a letter from edmund ellis, a minister of the church of england to john norris, another minister of the same church in vindication of the quakers from the charge of being socinians. elys, edmund, ca. 1634-ca. 1707. 1693 approx. 6 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 3 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2003-01 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a39354 wing e676 estc r41116 19637058 ocm 19637058 109232 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a39354) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 109232) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 1685:38) a letter from edmund ellis, a minister of the church of england to john norris, another minister of the same church in vindication of the quakers from the charge of being socinians. elys, edmund, ca. 1634-ca. 1707. norris, john, 1657-1711. 4 p. s.n., [london : 1693] caption title. dated: august 4, 1693--p. 4. imprint suggested by wing. reproduction of original in the bodleian library. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng socinianism. society of friends -apologetic works. 2002-06 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2002-07 apex covantage keyed and coded from proquest page images 2002-08 mona logarbo sampled and proofread 2002-08 mona logarbo text and markup reviewed and edited 2002-10 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion a letter from edmund ellis a minister of the church of england to john norris another minister of the same church in vindication of the quakers from the charge of being socinians . sir , having been lately informed , that a french minister now in london , being found guilty of spreading the doctrine of the socinians , is said to pretend to be a quaker ; and having a long time thought it my duty to do what in me lies , to take off that harmless sort of men , that are call'd quakers from that popular odium , which by some persons they have been most unjustly exposed unto , i make this address to you , being known to have writ against them , but a person of more learning and candor than any other that i have yet known to have written against them ; most earnestly entreating you by the love we owe to all mankind , that you would be pleased to concur with me in my present endeavours to vindicate these men , from that unjust imputation , viz. that they are socinians . you know r. barkley , in his apology , p. 84. says expresly . if ( the doctrine concerning the light within contradicts , overturns , and enervates the false doctrine of the pelagians , semi-pelagians , socinians and others , who exalt the light of nature , [ and ] the liberty of mans will , in that it wholly excludes the natural man from having any place , or portion in his own salvation , by any acting , working , or moving of his own , untill he be first quickned , raised up , and acted by gods spirit . clement lake ( one of those they call quakers ) in one of his letters ( lately publisht ) to john flavel an independent preacher has these words , in answer to flavels charge , that the quakers lead men to obedience to the light within for salvation : we press obedience to the light within , we own who is jesus christ the light of israel the light of the world , who is given to be a covenant to the people , and a light to the gentiles , to open the blind eyes esa 42. 6 , 7. this was davids light to his feet , and lanthorn to his paths , ps. 119. 115. and this word , or light , or jesus was in the beginning , and in him was life , and the life was the light of men , john 1. 8. can those men be socinians , who acknowledge that jesus christ is the true light in every man , which he could not be , if he were not infinite ? i must bear my testimony to this crooked and perverse generation , that jesus christ being the true , and eternal god is in every man , converting or convincing him in order to his conversion , or ( in proportion to the repugnancy he makes against the divine illumination ) tormenting him : i say tormenting him , not directly but consequentially , as the torment or vexation of a spirit , or rational soul , is the natural result of all repugnancy to the true light , which is the infinity of goodness . i further testify , and shall be ever ready , by the grace of god to maintain the assertion ( which i hope by you will not be denied ) that 't is possible for any man ( that has not made up the full measure of iniquity ) at all times , and in all places , by a sincere dependance upon the power and virtue of the light within , manifesting any action to be sinful , to conceive an aversion to it . i desire your candid reflections on the answer i shall here give to one passage in your first treatise concerning the divine light , p. 65. i had no reason to confine it ( as the quakers do ) to divine and spiritual truths , but to extend it to all truth without exception , which i suppose to be equally perceivable in this divine light , which as being the very essence of god , must be equally exhibitive of all . to this i answer , first that the quakers speaks of the light with reference to his being incarnate , and so 't is mani est , whatsoever influence he has upon the souls of men , it is in order to their sanctification , it shews nothing else but sanctifying truth . secondly , i assert , that all truth is divine , sanctifying truth , which being rightly apprehended , will most certainly carry the soul to god , the prime verity , the fountain of all being . you say , you suppose all truth to be equally perceivable in this divine light. we grant that all such truth , the consideration whereof is for the pesent necessane to our sanctification , is perceivable in this divine light. there are many things in your publisht writings that deserve the thanks of all men , particularly your confutation of mr. locks conceit that we have no innate idea of god ; for whose sake i beseech you to own the truth , wheresoever your find it , and i shall ever remain your faithful servant in the love of all truth , edmund elys . totness in devon. august 4. 1693. a letter from a gentleman in manchester to his friend concerning a notorious blasphemer who died in despair &c. gentleman in manchester. 1694 approx. 9 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 3 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2008-09 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a27369 wing b184 estc r28329 10526112 ocm 10526112 45205 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a27369) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 45205) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 1394:38) a letter from a gentleman in manchester to his friend concerning a notorious blasphemer who died in despair &c. gentleman in manchester. 4 p. printed for john whitlock, london : 1694. caption title. "licens'd, decemb. 28th, 1694." imprint from colophon. reproduction of original in the british library. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng socinianism. sunday. 2007-01 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2007-02 apex covantage keyed and coded from proquest page images 2007-03 mona logarbo sampled and proofread 2007-03 mona logarbo text and markup reviewed and edited 2008-02 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion a letter from a gentleman in manchester , to his friend , concerning a notorious blasphemer , who died in despair , &c. licens'd , decemb. 28th . 1694. dear sir , though you are more than one letter in arrears to me already , for which ( according to the rules of correspondence ) i might well expect your returns e're i gave you further credit ; yet being providentially furnish'd with extraordinary matter , i am easily enclin'd to run you one other letter into my debt , the contents of which will be ( indeed ! ) but too sad and surprizing . — i am not unsensible that upon such a melancholy occasion i could have addrest my self to several , more properly than to your self ; blessed be god , you are not of that unhappy number , that in works , and even in words , deny the divine being ; nor dares you entertain the least thought tending to the contempt of our lord and saviour jesus christ , god over all , blessed for ever ! neither the atheism , nor the more pernicious socinianism ( i was about to call it ) of this profane age has tainted your truly christian soul : and yet i think the terrible instance i have before me , of god's indignation against those damnable sins , will not to you be disadvantageously communicated . it may , at least , tend to establish you in your most holy religion ; and thus no doubt but it will be dispers'd by you , much more than by one less seriously dispos'd . and truly , i think such a singular relation cannot be made too publick in our age , wherein all manner of licentiousness does abound ! but before i acquaint you with particulars , give me leave to tell you , that you may relate what you shall have from me with all the assurance in the world. my evidence is a very honest credible person , who saw and heard most of what follows , and who had the rest from eye and ear-witnesses . but i have no reason to imagin that the truth of this divine tragedy will be call'd into any question ; it is known over a great part of the county , and was not so long since acted , but that upon enquiry , full satisfaction may be had about it from persons of the best credit . and now , without more preface , i shall give you a faithful account of matter of fact. at downam , near clithero , in lancashire , there liv'd one t. b. ( the full of his name , for his surviving relations sake , is conceal'd , ) about thirty six years of age , well known in that town , at his death especially by the office he then bore of churchwarden . this miserable creature , notwithstanding the good education which his better parents had bestow'd upon him , had for a great while indulg'd himself in an excess of wickedness , but chiefly in a sacrilegious abuse of the lord●s-day , on which he would use any unlawful exercises : nor did his office restrain him from committing this abomination , but as if he ( who should have been first in punishing ) prided himself in being the ring-leader of the sabbath-breakers , he would not only privately , and at home , but in the very open streets , revel and sport on that holy day . for this , and his other provocations , it pleased god so to leave him to the devil and himself , that he became guilty of such horrid blasphemy as procur'd ( it is to be fear'd ) his ruine in both worlds . the manner of it take thus . — on the 26th . day of august , 1694. being lord's-day ( the day of his sinful excesses ) he gave his attendance at church ; and after service , with the minister that preach'd there that day , he went to the ale-house , where he stay'd not long e're he remov'd to his own house ; in which seeing a bible lie on a table , he takes it up , and turning to the 9th . chapter of st. matthew , bursts out into this horrid expression , christ is a lyar ! upon this , says one that was by , how dare you speak such blasphemous words ? the wretch , pointing then to the 16th . and 17th . verses of that chapter , ( where our blessed saviour saith , no man putteth a piece of new cloth into an old garment , neither do men put new wine into old bottles , ) cryes out , why look here , he proves himself a lyar in these two things , besides many more places in the bible . that night he was struck with much sadness and sighing , which grew upon him every day more than other for that whole week , in which he kept much upon the bed , very listless to speak , or indeed , to take any notice of worldly concerns . the lord●s-day following he seem'd much more troubl●d in mind , and terrify'd in conscience , and he desir'd a neighbour's company all night : he would have pray'd , but could not : his sister , at his request , read by him , but he appear'd little affected with what he heard . two days more he continu'd tossing about in the room , keeping much upon his bed , and torturing himself . on wednesday , several neighbours and others hearing of his grievous condition , came into the chamber to him ; when suddenly he cryes out , turn , turn , turn , ( many times together , ) shut the door , christ is going to leave me . with that , some step'd to the door and shut it ; but he having his eyes still fix'd upon it , with a very hideous noise , cry'd out , it was too late , christ was quite gone and left him , he was damn'd for ever ; he is gone , he is gone ; it is too late , it is too late ; i am damn'd for evermore . this he repeated frequently ; and all that day he cried out of the torments of hell , and that he saw the flames of fire there , and that he was hanging over the flames ; and ( says he ) hell is a hundred thousand fathoms deep , and i am sinking deeper and deeper therein . he added , that he saw a numberless number there which he knew not , only one particular person he mention'd , with whom he had been very conversant , and from whom he was supposed to have contracted abundance of guilt . his relations , and the rest with him , were very much affrighted and troubled at his expressions and behaviour , but especially to see his ghastly and terrifying looks : they spoke together of sending for the minister , and some godly persons to pray with him : but he taking notice of what they said , told them , that it was now too late either to pray for him , or to tell him any thing of christ ; and for you too ( says he , turning to one of his nearest relations ) unless you repent soon . and further , he told them , that if there were hundreds and thousands of ministers to pray for him , it was all to no purpose , it was too late . after this time , he would not endure to hear of prayer , or reading the bible , nor would so much as suffer any to take a bible in their hands ; nay , so great a torment did the sight of a bible , or hearing of prayer seem to him , that upon either , he 'd cry out , let me go , let me go ; i will not stay here . and the minister coming to him with a book in his hand , he would have struck it out ; and tossing and rouling his body , he us'd all the means he could to get out of the room , all along crying out , do you not see the fire flaming in hell , and the lake of hell fire , and the depth of hell , which cannot be fathom'd : o hell-fire ! hell-fire ! fire of hell ! fire of hell ! oh , how i siak down in it ! thus he continu'd crying out , to the great amazement and terrour of all the company , all that day , and part of the night ; and the next day he was speechless : and upon friday , the 7th . of september , 1694. he expir'd , in the morning . ☞ his body , for several hours after his death , sweating very apparently . and thus have i briefly made you this fearful relation , after which i shall but add my hearty prayers for our selves , and for all whose ears are made to tingle with this dreadful report , that we may be preserved continually , by the grace of god , from profaning his holy day ; and above all , from villifying the glorious person of our lord and saviour jesus christ , to forewarn men of the horrid danger whereof this miserable wretch seems to be set up , by divine providence , a terrible and speaking monument ! but here i shall bid you farewell , and with due respects to your self , and the good ladies your sisters , in great haste , i subscribe my self , dear sir , yours most affectionately . manchester , decemb. 10. 1694. london , printed for john whitlock , near stationers-hall , 1694. a brief state of the socinian controversy concerning a trinity in unity by isaac barrow ... barrow, isaac, 1630-1677. 1698 approx. 14 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 12 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2004-11 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a31061 wing b930 estc r10201 11673326 ocm 11673326 48063 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a31061) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 48063) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 10:23) a brief state of the socinian controversy concerning a trinity in unity by isaac barrow ... barrow, isaac, 1630-1677. 23 p. printed for brabazon aylmer ..., london : 1698. reproduction of original in british library. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng socinianism -history -sources. trinity. 2004-05 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2004-05 aptara keyed and coded from proquest page images 2004-07 judith siefring sampled and proofread 2004-07 judith siefring text and markup reviewed and edited 2004-10 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion advertisement . a defence of the blessed trinity . by isaac barrow . d. d. price twelve pence . a brief state of the socinian controversy . concerning a trinity in unity . by isaac barrow , d. d. late master of trinity-college , in cambridge . london , printed for brabazon aylmer , at the three pigeons against the royal-exchange in cornhill , 1698. price two pence . a brief state of the socinian controversy . * the sacred trinity may be considered , either as it is in it self , wrapt up in unexplicable folds of mystery ; or , as it hath discovered it self , operating in wonderful methods of grace towards us . as it is in it self , 't is an object too bright and dazling for our weak eye to fasten upon ; an abyss too deep for our short reason to fathom . i can only say , that we are so bound to mind it , as to exercise our faith , and express our humility , in willingly believing , in submissively adoring those high mysteries , which are revealed in the holy oracles concerning it ; by that spirit it self , which searcheth the depths of god , and by that only son of god , who residing in his father's bosom , hath thence brought them forth , and expounded them to us , so far as was fit for our capacity and use . and the lectures so read by the eternal wisdom of god , the propositions uttered by the mouth of truth it self , we are obliged with a docile ear , and a credulous heart , to entertain . that there is one divine nature or essence , common unto three persons , incomprehensibly vnited , and ineffably distinguished ; united in essential attributes , distinguished by peculiar idioms and relations ; all equally infinite in every divine perfection , each different from other in order and manner of subsistence ; that there is a mutual inexistence of one in all , and all in one ; a communication without any deprivation or diminution in the communicant ; an eternal generation , and an eternal procession without precedence or succession , without proper causality or dependence : a father imparting his own , and the son receiving his father's life , and a spirit issuing from both , without any division or multiplication of essence ; these are notions which may well puzzle our reason , in conceiving how they agree , but should not stagger our faith , in assenting that they are true . upon which we should meditate , not with hope to comprehend , but with disposition to admire , veiling our faces in the presence , and prostrating our reason at the feet of wisdom so far transcending us . there be those , who because they cannot untie , dare to cut in sunder these sacred knots . who , because they cannot fully conceive it , dare flatly to deny them . who , instead of confessing their own infirmity , do charge the plain doctrines and assertions of holy scripture with impossibility . others seem to think , they can demonstrate these mysteries by arguments grounded upon principles of natural light , and express it by similitudes derived from common experience . to repress the presumption of the former , and to restrain the curiosity of the latter ; the following consideration ( improved by your thoughts ) may perhaps somewhat conduce . we may consider , that our reason is no competent or capable iudge coneerning propositions of this nature . 't is not sufficient , nor was ever designed to sound such depths ; to descry the radical principles of all being ; to reach the extream possibilities of things . such an intellectual capacity is vouchsafed to us , as doth suit to our degree ( the lowest rank of intelligent creatures ) as becometh our station in this inferior part of the world ; as may qualify us to discharge the petty businesses committed to our management , and the facile duties incumbent on us . but to know , what god is ; how he subsisteth ; what he can ; what he should do ; by our natural perspicacity , or by any means we can use , farther than he pleaseth to reveal , doth not suit to the meanness of our condition , or the narrowness of our capacity . these really are the most elevated sublimities , and the abstrusest subtilties that are , or can be in the nature of things . he that can penetrate them , may erect his tribunal any where in the world , and pretend justly that nothing in heaven or earth is exempted from his judgment . but in truth , how unfit our reason is to exercise such universal jurisdiction , we may discern by comparing it to our sense . it is obvious , that many beasts do ( by advantage of a finer sense ) see , hear , smell things imperceptible to us . and were it not very unreasonable to conclude , that such things do not exist , or are in themselves altogether insensible , because they do not all appear to us ? is it not evident , that we ought to impute their imperceptibility ( respecting us ) to the defect of our sense , to its dulness and grossness , in regard to the subtilty of those objects ? even so may propositions in themselves , and in regard to the capacity of higher understandings ; ( for there are gradual differences in understanding , as well as in sense ) be true and very intelligible , which to our inferiour reason seem unintelligible , or repugnant to the prenotions , with which our soul is imbued : and our not discerning those truths , may argue the blindness and weakness of our understanding , not any fault or inconsistency in the things themselves . nor should it cause us any wise to distrust them , if they come recommended to our belief by competent authority . it cannot be reasonable out of principles drawn from ordinary experience , about these most low and imperfect things to collect ; that there can be no other kind of vnions , of distinctions , of generations , of processions , than such as our own gross sense doth represent to us . reason it self more forcibly doth oblige us to think , that to sublimer beings there do pertain modes of existence and action , vnions and distinctions , influences and emanations of a more high and perfect kind : such as our course apprehension cannot adequate , nor our rude language express : which we perhaps , have no faculty subtile enough to conceive distinctly , nor can attain any congruous principles , from which to discourse solidly about them . no words , perhaps , which we do use to signify our conceptions about these material and inferiour things , will perfectly and adequately suit to a mystery , so much remote from the common objects of our knowledge , so far transcending our capacity . shall we then , who cannot pierce into the nature of a peble ; that cannot apprehend how a mushroom doth grow ; that are baffled in our philosophy about a gnat or a worm , debate and decide ( beyond what is taught us from above ) concerning the precise manner of divine essence , subsistence , or generation ? i do ( saith st. chrysostom ) eat meats , but how they are divided into phlegm , into blood , into iuice , into choler , i am ignorant . these things which every day we see and taste , we do not know ; and are we curious about the essence of god ? wherefore do we stretch our judgment beyond its limits , unto things so infinitely exceeding it ? why do we suffer our reason to be pragmatical , unjustly invading the office not belonging thereto ; intruding into things which it hath not seen , col. ii . 18. nor can comprehend ; those secret things , which belong to the lord our god , deut. xxix . 29. and the comprehension whereof he hath reserved unto himself ? these considerations may suffice in some manner , to shew , that st. chrysostom had reason to exclaim so much against the madness , as he styleth , it , of those , who are busily curious in speculation about the essence of god ; daring to subject divine mysteries to their own ratiocinations . that st. basil's advice was wholsom , not to be meddlesom about things , about which holy scripture is silent . that † another ancient writer did say no less prettily , than truly , that in these matters curiositas reum facit , non peritum ; we may easilier incur blame , than attain skill by nice enquiry into them . that many of the fathers do with great wisdom dislike and dissuade the searching 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the manner of things being true or possible , as a suspicious mark , or a dangerous motive of infidelity . that st. paul's rules , rom. xii . 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , to be wise so as withal to be sober , and modest ; and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , not to conceit any thing without warrant of scripture , 1 cor. iv . 6. are in this case most especially to be heeded . that , according to st. peter's admonition , we should as new-born babes ( unprepossess'd with any notions or fancies of our own ) long for , and greedily suck in the sincere milk of the word ; not diluting it with baser liquors of humane device . that where god doth interpose his definitive sentence , our reason hath nothing to do but to attend and submit . no right to vote , no licence to debate the matter . it s duty is to listen and approve whatever god speaketh , to read and subscribe to whatever he writeth . at least in any case it should be mute , or ready to follow job , saying , behold , i am vile , what shall i answer thee ? i will lay my hand upon my mouth , job xl . 4. in fine ; the testimony of god , with a sufficient clearness represented to the capacity of an honest and docile mind ( void of all partial respects , and clear from all sorts of prejudice ; loving truth , and forward to entertain it ; abhorring to wrest or wrack things , to use any fraud or violence upon any principle , or ground of truth ) the testimony of god , i say , so revealed , whatever exception , our shallow reason can thrust in , should absolutely convince our judgment , and constrain our faith. if the holy scripture teacheth us plainly , and frequently doth inculcate upon us ( that which also the uniform course of nature , and the peaceable government of the world doth also speak ) that there is but one true god. if it as manifestly doth ascribe to the three persons of the blessed trinity , the same august names , the same peculiar characters , the same divine attributes ( essential to the deity ) the same superlatively admirable operations of creation and providence : if it also doth prescribe to them , the same supreme honours , services , praises and acknowledgments to be paid unto them all ; this may be abundantly enough to satisfy our minds , to stop our mouths , to smother all doubt and dispute about this high and holy mystery . it was exceeding goodness in god , that he would condescend so far to instruct us ; to disclose so noble a truth unto us ; to enrich our minds with that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , that most excellent knowledge of himself . and it would be no small ingratitude and unworthiness in us , any wise to suspect his word , or pervert his meaning ; any wise to subject his venerable oracles to our rude canvasses and cavils . in fine ; the proper employment of our mind about these mysteries , is not to search and speculate about them , to discourse flippantly and boldly about them ; but with a pious credulity to embrace them , with all humble respect to adore them . finis . books printed for brabazon aylmer , in cornhil . a seasonable vindication of the b. trinity . being an answer to this question , why do you believe the doctrin of the trinity ? collected from the works of the most reverend dr. john tillotson , late lord archbishop of canterbury , and the right reverend dr. edward stillingfleet , now lord bishop of worcester . price 12d . a method of daily devotion . a method of devotion for the lord's-day . likewise several small books against debauchery , profaness , blasphemy , cursing , and swearing , &c. price two pence each , and something cheaper to them that give away numbers . all these by dr. ashton . notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a31061-e200 * v. defence of the b. trinity , p. 5. p. 21. id. on the creed , p. 337. v. defence of the b. trinity , p. 26. p. 55. † zeno veronens . 1 pet. ii . 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . mysteries discovered, or, a mercuriall picture pointing out the way from babylon to the holy city for the good of all such as during that night of generall errour and apostasie, 2 thes. 2.3. revel. 3.10 have been so long misted with romes hobgoblin / by me paul best ... best, paul, 1590?-1657. this text is an enriched version of the tcp digital transcription a27527 of text r9886 in the english short title catalog (wing b2053). textual changes and metadata enrichments aim at making the text more computationally tractable, easier to read, and suitable for network-based collaborative curation by amateur and professional end users from many walks of life. the text has been tokenized and linguistically annotated with morphadorner. the annotation includes standard spellings that support the display of a text in a standardized format that preserves archaic forms ('loveth', 'seekest'). textual changes aim at restoring the text the author or stationer meant to publish. this text has not been fully proofread approx. 34 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 10 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. earlyprint project evanston,il, notre dame, in, st. louis, mo 2017 a27527 wing b2053 estc r9886 12643368 ocm 12643368 65064 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a27527) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 65064) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 974:6) mysteries discovered, or, a mercuriall picture pointing out the way from babylon to the holy city for the good of all such as during that night of generall errour and apostasie, 2 thes. 2.3. revel. 3.10 have been so long misted with romes hobgoblin / by me paul best ... best, paul, 1590?-1657. [2], 16, [1] p. s.n.], [london : 1647. reproduction of original in union theological seminary library, new york. defense against charges of socinianism and heresy. eng catholic church -controversial literature. heresies, christian -history -modern period, 1500 socinianism. a27527 r9886 (wing b2053). civilwar no mysteries discovered. or a mercuriall picture pointing out the way from babylon to the holy city, for the good of all such as during that ni best, paul 1647 6023 3 0 0 0 0 0 5 b the rate of 5 defects per 10,000 words puts this text in the b category of texts with fewer than 10 defects per 10,000 words. 2006-04 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2006-04 aptara keyed and coded from proquest page images 2006-05 andrew kuster sampled and proofread 2006-05 andrew kuster text and markup reviewed and edited 2006-09 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion mysteries discovered . or a mercuriall picture pointing out the way from babylon to the holy city , for the good of all such as during that night of generall errour and apostasie , 2 thes. 2. 3. revel. 3. 10. have been so long misled with romes hobgoblins . byme paul best prisoner in the gatehouse , westminster . printed in the yeer , 1647. mysteries discovered . chap. 1. being so extreamly necessitated after so manifold a manner , as first for the discharge of my conscience to god , and man ; that woe is mee if like a fearfull or idle servant i should bury that simple talent ; secondly , for the vindication of my reputation , if i should sitdowne in silence , i might seeme to be an accessory to the false accusation of those that blast we with the most odious infamy of blaphemy ( to deny the heavenly trinity , and jesus christ to be our blessed saviour , ) and the truth of the sacred canonicall scriptures ; lastly , by my long and excessive indurance , being that i cannot procure by the best friends i have , or of those that are appointed by the parliament , a petition to be presented to the honourable house of commons in parliament , to omit , that i cannot receive that small annuity due into me out of yorkshire , besides the false reports of injurious and ignorant persons , that i am not onely a most debosh'd , and desperate , but a distracted and mad man ; which i hope will be a sufficient plea to indifferent judges for the publishing of my bonds . and i appeale to my countrey and all good christians , whether or no by so long imprisonment , without any allowance , or having a determinate hearing , notwithstanding above 100 petitions printed and written to the house in generall , and the most eminent ( and concerning members ) i be not debarred of christian , but of the liberty of a subject contrary to law , ordinance of parliament : equity and humanity . so that without a speedy remedy of such common continuate , and unheard of cruelties our ensuing end is like to be worse then that which we suffered in our late civill wars . for it is not the continuance of our mock-fasts that will excuse , so long as our oppression continueth , isa. 58. 5 , 6. &c. yea , of such as conclude their fasts like that of january 28th . 1645 , at westminster , with a consultation how to murther an innocent , and that after a most cruell ( more then heathenish manner without any legall hearing ) much lesse laudable proceeding : ( being not allowed of the divines once to oppose , or yet to give an advised answer by writing ) lord , lay not this to their charge , being but an intent ( through ignorance ) which by gods providence , and the more gracious of the parlament was prevented . for my discovery of two grand mysteries , viz. that anomious or lawlesse mystery , 2 thess. 2. from the third to the thirteenth verse , as also revel. 17. 1 , 5. and its opposite , revel. 10. 7. the mystery of god , to wit , the father and creatour , 14. 17. for the better cleering of which misty mysteries , imagine some great king like some of the old persians , that would seldome or never be seen of the people , should send his sonne and heire fully acquainted with his will and pleasure , as his vicegerent plenipotentiary and prolocutor , whether the sonne being equivalent ( to use that terme ) in way of reference , john 14. 9. as 13. 20. 1 thess. 2. 13. be in himself coequall to the king , for that ( as ) john 5. 23. is an adverbe of like quality and not equality ; this we know that god the father is that invisible and indivisible king , 1 tim. 1. 17. 6. 15 , 16. john 1. 18. 5. 37. 1 john 4. 12. and that the inauguration or anointing of our blessed saviour was his baptisme , matth. 3. 17. 4. 17. acts 1. 22. 10 , 37. which is therefore termed the beginning , viz. of his gospel , iohn 1. 1. 1 iohn 1. 1. and that new creation , 2 cor. 5. 17. so that christ is to us both god and his word , as moses was to aaron , and aaron to him , exod. 4. 16. not that a word is christ , or christ life everlasting , but in a figurative sence after a scripture manner and meaning , according to the character of that beloved apostle , as erasmus observeth in his argument to his epistles , and hierome in his preface to his gospel sheweth that this apostle had a speciall intent to confute corinthus and the ebionites that affirmed christ to be but an ordinary man the sonne of joseph , &c. this apostle being the best commentator of his own meaning ; how christ is said to be that visible god , as isa. 40. 7. the word , iohn 3. 34. yea , and palpable word , 1 iohn 1. 1. life eternall , 5. 20. that lambe of god , iohn 1. 36. our passeover , 1 cor. 5. 7. the the rock 10. 4. david our king , ezek. 34. 23. hosea 3. 5. in them typicall predications , and the like , john 15. 1. matth. 17. 12. is . 1. 10. revel. 11. 8. by a metaphor , or metonymy , as perkins and alsted in their tracts of sacred tropes ; where alsted expounds that 1 cor. 15. 28. then shall the sonne also himself be subject , that is acknowledged to be . chap. 2. to come to the question whether christ ( after the doctrine of athanasius in his symbole ) be coequal with the father ? wee know what charge the apostle giveth , gal. 1. 10. against such setters up of new creeds without warranty , contrary to the first and great commandement set forth by proclamation of the great king , expresly testifying not only his unity , deut. 6. 4. psal. 83. 18. 86. 10. isa. 37. 16. &c. &c. &c. but also his supremacy and majority , psal. 13. 5 , 5. joh. 10. 29. 14. 28. ephes. 1. 17. 4. 6. luke 1. 32. john 17. 3. mark 13. 32. in exclusive and superlative expressions : of which see more , mat 20. 23. 27 , 46. iohn 20. 17. heb. 1. 9. 1 cor. 15. 28. the son being tenant in capite , to god the father , 1 cor. 11. 3. both for his words , works , and honours , iohn 3. 34. 5. 19. 2 pet. 1. 17. and therefore not coequall , for without contradiction the lesse is dignified by the greater . also god and christ are distinguished , iohn 14. 1. 1 thess. 3. 11. it being an observation of the learned erasmus , that where god is put absolutely the father is understood , as iohn 8. 54. to come to the offices of christ our mediatour , 1 tim. 2. 5. as a king , acts 17. 31. matth. 25. 34. as a priest , heb. 7. 24. of a prophet , deut , 18. 18. according to that most usuall epithite of his sanctification , the son of man , denominations , being for the most part taken from the more worthy , so john 8. 40. acts 2. 23. 13. 38. rom. 5. 15. 1 cor. 15. 21. col. 1 15. heb. 2. 16. 4. 15. 2. esdras 13. 25 , 32. which were to no purpose if the better part of his person were not man : there being but a graduall difference betwixt him and moses and us , heb. 3. 5 , 6. 4. 15. rom. 8. 17. there being not one such word , or any one text tending to that purpose in the whole holy scriptures , but many to the contrary : if we have respect to the scope , coherence , analogy , and the originalls , in discerning figurative forms and phrases according to the sence and meaning , which is the spirit and life of the two testaments , revel. 11. 11. whereas the letter is but the corpes common as the high-way throughout christendom . wherefore to speak definitively of the heavenly trinity . i beleeve the father to be god himself , as 1 thess. 3. 11. expressed by these adjuncts , the god of heaven , revel. 11. 13. the living god and father , joh. 6. 57. 69. and that the son is our messiah , 4. 26. whom god made lord and christ , acts 2. 36. prince and saviour , 5. 31. and that the holy spirit is the very power of god , luke 1. 35. 24 , 49. as 1 cor. 2. 11. or the father god essentially , the sonne vicentially , the holy spirit potentially , or the father god above all , ephes. 4. 6. the son of god with us , matth. 1. 23. the holy spirit god within us , 1 cor. 2. 16. but for the son to be coequall to the father , or the holy spirit a distinct coequall person i cannot finde ; and i beleeve that these three are one , or agree and conspire in the substance of the same truth to salvation . see 1 cor. 13. 13. 1 john 5. 8. of two trinities without coequalls , or yet persons . * and that of three coequall persons to be but the chappell of rome , for the church of christ , and that which keepeth the rest of the world in the popes pownd forth of his fold , both the jews that beleeve the old testament , the turk , and the great mogoll , &c. according to the dictate of common intelligence , not corrupt in this kind by a contrary habit , who cannot be brought to believe in a trinity implying polytheosie , or apotheosie , i. e. many gods or a man-god . so that the denying of a second deity or godhead is not destructive of faith , but onely removes it from false foundation to a true , that is god the father by christ jesus , 2 cor. 5. 19. 1 pet. 5. 10. for that john 5. 18. was a misprision of the jews proceeding from their ignorance , as may appeare , 10. 34 , 35 , 36 , 37. by our saviour his own comment . chap. 3. to answer objections of scriptures wrested by that third semipagan century , and a prepossessed posterity ; as in gen. 1. 26. let us make man , which in the next verse , also 5. 1 , 2. six severall times ; and matth. 19. 4. mark . 10. 6. is expounded in the singular number like that , gen. 11. 7 , 8. which were a contradiction , not an exposition , and that elohim bara , the gods made in the first verse , a solecisme and not an hebraisme , being a figurative consultation with his wisdom , or communication with the holy angels by way of approbation , as 1 kings 22. 19. iob 1. 6. or enallage of the plurall number for the singular , for the more honour , * as iob 18. 2. dan. 2. 36. iohn 3. 11. as kings write in the style of majesty after the manner of the holy tongue , see gen. 24. 9. of abraham his masters , iosh. 24. 19. hee is holy gods , is . 19. 4. 54. 5. &c ▪ but to infer three coequal persons from thence , the person of christ ( according to the flesh ) nor then existing is altogether inconsequent ; of the like sort seems that to be , eccles. 12. 1. if parents be not implyed . for them high and glorious epithites , isa. 9. 6. of a man-child that was to be born , it is granted , they are very great and excellent , yet well beseeming our blessed saviour , the founder and governour of his church ; of whose wonderfull birth and works wee have sufficient testimonies ; being of his fathers most intimate counsell , a mighty god ( not almighty god ) above all appellative gods , 1 cor. 8. 5. revel. 1. 5. the everlasting father , or of the age to come , ( as ierome ) eyther by way of regeneration , and that by , an excellency or equivalency ; as iohn 14. 9. of whose government although there were a beginning , heb. 10. 6. yet shall there be no enduring the term militant , or of mortality , 1 cor. 15. 26. so that it is not a small thing for christ to be so dignified by the father , unlesse hee be deified and equallized with the father , see gen. 41. 43. exod. 34. 14. 1 sam. 18. 23. ester 6. 9. as is . 49. 6. that jer. 23. 6. is but an argument from the name for some relation to god , as gen. 22. 14. exod. 17. 15. judg 6. 24. 2 sam. 6. 2. as it may appeare , 1 cor. 1. 30. 2 cor. 5. 21. unlesse wee would make iehovahim gods in the plurall , which were dissonant to that incommunicable name . that zach. 13. 7. speaketh of a sociall and not a coequall party , as iudg. 18. 20. acts 15. 28. god and christ concurring as sociall causes , to wit , primary efficient , and principall instrument in the businesse of salvation , iohn 6. 44. 14 6. 1 iohn 1. 3 , 6. chap. 4. that john 2. 29. is an enallage of the active for the passive , and is spoken declaratively , as 20. 23. levit. 13. and 14. &c. of the priest clensing the leper , like that , gen. 41. 13. by the divine power wherewith god endowed him , john 5. 2 , 9 there being so many testimonies to that purpose , acts 2. 24. 13. 31. rom. 4. 24. 1 cor. 15. 19. 2 cor. 4. 14. gal. 1. 1. ephes. 1. 20. col. 2. 12. 1 thess. 1. 1. with heb. 13 10. &c. that acts 20. 28 . in some translations is with that peculiar bloud , and not gods own bloud which is absurd . that rom. 9. and 5th . is spoken of christ , as he was an israelite by kinde , with the like clause to that , rom. 1. 25. 2 cor. 11. 31. that philip . 2. 6. should be tooke not upon him the equality of a god , lord or master , as posselius and pusor shew ; the apostle exhorting them by the example of christ , who being in a twofold form , as john 13. 13. gal. 4. 1. took upon him the form of a servant , wherefore god hath highly exalted him , as verse 9th . so that john 20. 28. is as much as lord and master , like elohim and adonim , for the truth of christs resurrection was that which thomas doubted , and not his deity . that john 8. 58. of christ his being before abraham , is to be understood in place and dignity , as verse 53. and not time ( as appeareth ) by circumstance 57 : like that 1. 15 , 30. of the baptist . that 1 john 5. 7 , 8. be the same in effect , like that , mar. 10. 8. one by conspiration , or conjugation , not individuation , as 1 cor. 6. 17. john 17. 21. acts 4. 32. heb. 2. 11. jer. 32. 39. otherways we should confound the trinity by such an unity . that john 17. 5. is a scripture prolepsis , in regard of divine anticipation ; as may be gathered from that 13. 31 , 33. luke 24. 26. according to revel. 13. 8. so jer. 1. 5. in regard of gods sore-knowledge and decree ; acts 2. 23. gal. 1. 15. ephes. 1. 4 , 3. 11. 2 tim. 1. 9. that 1 pet. 3. 19. is understood of noe as in the next verse , who by the same spirit ( 1 cor. 12. 4. ) preached whiles the ark was in preparing ; before christ began to preach , mat. 4. 17. that christ in the revelation is called alpha and omega , so is the angell , 22. 13. it being usuall to attribute that to the ministeriall cause , which is proper to the primary , gen. 22. 15 , 16 , 18. 17. exod. 3. 6. 7. judg. 2. 1. josh. 1. 11. 15. 2 esdras 7. 3. for that which some contend , the first chapter to the hebrews to be of the some , they are to observe the manifold transitions ; as first of the father , 2 , 3 , 4. of the son , 5 , 6 , 7. of the angels ; 8. to the sonne ; 9 , 10 , 11 , 12. to the father according to the 102 psalme in which not a word of the son ; 13 , 14 of the angels again ; so that in the sixth verse is understood of a secondary and not supreme worship like a shadow to the person it belongeth to , 1 chron. 29. 20. so that inference of the whole first chapter to the hebrews , is a fallacy from a part to the whole . that john 1. 3. all things were made by him , is not meant of this materiall world , as appeareth by the 10 verse , but according to the subject intended , the new creation , 2 cor. 5. 17. according to that , heb. 1. 2. which ought to be ages , and not worlds , see 2. 5. concerning spirituall and eternall things , as 2 cor. 4. 8. col. 1. 16. that christ is said to be our saviour , we may read the like of others respectively in their kinde , judg. 3. 9. 15. isa. 19. 20. that pro. 8. 11 , only argues that gods wisdome was alwayes present with him , and doth infer his holy spirit , ler. 10. 12. iob 33. 3. as wisd. 7. 25. to which actions are attributed , prov. 8. 1. by a prosopopie of a person , as psal. 85. 10 ▪ 11. that trifagie , isa. 6. 3. is a reduplication expressing the excesse of the action or affection , as 2 sam. 18. 33. prov. 31. 2. deut. 13. 14. wherefore let us labour to reconcile scripture by scripture , and by no means admit of an absurd sense . chap. 5. that which is objected that christ were not a sufficient satisfaction if he were not equall to the father ; is dissonant from the condition of remunerative justice consisting in a geometricall proportion of acceptance by the partie offended , the party offended being sinfull man , besides that inferreth imminution to christ his most pretious blood , mat. 26. 28. 1 tim. 2. 6. heb. 10. 29. 1 pet. 1. 19. revel. 12. 11. iohn 15. 3. for a corollary i will conclude with that , exod. 34. 14. because the lord whose name is zealous , is a zealous god , and will not give his glory to another . as isa. 48. 11. having no equall in heaven , as psal. 89. 6. isa. 48. 11. for to add or substract to and from equals , maketh them unequall , equals agreeing in the same common measure , as revel. 21. 16. so that if christ be equall to the father , as touching his godhead he is so much more by the addition of his manhood , which i now doe more then suspect to be that 2 thes. 2. 4. of that catholike professor in a romish sense , according to the originall at thessalonia , hist. tripart . 9. 7. and if this , that , and another person , be equally god , almighty , eternall , &c. ( three ones make three , as well in the greatest persons as least parts , also if the son be from the father , and the holy spirit from both by a personall generation and procession , there must needs follow a hysteren proteron in the deity , to say that from god to naturals is inconsequent , it is to be noted that for particular respects , god having a voluntary agent , and that infinite , doth whatsoever he pleaseth , even beyond ordinary means , yet in generall respects , there is good consequence to and from god , with naturals observing the distance that is due to his majesty , as malac. 1. 6. mat. 5. 48. 7. 11. wherefore to make christ coequall to his father , is to mak another or a false christ ▪ or ( to deal plainly with friends ) an idoll christ , or two gods ( as much as in us lyeth ) the great indignity to his imparalleld father , which the indignation of his most pious son , in wounding the father through his sides , and i feare that which we now , and others hereafter shall suffer for , as revel. 6. 16 , 17. for as it is high treason to equallize even the kings sonne , with the king himselfe , so it is high blasphemy to equallize the first borne of every creature , col. 1. 15. with the creator himselfe , rom. 1. 25. and i suppose that blasphemy of the beast , with seven heads and ten hornes , revel. 13. 1 , 3 , 5 , &c. and that mystery of iniquity written in the forehead of the g. whore , 17. 5. diametrally opposite to that of the fathers name , written in the forehead of the 144000 , 14 , 1 , 7 , 7 , 3 , &c. as for that common evasion , applyed to christ as he is god , and as he is man , it is contrary both to reason and scripture , to limitate by so great a disparity , as hos. 11. 9. for i am god and not man , isa. 31. 3. 40. 17. implying contradiction , as he is , and as he is not , and is but a presumptuous begging of that which is in question , and if it be illogicall to limitate by a superiour , or subordinate ( as the pope errs , not as he is pope , but as he is man ) it is much more absurd to limitate by a disparate , and that of infinite disparity , to omit that luke 2. 40. the grace of god was with him , and act. 10. 38. for god was with him , which were an idle tautalogie if he were god , onely he is called god by a metaphor , as gabriell a man , dan. 9. 21. and judas a devill , iohn 6. 70. chap. 6. thus we may perceive how by iniquity of time the reall truth of god hath been trodden under foot by a verball kinde of divinity , introduced by the semipagan christians of the third century in the western church , immediately upon the ceasing of the heathenish emperours , who for their open hostility were likened to a lyon , 2 tim. 4. 17. as their successors to a dragon , for their serpentine subtilties , continuing 1260 years , begun by the first nicen councill about 328 , and made catholike by the imperiall decree at thessalonica , 342 , hist. tripart . 9. 7. but that prescription is no plea against god , and god be thanked , the time of this generall apostasie is expired , the mystery discovered , and the unity of god , zach. 14. 9. come upon the stage , covenant . the second particular , that i cannot forbeate but to cry out with the people , it is fallen , it is fallen , babylon the great , whiles i perceive that first resurrection from antichristian errour , as napier , and the calling of the jews comming so fast on , rom. 11. 15 , &c. to make one sheepfold , joh. 10. 16. wherefore to make the g. whore stigmaticall , first , by her brand in the forehead , reveal . 17. 5. by that which is in the very frontispiece of all the catholiks confessions concerning the trinity . secondly , by prescription ( or marke in her hand ) thereunto revel. 13. 16. thirdly , by her seat and place notorious , by seven hils , and ten kingdoms , 17. 9. fourthly , by that so well known name latemos , 13. 18. as moulin in his accomplishment of prophecies . fifthly , by her persecution of the saints , 12 , 13 , 7 , 17. 6. dan. 17. 11. sixtly , by a heathenish polytheosie of many gods , and apotheosie of a man-god . seventhly , by her tricotomy of the three catholike professions , revel. 16. 19. holding with the whore in tail generall . chap. 7. howsoever constantine by gods providence was ordained for ceasing the heathenish persecutions , yet had he no commission for setting up a new religion of redivived ethnicisme , as mede , revel. 11. 3. in imitation of the three sons of saturne , their three major gods ; the deifying of hercules , augustus , &c. their heroes ; in forcing some more difficult and figurative texts to confirme their inventions ; whereas that which is most plain , common and commanded is the measure of that which is more difficult and obscure ; for which cause they are termed gentiles in the revelation ; and the true beleevers jews . to passe by the reports of zosimus concerning the conversion of constantine ; we may observe by those , iudges 8. 27. 2 sam. 17. 23. 1 kings 1. 5. 12. 28. ier. 44. 17. how kings , captains , and counsellores , ( albeit renowmed ) are not presidents for religion more the meaner men , as 1 cor. 1. 27. 2 , 6. so that such servile cattell and men-admirers for advantage , iude 10. are the very bain of all ingenuity and christianity . chap. 8. to come to the first nicen council ( the load-star of the three following ) ; besides that humane councils are but externall and accidentall means of truth ; it was falsified by sozimus the civilian concerning the point of primacy ; and is generally condemned for there-baptization of the cataphrygians ; their three and ten yeares penance ; that men should pray rather standing then kneeling ; and is reproved by hierome , for equallizing the history of iudith with the holy canon , besides that divers of the best learned of them dissented from the rest and major part , according to that exod. 23. 2. also calvine could not endure that very god of very god in their creed ; for god being a most pure act , a begotten god ( to speak properly ) is a most grosse contradiction : and that begotten not made , contrary to that , rom. 1. 3. gal. 4. 4. generation being proper to living and mortall creatures for continuance of their kind ; thus by going forth of mens buildings or systemes , as 2 esdras 10. 54. transported by some good angell into the wildernesse , as revel. 17. 3. i got a glympse not onely of the g. whore , but of the spouse of christ , 12. 6. 21. 9. which things although they may seeme strange and new , the reason resides in the abolishing of an old errour , see zech. 14. 7. &c. isa. 30. 26. 2 esdras 5. 4 , 6. 22. for mysteries they are either of things more hard to be understood as parables not expounded , matth. 13. 11. prophesies not fulfilled , ephes 3. 3 , 4. godlinesse to a sensuall worldly and wicked man , 1 cor. 2. 14. or that cannot be understood , as meerlyes in believing things that are not , especially expresse contradictions concerning the unity and supremacy of god , as 2 thess. 2. 11. revel. 22. 15. for to multiply the deity , or detract from its unity is blasphemy , as all the doctors define . chap. 9. but me thinks i smell a fox or rather a wolfe , in the fable , and unlesse the lord put to his helping hand of the magistrate , for the manacling of satan in that persecuting power , revel. 20. 2. there is little hope either for the liberty of the subject , or law of god amongst us , psal. 119. 126. so this wo will not depart untill it rest in a poor and terrified remnant , as revel. 11. 13. and i cannot understand what detriment could redound either to church or common wealth by the toleration of religious , not antipoliticall , but rather benefit , as we see by example in holland and poland . chap. 10. for that which was objected concerning arrius his formidable end , it is rather an argument of his equivocall perjury , &c. hist. tripart , 3. 10. like ananias and saphira , act. 5. or judas 1. 18. then of the cause : as for that which is commonly answered , that god is not divided but distingoished into three equall persons , is as much as if they had not a reall , but only a relative or rationall being or existence , as if essence and existence differed in god , or in any thing whose kind consists in one individuall : for hypostaticall union and communion of properties , they are but reall contradictions , and the froglike croaking of the dragon , the beast and false prophet , revel. 16. 13. by vertue of a hocus pocus and a babylonian mouth , thus after the precipice of this romish jezabel , and the death of her two daughters , homousia and symousia like aholah , and aholibah , ezech. 23. i perceive how the western sun declineth to its period and setting : and as for that third reformation which succeeded the calvinian upon the turkish territories more remote from the romish tyranny , especially , about anno 1560 , in transilvania , lituania , livonia , and polonia , wee cannot expect to be compleat before the revolution to the east ( where it first began ) revel. 7. 9 , 9. 14 , 16. 12. ( there being 12 bishops successively at antioch , unto the yeer 400 , * antioch being the metropolis of syria , ( famous for that , acts 11. 6 ; and the ten persecutions , bounded on the east by euphrates . chap. 11. as for presumption , to professe that which god commands , yea , that first and great commandement i aver it to be none , deut. 18 , 20. and the son of syrach 3. 23. 5. 10. be it opposed by never so many , or great ; numb. 14. 44. 16. 2. or never so glorious titles of the orthodox nicene fathers , and the pope his holinesse , for that iob 32. 22. therefore , howsoever some object that it is damnable to beleeve no more then what we can comprehend , as iob 11. 7. yet let them consider that in the precepts necessary to salvation , we are to beleeve what we may apprehend according to our best understanding , mark 12. 33. ier. 9. 24. this i say to the shame of such as shut their eyes against the most illustrious and authenticall testimonies of all or the most memorable and approved times , places , and persons ; hardly to be brought that ever they had greater grand fathers , &c. not allowing any more of authentick and classick testimonies , then the most vain and improbable traditions amongst men ; nor to beleeve the histories of moses , christ , &c. because they had not the happy houre of st. thomas , or others to be seeing , and sensible witnesses , as iohn 20. 27. 1 iohn 1. 1. the lord god of his most gracious goodnesse grant , that the more able and ingenuous , like true and trusty souldiers of jesus christ , whose eyes the god of this world hath not blinded ; would do their utmost endevour to reduce the rest from that long captivity of our spirituall babylon , under that man of sin ; and that god would prosper their endevours that are studious of the sincere truth ; and strive for the same to death , as the son of syrach , 4. 28 ; and defend justice for their life , to the exaltation of their nation , as prov. 14. 34 ; that releeve the oppressed , &c. as isa. 1. 7 ; that so wee may enjoy the good things of the land . amen . to the honourable house of commons at westminster . the humble petition of paul best prisoner in the gatehouse . humbly sheweth , that whereas your petitioner hath been a close prisoner ever since the fourteenth of february 1644 , onely for this his premised reasons or opinion committed to a minister ( a supposed friend ) for his judgment and advice onely ; having at all times shewed himself a liege loving and active subject to the utmost of his ability : in these and whatsoever else humbly submitting himself to your most serene and able judgments . your honours would be graciously pleased in commiseration of his exceeding distressed estate , with what sufferings hee hath already endured , to grant him his release or judgment , according to the worth and wisdome of this honourable and independant court , and your petitioner shall pray , &c. notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a27527e-130 * purchas pilgrimage . covert's travels . * buxtorsii thesaur . 2. 10. drusius uno elohim . sixtinus amama gram. annot. * more's chronoll . magdeburgs hist. an apology for writing against socinians, in defence of the doctrines of the holy trinity and incarnation in answer to a late earnest and compassionate suit for forbearance to the learned writers of some controversies at present / by william sherlock ... sherlock, william, 1641?-1707. 1693 approx. 58 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 19 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2005-10 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a59791 wing s3265 estc r21192 12054584 ocm 12054584 53128 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a59791) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 53128) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 580:2) an apology for writing against socinians, in defence of the doctrines of the holy trinity and incarnation in answer to a late earnest and compassionate suit for forbearance to the learned writers of some controversies at present / by william sherlock ... sherlock, william, 1641?-1707. [4], 32 p. printed for will. rogers ..., london : 1693. marginal notes. advertisement: prelim. p. [1]. reproduction of original in cambridge university library. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng trinity. incarnation. socinianism. 2003-11 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2003-12 apex covantage keyed and coded from proquest page images 2005-01 mona logarbo sampled and proofread 2005-01 mona logarbo text and markup reviewed and edited 2005-04 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion the dean of st. paul's apology for writing against socinians , &c. imprimatur , geo. royse , r. r mo . in christo patri ac dom. dom. johan . archiep. cant. à sacris domest . jan. 17. 1692 / 3. an apology for writing against socinians , in defence of the doctrines of the holy trinity and incarnation in answer to a late earnest and compassionate suit for forbearance to the learned writers of some controversies at present . by william sherlock , d. d. dean of st. paul's , master of the temple , and chaplain in ordinary to their majesties . london : printed for will. rogers , at the sun over-against st. dunstan's church in fleet street . 1693. an apology for writing against socinians , &c. after a long silence , and patient expectation what the learned writers of some controversies at present ( as a late author calls them ) would bring forth , i intend by the assistance of the holy trinity , and the incarnate jesus , whose blessing i most earnestly implore , to resume the defence of the catholick faith ; which i shall publish in some few short treatises , as i can find leisure for it , that i may not discourage my readers by too voluminous a work. but before i venture to dispute these matters any farther , it is necessary to make some apology for disputing ; which is thought very unchristian and uncharitable , and of dangerous consequence , especially when we undertake the defence of the fundamentals of our faith , against the rude and insolent assaults of hereticks . sometime since , a melancholy stander-by would be a stander-by no longer , but interposed an earnest and compassionate suit for forbearance , to the learned writers of some controversies at present . these learned writers of controversy , are the socinians , who ridiculed without any learning or common sense , the athanasian creed , and the doctrines of the trinity and incarnation : the forbearance he desires , is , that no body should write against them ; though dr. wallis and my self are more immediately concerned in this suit. who this melancholy stander-by is , i shall not enquire , for my controversy is not with men , but with doctrines ; and i know by experience , that common fame is not always to be trusted , much less suspicions ; but if he be a divine of the church of england , it seems very strange , that he should profess himself a stander-by , when the fundamentals of the christian faith are in question ; and a melancholy stander-by to see some others undertake the defence of it . i confess i am always very jealous of men , who are so very tender on the wrong side ; for observe it when you will , their tenderness is always owing to their inclination . but to defend our selves , let us briefly consider what he says . he thinks , the open dissentions of its professors a great blemish to the reformation : that is , that it is a great blemish for any men openly to defend the true faith , which others openly oppose , or secretly undermine ; but certainly it would be a greater blemish to the reformation , to have old heresies revived , and the true ancient catholick faith scorned , and no body appear in the defence of it . but we know his mind , that it is for the honour of the reformation not to dispute , though it be for the most important truths . surely our reformers were not so much against disputing . but if these dissentions be so great a blemish to the reformation , whose fault is it ? theirs who dissent from the truth , or theirs who defend it ? this is a very plain case ; for no body would oppose the truth , if no body taught it : the urging too strict an union in matters of faith , begets dissentions : that is , to require an open and undisguised profession of our baptismal faith in father , son , and holy ghost , as the terms of christian communion , is the criminal cause of our dissentions . well : what shall we do then ? renounce the faith of the trinity , for the sake of peace ? this he dares not say , for that would pull off his disguise ; but christianity must be left in that latitude and simplicity wherein it was delivered by our lord and his apostles . this had been a good proposal , would he have told us what this latitude and simplicity is ; for i am for no other faith than what christ and his apostles taught : but i would gladly know what he means by the latitude of faith : for if the christian faith be such a broad faith , must we not believe the whole breadth of it ? or has christ and his apostles left it at liberty to believe what we like , and to let the rest alone ? to believe that father , son , and holy ghost are one supreme eternal god ; or to believe that the eather alone is the true god , the son a mere man , and the holy ghost nothing but a divine inspiration ? to believe that the eternal word was made flesh ; or that christ was no more than a man , who had no being before he was born of the virgin mary ? he can mean nothing else by this latitude of faith , but that christ and his apostles have left these matters so ambiguous and undetermined , that we may believe what we please ; and then indeed those do very ill , who dispute these matters : but this is such a breadth as has no depth ; for such a faith as this can have no foundation . can we certainly learn from scripture , whether christ be a god incarnate , or a mere man ? if we cannot , why should we believe either ? if we can , then one is true , and the other false ; and then there is no latitude in faith , unless christ and his apostles have left it indifferent , whether we believe what is true , or what is false ; what they have taught us , or what we like better our selves . in the same manner he leaves us to guess what he means by the simplicity of the faith. he is very angry with the school-doctors , as worse enemies to christianity , than either heathen philosophers , or persecuting emperors . pray what hurt have they done ? i suppose he means the corruption of christianity with those barbarous terms of person , nature , essence , subsistence , consubstantiality , &c. which will not suffer hereticks to lye concealed under scripture-phrases : but why must the schoolmen bear all the blame of this ? why does he not accuse the ancient fathers and councils , from whom the schoolmen learnt these terms ? why does he let st. austin escape , from whom the master of the sentences borrowed most of his distinctions and subtilties ? but suppose these unlucky wits had used some new terms , have they taught any new faith about the trinity in unity , which the catholick church did not teach ? and if they have only guarded the christian faith with a hedge of thorns , which disguised hereticks cannot break through , is this to wound christianity in its very vitals ? no , no : they will only prick the fingers of hereticks , and secure christianity from being wounded ; and this is one great cause why some men are so angry with the school-doctors ; tho the more general cause is , because they have not industry enough to read or understand them . he says , the first reformers complained of this , and desired a purer and more spiritual sort of divinity . what ? with respect to the doctrine of the trinity and incarnation ? what purer reformers were these ? i 'm sure not our english reformers , whom he censures for retaining scholastick cramping terms in their publick prayers : he means the beginning of our litany : o god the father of heaven : o god the son , redeemer of the world : o god the holy ghost , proceeding from the father and the son : o holy , blessed , and glorious trinity , three persons and one god : these are his scholastick , cramping terms , which he would fling out of our liturgy , when the season of such blessed alterations comes . i hope those excellent persons among us , who , i doubt not , for better reasons did not long since think of some alterations , will consider what a foul imputation this is upon such a design , when such a person shall publickly declare , that they ought to alter and reform the doctrine of the trinity out of our prayers . but the whole mystery of this latitude and simplicity of faith which he pleads for , is that plausible project ( which has been so much talked of of late : ) to confine our selves to scripture terms and phrases ; to use none but scripture words in our creeds and prayers , without any explication in what sense those words are to be understood : as he tells us , certainly we may worship god right well , yea , most acceptably , in words of his own stamp and coinage . now at the first proposal few men would suspect , that there should be any hurt in this ; though it would make one suspect some secret in it , to consider that hereticks were the first proposers of it , and that orthodox christians rejected it . the arians objected this against the homoousion , or the son 's being of the same substance with the father , that it was an unscriptural word ; but the nicene fathers did not think this a good reason to lay it aside : for what reason can there be to reject any words , which we can prove to express the true sense of scripture , though they are not found there ? for must we believe the words or the sense of scripture ? and what reason then can any man have to reject the words , though they be no scripture-words , if he believes the sense contained in them to be the sense of scripture ? the homoiousion , or that the son had a nature like the father's , tho not the same , was no more a scripture-word , than the homoousion ; and yet the arians did not dislike that , because it was no scripture-word ; nor are the socinians angry at any man who says , that christ is but a meer man , who had no being before he was born of the virgin mary ; tho these words are no where in scripture : and is it not strange , that a man who heartily believes , or at least pretends to believe , that father , son , and holy ghost are one eternal god , should be angry with a trinity in unity , or three persons and one god , which do as aptly express the faith which he professes , as any words he can think of ? it is very odd to be zealous for scripture-words without the scripture sense . if the scripture have any determined sense , then that which is the true sense of scripture , is the true faith ; and if we must contend earnestly for the true faith , we must contend for the true sense of scripture , and not merely for its words ; and when hereticks have used their utmost art to make the words of scripture signifie what they please , is it not necessary to fix their true sense , and to express that sense in such other words as hereticks cannot pervert ? there are but few words in common speech , but what are sometimes differently used , in a proper or metaphorical , a large or a limited sense ; and all wise and honest men easily understand from the circumstances of the place , in what sense they are used ; but if men be perverse , they may expound words properly when they are used metaphorically , or metaphorically when they are used properly ; and there is no confuting them from the bare signification of the word , because it may be , and oftentimes is used both ways ; and therefore in such cases we must consider the circumstances of the text , and compare it with parallel texts , to find out in what sense the word is there used ; and when we have found it , it is reasonable and necessary to express the true christian faith , not merely in scripture words , which are abused and perverted by hereticks , but in such other words , if we can find any such , as express the true sense in which the scripture-words are used , and in which all christians must understand them , who will retain the purity of the christian faith. we do not hereby alter the christian faith , nor require them to believe any thing more than what the scripture teaches , tho we require them to profess their faith in other words , which are not indeed in scripture , but express the true and determined sense of scripture words . and this is all the latitude of faith which this stander-by so tragically complains we have destroyed , viz. that we have brought the scripture words to a fixt and determined sense , that hereticks can no longer conceal themselves in a latitude of expression , nor spread their heresies in scripture words , with a traditionary sense and comment of their own . i would ask any man who talks at this rate about a latitude of faith , whether there be any more than one true christian faith ? and whether christ and his apostles intended to teach any more ? or whether they did not intend , that all christians should be obliged to believe this one faith ? if this be granted , there can be no more latitude in the faith , than there is in a unit ; and if they taught but one faith , they must intend that their words should signifie but that one faith ; and then there can be no intentional latitude in their words neither ; and what crime then is the church guilty of , if she teach the true christian faith , that she teaches it in such words as have no latitude , no ambiguity of sense , which hereticks may deny if they please , but which they can't corrupt in favour of their heresies , as they do scripture words ? it is an amazing thing to me , that any man who has any zeal , any concernment for the true christian faith , who does not think it perfectly indifferent what we believe , or whether we believe any thing or not , should judge it for the advantage of christianity , and a proper expedient for the peace of the church , for all men to agree in the same scripture words , and understand them in what sense they please ; tho one believes christ to be the eternal son of god , and another to be but a mere man ; which it seems has no great hurt in it , if they do but agree in the same words : but if the faith be so indifferent , i cannot imagine why we should quarrel about words ; the fairer and honester proposal is , that every man should believe as he pleases , and no man concern himself to confute heresies , or to divide the church with disputes ; which is the true latitude our author seems to aim at ; and then he may believe as he pleases too . but pray , why should we not write against the socinians ? especially when they are the aggressors , and without any provocation publish and disperse the most impudent and scandalous libels against the christian faith. he will give us some very wise reasons for this by and by , when he comes to be plain and succinct ; in the mean time we must take such as we can meet with . he is afraid pe●●le should lose all reverence for the litany , should ▪ we go on to vindicate the doctrine of the trinity in unity : i should not easily have apprehended this , and possibly some of the common people might have been as dull as my self , had he not taken care before he parted , for fear no body else should observe it , to teach people to ridicule the trinity in their prayers . dr. wallis would not undertake to say what a divine person signifies , as distinguished from nature and essence , only says , a person is somewhat , but the true notion of a person he does not know : this author commends this as ever held to by all learned trinitarians ; for indeed all the doctor meant by his somewhat is , that three persons signify three real subsistences , and are real things , not a sabellian trinity of mere names . and yet in the very next page he teaches his readers to ridicule the litany with the doctors somewhats : o holy , blessed , and glorious trinity , three somewhats , and one god , have mercy on us , &c. was there ever any thing more senseless , or more prophane ! that because the doctor would not undertake to define a person , but only asserted in general , that a divine person was somewhat , or some real being , in opposition to a mere nominal difference and distinction ; therefore in our prayers we may as well call the three divine persons , father , son ; and holy ghost , three somewhats . nobis non licet esse tam disertis . i am sure he has reason heartily to pray , that these three somewhats , as he prophanely calls them , would have mercy on him . in the next place he says , he is well assured , that the late ( socinian ) pam●●lets would have died away , or have been now in few mens hands , had not divers persons taken on them the labour to confute them . but did his socinian friends , who were such busie factors for the cause , tell him so ? did they print them , that no body might read them ? were they not dispersed in every corner , and boasted of in every coffee-house , before any answer appeared ? however , were it so ; is there no regard to be had to hereticks themselves ? and is it not better that such pamphlets should be in an hundred hands with an answer , than in five hands without one ? i should think it at any time a good reward for all the labour of confuting , to rescue or preserve a very few from such fatal errors ; which i doubt not but is a very acceptable service to that merciful shepherd , who was so careful to seek one lost and straggling sheep . heresies and vices dye by being neglected , just as weeds do ; for we know the parable , that the devil sows his tares , while men sleep . but this is no new charge ; the good bishop of alexandria met with the same censures for his zeal against arius ; for it seems that heresie would have died too , if it had not been opposed . i doubt this author judges of other mens zeal for heresy , by his own zeal for the truth , which wants a little rubbing and chafing to bring it to life ; but heresy is all flame and spirit , will blow and kindle it self , if it be not quenched . but yet if what he says be true , that by our unskilful way of confuting heresie , we run into those very absurdities which our adversaries would reduce us to ; this i confess is a very great fault , and when he shews me any of those absurdities , i will thankfully correct them ; for all the obloquies in the world will never make me blush to recant an error : but before he pretends to that , i must desire him , that he would first read my book , which i know some men censure without reading it . such general accusations are very spiteful , and commonly have a mixture of spite both against the cause , and against the person . his next argument is very observable : we must not dispute now against socinians , because these controversies about the trinity have been above thirteen hundred years ago determined by two general councils ( the nicene , and first constantinopolitan ) , which are owned by our church , and their creeds received into our liturgy . ergo , we must not defend this faith against hereticks , because it is the faith of two general councils which are owned by our church . did athanasius think this a good argument against writing and disputing against the arians , after the council of nice had condemned arius and his doctrines ? did st. basil , gregory nazianzen , nyssen , st. chrysostom , st. jerom , st. austin , think this a good argument , who wrote so largely against these heresies , which former councils had condemned ? but this author thinks the best way is to let the matter stand upon this bottom of authority ; that is , let hereticks ridicule our faith as much as they please , we must make them no other answer , but that this is the faith of the nicene and constantinopolitan councils , and the faith of the church of england . and can he intend this for any more than a jest , when he knows how socinians despise the determinations of councils , and particularly with what scorn they treat the nicene fathers ? is this an age to resolve our faith into church authority ? or would he himself believe such absurd doctrines as they represent the trinity in unity to be , merely upon church authority ? for my part i declare i would not . i greatly value the authority of those ancient councils , as credible witnesses of the traditionary sense of the church before those controversies were started ; but were not these doctrines taught in scripture , were they manifestly repugnant to the plain and evident principles of reason , all the councils in the world should never reconcile me to them , no more than they should to the doctrine of transubstantion . and therefore methinks he might have at least allowed us to have challenged the scriptures as well as general councils on our side ; and to have vindicated our faith from all pretended absurdities and contradictions to reason . but would any man of common sense , who had not intended to expose the faith of the holy trinity , have told the world at this time of day , that we have no other safe and sure bottom for our faith , but only the authority of general councils ? nay , that the council of nice it self , on whose authority we must rest , had little else themselves for their determinations but only authority , that it was authority chiefly carried the point . and thus for fear we should have believed too much upon the authority of councils , which is the only bottom he will allow our faith , he gives them a secret stab himself , and makes their authority ridiculous . that the several bishops declared , what faith had been taught and received in their churches is true ; that this authority chiefly carried the point , is false : athanasius grew famous in the council for his learned and subtile disputations , which confounded the arians ; and what arguments he chiefly relied on , we may see in his works : and whoever does but look into the fathers , who wrote against the arians in those days , will find , that their faith was resolved into scripture and reason , and not meerly or chiefly into authority . and thus he comes to be plain and succinct , and tells us , that of all controversies we can touch upon at present , this of the trinity is the most unreasonable , the most dangerous , and so the most unseasonable . it is the most unreasonable : 1. because it is on all hands confess'd , the deity is infinite , unsearchable , incomprehensible ; and yet every one who pretends to write plainer than another on this controversy , professes to make all comprehensible and easy . i perceive he is well versed in mr. hobbs's divinity ; though i can discover no marks of his skill in fathers and councils . for this was mr. hobb's reason , why we should not pretend to know any thing of god , nor inquire after his attributes , because he has but one attribute , which is , that he is incomprehensible ; and as this author argues , it is a small favour to request of persons of learning , that they should be consistent with , and not contradict themselves : that is , that they would not pretend to know any thing of god , whom they acknowledge to be incomprehensible , which is to pretend to know , what they confess cannot be known . now i desire to know , whether we may dispute about the being and nature of god , and his essential attributes and perfections ; and vindicate the notion of a deity from those impossibilities , inconsistencies , absurdities , which some atheistical philosophers charge on it , notwithstanding that we confess god to be incomprehensible ? and if the incomprehensibility of the divine nature does not signifie , that we can know nothing of god , and must inquire nothing about him ▪ ; the trinity of divine persons is as proper an object of our faith , and modest inquiries , as the unity of the divine essence , for they are both incomprehensible . and to say , that every one who pretends to write plainer than another on this controversy , professes to make all comprehensible and easy , may with equal truth and authority be charg'd on all those who undertake to vindicate the notion and idea of a god , or to explain any of the divine attributes and perfections . a finite mind cannot comprehend what is infinite ; but yet one man may have a truer and more perfect notion of the nature and attributes of god than another : god is incomprehensible in heaven as well as on earth , and yet angels and glorified spirits know god after another manner than we do . there must be infinite degrees of knowledge , when the object is infinite ; and every new degree is more perfect than that below it ; and yet no creature can attain the highest degree of all , which is a perfect comprehension : so that the knowledge of god may increase every day , and men may write plainer about these matters every day , without pretending to make all that is in god , even a trinity in unity , comprehensible and easy . this is a spiteful and scandalous imputation , and is intended to represent all those who undertake to write about the trinity , and to vindicate the primitive faith of the church from the scorn and contempt of hereticks , as a company of vain-conceited , presuming , but ignorant scriblers ; who pretend to make the incomprehensible nature of god , comprehensible and easy . but the comfort is , we have so good company , that we are able to bear this charge without blushing ; even general councils , and those great lights of the church , athanasius , st. hillary , st. basil , the gregories , st. chrysostom , st. austin , and many others , besides all those who in all succeeding ages to this day , have with equal zeal and learning defended the same cause ; and yet never profess'd to make all comprehensible and easy . all that any man pretends to in vindicating the doctrine of the trinity , is to prove that this faith is taught in scripture , and that it contains no such absurdities and contradictions , as should force a wise man to reject it , and either to reject the scriptures for its sake , or to put some strained and unnatural senses on scripture to reconcile it to the principles of reason ; and this , i hope , may be done by those , who yet acknowledge the divine nature , and the trinity in unity to be incomprehensible . but here he had a very fair opportunity , had he thought fit to take it , to correct the insolence and presumption of his learned writers of controversy ; who will not allow the divine nature to be incomprehensible , and will not believe god himself concerning his own nature , beyond what their reason can conceive and comprehend : who deny prescience for the same reason , that they deny the trinity , because they can't conceive it , nor reconcile it with the liberty of human actions ; and for the same reason may deny all the attributes of god , which have something in them beyond what we can conceive : especially an eternity without begining , and without succession , which is chargeable with more absurdities and contradictions , than the trinity it self : for a duration , which can't be measured ; and an eternal duration , which can be measured ; and a succession without a beginning , a second or third without a first , are unconceivable to us , and look like very plain and irreconci●●ble contradictions . this is the true use of the incomprehensibility of the divine nature ; not to stop all enquiries after god , nor to discourage our studies of the divine nature and perfections : for we may know a great deal , and may every day increase our knowledge of what is incomprehensible , thô we cannot know it all ; but to check the presumption of some vain pretenders to reason , who will not own a god , nor believe any thing of god , which their reason cannot comprehend ; which must not only make them hereticks , but , if pursued to its just consequences , must make them atheists , or make such a god , as no body will own , or worship , but themselves , a god adequate and commensurate to their understandings , which must be a little , finite , comprehensible god. in the next place , to prove how unreasonable it is to dispute in vindication of the trinity , he observes again , that this matter has been sufficiently determined by due authority : but having answered this once , i see no need to answer it again . to back this he adds , that the present issue shews ▪ that in this world it never will be better understood : for it seems , as he says , the master of the sentences , and some modern writers , have made very sad work of it . and yet he does not seem to be very intimately acquainted with the master of the sentences , nor some of these modern writers . but all that he means is , that no body can say any thing to the purpose for so absurd a doctrine , as a trinity in unity ; and therefore he plainly adds , the more men draw the disputacious saw , the more perplexed and intricate the question is ; and therefore the only secure way is , to leave off disputing for the trinity and let socinians dispute against it by themselves . but such stuff as this , deserves another sort of answer than i can give it . but he concludes this argument of unreasonableness very remarkably . and lastly , hereby our church at present , and the common christianity ( it may be feared ) will be more and more daily exposed to atheistical men ; for this being but the result of the former particulars , and such kind of men daily growing upon us , it cannot be believed , they can over-look the advantages which is so often given them . the sum of which is , that to vindicate the doctrine of the trinity against socinians , will make men atheists . this is a very bold stroke for a christian , and a divine , and i shall beg leave to expostulate this matter a little freely with him . 1st , i desire to know , whether he thinks the doctrine of the trinity to be defensible or not ? if it be not defensible , why does he believe it ? why should we not rather openly and plainly reject the doctrine of the trinity , which would be a more effectual way to put a stop to atheism , than to profess to believe it , but not to defend it ? if it be defensible , and there be no fault in the doctrine , but that some men have defended it ill , would it not much more have become him to have defended it better , than only to quarrel with those who have defended it , as well as they could ? 2dly , why does he not tell the socinians , what injury they do to common christianity , by ridiculing the faith of the holy trinity , and exposing it to the scorn of atheists ? does he think that they are no christians , and ought not to be concerned for common christianity ? or does he think , that atheists will like the doctrine of the trinity ever the better , for its being despised by socinians as an absurd contradictory faith , without having any defence made by trinitarians ? or does he think , that the defences made by trinitarians expose the faith more than the objections of socinians ? i wish i knew his mind , and then i could tell what to say to him . 3dly , how are atheists concerned in the disputes of the trinity ? or how are we concerned to avoid scandalizing atheists , who believe that there is no god at all ? must we be afraid of defending the faith of the trinity , lest atheists should mock at it , who already mock at the being of a god ? what shall we have left of christianity , if we must either cast away , or not defend every thing , which atheists will mock at ? surely he has a very contemptible opinion of the doctrine of the trinity , that he thinks all the defences that are , or can be made for it , so ridiculous , that they are enough to make men atheists . but i can tell him a secret , which possibly he may be privy to , though in great modesty he conceals his knowledge , viz. that atheists and deists , men who are for no religion , or at least not for the christian religion , are of late very zealous socinians ; and they are certainly in the right of it : for run down the doctrine of the trinity and incarnation , and there is an end of the christian religion , and with that an end of all revealed religion ; and as for natural religion , they can make and believe as much , or as little of it as they please . and this is one reason , and i am sure a better than any he has given against it , why we are , and ought to be so zealous at this time in opposing socinianism , because it is the common banner under which all the enemies of religion and christianity unite . this makes that little contemptible party think themselves considerable , that all the atheists and infidels , and licentious wits of the town , are their converts ; who promise themselves a glorious triumph over christianity , and particularly over the church of england , by decrying and scorning the catholick faith of the trinity and incarnation . ii. thus much for the unreasonableness of this controversie about the holy trinity ; in the next place he tells us the danger of it : and he has thought of such an argument to evince the danger of disputing for the holy trinity , as , i believe , was never dreamt of before ; and that is , that it is one of the fundamentals of christian religion ; now to litigate touching a fundamental , is to turn it into a controversie ; that is , to unsettle , at least endanger the unsettling the whole superstructure . now i am perfectly of his mind , that it is a dangerous thing to unsettle foundations ; but is it a dangerous thing too , to endeavour to preserve and defend foundations , when hereticks unsettle them , and turn them into dispute and controversie ? let us put the being of god , instead of the holy trinity , and see how he will like his argument himself . the being of a god is the foundation of all religion , and therefore it is dangerous to dispute with atheists about the being of god , because this is to turn a fundamental into a controversie , that is , to unsettle , or to endanger the unsetling the whole superstructure : and thus we must not dispute against atheists , no more than against socinians : and what is it then we must dispute for ? what else is worth disputing ? what else can we dispute for , when foundations are overturned ? what is the meaning of that apostolical precept , to contend earnestly for the faith ? jud. 3. what faith must we contend for , if not for fundamentals ? what faith is that which can subsist without a foundation ? but i would desire this author to tell me , whether we must believe fundamentals with , or without reason ? whether we must take fundamentals for granted , and receive them with an implicite faith , or know for what reason we believe them ? if our religion must not be built without a foundation , like a castle in the air , it is certain , that the fundamentals of our faith ought to have a very sure foundation , and therefore we are more concerned to understand and vindicate the reasons of our faith , with respect to fundamentals , than to dispute any less matters in religion , for the roof must tumble , if the foundation fail . what shall christians do then , when atheists , infidels , and hereticks , strike at the very foundations of their faith ? ought not they to satisfie themselves , that there is no force in the objections , which are made against the faith ? or must they confirm themselves with an obstinate resolution , to believe on without troubling themselves about objections , in defiance of all the power and evidence of reason ? this is not to believe like men ; christianity had never prevailed against paganism and judaism upon these terms ; for they had possession , authority , and prescription on their side , which is the only reason and security he gives us for the faith of the trinity , that the established church is in possession of it . if private christians then must endeavour to satisfie themselves in the reasons of their faith , when fundamentals are called in question , is it not the duty of christian bishops and pastors to defend the faith , and to defend the flock of christ from those grievous wolves st. paul prophesied of ? is not this their proper work and business ? and when the faith is publickly opposed and scorned in printed libels , ought it not to be as publickly defended ? when hereticks dispute against the faith , must we be afraid of disputing for it , for fear of making a controversie of fundamentals ? thanks be to god , our excellent primate is above this fear , and has now in the press a defence of that faith , which this writer would perswade all men to betray by silence ; and i hope so great an example may at least prevail with him , to let us dispute on without any more earnest and compassionate suits . iii. his last argument is , the unseasonableness of this controversie . he says , all controversies are now unseasonable ; and i say a little more , that they are always so ; for there is no juncture seasonable to broach heresies , and to oppose the truth : but if hereticks will dispute against the truth unseasonably ; there is no time unseasonable to defend fundamental truths . but why is it so unseasonable in this juncture ? because under god , nothing but an union of councils , and joyning hands and hearts , can preserve the reformation , and scarce any thing more credit and justifie it , than an union in doctrinals . to begin with the last first : is the union in doctrinals ever the greater , that socinians boldly and publickly affront the faith of the church , and no body appears to defend it ? will the world think that we are all of a mind , because there is disputing only on one side ? then they will think us all socinians , as some forreigners begin already to suspect , which will be a very scandalous union , and divide us from all other reformed churches . let union be never so desirable , we cannot , we must not unite in heresie ; those break the union , who depart from the faith , not those who defend it . when heresies are broached , the best way to preserve the unity of the church , is to oppose and confute , and shame heresie and hereticks , which will preserve the body of christians from being infected by heresie , and the fewer there are , who forsake the faith , the greater unity there is in the church . but nothing but union of counsels , and joyning hands and hearts , can preserve the reformation . must we then turn all socinians , to preserve the reformation ? must we renounce christianity , to keep out popery ? this stander-by is misinformed , for socinianism is no part of the reformation ; and so inconsiderable and abhorred a party , when they stand by themselves , that all parties who own any religion , will joyn counsels , and hands and hearts to renounce them . but what he would insinuate is , that we shall never joyn against a common enemy , whose successes would endanger the reformation , while there are any religious disputes among us . i hope he is mistaken , or else we shall certainly be conquered by france , for twenty such compassionate suits as this , will never make us all of a mind ; and whether we dispute or not , if we differ as much as if we did dispute , and are as zealous for the interest of a party , the case is the same . but he has unwarily confess'd a great truth , which all governments ought to consider , that every schisin in the church , is a new party and faction in the state , which are always troublesome to government when it wants their help . but these disputes about the trinity make sport for papists . it must be disputing against the trinity then ; not disputing for it ; for they are very orthodox in this point ; and never admitted any man to their communion who disowned this faith , or declared , that he thought it at any time unreasonable , dangerous , or unseasonable to dispute for it , when it was violently opposed . i doubt this protestant church-man has made more sport for papists , than all our other disputes ; for it is a new thing for such men to plead for socinians , but no new thing to dispute against them ; and new sports are always most entertaining . but he has himself started an objection , which if he could well answer , i could forgive him all the rest . but it will be said , what shall we do ? shall we tamely by a base silence give up the point . this is the objection , and he answers , there is no danger of it , the established church is in possession of it , and dispute will only increase the disturbance . but is there no danger that the church may be flung out of possession , and lose the faith , if she don't defend it ? no , the adversaries to the received doctrine ( why not to the true faith ? ) cannot alter our articles of religion ; but if they can make converts , and increase their party , they may in time change our articles , and then we shall hear no more of compassionate suits for forbearance . but they can dispute everlastingly ; and let them dispute on , we fear them not . but they are men subtil , sober , industrious ; many of them very vertuous , and ( as all must say ) setting aside their opinions , devout , pious , and charitable . i perceive he is very intimately acquainted with them , though st. paul commands all christians , to mark those which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned , and avoid them , 16 rom. 17. but let them be never so good men , as some of the heathen philosophers were , must we therefore tamely suffer them to pervert the faith ? but they are very zealous , and the presses are open , and they will never be silent . they are zealous against the truth , and therefore we must not be zealous for it ; they will write and print , and speak against the truth , and will never be silent ; and therefore we must be silent , and neither write , nor say any thing for the truth . was there ever such a reason thought of as this ? well! how long must we be silent ? neglect them till a fit time and place : but why is not this as fit a time , as ever we shall have , to prevent their sowing tares , or to pluck them up before they have taken too deep root ? can there be a fitter time to oppose heresies , and to defend the true christian faith , then when hereticks are very bold and busie in spreading their heresies , and opposing the faith ? but when this fit time is come ( for i know not what he means by a fit place ) what shall we do then ? will he then give us leave to write and dispute against such hereticks ? this he will not say ; but then let that be done , which shall be judged most christian and most wholesome . but what is that ? will it ever be most christian and most wholesome , to dispute for the faith against heresie ? if ever it will be so , why is it not so now ? if this never will be christian and wholesome , what else is to be done to hereticks in fit time and place , unless he intends to physick ' em ? and it seems he has a dose ready prepared , to lay all these controversies to an eternal sleep ; and it is , what he calls a negative belief , a pretty contradiction , but never the less proper cure for heresie . the project is this , as far as i can understand him , that the socinians shall not be required to own the doctrines of the trinity and incarnation , but shall so far agree , as not to contradict them , nor teach contrary to them : now i should like this very well , that they would not oppose the received doctrine of the church , but i believe he knows some little clattering tongues , which all the opiates he has , can never lay asleep ; and had he remembred what he had just before said concerning their zeal , and their eternal disputing , and that they will never be silent , he would never have proposed so impracticable a thing , as the imposing silence on them ; which makes me suspect , that he intends something more than what he says , and therefore to prevent mistakes , i must ask him a question or two . 1. whether he will allow us , who , as he grants , are in possession of this faith of the trinity and incarnation , to keep possession of it , and teach , explain , and confirm it to our people : we will answer none of their books , if they won't write them ; but if he expects that we should say nothing of , or for the trinity , as he would have them say nothing against it , we must beg his pardon ; we do not think the doctrine of the trinity and incarnation to be of so little concernment , as to be parted with , or buried in silence . we believe christian religion to be built on this faith , and therefore think ourselves as much bound to preach it , as to preach the gospel ; and if they will oppose the faith , as long as we preach it , we can have no truce with them . 2dly , i hope he does not propose this negative belief , as he calls it , as a term of communion ; that tho' we know they deny the trinity and the incarnation , yet if they will agree not publickly to oppose and contradict this faith , we shall receive them to our communion , and fling the worship of the holy trinity , and of a god incarnate , out of our liturgies for their sake . i grant there may be such things , as articles of peace , when men joyn in the same communion , notwithstanding some less material differences , while the substantials of faith and worship are secure , and oblige themselves not to disturb the peace of the church with less disputes ; but to make the essentials of faith and worship meer articles of peace , to receive those to our communion , who deny the very object of our worship , is as senceless , and as great a contradiction to the nature and end of christian communion , as it would be to receive heathens , jews , mahometans into the christian church , by vertue of this negative belief . this i know he will not allow ; for he says , we are agreed in the other parts of our common christianity : whereas it is absolutely impossible , that we should agree in any thing , which is pure christianity , while we differ in the fundamental doctrines of the trinity and incarnation , the owning or denying of which makes an essential difference in religion . it alters the object of our worship , as much as the worship of one and of three persons in the godhead , and as much as the worship of a god incarnate , and of a deified meer man , differ . it alters the way of our salvation , as much as faith in the blood and sacrifice of the son of god , to expiate our sins , differs from believing a great and excellent prophet , and obeying his laws . it alters the motives and principles of our obedience , as much as the love of god , in giving his son , differs from his goodness in sending an excellent man to be our prophet and saviour ; as much as the love , humility , and condescension of the eternal son of god , in becoming man , and in dying as a sacrifice for our sins , differs from the love of a meer man , in preaching the gospel , and bearing testimony to it by his own blood. it changes the hopes and reliances of sinners , as much as the security of a meritorious sacrifice offered by the eternal son of god for the expiation of our sins , differs from the promises of an extraordinary man sent as a prophet from god ; and as much as the intercession of a high priest , who is the eternal son of god , and intercedes in the merits of his own blood , differs from the intercession of a meer , though of an excellent man , who has made no atonement for our sins , and has no other interest in god , than what an innocent and obedient man can pretend to . it were easie to enlarge on this argument ; but i have directed in the margin , where the reader may see it discoursed at large . now if this author , for these reasons , will allow us to instruct our people in the doctrine of the trinity and incarnation , and not desire us to receive socinians into our communion , he will do good service , if he can bring them to his negative belief , and perswade them to be silent ; if he can't , we will try to make them so in time , if they have wit enough to understand , when it is fit to be quiet . in the next place he takes sanctuary in the act of parliament in favour of dissenters , which he conceives has done very much , if not full enough . but had he considered , how severe this act is upon his beloved socinians , he might much better have let it alone . for no dissenters have any benefit by that act , who do not renounce socinianism : but he pretends to give account of acts of parliament , as he does of other books , without seeing them . but we may see what a hearty good will he has to the cause : if the act has excepted socinians , it is more than he knew , and more than he wished ; for he hoped it had not been done , and endeavoured to perswade the world , that all the bishops of england had allowed it ; for he cannot believe , that the body of the bishops disallowed , or did not with good liking consent to the act , viz. to give liberty to socinians , as he supposed . this is such a scandalous representation of the bishops of england , as i 'm sure , they don't deserve , and which in due time they may resent . and here , without any provocation , he sets up the authority of bishops , against the lower house of convocation , who never differed upon this point , and i hope never will , nor will ever be tempted by such a forward undertaker , to dispute the bounds of their authority , but content themselves with the ancient constitution of the church of england . but if he understands the practice of the primitive and truly apostolick church , which he threatens these unruly presbyters with , no better than he does k. edw. vi.'s reformation , which he supposes to be made by the body of the bishops , in opposition to the presbyters ( or else i know not how he applies it ) he is capable of doing no great good nor hurt . only i can tell him one thing , that had he fallen into the hands of k. edw.'s reforming bishops , they would have reformed him out of the church , or have taught him another sort of compassionate suit than this . he concludes with a heavy charge upon myself , and dr. wallis , ( for he mentions none else ) as if we had receded from the doctrine taught even in our own church , about the holy trinity . do we then deny , that there are three persons and one god ? no , our business is to prove it , and explain and vindicate it ? but he thinks we explain it otherwise , than it has been formerly explained . and yet that very account he gives us of it , out of mr. hooker , is owned by myself , and particularly explained by my hypothesis . he has given us no just occasion to vindicate ourselves , because he has not vouchsafed to tell us , why he dislikes either of us . he has cited some broken passages out of my vindication , about three eternal minds , which are essentially one eternal mind . and what is the hurt of this ? is not every divine person who is god , a mind , and an eternal mind ? is not the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , or the eternal and uncreated word and wisdom of god , an eternal and uncreated mind ? is not the substantial word and wisdom of god a mind ? is not the eternal spirit , which searcheth the deep things of god , as the spirit of a man knoweth the things of a man , a mind ? and if i can give any possible account , how three eternal minds should be essentially one , does not this at least prove , that there may be three divine persons , in the unity of the divine essence ? and should i have been mistaken in this account , as i believe i am not , must i therefore be charged with receding from the doctrine of the church of england ? as for dr. wallis , he has nothing to say against him , but his calling the divine persons somewhats , with which he has very profanely ridiculed the litany , which i gave an account before . and now can any man tell , what opinion this melancholy stander-by has of the doctrines of the trinity , and incarnation ? he dares not speak out , but gives very broad signs , what he would be at . he discourages all men from defending these doctrines , declares , that all new attempts cannot satisfie the old difficulties , which he declares to be unsatisfiable , and unsoluble : that when we have moved every stone , authority must define it . and yet this authority extends no farther than to a negative belief ▪ which , he says , is all that can reasonably be required of men , of such mysteries as they cannot understand : and thus far he professes himself bound by our church articles for peace sake . and this is his faith of the trinity , not to believe it , but only not to oppose it . he complains of the scholastick cramping terms of three persons , and one god , and thinks the unity of three persons in one essence , to be only a more orthodox phrase ; so that he leaves us no words to express this doctrine by , and therefore it is time to say nothing about it . it is a controversie which exposes our liturgy , and is not only unprofitable , but corruptive of , and prejudicial and injurious to our common devotion : so dangerous is it to pray to the holy , blessed , and glorious trinity , three persons and one god. but then on the other hand , he carefully practises that forbearance , which he perswades others to , towards his learned writers of the socinian controversies , tho' they were the assailants : never perswades them to forbear exposing and ridiculing the faith of the church , which would have provoked his indignation , had he any reverence for the holy trinity , and a god incarnate ; but only thinks by the charm of a negative faith , that they may be required quietly to acquiesce in the publick determinations . he tells us over and over , how unseasonable and dangerous it is to meddle with such high matters , or to offer at any explication of what is incomprehensible ; but it is no fault in them , to talk of absurdities and contradictions in what they do not understand : nay , he all along insinuates , that these absurdities and contradictions , which they charge upon the doctrines of the trinity and incarnation , are unsatisfiable , and unsoluble ▪ he bestows high encomiums upon these enemies of the faith , but speaks with wonderful contempt of those who defend it , as far as he dares ; the fathers and councils are out of his reach , but the master of the sentences , and the school-men , and all modern undertakers , must feel his displeasure : to defend the trinity exposes our liturgy , and corrupts our common devotion ; but to ridicule it , makes them very pious and devout men. god preserve his church from wolves in sheeps clothing . and now having vindicated our ancient rights and liberties , which the church always challenged , of defending the truly catholick and apostolick faith , from the assaults of hereticks , i shall apply myself , as i have leisure , to the defence of my vindication of the doctrine of the holy and ever-blessed trinity , and the incarnation of the son of god. the end . notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a59791-e290 earnest suit , p. 1. p. 2. p. 2. p. 3. p. 3. p. 16. p. 3. p. 4. p. 5 ▪ page 7. page 7. page 8. page 8. page 9. see the vindication of the defence of dr. stillingfleet's unreasonableness of separation , pag. 256 , &c. page 11. page 13. page 7. page 6. page 2. page 6. page 17. page 9 , 10. a review of the annotations of hugo grotius, in reference unto the doctrine of the deity, and satisfaction of christ. with a defence of the charge formerly laid against them. / by iohn ovven d.d. owen, john, 1616-1683. this text is an enriched version of the tcp digital transcription a90286 of text r206587 in the english short title catalog (thomason e879_1). textual changes and metadata enrichments aim at making the text more computationally tractable, easier to read, and suitable for network-based collaborative curation by amateur and professional end users from many walks of life. the text has been tokenized and linguistically annotated with morphadorner. the annotation includes standard spellings that support the display of a text in a standardized format that preserves archaic forms ('loveth', 'seekest'). textual changes aim at restoring the text the author or stationer meant to publish. this text has not been fully proofread approx. 76 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 13 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. earlyprint project evanston,il, notre dame, in, st. louis, mo 2017 a90286 wing o802 thomason e879_1 estc r206587 99865708 99865708 117957 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a90286) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 117957) images scanned from microfilm: (thomason tracts ; 132:e879[1]) a review of the annotations of hugo grotius, in reference unto the doctrine of the deity, and satisfaction of christ. with a defence of the charge formerly laid against them. / by iohn ovven d.d. owen, john, 1616-1683. [2], 22 p. printed by h. hall. printer to the university, for thom. robinson., oxford, : 1656. annotation of thomason copy: "may 3d". reproduction of the original in the british library. eng grotius, hugo, 1583-1645 -early works to 1800. jesus christ -divinity -early works to 1800. socinianism -early works to 1800. a90286 r206587 (thomason e879_1). civilwar no a review of the annotations of hugo grotius,: in reference unto the doctrine of the deity, and satisfaction of christ. with a defence of th owen, john 1656 12183 10 495 0 0 0 0 415 f the rate of 415 defects per 10,000 words puts this text in the f category of texts with 100 or more defects per 10,000 words. 2007-06 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2007-06 apex covantage keyed and coded from proquest page images 2008-05 john latta sampled and proofread 2008-05 john latta text and markup reviewed and edited 2008-09 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion a review of the annotations of hvgo grotivs , in reference unto the doctrine of the deity , and satisfaction of christ . with a defence of the charge formerly laid against them . by iohn ovven d. d. oxford , printed by h. hall , printer to the university , for thom. robinson . 1656. a second consideration of the annotations of hugo grotius . having in my late defence of the doctrine of the gospell , from the corruptions of the socinians , been occasioned to vindicate the testimonys given in the scripture to the deity of christ , from their exceptions , and finding that hugo grotius in his annotatios had ( for the most part ) done the same things with them , as to that particular , and some other important articles of the christian faith , that booke of his being more frequent in the hands of students , then those of the socinians , i thought it incumbent on me , to doe the same worke in reference to those annotations , which it was my designe to performe towards the writings of socinus , smalcius , and their companions and followers . what i have been enabled to accomplish by that endeavour , with what service to the gospell hath been performed thereby , is left to the judgment of them who desire {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} . of my dealing with grotius i gave a briefe account in my epistle to the governours of the vniversity , and that with reference to an apology made for him , not long before . this hath obtained a new apology under the name of a second defence of hugo grotius ; with what litle advantage either to the repute of grotius , as to the thing in question , or of the apologist himselfe , it is judged necessary to give the ensueing account : for which i took the first leasure houre i could obtaine , having things of greater weight , dayly incumbent on me . the only thing of importance by me charged on those annotations of grotius , was this ; that the texts of scripture both in the old testament and new , bearing witnesse to the diety , and satisfaction of christ , are in them wrested to other senses and significations , and the testimonies given to those grand truths , thereby eluded . of those of the first kind i excepted one , yet with some doubt , least his expressions therein , ought to be interpreted according to the analogy of what he had elsewhere delivered : of which afterwards . because that which concernes the satisfaction of christ will admit of the easyest dispatch , though taking up most roome , i shall in the first place insist thereon . the words of my charge on the annotations , as to this head of the doctrine of the scripture are these . the condition of these famous annotations as to the satisfaction of christ is the same . not one text in the whole scripture , wherein testimony is given to that sacred truth , which is not wrested to another sense , or at least the doctrine in it , conceald and obscured by them . this being a matter of fact , and the words containing a crime charged on the annotations , he that will make a defence of them , must either disprove the assertion by instances to the contrary , or else granting the matter of fact , evince it to be no crime . that which is objected in matter of fact , aut negandum est aut defendendum , sayes quintilian : lib. 5. cap. de refut : and extra haec in judiciis fere nihil est . in other cases , patronus , neget , defendat , transferat , excuset , deprecetur , molliat , minuat , avertat , despiciat , derideat ; but in matters of fact , the two first only have place . aristotle allows more particulars for an apologist to divert unto , if the matter require it : he may say of what is objected , {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} . ( rhet. lib. 3. cap. 15. ) all which in a plaine matter of fact may be reduced to the former heads . that any other apology can or ought to take place in this , or any matter of the same importance will not easily be proved . the present apologist takes another course . such ordinary paths are not for him to walke in . he tells us of the excellent booke that grotius wrote de satisfactione christi , and the exposition of sundry places of scripture , especially of divers verses of isa. 53 : given therein ; and then adds sundry inducements to perswade us , that he was of the same mind in his annotations . and this is called a defence of grotius . the apologist i suppose knowes full well , what texts of scripture they are , that are constantly pleaded for the satisfaction of christ , by them who doe beleive that doctrine . i shall also for once take it for granted , that he might without much difficulty , have obtained a sight of grotius annotations ; to which i shall only add , that probably if he could from them have disproved the assertion before mentioned , by any considerable instances , he is not so tender of the prefacers credit , as to have concealed it on any such account . but the severalls of his plea for the annotations in this particular , i am perswaded are accounted by some , worthy consideration ; a breife view of them will suffice . the signall place of is . 53. he tells us , he hath heard taken notice of by some ; ( i thought it had been probable the apologist might have taken notice of it himselfe , ) as that wherein his annotations are most suspected ; therefore on that he will fasten a while ▪ who would not now expect that the apologist should have entred upon the consideration of those annotations , and vindicated them from the imputations insinuated : but he knew a better way of procedure , and who shall prescribe to him , what suits his purpose and proposall . this i say is the instance chosen to be insisted on ; and the vindication of the annotations therein , by the interpretation given in their author his booke de satisfactione christi is proposed to consideration . that others , if not the apologist himselfe , may take notice of the emptinesse of such precipitate apologyes , as are ready to be tumbled out , without due digestion , or consideration , i shall not only compare the annotations and that booke as to the particular place proposed , and manifest the inconsistency of the one with the other ; but also to discover the extreame negligence and confidence , which lye at the bottome of his following attempt , to induce a perswasion , that the judgment of the man of whom we speake , was not alter'd ( that is , as to the interpretation of the scriptures relating to the satisfaction of christ ) nor is others in his annotations , then in that booke ; i shall compare the one with the other , by sundry other instances , and let the world see how in the most important places contested about , he hath utterly deserted the interpretations given of them by himselfe in his booke de satisfactione , and directly taken up that which he did oppose . the apologist binds me in the first place to that of is . 53. which is ushered in by the 1 pet. 2. 24. from 1 pet. 2. 24. ( saies the apologist ) grotius informes us that christ so bare our sins , that he freed us from them , so that we are healed by his stripes . this thus crudely proposed , socinus himselfe would graunt it , is little more then barely repeating the words ; grotius goes farther , and contends that {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} the word there used by the apostle , is to be interpreted , tulit sursum eundo , portavit , and tells us that socinus would render this word abstulit , and so take away the force of the argument from this place . to disprove that insinuation , he urges sundry other places in the new testament , where some words of the same importance are used , and are no way capable of such a signification . and whereas socinus urges to the contrary heb. 9. 28. where he saies {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} signifies nothing but auferre peccata , grotius disproves that instance , and manifests that in that place also it is to be rendred by tulit , and so relates to the death of christ . that we may put this instance given us by the apologist , to vindicate the annotations from the crime charged on them to an issue , i shall give the reader the words of his annotations on that place : it is as followes : {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} &c : ] {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} hic est , abstulit , quod sequentia ostendunt , quomodo idem verbum sumi not avimus , heb. 9. 28. eodem sensu {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} ioh. 1. 29. & {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} & {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} isa. 53. 4. ubi graeci {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} : vitia nostra it a interfecit , sicut qui cruci affiguntur interfici solent . simile loquendi genus col. 2. 14. vide rom. 6. 6. gal. 2. 20. 24. est autem hic {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} ; non enim proprie christus cum crucifigeretur , vitia nostra abstulit . sed causas dedit per quas auferrerentur . nam crux christi fundamentum est predicationis ; praedicatio verò poenitentiae , paenitentia verô aufert vitia . how well the annotator abides here by his former interpretation of this place , the apologist may easily discover : 1 there he contends that {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} is as much as tulio , or sursum tulit : and objects out of socinu● , that it must be abstulit , which quite alters the sense of the testimony . here he contends with him , that it must be abstulit . 2 there heb. 9. 28. is of the same importance with this 1 pet. 2. 24. as there interpreted : here , as here ; that is in a quite contrary sense , altogether inconsistent with the other . 3. for company {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} used is . 53. is called in to the same signification , which in the booke de satisfactione he contends is never used in that sense , and that most truly . 4. upon this exposition of the words , he gives the very sense contended for by the socinians ; non enim proprie christus cum crucifigeretur vitia nostra abstulit , sed causas dedit per quas auferreretur : what are these causes ; he adds them immediatly , nam crux christi fundamentum est praedicationis , praedicatio verò poenitentiae , poenitentia verò aufert vitia . he that sees not the whole socinian poyson wrapped up and proposed in this interpretation , is ignorant of the state of the difference , as to that head , between them , and christians . ( 5 ) to make it a little more evident , how constant the annotator was to his first principles , which he insisted on in the management of his disputes with socinus about the sense of this place , i shall adde the words of socinus himselfe , which then he did oppose . verum animadvertere oportet primùm in graeco , verbum , quod interpretes verterunt pertulit , est {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , quod non pertulit sed abstulit vertendum erat , non secus ac factum fuerit in epistola ad hebraeos cap. 9. 28. ubi idem legendi modus habetur , unde constat {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} non perferre peccata , sed peccata tollere , sive auferre , significart . socin. de jes . christ . sat . lib. 2. cap. 6. what difference there is between the designe of the annotator , and that of socinus , what complyance in the quotation of the paralell place of the hebrewes , what direct opposition and head is made in the annotations against that booke de satisfactione , and how clearly the cause contended for in the one , is given away in the other ; needs no farther to be demonstrated . but if this instance makes not good the apologists assertion , it may be supposed , that that which follows , which is ushered in by this , will doe it to the purpose ; let then that come into consideration . this is that of isa. 53. somewhat of the sense which grotius in his booke de satisfactione contends for , in this place , is given us by the apologist . the 11th verse of the chapter which he first considers ( in my booke ) page 14 : he thus proposes and expounds : justificabit servus mens justus multos & iniquitates ipsorum bajulabit . in heb. est : {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} vox autem {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} iniquitatem significat , atque etiam iniquitatis poenam . 2. reg. 7. 9. vox autem {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} est sustinere , bajulare , quoties autem bajulare ponitur cum nomine peccati aut iniquitatis , id in omni lingua & maximè in hebraismo significat poen as ferre , with much more to this purpose . the whole designe of the maine dispute in that place , is , from that discourse of the prophet to prove , that iesus christ properly underwent the punishment due to our sinnes , and thereby made satisfaction to god for them . to manifest his constancy to this doctrine , in his annotations he gives such an exposition of that whole chapter of isaiah 53. as is manifestly , and universally inconsistent with any such designe in the words , as that which he intends to prove from them in his booke de satisfactione . in particular ( to give one instance of this assertion ) he contends here that {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , is as much as bajulare , portare , and that joyned with iniquity ( in all languages , especially in the hebrew ) that phrase of bearing iniquity , signifies to undergoe the punishment due to it ; in his annotations on the place , as also in those on 1 pet. 2. 24. he tells you the word signifies auferre , which with all his strength he had contended against . not to draw out this particular instance into any greater length , i make bold to tell the apologist ( what i suppose he knowes not ) that there is no one verse of the whole chapter , so interpreted in his annotations , as that the sense given by him , is consistent with , nay is not repugnant to , that which from the same verses he pleads for in his booke de satisfactione christi . if notwithstanding this information , the apologist be not satisfied , let him if he please consider what i have already animadverted on those annotations , and undertake their vindication . these loose discourses are not at all to the purpose in hand , nor the question between us , which is solely ; whether grotius in his annotations have not perverted the sense of those texts of scripture , which are commonly , and most righteously pleaded as testimonies given to the satisfaction of christ . but as to this particular place of isaiah , the apologist hath a farther plea , the summe whereof ( not to trouble the reader with the repetition of a discourse so little to the purpose ) comes to this head ; that grotius in his booke de satisfactione christi gives the mysticall sense of the chapter , under which consideration , it belongs to christ and his sufferings ; in his annotations the literall , which had its immediate completion in ieremy , which was not soe easily discoverable or vulgarly taken notice of . this is the summe of his first observation on this place to acquit the annotator of the crime charged upon him . whether he approve the application of the prophesie to jeremiah or no , i know not . he saies , grotius so conceived . the designe of the discourse seems to give approbation to that conception . how the literall sense of a place should come to be lesse easily discovered then the mysticall , well i know not . nor shall i speake of the thing it selfe concerning the literall and mysticall sense supposed to be in the same place and words of scripture , with the application of the distinction to those prophesies which have a double accomplishment in the type and thing or person typified , ( which yet hath no soundnesse in it ) but to keep to the matter now in hand , i shall make bold for the removall of this engine applyed by the apologist for the preventing all possible mistake , or controversie about the annotators after-charge in this matter , to tell him , that the perverting of the first literall sense of the chapter , or giving it a completion in any person whatsoever , in a first , second , or third sense , but the son of god himselfe , is no lesse then blasphemy ; which the annotator is no otherwise freed from , but by his conceiving a sense to be in the words , contrary to their literall importance , and utterly exclusive of the concerment of jesus christ in them . if the apologist be otherwise minded , i shall not invite him againe to the consideration of what i have already written in the vindication of the whole prophesie from the wretched corrupt interpretation of the annotator , ( not hoping that he will be able to breake through that discouragment he hath from looking into that treatise , by the prospect he hath taken of the whole by the epistle ) but doe expresse my earnest desire , that by an exposition of the severalls of that chapter , and their application to any other ( not by loose discourses forraigne to the question in hand ) he would endeavour to evince the contrary ; if on second thoughts he find either his judgment , or ability , not ready or competent for such an attempt , i heartily wish he would be carefull hereafter of ingenerating apprehensions of that nature , in the minds of others , by any such discourses as this . i cannot but suppose that i am already absolved from a necessity of any farther procedure , as to the justifying my charge against the annotations , having sufficiently foyled the instance produced by the apologist for the weakning of it . but yet least any should thinke , that the present issue of this debate , is built upon some unhappinesse of the apologist in the choice of the particulars insisted on ; which might have been prevented , or may yet be removed , by the production of other instances : i shall for their further satisfaction , present them with sundry other , the most important testimonies given to the satisfaction of christ , wherein the annotator hath openly prevaricated , and doth imbrace and propose those very interpretations , and that very sense , which in his book , de satisfactione christi , he had strenuously opposed . page 8. of his booke de satisfactione , he pleads the satisfaction of christ , from gal. 2. 21. laying weight on this , that the word , {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , signifies the want of an antecedent cause , on the supposition there made . in his annotations he deserts this assertion , and takes up the sense of the place given by socinus de servator . lib. 2 : cap. 24. his departure into the tents of socinus on gal. 3. 13. is much more pernitious . page 25 , 26 , 27. urging that place and vindicating it from the exceptions of socinus , he concludes , that the apostle said christ was made a curse , quasi dixerit christum factumesse {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} : hoc est poenae à deo irrogatae , & quidem ignominiosissimae obnoxium . to make good this , in his annotations , he thus expounds the words : duplex hîc figura ; nam & {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} pro {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , quomodo circumcisio pro circumcisis : & subauditur {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} : nam christus it a cruciatus est , quasi esset deo {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , quo nihil homini pessimo in hâc vitâ pejus evenire poterat : which is the very interpretation of the words given by socinus which he opposed ; and the same that crellius insists upon in his vindication of socinus against him . so uniforme was the judgment of the annotator , with that of the author of the book de satisfactione christi . pages 32 , 33 , &c : are spent in the exposition and vindication of rom. 3. 25 , 26. that expression {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , manifesting the end of the suffering of christ , is by him chiefely insisted on . that by {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} is there intended that justice of god , whereby he punisheth sin , he contends and proves from the nature of the thing it selfe , and comparing the expression with other paralell texts of scripture : socinus had interpreted this of the righteousnesse of christs fidelity and veracity : lib. 2. de servator . cap. 2. ( ut ostenderet se veracem & fidelem esse . ) but crellius in his vindication of him places it rather on the goodnesse & liberality of god , which is , saith he , the righteousnesse there intended . to make good his ground , the annotator , thus expounds the meaning of the words ▪ vocem {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} malim hic de bonitate interpretari , quam de fide in promissis praestandis , quia quae sequuntur non ad judaeos solos pertinent , sed etiam ad gentes , quibus promissio nulla facta erat . he rather ( he tells you ) embraces the interpretation of crellius then of socinus ; but for that which himself had contended for , it is quite shut out of doors : as i have elswhere manifested at large . the same course he takes with rom. 5. 10. which he insists on pag. 26. and 2. cor. 5. 18 , 19 , 20 , 21. concerning which he openly deserts his owne former interpretation , and closes expressely with that which he had opposed , as he doth in reference to all other places , where any mention is made of reconciliation : the substance of his annotations on those places , seeming to be taken out of socinus , crellius , and some others of that party . that signall place of heb. 2. 17. in this kind , deserves particularly to be taken notice of ; cap. 7 pag. 141. of his booke de satisfactione , he pleads the sense of that expression , {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , to be , {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} : and addes , significat ergoibi expiationem quae fit placando : but crellius defence of socinus had so possessed the mans mind before he came to write his annotations , that on that place he gives us directly his sense , and almost his words in a full opposition to what he had before asserted : {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , hoc quidem loco , ut ex sequentibus apparet , est auferre peccata , sive purgare à peccato , id est , efficere ne peccetur , vires suppeditando pro modo tentationum : so the annotator on that place ; indeavoring farther to prove his interpretation . from rom. 4 last , cap. 1. pag. 47 , of his booke de satisfactione , he clearly proves the satisfaction of christ : and evinces that to be the sense of that expression , traditus propter peccata nostra : which he thus comments on in his annotations : poterat dioere qui & mortuus est , & resurrexit ut nos à peccatis justificaret , id est , liberaret . sed amans {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} morti conjunxit peccata , quae sunt mors animi , resurrectioni autem adeptionem iustitia , quae est animi resuscitatio : mirè nos & à peccatis retrahit & ad iustitiam ducit : quod videmus christum mortem non formidâsse pro doctrinâ suâ peccatis contrariâ , & ad iustitiam nos vocanti testimonio ; & à deo suscitatum , ut eidem doctrinae summa conciliaretur authoritas . he that sees not , not only that he directly closes in , with what before he had opposed , but also , that he hath here cou●hed the whole doctrine of the socinians , about the mediation of christ , and our iustification thereby , is utterly ignorant of the state of the controversie between them , and christians . i suppose it will not be thought necessary for me to proceed with the comparison instituted . the severall bookes are in the hands of most students , and that the case is generally the same in the other places pleaded for the satisfaction of christ , they may easily satisfy themselves . only because the apologist seemes to put some difference between his annotations on the revelations , ( as having receaved their linedments and colours from his owne pencill , ) and those on the epistles which he had not so compleated ; as i have already manifested , that in his annotations on that booke , he hath treacherously tampred with , and corrupted the testimonies given to the deity of our blessed saviour , so shall i give one instance from them also , of his dealing no lesse unworthily with those that concerne his satisfaction . socinus in his second booke against covet , second part , & chap. 17. gives us this account of those words of the holy ghost , rev. 1. 5. who hath loved us , and washed us in his owne blood : johannes in apocalyp . cap. 1. v. 5. alia metaphorâ seu translatione , ( quae nihil aliud est quam compendiosa quaedam comparatio ) utens , dixit de christo & ejus morte , qui dilexit nos & lavit nos à peccatis in sanguine suo , nam quemadmodum aquâ abluuntur sordes corporis , sic sanguine christi , peccata , quae sordes animi sunt absterguntur . absterguntur , inquam , quia animus onster ab ipsis mundatur , &c. this interpretation is opposed and exploded by grotius lib. de satisf . c. 10. p. 208 , 209. the substance of it being , that christ washed us from our sins by his death , in that he confirmed his doctrine of repentance & newnesse of life thereby , by which we are turned from our sins ; as he manifests in the close of his discourse , hoc saepius urgendū est , ( saith socinus ) iesum christum eâ ratione peccata nostra abstulisse , quod effecerit , ut à peccando desistamus . this interpretation of socinus , being reinforced by crellius , the place falls againe under the consideration of grotius in those annotations on the revelations ; which as the apologist tells us , received their very lineaments and colours from his owne pencill . there then he gives us this account thereof , {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} : sanguine suo , id est , morte toleratâ , certos nos reddidit veritatis eorum quae docuerat , quae talia sunt , ut nihil sit aptius ad purgandos à vitiis animos . humidae naturae , sub quâ est sanguis , proprium est lavare . id vero per egregiam {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} ad animum transfertur . dicitur autem christus suo sanguine nos lavisse , quia & ipse omnia praestitit quae ad id requirebantur & apparet secutum in plurimis effectum . i desire the apologist to tell me what he thinks of this peice thus perfected , with all its lineaments and colours by the pencill of that skilfull man ; and what beautifull aspect he supposeth it to have . let the reader , to prevent further trouble in perusing transcriptions of this kind , consider rev. 13. 8 , pag. 114. heb. 9. 25. to the end ; which he calls an illustrious place in the same page and forward : i iohn 2. 2. pag. 140 , rom. 5. 10 , 11. page 142 , 143. eph. 2. 16. page 148 , 149 , col. 1. 20 , 21 , 22. tit. 2. 14. page 156. heb. 9. 14 , 15. pag. 157 , 158. act. 20. 28. and many others ; and compare them with the annotations on those places , and he will be farther enabled to judge of the defence made of the one , by the instance of the other . i shall only desire that he who undertakes to give his judgment of this whole matter , be somewhat acquainted with the state of the difference , about this poynt of the doctrine of the gospell , between the socinians and us : that he doe not take auferre peccata , to be ferre peccata : nostri causa , to be nostrâ vice , and nostro loco : causa {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , to be {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} : liberatio à jugo peccati , to be redemptio à reatu peccati : subire poenas simpliciter , to be subire paenas nobis debitas : to be {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , and {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} in respect of the event , to be so as to the proper nature of the thing ; offerre seipsum in coelo , to be as much as offerre seipsum in cruce , as to the worke it selfe : that so he be not mistaken to thinke that , when the first are granted , that the latter are so also . for a close of the discourse relating to this head , a breife account may be added , why i said not positively , that he had wrested all the places of scripture giving testimony to the satisfaction of christ , to another sense : but that he had either done so , or else concealed or obscured that sense in them . though i might give instances from one or two places in his annotions on the gospells , giving occasion to this assertion , yet i shall insist only on some taken from the epistle to the hebrews , where is the great and eminent seat of the doctrine of christs satisfaction . although in his annotations on that epistle , he doth openly corrupt the most cleare testimonies given to this truth , yet there are some passages in them , wherein he seems to dissent from the socinians . in his annotations on chap. 5. vers. 5. he hath these words , iesus quidem sacerdotale munus suum aliquo modo erat auspicatus ; cum semet patri victimam offerret . that christ was a preist when he was on the earth , was wholly denyed by socinus both in his booke de servatore , and in his epistle to niemoieuius , as i have shewed elsewhere . smalcius seems to be of the same judgment in the racovian catechisme . grotius saies , sacerdotale munus erat aliquo modo auspicatus : yet herein he goes not beyond crellius , who tells us : mortem christus subiit duplici ratione , partim quidem ut foederis mediator seu sponsor , partim quidem ut sacerdos , deo ipsum oblaturus : de causis mortis christi pag. 6. and so volkelius fully to the same purpose . partes ( saith he ) muneris sacerdotis , haec sunt potissimum ; mactatio victimae , in tabernaculum ad oblationem peragendam , ingressio , & ex eodem egressio : ac mactatio quidem mortem christi , violentam sanguinis profnsionem continet : de relig. lib. 3. cap. 47. pag. 145. and againe : hinc colligitur solam christi mortem nequaquam illam perfectam absolutámque ipsius oblationem ( de qua in epistola ad hebraeos agitur ) fuisse , sed principium & praeparationem quandam ipsius sacerdotii in caelo demum administrandi extitisse , ibid. so that nothing is obtained by grotius his munus sacerdotale aliquo modo erat auspicatus , but what is granted by crellius and volkelius . but in the next words , cum semet offerret patri victimam , he seems to leave them : but he seems only so to doe . for volkelius acknoledgeth that he did slay the sacrifice in his death , though that was not his compleate and perfect oblation , which is also afterwards affirmed by grotius : and crellius expresly affirmes the same . nor doth he seeme to intend a proper expiatory and satisfactory sacrifice in that expression ; for if he had , he would not have been guilty of such an {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , as to say , semet obtulit patri . besides , though he do acknoledge elsewhere , that this victima was {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , & {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , yet he sayes in another place ( on ver : 3. ) sequitur christum quoque obtulisse prose {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} ; giving thereby such a sense to that expression , as is utterly inconsistent with a proper expiatory sacrifice for sin . and which is yet worse , on chap. 9. 14. he gives us such an account why expiation is ascribed to the blood of christ , as is a key to his whole interpretation of that epistle : sanguini ( saith he ) purgatio ista tribuitur : quia per sanguinem , idest , mortem christi , secuta ejus excitatione & evectione , gignitur in nobis fides , quae deinde purgat corda . and therefore where christ is said to offer himselfe by the eternall spirit , he tells us , oblatio christi hic intelligitur illa , quae oblationi legali in adyto factae respondet , ea autem est , non oblatio in altari crucis facta , sed in adyto caelesti : so that the purgation of sin is an effect of christs presenting himselfe in heaven only : which how well it agrees with what the apostle sayes chap. 1. v. 3. the reader will easily judge . and to manifest that this was his constant sense , on those words v. 26. {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , he thus comments ; {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , vt peccatum in nobis extinguatur : fit autem hoc per passionem christi , quae fidem nobis ingenerat , quae cordae purificat . christ confirming his doctrine by his death , begets faith in us , which doth the worke . of the 28th verse of the same chapter i have spoken before . the same he affirmes againe , more expressely , on chap. 10. vers. 3. and on ver. 9. and verse 12. he interprets the oblation of christ , whereby he tooke away sinne , to be the oblation or offering himselfe in heaven , whereby sin is taken away by sanctification , as also in sundry other places , where the expiatory sacrifice of christ on earth , and the taking away of the guilt of sinne , by satisfaction , is evidently intended . so that notwithstanding the concession mentioned , i cannot see the least reason to alter my thoughts of the annotations , as to this businesse in hand . not further to abound in causá facili ; in all the differences we have with the socinians , about christs dying for us , concerning the nature of redemption , reconciliation , mediation , sacrifice , the meaning of all the phrases and expressions , which in those things are delivered to us , the annotator is generally on the apostate side throughout his annotations : and the truth is , i know no reason why our students should with so much diligence and charge , labour to get into their hands the books of socinus , crellius , smalcius , and the rest of that crew , seing these annotations , as to the most important heads of christian religion , about the deity , sacrifice , preisthood , and satisfaction of christ , originall sin , free will , iustification &c , afford them the substance and marrow of what is spoken by them ; so that as to these heads , upon the matter , there is nothing peculiar to the annotator , but the secular learning which in his interpretations he hath curiously and gallantly interweaved . plautus makes sport in his amphitruo with severall persons , some reall , some assumed , of such likenesse one to another , that they could not discerne themselves by any outward appearance ; which caused various contests and mistakes between them . the poets fancy raysed not a greater similitude between mercury and sosia , being supposed to be different persons , then there is a dissimilitude between the author of the booke de satisfactione christi , and of the annotations , concerning which we have been discoursing , being one and the same . nor was the contest of those different persons so like on another , so irreconcilable , as are these of this single person , so unlike himselfe in the severall treatises mentioned . and i cannot but thinke it strange that the apologist could imagine no surer measure to be taken of grotius's meaning in his annotations then his treatise of the satisfaction of christ doth afford , there being no two treatises that i know , of any different persons whatever , about one and the same subject , that are more at variance . whither now any will be perswaded by the apologist to believe that grotius was constant in his annotations to the doctrine delivered in that other treatise , i am not sollicitous . for the reinforced plea of the apologist , that these annotations were not finished by him , but only collections that he might after dispose of ; i am not concerned in it ; having to deale with that booke of annotations that goes under his name ; if they are none of his , it is neither on the one hand or other , of any concernment unto me . i say not this , as though the apologist , had in the least made good his former plea , by his new exceptions to my evidence against it , from the printers preface to the volume of annotations on the epistles . he saies ! what was the opus integrum that was cōmended to the care of {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} ? and answers himselfe , not that last part or volume of annotations , but opus integrum , the whole volume or volumes that contained his {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} adversaria on the new testament . for how ill this agrees with the intention and words of the prefacer , a slight inspection will suffice to manifest . he tells us , that grotius had himselfe publisht his annotations on the gospells , five yeares before : that at his departure from paris , he left a great part of this volume ( that is this on the acts and epistles ) with a friend ; that the reason why he left not opus integrum , that is , the whole volume with him , was because the residue of it was not so written , as that an amanuensis could well understand it . that therefore in his going towards sweden , he wrote that part againe with his owne hand , and sent it backe to the same person ( that had the former part of the volume committed to him ) from hamburge . if the apologist read this preface , he ought , as i suppose to have desisted from the plea insisted on : if he did not , he thought assuredly he had much reason to despise them , with whom he had to do : but as i said , herein am i not concerned . the consideration of the charge on the annotations relating to their tampering with the testimonies given in the scripture to the deity of christ , being an other head of the whole , may now have place . the summe of what is to this purpose by me affirmed , is , that in the annotations on the old and new testament , grotius hath left but one place giving testimony clearly to the deity of christ . to this assertion i added both a limitation , and also an enlargment in severall respects . a limitation that i could not perceive he had spoken of himselfe , clearly on that one place . on supposition that he did so , i granted that perhaps one or two places more , might accordingly be interpreted . that this one place is ioh. 1. 1. i expressely affirmed : that is the one place wherein , as i say , he spake not home to the businesse . the defence of the apologist in the behalfe of grotius consists of sundry discourses . first to disprove that he hath left more then that one of john free from the corruption charged ; he instances in that one of iohn 1. 1. wherein as he saith , he expressely asserts the deity of christ : but yet wisely forseeing , that this instance would not evade the charge , having been expressely excepted , ( as to the present enquiry ) and reserved to further debate ; he adds the places quoted by grotius in the exposition of that place as prov. 8. 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27. isa. 45. 12. & 48. 13. 2 pet. 3. 5. col. 1. 16. from all which he concludes , that the annotations have left more testimonies to the deity of christ untampered withall and unperverted , then my assertion will allow ; reckoning them all up againe section the 10th . and concluding himselfe a successfull advocate in this case , or at least under a despaire of ever being so in any , if he acquit not himselfe clearly in this . if his failure herein be evinced , by the course of his late writings himselfe will appeare to be most concerned . i suppose then that on the view of this defence , men must needs suppose that in the annotations on the places repeated , and mustered a second time by the apologist , grotius does give their sense as bearing witnesse to the deity of christ . others may be pleased to take it for granted without farther consideration : for my part being a little concerned to inquire , i shall take the paines to turne to the places , and give the reader a briefe account of them . for prov. 8. his first note on the wisdome there spoken of is : haec de easapientia quae in lege apparet exponunt haebraei , & sane ei , si non sol● ; at praecipuè haec atributa conveniunt : now if the attributes here mentioned , agree either solely or principally to the wisdome that shines in the law , how they can be the attributes of the person of the eternall son of god , i see not . he addes no more to that purpose , untill he comes to the 22 ver. the verse of old contested about with the arrians . his words on that are graecum aquilae , est , {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , ut & symmachi & theodosionis , res●pondetque benè haebraeo {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , & caldaeus habet {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , & 70 {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , sensu non malo , si creare sumas pro facére ut appareat : viae dei sunt operationes ipsius : sensum hujus loci & sequentium non male exprimas cum philone de coloniis : {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} . on verse 27 , he addes aderam , id est , {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , ut infra iohn evang. 1. 1. what clear and evident testimony , by this exposition is left in this place to the deity of christ i professe my selfe as ignorant , as i was , before i received this direction by the apologist : he tells us that {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} is rendred not amisse by the chaldee {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} and the 70 {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , though he knew that sense was pleaded by the arrians , and exploded by the antient doctors of the church . to relieve this concession , he tells us that creare , may be taken for facere ut appareat , though there be no evidence of such a use of the word in the scripture , nor can he give any instance thereof . the whole interpretation runs on that wisdome that is a property of god , which he manifested in the workes of creatiō : of the son of god , the essentiall wisdome of god , subsisting with the father , we have not one words nor doth that quotation out of philo releive us in this businesse at all . we know in what sense he used the word {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} : how farr he and the platonicks , with whom in this expression he consented , were from understanding the only begotten son of god , is known . if this of philo has any aspect towards the opinion of any professing themselves christians , it is towards that of the arians , which seems to be expressed therein . and this is the place chosen by the apologist to disprove the assertion of none being left , under the sense given them by the annotations , bearing cleare testimony to the deity of christ ; his comparing {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} ibi ego , which the vulgar renders aderam , with {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} seems rather to cast a suspicion on his intention in the expression of that place of the evangelist , then in the least to give testimony to the deity of christ in this . if any one be further desirous to be satisfyed , how many cleare unquestionable evidences of the deity of christ , are slighted by these annotations on this chapter , let him consult my vindication of the place in my late vindiciae evangelicae , where he will find something tendred to him to that purpose . what the apologist intended by adding these two places of isaiah , chap. 45. 12. and the 48. 13. ( when in his annotations on those places , grotius not once mentions the deity of christ , nor any thing of him , nor hath occasion so to do , nor doth produce them in this place to any such end or purpose ; but only to shew that the chaldee paraphrase , doth sundry times , when things are said to be done by god , render it , that they were done by the word of god ) as instances to the prejudice of my assertion , i cannot imagine . on that of peter , 2 epistle , 3. 5. {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} : he addes indeed , vide quae diximus ad initium evangelii iohannis : but neither doth that place intend the naturall son of god , nor is it so interpreted by grotius . to these he addes in the close , col. 1. 16. in the exposition whereof in his annotations , he expressely prevaricates , and goes of to the interpretation insisted on by socinus and his companions , which the apologist well knew . without farther search upon what hath been spoken , the apologist gives in his verdict concerning the falsnesse of my assertion before mentioned , of the annotators speaking cleare and home to the deity of christ but in one , if in one place of his annotations : but 1. what one other place hath he produced , whereby the contrary , to what i assert , is evinced ? any man may make apologies at this rate as fast as he pleases . 2. as to his not speaking clearely in that one , notwithstanding the improvement made of his expressions by the apologist , i am still of the same mind as formerly : for although he ascribes an eternity {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , and affirmes all things to be made thereby ; yet considering how carefull he is , of ascribing an {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , how many platonicke interpretations of that expression he interweaves in his expositions , how he hath darkned the whole councell of god in that place about the subsistence of the word , its omnipotency and incarnation , so clearely asserted by the holy ghost therein , i see no reason to retract the assertion opposed . but yet as to the thing it selfe , about this place i will not contend : only it may not be amisse to observe , that not only the arians , but even photinus himselfe acknoledged that the world was made {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , that how little is obtained toward the confirmation of the deity of christ by that concession , may be discerned . i shall offer also only at present , that {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , is threefold , {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} and {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} . the {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} or {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} is christ , mentioned iohn 1. 1. his personall or eternall subsistence , with his omnipotency , being there asserted . whether christ be so called anywhere else in the new testament may be disputed , luk. 1. v. 2. ( compared with the 1 of iob. 1. 1. ) 2 pet. 1. 16. and act. 20. 32. heb. 4. 12. are the most likely to give us that use of the word . why christ is so termed , i have shewed elsewhere . that he is called {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} psal. 33. 6. is to me also evident . {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} is better rendred {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , or {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , then {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} . where that word is used , it denotes not christ : though 2 sam. 23. 2. where that word is , is urged by some to that purpose . he is also called {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} hag. 2. 5. so perhaps in other places . our present quakers would have that expression of , the word of god , used no where in any other sense : so that destroying that , as they do , in the issue they may freely despise the scripture , as that which they say is not the word of god , nor anywhere so called . {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} amongst men is that which aristotle calls {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} saies hesichius . {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} is that which we speake in our hearts , saies damascen . de orthod. fid. lib. 1. cap. 18. so psalm 14. {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} . this as spoken in respect of god , is that egresse of his power , whereby according to the eternall conception of his mind , he worketh any thing . so gen. 1. 2. god said let there be light , and there was light . of this word of god the psalmist treats , 147. v. 18. he sedeth out {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} & melteth the ice , and psal. 148. 8. the same word is used . in both which places the septuagint renders it by {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} . this is that which is called {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , heb. 1. 2. and heb. 11. 3. where the apostle saies the heavens were made {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} : which is directly paralell to that place of 2 pet. 3. 5. where it is expressed {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} : for though {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} more properly denotes {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , yet in these places , it signifies plainly that egresse of gods power for the production and preservation of things , being a persuite of the eternall conception of his mind , which is {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} . now this infinite wise and eternall conception of the mind of god , exerting its selfe in power , wherein god is said to speake , ( he said let there be light ) is that which the platonicks , and philo with them harped on , nener once dreaming of a coessentiall and hypostaticall word of god , though the word {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} occurre amongst them . this they thought was unto god , as in us , {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} or {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} . and particularly it is termed by philo ▪ {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} : de agric. . that this was his {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} is most evident : hence he tells us {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} : de mund. opific. and a little after , {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} . the whole tendency of his discourse is , that the word of god , in his mind , in the creation of the world , was the image of himselfe ; and that the idea or image of the things to be made , but especially of light . and whereas ( if i remember aright , for i cannot now find the place ) i have said somewhere , that christ was {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , though therein i have the consent of very many learned divines , and used it meerly in opposition {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} ; yet i desire to recall it : nor doe i thinke there is any propriety in that expression of {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} used of christ , but only in those of {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} and {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , which the scripture ( though not in the very termes ) will make good . in this second acceptation , {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , photinus himselfe granted that the world was made by the word of god . now if it be thought necessary , that i should give an account of my feare that nothing but {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} in this sense decked with many platonicall encomiums was intended in the annotations on ioh. 1. ( though i confesse much from some quotations there used , may be said against it ) i shall readily undertake the taske ; but at present in this running course , i shall adde no more . but now , as if all the matter in hand , were fully dispatched , we have this triumphant close attending the former discourse , and observations . if one text acknowledged to assert christs eternall divinity ( which one was granted to doe it , though not clearly , ) will not suffice to conclude him no socinian ) which i said not he was , yea expressely waved the management of any such charge ) if six verses in the proverbs , two in isaiah ; one in st. peter , one in st. paul added to many in the beginning of st. iohn , ( in his annotations on all which , he speaks not one word to the purpose ) will not yet amount to above one text ; or lastly if that one may be doubted of also , which is by him interpreted to affirme christs eternall subsistence with god before the creation of the world ( which he doth not so interpret , as to a personall subsistence ) and that the whole world was created by him ; i shall despaire of ever being a successfull advocate for any man ; from which condition i hope some little time will recover the apologist . this is the summe of what is pleaded in cheife , for the defence of the annotations : wherein what small cause he hath to acquiesce , who hath been put to the labour and trouble of vindicating nere 40 texts of scripture in the old testament , and new , giving expresse testimony to the deity of christ from the annotators perverse interpretations , let the reader judge . in the 13th section of the apologist's discourse , he addes some other considerations to confirme his former vindication of the annotations . 1 he tells us , that he professeth not to divine , what places of the old testament , wherein the deity of christ is evidently testified unto , are corrupted by the learned man , nor will he upon the discouragement already received make any inquiry into my treatise . but what need of divination ? the apologist cannot but remember at all times , some of the texts of the old testament that are pleaded to that purpose ; and he hath at least as many incouragements to looke into the annotations , as discouragements from casting an eye upon that volume ( as he calls it , ) wherein they are called to an account . and if he suppose , he can make a just defence for the severall places so wrested , and perverted , without once consulting of them , i know not how by me he might possibly be ingaged into such an inquiry . and therefore i shall not name them again , having done somewhat more then name them already . but he hath two suppletory considerations , that will render any such inquiry or inspection needlesse . of these the first is that the word of god being all and every part of it of equall truth , that doctrine which is founded on five places of divine writ ; must by all christians be acknoledged to be as irrefragably confirmed , as an 100 expresse places would be conceived to confirme it . ans. it is confessed , that not only five , but any one expresse text of scripture , is sufficient for the confirmation of any divine truth . but that five places have been produced out of the annotations by the apologist for the confirmation of the great truth pleaded about , is but pretended , indeed there is no such thing . the charge on grotius was , that he had depraved all but one ; if that be no crime , the defence was at hand ; if it be , though that one should be acknowledged to be clear to that purpose , here is no defence against that which was charged , but a strife about that which was not . let the places be consulted , if the assertion prove true , by an induction of instances , the crime is to be confessed , or else the charge denied to contain a crime : but secondly he saies , that this charge upon inquiry will be found in some degree , if not equally , chargeable on the learnedst and most valued of the first reformers , particularly upon mr. calvin himselfe , who hath been as bitterly and injustly accused and reviled upon this account ( witnesse the booke intituled calvino turcismus ) as ever erasmus was by bellarmine and beza , or as probably grotius may be . though this at the best be but a diversion of the charge , and no defence , yet not containing that truth which is needfull to countenance it , for the end for which it is proposed ; i could not passe it by . it is denied ( which in this case untill further proofe must suffice ) that any of the learnedst of the first reformers , ( and particularly mr. calvin ) are equally chargeable , or in any degree of proportion with grotius , as to the crime insisted on . calvin being the man instanced in , i desire the apologist to prove that he hath in all his commentaries on the scripture corrupted the sense , of any texts of the old testament or new , giving expresse testimony to the deity of christ , & commonly pleaded to that end & purpose . although i deny not , but that he differs from the cōmon judgment of most , in the interpretation of some few propheticall passages , judged by them to relate to christ . i know what genebrard and some others of that faction , raved against him ; but it was cheifly from some expressiōs in his institutions about the trinity ( wherin yet he is acquitted by the most learned of themselves ) & not from his expositions of scripture , for which they raised their clamours . for the booke called calvino turcismus , written by reynolds and giffard , the apologist has forgotten the designe of it . calvin is no more concerned in it , then others of the first reformers ; nor is it from any doctrine about the deity of christ in particular , but from the whole of the reformed religion , with the apostasyes of some of that profession , that they compare it with turcisme . something indeed , in a chapter or two , they speake about the trinity , from some expressions of luther , melancton , calvin and others : but as to calvin's expositions of scripture , they insist not on them . possibly the apologist may have seen pareus his calvinus orthodoxus , in an answer to hunnius his calvinus judaizans ; if not , he may at any time have there an account of this calumny . having passed through the consideration of the two considerable heads of this discourse , in the method called for by the apologist ( having only taken liberty to transpose them , as to first and last ) i must professe my selfe as yet unsatisfyed as to the necessity , or suitablenesse , of this kind of defence . the summe of that which i affirmed ( which alone gives occasion to the defensative now under consideration ) is : that to my observation grotius in his annotations had not left above one text of scripture , if one , giving cleare evidence to the deity of christ ; of his satisfaction i said in summe the same thing . had the apologist been pleased to have produced instances of any evidence for the disproovement of my assertion , i should very gladly and readily have acknoledged my mistake and oversight . i am still also in the same resolution , as to the latitude of the expression , though i have already by an induction of particulars , manifested his corrupting and perverting of so many , both in respect of the one head , and of the other , with his expresse complyance with the socinians in his so doing , as that i cannot have the least thought of letting fall my charge , which with the limitation expressed ( of my owne observation ) containes the truth in this matter , and nothing but that which is so . it was indeed in my thoughts to have done somewhat more in reference to those annotations , then thus occasionally to have animadverted on their corruption in generall ; namely to have proceeded in the vindication of the truths of the gospell from their captivity under the false glosses put upon them , by the interpretations of places of scripture wherein they are delivered . but this worke being fallen on an abler hand viz. that of our learned professor of divinity , my desire is satisfied , and the necessity of my indeavour for that end removed . there are sundry other particulars insisted on by the apologist , and a great deale of rhetoricke is layd out about them ; which certainly deserves not the readers trouble in the perusall of any other debate about them . if they did , it were an easie matter to discover his mistakes in them all along . the foundation of most of them , lies in that , which he affirmes sect. 4. where he saies , that i thus state the jealousies about h. g. as farr as it is owned by me , viz. that being in doctrine a socinian , he yet closed in many things with the romane interest . to which he replies , that this does not so much as pretend that he was a papist . as though i undertake to prove grotius to be a papist , or did not expressely disowne the management of the iealousy , stated as above ; or that i did at all owne it , all which are otherwise : yet i shall now say , whither he was in doctrine a socinian or no , let his annotations before insisted on , determine : and whether he closed with the romane interest or no , besides what hath been observed by others , i desire the apologist to consider his observation on rev. 12. v. 5. that booke , ( himselfe being judge , ) having received his last hand . but my businesse is not to accuse grotius , or to charge his memory with any thing but his prevarication in his annotations on the scripture . and as i shall not cease to presse the generall aphorisme ( as it is called ) that no drunkard &c. nor any person whatever not borne of god or united to christ the head , by the same spirit that is in him , and in the sense thereof , perfecting holinesse in the feare of god , shall ever see his face in glory , so i feare not what conclusion can regularly in reference to any person living or dead , be thence deduced . it is of the annotations whereof i have spoken : which i have my liberty to do : and i presume shall still continue , whilest i live in the same thoughts of them : though i should see — a third defence of the learned hugo grotius . the epistles of grotius to crellius mentioned by the apologist in his first defence of him , giving some light to what hath been insisted on , i thought it not unfit to communicate them to the reader , as they came to my hand , having not as yet been printed that i know of . reverendo summaeque eruditionis ac pietatis viro domino johanni crellio pastori racov. h. g. s. libro tuo quo ad eum quem ego quondam scripseram ( eruditissimè crellî ) respondisti , adeo offensus non fui , ut etiam gratias tunc intra animum meum egerim , nunc & hisce agam literis . primò , quod non tantùm humanè , sed & valdè officiosè mecum egeris , ita ut quaeri nihil possim , nisi quod in me praedicando , modum interdum excedis , deinde verò , quod multa me docueris , partim utilia , partim jucunda scitu , meque exemplo tuo incitaveris ad penitiùs expendendum sensus sacrorum librorum . benè autem in epistolâ tuâ , quae mihi longè gratissima advenit , de me judicas , non esse me eorum in numero qui ob sententias salvâ pietate dissidentes alieno à quoquam sim animo , aut boni alicu jus amicitiam repudiem . equidem in libro * de verâ religione , quem jam percurri , relecturus & posthac , multa invenio summo cum judicio observata . illud vero saeculo gratulor , repertos homines qui nentiquam in controversiis subtilibus tantum ponunt , quantum in verâ vitae emendatione , & quotidiano ad sanctitatem profectu . utinam & mea scripta aliquid ad hoc studium in animis hominum excitandum inflammandúmque conferre possint : tunc enim non frustra me vixisse hactenus existimem . liber de veritate religionis christianae magis ut nobis esset solatio , quam ut aliis documento scriptus , non video quid post tot aliorum labores utilitatis afferre possit , nisi ipsâ fortè brevitate . siquid tamen in eo est , quod tibi tuique similibus placeat , mihi supra spem●euenit . libris de jure belli & pacis mihi praecipuè propositum habui , ut feritatem illam , non christianis tantùm , sed & hominibus indignam , ad bella pro libitu suscipienda , pro libitu gerenda , quam gliscere tot populorum malo quotidie video , quantum in me est , sedarem . gaudeo ad principum quorundam manus eo● libros venisse , qui utinam partem eorum meliorem in suum animum admitterent . nullus enim mihi ex eo labore suavior fructus contingere possit . te verò quod attinet , credas , rogo , si quid unquam facere possim tui , aut eorum quos singulariter amas , causâ , experturum te , quantum te tuo merito faciam . nunc quum aliud possim nihil , dominum jesum supplice animo veneror , ut tibi aliisque pietatem promoventibus propitius adsit . x. maii. m. dc . xxvi . tui nominis studiosissimus h. g. tam pro epistolâ ( vir clarissime ) quam pro transmisso libro , gratias ago maximas . constitui & legere & relegere diligenter quaecunque à te prosiciscuntur , expertus quo cum fructu id antehàc fecerim . eo ipso tempore quo literas tuas accepi , versabar in lectione tuae interpretationis in epistolam ad galatas . quantum judicare possum & scripti occasionem & propositum , & totam seriem dictionis , ut magnâ cum curâ indagâsti , ita feliciter admodùm es assequutus . quare deum precor , ut & tibi & tui similibus , vitam det , & quae alia ad istiusmodi labores necessaria . mihi ad juvandam communem christianismi causam , utinam tam adessent vires , quàm promptus est animus : quippe me , à primâ aetate , per varia disciplinarum genera jactatum , nulla res magis delectavit , quam rerum sacrarum meditatio . id in rebus prosperis moderamen , id in adversis solamen sensi . pacis consilia & amavi semper , & amo nunc quoque : eoque doleo , quum video tam pertinacibus iris committi inter se eos , qui christi se esse dicunt . si rectè rem putamus , quantillis de causis — januarii . m. dc . xxxii . amstelodam . finis . notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a90286e-140 grotius ad nocentissimae haereseos atque ●frenis licentiae scyllam , iterumque ad tyrannidis charybdin declinavit fluctuans : essen . notes for div a90286e-12310 this booke of crellius lay unanswered by grotius above 20 yeares . for so long he lived after the publishing of it . it is since fully answered by essenius . * that is the body of socinian divinity written by crellius and volkelius . let the reader judge what annotatiōs on that epistle we are to exspect from this man . a trve relation of the chiefe passages betweene mr. anthony wotton, and mr. george walker, in the yeare of our lord 1611, and in the yeares next following untill 1615 written by george walker ... ; for the vindicating of himselfe from some imputations laid on him by mr. thomas gataker, in his defence of mr. wotton. walker, george, 1581?-1651. this text is an enriched version of the tcp digital transcription a67141 of text r22429 in the english short title catalog (wing w367). textual changes and metadata enrichments aim at making the text more computationally tractable, easier to read, and suitable for network-based collaborative curation by amateur and professional end users from many walks of life. the text has been tokenized and linguistically annotated with morphadorner. the annotation includes standard spellings that support the display of a text in a standardized format that preserves archaic forms ('loveth', 'seekest'). textual changes aim at restoring the text the author or stationer meant to publish. this text has not been fully proofread approx. 74 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 20 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. earlyprint project evanston,il, notre dame, in, st. louis, mo 2017 a67141 wing w367 estc r22429 12621205 ocm 12621205 64519 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a67141) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 64519) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 250:e135, no 17) a trve relation of the chiefe passages betweene mr. anthony wotton, and mr. george walker, in the yeare of our lord 1611, and in the yeares next following untill 1615 written by george walker ... ; for the vindicating of himselfe from some imputations laid on him by mr. thomas gataker, in his defence of mr. wotton. walker, george, 1581?-1651. [2], 6 p. for william branch ..., printed at london : 1642. an answer to mr. anthony wotton's defense against mr. george walker's charge accusing him of socinian heresie, published by samuel wotton ... with a preface and postscript by thomas gataker. reproduction of original in thomason collection, british library. eng gataker, thomas, 1574-1654. -answer to mr. anthony wotton's defense against mr. george walker's charge accusing him of socinian heresie. wotton, anthony, 1561?-1626. -mr. anthony wotton's defence against mr. george walker's charge. socinianism. a67141 r22429 (wing w367). civilwar no a true relation of the chiefe passages betweene mr. anthony wotton, and mr. george walker, in the yeare of our lord 1611. and in the yeares walker, george 1642 14154 14 15 0 0 0 0 20 c the rate of 20 defects per 10,000 words puts this text in the c category of texts with between 10 and 35 defects per 10,000 words. 2004-11 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2004-11 aptara keyed and coded from proquest page images 2005-01 jonathan blaney sampled and proofread 2005-01 jonathan blaney text and markup reviewed and edited 2005-04 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion a trve relation of the chiefe passages betweene mr. anthony wotton , and mr. george walker , in the yeare of our lord 1611. and in the yeares next following untill 1615. written by george walker , out of his owne papers which he hath yet to shew ; for the vindicating of himselfe from some imputations laid on him by mr. thomas gataker , in his defence of mr. wotton . printed at london for william branch , and are to be sold in st. olaves churchyard upon breadstreete hill . 1642. a true relation of the chiefe passages betweene mr. anthony wotton , and mr. george walker , in the yeare of our lord , 1611. the foule brand which mr. gataker hath laboured to set upon mee in his preface , to wit , breach of piety and charity , and defect of humanity and common honesty , is so scandalous to the person and calling of a living minister and pastor in gods church , that mr. gataker in going about to set it on me , doth manifestly appeare to have printed it deepely in his owne forehead . the words of truth spoken of a dead man , in the defence of a divine and saving truth , and in confuting of a dangerous error can bee no such breach of piety or charity , as the unjust scandall and slander laid on a man living and labouring in the worke of the lord : for this tends to bring his ministry and the word of god by him preached into contempt ; to disgrace his person most uncharitably , and to adde affliction to him who hath suffered persecution and bonds for the truths sake , by wounding him deepely in his reputation , which is contrary to humanity and common honesty . mr. wotton in his papers which he dispersed in this citie , and which he acknowledged to be his owne when i brought them to his face before mr. gataker and eight other grave ministers , doth deny the imputation of the whole obedience of christ , to the law of god ; both active and passive , both joyntly and severally . he affirmes that there is no end or use whatsoever of the imputation of christ his righteousnesse for justification . he renounceth the law in whole and part , performed by our selves , or any other in our stead for our justification . in stead of mans owne workes of righteousnesse , performed to the law in his owne person which was the condition of justification , and life in the first covenant , and instead of christs fulfillng of the law for us which is the condition of justification and life to beleevers in the covenant of grace , he sets up faith , even the act of beleeving for righteousnesse , affirmes that it is said to be imputed in a proper sense without a trope , and serves for all purposes in our justification under the gospell , as perfect righteousnesse of workes performed to the whole law did for mans justification in the first covenant . hee denieth the punishment of our sinnes in christ , and the satisfaction wch . in him our head & surety was made to gods justice for purchase of our pardon . for ( saith he ) i see no place left for pardon , if we in christ be said to have satisfied gods justice , & to have suffered in him the punishments due to sin ; for pardon and punishment are contrary . thus he overthrowes our redemption by christ , and that christ is our ransome , as socinus did , ( though hee hold the words of scripture with socinus in an improper sense ; to wit , redeemer , ransome , propitiation , and the rest . ) for no man can dreame of any other way by which christ is said in scripture to redeeme us , and to be a ransome for sinne , but onely by being made under the law , and a perfect fulfiller of it in our stead . if faith serves for all purposes to justification , as a mans perfect righteousnesse of workes performed to the full in his owne person would have done in the first covenant ; then it serves to this purpose to be our formall righteousnesse ; yea our owne inherent righteousnesse by which we are justified . which is most contrary to the truth of the gospell , and contradictory to his owne words in other places . these and such like speeches i condemned for socinian heresie and blasphemy , as beza , paraeus , and lubertus had done before me , and for this mr. gataker did deride me , when i gave in my charge against mr. wotton 27. yeares agoe , and now blames it in mee as falshood and dishonesty . i desire no better defence of my innocency but mr. wottons owne confession in his expositions which mr. gataker hath published for his defence . for in his answer to the first proposition , he confesseth that the denying of the imputation of christs righteousnesse as a meritorious cause of justification is both hereticall and blasphemous . and this he himselfe doth in the words which are cited out of his owne papers , to prove him guilty of the first error , as you may see in the 12 page of mr. gatakers defence , where they are thus laid downe and translated out of mr. wottons latin theses . no necessary use or end can he assigned of the imputation of the obedience of christ to the justification of a sinner . and in an english manuscript of his , which i also shewed , and he acknowledged for his owne , he useth more peremptory words , saying , i dare not admit of christs righteousnesse imputed to any end whatsoever . i find no testimony or proofe of it in any part of gods word , no signification in any sacrament of the gospell , no necessary use or end thereof . which words if we take them as mr. gataker hath related them , prove him to be an heretike and blasphemer by his owne confession . unlesse mr. gataker can perswade us , that to be imputed as a meritorious cause , is to be imputed for no end or use whatsoever . but before i proceede to my narration , i will first lay downe the occasion , by which i have provoked mr. gataker to proclame so bitterly against me , and to brand me with breach of piety , charity , and defect of humanity and common honesty . in my discovery and confutation of socinianisme i perceived that mr. goodwins disciples did admire and extoll him as a deepe searcher out and discoverer of divine truth , which none could ever find out before him ; to convince them of folly and ignorance i rehearsed the names of severall persons who had published and taught the same things before mr. goodwin , and for them and other errors and heresies which are therein necessarily included , have beene condemned in former ages ; as peter abailard , servetus , socinus , arminius , and mr. wotton , out of whose booke de reconciliatione , mr. goodwin stole his opinions . my words are these , the fifth perverse publisher of this heresie , who first openly professed it in england , and in manuscript pamphlets , and printed bookes dispersed it in london , and from thence into severall places of the countrie , about twenty eight yeares agoe , was anthony wotton . i would gladly know what just offence can be taken at any of these words . that mr. wotton was the perverse publisher of this heresie , and the first that openly professed it in england , is a manifest truth ; as my parallell of him with socinus published by mr. gataker now in print , proveth most fully . if he be offended , because i call this errour an heresie , though he and his fellow subscribers to mr. wottons exposition , out of their great love to mr. wottons person , and upon his promise of reformation , did thinke it not fit to call any thing in his exposition of his speeches , by the name of heresie or blasphemie : i answer , first , that his speeches which i cited in my parallell are manifestly blasphemous and hereticall by his owne confession ; and of them and his opinion in them published , doe i speake and call it heresie . secondly , though i rather assent to beza , paraeus , lubertus , and other most learned and orthodox divines , who condemne some things in mr. wottons expositions for heresie , & blasphemie , rather then to mr. gataker and his fellowes , who were pleased to thinke otherwise ; i hope i give therein no offence , especially seeing i have gods word for my warrant , and have such cleare knowledge and full perswasion of the blasphemie of some of his speeches , that i did ( as master . downham , dr. gouge and others present at our meeting did heare and see , and if their memories faile them not , will confesse ) challenge mr. wotton and mr. gataker also , if he would take his part to defend some passages in those expositions , and promised that i would aske mr. wotton forgivenesse on my knees , if i did not by convincing arguments in strict syllogismes prove them to be hereticall : which they cowardly then refused with shew of scornfull disdaine . but if mr. gataker be so highly offended , because i call mr. wotton by the bare name of anthony wotton ; i must answer that therein i did him a favour . for under that obscure title , his person might have beene hid , and not made knowne to any , but those who were acquainted with all the passages betweene him and me . but mr. gataker by discovering him more plainly , and blazoning his armes , hath exposed his person to much shame , and stained the name and memorie of him long agoe dead and buried in the dust with the brand of heresie , & hath made all the world see , that he was the man who first sowed these socinian tares in the faire field of the church of england . as for my selfe , i am assured , that the goodnesse of my cause , which is the cause of god & his truth , will beare me out , & justifie me against all his misreports . and if any man be forestalled with prejudice and a sinister opinion of my proceedings against mr. wotton , let him read this my relation , which i can justifie both by living witnesses , and by my papers , which i have in my custody untill this day . when mr. wottons opinions were first made knowne to me upon the occasion mentioned in my letter to mr. wotton , which hereafter followeth ; i by meanes of my late reading of the controversies betweene junius & arminius , lubertus , bertius , gomarus , and others of the remonstrants , did easily discerne them to be of the same stampe with the heresies of servetus , and socinus , newly revived and set on foote in holland by vorstius , arminius , and those of that faction . i shewed mr. wottons papers to mr. alexander richardson a most learned and judicious divine , to whom for his singular learning in divinity , and all other learned arts , and excellent knowledge in the originall tongues of holy scripture , divers studious young men did resort from cambridge to his dwelling in the parish of barking in essex , to be directed in their study of divinity , and other arts : among which these proved men of good note in our church , mr. hooker , mr. chauncey , mr. yates , mr. john barlow , mr. perry , with others . mr. richardson approved my censure of them , and so detested them that he could not read one passage without sighing . he also sent to mr. wotton , to meete him in a conference before some judicious hearers , which mr. wotton promised , but did not performe . i also sent and desired that he would admit me , to come to him and conferre with him ; but as he was afraid to meete mr. richardson , so he disdained my youth and yeares , and referred me to one spencer a tradesman , a factious disciple of his , as i have objected to him in my letter : upon this i preached two sermons in the church of which i am now pastor , in the one i laid open breifly , the true received doctrine of justification ; in the other i discovered mr. wottons opinions to be socinian heresie , and shewed the danger of them . the next day some of mr. wottons friends being startled came to me , and intreated me to goe with them to him , and promised that he should purge himselfe from those errors , and give me good satisfaction : i yeelded to their desire , and went along with two of them to mr. wottons house , who welcomed me coldly in words , though his heart seemed by his countenance to be hot with indignation and disdaine . at my first entrance into his studie he told me very abruptly , that i had untruly affirmed that the whole streame of learned orthodox divines did hold the same doctrine which i had taught concerning justification by christs righteousnesse imputed to beleevers . and withall he shewed a place out of luther upon the galatians , in which luther denyed justification by our owne workes and righteousnesse of the law : but in the words which next followed upon the top of of the next page , ( which mr. wotton covered with his fingers as he held the booke in his hand ) luther in plain words affirmed that christs fulfilling of the law for us is our righteousnes ; & in the same page also saith , that faith is not sufficient for righteousnes without gods imputation of christs righteousnesse . i snatched the booke out of his fingers , read the words , which were directly against himselfe , blamed him before the two witnesses for his dealing d●lo malo , and going about purposely to delude us , and with great compassion and teares in mine eyes professed my griefe to see him , a man of great esteeme ( whom i had never seene before , but had much reverenced for the reports which i had heard of his great learning ) to play the prancke of a deceiver and jugling sophister . after many words which passed betweene us , but in no strict forme of disputation , which i desired and m. wotton refused ; he confessed that my doctrine , which i taught concerning imputation of christs righteousnesse , was sound and saving truth , able to save beleevers , though they went no further : but he had dived more deepely into the poynts of justification , and did goe further , but not a contrarie way ; but i protested against his opinion and told him it was as contrarie to my doctrine and faith , as darknesse is to light . mr. standish one of the witnesses who went along with me , desired me to rest satisfied and to breake off ; to which i yeelded , and tooke my leave . and no sooner were we entred into the streete , but the said mr. standish brake out into speeches of dislike against mr. wottons fraudulent dealing , protested that he would never hearken to his opinion and doctrine in these points any more , and that he was much comforted and confirmed by that acknowledgment of the truth which i at length did wring from mr. wottons owne mouth . the second day after this i went to cambridge & returned not to london till three months after ; in which time what lyes were dispersed in london concerning my apostasie to mr. wottons errors , my letter to him sheweth . the next yeare after i came to be setled in my pastorall charge , and because i found some in my parish much inclining to mr. wottons opinion out of respect to his person more then any knowledge , being not able to give any reason for it at all , i spent many sabbaths in preaching the doctrine of justification out of the fifth chapter of the epistle to the romans ; and in discovering and confuting all errors contrarie to the truth professed in the reformed churches , and amongst the rest the errors of socinus : what affronts were offered me in the church & what clamours raised against me in the citie , my letter to mr. wotton will tell you in part . i could rehearse many passages which would move laughter and discover the absurditie and ridiculous folly of divers people who were factiously addicted to admire all things in mr. wotton , good or bad ; i will instance in one example onely . it was this . i was requested to preach at black-friers on a wednesday in the absence of mr. gouge , some weekes after i had finished my text concerning justification . in that assemblie , there were many ancient professors of religion , who knew me not by face , and who were so taken with my sermon , that they were verie inquisitive to know my name , and hearing that i was pastor of saint john evangelists , and my name walker , they were so possessed with an evill opinion of me by the slaunders and railings of mr. wotton , and his disciples , that they cryed , hang him , he will be hanged before he come to preach such a godly sermon as this is , we will never beleeve that this is that walker which hath preached against that man of god , mr. wotton , and belyed him in the pulpit . my clerke being well acquainted with them , and overhearing , did affirme to them that i was the man , and told them that they themselves might easily come to be hanged in hell , if they did not repent of their wicked railings against me so unjustly : by this you see what wrong i suffered , and what hu●t shamelesse slaunders of wicked hypocrites , may doe to the good name of the most innocent , even among them that are religious . these & such injuries and reproaches heaped on me together with a ridiculous booke written against me by one spencer a disciple of mr. wotton , forced me to write a challenge in my letter to mr. wotton , by which i at length brought him to the conference , which is the subject of m. gatakers invective against me . this letter , because it containes a just complaint and a rehearsall of the ill behaviour of m. wotton and his disciples towards me , i have thought good here to insert , that the world may see the intolerable provocations , wherewith i was provoked to call m. wotton to account , before some brethren in the ministery equally chosen by both parties . anthonio wottono , georgius walker resipiscentiam & sanam mentem precatur . sir , my hearty desire , and prayer to god for you is , that you may repent and be saved . and as i doe , and by the grace of god will continually pray to god for you , so long as there is any hope : so now also i will not spare to exhort you , and in the bowels of jesus christ beseech you , ( yea if neede require ) by thunderings and threatnings of gods heavy judgements , proceed and goe forward to puty ou in feare , that if it be possible you may repent , and recant , and that the errors and thoughts of your heart may be forgiven ; for i perceive that you are in the gall of bitternesse and in the bonds of iniquitie . you will perhaps say , a sharpe and a fierce onset , who can beare it ? to remove and prevent all prejudice i answer , if it be sharpe , it is as it ought to be , for a deepe and festered wound hath neede of a sharpe corrasive , but such i am perswaded in my soule , that yours is ; and upon my conscience , and before god i speake it , whom i know to be the searcher of all hearts . wherefore though an heart settled in error , and over-runne with perverse affection cannot brooke any sharpe reproofe , but will hate the reproover , according to that saying of the wise man , reproove a scorner and he will hate thee : yet i will against hope beleeve under hope , though my experience would perswade me the contrarie , and will hope better things of you ; yea i will thus say to my heart , feare not , neither be affraid of his countenance , though it be as hard as brasse , for if he be ordained to life , and be within the compasse of gods election , though he be troubled , and frett at the first , yet spare not to rebuke , for by this meanes thou shalt find more favour in the end . i am not ignorant that by my former both writing and preaching against your errors , and by my fervency and vehemency of words i have troubled , and vexed you , neither would i have you thinke , that i have thus dealt with you upon any distempered affection or such like infirmity : i professe ingenuously that i have done it upon good deliberation and of set purpose , because i have judged , & doe yet still deeme that course to be the best for divers reasons . first , because i knew that the errors and opinions which you maintaine , and wherewith you have infected divers , are of all that ever were sowne by the enemie of god and men among christian people the most pe●●ilent and dangerous , being nothing else but the heresies of serve●us and socinus , those most damnable and cursed heretickes , the greatest monsters that ever were borne within the borders of christs church , as i can plainly shew by your owne writings and theirs compared together , and would have already shewed , if you had not refused to joyne with me in a christian conference before eight learned and godly ministers . now being perswaded , yea knowing that your opinions are so dangerous , & pe●nicious ; do you not thinke that i am bound before god to lay them open , and to inveigh against them , after the manner of gods prophets , whose fashion hath ever beene to brand lesse sinnes then these , and lesse dangerous errors , with the name of abomination , blasphemy sorcery , witch-craft , and such like ? the second reason of my fervency is godly jealousie , because i see that you labour by all meanes to draw mens hearts from the love of the truth of my god generally professed unto your errours , and that many who are grounded in knowledge of good things , are so overcome with a conceit of you , and affection to your person , that rather then they will forsake you , they will forgoe the truth ; this being ( as you know ) the ground upon which all heresies have beene builded , and the speciall meanes by which they have beene dispersed , and have gotten head , and made factions in the world , in all ages heretofore . can you blame me , whom god hath called to be a watchman over his flocke , if i be jealous over you , and if for love to my god and his truth , and the salvation of his people , i doe bring you , to the utmost of my power , into just disgrace with them , by uncovering your shame , so farre as may stand with equity , and conscience , and by painting out your errours in most ugly manner , for the terrifying of gods people from medling with them ? the third reason , and indeed the greatest of all , is your obstinacy , arrogancy , pride , perversenesse , fraud ; and dissimulation , the speciall markes of willfull heretickes ; all which i have good reason to suspect in you , yea , ( if we may know a man by his fruites and workes ) i know and have tryed to be deeply rooted in you . and that you may know i speake upon judgement , not in affection , i will name some particulars . first , when i first heard of your errors by one of your near●● disciples , i observed in him such forwardnesse to 〈…〉 before me , being to him a stranger , such 〈…〉 in urging and maintaining them , with no other arguments then your authority , whom he so odiously compared with all learned and godly divines , chiefe pillars of our church , as calvin , beza , whitakers , perkins , and others ; that he was not ashamed to call them foolish boyes in comparison of you ; not worthy to carry your bookes ; whereupon i conceived present suspicion , that these grosse and stinking sins did proceed from some secret sparkes of hellish fire , either by you suggested , or by him foolishly conceived , and that such a malicious and rayling spirit was not free from grosse errour . and therefore for mine owne better information , i desired to conferre with you , and to learne from you the substance of your opinion , and according to my small ability , to reason and dispute the question with you , if so be you held as he affirmed ; the message he willingly tooke upon him , and promised to bring me to you , to conferre in a kinde and friendly manner , ( for that was my desire , for the reverence i did beare to your person , being then , by report of others onely , knowne to me : ) but i found your answer farre differing from that which i expected , i looked for the spirit of meeknesse , humility , love , gentlenesse , and had good hope to be admitted into familiarity , and acquaintance with you ; and you in scorne sent me to one spencer , a fellow of ill report among all honest men ; who all with one voyce , when i inquired after him , told me , he was a vaine idle giddy-headed fellow , and so i now finde indeed , and his owne hand-writing shall testifie unto the world . if this be not an infallible token of your pride and scornefulnesse , let the world judge , thus to send a minister of the gospell in contempt to one of your disciples , to learne of him , as if you thought your selfe too high , and all others too base to be admitted to your presence . this your doing , when i complained to you of it , face to face , you excused , as done out of ignorance of mine intent and desire . afterwards , you for shame utterly denyed it , and sent about your disciples to disprove my report of it . and now lastly , you have againe so justifyed it , that you are not ashamed to say , you did me no wrong , in affirming that spencer understands the doctrine of justification better then i ; and that your pride , obstinacy , and perversnesse , might shew it selfe to the full ; you still goe on from worse to worse , and now you have set spencer to confute me , and to make a challenge ; whose writing will ( i hope ) be the utter ruine either of your errours , or of your selves . all judicious men to whom i shew it , are ready to stop their noses at the first sight and smell of the stinking folly , blindnesse , and ignorance , wherewith almost every line is stuffed , so miserably doth he beate himselfe , and eate the flesh of his owne arme , saying , and unsaying , lying and mistaking every point : these courses , and proceedings , whether they argue and convince you of pride , obstinacy , and perversenesse , i leave to the judgement of others . secondly , when ( after my first preaching against your errours for the satisfaction of some who were wavering and doubting ) one of your disciples brought me unto you , did not i then shew all patience , love , and good affection towards you ? did not i beseech you with teares to be silent in these points , till you had further sifted them , and throughly disputed them with others ? did not you use me scornefully , and goe about to wrest a place in luthers commentary on the galations , and out of it to prove that luther denyed the imputation of christs righteousnesse to us ; and this against your owne conscience ? for by a marke of your owne making in the same page , i was directed to words in the same page , in which he plainely disproved you , and this you would have smothered by covering the place with your fingers , till i plucked the booke from you . did not i patiently put up this , though it wounded my soule ? and did not this your dealing dolo malo , shew your fraud , and forgery , and that you are {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , which sinneth being damned of himselfe ? if you deny this , god is my witnesse and mine owne conscience ▪ your booke also , and the marke in the marg●● 〈…〉 against you ; and besides , i have another witnesse , 〈◊〉 godly christian who was there present . thirdly , after my departing for a time into the country , your disciples thinking i had quite left the city , did most falsely and abominably report abroad , that you did so put me downe by arguments , that i with teares acknowledged mine errour , and vowed to live and dye in your opinion . how wicked and false this was , you , and i , and they who were present , know ; i am sure that never did the papists and jesuites more falsly slander calvin and beza , then they did me in this report . if these be not the arts of the devill , the father of lyers , let all christians judge . fourthly , after my returne out of the country , when they saw their lyes discovered by my open profession , and constancy in the truth which i had preached ; they and you were so farre from shame and amendment , that you made me amends with all rayling , and reviling speeches , insomuch that in many mens mouthes , i heare your outrageous exclamations , in which you call me in asse , a sot , a boy , an impudent and brazen-faced fellow ; yea , your disciples have not beene afraid to make mowes at me , preaching in the pulpit , as mine eyes , and the eyes of divers others did often see and can testifie , and oftentimes have they cryed out in the church , and derided me , and scoffed at the word of god , by me delivered , and that so loud , that all round about have heard , and been offended . and yet all this i have endured , though the law was in my hand , to make them be apprehended , brought before the magistrate , and punished ; and for all this , there is no remorse nor amendment . shall i , nay , can i ( thinke you ) in this case judge any better of them , then as of wilfull heretickes , and blasphemers , and of your doctrine , which leades them into this excesse , then as of devillish heresie ? for the doctrine which i delivered and they derided , did not in one sentence differ from the doctrine of calvin , and all learned divines , as by my papers and notes shall appeare . lastly , for i will not repeate all particulars , ( which were an endlesse worke ) you still goe on in your opinions , and send out pamphlet after pamphlet , full of contradictions , and falsifications , as i can shew you to your face . you will neither conferre before any of our learned brethren , godly ministers privately ; nor publiquely before the reverend bishop of london . you dare not commit yourselfe to him , because he is a wicked judge , and will respect persons in judgement , my friends are too potent with him : these are your excuses ; and i know them all to be false . for so cunningly did you dissemble with that good bishop , and hide your errours , that he rather blamed me , than you , ( as i heare . ) can you therefore in conscience blame me , if i , for these , and such like reasons , thinke hardly of you , as of an heretique , and though my zeale doe burne against you like a fire , though i cannot without griefe looke upon you ? may not a christian minister ; nay , is he not bound in conscience being thus perswaded , to cry out against you , and to lift his voyce like a trumpet , and make men know your abominations ? yea , to threaten hell , destruction , and all curses against you , except you repent ? surely my conscience doth not accuse me of any thing which i have done in this cause ; i have the examples of the prophets to warrant and encourage me , and to justifie my doings . if you will stop my mouth , you must either by words or deeds perswade me to thinke otherwise ; and i promise you i will ; yea , i desire to be otherwise perswaded , if you will but purge your selfe from the crimes whereof you are openly convicted . wherefore i will once againe intreate you , and earnestly request you , yea , charge you in the name of iesus christ , that if you desire the peace of the church , and can abide to have the truth tryed , you will cast off those carnall and corrupt , yea hellish affections of pride and disdaine , or at least this show of them which appeareth in you ; and meete me as a christian before eight godly and learned ministers , chosen equally by both , that they be witnesse betweene you and me ; and that it may be seene whether i doe justly charge you with heresie and blasphemy or no ; and whether your writings doe not shew you to be a socinian . the foure ministers which i will chuse for my part , shall be mr. stocke , mr. downham , mr westfield , and mr. gouge . i professe , and take god to witnesse , that i desire your conversion , not your confusion . it is my love and zeale for truth , more then hatred or indignation against you , which makes me so hot and earnest against your errours . the first offence that ever you gave me , was the injurie which you have done to the obedience , righteousnesse and blood of our saviour iesus christ , whom you denye to be so made mine , that his obedience is imputed to me for righteousnesse , and his blood for the satisfaction of gods justice . for this ( if you obstinately persist in it ) i must hate you with a perfect hatred , as if you were mine enemie , neither shall there ever be peace so long as your errors are so great , and pernicious . god himselfe i am assured , will trouble you , and quickely confound you , except you repent . o consider therefore from whence you are fallen , and suspect your selfe . cannot that faith be sufficient for you , which hath saved so many saints of god , and for the which so many godly and noble martyrs have heretofore shed their blood , even in this place , and in this kingdome ? me thinks that the name of servetus , and socinus should terrifie your conscience , if it were so tender as you have heretofore professed . can you hope for any good or pure water , from such foule and polluted cisternes , full of all heresie and blasphemie ? o that you would but lay these things to your heart , and be moved ! my heart , i assure you , is open to imbrace you with all love , if you would truly repent ; god forbid that i should hate you any otherwise , then as you are the enemy of christ . and god forbid , that i should give you one {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , or god save you , if you persist in this heresie , which is so contrarie to the wholsome doctrine of salvation . wherefore , if now you will shew but one signe of amendment by yeelding to my request , and appointing a time and place where we may meete , i will much relent from my iealousie over you , and i hope that god will give good successe . but if i finde you so incurable , that you will not admit of the least meanes , which tends to the cure of your soule , but will still upon no grounds at all persist in your novelties , and publish them for the seducing of others , to the overthrow of gods ttuth , and the disturbance of the church : i doe thinke my selfe bound in conscience to forbeare no longer , but to publish your errours to the world , that all may see those many errours , blasphemies and contradictions , which i have faithfully gathered out of your owne words and writings . and because you doe goe about by your disciple spencer to challenge me , and to debase my calling and ministery , by laying false imputations upon me , as ignorance , slander , and the like : i have resolved to draw articles against you , and to collect your errours , and misdemeanours into one supplication , and to present it to the lord arch-bishop of canterbury his grace , and to the high commission , that there and before them it may be tryed and seene , whether you doe not jumpe with socinus in his heresie . i know and have traced you in all your socinian and arminian trickes , and distinctions , and if you trust to them you are deceived . if you compell me to take this last , and most desperate course with you , and if it turne to the subversion and ruine of your whole estate , and of your selfe and your disciples : blame your selfe , and not me . for you see i admonish you first , and it is in your owne hand to prevent it . i am loath to be a meanes of your open shame and confusion ; but if no better will be , melius est ut pereat unus , quam unitas . our saviour christ ( you know ) gave this commandement , that when you will not be privately admonished , then we must tell the church , sure i am , that if you be once brought in publicke , and persist in your errours ; you shall perish , and your blood shall be on your owne head : but on them that put away shame from israel , and are instruments to roote out heresie from the church , and on their seed , and on their house shall be peace for ever from the lord . the god of power and strength give you an heart to feare his judgements , and to hearken to them that admonish you in his name ; and if it be his will i pray that you may be converted in his good time , that the truth may flourish , and the peace of our church may be surely established unto the end of the world . thus you see i have opened my minde freely unto you . if i be deceived in you , it is error amoris , non amor erroris , i will so soone as i perceive it , change my stile , and mine affection towards you . i pray you let me have your answer as shortly as you can ; if you send not quickly , i will take it for granted that you scorne to hearken to me , and despise my christian admonitions , as heretofore you seeme to have done ; and i will proceed in my resolution against you . god is my witnesse , i desire your good , and the good of his church . if i were not carefull of your safety , i would not steale this time from my nights rest and sleepe , this sabbath day at night , after my body is wearyed with reading , preaching , and administring the lords supper . from my study this second of may , past one a clocke in the morning , anno dom. 1614. yours , if you be christs , george walker . vpon the receipt and reading of this letter , mr. wotton sent me a letter of defiance , and therein professed his scorne and disdaine of my threatnings : but the next day he sent me another , wherein he promised to yeild to my motion . and yet to prevent our meeting , he used meanes by mr. mason , the bishop of londons chaplaine , an arminian , to make it knowne to the bishop , in hope that he would forbid our meeting : notwithstanding the bishop gave way , and we did meete upon a day appointed , before the eight ministers named in mr. gatakers defence . i brought for me , mr. stocke , mr. downham , mr. westfield , and mr. gouge , now doctors . he brought for him , mr. balmeford , mr. randall , mr. gataker , and mr. hickes , the last of which appeared to be already of mr. wottons minde in all points . and both mr. gataker and be , bare themselves towards me , as towards an adversary , and as advocates for mr. wotton . dr. westfield being the onely man with whom i then had any great familiarity , did perceive a generall inclination in them all , to favour mr. wotton as much as they could , being all his old familiar friends , and i a stranger of two yeares residence in the city ; after our first meeting , refused to meete any more , fearing what followed , and i chose dr. baylie in his place . i being the plaintiffe and procurer of the meeting , did first shew what i desired , namely , that i might have mr. wottons writings , which were come to my hands , viewed ; and by mr. wotton acknowledged ; which he could not deny , but did confesse them to be his owne handy-worke . and that i having rehearsed mr. wottons words out of his bookes and writings , which i had in my sermon confuted , under the name of socinian heresies , and having paralleled them in writing , with the words of socinus , and made them appeare to be the same , by shewing and comparing the bookes and writing ; they would give me their hands to my parallell , and subscribe that i had not either charged mr. wotton with any opinions or words but his owne , or confuted under the name of socinianisme any words of his , but onely those wherein he did concurre with socinus . if i had either mis-related his words , or confuted under the name of socinianisme , any point wherein he did not jumpe with socinus , i desired them to censure me . the parallels being read and examined , appeared to some of them so cleare , and my charge so just , that the same day at mr. randall wetwoods table , where dr. baylie and mr. downham dined with me , the doctor did protest that i had discovered mr. wotton to be as damned an hereticke as ever did tread on english ground : mr. downham , mr. wetwood , mr. taylor , and mr. hopkins were eare-witnesses of this , and all yet living , as well as my selfe . mr. wetwood asked why they did not justifie me and censure him without more adoe , seeing that was the purpose of our meeting , that they should judge of things accordingly as they were proved . they pretended that they desired to convert , not to confound mr. wotton , that they perceived him to be afraid of shame like to fall on him , and that if i would yeeld to let him expound himselfe , he would by a wrested exposition gaine-say , and contradict his former words and opinions and run from them , which being gotten from him under his hand , they would either hold him to it , or shame him for ever , if he did fall backe againe . this course being mr. gatakers device , i refused to yeeld unto , because i had never opposed him , but onely in opinions formerly published , and not in future expositions , and because i had fully proved my charge , i desired their verdict and just judgement . but after much importunity i yeelded , and so lost my cause , and was drawne into a new businesse that was to contend with mr. wotton , not about his former opinions , which i had formerly confuted ; but about new expositions , which he would make in answer to my parallells . at another day appointed he brought his expositions , which when they had read in my hearing , i did except against divers passages in them , and some contradictions , which i desired to argue against , with mr. wotton face to face , in strict syllogismes ; but he refused to answer me , and our judges refused to heare me , or to suffer me to have a coppy of his expositions , as he had of my parallels . whereupon i protested against their unequall dealing , and departed , threatning to bring him and them before higher judges . after that they had read the expositions which mr. gataker did plead for most hotly , mr. wotton promised to make and publish a large declaration , wherein he would free himselfe from all socinian errors . in the meane time he begg'd this favour , that they would subscribe to his expositions , that they found no heresie or blasphemy in them . upon this promise and intreaty , they did subscribe as followeth . howsoever , we whose names are underwritten , doe differ from mr. wotton in some points of the former doctrine of justification , contained in these his expositions : yet we hold not the difference to be so great and weighty , as that they are to be justly condemned of heresie and blasphemy . lewes baylie , james balmeford , john randall , richard stocke , john downham , thomas gataker , william gouge , william hickes . the expositions thus subscribed , were commtited to doctor baylie , with charge that he should keepe them close , and not suffer me or any other man to see , or read them , untill mr. wotton had made a larger exposition , and fully purged himselfe from socinianisme . by which it appeared , that they durst not openly justifie their subscription , nor suffer it to come into my hands . and that it was a thing with much importunity wrung from them which the better part of them would never have yeelded unto , but upon promise of a better and larger exposition , and in hope to draw mr. wotton wholly from his errors ; some of which he had allready contradicted , and acknowledged to be hereticall and blasphemous , to wit , his denying of christs righteousnesse imputed for any use or end whatsoever . dr. bayly the first of the subscribers had ( upon the first reading of those speeches of mr. wotton which i shewed out of his owne writings , and did parallell them with socinus ) condemned mr. wotton for an heretike , and his errors for blasphemie . mr. downham heard his censure uttered at mr. wetwoods table , and by silence assented to it . mr. randall did argue verie hotly against mr. wottons opinions that same day that they subscribed , and told him before as all , that he had protested against them often in private , and had disswaded him from them ; and that he for his part abhorred them . dr. gouge hath publikely confuted them , and in the pulpit condemned them under the name of socianisme . mr. stocke did ever abhorre them , as he often told me in private . and one time , i by a prettie stratageme brought him before other witnesse , to condemne them for heresie and blasphemie . mr. wetwood mine host in whose house i then lodged , having by much importunity obtained of dr. bayly the sight of mr. wottons expositions subscribed , as you heard before , and committed to his custodie , did lend them to me for the space of two houres , till i had copied out both them , and the subscription word for word with the mens names , which copie i have yet to shew . and one sunday at night being invited to supper by mr. thomas goodyeare , my parishoner , i brought it with me to shew it to mr. goodyeare , who was verie desirous to see and read it . mr. stocke and his wife being at the same time invited came in while we were reading it together and seeing me 〈…〉 in my hand , asked what it was . i answered that it was a paper of new and strange opinions , which when he desired to heare , i did read to him that passage in mr. wottons expositions , where he saith ; this i say , that in this proposition ( faith is counted for righteousnes , ) the word ( faith ) is to be taken properly , not tropically ; and i asked him what he thought of it : he not knowing that it was mr. wottons exposition , out of which i read it , did answer that it was popery , or worse . i asked him whether he did not thinke it to be the heresie and blasphemy of socinus : he answered , yes verily . i asked him then what hee thought of certaine learned divines , who had subscribed to this , and other such speeches , that they were neither heresie nor blasphemy : he said he thought none but mad men would doe it , and asked who they were . i presently read the subscription and among the rest his owne name , and withall shewed him the copy . mr. goodyeare laughed heartily , and said to mr. stocke , o master , our parson is too cunning for you , i never saw any man so finely taken in a snare , as hee hath taken you in your owne snare . i have ever told you , that in this controversie you were too partiall for your old friend and familiar mr. wotton . mr. stocke could plead nothing but this , that mr. wotton had promised them to silence himselfe and his disciples in these points , and to write a large declaration ; whereby he would purge himselfe fully from socinianisme . in hope whereof they did gratifie him with this subscription , for the suppressing of clamours , till he had further cleared himselfe . but mr. wotton had broken his promise , and boasted of that which made nothing for him in the maine cause , but onely upon the by ; and had requited their favour towards him , with disgrace to them , and danger to himselfe ; and that it had beene better he had never beene borne , then to trouble the church of god with his false opinions . by this you see how dangerous a thing it is , even for godly men , to be judges in a cause of controversie betweene a familiar friend ( as mr. wotton was to these men ) and a stranger , as i at that time was to the most of them . as for the other three , to wit , mr. balmeford , mr. gataker , and mr. hickes , they were mr. wottons advocates , rather then equall judges : mr. balmeford was mr. wottons silenced brother ; mr. hickes was mr. wottons disciple , one who would jurare in verba magistri ; mr. gataker did more angrily and peevishly speake against me , and snarle at me then my adversary mr. wotton himselfe , so that i was forced to challenge him as well as mr. wotton , and to offer to dispute against them both . what mr. wottons intent was in begging such a beggerly subscription , and mr. gatakers in procuring it from the rest , the event hath shewed . for mr. wotton and his disciples did presently report through london , that i could prove nothing against him , nor bring any thing out of his bookes , or writings to convince him of socinianisme , and that the eight learned ministers had justified him , and condemned me for a false accuser . and upon this he grew more bold , and wrote certaine essaies concerning justification , a copy whereof i have to shew , wherein he denies the true , reall , and spirituall union of the faithfull with christ , and chrits meriting of justification , and salvation for them ; he affirmes that when they are said to be one with christ , the speech is metaphoricall , and that there is no mention of christs merits in all the scripture . by which his violent breaking out , and going on from evill to worse , i was forced to write my antithesis wottonismi , & christianismi ; wherein i discovered more of his errors , and his factious and schismaticall behaviour : this i presented to the then arch-bishop of canterbury , who committed it to doctor nidd● his chaplaine , who being himselfe a favourer of arminians , neglected to make report of it to his lord . and indeed i never called upon him , because mr. wotton having intelligence of it , silenced himselfe and all his disciples , being admonished by his friends of the danger in which he was , unlesse hee and they did forbeare to justifie and maintaine his errors , and further to provoke me by their false reports and calumnies . thus was the fire quenched , and no man opened his mouth to defend mr. wottons opinions ; though i with many others , did often ( as occasion was offered by the scriptures which we expounded ) confute and condemne them : in the meane time mr. wotton wrote his booke de reconciliatione in latine , wherein he seemed to recant and to contradict divers of his former writings ; but yet he vented so much poyson in it ; that when it was sent over to leiden to be printed , the professors there rejected it , as being full of socinian errours ; and ( as i have beene informed ) did also send to amsterdam to stop the printing of it , which was there attempted also ; so that mr. wottons disciples were forced to print it at their owne charge by stealth , in some further place beyond the seas , and to disperse the copies here in england . upon one of which mr. goodwin , a lover of novelties , and strange doctrines unhappily stumbled ; and thence stole his opinions , which his foolish followers receive , and admire , as new revelations from heaven , never heard of before . thus have i briefly related the chiefe passages betweene mr. wotton and my selfe . i have heard of others also , who did privately oppose mr. wotton , especially master woodcocke , a grave preacher , parson or vicar of chessam , who did in writing confute mr. wotton , and admonished him to forsake his errours . one thing i cannot omit , which was a strong motive to move divers godly people in london , to abhorre mr. wottons opinions ; that was the sharpe censure which that holy man of god , master alexander richardson gave against them on his death bed , and which mr. john barlow an eare-witnesse thereof , did report to divers from his mouth . mr. richardson being ready to leave this world , mr. barlow who had often before resorted to him for direction in his study , and resolution of doubts , in many points of divinity , was at that time present with him , and told him that hee had heard me the sabbath before , propounding the doctrine of justification , to be laid open out of the fifth chapter of the epistle to the romans , and to be maintained against papists , socinians , and other heretiques , some of which were of late revived in the city , and withall desired to know his judgement concerning mr. wottons opinion , who denyed christs fulfilling of the law for justification of beleevers , and the imputation of his righteousnesse ; and held faith to be imputed in a proper sense without a trope : mr. richardson answered and said , take these words of me a dying man . i have read and well weighed mr. wottons papers , and opinions , and i know them to be so pestilent and dangerous , that whosoever liveth and dyeth in the beleefe of them , shall never enter into the kingdome of heaven . commend me to mr. walker , and desire him from me , ( as being my last request to him ) to be couragious in the cause of god , and for that saving truth which he hath undertaken to maintaine against those dangerous and deadly errours , lately set on foote by mr. wotton . this message being delivered unto me before diverse witnesses , some of which are alive to testifie it , did much encourage me , and made me more bold to lay open the abomination of mr. wottons opinions publickely in my sermons , without feare or regard of the slanders and revilings of his factious and furious disciples . this was in the yeare 1613. and i praise god , i am constant in the same minde , and doe pray and hope that god will give me grace to persevere in this beleefe to the end . as for mr. gatakers invective against me in mr. wottons defence , i doe as little regard it , as mr. goodwins rayling libell , which ( some say ) mr. gataker counselled him to write against me . if it were not vaine expence of precious time , i could produce socinianisme out of mr. gatakers printed workes , and prove him a party . i could prove him to be thomas of all sides . sometimes holding that the elect and faithfull are cloathed with the garment of christs righteousnesse , and againe , disputing against their communion and imputation of christs righteousnesse . but i pray god to give him a more setled judgement in the truth , and a more charitable heart to his laborious neighbours , who spend their time in better studies then writing of treatises for unlawfull gaming and card-playing , and bedawbing margents with many quotations to small purpose , but onely for ostentation of much reading . yet give me leave to aske mr. gataker a few questions , which if he cannot answer with any credit , let him for shame hold his peace , and blush to thinke of his defence of master wotton , to the accusing and defaming of himselfe . 1. question , whether is it truth and honesty , to say that all the eight ministers , with unanimous consent , generally resolved and pronounced , that there appeared not to them either heresie or blasphemy , in ought that mr. wotton was by me convinced to have delivered or maintained ? when their subscription shewes , that they medled onely with his expositions , and not with his hereticall and blasphemous speeches , in which i paralleled him with socinus the hereticke . 2 quest . whether mr. gataker doth thinke that mr. wotton renouncing the law of god , and the righteousnesse thereof performed by christ in our stead for our justification , doth not in so doing deny christ his ransome paid , and satisfaction made to gods just law , for our redemption and for remission of our sins ? 3 quest . whether mans perfect fulfilling of the law in his owne person , under the covenant of workes , was not formall inherent righteousnesse , and would have made man worthy of life : and if so , how he can excuse mr. wotton , from making faith the formall inherent righteousnesse of beleevers , in the covenant of the gospel , by which they are worthy of justification , and eternall life , seeing he saith that faith under the gospell serves to all purposes , for obtaining eternall life , as mans perfect fullfilling of the law did in the covenant of workes ? 4 quest . whether mr. wotton professing his dissent from socinus in those things which are orthodox and true , to wit , that faith is obedience to christs commandements , who commands us to beleeve and repent ; that repentance which commeth not but by faith , is the meanes to obtaine forgivenesse of sins which christ hath brought , that is to get the sense and assurance of forgivenesse ; and that faith is a beleeving of that which christ taught , and an assurance of obtaining that he promised upon our repentance and obedience : can therefore be justified from the heresies of socinus , in the point of justification , when he holds other things which are condemned in socinus for heresie , as that faith used in a proper sense , not tropically , is said to be imputed for righteousnesse to justification , and not the righteousnesse of christ , apprehended and applied by faith ; and that christ hath not redeemed us , and satisfied for our sinnes , and procured our pardon and justification , by fulfilling the law in our stead ; and that faith , though not for the merit , worth and vertue of it , yet by the place and office which the lord of his mercy hath assigned , is the condition upon which god doth justifie and adopt us , and is accepted of god and counted for righteousnesse ? 5 quest . whether mr. wotton doth not deny the free covenant of grace , when he holds that god doth not covenant to justifie and give life , but upon a condition , performed on our part , equivalent for all purposes , to a mans perfect fulfilling of the law in his owne person under the covenant of workes ? 6 quest . whether mr. wotton affirming that if we be freely pardoned , then our sinnes were not punished in christ our head and surety , doth not deny christs satisfaction for sinne ? 7. quest . whether mr. wotton be not guilty of hereticall tergiversation , and grosse contradiction in these passages . first , when he saith , that there is no end or use of the imputation of christs righteousnesse , pag. 12. of mr. gatakers defence . and againe , pag. 21. that it is hereticall and blasphemous , to say that christs righteousnesse is not imputed as the meritorious cause of justification . and againe , in his essayes saith , that there is no mention of the merit of christ in all the scriptures . secondly , when he saith , that faith doth not justifie us , per se , by it selfe , and yet is said properly , and not tropically , to be imputed to us for righteousnesse , pag. 27. of the defence ; and is the onely condition which god requires on our part for justification , pag. 13. also , when he saith , that faith doth not justifie us , but onely as it apprehendeth and applyeth christ and his righteousnesse , pag. 27. and yet denyeth that christs righteousnesse is so apprehended and applyed by faith , that god counts it our righteousnesse to justification , pag. 12. thirdly , when he renounceth the law of god , performed by our selves or any other in our stead , for the justifying of us before god , pag. 12. and denyeth that we are punished for our sinnes , in christ our head and surety , for the satisfying of gods just wrath , pag. 29. and yet pag. 34. saith , i acknowledge and professe that christ hath made satisfaction for us , by paying a true price to god his father . is not this the same tergiversation , which the hereticke socinus useth ? who in some places confesseth in the scripture phrases , that christ is our redeemer , our ransome , and the propitiation for our sinnes : and in other places denyeth christs satisfying and paying of a ransome to god for our redemption and justification . fourthly , when he saith , that we are not accounted to be formally righteous , by fulfilling the law , and satisfying the justice of god in christ , and yet saith , that we are accepted of god as righteous for christs obedience no lesse then if wee had indeed performed those things , pag. 32. and pag. 26. for ought i hold of faith , christs righteousnesse may be even the formall cause of our justification . but pag. 22. he confesseth that he denyeth christs righteousnesse to be imputed as the formall cause whereby we are made formally righteous ; which is a flat contradiction of the apostles words , rom. 5. 19. by the obedience of one many shall be made righteous , that is , constituted and made formally righteous , for so the greeke word {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} doth signifie . 8. quest . whether mr. wotton can with a good conscience by mr. gataker be justified and proclaimed free from heresie , when he wil fully and perversely denyeth the very forme , essence , and being of justification , to wit , the imputation of christs righteousnesse , which he first simply rejecteth , as being of no use , and afterwards as the formall cause of justification , seeing he ( the said mr. gataker ) hath publickely extolled , and commended for orthodox , the like treatise of mr. william bradshaw , wherein he makes imputation of christs righteousnesse the forme of justification , and inveighed against some , ( meaning me , who had opposed some errours and contradictions which are in that booke ) in his funerall sermon , preached at mr. bradshawes buryall ? 9. quest . whether the faithfull being by one spirit united to christ , and made one spirituall body , and partakers of his righteousnesse , and whole obedience to the law of god , and thereby constituted righteous before god , can without hereticall perversenesse be denyed againe and againe to be formally , that is , truely and really righteous , by that righteousnesse , though not inherent in every beleever , but onely spiritually communicated from the head to every member of the body ? 10. quest . whether mr. wotton might not justly be judged to be possessed with the spirit of socinian blindnesse , and giddinesse , when he derides orthodox divines , for making every beleever justifyed by imputation of christs satisfactory obedience , a redeemer and saviour , and satisfyer for all the elect and faithfull ( for thus he argues . if christs righteousnesse and satisfaction , be imputed to every beleever , then must every beleever be counted a redeemer , justifyer , & satisfyer , for all the elect : but this is absurd , ergo the antecedent is false . in one of his written pamphlets ) though they doe not hold that gods imputing of christs obedience and satisfaction , is an accounting of it to be performed by them in their owne persons , or imputed as a meritorious efficient cause ; but onely his accounting it theirs by communion from christ the head to every member so farre as to make him formally righteous . and yet he himselfe contradicting his former absolute denyall of imputation , pag. 12. doth hold imputation of christs righteousnesse , as a meritorious , and efficient cause of justification , pag. 21. which is a manifest falling into that absurdity , which he would pin upon others . for if it be counted ours , as a meritorious efficient cause , then are we all counted justifyers , who doe justifie the elect , and merit their justification . i could propound divers other questions , but when mr. gataker sees himselfe seriously to answer these , i hope he shall perceive ( if he hath ever an eye left to see ) that his defence of mr. wotton , is worse then standing at his backe , till his head be broken , even a breaking of his head , and a defaming of him by going about to defame me unjustly in this pretended defence , the issue whereof is , that by publishing in print , those damnable hereticall speeches , which i in private objected against mr. wotton , out of his owne writings ( not one word whereof he could deny ) he hath made mr. wottons name to stinke , like the issue of a running cancer in a most foule body , and like those sepulchres dogges , which scratch rotten carkasses out of their graves , hee hath raked up mr. wottons rotten body of errours out of his grave ; ( as some godly divines have said , upon the reading of his defence . ) for what true christian , when he reades those desperate speeches which i objected in my parallel , now printed by mr. gataker , ( viz. that there is no end or use whatsoever of the imputation of christs obedience , active or passive , for the justification of sinners ; that faith , taken in a proper sense , is by god counted for righteousnesse : and is for all purposes , as sufficient to justification under the gospell , as the fulfilling of the law by a man in his owne person , was in the covenant of workes ; that he renounceth the fulfilling of the law by christ for our justification : and that our sinnes are not punished in christ , nor gods wrath satisfyed thereby ) is not so offended with the ill savour of those rotten heresies , that he is forced to stoppe his nose at the reading of them , as passengers doe , when they passe by the valley of hamon gog ? ezech. 29. 11. if mr. gataker be so profuse and prodigall of his reputation , as to subscribe to them , that there is no heresie or blasphemy in them ; when beza , paraeus , lubertus and others , our betters , have , before me , so proclaymed them to be : yet he hath with breach of piety and charity , and with greater virulency and defect of humanity , and common honesty than he hath proved to be in me ; most falsely fathered on those dead saints , mr. randall , and mr. stocke , and on those living pious men , doctor gouge , and master downham , a subscription to those errours ; that they saw no heresie , or blasphemy in them . whereas , indeed and in truth , i have to shew in writing , that their subscription was not to all or any thing , which i produced out of his writings against him ; but onely to his expositions , wherein he denyed many of his errours , and set a false glosse on the rest . indeed some things in those expositions , i did then shew to be already condemned for heresie and blasphemy , by the learned before named ; and thereupon i did blame their subscription , and protested against it , and desired to dispute with mr. wotton , and prove those points heresie ; but mr. gataker interposed and prevailed so with the rest , that i could not be heard , neither could i by any intreaty obtaine a copy of those expositions ; but they were committed to doctor baylie to be kept ; till mr. wotton had more fully in writing purged himselfe , and the doctor durst never suffer me once to read them , fearing lest i should write a publike confutation of them . howbeit i wrote a confutation of so much as i could remember , by hearing them once read , at the time when they were subscribed , and on wednesday , being the second day after , did shew it to doctor gouge , and mr. downham after the sermon at blackfryers . and a long time after , i with much adoe , by mr. wetwoods meanes , obtained the sight of them , for two houres , in which space i copyed them out , as is before related ; so farre was i from pressing doctor baylie to conceale them , ( as mr. gataker would intimate , pag. 37 ) that i never laboured for any thing more earnestly , then to have them published for the freeing of my selfe from the crimes which mr. wotton then , and now mr. gataker by false reports would lay and fasten on me , pag. 39. of his defence . as for that testification rehearsed , pag. 38. and subscribed by john downham , and william gouge , it was gotten by mr. wotton seven yeares after , when the businesse was almost forgotten : and ( as mr. downham told me ) it was upon this occasion . mr. wotton having written his booke de reconciliatione , came to him and told him , that now he had fully purged himselfe from socinianisme , ( as he promised ) in a booke which mr. mason the bishops chaplaine would licence for the presse , if two or more of them who heard the controversie , betweene him and me , would testifie that i did not convince him of heresie before them ; and that they all had so subscribed . and upon this suggestion , which was false , they two onely gave that attestation , which mr. stocke , and dr. baylie , abhorred to doe , repenting of what favour they had shewed him at the first . if this be not so , let mr. downham , and dr. gouge , speake for themselves : as for the rest of mr. gatakers defence , it is so frivolous , that a short answer will serve . his maine charge against me is , that i make mr. wotton to hold the same things which have formerly been condemned for heresie in abailard , servetus , and socinus ; for this he accuseth me of iniquity , but the iniquity returnes upon his owne head . first , for peter abailard , he held that our sins are not punished in christ , and that it had beene injustice in god to punish one for another , and to impute the obedience of one to others : and against him saint bernard disputes epist. 190. in these words , it was man who was indebted , and man satisfyed . if one dyed for all , then all dyed in him , that the satisfaction of one may be imputed to all ; for he who offended and forfeited was not one , and he who satisfyed , another ; the head and the body are one christ . and a little after . i call my selfe righteous , but by his righteousnesse . which is that ? christ , the end of the law for righteousnesse to every beleever . and againe , man is mercifully redeemed , or delivered , yet so as that there justice executed even in the deliverance . if the heresie of abailard , thus confuted by bernard , be not the same which i proved to be held by mr. wotton , let the reader judge . if abailard did deny in plaine words the eternall deity of christ , and after him servetus and socinus also : so also did mr. wotton in effect , though in words he professed the contrary . for he held that christs obedience did serve onely to justifie himselfe , and to bring him into high favour with god , so that god justifies us by him as by a favourite , onely upon condition of our trusting in him . now where is the infi●●●● value of his deity , if he needed justification and favour for himselfe ? secondly , that servetus and socinus were in the same errour , and that mr. wotton in the points of justification holds with them , i have proved out of his owne words . it is a poore defence for mr. gataker , to excuse him by naming other heresies of theirs which he professed not ; neither did i charge him with them ; and to plead , that because they were condemned for other heresies , more then this ; therefore this was no heresie . i know it to be heresie and blasphemie , and with the learned before named do proclame it to be so . yea mr. wottons owne conscience told him that his opinions were condemned for heresie and blasphemy , and for feare of shame , denyed them at sometimes ; and most frequently contradicted himselfe , saying and unsaying , as socinus his master often did . i am loath to spend more time , to answer to this last part of mr. gatakers defence , which one short breath is sufficient to blow away . if he be forward to breake out into a further defence of these errors , and of mr. wotton , ( who in his first paper speaking of the doctrine of justification , as it is held and maintained by all orthodox divines of the reformed church , did not blush to say , i am enforced to dissent from them all ; what spirit enforced him , i cannot conceive unlesse it was the spirit of abailard , who is condemned by saint bernard for saying , omnes doctores nostri post apostolos in hoc conveniunt , &c all our doctors or teachers since the apostles agree in this point ; but i am of another opinion : sic omnes , non sie ego , all other thinke so , but i doe not think so ) i shall by gods grace be as ready to resist him still . and i doubt not but the hand of all orthodox divines wil be against him who takes part with one against all ; yea against the holy scriptures , and the holy pen-men of them . my faith , by which i beleeve that i shall be saved , is a firme beleife that christ is my head and surety , who fulfilled the whole law for me , that he might thereby , redeeme , reconcile , and justifie me , and that my sins were punnished in him , and his righteousnesse , is my righteousnesse , in which i stand righteous before god . i know whom i have beleeved . i feare not what any man can say against me . if god be with me , i care not who be against me . if he justifie me , who can condemne ? i will therefore rest on that promise of the lord , esay 54. 17. no weapon that is formed against thee shall prosper , and every tongue that riseth up against thee in judgement thou shalt condemne . this is the heritage of the servants of the lord ; and their righteousnesse is of me , saith the lord . finis . mr. anthony wotton's defence against mr. george walker's charge, accusing him of socinian heresie and blasphemie written by him in his life-time, and given in at an hearing by mr. walker procured ; and now published out of his own papers by samuel wotton his sonne ; together with a preface and postcript, briefly relating the occasion and issue thereof, by thomas gataker ... wotton, anthony, 1561?-1626. 1641 approx. 87 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 33 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2007-01 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a67122 wing w3643 estc r39190 18253003 ocm 18253003 107259 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a67122) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 107259) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 1138:22) mr. anthony wotton's defence against mr. george walker's charge, accusing him of socinian heresie and blasphemie written by him in his life-time, and given in at an hearing by mr. walker procured ; and now published out of his own papers by samuel wotton his sonne ; together with a preface and postcript, briefly relating the occasion and issue thereof, by thomas gataker ... wotton, anthony, 1561?-1626. wotton, samuel. gataker, thomas, 1574-1654. [2], 62 p. printed by roger daniel ..., cambridge (england) : 1641. imperfect: cropped and tightly bound. reproduction of original in the union theological seminary library includes bibliographic references. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng walker, george, 1581?-1651. -socinianisme in the fundamentall point of justification. jesus christ -divinity. socinianism. heresies, christian -england. 2005-10 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2006-01 spi global keyed and coded from proquest page images 2006-04 emma (leeson) huber sampled and proofread 2006-04 emma (leeson) huber text and markup reviewed and edited 2006-09 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion mr. anthony wotton's defence against mr. george walker's charge , accusing him of socinian heresie and blasphemie : written by him in his life-time , and given in at an hearing by m r walker procured ; and now published out of his own papers by samuel wotton his sonne . together with a preface and postscript , briefly relating the occasion and issue thereof , by thomas gataker , an eye and eare-witnesse of either . hieronym . adv . errores joan. hierosol . nolo in suspicione haereseωs quenquam esse patientem . cambridge , printed by roger daniel , printer to the university . anno dom. 1641. the preface . it hath ever been and is generally held a breach , not of charity alone , but even of * piety too , to insult over and trample upon persons deceased : which if in any sort of men doth well deserve such a censure , surely among christian men especially it may justly be so deemed for any in that manner to deal with their christian brethren , such as have lived and died in the profession of the same common faith in christ , and in the fellowship of the same church of god with themselves . not that it is presumed an act unwarrantable or uncharitable to refute any errour that such have broched while they lived , or to remove any scruple that thereby may remain in the minds of those that yet survive : for * a fond thing were it , not to offer to pull out the shaft sticking yet in the body , or not to seek to close up the wound by it made in the flesh , because the party were gone and had withdrawn himself who had shot the one , and thereby caused the other . free it is at all times to defend necessary truths , whether the authours and patrons of them survive yet or be deceased : but to insult and triumph over any , when they are now dead and departed from us , as if we had convinced and conquered them while they were yet alive with us , when as indeed we have done nothing lesse ; yea , to renew aspersions and imputations of the most heinous and horrible guilt that can be against them long after their decease , when we suppose the memory of things so long before past and gone may be worn out with the most , and buried with the greater number of those that were privy to what was then done , recharging them in most vehement & virulent manner with those crimes which the parties then cleared themselves of , nor were we then able to make any good proof of against them , may deservedly be censured ( if i be not much mistaken ) to argue no small defect , not of piety and charity alone , but even of humanity , ( not to adde , of common honesty it self ) in those that so do . now this whether m r george walker have made himself guilty of or no , in his treatise lately published under the title of socinianisme in the fundamentall point of justification discovered and confuted , concerning m r anthony wotton , a man , by m r walkers own confession , of speciall note for his piety , life and learning , while he lived , which both the university of cambridge , and the city of london are able also to give ample testimony unto ; i say nothing my self , but leave it to be tried and judged by the sequele , wherein i shall be only a relatour of that that my self was for the most part either an eye or an ear-witnesse of , leaving m r wotton to plead his own cause , and m r walker's own dayes-men by their award under their own hands either to cast or to clear him . the relation . not to hold my reader therefore long in the entry ere i come to the relation : m r walker in a letter directed to m r wotton ( whom he had before bitterly inveighed against both in private and publick ) dated may the second , 1614. yet to be seen under his own hand , chargeth him ( for you shall have it precisely in his own words ) on this wise , the errours and opinions which you maintain , and wherewith you have infected divers , are of all that ever were sown by the enemy of god and man amongst christian people the most pestilent and dangerous , being nothing else but the heresies of servetus and socinus those most damnable and cursed hereticks , the greatest monsters that ever were born within the borders of christ his church . and after this charge in such hideous terms conceived , in the same letter he subjoyneth this peremptory challenge , meet me as a christian before eight learned and godly ministers chosen equally by both , that they may be witnesses betwixt you and me , and that it may be seen whether i do justly charge you with heresie and blasphemy or no , and whether your writings do not shew you to be a socinian . upon receit of this letter containing much other lavish and menacing language , m r wotton repaired to the right reverend , the then bishop of london , d r king their diocesan , acquainted him with the businesse , and requested his lordship to convent m r walker and himself , and to heare them both together ; not refusing , if m r walker could make his charge good against him , to undergo such censure and penalty as he should be deemed thereby to have justly deserved ; otherwise requiring due satisfaction by his lordships means from him who had wronged him in such manner . but the bishop perswaded m r wotton rather , according to m r walkers own proposition , to referre the matter to such a number of their brethren the ministers as were by him mentioned , and so to make a private end of the businesse . whereunto m r wotton returned this answer , that howsoever he desired rather that his lordship would be pleased to have the hearing of it himself , yet since that he seemed to like better of the other course by m r walker propounded , he was well content to condescend thereunto , so be that his lordship would be pleased to assigne one of his chaplains then present to be one of the foure to be nominated by him , though a stranger to him ; for that he cared not who they were , acquaintance or strangers , so they be godly and learned , that should heare and judge his cause . and the bishop accordingly promised that it should so be , assigning m r henry mason , a grave and reverend divine , being then and there present , to undertake that office with such others as were to be adjoyned unto him in the same : who yet surviving in the city is able to testifie of this passage with the bishop , whether it were according to this relation or no. for i have this onely from m r wotton's own report ( though nothing doubtfull of the truth of it ) who meeting me accidentally in pauls church as he came from the bishop , having not seen him long before , shewed me m r walker's letter , told me what speech he had had thereupon with the bishop , and what by the bishops perswasion he had yielded unto ; withall requesting me to be one of those that were on his part to be named for the discussing and deciding of this difference . which motion of his albeit i desired to wave , wishing him rather to make choise of some other , both nearer at hand , and of better abilities , the city affoording such not a few ; yet at his instant request , the rather pressing it upon me , because he had , as he said , so happily light upon me unexpected , and notwithstanding that he knew before my judgement in some particulars to differ from his , having both by word of mouth , and in writing also sometime at his own request manifested to him as much , yet making no reckoning thereof , i was at length induced to condescend thereunto . the persons nominated by m r walker were m r stocke , m r downame , m r gouge , and m r westfield ; whereof three is yet living , m r stock onely is deceased . those that were nominated by m r wotton ( because m r mason by occasion of an extraordinary employment by his majestie suddenly enjoyned , of surveying a book of d r john whites ready to be published , could not attend the businesse , another therefore being substituted in his stead ) were these , m r balmford , m r randall , m r hicks , chaplain to the earl of excester , and my self ; who alone ( i suppose ) of all the foure now survive , and am the rather induced to affoord this christian office to so worthy * a deceased friend . it was thought not so fit to meet in a private house ( which at first we had done , but found therein some inconvenience ) as in some church that stood out of the way of ordinary concourse . by occasion hereof d r baylie , afterward bishop of banghor , came in as one of us , and made up a ninth , because we desired to make use of his church . there accordingly we met , and some time being spent , or , if you will , wasted , rather in loose invectives then in orderly disputes , i made bold to propound a course to the rest of the company ( because time was precious , and my self came farthest ) for the better expediting of the businesse undertaken by us ; which was also generally approved of by the rest , and by both parties agreed unto . the proposition was this , that m r walker should in a parallel consisting of two columns set down socinus his hereticall and blasphemous errours and positions on the one side , and m r wottons assertions , wherein he charged him to concurre with socinus , over against them on the other side : upon view whereof it might the sooner appear how the one suited with the other . m r walker undertook so to do ; and m r wotton required onely to have m r walker's said writing delivered unto him some two or three dayes before the set time of our next meeting , that he might against that day prepare a brief answer thereunto , in writing then to be exhibited . the motion was on either side deemed equall ; nor did m r walker himself mislike it . now by this means , god in his providence so disposing it ( which at the present in likelihood was little dreamed of ) m r wotton , as * abel , though deceased , is inabled to speak in his own defence , and to plead now his own cause as well as then he did . m r walkers parallel , and therein his evidence produced for the proof of his charge above mentioned , you shall have in his own words as it was then given in ; those pieces of it onely that were conceived in latine being faithfully translated word for word , as near as could be , into english , because in english m r walker's book with the renewed charge is abroad . m r walker 's evidence . that it may plainly appear that socinus , servetus , ostorodius , gittichius , arminius and m r wotton do in the doctrine of justification hold one and the same opinion in all points , i shew by the parts and heads of their doctrine set down in order , and by their own sayings and testimonies paralleled and set one by another . the first errour of socinus and his followers is , that justification is contained onely in remission of sinnes , without imputation of christ his righteousnesse . socinus . his own words . 1 for ( as oft hath been said by us ) in remission of sinnes , which is the same w th not-imputation of sins , is our righteousnesse contained : and therefore with paul , not to impute sinnes , and to impute righteousnesse , or to account righteous are the same . and with this imputation ( as we have said ) the imputation of anothers righteousnesse hath no commerce . treatise of christ the saviour . part. 4. chap. 4. pag. 463. column . 2. near the end . 2 there is no one syllable extant in holy writ of christs righteousnesse to be imputed unto us , chap. the same , pag. 462. 3 it is the same with paul , to have sinnes covered , to have iniquities remitted , to have sinne not imputed , that it is , to have righteousnesse imputed without works . and this manifestly declareth , that there is no cause why we should suspect mention to be made of anothers righteousnesse , since we reade that faith was imputed unto abraham for righteousnesse , or unto righteousnesse , pag. the same . col . 2. 4 god delivered the lord jesus unto death , that by him rising from the dead we might hope to obtain justification , that is , absolution from our sins , pag. 463. col . 2. 5 that is first to be considered , that this imputation can in no wise be upheld , in the same place . wotton . 1 albeit with piscator i willingly acknowledge that the justification of a sinner is wholly comprehended in the alone pardon of sins ; yet i find no where in holy writ that there is need of the imputation of christs passive obedience unto the attaining of it , theses in latine . 2. that christs obedience is imputed by god to the justification of a sinner , doth not appear by any testimonie of scripture , or by any argument , or by any type or ceremonie in the law , or by any signification in the sacraments of the gospel , in the same , arg . 1. 3 no necessary use or end can be assigned of the imputation of the obedience of christ to the justification of a sinner , in the same , arg . 4. 4 i renounce the law , both in whole and in part , performed by our selves , or any other in our stead , to the justifying of us in the sight of god. 5 i assent to piscator , that justification consisteth wholly in remission of sinnes . for so doth the apostle , rom. 3. & 4. propound and dispute the question , without any mention or inckling of christs righteousnesse . these are his words in a little english pamphlet , first published briefly , and secondly by him enlarged . the second point or errour is , that faith is a condition appointed by god to be performed on our parts for obtaining of justification . socinus . 1 the promise was made to abraham not without a secret condition , to wit , that he should walk before god and be perfect , that is , he should not refuse to obey him . now to walk before god , and to obey him , are included in faith , and cannot be without it ; yea they flow from it alone , as he himself teacheth after in the same chapter . 2 the confidence saith he ( which he had before affirmed to be faith ) is the cause of our obedience : therefore a man believeth , because he trusteth . and it is perfected by obedience : because no man is truly said to have trusted , before he do indeed obey , part. 4. chap. 11. pag. 555 , 556. and a little after , 3 whereby that appeareth to be most true , which we even now strove to prove , that that faith , which of it self so far as concerneth what is in us doth justifie us , is confidence in christ , 559. wotton . 1 the condition to be performed on our part to justification , is to believe , sermon 8. upon john , pag. 352. 2 the act of faith or believing bringeth justification and adoption onely and merely by the place and office which the lord of his own mercie hath assigned it , to be the condition required on our parts for the atchieving of these favours and honours , serm. 9. pag. 452. the third errour is , that faith doth not justifie us , as it apprehendeth christ and his righteousnesse , but by it self , in a proper not metonymicall sense . socinus . 1 we are justified by faith in christ , so farre forth as we trust in christ , part. 4. chap. 11 pag. 558. col . 2. 2 the faith of christ doth justifie us by it self , or ( to speak more rightly ) god doth justifie us by himself , pag. 559. col . 1. wotton . 1 faith in that place ( to wit , rom. 4.5 . ) is to be taken properly unlesse peradventure it be used for to believe or to trust . for that which is by some alledged of a trope , whereby they suppose that christs obedience apprehended by faith is signified , i doubt how i may grant . and a little after , 2 what trope should there lie hid , i see not . 3 also serm. 9. on john. abraham believed god ; and it , that is , his believing , was counted to him for righteousnesse , pag. 453. 4 also in his purgation , i think that faith in christ , without a trope , in proper speech is imputed to all believers for righteousnesse . the fourth errour is , that for faith properly taken , and dignified and made worthy , not of it self , but in gods acceptation and of his mercie , a man is justified , and may lay claim ( as it were ) to remission of sinnes . socinus . 1 for faith we are deemed perfectly just . and a little after , 2 abraham believed god ; and for that cause he was accounted of him for righteous , part. 4. chap. 4. pag. 462. col . 2. 3 for one act of faith was abraham righteous , servetus , book 2. of law and gospel , as calvine reciteth in his refutation of servetus , pag. 903. wotton . 1 he that believeth is accounted by god , to all purposes concerning eternall life , to have done as much according to the covenant of the gospel , as he should have been accounted to have done , according to the covenant of the law , if he had perfectly fulfilled it , in his first english paper . the fifth errour is , that faith is no firm perswasion , by which men apprehend and lay hold upon christ and his righteousnesse , and apply them to themselves , as of right belonging to us by our spirituall union : but that it is a trust and confidence in christ for salvation joyned with obedience to christs precepts : or ( to speak plainly ) a confidence that christ , having obtained by his obedience the kingdome and all power , will certainly give us salvation , if we relie on him , and obey his counsels . socinus . 1 faith in christ , which maketh us righteous before god , is nothing else but to trust in christ , part. 4. chap. 11. in the beginning : and in the same , page 560. col . 2. 2 to believe in christ , is nothing else but to trust in christ , to cleave to christ , and from the heart to embrace his doctrine as heavenly and healthsome . and a little before , 3 this your apprehension of christ , is a mere humane device , and a most empty dream . and towards the end of the chapter . 4 he calleth our perswasion of righteousnesse , already obtained and gotten by christ , vain . wotton . 1 as for that perswasion , wherein some would have faith to consist , it followeth him that is justified , not goeth before , as faith must needs do , ser. on john , p. 392. also p. 338. and 448. 2 to believe in christ is to trust in christ , and to rest on him , to have his heart settled , and to relie wholly and onely on him . and what this trust is , he describeth more particularly , pag. 390. where he saith , 3 it is such a faith , as maketh us rest upon god for the performance of his promise . the sixth errour is , that christs whole obedience and righteousnesse serve , first and immediately for himself , to bring him into favour and autoritie with god : and secondly onely for us : not that it might be communicated to us in him , to make us truly and formally righteous , but onely that it might serve for our use in that it maketh him gracious with god , and so both able to obtain that faith might be accepted for righteousnesse , and we for it ; and also powerfull to give those blessings which are promised to those that trust in him . socinus . 1 as adams offense made him and all mankind procreated by him guiltie of death , so christs righteousnesse and obedience procured life eternall to christ himself . whereby it cometh to passe , that so many as shall by procreated by him become partakers of the same life , part. 4. chap. 6. and , 2. part . 2. chap. 8. p. 178. col . 2. and , 3. part . 3. chap. 3. in the end . wotton . in a paper written in latine . 1 all the good will wherewith god embraceth us proceedeth from that grace , that christ is in with god. now that is in these things for the most part contained , that he is by nature the son of god , that he is perfectly holy , that he hath performed obedience exact in all respects , both in fulfilling the law , & in performing all things belonging to the office of a mediatour : from whence it followeth , that those that believe are for christs righteousnes gracious with god. and in the same paper , 2 if question be concerning the formall cause of justification , i exclude from it either obedience of christ . if of the efficient by way of merit , i maintain it to depend upon both . the seventh errour is , that christ did not satisfie the justice of god for us , in such sort , that we may be said ( when we truly believe ) to have satisfied the justice of god and his wrath in him : and that god of his mercie without christs satisfaction made ours , doth pardon our sinnes and justifie and redeem us . socinus . 1 reade over all the places of the new testament , in which mention is made of redemption , and you shall find none in which there is evident mention of the paiment of any true price , or of satisfaction , part. 2. chap. 1. pag. 109. col . 2. and a little after , 2 as we are said to be sold under sinne , that is , enslaved to it , without any true price intervening ; so are we said to be redeemed from the same by christ , that is , freed , though no price hath truly and properly intervened . 3 likewise part. 1. chap. 7. in the end , he denieth satisfaction . 4 also chap. 4. pag. 84. col . 2. that there is no need of any satisfaction , when the offense is not imputed to him that hath offended by the party against whom he hath offended , or the debt is by the creditour remitted . wotton . in the paper written in latine . 1 neither ( that i speak freely what i truly think ) can i understand what place is left for pardon , if by payment of pains in christ we be deemed to have satisfied the wrath of god , and to have born the punishment due to our sinnes : for pardon and punishment are contraries . 2 also in his english paper enlarged , the same words are rehearsed , and the same reason given , even , because pardon and punishment are contraries . thus have you the evidence by m r walker then given in for the justifying of that his charge : which , for the effect and substance of it , is in as broad and odious terms in print now again renewed , some six and twenty years after the cause according to his own request heard , and some fourteen years after m r wotton's decease . may it please you now to heare m r wotton's answer in his own defense , as it was in writing by him then exhibited . mr. wotton's defence . a. w. in the doctrine of justification holdeth one and the same opinion in all points with socinus : and therefore is justly charged by g. w. to be guilty of heresie and blasphemy . that he doth hold the same in all points , is shewed by these seven errours following : the first errour of socinus and his followers is , that justification is contained onely in remission of sinnes , without imputation of christs righteousnesse . 1. if you mean without imputation of christs righteousnesse as the meritorious cause of justification , i grant the proposition to be hereticall and blasphemous . and so doth socinus deny imputation . i. christ ( saith he ) did not satisfie for our sinnes : treatise of christ the saviour , part 1. chap. 1. pag. 1. part 2. chap. 17. pag. 245. col . 1. part 3. pag. 306. beginning , and chap. 1. pag. 307. col . 1. ii. he could not satisfie , part 2. chap. 24. pag. 288. col . 2. part . 3. in argum . chap. 6 : pag. 406. iii. he did not pacifie god , part 2. chap. 2. pag. 120. col . 1. part 1. chap. 7. pag. 76. col . 2. iv. there was no need of any satisfaction to be made , part 1. chap. 1. pag. 1. v. god would not that any satisfaction should be made , part 3. chap. 2. pag. 317. col . 2. and pag. 324. col . 1. but i do not so deny imputation of christs righteousnesse : for i acknowledge it to be the meritorious cause of our justification , and that for it we are accepted of god as fully as if we had fulfilled the law perfectly , treatise of the justification of a sinner , in explication of the definition of reconciliation , and in the definition of adoption , and in the conclusion . 2. if you mean without imputation of christs righteousnesse , as the formall cause whereby we are made formally righteous , by having fulfilled the law , and satisfied the justice of god in christ , i say the proposition is neither hereticall nor blasphemous . and that i must be so understood , my writings shew . for , first , i professe that i speak of the formall cause of justification , treat . of justific . of a sinner , in the state of the question , in answer to argum. for position 1. and to arg. 1. for position 3. and in the conclusion . secondly , i expresse that manner of formally righteous , treat . of justific . of a sinner : where i expound what it is to impute to a sinner christs obedience ; and of justification , where i deliver mine own opinion , sect. 2. which is the very place that m r walker alledgeth against me out of the english . therefore i agree not with socinus in this first errour , but am unjustly charged to be guilty of heresie and blasphemy for holding one and the same opinion with him in all points in the doctrine of justification . the second errour is , that faith is a condition appointed by god to be performed on our parts for obtaining justification . 1. socinus defineth believing on christ to be nothing else then to yield ones self obedient to god , according to the rule and prescript of christ , and by so doing to expect from christ himself the crown of life eternall , treat . of christ the saviour , part 3. chap. 2. pag. 321. col . 1. 2. he maketh faith to be indeed ( as m r walker saith ) a confidence in christ , but he addeth immediately ( which m r walker leaveth it ) that is , an obedience to christs precepts , with a firm hope of obtaining those things which he hath promised to those that obey him , part 4. chap. 11. pag. 559. col . 1. and in the same page he laboureth to prove , that faith doth signifie obedience to christs commandments , sect. hinc factum est . 3. he maketh repentance and amendment of life the means to obtain that forgivenesse of sinnes which christ hath brought , part 3. chap. 2. pag. 321. col . 1. 4. and whereas faith is added to repentance , act. 20.21 . it is not ( saith he ) because faith in christ is required unto the obtaining of remission of sinnes , as working somewhat more in us besides repentance it self , that doth hereunto appertain ; but because this repentance cometh not but by faith in christ . in the same columne , sect. manifestum . 5. he saith , that whereas john sent the people to christ , and warned them to believe in him ; it was not as if they should find any other thing besides repentance in christ that was requisite unto the obtaining of pardon from god , but , first , that they might be exactly taught of christ what that repentance ought to be . besides , that from christ they might understand that that was wholly so indeed , which he delivered onely as a messenger . lastly , that they might not be washed with water onely , but have the holy ghost poured upon them , part 3. pag. 320. col . 1. but i never writ , spake , nor conceived so of faith to the obtaining of justification . nay , it is evident that i make faith not a believing of that which christ taught , and an assurance of obtaining that he promised upon our repentance and obedience ( which is socinus his confidence , part 4. chap. 11 pag. 559. col . 1. ) but a resting and relying upon christ , a trusting to christ for salvation , serm. 6. upon john , pag. 286. and serm. 8. pag. 386 , 389 , 398. yea a means , and , if you will , an instrument to apprehend and receive christ to our justification , treat . of justific . in explicat . of the definition of reconcil . so that , for ought i hold of faith , christs righteousnesse may be even the formall cause of our justification . therefore i agree not with socinus in this second errour , but am unjustly charged to be guilty of heresie and blasphemy for holding one and the same opinion with him in all points in the doctrine of justification . the third errour is , that faith doth not justifie us , as it apprehendeth and applieth christ and his righteousnesse ; but by it self , in a proper not metonymicall sense . this third errour hath two propositions , which shall be answered to severally . the former is , that faith doth not justifie as it apprehendeth and applieth christ and his righteousnesse . i hold this proposition to be false ; acknowledging and confessing that faith doth not justifie us but onely as it apprehendeth and applieth christ and his righteousnesse ; the very condition of the gospel being , that by faith we apprehend and apply christ and his righteousnesse to be justified thereby , treat . of justifie . in explic . of the definit . of reconcil . the other proposition is , that faith doth justifie us by it self in a proper not metonymicall sense . i never said or thought that faith doth justifie us by it self . this onely i say , that in this proposition , faith is counted for righteousnesse , the word faith is to be taken properly , not tropically ; the question being in such propositions not of the meritorious or formall cause of our justification , but of the condition required on our part instead of keeping the law. therefore i agree not with socinus in this third errour , but am unjustly charged to be guilty of heresie and blasphemy for holding one and the same opinion with him in all points in the doctrine of justification . the fourth errour is , that for faith properly taken , and dignified and made worthy , not of it self but in gods acceptation and of his mercy a man is justified , and may lay claim to remission of sinnes . neither socinus nor servetus ( in the words you bring out of them ) affirm that a man is justified and may lay claim to remission of sinnes , for faith any way dignified , &c. nay , socinus avoucheth , that repentance and amendment of life is that by which that forgivenesse of sinnes which is brought by christ is obtained , part 3. chap. 2. pag. 322. col . 1. how then am i proved to agree with him in that errour which he is not proved to hold ? especially , seeing that i never said that we are justified for faith , and do renounce all dignity and worth in faith , and give the whole merit of our justification to our saviour christ and his obedience . that which is alledged out of my papers is no more but this , that the condition of the gospel being faith , as the condition of the law is keeping of the law ; he that believeth in christ hath done as much , that is , performed the condition of the gospel , as well as he that keepeth the law hath fulfilled the condition of the law : so that on his part god requireth no more to his justification . and that this is certainly my meaning , the words going before in that english paper , and those also that follow in the other english paper , and in the latine , do manifestly shew . therefore i agree not with socinus in this fourth errour , but am unjustly charged to be guilty of heresie and blasphemie for holding one and the same opinion with him in all points in the doctrine of justification . the fifth errour is , that faith is no firm perswasion by which we apprehend and lay hold upon christ and his righteousnesse , and apply them to our selves as of right belonging to us by our spirituall union ; but that it is a trust and confidence in christ for salvation , joyned with obedience to christs precepts : or ( to speak plainly ) a confidence that christ , having obtained by his obedience the kingdome and all power , will certainly give us salvation if we rely on him and obey his counsels . whether the three propositions set down in this errour , be rightly gathered from the words alleaged by m r walker out of socinus or no , i leave to other mens judgement . but whatsoever socinus held , i have nothing to do with any of these propositions . onely of the first i say , that the perswasion , whereof i speak in the place he bringeth , is that particular assurance that every man ( as some define faith ) must have to justification ; viz. that his sinnes are forgiven in christ : whereas faith ( being the condition required on our part ) must go before justification , at least in nature . but this perswasion followeth it , and is bred in us by the spirit of god after we believe and are justified . for it is given to us , being already adopted sons , gal. 4.5 . and adoption is a prerogative vouchsafed us upon our believing , john 1.12 . therefore i agree not with socinus in this fifth errour , but am unjustly charged to be guilty of heresie and blasphemy for holding one and the same opinion with him in all points in the doctrine of justification . the sixth errour is , that christs whole obedience and righteousnesse serve first and immediately for himself to bring him into favour and authority with god ; and secondly , onely for us : not that it might be communicated to us in him , to make us truly and formally righteous ; but onely that it might serve for our use , in that it maketh him gracious with god , and so both able to obtain , that faith might be accepted for righteousnesse and we for it ; and also powerfull to give those blessings which are promised to those that trust in him . the words you alledge out of socinus prove no more ( at the most ) but the first point of this errour , that christs whole obedience and righteousnesse serve first and immediately for himself , to bring him into favour and authority with god. there is nothing in this sixth errour that toucheth me . all that i say , in the former place alledged by m r walker , is no more but this ; that whatsoever maketh christ beloved of god is some cause of gods love to us who are beloved in and for him , ephes . 1.3 , 4 , 6. now among other things for which christ is beloved , his holinesse and obedience have no mean place . whereupon it followeth that they may be reckoned in the number of those causes that make us beloved of god in and for his sonne our saviour jesus christ , treat . of justific . of a sinner , in explic . of the definit . of reconcil . in the latter i say , that we are not accounted to be formally righteous , by having fulfilled the law and satisfied the justice of god in christ . and yet i acknowledge that we are ( for his obedience ) accepted of god as righteous no lesse then if we had indeed performed those things . and this was determined in the first errour to be neither heresie nor blasphemy . therefore i agree not with socinus in this sixth errour , but am unjustly charged to be guilty of heresie and blasphemy , for holding one and the same opinion with him in all points in the doctrine of justification . the seventh errour is , that christ did not satisfie the justice of god for us in such sort that we may be said ( when we truly believe ) to have satisfied the justice of god and his wrath in him : and that god ( of his mercy ) without christs satisfaction made ours , doth pardon our sinnes , and justifie and redeem us . socinus denieth all satisfaction by christ , not onely with limitation ( as you propound it in this seventh errour ) but absolutely , as appeared in mine answer to the first errour : and accordingly he maintaineth that we are pardoned , justified , and redeemed without any satisfaction made by a true price paid to god the father by our saviour christ for us . but i acknowledge and professe that christ hath made satisfaction for us , by paying a true price to god his father for us : and that god doth not pardon us but for and in respect of that payment made for us . in the places alledged out of my writings i say no more , but that we cannot be held to have satisfied the wrath of god in christ , and withall to be truly and properly pardoned . if we have been punished , how are we pardoned ? if we be pardoned , we have not been punished . christ hath been punished for us ; we are pardoned for his punishment , esa . 53.5 . therefore i agree not with socinus in this seventh errour , and ( having cleared my self of agreeing with him in any of the seven ) am unjustly charged by m r walker to be guilty of heresie and blasphemy for holding one and the same opinion with socinus in all points in the doctrine of justification . the issue . thus have you both m r walker's charge and evidence , and m r wotton's answer in his own defence thereunto . you exspect now ( i suppose ) in the next place to heare what the issue of it was . upon the delivery in therefore and view of both compared together , there was by word of mouth further debating of the severall points at large , as well between m r walker and m r wotton , as by the parties nominated on either side among themselves . who albeit they agreed not with m r wotton in all particulars ; and in some things then debated were not all of one mind , as in that question occasioned by m r wotton's answer to one branch of the last article , to wit , whether in the work of redemption the faithfull be considered as one with christ , or no : or in plainer terms , whether our insition into christ in the order of nature be deemed to precede the work of our redemption , or the work of our redemption in the order of nature to go before it : concerning which , being somewhat a nice subtiltie , they were divided ; some holding the one part , and some the other : yet so farre were they from condemning m r wotton as guilty of heresie and blasphemie in the points above mentioned , as that they professed divers of them , and that some of m r walker's own choice , no one denying or opposing the rest therein , to have oft taught some of them , namely the second , to wit , that faith is a condition appointed by god to be performed on our part for obtaining justification : which yet m r walker affirmed to be a most dangerous errour . in conclusion , it was without further question or contradiction of any of the whole eight then present , as well the nominated by the one as those assigned by the other , with unanimous consent generally resolved and pronounced , that there appeared not to them either heresie or blasphemy in ought that m r wotton was by m r walker convinced to have delivered or maintained . which m r wotton requiring further to be testified under their hands , albeit m r walker , perceiving it to be deemed equall and meet , began to storm and flie out , and demanded of them , whether they would take upon them to determine heresie ; whereunto such answer was returned as was fit : yet it was accordingly ( as of right it ought ) yielded unto . the writing by all the eight then present subscribed , being committed to the custodie of d r bayly , upon promise by him made to deliver it to m r wotton , when it should by two of the parties , one of either side nominated , be demanded of him in his behalf . now howsoever the doctour afterward upon some pretences refused to deliver it as he had promised to do , whether pressed by m r walker to detain it or no , i wot not , himself best knoweth : yet for the truth of this issue , as it hath here been related in the behalf of m r wotton , it will plainly appear by the attestation of two of those of m r walkers party yet surviving ( for a third is deceased , and the fourth was absent at the meeting that concluded all ) in the very terms ensuing , written with one of their hands , and subscribed by them both . we whose names are under-written do testifie , that the eight ministers at the hearing of the foresaid points in controversie betwixt m r wotton and m r walker , and continuing till the end of that meeting ( though in every part they assented not to every of those positions ) under their hands witnessed , that they found neither heresie nor blasphemie in any of them , or to the like purpose . john downame . william gough thus have you faithfully related , upon ground of proof undeniable , the carriage of the businesse between m r walker , and m r wotton , and the issue of the same . you have m r walker's charge and challenge , together with the evidence produced and given in by him to make his charge good : you have m r wotton's defence in way of answer thereunto : and you have the verdict and sentence of select parties appealed to by joynt consent , delivered upon diligent view and due hearing both of the one and the other ; who all say in effect , that m r wotton did sufficiently clear himself from those foul imputations of heresie and blasphemie , that m r walker then charged him with ; and that m r walker failed in making good that his charge then , which with so much vehemency and virulency he reneweth now against him , yoking him with peter abeilard , and with servetus and socinus , as agreeing with them in such damnable and detestable dotages as they held and maintained , and for which they were condemned as blasphemous hereticks . the iniquitie whereof , though it may sufficiently appear by what hath already been related ; yet that the reader may the better judge how equally these persons are here yoked together , it will not be amisse ( though the matter be but unsavoury ) to acquaint him with some generall and principall heads of those points , that abeilardus , servetus , and socinus stand charged with . peter abeilard , or balard ( for a of his name they agree not ) whom b some affirm to have been one of the first fathers of the school-men , and first founders of school-divinitie ( for c peter lombard , say they , took from him ) is by bernard d charged , to have savoured of arius in the doctrine of the trinitie ; of pelagius , in the doctrine of grace ; of nestorius concerning the person of christ : to have held e christ to be no true redeemer of us , nor to have reconciled us to god by his death : but to have been an exemplary saviour ; that is , such an one as by his life and death , pietie and charitie , obedience and patience , chalketh us out the way to heaven : and to have broached in his books f a number of sacrilegious errours concerning the soul of christ ; his descent into hell ; the power of binding and loosing ; g the sacraments of the church , and by name that of the altar ; of originall sinne ; of concupiscence ; of sinnes of delight , infirmitie , and ignorance ; of sinne in work and sinne in will. but he telleth us not what they were . now whether bernard charge him truly herein or no ( which for divers causes may be justly questioned ; and the rather for that abeilard in h his apologie flatly denieth , that he ever wrote taught or once thought the most of those points that bernard fasteneth upon him , and for that i bernard's reports concerning others of those times , some whereof were his scholars , are not unjustly suspected ) it is not much materiall to our purpose ; the rather for that the charge granted to be true , the more pestilent and blasphemous his errours are found to be , the greater inequalitie will appear in the collation , unlesse the parties collated can be proved to have maintained opinions as pestilent and as blasphemous as his . but for servetus and socinus , the other two , what they held , we have records of sufficient credit . for servetus , ( from whom m r walker borroweth onely one small snip , wherewith to piece up his parallel ) whether his works be extant or no , i wot not ; and the better it is , if they be not . but what he taught and maintained , we have taken out of his writings , from m r calvine's relation , together with an ample refutation of them adjoyned thereunto . his chief assertions , among a vast heap of other absurd , prodigious and blasphemous ones , are these : that a there is no such trinitie of persons in the deitie , as is commonly maintained ; where he brandeth the orthodox tenet and the abettours of it with most hideous terms raked up from hel it self , and too vile to be related , and fasteneth many uncouth and fantasticall conceits full of impietie and blasphemie upon the names given in scripture to the second and third persons . that b god in the beginning of the world produced the word and the spirit : and began then as a person to appear in three uncreated elements and communicated of his essence unto all that he then made . that c this word being the face and image of god , is said then to have been begotten , because god then began to breed it , but stayed for a woman to bear it , untill the virgin mary was ; that d then christ was conceived in her womb , of the seed of the word and the substance of the spirit : so that the word was then first turned into flesh , and then that flesh by the spirit wholly turned into the essence of the deitie ; e and that christ hath now a spirituall body , that filleth heaven and earth . that f the spirit is a kind of gentle breath , which at first proceeded from the word , consisting partly of the essence of god , and partly of a created power : which g having moved in the creation on the face of the waters , and there finding no rest , retired again to heaven , and there stayed , till at the baptisme of christ it came down again . that h man is said to be made after gods image , because the very essence of god is in every man from his originall , and that not in the soul onely but in the body ; and that though the devil have by a kind of carnall copulation got into , and possessed himself of the body , yet that the divine essence remaineth still in the soul : which notwithstanding it is by sinne become mortall , and is breathed out into the aire , yet in the regenerate by means of the spirit it becometh consubstantiall and coeternall with god. that i christ should have come to carie men to heaven , albeit adam had never fallen ; and that the tree of knowledge of good and evil was a figure of christ , whom adam over-hastily desiring to tast of threw himself and his posteritie into perdition . that k none are guilty of mortall sinne , till they be twenty yeare old ; because they have no knowledge of good or evil till then ; l nor are therefore till then to be catechised : m nor any to be baptized , till they be thirty years old ; because of that age the first adam was created , and at that age the second adam was baptized . that n before christs coming the angels onely , not god , were worshipped : o nor were any regenerate by the spirit : p nor did their faith regard any more then terrestriall good things ; save that some few by apropheticall spirit might aloof off have some smatch of spirituall things . that q from the beginning , as well gentiles as jews , that lived well according to natures guidance , were thereby justified ; and without faith of christ shall thereby at the last day attain to life eternall . that r the law was given onely for a time ; and ſ that men were then saved by the observation of it ; which was then observed , when men did what they could , who might therefore glorie then in their works , being justified wholly by them : but t that men are not now to be scared with it . that u faith is nothing else but to believe christ to be the sonne of god : and v to justifie , nothing , but to make a man righteous , who was sinfull before : and that x we are now justified , partly by faith , and partly by works . that z on gods part there is no promise required unto justification : nor doth faith depend upon any promise of god , or hath any respect thereunto : in regard whereof * he scoffeth at those that build their faith upon gods promises , or that mention them in their prayers . that a there is a perfect puritie in every holy action ; and such as may endure even the extreme rigour of gods justice . that b abraham was indeed justified by works : howbeit , that his believing is first said to be imputed to him for righteousnesse , and he said to be just for one act of faith ; ( the place by m r walker produced ) as if a prince out of his favour regarding his souldiers mind and good will , would be pleased to accept the good endeavour for the thing fully performed : and so abraham was therefore by god deemed just , because by his believing it appeared that he stood well affected to acquire a commendation of righteousnesse by his good works . which is all , saith calvine , that he ascribeth unto faith , either in us , or in him . c whose faith , also he saith , as of others before christ was no true faith but a figure of true faith , and the righteousnesse imputed to him no spirituall but a carnall righteousnesse , and insufficient ; not a truth , but a shadow ; and the imputation of it but a type of the great grace of christ to us . and thus much , if not too much , of servetus his blasphemous and prodigious dreams and dotages : for i have raked overlong in this filthy sinck , in this stincking puddle , which till upon this occasion i never pried or peered into before , nor , it may be , should ever have done but for it . socinus remaineth , whose positions what they were , may appear by his writings yet extant , and in the hands of too many ; by means whereof it is to be feared that they do the more hurt . the principall of his tenets , though not so prodigious as those of servetus , yet blasphemous and vile enough , are these : he denieth not d christs deity and eternity onely , with e arrius ; but f his existence at all also before he was conceived by the virgin mary , with g photinus ; and so maketh him h a mere man. he denieth christ to have been i a redeemer , or to have wrought any redemption , or to have paid any price or ransome unto god for us , truly and properly so termed ; or that k by his sufferings any satisfaction at all was made unto god for our sinnes ; or that l god is thereby reconciled unto us ; or that m thereby he merited ought from god either for himself or for us . that n he is therefore onely called a saviour , and is said to save , partly o because he teacheth us by his doctrine , and p sheweth us by his practice the way to life eternall , and q confirmeth the same to us by the miracles that he wrought , and r by his dying and rising again from the dead ; and partly , ſ because he hath power given him by god to make the same good unto all that believe in him : that t to believe in him is nothing else but to obey him , or to keep his precepts under hope of eternall life thereby to be obtained ; and that this is the very u form and essence of justifying faith ; and that x for so doing a man is justified and accepted to life eternall ; and that y it is therefore in our power by our good works to attain thereunto . this is the summe of his doctrine concerning mans justification and salvation ; wherein also i am the briefer , because much of it hath been laid down before . now whether m r wotton or m r godwin do conspire and concurre with peter abeilard , servetus and socinus in these their blasphemous dotages , and are therefore justly yoked with them by m r walker or no ( it concerneth not me ) let others try and determine . but for m r wotton his own defence of himself herein , and the censure of others by m r walker himself appealed to , a which he cannot therefore in equity go from , i have faithfully delivered ; being confirmed by the attestation of those whom he cannot except against , being men of his own choise , and of sufficient credit and good esteem otherwise . and as for m r godwin , to me a mere stranger in regard of any acquaintance , one whom i never heard or saw to my knowledge , save once of late occasionally at the funerall of a friend , nor know certainly what he holdeth or hath taught , i say no more , but as they sometime of their sonne , b aetatem habet , he is old enough , and ( for ought i know ) able enough to answer for himself : and he surviveth yet so to do if he see good . but whether peter abeilard ever moved this question which m r walker saith he was the first mover of , to wit , whether faith , or the righteousnesse of christ be imputed in the act of justification , is to me a great question . and m r walker's reading herein ( as , i confesse , it may well be ) is better then mine , if he can shew where either he did ever handle it , or is reported so to have done . nor do i find in all m r calvines large relation and refutation of servetus his blasphemies , where ever he propounded or maintained any question in such terms , as this by m r walker is here conceived in . for socinus , it is true , that in prosecution of his discourses , wherein he laboureth to prove christ to be such a saviour onely as was out of him before described , he is inforced to acknowledge , that faith , such as he meaneth , that is , obedience to christs commandments doth justifie , without relation to ought done or suffered by christ , any satisfaction made by him , or merit of his ; neither of which he acknowledgeth : and the like may be deduced from what servetus held , ( though his assertions , as calvine also well observeth , are found oft to enterfere , and to crosse one another ) and from that also that abeilard is by bernard charged to have held . but if m r walker will father this upon him concerning the deniall of the imputation of christs righteousnesse , because from his positions it may be deduced , he might have risen a great deal higher , and have fetched in simon magus , ebion , cerinthus , marcion , manes , and a whole rabble of old hereticks ( and out of the ancient stories of the church made a list as large almost as his book is long ) from whose pestilent positions the same might as well be deduced , as from those things that abeilardus and servetus maintained . again , neither is this sufficient to prove a point to be hereticall and blasphemous , because it may be deduced from assertions of that nature : for if we shall condemn as hereticall and blasphemous , whatsoever by necessary consequence may be extracted from those dotages that some blasphemous hereticks have held , the like censure may then , yea must then be passed upon many orthodox tenets , in the negative especially , maintained by us against the church of rome , since that they follow necessarily from those grounds that by such hereticks have been held . for example : that christs body is not really present in the sacrament , nor is sacrificed and offered up to god in the masse , doth necessarily follow from the opinion of c eutyches and others , who maintained the humane nature of christ to be swallowed up into his godhead ; from the dotages of d simon , e saturn , f basilides , and many more , who held that he never suffered at all ; of g apelles , who held that his body was dissolved into the foure elements ; of h seleucus , i manes , k and hermes , that held it fastened to the starres , or lodged in the sunne : that there is no purgatory , nor use of invocation of saints , or of singing masses for souls deceased , followeth necessarily from the opinion of l the sadduces that held no spirits , and from the m psychopannychites dream of the souls sleeping till the last day ; which in effect therefore , the sequestration of them at least from the divine presence till then , that chamaelion spalatensis n pretended the rather to maintain , because by it those popish errours would be easily and evidently overthrown . for who is so meanly versed in the art of reasoning as not to know , that o the clearest truths may be deduced from the grossest falshoods that may be . as , grant a stone to have life , and a man to be a stone , and it will thence follow , that a man hath life . and yet were it absurd from hence to conclude , that whosoever holdeth the latter must needs either concurre in judgement with those that should maintain the former ; or hold any falshood , much lesse any absurdity , though those positions that inferre it be both false and absurd . and let m r walker consider this calmly and seriously with himself : he hath put down this in his parallel for an hereticall and blasphemous assertion , that faith [ in christ ] ( for so he must needs mean ) is a condition appointed by god to be performed on our parts for the obtaining of justification . now should any man hereupon enter an action against m r walker , accusing him as guilty of judaisme , paganisme and mahumetanisme , would he not , think we , make grievous complaint , yea with open mouth cry out and exclaim of extreme injury done him ? yet is it as clear as the light at noon-day , that whosoever shall deny faith in christ to be a condition appointed by god to be performed on mans part for the obtaining of justification , shall have all jews , paganes , and mahumetanes concurring therein with him , as in a point naturally flowing and necessarily following from what they hold . to go yet a step further ; suppose a man do concurre with such hereticks as have been spoken of in some point , be it a truth or an errour that is held and maintained by them , will it thence follow that he consenteth to them and agreeth with them in all things , or in such blasphemous opinions as they otherwise hold ? and here m r walker's candour may well a little be questioned . to prove m r wotton to hold one and the same opinion with servetus in all points concerning the doctrine of justification , he produceth onely this one saying of servetus , for one act of faith was abraham righteous . whether he have proved m r wotton to have said the same or no , is not now materiall , and i leave it to be judged by what himself hath spoken for his own defence in way of answer thereunto . but should a man , putting in a crosse interrogatorie , demand of m r walker whether he hold that christ hath fulfilled the law for us or no ? i doubt not but he would answer in the affirmative , that he hath . and the very same thing in the very same words is found by calvin related out of servetus , a the carnall people , saith he , might glory in their deeds , but we may not but in the crosse of our lord jesus christ : b we may onely relate the facts of christ , who hath wrought all our works for us , by fulfilling the law for us when we could not do it our selves . yet i suppose m r walker would take it in very ill part , and well he might , if any should thence conclude , that m r walker therefore doth in all points hold one and the same opinion with servetus concerning the doctrine of justification . again for socinus ; he maintaineth , that c to justifie is a term of judicature ; that , d it signifieth not to make a man inherently righteous , or to infuse righteousnesse into him ; but e to deem him , repute him , pronounce him righteous ; that f they do amisse that confound justification and sanctification , the one with the other ; that g that faith whereby we are justified is not a bare belief or assent unto the truth of gods word ; that h neither faith , i nor works , believing in christ , or obeying him , are the meritorious causes of justification ; or k do or can , in regard of any worthin them , merit ought at gods hands : l nor doth faith it self justifie by any force of its own . and all these points do our writers generally maintain against the papists ; yet never , that i know , was any papist so shamelesse ( and yet shamelesse enough are they ) as to condemn them therefore for socinian hereticks , or to charge them to agree with socinus and his followers in all points concerning the doctrine of justification . again it is by socinus held and maintained , that m justification consists in remission of sinnes , which for my part i deem erroneous , and suppose that elsewhere i have evidently shewed it so to be ; howbeit n calvine , o beza , p olevian , q ursine , r zanchie , ſ piscator , t pareus , u musculus , x bullinger , y fox , and divers others of great note and name , yea z whole synods of ours are found so to say ; and yet were these men never yet , that i ever heard or read , for so saying condemned as hereticks , much lesse as blasphemous hereticks , but had in high esteem , as their worth , parts and works well deserved , by those that therein dissented from them . i will adde but one instance more , socinus in the very entrance into his treatise of christ the saviour affirmeth , that a god might if he had pleased , without breach of his justice , have pardoned mans sinne freely , without any satisfaction required : and the same he b after again presseth and prosecuteth in his ensuing discourses . whether this be an errour or no , i stand not now to discusse . c vorstius herein concurred with socinus ; and d is for the same reproved by tossanus ; grotius likewise for e affirming the same is f taxed by ravenspergerus ; g defended by vossius , who citeth divines not a few , both old and new , saying the same : and it is maintained , to passe by all others , by h calvine , i musculus , k zanchie , l grineus , faius , m casman , n tilenus , o franzius , p smiglesius , and our reverend d r q twisse ; yet i am perswaded that no wise or discreet man at least will hence conclude any of these to be therefore socinian hereticks . and m r walker might do well to be better advised before he charge his christian brethren and fellow-labourers in the work of gods ministerie , with these odious imputations of heresie and blasphemie , ( then which what can be more hainous , more hideous , being taints of the deepest die ? ) upon such weak and unjustifiable grounds as these are . to conclude , if any shall demand of me why i have undertaken this office ( which from some , i know , i shall have small thanks for ) and why i thrust my finger needlessely into the fire ? the answer is ready from what already hath been said ; i am the onely surviver for ought i know ( for whether m r hicks be still living or no , i am not certain ) of those that were on m r wotton's part entrusted and employed in this businesse , and i could not therefore do lesse for so worthy a servant of god , and mine ancient acquaintance ; whom i alwayes reverenced while he lived as a man deserving singular respect for his pietie and learning , and zeal for gods cause , which r his works left behind him do sufficiently manifest , and will testifie to ensuing posteritie , and both do and shall still honour deservedly the memorie of him now deceased ; and at rest , i doubt not , with the lord , enjoying the reward of his religious pains taken in his masters work ; then to testifie what i then heard and saw , was a party in , and subscribed to with others ; and to second the pious intents of his sonne , who treadeth carefully in his fathers commendable steps , desirous to publish what in his fathers papers he found for the vindicating of his postumous name and reputation , as dear unto him as his own , with this preface and postscript adjoyned thereunto . i say no more , but wish onely veritatem cum charitate , that truth may with charitie be pursued on all parts . so grant , good lord , for thy christs sake , now and ever . amen . finis . notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a67122-e120 * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , homer . od. χ * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . plut. de serae numin . vindict . notes for div a67122-e290 the occasion . mr walkers charge his challenge . * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , mortuum etiam haud sustineo amicum prodere , eurip. apud dion . prus . orat . 37 * heb. 11.4 . notes for div a67122-e2750 charge . errour 1. answer . errour 2. answer . errour 3. answer . errour 4. answer . errour 5. answer . errour 6. answer . errour 7. answer . notes for div a67122-e4440 a fr. amboesius in praefat. apol . pro petr. ab. b beatus rhenan . ad tertull. calce admonit . ad lect. c joannes cornub. apud quercetan . in notis ad abeilard . d bern. ep . 192. e idem ep . 190. f idem ep. 188. g idem ep. 193. h abeilardus in apologia operibus praefixa : & epistolarum l. 2. ep . 20. et in apolog. altera apud berengarium ejusdem discipulum ep . 17. contra bern. p. 308. i legantur bernardi epist . 195 , 196 , 240. & in cant. serm . 55 , & 56. sed & illyric . catalog . test. verit. lib. 15. p. 1531. a calv. in relat . & refut . error . servet . artic . 1. p. 607. col . 2. b ibid. 657. col . 2. c ibid. d ibid. p. 658. c. 1. e ibid. p. 657. c. 1. f ibid. p. 658. c. 1. g ibid. p. 656. c. 2. h ibid. p. 609. c. 1. art . 29. & pag. 658. c. 1. i ibid. p. 657. c. 1. k pag. 609. c. 2. art . 37. & p. 547. c. 1. l pag. 650. c. 2. m pag. 649. c. 2. n pag. 658. c. 1. o pag. 657. c. 2. p pag. 658. c. 1. q pag. 658. c. 2. r pag. 652. c. 2. ſ pag. 655. c. 1. t pag. 652. c. 2. u pag. 658. c. 2. v pag. 656. c. 1. x pag. 658. c. 2. z pag. 653. c. 1. * pag. 654. c. 2. a pag. 651. c. 2. & 654. c. 1. b pag. 655. c. 2. c pag. 655. c. 2. & p. 658. c. 1. d socin . in evang. joan . c. 1. v. 1. p. 4 , 5. e epiphan . haer . 69. & aug. haer . 49. f socin . in joan. 1.1 . p. 7. & ad cuteni object . art . 8. g epiphan . haer . 71. & aug. haer . 44 h socin . in joan. 1.14 . p. 35 , 36. i socin . de christo servatore l. 2. c. 1. & 2. per totum . k ibid. l. 1. c. 1. p. 145 & l. 3. c. 2. p. 317 , & 321. l ibid. l. 1. c. 7. p. 76. & l. 2. c. 2. p. 120. & de offic. christ art . 38 , 39. m de christ . servat . l. 3. c. 5. & de justificat . synop . 1 p 4. n de christ. serv. l. 1. c. 1. initio . o de christ . serv. l. 1. c. 2. de offic. christ . art . 5. ad object cuteni , art . 9. p ad cuteni object . art . 14. q de christ . serv. l. 1. c. 3. de offic. christ . art . 35. r de offic. christ. art . 36 , 37. & de christ. serv. l. 1. c. 5. ſ de christ. serv. l. 1. c. 6. & de offic . christ art . 45. t de christ. serv. l. 4. c. 11. de offic. christ. art . 42. ad cuteni object . art . 17. u de fide & oper . ad q. ● p. 58. & ad q. 3. p. 60. ● in notis a● dial. n. n n. 16. x de christ . serv. l. 4. c. ● p. 462. c. 2. & p. 463. c. y de fide & oper . ad q. p. 62. a a sente●tia ex co● promisso aditi appelari non posse , saep● rescriptu● est . anto● imp. cod. l. tit . 55. leg . a sententi● arbitri pa●tium volu●tate electi non appellatur , jo. al. dicaeolog● l. 3. c. 55. n. 15. ab electis judicibus appell●re non putamus lic●re , b●rn . ap 180. b john 9. c aug. haer . ●2 . d aug. haer . e epiphan . haer . 23. f idem haer . 24. & aug haer . 4. g epiph. haer 44. & aug. haer . 23. h aug. haer . 59. i aug. ibid. k epiph. haer . 66. l act. 23.8 . m calv. ad● psychopann● n in concio●ne coram jacobo roge . o 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , arist . topi● l. 8. c. 4. ex falsis fa● sum , verúm que aliquando sequetur . ex veris poterit nil nisi vera sequi a carnali populo licuit in suis factis gloriari , nobis autem non licet nisi in cruce d. n. j. c. b solùm licet nobis christi facta narrare , qui omnia opera pro nobis operatus est , & legem implendo pro nobis , cùm non possemus id praestare , servet . l. 2. de leg. & evang . apud calv. p. 655. col . 1. c est verbum hoe justificationis juridicum , in quo jure nemo justus efficitur , sed pronunciatur , socin . de justif . fragm . sect . 1. p. 45. d in hac disputatione non significat justum facere , idem ibid. e justificari nihil aliud est , quàm pro justis haberi , de justif . synops . 1. p. 6. justificat , i. justos pronunciat , de justif . thes . 4. p. 9. certissimum est justificationem in sacris literis aliud nihil significare quàm justum pronunciare , & pro justo habere , idem in notis ad dial. n. n. n. 18. & n. 55. f autore dialogi saepius notat , quia justificationem cum vitae sanctimonia sive justitia & sanctitate , quâ quis praeditus est , confundit , num. 1. n. 18. & n. 31. & n. 46. & n. 55. & n. 59. g credere jesum revera esse christum dei filium , &c. non est revera ea fides , quae nos deo ad vitam aeternam gratos efficit , de fide & oper . quaest . 1. p. 55. neutrum horum , credere jesum esse messiam , et verbis ejus fidem adhibere , est fides illa quâ revera justificamur , ibid. q. 2. p. 57.58 . fides , quâ credimus dei promissa esse vera , non est revera ea fides quâ justificamur , in notis ad dial. n. 16. h fides , sive obedientia quam christo praestamus , nec efficiens nec meritoria causa est justificationis atque aeternae salutis , nec eam per se meretur . de justif . thes . 5. & ad cuteni object . art . 8. & de fide & oper . q. 4. p. 62. credere vera esse quae deus vel christus dixit , non est fides quâ justificamur . de christ. serv. 1.4 . c. 11. p. 554. c. 1. & p. 558. c. 2. i ex merito ipsorum operum nequaquam justificamur , de justif . thes . 5. non sunt meritoria , & suā vi hominem justificantia , de justif . fragm , sect . 7. p. 50. k nulla esse opera , quae tanti sint , ut propter ipsorum meritum justificari possimus , de justif . fragm . sect . 7. p. 48. l fides in christum non propriâ vi justificat , de christo servas . l. 4. c. 11. p. 560. c. 1. m formalis justificatio nostra coram deo fuit & semper erit remissio peccatorum nostrorum , socin . de fide & oper . q. 1. p. 56. justificatio nostra nihil aliud reipsâ est , quàm peccatorum deletio , ibid . q. 3. p. 60. n justitiam paulo nihil esse , quàm remissionē peccatorum calvin . in rom. 4.6 . o posira est omnis justificatio in in remissione peccatorum , beza de coena dom. p. 175. p justificatio consistit in gratuita remissione peocatorum , olev . in rom. 4.6 . q idem sunt justificatio & remissio peccatorum , ursin . explic . catech . q. 60. sect . 3. r idem sunt , remissionem peccatorum consequi , & justificari , zanch. miscel . l. 2. de remiss . pecc . thes . 10. p. 329. ſ justitia imputata nihil est aliud quàm remissio peccatorum , piscat . thes . vol. 1. loc . 15. thes . 14. t consistit in remissione , tectione , non-imputatione peccatorum : haec est ejus forma privativa & positiva , pareus in rom. 46. observ . 2. deus proprié justificat , cúm absolvit gratìs , remittens peccata propter meritum christi , ibid. ad v. 5. obs . 3. justificationis causa formalis est remissio peccatorum , idem cont . bellarm. de justif . l. 2. c. 1. p. 365. u justificatio nihil est aliud quàm remissio peccatorum parta per sanguinem christi , muscul . in joan. 3.18 . x quid aliud est justificatio quàm peccatorum remissio ? bullinger . in rom. 4.8 . y justificatio constat propriè peccatorum remissione , fox de christ . gratìs justif . l. 3. p. 383. z credimus totam nostram justitiam positam esse in peccatorum nostrorum remissione , confess . gallicanâ , art . 18. credimus peccatorum nostrorum remissione unicâ totam nostram justitiam coram deo contineri , confess . belgicâ , art . 23. a potest deus de suo jure , quantum velit , dimittere , socin . de christo serv. l. 1. c. 1. p. 4. c. 2. sicut potuisset homines , licèt peccantes , morti aeternae non mancipare , sic ex illius imperio eximere , & quidem jure , suâ solâ voluntate potest , ibid. pag. 5. c. 1. b potuit deus peccata nobis jure ignoscere , nullâ à quoquam pro ipsis verâ satisfactione acceptâ , ibid. lib. 3. cap. 1. pag. 306. cap. 1. & pag. 309. cap. 1. c in scripto poster . ad tossanum . d in rescript . ad vorstium . e de satisfactione christi adv . socin . c. 3. f in judicio de grotii libr. g. 2. p. 2. & g. 3. g in respons . ad judic . ravensp . cap. 28. h poterat nos deus verbo aut nutu redimere , nisi aliter nostrâ causâ visum est , calv. in joan . 15.13 . i si sic justus est deus , ut sine detrimento justitiae suae misericors esse nequeat ; si sic , inquam , justitiae suae obstrictus est , ut non liceat ipsi , quorum vult misereri & à peccatis absolvere teos , quod tamen permultos sibi principes & magistratus liberè permittere videmus , consequitur , non tantum illi potestatis esse in ipsius creaturas , quantum est homini in suos subditos , quâ re quid potest magìs impium cogitari ? muscul . in loc. commun . de justif . c. 3. k deus servare nos poterat solo suo imperio , peccata simpliciter ex sua misericordia condonando , zanch. de incarnat . christ . l. 2. c. 3. quest . 1. l though it be not lawfull for a man to justifie the wicked , yet god may do it , that is above all law : and the reason is , because god hath right and power to forgive sinnes , because they are committed chiefly against him . grineus and faius , willet on rom. 4.5 . quest . 14. n. 2. m concedimus justitiam punientem peccata , & misericordiam ea condonantem , utramque esse liberrimae dei voluntatis effectum , casman . anti-socin . part . 2. c. 1. n restituere five recreare hominem non minùs liberum deo fuit , quàm creare : peccatum . solo imperio tanquam nubem tollere poterat , tilen . disput . de incarn . fil . dei. o potuisset omnino deus primos parentes & omnes homines ex mortis imperio eximere & in gratiam recipere , solâ voluntate citra mediatoris satisfactionem ullam , nisi priùs & antè protulisset decretum suum comminatorium , franz . disp . de sacrif . 14. thes . 63. p utrumque deus potuit , & absque ulla satisfactione , & cum satisfactione peccata nobis remittere : de facto tamen eligit hoc posterius , smigles . de satisfact . christ. adv . smalcium cap. 11. q sine dubio potuit deus , si sic ei visum fuisset , adae peccatum , aut ipsi condonare , aut in ipso tantùm ulcisci , posterísque omnibus gratiam salutarem , eo neutiquam obstante , liberè gratificari , twiss . in vindiciis gratiae , potest . ac provid . dei. de praedest . lib. 1. part . 1. sect . 4. digress . 4. cap. 3. pag. 39. col . 2. r an answer to a popish pamphlet , or articles tending to prove the protestants religion to consist of palpable absurdities and notorious errours . a triall of the romish clergies title to the church against a. d. a defence of mr perkins his reformed catholick , against w b. runne from rome , of the necessitie of departure from the church of rome . sermons on part of the first chapter of s. johns gospel . de reconciliatione peccatoris libri 4. a vindication of dr. sherlock's sermon concerning the danger of corrupting the faith by philosophy in answer to some socinian remarks / by william sherlock ... sherlock, william, 1641?-1707. 1697 approx. 81 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 23 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2004-11 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a59900 wing s3371 estc r21027 12048983 ocm 12048983 53116 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a59900) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 53116) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 823:12) a vindication of dr. sherlock's sermon concerning the danger of corrupting the faith by philosophy in answer to some socinian remarks / by william sherlock ... sherlock, william, 1641?-1707. [4], 40 p. printed for w. rogers ..., london : 1697. reproduction of original in huntington library. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng sherlock, william, 1641?-1707. -danger of corrupting the faith by philosophy. faith -early works to 1800. socinianism. 2003-11 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2003-12 spi global keyed and coded from proquest page images 2004-09 melanie sanders sampled and proofread 2004-09 melanie sanders text and markup reviewed and edited 2004-10 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion a vindication of dr. sherlock's sermon concerning the danger of corrupting the faith by philosophy . in answer to some socinian remarks . by william sherlock , d. d. dean of st. paul's , master of the temple , and chaplain in ordinary to his majesty . london : printed for w. rogers , at the sun against st. dunstan's church in fleetstreet . mdcxcvii . to the right honourable sir edward clarke , lord mayor : and to the honourable court of aldermen . my lord , i beg leave to present your lordship with the vindication of my sermon lately published by the order of your court , against the cavils , calumnies , and wilful misrepresentations of a socinian writer . the argument is of that great consequence that it deserves to be defended ; and this pamphleteer has so rudely reflected upon the honour and sincerity of the court , for their order to print it , that i look'd upon my self under a double obligation , to defend so important a truth , and in that to justify your lordship's order . i pray god rebuke that perverse spirit of infidelity and heresy which is gone abroad in the world , and secure the faith of christians from all the arts and insinuations of impostors . that god would bless your lordship's government , and preserve this great city from all temporal and spiritual evils ▪ is the hearty prayer of , my lord , your lordship's , most obedient servant , william sherlock . a vindication of dr. sherlock's sermon before my lord mayor , &c. when i receiv'd the threatning and boasting message from some busy factors of the socinian fraternity , what work they would make with my late sermon before my lord mayor , concerning the danger of corrupting the faith by philosophy , my greatest concernment was , how to meet with their answer , which usually comes last to my hands , and how to bear the drudgery of reading it ; for their arguments have been spent long since , and that little wit they had is now degenerated into railing . that scurrilous treatment they have lately given to so many excellent persons , especially to that great man the bishop of worcester , is a fair warning to all who dare oppose them , what they must expect : and besides the experience of their many former civilities , i had more than ordinary reason to expect it now , they being touch'd in a very sensible part , without any other defence to make : and this author has not deceiv'd my expectations ; for upon a perusal of his remarks , i find nothing of argument , a very little wit , and abundance of railing . his wit and railing be to himself ; but i am sorry i can find nothing that looks so like an argument , as to administer occasion for any useful discourse . this there is no help for ; if men will write books without any arguments to be answered , there is nothing to be done , but only to shew that they have offered nothing to the purpose , or that needs an answer : and this will be done in a few words ; for he has disputed at large against what i never said nor thought , but has not one word against any part of the argument of that sermon . his title-page pretends a great zeal for the doctrine of the catholick church , and of the church of england , concerning the blessed trinity : which is as true , as that richard baldwin printed this pamphlet , who has publickly disowned it in print : but though a socinian conscience can digest such godly cheats , as a piece of wit and artifice , yet a wise man would not venture on them , because mankind hate to be abused , and grow very jealous of men of tricks . and yet had we to deal with modest men , it would be thought a little of the latest for a socinian to talk of defending the doctrine of the catholick church , and of the church of england , concerning the blessed trinity : for their cant about real and nominal trinitarians , and three infinite minds and spirits , is too well known to pass for so much as a jest any longer ; and till they can defend the judgment of their disinteressed person a little better than by scorning the answer , which they will never be able to make any other reply to , it were time for them , could they find any thing else to say in the room of it , to let that alone . and yet this is what he would bring this present dispute to , if he knew how : he often flirts at three infinite minds and spirits , though there is no such expression in the whole sermon ; but still he says i intimate this in asserting a real trinity : now if three infinite minds and spirits be essential to the notion of a real trinity , ( as his inference supposes ) it is the best vindication that could possibly be thought of for that expression : for not to believe a real trinity , is to deny the father to be a true and real father , and the son to be a true and real son , and the holy ghost to be a true and real spirit ; and this is to deny the catholick faith of father , son , and holy ghost , which cannot be a real trinity , cannot be really three , if each of them be not truly and really what is signified by those names . but though that phrase of three infinite minds and spirits was used very innocently by me , only to signify three infinite intelligent persons , each of which is infinite mind and spirit , and neither of them is each other , which is the catholick faith ; yet i freely acknowledge , as i have done more than once , that it is liable to a very heretical tritheistick sense , if understood absolutely , and in that sense i always disowned it : and it is a sign men have very little to say , when they make such a noise with an inconvenient form of speech , though expounded to a catholick sense : but the margin will direct the reader where he may find the true state of this controversy . but what is all this to my sermon ? which neither explains nor defends any particular hypothesis about the trinity , but is a general vindication of the christian faith from the pretences of reason and philosophy . but , the doctrine of the catholick church , and of the church of england , concerning the blessed trinity , explained and asserted ▪ against the dangerous heterodoxies in a sermon by dr william sherlock , &c and , remarks upon dr. william sherlock ' s ( false and treacherous ) defence and explication of some principal articles of faith , &c. were more specious titles , and both so good , that they knew not which to chuse , and therefore adorned the title-page with one , and the frontispiece with the other , that if ever a poor sermon was confuted with titles ( which have a strange magick in them ) this is utterly undone . but it is time to consider his remarks , which exactly answer the title , that they are nothing to the purpose . i am not at leisure to follow him in all his harangues ; and his wit and buffoonry i despise too much to take notice of it ; and when it appears that a man has discharged all his artillery of witticisms against his own mistakes , he is witty at his own cost too . he has made an abstract or summary ( as he calls it , p. 4. ) of my sermon , but in his own method , his own words , and directly contrary to my sense : that is , he has abstracted from every thing that is in the sermon , that no man living by his abstract can tell what the subject or drift of the sermon was , or any one argument contained in it : i 'm sure i who made the sermon , knew nothing of it but by mere guess , as i read it in his abstract ; and would those men who read these remarks , be but so fair and honest as to read the sermon too , there would need no other answer . the first branch of my sermon in his abstract ( p. 8. ) is this ; philosophy and reason are the only things which those men adore , who would have no god at all . and what makes some men atheists and infidels , even the philosophick tincture , and their adherence to natural reason , the same makes others to be hereticks , that is , to be arians , socinians , and pelagians . now any one would think that this were one of the heads of my sermon ; which is so far from truth , that there is no such proposition to be found there , but the contrary to this is to be found there in express words . in the first page of my sermon there are these words : what some men call philosophy and reason ( and there is nothing so foolish and absurd which some men will no call so ) is the only thing which those men adore , who would either have no god , or a god and religion of their own making . and what attempts some have made to undermine all religion , and others to corrupt and transform the whole frame of the christian religion , upon a pretence of its contradicting natural reason and philosophy , is too well known to need a proof . and soon after ( p. 2. ) this vain pretence to reason and philosophy ; the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the vain deceit in my text , which is applicable to all vain spurious philosophy , as well as platonism , and is so meant by the apostle . and p. 7. truly that which makes some men infidels , makes others hereticks , that is , a vain pretence to philosophy . now let any man judge , whether this be to charge atheism , infidelity , and heresy , upon reason and philosophy , or upon what some men call reason and philosophy , which may be very foolish and absurd ? whether the pretences of contradicting reason and philosophy , and the vain pretences to philosophy , signify reason and philosophy ? this is wilful misrepresentation ; for it is impossible he should mistake , i having expresly distinguisht between these vain pretences to philosophy , and true philosophy , ( p. 3. ) whoever considers what an enemy these vain pretences to philosophy have always been to religion , will see need enough for this caution ( of the text. ) true reason , and the true knowledge of nature , which is true philosophy , would certainly direct us to the acknowledgment and worship of that supream being , who made the world , and yet we know , there never was an atheist without some pretence to philosophy : though it seems , as this author tells us , ( p. 9. ) there has been an arch-heretick , even socinus himself without it ; and so may all his disciples be too , and yet be vain pretenders to reason and philosophy ; however , i am as orthodox in this point , as my lord bacon himself , whom he objects against me , whose sense i exactly expressed , though not his words . but nothing can more fully declare my sense in this particular , than what the reader may find ( p. 10. ) 2dly . let us now consider what great reason we have to reject all the vain pretences to reason and philosophy , when opposed to a divine revelation . for that i● all the apostle intends in this caution , not to discourage the use of reason , or the study of philosophy , which are great improvements , and a delightful entertainment of human minds , and with a wise and prudent conduct may be very serviceable to religion too ; but we must not set up any conclusions in philosophy against the christian faith ; nor corrupt the faith with a mixture of philosophy ; nor reject any revealed truths for want of natural ideas to conceive them by . nothing can be plainer than this ; that i am very far from condemning the sober use of reason and philosophy , though with the apostle , i will not allow them to oppose the authority of a divine revelation . so that our author need not be so terribly frighted , as if this innocent sermon were a designed revenge against the oxford heads , the learning of the place , and philosophy it self , ( p. 1. ) ( though the apostle indeed will not allow philosophy alone to make decrees in articles of faith ) ; here is no danger of setting up folly and falshood ( which would be to encroach upon his province ) or of writing a second moriae encomium , or praise of folly. here is no danger , that the articles of faith should disagree with true reason and philosophy , though a vain appearance , a socinian philosophy , may contradict the articles of faith. nay my lord mayor , and the court of aldermen , ( p. 9. ) notwithstanding this sermon , may very safely send their children to cambridge or oxford , if they get good tutors for them , who will reach them no socinian logick or philosophy : and which is more , we may confute atheists and infidels by reason and philosophy , ( p. 8. ) without being at the charge of buying a massy quarto bible , with clasps , and bosses , to knock'em down with : as he very wittily , and with great reverence to the holy scriptures , expresses it : for reason and philosophy may confute atheists and infidels , though they have no authority to make or unmake articles of faith , as to matters of pure revelation . nay more than this still ( if it be possible to please him ) , we will allow reason and philosophy to confute heresies , though not to judge absolutely in matters of faith : which i suppose is the reason , why , as he observes ( p. 9. ) hereticks , many of them , are no less bitter against this same ( damnable ) philosophy : they protest , especially in their latin works , that 't is this philosophy that corrupted and debauched divinity . damnable is a very fashionable word , and shews him to be well bred , and to have good acquaintance ; but it is a very great truth , that though catholick christians would never build their faith on philosophy , yet hereticks have always had great reason to rail at true philosophy , as i observed in my sermon ( p. 10. ) the importunity of hereticks did very often engage the catholick fathers in philosophical disputes ; but this they did , not to explain the christian mysteries by philosophy but only to shew , that as incomprehensible as these mysteries are , the philosophy of hereticks , and their objections against these articles , were very absurd . and such disputes as these may sometimes be absolutely necessary , and of great use to shame these vain pretences to philosophy , while we do not put the trial of our faith upon this issue . and thus much for his first proposition , ( for it is none of mine ) that reason and philosophy are the two idols of atheists and hereticks , and that make atheists to be atheists , and hereticks to be hereticks , ( p. 12. ) his second proposition ( ibid. ) runs thus . that to ascertain the very and true faith , we must attend only to that meaning of scripture which the words and phrases do imply : rejecting all mixture of reason and philosophy in our disputes about religion , and our inquiries about the meaning of scripture . now let any reader try , whether he can find any such proposition as this in all my sermon , either in words or sense . i could not for some time guess , what shadow of pretence he could have for charging such a proposition on me : i did indeed in some principal articles distinguish between faith and philosophy ; between what is revealed in scripture , and what philosophical disputes , which the scripture takes no notice of , have been raised about them , and warned all men from mixing and corrupting the faith with philosophy ; but does this forbid us expounding scripture agreeable to reason and common sense , and philosophy too , where sense , and reason , and philosophy , are proper judges ? they are not the supreme and absolute judges in matters of pure revelation ; but does it hence follow , that they cannot judge of their proper objects ? do i any where say , that we must always expound the scripture to a literal sense ? that when christ is called a way , a door , a rock , we must understand this literally ? and yet this is plainly what he would have to be my sense , as his beloved instance of transubstantiation shews . in this sermon i have given no rules for expounding scripture , which in time i hope i may . but what i assert is this , that when by all those methods which wise men observe in expounding any writing , we have found out what the true sense of scripture must be , we must not reject such doctrines meerly because natural reason cannot conceive or comprehend them . that revelation as to such matters as are knowable only by revelation , must serve instead of sense , natural ideas , and natural reason , ( p. 11. ) this gives a plain answer to all his cant about transubstantiation , from our saviour's words , this is my body , ( p. 12. ) for is there no way of knowing what is bread , and what is flesh , but by revelation ? is not this the proper object of sense and reason ? and then it does not come within my rule ; for sense and reason must judge of their proper objects , though revelation must serve us instead of sense and reason , as to such matters as can be known only by revelation ; that is , as i expresly add , we must upon the authority of revelation believe things which we do not see , things which we have no natural notion or conception of , things which are not evident to natural reason : as for instance , if it be revealed in scripture that god has an eternal word , his only-begotten son ; and that in time this word was made flesh and dwelt among us ; this son of god became man ; that god sent forth his son made of a woman , made under the law : though neither sense nor natural ideas , nor meer natural reason , give us any notice of it ; yet if we will own a revelation , we must believe it upon the sole authority of revelation : but though revelation in such cases be sense and reason to us , because we have no other means of knowledge ; yet sense must judge of the natural objects of sense , and reason of the objects of natural reason ; but revelation was never intended to unteach us what sense and natural reason evidently teach , and therefore it cannot teach us , that bread is flesh , and wine is blood. but this socinian is got so far towards popery , that he will not allow sense to be judge of this matter , whether the bread be transubstantiated or not , and that for a very pleasant reason ; his words are these , ( p. 13. ) he cannot have recourse to sense in the case , 't is only reason and philosophy can help him out : for though the apostles , who saw and tasted that it was bread only , and not flesh , might have appealed also to their senses ; yet we that never saw or tasted the substance which jesus gave then to the disciples , can know by reason and philosophy only , by nothing else , that it was not his flesh and blood : that is , i can't know by sense that christ gave bread and wine , and not flesh and blood to his disciples , because i did not see and taste my self that very substance that christ gave to his disciples : but can i judge by sense that what i my self see and taste in the lords supper , is bread and wine after consecration , not flesh and blood ? for that is the question between us and the church of rome ; not , whether we receive the same now which christ gave to the apostles in the first institution ( which they take for granted , and to question which , is meer scepticism ) but what that change is , which the words of consecration make in the elements to this day ; and if we cannot judge of this by sense , the church of rome have a better plea for themselves than i thought they had . and if i can't now judge by my own senses what it was christ gave to his apostles , and what they saw and tasted , i fear it will much weaken some other very good arguments against transubstantiation . but how will this socinian , who rejects the evidence of sense , confute transubstantiation ? why that is easily done by reason and philosophy ; as thus , the text expresly says , it was bread which he blessed and brake , and called it his body ; therefore it was his body in sign and signification , not in reality . all this is arguing , 't is reason that convinces us , not sense , that the substance he divided to them was indeed bread , not his flesh , which he neither blessed nor brake . this is reasoning indeed ; but did i ever reject reasoning and arguing about the meaning of scripture words and phrases , and the true sense and interpretation of scripture ? is there no difference between reasoning about the sense of scripture , and setting up the conclusions of meer natural reason and philosophy against the plain and evident doctrines of scripture ? it is certain i made a manifest distinction between them , p. 9. in all these cases we are concerned to enquire what the true sense of the article is ; for this the scripture teaches , and so far our faith is concerned , and these are not only justifiable , but necessary disputes , if the true faith be necessary . and such were the disputes of the catholick fathers with the sabellian , arian , and photinian hereticks , &c. so that i allow of arguing and reasoning as much as he does ; and add , but that which we are to beware of , is not to mix philosophy with our faith , nor to admit of any meer philosophical objections against the faith , nor to attempt any explication of these mysteries , beyond what the scriptures and the faith and practice of the catholick church will justify . this distinction he knew very well , but very honestly dissembles it , and endeavours to impose upon his readers , as if reasoning and arguing about the sense of scripture , and resolving our faith into meer natural reason and philosophy , were the same thing . he was aware what answer would be given to this , and therefore in the very next paragraph he confutes his own reasoning from scripture , and proves that the text does not confute transubstantiation : but if our preacher , says he , believes it was only bread , because the text it self calls it bread ( which was his own argument ) , let him consider , that seeing what was called bread before christ blessed it , after the blessing he calls it his body ; we cannot know by sense or by the text , but by reason and philosophy only , that it was not changed ( by the blessing ) into what now he calls it , namely , his body . but if this signifies bread , then . this is my body , signifies , this bread is my body ; and if bread be his body , then his sacramental body is not flesh : but i do not intend to dispute this point with him , but only observe , that to set up his reason and philosophy to be absolute judges in matters of faith , he will not allow either sense or scripture to confute transubstantiation . it cannot but give all sober christians a just indignation , to see the most sacred and venerable mysteries perpetually ridicul'd at this prophane rate ! in the reign of king james there was a pamphlet published to reconcile men to transubstantiation , by representing the doctrine of the trinity to the full as absurd , and chargeable with as many contradictions as transubstantiation it self : this was then charged on the papists , and they were sufficiently expos'd for it ; but a great man has lately informed us , that it was writ by a socinian , to make men papists or socinians , as it should happen ; which was a glorious design at that time of day , for men who take it ill if you will not allow them to be protestants , and to enjoy the liberty of protestants : for they could not but see that popery was then grown very fashionable and tempting by the favour and frowns of a popish prince ; and that the generality of christians did so firmly believe the doctrine of the trinity , that could they have persuaded them , as they endeavoured , that transubstantiation was as reasonable a doctrine as the trinity , it was much more likely that they would turn papists than socinians . instead of popery men are now running into the other extremes of atheism , deism , and a contempt of all reveal'd religion , and that upon a pretence of making mere natural reason and philosophy their sole guide and judge ; and now our socinians have a new game to play ; and if they dare not absolutely deny the authority of revelation ( which in many instances they have shewn a good inclination to ) , yet they give a superior authority to reason , which will serve as well , and make less noise than to reject all revelation . and if you shew them how absurd this is , to pretend to own a divine revelation , and to make revelation submit to mere natural reason and philosophy , they presently take sanctuary in transubstantiation , and defend it against the evidence of sense , and the authority of scripture , to make reason and philosophy the supreme judge in matters of faith ; and in the mean time matter not what becomes of religion , what advantage they give either to popery or deism , so they can but expose the faith of the trinity . he has given us a little specimen of it here ; but the same author , as far as i can guess from the same words and the same thoughts , has with his usual civility attack'd my lord bishop of sarum upon this argument , which upon this occasion i shall briefly consider . his lordship in vindication of the christian mysteries , with great reason rejects transubstantiation out of the number of mysteries , because it contradicts sense in the object of sense ; his words are these : transubstantiation must not be a mystery , because there is against it the evidence of sense in an object of sense : for sense plainly represents to us the bread and wine to be still the same that they were before the consecration . now i cannot think this author in earnest in the two first answers he gives to this . his first answer is , that it is not pretended by the papists , that the bread and wine have received any the least change in what is an object of sense . this is a discovery worthy its author , that the papists don 't deny that they see , and feel , and taste , and smell the sensible qualities of bread and wine : for who ever charged them with such a contradiction to sense as this ? but our senses judge of the substances of things by their sensible qualities ; judge that to be bread and wine , which has all the qualities of bread and wine : and therefore to say , as the papists do , that what our sight , and taste , and smell tell us has all the qualities of bread and wine , is not bread and wine , does not indeed contradict our senses as to sensible qualities , but contradicts that judgment our senses make of the natures of things from their sensible qualities : and this is that contradiction to sense which the bishop justly charges upon transubstantiation ; as is evident in his very words . in his second answer he disputes against the infallibility of our senses , as he calls it , by such common arguments as every freshman knows how to answer ; only i do not remember , that the delusions of our dreams used to be objected against the evidence of sense ; but suppose our senses may deceive us in some few instances wherein both sense and reason can correct the mistake , must they therefore deceive in the nature of bread and wine ? can he prove , that they ever deceive us with qualities and accidents without a substance ? for that is the cheat of transubstantiation : it is not pretended , as he observed in his first answer , that our senses deceive us in the colour , or figure , or taste , or smell of bread and wine ; and therefore all his instances of the deception of our senses are nothing to the purpose ; but let him give us any one instance of the other kind , if he can , and then we will believe transubstantiation in contradiction to our senses . but does he consider , what the consequence of this argument is ? he will not allow it a good argument against transubstantiation , that it contradicts sense , because our senses may deceive us in the objects of sense ( which by the way makes his instance of the delusions of dreams , which are not the objects of sense , very impertinent ; ) now if contradiction to sense be not a good objection , because sense is not infallible , what will become of his great argument of contradiction to reason ? for all men confess , that reason is not so infallible as sense is , as is evident from all the disputes and clashings of reason , and those absurdities and contradictions which contending parties mutually charge upon each other ; and if a contradiction to fallible sense be not a good objection against the truth of any thing , how comes a contradiction to much more fallible reason to be so unanswerable an objection ? and then we may much more safely believe a trinity in unity , notwithstanding all their pretended contradictions to reason , than we can believe transubstantiation in contradiction to sense . but in his third answer , he seems to be in good earnest , and i shall consider it as such ; and it is this . transubstantiation is contradicted by sense , saith his lordship , in an object of sense ; therefore 't is a false mystery . this is as much as to say , that a faculty or power judging of its proper object , always judges truly , and must determine our belief . he must say this , or his reasoning is nothing . i ask now of what faculty or power is almighty god the object . he will answer , god is the object , not of sense , which discerns him not , but of reason , which discovers , and sees this most glorious being . therefore reason , by his lordship 's own argument , judges infallibly concerning god , and must determine our belief about him : we must hearken to reason , when it finds contradictions in what men affirm concerning god. now notwithstanding his vain brags , and his triumphant challenge to the bishop , a very little skill will answer this argument . for , 1. the bishop need not say , because it is not true , that every faculty and power judges as certainly of its proper object , as sense does , and then his argument is quite lost : for if sense judges more certainly than reason , then a manifest contradiction to sense is a more unanswerable objection , than any appearing and pretended contradictions to reason . i believe this author is the first man who ever thus universally equalled the evidence of reason to that of sense ; or that ever affirmed , that reason could judge infallibly of god. and if reason may be mistaken ( which i shall take for granted ) especially in the infinite and incomprehensible nature of god , some appearing contradictions , or what some men will call contradictions , are not a sufficient reason to reject a revelation , and to disbelieve what god tells us of himself , and his own nature . 2 dly . whatever certainty we allow to our faculties in judging of their proper objects , we must extend it no farther than to what belongs to the judgment of that faculty : the same thing may be the object of different faculties , as it is of our different senses ; but every faculty , and every sense , judges of nothing in any object , but only what belongs to it self . all the objects of sense are the objects of reason too ; but sense judges of nothing but what belongs to sense , and reason of what belongs to reason ; and reason can judge no farther of any object , than it is knowable by reason ; and not only the divine , but even created nature has such secrets and mysteries as are not knowable by reason ; and therefore it is manifest ignorance or sophistry , to conclude from god's being the object of reason , therefore reason judges infallibly concerning god : for , not to dispute about the infallible judgment of reason , god is the object of reason , because reason can know something concerning god ; but god can be the object of reason no farther than he is knowable by reason ; and therefore if there be any thing which natural reason cannot know of god ( as i hope this author himself will own ) , with respect to such matters god is not the object of reason , and reason cannot judge at all , much less judge infallibly concerning god. but as sense leaves room for reason in the same object , so reason leaves room for faith. but must we not hearken to reason when it finds contradictions in what men affirm concerning god ? yes , most certainly , as far as god is the object of reason , and knowable by reason , but no farther ; for in such matters as reason cannot judge of at all , it cannot judge of contradictions . sense and reason can judge of contradictions only for themselves , or as far as their judgment reaches , but may appear contradictions themselves to each other . as for instance : reason assures us that man consists of soul and body , which are closely united to each other , and yet the union of spirit and matter is no better than contradiction to the judgment of sense ; for sense knows no union but by contact , nor any contact but between bodies , which have extended and solid parts , that can touch each other ; so that an union without contact is one contradiction to the judgment of sense , and a contact without extended solid parts , which a spirit has not , is another ; and yet reason does not matter these contradictions to the judgment of sense , because sense is not the judge of such things : and it is the same case between reason and faith , which receives its information from a divine revelation , concerning such matters as are not knowable by natural reason : should reason contradict faith in such matters as reason is no judge of , this is no more an objection against the superior evidence and authority of faith , than the judgment of sense is against the evidence of reason ; such contradictions are not in the nature of things , but are owing to our ignorance of nature , and presumption in judging of what we cannot understand . the example he gives of such a contradiction to reason , is a trinity of persons , every one of which is perfect god , and yet all of them but one god ; but for my life , i cannot see this plain contradiction , that three persons , each of which has all the perfections of divinity , and is perfect god , should be so essentially united in the s●me one eternal and infinite nature , as to be but one god. this is not a contradiction in terminis , it is not three persons and but one person , or three gods and but one god , but three divine persons , and one god. if the unity of the godhead consisted in the unity of a person , i grant it would be a flat contradiction to say , three persons and one god , which would be equivalent to three gods and one god ; but if the unity of the godhead consists in the unity of nature , that there is but one eternal and infinite nature , which is the one god , and this unity , and identity of nature be perfectly and entirely preserved in three divine persons , it is so far from a contradiction to say , that three persons are one god , that it would be a contradiction to say , that three divine persons , who have the same one identical nature , should be more than one god ; for that is to say , that one divine nature , which can be but one god , is three gods. now this is all that natural reason tells us of the unity of the godhead , that there is , and can be , but one eternal infinite nature , which is but one god ; this we expresly teach , and therefore do not contradict reason ; but then scripture tells us , that there are three , father , son , and holy ghost , to whom the name and attributes of god , and therefore this one infinite undivided nature , belong . this reason boggles at , and socinians call a contradiction ; but it is such a contradiction , as sense would judge the union of spirit and matter to be : at most it is an imaginary contradiction in the subsistence of the divine nature , which reason knows nothing about , and therefore can make no judgment of ; and such appearing-contradictions are no objections , because they may be no contradictions ; as we are sure they are none , when the doctrines charged with these contradictions are taught in scripture . there is one distinction , which seems to me to set this matter in a clear light , and to answer all the pretences of contradictions ; and that is , the distinction between contradictions in logick and philosophy . a contradiction in logick , is when two propositions in express terms contradict each other ; and all men grant that both parts of such contradictions cannot be true , as that there are three gods , and but one god , which is to say , that there are , and that there are not three gods ; that there is , and that there is not , but one only god. a contradiction in philosophy , is when any thing is affirmed concerning the nature or essential properties of any being , which seems to contradict all the notions and ideas we have of nature in other beings , and such contradictions as these may be both true ; for the natures of things may be contrary to , and contradict each other and yet both of them be true and real beings . there are infinite instances of this in all nature ; the ideas of hot and cold , of white and black , of light and darkness , of solid and fluid bodies , of matter and spirit , are direct contradictions , in this notion of a contradiction , to each other : and had we known but one of these opposites by our natural ideas , and the other had been revealed to us , we might as justly have cried out of contradictions , as the socinians now do , when you mention a trinity of persons in the unity of the divine nature . for heat contradicts the idea of cold , and fluid of solid ; as much as three persons in the unity of nature , contradicts the unity of nature in the unity of a person : this latter indeed is the natural notion we have , that there is but one person in one subsisting intelligent nature ; for we have no example of any thing else , and therefore can have no natural idea of any other unity ; but this does not prove , that it cannot be otherwise ; for there may be oppositions and contrarieties in nature ; and did we but consider what an infinite distance and unlikeness there is between god and creatures , we should not think it reasonable to judge of the divine nature by the ideas of created nature . this is a very real and sensible distinction between contradictions in logick , and in nature and philosophy , and there is a certain way to know them : logical contradictions are always immediately reducible to is , and is not ; for they affirm and deny the same thing in the same sence : the contradictions in nature and philosophy are only the opposition and contrariety there is between the ideas of several beings , which can never be reduced to a contradiction in logick , but through ignorance or mistake , by changing the sense and use of words . let any socinian try the experiment in the doctrine of the trinity in unity , and reduce it to such a contradiction if he can . a trinity of persons in the unity of the divine nature , is a contradiction to that idea we have of the unity of person and nature in created beings , but this is no contradiction in logick ; for it is not a contradiction in the same nature and being , as all contradictions in logick must be , but it is a contrariety or contradiction ( if we will so call it ) between the unity and personalities of two very different natures , the divine and the created nature ; and all the contradiction that can be made of it , is no more than this , that the unity of the divine nature , which is perfect and undivided in three distinct persons , contradicts the notion of unity in a created nature , which admits but of one person in one individual nature : but there are a thousand such contradictions in nature , that is , different natures , whose ideas are opposite and contrary to each other , and yet all of them real beings : but could they make a trinity in unity contradict it self , that the trinity should in express terms destroy the unity , and the unity the trinity , this would be somewhat to the purpose ; for it would prove a contradiction in logick , when the terms destroy each other ; but then the trinity and unity must be the same ; a trinity of persons , and but one person ; or a trinity of natures , and but one nature : but a trinity of persons , true , proper , subsisting persons , in the unity of nature , which is the catholick faith , is not a contradiction in logick , though it contradicts the notion of human personalities , which it may do , and yet be very true . this is abundantly enough to shew the weakness and folly of this socinian cant about transubstantiation ; the impiety , prophaneness , and mischievous consequences of it , let others consider . his third charge is , that i say , that as we are christians , and unless we will be understood to reject the supreme authority of divine revelation , we must believe those doctrines which are thought to be most mysterious and inconceivable , notwithstanding any objection from reason or from philosophy against ' em . he that believes no farther than natural reason approves , believes his reason , not the revelation ; he is a natural philosopher , not a believer . he believes the scriptures as he would believe plato or tully , not as inspired writings , but as agreeable to reason , and as the result of wise and deep thoughts , p. 14. here he has taken some of my words , and so put them together , as to conceal the whole force of the argument , which he always takes care to do . my business ( p. 10 , 11 , &c. ) was to prove , that we ought to believe those doctrines which are thought the most mysterious and inconceivable , notwithstanding any objections from natural reason and philosophy against them : and this i proved from the nature , use , and authority of revelation . that revelation , as to such matters as are knowable only by revelation , must serve instead of sense , natural ideas , and natural reason . that if we believe upon god's authority ( which is the strict notion of a divine faith ) we must believe without any natural evidence , merely because god has revealed it ; and then we must believe such things as are not evident to sense and reason . that to believe no farther than natural reason can conceive and comprehend , is to reject the divine authority of revelation , and to destroy the distinction between reason and faith. he that will believe no farther than his reason approves , believes his reason , not the revelation , and is in truth a natural philosopher , not a believer . here any man may perceive that our socinian was plainly baffled , for he has not one word to answer , but only says , that i contradict this my self in my vindication of the doctrine of the trinity , where i assert , that suppose the natural construction of the words of scripture import such a sense as is contrary to some evident principle of reason , i won't believe it : of this more presently ; but what is this to the purpose ? is there no difference between what reason can't conceive , comprehend , approve , and what the reason of all mankind contradicts ? no difference between believing what we do not see , what we have no natural notion or conception of , what is not evident to natural reason , and believing in contradiction to sense , and such natural notions , and natural evidence , as all mankind agree in ? but he is very much troubled , according to his principle of believing scripture no farther than natural reason and philosophy approves , how to distinguish between believing plato and tully , and believing a revelation . he says , they look upon plato and tully , as great men , but fallible ( p. 15. ) and therefore may take the liberty to dissent from them ; and believe them no farther than reason approves : very right ; but will he believe the scripture any farther than reason can conceive , comprehend , approve ? have a care of that : but they will do as well ; if reason will not approve of such scripture doctrines , as it can't conceive and comprehend , they will expound and torture scripture , till it submits to reason : for it is more congruous to think , that an inspired writer uses a figurative , or it may be a catachrestical ( very catachrestical ) expression or phrase , than that he delivers flat contradictions , or downright impossibilities : that is to say , they must by all means believe , or pretend to believe , the scripture ; but then they must never own any thing to be in scripture , which their reason calls a flat contradiction , or downright impossibility ; which is the very same thing ; for the reason why they will not allow , that the scripture contains any thing , which their reason does not approve , is because they must believe the scripture , but must not believe it beyond their own reason and comprehension ; and the only difference they make between plato and tully , and the scripture is , that they can safely reject their authority , when they please , but must be at the trouble of expounding away whatever they do not approve in the scripture . this is what i told them in the vindication ; and as impious as this author thinks it , i will venture to transcribe that whole paragraph . but i have not done with our author thus ; but must give him a little more about expounding scripture according to reason : for i affirm , that natural reason is not the rule and measure of expounding scripture , no more than it is of expounding any other writing . the true and only way to interpret any writing , even the scriptures themselves , is to examine the use and propriety of words and phrases ; the connexion , scope , and design of the text , its allusion to ancient customs and usages , or disputes , &c. for there is no other good reason to be given for any exposition , but that the words signify so , and the circumstances of the place , and apparent scope of the writer requires it . but our author ( as many others do ) seems to confound the reasons of believing any doctrine , with the rules of expounding a writing . we must believe nothing that contradicts the plain and express dictate of natural reason , which all mankind agree in , whatever pretence of revelation there be for it ; well , say they , then you must expound scripture so as to make it agree with the necessary principles and dictates of reason : no , say i , that does not follow ; i must expound scripture according to the use and significations of the words ; and must not force my own sense on it , if it will not bear it . but suppose then , that the natural construction of the words import such a sense as is contrary to some evident principle of reason ; then i wont believe it . how ? not believe scripture ? no , no. i will believe no pretended revelation , which contradicts the plain dictates of reason , which all mankind agree in ; and were i persuaded , that those books , which we call the holy scriptures , did so , i wou'd not believe them ; and this is a fairer and honester way , than to force them to speak , what they never intended , and what every impartial man , who reads them , must think was never intended that we may believe them : to put our own sense on scripture , without respect to the use of words , and to the reason and scope of the text , is not to believe scripture , but to teach it to speak our language ; is not to submit to the authority of scripture , but to make scripture submit to our reason , even in such matters as are confessedly above reason , as the infinite nature and essence of god is . though i am never so well assured of the divine authority of any book , yet i must expound it , as i do other writings ; for when god vouchsafes to speak to us in our own language , we must understand his words , just as we do , when they are spoke by men : indeed when i am sure that it is an inspired writing , i lay it down for a principle , that it contains nothing absurd and contradictions or repugnant to the received principles of natural reason ; but this does not give me authority to expound the words of scripture to any other sense , than what they will naturally bear , to reconcile them with such notions as i call reason ; for if one man has this liberty , another may take it , and the scripture will be tuned to every man's private conceit ; and therefore in case the plain sense of scripture contradicts those notions i have of things , if it be possible to be true , i submit to the authority of scripture ; if it seems to include a contradiction and impossibility , if that contradiction be not plain and notorious , and in such matters , as i am sure , i perfectly understand , there i submit again , and conclude it is no contradiction , though i cannot comprehend how it is ; if i can by no means reconcile it , i will confess , i do not understand it , and will not pretend to give any sense of it , much less to give such a sense of it , as the words will not bear . his fourth charge is , that i say , difficulty of conceiving a thing , nay , the absolute unconceivableness of it , must not hinder our assent to what is contained in revelation ; because we do not disbelieve what is made known to us by sense or by reason , notwithstanding any difficulty or inconceivableness adhering to such things . these are neither my words nor my argument . my argument is this ; that since , as i had shewn , in matters of pure revelation , which can be known no other way , revelation must stand in the place of sense and reason , we must allow no objections against revealed mysteries , but what we will allow to be good objections against sense and reason . now no man questions the truth of what he sees and feels , or what he can prove to be true by plain and undeniable reason , meerly because there are unconceivable difficulties in it , as there is in every thing , even the most certain and familiar things in nature : and if revealed truths are not more unconceivable than many natural objects of sense and reason , why should their being unconceivable be a greater objection against believing a revelation , than it is against believing our sense and reason in matters equally unconceivable ? ( serm. p. 13. ) this argument is easily understood , but can never be answered ; and therefore he wisely resolved not to understand it . in answer to this he tells us , that he does not always believe his senses , nor his reason neither , when it is not clear , but perplext with difficulties , or darkening doubts , but especially when there is a remarkable and manifest inconceivableness . nor do i require he should ; but my only question is , whether he does not believe , both his senses and reason , that there are many things in the world , whose natures are so mysterious , that he cannot conceive or comprehend the reasons and philosophy of them ? that though he sees men and beasts , heaven and earth , sun , moon , and stars , he will not believe , that there are such things as he sees , because he cannot understand the philosophy of their natures , and sees a great many things done by them , which are perfectly unaccountable , and would have been thought absolutely impossible , had we not seen them done ? these are all the contradictions and impossibilities , which i say men may make or find , when they know not the philosophical natures of things , nor how they act , and yet will be reasoning and guessing at them ; which this wise author calls a sermon for contradictions . but do i require any man to believe contradictions ? nay , do i say , that there are any such contradictions ? but this , i say , that there are such unconceivable mysteries , in all created nature , much more in the incomprehensible nature of god , as some gotham philosophers ( as he who knows them best calls them ) charge with impossibilities and contradictions ; and yet these gotham philosophers are so wise as not to disbelieve their senses as to the being of those things , how unconceivable and incomprehensible soever their natures are ; and this is all i ask , that in matters of pure revelation we give the same credit to revelation , that in the objects of sense we give to sense , i. e. not to disbelieve what is revealed , as , that god has an eternal son , and that this eternal son in time was made man , because the eternal generation and incarnation are inconceivable mysteries ; as we do not disbelieve , that there are any men in the world , because human generations , and the union of soul and body are inconceivable mysteries in nature . towards the conclusion of my sermon , i answered two objections against believing a revelation as to such doctrines which are inconceivable and incomprehensible to meer natural reason . and here to prepare the way , he first scorns the objections , as never made before , or however by none but my self . that i pass over known and very dangerous objections , and answer only to chimera's and follies , never suggested or thought of by any . ( p. 18. ) i am glad to find , that he grows ashamed of these socinian chimera's and follies ; but let us hear what they are . 1. it is thought very unnatural , that when god has made us reasonable creatures , and therefore made natural reason to us the measure of truth and falshood , he should require us to believe without reason , as we must do , if he reveal such things to us , as we do not , and cannot possibly know the reasons of : if we must believe with our understanding , how can we believe things , which we cannot understand ? now this socinian does not believe , that any sect of religious ever made this or the like objection ; let him , as he says , snuff his candle once more , and look into the late socinian pamphlets : what is the meaning of all their zeal for reason in this cause , of their great noise and outcry about mysteries , nonsense , contradictions ? what is the meaning of their expounding scripture by reason , not like fools , but like wise men ? why has this author shewn such a furious zeal against believing a revelation notwithstanding any objections from meer natural reason and philosophy against it ? if , as he now says , our reason and understandings are finite and imperfect , and the wisdom and power of god most perfect : therefore he may reveal many things to us , to be believed by us , though we understand them not , nor have any other cause of our believing them , but only god's revelation of them , ( p. 19. ) nothing can be more true , than what he says , that reason is the measure of truth and falshood , but not the frail fallible reason of men , but the infallible wisdom of god. if he be sincere and hearty in this , we are perfectly agreed ; for this is the very doctrine of my sermon , which he has so furiously opposed , or would be thought to oppose ; for to speak the truth , he has not opposed the doctrine of my sermon ; but , in his own language , his own chimera's and follies . but here is either a fallacy in his words , or he gives up his cause , which it is plain he never intended : the question is not absolutely , what is the rule and measure of truth and falshood , but what is so to us ? now if he will allow , that frail and fallible reason is not a rule to us , then we may believe things , which our reason does not approve ; nay , which it may judge improbable and false : and if the infallible wisdom of god be a rule to us , it can be so only in a revelation , and then we may and must believe the infallible wisdom of god in a revelation against the objections of frail and fallible reason . and one may easily guess , there is something amiss still , notwithstanding all these concessions ; for as silly an objection , as he says , this is ( which i am glad to hear ) , he will by no means own , that i have answered it , and then i have very ill luck indeed , to make a silly objection , which was never made before , and not be able to answer it when i have done . the answer i give to this objection is this , that the matter of the objection is not true ; for we do understand both what it is we believe , and the reasons why we believe it ; and this i suppose may pass for an answer to that objection : but then it is farther objected , that we believe such things , whose natures we cannot understand , and cannot account for by natural reason : to this i answer , that reason is not the judge of the nature and phil●sophy of things , nor does it require us to believe nothing but what we thus understand and comprehend : for then , as i had shewn , we must no more believe sense and reason , than revelation : and this i take to be a good answer too ; but then to shew the reason of this , i add : when we make an objection against any thing , that it is without reason , or as we apprehend , contrary to reason , we must first consider , whether it be the proper object of reason ; otherwise it is no objection ; as it is no objection against sounds , that we cannot see them , nor against colours , that we cannot hear them ; because sounds are not the object of sight , nor colours of hearing . this , i think , is plain sense , and good reason too ; but this he says is no answer to that objection , why should reasonable creatures be obliged to believe things without reason ? nor was it ever intended as an immediate answer to it ; the answer i give is , that we are not oblig'd to believe without reason ; but when such men as this author object farther , that to believe things , whose natures we do not understand , and cannot account for by natural reason , is to believe without reason ; it is a proper answer to say , that reason is not judge of the nature and philosophy of things , and nothing can be said to be without reason , or against reason , which is not the object of reason ; as no man pretends , that the pure natures and ●ssences of things , or their essential reasons , properties , unions , operations , are ; ( serm. p. 19. ) but herein , it seems , i was mistaken ; for i have met with a man at last , who makes reason the judge of all this ; for if these be not the objects of reason , reason has no object at all ; for our reason can be no otherwise employed , but either about substances , or their unions , essential reasons , operations or properties , ( p. 20. ) very right ! we may know something of all this ; but i speak of the philosophy of nature : now can this new philosopher tell us , what the pure simple essence and substance of any thing is ? what naked matter stripp'd of all accidents and qualities is ? how soul and body are united , which cannot touch each other ? how a spirit should feel pain or pleasures from the impressions on the body ? how we think and reason ? nay , how we see and hear ? how thought moves our bodies , and excites our passions ? and a thousand such like mysteries ; which could he unriddle , he would infinitely gratify the inquisitive world : but christianity not mysterious , and the philosophy of pure simple nature , are too great discoveries for one age ; and yet if ever this happens , they must go together . for as i observed , this is all the incomprehensibility men have to complain of in the doctrine of the trinity and incarnation : the first concerns the pure nature , essence , substance , of god , and the essential distinction and unity of the godhead , which we neither do , nor can know any thing of ; for all nature is a secret and mystery to us , much more the infinite nature of god. and the second concerns the union of the divine and human nature in the person of christ ; which is a mystery , but what we ought not to complain of , since the philosophy of all natural unions is a mystery to us . these things are not the objects of reason ; and therefore though we believe them upon the authority of a revelation , without understanding the mystery of them , this is not to believe without , or contrary to reason . and what now does this socinian say to this ? truly not one word , but falls out with socinus and crellius , and some of his best friends , for talking so much of mysteries , ( which by the way shews , that this is not such a new and unheard of objection , as he would pretend ) for now he has found out , that there is no mystery at all in the doctrines of the trinity , and incarnation ; and he is in the right , if his socinian explication of these doctrines , ( which destroys the mystery , and the catholick faith together ) may pass for the doctrine of the church . but there has been enough said of that in the distinction between real and nominal trinitarians examined , which the reader may consult , and this author answer , at his leisure ; though i am very sensible he can never want such answers as this for any thing . 2 dly , the second objection against such a revelation , as contains matters which natural reason cannot comprehend , is , to what purpose such a revelation serves ? what merit there can be in believing such doctrines ? and of what good use such a faith can be to us ? serm. p. 2● . this is another objection , which he thinks no sect of religious ever made ( p. 24. ) but the irreligious m●y make this objection , and there are more than one sect of these . as to the usefulness of it , i observed , that though neither natural , nor revealed knowledge extends to the reasons and causes of nature , and of essential properties and operations , yet both natural and revealed knowledge is of as much use to us , as if we did perfectly understand all the secret and incomprehensible mysteries of the nature of god , or of the natures of creatures . both natural and revealed knowledge are alike upon this account , that they only acquaint us what things are , and what ends they serve , and then we know what use to make of them , without understanding the secret mysteries of nature . this i shew'd both in the knowledge of nature , and of god , and added ; we may make all the use that can be made of this world , and of every thing in it , without understanding the essential reasons and causes , or internal nature of any thing . this last clause he fixes his remarks on ; and that he may have something to remark , he changes my words thus . we may use the world as fully , and every thing in it to as good purpose , as if we understood the reasons and internal natures of things . and then adds , no , trisler ; not so fully , nor to so good purpose , as if we better understood the natures of things . now this fully , and to as good purpose , are not my words but his own ; nay we can make no use at all of it , but only so far forth as we understand the nature and reasons of things in it . we can use nothing to any purpose , till we know or understand something of its nature ; and no farther can we apply it and use it , than we understand its nature , and know its properties and powers . now this is not meerly trifling , but knavery : he represents me very ridiculously asserting , that we may as fully , and to as good purpose use every thing in the world without knowing its nature , vertues and properties , as if we knew them ; whereas i expresly assert , that we must first know , what things are , and what ends they serve ( and the better we know this , to be sure the better ) and then we know what use to make of them , without understanding the secret mysteries of nature . that is , when by experience and observation , we know what things are good for , we know how to use them without understanding the secret mysteries and philosophy of nature : as how god created all things out of nothing ; how the corn grows , or our food nourishes us , and the like : and thus i shew'd it was as to the doctrine of the trinity , and incarnation , that how unaccountable soever these mysteries be , it is the most useful and necessary knowledge in the world . but there is one thing still behind , which i find nettles this author ; and i don't wonder at it : to shew how much it became the goodness of god to reveal these mysteries of salvati●n to us , i observed , that the lapsed state of human nature makes supernatural knowledge necessary : — for though natural knowledge must be allowed sufficient to all the ends of human life , while man continued innocent — yet when man had sinned , he forfeited the favour of god , and a natural immortality ; and whether he should be restored or not , and by what means he should be restored , depended wholly on the sovereign will and pleasure of god. and therefore the light of nature , though it could direct an innocent man how to please and worship god , and to preserve himself immortal , it could not teach sinners how to make attonement for sin ; nor give them any certain hopes that god would for●ive sins , and bestow immortal life on them : which makes it necessary , that the religion of a sinner be a revealed religion . this he imperfectly transcribes , and adds ; true , but not in the least to the purpose : 't is no answer to that objection , but to another : namely to this ; why revelation or a ●upernatural knowledge is necessary ? here he had overshot himself , in allowing supernatural knowledge necessary , and therefore immediately qualifies it with , or however highly requisite , which declares this socinian's opinion , that we might have been saved without the knowledge of christ or the gospel-revelation ; for i know nothing that can make any thing more necessary , than the necessity of ●alvation : and therefore if it be not necessary , but only highly requisite , we might be saved without it : he adds the reason why he says this is nothing to the purpose . the obje●tion was concerning a revelation and faith , not intelligible , or not conceiveable ; the answer is only concerning revelation or supernatural knowledge ) in general , why it was given to men . but it is neither so , nor so ; the objection concerns the use of such a revelation as contains matters which natural reason cannot comprehend ; this part of the answer proves from the lapsed state of human nature the absolute necessity of the gospel revelation , which contains these mysteries . for if nature can't save us , it can't discover to us the way of salvation neither ; and if we must be saved by a supernatural grace and power , it must be supernaturally revealed ; and what is supernatural is the object of faith , not of natural knowledge . serm. p. 24. but he adds , there is a great difference between supernaturally revealed , and unconceivable ; the whole christian religion , the precepts as well as faith of it , is a supernatural revelation , and yet a system so intelligible that it must be taught to the women , to the poor , and ●ven to little children . this is true , but there is a difference between supernatural knowledge , as opposed to natural knowledge , and supernatural revelation : such things as nature can teach us , may be supernaturally revealed , and the degeneracy of mankind may make this , in his language , highly requisite ; as the nature and providence of god , a future state , and the differences of good and evil : but supernatural knowledge is a knowledge which nature cannot teach , but must be learned only by revelation ; and this is the knowledge , and a mysterious knowledge it is , which the lapsed state of human nature makes necessary , as necessary as the salvation of sinners by the incarnation and death of the son of god : which makes a great difference between the precepts and faith of the gospel , though both contained in the same revelation . he adds , it was not made the matter of supernatural revelation , for its difficulty , mysteriousness , or transcendency of the human understanding , but to ascertain the truth of it , and to enforce its authority in the world . which is in plain english to say , that the design of the gospel-revelation was not to teach us any thing beyond the discovery or comprehension of meer natural reason , but only to give greater certainty and authority to the laws and religion of nature and here , for a conclusion , i joyn issue with this socinian ( and am glad to take the least hint for some useful discourse ) , whether the gospel revelation contain any thing which nature could not teach us , and which natural reason cannot comprehend ; or were only intended to give greater certainty and authority to the religion of nature ? that the gospel is a new revelation of what nature could not teach , nor meer natural reason comprehend , i shall prove ; not from the name or notion of mysteries , which these men so foolishly and absurdly ridicule ; but from the express authority of st. paul , 1 cor. 2.14 . but the natural man receiveth not the things of the spirit of god , for they are foolishness unto him , neither can he know them , because they are spiritually discerned . a brief explication of which words will be of great use in our present dispute . the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , or natural man , as theophilact and other greek fathers observe , is the man who judges only by natural light and reason , and will receive and believe nothing beyond what nature teaches : and the context proves this to be the true meaning of it . this account the apostle gives of the graecian philosophers , that as the jews required a sign , so the greeks seek after wisdom , 1 cor. 1.22 . nothing would content them but some philosophical speculations , and natural proofs and demonstrations of faith ; which in this chapter he calls , the enticing words of man's wisdom , and opposes to the demonstration of the spirit , and of power : that is , to the evidence of miracles wrought by the spirit of god ; which are a more certain and infallible proof than all their pretences to reason and demonstration : for where is the wise ? where is the scribe ? where is the disputer of this world ? hath not god made foolish the wisdom of this world ? for after that in the wisdom of god , the world by wisdom ( by natural reason and philosophy ) knew not god , it pleased god by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe , 1 cor. 1.20 , 21. these are the men who rejected the faith of christ , of whom the apostle here speaks , and gives an account of the reason of their infidelity in these words , the natural man receiveth not the things of the spirit of god. which will more fully appear , by examining what these things of the spirit of god are : and it is evident from the whole context , that they are matters of pure revelation , which can be known only by the revelation of the spirit , or the whole oeconomy of our salvation , by the incarnation , death , resurrection , ascension , of jesus christ , the eternal son of god , which is the subject of the gospel-revelation . this he calls , the wisdom of god in a mystery , even the hidden wisdom , which god ordained before the world to our glory , ver . 7. and what this is , immediately follows ; which none of the princes of this world knew ; for had they known it , they would not have crucified the lord of glory ; which can refer only to the dispensation of grace by jesus christ. this nature could not teach us , as it is written , eye hath not s●en , neither ear heard , neither have entred into the heart of man , the things which god hath prepared for them that love him , v. 9. that is , such things as neither sense , nor natural reason could inform us of : but god hath revealed them to us by his spirit , for the spirit searcheth all things , even the deep things of god ; for what man knoweth the things of a man , but the spirit of a man which is in him ? even so the things of god knoweth no man , but the spirit of god : now we have received not the spirit of the world , but the spirit which is of god , that we may know those things which are freely given us of god : which proves that these are properly the things of the spirit , which could never be known but by the revelation of the spirit : for they are the deep things of god , his secret counsels and purposes for the redemption of mankind ; the free results of his own wisdom and goodness , the things which are freely given us of god ; and therefore can be known , and can be revealed only by the spirit ; and these are the things of the spirit , which the natural man , the vain pretender to reason and philosophy , receiveth not . now can any man desire a plainer proof than this , how incompetent a judge meer natural reason is of the mysteries of faith , of the whole oeconomy of gospel-grace ? for what the natural man does not receive , that meer natural reason does not receive ; for the only reason why the natural man does not receive it , is because natural reason does not receive it ; and what is foolishness to the natural man , is foolishness to natural reason ; and what the natural man cannot know , because they are spiritually discerned , that natural reason cannot discern . now can there be a plainer proof than this ( if we believe st. paul ) that there are such doctrines contained in the gospel , as natural reason does not receive , or approve , but rejects with scorn : for it is not said , that the natural man cannot by the mere light of nature find out , or discover these things of the spirit ; that he had asserted before , but these words give a reason of the infidelity of the wise men , the scribes , the disputers of this world , who rejected the faith when it was preached to them by the apostles ; that the natural man , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , does not receive or approve the faith ; and not only so , but rejects it as foolishness , as absurd , contradictious , impossible , unworthy of a man of reason , and philosophy . like the philoso●hers of the epicureans , and the stoicks , who encountred st. paul , when he preached at athens ; and some said , what will this babler say ; other some , he seemeth to be a setter forth of strange gods , because he preached unto them jesus and the res●rrection . 17. acts 18. if then there be such doctrines as these in the gospel-revelation , it is certain , it can be no o●jection against any article of the christian faith , that meer natural reason does not receive , approve , comprehend it , but accounts it absurd , ridiculous , foolish ; for thus the things of the spirit of god were to the natural man in st. paul's days , and thus they will always be . nay if the things of the spirit of god are so far above the comprehension of human reason , then such doctrines as meer natural reason does not receive , have this mark and character of divinity , if they are contained in the gospel-revelation : nay , let me add farther , that those doctrines which have been always owned and defended with the warmest zeal by the catholick church , and opposed and rejected with as great scorn and contempt by pagans , infidels , and hereticks , as a contradiction to the reason of mankind , and the philosophy of nature , are most likely to be the true christian faith ; for this proves that the christian church always believed them to be gospel-doctrines ; and infidels and hereticks rejected them as incomprehensible , and inconceiveable , and absurd to human reason ; and such the doctrine of the trinity , and incarnation , and cross of christ , have always been to such natural men. nay , farther : if there be such doctrines in the gospel-revelation , which meer natural reason receiveth not , but accounts foolishness ; then it is certain , that is not the true christian faith which contains none of these mysteries , none of this hidden wisdom , none of these deep things of god. let the socinian then tell us , what things there are in their faith , which the natural man receiveth not , which are above the comprehension of meer natural reason : they glory that they have no such incomprehensible mysteries in their faith ; that they have a reasonable faith , that they have stript christian religion of riddles and mysteries , and fitted it to the level and comprehension of human reason ; but this very thing wherein they glory , is a demonstration against them , that socinianism is not the true christian faith ; for that contains such doctrines , as the natural man and meer natural reason receiveth not . they commonly laugh at that distinction between things contrary to reason , and above reason , which human reason is no judge of . we assert , that a divine revelation can never contradict true reason ; for a divine revelation must be true , and true reason is true , and truth cannot contradict truth : but we assert , that there are many things in the christian faith which are above reason ; which reason is not a competent judge of , and which natural men may call contradictions , if every thing must pass for a contradiction to reason , which meer natural reason does not receive , approve , allow . but after all , they must find something above natural reason , if they will believe like christians ; for such things there are in the christian faith , and then let them distinguish as they can between contrary to reason , and above it . but i must take notice of one thing more in these words , the reason why the natural man receiveth not the things of the spirit of god , and cannot know them , viz. because they are spiritually discerned , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , they are to be known and judged of only by spiritual arguments and methods ; and therefore the natural man , who rejects all means of knowledge but natural reason , can never know them . the truth and certainty of our faith must be learnt , not from the evidence of natural reason and philosophy , which was the evidence the philosophers expected . the greeks seek after wisdom , 1 cor. 1.22 . but ●t . paul tells us , that christ sent him to preach the gospel , not with wisdom of words , lest the cross of christ should be made of none effect . v. 17. &c 2.4 , 5. and my speech and my preaching was not with enticing words of man's wisdom ; but in demonstration of the spirit and of power . i did not confirm my doctrine by natural reasons and arguments ; but by the evidence of miracles wrought by the power of the holy spirit ; that your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men , but in the power of god. and the true interpretation , and admirable wisdom of these divine mysteries , must be spiritually discerned also . which things also we speak not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth ; but which the holy ghost teacheth , comparing spiritual things with spiritual . there is a spiritual language belongs to spiritual things ; and we must learn the true sense and interpretation of the faith , not from natural ideas , or the words and notions of philosophy , that is , in the socinian language , by expounding scripture by natural reason ; but by studying the language of scripture , and the meaning of the holy ghost in it , especially by comparing the old and the new testament together ; spiritual things with spiritual : this is a way of learning which natural men despise , and therefore cannot know the things of the spirit of god , which must be spiritually discerned . all this i think abundantly proves that there are such mysteries in the christian faith , as meer natural reason cannot discover , cannot prove , cannot receive and comprehend , cannot interpret ; which shews what reason we have to distinguish betwen matters of pure faith and philosophy ; and what danger there is of corrupting the faith by philosophy . and now i think i may conclude ; for i suppose no body will expect , that i should defend my self against his ridiculous charge , that i am a socinian ; which had he believed , i should have found better treatment from him : but i shall leave him to rave by himself , and look upon all these hurricanes of fury and vengeance , as a good sign that they feel themselves mortally wounded . the end . notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a59900-e270 the distinction between real and nominal trinitarians examined , &c. considerations on the explications of the doctrine of the trinity , p. 21 , 22. vindicatition , p. 150. the designed end to the socinian controversy, or, a rational and plain discourse to prove, that no other person but the father of christ is god most high by john smith. smith, john, fl. 1673-1680. 1695 approx. 91 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 34 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2005-12 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a60471 wing s4103 estc r15169 12279670 ocm 12279670 58644 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a60471) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 58644) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 926:10) the designed end to the socinian controversy, or, a rational and plain discourse to prove, that no other person but the father of christ is god most high by john smith. smith, john, fl. 1673-1680. 63 p. [s.n.], london : 1695. reproduction of original in cambridge university library. advertisement: p. 3-4. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng jesus christ -divinity. socinianism. 2005-04 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2005-05 aptara keyed and coded from proquest page images 2005-07 judith siefring sampled and proofread 2005-07 judith siefring text and markup reviewed and edited 2005-10 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion a designed end to the socinian controversy : or , a rational and plain discourse to prove , that no other person but the father of christ is god most high. by john smith . father , — this is life eternal to know thee the only true god. john 17. 3. london , printed in the year mdcxcv . an advertisement . the reader is desired to take notice , that these papers were written at different times , as matter did offer it self to the author's mind ; and for that reason some particulars are therein touch'd upon more than once ; for which 't is hoped , however , that there will need little excuse , since in relation to the whole design it may be pertinent enough . the method also , for that reason , is somewhat unusual ; but i have ventur'd however to let it pass as it is , since not method but matter in such cases is chiefly to be minded : and i doubt not but that in one part or other thereof , every part of the controversy will be found to be both fully and fairly discuss'd : and i wish none that read it may be of that evil temper as to forbear the acknowledgment of that truth , which yet in conscience they dare not deny ; like those jews of old , who though they believed in christ , yet did not confess him , lest they should be put out of the synagogue ; joh. 12. 42. a designed end to the socinian controversy . that there is a god. that there is such a being as god , ( by which is meant one eternal mind , essence or spiritual power , who is the original and first cause of all other beings besides ) is manifest ; for 't is not possible that any other being whatsoever could give a being to it self : certainly nothing can be more absurd than to imagine that a thing can act any ways towards its own production before it is . hence it follows , that every one of these beings is but the real effect of this first cause that had a being before it ; and this first cause of necessity must have been eternal , and without beginning : since had there been once no kind of being at all , there then could never have been such a being as god , no nor any other being besides ; for doubtless , of nothing , nothing can be produc'd . that this god is but one in nature or essence . and as 't is thus plain that there is a god , so 't is utterly impossible that there can be any more than one god : for whoever is truly god , must be absolutely infinite or immense ; that is , his divine essence must be boundless , and fill all that endless and inconceivable space that is without or beyond the limits of this world , as well as this world. for 't is impossible that any being whatever can in any respect be greater than god is , or contain him ; for then he himself could not be truly infinite , nor excel in all perfections . the nature or essence therefore of god is infinite , and in extent is without bounds ; and 't is self-evidently impossible for two or more infinitely extended beings to subsist together : which demonstrates by consequence , that god can be but one as to his divine essence or nature . and as right reason does plainly teach this truth , so do the scriptures as evidently declare the same : to instance in a few , — the lord he is god , there is none else besides him , deut. 4. 35. see now that i , even i am he , and there is no god with me , deut. 32. 39. there is none like thee , neither is there any god besides thee , 1 chron. 17. 20. i am the first , and i am the last ; and besides methere is no god , isa . 44. 6. we know that an idol is nothing in the world , and that there is none other god but one , 1 cor. 8. 4. — to us there is but one god , 1 cor. 8. 6. i might add a great number of other texts that speak to the very same purpose , but i think 't is needless in a case so plain . that this one true god is but one in person . now as 't is thus plain , that god is but one , as to his nature or essence ; so 't is evident likewise , that he can in no sense be any more than one in person : for if , as some affirm , the divine nature did contain in it several persons , as does the humane nature , then each of those must be truly immense , truly almighty , and truly most wise , else they could not each of them be truly god , ( as some have unwarily asserted , and the trinitarian notion supposes ) ; for whoever is truly god , must be every way thus qualified in all respects . for if that person that is supposed to be god , be not truly immense , then some other being of necessity must be greater than he ; for whoever is not infinite , must be bounded by some other being , which in that respect does truly surpass that bounded being in greatness : but ( as i said before ) nothing can in any kind or respect whatsoever be greater than god is , or contain him ; and by consequence he alone is truly immense . the person that is truly god , must be also almighty ; that is , he must be able to do more than any , or than all other beings together can do : for doubtless none is the most high , but he that in might and strength does transcend all others . touching the almighty , says job , he excels in power , ch . 37. 28. the person also that is truly god , must be most wise and knowing : 't is doubtless a property essential to the true god , to know more than any other being besides can know : of that day and hour , saith our saviour , knoweth no man , no not the angels which are in heaven , neither the son , but the father only ; matth. 24. 36. mar. 13. 32. now if that person who is truly god , must be thus immense in his person , almighty in his power , and most wise in his knowledg ; then it follows by direct consequence , that 't is impossible for more than one person to be truly god : for nothing can be more absurd , than to believe or affirm , that two or three distinct beings , such as all personal beings are , can be each of them unlimited , as to the extent of their personal beings ; can be each of them able to do more than the rest can do , or that each of them can know more than the others know . suppose , for instance , two such beings as a and b : now if the person of a can do more than the person of b , then the person of b cannot do more than the person of a ; for if he could , then would not a be able to do more than b , and by consequence he could not be almighty . again , if the person of a be most wise , and knows more than the person of b , then b cannot know more than a ; for if he did , then would not a know more than b , and so by consequence would not be most wise : which evidently demonstrates , that no more than one person can be truly god , since no more than one can be truly infinite in all these afore-mentioned divine perfections . that this one person who is truly god , is him only who is the father of jesus christ . 't is undeniably evident from the old testament , that the god of israel , or the lord of hosts , is the only true god : for thus it is written , thou art god , and thou alone , of all the kingdoms of the earth , 2 kings 19. 15. there is none like thee , neither is there any god besides thee , 2 chron. 17. 20. thou art god alone , psal . 86. 10. besides me there is no god , isa . 44. 6. i am god , and there is none else , isa . 46. 9. thou shalt know no other god but me , hos . 13. 4. now as this is plain beyond contradiction , so do all christians generally acknowledg , that the god here mentioned was him only who afterwards was called the father of jesus christ . and in the new testament no truth is more fully and plainly express'd than this is : thus says our lord himself , father , — this is life eternal , to know thee the only true god , joh. 17. 1 , 3. the same do his apostles affirm ; blessed be god , even the father of our lord jesus christ , 1 cor. 1. 3. blessed be the god and father of our lord jesus christ , eph. 1. 3. with one mind and one mouth glorify god , even the father of our lord jesus christ , rom. 15. 6. we give thanks to god , and the father of our lord jesus christ , col. 1. 3. he shall deliver up the kingdom to god , even the father , 1 cor. 15. 24. therewith bless we god , even the father , jam. 3. 9. to us there is but one god , the father , 1 cor. 8. 6. now it is impossible that any one article of the christian faith can be more fully and plainly express'd in scripture than this is ; the words can be understood in no other sense than what at the first sight they do plainly signify , and they give the most satisfying answer that can be given to any one that shall ask who god is , namely , that he is only that most divine person who is the father of jesus christ : and if in this case plain scripture is not to be relied on , i see not of what great use our bibles can be to us . yet this so plain and evident truth is commonly denied . for a very great number of professed christians do notwithstanding believe , that in the godhead there be indeed more persons than only one ; and that jesus christ , the son of god , is god also as well as his father . but of this error the former arguments are sufficient to convince them : for if none be god but the father of christ , then cannot the son be truly god also , since he in no sense whatever can be said to be the father of christ , that is , of himself . and certainly if men would resolve faithfully to make use but of common sense and common honesty , they could not but be convinced of the absurdity of this opinion , by only reading so often as they do in the new testament of jesus christ his being the son of god : for how can he be god himself , who truly is no other than the son of god ? if he be the son only , then 't is plain that he is not the father also , who alone is god : for 't is impossible , according to the notion we have of sons , for any being whatever to be the son of himself . no understanding man , when at any time he hears mention made of the son of a king , is so idle in his imagination as to believe , that thereby is meant the king who is his father ; he certainly then must be very sensless , who can think that by the son of god is any ways meant god , that is , god most high . christ not the true god , because he himself has a god above him . 't is also evident beyond contradiction , that our blessed lord cannot be truly god , since both he himself and his apostles do very plainly acknowledg , that he has a god above him : for instance , my god , my god , why hast thou forsaken me ? mat. 27. 46. i ascend to my god , and to your god , joh. 20. 17. him that overcometh will i make a pillar in the temple of my god , rev. 3. 12. the head of every man is christ , and the head of christ is god , 1 cor. 11. 3. blessed be the god and father of our lord jesus christ , eph. 1. 3. the god and father of our lord jesus christ knows i lie not , 2 cor. 11. 31. — that the god of our lord jesus christ may give you the spirit , eph. 1. 17. therefore god , even thy god , hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows , heb. 1. 8 , 9. these texts are very plain , and need no interpretation to make them be understood . now if our lord christ have thus a god above him , then 't is evident , if any thing in the world be so , that he himself is not god most high . christ not god , because what he does is by a power received from god. this truth christ himself does plainly declare ; i can , saith he , of my own self do nothing , joh. 5. 30. all power is given unto me both in heaven and in earth , mat. 28. 18. when the multitude saw his miracles , they marvelled , and glorified god who had given such power unto men , mat. 9. 8. now these things can in no tolerable sense be said of him that is truly god : for he that is god most high , hath essentially in himself all kind of divine dignity and excellency , and cannot without the highest of blasphemies be in any sense said to receive them of another . but of our lord it is recorded , that he neither said nor did any thing , especially in the work of our redemption , but what he was commanded to say and do by his father ; i have not spoken of my self , ( saith he ) but the father which sent me , he gave me a commandment what i should say , and what i should speak , joh. 12. 49. is he able to save the world ? to this power he was raised by god : him hath god exalted to be a prince and a saviour , acts 5. 31. can he give power to believers to become the sons of god ? this power he also has received : thou hast given him power over all flesh , that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him , joh. 17. 2. has he power to raise from the dead ? even this power also he did receive : as the father hath life in himself , so hath he given to the son to have life in himself , joh. 5. 26. has he power to judg the world ? 't is god that does enable him to do this : this is he that was ordained of god to be judg of quick and dead , acts 10. 42. i can do nothing of my self ; as i hear , i judg . joh. 5. 30. moreover , 't is thus said , the glory which thou hast given me , i have given them , joh. 17. 22. i appoint unto you a kingdom , as my father hath appointed unto me , luke 22. 29. the god of our lord jesus christ hath put all things under his feet , eph. 1. 17. now they must impose strangely upon their own understandings , that can ( unrequired by the gospel ) believe him to be truly god , even infinite in all perfection , of whom 't is said so plainly , that whatever power and dignity he has , is given him by another . christ not god , because god and he are plainly distinguished . this consideration alone of it self is a very strong argument , to prove our lord christ not to be really and truly god , since he is every where spoken of as a person that differs as much from god , as a noble subject differs from his prince or king. thus 't is said of him , that god anointed him , acts 10. 38. that he offered himself up to god , heb. 9. 14. that god raised him from the dead , acts 2. 24. that he was exalted by god , acts 2. 33. that he ascended to god , joh. 20. 17. that he sits at god's right hand , acts 7. 56. that god for christ's sake hath forgiven us , eph. 4. 32. that he hath redeemed us unto god by his blood , rev. 5. 9. that the god of our lord jesus christ hath put all things under his feet , eph. 1. 22. i might collect a very great number of other places that speak to the very same purpose , all which do evidently demonstrate , that the true god is not jesus christ : for if jesus were sent of god , and raised up from the dead by god , and sits now at god's right hand , &c. then 't is plain , that there is as great a difference between the true god and him , as there is between a prince , and him whom he is said to honour or imploy . 't would be strangely absurd for a man to affirm , that god can be sent of god ; that god can pray to god ; that god can ascend to god ; that god can sit at god's right hand ; and that god shall deliver up the kingdom to god , that god may be all in all . he that can believe this possible , is fitted for the reception of the most ridiculous and absurd errors that were ever found in the world. of that account which the scriptures give of the person of christ . as from what has been said before , it appears very plainly what kind of person christ our lord is not ; so 't will be likewise necessary to shew what the scriptures do declare concerning him as to what he is . now if we consider well the general scope and tendency of those sacred writings , we shall perceive very plainly that christ , or the messiah , according to the promises , was really to be of the same nature with them , which he came to redeem ; that as by man came death , so by man might come also the resurrection of the dead , 1 cor. 15. 't was by the seed of the woman that the serpent's head was bruised , gen. 3. 15. to abraham the promise was made , that in him and in his seed all the nations of the earth should be blessed , gen. 28. 14. moses tells the children of israel , that the lord their god should raise up unto them a prophet like unto him , deut. 8. 15. of this man's seed , ( namely david 's ) saith st. paul , hath god raised up unto israel a saviour , jesus ; acts 13. 23. in the fulness of time god sent forth his son , made of a woman , gal. 4. 4. from all which places 't is manifest , that as to the personal nature of christ , he is the same as were those humane ancestors from whom he did lineally descend ; in all things he was like unto his brethren , except in being a sinner ; heb. 2. 17. heb. 4. 15. and accordingly we find him almost every where mentioned by that plain denomination and term of a man ; ye seek ( saith he himself ) to kill me , a man who hath told you the truth which i have heard of god , joh. 8. 40. after me cometh a man that is preferred before me , joh. 1. 30. jesus of nazareth , a man approved of god by wonders and signs which god did by him , acts 13. 38. he hath appointed a day in the which he will judg the world in righteousness by that man whom he hath ordained , acts 17. 31. there is one god , and one mediator between god and men , the man christ jesus , 1 tim. 2. 5. but this man , because he continueth ever , hath an unchangeable priesthood , heb. 2. 7. but this man , after he had once offered one sacrifice for sins for ever , sat down at the right hand of god , heb. 10. 12. i could name a multitude of others , but i think it is needless . now to me 't is strange that any should so much as imagine that the believing and asserting of christ to be truly an humane person , should derogate from his true honour and dignity , when the gospel does so frequently assert him to be such ; whereas on the contrary , 't is not said so much as once , that he is god most high , or that he is one of that sacred three which do constitute or make up the true godhead : these unscriptural titles are derived only from the meer opinions and traditions of either deceived or deceiving men , whose eyes the god of this world hath blinded , so that they cannot see or discern the truth . the primitive confessions concerning christ were ; not that jesus our lord was god equal to the father in all kind of divine perfections , nor that he was god of the substance of his father , as he was man of the substance of his mother , as some have taught in after-times . all that those first confessions do contain was this , that he was the christ , the son of god , and the saviour of the world , this was the faith of martha ; she said unto him , yea lord , i believe that thou art the christ , the son of god , that should come into the world , john 11. 27. this was st. peter 's faith , thou art christ the son of the living god , mat. 16. 16. this was the eunuch's faith , i believe that christ is the son of god , acts 8. 37. this was the faith of the mariners ; of a truth thou art the son of god , mat. 14. 33. and the faith of nicodemus was , we know thou art a teacher come from god , for no man can do these miracles that thou dost , except god be with him , john 3. 2. st. paul is also said to preach christ in the synagogues , that he was the son of god , acts 9. 20. he is said also to testify to the jews , not that jesus was god , but that jesus was the christ , acts 18. 5. we have seen and do testify ( saith st. john ) that the father sent the son to be the saviour of the world , 1 joh. 4. 14. here 's no trinity in unity , nor god-man , nor hypostatical union , so much as mentioned , nor any other of those hard and cramping names with which the church of god has been since perplex'd . the undoubted faith on which the salvation of all christians does depend , is no other than this : these things , saith st. john , are written , that ye might believe that jesus is the son of god ; and that believing , ye might have life through his name , joh. 20. 31. if we confess with our mouth the lord jesus , and believe in our heart that god raised him from the dead , we shall be saved , rom. 10. 9. whosoever shall confess that jesus is the son of god , god dwelleth in him , and he in god , 1 joh. 4. 15. who is he that overcometh the world , but he that believeth that jesus is the son of god ? 1 joh. 5. 5. these are a plain account of that faith which now is indispensably required of every christian in relation to christ . the scripture no where injoins us to believe , on pain of damnation , either that jesus is god most high , or that he is indeed both god and man , or that he was eternally begotten of the father . it only teaches us thus much concerning him , that the man christ jesus is the mediator between god and men , 2 tim. 2. 5. that he is the propitiation for the sins of the whole world , 1 joh. 2. 2. that it pleased the father by him to reconcile all things to himself , col. 1. 20. that there is no salvation in any other , acts 4. 12. that he appears now in the presence of god for us , heb. 9. 24. and that he shall judg both quick and dead , at the latter day , acts 10. 42. these are fundamentals so plain , and so undoubted , that all christians do universally agree in the profession of them , as they likewise would do in all other truths , were nothing but what is really such imposed on the faith of believers . of the transcendent dignity of jesus christ . and now although from what has been said hitherto , it be plainly evident , that the godhead does consist but of one divine person only , even the father of christ ; and that jesus , called otherways in scripture the son of god , is no other than an humane person : yet 't is plain also that he is not a common man , but the chief and most transcendently excellent of all humane beings , yea in dignity above even the angels . for as his conception in the womb of a virgin was miraculous , so were his life and actions a wonder : he made a perfect conquest both of death and the devil ; and in that great instance of magnanimity has out-done all the renowned heroes both of greece and rome . and unto which of the angels said god at any time , sit thou on my right hand ? but to this dignity is jesus exalted , heb. 1. 13. god has crowned him with glory and honour , heb. 2. 9. and anointed him with the oil of gladness above his fellows , heb. 1. 9. angels , and authorities , and powers being made subject unto him , 1 pet. 3. 22. he is ascended into heaven in a triumphant manner : and as he now sits there at god's right hand in glory , so at the last day shall he come down from thence , to judg mankind , with such a surprizing majesty as shall amaze and confound the world. 't is doubtless impossible for any humane understanding to conceive , or tongue to express this most excellent man's transcendent dignity ; his greatness must needs be very extraordinary , who is thus set even above the angels , is the head of every man , and the prince of the kings of the earth . 1 pet. 3. 22. 1 cor. 11. 3. rev. 1. 5. and now if to those foregoing considerations we add that of his most admired love to us sinful mortals , in making peace for us by the blood of his cross , col. 1. 20. and in undergoing with invincible patience all those indignities and miseries which did befal him in this the course of that glorious work of his , the opening for men a new and living way to the regions of bliss : the consideration of this , i say , added to that other of his most transcendent glory and power , ought evermore to raise up in us that veneration which is sutable to such most wonderful instances of unconceivable majesty and heroick affection . yet it is not any way justifiable to honour christ falsly . as the glory of god is not to be advanc'd by falshood , so neither can we truly honour christ by lies ; he desires no such thing at our hands , neither at the last day will he reward us for affirming him to be that which indeed he is not : they only give true honour to christ who own him for the undoubted messiah , or the son of god , and do stedfastly both believe and obey his gospel . as for the other vain and ungrounded opinions of men concerning him , they no ways conduce to the glory of our blessed redeemer . 't is said indeed that we should honour the son as we honour the father , joh. 5. 23. but that word as does not import an equal honour , no more than it does import an equal holiness and purity , when we are commanded to purify our selves as he is pure , 1 john 3. 3. and as he which hath called you is holy , so be ye holy in all manner of conversation , 1 pet. 1. 15. besides , the word honour is of a doubtful import , and doth often-times signify only obedience , as is evident from ephes . 6. 1 , 2. where by honour thy father and mother is clearly signified , obey your parents . and accordingly dr. clagget , in his paraphrase on the place , makes it to be an honouring the son with the same faith and obedience ; implying , that we are as much bound to believe and obey the gospel of christ in the new testament , as we are the law of god recorded in the old ; that since he is made judg of the world , to be certain he will not suffer the breach of his own laws to go unpunished . doubtless we ought to be as careful of ascribing to christ those glories which are his , as we are to give to god almighty that honour which essentially belongs to himself : and no man can think or speak too honourably of his redeemer , so long as he no ways does thereby rob god the father of that truly divine honour which is his indispensible due . our lord who sought not his own glory , ( john 8. 50. ) will give us no thanks for such honours as do naturally derogate from his father's dignity : but such is their honour who make the son to be god ; for then since but one person can be truly god , they do assert by consequence that the father is not so . god has indeed highly exalted jesus his beloved son , and has given him a name above every name , and has put all things under his feet . but when all things are said to be thus put under him , 't is manifest that he himself is excepted that did put all things under him , 1 cor. 15. 27. so that notwithstanding the great and mighty dignities to which god hath exalted christ , yet he has still reserv'd to himself this most supreme royalty of being the god and head of christ . god hath given him indeed a kingdom ; but when the intent of this government of his is accomplish'd , he shall again resign it back , that so god in that after-state of eternity may be all in all , 1 cor. 15. 24 , 25 , 28. answers to the principal objections made against the vnitarian doctrine . and now tho from what has been already said , no man whose understanding is not inslaved by the tyranny either of self-conceit , interest , or education , can doubt of so great a truth as this is , namely , that no personal being whatever , besides the father of christ , is god most high ; as also that other branch thereof , that jesus our lord , as to his nature , is the same with them whom he came to redeem . yet since there have been many objections raised against it , i will endeavour as briefly as i can , to give them such reasonable answers as shall make these truths beyond exception . of the names of god given to christ . some object , that christ of necessity must be god , since in several places of scripture he is expresly called by the name of god. i answer , a god he undoubtedly is , and a mighty god too , according to the way of expression used in those antient times ; in which those were called gods who either represented god's person , or acted in his name and by his authority : but he is not god almighty . when the jews did accuse him for making himself god , he thus vindicates his innocence ; if , saith he , they are called gods to whom the word of god came — say ye of him whom the father hath sanctified , and sent into the world , thou blasphemest , because i said i am the son of god ? john 10. 35 , 36. christ had as good a right to this title as any of the rest , if not a better ; and therefore it could be no blasphemy to appropriate the same to himself , had he done so : but they lied , for he did not do it , he only said , that he was the son of god , calling god his father . of the mediation of jesus christ . others object , that if christ were not god as well as man , he could not have been a fit mediator between god and man , since in such a case , say they , he ought no way to be exactly the person concern'd . a fit mediator between god and man must neither be only god , nor only man , but one who by nature is between these two , even god as well as man. i answer ; 't is not necessary that a mediator should be of such a middle nature , nor does the scripture any where assert it : there is always supposed in the work of reconciliation , one offended , another offending , and a third not concern'd in the quarrel , interposing to make peace between them . now in this sense christ , though but a man , was a very fit and proper mediator : had he been god , he had been the party offended ; had he been a sinful man , he had been one of that party that gave the offence ; but being a man perfectly righteous , he therefore was fit to intercede between god and sinners . that christ is our mediator , is plain and evident ; and 't is as plain that he is only a man , and not both god and man , as some assert : there is , saith the scripture , one god , and one mediator between god and men , the man christ jesus , 2 tim. 2. 5. and 't is most wonderful , that in a matter so manifestly evident , men should dare to impose upon the world another faith , or be induc'd to believe contrary to so plain and evident a part of god's word . of the oneness of god and christ . others object , that christ jesus must needs be god , because 't is said , i and my father are one , john 10. 30. and again ; there be three that bear record — and these three are one , 1 joh. 5. 7. to these i answer , that though 't is said they are one , yet 't is not said what one they are ; 't is not said they are one god. this is only the ungrounded assertion either of some easy-minded , or else of some heedlesly bold and daring men. doubtless by that passage , 1 john 5. 7. is meant , that these three are one as to the record which they are there said to bear ; they perfectly agree in that witness which they give concerning jesus his being truly the christ , as the foregoing verses do plainly intimate . as for that other passage , john 10. 30. 't is plain , that the oneness there meant is a mystical or moral , and not a natural oneness : and 't is doubtless explained by john 17. 11. where our saviour prays that his disciples might be one as he and his father were one ; that they , saith he , may be one , as thou father art in me , and i in thee , that they may be one in us , v. 21. which denotes an oneness only in the same mutual affection , for believers can be one in no other sense but this : and look what oneness there ought to be between one true believer and another , the same oneness there is between christ and god , an inward intimacy , like that between real friends , of whom 't is usual to say , they are all one , one in heart , and one in mind ; as those in acts 4. 32. are said to be . of the equality of god and christ . some object , that christ must be god as well as his father , because 't is said , that he thought it no robbery to be equal with god , phil. 2. 6. to this i answer , that christ himself hath told us , that his father is greater than he , john 14. 28. hence 't is plain , that if the son be any ways equal to the father , yet 't is really but in some particulars ; for were the son equal to the father in every respect , then 't were impossible for the father to be greater than he . whence 't is clear that the son cannot be equal to the father in all things , though in some things he may . for instance , as god can save believers , so this also christ can do ; but this power of christ is not an essential , but a derived power ; thou hast given him power over all flesh , that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him , john 17. 2. these are our saviour's own words ; and 't is plain , that he from whom he receives the power , must in power be superiour unto him : he is not therefore almighty , and so by consequence not god most high , as the objection would suppose . of christ's being the maker of the world. some object , that christ is said to be the maker of the worlds , heb. 1. 2. and that all things were made by him , joh. 1. 3. and therefore , say they , he of necessity must be god eternal . i answer , many things are spoken of christ figuratively , as he is called a way , a door , a vine ; and the bread in the sacrament is said to be his body . now these , as those likewise which affirm him to be the maker of the world , are figurative or mystical expressions , in which one thing is said to signify another , as the old creation to set forth the new. there are in the scripture many dark and difficult passages , hard to be understood , as st. peter expresses it , 2 epist . 3. 16. which are doubtless true in some sense or other , could we be so happy as to hit upon the right : but in the mean time , till this can be done , 't is certain that that can never be the right sense which contradicts the clearest and the plainest parts of the bible , as well as the greatest and most certain evidences of humane understanding . the general current of the scripture declares plainly , that christ , or the messiah , was derived from the seed of , abraham ; that he was the son of david ; that he was made of a woman . wherefore 't is self-evident that in a literal sense he could never be the maker of the world , whose true ancestors were humane persons , and who was born , or whose being did first begin to be , some thousands of years after the world was made . all scriptures therefore that affirm christ to be the maker of the world , and to be the maker of all things , must be supposed to speak figuratively , and are no ways to be understood in their literal sense and meaning . in all such cases as this is , 't is safer to say , that we cannot understand truly in what sense these scriptures are to be taken , than it is to conclude , that they mean that which other more numerous and plain places of scripture , as well as reason , do make to be impossible . of the two natures of jesus christ . when we urge those scriptures which say that christ has a god above him ; that he could do nothing of himself ; that he knew not of the day of judgment ; that he died to redeem mankind . the opposers reply , that this is meant only as to his manhood or humane nature , but not as to his divine nature : for as he was god , none was his superiour ; he had all power essentially in himself , knew all things , and was truly immortal . i answer ; if christ had really two natures in him , so that thereby he had been truly god as well as man , the person thus constituted or made up of two such natures , could never have died according to his humane nature , if by his divine nature he had been truly god too : for how could he in person have been mortal in one capacity , if he had been on the contrary immortal in another ? he also could not possibly have been ignorant in one capacity of what he knew in another ; nor could he have wanted any kind of power , if in any of his capacities he had had all power essentially in himself ; one capacity must needs have supplied the defects of the other , especially the stronger of the weaker . of christ his being the son of god. 't is objected , that as christ jesus our lord was begotten by god on the body of the virgin ; so he must necessarily be god of the substance of his father , as he was man of the substance of his mother . in answer to this i say , that when the angel saluted the virgin with the glad-tidings of her being designed to be the mother not of god , but of the promised messiah , he told her , that the holy ghost should come upon her , and the power of the highest should overshadow her ; and that therefore that holy thing which should be born of her , should be called the son of god , luke 1. 31 , 35. now in the relation of this message these following particulars are remarkable : first ; that jesus our lord is the son of god's power only , and not of his person ; the power of the highest shall over shadow thee . 't was of the woman only that he was made , gal. 4. 4. ( he was not generated , as some think , out of his father's substance ) and so by consequence was the son only of his miraculous and almighty power . secondly ; it is not said that therefore he shall be the natural son of god in that sense , as one man is the natural son of another ; but therefore he shall be called the son of god , or he shall so be , and be so reputed , because in this one particular instance god was to him instead of a father , not a father in the way that men are fathers to their children , but a father in respect of the virgin 's receiving a power from god ; thus in an uncommon manner to conceive in her self a son of joseph and david , ver. 31 , 32. from what has been said i think it appears plainly , that christ his being god of the substance of his father , is an ungrounded conceit . the generation of our lord jesus may be better accounted for another way : for god the almighty architect , and most-wise contriver of the creation , has reserv'd to himself a power to alter the course of nature whensoever he pleases ; and as of a rib taken out from the side of adam he made a woman , so by the same omnipotent power he did enable a virgin woman to conceive a son. if god had power out of mere stones to raise up children unto abraham , mat. 3. 9. we ought not to think it incredible , that in this miraculous manner he should out of the posterity of abraham raise up this seed so wonderfully to be the world's redeemer . of the power by which christ did miracles . some i find are strongly perswaded that none but a person truly god could do those wonderful works that christ did . to such i answer , that a man who is no god can do things that are miraculous , when god gives him a power to perform them . this is evident in those which moses did , and in those also which were wrought by the apostles . the works of christ indeed were extraordinary , yet not done by a power inherent in himself , but by a power derived from god : for himself tells us , that all power was given unto him both in heaven and in earth , mat. 28. 18. he was a man approved of god ( saith the apostle ) by miracles , wonders , and signs which god did by him , acts 2. 22. this power god did bestow on christ , to be only an evidence of his being the true messiah : rabbi , saith nicodemus , we know that thou art a teacher come from god ; for no man can do these things that thou dost , except god be with him , joh. 3. 2. the works , saith christ , which the father hath given me to finish , the same works that i do , bear witness of me , joh. 5. 36. his works were an evident proof that he was no impostor , but a true and most wonderful prophet ; yet still he is said to be but a man , a man whom god was with , a man by whom god did wonders . of the incomprehensibleness of god's nature . some object , that we must not think to comprehend the infinite nature of god , nor understand fully every particular that does relate to his divine perfections ; for god is incomprehensible , and may for ought we know be that which yet we cannot plainly understand him to be , namely , three in person , though but one in essence . i answer ; some of god's divine perfections are self-evident , and 't is impossible that we can be mistaken therein : we are infallibly certain that he must be immense in person , almighty in power , and most wise in knowledg . and although we cannot know what god is in every respect , yet at the same time we may know certainly what indeed he is not ; we know certainly that he is not a man , or that he was made of a woman , as christ was : we know certainly that he is not mortal , or that he cannot die , as christ did ; and we know certainly that he has not a god above him , as christ had ; and we know certainly that he has not received any kind of power from another , as christ jesus is said to do . and as one truth naturally infers another , so we do from hence assuredly conclude that the person of jesus our lord is not truly god ; for he was made of a woman , gal. 4. 4. he died to redeem us , 2 cor. 5. 14. he had a god above him , 1 cor. 11. 3. and he did receive all the power he had of another , joh. 5. 30. mat. 28. 18. we also know certainly that if the divine godhead did consist of three persons , that then neither of the three persons singly can be god. if all three be but that one god together ( as the trinitarians assert ) then no one of them can be the true god by himself : for the same denomination cannot properly fit each person singly , as does fit them when conjoined in one mutual relation ; for then they might be said to be indeed three supreme godheads , which is utterly impossible . we also know certainly that if any of the three persons , said to be in the godhead , be god by himself , as we have proved god the father undoubtedly is , then all the rest are but superfluous and unnecessary , as to the constitution of a godhead : for one infinite , almighty , and most wise person , is as sufficient to all the purposes of a godhead , as ten thousand deities : but if three be but the one true god together , then no one of them can be that one true god by himself alone . lastly , we may be infallibly certain that if doctrines grounded on so many numerous and great evidences both of scripture and self-evident reason , as these are , that god is but one in person ; that the person who is truly god , is no other than the father of jesus christ ; and that the most excellent of men , even jesus christ , was only a man , be false ; then we cannot be certain of the truth of any other principle in religion : if the evidences here collected do deceive us , 't is in vain to hope by any other methods to find the truth . of the coming down of christ from heaven . some , as a proof of our saviour's godhead , urge those texts of scripture , where 't is said , he came down from heaven ; came forth from the father , and ascended up where he was before . to which i answer , that these prove not that for which they are intended , since 't is plainly inferred from other scriptures , that christ , some time before he was sent to declare the glad-tidings of the gospel , was assumed or taken up from the earth into his father's more immediate presence , ( as st. paul was some time after into the third heaven ) there to be instructed in the mind and will of god , and to be invested with that great dignity and power of being a prince and a saviour . to this the prophet daniel's vision plainly alludes ; i saw , saith he , in the night visions , and behold one like the son of man came to the antient of days , and they brought him before him ; and there was given him dominion and glory , and a kingdom , that all people , and nations , and languages should serve him , dan. 7. 13. and from the words of our saviour himself 't is plain , that he ascended up into heaven before he came down to declare his father's will to men ; no man , saith he , hath ascended into heaven , but he that came down from heaven , joh. 3. 13. but no man but christ ever came down from thence , which he never could have done had he not first ascended up thither . and that he was taken up to be instructed in the doctrine he was to publish to the world , is plain also ; the father , saith he , that sent me , he gave me a commandment what i should say , and what i should speak , joh. 12. 49. the redemption or restoration of mankind was a work of prodigious difficulty ; and god , who had fore-ordained our saviour for the performance thereof , did for his greater incouragement present to his view the glories , which before the world was ( joh. 17. 5. ) he had designed as a reward for his son the messiah : and 't was doubtless this fore-taste of the divine and heavenly happiness that animated him with courage and fortitude to encounter all the difficulties that stood in his way . hence 't is said , that he for the joy that was set before him , did endure the cross , and despise the shame , heb. 12. 2. of the eternity of christ . some object , that christ is said to be before abraham , before all things , and that he had glory with god before the world was . this , say they , proves him to be eternal , and by consequence god. i answer , 't is impossible that christ can be the true and living god , since 't is plain from what has been said in the former part of this work , that no person is truly god but the father of christ , and that christ has a god above him . 't is impossible for christ to be eternal ; for if god be his father , as all acknowledg , then there was a time when the son had not a being : for to be a son , and to be equal in duration with his eternal father that begot him , is undoubtedly impossible . besides , we are told plainly , that the son was first fore-ordained before he came to have a being in these latter times , 1. pet. 1. 20. now no fore-ordained being can possibly be eternal , since he that did ordain his being , must be before him of necessity ; and none but the very first of all beings can be truly eternal . how could he have a being before abraham , since 't is declared he was of the seed of abraham ? how could he be before david , when 't was out of david's posterity that god raised up jesus according to his promise ? and since jesus the son of god was made of a woman , gal. 4. 4. he could not be more antient in time than his mother that bare him . if follows then that these scriptures on which the objection depends , are purely figurative , and are not to be understood in their literal sense and meaning : they declare indeed that christ in some sense or other was before all things , before abraham , and had glory before the world was , but not in that sense which the objectors suppose . for 't is not reasonable they should be understood in such a sense as contradicts both common understanding , and the greatest and plainest part of all the bible ; they are places of the same nature with those which st. peter affirms are hard to be understood , 2 pet. 3. 16. and for that reason must by interpretation be brought to such a sense as is agreeable to the analogy of faith , and the most general scope and design of the holy scriptures : that is to say , that christ was before abraham , and before the world , &c. in the fore-ordination , decree and counsel of god , as in very deed st. peter interprets them , when he saith thus of christ , that he verily was fore-ordained before the foundation of the world , but was manifest in these lust times , 1 pet. 1. 20. of the satisfaction that christ made to god. some argue thus ; that if christ had not been god , the sacrifice he offered , or the satisfaction he made for sinners , would not have been of that infinite worth which was necessary to satisfy the infinite justice of an offended god. i answer . the holy scriptures do not any where declare this doctrine , but on the contrary they tell us , that as by the offence of one , judgment came upon all men to condemnation ; so by the righteousness of one , the free gift came upon all men to justification of life . rom. 5. 18. in which words are contained the whole doctrine of the satisfaction of christ ; and they imply thus much only , that god was so infinitely well pleased with the unspotted righteousness of his son , that for his sake he entred into a new covenant of grace and mercy with mankind , wherein he did engage himself to be still their god , and to afford them new means of becoming his people . thus did god in infinite mercy take all men again into favour for the sake of one perfectly righteous person , as in infinite justice he had before included all men under suffering for their first father's sin and transgression : so that as by man came death , the punishment due to the breach of the first covenant , so by man came also the resurrection from the dead , 1 cor. 15. 21. all which was not the effect of any equivalent price which by christ was given to god , but of the righteousness or obedience , which he perform'd to his father's command : for as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners ; so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous . rom. 5. 19. had christ given to god , or made in our stead such a satisfaction as had been equivalent to the transgressions of all men , in order to redeem them , how then could eternal life be the free gift of god ? how then could we be saved by free grace ? and how could our sins be said to be forgiven ? for gift , and grace , and forgiveness , are not proper terms where an equivalent hath been received . in the scripture 't is said indeed , that christ hath obtained eternal redemption for us , heb. 9. 12. that our peace is made through the blood of his cross , col. 1. 20. that we were reconciled unto god by the death of his son , rom. 5. 10. but it speaks not so much as one word of an equivalent . but is it not said , say some , that we are bought with a price , 1 cor. 6. 20. and that the son of man has given his life a ransom for many ? mat. 20. 28. i answer , these are but improper expressions , and are of the same nature with those which attribute hands , and eyes , and ears to god , which only imply that such acts are done by god which men usually perform by these bodily parts : even so ▪ christ is said to ransom ▪ us , and to buy us with a price , because by his means we do receive benefits equivalent to what they do who are set free from any kind of misery and bondage , by the payment of a price to them in whose bondage they are . i shall , as a close to what i have to say on this head , add , that the justice of god spoken of is satisfied in a manner different from that which the adversary supposes : that is to say , the justice of god is satisfied in the certain punishment of adam's transgression . adam was commanded not to eat of the forbidden fruit on pain of death . this command he transgressed ; and 't is evident that the punishment was accordingly inflicted , for adam died , and all his posterity do die likewise . now when the penalty is thus inflicted , 't is plain that justice is satisfied , and god in equity can require no more : but had not christ obtained the favour to restore us to life after the punishment was thus inflicted , there had then been an end of mankind for ever . from hence 't is apparent how idle their fancy is who imagine christ suffered what all mankind should have suffered , in order to free them for ever from suffering the same . for 't is plain beyond contradiction , that we are not freed from death , the punishment due to that first transgression , for we all die ; god does exact the forfeiture of every one of us , and by consequence his justice , as to that offence , is satisfied in all its demands . but this , say some , is false , for hell was our due as well as death ; and from that christ has freed every one that will believe . i answer , 't is strange that christ should free believers from one part of the punishment and not from the other : the scriptures no where reveal this secret , and for that reason we need not believe it . hell is the punishment which is due to the breach of the second covenant , and not of the first ; now neither has christ freed us from this by any thing that he has done and suffered for us . he by his righteousness did indeed procure for us a new covenant , and this new covenant of grace proposes life and pardon on condition that we will believe its promises , sincerely endeavour to obey its precepts , and repent of sin ; and they are truly the breakers of this covenant who live in a continued course of disobedience thereunto , and die at last in final impenitence . now for such sinners as these there does remain no sacrifice ; christ never died for the redemption of such , and by consequence can no ways be said to suffer in their stead . of the object of divine worship . some object , that jesus must be god , because 't is recorded that his name , in the most primitive times of the gospel , was called upon ; see acts 9. 14. and 22. 16. i answer ; 't is difficult to understand rightly what is there meant by calling on his name : this is certain , that the scripture no where injoins us to make christ the object of divine worship ; it does rather expresly intimate the contrary . our lord forewarns his disciples not to ask any thing of him after his ascension , but bids them ask the father in his name , job . 16. 23 , 24 , 26. and when our lord taught his own disciples to pray , he bids them say , our father which art in heaven , mat. 6. 9. he does not direct them to say , o christ hear us : he tells the samaritan woman , that in the following times the true worshippers should worship the father , joh. 4. 23. 't was the doctrine of st. paul , that in every thing by prayer and supplication we should let our requests be made known unto god , phil. 4. 6. and his own practice was according to his doctrine , i bow my knee ( saith he ) to the father of our lord jesus christ , eph. 3. 14. and in many other places , god or the father , not christ , is mentioned as the alone object of divine adoration and petition : and 't is worth nothing , that christ himself , whose example and footsteps we should follow , prayed always to his father , and never did so much as once petition any other person of the supposed trinity . and as to thanksgiving , 't is plainly said to be the will of god that we should do all in the name of the lord jesus , giving thanks to god and the father by him , col. 3. 17. and in another place we are commanded to give thanks always unto god and the father , in the name of jesus christ , eph. 5. 20. and accordingly we read in a great number of places in the new testament , how the apostles gave god thanks through jesus christ . jesus our lord is said in scripture to appear in the presence of god for us , heb. 9. 24. to be an advocate for sinners , 1 joh. 2. 1. to make intercession for the saints , rom. 3. 34. to be the mediator between god and men , 1 tim. 2. 5. the minister of the new covenant , heb. 8. 6. all which proves him to be the person that pleads our cause , that solicites our acceptance , the great transactor and manager of all affairs between god and us ; but it no ways intimates any divine worship due to himself . and indeed should we put christ instead of the true god , and make him the alone object of divine prayer and thanksgiving , in whose name then shall we approach the throne of grace ? and by whom shall we render thanks to god ? who shall be our intercessor , our advocate , our mediator ? for my part i know but of one mediator , and that 's the man christ jesus , 1 tim. 2. 5. and he only is the mediator between us men and the one true god , whom i before have proved to be only the father of jesus christ . to make our lord christ therefore the object of our divine addresses is as much as in us lies to deprive him of his mediatory office , which also by consequence is to deny him to be the son of god , even the beloved in whom alone we are accepted , eph. 1. 6. yea , and by this we deny also the godhead of the father , in whose stead we do by this means place christ , than which there can be nothing in this world that is more truly antichristian : see 1 john 2. 22. now from the aforegoing arguments 't is evident , that whatever the sense of the objected places are , yet they cannot mean that which the objector intends , since in vastly more numerous and plain places the scriptures make god and not christ to be the alone object of our divine addresses . of the novelty of the vnitarian doctrine . some object against the doctrine of god's being but one in person , the novelty thereof , that 't is but of yesterday in comparison to that which asserts a trinity , which is , they say , of at least 1600 and odd years standing . i answer , that the objector is greatly mistaken : for can that be a new doctrine which has the greatest and the most plain part of the scripture for its foundation ? the doctrine of god's being but one in person , is in the former part of this work proved to be expresly and plainly contain'd both in the old and new testament , and by consequence must needs be as antient as the scriptures are . the long continuance of the contrary doctrine , if it were as antient as the objectors affirm , is yet no argument of its real truth . we read that soon after the good wheat was sown , the enemy began to sprinkle tares in the field ; mat. 13. 25. and the mystery of iniquity began to work even in st. paul's time , 2 thess . 2. 7. so that 't is no wonder that some errors , as suppose this of the trinity , be almost of equal standing to the greatest truths : for where god has a church , the devil always has a chappel . 't is not the long or short continuance of any doctrine , as to its profession , that makes it authentick , but that foundation of reason and scripture on which it is built : a tenet is not therefore true because of its long or general belief , if at the same time it contradicts self-evidence , and the general current of the sacred scriptures . of scripture-mysteries . some object , that much of the scripture is mere mystery ; and therefore since all scripture is the object of our faith , we must sometimes believe things which we cannot comprehend . i answer , if we are to believe mysteries when clearly revealed , yet it does not from thence follow , that therefore we must believe impossibilities and contradictions . a just god can never lay on us a necessity of submitting to those terms and conditions of salvation which we cannot possibly understand . hence it follows that such obscure mysteries as evidently do contradict other plain truths , do no ways concern us , so long as we are in the dark as to their true sense and meaning . when a mystery is plainly express'd in scripture , as when 't is said , a virgin did conceive a son , or that all men shall rise again , or that christ shall judg the world , and no other plain scripture contradicts it , neither is it contrary to humane reason ; we are then to believe it , tho it may be above our understanding to conceive which way the power of god should enable a virgin to conceive , or in what manner our scattered dust shall be recollected and revived , or how our blessed saviour can be made fit for so great a work as an universal judg. but if some places in scripture had said these things , but others more numerous and plain had affirmed the contrary , or had it contradicted any self-evident principle of reason , we might then have rejected the belief thereof as safely and with as good authority as we now do that of the popish transubstantiation , which by the way is as expresly contain'd in scripture as is that of the trinity . but for mysteries of a more doubtful nature , such as want the qualifications before express'd , they can no ways oblige our faith , so long as their true meaning lies hid in obscurity of expression . there will be a time when all secret things shall be revealed , and all hidden things shall be brought to light , for which we must wait with patience , and not pretend , as some do , to explain even what is most hard and difficult , by such notions as are purely unintelligible ; for this is but the more to confound their minds which were at a loss before . 't is true , if any man can rationally explain a mystery , he then does good service both to god and man ; but this we are infallibly certain is never done , when the sense that is given of a doubtful place of scripture is contrary not only to the general current of the rest of the word of god , but is also a contradiction to the most self-evident sentiments of humane understanding . but some may say , if such passages as these are so generally to be overlook'd in the business of religion , why then did god cause them to be recorded in the sacred scripture ? i answer , that it may as well be asked , why god made so many sorts of small , and as we think , useless insects to live upon the earth , since we know not what benefit they are of to the world ? doubtless god , who does nothing in vain , made them for some great ends , though our short-sighted understanding cannot perceive what those excellent ends of his are : even so likewise will his wisdom be manifested some way or other , by what to us is yet hard to be understood in scripture . and though we are ignorant of the true meaning of many of the most obscure and doubtful parts thereof , yet the ends and purposes of god in causing them to be written , either are or shall in due time be accomplished . in the mean time we ought to magnify that manifest goodness of god , who hath communicated to mankind such a number of plain and evident precepts as will be fully sufficient for salvation , if we carefully observe them . all are concern'd in the business of life eternal , therefore hath god given us laws sutable to our common capacities : the gospel of christ was preach'd to the poor , which intimates that the glad-tidings of salvation did not consist of unintelligible mysteries , but of such plain and evident notions as did fit the understandings of the lowest people . of faith and reason . there are a sort of people in the world of several false perswasions , who when they can no longer maintain their errors against the power of true reason , fly to faith as their last refuge , and tell us , that 't is by faith only that we are made able to overcome the world , 1 joh. 5. 4. and that therefore 't is necessary for men to believe what yet they cannot comprehend . to this i answer , that faith indeed is the chief duty of the christian religion , because 't is the belief of god's promises and threatnings that does ingage mankind to the obedience of his precepts : few , i doubt , would be religious , were there no fear of hell , nor hopes of heaven . 't is said , that all things are possible to him that believes , mark 9. 23. which in other words imports that no difficulty nor hazard , how great soever , shall be able to stop them in their christian race : and in this sense it only is , that faith is said to be the victory that overcometh the world. but though 't is only a firm perswasion of the truth of god's promises and threatnings that inspires the faithful with courage to overcome and conquer the temptations not only of the devil , but of the lusts of this world too ; yet this is no argument that therefore we must assent to that which we see no reason to believe ; for then we might be every whit as liable to believe things false as things that are true . wherefore it behoves us to be very watchful and circumspect in avoiding false principles ; for error of any kind will rather make us slaves to the devil , than enable us to overcome and conquer him . as therefore thou oughtst to imbrace truth wheresoever thou dost find it , so be as ready to relinquish errors , when by carefully examining into religion thou hast discovered them to be such : for 't is in every respect as heroick an act of faith to believe our selves in the wrong when we really are so , as 't is to adhere stedfastly to a truth undoubted . know then that no kind of faith can be true that is certainly unreasonable , for the light of nature is as much god's law as divine revelation ; and none must ever think that god's law can contradict it self . right self-evident reason is the only touchstone that men have to distinguish truth from error : and 't is the agreement even of scripture with this reason that makes us know it to be the word of god ; 't is not our forefathers saying so , but the exact concurrence of the witness of our spirit and that testimony . and though some would perswade us not at all to trust to reason in matters of religion ; yet 't is observable that those very men that exclaim most against it , are yet necessitated to give reasons of their own to prove , if 't were possible , that your reason is not to be relied on : and certainly that guide must needs be most safe , whom the whole world , in some kind or other , do find it so necessary to follow . of the true nature of religion . 't is certain that the laws of religion are design'd by god for the only good of mankind ; he forbids some things and commands others , only because the one is prejudicial to man's well-being , and the other is absolutely necessary to his peace and happiness . in order then to the true happiness of this life there is required a sutable way of living , even such as respects the universal good of the whole kind ; which , in short , is that which men call a life of holiness , or a life perfectly free from every kind of injustice or mischief both to one's self and others . and as for the heavenly state , that is a state of perfect goodness and purity ; and 't is impossible that any one can take delight in that divine kind of life hereafter which he hated here : and for that reason could the wicked be admitted into heaven , yet then would they be unhappy , by reason that there none of those base and ignoble pleasures would be found which their corrupted minds on earth did love and admire . 't is then only a good life on earth that can fit us for the heavenly inheritance . now this goodness of life , so necessary to man's both present and future bliss , does not consist in speculation but in practice . belief is of no other use than as it enacts obedience ; and that 's the reason that the day of judgment is represented as taking no notice of the opinions , but of the practices of men. have you fed the hungry ? have you clothed the naked ? have you visited the sick ? mat. 25. 36. at that great solemnity the inquiry will not be , what had you in the world ? or what did you profess ? but what good deeds have you done therein ? how has your care been to promote the universal good of rational beings ? have you renounced the lust of the flesh , the lust of the eye , and the pride of life ? 1 john 2. 26. and lived soberly , and righteously , and godlily in this present world ? tit. 2. 12. and done justly , and loved mercy , and walked humbly with god ? mich. 6. 8. now if 't is the goodness of our practice that is the one thing necessary to salvation , then the disbelieving either a few doubtful , or else a few unreasonable opinions , can never be dangerous . let us then ( as to the point now under examination ) ask our selves but this one question , will the belief of the doctrine of a trinity make me a more merciful and righteous man than i shall be if i did profess the contrary ? will it make me love and honour god better ? will it make the service which i render to his divine majesty a more reasonable service ? and if on serious consideration you find it will not , then 't is plain that the unitarian faith , which denies a trinity of persons in the godhead , is much to be preferr'd , since 't is not perplex'd with such contradictions to humane understanding , but depends on more plain and noble evidences , and does also in all respects whatsoever effectually secure a good life ; which , when all is done , is the very soul and life of religion , and will stand by a man when hypostatical vnions , and mutual consciousness , and somewhats , will prove but poor things to depend upon for salvation . there can be no danger of damnation for not assenting to such mysterious notions as men can at no tolerable rate understand , such as is that of the doctrine of a trinity , ( which makes the divine power of the godhead to reside in three distinct persons , whose constitution is like that of a free state , rather than the more divine government of a single monarchy ) if in the mean time they believe heartily the plain doctrine revealed in god's word , and live up truly to the undoubted precepts which the christian religion commands , which i am certain does no where say , that unless ye believe that three persons are truly god , ye shall certainly be damn'd . salvation and the belief of the trinity not inconsistent . 't is objected as dangerous to believe the doctrine of god's being but one in person , because we should hereby , as much as in us lies , exclude from salvation all those pious and just men who in former ages have liv'd and died in the belief of a trinity . i answer ; the wisdom of the unitarian doctrine never was so uncharitable as to suppose this ; yet doubtless the belief of a trinity must needs much lessen their future happiness , though not wholly debar them of salvation : and therefore to persist therein , after due admonition especially , is very imprudent and dangerous . 't is plain , that though those who believe a trinity do believe more than either god or christ do require as necessary to salvation , yet together or therewith many persons do also believe all the chief fundamentals in religion that are requisite to save them ; and therefore their hope and trust in god's mercy on one hand , may out-ballance their error on the other . if god winked at the ignorance of the vertuous gentiles , how can we imagine that he should not be gracious to the heedless and unwitting errors of the humble and contrite-hearted christian ? if any man ( saith the apostle ) build on the foundation hay , and straw , and stubble , that is , doctrine that will not stand the test of truth , he shall suffer loss ; yet he himself shall be saved , but so as by fire , 1 cor. 3. 15. that is , with great difficulty he shall escape damnation . if god should be extream to mark what is done amiss , no man could stand in judgment before him ; as it is in psal . 143. 2. & 130. 3. all salvation is of the free grace and mercy of god , who pardons iniquity , transgression and sin , exod. 34. 7. a good life will make great abatements upon the account of a bad faith ; mercy rejoiceth against judgment , jam. 2. 13. and charity shall cover a multitude of sins , 1 pet. 4. 8. but though 't is possible for a man to be saved in this faith , who otherwise has lived well , yet 't will doubtless much lessen his future happiness , for error of any kind is the fruitful parent of many mischiefs ; it betrays us into absurdities , and involves us in many unwarrantable words and actions . as our faith is , so will our practice be apt to be , and consequently error in one respect or other will be apt to make mens lives less innocent ; and the less innocent our actions are , the less doubtless will our reward hereafter be : for the eternal glories , compar'd to that of the sun , and moon , and stars , 1 cor. 15. will be in proportion to the degrees of our christian perfection . they therefore whose religion is such only as will but just preserve them from damnation , must not expect so large a share of the divine recompences , as by god's grace is due to the inlarged capacity of the more exactly knowing and undefiled soul. but notwithstanding what has been said on the behalf of those otherwise good livers who have not been ignorant of the truth merely out of malice and design , i add , that in case men of false principles are told plainly that they are in the wrong , and yet they still do obstinately persist therein , and refuse to consider seriously the arguments both of scripture and reason that are offered to convince them ; i see not how in any case 't is possible for such to be saved : for this is truly and plainly to reject the counsel of god , and to do despite to the spirit of grace . by what nature the world was redeemed . when men have argued whatever they can about the necessity of christ his being truly god , that so the sacrifice he offered might be of merit sufficient to answer the demands of god's most infinite justice ; yet after all it must be acknowledged , that our peace was made with god , only by the holy life and death of an humane person : for nothing that is truly god can die or shed blood , but 't is by blood , even the blood of a dying jesus , that we are cleansed from all sin , 1 joh. 1. 7. and this his death for our redemption is an undeniable instance to prove , that his person was truly humane . christ jesus our lord was undoubtedly filled with the divine spirit , for in him dwelt the fulness of the godhead ; but this did not make him god , any more than a believer shall be made god by receiving of his fulness , joh. 1. 16. or by being partaker of the divine nature promised to such , 2 pet. 1. 4. it only fitted him for the work of redemption : he by that eminent inhabitation of the divine spirit became able to surmount all temptations to sin ; and 't was only the underfiled obedience of his life , even unto death , that made the sacrifice which he offered unto god acceptable . the blood that was shed to manifest the intire obedience of jesus unto god , was no other than the blood of a most holy and excellent man ; 't was not the blood of god , as some men rashly do affirm : on the cross he that thus died cried out , my god , my god , why hast thou forsaken me ? now for him to be god that thus prayed to god , is , i think , impossible . wherefore 't is evident , that he who thus died was not a true deity ; and yet 't was by him that died that the world was redeemed ; for which blessed be the lord god of israel , who hath thus visited and redeemed his people , and hath raised up a mighty salvation for us , out of the house of his servant david , luke 1. 68 , 69. a general rule for answering all objections . having considered and answered the principal objections urged in favour of the doctrine which asserts jesus christ to be truly god , in opposition to that of his being only the man who is the mediator between god and men , 1 tim. 2. 5. or that which asserts that none is god but the father of christ , 't will be needless to confute those other little objections which still remain ; since when the chiefest strength that does uphold an error is overthrown , 't is not in the power of some little props to maintain and support it : nevertheless , lest the minds of some should thereby be perplex'd , i here lay down one general rule , by which all other objections may be easily refuted , and that is this : if any principle in religion be true , by the greater and by the plainer number of evidences , it can never be false by a few in number , or by them that are dark and doubtful . if then the arguments to prove the true god to be only the father of jesus christ , are more in number , and plainer to be understood , than those are which are objected in favour of the contrary , you need then only to reply thus , that the proofs that make for it , are more both in number and weight , than those that are against it ; and that therefore 't would be unpardonable to suffer such trifles to unsettle and shake your faith. suppose a man objects against the doctrine of god's being but one in person , this text , let us make man , gen. 1. 26. and endeavour to prove from thence , that god is more than one in person , is it reasonable to suffer this to alter your judgment , when for that one passage , vs , urged in favour of the belief of more persons than one , you have ten thousand that mention god to be but only one , in such terms as these , i , thou , me , he , his ? and as for the terms of we , they , them , &c. they are not mentioned in scripture so much as once , as applied to god alone . if every single objection that is started should be admitted to be of authority sufficient to invalidate the best and clearest proofs ; or if every hard and doubtful passage in scripture were enough to overthrow all them that are clear and plain , then all true religion would soon be at an end : for some plausible exceptions may be made against the chiefest and plainest truths in religion , otherwise so many false and erroneous opinions would not have obtained that authority that they have in the world. indeed when we are told plainly , that we are in an error , and arguments truly considerable are at the same time offered to undeceive us , we ought then to suffer our selves to be convinc'd : for if what is thus urged carries with it so much clear evidence as makes it undoubted , the changing then of our opinions will not only be reasonable , but very honourable too , since nothing is more ignoble and base than to be a slave to error , from which not any thing in this world but truth can free us . of the true notion of the holy ghost . 't is plain from the general analogy of true faith , grounded on scripture-evidence , that the holy ghost is no distinct person subsisting of himself ; for then 't is clear , that our lord could not be the son of him who is now called god the father , or the first person in the supposed trinity , since 't is plain that the virgin mary's conception was occasioned by the overshadowing of the holy ghost , luke 1. 35. which all trinitarians acknowledg to be the third person , and not the first : 't is expresly said , that that which was conceived in her was of the holy ghost , mat. 1. 20. and that she was with child by him , mat. 1. 18. wherefore 't is evident from these additional words , and the power of the highest shall overshadow thee , luke 1. 35. that the holy ghost is only that divine and invisible power of god , by which he works his will and pleasure in the world ; and by consequence , that god , and the spirit of god , are no more two distinct persons than man and the spirit of man are ; for to the one the other is compared in the sacred scripture , 1 cor. 2. 11. and as the members of man's body do secretly and wonderfully obey the dictates of his will or mind , so , and much more so , do all creatures act , and are commanded by the almighty power of god's divine and most wise will and pleasure . when therefore all the elect people of god are said to be sanctified by the holy ghost , it must be understood of that new temper and inclination of mind which god by his divine and invisible power does work or cause in men. when he powerfully raises up in them holy thoughts , and excites in their minds new desires , he is then truly said to sanctify them by his spirit : and when men wilfully reject those motions to goodness , which god by his power does raise up in them , they are then truly said to resist , and grieve , and quench his spirit . and whereas the spirit is said to receive , and to be sent , from whence some would infer its distinct personality : 't is replied , that these are but improper expressions , such as are before noted to be spoken of god and christ ; they are words fitted to our dull apprehensions rather than to the true nature of the spirit it self , even as god is represented as having the actions and passions of a man , and to come down from heaven , when yet we know that he is already every where , though our mortal eyes have not powers fitted to perceive him : he that filleth all things can no ways be capable of moving out of his place . such expressions as these therefore are plainly improper , and must not be understood literally , or as at first sight they seem to express . the conclvsion . to what has been said on this subject , i will only add this one solemn protestation , that as what i here offer is grounded on the dictates only of plain and positive scripture , and the most evident and perfect reason , as i humbly judg : so the design of this its publication is the alone glory of god almighty , and the church's peace , which no ways can be establish'd firmly but on the foundations of truth . and though i am sensible the work is not perform'd with that exactness as to be in every part without reproof , yet i am satisfied that in the main i have therein managed the true cause of god and religion . nevertheless , i have a secret distrust within me , that what i here offer will not be kindly received : for my best indeavours must not expect to find better success than did those of my blessed lord and master ; who , though he spake as never man spake , and confirmed his doctrine with such miracles as did demonstrate him to be a teacher sent of god , yet was believed on but by a few : the praise of men was then generally much more belov'd than the praise of god ; joh. 12. 43. and i doubt the case is still the same ; men now seek their own and not the things of jesus christ , phil. 2. 21. they that love riches will hardly run the hazard of losing any temporal preferment for the sake of truth . others will be averse from acknowledging themselves in a mistake , who before have been honoured with the repute both of orthodox and learned men ; and those who have been long prepossess'd with the contrary perswasion , will hardly relinquish it , though the best of reasons be offered to convince them of their error . in short , the religion of mankind generally is but a self-righteousness , a law rather of their own making than of god's appointing . there are but very few that in all things do either live or believe as the gospel directs them : the whole world does for the most part prefer some senseless humour before sacred truth , and that immortal bliss to which it would conduct them . the end . the difference betwixt the protestant and socinian methods in answer to a book written by a romanist, and intituled, the protestant's plea for a socinian. tenison, thomas, 1636-1715. 1687 approx. 116 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 33 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2003-09 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a64356 wing t694 estc r10714 12590796 ocm 12590796 63913 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a64356) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 63913) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 676:6) the difference betwixt the protestant and socinian methods in answer to a book written by a romanist, and intituled, the protestant's plea for a socinian. tenison, thomas, 1636-1715. 64 p. printed for benjamin tooke ..., [london] : 1687. attributed to thomas tenison. cf. halkett & laing (2nd ed.). includes bibliographical references. reproduction of original in union theological seminary library, new york. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng r. h., 1609-1678. -protestant's plea for a socinian. socinianism. 2003-05 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2003-05 apex covantage keyed and coded from proquest page images 2003-06 john latta sampled and proofread 2003-06 john latta text and markup reviewed and edited 2003-08 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion the difference betwixt the protestant and socinian methods : in answer to a book written by a romanist , and intituled , the protestants . plea for a socinian . licensed , decemb. 14. 1686. printed for benjamin tooke at the sign of the ship in st. paul's church-yard . 1687. the introduction . the author of a late little book , which bears the title of [ seek and you shall find , ] does , both in his own name , and in the name of many sincere persons , make open complaint of the licentiousness of the press . a if he means by those persons , such as are so sincere in their credulity , that they mixt not one grain of reasonable inquiry with it , the complaint will give no pain to judicious people , unless it be by moving them to pity his weakness . and a man would imagine , that his ●…ort of sincere people were so purely credulous , seeing the justice of the complaint is on the side of the reformed . this lesser matter puts me in mind of a greater , yet of a like nature , in the circumcellions , one of those branches into which the faction , which sprang from donatus , was divided . they went about doing injury to the christians , from whom they had made a causeless separation ; and when their incivilities were , by those whom they had provoked , turn'd upon them , they took the confidence to call themselves martyrs . but certainly , those , who are the illegal aggressors , deserve the blame . those who send the challenge are the litentious , rather than the modest accepters . and , when truth and innocency are assaulted , such as honour them and have interest in them , ought to do some just thing in their necessary defence ; and , if need be , draw their pens in their service . provided that it be done ( as , i think , by our churchmen , it has been generally done ) in a way consistent with decency of manners , and publick peace . if , therefore , there appear amongst the romanists , misrepresenters and crafty softners and colourers of their own doctrine ; true and faithful representers are not unreasonably officious , when they enter upon the stage and take off the disguise . if artificial expositions are imposed , and set to sale in our own language upon every stall ; it is very proper for such as are friends to sincerity , to take upon them the office of true expounders , and to convince the world , that such sweetners of the doctrines of the synod of trent , have not declared what those doctrines are , but what , in their opinion , they ought to be ; or , by what turns of wit , they may be fenced against the arguments of reformed catholiques . if any man thinks fit not only to preach , but to publish in this nation , a sermon of st. peter , and , in that sermon , to reproach all churches besides the roman , as new trimmed vessels , leaky at the bottom , and unable to carry those , who sail in them ; to the haven ; it cannot be a crime to set forth a discourse on the same subject , ( without any reflexion either on such a person , or his performance ; ) and to shew the true sense of thou art peter , and the safety of our communion , and the soundness of our bottom ; whilst some are in a vessel which has suffer'd so many alterations and additions , that it cannot be call'd the same ship it was , when st. peter was in it . again , if such guides in controversy offer themselves , as lead men out of the way , and turn them round in an endless circle ; the direction of honest guides is a debt which they owe to truth and charity . if men in books , in pulpits , in conversation , shall daily ask the question , where is the protestant's judge ? they ought to esteem it a civility in others , when they give them a full answer about a iudge in controversy . and if men of like perswasion revile this church as the schismatical party of donatus , it is out of decency and not want of ability , that men do not give them an irene for their lucilla . in the mean time , they have a substantial answer , though not so sharp a rebuke , as their bold uncharitableness justly merited . last of all , if a romanist accuseth the church of england , as a patroness of the heresie of socinus , though not with a direct and downright charge , yet from the consequence of her methods ; common duty to so good and venerable a mother constraineth her sons to appear in her vindication ; and to shew that her plea is very widely mistaken . if she pleads for arians , socinians , or any other faction of men , who have departed from the true faith ; she does it no otherwise than in the words of her litany . in that pious office , she beseecheth god to bring into the way of truth all such as have erred and are deceived : and may god abundantly favour her charitable petition . by such considerations as these , i have , at last , been moved to write an answer to the book which the author is pleas'd to call the protestants plea for a socinian , and to make that answer publick . but i must acknowledge , that , upon other accounts , the diversion which this answer has given me , has been very unwelcom : as unwelcom as the trouble was to those of old time , who , when they were employ'd in offering sacrifice , were forc'd to turn aside , and drive away from the altar the greedy fowls , and the impertinent flies . now , in this answer , i shall , for order-sake , and that i may proceed distinctly , reduce what i purpose to say to certain heads ; and they are these three which follow . i. observations touching the book itself , its edition , character and design . ii. considerations relating to the general argument of it , by which it may appear to be of no real force against the plea of the reformed . iii. particular answers to the particular parts of this pretended protestants plea , as it stands divided in the five conferences of the author . the difference betwixt the protestant and socinian methods , &c. chap. i. observations touching the book itself , its edition , character and design . for the book itself , it may be noted in the first place , that it is neither new , nor entire . it is the fourth discourse in the second edition of the guide in controversies , set out in the year 1673. if this tract was published before that time , to me it was not ; for then , and not before , it came to my knowledge . but this is not the thing which gives our ecclesiasticks offence ; for whether the men of controversie bring into the field either their old or their new artillery of arguments , this apostolical church is proof against them . the book , of which this plea is a part , is believed , by many of the same way , to be of very great strength and solidity : and when a question is moved concerning their faith , they think it enough to say , the guide is unanswered * if that be a good method , a protestant , upon the like occasion , may take leave to say , the book against the popes supremacy , written by the learned and humble dr. barrow , is unanswerable . and , after all this , the guide is actually answered , though not in the formality of word for word , in a great volume of refutation * . the bottom on which all is built is shew'd to be false ; and if a workman discovers the unsoundness of the foundation , he is not oblig'd to tell particularly how every single brick is dawbed with untempered mortar . the guide is sufficiently answered , if it be prov'd , either that the first step he sets is false , or that he wants eyes , or that he is , by prejudice , blinded . some such thing seems to be , in some degree , in this guide in controversie ; and i may set it down as my second observation , that though there is a commendable temper in this , and his other writings , yet there is an obscureness in all of them ; and he that is conversant in his books , is as if he walk'd in a calm , but darkish night . part of this obscureness to the unlearned riseth from hard words , which , though they seem not to be affected by the author , are yet very frequently used by him . such are , in his other discourses , a relative cult . salvifical b . non-clearness c . inerrability d . church-anarchical e . traditive-sense f . decession g . and , in this plea , autocatacrisie h , plerophory i , cognoscitive faculties k , unliteral l , consubstantiality m . but the plain truth is this , that where the cause will not bear manifest and sound sense , it must be darkned with words , if men will plead , with art , for it . concerning the sense of the protestants darkned in this and his other discourses , he has done it with art enough ; i cannot say , with equal sincerity . little pieces of their writings are taken out of their places , and inlaid in such manner as to serve the figure of his work , but to blemish theirs . and it may be a third note , with particular reference to mr. chillingworth , whom , in this short dialogue , he has cited more than twenty times , that whilst he has picked out of him many other words , he has omitted every one of those which do expresly answer this plea for a socinian . i will set down these words afterwards , in their due place , for the satisfaction of ingenuous readers ; * and to shew that great accomplishments may be attended with great insincerity . fourthly , i observe concerning this writer , that he has not , in this dialogue betwixt a protestant and a socinian , strictly kept the character of either of them . first , he hath not accurately observed the character of a socinian . he introduceth the socinian as insisting perp●tually upon the point of the consubstantiality of th● son of god , or his being of one and the same e●sence or substance with the father : whereas that ●● properly the point in controversie betwixt the ●●rians and the catholick christians , rather than betwixt them and the socinians , who derive them selves from artemon and samosatenus more directly than from arius . it is true , they deny that christ is of the same substance with his father , but their proper heresie is the denial of his being any thing before he was conceiv'd by the holy ghost , and born of the virgin mary : for this reason the extracts out of the readings of the college of posnan n against the socinians , have the name given to them of theological assertions against the new samosatenians , and not the new arians ; yet in some respects they are , and may be so called , without absurdness of speech . socinus himself will not admit that the true arians are of his way , further than as they agree with him in affirming the father to be the only god by essence o . and sandius , though he was a professed arian , and an avowed enemy of the nicene doctrine , yet he wrote against the socinian heresies , which affirm , that christ was a meer man , and deny that the spirit of god is a person p . but the author may have been moved to select this point because of its accidental difficulty occasion'd by scholastick niceness in their disputes about this mystery , and the controversies which they have carry'd on about the very term of homousiety . there was artifice , therefore , in singling out this point as capable of being turned into perplexity . especially ( as go●… us q the socinian notes ) when the occams and the durands enter into questions about formalities , quiddities , and personalities . other points ( as about baptism , the lords supper , orders , and the church ) would have been too plain for the purpose . again , this author brings , or rather forces in his socinian , and makes him to speak to the protestant in these words : r — i pray tell me , whether do you certainly know the sense of the scriptures , for the evidence of which you separated from the church before luther , requiring conformity to the contrary doctrines as a condition of her communion ? this is rather the phrase of a papist than a socinian . for , though socinus believ'd his own scheme to be new , and distinct from the whole church , he did not believe that the lutherans had made such a separation . neither would he have disputed with them about the sense of the scriptures , for the evidence of which they separated ( or rather were driven ) from the church of rome ; for he did allow that those places were clear . nor would he have given to the roman church the name of the whole church , or scarce of a church at all . he did not so much as allow it to be a true church in the most favourable sense of the protestants , who distinguish betwixt a true and a pure church , and compare it to a mass of silver embased with lead . socinus plac'd the truth of the church in the truth of its doctrine s , from which truth he held the church of rome to be extreamly departed . he affirm'd concerning the notes or signs of the church , that either they were false ; or , if true , belong'd not to the church of rome : and he made particular instance in the mark of holy. he declar'd concerning luther , t that he drew men off from false worship and idolatry , and brought them to that knowledge of divine matters which was sufficient for the procuring of eternal life . he added , that god did afterwards , by zuinglius and oecolampadius , reform certain things of very great importance . he repeats it again , that , by the means of luther , men were enlightned in those things which were absolutely necessary to salvation . so that this author does not exactly personate a socinian when he speaks thus in a sonian's name ; whether do you certainly know the sense of the scriptures for the evidence of which you separated from the church before luther ? again , a socinian would not have spoken as this author does in his name , calling a heinous iniquity a u very great mortal sin. nor would any accurate speaker have us'd that improper expression . then ( secondly ) for the protestant in the dialogue , he does here and there misrepresent his sense , and speak , at the same time , as by him , and yet against him . for example-sake ; the socinian having said out of mr. chillingworth , that his party had not forsaken the whole church , seeing themselves were a part of it , ( which , by the way , a socinian would scarce have said , but rather have own'd his church to have been a new one upon the whole matter , and granted a kind of universal apostacy * ) the protestant is brought in as in a manner deriding this argument in his own person , or at least as contented with it as , by a socinian , propos'd : — so then it seems we need fear no schism from the church catholick till a part can divide from itself , which can never be . whereas a protestant would have first told them , that there is just fear of a schism in the body of the church catholick , though not from it : and that they had made a separation from the sound parts of it , though not from the whole ; whilst the protestants were both members of the universal church , and in communion with all particular churches so far as they are christian. he would have added , that mr. chillingworth's words were proper in his own case , but not in the case of a socinian church , which is taken to be a member in the universal church , but unsound and out of its place . fourthly , it may be noted , that the author of this book is not the inventer , but the borrower of this argument call'd the protestants plea for a socinian . it has been used by valerianus magnus ; by the author of the brief disquisition ; by sir kenelm digby , in his discourse x concerning the infallibility of religion , ( if he be the genuine author ; ) by the iesuite who cavill'd against dr. potter's book call'd , want of charity . which argument of the iesuite was long ago answer'd by mr. chillingworth y , though this author , who was under obligation , by the very nature of his undertaking , to have reply'd , is pleas'd to pass it over in silence . since that time , louis maimbourg ( then a iesuite ) wrote a book intituled , a treatise concerning the true word of god z . four chapters of that little book are spent in the managing of this method . and , if you will take it upon his own word , he has come into the field with invincible weapons a . about two years after , this protestants plea is set to sale among us , after the english manner in other knacks . after the french , comes the english guide ; after the foreign expositor , the english misrepresenter . we follow when the mode declines elsewhere . when others molt their feathers , we take them up and write with them . yet this is to be acknowledg'd , that our author , both in his judgment and manners , and closeness of writing , does much exceed that monsieur maimbourg , though he may seem to have taken some hints from him . my last observation toucheth the design of this book , which looks as if it were particularly levell'd against the established church of england . it is true , the more general name of protestant is used , but the authors who are cited are not luther or calvin ; cal●…xtus or daille ; cartwright or travers ; but archb. laud ; archb. bramhal ; mr. chillingworth ; dr. hammond ; dr. f●…rn , and dr. stillingfleet . now it has been one of the later stratagems of evil men , to misrepresent the ministers of this sound church , as favourers of the doctrines of socinus , and at this very time this art is in practice . otherwise , why d●…es the paper just now scattered abroad , b style the socinians the brethren of protestants by descent and iniquity ? to what other purpose serveth the beginning of the long book just now appearing , and call'd , a letter to the bishop of lincoln c ? for the author complains of the arian history of sandius , as publish'd here at london , ( though 't was set sorth in holland , and in england twice refuted ) and of that bishops declining an answer to it ; which ( surely ) he might reasonably do , without any approbation of so ill a book ; for every man is not at leasure to do every thing in learning , which , in the general , is fit to be done . the title of this book is serviceable to the abovesaid design , by way of insinuation . and who will assure us , that it was not pick'd out of the guide for this disingenuous end ? that it was gathered meerly as the choicest flower contain'd in that book ; and not as the fittest in this juncture for this calumniating purpose ? i do not believe that this was the principal design either of the author or the publish●…r . but , if a man , that goes about to fence himself from his neighbour , can both dig his ditch , and cast his durt upon him , he may , perhaps , be so ill natur'd as to think he does well to dispatch two works at a time . however it be with our present author , this is certain , socinus himself taking notice of it d , that england and scotland were not favourable to his doctrine ; and that it sprang out of italy . sozzo the uncle , blandrata , paruta , alciat , were italians , and bred in the roman church . ochinus was of siena , and , some say e , confessor to the pope , and general of the order of the capucins . faustus socinus the nephew , as well as laelius the uncle , was of the same siena , and nearly related to pius , the second , and third ; and to paul the fifth f . and , of the first chapter of the second book of the reformation of the church of poland g , these are the contents . after what manner the seeds of divine truth were carried out of italy into poland , in the year 1551 by laelius socinus . and before his remove in the year 1546 , he had form'd a socinian cabal of italians in the territories of venice h , and especially at vicenza , amounting to a considerable number . and i find it said elsewhere i , that , in the year 1539 , the burning of a lady who had turn'd from the church of rome , open'd the eyes of men in poland , and dispos'd them to inquiry into truth . i have seen some applications k of the socinians to the mahometans , in which they shew what approaches they make towards them . i have read of conditions of accommodation betwixt the socinians and the romanists l . but fame it self ( i think ) has not invented any such project betwixt the socinians and the english church . i do not offer this discourse , as a proof of encouragement for socinianism in the church of rome , yet it is an argument sufficient for the silencing of those of that communion , who charge it upon ours . and for other churches , that which is said already may be a proof of the wonted sincerity of monsieur maimbourg , who tells his readers with assurance , that the persons who , after the interval of nigh 900 years , reviv'd arianism , were all of them either lutherans or calvinists before they became the disciples of socinus m . a man ought to have been master of their history , before he had pronounc'd so freely of them : but some have an extraordinary talent in making history . it is true , the author de constantiâ religionis christianae n , was by education a lutheran ; but he was taken young into the school of the iesuites : and , after having been ten years among them , he turn'd socinian ; as he himself relates his own story . and men , who consider the nature of causes and effects , are inclined to believe that the way to socinianism has been much open'd and widen'd by the popish doctors who have so vehemently urg'd the obscureness of the scriptures in the doctrine of the trinity ; and who , at this very time , furnish the hawkers with their little dialogues , endeavouring to equal the new doctrine of transubstantiation , with that of three persons in one incomprehensible essence . for to say , that that invention of paschasius is as reasonable to be believ'd as the great mystery of the trinity , by all good catholicks , is in effect to say , that neither of them is reasonable . chap. ii. considerations touching the general argument of the protestants plea for a socinian ; shewing the weakness of it , and that it is not of force enough to overthrow the plea of the reformed . let that which hath been said , suffice for the quality of this writing , i will proceed to the general argument of it , which may , in brief , be thus represented . the protestants and socinians , agree in their plea , they alledge scripture , they measure faith by it as by a compleat and clear rule . they reject councils , and the major part of church authority , if they are not convinc'd that they are founded on the scriptures , in finding out the sense of which both sides profess due industry . both parties excuse themselves , ( whatsoever doctrines they advance , whatsoever wounds they open in the church ) as uninfected with h●…si , and free from schisan , till their private spirit be satisfi'd , and , before the tribunal they erect in their own heads , they are self-accus'd and self-condemned . therefore protestants make apology for socinians , and are neither able to confute them , upon these principles and methods ; nor to justifie themselves ; but are oblig'd to appeal to the infallible iudge , or the major part of the bench of iudges in the roman church , where all such controversies may be effectually ended . the force of this specious argument will be abated ( as all such arguments may easily be , whose force lays only in plausible appearance ) by a few plain considerations . first , the socinians will not allow their plea to be perfectly the same with that of the protestants ; especially those of the established church of england . the socinian author of the brief disquisition proceeds up●…n a supposed difference ; and he endeavours to shew that unless the evangelical quitted their own way of resolving faith , and made use of the methods of socinus , they could not solidly and evidently refute the romanists , and particularly the judgment of valerianus magnus , concerning the protestant rule of believing . secondly , both arians and socinians plead tradition ; though their plea is not manag'd exactly after our better manner . and when they plead tradition , why is not theirs then as much the popish plea , as , when they plead scripture , it is the protestants ? for neither do they plead that just as this church does . two assertions may be here advanc'd . first , that the arians and socinians plead tradition . secondly , that some papists have help'd the more modern of them to materials for the making of that plea. first , arians and socinians plead tradition against the divine nature of christ , as the romanists plead tradition for it . artemon taught the heresie of our saviours being a meer man. and we are assured by an unnamed a , but an antient and ( as appeareth by his fragments ) a very sagacious author , that his party declared that they follow'd antiquiry ; that their ancestors and the apostles themselves were of the same belief ; that , to the time of pope victor , the true doctrine of the apostles was preserved ; and that it was corrupted in the times of his successor zephyrin . these ( how unjust soever ) were their allegations . socinus b takes the boldness to affirm , that the romanists are not able to defend their principles about the trinity , by the authority of the fathers ; and , on the contrary , that the earlier fathers c . who liv'd before the council of nice , were firm in his belief . he cites the council of ariminum , iustin the martyr , and s. hilary . he promiseth ( upon supposition of leisure ) to write a tract on this subject , for the satisfaction of those who are moved with such authority . crellius d pretends that , during 300 years after christ , the doctors of the church consented in this faith , that the father was the most high god , whilst the son was a diety different from the creator of the world. he says of grotius , in upbraiding manner , that he must needs know of this historical truth , being a man conversant in the fathers . he quotes iustin martyr in his dialogue with trypho , as evidence on his side . he has the confidence to say , that the men of his way have demonstrated this ; and that the very adversaries of the unitarians have confessed this to be true in tertullian and origen . he introduceth s. hilary as a patron of that doctrine which denies the divinity of the spirit of god. he presumes to say , that the nearer approaches we make to the anti-trinitarians , the higher we come to the apostolical faith. mosc●…rovius * charges his adversaries with misrepresenting of the first fathers , when they bring them in as witnesses of that faith concerning the trinity which they profess . and he proceeds in telling of them , that ignatius , the most antient of those church-doctors whose writings are extant , does openly say the contrary in his epistle to those of tarsus , affirming that christ is not the deity who is god over all , but only the son of god. he goes on in citing iustin martyr , irenaeus , origen ; how much to the purpose , it is not my business here to determine . it is true , ignatius is not the most antient of those doctors whose writings are extant : but when he wrote this e , mr. young had not published clements epistle , nor m●…rdus that of barnabas . it is also confess'd that he cites a spurious piece of tradition , ( for ignatius wrote not that epistle ad tarsenses ) ; but , in the mean time , to tradition , he , in part , appeals . lubieniecius f spends a chapter in demonstrating ( as he imagin'd ) that god had not left his church , from the apostles times to his , without witnesses of the doctrine which denies the trinity . he glories in artemon , samosatenus , photinus , and others : for men are apt , in all factions , to pretend to number and antiquity . christopher sandius wrote his indigested heap of church-story with this very design , that , in the several centuries , he might take especial notice of the favourers of the arian doctrine . and , under the borrowed name of cingallus g , he gives himself the honour of having made a most solid proof concerning all the fathers of the three first ages , that they believed as arius believ'd . mr. biddle , in the appendix to his book against the holy trinity h , endeavours to strengthen his plea with the testimonies of irenaeus , iustin martyr , novatian , theophilus , origen , arnobius , lactantius , eusebius of caesarea , and hilary of poictiers . he pretends to the fathers , though he is guilty of false mustering . monsieur-aubert du versoy tells the world i with great assurance , that all the fathers who liv'd before the council of nice were ignorant of that notion of the trinity which is now commonly embrac'd ; that all of them deny'd the eternal generation of the son of god ; that all believ'd the father to be the only sovereign , omnipotent , eternal god. the socinians , who offer'd to make application here to the late ambassador of the king of fez and morocco , would , in their epistle k , perswade his excellency , that antiquity was on their side from adam to christ : and that all the primitive christians , in and after christ and his apostles times , never own'd any other besides the single and supreme deity of the father . this could not be said of all the fathers from a judicious reader of them , but might be borrow'd from the same person who furnish'd sandius with his false witnesses l . this brings to my memory , in due method , the second assertion , that some of the arians and socinians who put tradition into their plea , have fetch'd their materials from a roman storehouse , th●…ugh not directly from the church herself . the jesuite petavius is the man : and his second tome of ec●…lesiastical doctrines , is their magazine m . insomuch that the companions of monsieur clerc n , having first taken notice of the citations of curcellaeus in favour of the arian doctrine , do after that , refer us to father petau , as to the author whom he follow'd . the modern arians have , also , call'd huetius in to their assistance , in their plea from tradition , against the divinity both of the son o and of the spirit of god p . but the mistakes of petavius and others in this matter have been publickly shew'd by a learned person q of this church , whose work , though the friends of monsi●…ur clerc have touch'd upon , they have not refuted r . mr. chillingworth urg'd some such thing as this in part of his answer to the iesuite who charg'd the protestant as the advocate of the socinian , and he cited only the notes of petavius on epiphanius ; the ecclesiastical doctrines of that father not being then come forth into the light. i will set down mr. chillingworths words , because they are omitted by this author , who quotes him often where it is less to the purpose , and omits that in which he speaks directly to his point . the iesuite had thus misrepresented the faith of the reformed , chap. 〈◊〉 . sect 2. s the very doctrine of protestants , if it be follow'd closely and with coherence to itself , must of necessity induce socinianism . to this charge mr. chillingworth t makes the following reply . 16. had i a mind to recriminate now , and to charge papists ( as you do protestants ) that they lead men to socinianism , i could certainly make a much fairer shew of evidence than you have done . for i would not tell you , you deny the infallibility of the church of england ; ergo , you lead to socinianism , which yet is altogether as good an argument as this , protestants deny the infallibility of the roman church ; ergo , they induce socinianism , nor would i resume my former argument , and urge you , that by holding the popes infallibility , you submit your self to that capital and mother heresie , by advantage whereof , he may lead you at ease to believe virtue vice , and vice virtue ; to believe antichristianity christianism , and christianity antichristian ; he may lead you to socinianism , to turcism , — if he have a mind to it ; but i would shew you that divers ways the doctors of your church do the principal and proper work of the socinians for them , undermining the doctrine of the trinity , by denying it to be supported by those pillars of the faith , which alone are fit and able to support it , i mean scripture , and the consent of the antient doctors . 17. for scripture , your men deny very plainly and frequently , that this doctrine can be proved by it . see if you please , this plainly taught , and urged very earnestly by cardinal hosius , de author . sac. scrip. l. 3. p. 53. by gordonius huntlaeus , contr. tom. 1. controv. 1. de verbo dei c. 19. by gretserus and tannerus , in colloquio ratisbon . and also by vega , possevin , wiekus , and others . 18. and then for the consent of the ancients , that that also delivers it not , by whom are we taught but by papists only ? who is it that makes known to all the world , that eusebius that great searcher and devourer of the christian libraries was an arian ? is it not your great achilles , cardinal perron , in his third book 2 chap. of his reply to king iames ? who is it that informs us that origen ( who never was questioned for any errour in this matter in or near his time ) denied the divinity of the son and the holy ghost ? is it not the same great cardinal in his book of the eucharist against m. du plessis l. 2. c. 7 ? who is it that pretends that irenaeus hath said those things , which he that should now hold would be esteemed an arian ? is it not the same perron , in his reply to k. iames , in the fifth chapter of his fourth observation ? and doth he not in the same place peach tertullian also , and in a manner give him away to the arians ? and pronounce generally of the fathers before the council of nice , that the arians would gladly be tried by them ? and are not your fellow i●…suites also , even the prime men of your order , prevarieators in this point as well as others ? doth not your friend m. fisher , or m. floyd , in his book of the nine questions proposed to him by k. iames , speak dangerously to the same purpose , in his discourse of the resolution of faith , towards the end ? giving us to understand , that the new reformed arians bring very many testimonies of the ancient fathers to prove that in this point they did contradict themselves , and were contrary one to another , which places whosoever shall read , will 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 see , that to common people they are unanswerable ; yea , that common people are not capable of the answers that learned men yield unto such obscure passages . and hath not your great antiquary petavius , in his notes upon epiphanius in haer. 69. been very liberal to the adversaries of the doctrine of the trinity , and in a manner given them for patrons and advocates ? first iust in martyr , and then almost all the fathers before the council of nice , whose speeches , he says , touching this point , cum orthodoxa fidei regulâ minimè consentiunt ? hereunto i might add , that the dominicans and iesuites between them in another matter of great importance , viz. gods prescience of future contingents , give the socinians the premises , out of which their conclusion doth unavoidably follow . for the dominicans maintain on the one side , that god can foresee nothing but what he decrees ; the iesuites on the other side , that he doth not decree all things ; and from hence the socinians conclude , ( as it is obvious for them to do , ) that he doth not foresee all things . lastly , i might adjoyn this , that you agree with one consent , and settle for a rule unquestionable , that no part of religion can be repugnant to reason , whereunto you in particular subscribe unawares in saying , from truth no man can by good consequence infer falshood ; which is to say in effect , that reason can never lead any man to errour : and after you have done so , you proclaim to all the world , ( as you in this pamphlet do very frequently , ) that if men follow their reason and discourse , they will ( if they understand themselves ) be led to socinianism . and thus you see with what probable matter i might furnish out and justifie my accusation , if i should charge you with leading men to socinianism . yet i do not conceive that i have ground enough for this odious imputation . and much less should you have charged protestants with it , whom you confess to abhor and detest it ; and who fight against it , not with the broken reeds , and out of the paper-fortresses of an imaginary infallibility , which were only to make sport for their adversaries ; but with the sword of the spirit , the word of god ; of which we may say most truly , what david said of goliah's sword , offered by abimeleck , non est sicut iste , there is none comparable to it . thirdly , though the modern arians and socinians do speak of tradition , and not of scripture only , yet our plea and theirs is not perfectly the same . touching the holy scripture , we have a greater veneration for it than many of them ; and for tradition , though we make it not the very rule of our faith , nor place infallibility in it ; yet , in concurrence with scripture , it weigheth not so much with them as with us . we have a greater veneration for the holy scripture itself , than the right socinian : for such a one makes reason the rule of that rule ; and though he thinks a doctrine is plain in scripture , yet , if he believes it to be against his reason , he assents not to it . whereas a man of this church believes the scriptures to be written by inspiration from god : and , upon that account he assures himself that nothing contrary to true reason can be contained in the scriptures . therefore when he finds any thing in holy writ which to him is incomprehensible , he does not say he believes it though it be impossible and irrational ; but he believes it to be rational though mysterious ; and he suspects not reason itself , but his own present art of reasoning whensoever it concludes against that which he reads , and reads without doubting of the sense of the words : and by meditation he at last finds-his errour . the socinians u challenge to themselves petrus abailardus as one of their predecessors : for this they cite st. bernard ; and they strengthen their challenge with the testimony of baronius , who says of abailardus , that he made reason the judge of articles of faith. it is true , a protestant judges whether his faith be rational , or whether it be founded on divine revelation ; but he will not allow his reasonings to oppose any principle in holy writ : for that were either to deny it to be of god , or , with blasphemous irreverence , to reproach the almighty wisdom with a contradiction . yet after this manner socinians argue , though some of them use great caution , and few make open profession of it : nay , they sometimes tell us , that the scripture contains nothing contrary to manifest reason x . however , by their manner of objecting against the doctrine of the blessed trinity , the sagacious are convinc'd , that they first think it to be against plain reason , and then , rejecting it as an errour , they colour their aversion with forced interpretations of holy writ . the words of ostorodius y hint to us at what end they begin . if reason ( said he ) shews expresly that a trinity of persons in god is false , how could it ever come into the mind of an understanding man to think it to be true , and that it can be proved by the word of god ? and further , they own , with us , from the principles of reason , that god is just and good ; but then , with the platonists , they measure justice and goodness by particular notions , which are their reasonings , but not the reason of mankind . and when any thing is said in the scripture which is contrary to such measures , they are ready to depart from it . upon this account it is , that many of them deny the doctrine of the eternal torments of the finally impenitent ; not because it is not plain enough in scripture , but because it seems contrary to their notions of justice , goodness and mercy ; though to the true notions of them it may be reconcil'd . thus ernestus sonnerus lays it down z as his principle in the first place that the eternal pains of the wicked are contrary to gods justice ; and being prepossessed with this prejudice , he can , thenceforth , find nothing in the scripture which may over-rule his opinion . all this is not my private , and ( as some socinians may call it ) uncharitable conjecture ; there is a romanist a who has said the same thing , and in very plain terms . the socinian ( saith he ) judgeth the bible to be the wisest and most authentical book that ever was written ; such a one , as no other humane writing can contest with it ; yet not such a one as no slip nor errour may fall into it , even in matters of importance , and concerning our salvation : and therefore , that where reason is absolutely against it , he may leave it ; though for civility sake , he will rather choose to put a wrong gloss upon it , than plainly refuse it . — it cannot be pretended that scripture is his rule : for , seeing he supposeth scripture to be fallible , and that , upon all occasions , he correcteth it by his discourse ; it is not scripture but his discourse , and his reasoning , that is his true and supreme rule . which is the cause that they , or some of their party did denominate themselves sanarations from right reason . and as we have a greater veneration for the scriptures than most arians and socinians ; so have we a truer regard to real tradition , which they use , not so much as a witness of any great value , as a fit weapon for the encountring those who dispute out of antiquity ; to the end that they may overcome them with their own arms. socinus b had consulted some of the antient writers . he was one of the first in his age who suspected some of those epistles to be spurious , which went under the venerable name of ignatius the martyr . but i have not observed in any of his writings , that he puts a value upon any such authority , nay , he writes in divinity in such manner as if no church-writers had so gone before him as to give any considerable light to him . he promiseth a tract for the satisfaction of those , c who were moved ( in his opinion ) more than was fit with the authority of the fathers . and though , in this one point of the father as the one creator , he cites the antients by way of argument to the men who esteem them ; yet in other articles he confesses that he stands divided from them d , and rather glories that he gives light to all the world , than borrows from it . the author of the brief disquisition e blames the protestants for the great deference they pay to unwritten tradition , meaning by it that which is not written in the scriptures , but in the fathers ; although , at the same time , he makes them to ascribe to councils and single fathers a greater authority than they really do , notwithstanding they are very just to them . ruarus f though he was a man of extraordinary candor , yet , in his letters to bergius , he does not barely refuse , but reject with derision , his catholick interpretation of scripture according to the rule of vincentius lirinensis which admitteth , that sense which was every where , always and of all beleived . [ a rule by which we help our selves . ] and he further professeth that he should be much concern'd , if the interpretations of calvin and luther were not more solid and acute than those of the fathers . we of this church consider in the interpretations of the fathers , not so much the acuteness ( though in s. chrysostome , for instance sake , and in theodoret , it is not wanting ) as we do the history , and the light which they may give us into the consent of the churches in the primitive times . we are not apt to believe that there was such an universal corruption and apostacy g as socinians speak of immediately after the apostles times . we are not strangers to the testimony of hegesippus h of which they make use for the blackning of the primitive church he does not say that the leprosy was spread throughout the church , but that it began early . we do not undervalue the fathers , but proceed in the method of the antients who begun first with the holy scriptures i and then descended to those who wrote next after the holy pen-men . the calvinists themselves , radon and silvius , in a disputation at petricow in poland k did not plead just after the manner of the socinians . they pleaded the scriptures together with councils and fathers as subordinate witnesses . their socinian adversaries , gregorius pauli and gentilis , mock'd at their way of arguing . they profess'd they would admit of nothing but the pure word of god as shiing sufficiently by its own light. and they denied that there was contain'd in formal terms in the holy scriptures , the doctrine of three persons in one divine essence . again , the members of our church do not imitate the socinians in traducing l constantine the great and preferring constantius the arian before him . they celebrate his memory as a defender of the faith , so far are they from reviling him as a perverter of it . they do not joyn with socinians in reproaching the fathers of nice as mercinary and flexible men , whom constantine had gained to his party by interest or force m . they do not , with gregorius pauli n call the explication of the nicene faith the creed of sathanasius . they hate the irreverence as much as they despise the jingle . they do not beleive that the nicene creed is forg'd , as some socinians do * , though at the same time they take this upon the modern authority of laurentius valla , whom they make to say , that he read it in very antient books of isidore , who in his time was a collector of councils : such a collector of councils as varillas of history ; a father and a collector together . the truth is , it is valla's business to elude the sense of isidore , and to ascribe a twofold creed to the nicene fathers , the apostolical , and that which bears their name . whereas isidor●… distinguishes betwixt their creed and that of the apostles o . the protestants repeat in their liturgy the creed of nice in the form agreed on in the council of constantinople , and would not do so , if they did not beleive it orthodox . they do not say with some modern arians p that it was framed by marcellus ancyranus a heretick , or joyn with those spanish iesuites , who ( it seems ) charg'd this creed with the heresie of photinus the master of marcellus . they pay a more just duty to the emperour and the nicene fathers , than to say with the enemies of the holy trinity , that , setting council against council q , they chuse rather to follow those of sirmium and rimini than those of nice . our church-men do not , with the socinians , disregard the fathers who liv'd after that famous council , and acknowledge that those fathers are against it , and bid defiance to their opposition . but so does socinus n , so does crellius s , so does pisecius t , for thus he discourseth . do they say theology knows nothing of this ? it is enough if the apostles do . s. austin damns this . christ approves it . the same pisecius is more severe in his censure than socinus himself ; and he agrees with scaliger ( if scaliger be by him rightly cited ) in accusing all the fathers up to s. austins time , of ignorance in another doctrine about the receipt of departed souls not martyrs ; and in affirming that the errours of the first fathers prepared the way for antichrist . in fine , though the church of england does not make the councils her rule of faith , or make her last appeal to them ; yet she believes that , in times of controversie , when the heads of men are apt to be disturb'd even in matters otherwise plain enough , by the heats and distempers of the age they live in , they are of special use . the authority of them tends to the quelling of the party : and then , when the faction cools , it tends to the fixing and further strengthning of the weak and interrupted faith of many . for , as in a ballance one scale may descend more or less below the level ; so there may be faith and assent without adding the weight of fathers and councils ; and yet ( in unquiet times especially and disputing ages ) such testimonies may give some further strength to minds made feeble either by publick distractions , or the private attacks of crafty seducers . thus our church gives to the scripture the things that belong to the scripture ; and to tradition the dues of tradition : and it gives more even to the former than generally socinians do ; and more also to the latter , though with just caution and subordination . so that their plea and ours is not , in a strict way of speaking , the very same . but fourthly , if we admit that the plea of the protestant and socinian is the same , for the general nature of it ; we cannot be truly said to plead for them , unless the general plea be , with truth and pertinence , as well as boldness , applied to the very merit of the cause . if two men will plead the same thing with equal assurance , but not with equal reason , in truth and merit 't is not the same . if the confidence of men in pleading might weigh against the right of others , they that were in the wrong would be in the right : for what was wanting in the reason of the case , would be supply'd by impudence . but is it said by any of the robe , that when the counsel on either side pleads presidents , and statutes , or equity , the plaintiff pleads for the defendent , and the defendent for the plaintiff ? both pretend to the same rule , but he that is in the right measures his case by it ; the other would bend it towards his illegal interests . one has a plea , the other a pretence . if a socinian will plead scripture , and plead it falsly , it is so far not ours , but his . if confidence in pleading may either carry or ballance a cause , then pleas of laws , scriptures , oral tradition , fathers , councils , may be urged contrary ways , and each side be equally justifi'd : for all such pleas have been made by contrary parties . mr. lilburn pleaded law as much as judge ienkins , though not as well . some dissenters in the queens time wrote down their arguments , and gave their book the title of sions plea. it may be their adversaries might call it the plea of babylon . whether it was the one or the other , was to be tryed not by the name of the plea , or the persuasion of the advocates , but by the merit and nature of the cause itself . the apostles pleaded before magistrates of another faith , that it was better to obey god than man. all parties who dissent from the establish'd religion , use the same plea , and generally in the same words . but does this make the pleas equal ! must they not joyn issue upon the reason of the case , and compare their circumstances and those of the apostles , and observe wherein they agree , and wherein they differ ? if men , who plead scripture as their rule of faith , make apologie , by so doing , for all others who pretend to the same rule ; then catholick councils themselves plead for socinians : for ( to give an example , ) the general council of chalcedon ( and after it evagrius ) testifies u , that the intent of the second council was , to make it appear by scripture-testimony , that such as macedonius err'd in that opinion which they had advanc'd against the lordship of the holy ghost . the council here us'd the like plea with socinus , but to a contrary end , and upon surer reason . in such cases there will be no satisfactory conclusion , till the moment of the scriptures be particularly weigh'd . for tradition , that was pleaded x by valentinus , basilides , marcion , who boasted of their following the apostle s. matthias . and irenaeus y observ'd concerning hereticks , that , being vanquish'd by scripture , they accused it , and took sanctuary in tradition . thus , after his time , did the nestorian hereticks z : their epistle to the people of constantinople begins on this manner , the law is not deliver'd in writing , but is placed in the minds of the pastors . and when the metropolitans and bishops of the third council ( that of ephesus , ) had confuted nestorius out of the scripture , in stead of answering , he foam'd against them . s. cyprian a pleaded universal consent against appeals to rome ; and that is part of our plea too . yet the romanists will not allow that he either pleads for our church , or against their own . the plea is to be consider'd , and not meerly offer'd . if , for example sake , a church-man quotes the same s. cyprian in favour of the doctrine of the unity in trinity , and sandius the arian cites the same father as being against it , are we not to have recourse to the book itself , and to examine the pretences on both sides ? or can any man believe a quotation is made good by the meer quoting of it ? and may not one party be confuted without the spirit of infallibility ? it is evident it may be done , for it is done on this manner . sandius b cites the book de duplici martyrio , as not owning the text in s. iohn's epistle , there are three that bear record in heaven . now that book is not s. cyprians . it would be a very extraordinary birth , if he should be the father of it ; for it makes mention of dioclesians c persecution . and yet that spurious book does not reject the place in s. iohn , though it does not exactly set down the text d . and for the genuine s. cyprian e he mentions the text directly , in his book of the unity of the church . and of this how are we sure ? why ! let us open the book and read plain words , and their unwrested sense gives us satisfaction . i conclude , then , that notwithstanding the protestants and socinians do , both of them , plead scripture as the rule of faith ; yet because protestants plead the rule rightly in the point of the divinity of the son of god , and the socinians very falsly ( even in the opinion of the arians and romanists themselves ) f ; the plea of the former does not justifie the plea of the latter ; and [ justifie ] is our authors word . for the tryal of the plea we must come to dint of argument ; and truth is great , and will , in time , prevail . chap. iii. particular answers to the particular branches of the protestants plea for a socinian , divided into five conferences by the author of it . this third chapter needs not to be drawn into any very great length ; for after the general considerations which answer the general argument , there wants little more than the application of them to the respective heads in the dialogues . of the first conference this is the sum , both protestants and socinians plead scripture as the sole rule of faith. both say , the scripture is sufficiently clear . both say , it is clear in the doctrine of the nature of the son of god. the socinian professeth himself to be as industrious in finding out the sense of the scripture as the protestant ; and he is as well assur'd in his persuasion ; therefore the protestant , in this plea , iustifies the socinian , the latter saying the same thing for himself that the former does . i answer , first , ( as before , ) that though they pretend to the same rule , they walk not alike by it . one follows it , the other wrests it . and this ought not to be turn'd to the prejudice of him who is true to his rule . let both opinions be brought to it , and then it will appear which is strait and which is crooked . if two men lay before them the same rule of addition , and one works truly by it , and the other , either through want of due attention , or out of unjust design , shall cast up the sum false , there is no man who will tell us in good earnest , that the first justifies the second ; or that both of them needed an infallible arithmetician to be their judg. secondly , though this author picks out this one point of the divinity of christ , and represents it in the term of consubstantiality , which to the vulgar here , is more difficult than that of homonsiety was to the greeks ; and passes by many more easie socinian doctrines , yet so it is that we find in st. iohn this very article plainly revealed . for that apostle ( who certainly was conscious of his own design ) wrote the history of his gospel to this very purpose , that we might believe that iesus is the son of god : by which each romanist , who owns ( what his church does , ) the catholick sense of st. iohn's first chapter , can understand no other article than that of nice , that christ is god of god. thirdly , though the socinians do pretend that the writings of st. iohn are to them as clear as to any protestant , and that they cannot discern in them the divinity of christ ; yet confidence in saying a thing is not clear , is not an argument that it is not . the house is not naturally made dark , because the blind will excuse their infirmity upon it . men will say doctrines are obscure , even when they are secretly convinc'd of their evidence . for pride and prejudice are not very yeilding . my adversary here ( says a learned and good man * ) seems to object as elsewhere , that some who seem to follow the letter of the scriptures deny this , [ that is , the divinity of jesus christ , ] as do the socinians . what then ? this is not for want of evidence in scripture , but from making or devising ways to avoid this evidence . will this author say , that there was no evidence of there being angels and spirits , amongst the jews , because the sadduces , who had opportunity of observing all such evidence , beleived neither angel nor spirit ? and will he say that there was no clear evidence from the word of christ and his miracles , that they were from god , because the pharises and other unbeleiving jews , who conversed with him , and saw his miracles , and heard his word , did not acknowledge him for god ? [ i suppose not ] . fourthly , it does not become the author ( who is a romanist ) to say of the protestant pleading scripture , that , in so doing , he justifies the plea of the socinian ? for that supposes that the one has as much reason on his side as the other . whereas a romanist is oblig'd to own that the protestant , so far as it is oppos'd to the socinian creed , is the true catholick faith ; and that the nicene creed which is common to us and them , is founded on the scripture , though the bottom on which it stands is by the church to be discover'd ; whilst his church condemns the doctrines of socinus as haeretical , and therefore as such as cannot at all , either plainly or obscurely , be contain'd in the holy canon . fifthly , this author seems to magnifie the industry of the socinians , saying , that none have us'd more diligence in the search of the scriptures , as appears by their writings . this is true in part , and but in part ; for somtimes they have been in haste enough . slichtingius a made quick dispatch , writing many commentaries in a few months , and doing this amidst the heats and interruptions of war. but , i will allow socinus himself to have been very industrious , and crellius also . some of the rest have been industrious rather as scriveners than commentators , transcribing the sense , and , in part , the words of those who went before them . but if men are ingag'd in new conceits , they are under a necessity of being diligent . a text cannot be wrung and squeez'd with a dead hand , and there is more study requir'd for the perverting of truth , than for the declaring of it . for the true interpretation of scripture , much more is requir'd than industry and study . the protestant therefore , in this author b , speaks of a due industry , void of pride , passion , and other interest ; and such industry has not been always acknowledg'd either in the arians , or socinians . for the arians , the antients look'd upon them not so much as idle and ignorant , as mad and impious . the fathers of the sixth synod c were gathered together against arius the distracted presbyter . and the latins call'd his doctrine the arian frenzie d vincentius lirinensis e calls that heresie the poyson of the arians , as if it was some venemous and enchanted liquor . and the leudness of the arian manners f discover'd the evil of their temper ; and there was fierceness in it as well as leudness . a disposition more fierce than that of their adversary nicholas g , who , they say , gave arius a box on the ear , in the midst of the council . arius exercis'd the office of an expounder h of scripture in the church of alexandria : but his fundamental prejudice is well understood ; that is , be falsly imagin'd that alexander was teaching the doctrine of sabellius , who confounded the three persons and made them but one ; and he ran headily from thence , and fell into his own extream i . it is true , the temper of the socinians ( especially that of their master socinus , and of crellius and ruarus ) seems much more virtuous than the disposition of the arians , less sensual , less fierce and bloody : for they were almost always bred in the school of affliction , whilst the arians were sometimes an imperial party . notwithstanding which , all romanists have not allow'd the socinians to be very well qualifi'd for the reading of the scriptures . vuje●…us chargeth them with beginning at the alcoran , before they came at the holy bible k ; though i believe that charge has a grain of the misrepresenter in it . cichovius the jesuit has spoken as severely as vujekus , accusing the secinians l of making such a progress in blaspheming the son of god , as to seem to have fallen from a desire either of speaking or thinking rightly of divine things . let a romanist consider of the qualifications of a protestant and a socinian by the effect of their labours in matters of christian faith , and if he be not blinded with very gross partiality , he will acknowledge a difference . the protestant finds in the scripture the divinity of christ and the holy ghost , and the merit of christ's sacrifice ; the socinian pretends the contrary . if the protestant and socinian were equally dispos'd , how comes the one to interpret as a catholick , the other as a heretick ? and how can a romanist believe , that god gives an equal blessing to the industry of the protestants and socinians , whilst the latter do not so much as pray for grace to the spirit of god , nor apply themselves to god the father , through the meritorious sacrifice of his blessed son ; nor to christ himself as god , but as to the highest of creatures ? cichovius m therefore , has accus'd the socinians as making christ an idol . socinus thinks n those unfit to make such an objection , who add to the end of the books they write , praise be to god and the holy virgin. and moscorovius o mentions a polish m●…ssal , in which prayer to the holy ghost was exprelly forbidden . and before the conference betwixt a carmelite and stoienski p a minister of lublin , the one prays for success first to the virgin , and then to christ as god ; the other to christ , though not as the only god. but let those parties look to this matter whom it so particularly concerns . the question i here ask is this , whether these following doctrines proceed from an industrious search of the scriptures , by a mind humble and free from prejudice , passion , and worldly interest ? as , ( ex . gr . ) that christ was not at all , till he was conceiv'd in the body of the virgin : that the question q , whether christ was before the world , or after it , is of no moment . that his blood is not a proper sacrifice . that the holy spirit is not any person at all , either divine or created . that those who are not ordained by others may step forth and preach the gospel , and administer the sacraments r . that although officers are generally employ'd in those functions ; yet other christians are not under obligation to forbear the performance of them . that baptism is none of christ's perpetual precepts in his church . that it may be used in admitting those of riper years into a church , but not as a necessary christian rite . that to hold it to be such is to add to the scriptures s . that it is an indifferent ceremony , and , if to be us'd , it is to be us'd in the admission of those who come from some other religion to christianity t . that in the words of christ u , [ this cup is the new covenant in my blood which is shed for you , ] there is a solaecism , or false grammar , and that there are many such incongruities in the new testament x that it is an abuse of the lords supper to believe that it confers any benefit upon us , conveighs any grace from god , or give us any further assurance of his favour y . that it is idolatry to kneel at the sacrament of the lords supper , and that it may be celebrated with the head cover'd . if these doctrines be the results of due industry in searching the scriptures , prejud●…ce and negligence may likewise put in their plea as preparatives to true interpretation . but farther , in the very manner of socinian exposition , there is apparent failure . for , though the holy writers express the same thing very differently , and without respect to nicety of words , ( as is evident from the several forms of words us'd in representing christs institution of the lords supper ) ; yet the socinians make interpretations of places which relate to the great articles of christian faith , to turn upon subtleties of grammatical construction . for example sake , they perplex the most comfortable doctrine of christs satisfaction with curious observations about the particle for z . whereas our churchmen make the old testament , the key of the new ; and finding plainly that the sacrifices of attonement under the law , were the types of the offering the blood of jesus upon the cross ; they conclude that god , with respect to christs death in the quality of the great expiation , did admit the guilty world into a reconcileable estate . i might add that , by coming to particulars , the socinian prejudice and insincere artifice , in expounding such places of holy writ as concern their scheme , will appear to all unbyassed readers . i will instance in the interpretation of that place in s. iohn a , no man hath ascended up to heaven , but he that came down from heaven , even the son of man which is in heaven . socinus , for the avoiding a twofold nature in christ , by which he might be both in heaven and in earth , and exist before he was born of a virgin , sets down a twofold evasion in the place of an explication . first , he interprets ascending into heaven , by seeking after heavenly things , and descending from heaven , by having learned such celestial things . and , to make all sure , he takes the hardiness to say , in the second place , that as s. paul was snatch'd up into the third heavens , and let down again ; so the man christ jesus , was taken up into heaven , somewhile before his death , and made some stay there . and by his coming down again he explaineth his going forth from the father , his ascending into heaven , his being in heaven . if this be interpreting , what is perverting ? sixthly , whereas ( in the end of this first-conference ) the author himself speaks as a third person and a romanist , and raises a doubt about the certainty any man can arrive at in having rightly used his industry ; i would only ask him , whether a man cannot be as sure of his industry in consulting his reason and the scriptures , as in attending on councils , fathers , decrees of popes , and the method of the major part of church-governors , in the universal church of all ages ? for the argument of the second conference , this is the substance of it . the socinians plead , that they ought not to receive the article of the divinity of christ , from the major part of church-governors : that it was not originally in the creed : that no article ought to be receiv'd from church-authority , till men are convinc'd that it is grounded on the scripture , which conviction they want . now , unless the church were infallible in all she determin'd , or at least in distinguishing those necessaries in which she cannot err , from points which are not of such necessity , she cannot justifie her self in putting her definitions into a creed . protestants , not withstanding they own the article of christs divinity , and urge the whole creed into which it is put , do yet argue after the manner of the socinians against church-authority , and plead the scripture as their ground , and a necessity of conviction ; therefore ( whilst they continue this kind of plea ) they cannot by church-authority either justifie themselves or confute their adversaries . all this reasoning may be confuted by these distinct answers . 1. we have no need of confuting arians and socinians , by church-authority , seeing we can do it more effectually out of the scriptures ; and if they say , that the scriptures are on their side , their saying so does not alter the nature of truth . and the romanists allow that they say not true , and they may be confuted when they are not silenc'd . protestants decline not a disputation with socinians , by the rule of primitive church-authority . but if they undervalue this rule , it is discretion in protestants to debate the matter with them in a way which they themselves best like of , seeing that is also a more certain , as well as a more speedy way , to victory . 2. protestants do not well understand what romanists mean by church-authority , for some of their doctors . b , can by a new figure of their own , make a part and the whole of the church to be the same ▪ they do not think that the present major part of church-governors throughout the church can be their rule , because the people cannot always know which is that part ; or that it ought to be their rule , because , in some ages the minor part is the wiser and better . let not the roman church be griev'd at this , as said from me ; vincentius lirinensis said it long ago , that in the arian times c there was a general darkness even over the face of the latin church . in the mean time they are made to suppose by this author what they do not suppose , that the judgment of the catholick church is not infallible , in judging what points are necessary , what are not . for though this or that church or party of christians may fail , yet all cannot at once ; for then the church would fail . 3. this article of the divinity of the son of god was originally in the creed ; for that the fathers meant when in the apostolical creed they confessed christ to be gods only son. and this they grounded on the gospel of s. iohn , who wrote his gospel ( which begins with christs divinity , ) with this intention , that men should beleive jesus to be the son of god. 4. protestants admit of no article of faith which is not grounded on the scripture , which was never known before , and never oblig'd before ; yet , in the mean time they see no reason , why an article assaulted by hereticks and sophists may not be explained ; or why the form of confession design'd for baptism , might not be enlarged for the benefit of the church , and made a sum of the necessaries to be believ'd . it sufficed at the first incorporation of persons to be baptiz'd , that they profess'd to believe the religion which owneth father , son and holy ghost . 5. a particular church may put an article of faith into a creed , without pretending to infallibility . she has ability to do it , because she has an infallible rule by which she can go . but she ought not to say it is impossible any church should do otherwise ; because a party of men may do that which they ought not to do , and to which they were not constrain'd . prejudice , mis-attention , corruption may so prevail as to clap a false byass upon makers of creeds : else how came we by those of sirmium and rimini ? and for instance sake , in the infallible science of the mathematicks , the perverseness of the temper of the leviathan , would not permit him to agree with a learned professor of that science , even in the first elements of geometry ; and a controversie was maintain'd not only about the squaring of the circle , but about the dimensions of a point and a line . the force of the third conference may be set down on this manner . a protestant submits to the decrees of a council , no further than he is convinc'd that the same council is rightly constituted , and that her definitions are founded on the word of god. he believes that it may err in things not necessary , and in necessaries too if it be not a truly general council . he can scarce give to it the obedience of silence in that which he believes contrary to the scripture . the socinian says the same things , and denies the council of nice to be constituted rightly ; therefore the protestant justifies the socinian . our author should have gone on , and said , ( for so a romanist is by the tenor of his faith oblig'd to say ) that the protestant , with reference to the council of nice , has the reason on his side . a son of the church of england reverenceth the four general councils , of which nice is the first . he believes its faith to be bottom'd on the scriptures , and so did the council itself , and so does the church of rome . he receives it as a general council rightly constituted , though no pope call'd it , or otherwise confirm'd it than the rest of the patriarchs , metropolitans and bishops . he believes its d●…ctrine to be , in the phrase of vincentius 〈◊〉 , well-founded antiquity , and he offers to prove it . a socinian therefore , if he has retain'd him , will , as soon as he hears such a plea as this , desire him to return his fee. but what if a socinian be found perverse , and , being a disputer of this world , will have his own way of arguing ? may not the protestant wave the council of nice , and enter the lists , with reason and scripture ? he that will not have him do it , is not of the same mind either with the fathers of nice , on with the celebrated latin doctor s. austin . the council of nice disputed with the arians out of the scripture , and confuted them by it . the bishops of it , by eusebius , cite against them the words of st. iohn , in the beginning was the word , and the word was with god , and the word was god. they argue from the words themselves , as words clear and plain in their signification : they take notice of the [ word was , ] as contrary to [ was not , ] and [ was god , ] as contrary to [ was not god. ] s. austin observing the perverseness of maximine , lays aside councils , not as useless , but as of lesser authority than the holy scripture , the force of which his adversary could not , with the same ease and readiness , have avoided . neither ought i ( saith s. austin ) to alledge the council of nice , nor you that of ariminum ; for neither am i bound to the authority of the one , nor you to that of the other . let us both dispute with the authorities of scripture , which are witnesses common to us both . our author puts this citation into the socinians mouth , and takes it from dr. taylor 's diss●…asive from popery ; but , seeing it is the method of s. austin , why does he not justifie a protestant in using of it ? the sum of the fourth conference is this . a protestant excuseth himself from heresie by saying , a heretick is ( what he himself is not ) an obstinate maintainer of a fundamental error . none can be such hereticks to whom the truth is not sufficiently proposed . councils may not always rightly distinguish betwixt fundamentals and not fundamentals . he is not oblig'd to receive their definitions till he is convinc'd of the truth of them . he himself is judge whether the article be sufficiently propos'd , and whether he is convinc'd by that which is offer'd to him . the socinian says the same thing for himself . our author should have added , that he says it with equal reason , if he would have made the one plead for the other . but the protestant , in this point of the divinity of the son of gon , ( which is the authors instance ) does acknowledge that the doctrine is sufficiently propos'd ; does receive the council of nice ; does own that he is convinc'd . and the romanist confesseth that , thus far , he is in the right , and the socinian in the wrong . this comes to the same thing which was said before , and the answer is repeated , because the objection is brought again . and indeed there is but one argument , strictly so call'd , in all the five conferences which turn upon the same hinge ; and one answer suffices : viz. that when two say the same things concerning contrary doctrines , one of them only can have truth on his side : and that if both be equally confident , the confidence of the persons does not make the contradiction true . the plea is his , not who barely offers it , but who can make it good . in this point of the divinity , the protestant makes his plea good by the scripture and the council of nice , as a true general council : and if his plea be true , surely it does not cease to be so , because he has not had it allow'd before a roman judge : a man is sure that all the articles in the new covenant are genuine , though they be not confirm'd under the lead of the fisher. i come to the last conference , where our author reasons to this effect . the protestants imagine they excuse themselves from schism , by alledging , that they left a corrupt part of the church , ( meaning the roman ) and reform'd themselves . that the schism is theirs who caus'd it , that they are united to all churches in charity , and in the unity of the catholick church , being with them in all things in which they are obliged to be with them . and in the rest they are hindred from external communion by the sinful conditions which a particular church puts upon them . the socinians say the same thing for themselves , with reference to other communions besides the roman , therefore the protestant justifies the plea of the socinian in relation to schism . the same answer serves for the same objection . socinians say as protestants do , but the reason is on the side of the latter , and not on the former . and our author himself , with respect to his instance of the divinity of the son of god , will , by no means , say , that the soci●…ians , who make that article , where impos'd , a sinful condition of communion , can by saying so , excuse themselves from schism , whilst they any where refuse external communion upon the pretence of that article as not christian. a romanist cannot say that it is not sufficiently propos'd to the socinians , and that it was never in their power to be convinc'd . if they will turn this upon us with reference to our not separating from them but standing where we were , after having in christian , and legal manner also , thrown off the corruptions which were unagreeable to the primitive christianity , we will try it over again with them by scripture , antiquity and reason ; and the impartial world shall judge , if it pleases , whether the additional articles in the creed of pope pius are of god or men. for this point of schism , as here manag'd , the reasoning of this fifth conference was long ago confuted by mr. chillingworth . but our author did not condescend to take notice of it , though he cites many other words of mr. chillingworth not far from these . but a cunning marks-man will not put that into his gun which may make it recoil . however i shall be bold to produce the words , which he , in all probability , did studiously omit * . — whereas d. potter says , there is a great difference between a schism from them , and a reformation of ourselves : this ( you say ) is a quaint subtilty , by which all schism and sin may be as well excused . it seems , then , in your judgment , that thieves and adulterers , and murtherers , and traytors , may say with as much probability as protestants , that they do no hurt to others , but only reform themselves . but then methinks it is very strange , that all protestants should agree with one consent in this defence of themselves from the imputation of schism : and that , to this day , never any thief or murtherer should have been heard of to make use of this apology ! and then for schismatiques , i would know , whether victor bishop of rome , who excommunicated the churches of asia , for not conforming to his church in keeping easter ; whether novatian that divided from cornelius , upon pretence that himself was elected bishop of rome , when indeed he was not ; whether felicissimus and his crew , that went out of the church of carthage , and set up altar against altar , because , having fallen in persecution , they might not be restored to the peace of the church presently , upon the intercession of the confessors ; whether the donatists who divided from , and damned all the world , because all the world would not excommunicate them who were accused only , and not convicted , to have been traditors of the sacred books ; whether they which for the slips and infirmities of others , which they might and ought to tolerate , or upon some difference in matters of order and ceremony , or for some error in doctrine , neither pernicious nor hurtful to faith or piety , separate themselves from others , or others from themselves ; or lastly , whether they that put themselves out of the churches unity and obedience , because their opinions are not approved there , but reprehended and confuted ; or because , being of impious conversation , they are impatient of their churches censure ; i would know ( i say ) whether all or any of these , may with any face or without extream impudency , put in this plea of protestants , and pretend with as much likelyhood as they , that they did not separate from others but only reform themselves ? but , suppose they were so impudent as to say so in their own defence falsly , doth it follow by any good logick , that therefore this apology is not to employ'd by protestants who may say so truly ? we make ( say they ) no schism from you , but only a reformation of ourselves : this ( you reply ) is no good justification , because it may be pretended by any schismatique . very true , any schismatique that can speak may say the same words , ( as any rebel that makes conscience the cloak of his impious disobedience , may say with s. peter , and s. iohn , we must obey god rather than men : ) but then the question is , whether any schismatique may say so truly ? and to this question you say just nothing : but conclude , because this defence may be abused by some , it must be used by none . as if you should have said , s. peter , and s. iohn did ill to make such an answer as they made , because impious hypocrites might make use of the same to palliate their disobedience and rebellion , against the lawful commands of lawful authority . the conclusion . after all this causeless finding fault with the plea of the protestant , what is it that the romanists aim at , and after what manner would they mend this plea ? they will tell you , this seems to be the consequence of the late way taken up by many protestants , viz. that in stead of the roman church her setting up some men ( the church-governors ) as infallible in necessaries ; here is set up by them every christian , if he will , both infallible in all necessaries ; and certain that he is so . they will endeavour to persuade you , that the great ends they aim at are , truth and peace : and that these blessed ends are never to be universally attain'd without an infallible church to which all may submit their judgments in religion , and , by such submission , preserve unity . they will continue their discourse , and say , without such a judge , every mans reason is reason , and every mans scripture is scripture , and he is left to run wild after his own imaginations . and though a man is not in the right , he will not yield he is so , till it is given against him by an infallible judge . but men must first be satisfi'd that there is such a judge , and who he is , and where and how to be found , and how far men will follow him . when there was such a judge on earth , ( the most infallible high-priest , the blessed iesus ) prejudic'd and perverse men would neither be of one faith , nor of one heart . the wisdom of god will not , by forcing of assent , destroy the nature and virtue of it ; and he hath declar'd that he will permit heresies , that those who are approved and excellent christians may be distinguished from those who are not . this expedient of the romanists is like that of the atheist spinoza , who has left the following maxim to the world as his legacy for peace , viz. that the object of faith is not truth but obedience , and the quiet of human society . and they say in effect , shut all your eyes , and agree in one who shall lead you all , and you will all go one way : but the difficulty lies in getting them to agree . it is not difficult to say a great deal more upon this subject ; but , in stead of that which might be here offer'd from myself , i will refer the reader to a book lately publish'd , and call'd , a discourse concerning a iudge in controversies ; if he be not satisfi'd with that which mr. chillingworth hath said long ago , and to which this author has here said nothing . you say again confidently , that , if this infallibility be once impeach'd , every man is given over to his own wit and discourse . by which if you mean discourse , not guiding itself by scripture , but only by principles of nature , or perhaps by prejudices and popular errors , and drawing consequences not by rule but by chance , is , by no means , true . if you mean by discourse , right reason , grounded on divine revelation and common notions , written by god in the hearts of all men ; and deducing , according to the never-failing rules of logick , consequent deductions from them : if this be it which you mean by discourse , it is very meet , and reasonable and necessary , that men , as in all their actions , so especially in that of greatest importance , the choice of their way to happiness should be left unto it : and he that follows this in all opinions and actions , and does not only seem to do so , follows always god ; whereas he that followeth a company of men , may oft-times follow a company of beasts . and in saying this , i say no more than s. iohn to all christians in these words , dearly beloved , believe not every spirit ; but try the spirits , whether they be of god or no : and the rule he gives them to make this tryal by , is to consider , whether they confess iesus to be christ ; that is , the guide of their faith , and lord of their action ; not , whether they acknowledge the pope to be his vicar . i say no more than s. paul , in exhorting all christians , to try all things , and hold fast that which is good : than s. peter in commanding all christians , to be ready to give a reason of the hope that is in them : then our saviour himself , in forewarning all his followers , that if they blindly followed blind guides , both leaders and followers should fall into the ditch . and again , in saying even to the people , yea , and why of your selves judge ye not what is right ? and though by passion , or precipitation , or prejudice , by want of reason , or not using what they have , men may be , and are oftentimes , lead into error and mischief ; yet , that they cannot be misguided by discourse , truly so called , such as i have described , you yourself have given them security . for , what is discourse , but drawing conclusions out of premises by good consequence ? now , the principles which we have setled , to wit , the scriptures , are on all sides agreed to be infallibly true . and you have told us in the fourth chapter of this pamphlet , that from truth no men can , by good consequence , infer falshood ; therefore , by discourse , no man can possibly be led to error ; but if he erre in his conclusions , he must of necessity , either err in his principles , ( which here cannot have place ) or commit some error in his discourse ; that is , indeed , not discourse , but seem to do so . 13. you say , thirdly , with sufficient confidence , that if the true church may err in defining what scriptures be canonical , or in delivering the sense thereof , then we must follow either the private spirit , or else natural wit and iudgment ; and by them examine what scriptures contain true or false doctrine , and in that respect ought to be received or rejected . all which is apparently untrue , neither can any proof of it be pretended . for though the present church may possibly err in her judgment touching this matter , yet have we other directions in it , besides the private spirit , and the examination of the contents ( which latter way may conclude the negative very strongly , to wit , that such or such a book cannot come from god , because it contains irreconcileable contradictions ; but the affirmative it cannot conclude , because the contents of a book may be all true , and yet the book not written by divine inspiration ; ) other direction therefore i say we have , besides either of these three , and that is , the testimony of the primitive christians . 14. you say , fourthly , with convenient boldness , that this infallible authority of the church being denied , no man can be assured , that any parcel of the scripture was written by divine inspiration : which is an untruth , for which no proof is pretended ; and besides , void of modesty , and full of iniquity . the first , because the experience of innumerable christians is against it , who are sufficiently assured , that the scripture is divinely inspired , and yet deny the infallible authority of your church , or any other . the second , because if i have not ground to be assured of the divine authority of scripture , unless i first believe your church infallible , then can i have no ground at all to believe it . because there is no ground , nor can any be pretended , why i should believe the church infallible , unless i first believe the scripture divine . 15. fifthly and lastly , you say , with confidence in abundance ; that none can deny the infallible authority of your church , but he must abandon all infused faith , and true religion , if he do but understand himself : which is to say , agreeable to what you had said before , and what out of the abundance of the heart you speak very often , that all christians besides you are open fools , or concealed atheists . all this you say with notable confidence , ( as the manner of sophisters is , to place their confidence of prevailing in their confident manner of speaking , ) but then for the evidence you promis'd to maintain this confidence , that is quite vanished and become invisible . hitherto i have been arguing against our author ; but now , in the close , i cannot but joyn with him in his protestants exhortation to humility . it is an admirable virtue ; and may god grant to me , and to all men , a greater measure of it . it is a virtue proper even for guides in religion , that they may humbly help the faith of others , and not exercise dominion over it . and , because a late writer has been pleas'd to suffer this severe censure to drop from his pen , [ it is the less to be admir'd that [ our author ] is such a stranger to that spirit [ of meekness and humble charity , ] because among all the volumes of divinity , written by the protestants , there is not one original treatise , at least , that i have seen or heard of , which has handled distinctly and by itself , that christian virtue of humility . ] i will tell him of one book ( as i could of many others ) written singly upon that subject . i mean a late treatise by mr. allen , a man who had considered many ways , but long before his death , approv'd of that of the church of england , as the most safe and apostolical . he was a lay-man , a citizen , a man of little skill in languages or scholastick-learning , yet , by gods blessing upon his industry and sincerity , and the ministeral helps he met with in our communion , i will be bold to say he understood the scriptures as judiciously as many learned romish commentators , who have got a name in the world , and stand pompously , in several volumes , upon the shelves of students . the end. errata . pag. 3. lin . 7. for mixt , read mix . pag. 13. lin . 6. for fourthly , read fifthly . pag. 34 , lin . 22. for queens time , read unquiet times . a table of contents . the introduction , shewing , that this tract , and most of those which have been lately written in the controversies betwixt romanists and churchof-england-protestants , have been occasion'd by the former . p. 3. to p. 7. chap. 1. observations touching the book itself call'd the protestants plea , &c. it s edition , character and design . p. 7. to p. 17. chap. 2. considerations touching the general argument of the protestants plea , &c. shewing the weakness of it , and that it is not of force enough to overthrow the plea of the reformed . p. 17. to p. 38. chap. 3. particular answers to the particular branches of the protestants plea , &c. divided into five conferences by the author of it . p. 38. to p. 57. sect. 1. the argument of the first conference , with the answer . p. 38. to p. 46. sect. 2. the argument of the second conference , with the answer . p. 46. to p. 49. sect. 3. the argument of the third conference , with the answer . p. 49. to p. 51. sect. 4. the argument of the fourth conference , with the answer . p. 51. to p. 53. sect. 5. the argument of the fifth conference , with the answer . p. 53. to p. 56. the conclusion , shewing that the roman plea does not mend that of the reformed of this church , but come short of it ; and that every protestant is not wholly left to the private guidance of his own imagination . the end . notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a64356-e110 a in the epistle to the reader , p. 9. see dr. godden's ser. on st. pet. day , p. 39. notes for div a64356-e820 * see resp. ad 〈◊〉 ep. d. 〈◊〉 . * see d. still . sev . discourses in answer to the guide in contr. &c. p. 326 , 327 , &c. a disc. 3. p. 〈◊〉 . b p. 3●…2 . c disc. of 〈◊〉 . of ch. guides , p. 8. d dis. 3 p. 169 e disc. 1. p. 9 f disc. 2. p. 138 g disc. 1. p 47. h prot. plea , p. 24 , 28. 29 , 30 i p. 13. k p. 10. l p. 11. m p 4. 14 , 16 , 26 , 32 , 37. * see m. chill . pref. to the author of char. maintain'd , sect. 16 , 17 , 18. and , in this answer , p. 13 , 22 , 54 , 58. n see bibl. ●…tr . pol. in vol. 2. op. see. p. 422. o socin . contra 〈◊〉 , vol. 2. p. 618. p script . s. trinit . revelat●…ix , p. 173 , &c. & proh●…m . paradox . de sp. s. p. 3. &c. q gos●… . in 〈◊〉 ad disp. de personâ . r prot. plea , p. 5. s socin . de ecclesiâ , op. vol. 1. p. 341 , 342. t socin . solut . scrupul . resp. ad 23. vol. 1. op. p. 332. u prot. plea , p. 43. * prot. plea , p 37. soc. though i stand separated from the present unreformed churches , or also ( if you will ) from the whole church that was before luther . prot. plea , conf. 5. p. 33. x chap. 16. p. 199. y see chill . pref. to the author of char. maint . sect 16. 17. 18 and here p. 9 , 22 , 54 , 58. z traité de la vraie parole de dieu , à pari●… , 1671. c. 7. p. 47. c. 8. p. 62. c. 9. p. 71. c. 10. p. 87. seepartic . p. 82. 87. 88. a p. 380. par des raisons invincibles . b request to p●…ot p. 〈◊〉 . c see p. ii●… . fourth letter , p. 129 , 130 , 131. d socin . solut . scrup. vol 1. p. 332. e biblioth . anti-trin . p. 2. & bzovius , a. 1542. f ibid. p. 64. g hist. refor ▪ polon . p. 38. h bibl. anti-trin . p. 18. & h. ref. pol. p. 38. i excerpta ms. è lib. annal. polon . p. 1. k ms. ep. of english unitarian●… to ameth ben ameth amb. of fez and 〈◊〉 . l bibl. anti-trin . p. 149. conditiones unionis christianorumcum catholico-rom . in poloniâ . m maimb . hist. de l'arianisme . liv. douz . p. 360. n ms. in praef. p. 1. dialogue between a new cath. convert and a prot. a a●…on . ap . eus. eccl. h. e. l. 5. c. ult . p. 195. b soc. de eccles . op. vo●… . 1. p. 323. c socin . resp. ad va●…m , p. ●…18 . d crell . praes . ad lect. lib. de satisfact . p. 4 , 5. * hieron . moscorov . in r●… append. mart. s●…glecii , p. 19. e r●…v . 1611. f lubien . first . ref. po●… . 〈◊〉 . 1. c. 2. p 5 , 6 , 7 , 8. g cingal . script . s. ●…rin . re●…trix . p. 30. h bid●…e's apostol . opin . conc . the holy trin. reviv'd and affor●…d , lond. 1653. i protestant pacifique , part 2. p. 25. k tp. o●… s●… 〈◊〉 to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . l v. sand. 〈◊〉 1. s●… . 4 , 〈◊〉 . 〈◊〉 . 156●… 〈◊〉 . m see petav. 〈◊〉 . c 5 sect. 7. de 〈◊〉 . &c. & ap sand. n●…l h. e. 12. l. 1. p. 217 , 218. l. 2. p. 30. & ap . cingal . p. 35 , 36 & p. 31. quomodo enim illud queat esse ex trad. apostol . qu●…d de●…um quarto 〈◊〉 . patefact . & constitut . ait dionysius petavius . see sand. in ind. h. lit. p. petavius probat omnes patres ante conc. nic. eadem cum a●…io ante doc●…isse n desense des s●…ntimens , p 〈◊〉 . a●…es le p. pe●…u jesuite . o cingall . p. 35 , 36. p p. 16. p. 66 , 67. ex huet . origen . q d. g. bull. def. fid. n●…c . r defense des sentimens , &c. p. 78 , &c. see here p. 9 , 1●… , 54 , 58. s in chill . pref sect. 9. p. 6. 17 , 18. p. 9 , 10 , 11. t chill . pref. to the author of charity maintain'd , sect. 16 , u hist. res. polon . l. 1. c. 1 p. 7. x slicht adv . meisn. de ss . trin. p. 67. smalc . cont. frans. disp. 4. y ostor. c. 4. instit. z ern. sonn . demonstr . theol. & philos. p. 36. a disc. of infallib . in religion . p. 200. p. 20●… . b resp. ad vujek . p. 618. c socin . ibid. — in illorum gratiam qui istorum patrum authoritate plus quàm deceat moventur . d soc. ibid. p. 618. col. 1. neque enim ( arbitror ) ex script . nostr . hom . ostendetur unquam , eos afferere aut exstimare . scriptores ante conc. nic. qui hodiè extant , nostrae sententiae fuisse , &c. nisi nostrae sent . nom . intelligatur simpliciter id , quod sentimus de uno illo deo , &c. e brev. disqu . c. 5. de trad. p. 22. see c. 2. p. 6 , 7. &c. f ruar . epist. vol. 1. p. 116. to 139. partic . p. 132 , 134. g see slicht . contra cicohov . p. 181 , 182. h euseb. h. e. l. 3. c. 32. p. 104 , 105. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . i v. frag. ap . eus. e. h. l. 5. c. 28. p. 195 , &c. k a. 1566. see maimb . hist. vol. 3. p. 355 , 356 , 357. l maimb . ibid. biddle's pref. to cat. p. 23. after constantine the great , together with the council of nice , had once deviated , &c. this opened a gap , &c. m see disp. in maimb . h. arian . p. 357. n id. ib. p. 361. * see slicht . cont . cicov . p. 184. and his mistake followed by sandius , h. e. l. 1. p. 100 , octavo . o is●…l deer . sub hoc 〈◊〉 . 〈◊〉 . constantino ) juxta fidem 〈◊〉 ▪ post etiam sancti patres in concilio niceno de omni orbe terr . convenientes , evangelicam & apostolicam secundum ( vall●… from ms. a. c. reads it apostolos symb . tradiderunt . p chr. sand. nu●… 〈◊〉 . 1. p. 100. oct●… . q see maimb . h a. 357. n resp. ad v●…iek . p. 618. col. 2. s crell . praef. ad lib. de satisfact . p. 5. t pisec . an doct. de trin. sit m●…st . in ep. ded. u evagr. h. f. l. 2. c 4. p. 293. — 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . x see clem. alex. str. l. 5. y iren. l 3. z see act. conc. eph. tom. 2. c. 18. tom. 3 c. 17. socr. h. e. l. 〈◊〉 . c. 32. a s cypr. ep. 55. pam. 59. oxoh . p 136. na●… 〈◊〉 statutum sit omnibus nobis , & aequum sit pariter ac justum , ut uniuscujusq●… 〈◊〉 audiatur , ubi est crimen admissum , & sing . pastor . portio gregis sit ads●… 〈◊〉 ●…egat , &c. v. p. nicaen . can. 5. b chr. sand. append. ad interpr . parrad . p. 376 , &c. 379. c de dupl . mart. ed. ox. p. 40. d de dupl . mart. p. 594. ed. goulart . sect. 4. 5. commemorat & joh. evang. triplex in terrâ test. sp. aqu. & sang. &c. quanquam hi tres unum sunt , &c. e s. cypr. de unit. ecclesiae , p. 109. ox. dicit dominus , ego & pater unum sumus , & iterum de patre & f. & sp. s. scriptum est , et hi tres unum sunt , v. annot. oxon. f editor . diss. anon. de pace & conc. eccl. p. 3. ad lect. ingenuè fateor , socini de chr. personâ dogma — in eo mihi maximè improbari quod christum ante suam ex mariâ virgine nativitatem extitisse , neget . sect. 1. arg. 1. prot. plea , p. 1. to p. 12. answer to arg. 1. s. joh. 20. 31. * d. f. answ. to the author of sure-footing , p. 346 , 347 prot. plea , p. 1. & p. 4. &c. a lubieniec . historial . p. 6. b prot. plea. p. 8. c auct . incert . de 6. syn. oec . ap . instell . p. 1161. — 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . d tit. c. 8. l. 1. e. h. bedae , ut , &c. utque ad temp . arianae vesaniae . e v●… . li●… . 〈◊〉 . 6 p. 13. f v. li●… . p. 15. temeratae conjuges , &c. g v. sand. append. ad nucl . h. e. p. 22. quarto . h theod. h. e. l. 1. c. 1. — 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . i v. theod. haer. fab. l. 2. c. o. & niceph. call. h e. 〈◊〉 s c. 5. k v. resp. 〈◊〉 . p. 535. l v. conf. christ. vind. p. 3. in resp. ad ep. ded. 〈◊〉 . m v. resp. ad ep. cicho●… . p. 3. n resp. ad v●…k . p. 534. o moscor . refut . append. m. smigle●… . p. 21. p de jesu chr. divin . &c. disputat . relatio , p. 3. 3. q slicht . in 1. tim. 6. p. 258. r socin de eccl. p. 325 , 326. ep. 3. ad radec. p. 384. cat. rac. de eccl. p. 306 , 307. s socin . op. vol. 1. ep. ad p. sophiam siemichoviam , p. 431 , 432 , 433. t socin . vol. 1. ep. ad p. stator . p. 433. u s. luk. 22. 20. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . x socin . de usu & fine coenae domin . p. 773. y socin . de usu coen . op. vol. 1. p. 775. hales of sacr. p. 59. op. vol 2. p. 185 , 186. z see crell . de sat. p. 6. 190 , &c. about 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , &c. a s. joh. 3. 13. soc. exp. loc. script . vol. 1. p. 146. 〈◊〉 . pl●… , di●…ession , p. 9 , 10. sect. 2. arg. 2. prot. plea , p. 12. to 16. answer to arg. 2. b j. richard apho●…ismes de controverse . instr. 34. p. 223. le concile de trente , c'est à dire , toute l'eglise . c vinc. lirin . adv . haereses . cap. 6. p. 13. propè cunctis latini sermonis episcopis , partim vi , partim f●…aude deceptis , caligo , &c. prot. plea , p. 15. sect. 17. sect. 3. arg. 3. prot. plea , from p 1●… . to p. 24. answer to arg. 3. vinc. lir. adv . haer . c. 6. de arianorum ●…eneno , p. 15. ●…enè fundata antiquitas . v. l. 3. conc. nic. ed. pis. prot. plea. p. 18. sect. 4. arg. 4. prot. plea , p. 24. to 32. answer to 4 arg. arg. 5. sect. 5. prot. plea , p. 32. to p. 45. answer to 5 arg. * see here p. 9 , 22 , 58. chill . part . 1. chap. 5. p. 255. sect. 8c . ☞ prof. plea , digress . p. 9. chill . pres. to char. maintain'd , p. 8 , 9. sect. 12 , 13 , 14 , 15. see here p. 9. 13. 22. 54. prof. plea , p. 45. a defence of the papers , &c. p. 126. a practical discourse of humility , by w. a. lond. 1681. a continuation of the defence of hvgo grotivs, in an answer to the review of his annotations whereto is subjoyned a reply to some passages of the reviewer in his late book of schisme, concerning his charge of corruptions in the primitive church, and some other particulars / by h. hammond ... hammond, henry, 1605-1660. this text is an enriched version of the tcp digital transcription a45406 of text r17947 in the english short title catalog (wing h529). textual changes and metadata enrichments aim at making the text more computationally tractable, easier to read, and suitable for network-based collaborative curation by amateur and professional end users from many walks of life. the text has been tokenized and linguistically annotated with morphadorner. the annotation includes standard spellings that support the display of a text in a standardized format that preserves archaic forms ('loveth', 'seekest'). textual changes aim at restoring the text the author or stationer meant to publish. this text has not been fully proofread approx. 131 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 26 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. earlyprint project evanston,il, notre dame, in, st. louis, mo 2017 a45406 wing h529 estc r17947 11742084 ocm 11742084 48503 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a45406) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 48503) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 533:7) a continuation of the defence of hvgo grotivs, in an answer to the review of his annotations whereto is subjoyned a reply to some passages of the reviewer in his late book of schisme, concerning his charge of corruptions in the primitive church, and some other particulars / by h. hammond ... hammond, henry, 1605-1660. [4], 44 [i.e. 46] p. printed by j. g. for richard royston ..., london : 1657. "a post-script," p. 31-44 [i.e. 33-46] "errata," 1 leaf at end. reproduction of original in bristol public library, bristol, england. eng grotius, hugo, 1583-1645. owen, john, 1616-1683. socinianism -early works to 1800. a45406 r17947 (wing h529). civilwar no a continuation of the defence of hugo grotius, in an ansvver to the review of his annotations. whereto is subjoyned a reply to some passages hammond, henry 1657 21045 4 625 0 0 0 0 299 f the rate of 299 defects per 10,000 words puts this text in the f category of texts with 100 or more defects per 10,000 words. 2005-12 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2006-01 apex covantage keyed and coded from proquest page images 2007-01 ali jakobson sampled and proofread 2007-01 ali jakobson text and markup reviewed and edited 2007-02 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion a continuation of the defence of hvgo grotivs , in an answer to the review of his annotations . whereto is subjoyned a reply to some passages of the reviewer in his late book of schisme , concerning his charge of corruptions in the primitive church , and some other particulars . by h. hammond d. d. london , printed by j. g. for richard royston , at the angel in ivy. lane , m. dc . lvii . to the stationer . mr royston , i have been so often called on for the reply to the review of grotius's annotations , that i am at length inclined to change my former purpose , and permie those few sheets ( prepared as soon as the review came to my hands , but then laid aside , on a perswasion that they might be safely spared ) to follow the former on that subject , rather then deny to any so easie a request . i am your friend , h. h. septemb. 4. 1656. a continvation of the defence of hvgo grotivs , in answer to the review of his annotations . 1. if he that hath read the review of the annotations of hugo grotius , which is offered as a reply to the second defence of that learned man ; seem from thence to have any new scruples infused into his mind , it will not cost him many minutes to deposite them , by observing with me this method . 2. first , by adverting ( on the first head that of the satisfaction of christ ) not onely what fair and large characters of his thoughts lie legible to all men in his book de satisfactione , written on purpose against sosinus on this subject , but also how those have been since back'd with indubitable evidences of a later and fresher date , taken from his own express words in his discussio ( the last thing he wrote ) and in a letter under his own hand ( dated after the time of his surmised change ) written on purpose to forest all this surmise , and to assure us of his constant adhering to that sense which he had delivered in his book de satisfactione . which two as they are most irresrugable proofs of the matter in hand , being testimonies of him that certainly best knew his own thoughts , whether he were changed or no , so to neither of these is the least word of reply here offered by the reviewer , and so stand in full force against all that is here suggested . 3. secondly , by remembring that from the a beginning of this debate , the posthumous annotations on the epistles were expresly renounced and reiected by me , as departing manifestly from the judgment of that learned man , formerly expressed in those writings which he had completed and published in his life time , and consequently as unsufficient arguments , or testimonies of his change , when produced against his own repeted and express declarations to the contrary ; and yet from these are the proofs now principally brought in this review , and by the contrariety betwixt these and his book de satisfact : his change concluded , with what appearance of reason the reader will soon discern , when he hath considered the premisses , and what shall now occasionally be added thereto . 4. for this manner of dealing two things onely are pleaded in the review , which here must be regarded , before i proceed : 1. that the accuser having to deal with that book of annotations that goes under his name , if they are none of his , it is neither on the one hand or other , of any concernment to him . ] 5. to this i reply , first , that it is in the reviewer a manifest diversion , a course which is sure to render all debates infinitet in my answer to his preface of animadversions on iguntius's epistles , &c. i inserted , ex abundanti , one , and onely one digression , a defence of the learned h. grotius . and streightwayes the whole stream of the controversie is diverted into that one narrow chanel , removed from the question of episcopacy , to the inquiry into grotius's his opinions ; and that is one compitent diversion . after this , when both in that my digression , and also in my second defence , i had confined my plea to grotius himself , and those writings published by him in his life time , and known to be written , and perfected by him , expresly rejecting this book of posthumous annotations on the epistles , the reviewer is now pleased principally to insist , and found his charge against grotius , on those his posthumous annotations ; which is a perfect diversion again , instead of a reply , and to the waving evidently , because changing of the whole question . 6. secondly , as uneffectual at this plea it , it is yet much more unreasonable , if circumstances be considered , being evidently prevented , and superseded by that which hath past in this debate . for if there were any truth in those words of his epistle to the oxford heads , [ my defensative as to my dealing with grotious's annotations is suited to what the doctor pliads in his behalf ] then certainly he must be concern'd in this , which yet he resolves to be none of his concernments ; for it is sure that my plea was framed in defence of grotius himself , ( not of those incomplete if not false images of him , those parts of the annotations , which i professed to reject , and not to plead for . ) accordingly my words in the first proposal of this matter to debate , were these , [ this very pious , learned , and judicious man hath of late among many fallen under a very unhappy fate , being most unjustly calumniated sometimes as a socinian , sometimes as a papist — ] and then how can this defensative be , according to his promise , conformed or suited to my plea , if it refer not to the same subject , viz. to grotius , or those books of his , which are acknowledged to be his completed , genuine writings ? such alone being competent testifications of his sense , and so measures to judge of his perswasions , whether he were a socinian or no . 7. a second part of his plea is by reflecting again on that evidence , which , saith he , he had formerly offered from the printers preface to the volume of annotations on the epistles . ] but here , in the very entrance , is a mistake , which , for the clearing of my self , more then on apprehension of any advantage the reviewer can gain by it , i must first take notice of . the evidence was by him b cited from some words of the preface to the last part of the annotations , beginning thus , jam vero sciendum est — to those words there found , i gave answer in my second defence , p. 7. and he now tels me that a slight in spection will serve to manifest how ill it , i. e. my answer or the sense i gave of the words produced ) agrees with the intention and words of the prefacer , who , saith he , tells us , that grotius had himself published his annotations on the gospel five years before , and so proceeds , reciting the words of the prefacer for eight lines together ; and concluding , that if the apologist read this preface , he ought to have desisted from the plea insisted on ; if he did not , he thought assuredly he had much reason to despise them with whom he had to do . ] who would not think there were somewhat herein really mistaken by me , which called for this so solemn rebuke ? but the reader is intreated to consult the place , or if it be not worth his pains , he may believe me , who made the inspection more then slightly , and can assure him , that there is no part of what he thus now recites , to be met with in that preface , whence he hath formerly drawn his testimony . i say in that preface to the last part of the annotations under gretius's name , from whence it was , that the words [ jam viro sciendum — ] were ( truly ) cited , and to which words it was visible , that i gave that answer , which he now pretends to refute from the intention and words of the prefacer . 9. the short is , there being two volumes of annotations set out since grotius's death ; the former on the acts , and so on through the epistles of saint paul and saint james , the later on the other six catholick epistles and the revelation , and before the former of these the printers epistle , inscribed , typographus lectori , before the latter a praemonitio ad lectorem : from the latter of these it is that the words formerly by him produced , jam verò scieudum — and to which ( consequently ) i gave answer , were cited . and i that obediently and diligently read over that to which i was directed , and there finding the words which were cited , gave my answer to them , such as i thought the words capable of , am now unexpectedly rebuked for not reading it , and more then so for despising those with whom i had to do ; when indeed what is now in the reply cited from it , is not to be found there , but in the printers epistle to another volume . by what means he fell into this mistake , and was by that led into this causeless severity , i leave him upon recollection to consider . 10. i need add no more for the vindicating my self in this matter , yet if i shall now ( having till now no occasion ) attend to this other testimony , now newly alledged by him out of that other preface , it will soon appear that it neither ( as is pretended ) disproves the answer , which i gave to the words formerly cited from the premonition , nor refutes what i had first said concerning the posthumous annotations , and then surely i shall not be much concern'd in it : not the first ; for my answer being no more but this , that opus integrum signified not that volume completed , and so made integrum intire by grotius's own hand , but the whole volume or volumes which contained all his {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} adversaria on the new testament . ] this is no way refuted , but rather confirmed by these other words of the typographus lectori , for there also opus integrum signifies the whole volume or volumes , as that is opposed to the magna pars voluminis in the line before , without any respect to its being completed or made intire ; which alone having been denied by me , my answer is still secured from any force of this testimony . 11. not the second ; for if i shall now grant the printer to have in that preface delivered the whole and naked truth , ( which i had no obligation to be confident of ) and consequently that grotius committed to a friend those annotations , in order to printing , yet this no way proves that they were completed and perfected by him ; there is a middle , truly supposable , betwixt these two , viz. that they were by occcasion of the authors unexpected diversions , delivered to him imperfect . this remainder of annotations now by the reader expected to follow those on the gospels , and on the old testament , and the learned compiler being now at some leisure to set about it , was suddenly called back from paris to sweden , a long voyage , not certain whether ever he should return again ( as indeed he did not ) or whether god would spare him life and vacancy to perfect that work : having therefore communicated his notes to a learned man ( one by the way , much more addicted to the doctrine of calvin then socinus ) going now thence , he left them in his hand , and committed the publishing of them to his care , taking onely with him those sheets which were not legible , which he hastily transcribed in his journey , and , as the printer tells us , returned them from hamburge , and these , as by his words appears , belonging to the last volume , that on the revelation , which therefore had truly thus much of his last hand , as this hasty transcribing comes to ; so hasty that m. who was prepared to write them again for the presse , did almost despair of decyphering them . the rest , those on the epistles remained in the first rude draught , and are not pretended to have been ( so much as hastily ) transcribed by him , and so never obtained that perfecter growth , that fulness of limbs and lineaments , which i did and do suppose his {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , and greater leisure would have afforded them . which therefore cannot with any justice be balanced against the contrary evidences and plain words either of his discussio ( the last thing , as i said , written before his death ) or of his later , dated after his reading of crellius's and the socinians interpretations ( to which his supposed change is imputed ) and avowing his continued adherence to his former doctrine , much less of the several passages producible out of his undoubted writings , maturely composed , and publisht by him , which positively and professedly set down his sense , and cannot be prejudiced by such uncertain , feeble suggestions as these , drawn from his supposed misunderstanding of some few pages in the epistles . and let this serve for a second stage in my proposed method . 12. thirdly , that adhering to my former method , and , upon the grounds premised , abstracting from or setting aside ( as 't is visible i have done from the first rise of this debate ) these posthumous annotations , upon account of some heterodox mixtures in them discernible , especially in the matter of our justification , and the satisfaction of christ , and some other particulars , elsewhere noted , and confining our discourse ( more reasonably ) to those annotations , which he perfected and published in his life time , i. e. to those on the gospels and on the old testament , taking in also all his other writings whatsoever ; there cannot be any ground of suspicion concerning his change , nor want of instances ( which the reviewer now requires ) to disprove his vniversal negative , and to invalidate the charge brought against that learned man , of his wresting to another sense every text of scripture , wherein testimony is given to that sacred truth , or at least concealing and obscuring the doctrine of them . ] 13. i shall therefore , being now admonished of quintilians rule of aut negandum aut defendendum , do my duty in observing it , and formally deny his position , of every text , &c. and for contrary instances , begin with matth. 20. 28. where the son of man is said to give his life a {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , or ransome for many . here , saith grotius , puto respici vaticinium , isa. 53. 10. ubi dicitur , si christus vitam suam dedisset {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , quod hic rectè {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} vertitur , fore , ut sui cognitione multos justificaret , & postea , ipse peccata multorum tulit . here first , the parallel is set by grotius betwixt the evangelist and the prophet isaiah , and to that 53 of that prophecy is brought this sense , of christ's giving his life a ransome for many , i. e. of his satisfaction , and yet farther explained by that other phrase of the prophet there used , his bearing the sins of many , and the like , heb. 9. 28. his being offer'd to bear the sins of many . 14. secondly , the {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} or ransome here is interpreted by the hebrew {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} or sacrifice for sin there , and after more fully , by sacrificium piaculare , {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , an expiatorie , propitiatorie sacrifice for sin , victima lustralis — and the giving his life a ransome , the offering it up such a sacrifice for many , and this as the ground or condition of his justifying many by the knowledge of him , which what is it but the founding of our justification in the propitiatory sacrifice of christ's death , i. e. in the satisfaction wrought by it for us ? 15. so mat. 26. 28. where christs bloud of the new testament is said to be shed for many for the remission of sins . here , saith he , puto danielis oraculum respici , in quo de messiâ dictum est , {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , cum praecessisset {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} ad expianda peccata . adde quae rom. 5. 15. ( it should be 10. ) sic & in barnabae quae dicitur epistola , {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} . adding , simul autem transit christus à comparatione foederum ad comparationem sacrificiorum piacularium , in quibus anima pecudis offerebatur , velut succedanea anima hominis qui mortem meruisses , unde victima ferre peccata dicebatur in lege . hinc mo●i victima pro homine — here again , i. e. the words of daniel of making reconciliation for iniquity , and confirming the covenant with many , c. 9. 24. 27. are set as a prophecy parallel to this evangelical truth of christs bloud of the new testament being shed for the expiating of our sins . so likewise rom. 5. 10. of our being reconciled to god , when we were enemies , by the death of his son . and all these three illustrated by the plain words of barnabas's epistle , that christ offered up himself the vessel of the spirit , a sacrifice for our sins . 2. it is here affirmed of his bloud , that it was an expiatory sacrifice , such as wherein one is offered up in stead of the other which had deserved death , and is accordingly said to bear the sin of the other . and then what could be more expresse to the doctrine of satisfaction , then these three places of prophet , evangelist , and apostle , thus interpreted , which being added to the former , and now laid before the reviewer ( willing to have perswaded the reader these were none such , because i formerly thought it needless to produce them ) will sure now passe for {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , instances as competent as any quintilian would exact , to disprove the vniversal proposition of the [ not one text in the whole scripture — which is not wrested to another sense , or at least the doctrine concealed and obscured by these annotations . ] 16. but here on this ocasion the place in his annotations on isa. 53. is by the reviewer resumed , as hopeful to yield some colour to infer his charge ; where , saith he , he gives such an exposition of the whole chapter , as is manifestly and universally inconsistent with any such design on the words , as that which he intends to prove from them in his book de satisfact and in particular tels you in his annotations on the place , as also on 1 pet. 2. 24. that {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} signifies auferre , which with all his strength he had there contended against . 17. to this i answer , 1. ( as to his exposition of the whole chapter ) that i have already told him , that grotius endeavoured to find a first sense of the words of that prophecy , so as to belong peculiarly to the jews usage of the prophet jeremy , and that i acknowledge not to be appliable alwayes to their usage of christ . but beside this , saith he , there is a more principal and sublime sense , and that oft the more literal of the two , wherein the whole chapter belongs to christ , but this sense being more vulgarly markt by others , is onely in general , once for all , pointed at by him , in those short annotations , being also more fully explicated elsewhere , in a set discourse on that subject . 18. this answer being formerly given by me , the reviewer is now pleased to mistake , and to change it into a distinction betwixt the literal and mystical sense of a place , and then to undertake that his perverting the first literal sense of the chapter , or giving it a completion in any person but christ , is no lesse then blasphemy . but to this i reply , that my words are misreported by the disputant , and agreeably my sense also . for i distinguisht not betwixt the literal and mystical sense of the place ( or if i had , i must much have wronged grotius , who resolved the words to belong oft more literally or {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} to christ , than to any other ) but betwixt the first and literal interpretation , which had its immediate completion among the jews , near that time , wherein it written , and the more remote , concerning christ : that indeed mystical , because veiled under the first , but literal also , because that to which the very words belonged as properly , oft more properly , than to the other ; as when the {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} or plain word without any figure belongs to christ , and onely the figurative interpretation of it , the {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} to jeremy . of these two senses grotius makes frequent mention in his interpretations . see the note on zach. 9. 9. behold thy king shall come , which , saith he , primo & maxime obvio sensu , in the first and most obvious sense belongs to zorobabel , but sublimiore quodam sensu , in a more sublime sense to the messias ; and many the like . 19. if thus the reviewer had understood my words ( which i then thought plain enough , till i saw them misapprehended ) i am in charity to think he would not have deemed it little lesse then blasphemy , thus to interpret words of some other in a first , but that lesse principal sense , which belong to the son of god in the more principal and sublime sense , more remote in time of completion , but not in respect of the propriety of the words . 20. this the instance did evince , which i gave from the words , [ out of egypt have i called my son ] which evidently had a first sense in the israelites , a second , equally literal in christ , and so 't is applied in the new testament ; and many more might be brought of affinity with it , if there were need of them . 21. it will be more to the purpose of vindicating grotius's intention , and clearing the whole matter , that i give the reader one signall passage from him , by which his sense must in all reason be judged , being by him premised before his interpretation of the latter part of this prophecy , from chap. 40. which he generally interprets in a first sense , of matters that belonged to the jews from the time of their deportation , to the maccabees , &c. but acknowledges to contain also , and that more simply and more clearly the matters of christ . 22. the words are in the prooeme to isa. 40. cum autem omnia dei beneficia umbram in se contintant corum quae christus prastitit , tum praecipuè ista omnia quae deincept ab isaiâ praenuntiabantur , verbis saepissime à deo sic directis , ut simplicius limpidiusque in res christi , quam in illas quas primò significare esaias voluit , convenirent . whereas all gods blessings have in them a shadow of those things which christ performed , this is especially applicable to all those things which in the ensuing chapters ( this of chap. 53. must needs be comprehended in that style ) are foretold by isaiah ; the words most often being so directed by god , that they agree more simply and clearly to the matters of christ , than to those which isaias would first signifie by them . 23. here is the ground of what i said of the first sense of these prophecies , viz. that which isaias first meant to signifie by them , supposing that there was somewhat else , belonging to christ , which in a second sense or later completion he signified also , and the words so directed by god the wise disposer , that they most simply and clearly , i. e. without figures ( which are usual in prophecies ) belonged to him . this being by him said once for all , of all those prophecies that follow , doth by perfect equivalence , ( a collective being as full and ●fficacious as a distributive ) conclude of every particular , and consequently of this fifty third before us ( of which he again gives the same account as hath been said , particularly , when he comes unto it ) and of every verse in it , that it most clearly & literally belongs to christ , though in jeremy he supposed it had another interpretation . and so this , i now hope , will be deemed satisfactory , as to the general , to vindicate his exposition of the whole chapter , and the having mention'd it may be in some degree necessary to the preserving of them from misprisions who read not those notes intirely , that they may comprehend the sense of the whole prophecies , ( which is the proper'st use of them ) but cast their eyes upon some particular texts , to satisfie their present wants , or curiosities . 24. but then secondly , for the particular verse 11. i answer , 1. that in the annotation on 1 pet : 2. 24. i cannot be concern'd , having oft resolved that , as the rest on the epistles , to be unsufficient to give us his sense . as for that on isaiah , if it were true , that he had there interpreted {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} auferet , 1. this could not have been justly charged upon him , as a socinian interpretation , tertullian having given him authority for it , as he cites it , on mat. 8. 17. and indeed that evangelist too having there applied that prophecy to {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , the bearing their bodily diseases , which sure was so to be understood , as should denote his curing , ( i. e. his auferet , taking them away ) and not his bearing them in their stead , taking upon him all the diseases which he cured in any . but then 2. 't is clear , that he doth not so interpret it [ auferre to take away ] as to exclude , but expresly to include the ferre , or bearing also ; auferet , saith he , as applied to jeremy , by a metonymie , but that founded in the other of bearing , as the literal , quia qui sordes auferunt , solent ●as collo supposito portare ; so that the literal of bearing , or carrying our iniquities , is ( by the former observation ) left to be completed in christ , who did both bear and take away the sins of the world , and nothing by grotius is here affirmed , or interpreted to the contrary of that . and so much for the other part of the objection , and so for the third part of my method . 25. fourthly , when i had proposed to consideration two things for the preventing all jealousie of any after change in grotius , and the reviewer had taken notice of one of them , under the style of my first observation , and offered some semblance of answer to it , pag. 6. before he comes to the second , he cannot , as he saith , but suppose , that he is already absolved from a necessity of farther procedure — ] by that means freeing himself from giving any heed to that argument which i had laid greatest weight on , as that which of all others was most considerable in this business , viz. grotius's own words ( who certainly knew his own heart , better then any accuser , or diviner can be supposed to do , and ought to be believed , rather then any contrary surmises concerning him ) expresly testifying his constancy in adhering still ( now after the time of his supposed change ) to what he had delivered in his book de satisfactione . herein i shall leave the reader to pass the judgment , whence that absolution was derived to the reviewer , by which he could not but suppose himself freed from any necessity of considering this evidence , when yet he was at leisure ( by way of commutation ) to heap up contrary appearances from the annotations on the epistles , which i profest not to allow to be his , and therefore could not be concern'd in the producing of them . 26. here onely i had exprest my opinion that the notes on the apocalypse , had ( as i still think i have been informed , and have already premised some proof of it ) received from his own pencil the very lineaments , and colours , wherein they appear ; and therefore when he pitches on one annotation on that book rev. 1. 5. christ's washing us from our sins in his bloud , where he thinks the satisfaction of christ concealed , and the socinian interpretation taken up by grotius , contrary to his manner of explicating and applying it in his book de satisfactione ; this will require to be a while considered by me . 27. the words of grotius he hath rightly set down , but i suppose not sufficiently considered the latter part of them , which runs thus , dicitur christus suo sanguine nos lavisse , quia & ipse omnia praestitit , quae ad id requirebantur ; christ is said to have washt us with his bloud , because he performed all things which were required to it , i. e. to the washing of the soule . which words are certainly of competent largenesse to contain ( and so exclude not ) the doctrine of satisfaction , that being of the number of those things , which in gods counsel , were appointed , and so required to the washing of our souls ; this being considered , it will be no prejudice to that learned man , that in the former words he took in socinus's interpretation of [ morte suâ certos nos reddidit veritatis eorum quae docuerat , quae talia sunt , ut nihil sit aptius ad purgandos à vitiis animos — ] for of that there is no question , but that christ by his death did give us assurance of the truth of his doctrine , and that this assurance is very apt to purge us from our evil and vitious courses . in respect of which purgation saint paul himself saith , tit. 2. 4. that christ gave himself ( that is surely even to dye ) for us , that he might redeem us from all in quity ( the power as well as guilt of it ) and purifie unto himself a peculiar people , zealous of good works . and gal. 1. 4. he gave himself for our sins ( and thereby , i suppose , made a satisfaction for us ) that he might deliver us from this present evil world , from the vices and abominations thereof . and eph. 5. 25. christ gave himself for the church , that he might sanctifie and cleanse it , that he might present it unto himself a glorious church ; not having spot or wrinkle or any such thing . from whence i conclude that the socinians errour consists not herein , that they affirm this , but that they say this is all that christ did by his death , and so exclude his satisfaction ; which can by no means be affirmed of grotius , who , as he wrote a book in defence of it , so in this very place ascribes to christ the performing omnia all things , indefinitely , which were required to the washing of our souls , from which number his expiatory sacrifice was never excluded by grotius ? 28. and then it may be fit to be remembred , that as the denying the satisfaction of christ is one great errour justly charged on the socinians , so the confining the effects of the death of christ , to that one head of satisfaction , is an errour also , very carefully to be averted by him , that desires to reap benefit by christs death . 29. after his view of this place he is pleased ( to prevent the readers farther trouble ) to refer him to grotius's annotation on one place more of the revelation , chap. 13. 9. and i have observed his directions , and can assure him , there is not there one word to this matter . onely that arethas rightly applies the phrase [ from the foundation of the world ] to the word [ book ] not to the word [ slain ] evincing it from the parallel place , chap. 17. 8. where so it is joyned [ whose names are written in the book of life from the foundation of the world ] the book of life , in one place , and the book of life of the lamb slain , or the slain lambs book of life , in the other , being perfectly aequipollent . 30. the remainder of the catalogue of texts , that is added , is all again out of the epistles , and so hath already more then once been accounted for , by denying the annotations on them to have been perfected by grotius . and this is all that need to be considered , in reference to the first branch of the suggestion , that concerning the doctrine of the satisfaction of christ . 31. on the second socinian head of doctrine , that concerning the deity of christ , whereon the disputer had affirmed [ that of all the texts of the old and new testament , whereby the deity of christ is usually confirmed , — grotius hath not left any more then one , if one , speaking any thing clearly to this purpose . ] i thought i had given some matter of conviction , by referring to that learned man's . annotations on john 1. when both that one signal text is left by him speaking clearly to this purpose , and many other places of scripture are mentioned , and interpreted , and applied to the same sense , as parallel , and answerable to that . to this he replies , that this of john 1. was the one place by him expresly excepted , and therefore this instance would not evade the charge . and for the other places , prov. 8 , &c. he is pleased to suppose , that on the view of my defence men must needs suppose that in the annotations on the places repeted ; grotius must give their sense , as bearing witness to the deity of christ ; hereupon he will turn to the several places , and give the reader an account of them . ] 32. but before he proceed to that , and to save the pains of many of them , it may be soon considered , that what grotius doth in the notes on john 1. is as truly his act , as any thing that is done by him in any other place , much more so , than what is publisht under his name , in the annotations on the epistles , and consequently that as many places as he hath there affirmed to be parallel to john 1. 1. so many places he hath left speaking clearly to this purpose . grotius had not at that time publisht any other notes on any part of the bible , but those onely on the gospels . on the rest of the new testament he never lived to publish any , yet here on john 1. hath affirmed the words of saint paul , col. 1. 16. [ all things were created by christ — ] to be agreeable to the words of saint john , that without him was nothing made that was made . is it not now as visible , that he hath left that place of col. 1. 16. speaking clearly to the deity and creative power of christ , by which all things were at first made , as if he had lived to set out annotations purposely on that place , and had therein so interpreted it ? this certainly is so clear , that i cannot yet doubt ( what ever the reviewers sarcasme would suggest ) of being a successful advocate in this matter . 33. the same is again as clear of 2 pet. 3. 5. and of the two places brought by him , in concent with it , from the chaldee paraphrast on isai. 45. 12. & 48. 13. to testifie that by this {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , i. e. by the word of the lord , christ , the whole world was founded ; which again ( though he never should mention them again in all his writings ) are yet solemnly left by him , to testifie clearly to the deity of christ ; and so more than that one of john 1. 34. but the place more largely recited by grotius to this purpose , is that of prov. 8. from verse 23. a seculo habui principatum , i was set up from everlasting , to verse 27. when he prepared the heavens i was there ; and this the reviewer thinks fit to examine , by repairing to his annotations on the old testament , and there 1. he finds his first note on the wisdome there spoken of to be [ haec de eâ sapientiâ quae in lege apparet exponunt hebraei , & sane ei , si non soli , at praecipuè haec attributa conveniunt ] and this he thinks a very advantageous discovery , for if they agree solely or principally to the wisdome that shines in the law , how can they be the attributes of the person of the son of god ? 35. but i answer , that note of his is on the first verse of that chapter , far enough from verse 23. where the citation in his note on john 1. begins . and why might not many parts of the character of wisdome be by the jews duly applied to the law ( as will appear if you read the former part of the chapter for above twenty verses together ) and yet the latter and sublimer part of its character be competible onely to christ , the eternal wisdome of the father ? and why should not grotius's [ haec ] on verse 1. rather belong to those former 20 verses , than to the 23 &c. which he there ( as in the notes on the gospels ) expresly interprets so , as that verse 27. and 30. be all one with john 1. 1. and so prov. 9. 1. wisdome built her an house , i. e. saith he , corpus humanum , a mans body , which is not applicable to any thing , but christ in his incarnation . and so i hope this artifice hath stood the reviewer in little stead . 36. but then , saith he , on verse 22. grotius affirmes of {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} that it is rendred not amiss by the chaldee {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} and by the septuagint {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , though he knew that sense was pleaded by the arrians , and expleded by the ancient doctors of the church . ] 37. to this i answer , that grotius's words , [ sensu non malo si creare sumas pro facere ut appareat ] signifie not , that that rendring is not amisse , for he had formerly exprest his opinion of that , that aquila and symmachus and theodesian their rendring it by {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , was well agreeing or answerable to the hebrew {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} but that the other which was not the right rendring , might yet bear a tolerable , or not ill sense , if it were interpreted to signifie no more than that which he there names , viz. [ making to appear ] a sense which the fathers never exploded , nor was fit to be pretended by the arrians , or favoured by any in kindness to them . 38. this therefore was but a weak foundation of that confidence , with which the reviewer concludes , that of the son of god , the essential wisdome of god , subsisting with the father , we have not one word ] especially when he had himself confest that [ on verse 27. he addes , aderam , i. e. {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} john 1. 1. ] for certainly if those words of wisdome , when he prepared the heavens i was there , and the same again verse 30. ( to which also he refers the reader , though the reviewer pleased not to see it ) when he appointed the foundations of the earth , then was i by him ] be all one with [ the word was with god ] john 1. 1. there is then some word of the son of god , the essential wisdome , in those notes , and perfectly as much as is proportionable to the manner of those very short annotations on the old testament . 39. to which may be added , that by interpreting the phrase [ his wayes . ] verse 22. by operationes dei , the operations of god , the sense of that verse ( which the reviswer thinks perverted or obscured ) must in his rendring run thus , in the beginning of his operations god possessed this eternal wisdome , the son of god , which will be still to the same sense ; and then the note on chap. 9. 1. sets down the incarnation of this eternal word , or wisdome ; and what could have been more punctual against the socinian interest , than all this , being thus briefly amassed together , if the reviewer would have but the patience to discern it ? 40. what he adds by way of wonderment , that i should add the places of isa. 45. 12. and 48. 13. to the number of texts interpreted by grotius to this matter of the deity , is soon satisfied , by remembring ( what was visible enough before ) that the chaldee paraphrast in those and many other places rendring the word [ god ] by [ god and his word ] is fitly brought by grotius , as a witness , that the world was created by the word of god , as that is god , and that that is the sense of those places . which if it be , then are those texts of scripture left by grotius , to testifie to this truth of the deity of the word of god , i. e. of christ . 41. now for the principal place that of john 1. 1. the reviewer hath exprest his dislikes also to that , and mention'd some grounds thereof , 1. that grotius is very careful of ascribing an {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} ] but if by this phrase he would signifie him unwilling to ascribe an hypostasis to the word , this is misrepresented by him ; for 't is evident , grotius expresses no dislike to that style , all that he saith that way , is , vecem {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} — non à primis christianis usurpatam , cùm contra {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} dixerit athanasius , synodi nicaena , sardicensis , & romanae aliquot , that that word , and some others was not used by the first christians , that athanasius , and the nicene , sardicene , and some roman councels affirmed , that there was one hypostasis . and all these , i hope , are so contrary to the arrian , that if grotius should chuse to speak with them , he could with no justice be accused of that heresie , or obscuring the deity of christ by so speaking . 42. and yet it is farther clear , that from origen & others after him , he cites the distinction of hypostases , and what could he have done more to obtain the reviewers favour , then to cite it from them , that used , and not pretend it from them , that used it not ? 43. that he hath interweaved many platonick interpretations of {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} is also in the second place suggested , and at once , that he hath darkened the whole counsel of god in that place . ] but i hope there is no heresie in letting the christian reader know , how much platonists and hethen philosophers have by groping discoverd of divine truths , and to me it is not imaginable , that when the christian doctrine is once declared , such additions as these should by being subjoyned ex abundanti , obscure what was once made clear , and so darken the whole counsel of god . 44. thirdly , it may not be amisse , saith he , to observe , that not onely the arians , but photinus himself acknowledged that the world was made {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} ] and to this i answer , that what is wide of the mark , to which it is directed , no way sufficient to infer the desired conclusion , is ( in the managing of a controversie ) amiss to be observed ; and such will this observation appear to be ; for the matter of the question being a charge against grotius , of socinian doctrine , what can be concluded ( to that ) from the bare mention of the arians , and photinus his acknowledgments , unless first it be proved , that grotius was an arian , or photinian , and secondly that all arians and photinians are socinians ? either of which , as they have not the least appearance of truth in them , so are they not so much as attempted here to be proved by the author of this observation . on the contrary , there are these five shrewd prejudices against it . 1. that what the arians say in this matter , photinus doth not say , and so they were not fit to be put together . 2. that what the arians say , grotius doth not say . 3. that what the photinians say , neither the arians , nor grotius do say . 4 : that the socinians do in this differ much both from arians and photinians ; and yet 5. that grotius differs as much ( or more ) from the socinians herein , as he doth from either of the other two . 45. all this will appear by viewing severally the arians , and photinians , and socinians doctrine in this point , and the distance of grotius's interpretation from each of these . for the first , arius did indeed acknowledge in his d epistle , that god did by his onely son make {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , the worlds and the rest , and in the words of the text , {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , that all things were made by him , and without him was nothing made that was made . but sure this was no part of his heresie , ( if it were , the scripture as well as grotius , must be involved in it , who affirmed it equally ) but that he first affirmed christ to be himself a creature , {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , saith he , he by whom god created the world was a perfect creature of gods , though created {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , before all ages ; and again saith epiphanius , {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , though they call him a creature , yet they confess him above all his creatures . so again speaking of the holy ghost , they will have him to be {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , the creature of a creature , where still that is arius his heresie , in this matter , that he made christ a creature , and to that applied the septuagints rendring of the place prov. 8. of {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , god created me , and consequently would not allow him to be {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , of the same substance , or equal with the father . and when grotius saith any thing in favour of this doctrine , of christ's being a creature , or denies his equality with the father , then he must pass for an arian ; ( of which he hath not yet had the luck to be accused , that i know of ; ) but 't is certain he hath not done so , nay on the other side , 't is competently evident , if but by the notion which he applies to {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} in his annotations on prov. 8. ( to rescue that rendring from an evil sense ) that he utterly rejects that notion wherein the arian took it , viz. for creating , and so that he is herein profestly free from that heresie . 46. as for photinus in the second place , 't is certain his heresie , like that of paulus samosatenus , consisted in denying that christ had a being , or subsistence from the beginning , or before the holy ghost's coming upon mary , so saith b epiphanius , {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} — now though this heretick was content to acknowledge that the father made the world {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , by the {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} which was in him , yet that it was not christ which he understood by that style , is most clear , both by his denying christ to have had then any subsistence , and 2. by the similitude , by which he exprest himself , {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , as a man by {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} doth what he will ( by {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} meaning a kind of idea in the agents mind , by , or according to which he doth any thing ) so by his own {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , or by the {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} which is in him the father hath made all things ; but especially by epiphanius's way of confuting him , {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} — the {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} in man , whether the word of the mind within , or the word spoken cannot be called man , but the {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} of man , whereas the {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} in saint john is said to be god . and so as photinus saying [ all things were made by the {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , which was in god ] said quite another thing from what arius had said ( and therefore this reviewers observation was in that respect guilty of that fallacy , which aristotle calls plurium interrogationum ) so is it most certain , that grotius's interpretation of the evangelist , it no way consonant to photinus ( any more then to arius ) his notion . for when to those words of the evangelist [ in the beginning was the word ] his note is , jam ium erat , sic mos est hebraeis aternitatem populariter describere ] which defines the eternity of his being , he brings for explication of that forme of speech , the words of justine , {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , he was subsistent before the worlds . so again on those words [ the word was with god ] he saith this was in opposition to his being seen in the world in his incarnation , vult enim dicere , antè eum fuisse inconspicuum , he would express that before his incarnation , he was invisible ; adding for proof , dicitur enim deus {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , 1 tim. 1. 17. for god is said to be invisible , and to inhabit the light which none approcheth ; by all which it is clear , that by [ the word ] he understands invisible god himself , being or subsisting eternally with the father , which is in every part contrary to photinus's doctrine , as hath been shewed . 47. thirdly , for the socinians their interpretation is known to differ toto coelo in this particular both from arius , and photinus , being after this manner , that c in the beginning of the spiritual world , or the gospel , the word , that son of god , which was born of mary in augustus's reign , so called in respect of his office , which was to make known gods word to men , was with god , i. e. before john's preaching , was , as the word , or in respect of this office , known to none but to god : that this word is god , i. e. that christ was so called ( as angels and princes are ) in respect of the great benefits which we receive from him , and the dignity to which he is by god advanced , ( distinctly denying that he is the supreme god , the author of all things , or creator of the world ) that all things were created by him , i. e. all the new spiritual and divine things , which are under the gospel done in the world , and so on in concerdance with this foundation . from every part of which grotius's explications of that text are most remote , as hath already appeared , and have not the least infusion of this leven discernable in them , as will be evident to any , who shall but cast an eye on his notes on that place . of the notes on the epistles which came out since his death , this cannot be said , for there many of these , or the like socinian interpretations are crept in , some words of the epistles expounded in a sense expresly contrary to what he hath here incidentally said of the same words . this i have pointed at in one eminent instance , the place to the colossians , chap. 1. 16. of the worlds being made by christ , and thereon founded my resolution , that they were none of his , not consequently did i ever permit my plea for him , to be extended to the justifying of them . thus much may suffice for the supernumerary observation , which being sure , meant to insinuate somewhat , it now appears with what justice it was produced by him . by the way i suppose my account also given , why the interpretations of john 1. and prov. 8. of the world being made by {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} the word of god , were by me formerly produced , as irrefragable evidences , that this learned man inclined not to the socinians in this matter of the deity of christ . the reviewer may now judge what reason i had for it . 48. lastly , there being a threefold {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , 't is suggested that nothing but {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} was by grotius intended in those annotations on john 1. 1. but withall 't is confest , that much from some quotations there used may be said against it . ] and if there may , and if those quotations be so clear , as those out of justine martyr , and athenagoras , of christ's presubsisting before the worlds , of his being god before the worlds , that from the beginning god being an eternal mind , {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , had the word in himself eternally , and if the negative [ nothing but {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} ] be not reconcileable with any one mention of any thing else , such as christ's being god , and with god from all eternity ; upon these grounds , i say i shall confess it the prudentest course , which the reviewer here hath taken , viz. to defer the undertaking of this task , and to add no more , than the unproved suggestion , till space of greater leisure . 49. in reproching of me for a triumphant close , he is now pleased to give an essay of his own humility , in heaping these severals into one period , 1. that he said not grotius was a socinian . 2. that in his annotations on the six verses in the proverbs , two in isaiah , one in saint peter , one in saint paul , added to many in the beginning of saint john , grotius speaks not one word to the purpose . 3. that he doth not interpret christ's eternal subsistence with god , so as to a personal subsistence . 50. to these three i briefly answer . to the first , that the onely thing that in my first digression ( or second defence of grotius ) i undertook in behalf of that learned man , being the injustice of the charge , of his being sometimes a socinian , sometimes a papist , sometimes both ; this is by the reviewer in his epistle to the oxford heads undertaken to be refuted , which can never be done , unless he both say and prove , that grotius was a socinian . to the second , that , as hath now appeared , grotius hath spoken to the purpose of the deity of christ , on the eighth of the proverbs ( as of his incarnation on the ninth ) as well as on john 1. and for the other places , as it is sufficient that he hath recited them to that purpose on john 1. so the account is clear why he is not found to do it elswhere . on isaiah keeping himself to the literal hebrew , he had no occasion in those concise notes , to take notice of that , which onely the chaldee there had said . the other two are in the epistles , on which the annotations , which are published under his name , are by me deemed imperfect , and not to carry his full sense with them . to the third as before , that he cites out of origen , and others after him , the use of the word hypostases , and the distinction of them . onely he saith the word was not used à primis christianis , by the first christians , any more then {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} &c. and so it is certain it was not . 51. in the next place , i am reproved that i neither make inquiry into his treatise , for the places in the old testament , wherein the deity of christ is testified to , and are corrupted by that learned man , nor yet will look into grotius's annotations on those texts , which i remember at all times to be pleaded to that purpose . to this i answer , 1. that i never undertook the vindicaton of all grotius's annotations , nor ever said any thing , which should ingage me in such a long task as this . 2. the discouragements , which i mentioned to have already received from making inquiry into this reviewers former treatise , were taken from what had appeared from grotius on john 1 : compared with , and found evidently to supersede this authors suggestions of [ but one , if one place , in all the bible , left by grotius clearly testifying this truth ] for when , beside that of john 1. i found there so many more , put together , particularly prov. 8. verse 23. — largely set down , and in the annotations on the proverbs , found the same sense adhered to , and a reference back again to john 1. where he had spoken so largely on this matter , what need was there of farther inquiry for that , which had thus readily offered it self ? 52. now to my two suppletory considerations , he hath his replies also ; to the first , by confessing , what i desire , that one express text of scripture , is sufficient for the confirmation of a divine truth ] but then , denying that five places have been by me produced out of the annotations of grotius for the confirmation of the truth pleaded about . ] 53. to this i answer , 1. that if any one be sufficient to confirm this divine truth , then grotius hath been demonstrated sufficiently to have confirmed it , who hath evidently brought john 1. which is one such text . secondly , that that text , and prov. 8. 23 — he hath certainly not depraved , nor kept back from testifying to this truth ; so likewise col. 1. 18. and 2 pet. 3. 5. if we may judge by his own words on john 1. and not by the posthumous annotations , which i deem not competent measures to judge him by , and so there are four of the five . thirdly , he hath there also applied to it the places of isaiah , in the chaldee reading , and these superadded to the former , are very sufficient to confirme a divine truth , and that is all i said in this matter . but then fourthly , as the conciseness of his notes on the old testament , and his desire to clear the first , and nearest sense of the prophecies , such as pertain'd to the then approching affairs of the jews , are a competent account of his not inlarging to the more remote and ultimate completions in jesus christ . so his general advertisements , more then once given ( such as hath been produced from his preface to isa. 40. and to isa 53. ) are sufficient to testifie his acknowledgment of christ's being predicted in those places of the prophets , where his annotations on the several verses make no particular mention of him . and so , when he gives a sense of isa. 9. 6. which immediately belonged ( in his opinion ) to hezekiah , and according to that , interprets every part of that verse , he yet thus prefaceth it , sic tamen ut multò excellentius haec ad messiam pertinere non christiani tantum agnoscant , sed & chaldaeus hoc loco ] thus giving onely a lower notion of the words to hezekiah , and reserving the sublimer and more excellent to christ . so again chap. 11. 1. redit ad hezechiae . laudes , sub quibus sensu sublimiore latent laudes messiae ; and many passages there are to the same purpose : as others also of referring to the annotations on the gospels , wherein he hath spoken so largely of this sublimer completion of ohe prophecies , that he would not repete them in the places of the prophets , to which they belonged . 54. in the next place he comes to the comparison betwixt calvin's and grotius's dealing in this matter , and makes many offers of answer , to which i am concern'd to make particular replies . 55. first , he denies mr calvine equally chargeable , or in any degree of proportion with grotius . to which i answer , that whether he be , or be not truly chargeable , in any degree , i am not concern'd to examine , having not accused him , but onely made the parallel betwixt that learned man and grotius , in this , that each of them have by some been deemed chargeable . 2. the comparison which i made , was not of the equality , or indeed of the degree of proportion , but exprest with such caution , as sufficiently prevented that reply , my words being these , that it will upon inquiry be found in some degree ; if not equally chargeable , on the learnedst and most valued of the reformers , particularly on mr calvin himself , &c. here i said , in some degree , but proceeded not to define the equality , or to consider what proportion that degree held with that wherein grotius was chargeable , not indeed believing that either grotius or calvin had given any reasons for that charge , which i see lie heavy on both of them . 56. 3. the comparison of equality , which i made between these two learned men , referred onely to the bitterness and injustice of the accusations and contumelies that fell upon them , on that account , in these words , [ calvin himself hath been as bitterly and unjustly accused and reviled on this account , as ever erasmus was by bellarmine or beza , or is probably grotius can b. ] and there will be no way to disprove my comparison in this , but by heaping far more unjust reproches on grotius , then yet this reviewer hath done , which if others are resolved to do , yet shall i not thereby be refutable , who , as justice and charity obliged me , affirmed it onely not probable that they would . 57. in the next place he requires me to prove of mr calvin that he hath in all his commentaries on the scripture , corrupted the sense of any text , giving expresse testimonies to the deity of christ , and commonly pleaded to that end and purpose , although he deny not but that he differs from the common judgment of most in the interpretation of some few prophetical passages judged by them to relate to christ . ] 58. to this i answer , 1. that the latter part of this ( his not denying &c. ) is in effect the confessing all that i had said of mr calvin , which was but this , that he was by some charged of disarming the church of her defences against adversaries , by diverting those places of scripture which had formerly been used to assert the great mysteries , to other inferior ends ; and then i need undertake no farther tasks of supererogation , such as the proving mr calvin to have corrupted the sense of any text &c. which he knows i never affirmed of him . yet remembring him that i am not now to speak my own sense , but onely to justifie the truth of my report , that mr calvin and some of the first reformers have been severely accused and reviled on this account . i shall now 2. ( instead of g many ) refer the reader to schlussetburgius a lutheran superintendent , in his second book de calvinist . theolog. and 6. article ; or to fr. fevardentius , a doctor of paris , either in his comment on saint paul to philemon , or in his excerpta out of that lutheran . not : in iren : var : fragm : p. 508 , 509. in the latter of these he will find a catologue of twenty passages affixt to those eminent first reformers , especially to mr calvin , as 1. that the enmity betwixt the serpent and the seed of the woman , gen. 3. is simply to be interpreted of the hostility of men and serpents ; that the prophecies of the scepters not departing from judah till shiloh comes , gen. 49. expounded of christ , gives the jews occasion to scoff ; that the words of balaam , num. 24. a star shall rise out of jacob , must not properly be expounded of christ ; nor that of the lord by moses , deut. 18. 18. i will raise them up a prophet , which yet saint peter acts 3. 22 , and saint stephen acts 7. 37 : affirmed to belong to christ ; that mich. 5. 2. out of thee bethleem shall he come forth to me that is to be a ruler in israel ] must not be expounded precisely and properly of the divinity of christ . that zach. 9. 9. behold thy king cometh lowly — is by interpreters triflingly and in a false manner expounded of his entrance into jerusalem , which yet saint matthew and saint john have applied to it . these are a few essayes whereby to judge of many others . and the less mr calvin and the reformers are guilty of these , ( as truly in many that i have had the convenience to examin , i cannot but think him guiltless ) the more evident is the parallel betwixt grotius and them in this matter . 59. thirdly , he affirmes that what the papists raved against mr calvin , was chiefly from some expressions in the institutions about the trinity , ( wherein he is acquitted by the most learned of themselves ) and not from the expositions of scripture . ] but 1. the truth of this will be judged by what was last said , for all those twenty passages are fetcht from the expositions of calvin &c. on those so many places of scripture . and 2. 't is certain i specified not the book , wherein he had written what was thus chargeable , and so had not been reproveable , if they had been all out of the institutions , those being as acknowledgedly his , as the commentaries , and both much more then the annotations on the epistles are grotius's ; and 3. if he stand by learned men acquitted of the charge , then as i said , that may make the parallel more exact betwixt him and grotius , though i undertake not that every learned man hath been thus just to acquit him . 60. but then fourthly , for calvino-turcismus by me mentioned in a parenthesis , he tels me , i have forgotten the design of it , and that calvin is no more concerned in it than others of the first reformers , nor is it from any doctrine about the deity of christ in particular , but from the whole of the reformed religion , with the apostacies of some , that they compare it with turcisme , adding , that something indeed in a chapter or two they speak about the trinity , from some expressions of luther , melanchthon , calvin , and others . 61. to all this i answer , 1. that 't is visible i speak not of mr calvin alone , but of the learnedst and most valued of the reformers , and of mr calvin onely , as one of them . 2. that although the forgetting the design of reynolds and giffords book , would be far from a crime in me , had i been guilty of it , ( the subject matter of it is not so much worth remembring ) much lesse any indication that grotius were insufficiontly vindicated ; yet when the reviewer confesses , that in a chapter or two it speaks about the trinity , from some expressions of luther , melanchthon , and calvin , and others : this clearly evidences , that these reformers were there thus accused in the matter of the trinity , as now it seems grotius is ; and 3. if hunnius's calvinus judaizans , which is home to the business , be answered by pareus , and an account of the calumny given by him ] this still renders the parallel more complete . an account of the calumny and the first author , and grounds of it against grotius , being happily rendred by himself also in the discussio , p. 17. 62. the reviewer concludes this matter with a signification of his constant adhering to his proposition formerly asserted , with one limitation expressed ( of his own observation . ) but i that first gave the occasion of the debate in my digression concerning grotius , did never propose it with reference to that limitation , not being able to foresee , how much this reviewer had read , or observed of grotius's writings , nor can i yet pass judgment , whether what hath now been offered to him by another , will be yielded to come within the compass of that limitation , or no . and so i must be content to leave it at this time . 63. on the second sort of suggestion , the reviewer hath chosen to be brief , and hath well prepared for it by expressing dislike and aversation to any such undertaking , that seemed incumbent on him , viz. to prove that grotius was a papist . ] but to this i reply , as before , that this task is sure incumbent on him , if , as he said , his defensative be suited to what i pleaded in his behalf . for 't is certain , that in the digression , i had so proposed the debate , and undertaken to vindicate him from this suggestion , viz. that he was a papist . 64. that he closed with the roman interest , he is now willing to infer , from his observation on rev. 12. 5. to that therefore i have turned , and there find no other premisses toward this conclusion than onely these , 1. that dispersi ex judaeis , instrumenta ecclesiae catholicae , multos de populo romano christo genuere , that those that were dispersed from judaea — begat to christ many of the people of rome , and that these are there called partus masculinus the man-childe or masculine birth , in respect of the great constancy which appeared in the church of rome of those times ; then 2. that the church of rome hath this above other churches , that no church subjected more people to the word of god , so that her victories by the weapons of christ , were not inferior to the martial successes of old rome : 3. that the regiment of other churches after the apostles death belonged to that . now this being clearly applied by him to the infancy or first ages of the church , that which is first said of the constancy , is indeed much for the honour of the primitive roman church , but no way for the interest of the present , which having much departed from the primitive , cannot in any reason partake of those elogies , which he there bestows on that masculine birth , at the first appearing of it in the world . so likewise 2. of the ancient roman church it is , that he saith , it converted so many to the faith , which is a truth known , and acknowledged in history , but is not at this day assumed ( witness s. w. ) to be the foundation on which their supremacy is built . 3. that after the apostles death rome being a chief metropolis , and ( as the imperial see ) the most eminent of all others , had the dominion aliarum of other ( it is not omnium , of all ) churches , is not denied by any either ancient , or modern , that i know of . all the suburbicarian region , and the churches in that , were under the primate of rome , and that primate was within a while lookt on , as the patriarch of the west , and the first patriarch . and the words of grotius are not , by any circumstance of the place , inclined to any other sense . the aliae ecclesiae , other churches , being in no reason interpretable any farther , than those , which rome had converted to the faith , nor necessarily to all them , but to the oppida minora and provinciae , the lesser cities and provinces , unto which ( as he interprets ) the woman is said to flie ( and so christianity to be propagated ) when simon magus by the favour of the emperour had opposed and much oppressed it at rome , and drave the profession out of it , by which means those aliae ecclesiae were planted . and it may be worthy to be observed , that when the text before him was general , for {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} all the nations , he is not thereby moved to interpret it in that latitude of all simply , but ( in a more restrained sence , wherein all in scripture-style oft signifies but a great many ) onely by the nulla plures , and aliarum , others and none more then that . 65. here before he concludes , he is pleased to look back on a passage which he had used , [ that if men be drunkards , proud , boasters , &c. hypocrites , haters of good men , persecutors and revilers of them , yea , and if they be not regenerate and born of god united to the head christ jesus , by the same spirit that is in him , they shall never see god ] for which , he now saith , he fears not what conclusion can regularly , in reference to any person living or dead , be deduced . ] to this i reply by acknowledging the certain truth of the general aphorisme , and onely remembring him , that the onely question was , whether in a particular discourse concerning hugo grotius , after the mention of his eternal estate , and disclaiming all design of begetting in others any evil surmises of it , or of judging him himself , 1. it were seasonably added , that he was fallen to his own master , when falling in the style of that scripture ( visibly referred to ) signifies falling under condemnation , and 2. whether the applying this general aphorisme to this matter , were not apt to beget in others those evil surmises , which he was willing to disclaim : if in these he be not concerned , neither am i , and therefore i shall not further importune him in that matter . 66. to the fragments of grotius's epistles to crellius , i had formerly spoken , though they were not ( possibly ) formerly printed . but having no more in them than was acknowledged , somewhat of civility to a civil adversary , commendation of some things truly commendable ( such sure is the care of good life ) acknowledgment of advantage received by his writings , readiness of performing any office of kindness to him , and finally praying for him ; all these are certainly no more then due , as by christ's precept to the injurious , so to a learned man , from whom he differed in opinion , and may onely serve to direct us to the christian manner of dealing with adversaries , that of never labouring their ruine or hurt in any kind , but doing them all possible good . and if in this matter the reader will be moved with probable arguments ; it is not well to be imagined , in case grotius had at this time been changed from the opinion which he was of , at the writing of the book de satisfact : that having said what these fragments signifie him to have said , he would have concealed that , or that any such passage , had it been in the letter , would have been left out of the fragments , or being in the fragments , would have been supprest by the reviewer . 67. what in the second epistle is said of crellius's notes on the epistle to the galatians , that he had very happily found out the occasion , and purpose , and whole contexture of the epistle , no way concludes his imbracing the interpretation of each brief occasional passage in that epistle , wherein the socinian controversies are concern'd , or renouncing that , which he had given in his book de satisfact : as his sense of those passages . 68. there is no more remaining now before me , which seems to exact farther reply . thus much i have once more added , lest the reviewer may either think his animadversions despised , or conceive that they have succesfully performed what they attempted ; and moreover lest having once ( though but {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} ) undertaken the defence of this learned man . i should now by my silence seem to desert my plea , and be deem'd to have consented to , and in a manner confirm'd those calumnies , which on this score of his defection to heresit , i see from many pens daily cast out upon him . 69. and this , as it is an act of meer justice , and charity to the dead , and no less to those , who by their sin of uncharitable thoughts towards him , are likely to deprive themselves of the benefit of his labours ; so is it but a proportionable return of debt and gratitude to the signal value and kindnesse , which in his life-time he constantly profest to pay to this church and nation ; expressing his opinion , that of all churches in the world , it was the most carefull observer , and transcriber of primitive antiquity , and more then intimating his desire to end his dayes in the bosome , and communion of our mother . of this i want not store of witnesses , which from time to time have heard it from his own mouth , whilest he was embassadour in france , and even in his return to sweden , immediately before his death ; and for a real evidence of this truth , 't is no newes to many , that at the taking his journey from paris , he appointed his wife , whom he left behind , to resort to the english assembly , at the agents house , which accordingly she is known to have practised . which therefore may serve for a competent addition to , and conclusion of the evidences hitherto produced , ( being in perfect accord and harmony with them ) that as far as the english establishment is removed from socinian , and popish , so far this learned man stands vindicated from both these aspersions ; which makes me the less wonder , that some others , who have endeavoured to maintain their constancy of adherence , and submission to the church of england , are in like manner most injuriously aspersed by those who have departed from it ; lord lay not this sin to their charge . a post-script . 1. having lately a sight of a new piece published by the same author , one of the first things i happened to fall upon , appeared to be mine own concernment . for having cited from some words of hegesippus , that soon after the death of the apostles and their auditors , many false doctrines were preached and divulged in the church , he hath these words . 2. i know who hath endeavoured to elude the sense of this complaint , as though it concerned not any thing in the church , but the despisers and persecuters of it , the gnosticks . but yet i know also , that no man would so do , but such a one as hath a just confidence of his own ability , to make passable at least , any thing that he shall venture to say or utter . for why should that be referred by hegesippus to the ages after the apostles and their hearers were dead , with an exception against its being so in their dayes ; when if the person thus expounding this testimony may be credited , the gnosticks were never more busie nor prevalent than in that time which alone is excepted from the evil here spoken of ? nor can i understand how the opposition and persecution of the church should be insinuated to be the deflouring and violating of its chastity , which is commonly a great purifying of it : so that speaking of that breaching and preaching of errours , which was not in the apostles times , nor in the time of their hiarers , the chiefest time of the rage and madness of the gnosticks ; such as spotted the pure and incorrupted virginity of the church ; which nothing can attein unto , that is forreign unto it , and that which gave originall unto sedition in the church : i am of the mind , and so i conceive was eusebius that recited those words , that the good man intended corruptions in the church not out of it , nor oppositions to it . 3. what iust confidence any man can have of his own abilities to make any thing passable that he shall venture to utter ] unless it be found in a due care never to adventure to utter any thing , which hath not perfect truth in it , i acknowledge my self unable to apprehend . but how unjustly i am here charged of any kind of confidence of my own abilities , and how unsufficiently my answer in defence of the ancient church-writers is here invalidated , will , i hope , soon appear , by a short view , 1. of my answer , 2. of the words of the testimony it self , on which it was clearly grounded , 3. of that which is here objected against the fitness of my answer . 4. for the first , it must be remembred ( as the original of this debate ) what from this testimony of hegesippus he had ( a ) formerly concluded , viz. the corruption of the church as to doctrine , immediately after the apostles fell asleep , whereof , saith he , whosoever will impartially search into the writings that of those dayes do remain , will perhaps find more cause to complain , thou is commonly imagined . 5. to which my answer was , ( b ) that all that hegesippus there saith , is onely this , that the poyson of the heretical or apostatical , or atheistical gnosticks , in express words , the {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , the sect of the gnosticks falsly so called , and {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , the atheistical seducers , did openly set up against the truth of christ , as soon as ever the apostles were dead , which being by hegesippus terminated in the known despisers and persecutors of the true church , and orthodox professors , the grievous wolves that worried the flock , and those constantly resisted and combated with , preacht against and written against by the fathers and ancient writers , and never observed by any man to have gained of them , or infused any the least degree of their poyson into them , or their writings that are come to us . 't is a sad condition , that the just and unjust , the false teachers and orthodox professors should fall under the same envy , that the shepherds which oft laid down their lives for their sheep , should be defamed , aend again martyred by us their unkind posterity , under pretence that they were in conspiracy with the wolves also , 6. in this answer it is not possible i should be subject to any mistake , if this one matter of fact be true , that the gnosticks and atheistical seducers were the very persons , of whom alone hegesippus spake , ( for that those were the wolves , and that the church-writers have constantly refuted and detested them , and not suckt any of their poysonous doctrines from them , is so evident , that this author hath neither formerly nor now suggested the contrary . ) and for this in the next place , i appeal to the express words of hegesippus , there at large set down in greek , but here onely referred to , and more briefly toucht on by this author . 7. the words , as far as this matter is concern'd in them , i shall recite ; they are these , euseb. eccl. hist. l. 111. {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} . that there may be no place for doubt in this matter , i shall now give the english reader a full view of them , thus . but when the sacred quire of the apostles had severally ended their lives , and the generation of those that had been thought worthy to hear with their own cars the divine wisdome , was now past , then the rout or riotous convention of the godless seduction or seducers ( {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} signifies a seditious assembling , or military preparation of confederates or conspirators , and {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} deceit or seduction , may be used for the men that deceive or seduce ) received its beginning , by the cunning or deceit of false teachers , who , now that none of the apostles were left , avowed and openly attempted to preach or promulgate the science falsly so called , in opposition to the preaching of the truth . 8. what is here meant by the science falsly so called , no man can be ignorant , that hath compared that phrase used expresly by the apostle , 1 tim. 6. 20. with the writings of the primitive fathers , or but lightly considered the very nature of plain words . the word {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} gnosticks , literally signifies knowing men , so styled by themselves , but upon no grounds of truth , their doctrines being indeed directly opposed to the knowledge of our lord and saviour jesus christ , and so {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} knowledg or science falsly so called . this therefore must be the meaning of the apostles words , {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , the oppositions of the science falsly so called , i. e. the doctrines of the sect of the gnosticks , in direct opposition to the doctrine of the apostles , and consequently the same must be the importance of the like phrase in hegesippus , in consent with the apostles dialect ; what the apostle calls science falsly so called , hegesippus must be believed to mean by the very same words , the science falsly so called , i. e. the gnosticks ; what the apostle calls {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} oppositions or contradictings , hegesippus expresses by {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} opposite or contrary preaching , and these phrases are both farther cleared by a passage in the ancient author {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} : c. 6. which tels us of {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , the contradictory discourses of the dotage or folly or madness of simon ; by contradictory discourses certainly meaning the {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} and {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , oppositions and antipreaching , and by the dotage or madness of simon magus , the knowledge that he pretended to , and his followers , and which so puss them up in a mad conceit of it , but was indeed nothing else but blasphemous folly , far removed from all degree of true science . 9. from this short representation of this plain matter of fact , thus visible before our eyes , i shall now suppose it cleare , that it was not confidence of my abilities , but a well grounded perswasion , that he that cited these words in greek , understood the plain meaning of them , upon which i built my hope , that my answer to this passage of hegesippus would approve it self to him . for if the gnosticks and none else were the men spoken of by hegesippus , then was there no place for exception against my answer , and if hegesippus expresse words might be believed , thus it was . and thus stands this matter betwixt me and my reprover at this time ; i have laid it before him , let himself now , if he please , be party , witnesse , and judge ; i cannot think it possible i should need other . 10. but then in the third place , he hath an objection against this sense , which at least may have force against me ; for , saith he , if the person thus expounding this testimony ( i. e. i ) may be credited , the gnosticks were never more busie nor prevalent then in that time , which alone is excepted from the evil here spoken of . 11. to this i answer , 1. that in case i had at several times spoken things incoherent or contradictory , this would be no sufficient proof that what i now recited from hegesippus's plain words , was not contained in them . but then 2. i have been far enough from having thus ( anywhere ) contradicted my self , or what i affirme in this answer of mine , nor ( if i may be allowed the confidence to believe that i know and speake my own sense ) did i ever let fall any thing which will not be exactly reconciled with it . the short is this . the ringleaders of the gnosticks were verry busie in the apostles times , but did at first more clancularly operate , from whence in my opinion ( of which here it seems i must give an account ) they are in the apostle exprest by {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , the mystery of iniquity , iniquity , but that somewhat disguised , till at last in the season most for their turn , some of them put off their disguises ; simon magus in the apostles times , and though he miscarried , yet many of his followers afterwards in a more avowed and profest hostility ( the {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} in hegesippus ) when they had the advantage of all those being dead who had received the truth from christ himself : this is the summe of what i have elsewhere frequently , and more largely delivered , and this is exactly the sense of hegesippus in that place , as will yet more clearly appear by the addition of some other words , not yet recited , and ( i know not why ) omitted by this author in his first producing of them , when yet both the antecedents and consequents were set down by him . they are these , {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} . till those times he there speaks of , those hereticks , though some there were , that endeavoured to corrupt the wholesome rule of saving doctrine , skulked in darkness undiscernable , but afterwards ( when the senson better agreed with their design ) they did it {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , with bare head , or face , putting off disguise or care of secresie , with this , indeed it would not easily be reconcileable to say , that the gnosticks were never more busie nor prevalent , then in the apostles times ; and this he is pleased to set down as my saying ; but hath not intimated the place , where i said it ( as easily he might have done , and i suppose would not have neglected to do , if he had known where . ) for my part i remember not , neither believe any such words ever to have past from me ; if he shall produce any that have the least sound that way , i shall not doubt to give him an account of them , such as shall sufficiently supersede the conclusion , which now he is willing to draw from them . 12. mean while i shall yet farther give thus much over measure of reply to his objection , that in case hegesippus had not expresly named the gnosticks , which yet expresly he names , and therefore must mean them if he knew and considered what he said , yet the {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} the atheistical seduction or seducers , and the {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} the riotous convention or confederation of these , must needs signifie some known sect of hereticks in that age of the church , be they cerinthians , ebionites , nicolaitanes , menandrians , b●silidians , saturnilians , or after them valentinians , marcionites , or who ever else can be supposed ; and then , as it is certain , that all , or most of these , met and agreed in this common notion of the gnosticks , so from the poyson and taint of all and each of them , t is still equally clear , that the church of god , and the known governours and shepherds thereof , by gods grace and blessing preserved themselves , and exprest their constant opposition and dotestation of them , and markt them out to be avoided of all christians ; and so cannot be imagined to have been corrupted by them ( but on the contrary whosoever was discerned to be so corrupted , was cast out of the church ) and by their contrary doctrine , illustriously known in their writings against these heresies , long after the apostles times , ( irenaus against the valentinians &c. tertullian &c. against the gnosticks ) have demonstrated themselves to have continued stedfast and immaculate , and not to have been in the least corrupted : and then what can be farther removed from truth , than this whole suggestion from hegesippus , of the infection being diffused in the church ? but he further objects , that the opposing and persecuting of the church , which is a great purisying of it , cannot be insinuated to be the deflouring and violating of its chastity : to this i answer , 1. that if there were the least force in this objection , it would yet be unsufficient to disprove my answer ; it might possibly infer the impropriety of hegesippus's expression , whereof i undertook not to be the advocate , but cannot conclude him not to have meant those to be the corrupters , whom he expresly names to be so . 2. that in respect of those weak or deceiveable members of the church , that received the heretical poyson , ( and then fell off from it , or were by just censures cast out of it ) 't is not improper to say , that the church which once conteined them , was defloured and violated ; though on the other side , in respect of the constant fidelity of others , who were not moved by all their opposition , the church was still rather purified then defloured , as gold by trial in the fire comes out more pure , whilest yet the drosse is discovered by the same , means , and declared to have no purity in it . the truth is , many visible and temporary professors were infected and defiled by the gnostick infusions , as in all times of trial befals those that forsake the faith , rather than they will endure persecution ; and that is the plain meaning of hegesippus's words , and hath nothing new or strange in it . 14. one thing by the way i shall farther observe , that in this citation he hath made some change in the words , from what before he had represented ; to the apostles times , adding , the time of the apostles hearers , and not onely the apostles themselves , as if hegesippus included that second generation in the space of the virgin uncorrupted age , after whose decease ( and not till then ) the corruptions by him spoken of came in : but that i suppose will be found to be a mistake also . 15. in his former citing of the passage ( in his preface of animadversions ) he understood hegesippus of the corruption immediately after the apostles fell asleep . and indeed this is all that the words assure us [ when the quire of the apostles , saith he , were dead , and the age past of those that were deemed worthy to heare with their own eares , {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} the divine wisedom , or the wisdome that had divinity in it — ] where that ages being past , ] and the apostles being dead ] sure signifies the same thing , and {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} the divine wisdome ] very fitly signifies christ himself , the wisdome of the father , and no way appears to be extended to the apostles also ; and then they that were the hearers of that wisdome , will be the men of the apostles age , specially the apostles themselves , and not the subsequent generation . and that indeed thus it was , appears by the context in hegesippus , which evidenceth him to speak of trajanes times , wherein simeon bishop of jerusalem , one of the {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} and {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , seers and hearers of the lord , being falsly accused by hereticks , ( {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} ) was put to death . now this we know , was but the conclusion of the apostles age ; ( john , who was one of them , living till that time ) and not of the auditors of the apostles . but should it be granted according to his desire , that 't was of the latter age that hegesippus spake , it would , as hath appeared , stand him in little stead ; and therefore i shall not spring new occasion of contention with him on this matter ; had not the honour of the vniversal church of christ succeeding the apostles ( so nearly concern'd in this his reinforced objection ) seemed to exact this just tribute from me , i had not here given him this importunity . 16. whereon seeing i am thus far entred , it will not be amiss to pay him at once what he may expect of return to some other passages of this his last piece , wherein he is pleased to reflect on me . 17. and 1. occurs towards the beginning of it , pag. 33. a discourse of {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} &c. which he endeavours to apply to the prejudice of my evidences for the epistles of clement , and of st paul to the corinthians , being written to all the churches of achaia : in return to this i shall note but these four things of very many that offer themselves . 18. first , that there is a double notion of {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} &c. one wherin it is opposed to {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , ( and is all one with {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} or {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , being strangers or sojourners ) in which notion a pomponius takes it , when by it he expounds the latin incola , as that is all one with inquilinus a stranger in any place , qui aliquâ , or rather , aliâ regione ( {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} saith theophilus ) domicilium suum contulit . of this notion of the word i spake nor , nor could be imagined to speak , nor ( whatever he thinks ) is or can parochia or paraecia to be taken in this sence in any author . another notion there is of {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} for accola a neighbour , as in thucyd. l. 4. {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , the spartanes , and the nearest of the neighbouring cities , ( some of those {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , neighbours , it seems , nearer then others ) and so pomponius also , non tantùm qui in oppido moratur , sed qui alicujus oppidi finibus agrum habet , a borderer that lives and holds lands within the bounds , i. e. in the territories of any city , whether nearer or farther off , or whether that territory be wider or narrower ; wider as the territory of a metropolis , narrower as of an ordinary city , or yet lower , as of a town or village ; and which of these it is in any author , is not conclusible from the nature or use of the word , which equally belongs to all these , but from the quality of the place , to which in any author it is applied ; if the discourse be of a metropolis , then the territory , and so the {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} is the whole province or {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , as when mark is said by eusebius to have constituted churches in the plural at alexandria , the chief metropolis of egypt , these are by c him all conteined under the phrase {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , as by mark committed to anianus , and to the churches that belong to the chief metropolis of crete , gortyna , are by dionysius bishop of corinth , called {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , the church adjacent to i. e. the province of gortyna ; if speech be of an ordinary city , then the territory of that , and so the {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} is that which we now call a diocese ( though {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} anciently signified otherwise ) territorium est universitas agrorum intra fines cujusque civitatis , saith d pomponius , and is rendred by theophilus {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , all the region which is under a city ; and so farther downward to towns and villages also , as they are called {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , paroecia , parishes , the whole territory or bordering neighbourhood is comprehended under it . and so in summe , corinth , otherwise appearing to be the metropolis of all aehaia ( as achaia was one of the e five {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} of pelopounesus ) and this both in the civil and ecclesiastical notitiae ; in the civil , as is evident by the proconsuls keeping his residence there , acts 18. 12. 15. ( corinth being before this time f destroyed by mummius , reedified by iulius caesar , and now a g roman colony , and having a h province belonging to it , called {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , the corinthian region ) and in the ecclesiastical , as appeared both by the general {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} or conformity between the city and the church , not onely in after ages , but from the first , cited from a most ancient learned church-writer , origen contr. cels . l. 3. and more particularly as to corinth , by the express words of i saint chrysostome . all this , i say , otherwise largely appearing , and not deduced from the bare style [ {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} ] this church thus styled by clemens , and compared with pauls first epistle , which expresly comprehends the saints of all achaia , and yet ( as is granted on all sides ) no greater an extent , then what clemens wrote to , is by me regularly affirmed to be that whole province of several churches , ( for which 't was not yet that {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} grew to be the ecclesiastical word ) and not that single church of corinth , but all under that metropolis . 19. 2. that it is most unreasonable to affirm that either 2 cor. 9. 2. or anywhere else , achaia and corinth are all one , for that is all one as to say france and paris , a region or nation , and a city in that region , are all one . 't is true the church , to which the epistles of paul were written , comprehends under it all the christians of achaia , but then my pretensions must have place , that those epistles were written to all the churches of achaia , united in corinth , the metropolis , not that achaia , which had many cities in it was all one with corinth , that but one , though metropolitical city . 20. 3. that of the churches of achaia , beside corinth , that of cenchrea is expresly named , and though no other chances to be thus explicitely mentioned in scripture , which was not obliged to write the full corography of the apostles plantations , yet this negative argument gives us no reason to doubt , but there were more cities in achaia then these two ( all geographers assure us of many ) and those in some proportion converted to the faith , and formed into churches , in saint pauls time , and before clements writing to them . however that one of cenchrea concludes as much , as i want ; cenchrea being another city-church , different from corinth , and {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} neighbouring to it , part of its territory , and under it as a daughter under a metropolis . 21. 4. that chrysostome , that speaks of corinth as a metropolitical church , speaks of it , not ( as this author pretends ) onely in the political , but ecclesiastical notion , and not onely as in his own , but as it was in the apostles time : else he could not say of s. paul , as he doth , {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} that he wrote to a metropolis ; t was certeinly to the church that saint paul wrote not the city ; and 2. to that church , in saint pauls age . the testimony is as clear as the sun , that b saint chrysostome speaks of corinth , thessalonica , and the ephesians , and galatians , to whom the apostolical epistles are directed , as so many metropolitical churches , to each of which saint paul wrote , and thereby in every of those epistles wrote not {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , to one city onely , ( he addes , or to two , or to three ) but {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} to all every where in each of those regions , relating to those metropolitical churches , to all the churches of galatia , of achaia , &c. 22. and so much for that affaire , on which five leaves were providently laid out at the beginning of his journey , to secure some principles which were after to be improved by him , which yet he cannot but know are superseded by many other evidences of metropolitical churches planted in the apostles times , at jerusalem , antioch , ephesus , thessalonica , philippi , alexandria , and rome &c. every of which requiring his answer , as much as {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} . 23. p. 87. he minds me of his acknowledging the catholick church , both the invisible body of christ , his elect , &c , and the vniversality of visible professors , and consequently of the injury formerly done him , in comparing his expression [ that there was never any church-officer instituted in those first times relating to more churches in his office , or to any other church than a single particular congregation ] with the author of the saints beliefe , which instead of the holy catholick church in the apostles symbols substituted this very hypothesis ; as if i either really believed , or was willing to perswade others , that he denyed the catholick church . 24. to this i answer , 1. that i neither entred into his secrets , nor indeavoured to infuse any jealousies into others concerning his talent undiscovered thoughts , but onely considered those words then before me , not being at that distance able to divine , how far he meant to acknowledge the catholick church in a tract written two years after . 25. secondly , that his acknowledging now two notions of the catholick church , one of all the elect , the other of all that are called , doth not so certainly difference his doctrine from that of the author of the saints belief ; there being no reason to doubt , but that he that compiled that , did at that time acknowledge the catholick church in those two notions . the thing that he meant to deny , and renounce , implicitely by leaving out the mention of the catholick church , and explicitely by what he substituted in stead of it , was ( i supposed ) the several degrees of associations , each known among men by the name of a church , 1. that of the whole christian world , the vniversal church , either as it by some pretended to be monarchically , or by others aristocratically governed . 2. that of each national church under the primate thereof . 3. that of each provincial church under the metropolitane . 4. that of every diocesan church under the bishop ; and lastly , of every parochial church under the rector thereof . and all these seem as avowedly to be denied by this author to have been instituted in those ( i. e. in ignatius's ) times , as by the compiler of the saints belief they were ; and some of these being , to my understanding , thus anciently instituted , and express mention made in ignatius , not onely of the {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} or multitude under a particular bishop , which is one of these , but farther of the church of syria , i. e. of that whole region , and the church of syria which is at antioch , all joyned under antioch , the metropolitical church , and the catholick church , wider then either of these , and comprehensive of both ; this i deemed fit to be confronted to his hypothesis ( and the parallel in the saints belief ) of the no other church , than a single particular congregation , which i supposed narrower than any one of these . and this is a brief , and i hope , inoffensive , account of that particular . 26. pag. 232. an exception is made to my instance in the bishop of oxon , and that from a supposed exemtion of this author , at the time of his writing , from the jurisdiction of that bishop . but 1. i proceeded not to the naming or specifying the author at all , when i spake of the bishop of oxon , much less considered the quality , which was peculiar to him , from other men , or the exemtion consequent to that quality , which whatever it can be pretended , is but temporary , and personal , and so not proper for any special consideration . 2. i answer , the bishop of oxon hath a diocese , or else no man that lives in that , could by any priviledge of his place , be exemt from it . and then what i said of the duty owing to that bishop ( somewhat more then styling him a reverend and learned person , and being glad of his neighbourhood and acquaintance , {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} signifies more than that ) regularly belongs to all such as are in his diocese , and are not exemt from his jurisdiction , and whatever he please to imagine , i never meant to extend it to any other . 27. pag. 122. i find a dislike of my way ( he should not have said of justifying our separation from rome , but ) of defending our church from the guilt of schisme , charged on us by the romanists . but this is no news to me ; he had once before signified thus much , and i was not then surprised with it , and shall onely assure him , that now i have seen his new way , i am no whit less pleased with the old , than before i had the confidence to be . 28. the last that i took notice of to be my concernment was pag. 229. where perhaps i may be the person , accused to have charged the doctrines ( there named , as a considerable portion of the doctrine of our church ) of everting fundamentals . if it be so , i have then two things to say in this haste , and no more , 1. that the doctrines , which i charge in the tract of fundamentals , i charge not of everting of fundamentals , but ( as may be seen in the title and contents of the 12 chapter ) of aptness to obstruct and hinder the superstructing of good life upon christian belief : of which whether the doctrines by me specified be guilty or no , i appeal to those indifferent readers that shall impartially view what is there said , and shall be content to be concluded by that , though not by this vmpirage . 29. 2. that no one of the doctrines thus accused by me are the doctrines of the church of england , as there ( as far as i ever heard it doubted ) is cleared by me ; whereas on the contrary some of them , that particularly of christs redeeming none but the elect , are as expresly renounced by our church , as any branch of atheisme or polytheisme is disclaimed by the creed of the apostles . 30. and now i may be permitted to take my leave of him at this time . the end . errata . pag. 3. l. 11. r. and so . p. 5. l. 33. r. bad been long expected . p. 6. l. 20. r. his letter . l. 27. r. few passages . p. 7. l. 18. r. so that 53. ibid. r. 10 this sense l. 35. r. {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} l. 36. r. {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} p. 8. l. 5. again , i. the . p. 9. l. 21. r. was written . p. 16. l. 7. r. {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} l. 16. r. {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} p. 25. l. 8 r. or as . l. 34. r. schlusselburgius p. 32. l. 13. r. sounded . l. ult. r. on them . p 36. l. 4. r secrecie ; with . p. 39. l. 8. dele to . l. 29. r. and so the p. 42. l. 16. r. symbole . l. 21. r. latent . p. 43. l. 1. r. as it is . notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a45406e-320 a see ans. to animad. vers : p. 132. b epist. to the oxford heads . d epiph. l. 2. haer. 49. socin. in john 1. g lutherani penè omnes ariani smi eum accusant . grot. appendi . de antich , p. 85. notes for div a45406e-19030 pref. to his book persever . p. 5. answ . to animadv. p. 13. a d. verb . sig. c eccl. hist. l. 11. {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} . d ibid. e pausan : {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} . f pausaen : {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} . p. 44. l. 19. g me . la l. 11. c. 3. h pausan : {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} : p. 44 i to : 3. p. 343. b tom. 3. p. 343. a modest plea for the due regulation of the press in answer to several reasons lately printed against it, humbly submitted to the judgment of authority / by francis gregory, d.d. and rector of hambleden in the county of bucks. gregory, francis, 1625?-1707. 1698 approx. 128 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 29 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2008-09 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a42050 wing g1896 estc r40036 18665122 ocm 18665122 108129 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a42050) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 108129) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 1655:17) a modest plea for the due regulation of the press in answer to several reasons lately printed against it, humbly submitted to the judgment of authority / by francis gregory, d.d. and rector of hambleden in the county of bucks. gregory, francis, 1625?-1707. [54], [2] p. printed for r. sare ..., london : mdcxcviii [1698] reproduction of original in the trinity college library, cambridge university. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng letter to a member of parliament, shewing that a restraint on the press is inconsistent with the protestant religion, and dangerous to the liberties of the nation. freedom of the press -england -17th century. socinianism. 2007-10 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2007-11 apex covantage keyed and coded from proquest page images 2007-12 emma (leeson) huber sampled and proofread 2007-12 emma (leeson) huber text and markup reviewed and edited 2008-02 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion a modest plea for the due regulation of the press , in answer to several reason● lately printed against it . humbly submitted to the judgment of authority . quae est pejor mors animae , quàm libertas erroris ? august . in epist . 166. by francis gregory , d. d. and rector of hambleden in the county of bucks . london , printed for r. sare , at greys-inn-gate in holborn . m dc xc viii . a modest plea for the due regulation of the press , &c. sect . i. good reader , it is not long since i accidentally met with a printed paper , entitled , a letter to a member of parliament , shewing that a restraint on the press is inconsistent with the protestant religion , and dangerous to the liberties of the nation . this title at the first view did startle and make me wonder ; for i could not imagine how the contents of this letter could possibly justifie such an inscription . but whether this letter were really sent , or only pretended , and by whom , i cannot tell ; for the writer of it thought it an act of prudence to conceal his name , as well as his opinion . but if he be not one of the worst sort of hereticks , i mean a socinian , it is his great misfortune , and no small fault , that he hath given his reader just cause to think him so . for , 1. this author treats our common people with extraordinary civilities , he pleads for the full liberty of every man's conscience ; and tells us , that every man hath as much right to communicate his thoughts to his neighbour , as to think them himself ; he tells us , that every man is to judg for himself , even in the controverted points of religion , as well as the ablest divines of our church . nor can we wonder that a socinian should thus flatter the vulgar ; for they , who design to instil their opinions into the heads of men , are concerned in policy by fair words and courtship first to insinuate themselves into their hearts . 2. this author treats the church of england with incivility and scurrilous language ; he loads its governours with several calumnies , which are no way deserved ; he calleth them , imposers upon the consciences of men , tyrants , lords of the peoples faith ; but 't is not my business to wipe off his unjust reproaches , but to answer his groundless arguments . but however , 't is not strange that a socinian should thus bespatter the clergy of our church , to render us odious to the people , because they know that our divines are the most able men to defend those great articles of our creed , which they oppose ; and to confute those detestable doctrines , which they promote , but will never be able to maintain , so long as the church of england shall continue as well stored with learned men , as now it is . but in the mean time , they make it their business to disparage and vilifie our divines , in hopes that our people , disesteeming our persons , may shew the less regard to what we plead in defence of truth . 3. this author sheweth himself yet more manifestly to be a socinian , because according to the known practice of that sort of men , he highly magnifies humane reason , exalting it far above its proper sphere , advancing it to that sublime and sacred office , which , as now it is , it can never discharge . for in that preliminary discourse , which he premiseth as an introduction to the main body and substance of his letter , he tells us , that god hath given man , his reason , which is his only light , not only to discover that there is a religion , but to distinguish the true from the many false ones . he tell us again , p. 15. that god hath given men no other guide , but their reason , to bring them to happiness ; and yet again , p 17. he saith , that the peoples common notions are the tests and standards of all truths . now , my own reason , such as it is , tells me , that all these assertions are as false , as bold and daring ; for , what greater encomiums could have been given to humane reason , were we still in the state of innocence ? though in that state the reason of man might shine , like the sun in its full glory , not a cloud interposing ; yet by , and since , the fall of adam , the common reason of mankind is become like the moon lying under , though not a total , yet a very great eclipse . solomon , the wisest of men , hath left our reason no better title than this ; the candle of the lord. 't is not stiled a blazing torch , but a candle , which is but a diminutive light , and so much the less , because 't is full of snuff , 't is clouded with mists and fogs of ignorance ; and in nothing more , than in matters of religion . true it is , that this little light of nature , being well attended to , is enough to discover to us some truths , which are a sufficient ground for natural religion ; the reason of man , exercising it self in contemplating the works of creation and providence , is enough to convince him , that there is a god , and that this god ought to be worshipped ; but there are some other truths , absolutely necessary to salvation , which the most improved reason of man , without some other help , could never have discovered . in all cases , the reason of man is , lumen sine quo non , a light , without which we can discern no truth at all ; but yet 't is not a light , by which we can discern every truth , which doth concern us . our lord hath truly said ; the light of the body is the eye , and yet this eye , be it never so clear and strong , without the help of some other light beside it's own , can see very little or nothing ; so here , the light of the soul is its reason , and yet this reason , without some other assistances , in matters of religion can discern but very little . there were amongst the heathens many sober , vertuous , and industrious moralists , men of raised intellectuals , men of excellent parts both natural and acquired ; and yet as to the matters of religion , they shewed themselves mere sots and dunces ; they became , as st. paul saith , vain in their imaginations . they exceedingly doted in their notions concerning the nature , will , and worship of god ; there are several religious and necessary truths , whereunto their own reason , though much improved , was , not only a perfect stranger , but a professed adversary ; the doctrine of the creation stands opposed by that known maxim , which their reason entertained as an undoubted truth , ex nihilo nihil fit , out of nothing , nothing is or can be made . and as for the great doctrine of the resurrection , men of reason look'd upon it , as celsus speaks in origen , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , as a thing impossible , and abominable , and according to these notions they took st. paul , who preached this glorious , but difficult doctrine , to be no better than a vain babler . but whence might this gross ignorance of theirs arise ? how came it to pass , that men so acute and lucky in searching and finding out many secret mysteries both of art and nature , should be so dull and unhappy , as not to apprehend the mysteries of religion ? doubtless the reason must needs be this ; their own understandings , though exercised to their utmost ability , could not inform them better for want of some other and clearer light. and what was their case , would have been ours , had not god enlightened and blessed the christian church with divine revelation . but withal , this great blessing of divine revelation doth not exclude , but require the very utmost exercise of human reason ; for we must employ , not only our eyes or tongues , but our understandings in reading the word of god ; it must be our great endeavour by the use of all proper means , to find out the true meaning of what we read ; and when upon good grounds we are satisfied that the right sense of such or such a text is this or that ; though the matter therein delivered be above the reach of our reason , yet the same reason will oblige us to believe it as an undoubted truth , because that god , who cannot lie , hath so revealed it . and this , i think , is all , which humane reason hath to do in matters of faith and worship , unless it be to oblige us to the practice of what we know and believe . to conclude this subject , our lord saith of himself , i am the light of the world , the same thing he said to his apostles too , ye are the light of the world , so they were not only by their holy example , but by their holy doctrine too . why else doth the apostle mention the glorious light of the gospel ? the light of reason is but as the light of a glow ▪ worm ; the light of the law is but as the light of a star ; but the light of the gospel is as the light of the sun , a very glorious light indeed . now , if this be true , if christ himself , if the apostles of christ , if the gospel of christ be so many lights differing in number , had not this author strangely forgot himself and his bible , when he told the world in his printed paper , that the reason of man is the light , nay , the only light , which god hath given him to distinguish the true religion from the false ones ; and again , that god hath given to men no other guide , but their reason , to bring them to happiness ; and yet a third time , that the people's common notions are the tests and standards of all truths . if these three propositions be true , or any one of them , i do confess , that the small light of my own reason hath not yet enabled me to discern any difference betwixt the clearest truths , and the grossest errors . and verily the exposing such notorious falshoods to the view of the world by the help of the press , is a very strong argument , why its liberty should be restrained . but to go on . sect . ii. the main arguments , which this author pleads for an universal freedom of the press , are drawn from these two topicks ; first , from the great usefulness of printing , which hath been so very beneficial to the christian church . secondly , from several great inconveniencies , which , as he saith , would follow , were the press once more restrained and limited . i. this author pleads the great usefulness of printing , as an argument that the press should be unlimited . to which i answer two ways . 1. by way of concession ; we do easily grant that the invention of printing hath proved very beneficial to the christian church : 't is this , which hath diffused the knowledge of useful arts and sciences , and all sorts of humane learning : 't is this , which hath furnished our libraries with vast numbers of excellent books : 't is this , which hath furnished our churches and our families with great store of bibles ; and we easily grant , what this author asserts , that to this art of printing we owe , under god , the happy and quick progress of the reformation . but 2. by way of denial , we cannot grant that the usefulness of the press is a good argument , that its liberty should be unlimited . for notwithstanding these great advantages , which both religon and learning have reaped from this curious art of printing , may not it , as well as many other things , very useful in their own nature , be so abused and perverted , as to become instrumental to the great detriment of mankind ? 't is an old rule , corruptio optimi pessima ; the better things are when well used , the worse they grow , when corrupted . the sword is an excellent instrument , when it defends the guiltless , but it proves an unhappy tool , when it murders the innocent . physick , duly administred by a learned physician , may preserve a life ; but being misapplied by an ignorant mountebank , it tends to destroy it . 't is certain that the art of printing hath done a great deal of good , and we are to bless god for it ; but withal , it is as certain , that it hath done , and still may do a great deal of mischief , and we are to lament it . when the press tends to promote religion and virtue , 't is well employed , and ought to be encouraged ; but when the press tends to promote vice and irreligion , it ought to be discountenanced and restrained . 't is evident that the press hath been used to publish a great numbers of such papers , as tend to debauch the lives , and corrupt the judgments of men ; such are our obscene poems , our profane and wanton stage-plays , where vice is not only represented but so promoted , that we may justly fear , that as all their spectators lose their time ; so many of them may lose their innocence too . for since the hearts of men are so prone to evil , and become so like to tinder , apt to take fire from every little spark , 't is hard to see those vices , which are pleasing to flesh and blood , represented upon a publick stage , and yet not be infected by them . and as these are very like to debauch their spectator's morals , so are there many other printed papers as like to corrupt their reader 's judgments . such are those many volumes printed in defence of popery ; and which is worse , such are those books printed in the defence of arianism , socinianism , and other heresies justly condemned by the catholick church in the first and purest ages of christianity . 't is reported that our modern socinians have already perverted a considerable number of men , not only by their personal insinuations , but by their printed papers ; and 't is very probable , that they may yet make many more proselytes to their dangerous opinion , if the press be still permitted to publish whatever they think fit to write . for their books contain arguments so plausible , so seemingly strong , that they may pass for clear evidences and demonstrations amongst the unlearned multitude , who are in no capacity to discover the fallacies that lie in them . now , since the press may as well do harm as good , 't is very reasonable that it should be well regulated to promote that good , and prevent that harm ; 't is very fit that no new books should be published , till they have been first supervised and allowed . but to whom ought the care of this be committed ? doubtless to men of integrity , learning and judgment ; to men , who are able , at first view , to distinguish vice from vertue , and truth from error ; and with such men is the church of england stored ; men of such parts and piety , that we cannot without breach of charity , so much as once suspect , that they would , to gratifie any party , stifle any book , which might tend to the advantage of the christian church , or the common benefit of mankind . notwithstanding this , our author thought fit to tell his friend , the parliament-man , that of all other persons , the clergy-men of our church , are the most unfit to be trusted with the regulation of the press ; and for that , he gives this reason ; namely , because they would allow no books to be published , save only such as tend to establish their own opinions ; that is , in plain english , they would permit no books to be printed , which tend to subvert the fundamental articles of the christian faith ; and for that , who can justly blame them ? that the articles of the church of england are sound and orthodox , hath been proved over and over by such scripture arguments , as priests and jesuits , arians and socinians , or any other heretick , never yet could , nor ever can overthrow ; and if any books , which contradict them , be offered to the press , 't is fit they should be stifled in the birth ; and if they chance to be brought forth by stealth , 't is fit they should immediately be cast into the flames , that being the quickest way to cleanse them from that dross that is in them . but however , to prevent as much as may be , the further increase of dangerous books , which by good words , fair speeches , and seeming arguments may do much mischief amongst the illiterate vulgar ; 't is very necessary , that all writings offered to the press about matters of religion , should carefully be examined by conscientious and judicious divines ; and that no general liberty should be allowed to men of all sects to write , and to printers to publish whatever they please . there are amongst us in this unhappy age , hereticks of several denominations , of whom st. paul saith , their mouths must be stopped ; and for that he gives a very just reason , when he tells us , they subvert whole houses , teaching things which they ought not . now , if there ought to be a muzzle clapped upon the hereticks mouth , there is far greater reason that there should be a restraint upon his pen and press . for 't is impossible that any heretick should do so much mischief with his tongue , as he may by his writings ; words only spoke and heard are transient ; but words written and printed are permanent ; an heretical tongue can do no harm but by a personal conference , but an heretical pen may do much mischief to men at a distance ; the wrong that may be done by heretical discourse alone , can reach but the present age ; but heretical books may injure and poyson the souls of men in after ages . and since there are too many such books published amongst us , it is the great concern , and should be the great care of our governours , to see that there be no more , lest if their number increase without controul , they may by degrees , considering the ignorance , instability , and credulity of men , subvert the faith of the son of god , and endanger the souls of men. but , sect . iii. 2. this author argueth for an unlimited liberty of the press , not only for its own great usefulness , but from the consideration of several grand inconveniences , which , as he saith , would follow , should the press chance to be restrained ; and the first which he names , is this . first . the restraint of the press tends to make men blindly submit to the religion they chance to be educated in , and to take it up without any trial . to this i answer thus ; this argument may hold in popish kingdoms , where the people for want of means , cannot ; and , for fear of their inquisitors , dare not examine the principles and practices of the roman religion . but the same argument pleaded in , and against the church of england , is of no force ; for it proceeds upon a false ground , and hath a fallacy in it ; for here is , non causa pro causa ; the restraint of the press is here assigned as the cause , or at least the great occasion , that men take up their religion upon trust , though indeed it be not so . the matter of this charge is true , and as it cannot be denied , so it is much to be lamented , that great numbers of men , even amongst us , do indeed take up their religion barely on trust . protestants they are , but why are they such ? only because it was the religion of their parents , that wherein they were trained up from their childhood ; 't is the religion established by our laws , generally professed in our nation , and preached in our churches . these , i fear , are the only motives , upon which the far greatest part of men do , by a blind and implicite faith , take up their religion . there is a vast multitude of men , who are constrained thus to take up their religion upon trust , by an invincible necessity ; men , who were never blest with a liberal education , never taught to read ; men so dull and stupid , that they cannot apprehend , much less remember the strength of an argument ; and surely persons under such ill circumstances , are in no capacity to judge for themselves , but must rely upon the judgment of their teachers , and upon their credit and authority , take up some religion or other , or else they can take up none at all ; and this is the great unhappiness of many thousands , i fear , even in the church of england . but besides these , there is another sort of men bred up in the principles of learning ; men of compleat knowledge and good ability to judge betwixt vice and vertue , truth and falshood ; and how frequently , how earnestly , do we exhort such men from our pulpits , to prove all things , to try the spirits ; but , alas ! 't is much to be feared , that we lose our labour , that men will not spare any time , nor take any pains to examin their religion , but rather take it up at a venture just as they find it . now , if a man takes up his religion upon trust , when he need not do so , he runs himself both into sin and danger ; a sin it certainly is , because a breach of those fore ▪ named commands ; and a great danger it is , because instead of a juno , he may embrace a cloud ; instead of a true religon , he may close with a false one . but where lieth the fault ? upon whom , or what , must this sin be charged ? sure i am , that in this case a restraint upon the press is innocent , and cannot be justly blamed ; for , were not men obliged to examin the matters of their religion long before the art of printing was invented ? and was not the neglect of this duty a sin in former ages , when there was not so much as one press in all the world ? and if so , how could the trial of religions depend upon the press in those early days , when as yet it had no being ? and because the true christian faith is the same in all the ages of the church since the apostles days , we must measure our own religion by the same rules , by which the primitive saints measured theirs , and what were they ? not the voluminous writings of men , which the press hath now brought forth , but the sacred oracles of god. this is the course , to which the prophet directs us ; to the law , and to the testimony . this course did the bereans take , when to examine the doctrines even of the apostles themselves , they searched the scriptures daily , whether those things were so ; and for their doing so they are highly commended . and indeed the scripture is the lapis lydius , the touchstone , the canon , the only authentick rule of manners , faith , and religious worship ; a rule so plain and easie in all necessary points , that in order to the trial of our religion we have no absolute need of any book but gods , though other good books do well towards the better understanding of some passages in this . 't is the great privilege of our church that we have this rule of scripture in such great quantities , that every man , who can and will , may , at an easie rate , have it in his custody , and thereby examine his religion , when he pleaseth . nor can we justly blame the restraint of the press , so long as it is permitted to print our bibles , and prohibited to publish no man's book , but such only , as are contrary to gods. indeed , were the press in england restrained , as it is in popish kingdoms , from printing the bible in our vulgar tongue , this authors argument would have had much strength in it ; but since it is otherwise ; since we have the scriptures , those tests and standards of our religion , preached in our publick churches , and easily to be had and read , as oft as we please , in our private families , this author's argument against the restraint of the press is invalid and unconcluding ; for it doth not prove that , for which he pleads it . but to proceed . sect . iv. ii. the second allegation , which this author urgeth , as a grand inconvenience , against the restraint of the press , is this ; such a restraint , saith he , deprives men of the most proper and best means to discover truth . to which i answer thus ; there is a very close connexion betwixt this argument and the former ; a connexion as between an antecedent and a consequent ; or between the premises and the conclusion . in the former argument he mentions the examination of religions ; and in this , as the end and consequence of that , the discovery of truth ; for to what purpose should any religion be impartially examined , were it not to discover , whether it be true or false . and for this reason , the same answer , which i have given to the former argument , might serve well enough for this ; for since the restraint of the press doth not , as i have there proved , prevent the due examination of religion , it cannot prevent the discovery of truth . but that so it doth , our author is very positive ; yea , and he tells us by what means it doth so , namely , by hindering men from seeing and examining the different opinions , and the arguments alledged for them . but let this author tell us , how this can be true ; can a restraint of the press for time to come hinder any man from seeing and examining the different opinions of men , and their arguments for them ! are there not already great numbers of printed books , exposed to common sale , wherein the different opinions of men about matters of religion are throughly discussed ! may not every man , that will and can , sufficiently inform himself by books already extant what arguments have been pleaded by all sects of christians in the defence of their respective professions ? and since the press hath already brought forth such a numerous issue of this kind , methinks every future birth of the same sort would be but a superfetation . i am persuaded , that should all the presses in the christian world be absolutely forbidden to print any more new books of controversy , and polemick divinity , it would be no injury to the catholick church , nor to any one member of it ; for , nihil dici potest , quod non dictum est priùs ; prints indeed may be new , but arguments , either for old truths , or against old errors , can hardly be so . but when all is done , religious truths cannot be discovered by humane arguments any further than those arguments are grounded upon the infallible word of god. 't is a rule in mathematicks : rectum est index sui & obliqui . he , that would discover the rectitude or obliquity of a line , must bring it to , and compare it with such a rule , as is already found to be exactly streight . so in our present case , he , who would discover the truth or falshood of any opinion in matters of religion , must apply them to , and judg them by that infallible rule , which st. james very deservedly styles , the word of truth . and this rule , in all points necessary to salvation , is so plain and easie , that every man , who hath not lost the use of common reason , may thereby judg for himself . there are indeed in the word of god , as the apostle saith , some things hard to be understood ; but in what texts do these difficulties lie ? st. austin answers , non quoad ea , quae sunt necessaria saluti , &c. the scriptures are not difficult in any of those points , which are necessary to man's salvation . so thought st. chrysostom , who thus demands ; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; what man is there , to whom all the necessary truths of the gospel are not clear and manifest ? he saith elsewhere ; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . the husbandman , the servant , the widow , the boy , persons of very mean capacities may easily understand what the scriptures teach about such points , as are fundamental . that this was the doctrine of the primitive church before st. chrysostom's time , is evident from that testimony of irenaeus ; universae scripturae & propheticae & evangelicae in aperto , & sine ambiguitate , & similiter ab omnibus audiri possunt . the whole scripture , the prophets , the evangelists , in such points as most concern us , are so plain , express , and open , that all sorts of men may equally apprehend them . now , if a man may discover the truth of all those doctrines , which are necessary to salvation , by scripture rules ; if his faith be grounded on them , and his practice be suitable to them ; what hazard would that man run , should he never see the different opinions of men about them , nor weigh their arguments against them ? suppose a man being well informed by the express word of god , do stedfastly believe the resurrection of the dead ; what were this man the worse , should he never see nor examine the reasonings of pagans and sadducees against this great article of our creed . suppose a man be convinced , as well he may be , by such texts of scripture , as cannot , with any tolerable sense , be otherwise interpeted , that our blessed saviour is truly god , and truly man ; what need such a person to see the opinions , and weigh the arguments of arians and socinians against this fundamental point of our christian faith ? to him , whose belief is already grounded upon the infallible word of god being rightly understood , the sight of different opinions , and the arguments for them signifieth nothing ; such a man doth not need the confutation of heretical cavils to confirm that faith of his , which is already bottomed upon a rock , which is immoveable . and as the sight of different opinions , and the examination of arguments pleaded for them , is not needful to confirm a strong and well grounded faith ; so it is dangerous , and tends to impair , and shake a weak one . for , well meaning christians , bred up in the true religion , being of too easie belief , of slender judgments , and not well acquainted with the word of god , may probably be perverted by heretical books , as being unable to discern the fallacies contained in them , and to cite such texts as might confute them . but here it may be demanded , who must judge , whether such or such an opinion be justified or condemned by such or such a text ? i answer , where texts are plain and obvious , every discreet and intelligent person may judge for himself ; but when texts are somewhat abstruse and difficult , when knotty questions and controversies are raised about them , then the judge must be no single person ; no , nor any small party of men , who are byassed , prejudiced , and wedded to their own opinion , but the judge must be the catholick church ; i mean , its representative in the four first general councils , which consisted of men not over-aw'd by authority , nor tempted by interest ; but men as religious , as they were learned , as well versed in holy writ , as able interpreters of scripture , as any sort of men , born since those early days . and this , i think , to be the greatest human authority to warrant the sense of such and such texts , and prove the doctrins grounded on them . now , since we of the church of england are blest with the free use of our bibles ; and favoured with the judgment of the best expositors about the sense of those texts , which tend most to determine those disputes , which have arose betwixt protestants and papists , betwixt trinitarians and anti-trinitarians , we can have no need , of any search for truth , to consult the printed papers of this age , many of which do tend to promote error much rather than discover truth . and verily when the licenser of books doth reject and suppress heretical papers , he doth good service both to god and men ; and if such papers chance to steal the press , they ought to be treated like other thieves , who , to prevent their doing any future mischiefs , are apprehended , condemned , and executed . and so i quit this argument , and proceed to the next . sect . v. 3. this authors third allegation against the restraint of the press runs thus , the restraint of the press hinders truth from having any great influence on the minds of men , which is owing chiefly to examination ; because that which doth not convince the understanding , will have but little , or no effect upon the will. i answer thus . what this author doth here assert in relation to the influence of the understanding upon the will and affections is true in general ; nor can it be justly denied that a strict examination of religion is the proper means to convince the understanding of its truth . but although the subject matter of this allegation be true in the general ; yet here it is misapplied and very impertinent to the case now in hand . for this argument , as the former did , doth proceed upon a false hypothesis ; for it supposeth that if the press should chance to be restrained for time to come , men would be deprived of all sufficient means for the due examination of their religion . 't is st. paul's command , prove all things . 't is st. john's command , try the spirits , whether they are of god. these commands must needs suppose , that in those days there was a certain rule , by which religions might be tried ▪ and the same rule , in its full force and vertue , is standing still . tell me then , are our bibles out of print , or taken from us ? have we no catechisms , no systems of divinity left amongst us ? nay , are there not books of controversies exposed to sale in our cities , greater towns , and both our universities ? nay more , are there not popish and socinian catechisms to be had in england ? do not these books already extant , contain the strongest arguments , which the most learned men of all parties were able to urge in favour of their respective opinions ? and may not men by weighing these reasons , which are already made publick , give a judgment which religion is true , and which is false , as well as by any new papers yet to be printed ? but although there be a great variety of books , which may help to guide us in our searching after truth ; yet i must still mind my reader that the scripture is the only adequate and authentick rule , whereby the truth or falshood of any religion must be determined . and certain it is , that those convictions of man's understanding , which arise from the immediate word of god , are like to have a more powerful influence upon the will and affections , than any other convictions arising from any such arguments , as are no more than the dictates and collections of humane reason , which is fallible , and may deceive us , whereas the word of god , well understood , cannot do so . and this , i think , is a sufficient answer to this authors third allegation . sect . vi. 4. the fourth is this , the restraint of the press is that , which tends to make men hold the truth , if they chance to light on any , guilty ; and the reason , which he gives is this ; because that will not be accepted , if it be not the effect of an impartial examination . to which i answer thus . i cannot pass by this without observing that this author hath hitherto much harped upon the same thing , and hath hitherto bottomed all his arguments upon the same ground , and a very slippery one too ; he hath proposed his allegations as distinct in their number , but in their proof , there is little or no difference to be found . for he tells ; first , that the restraint of the press tends to make men blindly submit to the religion they chance to be educated in . secondly , that it deprives men of the most proper and best means to discover truth . thirdly , that it hinders truth from having any great influence upon the minds of men. fourthly , that it tends to make men hold the truth , if they chance to light on any , guiltily . these indeed are very considerable objections against the restraint of the press , were they true ; but how doth our author prove them so to be ? to prove them all , he hath yet made use but of one medium , and that a false one too ; for 't is nothing else but a groundless supposition that men would want due means for the examination of their religion , were the press any whit restrained . i say , any whit ; for we do not plead for a total restraint , but for a just and due regulation . and were the press so regulated , yet would it not be attended with any of these ill consequences , with which this author is pleased to charge it ; for since men have sufficient means for the trial of their religion , if they do it not , their fin and folly must be imputed , not to the restraint of the press , but to their own ignorance or negligence ; for , as some cannot , so others will not . but our author goeth on , and so must we . sect . vii . 5. this author's fifth allegation against the restraint of the press takes up more than three pages , but the full substance of it is this ; it prevents acts of charity to the souls of men , it invades the natural rights of mankind , and destroys the common tyes of humanity ; so he . this is dogmatically and magisterially delivered , and since it is such ● grievous charge , it had need be very well proved ; and how doth our author make it out ? he tells us that all men are obliged , especially in matters of religion , to communicate to one another what they think is the truth , and the reasons by which they endeavour to prove it : to which i answer thus . that we are indeed concerned , not only to profess a religion , but promote it too ; i think , that he , who hath one jot thereof , will never deny . we are bound by several obligations to instruct and teach our neighbour in the principles of that religion , which we own our selves . st. paul commands it , edify one another ; and so again , teach and admonish one another . we are engaged by the frequent commands of god , and that eternal law of charity , in our capacities , and as occasion is offered , to propagate our religion ; to plant it where it is not , and to water it where it is . but then methinks , before we do this , we should , not only think , as this author saith , but secure our selves and others too , that the religion which we advance in the world , be indeed the religion of god ; we must be sure that we plant not weeds instead of flowers , that we sow not tares instead of wheat . for to promote a religion , which may possibly be false , were a desperate venture indeed , and he that doth it , hazards the honour of god , and the souls of men. i find that our blessed saviour and his apostles taught no doctrine , but what they were sure of ; we speak that we know , saith our lord ; and thus st. john , we know that we are of the truth . certainly , whosoever undertakes , and is obliged to instruct another in matters of religion , had need be very well informed himself . for if our directions should chance to prove wrong , what excuse could we make ? suppose we instil into the minds of men error and heresie instead of truth , what were this but to ruin the souls of men , though we might think to save them ? it 's true , our good intention and ignorance may excuse such an ill act , à tanto , but though such a mistake may somewhat extenuate the fault , yet can it no way lessen the fatal consequence that doth attend it . suppose a physician , who really intends to cure his patient , by a mistake of his remedy , should chance to kill him , the poor patient , who dieth only by a mistake , suffers as great an injury , as if his physician had poysoned him knowingly , and with design . 't is indeed an act of charity to instruct the ignorant , and lead the blind ; but withal , the man who undertakes it , must have eyes in his own head , lest if the blind lead the blind , they both fall into , and perish in the ditch . certain it is , we are much engaged very strictly to sift the grounds of that religion , which we are to propagate in the world , and teach our neighbours , lest otherwise , through our own mistake , and his confidence , we become guilty of cruel charity , and prove instrumental to damn that person whom we should endeavour , as far as we can , to save . and as it is a dangerous thing for private persons to promote any false religion , though they themselves being mistaken , do think it true ; so to permit other men to publish heretical doctrins cannot be the duty of those persons , who have authority , and should have zeal , to prevent it . to restrain this unchristian liberty of the tongue , pen , and press , is not , as this author doth boldly assert , to invade the natural rights of mankind , nor to destroy the common tyes of humanity . for if it be a man's natural right to persuade his neighbour , either by his tongue or his pen , to entertain an opinion really heretical , whether he thinks it so or not ; 't is also his natural right to draw him into sin ; for if he prevail ▪ that will be finis operis , though not operantis ; it will be the issue of the act , though it were not the intention of the agent . we cannot doubt but that st. paul very well understood what natural right every man hath to use his tongue , and in what cases he ought to do it , and thereby to communicate his thoughts to his neighbours ; but suppose a man's thoughts be wild , and his opinions heretical , must he be left at liberty to impart such thoughts , and vent such opinions , even as he pleaseth ? see what st. paul saith concerning hereticks , their mouths must be stopped ; i. e. they must not be permitted by personal conferences to communicate their ill opinions to inform , or , which is all one , to corrupt the judgments of other men ; so thought st. paul. now , he who pleads for an universal liberty , as the natural right of all mankind , to communicate to other men , whatever they think to be a truth , whether it be so or not ; must censure st. paul as a man , either ignorant , or else an invader of men's natural right , since he so positively declares that some men's mouths must be stopped . and in order to this , the same apostle gave bishop titus this direction , a man that is an heretick , after the first and second admonition , reject ; i. e. excommunicate him , cast him out of the church ; and certainly , if the person of an obstinate heretick must be rejected , his books may not be admitted ; for , as to his person , his breath is infectious . his words eat like a canker ; and as to his writings , there is in his ink more poysons than one . now , since there are so many heretical pens at work amongst us , there is great need now , if ever , that some spiritual argus should attend and watch the press , lest more venemous doctrins should steal from thence to infect and kill the souls of men. and this , i think , is a sufficient answer to this author's fifth allegation . sect . viii . 6. this author's sixth allegation against the restraint of the press is this ; there is no medium between men's judging for themselves , and giving up their judgments to others . we grant it , but what then ? his inference is this , if the first be their duty , the press ought not to be restrained ; but why not ? his reason is again the same , because it debars men from seeing those allegations , by which they are to inform their judgments : that 's his argument , to which i answer thus : we must distinguish betwixt man and man , betwixt such as can judge for themselves , and such as cannot , where the scripture is express , the words plain , and the sense easie ; every man who hath a competent use of reason , and can read his bible , may judge for himself . but when several interpretations are given of any texts , when doubts are raised , when arguments are produced to defend both parts of a contradiction ; there is a vast number of men , who are no more able to judge which is true , and which is false , than a blind man is to distinguish betwixt a good colour and a bad one . 't is the great unhappiness of such persons , that in matters of controversy they cannot rely upon their own weak reason ; but must either suspend their judgments , or else give it up to the conduct of some other person , and who is so fit to be trusted with it , as their own ministers ? provided they be ▪ as every minister should be , men of piety and parts , able to satisfie doubts , remove scruples , and convince gainsayers . but if men give up their reason to the clergy , this author , who vilifieth our clergy as much as possible he can , gives our people an intimation , that by so doing , they make us , the lords of their faith ; but how doth that follow ? suppose two persons are engaged in a doubtful controversie about an estate claimed by both , these persons being of themselves unable to determine the case , appeal to the king's judges , but do they thereby make those judges the lords of that estate which is contended for ? surely no , the judge doth no more than according to evidence and law , declare to which person that estate doth justly belong . so it is in our present case , several parties of men lay claim to truth as theirs , and produce evidences for it : now , a man unable to satisfie himself which side truth is to be found , consults his minister , who , by evidence of scripture , which in this case is the only law , assures his neighbour the truth lieth here or there . and indeed that the minister is the most proper judge in controversies relating to religion , we cannot doubt , if we dare believe the prophet , who saith , the priest's lips should preserve knowledge , and they should seek the law at his mouth , for he is the messenger of the lord of hosts . this text doth not constitute us , nor do we pretend to be lords of our people's faith ; but as the apostle speaks , helpers to the truth . we do not require any weak believer's assent to any one article of faith , whereunto god requires it not , though the church of rome doth so : and how unjustly then , without modesty or truth , doth this man stigmatize us , as lords of our people's faith ? but beside those weak christians , who in controverted points cannot judge for themselves , there are some other of clearer heads , and more improved understandings that can ; and for their sakes this author saith , that the press ought not to be restrained , and his reason is this ; because the restraint of the press debars them from seeing those allegations by which they are to confirm their judgments . this argument , in effect , hath already been offered once and again , and hath as often been replied to ; but for the greater satisfaction of my reader , i shall again consider and enlarge my answer to it , and this it is : not knowing and intelligent christian , who is well able to judge for himself , can want any new allegations from the press to confirm his judgments in any disputed points of faith or worship , because we have already sufficient rules to judge by ▪ for , 1. we have the scripture preached in our publick churches , and if we please , we may read and consider them in our private families and closets . and here i do again affirm that all matters of revealed religion must be examined , proved , and determined by the written word of god. this is the only sure balance to weigh , and touch ▪ stone to try all matters of faith and worship . to this our lord sent his hearers , search the scriptures ; and again , how readest thou ? and , which is remarkable , the ignorance of scripture did he make the only occasion and ground of error in points of faith ; so he told the sadducees , ye err , but why ? not knowing the scriptures ; by which our lord himself proved that great doctrine of the resurrection , which they denied . and when our lord would prove himself to be a greater person than david , he did it by that text , the lord said unto my lord , &c. this course took our blessed saviour , and so did his apostles too , and so must we ; we must take the scripture for our guide in matters of religion , for that is the only and infallible rule and unalterable standard , to measure all the doctrines and practices which such or such a church doth teach , recommend or require from us . but if it shall be again demanded , who must be the judg , whether amongst different interpretations of holy writ this or that be the true one ; whether in controverted points such or such a text do certainly warrant such or such a doctrine , as is grounded thereon , i answer again . 2. we have the united judgment and decrees of several councils ; those , i mean , that were convened in the first and purest times , before the superstitions and idolatries of rome had crept in by degrees thro' carelesness , vice , and ignorance , and over-spread the church . the grand controversie , now on foot amongst us , concerns the divinity of christ , the personality and deity of the holy ghost ; that christ , in the most strict and proper sense of that notion , is truly god ; that the holy ghost is a person , and a divine person , we affirm ; but our socinians , who are the spawn of old arius , make bold to deny . to justifie our doctrine we cite such and such texts ; and to establish their opinions , as well as they can , they do the same thing ; as for the scripture , which we produce to prove the doctrine of the trinity , because humane reason cannot comprehend it , they do either question the authority of such texts , or else they wrest them to such an intolerable sense , as every sober man's reason may justly abhor . now , the question is , who must judge betwixt us and them ? who must determine , whether the scripture be on their side , or ours ? i answer , that heterodox opinion , now much contended for , which we call socinian , did appear under some other names , very early in the christian church : in the first age the godhead of christ was denied by the jews , and particularly by ebion ; in the third century by one theodatus , artemon , and beryllus , and sabellius ; in the fourth century , by arius , eunomius , and some others . and in the same age , the personality and divinity of the holy ghost was denied by macedonius and some others , who were there branded by a particular name , and called , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , oppugners of the holy ghost . these heterodox opinions beginning to spread and disturb the peace of the christian church , and some other ill opinions arising too , several general councils were summoned by several christian emperors ; the nicene council , by constantine the great , whose main work was to examine the opinion of arius ; the council of constantinople , called by theodosius the first , to debate the opinion of macedonius ; the council of ephesus , called by theodosius the second , to consider the opinion of nestorius ; and the council of chalcedon summoned by the emperor martian , to consult about the opinion of eutyches . these councils consisting of some hundreds of bishops , having the glory of god in their hearts , the settlement of the church in their eyes , and the bible in their hands , did after a mature deliberation , pronounce the opinions of these men to be contrary to the doctrine of the gospel , and the obstinate defenders of them to be hereticks . and certainly the determinations of these general councils , which were made up of persons exemplary for their piety , and eminent for their learning , who resolved on nothing without mature advice and deliberation , are of as great authority , and afford as much satisfaction in matters of religion , as any thing of man can be or do . for the truths of god , once taught the world by christ and his apostles , being unchangeable for ever ; and our bibles , which are the only rule to measure religions by , continuing one and the same for ever ; that , which was an error in those early days , must needs be an error still ; and that , which was a truth then , must needs be a truth now . and if we cannot think of any more proper means for the right understanding of scripture , and the discovery of truth and error , than the deliberate and unanimous judgment of so many hundred pious , learned , and unbiassed men assembled together ; then certainly the determinations of those antient councils are very considerable evidences for truth , and against error . and the rather , because they consisted of such persons , who , besides their eminent piety and learning , had the great advantage of living nearer the apostles age , and thereby were the better able to inform themselves and us , what was certainly believed and done in the very infancy of the christian church . sect . ix . 3. the writings of the antient fathers , those especially that lived within the first six centuries , where-ever they agree , and are not since corrupted or maimed by the frauds and forgeries of the roman church , are of singular use in this matter too . that ignatius , clemens , origen , athanasius , cyril , nazianzene , basil , chrysostom , hierom , austin , and many others both in the eastern and western churches , were indeed persons of great piety and excellent parts , our socinians , without breach of modesty , cannot deny . and although some of these great names , in some particular matters , had their peculiar mistakes , and shewed themselves to be but men ; yet in all points where we find an unanimous consent amongst them , we are to have so much veneration for their authority , as not easily to suspect or contradict it . true it is , if we take these fathers singly , man by man , where we find any of them alone in their opinions , as origen in reference to the punishments of hell ; and st. austin in reference to infants that die unbaptised ; we are not in this case much more obliged to accept their judgment , than the judgment of some single person yet alive . but if we take all the fathers , who lived within six hundred years after christ , together and in a lump , where we find them one in judgment ; they are enough to make a wiser council than any hath been since their time ; they are enough to inform us what is error , and what is truth . but , sect . x. 4. because learned men , whose fortunes are mean , cannot purchase ; and unlearned men , whose intellectuals are weak , cannot read and understand the voluminous writings of the fathers ; we have several systems of divinity , confessions of faith , short abridgments of christian religion , which are , especially to unlearned persons , great helps in this matter too . and here methinks those antient creeds of the apostles , nice , and athanasius , which are so generally received by the church of god , are of great authority to settle our judgment in the main and most necessary points of faith. besides , we have many choice and excellent catechisms , composed by men that were pious , judicious , acquainted with scriptures , well versed in the primitive councils and fathers . these short catechisms , compiled by persons of singular endowments , and approved by the church , are little less than contracted bibles , containing in them whatever man is obliged to know , and delivering enough in easie terms to inform us in matters of practice , to secure us from errors , and confirm our judgments in all the great points of faith. in short , the substance of my answer to this argument is this ; since we have the written word of god to be our rule , and since this word , in some material cases , according to the different fancies and interests of men , hath different interpretations given concerning its true sense and meaning ; 't is our safest way , for our better satisfaction , to betake our selves to the most able , faithful and unbiassed judges ; and they are the most antient councils , and the primitive fathers , whose judgments are declared in our several creeds , in other publick confessions of faith , and orthodox catechisms set forth or approved by the church of god. and since we are very well stored with these excellent helps , i do once more conclude that no man , whether learned or unlearned , can need any new arguments from the press to confirm his judgment in matters of religion . sect . xi . 7. this author's seventh allegation against the restraint of the press runs thus . if it be unlawful to let the press continue free , lest it furnish men with the reasons of one party as well as the other , it must be as unlawful to examine those reasons . to this i answer thus ; we must distinguish between party and party ; between one , who is orthodox , and one who is heretical ; this distinction being premised , i shall resolve this hypothetical proposition into these two categorical ones . that it is not lawful for many orthodox christians to examine those reasons , which hereticks may urge in defence of their ill opinions . and therefore that the press should not be permitted to furnish such christians with any such reasons , 't is notoriously known that there are amongst us vast numbers of persons , who are of weak judgments , not firmly established in their faith , not able to distinguish truth from falshood in a fallacious argument , and therefore are apt to be tossed up and down by every wind of doctrine : now , for such men to peep into heretical books , cannot be lawful , because they do thereby run themselves into a very dangerous temptation . our lord hath left us this caution , beware of false prophets ; it seems they are dangerous men ; so we are told again and again : they creep into houses , and there find success , for , they lead captive silly women ; and again , they overthrow the faith of some ; nay , they subvert whole houses ; it seems that heresie is a contagious disease , apt to over-run whole families . and doubtless this poyson may be conveyed in a peice of paper as successfully , as any other way ; this infection may be received as well by the eye from a book , as by the ear from a tongue ; for when unlearned men meet with socinian arguments , drawn either from humane reason , or abused scripture , since they themselves cannot confute them ; they are apt to yield up their own reason , and give up those truths for lost , which they are not able to defend . and i think that it will be no breach of charity , if i tell my reader that i am verily persuaded , that the great reason , why this author pleads so many arguments , though no good ones , for the unlimited liberty of the press , is this ; namely , that our socinians may without controul publish their books full of subtile , but fallacious arguments to surprize and captivate the judgments of illiterate and undiscerning men. we know , that in the late reign an universal liberty of conscience was pleaded for , and granted by a declaration upon a design to bring in popery ; so now an universal liberty of the press is contended for by those men , whose design it is to introduce socinianism , the very worst of heresies , for it totally subverts the very foundation of our christian faith and hope . indeed , to my best observation , this author hath not , in his whole letter , so much as once named socinian , nor drop'd one plain word in favour of it ; but yet , latet anguis in herba ; this was very prudently done to prevent suspicion ; but if he be not a man of that sort , why doth he tell us , that if the press must be regulated , it must be done by some lay-man ; for which he can have no substantial reason , save only this , namely , because from a clergy-man no socinian book can ever expect an imprimatur . but this , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 only by the way , in short , the substance of my answer to this allegation is this , 't is not lawful for men of weak understandings to mind subtile arguments contained in heretical books , lest thereby they might be ensnared ; and for that reason , the press should not be permitted to publish any such books , unless security could be given that they should never come into vulgar hands . sect . xii . 8. this authors eighth allegation against the restraint of the press is this . the press ought not to be restrained , because the reformation is wholly owing to it . i answer , there is no liberty denied to any english press to publish any book , which tends to help the devotions , to reform the lives , or confirm the judgments of men in the true faith of christ ; but as for the established religion of our church in matters of faith , and worship , it is so well refined already from the dregs of popery and superstition , that we do not need another luther , nor the help of any press to reform and make it better . he that would reform our religion in any of its substantial parts , must reform the scriptures too ; for our church teacheth no other doctrines in the great points of faith and worship than christ and his apostles taught the world , if we may believe those sacred writings , which they have left us . but since i have already , under another head given a sufficient answer to this allegation . i need not here say any more about it . sect . xiii . 9. the ninth allegation , which this author urgeth against the restraint of the press , is this ; our divines condemn the popish clergy for not suffering their laity to read protestant authors ; we do so , and very justly too , but what then ? the inference , which he intends , must be this ; our protestant clergy must be condemned for not suffering our laity to read socinian books , and for watching the press to prevent it . to this i answer thus ; this inference is , a non sequitur , it is wild and extravagant ; for there is a great difference in the case : the prohibition of books may be an act either to be blamed or commended according as the books prohibited are either really good or really bad ; to forbid men the use of such books , as tend to the benefit of mankind , the advantage of true religion , and the salvation of souls , is an act impious and tyrannical . and this is the known practice of the roman church , which forbids lay-men to read the bible , and the writings of such protestant authors as teach nothing but what the scriptures teach , and for this do we very justly condemn them . but on the other hand , to forbid injudicious men the use of such books , as tend to promote errors and heresies , to distract their readers judgment , and rather to shake their faith than to confirm it , is an act laudable , charitable , and necessary for the age we live in , for those predictions of christ and his apostles ; false prophets shall arise ; and again , false teachers shall be among you , are fulfilled in these times ; for there are amongst us romish priests and jesuits ; yea and some far more dangerous than they : i mean , our socinians , who cannot corrupt so many souls by their personal conferences , as they may by their books . and is it not high time to watch the press , lest any thing steal from thence , which may poyson the heads of unwary men ? or must the press be permitted freely to spread that destructive heresie , which hath been long since condemned by the catholick church and its representatives met in general councils ? but here this author , to justifie his own opinion , cites a learned divine of our own church , and borrows this passage from him , they that have a good cause , will not fright men from considering what their adversaries say against them , nor forbid them to read their books , but rather encourage them so to do , that they may see the difference between truth and error , reason and sophistry with their own eyes , &c. that we may see how little service this passage doth our author , let us view it again . they who have a good cause , but who are they ? we cannot doubt , but this good man meant the church of england , of which he himself was a very worthy minister ; but what saith he of this church of ours ? it will not fright men from considering , &c. but what men ? this eminent divine was the lecturer of gray's inn , where his auditory did chiefly consist of such persons , as had been blest with a learned education , and might charitably be presumed to be well skilled in the law of god as well as in the law of man. now , that this judicious divine of ours did mean , that the church of england would rather encourage than forbid persons so qualified to read and examine the books of our adversaries as well as our own ; to me seems evident from that reason which he subjoyns as the only end of an impartial examination , namely this , that they may see the difference between truth and error , reason and sophistry , with their own eyes ; this expression doth plainly import the persons fit to read books of controversie in matters of religion are only such as have eyes of their own , i. e. clear heads , enlightned understandings , able to discern truth from falshood . and verily could the books of our socinians be confined within the libraries of learned and judicious men , whether of the clergy , or of the laity : could they be surely kept from purblind eyes and weak judgments ; that unlimited liberty of the press , which this author doth so earnestly contend for , were the more allowable . but since this can never be , since heretical books are and ever will be exposed to common sale ; though the church of rome doth ill in restraining their laity from the use of good books ; yet the church of england would do very well in restraining the press from putting ill ones into the hands of unskilful men , where they would be more dangerous than edge-tools in the hand of a child , who knoweth not how to use them . and so much in answer to this objection . sect . xiv . 10. this author begins his tenth allegation thus : i cannot see how they , that are for tying men to that interpretation of scripture , which a licenser shall approve , and therefore put it in his power to hinder all others from being published , can with any justice condemn the popish clergy for not licensing the bible it self for the laity to read. i answer , here are two suppositions , both which are either impertinent to us , or false in themselves ; if the church of england be not the persons here charged , the charge is impertinent ; but if they be , it is false . for , 1. the church of england doth tie none of her members to that interpretation of scripture , which such or such a licenser of hers shall approve . 't is well known that we have many interpretations of the scripture , which never were under the inspection of any english licenser ; the expositions of the fathers , schoolmen , and many other divines are brought us from beyond the seas , and the free choice and use of them is allowed us by our church . and if such books chance to be reprinted here in england , the care of the edition is committed , not to the licenser of books to judg of their matters , but to the composer and corrector of the press to see to their forms , character , and exact truth of printing . now , if this be so , as indeed it is ; if we are allowed to consult various interpreters of our bibles , if we may take our choice of such or such expositors , and use what editions we please ; why should this undeserved imputation be cast upon the church of england , as if she tied all her sons to such interpretations of the holy scripture , as her own licensers shall authorise ? 2. the church of england doth not give her licensers a despotick , arbitrary , and absolute power to reject every book , every interpretation of scripture , which doth not please them . 't is certain that our licensers do not act by any immediate and independent power of their own ; but as delegates and substitutes by an authority derived from their superiors , and if any of them shall either allow any book , which tends to mischief ; or suppress any book , which tends to common good , they do abuse their power , exceed their commission , and must answer for it . but is the miscarriage of some few licensers an argument that they should all be laid aside ? some kings have proved cruel tyrants . some judges have been corrupted , and must we therefore have neither king nor judg ? sure i am that in this age of ours we do sufficiently need a discreet and able judg of books : and the test and censure of such a judg no man need fear more than our socinian writers ; for they , being no great friends to the scripture , are very odd interpreters of it , not through ignorance , but design ; i will not say , through rancor and malice ; but i will say , through partiality and prejudice . for , because the beginning of st. john's gospel , and several expressions in st. paul's epistles , being rightly understood , and in the sense of the catholick church , do totally overthrow their dangerous hypothesis ; they fix upon those texts such interpretations as are childish , absurd , and even ridiculous ; such , as none of the fathers , schoolmen ; or criticks , so far as i can find , did even think of . and what an ill cause do these men manage , who endeavour with handfuls of dirt to stop the mouths of those witnesses , who , being permitted to speak their own sense , do so loudly proclaim their united testimonies against them ? and methinks this one consideration , were there no more , is enough to justifie our church in appointing some fit persons to be the judges of books , and the interpretations of scripture offered to the press ; and the rather , because if any licenser should out of any by ▪ respect , or for any sinister end , stifle any papers , which deserve to see the light ; the injured authors may appeal from the licenser to the vice-chancellors in either of our universities , or to the lord bishop of london , or to his grace the lord archbishop of canterbury ; so that the fate of books doth not ultimately depend upon the pleasure or sole judgment of a licenser . now , those two forenamed suppositions , upon which this author bottoms this tenth allegation , proving false , the superstructure , which he builds upon them , falls to the ground , and there i leave it . sect . xv. 11. the next allegation against the restraint of the press this author thrusts into the mouths of other men , and makes them say what perhaps he himself doth not think : namely this . 't is no small presumption that the clergy themselves are conscious of the falseness of their religion . how ! the clergy , what ! the whole clergy ? are ten thousand of us at once presumed to be hypocrites , juglers , and gross dissemblers with god and man ? we , who teach men that a false religion leads towards hell , do we know our own to be false , and yet embrace it still ? the martyrs of england in queen mary's days died for the same religion , which we now profess , and were they also conscious that this religion is false , and yet in the defence of it shed their blood ? certainly this presumption is not small , but very strange ; 't is a great breach as well of charity as of truth ; for , if the scriptures be true , and who dares suspect them ? we are abundantly convinced that our religion cannot be false ; and why then should any man presume that we have indeed other thoughts concerning it ? the reason here given is this ; because the clergy dare not suffer their religion to undergo a fair trial , but do what they can to stifle all the reasons that can be urged against it . but , sir , pray tell us , can any sound reason be ever urged against a religion , such as ours is , instituted by christ , taught by his apostles , embraced by the primitive church , and sealed by the blood of thousands of martyrs . but 't is not strange to hear men speak against the very best of things or persons ; for our lord told his apostles , men shall revile you , and say all manner of evil against you . thus were their persons treated ; yea , and their doctrine too . the jews spake against those things , which were spoken by paul. nay , the psalmist tells his god , they speak against thee ; and what wonder then if they speak against his religion too ? but what do they speak ? that , which this author styles reason , is but pretence and sophistry ; and were such pretences , though never so plausible , yet being fallacious , buried in perpetual oblivion , and stifled for ever , what harm were in it ? what one single soul would be the worse ? but our author replieth , that when there is a contest between men of two different opinions , they have not fair play , if their respective reasons be not heard equally on both sides ; we grant it , what seneca saith , is true ▪ qui statuit aliquid , parte inaudita altera , aequum licet statuerit , haud aequus fuit . well , the main parties , now contending , are the church of england , and our socinians , and have not these men very often been heard already ? their opinion , and their arguments for it , being much the same with those of the old arians , have been frequently debated , all their witnesses have been heard , all their evidences have been maturely considered , baffled , and overthrown , and condemned by several councils , by many pious and learned fathers , by a great number of worthy divines , by papists , by protestants , by calvinists , by lutherans , by all sorts of christians ; but themselves . now , when a cause condemned by several able and impartial judges , at several times , and in several places , is , by a bill of revival , renewed and brought upon the stage again with the self same witnesses , and the self same evidence ; if the proper judges , to free themselves and others from a great deal of needless trouble , should reject and cast it out of the court without any further hearing , i think there would be no foul play in doing so . but we have not treated our modern socinians thus ; for did any of them ever desire a personal conference with any of our learned divines , and was rejected ? did any of them ever provoke the professours of divinity in either of our universities , to a publick disputation , and was refused ? are not their writings and ours to be seen , and had in many shops in london , oxford , cambridge , and other great towns and cities ? have they not received our printed answers to their printed objections ? if they have , why should this author complain for want of fair play ? why should he unworthily tell the world , that we dare not suffer our religion to undergo a fair trial , for fear it should prove false ? no , we do not doubt the truth of our religion , nor the ability of our church to defend it ; but our lord tells , false prophets shall deceive many ; and st. peter saith , they shall bring in damnable doctrines ; and yet he tells us , many shall follow their pernicious ways . these texts do make us jealous that many weak , easie , and credulous men may be corrupted by the sophistry and fallacies of socinian arguments , which , for that reason should not be published . but , may our author reply , and in effect he doth so , what danger can there be in publishing such arguments , since , if they be false , we have great store of divines able to confute them ? we have so , and bless god for it ; but what then ? must we permit the souls of men to be poysoned , because we abound with sovereign antidotes ? must we permit the church our mother , or her sons who are our brethren to receive wounds in their heads , because we have balsam enough to cure them ? we would take a better course than so , and follow the old rule , venienti occurrite morbo , prevent the poyson , and then we need not use any antidotes ; prevent the wound , and then there is no need of plaisters ; so here , if we can , by a due regulation of the press , prevent the spreading of erroneous doctrines , there will be no need of confutations . but if men of restless spirits be still permitted to disturb the peace of our church , and stagger the faith of weak believers , by publishing arguments , which only seem to be plausible , against the fundamental articles of our creed , we shall be concerned to spend more time , and blot more paper , in returning just answers to them ; we must not quit the field , so long as there are enemies in it . and so i pass from this paragraph to the next . sect . xvi . 12. this paragraph begins thus ; it may be objected , saith he , ( and very justly , say we ) that by such a latitude , people may be seduced into false religions , or into heresies and schisms . the truth hereof , this author doth not deny ; but though it should be so , yet he insinuates , that there would be but very little or no danger in it ; for , thus he tell us , if two persons profess two different religions , the one a true , the other a false one ; yet if they have been equally sincere in their examination , they are equally in the way to heaven . this assertion , were it true , would be very comfortable to all sober jews , turks , and pagans , who have been serious in examining the grounds of their respective religions ; and yet i cannot think them equally in the way to heaven with all such christians , as have done as much . and 't is easie to believe , that those christians , who , after an impartial search into scripture-truths , do own the divinity of christ and the holy ghost as fundamental articles of our faith , are in a much fairer capacity of salvation , than our socinians , who , after all their examinations , embrace a doctrine contrary to the faith of the catholick church , even denying the lord that bought them ; a doctrine , which st. peter stiles , damnable . st. paul tells us , there is one faith , one true religion , and no more ; and this one true religion is the only right path , which leads towards heaven ; and he , who is mistaken in the choice of his religion , is like a traveller , who , after all his enquiries , mistakes his way ; and if he continue under that mistake , he hath little hopes to attain his desired journey 's end . but to justifie this strange paradox , this author subjoyns this reason ; two such persons , the one after a due examination , professing a true religion ; the other a false one , are equally in the way to heaven , because in following their reason , they both have done what god requires . that 's his argument , but there 's a fallacy in it ; for , doth not god require , and doth not reason oblige us , in order to our salvation , to obey one command as well as another ? one command is this , prove all things ; another immediately follows , hold fast that which is good . now , if one man obey the first of these commands only , and another obey them both , they do not equally do what god requires , nor consequently are they equally in the way to heaven . and this is the case of two persons , who , after an equal examination , hold two different religions , the one a true , and the other a false one ; the obedience of the one is only , secundùm quid , he obeyeth but this single command , prove all things ; but the other obeyeth this and that too , hold fast that which is good , which a false religion can never be . and if so , how can two such persons be in an equal capacity of salvation , except a wrong way do as directly lead to heaven as the right one ? there is another assertion in the same paragraph , which i cannot pass over without some reflections upon it , and 't is this ; the perverse holding of religion ; i. e. taking it up on trust , whether it be true or false , is heresie . this definition of heresie is to me a new one , and repugnant to many old ones , which i have met with . it is true , the different opinions of the old philosophers , whether true or false , are indifferently stiled by epiphanius , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the heresies of the philosophers . but in matters of religion , this word , heresie , is very seldom , if ever , used in any sense , but a bad one ; the evangelist mentions the sect , in the greek , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the heresie of the pharisees and the sadducees , an expression , which doth no way commend them . nor did the jews intend the credit of the christian religion , when they called it , this sect , or as it is in the original , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , this heresie . and as for the pagans , many of them had as bad an opinion of it , and stiled it , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , an atheistical heresie ; so eusebius . sure it is , the word is now generally used in an ill sense , and doth necessarily imply nothing else , but an unsoundness and tenacity of opinion , about matters of religion ; accordingly the old canon law of the greek church defines an heretick thus ; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , one that is not right in his judgment . the council of carthage describes them thus ; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , hereticks are they , who have wrong apprehensions about the christian faith. tertullian , defines heresie thus , quodcunque adversùs veritatem sapit , whatsoever makes against , not the laws of god , but his truth ; accordingly an heretick , in the language of hesychius , is this , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , one that chuseth some opinion besides , or against the truth . these definitions of ancient divines inform us what their thoughts were concerning heresie ; namely , that it was nothing else but an opinion held against some truth . but this late author is of another mind , for he tells us , that the taking up a religion on trust , though the true one , is heresie , and according as men are more or less partial in examining , they are more or less heretical . but if this be so , then must the nature and essence of truth depend on the bare act of examination , which cannot be , because truth will remain truth , whether it be examined or not ; the strictest examination doth not constitute truth , but only makes it evident . indeed he , who takes up a true religion barely upon trust , may be to blame ; but his fault is not heresie , but negligence and disobedience ; 't is not , as heresie is , an errour in point of judgment , but a sin in point of practice ; 't is not the violation of a doctrine , but the transgression of a command . so that whatever title we may give such a man , we cannot justly brand him with the name of heretick . but yet our author , from these foregoing premises , infers this as an epiphonema , or granted conclusion ; so that 't is not , what a man professeth ; but , how , that justifieth or condemns him before god ; no. is the what excluded ? and is the , how , all ? suppose a man profess the religion of mahomet with the greatest devotion that can be , would not the what condemn him , or would the how excuse him ? suppose a jew with the highest reverence should have offered up a swine instead of a lamb , would not the what , the matter of his sacrifice , notwithstanding its exactest manner , have rendred it abominable ? the truth is , god considers both the what and the how , the substance of his worship , and its circumstances too ; and if so , why doth this man tell us , 't is not the what , but the how ? and now being wearied with pursuing this author through so many impertinent allegations against the restraint of the press , i shall take my leave of him when i have propounded two arguments against that unlimited liberty of the press , for which he is so zealous an advocate , and and that , i fear , upon an ill design ; and my first argument is this . 1. since this unlimited liberty of the press would certainly be , as this author himself doth not deny , an in-let to schisms , heresies , and a great variety of opinions and practices in matters of religion ; the allowance of it can never consist with that command of god , contend earnestly for the faith once delivered to the saints . this text supposeth that the true faith , or which is all one , the true religion , is but one ; and that for that one , we are to contend , and that earnestly too : now , to allow an unlimited liberty to the press , which will open a wide gap to introduce false religions , is so far from a contending for the one true faith , that it is indeed a contending against it ; and therefore such an allowance is a direct breach of this command . 2. since this unlimited liberty of the press would certainly prove an in-let to schisms , heresies , and false religions , the allowance of it would be contradictory to the judgment and practice of the universal church in all ages . it is true , the church of christ in all ages had not the use of a press , but if the late art of printing , without any due restraint should prove a means to introduce an inundation of heresies ; the allowance of such a liberty , and those numerous errours , with which it would be attended , would be diametrically opposite to the judgment and practice of the catholick church from one generation to another . now , the question which relates to the case in hand , is this ; how did the primitive saints deal with those men , who differed in opinion from the received doctrine of the catholick church ? they followed st. paul's rule , 2 tim. 2. 25. in meekness instruct those that oppose themselves ; they did so , they used all gentle and rational means to reduce them ; but when this would not do , what course took they then ? did they indulge them ? did they give them an universal liberty of conscience ? surely no ; and to prove this , three things shall be shewed . first , that an unlimited toleration of all opinions and practices in the matters of religion , is contrary to the judgment and practice of particular learned men in the primitive church . tertullian , indeed tells us , non religionis est cogere religionem , quae sponte-suscipi debeat , non vi ; the owning of any religion ought to be free , not forced ; and 't is best , that it should be so ; but lest this expression should be made use of , as pamelius words it , ad sectarum licentiam , as a license to hereticks ; the same tertullian saith elsewhere , ad officium haereticos compelli , non inlici dignum est ; it is fit the hereticks should be compelled , not allured , to do what becomes them . st. hierom saith of heresie , scintilla statim , ut apparuerit , extinguenda est , the very first spark of it should not be cherished , but extinguished ; and how far he was from countenancing ill opinions , is evident from his epistle to riparius , where he calleth his opposing the heresies of those times , christi bellum , the war of christ . and fevardentius tells us , gloriatur hieronymus se haereticis nunquam pepercisse , st. hierom glorieth , that he never spared any hereticks . that great man st. austin , who was very tender of punishing men for their opinions , did yet write several epistles to the governours of several provinces , which bear this inscription , de moderatè coercendis haereticis , wherein he doth beseech them to restrain hereticks , not by capital punishments , but by some gentler corrections . that sentence , which dulcitius pronounced against the donatists , st. austin thought too severe , and so do we ; noveritis vos debitae morti dandos , know that ye must die , as ye deserve ; such sanguinary courses are very improper means to reduce hereticks ; they are inconsistent with our lord's designs , and cannot be reconciled to that command of his , compel them to come in , that my house may be filled ; the compulsion , here required , must be such , as tends to recover men , not to destroy them ; and certainly to send them out of the world by bloody laws , were a strange way of bringing them into the church . that expression of st. paul will never warrant such a course , galathians 5. 12. i would they were even cut off , which trouble you . he doth not wish they were killed with the sword , but only cut off from the church by excommunication . but although sanguinary laws may not be executed , unless it be in case of professed atheism , gross idolatry , or downright blasphemy , yet for the restraint of other opinions and practices , which corrupt the doctrine , and disturb the peace of the catholick church , some gentler punishments have been used , and in st. austin's judgment , still ought to be . in short , all those learned and pious men , who were so renowned in former ages , athanasius , great st. basil , irenaeus , and many others , have declared to all succeeding generations , that they did not approve of a general toleration of all opinions and practices in the matters of religion . for , why else did they write so vehemently against the ill opinions of arius , eutyches , nestorius , and other hereticks , concerning whom cyril of jerusalem gave every orthodox christian this advice 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , abhor them , avoid them , do not so much as once salute them ; so he . 2. 't is certain that an universal liberty of conscience , an unlimited toleration of all opinions and practices in the matters of religion , is directly contrary to the decrees and canons of antient councils , and that we may see in a few instances ; as , 1. the decrees and canons of councils did not leave men to the liberty of their own consciences , as to the use of both the sacraments . the council of carthage established this canon in reference to baptism , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , whosoever demeth that little infants , newly born , ought to be baptised , let him be accursed , or excommunicated . and as to the other blessed sacrament , there is a canon , ascribed to the apostles themselves , which runs thus , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . all christians , who come to the publick assemblies , and there hear the scriptures ; but stay not to receive the holy communion , ought to be excommucated , and so thought the council of antioch : 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . they , who turn their backs upon the holy communion , ought to be cast out of the church . and the council of sardica , as zonaras tells us , did , by a canon of theirs , excommunicate all persons , who abstained from the holy sacrament : 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for three lords days together . 2. the decrees and canons of councils did not leave men to the liberty of their own consciences , as to the observation of the lords day . concerning this the council of laodicea thus decreed , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 no christian ought to act like a jew ; and rest upon the saturday ; but to prefer our lords days , and rest in them ; and as for such as should transgress this canon , the council passed this sentence upon them ; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , let them be accursed of christ : nor was it left as a thing arbitrary for men commonly to fast upon the sunday , if a clergy-man did it , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ▪ let him be deposed or degraded ; if a lay-man did it , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , let him be excommunicated ; so say the apostles canons . 3. the decrees and canons of councils did not leave men to the liberty of their own consciences , as to the use of publick churches , and the frequenting of sacred assemblies held therein . the heretick eustathius , in the fourth century , despising publick churches , taught his followers to pray and perform other acts of divine service in private conventicles . against this practice the council of gangra established their canons . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and again , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , &c. if any man teach , that the church and solemn assemblies met therein , are to be despised , and if any man shall set up private meetings for the worship of god without licence from his bishop , let him be accursed . these canons , and many more to the like effect , are undeniable evidences , that the councils of the primitive church were far enough from being favourers of a general toleration of all opinions and practices in matters of religion . 3. 't is certain that an universal toleration of all opinions and practices in matters of religion is contrary to the judgment and practice even of the roman church itself . what their judgment is in this case , we are informed from the learned men of their communion ; lorinus , one of their jesuites , intimates his opinion , as well as his authors , when he saith , haereticos rectè clemens exterminandos praecipit : clemens did justly command hereticks to be rooted out . thomas aquinas , their angelical doctor , delivers his opinion concerning hereticks very roundly thus ; non solùm ab ecclesia per excommunicationem separandos , sed etiam per mortem à mundo excludendos ; hereticks deserve not only to be excluded from the church by excommunication ; but also from the world by death . bellarmine , their most illustrious cardinal , spends a whole chapter in proving , that hereticks , posse ac deberi temporalibus poenis , atque etiam ipsa morte mulctari ; that incorrigeable hereticks not only may , but must , suffer temporal punishments , yea and death itself . but there is no man , that speaks more fully to this , than maldonate , another jesuite , who expresly saith , comburendi tanquam proditores , & transfugae discedentes haeretici : hereticks , who depart from the church , are to be burnt , as so many traitours and renegadoes . and whom he means by these hereticks , he elsewhere tells us , calvinistos & lutheranos haereticos esse quis non videt ? nullus nunquam haereticus fuit , nullus haereticus esse potest , si illi haeretici non sunt : who doth not know , that calvinists and lutherans , protestants of both denominations , are hereticks ? if they are not , no man ever was , nor can be , such ; 't is boldly spoken , but never was , never will be prov'd . and 't is worth our observation , that the same jesuit hath left the kings of the christian church this advice ; admoneo non licere illis istas , quas vocant , conscientiae libertates nimiùm nostro tempore usitatas haereticis dare . i put princes in mind , that it is not lawful for any of them to grant hereticks , i. e. protestants , any liberty of conscience , of which he complains as a thing too often done . these instances are enough to teach us what are the principles of the roman church , whereunto their practice hath been so sutable that it may be a matter of dispute , whether rome pagan , or rome papal hath shed the greater quantity of christian blood . and certainly , their persecuting , impopoverishing , imprisoning , tormenting , banishing , and massacring so many thousands , in england , scotland , ireland , france , and other places , barely upon the score of religion , are very sorry arguments , that they do really like any toleration , what hand so ever the men of that religion may have in ours . 4. 't is certain that an unlimited toleration of all opinions and practices in the matters of religion is directly contrary to the commands and edicts of good kings both in the jewish and christian church . 1. the good kings of israel and judah did not permit all their subjects to do , what they pleased , in the matters of their religion . we cannot doubt , but there were in those days many men of erroneous judgments , who thought they did well , when they worshipped god by an image . st. paul mentions , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the conscience of the idol , i. e. a false opinion , that there was some thing of divinity in it , and accordingly did such men sacrifice to it . but was this opinion and practice allowed by any of their religious kings , because it was sutable to the mistaken consciences of some of their subjects ? did hezekiah , did josiah , nay did jehu , grant a publick indulgence for the worship of idols , because many both laicks and priests were for it ? it was so far from this , that , although a great number of their subjects were too much inclined , and had been too long accustomed to it , they took care to root it out . 2. nor was such an universal tolleration of all religions ever known in former ages in the christian church , since the religion of christ was own'd by kings and emperors . it s true , socrates tells us , that the good emperor theodosius did bear with the novatians , but he bore with none besides ; what he said to demophilus , an arrian bishop , we have from the same historian . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , i command thee to quit the christian churches . 't is also true , that the good emperor constantine the great did once sign a royal edict for such a toleration , the sum of which is thus recorded by eusebius , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . i. e. let us give both to the christians and to all others the free choice of their religion . and hereunto he added this charge ; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ▪ let no man disturb his neighbour in point of religion , but let every one do as his soul desires . this , indeed was constantine's act , and a wise act it was , and all that could then be done , considering in what circumstances he then stood ; for , constantine and licinius were then co-emperors ; constantine favoured the christian religion , licinius favoured the pagan worship : heathenism was the religion then established by law , christianity was under hatches ; the pagan religion did not need a toleration , the christian did . in such a juncture of time as this , it was very worthily done of constantine to get the consent of his colleague licinius to a general toleration of all religions , that so the christian might be comprehended in it ; and such a present toleration did he procure in order to a future establishment of the christian faith. and that this was indeed his present design is evident from what he afterwards did ; for , when he became the sole emperor , and was well settled in the throne , he made it his great business to suppress all false religions , and establish that of christ ; eusebius tells us , that there was sent out by him a law. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , restraining the abominable idolatries , that had hitherto been practised in cities and countries ; and again 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the law commanded that none should dare to set up any images . the same historian saith , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , by his command the gates of idol temples were shut up : nay ▪ another historian tells us that he did , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , quite pluck down the temples of venus . and as he had no kindness for any ill religions without the christian church , so did he give no countenance to any sects and ill opinions , which arose within it . that he banished arius , though baronius denies it , we have the authority of sozomen , who saith , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . arius was called back from banishment not long after the council of nice : and how he dealt with other hereticks , the same historian informs us , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by a law he commanded that the oratories of hereticks should be took from them , and that they should hold no assemblies either in publick or private places ▪ and as this good ▪ emperor took care to root out all false worship , and to suppress ill opinions , so did he by his royal authority promote the true service of god. to that end , he set forth a law for the observation of the lords day . so eusebius tells us , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , or as the same historian saith in another place , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . he exhorted , nay , by a law he required the universality of his subjects to cease from all their worldly business upon the lord's daies , that therein they might attend the exercises of religion . certainly these and the like proceedings of his are infallible evidences , that although this good emperor did once , in christian policy , and for an excellent end , sign a royal edict for a general toleration of all religions ; yet , when it might be otherwise , he did not like it . this example of constantine was followed by succeeding ▪ emperors , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , saith justinian ; we condemn every heresie , and lest the books of hereticks should transmit their ill opinions to posterity , theodosius and valentinian did command by a law , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , that their writings should be cast into the flames . we read , that they were debarred from the common priviledges of orthodox christians , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , saith the civil law , and it instances in several particulars , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , we decree that hereticks shall be uncapable of any publick imployment , whether military or civil ; nor might they be admitted as witnesses in their courts of judicature , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , let not an heretick's testimony be received against an orthodox christian : nay more , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ▪ no heretick shall inherit the estate of his father . in short , we find hereticks deposed , degraded , banished , and sometimes fined ; witness that law of theodosius , mentioned by the council of carthage , which enacted , that in some cases , hereticks should pay , as the canon words it , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , ten pounds of gold. now , we do not write this with any design to encourage the governours of our church or state to exercise any severity towards our sober and peaceable dissenters , who differ from us only in the circumstantials of our religion ; but we mention these things to confirm our present argument ; and to shew , that our present unlimited toleration of all opinions and practices in matters of religion , is quite contrary to the judgment , usages , and laws of the antient church , who punished such as held and taught heterodox opinions , and would not be otherwise reclaimed . 5. 't is certain that an unlimited toleration of all opinions and practices in matters of religion is directly contrary to the divine law , to the will of god revealed in his written word . the jewish church was never permitted to teach and do , what they pleased , about the things of god ; they were not allowed to serve their maker , as they listed ; they were obliged to sacrifice when , where , and what they were commanded . it was not left to them , as a matter of choice , whether they would circumcise their infants , or not ; no , the law was this , the uncircumcised man child shall be cut off . nor were they left to their own liberty , whether they would come to jerusalem to eat the passover , or not ; no , the text saith of good josiah , the king commanded all the people , saying , keep the passover . we do not find any indulgence in matters of religion granted to the jewish church by almighty god , or any of their good kings . and as there is no such thing to be found in the law or the prophets ; so there is very little or nothing to be met with in the whole gospel , that gives any countenance to such a practice ; the main place , which seems to look that way , is in the parable of the tares ; of which 't is said , let them grow until the harvest , what means our lord by this ? is it indeed his pleasure , that ill men , and ill opinions , should be indulged and countenanced in his church ? st. chrysostom gives us another interpretation of our saviour's words , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , our lord doth here forbid us to kill and slay ▪ hereticks ; but is there no difference betwixt a sword and a rod ? is a bridle and a halter the same thing ? the heretick must not be destroyed , but may he not be restrain'd ? st. chrysostom answers thus , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , &c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , our lord doth not here forbid to curb hereticks , to stop their mouths , to check their boldness , dissolve their conventicles , &c. as he goeth on . of the same mind was st. paul , who saith , their mouths must be stopped ; but how can that be done , if there may be no penal laws ? and if an universal liberty of conscience in opinion and practice about matters of religion be indeed agreeable to the gospel of christ , what meant st. paul by that demand of his , shall i come to you with a rod ? 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , shall i bring a rod to whip and scourge you ? so st. chrysostom . and since st. paul , who well knew the mind of christ , did , upon just occasion , make use of his apostolical rod to punish , not only immoralities in life , but errors in judgment too ; we may thence infer , that an unlimited toleration of all opinions in matters of religion hath no manner of countenance from the law of christ ; we read , that st. paul made use of this rod , to strike elymas blind ; and why he did so , that expression intimates , wilt thou not cease to pervert the right ways of the lord ? it was for his opposing the gospel , and that in all probability arose from the error of his judgment . but the case is yet more plain in the example of hymenaeus and alexander , of whom st. paul saith , i have delivered them to satan ; a severe punishment , surè futuri judicii praejudicium , 't is a fore ▪ stalling the dreadful judgment of god. so tertullian . but why did st. paul inflict it ? he gives this reason , concerning faith they have made shipwrack ; or as he elsewhere expresseth it , they have erred concerning the truth . it was for their ill opinion about one article of our creed . these instances are enough to shew that a toleration of all opinions and practices in matters of religion was never thought to be lawful , and consequently such an unlimited liberty of the press , as tends to bring in , and spread errors and heresies , ought not to be allowed . and now i shall take my leave of my reader , when i have admonished him , that in all this discourse , i plead for the regulation of the press , as to such books only , as concern morality , faith , and religious worship , of which , our learned ecclesiastical governours are the most proper judges . but as to policy and state affairs , they fall under the cognizance of the civil magistrate , whose province it is , and whose care it should be , to prevent the publishing of all such pamphlets as tend to promote popular tumults , sedition , treason , and rebellion . and had this been carefully done some years ago , it might have happily prevented those dreadful confusions , under which our church and state now do , and still are too like to groan . farewel . finis . books printed for richard sare at grays-inn gate in holborn . the fables of aesop , with morals and reflections . fol. erasmus colloquies , in english octavo . quevedo's visions . octavo . these three by sir roger l'estrange . the genuine epistles of st. barnabas , st. ignatius , st. clement , st. polycarp , the shepherd of hermas , &c. translated and published in english . octavo . a practical discourse concerning swearing . octavo . the authority of christian princes over ecclesiastical synods , in answer to a letter to a convocation man. octavo . sermons upon several occasions . quarto . these by dr. wake . epictetus's morals with simplicius's comment . octavo . a sermon preached upon the death of the queen . both by mr. george stanhope . the doctrine of a god and providence vindicated and asserted . octavo . discourses on several divine subjects . octavo . these two by thomas gregory lecturer of fulham . dr. gregory's divine antidote , in answer to an heretical pamphlet , entitled , an end to the socinian controversy . octav. compleat sets consisting of 8 volumes of letters , writ by a turkish spy , who lived 45 years at paris undiscovered , giving an account of the principal affairs of europe . twelves . human prudence , or the art by which a man may raise himself and fortune to grandeur . twelves . moral maxims and reflections ; written in french by the duke of roachfoucault , now englished . twelves . the art both of writing and judging of history , with reflections upon antient and modern historians . twelves . an essay upon reason , by sir george mackenzie . twelves . death made comfortable , or the way to die well , by mr. kettlewell . twelves . the parson's counsellor , or the law of tythes ; by sir simon degg . octavo . the unlawfulness of bonds of resignation . octavo . an answer to all the excuses and pretences which men ordinarily make for their not coming to the holy sacrament , octavo . price 3 d. by a divine of the church of england . remarks on a book , entitled , prince arthur , an heroic poem ; by mr. dennis . octavo . fortune in her wits ; or , the hour of all men : written in spanish by don fran de quevedo , translated into english . octav. price 1 s. 6 d. a gentleman's religion in three parts ; the first contains the principles of natural religion ; the second and third , the doctrines of christianity , both as to faith and practice , with an appendix , wherein it is proved , that nothing contrary to our reason , can possibly be the object of our belief ; but that it is no just exception against some of the doctrines of christianity that they are above our reason . twelves . examen de ingenios , or the trial of wits ; discovering the great difference of wits among men , and what sort of learning suits best with each genius ; published originally in spanish by dr. juan huartes , and made english from the most correct edition , by mr. bellamy ; useful for all fathers , masters , tutors , &c a compleat list of the royal navy . notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a42050-e150 prov. xx . ●● . matth. vi . 2● . rom. i. 21. ●rig . adv . celsus , l. 5. ● . 24. joh. viii . 12. matt. v. 14. notes for div a42050-e1190 tit. i. 11. notes for div a42050-e2360 1 thess . v. 21. 1 joh ▪ iv . 1. notes for div a42050-e3140 jam. i. 18. 2 pet. iii. 1 ep. 3. t. 2. ● orig. in laz t. 1. p. 244 in mat. ho● 1. p. 5. iren ▪ l. 2. c ● notes for div a42050-e4390 ● thess . v. 11. joh. iii. 11. 1 joh. iii ▪ 9. tit. i. 11. tit. iii. 10. 2 tim. ii . 17. notes for div a42050-e5170 mal. ii . 7. ●h . v. 39. ●uke x. 26. ●att . xxii . 29. ●sal . cx . 1. notes for div a42050-e6590 matth. vii . 1● 2 tim. iii. 6 ▪ 2 tim. ii . 18 tit. i. 11. notes for div a42050-e7290 matth. xxiv . ● 2 pet. ii . 1 ▪ notes for div a42050-e8600 matth v. 11. act. xiii 45 ▪ ps . cxxxix . 20. matt. xxiv . 1 2 pet. ii . 2. notes for div a42050-e9600 pet. ii . 2. ●phes . iv . 54 epiph. haer. 8. ●●seb . hist . ● . c. 18. ●ll . constitut . ●t . 12 . ●nc . carthag . ●n . 25 . ●ertull . de ●irg . velandis . jude 3. tertull. ad scapulam . pamel . in locum . tertull. in scorp . hieroymus ● gal. 5. 9. fevard . in renaei praefa august . in e 61. luk. xiv . 23. ●yril . hierosol . ●atech . 6. ●ono . carthag . ●ant . 122. apost . can. conc. antioc can. 2. conc. laod. can. ●9 . apost . can. 66. conc. gangz . can. 5. & 6. lorinus in act. 10. v. 30. aqu. 2. 2. qu. 11. art. 3. maldonat . in luc. 9. v. 55. maldonat . in matth. 13. v. 26. maldonat . in matth. c. 13. 26. cor. viii ▪ 7. socr. l. 5. c. 7. eus . hist . l. 10. cap. 5. eus . de vit. const . l. 2. c. 56. euseb . de vita const . l. 2. c. 45. euseb . de vita const . l. 4 , c. 23. socr. l. 1. c. 18. soz. l. 2. c. 16. soz. l. 2. c , 32. eus . de vita const . l. 4. c. 18 , justin . in ep , de fide orthodoxa . balsam . in coll. const . ex l. 1. co● . blastaris synt ▪ lit . a. blast . syntag. alphab . lit . a. idem ibid. concil . carth. can. 96. matth. 13. 30. chrysost . in locum . tit. 1. 11. 1 cor. 4. 21 , chrysost . in . locum . act. viii . 10. 1 tim. i. 20. 1 tim. i. 19. 2 tim. ii . 18. some thoughts concerning the several causes and occasions of atheism, especially in the present age with some brief reflections on socinianism, and on a late book entitled, the reasonableness of christianity as delivered in the scriptures / by john edwards ... edwards, john, 1637-1716. 1695 approx. 132 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 76 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2003-01 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a38046 wing e215 estc r18870 12283637 ocm 12283637 58808 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a38046) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 58808) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 182:13) some thoughts concerning the several causes and occasions of atheism, especially in the present age with some brief reflections on socinianism, and on a late book entitled, the reasonableness of christianity as delivered in the scriptures / by john edwards ... edwards, john, 1637-1716. [9], 126 [i.e. 142] p. printed for j. robinson ... and j. wyat ..., london : 1695. the reasonableness of christianity (1695) is by john locke. errata: p. 126 [i.e. 142]. reproduction of original in british library. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng locke, john, 1632-1704. -reasonableness of christianity. apologetics -early works to 1800. apologetics -history -17th century. atheism -controversial literature. socinianism -controversial literature. 2002-06 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2002-07 aptara keyed and coded from proquest page images 2002-08 jennifer kietzman sampled and proofread 2002-08 jennifer kietzman text and markup reviewed and edited 2002-10 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion some thoughts concerning the several causes and occasions of atheism , especially in the present age. with some brief reflections on socinianism : and on a late book entituled the reasonableness of christianity as deliver'd in the scriptures . by iohn edwards , b. d. and sometime fellow of s. iohn's college in cambridge . london : printed for i. robinson at the golden lyon , and i. wyat at the role in s. paul's churchyard ▪ mdcxcv . to the most reverend father in god , his grace thomas , by divine providence lord archbishop of canterbury , primate and metropolitan of all england , &c. my lord , your grace being not only by your place and station , but by your own choice and voluntary act , the grand patron of our religion , it cannot be improper to present you with these brief papers , which , though in themselves very mean and inconsiderable , and unworthy of your grace's view , are a vindication of that holy cause against the repeated cavils and bold insults of atheistical spirits , who ( as your grace with a very deep resentment and regret * observes ) are of late grown very numerous . how vigorously your lordship hath attacked this sort of men , is well known to the world ; and that hitherto they have not been able to bring about their impious designs , is in great part owing to your lordship's successful attempts . i presume , from the encouragement which so illustrious an example hath given me , to engage in the same cause , that is , to lay open the folly and absurdity of their pretences , and withall to discover some of those heads and springs whence the atheistick apprehensions of these present times arise , and whereby they are fed and nourished . which i hope will be of good use to those who desire to be caution'd against the venom of this raging evil , and will in some measure operate even on those who are infected and corrupted with it already . i am sensible how precious your grace's minutes are in this time of extraordinary business and emergency ; and therefore i will not be injurious to the publick by any farther applications to your grace . only i superadd my hearty prayers for your health and long life , wherein the common welfare and happiness both of church and state are so much involved : and so i subscribe my self , your grace's most dutiful son , and devoted servant , iohn edwards . the preface . i designing , by the divine help and conduct , to defend the existence and providence of god by arguments drawn both from the greater and the lesser world ; it is my request to the reader , that he would accept of this brief essay in the mean time , which i conceive will be a suitable introduction and preparative to that other vndertaking . for as in that intended discourse i shall carefully trace and discover the footsteps of the divinity every where ; so here i make it my business to shew how frequent an obvious the occasions of disbelieving it are . by which means we shall effectually learn how to purge our minds of those ill qualities which naturally are subservient to atheism ; we shall know how to remove those stumbling-blocks , to answer those objections , and to clear up those mistakes which usually betray men to this infidelity . and thus there will be a way made for what i design . persons will be fitted to receive and retain the impressions which those topicks that i shall afterwards make choice of will enstamp upon their minds : and i hope the age , which hath lately been stigmatized with marks of atheism , will for the future be renowned for these truly illustrious and glorious characters . i will only farther acquaint the reader , that some part of what i here offer ( viz. such particulars as i thought were convenient for an usual and mix'd auditory ) was deliver'd lately in one of the city-pulpits ; and the other heads , with their enlargement ( which are of somewhat a different strain , and are chiefly adapted to the curious and inquisitive ) are an addition since . but as i have added several things , so i have omitted some , at the desire of those who are concern'd in both . this is all that i had to advertise the reader of ; and so i bid him farewel . some thoughts concerning the causes and occasions of atheism . that the world was not void of atheists in king david's time , may be gathered from his words in psalm xiv . 1. the fool hath said in his heart , there is no god. but it is exceedingly to be lamented , that the number of them is much increased since , yea , that it is the unhappiness of this present age , to be pester'd with not a few of them . notwithstanding those cogent and incontestable arguments for a deity which are suggested from the holy scriptures , and the natural reasonings of sober minds , there is still an atheistical spirit prevailing in the world. there is a sort of men ( if i may call them so whole bold infidelity is so irrational and brutish ) that reckon the notion of a god to be a melancholick conceit , and the mere effect of credulity and ignorance . yea , there are some that pass for wits , who strive for the honour of being accounted the most able atheists of the age. wherefore , instead of rehearsing or urging those topicks which are wont to be produced for the proof of the divinity ; my business at present shall be , to enquire into the causes of atheism , which now vaunts it self with an impudent fore-head , and begins to boast that it hath got footing in a great part of the world. i will search into the occasions , either real or pretended ( for i will mention both ) of this reigning mischief . i will shew you on what grounds the impious do at this day not only , with the psalmist's atheistical fool , say in their hearts , but openly and avowedly proclaim to the world , that there is no god , that is , no supreme over-ruling being of infinite perfection , no eternally wise , intelligent , and omniscient substance that at first gave existence to all things , and ever since upholds them , and takes care of them . i. i assign ignorance to be one great spring of this gross unbelief . as knowing as the world is at this day , there are too many people of inferiour rank whose education hath been so unhappy , that they have not been instructed in the common principles of religion ; and they are more unhappy in that they will not allow themselves time and leisure to look into their own minds , and to rouze those inbred notions which are implanted there by god , and which would ( if they would give way ) lead them to him . wherefore it is the concern of all persons , to know how to converse with themselves , and to rifle their own breasts , that they may find a deity written there : and besides , they should be careful to acquire such a stock of knowledge from without , that they may understand their religion , and not be seduc'd by atheistical notions that fly up and down every where . but this first cause which i assign of atheism , is not only to be found in some meaner sort of people who have not time ( as they order their affairs ) to think of a god , but in others of a higher rank and quality : for by ignorance i mean a wilful and sottish stifling of natural notions and impressions : and this sometimes prevails in men of great parts and knowledge . think it not strange that i reckon such persons in the number of the ignorant ; for ( to speak impartially ) they are so : and this was the sense of the * wisest pagans long since . for to have no knowledge , and to stifle it , is the same thing ; which is the case of these men : they make it their business to choak the innate principles of their minds , and to disregard those notices which their natures suggest to them . thus these persons are stubbornly and obstinately ignorant . whatever their pretences and boastings be , their atheism proceeds from want of learning and wit. for 't is not the part of a learned and ingenious man to destroy the notions of mankind , and pull down what hath been built by the universal suffrage of the world , and in its place to erect a conceit of his own . some may take such for brainish and scholar-like sort of men , but then these are so without thinking ; for it is the want of this that makes them what they are . or , to say the best of this kind of men , and atheist is but a half-witted person : he hath perhaps made some attempts in science , but to little purpose : he hath attain'd to some slight and trivial notions ; but hath not penetrated into the heart of things ; and thence it comes to pass , that he is full of doubts and cavils , which he is able to raise , but he hath not skill and ability enough to answer them . wherefore it was excellently said of my lord bacon , * a little philosophy inclines mens minds to atheism ; but depth in philosophy brings mens minds about to religion and a deity . thus though this mis-shapen monster would be thought to be the genuine issue of true wisdom and sound knowledge , yet it is really the daughter of an affected ignorance . wherefore to secure your selves against atheism , be careful that you blind not your minds ; willingly receive the rays of light into your souls , cherish all sound notions and conceptions , and by all proper methods bring your selves to a right understanding , and steady embracing of all the fundamental principles of your religion . ii. there is great disingenuity and unhandsome dealing in the case , else we should not have so much atheism . here i will prove , that they do not act fairly , but that they are ungenteel , which perhaps will affect these persons more than any thing that i can say . what they are willing and forward to grant in other matters , and on other occasions , they refuse to grant here , yea they utterly deny it , though there be the same reason for one as the other . this plainly appears by their objections . as first , they tell us they have no sensible notices of a god , and therefore they can't admit of it ; for all the knowledge ( say they ) which we have of things , is deriv'd to us from sense . but here we see that these men are partial and disingenuous , for they will not deny that there are many things which they judge not of by sense ; they grant that the swiftness of motion oftentimes out-runs the nimblest sense , and the observation of the quickest eye ; yet they do not deny the motion it self : the element of air , in which the daily converse , is not seen , nor is it heard or felt ( unless when 't is extraordinarily moved and disturbed , which is but seldom : ) nor will they say they taste it ; and 't is as certain that they cannot smell it , ( for this is only the vehicle of smells , but is not it self the object of that sense ) and yet these nice gentlemen do not deny the existence of the air. they can by none of their senses discern the motion of the sun , moon , and stars ( or , as perhaps they think it most proper to say , the earth ) , and yet there is not a man of them that denies that they move . it can't be determin'd by sense , whether the sun be bigger than it appears to be , and therefore epicurus ( who was a great man for sense ) held it was of no greater dimension than it seems to the eye to be ; yea , of no greater heat in it self than it seems to the feeling to be here on earth . and the atheistical poet , who borrow'd his notions from him , was of the same mind , nec nimio solis major rota , nec minor ardor esse potest nostris quàm sensibus esse videtur . lucret. lib. 5. this is certain , that the things that are least discernible act most . the animal spirits , which do all the great things in our bodies , are themselves imperceptible . they are the insensible and invisible parts , as spirits , wind , subtile matter , exhalations , which ( being agitated ) do the chiefest exploits in nature . there are fine particles and atoms diffused through all bodies whatsoever ; and these are the cause of sense and motion in animals : by help of these , minerals , plants , and all vegetables , are brought to perfection . these invisible agents effect strange things , and act most wonderfully in the world. the nutritious iuyce in the nerves , if we may credit the famous glisson , is of mighty use and influence : yet ( as he confesses himself ) there are no cavities to be seen to convey it , and none of this succus is ever discern'd in the dissecting of animals . notwithstanding this , some physicians of the most piercing judgment , have granted ( whatever they do now ) the real being of it . and in other instances it might be shewed , that sense is not always made a judge even in sensible objects , but we gather the being and operation of them from reason and discourse . this the persons whom we are now dealing with do not deny , but even practise it themselves , and are willing to allow of it . why therefore are they so void of ingenuity and fair-dealing , as not to admit of the same in the case that is before us ? why do they most irrationally deny a god because they do not apprehend him by bodily sense , whenas they judge not of some other things by sense , nay though they be proper objects of it ? this is a plain proof of these mens wilful prejudice and partiality , especially if i add , that god is infinitely farther removed from our most exalted apprehensions , than the sun ( of which we spoke before ) is from this earth . this glorious sun * dwelleth in that light which no man can approach unto , whom no man hath see , or can see . secondly , they tell us that there are great difficulties in conceiving a god , and they are loth to swallow these down : and more especially the notion of a spirit ▪ i. e. a being that is void of matter and body is too hard to be conceiv'd by them , and therefore seeing we hold god to be a spirit , they can form no conception of him . i will reply to both the parts of this objection distinctly : and first as to the general cavil , that this notion is accompanied with difficulties , i answer , there are great difficulties in other matters , which yet they leap over with ease , and do not disbelieve the things themselves because of the difficulties that attend them . it is very hard to explain how a little wheel of two inches diameter , fixed on the same axil with two greater wheels of ten inches a-piece , moving together ( the greater ones on the ground , the lesser on a table ) should move over the very same space in equal time , with equal rotation with the greater ones : and yet the thing it self is not denied by any one . and many other puzzling problems might be mentioned , where the hardship doth not discourage them from embracing them . but i will instance in one of their own hypotheses , viz. that of atoms , which they chuse to solve the original of the world by , that they may evade the insuperable difficulties ( as they think them ) of the acknowledgment of a god. if they say that these atoms had their existence from themselves , then instead of denying one god , they assert many , for self-existence is of the very nature and essence of a deity ; wherefore if they were all from themselves , they are all gods. if they say that other matter or atoms were the first cause of these , then they run to infinity , and no body is able to trace them . if they say they are of nothing , then they had as good have begun with that , and have confessed in plain terms , that the world was made out of nothing , and then they come to us , but they are resolved they will not do that . thus they are confounded as to the rise and origine of their atoms . then , as to their motion , whence had they that ? either of themselves or of an other ? they could not have it of themselves , for we see it is not of the nature of matter to move : it is in it self a dull and inert , a lumpish and unactive thing . if this motion was impress'd on it by an other , then that was either some other matter , or something else . if they hold the former , they run again in infinitum , and he is a distracted man that will run after them . if they maintain the latter , they betray their cause , and acknowledge a spirit , for there is no real and substantial thing besides matter and spirit . in brief , whether the former or the latter assertion be held by them , they do in a manner own what they deny : for we will not disagree about the name , if we can agree on the thing it self . that being or agent which gave the first motion to things , is god. if after all they say , that matter had this motion by chance , and so was neither from it self or any other , they talk more absurdly and wildly than before ; for chance is a word made to signifie only the unexpected happening of a thing , but doth not import that there was no cause or author at all of it . but however , if they will stand to this ( as generally they do ) that matter at first had a strong power by chance to jump into an orderly system of heavens , earth , sea , &c. then i ask them , what is the reason that there hath been nothing of this nature since ? what reason can be given why all the atoms and effluviums in the several ages and successions of time , ever since this visible world had its being , have not produced some excellent frame either like this world , or of an other nature ? what! is this lucky chance quite ceas'd ? is this fortunate lottery at an end ? is there no probability of a brave fortuitous hit once again ? is there no such fine piece of work as that of sun , moon , and stars , to be expected once more ? no : there is an utter despair of it ; for from eternity ( according to them ) to this moment , we have had no such good luck , and therefore what reason have we to expect any such afterwards ? yea indeed , what ground have these chance-philosophers to think that there ever was any such thing ? what reason have they to declare it to be their firm perswasion that matter was set into motion from eternity , and that by the frisking of its particles , it at last danced into a world ? yet this and all the rest they believe and vouch rather than they will hold that the beginning of things was from an intelligent and wise being . it appears hence , that they will say any thing rather than acknowledge themselves to be in the wrong : they make nothing of talking idly and impertinently , of running into banter and nonsense , as we have heard . they can give credit to this extravagant fancy , that an everlasting juncto of atoms did without counsel and knowledge club together to make the world. they can tamely submit to this unaccountable maxim , that these infinite bodies , after eternal brushings , agitations , encounters , knocking 's , tiltings , justlings , jumblings , fell by mere chance into this excellent frame that we now behold . thus the atheist , to avoid some seeming difficulties , runs into those which are really so , yea into the greatest absurdities imaginable . if it be difficult to conceive the self-existence and eternity of one god , surely it is insuperably so , to conceive infinite matter moving it self , and giving being to it self from all eternity . it is plain then , that these men deal not fairly and uprightly , but wilfully deceive themselves and others . they cry up reason , and yet maintain things which are repugnant to ordinary discourse and the common dictates of reason ; and therefore are rather to be exploded than with much industry to be confuted . they cannot only swallow down , but digest absurdities when they think fit , and at other times they can fancy them where there are none , nor any shadow of any . then as to that particular difficulty , viz. that the notion of a spirit is inconceivable , and therefore they have no conception of a god ; i return this brief answer , that if this which they say be true , if it be impossible to apprehend the idea of a spirit , then there is no such thing : and if so , then matter alone must do all things in the world , but particularly , it must have understanding and knowledge , is must think and reason , for ( whatever the precarious hypothesis of atoms suggests ) the curious frame of this world could not be erected without knowledge and wisdom , and it cannot be kept up and managed without these . now , i appeal to any considerate man , whether the flat denying of this , and the asserting that the dimensions of a body are intellectual , that to be long and to be broad , and to be deep , are acts and exertments of reason or will , and ( in short ) that extension is thinking , be not far greater absurdities than any thing they imagine to be in the notion of a god. it is a sign therefore that these men make difficulties where there are none , and do not take notice of them where they are . i could here prove that our faculties may form as clear , explicit , and distinct an idea of a spirit ( which they so much boggle and startle at ) as they do of their own existence , or any other principle in nature ; but this i have made my task in an other place . thirdly , they tell us they cannot believe a deity , because there are no proper demonstrations to prove it . for you must know , that there persons whom we have to do with at present , are great men for demonstrations . but i answer , the existence of many things in the world cannot be made out by demonstration , strictly so called , and yet no man questions the reality of them . the skilfullest mathematician under heaven can't demonstrate that the sun shines , and yet there is no doubt at all of it , and he would be counted a mad-man that denies it . we are morally certain of many things which we cannot possibly demonstrate ; but this doth not hinder us from yielding a firm assent to them . and 't is certain , that an assent is an firm on moral grounds as on rigid demonstrations , when the matter is capable of no other grounds ; for the evidence is proportionable to the matter to be proved , and that is as much as can be desired by any intelligent man. there can be no greater than a moral certainty of a deity : for there are no grounds of it mathematically demonstrative . but by being morally certain we are certain enough , and as certain as the nature of the thing will bear . this should content any rational man , and it is unreasonable to demand any more . then , as for those demonstrations which they talk so much of , they cannot but acknowledge , that as they are sometimes managed they yield but little certainty . for , not to speak now of the old academicks and scepticks , who denied geometrical principles ; or of demetrius , sextus empiricus , epicurus , zeno , and others of the ancient philosophers who reason'd against them , i will mention some of our moderns ( and those of great skill and learning ) who have disagreed about mathematical proofs , and thereby proclaim to the world their uncertainty . the greatest astrologers hugely differ as to the distance of the sun from the earth . it is nearer to it ten thousand miles than it was , saith copernicus . but i. scaliger would have the writings of those authors who hold the sun is nearer to the earth than 't was in former days , * to be razed out with sponges , or the writers themselves to be corrected with stripes . and other very good astronomers are so far from consenting to this , that they maintain the sun is farther off from the earth than it was at first . and yet on both sides they proceed on mathematical grounds . there is no mathematical demonstration for comets being above or below the moon , saith * ricciolus , a very skilful mathematician : but others of that faculty have pretended much to the contrary . the paralax is well known to be a mathematical business , that by which the planets are judged to be higher or lower : but the greatest astronomers have quarrell'd with one another about this doctrine . tycho is for it ; but claramontius is against it ; and galilaeus even explodes the proof brought from the paralax . dr. wallis and mr. hobbes's contrasts in print , shew that mathematicks are dubious : and this latter ( who was so stiff an opposer of the notion of a spirit , and consequently of a deity ) finds fault with all geometricians , old and new , in his book entituled the principles and ratiocination of geometricians . cartes's dioptricks and geometry are pretended to be baffled by other learned mathematicians , as bourdin , hobbes , fermat . franciscus du laurens , and dr. wallis , scuffle about a mathematical problem . so that it seems it is not an infallible science . i am certain , saith * dr. henry more , that mathematical certitude it self is not absolute . there is an essay of dr. pell to shew the errors and mistakes of the best and most celebrated astronomers for want of better knowledge in geometry . even † monsieur malebranch , a profound admirer and follower of descarts , acknowledges that in his geometry there are some footsteps of the weakness of the humane mind . and i will conclude with the words of one that was known to be eminent in mathematical studies , * even in geometry and arithmetick ( saith he ) how many things are forcibly concluded to be true which are inexplicable , unimaginable , incomprehensible ? thus you see the mathematical certainty which some men talk of , is not so easily to be attain'd as they fancy . disputes have place in geometry ; demonstrations sometimes prove to be paralogisms . but as for a mathematical demonstration for the proof of a god , it is vainly and unreasonably required , because there can be no such thing , for the matter will not bear it . wherefore though † some divines have been great philosophers and mathematicians , yet they never attempted any such thing . a man must not expect to have every thing proved the same way . if we have things evidenced by the arguments which they are capable of , it is satisfactory , and every wise man rests in it . and these men themselves do so in other things : they acquiesce in that evidence which the things admit of , and they seek no farther . which shews , that in the present case they are disingenuous , and cross-grain'd , and act merely out of prejudice ; which was the thing i undertook to make good . their insincerity nourishes their atheism . therefore let us have a care that we give way to no such thing . iii. another cause of this pernicious opinion , is , ostentation of wit. for you may take notice , that this mischievous plant springs from contrary seeds . as before this kind of men put on a very grave and solid countenance , so now they shew themselves to be very pleasant and airy , and set up for the art of drolling . before they appear'd like philosophers , now they come upon the stage like buffoons . then with a magisterial grimace they affected demonstrations ; now nothing will please them but the comical part . it is observable , that they are a sort of jesting , scoffing people , giving themselves to railery and burlesque . and it is this jocular humour that in part betrays them to atheism , for they take liberty to jest with their maker . these witty and facetious folks must needs play with heaven , and laugh god out of his being . they are defective in sound learning and judgment , and in the place of these have a fanciful way of jeering , which they addict themselves immoderately to . democritus was the great asserter of eternal matter , and thought that the casual motion of it was the cause of all things : the influence of which principle in his cogitations , made him at last laugh at every thing he saw , and mock at all actions and occurrences of humane life ; for 't is certain that if they are all by chance , they are to be denied . the followers of this great man have learnt from him to be laughing philosophers ; and there are abundance of this sect now-a-days . this i look upon as one cause of the great atheism of this age. they think their tongues are their own , and they may say what they please ; and they perswade themselves , that what is wittily said is well said . hence these sparks venture to ridicule religion , to scoff at virtue and piety , and to mock god himself . then at last they really believe what they fancy'd , and jestingly utter'd ; and they assert in good earnest what at first perhaps was said only in merriment . wherefore , to guard your selves from atheism , be always very serious , and abhor the sportful vein , the flashy fancy of these men , who think they can't be men of parts unless they make a mock of god and religion . whereas the brightest and most accomplish'd heads ever exploded this : and in our own nation we have abundant instances of this , that even the * wisest and the wittiest men ( tho no church-men or divines ) have express'd their deep sense of god and serving him , and defied the contrary profane atheistical humour . iv. pride and self-conceit may justly be reckon'd another spring of atheism . men in this and former ages have thought it below them to go tamely along with the generality of mankind in asserting a deity . they would be thought wiser than others : and consequently they affect to go against a commonly receiv'd notion . but more particularly these high-flyers account it base and sneaking to listen to an old story of religion , and to submit their belief to the harangues of the parsons , as they are pleas'd to word it . especially great men are apt to be possessed with this pride , and consequently to be atheistical . they strongly incline to king alphonsus's impious bravado , that if he had been present at the creation , he would have framed the world better than 't is now . there is in many an excessive desire of a name and vogue : and they think to obtain them by scorning the common way , and going out of the beaten road , by giving the lye to all mankind . and though one would think that they might shew the subtilty of their wit by diving farther into things than the vulgar , and not by casting off the agreed sentiments of mankind ; by refining and improving the principles of nature , and not by nulling and evacuating them ; yet they choose the latter , that they may ( as they think ) give the greater proof of their wit and parts , and that it may be seen that they are able to weather a cause be it never so bad . to maintain this all sober considerations are postpon'd : they superciliously renounce ( when they are in the humour ) all reason and arguments ; they arrogantly resolve to hold the conclusion , whatever becomes of the poor premises . atheism owes its being much to this , as i apprehend ; as i think it it is sufficiently evident from what i have said before , when i shew'd that they chuse rather to maintain the greatest absurdities , than to adhere to a received truth . wherefore that we may effectually prevent this folly in our selves , let us banish presumption , confidence , and self conceit ; let us extirpate all pride and arrogance ; let us not list our selves in the number of capricious opiniatours . v. undue apprehensions of a deity joyn'd with superstition are the high road to atheism . those that think amiss of god will easily be enclined to question his existence . it is too true that men model the divinity according to their own fancies : the creature fashions his creator . or , like him that engraved his own image in that of the goddess , they shape themselves and figure out their own absurd notions and conceits , whilest they pretend to give the pourtraiture of god. therefore imposing of false doctrines concerning the attributes of god is very pernicious , for they are destructive of his very being and nature . it is no wonder that when these come to be scann'd and examined , men doubt of the very existence of god , because so irrational and absured things are attributed to him . they are loth to think there is such a one , or they wish there were not . so that they endeavour to destroy that which they can't endure . thus mistakes and misprisions concerning god lead to atheism . false conceptions of a deity expunge at last the belief of one . and so 't was of old in paganism , idolatry was the great mother of atheism : gross superstition undermined the godhead . it hath been falsly and blasphemously said that * fear was it which first introduced a god into the world : but yet it is certainly true that this with some persons hath expelled the notion of him out of the world : for they being timerous and melancholick create to themselves strange fancies concerning him whom they are to worship , and represent him to their thoughts as severe and tyrannical . and the gentile priests and rulers laid hold on this passion of fear , and did what they could to promote and heighten it , that thereby they might keep the people in awe . to which purpose they invented innumerable rites and ceremonies , many of which were harsh , troublesom and afflictive . so that bigotry and excess in religion made way for none at all : and when they were wearied with the intolerable burden of it they cried out , with that nonsensical atheist , tantum religio potuit suadere malorum . then religion it self and the author of it were discarded . this was caused by the undue representations which were made of god : the priests would have the superstitious bigots believe that the divine numen could not be appeased without those wild observances . this is that which plutarch took notice of , telling us that * from such gross , absurd and extravagant devotion men came to disregard a diety , and to conclude there is none rather than to believe there can be such a one , one that is delighted with so unaccountable ceremonies and usages . therefore , to shut out atheism , let us have right conceptions of the supreme being whom we worship and serve . it concerns us to assert rightly the notion of god , lest otherwise we slide into a disbelief of any . who misrepresenteth the divine being is in a ready way to deny him . vi. corrupt affections and lives ( for i will joyn both these together , because they are never asunder ) make men atheists . men of depraved minds and manners doubt of all religions because they like none , and at last they flatly deny what they love not . an atheist first desires and wishes no god , and his desires and wishes work on his understanding . his willingness to have it so enclines him to believe it . he easily credits what he longs for : his affection corrupts his judgment . thus the indulging of lust and vice dispose a man to atheism . to which purpose observe the soil where this poisonous weed springs up , grows , and thrives most , viz. in the courts of debauch'd princes , among such nobility and gentry , and in great cities where vicious and prophane living is most in fashion . they are lewd and dissolute in their manners , and give themselves up wholly to the satisfying of their lusts : and this naturally prejudices them against the belief of a god and a life to come . nothing doth so much extinguish all apprehensions of these as carnal pleasures . he that lives dissolutely and wickedly can't easily entertain the notion of a god , for 't is counter to his course of living . therefore he goes on in his debauchery , and huffs and swaggers , and perhaps swears by the divinity that there is none . it is plain that this sort of men decry a god , because they would not be obliged by his laws . sensuality makes them desirous to remove all stops of a wicked life , and therefore they whet their wits ( such as they are ) to annihilate religion , and to extirpate a deity . an abhorrence of the practical part of piety engages them against the theory . their lives influence on their belief . they are addicted to atheism by their lewd and prophane courses . for we must observe this , that these two mutually advance one an other . as atheism is the highway of wickedness ( which the psalmist takes notice of when he saith , the fool hath said in his heart , there is no god : corrupt are they , and have done abominable iniquity , psal. 53. 1. ) so 't is as true that wickedness is the original of atheism and infidelity . for 't was rightly said by a great man , * none deny there is a god but those for whom it maketh that there were no god. for they know that if there be one , he will certainly judg them for their evil doings . they cannot therefore be secure in their sins unless the notion and remembrance of a deity be blotted out . it is their supposed interest then , not their reason , that makes them deny a god ; for it is their concern to be perswaded , that there is none to punish them . briefly , they are unwilling to believe any thing but what their lust shall put into their creed . thus you see the true reason of the atheism of these times . it is fed and pamper'd by luxury ; the constant fumes and steams of this affect the brain , and discompose the intellect . practical atheism leads to that which is dogmatical , i. e. holding and believing that there is no god. evil and perverse minds , profane and debauch'd lives , strangely byass and incline men to this . wherefore if you would effectually shut out this vile perswasion , take care to suppress your evil affections and practices , for these are wont to court mens understandings to turn atheists . vii . atheists take occasion from our divisions , broils , and animosities , from the many parties and squadrons of sects that are in the world , to bid defiance to all religion ; and they resolve to profess none till they can see them all agreed . thus * tully observed of old , that the dissentions of philosophers , the various sentiments and opinions that prevail'd among them were a cause of some mens denying a deity , at least of their staggering about it . and truly this observator himself , in his books de natura deorum , is so given to the academical vein of disputing , that he seems sometimes to be irresolv'd whether there is any god or no. so it hath been among some of those who have taken upon them the external denomination of christians . the differences in opinion , the errors and heresies which they take notice of , cause them to suspect yea to renounce all truth . a great deal of the atheism of this present age may be ascrib'd to this . some behold the great scufflings that are about religion , not only the single combates , but the pitch'd batelts that are about it , and thereupon they discard all thoughts of any such thing , and become perfect libertines . and herein they are promoted and push'd on by such persons as the author of fiat lux and the treatise of humane reason , who both design scepticism , and so atheism . but though it is thus , though the different perswasions about religious matters have this ill effect , yet this can be no true reason why any man should renounce the belief of a god. for he that is truly rational and considerate , will rather make this an argument of the contrary : for it was foretold by * christ and his † apostles , that errors and delusions should be in the world , and therefore the fulfilling of these prophecies be as witness not only to the truth of the writings of the new testament , and consequently of christianity , but of the divinity it self . for things of this nature , which depend wholly on free and arbitrary causes , cannot be foretold without divine and supernatural help . none but an all-seeing eye could have a prospect of these future occurrences . the predicting of such things to come is an evidence of an omniscient deity . and then as to the thing it self , why should any man think it strange and unaccountable that there are dissentions in christendom ? he may as well wonder that there are men in the world ; for as long as these retain their nature , i. e. are subject to prejudice , love of interest , passion , pride , and the like , there will be errors and heresies , for these proceed from some of those ill principles : and unless god should change the frame of the world , and destroy the freedom of man's will , i. e. make him another creature , it cannot be otherwise . how unreasonably then do men question a god , and cry out against religion it self because they see so many of this sort of disorders in the world ? whereas it is certain , that it is not the fault of religion that things are thus , but they are thus because men have so little religion . again , the cheats and delusions that are in the world are useful for the trial of mankind , that ( as the apostle saith ) they who are approved may be made manifest , 1 cor. 11. 19. i do not say they were design'd for this ( for no evil is design'd by god ) yet it is certain they are expedient for this purpose ; and there is no better way to have an experiment of the upright judgment , sincerity , faithfulness , and constancy of persons , than by their being expos'd to these impostures . lastly , god deservedly punishes men with erroneous and false doctrines . 2 thess. 2. 10 , 11. because they receive not the love of the truth ( yea because they hate it , and oppose themselves to it ) and have pleasure in unrighteousness , for this cause he sends them strong delusion , that they shall believe a lye , and that they shall defend and maintain it . it is just with god to leave men to the error and blindness of their minds , and judicially to give them over the atheistical perswasions when they have wilfully debauch'd and abused their faculties . this is the dreadful , but just judgment of god ; and i doubt not but the present atheism of this age is such . thus it is evident that errors and dissentions about religion are so far from being arguments of the non-existence of a deity , that they are undeniable proofs of it . let not then the diversity of sects and the disputes of wrangling heads ( as particularly the late upstart contrast between the unitarians and trinitarians ) prejudice us against our christian faith. but let us rather be stirr'd up hence to hold fast the principles of our belief , and to own a deity when there are so many in this degenerate age that deny it . and withal , let us endeavour to banish atheism by doing so to our divisions : let us lay aside our religious squabbles , and arrive at last to a happy agreement in doctrine , that we may hereby cut off occasion of atheistick unbelief on this account . however , though in some points we can't fully accord , let us not be hot and firy against one another , as if charity were no virtue with us . viii . there is something more heinous than divisions , which frequently occasions atheism , and confirms men in it ; and that is , the hypocrisie and evil practices of too many that make a very fair profession of christianity . whilst it is observ'd that they talk religiously , and pretend to holiness , but do nothing of what they talk of or pretend to ; whilst it is seen that they have a form of godliness , but deny the power thereof ; whilst it is evident that they cry the temple of the lord , the temple of the lord , and yet are unhallowed in their lives ; whilst it is known that they lay claim to the spirit , but are carnal and sensual in their manners , and enterprize very vile things for their worldly profit and advantage ; in short , whilst it is observ'd that the behaviour of sundry of the avowed professors of christianity is unanswerable to their principles , there is a sort of men that for the sake of these , presently conclude all to be hypocrites , and christianity it self to be an imposture . this then i grant , that the unbecoming lives of christians are an unhappy occasion of atheism sometimes , but they can never be alledged as a sufficient one . for what though there be mere pretenders to godliness ? doth it thence follow that there is none at all ? what though there are great numbers of religious impostors ? must i therefore thence conclude that all professors of religion are an errant cheat ? then by the same logick i may peremptorily infer , that there is no such metal as silver , because by too noted experience we find at this day that it is generally counterfeited ; and there is no such thing as true coin , because so much is adulterated amongst us . no man of sense will make these conclusions : and 't is as certain , that he can with as little reason make the others . let us not then be abused by unsound and fallacious inferences : let us not think there is no religion because there are so many unworthy retainers to it . yea , let us be fully convinced of this , that though christianity hath been , and is to this day abused and sophisticated , and thereby dishonoured ; yet it is a reality , and we may venture our lives upon it . and seeing the evil deportment of some that profess christianity is the greatest encouragement to atheism and vice , let us all make it our great business to adorn our profession with a holy , strict , and exemplary conversation . let our light so shine before men , that others seeing our good works may be so far from denying , that they may glorifie god. and let us pray for the arrival of that happy day ( and i hope it is not very far off ) when religion shall universally bear sway upon earth , and when men shall be throughly convinced of the real worth of christianity from the practices of those that profess it . ix . in the next place , more particularly , the ill examples of some who by their office are spiritual guides and instructors , are mention'd as another great occasion of irreligion and atheism . it is necessary to take notice of this , because it is alledged ( but very frequently without ground ) by the sworn patrons of that cause which i am now pleading against . they observe of some of this order of men , that they urge virtue and holiness with great warmth and pathetick zeal , and yet are very cold , yea wholly neglectful in the practice of them , and visibly favour those vices and enormities which they disswade others from : whence it is no wonder ( say they ) that these persons are not believed to be in good earnest , yea that they are thought not to believe themselves , i. e. to be really perswaded that those things are true which they discourse of ; for it is seen , that their lives wholly contradict their doctrine . whence this rash conclusion is made , that preaching is a meer trade , that the ministerial function is a cheat , and that religion it self is so too , and that a deity is no other . thus where is there more of atheism than in italy , the pope's own soil , part of which is call'd holy land ? which the observing * author of europae speculum ( who had convers'd in his travels with the italians , and knew them very well ) attributes to the gross wickedness of the roman clergy , and particularly of the popes and cardinals , of whose scandalous speeches and actions the people of that country have a greater knowledge than others . they are not ignorant that several popes were inclined to be atheists ; as paul 3. when he was dying told the standers by , that he should now know three things , viz. whether the soul be immortal , whether there be a hell , and whether there be a god. and iohn 23. ( as is plain from that council of constance by whom he was deposed ) profess'd that he look'd upon religion as a fable , and god and the soul's immortality as such . and they dayly behold the lewd and dissolute practices of some of the cardinals and prelates , abbots , monks , and of their parish-priests , which very thing ( as the foresaid author observes ) makes them the most irreligious people in the world , yea causes them to defie all religion for their sakes . especially they conclude , that there is nothing true and real in christianity , because so many of the eminent pretenders to it and assertors of it , live continually in opposition to all religious principles and practices , and are seen to be guilty of the most horrid impieties , of the most execrable villanies that are to be imagined . their being so near to the head of that religion ( as he is stiled ) makes them averse to the whole kind . and this is in some measure the case of people in other countreys , where even the protestant faith is professed , but is accompanied with the scandalous lives and lewd practices of some that are immediately concern'd in holy things , and whose employment it is to direct others in religion . but to speak impartially to any considerate person , this cannot yield an occasion of being atheistical : for though the manners of some of the sacred function be offensive , yet 't is irrational and absurd to blast all religion for their misdemeanours . we do not read that our saviour condemned the iewish church and mosaick law because of the hypocrisie and wickedness of the chief priests , scribes , and doctors of the law. nay , he tells the people , all that they bid you observe , that observe and do ; but do not ye after their works , matth. 23. 3. as much as if he had said , the moral law , and all the offices of religion , are not in the least discredited by the vicious manners of some of your teachers . be careful that you imitate them not in their practices ; but be very observant of the holy doctrine which they deliver ; entertain no ill thoughts of it , because of the corrupt lives of your guides . the like may be said now ; the faults and miscarriages of any ecclesiastical persons must not be charged on the sacred institution of christ ; we ought not to think ill of christianity for the disorderly behaviour of any spiritual officers in the church . we see that there is no man refuses to follow a learned physician 's prescriptions and rules concerning health , because he doth not observe them himself . nor can the spiritual patient with any reason reject the rules of saving health and happiness , though they are not observ'd by the prescriber himself . but to be yet more plain with the persons i am now dealing with , they ( of all men ) cannot with any tolerable pretence make use of this plea : they cannot complain of the lives of the clergy as administring to their disregard of religion , for the more strict and religious any church-man is , the more is he despised and hated by them . a pious clergy-man is reckon'd by them a weak shallow creature , a fantastick bigot , and is laugh'd at as such . so that it is evident , that what they alledge concerning the undue behaviour of some that serve at the altar , is a more groundless cavil ; for they would have all men as wicked and debauch'd as themselves . it must indeed be acknowledged , that this is a great scandal , and of very pernicious consequence , and such as is not to be permitted with impunity in the church : but it is no excusable ground of impiety and atheism . however , since it is so heinous in it self , and is made by the perverse minds of many an excuse for their atheism , it is the concern of all christian guides of souls to be examples to the flock , to conform their lives with great circumspection and exactness to the laws of christ jesus their master , and to take care to perform themselves whatever they require others to do . x. unbelief of a god is occasion'd sometimes by the strange revolutions and changes , the odd events , and unaccountable administrations that are in the world. especially men are inclined to question god's existence as well as his providence when they behold the prosperous state of the most vicious persons , and on the contrary , observe how miserably sometimes the best men are treated in this life , and at death are not at all differenc'd from the worst , but perish alike . then you shall hear one cry out , quis putet esse deos ? and another uses the like language of the poet , dum rapiant mala fata bonos , — sollicitor nullos esse putare deos. but any understanding man , who will take time to consider and deliberate , will see that nothing of this nature can justly administer matter of atheism . for is must be remembred , that we are finite shallow creatures , and are not able to comprehend the wise designs and purposes of heaven in every event that we see : and therefore when we meet with obscure and rugged dispensations , and such as seem to be very disorder'd and irregular , we have no reason to find fault with them , and to think them unworthy of god , and of divine providence , because we are not able to make a judgment of them . those events which seem to be excentrick and at random , are guided by a steady unerring hand : but we have not depth of apprehension to conceive it at present . but it may be afterwards , when our minds are more enlightned , we shall know how to solve these difficult phoenomena . however , at the last day all these intrigues , these knots , these labyrinths , these riddles , shall be fully resolved ; and it shall be part of our employment in the other world , to admire and adore the infinite wisdom of god in the disposal of the affairs here on earth . and particularly we shall then be satisfied , yea we may be now , concerning the foresaid problem , viz. the prosperity of the wicked , and the contrary circumstances of the good ; for 't is evident , that these are according to exact justice and wisdom . god intended the former should have their portion in this life only ; and he designed the latter to be prepared for heaven by those rougher dealings here below . lastly , learned times , especially if accompanied with peace or prosperity , are reckon'd by a * judicious person as another cause of atheism . nor is this inconsistent with what i said before , that ignorance is the mother of atheism . for learned or peaceable times are only thus far conducible to this great evil , that men are then generally too inquisitive and curious , too nice and wanton , and over-busily pry into secrets ; which when they cannot satisfie themselves about , they are inclined to be atheistical , and to doubt even concerning the chief things of religion . wherefore i question not but the starting and keeping up at this day the debates about the doctrine of the holy trinity are a great advancement to this evil disposition of mind . there are those who push on both parties to wrangle and quarrel about this grand point , and in the mean time laugh at the combatants on both sides . whilst they encourage some writers to baffle the trinity of divine persons , their project is to destroy the essence it self . whilst they put them upon maintaining the unity of the godhead , they hope in the close of the dispute to introduce a nullity not only of the deity , but of all religion . for by these bandyings backward and forward , they know that mens minds will be unsettled and that they will be apt to waver about the truth and certainty of the main articles of our religion . when persons observe , that the very divinity of our blessed lord and saviour is toss'd and torn by rude pens ; when they see so catholick a doctrine attack'd with such violence ; what can they think of the other great verities of christianity ? and withall , the anti-trinitarians hereby provoke some of their adversaries to an indecent sort of language concerning these holy mysteries : so that some of these latter have hurt the cause it may be almost as much by their defending it , as the others have by their opposing it . thus it must needs be when persons immoderately indulge curiosity in these abstruse and sublime matters , and will not be content with what the bible and immediate inferences drawn thence suggest to us . by this means they lose their hold , and give their antagonists a clear advantage against them , and manifestly promote the design of those who make it their work to make void the notion of a deity . nay , in the very socinian doctrine it self there seems to be an atheistick tang. would not a man guess that there is in approach to atheism in those reflections which are made on a sermon preach'd by the right reverend bishop of worcester , * where one of the most receiv'd notions concerning the nature of the deity it self is cashier'd . the self-existence of god , which is the primary , fundamental , and essential property , and is the very life and soul of the explicatory part of the doctrine of the deity , is peremptorily pronounced by them to be a contradiction . it is well known , socinus , and crellius , and others of this party , deny god's immensity , i. e. his being present every where as to his essence and nature . all of them agree , that he hath not a knowledge and foresight of every thing that happens in the world , for future contingencies are hid from him . particularly * socinus largely argues against this praescience , and tells us , that he is to be laugh'd at that asserts the contrary . nay , it is farther observable , that this great patriarch of the present cause disowns the immaterial or spiritual nature of god , as may be undeniably gather'd from his † exposition of iohn . 4. 24. and other passages in his writings . and he is followed by crellius , as is manifest from that account which this latter gives of a spirit , when ‖ he speaks of the nature of god. he doth not make it to be any thing above a refined body , a substance void of all gross matter , such as the air or aether is . so that when these men call god a spirit , their meaning is , that he is a fine and tenuious sort of matter , not that he is wholly incorporeal , and altogether free from matter . this is the same with mr. hobbs's corporeal god. thus four of the chief attributes of the deity , viz. self-existence , omnipresence , omniscience , and spirituality , are either in whole or in part rejected . whereupon , i ask this question , whether these things do not discover a tendency ( to say no more ) in the anti-trinitarians to that which i am charging them with ? for to assert a god ▪ and yet to deny some of his choicest properties ( whereby we know him to be god ) is in effect the same with denying a deity . if they distinguish between the english and foreign socinians ( as i perceive they do ) and tell us that the former do not assert the things before mention'd , i answer , the very english prints avouch the first of those particulars : and as for the rest , they being the doctrine of the chief patrons of the socinian cause , yea and of the most of them , the english unitarians are involved in them , because those foreigners are the greatest and most substantial part of that body of men call'd socinians . thus the trinitarian scheme of religion , drawn up by some english socinians of late is thought by them to touch all the trinitarians ( else it could not be stiled the trinitarian scheme ) though every individual trinitarian doth not hold all those things mentioned there . let them apply this , and they will have nothing to object . and further , i would argue from their own avowed principle , which is that they are to admit of nothing but what is exactly adjusted to nature's and reason's light , nothing but what is entirely clear and evident : for though it is true some socinian writers of late have laid aside this notion ( and truly we may observe that they are shifting every day their arguments , and so we know not where to have them ) yet he that is acquainted with the writings that make up the main body of socinianism knows full well that this is a principle constantly asserted and maintain'd by the generality of them , and upon all occasions insisted upon . this hath been the stanch notion of the great dons of the party , and of the famous socinus himself . and slicktingius , though he seems indeed sometimes to be otherwise perswaded , yet comes to this at last , that the trinity is a doctrine that can't be borne , because it can't be understood . and why do * * crellius and others argue from reason and logical arguments against the trinity , if they do not refuse the doctrine upon the account of reason ? and it is certain they would not do this if they were not perswaded that these things in religion must be adjusted to natural reason , and that they are displeased with the doctrine of the trinity and incarnation , &c. because these are not exactly squared to their natural notions . you see then what is the sentiment of the greatest rabbies of this way , and therefore we must make our estimate of the socinian or antitrinitarian doctrine from these , and not from one or two modern writers . this i think will be granted by all men of reason . but what if it doth appear that even the very english and modern socinians , though they seem to wave this principle , do yet retain it , and govern themselves by it ? else why do they complain that * they have no conception of the trinity as the trinitarians represent it to them , they cannot form an idea of it ; it is a notion that excites no idea's in their minds ; it is against reason and natural light ? we are advised by the modern pen-men † to consult our reason about the thing in question ; and if we do so , we shall find an absolute impossibility in the trinitarian doctrine : our reason will assure us that an almighty father and an almighty son are most certainly two gods , and that two creators can be no other than two gods : therefore we may , and we must infer that the explication of the first verses of st. john 's gospel , which advance such a doctrine , is certainly false . again , the english socinians tell us that ‖ the doctrine of the trinity clashing altogether with our natural idea's can be no matter of revelation , and therefore ought not to be believ'd . and hear their final and resolute determination , which fully speaks their absolute adherence to this principle , † we abide by this argument , here we fix our foot , never to be removed , that the inconsistence of the trinity ( as well as the incarnation ) with reason and natural knowledge being undeniably evident , therefore this doctrine can have no real foundation in divine revelation , that is to say , in holy scripture . and we find that our english unitarians * argue from reason in this point , and they declare that they cannot believe it because reason doth not teach it . thus we find that the bottom of all is , the trinity and such like doctrines are above their reason , and natural idea's , and therefore they are no matter of their faith. this is it which the reverend person before named charges these men with in a great part of his * sermon : and certainly he would not have done it if there were no such persons in being . it is too plain that there are such , and i think i have proved it from their own mouths . the sum of their opinion and resolution if this , that there is nothing difficult and abstruse in religion , and that they will not believe any thing in christianity but what they can make out by reason : otherwise it must be discarded presently . now , to apply this principle of the antitrinitarians ; we are assured that we cannot by searching find out god , job 11. 7. his infinite nature and immense essence are not commensurate to our conceptions , are not adjusted to our idea's , but are far above them : it is impossible that the apprehensions of finite creatures should reach these things : therefore according to the foresaid principle , the unitarians are not obliged to believe any such things ; they must not admit of the infinite nature of god , concerning which our conceptions will always be obscure and unproportionate ; yea , they cannot but infer from their own maxim , that god is an impossible being , at least that his immense nature is such . they cannot comprehend and conceive the manner of the immense and infinite presence or knowledge of god ; therefore they must disown the things themselves . thus by vertue of their own profess'd principle , the godhead it self as well as the trinity is shock'd by them : and consequently one would be apt to gather that a socinian , so far as he is led by this principle , is an atheist , or ( lest that should seem harsh ) one that favours the cause of atheism . for he may as well quit the belief of a god because of these difficulties and abstrusities in the nature of god , as renounce the doctrine of the trinity , because there are some inexplicable and unintelligible things that accompany it . but because all men do not follow the natural conduct of their principles ( the divine providence over-ruling in these cases ) i do not here pass an universal censure , i do not speak of every individual man , nay i hope charitably concerning most of them . however , it is to be fear'd , that some are unhappily under the force and sway of the foregoing principle ; and these are the persons i speak of , and no other . these things i freely and openly suggest . which the learned and ingenious gentlemen of the racovian perswasion cannot dislike , unless they disapprove of themselves , unless they disclaim their own writings ; for they cry up in almost all of them ( and in * one very lately ) a freedom of discourse , a liberty of speaking their thoughts , which they applaud as a very generous and noble thing , and much value themselves upon it . they cannot deny that to me which they allow of and magnifie in themselves , especially when i most sacredly profess to them that i have sincerely delivered my thoughts , and spoken what i conceive to be the words of truth and soberness . wherefore i expect to be approved of by persons of their ingenuity and free temper , who ( as i find ) blame others ( even some of the clergy ) for palliating and dissembling , and not speaking out . i think they will not charge me with this fault , for i have acted according to their own generous principles : and i must tell them there is not a friend of theirs in all their dear eleutheropolis that is more disingaged and unbyass'd than i am . but though i have used a becoming freedom , yet there are some things that i omit , because i would let the world see that i am not eager and lavish in blaming and censuring any party of men , especially since it is suggested to me by some that are learned and sober of that perswasion , that it is hard that their opinion should suffer for the ill consequences of it , or for the insincerity of any that profess it , or by reason of the rash indiscreet passages which occurr in some of their late writers . i do it likewise because i would give the world an example of moderation and temper in this disputing and wrangling age ; that it may be seen , that whilst i remonstrate against the errors and mistakes ( as i suppose them to be ) of any side , i can forbear to publish the aggravations of them , and that i had rather the truth should prevail than the contrary opinion , or the maintainers of it should be exposed . finally , i consider that it is improper and unseasonable to contend among our selves at home whilst our armies are engaging the enemy abroad . the proper antidote belonging to this head of my discourse is this ; let us make a difference between finite beings and that which is infinite : for seeing there is such a vast difference between them , we ought to observe it . we cannot form the same conceptions of one and the other ; yea the latter is exalted above our reach and comprehension ; wherefore let us be satisfied , that the properties of an infinite being ( such as god is ) are incomprehensible , and therefore that may be possible in the infinite nature of god ( as namely that it is communicable to three distinct persons ) which is impossible in the finite nature of man or other creatures . let us attend to that which may be known , and that clearly and distinctly , and not trouble our thoughts and wrack our brains about unsearchable mysteries . a lover of peace as well as truth should not be so much sollicitous about the manner of the three personalities or subsistencies as about the trinity it self . we are sure of the latter , as sure as the scripture can make us ; therefore it doth not become us to wrangle about the former ; especially when we find that ill-minded men make use of this quarrel to promote the cause of atheism ; and truly they make advances towards it every day . i proceed to other doctrines which administer to this great evil which i have been speaking of , and which may justly be reckoned among the blemishes of these inquisitive times . such is that of a * late writer , that the books of the old testament were not written by those persons whose names they bear , that the historical parts of the bible are lame and imperfect , and repugnant to themselves ; that the writings were not carefully and faithfully transmitted to us , but abound with many faults and mistakes , that the books of the prophets are mere scraps and fragments , and taken without order and method from other writings . all which put together , destroys the authority of divine revelation , and consequently of all reveal'd religion , from whence we have the strongest and most pregnant arguments for a deity . again , the same design is advanced in these learned times by thrusting of opinions and theories on the world in defiance of the plain letter and historical part of the bible : as if the sacred history , which was written by inspired men , were not as credible and authentick as that of prophane authors . the frame of the primitive earth is represented opposite to what moses tells us it was : the account which he gives of paradise ( as it is a particular place ) is contradicted , yea it is strongly averr'd , that there never was any such thing . what moses relates concerning our first parents is laugh'd at as a romantick story . the universal deluge in noah's time is attributed to an accidental diruption of the earth ; which when scann'd , is found to be fictitious and imaginary , and thence the deluge it self is concluded by many to be so ; and moses is reckon'd by them as an impostor . which is taken notice of , and thus animadverted upon by a curious observer , and one who ( as becometh so learned an head ) joyns religion with his philosophical researches , * the atheistical party had hereby an occasion ( saith he ) boldly to give out that such a deluge as that described by moses was altogether incredible , and that there never was , nor could be any such thing . nothing was talk'd of among them under mathematical demonstrations of the falshood of it , which they vented with all imaginable triumph , and would needs have it that they had here sprung a fresh and unanswerable argument against the authentickness of the mosaick writings ; which is indeed what they drive at , and a point they very fain would gain . for if the pen-man of the first book in the bible be found tripping , then the credit of all the rest falls to the ground ; we may justly question their fidelity , yea deny whatever they say . and so the bible falls , and with it all our religion , and with that necessarily a deity , which is the thing ultimately aimed at , i do not say by the first hand from whence these notions came ( for i charitably hope better things of so learned a person , especially since he hath shew'd himself not unwilling to retract them ) but by those ill-minded men who make their markets of these opinions . all that i will add here is this , that if ( according to a learned * doctor of the sorbon ) it be a very dangerous paradox to presume to deny that the pentateuch was composed by moses , and accordingly hobbes and spinosa are condemn'd by him for using arguments to that purpose , then surely it must be much more dangerous and pernicious to hold that any part of moses's writings is mere forgery and fiction , i. e. was designed only to comply with the ignorant iews at that time , and doth not contain matter of fact . i have said something of this nature in another place , and on another account , but i never had occasion before to represent it as an unhappy handle which atheistically disposed persons may lay hold upon . wherefore let those who are philosophically disposed take warning hence , and forbear to prefer their own precarious hypotheses before the plain account which this inspired historian gives of those first things in the world. let none presume to represent the writings of this first author as false , in order to make their own true , and thereby to gratifie the worst sort of men . i need not say more here , because i have already antidoted against the infection of these two last heads , viz. in those discourses wherein i have treated of the authority and perfection of the scriptures . in the next place , learned enquirers are apt to give encouragement to atheism by an obstinate endeavouring to solve all the phoenomena in the world by mere natural and corporeal causes , and by their averseness to admit of the aid and concurrence of a supernatural or immaterial principle for the production of them . the mechanick philosophy hath done a great deal of mischief on this account : not but that ( so far as it ought to be made use of ) it is generally the most excellent ( because the most plain and sensible ) way of displaying the operations of natural bodies : and it cannot be denied , that since this hath been revived and entertain'd , there hath been that improvement in natural philosophy which never was thought of before , and which could never have been attain'd by the aristotelian way : yet this is to be said with truth and reason , that the great reviver and manager of it hath carried it on too far by undertaking to give an account of all effects and events in the production of vegetables and animals , and in the very formation and organization of the body of man himself by mere mechanick principles , thereby in a manner ascribing divinity to matter and motion . this great philosophick wit over-shot himself here : and though it is true he hath otherways ( viz. by asserting the notion of souls or spirits , and by demonstrating the essential and real difference from bodies ) made some part of amends for this , yet there are many at this day who make very ill use of this doctrine . some take occasion thence to believe , that men as well as brutes are no other than engines and machines , mere neurospasts and senseless puppets . others build upon this notion the conceit of thinking matter , for if pores and particles do all things in the bodies of brutes , it is probable they serve instead of souls to those of humane race : and so a spiritual and immaterial principle is excluded . this philosophy is vain deceit , and too many are spoil'd by it . but they should consider that the noble french philosopher himself did not believe all that he wrote . malebranch , who was a great admirer and defender of him , tells us , that he never pretended that things were made in that manner that he describes them * . yea , we have des cartes's own word for it , † i require not any one , saith he , to believe that bodies which compose this visible world were ever produced in that way which i have represented them . it seems by his own confession , that he was not in good earnest in all the parts of his philosophy , and therefore we may gather that in some of the particulars aforemention'd he only propounded his conjectures . we might carry this thought yet farther , and observe that the generality of the modern philosophers ( not only cartesians , but others ) have contributed much to atheism , by referring all things , not only in organiz'd bodies but in every part of the world , and all the phoenomena that we take notice of in it to a corporeal principle , and to the efficiency and power of this alone . whereas , it is certain that there are many things which happen in the world that cannot be solv'd any other way than by the superintendence of a spiritual being . there are several wonderful occurrences which no man can give an account of , but by supposing an almighty immaterial agent , which is no other than god. thus we must be constrained to repair to an incorporeal principle to solve the cause of the seas constant ebbing and flowing , and the attraction of the loadstone , and the hanging of the clouds , and many other phoenomena in nature : for the accounts that are given are imperfect and inconsistent , and do no ways satisfie any serious enquirer . a man that is not willing to be put off with slight and insufficient suggestions , cannot rest in them as true causes of those things . only philosophical men will be assigning some reasons of things , whether they can or no : and this is an inclination which is incident to the best and wisest naturalists in all ages . but they may as reasonably undertake to shew whence it is that the sun hath its continual motion from east to west , or ( as they would rather express it ) why the earth wheels about upon its axis from west to east : which yet i do not see attempted by any philosopher whatsoever ; and yet there is as much reason for the one as the other . so for gravity , that known affection of bodies whereby they are inclined towards the same common center , it seems not to be solved by any principles of mechanism that have hitherto been propounded , whether it be from a kind of magnetism in some parts of the earth ( as hath been imagin'd by some ) or from the reflected particles of the celestial matter driving down into their places the earthy bodies they find above them , or ( as they at other times are pleased to speak ) from the pressure of the atmosphere , which moves all bodies continually downwards , because it doth it self press always towards the earth : or whether it be ( as the learned isaac vossius holds ) from the diurnal motion of the earth , whereby all heavy bodies ( which move with greater difficulty than light ones ) tend to the middle or center , and light bodies are expelled towards the superficies or from the center . but a man that would be very serious in philosophizing , can hardly acquiesce in any of these solutions . he is not hereby satisfied how non-gravitation can be and not be in a thing at the same time , as in water in the sea or in a river : for it is heavy and presses down , and yet the parts do not gravitate ; for 't is known that those that dive , and are under so great a heap of waters , yet feel it not upon them . here must be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , there must be acknowledged an other cause besides those before mention'd ( if they may be said to be causes at all ) . and accordingly i find that some of the most judicious philosophers of our own nation have averr'd that a god , a divine incorporeal substance may be evinced from the phoenomena of gravity . this is made good by strong and nervous arguments in an * undertaking of the learned dr. more . † another ripe-witted naturalist positively determines , that the common phoenomenon of gravity is impossible to be explain'd by any natural operation of matter , or any other law of motion but the positive will of a superiour being , so ordering it . and there is lately risen in our horizon another bright philosophick luminary , from whom we may expect great discoveries : it is his frank acknowledgment that this wonderful property of bodies , whereby the world is tied and link'd together , and all things in it are kept from running back into their first chaos and confusion , and which consequently is necessary for the welfare , yea the very subsistence of the universe , is supernatural . * no power , saith he , of mere nature can produce it : it surpasses all the mechanism of matter . and in several other instances which might be offer'd , there may be seen a despair of resolving the nature of them by material causes wholly . no meaner a person than * doctor lower ( who was voted by all the faculty to be one of the most accomplish'd anatomists of this age ) imputes the wonderful motion of the heart , and the circulation of the blood , to a divine and supernatural cause . he who was as well skill'd as any man in the fabrick of the parts and vessels of the body , and knew all the springs of their actions and operations , was of opinion , that these could not be solv'd by any ordinary principle . i mention this only to let the reader see that some of the bravest and wisest philosophers are forward to own a divine hand even in the common works of nature . they do not think it below a man of philosophy to resolve some things into an immaterial principle . for a pious and christian philosopher may plainly discern that there are some things above the efforts of matter and motion . it cannot be denied ( whatever some are pleas'd to say to the contrary ) that we live in as learned times as ever have been extant . all arts and sciences are improved even to a prodigy ; and particularly the accessions which are made to philosophy are very great and astonishing . but yet i must needs concur with that very thoughtful and ingenious gentleman before cited , who hath most truly told the world , that * without the notion and allowance of spirits our philosophy will be lame and defective in one main part of it , when it leaves out the contemplation of the most excellent and powerful part of the creation , viz. those immaterial beings . and herein he follows all the great and renowned philosophers of our age , especially those of our own country , as dr. more , sir matthew hale , dr. willis , mr. boyle , mr. ray , &c. who pretend not to solve all things in philosophy by mere natural causes , who look not upon man as a piece of clockwork , but have frequent recourse to those springs and causes which are spiritual and incorporeal , and sometimes to the immediate hand of the almighty himself . to conclude then , let not the inestimable blessing of knowledge and learning which is so peculiar to this age , make us forgetful of the grand source and spring of all operations and effects in nature . let us beware of those men who ascribe all the phaenomena in the world to the power of the modified matter , and will leave nothing for god to do himself . neither let us think that to philosophize is to jar with the sacred writings , and to deny the very natural history of it . the scoffers at a deity never had a more hopeful harvest then since these notions have prevail'd . by this means it comes to pass that philosophy , which is the study of wisdom , affronts the truest and highest wisdom ; and even natural philosophy , which is one of the choicest accomplishments of humane minds , leads men even to the denial of the author of nature . no wise man will disapprove of a latitude either in philosophy , or in the dubious and controverted points of theology : but then here he must be upon his guard , for there are those that under the pretence of throwing off some precarious things in the old philosophy , and discarding the empty speculations of the schools cast off those principles which are useful and sound : under the notion of the advancements of arts and sciences , and the improvement of the belles lettres , and carrying learning up to a greater heighth , they in the mean time help to pull these down . especially in religion , under the colour of searching further than others have done into divine matters they abandon some of the choicest principles : under the pretext of reason and good sense they obtrude any new conceit upon the world , and regard not the suffrage of the holy scriptures or of the primitive church . this they call a rational religion , and if you offer any thing against it , they cry it down as a dream , a romance , a fable , a phantom , an hobgoblin , and ( which is a word which they think comprehends all the rest ) priest-craft . and here i might observe that among the opinions which lead to atheism , the denial of daemons and witches , which * of late hath so much prevail'd , is none of the least . for besides that this is an open defiance to unquestionable history , experience and matter of fact , and so introduces the worst sort of scepticism ( which is the high-way to atheism ) it is evident that this supplants the belief of spiritual beings or substances : for witchcraft and all diabolick transactions are disbeliev'd on the account of the improbability , if not impossibility of spirits . so that it is plain the rejecting of the being and commerce of daemons or infernal spirits opens a door to the denial of the deity , of which we can no otherwise conceive than that it is an eternal spirit . there are other doctrines which advance atheism , and may be reckon'd among the dangerous luxuriances of these inquisitive times . such is the vilifying of the hebrew text of the old testament , the proclaiming it to be faulty and erroneous , in order to establishing the seventy's version as only authentick . such is the building the authority of the books of the old testament on the pretended inspiration of certain publick scribes or notaries among the iews , in imitation of such among the egyptians ; the avouching that the leaves or volumes on which those books were wrote are misplaced and put out of order ; the professed declaring that the canonical books are not the same that they were at first , but that several words and passages are left out . all mere fiction and conceit , unworthy of so excellent a genius as f. s's . such also is the maintaining that the greatest part of the religious rites and constitutions which god himself settled among the iews were a transcript of those that were in use among the idolatrous pagan nations , and that the all-wise lawgiver borrow'd those immediately from these . the two former of these attempts null the authority of the sacred writings , and the last of them disparages not only them but the blessed founder of the jewish oeconomy . i speak not this as if any of these opinions can be thought to be true reasons on which a man may ground his disesteem of the scriptures , or of the holy doctrines contain'd in them , or of the sacred inditer of them ; for they are the sentiments but of a very few , and of those whose learning , though it was exceeding great , had not wholly conquer'd their prejudice , or freed them from misapprehensions in some things . i cannot charge them with any direct design of favouring the cause of atheism , but ill-disposed men have made use of their notions to that purpose . wherefore , as we value the reputation of our religion , and the honour of the divine author of it , let us be careful that we split not upon any of these rocks , nor endanger our selves on any of the shallows before mention'd , and thereby make shipwrack of our faith and holy profession , or so endanger our selves that we can hardly be brought off again . i might in the last place take notice of a plausible conceit which hath been growing up to a considerable time , and now hath the fortune to come to some maturity . not to speak of its reception , ( if not its birth ) among some foreign authors , chiefly socinians , it seemed among our selves to be favour'd by that learned , but wavering , prelate who writ the liberty of prophesying , and afterwards by another of his order who compos'd * the naked truth . lately it hath been revived by the author of the naked gospel : and since more particularly fully and distinctly it hath been maintain'd by the late publisher of the reasonableness of christianity , as deliver'd in the scriptures . he gives it us over and over again in these formal words , viz. that nothing is required to be believed by any christian man but this , that iesus is the messiah . he contends that there is no other article of faith necessary to salvation ; this is a full and perfect creed , and no person need concern himself in any other . this takes up about three quarters of his book , for he goes through the history of the evangelists and the acts of the apostles , according to the order of time ( as he thinks ) to give an account of this proposition . but yet this gentleman forgot , or rather wilfully omitted a plain and obvious passage in one of the evangelists , go teach all nations , baptizing them in the name of the father , and of the son , and of the holy ghost , mat. 28. 19. from which it is plain , that all proselites to christianity , all that are adult members of the christian church , must be taught , as well as baptized , into the faith of the holy trinity , father , son , and holy ghost . and if they must be taught this doctrine ( which is the peremptory charge and commission here given to the apostles , go teach , &c. ) then it is certain that they must believe it , for this teaching is in order to belief . this will be denied by none , i suppose , and consequently more is required to be believed by christian men , and members of christ's church , than that iesus is the messiah . you see it is part of the evangelical faith , and such as is necessary , absolutely necessary , to make one a member of the christian church , to believe a trinity in unity in the godhead ; or , in plainer terms , that though god is one as to his essence and nature , yet there are three persons in that divine essence , and that these three persons are really the one god : for we can't imagine that men and women should be required to be baptized into the faith and worship of any but the only true god. this epitomizer of the evangelical writings left out also that famous testimony in iohn 1. 1. in the beginning was the word ( christ jesus ) and the word was with god , and the word was god. whence we are obliged to yield assent to this article , that christ is the word of god. and there is added in verse 14. another indispensable point of faith , viz. that the word was made flesh , i. e. that god was incarnate , the same with 1 tim. 3. 16. god manifest in the flesh. and it follows in the same verse of this first chapter of st. iohn , that this vvord is the only begotten of the father : whence we are bound to believe the eternal , though ineffable , generation of the son of god. our author likewise takes no notice that we are commanded to believe the father and the son , joh. 14. 10 , 11. and that the son is in the father , and the father in the son , which expresses their unity . this is made an article of faith by our saviour's particular and express command . and other eminent parts of christian belief this writer passes by , without having any regard to them , and yet pretends to present the world with a compleat and entire account of all that is the matter of our faith under the gospel . this cannot but seem very strange and unaccountable to any man of deliberate thoughts , and who expects sincerity from a writer who makes some shew of it ? but this is not all ; this learned gentleman , who with so much industry amasses together quotations out of the gospels and the acts of the apostles , yet is not pleas'd to proceed to the epistles , and to give an account of them as he did of the others ; though the epistles are as considerable a part of the new testament as the gospels and the acts , and the pen-men of them were equally inspired by the holy ghost . can there be any reason given of this partial dealing ? yes , it is most evident to any thinking and considerate person that he purposely omits the epistolary vvritings of the apostles because they are fraught with other fundamental doctrines besides that one which he mentions . there we are instructed concerning these grand heads of christian divinity , viz. the corruption and degeneracy of humane nature , with the true original of it ( the defection of our first parents ) the propagation of sin and mortality , our restoration and reconciliation by christ's blood , the eminency and excellency of his priesthood , the efficacy of his death , the full satisfaction thereby made to the divine justice , and his being made an all-sufficient sacrifice for sin. here are peculiar discoveries concerning christ's righteousness , and our justification by it , concerning election , adoption , sanctification , or the new birth , and particularly saving faith , which is so signal a part of it . here the nature of the gospel , and the new covenant , the riches of god's mercy in the way of salvation by jesus christ , the certainty of the resurrection of humane bodies , and of the future glory , are fully displayed . these are the matters of faith contain'd in the epistles , and they are essential and integral parts of the gospel it self : and therefore it is no wonder that our author , being sensible of this , would not vouchsafe to give us an abstract of these inspired writings , but passes them by with some contempt . and more especially ( if i may conjecture ) he doth this because he knew that there are so many and frequent , and those so illustrious and eminent attestations to the doctrine of the ever to be adored trinity in these epistles . nor is this any uncharitable conjecture , as the reader may easily satisfie himself if he takes notice that this writer interprets the son of god to be no more than the messiah : he expounds iohn 14. 9. &c. after the antitrinitarian mode , whereas generally divines understand some part of those words concerning the divinity of our saviour . he makes christ and adam to be the sons of god in the same senses , viz. by their birth , as the racovians generally do , and so he interprets luke 1. 35. iohn 5. 26. according to their standard . when he proceeds to mention the advantages and benefits of christ's coming into the world , and appearing in the flesh , he hath not one syllable of his satisfying for us , or by his death purchasing life and salvation , or any thing that sounds like it . this and several other things which might be offered to the reader , shew that he is all over socinianized ; and moreover that his design was to exclude the belief of the blessed trinity in this undertaking of his , viz. to prove that the believing of christ to be the messiah is the only point of faith that is necessary and saying . all the other articles and doctrines must fall a sacrifice to the darling notion of the antitrinitarians , namely that christ is not the true god , and coessential with his father . for the sake of this one point they are all dispatch'd out of the world , and are made by him martyrs to this cause . one could scarcely imagine that a person of ingenuity and good sense should go this way to work . which enclines me to think that the ingenious gentleman who is suppos'd by some to be the author of this treatise is not really so . i am apt to believe that the world is impos'd upon in this matter , for in this present attempt there are none of those noble strokes which are visible in that person 's writings , and which have justly gain'd him a fair repute . that vivacity of thought , that elevation of mind , that vein of sense and reason , yea and of elocution too which runs through his works are all extinct here : only he begins as 't were to recover himself about the close when he comes to speak of the laws of christian morality . some may attribute this flatness to the ill cause he manages ; but for my part , i question whether we have the right author , i can't perswade my self but that there is an error of the person : at least i will charitably presume so , because i have so good an opinion of the gentleman who writ of humane understanding and education . but what is the ground of the foresaid assertion ? what makes him contend for one single article , with the exclusion of all the rest ? he pretends it is this , that all men ought to understand their religion . and i agree with him in this ; but i ask him , may not a man understand those articles of faith which i mention'd out of the gospel and epistles , if they be explain'd to him , as well as that one which he speaks of ? why then must there be but one article , and no more ? but he , notwithstanding this , goes on , and urges that there must be nothing in christianity that is not plain , and exactly level to all mens mother-wit and common apprehension . for * god considered the poor of the world , and the bulk of mankind : the christian religion is suited to vulgar capacities , and hath only * such articles as the labouring and illiterate man may comprehend . the writers and wranglers in religion fill it with niceties , and dress it up with notions , ( viz. the trinity , christ's satisfaction , &c. ) which they make necessary and fundamental parts of it . but the bulk of mankind have not leisure for learning and logick : and therefore there must be no such doctrine as that concerning the trinity , the incarnation of the son of god , and the like , which are above the capacity and comprehension of the vulgar . and in the entrance of his book he hath the same notion , for he tells us that the scriptures are a collection of writings designed by god for the instraction of the illiterate bulk of mankind , ( for he is much taken with this phrase , you see , the bulk of mankind ) whereby he understands the ignorant and unlearned multitude , the mob , as he calls it in another place . surely this gentleman is afraid of captain tom , and is going to make a religion for his myrmidons : and to please them he gives them as little of this kind as he possibly can , he contracts all into one article , and will trouble them with no more . now then the sum of all that he aims at is this , that we must not have any point of doctrine whatsoever in our religion that the mob doth not at the very first naming of it perfectly understand and agree to . we are come to a fine pass indeed : the venerable mob must be ask'd what we must believe : and nothing must be receiv'd as an article of faith but what those illiterate clubmen vote to be such . the rabble are no system-makers , no creed-makers ; and therefore away with systems and creeds , and let us have but one article , though it be with the defiance of all the rest , which are of equal necessity with that one. towards the close of his enterprise he hath a fling ( and that a shrewd one ) at the dissenters , telling them that * their congregations and their teachers understand not the controversies at this time so warmly manag'd among them . nay the teachers themselves have been pleas'd to make him their confessor , and to acknowledge to him that they understand not the difference in debate between them . why ? because they ( as well as the conformists ) have obscure notions and speculations , such as iustification , the trinity , satisfaction , &c. terms that all the bulk of mankind are unacquainted with : whereas religion should have no difficulties and mysteries in it . the very manner of every thing in christianity must be clear and intelligible , every thing must be presently comprehended by the weakest noddle , or else it is no part of religion , especially of christianity , which yet is call'd the * mystery of godliness : but this being in the epistles , it is no great matter ; we are not to mind what they say . thus we see what is the reason why he reduces all belief to that one article before rehearsed : as if the other main points which i produced were not as easily learnt and understood as this ; as if there were any thing more difficult in this proposition [ the father , son and holy ghost are one god , or divine nature ] than in that other [ jesus is the messiah ] . truly if there be any difficulty , it is in this latter , for here is an hebrew word first to be explain'd before the mob ( as he stiles it ) can understand the proposition . why therefore doth this author , who thinks it absurd * to talk arabick to the vulgar , talk hebrew to them , unless he be of opinion ( which no body else is of ) that they understand this language better than that ? or , suppose he tells the rabble that messiah signifies anointed , what then ? unless he explains that word to them , it is still unintelligible . so that it appears hence that this article which he hath spent so much time about , is no more level to the understanding of the vulgar then that of the holy trinity , yea it is not so much . to conclude , this gentleman and his fellows are resolved to be unitarians ; they are for one article of faith , as well as one person in the godhead ; and there is as much reason for one as the other , that is , none at all . but it doth not become me perhaps to pronounce this so peremptorily , and therefore i appeal to the judicious and impartial reader ; desiring him to judge of what i have suggested . but this i will say , if these learned men were not highly prejudiced and prepossessed , they would discern the evil and mischief of their assertion : they would perceive that when the catholick faith is thus brought down to one single article , it will soon be reduced to none : the unit will dwindle into a cypher . the proper remedy here is to consider that it is unlawful * to add unto , or diminish ought from the written word : yea , a curse is threatned against those that † add to or take away from the scriptures ; for if it be criminal , and deserves a curse to deal thus with the book of deuteronomy or of the revelation , then by the same reason those that add to or detract from any other part of the holy scriptures are undeniably guilty , and are obnoxious to the divine plagues . i hope such as practise the latter will seriously think of it , and for the future believe themselves concern'd to embrace all the necessary and fundamental articles of faith , as well as one of them . thus i have briefly discover'd the springs and sources of atheism , and i have endeavour'd all along ( more or less ) to stop them up , and hinder the current of them . now , for the close of all , let me add these inferences from the whole , i. we ought to bewail the spreading atheism of this age wherein we live . of old there were but few that openly profess'd it . there are reckon'd up four several sorts or forms of atheism by a late * learned writer , viz. anaximandrian , democritick , stoical , stratonical , and yet there was scarcely one of these that was a downright denying of a god. some have given diagoras , theodorus , protagoras , the title of atheists , and have thought them to be absolutely such : but others , upon a strict search , are of opinion , that they deserv'd not that infamous name ; yea , they find that they were great asserters of a deity . the first of these was accused of atheism , and banish'd for it by the athenians ; not that he denied a god , but because he derided the feigned gods of his time , whom the athenians had such a reverence for . the second passes for an atheist ; but those who have narrowly enquired into things tell us , that he got that name because he spoke against the idolatrous worship of the grecians , and had a kindness ( it is probable ) for another religion : for being a cyrenian , and acquainted with king ptolomee , he came to have some intercourse with the iews of alexandria , and had some notice of the true god. the third was reputed and call'd by some an atheist because he doubted of the truth and reality of the gentile gods. so anaxagoras ( another greek philosopher ) was arraign'd for atheism by the athenians because he denied the sun to be god , and freely discours'd against the other pagan deities . thus the malicious accusers of socrates represented him as an enemy to the gods : part of the crime charged on him , and for which he was condemn'd , was his speaking against the traditions and fables of the poets concerning the gods , and his declaring them to be lewd and wicked . to give this great man his due , he was so far from being an atheist , that he died a martyr for a deity . only to gratifie the vulgar , and that he might not go off unlamented , after he had drank his poison he requested his friends to offer a cock for him to aesculapius . some put democritus into the catalogue of the ancient atheists , but if we read his life in laertius , we shall find that they have little reason to do so . lucretius is the most suspicious man of all , and lucian may be join'd with him , the former a serious , the latter a jocular atheist . but it is sad to consider that the number of this sort of men hath been exceedingly augmented since . * david perron undertook in the presence of king henry the third of france , to prove that there is no god. mersennus , in his commentary on genesis , tells us , that in the year when he wrote it , viz. 1623. there was a vast multitude of them in france : there were at least fifty thousand atheists in the city of paris at that time , and in one house sometimes a dozen were to be found . a worthy * author , whom i had occasion to mention before , acquaints us on his own knowledge , that atheism was very common and rampant in most parts of italy . not to mention machiavel , aretine , &c. it cannot be denied that vanenus openly declared and profess'd himself an atheist , and died so at the stake . indeed i am apt to suspect those who tell us there are scarcely any of this perswasion in the world. thus † one declares that he hath travelled many countries , yet could never meet with any atheists , which are few if any : all the noise and clamour is against castles in the air , i. e. such and no other he fancies them to be . but to come nearer , our own nation hath produced too many of this kind . even in this civilized christian protestant country there are those that are infected with this cursed infidelity , and defie all religion and a god. it is an unquestionable truth , that there are in this great city of the kingdom constant cabals and assemblies of profess'd atheists , where they debate the great point of the existence of an infinite spirit that governs the world , and in the close determine in the negative . i have sometime accidentally happen'd into the company of , and held discourse with some that acknowledge they belong to that society ; and they have not been ashamed to own whatever is done in it . mr. hobbes is their great master and lawgiver . i find that they pay a huge reverence to him . if they acknowledge any divine thing , it is he. if they own any scriptures , they are his writings . the language that i lately met with from the mouth of one that was , i suppose , a well-wisher ( according to his poor ability ) to mr. hobbes's mathematicks , was this , his leviathan is the best book in the world next to the bible : he himself was a man of great piety , and is spoken against by none but the priests . and whom do they ( for this man speaks the sense of the rest ) mean by priests but the ministers of religion ? so they would have a bible and piety without these ; which is as much as to say , they would have neither of them . but indeed this man had a way of being something more plausible than his fellows , and would vouchsafe to mention the bible and piety , and thereby seem as it were to allow of such things ; whereas others are wont to laugh at them as well as at the persons they call priests , for they go together . i may say truly , it is grown fashionable to deride whatever is sacred , and to talk like an atheist . in some companies it shall be question'd whether a person be a gentleman if he does not give proofs of his being prophane . to defend the wildest principles , and to ridicule religion , is counted one certain mark of a wit. he that doth not shew his raillery against virtue and goodness , and speaks not contemptibly of god and religion , is not a man of parts . this is the sentiment and perswasion of a great part of this nation . i would not libel the land of our nativity ; yea , i rather heartily wish that what i have said on this occasion might receive a confutation . but it is too evident that i speak truth ; it is too manifest to be denied that there are every where confiderable numbers of men who openly renounce the existence of god. david's atheist was modest , and only said in his heart , there is no god ; on which account some atheistical spirits now-a-days may think perhaps he deserved the title of fool which the psalmist gives him . but these count themselves a wiser rank of atheists , because they say this with their mouths , and speak it aloud , audibly proclaiming their opinion , and being very zealous to gain proselytes to it . 2. let us abhor the converse and society of those persons whom we know to be of this character . and truly they are very common every where . it is prodigious to see how they daily encrease . there is scarcely a town where there are not some that may justly be reckon'd in this number . do not mistake me . there are some deluded people who are apt to censure all as atheists that are not of their way . the * primitive christians were thus stigmatized , and usually called by that name because they did not comply with the pagan worship and usages . if a man discourses not according to some mens fond notions and bigotisms ; if he speaks against their superstitious practices , he presently hath this brand set upon him . there are those that call all persons atheists and hypocrites that hold not the same principles with themselves . yea , if a man be a great student in philosophy , some weaker people may be apt to fix this character on him . as heretofore all that had skill in mathematicks were said and thought to deal in art magick ; so in the opinion of some at this day men of great art and learning are voted atheists by them , and almost every physician hath this censure past on him by men of weak minds . but i hope none of those i now speak to are so unwise and weak , or at least not so uncharitable and censorious as to bestow this ignominious epither on those to whom it doth not belong . by an atheist or a person very much disposed to be so , i mean one that hath an enmity to the very notion of a divine infinite being , a supreme immaterial substance , that is the soveraign author of nature , and the first cause of all things , from whom all things were , and on whom they depend . i mean such a one as owns no allegiance to this divine ruler and soveraign , and in his words and actions discovers this to the world. and accordingly he is one that acknowledges not the infinite power , wisdom , goodness , and justice of god in the government of all things : he speaks irreverently of all that appertains to religion and godliness : he laughs at the profound mysteries and sublime doctrines of christianity : he endeavours always to diminish the esteem of sacred things : yea , he will be jesting and drolling on them if he hath any talent that way . if he be open-hearted , and not upon the reserve , he will tell them that religion is a mere invention of politick heads to awe the multitude , and to keep the world in good order . he is one that blasts religion with the ignominious title of a popular cheat , and labours to perswade others to do the like . where you find these characters in any person , you may conclude without breach of charity , that he is an atheist . and it is the company of such that i exhort you to beware of , and wholly to avoid . it is almost incredible that such great numbers should be every day led away with this ignis fatuus , and plung'd into bogs and mire , never to be pluck'd out thence . therefore take heed what society you mingle your selves with in this dangerous age. sit not with the known despisers of god and religion , for they will insensibly instill their poison into you . by frequent associating with them you will learn to resemble them . wherefore fly from them as from a serpent , and be not prevail'd with by any entreaties or threats to hold correspondence with them . assure your selves of this , that the title of atheist is the most reproachful and detestable one imaginable , though some of late who glory in their shame entertain other thoughts . nay , some of these persons seem to be partly sensible of it , and change the name into that of deist . at this day atheism it self is slily call'd deism by those that indeed are atheists . though they retain the things , yet they would disguise it by a false name , and thereby hide the heinousness of it . but let us not be deceived and blinded by pretended shews , but throughly apprehend the vileness of this opinion which some endeavour to palliate . it is a very denying the creed of nature , it is a renuntiation of that which the very devils believe , and tremble at . it is briefly but fully represented in st. cyprian's words , * this ( saith he ) is the sum of this most beinous crime , that those who are guilty of it wilfully refuse to acknowledge him whom they cannot be ignorant of . for their own beings and natures furnish them with arguments for a god : and if they did not obstinately shut their eyes , they must needs behold a deity . therefore to be atheists , or without god in the world ( as the * apostle speaks ) cannot but be a great prodigy ; it is unaccountable almost ( if the degeneracy of manking were not so great as it is ) that the world it self should not administer to mens thoughts convictive arguments of a divinity . whence it hath been observ'd by a very wise man , that there never was any miracle wrought by god to convert an atheist , because the light of nature might have led him to confess a god. this shews how detestable and pernicious atheism is ; and much more might be said to this purpose . wherefore i hope i need not multiply words when i call upon you to keep out of the company of those men who you know are infected with this hellish poison . 3. let us labour to work in our selves and others a profound sense of that great god with whom we have to do . generally the belief of a deity is from custom and education , because it is the perswasion of the place and the persons we converse with : but we should not content our selves with this , but arrive to the knowledge of the true grounds and reasons of this belief . seeing this is the first thing in religion , and no man can be religious and vertuous unless he believes there is a god , let us fortifie our minds against atheism by those several arguments and considerations which are wont to be propounded by learned and religious * writers : that we may as throughly be perswaded of this great truth as of our own being , which a great philosopher makes one of his first and indubitable principles . but especially view the works of the creation , and perswade your selves of this , that a material world without an immaterial cause of it , is mere nonsnse . look abroad , and behold the heavens and the earth , and all the furniture of them ; there you may believe a deity , because you do as 't were see it . the creator is made visible by his works . every thing in the sensible world is an † image , a picture , a footstep of the deity . from this exquisite fabrick we infallibly gather the existence of its all-wise architect and moderator . of which i shall give the reader a particular demonstration in a short time and that you may effectually extirpate atheism out of your minds , frequently peruse the h. scriptures . read god in his own book . there you will certainly inform your selves concerning the superintendence of spiritual or immaterial agents , viz. angels , which makes way for the belief of a god , who is a spirit . there you will meet with those wonderful operations and events which can no ways be solv'd without granting an omnipotent and all-wise disposer of things . and there you will find this supreme governour of the world communicating his will and pleasure to mankind . i question not but one great reason ( and i might have mention'd it among the rest ) why men are so disposed to be atheists , is because they never , or very seldom , consult this holy volume : they refuse to hear god himself speaking to them in these writings . wherefore i recommend to you the serious and frequent reading of the bible as the most effectual means to confirm you in the belief of a deity . assure your selves that this book is the best antidote against atheism . 4. and lastly , labour to be truly religious and holy ; beg the divine assistance to sanctifie you in your hearts and lives ; and thereby you will be let into the intimate knowledge of this grand verity which i have been discoursing of . you will then more sensibly understand and be convinced of it than by all the arguments that can be offer'd : or rather , this one will make all the rest effectual . whereas on the contrary , men of unsanctified minds and profane lives despise and scoff at that of which they have no experience , and will not believe the existence and power of god which they never felt : strive then by an inward experiment to confute atheism : so that you may not have any inclination to say in your hearts ( though you do not utter it with your tongues ) there is no god , but that you may be so strongly convinced of the contrary truth that you may be able to assert it with a firm and unshaken belief , and from an internal sense of it on your hearts , to attest the reality of it to the whole world. finis . errat . pag. 104. lin . 8. dele to . notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a38046-e160 * sermon of the folly of atheism . sermon at the queen's funeral . notes for div a38046-e530 * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . hierocl . * his essays . * 1 tim. 6. 16. * exercitat . 99. * de cometis . * preface before his philosoph . writings . † search after truth , book 3. chap. 4. * bishop ward 's serm. † copernicus , lansbergius , clavius , petavius , tacquet , scheiner , gassendus , fromondus , kircher , ricciolus , oughtred , ward , wallis , more , glanvil . * sir tho. more ▪ , sir phil. sidney , sir w. raleigh , sir hen. wotton , lord bacon , mr. selden , mr. cowley , &c. * primus in orbe deos fecit timor . — pap. stat. * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . * lord bacon's essay of atheism . * de nat. deorum , lib. 1. * mat. 7. 16 . luke 17. 1. † 1 tim. 4. 1. 2 tim. 3. ● , 6. 2 pet. 33. jude 18. * sir edwyn sandys . * lord bacon's essays . * considerations on the explications of the doctrine of the trinity , page 5 , 6 , 7. * praelect . cap. 8 , 9 , 10 , 11. † fragment . disp. de adorat . christi . ‖ deus est spiritus aeternus : spiritum autem cum nominamus , substantiam intelligimus ab omni erassitie , qualem in corporibus oculorum arbitrio subjectis cernimus , alienam . hoc sensu angelos dicimus spiritus , & aerem , &c. de deo & attrib . cap. 15. * comment . vol. 1. page 118. * de uno deo p. lib. 2. sect . 1 , 2. * letter of resolution concerning the doctrine of the trinity . the unreasonableness of the doctrine of the trinity . † an accurate examination of the principal texts , &c. chap. 5. ‖ observations on the answer to the brief history of the unitarians , chap. 2. † letter of resolution concerning the doctrine of the trinity . * observations on the answer to the brief history of the unitarians , chap. 1. * of the mysteries of the christian faith. * an exhortation to a free and impartial enquiry , &c. * spinosa . tract . theol polit . cap. 8 , 9 , 10. * dr. woodward's hist. of the earth , part 3. 161. * du-pin hist. of eccles. writers . prelim. dissertat . * search after truth , book 1. † princip . philos. pars 4. * enchirid. metaphys . cap. 11. † mr. l●ck concerning education . * dr. woodward's nat. hist. of the earth . part 1. * de corde . * concerning education . * mr. hobbs leviath . chap. 34. mr. websters display of supposed witchcraft . dr. becker's enchanted world. * chap. 1. concerning the articles of faith. * p. 302. * p. 302. * page . 303. * 1 tim. 3. 16. * page 302. * deut. 4. 2. † rev. 22. 18 , 19. * dr. cudworth's intellectual system . * l'histoire d' henr. 3. * in his europae speculum . † an essay in a letter from oxford . * just. mart. apol. 2. * haec est summa delicti nolle agnoscere quem ignorare non possis . de vanit . idol . * ephes. 2. 12. * fab. faventini disp. 4. adv . atheos . tho. campanella spizel scrutin . atheismi . muller . atheismus devictus . ian. & ioach. ian. disputat . contr . atheos . dr. more , mr. smith , sir charles . woosley , dr. tenison , ( now archbishop of cant. ) dr. cudworth , dr. barrow . † 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . plato . a defence of the dean of st. paul's apology for writing against the socinians in answer to the antapologist. sherlock, william, 1641?-1707. 1694 approx. 131 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 36 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2005-10 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a59811 wing s3283 estc r8168 11902930 ocm 11902930 50617 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a59811) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 50617) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 512:3) a defence of the dean of st. paul's apology for writing against the socinians in answer to the antapologist. sherlock, william, 1641?-1707. [4], 66 p. printed for william rogers ..., london : 1694. attributed to william sherlock. cf. halkett & laing (2nd ed.). reproduction of original in union theological seminary library, new york. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng sherlock, william, 1641?-1707. -apology for writing against the socinians. socinianism. 2003-11 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2003-12 spi global keyed and coded from proquest page images 2005-02 john latta sampled and proofread 2005-02 john latta text and markup reviewed and edited 2005-04 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion a defence of the dean of st. paul's apology for writing against the socinians . a defence of the dean of st. paul's , apology for writing against the socinians . in answer to the antapologist . licens'd . london : printed for william rogers , at the san over-against st. dunstan's church in fleetstreet . mdcxciv . a defence of the dean of st. paul's apology for writing against the socinians . one would have thought , that when the ancient doctrine of a trinity in unity , had not only been contradicted , but openly scorn'd and ridicul'd with as little modesty as sense , it had been no unpardonable crime to undertake the defence thereof : but it seems a certain stander-by being a little touch'd with melancholy , could not bear such an attempt ; for this is to litigate touching a fundamental ; and that is to turn it into a controversy ; that is , to unsettle , at least endanger the unsettling the whole superstructure . so that when some learned writers took upon them to chastise the insolence of these busy and factious underminers of christianity , who in the opinion of any one that is not overrun with melancholy , must be thought by their bold attempts upon the fundamentals of our faith , to have endeavour'd the unsettling the whole superstructure ; this stander-by was put into a sudden fright , to see men so unreasonable , as to write in vindication of a fundamental article of the christian faith , which it becomes peaceable men rather tamely and silently to give up , than to litigate concerning it : and therefore he addresses in an earnest and compassionate suit to the learned writers in defence of the churches doctrine , to hold their hands , and forbear at least till a fit time . but it seems all men had not the same sentiments of this peaceable design , as the melancholy author of it had ; nor could the compassiona●e suit work its hop'd-for effects on the minds of all learned writers . 't is no wonder therefore that the dean of st. pauls was not thereby discouraged from resuming the defence of the catholick faith ; but only thought it necessary , before he ventured to dispute these matters any farther , to make some apology for disputing ; and to show , that notwithstanding what this author endeavours to persuade the world , it is neither vnchristian , nor vncharitable , nor of dangerous consequence . but this apology of the dean's did , it seems , stir the spleen of our stander-by , and move the choler of this peaceable and modest person , who would ( but it seems he could not , especially towards the church of england ) observe the common rules of good manners : and therefore we must not blame him , if in his reply to the dean we do ( notwithstanding his designing the contrary , and composing his mind as far as he was able ) meet with bitterness , passion , cavilling , insolence , and ill language ; for tho he will not pardon such things in himself , ( and therefore 't is to be hop'd will do private penance for them ) yet it may become us to pardon them , and let it pass , as he says too many do , for a point of justice in such case , calcare fastum majori fastu . and besides , since he owns , that 't is not without difficulty that human nature forbears rendring an angry and disdainful reply to haughty and ill-natur'd answers , or those which are fancied to be such ; if he does now and then do so himself , we may suppose it was because he could not help it , and therefore it is excusable ; for i hope the plea which he makes for hereticks , may serve also for himself ; and if a man must conceive as he can , and judge as he can , and believe as he can , so he must also write as he can . and this i think will also be a sufficient apology to our author , for my not being of his mind ; for since i must conceive as i can , and judge as i can , i find that for my life i cannot judge his discourse to be either rational or well design'd ; but rather , as he would fain have the world think of the endeavours of other learned writers , vnreasonable , vnseasonable , and of dangerous consequence : and therefore without any farther compliment , i shall venture to bestow some short remarks upon it ; in which i shall also confine my self to the main design of the book , which is , ( as we shall hear him confessing himself anon ) to dissuade men from writing in defence of the doctrine of the trinity ; and therefore i shall not think my self concerned to enlarge in the confutation of those arguments against the dean's hypothesis , which ever and anon he gives us into the bargain ; for my business is only to consider what he says in defence of his peaceable design of persuading all men , as well as the dean , not to write in defence of the truth , if he thinks it so . but i must desire one thing of our author , that because he falls foul on the dean for pretending to know his intent , when he wanted the gift of discerning spirits to capacitate him for being a judge of it , he would take notice , that i do not pretend to know his inward intentions any more than his name . and therefore whatever i shall say in my reflections , let him not pretend that i do it to calumniate and inodiate him , since all i have to do with , is his book . but now let us come closer to the purpose , and be plain and succinct , as far as our author 's intricate way of writing will permit , who begins ( as he also goes on ) with heavy accusations against the dean for his bitterness , insolence , ill language , indignities , false imputations , and at least seemingly malicious insinuations against himself : whether all this be true , and whether the dean in any place treats him with greater sharpness than such a writer deserves , must be left to the impartial reader to judge . one of the false imputations with which he charges the dean , is , that he says , he called the socinians learned writers of controversy , whom he now protests he did not mean by that character : and tho his title-page be so ambiguous , that it might easily be mistaken either for a suit to learned writers , or for forbearance to learned writers ; yet i am apt to believe him , because he has not dissuaded the socinians from writing against the trinity , but other learned writers from writing for it : a good orthodox excuse . but waving this and many instances of the like disingenuity , he will present here the main state of the cause betwixt the dean and himself ; which in short is this , that the disputes touching the controversies of the holy trinity , might be at present let alone , till fit time and place ; i suppose he means only by the orthodox writers , who defend that doctrine ; for he himself protests , that by learned writers , to whom he addressed his suit , he did not mean socinians : and to persuade to this , he had said , this particular controversy is of all others at present most unreasonable , most dangerous , and most unseasonable . this may pass for a state of the question ; and i will leave it to the reader to judge upon the whole , whether the dean has not quite overthrown this state of his question , and sufficiently demonstrated the weakness of all he urged . now he is desirous to know , where is the mischief of all this : for all that he designed was plainly no more then , to move for peace , at least for a truce , till both parties were calmed , and might calmly treat . but , methinks , the fairest way for this had been , to desire both parties to hold their hands , and not only to beseech one to be silent , and let the others write , and talk , and rail , and argue on too as well as they can against the established doctrine . but methinks this very project of a truce does not seem very reasonable , for it looks as if he thought the church and the socinians to be upon equal terms with one another , which i can by no means grant ; because the church of england , in this point at least , has had sixteen hundred years prescription , besides the authority of scripture and reason on her side . nor can i think any treaty lawful in such fundamental points , but that all catholick christians are bound to do what they can by reason to convince these men of their errors , and reduce them into the bosom of the church ; for i do not like our authors way of compounding with hereticks and shismaticks , and i hope posterity may find better expedients for vniting of protestants , than for the sake of peace to give up truth . but here though our author could bear , what he thinks a modest and just reprehension , yet he is very angry with what the dean says , and looks upon it as imperious beyond measure , especially when the great argument of all , is no better than a petitio principij , that the doctrine of the trinity , as dr. sherlock hath stated it , and does defend it , is a fundamental of the christian faith. now this i take to be a false imputation upon the dean , who does indeed , as the church of england does , look on the doctrine of three persons and one god , as a fundamental of the christian faith ; and this he endeavours to vindicate from those absurdities and contradictions which are charged upon it , and gives such an explication of it , as though he believes to be true , he does not lay down as necessary to be expresly believed by all ; nor will he esteem any man a heretick who sincerely believes the doctrine of the church , that there is but one god and three persons , though he does not subscribe in all things to his hypothesis . and therefore i think the antapologist is fallen into a fit of melancholy when he complains of the dean , because in his apology he quits his adversary , and neglects all that has been said against his novelties , and falls upon exposing the peaceable man. now i should rather have wondred , if in an apology for writing against the socinians , he had entred into the main subject of debate , when his only business was to show the weakness of such earnest suits , as desired that no man should write any thing in the present controversy ; so that i cannot but think the antapologist is a little , if not besides himself , i am sure a great deal besides the purpose , to make it a matter of accusation against the dean , that he keeps close to the proper subject of his discourse ; for i would here only ask him , whether in his suit he undertook a confutation of the dean's hypothesis ? if he did not , then i hope his book may be pertinently answered , and solidly confuted too , without entring into the merits of that cause . i would ask him also , whether he did not address to all learned writers against the socinians in this conttoversy , as well as to the dean ? and whether what he urges be not level'd against any man's writing in defence of the established doctrine , as well as of the dean's particular hypothesis ? if so , 't is plain that the dean did very well , not to run out into a vindication of his own hypothesis , or of the doctrine of the trinity in general ; but to fall upon exposing the peaceable man , as our author terms it ; that is , to show the insufficiency of all his pleas for forbearance towards the socinians , and betraying the christian faith , under the pretence of peace and moderation . but the dean does not like that the faith should be stated in scripture language , but would have school-terms pass as fundamental in faith , as well as his own new definitions and new notions . as to the first of these things : the dean does , and that on very good reasons , desire , whether the melancholy stander●by can admit it or no , that the true faith , under what words soever it be expressed , and not merely the sound of scripture-words , should pass for fundamental ; and thus far he is for school-terms , or any terms that fix the true sense of scripture : but as to the other branch of this accusation , 't is false and ridiculous , and that is answer enough to it . as for the uncertain signification of philosophical terms , methinks he should not quarrel at that , which may afford his friends the better shelter , and permit every one under the same words to couch his own meaning . and it seems in what he writ , he did not contest either of these points ; and yet in the very page before , he complains of the dean , because in his answer he did not offer one word to prove his own new notions ; which yet he owns he did not contest with him , and is still as willing as ever to decline engaging , but only in his own defence he can't forbear declaring , that the dean has to his power overthrown the true catholick faith of the nicene creed , as much as philoponus or joachim ever did ; nor will his invention of mutual consciousness clear him from the charge of inferring three gods , since that can infer only an vnity of accord , &c. this he says , but does not here go about to prove it , because these things require more words than the present design admits , and it may be more reason than he is master of ; and therefore 't is as easy for me , and as allowable to say , that the dean's mutual consciousness does infer more than an vnity of accord , as for him to say it does not : and that it does infer full as great , if not a greater vnity of substance and nature , than the words of the nicene creed express ; and if it were not for the reason which he himself has given , i should not care though i ventured to dispute this matter with him at large . as for his next section , i do not know well what to make of it ; 't is long and full of quotations , but to what purpose , he who writ it may possibly know best . in the first place , i think he would have none but scripture-terms made use of in stating this doctrine ; but this , whether it were the invention of old hereticks , or new ones , hath been shewn to be in our case very foolish and unreasonable , and what none would contend for , but he that either knows not what he asks , or has a mind to overthrow the true faith. the next thing , as near as i can guess , that he endeavours to shew from fathers , schoolmen , and protestant divines is , that the word person is equivocal and uncertain in its signification ; i hope then his clients may like it the better , as being able to make use of it in a sense agreeable to their own doctrines . but after all this vncertainty of the word person , about which he has shown so much learning , as far as i can find there is so much of its signification agreed to on all hands , that the antitrinitarians are unwilling to use it , as evidently including something that will not go down with them ; and i fear that this is the true reason of our author's quarrel against it . but now our author has shown himself such a master of books , he can't forbear stepping a little out of the way again , to show himself as great a master of reason , and therefore falls foul upon the dean for contradicting himself , for making three minds and one mind , and making the persons distinct , and not separate , which is to him an unavoidable contradiction : and who can help it if it be ? what the dean maintains , is not so to every body's apprehension ; especially if it be considered in his own words , without our author's comment on them ; for it may be understood how three minds are one , tho it be something difficult to apprehend that they are three sames , and not three sames : and i can no more understand our author's arguing , that if they are distinct , they are separate also , than he can the dean's , when he says they are distinct and yet not separate ; which i believe will not sound like an absurdity to any but a socinian vnderstanding . but if the dean has been mistaken , and has fallen short in his arguing , and has also set up an hypothesis full of contradictions , which yet there are a great many wiser men than our author do not believe , what would all this be to the design of our author's book ? if dr. sherlock does not argue well , must no body therefore write , that can argue better ? if his hypothesis be unreasonable , is it therefore unreasonable to write in defence of the doctrine of the trinity ? or is the doctrine it self unreasonable ? some men we know think so ; and this may be several strokes in his book be suspected to be the opinion of our author . however , he is so great a lover of peace ( why then does he quarrel so much with the orthodox writers , and the church of england ? ) that he is willing to admit the old way of speaking , and the ancient notion of a divine person , as being more consistent and less obnoxious : which if it had been kept to , he had f●rborn his suit : 't is the new notion then that he quarrels at ; but why then must all men be desired not to write in defence of the doctrine of the trinity , even tho they do hold to the old notion ? but h●re ( that is in the ancient notion of a person ) or rather in that word , since it has been a long time in use , without ever defending or explaining the thing ) he would have our divines stop for peace sake . and i believe they will gratify him so far , as not to enter into any farther disputes about it , if he will secure that the socinians shall not oppose this , but subscribe to it , and not write against it . now he would persuade us , and so it may be he might if we had never seen his melancholy ●uit , or did not understand english , that all he desired was , that men would stop at the ancient notion , &c. when 't is plain to any english understanding , that he desired a great deal more , viz. that no body would write at all in defence of the ancient faith , or ancient notion ●f a person , though our adversaries do daily affront and ridicule the doctrine of the church , and the ancient notion too . for i only desire to know , whether the ridiculing the athanasian creed , which was the occasion of dr. sherlock's vindication , be not ridiculing the ancient notion . this being all his harmless design , he is very angry at the imputation of disguised heretick , &c. what he is , i determine not , but i am sure he writes just as if he were such an one ; and since he has not set his name , i can't apprehend it any ways uncharitable to suspect so much of an unknown author , of whom we have nothing else to judge by but his book , which i am sure will never prove that he is any thing better , and does well deserve to have a brand set upon it , that unwary readers may not be deceived by it . and this i believe , whatever he doth , very few orthodox hearty asserters of the catholick faith , will think a calumny . now for the dean's new hypothesis again , who did not keep within bounds , and stop where he ought to have done , but must needs be rambling , and therefore he must have a lash or two for that . and for the reader 's great edification , our kind author will give an account how far he had read of the dean's book when he writ , which , and several other as weighty accounts of himself and his private concerns , i leave to the reader that has curiosity enough to peruse them . but the dean holds that which necessarily infers three gods , and in his apology goes beyond himself , as in his vindication he went plainly beyond and contrary to the doctrine of the fathers , schools , and protestant divines . pray what 's the matter now ? why , he calls the son a god incarnate , and the holy ghost a god ; and therefore infallibly by vertue of this little particle a , there must be three gods , all the world can't help it : for tho he expresly says , these three are but one god , and proves it too , yet as long as he says the son is a god incarnate , there is nothing can vindicate him from the imputation of tritheism ; and therefore he must according to his promise , thankfully correct this absurdity , now it is so plainly shown him . but does a god incarnate signify any more , but that he who is incarnate is god ? which if we were always to deal with such criticks , is a much safer way of speaking , than to say he is god incarnate ; for among those who own a trinity of divine persons in the godhead , a god incarnate can signify no more , than that one of the divine persons , who is really and truly god , is incarnate ; but to say god incarna●e , might be abused by such perverse criticks to signify , that the whole trinity , which is the one god , is incarnate . the next complaint of our author is , that the dean charges him with desiring that no body would write aga●nst the socinians : and pray is not that the design of his melancholy suit ? to most mens apprehensions i dare say it is ; nor do i find that he himself makes any exception against the truth of the charge ; he does not say it was not his design , tho it is very iniquitous in the dean to charge him with it , because whatever his intent was , he has given us two admirable reasons why it cannot be concluded from his book . the first is , that others as well as socinians are heterodox in this point : but the dean and dr. wallis writ only against socinians , and he owns his suit was chiefly to them , and no body else is particularly named in his suit , and therefore the dean guessed pretty right , and had some reason for his guess . 2dly . these are not the only points in which they are heterodox , and therefore the doctor had liberty to write against them in other points : but still was not he and every body else desired to forbear them in these their principal errors ? and did the dean charge him with any thing more ? for in this present controversy what had he to do with their other errors ? and yet i believe many at least of his reasons for not writing , will hold as well in other points as in this of the trinity . in the next place he gives an account why he stiles himself a stander by , which does not become any divine of the church of england in such a fundamental article of the christian faith. the first reason he gives , is his mean opinion of his own skill in the controversy , but it is modestly express'd with a perhaps , and therefore perhaps it was his ill opinion of the controversy it self . his next reason is , that every one who is skill'd at his weapon must not draw upon every one he meets begirt with a sword , but if they draw upon him , or to take it out of the metaphor , assault the catholick faith , which every christian is concerned in , and every divine concern'd to defend , it does not become him to be a stander by , but to use his skill to defend himself and his faith ; for to be a stander-by in such cases , in plain english is to be a neuter ; and when there is a dispute of faith , if a neuter be not a heretick , he cannot be orthodox , for he is on neither side , if we can suppose a medium between these two . in the next place he does not like to be thought tender on the wrong side ; but certainly he is so , if he means any thing that he speaks . he readily owns what i believe no body will lay to his charge , that he has shown a tenderness to the church of england and the nicene faith ; i suppose by those severe reflections which he makes upon both , and his burlesque of the athanasian creed and the litany , which as yet stand in our liturgy , and are like to do so , till it fall into the hands of such melancholy reformers , as out of pure tenderness for the credit of the old reformation , are for changing the frame of our most fundamental articles , or resolving them all into a mere negative belief , which is to leave no positive faith in the church . and here our author would know how he is tender on the wrong side , when he has only express'd a tenderness for the church of england , the credit of the reformation , and for peace and holiness ; and i 'le warrant you , has not said one word in favour of the socinian heresy , and therefore the dean may keep his profound politick notes , of mens tenderness being due to their inclinations , for better purposes : what these purposes are , i know not , but certainly 't is no improbable conjecture , that men have some inclinations to that , for which they express a great tenderness , though t is possible this rule may sometimes fail , and that tenderness , which our author saith he has expressed for the church of england , may not be due to his inclinations . but now let us go forward to the next paragraph , and we shall meet with some farther instances of the dean's disingenuous arts ; who perverts our author's peaceable assertions , and makes what he pleases of them by odious that is's , which the reader must know , is his common way of dealing . a short but heavy charge this , if it be true ; but the comfort is , that he who reads the dean's book with his own eyes , rather than the antapologists , will find no ground for such an accusation ; for he does no where pervert his peaceable assertions , nor do his that is's misrepresent the consequences of our author's assertions : and i take it for no disingenuous art , to expose any assertion by shewing its true m●●ning , and laying open the just consequences of it . a●● as to that publick hate , which he saith the dean endeavou●s to cast on him , i don't see how that can be , since 〈◊〉 dean has never mentioned his name , and theref●●● 〈◊〉 did not know him , or had no mind to expose him . in the next section he confesses himself an 〈◊〉 ●o such open disputes between protestants , as only pu●li●●●o the common enemies the divisions of the protestants . and so i believe is the dean too , as also to all such open disputes among christians , as have the same ill consequences with respect to the common enemies of christianity ; and yet i believe neither he , nor our author , would from hence conclude , that we must not dispute against any popish errors , because this publi●hes to the common enemies of christianity the divisions of the christians ; or that , if there be any such open disputes , those who defend the truth when openly contradicted , must bear the blame of them . as to what he says , that voluntary disputings have never suppressed , but rather revived old heresies ; if he means by voluntary disputing , a necessary defence , as he must mean if it be any thing to the present purpose , 't is very wisely thought of , that disputing against those who revive and propagate old heresies , is the thing which revives them . how this projector for the churches peace , would have those who should write in this controversy authorized , he will set down anon , and then 't will be time enough to admire the wisdom of his contrivance : let us in the mean time come to his latitude of faith , which is another branch of his notable project for peace , which he still adheres to , though , i think , he has given little or no answer to what the dean urged against it ; so that the dean's arguments hold good still notwithstanding his exceptions against them : nor are we one dram the wiser for all that fine lecture which he here reads concerning latitude , as a metaphorical term derived from astronomy , geography , triple dimensions , or what else you please ; nor yet for his citation from one who , i believe , was far enough from his latitude of faith. for i can't yet find what he would be at in the present point , unless it be , what he has been already charged with , that every man should be let alone to believe what he pleases , so he doth but profess to believe the words of scripture , though in never so perverse a sense . this i can't believe is that latitude in which the apostles left the faith. he says , to leave faith in the latitude in which it was delivered , is to impose no determinations of such words ( i.e. of such words as may carry with them different notions ) as necessary to salvation , but to allow each person to believe the matter propounded in one of those senses , whatever it be , which the words naturally bear , and which in his conscience he judges truest . this don't seem either safe or reasonable , because a word or phrase may naturally be capable of divers senses , and yet it may be demonstrable that in one place it must be taken in one sense , and in another place in another sense ; so that to take it in the wrong sense in either place , may be ridiculous , absurd and heretical . now i am persuaded that the apostles never intended to leave faith in this latitude , nor was it reasonable they should , for then we need profess but one general article , that the scriptures are true , and every man should be left to make what he would of them ; which would be a pretty and easy kind of unity of faith , comprehending all , or at least almost all heresies , for which some places of scripture are always urged by their abettors , which seem to them naturally to signify what they assert , or at least they say so ; and our author has told us in another place , that we are to believe them in what they constantly profess . but if he means only , that we should not impose any more determinate signification on such words , than what the apostles appear to have design'd them in , nor limit them to such specialties as they cannot be proved to be limited to in scripture , we agree with him . but this will not serve his cause , for here we must take in the circumstances of the place , the coherence with other texts , &c. and then we will limit them no farther than what evidently appears to be the true sense of them ; and so far we think it reasonable to limit them , and not to leave every one to interpret them as he fancies , and yet be obliged to account him orthodox , and not to oppose his false and erroneous interpretations ; which is to permit all heresies to go on , and never say a word against them . but i hope he will allow , that all scripture has some determinate sense , or else it signifies nothing ; and that this sense in the great articles of faith is obvious and intelligible to impartial , diligent , and unprejudiced seekers , and that as far as this determinate sense we ought all to agree : for tho in some lesser matters we cannot easily fix this determinate sense , nor know certainly what it is , and therefore may without any great danger be ignorant , and may own our ignorance ; yet as to the prime articles of our faith , we ought certainly to understand them in some determinate sense ; ( tho under that compass some specialties may be contain'd , to either of which it is not necessary to determine our assent ) for else indeed we do not understand them at all , and do only repeat a huddle of words when we confess our faith. now if our author can show me some plain determinate sense of those places which we urge , that comprehends under it both what we assert , and what the socinians maintain , only as such specialties , either of which may agree with the natural sense and plain meaning of the words in all those places , i will join with him in desiring no body to write against the socinians , at least not with any warmth or zeal , as allowing them to be no hereticks , nor involved in any dangerous errors . in the next paragraph , because the dean was not good at guessing , he will explain what he meant by simplicity of faith , and not any longer leave it to guess , though he first of all gives the dean liberty to take it in what sense he please , even in that of foolishness , and thinks that the apostle would in a sort justify the expression ; but neither the apostle nor common sense will justify the pertinency of it in this place . he tells us then , that he really meant plainness , vnmixedness , purity ; and i believe the dean is as desirous as he , that the faith should be preserved as plain and as pure as the apostles left it , and yet i fancy that will not hinder him nor any man else from defending it against the rude assaults of hereticks , nor from using reason in its defence : for the dean's design is to keep the christian faith pure and vnmixt from heretical glosses , which make it quite another thing than what the apostles left it , and not as our author fears , to vamp philosophy into faith. but now the dean must answer for what he has presumed to say in favour of the schoolmen , and must be confuted from his own words , for asking such an unreasonable question , as , what hurt have they done ? and here he spends three pages to show his own reading , and the schoolmens follies , and particularly those of the master of the sentences ; but i have more wit than to follow him through all these particulars . in short therefore , i suppose the dean did not intend to justify every thing that they said , but only thought they had done no harm by the words person , nature , essence , subsistence , and consubstantiality , which the dean expresly mention'd , and thought them a good defence against hereticks concealing themselves under scripture-phrases . and that the dean did not intend to vindicate them in all things , nor to fix on them the character of infallibility , is plain from what our author cites : and that the use of these words hath done more harm than good , i leave our author to prove at his leisure ; and so pass over all his tedious harangue against the school-doctors ; let him bang them about by himself , and vent his displeasure against them as long as he will , it may be a good exercise , and serve to divert his anger from the church of england and its orthodox defenders : but how he and the animadverter will agree the matter , i cannot guess . and it may be 't was this that mollified his displeasure by that time he came to the fathers , who otherwise were like to have smarted for the same kind of folly , but now are like to come off pretty well ; and he has given us a reason for it , which i like well , because it argues some modesty : he owns they are guilty as well as the school-doctors , but his respect would not let him expose their venerable names : he has indeed caught them in a great fault , but he is so kind as to let them escape . i am glad he has so much reverence for the ancient doctors , i only wish he had as much for the ancient faith , and would let that escape his lashes too . but the dean accuses him of not understanding , or not reading the schoolmen . what the dean t●ere says , i verily believe may be true , but neither does he affirm it to be our author's case , nor will i , because he now tells us , he has read them , and thinks he doth generally understand them ; and i had rather take his word , than contest that point with him . but the dean says , he censured even our english reformers for retaining scholastick cramping terms in their publick prayers ; this he denies , but owns that he did modestly wish that they had observed the same temper as did the foreign reformers ; which implies , that they ought to have done so , and yet did not , which notwithstanding the modesty of it , i take to be censuring them . nay , and is not what follows , censuring our litany and the compilers of it ? if it be not , i am sure the dissenters themselves never censured it . but by these terms , the dean says he means the beginning of the litany . and how comes he to know his thoughts ? a very pretty question : for how should any man with out conjuring know by his own words , that he meant the litany , which he prophanely and scornfully ridicules ? ●ut he meant not that alone ; a good excuse ; for it seems he meant also the ●reface in the communion service before the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 on trinity sunday ; that is , who art one god , one lord ; not one only pers●n , but three persons in one substance ; for that which we believe of the glory of the father , the same we believe of the son , and of the holy ghost , without any difference or inequality . and has not that school divinity enough in it ? and if this be all the hurt in school divini●y , it will make every good christian very fond of it , for it contains the true ●hristian faith. but because the dean has pitch'd upon the other , he will stick by it . generously done : now let us see how he defends his censure . luther and calvin are both called in to help . luther left out that petition , o ho'y , blessed , and glorious trinity , three persons and one god : of which he confesses the lutherans give another reason , viz. that the german word did not so expresly signify a trinity , as to exclude a triplicity ; but he will not allow this to be currant ; but i suppose they understood i uther's reason better than he . and then calvin disliked it also ; but so he did episcopacy ; and will he think that a sufficient ground to censure our reformers for retaining it ? but to what purpose are these citations ? let them be as express as they will , they are no argument to us , who are no more bound to acquiesce in their judgment , than our author is in that of the compilers of our liturgy , for whom i think he should have as much reverence , as either for luther or calvin . but other foreigners also , and our nonconformist countreymen , have strong exceptions against this part of the litany , which he cannot answer as he would . i am sorry for it , but i hope there are some others in the church who can . how he would have them answered , i cannot tell , but i suppose he can answer them so as to satisfy himself , which sure cannot be without sufficient reason to justify the lawfulness of these forms . and if that can be done , which if it could not , he must be a hypocrite in using them , i am sure 't is no sign of a tenderness for the credit of the english reformation , to endeavour thus to expose it , and to publish what he thinks to be the infirmities of it , when this publication can serve no other end than to encourage men in their opposition to , and dislike of the establish'd church : certainly it had been more proper to have reserved these complaints till his fit time and place . but he will grant that these forms may be used without sin , but yet he judgeth it much safer not to come so near dividing the deity , and so far to distract devotion . but must we not then lay aside the apostolical form of benediction in constant use among us , the doxology , and the form of baptism , for fear of dividing the deity , and distracting devotion ? for in all these there is as express , distinct , and particular mention of three , i dare not add persons for fear of offending our author , as in the litany . but still he would have these forms reduced to more scriptural ones , to bring in our own dissenters , whom we ought if possible , i hope i may add , by reasonable methods , to bring in and unite to us . but here i cannot but observe , that this and a great deal more of his book , is directly writing against the received doctrine of the trinity , and the established worship of the church of england . now what is this to the design of his book , to persuade men not to write in defence of the doctrine of the trinity ? did he do that , only that he might have liberty to ridicule and expose it ? i must confess 't is a good argument to engage men not to write in defence of this doctrine of the church , if he can make it out , that it ought not to be retain'd . but methinks 't is such a kind of argument , that bespeaks a man not so much a peacemaker , as a profest adversary . and besides , i would ask him , whether it be less dangerous and less vnseasonable at present for him to write against the established doctrine and worship of the church , than for others to write in defence of them ? in the next section he tells us , that vnscriptural words were complained of by the fathers , as well as by hereticks ; and by the fathers first , for which he cites st. athanasius and st. ambrose , whom i am not now at leisure to turn over , nor does it seem very material to the present business . st. athanasius he owns apologizeth for the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from the necessity of it ; and if that will be allowed as a good reason , i suppose the dean will not desire more in favour of vnscriptural terms , and therefore since our author is willing , i think we had as good let this project stand upon its own merits . here then he is very liberal , and will allow us to vindicate scripture from heretical glosses . why then may we not write in defence of the doctrine of the trinity , and show what is the true sense of scripture in that point ? and if we may do this , why is it not seasonable to do it now hereticks are so busy in perverting the true sense of scripture ? and if he will grant us this , the main design of his book is overthrown . but when we have plainly proved that these words of scripture contain this sense , why should we ( i suppose he means in our creeds and articles ) change the words ? i will tell him one short reason , if he does not know it already , and that is because , when we have proved this to be the true sense of scripture , so as to satisfy honest and unprejudiced minds , yet perverse hereticks may still take them in their own sense , and so we shall be never the nearer the knowledge of their minds , nor able to distinguish them , unless we require them to profess they believe them in that sense , which we have proved to be the true sense ; and then it must be in other words ; for though we have shown to all reasonable men , what is the true meaning of them , and so made the sense of the words plain ; yet the words are the same that they were ; and therefore every one who took them in a perverse sense before , may do so still if he will. besides , why may not any man , who believes that to be the true sense which has been shown so to be , profess his belief in those terms when required by the church , as well as in scripture words which he takes in the same sense ? the dean urges , they ( i.e. scripture-words ) may be undetermined , and 't is necessary to fix their true sense . but this , says our author , is the difficulty ; they may rationally , at least probably , admit of more senses than one , &c. he gives an example of this , which is not very much for his reputation , because it can serve no other end , but to overthrow the personality of the holy ghost , and his intimate conscious knowledge of god ; and were my design at present to dispute the sense of particular texts , it were easy to show , that it is not the obscurity of the text , but his own inclination , which makes him fancy his latitude of sense ; but it is a vain thing in such a cause as this to infer a general rule from a particular instance : for how many instances soever of this nature he could give , if he will allow that there are any express texts for the divinity of the son and of the holy ghost , which will not admit such a latitude of sense , ( as he must acknowledge if he will allow the doctrine of the trinity to be a scripture-doctrine ) there can be no pretence then , to leave such a fundamental article in such a latitude of sense , that men may either own or deny a trinity as they please . further , he would be clearly for expressing some fixed true sense of all controverted tex●s in such words as hereticks cannot pervert , but for two or three reasons , which are worth hearing : his first reason is , because he cannot always be sure which sense is most truly affixed . but can he never be sure of this in any texts that have been controverted ? if he can , then this is no reason why it should not be done in them . his second reason depends upon the first , and so must stand or fall with that , for where we can be sure which is the true sense of scripture , there is no such danger of changing faith and changing scripture by fixing the sense , but the greater fear is of having no scripture , if you have no determined sense of it . his last reason , as urgent as all the rest , is , that we cannot tell where to find such words as hereticks cannot pervert . i grant some hereticks are so perverse , as to wrest almost any words to their own sense , or else the socinians could never have wrested such plain texts of scripture , and forced them to comply with their notions . but that some words have been found that hereticks could not pervert , is i think undeniable , since they have and do frequently refuse to subscribe to them and raise such opposition against them ; as for instance , the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , which the arians always opposed . now if these words did not plainly contain such a sense as doth expressly contradict their opinions , why should they not profess their faith in such words ? he could assign many words pitch'd upon from time to time , to guard the faith and prick the fingers of hereticks , &c. what then ? this is no proof that all words can be perverted , or that none were ever pitch'd upon that could not . as to the two words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and personae , pitch'd upon by him , and so learnedly criticis'd upon , i shall only say in short , that these and such other words as the church of england delivers her doctrine in , have prick'd the fingers of some men , or else what makes the socinians cry out so ? there is something plainly signified by them , which the antitrinitarians think not so easily reconcilable to their opinions as the words of scripture are , though it be indeed no more than we say and prove to be contain'd in scripture ; or else why do they not rest contented with them as well as with the words of scripture ? suppose there are some homonymies , as our author complains , in some words used in this controversy ; will these words admit the heresies against which they are directed ? will they admit socinian opinions ? or do they contradict them ? if they do , then they serve the end for which they were designed , notwithstanding these homonymies . our author seems to think , that words cannot be found to fix the sense of scripture , unless the same words will exclude all heresies concerning the subject to which they are apply'd , which is manifestly absurd . for if i confess that god is almighty in the most express terms that can be imagined , may i not for all that affirm , that he is not just or good ? and must the word almighty be rejected because it does n●● exclude all heresies concerning the divine nature , though it sufficiently exclude all such blasphemous notions as make god a weak and impotent being . now though i confess three persons in the godhead , 't is no wonder that i may nevertheless hold heresy , and blasphemy , and assert three gods too ; but can i under these words mean , that there is not a trinity of persons , as socinians affirm ? but hereticks may here conceal themselves under a larger latitude of expression , and spread their heresies with a traditionary sense and comment of their own , more exactly and more poisonously then the purity of the holy text would have permitted . how shall we be able to deal with this man , who is so well skilled in the versatile wit of hereticks , that neither scripture-words , nor all the words made use of by the antient fathers with great caution and judgment , are able to hold him ? i wonder how he knows , what either heresy or orthodoxy is as to the doctrine of the trinity ; when , if we may believe him , there are no words that do determinately signify either , but both the words of scripture and fathers will equally serve both . but now we must return to the latitude of faith , which the dean tragically complains of him for pleading for , &c. here our author is much out of humour at some questions which the dean put to him ; and i do not wonder that it goes against his stomach to answer them briefly and plainly , though he says he will. for upon reading his answers , they appear neither brief nor plain , nor can i well tell what to make of his tedious harangue for some pages together . the dean asks him , if there be any more faiths than one ; to this indeed he answers plainly , that faith as truth can be but one. but then in what follows he makes it neither brief nor plain ; for though he owns there is but one christian faith , he qualifies it very notably , with and every truth which christ and his apostles taught , ought , if it can be without scruple understood , without scruple to be believed . now i would here ask him , if he will not be offended at my presumption , whether there be not some christian truths which ought to be expresly believed by all christians ? this i believe he will grant , because he afterwards says , that what is necessary to the salvation of all is plain . this is all we desire , and then let protestant divines be as tender as they will in defining the number of fundamentals : the only question to our present purpose will be , whether the doctrine of the trinity is not one of these few fundamentals which are necessary to salvation ? and if it be , certainly we may be allowed to write in the defence of it , and to require the profession of it from the members of our church ; and surely what is fundamental in this point is but one , and that wherein all ought to agree ; and then the faith will be but one , and no such fallacy in the deans questions as he complains of . if he will not allow the doctrine of the trinity to be a fundamental , i think'tis no hard matter to prove it ; but that is not my business , nor according to the design of his book , is it his : 't is upon this supposition we argue , and upon this supposition i would fain see him prove that the church ought not to require an express belief of this article ; but to leave it in such a latitude , as that every one may be socinian , arian , sabellian , or what else he please , and yet pass for a very orthodox christian. this i take to be the latitude he pleads for , and which , though in his dialect it be stiled believing as by grace we are able , is really believing only what we please . the rest of this paragraph concerning different measures of faith , as to the present purpose , is no more than mere harangue , ad populum phalerae ; for i cannot possibly understand that it concerns the present controversy , how god will hereafter deal with men , by reason of their different capacities and opportunities of knowledg , and what excuses ●here may be for some mens ignorance of the most important truths , &c. and i dare affirm , that all he urges here , mutatis mutandis , will be of as great force out of the mouth of a turk or deist , to prove that we urge too strict an vnity , when we desire them expresly to believe the truth of the christian religion . suppose , though there is no reason for it , that we should grant him his negative belief , even for the whole creed , will that serve his and his clients turn ? will his socinian friends submit to it ? will they then not say a word against the doctrine of the trinity , nor endeavour to spread their errors any farther ? or if they do , will he give us leave to oppose them and defend the truth ? but now let us see in the next section , where he thinks , tho upon very unjust grounds , as will appear presently , he has caught the dean ●●ipping , how ●itifully ( to use his own phrase ) and pedantically , as well as unreasonably , he triumphs and exults over him , and endeavours to expose his subtilty , as he calls it , in saying , that if the faith be one , there can be n● more latitude in the faith , than there is in an vnit. now sure this is no such metaphysical subtilty ; for if the faith be one , 't is plain there can be no more latitude in it than in an unit. but now for our author 's great discovery , without any subtilty in it , there are , says he , as many sorts of vnits , as there are of vnities ; and then he reminds the dean of philosophical and arithmetical vnits or vnities , which you please ; and what latitude there may be in an vnit. suppose all this , the dean doth not , as i can find , say there is no kind of latitude in an vnit , but only that there can be no more latitude in the faith , than there is in an vnit ; which if it be one , must be so . but then i pray , what is the latitude in an vnit , considered as an unit ? none , i think ; for in whatever respect 't is one , 't is no more than one , and has no latitude . a compositum , which is a thing he imagines the dean may have heard of in philosophy , tho , as he says , it has parts , yet is but one totum , and in that respect has no latitude ; and an hund●ed is but one hundred and no more ; and therefore as an vnit it is but an vnit , and has no latitude . and if the faith be one , as one , it can have no latitude : if the vnity of the one f●ith be only an vnity of words , then there is no latitu●● ●f words , and we must comply with our author's fancy , and never profess it in any other words than the words of scripture : but if it be an vnity of sense , ( as one would think'tis most reasonable and most proper it should be among intelligent creatures ) then we must agree in the same sense ; and if we do not agree in some one sense , we do not agree in the same ●aith , tho we do use the same words ; and if we do agree in the same sense , 't is no harm tho we happen not to use exactly the same words , and then there may be very good reason sometimes to make use of other than scripture words . i believe then there is no latitude in an vnit. yes , but there is , and 〈◊〉 the one faith too , especially as by the one faith we understand what churches and doctors have now made it . what churches and doctors have made the one faith , if any of them have made it more than our saviour made it , concerns not us , we justify no such things . but what is this to our purpose ? sure these churches and these doctors do still require an vnity of faith , and allow no such latitude as our author contends for ; nay , i fancy he really thinks they urge too strict an vnion ; and yet this for want of a better , must be made an argument to prove , that there is a latitude in the one faith ; and is it not a stabbing one ? some doctors require more things as articles of faith , than really are so ; ergo there is a latitude in the one faith. but sure this is no sign that these churches and these doctors allow a latitude in the one faith , if they make it stricter than christ or his apostles made it , much less that christ and his apostles allow of any such latitude of faith. but have we not whole systems of opinions now a-days made up into confessions of faith ? yes , we have several systems of arian , socinian , pelagian , calvinistical opinions , and all of them require a subscription at least from their divines to these several systems , without allowing his negative belief , which is a certain proof that they do not allow his latitude of faith ; and from hence to prove that the scripture words have no determine● sense , and are not to be believed in one determined sense , is to prove that the multitude of heresies destroys the certain and determined sense of scripture ; and i wonder what he means , who pretends to own one faith , to object against this one faith the various and contrary systems of opinions in religion , unless he thinks all these contrary systems are within the latitude of the vnit , or of the one faith. and now that this latitude may not pass for his own invention , he tells us , that god is doubly the author of a latitude in faith. 1. in revealing his truth in such terms as admit of a latitude of conception ; that is , in not revealing it at all ; for if the terms admit of a latitude of conception , i. e. two contrary senses ; which is the truth ? both cannot be , and if both are equally the sense of the words , then the truth is not revealed , but as far to seek as ever . now for my life cannot i imagine what else this latitude of conception should be , unless he means that god has revealed his truths , and those too the most fundamental articles of christian faith ( for concerning such our present controversy is ) in such dubious and ambiguous phrases , that we cannot understand the true sense of them , or at least that very few can , and that even they few cannot be certain that they understand them in the right sense , that is , in that sense which god meant them ; tho that is improperly said , for it seems god meant them in none , but intended that every man should believe them in what sense he pleases . this he may call a latitude of faith , but it is such a latitude , that if i should tell any infidels of it , whom i would convert to christianity , they would presently laugh at me and my faith too . but in the second place god is the author of a latitude in faith , in giving to men , as he sees fit , such measures of knowledge and persuasion , as leaves them in a higher or lower degree of faith , and even of holiness . this is impious ; for in the true consequence of it he charges not only all the heresies , but all the infidelity in the world on god almighty , and justifies both their heresies and their infidelity by the different degrees and measures of faith , or by the no-faith which god gives them ; but i am not at leisure to dispute this now , for it does not concern our present purpose . but if our author would say any thing either in defence of what he pleads for , or against what the dean maintains , he must show that christians are not obliged to profess and believe one and the same truth ; that agreeing in scripture-words , tho understanding them in contrary senses , is sufficient to make orthodox christians ; that we must not defend the true faith against such as oppose it , especially if they , or any peaceable men for them , pretend that they believe as they can , and as by grace they are able ; and that the church must not require an open and undisguised profession of the true faith. now all this , he says , is far from thinking it indifferent what men believe ; but very far i am sure from being any proof of what he pleads for ; for there is nothing that can uphold his cause , but such an indifferency as will not allow the church to concern her s●lf what men believe ▪ nor her members to defend the true faith. but i must conceive as i can , and judge as i can , and believe as i can too ; i must not believe what i cannot believe . very well : and i need not believe any more than i can ; and this is true too , if it be not my own fault , that i can believe no more ; but if it be , i shall hardly be excusable before god or man. i cannot , it may be , believe the true faith of the holy trinity ; or it may be i cannot believe the truth of the christian religion , as i fear too many now-a-days will be ready to tell you ; some lu●ts and prejudices hinder me from discerning the clear evidence of it , and so long i cannot believe , and therefore i hope i shall be excused , and no body will be so quarrelsome as to litigate with me about it , nor go about to confute me , for i believe as by grace i am able ; for though the gospel be never so true , if god has not given me grace to understand so much , how can i believe it ? for neither i , nor any man alive , who believes any thing , can believe all that dictating men will impose upon them . but can't he believe what reason and divine revelation di●tate ? and who desires him to do more ? if the doctrine of the trinity be the imposition only of dictating men , let him prove that , and we will no longer desire him or any man to believe it . but if it be the plain truth of the gospel , we will desire him to believe it , and think the church has authority enough to require him to do it , though the church can't make that an article of faith which god has not made so : for i hope she can require the profession of that which god has made so , and that is all we desire . but in controversies the church may declare her sense , and we are bound so far peaceably to submit and accept it , as not to contradict it or teach contrary , under penalty of her censures . a very bountiful concession , for which he deserves her publick thanks , if he will but stay for them till a fit time and place . and this he would be content ( i doubt it not ) to conceive the whole of what our church requires , as to these things , which are merely her determinations . now who can tell what he means by merely her determinations ? for i never heard that the church delivered any doctrines , especially the creeds , as merely her determinations , which would be indeed with a bare face to impose upon the faith of christians ; but she never pretended to make a faith , but to teach that faith which was once delivered to the saints . but does he really think the church desires no man to believe the creeds , and particularly the doctrine of the trinity , but only not to oppose them ? doth she indeed hand them to us merely as her own determinations ? can any thinking man say so ? but if this were all , do our socinians observe this ? why does not he first persuade them to comply thus far , before he desires us not to defend the church's doctrine ? but let us hear his profound reason ; for in truth it is to no purpose for her to require such approbation and consent , which whether paid or no , she can never come to have knowledge , of which sort is belief and inward approbation . is it then to no purpose to teach men the truth , because they may put upon us , and say they believe it when they do not ? is it to no purpose to require men to profess their minds sincerely , because we cannot always be sure whether they do or no ? this is admirable logick . we must then never administer an oath , because we can't tell for all that , whether the person speaks the real truth or no. but if this be true , there is no need of disputing a latitude of faith , for men may take this latitude whether we will or no. but to exact this may breed hypocrisy ; not if his latitude of faith be allowed , for then men may sincerely profess their faith in any words which have latitude enough to excuse from hypocrisy , which , if we will believe him , all words have , whether found in scripture , or used by the ancient church . but must nothing be done , from whence bad men may take occasion to be hypocrites ? then i am sure vertue must not be encouraged , nor vice punished , because some may hence take occasion to counterfeit virtue when they are not sincerely virtuous . and i hope he will not say , that requiring an inward belief makes men hypocrites any other ways ; it is not design'd for that end , it does not command nor force men to be hypocrites , and if men will be hypocrites , who can help it ? nay , certainly if our church required only his peaceable submission in what she teaches of the trinity , she might be more justly accused of encouraging hypocrisy . for what else would it be , to oblige men daily to worship the trinity , when she does not suppose nor desire them to believe any such thing , and to profess their faith in three persons , when they do not believe one word of that doctrine ? but it cannot be a seed of charity and christian concord to exact this inward belief . but i think 't is great charity to the souls of men to exact such a faith as is necessary to salvation ; as for charity to the bodies of men , writing against their heresies breaks no bones . and if by concord he means an unity of faith , which is the only concord we are now concern'd about , such a latitude as admits of twenty several sorts of faith , can't be this concord ; and whenever there is such a concord , as an universal liberty of faith signifies , which can be only a civil and political concord , i desire him to tell me , whether ever he found a greater unity in the faith , or less disputing for it . after some usual compliments pass'd upon the dean and his hypothesis , which deserve to be scorn'd , not to be answer'd , he comes to dr. wallis his three somewhats . the dean says , that when dr. wallis called the three persons three somewhats , thereby he only meant , that the true notion of a person he did not know : that is , that tho , as the doctor says , a person in divini● is analogous to a person in humanis , yet by what peculiar name to distinguish them he could not tell , and therefore calls them somewhats ; which , as the dean says , must signify , that three persons are three real subsistencies , and three real things , not a sabellian trinity of mere names . and if he can think this a good occasion to ridicule the trinity in our prayers and doxology , by the name of three somewhats , he is not a fit man either for the dean , or any sober christian to dispute with . but now for his unavoidable consequence of not knowing the true notion of a person , that we then worship we know not what ; i have hardly met with any thing more empty and weak . if we have not the true , that is , full notion of a person , therefore we worship we know not what , when we worship three persons : he might as well have concluded ; that because we have not a compleat notion of god , nor of several of his attributes , as omnipotence , omniscience , &c. all which we allow to be incomprehensible , therefore we worship we know not what , when we worship an omnipotent and omniscient , that is , an incomprehensible god. but now since he pretends to own a trinity , and has ridiculed somewhats , and done little less for the word person ; i would desire to know what he worships , when he says that prayer in the litany , o hol● , blessed , and glorious trinity , three persons , &c. and what he means , when he owns ●hree that bear witness in heaven ; whether they be in his opinion three somewhats , or three nothings ; three real things , or only three names ? but however that be , he will not blush to press again his desires to all men to let this controversy rest , as it was above thirteen hundred years ago determined by ●wo general councils . pray who are they that will not l●t it rest ? are they not his friends who move these ancient boundaries of peace ? if we must let it rest , persuade them to leave us in quiet possession of the truth , and we are content ; which sure he ought to do , or else to let us alone in defending it . for i cannot but look upon it as very partial and iniquitous , to desire us to let the controversy rest , that is , not to write in defence of the ancient doctrine , while our adversaries freely spread libels against it ; and who can imagine that any man who has any zeal for the true christian fa●th , should press this ? as for his reason , which he thinks stands unshaken , i am of opinion that neither the dean nor any one else had occasion to shake it , it was weak enough to fall of it self . if some men by the improvements they have attempted , have , as he says , embroil'd this do●trine , the fault is theirs ; or if some will draw false inferences from what is well and cautiously said , there is no help for it , as long as there are men of perverse minds , and weak heads : but sure all who have writ on this ●ubject have not embroiled it ; i have read what some learned writers of controversy , besides the present dean of st. paul's and dr. wallis , have writ on this subject within less than thirteen hundred years , which has not embroil'd nor perplex'd my understanding , but given me much satisfaction , and made several things clearer to me than they were before . but if this argument were never so true , it does not prove that we ought not to defend the ancient doctrine , but only not to give any new explications of it , lest they should turn the heads of some men . as for what he quotes out of the nouvelles de la republique des lettres , if it signify any thing more than to let us know he understands french , it must be to warn the world against mathematicians , who it seems are very busy in corrupting the faith with their notions of mathematical quantities : i never saw the book , and am not mathematician enough to be a proper judge of it ; and therefore must refer it to dr. wallis , who i● . but now he is for carrying on his jest in good earnest , whatever the dean think of it , and would still have the doctrine of the trinity left on its old foundation of authority ; i.e. he would have us yield the point to the socinians , who he knows value the authority of councils no more than he does that of the church of england . the dean , he tells us , demands of him , would he believe such absurd doctrines as some represent the trinity in vnity to be , merely upon church-authority ? to which he returns an answer , by which 't is not easy to apprehend what he means . he says , he is not press'd with any such absurd ●octrines : it may be he is not , for i am not sure ( tho he pretends the contrary now and then ) that he believes any more of the trinity than the socinians do : but if he believes what the church of england teacheth , the socinians i am sure do press him as well as others with pretended absurdities . now as for such forms of speaking , as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , conglorified , and the like , he thinks we must receive them only from church-authority , and would have those who defend them ( which i think he does not care to do ) urge nothing else . the fathers indeed , good men , thought the sense of these words was in scripture , and so doth he , admitting what we judge good consequents out of scripture , to be of the same truth with scripture ; but poor man he confesses he is not able to prove it , nor to convince others who do not think so ; and because he cannot convince them , he thinks no body else can ; which may be true , if he knows his men to be convinced ; for some men will never be convinced , and some others have as little mind to convince them . but he goes on , demonstrate to the world this to be the sense of sc●ipture , and the controversy is at an end . if he means , prove it by good and sufficient reason , this we say may easily , and often has been done , and yet the controversy is not at an end , and i fear never will be , while there are such peacemakers as he is , fluttering about the world . but when he calls upon us to demonstrate this , i hope he does not mean mathematical demonstrations , unless he has a mind to trepan us into the nouvelles ; and as for any other demonstrations , if he cannot give them , others can , if he will secure them from his earnest suits . well , but if we can't demonstrate this , we must own this to be the state of our evidence . we have for the orthodox side , scripture interpreted by the tradition of the church : this at length resolves it self mainly into church-authority . this were true , if there were no other certain way of knowing the true sense of scripture , but church-authority ; for this sets aside scripture , and resolves all at last into church-authority ; and he himself has made that too contemptible to be a sure foundation for faith ; but the scripture was so writ by the divine penmen , as to be understood ; and tho a traditionary sense of scripture be a very good confirmation of what according to the ordinary rules of expounding scripture , appears to be the true and genuine sense of it , yet no authority ought so far to over-rule us , as ●● persuade us to believe that to be the true sense of scripture , which neither the usual signification of the words , nor the circumstances of the place , nor the contexture of t●e reasoning proves to be so . and this was the question he ought to have answered the dean , whether he would have believed such things as the socinians say are very contradictions and absurd , and which he himself does not say , are not absurd , merely upon authority , though this authority pretends scripture without any reason to be on its side . but still he has a farther fetch , which the dean was so dull as not to smell out , nor i believe would any man else , though he had attended his words never so strictly ; and it is this , that some other concurrent power should be called in to end this controversy , i suppose , by imposing silence on all parties , this carries a show of greater impartiality than our author usually expresses , for then the socinians , as well as the orthodox , must have their hands tied up . but i doubt this is not such a very fair proposal , when 't is thoroughly considered ; for this must not be done till the hereticks are first gratified , and the forms of worship , which some mens consciences can't bear , made easy , that is , the doctrine of the trinity thrown out of the liturgy ; thank him for his extraordinary civility to the church of england . and then no matter how severe the laws be against any who shall write or speak more in the controversy ; that is , i suppose , every man shall be punished who shall presume to speak one word for as well as against the trinity , and pretend to teach any such doctrine ; for saying any thing of it , either in the desk or pulpit , will be speaking in the controversy . now this i think will not amount to much less than determining the controversy on the socini●ns side ; for to prohibit the teaching or asserting the doctrine of the trinity , or the explaining of those texts which do assert it , looks very like determining that there is no such thing , or at least that 't is no matter whether men believe it or no , or in what sense they take the scripture words , so they do but agree to use the words . but to proceed with our author , he professes a great reverence for the council of nice ( whether in earnest or in jest let the reader judge ) and speaks a great many fine things in behalf of it , not worth repeating . and then he falls foul upon athanasius and his disputations , taking a hint from what the dean said concerning his learned and subtil disputations , which confounded the arians ; of which this author for brevities s●ke , and to keep close to the business in hand , gives us a tedious historical account , which is many times a very good way of dropping the main point ; besides , that it is always easier to tell a story , than to reason well . and to what other purpose all this account serves , he may guess that can ; for my part i see so little in it , that i think it time lost to consider it any farther . for i cannot understand how it proves , that the council of nice did rely chiefly on authority , as our author asserts ; and that ●heir faith was not ( as the dean says it was ) resolved into scripture and reason . when he shows how his story will prove this , which was the thing in debate , i will seriously consider his quotations , but in the mean time i shall leave him to read his history-lectures to the walls , and pass on a page or two farther , where we shall meet with a masterpiece of wit and reason , in some learned remarks on the athanasian creed , which may well enough divert a reader who is disposed for a little mirth , but will signify little to one that has a mind to be serious . but however , he cannot forbear an instance or two o●t of that creed , to shew how apt that creed is to lead men to mistake the truth , and to prosess heresies and blasphemy . i suppose this was meant for an instance to show his tenderness for the church of england , who owns and embraces this creed . he has found out a way , ( and as far as i know , the glory of the invention may be all his own ) to prove from this creed , that two of the three persons are not eternal , but created , because there is but one eternal and one vncreated , and therefore two of the three must be created ; tho the creed expresly says of each of the three persons , that he is eternal and uncreated . any man , i think , would rather hence conclude , that these three are one eternal and one uncreated , than that two of the three are not eternal . and i dare venture any man for making such a mistake , tho he hath a less metaphysical head than our author , and less grammar to direct him how to discern when a word is to be taken adjectively or substantively . and now he tells us , therefore ( i.e. because of what has been said ) he had reason , as to the doctrine of the trinity , not to go beyond the decisions of the councils , but to acquiesce in their authorities ; as if that were all he had urged , when 't is plain that he affirm'd , that it was authority that chiefly carried the point in these councils , and would have us urge nothing but their bare authority in defence of our faith ; and whether from what he has said , there be reason for us thus to expose our selves for fools to our adversaries , i leave every one to judge , who knows what reason means . so that the dean's question was very pertinent , and still retains its first force , for i would fain see this author show us any man of sense , who would believe such absurd doctrines , as the socinians represent the trinity in vnity to be , merely upon church authority . what farther authority beyond that of the church interposed in the council of nice , he has no mind to speak : but i think what he does speak , does plainly enough insinuate , that it was not reason nor scripture , but human force , which carried it , and determined the point in that council ; and would any man who did not intend to expose both the nicene faith and council too , insinuate this ? let the dean then be as charitable as he will in his opinion , i am hard to believe that this was writ with any other design than to expose the doctrine of the trinity , and the church of england , as well as the council of nice , which no doubt is much beholding to him , because he would not speak all he knew of it , but leave every one to suspect the worst . and after the same manner i find he is willing to oblige the dean ; for he will also pass by here , as small faults , some blunders of mr. dean's ; but not without naming them , for fear the reader should be so dull as not to apprehend them without notice . one of them , or rather all , is , that he makes st. athanasius , st. hilary , and st. basil ( tho i cannot find either hilary or athanasius named by the dean in that huddle of fathers ) to write largely against those heresies which former councils had condemned ; whereas they all three died when there had but yet one council sat . this blunder may , i hope , pass indeed but for a small fault , or rather , as i take it , for none at all : for as to hilary , he is not mentioned by the dean ; and then for athanasius , the dean a line or two before that huddle of fathers that sticks in our author's throat , says of him , that he wrote against the arians after they were condemned by the council of nice , which i hope is no blunder . and then if st. basil did dye after one council only had sat , did not the rest there named live and write after more councils than one had sat ? and therefore if some here named writ after one council , and others after two or more , what blunder is it to say in general , they writ against heresies which former councils had condemned ? is not this agreeable to the common form of speech ? and yet it may be they might write against some things condemned by more councils than one , tho not general ones . but however , these fathers , he says , are impertinently cited against him ; this i am sure is impertinently said ; for 't is evident enough , that what they are cited for , is directly contrary to what he would persuade us to , for they wrote against heresies condemned by former c●uncils , and that it is for which the dean cites them ; and the antapologist , if i can tell what to make of his arguments , has all this while been persuading us not to write against the antitrinitarians , because they were condemned by former councils : now on which side the impertinency lies , let any other stander by judge . and thus much , and more than enough , as to his adhesion to the authority of these councils ; which i can make nothing else of , but that he would have nothing added to the determinations of these councils . but all this while how does this prove , that authority chiefly carried the point , or that we may not write in defence of what these councils have determined ? and now our author after all this tedious harangue should come to vindicate his reasons from those exceptions which the apologist has made against them ; but that is a task which does not agree so well with him : he he has not , i suppose , leisure and books enough about him , being so many miles from his study ; and his adversaria for the proper month , it may be , are not at hand ; and therefore let his reasons shift for themselves as well as they can these hard times . as to his reflections on the dean ( to whom he now wholly applies what he had formerly said in general , against all who write in defence of the true faith , and for whose sake alone i believe indeed he wrote ) for contradicting and not being consistent with himself , while he says he has made that point plain and easy , which he confesses difficult and incomprehensible ; they need no very long answer , for the dean does not pretend to have made the doctrine of the trinity so easy and plain , as that there is now nothing in the nature of god incomprehensible : nor doth he say , that so much of the mystery as he has made plain , is incomprehensible . it is then no contradi●tion to make it plain , that there are , and how also there may be without any contradiction to the nature of an infinite and eternal spirit , three persons and but one god ; and yet to confess that the nature of god is incomprehensible . but now this controversy is like to be at an end ; for says our author , now i may set my heart at rest as to this controversy , if mr. dean will stand to the profession he has made , that all that any man that he ) pretends to in vindicating the doctrine of the trinity , is to prove that this faith is taught in scripture . this , our author adds , is that which he would be at . and yet i fear the dean and he would not be at the same thing : the dean would have it , and has proved it , that the doctrine of three persons and one god , is contained in scripture . now if i can guess at the meaning of the stander●y , this very attempt put him into a melancholy fit , and therefore he desires no man would meddle with this controversy . this was the design of his book , to persuade us not to meddle with this controversy , but to leave every man to take the words of scripture in what sense he pleases ; and this i take to be different from the dean's design of proving this doctrine to be contain'd in scripture ; and so the dean's own profession , tho he stand to it , will not bring the business so near a compromise . for i doubt , that if we should grant our author what he says , that three such persons as the de●n has defined , are not asserted in scripture , yet he would not be so kind to the church of england , as to grant , that three real persons are there asserted , which we know the socinians deny , and put strained and unnatural senses on scripture to reconcile it to their principles of reason ; and did so long before the dean gave any definition of a person , or said one word in the controversy . but after all , he has not fairly represented the dean's words , but has stopped where he thought fit ; as if the dean had only said , that all any man pretended to , was to prove that this faith is taught in scripture ; whereas he went farther , and added , and that it contains no such absurdities and contradictions , as should force a wise man to reject it , &c this , i doubt , the stander-by does not love to hear of , that there is no absurdity , no contradi●tion in the doctrine of the trinity . in the next page he proceeds to account for his last reason he assign'd for the present vnreasonableness of some mens agitating this controversy : he should have cleared his accounts as he went along , and said something more to the purpose in justification of his other reasons , before he came to the last ; but it may be he has a good excuse , and therefore we will be contented to attend his motions . here then he tells us , that the dean calumniates him , when he affirmeth this to be the sum of his argument , that to vindicate the doctrine of the trinity against socinians , will make men atheists . now i desire any man to look upon his words , and see if it be not so ; for he addresses his suit to all who write in vindication of the trinity , to forbear writing ; and to this purpose he tells them 't is unreasonable to controvert this point ; and the reason he brings to prove his assertion , is , that hereby our church at present is , and the common christianity ( it may be feared ) will be more and more daily exposed to atheistical men ; by what , i pray ? by vindicating the doctrine of the ●rini●y . this is the plain sense of his words , tho now he is asham'd of it , and would have us believe the sum of all was only this , such vindications as that writ by dr. sherlock , he should have added , or by any other learned writers of controversy at present , at least dr. wallis , tend rather to make men atheists , than to convert socinians . if this be all●he meant , it were to be wish'd he would learn to speak plainer . why did he not plainly say , he was not against mens writing in vindication of the doctrine of the trinity , but that he only disliked dr sherlock ' s vindication ? but whatever the doctor 's vindication will do , i am sure our antapologists politick method for men to agree in the bare sound of words , and no body to know what they mean by them , or to take them in opposite and contradictory senses , would expose us and our faith to the just scorn of atheists and scepticks , who by the same art might subscribe all the articles of the christian creed , and yet believe never a word of the gospel . in the next section he comes to the secret , which the dean told him , that atheists and deists , men who are for no religion , are of late very zealous socinians ; and which the dean urges as a good reason why we should at present be zealous against socinanism , and so undoubtedly it is , and a far better than any he has urged to the contrary . for the truth of the matter of fact , 't is notoriously known , and needs no proof . to invalidate this argument , i can't find that he has said one word ; but instead of this , ( according to his usual way of digressions ) he puts off the reader with an account of his friendship and acquaintance , which he holds with no atheists nor deists , but only with some virtuous rationalists ; and that his virtuous rationalists do not ridicule this faith. this virtuous rationalist , is a new name , and i 'am afraid signifies , either a deist , or a socinian , for other men are not ashamed of their known characters , and if they do not ridicule the doctrine of the trinity , no thanks to their good nature , nor to their good manners ; they do their best , as he has done , to ridicule it ; but it is a doctrine that won't be ridicul'd . thus much for the unreasonableness of this controversy about the holy trinity . in the next place he objects the danger of it ; and his argument for that , is , that it is a fundamental of our religion : now to litigate concerning a fundamental , is to turn it into a controversy ; that is , to unsettle , at least endanger the unsetling the whole superstructure . now , in answer to this , the dean had proved , that there was very great reason to dispute and settle fundamentals , when hereticks endeavour to unsettle them ; and ask'd this author , whether the being of a god were not a fundamental ? and whether that were a good reason not to dispute for the being of a god , because atheists denied it ? this made him ashamed to own his argument , and therefore he charges the dean with misrepresenting it . his pretended misrepresentation is , that he did not say , that the doctrine of the trinity was a fundamental in general , but only , if duly stated , and therefore not a fundamental , as unduly stated by the dean . this is so trifling an evasion , that it is hardly worth the while to expose it . was the dispute , whether the dean should write in defence of the doctrine of the trinity , or whether the doctrine of the trinity should be defended ? was his argument urged to prove that it was dangerous for the dean , whom he never named before , to defend the doctrine of the trinity by his mistaken notion of it , or that it was dangerous to dispute a fundamental ? to show the fol●y of this pretence , let us put his argument into mode and figure , wherein his fundamental doctrine of the trinity , as duly stated , can be only the minor proposition . 't is dangerous to litigate touching a fundamental , or to turn a fundamental into a controversy . but the doctrine of the trinity , as duly stated , is a fundamental : ergo , 't is dangerous to litigate touching the doctrine of the trinity , as duly stated . now if he will not allow the major proposition , his argument is nothing ; and if he will , then the force of his argument consists in the danger of disputing fundamentals , and i● seems the dean placed the force of his argument right ; and if that argument be good , it is as good against disputing for the being of a god against atheists ; for the being of a god is as fundamental as the doctrine of the trinity . so that this limitation of duly stated , does not at all concern this argument of disputing about the trinity ; but the argument only prov●s , that we must not dispute about the doctrine of the trinity , as duly stated , because it is a fundamental , and i suppose , whenever we talk of defending the trinity , we mean it as duly stated . but tho the stander-by would not allow any man to defend fundamentals , yet our worthy primate being not under his jurisdiction , has ventured to do it . this was then news to him , and welcome tidings too , if we may believe him ; and he pretends also to pay great deference to his authority , tho one would hardly guess so by the lash he gives him for licensing by his chaplain the dean's apology . but what has he to answer this authority ? why , he hopes in that piece to find ( as i hope too by this time he has ) plain and perspicuous scripture-notions , clear reason , and genuine antiquity . will this justify the writing of that piece ? if so , then 't is not unreasonable , nor unseasonable , nor dangerous , to write in defence of fundamentals , and even of the doctrine of the trinity ; but farther , he was capacitated by his publick station , &c. very well : and if that will justify him , why will not his approving the apology , justify the dean at least in writing that book ? and why may not his vindicacion be as well justified by the approbation of another , who was also capacitated by his publick station , either to write , or to license other men to write on this subject ? his last argument is the vnseasonableness of this controversy ; he says , all controversies among protestants are now unseasonable ; the dean adds somewhat more , that they are always so ; for there is no juncture seasonable to broach heresies and oppose the truth . to this he answers , that there may be controversies among protestants , without heresy ; but it is not easy to conceive any controversy , but that one side or other must oppose the truth ; and this i believe the dean thinks always vnseasonable ; but the present dispute was about fundamental articles , and therefore he had very good reason to mention only the vnseasonableness of broaching heresies . and he seems to me to urge a very good argument why no juncture can be unseasonable to defend the truth when 't is oppos'd ; for if hereticks will dispute against the truth unseasonably , there is no time unseasonable to defend fundamental truths . but can any thing be more pleasant than his proof of the seasonableness of some controversies , he might have said of all , even of socinianism it self , in all junctures , from the university-exercises in the divinity-schools , where men who are all of a mind dispute with one another , not to oppose the truth , but to learn how to defend it against the common enemy when occasion serves ? he might as well have proved that civil wars are not always unseasonable , because 't is never unseasonable for fellow-citizens to learn the use of their arms in a martial scene , without bloodshed . but his argument why it is so unseasonable in this juncture , is this , because , under god , nothing but an vnion of counsels , and joining of hands and hearts can preserve the reformation , and scarce any thing more credit and justify it , than an vnion in doctrinals : here he complains , that the dean left out somewhat at the latter end , and therefore i will add it , and it is this , so above all other controversies none can be well thought of worse timed than this ; let the reader judge whether this injured the force of his argument , especially since it was afterwards particularly considered . in answer to this , in the first place the dean asks , is the vnion in doctrinals ever the greater , that socinians boldly and publickly affront the faith of the church , and no body appears to defend it ? all that he answers to this is , that he does not love affronts , especially to the faith of the church , and don 't know that the socinians affront it , and is sorry for it if they do ; it may be he will not allow writing against the faith , and endeavouring to ridicule it , to be an affront , which he knew very well the socini●ns did , if he knew that ever the dean writ against the socinians , which was in answer to as prophane and as scurrilous a libel as ever was writ : but whether he will allow this to be affronting of the faith or no , i suppose he will allow that it is opposing it ; which argues no great vnion in doctrinals , tho no body should defend it , unless , as the dean adds , the world should think we are all of a mind , because there is disputing only on one side , and then they will think us all socinians , as some foreigners begin alrea●y to suspect ; which will be a very scandalous vnion , and divide us from all other reform'd churches . his answer to this , ( and a very politick and grave one it is ) as far as i can guess , amounts to this , that if we live good lives , and let our adversaries alone , the world will credit our practice , articl●s , homilies , &c. and therefore think us no socinians . now if subscribing the articles be no more than he makes it to be , they cannot conclude us to be no socinians from our articles , because a man may subscribe them , and yet believe never a word of them ; in which case the only way to show that we do believe them , is to defend and vindicate them , and then i believe the world will think us no socinians ; but otherwise , i fear , they will , as the dean says , think us all socinians , which will be a very scandalous vnion indeed . as to what he says of pamphlets dying away , if they were not opposed ; i am not in all cases of his mind , and see no present prospect of it , especially in this controversy , which so much gratifies atheists and infidels : but if these heresies would in time dye away of themselves , which yet i much question , as not finding that false opinions always lose ground by not being opposed , what must be done in the mean time ? must we all pass contentedly for socinians in the eye of the world , and be afraid to say we are none ? i believe all men would not think this much for the glory of the reformation , nor would the cause of religion be much beholding to us for it . but his great argument to prove this juncture unseasonable to defend the doctrine of the trinity is , that it makes sport for papists ; to which the dean answers , it must be disputing against the trinity then , not dis●uting for it , for they are very orthodox in this point , and never admitted any man to ●heir communion , who disowned this faith , or declared that he thou●ht it at any time unreasonable , dangerous , or unseasonabl● to dispute for it , when it was violently opposed . this he thinks fit to return no answer to , but only to deny that the dean took any notice of it , but says it was too warm for him , and that he let it slip through his fingers . the dean observed farther , that if this argument to prove the unseasonableness of this controversy in the doctrine of the holy trinity in this juncture , from the necessity of union of counsels and joining of hands and hearts for the preservation of the reformation , have any force , it must signify , that we shall never join against a common enemy , whose successes ●ould endanger the reformation , while there are any religious disputes among us ; which is a confession that every schism in the church is a new party and faction in the state , which are always troublesome to government when it wants their help . he seems surpriz●d at this , as not aware of this consequence , the truth of which he has not confidence enough to deny , nor reason enough to answer , but only sences a little for his beloved socinians , as a very small inconsiderable party , and so quiet and peaceable in their principles , that there is no danger of their disturbing government : now if all this be true , it only proves the impertinency of his argument ; for then we may still write against the socinians , and yet unite counsels , and join hands and hearts to preserve the reformation ; of which the socini●ns , as the dean before urged , and he thought fit to take no notice of , are no part . and now passing by some poor trifling reflections , we must come to his mind in a passage of more weight ; but pray , what are these trifling reflections , which he is so good natured as to pass by ? they are only some reflections on his answer to an objection started by himself in these words , shall we tamely by a base silence give up the point ? of which he tells us there is no danger , for a wise reason , viz. that the established church is in possession of it , and the a●versaries of the received doctrine cannot alter our articles of religion . now this answer is apparently weak , and the insufficiency of it is shown by the dean in a few words , as indeed a few are enow to do it ; and i suspect he passes by these reflections upon a very reasonable account , because he could not answer them . i shall not therefore trouble my reader with the repetition of them , nor ask our author any question for fear he should say , i fall on catechising him , which possibly will not agree with a man of a negative belief . but it may be the reader will not be angry , if i ask him a question or two ; whether because our articles oblige us to profess our faith in the holy trinity , this be a good reason why we should not defend it ? and if the socinians , as he tells us , have a zeal too , no less ardent than that of church men ; whether this be a reason why we should by a base silence suffer them to spread their poyson without contradicting them ? if our author were to answer this question , i suppose he would in his melancholy fit , say , yes by all means ; for if no body disputes with them , they will leave off disputing ; but will they leave off perverting the people ? will they leave off making proselytes to their heretical opinions ? nor do i believe after all , that the charms of our author 's melancholy suit and peaceable rhetorick , would be able to silence them , though no body should write against them : for why then did they unprovoked make the first onset ; and , as soon as they thought the times would bear it , openly disperse their envenomed libels , which i don't question but they would have done sooner , if they had thought it safe : if our author had told us , they had no ardent zeal , his argument would have been much more to the purpose ; for then indeed there would have been more reason to neglect them , since there would have been less reason to fear the spreading of the infection . well , but whether they will leave off disputing or no , 't is fit we should , and neglect them till a fit time and place , which is the weighty passage that the dean will not understand ; but however , whether he will understand or no , we must wait for this fit time and place before we open our mouths in defence of the truth . i wonder our author would not stay for them before he writ against the deans gross pack of errors , as he is pleased to stile them ; for certainly , according to his own rule , he ought to have remained a stander-by ( as melancholy as he pleases ) till what he himself calls a fit time and place were come . for it seems , tho the dean thought the present a fit time , not upon those reasons which he himself gives , and which our author has not confuted , but as our author , who , i suppose , by this time has got the gift of discerning spirits , , faith , because he had leisure and a mind to give the world some new specimen of his skill in dispute , and for other reasons that the world talk of ; yet all these reasons are not able to convince him , but that the fittest time and place is a full house of convocation : and if we grant this , may not the present also be a fit time , till the other can be compass'd , tho not the fittest ? and the fittest persons a committee chosen by that great and reverend assembly ? here i had a great mind to be at the old way of questions ; but since he is so afraid of being catechis'd , i must , to humour him , put the case categorically ; and , besides referring him to what the dean has already said , tell him what exceptions i have against his proposals , which i look upon as neither reasonable nor practicable ; for certainly there is no great reason why those doctrines , which have been so long since defined by a convocation , should never be defended against the assaults of scornful cavillers and opposers , till a convocation can meet and order an answer to their scandalous pamphlets , and then overlook it again before it goes to the press . and i think the authority lodged in the archbishop and bishop of london to license books , may be sufficient to justify any man , whom they approve , in writing in defence of the established doctrine , without waiting for a new convocation ; or else what was that authority lodged there for ? i hope , not to license books against the doctrine of the church , nor yet merely to license such as do not at all meddle with the doctrines of our religion . and if this authority be sufficient , we know the dean was thus far authorized to write in defence of the doctrine of the ●rinity . it seems very hard , that we may not vindicate the fundamentals of our religion from absurdities , contradictions , and falshoods imp●ted to them , till a convocation can be called to do it ▪ which in my apprehension is not easily practicable , unless we could have a convocation always fitting , which he cannot think either feasible or convenient according to our constitution : and yet if they are not always sitting , it will be very difficult and troublesome immediately to call them to confute every heretical doctrine that in times of liberty may be broach'd by bold and daring men . when it may be fit to do thus , i leave those , to whom it belongs , to judge ; but i am sure 't is neither reasonable nor practicable every time hereticks oppose the truth . now by this method he says , all sons of the church would and must be concluded . and are they not already concluded by the articles , liturgy , homilies , &c. which he says our adversaries cannot alter ? i suppose he would not have us obliged to subscribe every line and tittle in such a book revised and approved by a convocation , as a fundamental of christianity , but only the doctrines there defined as fundamental . and thus i think in the present point , all sons of the church are already concluded by subscribing the articles and creeds ; and if this would do it , as our author imagines , there would already be a due end put to these controversies . but according to his peaceable notion of subscription , by his proposed method , all sons of the church would not be concluded any farther then to hold their tongues , for they might still believe , and inwardly approve the socinian doctrines , or any other ; which thou●●● he may think a due end of these controversies , yet few others will. but after all , how would this put an end to these controversies ? if a convocation should meet and determine on the side of our articles , and write a book to justifie the truth , will this put an end to these controversies ? will the socinians be generally converted any more than they are by learned mens writings now ? i doubt they would hardly acquiesce in such a book , though drawn up by our author , who though he would be favourable enough to them , yet i hardly believe would be able to satisfy them . which he thinks will not be , till we can make things plain which are confessedly unsearchable , if not , as some pretend , unintelligible . the plain english of which i take to be , that it is impossible to prove the doctrine of the trinity so as to satisfy even rational and sober men : and then i cannot apprehend how his method would put an end to these controversies any other ways , than by a negative belief ; though i very much question whether even upon such terms he could persuade the socinians to be silent . but still he cannot see any readier expedient than this towards such an vnion , as in the present state of things may be adjudged possible . indeed i cannot tell whether a real christian union in the present state of things , will be adjudg'd possible , or no ; nor whether such an vnion as our author pleads for , be necessary for our affairs ; and would be effectual to keep out popery , and beat the king of ●rance ; but i hope both may be done without it : but if such an union as is indeed desirable , and such as there ought to be in the church of christ , be not possible , i know the fault is not in the church , nor only in her professed enemies who will not comply , but in such pretended friends as under the colour of peace do openly affront and condemn the faith of the church , and vilify her constitutions , thereby hardening and encouraging her adversaries in their obstinacy , and giving them hopes , that by their means they shall at length obtain the terms they desire . but of this negative belief enough has been said ; only i cannot but take notice of one thing here desired by our author , that no pra●tice be imposed upon any , contrary to their consciences . the meaning of which i take to be , as is plain from several other places of his book , and particularly from p. 10 of the earn . suit ; that no expressions should be allowed in the liturgy , which any one professes are against his conscience ; nor any rite or ceremony required , which all men are not satisfied in ; and so we must part with episcopacy , and all order and decency , to satisfy mens pretences to conscience . this is a brave protestant reconciler , and this is admirable arguing for a church-of england-man , and one who has read fathers and schoolmen . this is such a loose and wild principle , as if duly adhered to , we must tolerate most , if not all errors , schisms , and vices , that were ever heard of in the world . the next thing we are to answer is a captious question , with which he pretends to answer the dean , who as he imagines had put such an one to him . the dean had ask'd him , whether he would allow us , who as he grants , are in possession of this faith of the trinity and incarnation , to keep possession of it , and teach , explain , and confirm it to our people ? now because he is resolved to be as captious as the dean , he asks him , whether he never saw certain royal injunctions assigning fit subjects for sermons ? no doubt but he has : what then ? why then , must they not be obeyed ? yes . but what of all this ? to discourse concerning the doctrine of the trinity , is not there prohibited . but is there not the same reason of it , as of those things that are ? i believe not : for as i take it , the trinity and incarnation are more fundamental points than the disputes about predestination , and more necessary to be believed by christian people . besides , the controversy then was not only with such as wholly denied the article , but among those who differed in the sense of the article , while there was something contained plainly in the article , to which both sides agreed , tho some would have more included in it , than others could find , or would allow to be there asserted . which controversy authority saw fit to silence at that time , since both sides owned the truth of the article , which asserted a divine predestination ; and would not let every one in their pulpits run into nice , useless , and hurtful questions ; nor do we desire this should be allowed in the doctrine of the trinity . and when he has interest enough at court to procure a royal injunction , that no man shall write or speak concerning the trinity , we know what we have to do ; but till then , his royal injunctions are no more to the purpose than his own arguments . but however , he will not stand with us for this point , for notwithstanding this , he yields that ministers should at due season preach to their people the doctrines of the trinity and incarnation ; only let them do it plainly , easily , purely , and sincerely , according to scripture , and not with innovations of their own . this , if he be sincere and plain in what he says , is all we desire ; and if he will promise never to revoke this grant , we will be satisfied . in the next place he is for admitting known socinians into the communion of the church . the dean had said , he hoped he ( the stander-by ) did not propose this negative belief , as he calls it , as a term of communion ; that though we know them ●o deny the trinity and incarnation , yet if they will agree not publickly to oppose and contradict this faith , we shall receive them to our communion . thus far our author cites ; but the dean had said also , and fling the worship of the holy trinity , and of a god incarnate , out of our liturgies for their sake . this he very roundly answers , and utterly confutes , with a short why not ? this is indeed a short question , and needs no long answer ; for in the next page , if he would but look on it , the dean has given him a sufficient reason , why not ? but he thinks to evade all by putting an impertinent case , too long to be recited here , and indeed not worth it : for it doth by no means reach the point , which isc whether the governors of the church ought to make the terms of communion so large , as that known professed socinians and arians may fully communicate with us as compleat and orthodox members of the church ; and not , as our author gravely puts it , whether every preacher should stop when he sees a socinian come into the church . besides , he supposes his socinian to be a known good liver , and professing the common christianity ; but it may be we may not agree with him ; and suppose i should not be so happy as to think so well of his socinian friend as he doth , will he then give me leave to turn him out of the church ? but what is all this to the publick constitutions of a church , and the laws of communion ? must they be made so loose as to admit all sorts of hereticks , because an heretick of any sort may sometimes appear at least to be a good liver , and profess to believe the common christianity , &c. as there have been such professors of other heresies , and may be of any as well as of this ? if our author answers this too with a why not ? i desire he will subjoin a reason for what he says , and then he may deserve a reply . and now our great champion of wrong'd innocence , out of his extraordinary generosity , and love of peace and truth , cannot forbear observing , that the dean wrongs the poor innocent socinians , and imputes sundry points very iniquitously stated , to them , which yet they hold not as he states them and first he tells us , if he ( the dean ) as some in the world , had had personal dealing with the generality of his parishioners as to matters of conscience , he would say , that the ignorance of many church-people , and so the errors of their conceptions touching god and the three persons in the godhead , much more alter ( as to them ) the object of the christian worship . the dean , i believe , tho not so unacquainted with his parishioners , while he had a parish , yet never met with such ignorance as this ; and yet no man doubts but there are some persons very ignorant , who have no distinct conceptions of god the father , son , and holy ghost , but yet have no heretical opinions about them ; and i wonder this stander-by , who is so fond of a negative belief , should not see a difference between a negative orthodoxy , and professed positive heresy . by the same argument he might as well prove , that all other hereticks ought to be received into the communion of the christian church , because there are a great many christians that are extremely ignorant in all other points of faith. but tho a general , confused , indistinct knowledge , with a sober and pious conversation , may qualify men for christian communion , yet profest hereticks ought to be flung out of the church . the first are the churches care to instruct them better , as opportunity and their capacities will admit ; the others are her profest enemies , and must be removed from the church , to preserve the sound parts from infection ; and i can t imagine what notion a man can have of church-communion , without unity of faith ; tho the same communion may admit of very different degrees of knowledge . it would be too tedious , and not very pertinent here , to run thorough these things ; but i am sure , for all his haste , the dean has not in this place imputed any thing to the socinians , but what they avowedly and in print maintain ; for it is evident that the socinians do deny the meritorious sacrifice , and the meritorious intercession of our saviour ; that they do also deny that the eternal son of god offered himself ; that god demonstrated his love to us by sending his own son in a proper sense , as opposed to a mere man , or created spirit ; and consequently , they do deny the humility and condescension of the eternal son of god , in becoming man , &c. and therefore these things are not iniquitously imputed to the socinians , which yet are the very things which the dean's discourse imputes to them ; and therefore he has no reason to add , that some men write against them without understanding them ; but i am afraid 't is too true , that some men apologize for them without understanding th●m . as to the socinians altering the object of religious worship , i refer the reader to that discourse of the dean's , to which he himself has referr'd in his apology , where he will find that point more largely handled , and fully and clearly proved . but now we come to a great point , and which takes up a great many pages in our author , about the authority of parliaments , bishops , and convocations ; on which head i have some good reasons not to be so large , and to desire the reader 's excuse , if i do not follow our author in all he says on this subject ; especially , since our proper business doth not require it , and therefore i do not care to ramble like him , unless i had the same advantage as he has , to be on the securer side . 't is not safe to define what parliaments can do without convocation● , or bishops without presbyters . but i am sure the church has no cause to thank our author , who would first betray her faith , and then diminish her authority , even in things purely spiritual : first , he gives up the convocation , for what reason is manifest , and for which the inferior clergy are bound to thank him : and then he does the same in effect for the bishops , when he allows so much to the parliament , for they have not so much as a negative voice there , and articles of faith may be coined even against the express will of every one of them ; and though he cannot believe the body of the bishops disallowed , or did not with good liking consent to the act of toleration ; if he does not particularly know this ( which it is certain might have passed without any of their consents , and how many dissented i never enquired ) his opinion , belief or disbelief , must be owing only to his inclination . and if we could suppose ( what god be thanked there is no danger of ) the majority of the lords an● commons to have as little understanding of , and zeal for the catholick faith as our author has , we might have a socinian creed made without the assent of one english bishop , or at least such articles of communion framed , as would admit all manner of hereticks into the bosom of the church , and allow all to be orthodox christians , that believe but as well of christ as the mahomet●ns do . and this our author , at least as far as concerns those hereticks , for whom alone he is advocate at present , hopes to see done ; for he hopes that authority , namely king and parliament , will in time relax what more is necessary for such an vnion as is possible to be patched up by a latitude of faith , and a negative belief . i hope they will not , and think there is reason to conclude from some late proceedings , that they will not . but we must not pass by his reflections on the dean's wonted civility , in taxing him with pretending to give an account of acts of parliament , as he doth of other books , without seeing them . this is indeed very uncivil not to believe a man except he produces witnesses that heard or saw him read the act ; and since he thinks this a hardship , i will not give him the trouble ; but i must needs say there was no reason for the dean to think otherwise before ; for by the account which he gives of this act , no man that thought that he had either sense , or sincerity , or modesty , could imagine that he had ever seen it , but was imposed upon by hear-say , or by a hasty conclusion , that because it was an act of indulgence to dissenters , it must certainly indulge the innocent and true protestant socinians among the rest . this would have been his best excuse , and much more allowable than still to stand to it , that other dissenters have benefit by that act who do not renounce soci●ianism , contrary to the express words of the act. but let us see how he makes it good , what then , do you think of a t●cit connivance at their stay at home ? i think there is no such connivance allowed by the act , nor can i believe it is the meaning of the words of the ●ct , or the design of those who made it . and i am sure this melancholy dream of a tacit connivance , is a very scandalous representation of the bishops and of the whole parliament ; for this is to tolerate atheism , deism , and profaneness , and to give men free liberty , not only to be of what religion they will , but of none at all , if they like that better . but then , what do you think of a tacit connivance quietly to come to our congregations ? this i think is no new favour , but what was always openly allowed to all who were not excommunicate , and is very far from a tacit approbation or ●oleration of their erroneous opinions , to let them come thither where they cannot join with us , but they must be supposed to renounce these errors ; for i am sure there is no allowance in the act for them to join with us only in such parts of our worship , as do not expresly relate to the holy trinity , any more than to hold separate assemblies of their own , without declaring their faith in the holy trinity . and then for his vetuit inquiri , i wonder where he will find it , there is no such thing in the act , and i believe any lawyer will satisfy him , that what law was in force against socinianism before , is so still , and the same inquisition may be made after them ; but if any , whose business it is to discover such offenders , or punish them when known , will neglect their duty , 't is their connivance and not the law that affords impunity . but i wonder what makes him dream of a tacit connivance for socinians , because they are expresly excepted : ' ●is just as if he should say , the articles of the church of england give a tacit connivance to them , because they require every man to renounce their errors , and to confess his faith in the holy trinity . this is an excellent argument to prove all hereticks true church of england men , even though they should write earnest suits , and enter their protests against her. but if this will not do , he now has , and then had in his head ( though he had not occasion to out with it ) another favour shown by the parliament to dissenters , not by this act indeed , but by a former statute ; which took away the writ de haeretico comburendo , which it seems he was afraid might hurt his socin●an friends , in case some such of their friends as mr. ●ean , were in the place they affect , but now , he says , he hopes this custom here is in a fair way to be aboli●●ed . this is so silly , that i can hardly call it spiteful , for its silliness is an antidote against its spite ; every one knows that writ was taken away to secure the church of england against the fears of a popish successor , which was the only danger of reviving that writ ; which had been so long out of use , that it was hardly known among protestants : which argues no great tendern●ss in him for the church of england to insinuate so vile an accusation , as if this practice of burning hereticks had been so very customary , that he can still only hope that an act of parliament can put a stop to it . his conclusion is so rambling , and so very furious , that i begin to fear his melancholy has some spice of frenzy in it ; and therefore it is time to leave off disputing , without returning the compliments or advice which he has given the dean at parting . finis . notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a59811-e140 earn . su● . p. 7. antap. p. 1. ant. p. 11. p. 2. ant. p. 3. sect. 2. p. 4. ant. p. 5. ant. sect. 3. ant. p. 5. ant. p. 5. p. 8. p. 11. p. 12. sect. 7. p. 18. sect. 8. p. 20. p. 2● . sect. 9. p. 21. p. 23. p. 23. p. 25. p. 27. sect. 11. p. 27. p. 28. p. 28 , 29. sect. 12. p. 30. apol. p. 8. antap. p. 30. p. 3● . p. 31. p. 31. p. 31. p. 31. p. 31. sect. 14 . p. 33 . sect. 15 . p. 34. p. 3● . p. 39. p. 39. p. ●● . p. 41. p● 42. p. 43. p● 43. p. 44. e●rn . suit , p 7. antap p. 44. sect. 19. p. 45. p. 31. ant. p. 51. ant. p. 51. ant. p 51. earn s●●● p. 10. ant. p. 51. ant. p. 52. p. 52. apol. p. 26. ant. p. 52. p. 53. p. 53. apol. p. 26. ant. p. 53. p. 54. ant. p. 55. sect. 25. ear. suit , p. 11. ant. p. 55. p. 54. sect. 125. p 55. socinianism unmask'd a discourse shewing the unreasonableness of a late writer's opinion concerning the necessity of only one article of christian faith, and of his other assertions in his late book, entituled, the reasonableness of christianity as deliver'd in the scriptures, and in his vindication of it : with a brief reply to another (professed) socinian writer / by john edwards ... edwards, john, 1637-1716. 1696 approx. 190 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 86 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2003-01 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a38042 wing e214 estc r3296 11789813 ocm 11789813 49159 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a38042) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 49159) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 491:13) socinianism unmask'd a discourse shewing the unreasonableness of a late writer's opinion concerning the necessity of only one article of christian faith, and of his other assertions in his late book, entituled, the reasonableness of christianity as deliver'd in the scriptures, and in his vindication of it : with a brief reply to another (professed) socinian writer / by john edwards ... edwards, john, 1637-1716. [16], 142 p. printed for j. robinson ... and j. wyat ..., london : 1696. errata: prelim. p. [16]. the reasonableness of christianity (1695) is by john locke. "a brief reply to another socinian writer, whose cavils bear this title, [the exceptions of mr. edwards in his causes of atheism against the reasonableness of christianity, &c. examined.]" (p. [113]-142) has half title. reproduction of original in union theological seminary library, new york. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng locke, john, 1632-1704. -reasonableness of christianity. exceptions of mr. edwards, in his causes of atheism. socinianism. 2002-06 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2002-06 aptara keyed and coded from proquest page images 2002-07 judith siefring sampled and proofread 2002-07 judith siefring text and markup reviewed and edited 2002-08 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion socinianism unmask'd . a discourse shewing the unreasonableness of a late writer's opinion concerning the necessity of only one article of christian faith ; and of his other assertions in his late book , entituled , the reasonableness of christianity as deliver'd in the scriptures , and in his vindication of it . with a brief reply to another ( professed ) socinian writer . by iohn edwards , b. d. and sometime fellow of s. iohn's college in cambridge . london : printed for i. robinson at the golden lyon , and i. wyat at the rose in s. paul's church-yard . mdcxcvi . the introduction . the following discourse ( which was finish'd above two months ago , but by reason of some intervening occurrences found not its way to the press ) is design'd against the undertaking of a late author in his book which bears the title of the reasonableness of christianity , &c. but the writer himself is wonderfully pleased with his lying hid , and being no body . i grant there may be reasons why a man may sometimes conceal his name , and not prefix it to the book he is author of . but there are some reasons that are proper and peculiar to this writer's circumstances , for this is perfectly after the mode of our late english racovian writers , who constantly appear nameless , and accordingly herein he shews himself to be of the right racovian breed . and another good reason is this ( which indeed argues something of modesty ) he would not set a christian name before that book wherein he so grosly abuses christianity , and renounces the greatest part of it . i will not wast time , and trouble the reader and my self about guessing who this writer is . out of christian good will and charity i am backward to believe that he who is vogued to be the father of these extravagant conceits , is really so . i will still perswade my self that there is an error of the person ; upon which account i shall be more free than otherwise i should have been . but to come to the book it self ; there was ( to express it in the most learned and rhetorical stile of our author himself ) a great flutter , noise and buz raised about it , even while it was yet under the printers hands . there were certain factors and emissaries who extravagantly extolled it , and it was observ'd this applause came from the racovian quarter . those of that way knew before it came out that it was in favour of their cause : whence it was that they so mightily raised the expectations of those they convers'd with , and highly magnified this piece before the world had seen it . and as soon as it was blessed with the sight of it , their language ran to an exorbitant heighth : as if christianity had been never known before the time of the compiling of this book . all that went before this author were deluded creatures , and were perfect strangers to the articles of the christian faith , and to christianity it self . now is risen up an infallible teacher : all must obsequiously repair to this great oracle . now the socinians have another champion , now they look brisk upon it , and the day is their own . now converts come in apace , and the youth begin to have a polonian aspect : and in a short time we shall have a brood of socinians , we shall be stock'd with young racovians . and to let you into the whole project , this is the short account of it , socinianism was to be erected at this time ( they can stay no longer ) and in order to that all hands are to be employed , i. e. all that they can get . among others they thought and made choice of a gentleman , who they knew would be extraordinarily useful to them ; and he it is probable was as forward to be made use of by them , and presently accepted of the office which was assigned him . now , thinks he , i had best to make use of this opportunity , and to set up for a divine . not only the illiterate bulk of mankind , but their reverences and right reverences ( to use the words of a * writer of our own brotherhood ) shall come to me to have their understandings inform'd , for we have but a sorry unthinking sort of teachers now a-days , whether they be conformists or otherwise : i could never approve of their systematick genius , their doating upon creeds and confessions , and rendring our faith cumbersom and burdensom . it may be even these men will give ear to what a thoughtful musing man dictates to them , though they never think themselves , but take all upon trust , and swallow epistles and gospel together . i have attained to such a heighth and perfection of knowledg that i am able to instruct these people after another rate . i must tell them ( which i know they will look very strangely upon ) that the apostles , when they wrote the epistles to their christian converts , designed not to trouble their heads with any articles or truths that were necessarily to be believed , they only dropt a few occasional documents . and it may be now and then that one article which i have propounded to the world may be hook'd in by the by : but that is no place to look for any necessary and fundamental truth of christianity , which is absolutely to be believ'd by us . this seems to be novel doctrine , and so indeed it is , for i have the honour to be the first famous inventer of it ; but i doubt not but in a short time i shall not only propagate this , but the cause to which it is subservient , in a wonderful manner . to this purpose i will carry it cunningly : whilest the double-column'd prints are openly and in a down-right way advancing the cause , i will do as much service under-hand . they look directly towards poland or transylvania , they publickly profess themselves to be socinus's followers , but i 'll be upon the reserve , and so disguise my self that it shall be very difficult to discover me . i will make the world believe that i never heard of such a man as socinus : and if they tell me that i speak his very language as perfectly as if i were a native of sienna , i 'll face them down that i had it not by fingring of any socinian authors , but by a kind of natural revelation . well , this cause must be carried on , and i can do it as well as any man by maintaining that there is but one article of christian faith necessarily to be believ'd to make a man a christian , necessarily to be believ'd in order to salvation . for if there be but one point necessary to be believ'd , then the doctrines concerning the trinity , concerning the incarnation and divinity of christ , concerning his satisfaction , &c. are rendred unnecessary as to the making us christians . and this i will shove on under the colour of being serviceable to the bulk of mankind , of being obliging and merciful to the multitude and rabble , and poor people ; though ( to say the truth ) i shew my self to be so far from obliging the multitude that i do them an infinite deal of mischief . yet if i compass my end , it is enough , and i care for no more . and my end is this , to hale in socinianism after a new manner . you see what the musing of this gentleman comes to : and i was so unhappy a man as to find it out , to take notice of it , and to discover it to the world in a late discourse which i publish'd : and thereby i have extremely exasperated this new undertaker and his adherents . i do not wonder at it , for now their intrigues are laid open , their racovian plot is detected , and all their measures are thereby broken . but to keep up their hearts , a vindication ( as it is call'd ) of this treachery is publish'd by him who was appointed to be the chief tool in this work . here he makes it his business to defend his new paradox , and to shore his notion up again with some crazy props . throughout the whole he is pleas'd to criticize with some magisterialness and pertness on the reflections which i made on his book . and now it is my turn again to be critick , and i shall discharge the task with all impartiality and integrity . it is true , there is nothing of any moment , nothing weighty and argumentative in what he hath offered , and therefore some in whose judgment i could confide , would have prevailed with me to add no more on this subject , which they were perswaded i had before sufficiently cleared : but partly to shew somewhat further the great danger and mischief of this writer's opinion , partly to prevent the seduction of some well-meaning persons who may be apt to be led away by his smooth pretences , ( for though his cavils and evasions be weak , yet they may chance to light into the hands of some weak readers , such as are not well establish'd in their notions : wherefore not on the account of his petty objections , but for the sake of these persons i reassume this argument ) and partly to lay open the wilful mistakes and gross dissimulation ( as i take it ) of this writer , and partly to gratifie those gentlemens expectations who with some impatience seem to long for a reply , i have once again undertaken to employ the press upon this occasion . but the chief and principal design , as well as motive , of my appearing again in this cause is to assert and defend the christian faith which this author hath misrepresented , maim'd and abused . to which purpose i will set before the reader the heads of his pretended vindication , and in the face of the world make it appear how falsly and perfidiously he hath acted in the cause of religion . and may it be the readers prayer ( as well as it is mine ) that this enterprize may tend to the glory and honour of god the father , god the son , and god the holy ghost ( three glorious persons in one ever to be adored deity ) and to the edification of the christian church . amen . ian. 27. 1695 / 6. errata . page 17. line . 1. read . world. p. 22. l. 18. for christ. r. iesus . p. 54. l. 20. r. sylburgius . p. 85. l. 9. r. racovians . p. 87. l. 23 after iesus insert christ. p. 116. line 3. after done make the other part of the parenthesis . p. 117. l. 18. after if insert the truth were known , i believe it would appear that . p. 120. l. 17. r. telling . p. 125. l 8. r. him . p. 128. l. 21. after hath insert had . p. 131. l. 13. after religion insert who is so near a-kin to one that is voted a socinian in the brief history of the vnitarians . p. 135. l. 11. r. socinianiz'd . a late writer's unreasonable opinions confuted . chap. i. the first general charge against the late writer , viz. that he unwarrantably crowds all the necessary articles of faith into one , with a design of favouring socinianism . he endeavours to shift off the enditement , but is cast by his own words . his wilful mistake about the article of the deity . he labours in vain to split one article into two. it is shew'd that besides the bare believing of jesus to be the messias , it is necessary to know and believe the fall of adam , whereby sin and death entred into the world , and were derived to his posterity . it is necessary to know and believe who the messias is ; whether he be god or man , or both : on which will follow the necessary belief of the holy trinity . it is requisite to have a right conception concerning our recovery and restauration by the messias , i. e. to know what he undertook and did for us , and to be acquainted with the great privileges bestow'd upon us by him . it is of necessity to believe what the messias requires of vs. it is undoubted matter of our belief , that our salvation springs from the mere favour and grace of god through christ jesus , and not from any works or merits of ours . it is indispensably requisite , that we believe the doctrin of the resurrection , of the final judgment , and of eternal life . i will now betake my self to the task which is before me , after i have told the reader , that i intend not to imitate our nameless author in his childish flourishes , in his spruce and starched sentences , and in his impotent jestings , which are sprinkled up and down his vindication . nor will i follow him in his impertinencies and incoherencies , in his trifling excursions to eke out his two sheets and a half . i will not resemble him in his little artifices of evading , in his weak and feeble struglings with a strong truth . i will not personate him in the confusion and disorder of his reply , for it seems he had forgot , that it is one sign of a well-bred , a well-taught man , * to answer to the first in the first place , and so in order . i will not imitate him in his dry common places , in his set of words and phrases , of sayings and apothegms , which would have serv'd on any other occasion , as the intelligent reader cannot but take notice . much less will i comply with him in his angry fits and passionate ferments , which , tho he strives to palliate , are easily discernible , for he feels himself wounded , and is not able to disguise it . i will betake my self , i say , to the present concern with great application and mindfulness , fully making good my former charges against his book , and clearing my own from those sorry objections and cavils which he hath since rais'd against it . in the whole management i will sincerely acquaint the reader first with his own words , and then offer my refutation of them : and all along i will be careful to banish all indecent reflections ; unless those shall be counted such which are purely grounded on his own expressions , and which his freedom of language necessarily and unavoidably administers to me . the main charges are these . 1. that he unwarrantably crowded all the necessary articles of faith into one , with a design of favouring socinianism . 2. that he shew'd his good will to this cause by interpreting those texts which respect the holy trinity , after the antitrinitarian mode . 3. that he gave proof of his being socinianiz'd by his utter silence about christ's satisfying for us , and purchasing salvation by vertue of his death , when he designedly undertook to enumerate the advanvantages and benefits which accrue to mankind by christ's coming into the world. and in the making good of these particular charges , i shall ( as i did before ) evidence to the world that this writer hath not only a design to cherish socinianism , but at the same time to make way for atheism . i begin with the first , on which i will enlarge more than on any of the rest ; because it comprehends in it several other particulars , and because in discussing of this , i shall have opportunity to lay open the sophistry and dissimulation of this vindicator , and likewise to discover to the reader how mischievous and pernicious his design is . first , it is observable that this guilty man would be shifting off the enditement by excepting against the formality of the words , as if such were not to be found in his book . but when doth he do this ? in the close of it , when his matter was exhausted , and he had nothing else to say , vindic. p. 38. then he bethinks himself of this salvo , whereas he had generally before pleaded to the formal enditement , and had thereby owned it to be true. and indeed he can do no other , for it was the main work he set himself about to find but one article of faith in all the chapters of the four gospels and the acts of the apostles : and accordingly he over and over again declares , that there is but that one truth ( viz. iesus is the messiah ) necessarily to be assented to by christians , or ( as he sometimes words it ) absolutely required to make a man a christian , or a member of christ. this is the sole doctrin press'd and requir'd to be believ'd in the whole tenour of our saviour's and his apostles preaching . p. 192. of his reasonableness of christianity . and again in the same place . this was the only gospel article of faith which was preached to them . this he often inculcates , having left out several considerable passage in the very gospels , and having thrown aside the epistles , as if they were no part of the new testament , hoping that some of his readers would be bubbled by this means . and when i told him of his one article , he knew well enough that i did not exclude the article of the deity , for that is a principle of natural religion ; whereas , i only took notice of his passing by and wholly omitting those points which are evangelical . yet he willfully mistakes me in this , p. 27. of his vindication , and saith he doth not deny the necessary belief of a deity , or one only true god ; and so the belief of the messias with that makes two articles . thus he would perswade the reader , that i misunderstood him , and that i tax'd him with setting up one article , when he acknowledges two . but the reader sees his shuffling ; for my discourse did not treat ( neither doth his book run that way ) of principles of natural religion , but of the revealed one , and particularly the christian. accordingly this was it which i taxed him with , that of all the principles and articles of christianity he chose out but one as necessarily to be believed to make a man a christian. and though since he hath tried to split this one into two , p. 28. yet he labours in vain , for to believe iesus to be the messias amounts to the same , with believing him to be a king or ruler , his being anointed ( i. e. being the messias ) including that in it . yet he hath the vanity to add in great characters , these are articles , as if the putting them into these great letters would make one article two . such is the fond fancy and conceitedness of the gentleman , whereas in other places he hath formally declared , that there is but one article that is the necessary matter of faith. this i had just reason to except against ; and now i will give a farther account of my doing so , by shewing that , besides that one fundamental principle or article which he so often mentions , there are others that are as necessarily to be believed to make a man a christian , yea to give him the denomination of a believer , in the sense of the gospel . several of these i particularly , but barely enumerated in my former discourse , and now i will distinctly insist on the most of them , and let the reader see , that it is as necessary for a convert to christianity to give assent to them , as to that other he so frequently specifies . this proposition , that by one man sin entred into the world , and death by sin : and this which follows , death passed upon all men , for as much as all men have sinned , rom. 5. 12. and that other , that even the regenerate ( for the apostle speaks of himself and the converted ephesians ) are by nature the children of wrath , as well as others , eph. 2. 3. these , i say , are as absolutely necessary to be known , assented to , and believed , in order to our being christians as this proposition , iesus is the messias , or sent of god. for i ask , what was the end of his being sent ? was it not to help mankind , to rescue and deliver them from some evil ? and where can we be inform'd concerning the rise and nature of this evil , but in the sacred and inspired writings ? and do not these foresaid texts , which we find in st. paul's epistles , acquaint us with the true source and quality of our condition by nature ? do they not discover the root of mans misery , viz. the apostacy of adam ( for he is that one man ) and the dreadful consequences of it , expressed by death and wrath ? and is this set down to no purpose in these inspired epistles ? is it not requisite that we should know it and believe it ? yea , is not this absolutely requisite ? for it is impossible any one should firmly imbrace , or so much as seriously attend to the doctrin of the messias , unless he be persuaded that he stands in need of him . and can he be persuaded of this unless he be acquainted with his degenerate and miserable state , his universal depravity and innate proness to what is vitious , and with the true original of it ? viz. the voluntary defection and fall of our first parents , and with that the loss of our happiness . the word messias is an insignificant term till we have a belief of this : why then is there a treatise published to tell the world , that the bare belief of a messias is all that is required of a christian ? again , it is not only necessary to know that iesus is the messias , but also to know and believe who this iesus , this messias is , viz. whether he be god or man , or both . for every one will grant that there is a vast difference between the one and the other , as much as there is betwixt infinite and finite ; and therefore that we may have a due apprehension concerning the messias , it is absolutely necessary , that we should believe him to be what he is declared to be in the infallible writings , viz. god , as well as man. the word was god , john 1. 1. the word was made flesh , v. 14. and this word is the only begotten of the father , in the same verse . god was manifest in the flesh , 1. tim. 3. 16. he is called not only god in these places , and in several others , but he is stil'd the true god , 1 john 5. 20. and the great god , tit. 2. 13. the lord of all , acts 10. 36. god blessed for ever , rom. 9. 5. hence we must conclude , that there is a necessity of believing the messias to be the very god , of the same essence with the father and the holy ghost , for these are the two other persons included in the deity . so that hence it will follow , that it is requisite to believe the holy trinity , i. e. that there are in the godhead three persons , father , son and holy ghost ; which is the doctrin that our saviour himself taught ( and he taught it , that it might be believed ) mat. 28. 19. where the celebration of baptism , which is a solemn part of divine worship , is commanded to be in the name of the father , and of the son , and of the holy ghost , who are one god , 1 john 5. 7. these three are one , one essence or being , as the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 imports . those words of the apostle are observable , 1 cor. 1. 13. were ye baptised in the name of paul ? as much as to say , baptism is in the name of god , and not of a man : therefore when it is said , go and baptize in the name of the father , son , and holy ghost , it is included , that these three are god , i. e. three persons of one and the same deity . thus it is manifest , that the believing of iesus's being the messias , or anointed is not sufficient to make a man a christian believer , but he must further believe these propositions or articles , viz. that the son of god was made flesh , i. e. assumed our human nature ; that christ is true god ; that he with the father and the spirit are one god ; for these are not only expressed in the gospels and epistles ( out of both which we are to gather the fundamental articles of faith ) and consequently are to be assented to by all christians , but the very nature of the thing it self dictates that we ought to have a firm belief of these truths ; for otherwise when a man professes his belief in the messias , he is yet ignorant of the person he pretends to believe in . he doth not know whether he believes in a god or in a man , or to which of these he is beholding , for the good he looks for by the messias's coming . now , sir , you with your reasonableness of christianity , what do you think of this ? is it not reasonable that a christian should ( as the apostle speaks of himself ) know whom he hath believed ? 2 tim. 1. 12. nay , is it not indispensably necessary , that he should know whether it be a divine , or human , or angelical power that he is obliged to , that so he may accordingly proportion his affections and service ? for ( what ever the late set of socinians hold ) there must be a difference made between the homage which is paid to a creature ( such as they declare christ to be ) and that which is due only to the creator . i will refer the reader to the incomparable bishop pearson on the second article of the creed , where he shews , the necessity of our believing christ to be the eternal son of god , and god himself , 1. for the directing and confirming of our faith concerning the redemption of mankind . 2. for the right informing of us about that worship and honour which are due to him . 3. for giving us a right apprehension , and consequently a due value of the infinite love of god the father in sending his only-begotten son into the world to die for us . thus this judicious writer . but our nameless author would persuade us , that there is no necessity of believing any such thing . then in the next place , we are to have a right conception concerning our recovery and restauration by this messias , who is god-man . and here those several scriptures will furnish us with articles , as by the offence of one , judgment came upon all men to condemnation , even so by the righteonsness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life . for as by one mans disobedience many were made sinners , so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous , rom. 5. 18 , 19. he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself , heb. 9. 26. christ was once offered to bear the sins of many , heb. 9. 28. christ hath once suffered for sins , the just for the unjust , 1 pet. 3. 18. he gave himself a ransom for all men , 1 tim. 2. 6. ye are redeemed with the precious blood of christ , 1 pet. 1. 18 , 19. and to it is prefix'd ye know , to let us understand that this article is to be known and assented to . we are bought with a price , 1 cor. 6. 20. and 7. 23. we are reconciled unto god by the death of his son , rom. 5. 10. by him now we have received the atonement , v. 11. by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified , heb. 10. 14. it behoved christ to suffer , and to rise from the dead the third day , luk. 24. 46. christ must needs have suffered , and risen again from the dead , acts 17. 3. he was taken up into heaven , and sat on the right hand of god , mark 16. 19. these and the like places afford us such fundamental and necessary doctrins as these are , that by and for the meritorious righteousness and obedience of christ ( the second adam ) we are accounted righteous and obedient in the sight of god : that christ was a sacrifice for us , and suffered in our stead : that he satisfied divine justice by paying an infinite price for us ; that by vertue of that payment all the debts , i. e. all the sins of believers are perfectly absolved : that hereby the anger of the incensed deity is pacified , and that we are entirely reconciled to him : that we have an assurance of all this by christ's rising from the dead , and ascending triumphantly into heaven . these are principles of the oracles of god , heb. 5. 12. these are part of the form of sound words , 2 tim. 1. 13. which are indispensable ingredients in the christian faith , which you may know by this , that if a man be obliged to the belief of the messias's coming , it is undeniably requisite that he should know what the messias came to do for him , and that he should firmly yield assent to it . this i think no man of reason will deny : and then it will follow that these articles which i have last mentioned are the necessary and unexceptionable object or matter of the faith of a christian man. and here likewise it were easie to shew , that adoption , iustification , pardon of sins , &c. which are privileges and benefits bestowed upon us by the messias , are necessary matters of our belief , for we can't duly acknowledge him for our benefactor and saviour , unless we believe , that these great prerogatives are confer'd upon us . moreover , it is of undoubted necessity in order to our being christians , that we know and believe what the messias requires of us ; which is contained in such general texts as these , that ye being delivered out of the hands of your enemies may serve him ( christ our deliverer ) without fear , in holiness and righteousness before him all the days of our life , luke 1. 75. the grace of god which bringeth salvation , teacheth us , to deny ungodliness and worldly lusts , &c. tit. 2. 11 , 12. he gave himself for us , that he might re-redeem us from all iniquity , &c. tit. 2. 14. this is the will of god , even your sanctification , 1 thess. 4. 3. without faith it is impossible to please god , heb. 11. 6. without holiness no man shall see the lord , heb. 12. 14. which places yield us such propositions as these , that the messias who vouchsafed to come into the world to redeem lost man , requires of him universal holiness and righteousness , and the abandoning of all sin and ungodliness : that it was one grand end and design of christ's visiting the would to redeem men from their iniquities , to sanctifie their natures , and to make them entirely godly , sober and righteous in their lives : that without these there is no salvation , no seeing of god in the regions of glory , no hopes of everlasting happiness . the disbelieving of these articles hath made so many sorry christians as we see every where , such as lay claim to that honourable title , but are regardless of that holiness which should accompany it . we must not only believe that iesus is the messias , but we must believe this also that we can have no benefit by this messias unless we by faith and obedience adhere to him . neither is this enough , it is further matter of our belief , as we are christians , that our salvation springs from the mere favour and bounty of god through his son iesus christ , and that this is the only source of that happiness which we expect . by grace we are saved , through faith , and that not of our selves : it is the gift of god , eph. 2. 8. not by works of righteousness which we have done , but according to his mercy he saveth us , tit. 3. 5. where there is not this perswasion and belief , the true notion of christianity vanishes , and the conceit of merit comes in its room : wherefore there is a necessity that we believe and be perswaded aright as to this matter . we are worthless creatures of our selves , but there is a worthiness derived to us from the unspotted and meritorious righteousness of him that is the eternal son of god. he that knows not this , he that believes not this deserves not the name of a christian . i should have been glad to have found something of this nature in this gentleman's christianity . but he endeavours to seduce his readers by other apprehensions , he tells them that the bare assenting to this , that iesus is the messias , is the summ total of the christian faith , and the gospel requires no more . lastly , the doctrines of the resurrection of the final iudgment , and of eternal glory in heaven are contained in such passages of the new testament as these , christ will raise up his at the last day , iohn 6. 44. the lord iesus christ shall judge the quick and the dead at his appearing , 2 tim. 4. 1. father , i will that they whom thou hast given me , be with me where i am , that they may behold my glory , iohn 17. 24. and are not these truths the proper object of our faith now under the gospel , they so peculiarly belonging to the doctrine and belief of the messias ? can we believe in him , and yet not believe these great things which are brought to light by his preaching the gospel ? for though they were in some measure discovered and revealed before ( i. e. the general doctrine concerning a future state , and the endless happiness accompanying it was not unknown ) yet christ's words and those of the apostles do more abundantly assure us of the truth of them : especially christ's rising from the dead and ascending into glory have irrefragably confirmed the reality of them , according to that of st. peter , we are begotten again unto a lively hope by the resurrection of iesus christ from the dead , to an inheritance incorruptible and undefiled , and that fadeth not away , reserved in heaven for us , 1 pet. 1. 4. who but the vindicator could imagine that these evangelical doctrines are not necessary matter of faith to christian men ? who but he could fancy and ( which is more ) publickly assert that the belief of the messias's being sent from god , without being acquainted with his gracious appointment as to our future rewards , is all that is required as necessary to constitute a christian believer ? especially , when it is said , he that comes unto god must believe that he is a rewarder , heb. 11. 6. observe it , he must believe : then it is not indifferent , but a necessary article of faith . chap. ii. the foresaid articles and doctrines are proved to be necessary matter of christian faith. not that a man is supposed actually to exert his assent and belief every moment . that we may be true christians , all these fundamental truths must be imbraced , and none excluded . the late writer's forgetfulness . it is prov'd that he grounds his notion of one article upon the weakness of vnderstanding and capacity in the generality of people . herein he follows the steps of the racovians , who submit the greatest mysteries to the judgment of the vulgar ; and , if they will not bear that test , reject them . the doctrine of the trinity how said to have no difficulty in it . it contains in it no contradiction . this proposition , jesus is the messias is not more intelligible than any of the articles before mentioned . thus i have briefly set before the reader those evangelical truths , those christian principles which belong to the very essence of christianity . i have proved them to be such , and i have reduced most of them to certain propositions , which is a thing the vindicator call'd for , p. 16. if what i have said will not content him , i am sure i can do nothing that will. and therefore , if he should capriciously require any thing more , it would be as great folly in me to comply with it as it is in him to move it . from what i have said it is evident that he is grosly mistaken when he saith , whatever doctrines the apostles required to be believed to make a man a christian , are to be found in those places of scripture which he hath quoted in his book , p. 11. the places which he quotes are made use of by him to shew that there is but one article of belief , viz. that christ is the messiah : but i think i have sufficiently proved that there are other doctrines besides that which are requir'd to be believed to make a man a christian. why did the apostles write these doctrines ? was it not that those they writ to might give their assent to them ? nay , did they not require assent to them ? yes , verily , for this is to be proved from the nature of the things contained in those doctrines , which , were such as had immediate respect to the occasion , author , way , means , and issue of their redemption and salvation , as any impartial judg by examining the several particular articles and propositions will readily grant . so that the sum of all amounts to this . the belief of those things without the knowledg of which a man cannot be saved is absolutely necessary : but the belief of the foregoing particulars is the belief of such things without the knowledg of which a man cannot be saved ; therefore the belief of these particulars is absolutely necessary . none will be so refractory , i suppose , as to deny the first proposition in this syllogism ; therefore i am to prove the second , which is easily effected thus . the belief of those things which have immediate respect to the occasion , author , way , means , and issue of our salvation , and which are necessary for knowing the true nature and design of it , is the belief of such things without the knowledg of which a man cannot be saved : but such is the belief of the preceding articles , ergò . not without good reason therefore i call'd them the essential and integral parts of our christian and evangelical faith : and why the vindicator fleers at these terms ( p. 18. ) i know no reason but this that he can't confute the application of them . surely none but this upstart racovian will have the confidence to deny that these articles of faith are such as are necessary to constitute a christian , as to the intellectual and doctrinal part of christianity ; such as must in some measure be known and assented to by him , such as must be generally receiv'd and imbrac'd by him . not that a man is supposed every moment to actually exert his assent and belief , for none of the moral vertues , none of the evangelical graces are exerted thus always . wherefore , that question , p. 16. ( though he saith he asks it seriously ) might have been spared , whether every one of these fundamentals is required to be believed to make a man a christian , and such as without the actual belief thereof , he cannot be saved ? here is seriousness pretended when there is none , for the design is only to cavil , and ( if he can ) to expose my assertion . but he is not able to do it , for all his critical demands are answered in these few words , viz. that the intellectual ( as well as the moral ) endowments are never supposed to be always in act : they are exerted upon occasion , and not all of them at a time . and therefore he mistakes if he thinks , or rather as he objects without thinking , that these doctrine , if they be fundamental and necessary , must be always actually believed . no man besides himself ever started such a thing . and why should not every one of these evangelical truths ( which is another thing he puts into his question ) be believed and imbraced ? they are in our bibles for that very purpose , as i have proved , and therefore i need not undertake it again here . hence it follows that a man cannot be a christian without the knowledg and belief of these truths which are the basis of religion , the standard of the christian faith , the very badges and characters of christianity . wherefore for any man to make up christianity without the belief of these is a ridiculous and absurd attempt , and consequently we may guess that none would have ventured upon it but this writer . this is he that sets up one article with defiance of the rest , ( though he is much displeased with me for saying so , p. 31. ) for what is excluding them wholly but defying them ? wherefore , seeing he utterly excludes all the rest by representing them as vseless to the making a man a christian ( which is the design of his whole undertaking ) it is manifest that he defies them . but let us hear what this author pleads for himself . he founds his conceit of one article partly upon this , that a multitude of doctrines is obscure , and hard to be understood , and therefore he trusses all up in one article , that the poor people and bulk of mankind may bear it . this is the scope of a great part of his book . but his memory doth not keep pace with his invention , and thence he saith he remembers nothing of this in his book . vind. p. 27. this worthy writer doth not know his own reasoning that he uses , as particularly thus , that he troubies christian men with no more but one article , because that is intelligible , and all people high and low may comprehend it . for he hath chosen out ( he thinks ) a plain and easie article , whereas the others which are commonly propounded are not generally agreed upon ( he saith ) and are dubious and uncertain . but the believing that iesus was the messias hath nothing of doubtfulness or obscurity in it . this the reader will find to be the drift and design of several of his pages . and the reason why i did not quote any single one of them was because he insists on this so long together , and spins it out after his way . in p. 301. of his reasonableness of christianity , where he sets down the short , plain , easie and intelligible summary ( as he calls it ) of religion , couch'd in a single article , he immediately adds , the all-merciful god seems herein to have consulted the poor of this world , and the bulk of mankind . these are articles ( whereas he had set down but one ) that the labouring and illiterate man may comprehend . he assigns this as a ground why it was god's pleasure there should be but one point of faith , because hereby religion may be understood the better , the generality of people may comprehend it . this he represents as a great kindness done by god to men , whereas a variety of articles would be hard to be understood . this he enlarges upon , and flourishes it over after his fashion , and yet he desires to know when he said so , p. 29. vindic. good sir , let me be permitted to acquaint you that your memory is as defective as your judgment ; for in the very , vindication you attribute it to the goodness and condescention of the allmighty that he requires nothing as absolutely necessary to be believed but what is suited to vulgar capacities and the comprehensions of illiterate men , p. 30. it is clear then that you found your one article on this , that it is suited to vulgar capacities , whereas the other articles mentioned by me are obscure and ambiguous , and therefore surpass the comprehension of the illiterate . and yet you pretend that you have forgot that any such thing was said by you : which shews that you are careless of your words , and that you forget what you write . what shall we say to such an oblivious author as this ? he takes no notice of what falls from his own pen , and therefore within a page or two he confutes himself , and gives himself the lye. the plain truth is , he socinianizes here , but will not own it , which makes him run into these contradictions . he follows the steps of his good patron crellius ( one of the stiffest racovians that we have ) who throws aside several articles of faith because they are dark and difficult , and not adapted to the capacity of the vulgar . this very thing he alledges to set off his arguments against the holy trinity , viz. that * the doctrine which he maintains is according to the understanding of the vulgar . the common people ( he saith ) among the iews , the fishermen did not apprehend the doctrine of three persons in the deity : neither do the vulgar christians at this day form any such notion : therefore away with the doctrine of the trinity . and this is the guise and practice of our socinians at this day : it is known that they are wont to propound this sacred point to the very school-boys ( very great judges indeed ) and to demand their resolution of it , and they pretend that they give it in the negative . all the appeal now is to vulgar capacities , to the judgment of the multitude . if these please to allow of any more articles of belief than one , then our author will consent to it that we shall have them : but he acquaints us that they are for no more but one , and therefore we must be content with that . this is his new divinity . and a † socinian brother , who undertakes the defence of his notions , seconds him in this , telling us that the articles of faith which are generally propounded by divines are difficult , obscur , unintelligible , abstruse , but the one article of mr. lock ) is not so , but is exactly calculated for the vulgar meridian , and therefore is the only authentick and necessary point in the christian theology . i think the reader will bear me witness that i have refuted this wild conceit by giving a distinct account of the evangelical doctrines and articles before mentioned , and at the same time shewing how intelligible and plain they are , and by letting him see the absolute necessity of their being assented to and embraced by every christian. no true lover of god and truth need doubt of any of them , for there is no ambiguity and doubtfulness in them . they shine with their own light , and to an unprejudiced eye are plain , evident and illustrious . and they would always continue so if some ill-minded men did not perplex and entangle them , on purpose to render them contemptible , yea , to exclude them wholly from being the matter of our belief . and as to the doctrine of the trinity , which is the main verity which these men set themselves against , there is not any difficulty , much less any absurdity or contradiction ( as they are wont to cry out ) in that article of our christian belief . indeed there is a difficulty in this and several other truths of the gospel as to the exact manner of the things themselves , which we shall never be able to comprehend , at least not on this side of heaven : but there is no difficulty as to the reality and certainty of them , because we know they are revealed to us by god in the holy scriptures . nay , as to the thing it self , thus far we can apprehend that it is not impossible or absurd that the three distinct persons in the deity should be one god , for there may be a plurality of persons in the same infinite essence . every person doth not require a single particular essence , or if they will call the three numerical subsistencies by the name of essences , yet they are united in one general substance or essence , which is common to them all . and when they say it is a contradiction that one should be three , which is as much as to say , one is not one , this is soon taken off by replying ( and that most truly ) that one and not one in the same respect is a contradiction , but one and not one in different respects is no contradiction . any smatterer in logick know , this . and this is the case here , for tho the three personalities be distinguish'd , and that really , yet they agree in one common essence , and so the divinity is both one and three in different respects , on different considerations . and this is that which is abundantly testified in scripture , in the gospels as well as the epistles ( let our author remember th●t : ) there we learn that the divine essence or nature is branch'd out into three distinct persons , * father , son and holy ghost , and that * these three are one. then as to the proposition which this new modeller of christianity commends to the world as the only necessary matter of faith , although he pretends it is more intelligible than any of those that i have named , yet any judicious man cannot but see the contrary , for this must be explain'd ( as well as those ) before his vulgar capacities can apprehend it . here first the name iesus , which is of hebrew extraction , though since greciz'd , must be expounded , and so must the word messias ( as i said before : ) and when this is done they must be told , even according to the confession of a late * socinian writer ( whom afterwards i must discourse with a little ) the manner of his being the messiah , such as being conceived by the holy ghost and power of the most high , his being anointed with the holy ghost , his being raised from the dead , and exalted to be a prince and a saviour . and then they must be told for what end and purpose this was ( or else they can have no true belief of the messias ) under which several weighty truths are comprehended . and if he doth not agree to this , viz. that the words must be thus opened and explained , and fully understood so that christian souls may have the true sense of them , then he doth as good as say that the bare pronouncing of these words iesus is the messias is enough to make a christian. and we shall be apt to think that he intends this for a charm or spell , and that the very syllables will suffice to make one a true believer , especially if he be one of the vulgar and illiterate . but it may be he hath something else to say to an other rank of men : perhaps he holds that there is one christianity for , the bulk of mankind , and another for the finer and better sort of people : and then it is likely he will tell us of two heavens , one very spacious to hold the multitude , and the other of a lesser compass to receive the rest . these are the absurdities ( which i confess i delight not in exposing or so much as mentioning ) that this new notion may produce . whence it appears that all his jargon and chatter about his one article are vain and insignificant , and are serviceable only to gull the unwary reader , and ( which is worse ) to debauch christianity it self . chap. iii. the late writer's passing by the epistles , and not collecting any articles of faith out of them shew his contempt of them . his evasion , viz. that the epistles were writ to those who were already believers , is proved to be groundless . if it were true , it is nothing to his purpose . the epistles teach fundamentals . his other evasion , viz. that the fundamental articles in the epistles are mixed without distinction with other truths discovered to be of no force , and retorted upon him . the true reason why he went no further than the gospels and the acts. his other excuses for rejecting the doctrines contained in the epistles examined , and found to be sophistical . he travels as far as china for prudence , and there borrows it of the missionary jesuites . the rom. 14. 1. which he alledges , authorizes him not to impose upon weak christians . his evasions are inconsistent with themselves , and accordingly not well approved of by the party . his objection about the apostles creed fully answered . our church's iudgment concerning the articles of this creed . this profession of faith hath several articles in it which socinians will not subscribe to . whilest he is censuring , he commits a great blunder . he mistakes and misrepresents the gospel-dispensation . but the gentleman is not without his evasions , and he sees it is high time to make use of them . this puts him into some disorder , for when he comes to speak of my mentioning his ill treatment of the epistles ( which he purposely omitted when he made his collection of articles , or rather when after all his search he found but one article ) you may observe that he begins to grow warmer than before . now this meek man is nettled , and you may perceive that he is sensible of the scandal that he hath given to good people by his slighting of the epistolary writings of the holy apostles : yet he is so cunning as to disguise his passion as well as he can . he requires me to publish to the world those passages which shew his contempt of the epistles , p. 19. but what need i , good sir , do this , when you have done it your self ? i appeal to the reader whether ( after your tedious collections out of the four evangelists ) your passing by the epistles , and neglecting wholly what the apostles say in them be not publishing to the world your contempt of them . but let us hear why he did not attempt to collect any articles out of these writings : he assigns this as one reason , the epistles being writ to those who were already believers , it could not be supposed that they were writ to them to teach them fundamentals , p. 13 , 14. vindic. certainly no man could have conjectured that he would have used such an evasion as this . i will say that for him , he goes beyond all surmises , he is above all conjectures : he hath a faculty of shifting which no creature on earth can ever fathom . do we not know that the four gospels were writ to and for believers as well as vnbelievers ? are we not particularly and expresly told by st. luke that he writ his gospel to the most excellent theophilus ? luk. 1. 3. whom all grant to be a believing christian of some eminent rank . or if this author be so singular as to question it , he may be satisfied in v. 4. by the evangelist himself . and so the acts of the apostles we find are dedicated to the same eminent believer , acts 1. 1. by the same argument then that he would perswade us that the fundamentals are not to be sought for in the epistles , we may prove that they were not to be sought for in the gospels , and in the acts , for even these were writ to those that believed . and yet it is clear that this writer did not make use of this argument , otherwise he would not have confined the fundamentals to the gospels , and the acts. here then is want of sincerity in a great measure , which hath been accounted heretofore a good qualification in a writer . again , granting that the epistles were all of them writ to those that already believed , yet what can this be to his purpose ? must no believers have any fundamentals taught them ? what is the meaning then of 1 iohn 2. 21. i have not written unto you because you know not the truth , but because you know it . suppose they have forgot the fundamentals , or have corrupted and perverted them ? as was the case of the galatians , who mixed the law with the gospal , legal works with faith ; and of the dispersed hebrews who had received the christian doctrine , but were falling away from it . might not the apostle , yea did he not in his epistles to these persons remind them of the great articles of the christian faith ? did he not , when he writ to the galatians assert the doctrine of justification through faith in christ's righteousness , without the works of the law ? did he not in his epistle to the wavering hebrews endeavour to establish them in christianity by displaying the excellency and transcendency of the priesthood of christ , by convincing them of the efficacy and perfection of the one sacrifice of the messias on the cross , whereby the sins of mankind are perfectly expiated ? so st. iohn's first epistle was written on occasion of the christian churches ( converted from judaism ) being endanger'd by certain seducers that were crept in among them , and labour'd to unsettle their belief concerning the divinity as well as the humanity of our saviour . whereupon this apostle , who had clearly delivered the doctrine of the holy trinity in the beginning of his gospel , now more especially urges that principal article of their faith the deity of christ , chap. 2. v. 22 , 23. and also in express words asserts the whole trinity , chap. 5. v. 7. thus it is manifest that the apostles in their epistles taught fundamentals , which is contrary to what this gentleman saith , that such a thing could not be supposed : and he would pretend that as a reason why he did not look for any necessary articles of faith in the epistles . but we see how groundless his pretence is . hear another feigned ground of his omitting the epistles , viz. because the fundamental articles are here promiscuously , and without distinction mix'd with other truth . p. 14. but who sees not that this is a mere elusion ? for on the same account he might have forborn to search for fundamental articles in the gospels , for they do not lie there together , but are dispersed up and down : the doctrinal and historical part are mix'd with one another : but he pretends to sever them ; why the did he not make a separation between the doctrines in the epistles and those other matters that are treated of there ? he hath nothing to reply to this , and therefore we must again look upon what he hath suggested as a cast of his shuffling faculty . or if he should excuse himself by saying that necessary and fundamental principles can't be distinguish'd from those other truths which occur in the epistolary writings , any one may discover the insufficiency of such a plea , because necessary truths may be distinguish'd from those that are not such by the nature and high importance of them , by their immediate respect to the author and means of our salvation . besides , i suppose this flourishing scribler ( he knows very well why i give him that particular title ) will not deny that the epistles contain divers rules of holy living , several religious precepts in order to the practise of godliness ; and that these are not so promiscuously and without distinction mixt with other truths but that they may easily be distinguish'd from them . why then may we not expect to find necessary doctrines of faith in these writings as well as instructions concerning the practise of holiness , and the regulating of our lives ? and why may we not distinguish between these and the occasional matters as well as between the others and them ? nay , it is certain that those necessary doctrines of faith which were but lightly touch'd upon in the gospels and the acts are distinctly and fully explain'd in these epistles . the truth then is that the gentleman was loth to go any further than the former : these latter affrighted him , for he knew either by reading them or by hear-say , that there were several other divine truths in them , which have been generally thought to be necessary to be believ'd in order to making a man a christian ; but our author had no kindness for them . he commands his readers not to stir a jot further than the acts. it is not in the epistles , saith he , that we are to learn what are the fundamental articles of faith , p. 295. they were written for resolving of doubts and reforming of mistakes , ( as he saith in the same place ) and therefore i forbid you to seek for fundamental doctrines there , you will but lose your labour , and moreover you will meet in these writings with several points which we approve not of , and therefore must not admit of , because faustus socinus hath given us a charge to the contrary . but let us hear further what this vindicator saith to excuse his rejection of the doctrines contain'd in the epistles , and his putting us off with one article of faith. what if the author ( meaning himself ) design'd his treatise , as the title shews , chiefly for those who were not yet throughly or firmly christians : purposing to work upon those who either wholly disbeliev'd or doubted of the truth of the christian religion ? p. 6. here he comes with his what if's , and gives another palpable proof of counterfeiting , and that in religion . now , seeing his book is sifted , and the design of it is laid open , he would make us believe that he intended his piece for atheists , turks , iews and pagans , and a few weak christians ; for these he must mean by those that wholly disbelieve , and those that are not firmly christians . and he would bring in his title to speak for him , but it saith not a word in his behalf ; for how those that wholly disregard and disbelieve the scriptures of the new testament , ( as gentiles , jews , mahometans and all atheists do ) are like to attend to the reasonableness of christianity as deliver'd in the scripture is not to be conceived , and therefore we look upon all this as mere sham and sophistry . he is put hard to it , and like one a drowning he fastens on any thing next at hand . that is his case , as any man may perceive . but i ask , why had we not a hint ( one gentle hint at least ) of this in all his book ? it would have been very useful to the reader to have been acquainted with his design . no : he thinks otherwise , for in the same page he saith , would any one blame his prudence if he mention'd only those advantages , ( viz. of christ's coming ) which all christians ( especially socinian christians ) are agreed in ? he hath bethought himself better since he first publish'd his notions , and ( as the result of that ) he now begins to resolve what he writ into prudence . i know whence he had this method ( and 't is likely he hath taken more than this from the same hands ) viz. from the missionary iesuites that went to preach the gospel to the people of china . we are told that they instructed them in some matters relating to our saviour ; they let them know that iesus was the messias , the person promised to be sent into the world , but they conceal'd his sufferings and death and they would not let them know any thing of his passion and crucifixion . so our author ( their humble imitator ) undertakes to instruct the world in christianity with an omission of its principal articles , and more especially that of the advantage we have by christ's death , which was the prime thing design'd in his coming into the world . this he calls prudence : so that to hide from the people the main articles of the christian religion , to disguise the faith of the gospel , to betray christianity it self , is according to this excellent writer the cardinal vertue of prudence . may we be deliver'd then , say i , from a prudential racovian . he would clear himself by quoting rom. 14. 1. him that is weak in the faith receive ye , p. 7. as if that text authorized him to deceive novices and weak christians ; as if because they are infirm , therefore he must strengthen them by imposing upon them . it may be he will say , children must have but few lessons given them : but i answer , there is difference between few and only one ; and there is difference between telling them that there is but one , and afterwards hinting that there are more . for that must be the meaning of his what if he design'd his treatise chiefly for those , &c. what if he first of all tells them that nothing is absolutely requisite to be believed but this that iesus is the messias , and what if afterwards he intends to let them know that something else is requir'd of them ? and yet at the same time ( such is the unaccountable humour of the gentleman ) he declares that nothing more is requir'd of them . here is no bottom for any thing he saith . he contradicts himself , and imposes falsities upon mens minds . he would in one place ( i remember ) fancifully please himself by thinking that all his sins which i espie in his book are sins of omission , p. 9. but if this be not one of commission ( and that a very great one ) it is hard to tell what is . he pretends a design of his book which was never so much as thought of till he was sollicited by his brethren to vindicate it . but now , ( see how his pious frauds prosper ) when he hath attempted it , they are displeased with the way he hath taken . and no wonder , because they cannot but perceive that his vindication is inconsistent with his treatise , and that by these last evasions and collusions he hath in a great measure betray'd their cause , as well as that of christianity . i find that they have only this to excuse him that he did not take time enough to consider of what he writ : but for my part , i think that adds to his fault . but this author of the new christianity wisely objects that the apostle's creed hath none of these articles and doctrines which i mentioned , p. 12 , 13. nor doth any considerate man wonder at it , for the creed is a form of outward profession which is chiefly to be made in the publick assemblies , when prayers are put up by the church , and the holy scriptures are read . then this abridgment of faith is properly used , or when there is not generally time or opportunity to make any enlargement . but we are not to think that it expresly contains in it all the necessary and weighty points , all the important doctrines of our belief , it being only design'd to be an abstract . it is with this creed as 't is with the commandments and the lord's prayer . if a man doth not more than is expresly enjoyned in the decalogue , he can't be said to act as a christian. if he prays for no more than is expresly mentioned in the petitions of the foresaid prayer he can't be said to pray as a good christian. so if a man believe no more than is in express terms in the apostle's creed , his faith will not be the faith of a christian. and yet still it is to be granted that as all things to be done and all things to be prayed for are reducible to the ten commandments and the lord's prayer , so all matters of faith in some manner may be reduced to this brief platform of belief . but when i call it an abstract or abbreviature , it is implied that there are more truths to be known and assented to by a christian , in order to making him really so , than what we meet with here . and yet i must take leave to tell our vindicator that this creed hath more in it than he and his brethren will subscribe to . if he were not above catechisms as well as creeds , i might remind him of our church's judgment concerning the articles of this creed . qu. what dost thou chiefly learn in these articles of thy belief ? answ. first , i learn to believe in god the father , who had made me and all the world : secondly , in god the son , who hath redeemed me and all mankind : thirdly , in god the holy ghost , who sanctifieth me and all the elect people of god ? these are killing words to a disciple of socinus , who acknowledges neither the god-head of the son , nor of the holy ghost , nor the redemption or sanctification by either . yet our church , with all the christian churches in the world , owns these truths to be contained in the apostles creed . and there are other articles of this symbol ( let them palliate it as they please , ) which the racovian gentlemen are unwilling to give their assent to . they faulter about christ's iudging the quick and the dead , they partly deny the resurrection of the body , they deny life everlasting as it respects wicked men , for they hold that these shall be annihilated , of all which i may have occasion to speak another time . at present i only take notice of their lopping off several articles from this creed . but was it not judiciously said by this writer that it is well for the compilers of the creed that they lived not in my days ? p. 12. i tell you , friend , it was impossible they should , for the learned * usher and † vossius and others have proved that that symbol was drawn up not at once , but that some articles of it were adjoyned many years after , far beyond the extent of any man's life ; and therefore the compilers of the creed could not live in my days , not could i live in theirs : but i let this pass as one of the blunders of our thoughtful and musing author . nor had he reason to think that those that made the apostles creed would have been censured by me , for i have vindicated and asserted their articles , whereas he and his friends have new-modell'd the creed , yea indeed have presented us with one article instead of twelve , and in order to that have sunk the epistles , because they are not socinianized , all over socinianized . if this gentleman had said that the belief of iesus's being the messias was one of the first and leading acts of christian faith , he had said right , and none would have opposed it . if he had said that the knowledg of the gospel , and consequently of the doctrines of it , advanc'd at first by degrees , and shone brighter after our saviour's ascension than before , he had spoken truth ; but when he positively and peremptorily declares that neither at first nor afterwards there was any necessity of believing more than this that iesus is the messias , he misrepresents the gospel-dispensation , and mistakes the nature of christiaanity . to stop here , and go no further is unsufferable . this is as if a breeder up of children and youth should carry them no further than the a b c. he is wholly for reducing of christianity , whereas he should have given it in its full and ample extent ; especially he should not have kept back any thing of the foundation . chap. iv. the christian faith which this gentleman describes is of the same scantling with that of the mahometans . the affinity between the turks and anti-trinitarians . the devils are capable of a higher degree of faith than that which he saith makes a christian. a brief idea of the compleat faith of a christian. the danger of asserting that there is but one article of christian belief necessary to be assented to . this is the way to introduce darkness and blindness into christendom ; and to promote the designs of that church which cherishes ignorance as the mother of devotion and religion . how far this writer is instrumental in it . what care he hath of mens souls , and of their salvation . it is the practise of socinian writers to curtail christianity , and to cut off as many fundamental articles from it as they can . this writer had his platform from crellius . he is approved of and applauded by the english socinians . three reasons assign'd why the socinians agree to maim the heads of christianity , and to reduce all into one article . the office of catechizing was not instituted for the teaching of one article of faith only . it is likely i shall further exasperate this author when i desire the reader to observe that this lank faith of his is in a manner on other than the faith of a turk . for the * * alcoran acknowledges that the spirit of god bore witness to christ the son of mary : a divine soul was put into him . he was the messenger of the spirit , and the word of god. and in another place god is brought in declaring that he had sent christ the son of mary , &c. and in other places he is mention'd as a prophet , as a great man , one commission'd by god , and sent by him into the world . this is of the like import with what our good ottoman writer the vindicator saith of our saviour , and this he holds is the sum of all that is necessary to be believ'd concerning him . the mahometans call themselves musselmen , of rather ( according to the true account of the arabick word ) † moslemim , i. e. believers ; and what difference is there between one of them and our author's believer ? the former believes that christ is a good man , and not above the nature of a man , and sent of god to give instructions to the world : and the faith of the latter is of the very same scantling . thus he confounds turky with christendom ; and those that have been reckon'd as infidels are with him christians . he seems to have consulted the mahometan bible , which saith , * christ did not suffer on the cross , did not die ; for he and his allies speak as meanly of these articles as if there were no such thing . the alcoran often talks ( particularly see the last chapter of it ) against christ's being the son of god by generation . it is one of the first principles of mahometism that there is but one god neither begetting nor begot . see sulburgius's saracenica . this is it which our author drives at when he labours to prove the messias and the son of god are terms synony mous , as you shall hear by and by . this reminds me of that affinity and correspondence which hath been between the turks and this gentleman's party . † servetus conferr'd notes with the alcoran , when he undertook to fetch an argument out of it to disprove the deity of our saviour . it is observable that those countreys of europe which border on the sultan's dominions , as hungary , transilvania , &c. abound with socinians and antitrinitarians . the inhabitants of these places accommodate themselves to their potent neighbours , they make some approach to the conquerer's creed . some of these men have lately got footing in england , and because they and the great turk disbelieve the trinity , therefore we must all be proselytes to their opinion . they are making way for this by taking away all the articles of the christian faith but one. and our late writer is the instrument they make use of for this purpose . this great mufti hath given us a hopeful draught of christianity ; and it was fit the english reader should know that a turk according to him is a christian , for he makes the same faith serve them both . nay , in the last place , let us take notice that this gentleman presents the world with a very ill notion of faith , for the very devils are capable of all that faith which he saith makes a christian man , yea of more , for we read that they believed iesus to be the son of god , mat. 8. 29. they cried out to him , thou art christ the son of god , luke 4. 41. which latter words in both places denote his divinity , as i shall shew afterwards . but besides this historical faith ( as it is generally call'd by divines ) which is giving credit to evangelical truths as barely reveal'd , there must be something else added to make up the true substantial faith of a christian. with the assent of the understanding must be joyn'd the consent or approbation of the will. all those divine truths which the intellect assents to must be allow'd of by this elective power of the soul. true evangelical faith is a hearty accepting of the messias as he is offer'd in the gospel . it is a sincere and impartial submission to all things requir'd by the evangelical law , which is contain'd in the epistles as well as the other writings . and to this practical assent and choice there must be added likewise a firm trust and reliance in the blessed author of our salvation . but this late undertaker , who attempted to give us a more perfect account than ever was before of christianity as it is deliver'd in the scriptures , brings us no tidings of any such faith belonging to christianity , or discover'd to us in the scriptures . which gives us to understand that he verily believes there is no such christian faith , for in some of his numerous pages ( especially 191 , 192 , &c. ) where he speaks so much of belief and faith , he might have taken occasion to insert one word about this compleat faith of the gospel . having thus represented how defective , how narrow , how erroneous , how mistaken this unknown writer's christianity , and especially his faith is ; i will now proceed to shew how dangerous and pernicious this sort of doctrine is . here is a contrivance set up for the bringing in of darkness and barbarism into the christian world . the only necessary point of belief that the old testament delivers , is , according to these gentlemen , that there is one god : and all the new testament affords us as matter of necessary faith is this , that iesus is the messias . carry but these two articles along with you , and you are a true christian. there is no necessity at all of being acquainted with the reveal'd doctrine concerning the cause of mankinds degeneracy and corruption , which gave occasion to the messias's coming into the world . there is no necessity of knowing whether this messias be god or man , or both : there is no necessity of understanding whether he came to suffer and dye in our stead , and to satisfie the divine justice , and to purchase salvation for us by his blood : there is no necessity of believing that without faith and evangelical obedience we cannot have any benefit by the messias : there is no necessity of being perswaded that our salvation springs from the mere grace and bounty of heaven : there is no necessity of believing the privileges and rewards ( both here and hereafter ) which are entail'd on christianity . there is but a single article of belief , and this is a very short one too , viz. that iesus is the messias ; and if you assent to this you are as sound a christian and as good a believer as this gentleman can make you . one would think that seeing there are so many branches of the evangelical faith commended to us and urged upon us by the apostles in their epistles ( some of which our saviour himself in the gospel , had made mention of ) one would think , i say , that a man that hath a true sense of christianity , and is a lover of souls should endeavour to display before the world these several parts of the christian belief , and should be earnest with men to embrace them all , and not to omit or neglect any of them , seeing they all so nearly concern their everlasting wellfare . but here comes one that makes it his great business to beat men off from taking notice of these divine truths , he represents them as wholly unnecessary to be believed , he cries down all articles of christian faith but one. he at this time of day , when christianity is so bright , strives to darken and eclipse it ; he hides it from the faces of mankind , draws a thick veil over it , will not suffer them to look into it , takes the holy and inspired epistles ( which are as much the word of god as the gospels ) out of their way , and tells them again and again that a christian man or member of christ need not know or believe any more than that one individual point which he mentions . hear o ye heavens , and give ear o earth , judg whether this be not the way to introduce darkness and ignorance into christendom , whether this be not blinding of mens eyes , and depriving them of that blessed light which the writings of the evangelists and apostles should illuminate mens minds with . which makes me think sometimes ( and perhaps the reader doth so too ) that this writer and the other confederates are under-hand-factors for that communion ( though they would seem to be much against it ) which cries up ignorance as the mother of devotion and religion . if they had not some such design , why do they labour so industriously to keep the people in ignorance , to tell them that one article is enough for them , and that there is no necessity of knowing any other doctrines of the bible ? thus by following their italian master socinus , they trade for that countrey . and this vindicator among the rest trafficks very visibly for it whilest he blasteth so substantial a part of the new testament as the epistolary writings are . would not one be apt to suspect that ( as their roman masters have done ) they would afterwards not only keep a part , but the whole scripture from the people ? and so we shall travel to rome by the way of racovia . and here you may see now what his pretences of love to the bulk of mankind come to . see how sincere he is in taking care of the salvation of their souls , which is a thing that he more than once mentions , and with some reflection ( p. 9. vindicat. ) on me as if i disregarded that great concern . but i hope i have in some measure faithfully discharged that part , though the great iudg of heaven and earth knows my manifold desiciencies and failings in it ; but i am well satisfied that this inferior inquisitor cannot charge me with a noglect in that great and important work , which i have made the business of my life . but behold how this censorious gentleman himself manifests his regard to the salvation of peoples souls when he puts out their eyes , when he studies how to nurse them up in ignorance and blindness , and thereby to ruine their souls for ever . he can afford them but one article out of the whole new testament . that must suffice them now , and perhaps afterwards it will be thought too much . here , before i proceed any further , i would take notice that the project of the necessity of but one article of christian belief is the direct spawn and product of socinianism , but improved by this author . he that hath convers'd with the unitarian writers is sensible how they endeavour to cramp our belief and knowledg , and cut off as many fundamental articles of religion as they can . * they insist upon this , that the points necessary to be known are but few : they interpret those places of scripture which directly speak of knowing of god , i. e. of knowing his nature and attributes , and other matters in religion that are to be believed , concerning a practical knowledge . * socinus leads the way , undervaluing the former sort of knowledge , and interpreting acts 17. 27. seeking the lord , if haply they may feel after him , and find him , concerning a holy life ; whereas the plain scope of the place will convince any unprejudiced man that it is spoken of those who being ignorant of god , labour to throw off that ignorance , and to attain to a knowledg of him , in order to their right worshiping and serving him . the rest follow this ring-leader , and accordingly you may observe that in their definitions of religion they seldom ( or never ) insert knowledg as any part of it , but they wholly define it to be a living according to the divine precepts and promises , or to be the way to eternal life and happiness . some of them seem to restrain that place , iohn 17. 3. that they might know thee the only true god , &c. unto a practical knowledg . and in other particulars it might be shewed that they very much disparage the doctrinal part of christianity , and more especially take care to abbreviate and cut off the fundamentals of it . crellius is much for diminishing and reducing the knowledg and belief of the articles of faith. the sacred writers ( saith * he ) when they speak of that knowledg in which religion , or the way to eternal life consists , speak not of that knowledg whereby any attribute that is essential to god or christ is known . here is the platform of our gentleman's design , and thence let the reader guess whose part he takes . crellius hath given him his kue , and he very strictly observes it : no attribute that is essential to god the father ( as father ) or christ the second person in the deity must come into his creed , i. e. to be made a necessary article of it . and that the world may know that this is acceptable to the party , one of them is chosen out to vindicate this attempt of setting up one article . a * professed socinian writer ( and no alien , but true english breed ) undertakes it , and applauds the author , and defends his work : that it may publickly appear that this is the doctrine of the racovians or anti-trinitarians , and that it was not only begun to be entertained by the ancient and outlandish socinians , but that now , when it is fully improved , it is vouched by the modern and native ones . but what may be the reason why both the exotick and english unitarians agree to maim the heads of christianity , to contract its articles , and to reduce it into so small a compass ? seeing there are several fundamental truths appertaining to the christian religion , why are they not all pronounced necessary to be believed and assented to ? they have several reasons for this ; first , they are compell'd to do it because otherwise they can't maintain that which so many of them profess to believe , viz. the salvation of all men , of whasoever perswasion they are . this is an extravagant principle which they have taken up , and it is the modish opinion at this day , but if they should hold that there is a necessity of believing a considerable number of articles in christianity , they could not possibly entertain this fashionable notion . secondly , they cunningly keep up this conceit of the necessity of but one article , because it makes for their own preservation and safety , that neither the magistrate nor ecclesiastical power in any country may take occasion to animadvert upon them : for why should they trouble and molest them for holding such doctrines as are not of the foundation of religion , as are of no necessity to be believed ? this makes them forward to propagate their notion . and hence also we see what is the reason of their talking so warmly for liberty : this is done to secure themselves that though they broach never so pernicious opinions they may not fall under the lash of the magistrate . in brief , they would not be punish'd here , and they think they have made sure of hereafter by another tenent of theirs . thirdly , by vertue of this expedient they can throw off any doctrine when they please , especially those main articles of the holy trinity , of christ's satisfaction , &c. for it is but saying that they are not necessary to be believed , ( there being a necessity of believing but one ) and the business is done . thus you see how it is their concern to hold up their one article . but who sees not that hereby they depress christianity , and unspeakably injure the faith of the gospel ? what is the meaning of catechizing , which hath been so universally commended and practised by the ancients ? there were in the primitive church particular persons that made it their business to instruct and inform the ignorant in a catechetical way : yea , it was a distinct office among the christians of old . saint mark in the church of alexandria was a catechist , pantaenus succeeded him , then origen had the same employment there , and heraclius after him . what! was this only to teach one article of faith ? who but a socinian can believe this ? is it not enough to rob us of our god , by denying christ to be so , but must they spoil us of all the other articles of christian faith but one ? who would think that the popular man , who pretends to take such care of the multitude , should do them the greatest mischief imaginable , whilest he makes a shew of being extraordinarily kind to them ? for a greater mischief there cannot be than to put them off with one article of christian belief , when there are many others of absolute necessity . chap. v. this writer's doctrine tends to irreligion and atheism . in what terms we may suppose the atheists congratulate him . the clipping of the articles of the creed is a preparatory to the diminishing of the precepts of the decalogue , and the petitions of the lord's prayer . obj. doth not the frequent mentioning of this article [ jesus is the messias ] in the new testament ; yea , the sole mentioning of it in some places argue that there is no other article of faith which is necessarily to be believed but this ? answ. no : because 1. the believing of jesus to be the promised messias was the first step to christianity , and therefore is so often propounded in the evangelical writings . 2. though this one article be mentioned alone in some places , it is to be supposed that other matters of faith were at the same time proposed , though they are not recorded . 3. we must supply those places of scripture where this one article is set down alone from others which make mention of other necessary points of belief . 4. the clear discovery of the doctrines of the gospel was gradual ; and therefore we must not think that in the four evangelists and acts are specified all the necessary articles of faith , but we must look for some of them in the epistolary writings , when the spirit of god had further enlightned the apostles and other christians . and now , to prove yet further the pernicious nature of his writings , doth any man doubt of their tendency to irreligion and atheisin ? i charge him not with any such thing as a formal designing of this . ( no : i will not entertain such a thought ) but i only take notice how serviceable his papers and opinions are to this purpose . he hath mightily gratified the atheistical rabble by this his enterprize , and accordingly we may suppose them in such words as these to express their great obligations and thankfulness to him on this occasion ; we are beholding to this worthy adventurer for ridding the world of so great an encumbrance , viz. that huge mass and unweildy body of christianity which took up so much room . now we see that it was this bulk , and not that of mankind which he had an eye to when he so often mention'd this latter . this is a physician for our turn indeed : we like this chymical operator that doth not trouble us with a parcel of heavy drugs of no value , but contracts all into a few spirits , nay doth his business with a single drop . we have been in bondage a long time to creeds and catechisms , systems and confessions , we have been plagued with a tedious beadroll of articles which our reverend divines have told us we must make the matter of our faith. yea so it is , both conformists and nonconformists ( though disagreeing in some other things ) have agreed in this to molest and crucifie us . but this noble writer ( we thank him ) hath set us free , and eas'd us by bringing down all the christian faith into one point . we have heard some men talk of the epistolary composures of the new testament , as if great matters were contain'd in them , as if the great mysteries of christianity ( as they call them ) were unfolded there : but we could never make any thing of them ; and now we find that this writer is partly of our opinion . he tells us that these are letters sent upon occasion , but we are not to look for our religion ( for now for this gentleman's sake we begin to talk of religion ) in these places . we believe it , and we believe that there is no religion but in those very chapters and verses which he hath set down in his treatise . what need we have any other part of the new testament ? that is bible enough , if not too much . happy , thrice happy shall this author be perpetually esteemed by us , we will chronicle him as our friend and benefactor . it is not our way to saint people : otherwise we would certainly canonize this gentleman , and , when our hand is in , his pair of booksellers for their being so beneficial to the world in publishing so rich a treasure . it was a blessed day when this hopeful birth saw the light , for hereby all the orthodox creed-makers and systematick men are ruined for ever . in brief , if we be for any christianity , it shall be this author's , for that agrees with us singularly well , it being so short , all couch'd in four words , neither more nor less . it is a very fine compendium , and we are infinitely obliged to this great reformer for it . we are glad at heart that christianity is brought so low by this worthy pen-man , for this is a good presage that it will dwindle into nothing . what! but one article , and that so brief too ! we like such a faith , and such a religion because it is so near to none . and is not the reader satisfied that such language as this hath real truth in it ? doth he not perceive that the discarding of all the articles but one makes way for the casting off that too ? and may we not expect that those who deal thus with the creed will use the same method in reducing the ten commandments and the lord's prayer , abbreviating the former into one precept , and the latter into one petition ? so that not only our faith but our practice and devotion shall be crampt . there is as much reason to do one as the other : and they that have done the former will in time , it is no doubt , use the same discipline towards the latter , i. e. lop off some of the precepts of the decalogue , and diminish that form and pattern of prayer which our saviour hath left us . thus this writer sees how sitly his book of the reasonableness of christianity , &c. was brought into my discourse about the causes and occasions of atheism , which he seems to wonder at , p. 2. it appears also that if i gave his book an ill name ( as he complains , ) it doth deserve it , and that it hath not only a socinian but an atheistick tang. i have proved ( and shall yet further do it in this present undertaking ) that he hath corrupted mens minds , depraved the gospel , and abused christianity . and is there no atheism in this ? to conclude , if after all he will stand to his proposition , and assert there is but one article of faith ( just one and no more , and it is sure there can be no less ) necessarily to be assented to , he may enjoy his confident humour , but it is to be hoped that there is not any considerable number of men in the world that will admit of such an unaccountable paradox , and forfeit their reasons merely to please their fancy . but because i design'd these papers for the satisfying of the readers doubts about any thing occurring concerning the matter before us , and for the establishing of his wavering mind , i will here ( before i pass to the second general head of my discourse ) answer a query or objection which some , and not without some shew of ground , may be apt to start . how comes it to pass , they will say , that this article of faith , viz. that iesus is the messias or christ , is so often repeated in the new testament ? why is this sometimes urged without the mentioning of any other article of belief ? doth not this plainly shew that this is all that is requir'd to be believ'd as necessary to make a man a christian ? may we not infer from the frequent and sole repetition of this article in several places of the evangelist and the acts that there is no other point of faith of absolute necessity , but that this alone is sufficient to constitute a man a true member of christ ? to clear this objection , and to give a full and satisfactory answer to all doubts in this affair , i offer these ensuing particulars , which will lead the reader to the right understanding of the whole case . 1. it must be consider'd that the believing of iesus to be the promised messias was the first step to christianity ; and therefore this rather than any other article was propounded to be believ'd by all those whom either our saviour or the apostles invited to imbrace christianity . if they would not , if they did not give credit to this in the first place , viz. that iesus of nazareth was that eminent and extraordinary person prophesied of long before , and that he was sent and commission'd by god , there could be no hope that they would attend unto any other proposal relating to the christian religion . this is the true reason why that article was constantly propounded to be believ'd by all that look'd towards christianity , and why it is mention'd so often in the evangelical writings . it was that which made way for the embracing of all the other articles , it was the passage to all the rest . but our anonymous author not thinking of this , but observing that this one article was usually required to be assented to in the gospel-writings , he thence inconsiderately concludes that this is the whole of the christian belief , and that there is nothing else to be necessarily assented to , to make a man a christian. i am sorry to see that a person of some sense can have so little a feeling of the true nature and import of christianity , that he can harbour such a thought as this , that all the necessary part of our belief is summ'd up in a bare giving assent to this proposition , iesus is the messias . he mistakes a part of christian faith for all , and the entrance and beginning of it for the full consummation of it . 2. it is to be remembred that though this one proposition or article be mention'd alone in some places , yet there is reason to think and be perswaded that at the same time other matters of faith were proposed . for it is confess'd by all intelligent and observing men that the history of the scripture is concise , and that in relating of matter of fact many passages are omitted by the sacred pen-men . wherefore though but this one article of belief ( because it is a leading one , and makes way for the rest ) be expresly mention'd in some of the gospels , yet we must not conclude thence that no other matter of faith was requir'd to be admitted of . for things are briefly set down in the evangelical records , and we must suppose many things which are not in direct terms related . the not attending to this hath been one occasion of the present mistake . hence it was that this narrow-minded writer shuts up all in belief of iesus's being the christ. 3. this also must be thought of , that though there are several parts and members of the christian faith , yet they do not all occur in any one place of scripture . this is well known to those that are conversant in the writings of the new testament , and therefore when in some places only one single part of the christian faith is made mention of , as necessarily to be imbrac'd in order to salvation , we must be careful not to take it alone , but to supply it from several other places , which make mention of other necessary and indispensable points of belief . i will give the reader a plain instance of this , rom. 10. 9. if thou shalt believe in thy heart that god hath rais'd him ( i. e. the lord jesus ) from the dead , thou shalt be saved . here one article of faith , viz. the belief of christ's resurrection ( because it is of so great importance in christianity ) is only mention'd ; but all the rest must be supposed , because they are mention'd in other places . and consequently , if we would give an impartial account of our belief , we must consult those places : and they are not all together , but dispers'd here and there : wherefore we must look them out , and acquaint our selves with the several particulars which make up our belief , and render it entire and consummate . but our hasty author took another course , and thereby deceiv'd himself , and unhappily deceives others . 4. this ( which is the main answer to the objection ) must be born in our minds that christianity was erected by degrees , according to that prediction and promise of our saviour , that the spirit should teach them all things , john 14. 26. and that he should guide them into all truth , john 16. 13. viz. after his departure and ascension , when the holy ghost was to be sent in a special manner to enlighten mens minds , and to discover to them the great mysteries of christianity . this is to be noted by us , as that which gives great light in the present case . the discovery of the doctrines of the gospel was gradual . it was by certain steps that christianity climb'd to its heighth . we are not to think then that all the necessary doctrines of the christian religion were clearly publish'd to the world in our saviour's time . not but that all that were necessary for that time were published : but some which were necessary for the succeeding one were not then discover'd , or at least not fully . they had ordinarily no belief before christ's death and resurrection of those substantial articles , i. e. that he should die and rise again : but we read in the acts and in the epistles that these were formal articles of faith afterwards , and are ever since necessary to compleat the christian belief , so as to other great verities , the gospel increased by degrees , and was not perfect at once . which furnishes us with a reason why most of the choicest and sublimest truths of christianity are to be met with in the epistles of the apostles , they being such doctrines as were not clearly discover'd and open'd in the gospels and the acts. thus i have , i conceive , amply satisfied the foregoing objection , and i hope the reader is convinc'd of the true grounds why we must not expect all necessary points of christianity in the writings of the four evangelists . if our present writer had thought of this , and had distinguish'd of times , he had not formed such an ill notion of christianity as we find he hath done . but it is not only upon mistake that this author proceeds : his fault is much worse . it is too apparent that by this abbreviating of christianity , and by his voluntary neglecting what the epistolary writings deliver , he designs to exclude those fundamental doctrines which have been owned as such in the church of christ. so much for the first general head which i propounded to insist upon . chap. vi. the next general charge against him is , that the texts of scripture which respect the holy trinity are disregarded by him , or interpreted after the anti-trinitarian mode . this is proved from plain instances . the latter more especially is evidenced from his interpreting the messias and the son of god to be the very same as to signification , and that no more is denoted by one term than by the other . the weakness of the socinian arguing on this occasion fully laid open : and the texts where these terms are mentioned plainly cleared . a text produced and urged that confutes the vain surmises of the racovians about those expressions , and that reduces them to an unavoidable absurdity . the messias is a title of christ's office : the son of god is the title of his divinity . the former is founded on his mission from the father : the latter on his peculiar property as he is the second person in the sacred trinity ; and consequently they are not synonymous terms . the gentleman would wind in two learned prelates , but his attempt proves ineffectual he is given to shuffling . he abuses scripture by quoting it . my next charge against this gentleman was this , that those texts of scripture which respect the holy trinity were either disregarded by him , or were interpreted by him after the antitrinitarian mode . and this he is so far from denying , that he openly avows it , vindic. p. 22 , 23. by which he hath made it clear that he espouses that doctrine of the socinians . when i had offer'd those two plain texts , mat. 28. 19. iohn 1. 1. to prove the doctrine of the blessed trinity , he takes no care to give any resolution about them , though he was absolutely oblig'd to do it , because those texts are not in the epistles , but in the gospels , out of which latter he saith he made his collection of articles , but he should rather have said ( and that with truth ) out of which he drew one article . nay , which is more strange , though he particularly mentions , p. 9. my taking notice of his omitting these texts in his treatise , nay though he sets them down at large in his vindication , yet he hath the confidence to run presently to another thing , and he shifts it off by one impertinent matter or other , and faith not one syllable with reference to those famous texts which are such remarkable testimonies to the doctrine of the trinity . who could do this but a socinianiz'd writer ? and who could do this but a man that was wholly careless of his credit , and did not care how he acted ? and this very thing doth moreover shew that this author ( let him pretend what he will ) is as great a despiser of the gospels ( when any thing in them doth not serve his turn ) as he is of the epistles . this will perpetually stick upon him , and he will never be able to wipe it off . if ever he accounts for this , he must at the same time make an acknowledgment of his crazy memory , and of something worse . again , as it is evident that he rejects the doctrine of the blessed trinity , so more especially and particularly he waves that of the deity of our saviour . which appears from this that he justifies the charge against him , viz. that he made these terms [ the messias ] and [ the son of god ] the very same as to signification , p. 23. vindic. which is the very thing that * slichtingius and other racovians insist upon , and make a great stir about . and herein they write after † their master , who largely pursues this argument ( for so he reckons it to be , ) viz. that there is no difference between the name christ or messias and that other the son of god. he alledges the very same text that our vindicator doth , and some others . he argues from matt. 16. 16. compared with luk. 9. 20. thou art christ the son of the living god , saith the former place : thou art the christ of god , faith the latter : therefore christ and the son of god are not only the same person , but these two expressions signifie the very same thing and no more . what a weak and pitiful consequence is this ? for it is grounded on this absurd bottom , namely , that when any of the evangelists speak about the same matter , if one of them adds some words , yea , some material passages which are not in the other , these must be reckoned to be the very same with what the other said , though they were utterly omitted by him . then we may argue thus , st. matthew saith , christ began to preach , and to say , repent , mat. 4. 17. st. mark saith , he preach'd the gospel , saying , repent ye , and believe the gospel , mark 1. 14 , 15. therefore repenting and believing are the same , and there is no difference between them . would not a man be hooted at for such arguing as this ? yet this is the very reasoning of our racovian , and of this late proselyte of theirs . in one evangelist he saith , our saviour is called christ , in another the son of god , therefore the denominations of the son of god and christ are identified . again , they endeavour to prove it from comparing mat. 26. 63. mark 14. 61. with luk. 22. 67. in the former places 't is related that the high priest asked our saviour whether he was the son of god , the son of the blessed : in the latter , whether he was the christ. whence they roundly conclude that those names christ and the son of god are synonymous . but they do this without any shew of reason , because they cannot ( as * slichtingius himself confestes ) simply from an omission infer the identity of the things which are expressed and which are left out , viz in the writings of the evangelist : and consequently their arguing is vain and groundless . the plain and satisfactory answer to it is this , that st. luke ( guided by the holy ghost in giving the narrative of what was done relating to our lord ) omitted the particular words which the other evangelists have : and this is usual with all the evangelists at one time or other . but a man can't infer thence that the words and expressions which are used by them are of the same import and signification . after this rate , when i read that christ fell upon his face , mat. 26. 39. and that he fell on the ground , mark 14. 35. and that he fell on his kness for so 't is in the greek ) luk. 22. 41. i may conclude that face and ground and kness are the very same thing , and one of them signifies no more than the other . this is the wild logick of these men . can there be a more extravagant way of talking than this ? especially if we remember what pretences to reason and good sense these men make above the rest of mankind . there are other texts quoted by our author to prove that there is no difference between christ and the son of god as to the signification of the words , but they may easily be answered from what i have said concerning the interpretation of the foregoing texts . there is one place ( to name no more ) which confutes all the foresaid surmises of the socinians about the identity of those terms : it is that famous confession of faith which the ethiopian eunuch made when philip told him that he might be baptized if he believed ; acts 8. 37. i believe , saith he , that iesus christ is the son of god. this without doubt was said according to that apprehension which he had of christ from philip's instructing him , for it is said he preached unto him iesus , v. 35. he had acquainted him that jesus was the christ , the anointed of god , and also that he was the son of god , which includes in it that he was god. and accordingly this noble proselyte gives this account of his faith , in order to his being baptiz'd , in order to his being admitted a member of christ's church , i believe that iesus is the son of god , or you may read it according to the greek , i believe the son of god to be iesus christ. where there are these two distinct propositions , 1. that iesus is the christ , the messias , 2. that he is not only the messias , but the son of god. if you do not own these two propositions included in his words , you must say that the eunuch ( though instructed by philip ) spoke non-sense , for it to be christ and to be the son of god are of the same signification , then his words sound thus , i believe that iesus christ is christ , i believe the messias is the messias . this absolutely follows from the foresaid notion , that the messias and the son of god are synonymous . so then here is an absurd tautology instead of a sober confession of faith from this eminent convert : and philip accepts of it as a good and right profession of his belief . this you must grant , or else you must acknowledg that the messias and son of god are not of the same signification , but are distinctly attributed to iesus . these words will force you to acknowledg this , for in saying he believes christ to be the son of god , or that the son of god is christ , he lets us know that these two , viz. to be the messias and to be the son of god are different things ( though they meet in the same person ) and consequently that in all those places ( which are very many ) where the son of god is added to the messias , we must understand it as an addition to the sense : whereas according to this writer and his complices these two are identified : and consequently here is a nonsensical reiteration in the words , for they amount to no more than this , i believe iesus christ to be christ. this is that absurdity which they are reduced to . but yet i will subjoyn this , that we are not unwilling to grant that our saviour is sometimes call'd the son of god because of his * miraculous conception , also because of the dignity of his † mission , and sometimes because of his ‖ resurrection . but then we say that these do not exclude another , and higher cause of this appellation , viz. his ** eternal filiation : he was begotten from eternity of the substance of the father by an ineffable generation . if then we will speak of these two denominations distinctly and properly , we must say that one is the name of his office , the other of his divinity , and consequently that christ and the son of god are not expressions of the same latitude and import . and how indeed can they be ? for they have different foundations , the one hath its rise from the divine mission , viz. that of the father , who sent and anointed him to be a saviour : the other is grounded in the singular and peculiar property of the second person in the sacred trinity , and so is the name of his person . wherefore it is most irrationally and absurdly done of our late convert , in a fond imitation of his brethren , to confound these two which are really distinct. i mention'd this as a proof of his being a socinian , and he lets it remain a proof , and so do i. but here i would only observe that he and they proceed in a preposterous manner when they tell us that christ is called the son of god , because of his office and its dignity , whereas it is evident that he had the office and dignity , because he was the son of god , and because none could perform the office but he that was so . he was not god ( a metaphorical god , as the socinians sometimes make him ) because he was christ or the messias : but he was the messias because he was god , even the true god. he was the christ of god because he was the son of god : and this filiation , in its strictest and properest sense , implies his divine nature , and his coessentiality with the father . he would here wind in ( p. 23. ) the late archbishop of canterbury , as if he understood the foregoing terms as the socinians do . but his words that are cited do not necessarily import any such thing , for nathanael might own our saviour to be the messias , and call him the son of god , and yet it doth not follow thence that the signification of both these appellations is the same , or that the archbishop thought so . and he would make use of the authority of an other prelate , now living , of extraordinary worth and learning , who speaking only in a general way represents these two as the same thing , viz. that iesus is the christ , and that iesus is the son of god , because these expressions are applied to the same person , and because they are both comprehended in one general name , viz. iesus . yet it doth not follow thence but that if we will speak strictly and closely we must be forced to confess that they are of different significations ; for we have different ideas and notions of them , the one being the name of our saviour's office , the other of his person and eternal filiation . but our gentleman adheres to his good patrons and friends the racovians , and pronounces them the very same . and we may , for this as well as other reasons , pronounce him the same with those gentlemen . which you may perceive he is very apprehensive of , and thinks that this will be reckon'd a good evidence of his being what he denied himself to be before . the point is gain'd , saith he , and i am openly a socinian . p. 23. he never uttered truer words in his life , and they are the confutation of all his pretences to the contrary . this truth , which unwarily dropt from his pen , confirms what i have laid to his charge , that he did read the foresaid texts with socinian spectacles , that he interpreted them after the racovian mode , that he passed by other texts , yea , the whole epistles themselves , because he was sensible how many illustrious attestations to the doctrine of the ever to be adored trinity are contained in them . it is true , he tells us that he never read the socinian writers , p. 22. but we know his shuffling is such that there is no depending on his word . but suppose he did not read those authors , yet he doth not deny that he hath convers'd with some of them , and hath heard their notions and arguments : and this indeed he intimates to us when he lets us know that the generality of divines he more converses with are not racovians , p. 22. which intimates that there are some particular divines he less converses with that are of another way . what shall we say ? the gentleman is a racovian , and yet pretends he doth not know it . so we must number him among the ignoramus-socinians ( as they tell us in their late papers of ignoramus trinitarians ) which is one sort of those folks it seems . i will only further take notice here of what was truly said , before he was aware , that it was a dull work with him to quote scripture , p. 25. he hath sufficiently convinced the world , in his numerous quotations of scripture , that it was so . he might have added , it is a diabolical work , for in quoting scripture after that rate which he is guilty of , he doth but follow his pattern in mat. 4. 6. his handling of scripture , and making that use of it which he doth , is an abusing of it . such treating of the holy book is desecrating it ; and whilest he talks scripture , he prophanes it . so that a socinian begins to mend when he leaves this work off , ( p. 25. ) in comparison of what he did before . so much for the second charge . chap. vii . the last general charge against him is , that when he professedly enumerates the advantages of our saviour's coming , he hath not one syllable of his satisfying for us . hence it is rationally inferr'd that he favours racovianism . he endeavours to evade this by pretending that in other places he uses such terms as import satisfaction . herein he is refuted . his dissimulation discovered . even whilest he proclaims himself a socinian , he labours to disguise it . which argues his weakness and insincerity . his book is unworthy of the specious title which he prefixes to it . the author's conclusion of the foregoing debates . another proof , or rather demonstration of our author 's being a disciple of socinus is this , that when he mentions the advantages and benefits of christ's coming into the world , he hath not one syllable of his satisfying for us , or by his death purchasing life and salvation , or any thing that sounds like it . he makes nothing of the force of this evidence , wherefore it will be proper now to set it before the reader in its true and native light . he that was giving an account of the reasonableness of christianity , and was more particularly making it his business to shew for what end and purpose christ appear'd in the flesh , and to let his readers know what good and advantage were brought to them by the messias , he ( i say ) when he was about this work , and designedly undertook it in this part of his book , was obliged to declare that one great advantage of the messias's coming was to take away our sins by expiating them , that one main end of his coming was to make satisfaction for us , and thereby to purchase life and glory . but this new convert hath not any thing that sounds like it in this place , where he professedly took upon him to acquaint us what are the advantages which accrue to us by the messias . though he hath the confidence to struggle with many other parts of the charges against him , yet here he submits , and grants ( p. 5. vind. ) he hath no such thing in the place where the advantages of christ's coming are purposely treated of . and if by his own acknowledgment he hath no such thing when he reckons up the advantages and blessings of christ's appearing in the world , then every intelligent man knows what inference to make , viz. that this author was of opinion that christ came not to satisfie for us , and to purchase life for us by vertue of his death , which is one of the grand points of socinianism . the force of this inference is unavoidable , and it will attack our adversary , be he never so cunning at evasions , be he never so closely intrench'd in his equivocations . for where should we expect this to be mention'd , if it be not expresly taken notice of in that part or division of his treatise where he purposely sets forth the benefits of the messias's arrival ? if he doth not make express mention of it here , it is either because he forgot it , ( but he owns no such thing ) or because he was careless ( but he doth not think himself , whatever others do , to be such a writer ) or because he wilfully left it out , and this indeed is the true reason : for all the world cannot but see ( notwithstanding his shifts ) that his subject engag'd him to reckon this in the number of the benefits accruing by the coming of jesus christ , if he had thought it to be one . when he was enumerating of those , this could not possibly have been omitted , because by all writers that are not socinians this is always put into the catalogue of those blessings which we share in by the undertakings of our blessed saviour . hence it appears how impertinent and ridiculous that is , it was not in the place he ( meaning me ) would have it in , p. 5. he should have said , it is not in the place where every one might reasonably have look'd for it , it was not in the place where his matter necessarily oblig'd him to insert it , so that he was both faithless to his subject , and false to the true cause : in brief , it was not in that place where , if he had not been a pupil of socinus , it would certainly have been found : for no man but such a one did ever designedly undertake the enumeration of those benefits which we are partakers of by our lord 's coming , and yet omit at the same time his redeeming and purchasing us by his blood. he pretends indeed , p. 5. that in an other place of his book he mentions christ's restoring all man kind from the state of death , and restoring them to life , and his laying down his life for an other , as our saviour professes he did . these few words this vindicator hath pick'd up in his book since he wrote it . this is all thro' his whole treatise that he hath dropt concerning that advantage of christ's incarnation which i was speaking of : and they are general terms too , and such as every racovian will subscribe to ; for they are not backward to own that christ some way or other ( but not that before specified ) restored us to life , and they cannot gainsay the express words of christ concerning his laying down his life for his sheep , iohn 10. 15. but it is well known that ( notwithstanding this ) they deny the satisfaction of christ , and his purchasing life and salvation by vertue of his meritorious passion and death . there is not any thing that sounds like this in that part of his discourse where he peculiarly made it his employment and task to let the reader know what advantages we reap by our saviours assuming our humane nature . but he deridingly cries out what will become of me , that i have not mention'd satisfaction ? p. 6. i will tell you , sir , ( seeing you would know ) what will become of you ; you will ever hereafter be reckon'd by all understanding men an egregious whiffler , or in plainterms a notorious dissembler . for the case stands thus , ( and i doubt not but the reader will perfectly agree with me in it ) you believe christ's satisfaction , or you do not : if you believe there is such a thing , and this was one of the advantages we have by christ's coming , then you were false and treacherous in omitting it : if you believe it not , you are as false and hypocritical in vouching your self to be no socinian , seeing this is one known badg of a person of that character . let him take which of these ways he will , he forfeits his truth and integrity . was it not enough to make use of the chief socinian arguments , and to expound texts in the racovian way , and to leave out plain and direct places even in the very gospels that assert the holy trinity , and moreover to throw off all the famous testimonies to this doctrine in the apostolical epistles , and to balk the satisfaction of christ for us even when he was purposely telling the reader what are the advantages which flow to us from christ's coming ? was it not enough , i say , to do all this ( which loudly proclaims him a socinian ) but must he also hold the world in hand that he is none ? can this writer himself consider this , and not blush ? who doth not wonder at his weakness , that he should manifestly take the part of these gentlemen and yet endeavour to perswade us that he is not of their number ? but who doth not wonder more at his insincerity , that he should act thus ? must not this then be his lasting character that he hath in his writings demonstated himself to be not only a socinian , but a false hearted one ? there are other passages in his book which i might produce to confirm this character of him , but those may be taken notice of at another time . at present let it suffice that i have shew'd that he hath not said one word in his vindication that clears him of this imputation . and as for his book it self of the reasonableness of christianity , let it suffice to say that though there have been many treatises concerning that subject , yet none ever could imagine that this which he offers could possibly be brought under that title . he saith some body is good at conjecturing , but if a man had the best faculty in the world that way , it were impossible to guess and surmise that such a title should be prefix'd those papers which are an unreasonable and false representation of christianity , a lame and shatter'd account of the principles of the gospel , and , in short , a kind of libel against the new testament . finally , let it suffice that i have demonstrated to the reader that this gentleman acts a part in what he writes ; by which he hath gained this , that he must never be believed for the future . he that is such an under-hand dealer can't be trusted : there is no heed to be given to what he saith . thus i thought my self obliged to set before the reader the state of the case between this gentleman and my self , and to give an impartial account of our sentiments . i am satisfied in my undertaking , for ( whatever my defects in it otherwise be ) i 'm sure i have aimed aright , at the vindicating the glory of the great majesty of heaven and earth . i have faithfully asserted our holy religion , and the divinity of the blessed author and founder of it . i have maintained the authority and honour of the holy scriptures . to the pursuing of which glorious designs i shall dedicate my whole life : and i hope from what i have written , and shall hereafter write , the world will bear me witness that i do so . chap. viii . the gentleman insinuates that the author would represent every one as an atheist that thinks not as he doth . this calumny is baffled . he laughs at orthodoxy , and cries down systems and creeds . this indifferent writer blames the author for his zeal . is angry with him for penetrating into his thoughts and intentions . the party inure themselves to sophistry , and yet make a shew of simplicity and plainness . the gentleman 's uneven temper observ'd . what is meant by a known writer of the brotherhood . he is himself of an other fraternity . though he pretends to be grave , he scosss and ieers . he cannot be brought to confess himsef to be a retainer to socinianism , though he hath given such evident proofs of his being one . the author shuts up all with seasonable advice to him , giving him some account of the freedom which he hath used towards him in the preceding discourse . having now dispatch'd my main business , and found the bill against the criminal , not by innuendo's but by plain express proof , i am at leisure to account with him for some other passages in his vindication . he insinuates that i would represent every one as an atheist , or a promoter of atheism that doth not think as i do , doth not just say after me , p. 1 , 2. which is a groundless calumny , and might be confuted from that freedom which i professed , p. 77. even in that discourse which he excepts against . i have always been averse to bigotism , i never shew'd my self a dogmatizer , but always declar'd for an ingenuous liberty , such as doth not audaciously encroach upon the necessary and fundamental points of our religion . therefore this vindicator's wilful mistaking of what i said , thereby to represent me as extremely censorious and uncharitable , looks like spleen . but i need say no more than this , that the reader is convinc'd ( i question not ) from what hath been premised that this writer will say any thing that comes into his head . this seems to be natural to him every where : and he can be no more without it than a spaniard without his guittar . to be orthodox is a great scandal , it seems , and he often objects it to me : which , as the learned know , was the very language and idiom of the arrians of old , and of that sort of men who are since known by the name of socinians . he speaks in the very stile of the old antitrinitarians ; though it may be he will say he doth not know it . he publickly prides himself in his heterodoxy , and hates even with a deadly hatred all catechisms and confessions , all systems and models , p. 8. he laughs at orthodoxy , p. 17 , 20. and derides mysteries , which are infallible marks of a racovian brother . and o how he grins at the spirit of creed-making ? p. 18. vindic. the very thoughts of which do so haunt him , so plague and torment him that he cannot rest till it be conjured down . and here , by the way , seeing i have mention'd his rancour against systematick books and writings , i might represent the misery that is coming upon all booksellers if this gentleman and his correspondents go on successfully . here is an effectual plot to undermine stationers hall ; for all systems and bodies of divinity , philosophy , &c. must be cashier'd : whatever looks like system must not be bought or sold. this will fall heavy on the gentlemen of st. paul's church-yard , and other places . this author often finds fault with me for my zeal , p. 5 , 18 , 37. it is likely he hath heard that when the gospel was heretofore read in the churches in poland ( before it was socinianized , ) it was usual to draw their swords , to shew that they would defend it against all that opposed it . i do but draw my pen in defence of the gospel , yea and the epistles , and i am censur'd as a zealot by him . and it is not strange , for he must needs declare against zeal that is indifferent . besides , according to this judicious casuist there is but one point of christianity that a man can be zealous for , if he would . queen mary's martyrs foolishly threw away their lives , for neither bonner nor any of their persecutors did so much as desire them to renounce this article iesus is the messias : and as for all the rest , this gentleman tells us that they are not necessarily to be believ'd , and consequently not to be acknowledg'd and profess'd ; and then who will shew any zeal for them , especially such as will carry a man into the flames ? he often talks of my being in his bosom , and knowing his heart and thoughts , p. 14 , 15 , 24. ( which by the by is more than his brethren will allow god himself to know , for free acts being uncertain they can't be certainly understood by god ( as the gentleman whom i shall speak a word with anon tells us . ) this sort of talk argues that he is much troubled that i have penetrated into his thoughts , and have discovered to the world what his intention and design is . and yet he intimates also by this way of speaking that it is an impossible thing to do this . how impossible then is it for himself to know his heart ? for this is a certain maxim , it is the punishment of a dissembler to deceive himself , for his endeavouring to do so to others . i wish this writer would consider of it , and learn for the future to be free , open and fair , and then others ( as well as himself ) would have a window into his breast , and see that which they are sorry they find no appearance of now . and i wish this were not too common a fault of the party , at least of many of them . they inure themselves to sophistry , cunning , and artifice , when they either interpret texts , or argue in favour of their darling opinions . they then too palpably impose upon other mens minds , as well as upon their own . and yet at the same time they pretend to great simplicity and honest dealing . thus you find them applauding themselves in their late prints : * the vnitarians ( say they of themselves ) are plain fellows , and have countrey consciences , and do not like juggling . you gentlemen of the city , look to it : these vnitarians , these socinians have a very bad opinion of you , for here they would have it believ'd that city-consciences are false and perfidious , deceitful and juggling . it is a course complement , and rustick enough which these plain fellows put upon you . it is not the first time they have struck at you : london must be disciplin'd by racovia . and the vindicator is one of these plain fellows , for as he hath shew'd himself an vnitarian , so he makes it appear that he hath a country-conscience in the sense that these men ultimately mean it in , viz. a knack of cheating in a rustical plain way , as when he pretends to make a religion for the rabble , an easie plain religion , a creed with one article , and no more ; pretending thereby to gratifie them , but under hand subverting christianity . nor have i yet done with him . i find him to be a man of a very uneven temper : sometimes he is very low and whining , and will be asking pardon , and desiring me , &c at other times he is imperious and magisterial , and requires me , &c. sometimes he talks very demurely , as about being in earnest , p. 9. being serious and grave , p. 24 , 25. and in a pedantick humour he undertakes to censure and correct my stile , p. 24. but this fit of gravity doth not last long ; he every where shews himself light and freakish , ironical and abusive as far as he is able , and nibbles at wit according to his mean talent . he inveighs forsooth against declamatory rhetorick , wit and iest , &c. p. 24. vindic. and yet at the same time is wanton and frolick , starting any thing to sport himself with . in that very place before mention'd where he seems to put on his gravity , he hath not forgot the merry time of rope-dancing and puppet-plays , at which he was good in the days of yore . it is likely he had been a little before conducting some of his young brood to bartholomew fair , and thence this precious idea came into his head . without doubt he thought he was not a little ingenious in that waggish expression , p. 6. a known writer of the brotherhood : which is meant of the brethren of the clergy who have writ against the socinian cause , the same with the popular authorities and frightful names which he speaks of , p. 23. the professed divines of england you must know are but a pitiful sort of folks with this great racovian rabbi . he tells us plainly that he is not mindful of what the generality of divines declare for , p. 22. he labours so concernedly to engratiate himself with the mob , the multitude ( which he so often talks of ) that he hath no regard to these . the generality of the rabble are more considerable with him than the generality of divines , the writers of the brotherhood . though truly a wise man that hears any one judg thus , will think he deserves as well to be rewarded with a pair of ears of the largest size as he did who judg'd on pan's side against apollo . but there is more yet in this term of brotherhood than this , for here it is implied ( and his thoughts may be suppos'd to be upon it when he wrote ) that he himself is a writer of an other fraternity ; and truly this stile is very proper , for the men of that party ( as 't is well known ) have labour'd to signalize themselves ( in the writings that they have publish'd ) by the title of brethren . it is agreed then ; we will for the future take him for a polonian brother . and i ask the reader whether this brother be not of kin to the order of friers in italy who were call'd fratres ignorantiae , viz. because , they professed to teach the people as little as possibly they could , as suppose one article of religion , and no more . i might proceed further , and shew that this author , as demure and grave as he would sometimes seem to be , can scoff at the matters of faith contain'd in the apostles epistles , p. 18. l. 4. &c. to coakse the mob he prophanely brings in that place of scripture , have any of the rulers believ'd in him ? p. 33. ridiculously and irreligiously he pretends that i prefer what he faith to me to what is offer'd to me from the word of god , p. 25. what is there that this gentleman will not turn into ridicule or falsity ? what is there that he will not take hold of to be sportive and gamesome ? we may further see how counterfeit his gravity is whilst he condemns frothy and light discourses , p. 26. vindie . and yet in many pages together most irreverently treats a great part of the apostolical writings , and throws aside the main articles of religion as unnecessary . from all which it is clear that he contradicts and opposes himself . whence by the by we may gather that when he saith he is no socinian , we must take his meaning to be that he is one , for he is made up of contradictions . i observed before that the dissenting ministers consfess'd to him ( if you will believe * him ) that they understood not the difference in debate among them : but this gentleman can't be brought to confess any thing , he will not own that he is a writer of the brotherhood . no : there is some great reason ( if it may be call'd so ) for this , that he would not be thought to be of sozzo's side : though the marks and tokens are so plain that he may be apprehended without a hue and crie . come , good sir , do not act a part any longer : they have been desirous to put you upon service , and you were as willing to be employ'd in it : but now at last confess it . appear no more in masquerade : away with this mummery , and shew your self what you are . you have let the world see ( and so far we are beholding to you ) that socinian is a reproachful title ; that any one may gather from your being so backward to own it . you would never have taken so much pains to shift off this character if it were not a very scandalous one. throw off your vizour then , and speak out like a man. be free and ingenuous , and dissemble not with heaven as well as men. i have , sir , been very free with you , which you may impute to your not being so with your self . you know the rule among the men of art , the heart is known by the pulse . i have made bold to usurp upon the faculty , i have been feeling your pulse , and i have found that it strongly beats after the racovian tone . this i have told you with some plainess , and you are obliged to me for representing you to your self . i know you did not expect an assault , for it was your self ( however you apply it to me ) that was thought to be one of * the most priviledged sort of men . but , sir , in the reign of truth protections are not of any use . it is a laudable way sometimes to fight the enemy in his trenches . there are some criminals that must be snatch'd from the horns of the altar , especially when they injure the altar it self , when they abuse that which is holy , and trample upon our sacred faith and religion . to conclude , i have said nothing out of prejudice or disgust , much less out of bitterness and ill will , for i am in entire charity with you , and the more so because i have spoken so freely . if you complain now ( as you did before ) that you are hardly dealt with , i have only this to say , a plain down-right adversary might perhaps have met with another usage , but such a stubborn dissembler could not expect fairer quarter . a brief reply to another socinian writer , whose cavils bear this title , [ the exceptions of mr. edwards in his causes of atheism against the reasonableness of christianity , &c. examin'd . ] a brief reply to another socinian author . there came lately to my hand this writer's sheets in the true racovian print : but i having been so large upon the vindicator , this double-column'd gentleman , who pretends to be an examinator , cannot expect i should spend much time about him . in the first place we are to observe that he most humbly and reverentially dedicates his papers to the new patron of the cause , and takes upon him the defence of what he hath said in his reasonableness of christianity . he highly applauds him for his being so serviceable to the socinian and antitrinitarian interest . and it is part of his panegyrick that he hath happily provided for the quiet and satisfaction of the minds of the honest multitude , p. 3. that is , he hath not troubled and molested them ( as some have done with propounding several articles of christian belief ) but hath told them that one is enough for them , and bids them rest contented with that , like good honest ignorant souls . thus he hath provided ( but how happily let the reader judg ) for their quiet and satisfaction . but though the examinator heaps great commendations on the vindicator , yet he professes i● ( you 'll believe him , you may ) that he knows him not , p 4. only at a venture he takes his part , he now being become one of the brotherhood , and may prove a very substantial tool and engine in the great work they are now about , viz. the subverting of our saviour's divinity , the laying aside the apostolical epistles , the shutting out the necessary matters of faith contain'd in them , and the setting up and idolizing of one article , with defiance of all the rest as any ways necessary to be believ'd . this is the new diana that is set up by our ephesians , especially by their late demetrius . then he hath a fling at my booksellers , p. 5. wherein he follows the steps of the vindicator , p. 37. and in this and other things they jump , which discovers their correspondence , though he had but just before said he knew him not . and so this gives us an account of the truth of what the vindicator said , that he knew not that the socinians interpreted such and such texts after such a manner . this is said to impose upon the world , and make them believe that he and the racovians have not been confederates . but he confutes this in another place , where he owns that he hath particular knowledg of that gentleman , and knew the circumstances of his life , p. 13. col. 2. for he could not say of him that he overcame the prejudices of education unless he had been acquainted with his education and manner of life . and if this is the gentleman of no ordinary judgment , from whom he saith he hath seen a letter , &c. p. 17. here still you see is juggling and sleight of hand , and it is natural and proper it seems to the party . and further to shew their conferring of notes together , it might be observ'd that both agree to say that what i write was writ in hast and in a fit , examin . p. 5. vindicat. p. 19. and let it be so , if they will , for thence it will appear that a man need not take up much time to confute either the vindicator or this gentleman . but what is this that he hath to say of my booksellers ? some great matter without doubt . he put me upon making exceptions against that treatise , that so the sale of his own tract might be the more promoted , p. 5. the reader may guess from this what is their own trade ; they and their booksellers joyntly club to cheat the poor bulk of mankind . that is their practice we may learn from their fastning it upon others . any man may see that the rationalist went snips with his pater-noster-men , they fully understood one another , as appears from their not denying him to be the author of the reasonableness of christianity , &c. all the time it was in the press : but when they saw the sale of it was not according to their high expectations , they , to buoy up the gentleman's credit , began to disown him to be the author . this was done by the two shrine-men that before cried aloud for diana . now then , i think it appears at last that these people are extremely beholding to my booksellers if they did any such thing as they surmise , for by this means the sale of their book was promoted . after the booksellers , i must be taken to task by the reverend examinator , who having flutter'd a little about the formal words which i had said were to be found in the reasonableness of christianity ( which no creature that hath once read it will once doubt of ) he fixes on this ( p. 5. ) as the vindicator's true sense , yea his own words , that all that was to be believed for justification , or to make a man a christian , by him that did already believe in , and worship one true god , maker of heaven and earth , was no more than this single proposition , that jesus of nazareth was the christ or the messias . this man makes a miserable entrance to his work , for though he saith these are the vindicator's words ( for thus he brings them in , it is true he saith ) yet no man alive can find them in his book : and he knew this himself , else he would have set down the page , as we find him paging it afterwards . what shall we say then to such men as these who will vouch any thing ? they can be trusted with no book , no not with one of their own tribe , for we see here that this writer's stile is , he saith , and yet this express saying no where occurs in the book he refers to . and here by the way , we may observe the bold partiality of this writer ; he ( as well as the vindicator , p. 38. ) would charge me with not quoting the formal words which are in the reasonableness of christianity , whilest he is not sensible of his plain misquoting the same author . yet here we may observe this , that it is but a single proposition ( and no more ) which is to be believ'd , to make a man a christian. this is the sense of the vindicator's friend , thus he understands him ; and so indeed every one must , and yet it may be remembred that the vindicator himself would evade this , and pretends that he means more than a single proposition or article . now next let us see how this examinator licks over the vindicator's article , and tells us that the belief of iesus's being the messias comprehends and implies several other things , p. 3. here he sweats to bring off his brother handsomly and with credit by letting us know that his bold assertion which runs through his whole book is to be qualified after this manner , 1. all synonymous expressions , &c. and so he sets them down one , two and three . but i ask him this question ( and let the reader be pleas'd to observe the issue of it ) why did not the gentleman himself make use of these qualifications when he vented the proposition , and insisted upon it in the bulk of his book , yea why did he not mention these qualifications in his answer to my exceptions against his book ? he knew what he had asserted , and he defends ( as well he can ) his doing so , but you will find in no part of his vindication that he betakes himself to these evasions , though he hath enough of others of a different sort . how then come you , mr. examinator , to invent these things for him ? do you not hereby proclaim to the world that you will put off the reader with any idle and groundless conceit of your own ? when he repeats my words , p. 6 , 7. wherein i took notice of the gentleman 's willful omitting of plain and obvious passages in the evangelists ( out of whose writings he had drawn a whole article ) which contain the belief of the holy trinity , he saith not a word to excuse his omission , but by his silence ( for he would have spoken without doubt if he had had any thing to say in his friends defence ) he owns it to be wilful and blameable . only he comes with the trite and common answer of the party to those texts ; but before he enters upon the second of them , viz. iohn 1. 1. he declares there is no such text in the whole bible , p. 9. he said rightly that he was bold to say it , for a man shall scarcely hear a more audacious word , though 't is true he endeavours to mollifie it with an if . as to what he saith about my taking notice of the gentleman 's slighting the epistolary writings , i have fully answered it in the foregoing papers , and therefore shall add no more here . he proceeds next to those socinan authors , whose undue notions concerning god i glanc'd upon . the author of the considerations , &c. in reply to the right reverend bishop who had from the notion of god's eternity inferr'd that he was self-existent or from himself , hath these words , what makes him ( viz. the bishop ) say , god must be from himself , or self-originated ? for then he must be before he was , which this writer concludes to be a contradiction . therefore he would make this conclusion that god's self-existence is a contradiction . i know it will be pretended that this is the consequence only of the bishops notion of eternity , but it is plain that that writer makes use of this arguing to shake the belief of the eternity and self-existence of the allmighty , and that will appear from what he further adds in way of exception to what that reverend person saith afterwards concerning god's eternity . this examinator talks of a false notion of self-existence , but doth not say what it is . if i have mistaken the considerer , let him write plainer another time . as to the examinator's question . how the second and third persons can be self-existent ? i answer , they are self-existent as they are eternally from the self-same deity . though according to the nicene creed christ be god of god , yet that doth not infring his self-existence , because those words are not spoken of the essence of christ which is common to him with his father , but of his personality . he being the same with the father as to the former hath his existence of himself ; but differing from the father as to the latter , he is rightly said to be from him , or of him as he is the second person in the trinity . this is easily reconciled with what he saith an other bishop asserts , if this vnitarian hath not a mind to quarrel . in the next paragraph he is quite non-plus'd , for i had charg'd the sacinian authors with their denial of god's foreknowing future contingencies , and consequently denying the omniscience of god , which is an inseparable attribute of the deity ; and he having nothing to reply to the purpose , first tells us he is not concern'd in it , p. 18 , whereas every one knows that he being one of the party is concern'd . secondly , assoon as he had as it were renounced the socinian doctrine by saying he was not concern'd in it , he presently owns it for truth , as those words import , p. 18. — to deny his foreknowledg of the certainty of that which is not certain , &c. which is as much as to say that there are some things that are uncertain and therefore unknowable , and these god can have no knowledg of . and yet thirdly , he would seem to hint that it is a dishonourable thing to god ( those are his words ) that he should not have a foresight of these things . thus confused is our author , which shews he is not fit to be an examiner of other mens writings , when he can't write consistently himself , but in three or four lines hath as many blunders . in the next words and what follows he perfectly gives up the cause , p. 18. for i had laid this to the charge of the racovians that they denied the immensity or omnipresence of god , which is a property or perfection never to be disjoyn'd from the deity ; whereupon he tamely acknowledges that crellius and the rest of the fraternity are of this perswasion . only , because the gentleman must be wagging his tongue , he gives us a scrap out of a latin poet , and just names a greek father , who never said any thing to that matter , and so we are rid of them . but he comes on again , and goes off assoon , for he barely mentions the spirituality of god , which i had asserted to be another divine excellency : and it is such an attribute of god that we can't conceive of him without it , and therefore it is made the short and comprehensive definition of him that he is a spirit , iohn 4. 24. in my discourse which this examinator calls in question i took notice that the socinians denied this property of the deity , which i justly tax'd as an atheistick tang : and i think it was a mild term , for it is a rank sign of a great tendency to atheism to deny that god is a spirit , i. e. an immaterial incorporeal being . but our present author resolves himself into the opinion of those modest divines ( who by their blushing can be no other than socinus's scholars ) who determine nothing about the point ; which is as much as to say , he and they deny it . but you must know they are now a little upon their credit : this gentleman ( who speaks in the name of the rest ) had before given up the immensity and omniscience of god , and therefore it is high time now to be upon the reserve , and to pause a little , that the world may not see that they reject all those properties of the deity which i mention'd . but notwithstanding this cunning practice of theirs , the world may see , yea , it cannot but plainly see that they deny every one of these divine attributes more or less , and this particularly which i mention'd last , viz. that god is a spirit properly so call'd . for whereas i quoted socinus and crellius ( their grand patriots ) to prove this denial , this writer takes no notice of my doing so , which lets us see that the opinion of those great masters is humbly submitted to by all the rest . so now i hope the reader is convinc'd that i was not vnjust to the socinians , that i did not highly injure them ( as they have cried out ) when i charg'd them with atheism or a strong tendency to it in some points . i tax'd them with denying these four attributes , the self-existence , the omniscience , the omnipotence , the spirituality of god , and lo ! this professed son of socinus ( who was chosen out with great deliberation and judgment without doubt from the rest of his brethren to undertake the cause , to refute what i had alledg'd against them , and who questionless hath said all that he could in the case ) lo ! i say , this professed and known writer of the brotherhood confirms and ratifies what i have laid to their charge . for he produces the words out of their own author which i referr'd to , whence it appears that he had a mind to distort the right reverend bishop of worcester's words , and to argue against the self-existence of god. this examinator without any more ado rejects the second and third attributes , and by his boggling at the fourth we know what must be the fate of that . thus he and his fellow-criminals being conscious to the truth and justice of the charge , confess themselves guilty . they are so far from clearing themselves of the imputation and enditement that they aggravate it . i leave the reader to give the sentence . they deserve a severe one at his hands , but i desire him to be merciful for the sake of our lord jesus christ , who forgave and pray'd for his greatest opposers . may the all-merciful god forgive them , and enlighten their minds , that they may be convinc'd of their errors , and heartily renounce them . the lord give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth , that they may recover themselves out of the snare of the devil . then he runs to their common place , which hath help'd to fill up their papers many a time , and he thinks he doth great feats . but he only epitomizes crellius de vno deo patre , and offers a great many texts which have been answered a hundred times , as he ( but untruly ) saith on another occasion , p. 8. this takes up 18 or 19 whole pages : and why ? because this costs him nothing , he borrows it all ( and he might have borrow'd a great deal more ) from the same author . here he can afford to be very long and large , but when he undertakes the examination of what i had particularly objected against the socinians , he is like the dog at nilus , he is presently gone : he is not furnish'd with any answer that he dares insist upon , or trust to . next , i will observe to the reader that this author meddles not with my argument which i drew from their own professed principle , viz. that nothing is to be believed but what is exactly adjusted to reason , and thence prov'd that upon the same account that they reject the doctrine of the holy trinity they may likewise quit the belief of a deity . this i enlarg'd upon in seven pages together , it being ( as i then conceiv'd , and am more confirm'd in it since ) an unanswerable proof of what i laid to their charge . he only grazes on it a little , p. 19. but wheels off presently , and fixes upon that subject before mentioned , god's vnity , because he knew where to have enough of it , but did not know how to take off the force of that argument which i propounded and insisted upon . in the next place he will turn critick , and see whether he can thrive in this employment , seeing he hath so ill success in his former attempts . his nice palate disgusts the word birth , as applyed to adam , p. 38. but thereby he only shews his want of skill in the denotation of words . he is so poor a dabbler in grammer and criticism that he knows not that by the hebrew jalad , and the greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and the latin nasci , and accordingly our english [ to be born ] are signified in a general way the origin , rise , or beginning of things or persons , and consequently birth or nativity is not to be taken always in the vulgar sense . he might have read in genethliack writers that the word is applied even to cities and houses . but i need not go so far to defend the expression . the use of it , and that in the very way that i have applied it , is to be found in scripture : art thou the first man that was born ? iob 15. 7. or we may read it , if we please , more exactly according to the original , art thou born as the first man , or adam , i. e. ( as the context will shew it ) art thou as understanding as the man that was first born , viz. as our first parent adam ? by reason of this birth adam is call'd the son of god , luk. 3. 38. whence the socinians would gather that christ hath that name upon the like account , because of his extraordinary original , because of his miraculous birth . thus we have found that this gentleman is ignorant of the true meaning of words in common authors , that he doth not know the acception of them in holy scripture , nay that he doth not know what his own authors say , which evinces him to be triply a blunderer , and that he deserves no more to be call'd an examinator . then he thinks he doth mighty things , p. 39. by quoting limborch a very learned foreigner ( a system-maker , for he hath compiled a large system of divinity , though he gives it another name ; and why then doth this gentleman talk so reproachfully of systems ? p. 44. &c. ) but this his author is a second episcopius ; and therefore it was wisely done to bring him in to tell us what are the fundamentals of religion . but it was more cunningly done in the next paragraph to fetch in the sixth article of the church of england in favour of the vindicator's conceit . surely this his patron , at whose feet he lays his papers , will give him little thanks for this , for he jeers him rather than defends his cause . thus though they are agreed , and understand one another so far as to impose upon the world , yet they cannot ( and never will ) agree to speak truth . and indeed this worthy writer foresignified something of this nature . he is a boding sort of man , you may perceive , for thus he speaks in his humble dedicatory to the vindicator , if i have mistaken your sense , or used weak reasonings in your defence ( and behold ! here he doth both ) i crave your pardon . and so you may , and i will tell you for your comfort , he will soon forgive you , for he knows that your heart is right , i. e. for the good cause , and therefore a little mistaking of him out of weakness is pardonable . then he hales in mr. chillingworth by head and shoulders , p. 40. pronouncing him very definitively the ablest defender of the religion of protestants that the church ever had ; which is too high a character for him , though he was a person of great parts and learning . why must he be said to be the ablest defender when we can name so many eminent writers in other countreys that have perform'd this task ? or , if he means the church of england , why must he have the absolute preference to others that we can name here , especially that great ornament and glory of our church , whom i had occasion to mention before , who hath so learnedly defended the religion of protestants ? i , but he writ against crellius , and therefore he must not be the ablest defender . again , there is a reason well known to the world why mr. chillingworth hath the preheminence in the opinion of this writer and his confederates , but of that at some other time perhaps . let us now go on , and see what this gentleman gets by his producing of mr. chillingworth ; and it is no other than this , a plain confutation of the vindicator's project concerning the reducing of religion to a point , and no more . for these are that worthy man's words , the bible , the bible , i say the bible only is the religion of protestants . and i say so too , but this gentleman and the author of the reasonableness of christianity are of another opinion , for according to them it is not the bible , but a very small portion of it that is the religion of protestants . they acknowledg that some few verses in several chapters of the four evangelists and the acts are matter of faith or religion , but they do not cry the bible , the bible , the bible , they do not think that all and every one of the fundamental truths in the whole scripture are the necessary matter of our belief . thus i think this reverend scribe might have spared the quoting of mr. chillingworth , unless he delights in confuting himself and his new convert . afterwards he nibbles at some other passages in my discourse , but flies off into impertinencies . only one thing i meet with that is very remarkable , and i request the reader to attend to it . there are ( saith he ) some that-of deists have been reconciled to the christian faith by the vnitarian books , and have profess'd much satisfaction therein , p. 42. you may perceive that they are making of proselytes as fast as they can , and among the rest some deists come in to them , and so ( as the apostle speaks of seducers and those that are seduced , 2 pet. 2. 20. ) the latter end is worse with them than the beginning : for whereas before they owned a natural religion , now they become guilty of perverting and prophaning a revealed one . they are so far from being reconciled to the christian faith , that they oppose and contradict it , and even defie the main articles of this religion which is owing to divine revelation . such converts as these have no reason to profess much satisfaction in the vnitarian books , unless corrupting the christian saith be to be chosen before plain theism . to speak the plain truth ( and it is the design of these papers to do so ) and that which every thinking and considering man cannot but discern , the socinians are but the journey men of the deists , and they are set on work by them , for these latter hope to compass their design , which is to impair the credit of the christian religion and of those inspired writings which give us an account of it , they hope ( i say ) effectually to compass this design by the help of such good instruments as they find the socianiz'd men to be . you see then what ground this gentleman hath to think that the deists are proselytes to the vnitarians . then he proceeds to make a long harangue about the obscurity of systematical fundamentals , p. 44. &c. but never was poor creature so bewildred as he is . only he happily lights upon the quakers , p. 44 , 45. where it is worth observing that the man doth not know his friends from his foes , nor these from them . he rails against this sort of men ( who he saith would be counted the only people of god ) and yet it is certain that they are his brethren socinians . they utterly disown the scripture as the rule of faith , he saith : and doth not our late socinian writer symbolize with them when he declares that the divine truths contained in the epistles of the holy apostles ( which are a considerable part of scripture ) are not the necessary matter of faith ? he complains that the quakers turn the gospel into an allegory ; but the foremention'd author doth much worse , for he represents the greatest part of the gospel-discoveries as superfluous and needless . in giving us the farther character of the quakers , he in lively colours represents the socinians , for these are his words concerning them , retaining still the words wherein the christian faith is expressed , though in an equivocal sense , they have made a shift to be reputed generally christians . certainly there could not be a better pourtraiture of the racovian writers , for it is known that they are crafty and sophistical , and quote scripture only to pervert it . they acknowledg christ to be god , and an expiatory sacrifice , but they mean it equivocally ; they quit the true sense of scripture though they retain the words , and by reason of this latter have made a shift ( as this author speaks ) to pass for christians . these men ( whatever some few english writers of the racovian way hold of late ) exactly side with the quakers in crying down of water-baptism ( for so they both call it in derision . ) in the grand point of the trinity they both concur , i. e. to reject it , witness w. pen's sandy foundation , by which he means the doctrine of the blessed trinity . in a quibbling manner , wherein he shews both his ignorance and blasphemy , he thus speaks , * if god , as the scriptures testifie , hath never been declared or believed but as the holy one , then it will follow that god is not an holy three . neither can this receive the least prejudice from that frequent , but impertinent distinction , that he is one in substance , but three in persons or subsistencies . to which all socinus's followers say amen . the same gentleman derides the doctrine of satisfaction , and scoffingly calls the asserters of it † satisfactionists : and who knows not that transylvania agrees here with pensylvania ? the man that suffer'd at ierusalem is the socinian as well as the quakers stile : and generally as to the main things that relate to our saviour , they perfectly accord , viz. in making nothing of them . if quakerism then be no christianity , as this our writer reports it in the same place , then we may with much more reason conclude that socinianism is none . by this it appears that socinus and fox are well met , and that they are very loving friends . but they must seem to disagree , as here in this gentleman's papers . lastly , let us see the wonderful hand of god in suffering this unthoughtful writer to produce a paper written by a iesuite in the late reign , entituled an address , &c. and in this address , he saith , he goes about to shew that the scriptures commonly alledg'd for the trinity , admit of another sense . he goes the same way in the article of the incarnation . what! had he not enough of the quaker but he must bring in the iesuite ? and must he tell the world that the iesuitical writers take the part of the socinians ? must he publickly give notice that they both carry on the same work , and joyntly conspire to pervert the scriptures in order to it ? for the credit of the cause , it had been better to have placed this under a former head , and to have told the reader that some iesuites ( as well as some deists ) are converts to socinianism . but he hath blurted it out that ignatius loyola and faustus socinus were of kin . surely this author must not be employ'd any more to write in defence of the cause . he must be no longer a double-column'd writer : they must look out for a man that is not so open-hearted , one that can handle his weapon with more cunning , for this man hath stabb'd his own cause . but because this writer in the beginning and towards the end of his papers is pleas'd to use some words of deference and respect , i will not be backward to return his civility in the same kind by letting him know that i suppose him to be a person of ingenuity and learning ( only i wirh he had shew'd it in his late undertaking ) and that i would not have made opposition to him in any other points but these which are the foundation , basis and ground-work of christianity , and the very life and soul of our religion , and therefore none is to be permitted to treat them irreverently and scoffingly , as he and his associates have lately done . but i entertain some hope that this unsavoury tang will wear off in time . and thus i have finished both my replies to the gentlemen's writings against me : and i have wholly confined my self to these , and not ventured to guess at their persons , or make any reflections of that kind , for that is a thing which i abhor . nay , though the vindicator by his reflecting upon my degree , p. 24. and 36. and calling , p. 36 , and before , p. 26 , and before that , p. 9. had given me occasion to enquire into his quality and character , yet i purposely forbore to meddle with any such considerations . and so as to the examinator , i could easily have traced his person and station , and offer'd some remarks upon either , but i made it not my business to observe who they were that wrote , but what they had written . and it was necessary to do this latter with some salt and keenness , that the levity of their arguments might be the better exposed , and that i might in a lawful and innocent way retaliate that liberty which they had taken . and indeed the socinian gentlemen must shew themselves very disingenuous ( which i will not presume of them ) if they be dissatisfied with me for my freedom of discourse , when in all their writings they profess to use it . and it is plain that they make use of it : for who sees not that * they have been very sharp upon some of the most eminent and venerable persons of our church ? they have handled the late archbishop and some of his reverend brethren ( who in their writings shewed their dislike of the socinian doctrines ) with no excess of respect : and they represent them and the whole clergy as mercenary , timerous , and false hearted : they would perswade the world that the doctrine of the trinity is defended by them merely because they are bribed or forced to it . and others of their writers have been very severe upon the trinitarians in their late prints . and therefore with good reason some of these have been free with them again , especially that worthy person who undertook the defence of the archbishop and the bishop of worcester , and hath with great vivacity and sharpness reflected on the socinian errors , and with as great solidity and composedness establish'd the contrary truths , and hath not spared that socinian author whom he grapples with , no not in the least . i suppose none will grudg me that freedom which this gentleman and others have taken in their replies to the racovian writers , especially seeing i have not ( as i conceive ) made ill use of it . but of that let the reader judg . finis . books written by the reverend mr. john edwards . an enquiry into several remakable texts of the old and new testament which contain some difficulty in them , with a probable resolution of them , in two vol. 8 o. a discourse concerning the authority , stile and perfection of the books of the old and new testament , with a continued illustration of several difficult texts throughout the whole work. in three vol. 8 o. some thoughts concerning the several causes and occasions of atheism , especially in the present age , with some brief reflections on socinianism , and on a late book entituled , the reasonableness of christianity as deliver'd in the scriptures . 8 o. a demonstration of the existence and providence of god from the contemplation of the visible structure of the greater and the lesser world. in two parts . the first , shewing the excellent contrivance of the heavens , earth , sea , &c. the second , the wonderful formation of the body of man. socinianism vnmask'd : a discourse shewing the unreasonableness of a late writer's opinion , concerning the necessity of only one article of christian faith , and of his other assertions in his late book entituled , the reasonableness of christianity as deliver'd in the scriptures , and in his vindication of it ; with a brief reply to another ( professed ) socinian writer . all sold by jonathan robinson at the golden lyon , and john wyat at the rose in st. paul's church-yard . notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a38042-e170 * the exceptions of mr. e. against the reasonableness of christianity , &c. examined . notes for div a38042-e1160 * mishn. tract . avoth . c. 5. * de uno deo patre . l. ● . c. 1. † the exceptions of mr. e. &c. examined . * mat. 28. 19. iohn 10. 30. * mat. 28. 19. iohn 10. 30. * the exceptions , &c. examined . * diatr . de symbol . † de trib. symb. * azoar 1. * azoar 67. † from the arabick verb islam , credidit , whence the mahometan religion is call'd islamisinus . * alcor . azoar . 11. † de trin. l. 1. * socin . de cognit . dei. ostorod .. instit. cap. 3 , 4. epifeop . apol. remonstr . * praelect . cap. 5. * de uno deo patre . sect. 1. cap. 1. * the exceptions of mr. e. against the reasonableness of christianity examin'd . * cont. meisner . de trin. † socin . cont . wiek . cap. 5. * cont. meisner . de trin. * luke 1. 35. † john 10. 36. ‖ acts 13. 32 , 33. ** john 3. 16. rom. 5. 8. 2 cor. 11. 31. * the trinitarian scheme of religion , page 21. * reasonableness of christianity , p. 303. * vindic p. 20. notes for div a38042-e14640 * w. pen's sandy foundation , p. 12. † sandy foundat . ibid. * considerations on the explications of the doctrine of the trinity . a preservative against socinianism. the first part shewing the direct and plain opposition between it, and the religion revealed by god in the holy scriptures / by jonath. edwards. edwards, jonathan, 1629-1712. 1693 approx. 202 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 45 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2008-09 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a38061 wing e217 estc r24310 08120939 ocm 08120939 40896 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a38061) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 40896) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 1228:14) a preservative against socinianism. the first part shewing the direct and plain opposition between it, and the religion revealed by god in the holy scriptures / by jonath. edwards. edwards, jonathan, 1629-1712. the second edition. [8], 71 p. printed at the theater for henry clements, oxon : 1693. reproduction of original in the cambridge university library. includes bibliographical references. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng socinianism. 2006-10 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2006-10 aptara keyed and coded from proquest page images 2007-05 emma (leeson) huber sampled and proofread 2007-05 emma (leeson) huber text and markup reviewed and edited 2008-02 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion imprimatur , henr. aldrich vice-can . oxon . july 10. 1693. a preservative against socinianism : shewing the direct and plain opposition between it , and the religion revealed by god in the holy scriptures . the first part . by jonath . edwards d. d. and principal of jesus coll. oxon . the second edition . oxon . printed at the theater for henry clements . mdcxciii ▪ the preface . tho custome hath in some sort made it necessary to entertain the reader with a preface , before he enters upon the perusal of a book , shewing the design , and the occasion of writing of it ; yet in this case i hope there will be no need , either to court his favour , or mollifie his displeasure , for undertaking the defence of christianity against the great and dangerous opposers of it . for this being the common cause in which every man who is called by the name of christ , hath an interest , he may i hope without begging pardon , or if he please without shewing any reason , engage in maintenance of our holy religion , embraced by the whole church of god , as well as by that of which he is a member ; against all such , who shall either openly oppose , or secretly endeavour to undermine it . here every man is a souldier , and by his baptismal vow , having bin listed under christs banner , is obliged to fight under it , against all the enemies of his savior ; and such are the pernicious opinions here represented , which carry in their forehead an open , and declared hostility , and direct opposition to the divinity , and the cross of christ . the adversaries of our holy religion have taken the confidence to publish their impious opinions , not only without leave , but in opposition to the just authority , and the known and standing laws of this nation : they have revived the opinions , reprinted the books of some former socinian writers , which had almost bin forgotten , but they have taken care to refresh our memories ; and all this hath bin done in defyance to the government , as well as in the face of it . it hath bin as the occasion of trouble to all good men , so likewise matter of wonder and enquiry to all considering men , to find the nation pester'd with such numbers of socinian books , which have swarm'd all upon a suddain , and have bin industriously dispersed thro' all parts of the kingdom , whereby many weak and unstable souls have bin beguiled , and their minds corrupted from the simplicity which is in christ . who they are , who have bin the secret abettors and promoters of these antichristian doctrines as it is variously discoursed , so i shall not curiously enquire ; least by roaving and uncertain conjectures , the innocent may be mistaken for the criminals . only this i think is so evident , that it may be taken for granted ; that since there have bin no considerable numbers of men formerly , that we know of , who have openly and avowedly professed the impious tenents of socinus ; they must have lain lurking under some other outward name and profession , watching the first and most convenient opportunity to divulge their opinions , which for some just and weighty reasons no doubt , they thought fit for some time to stifle and conceal . i think there are scarce any among us so foolish as to imagine , that like cadmus his off-spring ( tho' without doubt the old serpent hath had no small hand in this affair ) these men should spring out of the ground ; or as some have fancyed of woodcocks , that they have dropped out of the clouds among us : it is therefore beyond all doubt , that they have lain hid and disguised under the denomination of some other sect or party , and profession . but among other persons or parties concerned in this affair , it would be a miracle , greater than any of late years pretended to be wrought in france for the conversion of the poor hugonots there , if the papists should not be engaged in it : who never as yet have stood by as unconcerned spectators , when any mischief was in contrivance against our church : but have always watched , and laid hold on the fittest opportunity , of sowing and increasing divisions among us ; and who have by a late experiment sufficiently convinced the world , that they have a much better knack , at unsetling and disturbing our religion , than in establishing and defending their own . no question it must afford matter of no small sport and entertainment to them , to find a generation of men , or vipers rather shall i call them ? risen up in their stead , who may tho' by different methods , at length perfect that design which they have bin long since projecting ; viz. the ruine of this poor church , and the destruction of that holy and excellent religion , which by gods right hand hath bin established , and hitherto wonderfully preserved among us . but whatever the causes have bin of this suddain appearance of socinianism , or whoever were the authors that have secretly and in masquerade , abetted and encouraged it ; much of which lies as yet in the dark ; the pernicious effects of it have bin , and are , at this day too visible . the minds of men , as we said before , throughout the nation being strangely corrupted ; infidelity and scepticism universally prevailing . some deriding all religion , which they either laugh at as the effect of folly and superstition , or detest as a meer cheat and contrivance of some cunning and designing men . others profess themselves enemies to revealed religion , speak opprobriously of the holy scriptures , deride the sacred pen-men of them , and make but a jest of any thing that is said in vindication of their authority and inspiration . a third sort seem to own , and profess to believe the bible , yet oppose , nay not only so but ridicule all the great mysteries of our religion ; such as are the doctrines concerning the blessed trinity , the incarnation of the son of god , the redemtion of the world by the merit of his death and sufferings ; the belief of which have bin hitherto looked upon to be the badge and mark whereby christians have bin distinguished from jews and mahometans . lastly , a fourth sort there are ( for you must know there are several ranks and orders of these enemies of our religion ) who receive the holy scriptures as we do , and believe , at least they tell us they do so , all the great mysteries of our faith contained there ; but yet at the same time they take care to let us know , that the belief of these is not necessary . so that whether you are a believer or an infidel in these matters , it makes no great difference ; forasmuch as the honour of god , the welfare of religion , and the salvation of your own soul , is not concerned either one way or other . and if so i am sure no wise man ought to trouble himself , much less to give others any trouble about such trifling and inconsiderable opinions . and these i look upon to be the greatest and most dangerous of all the forementioned enemies , forasmuch as by the observation of all ages , it hath bin found a much surer and speedier way , to ruin any cause by betraying than opposing it ; and that you may much easier guard your self from the open hostility of a professed enemy , than from the treachery and falshood of a pretended friend . to prevent therefore if it be possible ( and i hope it is not too late to attempt it ) the growth and progress of that infidelity which is to be found in many ; that coldness and indifference about the great and sacred mysteries of our religion , which is to be observed in others ; all which are the blessed effects of socinianism ; and which seem to have diffused themselves among all orders and ranks of men among us , beyond the example of former times ; it hath bin judged an advisable course , to shew the plain and direct opposition , that is between the doctrines of socinus and those which are revealed by the spirit of god in the holy scriptures , and especially in the writings of the new testament . and this , among such especially who have not extinguished all regard for religion , may , as it is hoped , be of some good use , to fortify them aaginst the infection of these pernicious errors , which have already spread like a gangrene . our writers generally have bin employed , and that very commendably , and for the most part with great success , in vindicating our holy religion , from the bold and impudent cavils of these hereticks ; and so have stood upon the defensive part . now it may be thought , for many good reasons , advisable , to make an offensive war upon these infidels ; and to bring it into their own territories . that is , that the charge of vnreasonableness and impiety , which they with equal falshood and impudence , have laid at the door of the christian religion ; should be retorted upon their new , and dangerous opinions ; which upon examination will be found to be opposite to piety , repugnant to plain reason , and in the conclusion such as will conduce to the overthrow of all true religion . and to discover this , ( which i hope in some measure is done in them ) is the design of these following papers ; viz. that the religion of socinus as opposed to christianity is both impious and absurd . so that fairly to represent socinianism will be the best method that we can take to consute it ; and rightly to state the controversy , will be the speediest way to put an end to it . i confess as to the point of reason , the socinians have laid such a claim to it , as if they did intend to engross and monopolize that to themselves , which yet , tho' in several degrees , is the right and inheritance of all mankind . and for their attainments in this , they have so magnified themselves , and have bin so undecently as well as unjustly magnified by others ; that many innocent and well meaning men have bin afraid to enter the lists with these sons of anak , these champions of infidelity . but i dare venture to assure the reader , he needs not fear to encounter these gyants upon the plain square of reason , notwithstanding all their boasts and brags of it . and i think it may be easily made out , that in opposition to some important articles of our faith , upon pretence of their repugnance to reason , they have advanced some other positions , so contrary to reason ; that when they come to be compared , i believe it will be found , that there is scarce any thing in popery , not excepting that gross fulsome doctrine of transubstantiation ; which contains greater absurdities , more opposite to , and incomprehensible by natural reason . particularly what they say concerning the factitious divinity of christ , is by far more unconceivable then what the papists aver of the change of the elements in the eucharist . and any man that hath abilities to judge of these matters , will upon enquiry find ; that it is less absurd and impossible , if there are degrees of absurdity in contradictions , and of difficulty in things that are impossible ; that a piece of bread should be transubstantiated into flesh , than that a man should be transformed into a god. in short tho reason be the idol of these men , yet i must desire to be excused if i do not stand in any great awe and admiration of it : and truly for my own part , i should much rather fear the malice then the reason of a socinian , at any time . and i am afraid , that if ever these men ( quod avertat deus ) should gain strength and numbers among us ; they would prove one of the most cruel and sanguinary sects , that ever yet disturbed the peace of the church . it is not to be denied , but that they have in their writings advanced some parts of christian morality to a great height , and have spoke many and deservedly great things , concerning forgiveness of injuries and patience under them , in complyance with the commands , and in imitation of the example of our blessed saviour : but i should be loath to trust a socinian for all that ; and if we were forced to make the tryal ( tho i hope we are in no danger of the experiment ) i doubt not but we should find , the forgiveness of these men more implacable than the revenge of others : and that their meekness and moderation would have more terrible effects , than the rage and fury of the arians and donatists , in ancient times . and that the reader may not think i utter this without ground , tho i have a great many , i will at present offer but one reason for my conjecture , and that is taken from their boysterous , impudent , scurrilous way of treating the great and adorable mysteries of our religion ; which shews what usage the professors of them would in all likelyhood meet , if they ever had them in their power . the blessed trinity is by some of them styled triceps cerberus , and the doctrine concerning it they have ascribed to the invention of the devil , and tell us that it was fetched from hell. sometimes they will speak very honourably of our saviour , but at other times , and upon other occasions so reproachfully of his divine nature , that they treat him worse then either the jews or romans who condemned and crucified him . and tho they pay divine honour and adoration to him , yet that doth not take off the guilt and impiety of their sacrilegious denyal , and as far as in them lies despoiling him of his divinity ; but herein they transcribe the copy which the roman souldiers before mentioned set them after his condemnation by pilate , who put a crown upon his head , and a scepter into his hand ; and yet at the same time they spit in his face and buffeted him . one would think that the great and venerable mysteries of our religion , entertained by all the wisest , and learnedst , and best men and churches , in all ages ever since christianity was first planted in the world ; tho they had bin errors , yet had deserved to be treated with a little more civility and respect , than these men have shewed in their writings : who have wanted something else besides a good cause to defend : for they have wanted modesty and civility in the defence of a very bad one ; have wanted the candor and ingenuity of a fair adversary ; and have treated the mysteries of our faith with such a prostitute , and impudent scurrility ; that we cannot well tell what reply to make to them ; except in imitation of the blessed and meek arch-angel michael , we should desire god to interpose in his own quarrel , and to rebuke the blasphemies of these men , but to have mercy upon the blasphemers . to conclude all , as there is no danger at present , god be thanked , that we should be frighted out of our religion , so i hope we shall not be wheedled out of it , by any of the artifices of these seducers who lye in wait to deceive ; nor by any other specious pretences that they may make ; no not by the pretence of peace , which i know hath sometimes bin offered in their behalf . i confess peace is a most desireable thing , the blessings that attend it are so great that we cannot tell how sufficiently to value , and so many , that we can scarce number them . so that all humble and truly pious christians should be content to part with any thing to obtain it . but i must recal that last word , for upon second thoughts i find it may be too dearly purchased ; as it certainly will be , when bought at the expence either of truth or justice ; without which , peace tho otherwise the most useful and excellent , would prove one of the most pernicious and mischievous things in the world. and when i speak of truth i chiefly and principally mean those fundamental truths which are treated of in these following papers , the belief of which have hitherto bin looked upon by most christians , to be necessary to our salvation : and if there be any truths of that importance i hope every man will consider , that tho peace be much to be desired , yet that it is not advisable for him to hazard his salvation to secure it . when all is done the reputation of being esteemed a peaceable and moderate man will stand a man but in little stead when he comes to appear before the tribunal of christ , and there to be charged with the guilt of betraying his religion , and at the same time , the souls of them committed to his charge , to endless perdition and ruin . in one word , tho peace be so great a blessing that a man might be content to lay down his life , yet no man should lay down his soul for the sake of it . and tho a pious man might in some cases commendably submit to death , yet no wise man , nay indeed no man not out of his wits , would venture upon damnation to obtain it . a preservative against socinianism . in all ages ever since the first planting of a christian church in the world , god for many wise reasons hath thought fit to exercise it with various and different sorts of tryals . the apostles who were immediately commissioned by christ , and sent to teach all nations , and thereby to bring them over to the belief and obedience of the gospel , ( according to the prediction of their blessed master in the 10 th . of matth. who had forewarned them of it , ) met with great and violent opposition , and that both from jew and gentile , who with an extraordinary zeal or rather fury , set themselves to oppress and stifle this new doctrine , if it were possible , at its first appearance , and before it had gained much ground and footing in the world . but besides the open force with which the enemies of it endeavoured to destroy the christian doctrine , the apostles and other ministers of it , met with another and more dangerous opposition from some false brethren , who did not aime so much at the destruction of the christian faith , as by some undue mixtures to corrupt the purity of it . such were the judaizing christians , who tho they embraced the doctrine of the gospel , yet still they retain'd a weighty affection for their old religion and the law of moses , to the observance of which they thought themselves under an indispensable obligation , and not only so , but would oblige all other converts to the like observance ; and their zeal in this matter occasioned no small trouble to the apostles , and disturbance to the churches , where they first planted the christian faith . see acts 15. and 5. gal. and tho this was a matter of no small concern , and might in the conclusion have proved of dangerous consequence , yet it was not considerable in a manner , if compared with many other execrable opinions and practices , which began very early to be introduced into the church , by ebion and cerinthus , menander , saturninus , basilides , and carpocrates . succeeded afterwards by valentinus and marcus , marcion , and hermogenes , and a long train of hereticks shall i call them ? or hogoblins ; for so i think they might well be styled , if we consider either the darkness and ignorance of all religious matters with which they were encompassed , or the wild pranks which they played , to the great disturbance of all good men ; who were all descended from that son of perdition simon magus , who was their patriarch and ring-leader . it were a difficult task to muster up the names , but almost an endless attempt to reckon the senseless and extravagant opinions of these hereticks ; by reason of whose pernicious ways , the way of truth was evil spoken of . for many of the objections of the heathens against christianity , tho all of them were false , yet were taken from the execrable opinions and practices of these lewd miscreants , who thereby brought no small disgrace upon the christian religion , and put no small stop to the growth and propagation of it . but not to prosecute this matter any farther , if we descend a little lower , we shall find that god had no sooner dissipated the storm that hung over the christian church for some centuries ; and put a stop to the effusion of any more of that blood , ( which without any distinction of age or sex , was spilt like water under the ten famous persecutions ) by the advancement of constantine to the empire ; but the devil betakes himself to new shifts : who finding his former methods of cruelty so signally baffled by the patience and constancy of the martyrs , he begins to play a new , or rather to revive his old game , and since he cannot destroy the professors of christianity , he will endeavour to undermine their religion . he had indeed made a vigorous effort , to extinguish both the name and memory of the christian religion , and to have tore up both the faith and the believers quite by the very roots ; but herein he was disappointed , and therefore he endeavours to compass that by stratagem , which he cannot effect by storm ; and in this method he finds greater success than in the former . for being baffled as we said before , in his attempts upon the disciples of christ , he attacks the doctrine which they embraced : and here inimicus homo , the enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat ; hoping thereby to choke the word , which now he despair'd to extirpate . and herein he found fit instruments for the execution of his design ; for taking advantage of the ambition and curiosity , the discontent and revenge , and other disorderly passions of arius , photinus , nestorius , eutyches and others , he soon prevail'd with them to assist him in the project which he had laid , for corrupting the doctrine and thereby disturbing the peace of the church . for they presently broached many dangerous opinions , whereby they did either plainly deny , or some other way pervert the doctrines then generally entertained by the whole church , concerning the natures and the person of the son of god. but these errors having long since bin buried in the western church , and lay forgotten in a manner with their authors , were again unhappily revived at the beginning of the reformation , by the endeavours chiefly of some polanders and italians in the last age , and among them principally of faustus socinus ; who having gathered up the dangerous errors of paulus samosatenus and photinus chiefly , against the divinity of christ , he put them together in one body , together with those of pelagius in the point of original sin , and those other doctrines which are supposed to have a necessary dependance upon it . and herein socinus seems chiefly to have chosen pelagius for his pattern . for the other hereticks , i mean arius , photinus , and macedonius being content with the denyal of those fundamental doctrines , concerning the divinity of the son and the holy ghost , or with their particular errors about the natures and person of christ , as nestorius and eutyches ; they did not attend to , or at least did not draw out those doctrines into all their pernicious consequences , which might when clearly understood , overthrow all the other parts of the christian doctrine . but pelagius gave us a systeme of his divinity , and drew out his errors into a greater length , in opposition to several important parts and branches of our religion ; chiefly that which concerned the doctrine of original sin , which naturally lead him into those other dangerous mistakes , which did by consequence overthrow the necessity of the satisfaction made by christ , and the redemption of the world by the merit of his death and sufferings , as the fathers , and particularly st. austin directly charge him . for he was master of reason enough to consider where it was that his first error would naturally lead him , and he was content to follow it , and thereby fell into that labyrinth of errors , from which with all his skill and sophistry he could not disentangle himself ; for when pressed with the arguments of his adversaries , and the authority and tradition of the catholick church ; tho he could and did find as many shifts and tricks as any other , to escape the force and conviction of truth ; yet his former and fundamental error in denying the imputation of adam's sin , and the original guilt and stain of our natures contracted thereby , hung like a dead weight about him , and sunk him down into those impious opinions which he broached concerning the grace of god , and the liberty and freedom of mans will in religious matters in opposition to that grace ; concerning the nature and efficacy of the sacrament of baptism , the merit of good works and the justification of a sinner , the nature of gods law and the possibility of raising to a state of perfection in this life , by yielding a perfect obedience to it , &c. all which having been picked up by socinus , together with what was deliver'd by the other hereticks , against the divinity of the son of god , and the holy ghost , he hath at length given us the most perfect systeme of heresies , in opposition to the doctrine of the gospel , in almost all the parts and branches of it , that ever was ushered into the world . and indeed to give him his due , tho in point of time and standing he was inferior , yet in point of skill and management , that is , in the art of heresie , he was superior to all that went before him , most of whom were but fools and ●unglers in comparison . for many of the ancient hereticks had several extravagant and incoherent notions , which had no more connexion between one another , then the parts of a rope of sand : so that like a company of mad and hair-brained people , they attacked the christian religion with great fury , but it was at randome and without skill ; flinging about their mad opinions like wild-fire , with which indeed they did a great deal of mischief , but it was at all adventures , without order , and as one would imagine , without any certain aim . but socinus comes more gravely and leasurely to work , and what m. cato said in another case of julius caesar , 2 may be applyed to him , sobrius accessit ad perdendam religionem . like a man that had his wits , tho , as many think , not the fear of god about him , he comes more soberly and with greater deliberation to destroy the christian religion : he puts his opinions into better order , his errors are better united , and have as far as the nature of error would allow , for the most part , a good correspondence between one another : like a wary and well disciplined captain , he puts his arguments into good array , levels his batteries against the great mysteries of our religion , and chiefly against the eternal divinity of the son of god : as well knowing that if he can succeed in his attempt upon that , he may promise himself an easy and cheap victory over all the rest of our religion ; and therefore having , as he thinks , effectually overthrown that main and fundamental article of it concerning the ever blessed trinity , he is resolved to follow his blow , and to pursue his imaginary conquest in that point , to the overthrow of all the other parts of the christian doctrine . he saw where arius , photinus , nestorius , &c. were wanting , who having , as was said before , contented themselves with their particular errors concerning the natures and person of christ , as persons who thought they had done mischief enough , they seemed content with what they had done , and went no farther . but socinus in imitation of his beloved loved pelagius , enlarged our prospect into his religion , and from the principles which he laid down , he drew out his conclusions to a greater length : for having denyed the trinity , and particularly the eternal divinity of our saviour , with it he could not avoid denying his satisfaction , and the redemption of the world by the merit of his death and sufferings ; having disowned the personality of the holy ghost , the necessity of his grace , and the efficacy of his operations upon the minds of men , must at the same time fall to the ground . together with these he hath published many dangerous errors concerning the nature and attributes of god ; concerning his prescience and providence in the government of the world ; concerning the creation of man and the fall of adam , and that corruption of our natures which is the consequence of it ; concerning justification , and faith which is the means of obtaining it ; concerning the church , its nature and the notes whereby it may be distinguished from all other societies ; concerning the ministry and the persons to whom christ hath committed the care and government of his church ; their distinction and authority to preach the gospel , and to exercise discipline in it ; concerning the sacraments and the end of their institution , and particularly concerning the nature and efficacy of baptism and the lords supper ; lastly , concerning a future state and the condition of men after this life . to which may be added some other doctrines , which do not seem to have any connexion with the former , but yet are of dangerous consequence to the peace and welfare of all civil societies : those i mean which he hath advanced about the power and authority of the civil magistrate , the lawfulness of war and oaths in a christian commonwealth , which have as mischievous an influence upon the order and peace of states and kingdoms , as his other opinions have upon religion . so that socinus having observed what was wanting in the former hereticks to make their attempts entirely successful against the christian religion ; being engaged in the same design , but in order to make it more effectual , he wisely resolved to correct what he thought was amiss in them : wherefore laying aside what was more gross and absurd in the wilder and more extravagnt opinions of the ancient hereticks , and supplying the defects of the more subtile and refined who came afterwards ; he and his followers have at length given us a body of their divinity , more compleat in its kind then ever the world was blessed with before their time . not but that in spight of all their art and skill , such being the fate and folly of error , they cannot avoid , especially in the defence and maintenance of their opinions , falling into many and those very plain contradictions . upon the whole matter i think it may be reasonably doubted whether socinus , any more than that grand impostor mahomet , may be properly called a heretick , as being the founder of a new religion , rather than the author of a new name and sect among christians . for as the alcoran of the former , is , as we are told , a fardel of errors and absurdities arising from the impure mixture of christianity , judaism , and paganism , together with some idle and extravagant notions of his own ; so the doctrine of socinus , seems to be a composition of the errors of arius , photinus , and pelagius , &c. together with some additions of his own , not indeed so seemingly absurd , as those of mahomet , but , i am afraid , no less dangerous to the christian religion ; of which he hath retained only the name together with the empty sound of the words ; but with such false glosses , such forced and malicious interpretations , as have quite destroyed the true notion , as the whole design of the gospel : in opposition to which he hath given us a kind of natural and new religion , not such as the spirit of god hath revealed in his word , but such as his own carnal reason suggested to him , in opposition to that revelation . and that this may not be looked upon to be an uncharitable because a groundless charge ; i shall lay before the reader a scheme of the religion revealed by god in holy scripture , and particularly that published by christ and his apostles in the writings of the new testament , and which hath bin embraced by all sound christians in all ages of the church , from the first planting of one in the world , to this day , together with another of the new , or newly revived opinions of the socinians : that by comparing of both , he may be able to make a judgment of what is here suggested , which upon examination i hope he will find to be agreeable to truth , and not contrary to charity . and first , as it is fit , we shall begin with the great object of our religion , almighty god : in the knowledge and worship of whom , together with an obedience to his commands , consists the entire nature of religion . and here upon enquiry i believe we shall find , that what the scriptures have revealed concerning the nature of god , is widely different from the account which socinus and his disciples give us of him . as to what concerns the nature of god , the scriptures propose him to be considered two ways by us . 1. absolutely in his glorious and essential attributes , or 2 ly , relatively in the great and adorable mystery of the ever blessed trinity . first , if we consider god in his attributes , we shall find that the first great , and , if i may so call it , fundamental attribute which the scriptures reveal , and indeed natural reason dictates concerning him , is the unity of the godhead , deut. 6. 4. hear , o israel , the lord our god is one lord. deut. 32. 39. see now that i , even i am he , and there is no god with me . 1 cor. 8. 5. 6. for tho there be that are called gods , whether in heaven or in earth , &c. but to us there is but one god the father of whom are all things . 1 tim. 2. 5. there is but one god , and one mediator between god and man , &c. here undoubtedly it will be said that the socinians are beyond all suspition orthodox , all their studies and labors being employed in asserting and vindicating the unity of the godhead in opposition to the doctrine of the trinity , which according to their apprehensions must infer a plurality of gods. but for all their boasts concerning this matter , and assuming to themselves upon that score the name of unitarians , we must not be too hasty in acquitting them from the imputation of polytheism ; for tho they deny the eternal generation and divinity of christ , and say that he had no existence before his being formed in the womb of the virgin , and appearance in the world ; and that the being which he then had was purely humane : yet after his resurrection from the grave , and his ascension into heaven , they say that god the father as the reward of his obedience and sufferings , exalted him to the honour and dignity of a god ; not indeed to be the supreme and eternal god , but however deus verus , a true god , distinct and separate from his father ; and socinus takes it ill of his adversaries , that they should charge him with denying christ to be god , 1 , and complains against them that will not be brought to confess and worship him 2 , for their lord and god , who was once a weak and infirm man : and herein he saith the power and goodness of god was discovered , and his admirable wisdom displayed , in extolling and deifying this man , beyond what we can imagin 3 and to the objection that might be made against this opinion , as that which did unavoidably infer a plurality of gods , wolzogenius will tell you , that if by two gods you mean one of whom are all things and we in him , and one by whom are all things and we by him , we are so far saith he , from being ashamed of worshipping two such gods , that we rather glory in it 4 but if it shall be farther said , that to do them right , they acknowledge but one supreme god by nature , and that christ is only a god by appointment and office , not , natus but factus , not born but made , and deifyed after his ascension , by a communication of the divine power , wisdom and goodness to him : i answer that this is so far from abating , that it rather encreases the difficulty , and makes the socinian notion both absurd and impious , as may be shewn more at large hereafter , when we come to lay the charge of idolatry at their door . indeed one would think it should be a debasing of the name and honour that is due to god , to give either of them to any but him that is so from all eternity ; the same wolzogenius will tell you , you may if you please , reproach them for so doing , but he values it not a rush , nos non erubescimus , we are not ashamed to own that we worship deum factum vel factitium , a made god ; not made indeed by a goldsmith or engraver , ab aliquo sculptore vel aurifabro , but they acknowledge with st. peter acts 2. 36. that god hath made jesus who was crucifyed lord and christ , that is , saith he , deum eximium fecerit , hath made him a great and eminent god. ibid. if this be not enough , if you please to consult smalcius , he will give you all the satisfaction that you can possibly desire further in this matter . for first , he will tell you , that whereas the scriptures assure us that there is but one only true god , yet that must be taken sano sensu ; not as if there were no other true god besides god the father , but that there is none that is god ; eodem prorsus modo , just in the same manner as he is 1 . for otherwise the thing is certain and past all doubt , that there are more true gods then one ; and let the inspired writers be never so positive , yet he and his friends can and will with equal confidence advance this contrary position , that the true god is not one only god 2 . nay it is not an indifferent matter , but a truth which they firmly believe and earnestly contend for 3 . and therefore pronounce it without any haesitation , that there are more true gods then one . and indeed they have reason to contend earnestly for this opinion , if it be true what he saith in the same place , that to acknowledge and confess , and adore one only chief and supreme god , is purely judaical , and a renunciation of the christian religion 4 . here he speaks as home to the point as you can possibly desire , and it is enough in all conscience . thus whereas the scriptures tell us there is but one god , the socinians say there are two ; one god by nature , another by grace , one supreme , another inferior , one greater , another lesser , one elder and eternal , the other a junior and modern god : and this by socinus is made the great mystery of the christian religion , greater indeed if true , and more incomprehensible than any other , or than all the other stupendous and adorable mysteries of our faith put together . now as the socinians say there are two gods ; so if you believe curcellaeus , he will confidently tell you there are three , who tho he be no socinian , yet he agrees perfectly with them in almost all their other errors , except that which concerns the doctrine of the trinity , where he hath a peculiar notion of his own , distinct as he tells you both from arius and socinus : for he makes the son and holy ghost to have a divine nature communicated to them from all eternity , but yet such that is different in each of them , so that they are thee distinct divine beings . and to the objection made by maresius , that this notion must inevitably imply that there are three gods ; he answers , that if by three gods , be meant three specifically distinguished from each other , he disowns any such distinction between the persons of the trinity ; but if by three , by meant three persons agreeing in the same common nature , yet numerically distinguished in each of them , it is that which he owns and earnestly contends for ; that the father , son and holy ghost , are as much three gods as peter , paul , and john , agreeing in the same common nature are three distinct men . and if you believe him , he will tell you the ancients were not afraid of the imputation of polytheism , in this sense ; and to think of the same individual nature being communicated to three persons , was a notion that never entered into the heads of any of the fathers , in their disputes against the arians , as being against both reason and religion . curcell . dissert . prima de vocibus trinit . &c. cap. 105. & deinceps . and limburg , who publishes and recommends him to the world , i suppose is of the same opinion . the 2 d attribute which the scriptures ascribe to god , is his immensity and omnipresence , assuring us that his nature is infinite , and consequently that it cannot be confined to any place , or circumscribed within any limits . tho he is peculiarly and eminently resident in heaven , yet solomon will tell us that heaven , and the heaven of heavens cannot contain him , 1 king. 8. 27. and the psalmist puts the question , whither 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 also . ps . 139. 7 , 8. so st. stephen , act. 7. 48. the most high dwelleth not in temples made with hands , that is , is not confined within those limits , as many of the heathens thought their gods were , for , as saith the prophet , heaven is my throne , and the earth is my footstool . and indeed not only the infinite nature of god , but the belief of his providence necessarily supposes it . upon which account we are said in him to live , and move , and have our being , act. 17. 28. forasmuch as he is above all , and through all , and in all . eph. 4. 6. now in opposition to this important truth , which is not only revealed in scripture , but dictated by the light of nature , and acknowledged upon that score to be such , by all sober heathens , as well as by sound christians ; the socinians will tell you , that god is not infinite in his essence , or nature , but that he is so confined to the heavens , as not to be substantially present elsewhere , or not to fill any places out of those limits . and therefore when urged with those places of scripture , which say that god fills heaven and earth , and that he is every where present , jer. 23. 24. ps . 139. they answer , that they must be interpreted , only with respect to the vertue , power , and operations of god , which extend to the remotest places where he is not essentially present 1 . as the sun , which is the instance some of them give us to illustrate this matter , is confined to the heavens , and indeed takes up but a small roome there in comparison , yet may be said to be , ubique terrarum , because he diffuses his light , heat , and other influences , to the remotest parts of the earth . but of this attribute more hereafter . the 3. attribute ascribed to god in scripture , is his omniscience , whereby he knows all things past , present , and to come , which knowledge of his extends it self not only to all things and persons , but likewise to all their actions and the effects of them , and together with them views the secret springs and principles of those actions , discerning the designs and contrivances of men , and all the thoughts and intents of the heart , there being no creature that is not manifest in his sight , but all things are naked and open to the eyes of him with whom we have to do , heb. 4. 13. what our translation renders open , is more emphatically expressed in the greek , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , all things are , as it were , diffected and anatomized , the very inside of all things are laid open to his view . what is lodged in the darkest corners and deepest recesses of the soul , cannot be hid from his sight , whose eies are in every place , like a flame of fire , beholding the evil and the good . nay this knowledge is of so vast an extent , as to comprehend within its mighty compass , not only things past and present , but likewise all things to come ; for his duration being commensurate to all the parts of time , he doth not measure things as we do , by first and last , but all things present and to come , are open to him at one view , with whom a thousand years are but as one day , and one day as a thousand years , 2 pet. 3. 8. nay not only those things which are properly future with respect to any necessary causes of their production , but even those which are most contingent , as depending upon the spontaneous motion of mens free will ; all such actions , together with the most casual events , as well as remote consequences of them , are the objects of gods knowledge , who doth not only discern our intentions and designs whilst they are in fieri , in the time of their hatching and framing in the soul , but antecedently , long before the mind comes to any determination , he understands our thoughts afar of , ps . 139. 2. and of this besides the plain declarations of scripture , the predictions that have bin made by god of the most contingent and fortuitous events are an argument that one would think should place this truth beyond all contradiction : it being that which god almighty made choice of , to vindicate the honour of his divine nature and perfections , in opposition to the vain claim that was laid to them by the dull idols of the heathens , and their more stupid worshippers , esay . 41. 22. let them bring forth and shew us what shall happen , let them shew the former things what they be , that we may consider them , and know the latter end of them , and declare us things for to come . shew the things that are to come hereafter that we may know that you are god. it is true this knowledge of god as it extends to things to come , is too wonderful for us , we cannot attain to it : and therefore if we think to measure his knowledge by our own shallow conception of things , we engage in a task more absurd and ridiculous , than if we should attempt to take up the waters of the ocean and inclose them in the hollow of our hand . and of this absurdity are the socinians guilty . who will by no means be brought to acknowledge this great truth ; for tho when you come to discourse with them upon this subject , they will tell you , they allow god to be omniscient , and that he knows all things ; yet you must not be too hasty in taking an advantage of that concession . you must give them leave to explain themselves ; god knows all things , that 's true , but with this limitation , quatenus sunt scibilia , as far as they are capable of being known . but future contingencies must be excluded out of that number , having no being either in themselves , or in any certain or necessary causes of their production ; and therefore are no more the object of any , even divine knowledge , then darkness is the object of sight : your eyes may as soon be dazled with one , as your understandings be affected or receive any impression from the other . for gods knowledge , say they , is agreeable to the nature of the things known ; which may in some sense be true , but is a truth ill applyed by them , when they tell us , that god knows things that are certain , as such that shall come to pass ; things that are likely , he considers as such that may probably come to pass ; things that are barely possible , as depending upon the arbitrary , and therefore uncertain determinations of mens free will , he knows as possible , that is , they may or may not come to pass , but whether of these two shall happen , that is still a secret even to god himself ; whose divine knowledge cannot arrive to the knowledge of such future contingencies , of which , according to the known maxim , there can be no certain or determinate truth or falshood . perhaps you will say this maxim is true , with respect to second causes , and any created knowledge , but not with respect to the knowledge of god , to whom the most casual events are present , and therefore certain ; for as much as he foresees which way men will freely determine their own choice , either in acting , or forbearing to act , in doing this , or doing the contrary . and without this prescience we cannot well imagine how god should be able to govern the world , and particularly angels and men , in whose actions and the event of them , his own glory is so eminently concerned . the socinians will tell you all this is a great mistake , and that such a notion of gods knowledge is so far from being necessary to his providence , that it is derogatory to the freedom of mens will , and thereby leads to the dishonour of god , and the overthrow of all religion , which crellius endeavours at large to prove lib. de natura dei cap. 24. de sapientia dei. and after he hath taken some pains to shew that this omniscience is opposite to reason , he comes to shew its repugnance , as he thinks , to the plain declarations of scripture , and what he and his master say upon this head , and upon that which follows , it will be worth our while a little to enlarge upon , forasmuch as it will help to give us a true idaea of socinianism , which tends plainly to the dishonour of god , and in the conclusion to the overthrow of all natural as well as revealed religion . now the places of scripture which he quotes to this purpose , are those which speak of gods waiting for the amendment and repentance of sinners , as he doth in that remarkable manner , esay 5. 4. what could i have done more for my vineyard , that i have not already done to it ; and yet when i expected it should bring forth grapes , it brought forth wild grapes ? and v. 7. when he looked for judgment , behold oppression ; for righteousness behold a cry 1 : how saith he could it be said either with propriety or truth , that if god had foreseen their obstinacy , he could have waited and hoped for their amendment . he farther refers us to two other places , to gen. 18. 21. concerning sodom , and to that concerning abram gen 22. 12. this is certain saith he , 2 , that god here by a new and an extraordinary experiment , made a discovery of the faith and piety of abraham , which he was not certain of before he made this tryal of it : and of the execrable impieties of the sodomites , which he would scarce believe they could be guilty of , till he came down from heaven on purpose , and made as it were his own eyes the witnesses of the truth and certainty of those matters . for a further confirmation of his opinion , he cites those places of scripture where god is said to tempt abraham , that is , to make a tryal of his obedience , gen. 22. 1. and so those other deut. 8. 2. judges 2. 21. where god is said to have lead the children of israel in the wilderness forth years , to prove them , and to know what was in their hearts , and whether they would keep his commandments or no : and to have left of the canaanites in the land , declaring his resolution not to drive them out thence , that he might prove israel , whether they would keep the waies of the lord as their fathers did or no. from all which he concludes that he must be pertinacissimus , extreamly obstinate that should oppose his opinion , which if you believe him 3 , is supported not only by the evidence and strength of reason , but by the authority of holy scripture 4 . what crellius here saith against gods prescience , he learned from his master socin . praelect . theol. cap. 8. p. 585. where the master goes farther then the scholar in aggravating the inconveniences that must attend the notion of prescience ; for from hence saith he it must follow , that many things are ascribed to god in scripture either falsly , or else must suppose him guilty of such imprudence 1 , which we cannot imagine any man could be lyable to , except he were stark mad . and then quotes the places before cited by crellius , and to them adds numb . 14. 12. &c. where god sware that the israelites should not enter into the land of canaan , which yet he sware to their forefathers he would give them , and he did once really intend to put them in possession of it , but their murmurings and rebellions caused him to alter his resolution . now if god had foreseen the disobedience and impieties of the children of israel which moved him to change his purpose concerning them , in promising to bring them into the land of canaan , and confirming that promise with an oath ; he must have acted , saith this bold man , so , as we cannot suppose any man to have acted , that was not quite out of his wits 2 . but now against all this , the foretelling of future events , even such as are most contingent , as depending upon the entire freedom of mens wills ; and the numerous as well as plain predictions of these matters which stand upon record in the book of god , one would think should be an unanswerable objection . and it seems it was so with episcopius , who though he agrees too well with socinus in many of his other loose and dangerous notions concerning the nature and attributes of god , yet here he leaves him , and declares himself of a contrary opinion , being chiefly induced thereunto from this argument of predictions . but yet to mollify the matter ; and to give as little offence as might be , to a party whose favour he courted , he tells them and us 3 , that it was but a small matter about which they differ'd , which should break no squares between friends ; for tho he affirmed , and they denyed , yet the 4 matter of the dispute was purely problematical , which had divided the opinions of the most learned divines , but never to that day had received any determination ; 1 that there was not one christian in a thousand had any knowledge of it ; in short , 2 that it was so trifling and inconsiderable a matter , that neither religion nor the worship of god was at all concern'd in it . but what episcopius could not do , socinus hath done , or at least hath attempted the doing of it ; viz. the reconciling the truth of gods predictions with the denyal of his prescience , and it is worth our while to hear what he saith upon this occasion . 1. then , sometimes gods predictions are no more then his warnings , potius monet quam praedicit , socin . prael . th. cap. 10. god dealing with men , as men sometimes deal with children , telling them that they will do such and such ill actions , to deterr and shame them from so doing , solemus nos cum puerum ab aliquo errore committendo deterrere volumus , &c. ibid. 2. god foretells some actions , and particularly some wicked actions , not as if he knew they would certainly be committed by evil men , quia ea certissime futura nosset , sed quia sic plane verisimile erat , ibid. but because it was very likely they should be so : that is , what we call a prediction , and what the scriptures without any limitation deliver as such , socinus accounts but a conjecture , that is a probable guess , of what may likely come to pass ; but what may come to pass , may likewise not come to pass , and so for all their confidence , the inspired writers , and what we cannot think of without horror , the holy spirit that directed them might be mistaken . but forasmuch as these two former answers may serve for some predictions , but cannot give a reasonable enquirer just satisfaction as to others , which are so plain that the force of them cannot be thus eluded : therefore once for all to put an end to this objection , and you may well imagine he was hard pressed , before he would betake himself to this last , and in him a desperate shift ; he is forced to take sanctuary at those very decrees of god , which at other times he opposes with all his might : like a malefactor when close pursued , and finding no other way of escape , he flies for protection to those very altars , which at other times he hath so often profaned by his crimes . for saith socinus , the things which god foresees , are either good or evil ; if good , he may absolutely decree what is so 1 , and make that necessary otherwise would be but indifferent : nay he may impose a necessity upon the wills of men , and make them to do and choose what is good 2 . now this is downright calvinism , and if you had a mind to believe it to be true , yet the socinians themselves , and the remonstrants their friends , will furnish you with such objections against the belief of it , that to them at least they must be unanswerable . for it is a known and an avowed principle among them both , first that where there is necessity , there is no religion ; and consequently neither good nor evil 3 . if our actions proceed not from freedom , they lose their nature , and may be any thing else , but cannot be virtue and vice , forasmuch as necessity takes way the distinction of actions good and bad . 4 . 2. that freedom and necessity are so opposite one to another , that omnipotence it self cannot reconcile them , forasmuch as they are plain contradictions , and terms that destroy each other 5 . that necessity robs you not only of your freedom but of your will itself , to which freedom is so necessary , that without it it is no will , it being an essential property of it , proprium quarto modo ; and to say that the will can subsist without its property , that is it's essential liberty , is absurditate ipsa absurdius 6 . now let us put both these things together : there is no religion , consequently neither good nor evil , virtue nor vice , where there is necessity ; and yet nihil prohibet , saith crell . nothing , consequently neither religion , nor the nature of good and evil hinders , but that god may absolutely decree things good to be done 1 , and decree them so as to become necessary by virtue of that decree . again , the will cannot be necessitated in any of its actions , forasmuch as this would destroy its freedom , which is a fundamental radical property of it , and cannot be separated from it without destroying the will itself : and yet god can impose a necessity upon the wills of men of choosing this thing or another 2 : and socinus will tell you , that god usually leaves the wills of men to their freedom , except it be when the judgements require him to lay them under a necessity 3 . now how shall we reconcile these sayings , which to us poor christians seem to be plain contradictions , and therefore impossible to be true . but socinus is not only a great admirer of reason , but a great master of it too ; and therefore by the help of a distinction , he doubts not but to bring himself fairly off ; for in the forementioned place , having in order to give an account of some of the predictions of scripture , bin forced to bring in the decrees of god into his assistance , which could not , one would think , but entrench upon the freedom of mans will , by making all actions subject to these decrees necessary ; he gravely tells us , and we are beholding to him for the discovery ; that notwithstanding his decrees , god hath left man entirely to his liberty ; for besides the direction and government of his external actions which indeed god hath reserved to himself , he hath left every thing else in the power of mans will 4 . that is , when you say a man is a free agent , you must distinguish between the inward and outward act , between choosing and doing ; in the former sense a man is entirely at liberty , for what can be freer than thought , who can lay a restraint upon mans will , or shackle his desires ? the decrees of god , can put no force upon these , and here sapiens dominabitur astris ; they only govern mens outward actions , which may indeed become thereby necessary , but that 's no great matter ; animus cujusque est quisque , the mind is the nobler part , let a man but assert the honor and dignity of that ; and he need not be much concerned what becomes of his outward actions . but against this it may be objected , that a great part of religion consists in the practice of many external actions of piety towards god , iustice and charity towards men ; and if these are not free , they are no longer acts of religion , any thing else but not virtue and vice as was said before . to this he will tell you , that god measures mens obedience or disobedience respectively , not by the external fact , but by the internal actions and consent of the will 1 . which tho in some sense , and with a just limitation it may be true ; yet as it is here brought in by him , to serve his present purpose , is a very loose and a dangerous determination ; in short this whole matter , as it is stated by socinus , is lyable to very many and those unanswerable exceptions . for 1 st . whereas he saith the will even to the last is entirely at liberty , tho the external actions are subject to the decrees of god , and thereby become necessary ; this is a plain contradiction to what both he and crellius before told us , that god might necessitatem afferre voluntati & necessitatem imponere hominibus hoc vel illud volendi : force even the will , as well as make the outward actions necessary . 2 ly , he asserts a freedom in men to little or no purpose ; for one would think if god gave man a principle of freedom , he did it chiefly for the government of his actions ; and if these are not in his power he had even as good be without his liberty ; and that his will and his actions should run the same fate , and be both equally subject to it . for my part i should think i had as good be shackled and manacled , as to have a full power of moving , and yet not be able to stir either hand or foot . 3 ly , if socinus should be asked , how it can be imagined that the actions can be necessary , when the principle from whence they proceed is absolutely free , for it is of humane and voluntary actions that socinus in that place is speaking , i believe it would puzzle him to give a satisfactory answer . 4 thly , tho socinus takes care of the freedom of mans will , which he in this place is concerned to vindicate , yet as far as i can perceive he hath little care of religion ; for if , where there is necessity there can be no religion , as the socin . and remonstrants said before , and that a great part of religion consists in external as well as internal actions ; i cannot see but that thereby religion is left in great danger , if not entirely overthrown , and that vertue and morality , are for any assistance that socinus in this place affords them , fairly left to shift for themselves . well , but however tho socinus by making good actions subject to gods decrees , and thereby necessary , may be guilty of contradicting himself ; yet there is no great harm in all that , his opinion may be absurd , but he doth not design to encourage impiety thereby ; for tho he make god the cause of good actions yet he doth not as his adversaries do , make him the author of sin. in reference to what is evil , here man is left entirely to his own freedom , the guilt of which cannot be transferred upon the decrees of god , which are not in any wise concerned in them ; but the shame and blame of all must be laid at mans own door , and imputed only to his own freedom . but soft and fair : there is no general rule but may have some exceptions ; for there are plain predictions in scripture , not only of some good , but of many evil and wicked actions , such for instance , as were the treachery of judas , and the denyal of peter , &c. now these according to the socinians , god could not foresee except they were necessary , and they could not well be necessary without his decree , and therefore to reconcile the prediction and the event , god first resolves to have an ill thing done , and then wisely foretels the doing of it . read what follows and then you will be further satisfyed in this matter , and that socinus and his followers are not wronged in having this laid to their charge . for first , saith crellius , if god finds men ●it and disposed for any mischief , eorum malitia uti potest ad consilia sua exequenda 1 , he may make use of their wickedness to compass his own designs . nay not only so , he may likewise decree something to be done by them , quod sine peccato ab iis fieri nequit , ibid. which cannot be done without sin . what crellius saith in general , socinus gives us an example of in the egyptians , whose sin in oppressing the children of israel , god long before foresaw and foretold , gen. 15. as having decreed it to be done . but to excuse this matter he saith , god did not put that wicked disposition into the minds of the egyptians , but found it there , malam eam mentem in ipsis invenerat , qua ad judicium suum exequendum , quodammodo abusus est . praelect . th. cap. 10. p. 547. and what he found there , he made use of for the execution of his judgements . this is something , but it is not full enough , this is but beating about the bush , therefore he will keep you no longer in suspence . not only an action that could not be done without sin , but the sin it self may be decreed and effected by god , si quid ab hominibus contra dei legem committitur id non quidem decernente ac autore deo fieri asseveramus , nisi raro ac quibusdam de causis , socin . prael . th. p. 544. that is , if god be the author of sin it is but rarely , and that for very weighty reasons . here again socinus to our great amazement , is a downright predestinarian , and if we may judge of the opinions of calvin even by the representation of his adversaries , he is calvino ipso calvinior . what socinus here affirms , that god sometimes is the author of mens sins , is confirmed by smalcius , but with this difference , that whereas by socinus god is made the immediate author of sin , smalcius will bring in the devil to bear part of the blame , deum quandoque per diabolum homines compellere ad scelera perpetranda 2 . god indeed , saith he , compells men to do evil , but he makes use of the ministry of the devil , who is the instrument in the compulsion . what they say thus in general , they do further illustrate , if you think what hath bin said may not be so clear , but that it may want a comment , by particular instances , and specially that of peter's denyal of his master , which was a contingent event , one would think , as depending upon the freedom of his will , and yet this was foretold by christ . but how could this be ? why socinus will tell you this denyal of peter , was not a matter so contingent as you may imagine ; for god for the punishment of his confidence , decreed to withdraw his grace from him , upon which substraction of his grace , that denyal could not but follow 1 . nay he goes farther ; not only withdrawing his grace from peter in the hour of temptation , but taking effectual course that he should be tempted . for , saith he , peter being disposed to commit this sin , and wanting only an opportunity of putting it into practice , to make good the truth of his prediction , god took care to offer him that occasion . and this he thinks may safely be said , without any absurdity 2 . here he speaks home and full to the point . indeed at another time he himself can scarce digest , what he here would have his readers swallow without straining ; for , saith he , to say that god foresees evil , because he decrees it , cannot be affirmed without impiety 3 . how shall we reconcile this with all we before quoted out of him ? i confess i was in some pain for him , to know how he would come off , but he soon relieved me : by the help of a distinction he can perform wonders , among which one of the greatest is to reconcile contradictions . for saith he , si certa mali operis praedictio erit , ipsum quidem opus à deo decretum fuerit , non autem cordis malitia , p. 549. that is , you must distinguish between the act and the obliquity of it , and then you may reconcile the honour of gods justice and the truth of his predictions : a very nice and methaphysical distinction , and which i should almost have despaired to have found any where , but in the writings of a schoolman or a calvinist . upon the whole , i think , we have reason to admire the judgment of god , upon these men ; in giving them up , as a just punishment of their contempt of his revelations , to the conduct of their own carnal and corrupt reason , which when it is not assisted by a divine revelation , is but a blind guide in matters of religion ; and therefore it is no wonder if we find them roving and wandring in a labyrinth and maze of errors , like men bewildred , going backward and forward , saying and unsaying , and at length growing giddy , and falling back into those very opinions which they have made so much hast to fly from , and upon the account of which , they and the remonstrants have raised so many , and such tragical exclamations against their adversaries . 4 ly . the next attribute that the scriptures ascribe to god , is his immutability , whereby he is uncapable of alteration , and therefore not liable to change 1 sam. 15. 29. the strength of israel will not lie nor repent : for he his not a man that he should repent . this would argue god to be like our selves , of like weakness , and like passions with men . for whatever alterations may happen in the world , yet he remains unalterable , with whom is no variableness , neither shadow of turning . james 1. 17. indeed men upon many accounts , and for many very warrantable reasons , may be obliged to shift and change their counsels and resolutions : who for want of wisdom and foresight in laying their projects , or for want of strength of execute them , and by a great many other unexpected accidents , which the greatest prudence could not foresee , nor consequently avoid , oftentimes meet with many and fatal disappointments . but when infinite wisdom is joyned with infinite power , nothing can hinder such an agent from bringing his purposes to the desired event . my counsel , saith the lord , that shall stand , and i will do all my pleasure , esay . 46. 10. who can withstand the power of god ? who can baffle his contrivances , or resist his will ? for the counsels and decrees of god are as immutable as his nature ; for be they absolute , or be they conditional , as long as he foresees the performance of the condition , it makes no difference in this case : many devices may be in mans heart , but the counsel of the lord that shall stand , prov. 19. 21. however men may alter , and the dealings and dispensations of gods providence in several acts of mercy and justice upon that score , may be different towards them ; yet this is without alteration or change in his purposes towards them , who remains still the same , yesterday , and to day , and for ever . the socinians utter many bold and dangerous expressions in opposition to this plain truth , which is the unavoydable consequence of their denyal of gods omniscience . forasmuch as there are many events which depend upon the actions of men , which arising from the freedom of their will , are therefore purely contingent , and consequently out of the reach of gods knowledge ; this must according to them unavoidably cause god to alter his counsels , to take new measures , to change his affections towards men , and alter his purposes concerning them : that is , he who is a reprobate to day , may be an elect person to morrow , and he who at present is elect , may afterwards be reprobated , and those may finally perish , quos deus saluti destinavit , whom god once designed for eternal happiness . socin . de off. hominis christiani , cap. 11. now this one would think should be an argument of inconstancy , and consequently not fit to be ascribed to god. crellius will tell you , there is no such matter ; this is only an instance of his freedom ; it shews you only that there is a variety in the acts of gods will , but no inconstancy . for a man is then said to be constant to his purpose , who persists in it till some good reason obliges him to alter it 1 , and therefore what you would call wavering , he will say is the result of wisdome 1 , god accommodating his decrees to the nature of things , and the actions of men ; so that in short , god is subject to change , but not without good reason , he may alter his purposes as wise men usually do , according to the different circumstances of things , and as the exigence of his affairs shall require . but with the leave of this bold man , another would be apt to think , that tho men may without the imputation of levity alter their counsels , yet this arises from the imperfection of their natures , and particularly of their knowledge of future events , which tho it be no fault , yet it must be acknowledged a weakness , tho such an one as they are no more accountable for , than they are , because they cannot restore sight to a man born blind , or raise the dead . but it cannot be ascribed to god without a derogation to his infinite knowledge , and unerring judgement , and is therefore an argument of weakness , notwithstanding all that crellius urges very weakly to the contrary , ibid. therefore that we may return where we first began , to the decrees of god concerning the future , and final state of men ; this is certain , that they with relation to their several and respective objects , are fixed and unmoveable ; for be they antecedent or subsequent to his foresight of mens faith or infidelity , it matters not in this case : the scriptures however assure us , and right reason would confirm the same , that they are immutable , more stable then the foundations of the earth , or the poles of the world , which may and shall be shaken , and stagger out of their places like drunken men , but the counsel of the lord that shall stand . for let holyness and perseverance be the cause or the effect of gods election , yet all sober persons agree in this , that whoever lives an holy life , and perseveres in it , is undoubtedly chosen by god to eternal life , and whosoever lives and dies in his sins and impenitence , is certainly designed and shall be doomed to everlasting punishment : here the foundation of the lord standeth sure , the lord knoweth them that are his , and them that are not so . but socinus , who denies the certainty of gods knowledge of many future events , viz. those which are contingent , such as are the actions of men , as depending upon the uncertain because free motions of their will ; must in pursuance of this principle , deny the certainty of gods election ; because he cannot foresee who will obey his commands and continue to do so , against all the temptations which they will meet with in the world to the contrary : and consequently he must say , what another would account impiety to think , that god almighty for want of knowing the determination of mens choice , must likewise be ignorant of the final event of their actions : and therefore he who at present is the object of his love , and designed by him for the joyes of heaven , may in the conclusion for ought he knows , merit his displeasure , and be tumbled down to hell . now that men may make such uncertain conjectures concerning their final state , and thereupon meet with a fatal and terrible disappointment , may be a certain tho a sad truth , and therefore no great wonder : but to think that it should thus happen to the allwise creator of men , is to have too mean and dishonourable conceptions of him ; and such the socinians have , doubting not to aver , that god finds reason to alter not only his dispensations towards men according to their behaviour , but his own intentions of kindness and displeasure , choosing what at first he refused , and refusing afterwards what once he thought worthy of his approbation and choice , socin . prael . th. cap. 7. a fifth attribute in god , and which indeed cannot be separated from him , without overthrowing all religion , is his justice : and that not only as it signifies his holiness and righteousness , but as it betokens his anger , indignation , his severity and displeasure against sin and sinners . and this the scripture speaks very often of , psal . 5. the psalmist describes god as one not only that hath no pleasure in wickedness , ver . 4. which arises from the holiness and righteousness of his nature , but as one likewise that hates all the workers of iniquity , ver . 5. and particularly , who abhors the deceitful , and will destroy the lying man. the wicked and him that loveth violence his soul abhors , psal . 11. 5. hence he stiles himself a jealous god , jealous of his authority and honour , and will revenge the contempt of it : he is slow to anger , but yet will not acquit the wicked , forasmuch as he is jealous , and furious , who will take vengeance on his adversaries , and reserves wrath for his enemies , nahum . 2 , 3. and when god proclaims his name , the name by which he desires to be known , it is the god merciful and gracious , &c. but yet one that will by no means clear the guilty , exod. 34. 6. numb . 14. 18. he is deus ultionum , the god to whom vengeance belongeth , ps . 94. 1. the god of recompences , jer. 51. 56. and in short , a consuming fire , heb. 12. 29. all which expressions seem plainly to denote , that justice in god is a necessary and an essential attribute , and which you can no more separate from him than you can his nature : i mean that justice which betokens his severity and indignation against sinners , and moves and enclines him to punish them , tho the punishment it self may in some sense be said to be arbitrary , and subject to the freedom of gods will ; as are also the emanations of his goodness , and the effects of his power : but yet all this doth not hinder but that power and goodness may be essential attributes of god , and are acknowledged so to be by the socinians themselves : and the like we affirm of justice , to the terrible effects of which , the sins of men render them necessarily obnoxious : all guilt which is the inevitable consequence of sin being in its own nature an obligation to punishment . but socinus will furnish you with new notions concerning god in this matter , and quite different from what either jews or christians have conceived of him . for he will tell you , that justice and mercy in god , not only as to their external effects as they are discovered in rewards and punishments , but likewise in themselves , are not attributes essentially belonging to god , but are things purely arbitrary and indifferent : and particularly that justice , as it bespeaks an hatred of sin and indignation against the workers of iniquity , is not a permanent property , or , as he loves to speak , a quality residing in god , which belongs to him per se , but ex accidente , that is , it is a matter purely contingent , and the effect only of his free and mutable will 1 now this as it is laid down by the socinians i take to be not only a false but a dangerous position ; forasmuch as it furnishes us with such a notion of god as is dishonorable to him , and will naturally lead us to a contempt of him . but before i come to prove this , ( forasmuch as i take it to be a matter of great importance in it self , and especially is so in our disputes with the socinians , who have introduced this notion of god without justice , in order to destroy the true reason of christs death and sufferings , which was to give satisfaction to the justice of god for the sins of mankind , ) i must crave leave to lay down certain positions , which tho i might take for granted , and call postulata , as being commonly known and received truths : yet i shall as i go along endeavour to prove them so . the first thing therefore which i shall lay down , is , that if there be a providence , it must be chiefly and principally employed in the care and government of human affairs : for there can be no imaginable reason assigned , nay it would be contrary to all reason to suppose , that god should take care of beasts and inanimate creatures , and neglect one of the noblest parts of the creation , i mean man , for whose sake chiefly , next to his own glory , he created the visible world , and to whom as to his vicegerent he hath given the dominion over the works of his hand , having put all things under his feet . 2 dly , there can be no providence nor care of human affairs without giving men laws for the government of their actions : for as his providence towards other creatures is seen , in giving them certain laws of motion and rest suitable to their respective natures , and in guiding and governing them so , as may most tend to his own glory , and the wellfare and beauty of the universe : so his government and care of men consists in giving them certain laws as rules of their actions and manners ; it being much more requisite upon many accounts that they should act by a certain direction ; forasmuch as the confusion and mischief that must be the consequence of their disorderly living must be far greater , and more repugnant to the nature and righteousness of god , than if other creatures should swerve from the laws of their creation ; which yet they inviolably observe , except when god thinks fit to interpose , for the ends of his own glory , and the good of men . 3 dly , that laws are so a 1 rule of moral actions , as to put us under an obligation of yielding obedience to them , and in this they differ from 2 good counsel and advice , which tho it tend to our advantage , and the promoting of our truest and best interest , yet it puts us under no necessary obligation of complying with it ; every man being left to his liberty to take or refuse it at his pleasure . 4 thly , that the violation of a law naturally and necessarily upon that very score makes a man lyable to punishment : which is but the same thing tho in other words with the foregoing proposition : for therefore are we obliged to yield obedience to laws , because if we refuse to do so , we are thereby obnoxious to punishment . this is that which in the civil law is called , jus seu obligatio delicti , quo quis ob maleficium ad poenam tenetur . the prescribing of a law is the act of a superior , whereby he obliges his subject to regulate his actions according to that prescription ; which if he refuses to do he may be called to an account as one that deserves to be punished for his disobedience 1 . this is one of the prime dictates of nature 2 , as well as the language of scripture , that he who doth wrong not only as that signifies injury , but any evil in general , should receive for that evil that he hath done , col. 3. 25. lastly , that there is a necessary relation between punishment and justice , whose office among other things is to distribute rewards and punishments . i do not say that justice is alwaies obliged to exact the punishment , which the delinquent is alwaies and necessarily obliged to suffer , i mean is necessarily obnoxious to ; but wherever there is punishment if just , it must flow from that habit or attribute which we call justice ; and that not only as it bespeaks righteousness and equity ; but likewise as it signifies that severity and indignation which every lawgiver is supposed to conceive against him that transgresseth his laws , who thereby violates his authority and offends against the publick good . it hath bin doubted indeed whether in human punishments , the civil magistrate may aime at the vindicating of his own authority , consider'd abstractedly from the publick good . and here that famous passage of seneca 3 , is often cited upon this occasion , and which he translated out of plato de leg. no wise man punishes a fault because it hath bin committed , but lest the like should be committed again : for what is past cannot be recalled , but wise and good men in punishment aime at preventing mischief for the future . but tho this may be true with respect to men , yet it is not so with regard to almighty god , to whom , as grotius in the formentioned book and chapter sect. 4. hath very truly and judiciously observed , those sayings of plato and seneca would be very ill applyed ; forasmuch as god in punishing the sins of men , may very righteously , and oftentimes doth , aime at nothing but the asserting of his own honour , and vindicating the authority of his laws , and in short , the revenging the contempt and violation of them : as is evident in certain invisible punishments inflicted upon some sinners in this life , such as are obduration and giving them up to a reprobate sense ; and will be much more evident in those everlasting punishments ( for so we will make bold to call them whatever the socinians may say to the contrary ) in the life to come , where god can aime at nothing but the satisfaction of his justice , and thereby the manifestation of his own glory 1 . but whatever the reasons may be of inflicting punishment either by god or man , yet justice is the hand that inflicts it : which is called distributive or vindictive , and is therefore defined by an 2 ancient writer from one of its noblest offices to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , an exacting of punishment : and by plutarch to the same purpose , to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , ultrix in eos qui adversus legem divinam delinquunt . now these things being thus premised , i proceed to make good my charge against the socin . in calling that not only a false but a dangerous opinion of theirs , which makes justice to be no necessary or essential attribute in god , but a matter purely arbitrary and contingent , as being the effect only of his free will. 1. then this opinion i say is false and impious , because it furnishes us with such an idea of god as is dishonourable to him and will naturally lead us to a contempt of him ; because it teaches us so to conceive of god , as of one that is not necessarily concerned in the actions of men and the affairs of the world : that is , it gives us a notion of a god without a providence ; for if there be a providence , it must chiefly and principally be imployed ( as was said in our first prop. ) in the care and government of human affairs ; there can be no government without laws , no laws without the sanctions of punishment , either expressed or necessarily implyed in all such laws ; no punishment without justice to inflict it ; and consequently ( that we may bring both ends of our sorites together ) where there is no justice , there is no providence ; and where the one is not necessary , the other is not so too . therefore tho the socinians do acknowledge gods providence and that he doth actually govern the world , yet this doth not take off the charge of falshood and impiety from this position of theirs ; because thereby they make his providence to be a contingent and perfectly an arbitrary matter ; you may notwithstanding all this have a true notion of god and do him no wrong , if you conceive of him as of one that may be unconcerned in the actions of men , who after he hath sent them into the world , may suffer them to live as they please , every man doing that which is right in his own eies : which yet is great impiety so much as to imagine ; forasmuch as it is repugnant to the infinite perfections of almighty god , helps to debase him in our thoughts , to weaken that reverence and esteem which arises in our minds when we conceive of him ; and thereby leads us naturally and inevitably from a disesteem to a denyal of him . so that what at first i called a dangerous i am now afraid in the conclusion will prove to be an atheistical assertion : upon which account epicurus among the ancients was generally accounted an atheist ; 1 posidonius the stoick thought him so , and that it was only the envy and infamy which attended such persons , which obliged him not to profess himself one : but what in words he affirmed , he did in deed effectually overthrow : for by denying gods providence , 2 re sustulit , oratione reliquit deos . in which charge against epicurus , cotta the academick hath had the consent of all wise men among the heathens , as well as the suffrage of christians : whose way of arguing would be of no force , had they not bin of opinion , that if there be a god who made the world , there must necessarily be a providence ; and if a providence , i am sure there must be that attribute in god which we call justice , without which that other can never be exercised . but you will say that god may give men laws for the government of their actions , and that will be a sufficient vindication of his providence , tho he assigns no punishment to the breach of them . that is , tho we cannot conceive a god without a providence , yet we may conceive a providence without justice . indeed socinus hath told us so , for speaking of the command of god to adam in paradise , requiring him not to eat of the forbidden fruit , and the threatning annexed , in the day thou eatest thou shalt dy the death , gen. 3. which threatning covet his adversary told him , did flow from that justice in god which we have hitherto bin speaking of ; he answers , that this justice was not any thing in god inhering in him , and therefore nothing could flow from it , as being only an accidental effect of his free will : 1 cum à me ostensum fuerat , ejusmodi justitiam in deo non veré residere , nec proprié dei qualitatem dici posse , sed tantummodo effectum voluntatis ejus ; nihil ex ea fluere potuit : as much as if he had said , non entis nullae sunt operationes , what is not , can have no influence to produce any thing . and for a confirmation of this he adds , 2 that god might have given adam ( and what god might have done to adam , he might undoubtedly have done to all the sons and posterity of adam ) this law , and not have annexed death as the punishment of the breach of it , nay if he had so pleased he might have assigned no punishment at all . but this is delivered by socinus with the same confidence as are many of his other absurd errors , in which he stands single by himself , against the constant and uniform suffrage of divines ancient and modern , fathers and schoolmen , philosophers and lawyers , and those both canonists and civilians : among whom it passes for an uncontrolled maxim , that , that is very vainly and impertinently commanded which may be securely neglected . frustra est aliquid praecipere , quod impuné potest negligi : and this bold position he lays down , and gives us not the least reason for it , but his own affirmation . but tho he gives us no reason for his assertion , i am sure there is very great as well as very apparent reason against it ; forasmuch as such laws as these will neither secure the honour of god , nor serve the ends of his providence ; being but in the nature of good advice , which , as we said before , every man is at liberty to take , or refuse at his pleasure . so that while he makes the law precarious , at the same time and for the same reason he makes the obedience of men so too : in which case god must be beholding not to his own authority , but to the good nature of his creatures , that they yield any obedience to his commands . perhaps you will say there may be other obligations , besides those of punishment which men may be under to practise their duty : such as are those of honour and gratitude , and the strong tye of reason , which will bind a man to comply with his duty , if there were no other motive to it , but this , that to do otherwise will be to act unsuitably to the dignity of his nature . all this may be fine in speculation , but will signifie little when reduced to practice : the generality of men being governed by sense , the motions of which are too headstrong and furious to be curbed by the bare commands of reason , when they are not enforced with the fear of punishment : the voice of which will be as feeble as that of old eli to his rebellious sons , far too weak to master their violence : and therefore that frantick woman that some have talked of , who brought fire in one hand to burn up paradise , and water in the other to quench the flames of hell , if she had succeeded in her design , instead of promoting would have extinguished all virtue , and soon have rooted it out of the world . in short , to summ up what hath been said upon this subject : if there be no justice naturally in god , there might have bin no providence , and if no providence , then men might have bin left to the conduct of their own giddy and unruly passions , which would soon break through the restraints of reason ; and when men were thus left to the government of lust and sense , the unavoidable consequence of this must have bin , that the world would have bin filled with blood and murders , with impurity and vncleanness , with theft and rapine , with injustice and oppression , and the gentle race of men would soon have become worse then the worst of wild beasts , preying upon and devouring one another . and to suppose that god could be unconcerned at all this , as if there be no justice in him which enclines him to punish such wickedness , he might be , is to have such a notion of god as it is reported lewis the 11 th of france had of his leaden god which he carried about him , and when he had caused any man to be murder'd , or done the like mischief , he would take it into his hands , and kiss it , and beg pardon , and then all was well again , and he himself became immediately safe if not innocent . in short at this rate , we should not dishonour god if we so conceived of him , as of one who did not necessarily act according to the eternal and unalterable rules of wisdom , goodness , and righteousness , that he might be a god not of order but confusion , which is not only an impious , but a blasphemous assertion . 2 dly , my second reason why i account this position of socinus about gods justice to be false and dangerous , is because it takes away the distinction between laws positive and natural ; which distinction hath hitherto bin looked upon , not only to be true but sacred ; sorasmuch as the contrary would open a gap to all manner of impiety and wickedness . now positive laws are accounted such as owe their original only to gods free will and pleasure ; and therefore as they cannot be known , so they cannot oblige any but those to whom he hath made such a declaration , and discovery of his pleasure . 1 natural laws are those which are discovered by the light of nature , as being the necessary result of our constitution , and that relation which we hear to god as rational creatures : many of which tho revealed in scripture , yet in themselves are obligatory , antecedent to any such revelation . now these laws do necessarily suppose justice in god , without which they would be insignificant : for tho natural laws owe their original to the holyness of god , as being but a transcript of those essential rules of righteousness which make up his nature ; yet all their force and obligation , ( without which they are not properly laws ) results from his justice ; that is , from the fear of punishment , which the law threatens , and justice inflicts , without which they would be perfectly insignificant . from which by a just and necessary consequence it unavoidably follows , that if their be natural laws , there must be justice naturally in god : so on the other hand , if there be no justice , there can be no laws of nature , forasmuch as without the former they can have neither force nor obligation , nor consequently have the formal reason of laws . 3 dly and lastly , this opinion of socin . is both false and impious , because it tends to overthrow all natural religion , by supplanting that which is the chief if not the only support of it in the world , and that is the fear of god. for take away his justice as this socinian hypothesis doth , and then you have left nothing in him which a man governed by the light of nature need to fear : not his unity , nor his eternity , nor immensity , not his holyness , nor his goodness , to be sure ; nor lastly his power which in conjunction with the former , as it necessarily is in god , is as harmless and innocent as either of the former attributes , when it is not moved nor excited by a just displeasure and indignation . imagine therefore a socinian were to discourse a pagan , i would fain know how upon this principle he could convince him that it were his duty to worship god , and to live a virtuous life : he might tell him indeed , and tell him with great truth , that the divine nature and perfections are in themselves a just ground of esteem and adoration : that virtue hath many and those powerful though invisible charms , as being both agreeable to our reason , and at the same time serving to promote our wellfare and happiness in this world ; yet all this would lay him under no obligation to do that , which otherwise would be highly reasonable and fitting to be done : suppose it be honest , suppose it rational , suppose it his interest , yet he is left to his liberty , and may , and no doubt will , do what he pleases for all that : he may act indeed like a fool and a brute , yet he is guilty of no sin in the mean time ; for where there is no justice , there can be no fear of punishment , where there is no punishment , there is no obligation , nor consequently law ; and where there is no law , there can be no transgression . so that tho his reason may upbraid him with the folly , his conscience in this case would never check him for the guilt of his vices ; which if the laws of his country did not take some care to prevent , he might securely practice without any fear of gods displeasure . in short , notwithstanding all the fine discourses about the beauty and amiableness of religion and virtue ; the inclinations of sense would soon bear down the dictates of reason , and the slightest temptations would prove too strong for these very speculations ; and as to the generality , the conclusion which they would draw from this principle , would be , let us eat and drink , for to morrow we dye , and after death comes no reckoning or account . come on let us enjoy the good things that are present , and let us speedily use the creatures like as in youth : let us fill our selves with costly oyntments , and let no flower of the spring pass by us : let us crown our selves with rose-buds before they are withered , let none of us go without his part of our voluptuousness : let us leave tokens of our joyfulness in every place ; for this is our portion , and our lot is this . wisd . 2. ver . 6 , 7 , 8. but tho this notion overturns all natural religion , yet it is it self effectually overthrown by the dictates of natural conscience , which are an unanswerable proof both of the existence and the justice of god : for we must know that conscience is something more than bare reason : for reason may direct , but conscience will prescribe ; reason gives us a rule for the government of our actions , conscience passes that rule into a law , gives it its force and obligation . the 1 prescribing of a law is the act of a superior , and no man is properly superior to himself , and consequently no man can by his own act , peremptorily oblige himself , except that act be enforced by some other and higher obligation . and therefore conscience is not bare reason , but reason as it is gods vicegerent , cloathed with his authority , armed with his justice : and therefore in a more imperious way it commands our obedience , not only perswading us to our duty , but threatning for the neglect of it : it puts on a majestick aire , tells us this must be done , or refuse it at your peril : indeed it executes the office , and sustains the person of a legislator , a witness , and a judge : first prescribes a law , then accuses for our disobedience , and lastly solemnly arraigns the sinner for his guilt , and then passes sentence upon him . so that these actions of conscience and the tribunal that god hath erected there , are one of the clearest and most uncontrolled proofs of a future judgement , of which the former are a kind of anticipation . and indeed if we look back to former times , and consult the history of ages and countries , the most ignorant and barbarous , we shall find , that as the light of nature hath directed them to the belief and acknowledgement of a god ; so one of the earliest notions that arose in their minds when they have thought of him , hath bin the apprehension of his justice : of which among other things , the numerous , tho many of them impious and ridiculous rites , which they made use of to appease the anger of their incensed deities , are an irrefragable argument . and this apprehension of divine justice , was , as one of the principal causes , so one of the chiefest , if not the only support of natural religion in the world . now to apply this to our present purpose , and to bring the parts of our argument a little closer together : if men by the light of nature could discover this attribute of justice in god , it must unavoidably follow , that justice in him is natural ; for the light of nature can discover nothing in god but what is so : whatever is the effect of gods meer pleasure , and the result of his free will , can never be known but by revelation ; and it is impossible it should be otherwise discovered , except we should suppose men to be omniscient , and that they may know more of god than they can of one another : for what man knoweth the things of a man , save the spirit of man that is within him ? 1 cor. 2. 11. so much less can any man discern the things of god but the spirit of god. he indeed searches the deep things of god , such as are the results of his free pleasure , and the counsel of his will ; which lay hidden in the breast of god , and must for ever have done so , had not he who lay in the bosom of his father , revealed them unto us : and therefore if justice were , as the socinians tell us , the effect only of gods free will , it must have lain undiscovered to the gentile world , to whom god vouchsafed no revelation of his will ; which yet is contrary to the account which the histories of all times and ages have given us of this matter : from whence it is evident that the belief of gods justice among men , is coeval with that of their being , written in the same characters , and engraven by the same hand , that implanted the notion of a god in the minds of men ; and if so , then the same hand that defaces the notion of gods justice , must at the same time and for the same reason erase the belief of his existence out of the souls of men : and i doubt not if the socinians had lived in those days , by this hypothesis of theirs , they would have been extreamly serviceable to theodorus , diagoras , democritus , and epicurus , in the design they were engaged in , of rooting the belief of a god and religion out of the world ; for they might have told men not only with great plausibility but truth ( if this opinion were true ) that all those accusations of conscience , and anxieties of mind , which were occasioned by the belief and dread of divine justice , were the effect only of fancy and delusion , and did owe their original not to a divine impress , but to the craft and contrivance of priests and polititians , who instilled into the minds of weak and unwary men , the vain fears of invisible powers ; representing them armed with thunder and with the sword of justice in their hands , whereas really there was no such thing ; but all this they did to keep the world in awe , and thereby to compass the designs of their interest and ambition . what further design socinus himself might have , or whether he had any other design by advancing this opinion , than the overturning that great article of our faith concerning the satisfaction of christ , i shall not positively determine . only this i cannot but acquaint the reader with , which hath bin long since observed likewise by others , that socinus and his followers in all their books and disputations , have made it their business chiefly to cavil and make exceptions to their adversaries , not careing what became of religion , so that they might with any colour avoid the arguments with which they were pressed , as is in some measure made evident by several passages which we have quoted out of their writings in the foregoing discourse . and i have this further to add , that as socinus , by denying the divinity and satisfaction of christ , hath plainly overturned the foundation upon which the christian church and religion have bin built : so by this assertion about gods justice , and by several others dispersed and slily insinuated through his writings , he hath given a shrewd blow to all religion whatsoever , whether natural , or revealed ; so that an unwary reader , by perusing his writings , may find himself an atheist before he well perceives how he comes to be so : as he saith in another case , viz. his opinion against hell torments , that he had so contrived the matter , ut lector prius sentiat doctrinam istam sibi jam persuasam esse , quam suaderi animadvertat 1 . and now i should come to a conlusion of this discourse about gods justice , ( which i have spun out to a greater length then i at first intended ; ) but that i foresee an objection will be made against all that i have said , by the socinians and their friends ; who will be apt to say , that i have bin taking a great deal of pains to no purpose , to aggravate the mischiefs of an opinion , which admit it were false in speculation , yet as it is stated by them can in point of fact and practice , carry no inconvenience imaginable along with it . for whatever god may do when left to his own liberty , yet he hath thought fit to oblige himself by positive promises and threatnings to reward the righteous and to punish the wicked : so that now by the revelation of his will he hath indeed abridged himself of his natural liberty , but hath thereby taken effectual care to secure his own honour , and to establish religion in the world , and all this is plainly acknowledged by the socinians . to which i answer , 1 st . that this doth not take off the falshood and impiety of this socinian opinion , which i was obliged to discover ; any more than if a man should say , that god hath indeed resolved to act wisely and righteously in the government of the world ; but that neither wisdom nor righteousness are necessary and essential attributes perpetually residing in him , but are only the effects of his free will : which were a most irreligious and profane assertion , notwithstanding the former acknowledgment . 2. tho the socinians hereby take care of revealed , yet they overturn all natural religion , as we shewed before , where god hath made no such revelation of his will , or discovery of his intentions how he doth design to deal with men ; and so as far as in them lies , by this principle , they help to make the 1 much greatest part of mankind atheists . 3 ly . when god hath declared his purpose , and hath accordingly given men laws for the government of their actions , and hath to those laws expresly annexed the sanctions of rewards and punishments , yet according to the socinian principles , this doth not sufficiently encourage men in virtuous practices , nor lay an effectual restraint upon the wicked . 1 st . as to rewards it is true the gospel affords us , as the apostle tells us , exceeding great and precious promises 2 pet. 1. 4. which exceed not only our deserts , but our hopes : but what absolute assurance have we that they shall be made good to us . they are only the effects as socinus tells us liberae , or as vorstius explains it , vertibilis voluntatis , not only of a free , ( for therein we agree with them , ) but of a mutable will : for according to them , as was shewed before , god is liable to alterations , and may change his purpose as he doth the weather , sicut potest pluere vel non pluere : and tho the morning proves never so fair , yet the heavens may be overcast ; and the sun that rose so gloriously , may set in a cloud . in short , if we believe the socinians , the promises of god considered barely in themselves are not a sufficient basis for a christians hope and security ; forasmuch as god being 2 mutable in his nature , he may repent of what he promised , and change and alter his resolution . and that the reader may not think that i have wronged the socinians in laying this to their charge , i must refer him to a treatise writ by crellius , de causis mortis christi ; where he will find this that i have affirmed of them abundantly made good . for there he tells us that the true reason of christs dying for us , was that thereby he might be a mediator , and surety of the covenant which god hath made with men ; for tho god had given men the promise of pardon of their sins , yet that promise was no sufficient security , because he might have receded or started from it : therefore to fix him as it were to his word , christ was sent as a sponsor and surety of the new testament , which , in the name of his father , he did confirm and ratify , by sealing it with his blood ; whereupon now god is obliged to make good his promise , so that if he had a mind to revoke it he cannot , the death of christ compelling him to preserve it 1 . indeed he could not but be sensible , that what he had thus delivered , would sound harshly in the ears of most readers , those especially who had any concern for the honour of their maker , which by this supposition was so highly and scandalously invaded : therefore to mollify this matter he tells us , that the efficacy which he ascribes to christs death , was not absolutely necessary in respect of god ; whose own love , grace and mercy , might move and encline him to make good his promise ; yet however this put him under no obligation ; for if it had , there had bin no need of the death of christ , either in respect of god , or our selves , either to have tyed him to the performance , or to have afforded us security . therefore he tells us 2 , that we might have a firm bottom for our hope , that if we believed in christ , that is , obeyed his gospel , our sins should be forgiven us ; it highly concerned us that god should be obliged to perform what he had promised ; and not only so , but that we might acquire a right to pardon ; which right he founds not in the promise of god but the death of christ , which he saith gives us such an undoubted title to mercy , and that supported by such a firm and manifest assurance and proof , as will not suffer god whatever may happen , to break his word , and recall his promise . 3 and this he tells us was the true reason of christs coming into the world , and of gods delivering him up to death for our sakes . by all which it is evident , that in the opinion of this man , the promises of god considered nakedly in themselves , do not afford us a sufficient security ; forasmuch as something may intervene , which may cause god to repent of what he promised , and thereby hinder the performance : and that you may not think that he had forgot himself , by making an impious or impossible supposition , he tells us , utimur phrasi sacris literis usitata ; that he used a phrase which was frequently made use of in the scripture it self , which often mentions gods sorrow and repentance , and therefore it can be no disparagement to almighty god to ascribe it to him , it being rather in their opinion an argument of his wisdom , as was shewed before . i must indeed acknowledge that this very author at another time , lib. de deo. cap. 25. de sanctitate dei. p. 241. affirms that the promises of god put him under an obligation , and that both his veracity and faithfulness engage him to make them good . but it is as evident on the other hand , that here he supposes the contrary , and that his argument proceeds upon that supposition . but by this time i hope the reader will not be much surprised to find socinians contradicting themselves , and he need not be concerned at it ; for i can assure him , whether he will or no , they will take the liberty of so doing . and hereby we find the observation which we a little before made concerning them , confirmed ; viz. that in their disputations and writings they care not what they say , having no regard to the honour of god or religion ; being only concerned for their own reputation , and to defend and maintain their own loose and unwarrantable opinions . 2 ly , but let us admit that god by his promises puts himself under an obligation to men , so that he cannot go from his word , but is obliged to make it good ; yet he may be at greater liberty as to his threatnings . indeed these , as the gospel represents them to us , are very terrible , whether we consider the punishments threatned either as to their intensive pain , or as to the extent of their duration ; for we are told that the wicked shall go into everlasting punishment ; that the worm that gnaws their conscience shall not dye , and the fire that torments them shall never be extinguished . this is indeed enough to make the sinner look pale , and to fright him either out of his wits , or out of his wicked course of living . but for all this he need not despair of mercy ; for tho god hath threatned severely , yet no man living can absolutely tell us , if we believe socinus , whether he is resolved to execute his threatnings . for as at first god might either not have punished the sinner at all , or not with eternal death , so now tho he hath declared by his solemn edict that he will do so , yet for all that he may if he pleases not inflict the punishment . deus potuisset , idque jure , homines licet peccantes morti aeternae non mancipare , sic postquam eos morti aeternae edicto suo mancipavit , ex illius imperio eximere potest . socin . de christo serv. lib. 1. p. 124. eximere potest , saith socinus , he may exempt the sinner notwithstanding his decree of punishing him ; and why may not he hope that he will : the bare threatnings , according to socinus , do not oblige god to execute them : and the consideration of gods mercy and justice , to which the torments of hell , as he may imagine , can scarce be reconciled , may upon that score afford him some ground to hope that he doth not design to do so . we know sinners are apt to allow themselves , as too great liberty in sinning , so to flatter themselves with too great hopes of impunity ; and if they meet with any such compassionate casuists as socinus , who will afford them any encouragement , they are presently apt to run away with it , and never look back , to see that vengeance which pursues , and will at length certainly overtake them . but how comes this man to know any thing of god besides what he hath revealed of himself in his word ? must we have recourse to that exploded distinction of the calvinists , and for which they have bin so much railed at by their adversaries , concerning the revealed , and the secret will of god ? for tho the question in the case may seem to be about the power of god , yet really and in truth it is about his will ; forasmuch as god cannot do what he hath solemnly declared he will not do ; and that for this plain and irrefragable reason , because god cannot deny himself . and now have we not reason to put the question , and enquire , whither went the spirit of god from the inspired writers , to rest upon the head of this impostor , who makes his exceptions to what they have declared as the peremtory and unalterable decree of god ? nay who boldly ventures to affirm that , which balaam could not be hired to utter , tho tempted to it by the wages of unrighteousness ; but makes that pious acknowledgement numb . 23. god is not a man that he should lie , nor the son of man , that he should repent : hath he said , and shall he not do it ? hath he spoken , and shall he not make it good ? now if it be impossible for god to lie , then it is not possible for him to alter the sentence concerning the final state of men ; which is delivered in scripture in such terms , as plainly evince it to be his peremptory and irrevocable decree : the happiness of the righteous , and the punishments of the wicked , as to the extent of their duration , being expressed in the same words , and in the same sentence : and if it be possible to know any thing of the absolute and immutable pleasure of god ; the wit of man could not contrive any plainer words , then what the wisdom of god hath already made use of , to declare his final and unalterable intentions , concerning the everlasting punishment of the wicked . besides it deserves to be considered , that this declaration is not only delivered in the manner of a threatning , but likewise by way of prediction , in the fulfilling of which , the veracity of god may seem to be more particularly concerned , than in the execution of a bare threatning delivered in a sermon , or exhortation , or the like . now in those glorious visions which were communicated to st. john which he stiles the word of god , the testimony and revelation of jesus christ , concerning the things which were , and which should be hereafter , rev. 1. v. 1 , 2 , 19. which are styled the true sayings of god , chap. 19. v. 9. the words that are faithful and true ch . 21. v. 5. i say in these visions are contained , as the state and events of the church till the final dissolution of all things ; so likewise the condition and fate of the righteous and wicked , after the judgment of the last day . ch. 20. 21. he tells us that he saw the dead , both small and great , stand before god , and they were all judged according to their works , and whoever was not found written in the book of life , was cast into the lake of fire , ver . 15. called ver . 10. the lake of fire and brimstone , where the devil , and the beast , and the false prophet shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever . and what is said in general of the wicked , we are assured shall betide the fearful , and unbelievers , and the abominable and murderers , and sorcerers , and idolaters , and all liars , who shall have their part in that lake , which burneth with fire and brimstone , rev. 21. 8. this is that furnace of fire which our blessed saviour so often mentioneth , mat. 13. 42. 50. that everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels , mat. 25. 41. that fire , which again and again he assures us mark. 9. shall not be quenched , no less then five times within the compass of six verses , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48. to declare unto us by this repetition , the certainty of this thing , as in the case of pharaoh's dream , which was doubled to assure him that the thing was established by god. gen. 41. 32. the wit of man could not ●ind out words more full and significant , to express the eternal duration of these punishments , and gods unalterable purpose to inflict them . now to say , notwithstanding all this , that yet in the conclusion , things may happen to be otherwise then what the son of god hath declared , and this servant of god hath foretold , is with great boldness to contradict them both : and if it be possible that these predictions may not be accomplished , then the words are not faithful and true , that is , are not undoubtedly and absolutely true : so that at the same time , that socinus puts an end to the certainty of hell torments , he doth likewise put an end to the certainty of the writings of the new testament , and the predictions that are contained there : which is highly derogatory to the authority of those sacred writings , and particularly of the revelation of st. sohn ; which looks too much like the taking away from the words of the prophecy of that book ; which yet i hope it is not , because of that dreadful punishment which attends those that do so , rev. 22. 19. in short , if things may happen otherwise than st. john foresaw and foretold , some scepticks and infidels , which the age we live in doth too much abound with , may be apt to account that a dream , which he calls a vision ; and to think , the holy man was was scarce awake when he pretended to foresee these things . neither ought the case of temporal threatnings be objected here in favour of socinus's assertion : forasmuch as god himself hath told us , that in all such threatnings , a condition is to be supposed , tho it be not alwaies expressed ; so that tho they are delivered in terms seemingly absolute , yet god without any impeachment of his veracity , may upon the performance of the condition revoke them . at what instant , saith god , i shall speak concerning a nation , and concerning a kingdom , to pluck up , and to pull down , and to destroy it : if that nation against whom i have pronounced , turn from their evil , i will repent of the evil , that i thought to do unto them , jer. 18. 7. 8. and this was the case of niniveh , where tho the threatning was seemingly peremtory , yet the execution was suspended upon their repentance , which was the end of the threatning . but as to the punishments of the life to come , the threatnings of them must be absolute and unconditional , forasmuch as there can then be no room for repentance and amendment : every mans state will then be finally determined : he that is filthy will be filthy still , without any possibility of change , or hope of pardon : and this is that which fills up the measure of the punishment of the damned : he that sinned without the fear of god in this life , shall be punished without mercy in the next ; and this despair will be that worm which will feed upon him to all eternity , which shall ever torment , but never devour the sinner , who will then become a terror to himself and an everlasting amazement . in short therefore , and to summ up all that remains to be said upon this subject ; he that goes about to weaken the force of those declarations which god hath made concerning the eternal punishment of the wicked , gives a dangerous blow to all revealed religion , of which we can have no certainty , if once we undermine the veracity of god , which is the foundation upon which it is built , and by which it is supported . but you will say the hopes which socinus gives the sinner are but very slender , and those remote ones , which no man in point of prudence or safety should venture to rely upon . i confess i think so too : but for all this sinners will be bold and presumtuous : and you cannot wonder that men should grasp at any thing ; lay hold upon any the weakest twig , rather than sink into hell. but if this be not enough , socinus can give the sinner more positive and direct encouragement ; such as will not only put and end to the torments of hell , but likewise to his own vain and superstitious fears concerning them , and will extinguish those flames , which our blessed saviour ( who one would think should best know ) hath assured us are unquenchable : but of this more hereafter . now if what hath bin hitherto said is not sufficient to shew the impiety and detestableness of these socinian notions , he that will be at the pains to peruse their writings , or will but have the patience to read what is here transcribed out of them , will find ( if it were possible ) yet greater abominations than these : particularly in the account which they give of those affections and passions which they ascribe to god , and with which indeed the scriptures represent him to us , but in a quite different sense than they are understood and interpreted by the socinians ; who give us such a description of almighty god as is repugnant to piety , and to the general sentiments , not only of all sound christians , but even of jews , and many sober heathens , who have had truer and more honourable conceptions of the nature of god , than these men furnish us with ; who cloath him with all the passions and weaknesses of men , ascribing to him love and hatred , mercy and compassion , hope and desire , joy and sorrow , fear and repentance , which they make to be truely and properly in god , tho not exactly in the same manner as they are in men , no more than they are in other created spirits , or the soul of man it self in its state of separation from the body : that is , they are there , but without any motion , or sensible alteration of the blood and spirits , such as is to be found in men . but our religion and right reason will inform us , that these things are attributed to god , but it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , in a figurative sense , representing thereby to us the various administrations of gods providence towards divers objects , who as they are endued with different qualities and dispositions , so god is pleased to exercise different actions towards them ; which actions in men indeed arise from different principles and passions , but do not so in god , who amidst the variety of the actions and dispositions of men , and his dealings suitably to them , yet in his essence continues still the same , without any perturbation or the least shadows of change . and therefore divines tell us , and particularly limburg , that these things are ascribed to god 1 , not with respect to god , but with a regard to those objects about which the acts of his providence are conversant , according to that known maxime of the school-men , affectus in deo notant effectus ; and so far he is orthodox : but a little after in the same section he overthrows what but just before he asserted , and so interprets and explains himself , that a socinian cannot be displeased with his opinion . for first he makes these affections to be acts , or as crellius calls them commotions of gods will , which some have thought could not be properly ascribed to him , without overthrowing the simplicity as well as immutability of his divine nature . but to let that pass . 2 . he makes these passions in god to be analagous to those in men , without which analogy , or resemblance , there is no reason , he saith , why the scriptures should ascribe them to god. si nihil illis analogum deo tribuamus , nulla apparebit ratio , cur iisdem cum affectibus humanis nominibus appellentur . so saith limburg , loc. supra citat . sunt enim in nobis affectus commotiones quaedam atque inclinationes appetitus , cui vim facultatemque analogam voluntas divina in se complectitur . so saith crellius cap. 26. p. 197. and here i think they perfectly agree . but for once we will make so bold as to ask these gentlemen , whether when the scriptures attribute hands and feet , and eies and ears to god , they think that there is something in the nature of god that is analogous , and bears any resemblanee to these parts of a mans body , without which they could not with any reason be applyed to him . tho i have reason not to be over confident of a socinian , yet in this case i will take it for granted , they would both answer in the negative , and that there were here no 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , but what the fathers , and particularly st. chrysostome upon many occasions so often mention , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , nay there is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , or , if in imitation of st. paul you will joyn these two words together , there is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; nothing to be supposed in god by way of resemblance , but an exceeding great and adorable condescention in him , who stoops to our capacities , and expresses some properties and operations of his , by such parts , which are the instruments of the like operations in men . so with the same truth , and for the same reason it should be averred , when human passions are ascribed to god , it is not by reason of any resemblance that is between god and men in these affections ; but by reason of that analogy or similitude that is to be found between the operations of god , and these actions of men ; which in them arise from such commotions of the soul which we call passions , but in god proceed from his simple and uncompounded nature , who is infinite and unchangable , and therefore as our church in conformity to the scriptures hath taught us to believe , is without parts and without passions . article 1st . the impiety of this opinion will further appear from a consideration of those particular passions which the socinians affirm to be in god ; which cannot truly be ascribed to him , without a great disparagement to his infinite and adorable perfections , and those are fear and grief : under which we must comprehend sorrow and repentance , which properly respect things past , whereas grief and trouble which alwaies attend it indifferently respect things either past or present . and these are passions which necessarily infer a weakness in god , such as a stoick would not allow in his wise and virtuous man. and first for fear , crellius 1 will tell us that tho at first view this passion cannot without a seeming absurdity be attributed to god , yet he is truly lyable to it , and indeed it is the necessary effect of his wisdom , as it is conversant about creatures prone and lyable to sin . and this he proves from deut. 22. 26 , 27. i said i would scatter them into corners , i would make the remembrance of them to cease among men , were it not that i feared the wrath of the enemy , least their adversaries should say , our hand is high , and the lord hath not done all this . and then refers you to two other places before mentioned , exod. 32. and numb . 14. where we have instances , as he tells us , of gods altering his purpose of destroying the children of israel , out of this principle of fear 2 : least the heathens and particularly the egyptians , should misconstrue his actions , and for want of knowing the true reasons which moved him to this severity , impute it either to a malicious design , as if he had rescued them out of the hands , and delivered them from the tyranny of pharaoh , that he might have the glory of their overthrow in the wilderness : or else to his impotence that he was not able to compleat their deliverance , and to bring them into the land which he had so often promised them . now god to save his honour which else might have suffered by this action , and to prevent the upbraidings of his enemies , which he was extreamly afraid of , was prevailed upon by the entreaties of moses , and the reasons which he offered , to spare those , whom in his thoughts he had solemnly devoted to destruction . he further refers his reader to several other places where god is said to do something which otherwise he was unwilling to do , or to omit the doing of something which before he was resolved upon , as gen. 5. 22. exod. 15. 17. 35. 3. &c. out of a just fear of what might happen : and this is so far from being with him an argument of imperfection , that he saith it is the result of wisdom and a just caution , in foreseeing some probable events , and thus wisely preventing them . ibid. 2. for grief and trouble , these likewise by the same metaphor are to be ascribed to god , that is , saith crellius , forasmuch as all metaphors arise from similitude , something like these must be found in him . and for proof of this he quotes all those places of scripture , where god is said to be provoked , to be displeased and grieved , ps . 78. 40 , 46. ps . 106. 33. esay . 3. 8. 2 sam. 11. 27. and particularly that memorable place , esay . 1. 14. where god is said to hate the new moons and feasts of the jews , they are a trouble to me saith god , i am weary to bear them . where he hath this remark cap. 31. p. 319. these things are then said to be troublesome to us , and which we cannot well bear 1 , which bring uneasiness and a certain disquiet along with them . and to say and think this of god , is so far from tending to his dishonour , that the contrary conceit would overthrow all religion , forasmuch as it would introduce an opinion concerning god fit only for stoicks and epicureans to entertain of him : quis enim , saith he , who can form such a notion of god , as of one that is not affected with pleasure , nor sensible of pain , nisi qui ad epicureorum vel stoicorum saltem sententiam de deo accedere vult ? loc. citat . 321. a god enjoying pure and unmixed pleasure , perfect rest and an uninterrupted tranquillity , never disturbed with passions , nor disordered by any of the actions of men , or the changes and revolutions that happen in the world ; this doctrine concerning him is fit not to be preached in the temples of christians , but to be published in the schools of zeno and epicurus . indeed we are beholding to him for that liberal concession , that this trouble and grief which he supposes to be in god , doth not arise from any internal causes , such as are the indispositions of body or mind which occasion grief in men , and make them uneasy : but only from external motives and reasons , viz. the actions of his creatures 1 so that what god cannot do himself , he hath put it into the power of his creatures to effect , and that if it were not for the follies and impieties of men he would be entirely happy , perfectly at rest ; all that grief and trouble which affects him , is solely owing to the actions of his creatures , and not to any disorder of his own nature : a very pious acknowledgment ! lastly , for that sort of grief which respects things past , which we call repentance , this likewise is to be found in god : and not that only which signifies the alteration of his counsels , or a change of his will , of which we have spoken before ; ( which may indeed be called repentance , but that saith crellius is dilutior metaphora 2 : ) but as it betokens the passion and affection it self . and for this he quotes gen. 6. 7. where it is said , that god repented that he made man , and that it grieved him at the heart . this is affectio in deo ingrata , ibid. an affection that brings molestation with it , arising in god when he sees that those his actions which were so well designed by him , by the folly and malice of men , are so far perverted , as to produce effects so contrary to his intentions . now against all this it would be very natural for men to object , and the socinian easily foresaw it , that what is thus asserted , must be quite contrary to the sense of mankind , and to those notions which naturally arise in mens minds concerning the perfections of almighty god ; for to suppose such variety of commotions in the mind of god , and these sometime opposite to ane another , which cannot but occasion in him molestation and trouble ; which must be further increased , when he finds his designs baffled , his councils overthrown , his authority despised ; which obliges him oftentimes to change his own purposes , and revoke his decrees : one would think that all this should really be not only a derogation to his infinite perfections , but likewise a diminution of his happyness . 1 st . as to what concerns the perfections of god , crellius will tell you , that nothing of all this that is asserted of the nature of god is an argument of imperfection . it is true , he hath not the same notions of the perfections of god as you have . you may perhaps think him infinite , but that is a weakness in you to think so : he is finite in his being , and consequently must be so in his operations : he is limited in his presence to certain spaces : his knowledge hath its just bounds ; he is mutable and lyable to change : he is extended ▪ and for that reason must be made up of parts ; in him you may find a composition of substance and accidents , and these oftentimes contrary to one another : he is cloathed with passions , which have such a resemblance to those weaknesses of our nature , that from a 1 consideration of humane passions , we must make a judgement and frame our apprehensions of those motions which are to be found in god. and these motions in god are sometimes more calme , at other times more violent and impetuous , the impieties of men provoking him to that degree that he is earnestly bent upon their destruction , but afterwards calmed by their prayers : now angry at men for their sins , by and by appeased by their repentance . sometimes you will find him doing a thing , by and by repenting the doing of it ; one while resolved upon one action , and anon resolving the quite contrary : and all this to be found truly and formally in god , and not in that figurative sense in which the scriptures ascribe them to him . for saith the same author , separate all impurity from those passions , all corporeal mixture , nay it must be concretio terreni corporis , the mixture of a terrestrial body , that you may not mistake him : for there is a spiritual body , and coelestial matter which may belong to god himself : in short exclude all impotence and imperfection from these affections , ( and indeed it must be a very nice and metaphysical abstraction that is able to do it ) and then whatever remains in the true notion and formal conception of these passions , are still to be supposed and must be left there , when applyed to god himself . sejungenda quaecunque imperfectionem aut imbecillitatem resipiunt , caetera , quae in natura cernuntur affectuum illorum , quorum nomina deo tribuuntur , esse relinquenda . ibid. but however tho this should prove no imperfection , yet the uneasiness and disquiet , that is the inseparable attendant on grief , and fear , and sorrow , those tormenting passions , must , one would think , interrupt that tranquillity which we suppose god to be possest of , and consequently be an abatement of his happiness . to which he answers first in general , 1 that as we ought not indeed to urge any expressions in scripture , so far as to oppose the happyness of god ; so neither on the other hand ought we to urge the belief of his happyness , so as to affirm him not to have a true sense of evil , mixt with uneasiness . but more particularly , you must consider in this case that tho men by their sins 2 may grieve god , yet they cannot hurt him : tho they may disturb , yet they cannot deprive him , of any of his essential perfections . that is something , but not enough ; for among men we are apt to account it an unhappyness to be robbed of our ease and quiet , tho they that do so should not have it in their power to deprive us of any thing else . therefore 2 ly , tho there are some things of that force as to be able to create dolorem & molestiam , grief and molestation to god ; yet the number of those other things which afforde him satisfaction and pleasure , do so far exceed and overballance them 3 , that they do much abate the trouble and uneasiness that is occasioned by them : a blessed apology for the perfections and happyness of allmighty god! and thus much shall serve to be said upon the first head , concerning the nature of god considered absolutely in himself , and his divine attributes ; by which we may see the difference between what the scriptures say , and what the socinians affirme of him : and i doubt not but the pious reader , will not only be offended , but struck with a just horror and amazement , at the boldness and impiety of these blasphemers , who are thus injurious to their maker , and think and speak thus dishonourably of him . but how little regard , and how mean soever their conceptions be of god , yet they have a good opinion of themselves ; in that they make not only their reason to be the adequate judge of his revelations , but even their own passions and weakness , the rule by which they measure , at least make an estimate of his infinite nature and most adorable perfections ; an attempt , besides the impiety of it , more ridiculous , then if a man should endeavour to take the dimensions of the heavens with a single span , or to fathome the depth and reach the bottome of the ocean with his little finger . in the next place we must consider god relatively in the great mystery of the trinity . and that which the scriptures teach us to believe of this matter , is briefly summed up in the first article of our religion established in this church concerning faith in the holy trinity , in these words ; in the unity of the godhead there be three persons , of one substance , power and eternity , father , son , and holy ghost . or as it is with some alteration of words , but to the same purpose expressed , in the doxology to be repeated upon trinity sunday ; wherein we are taught to make this acknowledgement of almighty god , that he is one god , one lord , not one only person , but three persons in one substance ; for that which we believe of the glory of the father , the same we believe of the son , and of the holy ghost , without any difference or inequality . a brief but comprehensive epitome , of what is more largely declared and explained , in the creed , which the socinians and remonstrants have so great a spight against , commonly called the athanasian creed . this is the faith of all the reformed churches , being herein agreeable to the doctrine held by the church of god in all ages , ever since the first planting of christianity in the world ; what we and they believe of this matter , being conformable to the plain and express declarations of scripture , and especially of what christ and his apostles have delivered to us concerning this matter , in the writings of the new testament . for this you may consult the harmony of their confessions ; both lutheran and calvinist all exactly agreeing in this doctrine , without any the least difference or variety : where you may likewise see the consent of the catholick church from the first ages next to that of the apostles , from whose inspired writings the fathers received this doctrine , which by an uninterrupted tradition , thro all the successive ages of the church , hath bin delivered and brought down to the times we live in : in this faith we have all bin baptized , being at our first admission into the christian church , solemnly consecrated to the worship and service of those three ever blessed and glorious persons , father , son , and holy ghost mat. 28. these being the three that bear witness in heaven , and these three are one , 1 jo. 5. 7. for that text we shall not easily part with , notwithstanding the cavils of the socinians , and the over officious endeavours of some others , whether papists or protestants , who would weaken the authority of that testimony , and thereby rob us of the advantage of it . for tho some greek mss. want it , yet there are others more approved and of greater antiquity in which you may meet with it . besides it is to be found in the writings of the ancients , tertull. cypr. athanasius , and jerome who quote these very words : and if you have a mind to know more of this matter , without going any further , you may peruse what mr. poole in his synopsis hath quoted out of gerhard , dr. hamond and other writers in vindication of this text. from which , i think , it will appear , that the authority of this place remains clear and in full force , notwithstanding the attempts that have bin made to overthrow it . tho if we gave up this text , yet we should not the holy doctrine contained in it , which is so plainly delivered in other places of scripture , and shines there with so bright a lustre , that a man had need wink hard , who would avoid the conviction ; or else must have so great a confidence in his eyes , that he may hope in time to stare the sun it self out of countenance . for as in some places of scripture he will find the unity of the godhead asserted ; so in others he will find the name , and not only so , but to avoid any cavils and exceptions that may be made about the ambiguous signification of that word : he will find the same divine attributes , and operations , on all hands acknowledged to belong to god the father , ascribed likewise to the son and the holy ghost ; who yet are allwaies mentioned as distinct from one another : from whence by an easie and a necessary deduction , it must unavoidably follow , that since they are really distinguished from each other , and yet agree in the same common nature , as the same properties and the same operations irrefragably evince ; they must be , what we have bin taught hitherto to believe and profess of them , in the language of the church , three persons and one god. and as we pretend to agree in the same doctrine with the ancient church , so i think it is highly fitting , and for many just reasons in a manner necessary , to preserve the same words in which it hath bin delivered down to us , in opposition to any new modes of speaking . for the ancient words by prescription and long use , have obtained both a just authority among christians , and a setled and determinate signification : whereas new phrases may be liable to great exceptions , and introductive at long run of new and unwarrantable opinions about these mysteries ; beyond the intention of them who first made use of them . now against all this the socinians will tell you , that this doctrine concerning the trinity is so far from being a fundamental truth , that it is indeed the foundation of all the errors that have crept into the christian church ; as being opposite to the scriptures , and plainly repugnant to reason : it is a popish doctrine , so saith socinus lib. quod regm polon . &c. cap. 4. so welsing . lib. de o●●ic . hominis christiani , and by so saying they do exceedingly advance the reputation of popery , by making it of so great and venerable antiquity , embraced by all sound christians ever since the apostles days . it is a paganish opinion , ethnicismum sapit , so saith smalcius , exam. cent. err. so opposite to reason , that it is a wonder how any man in his wits could ever have thought of it . so saith ostorod . he cannot imagine , quomodo homini ulli ratione praedito in mentem venire posset . inst . rel. christianae cap. 4. that is , sure it could never have entred into any mans head , that ever had any brains there . nay it is not only a very foolish , but a very dangerous error , that puts a stumbling block , and rub in mens way to heaven . strange that that doctrine should be thought an hindrance to mens happiness , the belief of which by all good christians hath hitherto bin thought necessary to salvation : but so it is if you believe socinus , lib. supra cit . eodem cap. and indeed it is no wonder it should hinder men from going to heaven , if it be true that volkel . tells us , that this doctrine of the trinity is not an error that is owing to the ignorance and mistakes of men , but to the delusion of the devil 1 . that it is a blasphemous doctrine as another of them saith 2 , hatched in hell , and from thence fetched by the son of perdition , and obtruded upon the church . and if this be so , i i must profess my self to be of the same mind with 3 smal. and to hope with him , that this absurd and most false doctrine as he calls it , will shortly be chased and hissed out of the world. but farther , particularly concerning christ , they tell us that he had no existence before his formation in the womb of the virgin : and the being which he then had was purely humane , and therefore what is said of the divinity of christ is a mere fable 4 , owing to senseless and absurd interpretations of holy scripture 5 . the account of his eternal generation , is a meer romance , false , impossible , a plain contradiction 1 ; the 2 contrivance of some idle trifling persons , who had nothing else to do but to invent such absurd and incredible notions . here by the way , i must desire the reader to take notice not only of the impiety , but likewise of the unparallel'd impudence and scurrility of these blasphemers , and consequently whether it be fit to entertain any favourable opinion , of the doctrines of these men , and much more to have their persons and writings in admiration . 2 ly , concerning the spirit of god ; they tell us that he is not a person , as the church of god hath hitherto vainly imagined : but only a quality , an accident ; sometimes taken for the innate power and virtue residing in god , and sometimes for the operations that proceed from that virtue and faculty 3 . crellius hath written a particular treatise de spiritu sancto , and therein he tells us that the word spirit , in its first and proper signification , denotes 4 that breath which is expired out of the mouths of men or other animals ; and from the resemblance that is to be found between them , it is transferred to signify that divine virtue in god which we call the holy ghost : and therefore when christ , joh. 20. 22. breathed on his disciples , and thereby conferred upon them the holy ghost ; 5 he did thereby give them to understand , that the holy spirit was an emanation from god , not unlike a vapour or breathing . at this rate the holy ghost should it seems be a subtile and tenuious substance , contrary to what he asserts cap. 1. where he plainly tells us that the spirit of god is not properly a substance but a quality , therefore called in the scripture the power of the most high , & virtus proprie qualitas est , p. 466. but forasmuch as many things , by his own acknowledgment , are affirmed of , and actions ascribed to the holy ghost , which cannot well agree to qualities , but must suppose the thing to which they are ascribed to be a substance ; such as are local motion , bodily shape , division and the like : to reconcile therefore these seeming differences he is of opinion , that the spirit of god consider'd abstractedly in it self , is a meere quality ; but yet this vertue may be impressed upon , and conveighed into some subtile and coelestial matter , & ejus naturae valde congruae , which is agreeable to its nature , ibid. as we find the vital energy of the soul communicated first to the animal spirits , and by them to all the other parts of the body : and as we find the influences of the coelestial bodies , and qualities of terrestrial ones , heat , light and odors , conveighed in some subtile effluvium's , from the bodies in which they are , into the air , and some other subjects at a great distance . so saith he , by the spirit of god is sometimes meant that 1 tenuious matter which contains a divine quality in it , and by which it is conveighed into the minds of men : and in this sense he conceives the spirit of god , may be called a corporeal substance , which hath extension , and is capable of division , as other bodies tho spiritual are 2 . and by this notion he thinks he hath found out an easy way , to solve the former difficulties concerning the local motion of the holy ghost , and particularly , his descent upon our saviour at the time of his baptism , and upon the apostles in the day of pentecost . of his being poured out , of his being given , sometimes in measure , and sometimes without it : of his being divided and distributed and the like : which tho we interpret of the gifts , he doth of the nature and essence of the holy ghost , which according to this account he gives of it , may like other steams and vapors be carry'd here and there , and may be divided and distributed in greater and lesser quantities as there is occasion . and thus god took some part of this coelestial matter , which contained that divine virtue with which moses was endued , and put it into the 70 elders numb . 11. 25. and in the same sense elisha had a double portion of the spirit of elias , that is , of that divine steam and vapor which enabled him to do wonders . now if we shall further enquire what that coelestial matter is , by which this divine quality which he makes to be the holy ghost , is conveighed and distributed among men ; he hath not determined , but hath left it to the readers discretion to conjecture : tho he hath given sufficient intimation how he would have him govern his opinion . for in the other instances which he produces , the quality and the effluvium's , proceed from the same subject ; and he gives you no limitation , no caution in the least to think otherwise in this case : it is plain that some of his friends as he tell us , were of that opinion , that the spirit of god , was nothing but an emanation , a tenuious steam flowing from the very substance of god , as the breath doth out of our mouths and nostrils 1 : quam sententiam , saith he , in medio relinquimus ; he will not give you his opinion in this case , it being but fit that in matters of religion , every man should be left to his own freedom , and therefore he fairly leaves you to your own . it is plain , if he were not himself of that opinion , yet he thought there was no harm in it ; otherwise he would have given his reader some caution about it , which he hath not in the least done . and now we are come to the bottome , or if you please , to the very dregs of socinianism , and that which is the true cause and sourse of all those extravagant , and indeed blasphemous notions which these men have of allmighty god : who in their most refined and exalted speculations , cannot raise their thoughts to conceive any substance above matter . it is true , they call god a spirit , but it is as certain that they mean a spiritual body ; as appears by what crellius tells us when he comes to describe god , and to give the 2 definition of a spirit which is contained in that description . when we call god a spirit , saith he , we mean a substance free from all that thick gross matter which is the object of our senses shall i say ? no that 's too much , but which can terminate our sight ; for a spirit tho it be invisible , you must know it may be palbable ; and such is the aer saith he , to which the word spirit is a genus , common to it , to god and angels 1 : each of which are spirits , but that which is most subtile is likewise most spirituous . and by this explication of the nature of a spirit , crellius who calls god a spirit , and socinus who plainly thought he was none , ( as appears by his 2 forced and perverse interpretation of those words of christ jo. 4. 24. which contain as plain and clear a declaration of this great truth , as could be expressed in words , ) may very easily be reconciled . for whereas the master denies god to be a spirit , he might by spirit mean an incorporeal , immaterial being ; and the scholar by acknowledging him to be one , did not intend to exclude matter from his constitution ; but that he was not composed of such thick gross parts of matter as our bodies are , which can terminate the sight ; but of matter of a more tenuious and refined contexture , more subtile perhaps , but of the same nature with aer or aether . and from hence result all their impious opinions about god , in opposition to his immensity , simplicity , omnipresence : judging of their maker by themselves ; of his thoughts by their thoughts , of his waies by their waies , of his dealings with men by their own foolish passions : and in short , measuring all his glorious and incomprehensible perfections , by their own narrow and shallow conceptions of sensible objects . hence it is that we have those bold assertions of vorstius 4 deus non est infinitus , nec in essendo nec in operando . infinita virtus non est in deo. immensitas 3 seu infinitas est 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . to be infinite is impossible , and therefore so far from denoting a perfection , that it implies a plain contradiction . and among other arguments which he makes use of to prove god not to be infinite , this is remarkable ibid. p. 237. because god at present , saith he , is seen by the angels , and shall be so hereafter by us , with our bodily eies ; and therefore not infinite . for what is so cannot be comprehended by any sense , as he rightly upon this supposition argues : quia debet esse proportio inter objectum percipiendum , & personam percipientem : and whereas it may be objected that the beatifick vision respects the inward speculation of the mind , and not the external perception of the eies ; some indeed so interpret it , saith he , sed nescio an sacris literis consentaneum sit ; certe magnam futurae nostrae foelicitatis partem hac explicatione tollere videntur . now if god be finite , it must further follow , and is plainly acknowledged by these men , that magnitude and extension , and a true local presence may and must be ascribed to god : and this is so far from being by them looked upon to be derogatory to the nature and perfection of god ; that the contrary notion is scouted by them , not only as false , but as absurd and ridiculous , which asserts such a presence of god , as obliges us to believe him not be confined to any certain place , neither to have any parts commensurate to the parts of that place in which he is . for this if any thing must be the meaning of 1 episcopius's atomica & atopica essentiae divinae praesentia ; which he rails and exclaims against , and can scarce think of without horror and astonishment . but further , if local presence be ascribed to god , i think local motion may with good reason be so likewise ; forasmuch as it may be more honourable to god to imagine that he may sometimes change , then that he should allwaies be immoveably fixed and consined to one certain place . lastly if extension may be attributed to god , and such an extension as was said before , which hath its certain bounds and limits , by an unavoidable consequence , figure must be ascribed to him also : forasmuch as figure doth naturally and necessarily result from the termination of extension : this being the definition of a figure , quae sub aliquo vel aliquibus terminis comprehenditur . and now at length we see what a blessed notion of almighty god the socinians have furnished us with ; how scandalous and dishonourable to god , how repugnant to piety , how opposite to right reason , and to those sober and just apprehensions which that hath furnished many wise heathens with , who i am afraid may one day rise up in judgement against these men and condemn them . it may be now time to draw towards a conclusion of this discourse , therefore i shall briefly summe up what hath been said upon this subject : that the readers memory may be refreshed with the account which hath bin given him , both of what the scripture affirms of god , and what the socinians say of him . the scriptures have informed us that our god is infinite , they say he is finite , ours is omnipresent , theirs limited and confined to a certain place : ours immutable , their 's liable to change ; ours is naturally just , theirs contingently so : ours necessarily concerned in the government of the world , and taking care of humane affairs ; theirs might , like epicurus his deity , sit at ease in the enjoyment of his own happyness , leaving the world to the conduct of chance ; and men to the guidance of that which is equally uncertain , their own giddy and unstable passions ; neither giving them laws for the regulating of their actions , nor assigning any punishments to the violation of them . our god is omniscient , their 's ignorant of future and contingent events : ours without parts or passions , theirs compounded of one , and lyable to the other ; even to those which argue the greatest weakness and infirmity , and which some of the philosophers thought inconsistent with the bravery and resolution of a wise and virtuous man. in short , our god consists of three blessed and glorious persons , subsisting in the same undivided essence : they deny the divine nature of the son , and yet by an unpardonable contradiction , say that he is a true god ; and disown the personality of the holy ghost . from all which i think it will appear very evident , what we undertook to make out at the beginning of this discourse , that the object of their religion and ours is different ; and that will go a great way to prove that the religions themselves are so too . in short , the difference between us is not so small as some ignorant people may imagine , and some crafty and designing persons may pretend ; among whom i cannot but reckon curcellaeus , who most falsely and impudently against common sense and reason , and therefore one might be tempted to imagine , against his conscience , would perswade the world to believe , that the difference between us and the socinians , in the point of the divinity of the son of god , was a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , a contention about words rather then any real difference , in a matter of faith : which is quite contrary to the notion that either the orthodox or the socinians have of this matter : who lay a greater and truer stress upon their opinions , then this man doth , who pretends to bless the world with a discovery of what no body ever knew before . but i believe the reader who hath perused the foregoing discourse , will be induced to believe that either the socinians or we are in a very great mistake , the distance between us being wider then that between heaven and earth : and indeed no less then between finite and infinite . so that upon a true state of things , i believe it will be found that our opinions are not only seemingly inconsistent , but absolutely irreconcileable ; forasmuch as in order to reconcile them , we must part with the infinite nature of god the father , and the divinity of the son , and of the holy ghost . and surely that man must be very fond , nay he must be mad for peace , that can be content , to sacrifice both truth and the divine author of it , in order to purchase it . once indeed our blessed saviour came down among men , and offered up himself upon the cross in order to reconcile the two greatest enemies , god and man : but it is too much in all conscience which is expected of us , that we should make a new oblation of our saviour : and not only as the jews 1 did , nail his body to the cross , but sacrifice even his divinity , to compose the differences in religion . but perhaps some may say the socinians are men of more reason and moderation , then to desire us presently to part with all our religion to gratifie them : they only plead for liberty , and in order to their joyning with us , that we would remove those obstacles of communion , viz. articles , creeds , confessions of faith , some useless expressions in our common prayer , which contain too plain and uncharitable acknowledgments of the trinity ; which hinder many pious , useful and excellent persons from coming to our churches . why should we not strip our faith of all those larger and unwarrantable explications which councils and fathers have made of it ; and reduce all to the naked expressions of scripture : that is , content our selves with a few ambiguous words , ( which the perverse and subtile interpretations of hereticks have made so ) and let every man abound in his own sense . they believe christ to be the son of god , so as to be true god likewise : what need we trouble our selves or them with the word consubstantial ; pity it is , that a word , nay a letter should divide men in their opinions and affections . to all which , tho i have a great deal that i could answer , yet at present all that i shall say shall be this : that the socinians are wise men , persons of a deep reach ; but they must not think that all the rest of the world are fools . it were too much in all conscience to desire us to part with all at first : but they know what advantage to make of our concessions : if they can perswade us with that foolish woman prov. 14. 1. to pull down our house with our own hands , it will save them the toyl and drudgery of so doing : at least if they can prevail with us to demolish our outworks , then they will be able as with greater ease , so likewise with greater hopes of success , to attack the main fort. in short , the ancient creeds and confessions , and those ancient words in which the doctrine of faith hath bin conveyed down to us ; are only 1 an hedge of thornes , as they have bin truly and pertinently styled , with which the christian faith hath bin guarded against the designs of disguised hereticks , and i hope they will prick their fingers , who shall attempt the removing of them . and thus much shall serve to be said upon the first head , of the great difference there is between what the scriptures affirme , and what the socinians say of the great object of our religion god allmighty . and if there were only this in the case , i hope it might prove sufficient to guard any pious well meaning christian from the infection of their impious opinions , which furnish him with notions so dishonorable and injurious to his maker : and who by denying the blessed trinity , and the divinity of our saviour , have subverted the very foundations of christianity , altered the whole oeconomy of mans salvation : so that they and we must go different waies to heaven , as having neither the same meanes of grace , nor the same hopes of glory . i should now proceede to shew the opposition between the socinian tenets , and the other parts of the christian doctrine , which are thereby contradicted , and overthrown . but this must be referred till a time of further and better leasure : but by this taste which i have given the reader of socinianism , i may have reason to hope that he will be of the opinion , that religion is like wine , the older , the more excellent and desireable . and therefore that no man of wisdome , or indeed of common sense , who hath not lost all relish of divine things , when he hath tasted of the old religion , will straightly desire the new , because he will find that the old is much better . now to the holy blessed and undivided trinity , three persons and one god , be all honour , glory , and praise both now and for evermore . amen . finis . notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a38061-e1750 1 ad evertendam rempublicam sobrium accessisse . suet. in jul. caes . 1 quasi nos christum verum deum esse negamus , quod tamen à nobis non sit , socin . oper . tom. 2. p. 645. 2 ut pro deo ac domino suo venerentur , p. 631. 3 in eo homine supra quam dici potest extollendo & deificando , ibid. 4 ut potius id gloriae nobis & laudi ducamus , wolzogen . prolegom . in evangel . johannis cap. 8. de vera divinitate christi . 1 quod vero deus ille unus qui pater est , solus verus dicitur , id non ideo fieri dicimus quod nemo alius praeter patrem deus verus sit , sed quia nemo alius praeter patrem , isto prorsus modo deus verus sit , quo ille est . smal. exam. cent. err. p. 4. 2 certissimum est quod non unus tantum verus deus sit . ibid. 3 contendimus & firmissime docemus esse plures deos praeter unum . eosque veros . refut . smigl . de novis monst . nov. ar. p. 14. 4 tantum unum summum deum agnoscere unum tantum natura deum colere , unum tantum independentem deum confiteri , esse judaicum quiddam , & abnegationem christianae religionis . ibid. p. 26. 1 ea verba , speaking of those words jer. 23. 23. [ am i a god at hand , and not a god afar off ? ] suadere videntur , ipsius dei substantiam non ubique pariter praesentem esse , & sic eam non esse immensam sive infinitam , quamvis ubique tamen sua virtute & providentia sit ipse deus praesens . socin . de dei essentiae cognitione p. 68. vid. crellium , cap. 27. de dei immensitate & omnipraesentia . 1 quo enim pacto potest quispiam dici id expectare , quod non eventurum planissime intelligit , imo jam reipsa videt , ibid. 2 deum novum quoddam & insigne experimentum , illic quidem impietatis sodomicae videre voluisse , hic vero pietatis abrahamicae vidisse , quod antequam fieret , plane certum & exploratum non erat . 3 non modo evidentissima & plane cogente ratione nititur , sed & sacrarum literarum autoritate stabilitur . 4 crell . ibid. 1 quae ne in hominem cadere potest , nisi plane dementem . ibid. 2 quis ex hominibus it a amens est , ut juret se aliquid facturum , quod se facturum minime esse jam probe noverit . ibid. 3 lib. 4. inst . th. cap. 18. 4 inter eruditissimos theologos lis adhuc sub judice est . ibid. 1 vixcredo millesimum christianum dari qui scientiam hujus rei habeat . 2 absque hujus scientia , religio cultusque divini numinis apud innumeros hominum myriadas sartus tectus constat . idem ibid. 1 si testimonium loquitur de bonis operibus certo praevisis , sine dubio deus ipse decrevit . socit . prael . th. cap. 10. p. 549. 2 crell . cap. 24. de sap . dei. 3 hoc est pessundare religionem , quae nulla proprie est ubi est necessitas . smalc . contra smigl . cap. 2. 4 crell . cap. 24. de sapientia dei p. 204. ubi talis necessitas est , nec ullum verum peccatum est , nec meritum poenae . ubicunque necessitas dominatur ibi religioni non est locus . examen . censurae cap. 7. p. 82. so say the remonstrants . 5 quod necesse est , hominis libertatem à se penitus excludit . socin . prael . th. cap. 8. arbitrium libertatem in se continet quam si demas , arbitrium esse desinet . crell . de volunt . dei cap. 21. p. 139. qui necessario vult & agit , is libero arbitrio praeditus non est , id. cap. 24. de sap . dei. p. 206. 6 exam. censurae conf. remonst . cap. 6. p. 76. 1 nihil prohibet quin deus simpliciter bona fieri decernat . crell . de sap . dei p. 210. 2 potest necessitatem homini imponere hoc vel illud volendi . ibid. 3 deus voluntatem liberam esse sinit , nisi quando ut ei necessitatem afferat , ejus judicia requirant . socin . praelect . th. cap. 7. p. 544. volunt as hominis ad extremum usque est plane libera , adeo ut praeter ipsum factum externum , omnia in ejus sint potestate . ibid. 1 deus obedientiam & inobedientiam hominum , ex ipsa perfecta & consummata voluntate , non autem ex ipso externo facto metitur . ibid. 1 crell . cap. 24. de sapientia dei p. 210. 2 smal. contra frantz . p. 416. 1 negatio ista necessario consecutura erat , socin . ibid. p. 548. 2 non alia re opus erat , nisi ut occasio christum negandi petro daretur , id quod deum ipsum curasse , i. e. effecisse , nihil absurdi continet . vid. smal. contra frantz . p. 431. ubi asserit voluntatem petri quodammodo esse coactum & ad breve temporis spacium libertate sua privatam , idque deum interdum & facere posse & solere . 3 peccata ita à deo nota fuisse affirmare , quia futura omnino ita decrevisset , impium prorsus videri debet . ibid. p. 547. 1 constantis● est persistere in animi proposito , nisi quid intervenerit , cujus ratio non immerito haberi possit , & quod in aliam sententiam voluntatem jure flectere queat . crell . cap. 25. de sanct. dei , p. 265. 1 quae rebus mutatis ita consilia mutat , ut ea illarum rationi attemperet , cap. 32. de decretis dei. p. 350. 1 justitia ea , quae severitas vel vindicta , vel ira , vel indignatio , vel simili alio nomine nuncupatur , non est qualitas seu mavis proprietas , nec vere residet in deo , sed tantummodo effectus est voluntatis ejus . socin . di●p . de christo servatore , p. 123. nullam ejusmodi in deo proprietatem , h. e. qualitatem in ipso perpetuo residentem , esse censemus , quae deum ad peccata punienda simpliciter moveat . sed id quod in ipso existens eum ad peccata punienda simpliciter movet , iram & severitatem , misericordiae oppositam , esse statuimus ; quae non proprietas est in deo perpetuo residens , sed veluti affectus quidam ipsius , & liberae voluntatis effectus . crell . resp . ad grot. de satisf . christi . p. 1. 1 lex est regula actuum moralium , obligans ad id quod rectum est , gr. de jur. b. & p. lib. 1. cap. 1. sect 9. 2 obligationem requirimus , nam consilia & si qua alia sunt praescripta honesta quidem sed non obligantia , legis aut juris nomine non veniunt , ibid. ubi consilium datur , osserentis arbitrium est ; ubi praeceptum , necessitas servitutis , hieron . lib. 2. contra jovin . decretum necessitatem facit , exhortatio liberam voluntatem excitat gratian. dist . 4. ad finem . 1 praeceptum ibi est , ubi est poena peccati , ambr. lib. de viduis . praecepto quisquis non obtemperat , reus est & debitor poenae , august . lib. de sancta virgin. 2 inter ea quae natura ipsa dictat licita esse , est & hoc , ut qui male fecit malum ferat : quod antiquissimum & rhadamantheum jus vocant philosophi grot de jure b. & p. lib. 2. cap. 20. sect. 1. 3 nemo prudens punit quia peccatum est , sed ne peccetur : revocari enim praeterita non possunt , futura prohibentur , lib. 1. de clem. cap. 6. 1 certe poenas quorundam valde perditorum à deo non ob aliud ( scil . extra se ) exigi , sacra verba testantur , cum dicunt eum voluptatem capere ex ipsorum malo , subsannari atque irrideri impios à deo. tum vero & extremum judicium post quod nulla expectatur emendatio , immo & in hac vita poenae quaedam inconspicuae , ut obduratio , verum esse quod contra platonem dicimus evincunt . ibid. 2 apud grot. ibid. 1 cicer. de natura deo. lib. 1. cap. 123. 2 ibid. 1 socin disp . de christo serv. pars prima p. 123. 2 quod verum esse deprehendetur , si consideremus potuisse deum praeceptum illud homini tradere , neque tamen poenam mortis , si illud non servasset addere : immo ne poenam quidem ullam . ibid. 1 jus naturale est dictatum rectae rationis , indicans alicui actui , ex ejus convenientia aut disconvenientia cum ipsa natura rationali , inesse moralem turpitudinem aut necessitatem moralem , ac consequenter à naturae autore talem actum aut vetari aut praecipi . actus de quibus tale extat dictatum , debiti sunt aut illiciti per se , atque ideo à deo necessario praecepti aut vetiti intelliguntur , quà notá distat hoc jus non tantum ab humano jure , sed & à divino voluntario , quod non ea praecipit , aut vetat , quae per se ac suâpte naturâ aut debita sunt , aut illicita ; sed vetando , illicita , praecipiend● , debita facit . grot. de ju. b. & p. lib. 1. cap. 1. sect. 10. 1 facultas injungendi aliquid per modum legis aut praecepti infert superioritatem , quemadmodum obligatio parendi arguit nos inferiores esse eo , qui praecipere nobis potest ; saltem qua imperium ejus se extendit : ob eam causam suis decretis immediate nemo potest obligari irrevocabiliter , puffendorf . elem. jur. lib. 1. cap. 13. sect. 4. 1 epist . 6. ad volkel . 1 see breerwoods enquiries , cap. 14. 2 voluntas dei est principium cujusdam mutabilitatis in deo , vorst . disp . p. 212. 1 vis atque efficacia mortis christi ad remissionem peccatorum comparandam tanta est , ut etiam deum , si forte eum promissionis suae de remissione peccatorum , & liberatione ab interitu nobis concedenda poeniteret ( utimur phrasi sacris literis usitatâ ) movere atque impellere possit , ne promissum suum rescinderet , sed quod pollicitus esset , reipsa praestaret crell . de causis mortis christi . p. 613. 2 nam ut nos tanto certius credere possemus , nobis in christum credentibus peccata remissum iri , plurimum referebat deum ad id faciendum obligatum esse , & nos jus ad illud obtinendum habere ; jus inquam manifestissimis ac certissimis documentis nixum , quod jam quicquid tandem interveniret , deum non pateretur promissa sua rescindere , ibid. 3 hic revera finis ac scopus fuit , cur deus morte christi se nobis obligare voluerit , ut porro ad christum morti tradendum impulsus fuerit , ibid. 1 non cum relatione ad ipsum deum , sed in ordine ad ipsa objecta , quae extra deum sunt , circa quae deus operatur lib. 2. cap. 10. 2 see episcop out of whom limburg hath transcribed his divinity , inst . th. lib. 4. cap. 22. quod non sic accipiendum est quasi affectus nulli proprie ac per se deo competant : contra enim in deo credimus affectus esse . natura divinorum affectuum vix aliter à nobis concipi atque aestimari potest , quam ex natura affectuum humanorum ▪ sive per similitudinem & analogiam quam habent cum affectibus humanis . 1 sapientiae ipsius , quatenus circa creaturas versatur in peccata pronas , effectum esse prope necessarium , cap. 31. p. 324. 2 moses deum à proposito perdendi populi israelitici revocasse dicitur , argumento metuendi mali eventûs ; quod scil . hostes deum essent calumniaturi , videtur deus hunc eventum , utpote sua natura possibilem , suo modo metuisse , & propterea à proposito suo recessisse . vorst . notae ad disp . 10. p. 451. 1 ea demum molesta sunt , & in illis sustinendis laboramus , quae dolorem aliquem nobis afferunt . 1 ex rebus extra deum existentibus , quas in creaturarum arbitrio posuit , ibid. p. 320. 2 ibid. p. 322. 1 ex affectuum humanorum natura , à quibus ipse dei spiritus ob analogiam , ac similitudinem voces ad deum transfert , aestimanda nobis erit natura illorum voluntatis dei actuum . cap. 29. de affect . dei. p. 297. 1 ut jucundum quendam rerum malarum sensum ei tribuere non liceat . idem cap. 31. p. 321. 2 ea quae voluntati divinae adversa sunt , illius beatitudinem non evertunt aut laedunt . ibid. 3 ut vim ingratarum rerum & molestiam quam parere possunt , aut tollant , aut imminuunt , p. 321. 1 volkel . de vera relig. lib. 5. cap. 9. 2 sunt blasphema dogmata , ex imo orco , per filium perditionis ecclesiis gentium , virtute satanae obtrusa , theod. schimberg . citat . à gerhardo in exeg . loc. 3. de trin. 3 propediem exsibilabitur ista absurdissima simul , & falsissima de dei essentia opinio . smal. contra franz . 4 smal. refut . smig . fabula ista mundo tunc non innotuerat . 5 facessant hae imperitae ac absurdae interpretationes , socin . in 5. cap. 1. epis . johan . ver . 20. 1 nugae , falsum , impossibile , contradictionem implicat . smal. refut . smigl . ad nova monst . ar. 2 idem refut . lib. de incarn . cap. 3. vanissimum commentum otiosorum hominum . 3 vid smal. refut . lib. de incarn . cap. 27. socin . tract . de deo , & contra wier . & alibi passim . 4 flatum exore animalis expressum . p. 455. 5 indicavit spiritum sanctum ejusque à deo & christo emanationem seu emissionem , a●●latui sive spiraculo esse similem , proleg . de spiritu sancto ibid. 1 materia subtilis , quae qualitatem divinam in se habet , & per quam in hominum pectora deferri solet . ibid. p. 476. 2 isto modo spiritum sanctum substantiam quandam esse , eamque corpoream non est negandum , ibid. 1 crell . proleg . de spiritu sancto , p. 1. substantia subtilissima halitui oris analoga , & quemadmodum ille ab ore emanat , ita spiritus iste à deo. 2 deus est spiritus aeternus ; spiritum autem cum nominamus , substantiam intelligimus ab omni crassitie , qualem in corporibus oculorum arbitrio subjectis cernimus , alienam . hoc sensu angelos dicimus spiritus , & aerem licet sensibus quibusdam , ut tactui patentem , & alia corpora huic similia . lib. de deo , & attrib . cap. 15. 1 quorum unumquodque hoc nomen tanto magis sortitur , quanto est subtilius , ibid. 2 vid. vorst . not. ad disp . 3. de natura dei p. 200. 4 ibid. p. 234 , 235. 3 non est fortasse eorum verborum sententia , quam plerique omnes arbitrantur , [ deum scil . esse spiritum : ] neque enim subaudiendum esse dicat aliquis verbum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , quasi vox 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 recto casu accipienda sit : sed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 repetendum verbum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , quod paulo ante praecessit ; & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , quarto cas● accipiendum , ita ut sententia sit , deum quaerere & postulare spiri●um . frag. disp . de ador. christi cum christiano franken ▪ p. 778. 1 exam. censurae in conf. rem . cap. 2. p. 43. 1 curcell . rel. christianae inst . lib. 2. cap. 21. p. 78. quae confessio , si rem ipsam potius quam verba aut phrases spectes , parum ab orthodoxorum sententia differre videtur . 1 dr. sherlocks apol. an answer to the brief history of the unitarians, called also socinians by william basset ... basset, william, 1644-1695. 1693 approx. 209 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 90 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2008-09 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a26746 wing b1048 estc r1596 12306118 ocm 12306118 59259 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a26746) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 59259) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 199:11) an answer to the brief history of the unitarians, called also socinians by william basset ... basset, william, 1644-1695. [7], 166, [2] p. printed and sold by randal taylor ..., london : 1693. advertisement: p. [1]-[2] at end. reproduction of original in british library. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng nye, stephen, 1648?-1719. -brief history of the unitarians. unitarians. socinianism. 2006-04 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2006-05 apex covantage keyed and coded from proquest page images 2007-04 robyn anspach sampled and proofread 2007-04 robyn anspach text and markup reviewed and edited 2008-02 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion imprimatur , geo. royse , rrmo . in christo patri , ac dom. dom johanni , archiep. cantuar. à sacris domest . novemb. 21. 1692. an answer to the brief history of the unitarians , called also socinians . prov. 18. 17. he that is first in his own cause seems just ; but his neighbour comes , and searches him . by william basset , rector of st. smithin , london . london , printed , and sold by randal taylor , near stationers-hall , 1693. to the most reverend father in god , john , by divine providence lord archbishop of canterbury , primate of england , and metropolitan , and one of their majesties most honourable privy-council . it is the design of these papers to baffle and expose those little pleas and objections which the late author of the socinian letters hath urged against the divinity of the son. my lord , this cause doth merit , as well as the author want your grace's patronage ; for which reason i humbly presume to prefix so great a name , not doubting but they will meet with what favour they may either deserve or want . that that god who hath raised , would preserve , guide and strengthen you in those undertakings which so great a place doth call , and so pious a mind , more large and rich than that place it self doth dispose you to , for the well-governing the church , and the uniting us in the true faith , and in all the designs and interests of religion , is the earnest prayer of your grace's most humble servant , william basset . to the reader . when i first met with these socinian letters , and found that words , and fallacy were their whole composition ; i could not but think them so unlike their patrons , or their patrons so unlike the character they affect , which is to be men of wit and reason , that i judged them not worthy an answer . but since it appears that these , like some other the worst things among us , do not want their admirers , i thought this performance my duty . in it i have answered not only the first of these letters , but divers parts of the rest , as well as some things in more manly writers , as eriedinus , crellius , &c. by calling in the other letters to asist this , and other socinian authors , to supply the weakness of them all , i put the objections , in their full strength , to the end their overthrow may be the more conspicuos to the world , and the more sensible to themselves . if they venture upon argument , and do any thing , that affects the cause , i am ready to support it , but if they only load me with words , and cavils , i must neglect them . if these labours are succesful in recovering any , whom this heresy hath infected , and in preserving those , who yet are whole ; and hereby in giving any check to the growing errors , and prophaness of the age , i shall place the time spent upon this argument among my happy minutes . that it may be productive of such blessed effects , was the hope , and design , and shall be the prayers of yours , w. b. an answer to the first of the four letters , intituled , a brief history . sect . 1. these letters are intituled , a brief history ; yet instead of history you find little , if any , but an abuse of divers authors in the end of the first . a title as foreign from the letters , as the letters from the truth , that is , neither to the point . that term [ vnitarian ] is put as a distinction between them and us : take it as it signifies him , who believes one only god , exclusive of all others ; and then it makes a distinction without a difference ; for we are as intirely in that faith , as the socinian can be : but as they make it signify one , who believes the father only to be god , exclusive of the son , and the holy ghost , i must declare it a term suitable to these letters , i. e. full of error , and blasphemy . that word [ socinian ] we leave to the followers of socinus , who ( their beloved sandius saith ) differed from all the world ; which proclaims those under this denomination , men of novelty and error . the title page quotes act. 17. 11. they searched the scriptures daily , whether these things were so . answ . st. basil saith of eunomius , tom . 1. l. 5 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . thou seekest , that thou may'st find , not faith , but infidelity ; not to discover a truth , but to establish an error . this ( i fear ) we shall find too true of our socinians ; who wrest the rule of truth ●o their own prejudicate opinions . sure i am , did men sincerely follow this example , we should find but few of this perswasion ; since their heresy is founded not upon scripture , but upon those false glosses , and sophistical evasions , which make the scriptures of none effect . the preamble to the letter pretends , that his friend demands an account of the socinians . their doctrine concerning god ( in which only they differ from other christians ) the remonstrants professedly agreeing with them in other points of faith , and doctrine . answer , their doctrine concerning god is , that the father only is god ; p. 4. but that they differ from other christians in other points beside this , is notorious to the world . they own the arians to be christians , and vnitarians , because they agree with themselves in this doctrine ; p. 33. but the arians ascribe to the son the creation of the world , while the socinians deny his existence before the incarnation : therefore either the arians are no christians , or the socinians differ from other christians in other doctrines besides this . but he would prove that in other points the socinians agree with other christians , because in other points they agree with the remonstrants : which implyes , 1. that there is no difference between themselves , and the remonstrants , but this ; which is well known to be false , and 2. that themselves , and remonstrants are all the christians in the world : because he makes it , that their agreement with these doth prove their agreement with other christians ; but this is false too : because these remonstrants were condemned by the synod at dort about the five propositions . you have then a double falshood in the compass of this one parenthesis ; the one in inlarging the number of his friends ; the other in lessening the number of his errors . the design of which must be to perswade the reader , that there is but one step between the orthodox faith , and this heresy , to the end he may the more easily decoy 'em into it . according to this beginning you must expect but little , if any truth , and honesty in this letter , which we shall now consider . sect . ii. he saith , p. 4. that — christ was a man , the son , prophet , messenger , minister , servant , and creature of god ; not himself god , they think is proved by these ( as they call them ) arguments . answer . i am glad to find any modesty in a socinian , for they [ call ] them arguments ; and they [ think ] they prove : but with better assurances we declare they are no arguments , nor do they prove the point in controversy : for though they prove that christ is man , yet they do not prove he is no more than man , or is not god. this will easily appear from our examination of his arguments themselves , which are these , argum. 1. p. 5. if christ were himself god , there could be no person greater than him : but himself saith , joh. 14. 28. my father is greater than i. answ . i deny the consequence : because though the son is less than the father in some respects , yet he is equal to the father in others . none of the former do destroy his divinity , but the letter do prove it . for , 1. the son is less than the father , in regard of his humane nature , and offices : but these ( we shall prove ) are not inconsistent with his divinity . and , 2. in regard of his sonship . for the father is of himself , but the son is of the father . whence episcopius infers a subordination of persons , but yet establishes the doctrine of a trinity . so the nicene fathers taught , that the son is god of god , that is , god of , and from the father ; but yet withall asserted , that he is of the same substance with the father ; and consequently is god , as the father is . and indeed this subordination cannot destroy his divinity , because it doth not destroy his nature : for the inequality arises not from the essence , but from the order , and manner of subsistence . but , 3. in other respects the son is equal to the father ; this the apostle asserts , phil. 2. 6. who being in the form of god , thought it not robbery to be equal with god , viz. the father . now if he thought it no robbery , it could be no robbery ; and if no robbery , he must be equal ; and if equal , he must be god by nature , as the father is . this leads to the true sence of those words [ being in the form of god ] for though 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , of it self strictly signifies not substance , so much as accidents ; not so much the nature , as the appearance of things ; whence erasmus , and the socinians , would have these words to signifie , not that he is god , but that he was like to god. yet however the apostle must here intend it substantially : that is , his being in the form of god , must signifie that he is god ; as his being in the form of a servant , signifies , that he was a servant : and the reason is , because his equality with god is here inferred from his being in the form of god ; but there cannot be an equality between a thing , and the mere likeness of it ; between a real nature , and a bare similitude . whence erasmus understood the force of the word , but not the reach of the apostle's argument . though erasmus doth not deny the divinity of the son , yet because he thinks this text doth not respect his nature ; i shall therefore oppose to his sence the judgment of the ancients ; as arnob. & serap . conflic . l. 2. novat . de trin. c. 17. hilar. pict . epist . de trin. l. 8. & 10. greg. nys . tom . 2 cont . eunom . ora. 7. &c. which judgment of theirs i shall confirm by these arguments ; viz. 1. by the matter of the apostle's argument , he was in the form of god , and in the form of a servant . if this text speaks him not god , but like to god ; it must also speak him not a servant , but like to a servant : but that he was a servant he saith himself , mat. 20. 28. i came to minister ; and therefore he must be god ; because the same phrase , and sense applyed to each nature , must import the reality of the one , as well as of the other . 2. the order of the parts speaks our sense : for being in the form of god , i. e. while he was in the form of god , he took upon him the form of a servant : therefore that form was before this . but there was no such difference in the parts of his life , or condition upon earth , that one should merit to be called the form of god , the other the form of a servant : therefore his being in the form of god must be antecedent to his humane life . 3. this was his choice , and voluntary act , for he took upon him the form of a servant : but he had no liberty of choice in this world ; because his condition here was determined and foretold ; whence himself saith , luke 24. 44. that all things must be fulfilled , which were written in the law of moses , and in the prophets , and in the psalms , concerning me ; therefore this choice was before this life ; and consequently must be the act of the divine , not of the humane nature . so evidently doth this text respect the nature of christ ; and therefore declare him to be equal to god the father , as being god by nature , as the father is . this equality our saviour himself doth prove , joh ▪ 5. 17. my father works hitherto , and i work : whence the jews concluded v. 18. that he made himself equal to god : upon which he doth not explain himself , as if they mis-understood him ; which he did in the case of eating his flesh , and drinking his blood : but v. 19. he proves this equality , what things soever the father doth , these [ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ] the very same , the son doth likewise . whence he must be equal to the father in operation , and consequently in power . so ambrose de fid . l. 1. c. 13. and greg. naz. orat. 36. hence he requires v. 23. that all men should honour the son , even as they honour the father ; which imports an equality of honour flowing from an equality of operation ; for the reason of the duty instructs us in the nature of the duty it self . this honour is owing from their works , but they both do the same works , therefore they must both have the same honour . hence joh. 10. 30. i , and my father are one ; that is , not in concord only , as the socinian pretends , but in power : because the context speaks not of wills and affections , but of keeping his sheep : none shall pluck them out of my hands ; because none is able to pluck them out of my father's hands ; for which he gives this reason , i , and my father are one : which must be one in power . and if they be one in power , they must be one in nature ; unless you make an almighty creature , which is not only an absolute contradiction , but also confounds the essential properties of god , and the creature ; which is a much viler absurdity , than they can with any shadows of reason pretend against our doctrine . that gloss then of athanasius cont . ari. orat. 4. must be admitted , viz. this shows 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the sameness of the god-head , and the unity of power . for indeed the abscribing to the son the same infinite perfections , and the same honour , but not the same nature with the father , as the socinian doth , proclaims not only the perverseness of the disputant , but the idolatry of the professors too . in that case of his being the messias , he sends men to his works , whose nature , and agreeableness to ancient prophecies , do sufficiently declare the point . so here he first asserts his equality with the father , then improves it to an unity in power , and honour ; and then leaves men to conclude from thence an unity of nature . this is the most rational way of teaching ; for positive affirmations tell us things are so ; but natural , and necessary consequences , such as these are , prove they must be so . therefore though the father is greater than the son , as the father is of himself , and is god only ; while the son is of the father , and is both god and man ; yet the son is equal to , nay , one with the father in operation ; and if in operation , then in power ; and if in power , then in nature : and therefore must be god. he proceeds p. 5. to manage this argument from joh. 20. 17. i ascend to my god , and your god : whence he fancies , the son is not god , because another is his god. answ . as christ is man , and we his brethren , so our god is his god : this proves that he is man , but cannot prove , he is not himself god , which is the design of this letter . nay , as the son is god of god , i. e. god the son of , and from god the father , so the father may be his god , as well as his father ; without weakning the doctrine of his divinity . so far is this text from concluding his point , that it makes nothing against us . he adds , joh. 12. 49. the father , which sent me , he gave me a commandment : the argument is , the son is not god , because the father commands , and sends him . answ . this hath been answered already . for in what respects the father is greater than the son , in the same respects the father may command , and send the son : but as the father's being greater than the son , doth not destroy the divinity of the son , because ( as before ) it doth not destroy his nature ; so neither can his commanding and sending him ; because this power flows as a right , or consequence from his superiority , and if the father's superiority it self cannot destroy the son's divinity ; that power , which is implyed , or wrapt up in the very nature of that superiority , can never do it . arg. 2. p. 5 , 6. if christ were god , he could not be the creature of god : but that he is the creature of god , he would sain prove from two scriptures ; the former is heb. 3. 1 , 2. the high-priest of our profession jesus christ , who was faithful to him , that appointed him : in the greek , and in the margin it is , faithful to him that made him . answ . the meaning is , that appointed , or made him high-priest , respects not his being , but the designation of him to that office. in this sence we use the phrase of making a bishop . yet this ( it seems ) is a socinian creation . his other text is , colos . 1. 15. which calls him the first-born of every creature : whence he would have him to be but a creature . answ . he is the first-born of every creature not in kind as one of them , but in regard of an existence prior to them : whence v. 17. he was before all things . to this agrees that of st. john ch. 1. 1. in the beginning was the word , i. e. when all things first began , then this word , this first-born [ was ] or did exist . and both this apostle and the evangelist with one consent declare him not a creature himself , but the maker of all creatures , for colos . 1. 16. by him were all things created : and joh. 1. 3. by him were all things made . this drives the socinian to three most palpable falshoods , viz. 1. these words [ by him were all things created , colos . 1. 16. ] are spoke ( say they ) not of christ , but of god , let. 4. p. 131. answ . they grant us , p. 130. that v. 15. which runs thus ; the image of the invisible god , and the first-born of every creature , is spoke of christ : and consequently , v. 16. must be spoke of him too ; because that word [ him ] by him were all things created , cannot possibly have any other antecedent , than the image of the invisible god , and the first-born of every creature ; whence immediately follows this , 16 v. for by him , i. e. by this first-born were all things created . they would have indeed the [ invisible god ] to be the antecedent , that by him , viz. the father , were all things created . but sence , coherence , grammatical construction , and other parallel texts , can never allow this . because , 1. the subject of that 15th . verse , is christ ; who is called the image , and the first-born ; but those words [ the invisible god ] are but an adjunct , designed only to show us whose image he is : but now the relative must respect the subiect , not that , which is but a dependent upon it . 2. these words [ the first-born of every creature ] do follow those words [ the invisible god ] for the text runs thus ; the image of the invisible god , the first-born of every creature : therefore to these , viz. the first born — the relative [ him ] must immediately refer : that by him , viz. christ , who is this image , this first-born , were all things created . sometimes indeed a relative may refer to not the next , but a remoter antecedent : but this is only in two cases : as either for the sake of sence , or for the avoiding that interpretation , which may contradict some other text : but neither of these can be pretended in the case before us . for the sence is as compleat , and natural , as well as the construction more easie , if the relative refer to the first-born , as if it refer to the invisible god ; and the referring it to this first-born , doth not contradict any text ▪ but concurs with all them , that ascribe creation to the son. therefore the socinian can have no other reason for his construction , but only the support of an heresy . 2. they say , that all things were made not [ by ] but [ for ] him . answ . this is totally over thrown by st. john ch . 1. 3. by him were all things made ; and without him was not any thing made , that was made . where observe that the evangelist doth industriously secure thetitle of creator to the son. 1. by an universal affirmative , which includes all things made , in the number of his creatures , for by him were all things made . and , 2. by an universal negative , which denys there ever was any creature , which was not created by him ; for without him was not any thing made , that was made . no text saith so much in reference to the father ; therefore they may at least as fairly deny the father to be creator , as the son ; and doubtless the design of the holy writer is to obviate and expose all cavils against this doctrine . 3. they fly to a metaphorical creation , that he did not make , but renew all things after they were made . answ . this is impossible : for colos . 1. 16. by him were all things created , that are in heaven ▪ — whether they be thrones , or dominions , or principalities , or powers . — by which the socinian , let. 4. p. 133. understands angelick orders ; but the holy angels were not renewed , for they kept their stations , and therefore did not want it . and the fallen angels were denyed it . the same letter p. 132. saith , that all things were modelled , not created by him ; and p. 133. explains it thus , christ is said to modell and order all things upon carth , because of the great change he introduced . for which sence he quotes camero , piscator , diodate , dallee , vorstius , davenant , and grotius . answ . i can find nothing in camero , dallee , and vorstius , upon this text : had they spoke to his purpose , i doubt not but be would have given us particular references . piscator saith , all things were per eum condita , made , or created by him ; as the word usually signifies . but for argument sake , suppose it may in a remoter , and looser sence signifie also to modell and order : yet let the socinian tell me , what reason he hath to tye piscator's sence to these , exclusive of that : since that is the common import of the word , and is agreeable to the mind of this author , who , upon all occasions , asserts the divinity of the son , and ascribes to him the creation of the world . for upon these words john 1. 3. by him were all things made ; piscator saith , the evangelist doth here assert the deity of the son from the effects , or things , that he hath done , videlicet ex omnium rerum conditarum creatione , from his creating all things made : where himself applies this word [ condita ] to the creation of the world by the son. therefore the socinian is false , and unjust in pretending that this author understands it not of creation , but of modelling , and ordering things . diodat is so far from the socinian sence , that upon these words he asserts the eternal generation of the son , and speaks him with the father an equal , and co-operating cause of all things . davenant upon this text thus , christus non est creatura , sed creaturis omnibus prior ; quia per ipsum conditae sunt : christ is no creature , but is before all creatures , because they were all made by him . where this author by this word [ conditae ] must necessarily mean a creation properly , because he gives this asareason , why christ is no creature , but is before all creatures , viz. because he made them all : but he cannot possibly understand by it to [ model ] or [ order ] because he might model , or order , and yet notwithstanding be a creature , and after those creatures too . therefore the socinian doth here pervert the sence of this author , and also totally ruines that argument , by which he proves that sence : which is a crime so salse ▪ and malicious , that it can admit no palliation . as for grotius , he shows indeed , that the word here rendred to create , doth not always signifie properly to create , but is sometimes applyed to the new creature . we grant it : but by the leave of so great a man , and of this little socinian too ; this doth not prove it doth not signifie properly to create , in this text . that it is taken improperly in some places is no argument that it ought to be improperly in this . though i shall prove in it's place that grotius was neither arian nor socinian ; yet i must say , that he hath not in all places done that justice to this cause , which he might and ought to have done it . it is worth our while to observe , that to prove that christ is a creature , these men will have 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ( which signifies to create , in as large , and loose a sence , as the english word [ make ] doth ; as to make the world , to make a verse , &c. ) to signifie properly to create in heb. 3. 2. contrary ( as we have shown ) to the evident sence , and design of that place : but to prove he did not make the world , they will have 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , in colos . 1. 16. to signifie not to create , but to model and order : though it doth most properly signify to create , and v. 17. by ascribing to him an existence prior to all things , ought to lead and determine us to this sence . this is plain shuffling : and indeed where men will take words of a various signification in such a sense as is agreeable to their own hypothesis , but not to the scope , and design of the place , that uses 'em , they may perplex any truth , and colour over the foulest heresy in the world ; and in fine , turn ▪ the whole scriptures into contradictions , and non-sense . that christ was no creature , i shall further prove against this letter , and the arian both , by these two steps ; 1. that he was before all creatures , and 2. that he was from eternity . 1. he asserts his own existence before the world : for john 17. 5. he had glory with the father before the world ; and therefore he must exist before it : for non entis nulla sunt praedicata . they say indeed , this glory was in decree only , as the lamb was slain from the foundation of the world in decree only : but these are not parallel cases ; for then that lamb could be slain no otherwise . but the scriptures do abundantly declare that christ did actually exist before the world ; and therefore might be actually glorified before it . necessity requires that interpretation as to the lamb ; but there is no such necessity in this case ; and therefore no such interpretation is to be admitted : for we must never leave the common , proper , and literal sence of a scripture ; unless it be for the sake of a concurrence with , or non-contradiction of some other scripture , which is not in this case ; because no scripture saith , he did not exist before the world . this is a fallacy à bene conjunctis ad male divisa : when men put such odd constructions upon a text taken by it self , which it abhors , when taken together with others . for , in this case , was there no text but this , which ascribes to him a being before the world , their gloss might [ perhaps ] seem to have a little colour of probability in it ; and that is the most it could then pretend to : but take this scripture together with those , that declare he did exist , when all things began , joh. 1. 1. that he was before all things , coloss . 1. 17. that he made and created all things joh. 1. 3. col. 1. 16. the case is so plain from the light , which one text gives to another , that a man would think that none , but the wilfully blind , could mistake it . if in this manner we follow this , or some other point in controversy between the socinian and our selves from one text to another , till we have laid all those together , which speak to the same point ; one would think that either the scripture is so worded , that it is extreamly apt to lead all plain honest minds into error : or else that the socinian sence is but mere shuffles , and evasions of the truth . one of these must be ; judge , & choose , but consider it is on the part of god , and socinus , who stand here opposed each to other . upon this scripture irenaeus in the next age after the apostles l. 4. c. 28. thus , ante omnem conditionem glorificabat verbum patrem suum , & glorificabatur ab eo : before every creature the word , i. e. the son , did glorifie his father , and was glorified by him . by which this father doth speak , 1. his existence before all creatures : for every thing did glorifie it's maker so soon as it did exist ; but the son did glorifie his father before all creatures , and consequently did exist before them . and , 2. his divinity . for had irenaeus numbred the son with the creatures , as the first of them in the arian sence ; or as the last of them in the socinian ; he must have worded it with some respect to them , as thus , before all [ other ] creatures : or the first of all creatures ; the son did glorifie , &c. but this form distinguishes him from all creatures , not as one of them , but as being already distinct from , as well as before them all . the son then was before the world , i.e. before the creation , and consequently before all creatures , which was the thing to be proved ; whence it follows , that there is no necessity of taking those texts , which ascribe creation to him in an improper sense ; and if no necessity , they must be taken in a proper one ; because all scriptures must be taken properly ; unless that sense doth contradict some other scripture ; which is not in the case before us , because no text saith the son did not , or that the father only did create the world. 2. since the son was before the world , he must be from eternity ; because the scriptures no where suggest a creation between eternity and time : but on the contrary , moses declares that the creation of the world was the beginning , viz. of the creature , and consequently there could be no creature before it . whence in the scripture-phrase to be in the beginning , that is , before the world ; and to be from eternity , are the same thing . for wisdom doth thus express her eternal existence , prov. 8. 22 , 23. he possessed me in the beginning of his ways , before his works of old . i was set up from everlasting , from the beginning , or ever the earth was : and v. 24 , 25. when there were no depths , i was brought forth ; when there were no fountains abounding with water : before the mountains were setled , before the hills was i brought forth . thus to be in the beginning , and to be before the world , are phrases , which the spirit uses to express the eternal existence of wisdom : but the son was in the beginning , joh. 1. 1. he was before all things , colos . 1. 17. and before the world , joh. 17. 5. therefore the same phrases must as well express the eternal existence of the son too . if the son then was any where called a creature , it must be restrained to his man-hood , as his descent from abraham is , rom. 9. 5. it was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as to the flesh : which restriction must imply that there is something excepted , as to which he is no creature ; and as to which he did not descend from abraham ; which can be no other than the divine nature : whence the next words say , he is over all god blessed for ever . irenaeus l. 3 c. 18. reads it thus , exquibus christus secundum carnem , qui est deus super omnes benedictus in saecula . of whom christ was according to the flesh , who is god over all blessed for ever : and tert. adv . prax. c. 13. thus , — who is deussuper omnia benedictus in aevum omne : god over all blessed for ever : which reading is farther from the socinian conceit of its being a thanksgiving for christ , thus , who is over all god be blessed for ever , than our translation is . from this text , which the socinians have so miserably disguised , not these fathers only , but the first ages of christianity too , have always pleaded the divinity of the son. he continues his argument from 1. cor. 3. 32. christ is god's : that is ( saith he ) god's subject ; and this he fansies must be god's creature . answ . why not god's son , since the scriptures so often call him so ? but if it must be [ god's subject ] yet it can do him no service : for he is his subject in regard of his humane nature , and offices : nay , his subordination to the father , as son ; the apostle ( as we shall show ) calls a subjection : which will appear to be so far from affecting his divinity , that it gives light , and strength , to this doctrine . he cites mat. 12. 17 , 18. behold my servant . his argument lyes thus , p. 5. if christ were god , it could not without blasphemy be ( absolutely , and without restriction ) affirmed of him , that he is the servant of god. answ . it is not affirmed of him absolutely , and without restriction , but in reference to his humane nature , and offices : and till the socinian doth prove that it is absolutely affirmed of him , i. e. that christ is in all respects a servant , and not in some only ; it hath not so much as the face of an argument . his next scripture is phil. 2. 8 , 9. he humbled himself , and became obedient to death , therefore god hath highly exalted him . answ . his obedience to death , doth indeed prove that he is man , for else he could not dye : this we all grant : but neither this , nor his exaltation can ever prove he is not god , which is the thing in controversie . the truth of this will appear from our explication of his next scripture , which is , 1 cor. 15. 28. then shall the son also be subject to him , who put all things under him . which subjection he conceits destroys his divinity . ans . [ then ] shall the son be subject ; that is , at the end of the world , v. 24. which implies that till then he is in some respect not subject ; which is a demonstration of his divinity . for all creatures are in all points his subjects ; therefore if there is any one respect , in which the son is not subject , then the son must be god. now his non-subjection is this , that now he hath a kingdom , viz. the church given by the father , in which he reigns himself as mediator , whence v. 25. he must reign . this kingdom the church is separate from the dominion of the father , which is the world : therefore so far as he reigns in this kingdom , so far he reigns separate from the father , and that is not subject to him . hence he saith , matt. 28. 18. all power is given me : phil 2. 9. god hath highly exalted him ; and again psal . 2. 9. i have set my king upon my holy hill of sion . but at the end of the world , he shall deliver up this kingdom to the father , v. 24. and then he shall reign no otherwise than as subordinate to the father , as son ; which the text expresses by [ subject to the father ] . whence it must be granted , that when he saith , the father commands and sends me , &c. these were spoken , and ought to be understood , antecedent to this exaltation . to close this argument . on the one hand this exaltation proves no more than this , that the son hath now a kingdom , which he had not before ; but it doth not prove that he did not reign before with the father in the government of the world : and on the other hand , this subjection proves that the son shall resign this kingdom , but it doth not prove , he shall not reign with the father for ever : because this subjection is not a subjection of the creature to god , but a subordination of one person to another in the sacred trinity . argum. 3. p. 6 , 7. the true god is not the minister , or priest of any other . but christ is the minister , and mediator of god , and men ; heb. 8. 6. he hath obtained a more excellent ministry : ch . 2. 17. he is a faithful high-priest . — answ . these texts respect not his nature , but his offices ; and therefore do not deny his divinity . for the same apostle applies to him those scriptures , which can be spoke of none but god ; as psal . 45. 6 , 7. thy throne , o god , is for ever , and ever : which heb. 5. 8. declares that god spoke of his son : and psal . 102. 25. thou hast laid the foundations of the earth ; and the heavens are the work of thy hands : this also v. 10. applies to the son. these texts are sufficiently vindicated by the learned dean of st. paul's , dr. sherlook , who shows that this word [ god ] psal . 45. 6. is not a nominative , and is not spoke of the father , as the socinians , and particularly this letter from eniedinus , would have it ; who render it [ god is thy throne ] i. e. the father is a throne to the son : but it is an attick vocative , and consequently can be spoke of no other than the son , whom it stiles [ god ] and to whom it ascribes an everlasting dominion : as the other psalm doth the creation of the world. those very socinians , who have read this answer , do yet still insist upon their own sence , without taking any notice of that answer ; which is an evident argument they do not pursue the discovery of truth , but only serve their own hypothesis . euseb . praep. evang. l. 4. c. 15. argues the same thing from the hebrews , and aquila's version . and sure i am that from hence the apostolick ages did always assert the divinity of the son. thus just . m. dial. tertul. adv . prax. c. 7. orig. cont . cels . l. 1. cypr. adv . judae . &c. and certainly since each testament , viz. the old in its doctrine , and the new in the express application of it to the son , do joyntly proclaim this minister , this priest to be god , as well as man , the socinian must be extremely unjust in pleading the one in contradiction to the other . he insists , the true god cannot mediate or intercede , but christ intercedes , 1 tim. 2. 5. there is one god and mediator — the man christ jesus . they object elsewhere , that christ the mediator is here distinguished from god , there is one god , and one mediator , whence they presume this mediator cannot be god. answ . the mediator is distinguished from god , not simply , because ( as we shall prove ) himself is god : but only secundum quid , as mediator ; for as such he not only is both god and man ; but also by his mediatorship stands between both , in order to the reconciling both together ; and consequently , must be distinct from both . but that this mediator is god as well as man , will appear : 1. from the sense of antiquity , and the judgment of the church in all ages , which ever held that the mediator must be utriusque particeps , partaker of both natures , that there may be some equality between the mediator , and the persons between whom he mediates , to the end he may the more powerfully reconcile both together . upon which bottom irenaeus , who was disciple to polycarp , as polycarp was to st. john the evangelist . l. 3. c. 20. thus , adunivit hominem deo ; whence theodoret , dialog . 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , he hath united man to god. and , 2. from the nature of his mediatory kingdom , which requires omnipotence , whereby he may be able to support and govern it : and omniscience , whereby he may know all the wants and circumstances of it . therefore since the nature of this kingdom of christ doth require infinite perfections , which are incompetible to a creature , it doth evidently declare the deity of this mediator ; who is accordingly not only stiled god , but hath likewise the incommunicable name , viz. jehovah , and perfections of god ascribed to him in the scriptures . 3. the design of this text is not to declare that the father only is god exclusive of the son , and the holy ghost ; but to teach us that there is but one god , and one mediator exclusive of the many gods , and many mediators , acknowledged by the gentiles . but still ( notwithstanding any thing in this text ) this mediator may be with the holy ghost one god with the father . they have therefore brought a text to disprove our doctrine , which neither as to letter , or design , makes any thing against us . but this letter pleads , that god cannot mediate , but christ doth , therefore christ cannot be god. answ . we grant that god cannot intercede with the creature , because this would imply that he is neither almighty , nor all-sufficient ; but the son may intercede with the father without bringing his divinity into question . therefore ( to put the socinian into a right method of dispute , which he yet seems totally a stranger to , there being nothing proper and concluding in all his arguments ) let him prove that in this text these words [ one god ] are spoke exclusive of the son ; and that the son's intercession with the father is inconsistent with his divinity : this is to his purpose , and most be done , or else he must give up this text , and indeed his cause together . his argument is fallacious ; for it applies that to god in reference to the creature , which we apply to one person in the god-head in reference to another ; and lyes thus , god cannot pray to the creature , therefore the son cannot pray to the father : a socinian argument indeed , which all men else would be ashamed of . but it is said [ the man christ jesus ] true , but this is not simply man , but man united to the eternal word , or son of god. so [ the man jesus christ ] suffered for us ; but there was such an union between the two natures , that what was suffered by the one , was imputed to the other ; whence , act. 20. 28. we are purchased by the blood of god , that is , by the blood of christ united to the second person in the glorious trinity . this text tertullian ad vxor . l. 2. c. 3. quotes without any anti-trinitarian gloss upon it ; and indeed these blasphemous interpretations now in use with these men , were utterly unknown to the apostolick ages . argum. 4 p. 7 , 8. god doth all things in his own name , and by his own authority ; he ever doth his own will : and seeks his own glory : but christ saith , john 17.28 . i am not come of my self : john 5. 43. i am come in my father's name : john 5. 30. i seek not my own will : and ch . 8. 50. i seek not my own glory . answ . this is true of god in reference to the creature ; but it is not true of one person in the trinity in reference to another . for though god cannot come in the name , and by the authority of a creature , yet the son may come in the name , and by the authority of the father : because , though the son is equal to the father as god , yet the father is greater than the son , as father . for which reason episcopius , whom this letter bespatters for an arian , institut . theol. l. 4. c. 32. saith , that the son refers all things to the father , as the fountain of the deity ; of , and from whom the son is . by this he rejects a co-ordination , but asserts a subordination of persons in the trinity : and therefore at the same time both ruins these objections , and also establishes the doctrine of a trinity . he proceeds ; god declares himself to be the prime object of faith and worship ; but the son doth not so , for john 12. 44. he that believes on me , believes not on me , but on him that sent me . answ . christ doth in this very text propose himself as the object of faith and worship ; for he saith , he that believes on me , which asserts that men did believe on him , and implys that they ought to do so ; what follows is but a qualification of the thing suitable to his subordination to his father ; for such an one believes not on me , that is , solely , or ultimately : but on him that sent me , i. e. on him , as well as me ; by which he doth not exclude , but include himself with the father , as the object of faith and worship . this sense must be allowed , else you run into these two absurdities , viz. 1. you make the first clause assert , what the second denyes ; and the second deny what the first asserts , viz. that men do believe on him , and yet do not believe on him : thev do not believe , and yet they believe still . 2. these scriptures , which make faith in christ a condition of salvation , such as john 3. 36. he that believes on the son , hath everlasting life ; must be razed out of our bibles . but perhaps he may trifle upon that word [ prime ] object , which hath nothing in it . for if the father be the prime object as he is the first person in the trinity ; yet the father , son and holy ghost , are the one , and only object in regard of nature . but as the texts , he here quotes , cannot serve his hypothesis , so there is one among them , that totally destroys it , viz. john 8. 42. i proceeded forth , and came from god : that is , i am not from the earth , but from heaven : this is the apostles sense , ephes . 4. 9. that he ascended , what is it , but that he descended first ? whence he did not first ascend to receive his doctrine and authority from god , as socinus dreams ; but he first descended from god , with whom he was in the beginning , john 1. 1. and with whom he was glorified before the world , john 17. 5. our sense falls in with variety of scriptures , which on every side confirm and support it : but theirs labours with endless difficulties in wresting and perverting them ; that is an argument of truth , but this os falshood . argum. 5. pa. 9. god was always most wise , but christ increased in wisdom , luke 2. 52. answ . the text saith , he increased in wisdom and stature , which word [ stature ] suits not a divine nature , but an human body , which shews that the text speaks of him , not simply , as if in his whole capacity , without any exception , he increased in wisdom , but only as man , and consequently this text proves he is man ; but doth not prove he is not god , which is the design of this argument . this is a demonstration of a studied corruption of the truth ; for ( like the devil ) he quotes but one part of the text , to the end he may pervert the whole . he proceeds , god was never ignorant of any thing ; but he makes it that christ was ignorant of two : 1. of the place where lazarus was buried , john 11. 34. where have ye laid him ? answ . this no more proves that he knew not the place , than gods asking cain , gen. 4. 9. where is abel thy brother , doth prove that god knew not what was become of him ? how can we presume he was ignorant of this , who of himself knew both his death , and the time of it too . that he would not in every thing give demonstrations of his divinity , is no argument against it . 2. he pleads that christ knew not the day of judgment , for mark 13. 32. of that day knows no man ( in the greek 't is [ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ] none knows ) no not the angels — neither the son , but the father ; st. matthew , ch . 24. 36. adds , but the father only . answ . he knew it not as man ; but this doth not prove , he is not god , and did not know it as such . for john 21. 17. he knew all things , and therefore must know this , or this must be nothing . in 1 king 8. 39. god only knows the hearts of men ; but joh. 2. 25. christ knew what is in man : but to know the hearts of men , and to know what is in man , are the same in sense ; therefore christ knows what god only knows ; and consequently christ must be god , and for that cause omniscient . revel . 2. 23. i am he who search the heart . this let. 4. p. 154. doth acknowledge that christ spoke of himself . but this ( as we know ) is proper to god , who alone can search the heart : therefore our savior's application of it to himself , is a manifest assertion of his own divinity , and consequently of his omniscience , which is inseparable from the divine nature . whence it must be that he knew it not as man only , but yet at the same time must know it as god. but here the socinian pleads , that he knew many things not of himself ; but by communication from the father , as the prophets did , 2 kings 8. 12. i know the evil thou wilt do to the children of israel : therefore some extraordinary knowledges in christ , do speak his knowledg no more omniscient and inherent , than that of the prophets . so to this purpose p. 155. answ . these are very unlike cases . for , 1. this prophet knew this man so far as concerned his future dealing towards this people : but this doth not prove , that he knew this man any farther , or any other man at all . whereas joh. 2. 24. christ knew all men , and v. 25. he knew what was in man ; and therefore all that is in man : which never was affirmed of any of the prophets . from which alone it appears , that his knowledge was much more extensive than any of the prophets . 2. he knew all things joh. 21. 17. which imports an infinite knowledge ; but an infinite knowledge can never be communicated to a finite understanding : because there is an infinite disproportion between the faculty and the object : therefore the knowledge which christ had , speaks him infinite , and that is god. 3. this hypothesis , viz. that such a knowledge can be communicated to a creature , doth confound the essential properties of god , and the creature , because it makes the creature infinite , as well as the creator , and 4. our saviour saith , revel . 2. 23. i am he who search the heart : which phrase [ search the heart ] was never applyed to any of the prophets ; but only to father , son and holy ghost : yet he saith , not only i do it , but i am he that do it ; which is more emphatical , and implies , that this is his own act , and consequently , that his knowledge of the heart , is from his own self . therefore his knowledge was not like the prophets ; for their's was finite , but his infinite : their 's communicated , his inherent . for which reasons , as well as others , antiquity put that sense upon these texts , which might not deny , but establish not his omniscience only , but such as is not communicated , but inherent too : for greg. naz. ora. 36. athanas . tom . 1. contr. ar. ora. 4. &c. he knows this day 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as god : and consequently must know it of himself , but he knew it not , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as man ; hereby making those words [ none knows ] to exclude not what is god , and therefore not the son as god ; but all the creatures , and therefore the son as man. in the same sense must we take that of st. mathew ch. 24. 36. of that day , and hour , knows no man , no , not the angels of heaven , but my father only . for here [ father ] must not be taken personally for the father , in opposition to the son , and the holy ghost : but essentially for god the father , son and holy ghost , in opposition to that word [ man ] of that day and hour , knows no man — but the father only ; therefore these words [ the father only ] exclude the son from this knowledge as man , but not as god. this exposition is cleared , and confirmed from hence . 1. that in the scriptures [ father ] doth often signifie god essentially , including , son and holy ghost , who are of , and from , the father . 2. this sense must be granted , else you make this one text , to contradict all those which say the son knows all things , &c. and 3. these exclusive particles [ none ] knows , or the father [ only ] i. e. god [ only ] knows : must be so interpreted in divers places of scripture , as particularly luk. 10. 22. no man [ in the greek it is here also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 none ] knows who the son is but the father , or the father only . whence they may as well exclude the holy ghost from the knowledge of the son , as the son from knowing the day of judgment ; because this particle [ none ] must be as exclusive in that text , as in this . but this word cannot exclude the holy ghost from the knowledge of the son , because 1 cor. 2. 10. the spirit searches all things , even the deep things of god : which word [ search ] doth imply , that this knowledge is perfect , and from himself , when applyed to the spirit , as well as when applyed to the father in the searching the heart : and consequently by parity of reason , it cannot exclude the son from the knowledge of that day . therefore when i find these texts cited by the socinians , confineing these knowledges to god ; and yet meet with others , which ascribe infinite knowledge to the son , and the holy ghost , i must conclude , not that the son and holy ghost , are either ignorant of some things , for then i must contradict those texts , which say they know all things , or that they are creatures indowed with an infinite knowledge ; because this ( as is disputed already ) is utterly impossible : but i must conclude they are god ; and therefore are not excluded by those texts , from knowing those things of themselves ; but are included with the father in the god-head ; and therefore are with the father , that one god , to whom all things are open , and naked . he proceeds , christ ascribed the infallibility of his judgment to the father , joh. 8. 16. if i judge , my judgment is true ; for i am not alone , but i and my father , that sent me : which he thinks an argument against his divinity . answ . i am not alone , but i and my father — that is , the father hath not left me alone , but bears witness to me by miracles . this speaks not the insufficiency of his judgment , but the incredulity of this people , and the abundant means , that he vouchsafed them . whence he so often appeals to his works joh. 10. 25. the works that i do in my fathers name , they testifie of me , and v. 38. though ye believe not me , yet believe the works . therefore this proves the grace of god the father , but doth not disprove the divinity of the son. he insists , god cannot be tempted , jam. 1. 17. but the son was tempted of the devil . answ . if god cannot be tempted , what is the meaning of mat. 4. 7. jesus said — thou shalt not tempt the lord thy god ? st. james saith , god cannot be tempted with , or to evil : no more was our blessed saviour , for he complyed not with the temptation . he cites luke 18. 19. why callest thou me good ? there is none good , save one , that is god. on which the letter saith , he refused to be called good , because god only is good. answ . the true meaning is , he refused to be called good , unless in relation to his divinity , implying that himself is good , not by participation , as man is ; but essentially as god is : therefo r he asks , why callest thou me good , viz. as man , or as god ? that sense he rejects , this he claims as his due . so athanastom . 1. de hum. nat. suscept . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . if you think me man , and not god , call me not good . suppose this text is of it self capable of those two senses , the one of which speaks him but man , the other god : wee may easily determine which sense to take it in ; for their's contradicts all those scriptures , which declare his divinity : but our's comports with them , without contradiction to any : therefore not their's , but our's must be admitted , because it must be interpreted in concurrence with other scriptures , but not in contradiction to ' em . arg. 6. p. 10. god gives what , and to whom he pleases , but christ saith , to sit on my right hand , and on my left — is not mine to give , mat. 20. 23. answ . is not mine to give , i. e. as man , not mine exclusive of the father , or contrary to the divine oeconomy , according to which , something is ascribed as peculiar to every person in the sacred trinity . that this is the meaning , is evident from joh. 10. 28. i give unto them eternal life : nothing can be greater than this , yet the son gives this , as well as the father . therefore in what sense the other is not his to give , in the same sense eternal life is not his to give : but in what sense he gives eternal life , in the same sense he gives the other too , whatever you please to understand by it . this they know is our doctrine , and therefore ought not only to propose this scripture , but also to prove an inconsistency between this scripture , and this doctrine : this he doth not attempt , not will ever be able to perform . but it seems it is enough for a socinian to start an error , and then leave it to the world , in hope some may take it , as the man did the snake , into their houses . he proceeds , god needs no aid of any other ; but christ saith , he that sent me , is with me . answ . the thing in controversie is , whether the son be god , as well as man : the socinian brings this text against us ; but if we at present only suppose that he is both , which we must do , till it be disproved , he can never tell me , why the fathers presence with the human nature of christ should necessarily imply a denial of his divine nature ; and consequently this text is no due medium , whence to conclude his point . he adds , god cannot pray for himself , and people , but christ prays for himself and disciples . luk. 22. 42 ▪ heb. 5. 7. &c. answ . we teach that christ is both god and man : now he prayed for himself , only as man , luk. 22. 42. that this cup , viz. his passion , now at hand , might pass from him . he prayed for others , as priest , heb. 56. thou art a priest for ever , whence v. 7. in the days of his flesh — he offered up prayers : whence the socinian thinks he cannot be god , that is to say , his praying must hinder the human nature from being united to the divine ; for which he can produce neither scripture nor reason . nay , as man he dyed , yet notwithstanding this was united to the divinity : and if his death could not hinder this union , much less can his praying . but to shew the weakness of this argument , we will add , though he cannot pray considered essentially as god ; for so there is nothing above him , yet he may pray considered personally , as the son of god , viz. the father ; for as son , he is subordinate to the father , and consequently as son may pray the father . this is an argument then no more to his purpose , than if he had told us a story of abraham's travels , or noah's planting a vinyard . he urges farther , christ dyed , and the father raised him from the dead , ephes . 1. 19 , 20. whence also he fancies he cannot be god. he that dyed , and was raised , must be man ; but his argument implies , that he who raised him , must be god , which is enough to our purpose : for he raised himself , john 2. 19. destroy this temple , and in three days i will raise it up ; which v. 21. saith , he spake of the temple of his body . therefore ( according to his own hypothesis ) the son must be god , as well as man ▪ but the socinian pretends , let. 3. p. 89. that christ raised his body by a power communicated to him by the father ; and accordingly his being raised is always attributed to the father , not to himself . answ . this is false ; for that text doth attribute it to himself , i will raise it up . therefore either the son must be the father ; or else his resurrection is not always attributed to the father . 2. if he was raised by a power solely from the father , then he must be raised by the father : for he raises the dead by whose power the dead is raised ; and consequently he could not say , i will raise it . 3. this notion makes the raiser , and the raised , to be the same : which is as incongruous as to speak the maker , and the thing made to be the same . therefore when he saith , i will raise it up , he speaks not as man , for as such he was to be raised : but as god , who alone is the raiser of the dead . and , 4. the ascription of it to the father doth not deny the co operation of the son : as the ascription of it to the son doth not deny the co-operation of the father ; for then those texts , of which some ascribe it to the father , others to the son , must be contradictory . but the ascription of it to both doth declare the divinity of both , because now both must be god , or else they could not raise the dead . his next scripture , which is mat. 28. 18. all power is given me ; is already answered in arg. 2. for this power here given him respects only the government of the church , to which he was now exalted ; which the psalmist expresses by seting him a king on the holy hill of sion : but this doth not prove that he had not , antecedent to this , a power with the father in the government of the world. this proves he had now a new government , but doth not prove that therefore he was not god : because the father had a new government upon the creation of the world , but yet was god. such additionals prove an alteration in the things added , but not in those divine persons , to whom they are added . all the difference is , this power was given the son. true , but this ( as before ) speaks the son subordinate to the father , but doth not destroy his nature , by which he is god. argum. 7. p. 11. christ in the scriptures is always spoken of as a distinct and different person from god : and is described to be the son of god , and the image of god. answ . he is personally distinct , and therefore is not god the father : but he is not essentially distinct , and therefore must be god the son. if the socinian then would gain his point , he must prove not only [ a ] distinction , which we grant ▪ but [ such ] a distinction , which we deny . but he hath said that christ is the son of god , and the image of god ; whence he concludes , p. 12. thus , it is as impossible that the son , or image of the one true god , should himself be that one true god ; as that the son should be the father , and the image be the very thing , whose image it is . answ . profoundly argued , and like a a socinian ! for he falsly supposes that the father only is the one true god : when father , son , and holy ghost are together the one true god. therefore take the one true god , and the invisible god , personally for the father only ; and we grant that the son of that one true god cannot be that one true god , because the son cannot be the father : and that the image of the invisible god cannot be the invisible god , because ( as he saith ) the image cannot be that very thing , whose image it is . but take the one true god , and the invisible god , essentially for father , son and holy ghost , and then the son with the father , and holy spirit , is that one true god : and the image of the invisible god , with the father and holy ghost , is that invisible god ; because all three persons together are the one true and invisible god. now the son is called the image of the invisible god , because as an image represents that very thing , whose image it is , so the son represents the father , as having in himself all the perfections of the father flowing from the same essence common to both . whence he saith , john 14. 8. he that hath seen me , hath seen the father ; because as hilar. pict . epist . de trin. l. 9. glosses , the father is seen in the perfections of the son ; and consequently the son must be of the same nature with the father ▪ our doctrine then is not simply impossible , and contradictory to common sense , as the letter pretends : but theirs is palpably false and absurd ; for all these arguments ( as he calls them ) run upon these two false suppositions ; viz. 1. that there is but one nature in christ : for he proves that christ is man , and thence concludes he cannot be god ; when the scriptures abundantly declare that he is both . 2. that there is but one person in the god-head : for he often proves that christ is not god , viz. the father , as many of his quotations must be understood ; and thence concludes he is not god ; though the scriptures prove that father , son and holy ghost are god. thus he supposes what we deny , that there is but one nature in christ , and but one person in the god-head ; but proves only what we grant , viz. that christ is man , and that the son is not the father . but let him prove first that there is but one nature in christ , and then that christ is man : and again , first that there is but one person , viz. the father in the god-head ; and then that the son is not the father ; from each of which it will follow that the son cannot be god ; nothing less can conclude his point : but this method of his proves nothing against us , but only betrays the socinians want either of honesty or judgment . however , he concludes his arguments ( as he calls them ) with a socinian confidence ; asserting , p. 13. that there is in scripture no real foundation for the divinity of the son. for proof of which he now flyes above common argument , and can stoop to nothing below demonstration . § . demonst . 1. par . 8. p. 13. — so many scriptures expresly declare , that only the father is god. for proof of this he quotes , john 17. 1 , 3. father — this is eternal life , that they might know thee , the only true god , and jesus christ , whom thou hast sent . answ . the letter saith , that only the father is god , which denyes the son , and holy ghost is god : but this text saith , the father is the only true god : this excludes the gentile gods , but not the son , and the holy ghost , who with the father are the only true god. he here removes the exclusive particle [ only ] from the praediciate , the [ true god ] to the subject [ thee ] for ( pardon the repetition ) the apostle saith — thee the only true god ; but the socinian saith , only thee the true god ; which is such a corruption of the text contrary to all antient and authentick reading , that utterly perverts the very sense and design of it . you have then a demonstration indeed , not that only the father is god , but that the scriptures and socinianism are at odds ▪ and that the one or the other must be reformed . the next words [ and jesus christ , whom thou hast sent ] do distinguish the son from the father as to office , so doth 1 ▪ cor. 8. 6. there is but one god — and one lord ; but they do not distinguish him as to nature . the same is true of other quotations under this head ; and consequently none of 'em prove what he undertakes , viz. that only the father is god. demonst . 2. parag . 9. p. 14. if christ were god as well as man , it had been altogether superfluous to give the holy ghost to his said human nature as a director , and a guide : for what other help could that nature need , which was one person with ( as they speak ) god the son , and in which god the son did personally dwell ? his quotations are luke 4. 1. act. 1. 2 and ch. 10. 38. which prove only this , that the holy ghost was given to the human nature of christ : which the poor man thinks a demonstrative proof , that christ was not united to the eternal word , or son of god ; and consequently was not god. 1. this demonstration ( as he calls it ) is founded not upon scripture , but upon a socinian presumption . for no scripture saith , that if the son was god , he should not have had the presence and conduct of the spirit of god. and certainly it is a monstrous way of arguing , that this or that is necessary for god to have done , or not to have done , and then to conclude , he hath , or hath not done it : for this is no better , than to limit the almighty , to give rules to infinite wisdom , and to make not the scripture , but our own blind conceits , the rule of our faith. in this way the romanists demonstrate an universal head of the church : some the divine right of this , or that form of church-government ; and after the same methods , others may as well demonstrate away all religion , and introduce what they please of their own . 2. his foundation is utterly false . for the church is the body of christ , which ephes . 4. 15 , 16. is said to be fitly joyned to him our head , to intimate that he doth actuate , and guide it ; and yet notwithstanding standing this , the spirit is sent to lead her into all truth . where let the socinian tell me , why both the son of god , and the holy spirit , may not guide the human nature , as well as myslical body of christ . 3. it follows , that the same works of god are ascribed now to one person , then to another : thus we find it in this of conduct , in that of creation , &c. but this doth not destroy , but rather declare and confirm the doctrine of a trinity : because it proclaims those powers and operations , which the socinian would limit to one person , to be common to all three ; whence it follows , that all three must be god. demonst . 3. parag . 10. p. 15. we have an instance of this in the demonstration now before us . for he would not have the son to be god , because he ascribes his miracles to the holy spirit , mat. 12. 28. i cast out devils by the spirit of god. now this doth not prove the son is not god , any more than the ascribing creation to the son , doth prove that the father did not create . but it is a good step toward the proving that the holy ghost is god ; for miracles cannot be wrought but by a divine power , therefore if the holy ghost hath such a power of miracles , that they are wrought by him , if he be a person which we shall easily prove , he must be a divine person , and that is god. demonst . 4. parag . 11. p. 15. had our lord been more than a man , the prophecies of the old testament — would not describe him barely as the seed of the woman . — answ . they describe him as such , but not barely as such ; for they describe him also as god. thus isa . 40. 3. prepare ye the way of the lord , make strait in the desert an high way for our god. this is evidently spoke of the messias , and the evangelists with one consent , apply it to christ , mat. 3. 3. mark 1 , 2 , 3. luk. 3 , 4. and joh. 1. 23. where they all agree , that the voice in the wilderness , was the baptist ; and that the way he was to prepare , was the way of the messias ; therefore according to their application of scripture , the prophet doth stile the son , the lord our god. observe farther , that this text calls the messias lord , in the hebrew , it is jehovah , which ( we shall prove ) is an incommunicable name of god , which therefore asserts the divinity of him , to whom it is applyed : and consequently the prophet in this place declares him to be god in a proper sense . compare psal . 46. 6 , 7. with heb. 1. 8. and psal . 102. 25. with heb. 1. 10. and you will find , that according to the apostle's application of those texts , the psalmist ascribes to the son , an everlasting throne , and the creation of the world ; and certainly this describes him not as the seed of the woman , but as god. § . 4. this pen having thus attack'd the divinity of the son , now turns it self against that of the holy ghost ; affirming p. 16. that the holy ghost — is only the power and inspiration of god , at least is not himself god , which they bold is ascertain'd by these considerations . consid . 1. the holy ghost or spirit , and the power of god , are spoken of as one and the same thing , 1 cor. 2. 4 , 5. luke 1. 35. ch. 11. 2c . mat. 12. 28. luk. 24. 49. compared with act. 1. 4 , 5. answ . he is here to prove , that the holy ghost is only the power and inspiration of god , but is not himself god , but these texts say no such thing , and consequently do not ascertain this position . 2. the blessed spirit is not properly the inspiration of god , but something distinct from it . for 1 cor. 12. 8 , 9 , 10. wisdom , faith , &c. are given by the spirit : whence heb. 2. 4. they are called the gifts of the holy ghost . hence each text distinguishes between the spirit , and these gifts : but neither of them are the inspiration of god. for inspiration is the act , whereby the holy ghost conveighs these gifts to men , which v. 11. is called a dividing them . this is clear from 2 tim. 3. 16. all scripture is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 inspired , or given by the inspiration of god. here scripture is the gift or thing inspired , god is the giver or inspirer ; therefore inspiration can be but the act , whereby it is given or inspired . therefore as the graces before mentioned , viz. wisdom , faith , &c. are the gifts of the holy ghost , so the holy ghost , must give them by way of inspiration . the socinian then doth here confound the agent and the act , making the giver and the giving , the same thing ; which is as false and absurd , as to say my act of donation is my person . 3. he asserts , that the holy ghost is only the power of god , that is , as he often explains himself , is neither god , nor a person . but this is neither proved , nor ever can be ; because such power can know no more of god , than a grace or vertue can do , which are qualities , not persons : but 1 cor. 2. 10. the spirit searches all things , even the deep things of god : whence the spirit must be not a simple power , but a person endowed with an infinite knowledge , and that can be no other than god. what the letter opposes , the scriptures are clear in ; for act. 5. ananias did lye to the holy ghost , whence v. 4. saith , he lyed not to man , but to god. therefore the holy ghost must be god. eniedinus , who is much more manly in his performances , than this epistler parallels this of ananias , lying to the holy ghost , and to god , with the jews rejecting samuel and god : thus , the jews rejected samuel immediately , who was set over them ; but they rejected god mediately , who did set samuel over them : so ananias lyed to the holy ghost immediately , who was given to the apostles : but he lyed to god mediately , who gave the holy ghost to the apostles ; whence as the jews did sin differently against samuel and god , viz. immediately , and mediately , so did ananias against the holy ghost and god , whence he would have the holy ghost and god , as much distinct , as samuel and god ; and that is essentially . answ . that place as put by the objector , is not parallel with this : for that saith ▪ they rejected not samuel , but god ; but this doth not say , that ananias lyed not to the holy ghost , but to god. therefore this text doth not distinguish between the holy ghost , and god , as that doth between samuel and god : and consequently the holy ghost and god , are not here made so distinct , as samuel and god. but take these texts right , and we may allow a parallel . but then it must lye between samuel and peter ; and again between god and the holy ghost ; thus the jews thought they rejected samuel only , as ananias thought he lyed to peter only ; but saith god to samuel , they reject not thee , but me : and saith peter to ananias , thou hast lyed to the holy ghost ; that is , not to men , but to god. therefore while that text distinguishes between samuel and god , as different , this unites the holy ghost , and god as the same . consid . 2. p. 17. a manifest distinction is made , as between god and christ , so also between god and the holy ghost : so that 't is impossible the spirit should be god himself . his quotations are , rom. 5. 5. — the love of god is shed abroad in our hearts , by the holy ghost , 1 cor. 3. 36. — ye are the temple of god , and the spirit of god dwells in you , and rom. 8. 27. he ( the spirit ) v. 26. makes intercession for the saints , according to the will of god. answ . he knows we grant there is a personal distinction , that as the son , so the holy ghost is not god the father . this is all these texts do prove , without which there could not be a trinity . but none of 'em prove that the son and holy ghost are not god , which is the design of this consideration . but because rom. 8. 27. here quoted , ascribes personal acts to the holy ghost — he makes intercession : therefore , that he may at once destroy his divinity , and personality both , he pleads , that the holy ghost is spoke of as a person by the same figure , that charity is described as a person , 1 cor. 13. 4 , 5. the argument lyes thus , personal acts cannot prove the holy ghost to be a person , because they cannot prove that charity is a person . answ . this doth as effectually destroy the personality of the father and the son , as of the holy ghost : for ( according to this argument ) personal acts do not prove the father or the son to be persons ; because they do not prove , that charity is a person ; but that argument which proves too much , proves nothing at all . 2. the scriptures do ascribe to the holy ghost , not only those personal acts which they do not to charity , or to any thing else , which is not a person : but a subsistence to the father , son and holy ghost , together in the same text 1 john 5. 7. there are three — the father , the word , and the holy ghost , implying , that the subsistence of the holy ghost is as real and personal , as that of the father , and the son. they ascribe to him also life , understanding , will and power ; for 1 cor. 12. 11. he divides the manifold gifts of god , to every one as himself will : whence these two cases are so unlike , that even biddle the socinian , was ashamed of it . for ( notwithstanding this of charity ) he asserts the personality of the holy ghost , even while he denies his divinity . 3. scripture must not be taken figuratively , without a necessity , else you may turn the whole into an allegory , and loose at once both the letter and design in a cabalistical sense . now this necessity doth lye in the case of charity , as much as in that of the anthropomorphites mentioned , let. 4. p. 159. for all men do as well know , that charity can be no person , as that god can have no human parts , as eyes , ears , hands , &c. but this is so far from lying in the case of the holy ghost , that let. 3. p. 99. doth consess ▪ that all the arrians , and many socinians do acknowledge , that the holy ghost is a person . whence this is a conceit so weak , as well as novel , that even the vnitarians themselves ( as he idlely calls them ) are divided upon it . it is plain then , that in the judgment of their own party , as well as of the church in all ages , here is no necessity of a figurative interpretation ; and consequently no such ought to be admitted . the socinian arguments ( we see ) are like ghosts , that appear only to whom they please , since none but a few of their own party have yet discerned ' em . consid . 3. p. 18. the spirit is obtained for us of god by our prayers , act. 15. 8. luk. 11. 13. whence he thinks the spirit is not god , because he is given by another . answ . by the spirit he here understands the gifts of the spirit ; as himself explains it : whence he proceeds thus : but they , viz. the socinians , say also , that if the holy spirit were at all a person , much more god , his gifts — would be bestowed by himself . which , 1. convinces him of contradiction : for he saith , they are the gifts of the spirit , yet denyes that they are given by the spirit : which is as much as to say , they are given by the spirit , and yet are not given by the spirit , which is a contradiction in terms . and , 2. this utterly destroys his argument , which is this , that the spirit doth not bestow his own gifts , therefore the spirit is not god , but the spirit must bestow his own gifts , else they could not be his own gifts , but must be the gifts of him that bestows 'em ; therefore the antecedent being false , the consequent must be false too . now that the spirit doth bestow these things , which he acknowledges to be the gifts and graces of the spirit , is expresly asserted by st. paul , 1 cor. 12. 8 , 9 , 10 , 11. where he saith of these very gifts and graces of the spirit , that the spirit divides them to every one as he will ; and if he devides 'em to men , he must give 'em to men ; because these are synonymous terms , which are both expressive of the same thing . the texts he quotes , do prove these things are given by the father , we grant it : but this , and other texts do prove they are given also by the spirit ; but those texts can no more exclude the spirit , than these can exclude the father . therefore they must be given by both , as indeed they are by the whole trinity ; for which reason they are ascribed now to one person , then to another ; as faith , repentance , &c. which are the gifts of the spirit , are attributed not to the spirit only , but sometimes to the father , as himself proves , and sometimes to the son , as the apostle declares , act. 5. 31. him , viz. the son hath god exalted — to be a prince , and a saviour , to give repentance ( which implyes faith ) to israel ; and act. 2. speaking of the gift of tongues , saith , v. 32 , 33. that jesus , who was raised from the dead , being by the right hand of god exalted , [ he ] viz. the same jesus hath shed forth this , which ye do see and hear . the result is , 1. that the socinian is partial and unjust , in quoting one text of scripture in opposition to another ; and , 2. he hath not only lost his own argument , but hath also furnished us with one against himself ; for he argues thus , the spirit doth not give these gifts to men ; therefore the spirit is not god ; which implyes that if the spirit doth give these gifts , then the spirit is god ; but ( we see ) he doth give these gifts , and therefore must be god. and indeed he can be no other than god , who divides these manifold gifts of god according to his own will. he proceeds , there is no precept , nor example in all holy scripture of prayer made to the spirit on this , or any other occasion : which ( on the trinitarian supposition ) that the holy spirit is a person , and god ; no less than the father , is very surprizing , nay utterly unaccountable . answ . we deny it , for 2 cor. 13. 16. we read thus ; the grace of our lord jesus christ , and the love of god , and the communion of the holy ghost be with you all ; which text we shall first explain , and then apply it to the present argument . that word [ god ] the love of god , must not be taken essentially for god , as if the son , and holy ghost were not god : but personally for god the father , and therefore can distinguish them only from the father . my reasons are these , 1. other scriptures ( as we have said ) do not only stile the son , and the holy ghost god , but do also ascribe to them infinite perfections , which are not competible to any creature ; and likewise attribute to them the name jehovah , which is proper to god , as we shall prove anon . therefore if you make that word [ god ] in this text to signifie god essentially , and consequently to exclude the son , and holy ghost from the deity ; then this text must contradict all them : but that cannot be the true sense of one text , which contradicts another . and , 2. st. paul himself doth thus explain it , ephes . 6. 23. — faith from god the father , and the lord jesus christ : where he distinguishes the son not simply from god , but from god the father ; this denyes that the son is the father , but still implyes that the son is god. now this text being the more full and perfect , explains that in the corinthians , by teaching us to supply these words [ the father ] the grace of our lord jesus christ , the love of god , viz. the father , and the communion of the holy ghost — now this text thus supplyed and perfected by that , doth make a distinction of persons , but not of essences , that is , it teaches that the son , and the holy ghost , are not the father , but yet one god. this sense st. paul expressed to the ephesians , and therefore must intend it to these corinthians . now the text , thus explained , is not only a benediction to this church , but also a prayer to god the father , god the son , and god the holy ghost , that this grace may descend upon it . we never pray to god , but we pray to father , son and holy ghost , which was the judgment of antiquity : for justin martyr , who florished in the middle of the age next after the apostles , saith in his apologie , we christians worship father , son , and holy ghost ; and yet against gentile polytheism in the same apology declares , that they worshiped god only ; therefore they must necessarily understand it , that all three persons together are that one god , whom they worshiped , and to whom they prayed , which is one part of worship . but you will say , what is the reason then , we are not commanded to pray expresly and particularly to the holy ghost , as we are to god ? answ . 1. in divers scriptures [ god ] is put essentially for father , son , and holy ghost ; therefore in those scriptures all commands , and examples of praying to god , are to be understood inclusively of all three persons , who are essentially one , and the same god. 2. the father is the first person in the trinity ▪ of and from whom the son and the holy ghost are ▪ therefore as for this reason the son refers things principally to the father , but not exclusive of himself ▪ so for the same reasons prayers are directed principally to the father , but yet are to be understood inclusive of the son , and holy ghost , but not exclusive of them . 3. the father is principal agent in the government of the world ; and the first mover in all divine operations , saying to the son , and the holy ghost , let us make man : whence the son saith , john 5. 17. my father works hitherto , and i works by which he speaks the father principle operator , but himself a co-operator with him . again , the son from the father hath the government of the church , whence it is called the kingdom of christ , to which the father exalted him , and from the father and the son , the holy ghost is in the ministration of it . upon which accounts , prayers are directed primarily , and expresly to the father , but yet are intended as extensive to the son and holy ghost . they are directed most particularly to him from his priority of order and operation ; but yet they belong to all three in regard of the sameness of their nature . these things are suited to the rules and methods of the divine oeconomy , and may seem difficulties ; but had our considerer considered well , he had never made them supports of an heresie . consid . 4. p. 19. if the holy spirit , and our lord christ are — god , no less than the father , then god is a trinity of persons , or three persons ; but this is contrary to the whole scripture , which speaks of god as but one person ; and speaks of him , and to him by singular pronouns , such as i , thou , we , him , &c. answ . we deny that any one text of scripture , doth prove that god is but one person . he quotes , job . 13. 7 , 8. will ye speak wickedly for god ? — will ye accept his person ? — whence he thinks , there can be but one person , viz. the father in the god-head . to which we answer thus . 1. the letter of these texts doth not say , that god is but one person : or that there is but one person in the godhead , which is the thing to be proved . 2. the reason and design of 'em , cannot possibly import any such thing . for these expressions are used to signifie only the doing unjustly for god , as men do for others , when said to accept their persons . for job hereby accuses his friends of injustice and partiality , in that they justified god's visitations upon , by condemning him of hypocrisie . therefore these texts are not suited to the nature of god , nor designed to determine , whether there be only one , or more persons in the god head , but to signifie unjust censures ; and therefore must import not a singularity or plurality of persons , but only partiality in their judgment , between god and himself . will ye speak wickedly for god ? and talk deceitfully for him ? will ye accept his person ? 3. phrases that are taken from the common ufuages of men , or as common forms of speech , are not to be used in an argument , in which the holy pen-man did not intend them to the contradiction of those texts , which professedly speak of that point , this all men of reason and judgment , must grant me ; because in expounding scripture , we are to consider not only words , but phrases , together with the scope and design of the place , and if so , it must be granted in this case before us , that these texts in jobe , which concern not the nature of god , ought not to be brought to prove , there is but one person in the god-head , when so many texts on set purpose , declare the divine nature of three . he quotes also , heb. 1. 1. 2 , 3 ▪ god — hath spoken to us by his son , who being — the express image of his person . answ . 1. god here must signifie the father , because he speaks to us by his son , whence the son is the image of his father's person . but however this doth not reach his case ; for it proves indeed , that god the father is but one person , which we all grant : but it doth not prove there is no other person in the god-head , which is the thing in controversie . nay , 2. this text is not only , not for , but is really against , him . for if the son be the express image of his father , he must duly represent the father , as images duly represent those things , whose images they are : and if he , the living image of his father , duly represents the father , he must have in himself all the perfections of his father , and consequently must be infinite himself , else he could not in his own person or nature , represent infinite perfections ; and that he doth so , is evident , not only from his being termed the image of his father , but also from those words of his once quoted already , joh. 14. 8. he that hath seen me , hath seen the father . so far is this text from proving , but one person in the god-head , that it consequentially introduces a second . he cites , deut. 6. 4 , 5. — the lord our god is one : the word is jehovah , whence the letter saith , jehovah is one , and that the jews morning and evening repeated this verse , to keep it in perpetual memory , that jehovah or god , is one only , not two or three . answ . the meaning is , there is but one god , which is spoke in opposition to gentile gods , which the jews were so much inclined to , not that there is but one person in the god-head , which was never disputed among them . we say then , that jehovah or god , is but one , viz. nature or substance , that is , there is but one god , which is all this text can pretend to , and all that our socinian can prove : but we say likewise , that jehovah or god , is three persons , viz. father , son and holy ghost . that the father is jehovah or god , the socinian grants us , and that the son and holy ghost are jehovah , or god , we will prove . 1. that the son is jehovah , or god will appear from hence . in exod. 33 , 1 , 2 , 3. the lord , the word is jehovah , said , i will send my angel ▪ but i will not go up into the midst of thee . now as the letter supposes , that jehovah is god , so in this very place , it can signifie no other than god properly . because , ● . jehovah is here distinguished from an angel , as such , and therefore from every angel , i will send my angel , but i will not go . — and 2. he declares his propriety in this angel , for it is [ my ] angel : an angel that is mine , that is , my creature , and my servant : which gloss i found upon this bottom , that we never find in all the scripture , that one angel speaks thus of another ; for though there be different orders of angels , yet they are all servants of god , not the servants one of another . therefore this must speak this jehovah to have that right to propriety in , and that power over this angel , which god has to , in , and over his creatures . then gen. 18. 1. the lord i. e. jehovah , appeared to abraham , v. 2. expresses it by three men ; but v. 3. calls only one of these three jehovah , or lord , the same is so called again , v. 13. 20. and v. 22. doth again expresly call these two [ men ] but this [ jehovah ] this only was dignified with these titles , to this only did abraham bow himself , and direct his discourse . now since this jehovah is so industriously distinguished from these men , as he was before from that angel ; and v. 25. is called the judge of the world ; which neither is true , nor was ever affirmed , of any created spirit , it must needs be that this jehovah is god. but now this jehovah cannot be the father , because 1. this jehovah appeared in humane shape , as , to joshua , to moses , so to abraham , whence himself , and the two with him , are called men , v. 2 : but the father never appeared in humane shape ; and the teaching that he did was antiently , as well as justly , condemned as part of the patropassion heresie : and 2. these three are called angels heb. 13. 2 , because they were sent , as the word imports ; but the father being the first person in the trinity , cannot be sent from any . the result then is , here is jehovah i. e. god appearing in the likeness of men , but the father never did appear in this likeness , therefore this could not be jehovah , or god the father ; but must be jehovah , or god the son , whom the father sent in humane shape as an intimation of his future incarnation . this is evident from joshua ; for c. 5. v. 13. he sees a man with a drawn sword , and ▪ asks , who he was for ? the man answered , v. 14 , as captain of the host of the lord am i come . here this man is captain of the host of jehovah the lord ; and yet c. 6. v. 2. this man , this captain , is himself jehovah the lord ; for after he had answered joshua , and commanded him to put off his shooe , because the place was holy c. 5. v. 15 , then c. 6. v. 2. jehovah the lord , i. e. this man , this captain , said to joshua — therefore the former jehovah , or lord , is the father , whose host this was ; and the latter jehovah , or lord , is the son , who was sent from the father as captain of it . this was the sense of all antiquity ; for so justin martyr dial. so grenaeus l. 4. c. 15. and 23. and so tertul. de incar . c. 6. and adv . marc. l. 3. c. 9. who were followed by cyprian , origen , and the rest . again gen. 19. 24. the lord [ jehovah ] rained down fire from the lord [ jehovah ] in heaven . the series of this history shews that the former jehovah is the very same with jehovah ch . 18 ; whence , the latter must be the father , who was in heaven : this was the judgment not only of the fore-cited fathers , but also of the first council of sirmium . and indeed as this appearance in humane shape was a signification of his future incarnation , so his raining down fire from heaven was a type of the last conflagration , when this jehovah the son shall come from jehovah the father to judge the quiek and the dead : for which reason abraham calls him the judge of the world , gen. 18. 25. we shall confirm and conclude our point in our answer to crellius , who , de nomine jehovah , objects several things against us with a design to perswade that [ jehovah ] is not a name proper to god , but is sometimes given to angels properly taken ; and consequently , that this jehovah was not tht son , but only an angel of god. object . 1. these three in genesis 18. are called angels heb. 13. 2. ans . they are likewise called men gen. 18. 2. whence let the socinian tell me 1. why one of these angels may not be the son of god , as well as these three men be angels ? and then , 2. why the other two should be called only men and angels , but this he stiled jehovah , whom the scriptures distinguish from men and angels , unless to denote the distinction of his nature from all created beings : and why he should then be joined with the father under the same name jehovah gen. 19. unless to declare the sameness of his nature with the creator , god blessed for ever ? object , 2. he who is called lord [ jehovah ] in exod. 3. 7. is expresly said to be an angel of the lord , v. 2. whence he thinks that jehovah is a name not proper to god ▪ but common to created spirits . ans . angel doth note his office , as being sent from the father ▪ and jehovah notes his nature , as being of the same substance with the father : for v. 6. this jehovah saith , i am the god of abraham ; and v. 14. he stiles himself 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , i am ; this implies a perpetual existence from everlasting to everlasting , which is not competible to any creature . hence our saviour saith matt. 23. 31 , 32. have ' ye not read , not what god spake to you by his angel , but that which is spoke to you by god , saying , i am the god of abraham — where our saviour himself , who is the best interpreter of scripture , teaches that this jehovah was not a created spirit , but even god himself . upon which justin martyr apol. saith , this is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , our christ . and tertul. adv . prax. c. 14. deum i. e. filium dei visum — moysi — god , that is , the son of god was seen by moses : the same you have again c. 16. see cypr. adv . judae . 1. 2. &c. object . 3. jehovah is indeed a name proper to god , but yet is sometimes given to angels , as they personate god , i. e. bear his name and authority . ans . here was not only the name and authority of god , but also that honor received which is due to god only ; for moses by special command did worship him : but you have not one such instance of an angel that any way appeared to be a created spirit , that bore the name and authority of god , and received the honor due to god. the angel to the blessed virgin spoke otherwise , and that to s. john forbad him to worship him , and that for a reason common to all created angels , revel . 19. 10. see thou do it not , for i am thy fellow-servant . as we find no such thing , so neither can any such thing ever be ; for god hath said , my glory will i not give to another : but this gives a creature his name , his authority , and his honor ; and these are his glory . therefore the matter of this objection is not only not found in the scripture , but is even contrary to it . object . 4. the law was given by the disposition of angels , act. 7. 53. and was spoken by angels , heb. 2. 3. whence he presumes that jehovah , who gave the law , was not the son of god , but a created angel. ans . this doth not follow : for as it was given by angels , so it was gal. 3. 19. in the hand of a mediator , that is , of christ ; as theophylact and others take it . but some say this mediator was moses : be it so , it is all one . for if moses was mediator , it was only as a type of christ , and there must be an exact agreement between the type and the anti-type ; therefore if the law was given by moses a typical mediator , it must be given by christ the true and proper mediator . whence the result must be , that moses gave it immediately to the people , but christ gave it mediately by moses , and by those angels , which are ministring spirits . therefore when s. john saith , c. 1. 17. the law was given by moses , but grace and truth , i. e. the gospel , came by jesus christ , he respects the immediate delivery of both ; the law was given immediately by moses , and the gospel immediately by christ : which excludes christ from only an immediate , but not from a mediate delivery of the law. but the difficulty is from heb. 2. 2 , 3. if the word spoken by angels was stedfast , and every transgression and disobedience received a just recompence of reward ; how shall we escape , if we neglect so great salvation , which at first began to be spoken by the lord ? upon which crellius saith , the gospel , which is the great salvation , is preferred before the law , because the law was given by angels , but the gopel by the lord : and consequently jehovah , who gave the law , was not the lord , but an angel. ans . this text , which saith the law was spoken by angels , doth no more exclude the son , than joh. 1. 17. which saith the law was given by moses , doth exclude those angels : for indeed it was given by all three . therefore the opposition lies not between jehovah and the son , who are the same , and gave both law and gospel too , but 1. between his different manner of giving each : for ( as before ) he gave the law mediately by angels ; but he gave the gospel immediately by himself , as the eternal word now made flesh : upon which account sin against the gospel is a greater affront to his person and authority , than sin against the law. and 2. between the nature of each considered in themselves : this is a great salvation in comparison of that . and because sin doth always arise proportionate to the means it is committed against , therefore upon this account also sin against the gospel is greater than sin against the law. whence this toping argument of crellius , which ( he saith ) doth penitus evertere totally overthrow us , doth neither exclude jehovah the son from giving the law , nor yet debase him to a created spirit ; and consequently doth not at all affect us . in fine , we grant that jehovah is sometimes called an angel , as he is sent from the father ; but we deny that an angel , which is any way declared to be a created spirit , is ever called jehovah . let the socinian prove this , and then we will dismiss this argument : else he faith nothing to the purpose . 2. the blessed spirit is also called jehovah : for exod. 17. 7. they tempted the lord , the word is [ jehovah ] . this is repeated psal . 95. whence the apostle heb. 3. 7 , 8 , 9. thus , the holy ghost saith — when your fathers tempted [ me ] . therefore ( according to the apostles application of these seriptures ) the holy ghost is this jehovah . the result is , jehovah is indeed but one god , but yet is three persons ; viz. father , son , and holy ghost , who are in the godhead , and therefore are this one god , which was the thing to be proved . whence his next scripture , which is isa . 45. 5. i am the lord , the word is [ jehovah ] there is no god before me , is easily answered . for here jehovah excludes a plurality of gods , but not a plurality of persons in the godhead . he adds ( in his great wisdom and judgment ) mat. 4. 10. thou shalt worship the lord thy god , and him only shalt thou serve . where because [ the lord thy god ] is singular , and that word [ only ] excludes all others , he thinks he hath found a proof that the father only is god. ans . this proves indeed that there is but one god , which we all grant ; but it doth not prove there is but one person in the godhead ; or that the son and the holy ghost are not god ; which he undertakes . but because suppositions grant nothing , we will suppose that this text proves that the father only is god ; but then it must be granted upon this supposition , that it doth also prove , that the father only is to be worshipped ; for him only shalt thou serve . but the socinians deny that the son is god , and yet worship him as well as the father . whence it evidently follows , that either their religion must be an heresie , or themselves idolaters ; for if the son be god , they are hereticks in denying it : if he is not , they are idolaters in worshipping him . and certainly these men are put to an hard shift for scripture ▪ proofs , when all the texts they cite , do either not affect us , or wound themselves . he now proceeds to his singular pronouns , thus ; no instance can be given in any language of three persons ; who ever spoke of themselves , or were spoken to , by singular pronouns , as i , thou , &c. such speaking is contrary to custom , grammar , and sense . ans . to this , that of the learned dean of st. pauls , dr. sherlock , is the most apposite , viz. there is no other example in nature of three persons , who are essentially one . whence this is an impropriety in reference to the creatures , which is none in reference to god. for he may speak of himself , or be spoken to , singularly , because he is but one god ; and plurally , because he is three persons , without any ungrammatical solecism . and sometimes he doth speak plurally , as gen. 1. 26. let us make man : whence we conclude a plurality in the godhead . but this cannot be a plurality of essences , or natures , for then there would be a plurality of gods , which is contrary to scripture , for this declares there is but one ; but a plurality of subsistences , which we call persons , united in the same nature . this plurality other scriptures , particularly psal . 33. 6. do determine to three , viz. the lord , the word , and the spirit , and 1 john 1. 7. the father , the word , and the holy ghost : and this we call a trinity , as the church ever did from the apostles time . but to this he saith , god doth here speak of himself after the manner of princes , p. 21. and therefore is but one person , though he saith [ us ] . ans . 1. he could not speak this after the manner of princes , for then there was no prince , nor any man in the world : nor can he prove any such custom in the mosaic age. therefore this is an expounding the first writings in the world after the custom of later ages , which we cannot allow . 2. in time princes spoke [ of ] but not [ to ] themselves plurally , which yet god doth do , if this gloss be true . therefore this exposition , which he pretends is after the manner of princes , is indeed without all example . 3. god himself expounds this text our way , psal . 33. 6. by the word of the lord were the heavens made , and all the host of them by the breath of his mouth ; that is by the lord , viz. the father ; by the word or son , and by the spirit . now st. john c. 1. 1 , 3. teaches that by the word , viz. that word which was god , that word , which v. 14. was made flesh , were all things made . which directs us to understand that [ word ] in this psalm , not of the command , but of the eternal , or substantial word , or son of god : to whom together with that spirit , who gen. 1. 1. moved upon the waters , preparing that indigested matter for its several forms , the father said , let us make man. this was the sense of all antiquity . just . mart. dial. iren. l. 4. c. 37. he spoke to the son , and the holy ghost , per quos , & in quibus omnia — fecit , by , and in whom , he made all things . tertul. de resur . carn . c. 6. and adv . prax. v. 7. orig. cont . cels . 1. 6. and the constitutions l. 5. c. 6. which pretend to give us nothing but what is apostolical . he proceeds to 2 cor. 10. 2. some , who think of [ us ] — which he saith s. paul spoke of himself only . ans . it is not probable that s. paul spoke of himself after the manner of princes , when it is evident he lessened himself in almost every thing but sin and sufferings . 2. when a prince speaks plurally , we know he must speak of himself , because he is but one : but the apostles were many , and under the same censures : therefore when s. paul speaks plurally [ us ] we have no necessity of understanding it of himself only , bu● have reason to believe he spoke of himself and them together . 3. suppose that s. paul spoke plurally of himself , as princes have done for many ages , yet what argument is there in either of these to prove that the father is to be understood thus in gen. 1 , especially when the scriptures so frequently ascribe the creation to the son , and holy ghost , as well as to the father ? there is therefore nothing manly , or cogent in this quotation . by this time ( i think ) his singular pronouns have done him as little service as his scriptures . consid . 5. and 22. had the son or holy ghost been god , this would not have been omitted in the apostles creed , which ( they say ) p. 23. was purposely drawn up to represent all the necessary articles of religion : but that the divinity of each is omitted there he would sain perswade the world. this very argument had almost perverted two of my acquaintance ; the one a very ingenious merchant in this city . i shall therefore ( according to their desire ) give the fuller answer to it : and shall prove 1. that this creed under the apostles name was never composed by the apostles ; and 2. though it doth not expresly assert the divinity of the son and of the holy ghost , yet it sufficiently teaches both . 1. this creed was never composed by the apostles . some with more presumption than judgment think irenaeus and tertullian against us . but if you consult those famous places , iren. l. 1. c. 2 & 19. tertul. de virg. veland . c. 1. de praes . haer. c. 2. and adv . prax. c. 2. you will find these fathers differ so much from one another , and each from himself , both as to the order and points of faith they deliver ; that they evidently seem to intend not any setled form , but the substance of faith contain'd in the scriptures , whence themselves might draw the articles they deliver . irenaeus saith indeed , that his rule of truth , i. e. the articles there writ , came from the apostles ; which some have thought sufficient to prove it of apostolical composure . but , 1. it s coming from the apostles is no argument for them ; for that might be from their writings in the n. test . as well as from this creed , had they composed it . 2. his calling it the rule of truth is against them ; for it was not customary , so neither is it so proper to call a creed the rule of faith , as the scriptures from whence all creeds are taken , and by which they must be proved . and 3. there is not so much agreement between the articles in iren. and this creed called the apostles , as between those articles , and some of those creeds , which are well known to be the different creeds of different churches . therefore there is nothing in this father , that can prove the socinian assertion ; but something , that may incline to the contrary . as for tertullian the case is more clear ; for he saith de praes . haer. c. 13. that his rule of faith , meaning the articles there mentioned , were taught by christ : but christ composed no symbol : and adv . prax. c. 2. his rule taught the mission of the holy ghost : but this creed teaches no such thing . therefore from both he must intend the scriptures , not a creed ; or if any , yet however not this . arius in epiphanius adv . haer. l. 2. to 2. haer. 69. would fain have justified his heresie against the divinity of the son from the creed of alexandria ; which differs to much from this under the apostles name , that none can pretend they are the same . but it must be granted , he would much rather have appealed to this , had it then been , or believed to be theirs , and also thought not to teach the divinity of the son and the holy ghost , because a creed composed by the apostles themselves would have been of much more force and authority than one composed by any particular church whatever . therefore his appeal to that , but not to this , is to me a demonstration that this creed was then not known , or else not believed either to be theirs , or to import any such doctrine . it could not come from the apostles , at least as we now have it , which ought very much to take down mens presumptions of its antiquity , and must totally ruine that of heylen , aud ashwel in his f●des apostolica , who will have it to be unalterable , and therefore to come from them in all points as it now is . for , 1. though 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is brought from the psalms into the acts of the apostles , and in each place is rendered hell ; and tho irenaeus and tertullian both speak of christs going where the souls of the dead are ; yet the strict phrase [ he descended into hell ] is not in any of the antient creeds or fathers ; nor yet in the articles mentioned by irenaeus and tertullian , from whom they pretend to take this creed it self . the first time we find it is in the interpolat●r and tral , but this appeared not till the fourth century ; nor could it be wrote till the arian heresie . for ad magnes . vas . edit . p. 147. he saith , christ is the word of god 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , not spoken , but substantial . for though the notion is agreeable both to scripture and the most antient fathers ; yet the distinction in these very words was not known till arian evasions made it necessary for the securing the sense both of scripture and antiquity . 2. the word [ catholick ] which this creed uses , was not in use among ecclesiastical writers in the first ages . for ignat . epist . ad ephes . expresses the thing by a circumlocution , as the church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the ends of the earth . and iren. l. 1. ● . 2. the church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 all the world over . we find the word it self first in cl● . alex. str●m . ● . 7. but it is not in any of the eastern creeds , till that of jerusalem . s. gyprian likewise hath the word ; but it is in none of the latin creeds , till the fourth age. the epistles of james , peter , john and jude , must therefore be intituled catholick , not by the pen-men , but by some later hand . the first time i observe them cited under this title , is by cyrd of jerusalem , who carech . 6 ▪ wrote seventy years after manes , who broach'd his heresie under probus the emperor about the year 277. how then to bring haylen out of the wood , who places the apostles with every one an article of this creed in his mouth as a frontispiece to his book upon this subject , ascribing the descent into hell to s. thomas , and the [ catholick ] church to s. james , i know not . or whence s. austin should have that story of the apostles bringing every one his article to the composing it , when the four ages before him knew nothing of the matter : or why any should quote that tract under his name as his own , which all learned men ( unless some romish writers ) do now reject as spurious , i can as little imagine . to conclude this argument ; had the apostles composed this creed , it would have been found first in the hebrew or greek tongues , in which they wrote : it would have been part of the sacred scriptures , or at least have been mentioned in the history of the acts , and have been known to all the churches founded by the apostles , it being pretended to be wrote before their dispersion from jerusalem . but on the contrary we find it not till the fourth century , and then known only to the latin church , which did obtrude it on the world under the name of the apostles ; witness preuotius , feu ardentius , baronius , the paris doctors in their censures of erasmus , and others , who take up the cudgels from their old pope leo in the fifth age , as he did from ruffinus , and ruffinus from the spurious clemens in his epistle to s. james ; which was ever rejected by all considering men , because it appeared not in the apostolick ages ; and also mentions the death of st. peter , who out lived this james , to whom it is directed . from rome the reformed churches received this doctrine , and that rubrick of ours which calls it the apostles creed , is taken out of the roman breviary ; which our reformers ( not fore-seeing the advantages the socinians make of it ) thought of no such moment as to call for an alteration . but when our church composed the articles of our religion , she expresses her self thus , article 8. that which is commonly called the apostles creed : which doth not only not affirm that it is theirs , but suggests that it is not . du pin , who is more judicious and impartial than his predecessors , grants that it is the apostles as to the doctrine it contains , but denies it to be of their composure ; for he faith they ● ' avoient poynt comopsè de formule de foy , comprise en un certain nombrè de mots , have not composed a formula of faith comprised in a certain number of words : he adds , irenaeus and tertullian did not intend la formule de foy , mais la foy meme , a creed , or form of faith , but the faith it self . this is the judgment of vossius , erasmus , our perkins , and others : however some men , who make a great noise about antiquity , are pleased to take up an error from others , instead of understanding the authors they quote . had it not been for these socinian impudences discovered in this letter , and in the fifth to the publisher , as well as in other of their writings both at home and abroad ; i had rested in that of calvin instit . l. 2. c. 16. ser. 18. apostolicum nuncupo , de authore interim minimè solicitus : i call it the apostles , but in the mean time trouble not my head about the author . but after all this , what ground hath this letter for his confidence ? it saith , pag. 23. this creed is recited by s. cyril , s. cyprian , and socrates in his hist . lib. 1. c. 26. quotations , that are true socinian ; for they are false , but if true , are yet insufficient for their end . for did these authors recite this creed , yet how doth this prove the apostolical composure of it ? but cyril of jerusalem explains a creed peculiar to that church , which differs nothing material from that of nice and constantinople , except the consubstantiality the english reader may find it at the end of the life of this father written by dr. cave . s. cyprian hath it not , unless he means a piece bound up with him in the oxford edition , which is ascribed by some to s. jerom , by others to ruffinus . which ( if so ) must betray either his ignorance or sophistry . socrates indeed hath a creed in the place quoted , but he there tells us , it was composed by arius and euzoius ; and begins thus , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . we believe in one god the father almighty , and in the lord jesus christ his son , who was made of him before all ages , god the word , by whom all things were made . this , he faith , is the apostles creed , which he so earnestly contends for ; where observe , 1. what trust we may repose in socinian quotations ; for if he is so false where he makes a particular reference , what must the reader expect where he only names an author ? this answer will prove what i here assert against the whole party of 'em , that throughout this letter , there is not one quotation in seven , but what is either false , or not to his purpose . if they will have this an argument of their learning , they may ; but i am sure it is no proof of their honesty . 2. the socinian denies that our saviour did exist before his incarnation : but this creed saith , that he was before all ages , and made all things . i demand therefore of our socinians , that they profess this faith , or acknowledge themselves the perverters of truth , and debauchers of antiquity . and indeed ( like the harpies ) they rarely settle upon any place , but they so pollute it , that it wants a laborious pen to cleanse , and restore it to it self . he hath then presumption only , but no colour of proof , that the apostles composed this creed . we therefore proceed to the next part of our argument . 2. though this creed , called the apostles , doth not expresly assert the divinity of the son and holy ghost , yet it sufficiently teaches both . for , 1. it doth stile the son his [ only ] son ; which words indeed in themselves import only this , that he is a son in such sort as none else is , which the socinian would perswade respects not his divinity , but his being born of a virgin : but take them together with the scriptures , whence they are themselves taken , and by which they must be explained , and then it will sufficiently appear that his only son is a son by nature . whence s. austin in symb. l. 1. c. 2. quando unicum audis dei filium , agnosce deum , the only son of god is god. this some other parts of our dispute will evince so far as the letter hath led us to this argument . but , 2. as to the holy ghost , he thinks nothing can be here pretended to prove him a divine person , excepting only the phrase of believing with the preposition [ in ] which is set also before the church , and therefore can ascribe a divinity to the one no more than to the other . but his thoughts are very short , and dull . for though this hath been a common error , which some at this day will hardly be drawn from ; yet we declare that we neither do , nor need for the establishing this doctrine , hold any such force in this phrase . see dr. hammod's practical catechism , lib. 5. dr. peirson , and heylen upon this article , who absolutely deny it ; because not this creed only , but all antiquity apply it to men , and so do the sacred scriptures . they instance in exod. 14. 31. the people believed [ in ] the lord and [ in ] moses ; and 1 sam. 27. 20. achish believed [ in ] david . to which we add that of our blessed saviour joh. 5. 45. moses 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , in whom ye believe , or trust , as we translate it . they , with musculus , and others , impute the notion to s. austin and jerom , whose translation first omitted the preposition in these texts of the old testament , which other translations follow . a little before these fathers greg. naz. acknowledges the preposition in the translations of his time , but yet saith this phrase ought to be applied to none but the lord ; for the people did believe in moses not as moses , but as a type of the lord , and consequently this did not terminate in moses , but did refer ultimately to the lord. but he did not consider that achish believed in david , but he could not believe in david as a type of the lord , when he knew neither the lord , nor that david was any type at all . hence ashwel took his notion of the peoples believing in moses as subordinate to the lord ; but there could be no such subordinate faith in this heathen prince , who yet believed in david . this was therefore an error growing and setling it self in the church sometime before jerom and austin ; but however it was these two that fixed the point , and by that omission in that translation , as well as otherwise occasioned others to e rt with them . but you will say then , where , or how doth this creed teach the divinity of the holy ghost ? i answer that the son , and the holy ghost are put into this creed as equally objects of faith and worship with the father ; and this is the very thing that declares the divinity of both . nor is this from men , but from god ; for it was so done upon the special precept of our blessed saviour in the form of baptism , which is the original of all creeds . i confess the fathers use this phrase in their disputes for a trinity . so greg. nys . to . 2. cont . eunom . l. 1. if the holy ghost be not god , tì 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ▪ why do men believe the h. ghost ? but observe , he doth not here dispute from the sole force of that phrase of believing in , but from our believing in the holy ghost as well as in the father , which makes the blessed spirit equally with the father a sharer in our faith , and adoration . in this sense is hila. pict . epist . de trin. l. 9. who teaches that we cannot believe in the father without the son ; whence he concludes they must be the same in nature : but this conclusion is drawn not from the form of the expression that we believe in , but from the matter expressed , that they are both equally the objects of our faith. and indeed there is no such extravagance in the world as to teach that we believe in god , in a creature , and a simple power ; that he , who will not give his glory to another , should set a meer creature , and a naked power , or inspiration , which is no person , equal with himself in the faith and adoration of his people . so falsly doth this letter pretend from this creed , that the apostles did believe as the socinians believe ; when neither did the apostles compose it , nor is it any way servicable to the socinian hypothesis . sect . v. now , as if he had proved his point , when he had proved nothing , but what we may safely grant him , he concludes p. 24. parag . 6. theirs , viz. the socinians , is an accountable and a reasonable faith. answ . a faith just as reasonable as this inference : for as this is drawn from no due premises , so that stands founded on neither scripture , nor good argument . a reasonable faith indeed , which makes a finite god , and an infinite creature ! which denies the son to be god , and yet doth worship him ! a reasonable faith , which cannot support itself without expunging some texts out of the sacred canon , without transposing the parts of others contrary to the ancient and most authentick reading , and without expounding some contrary to the very letter , and most evident design of the place ! socinus himself was so sensible of the reasonableness of this faith , that he not only rejects the sense of the church , but in his epistle to balcerovicius he allows the offering any force to the sacred scriptures , rather than to their own sentiments ; in which our present socinians are his strict disciples . and de jesu chris . salvat . parag . 3. c. 6. to . 2. he vents himself thus , if i find such things , non semel , sed saepè ▪ — not once , but often in the scriptures , non id circo tamen it a re● pror●us se habere crederem : i will not for all that belive it . and if this be an accountable and a reasonable faith , which is founded not on the scriptures , but on the wills of men , then all heresies must be accountable , and reasonable too . but on the contrary , this must be a most unaccountable , and a most unreasonable , nay a blasphemous , and most dangerous faith , which makes the writings of socinus , as ma●●met did his alcoran , the peoples , bible , and their rule of faith ! but that of the trinitari●●s ( he saith ) is absurd , and contrary both to reason , and it self : and therefore is not only false , but impossible . his reason is , that we teach there are three almighty , and most wise persons , and yet but one god. answ . the scriptures cannot teach any thing absurd or impossible , but the scriptures doteach there are three , who are but one god ; therefore this doctrine of ours is not absurd and impossible . now that there are three , who are but one god , is evident as from other places , so likewise from 1 john 5. 7 , 8 ▪ there are three that bear record in heaven , the father , the word , and the holy ghost ; and those three are one ▪ and there be three that bear ▪ witness in earth ; the spirit , the water ▪ and the bloud ; and these three agree in one . which texts i will so clear from all their cavils ▪ that they shall sufficiently vindicate our doctrine from being absurd and impossible . euiedinus , and the rest , would expunge the last clause in the 7th verse , these three are one . because ▪ 1. some fathers , who wrote professedly on the trinity , have i● not : whence he makes them to be added by some enemy of the arians . ans . 1 st. cyprian in the middle of the age before arius hath this text intire de vnit ecc●es and st. jerom soon after arius censures the omission of this clause . now that of eniedinus is impossible , for these words could not be added by some enemy of the arians , in the time of st. cyprian , who flourished almost an age before arius himself was . but the careless , or designed omission of 'em is necessarily true , because the 4 th age wanted them , after st cyprian in the 3 d age had ' em . nor do we find many that quarrell'd with st. jerome for censuring this omission , which some would certainly have done , had he not had a ground for this censure : which is an argument that st. cyprian himself had this clause , and that it was not afterwards foysted in by some other hand . 2 they plead , that v. 7. is not in the syriac , nor arabick , whence some reject the whole . ans . we grant it ; but v. 8. is in both ; which is linked to v. 7. by a conjunction copulative [ and ] ; beside which , the sense , coherence and dependance of these with , and upon one another , speak this imperfect without that . whence beza ( whom letter 4 , p. 152 quotes on his side ) saith both must be expunged , or reteined together ; and then concludes for the reteining both . and indeed this case is so clear , that since the socinians receive v. 8 , they must receive v. 7. too , or renounce their own reason . we proceed to confirm the whole verse to be authentick . 1. these words [ i and my father are one ] are allowed on all hands to be st. john's ; therefore rhose words [ these three are one ] from the likeness both of stile and matter , seem to be his too . for such a likeness between text and text , is as good an argument ( according to the proportion of matter ) to prove that each have the same author , as it is between that gospel and his epistle ; but all learned men allow of this argument , therefore the socinian must allow of that , or differ from the world of the learned , as they do already from the world of christians . 2. our learned bishop of salisbury , dr. burnet , in his letter from zurie , observes that among ten copies he had seen abroad , nine had either the 7 th v. or st. jerome's epistle , or preface , which condems the omission , while one only wanted both . therefore among ten copies one only was purely arian , or socinian ; because the omissions in them that wanted , are condemned not only by that epistle , or preface , but by them also who added that epistle or preface to those copies . 3. suppositions grant nothing ; therefore suppose we , that this text it self is not authentick ; yet the matter of it is taught by all those scriptures , which assert the divinity of the father , the word and the holy ghost , and the existence of but one god ; for they , taken together do assert that these three are one ; that is , one god , or one in nature , therefore was the socinian a man of that reason he pretends , he could not think the expunging this text out of the sacred canon , of so much moment , when divers others taken together speak the same thing . he is then imployed about a work he can never effect ; or if effected , yet can do him but little , if any service . for which reasons they betake themselves to other methods . for they farther plead , if this text be authentick yet it cannot intend one in nature , but one in testimony , because each verse speaks of each three as witnesses . ans . true , each intend testimony , as beza calvin , erasmus and others observe : but this doth not prove that v 7. intends no more ; nor do these authors exclude an unity of nature . but the variation of the phrase implies a restriction of the matter . for v. 7. saith , the father , the word , and the holy ghost , are one ; which is equally extendible to nature , and testimony : but v. 8. saith , the spirit , the water , and the blood , agree in one : which is applicable not to nature , but to testimony , especially where testimony is mentioned , or evidently intended ; therefore we understand the former of one in nature , and testimony both : else we do not take the phrase in its full latitude , nor make it comport with those other texts , which declare the divine nature of father , son , and holy ghost : and yet that these three are but one true , and almighty god , because that nature is numerically one , in which they all agree : but we understand the latter of testimony only , because the phrase designs no more , nor do any other scriptures declare that the spirit , the water , and the blood , do agree in nature , as the other do . but they insist thus , the expounding , v. 7. of nature , doth lose the design of these texts , which speak of testimony . ans . the expounding it of nature only , exclusive of testimony , would have gave some colour of reason to his objection : but we expound it both of nature , and testimony too ; which exposition doth not lose , but secure the design of this text. for since they are one in nature , and that nature is divine , they must be one in testimony , and that testimony must be infallible too ; because three divine persons , who are one in nature , can neither agree in a false testimony , nor disagree in that testimony they give . can we now think that this doctrine , which teaches there are three , who are but one god , is false , and impossible ; when it is so evidently founded on this , and other concurring texts , which are the word of truth ; and which therefore can teach nothing which is false and impossible ? if any thing we teach seems absurd , and contradictory ; or false and impossible ( as the letter words it ) it is not from the doctrine it self , but from the socinians misrepresentation of it . for , 1. they say we teach that there are but one ; hereby suggesting to others , and arguing themselves , as if we mean in one respect only ; which is indeed impossible . whereas we teach , that three in one respect are but one in another ; which ( according to their own doctrine ) takes away the impossibility . for the socinian himself grants us , upon these words , i and my father are one , that two in one respect may be but one in another : and if two may be one , why not three ? since the difficulty lies not between two and one , but between a plurality whether they be two , or three , and an vnity . they allow the thing , it is only the modus , or manner , how two , or three , can be but one , in which we differ . therefore since we so far agree , they ought to set forth how we hold three to be hut one , together with our reasons for this doctrine ; which would lead even a prejudiced reader to some deliberation : and not by a partial and sophistical representation , make our doctrine seem prima facie , absurd and impossible , to the end they may huff off all consideration of it . indeed their manner of vnion is common among men ; but if ours is plainly founded on divine revelation , as we maintain it is , the singularity of the thing is not able to destroy the thing it self ; and therefore ought in justice to be so proposed , as to leave men to examine and consider it ; and not to be rejected without either . 2. they say , let. p. 159. we teach there are three persons , who are severally , and each of them the true , and most high god ; and yet there is but one true , and most high god. ans . we teach , there are three divine persons , who together are the true and most high god. they are every one a divine person , or god , as they have every one a divine nature ; but they are together the true and most high god ; as that divine nature is but one , tho common to all three . the distinction arises from the distinct manner of subsistence ; but the unity from the sameness of essence . this speak three that are god , but not three gods , because these are all within the godhead , as having but one and the same substance ; and consequently can be but one god. 3. their objections arise from the want of parallel instances in nature ; whence they speak it absurd , and impossible : but the absurdity lies on their side , who measure supernatural things by natural , and will believe nothing of god but what they see in the creature ; as if an infinite nature must be in all things commensurable to the nature and thoughts of what is finite . 4. they declare it absurd and impossible , because we cannot demonstrate the manner of it , how three can be but one ; when th● thing being matter of pure revelation we had known nothing of it , unless it had b●en revealed ; and therefore now can know no more , than is revealed . now it is revealed that the father is god , the son is god , and the holy ghost is god ; and yet these are not three gods , but one god. but how this is , revelation doth not tell us . therefore we are not absurd , who teach what the scriptures teach ; but they are absurd in demanding more . the church indeed uses the distinction of personal and essential ; that they are three personally , and but one essentially ; that is , they are three persons , and but one god. not that these terms are fully , and so clearly expressive of this mystery , as to remove all cavils and difficulties ; but that she may ( the best she can ) express her own sense , the sense of antiquity , and the import of those scriptures that respect a trinity . let them give us more proper , and significant terms , and we will use them ; but let them not reject a divine truth for the sake of those terms which heresie hath forced us to make use of . 5. this method of theirs implies a whole train of absurdities , for we are to prove , first , [ that ] a thing is ; and then [ how ] it is : if we prove the former , that must be granted , because proved ; though we should never be able to prove the latter . but they ( contrary to all the rules of art , and method ) require us to prove [ how ] it is ; in order to their believing [ that ] it is : and do reject that part , which is proved , only because the other is not . according to this method they must deny a thousand things , which they see , which all mankind will say is absurd with a witness . they say p. 158 , that interpretation of scripture can never be true , that holds forth either a doctrine , or a consequence , that is absurd , contradictory , or impossible . ans . we readily grant it , and such is that of the anthropomorphites mentioned in the next page . for god is a spirit , but not a body . because body is compounded of parts , is subject to dissolution , and cannot be in all places at once ; therefore those scriptures , which ascribe humane parts to god , cannot be true in a literal sense ; but only in an improper one . and when these men have proved such an absurdity , contradiction , ot impossibility in the doctrine of a trinity , we will dispute no more . they may indeed prove that three men cannot be one ; or one man three ; but as the learned bishop of worcester , dr. stillingfleet , observes , they can never prove that an infinite nature cannot communicate it self to three different subsistences , without such a division as is among created beings : because a finite capacity can never comprehend the powers , and operations of an infinite nature . so absurd are these men as to decry revealed truths for absurd , and impossible , only because they cannot understand them . should they do the like in natural things , they would quickly become the contempt of mankind . we are not ashamed to own a mystery in the divine nature , when we find little but mystery in common nature her self . nor can we think it unreasonable that god should command us to believe that a thing is ; though he hath not told us how it is ; any more than it is unreasonable that nature should oblige us to assent , where the most refined reason can find no place of entrance . god hath revealed so much as is fit for us to know ; and ignorance is neither a sin , nor a reproach , where he hath not instructed us . but we must declare it not absurd only , but blasphemous too , to deny what god hath told us , only because he hath not told us more ; or not baffled our cavils by a demonstration ; as if , they dare not believe him any farther than they can see . a right nicodemus temper , which stumbles at divine truths only with an — how can these things be ? sect. 6. from their reasonable faith he proceeds to complement its professors for learned , and reasonable men : which ( he saith ) is their character among their worst adversaries . ans . we do not envy what learning , and reason they are thought to have : but we charge them with the abuse of both ▪ their guilt this way will easily appear to any , that can but understand an author ; their arguments being fallacious , and their quotations false . but as for this epistler ( poor man ) though we cannot admire his talents , yet we must declare he misimploys that little he hath . this will abundantly appear as from what he hath done , so likewise from his history of the sorinians , which we now proceed to . for p. 26 ▪ thus , those , whom we call socinians , were by the fathers , and first ages of christianity , called nazarens , by which name st. paul is accused before felix , acts 29. 5. ans . a christian signifies a disciple of christ ; and nazaren in this place a disciple of jesus of nazareth : and did then denote nor a party , but the whole body of christians : so epiphanius adv . haer. l. 1. to 2. haer. 29 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , all christians were then called nazarens ; and that by way of contempt from the jews , as they afterwards were galilaeans by the apostate . they are indeed branded for a sect in the place quoted , but not as a party broke off from the body of christians , but as the church of christ now separated from the jews . i beseech you then what peculiar honour , and advantage can the socinians claim to themselves from hence , was the thing they plead true , when , as christians , they have this honour , but in common with others ; and , as sorinians , can pretend to but one of the smallest shares of it ? the same father , c. 7. tells us of a sect of nazarens , even before the incarnation , tho indeed petavius rejects the account ; nor can i see any sufficient grounds for it ; but however i mention it to pleasure our socinians , who are seeking a pedigree . therefore take it thus , some of these ( he saith ) professed christ , but denied his divinity ; in other things they were jews still ▪ for they observed circumcision , the sabbath , and other ceremonies ; and therefore stood distinct both from jews and christians . whence jerom ▪ epist . ad aug. gives this character of 'em ; viz. they are called minaeans , or nazarens ; sed dum volunt & judaei esse , & christiani ; nec judaei sunt , nec christiani ; while they would pass both for jews and christians , they are neither . and if these men will claim from hence , you have in them this character of a socinian , that he is one who is neither ▪ jew nor christian . hence i suppose this epistler is none of the reasonable , or learned among them , since he hath mentioned this either to no purpose , or to his own disadvantage . he there saith , they were also called ebionites . ans . these were of two sorts , euseb . hist . l. 3. c. 27. the one held , that christ was born of joseth and mary ; the other of the holy ghost , and the virgin. but both observed jewish rites , and rejected st. paul's epistles , calling him an apostate . they received no gospel but sr. matthew , and that mutilated too : epiphan . adv . haer. l. 1. to 2. haer. 30. which petavius observes was depraved by them , and was the same with the gospel to the hebrews , which was used by none but hereticks . orig. cont . cels . l. 5. saith , they teach the law , and reject the epistles of st. paul. and optat ▪ mileu . l. 4. they held it was not the son , but the father that suffered . they were these men who troubled the apostles , and drew their disciples back to mosaic rites , under menander , cerinthus , and others , whose heresy was substantially the same for divers ages . whence st. paul brands them for false brethren , gal. 2. 4. elsewhere for corrupters of the word ; and such as he in wait to deceive . this was the reason they rejected his epistles , because he so constantly censures them . and ebion himself was branded by all antiquity for one of the gnostic hereticks , tertul ▪ de praes . haer. c. 33. yet our socinian author makes himself , and party , the same with these ! no matter what poyson men suck in ▪ so they deny the divinity of christ ! this one bleasphemy sanctifies all ! by this rule they are the same with simon magus , the father of hereticks ; and with the devil , the father of lies ; for they both denied the divinity of the son ; the one in making himself a saviour , the other in tempting him ; excepting this , that the devil afterwards confessed this truth , which the socinian still denies . an hopeful brood indeed , that glories in such fathers . he proceeds , the socinians were also called , artemonites , theodotians , symmachians , paulinists , samosatenians , photinians , and monarchians . ans . grant this , and it must be granted too , that as these men were always condemned for hereticks , so the socinians were always condemned in them . and strange it is they should always be in the right , and yet be always condemned for it ? they were called artemonites , photinians , &c. to signifie they were the followers , not of christ , but of artemon , photinus , &c. and did the socinians seriously reflect upon their blasphemies , and their palpable corruptions both of the letter and sense of the sacred scriptures , as well as of all antiquity ; it nearly concerns them to consider how far this is applicable to themselves ; that is , in plain english , whether the name [ socinian ] doth not better suit them than that of [ christian . ] the monarchians boasted , that they held the world was governed by a monarchy ; that is , by one god , in opposition to the orthodox , who ( they say ) introduced three gods , by the doctrine of a trinity . whence i grant , that these , and our socinians are men of the same pride and falshood . in answer to whom the orthodox always declared ( as we do ) that they held no other than a monarchy , and that the doctrine of a trinity is no way contradictory to this . for when some in tertullian adv . prax. c. 3. cried , monarchian tenemus ; we profess but one god. he proves , that the orthodox , or ( if he will ) the trinitarians , did hold but one god too : for proof of which he argues , c. 4. that he deduces the son from the substance of the father , and the holy ghost from both ; which doth no way destroy , but ( as he there pleads ) confirms a monarchy ; for being all three but of one substance , or nature , they can be all three but one god. upon the same bottom the most strenuous asserters of a trinity did ever maintain this doctrine . athanas . to. 1. cont . ari. ora. 5. declares , that the government of the world is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , by but one god. greg. n●z . who triumphed over eunomius , ora. 35. observes , that there are three opinions about god , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; anarchy , which ( with epicaras ) denies the divine government ; pelyarchy , which ( with the rest of the gentiles ) asserts its government by many gods ; and monarchy , which is by but one god. the two first ( he saith ) introduce confusion , while the last only can keep the world in order . and euseb . de eccles . theol. l. 1. c. 11. observes , that tho the church teaches that form ( meaning in the nicene creed ) god of god , yet she designs hereby not two gods , but two persons in the god head . now had these sveinians first destroyed this notion , by proving that a trinity must import , not three persons in the god head , but three gods ; and then valued themselves upon these names of monarchians , and vnitarians , they had acted like men : but their insisting upon these terms without disproving our doctrine , speaks them as wretched as their cause ; the one barren , the other blind , since both are forced to call in exploded cavils to support them . hence he proceeds to glory in some men of name among them , as theodotion and symmachus , both of whom translated the old testament into greek , and by eusebius are called ebionites , or nazarens . ans . eusebius speaks them ebionites , but not a word there of a nazaren ; under which name he vainly strives to sweeten himself , and party ; that they might seem to appear with some little face of honest christianity . we acknowledg their translation of the old testament , but being branded for ebionites , we must presume they denied great part of the new : as for symmachus , he is expresly said to reject the gospel of st. matthew . therefore since our socinians so passionately desire to pass for ebionites , that i may gratify 'em what i can ; i grant 'em there is one good reason why it should be so , and that is , as the ebionites reject some parts of scripture , and corrupt others ; so do the socinians too ; and now at length scoff at the divine authority of the whole . the matter is too plain to be denied ; i have sometimes heard it my self , and know of persons that complain of some under their charge , that are debauched in their principles and manners by such doctrines . but whether these are the strict fort of socinians , or socinians at large ▪ viz. atheists and deists that now heard among them , i think they ought to acquaint us . but let old theodotion , and symmachus be what they will , what is the glory of having these two on their side , when the whole church was against them ? it must be a miserable crap , where such gleanings are their vintage . but they have a third , it seems , paulus of samasatum , p. 27 ▪ a man both learned and eloquent . ans . he did indeed deny the divinity of the son , which is the only thing ( it seems ) that makes him great and good . for eusebius h. l. 7. c. 27. and the synodical letter , c. 30. say , he had neither wealth , nor learning , but made himself vastly rich by sacriledg , and oppression . his pride was unmeasurable , be walked the streets with guards — he abolished the psalms sung in honour of our saviour , and had others sung in praise of himself . he incouraged , and protected the wicked , gaining to his side the worst of men . prateolus among other things saith , he was proud and simple . he taught that christ was more for the jewish than the christian religion ; whence he taught circumcision : of a beggar he became rich by sacriledg , oppression and knavery . these are the characters of an heretie , which neither himself nor friends could ever answer , and whom the vilest object would blush to own , unless a socinian , who would fain adorn themselves with this mans glories ; like the wild savages , who dressed up themselves with the guts of beasts . his next man i photinus of si●mium , who being deposed by the council , his city would not part from him , till the emperor sent an army to expel him . ans . 1. praleonus , haev l. 14. 25 ▪ saith , photinus held that christ was a mere man , ex utroque sexu natum , born of both sexes ; but this the socinians deny , for they hold he was born of the holy ghost , and of the virgin ; therefore this letter is false in reckning photinus one of them . 2. but however an heretick he was , and therefore a party with the socinians ; and ( it seems ) so dear to his city , that the emperor was obiiged to expel him by an army . suppose it ; yet had this man considered how often constantius imposed his arian creatures by force and sometimes established 'em by blood ; he must have expected to lose more than he thought to have gained by this plea. 3. this is an appeal from the government both civil , and ecclesiastical to the mob ; an argument that his heresie had left him but few , if any friends of sense and judgment . he proceeds to eusebius , h. l. 5. c. 2 and theodoret. haer. fab. c. 2. de artem. and pretends , they say , that these nazarens constantly affirmed , that they derived their doctrine from the apostles , — and that it was the genenal doctrine of the church , till the popes , victor and zepherine , set themselves to root it up . ans . neither of these in the places quoted , mention a nazaren : but the heresie of arlemon , renewed by paulus samofatensis , who taught that christ is no more than man. eusebius saith indeed , there were some who affirmed that all the antients , and the apostles themselves , taught this doctrine , and that it continued till victor and zepherine . but he calls this an impiouse lye , and proceeds , perhaps this might seem credible , did not the sacred scriptures , and the writings of certain brethren , more antient than victor , contradict them ; i mean justin , miltiades ▪ tatian , clemens and many others ▪ in all whose books the divinity of christ is taught . for who knows not the writings of irenaeus , melito , &c in which christ is set forth as both god and man ? the psalms and canticles of the brethren written 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , from the beginning — ascribe a divinity to him . seeing then this was so long since the doctrine of the church , how can it be , that all men to the time of victor could teach that doctrine which these men hold ? — theodoret , in the place cited , saith , that artemon pretended the apostles taught that christ was a mere man , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . perverting the sense of the sacred scriptures . this exactly agrees with that of eusebius therefore this letter wisely refers us to those very places of antiquity , which declare that doctrine to be heresie , and condemn the maintainers of it of falshood and impudence , which yet it self would support . he told us the socinians are learned and reasonable men , but i hope this is not one of his proofs of it . however , the letter proceeds , victor ( say the socinians ) began to persecute the apostolic doctrine of one god , or ( which is the same ) that god is one in the year 194 but with little success , till that which was afterwards the doctrine of the arians , grew into general credit ; — for justin martyr , origen , and other principal fathers , teaching ( as the arians afterwards did ) that the father is before the son , and the holy ghost , in time , dignity , and power ; yet that the word , or son , — was ereated sometime before the world , — and that the holy ghost was the creature of the son. ans . the letter tells us , that the socinians say this ; and indeed it may pass for a socinian story ; for it hath not one word of truth in it . for , 1. the doctrine of one god , or that god is one ; that is , one person , as they explain it , never was the apostolic doctrine , as eus●bius , now quoted by himself , doth declare , both from the scriptures , and from the most ancient fathers , as well as from the hymns composed in honour of christ , from the beginning of the cospel . 2. the doctrine of one god , or that god is one ; that is , not one person exclusive of other persons , but one god exclusive of other gods , was the doctrine of the apostles and apostolic men , appears from the same place in eusebius , and from all the same topicks already mentioned . 3. that victor did persecute , and root out the heresie be contends for , doth not appear from any monuments of those times , nor is in any reason to be supposed , because that heresie had not then obtained in that church ; and what he did was only ( according to the common rules , and practice of the church ) to quash this heresie in its beginning . 4. the letter makes it , that that pretended persecutition did little succeed , till it was assisted by the doctrine of justin martyr , and origen , which supposes that their doctrine began under that persecution , which is impossible : for this persecution ( the letter saith ) began a. d. 194. but justin suffered about 30 years before that time , and origen did not appear till the middle of the age after . and , 5. neither these , nor any other fathers , from the apostles , to origen , did ever teach any such doctrine , which might be easily proved by an induction of particulars , so far as their works are come down to our hands . justin martyr saith indeed , apol. p. 60. that beside the father , we worship the son , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , in the second place ; and the holy ghost , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , in the third . now here is a priority of order or prace ; but where is that of time and power ? not in this father , i am sure , but in the socinian comment only . we charge him with falshood ; let him clear himself by a particular reference . what justin here saith , ever was , and still is the doctrine of the church . so novat . de trin. c. 31. pater qua pater — the father , as father , is before the son , and yet he declares , that the son is co-eternal and co-essential with the father ; which speaks ( as we said ) a priority of order or place , but not of time , because the father and son are co-eternal . this must necessarily be the sense of our justin ; for in the same apology , p. 64. he saith , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we worship god only . wence any man in his wits must conclude , that they held , that father , son and holy ghost are god ; else how could they worship all three ▪ and yet worship none but god ? and if they are god , they cannot be after the father , in time , or power , but must be co-eternal , and co-equal with him . had justin taught , that the son , and holy ghost are after the father in time , and yet had worshipp'd them , he would hereby have totally ruin'd the very reason , and design of this , as well as of other apologies ; which were purposely written to justifie the christians , who suffered any thing rather than worship the gentile gods , for this very reason , that they were not from eternity , and consequently were not gods , but creatures . our socinian ( it seems ) thinks it enough to name an author , tho he can find nothing in him to his purpose ; having neither authority , nor argument for what he saith . iren l. 3. c 26. indeavours to prove that the son is god by nature , and after some time spent on this argument , thus diligenter , igitur significavit spiritus sanctus , per ea quae dicta sunt , generationen ejus quae ex virgine , & substatiam quoniam deus . the blessed spirit diligently signifies by what things are spoken , his generation , which is of the virgin , and his substance as he is god. by his generation he intends his humane nature , and by his substance as god the divine . this ( he saith ) is expressed , isa . 7. 14. by that word [ immanuel ] god with us , of god in our nature . he proceeds ; his humanity appea●s from his eating butter , and hony , and his divinity from his choosing the good , and refusing the evil , v. 15. this last ( he saith ) is added , least by his eating butter , and hony , mude solummodo eum hominem intelligeremus , we should think he is merely man : and again the word [ immanuel ] intimates that we cannot see god in his own nature , but as he is manifested in our's . it is therefore impossible that irenaeus should hold that the son is god as to title , or office only , as the arians afterwards did ; when he so plainly teaches that he understood him to be god in the trinitarian sense , and that is in substance , or nature . this shows what sense we are to take him in , l. 1. c. 2. where he lays down this as one article in the christian faith , that christ is lord , and god ▪ which faith ( he faith ) the church throughout the world received , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from the apostles , and apostolic men : and c. 3. this faith the church keeps as if she had but one soul , and but one heart ; where observe 1. that [ god ] must here signifie god by nature , or substance , because he so explained himself in the place before quoted . 2. it is impossible that the doctrine against the divinity of the son could be the doctrine of the church from the apostles to victor ; when the deity of the son was the doctrine of the whole church from the apostles to irenaeus ; who was cotemporary with victor , as appears from the fragments of his epistle to this victor himself in euseb . h. l. 5. c. 24. clemens of alexandria , who flourished under victor , and zepherine both ▪ is as clear in this matter , ●as pen can write , for he not only saith adm . ad gent. that christ is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . both god and man ; and paed. l. 2. he is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . which i can render no better than in the words of the apostle , 1 tim. 3. 16. god manifest in the fiesh , but he also ascribes those things to the son , which all men must grant us , can be true of none , but god : for strom. l. 7. the son is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 indivisible , removes not from place to place ; but is in all places , but is contained in none . again he is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 all mind , all eye , beholding all things . this sufficiently proves clemens no arian , since he so manifestly declares the divine nature of the son. strom. l. 5. he collects certain notions out of plato , which ( he saith ) can signify nothing else , but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . the holy trinity . for he puts the father as the cause of all things , then descends to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a second , who is conversant about second things , and to a third , who is imployed about third things ; he seems to understand by the former the son , who continues ; and by the latter the holy ghost , who finishes things . this ( he saith ) plato had from the hebrews ; which argument he abounds in , pleading that the gentiles had their choicest notions from the jews mediately , or immediately . but whether this was the sense of plato or not ; is totally foraign from my argument . it is enough to me that this father is so far from being either arian or socinian , that he looked upon the doctrine of a trinity as so plain a truth , that he thought an heathen could spell it out of the old-testament . tertullian wrote under zepherine , if not under vict r too ; and yet adv . prox. c. 2. satih , the divinity of the son was taught from the beginning : and what he understands by his divinity , himself explains c. 3. where he declares that the son is of the same substance with the father . these are most undenyable proofs of the shameless impudence of this letter , which will have all the principle fathers of those times to be patrons of the arian herefy . as for origen , he not only lived in the age after victor , but also upon revel . 1. 8. i am alpha , and omega , , the first , and the last , — the almighty ; doth declare that in these words st. john asserts the divinity of the son. these things so totally ruine this part of the letter , which would have arianism the swaying religion of those times , that i should perswade my self they would never more offer these falshoods to the world ; did i not find , they have the confidence to revive old rotten heresies ; and both to adorn , and support their own by them , who were the worst of men , as well as the most erroneous of christians . however the letter proceeds p. 28 , 29 this doctrine being advanced by justin , origen , and others , became the more currant doctrine of the church , till in the council of nice it was condemned , and another more popular ( and so more taking ) than that ( as attributing to the son eternity , and equality with the father ) did generally obtain . ans . as justin , origen , and others of note in the church ( as the letter speaks ) never taught any such doctrine ; so the council of nice did establish no other , but what had always been the doctrine of the church , according to that of athanasius de synod . nicaen . decret . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the faith established at nice , is the faith of the catholick church . what this father saith , we may easily prove both as to the doctrine it self , and also as to the terms , that express it . 1. the doctrine established at nice is this , that the son is of the same substance , essence , or nature with the father ; and therefore is properly god as the father is ; but that this was always the doctrine of the church , is sufficiently evident from what we have already cited from justin martyr , irenaeus , clemens of alexandria , and tertullian . to whom i shall add ignatius , who was cotemporary with the apostles . that his epistles are genuine , is acknowledged by their beloved sandius ; and is proved by doctor peirson against dailly , even to the shame of all future doubts , and opposition . these often stile the son god , epist . ad s nyr . begins thus , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i glorifie jesus christ , who is god. and p. 7. vos . edit . he asserts the divinity again . but i refer the reader to one place , which can never be evaded by any arian , or socinian artifice ; and that in his epist . ad ephes . there is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . in which words the author doth distinguish between the humane and divine nature of christ ; for he catnal and spiritual ; of mary and of god ; he is begotten and unbegotten ; i. e. begotten as man , and unbegotten as god : for his eternal generation respects not his nature , by which he is god , but his person , by which he is the son of god. again , he is passible , and impassible ; that is , passible , as man ; so not only his body was peirced ▪ and crucified ; but mat. 26. 38. his soul was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , exceeding sorrowful ; or encompassed round with sorrows ; whence proceeded his agonies and bloody sweat : therefore he is impossible only as god. this ( i think ) considered together with the whole quotation , demonstrates , that it is the design of this author to assert the divine nature of christ , because nothing but that can be vnbegotten , and impassible . 2. the terms in which this council doth assert the divine nature of the son , are , that the son is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , consubstantial , or of the same substance with the father ; but this was no invention of that council . for iren. l. 3. c. 26. but now quoted , saith ▪ that his generation of the virgin speaks him man ; but his substance speaks him god : and if so , he must be god in substance ; and if god in substance , he must be as the same substance with the father ; because there can be but one divine substance , essence , or nature ; as there is but one god. tertullian is more large in this point ; for adv . p●ax . c. 2. and 3. he expresly saith , that the father , son and holy ghost , are three ; — non substantia , not in substance ; that is , they are not substantially distinct ; but they are vnius substantiae , of one , and therefore of the same substance . now , i pray , what is the difference between the fa h r and the son 's being vnius substantiae , of our substance ; and between the son's being ( in the phrase of nice ) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 consubstantial with the father ? even none . for he that is consubstantial with another , must be of the same substance with that other . in the same place the same father varies the phrase , but keeps to the matter ; saying , that he deduces the son de substantia patris , from the substance of the father ; which implies what is imported by the two other phrases . and this ( he saith ) was taught ab i●tio evangelii , from the beginning of the gospel . therefore the nicene council did determine no more in this partscular , than what was taught by the church , even from the beginning of the church it self . so plain is it , that the nicene fathers did neither invent any new terms , nor impose any new doctrine ; but did only declare and confirm that which was the doctrine of the ▪ hurch from the apostles themselves . this gives credit to not only what we have quoted from athunasius already , but also to that passage in his epistle ad episc . in afric . that the bishop of rome and alexandria , did from an hundred and thirty years since condemn those who denied that the son is of the same substance with the father . but the arian doctrine , which teaches , that the son was indeed before the world , but not from eternity ; and that there was a time in which the son was not , is no where found in the first ages of the church ; but was condemned as a new monster in religion in the fourth . so athanas . cont . art. or a. 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 — who hath heard such things as these ? and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . this is not from the fathers , but is of yesterday . and hilar. pict . episc . ad constant . august . l. it is novella lu●s , a new pest ; a pest that hath no more of antiquity , than of trnth to sweeten it . and indeed it was not any of the ancient fathers ( as this letter falsly pretends ) , but arius , a presbyter of alexandria , in the 4 th age of the church , that invented that heresie , from whom it took the name of arianism . as he was she first , who in this way sought to undermine , and subvert the divinity of the son , so he had somewhat a like exit with judas , who betrayed him . for as this traytor burst asunder , and his bowels gushed out ; so this heretic , presently upon his perjury , whereby he would seem to abjure , but still retain the poyson of his heresie , voided his bowels in a common jakes . this was thought a warning-piece to the arians then ▪ and ought to be considered by the socinians now ; since they have improved this heresie , as the pharisees did their proselytes , by making it sevenfold more the child of hell than it was ; it being in some degrees more gross ▪ daring , and anti-scriptural ; and carried on by no less falshood , treachery , and wickedness than the other ; excepting the formality of an oath , and that blood , and tortures , which these men have not the power of . the letter proceeds , p. 29. but did superstition stop here ● no. for there shortly arose another doctrine , that the son and holy ghost , are the sa●e god with the father , not only ( as the nicene fathers explained the matter ) by vnity of wills , and specifick identity , or sameness of substance , but by numerical , or true identity , and sameness of substance and nature . ans . 1. this council did intend a numerical unity , or sameness of substance ▪ that there might be no room left for any cavils about three gods. 2. the church was so far from any new doctrine , that that age , as well as the next did celebrate this creed as the standing rule of faith to all the churches . epiphan . adv . haer. l 2. to c. haer. 72. calls it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the ecclesiastical rule of faith. greg. nys . to 2. cart . eunom . l. 1. in our creed there is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the word consubstantial , which must be the creed of nice ▪ and yet this is ours . basil to 3 epistle 6. recites this , and calls it the creed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , in use with you . ambros . de fid . l. 1. c. 8 , 9. quotes part of this creed about the consubstantiality , and then saith , this is the doctrine of the church , which anathematizes them ▪ that teach otherwise . and evag. h. l 3. c. 17. this was used in baptism then , as the creed called the apostles is now with us ; and was confirmed by the next general council at constantinople . they all kept up to this rule , and intended the same thing ; though they did not all agree in the manner of explaining , and proving it . what room then there could be here left for any new doctrine soon after this council at nice , i am yet to learn. sect. 7. hence he proceds to some eminent authors , who ( the letter saith ) are either arian or socinian . 1. erasmus is thought an arian , p. 31. to coulour which pretence , he quoates him upon philip. 2. 6. and ephes . 5. 5. ans . the former text , he thinks , doth respect not his nature , but the manner of his appearance and behaviour : but yet he grants us that christ is god , though he thinks this text doth not prove it . and on ephes . 5. 5. the kingdom of god , and of christ : he declares that these words do not deny the divinity of the son. but had this letter pursued truth , and not the support of an error , it would likewise have told the reader , that upon john 1. 1. the word was god ; he asserts that there is divinam essentiam tribus personis communem ; a divine essence common to three persons : which is all we contend for ; and which alone speaks erasmus himself as true a trinitarian , as the author of the athanasian creed . his paraphrase upon this clause [ in the beginning was the word ] saith , the eternal word was with the eternal father ] yet by the word he understands not the command , power or wisdom of god , but a person , as appears from the last quotation before this ; and consequently he here asserts both the personality , and eternity of the word , which is the very doctrine we teach . john 8. 5 , 8. before abraham was , i am , he renders , pri●squam nasceretur , before abraham was born ; to the end he might distinguish ( as he saith himself ) : the manner of abrahams existence from christ's . abraham was in time , but [ semper est christus ] christ is always ; which directly contradicts both the socinian , who denies christs existence before his incarnation ; and also the arian , who denies his existence from eternity . upon these words he quotes st. austin , who glosses thus , abraham was made , but christ is ; that denotes a creature , this a being eternally existing . it is plain then that erasmus taught a trinity . and certainly he would not think that the ignorant , and dull side of the question ( as the letter speaks ) which he teaches for orthodox divinity . all the difference between him and our selves is this ; that we agree in the same doctrine , but differ only in some of those mediums that should prove it . for which reason he ought to be read with caution and judgment . the letter saith that this author in his scholia on the third tome of st. jerom's epistles , denies that the arians are hereticks . ans . had he told us upon what epistle these scholia are , we might have examined the place without much loss of time : but i presume , he thinks himself safe under so loose a reference , hoping none will turn over a volume to disprove him . in his epistle to bilibaldus thus , i ( saith erasmas ) could be of the arian perswasion , if the church approved it . ans . the author thus , cum arianis , & pelagianis sentire possim , si probasset eccesia quod illi docuerunt : nec mihi non sufficiunt verba christi , sed mirum videri non debet , si sequor interpretem ecclesiam , cujus authoritate persuasus credo scripturis canonicis . i could be of the same mind with the arians , and pelagians , if the church had approved what they taught : not that the words of christ do not satisfy me , but it ought not to seem strange , if i follow the judgment of the church , by whose authority i believe the canonical scripture , which place is certainly against him : for 1. he saith the words of christ do satisfie him , i. e. as to arianism , and pelagianism , before mentioned . 2. he puts arianism , and pelagianism together , implying that he had no more favour for that , than for this ; which i do not remember he was ever charged with . therefore 3. his design is not to favour this , or t'other heresy , but only to shew how far he could give up his faith to the judgment of the church : and consequently his own sense must be much distant from both these perswasions , else this could be no argument of his wonderful submission to the churches authority . a romanist may make good advantage of this , and therefore the paris doctors never put it among their censures : but it no more helps the socinian , than the things he calls his arguments , and demonstrations . he proceeds p. 31. grotius is socinian all over , and p. 32. there is nothing , in all his annotations which they , viz. the socinians , do not approve , and applaud . ans . upon joh. 1. 1. these words [ in the beginning ] grotius will have to be taken from gen. 1. 1. and understands them of the creation properly , or of the beginning of the creature : as he doth also v. 2. [ by him were all things made . ] for which he quotes the epistle of barnabas , justin , athenagoras , tatian , tertullian , and others . this word [ was ] he renders jam tum erat , then was , or did exist , when all creatures began : by which existence before time he understands an eternal existence : and yet he holds the [ word ] or son not for the command or simple power of god , but for a person . where observe that grotius teaches that the son is a person eternally existing , who ( in a proper sense ) made , or created the world , and if either arian or socinian approve , or applaud this they must each depart from his own heresy . therefore when upon those words , colos . 1. 16. by him ; viz. the son ; as grotius himself takes it , were all things , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 [ created ] ; he saith , this word is sometimes applied to the new creature ; we must understand him , as shewing the various acceptations of the word , not as designing hereby to deny the son to be creator , because he so expresly ascribes creation to him upon that text of st. john. 3. in p. 32. he pretends , that petavius grants , that the fathers before the nicene council , did agree in their doctrine concerning god , with the socinian , and concerning the son , and holy spirit , with the arians . ans . 1. petavius saith no such thing . let the socinian vindicate himself , by referring us to the places . 2. had he said so , the quotations we have given the readet out of ignacius , justin ; iraeneus , clemens , tertullian , and others , would abundantly confute him . 3. patanius himself was a trinitarian , as appears from what he hath wrote upon this argument ▪ and , 4. he did not accuse these fathers of arianism , or socinianism , but only censured some of those arguments , by which they would establish the doctrine of a trinity . 4. the letter reports episcopius suspected of arianism p 34 , 35. he saith , the father is so first , as to be first in order ( i. e. in time . ) ans . 1. episcopius saith , the father is first in order which we all grant : but it is the socinian comment , that makes the first in order to be the first in time , which we deny . because though the father is first in order , yet the son is co-eternal with the father , as before . 2. this author denies a co-ordination , and asserts a subordination of persons in the trinity : but this subordination doth not destroy , but only explains the doctrine of a trinity , as is noted already . and , 3. in his institut . theol. l. 4. c. 32. he ascribes a divine nature to father , son , and holy ghost , and teaches that they are all properly persons : and if this be arianism , or socinianism , we are all such . 5. he complements his dear friend sandius for a gentleman of prodigious industry , and reading : and no less ingenious than learned . ans . whatever his industry , and learning was , i m●st deny both his judgment and honesty . 1. his judgment . for he knows not how to distinguish between the genuine , doubtful , and spurious writings of the antients ; but thinks clemens the father of the constitutions under his name : which is utterly impossible , because l. 7 ▪ c. 48. the author mentions three bishops of jerusalem made by the apostles ; james , simeon , and judas : but st. john , the last of the twelve died , and this clemens himself suffered martyrdom in the year 100. while simeon lived about seven years after : how then the apostles could appoint judas his successor , or clemens , their scribe record it , neither their learned sandius , nor our socinians , those men of wit , and reason , can resolve me . they , as well as the apostolic canons , were probably written about the end of the second century , and seem to owe themselves ( excepting their corruptions ) to clemens of alexandria . he receives likewise the epistles ascribed to ignatius ; and de vet. script . eccles . he would prove the legitimacy of that ad philip. by this argument , viz. origen , who flourished about the middle of the third age , hath something upon st. luke , like something in that epistle ; where observe . 1. origen doth not mention either ignatius , or this epistle . 2. ignatius , and origen might hit upon somewhat like notions without communication . and , 3. these ascribed epistles are not mentioned by eusebius , jerom , or any other hefore them ; whence we ought in all reason to reject them . dr. peirson , late bishop of chester observes , they appeared not till 400 years after ignatius , whence he declares them spurious vind. epist . 8. ignat. c. 10. 2. by such intolerable errors he creates difficulties to himself . for the design of his history is to prove that all antiquity is arian : bur the epis . ad heron. which is one of the ascribed , saith , that if any asserts that christ is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , a mere man ( which phrase was always used in opposition to his divinity ▪ iren. l. 3. c. 26. and eusebius in the case of ebion ) the same is a jew and a murtherer of christ . now had he like a man of art , and judgment , rejected these epistles , he had removed this block , at which he must now stumble and fall . 2. i deny his honesty . for hist . l. 1. secul . 1. he will have the creed called the apostles , to be composed by them , to be the only creed used in the church ; and that very creed too , which was established at nice : and that evag. h. l. 3. c. 17. saying , we are baptized into a creed composed by 318 bishops , intended no other but this : when this was never mentioned in that council , and the concert is totally ruined by the testimonies we have already produced upon this argument , sect. 4. should i draw out all the instances of weakness and knavery , i ●hould leave but little of that book behind me . a fit man for an ecclesiastical historian , whose want of judgment , and honesty makes his writings like a sword in some mens hands , dangerous to them , that come in the reach of it . sure i am , no student ought to read him till he is well acquainted with the true state , and doctrine of antiquity . his accounts of antiquity , and the brief history of the socinians , may go together ; and if each will be pretenders to wit , and reason , i matter not , so long as we have on our side better pretensions to truth , and honesty . dr. wallis in one of his letters gives an account of this sandius's conversion , and his dying in the trinitarian faith. i earnestly pray that the same mercy , and goodness , would open the eyes of all arians and socinians , that they may no longer lye under strong delusions , and the belief of a lye but may come to the knowledg of the truth , and be saved . finis . boeks printed for john everingham at the star in ludgate-street . an enquiry into several remarkable texts of the old and new testament , which contain some difficulty in them : with a probable resolution of them , in two parts . by john edwards , b. d. sometime fellow of st. john's colledge in cambridge . a new discourse of trade , wherein is recommended several weighty points relating to companies of merchants . the act of navigation , naturalization of strangers ; and our woollen manufactures , the ballance of trade , and the nature of plantations , and their consequences in relation to the kingdom , are seriously discussed . and some proposals for erecting a court of merchants for determining controversies , relating to maritime affairs , and for a law for transferrance of bills of debts , are humbly offered . by sir josiah child . miscellaneous essays : by monsieur st. euremont , translated out of french , with a character , by a person of honour here in england , continued by mr. dryden . monarchia microcosmi : the origin , vicissitudes , and period of vital government in man. for a farther discovery of diseases , incident to human nature . by everard maynwaringe , m. d. the epistle and preface to the book against the blasphemous socinian heresie vindicated, and the charge therein against socinianism, made good in answer to two letters / by j. gailhard ... gailhard, j. (jean) 1698 approx. 223 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 47 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2008-09 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a41509 wing g121 estc r40436 19319966 ocm 19319966 108605 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a41509) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 108605) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 1670:28) the epistle and preface to the book against the blasphemous socinian heresie vindicated, and the charge therein against socinianism, made good in answer to two letters / by j. gailhard ... gailhard, j. (jean) [2], 90 p. printed for j. hartley ..., london : 1698. includes advertisementi: p. 90. reproduction of original in the bodleian library. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng gailhard, j. -(jean). -blasphemous socinian heresie disproved and confuted. socinianism. 2007-01 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2007-01 apex covantage keyed and coded from proquest page images 2007-04 john latta sampled and proofread 2007-04 john latta text and markup reviewed and edited 2008-02 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion the epistle and preface to the book against the blasphemous socinian heresie vindicated ; and the charge therein against socinianism , made good. in answer to two letters . by j. gailhard , gent. hinc drances , thersites inde . if any teach otherwise and consent not to wholsom words , even the words of our lord jesus christ , and the doctrine which is according to godliness : he is proud , knowing nothing , but doting about questions and strifes of words , whereof cometh envy , strife , railings , evil surmisings : perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds , and destitute of the truth , supposing that gain is godliness : from such withdraw thy self , 1 tim. vi . 3 , 4 , 5. london : printed for j. hartley , over-against grays-inn-gate in holborn . 1698. an answer to two letters . having lately publish'd a book against the present great grievance of the nation in matters of religion , socinianism i mean , and knowing how the pen-men of that party are now fallen in a course of writing from time to time against what comes out in opposition to them , i indeed looked for an answer , but thought they would have gone about to refute my arguments , as 't is the usual way of those who follow the school rules ; but i therein find my self disappointed , and am apt to believe that these men do so far depend upon what their great masters have done , as to think they now may sit still under the shadow of their works ; for it is plain , say they , that the most polite and rational modern sermons and other moral discourses , are extreamly beholden to socinus his works . yet instead of what i expected , out comes from behind the curtain and in disguise , one of those fancies which our ideists are so fond of , under the name of an apology for the parliament , &c. and this in two letters by different hands . i must need fear what will become of me ! but sirs , it is not in you the part of generous enemies , tho' to support a weak cause , to come two against one ; yet for what they have done , 't is no matter , for truth and i against any two or ▪ twenty such hands : and the truth now in question , tho' they would have driven it into corners , hath gotten the upper-hand , and is so strongly settled , that it hath disheartened its adversaries from making any attempt upon it ; and they have chosen to meddle with other things , and leave that untouched . this answer no answer , this apology or two letters , having been sent me down into the country , i fell on perusing of them , to see what they contained as to matters in question and the cause in hand , but 't was not to be found , and so i concluded it to be lost among them , hardly any steps thereof being left , only instead of it , i lighted upon reflections and invectives ( which that sort of men are full of and very free to bestow ) against the author of the book : they fly off from the point and avoid coming to discuss it : what notion of theirs , can this way of deciding controversies , be grounded upon ? no answer in the least to any of my arguments , tho' i had given them a large field : they being a people not usually mute , may not i reasonably infer , that seeing upon things in question they say nothing , then they have nothing to say , and so yield the cause , if not positively , yet by a good consequence ; thus they save me the trouble to refute any thing , or to add to what i said upon the matter , tho' about it i have many more things to say . the author of the first letter gives a convincing and short reason , why he answers none of my arguments , i thought you an unfit writer on behalf of the trinity , and therefore did not so much as read over your book ; tho' in another place he saith , i have dipp'd into it here and there , and have staged it over . this is magisterially enough decided ; but there is in such decisions more mercury than salt : you say i am an unfit writer upon those matters , and yet you did not so much as read over my book ; this is wisely and learnedly spoken , 't is an unanswerable argument , but if you had given any for me to answer , i might well have desired the reader , by this paw of yours , to have judged of the lion , how great a logician you are to draw conclusions out of premises . but what would ye have done if there had been no epistle nor preface to carp at ? then 't is likely you would have taken no notice of my book , or else why do ye leave the principal for the accessary ? such a carriage gives me cause to suspect , that seeing you take no notice of it , you look upon 't as a morsel of too hard a digestion for your stomach , therefore you meddle not with it : ye answer it not , but invectives against the author must do the work ; for indeed whilst in these letters i was seeking for what i could not find , i found what i was not looking for , soft words and hard arguments from men who would seem to have engross'd all reason unto themselves , i sought for , but found very soft arguments , if any at all , yet hard words : truly sirs , to answer in your own way , i could almost say , i have happen'd to tread upon a nest of wasps , so had cause to expect some of them would come out buzzing about my ears , that 's all the harm they can do me , if they intend any thing more , then i hope they lost their point and missed their aim . i think that what i said to prove my assertions , might in some degree have been taken notice of : but seeing they have no mind to meddle with nor remove the weight , there let it ly for me ; yet tho' as to the matter they offer'd nothing to answer , rather than to be altogether silent , we must turn to what they otherwise have started up , tho' not belonging to the subject of my book : they act like those who shot at a man from behind a hedge , and so think they may with safety to themselves wound their enemy who cannot well close up with them ; for they , with being nameless and in their holes , have taken sufficient care to provide against it , and none can swear against them . ye are the men : however , because such men would call one dumb , who should say nothing to their imputations and misconstructions , tho' never so groundless , i shall by the grace of god take notice of most things in the letters , and therein hope to clear my self of their aspersions , also to demonstrate how they are guilty of some things which they would charge me with , or of the same nature , and i shall examine what here and there they say about matters in question : sometimes i shall answer both letters together in those things which tend to the same purpose , and at other times asunder and as i shall see cause : however i shall not do 't in order , but here and there according as i light upon the things in the letters , which i intend to examine one after another . with an idle and ridiculous fancy of an apology , they would bring me under a necessity of making my own : fervency of zeal for the glory of god , is the first thing and in the first line , laid to my charge ; but this , paul brings me off when he said , it is good to be zealously affected always in a good thing : and that the thing in question which i appear for , is good , very good , i appeal not only to scripture , but also to the testimony of the whole primitive church , of all christian protestant churches , specially of our church in this kingdom ; and if according to their principles of a private judge i must have it within me , i want it not ; for in my conscience i am so fully satisfied it is good , that thorough god's grace strengthning me , i am ready to lay down my life , and that 's for the same cause for which my blessed saviour laid down his , and so many more after him , namely that he was truly , that is in a true and proper sense , god's own and only begotten son : and when upon this cause of his , men are neither cold nor hot , he spueth them out of his mouth . after this , out comes a volley of trash , the product of an elevated fancy and inflamed imagination , whereby things of moment are wrested and ridiculed , tho' may be , the party takes it for a great piece of wit : and whether i will or not , he would make me to say that which i never so much as thought upon ; and because he would make of it a stage-play , tho' very insipid and profane , he brings me in as postponing the glory of god , as he saith , to temporal concerns ; how this can agree with what he said just before of my fervent zeal for that glory , let him declare : i think by means of the word postpone , i may understand something of the writers meaning , and i believe some among them could tell news , how it came to pass that my book which was intended to have been published by candlemas term , for all the endeavours used to hasten it out , came forth only the day before the prorogation : i have cause to suspect there was some tampering by a sort of men diligent in their concerns and of unwearied endeavours to promote their cause , for the children of this world are in their generation wiser than the children of light : i doubt some of them plowed with my heifer , however let none boast before the time , for thorough god's direction that which last year was not done , as indeed for that reason it could not be , may happen to be done this ; however to god we leave the success . yet as in my preface i gave an account of the effectual care which the parliament of scotland had taken to put a stop to your damnable heresies in that kingdom ; so now i must tell that which ye know well enough , but may be every one else doth not , how in ireland about the beginning of september last , the committee for religion having examined the carriage of one of your gang , m. toland , who , no doubt , was gone over to promote the cause , and made their report to the house , immediately they passed a vote , that his book should be burnt by the hand of the executioner , and his person taken into custody to be proceeded against ; but he finding the place too hot for him , made a shift to escape and come over , or else he had been laid up , but we hope here he shall either be followed by divine mercy , or meet with human justice ; for we have ground to think that the parliament of england , with as much zeal as those of scotland and of ireland , will appear for the cause and honour of god , and as one of the wolves hath been unkennel'd in ireland , so that same and others , shall here be so too : and 't is but what all obstinate leaders of such miserable wretches who deny the lord that bought them , do justly deserve , to be branded with b , that every one might know them for blasphemers by reason of the blasphemous , heretical , and impious opinions , which those despisers of god , with impunity , whereat they grow bolder , do daily publish and spread abroad , and that in so bold and licentious a manner , as was hardly ever allowed in any christian state. the emperor theodosius left a precedent in such cases , for by a law he ordered the fifteen volumes which impious porphiry had written against the christian religion , every where to be burnt and destroyed . and indeed 't is but what the anti-christian writings of such miscreants as were celsus , porphyrius , julian the apostate and the like deserve to be : their works were levelled against the true god in the most holy trinity , and against the person and divinity chiefly of our blessed lord and saviour , and are not the socinian books so too ? the like crime deserves the like punishment ; this i speak in commendation of the zeal and justice of the house of commons in ireland : something more i must say , and tho' i am sure to be disowned by socinians and socinianizers , yet i hope not so by those who are really concern'd for the honour of the glorious trinity and for their religion ; 't is this , it were but justice and christian prudence , if the pen-men of the antitrinitarian and antichristian doctrines were burnt at the fingers end , to disable them from dropping their poison upon paper : if only paring their nails could do 't , it would be well ; but i am of opinion , that alone will not do 't , nor gospel-arguments , but the authority of the law must : and this the parliament of ireland in their wisdom have found necessary , and being satisfied how things of that nature come within the compass of their jurisdiction , tho' m. toland in his letter to a member of the house of commons there , pag. 32. declares he is a perfect stranger to any such power claim'd by that honourable body , tho' in himself , he was conscious he might not say so in the original copy : and his apologist is of the same opinion , tho' he more cunningly meddles with it , and brings it in as the judgment , as he saith , of several members of the committee , pag. 23. which are but reflections insinuated against the right of parliaments in general , and so reaches every parliament wheresover . but there are several flaws in that apology . here i meet with some apologist whom i know well by the stile , tho' others of the kind make use of the same ink ; such are in jest apologists for parliaments , but in earnest , against ; indeed i think that to study that common place , and to erect themselves into apologists , consists with their own interest ; for on their side , there is more need of apologies than of panegyricks . but i must speak of other things . both writers come upon me with a charge indeed , i am a sanguinary man , a brother to papists , a bonner , a persecutor , a bloody-minded believer , and such other words to the same purpose : i shall not say this is much dust , but great thunder-claps , which shall end like crackling of thorns under the pot. the ground of all this is my humble address to both houses of parliament , that they would be pleased to take some care of the cause of christ , and to put a curb upon his enemies ; such i call those who would rob him of his divine nature and attributes , and attempt to overthrow the first article of our faith , of one god in three persons . there are some men in the world , that if one doth but look them in the face , they are apt to cry out , murther , whether or not at that time a guilty conscience flies into their faces , god knows ; that same may happen sometimes to disturb them so far , as to make them grosly mistake in their judgment as about things so about persons , as they are very much in me , who in my heart and opinion am as much against persecution upon account of religion , and for a due regard to tender consciences , as any man in the world. when the question is about indifferent and not very material things , then for peace and charity 's sake , gentleness and meekness ought to prevail , but it must be otherwise when fundamentals are not only shaken but overturned ; and when religion it self is pulled up by the very root , as 't is when humane reason is made a standing rule whereby to judge of revelation , when the doctrines of the most holy trinity , of the satisfaction which the lord jesus hath by the sacrifice of himself made for our sins , with other things thereupon depending , and what scriptures with the received creeds of the primitive church do affirm about it , and what our church believes ; i say it ought to be otherwise when all these lie at stake and are blown up at onc● : then or never 't is high time to speak out especially when we see , how boldly and openly these things are carried on : we use to say , there is a difference between mad and stark staring mad ; people distemper'd in their minds , are dealt withal according unto the nature and degree of their distemper ; some confin'd to their chambers , others to their beds , others bound and chained up : the like we observe in the distempers of the politick body ; he who rashly speaks ill of the government deserves some punishment , but not so great as he who violently attempts to overthrow it , or to destroy the persons in whose hands god hath lodged the power ; so it must be in spiritual diseases which affect the body of the church ; and these several ways i mean , when i speak of a true and proper remedy , whereof the applying depends upon the skill of the physician ; 't is not any effect of cruelty , to make incisions , and cut off dead flesh out of a wound to prevent a gangrene , nor to restrain people that have the plague from coming among those that are free from it , for fear of infecting them : so 't is no persecution to take care that hereticks , ( such all orthodox christian churches take socinians to be ) do not come in among those that are sound in the faith : this great danger may in a due respect and humble way be represented to the superiour power , whose office is to prevent and remedy inconveniences . this i humbly conceive to be a branch of the right of the subject , and it may not be called , to prescribe them what to do ; they cannot be every where , nor know every thing , therefore stand in need of being informed : this is the usual course of justice ; for no redress when no complaint is made ; and i was so far from presuming to prescribe therein , that in my epistle , pag. 18. i declare against it . all that are no socinians are agreed how their tenets about the most holy trinity are heretical , and consequently contrary to the doctrine of the church , as by law established : now the laws of the land do forbid any thing to be published that is contrary to it ; it is known to all , how socinians do in print , and otherwise , daily publish their blasphemous and heretical opinions , whereby they break the law , the consequence is good to say , they deserve to be punished , as do all law-breakers ; and i hope they cannot pretend to come in within the act of indulgence ; tho they deny their opinions to be heretical , yet that 's not enough for them to be accounted innocent ; for 't is very rare to see a guilty man , when he is lyable to , and sure of punishment , to confess his own guilt , yet his bare denyal doth not free him from it ; for if to deny was enough to clear , no man could be found guilty . both authors of the letters are very angry , and much cry out against what i said about a field of honour , which is , in relation to the cause , to be defended against its enemies , and not to any capital punishment , which had been an imprudent thing of me , and contrato my inclination , to have suggested against hereticks ; but these gentlemen , who often call me hot and fiery , hastily skipp'd from the second page of my epistle to the seventeenth of the same , to make the field of honour to be smithfield : these two things are written too far asunder , to be joyned together , as indeed there was in my thoughts nothing like smithfield , when i was insinuating , that as god's work is glorious , so the occasion offer'd to promote it is as a field of honour , as expressed in the place , and what there i mentioned of one who for socinianism suffered in smithfield , was not of my own , but in consequence of a citation out of sir thomas ridley ' s view of the civil and ecclesiastical laws , where he saith , against such is provided sentence of death ; and there i gave two instances , how what he said had been executed : let any impartial man peruse the places , and they shall find it to be as i say , and then may take notice how rash , hasty , and unjust are these men , who pretend to so much calmness and meekness of spirit , in making reflections upon others ▪ who , through god's grace , have a more christian charitable frame of spirit than themselves : we indeed hate abominable blasphemies and heresies , but neither blasphemers nor hereticks , for some of them , god , if he pleases , may shew mercy , and give repentance unto ; their conversion not their ruin is wish'd for , and also endeavours are used to preserve others from being infected . the true and short account of the business is this ; things being in the state and condition as i represent in my epistle and preface , i looked upon it as a duty incumbent upon me as a christian , with what little strength god hath given me , to lay it out in the defence of the most just and best cause in the world , namely , the due honour of the most holy and adorable trinity , and the divinity of our blessed lord and saviour , and of the holy ghost , which so many legions of martyrs have freely shed their blood , and gloriously laid down their lives for : i went not about to support it with enticing words of man's wisdom , or with studied , affected , pompous expressions , which only bad causes stand in need of ; but as our faith doth not stand in the wisdom of men , but in the power of god , so i endeavoured with good arguments drawn out of his word , which hitherto remain unanswered , to confute heresie and sophistry : one must not so much mind words and stile , when the question is about things . those men who mind more how they say than what they say , desire their own glory more than the good of others : in a declamation one hath more freedom of stile than in difficult and deep points of divinity , philosophy , and mathematicks ; certain matters are not adapted to a lofty stile ; they that are so fond of this more than of the other , are like those who prefer the shell before the oyster , or the stone before the kernel . now to come to that which concerns me , i say , it being no evil thing to promote a good cause by all lawful means , for right and favour to countenance it , are not incompatible , not to be wanting in any thing depending upon me ; the parliament then sitting , and i knowing how there are several honorable and worthy members who lay to heart the glory of god , wherein the good of the nation doth consist , with all due respect in an epistle dedicatory i humbly commended and offered it to the serious consideration of both houses , in hope that this might happen to be a means , amidst their application to the great national concerns of another nature , to draw their eyes towards this cause , thereby to bring a blessing of god upon their proceedings ; for the greater the emergencies and occasions are , the more need of god's favour , which may be procured no better than with doing such things as are acceptable in his sight , as is the care of his honour and service . after i had done the most , and in my book about several points proved the falshood of socinianism , i thought i might shew the necessity of a remedy , and endeavour to set to work as many hands as i could ; and as no man may deny it to be the concern of a parliament ( for every new one doth appoint a committee of religion ) to look into things belonging to 't ; always necessary , but specially when the most fundamental part of the doctrine of the church by law established , is daily , publickly , and in print stricken at ; so i thought i might humbly address to both houses , as the undisputably competent judge of such things , wherein i think i have done nothing contrary to the laws of god and of the land , nor to the rules of charity , and so deserve not the hard names nor ill language given me , by those who have no better argument to defend a bad cause , for all their pretended good nature , and to throw dust into peoples eyes , only to shuffle off the matters in question . the truth is , that society of men are against all manner of restraint in matters of religion , they would have every one believe and profess what seems good in his eye ; and so of the church , which is the house of god , to make a meer babel and confusion without order and rule , which frame will at last rend in in pieces and ruin it : in the church there must be some authority of the rulers of it over the members ; christ hath formed and given it a being , and left rules for the preservation and well-being thereof , the admiministration of which he hath committed to her governours ; and to what purpose should those laws be , if there was no executive power , there is an ecclesiastical jurisdiction with a coercive and expulsive power ; there are pales and walls to hinder wild boars and ranging bears from coming in , and doors to turn out those who offend , infect , dishonour , endanger and would undermine it : and convocations , which i see they care not for , are necessary from time to time to promote her good , and to remedy or prevent inconveniences , chiefly those which relate to doctrine ; and tho' we attribute an infallibility to none of them , as there is none upon earth , yet 't is their province for their own members to declare about heresie , blasphemy , and other things contrary to sound doctrine and piety : to me there appears none more competent judges in such things , than those who have christ's commission to feed and to rule over his flock , and in the right administration of this office , the civil powers called the nursing fathers of the church , are bound to protect and assist them against the enemies of the holy trinity , and of the person of jesus christ , such are socinians . tho' according to times and places , men have different notions of divine truths ; yet a real divine truth is such at all times and in all places ; 't is not the opinion which men have of it that makes it to be truth or not truth ▪ nor can the several contrary interpretations change it ; so if the 39 articles , specially those that relate to faith , were true at first , they must be so at last , and no following convocation can make them not to be what they are , or to be what they are not ; 't is not the stamp of any human authority that may make a divine institution to be divine or not ; and tho a new convocation should repeal what in fundamentals a former one setled , yet some reasons for it ought to be produced : about doubtful things advice may be asked , as it was in the dispute about circumcision , when paul and barnabas were sent to jerusalem for counsel about it ; nothing must be omitted that may lawfully contribute towards clearing of the matter ; but when after a serious examination by the rule of god's word , according to the true signification of the words in the original , the scope of the place , and the analogy of faith , articles of faith once are declared , 't is fit to stand to them , and the church by which they are received , is enabled to judg of what is or is not contrary thereunto , and to keep from coming in those who would against her mind , and turn out her own members , which hold doctrines contrary to the truth she professeth : so the church of england being satisfied that the socinian tenets are quite contrary to the 1st . and 2d . articles of faith she believes , hath right to turn out socinians that are within her pales , and hinder those who would come in from without : and if she wants a sufficient power , she may very well sue for help from the civil , which is the legal way for relief ; and when this takes an effectual course about it , 't is wrong and injury to the right and liberty of the subject , no more than 't is injustice to hinder one fellow-subject from hurting another : this is no popish principle , nor contrary to those of reformation : but where a national church is setled , to allow every man a liberty to frame unto himself what notions he pleases of religion , then to promote , vent and publish it , to the disturbance of what is already setled by law , you thereby introduce confusion into the church , which may soon become anarchy in the government , which to prevent in my humble address to the parliament , i thought the laws now in being about such things might be executed , and , if in their wisdom they thought fit , new ones be enacted . what papists believe or do , as to authority , about interpretation of scriptures , is no rule nor precedent for us ; there is a sad experience in the world of the nature of the spirit which they are acted by , and of the methods they have taken to support their spiritual tyranny over the consciences and souls , yea , lives of men ; they made themselves parties and judges , and would admit or hear of no reasons contrary to theirs , which were grounded not upon god's word ( tho' in some things they pretend it ) but their own traditions and practice to their church ▪ now among us you find no such thing , the law is open for you , if you take scripture to be it , whereof you sadly wrest the words , contrary to their natural sense , without giving any good reason for it , and you stand by your selves in defiance and opposition of the general consent of the universal church , which condemned those unsound men , when they appeared against the person of our saviour and lord. and here i must say , we , no more than you , receive the authority of antiquity or of fathers upon their own bottom ; for we agree they were fallible , when they said so and so ; but whether in so saying they spake truth , is well worth enquiry into ; i will compare them with scripture , and if they agree with it , i will agree with them : and this is to me a strengthning evidence , that i am not singular , seeing others as well as i , could in the word of god find those truths which i do believe : wo be to him that is alone , abounds in his own sense , and thinks he knows more than all the world besides ; for the application of scripture truths , it may be every ones right to direct himself by his own reason enlightned by the spirit ; as to the explication , a very great care ought to be had , and still according to the rule of god's word , with all the help he can get besides ; but when they have opinions which they find are generally opposed , people so modest , so quiet , and of the character they give of themselves , not to disturb others , should keep it within themselves , and not be so servent as ye are , to spread it abroad , whether your zeal be without or against knowledg : and if every one who pretends to be a member of the church be so busie as ye are to promote their opinions , and no curb be put upon interpretations , then no end of heresie , blasphemy , or of all sorts of the worst opinions . but before i proceed , i think fit to pull down that strong-hold of theirs , as they take it to be , tho' rather sandy foundation of a free liberty for every one to make what interpretations they please : and that i shall the more willingly do , tho' as briefly as i can , because 't is a matter controverted between them and us , which i had no occasion to meddle with in my book . to begin , i say , as there is a right , so there is a false interpretation of scripture : the right is that which gives the true sense and meaning the false on the contrary : now if every private man might interpret scripture , what monstrous interpretations would there be , as we see it too much in the world ; and this is the ground of heresy , blasphemy and fanaticism ; which to prevent , the lord jesus , as st. paul saith in those * two places , where he mentions the offices in the church , hath settled prophets and teachers : every private man may read but not interpret scripture , which in this case , is the first thing to be known ; for , saith the apostle , knowing this first , that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation , so the interpretation must come from whence the revelation came , 't is but one and the same spring ; therefore in the next verse he clears the matter , for prophecy came not in old time , by the will of man ; but holy men of god spake as they were moved by the holy ghost ; which doth exclude as humane private revelation , so also humane private interpretation : and herein paul joineth with peter , when he puts this question , do all interpret ? which contains an exclusive how all do not , no more than all are no workers of miracles , furthermore we must know how scripture hath a binding power not only directive but also decisive over the conscience ; so that thereby the conscience , far from having that free liberty , is tied and bound to the determination of the word ; or else no man that believes an opinion contrary to sound doctrine and never so heretical and blasphemous , could be guilty of sin : but we are assured of the contrary , for they who wrest the scriptures , do so unto their own destruction ; tho' a man must be very cautious not to go against his conscience , yet where there is a competition between god and man , the word of god and the judgment of man ; when each challenge of us a consent , we must give it the word which certainly is true and infallible , preferably before the conscience , which may be seduced and erroneous , which happens often when 't is guided by humane reason . in scripture is in matters of faith a convincing and constraining power , which in conscience we are bound to submit to ; in humane things , the judge is not properly judge , except he judges according to the law ; for he hath no power to alter or corrupt , but to declare the true sense of it . the interpretation of the divine law which the question is now about , may happen to be mistaken , but the law never , for 't is infallible , as being the word of the true and infallible god ; hence is derived its divine and undisputable authority , beyond that of any thing else , and it should work upon men more than miracles , even than raising from the dead , which may be called the greatest of all ; for , they that hear not moses and the prophets , will not be perswaded tho' one rose from the dead . the reason is , because therein the spirit of god speaks , and thereby leads us into all truth : and indeed , if scripture was not the end of debates in matters of religion , our conscience could never be settled nor quiet ; for that same thing , no humane reason , power or judgment , is able to effect ; but we aquiesce to , rest and depend upon the word of the god of truth : and if at the bar of conscience there was no such binding rule , but men were left to their own private judgment , none would be bound to believe scripture , but always live amidst doubts , difficulties and conjectures , not to say , singular notions , fancies and dreams ; and so we could never be at a certainty : besides , that after this , there were no sin in any man to receive any sense of scripture , tho' never so contrary to the intention of god's spirit therein ; and , as said before , never so erroneous and heretical , only because it is according to a man 's own private opinion and deluded imagination ; which is to take away the obligation whereby conscience and the whole soul are bound to believe the truth of scripture only , and not false interpretations . besides , there is in scripture some matters of faith which are not so obvious to the soul and to reason , as matters of fact are to the eye and ear ; as also there are others not to be interpreted according to the plain and literal sense as they seem to be : out of the number and variety of such afforded in the word , i shall bring only two instances : can they think that this consequence by our saviour , god is the god of the living , and not of the dead ; therefore there shall be a resurrection of the dead , is plain and obvious to any man ; or that this is true , paul is a robber of churches , because he said , i robbed other churches : hence appeareth the danger and inconvenience of allowing of such a particular free liberty of interpreting scripture , seeing it can be and is so much abused . we are taught in the word , that we have received the spirit of god , that we might know the things that are freely given to us of god , and which the holy ghost teacheth ; if human reason were a sufficient light for a man to enable him to interpret scriptures , then paul's prayer , that god would give the ephesians the spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledg of him , the eyes of their understanding being enlightned , &c. the like for the colossians , were in vain ; for 't is frivolous to ask what one hath already , and wants not at all : this liberty which they allow themselves every day , to search and find out new interpretations , whereby the minds of men are tossed , and never to be setled , cannot consist with the true faith revealed in the word of god , which we are commanded to be stedfast in , and to be rooted and built up in christ , and stablished in the faith : and not carried about with divers and strange doctrines : certainly that freedom of interpreting is herein forbidden , and so are we forbidden to believe those false glosses and interpretations ; for saith the apostle , beloved , believe not every spirit , but try the spirits whether they are of god ; the reason is this , because many false prophets are gone out into the world , who allow themselves a freedom of interpreting scrpiture according to their own humour and fancy , no ways allowed by the laws of god , and should not be by the laws of men ; a curb ought to be put upon such wandering profane thoughts , at least upon the publishing of them . the adversaries who are so fond and conceited of their human reason , learning , and wisdom , might take notice how the apostle hits them , when he calls those who give false interpretations of , and wrest scriptures , both unstable and unlearned ; certainly those men are unstable , who make use of a pretended liberty , ever to give scripture new interpretations , as suggested by their reason ; so to day they may give one , and the next another different from and contrary to it ; and is not this change a fickleness and unstableness ? these unstable men would make those different interpretations to be a part and proof of their learning ; but far from that ; for peter calls them unlearned , whereby he gives a great blow to that diana-idol of theirs . but as i hope hereafter by the grace of god , to have an occasion of enlarging upon this , i shall for the present forbear saying any more to it what he brings in of bonner and latimer , about the interpretation of the words , this is my body , cannot answer his purpose ; that instance indeed can shew how a text may differently be interpreted , and that one may happen wrongfully to suffer for a good cause ; and how the strongest side and most supported , is not always the best : but this cannot prove , that because one has unjustly suffered , the other may not justly suffer ; that sort of men who are always wholly bent to provide for their safety , would infinuate how no man should be called to account for any wresting of , or putting false interpretations upon scripture , tho never so false , blasphemous , impious , and heretical , because he who doth so , believeth them not to be such , which is their own case : it doth not follow , that a truth , tho made doubtful , because to day 't is supported , and to morrow shall be oppressed , must not be owned , and a restraint put upon those who oppose it : the merit of the cause is impartially to be enquired into , and when truth is found out , not only it must be exalted , but also its contrary is to be kept under : tho queen mary supported a bad cause and suppressed a good one , it doth not follow but that queen elizabeth did well to suppress a bad cause and support a good one : tho an innocent be brought to suffer , yet the guilty must not go free for all that : because formerly innocent blood was shed , must not justice now be executed upon criminals ? 't is not the opinion of men but the truth of the thing which makes any one guilty or innocent ; the law is judge of it : so in matters of religion , 't is not the interpretation of the text , nor the opinion which the interpreter hath of the soundness of his interpretation that makes it orthodox and sound , but the word which explains it self ; for what in one place is dark , is plain in some other ; and when some men , contrary to those lights , will set up heretical and blasphemous opinions , and therein grow obstinate , only because they think to be in the right ; upon such account the word of god authoriseth men to enact such penal laws as they shall think most conducing for the glory of god , and to have them put in execution , chiefly when the parties against the known laws of the land do publish , and in defiance of all , at the parliament doors , offer their heretical books with words to this purpose ; i put a most excellent book into your hand , pray read it with attention , and when you are converted strengthen your brethren ; thus profanely abusing god's most holy word . they are by no means pleased with my way of writing , but i like it the better for their disliking it : they find fault first with the matter , order and expression ; secondly , with my often using scripture ; thirdly , with my sallying , as they call it , into sundry metaphors . the first of the two ironically talks of depth of learning , height of fancy , &c. which is proper to fantastical men , who would transform fancy , yea all religion into reason . the other calls it , a world of school cant , which now adays goes for deep learning : so both , tho' in a different way , talk of depth of learning ; that people would have others like themselves , to build upon no foundation but humane reason , which is not allowable , chiefly in things of the nature of those now in question : what they call cant , is out of scripture , writings of antient fathers , and out of schools ; which , as i think , are the proper store-houses whence to draw our materials ; but with them every thing is cant which doth not suit with their tunes : those men would have all notions of things , manner of expression and stile , to be but one and the same ; but theirs to be the original for others to go by ; which , especially in men who so highly pretend to reason , is as unreasonable , as if one would have all features in the face , all shapes of the body , all humours and inclinations of the soul , to be alike ; a thing impossible : for every man , saith the apostle , hath his proper gift of god ; one after this manner , another after that . however , these great masters of wit , learning and reason , find fault with the way of other mens writing , if it be not as they would have it , that they call nonsense , and what else they please ; for their tongues and pens are their own , wherewith they will do what they have a mind to . their ironical expressions may well be retorted upon them ; yet they should know how truth is better when naked , and needs no painting as doth falshood ; to paint is the part of an harlot , not of a vertuous woman . i ask ▪ is not gold , gold still , and good , tho' it be not enamel'd , or otherwise curiously wrought ? if they have their way of writing , i have mine , which they shall not put me out of , but will keep to 't till i see a law enjoining others to conform to theirs : i thank god my ways are different from , and would not change them for theirs , tho' they would set up for censors and reformers of other mens works , but by what patent , i cannot hear nor see ; and if i could help it , i would have nothing common with them , because their plague is in the head ; and to give them their due , in what they say there is more of flashy wit , than of solid and sound reason ; they prefer the bark before the body of the tree , and the cloaths before the person who wears them . they dislike my quotations or fragments of scripture , as one of the two calls them ; and good reason they have , for they are so many strong and destructive batteries against them ; they would not see the mouth of that cannon which shatters their false opinions to pieces : if to quote scripture be a fault , they are not guilty of it ; they travel not much into that country , and when they do , 't is with a cup of venom in their hand , if possible to poison the springs . their reason is the god-idol , for whose sake they slight revelation ; but , saith he , those fragments are ill applied : i see you had more curiosity than your brother , ( which of the two is simeon and which levi , i cannot tell , however one calls himself a lay-man ) for you read the book ; but what 's the reason you give not one instance of these fragments of scripture being ill apply'd ; surely you are apt enough to take advantage if any was offered , and i cannot believe you would have so much charity as to spare me ; for by the sowrness and gall of bitterness which i find in the letters , i have cause to think so , you cannot so soon have forgotten all those portions of god's word ill apply'd ; i had been glad to have seen some named , then upon a good account i could have said something to you ; but you give me cause to think those misapplyings to be the man in the moon , i mean your humane reason : as for me , about matters in question , scripture is my stong-hold and the arsenal whence i draw both offensive and defensive weapons which they would have us to throw away , but they must pardon us for not complying with them ; they themselves cannot and will not do so , for therein they would find their condemnation : we follow better examples , those of great captains in this warfare , as paul , who in this same cause reasoned out of the scriptures , and at another time he testified concerning jesus christ out of the law of moses and out of the prophets , from morning till evening . he was not weary of it , neither must we be , let socinians say what they will to the contrary : and tho' he was immediately inspired by the holy ghost , yet on all occasions he appealed to the scriptures for a confirmation of what he said : thus when he affirmed that christ died for our sins , he immediately addeth , according to scripture ; and in the 11th . verse he saith , that he was buried , and that he rose again , still according to the scriptures . his death , burial and resurrection , three articles of our faith , he proves by scriptures , which is a rule laid before us to prove his divine nature and attributes , which we ought to follow , except we think , we about such things know more than the apostle . and then apollos , whose great commendation is , that he was mighty in the scriptures , and that he mightily convinced the jews publickly , shewing by the scriptures that jesus was christ . so if we will convince socinians that christ is the true natural son of god , we must do 't out of scripture , as out of the same apollos did mightily convince the jews that jesus was christ : besides , we have the example of a number of people , i mean of berea , said to be more noble than those of thessalonica , because they searched the scriptures ▪ daily , whether those things preached to them , were so . thus we obey our blessed saviours command , to search diligently the scriptures , for they bear testimony of him : and accordingly when he was with his disciples , he taught them out of the law of moses , the prophets and the psalms , all things written concerning him , as after his resurrection he put them in mind of it ; then he opened their understanding that they might understand the scriptures , without which no knowledge of him to be had ; and in these matters the question is about him , his person : besides that , 't is usual as with paul and the other apostles , so with the evengelists out of texts of the old testament , to prove what they affirmed in the new ; nay , in the old we sometimes find one prophet quoting some texts of another ; and upon this very account of sanctifying the lord of hosts the messiah , the prophet sends the people to the law and to the testimony ; if they speak not according to this word , it is because there is no light in them ; without it their natural reason is but darkness . i am blamed for using sundry metaphors , called , a flourish of wild rhetorick ; but if it was transplanted into their garden , it would be natural enough there , as indeed it would be in its proper center . if sometimes i make use of metaphors , i wonder why they dislike it ; in some respect it may be called a creature of their own , for they are the metaphorical doctors of the world , who make bold to turn almost the whole scripture into metaphors , even to set up a metaphorical god : o sirs , first pull out the beam out of your own eye , and then ye shall see clearly to cast out the mote out of your brother's . anon we shall meet with some more cavils of theirs . they appear at the bar , whereto indeed they deserve to be called , and plead for themselves thus : the first of the 39 articles saith , there is but one living and true god , and in vnity of this godhead there be three persons of one substance , power and eternity , the father , the son , and the holy ghost . as to the latter part , which is the main question , they pretend to come off with mincing the matter , and say , by some of their late prints , meaning socinians , i perceive that they for peace-sake , submit to the phrase of the church , and expresly own three persons , tho' they think the word person not so proper as another word might be . the weight of the words of the article lieth so heavy upon them , that under it they must either break or bend ; this last they chuse to do , and would seem to yield ; not because they believe it , but only for peace-sake ; peace to themselves , to avoid the penalty : they think the word person not so proper as another might be ; still they reserve a back-door , why do they not name the word which is in their opinion more proper than that of person ? that word remains in petto in their breast , till there be a fair occasion to declare it . their speaking of peace is well , if with it they join truth , for they ought not to be asunder ; no christian is to betray truth for peace-sake . now if a person of the godhead be described as it is by an incommunicable subsistence of the divine essence , the socinian shall not be acquitted as he pretends : it is not my work , neither is this a place to shew how frivolous that plea would prove at the bar of the law ; but i am sure in my book i sufficiently demonstrated it to be a vain subterfuge and against the gospel . that trimming spirit in them , which , because they have not the upper hand , one may easily perceive to rule throughout in both letters , puts me in mind of the popish methods in such cases , as among other instances it appears by what passed in 1561 , in that great assembly at poissy in france , which the then french king charles ix . appointed to meet , and in his presence therein to have free conference about religion , between some of the popish clergy and some of the protestant ministers : because as yet things were not ripe for their designs , they by means of those conferences would try whether some way might be found out to plaister things over , and for the present to compose differences ; in order thereunto , after some discourses about the sacraments , which between the cardinal of lorrain and theodorus beza had happened in the k. of navarr's chamber , where they met accidentally ; the popish party being not willing to venture their cause upon disputes , first by the doctors of sorbon , and lastly by the cardinal of tournon in the name of the whole clergy , desired the king and queen-mother to give the protestants no hearing , who by the mouth of beza had already made a speech in the assembly , and given an account of their confession of faith : so then these publick conferences not doing the work , they did set up private ones ; first between two and two , then between five and five ▪ of both religions , and among these for the protestants peter martyr was one ; the point was about the lord's supper : on the popish side the design was , not to find out the truth , but only such words as each side might interpret on his behalf : to that purpose several formules , which here i need not to insert , were by the papists offered the protestants , but being ambiguous , captious , and such as might be understood in a double sense , beza for conclusion said , we must say all or nothing , because indeed the mystery of that holy sacrament must be explained . the like was practised in their council of trent , where happened great heats between the dominicans and franciscans about several points , wherein they differ , but to displease neither side , their canons about those matters , before they were passed , they shewed to both parties , and penn'd them in such words and expressions , as each side might favourably interpret for his own opinion . thus socinians would follow the same way , and admit of such words as may be taken in their sense and ours too ; yet tho' we should agree about the terms , they know we do not in the signification ; they for peace sake submit to the phrase of the church , and own three persons , yet interpret it not as the church doth : again , they seem desirous to wash their hands of socinianism , yet defend it as much as they are able : vpon the prudent explication which hath been given of some obnoxious terms , they weave the dispute and come in as brethren , yet still believe not as the church doth ; nay , if we will believe them , we are all of a perfect agreement ; but if we examine it will be found , if by these pretended last concessions of theirs we agree , 't is about some words , when the difference about things still remains . and as then papists were only to have things quiet for the present , so i perceive socinians are now content it should be so between us , to see whether times may happen to turn for them , then indeed they would declare , by the word person they mean not an incommunicable subsistence of the godhead , but only an attribute as wisdom , love ; that christ is god and son of god by favour not by nature and by eternal generation . but all such trimmers , to speak in job's words , are physicians of no value , and such remedies cannot cure the wound but it will break out again , and this i call daubing with untempered mortar , 't is not enough to ease of the pain , but the cause must be removed , which is the only way to cure for certain , and to prevent relapses : this i bring in to shew how socinians are not so averse from such popish practices as they pretend to be ; and if we narrowly inquire into it , we shall find they are willing to join with them in the practice of the following maxim , where they are the weakest , they first pretend for moderation and toleration , then for an equality , afterwards struggle for superiority , and at last destroy any one that to a hairs breadth would not come up to what they would have : for as papists brag of a spirit of infallibility intailed upon their church , so socinians are of opinion that the spirit of god , ( if they own any such thing ) is departed from other christian societies only to be among them , who look upon themselves as the only true interpreters of god's word , as socinus doth applaud himself in his new fangled expositions , therefore they despise all antient doctors of the primitive church , and i think , in tertullian's words against montanus , we may say it to be the socinians opinion , truth waited for their coming , without which it had been quite lost : yet according to their principles we must all be scepticks and pyrhonians always doubting of every thing and never sure of any , then in the word of god is no truth that we can be certain of : we know no man hath dominion over the faith of another , nor ought to impose his opinion upon others , neither could they who went before us be masters of our faith , nor we of the faith of those who are to come after . you see i make use of your own expressions , but withal i must tell you that if any one would in former or present times offer to force things of their own upon us to believe , we would reject it , by their own , we mean any thing different from or contrary to the word of god , 't is not their offering to us , or of us to others , can bind the consciences , but the things offered do , if they be the word of god ; no human authority doth per se and of it self tye my conscience , but god's word doth , therefore if any thing be proposed as an article of faith , we must see whether it be contained in the word of god , which bears record of it self , and so stands in no need of the testimony of man : 't is not the hand that gives alms which can make gold to be gold or silver to be silver , nor the lawyers quoting the law that can make it to be law , 't is so in it self , so is gospel gospel in it self , without any human help , or else you make the gloss and interpretation more than the text , and as according to your principles you may alter your interpretation one to day and another different from it the next , what a confusion would you leave us in , when you are so sickle and cannot agree with your own selves ? as indeed you make an alteration in the questions from what they were in socinus's days . by what they say of doctrines which according to circumstance of times may be convenient or inconvenient , i find them inclined to blame the times to excuse themselves : but the faults which too often are committed , the times are not to be accused of but the malice or weakness of men , there being no season so troublesome as can keep a good judge from doing justice , or a good divine from giving a good interpretation of scripture , so mens faults ought to be chastised , and not the times , which are as men govern themselves , to be complained of ; but good and holy laws ought to be enacted by those whom it belongs to , having the glory of god , and the good of the people before their eyes : new distempers require new remedies , and new laws are necessary against new crimes , wherefore i lay hold on this new occasion , and once more make bold , to both houses of parliament , humbly to commend the cause of god , and of his son the lord jesus , ( according as i formerly besought them in my epistle ) in earnest to mind it , or else with david i say , arise o god plead thine own cause . however , as to faith and practice , they give a good character of themselves ; as to the first , they believe all the articles of the apostles creed , but still they reserve unto themselves to give what interpretation they please ; but sure we are , 't is not that contained in the nicene and athanasian creeds : still there is a jesuitical jugling , equivocation , and mental reservation . ask them which is the true sense of the words in jesus christ his only son , they will not say , 't is of his own nature and substance and from eternity ; which creed , say they , was heretofore thought a full and sufficient summary of faith , till some men perverted the true and orthodox meaning , and brought false glosses upon 't , contrary to the plain and natural interpretation received by the universal church ; then indeed to refute unsound and anti-scriptural expositions and wresting of the true sense , to explain and enlarge was found necessary : 't is their principle thankfully to lay hold on the message of redemption by jesus christ : this seems fair , but is very defective ; for according to them , christ came into the world as a bare messenger , a meer man , to declare the will of god unto us , which others , tho not so fully and plainly , had done before , to die only for our good , but not in our stead , nor to purchase us by the merits of his death : so they say the lord jesus is god by favour , not by nature , robbing him thus of his divinity . when we seriously come to the matter , they are full of quiblings and cavils : as to the receiving the message of redemption , 't is according to them by strength of reason and not of faith , for no true faith in christ , except men believe him to be true god as well as true man. as to practice , this character they give of themselves , they fear god , walk humbly before him , hold no correspondence with any known sin , &c. this is well , but not enough ; for the moral virtues of the heathen carryed some of them as far as this : but a sound ▪ knowledg in the mind is required , and no sound saving knowledg of christ , except one knows him for such as he is , that is , god and man , or else he is but half a christ , an imperfect mediatour , whole christ is the true object of faith. these things are written that ye might believe that jesus is the christ the son of god , as well as the son of man. i am glad to find something like the matters in question ; in the first letter we are told what ground they go upon concerning their opinions ; scripture they own to be the rule of faith , but unto themselves they reserve the interpretation , which is as bad as what they condemn in papists , to depend upon the authority of their own interpretation , and so can turn it which way they please ; so may every socinian , as well as every quaker , have their private interpretation : but to say that protestants for the interpretation of scripture do rely upon their own reason , is without warrant and doth not consist with truth , except by protestants they mean socinians : if this were a fit place i could shew that they have not the same regard as we , for scriptures , tho they assert it , for they dispute the truth and authority thereof : but i must come to human reason , which in one page is twice asserted to be the onely guide god hath given us in matters of religion , for under that head i reduce the three he there mentioneth about revelation : but this is not the judgment of true protestants ; if a man hath no other guide but his own reason , 't is a blind one and very defective , 't is but one part of three and the least too ; for to the end that human reason may be a fit guide , it must be first subordinate to revelation , which is the prescribed rule and from which it ought not to recede no more than a judge from the law , ( as paul told ananias ) or else he is in danger of falling into precipices , that 's the light it must follow , and as the soul is guided by reason , so must reason be by revelation : neither can reason and outward revelation do the work without inward revelation , whereby reason is supernaturally endowed , and this is faith a gift of god : this is the ground of our blessed saviour's giving his father thanks for revealing the mysteries of faith and salvation unto babes , that is , those who as yet in his sense were not capable of reason , and plainly tells peter that if he knew and confessed him to be the son of the living god , flesh and blood , or his natural reason , had not revealed it unto him , but his father which is in heaven ; when the lord jesus was upon leaving this world , he promised his disciples a guide , what their own reason ? no such thing , but the holy ghost , the spirit of truth , who should teach them all things , and bring to remembrance whatsoever he had said unto them , and he was to abide with them for ever : this spirit of god is the right guide whom true protestants own to lead and guide us in the way of salvation ; and this he doth not according to human fancies or private inspirations , but according to the rule of the word , for saith our saviour , he shall receive of mine , that is my word , and shall shew it unto you , for he shall not speak of himself , he teaches and applies the word , and his working is by the apostle called the spirit of a sound mind , which god hath given us ; so that a sound mind , an orthodoxy in the faith is an effect of god's gift , not of our reason or of any thing else in us , wherefore david saith give me vnderstanding according to thy word . but these things socinians have been told over and over , and in the preface and latter end of my book i think i said enough to satisfie unbyassed persons , so have others too : this is the sure and infallible guide which god hath given us , and not any human authority different from or contrary to it ; the pope we cannot own for he is a party and sets up for himself , nor the antient writers , if they deviate from the rule , but 't is a good argument for the things wherein they follow it : men must not be so selfish and wilful as to despise others who may have the spirit of god as well as themselves , and being witnesses of those times are able to inform us how things stood in their time , and cannot be partial for this wherein we live . the author of the first letter hath a touch upon the matter and that 's all : 't is about the interpretation of what s. john saith , the word was made flesh , i confess there is a great difference in the interpretation , we say according to the natural signification , the word or son of god took upon him our human nature ; they say 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which we translate the word , signifies reason rather than word , and they infer that the reason or wisdom of god was communicated unto jesus christ ; this is a very much forced interpretation and fetch'd afar off , for all along the word is spoken of as a subject , and they would make a shift to turn it into the predicate . now what shall we do , of these two opinions to find out the true one ? for if every person or party be allowed such a latitude as to interpret things after their own fancy , there will be no end of false glosses and wrong interpretations : how doth the goldsmith do to know true gold or silver from that which is false ? he brings it to the touch-stone , so must we in this case ; between them and us is a difference , the party must not be the judge , 't is not just they should be judges in their own cause , nor we in ours : then we must agree about a judge , such as is impartial and infallible , and none but god is such : now god doth not immediatly speak from heaven , for he doth it in his word , that is his will and ought to be our law and rule : in matters of faith i will believe no man's assertion , except out of scripture he proves it to me , the like he may justly expect from me ; but in case of that text of scripture he and i give different interpretations , what 's to be done ? we ought still to keep in the same court , and wait for a decision from the same judge ; then i must prove my interpretation by some other place of scripture or else he must not believe me , nor i him except he doth the like : and if men will but lay aside prejudices , and be acted by a real and sincere desire to find out the truth , god will not leave them , but therein afford such helps as shall answer their good ; for all scripture is given by inspiration of god , and is profitable for doctrine , for reproof , for correction , for instruction in righteousness , that the man of god may be perfect . now let us come to our point , and reduce the rule to a practice ; the question is , whether by the word is meant a person as we say , or a quality as they would have it ? there is a great difference between persons and things ; now to find out the truth , this text must be compared with others , we need not to go far , for in the first verse of the chapter we read thrice the same name : in the beginning was the word ( was , signifieth existed , had a being , which relateth to a person , and not to a thing ) the same word was with god and was god ; what ? a quality with god and a thing god ? doth the evangelist begin his gospel in so high a strain only to tell us how reason was in the beginning , how reason was with god , and reason was god , or in plain words that god was reasonable , which is a truth known to every one ▪ so no need to tell it , but he would acquaint the readers with things before unknown to them ; besides doth this hold any proportion with the nature and excellency of the gospel and great tidings of salvation ? this indeed is to exalt reason , and because they make a god of their reason , therefore for name 's sake reason must be deified : then , according to their principle , this reason must be an efficient cause of all , for all things were made by him , and without him was not any thing made that was made ; to create and make things is the property and act of a person , and not of a thing , in him , as in a person and not as in a thing , was life ; and the same apostle calls him the word of life , that life which was manifested , and that eternal life which was with the father first , and then was manifested unto us ; as if he had said , the living god , according to an usual way of speaking in scripture , when the abstract is put for the concrete , thus god is called the lord our righteousness ; that same word that was god , was made flesh , and dwelt among us , to dwell denotes a person ; and we beheld his glory , not the glory of reason or wisdom , but the glory as of the only begotten of the father , here is a relation of a son to a father , and surely a son is a person not a thing ; and of this same john bare witness of him , saying this was he of whom i spake , he that cometh after me is preferred before me , read on till ver . 19. all along the word is spoken as of a person , and in ver . 17. he declares who that word is by a comparison between persons , the law was given by moses , but grace and truth came by jesus christ . this jesus christ he hath been speaking of all this while , and his design is to shew that jesus christ is the word so often by him mentioned , and to that effect he speaks of john's evidence about him , if the word be a thing and not a person , christ was so , and so moses who was a person , and christ after he was made flesh is compared to him : o the perverseness of some mens judgment ! who read scripture , not to find out truth or be guided by it , but out of it to wrest some things to support their prejudices : papists , to set up the pope's supremacy , think after much seeking to have found a text to serve their turn , he that is spiritual judgeth all things , yet he himself is judged of no man , with them the pope is that spiritual man : the socinians , whose design is not to set up one , as papists do , but to pull down and destroy the great work of incarnation , say , because it serves their turn , no word or divine person , but only the reason of god was made flesh . out of what i have said i think it plainly appears how the scope of the place , and the design of the evangelist is to speak of a person and not of a thing . but to prove our interpretation , let us further search into scriptures , paul speaks to our purpose , for as john saith the word that was god was made flesh , so he declares that god was manifest in the flesh , which he calls the great mystery of godliness , and the whole verse , tho in different branches , as preached unto the gentiles , believed on in the world , received up into glory , do plainly demonstrate the lord jesus to be that god or person of the godhead manifest in the flesh : and in another place he saith , when the fulness of the time was come , god sent forth his son , made of a woman : that person which in another place is called god , in this is called the son of god , and in another god's own son or proper son : in these several texts mention is made of an incarnation , or of being made flesh , manifest in the flesh , made of a woman , and god sent his own son in the likeness of sinful flesh , and the subject is called the word , god , son of god , god's own and proper son : is there in all this any metaphor , or any ground to say that the word made flesh signifieth reason communicated to jesus ? all this proves that our interpretation is according to the analogy of faith , and shews a sweet harmony of several texts of scripture , to demonstrate the adorable mystery of the incarnation of the son god. thus far we proved our interpretation of that text of scripture , we do not perceive they are in a condition to do the like for theirs , for if they could we should hear of it , they have not one text to do it : magister dixit is no reason with us , the vnitarian may say , but that is not enough , what he saith he must prove , upon true grounds and to the purpose : well , for want of scripture the author of the letter gives a reason of his own , which is this , and we all know that divine wisdom may be communicated to man without the incarnation of god : did ever any one read such a pitiful coming off in so weighty a matter as this is ? how sawcy with god are some men in the world , in setting out their foolish and wandering fancies , and where is a due respect for his holy word ? hath not god made foolish the wisdom of these men , if ever they had any ? doth this interpretation hold any proportion with that high and noble idea which the evangelist would give us of the person whose history he writes ? first of all we defy them to shew that this is the sense of any text concerning this matter ? secondly , suppose they could , yet it being against the usual meaning , they ought to shew reason why in this place it should be taken otherwise , and then must such a silly reason weigh down the authority of so many texts of scripture ? what will become of all the glorious attributes and prerogative of the lord jesus over angels and men ? what of that name which is above every name , god's own , only begotten son in whom he is well pleased , if all comes only to this , god's reason and wisdom were communicated to him , which god in a high degree did to solomon , and to others of his eminent servants , whereby he must make them equal with his son and he with them : we all know that god , if he pleases , can create another world , must we conclude therefore he hath not created this ; god , if he had pleased , could have delivered his people out of egypt otherwise than by the hand of moses , must we say therefore he delivered them not by his hand ? out of what god can do we must not infer that he hath not done what he hath done ; because god can communicate reason to man , therefore the word the son of god was not made flesh : ye great logicians , is this a good consequence , risum teneatis , i could almost say , if the thing in question was not of the highest importance . before i leave this point , i shall skip over to another place of the letter ; for tho' he there speaks not to me , but to another , whose notions i am not concerned for , yet what he saith relating to the cause , i ought to take notice of , the more because ▪ it belongs to that text of john , which hitherto we were upon ; 't is said , tke incarnation of god is no where expressed in scripture , it can be no more than meerly a deduction from thence . 't is well you are so kind , as to grant 't is in 't in some way : as to the first part , if you say in so many letters , according to your cavilling way , we know 't ; for the word incarnation is latin , and so none of the books of scripture being originally written in that language , we must not think to find it in 't , but we say a word altogether equivalent , and which signifies the same thing is in 't : doth not to be made flesh and to be incarnate , being made flesh and incarnation , signifie the same ? may be you will deny it , 't is but what some of yours do in a thing of the like nature , as that to make and to create the world , signifie not the same thing : if the word , which as s. john saith , was god , was made flesh , i think , that according to all rules of logick , out of those premises we may conclude , how god was incarnate or made flesh , and that act we may well call incarnation . as to the other part , that it is only by deduction , you cannot be ignorant how there are such deductions as are equivalent or next to the expression ; for when the chief assertion contained in scripture is true , so must also be whatsoever is therein included , and in the explication of it drawn by a true and right consequence . thus , tho' in the sixth commandment , to give one poyson be not expressed , yet by a true and certain consequence , 't is deduce out of these words , thou shalt not kill ; so starving one to death is adjudged murther , and punished as such : tho incest be not expressed in the seventh , yet none will deny it to be forbidden under these words , thou shalt not commit adultery ; so is fornication ; and so of every other precept wherein when a sin is forbidden , all of the same kind are so , and also the virtue contrary to the sin is prescribed : and tho there were some difference in the nature of the thing , yet hence we infer this certain truth , that tho some things be not expresly set down in scripture , yet are therein contained , and thence deduced by a true and lawful consequence : of this sort are the words trinity and incarnation ; and if the names , then also the things ; for the use of words is to signifie things . as to what is added in answer to the assertion , that the son of god was made man , how the vnitarian will say , the son of god doth not always signifie god , 't is thereby implyed that sometimes it doth , and that grants what we desire ; for thus we know , that when it is simply and absolutely attributed to christ , which is never so to any angel or man , we may conclude , that then it necessarily signifies god. as to what is answered to the other text , the word was made flesh ; that the word doth not plainly signifie god , i only say this , how john saith the word was god , i leave them in his hands , and let them come off as they can : as to the third text , the vnitarian will say , what he said before ; that god may be manifest in the flesh without being incarnate ; he may say what he pleases if he proves nothing , nay , not so much as go about it ; surely they claim a priviledge to be believed in what they say upon their bare word ; but seeing they give no reason for what they say , we may suppose those great masters of reason have none to give , their reason fails them , and is succeeded by passion ; i see they found out a short way to answer all arguments against them ; either with not taking notice of them , and thus they answer my book , or with denying every thing without giving any reason for it : this puts me in mind of a common saying when i was in the philosophy school , plus negabit asinus quàm probabit philosophus . the dullest fellow in the world can deny more , than the greatest philosopher is able to prove ; do but always deny , and at last the philosopher will have nothing to say : there is no arguing against those who deny principles ; now this is a great one for men to give reason as for what they affirm , so for what they deny ; this is the part of rational men : we attack them out of scripture , and they ought in our way to answer us out of the same , as their school-arguments we answer in their way . but to return to what the unitarian saith , that the son of god doth not always signifie god , i say 't is not always necessary to our purpose it should : and to state the question well , these two things ought to be observed : first , the question is not at all about angels or men , but about the person of the lord jesus : the second , the name god is not improperly taken . this being premised , i say , how the words son of god when spoken of christ , do signifie god ; which to prove out of many texts , i shall bring only two in s. john's gospel , and if in the whole bible there was but one , yet it would be sufficient , for every word therein is truth ; and if once the holy ghost therein declares the son of god to signifie god , 't is not in the power of men or devils to make it otherwise : besides that , the two texts are so plain , that there is no ground left to cavil : the first place is about the interpretation given some words spoken by our blessed lord , whereby , said the jews , thou makest thy self god , which our saviour rendered by these , i said i am the son of god. so that the words god , son of god , signifie just the same : the question between our lord and the jews , was not about the meaning of what he had said , they were agreed about it ; but the dispute was , whether those words were blasphemy ? which they affirmed , and he denied . those words in question spoken by our saviour are in ver . 30. i and my father are one , which because they are most material to the question , i shall thereupon observe this , how therein christ expresses two persons , himself and the father ; the word i he explains by the name son , i said i am the son of god ; and as by the first words of the verse , he makes a distinction of persons , so by the last he affirms a oneness between him and the father , when he saith they are one. this oneness cannot be of a personality , which already he hath distinguished ; what else then can it be but in nature , and consequently in the attributes thereunto belonging . with this text is to be compared the other , i am in the father , and the father in me . it is very idle and frivolous for them to think they are one only in will and consent ; for if our saviour's meaning had been only so and no farther , the jews would never have branded it with blasphemy , nor offered to have stoned him for it ; they well knew , how by their law no man could be guilty of blasphemy for saying his will and consent was one with god's , for they were commanded to conform their will and mind to the will of god , that thereby might be a perfect agreement between their god and them , between his law and their obedience : therefore to make this in their opinion to be blasphemy , there must be something of another nature , which they declare plainly enough , because that thou being a man , makest thy self god. so the question came to this , whether the lord jesus was god ? which the jews denied , as now socinians do ; but our lord affirmed , as after him we do ; whence we conclude he is , because he said so ; which if he were not , he had asserted a lye , spoken blasphemy , and the jews had been in the right ; but seeing he said he was the son of god , he spoke the truth , which socinians denying , they bring the lye and blasphemy upon themselves , and as good as say , as the jews did to pilate , he ought to die because he made himself the son of god , john 19 7. the other text to prove how the name son of god when spoken of christ , signifies god , is this ; lazarus's sickness was for the glory of god , that the son of god might be glorified thereby : we may see how the word god is explained by that of son of god : so that whether the name god be taken essentially or personally , still the person of the son is god , for therein is but one glory of god and of the son of god , the father is glorified in the son ; if they have one equal and common glory , then they have a common and equal nature ; for we know the true and eternal almighty god hath said , my glory will i not give to another . in my book i at large have asserted this divine filiation of the lord jesus , with the manner of it , and thereunto expected an answer , if they had been willing and able to give it . that divine and proper sonship and his godhead , john in several places of his gospel and epistles , both as his own belief and in the very words of our blessed lord , in those comparisons which he so often makes between himself and the father , lays it so clear , that for an unprejudiced mind there is no ground left to doubt of it ; the pronoun possessive my in the singular number , joined with father , which so frequently he makes use of , doth denote the singular nature of his sonship , and distinguish it from every other kind : i shall mention only what , when he was but twelve years old , upon the occasion of his being found in the temple asking the doctors of the law questions , and mary having said , son , why hast thou thus dealt with us ? he answered , wist ye not that i must be about my father's business ? the meaning of which they understood not , as the evangelist observes , he thereby signified another kind of filiation that what had any relation to mary : as according to the flesh he was her true and proper son , because begotten of her own substance , so in relation to the spirit and deity , he is god's own and proper son , because begotten of the substance of the father : if there be any such , ( as certainly there is , and in the chapter about his eternal generation i sufficiently proved it ) then ye socinians cannot deny the lord jesus to be he ; and if he be not the proper son of the father , as the apostle affirms he is , then god the father is not properly a father ; for the works of grace do not properly make one a father , but it must be the work of nature , of humane in men of divine in god ; humane nature may receive some divine gifts , but only thus much as it is capable of , within certain bounds and degrees , or else it were to make humanity to be deity : but christ hath not the spirit by measure , or by grace , but by nature and infinitely in him , which no finite being , such is every creature , is capable of ; the reason is , because in christ dwelleth all the fulness of the godhead bodily . thus he must necessarily be god primarily , and not derivatively , or in part only ; for divine nature is indivisible , either wholly god , with all attributes of the godhead , or no god at all : no creature , man. angel , or arch-angel , can have all the fulness of the godhead dwelling in him , because none of them is the infinite god : but since all the fulness of the godhead dwelleth in the person of christ , he must needs ▪ be god infinite ; for all this fulness of the godhead is a fulness of nature , of the essential attributes of that same nature , of immensity , power , eternity , and of any thing else proper to that nature : if in the whole word of god there was no other text but this to prove the godhead of our saviour , it were sufficient to do 't , it being so positive , so full , and so plain : all is an absolute word , to be taken without any restriction or limitation whatsoever : all fulness , what more can be said ? of the godhead , what more divine and expressive ? but what upon the matter remains in the same place is this , whether a god , and a god , and a god , do not amount to more than one god ? to take the thing as i ought , and not as some others do , i say that your arithmetick in this doth fail and deceive you ; wherefore believe revelation before your reason , which indeed may tell you how in humane and finite things one , one and one make three ; but revelation , which contradicteth not it self , calls the father god , the son god , and the holy ghost god ; the same also saith there is but one god : a divine nature common to three persons , doth imply three persons , but no more than one god , which is one divine nature subsisting in three persons and three persons existing in one nature : must i with scripture conclude , that father , son and holy ghost are but one god , or with your arithmetick and reason , that they are three gods ; make but your reason first agree with revelation , and then you and i shall agree ; so that the dispute is more between your reason and scripture than between you and me : but surely with me gods word is of greater authority than your reason ; ye must not suffer your reason , that ignis fatuus , to wander from the rule : do you know what solomon saith , he that trusteth in his own heart is a fool ; if you know it not , i tell you and your partner , he speaks to you when he saith , cease from thine own wisdom , or reason . now having done with this , i must go back where i left , and there shall find things of another nature , you call enemies to the common rights and liberties of humane nature . those who permit not every one a free liberty to make interpretations and inferences for themselves from scriptures , and this you ground on a false supposition , that both the word of god and the best means of understanding it , are originally and vncontroulably given to every man : for scripture and experience convince us , that every man hath not the word not means to understand it , and therefore 't is neither originally nor uncontroulably given to every man ; this is a truth which elsewhere i made good , and shall , by gods grace , be ready again to do upon occasion : but besides that it would require some time , this is no place to do 't , and i ever avoid going from the question : however , this i say , that ye go upon a principle destructive to order , if every one must be allowed to believe and profess what he pleases , tho' never so heretical , and to the disturbance of a settlement made by a lawful authority , and to promote it in discourse , conversation , printing , publishing , and such other ways as ye gentlemen socinians are forward to do , what security for the articles of our religion as by law established : we must be governed by an uncertain tide ; this year of one mind and religion , the next , as occasion is offered , of another ; and those who now are the undermost in power , and so much plead for a freedom of opinions and religion in the greatest latitude , if once they had the upper-hand , they would alter their tune , and turn blasphemy and idolatry upon the orthodox for setting up a meer man for a god , and worshipping him : as long as they want power they are for moderation , but ye are ruled by a spirit which might soon happen to make you turn moderation into persecution , as all enemies to christ are apt to do . socinians were not twice banished out of poland , where they were grown strong , and turned out of other places for nothing ; 't is but prudence to tie your hands and bind you to your good behaviour ; if ye are so busie when not supported by the magistrates , what would ye be if once you had gotten the power in your own hand ; unruly horses must have curbs put upon them : will not a general toleration , and for every man in the land about religion , introduce confusion ? that must not be , if it were only for order sake ; for as the greatest part of the world is the worst of it , so idolatry , blasphemy , and all manner of heresy , must be look'd for at one time or other ; and are ye not of opinion , that confusion in church might pass into the state , for ye would not be bound with any thing : no doubt ye would be very angry if the parliament would either revive old or enact new penal laws against you : how far you would give the magistrate leave to meddle in matters of religion we cannot well tell , tho' by thet title of the book you commend to our reading about the power of the magistrate and the rights of mankind in matters of religion , which i being in the country cannot see for the present , yet we must suppose it to favour your principles , or else you would not commend it as you do . and as you would not have the magistrates to meddle far in matters of religion , nor to punish hereticks , which was one of donatus his errors ; so by what you say , you have no very good opinion of a convocation , which yet we look upon to be the most competent judge we have about those matters : we agree with you how the convocation which made the articles , service-book and homilies , was an assembly of doctors and clergy-men that were fallible ; but for all that fallibility , many of them were men of great piety and parts ; and as no infallibility is to be found in this world , next to that , i think the nation was happy at that time to have persons so well qualified for the work : and ye are much mistaken , to say they enacted their opinions into articles , for the articles of our faith are not mans opinions , they extracted them out of the word of god , which supplied them with the materials , only they disposed it into the best order they thought fit , as god enabled them : after this rate you attempt to give our religion a fatal blow ; you would have us to pin our faith on mens sleeves and opinions , so they might lawfully be repealed this year , the next , or at any time : thus if popery under king james had prevailed , we had quite been at a loss , our articles had been declared heretical , ( tho' if we measure them according to the rule of god's word , they are as sound as any can be ) and our religion in some sense had been lost , and we put to seek for and set up another : but , i say , that tho' the whole popish , false christian and mahometan world , should condemn them , yet still they would be true and orthodox , not because they were formed by a convocation , but because they are collected out of god's word the rule of truth : suppose socinians here had the upper hand , which i hope i shall never live to see , then they would get a convocation of their own to wrest and turn our articles into their channel , and for all their plea for a private interpretation , they would set up a publick one of their own , and like another council of arimini , which revoked what that of nice had done before against arians , have an assembly to condemn , or at least to give our said articles their socinian interpretation . as to what you say , that a future clergy may repeal and declare against the present articles ; i answer , god forbid that ever he should be so angry against the nation as to suffer such a thing to be brought upon the stage , but in case it was , i say , it might happen that such a convocation could repeal , that is , have a power , but it might not , that is , should have no right to do 't ; i can , but may not kill a man. i shall not trouble my self with discovering the rottenness of your principles about these things , for that you do your selves , when you say that people may alter their minds , and so their religion ; so one to day a socinian , may , if he thinks fit , to morrow be a true christian , and you give this for a reason , a man cannot foresee what will come to pass , and so a doctrine which at one time may be convenient , may be otherwise when circumstances of time shall alter : so now , when socinians are undisturbed , it is convenient for them to be what they are ; but if the circumstances of time should alter , then for conveniency sake they might alter too , to avoid fire and faggot , if they were in danger of it : this policy never enter'd into the heart of martyrs ; but after this principle , yours is a time-serving and unstable religion , one may alter from the worse to the better ; 't is well and good , and happy ye , if god peradventure will give you repentance to the acknowledging of the truth of christ , and not holding it in unrighteousness . this principle of yours for fickleness and changeableness in religion , you would demonstrate , and may be justifie , out of what you say , all the subscription of the clergy to the predestinarian-doctrine contained in the articles and homilies , hath not preserved them from contrary sentiments , such as , when van harman first broached them , were universally judged to be contrary to the doctrine of the church of england . i like , in a thing that cannot be denyed , to see you own the truth , how arminianism is contrary to the articles , homilies , and doctrine of the church of england . thus , habemus fatentem reum ; why then , ye , who pretend to be members of the church , do you profess doctrines contrary to hers , and all along declare for them ? i see you will not stop there , but infer , that as the clergy of the church , contrary to their subscriptions , are departed from the doctrine . i call it the true , about predestination to fall into arminianism , so they may embrace socinianism , as you say , the majority now doth , and so successively and by degrees pass into any other heresie ; for which you give this reason , men cannot help the altering of their minds : this truly and properly is the religion of libertinism , and atheism is the next step : so men may plainly see what a kind of religion you are striving for , and would bring us into . to what hath been said about convocations , this i shall add , that though ye seem to slight a convocation , yet let me tell you , either in quality or number 't is no despicable body , it being the representative of a considerable part of the nation ; and 't is hoped from the piety and wisdom of the parliament , that in matters of religion , upon occasion they will not despise their advice and address . in the disputes about socinians and us , we are agreed to be judged by the word of god ; yet they dislike our making use of it against them , too much as they think ; but this gentleman , who in the beginning of his letter complains of my numerous quotations of scripture phrases , as he calls it , hath taken effectual care to avoid giving me cause to complain of the like against him ; for in the whole letter there is but one quotation , just at the latter end of it , and 't is usher'd in with this christian preamble , ' the ill-natur'd turn of your title-page , and the malicious and persecuting design of your preface , convinced me , that ( if we may believe our saviour christ ) you know neither the father nor the son ; this is what we call to beat a man with his own weapons , his own he hitherto used to little purpose , at last he resolv'd to try whether the same i made use of against him , would do his work ; but he is so unskilful in handling of it , that 't will not serve his end , but is against rather than for him : he saith to me , if we may believe our saviour christ , the if may well be turned against you ; out of another mans pen it were not questionable , as 't is out of yours ; i wish you would believe him as we do , when he absolutely , and without any limitation , doth call himself the son of god ; as some times they wrest his words , so here they would make him say , that i know neither the father nor his son , whereupon he quoteth this text , they shall put you out of the synagogues , yea , the time cometh , that whosoever killeth you , shall think that he doth god service : and these things will they do unto you , because they have not known the father nor me . but how well applyed let us see , not at all to his purpose ; for there the lord jesus foretold his disciples , that for his sake , and upon his account , persecutions should befall them ; i ask whether in earnest he looks upon himself and other socinians to be disciples of christ ? may be such as judas was , who betrayed his person as they do his truth ; but true disciples , that cannot be ; for suppose that sect were brought under the rod , it would not be for his cause : his apostles , as we read in several places of the book of the acts , suffered persecution for owning christ to be the true son of god , the holy one , the prince of life , and not for affirming him to be a meer man , who had no being before he was born of the virgin mary , and denying him to be true eternal god of the same nature with the father ; certainly if god should bring you to punishment , ye could not have the face to say it is for the same cause as his disciples suffered , they suffered for giving him his due , and ye for robbing him of it . therefore to retort your own argument upon you , i say , ye know neither the father nor the son ; for , the father ye cannot know but in and by the son : the son ye do not know , for ye will not own him to be what he is , namely , true eternal god , blessed for ever ; thus out of our saviour's own words i conclude against you , as in this same cause and upon the same account he did against the jews , who looked on him as a meer man , and would by no means own him truly to be god , son of god , ye neither know me nor my father , if ye had known me , ye should have known my father also : wherefore since ye know me not , ye know not my father neither . this weight i farther lay upon you , how as ye know not , so ye have not the father ; for ye deny the son to be what he is indeed , of the same nature with the father ; and the apostle saith , whosoever denyeth the son , the same hath not the father ; to deny the son is not only to deny him to be , but also to deny him to be what he is . and now , since i am upon this , your words , if we may believe our saviour christ , are a motive for me to go on , and to call things by their name , to say , ye are a sort of infidels ; for ye will not believe god , tho' he speaks from heaven , not only once but twice and thrice , in our lord's baptism , in his transfiguration , and at another time , when the voice came from heaven , god the father from heaven proclaimed him to be his beloved son , in whom he is well pleased , with a command to hear him , hear ye him ; yet ye will not believe the father , nor hear the son , who appeals to that testimony of the father , nor when he calls himself god's son , onely begotten , who is one with the father , in power equal with him , for what things soever the father doth , these also doth the son likewise ; that the father sent him out of his bosom , that he came down from heaven , he proceeded and came down from god , and so many more things to that purpose : but now he speaks to you as once he did to the jews , why do ye not understand my speech , even because ye cannot hear my word : yet him ye will not hear ; but mark what will become of it ; and it shall come to pass , that every soul which will not hear that prophet in all things whatsoever he shall say unto you , shall be destroyed among the people : ye would rob him of that glory and honour which he received from god the father , which not only is recorded by the evangelist , but confirmed by an apostle with all the necessary circumstances , what , where , and when ; we were eye-witnesses of his majesty ; for he received from god the father honour and glory , when there came such a voice to him from the excellent glory ; this is my beloved son , in whom i am well pleased ; which he affirms not by hear-say , but as ear-witness ; for he addeth , and this voice which came from heaven , we heard , when we were with him in the holy mount : but ye will hear neither christ nor his apostles , tho they speak loud and plainly enough ; whence we may well conclude you to be none of his sheep , whereof the great shepherd himself gives this to be the proper character , that they hear and know his voice only , and not the voice of strangers , and they follow him when he leads them out ; but ye follow him not , only the devices and inventions of your own heart . thus to return to you , who falsly would bring in your selves as disciples of the lord jesus ; we know , that as there is a church of christ , so there is a synagogue of satan , and that the devil hath his martyrs as well as the lord jesus ; some have been so far hardened , as to dye for denying there is a god ; therefore 't is neither the manner , nor the place , but the cause of death which makes the martyr ; 't is neither smithfield in london , nor campo di fiori in rome ; for as the most honest men , so the greatest villains may happen to be executed in both ; neither must we believe those who falsly would call themselves disciples of christ , and insinuate as if they suffer'd for his cause , when 't is for their heresies and blasphemies : i remember the apostles words , how false apostles , deceitful workers would transform themselves into the apostles of christ : and no marvel , for satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. do not pretend to say , ye are for christ , when ye are against him . as to your mis-applying of the text to me , let me advise you to be more conversant with scripture , and therein you may learn how , at another time , more fitly to adapt your comparisons , and better to apply texts , and not as you would so ingeniously screw out of that , how you think me an unfit writer in behalf of the trinity ( which you believe not ) and therefore did not so much as read over my book ; and i to answer ad hominem by a rational and natural consequence , out of your own words , that you have not so much as read over my book of the trinity , do conclude you to be a rash , giddy , and unfit judge , whether or not i am an unfit writer in behalf of the trinity . thus go you off the stage like a snuff . i answer you in your way , because you answer me not in mine . an answer to the second letter . having done with one antagonist , i must now turn to the other : between them both they shar'd the task , to try which of the two could most wrest and mis-represent things , and give a man ill language . wherein it must be owned , this last yields it not to the first ( for they writ after the same manner ) and whose steps about my epistle he follows in his first page , and part of the next , wherein he would seem to soar high in his politick enthusiasms , and then falls down right into a nonsense , which he would father upon me ; certainly a man hath little to say or do , that stumbles at the threshold , and falls a gathering straws , when there are solid and good things to mind ; and instead of examining high matters of divinity offered , he to put off the blow , and for diversion sake , turns to be a grammarian , and pittifully falls upon cavilling at words : this , like the dog in the fable , is to snap at the shadow and leave the body : my words are these , to time things well , is one of the best parts of prudence : to say it is the part of a prudent man to act in due time and season , is there any thing contrary to sense and reason ? by the word part is not meant any such thing as we call essential part , as the soul is to man , or what we call integrant part , such are an arm or a leg to the body , but 't is an usual way of speaking to say , 't is the part of a wise man not to be hasty , 't is the part of a christian to forgive , to signifie how 't is proper for , and belongs to a wise man not to be rash , and to a christian to forgive : i add , and one of the most essential circumstances of our actions , the meaning is plain , how timing things well , is one of the chief and most necessary circumstances of our actions . this is no just cause for any man thereupon to entertain such idle and extravagant fancies as we see him to do : without being a great philosopher , one may know there are several circumstances belonging to every action : an ordinary rhetorician can tell the rule — quis , quid , ubi ▪ quibus auxiliis , cur , quomodo , quando . i take agent , time and place , to be three concomitants of any action , and without the three no action , so then the prudential part of an agent in the act , and to make it succeed , is to chuse a fit and proper time ; to apply a remedy , take physick or be let blood ; if done in due time , is to observe one of the chief and necessary circumstances if the word essential joyned to circumstance doth disquiet you , then by the word most essential is improperly understood the circumstance most necessary to be observed ; we use to say a thing most essential , or most necessary , most to the purpose , most important and most material , to signifie the same thing or near upon 't ; i take the essence , whether physically or metaphysically , to be the same with the nature of the thing : and do you not think that circumstances have their nature , and that there is the nature of an accident as of a substance ? and that to the end one may act well , there is that which is necessary and most necessary . god forbid , when we speak of gods nature , or even of matters of philosophy , we should make no difference between essence and circumstance ; but in discourse 't is usual , as you know too well , to make use of such improper and figurative expressions . doth not our grammar tell us , that nouns adjectives are compared , and that there are three degrees of comparison , have ye so far forgotten it ? thus the word essential is an adjective , whereof the superlative we call most essential , and we may say essential , more and most essential : surely ye judicious and acute sophisters , if ever you learned logick , were taught , that there is a predicament called proprium , and that there is a proprium not only primô , but also quartô modô ; quod convenit soli , semper , & omni , which in grammar words we may call most proper in the superlative degree : and ye gentlemen , for so i must call you , ( tho' i would have call'd you by your names if ye had subscrib'd your letters ) ye gentlemen socinians , who are so much for tropes and figures , might know how 't is usual by an hyperbole to represent things with exaggeration as whiter than snow , blacker than pitch ; and if such manners of speaking with exaggeration be admitted in a common discourse , much more may this improper one now in question : so sometimes a thing which we like well , we call best of all ; thus if instead of saying essential i said most essential , i did use the superlative degree instead of the positive : but these are but quibbles of your own , which argues , that seeing you stick at such things , you have little else to say for your selves ; ye leave things for words , and like drowning men , lay hold upon any thing that lieth in your way to save a sinking cause , when no serious man but would think it below himself to stay upon such things ; all your observations and inferences are an effect of a distemper'd imagination , and not of a sound reason , whereby you deserve the name of the ridiculer ridiculed : as well as you , we know essence to be one thing and circumstance another ; but that were tolerable , if ye did not as ye do , jest with holy things . but i think to know where the sore lieth ; ye do not like the words essential nor essence , derivative nor primitive ; and tho' in the schools of divinity and philosophy they be used , yet ye dislike them , because in so many letters not to be found in scripture ; but here you might see i use it not in a religious but civil account . i own i am at a loss to find a way how to please such nice spirits as ye are ; for of one side ye would not have us to use the words essence , trinity , person , because you say they are not in the word of god , yet ye both find fault with me for making use of scripture so much as i do against you in my book : so ye gentlemen , prodigies of learning , may now see , ( which if you do not others do ) how ye sin against very common rules ; what then will become of the four things you learned , after you put your wits to the rack to make others pass for nonsensical scriblers , who hardly can write three words of good sense ? thus if your witty premises do fall , how can your learned inferences stand ? these miserable shifts , which every solid man would scorn to trouble his head with , do tend only to shew how in you is an earnest desire , but want of power to make others who differ from you , to pass for silly and ridiculous : so take to your selves what you had prepared for others : but what 's all this to the cause , but a putting it off and running away from it ? having shewed how , when i penned my epistle , i thank god , i was in my right senses , the next thing i must do , is to prove my charge against socinianism , which he calls false and disagreeing , yet i make no doubt but it will stick . first , i call it blasphemous , and i shall prove it out of better authority than that of the polonian knight or bidle's , or what the reasons to the contrary of the authors of both letters , can come to . in order to 't , i say , there is a twofold blasphemy , one positive , when men call or otherwise make god a liar , and to deny himself , or the like ; and the other negative , when men deny him to be infinite , almighty , or eternal ; the first when god is made to be what he is not , the second when he is deny'd to be what he is : that blasphemy is an abominable injury , directly against god's nature , attributes or works , is so plainly and frequently set down in scripture , that i think unnecessary for me to prove it ; and if the same offence committed against god's nature , attributes and works , be called blasphemy , and that committed against the lord jesus's person be called blasphemy ; it follows first , that jesus christ is true god ; then secondly , that whosoever denies christ to be god in his nature , attributes and works , he is a blasphemer : now socinianism denieth our saviour , divine nature , and essential attributes of that nature ; therefore socinianism is a blasphemous opinion and doctrine , as much for denying christ to be true god by nature , as by denying divine nature , almightiness and eternity . now that the sin called blasphemy is sometimes committed against the lord jesus , we learn it out of his own mouth upon the occasion of the pharisees saying he did cast out devils by beelzebub the prince of devils , this he called blasphemy against the holy ghost the chiefest of all : and when he was in the hands of the jews , the things by them done and spoken against him , were by the evangelist called blasphemy , and many other things spake they blasphemously against him . thus when the jews spake against the things that were spoken by paul , and what were those things ? that christ was the son of god ; which to prove , he made use of the words of psalm 2. thou art my son , &c. in the proper sense ; their speaking against this is call'd contradicting and blaspheming ; upon the same account in another place 't is said , they opposed and blasphemed . thus paul saith of himself , he was before his conversion a blasphemer , and compelled others to blaspheme , that is to deny and speak ill of christ ; so to say that christ is not god of the same nature and power equal with the father , is as great a blaspemy , as to say he was or is a sinner , which any one that hath a religious honour and love for him , and hopeth for mercy at his hands when at the last day he shall appear in his glory , cannot , and as much as in him lieth , must not endure . the next charge against socinianism is atheism and deism ; he doth couple them thinking to shew a contradiction , but there is none : i say to worship the true god not in a true manner is idolatry , as well as to worship a false god : jeroboam for worshipping the true god in an undue manner , is branded with idolatry , and provoked god as much as ahab for worshipping baal , or a false god , or else with papists we must take away the second commandment : in like manner , i say , not to know the true god in a true manner is atheism , as well as not to know him at all ; and the true way to know god , is to know him in christ , without whom no true knowledge of god ; to that purpose the apostle saith unto the ephesians , that at that time when they were without christ , they also were without god in the world : that is , they were atheists ; and is it truly to know god in christ , only to know him there in a creature ? ( seeing the very heathens can tell us , praesentemque refert quae libet herba deum ) and not rather as in him in whom dwelleth all the fulness of the godhead bodily . these fragments of scripture please not socinians , for they not knowing god in christ , as his eternal and natural father , are thereby branded with atheism . as for deism , i take it in the sense wherein it is taken now adays , for a deist is he who prefers humane reason before faith and revelation ; so you own my charge is not a perfect nonsense , tho' in some degree you would have it still to be a nonsense ; for you are pleased thus magisterially to decide , now i confess this sort of charge is not so perfect a nonsense as the other ; however i still lay under the lash , for it is a silly calumny , as you say , yet 't is no calumny but a truth , and that no silly one : ( i shall anon take notice of your stile . ) deism is not only an absolute denial of all revelation , but also 't is a giving the preference to humane reason before revelation ; which is done when you set up your own reason to be a judge of revelation ; and here i hold you fast , for else you would give the slip. tho' you have not the face to deny christian religion to be of divine institution , yet your own reason , which your brother calls the only guide which god hath given us to judge and interpret that revelation , you exalt above it ; is not this to set up a tribunal over and above the word of an infallible god , and to make your poor silly humane reason the oracle or revealer of the true sense of that revelation ? so i leave you to refute this charge of deism as well as you can , the racovian catechism shall afford you no help , except you mince it as you use to do other things , which by and by i shall , by the grace of god , take notice of . a deist we call him who makes a god of his own reason , as you do , that is , sets up a false god ; now between such a one and an atheist there is not the direct opposition which you imagine , for in these times deist is taken in an ill sense , and in a way of reproach ; but to believe a god is no reproach , and ought to be taken in a favourable sense ; so 't is the use of the words that shews their signification : besides , as there are two sorts of atheists , the one in theory the other in practice ; for as there is a fool , whom david speaks of , who saith in his heart there is no god , so there is a fool that saith so in his actions , and lives as if there was no god : the like we say of deists , some are speculative , such as believe as you do , their own reason to be the only guide in matters of religion ; others are practical deists , who accordingly own no other sense of scripture , but what is their own interpretation . and others through-paced , i may add , who are both practical and theorical deists , and i make no doubt but that ye know well where they live , tho' you question much whether we have any of these socinians in england . profaneness and immorality follow next : profaneness i call a handling of holy things without a due respect , which in a high degree is the guilt of socinians , as in several places of my book i made it plainly appear ; how bold and sawcy are they with god's word ? how contrary to the analogy of faith , the design of the spirit of god , and the natural , usual and proper signification of the words , do they wrest scripture to make it serve their own turn ? they irreverently use it as a stalking-horse to answer their ends , and by forcing unusual and far-off-fetch'd interpretations , as much as in them lieth , would make it contradict it self : this , and prefering humane before spiritual and heavenly things , like esau , whom scripture calleth a profane person , for selling his birth-right for a morsel of meat , i brand with the name of profaneness ; and shall not i call so the preference which you give your humane reason above divine revelation , when you make it to be the judge of it ? in some places of your letters , your own example is a proof of profaneness attending on socinianism , let the particular of your jesting at the name of christ's mystical body to signifie the church , serve for all ; you cannot be , but wilfully ignorant , how in several places of scripture an express mention is made of the body of christ , whereof we are said to be the members , and christ is called the head of the church , and the saviour of the body . this cannot be spoken of his natural body which now is in heaven , so it must be of another body of his , and that 's our being in him by faith , and he in us by his spirit , which scripture calls a mystery , so in scripture phrase we may call that a mystical body without giving profane men cause to jest at it as you do . god's name , saith david , is holy and reverend , but ye make bold to profane it . as for immorality it consists both in words and actions , carriage and conversation ; so that tho' one was not an immoralist either in every kind or in every degree , if it be but in one , 't is enough to denounce him an immoralist : as for me , who neither have nor desire to have any society with the professed enemies or false friends of christ , i do not meddle with their actions , for 't is not my business , but leave every one to god ; besides that , i ever avoid , as much as i can making or medling with persons , only with things : but , i say , that profaneness is usually attended with immorality , for commonly sins go by couples , and he who is so profane as to jest with god and his word , is soon drawn to that jesting , foolish talking and filthiness , which the apostle joineth together : and you may know how paulus samosatenus bishop of antioch , one of your first and great ringleaders , kept young wenches , and allowed his clergy to do the like . tho' the persecuting accuser , as i am call'd , have not the wit of machiavel nor of his villains , yet he hath truth on his side , which is better : and the negative argument , how neither the racovian catechism nor socinian author hath written so , cannot put off the blow ; indeed men must wholly have forfeited common sense and reason , who in their writings and in the face of the sun , will set up for champions of profaneness , immorality , atheism , impiety , blasphemy , or idolatry . but what they do not plainly express , is often drawn by good and lawful consequence ; in any of your books you do not say ye are profane , but out of what you say in your two letters , how that , as to your selves , you are the judges of scripture , and that your reason is your only guide in giving such interpretation as ye think fit , is not this to make bold with holy things ? tho' i had no other evidence ( which yet i am full of ) i say , that only is a sufficient ground for me to conclude your principles to be profane , which make you prefer your own reason before the teaching of the holy ghost out of that same scripture , and those who embraced your principles , are thereby led into profaneness . what you say about the means used by some men to promote heresies by high pretences to piety and vertue , may be true , and what i say too , every bait is not proper for every sort of fish , so men have several ways to get proselytes , according to the several tempers of those whom they would draw to themselves ; do but find the predominant passion of a man , and , except god be pleased to strengthen him , ye are like soon to draw him into your snare , according as they are acted by worldly considerations . there is but one true god , and one true principle of religion and piety , but there are many gods of this world ; give but riches to the covetous , honours to the ambitious , and pleasures to the voluptuous , without god's restraining grace they will soon be for you ; but you will say , what 's this to us ? we know all that : then i come to you , and say , how i take you to be zealous for socinianism as you take me to be against it , and by your carriage we find to be in you a great desire to propagate it : to increase the number of proselytes , you must draw them out of several parts , and ye know how in this corrupt age , there is abroad a spirit of profaneness , immorality , and of sin in all kinds ; now for you to make converts out of all these kinds , ye would think it would tend much to the honour of your cause ; and as in the nation there is also a sort of witty people , tho' sometimes profane , to please those too , you study with fine words , smooth language , and with such plausible reasons as you are masters of , to support it , and 't is known ye are unwearied in your endeavours to promote the interest of the cause : i see no reason to hinder me from believing , but that any who will join with you in the main , shall be welcome among you , and this intriguing spirit in you , makes you the more dangerous to our religion , and shews the necessity of a great care required to prevent the ill effects of it ; thus ye follow the maxims of papists , tho' in some things you would seem to be much against them ; for among them do but come to mass and own the church , then do what you will , and believe what you please as to your self , you are a good catholick still ; and the jesuits , who among them are reckoned to screw up things to the highest , do say , commit what sin ye will , and under an easie penance ye shall from us have a full absolution ; all this to draw a throng and get their churches to be crouded ; so ye will do or say , be but vnitarian , as to the rest give scripture what sense and interpretation your reason suggests unto you , and all shall be well ; as to life and manners , we shall leave you to that same only guide your own reason : they which are unsound in the true faith , without which 't is impossible to please god , 't is very possible for them to be so in their practise ; tho' men teach not atheism , profaneness and immorality , yet it being too much the religion of the times , some may happen to practise it , and to strengthen themselves , will indifferently receive among them those who do : so this is no new way to promote heresie , i wish it be not successful , tho' you say 't is not like to be so . ye may know the true god , yet not as he ought to be known , in and through christ ; ye know not christ , and will not own him to be such as he is , true god , son of god by eternal generation , and as the father is glorified in the son , if ye glorifie not the son as he ought to be , ye glorifie not the father ? but what followeth for not glorifying god as he should be ? st. paul can tell you , how because men when they knew god , glorified him not as god , or as he ought to have been , therefore he gave them over to those dreadful judgments and abominable courses , which may be read in the place quoted in the margin , whereby ye may see errors in judgment followed with those in practise : hereunto i shall add that which can serve to strengthen what i said about atheism , and 't is this ; our saviour told the jews , ye have not known god , the reason is , because they had not known him : to know one is to know him for what he is ; this reason the lord jesus gave his disciples , if ye had known me , ye should have known my father also ; and henceforth ye know him and have seen him ; the reason must be this , because ye have known and seen me . for the knowledge of the glory of god is only in the face of jesus christ . as to the charge of idolatry , he seems willing to save me the trouble to make it good , for he saith , as to what concerns idolatry , it must be confessed , that socinus ' s system of divinity is not absolutely free from it ; and he gives his reason thus , for he maintaineth that divine worship is to be given to jesus christ , tho' he be not the true almighty , and the eternal god , but only something i know not what , more than a meer man ; which is but what themselves make of him and no more . to render the creature a religious worship only due to the creator , is certainly idolatry ; but , saith he , i question much whether we have any of these socinians in england ; he is best able to tell , being no doubt , well acquainted with most socinians in england : he thereby declares that there is more than one kind of socinians , and what a kind of them he himself is of , namely a davidian : among the promoters of this heresie , i in my book took notice of one francis david , who tho' in every thing else he agreed with socinus , yet herein he differed from him , that he denyed any religious worship should be rendered unto christ ; and that the author of the letter is of that sect of socinians , i am confirmed in my opinion by what he said before , how socinus lies under the suspicion of having contributed to the persecution of francis david : here appears his partiality for this last against the first ; so socinus was a persecutor , so may socinians be upon occasion : his system was not absolutely free from idolatry , but david's was ; however that distinction cannot clear him , for tho' according to the socinian hypothesis the davidian opinion be free from idolatry , yet according to ours , 't is the worst of the two , for they altogether deprive our saviour of the worship which the others yield him in some way : in the mean time he would give us the slip thus , it is not unlikely but that socinianism may get clear of the charge of idolatry , either by the help of her own logick , or by virtue of the authority of the church : as if the church was bound to defend their errors . but anon i , by the grace of god , shall examine it , but before , we must make an end of the charge . after the word idolatry , is in abbreviation an &c. which at large he writes et caetera : upon such enumerations it is usual for brevity's sake to conclude with that letter , thereby including other things of the same or like nature , but he like a weak silly gnat ( no more than i a conjurer , as in the place he saith i am not ) sticks at the cobweb and would make an insipid jest of it , tho the foregoing things are serious and of moment , and the better to set out that buffoon's trick of his , he goes backward to the dissenters of the last age , who , saith he , baited the word unmercifully . i see , as to time , we must help his m●mory , for that which was about between 40 and 50 years ago , within this same century , he calls the last age ; then he omits the chief ground of exception against it which was an oath in the case , men were made to swear to an &c. : but here his righteous conscience , as he calls my soul , is not put to the rack ; but seeing he presses me to declare what i meant by &c. after atheism , deism , profaneness , immorality , idolatry , whereby i also pointed at popery , i now fill it up with davidism , whereunto i might add ebionism , cerinthism , arianism , photinianism , sabellianism , samosatenianism , macedonianism , pelagianism , donatism : ye see how big-bellied was my &c. to contain so many things , and more too ; for socinianism i look upon as a sink into which fall all virulent humours against the person and grace of our blessed lord and saviour ; as in the body a diseased and infected place draws most if not all corrupted humours to it self : and as your religion is a kind of confusion , and ye are great latitudinarians , so to strengthen your selves you reject none but receive all comers into your communion , which you would set up for the only school of wit , parts , and learning , and this in part was my meaning when i said how to promote your cause you would be ready to admit among you not only all excrements of christian religion , but even jews and mahometans , for you think the way to heaven broad and easie , there being , as ye say , but very few things necessary to salvation to be done and believed , contrary to what our saviour said , strait is the gate and narrow is the way which leads unto life , and his apostle saith the righteous is scarcely saved . by what i said it may appear whether my charge was disagreeing , false and incredible , or whether the attendance i gave socinianism doth not belong to it . now i come to the two ways whereby you think socinianism may get clear of the charge of idolatry , the first you say is by the help of her own logick , the second by virtue of the authority of the church ; its logick is refined enough according to this world , as far as mode and figure can stretch , you will ; if barbara cannot do , may be celarent , cesare , festino , or some bocardo will , all these are at the command of your logicians , then sophism , as sorites or the like , will come in apace and in course , and when an argument in its own mode and figure cannot do , then you will be mincing , for out of your own letters i find ye are excellent in that art ; now your logick is this , if nothing else can serve , you will say ye are no socinians , ye take it an injury to be so called , for ye say ye are very injuriously termed socinians , yea twice in the same page ; so ye positively deny your selves to be socinians , do ye say so out of shame or out of fear ? one would think there is cause for both : men who call themselves and pretend to be christians should indeed be ashamed to go about robbing christ of his due , and afraid of punishment , if not from men , yet at last from god , the avenger of his honour : not only ( if we may believe him ) he is no socinian , but saith he , if there be any in england 't is more than i know ; sometimes some men in the world know not themselves , however they will not confirm their denyal with an oath . they will not be socinians , yet when they are charged with a denyal of revealed religion , they appeal to the racovian catechism , which is the summary of socinianism : this playing fast and loose in matters of religion is not to be endured : however they are brought to deny themselves and so they may be allowed to deny their master socinus : but why do ye engage in a cause , if you are ashamed to own it ? hereupon to them we may put the question , which upon the account of the most holy trinity they put to us ; a thing is or is not ? ye are socinians or ye are not ? if ye be , why are ye such hypocrites as to deny it ? if not , why do you concern your selves for them ? let them maintain their own quarrel and defend their own cause , and why do ye take up the cudgels for them ? why in their defence , contrary to good nature , breeding and moderation , do ye write so passionatly and angrily , that one would think your letters to be dated from billingsgate ? if ye be davidians ye are socinians still , and the worst of them too : sirs , 't is not the change of name that can alter the thing , if ye hold socinus his damnable opinions , ye are socinians , call your selves never so much by the name of vnitarians , or what other ye please ; so this sophistical logick of denying your selves to be socinians , cannot do the work. let us see whether the other which you brag of , the authority of the church , will do 't : these men make use of a great name with a design to shelter themselves under it : one of them falsly chargeth me with making , as he calls it , an impudent reflection ; but here upon good grounds , in his own coin , i might turn it upon him and say , 't is a piece of transcendent impudence for such cattel to call themselves members of the church , which this doth in as plain words as can be , for i am no socinian , but a member of the church of england by law established . so formerly some called themselves the church which were the synagogue of satan , and as our glorified saviour knew them , so he knows these , i know , saith he , the blasphemy of them , which say they are jews and are not , but do lye , and are the synagogue of satan , he knows them to be blasphemers : socinians members of the church of england ! then satan is an angel of light , for sometimes transforming himself into one : those who are a scandal to the christian name , and would prove a shame to any church but their own , to be members of our church ! then such members as are rotten and gangreened , ought to be cut off and spued out of the church , in case they be in , as they pretend they are : members of the church are her sons , but these can be no natural lawfully begotten , but bastards , who are in only to watch an opportunity and time to bring in thieves and enemies , unnatural sons who rend their mother , and care not if she were torn in pieces , such sons to the mother as the harlot was mother to the child , whom she pretended to be mother to , tho she was not , content she was that the child should be divided and cut to pieces . i hear indeed how some of them are in orders , and actually in the service of the church ; and this i meant when i said the enemy and plague of socinianism was gotten into the bowels of the church , the more the pity ; and therefore seeing they will not hide themselves for shame , here i do humbly desire the heads and governours of it , to take notice of socinians boasting to be members of the church , and care to weed them out . good lord ! men who overthrow the first article of our religion of one god in three persons , and the second of two natures in one person , besides others , the athanasian creed , the the first part of the litany , with several others of the service book , yet they have the face to call themselves members of the church . however 't is worth the inquiring into , what they ground upon their calling themselves members of the church ? we already have taken notice of one place , wherein , speaking of themselves in the third person , they say , for peace sake they submit to the phrase of the church , and own three persons : so they seem not to be much concerned for the truth , to know whether what they or we say be true , but they take care of their safety , being , as they pretend , alarm'd with fear of fire and faggot , and to save their bacon ; therefore i am apt to believe that what they say , in relation to this , is more out of fear of punishment than of love for truth : however for peace sake they are members of the church : but to dive into the bottom of this title of theirs of being members of the church , two places i am to look into , the first is this , as for those late english writers sometimes called unitarians , and very injuriosly termed socinians , they seem desirous to wash their hand of it : and their disputing some of the articles of our church , hath proceeded chiefly from their apprehension that it would be idolatry to admit them . thus still under disguise , and of a third person , they are those late english writers who call themselves vnitarians , who seem desirous to wash their hand of socinianism , so 't is only seemingly and in appearance , for else what could make them tooth and nail concern themselves so much for socinians ; let it be taken notice of how these pretended members of the church confess that they disputed some of the articles of it , and these are none of the less fundamental , which they suspected as leading into idolatry , and therefore they would not admit them : see what members of the church these are , who publickly and in print own that some of the articles of the church do tend to idolatry ; doth not this very thing deserve punishment according to law ? and to justifie their disputing of some of the articles , they would infinuate as if the church , or some part of it , had owned they were in the right , therefore upon the prudent explication which hath been given ( he doth not name by whom ) of some obnoxious terms , they wave the dispute and come in as brethren : this is as good as to say , that in our articles those that are the most fundamental , are in terms justly obnoxious , that is to their cavils : and to shew they had cause to take exceptions , an interpretation hath , according to their sense , been given those articles , and so , upon their own terms , they are come in as brethren ; if they are come in , then they were out before , and so no members : thus it seems they had correspondency in the church with some who , as they term it , prudently made way for them to come in : now doth not this confession justifie what in my epistle i said , socinianism is gotten into the church ; and consequently shew a necessity to turn it out : thus having , as he thinks , twisted socinians with the church , he most judiciously draws this inference , and ironically bids me defiance ; i hope mr. gailhard , will not in anger against them , impute idolatry to our church , as by law established . can any thing in relation to the church , be spoken more insolently in the face of the whole nation ? a strange thing , indeed , tho' nothing may seem strange from men whose principles allow them to say and make themselves any thing : like the grievous wolves , which in sheeps clothing enter in among the flock , not to feed but to tare it ; to deceive the blind , they come in with esau's hands , but the voice is jacob's , yet being known should bring a curse upon themselves : but 't will be strange indeed , if such ones be once found out , having under the cloak of taking care of souls poisoned them , be not cast out by suspension or deprivation , according to the severity of the penal or at least of the ecclesiastical laws . upon this occasion , the eyes of the whole nation are fixed upon my lords the bishops . the other place which i must take into consideration is this ; he tells us , speaking of me , that to deny the trinity and our saviours divinity , is as much as in a man lieth , to pull our religion up by the very roots , and quite to overthrow it ; which , saith he , that the socinians do , he takes it for granted : that they deny the trinity and christ's deity , 't is done in the face of the sun , and that these points are the foundation of christian religion , no true christian will deny ; and my inference is good , that pulling down the foundation , the building doth necessarily fall : yet , according to the usual way , he would mince the matter thus ; yet those who are injuriously called socinians declare , that they only dispute some unscriptural terms with us , but are well satisfied with the sense put upon those terms and explications , which a considerable majority seem to be agreed in . they cannot leave off the ridiculous juggling in their change of persons ; for they are those called socinians , who dispute with us , that is with themselves ; so they act both parts , put the question and answer it , be the socinian and church-men too ; but the worst is , they want sincerity , that whilst they indeed are the socinian , yet would pass for the church-men . besides , they would have the dispute to be only about words , and so of no importance ; thus whether there be three persons in the most adorable trinity , and whether the lord jesus and the holy ghost be truly god , they make it to be a dispute only about a word and a trifle : what a confidence is it for such men so publickly to vent their impieties ? thereupon they declare to be satisfied upon this ground , that a considerable majority of the church seem to be agreed with them in their sense ; so according to this , a considerable majority of the church is become socinian : let him that can , believe this , for my own part i am not so credulous ; however , i humbly desire of the church , especially of that lesser part which this man owneth not to be socinian , to mind what he saith so openly , and to take it into their serious consideration , i bring it to their door and there leave it : they are highly concerned to take in hand their own cause as 't is now become ; i have done and said what might be expected from a member , my work being to vindicate the honour and right of my most blessed lord and saviour , as far as he will be pleased to enable me , and to pull off the vizard from these falsly pretended members of the church . in the pamphlet are several trifles under the head , how wide socinianism is spread , which yet in my way i shall take a short notice of , not minding what he saith of my ill-natur'd and malicious paper , for by this time he hath pretty well used me to ill language as to an idle foolish talking , and ( which is the worst ) ridiculing and profaning holy things . in several parts of europe where i happened to meet with the dispersed jews , i sometimes took an occasion to discourse with some of them about our blessed saviour , but in them all from the highest to the lowest , i found a gall and prejudice against him , and have cause to think those whom we have here in england to be acted by the same spirit : and by some words heard to drop out of manasseh ben israel's mouth , when in cromwel's time he came over , i perceived that if ever they were suffered to stay here , they in matters of religion would be as ready to do us harm as themselves good in another way ; and i thought that i being about naming the enemies of christ , the jews we have here might not be omitted : and i am of opinion , that in case among them there be any man of parts , socinians would not be backward to gather out of them what arguments they could against the person of our blessed lord , no not from mahometans , if any were near and able to afford them : and this i said in relation to servetus , one of their ringleaders , who in his youth being in africa among jews and mahometans , suck'd their blasphemies and brought them into europe ; and to shew how , in relation to the principles of religion about our saviour's person , 't is possible for a socinian to become a turk , i prove it by the example of alciati , one of their gang , and socinus's companion , who out of poland fled into turkey and became mahometan . do not think i do you any wrong , when speaking of socinianism i mention mahometanism ; for tho' as well as you they deny our blessed saviour to be god , yet they own him to be a great prophet sent by god : 't is observable how mahomet himself in that part of his alcoran wherein he relates that notorious imposture of his having been carry'd up into the highest heaven , there to see great and strange mysteries , ( whence may be you borrowed your dream of an imaginary ascension of our lord and saviour after his baptism before he began to teach ) when at his coming to the first heaven he met with adam , in the second noah , abraham in the third , &c. he saith , they all one after another , commended themselves to his prayers ; but when he came into the seventh , where he met jesus , himself he commended to jesus's prayers . and if ye will know how in many things about the trinity and christ's divinity socinians agree with mahometans , i refer you to hottingerus in his histor . orient . l. 2. c. 3. yet tho' what i speak upon the matter be words of truth and soberness , he has as good as call'd me mad , and fell into such a long raving fig , as i think it would require a strong dose of hellebore to purge away the matter which caused it ; and that makes him so often talk of fire and faggot , and such other things as he brings in over head and shoulders , and so looks upon me as one who would see all socinians put to death : socinianism indeed i would gladly see rooted out , but to have men put to death , is neither my inclination nor my work ; yet as there is a sin of concealing what one hath seen or known , so i cannot but take notice of , that , as in the case of a false swearer , god said thine eye shall not pity , so the blasphemer was by his immediate command put to death . he would take advantage of something i said about arminians , and upon that occasion would act the states-man's part , and shew i have taken wrong measures to gain my point , and so would ironically give counsel : by what they say in several places , i see they are free enough to advise , tho' undesired and unfit ; but they should know we are not used to take the counsel of our enemies : men who stand for the truth are not byassed by worldy considerations and designs , tho' never so plausible and specious : i thank god , in matters of religion i have no squint eye , i am neither ashamed nor afraid openly to own a truth , if i was not satisfied it is so , i would not own it , but it being , i will do 't , by the grace of god , as long as i live , till i see cause to the contrary : therefore 't is but time and labour lost for such advisers ; their wise counsels let them keep for themselves , for some things which they call sense and reason , others upon better grounds call sensual reason . and here , sirs , i must tell you , how you talk so much of want of learning in others , as if ye were the only great doctors of the world ; if , as ye say , i am a mystery to you , so is your learning a mystery to me ; by your letters i cannot find where it lies , nor no man else i think : but to speak confidently , to lodge all brains in the world within your own skull , to outface men , to wrest and misrepresent what others say , and to set up for judges of all good sense , wit and learning , that indeed ye sufficiently learned , and every one may well be satisfied how great proficients ye are in that kind of learning : but to take my turn to advise you , do not always trust your own looking-glass , for it doth but flatter you , and represents not after nature ; ye would appear unto the world as if all wit , parts and learning were monopolised to your selves , and all besides you lying in blindness and ignorance : that original sin derived from , and inherent in socinus's family , that old leaven in you ought to be purg'd , but god knows when it will be , if at all , for ye look very big upon all others , like the proud pharisees , this people who not knoweth the law are cursed , but we sit in moses his seat. matters of grace and providence i believe to be of the highest importance , and such as our salvation depends upon , and in my judgment i am fully satisfied arminians to be much in the wrong ; but however if a comparison be made between the socinian and arminian principles , no man that is acquainted with both can but make a difference ; for tho' in many things they agree , yet in others of the most essential , as about the trinity and the person of our blessed saviour they differ from them , and therein join with us against that common enemy , socinians lay under open blasphemy and condemned heresie by the first oecumenick council and others following ; the arminians not so , i mean not worstius and the like , but such as in comparison of others are moderate : but still i say , that the cause against socinians cannot so effectually be handled upon arminian principles , for in some things their bounds are so near and undiscernable , that sometimes a man cannot fall upon one but he must tread upon the other , and one blow sometimes hits them both ; so sometimes the arminian doth not strike home upon the socinian , for fear of hurting himself . however , to shew you what a difference we ought to make between adversaries and adversaries ; we have some disputes both against lutherans and papists , yet much more and greater against the last than against the first ; certainly we will not carry our selves equally towards both , for there is cause to make a great distinction between them , which to shew , upon occasion we keep communion with lutherans when we may not with papists ; yet the former are in a gross errour to think the substance of the glorified body of christ which is now in heaven , and shall be until he comes to judge the quick and the dead , to be included in , with , and under the bread and wine ; yet because they declare they adore not the bread nor the wine , we do not look upon them as idolaters , as we take papists to be , for they adore a wafer under the notion that it is turned into the substance of the body of christ , and we are forbidden to have communion with idolaters : thus we ought to make a difference between lutherans and papists ; so we must between those who would destroy the grace of god in christ ( which is very ill ) and those who impiously fly against his person , as ye do ; nay i say socinians in some things are worse than papists , who own the article of the trinity of persons in the unity of divine nature , and the divinity of the son and of the holy ghost , which ye deny : ye are the worst of all christian societies , which name ye are unworthy of , because ye reject , despise and undervalue the person of the lord jesus christ , from whom we are called christians , and will not take his word nor god the father's when he is by him and by himself called son of god. this man , as well as his partner , will make use of his arithmetick ; and because i complain'd of the increase and number of socinians , he makes a pother about almost all the church , a moiety of the presbyterians , nine parts in ten of the quakers ; like a squirrel in a cage , which turns again and again , but never the farther on in his way , always within the circle ; so he , which way soever he turns himself , is ever upon his dunghil . as to the number of socinians ; tho' it was never so inconsiderable comparatively , yet 't is ever too great , tho' never so few yet still too many : one wolf in a sheepfold can do havock enough ; only one that hath the plague can infect a whole town ; always vermin multiplieth too fast ; wherefore to prevent the growth and increase of it , 't is necessary a sufficient care be taken by those who are concern'd , ( especially those whose diocess is much infected with , and made the center of that vermine ) whom david , a great king and judge of israel , and a prophet too , gives this charge unto , be wise now therefore o ye kings , be instructed ye judges of the earth , psal . 2. dignity calls for and commands duty , and to whom much is given , of them much shall be required . not only a disposition but also a resolution in magistrates , is necessary , for 't is that which helps to put life into those laws , which otherwise languish for want of due and discreet execution , wherein one is to go to the root of the evil , if he will extirpate it : in some distempers the dose must not be weak , else it will but stir the humours , and not remove them . but what is it that david would have kings and judges of the earth to learn and be instructed in ? in the next verse he saith it , to serve the lord with fear ; in their station to defend his cause and maintain his concerns , is part of the service required here : but whom is this service due to ? to christ the messiah , to whom the lord hath said , thou art my son , this day have i begotten thee , to whom the heathen are given for his inheritance , and the uttermost parts of the earth for his possession , whom he shall break with a rod of iron , and dash them in pieces like a potters vessel . certainly such a potent lord , son of god , deserves to be served with fear by all kings and judges of the earth ; and 't is his cause , not man's , which now is under debate , his right and title being questioned , which if men in places and power do not , as they are bound , assert and vindicate , to speak in mordecai's words to esther , deliverance shall arise from another place , some others will do god's work , but thou and thy father's house shall be destroyed . for the lord jesus himself will in his due time not only do 't , but also require it at the hands of those who neglected it , which is a most abominable crime , no less than , as much as in them lieth , to set their hands to his condemnation , and suffer him again to be crucified for pretended blasphemy , for affirming himself to be the son of god , which the jews did well call making himself god. for the names god , son of god , simply , properly and absolutely taken , imply divine nature , as man , son of man do humane ; therefore said the jews to pilate , by our law , that is of blasphemy , he ought to die , for he made himself the son of god , which if he was not , then , ( without blasphemy let it be spoken , and the thoughts make my hair stand on end ) he had been a blasphemer , a lyar , and an impostor , and such the socinian principles impiously make him to be . and because i said , it had been well if at first that necessary care had been taken , especially by those that are most concern'd , to prevent it ; thence he doth infer , that tho' not indeed in plain words , but intelligibly enough , i said it had not been done , which after his usual , calm , and christian-spirited way , he calls a meer story , my own pure invention , and a notorious slander ; and to prove it so , in his head he frames an idea of an hurly burly and confusion in opposing of socinianism , and this he would make a play of , and without any distinction ridicule all that appear'd against it : the opposers , saith he , did but scuffle tumultuously with they knew not whom nor what , and in the event it appeared they were more afraid than hurt ; and to ridicule it the more , he saith , this zealous leader would scower through the dark vales of antient fathers and general councils ; that learned author would bustle in the thorny thickets of the school-men ; here indeed is to be found the flourish of wild rhetorick sallying into sundry metaphors , as he speaks of , and he adds , one or two now and then with wondrous confidence and manly resolution , would bolt out upon the open plains of natural reason , but they were quickly forced to shelter , not being able to bear the brightness and warmth of the meridian sun , which illuminates and gives light to those plains ; these are high fancies and true bombast , if any thing be so , surely the man hath read don quixot : this people , who condemn in others something of metaphors , allow it to the full themselves , as being privileged persons who may say and do what they please , and all is well : but , alas , all these opposers of socinianism were but fools for their pains , especially those who would talk of reason with them who are the great masters of it , and could not stand before them , but-were sent to school with a rod upon their back , and all this depth of learning , height of fancy , closeness of reasoning , brightness of eloquence , and clearness of stile , are set in form of a triumphal cant ; yet for all this , for greater security , he still runs under the shelter , for after he hath talk'd of some of our old school terms , of which we had no great opinion our selves , ( whether we will or not this man is always among us ) and kept them only because we could get no better , but then the wisest of our doctors explained them to a very honest sense . speak , said one formerly , that i may know thee ; so this people are known by their talk ; but still i say our man runs to the shelter when he saith , oxthodox with us who are the majority of the church , which if it was true , as 't is not , would be but to follow the multitude to believe and do evil. something he would be picking out against my citation out of the book of the reformation of ecclesiastical laws , wherein without passing sentence , as he pretends i do , i humbly offer a precedent of what was formerly done in like cases : and suppose the book had been written before socinus was born , yet it may reach him and his opinions ; as for instance , when a law is enacted , it doth reach those who break it , tho' born never so long after ; and we know a law can be broken in several ways , nay sometimes laws are made not only to restrain present crimes , but also to prevent others to come ; for 't is the prudence of the law-giver not only to punish evils in being , but also to prepare a remedy against those which may happen : therefore if socinians in the land do any thing forbidden by some law , tho' never so old , if unrepealed , they are liable to the penalty of it : the law doth more directly regard things than persons : when the law makes a thing to be treason which was not so before , yet whosoever hereafter , tho' unborn when the law was enacted , commits it , is no doubt by that law guilty of treason ; this truth one may know without prophetick inspiration . as to what i add out of king edward's letter to archbishop cranmer , &c. how according to the power , form and effect of a certain act of parliament in the third year of his reign , he had appointed them to compile his ecclesiastical laws ; his wresting and unfaithfully representing the thing is clear and palpable , for he would make my observation thereupon , how in those laws there is something of a parliamentary authority , because he saith , he hath chosen them by virtue of an act of parliament in the third year of his reign , to be gainsaid by my next words by him misquoted thus , that something wants a parliamentary stamp , when they are thus , and if there be any thing wanting , it lieth in your power to set a parliamentary stamp upon 't ; he relates them absolutely , and i conditionally with an if ; i take it to be good sense to say , there is already something of a parliaments authority , and in case there be any thing wanting , this present parliament may supply it if they please : it is great pity that this spoils his witty jest in that place of a something that 's just as good as nothing : i shall have a farther tryal of their misrepresenting things . i find they are not so much concerned as to what the gospel saith about matters in dispute , as they are about what the law saith when it reaches their persons ; threaten them with a parliament , and they are more concern'd , than if you would set the whole bible in order against them . therefore they are nettled with the fourth canon directly pointed at them by name , of the ecclesiastical constitutions by both convocations in 1640 , and by king charles the first , straightly enjoyned and commanded to be diligently observed and executed . the king is supreme head of the church within his dominions ; by virtue of that supremacy king charles of his own voluntary act , and without any violence or compulsion , set upon them his royal authority ; and his memory is not become so odious and contemptible , and in that particular so slighted , that no regard at all should be had for it : and tho' socinians despise the authority of those who went before , i dare say in the nation there be some who are not of their mind ; and as we know the legislative power to be lodged in kings , lords and commons , so we hope they will agree in things which tend to the glory of god , the good of the nation , and that upon occasion none of the three , through god's influence , will , as i said before , give the convocation any repulse about things within their sphere when represented in parliament : but i find you are as angry , hot and fiery ( i make use of your own words ) against convocations as against calvinism , for you speak of the ceremonial or sanguinary rules and orders , canons and constitutions of the convocational clergy ; and let me say , how in the same page you give the clergy some other lashes , which is not brotherly done , but i hope you will give me leave to think , if not to say , that you or your partner may be of the tribe , if so , then in moses's words let me tell you , ye take too much upon you , ye sons of levi. the man seeing he is unable to defend his own cause , would be suing for help ; in order to 't , he maliciously and fasly would suggest , that i have slurred the honour of my lords the bishops , when i no where have named or so much as pointed at them , only in a place of my epistle where it was unavoidable , 't is upon the occasion of a quotation out a book call'd the reformation of the ecclesiastical laws , my words are these , according to this , bishops are to take cognizance , inquire into and declare whether or not the person or persons be guilty of blasphemy , which being clear , he or they ( according to that law ) are to be delivered into the civil magistrate's hand ; but if through neglect or otherwise any of the bishops happen not to act their part , and thereby stop the course of justice , certainly the magistrate is to look into 't : this man , who in several places abuses convocations , would , to serve his turn , in this seem to be much concern'd for the lords bishops : of this false accusation he gives two reasons , the first is this , for tho' several of them have written learnedly and angrily against socinianism , some in the real , some in the nominal trinitarian way , yet mr. g. takes no notice at all of this ; and for this reason he affirms , he most audaciously and slyly slurs the honour of my lords the bishops . his second reason is , he often declares his aversion from the arminians , of which perswasion most of the bishops have shewn themselves . is this good logick ; i am against arminianism , therefore against episcopacy , because , it may be , some of the bishops are arminians , it will not stick ; i disprove arminianism , and honour the bishops , as , some of their lordships can witness ; but to aggravate , he falsly and foolishly saith , i have thereby slyly and desperately wounded the honour of the chief defenders of the orthodox faith. out of this he would prove me to be a rank socinian , or else i would not , saith he , have done so ; wherein he confesses socinians to be desperate enemies to the lords bishops . and to retort it , he being a socinian , must be an enemy to the bishops : but i see the devil is devil still , a slanderer , a false accuser , tho' hypocritically he pretends much meekness and charity : this very same man who but one leaf before blames one much better than himself for not taking care of his language , for his liberal railing and throwing his wit and his foam about he in many places of his letter doth so against me , slanderously charging me with impudent reflections ; and again , is it not the highest impudence in him ? and in other places they throw such like words upon me : therefore thou art unexcusable , o man , whosoever thou art that judgest , for wherein thou judgest another thou condemnest thy self , for thou that judgest dost the same things . nay , not only so , but the man hath from first to last broken not one , but most rules of humanity ; it would be a happy thing if every man could but know the plague of his own heart . and were it not that a good advise , which he doth much want , bestowed upon him , would be so much time and labour lost , i would put him in mind , how by god's command , there was no sacrifice offered without salt , an emblem of prudence , to shew how god would not have men rashly to meddle with holy things , and except , with a serious and humble frame of spirit , and with an awful reverence , ( which was the true preparation of the sanctuary ) they were qualified for it , otherwise he would not relish or accept , but only ( to speak in solomon's words ) account it to be the sacrifice of fools : this under the gospel in matters of religion , ought to be a rule for us , as in relation to god , so between man and man , for the apostle saith , let your speech be always with grace , seasoned with salt , that ye may know how ye ought to answer every man : which being joined with another apostles exhortation , be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you , with meekness and fear , or reverence , as the greek word doth also signifie , doth teach us how we ought to speak with grace , fear and reverence of matters of religion , and with meekness towards those whom we speak to : but these men do quite the contrary , for of one side they jest with holy things , and on the other they injuriously use those whom they deal with ; that is , are profane with god and rude with men : they cry up moderation and mildness , yet with their railing , ironical and brutish stile and language , are ever the first to break the rules thereof ; to call one impudent , and at several times too , and to give the lye , it argues in them neither breeding nor good nature , therefore they must expect that men thus unhandsomly provok'd , will take some notice of it , tho' it be contrary to their natural inclination and practise . here upon this account i must desire the reader to take special notice of the spirit which this sort of men , whom we now deal against , are acted by , and in particular of the want of sincerity , moderation , modesty and judgment , and this shall be within a narrow compass , out of what is said by one of the men ( as i take it ) whom i have to deal with ; in the apology for m. toland , are with great approbation quoted some lines of one of their own , whom he calls that celebrated vnitarian in the agreement , he hath written , of the vnitarians with the catholick church , p. 54 , 55. he highly commends that man with the name celebrated , in hopes upon occasion of the same return of flattery from him , for asinus asinum fricat . the very man whose letter i now am about examining , would charge me with slurring the honour of the lords bishops , and desperately wounding the honour of the chief defenders of the orthodox faith : would not one think that this man is highly concerned for , and hath a great honour for the bishops , whom he well calls the chief defenders of the catholick faith ; but this must needs be either out of hypocrisie to serve , as he thinks , his present turn against me , or by an irony , for socinians love neither bishops nor convocations ; for will they sincerely call defenders of the orthodox faith , those who writ against them ? and for proof of this , let us observe how in the fore-quoted place of the apology , they use one of our most eminent and learned bishops ; when i speak thus , the reader will presently know i mean my lord bishop of worcester , who by them is named in the place : i know not , saith he , what it was to his lordship's purpose to fall upon mr. toland ' s book ; but if he knows it not , his lordship did , and we may suppose it was to some purpose , or else he might as well say , the lord bishop knew not what he did : one would think they cannot have the face to teach him what he must do : but here follows that which is worse , but if he would needs attack the book , he should have dealt fairly . which plainly enough implies the bishop hath not dealt fairly ; and to shew herein that i am not mistaken , he adds , and not carp'd only at a few passages , and those too so mangled and deformed by his representation of them , that i dare to affirm , mr. toland doth not know his own book in the bishop's representation of it . is not this a plain demonstration of the great respect which such men have for the lords bishops , and of the reason this man hath to accuse me for slurring and desperately wounding the honour of the bishops ? but let us turn leave , and see in how different a stile that socinian speaks of mr. toland and his book , him he calls the learned and ingenious author , and of the book he saith , i do not perceive , to speak truly , but that book still stands in its full strength : and not only so , but , if we believe him , it hath also acquired a farther reputation , by what hath been written against it , which that great master of learning doth despisingly call an unsuccessful nibling at it . but this kind of comparison between two so highly different persons , is odious , for it carries along with it a great disparagement to one of them against whom is given the preference , and is an invincible proof of want of judgment in such men as pretend to make it : but the commendation or discommendation of that sort of people , being so misapply'd , are insignificant ; and it would be no credit , rather the contrary , for an orthodox person to be commended by them : but to carry on their confidence to the utmost they challenge the lord bishop to answer the reasons in their own books against the trinity . yet for all this , and after their great commendation of mr. t 's book , those wise and cautious men being afraid of any thing that smells of the fire , as that book doth , they declare about it , in which , and for which , we are not in the least concern'd : but i think they were for one which somewhile ago was burnt , whilst many more of theirs which now are abroad deserve the same fate . but as we must not expect they will follow the example of those who brought in their books ( among which we may well think were no worse than some of the socinians are ) and burnt them , which these will not themselves do of theirs , for indeed 't is the proper work of the common executioner , far from it they set them out and commend as much as they can , nay they are so bold as to let the world know there were such books of theirs abroad , and we find it many times , witness mr. t 's apology among the advertisements in the post-boy , and such printed papers , and this in defiance of laws and parliaments , whose authority in matters of religion , as observed before , they deny : so that it were but fit that on this occasion that illustrious body would be pleased to assert and vindicate their right . for that sort of men if they had power , would in the denial of this authority soon pass from religious to civil matters , wherefore 't is the interest of church and state to support one another , for they are like the twain children , born and bred together , between which was such a sympathy , that when one was well , sick , or strong , the other was so too , and as they were born , so they died together . he who but a little before said that the socinians will agree to the disputed article if they may explain it , meant after their own way , is such a stranger to scripture , that if it be not the printer's fault , i am apt to believe , because in the margin i quoted not the place , he knew not whom i meant when to socinians i apply'd the character which scripture gives of ishmael , whose hand was against every man , and every man's hand against him ; for instead of ishmaels the word infidels is in . tho' i do not mind the nauseous stuff wherewith he hath fill'd up the rest of that page and the following , yet i well know and take notice how he is not satisfied to misrepresent me to the lords bishops , but most maliciously would traduce me as one who makes impudent reflections on the king and parliament , thereby to make me obnoxious : to be impudent were an invasion upon his property , which i never was nor shall be guilty of . here i might claim the law of retaliation ; he cannot defend his cause , therefore he would throw his venom upon me , si non marte tamen arte ; now this calumny of his , he doth ground upon these words of mine ; that to the toleration of those two transcendent wickednesses , blasphemy and idolatry , we may chiefly attribute the cause of the chastisements which make the nation uneasie . i hope none will deny that sins bring god's judgements upon nations , and when we feel them 't is our duty to speak the truth , our sins are the cause of this ; afflictions do not arise out of the dust , but if we must believe scripture , chastisements or punishments of nations , families and persons , come from the hand of god ; for as he is most just , so leaves nothing unrewarded ; if in the world there was any person free from sin , that very same should also be free from all manner of pains ; but punishment is tyed to the tail of sin , and when we feel god's chastisements , and we know they are inflicted for sin , then the most notorious , the greatest and most frequent sins are obvious to our eyes , as the two in question must needs be , and thereupon we should say , lord we have sinned against heaven and against thee . about this point , i shall out of scripture , bring a precedent of what must be done in such cases : the israelites are smitten at ai , whereupon joshua rent his cloths and fell upon his face , and god said unto him , israel hath sinned , i will be no more with you , except ye destroy the accursed from among you ; the accursed , both person and thing , at that time were destroyed ; and now if not the persons , at least the thing should be , if we will have god among us ; and what things in the world more accursed than blasphemy and idolatry ? wherefore i then did , and now do conclude , that all christian and prudent care ought to be used to remove blasphemy and idolatry out of the kingdom , but how to effect it , 't is to be left to those whom it belongs to , but still the thing ought to be done ; now i ask , is this to make an impudent reflection against king and parliament ? but they make a real one , for under the notion that he is no persecutor , they would proclaim his majesty and the parliament to favour and protect blasphemy and heresie , that is socinianism . but this gentleman , according to the spirit which they all are originally acted by , would profanely ridicule the dispensations of god's special providence and divest that infinite majesty of his being the just judge of the world , who doth execute justice and judgment : after this rate the old world was drowned by chance , tho' the flood had been foretold 120 years before : thus sodom and gomorrah were consumed by accident , and without god's special appointment , tho' he out of heaven rained fire and brimstone : so by hazard nadah and abihu were consumed , tho' scripture saith , there went out fire from the lord and devoured them . likewise , without a special providence , the earth opened her mouth and swallowed up korah , dathan and abiram , tho' it was a special judgment of god ; as was that of the 14700 men , who for their murmuring against moses and aaron , as we read in the same chapter , died of the plague . in the like manner , after their principles , the famine in david's days of three years , year after year , came meerly according to a general course of nature , without a particular cause , and special providence ; certainly when david inquired about it , the lord assigned the particul cause , and answered , it is for saul and his bloody house , because he slew the gibeonites . the sin , with the punishment , and by whom inflicted , were all named and expressed , yet against all right and reason , they would not have this case to be a special providence , for they say there is no such thing in the world. but why should i bring a candle to light the sun , and in a thing which god's word doth so plainly and fully demonstrate , how to punish national , family and personal sins , god sends the plague , famine , the sword , venomous beasts , the locust , the canker-worm , the catterpillar , and the palmer-worm , which the lord calls his great army which i sent among you : did the plagues of egypt come at a venture , or were they inflicted by god to punish that nation for their sins ? god threatned the children of israel for their disobedience , to send upon them cursing , vexation and rebuke ; the pestilence , a consumption , a fever , an inflamation , an extreme burning , the sword , blasting , mildew , the both of egypt , the emerods , with scabs and itch , madness , blindness , astonishment of heart , &c. as expressed in deut. 28. are not all these judgments of god upon men for their sins ? have i then spoken any harm , that you should cavil at what i say , that to the toleration of blasphemy and idolatry , we may chiefly attribute the cause of the chastisments which make the nation uneasie through losses by sea , by land , by fire , or any other way you named or can name ? blasphemy and idolatry ( 't is a sad truth ) do abound in the land , and a flood of all evil in doctrine and practise hath overflowed it ; and tho' it be against gospel and law , yet no visible effectual care is taken to suppress it : can we be unconcerned when we hear god by his prophet speaking thus , shall i not visit for these things , saith the lord ? shall not i be avenged on such a nation as this ? jer. 5. 29. with such a warrant in my hand , i am neither ashamed nor afraid openly to declare , that winking at blasphemy and idolatry , we may well reckon among the chief causes which have drawn god's rod upon the back of the nation , and the more , because the sins which there move god to speak by his prophet , are against men , but these we now complain against are directly against god : and if god be angry for their not judging for men , will he not be so if men neglect to judge for him ? do but read the last verse of the same chapter , where mention is made of distempers , if not exactly the same in relation to persons , yet in nature much like ours , and take notice of god's expostulation there , what will ye do in the end thereof ? now the misdemeanour they would wrongfully charge me with , i may justly retort upon them : with all due respect i addressed to both houses , and humbly represented things as 't is usual in points of grievances , whereof some are of a spiritual as others of a temporal nature : i then said , and now say it again , that according to divine and humane laws , blasphemy should be rooted out and blasphemers punished : to ask for justice is not to prescribe the judges any thing what they ought to do , and there is nothing like this in my whole epistle , as these words of mine which the author of the letter hath taken notice of , do evidence . thus having laid open the disease , i leave it for your piety and christian wisdom to find out , and apply the true and proper remedy : we know 't is for the supreme judges to do justice in what manner and degree they please : no man of sense will deny it to be in the power of , and to belong to the magistrates office to punish delinquents against god as well as those against men , of the first as well as of the second table , blasphemers , idolaters , profaners of god's holy name , as well as murtherers , adulterers and thieves : s. paul was no sanguinary man , yet in one place , after an enumeration of several things , whereof some are less grievous than blasphemy , concludeth , that they which commit such things are worthy of death . for my part , i neither in my epistle nor in the preface have said , or designed to say so ; yet if i had , without being a sanguinary man , i here have a warrant for it . but having spoken of my self , i now must come to you and say , ye both have been much wanting in your due respect for that illustrious assembly of parliament : for one humbly to address or petition the supreme judges to redress things which are amiss , is no disrespect ; but to pretend to be their apologist and make use of their name in an ironical way , as ye , i may say , saucily have done in the title of your pamphlet , is certainly to want a due respect and to deserve punishment : to call a libel against the doctrine of the religion by law established by the name of an apology for the parliament , most humbly representing , &c. is a great abuse , and a piece of high impudence in you , which hangs together with your whole carriage ; for contrary to the known laws of the land , and in defiance of the civil and ecclesiastical jurisdictions , you do print , publish , and most insolently go about to vindicate your heretical and blasphemous opinions in opposition to and the disturbance of the church by law established . and when ye are not able to defend your bad cause , to give the thing a wrong side , the superior power to be your drudges , must by you be brought in , but 't is in you a high presumption to think you can impose upon them : now for my part i must tell you , that when i am engaged in any controversie i stick to the point , beg for no foreign help , and answer not with injuries but with good arguments , ye do the contrary . but over and above what i have said , to shew how with humbly addressing my self to the parliament to ask justice against you , and towards preventing the growth of socinianism , i did nothing but what is according to law , i here lay down an undeniable proof of it , with a copy of the presentment of the grand jury of middlesex on the last day of the last easter term 1697 , and this according to directions given by the judges , who must know the law. the names of the worthy persons that were of it , do for their piety and zeal deserve to be recorded in letters of gold , and 't is hoped this may be a precedent for others to do the like in other parts of the kingdom . a copy of the presentment of the grand jury of middlesex , the last day of the term at westminster , viz. we the jurors sworn to enquire on the behalf of our sovereign lord the king , of all offences committed in the county of middlesex , in consideration of our duty and in obedience to the directions given us by mr. justice rookeby in his charge , do humbly present that , we find by daily experience , that several great and fundamental articles of the christian religion , as they are professed by the church of england and contained in the 39 articles , and established as the avowed doctrine of the church of england by several acts of parliament , are not only disputed and questioned , but absolutely denyed , and particularly the doctrine of the trinity , of the divinity of christ , and of the divinity of the holy ghost , and books are daily writ , printed and published , either directly contrary to the said doctrine , or by consequence in opposition to them , denying all the mysteries of the christian religion , and resolving all into such notions as are to be made good by humane reason , and thereby making void the whole revealed religion , and destroying the necessity of faith in order to eternal salvation , by means whereof arianism , socinianism , atheism and deism do greatly abound : and there are proselytes to the same daily made , to the great scandal of the church of england and the orthodox members thereof : for preventing of which for the future , we do present that all care possible ought to be taken for the speedy discovering of all such books as are so writ , printed or published , contrary to the known doctrine of the church of england , and the authors , printers and publishers of the same ; and for punishing the authors , printers and publishers thereof according to the utmost severity of the laws , and for the suppressing all such books of that kind as are already printed , and for preventing the printing any more for the time to come : and we do farther present , that a book entitled , christianity not mysterious : or a treatise shewing , that there is nothing in the gospel contrary to reason or above it , and that no christian doctrine can be properly called a mystery ; supposed to be written by one mr. toland : and also another book entitled , the reasonableness of christianity , as delivered in the scriptures : and also one other book entitled , the lady's religion , in a letter the honourable the lady howard , are books fit to be suppressed , and the authors , printers and publishers of the same ought to have such punishment inflicted on them , as by the laws of the land they may . item , we present a pamphlet lately published , entitled , a letter to a convocation-man concerning the rights , powers and privileges of that body , to be scandalous and against the constitution of the government , and ought to be suppressed and the author punished . now ye may see by the agreement of this presentment , with the things contained in my epistle and preface , to which 't is posteriour , how in what i said or did , i was not in the wrong nor out of the way : i faithfully give it as it is , without changing words or altering the sense , as some of you have done of some of your citations out of my papers ; ye are always sure to give the worst construction of words and things , like spiders ye turn all things into poison ; about which , besides what i already observed , i shall on the way take notice of one thing more , when i say no soldier in an enemy's country ought to struggle out of the way , &c. for he that doth so , ventures to be knocked on the head ; you put in ought instead of ventures , is this fairly done ? certainly 't is a great difference between saying a man runs the hazard of being knocked , and he ought to be knocked on the head ; so if i should but write or speak reason , you with adding one letter , would soon make it treason ; and if you write or speak treason with taking off one letter , you can soon make it reason ; this is said to shew your partiality : as to what follows in the same page and the next after about dr. sh — against his antagonist as against me , i shall not trouble my head about it , only god forgive and give you grace to mend : i see all that have any thing to do with this man or lye in his way and are not of his mind , must prepare for the like usage : but , i say , i do not concern my self about persons so much as about the cause ; and therefore whosover would in the godhead set up three spirits and substances , is in my opinion fallen into a fundamental heresie ; and whosoever is against such , in that same thing . i join with , because i always love to be for the truth . in what follows i desire the reader to take notice of the man's want of sincerity : as well as i , he knows we are not and cannot be agreed upon the very terms he sets down , for they contain the quintessence of their error about the holy trinity ; for , sirs , ye would have jesus christ to be not a person , but only an attribute as the wisdom of god , so the holy ghost to be only the vertue and power of god , and not an hypostasis a person of the godhead ; for tho' one of you saith , that for peace-sake ye submit to the phrase of the church , that is to the name person , yet ye interpret it not as the church doth . therefore , tho' you say , the vnitarians , the catholick church , the translator and i , are at perfect agreement , and tho' we agree in the oneness of the godhead or of one divine nature , and , to make use of your words , that there is one infinite spiritual substance , yet we are far from agreeing with you in what follows , with three properties , unbegotten , begotten and proceeding , &c. except ye explain your meaning otherwise than ye use to do : arius under a word which if well taken , might be harmless enough , sheltered his error , so 't is usual with you , ye are meerly for words , but we do besides words look for things , and would have such words as are proper as much as may be , to signifie the things ; now your threefold distinction of original mind , reflex wisdom , and divine love , may be sufficient to represent what you mean thereby , but not what we believe : we make a distinction between the property and the person of the godhead , but you do confound them , and would have it to be but one and the same : now if with us you will say , that in one and most simple nature of god are three distinct persons to whom the infinite and singular nature of one only god is common , and that these three distinct persons , the attributes of that one god do belong to , then you say something to the purpose , or else , like the gibeonites , you come in to us only to deceive us : we assert three persons and not barely three properties in the godhead ; we say the father is a person , the son a person , and the holy ghost a person , and so three persons ; but we don't say , the father is an attribute , the son an attribute , and the holy ghost an attribute , thereby of three persons to make three attributes : we cannot say the son of god to be a property or attribute ; we cannot say an attribute of divine nature was made flesh ; we cannot say three properties appeared in our saviours baptism , or that we are baptised in the name of three properties : therefore ye may see we are not so far agreed as you said ; if you will have us to be agreed , you must come to us , for we declare we cannot go to you , that 's the easiest and surest way of the two , for we are tyed by a revelation , and may go no farther than it doth allow us ; but your human reason is a latitudinarian which can stretch a great way ; we may not , we cannot go beyond the bounds which god in his word hath prescribed us , but ye are free-willers and at liberty ; to day your reason may teach you one thing , to morrow another ; for as you say your selves , a doctrine which at one time may be convenient , may be otherwise when circumstances of times shall alter , but with us , no circumstances can alter our heavenly doctrine . out of this you may see , how all this while , i have not been fighting against the man in the moon , or as you very civilly express it , making a rod for a foolish back of my own , or to speak home , a fagot to roast my own ribs . but upon a surer ground i may say , he hath been in a dream or in a hot violent fit , for he hath been striking on all sides and spared none that lay in his way ; as for me , i am the man , and therefore in the fit , having forgotten the cause he hath at me almost in every page ; and in one place he admires at my extravagant zeal , who would have the socinians burnt for their complyance with the church of england : if so , then indeed there were cause to admire , but there is true ground of admiration that he thinks it so ; but really nothing is to be admired at , either in or from him , for he calls me a papist , a calvinist , and a zealous one , a socinian , nay a real one : he saith he is no socinian , but i am , when he writes for and i against them ; this is a hocus pocus , 't is and 't is not ; surely there is cause to suspect something is out of order within that brains of his , or an extraordinary brazen-fac'dness , however let him as he can secure all this from contradiction , et erit mihi magnus apollo : when i think upon such men as pretend to alter the nature of things , i am put in mind of what a famous popish author saith , that the pope can make that to be sin which is no sin , and that not to be sin which is sin ; so do these men who would seem to be much against popery , yet follow several of their maxims , and would make that to be a nonsense which is good sense , and that to be no contradiction which is , and so on the contrary : if these men themselves be not mysteries , as one calls me , their dark sentences are ; all this while the cause is safe enough . but calvin not so , how roughly doth he handle him on all occasions , if he were alive he would not be good to give to dogs , tho' neither he nor a dosen more such one 's would be worthy to carry his books : i confess 't is to me , and ought to be a wonder to others , to find how mad some men in the world are against that faithful servant of god , once in his life and conversation , and now in his works and labours an eminent instrument in his hand as for instruction , so at first in the work of reformation : this is a fit of rage which several years since , out of envy , some in parts much inferiour to him , began to be possessed of , and by men of the same kidney , hath been propagated to this very day , whereof the authors of the two letters are real instances ; for to speak in paul's words , they are exceeding mad against him , and as they are against his memory and person now far out of their reach , so they are broken loose and so hot and fiery against the doctrines he taught , that all the water of the leman lake could hardly cool them ; what they call calvinism they adorn with these epithets , proud , sowr , and fiery qualifications , calvinistical impatience , and many such more , whereof this orthodox is one , the heresie of the tritheists is not worse than uncharitable and ill natur'd calvinism : therein i shall conclude with this , in truth i think heylin was over modest to esteem a presbyterian that is a calvinist worse than a papist : here is your protestants ; and as if this had not been enough , his own venom he throws out in the same place , for my part i esteem a christian from whatsoever sect denominated , not excepting the socinians , more honourable than a persecuting calvinist : tho' the word persecuting had been left out , it had been all one to that christian righteous soul of his . but as for socinus he was a most excellent man , very sound in the faith , and who , if we will believe this man , hath by his works laid a great obligation upon the world , and he subscribes to what one of the gang said of him , that none since the apostles hath deserved better of the christian religion ; so that a man may more avail himself by reading his works , than by perusing all the fathers together , with the writings of more modern authors . this people either never read , or care not for what paul saith , let your moderation be known unto all men , for they observe it neither for socinus nor against calvin ; but having elsewhere had an occasion in few few words to do this faithful servant of christ some justice , i shall leave off speaking of his person to take some brief notice of his works . that which most nettles his enemies are the doctrines about grace and providence mentioned in the two letters , which they call calvinism : but if they would not so proudly despise all antiquity , but peruse some of augustin's works , who lived 1200 years before calvin , they might find he was a calvinist , so were hilarius , prosper , fulgentius , and others , who so long before he was born , could , as well as he did afterwards , find those same doctrines in the word of god ; and accordingly , the beginning , progress and end of our salvation , and from first to last , we attribute to god's free grace , which in that matter we can never yield too much nor too little to any thing of our own ; we do not , like the pharisee , boast in our prayers , that we fast twice a week , give tithes , and are not extortioners , unjust , and make no comparison with our neighbours as being better men than they , but we say , god be merciful to us miserable sinners ; for we are commanded to trust in the lord with all our hearts , and forbidden to lean unto our own understanding , which is as good as to say , depend not upon your own reason ; therefore in any thing we go about , we are to call upon god for his help , and the gracious influence of his holy spirit , being sure that without it we can do no good ; and we be sufficiently taught in scripture to trust to no strength or abilities of our own ; and when in the world we meet with men of principles contrary to these , we find it not strange , for we know that there must be also heresies among us , or those called christians , that they which are approved may be made manifest among us : wherefore as long as we have about these matters such a foundation as paul the great preacher of free grace hath laid , we need not to care for all exceptions or cavils of men or devils : these are such truths , as we hope through grace , never to be ashamed or afraid to own unto the end , even to lay down our lives , as he did his , for so glorious a cause . the person of the lord jesus christ and his grace are so linked together , that no man strikes at one , but the other feels it ; tho' may be in a different degree , they have a common enemy , so he who is against one is against both , which i positively affirm of socinians ; grace and truth , saith the evangelist , came by jesus christ , who coming into the world brought grace along with him , for he is the spring of it , which he manifested in framing and redeeming of his church , the foundation whereof and of our christian religion lies in this great and fundamental truth whereof peter made a confession , how jesus christ is the son of the living god ; upon the verity whereof , there our saviour declared that his church should be built , and at the same time signified that the gates of hell shall not prevail against it : for this is the house built upon a rock which , tho' the rain descendeth , and the floods come , and the wind blows , yet it falls not , for it is founded upon a rock . in that promise of his the lord jesus declares two things ; first , the gates , that is the power of devils in hell , would afterwards make some attempt against that fundamental truth of his being the son of the living god. as indeed , it hath from time to time raised its strongest batteries against it , as not long after his ascension , even in the life time of his beloved disciple , and after his death , the assaults began by simon the sorcerer , ebion , cerinthus , menander , and afterwards by other hellish instruments : but in arius's time great strugglings happened with so prodigious a success , that all the world was said to be arian ; hence came the saying , all the world against athanasius , and athanasius against all the world ; so afterwards for the same cause against our saviour's divinity , several fought under the banners of hell , as now , tho' more cunningly , socinians do , having taken up the cudgels ; and as those blasphemous opinions were exploded out of the world , so shall be , in god's due time , those which are raging for the present , notwithstanding all the craftiness , malice and power of hell , and all antichrists , of devils and men : this my so positively speaking , is grounded upon christ's promise , how the gates of hell shall not prevail against the truth of his being the son of the living god , which his church is built upon ; and this is the second thing , not only deduced from , but plainly contained in those words of the lord jesus , whose person is a fit object of adoration , as his grace is of admiration . these truths one may abundantly be satisfied with out of scripture , which i much have made use of , because some places prove a truth directly , others collaterally , and others are brought in to illustrate and give a light to the thing , so that scripture is of several uses , nothing therein without some use ; 't is of it as of the rivers in the garden of eden , they all did not run one and the same way . but now to conclude , i in the first place put you in mind to answer my book , and then take this occasion which you give me , in case ye knew it not before , to acquaint you , how upon those matters i have written a book hitherto unanswered ; if you have such an aversion for them as you * express , do but give us in print your thoughts about it , 't is a fair field i offer you , but be not afraid , for 't is not smithfield : but if ye can defend that cause no better than the socinian about the holy trinity and person of the lord jesus , then it will be in you but time and labour lost in vain . and if you go about it , be more serious in a business of so high a nature , and less virulent and malicious ; for shame leave off jesting with holy things , and let it be without giving ill language , for therein i yield you know to do 't more than my self , and write like scholars and gentlemen , without breaking the bonds of humanity , with arguments as hard as ye please but softer words , and make no more haste than good speed ; if ye come in that way , then by the grace of god i will fairly answer you in the like manner ; and tho' already there is work enough cut for you , i doubt more than ye are well able to compass , yet several new arguments i have to bring in : but if in the usual scolding reviling way , i will leave you to chew your cud : may be your bantering way of writing hath succeeded against some , but be not mistaken , with others it will never do , come with good arguments and then i am for you ; however come which way you will , i declare i shall not in the least care whether you come asunder or both together . finis . books printed for j. hartley . the blasphemous socinian heresie disproved and confuted , &c. with animadversions on mr. toland's christianity not mysterious . dedicated to both houses of parliament , by j. gailhard , gent. verdicts of the learned concerning virgil and homer's heroic poems . regular and irregular thoughts in poets and orators . notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a41509-e180 page 18. page 15. page 4. page 3. gal. 4. 18. rev. 3. 15. page 3. luke 16. 8. pag. 59. 1 cor. 2. 4 , 5. acts 15. eccles . 4. 10. * 1 cor. 12. 28. and ephes . 4. ii . 2 pet. 1. 20 , 21. 1 cor. 12. 30. 2 pet. 3. 16. luke 16. 31. luke 20. 38. 2 cor. ii . 8. 1 cor. 2. 12 , 13. ephes . 1. 16 , 17 , 18. colos . 1. 9. 1 cor. 15. 58. coloss . 2. 7. heb. 13. 9 1 john 4. 1. 2 pet. 3. 16. page 8. page 4. 16 , 18. 1 cor. 7. 7. acts 17. 2. acts 28. 23. 1 cor. 15. 34. acts 1● . 24 , 28. chap. 17. 11. luke 24. 44. ver. 45. isa . 8. 20. matt. 7 5. pag. 6 , 7. job 13. 4. psal . 74. 22. john 20. 31. pag. 6 , 8 pag. 11. acts 2● . 3. matth. 16. 17. john 14. 16 , 17. chap. 16. 13 , 14. 2 tim. 1. 7. psal . 119. 169. pag. 8. 2 tim. 3. 16. 1 john 1 , 2. 1 cor. 2. 15. 1 tim. 3 16. gal. 4. 4. rom. 8. 32. p. 12 , 13. john 10. 33 , 36. john 14. 10. chap. 11. 4. isa . 42. 8. luke 2. 49. 50. coloss . 2. 9. prov. 28. 26. chap. 23. 4. p. 9 , 10. in 1565. and 1660. pag. 39. p. 6. 13. page 14 , 2 tim. 2. 25. pag 30. john 16 2 , 3. joh. 8. 19. 1 john 2. 23. matt. 3. 17. and 17. 5. joh. 12. 28 joh. 5. 37. joh. 8. 43. acts 3. 22 , 23. 2 pet. 1. 16 , 17 , 18. john 10. 3 , 4 , 5. 2 cor. 11. 13 , 14. page 17. pag. 19. pag. 18. matt. 1● . 31. luke 22. 65. acts 13. 33 , 45. 1 tim. 1. 13. acts 26. 11. ephes . 2. 12. coloss . 2. 9. pag. 19. psal . 53. 1. pag. 22. heb. 12. 16. pag. 25. rom. 12. 5. 1 cor. 6. 15. coloss . 1. 24. ephes . 5. 23 , 32. psal . 111. 9. ephes . 5. 4. pag. 20. matt. 11. 27. rom. 1. 21 , &c. john 8. 55. chap. 14. 7. 2 cor. 4. 6. pag. 21. pag. 18. 1 pet. 4. 18. p. 22 , & 33. p. 33. . ●9 . rev. 2. 9. & 3. 9. p. 7. p. 22. pag. 33. lev. 5. 1. deut. 19. 21. lev. 24. 16 , 23. p. 25. p. 27. p. 18. p. 4. p. 27. p. 28. p. 29. p. 30. p. 30. num. 16. 7. p. 31. p. 28. p. 33. p. 40. rom. 2. 1. coloss . 4. 6. 1 pet. 3. 15. pag. 42 , 43. acts 19. 19. p. 31. gen. 16. 12. josh . 7. 2 sam. 21. 1. joel 2. 25. rom. 1. 32. monday may 17. p. 36. p. 37. p. 14. p. 37. p. 38. p. 26 , & 29. acts 26. 11. p. 28. p. 35. p. 33. p. 41. p. 18. phil. 4. 5. luke 18. 11 , 12 , 13. prov. 3. 5. john 1. 17. matt. 16. 18. chap. 7. 24 , 25. a plea for free grace against free-will . * p. 9 , 20 , 33. a twofold vindication of the late arch-bishop of canterbury, and of the author of the history of religion the first part defending the said author against the defamations of mr. atterbury's sermon and ... : the charge of socinianism against dr. tillotson consider'd ... : the second containing remarks on the said sermon ... : and a word in defence of the ... bishop of sakisbury, by another hand. howard, robert, sir, 1626-1698. 1696 approx. 224 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 95 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2007-10 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a44658 wing h3006 estc r9361 11906437 ocm 11906437 50689 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a44658) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 50689) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 816:4) a twofold vindication of the late arch-bishop of canterbury, and of the author of the history of religion the first part defending the said author against the defamations of mr. atterbury's sermon and ... : the charge of socinianism against dr. tillotson consider'd ... : the second containing remarks on the said sermon ... : and a word in defence of the ... bishop of sakisbury, by another hand. howard, robert, sir, 1626-1698. [2], 185 p. [s.n.], london : 1696. reproduction of original in duke university library. attributed to robert howard. cf. nuc pre-1956. part one signed: n.s. [i.e., howard]. "the author of the history of religion vindicated", and "a reply to the anonymous edinburgh libeller" have special t.p. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng atterbury, francis, 1662-1732. tillotson, john, 1630-1694. burnet, gilbert, 1643-1715. socinianism -early works to 1800. 2005-03 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2005-06 spi global keyed and coded from proquest page images 2005-07 rachel losh sampled and proofread 2005-11 spi global rekeyed and resubmitted 2006-09 ali jakobson sampled and proofread 2006-09 ali jakobson text and markup reviewed and edited 2007-02 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion a twofold vindication of the late arch-bishop of canterbury , and of the author of the history of religion . the first part defending the said author against the defamations of mr. fr. atterbury's sermon , and both those eminent persons against a traiterous libel , titled , the charge of socinianism against dr. tillotson consider'd . in two letters to the honourable sir r. h. the second containing remarks on the said sermon , and a reply to the same libel . wherein some right is done to that great and good man dr. tillotson , in the points of the original of sacrifices , the sacrifice of christ , future punishments , &c. and a word in defence of the eminent bishop of salisbury . by another hand . london , printed in the year 1696. sir , i have receiv'd by your favour some papers written by two very learned persons , which you say are ready for the press , occasion'd by two extraordinary angry men , mr. atterbury and mr. monroe , who have express'd their displeasure against my history of religion . i dare not give my opinion of their writings , i am too much an oblig'd party ; besides , their own abilities will much better shew it than i can express it : but i fancy , that if mr. atterbury and mr. monroe had imagin'd they should have rais'd such a strength against them , they would hardly have muster'd up their own weak forces . for mr. atterbury , i know him not , but he has made himself known by chusing a very improper place ( the pulpit ) to vent a passion unsutable to christianity , or common morality ; for such must an injurious violence be esteem'd , that has no reason pretended to excuse , or at least to extenuate the passion : from that place we expect to be taught by perswasion , not by railing ; yet he seems to have a christian consideration that hinders him from writing some body's life ; if he means mine , i will free him from his tender christianity , and own that i writ the history of religion ; and if he pleases to use the freedom i give him , i assure him i shall not be displeased at any truth that he can write : but if his usual passion guides him other-ways , i shall attend him with such answers , and make him such sutable returns , as will be proper for the occasion , and consider his calling with as little respect as he did the sacred place where he chose to rail . for mr. monroe he is angry at every thing , he sputters at the government , and will not allow that most excellent man dr. tillotson , late archbishop of canterbury , either to have a title to that , or any parts or abilities ; but at a venture , among many other errors , charges him to be a socinian , and at the same time discovers he does not know what a socinian is ; then falls upon the bishop of salisbury , and then with an obliging anger ranks me with those great men : but his furious wildness is sufficiently laid open by these two learned men. when i writ the history of religion , i was very much pleas'd to see the church of england ( which i have fought for , and shall ever defend ) so free from all those heathenish rites and superstitions , retain'd by the priest-craft of the church of rome , and could not but admire to see any that profest to be a minister of the church of england offended at it ; nor can i imagine any reason for such a concern , unless they would have the very name of priest of what perswasion so ever , so sacred that it should not be irreverently handled : if this should be the cause , i dare venture to assure them they will find no return , for could any write with such a disadvantage to the ministers of the church of england , the popish priests would not shew any displeasure to see them condemn'd here , that they pretend to believe will be damn'd hereafter . but mr. monroe seems to grumble something about sacrifices , as if i had writ concerning the original of them . i could not be so dull as not to know the beginning of them was as early as abel , i only trac'd the use of them , with the rites and superstitious ceremonies taught and enlarged from time to time by the heathen priests , and how they were still continued and imitated by the priest-craft of the church of rome , which i thought i had made evident by matter of fact. a friend of mine , of quality and learning , told me , he ask'd a minister why he was displeas'd at the history of religion ? he answer'd , that they were whipt upon the backs of the romish priests ; i could not but wonder how they got up there to receive the lashes of the others . i believe that there are some so in love with power , that they were displeased i inveigh'd against persecution , by which they exercise it : if that offend any , i shall always persist in receiving their displeasure ; for i presume i have clearly shew'd that it is contrary to the teaching of the gospel ; we are there taught to love our neighbours as our selves , and certainly they would hardly seem such neighbours that would be executioners ; they would not seem to love others as themselves , unless they were equally desirous to be their own hangmen . but mr. monroe is yet more severe , and will be the judg of what i mean ; for being displeased , as it seems , that i writ against transubstantiation , he says i meant it against the trinity , though i had not a thought , nor writ a word that could give him the least cause to pronounce so rash a sentence . i remember a justice of peace in a play that bid his clerk make the mittimus while he examin'd the party ; but of all men living i would not have him my arbitrary judg , for he that makes himself worse than others , would probably condemn me to be worse than i am . but i leave these two angry men to the correction of those two learned persons , to whom ( as in gratitude i ought ) i shall ever acknowledg great obligations , by whose strength my weakness is sufficiently supported : i shall only add , that i have read of a wise philosopher that would not trust himself while he was in passion ; but these revers'd philosophers raise all their confidence from their passions . i have seen an angry cur bite at a wheel because it moved from him ; and i presume that dark keeping is the cause of such a causeless fierceness . at the latter end of one of these learned mens writings , i find a very charitable answer for me to dr. sherlock , who in his defence of that excellent man dr. tillotson , late archbishop of canterbury , ( in answer to the charge of socinianism against dr. tillotson considered ) is pleased , unprovok'd by any cause , to call my history of religion an execrable pamphlet , and me an atheist or deist , which it seems is all one to him , for he says , it matters not which , and that my design is to ridicule christian religion . if these heavy charges be true , i readily confess 't is an execrable pamphlet indeed ; but he is not pleas'd to give the least reason to excuse or justify so much undeserv'd bitterness : if it be dr. sherlock's , as generally believ'd , i will not venture to pretend to cope with him in harsh and virulent expressions , he is more furnish'd than i am with ammunition proper for such a war , witness the muster of his angry forces in that learned book which charges him with tritheism ; but i hope he will not be displeased if with an unmov'd temper i endevour to : free my self from such uncharitable imputations . but of all men living , the doctor seems to me the most improper man to charge any one with ridiculing religion , and not accompany his charge with the least cause or reason for it , since he is not only indicted for it , but the indictment made good upon him ; if the proof of idolatry , impious and heretical opinions can do it , and the charge made out by a doctor of the church of england , a man of most extraordinary learning and parts , with strong reason and authority , and for ought i can see to the contrary , very unanswerable by mr. dean ; and not only charges him for his publick writings , but for his private practice , if no regard of conscience can ridicule religion . this is set forth by that most learned person in his animadversions on dr. sherlock's book , entituled , a vindication of the holy and ever blessed trinity , which charges him with tritheism , tho mr. dean is pleased most peremptorily to declare that he has made his notions plain and obvious , tho by words and phrases neither obvious nor plain : but the charge is made out upon him with strength of reason and learning ; neither of which dr. sherlock is pleased to bestow on me for his severe judgment , perhaps he believes ( as indeed he may ) that his only pronouncing makes it as obvious and plain , as his endeavouring to prove it would have been . the charge of ridiculing religion in his own practice , arises from his seeming contempt of conscience , one of the chief rules of christianity , by professing he would suffer martyrdom rather than take the oaths ; but he was easily converted when interest more prevail'd upon him than such a slighted part of christianity ; nor stopt there , but ridicul'd providence it self , to bring it in aid to justify his contradictory consciences : for what can more appear the ridiculing of providence , than to endeavour to make it the justifier of mischief and injustice , if but successful enough ? but if the doctor can make this good , he will reach a more sublime art of priest-craft , than any that i have describ'd in the history of religion . but it may be he does not believe that i ridicule the christian religion comprehended in the gospel , but the religion which he calls christian , that differs from the gospel , and is founded upon new and extravagant notions ; for he is charg'd with blasphemy by the same learned person , in his book of the knowledg of christ ; on such a religion i confess if i had the art of ridiculing , i would willingly bestow it . but since he is not pleased to give the least reason for his hard and uncharitable censures cast upon me at a venture , i will take the opportunity to refer it to any impartial reader , if he pleases to examine it , whether i have not in my history of religion pursued the blessed rules and precepts of the gospel with a sacred veneration , and upon that strong and sure foundation have endeavour'd to build all my reasons and arguments : but the doctor perhaps would have his notions receiv'd as true christian religion , tho not founded on the gospel ; and consequently not to believe those dark notions , is to ridicule christianity . with the same passionate liberty he calls me a deist or an atheist , it matters not which . i cannot imagine how any man should venture to pronounce such a blasphemous indifferency : but seriously reflecting upon what the doctor has writ , i began to imagine that he had so fully and clearly convinc'd himself , ( since he thought he had made it so plain to others ) that there were three distinct equal and infinite beings ; that consequently he presum'd if any did not believe in three gods , it matter'd not whether they believ'd any at all ; and if his notion of three gods equally infinite and almighty were true , it seems to follow , that he that does not believe the three , must be guilty of atheism , tho he believes in one . by this he seems to have reason to make deism and atheism of equal respect : so that every one is concluded an atheist that is not of the doctor 's opinion . this adventurous passion can only proceed from the opinion of his own infallibility , and is angry at any that will not believe in him . i know not what answer to make to his downright calling names , there 's no argument can arise from direct railing , and such in the common method of the world are replied to with nothing but blows ; but i shall only say that he calls me what i am not , and to wave the harsh word which is due to him , i shall only add , that what i say is true , and leave the contrary to rest upon him . i will conclude with one assurance , that i shall not take it ill of any one that shall offer reasons unclogg'd with passion against any thing i have writ ; and if i cannot clearly answer them , i will submit and acknowledg my error ; and that any one may have the freer invitation , i own that the history of religion was writ by , sir , your true friend , and most humble servant , ro. howard . a vindication of his grace , the ( late ) archbishop of canterbvry ; and of the ( honourable ) author of the history of religion : from the defamations and scandals of mr. fr. atterbury ; and of a ( traiterous ) libel supposed to be written by dr. m — roe , with this title , the charge of socinianism against dr. tillotson considered , &c. in two letters to the ( honourable ) author of the history of religion . printed in the year , 1696. to the publisher . sir , i hear , my letters to our honourable friend , the author of the history of religion , are in your hands ; and that you have thoughts of putting them into the press : if so , i pray , let this to your self go along with them . for i ought to inform you : that i have receiv'd an answer from our friend , concerning the great favours , and liberalities of king james to him . he avows , that his majesty , both when he was king , and while he was only duke of york , never did him any favour , nor made him the offer of any : but on the contrary , shew'd to him all the unkindness , that occasion and opportunity ( at any time ) enabled him to express . it appears then , that the libeller , knowing the great services of our friend to the crown and royal family , took it for granted ; that king james had endeavour'd to win him , to the popish and arbitrary interest , by preforments and liberalities : and so ( at adventures ) he makes it one part of his guilt and naughtiness ; that he would not be bought by favours , the meaning of which he might so easily guess at . but had his majesty been as bountiful , as the libeller supposed ; why might not our friend have taken those favours , either as part of the reward , due to his services ; or as his majesty's royal munificence , to wit and distinguishing abilities : why was he obliged to understand them , as bribes and corruptions , as the libeller would have them interpreted ? this ungrateful man , says our popish accuser , forgot all the king's bounties to him , and was with the most forward in turning him out . let us grant to a fool both his lies ; yet where ( however ) is the ungratitude , when never any thing was given to our friend by the royal family , which he might not most justly put to the account either of his services , or his abilities ? but king james , father petre , and the nuncio , knew better things , than to fling away their money on a person , whom his vertue , more than his fortunes , had set so much above the reach of bribes : they were for a contrary method , to brow-beat , and mortify him by oppositions . but neither would this do , he remained the same to his religion and country , as he was to the crown and royal family , when they were attacked by the republican faction : that is , he was ( heroically ) firm to both , while they were the weaker side , without seeking afterwards from either , the rewards of his merit to them . you and i , sir , have nothing so much valued by us , as the friendship and esteem of a fortitude , constancy , and vertue so extraordinary ; nor any thing that we desire so much , as the long life and prosperity of a friend , whom with so much reason we value and love . this is all that i need now to say , saving that i am , with the greatest respect , your most obliged , and assured friend , n. s. the first letter ; being reflections on a sermon , preach'd before her ( late ) most excellent majesty , on these words of solomon , the scorner seeketh wisdom , and findeth it not : by francis atterbury , student in christ-church , oxford . to the honourable and learned author of the history of religion . sir , as i had the honour , to see the history of religion , before you gave way , that it should go to the press : so i cannot but wonder , that any should be so rouzed , and even affrighted and scared , by a book , which seemed to me , not only true and useful , happily thought and as well exprest , but also altogether inoffensive to every true lover of ( a sincere undisguised ) piety and morality . i deny not , that when i began to read the book ; the term priest-craft , there often used , and the instances you give of it , made me a while doubtful , what might be the author's aim ; whether he might not ( at length ) stretch his notion of priest-craft , not only to the impious frauds of pagan priests , and the pious frauds ( as you civilly call them ) of some christian priests , but even to all revealed religion , as if it were an imposture that has depraved , rather than explained and inforced natural religion , that new mistress of many of our modern wits . but when i had gone over the whole , with such an attention , as i thought was due to the subject treated of ; and of the conceptions and observations of an author , whose pen had always hitherto been successful : i perceived , to my great satisfaction , that the thoughts in the book had been conceived in the last reign ; and by occasion of the danger we were in , from popery . you draw a parallel , between the pagan and the romish-priests : you are so impious as to think , nay to say and publish it to the world , that a popish priest is as errant a knave , as cato thought the ( old ) roman augurs : you even dare to add , that their sin and guilt is greater , because the latter had not a rule to direct them , but the other act against a most plain rule ( a directing gospel , as you speak ) meerly for profit . you give so many , and so pertinent instances of this , that had you published your book in the last reigns , when it was thought and written , you had been inrolled among our confessors : but now that the danger is past , and the church's turn is served by you , and ( the few ) such as you are ; mr. atterbury is for putting you into the seat of scorners . after you had finished the scenes , in which you expose , first rome-pagan , then rome-antichristan ; you are so unlucky , as to drop some words against persecution ; and also to advise the contending parties of christians , that , setting aside their wranglings about obscure and undecidable questions and mysteries ; they would consider the gospel as a doctrine ( chiefly ) of love , mercy and charity , and behave themselves accordingly towards one another . haec tetigit gradive tous urtica nepotes : this ( invenom'd ) sting in the tail of your book , has so wounded mr. atterbury ; that he could not forbear running up ( immediately ) into his pulpit , to tell ( no less persons than ) the queen of england , and her whole court , what kind of man you are . see here , what characters he has given you . he is so possessed with the notion of pious frauds and priest-craft , as to apply it ( indifferently ) to all religions , and to every thing in religion . bless me , and deliver me , from the malevolence of a student ! as he writes himself . but cholerick and revengeful men , commonly wound themselves most , when they are endeavouring to wound others : here is a book written against popery , and persecution ; mr. atterbury is so angry at it , that he cries out , men of israel , help , here is a damnable book written against all religion , and every thing in religion . that is , he owns no religion , nor any thing as part of religion , but only popery and persecution . truly , he has been a student at christ-church so long , to good purpose : but was it necessary , he should vomit up such a secret , before the queen , and the court of england ; might it not have been better whisper'd , among his jacobite friends ? but her majesty was pester'd with too many such chaplains : men that cannot abide to hear , i do not say , our holy father the pope , or the sacred college , but not a romish priest , spoken disrespectfully of . at pag. 16. he suggests the writing the history of your life , in revenge for your history of religion . he is ( surely ) a pleasant man ; he would write the history of an anonymous , or nameless author ; that is , of one he does not know . but as before he told us his religion , persecution and popery ; so here he lets us know his wit and honesty : he would write , he says , of he knows not whom , and he cares not what , provided it be black enough . for that 's the ( only possible ) meaning , of writing a life in revenge . but if his blind rage will permit a third person , to interpose between him and the author of the history of religion ; i intreat him , that when he writes , i may furnish him with some memorials : better , i assure him , than malice , and ignorance of his adversary , will ever minister to him . i can tell him , that ( the sad man ) the author of the history of religion , has a good degree of charity to the poor , and as great of the vertue of liberality to the learned : i can inform him , of your compositions to the theater , which made your younger years so famous ; and of the ( unanswerable ) defences you have since made for the nation 's rights against arbitrary power and tyranny . i dare not , i confess , tell him of your posts of trust and honour : for he will be unreconcileably alienated , when he knows , that to all your other naughtiness , you are a williamite too . he takes for his text , the words of solomon , prov. 14.6 . a scorner seeketh wisdom , and findeth it not . from hence he would raise an invective , a sermon he calls it , against you , and the history of religion . a man would wonder , how this text should make for popery and persecution ; or against the patrons of sincerity , and liberty , in religion . but what is there , so remote , or hid from others , that a student cannot discover it ? father atterbury is able , i doubt not , to prove from this text , or to disprove any proposition in euclid . for students do not hold themselves obliged , to reason accurately and closely , as other ( common ) men must ; but by leaping over some ( intervening ) unsutable propositions , may skip from tumult to king pipin , or what is as good , from historian to scorner . yet methinks , since this gentleman had a mind to declaim ( before the queen ) against the history of popish jugglers and cheats , he should have shown his zeal in some other way , rather than in a sermon , or from a text of holy scripture : for of all abominations , there is none so detestable ; as to wire-draw , wind , and bow the sacred text , to argue against it self ; that is , to patronize impostures and deceits . in the prosecution of his text , so pat ( as every one sees ) to his purpose ; he falls to considering , what may be the reasons , why the scorner seeketh wisdom , and findeth it not . one of the reasons he offers is very marvellous ; it is this , because the scorner ( saith he , pag. 12. ) is a man of quick and lively parts . such men ( saith he further , there ) are apt to give themselves a loose , beyond plain reason and common sense . i know not , i confess , what he means ; nor ( i believe ) can all the students of christ-church , interpret it to me . but be that as it will ; the thing he aims at , in that whole page , is , that quick and lively parts are marvellous hinderances , in the quest of wisdom and truth ; according to him , the only hopeful candidate of wisdom , is a sancho pancha . but it will not yet go out of my mind , nor can i keep my eye off it ; that a court-chaplain should have so little government with him , that , so soon as he had read a book against popery and persecution , he should from the pulpit and in the royal presence , attack the author in such terms as these : he has written the history of religion , and were i not withheld by religion , i would write his history . what! is it such an offence , at this time of day , to write a few sheets against popery ; that no person of honour must put pen to paper , on that subject , on pain of being libelled by her majesty's chaplain , for that 's the unquestionable meaning of writing his life ? but he is withheld , he says , from writing this life , by religion . by what religion , sir ? would you have us to think , after you have defamed him in such language as this , and to such an auditory , 't is from conscience , and love of your brother , that you do not libel him to the ( unsignificant ) rabble ? it is evident then , that you have ( hypocritically ) feigned a religious tenderness ; to which you are an utter stranger : must we be obliged to call it your religion , your charity , and tenderness , that you are content not to write his life to the common herd ; when you have actually pointed at him , in a sacred place and exercise , in the presence of the prince , and most illustrious personages of the kingdom ? and for whom is it , that you counterfeit this pious tenderness ? for an anonymous writer , for one you do not know . for as to report , and the whispers of those sagacious men , who so certainly know all authors , they are so oft mistaken : that , except it be here and there a student , no body heeds them ; or rather , every body abhors them . i am amazed , that any man ( especially a man of learning and wit ) should utter so many follies , and contradictions , in a pulpit : and also oversee them all again , when he prepared his notes for the press . for instance . he asperses an honourable person , in the very highest degree , in the royal presence : and yet 't is meer religion , he says , that withholds him , from writing his life to the common people . that is , he has swallowed the camel , and is now grievously straining at the gnat. again , he has an inclination to libel ( or as he calls it , write the life of ) the author of the history of religion : and yet this author is nameless ; that is , utterly unknown to father atterbury , and his whole fraternity . again ; he saith , this book is directed against all religion , and every thing in religion : and yet the very design of the book , is this ; that ' t is a shame , that so many have had no religion but their belly and their profit ; and a pity , that others are persecuted only for religion , and conscience towards god. once more , he saith ; that the thing which the scorner seeketh for , is wisdom : and yet he adds ; he finds it not , because he has quick and lively parts . that is , according to this student ; the scorner seeks , for what he has : and he misses it , because he possesses it . it is well , that the student's sermons are so short , as they always ( i observe ) are : for these are such flat and direct contradictions ; that if there were many of them , they would too much expose the preacher , to the contempt of his ( very meanest ) hearers . i have done with father francis , for the present ; only this , sir , i shall promise you : that when he is disposed to try his hand in writing lives ; he shall have the satisfaction , to see his own picture , drawn in such lively colours , as time shall not easily deface . sir , i think , i shall not need to mind you ; that you ought not to be in the least disturbed , at the sawciness of an obscure academick . for being bred , as they are , among mean companions ; and comparing themselves only with under-graduates , servitors , and gippoes : when they first appear abroad in the world , the poor wretches always make themselves ridiculous , by not knowing themselves , and their rank in the world. they think , that all mankind has that reverence for them ; which their sizers , and college-servants , are forced to show them : and from hence , when they get into the wooden box , instead of ( the apostolical ) reprove and exhort ; they fall to ( porterly ) reproach and scandalize . on the contrary ; i doubt not , you will always be pleased and happy , in the recollection of the immortal services ; which you have done the royal family , the monarchy , the liberties of the nation , the common-wealth of learning , particularly learned men ; and that nothing may escape your influences , to the calamitous and poor . i promise my self , that you will not lay father atterbury's want of honesty , good sense and government , against such advantages as these : but rather you will be mindful to give thanks to god , who has lifted you ( by favourable providences ) so much above the ( unheeded ) reproaches , of an unfinish'd pulpiteer . sir , i am your most obliged , most assured , and most humble servant , n. s. april 3. 95. the second letter , in answer to , the charge of socinianism , against dr. tillotson , considered ; and to the appendix , concerning the history of religion . sir , since my last , here is another weak brother that has taken offence , at the history of religion . i confess , i wish the history had gone to the press , with that title , which your self ( in the manuscript copy ) gave it ; the history of religion , as it has been abused by priest-craft . the words , as it has been abused by priest-craft , might have prevented some peoples mistakes : who now seeing in the title page the history of religion ; and meeting with little in the book it self , but an account of the various perversions of religion by ( pagan and popish ) priest-craft ; they infer , that by religion the author means even all religion . the publishers of your book feared , it should seem ; that if priest-craft were not left out of the title of your book ; it would raise such a jealousy in those for whose use and good the book is design'd : that they would never suffer themselves to be undeceived ; that is , they would never read it , and thereby be informed of the abuses put on them , by impostors pretending to religion . either way , the book was like to be mistaken ; but the publishers ( who put it forth , i may add that also , against your inclination , because you thought it now not so necessary or seasonable ) judged it not advisable , to give occasion of offence in the very title . but ( as i said ) it appears by the event ; that it had been better to keep the title , given to his book by the author himself : for all your maligners ( that have hitherto appeared ) seem to be misled by the present title . because the title is the history of religion ; and the book is only an exemplification of the corruptions and abuses thereof , by some wicked priests : therefore they cry out , 't is written against religion , and the sacerdotal function . but jacta est alea ; 't is now too late , to recal the oversight of the title : we must be content , to examine what your opposers have to object to the book . enough ( i think ) has been said to mr. atterbury ; you are now attacked by one who does not put his name to his book ; but the title of it , is this . the charge of socinianism , against dr. tillotson , considered : with a supplement , by occasion of an history of religion . in the former part , that against dr. tillotson , late arch-bishop of canterbury ; our author pretends at p. 10. that the arch-bishop's design in publishing his four sermons against the socinians was , only that he might be soundly answered by them : and further , that they and the arch-bishop play booty , into one anothers hands . pag. 9. he adds , the arch-bishop printed his sermons , and procured the recommendation of them by the court , that he might serve the socinians , and more reconcile men to their principles . but lest the confederacy between him and the socinians should be discovered , they agree , ( saith our author ) like counsel at the bar ; to fall foul ( sometimes ) on one another , and even to scold and call hard names : which to wise observers ( says he again ) serves only to discover so much the more their hypocrisy and deceit . but it is the least part of his charge against the arch-bishop , that he is a socinian ; and wrote only to oblige them , and to betray the cause into their hands : for he says , pag. 13. dr. tillotson is owned by all the atheistical wits of england , as their true primate and apostle ; in him they glory and rejoice , and make their boasts of him . he leads them , not only the whole length of socinianism ; they are slender beaux who have got no further ; but to call in question all revelation . he sums up almost his whole charge against the arch-bishop , at pag. 32 , and 33. in these words . he exceeds the theistical juncto , in the barbarous accounts he gives of the rise of christian religion : for they make it to be only the invention of wicked men , and of devils ; he makes it to be a mean compliance with those inventions , of devils and wicked men. he contends , that all revealed religion is good for nothing , but only to preserve outward peace , in this world. 't is a maxim with him , that a mother's suckling her own children , is of more necessary and indispensible obligation ; than to believe in christ. he disputes openly , and professedly , against the satisfaction by christ : and according to him , not only the eternity , but the being of hell , is a precarious supposition . to add now no more ; he he says at p. 16. that a plain and downright hobbism appears in the arch-bishop's sermons ; and that the same thread runs thorow all his works . besides these ( as every one knows , most false ) imputations on the arch-bishop's books and doctrine ; our author speaks of his person , with like malevolence and contempt : he never calls him arch-bishop , but dr. till . or jo. cant , or such like . and he concludes his whole performance , with an address to the clergy and people ; to separate from this , and some other heretical and impious bishops : he assures them , that by the canons of the catholick church , they not may , but ought to separate ; and that it is not schism , to depart from those guides , who corrupt religion by their heresies . after these compliments to the arch-bishop ; our famous author ( for his book will certainly make him so ) proceeds to sprinkle his flowers , upon you . at first , he is much in doubt , whether the arch-bishop was not author of the history of religion : but that doubt he soon dismisses ; and he resolves , that it is written by sir r. h — d. i suppose , for no other reason ; but that he thought fit , to divide the nauseous load of his stomach , between two : it would have seemed too malevolent and implacable , to discharge it all , upon one man. besides , as 't is one of the delights ( as well as undecencies ) of excessive anger and malice ; to repeat the same charges and reproaches , over and over : if our author had wrote but against one , he had missed the satisfaction of easing his mind by re-iterating his scandals ; and saying again and again the same lewd and mad things . when the most learned writer had fixed in his mind upon an author , for the history of religion ; tho he is content it should not be the arch-bishop himself , yet of necessity it must be one of his grace's disciples and proselytes . and for this most ( dangerous ) charge , i confess ( sir ) your self gave occasion enough , in your book : by the respectful mention you make of his grace ; and by your quoting , and ( most wickedly ) applauding some passages of his sermons , which recommend a pacifick temper and carriage , as the greatest and surest argument of a right christian. but here , before we go farther , it will be proper and useful ; seeing our ( immortal ) author has been so careful , to discover the ( heretical and blasphemous ) writer of the history of pagan and popish cheats in religion , for you meddle with no other ; to inquire , and ( if we can ) to ascertain our conjecture , who it is that is thus greatly concerned and angry at their detection : and whether i rightly guess at the man , or no ; yet i shall not fail ( i think ) to give his true character , both as to his honesty , principles and abilities . the vogue of the town lays this libel , to a certain jacobite club ; others again to a late dean , who has quitted his deanry , because he would not take the oaths that are required , since his present majesty was declar'd king. i do not believe , it was written by a club ; for this , in my opinion , incontestable reason : that whereas it consists of three parts , and ( were it not printed in an extream small character ) would be a bulky book , yet the whole is very uniform ; the language , thoughts , theology , are throughout the same , every where of a piece . as to the dean , having read his former works , to which his name is affixed ; i dare to discharge him wholly , from having the least hand in , or liking of , this ( equally silly and wicked ) trifle . the dean writes after another manner , elegantly , judiciously , learnedly ; i doubt not , he is a much better man , than so much as to approve the ( shameless ) falsifications and scandals , that appear here in every paragraph . no , no , the author came from beyond tweed , if not beyond the tay : the many northern improprieties and barbarisms ( both in the phrase , and the writing particular words ) never used by any english-man ; and the calvinism , or rather the knoxism , in the whole ; are manifest indications that our author is a scot. nor has dr. m — roe been able to keep his own secret : 't is got abroad among a great many , that this late professor in one of the scotch universities , and a bishop elect , is the man that has thought himself qualified , to censure the doctrine of an arch-bishop of canterbury ; and to incounter with the ( great ) author of the history of religion . that he is a scot , i prove ( i say ) first , by the northern improprieties and solecisms ( as well in the writing of particular words , as in the phrase ) which abound in every page of this pamphlet : i believe , sir , you will be of my mind ; if you cast your eye but on a few of them . for positive , he always writes possitive . for estimation , our highland aristarchus says esteemation ; and never other ways . when you say innoscence , the most learned professor takes it to be innocence : and hereupon commits i know not how many blunders ; and vents his follies as fast , as elsewhere his malice . then , for his phrase , or improper application of words , and proverbial expressions ; his elegances are such as these . the man above-told . the reasons above-told . barbarous notion of the christian religion . barbarous account of the rise of the christian religion . it makes all my flesh to creep . no english-man ever writes so , or uses these words in that sense , or that order . his theology too , as i observed before , is knox all over . for tho the scotch divines of the episcopal party , forsook mr. calvin and mr. knox in the question about church-government : yet in points of doctrine , they have varied nothing at all from mr. knox , author of the reformation in scotland ; and mr. knox took mr. calvin for his copy . hence it is , that our present libeller so often cants and calvinizes ; you would think the bishop elect were some speaker in a quakers , or anabaptists meeting-place : of which , i suppose , the reason is ; because he would pass for an elect bishop , as well as a bishop elect. for example . pag. 15. i compare our natural light or knowledg , to the creation of the first day . and it is the light of the first day , that we enjoy still ; but not as it was that day created . it was regulated and modelled the fourth day into the sun , moon , and stars ; and now we have no participation at all of the light of the first day , but what we have from its regulation on the fourth day , and convey'd to us from the sun : which i compare to revealed , that is , to the christian religion . god is light ( 1 john 1.5 . ) and christ is called ( mal. 4.2 . ) the sun of righteousness : and tho there is a precedent natural knowledg of god , like the light of the first day ; yet now that christ is revealed , the true knowledg of god must be had in the face of christ. pag. 8. as we explain the matter , [ he means the satisfaction by christ ] all the attributes of god stand full and infinite ; they rejoice and exalt together . but this i cite , not for the divinity , but for the monstrous impropriety and cant of the language : the words full and exalt being altogether senseless here . p. 21. god is not only just , but is justice in the abstract , justice is the nature of god. — all the justice we have , is but a ray sent down , from the essential restitude [ he aimed to say rectitude ] in god. at p. 7. he affirms , that the law and gospel are the same ; and he thinks that st. paul has so taught us , heb. 4.2 . at p. 9. he contends ; that it was indispensably necessary , that a full and adequate satisfaction should be made for sin , to the justice of god. at p. 21. he will have it , that justice will exact the uttermost farthing , justice must do it , and otherways it were not justice : and from hence he concludes ; that because god is justice , and justice cannot forgive the debt of sin , therefore god cannot forgive it . all this is calvinism , or rather knoxism . but what name shall we give to his impiety , when speaking of our saviour , he fears not to call him ( p. 22. ) that accursed and devoted head ? he did not learn this of mr. calvin , or of mr. knox ; mr. calvin makes this judicious note on gal. 3.13 . christus peccati & maledictionis reus erat , non in se , sed in nobis ; sive quatenus nostram personam susceperat . as who should say , the lord christ is not to be called accursed in his own person , but only as representing or sustaining our persons , the persons of sinners . therefore accursed head , when spoken of our saviour , is not only harsh , improper and overbold ; but heretical and impious . but of our author's divinity , more hereafter ; let us now see , what are his principles , and how he stands affected toward the government : it may be , we shall find that all this cry about socinianism , hobbism and irreligion , is nothing but this ; that they are charges , very fit for a jacobite to lay to a williamite , because they are black enough . he often intimates that the court , and the king and queen , did design to countenance the arch-bishop's blasphemies , socinianism , and super-hobbism , that 's his word , by their commanding his sermons to be printed . he will not own the arch-bishop , the bishop of sarum , or any of the new bishops , to be bishops , as being set up by an incompetent authority ; but only persons bearing themselves to be bishops : and the peculiar name he has found for them , because he delights in abusing the words of sacred scripture , is , spiritual wickednesses in high places . at p. 15. he discharges his choler upon those ; who ( as he phrases it ) have deserted , betrayed , and taken arms against king james . with respect to the oaths , that are required to the present government , because he cannot jest but in the words of holy scripture , he says , because of swearing , the land mourneth . he was so afraid , that some dull reader might overlook his contempt of the scriptures , and his treason to the government ; that he was careful to write the word swearing in capital letters . he compliments the present arch-bishop , upon his accession to the chair of canterbury , in these words . on novemb. 16. 1694. dr. tillotson was struck with that fatal apoplexy , that carried him out of the world the 4 th day after ; to make room for another comprehensive latitudinarian , who look'd over lincoln , to succeed him . he intended ( without doubt ) to allude to the proverb , the devil look'd over lincoln : but to spoil his conundrum , the proverb doth not intend lincoln cathedral , but lincoln college , to which place his grace never had a relation . 't is easy to see , by these passages , that the late arch-bishop , the author of the history of religion , and other great men , are out of this author 's good graces ; not for any real socinianism or hobbism , but only because they are notorious williamites : hobbian and socinian are the worst names , that we can now give ; so 't is expedient , that all williamites should be represented as socinians and hobbists . a man that shall thus undertake to reproach his sovereign , to spit upon the government , and to accuse the greatest divines of the kingdom , as partly not understanding , partly heretically perverting the doctrine of the church , ought to be a person of very great abilities ; in respect both of judgment , and learning . every one will blame such daring attempts , in a man of very mean , or no wit and erudition : such a one , let the grounds of his opposition and complaints happen to be never so just , should patiently expect , till a sufficient head and hand shall enterprize to manage the accusation . but the chitt who at present has ventur'd upon all this , is so utterly unfurnish'd of the qualities , requisite to such a work ; that the care of a village-cure , or of a country-school , is hugely above him . i pray ( sir ) have the patience if you can , to take account of some instances of our author's learning , and judgment . he had heard say , or had read somewhere ; that st. peter's words , which things the angels desire to look into , are very emphatical in the greek ; therefore to seem learned in a tongue which he can scarce read , with much to do he finds the text , and sets it down thus ; which things the angels desire 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , to stoop down with reverence , and admire . here first , the high-land critick instead of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 reads 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; which last will never be found in any but a high-land vocabulary . in the next place , he interprets 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by to stoop down with reverence , and admire ; a sense never put on the word by any lexicographer , no not by the meanest abcedarian grecian . indeed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ( or as the learned professor speaks 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) is rendred by some criticks , se inclinando introspicere ; which ( it may be ) he took for to stoop down with reverence and admire : but the criticks meant thereby , to view exactly , after the manner of persons that stoop or bow that they may observe a thing the more distinctly : the signification of stooping down to honour and admire , is a discovery that we owe to this great author only , all the grammarians and criticks will reject it . in my opinion , our author acted prudently , when foreseeing that with the late revolution in scotland , the presbytery would be the trump-card ; that he might quit his station with credit , he feigned himself a jacobite , and refused the oath : he was conscious to himself , that the presbytery would never continue a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the professor's chair ; much less , allow of this criticism on 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , that it denotes stooping down to honour and admire , when ( here ) it so certainly signifies only stooping down to view distinctly and exactly . he falls upon the bishop of salisbury , for his explication of the incarnation and the divinity of our saviour ; he says , this explication implies both heresy and idolatry . he ( kindly ) instructs the ( poor ) bishop , how the incarnation is to be understood . 't is not ( says our professor ) rightly accounted for , by the similitude of the inhabitation of jehovah in the cloud of glory : no less inhabitation [ of the word ] than an impersonation can declare or truly describe the incarnation ; for no other sort of inhabitation can carry with it communicatio idiomatum , that is , can make god to be called that thing , or that thing be called god. mr. hill and this author were best to confer notes , they alike understand the church's doctrine about these mysteries ; and have equal right to censure the doctrine of this learned prelate . if he slights mr. hill , yet it may be his lordship may have so much charity for his country-man ; as to inform him , that impersonation of the divine word , is the eutychian heresy . the catholick church never says , that the divine word , but the humane nature is impersonated by the incarnation . 't is the manhood that is impersonated in the word , or as the athanasian creed speaks , is taken into god ; not the word that is impersonated in the manhood . the manhood which is not a person , is rightly said to be impersonated by being taken into the person of the divine word ; but the word being always a person , cannot be impersonated by the incarnation . it was with great propriety that his lordship used the word inhabitation ; as not only not implying any heretical ambiguity , as impersonation does , but being the very term used by st. john ; who ( john 1.14 . ) explains 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ( or he was made flesh ) by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , or he inhabited in our nature , in the human nature or manhood . the arch-bishop had said ; it pleased god there should be some mysteries in the christian religion , such as , three persons who are but one god , the incarnation of god in the human nature , god satisfying for sin in his own person : probably , saith the arch-bishop , for this reason among others ; because it had been found by experience , that men have a great inclination for mysteries , and are hardly contented with a religion that has not something in it sublime , mysterious , and above human capacity . what says momus to this ? why , his answer is not more morose and malevolent , than 't is impious and profane . p. 6. blessed god , this man makes no more of the mysteries of our religion , than only to satisfy mens foolish curiosities . he that will have a may-pole shall have a may-pole ; since you will have mysteries , here 's one for you , god manifested in the flesh. this is to satisfy your foolish longing after mysteries , and to give you your full of mysteries . was there ever so impious a burlesque upon god , and the religion of christ ; — as if he was incarnate and crucified , only to out-do raw-head and bloody-bones . — what are mysteries , without any farther consideration than as mysteries ; but the height of folly , perfect rary-shows . the arch-bishop said not , that mysteries are of no other consideration or use in religion , but only to satisfy the curiosity and inclination of men ; but that this is one reason , among many others by him assigned , why there are some mysteries in the christian religion : he giveth divers other reasons of the incarnation and the satisfaction , and some illustrations of the mystery of the trinity ; besides this which so much displeases our professor . was it becoming of a man , pretending to probity and learning ; to run out into such wild expressions as these , by occasion of the arch-bishop's ( inoffensive ) saying , that the christian mysteries might be ( in part ) intended to satisfy the general inclination of mankind , for mysteries and sublime things ? would any but our ( mad ) author have fallen hereupon , to comparing the trinity to a may-pole ; the crucifixion of our saviour , to raw-head and bloody-bones ; and all mysteries to rary-shows and the height of folly ? is this the sobriety of a bishop elect ; or a reflection to be prefaced with , a blessed god ? he that manifestly perverts the words of another , to an impious sense ; or puts innocent words and sentences , into profane terms and expressions , is guilty of blasphemy against god , and the highest injury and uncharitableness to his neighbour . and if the arch-bishop's words had in the consequences of them , ministred real occasion for such kind of comparisons ; as the may-pole , rary-show , raw-head , and the rest of this author's extravagance and wickedness : yet seeing those consequences were never intended by the arch-bishop , but are most contrary to his mind and sentiments concerning the mysteries he defended : this author out of reverence to those mysteries themselves , should have forbore such horrid terms ; which would have been very foul and black , even in the mouth of a socinian . i know not what excuse can be made for our author ; unless we should say ; that , poor man , with his preferments he also lost his wits . not quite to tire you , sir , with the specimen ( i promised ) of our author's honesty , wit and learning ; i will give you but one example more of it . 't is the principal design of his book , to prove the arch-bishop , the bishop of salisbury , and the author of the history of religion , are socinians ; the other charges of irreligion and hobbism , come in only by the by , and only sometimes , when his inflamed choler wholly disorders his brain . therefore now , doth he himself understand what that socinianism is , which he charges upon others : for 't is not uncommon with malicious men , to charge others with socinianism , popery , hobbism , and such like , which they have heard ( from divers ) are very bad things ; without knowing ( scarce ) at all what is implied in those words . i assure you , this is ( very much ) our author's case : he has charged you and others with socinianism , not as 't is an heresy understood and detested by him ; but only as 't is a word of scandal and reproach . you will believe me , when you know that he says ; p. 32. none were more violent persecutors than the arians , that is the socinians ; when they had power . when he says here ; the arians , that is , the socinians : you know , sir , he might as well have said ; the jews , that is , the roman catholicks . p. 2. there was no shibboleth , which all these our adversaries [ the anti-trinitarians ] did refuse ; but that of consubstantiality , or that the father , son and spirit are consubstantial : which also this author [ the arch-bishop ] does refuse ; and while he does so , he must be reckoned among those adversaries . first , the arch-bishop never refused the word consubstantial . then , you ( sir ) who have been so conversant with the antient history of the church , remember very well ; that neither did all anti-trinitarians reject consubstantial , nor all catholicks admit of it . it was first advanced by paul of samosata ( patriarch of antioch ) who held as the socinians now do ; and was rejected by a council of 72 catholick bishops , assembled at antioch against the said paul. afterwards , it was approved by the first nicen council , but refused by the bishops of britain , gaul and germany ; not because they disliked the thing signified thereby , but because they would not admit of an unscriptural term in declaring points of faith. as for the arians , they were only the anomaean arians who disliked the word consubstantial , the rest admitted of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ( consubstantial ) as well as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of like substance . socrat. h. e. l. 3. c. 25. p. 2. they ( the socinians ) puzzle peoples understandings , tho by very foolish and contradictory arguments ; how god by his infinite power may bestow true and real divinity upon another , and that from all eternity : because what he can do to day , he might have done yesterday , and so backwards for ever . all this , sir , is a chimera of his own ; and was never held , or said , by any socinian : they hold , on the direct contrary ; that it implies a contradiction that divinity ( or so much as simple existence ) can be bestowed by one person on another person from all eternity ; they suppose , that bestowing and receiving imply an actual priority of the person who bestows being or divinity , and that in this case the giver and receiver cannot be co-eternal . in a word , our anti-socinian professor imputes the very doctrine of the catholick church , to the socinians : 't is the church ( not the socinians ) that holds , that god can bestow true and real divinity on another , and that from all eternity ; and 't is the churches , not the socinians argument , because what he might have done to day or yesterday , he might also do from forever . when he calls this , a foolish and contradictory argument ; all men ( but himself ) know , that he declares himself a socinian , as often as he says it . p. 30. of the english socinians , some say , the trinity is three , who are one person : others of 'em say , the trinity is three persons , whereof two are creatures . but if there be any such , as he pretends , neither party of 'em are socinians : english they may be , but socinians they are not . 't is with like truth , and knowledg of our english vnitaries , that he says in the same page ; they excommunicate , and depose from their ministry , those of their own party , who deny that divine worship is to be paid to the lord christ. i am certainly informed that the vnitarians in england have no ministry at all ; they do not separate from the church , on the account of their different opinion from the church : they never separated in england , from the common assemblies to worship ; which , in my opinion , is pious , charitable and prudent ; for it is the separation , not the difference of opinion , that begets the heats among contending parties . but the occasion of these mistakes of our worthy author , is ; that tho ( it should seem ) he hath read the brief history of the vnitarians , his ( northern ) frozen head perceives not the subtleties , of this mercurial tribe : he knows neither their discipline , nor doctrine ; and is of their mind without being aware of it . i know , sir , you are weary of these follies : i will therefore draw our author , in little ; and having so presented him to you , leave him to your pity and prayers . he was a bishop elect , in that juncture , when only such were chosen by the king and the nuntio , to the episcopal chairs of england and scotland ; as would not fail to make those churches contemptible and ridiculous , by their notorious unsufficiency and incompetency . he is a jacobite ; but made so , by nothing but his ( too certain ) fears , that the presbytery would never indure a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the theological chair . with him , the arch-bishop , the bishop of sarum , and the author of the history of religion , are most blasphemous socinians ; because our professor mistakes the doctrine of the church , and the arguments she useth , for the socinian doctrine and reasons . he is an anti-socinian , who believes that god the father could not bestow true and real divinity on another person , from all eternity : and that 't is foolish and contradictory , to say , that what god might do to day , he'might do yesterday , and backwards for ever . an antiquarian he is , who has discovered ( in antient history ) such an only shibboleth of orthodoxy , in the trinitarian questions ; as was first advanced by one of the socinians patriarchs , and rejected by a council of ( 72 ) catholick bishops . he is a christian , who is not content to think it , but publishes it ( in print ) to all the world ; that jesus christ is an accursed and devoted head. this is your man , sir ; the critick , wit , historian , divine , who resolves to make an example of all latitudinarian archbishops and bishops , and all their disciples and seconds : of which number , he saith , you are the first and most considerable ; and as such , 't is but just and fit , that you should be treated accordingly . what he objects , is partly against your self , and partly against your history of religion . as to your self ; he saith . you are a disciple of ( that late execrable ) jo. cant , or ( as he otherwise call him ) john till . you have copied , he saith , after him , very exactly : insomuch that this critick himself is sometimes in doubt ; whether the history of religion were written by you , or by the archbishop . elsewhere he saith , your history doth square most exactly with the archbishop's notions and scheme of religion . yet he owns , that you are not altogether so profligate , or have more of art and address , than that archbishop of theists and hobbists : you are more modest or more cunning , those are his words , than the other ; you do not attack religion in such broad words , as he . but 't is the endeavour of both of you , of him more openly , of you more secretly , to ridicule all religion ; and to resolve it wholly into priest-craft . and i must confess , sir ; that your history and the archbishop's sermons have a like thread . he , in most of his sermons , combats the seven-headed beast ; as a divine , by argument ; you as a gentleman , in the historical way : he shows , how defenceless and weak , popery is ; you , how ridiculous and foppish it is . and the learned professor , by exclaiming thereupon against both of you as designing to ridicule all religion , abundantly intimates ; that to him , there is no other religion but popery . he has an obscure period at p. 31. that you assisted in turning a certain neighbour out of house and home , who had not only never injur'd you , but had done more for you than all your relations and other friends ever did . the meaning is , you had a share in effecting the late revolution ; or as our author elsewhere speaks concerning some others , in deserting , betraying and excluding king james : who ( as this man says ) did more for you , than all your friends or relations ever have done . i am wholly a stranger , to the particulars of this charge ; therefore i can only say : either 't is true , or 't is false . if 't is false , his lordship elect is a great rascal , saving the reverence belonging to his coat and profession ; to devise and publish to the world a tale , that ( in his opinion ) implies the very foulest and blackest of crimes and scandals . but if it is true , that when king james had done a great deal for you ; after all , you concurred with , nay you highly promoted the revolution : the charge here brought against you , will amount to thus much . that whereas 't is too well known , that his late majesty's favours to any of his protestant subjects , were designed only to gain them to the popish and arbitrary interest : you could not be bought , no not by more than all your friends and relations ever did for you , to side against the interests of your religion and country . no money , no preferments , no favours ( it should seem ) could bribe you ; to give up the protestant religion , or the freedom and properties of the nation . a most terrible accusation ; and on your part a treachery not to be purged , with sacrifice or offering for ever ! but then after all this , to write a history too against ( the holy cheats of ) your king's and friend's religion : this is such an aggravation of your former fault , that our author will not say , the lord have mercy on you ; but in the highland phrase , it makes his flesh to creep . i am of opinion , that an highlander's flesh naturally creeps : for our beggars say , that set a — on a board or table , with the head west , or east , or south , the — will not fail to turn it self , and creep northward . as to your book , his general charge against it , is ; that 't is designed against all religion , and especially all positive ( or revealed ) religion : from whence he takes occasion to nick-name you sir positive ; or as he writes ( according to the high-land orthography ) sir possitive . if you say ; but what instances can he give out of your history , from whence any sober man would infer , that you meant to expose religion in general ; and not , only the pious frauds of modern rome , and the tricks of rome pagan ? i can only answer , that what collections ( out of the history ) he may have by him , i know not ; but the particulars which he mentions , are these . p. 27. you set up , he saith , unreconcileable war against all mystery . how so ; have you dropt the least word against the doctrines of the trinity , the incarnation , or the satisfaction ? no , you are more modest or else more cunning ( he saith ) than the archbishop ; you are a man of more art and address , than to expose your credit by broad words : but this you do . you make transubstantiation your ( pretended ) mark ; but your level ( or design ) is against the trinity , and other mysteries of the catholick church . i perceive , sir , you must never expect ; to be delivered from the imputations of irreligion , socinianism , and such like : for it should seem , when your mark ( which you openly set up ) is transubstantiation ; your design , level or aim ( in spight of you ) shall be religion and the trinity . i think , i may say ; as what you have done , admits of no defence , with such judges as dr. m — roe : so with others , it can need none . at p. 29. he falls upon the word priest-craft , and mauls it most terribly . he saith , that the thing by you designed , ought rather to be called lay-craft , or state-craft ; than priest-craft : for religion has been more corrupted by lay-men , especially by parliaments , than by priests . yet at length , he is willing to admit ( there ) of the term priest-craft ; provided it be applied rightly : that is , to those cursed priests , the latitudinarians and socinians . you manifest your impiety again , in what you say ( in the history ) concerning the creeds ; that have been devised by arians , photinians , catholicks , papists , protestants , and all the sub-divisions of these parties : for you note , that in very deed , creeds are the spiritual revenges , of dissenting parties , upon one another . i must confess , that you but too plainly intimate , in the history ; that according to your ( weak ) judgment , it had been better to content our selves with the apostles creed , as unsufficient as those poor men were to pen a creed for the church , which they had planted : than that every party should contrive a new creed , with anathema's and damn ' ems to every clause of it . but the professor ( a sagacious man ) doth not at all believe , that you had any pacifick or charitable aim , in what you offer : no , no , your intention ( he says , p. 30. ) was this , that atheists , latitudinarians and socinians might get into the church without swearing , or subscribing to i know not how many lies . and all to no purpose ; for no subscribing or swearing will ever keep 'em out . again , he observes ; that you would perswade people , that there is no condemnation for error ; because it proceeds ( say you ) from innoscence , which is to say ignorance and weakness . here he has got a common place , upon which to read : for not having grammar enough to distinguish innoscence from innocence ; he proves largely ( and most learnedly ) that all ignorance is not innocence ; or that all persons shall not be judged as innocent , because they were ignorant . he saith further , that 't is very hard to determine , which are sins of ignorance : but be sure , says he , sins of intrigue and design are not sins of innocence ; and here comes in your ( black ) ingratitude in not betraying your country and religion , to your great ( arbitrary and popish ) friend , tho you were tempted with such mighty offers and liberalities , as he says . his last instance of your bad inclination , is ; that you argue so largely against punishing people for meer conscience , and simple error . your arguments against persecution , are ; that force does not convince , it may make men hypocrites , but never true converts : and that the prescriptions in the gospel , concerning the erroneous , are all gentle and meek ; not arms , or proscriptions , or mulcts . to the first , he answers ; punishments are inflicted for other ends , besides converting the criminal : they are intended , for vindicating the honour of god ; and to prevent the infection of others . our author , it would seem , knows not ; that god is honoured , not dishonoured , by every person 's professing and acting , as his conscience perswades him that 't is the will of god he should act and profess : and consequently that to punish such persons , however erroneous ; is no other , but to punish them for their loyalty and obedience to god. but punishment , he saith , may prevent the infection from spreading among others . yes , witness the persecutions of the primitive christians ; which were so successful for suppressing their opinions : that they begat the famous proverb , sanguis martyrum est semen ecclesiae , the seed of the church is the blood of its martyrs . but admitting it were true , what he says , that persecution may prevent the growth of opinions and sects ; yet how will the inquisitor general help it , if god himself has forbid this means of prevention ? it is our saviour that said ; let the tares grow up with the wheat , lest with the tares you pluck up also the wheat . the tares are errors , which therefore in that parable are said to be sown : yet the tares must not be plucked up , nay must be suffered to grow up with the wheat ; lest our ( ignorant ) zeal mistake the true wheat for tares . the judgment , which are tares and which wheat , is reserved ( saith our saviour there ) to god ; if it were left to men , while they ( think they ) gather the tares , they will root up also the wheat , mat. 13.29 . but to this , and to your other argument ; that the gospel prescribes only gentle means , to be used to the erroneous : he replies , the prescriptions against force , and the gentle methods hinted in the gospel , are directed only to preachers ; not to the civil magistrates . who is no more bound up by those prescriptions , from punishing the erroneous ; than the commands of turning the other cheek , and give him thy cloak also , restrain him from punishing the injurious , or such as steal from others . 't is only to preachers , he saith , not to the magistrate ; that forbearance and gentleness is required , toward the erroneous . on the contrary , it is certain to me ; that not to root up the tares is a charge , given wholly to the magistrate , and not at all to preachers . preachers ( as preachers ) must root up the tares ; by argument , exhortation , and such like christian means . 't is well known to all , that preachers have no power ( either from god or men ) to root up by force or any external punishment : it would be a senseless prohibition , let not preachers hang , or burn , or sequester men for their errors ; because every one is aware , 't is not at all in their power , nor ever was , but only in the magistrates . i say , for this reason 't is even self-evident ; that the prescriptions against force or rooting up , belong not ( as our inquisitor contends ) to preachers , but to magistrates , who only have that power . whereas he adds ; you might as well plead the charges of turning the other cheek , and give him thy coat also , against the magistrates punishing violence and theft : i answer , the cases are altogether unlike . the magistrate is permitted , nay required to punish violence and theft ; because in such offences we sin both wittingly and wilfully : but error and mistake ( which some call heresy , and this author calls blasphemy ) are involuntary , and pure innoscence ; which i would not have the professor mistake again for innocence , tho it also implies and supposes innocence . i cannot see any thing more , sir , in this libel , that concerns you , or the history of religion ; i will conclude therefore , with only saying : that as you were somewhat concerned that mr. atterbury , a man of learning and wit ( o how unlike , to this other , he ! ) should first mistake the design of your book , and then make such haste to scandalize you for it in the very royal presence ; so without doubt you will smile at it , that all the irreligion , profaneness and socinianism charged upon it , is resolved at last into only this ( and by malice it self ) that 't is a perfect copying after the sermons and opinions of archbishop tillotson . this is the utmost , we see , that your's and the government 's worst adversary could make of it . sir , i am your most assured , most obliged , and most affectionate friend , n. s. july 17 , 1695. the author of the history of religion vindicated from the scandalous and unchristian invectives of mr. f. a. in a sermon at white-hall , on proverbs xiv . 6 . buchanan franciscanus & fratres . — in sanctos quicquam cave dicere fratres . printed in the year , 1696. king charles the second , and james the just , that waited for the divine right , as long as waiting was good , were often nick'd with punishing texts , which , by being maliciously tim'd , were in meer reading turn'd into downright satyr : but our preacher is not for a dry bob and away , he will serve himself of his text , before he , and that part ; and the words are these , prov. 14.6 . a scorner seeketh wisdom and findeth it not . the first thing mr. fr. att. propounds for his inquiry , is , who is the person represented under the character of the scorner . solomon , no doubt , design'd a general reproof , but our preacher's whole sermon is levell'd at a particular and honourable person , sir r. h. the author of the history of religion , him he would have us to understand by the scorner , let solomon intend whom he will. here let me borrow an allusion from mr. bayes in the rehearsal [ much such a poet , as mr. f. a. is a preacher . ] as dull mortals fear the event of such things as shall never appear ; so tho it be hard to find in the word what was never at first by the writer put there , yet a preacher acute by the help of his priestcraft-resentment can do 't . of the jewish scorner in his text , typical of our english gentleman [ as he would have us conceive ] he says . the frequent revolutions in the jewish state contributed mightily to unsettle the scorner's thoughts , and create in him a slight opinion of the eternal differences of right and wrong , good and evil : but our gentleman was , in the revolutions intimated , fix'd and settled in his thoughts on the loyal suffering side , and his unshaken vertue held out , till it happily reach'd its merited reward . but there were a sort of zealous pretenders to religion among the jews , [ tho whether typical of any such among us , i know not ] that were never loyal , but when they were caress'd . after the character of the scorner , it had been proper for mr. att. to have defin'd , and explain'd what was the wisdom , which he sought , and found not , but that he declin'd , and he had reason ; for had he determin'd the wisdom mention'd in his text , to have been true religious wisdom , he had been prevented of much of his malice , and must have been forc'd to allow'd sir r. h. the praise of having sought true religious wisdom , and had he call'd it profane worldly wisdom , then his angry libel had ran into ridiculous jest ; for what strange thing is it , that a man who seeks worldly wisdom should not find spiritual ? it's as if i should say mr. att. seeks a prebendary's place , and cannot find a captain's . it 's not to be expected that a man should find what he does not seek . but tho he will not explain the nature of the wisdom in his text , yet he will tell us , what is meant by seeking it , i. e. he will tell us what is meant by seeking the lord knows what . and he makes nothing of broad undisguis'd contradictions , now affirming that , the scorner makes freer inquiries after truth , shakes off the prejudices of education more thorowly , than the rest of mankind ; and presently after saying of this self-same scorner , that he is unconcern'd what god and wise men in all ages and countries have said . but great men can contradict themselves as well as mr. att. tho perhaps not reach the just height of such a particular atterburianism as this . he sets down as a note of infamy , that which adorns the character of a wise man above any thing else , viz. his examining things to the bottom , taking nothing upon trust , not relying on the authority of man. well , sir robert ! if these be the sins you have to answer for , you have the noble beraeans to keep you company , and at the day of judgment st. paul shall speak a word for you both . but it must be confess'd , that a church-pharisee is ten times more civil , than a heathenish knight , for he takes all upon trust , all he hears from his superiors is gospel , out of reverence to authority he examines nothing to the bottom . thus far i have consider'd mr. att 's preface , and the opening of the text , as he calls it , and now i come to his observation , which , what it is , we are to seek , for he has not set it down ; but as when he did not define wisdom , he explain'd the meaning of seeking it , so now an observation , which he never made , he will justify , and he justifies it , by as extraordinary a method , as ever ill made or unmade observation was justified . for he wisely shows how it comes to pass , that men who set up for a more than ordinary fame in wisdom and goodness by contemning religion , and religious men , do , and must fail of the end they propose , because , as wise as they are in other things , they are uncapable of impartial inquiries after divine truth , in plain english , they fail of the end which they propose , because they do not propose the end which they fail of . well! go thy ways honest fr. att. thou art a shrewd fellow , i 'll say that for thee , and hast logick and wit enough to write against the socinians . mr. att. assigns four things , which render a man incapable to search successfully after truth , especially divine truth . the first is pride , this he defines to be , an undue value which a man has for himself , and his own opinion , with a disregard for every thing beside . having thus defin'd , immediately he starts an abuse upon old hobbs , whose leviathan , tho i hold to be an ill book , a very ill book , more impious , tho not more malicious , than the sermon about the scorner , yet the passage cited from his epistle , by way of reproach , is ingenious and honest . i will set it in its proper light , not that mr. att. may be asham'd of his misrepresentation , he is more hardy than so , but that all lovers of honesty and truth among the clergy , may be asham'd of their brother att. hobbs had said , what he thought proper to recommend his book to the patronage of his honour'd friend mr. fr. godolphin , and supposing that what he had said , was yet hardly enough to furnish mr. g. with a satisfactory reply to them who might happen to condemn his work , he comes off with a witty piece of railery , thus , if notwithstanding this , you find my labour generally decried , you may be pleas'd to excuse your self , and say , i am a man that love my own opinions , and think all true i say , and that 's more than any man will be perswaded to say for the author of the scorner . but if loving a man 's own opinions must be an instance of pride , let the reader consider , whether most loves his own opinions , sir r. h. who can indulge a peaceable good subject to differ from him , and enjoy the present parliamentary liberty of conscience , without envying or censuring him , or mr. att. who in bold defiance of the laws of his country , reproaches all men that do not believe , as he does ; and then if this be a piece of pride , and pride hinders knowledg , has not mr. att. prov'd himself a blockhead , which he need not have done neither ? but some orators will use , in spight of tully's caution against it , in re non dubiâ , argumentis non necessariis , in a matter not doubtful , arguments not necessary . it 's crudely said by him , that pride is a great enemy to knowledg , he ought to have shown how ; for an inclination to be proud of knowledg , seems to prompt a man to study , and let mr. att. say what he pleases , there are more humble blockheads than proud ones . he reproaches the gentleman whom he represents under the character of a scorner , for a superficial sciolist , positive in his opinions , and hardy in his assertions . now tho that honourable person is ever as ready to give , as take a sober liberty of philosophizing and prophesying , yet positiveness would be less odious in him , whose excellent natural parts , and all desirable advantages of study and conversation , make it as probable for him , as any man breathing to come to the knowledg of the truth , whatever is the object of his inquiry : but what an insufferable presumption is it , in young mr. att. who translated himself but t'other day , from working on another man's profane satyr , to the study of divinity ? what an insufferable presumption is it in him , to be positive ? whereas if his genius had inclin'd him to the search of religious truths , and all his time been spent that way , and no hours given to wild joys or soft delights , he could yet have but slenderly stor'd himself with wise and useful notices , being yet but a young man , and a very young divine : and what sets his credit still lower , divinity his fate , and not his choice , the study not which he passionately loves , but comfortably lives by . and then i must tell him , one had better be a half philosopher , a half physitian , or a half-bred man , than a half divine ; for the half-bred man is not in so much danger of becoming a fop , the half physitian an emperick , the half philosopher an atheist , as the half divine of becoming a merciless persecutor of all that differ from his opinions , pursuing them , when the law ties his hands , with an unchristian reviling tongue . but mr. att. has one extraordinary remark concerning the mischief of pride . he affirms that it will harden the scorner in his way against whatever wise men can think or say . this pretious youth that translated absalom and achitophel , cannot but have heard of elkanah settle , who has two verses , for whose character soever they were intended , that agree well with the translator's . at his wise thinkings some diviners guess , but his wise sayings no records express . i am sure there are no such in his libel . as for the humble duties of the cross , sir r. h. does as sincerely own his obligations to them , as any good christian can , and needs as little forgiveness , at least as mr. att. indeed for mysteries , 't is likely he could wish none impos'd , but such as are clearly reveal'd , which also by being reveal'd cease to be mysteries , and are then but improperly so call'd . but mysteries which are not plainly reveal'd , but plainly contradict sense and reason , them his conscience seems not strong enough to digest . 't is impudent calumny to intimate , that if sir r. h. cannot give himself a certain plain account in what manner , and to what end god did a thing , he therefore concludes that god did it not at all . but it really is sir r. h's weakness not to believe the interpretation of a text given by a priest , which serves his priest-craft . even any explication which tends to the increase of the priest's honour , or power , wealth , or odd worldly convenience , he is too apt to suspect ; nay i have heard it said of him , that he thinks it an instance of subtle impiety for priests to twist their worldly sensual advantages with the honour of god almighty ; and fancies that they learn'd the trick of a heathen painter , one phidias , who was hir'd to draw only the picture of minerva , but the ambitious artist so curiously join'd his own in the same tablet , that his mortal phyz was not to be expung'd without impairing the glories of the goddess . nay , and which is worse than all this , tho mr. att. has strenuously belied sir r. h. yet he has unluckily charged him with one thing , which i am afraid will stick ; i will be fair , and repeat it in the preacher's own words , if he has not as clear an idea of every term in an article of faith , as he has of those in a mathematical proposition , 't is presently unphilosophical , absurd , and foolish , invented by those whose interest it is to puzzle mens vnderstandings , that they may have their wills and affections at their service . on my conscience sir r. is guilty , and he really wrongs mr. att. that says there is not one true word in his scurrilous libel . but the charge which can hardly be avoided , may admit of some plea in its defence , or excuse , for i do not see how an article can be believ'd that is not understood , can a man believe he knows not what ? if that be in his power , sir r. has not only a proud but a stubborn understanding ; but then also it will be in mr. att 's power to believe transubstantiation , and if in his power , i think it was not well done to refuse it to king james ; for he that can believe a proposition whereof he has no idea , ought in conscience to oblige the chief magistrate , under whom he lives , with being of his religion , unless he had before-hand given his promise to the king of morocco . but i have another thing to reason with mr. att. all articles of faith necessary to salvation are plain and easy to be understood by an ordinary capacity , the best preachers have ever profess'd it . now i would fain know of mr. att. whether their being propos'd in difficult terms , whereof we have no clear idea , be that thing which makes them plain and easy ; if it be , then we are more beholding to the school-men and their followers , than to the first apostles ; but if difficult terms cannot make an article of faith plain and easy , i desire to be acquainted for what end such are made use of , except to puzzle mens understandings . to see how some teachers can vary their notes ! when they treat of the reasonableness of the christian religion , then all the doctrines thereof are plain and easy to be understood : but when they plead in defence of mysteries , whereof we can have no clear idea , and they that plead for them , have confus'd , and different idea's , then they may be difficult , inexplicable , and never the worse . the next particular in the character of the scorner is said to be a strange and unreasonable suspicion . upon this head mr. att 's discourse is loose , and undetermin'd ; he will allow an inquirer to be cautious , but not suspicious : but how these two differ , where wise caution ends , and where faulty suspicion begins , as for that , he begs his reader 's pardon . caution and suspicion are but different words for one and the same thing . a man may be too cautious , and he may also be not suspicious enough , as the elegant old man of ascra notes , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . credulity and diffidence have both undone men. between foolish suspicion , that is not to be satisfied with good reasons , and easy credulity which is satisfied without any at all , there is a certain vertue [ says casaubon upon theophrastus ] 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 without name , prudentiae velut 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , which flows from wisdom , by which we believe them who deserve belief , and suspect their honesty who believe well of no body , that is not of their opinion . the third topick whence mr. att. draws the character of the scorner , is , false wit , which he defines to be bold jesting upon things sacred and serious . quickness of wit he commends , coldly indeed , but as well as a poor pretender could ; but , false wit , that which exerts it self in satyr and drollery , that he inveighs against , and says it betrays a man into a thousand errors , for one it discovers to him ; and i believe it , and that 's the reason , himself is so often , and so much in the wrong . he never aim'd at any wit , but this satyrical , drolling false wit ; and he made the greatest show of it , when he took upon him to be john dreyden's broker , and with a sorry roman gloss calander'd for colleges and schools , that infamous english libel of absalom and achitophel , which an old canker'd poet stuff'd with common-place wit , and mercenary dictated scandal . now since mr. att. never pretended to any other wit but this satyrical drolling false wit , and to this still continues his pretence ; if his character of the scorner represents any man now living , it represents himself : and therefore all this while what has he been doing , but drawing his own picture , and like an inverted narcissus , throwing stones at it ? it cannot be denied , but that the eminent deceas'd person , on whom mr. att. reflects , p. 12. excell'd in false wit , with quickness of thought he would ridicule religion , and plead surprizingly for vice ; but then he openly and bitterly repented , which is more than i ever heard that mr. att. has done for his vile journey-work under a hungry rhiming sinner . as for miracles , i see nothing in the history of religion , but that sir r. firmly believes all which are recorded in the bible , tho i am indeed apt to suspect he may imagine , [ for i will not tell a lie for him ] that the counterfeit miracles of juggling priests first tempted cautious and suspicious bad men , to call in question the truth of the miracles of jesus christ. just so it is the impudence , pride , and lordly ill nature of such priests as att. that makes the worthy and reverend clergy of the church of england , had in no greater veneration . if mr. att. had censur'd old hobbs for teaching that right is founded in power , or that the command of the civil magistrate makes the scripture a law to us , god forbid that i should speak a word in his vindication : but the accusation preferr'd against him , p. 13. is so shamefully false , that i much wonder , if this notorious slanderer can henceforth ever hope the least credit should be given to what he affirms or denies of any man whatsoever . the accusation is this : the great leader of the libertines of this age , thought he had said something very prejudicial to the divinity of christ , when he had translated , after an absurd manner , the greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and blasphemously told us , that that was as much as to say , the verb of god. ] but the words of hobbs in the 36 th chapter of his leviathan are these . our saviour is called the word , not because he was the promise , but the thing promised ; they , that taking occasion from this place , do commonly call him the verb of god , do but render the text more obscure , they might as well term him the noun of god ; for as by noun , so also by verb , we understand but a part of speech , a voice , a sound , that neither affirms , nor denies , nor commands , nor promises , nor is any substance corporeal or spiritual ; and therefore it cannot be said to be either god or man , whereas our saviour is both . in this place hobbs reproves those that called christ the verb of god , and att. says that hobbs speaks against the divinity of christ , whereas hobbs openly professes that our saviour is both god and man. the jesuits have not with greater impudence belied luther and calvin . with the same hardness of brow and spirit of falshood , he affirms , that hobbs pretended to give a mighty blow to the doctrine of grace , by saying , that infusion and inspiration signified in plain english , inpouring and inblowing ; whereas all i meet with in chap. 34. is , that inspiration taken properly signifies blowing into a man [ inblowing is att 's term ] some thin and subtile air , &c. but the word is used in scripture metaphorically only , as where it is said , god inspir'd into man the breath of life , no more is meant , than that god gave unto him vital motion : and where it is said , all scripture is given by inspiration from god , it signifies , that god inclin'd the spirit or mind of the writers to write that which should be useful to such and such good purposes . i have taken pains to vindicate hobbs [ who has faults enough to answer for , without being unjustly charg'd ] from these particular unjust charges , that the reader may understand how convenient it is , to imitate the noble beraeans , and examine carefully , whether all those things are true which are sometimes told them è cathedrâ . in the fourth place , mr. att. ascribes the deception [ that is his word ] of the scorner , to his sensuality . now i can hardly believe but that the translation of absalom and achitophel was done by another hand , tho it goes under att 's name , who perhaps might be hir'd to father it , because he seems not to have learning enough to be so wicked ; for here he imagines the word deception to be synonimous with error or ignorance , whereas it signifies deceit or cozenage : sensuality indeed is likely to prevent a man from knowledg , but poor mr. att. by his ignorance of grammar is fall'n into another doctrine , viz. that sensuality is the cause of the scorner's deceptions , i. e. sensuality helps him to deceive others . — — nec te vox barbara turbet , aut temere erumpens linguâ titubante solacus : tot sanctos oppone patres , mysteria sacra ; turpe est grammaticis submittere colla capistris . buch. fran. but that which mr. att. would have said , had he had skill to express it , is , that sensuality does discourage the scorner from inquiring after , and fatally prevent him from finding wisdom . very true : but what will he hence prove ? i know what naturally follows , viz. that sir r. h. whose knowledg , whose observations , and experience through all the most useful parts of learning , are so very considerable , has led a studious philosophical life , and that mr. att. who does not understand grammar , has spent his time in sensuality , when he should have pli'd his book . but of all the lines in mr. att 's holy invective , sir r. ought to forgive him two or three , p. 14. where telling his reader in what age of life the humour of scorning is most prevalent , he pertinently observes , it is commonly incident to men at that time of their lives , when their lusts are most ungovern'd , and their blood boils hottest ; it is chiefly the young robust sinner , that indulges himself in it , while he is in the midst of his enjoyments . that is as much as to say , that old age has banish'd from sir r's breast , or at least abated the humour , while young and robust mr. att. — but this humour of the scorner will in time wear off with him also . but pray how has sir r. set his face directly against the doctrines of religion ? it does not appear from his late history , unless his accuser means the false doctrines of religion ; and let him set his face , and his heart as directly and strongly against them as he pleases , i am afraid he will be able to do little more than save his own soul. but in truth sir r. has dealt very sparingly on this argument , and has chose such particular inoffensive instances of priest-craft , that none but pagan and popish priests have the least reason to be angry : i am sure no presbyters of the church of england are concern'd , unless those few , who make it their business to have the belief of unintelligible , an unexplicable mysteries , enforc'd by cruel and unchristian penalties . let our preachers be but content , that the people own the authority of the sacred book , particularly , that they agree to those texts [ whose sense is so much controverted ] as true , in that sense which the writer design'd , tho what that is , is not certain , and not compel them to confess something more , something against their consciences , till a majority of convocation-men [ who only pretend to make , i should say declare articles of faith ] shall determine what is the true sense of the controverted texts , and their credit shall stand fair with the ages to come , for all that sir r. has said in his history of religion . p. 16. l. 1. mr. att. has these remarkable words , some men who write pretended histories of religion , are beholding to the real religion of others that their histories are not written . here we are , first , to inquire how sir r. h. has provok'd mr. att. that he threatens to write his history . 2. how dangerous it is to provoke a priest to write one's history . 3. whom is sir r. h. beholding to , that his history is not written . of these in their order . 1. how sir r. h. has provok'd , &c. has sir r. h. question'd the existence of a deity ? or deny'd the truth of revealed religion ? this were to provoke the generality of mankind , but by good luck no such thing is laid to his charge , tho if it were , it might be easily disprov'd from his writings . what then ? has he slurr'd the divine right of episcopacy , and given the prelates but a parliamentary right in the room ? has he dress'd up the grave doctrines of non-resistance , and passive obedience in an odd disguise , which were ugly enough in their own true shape , that so they may be laugh'd at , as well as hated by the people ? has he confounded arbitrary power that had well nigh confounded the nation ? for ought i know , something of this nature he may have done , but it 's no matter , mr. att. has swallow'd all this ; that which sticks , and will not down , is a pretended history of religion : well then ! what 's the fault of that history ? what injury is it to mr. att. if the world be made acquainted , how the heathen priests topp'd false doctrines upon the people , and by cunning wicked arts made a gain of them ? how they puzled their understandings and stole their wills and affections , how they cherish'd their ignorance , and scar'd 'em from the free use of their reason ? what hainous provocation is it against a priest of the church of england , if the nation be told how the priests of the roman communion imitate the religious frauds of the priests of the heathens ? if mr. att. will be concern'd at this , he will tempt men to believe , that our religious guides pursue the same methods of priest-craft as the other , but then 't is att. that libels the church , and not sir r. h. for he only in general terms , and very modestly wishes that reformed churches did not violently pursue the same ; nay , in his preface , he gladly takes occasion [ so studious is he to make his court to our church ] to commend the excellent spirit , and useful teaching of the late arch-bishop , whose life and learning , whose honest , wise and useful way of plain teaching , sets his honour far above the most venerable names in all antiquity . 2. how dangerous it is to provoke a priest to write one's history , that 's next to be inquir'd . luther and calvin wrote [ tho not under that very name ] histories of religion , widely different from what the romanists write , insomuch that the incens'd jesuits have wrote their history ; and never did the famous society themselves practise more enormous villanies , than they laid to the charge of those two famous reformers . now if mr. att. should look back on his own life , and charge sir r. with all the vile deeds , whereof he himself has ever been guilty , in troth he would make a fine picture of the old gentleman , and be fully even with him for his history . it were a good motto for a clerical historiographer , nemo me impune lacesset ; for i don't think any man's innocence a sufficient security while he exposes priest-craft . i shall content my self to give but one example , but that an illustrious one , to justify my opinion . when king john began to set his face directly against the corruptions , the priest-craft corruptions of the church of rome , a parcel of ungracious monks could not bear it , not they , no , not from their soveraign , therefore they poison'd him with the sacrament of the altar ; and when they had done , they wrote his history , and publish'd him for a wicked and atheistical , a foolish and tyrannical prince ; yet protestant authors give him a better character , and there are circumstances which will incline an unprejudic'd man to believe that this king deserv'd it . i did not think to have given another instance , but just as i am writing this , there comes into my head a very remarkable one , which also has a particular circumstance fit for mr. att. to consider , so that i know not how to pass it by . pausanias in his baeotics gives an accurate description of trophonius's antrum , and says , that he himself consulted the oracle there . now pausanias was a grammarian of caesarea in cappadocia , and liv'd in the second century ; so that by mr. att 's favour , oracles did not cease at the coming of christ , which anthony van dal● has prov'd beyond all contradiction . but to my instance . pausanias declares by what rites and ceremonies , they prepar'd themselves , who , to consult the oracle , would descend into the cave , and how they return'd back , by the same hole they went down , their feet foremost . then has he these words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , &c. they say that none ever miscarried in the cave , but that all return'd that went down , except one only , one of demetrius's halbadiers : now that fellow had not run thrô the ritual course of preparation for the descent , and descended , like an ungracious fellow as he was , not to consult the oracle , but to discover the priest-craft : him therefore for this unpardonable sin , the priests of trophonius made away , knowing that the dead tell no tales ; his body was afterwards found the lord knows how far from the mouth of the cave , and then they wrote his history , the substance whereof was this , that he was a profane scorner , who with much ado , had made a shift to get rid of good principles , and such stiff opinions , as he found inconsistent with a soldier 's life , and that he knew very little of the divine mysteries of the gods , by reason he was a proud , suspicious , witty , sensual fellow . the third and last thing to be inquir'd is , to whom sir r. h. is beholden that his history is not written , i. e. that he is not scandalously abus'd , for that mr. att. means ; otherwise , to write his history , were to oblige the age , and perpetuate an honourable name to a nobly descended gentleman , who deserves it , with our latest posterity : and what a noble theme were it to a man that had a genius capable ! the roman and grecian orators prodigally wasted their eloquence on meaner subjects than the unshaken loyalty of sir r. h. during the troubles of k. charles the first , and second , his faithfulness to his country during the reign of king james , his courage and wisdom in defending the happy choice of the people , and the right of our present successful deliverer , our just and lawful king william . but we are to inquire to whom sir r. is beholden , that after he has expos'd priest-craft , he himself is not scandalously abus'd , and defam'd in a virulent and lying sort of a history . mr. att. says that sir r. is beholden to the real religion of others , meaning , no doubt , of himself and friends . now real religion will certainly restrain a man from false reproaches , but nevertheless [ to suppose that mr. att. has some religion ] that was not the thing which restrain'd him from a scandalous history , for then it would have restrain'd him also from a scandalous sermon ; much less was it any reverence to sir r. h. as being a person of honour , and a privy-counsellor : for priests have not given such a divine right to kings , but that they dare open their characters , and will do it , when they find themselves neglected . king william our invited defender , our successful deliverer , our rightly chosen , just and lawful soveraign , has not escap'd from impudent and wicked , unrighteous , and ingrateful reflections in priestly protestations , prints and preachments : was it then sir r. h's good luck which sav'd him from unchristian reproaches ? a man must have very good luck that lives unreproach'd in the midst of a crooked and perverse generation , the late excellent arch-bishop could not do it , but was even by priests reported a socinian , tho he has wrote against their reputed heresy , if not with all the evidence which could be desired , yet beyond any other trinitarian ; and [ which recommends him to the esteem of all sincere christians ] he has wrote with a due charity to dissenters , which also is part of the honourable character of that good man , the present bishop of gloucester . but what do i talk of good luck ? a word which unthinking men use when the reason of a thing is not very plain . a little thinking and reasoning will perhaps satisfy the curious why the author of the history of religion has not been dress'd up in the san benito . for , reason we thus : would mr. att. be content that his character should be open'd , and the history of his life drawn forth ? he must needs have more tenderness for his own reputation than so . he knows it is not prudence [ or should know so ] to break his neighbour's windows , when his own house is made of glass . again , we may consider , that tho a dog may bark , and no body mind him , yet if he bite , he may chance to have his teeth knock'd out . the railing of mr. fr. atterbury i have reprov'd ; as to the other short part which may be called sermon , i will remark but one thing , upon one period . they say , a fair reasoner ought to represent the full force of his adversary's argumentations , but there 's no need he should mend them , unless he begin to be sick of his own hypothesis ; wherefore i cannot but wonder at one period of mr. att 's sermon , p. 19. the jews were a proverb and a by-word to the rest of the world , the perpetual subject of contempt and reproach ; and who would have thought [ may we suppose one of those wise heathens to have said ] that truth should have lain hid , among such an odd sort of people in such a little spot of the world ? now what disciple of spinoza or hobbs could have put such pointed words into the mouth of a wise heathen ? and what preacher beside att. would have done it ? there too , where he held not himself oblig'd to make something of a reply , to take off the ill influence it might chance to have on young unstable people ? it would have become him , at least to have subjoin'd , that that odd sort of people were god's chosen , and the special care of his miraculous providence , and the little spot of ground by them inhabited , blessed above all the earth . sir , 't is to no purpose to tell the world what mov'd me to write this pamphlet , yet for my own sake , i am contented that they know what did not : it was not a desire of your favour , i had that before , and was in no danger of losing it ; it was not any command from sir r. h. he hardly knows my face , needs none of my defence , and i heartily beg his pardon for the sawciness of the attempt ; it was not to get bread , but that proves it self , for i conceal my name , that i may not lose my curacy ; yet could the age bear plain dealing as well from a poor priest , as from a generous poet , i would soon be known : for tho no man who has so little , is so little concern'd about getting more , yet i am not of so poor a spirit neither , but that i could pati divitias , suffer to have my commons mended . you call'd to my mind t'other day [ i thank you ] this excellent proverb , wisdom is good with an inheritance ; take me a disputing the inspiration of the author , and tell my friends , a kind wish is too good for me . as to the reasons and arguments which i have used against the libeller , i doubt not but that they will appear to the impartial reader , plain , strong and convincing ; but whether my readers be impartial , or biass'd , 't is all one to me , i shall be as well satisfied in angring a zealot for priest-craft , as in pleasing an honest enquirer after , and lover of truth . my stile is careless , but i hope intelligible , it should have been quick and sharp , but you forbad it , wherein you were to blame . for , 1. the lewd libeller is the most virulent and audacious that ever wrote . 2. his friends among us , that are most fierce for securing the trade of priest-craft , are least concern'd for the honour of god , in restraining vile immoralities . 3. i never yet knew nor heard of a zealot for priest-craft , but the same was , as the libeller , an impugner of the right and title of king william to the crown . now , sir , what do you think of your self , that would have me deal gently with men that blaspheme both god , and the king ? do you think your good nature will bear you out ? i hope you are not hedging in an interest against the return of popery and slavery , which , since the reduction of namur , even the jacobites are grown weary of expecting . i know not what to say to you , but for once , since i have comply'd with the excess of your humanity , if the world will forgive my fault , i will forgive yours ; nay , and be so liberally obliging to you , as to lend an ear to your softer counsels another time . so fare you well . nov. 4. 1695. a reply to the anonymous edinburgh libeller , wherein the honourable sir r. h's history of religion is vindicated from the invidious , and unreasonable exceptions of priest-craft . also some right done to that great and good man dr. tillotson , late arch-bishop of canterbury . and a word offer'd in defence of his surviving friend , the eminent bishop of salisbury . printed in the year , 1696. having lately had sight of a libel , said to be printed at edinburgh , and forg'd by a true son of the church , [ so the author would have it believ'd ] i congratulate sir r. h. the being plentifully rail'd at , in so good company as the late arch-bishop , a prelate of the most consummate worth that ever sat on the throne of canterbury , and the learned bishop burnet , to whose singular merits , the english may well forgive the flagitious attempts of hundreds of his country-men , provided there be never an edinburgh libeller among them . were i the praeceptor intrusted with the breeding of a hopeful young gentleman , to season his tender mind with the sound and honest principles of holy religion , i would have him carefully read arch-bishop tillotson's sermons . to acquaint him with the nature of the english government , to instruct him in the true interest of his country , and to let him into the differences between the romanists , and the reform'd , i would put into his hands no book sooner , than bp burnet's exact and faithful history of the reformation : and to teach him to distinguish truth from falshood , [ that so he might happily conjoin the christian and the philosopher , which is impossible to be done , but by a free use of reason , and an unaw'd examination of the grounds of what is commonly receiv'd ] sir r. h. should be none of the last examples , which i would propose for his imitation ; for as every man is tempted when he is drawn away of his own lust , so every man is cheated , when he is misled by his own credulity . that part of the infamous libel , on which i shall chiefly reflect , is call'd a supplement . a supplement , bless us ! and yet the two former carried convitiorum plaustra , waggon-loads of slander ; such store of lies quantum in acheronte mortuorum est , the dead may as easily be numbred : i will make him swallow some , and let things take their course ; for who can forbear his amen to the bilbo-prayer , rumpatur quisquis rumpitur invidia , let envy burst the male-content with its rank poisonous plethory . when caiaphas told the chief priests and pharisees , it is expedient that one man should die for the people , he prophesied , tho he did not know it , and his words were true in a sense which he never intended : so our true son , but of the lord knows what church , [ i am sure of no church under the king of england's dominions ] speaks more truth in his first paragraph , than in all his work beside . some of his words are these , the history of religion gives a like account of religion as dr. tillotson , and quotes him with great applause , as the true pattern of orthodox divinity , and much in the doctor 's stile and air. if sir r. h. in his history gives such an account of religion as the abp does in his sermon , what good christian , or what but morally honest deist , would offer to open his mouth against it ? if the honourable lay-man quotes the venerable prelate with great applause , as the true pattern of orthodox divinity ; who , but an inveterate schismatical non-juror , would be so contemptibly foolish , as to accuse him of want of reverence to priests because of their character ? and if the history of religion be wrote in the stile and air of the arch-bishop , then all ingenious and discerning men will confess , that it has , beside the usefulness of its excellent matter , all the happy accession of winning ornament , which wit and words can give it . naturalists say , that venomous serpents carry their antidote with them , but this foolish pestiferous animal presents his antidote first ; so that his poison is like to have no effect on his readers . sir r. h. he lastly saith , ridicules all reveal'd religion , and turns it into what he calls priest-craft . whereas 't is that gentleman's form'd design to separate religion both natural and reveal'd from priest-craft . he is concern'd that there should be any knaves among the priests , and so many fools among the people ; wherefore he does his part , to instruct the one , and convince the other : and tho there be little hopes , that argument should prevail much upon the latter , who by their craft maintain their pride , their power , and luxury , yet by making the former wiser , these may chance to be brought to something of reason . the libeller hopes to detract from sir r.h. by accusing him of having borrow'd his history , from a work of mr. blount's : in answer to this i note , that neither of those gentlemen pretend to invent their matter , and since they treat of one and the same subject , it is not strange , if they make some the same observations . i wish the former had publish'd none , but wherein the latter does agree with him . as for the latter , he has through a long course of life , shown a steddy honesty , in all his writings , a solid judgment ; and whosoever has wit enough to lend , he has no need to borrow . he adorns his subject with that just reasoning and proper method , with that manly stile and agreeable turns of ingenuity , which must needs win the heart and convince the understanding of every reader , that is not interestedly obstinate , nor naturally stupid : and then , without giving any just cause of offence , [ which it is to be confess'd mr. blount has done ] he entertains us delightfully and usefully on several topics , that are not to be met with in the great diana . had mr. blount but borrow'd from sir r. h. and confin'd his wit to sir robert's juster reasonings , his fame also might have defied the impotent malice of the libeller . but the libeller is no borrower ; what he says of them , whom he has chose to hate , is pure invention , so false , that no body could have the impudence to say it before him ; and tho there is a wonderful variety of false doctrines preach'd up and down in the world , yet he has advanc'd some new , and is gone beyond his best-worst masters . i shall take notice of the particulars as i meet them . but when he reproaches mr. blount for an atheist , [ whom i will not vindicate , tho i think him but a deist , which is no good character neither for one bred up in the christian religion , and capable of examining the grounds of it ] and tells of his intimacy with dr. tillotson , the reader cannot but be amaz'd at the senseless calumny . there 's an ironical way of commendation , whereby the person commended is expos'd to contempt and scorn ; and there 's a witless way of railing , whereby a spiteful wretch destroys his own credit . machiavel has abus'd the libeller with his villanous false axiom , fortiter calumniare , aliquid saltem adhaerebit ; for 'gainst a man generally well spoken of , much seen , and long tried , a subtle whisper might chance to create unjust suspicions , but heavy loads of odious calumnies flung at such a one will not leave a blemish . it is possible that a gawdy atheist , or a scandalous non-juror might sometimes obtrude an unwelcome visit on arch-bishop tillotson ; but he must have been a man truly vertuous , and in all probability not meanly learn'd , that could have an intimacy with him : for tho his grace was as easy of access , as business , civility , or charity requir'd him ; yet he receiv'd none but the best , the bravest , and most knowing into his bosom . a just defence of this famous and incomparable prelate , i wish well to , but have not the happy leisure , nor just ability which the work requires ; yet that the defamatory libeller may not triumph in his iniquity , i will examine his supplement further than i intended . so then , before i do that right , which was my first intention , to sir r. h. i must reprove the libeller for his unchristian and injurious treatment of arch-bishop tillotson : and that no just occasion of offence may be given to any sincere christian , i must premise , that the libeller has so twisted his objections against the arch-bishop , with those against mr. blount , that there 's no avoiding some defence of that unfortunate gentleman ; but as for his theistical , or atheistical notions , [ if he has any such ] god forbid that i should offer the least word in defence of them . if mr. blount meant thrô the heathen sacrifices , to wound those of moses , he is to be condemn'd for it ; but this thing he says well , that the heathen sacrifices ought no more to be spar'd , for their resemblance to the sacrifice of moses , than a criminal ought to be pardon'd for wearing the same colour'd garments as the judg : i add , than a treacherous coward ought to be pardon'd for his blew coat , or a non-swearing parson pardon'd his cursing the king for his cursing the unitarians also , under the invidious name of socinians . the libeller affirms , that mr. blount builds on the same foundation as dr. tillotson in his sermon of sacrifices , &c. tho he does not go the length of his master dr. tillotson . now what if mr. blount does build on the same foundation as dr. tillotson ? i hope he is not to be blam'd for that , unless it can be prov'd , that the doctor 's foundation is weak : and if mr. blount goes not the same length as dr. tillotson , that 's no reproach to the doctor , unless it can be shown , that he went beyond the even measures of just reasoning : and to suppose that both these do really look upon sacrifice as a human invention , can the libeller produce a divine command instituting and requiring the same ? if he can , let him rail and spare not , otherwise it is plain , he rails , because it is easier for a man of his parts and principles , to rail than argue . but that dr. tillotson speaks of reveal'd religion , as a human invention , that 's a devilish invention of the libeller . there be religions in the world , the greatest part of which is human invention , and the revelation pretended , a pretence and no more ; but that the revelations made to moses , or those imparted to the world by the ministry of jesus christ , were inventions of men , this the arch-bishop has not said , no , nor so much as intimated : had the libeller himself but imagin'd , that the arch-bishop had intimated so much , he would not have fail'd to point out the place ; but the arch-bishop not giving him the occasion to belie him plausibly , he does it roundly and boldly , not doubting but that a foolish jacobite of no faith , will believe a lying jacobite of no conscience at any time . but whereas the libeller reviles the arch-bishop for what he has taught , now on this article , now on that , without order , or art , after a desultory manner , familiar to frantick enthusiasts , as his spirit mov'd him , and ill language came in his way ; i think it more becoming for me to propose something of method , and so to consider , 1. what the libeller in his supplement objects against the arch-bishop , concerning the original of sacrifice . 2. concerning the sacrifice of christ. 3. concerning future punishments . on the first topic , the arch-bishop is blam'd for teaching , in his sermon of the sacrifice and satisfaction of christ , that a very great part of the jewish religion which was instituted by god himself , seems to have been a plain condescension to the general apprehension of mankind concerning the way of appeasing the offended deity with sacrifices . this the libeller pronounces a most irrational and blasphemous account of christ's sacrifice and death ; but , say i , 't is no account at all of the sacrifice and death of christ , being only a short digression from that subject . they that hir'd this fellow to write against the arch-bishop , hir'd him for the sake of his impudence , not for any great cunning to varnish his scandal , and give it the air of probability . the general apprehension of mankind concerning sacrifice , and the condescension of god to the jews might properly enough be used by way of exordium to a discourse concerning the sacrifice and death of christ , or brought in by way of similitude , as they are by the arch-bishop ; the reader may peruse the whole paragraph , which begins thus , and indeed a very great part of the jewish religion , &c. he that cannot distinguish the general apprehension of mankind , and the condescension of god to the jews , from the particular sacrifice and death of christ , was never made to decide a controverted difficult question , but to be laugh'd at for medling with that he does not understand , tho a malapert ignoramus should not scape so neither ; and therefore i shall give him some farther correction before he and i part . in the paragraph of the arch-bishop , cited and reprov'd by the libeller , there are two things to be distinctly consider'd : 1. the general apprehension of mankind concerning the appeasing god by sacrifice . 2. god's condescension to the jews , who were , with the rest of mankind , possess'd by that apprehension . 1. the general apprehension , &c. p. 9. the arch-bishop calls it , a certain apprehension and perswasion , which had very early and universally obtain'd among mankind ; only he will not determine , p. 10. whether it had its rise from divine revelation , or otherwise . but the libeller , like that sort of person , whose way is to rage , and be confident , positively affirms , that there is nothing more plain , than how the heathen came to the knowledg of sacrifice , viz. that cain , tho he corrupted the true religion , yet preserv'd the institution and deriv'd the worship of sacrifices to his posterity . so pag. 27. and p. 5. in his charge of socinianism against the arch-bishop consider'd , he doubts not to affirm , that sacrifice was commanded by god to adam , and that all the christian world have hitherto believ'd , that god reveal'd to adam his pleasure concerning that worship . of which two things , the former is at least suspicious , but the latter is notoriously false , and he knows it . to take off all suspicion from the former , let the libeller , if he can , produce one text of scripture , where the least mention is made of any law imposing the worship of sacrifice given to adam , abel , or cain , noah , abraham , his patriarchal progeny , or any man whatsoever , before the days of moses : but instead of that , he gives his suspicious assertion all the air of a presumptuous boldness , not so much as pretending an argument , by way of consequence remote , in favour of it : for it is not enough for him , with the rest of mankind , to be liable to mistakes , unless he also lets his reader see , that he judges of truth by his vitious interests , by his passions and affections , by his sick prejudices , and malicious distaste ; yet i will not take the advantage of his leaving his magisterial sayings to shift for themselves , but fairly consider what men of better temper , more sense and greater learning , who have happen'd erroneously to say the same , were wont to plead in defence of their so doing . 1. they were wont to cite heb. 11.4 . by faith abel offer'd unto god a more excellent sacrifice than cain . and hence to plead thus ; divine faith relies upon divine revelation : if abel by faith offer'd , then he , or his father had an immediate revelation from god , requiring that service . but why that consequence ? for is it not enough to raise the gift of abel to the title of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , a greater sacrifice , i. e. in the acceptation of god , than cain's ; if it proceeded from a truly pious affection , and a firm perswasion that god would amply reward him , for his testifying his obedience , in such instances , as he found himself oblig'd to by his reason . reason was a digest or body of laws , which we know that god did give to adam ; but , that god gave him any other , that we do not know . it is not unreasonable to think , that natural reason might lead abel to sacrifice , that natural reason might beget in abel a perswasion , how god would graciously reward that pious affection , which he sought to testify by sacrifice ; such perswasion is the same thing as faith , tho not as mosaical faith , nor christian faith. he that cometh to god , must believe that he is , and that he is a rewarder : indeed the object of faith grows wider , according to the compass which revelation gives it , but still 't is faith in god to believe that , which reason judges to be highly probable . but further , to show the weakness of the consequence drawn from this text , it may be consider'd , that in the same , abel's sacrifices are called gifts , which intimates , that they were voluntary offerings , which proceeded purely from his own inclination and choice , and not from any express law , any positive command which required them at his hands ; nor is it of small moment to note , that the acceptation which abel's sacrifice found with god in this text , ascrib'd to the virtue of his faith , is in 1 joh. 3.12 . ascrib'd to his righteous works . 2. that sacrifices owe their original to a divine command , some would infer from gen. 4.5 . where it is said , that cain's countenance fell , because god had no respect to his offering . for they argue thus ; if cain's countenance fell , [ which was a token of his dejected mind ] because his offering was not respected , then it must follow , that the offerer offer'd in hopes of reward , which hope of a reward he could not reasonably entertain , unless he offer'd in obedience to a divine command , and not upon a presumption of his own brain . but why might not the sons of adam hope for reward and blessings from the goodness of god , when they sought to propitiate him according to the best of their understandings , where they had no positive precept ? i see not but they had all reason for hope in this case , especially if they look'd on their creator , which they certainly did , as a just and merciful being . but the argument drawn from this text of genesis , must needs appear of no force , if a man will but consider , that we find in scripture , god has accepted of services paid , nay services but intended to be paid , [ witness david's purpose to have built him a temple ] which he never particularly expresly requir'd . 3. some think that sacrifice must needs owe its original to positive divine command , because otherwise they know not how to excuse the first sacrificer from will-worship , which they think is condemn'd by the apostle , col. 2.23 . now i grant it is not for man of himself to appoint how , or with what , god shall be worshipped : but when man , not having receiv'd a positive divine command , follows the conduct of his reason in the worship which he pays to god , he of himself does not appoint the same , but god that endow'd him with the principle of reason : and tho the way which he chuses of worshipping god , may not improperly be called will-worship , because he chuses it ; yet , nor does it deserve to be condemn'd , nor does the apostle condemn it . the voice of reason is the voice of god , as well as miraculous divine revelation : we are farthest instructed by the latter , by the latter we are more powerfully encourag'd to our duty ; but our obedience to the former , when we are no farther instructed , nor encourag'd , shall be , not only graciously accepted , but also largely rewarded . that the will-worship mention'd col. 2.23 . is not condemn'd by the apostle , i refer to dr. hammond , who has made that out beyond contradiction . briefly , and plainly , where the matter of will-worship is unlawful , there will-worship is to be look'd on as a sin ; but where the matter of it is perfectly lawful , and not forbidden , there will-worship is not only no sin , but an act of religion , holy and well-pleasing unto god : which is very evident , not only from the natural reason of the thing , but also from the letter of scripture , which bears honourable testimony to the good purpose of david's heart , and to the voluntary abstinences and austerities of the rechabites ; also the practice of our saviour in observing a feast instituted by the maccabees , does abundantly confirm the same . the chief arguments that have been offer'd by those modester mistaken men , [ who do not hold opinions they know not why ] to perswade that sacrifices were at first instituted by positive precept from god , i have now answer'd . let the libeller , if he can , answer those arguments , which [ as it appears to me ] do fully evince , that the first sacrificers sacrific'd , mov'd thereunto by the sole impulse of their own honest reasoning minds ; and those arguments i shall mention . 1. as a preliminary , it will go a great way , that neither in the books of moses , nor of any sacred writers , is there the least mention of a command from god for his being worshipp'd with sacrifice . but , 2. on the contrary , there are many texts scatter'd up and down , which declare the little or no esteem that god sets upon that worship . god expostulates with the sacrificers , and asks them to what purpose were the multitude of their sacrifices , and plainly tells them , that he was satiated with them , that he had no pleasure in them , that he hated them , &c. psal. 40.7 . isa. 1.11 , 12 , 13 , 14. to evade these plain words , some are contented to plead , that a weak but inveterate opinion had possess'd the minds of the stupid jews concerning the intrinsick excellence of sacrifice , the great value of it , by it self , without obedience , and that god did not intend strictly to signify that sacrifice was an abomination to him , but to teach those jews to consider , which it was , sacrifice or obedience , that he esteemed most : sacrifice alone , sacrifice without righteousness , that god hated ; but when sacrifice was offer'd up with clean hands , he was pleas'd both with the one and the other . thus may the literal sense of any text be paraphras'd away to serve an hypothesis , but i shall show , that god , who often renew'd his laws and commands of righteousness , has disclaim'd the having spoke unto the jews , and commanded them to sacrifice : this is a third argument , and enough alone to determine this controversy ; jer. 7.22 . for i spake not unto your fathers , nor commanded them in the day that i brought them out of the land of egypt , concerning burnt-offerings or sacrifices . that god might abate the great opinion which the jews had entertain'd concerning burnt-offerings and sacrifices , he professes he never commanded them in the day that he brought his people out of egypt . o! but for all that , say our adversaries , god might have commanded them in the early days of the world , soon after he created man : but this of all their evasions is the most weak and senseless ; for it were an impertinent argument , and not at all fitted to abate the extravagant opinion which the jews had of sacrifice , if god who did not command the same , when he brought his people out of egypt , should have commanded that worship in the beginning of the world : had god commanded sacrifices in the beginning of the world , that early command must have made them as sacred and necessary , as any later could do . to abate the extravagant opinion which the jews had of sacrifice , nothing less could be pertinent , than letting the people know that god never commanded it , nor in the days of moses , nor in the days of the first men. the prophet indeed brings in god professing with a seeming restriction , that he never commanded it , when he brought his people out of egypt ; but it is accountable that he should so speak , tho he never commanded it before , because we have no account that he did command it before ; and if the prophet by a decent prosopopeia , represents the all-wise god reasoning well , he did not . by this time , i suppose , the reader will grant me that the libeller was unreasonably angry at the arch-bishop , for not determining whether sacrifice ow'd its original to revelation , or natural reason ; and unreasonably confident to determine the former ; but when he affirms , that all the christian world have hitherto believ'd , that which he so confidently and unreasonably determines , he says that which is notoriously , false ; for , granting him to be the ignoramus which he seems to be , yet he must needs have read something : some few must needs have fallen under his notice , among a crowd of writers , which declare their thoughts on our side , viz. that natural reason first taught men to sacrifice , which service , when in process of time , it became loaded with superstition and fraud , it pleased god to separate from its grosser corruptions , and indulge to his people , with such regulations as were proper to distinguish them from the heathen , and render that innocent , and in some measure useful . christian fathers , and others , a good round number are cited by dr. spencer , de legibus hebr. ritualibus , and dr. outram , de sacrificiis , who all agree that no command from god impos'd the rite of sacrifice on the first sacrificers , but that they were led into it by their own natural reason , judging it a good testimony of their gratitude to god , to present him with something of that all which his bounty had given them . what should tempt the libeller to affirm , that all the christian world have been always perswaded of the contrary , it is not easy to imagine ; but of this i am convinc'd , that he having belied an arch-bishop of as great knowledg and vertue , as ever wore that dignity , is fitted to say any thing of any man , to affirm the falsest , and deny the most evident thing in the world. the second remarkable thing in the above-mention'd paragraph of the arch-bishop , cited and reprov'd by the libeller , is god's condescension to the jews , who were possess'd with the general apprehension of mankind , concerning the way of appeasing him by sacrifice . what the arch-bishop hath taught on this head , may be fairly and chiefly drawn up thus . when religion ran to decay , and there was no end of numerous rites and ceremonies , it pleased god for the restoring that , for the reforming and regulating these , 1. strictly to forbid his people all idolatry . 2. to admit no rites whatsoever into his service that were immoral or dishonest ; but then as for those borrow'd from the gentiles , and by long use endear'd to the jews , which , tho little useful to the nobler purposes of religion , were yet of an indifferent nature , and innocent in themselves , those he adopted into the ceremonial of his own service by the ministry of his servant moses . but the libeller , p. 2. of his supplement , represents the arch-bishop , together with mr. blount , agreeing , that sacrifice was a trick , and a barbarous invention of wicked and foolish men ; also teaching , that the jewish ritual was nothing but a compliance of god with the barbarous wickedness of men. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . a little great grecian , full of the spirit of his blind father , bestow'd this stricture on the accuser of his brethren , who has his name from the business he goes about , viz. slandering and accusing : i apply it not improperly to the libeller ; for , when the devil slanderously accus'd job , it was not by falsly charging him with some vile wickedness , which his righteous soul abhor'd ; but by slighting the high character which god gave of his upright servant , and objecting , that his piety , so much commended , was not affliction-proof . but this libeller fears not to accuse a man , little inferiour to job , save that he had not his numbers of children and cattle , to accuse him ( i say ) of blaspheming the majesty of heaven , and speaking ill of the ways by which god was content to be worshipp'd . i see a scholar may out-do his master , and even a man , when he gives his mind to it , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , clearly put down the grand accuser ; but i will not wonder at it , for the man that does this , has the conscience of a non-swearing jacobite , and out-does his master only in impudence not in cunning . for this is very evident , that tho sacrifice most probably was invented by the untutor'd reason of the first good and grateful men , yet when the administration of it was restrain'd to peculiar persons , they quickly plaid tricks with it , such as sensual and covetous men are always given to ; but when they brought up human sacrifice , that surely was a barbarous invention , a mischievous trick of the inhuman sacrificer , to gratify his own vindictive spirit : for whom will calchus nominate to appease the wrath of his apollo , but some unhappy envied sinon ? with such inventions and tricks as these , far is it from god that he should comply , and far from the arch-bishop was the imputing to god such a compliance : but that god should condescend to indulge the jews some heathenish rites , not wicked nor immoral , that is very agreeable to the scripture-accounts concerning sacrifice , and very probable from the consequences of unstrain'd reason . 1. 't is very agreeable to scripture-accounts concerning sacrifice : that the rites and ceremonies in use among the heathens , gave occasion to the rites and ceremonies among the jews , cannot perhaps be prov'd by plain , full and express words of scripture ; but neither can the contrary be so prov'd , nay the contrary cannot be fairly inferr'd thence , which this can , being not obscurely implied in several places , and therefore i might well call it agreeable to scripture ; deut. 4.7 , 8. for what nation is there so great , who hath god so nigh unto them as the lord our god is in all things , that we call upon him for ? and what nation is there so great , that hath statutes and jugdments so righteous as all this law which i set before you this day ? this place jonathan , and the jerusalem targum paraphrase thus . 't is the custom of the nations to carry their gods about on their shoulders , that they may seem near , tho they are far enough off , for they hear not with their ears , i. e. they have no ears to hear ; whereas the word of the lord is seated high on his throne above , and he hears our prayers whenever we pray before him , &c. moses therefore , that he might engage the minds of the jews to god , and the ceremonial ordinances which god had instituted by him , seems in the text to design this reasoning . i know that you desire a god , a god not cover'd with a cloud , and to be seen only by the eyes of the mind , not a god so far as that is from you , but a god that illustriously manifests his presence , and by prodigies , oracles and symbolical representations , does as it were set himself before your eyes plainly to be beheld : well , i know that you have a very great opinion of the sacred rites in use among the gentiles , and that nothing would please you more than religion drest up after their modes , with much busy ceremony and pomp , which you look on as tokens of divine presence . now i would have you consider that god has graciously condescended to your desires , insomuch that i dare confidently appeal to you , what nation has their gods so near , as the lord you god is unto you ? what nation has so glorious testimonies of divine favour and presence as you have ? you that admire the rites of strangers so much , tell me what foreign nation worships their gods with rites so decent , and significant , so innocent , so grave and so becoming , as you do : for you worship not the great and good god with that wild mixture of gentile rites , some of which are very ridiculous , some very cruel , some impure and abominable ; no , the rites which you have borrow'd from strangers , thrô the indulgence of your god , are corrected and separated from all their odious , vile and base pollutions , are so order'd and dispos'd , as to lead you to a right knowledg of god , which brings him near to you , and you to him . if the reader be really free from all prejudices and prepossessions , i am much perswaded , that he will grant me this paraphrase is unforc'd and very natural . he may please to consider further , that moses in the text compares the rites of the jews and gentiles together , to show the jews how their rites were preferrable to the rites of the gentiles , which implies a similitude between them : and 't is not easy to think , that god of himself would fashion the jews rites to a conformity with the rites of the gentiles ; but 't is very reasonable to think that god might indulge the jews , as much as might be any ways made fitting to be indulg'd . i have been so long on this text , which i have in great measure interpreted in the words of dr. spencer , that i shall but mention what others are quoted for the same purpose , and refer the reader to that learned author , who applies them with great learning , wit and judgment , acts 13.8 . exod. 20.25 . levit. 1.2 . numb . 6.1 . gal. 4.3 . i pass over the testimonies of antients and moderns , jews and christians , who have declar'd their opinion fully with the arch-bishop in this matter , viz. that the rites and ceremonies in use among the heathens gave occasion to the rites and ceremonies among the jews , which god indulg'd to his people , when he had corrected , limited , order'd them so , as to prevent idolatry , and take away several unhappy occasions of immorality ; these i pass over , because , notwithstanding what some sometimes pretend , i never knew a man that car'd two straws for authority when he saw that authority was against him , and thought that reason was for him . wherefore i proceed to show , that the doctrine i am treating of , appears probable from the consequences of unstrain'd reason . 1. consider the circumstances of the mosaick rites , they were not such as god could take delight in , for any real excellency in them , they were not perfective of human nature , had no tendency to make men more just , merciful and temperate . now it is not reasonable to think that god would load his people with such empty rites , only to show his power , only because he would do it ; but very sutable it is to the notions which we have of god , to believe that he might condescend to the infirmities of his people , and indulge them rites to which they were addicted , when he had cleans'd them from sin. 2. consider the time when the rites of the jews were instituted , for 2000 years the people of god were unacquainted with those rites , which pass'd into law but in the days of moses ; we read nothing of them in scripture before that lawgiver : what! was god's nature chang'd , was he grown weary of the purity and simplicity of the worship which the best men of the first ages paid him ? how vain an imagination were this ! and how likely therefore [ for new manners we say need new laws ] that god , having to do with a people grown refractory , and prone to idolatry , by their long converse with the egyptians , should , to prevent their idolatry , indulge them some use of egyptian rites purg'd from egyptian abuse and superstition ? 3. the multitude , the pomp , the splendor of the jewish rites speak them to be of heathen original . had god impos'd the jewish rites , either meerly to show his power , or to adumbrate something of the gospel-dispensation , one is apt to think they needed not to have been so numerous , nor so glorious ; numerous and glorious were the rites of the gentiles , and there 's a reason for it . idolatry nakedly and in it self consider'd , has nothing to intice the minds of men , therefore that stood in need of making use of those bewitching rites , which might strike upon the senses , and tempt the vain imaginations of men , such as sumptuous priestly robes , solemn processions , pompous spectacles , glorious temples , sweet musick , odoriferous perfumes , joyful dancings , images shining with gold and jewels . but true religion which is acceptable to god on its own account dwells in the mind , exerts its self in praises of , and prayers to god , in acts of temperance , justice and mercy , this needs not multitudes of pompous rites to recommend it : for to consider it well , is all that is requisite to bring men in love with it . therefore when god gave the jews rites many and pompous , it is most likely he did it , by way of condescension to their infirmity , who were so strongly addicted to that , which of it self could not profit . 5. the near affinity and resemblance between the rites of the jews and the gentiles , makes it highly probable , that the rites of the former were borrowed from the latter . but why not as well the rites of the latter from the former ? i will assign the reason . the egyptians long before the days of moses were a people fam'd for their learning , and much taken notice of for the solemn rites and usages in matters civil and profane ; whereas the jews grew from an envied family , to a numerous hated people , whom the egyptians , jealous of their numbers , opprest with the hardest slavery , and us'd with the most contemptuous scorn , inventing lies to their disgrace , and exacting tasks above their strength . now a man must be stupidly senseless , that can imagine , or impudently partial , that dares affirm , that so celebrated a nation as the egyptians , pompously and operosely superstitious , threw off the bewitching rites of their ancestors which they had been so long , so much in love with , to follow the strange rites of their poor miserable misus'd slaves ; he must be a very obstinate man , that will not acknowledg the egyptians to have been as averse to the rites as the persons of the jews , for such is the general disposition of mankind , those they have the least love for , their manners they least imitate : but to give this argument its full strength , let it be consider'd , that the jews were held as a vile and base people in the eyes of other nations besides the egyptians ; few historians take any notice of them , and they that do , mention them with scorn and indignation , give them a character much worse than they deserv'd , tho they deserv'd no good one ; and would the egyptians borrow their rites from such a people think you ? the libeller's faith cannot digest it , as for what his tongue may say , i matter not that , nor he neither . again , as the egyptians were fam'd for their learning , and antiquity , so were they not meanly proud of these advantages ; antient writers describe them very full of themselves , opiniative of their own ways , and manners , and utterly averse , not only from all communication with the despicable jews , but also with any other neighbours ; they studiously declin'd foreign intercourse and friendships , and that for this very reason , that they might preserve their antient rites and customs sacred and safe from innovation [ i refer for authorities to dr. spencer , from whom i borrow the most i say in this matter : ] if the egyptians would have chang'd their manners , the jews should have been the last whom they would have follow'd . i need add no more on this head , when i have noted that the most famous grecian philosophers are said to have travelled into egypt , as the famous school of the world for knowledg sacred and profane , thence they borrow'd their rites ; and plutarch one of the many authors who tells us so , does likewise affirm of the jews in his life of pythagoras , that they mix'd many things borrowed from the egyptians with their own holy rites . i have said enough to justify what the arch-bishop hath taught concerning the original of sacrifice ; and who is there now , that will not be amaz'd at the impudence of the libeller , who in his first libel against the arch-bishop , is not asham'd to vomit up this ignorant , false and inconsistent charge , p. 5. this author [ meaning the arch-bishop ] would perswade us , that the devil was the author and first inventer of it [ i. e. of sacrifice ] and that god came in but at the second hand in imitation of the devil , to graft upon his stock ? for , as i have shown , the truth is , the arch-bishop leaves it in doubt , whether sacrifice took its original from natural reason , or divine revelation , and might without any injury to the cause of religion , have determin'd the former : and he asserts but this , that when the sacrifical , and other ritual way of worship came to be grosly corrupted , god purg'd it from all its gross corruption ; and because the jews were incorrigibly fond of it , god having purg'd it from all its gross corruption , and order'd and dispos'd it wisely , he then in pity to the infirmity of his people , indulg'd it to them , but always signified that he had no pleasure in ritual services for their own sakes , and that what he most esteem'd was obedience to the laws of righteousness . generally base men do either find or make some umbrage for their calumnies , but never did wicked wretch with case-harden'd conscience vouch such notorious odious lies , such broad and bare fac'd calumnies as the libeller . it 's plain to me , if the devil be a worse creature , 't is only because he has the greater power . 't is a note of varro's , which one would think could not but be true , neque in bonâ segete nullam esse spicam nequam , neque in malâ non aliquod bonum , in the best field of corn some bad ears , in the worst some good ones . but the libeller's supplement is a field which throws up plenty of wild fancies , gross mistakes , malicious reproaches , false imputations ; yet wherein he quarrels the arch-bishop , or sir r. h. not one honest , probable or pardonable saying arises . how this comes to pass , is to me pure amazement : if it be fate , the libeller is doom'd the most severely of all the sons of men ; if free-will , none e're worse us'd his liberty , no not the traitor judas ; for , 't is true , he betray'd a better man , but i do not read , he so belied him . on two more heads , viz. the death of christ , and the eternity of hell-punishments , great out-cries are rais'd against the arch-bishop , but his grace's reasonings are not consider'd , nor answer'd , that 's not the libeller's way . on the former , both the late arch-bishop , and the present bishop of sarum speak to this purpose , we know no reason but that god might , if it had pleased him , have brought about the salvation of mankind by another way than the death of christ , his justice did not necessarily oblige him to redeem the world by the blood of his son. i must confess , i think , that the modern unitarians have more carefully , judiciously and exactly handled this subject , than either of these two very learned and good bishops ; but in defence of what the latter teaches , these things are plain and obvious . that lord who punishes his vassal without a cause , or more than the cause offer'd does deserve , is unjust . that lord who exacts the utmost penalty of the breach of a just law , is just ; but he is not oblig'd to exact it , because then he were oblig'd not to be merciful : this argument is close , plain , and must conclude the dispute , unless justice [ according to the dream of john calvin ] be one thing with respect to man , and another with respect to god. i will prove that the notion of the word justice is one and the same , let it be consider'd with respect to god or man. we read of no other measures of justice in scripture than never punishing beyond demerit ; the punisher , if a supream , always having the power , not to punish so far . indeed inferiour officers are absolutely bound to exact the utmost penalty of the law transgress'd , unless their commission leaves some cases to their discretion ; but the supream governour of a nation , and the great governour of the world , may if they please , forgive much , and be never the less just , they may so for all that we read in scripture , they may so for all that we can discover by reason . a constant unrelenting execution of justice leaves no room for mercy ; but wise and gracious acts of mercy in proper time and place dispens'd are no blemish at all to justice . but if we suppose god to be just by other measures of justice than scripture and reason acquaint us with , we mispend our time in talking about his justice . again , if we suppose justice , with respect to god , to be something which we can't understand , or rather something contrary to that which we do understand , and that it always requires full satisfactions for sin , the consequence of this will be , that god can forgive no sin ; so that what the libeller disputes for , is the eternal misery of mankind . let him dispute for his own soul , as being unworthy of the mercy which he blasphemously reproaches , but 't is an odd opinion for one that calls himself a true son of the church , that neither god , nor the king can be just , while he is on this side hell and the grave . to urge authority here is an argument little worth , that is , as to the merits of the cause , but it will sly in the face of the libeller , who vends his unintelligible whimsies for receiv'd opinions ; wherefore i will cite him one or two antients and moderns of that class who might hope for his good word , if it be possible for any such to come from his lips. athanasius , tom. 1. serm. contra arianos , p. 239. edit . commel . aug. l. 13. de trin. c. 10. calvin . instit. l. 2. c. 12. § . 1. zanchius l. 11. de incarnatione , c. 3. quaest . 1 : i spare the reader the trouble of long transcriptions , and refer him to grotius against ravenspergerus in defence of his book de satisfactione christi , who has collected many more authorities for the very same doctrine which our two bishops teach concerning the death of christ. when i have replied a few words in vindication of the arch-bishop's sermon on matth. 25.46 . i shall leave the doing him farther right to an abler hand . the arch-bishop propos'd to explain , how it can stand with the justice and mercy of god , to punish temporal sins with eternal punishments . rejecting the common weak solutions which pass'd in an age less inquisitive and wicked than ours , this is the chief thing on which the arch-bishop insists . tho he that promises does thereby pass over a right to another , and is oblig'd in justice and faithfulness to make good his promise , yet he that threatens keeps the right of punishing in his own hand , and is not oblig'd to execute what he hath threatned further than the reason and the ends of government require . to the same purpose the learned bp burnet teaches , that there is a right of punishing sinners vested in god , which he may use , or not use , as he pleases . there is not the least syllable of what is here said by either of these worthy , learned and pious prelates , which the libeller pretends to reason against ; indeed their words are plain and carry their evidence with them : but the libeller , well knowing how impossible it was to disprove plain and evident doctrines , conjures up all the powers of his old canker'd mind , the spirit of envy and of malice , of impudence and of falshood , by the help of which , after he has told his reader that mr. blount argues against future punishments , at least the eternity of them , he adds , — exact dr. tillotson's notion in his sermon upon hell. and he goes on thus : — mr. blount disputes as dr. tillotson does , as if future punishments were inconsistent with the goodness of god , when as it was the arch-bishop's form'd design , to show how hell-punishments did consist with the divine justice , and goodness , &c. and he has done it beyond reasonable objection . the only thing which can with any shadow of sober reasoning be objected against the arch-bishop , is , that if god has it in his power to forbear the executing of eternal vengeance on the wicked , yet it is not fit that the people should be told so from the pulpit , for thereby the preacher lessens the discouragements of sin , and very much weakens the strongest argument in the world to a holy and vertuous life . had the libeller had but a grain of quick sense , 〈◊〉 would have insisted on this charge , but a bigot always sacrifices his wit to his zeal . yet after all , the defence of his grace would have been obvious to an equal considerer : for , 1. who is there that observes not , how the many unaccountable systems of christianity , which are impatiently contended for , and anathematically impos'd by warm professors , have given occasion to atheists to suspect the grounds of all religion , and to theists to question the truth of our reveal'd . among the rest of christian articles generally receiv'd , which seem at first sight not so very agreeeble to natural reason , that of eternal punishments is one ; hence arose a necessity of examining the article , and explaining how much was , and how much ought to be understood by it . 2. the sense of the words for ever and everlastingly , not being always the same in scripture , the archbishop found himself not oblig'd to account for the reasonableness of punishments , which could not but be of eternal duration . 3. while the arch-bishop supposes a power in god to remit of his sentence , and not punish to the utmost extent of his threatnings , he does not in the least indulge the sinner to think , but that future punishments shall certainly be of that duration and intenseness , that it is infinitely more reasonable to prefer the labours and hardships of a vertuous and godly life , before the liberties and pleasures , of a sinful , the odious calumnies against the late arch-bishop , which the libeller threw in my way , being thus remov'd , i return to the justification of sir r. h's admirable history of religion , which also i design'd . the libeller in his supplement mark'd p. 27. inveighing against the censurers of priest-craft in general , has these words . tho they have no account from the heathen how their sacrifices began , yet these gentlemen are very sure , they were first introduc'd by priest-craft . i will not deny , but that mr. blount does suppose sacrifice to have been an heath'nish invention introduc'd by priest-craft ; but for all that the arch-bishop , or sir r. h. has said , sacrifice may owe its first original to the natural reason of pious good men in the infancy of the world ; only they both were perswaded , that a great deal of priest-craft was early super-induc'd by the sacerdotal administrators , of which sir r. h. has taken but very sparing notice . upon king charles his restoration , a certain eminent doctor appearing in the chappel at white-hall , a noble lord ask'd his majesty , why he would suffer that person to appear there , who had decypher'd his father's letters taken at naseby ; the king replied , man ! i ought to thank him for those he did not decypher : and ought not the libeller to have thank'd sir r. h. for the many scandalous instances of priest-craft , which he has so obligingly past over in silence . as to the particular of sacrifice [ which tho the priests did not invent , yet they early made their markets on 't ] we read even in the old testament , that the jewish administrators of it , were not contented with that share of honour and maintenance which was legally alloted them ; and the votaries of the fair sex , had something to complain of of another nature , witness the story of hophni and phineas : the romish priests have copied this lewder craft , and yet there 's not a word concerning it in all the history of religion . as to that accusation , that mr. blount and sir r. h. do not agree in the accounts which they give of the original of idolatry , i ask , will the libeller prove thence , that sir r. h. took his history out of mr. blount's diana , or will he prove thence , that idolatry is neither state-craft nor priest-craft ? but how do mr. blount and sir r. h. differ in the accounts which they give of the original of idolatry ? why , he says , that mr. blount makes idolatry to be the invention of kings , sir r. h. of priests . but , as his manner is , he belies them both : sir r. h's words , at most , come but to this , that priests promoted idolatry , that they got by it , that it seems impossible it should enter into the minds of men without some direction and design . now for all that is here affirm'd , men might be first cheated into the opinion and practice of idolatry by kings , only to the satisfaction of priests , who found their account in promoting it . what he quotes from mr. blount , is no more than that the primitive institution of idolatry receiv'd its birth from princes , at whose charge it was afterwards educated by ecclesiasticks . now the invention of idolatry , is one thing , the institution , and passing it into a law , another ; so that , for all that is here affirm'd , men might be first cheated into the opinion by priests , who studied to make their court to kings , at the expence of the people . the libeller has one line impertinent , and invidious above all the rest , 't is this . malice to kings and priests commonly go together . this joining kings and priests together is another instance of priest-craft , for the omission of which , the parties concern'd ought to have been silently thankful . as for sir r. h. he has given sensible testimonies of his affection and reverence for priests , priests of like sincerity and vertue as that excellent prelate , of whose sermons he makes honourable mention in his preface , and but with the last necessity was consenting to retire from that impatient tyranny , which for a while bore down all our rights , religious and civil , before it . but see the craft of some men , they flatter kings , not for any love they bear to a crown , more than to the rods and axes of a republick ; but that kings rais'd to heaven by them , may draw them up after ; they make all to be law which comes from the mouth of kings , that kings may make all that to be gospel , which comes from the mouth of priests . let the name of kings in god's name , be for ever honour'd ; but let priests , that is , if they would deserve esteem , know their distance , and their duty : there 's designing sawciness in them , when they join their honour so nearly to that of kings ; from writing kings and priests , they 'll rise to the vain stile of the butcher's son , ego & rex meus . crafty priests , like ivy , twist their clinging arms around the royal oak , tenaciously adhere , rob the root of its nutritive moisture , and if not timely torn away , o're-top the tallest branches , nay tear it all to pieces : every adhering part still lives , and every creeping fibre plots to steal into the decays of the poor dying trunk , and there a new root infix ; for it is all one to the ivy , so it have but a supporter , whether 't is a vigorous living , or a dull dead one . reflecting on sir r. h. and others , the libeller says , they make religion to be state-craft or priest-craft , as it serves their purpose . i answer for sir r. h. that he has sufficiently declar'd how true a sense he has of religion in that just and noble character which he has given of the arch-bishop's sermons . but if this libeller would fain know distinctly what is state-craft , and what priest-craft , neither confounding the terms , nor uniting the sense , i will tell him . when kings make use of the learned sophistry of obsequious priests to support their illegal arbitrary power , that design in kings is properly call'd state-craft , or king-craft : bur when priests preach up passive obedience , and non-resistance , their so doing is priest-craft ; for such crafty priests as those would not lavish a poor prayer for ever a king of 'em all , if it was not in prospect of a mighty protection to bear them out in all their unwarrantable clerocatacurieuontisms ; if this cramp word be too hard for the reader , he may pick the sense of it out of 1 pet. 5.3 . the next charge against sir r. h. is this : he makes use of the errors of the church of rome to undermine christianity . but sure a man may reprove the errors of the church of rome without undermining christianity , unless those errors belong to the foundation , which god forbid it should be said ; this i am sure , sir r. h. has not utter'd , nor does the libeller charge him to have utter'd the least word against faith in christ , repentance , and good works . it is usual with men to be fond of their own conceptions , and confident that every beloved error of theirs belongs to the foundation of faith ; but for one that calls himself a true son of the church , to be so much concern'd at the reproof of romish errors , argues that there 's false fire in his zeal , or but a cold indifference in his protestant profession , and that for his particular , tho priest-craft be the thing he chiefly studies , yet he is not his craft's-master . but further [ says the libeller ] sir r. h. spits his venom against the mosaical institution , and to prove this charge he cites hist. of relig. p. 58. where sir r. h. has these words , christ came to redeem us from the darkness of that condition we were in by strange and puzzling methods of religious ceremonies and mysteries , various rites of sacrificing , good for nothing but to confound and distract the minds of men. now if this be to spit venom at the mosaical institution , then the pen-men of the new testament spit venom at it most outragiously ; for they frequently speak of it in their epistles , after the same manner , as sir r. h. in his history . nay , st. paul in one place , says all our fathers were under a cloud , under a vail ; and if i be not much mistaken , he calls their mysterious rites and ceremonies beggarly elements . but setting aside the authority of the sacred pen-men , have not all the doctors which have labour'd in expounding the mosaical ceremonies , acknowledg'd them to be very puzzling ? the calvinists are generally perswaded , that god instituted the ceremonial digest , purely because he would do it ; for no other reason but to prove his people , whether they would obey his laws , which had no other goodness in them , but what his arbitrary sanction gave them : but the learned spencer hath satisfied me , that god design'd in all those laws to distinguish his people from the heathen , and wean them from idolatry ; but yet , as dr. spencer confesses , it is not so very plain of every ceremony , what was the natural tendency thereof to such good end. but as for mens learning the duties of morality from the ceremonial law , it was certainly dark as for inclining them to vertue , it was , without contradiction , weak , and it were a wonder if the minds of men should not be confounded and distracted by such methods . but now for a dismal charge ! this sir r. h. like a meer infidel , not having the fear of god before his eyes , borrows the socinian arms against christianity . to this i answer ; 1. it is a silly cavil . such a one borrows arms or arguments against this , or that ; whereas the only thing worth noting , is , whether the borrower understands , and uses them with skill . 2. let it be examin'd whether the libeller does not borrow his reproaches ; indeed they are so gross and impudent they should be his own , yet were it worth the while , i could show how he runs in debt for them to some of his craftier brethren , who have rais'd slander to such a height , that it is not safe , no , not for a man of the greatest integrity , to reprove any the most odious instances of priest-craft . 3. but has socinus wrote against christianity ? the downfal in black-fryars upon father drury , and his popish conventicle , was impudently publish'd beyond sea , by a bold turn of lying priest-craft , as a sad judgment upon an assembly of hereticks ; this is the very picture of the libeller's charge : for , not to recount the books which socinus has wrote in confirmation of the christian religion , not to mention the honourable testimony which the polonian knight has bore to his memory , even the adversaries of that famous man will vindicate him from the libeller's base reproach . mr. how , as firm a trinitarian as any non-jurant jacobite of 'em all , and much an honester man , fairly confesses concerning socinus's book de deo , that it is wrote not without nerves , i. e. in plain english , it was wrote strongly and well ; that , and his other books have been well worn by the best of our preachers , and they have mended their preaching by it . but perhaps they read with judgment , and left all the antichristian stuff to sir r. h. no such matter , for they fought against christianity too with socinian arms , if the libeller's word may be taken . time was [ he says in his postscript , pag. 24. ] that dr. sherlock was a rank socinian in the doctrine of satisfaction , tho he grants , that that doctor has since made some amends , and i think he is something alter'd , but whether for the better or the worse , i will not take upon me to determine . but sir r. h. may comfort his heart , for the better part of the church-of england-clergy , and some of the dissenting ministers , as appears by their prints , are of the arminian perswasion in the quinquarticular controversy ; and he may well remember how bitterly all those doctrines were inveigh'd against , under the name of socinianism . now who knows but that sir r. h's socinianism may in time come to be good orthodox doctrine ? 't is honest and plain , as much of it as he is concern'd in already . and now i expect to be call'd rank socinian , perhaps atheist , meer atheist at least , but that from the libeller will be no disgrace ; yet not to create needless envy to my self , nor bring unjust suspicion on sir r. h. i solemnly profess , that i know no more of his mind in these matters , than from his history ; and that i my self agree with socinus no farther , than he agrees with the plain and sound doctrine of the gospel ; which i think he does not in some points , particularly in that doctrine , that a dignified and creature-god is capable of divine worship . the trinitarians have undoubtedly the better of the socinians here ; but then , to deal ingenuously on all hands , the present unitarian writers do not espouse that error of socinus . 4. what are the doctrines of christianity , against which sir r. h. has fought with borrow'd socinian arms ? they are reckon'd up thus , the trinity , incarnation , divinity and satisfaction of christ , and every thing in which is the least pretence of mystery . but what says sir r. h. ? why , he allows the gospel to be a mystery , a mystery reveal'd : i. e. the way of salvation declar'd by jesus christ still retains the name of mystery , just as men , who had receiv'd their sight , are call'd blind , in that expression of the gospel , the blind see . the reveal'd mystery of the gospel sir r. h. believes and reverences : then for unreveal'd mysteries , he is not such an enemy to them , as the libeller would perswade ; for tho perhaps he does not believe them , because he has no idea of them , yet neither does he disbelieve them . of things whereof he has no idea , neither does he affirm or deny any thing . if any one shall object , that he declares against transubstantiation , i grant it ; but then that , and some doctrines akin to it , are falsly call'd unreveal'd , or not fully reveal'd mysteries ; for they are plain and manifest contradictions . but i suspect that the reader may desire i should speak home ; what says sir r. h. to the mysteries of the trinity , incarnation , divinity and satisfaction of christ ? why , he says nothing at all to them , he does not trouble his head about them , yet he may believe more of them than every body is aware on : for all him , the libeller , and every one else , may believe as much of them as they can ; only he would not have them who are good at believing , force others to believe more than they can , in spite of their senses . the imposition of difficult speculations sir r. h. has happen'd to censure , perhaps when he was pleas'd with the consideration of the plainness of our saviour's sermons ; but he may defend himself with a golden axiom of dr. sherlock's — nothing can be a greater injury to the christian religion , than to render it obscure and difficult . if that doctor be not of the same mind still , sir r. h. can 't help that . i know not how it came to pass , but so it is , he has asserted , that crafty , heathenish and romish priests do not believe the ridiculous things which they impose . but i hope that the libeller will not make mysteries of ridiculous things , to prove that sir r. h. ridicules mysteries ; for ridiculous things will be ridiculous , let sir r. h. or the libeller either , do what he can . sir r. h. also seems to hint , that knowing men may sometimes submit their practice to crafty priests , tho they can't their understanding . the morocco embassador was contented to wear a wide sleeve , tho he never expected to catch the moon in it : and some say king charles the second was a votary of our lady , but he had not a word to say to that embassador , to save the honour of her flying chappel , now happily resting [ blessed be the angel-carriers for it ] at loretto . 5. what mean these words , sir r. h. levels directly at the trinity , incarnation , divinity and satisfaction of christ ? i have heard much of the divinity , incarnation and satisfaction of christ ; but of the trinity of christ i never heard before , i believe nor sir r. h. neither . what new great mystery's this , that 's come to town , so long kept silent , and so lately known ? i always thought there was an exuberant foecundity in mystery , but never dream'd of such monstrous superfoetations . p. 28. l. 1. the libeller would prove , that religion ought to be mysterious , because god is incomprehensible . as if he should say , because god has not fully reveal'd his own nature ; or , because we are not capable , fully to understand his nature , therefore we are not capable to understand those things which he fully reveals , and which most concern us . — dîi●te , damasippe , deaeque insanam ob sophiam donent tonsore . whether the nature of god may be fully understood or not , affects not the question concerning the nature of religion : thus much we do know of god , that he is almighty , and all-wise ; and from these two certain notions , we learn that his dominion over us is absolute , and exercis'd in ways most agreeable to reason . 't is dishonourable to god to assert , that he proposes to our belief what we cannot understand : and it is impossible for man to obey god , by believing what he cannot understand ; if there be any thing in religion which is contrary to , or above our reason , we may be content to be ignonorant of it , for it does not concern us . but i will set down an entire period of the libeller , in answering of which , i shall answer the substance of his reasoning for mystery . pag. 28. l. 3. there are mysteries irreconcileable to them in their own natures , and in the natures of every thing they see before them ; yet they would have every thing in a supernatural religion reveal'd from heaven , to be so plain , that their reason should be able to dive to the very bottom of it : which if it were , it would be no revelation , or perfectfectly to no purpose ; for what needed revelation in things that are obvious , and plain without it ? concerning the understanding which we have of our own nature , and the nature of other things , i shall say nothing , because that subject is now treated of , with so clear and exact a fulness , as must needs surprize , satisfy , and please impartial thinking men. the author starts out into the world early and young , but with so vast a stock of learning , it would be look'd on not without admiration in the chair of a venerable professor . but whether we perfectly understand our own composition , whether we have adequate conceptions of the nature of things , or no , what 's that to the nature of religion ? in religion some propositions are to be believ'd , some commands to be obey'd ; and it is absolutely necessary that both of them be so very plain , that an honest-minded man may certainly understand them : for tho it must be confess'd , we do not pay so ready obedience as we ought to the plain commands of our almighty lawgiver , yet were his commands wrote in mysterious words , hard to be understood , it would be impossible to obey them at all : so in propositions to be believ'd , tho our beloved vices may much retard our assent , even after we understand the sense of them , and perceive their probability ; yet if we do not both understand the sense of them , and perceive their probability , it is impossible we should believe them , or think them to be true , which is what is meant by believing . if any one should object , that tho we understand the sense of the article of the resurrection , yet we do not perceive the probability , but nevertheless are oblig'd to believe it : i reply , that we not only understand the sense , but also perceive the probability of this fundamental article . for , 1. it is confess'd that the resurrection of the dead does not imply a contradiction . 2. we suppose it possible only to the power of god , who can do all things , not implying a contradiction . 3. we believe it will be , because we believe that that is a faithful history , wherein it is recorded , that god who is true , as well as almighty , hath promis'd to raise the dead . so now i may venture to tell the libeller , who with plain dulness pleads not , but betrays the cause of mysterious priest-craft , that if our reason cannot dive to the bottom of an article in religion , neither can our belief dive to the bottom of it : if we understand but in part , we believe but in part , and that part which puzzles our reason , exceeds our belief . but why would the libeller have us believe to the bottom of an article , when to the bottom we cannot dive ? what is to be got by believing more than we can understand ? nothing , nothing to the poor believer , neither in this world , nor in that which is to come , but very much for the man that coins the article , and imposes it under the penalty of hell and damnation . the priest gains a sort of divine honour to himself by his mysterious article ; and he that commands our affections , will one way or other have a finger in our purses . the latter part of the period above quoted carries this sense — that part of supernatural religion , to the bottom of which our reason can dive , is no revelation , or reveal'd to no purpose , because revelation is not needful in things which are plain and obvious without it . the wildness and falseness of this assertion will be clearly seen by instance . our reason can dive to the bottom , that is , plainly understand the sense of this article — god hath appointed a day , wherein he will judg the world by the man christ jesus ; and yet we could not have div'd to the bottom of it , if god had not plainly reveal'd it : for the vertuous discourses of the heathens were enforc'd but with a conjectural and doubtful supposition of a future judgment , it was the man christ jesus who openly and assuredly proclaim'd that doctrine , and god almighty credited his testimony with signs and wonders , above the ordinary power of nature ; nay as a satisfactory earnest of the general resurrection , christ in his life-time rais'd one or two from the dead , and together with himself , many others also did arise from death . that we now know , there will be a resurrection , and a day of judgment , does not prove we could have known it without revelation : but , that we could not have known it without revelation , plainly proves , that it was reveal'd to good purpose ; and tho revelation be not necessary in things plain and obvious , yet it was necessary in things not plain , to make them plain ; and it is not the part of a minister of the gospel to obscure the doctrines and notions which his master made plain and certain . i did not think to have taken the libeller to task , for any other of his wild talk about mystery , because all the common mistakes on that topick are so manifestly discover'd by a very great master , that i do not expect a man of reputation will in haste venture a defence against him . but one artificial pleasant stroke i must not balk . a mystery [ says the libeller , defining it like a logician ] is not that whereof we know nothing at all . but i will dispute with him this his negative definition , and prove , that if that , to which he gives the name of mystery , be any thing , it is that , whereof we know nothing at all . i prove it thus . if that which we do know , be not at all mysterious now we do know it ; then the mystery , if such a thing there be , must consist in that , whereof we know nothing at all : thus his negative definition is utterly ruined . i will load his affirmative with inconvenience , a mystery [ says he ] is that , whereof we know something , tho not all . then , say i , he himself is a mystery ; for tho we know him for a slanderer of the best of men , a libeller of our just and legal government under king william , yet this is but knowing him in part , and viewing an imperfect draught of a very ugly picture ; no man living knows how many worse devils are harbour'd in his mysterious heart . i am in haste to take leave of this topick ; yet casting my eye backward , cannot forbear remembring him of one grave piece of dull false reasoning , 't is this . is not heaven a mystery to us ? do we understand it perfectly ? can we describe it ? and is it not reasonable , is it not necessary , that the methods of fitting us for it , and of conveying us thither , should be very mysterious to us ? i reply , 1. this making mysteries of the holiness which god requires , and the happiness which he promises , is a treacherous giving up the cause of religion , and a shameful temptation to downright atheism . a very mysterious promise at most is but a cold enforcement of duty , and a very mysterious duty is in danger to be ill perform'd even by the man that is well disposed . 2. heaven is in some measure describ'd in the new testament , and as far as it is there describ'd it may be understood , and as far as it is understood , it is no mystery ▪ the methods of fitting us for heaven are also describ'd in the new testament , fully describ'd , and may be perfectly understood by any person of ordinary capacity , that honestly applies his mind to the consideration of the same ; and if he pursues the methods there set down , they will certainly convey him to heaven , for heaven is plainly promis'd to so doing . 3. tho the author of the history of religion thought it a matter of astonishment , that the humour and affectation of mystery should continue , when religion and faith were by our saviour's coming alter'd from their former darkness , yet to me the reason is obvious and manifest . crafty priests pretend that heaven , and the way to it is very mysterious , that so honest and plain people may be mov'd to take them for their guides . indeed a man would be glad of a good guide , when the way that leads to the place where his interest lies is very mysterious , dark , and hard to be found ; but how should a priest know it better than another man , whose natural endowments , and industrious improvements are as great as his , perhaps greater ? so it often happens . i am sure 't were a hard case , that a man of honour and honesty , experience and learning should be led by the nose by a priest , who confesses that himself understands but little of the doctrine which he preaches . it was a just complaint which cario mov'd against chremylus in aristophanes , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , &c. in english thus it founds — he has his eyes in his head , and follows the steps of a blind man ; one that had brains as well as eyes , would not do it . i have known a dog that could see , lend his eyes to the blind ; but this odd master of mine santers with his eyes open after a blind stroler ; and because i am his man , i must have no more wit than to bear him company . 4. but if a man valued his eternal interest no more , than to trust the libeller with directing him the methods of going to heaven , what methods would that master of mystery direct him ? why he has set them down , p. 28 , 29. i will put his methods in method for him , and give them mostly in his very words , exactly according to his sense . 1. the man that would go to heaven , and ▪ take the libeller for his guide , must have a great care that he avoid the scandal of good morality ; for which , tho sir r. h. has a high esteem , and cannot forbear his strain'd encomiums on that late moral preacher arch-bishop tillotson , yet it will never carry a man to heaven , any more than his own natural strength can lift him up to the skies ; for morality is not religion , nothing is religion but that which is reveal'd . morality is nothing but believing according to the light of nature ; the adversaries of priest-craft may suppose it to consist in living up to that light , tho they do not live up to it neither , nor indeed is there any thing to be got by it . 2. the man that will be conducted to heaven by the libeller , must be content to put himself under the discipline of religion , reveal'd religion ; for reveal'd religion [ which is a complex of the methods of conveying him thither ] differs infinitely from moral religion , which is falsly so call'd , because nothing is religion , but that which is reveal'd [ as was above noted ] : for moral religion [ to allow the phrase a while ] teaches only to believe according to the light of nature ; at most , but to practise according to that light ; whereas reveal'd religion puts men under discipline , and that manag'd by others , and those others are priests , and none but priests , for without priests there can be no religion ; and to cry out against priests , who have the administration of religion , is the same thing as to decry religion it self . 3. the candidate of heaven must take notice , according to the libeller , that a belief of those things which religion teaches , is sufficient to entitle a man to a sect , to be an epicurean , or a stoick ; but there goes more to make a good christian than so : what more ? good moral practice ? no , no , 't is no matter for that . but when a man believes the mysteries which religion teaches , the next thing he has to do , is to enter himself into a society or corporation , which is called the church ; for morality having no promise , entitles men to no privileges but what they have by nature : but unconceiveable privileges and promises are annex'd to the society or corporation of the church . 4. that the candidate of heaven may not mistake , and enter into a wrong society or corporation , [ which would be a damnable mistake ] he must be sure to take notice , that the right corporation is govern'd by episcopal officers , who have power to expel out , and admit into their society according to the rules of their charter : and the sentences which they pronounce , they say , christ has given his infallible promise to ratify in heaven . 5. that the candidate of heaven may not be tempted to dislike and scruple the methods above-mention'd , the libeller assures him , that if he does not submit to these methods , he sets himself out of all hopes of future happiness , and there 's an end of him . the sum and substance of all in plain english comes to this — a man need never trouble himself about leading a good life , let him but believe as his priest would have him , and submit himself to the discipline of the spiritual corporation , and he need never fear going to heaven . so then more athanasiano , whosoever will be saved , before all things it is necessary , that he makes use of the methods above-said . father poza , a jesuit , is reported to assert , that an ill interpretation may be made of those words , i believe in god the father almighty : but i defy the wittiest jesuit breathing to make out a good interpretation , nay to make out an interpretation not scandalous , of these the libeller's methods . but after all , one thing i will say for him , viz. that i have reason to believe , that the methods which he commends to others , he himself religiously follows . i am almost asham'd to argue seriously against this ignorant and scandalous libeller : but that none may say he is only ridicul'd , and misrepresented , not answer'd and refuted , i will reason with him on the chief topick of all this wild stuff , of which he speaks in general terms so extravagantly and falsly . that chief topick is , his distinction between morality and reveal'd religion , by the means of which he takes occasion to blaspheme god and good men , and tempts the weaker sort of people to have low thoughts of true piety and vertue , and build their hopes of happiness on their assent to they know not what mysterious propositions . now i will show that morality and reveal'd religion are much the same , that they are divers names , under which the same things are denoted . morality may be defin'd to be the practice of all those things which natural reason , free from passion and prejudice , approves as just and fitting to be done . monroe says , that believing according to the light of nature , is morality : but he minds not what he says , venting what comes uppermost , so that in this particular it is his chance to be wrong , as when he calumniates 't is his choice . that which is usually call'd the law of nature , is nothing else but convenientia cum naturâ rationali , an agreement with rational nature , or natural reason ; morality is the actual observance of that law , the practice of all those vertues that are agreeable to natural reason . natural reason hath been ingeniously compar'd to the changeable lustre of a dove's neck , which appears of other colours to me , than it does to him who stands not in the same light that i do : but natural reason , free from passions and prejudices , is the proper judg of every thing which can be made the duty of a man. christianity , which is now the only true reveal'd religion , is a perfect system of all the laws of nature , of all those vertues which natural reason , free from passions and prejudices , approves ; and all those laws , all those vertues , by the general consent of men , fall under the name of morality . the gospel of jesus christ , is a moral gospel ; his errand into the world , was to re-establish the despised authority of moral goodness , to teach men to set aside their vicious prejudices , and impartially consider the reasonableness of moral goodness . in short , the reveal'd religion of christ , is the old moral religion , which careless neglects , hasty passions , and evil examples had almost banish'd out of the world. but now it will be ask'd , why it 's call'd reveal'd religion ? that 's the next thing i have to show . and here let it be consider'd , that tho there is not a vertuous precept in the whole gospel , which was never heard of in the world before ; yet christ gave the whole a new sanction , and a more awful authority , he establish'd all the instances of good morality upon stronger foundations . the mosaical religion , the morality whereof was encumbred and darkened with a heavy burden of numerous strange rites and ceremonies , did exhibit only temporal promises and threats , to perswade the jews to obedience : or if there were any thing beyond this life promis'd or threatned , 't was in such obscure expressions , that 't was uncertain , and not to be made out but by labour'd reasonings and long deductions . the wiser heathens , who discours'd reasonably , and liv'd well , enforc'd their wise discourses , and good examples , with but faint and doubtful probabilities of a life to come , wherein successful wickedness should be punish'd , and injur'd vertue rewarded ; and when they could not demonstrate their argument , were fain to be content with this harmless speculation , that vertue was reward enough to it self , and a good man happy , even when he was grievously tormented . our blessed lord and master jesus christ was the most consummate doctor , the most authoritative lawgiver , that the world ever knew : it was he that brought life and immortality to light , which were descri'd before by waving flashes , by sudden glances of rays faint and weak : he reviv'd languishing morality by the revelation of a resurrection , and a judgment to come ; and god gave testimony to the revelation of his son , by signs and wonders supernatural , and uncontestable . the reason of man could not have attain'd to the certain knowledg of these things , if god had not made them known by the ministry of his son. in short ; the precepts of the christian religion , are moral precepts , and obvious to natural reason ; but the sanction and enforcement of them by future retributions , that 's divine , reveal'd from heaven , and confirm'd by miracles . having given this account of the nature of morality , and shown what that is which gives it the name of revealed religion , i hope i may have leave to guess why the libeller undervalues morality , and extols the discipline [ as he words it ] of reveal'd religion , perhaps the cause may be this ; morality is a dry , lean business , a crafty priest can make no earnings of it , there 's more by half to be got by discipline . discipline ! discipline manag'd by others , by the administrators of religion , by priests , o 't is a fine thing ! for not only may the laity obtain salvation by submitting to it , but they may be made to be sav'd whether they will or no , tho not for nothing neither . what a sad thing is it , that this discipline should be relax'd now ! how will the gentlemen answer it to god , and their country , who have laid open the inclosures of the corporation ? i know not [ said an orator of no mean craft in my hearing ] which is worse , that the people go astray , or that they may do it . this age is as unhappy by not being kept under discipline , as the ages before moses ; for they living before reveal'd religion , and nothing being religion but reveal'd , could have no religion at all ; and the present age , tho living under reveal'd religion , yet not under discipline , had even as good live under no religion . the sum and substance of religion consists in discipline ; for , says monroe , there can be no religion without priests , and they are the administrators of discipline . but what shall we do in this case ? he that tells us there can be no religion without priests , whereby he damns the first ages of the world , confesses there never were more priests without religion than now , so that it must go hard with this present age. the author of the history of religion had more honesty and good-nature , more wit and good sense , than to talk at this angry , decretory , censorious , scandalous rate : he meddles not with the numbers of wicked priests , only , for the honour of priests that are truly religious , he taxes the frauds of the crafty ; and why that should be imputed to him as an unpardonable sin , the libeller will never be able to say , who owns , that wicked priests are no where more severely reprehended than in scripture . that man must have no regard to his own credit , who finds fault with the history of religion ; for the author in celebrating the fame of the late arch-bishop tillotson , has sufficiently publish'd to the world , that he has an high esteem and veneration for priests , priests that are men of learning and vertue , tho they follow their late thrice excellent metropolitan at a distance , and but as ascanius follow'd aeneas , non passibus aequis . the coming in of king william , was a test upon all orders of men , and openly discover'd who had a true zeal for the interest of their country , and the preservation of their religion , and who were only jealous of a private and less honourable interest . the history of religion , in like manner , is a test upon all its readers , no man can declare his dislike of that book , but at the same time he proclaims that he esteems the substance of religion to consist in that , which is least to be understood , that he is all for discipline , as the libeller phrases it , and if it were in his power , would treat all them that do not believe as he does , very scurvily . a great deal of dull , false , railing , idle stuff , p. 29. and 30. being pass'd over , i note , that he presses the biddelite socinians [ as he calls them ] in one point , with an unanswerable objection : but those that consent with mr. biddle are in no greater an error than the trinitarians , and the unitarians have a charity for them both , while they live well , and lay not a persecuting weight upon their beloved error . what the socinians and present unitarians hold , in what they agree , in what they differ , the libeller shows that he does not understand , and 't is not worth the while to lead him into a true sense of the controversy : for when all is done , his way is to curse , and not to argue ; and they that differ from him , in what particulars soever , shall be sure to be branded with the vile names of cursed priests , and latitudinarian ministers of satan . one thing in him is very pleasant , he would fain perswade the world , that the differences between dean sherlock , and dr. south in explaining the trinity , are not worth speaking of , but only such as may happen between any men of the same faith. it is a wonder he did not tell us , that as notwithstanding some slight differences of opinion , both those doctors were still orthodox in the faith ; so notwithstanding an angry word or two by chance past between them , they are both the most civil and good-natur'd gentlemen , the most endearing , faithful , and inseparable friends that one shall meet with in a summer's day . the libeller advances a new charge , never before heard of , p. 31. socinian-latitudinarian ministers wrap up the mystery of their iniquity in darkness lest it should be detected : how this can stand with his former charge , that they would have all things in religion be so plain , that reason may be able to dive to the bottom of them , i cannot imagine : but i must confess these contradictory charges are two or three pages asunder , and he may defend himself by very great authorities . as for wrapping up — something — i know not what , in darkness , the libeller out-does all his brethren ; for instance , pap . 31. l. 4. col . 1. take these words — god dwells in light inaccessible , in thick clouds and darkness , caus'd by light too strong for our weak senses . here he takes light and darkness for one and the same thing , or light to be the cause of darkness , i can't tell which ; and by the epithets which he gives to light and darkness , he intimates that the greater the light is , the thicker must be the darkness . ocyus archigenem quaere , atque eme quod mithridates composuit — pag. 96. of the history of religion there occurs this word innoscence , instead of which the libeller reads innocence . innoscence being but an uncouth word , i am willing to suppose the libeller has corrected a false print , but then his reflections are unjust , for in that place sir r. h. speaks of simple error , error which proceeds from ignorance , not faulty ignorance , but incapacity : and such error he deems innocent , because the erring person could not help it ; nor has such error of it self any noxious influence upon other men ; therefore wholly beside the matter is that reflection of the libeller's — when ignorance is set up to countenance infidelity and irreligion , then it is all innocence . but this forgetful calumniator having spit his venom in this column , licks it up again in the next , professing [ and so far agreeing with the author of the history ] that he is far from thinking every error criminal ; and that no body is more for perswasive methods than he , as to errors which proceed from weakness , and have not malice in them . tho but a few lines before , to point a calumny which he was aiming against men of moderation , he determin'd , that blasphemy , idolatry , and treason were but errors . his contradictions are thicker sown now , and truly i think the worthy persons whom he traduces , would do well to forgive him , because he falls out with himself in every other line , to their sufficient vindication . yet one thing i will not forgive him , that is , his blunt and scurrilous impudence , borrow'd a veteris malevoli poetae maledictis , when he pretends to set down what faults ignorance cannot excuse . the first he notes , are affectation and pride . but why this to the author of the history of religion ? who , if proud , has more in him to excuse the fault than most gentlemen have , and many a priest that i know , is proud of less . but after all , he never arriv'd at that arrogant height of positiveness , as to determine thus — whosoever does not believe as i do , without doubt he shall perish everlastingly : nor do i believe there are any the least seeds of this ecclesiastical positiveness growing in the mind of that honourable gentleman . the second sin which the libeller notes , that ignorance will not excuse , is ingratitude : his note is just , but his instance is a notorious , villanous and treasonable falshood . so that an honest pagan would say of him as chrysalus of archidemides , — aedepol certè scio vulcanus , sol , luna , dies , dei quatuor scelestiorem nullum illuxere alterum . the author of the history's share in the revolution , is so far from blemishing , that it adds a new lustre to his bright honour . he that could be content in the prime vigorous years of life , to seek his fortunes with an unhappy dethron'd prince , has now evidently shown to all the world , that his soul is devoted to serve the crown with his private interest , or any thing else , but the extirpation of the protestant religion , and the utter ruin of his country . — but that the late king had laid such obligations on the author of the history , as to do more for him than all the friends he had in the world ; the libeller rubb'd his forehead hard when he ventur'd on that lie ; for nothing was more known through the whole court , than that the late king number'd him , and us'd him , as one that could not be brought to sacrifice the religion and laws of his country to the arbitrary lust of a priest-ridden tyrant . this lewd libeller seems to be of the mind of an old barretter , who instructing his lawyer to load their adversary with a very invidious and scandalous imputation ; the lawyer ask'd him , what proof could be made of it ? to which the litigious knave replied , say it , say it , man , and let them disprove it . but this unconscionable impudence takes away all credit from a more plausible calumny . the libeller reckons in the last place , for sins not to be excus'd by ignorance , sins of intrigue and design : but 't is manifest that here sua vineta caedit , he cuts down the hedges of his own vineyard . the plainer the doctrine , sure the farther from intrigue and design ; but between intrigues and mysteries , there 's a near and apparent relation . the author of the history of religion rightly and truly observ'd , that the whole aim of our saviour in the gospel , was to use clearness : the libeller does not love clearness , and yet one would wonder he should not ; for he 's as ill made for the carrying on an intrigue as any dull priest of 'em all , who makes such mean fellows as my self , with a very small stock of learning , and a little better portion of humanity , go off at a great rate . pag. 31. col. 1. the libeller crowds into two or three lines as much folly and fury as he is able . for having charg'd the author of the history , and such as agree with him [ and they are the most men of good sense and firm integrity ] with blaspheming god , and ridiculing religion , which their souls abhor , he notes , that god has pronounc'd that crime to be death , and then pronounces — nor would these sons of belial have escap'd it , had they liv'd in any christian country . he that overflows with such audacious , shameless eruptions of artless malice , over-does machiavel's cursed advice ; for from so profligate and careless a writer , no man will expect either truth or reason . but why sons of belial ? i fancy he had an eye to pasor's descant on the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , nomen origine heb. latinè sine jugo , h. e. impatiens jugi , i. e. disciplinae . to be impatient of the yoke of discipline , discipline in which consists the substance of religion , discipline exercis'd by priests , by priests without whom there is no religion , this , this is that which fires the libeller so , that he terms it blasphemy and irreligious jesting ; this , this is belialism , and to relax this discipline by toleration , that 's so unchristian an act , it provok'd him to declare , p. 29. col . 1. that kings and parliaments have corrupted religion , as well as priests , and parliaments more than priests . i find that even kings are upon their good behaviour with crafty priests , but they make no reckoning at all of parliaments ; their flattering oratory is mercenary , meer craft , and subtile bargaining . that human ordinance , which would be divine , must execute temporal wrath upon the contemners of spiritual discipline : for the neglect of this , both kings and people fall under interdict ; and the life of a dissenter from discipline , is an uncontestable argument , that there 's no christianity in the country . one word more ; why is this libeller angry , that sir r. h. has shown how religion has been corrupted by priest-craft , whenas he himself confesses , that priests have corrupted it , tho not so much as parliaments ? i cannot imagine his meaning , unless it be , that he thinks none ought to corrupt religion , but priests , and priests may do what they please with it . let the reader now be judg , whether what this lewd libeller applies to two most learned and pious bishops , in p. 23. quoted from hosea 9.7 . does not fitly agree to his own person , [ for i am told he is a non-jurant priest ] the prophet is a fool , the spiritual man is mad . in the same section he quotes jer. 23.10 . because of swearing the land mourneth : the reader may guess what swearing he , that has not sworn allegiance to king william , meaneth ; but the prophet meaneth common swearing , and indeed it is that , together with the unquiet machinations of the non-jurants , and the unfaithfulness of them that took the oaths only to save their places , which troubles the land. he aims another text , jer. 5.31 . against the bishop of sarum , a priest worthy of all honour ; but i will better apply it , to crafty wicked persecuting priests , such as the libeller , the prophets prophesy falsly , and the priests bear rule by their means ; but the people of england , wiser than the jews , do not love to have it so , and i hope there will be an end thereof . amen . post-script . no venerable injur'd name in all the catalogue of english bishops better deserves to be vindicated from the base calumnies of audacious libellers , than the incomparable dr. tillotson , late arch-bishop of canterbury : sure 't is the awful sense which this age has of the great honour due to his thrice happy memory , which makes them who are best able , so slow to do him justice . there was publish'd t'other day indeed a pamphlet , stil'd , reflections upon a libel , entituled [ the charge of socinianism against dr. tillotson consider'd , &c. ] but so sad and sorry a story is that , so coldly does the writer defend his grace's most useful and truly christian sermons , so perversly does he draw that great man into the favouring his private , scandalous , indefensible doctrines , that the arch-bishop seems worse us'd by the vindicator , than by any his most spiteful adversaries . who this vindicator should be , does not plainly appear , but he has a mind to be guess'd at , and therefore i will oblige him . he must , at least , be a friend of the dean of st. paul's , because he tells us , p. 10. something , i know not what , how that dean happen'd to be an eminent man , and he gives him the honourable appellations , which that learned person seldom forgets when he speaks of himself ; and towards the conclusion , p. 61. as if he had resolv'd openly to discover himself , he falls upon an honourable gentleman with more than billingsgate rudeness , charges him with ridiculing the christian religion , proscribes him for an atheist or deist , which he saith is all one , calls his history of religion an execrable pamphlet . the design of the author of the history of religion [ says this nominal vindicator of the arch-bishop , who has one word for him , and two for a friend behind the curtain ] is to ridicule the christian religion , without offering at one reason , why it ought to be ridicul'd . such impudence as this ought not to be suffer'd to go off with flying colours ; therefore let it be noted , 1. that the design of this nominal vindicator , is to calumniate an honourable and honest christian gentleman ; for he accuses him of ridiculing the christian religion , without offering one instance wherein he has ridicul'd it . 2. that gentleman is so far from ridiculing the christian religion in that book of his abovemention'd , that i defy all persons whatsoever , of clergy or lay-denomination , that have taken offence at it , to assign any one instance , wherein he detracts from any of the practical duties of our holy religion requir'd by jesus christ. 3. tho that gentleman is no friend to priest-craft , yet he is the most mild and temperate adversary , that ever oppos'd the pious frauds of impious hypocrites : for he is content that all who please , all who can , believe all the pretended mysteries now in vogue , which puzzle the most thoughtful and discerning wits of the age , and all that shall be devis'd at any time hereafter , by men that can't employ themselves better ; provided that they who can't believe them , may not be induc'd by perswasive penalties to profess they do . 4. tho the christian religion is truly divine , and of all things ought not to be ridicul'd , yet some priests for twenty reasons ought not to be spar'd ; i will pay down half the twenty now , this present , and the remainder upon demand . ( 1. ) some ought not to be spar'd , because they themselves ridicule religion by the apish modes in which they dress it ; the most of these are romanists . ( 2. ) some , because they make a gain of it , by superinduc'd false doctrines . ( 3. ) some , because they exact the belief of they know not what . ( 4. ) some , because they make the life of religion to consist in discipline . ( 5. ) some ought not to be spar'd , because they teach that there 's no religion in morality . ( 6. ) some , because they teach that there can be no religion without priests . ( 7. ) some , because they can't dispute without bringing against one another railing accusations . ( 8. ) some , because they make a very great show , of a very little learning . ( 9. ) some not to be spar'd , because they preach up one thing one day , and another the next . ( 10. ) some , because they indent with kings , and give and take divine right from them , as offence is given to , or remov'd from themselves . the nominal vindicator of the arch-bishop , when he accuses the author of the history of religion for an atheist , or deist ; being in running haste , throws in these words — it matters not which : no ? is a deist quite as bad as an atheist ? what will become of his old friend socrates , and one or two more generous heathens , of whom he and many a truly honest , pious , christian priest have had a very charitable opinion ? he that from his heart sincerely believes there is a god , and that he is a rewarder , cannot be a very wicked man , tho it is to be confess'd , he cannot be so good as a true christian . one word more with this nominal vindicator , why is the history of religion such an execrable pamphlet ? it does not diminish the authority of the sacred writings , it does not detract from any precept which our lord christ has given us , nor from the revelations wherewith he has enforc'd his precepts ; it does not prejudice any honest priest in the faithful discharge of his function , no nor in the recovery of his temporal rights , due to him in such a spiritual dignity , by english law ; it is only out of their way , who being devoid of true religion would make a trade of the outward form. they are the men , the only men who curse the history of religion , and let them curse on , they will but curse it into greater credit ; the bookseller may venture on a second edition , their curses will publish it so widely , he need not fear but that a numerous impression will go off . i beg one for my advice ; and i promise , seeing i can't set it in my study where i would , because honest mr. johnson tells me the book of homilies is the next best book to the bible , i will be sure to place it next after the book of homilies . finis . the rise, growth, and danger of socinianisme together with a plaine discovery of a desperate designe of corrupting the protestant religion, whereby it appeares that the religion which hath been so violently contended for (by the archbishop of canterbury and his adherents) is not the true pure protestant religion, but an hotchpotch of arminianisme, socinianisme and popery : it is likewise made evident, that the atheists, anabaptists, and sectaries so much complained of, have been raised or encouraged by the doctrines and practises of the arminian, socinian and popish party / by fr. cheynell ... cheynell, francis, 1608-1665. this text is an enriched version of the tcp digital transcription a32802 of text r16168 in the english short title catalog (wing c3815). textual changes and metadata enrichments aim at making the text more computationally tractable, easier to read, and suitable for network-based collaborative curation by amateur and professional end users from many walks of life. the text has been tokenized and linguistically annotated with morphadorner. the annotation includes standard spellings that support the display of a text in a standardized format that preserves archaic forms ('loveth', 'seekest'). textual changes aim at restoring the text the author or stationer meant to publish. this text has not been fully proofread approx. 247 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 44 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. earlyprint project evanston,il, notre dame, in, st. louis, mo 2017 a32802 wing c3815 estc r16168 11732271 ocm 11732271 48402 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a32802) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 48402) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 21:7 or 245:e103, no 14) the rise, growth, and danger of socinianisme together with a plaine discovery of a desperate designe of corrupting the protestant religion, whereby it appeares that the religion which hath been so violently contended for (by the archbishop of canterbury and his adherents) is not the true pure protestant religion, but an hotchpotch of arminianisme, socinianisme and popery : it is likewise made evident, that the atheists, anabaptists, and sectaries so much complained of, have been raised or encouraged by the doctrines and practises of the arminian, socinian and popish party / by fr. cheynell ... cheynell, francis, 1608-1665. [8], 75 [i.e.79] p. printed for samuel gellibrand ..., london : 1643. pages 74-75, 78-79 numbered 70-71, 74-75 respectively. errata: p. [79]. reproduction of original in thomason collection, british library. eng socinianism. arminianism. atheism. anabaptists. a32802 r16168 (wing c3815). civilwar no the rise, growth, and danger of socinianisme· together with a plaine discovery of a desperate designe of corrupting the protestant religion, cheynell, francis 1643 42809 280 235 0 0 0 0 120 f the rate of 120 defects per 10,000 words puts this text in the f category of texts with 100 or more defects per 10,000 words. 2004-04 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2004-04 apex covantage keyed and coded from proquest page images 2004-06 judith siefring sampled and proofread 2004-06 judith siefring text and markup reviewed and edited 2004-07 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion the rise , growth , and danger of socinianisme . together with a plaine discovery of a desperate designe of corrupting the protestant religion , whereby it appeares that the religion which hath been so violently contended for ( by the archbishop of canterbury and his adherents ) is not the true pure protestant religion , but an hotchpotch of arminianisme , socinianisme and popery . it is likewise made evident , that the atheists , anabaptists , and sectaries so much complained of , have been raised or encouraged by the doctrines and practises of the arminian , socinian and popish party . by fr. cheynell late fellow of merton college . vt judai olim volebant audire populus domini cùm essent non populus , osc. 1. 9. jactabant patrem abraham cùm essent ex diabolo , job . 8. 44. sic sociniani quoque titulum christianorum sibi arrogant , & fratres nostri spirituales haberi petunt , cùm unum nobiscum patrem deum trin-unum minimè agnoscant . vide d. stegman . photinianism . disp. 1. p. 4. 5. {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , inquit philosophus ; parum itaque rationales sunt sociniani qui deteriora sequuntur . london , printed for samuel gellibrand , at the brazen serpent in pauls church-yard . 1643. to the right honovrable the lord viscount say and seale , &c. peace . noble sir , learned casaubon assures me that when the greek fathers wrote to a wicked man they were wont to salute him with that apostolicall benediction , grace be unto you : but when they wrote to a religious man they used the ordinary hebraisme , peace be unto you , because peace doth suppose grace , and doth comprehend all outward blessings . i am sure your very enemies gave you this testimony at oxford , that you were a man of peace , but as it followes in the psalme , when you spake for peace they were for warre . psalme 120. 7. all that your honour desired was , that ( as it became gowned men ) they would take up their bookes , and lay down their armes ; that they would not protect delinquents any longer , but yeeld them up to a legall tryall . you desired that nothing might be tumultuously attempted , but all things orderly reformed . you engaged your honour to them that what plate you found in places fit for plate , the treasury or the buttery should remaine untouched , and most societies engaged themselves by a solemne promise , that they would never give their consent that their plate should be put to any other use then what was sutable and according to their oath , and the intention of the donours , their successors having in all these respects as great an interest in the plate as themselves ; nay they generally confessed that they had no more power to aliene their plate then their lands . in confidence of their promise you told them you did leave their plate in their owne custody , which otherwise you would have secured , and in confidence of your honours promise they brought forth their plate , and made publique use of it , even whilest the souldiers were in towne ▪ your lordship found the university ( as the reverend doctours had left it ) groaning under a kinde of anarchy ; for it was thought fit by the round-house , that the university should be dissolved , and every man left to doe what seemed good in his owne eyes . it was suggested by a doctor well read in politiques , that if they did not dissolve the university , the parliament would dissolve it ▪ but your honour made it appear how much you did abhorre an anarchy , and honour the vniversity ; you assembled those few governours of private colledges which were at home , and the substitutes of all that were absent , you consulted them how the vniversity might be put into its right posture : you assured them that it was not the intent of the parliament to change the government or infringe the liberties of the vniversity , & that though the new statutes were justly complained of , yet you conceived it fit that the vniversity should for the present be governed by lawes that were none of the best , rather then left quite without rule , or government ; they all confessed that you behaved your selfe more like a chauncellour then a souldier , for the vniversity was not over-awed by a garrison , or over-ruled by a councell of warre . you did not impose any taxes upon the university , you did not go about to perswade them that guns were mathematicall instruments , and therefore they might buy guns with that very money which was bequeathed and set apart for mathematicall instruments ; you did not importune any scholars to list themselves in your regiment , nor did you desire that doctours would turne commanders , or that any commanders should be created doctours , or boyes created masters , lest there might be an anarchy even in convocation by such a premeditated confusion ; and yet such counsells and practises have been suggested by some , that are none of the meanest ranke . when i was commanded by speciall warrant to attend your honour , ( deputed by both houses of parliament for the service of king and parliament to settle peace and truth in the vniversity of oxford , and to reduce the said vniversity to its ancient order , right discipline , and to restore it to its former priviledges and liberties ) there was notice given of a pestilent book very prejudiciall both to truth and peace , and upon search made , the book was found in the chamber of mr. webberly , who had translated this socinian master-peece into english for his own private use , as he pretended ; to which vain excuse i replyed that i made no question but he understood the book in latine , and therefore had he intended it only for his own private use , he might have saved the paines of translating it . besides the frontispice of the book under mr. webberlies own hand did testify to his face that it was translated into english for the benesit of this nation . moreover there was an epistle to the reader prefixed before the booke ; ( i never heard of any man yet that wrote an epistle to himselfe ) and therefore sure he intended to print it . finally , he submits all to the consideration of these times of reformation , and the reformers have thought fit that it should be answered and published . i desired at the first intimation to decline the service , because it were better to confute socinianisme in latine ; but i have since considered that 1. the opinions of abailardus , servetus , socinus , are already published in english in a book entitled mr. wo●●ns defence against mr. walker , and therefore if this treatise had been suppressed , their opinions would not be unknown , for they are already divulged . 2. the opinions being published in english without a confutation , it is very requisite that there should be some refutation of the errours published also , for it is not fit that a bedlam should go● abroad without a keeper . 3. if there be but just suspition of a designe to introduce damnable heresies , it is requisite that the grounds of suspition should be manifested , especially if it be such a pestilent heresy a●socinianisme is ( which corrupts the very vitalls of church and state ) it is fit the heresy should be early discovered left both church and state be ruined by it . 4. the parliament is much blamed for imprisoning the translatour without cause : and it is much wondered at that his chamber should be searched by officers : now the cause of both will appear . the translatour and his work were so famous that there was notice given of his good service intended to this nation , upon notice given there was a search made , now upon search made the book being found , and the translatour apprehended , the parliament is rather guilty of his release then of his imprisonment . 5. the translatour cannot complain of the publishing of it , because ( as hath been shewn ) he himself intended to publish it , he submits all to these times of reformation , and so doe i , let the reformers judge . this book belongs to your honour , because it is but a prodromus or fore-runner to make way for a full answer to master webberlies translation , and therefore i present it to you , not only because master webberlies book was seised on by your lordships warrant ; but because i know your honour hath ever patronized the true protestant religion , for protestants doe not place religion in shadowes and ceremonies ; and because you justly abhorre all superstitious rites , whether old or new , all judicious men will esteem you the stricter protestant . that you may testify your dislike of schisme as well as heresy , you have discovered and refuted the uncharitable and bitter errour of the brownists . you have studied nazianzens law of martyrdome , neither to seek nor fear danger ; the first would be rashnesse , and the second cowardlinesse . {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} . you are not of the sect of the elcesaites whereas eusebius and augustine testify ) taught men to deny the faith in time of persecution , and yet to keep it still in their heart , forgetting that of the apostle , that with the heart man beleeves unto righteousnesse , but with the mouth confession is made unto salvation . rom. 10. 10. you have learnt to be a good christian , and therefore a good subject ; conscience will bind you to obedience , and no other bond will hold men close to their duty ( to that allegiance which is due by the law of god and the land both ) in these treacherous times . it was the wisedome of that famous emperour to banish all renegado's from his court , {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , as traytours against god himselfe , for he considered that they who betrayed god for feare , would not stick to betray their prince for gain . i dare say that you are the kings sworne servant , and all men say that in your place you doe advance the kings income to the highest , nay some have been bold to say that you have lesse care of the subjects profit , then of the kings . your devotions speak you a royalist , none prayes more heartily for the king ; it is your iudgement that the kingdome cannot be preserved without an union between the three estates by which the kingdome is governed , and if you might have been heard you would have petitioned , and sollicited for an happy union between king and parliament , only you conceive that an union between a court of justice and capitall delinquents , is intolerable , and an happy union between protestants and papists altogether impossible : we cannot forget how many leagues the papists broke in 6. yeares space ; i reckon from 1572. to 1588. wise homer and witty aristophanes were both in good earnest when they said that no man that had either wealth or innocence could delight in civill warre , and aristophanes shewed himselfe as good a statesman as a poet in his sweet lines of peace , where he advises all men to beware how they enter into a league of peace with men that are unpeaceable ; and sure delinquents and papists are none of the trustiest or meekest men ; what ( saith he ) shall gulls confide in foxes ? {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} the papists will certainly count us protestants gulls indeed ( well we may be as innocent as doves , but we are as simple as gulls ) if we confide in jesuited foxes ; let the woolfe and the sheep be first married , and see how they agree : let us try whether we can make a crabbe goe streight forward , or make a hedge-hog smooth . — {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , &c. if we say to the pope as the men of jabesh said to nahash , make a covenant with us and we will serve thee , the pope will answer like nahash the ammonite , on this condition will i make a covenant with you , that i may thrust out all your right eyes , and lay it as a reproach upon all england , all israel , all the reformed churches , 1 sam. 11. 1 , 2. if wee have lost our eyes already , let us be avenged on the philistines ; the lord strengthen us , as sampson said , that we may overthrow the pillars upon which rome stands , so shall we be avenged of the romane philistines for both our eyes . judges 16. 28. but there are other philistines namely arminian and socinian philistines , by which church and state are much endangered , and it is the businesse now in hand to lay open their mystery of iniquity to the publique view . wee may say to these pestilent heretiques as well as to malignant statesmen , ita nati estis ut mala vestra ad rempub. pertineant ; for there are no greater statesmen in the world then the english arminians , and popish socinians ; for such monsters hath england nourished as are not to be found in all africa . herod and pilate , the romane and the racovian antichrist , are made friends in england , all the grand-malignants , arminians , papists , and socinians are of one confederacy , all united under one head the arch-bishop of canterbury , the patriarch or pope of this british world , alterius orbis papa as his brother-pope hath given him leave to phrase it , because he saw the arch-bishop too proud to acknowledge his supremacy , but forward enough to maintain any other point of popery , & ready to joyn with him to suppresse all pure protestants . if this design take effect , there may wel be a reconciliation professed & established between rome and canterbury , the two popes may divide the spoile of the church betweene them if they can but agree at parting . whether some have not endeavoured to make such a reconciliation ; whether all points of popery almost have not been greedily embraced in england , and that of the popes supremacy only rejected , more out of pride then conscience , let the prudent judge , they have light and evidence enough , and new evidence is dayly produced . the lord unite the king and parliament , that truth and iustice , piety and peace may be established in our dayes : so prayes aprill , 18. 1643. your lordships humble servant , fr. cheynelz . it is ordered this eighteenth day of aprill , 1643. by the committee of the house of commons in parliament concerning printing , that this book intit●led the rise , growth , and danger of socinianisme , &c. be printed . iohn white . chap. i. of the rise of socinianisme . the socinians have raked many sinkes , and dunghils for those ragges and that filth , wherewith they have patched up and defiled that leprous body which they account a compleat body of pure religion . ever since the world was possessed with the spirit of antichrist some malignant heretikes have been ever and anon desperately striking at the person , the natures , the offices , the grace and spirit of christ . cerinthius and ebion began to blaspheme christ , even in the apostles time . i need say nothing of theodot us byzont in us , paulus samosatenus , arius and the a rest ; yet it will not be amisse to shew wherein the socinians have refined or enlarged the ancient heresies , which have been long since condemned to hell . ostorodus would not have the name of ebionites imposed upon the socinians , quia vox ebion hebraicé egenum significat , praef. iust. pag. 10. 11. it seemes they would not be counted mean conditioned men : and there are some indeed and those no beggers ( unlesse it beat court ) who are too much addicted to socinian fancies ; and yet if that be true , which ostorodus cites out of eusebius , that the ebionites were so called because they had a mean and beggerly opinion of christ , sure the socinians might well be called ebionites , for none have baser and cheaper thoughts of christ , then they . if ostorodus had thought it worth while to have consulted eusebius his ecclesiasticall history , lib. 3. cap. 24. or epiphanius haeres . 33. he might have seen another reason why those heretikes were called ebionites . the socinians take it no lesse unkindly that they are called arians . ex consensu tantùm in principalibus cum ario de jesu christo , arianismi jure quis argui potest ? saith smalcius . it is well he confesses that they may be called arians who agree with arius in the maine , i deny that the arians had higher thoughts of jesus christ , then the socinians . the arians were termed {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , because they maintained that christ was created {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} . some arians did acknowledge that christ was equall to the father in essence and nature , though they denyed him to be of the same essence with the father ; and others of them did only say , that the son was unlike the father , and were therefore called {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} ; yet these also were cōdemned because neither of these sects would acknowledge the son to be consubstantiall with the father ; for if they would have confessed that the father and the son were of the same essence , they would never have said that their essence was equall , but rather that their persons were equall , and their essence the same ; for equality is ever between two at the least : therefore by saying that their nature was equall , they implyed that they had two different natures . and they who talked of a dissimilitude of nature , must necessarily suppose , that the father and the son had different natures , for a nature cannot be said to be unlike it selfe : and if this latter sect by dissimilitude meant an inequality , then they were blasphemously absurd , in fancying that there was majus and minus in the same most indivisible , and single essence . reverend beza hath set this forth to the life , in his preface to the description of the heresy and perjury of that arch-heretike , valentinus gentilis , ariomanitae — in duas minimùm factiones divisi sunt , nempe in {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} & {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} . he disputes the the point , whether {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} did not imply as much as {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} — nisi voxilla {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} ( sicut de dionysio corinthio , basilius ad fratrem scribit ) commodâ quadam interpretatione ( sed plane ut mihi videtur violentâ ) leniatur , nam certè in unâ eademque prorsus essentiâ nullus est neque aequalitatineque inaequalitati locus , utpote quae minimùm in duobus cernantur ; ac proinde in hypostasibus , non in essentiâ spectare aequalitatē necesse est . {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} — qui filium patri faciebant dissimilem , se vel arianos prodebant vel stolidos , quum in simplicissimâ & singularissimâ naturâ , nempe deitate , majus & minus quiddam imaginarentur , pag. 4. & 5. by this and much more which might be added , it doth plainly appeare that if the arians were not more rationall , yet they were more devout then the socinians , they had a a more honourable and reverent opinion of christ . for the socinians will not acknowledge that god and christ are equall , or like in nature . the socinians make christ , {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , the arians thought him the most excellent of all creatures , and therefore said , that he was created before any other creature , and used by god as an instrument to create the rest , as doctor stegman observes , disput. 1. pag. 3. finally the arians and socinians agree in this , that both deny christ to be consubstantiall with the father , and therefore though they differ in telling their tale , in explaining their errour , yet both agree in the maine , and that 's ground enough to call them arians , if smalcius may be judge . doctour stegman usually cals the socinians , photinians , and therefore entitles his own book photinianismus ; and the socinians doe acknowledge that they agree with photinus in the maine , yet they say it is not sufficient ground to call any man photinian because he agrees with photinus in fundamental points ; but smalcius tells us that socinus was the servant of christ , they own his doctrine , and own the man as their fellow-servant : quid photinus ? quid alii ? nisi servi christi ? they give him and others that are as bad as he is , the right hand of fellowship ; and it is commonly conceived that mahumetisme took his rise from photinianisme . i have no book about me , that fhewes so clearly what the photinians held , as iacobus ad portum professor of divinity in academia lausannenfi , in its epistle dedicatory , doc●erunt christum iesum naturâ esse {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , gratiâ divinâ tamen insigniter ornatum , eumque tum demum esse coepisse , cùm in utero virginis mariae conciperetur ; ac proinde verbum dei , vel deum non aliter in ipso quàm in aliis prophet is habitasse , nec ipsi {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} aut {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} unitum fuisse , sed tantum gratiâ & efficaciâ ipsi assedisse : ipsum denique esse {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , sed {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} & {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , non autens {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} ut loquuntur , ex quâ infoelici haeresi postmodum mahumetismus ortus esse perhibetur . others call the socinians samosatenians , and therefore thalyaeus calles his booke in which he answers the arguments of socinus , eniedinus , ostorodius , and smalcius , anatome samosatenianismi , in which he shews that the socinian glosses are of the same colour with turkish and iewish blasphemies ; the four professors of the theologicall faculty at leiden , have given a large commendation of thalyaeus in their approbation , printed before the book , and signed with the hands of all the professors , in which they with one voice vote socinianisme to be recoct samosatenianisme ; impiam pauli samosateni sententiam melior & sanctior ecclesia sub cruce adhuc militans , ut enata fuit exhorruit , eaque mox publico episcoporum judicio execrata est . scriptum illud conscriptum contra renatum & ab infausto illo socino ejusque asseclis recoctum samosatenianismum censemus pie docte & solide &c. the samosatenians did borrow their name from paulus samosatenus bishop of the church of antioch , and therefore his practises were the more abominable , because he poysoned that church , in which disciples were first called christians , with hereticall blasphemies against the lord christ , as reverend beza observes . i find in augustine that artimonius did first broach this heresy , and paulus samosatenus did revive it ; but i need say no more of the samosatenians , having said enough already of the photinians , for photinus did confirm that heresie which samosatenus did revive , and therefore the followers of paulus samosatenus . were more commonly called photinians then paulians , or samosatenians . and though philaster reckon samosatenus his heresy by it self , & photinus his heresie by it self , yet to shew that they were not different heresies , he saith photinus did in all things follow paulus samosatenus . i do not reckon up all the disorderly heretikes in order , take them as it happens . nestorius denyed that the self same person was god and man , he would not acknowledge that the word was made flesh , only the word was with that flesh , ( by an effectuall presence ) which was taken of the substance of the virgin , affirmabat enim {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} illi carni ex mariâ prognatae nonnisi {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} adfuisse , as learned beza declares it in brief . if any man desire to be further acquainted with the opinion , and the desputes about it , let him reade s. cyril , and peruse the famous and orthodoxe ( not the spurious and surreptitious ) ephesine councell , and he may receive full satisfaction . the socinians are farre worse then nestorius , for they do not onely deny , that the selfe same person who was borne of the virgin , is the second person in the trinity , but they utterly deny that there is any second person , or third person which is consubstantiall with the father . having mentioned nestorius , i must not skippe over eutyches , who in opposition to nestorius his dividing of the person of christ , did vainely imagine , that the natures of christ were mingled , and so he confounded both natures , and their essentiall properties : yet the eutychians did grant that there were two natures in christ , which the socinians deny . the time would faile me , or at least the readers patience , should i shew how the socinians agree with the noetians , who maintained , that there was but one person in the godhead : with macedonius , who denied the holy ghost to be a person : with the pelagians , concerning their deniall of the image of god in adam before his fall , and their maintaining of free-will , and denyall of originall sinne since the fall . in a word , how they agree with the valentinians , marcionites , cerdonians , manichees , apollinarists , sabellius , the donatists , sadducees , papists , anabaptists , schwenckefeldians , antinomians , and i know not how many more of the like stampe , hath beene shewen by others already , and the manifestation of their errors in the ensuing treatise will sufficiently declare . i will passe over many things very observable , because i would willingly discourse at large of some later passages , and subtile inventions by which socinianisme was introduced into forraine parts , and in some parts established by the suffrage and subscription of too many eminent wits , and great scholars . but i must not in my haste forget abeilardus , or as platina cals him , baliardus , as bernard , abailardus , his name in our english tongue may be balard ; he flourished about the yeare 1140. he had a very ready discoursing wit , and is by some voiced to be the first founder of schoole-divinity ; whether he maintained all those heresies which bernard layes to his charge , i shall not now stand to dispute , there is some cause of doubt ; abeilard lived to make his apology , and if it was but an honest recantation , he hath made some amends . learned mr. gataker in his post-script to mr. wottons defence , pag. 40. & 41. will direct you to authors , from whom you may receive better satisfaction then i can for the present give , unlesse i were furnished with a better library . i shall not doe postellus so much honour as to take notice of him ; as for servetus , i will not staine my paper with his blasphemies : mr. gataker hath shewen his chiefe assertions in the booke forecited from the 42. to the 47. page ; it is much questioned whether the senate of geneva did not deale too severely with him . samosatenus , arius and eutyches did all revive in that cerberus , he was both admonished and refuted by three learned divines of that age , oecolampadius , melanchthon & calvin ; he had time enough given him to recant , hee did stubbornely maintaine his cursed blasphemies for thirty yeares together , as beza shewes ; ob triginta annorum blasphemias execrabiles & indomitam pervicaciam ex senatus genevensis sententiâ justissimo supplici● affectum , quis non tandem nisi planè furiosus & excors abominetur ? the senate of geneva were in good hope by this exemplary punishment upon servetus to crush this cockatrices egge , and kill the viper ; but for all this some under hand , and others more boldly and impudently did seduce the people . bernardine ochin seemed to be an academik , a meere sceptik in religion , he questioned all things , and determined nothing ; lalius socinus carried the matter with such a cleanly conveyance , that he was scarse taken notice of , though he received some checks and admonitions , yet most men thought charitably of him during his life ; his black designes were not fully discovered till after his death ; this is the grandfather of the socinians ; but i will say no more of him yet , till i have shewen what pra●kes were played by those bold fellowes , who acted those tragedies openly upon the stage , which lelius composed behinde the curtaine , valentinus gentilis practised at geneva , george blandrate a physitian in poland , and transylvania . give mee leave to make but two or three observations by the way , and i shall open the practises of these impudent hereticks more fully to you . first , the devill hath done more mischiefe in the church by counterfeit protestants , false brethren , then by professed papists , open enemies . secondly , observe that vaine curiosity did betray the churches , and make them a meere prey to these subtile hereticks ; most men have an itching desire to be acquainted with novelties , and at that time the churches were very inquisitive after a more rationall way of divinity , they began to examine the articles of faith , especially the article of the trinity , by some received axiomes of philosophy , and by that curiosity puzled their reason , and lost their faith . thirdly , though poland and transylvania were grievously infected , yet the mischiefe came from italy , as reverend beza observes , and therefore cryes out , sa●è fatalis esse videtur p●lonis italia . besides the flame brake out first in the italian church at geneva , though the coales were dispersed and blowne too in other places . the italian church had some warning given by the execution of michael servetus in the yeare 1553. but that church was too indulgent for foure or five yeares , yet at last the elders of the italian church , perceiving that some of their flock began to oppose the doctrine of the trinity , they thought fit to set forth some forme of confession , unto which they required all to subscribe , upon the eighteenth day of may , 1558. they all protested by that faith whereby they were oblieged to god , that they would never purposely and malitiously directly or obliquely oppose that confession , or favour any forme , or sect which did make the least appearance of dissenting from it ; and whosoever did violate this protestation , should be held a perjured and perfidious man . valentinus gentilis made no great haste to subscribe , but being called upon , he testified his consent with his owne hand . yet not long after , he said he was pricked in conscience for subscribing to this forme , and therefore contemned his protestation , and endeavoured to seduce the simple people ; whereupon he was convented before the senate of geneva , the points in controversie being rationally discussed , and valentinus nonplust , he had nothing to say , but that he was not well versed in the art of disputing , which was notoriously false , for he was an acute subtile man , as appeares by his confessions , epistles , replies ; his sublime notions about the essence , and subsistences of the trinity and quaternity ; that one question did sufficiently discover his subtilty , an essentia divina ex semetipsa absque ullâ consideratione personarum sit verus deus ; and that thesis of his , deus pater solus verus deus est essentiator , hoc est informator individuorum , nempe filii spiritusque . the god of israel ( saith valentine ) is the onely true god the father of jesus christ ; and so by opposing the father to the son , and affirming that the father only was the true god , he did clearly deny the son to be the true god . clare apparet ( saith the senate ) quum patrem opponis filio & uni duntaxat veram deitatem tribuis , te excludere alterum , quem cum illo confers — facessat antithesis inter patrem & filium ubi fit deitatis mentio — in comparatione fingis duo antitheta , patrem opponis filio ac si in solo patre esset dei essentia — filium essentiatū à patre dicis , à seipso esse neg as — jamsi essentia divina sit in solo patre , vel eripies eam filio , vel partibilem finges , utcunque n●nc centies concedas filium esse verum deum , spoliatus tamen suâ essentiâ titularis solùm erit deus . — individua tibi somnias quorum singula partem essentiae obtineant — deus indefinite est ingenitus , & pater etiam personae respectu ingenitus , filius autem respectu personae à patre est genitus — non abstrahimus personas ab essentia , sed quamvis in ea resideant , distinctionem interponimus . hoc sensu individuos tertullianus vocat patrem & filium , non autem ( ut tu stul●e imaginaris ) individua , quae sub specie comprehendantur . to this effect the senate answered valentines subtilties ; i have put it close together , that i might not be tedious , and yet manifest upon what grounds this great wit was condemned by that grave judicious senate . he had one question more , which he tooke much pride in , namely , utrum essentia concurrat in trinitatem ? to which the senate answered , essentia non concurrit ad distinguendas personas , nec tamen personae sine essentiâ sunt — veteres ad personas tantum nomen trinitatis retulerunt — quarum rerum dices esse trinitatem ? respondes , tria concurrere , essentiam , filium , & spiritum . hinc verò plane perspicitur te essentiam filii & spiritus exinanire . this conceit of valentinus , that the essence , sonne , and spirit , make the trinity , did at once deny the person of the father , and the divine essence of the sonne and spirit ; for , observe how he puts in the essence to make up the trinity , and so left out the person of the father , and by opposing the other two persons to the divine essence , he did imply , that they had an essence different from the divine essence . valentine having received this full answer from the senate , was much enraged , but upon second thoughts , he fell to his devotions , made some shew of repentance , and seemed to be satisfied ; nay , hee proceeded so far as to write to the senate , and acknowledge that he was fully convinced by the cleare and solid reasons laid downe by the consistory , in their answer to his objections : nay , farther yet , he descended to particulars , and confessed that they had manifestly proved , that those three grounds upon which all his fancies were built , were all most false and absurd . first , saith he , i have offended in that whilest i affirmed , the onely god of israel to be the father of iesus christ , i considered not that by opposing the onely god to christ , i denied christ to be god . secondly , i was too rash in considering the divine essence out of the three persons , and concluding from thence , that the essence and the trinity of persons made a quaternity : for now i perceive that the divine essence cannot be considered anywhere , but in the three persons . thirdly , i have offended , in that i said the person of the father was sophisticall . upon these rotten ruines ( saith valentine ) did i build many false consequences , which now i doe abhor and detest , and professe that i beleeve the doctrine of the trinity in the sense of your consistory ; o my conscience hath beene wounded for my inconsiderate answers to that excellent divine and servant of god john calvin ! but i have acknowledged my fault with hearty sorrow , and i make no question but the searcher of hearts hath forgiven me ; i beseech you likewise to forgive me , for i beleeve that the trouble of my minde will bring forth such fruits of repentance in my future conversation , as will wipe off this offensive blot wherewith now i am bespotted and stained , i hope the clemency of the holy ministers is such , that they will receive such a miserable stray beast as i am into their fold againe , and triumph at my conversion . hee proceeded farther yet , made a solemne and orthodoxe confession of his faith , and a recantation of his errors on the 29. of august 1558. at last having abjured his errors under his hand , the senate in hope that his repentance was cordiall and sincere , they commanded him to walke bare-headed , bare-legged and bare-foote thorow every street in the city , with a trumpet blown before him , and a light in his hand , then to kneele downe , aske pardon of the senate , and burne all his heretical doctrines with his owne hand , all which he did upon the second of september following . behold the mercy of geneva to one that was but hopefull , though he had beene an heretick , a schismatick , a seducer , they forgave him , and gave him leave to come forth of prison , without taking any sureties , because he pleaded that he was a stranger , and poore , onely they tooke an oath of him , that he should not depart the city without their licence : but he soone brake his oath , and fled not far off to gribaldus and alciatus , two of his owne stampe , and faction ; but he met there with a governour of a resolute spirit , who began to enquire into his dangerous opinions , and being fully informed of their desperate malignancy , he committed him to prison for a while , but not long after released him , and gave him a faire warning , but no sooner he enjoyed his liberty , but he presently published his opinions in print , and abused the governour with a dedication , as if the book had been published by the governors consent and authority . not long after he travails to lyons where he was imprisoned for the space of 50. days , but he pretended that he did only oppose calvin in the carriage of some controversies , and by that meanes the antichristian spirit , which reignes in the bosome of papists , did incline them to forgive and release him ; it seems the papists cares not what article of faith be denyed , nor how much jesus christ be dishonoured , so calvin be opposed , for by this silly shift he got o●t twice from the papists . confessionem it a potuit attemper are ut à papist is admitteretur , solùm evangelicas ecclesias , & nominatim calvinum perstringens , &c. and by that means he made his first escape ; his second escape was obtained by the selfe same shift . libellum antidotorum & confessionem sic potuit attemperare ut judicaretur solum calvinum impugnare , non ipsam trinit atem ideoque solutus carceribus dimissus est ; as aretius relates in his history of valentine . but hee was not satisfied yet , unlesse he could beguile protestants as well as papists , he went therefore over into poland , and joyned with alciat , and blandrate , in seducing the polonian churches , he confirmed his doctrines by sophistry , some fragments out of the fathers , and some pieces of the alcor●● , to shew that he intended to please the turks , as well as the papists , and to quarrell only with the protestants ; his friend alciat turned direct mahometist being led to it by his principles ; but valentine expressed himself in a more reserved and cunning way then alciat or blandrate , whereupon there fell out some difference between them , and so by gods providence they did the lesse hurt in poland , but there they continued above two years , but at last the king of poland took notice of them , and intended to have published an edict against their hereticall blasphemies , but then the antichristian spirit stirred up cardinal hosius , to suggest another course to his majesty : but god moved the king to banish all strangers , innovatours in doctrine , and perturbers of the peace , out of his kingdome , upon the 5. of march , in the yeare 1566. being banished out of poland , and knowing that calvin was dead , he thought fit to return into the old quarters , never dreaming that he should have faln into the hands of the old governour , whom he had formerly a bused in so high a nature ; but by divine providence the same person though it was not his turne , was governour of that province , ( vide supra , p. 10. ) as aretius declares , gaium ipsum accedens , cui idē adhuc praefectus ( prorogat â forte ipsi extra ordinem ejus provinciae administratione ) praeerat . valentine thought it his best course , to put a good face upon the matter , and challenge any man to dispute with him , but the governour well knowing , that he had been often disputed with , and fairly admonished , cryed , fiat quod justum est , and clapt him up close prisoner , upon the 11. day of june , 1566. the province being under the jurisdictiō of the senate of bern , valentine appealed from the governor of gaium to the senate of bern , & he was brought thither upon the 19. day of july . when he was examined , the senate charged him with heresy , perjury , blasphemy , schism ; and over and above that , he had joyned with alciat and blandrate , in seducing the simple people . to which he answered , that he had nothing to do with either of thē , for alciat , saith he , is a mahumetan , and blandrate is a sabellian and samosatenian ; he complained that those churches which were called evangelicall , or reformed churches , were still too much enslaved to the pope ; and yet when he was among the papists he saw his own confession , of that which he called his faith , passed currant enough . nostras ecclesias damnari quasi adhuc papatui servientes , quum interim ipse inter papistas constitutus posset confessionibus editis elabi . he was questioned for a book which he dedicated to the king of poland , in which he repeated the confession of his faith , which was confuted at geneva , and subjoyned his book of antidotes , in which he indeavours to refute certain theses collected out of augustines 15. bookes , de trinitate , and the 13. chapter of calvins first book of institutions , which treats likewise of the trinity . finally , he made some sharp annotations upon athanasius , and confirmed his own opinion out of the alcoran . the senate picked out all his calumnies , impostures , blasphemies , heresies old and new . wherein valentine agreed with arius , is shewen by aretius , in the 8. chapter of his history ; if any man desire to peruse the determinations of justin martyr , ignatius , tertullian , augustine in this great article of the trinity , he may read them at large in the same history , from the 13. to the 17. chapter . i must hasten to bring valentine to his deserved punishment ; the senate had treated with him , from the 5. of august to the 9. of september , and he remained still stubborn , and pertinacious in his blasphemies , and therefore the senate pronounced sentence of death upon him , which was accordingly executed ; for he could not by prayers , teares , arguments , entreaties , be wrought upon to change his mind : he had a faire warning given him before , by the senate of geneva , if he had had the grace to have taken it , their charge ranne high , and their admonition was propheticall . filium dei quem praedicamus , in diabolum transfiguras . deum quem colimus , vocas deum turcarum , multaque ejus generis , sed vide miser ne te praecipitaverit tuus furor ut voces emitteres quae per jugulum redeant . it is now time to draw the curtain and look for socinus who most of this while , played least in sight , till he went quite out of sight , in the yeare 1562. laelius socinus was the tutor and unckle , faustus socinus was the nephew and disciple ; laelius did contribute materials , faustus added form and method to that monstrous body of errours and blasphemies which we call socinianisme . laelius socinus was borne in the yeare , 1525. his parents were of good rank and quality , his father was styled , ic . torum princeps . the life of socinus is written by a polonian knight , who was tender of his honour , who hath also set forth a dissertation , which he desires may be prefixed before the works of faustus , or rather the notions of laelius digested into order by faustus ; and out of those two treatises we may pick something to give light to the originall of socinianisme ; but we are most beholding to d. calovius , who hath handled this argument more distinctly , then any man that i have met with , and he saith that about four yeares after servetus his death in the year 1557. laelius socinus did underhand encourage them who had raked in servetus ashes , and blowed some coales that were yet alive , and from thence raised a blacker flame . laelius then , no doubt , favoured valentine , for about the year 1558. valentine began to shew himself , and in that year , the italian church put forth their orthodox confession about the trinity at geneva , as hath been already shewed . moreover the polonian knight saith , that laelius did take speciall care of his country-men , quodque praecipue suos erudierit italos : and though laelius did keep his most usuall residence amongst the helvetians , yet his letters travelled up and down the world , and he now and then visited his countrymen in person , who were banished into poland , and germany ; he went twice on pilgrimage , to gaine some proselytes in poland , first in the year , 1551. and afterwards in the yeare , 1557. and there he infected many of the nobles with his pestilent heresies , which have found such good entertainment ever since , that poland doth to this very day ( the lord of heaven be mercifull to them ) labour under that deadly disease . but it was laelius his chief desire to instruct his three brethren , celsus , cornelius , and camillus , in that which he called his religion ; and though they lived farre asunder , ( celsus enim bononiae , reliqui senis agebant ) yet they held such intimate correspondence , that the seeds of this heresy were mutually cherished by their frequent letters . but his nephew faustus was his best scholar , and therefore by divers hints and intimations best acquainted with the secrets of his art . ingenio nepotis confisum plura divinanti innuisse , quàm discenti tradidisse ; ( saith the polonian knight ) non dissimulato inter amicos praesagio pleniùs haec atque foelicius à fausto orbi prodenda ; and faustus socinus doth acknowledge that he did owe all his mysterious knowledge to his unckle only , ( for he was never taught of god ) praeter unum laelium patruummeum — vel potius praeter paucula quaedam ab ipso conscripta & multa annotata , nullum prorsus magistrum me habere contigit . epist. ad maro . sq. you may read particulars in d calovius ( pag. 2. & sequ. ) i need not therefore descend to particulars since the confession is so generall ; only be pleased to observe that the heresy doth directly strike at the nature , person , offices , satisfaction , sacraments of christ . and as the arminians are much offended with the ninth chapter to the romanes , so the socinians are as much offended with the first chap. of the gospel according to saint iohn ; it was therefore laelius one of his master-pieces to pervert that scripture by a devilish gloss . i dare not give a more gentle epithet : faustus doth confesse that his unckle laelius did contribute all the stuffe out of which he framed his exposition upon the first part of the first chapter of saint john ; illam verborum johannis expositionem , & quae ad eandem adserendam produxit , sese magnâ ex parte è laelii sermonibus , dum adhuc viveret , & post ejus mortem ex aliquibus ipsius scriptis sumpsisse & deprompsisse . v. frag. duor . script . socin. & epist. 1. ad dudith . pag. 13. but though laelius soci●us carried matters thus closely , and did all by sleight of wit and hand , yet about 3. yeares before his death he was shrewdly suspected for a seducer , his brother cornelius was apprehended , the rest fled for fear , faustus his nephew and disciple , fled quite out of italy , to lyons in france , laelius in the mean time died in the yeare 1562. and the 37. yeare of his age , as calovius assures me : cum faustus aliquandiu lugduni in gallia viveret , laelius interi●s tiguri extinctus est anno 1562. aetatis ejus septimo supra trigesimum . all laelius his notes were i beleeve committed to faustus , qui patruo suo laelio emortualis extitit , as the same author , de origine theol. soc. § . 25. and therefore certainly most of his opinions would have died with him , had not this unlucky faustus poysoned the world with them . for faustus himself acknowledges that laelius was very sparing in opening himself , except it were in some lighter controversies . nolebat ille sententiam suamnisi in levioribus quibusdam controversiis omnibus aperire , ne turbarentur ecclesiae , & infirmi quorum maximam semper habuit rationem offenderentur , & à vero dei cultu ad idola fortasse iterum adducerentur . frag. f. socini disp. de christi naturâ p. 5. observe by the way that the socinians doe not much differ from the papists in any point in controversie between the papists and reformed churches , unlesse it be in the point of idolatry . but indeed there was one reason more why laelius was so wary , he knew how it fared with michael serv●tus in the year 1553. & that severe example might well keep him in awe for 8. or 9. years after , about which time he died : and indeed faustus seems to glance at some such reason , for he saith laelius had observed that there was a custome which grew in request in some churches , ut execrabiles haberentur quicunque adversus receptas sententias vel mutire quidē ausi essent , in the place forecited . nay i can easily guesse at a third reason yet , because laelius had in former time before he was poysoned with servetus his doctrines taught the same truths which are generally received in the reformed churches , and if he should have retracted so many opinions , the people would not have beleeved him in any thing he had taught , but would have quite faln off to popery againe , as he conceived : for the people had a great opinion of his doctrine , though he was neither doctour nor pastor in the church . neve tandem divina veritas ab eo praedicata ( quineque pastoris neque doctoris officio in ecclesia fungeretur ) ob auctoris non parvam ( i beleeve it should be , though 't is printed magnā ) auctoritatē magna christiani orbis detrimento passim rejiceretur . faustus disp ▪ de christi natura , pag. 6. it was therefore laelius his master-plot to propound doubts & questions to such famous men as calvin , & others in the reformed churches , as if he intended to gain some farther light ( when indeed he sought for further advantage ) by their determinations . quod tamen ut omnem offensionem vitaret addiscendi tantum studio a se fieri dicebat : qua tamen ratione ab initio idem vere ab eo factum fuisse verisimile est , quare etiam discipulum semper se , nunquam autem doctorem profitebatur . faustus ubi supra . master calvin did easily perceive his subtilty , and therefore gave him a faire but sharp admonition about the calends of january , 1552. as the polonian knight doth confesse : si tibi per aereas illas speculationes ( saith calvin ) volitare libet , sine me quae so humilem christi discipulum ea meditari quae ad fidei meae aedificationem faciunt — quod pridem testatus sum , serio iterum moneo , nisi hunc quaerendi pruritum mature corrigas , metuendum esse ne tibi gravia tormenta accersas . faustus saith that his uncle was snatched away by an untimely death , non sine dei consilio , that so those great mysteries which god had revealed to none but laelius , might be made known unto the world . cùm statim fere post mortem ejus , eorum quae ipse palam docere non audebat pars aliqua & literis consignari , & passim divulgari est coepta ; id quod eo vivente nunquam fortasse contigisset , amicis ex iis quae ipse scripserat non adhuc plene edoctis , & adversus praeceptoris voluntatem aliquid eorum quae ab ipso didicerant in vulgus prodere minime audentibus . hac scilicet ratione deus quae illi uni patefecerat omnibus manifesta esse voluit . faustus ubi supra , pag. 6. & 7. i am at this great paines of transcribing , because socinian bookes are so deare , every man will not pay a groat a sheete , the price that i am forced to , onely that i may declare the truth ; so much for laelius . faustus socinus the nephew of laelius was borne in the yeare 1539 , two houres and three quarters before sun-rising on the fift of december ; so scrupulous are some in calculating the nativity of this monster ; and he himselfe tooke notice of it in his epistle ad excellentissimum quendam virum ; he was of no meane parentage , his father was by name alexander socinus , and for his policie , subtilitatum princeps , as he was deservedly stiled ; his mother was nobly descended , the polonian knight hath shewen her descent , matrem habuit agnetem burgesii petruccii senenfis quondam reipub. principis ac victoriae piccolomineae filiam . he studied the lawes till he was about three and twenty yeares of age , and then hee betooke himselfe to the great duke of hetruria his court , where he spent twelve yeares , onely he had so much leisure at court , as to write a booke about the authority of the scripture , in which he doth slily pervert the scriptures , and lay a ground for all his hereticall blasphemies . this is all the account that can be given of him for 35. yeares . i doe not heare of any great brags ( though the socinians doe make loud brags of him ) of his logique , philosophy , schoole-divinity , the learned tongues , onely he spent some two or three yeares in digesting his uncles notes , and then thought he had learning enough to contradict all the fathers and councels , and undertooke to censure all the reformed churches , and to dispute with the greatest scholars in the world : the presumption of his wit , besides the badnesse of his cause , did betray him to his adversaries , especially in the first prizes he played , and he was so subtile as to seeme ingenuous in acknowledging such oversights as he could not possibly conceale : quod vero ais ( saith faustus to puccius ) supellectilem meam hebraeam & graeeam — teipsum latere non potest ejusmodi meam supellectilem non valde curtam modò , sed propemodum nullum esse ; graecos enim fontes , ut egomet omnibus dico , leviter admodum degus●avi , hebraeos vix dum attigi , &c. socin. resp. ad def. puccii , pag. 49. and he confesses that he made a great flourish in the world before he had any logick , hee had vapoured against puccius , palaeologus , volanus , and divers others , he had composed a commentary on the first part of the first chapter of s. iohn , and on the seventh to the romans , his animadversions in theses posn . de trino & uno deo , & alia quaedam imperfecta , as he saith , cum nondum dialecticae ullam operam dedissem , ut post hac non mireris si in meis scriptis multa deprehenderis minus rectè tradita ac conclusa . epist. ad excellentissimum quendam virum . it was no wonder indeed if a man that understood neither greek nor hebrew , nor logick , should give many interpretations , and draw many conclusions which will not hold . now whether after the delicacies of the court , and 35. yeares of his age mis-spent , he was so apt to mould his stiffe braines , and new-cast them into a logicall forme , let the world judge . socinus then was not the greatest scholar in the world , though hee thought himselfe able to teach all the church , and all the world . the polonian knight acknowledges that he was of an hasty cholerique disposition , praecipitem ad bilem natura formaverat ; but it seemes his heat did evaporate at court , in vita a●licâ deferbuisse juvenilem illum socini astum , qui plerumque magna in magnos lapsus pr●cipitat ingenia ; and yet marcellus squarcialupus socinus his good friend doth often complaine of him for his rashnesse , &c. as calovius shewes at large : you may reade plentifull testimonies cited at length , consid. th. socin. pag. 13. & 15. to him therefore i referre you . faustus then had more subtilty then learning ; when he was not able to prove his opinions , he told his auditours , haec si vera non sint , verisimilia saltem & probabilia deprehendetis . he was of a ma●ignant wit , hee knew how to disgrace truth by scoffes and slanders , he thought to affright weake spirited men from the protestant religion , by telling them that they held opinions ( in particular that christ is god ) which made christian religion ridiculous to iewes and turkes , et exteris denique omnibus , but names none else . haecque & hujusmodi alia quaedam , quorum ansam illis dedit graeca vox * {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , ingeniose quidem ( ut illis videtur ) & foeliciter comminiscuntur quae omnia — cùm ridicula magna ex parte appareant efficitur ( proh dolor ! ) ut jesu christi religio — & judaeis & turcis & exteris denique omnibus maximè sit ludibrio . explicat . cap. prim . ioh. pag. 9. our superstitious men of late pressed us to comply with them , in hope of converting papists from their superstition , by conforming our selves to the selfe same superstition , and now the socinians would have us to deny christ to be god , that we may convert turkes and iewes to the christian faith : as if the best way to convert men to the christian faith , were to deny a prime article of our christian faith ; or as if jews and turks would have a better opinion of christ , if the christians should deny him to be god , and so harden them in their beloved blasphemies ; and yet faustus socinus saith his friends did encourage him to write against that inveterate figment of the divine nature of christ , hac enim ratione — & iudaeos & turcas ad christianam religionem allici posse , qui portentosis istis opinionibus quae christianae fidei axiomata esse creduntur ab eâ amplectenda semper sunt deterriti . faustus , ubi supra , pag. 2. i should tyre out my reader , if i should but reckon up the tricks and devices of this faustus ; for he pretended just as our translator here , to be a reformer of the reformers , nay of the reformation it selfe ; he makes many glorious pretences in his booke called solutio scrupulorum . god ( saith he ) in this last age intends to make many new discoveries , and to reforme his church more thorowly then ever . luther he confesses hath discovered truths enough to carry us to heaven ; zuinglius and oecolampadius reformed the church in matters of great weight and moment ; they are justly to be extolled , because they have purged the church from superstition and idolatry , and caused all false worships to be abhorred ; but he doth very slily intimate , that it was now left to him to confute all errors which luther , zuinglius and oecolampadius had not observed in the church ; for saith he , though the idols temple is laid levell with the ground , no man hath as yet set up the temple of christ : nay he goes farther , nec caementa & lapides ad illud extruendum parari ; and we may truly say , socinus lapides loquitur , as the comedian said ; and he knows full well how to daube with untempered morter . he hath written two other pestilent books , in which he hath most cunningly vented his poyson , one is a booke which i never saw , de ss. scripturae authoritate , which calovius tels is one of his most subtile pieces , and seemes to be one of his first essayes : dominicus lopez a jesuit was so taken ( or mistaken ) with it , as to print it in the yeare , 1588. the other pamphlet is a briefe discourse , de causâ ob quam creditur aut non creditur evangelio iesu christi . in this second he speakes plainer then in the former , as they say who have read both , and they conceive that it was purposely put forth as a commentary upon the other ; for socinus did speake more freely still every yeare then other , accordingly as hee saw his discourses entertained and applauded by potent abettours ; he did not put his name to his commentary upon iohn , till he saw how it would take ; libuit antequam nomen nostrum prodamus aliorum exigui hujus laboris nostri judicius cognoscere . explic. ioh. p. 4. and calovius saith , he did not put his name to it till whole churches ( congregations i suppose he meanes ) had subscribed to socinus his tenets , calovius de origine theol. soc. p. 19. he gained very much by his feigned modesty , he saith it was his hearty desire to bring all men to his opinion , yet such was his charity and modesty , that he would account them brethren , who counted him an hereticke , and held his opinions to be pernicious , upon condition they did their best , to live in obedience to christs precepts , and sought in a faire way to convince him by scripture , explic. cap. prim . ioh. pag. 4. but though he pretended to be ruled by scripture , it is most evident that all his art was to withdraw men from hearkning to the plainest texts of scripture which doe contradict blinde carnall reason . he taught the world a new way of disputing in divinity ; we were wont to argue thus , whatsoever god saith is true : but god saith thus and thus ; ergo : but he taught us to prove , that such and such a proposition is true by the causes and proper effects first , or else saith he , it is absurd to thinke that god said any thing but truth , and therefore unlesse it can appeare by some demonstrative argument , that such a proposition is true , we must not pitch upon that proposition , as the minde of the holy ghost in any text of scripture ; what ever the words of the text seeme to hold forth unto us , wee must goe looke out for some other sense which is agreeable to right reason . rationis lumen quo deus nos donavit aperte ostendit non debere nec posse corporalem poenam quam unus debeat ab alio persolvi , idque etiam omnium gentium ac seculorum legibus ac consuetudinibus perpetuo & maximo consensu comprobatum sit , as socinus in his tract deservatore ; behold how the light of reason , the laws , nay the customes ( and perchance some of them unreasonable ) of nations must over-rule god , so that god himselfe shall not be believed , if he doe not speake consonantly to my corrurpt reason , and our vaine customes . it is cleare and evident , that whatsoever socinus produces against christs satisfaction , or our justification , is a meere figment of his owne braine , for he onely urges some colourable arguments , which have but a shew or shadow of reason . but i shall not instance in more particulars now , because i desire to passe on and discover socinus his subtilty , in scattering his errors abroad in sarmatia , transylvania , &c. and therefore this shall suffice for the rise of socinianisme . chap. ii. the growth of socinianisme . ill weeds thrive apace ; laelius had sowne his errors , as hath beene already shewen , in some five or sixe yeares , within ten yeares space there were whole congregations submitted themselves to the socinian yoake in sarmatia as doctor calovius assures mee , intra decennium integra ecclesiae accesserunt haeresi ejusdem in sarmatia , consid , th. soc. prooemial . pag. 65. and this heresie did spread so fast in transylvania , that within twenty yeares after there were some hundreds of congregations infected , ut vix triginta elapsis annis aliquot centuriae coetuum talium ibidem numeratae fuerint . ibid. what they maintained upon their first apostasie , may bee seene in a booke , de falsa & vera unius dei , patris , filii , & s. sti. cognitione . it pleased god that franciscus davidis the superintendent of those new perverted proselytes in transylvania , did lay some rubs in the way of faustus socinus ; for this franciscus desired to know why christ should bee worshipped or prayed unto any longer , if hee were not god ? blandrate and faustus did lay their heads together to answer this quere ; but this same franciscus davidis maintained stoutly that invocation and adoration were parts of divine honour due to god alone ; this hapned about the yeare , 1578. some twenty yeares after the stirres which were in the italian church at geneva , ut supra . but faustus and blandrate could not compose the tumults ( or answer the objections ) which franciscus had raised in transylvania , and so faustus socinus was forced to returne with shame enough into poland : but when faustus could not doe what he would , he seemed to be content to joyne with the davidians , as they were called from franciscus davidis , as farre as they would goe hand in hand with him in opposing the reformed churches , and he did prevaile very much in a synod about the yeare , 1588. in other points also which hee did cunningly winde in , and they greedily swallow ; and he prevailed very farre the next yeare in another synod , and within a matter of foure yeares , as calovius saith , he brought over all ( them whom he had wrought upon , to deny the godhead of christ ) to subscribe to the whole body of socinianisme : and no marvaile , for though there are many parts of socinianisme which have no rationall dependance upon the deniall of the godhead of christ ; yet when once men come to be sofar blinded as to deny that glorious truth which shines so clearly in the gospell , it is no wonder if they see nothing at all . besides he was so wise as to strike in with the nobles , and the courtiers , with the most youthfull and sharp witted pastors , and not only with subtile disputants , but smooth popular oratours , men more able to corrupt the people , witnesse petrus steinius ; or statorius , by whose unhappy eloquence the sublimest subtilties of socinus which transcended vulgar capacities , were so explained and smoothed in a popular , but plausible way , that the most refined notions were made familiar to the common people ; infoelici steinii suadâ subtiles & à rudiorum captu remotiores socini sensus populari ratione tradere & flexanimae orationis genio cunctis probare poterat , &c. this blasphemous wretch did travaile , ab extremâ silesiae or a in intimam lithuaniam , that he might spread his errors , though he did thereby often endanger his life : he lived a long time , he was about 66. years of age when he died ; though it was long ere he began to seduce as hath been shewn , yet he had 30. years time to infect a people that were too willing to be infected ; he died , as calovius informs me , in the yeare 1604. tandem anno etatis quinto ultra sexagesimum blasphemam exhalat animam , aerae christianae 1604. vitaque cum gemitu fugit indignata sub umbras . chap. iii. the danger of socinianisme . learned grotius may remember that there was a time when he himselfe thought socini●nisme to be very dangerous , cum haeresis sit venenum ecclesiae , & quidem praesentissimum , sed tamen haereseos aliqui sint gradus , ut sit hac illâ nocentior priorem aliam non reperiri haresi socini , ad cujus etiam mentionem pii omnes exhorreant , in his speech to the states called h. g. pietas . certain all pious men may well tremble at the very mention of socinianisme , at the very repeating of their basphemies . for my part i dare not call them christians , because they deny the godhead and satisfaction of christ , they will not be baptized in the name of the trinity , they labour to pluck up christianity by the roots , and to overthrow the very foundation of religion . i cannot but blot out smalcius his name out of the white roll of christians , if it were but for that one blasphemy , christianus esse potest qui divinam christi essentiam negat . smal , contr. nova monstra . an errour that takes away all prayer to christ , and worship of him , doth utterly destroy christian religion : but the denyall of the godhead of christ doth take away all prayer to christ and worship of him , ergo . this argument was urged by franciscus davidis and simon budnaeus , but fanstus socinus ( ut supra ) was not able to give any satisfying answer to this triumphing reason . the socinians are mad with reason , if they conceive it reasonable to give divine honour to any save god alone . none pretend to be greater enemies to idolatry , then the socinians , and yet they doe clearly maintain this idolatrous principle , namely that divine honour may be given to one whom they conceive to be a meer man , christ blessed for ever . the socinian errour is fundamentall , they deny christs satisfaction , and so overthrow the foundation of our faith , the foundation of our justification ; they deny the holy trinity , and so take away the very object of our faith ; they deny the resurrection of these bodies , and so take away the foundation of our hope ; they deny originall sinne , and so take away the ground of our humiliation , and indeed the necessity of regeneration ; they advance the power of nature , and destroy the efficacy of grace . it is an antichristian errour , because it takes away the very essence and person of iesus christ , for they deny him to be god , and so take away his essence ; they deny him to be the second person in the trinity , and so destroy his very person also . they doe in effect rob him of all his offices , for if christ be not god , he is not that great prophet foretold by moses , who is prince and author of life , act. 3. 15. 22. ad finem , act. 7. 37 , 38. nor can he be a priest able to save by the offering of himself , because the merit of his sacrifice depends upon the dignity of his person : the offering of a meer man cannot satisfy for so many thousands of men : and therefore the socinians having denyed the godhead of christ , deny that he hath given god full satisfaction . nor can christ be a king , who hath an heavenly and eternall kingdome by nature , if he be not god . it is an anti-spirituall errour , for they deny the nature and person of the holy ghost , the speciall grace and saving efficacy of the holy ghost ; they say , we can understand the deepest mysteries of faith , and beleeve in christ without the speciall assistance of the holy ghost . they overthrow the very nature of faith , for they confound faith and workes ; obedience to gods commands is faith it selfe , or the very substance and forme of faith . fides ( quâ justificamur ) obedientiam pr●ceptorum dei non quidem ut effectum , sed ut suam substantiam & formam continet . socin. miscl . p. 162. they destroy the morall law which was delivered by moses , by saying that is imperfect . christ came to fulfill ( that is , say they ) to make the law perfect ; and they overthrow the gospel , by saying that we are justifyed by the workes of the law , and by their confounding of the law of faith , and the law of workes ; they say as the jewes say , that the great work of the messiah is to proclaime and confirme the law , only they adde that it w●● his in●ent , legem mosaicam ceu minus perfectam perficere & locupletare , and therefore they say , christ and his apostles did so often presse obedience to the law , to shew that we are to be justifyed by the works of the law : and hence it is that they call our blessed saviour , mosen mosissimum , as if christ had not preached the gospel , the law of faith , as the apostle calls it , rom. 3. 27. and by this meanes the law of justification by faith alone without the works of the law , which is the scope of the gospel , is quite overthrown . they set open a wide gap to atheisme , by denying that the soule of man can possibly so subsist by it selfe after this life , as to be capable of joy or torment , of reward or punishment ; they may when they please speak plain english , and say , that there is neither heaven nor hell . animadvertendum est ( say they ) christum & apostolos coactos fuisse quodammodo hominum opinionibus , quae tunc plerunque vigebant , se accommodare , quemadmodum satis aperte docet parabola divitis & lazari . nam aliquem in inferno fuisse & ibi torqueri , in sinu abrahae decumbere , sunt plane fictitia , & similia illis , quae poetae de ixione , sisypho , tantalo scribunt : hâc etiam prudentiâ hodie apud vulgus christianorum in hac materiâ utendum , &c. i have transcribed this out of doctor josuah stegman the reverend superintendent of scawenburg , and when ever i cite stegman briefly in the margin , i intend that learned author , and not ioachimus stegman the grand socinian . the socinians desire to take us off from giving any heed to the received interpretations of a fathers or councells , that so they may obtrude their own fancies and conceits upon us as solid , and rationall , most accurate , but very moderate interpretations , vide brev. disq. p. 7. they of all men doe most affect the conduct of their own private spirit , which they call right reason ; and though they pretend that we are more busie in enquiring after the unanimous consent of fathers and councels , then the true sense of the scriptures , yet they doe not endeavour by this out-cry to extoll and enthrone the scriptures , but to set their own private spirit or b judgement in the chaire , which is indeed to make every man a pope . this conceit of theirs cannot but take well with the multitude , for every man ( as luther saith ) is born with a pope in his belly ; and with a pope in his braine too , for every one would faine have his reason , his fancy to sit judge in all controversies , every man is apt to think himself infallible , and that his private iudgement ought to be the publike standard . finally , every one desires to give a toleration or a dispensation to himselfe , that he may be allowed to maintain such opinions and goe on in such courses as are generally condemned by the judgement of learned and pious men . there is another quarrell that they pick with the reformed churches , and that is for extolling their doctours too highly , such as luther , brentius , melancthon , bucer , chemnitius , calvin , beza , zuinglius and the rest , but they would pardon this errour , if they did not oblige other men to stand to the judgement of these and such like reverend authours ; if they might have but their liberty of prophecying according to their own private spirit or judgement they would be content , but that the churches passe their censures upon such as dissent from the most received interpretations of fathers , councels and the reformed divines , though such interpretations seem unreasonable to the private judgement of our acute socinians . but there is a third fault greater then any of the former , & that is , that the reformed divines make the holy spirit speaking in the scriptures ( and shining into the hearts and minds of men by a glorious light to enable them to understand the scriptures ) the judge of controversies , for by this means say they , the judgement of sound reason is made uselesse and of none effect or authority before the illumination of the holy ghost : this is an high fault indeed ; we are it seemes in great danger of being seduced from the dictates of blind carnal reason to follow the light and voice of the scriptures , & the holy spirit . besides , there is another greater danger , if we follow the spirit so much , we shal not be able to answer that seraphique doctour , valerianus magnus , his book , de acatholicorum credendi regulâ iudicio , set forth at prague , 1628. but it may be the book needs no answer , or they that follow the spirit and the scriptures are not at leisure , they have better imployment . but let the socinians speak their minde clearely , then what is it they would have ? why , they would throw the pope out of his chaire , and they would sit there themselves by turnes , that so they may be popes round ; for every man say they hath reason enough before he is inlightned by the holy ghost to judge of the authority of scriptures by histories , and other principles , and to collect out of the scriptures compared , and the foresaid principles , not onely all things necessary to salvation , but many profitable truths besides , though not so necessary . i should be very glad to learne what those other principles are besides the scripture out of which we may collect truths necessary to salvation ; for this you must look into the seventh chapter of this brevis disquisitio , caterùm ad sacrarum literarum anctoritatem & genuinam mentem dignoscendam principia etiam illa quae philosophica appellant advocanda esse . but if a man be no scholar , why , then those principles which are knowne to him by nature , and his owne observation , are the rules whereby hee must examine ; first , whether the scriptures be the word of god , and then , what is the true sense and meaning of them ; if such a man have but a good wit , a little experience ( saith hee ) will serve the turne . nay , he affirmes that it will serve the turne , if by the helpe of those good principles , his owne good wit , and conference with others , he do but heare the summe of those few things which the socinians conceive necessary to salvation , though he never heare or know , that there is any such booke as the booke of god . mr. chillingworth comes very neere this disquisition-monger in his accurate treatise , for he saith , the scripture is not to be believed finally for it selfe , but for the matter contained in it , so that if men did believe the doctrin contained in the scripture , it should no way hinder their salvation not to know whether there were any scripture or no , chap. 2. pag. 65 , 66. i thought it had beene necessary to have received those materiall objects or articles of our faith , upon the authority of god speaking in the scriptures ; i thought it had beene anabaptisticall to have expected any revelation but in the word of god ; for a revelation , nay a supernaturall revelation is necessary to help naturall reason , as the same mr. chillingworth acknowledges . knot had very unhappily branded mr. chillingworth for a socinian , because he maintaineth , that nothing ought or can bee certainly believed , farther then it may be proved by evidence of naturall reason , ( where i conceive , saith mr. chillingworth , naturall reason is opposed to supernaturall revelation ) and whosoever holds so let him be anathema . sect. 28. in his answer to knots direction to n. n. now let mr. chillingworth say that either there is a revelation to be expected out of the word , as the enthyfiasts do , or else let him acknowledge , that god hath ordained the scriptures as the meanes and instruments to reveale saving truths , and let him teach men to depend upon the ordinances of god , and not make men stand at a gaze to expect a revelation in an extraordinary way . or else let him speake plaine , and say there is truth enough written in the hearts of every man by nature to save him , or that it may be learnt from philosophers writings ; let him say as socinus doth , that the substance of the promises is eternall life , that the maine thing god lookes after is practise , that heathens and christians have the same practicall rules written in their heart , and so if a man doe but hope for eternall life by observing these practicall rules ( as many heathens did , witnesse that verse of phocylides , {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , and the discourses of socrates , plato , hermes , &c. ) hee may be eternally saved ; and then we shall know how free he is from socinidnisme . or else let him confesse , that naturall reason being helped by a supernaturall revelation in the word , is not able to discerne saving truths , so as to beleeve them after a saving manner , without the speciall assistance of the holy ghost , such assistance as is vouchsafed to none but the elect of god , and then i will acknowledge that he is no socinian . but otherwise , if either he thinke as he seemes to thinke , that all the materiall objects which are necessary to salvation , may be knowne out of some other booke then scripture , or by some other meanes ; and that if a man beleeve them meerely as truths probable by reason , and doe not receive those truths as the oracles of god , but dictates of reason , then sure he may be a socinian still ; nay , if he hold a supernaturall revelation by the word to be necessary , it being the meanes which god hath ordained , and so is made necessary to us by gods ordinance ; yet if hee thinke this outward revelation to be sufficient , without the inward and speciall revelation of the spirit , he may be a socinian still . but this by the way , i shall say the lesse of mr. chillingworth , when i come to touch upon his booke ; sure i am , such dangerous principles as these , will beate greene heads from the study of the scriptures , if they be not censured upon every occasion . i know master chillingworth protests that he is willing to stand to the judgement of the catholique church , of this and former ages , to the consent of protestants , the church of england ; but if he put in the papists into the catholicke church , as i beleeve he will ; then he will say the papists doe not agree , and therefore the catholick church of this age is not against the socinians ; nay the fathers doe not all agree , and so there is not a catholick consent of the ancients , as mr. chillingworth i beeleeve did purposely shew at large in the eighteenth section of his answer to n. n. that so he might winde himselfe out the better in this 28. section : nay , peradventure he will put the socinians in for to give a vote , if you aske for the consent of the catholique church of this age , for hee cals them a company of christians in the 29. section ; and though he saith , they are erroneous in explicating ( he doth not say in denying ) the mysteries of religion , & allowing greater liberty in speculative matters , ( so the socinians call the articles of the christian faith ) then any other company of christians doth , or they should doe , yet for their honour he saith , they explicate the lawes of christ with more rigour and lesse indulgence to the flesh then the papists doe , and that is true , but not much for their commendation , because they thereby disgrace the morall law of god , and say it was imperfect , till christ gave new lawes ; but mr. chillingworth was willing to take any occasion to commend them . moreover if mr. chillingworth by the church of england , meane the arch-bishop of canterbury and his faction , then indeed there will not be a generall consent of the church of england against the socinians . once more , if he take in all the arminians , and some iesuited papists , that ( as vertumnus romanus prescribes ) come to church and heare our common prayers , and receive the sacrament in some congregations in this kingdome , though they bee of mr. fisher , or mr. flued his minde , and ranke all these amongst protestants ( for we have had strange kinde of protestants for these twelve yeares last past , ) then i beleeve there will not be a generall consent of such protestants against the socinians ; and so mr. chillingworth may oppose socinianisme , when all these agree together to oppose it . but indeed hee hath one argument which makes me beleeve that he and more of that faction who countenance many socinian errors , doe not agree with the socinians in all points , because socinianisme if it be taken in all its demensions , is such a doctrine by which no man in his right minde can hope for any honour or preferment either in this church or state , or in any other . many men do indeed adventure as farre as they dare this way , onely they are afraid of thwarting the great designe , as i shall hereafter shew . i dare not excuse mr. chillingworths dangerous principles , though i account him a very rationall man , yet i beleeve him to be the more dangerous , i dare not therefore give him that liberty which he gives others , and cry , quisque abundet in sensusuo , because they are not the words of s. paul , though mr. chillingworth father them upon him , chap. 2. pag. 92. the words of the apostle are , let every man be fully perswaded , or assured in his own minde , rom. 14. 5. i goe on to shew the danger of socinianisme . it is an hotch-potch of gentilisme , turcisme , judaisme , and i know not what , they have put in some scruples of christianity to make up the messe . the centuriatours say , that mahomet did compose his alcoran by the helpe of the iewes , and iohannes antiochenus an arian : and truly turcisme doth much savour of iudaisme and arianisme . now socinianisme is compounded of the selfe same ingredients , socinus borrowed very much from servetus , and servetus from the alcoran , as wajekus proves , and socinus doth acknowledge , vide antiwajek . soc. pag. 33. they say we hinder the conversion of the turks , by departing so far from them ; whereas they agree with turks in denying the godhead , eternall generation , meritorious satisfaction of christ , in blaspheming the trinity : paul alciat , and adam neuser , two socinians turned turks ; nay the turks discourse more solidly about the prescience of god , then the socinians , or arminians doe . the resurrection of these very bodies was believed by none but iewes and turkes at first , ( as the socinians would make us believe ) and the protestants have received it from them . they open a gap to an atheisticall libertinisme , by promising salvation to all hereticks , ignorant persons , if they live but chast , sober , just lives , and expect eternall life , for that is the summe of the promises , and they need not know or beleeve more : all the mysteries of faith are by them counted but meere notions , speculations at best , and it is no great matter if men have diverse and contrary opinions about them they may all fare well enough ; truly i thinke one as well as another , if there be neither heaven nor hell . socinians are not to be permitted in any church , for they deny that there is as yet any triumphant church above , nor is it necessary that there should be any militant church here below . the arminians jumpe with them in the same conceit , they say , christ may bee a king without a kingdome , an head without a body : neque verò necesse esse credimus ad hoc ut christus rex & caput maneat in terris ecclesiam veram semper esse . their reasons are , because christs kingdome doth rather consist in his owne soveraigne authority , then in the obedience and subjection of any people . besides , if there were a necessity of it that there must be a church on earth , then christs people would not be a free willing people , and so there would be no spirituall church , if they are not left at liberty , to accept or refuse christ ; sure that is a rebellious liberty , for a liberty to reject christ , is a liberty to rebell . no man they say need inquire after the true church , much lesse is it necessary that he should be a member of the true church , ubinam quaeso est scriptum christum praecepisse ut unusquisque inquirat , & norit quaenam sit vera ecclesia ? socinus de eccles. thes. they would not have any marks given of a true church , i suppose for fear theirs should be discovered to be a false ; but especially they deny , that the pure preaching of the word is a note of the true church , for with jeasting pilate they aske , what is truth ? how shall it appeare , say they , that any church preaches the saving truth ? nay arminians and socinians both tell us , that there is no need of preaching : saving truths are sufficiently manifested they say , and yet it seemes it is not sufficiently manifested to them , for they cannot tell what it is . they doe not see any great use of the sacraments , they cannot believe that the sprinkling of water upon the body , should have any spirituall effects upon the soule ; they cannot believe that our faith can bee strengthened , our pardon sealed , christ and his benefits imparted to us by eating of bread , and drinking wine . now sure a church that is without ministers , sacraments , markes or signes of a true church , would be but an empty titular church , and to such a church onely should socinians be admitted . socinians are not to be suffered in any state , for they will not shew any obedience or respect to magistrates ; they say , they have no power to punish hainous offenders in time of peace , nor have they power to defend themselves or the people by the sword , in time of warre . but especially , they charge the magistrates to beware how they meddle with good honest hereticks , for all hereticks in the opinion of arminians and socinians ( who speake favourably in their owne cause ) are good pious men . what they say of the law of nations , or of a particular state , i had rather you should reade in their writings then in mine . i beleeve your patience is already tyred with this briefe narration , if any desire to be farther satisfied in particulars let them reade this book . chap. iv. whether england hath been , or still is in danger to be farther infected with socinianisme . farther infected i say , for it is too evident that it hath been in some measure already infected with this pestilent heresie . i know the archbishop of canterbury did pretend to crush this cockatrice of socinianisme , but all things being considered , it is to be feared that his canon was ordained for concealing , rather then suppressing of socinianisme ; for he desired that none but his own party should be admitted to the reading of socinian books , it was made almost impossible for any that were not of his party , to take the degree of batchelour of divinity ( i can say more in that point then another ) or at least improbable they should have means to pay a groat a sheet for socinian books . it is well known that the arch-bishop did highly favour , and frequently employ men shrewdly suspected for socinianisme . master chillingworth , to speak modestly , hath been too patient , being so deeply charged by knot for his inclining towards some socinian tenets : no man in saint ieromes opinion ought to be patient in such a a case , and sure no innocent man would be patient . mr. chillingworth hath not yet answered — christianity maintained . the protestants doe not own many of those principles which are scattered in master chillingworths book , and knot could observe that he proceeded in a destructive way , just as the socinians doe . the reformed churches abroad wonder that we could finde no better a champion amongst all our worthies ; they who travailed hither out of forrain parts blessed themselves when they saw so much froath and grounds ; so much arminianisme and vanity in master chillingworths admired peece : what doth it advantage the protestant cause , if the pope be deposed from his infallible chair , and reason enthroned that socinianisme may be advanced ? but i am afraid doctor potter may take it unkindly that i have named master chillingworth before him ; for his grace employed doctour potter first , and he was cryed up as a patr●ne of the protestant profession , but he sowred his calvinisme with so much arminian leaven , and sweetned popery with some such gentle scruples of moderate divinity as they call it , that the jesuites laughed in their sleeves , and knot was so pleasant that he could scarce refrain from laughing openly . that these two great champions doe vent arminian principles is manifest to any man that hath but peeped into their books . now that arminianisme is a fair step to socinianisme hath been sufficiently proved by bodecherus , ( though he hath been derided , he hath not been answered ) peltius , vedelius and others , so that i need say no more in that point . what art and care hath been used to propagate the arminian errours in england , would require a large volume , and i had laid open all their sleights and projects ( had not my bookes and notes been seised on ) to the full : god may give me opportunity to say something to that point yet before i finish my course . the church of scotland complains of his grace , for he first protected wederburn , when he fled from scotland for fear of the church-censures , because this wederburn had poysoned the young students in divinity with arminianisme in the new colledge at saint andrews ; his grace made the same wederburn bishop of dumblane , that so he might be dean of the kings chappell , and vent all his arminian errours in the royall chappell , in despight of all the presbyteries . then his grace chose out 24. royall chaplaines , such as were most likely to preach the deanes arminian tenets to the state when they saw that all preferment did run that way . i will not say any thing of master sydserf , doctor forbes , &c. you may read the complaint at large in a book entitled ladens . {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , or the canterburian self-conviction . but that which did most mischiefe , was a large declaration procured by his grace , but sent in the kings name into scotland , in which their general assembly was much condemned for passing any censure upon arminians . besides , his grace had two scouts in ireland , the bishop of derry , and doctour chappell : behold three kingdomes infected at once with this deadly disease , by the pestilent subtilty of one arch-bishop . but i shall make it appear that we have gone nearer to socinianisme yet . acontius was ( as learned peltius calls him ) clandestinus socinianorum assecla ; now i have wondred often what was the reason that acontius was new printed in oxford by doctour potters book-binder . creature i might say , if i did affect the language of the times . they might as well have printed bonfinius , for i finde him joyned with acontius , they were both sneaking socinians , they followed socinus just as nicodemus followed christ , by stealth & in the dark . iacobus acontius & bonfinius socini clandestini asseclae . judicious and learned pareus not long before his death writ a letter on the first of march , 1613. ad n. n. in which he expresseth himselfe after this manner . arminium vestrum sociniani in polonia expresse ut suum nuper nominarunt , unà cum quodam bonfinio & acontio clandestinis asseclis , quorum authoritate postularunt àfratribus orthodoxis fraternitatem , isti verò fortiter recusarunt . acta ad me misit synodus lublinensis , cui nuper postridie natalis domini respondi , &c. pareus was a man of a very peaceable disposition , willing to compose all differences which might fairely and honestly be compounded , as appeares by his irenicum , and therfore his judgement is to be the more valued , but you see he doth not vent his own private opinion , but declares the judgement of the synod ; i beleeve that every impartiall reader will think this passage very considerable . the socinians have one principle which draws a great party after them of all heretikes , & sectaries . nothing ( say they ) is fundamentally necessary to salvation but only faith or obedience to the commands of christ , for they make faith & obedience all one , ut supra . now acontius was a great stickler in this point , and therefore learned peltius saith , this opinion did open a wide gap to let in all heresies into the church , and yet acontius and the socinians thought nothing else fundamentall but obedience to christs precepts ; men might deny the godhead of jesus christ , and almost any article of the christian faith , and yet be christians good enough in their conceit . nihilque tandem fore fundamentale praeter istud ( scil. obedientiam mandatorum ) ex mente acontii & socinianorum positum . see peltius his epistle dedicatory , prefixed before his harmony . well might acontius his book be intitled stratagemata satanae : but sorry i am that doctour potter should be thought to have such an hand in publishing of it , that it was known in oxford by the name of doctour potters stratagems . i know acontius doth in that book mince the matter , but the book is so much the more dangerous , and cannot but poyson young students more insensibly and irrecoverably . besides acontius his pretence of moderation and charity will work much upon men that understand not his stratagems , they will conceive that he grew every day more moderate and more a accurate also , and that he complyed so far with the socinians meerly out of a desire of peace . but though the book be close and dedicated to queen elizabeth , yet ever and anon he lets fall some hopes of being saved without the acknowledgement of those mysteries which the church hath long held for necessary articles of faith . what did the man that was cured of the palsy beleeve ? why , ( saith he ) he did beleeve as it was fit , that that man who is called iesus was from god , ( mark he doth not say that he was god ) and in favour with god , and hoped that he should be healed by him , and yet his sins were forgiven . credebat enim ut par est hominem eum qui iesus diceretur à deo esse & apud eum gratiosum , itaque sperabat per eum sanitatem se posse adipisci . illa verò eum cognita etiam habuisse omnia quae diu pro articulis fidei necessariis habuit ecclesia quàm sit verisimile , cuique judicandum relinquo . sunt & alia multa loca quae eódem prorsus tendunt . nay he conceives abraham the father of the faithfull to have been ignorant of those heads of divinity which we count articles of faith , fundamentall articles . abraham , saith he , beleeved that he should have off-spring , that in his seed all the nations of the earth should be blessed , that canaan should be his , caeterum de religionis apicibus istis ignorare opinantur ( scil. reformati ) fas non esse mirum est silentium quin , ipsum etiam salutis mysterium per ejus semen tecte admodum obscureque promittitur . i put in ( scil , reformati , ) for doubtlesse it is a jerk at the reformed churches , and so that passage fore-cited , ecclesia diu habuit , is certainly a jerk for the nicene fathers , athanasius and those ancients which required such a distinct confession of faith . you see he seems to leave it doubtfull whether abraham did beleeve in christ or no ; these oblique passages and many such in his third book especially , doe shew what a good mind he had to favour them , who at that time about the yeare 1565. did call the articles of the christian faith into question . no marvaile if he wrote so warily when servetus had been made such an example , in the yeare 1553. besides laelius socinus was now dead , and faustus not grown up to his maturity . sabellius he saith was an heretike for saying that the father did not differ from the son , but he is not so forward to call them heretikes who deny that the son hath the same nature with the father ; he tells us that * we must beleeve christ to be the sonne of god , and to be made man , but he doth not presse us to beleeve that christ is god . we need not wonder at his moderation , when he is very tender even about transubstantiation , and unwilling to appear on either side . magna jamdudum fuit & vere tragica controversia de interpretatione verborum corum , accipite , hoc est corpus meum ; non necesse est autem me hoc loco utrarum sim partium aperire , tantum catenus quidem utrarumque esse me profiteor , quod utrosque adveram dei ecclesiam pertinere nihil prorsus dubitem , lib. 3. — . and a little after , de verborum sententiâ lis est , non de veritate : this is an excellent device indeed to help off the grossest heretikes , and say that they only differ from us about the meaning of some places of scripture . christ saith he bids all come unto him that are heavy laden , and what saith he , will you of your own head say to any man that is comming to christ , heus tu ! frustra accedis qui hoc & illud non credas ? but if you reply that acontius hath not reckoned some points of religion which are of high concernment , and therefore you may safely tell a man unlesse he beleeve them he cannot be saved ; he hath endeavoured to prevent your reply by this excuse ; si miraris inter ea quae recensuimus cognitu necessaria non numerari quosdam summo quamvis loco habitos religionis apices , evolve diligenter , examine saith he whether those high points could be known under the old testament to the people of israel , &c. this is just the socinian device , i will not trouble you any longer with the unsavory discourse of that rotten author , whose main stratageme was a pretended moderation and feigned charity . let us now passe on to some later authours ; doctor francis white was a man countenanced by the arch-bishop to write against the sabbath , and in his epistle dedicatory to the arch-bishop , well knowing what would please his graces tooth , he saith that we are beholding to the testimony of the bishops , for the weightiest matters in religion , and amongst the rest he saith for the eternall deity of the blessed saviour ; it seemes if the christian world had not given credit to the testimony of bishops , the eternall deity of christ had not been acknowledged by christians ; what if bishops had lost their votes , and credit some ages since , must christ have lost his deity , or at least the honour of it ? is there nothing written in scripture concerning the eternall deity of christ ? this is just indeed as tertullian saith , nisi deus homini placuerit , deus non erit . this book was printed in the year 1635. i need say nothing of that little pamphlet about schisme , printed not long since , because other men have said so much of it , i am credibly informed that when the author of it was asked by a great person in this kingdome , what he thought of the socinians , he answered , if you could secure my life i would tell you what i think ; and truly he hath told us what he thinkes in this little tract , viz. that arianisme was but a rent in the church upon matter of opinion ; p. 9. that those passages in our publique formes which offend the arians , are but private fancies , and therefore he desires there may be such a leiturgy as the arians may not dislike . p. 10. and then the socinians and protestants might joyn in one congregation . but must we not say that christ is very god of very god that he is the great god , the true god , god blessed for ever , for fear we offend the arians , socinians , &c. must we not worship the trinity of persons , in the unity of the godhead ? his grace will peradventure thinke it long till he heare what i have to say to his own learned book . i must confesse there is good learning in that book of his , which was printed 1624. i should doe him wrong if i should deny it ; and though there are some passages which sound ill , yet i have charity enough to put a good construction upon most of them ; but if a prudent reader will but compare that book and the enlargement of it together , which was printed in the yeare 1639. he will find a great deale of alteration in that second edition , or rather second book , for it is indeed another book . i shall give you a taste of some passages in the latter book which are not in the former , that you may see how much his grace had altered his religion in those 15. yeares . in the 76. page he saith , the mysteries of faith doe not contradict reason , for reason by her own light can discover how firmly the principles of religion are true . he doth not say reason by the light of scripture , or by the light of the spirit , but reason by her own light can discover how firmly the principles of religion are true . the socinians lay this principle as their foundation , and keep so close to it that they reject the weightiest articles of the christian faith ; because reason cannot discover them to be true by her own light , that is reason ( ante spiritus sancti illustrationem ) before the illumination of the holy ghost , as they explain themselves in their brevis disquisitio , cap. 3. de spiritu sancto . and upon the same ground they doe reject the received interpretations of scripture , because reason cannot discover how firmly they are true . can the arch-bishop make it appeare by the light of reason , that there shall be a resurrection of these selfe same bodies ; that there are three persons and one god : that the word was made flesh ; that god was made man ; that christ was born of a virgin ; that god justifies many thousands of the ungodly by the obedience and satisfaction of one man ; must we not beleeve these articles till reason by her own light , without the illumination of the holy ghost , doth discover them to be true , and how firmly they are to be beleeved because true ? for that i suppose the arch-bishop means , when he saith , reason can discover how firmly these principles of religion are true : why doe the socinians so often challenge us to be tryed by reason , by common sense , by the judgement of all men , but because they conceive , reason by her own light can discover how firmly the principles of religion are true ? i know the socinians doe talk much of the offices of christ , but they receive nothing from the scripture , concerning christs offices , but what is as they say agreeable to reason . they say likewise that it is necessary to salvation to know the promises of god , but they affirme that it will suffice , if a man be but acquainted with the substance of them , if he doth but hope for a better life after this , which even some heathens did without the knowledge of christ or his gospell . reason by its own light did discover unto them that the good and great god had prepared eternall happinesse for our immortall soules : if this then be enough ( as the socinians say it is ) to receive all things as principles of religion which reason by her own light can discover to be true , ( and how neer the arch-bishop comes to them , let the reader judge ) then the philosophers , especially the platonists , were in an happy condition , & it will be lawfull for a man to cry out aloud , sit anima mea cum philosophis , and he shall never be thought an atheist , nay shall passe for a good christian . there was a sermon preached to sir iohn byron when he was in oxford , which favoured strong of this heathenish divinity , and sir john gave the preacher solemne thanks for his paines . let us then canonize the heathens for saints , and put hermes , phocylides , pythagoras , socrates , plato , plotinus , cicero , zoroaster , iamblichus , epictetus , simplicius , into our rubrike , and let not aristotle , alexander or averroes be left out . the heathens did endeavour to keep gods commands in hope of a better life . what doe the socinians , or indeed arminians require more ? now reason by her own light can discover that i ought to love god , better then the world or my selfe , because he is the chiefest good ; reason tells me that i must doe as i would be done to ; the law of nature is written in the hearts of heathens , the writings of philosophers doe abound with principles of morality and good life , and socinus saith , it is sufficient for a mans salvation to know what god hath commanded and forbidden ; and if he erre in other points , he shall not be shut out of heaven , for such errours as reason cannot by her own light discover to be errors . in like manner the arch-bishop , if he will be true to this principle he hath laid down , must affirm that no man shal be dāned for rejecting any articles of the christian faith , which reason by her own light cannot discover to be true , and so manifestly true that they ought to be firmly beleeved . if this be not socinianisme in the highest , let the impartiall reader judge . that the arch-bishop hath added this passage to his old book ( perchance upon master chillingworths weighty inducements ) will appear if the reader be pleased to compare the 76. page of his new book with the 21 page of his old book . there is another suspicious passage in the 25. section of the arch-bishops relation , he descants upon a place of epiphanius , pag. 185. and 186. epiphanius said , that in peter were found even {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , the very niceties , and exactnesse of the christian faith , saith the arch-bishop , and presently gives this reason . for he professed the godhead of the sonne and of the holy ghost , pag. 186. how will the socinians triumph when they heare the primate of all england discoursing of the godhead of christ and the holy ghost as niceties ? i grant the word {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , is most commonly used in an ill sense , but certainly epiphanius used it here in a good sense , which the arch-bishop could not but see , and therefore used the word exactnesse , but to gratify the socinians he puts in niceties , as if he had said , if you will be exact , you may say that christ is god , but that 's but a nicety , somewhat more then needs , a man may be saved without it ; for the arminians say athanasius was too bold to prefixe that proud preface before his creed , whosoever will be saved , &c. and i make no doubt but his grace was led much by them , he had such high thoughts of the arminian conceits . the arch-bishop doth acknowledge that in the old latine edition at paris , pag. 497. it is thus translated , in hoc omnes quaestiones ●c subtilitates fidei inveniuntur ; therefore hee might have said that all the mysteries of faith were maintained by peter , though by the malice of anti-spirituall men even the godhead of the holy ghost , and such like mysteries were made questions , or at best counted subtilties , and niceties . moreover when the arch-bishop comes to speak of the proceeding of the holy ghost from the sonne , he perswades the church of rome to moderation , and then le ts fall a sweet bit for the socinians to feed upon , pag. 25. and rome , saith he , in this particular should be more moderate , if it be but because this article filiog was added to the creed by her self ; and it is hard to adde and anathematize too . the socinians are apt enough to say that many of the articles of our faith were framed at rome , and it seemes his grace would confirme them in that opinion . this was added also to his new book , as will appeare , if you compare the 25. page of the new book and the 6. of the old . it is the common practice of men addicted to the socinian way to speak very favourably in this point . these i call very suspitious passages , you must not expect demonstrations in this point , for i know the arch-bishop was too wise to speak plain , though some of these passages are plain enough . and i must professe that i doe not beleeve the arch-bishop ever intended to bring in all points of arminianisme , socinianisme , or popery , but to pick out such points as might stand with the great desig●e ; he was to humour all these three factions , that all three might joyn with him to suppresse calvinisme , and then admire him as the astolike patriarch , pope of this other world of britaine , for he would not have us ignorant that pope urbane the second even in a councel accounted his graces worthy predecessour saint anselme as his own compeere , ( or fellow-pope ) and said he was as the apostolike and patriarch of the other world ; so he then termed this iland . pag. 171. of the new book . but i beleeve his oecumenicall grace had such a thirst to be a governour of this little world , and yet such a liking to the universall grace of the arminians , and the right reason of the socinians , that no man that hath one dram of right reason can possibly free his grace from contradicting himselfe , and thwarting his own designe , by crying up some opinions which could not stand with his own principles in his old book , and his plot which now & then peeps out in his new , and yet he hath jumbled all together for no other reason that can be imagined , unlesse it were his master-plot to countenance other mens opinions that they might promote his designe , and for a copy of his countenance adore him as the primate and patriarch of the britaines , whose judgement is finall , and therefore there lies no appeale from him to rome or cracovia , no not to right reason assisted by universal grace ; it seemssuch slaves he had who to satisfy his ambition and their own , would deny both their principles and his , that the master-plot might thrive and prosper . for it is observable , that our english arminians , and socinians are nothing so true to their own principles , as the ringleaders of these factions are beyond the seas . his grace both in his old book and in his new , saith that reason and ordinary grace superadded by the help of tradition , doe sufficiently enlighten the soul to discern that the scriptures are the oracles of god ; here is the socinians sound , or right reason before the illumination of the spirit , but to please the arminians ; ordinary or universall grace comes in also , and the name of tradition to please the popish party ; and what all these are like to doe without the speciall grace of the holy spirit , i leave it to any protestant to judge . there is another rule which his grace holds fast in both his bookes , namely , that the churches declaration can bind us to peace and externall obedience , where there is not expresse letter of scripture and sense agreed on . what , sir , must there be no deduction , no consequences allowed ? must there be expresse letter of scripture ? there 's one socinian rule . secondly , when the letter of the text is expresse , must not the point contained in the text , and expressed in the letter , be accounted fundamentall , because the sense is not agreed upon , but the point called into question by some learned socinian , or bold arminian ? is the sense of that place of scripture which hath been received by so many fathers , councels , reformed churches , martyrs , not true , or the point not necessary , because it is now called into question by some wanton wits that can hardly agree upon any point ? must we then subscribe to that arminian and socinian principle , nullum dogma controversum est fundamentale ? when a point begins to be controverted shall it cease to be fundamentall ? by this meanes we may bring in an atheisticall libertinisme into the church ; we shall have no more articles of our faith , then the arminians , or socinians please to leave us . i beleeve we shall have a very short creed one of these dayes , if this rule be followed : for as fast as they please to question our articles we must part with them , especially if our great patriarch interpose his authority , his declaration must passe for the churches declaration ; if he say such a point is controverted and i command you silence , it is not fundamentall now , because controverted , then we must be silent and let the truth fall to the ground . this was the old muzle which was put upon the ministers mouthes to make them lie still , like dumbe dogs , whiles the theeves stole away what they pleased , this and that commandement , this and the other article of the christian faith : we must it seemes for peace sake , part with our religion , and disobey god that we may obey the church : sure he that hath the head of a scholar , and the heart of a christian , will scarce have any inward peace if he perform externall obedience in such a case . this may suffice for a taste of the arch-bishops divinity : nor the young students could not but take notice of such passages , and therefore whet their wits to maintain those opinions which his grace countenanced . there was a great scholar who asked one of the canterburian faction , what he thought of the primate of irelands treatise concerning christs incarnation , in which he demonstrates that the word was made flesh , and that therefore christ is god and man ; the canterburian answered , that indeed there was as much produced upon that argument as could be said upon it , but under correction ( saith he ) i conceive the primate hath not cleared the point which he undertook to prove . the men of this strain when they were at their height , began to vary their expressions , they called christ their great master , or our lord and master , at the highest , so that you could scarce tell by their prayers whether they did respect christ or their patrone most , for the chaplaines styled their patrone their very good lord and master . dr. taylour in his epistle dedicatory to the arch-bishop , before the sermon on the gun powder treason , seems to affect that expression of calling christ our great master ; the socinians will beare them company in such generall expressions , and some have thought of composing such a liturgy as might give no offence to arminians or socinians ; that would be an inoffensive liturgy indeed , and they may doe well to enlarge their charity , and make their liturgy inoffensive to the turkes and jewes as well as the socinians ; for any liturgy which will please one that is a thorow socinian , will please turkes , and jewes also , if it be but warily composed , and they will keep themselves in such generall expressions as some doe too much affect . but of all that i have met with , none comes neer mr webberly , a batchelour of divinity , and fellow of lincolne colledge , who hath translated a socinian book into english , for the benefit of this nation , and prepared it for the presse . now they think they may own the businesse , they dare appeare in their proper colours , and blaspheme christ in plaine english . but because some parts of socinianisme strike directly at the superstition of rome so highly extolled in our dayes , and at the pompe of the clergy , which must be maintained by the sword ( for what care they though england swimme in bloud , so they swimme in wealth and pleasure ? ) therefore mr. webberly tells us very honestly , that socinianisme was to be corrected and chastised with respect to the nature of our climate ; what need i adde more ? take all in a word . there are some mysterious parts of socinianisme that se●m rationall , these i think in good earnest , the men of this age have too much doted on . secondly , some parts of socinianisme they qualify and chastise a little , because there is a little too much quick-silver in them . thirdly , some parts they doe totally reject , because they thwart the maine designe . fourthly , some parts of socinianisme are instilled into the people , that they might be made a meer prey to their courts in times of peace , and to their army in times of warre . mr. webberly , for instance , may be so farre irrationall as to be of the councell of warre , which no strict socinian would allow ; but then mr. webberly would teach the people that they must not defend their possessions against invading enemies , by force of armes , because god hath not given his people any earthly possessions by covenant under the gospell , as he did under the law . surely they have heard of iulian who boxed the christians on one eare , and bid them turn the other eare that they might be boxed on both sides in obedience to their masters command . chap. v. shewes that the famous atheists ( anabaptists and sectaries ) so much complained of , have been raised , or encouraged by the doctrines and practises of the arminian , socinian , and popish party . there hath been a great complaint of late that men are turned atheists , and surely not without cause , but let us sadly inquire into the reason . the socinians doe deny christ to be god to the glory of god the father , as they use to say , and i beleeve god the father hath taken it so unkindly at their hands , that he hath given them over to that cursed atheisme which reignes in the heart of every man by nature , and is much strengthened by the profane wits of this latter age . i remember a story of reverend amphilochius who had been an importunate suter to theodosius the emperour , that the arians might not vent their blasphemies so freely against the son of god , because he was as god , equall to his father ; but he could not obtaine his request ; at last the good old man pitched upon this course , he comes to the palace of theodosius the great , and salutes the emperour with all due acknowledgements and accustomed reverence , but as for arcadius the son of theodosius , who was created co-emperour with his father , amphilochius passed him by without any respect or reverence at all , & at last very familiarly stroakes the young emperour upon the head , as if it had been some ordinary boy , and cryed , god save thee good child ; at which the emperour was extreamly enraged , and commanded them to turne amphilochius out of doores : but this reverend man replyed , i beseech your majesty to consider that if you are so much incensed against them who doe not honour your son as they honour your self , what wil god the father think of them who deny equall honour to iesus christ his son , who is equall to his father in nature and power ? the emperour who was wavering before , was much confirmed in his faith , by this seasonable admonition , and presently forbad the arians to dispute any more against the godhead of christ . you may read the story at large in sozomen's ecclesiasticall history . now can we imagine that god the father should take it lesse unkindly at the hands of the socinians and all who admire their acute blasphemies , that they deny jesus christ to be god ? and what punishment is fitter for such blasphemers , then that , rom. 1. professing themselves wise , they should become fooles , and denying the godhead of christ , and the holy ghost , they should be given over , not only to deny the power of godlinesse , but to deny that there is any god at all , because they did not like to retaine the knowledge of god ? 1. the scriptures doe clearly shew that god the father is no more god then jesus christ ; but ( say the socinians ) jesus christ is not god . who sees not what conclusion will follow ? ergo , if they said true , there would be no god at all . 2. the socinians doe not worship the same god with the protestants ; for we worship the trinity in unity , that is , all the three persons as one god , they say it is repugnant to common sense , to hold that the three persons are one and the same god , and therefore they may when they please leave it to common sense to determine whether there be any god at all . 3. the socinians proceed in a destructive way ; now destroy all religion , and atheisme will be embraced in stead of religion . mr. chillingworth hath cleared that point sufficiently , that popery leads men to flat atheisme : and it is plaine and evident that if papists must beleeve neither more or lesse then the pope thinkes fit , the pope may lead them all into atheisme when he pleases . and how pleasing atheisme hath been to some popes , i need not stand to declare , the papists themselves have spoke plaine enough . the papists have extolled the pope above all that is called god , and therefore the dullest papist that can but see that the pope is not god , will be ready to question whether there be any god at all . if the pope have more authority then god , then the conclusion will be easie : but according to the romanists the pope hath more authority then god , for the church is above the scripture , the pope above the church , he is the head of it : let papists though our enemies , frame the conclusion , they who maintaine the popes infallibility , and yet cannot but see how he takes upon him to correct gods own institutions , will conclude that it is possible for god to be deceived , and then i am sure he is no god : and whether the pope be god , let the papists judge . what practises there have been by the popish party for the promoting of the socinian heresies , i could shew at large if it were not too manifest to be proved . faustus socinus writ a most pestilent book de ss. scriptura authoritate , and this book he did privatly send about in writing to his friends ; dominicus lopez a jesuite it seemes was a great friend of his , and the book comming to his hand he thought fit to publish it for the common good . i need say nothing of petavius his notes in epiphan. haeres . 69. cardinall perron his reply to king james , lib. 3. his book of the eucharist . lib. 2. cap. 7. mr. fisher , or mr. floyd . how easily the racovian and romane antichrists would be reconciled , at least so far as to joyn against the calvinists , is evident to any understanding man . and mr. webberly in the appendix or sixth book of his translation , shews that the two great articles which offend the romanists and racovians are , 1. the totall exclusion of all kinde of good workes from justifying a man before god : and 2. the totall negation of mans freewill in doing good . they are enemies to the grace of god , in justifying sinners freely by faith alone in christ , and to the powerfull and efctuall grace of god in converting and sanctifying our souls . this is the grand quarrell , the socinians deny christ to be god , that so they may deny that the bloud of christ did fully satisfy for our sins : these errours strike directly at the covenant of grace , which is the foundation of all our comfort , and if once we undermine the foundation , and reject the principles of christianity , it is then an easie matter to be an atheist : for if the protestant religion be deserted , there is nothing in any other religion to keep a man back from being an atheist ; for popery , to speak strictly , is antichristianisme , and i have said enough of socinianisme ; iudaisme , and turcisme , are too neer of kin to socinianisme : let any man that doubts of this truth , read doctour calovius his decas dissertationum , vedelius de deo synagogae , and he may receive satisfaction without reading others . and for the arminian atheisme , i referre you to vedelius his book , de arcanis arminian . anabaptists are justly complained of , but from whence did they suck their poyson ( i mean the anabaptists of the last edition , ( the men so much complained of ) but from the arminians , socinians and papists ? from the arminians they received their doctrine about the fall and free-will of man ; are they not pure armininians in that great point of predestination ? they oppose the reformed churches in their doctrine about originall sin , the socinians have taught them to deny that infants are conceived and born in sin , and this is the true reason why they deny baptisme to infants , though i know they urge many other reasons to colour the businesse : no man need to wonder that baptisme of infants is neglected by all those who deny originall sinne , pelagius of old , about the yeare 420. said that it was a vaine thing to imagine , that the sinnes of infants were washed away by baptisme , because they have no sin at all , and therefore heaven was set open to them . the anabaptists in the conference at franckendale , maintained that infants were born without originall sinne , nay without the least spot of sinne , and therefore there was no need of their being washed in the laver of regeneration . the socinians tell us that originall sinne is a meere fable , a fancy . they that can goe no farther then english , may read a book of free-will , predestination , the first transgression ; subscribed in the epistle or preface after this manner , your brethren the anabaptists falsly so called . but i beleeve the reason why the anabaptists are complained of at this time , is because they are disobedient to magistrates ; for it is commonly said that they have lately taken up armes in rebellion against the king . i must confesse i have wondred often when i have heard of this dayly complaint , because i know that an anabaptist doth not think it lawfull to be a cutler , he thinks no sword ought to be made , because he conceives it unlawfull to use a sword . it is well known that the anabaptists goe to sea without any ordnance in their ships , that they travaile without any sword by their side : but if there be any fighting anabaptist in these days , i suppose the english socinians have taught the english anabaptists to deny those principles in practise , which they maintain in dispute . who are so active in all counsells of warre at oxford , as men that are shrewdly suspected for socinianisme ? if they deny this truth , their letters which are dayly intercepted will testify to their faces that they are not true to their own principles . yet i commend the chaplaines for their designe , they would fain seise upon mens goods without force or violence , and therefore they tell the people that they ought not now under the gospell to fight for the defence of their goods ; and if they could perswade the people to be anabaptists in this point , then these reverend troopers and meek men of warre , might seise upon all the peoples goods , without force of armes , and so be as true to their racovian principles , as the racovians themselves , they might robbe without weapons , a whole parish might be plundered by one sermon as well as by two troopes , if the people were but throughly instructed in ( or as we say , beaten to ) this conscientious slavery . all the spoile of a whole towne would lye no heavier upon the conscience of one of these chaplaines , then a reare egge upon his stomack , for they are not ashamed to affirme that god hath not given his people any earthly goods or possessions under the gospell , and therefore plundering is not robbing , they doe but take that from men which god never gave them mr. webberly in the third chapter of his treatise , tells us that god hath not given his people any earthly possessions now under the new testament , they must not regard earth but look after heaven ; this is they say the court-divinity ; but sure the rationall lords that have such vast possessions should not be much taken with these raptures ; if they be , it were good for the lords to turne chaplaines or step into a cloyster , and let their own chaplaines be lords in their roome . how the court-chaplaines will maintain this doctrine , and not be as anti-monarchicall as the very anabaptists , i professe i know not , they might have done well to have excepted the crown-lands ; they were wont to preach at the court , that the subjects have nothing of their own , but by this doctrine they will leave the king nothing of his owne ; sure they mean to have all to themselves . they must say that our king lives under the new testament , they will grant him to be a christian , and therefore he must not regard earthly possessions , &c. the king may perceive by this , what good friends he hath at court . nor doe they stick to question the authority as well as the possessions or revenues of kings . the anabaptists as disobedient to a parliament as to a king ; any person or court which hath power to fine or imprison , is by them denyed to be a godly person or a christian court . it was one of the seditious lawes enacted by that lawlesse faction at munster , magistratibus ac principibus nullus subjiciatur . the socinians and arminians think themselves as lawlesse . the * arminians say that they can willingly beare with one that conceives it unlawfull for a magistrate to punish any delinquent with capitall punishment , though he doe not embrace this opinion out of tendernesse of conscience , but only because he hath been trained up in it from his youth . you see the arminians give faire quarter to the papists and socinians ; if any man hath been nursed up in this opinion they will beare with him though his conscience be not tender . they excuse socinus in the same chapter , and say that many honest men were of this opinion before socinus was born . the arminians and socinians make a king of clouts , and put a wooden or painted sword into his hand to affright children , for they say that he must not draw bloud , no not in a legall way , for capitall offences . the * arminians foresaw this consequence , and are content to let it passe , they will not alter the confession of their faith to avoid this inconvenience . in the confession of our faith say they we use none but this generall expression , the power of the sword , and forbeare to mention any capitall punishment , because say they we doe not require all that embrace our confession to maintain that magistrates have power to inflict capitall punishments : whereby it appears that they doe plainly equivocate even in the confession of their faith , or rather the declaration of their opinion . non fidei nostrae confessionem , sed sententiae declarationem exhibemus , they use generall and slippery termes and teach all their sectaries ( the socinians and anabaptists need no teaching ) how to slip their necks out of so wide and loose a collar . reverend iunius shewes that the arminians teach their sectaries to blot the name of any prince or magistrate out of the number of christians and make him an infidell , if he punish the greatest offenders with death in a legall way . doe any reformed divines maintain this seditious tenent which will certainly ruine any state where it is generally received ? did melanchthon , bucer , calvin , beza , bullinger , ever preach such doctrine ? nay did they not constantly oppose the anabaptists in this very point ? nay was not the faction of anabaptists raised by the devil and fomented by rome , on purpose to hinder the reformation begun by those worthy reformers ? read that great counsellour conradus heresbachius his epistle to erasmus , and there you will see the devill raised them up in opposition to the reformers . i know one of late preached valiantly against blessed luther , and said that luthers book de libertate christiana gave the first occasion to the giddy anabaptists to be so extra vagant ; lambertus hortensius indeed hath a touch upon it , but he addes withall , that though thomas muntzer was well read in that book of luther , yet being an illiterate man he did not well understand , or else did wrest that book to his purpose ; now if the book was not well understood , and worse interpreted , sure the interpreter was in fault , for if he had no learning he might have had some ingenuity , or at least humility , and left the book to more learned readers , or candid expositours . thomas muntzerus saxo erat homo ut accepi illiteratus , sed ut apparebat , in hoc libello egregie exercita●us , & scripti interpres parum candidus , we must distinguish betweene the first tumults of anabaptisticall men , and deliberate anabaptisme . the first tumults were raised above an hundred yeares since , by illiterate dreamers , such as nicholas storke , thomas muncer , phifer ringus and the rest ; yet muncer at that time laid a faire foundation for servetus , socinus and the rest to build upon ; for he denyed the satisfaction of christ ; and what doctrine is fundamentall if the satisfaction of christ be not ? the socinians make it their grand designe to perswade men that jesus christ hath not truly and properly satisfied for our sinnes . the heresy of the anabaptists was not backed with any strength of argument , nor methodically digested till servetus and socinus set to work , i must then look upon servetus and * socinus as the maine pillars of deliberate and refined anabaptisme . luther must be excused , for he was not guilty at all , it was an occasion snatched and not given , snatched by muncer , not given by luther , when the anabaptists urged luthers authority ; for luther did utterly disavow any such sense , as they put upon his book , nay he abhorred their designe and opposed their faction even at their very first rise . when muncer was stepped aside to melhusium , luther wrote against him to the senate and desired them to beware of the woolf in a sheeps . skin ; this was very early , in the yeare 1524. and upon the lords day as bullinger assures me . in the yeare 1525. and the sixth of novemb. the anabaptists were so confident of their own strength , that they challenged any reformed minister to dispute with them ; but when they were ready to dispute , one of the anabaptists cryed out , sion sion , rejoyce o hierusalem , they were presently in such a tumult that they were forced to remove to another place ; yet the senate , zuinglius and other learned men were so patient as to argue with them three dayes together , and when the anabaptists saw themselves confuted by the evident demonstrations which zuinglius produced out of the word of god , one of them had a designe beyond all the rest , he said zuinglius was a learned man and could prove any thing , but saith he , o zuinglius i adjure thee by the living god to speak thy conscience , and tell the truth . i will quoth zuinglius , thou art a seditious clowne , since milder answers will not serve the turn , i speak plain and home . upon the 15. day of november , 1525. the senate made a decree against the anabaptists , and declared that zuinglius had convinced them , clearely confuted the anabaptists , and therefore they would proceed severely against all anabaptists . now about this time servetus the great grand-father of faustus socinus , as hath been shewen , began to perk up , for servetus was put to death in the yeare 1553. because he had been a blasphemer for thirty yeares together ; so it seemes he began to vent his blasphemies as soone as thomas muncer himselfe , about the yeare 1523. theodorus strackius ( being to set forth the history of the anabaptists ) slides on a sudden into a long story of servetus that monster of men , and enemy of god , nay ( as he saith ) of the whole true godhead in the sacred trinity ; this servetus that he might shew his good inclination towards the fanaticall sects of these times ( saith strackius ) hath endeavoured to make the baptisme of infants not neglected only , but abominated ; i dare not mention his other blasphemies , at which i think the very devills tremble . there are so many severall sects , both of socinians and anabaptists , who have runne away with their mouths full of anabaptisticall and socinian blasphemies , that we must let them all passe for sectaries of servetus and socinus , though some of them are farre more dangerous then others . the anabaptists maintaine some opinions which are as welcome to the papists and iesuited party in england , as other parts are to the socinians ; the anabaptists did dreame at first of an unwritten word , and a very subtile one too , such as the pope and jesuites dreame of , and such visions and revelations as the priests boast of . the designe of the anabaptists pleased the papists well , because they endeavoured to root out protestant princes and ministers , the papists knew full well that no church or state could stand without magistrates and ministers . there is one iohannes angelius who commends servetus and saith he spake nothing but what david george and such like saints have delivered ; this jesuited politician you see hath praises to spare for servetus , one of the most abominable horrible anabaptists of all others , as reverend bullinger observes lib. 2. contra anabaptistas . cap. 12. because there are 12. or 13. sects of anabaptists in his account , and servetus was one of the worst sort ; but he saith david george went farre beyond even servetus himselfe . the truth is , these two were guilty of sublimed anabaptisme , deadly socinianisme , though david george differed from soci●us in a point or two . now what good friends the iesuites are to the socinians hath been already shewen , what patrons the arminians are of anabaptisme the professours of leyden declare . this being premitted , let us sadly enquire whether our late writers doe encline to the anabaptists and socinians in the great point about the authority of princes and magistrates ; for i know it is commonly said that though the first reformers did oppose the anabaptists in this point , yet the men that seeme to be most zealous for a reformation in these unhappy dayes , are arrant anabaptists in this point . we live in an angry time , and men will speake passionately when they are provoked , and vexed , i will not therefore take upon me to justify the angry expressions of the most judicious writer , much lesse can i ever mention those bastard-pamphlets without indignation , which spring from a licentious and prostituted presse . let us single out some that have lately studied this weighty controversy , and it may be it will appear that they who are said to write against the king have setled & established his lawfull authority upon surer grounds and better principles then those very men who pretend to write for the king . every man is now accounted an anabaptist if he doe not maintain monarchy to be iure divino ; heare then what dr. ferne saith . we confesse that neither monarchy , nor aristocracy , or any other forme is iure divino . nay he saith that that power or sufficiency of authority to govern which is the ordinance of god , is to be found not only in monarchy , but in aristocracy , sect. 3. moreover if we consider the qualification of this governing power , and the manner ofexecuting it even according to monarchicall government . dr. ferne grants that it is the invention of man , and hath not so much as gods permissive approbation till that qualification or forme is orderly agreed upon by men ; in the selfe same sec. be pleased now to hear mr. burroughes : however princes may be exasperated against puritanicall preachers ( sai m. burroughes ) yet they are as much beholding to them as to any people in their kingdomes for bringing people out of conscience to obey authority ; you see here the people are pressed to obey the lawfull authority of the king out of conscience by such as are counted puritanicall preachers . in the answer to the observations printed at oxford by his majesties command , i find that monarchy is not much younger then man himselfe — that regall power sprang first from paternall , a regall power belonged to the pater-familias , pag. 3. as if he meant onely to conclude the subjection of the kings children and family : the patriarchs were patres patriae without a metaphor , they begat their own subjects . but how came divers families to be subjected to one king or common father ? why , reason ( saith he ) did direct the people to choose one common father . p. 6. monarchy then is grounded upon the peoples reason , and yet quite thorowout his book he talkes as if the people had no reason , for he tells them that there may be reasonable motives why a people should consent to slavery , as the turkes and french peasants have done : he teaches them how to perish with a great deale of discretion , or else how to be safe by the benefit of slavery . p. 10 , 11. the observatour saith that regall dignity was erected to preserve the commonalty ; it was so , saith the answerer , p. 8. and when routs became societies they placed an head over them to whom they paid the tribute of reverence for the benefit of protection : what if the people be not , protected must they pay no tribute ? god send his majesty better protectours then this champion . dr. fern discourses just as wisely when he propounds davids rewarding of false ziba as a pattern to our king , he would perswade the king to trust papists as false as ziba to seise upon the estates of his good subjects ; and bestow their estates upon arrant ziba's , men that abuse his majesty and seek their own ends , & when the innocency of the subject and treachery of these ziba's , papists or pickthankes is discovered , yet the king must not reverse his sentence pronounced in favour of the papists though to the ruine of good subjects and their posterity , all this divinity is closely involved by this conscientious doctour , in the 7. section . how farre the divines of this time differ from the doctrine of papists is clearly shewen by mr. burroughes , mr. bridge , and therefore it is strange the papists should be counted the better subjects . mr. burroughes doth acknowledge the kings supremacy , the king ( saith he ) is supreme but not absolute , because his authority is limited both by the law of god and of the land . for we may and ought ( saith doctour ferne ) to deny obedience to such commands of the prince as are unlawfull by the law of god , yea by the established lawes of the land ; for in these we have his will and consent given upon goood advice , and to obey him against the lawes , were to obey him against himselfe , his suddain will against his deliberate will , sect. 1. for instance , it is the kings deliberate wil that this parliament shall not be dissolved , or any forces levyed without consent of both houses of parliament , as appeares by two severall acts made this parliament . if then any take up armes either without consent of parliament , or on purpose to dissolve this present parliament , they doe certainly take up armes against the king himselfe , ( as dr. ferne says ) because against the deliberate will of the king . if any commissions then should be issued out in the kings name to any persons to encourage them to take up armes without the consent of the parliament , or against the parliament , such commissions must be interpreted to proceed from the kings suddaine will , which is not to be obeyed , saith dr. ferne , against the kings deliberate will . they are not the kings friends who advise him to send forth any illegallcommands . there is another answer to dr. ferne intitled a fuller answer , in which there is much law and logick ( viz that in a mixt monarchy there is a co-ordinate supremacy , and coordinata invicem supplent ) and a great many things which the common people understand not . this respondent saith ( as dr. fern doth ) that monarchy is not gods ordinance , but then he tells the people their duty in plaine english , namely , that it is gods ordinance that men should submit without resistance , to that kind of government which they have by consent established , and therefore they must submit to this coordinate supremacy , though it be the ordinance of man for the lords sake , as saint peter saith . pag. 17. here is submission out of conscience for the lords sake , to all legall supremacy ; what can be desired more , unlesse they would make the king an absolute monarch ? ( and so give him an absolute supremacy ) which the king himselfe doth utterly disclaime in his answer to the 19. propositions . the zealous divines of this very time doe abhorre the seditious practises and opinions of all anabaptists , who because the church had not christian kings at first , cry out with open mouth a that the church cannot be safe if there be any king or magistrate in the church ; nay they adde that if a king turn christian he must cease to be a king , because christianity it selfe is repugnant to magistracy , and no b magistrate ought to look after any thing that concernes religion . they maintain that christians ought not to have any judiciall tryalls before magistrates , that no christians ought to punish offendors with death or imprisonment , but with excommunication only . they would not have heretikes punished by the magistrate , c but every man should be left to his liberty to beleeve what he thinks fit , just as the arminians and socinians dreame . i would kings and princes did seriously consider that the d arminians have taught heretikes to rebell against any prince or magistrate who goes about to inflict punishment upon them in a legall way ; for , say they , if the magistrate goes about to punish an heretike because he thinks the heretike in an errour , the heretikes may all joyne together and rise up in armes against the magistrate because they conceive the magistrate to be in an errour ; for the heretikes have as much power to kill the magistrate , as the magistrate hath to execute such seditious heretikes , par omnium in omnes jus est , is not that pure anabaptisme in the highest ? nay they adde farther , that though the heretikes be seditious , reipub. turbones , if they be apostates , if they turne iewes and blaspheme christ , yet they would not have them punished by the magistrates : these arminian , socinian , anabaptisticall errours are justly abhorred by the divines of this very time . there is at this very day a great talke of tubbe-preachers ; if there be any such , the arminians and socinians must defend them as long as they keep in private , but if they preach false doctrine publikely , then indeed the arminians would have them grievously punished , the magistrate may if it be needfull ( say they ) make a whippe of cords and drive them out of the temple , as our saviour did the hucksters : thus they abuse our saviour and the magistrate both in a breath , they will not allow the magistrate to doe any more . they doe not think it necessary that ministers should expect a mission in the first constituting of a church , for then there can be no order , for order is not yet begun , nor must ministers expect a mission when a church is to be reformed , for then they say all order is quite fallen to the ground , and therefore the word may be lawfully preached by them that are not sent , so the arminians ( exam. cens. cap. 21. pag. 228. ) state the point . you see if there be any tubbe-preachers , now our church is but reforming , they doe punctually observe the arminians grave instructions . the arminians allow a liberty of prophecying , if any man shall perswade himselfe that he hath received some spirituall interpretations of the word by the inspiration , suggestion , assistance of the holy ghost , and any magistrate shall imprison this man , because the interpretation is contrary to the spirit of the reformed divines , the magistrate doth imprison the spirit and quench the spirit , and the church of rome may as well emprison any protestant because he brings an interpretation contrary to the spirit of their church , which is as the papists conceive infallibly guided by the spirit . here'snothing but qui sibi persuadet , a strong perswasion required to beare out this enthysiast , though he seemes to the reformed divines to preach nothing but his own brain-sick fancies , nay phrensies , sed hoc ipsum est spiritum extinguere , authoritatem sibi arrogare , spiritum qui cum spiritu nostro ( by our spirit they meane the spirit which enlightens the reformed divines ) non convenit , pro insanâ & corrupta mente , libidine contendendi , adeoque mali spiritus suggestione , censendi , eoque nomine vi armata eum opprimendi — colloca teipsum coram tribunali pontificio , reformationem dogmatum , & articulorum variorum urgentem & orantem ne spiritum tuum quem divinum esse credis extinguat ; quid respondebis si tibi reponat verba tua , an spiritus est quod cuique insana & corrupta mens , contendendi libido , adeoque malus spiritus suggerit ? exam. cens. cap. 24. pag. 276. unlesse we have that infallible spirit which the apostles had to discern spirits , the arminians tell us we must allow men liberty to prophesy contrary to the spirit of the reformed doctours , or else our censure of these enthysiasts will bee doubtfull , uncertain . finally ( for i am weary of this subject ) they will admit anabaptists to be true and lawfull pastours of christ . cap. 23. exam. cens. de baptismo . pag. 248. in fine . sure this is liberty enough , the socinians need not desire more , the arminians and socinians then must patronize these tubbe-preachers . in the next place there is a complaint of brownists , to which complaint i shall answer briefly , and yet fully . first , they are to be blamed who gave the first occasion of this rent : i know between 40. and 50. yeares agoe , there were some followers of browne , but in the latter end of king james his reigne , the number of brownists properly so called was much decreased , and it was a rare thing to meet with a brownist ; but when bishop land began to sit at stern , ( and so he did a while even in arch-bishop abbot his time ) then the number of brownists began to encrease ; the reason was , because ceremonies began to be urged upon the conscience with so much earnestnesse as if they had been necessary to salvation : and about 6. or 7. yeares since when the arch-bishop was in his ruffe , and his priests began to surrogate it , preaching for doctrines the commandements of men , and consequently worshipping god in vaine , math. 15. 9. men of tender consciences ( and those no weake ones neither ) began to feare , that they should transgresse the commandements of god , by observing traditions , math. 15. 3. and conceived it vain , to joyne with them in worship , who worshipped god in vain . many were prevailed with by this reason , but there were some of a moderate temper , who if they might have the liberty of their conscience , and not be forced to the use of any ceremonies , would , and did , communicate even in parish-churches : but the archbishop of canterbury began to lay on greater burdens ; crucifixes must be set up at the east-end , that was too plain ; next , the communion-table , to colour the design , or , at least , to add varnish to it , must be advanced into an altar , & men must by a tacit consent , ( as we were informed at the visitation of merton college ) expressesome outward reverence , by bowing towards the east , the altar , the crucifixe , choose which you please , all if you will ; but in no case must we be commanded to bow , & yet we must be censured as disobedient , if we refuse to bow . this was interpreted by rationall men an asking of our consent to bring in popery : it was now high time to make protestations that we would neither bow to east , nor hoast , nor altar , for if we held our peace we knew not what might come by tacite consent . we were sure that our actions would speak aloud , and how tacite soever our consent was , it would be known to god & our conscience . i will not take this faire hint to tunne into a long story of what censures were passed upon my self or others , for our protestation against this superstitious innovation , but sure i am that by degrees there were so many innovations both in point of doctrine , and externall worship , that the papists themselves thought those of greatest worth , learning and authority in england , knew not well what religion to be of , or where to fasten . the jesuite who wrote the directions to n. n. which mr. chillingworth endeavours to answer , began to triumph in our complyances with rome . heark what he saith . protestantisme waxeth weary of it selfe , the professours of it , they especially of greatest worth , learning and authority , love temper and moderation , and are at this time more unresolved where to fasten , then at the infancy of their church . their churches begin to look with a new face , their walls to speak a new language , their doctrines to be altered in many things , &c. mr. chillingworth is so vaine as to call this painting of churches the beauty of holinesse , sect. 22. but to proceed , if the guides of the church would not endure so much as a nominall inconformity with rome , if they and their adherents looked so like , and preached so like them , that the papists themselves took them for romane catholiques ; no marvaile if the poore people cryed out that england was turned babylon , and began to separate ; for that is very observable which judicious hooker delivers in his ecclesiasticall politie . the people ( saith he ) are not accustomed to trouble their wits with nice and subtile differences in the exercises of religion — and ( saith he ) in actions of this kinde , ( hee speakes of adoration of the crosse , it may well be applyed to adoration towards the east , hoast , altar , crucifixe ) we are more to respect what the greatest part of men is commonly prone to conceive , then what some few mens wits may devise in construction of their owne particular meanings . they then are to be blamed who invented a few cogging distinctions to juggle with god and their conscience , and thought to salve up all with some curious subtilties which the people understood not . if they that should be lights of the church gave no better light then an ignis fatuns , which doth seduce them into bogges and ditches , if they puzzeld the people and gave them good cause to doubt whether it was safe to communicate or no , must the people communicate when they are perplexed with such doubts that they cannot communicate in faith ? he that doubts is damned if he eat , rom. 14. 23. the poore people could not be resolved , and durst not be damned ; sure the archbishop was rather schismaticall , in imposing such burthens upon tender communicants , then the people in separating from externall communion . let mr. chillingworth be judge , sure he is no brownist ; neither is it alwayes of necessity schismaticall to separate from the externall communion of a church , though wanting nothing necessary . for if this church supposed to want nothing necessary , require me to professe against my conscience , that i beleeve some error , though never so small and innocent , which i doe not beleeve , and will not allow me her communion , but upon this condition ; in this case the church for requiring this condition is schismaticall , and not i for s●parating from the church . secondly , all separatists are not brownists ; it is evident from this very place of mr. chillingworth ; for a man may have just cause to separate from the externall a communion of a church , though he think that there are all things necessary to salvation in that church . but no brownist doth conceive that there are all things necessary to salvation in any of our parish churches . they deny that there is any true church or ministers of god to bee found in any parish of england ; or that all the parishes taken collectively can make one church of god ; they say our congregations and ministers are limbs of b antichrist , babylonians , idolaters ; this doctrine i have ever preached against , ( i preached against it even at westminster , where they say there are so many brownists ) and resolve to preach against it still . 3. there are some reverend and learned ministers in this kingdome , who are commonly called the independent ministers , and these are all put downe for brownists , if not anabaptists , in the oxford catalogue , though the arminians have no reason to censure any that goe from a congregation that is lesse pure , to one that is more pure . i will therefore briefely shew that these ministers are neither anabaptists nor brownists . they will not say the magistrate is an head of the church , but they say that every christian magistrate is an head in the church , which no anabaptist will say . they say that the prelates doe not hold from the head , as all officers of the church should doe , ephes. 4. 15 , 16. and yet they acknowledge that it is possible for a prelate , and the diocese under him to hold the head , as the phrase is , colos. 2. 19. and this no anabaptist or brownist will acknowledge . they will communicate even in a parish-assembly , where the minister and people generally desire and labour by all lawfull meanes to procure a reformation . they protest against brownisme , as a * bitter error , and full of cruelty ; what can be desired more , to cleare them from being brownists or anabaptists ? i heard the same man preach since with much fervency and earnestnesse of spirit against the brownists for this their error , and among other inconveniencies which arise therefrom , hee mentioned this , that upon the same ground and reason for which they chiefely make the churches in england no true churches , nor the ministers thereof , true ministers , they must make all those in scotland , france , and other reformed churches , ( whom yet they seeme to acknowledge ) to be no true churches ; and so no true churches to have beene in europe since the reformation but themselves , which were a horrid opinion to enter into a mans heart . 4. brownists doe not , that ever i could learne , differ from protestants , concerning civill government , and therfore i doe not know why men should cry out , that brownists are greater enemies to the state then papists themselves : we have not yet forgot the powder-treason , and we doe still groane under the irish rebellion . 5. if the brownists be as bad as the donatists of old , if they conceive that there is no true church but in parte brownistarum , as they conceived there was none but in parte donati : if they should deny the catholique church ( which they do not ) and refuse to communicate with any of the reformed churches , or with any independent congregation , because they will not communicate with any who are ready to embrace communion with any parish church , let their errour , schisme , pride , uncharitablenesse , cruelty , and bitternesse be aggravated to the highest , yet the papists have no reason to complaine of them ; for papists deny the catholike church as directly as the brownists can be thought to doe , they confine it to their owne party ; the socinians and arminians may hold their peace for shame , for they both tell us , that it is possible that christ may have no church at all , neither in this part nor that , hee may bee an head without a body , an husband without a spouse , a king without subjects , as hath beene shewen above , pag. 49. the socinians say that there is not as yet any triumphant church above , nor is it necessary there should bee any militant church here below . it was no errour in the donatists that they held it possible that the church might bee contracted from a larger extent to a lesser , ( as mr. chillingworth observes ) but their error was that they held it done de facto , when they had no just ground or reason to doe so ; chap. 3. p. 162. but the author of the tract concerning schisme doth quite outleape mr. chillingworth . it is ( saith he ) a thing indifferent , the church may be in any number more or lesse , it may be in any place , countrey or nation , it may be in all , and for ought i know it may be in none , pag. 7. sure the brownist is more moderate , he saith there must be a church . 6. but the great quarrell with the brownist is , that hee would have the common-prayer booke taken away ; to which i answer in a word , that they are not all brownists who desire to have that law abrogated , by which the common-prayer booke is established ; mr. chillingworth desires that there might be this triall made betweene us and the papists , that there might be some forme of worshipping god propounded which is wholly taken out of the scripture ; and herein saith he to the papists , if we refuse to joyne with you , then , and not till then , may you justly say we have utterly and absolutely abandoned your communion . answer to the preface . sect. 23. may not some that are not brownists say the same to us , we keepe our distance from you , meerely because your forme of worshipping god is not taken wholly out of scripture , though for the present then wee joyne not with you , yet doe not say ( till that be done ) that wee doe utterly and absolutely abandon your communion . the author of the tract of schisme would have such a forme of service , as donatists , arians , papists , all that call themselves christians , might joyne in ; p 9 , 10. you see he dislikes the common-prayer booke , and sure dislikes the best part of it , the creeds , he is farre worse then a brownist . be pleased to observe that liturgies were first composed to expell socinianisme , and now this author would have a liturgie composed to let in arianisme , or at least to humour the arians , and sooth them up in their heresie , as if the articles of our creed were but private fancies , and it concerned us more to please hereticks , then preserve our creed . but there is a learned man of a more moderate opinion , and sounder judgement then either of the former , though they bee both very learned men , it is dr. featley , be pleased to heare him speake . there is nothing ( saith he ) in the protestant liturgie or service which the romanists do , or by their owne rules can except at ; the confession , forme of absolution , prayers , hymnes , collects , &c. are either such as the papists themselves use , or at least such as they dislike not ; in his annotations on vertumnus romanus , p. 16 , 17. now this is the very reason the papists bragge so much , and why some that are not brownists take offence at our liturgy . and this learned doctor tels us , that all who love the truth in sincerity , should with bended knees humbly desire that his majesty , and the high court of parliament , would make some more certaine distinctive signe betweene papists and protestants , then monthly comming to church , and taking the oathes of allegiance and supremacy . now how this present liturgy which the papists like so well , can make any such distinction , let the prudent judge . i intend not to run out into the large question , about the necessity or antiquity of liturgies ; but let men that are so violent in this point consider ; 1. how corrupt those liturgies are which are voted for ancient . 2. how much bishop hall is forced to grant , when this question was agitated betweene him and the smectymn●ans . 3. to passe by what is said about the lawfulnesse of a set-forme , let them consider what arguments are produced against the imposition of a set-forme . 4. if it were granted that a set-forme may be imposed , yet those many cart-loads of arguments which are produced against this set-forme are considerable . 5. it is confessed , that a minister should be able to pray as well as preach , and should give and even devote himselfe to prayer , he should meditate and study how to pray . 6. it is granted on all sides that wee ought to pray according to the occasion , and how we should foresee all the wants and straits of a church , and compose a set-forme for them before-hand , it concernes them to declare . when k. iames was to advise prince henry how to pray , hee did not thinke it sufficient to leave him to the church-liturgy , or to any prayers composed by man ; the onely rule of prayer , saith he , is the lords prayer : he advised him to study the psalmes of david , because they being composed by a king , hee might collect prayers out of them most sutable to his wants , and so he should be enabled to pray according to the occasion ; he disswaded him from following the common ignorant sort , that prayes nothing but out of bookes , for that would breed an uncouth coldnesse in him towards god : hee bids him take heed that hee be not over-homely in his expressions , for that would breed a contempt of god : nay he counsels him farther , to pray as his heart moves him , pro re natâ , reade his {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , pag 151. 152. let these things be well weighed and considered , and then our fierce men will not terme every man a brownist , who desires to have that law abrogated by which this common prayer booke is established and enjoyned . i need not adde what the arminians and socinians think of liturgies , onely observe , that though the arminians beyond sea were prevailed with to write something for the archbishops , bishops , archdeacons , &c. in england yet they write but faintly , exam. censurae . cap. 21. and they could not be prevailed with to write a word in defence of our liturgy , they will not admit , no not of the most received creeds ; there is ( they say ) too much majesty in them , they call the preface to athanasius his creed , whosoever will be saved must hold , &c. a proud preface , for this is ( say they ) to give divine authority to humane formes , and into the assembly of such bold men let not our soule ever enter : you see what they think of humane formes . exam. censurae praef. pag. 6. 7. and lastly , the brownists had beene in the right if the archbishop of canterbury could have compassed his designe , for his project was to root out all that would not comply , which if he had effected , he had made good the brownists opinion for them , for then there would have beene no true church of god in england indeed ; not a true governing church , for his government would have beene tyranicall , not a true practising church , the practises of his grace and his adherents are sufficiently knowne : nor a true teaching church , as shall evidently be demonstrated in the next chapter . chap. vi . the religion so violently contended for by the archbishop of canterbury and his adherents , is not the true pure protestant religion . i intend not to transcribe overmuch out of bishop mountague , shelford , pocklington , dr. potter , mr. chillingworth , dr. dowe , dr. heylin , &c. their books are commonly sold , and i have given a taste already in the third and fourth chapters of some of these authors ; ex ungue leonem , as they say ; there are a great many passages collected and published already by severall men , so that i am forestalled , and by some happily prevented ; there is a booke entituled ladensium {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} closely penned , and never answered , in which their heresies are filled up by dozens , there will come forth a booke very shortly , in which the designe of reconciling , or rather uniting rome and canterbury , ( for there was no great quarrell betweene them ) will be more fully discovered ; for these reasons i may well shorten my journey . let any man that desires satisfaction , but peruse those bookes which were printed in england betweene 1630. and 1639. and compare them with the harmony of confessions of the reformed churches , and then hee may easily judge . mr. chillingworth proves undeniably that the church of rome is not infallible , but to what end and purpose ? why , that rome and canterbury may shake hands , the pope may abate something in point of supremacy , his primacy being grounded upon his infallibility ; but if the pope , cardinals , &c. the archbishop of canterbury and his adherents were united , the people would be unwilling to part with their masse : why for that if they will but yeild thus farre , as to turne their masse into english , the good men are agreed ; for mr. chillingworth tels the papists , that no godly lay man ( that is , an ignorant papist that is well conceited of the masse ) who is verily perswaded that there is neither impiety nor superstition in the use of their latine service shall be damned as he hopes for being present at it ; excellent divinity ! a strong perswasion will turne superstition and impiety into godlinesse . yet he saith there is some danger as long as the service is in latine , because the want of that devotion which the frequent hearing the offices understood might happily beget in them , the want of that instruction and edification which it might afford them , may very probably hinder the salvation of many , which otherwise might have beene saved ; that is , might have beene saved if the service had beene in english ; this is plaine dealing , the men are likely to agree , the masse in english may beget such devotion , afford such instruction and edification , as is sufficient for salvation . can the papists desire fairer quarter , or a foller acknowledgement ? is not this doctrine sufficient to effect an accommodation betweene rome and canterbury . i dare say all the papists in england will fight for such a protestant religion . mr. chillingworth in his epistle dedicatory gives his majesty to understand , that the papists allow protestants as much charity as protestants allow them ; and therefore such protestants and true papists will easily be reconciled , or indeed are already reconciled . i cannot stand to reckon up mr. chillingworths principles , consider these that follow . 1. god is not offended with us for not doing what hee knowes we cannot doe . whiles we are unregenerate god knowes we cannot repent and beleeve ; is not god offended with us even then , for our impenitence and unbeleefe ? besides , he conceives that unaffected ignorance joyned with implicite faith and generall repentance is not damnable . 2. mr. chillingworth is verily perswaded that god will not impute errours to them as sinnes , who use such a measure of industry in finding truth , as humane prudence and ordinary discretion ( their abilities , and opportunities , their distractions and hinderances , and all other things considered ) shall advise them unto , in a matter of such consequence . sure god will judge men with more then ordinary discretion , and therefore though we may justifie our selves when our opinions and practises are scanned by humane prudence , yet god may justly condemne us for not attending upon him without distraction ; such loose principles as these will nurse men up in security and ignorance , or else betray them to indifferency in religions , to that * arminian libertinisme , which hath been so much admired of late dayes , and cryed up as the only way to maintain peace . for if a man poysoned with this principle be seduced by a papist , arminian , socinian , he need use but ordinary discretion , and therefore take but ordinary care to resist the seducer : alas his abilities are not great , his distractions not few , and his hinderances many ; besides if he have time to consider the arguments propounded , yet hee wants opportunity , and therefore all things considered he had as good yeeld as stand out , for it is in the eye of humane prudence , a matter of no great consequence : for mr. chillingworth saith a papist may be saved , especially if he have the masse in english , and socinians are a company of christians , which though they are erroneous in explicating mysteries and take too great a liberty in speculative matters , yet they explicate and maintaine the lawes of christ with lesse indulgence to the flesh then the papists . 3. mr. chillingworth thinkes it sufficient to beleeve all those bookes of scripture ( to be gods word ) of whose authority there was never any doubt made in the church : hee cannot in reason beleeve the * other bookes so undoubtedly as those books which were never questioned , and he hath the example of saints in heaven to justify or excuse his doubting , nay his denyall . sect. 38. there is no necessity of conforming our selves to the judgement of any church concerning the rest that were never questioned , for that also he urges the authority of some saints in heaven ; ancient fathers , whole churches by their difference about this point , shewed that they knew no necessity of conforming themselves herein to the judgement of any church . sect. 34. and yet of this controversy whether such or such bookes be canonicall , the church is to judge . sect. 35. and the churches testimony is , though no demonstrative enforcement , yet an highly probable inducement , and so a sufficient ground of faith . what kind of faith this is like to prove , i know not , which is grounded upon a probable testimony , to which no man need to subseribe or conform . 4. it is enough to beleeve by a kind of implicite faith , that the scripture is true in gods own sense and meaning , though you know not what god meant , if you use such industry as ordinary discretion shall advise for the knowing of gods meaning , of which i have said enough already ; this may suffice for a taste . dr. potter is very charitable to the papists , because they receive the apostles creed , but whether they receive it in the apostles sense , is the question . whether mr. rouse or dr. potter hath answered that subtile booke most like a protestant , let the learned judge . i have said enough of dr. potter already , i referre the reader to ladens . {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} . i am even ashamed to repeat what dr. pocklington hath printed in his sermon , sunday no sabbath , see the first edition p. 48. 50. we must have an altar with a crosse upon it , if we will beleeve dr. pocklington , altare christianum . cap. 21. pag. 143. we may comply with the jewes in phrase , and other respects . cap. 22. pag. 147. i hope he doth not mean in caspar barlaeus his sense , or as the socinians mean ; he hath a vain conceit that the christian church of the iewes had altars . i hope they did not bow all , to , or towards the altar when they met . act. 15. we must if we will beleeve this dr. agree with the iewes in externall rites & ceremonies , p. 147. give me leave to throw away this book ; and dr. kellet his tricenium . when the arch bishop of canterbury was to assigne what errours in doctrine might give just cause of separation , he would not adventure to set them down in particular , lest in these times of discord , he might be thought to open a doore for schisme ; he knew full well that some who were countenanced by him had brought in errours enough , which gáve just cause of separation . knot the jesuite spoke plaine english to mr. chillingworth , when he told him that the doctrine of the church of england began to be altered in many things , for which our progenitours forsooke the romane church . for example , it is said that the pope is not antichrist , prayer for the dead is allowed , limbus patrum , pictures ; it is maintained that the church hath authority in determining controversies of faith , and to interpret scripture , about free-will , predestination , universall grace ; that all our workes are not sinnes , merit of good workes inherent justice , faith alone doth not justify , traditions , commandements possible to be kept . your thirty nine articles are patient , nay ambitious of some sense in which they may seeme catholique . calvinisme is accounted heresy , and little lesse then treason . men in talke use willingly the once fearfull names of priests and altars . what saith mr. chillingworth to this bold charge ? why , some things he excuses , and grants the rest . as for the popes not being antichrist , the lawfulnesse of some kinde of prayers for the dead , the estate of the fathers soules before christs ascension , free-will , predestination , universall grace , the possibility of keeping gods commandements , and the use of pictures in the church ; these are not things fit to be stood upon , we must not break charity for such matters , these points have been anciently disputed amongst protestants , if you will beleeve an arch-priest brearley ; and so he leaves that point ; here is a faire compasse , a long rope for a papist , arminian , &c. to dance in . but mr. chillingworth saith the protestants have constantly maintained , and doe still maintain , that good workes are not properly meritorious , and that faith alone justifies ; but either this is false , or else men that are counted protestants have changed their religion . franciscus de sancta clara wil inform him of the extravagancies of some in these points , who passed for such protestants as england hath been guilty of entertaining of late yeares . i have heard it publikely maintained in oxford by mr. wethereld of queenes colledge , that bona opera sunt causae physicae vitae aeternae , he had said before that they were morall causes , by that he meant meritorious , but that expression would not content him . it is well known what dr. duncan maintained at cambridge ; what shelford printed there , what dr. dow and dr. heylin have since maintained , and to their power justifyed ; you may read their words at large in ladensium {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} the fifth chapter . the arch-bishop of canterbury hath given us the reason why the jesuites refused to come to our churches , ( it seems he had invited them ) since they themselves acknowledge that there is no positive errour in our liturgy , and it is briefly this . because though our liturgy had in it nothing ill , yet it wanted a great deale of that which was good , and was in their service . i can now give at least a probable conjecture why his grace altered the service-book which he sent into scotland : why , surely to please the jesuites , for he put in something which the jesuites counted good , and so in his apprehension made up the defect . mr. newcomen in his learned sermon hath shewen at large how punctuall his grace was in observing the jesuites instructions for the alteration of our religion . how truth hath been sold at a low rate , by the highest priests , is clearely discovered by mr. hill in his accurate sermon . revend dr. hakewill hath set forth dr. heylin to the life , and therefore i will not presume to adde any thing to his happy observations . the ministers remonstrance will give sufficient light to this point , i hope it will be published ere long . there is a book which passeth from hand to hand as a pretious manuscript called romano-catholicus pacificus , in which there are many faire offers made for a reconciliation between rome and canterbury , the arch-bishop of canterbury shall enjoy the cyprian priviledge and be subject to no patriarch , of which you may read at large in the supplement of the canterburian selfe-conviction , a passage well worthy the serious consideration of all statesmen . i might make my book swell if i should but reckon up the tithe of bishop mountague his popish expressions , and therefore i leave men to peruse his writings , there are few points of popery which you may not find in his bookes or in his articles at visitation ; it seemes our guides were gone so farre that the papists thought they might accept of all propositions of accommodation which were tendered to them by our gentle reconcilers . dr. featley hath excellently discovered what a good opinion the romanists conceive of some who professe themselves members of the church of england ; protestants are now counted heretiques no longer , if you will speak properly and strictly , saith that popish priest , and therefore sure protestantisme is waxed weary of it selfe , as knot speaks ; you may well know what protestants this vertumnus meanes , such as have been cited in this sixth chapter : concerning the book called jesuitica negotiatio , the ministers have said enough already . i admire at the impudence of divers men who have thus freely expressed themselves for the encouragement of the arminian , socinian and popish party , and yet are not ashamed to say that they stand for the protestant religion . i have seen a letter under mr. chillingworths own hand in which he doth excite dr. sheldon of all-soules , and dean potter , &c. to stand in defiance of the parliament , and advises them to stir up the youth ( the young laddes of the university as he calls them ) to oppose the parliament ; now can i or any man beleeve that mr. chillingworth doth intend to maintaine calvinisme , i mean pure protestant religion ? i appeale to the conscience of* dr. sheldon whether he hath not reserved more charity for an infidel then a calvinist ? he hath expressed himselfe very slily in his sermons , and yet plainly enough to intelligent auditours , but i will take the counsell of his text , and judge nothing before the time . i remember his observations upon that text , good master what shall i doe that i may inherit eternall life ? it is not , saith he , what shall i beleeve , as the calvinists would have it , ( or to that effect ) but what shall i doe ? sure the good dr. forgot the jaylours question , what shall i doe to be saved ? and the apostles answer , beleeve , &c. is this the calvinisme he jerkes at ? knot i beleeve had some ground to say that the infection was so generall that it had overspread all soules . i would there had been no need of such discoveries , but since things are grown to this passe , it is folly to complement , we are compelled to speak plain english in sober sadnesse . if our faith will be lost except it be kept by a controversy , it is an act both of faith and love for orthodoxe men to undertake the controversy . dr. potter doth acknowledge the church of rome to be a member of the church universall , and saith the church of england hath a true and reall union still with that church in faith and charity : nay pag. 76. we doe not forsake the communion of the church of rome any more then we forsake the body of christ , whereof we acknowledge the church of rome a member though * corrupted . but it seems in 8. or 9. yeares dr. potter had altered his opinion , for in his sermon preached at the consecration of the bishop of carlslie , in the yeare 1628. i find these words ; [ i am confident were the fathers now alive they would all side with us in our necessary separation from the abominations , idolatry and tyranny of the papacy , with which no good christian can hold any union in faith , any communion in charity . ] p. 64 , 65. the learned and reverend bishop davenant did maintain that the church of rome was apostaticall in his sad determinations ; if it be apostatized from faith as bishop davenant saith , and hath no more charity then dean potter saith it hath , how can we ( especially since our separation from rome ) be said to have a true and reall union with it still in faith and charity ? it is in vaine for him now to distinguish between the church of rome , and the court of rome , though there was once ground for that distinction , for rome is all court now ; if he will have me use charrons similitude , the church is the apple , and the c●ur the worme , the worme hath eaten up the apple , the court hath devoured the church ; we distinguish between fundamentalls and superstructions , and some talke as if the papists were sound in fundamentalls , but the case is cleare that they have overthrown the old foundation , and all their superstructions are upon a new foundation , or upon no foundation at all . for if their churches authority be the foundation of all their faith , and their churches authority be built lastly and wholly upon prudentiall motives ; as mr. chillingworth shewes , cap. 2. pag. 64. sect. 35. then sure here is a new foundation , or else their church is a castle in the ayre , a church without foundations . i dare appeale to master chillingworth whether the papists doe not erre grossely ( and therefore fundamentally ) in those things which belong to the covenant between god and man in christ ? see whether my inference be not grounded on his assertion . pag. 17. the answer to the preface , sect. 26. dr. potter tells us * that their errours and practises for which they have been forsaken of protestants are not damnable in themselves to men who beleeve as they professe ; but the arch-bishop of canterbury is more orthodoxe , or else the man that gave him this note was more orthodoxe , ( for doubtlesse the materialls of that faire fabrick were brought in by men of different religions , the principles are so crosse ) he saith that errour in points not fundamentall may be damnable to some men , though they hold it not against their conscience . sect. 37. numb. 6. pag. 320. dr. potter and some others have a fancy of resting in the profession of such truths as all christians in the whole world agree upon . master chillingworth will put in the socinians for a company of christians ; i hope dr. potter will not joyn with him ; but the arch-bishop dislikes this plot , as it comes from a. c. or at least shewes the danger of it , and would be better advised in this point . he saith he doth not think it safest in a controverted point of faith to beleeve that only which the dissenting parties agree upon , or which the adverse party confesses ; the arch-bishop instances in the doctrine between the orthodoxe and the arian ; if that rule be true which was mentioned before , then saith he 't is safest for a christian to beleeve that christ is of like nature with god the father , and be free from beleefe , that he is consubstantiall with him , &c. his second instance is about the resurrection . his third about the unity of the godhead ; if we will rest in the acknowledgement of one god ( he meanes , and not confesse the trinity of persons in the unity of the godhead , for his grace hath not framed his argument right ) then iewes , turkes and socinians will be as good christians as we are . the fourth instance is about the verity of christs godhead . the arch-bishops relat. p. 309 , 310 , &c. you see whither this charitable principle would lead us , we must take in the socinian first , as a christian , and then we may turn turkes with credit . i will conclude all with a part of dr. potters prayer ; the lord take out of his church all dissention and discord , all heresies , and schismes , all abuses and false doctrines , all idolatry , superstition and tyranny , and unite all christians in one holy band of truth and peace , that so with one minde and one mouth we may all joyne in his service , and for ever glorify the holy name of the most holy and glorious trinity . amen . amen . amen . the printer to the reader . the author being called from london to a businesse of higher conc●rnment could not oversee the presse , but some few sheets being sent to him , he returned some brief corrections which he hath desired me to communicate that the reader might blot out those things which are redundant , and rectify such mistakes as alter the sense of the author . be pleased to take speciall notice of these that follow . s. g. errata . in pag. 2. lin. 6. r. he will not confesse that they pag. 3. l. 19. dele ( if smalcius be judge ) in pag. 3. l. 6. marg. dele [ sociniani ] in pag. 6. l. 18. r. [ with him ] but consider that samosatenus p. 10. l. 20. dele [ they ] p. 27. l. 7. r. but the cause of the quarrell is that the churches p. 28. l. penult . r. without the word . p. 33. l. ult. r. let them read my answer to mr. webberley . p. 37. l. 7. dele therefore . p. 38. l. 10. r. istis quos ignorare . notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a32802e-190 vide annotat. casaub. in g. nys. epist. ad amb. & bas. pacem ecclesia , pacem christi amissā quaerere , & turbatā componere , & repertam tenere curavimus sed hujus ipsius fieri nos vel participes vel autores , nec tēporis nostri peccata me ruerunt — nec antichristi ministri sunt passi , qui pace sua , id est , impietatis sua unitato se jactant , agentes se non ut christi episcopos , sed antichristi sacerdotes . hilarius contra auxentium . volumus & nos pacem , sed pacem christi — pacē in qua non fit bellum involutū ; pacē , qua non ut adversartes subjictat , sed ut a mices jungat , hieronym . ep. ad th. contra errores ioh. hi●ros . see mr. gatak●rs defence of mr. wotte● . {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , &c. gr. na. zimz orat. 20. elcesaita fidem in persecutione negādam docebant & in corde servandam . aug. de hare sibus ad quod. vult . deū . euseb. de vita const. l. 1. c. 11. vide dinothuw● d● bell● ga●ico ; cundē de be●o belgico . dimetr . meteran . hist. belg. p●pellinier● . memoires de la ligue . insidi● sub pacis nomine latebant 1572. barth. {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , &c. at saptens quondam rite ho● pradixit homerus . exors ille , domus , pauperque extorris & exlex , quem bellum civile juvat , crudele , nefandum . aristop . {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} . vulpt●bus atque leves voltis confidere mergi ? {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} mergus , fulica , ardea , mihi gavia videtur esse ; a gull , or sea . goose , vide observ. flor. chr. in locum . nullâ id ratione queamus ante lup●s quàm connubio sibi junxerit agnam . at nunquā rectà efficias incedere cancrum , non facias unquam ut lavis sict asper echinus . petra romana est mola asinaria , demergatur sola in profundum maris , in collo nostro non suspendatur . barret . d● iur● regu . tacit. a● . l. 4. vibane the 2d . did account my worthy predecessour s. anselm his own compeer , and said he was the patriarch and apostolique of the other world . the archbishop his relat. p. 171. the like priviledge offered to this archbishop by the english fryar bar●●si●s ; see the large supplement of canterburies selfe-conviction pag. 20. what offers were made by signior co● , i leave to one more skillfull to demonstrate . notes for div a32802e-2100 scribant ● laute & accurate qui ad hoc munus ingenii fiductâ vel officii ratione ducuntur ; me verò sublevanda recordationu , vel potius oblivionu mea gratiâ , commoniterium mihimet parasse suffecerit . vinc. li●in . adv. har. a vide calovium consid. theol. socin. pag. 105. 106. & sequ. vide stegman photin . disp. 1 pag. 1. & 3. hebionei christun● tantummodo hominem dicunt . vti augustinus de haresibus . euseb. pamph . hist. lib. 3. cap. gr. {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} . lat. 24. epihanius hares . 30. ariani patrem & filium & spiritū sanctum nolunt esse uniui ejusdemque naturae at que substantiae , aut ut expressius dicatur , essentia . august . de haeresibus . ariani omnes dicti antiquitus era●t , licet sententiis inter se discordes , qui in pr●c●puum errotem cum ario conspirabant ; nempe filium dei patri consubstantialem esse negantes ●ti smiglecius probat . d bez● , prasatio prafixa explicat . val gentilis perfidi● & perjurii . sociniani cum aetionis filiū nō modo {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , sed etia {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} di●unt . stegman . phot. disp. 1. pag. 7 , 8. sociniani insuper filium de● post munds occasum prorsus non regnaturum cum ario s●mniant sociniani . vide calov . de di . stinct . theol. s●cin . a priscis haresibus . pag. 116. noc est ut photinianum nomen su●terfugiant cum in principalibus se c● photino convenir● fateantur . d stegman photin . disp. 1. pag 3. iacobus ad portum orthod fid defen. advers●● ostorradium . martin . thalyaus anatom . samosat . glossema samosateniorum est ejusdē●oloris cū turcismo ac iudaismo — cum turcis quidem plus habent affini tatu quàm cum iudae● — turcismus en●m ut ex alijs errorum cento nibus , sic ex samosatenia nismo a mahume te est conftatus . pauliani a paulo samosateno christū non semper suisse dicunt sed ej us initiū ex quo de ma. ria natus est asse verant , nec eum ali quid amplius quā hominem putant . ista haeresis aliquāao cujusdā artemonii fuit sed cum defecisset ●staurata est a paulo , & postea sic a photino confirmata &c. aug de hares . execrandus ille samosatenus ejus ecolesiae conspurcator in quâ primi sunt christiani nominati . d. beza ubi supra . august de hares . haresis samosaten ; postea sic a photino confirmata ut photiniani quàm p●ultani celebriús nuncupentur — philaster continuatim ponit ambos ( samosatenū scil. & photinum ) sub singulis & propriis numeris quasi haereses duas , cum dicat photinum in omnibus pauli secutum fuisse doctrinam . vide iacobum ad portū orthodox . fid. defens . stegman . disput 1. pag. 4. 7. 8. calovium considerat . theol. socin. preoemial . gloriantur sociniani selectes quasdam cōfessions sua vel directe vel oblique de deo & christo favisse , samosatenum photinum , baliardum , basilidianos , carpocrat , gnosticos , marcionites , montanistas , noctianos , arianos , berillum , eutych , donatum , helvidiū eunomiū , miletium , sabinum , praxeam , manichaum , sabellium , photinum , & ejusce furfuris perditissimos hareticos , vide caloviunt de d●uct , theol. socin. à priscis haresibus pag. 106. vide d. stegman disp. 1. pag. 4. learned mr. gataker his postscript to mr. wotto●s defence , pag. 40. 41. calov . considerat . theol. socinian . prooemial . p. 120. beza prafat. pra . fix . explicat . h●res . valent . gen● . calovins consid. theol. soc. prooe●ial . pag. 6. michael , servetus p●nas luens , anno 1553. nonnulli geneva iterum è favillis serveti flammas quasdam hareseos ipsius excitare , tum illis quoque inter alios favit lalius socinus . calov . decas dis. pag. 7. impictas val. gent. b●evi script● detecta per d. 1. calvinum vide valentint gent. pro. theses . confession● . libellum antid●torum . responsum d. calvini ad question . georg elandratae . eiusdem brev. admonit ad fratres polonas , nee non confirmat . istius admonit . simleri epistolam ministris in polonia & russia . theses 1. hyperii in acad marpurg assert . doct. cath. de trinitate per alexand. ale●●um theses d. beza in pra●ect de trinitate . b. a●etis histor. val. gent. vide beza pr●●●● . confessi● fidei edita in italica ecclesia genevae habetur in explicat . perfidia val. gentilis pag. 1. ibid. pag 3. vide explicat . prafidia valent . gentilis , p. 14 , 15 , 16. ubisupra pag. 17. epistola valentini gentilis ad senatū genevensem habetur in explicat . perfidia val. gent. p. 27. abjuratio val. gentilis ipsius manu sponte scripta , et ad senatum genevensem missa . vide explicat . perfidia val. gentilis p. 28. er●t in confinio pagus fargiarum ubi habitabat gribaldus — aderant ibidem alciatus — in praefecturâ gaiensi ditionis mag. dom. bernēsium aretius histor. val. gent. gratianopoli . lugduni . quid interea bonus ille hosius cardinalis cum suis catholieis ? nempe ridere suaviter nostros undique ad extinguēdum hoc incendtum accurrētes probrosis libellu lacessere , regiam denique majestatē de coercendis istis blasphemiis cogitantem arectis consiliis provirtbus avoeare ; as merito quidem : quorsu enim satanadversus seipsum depugnaret ? beza prafat. ubi supra . neglecta juramŭti religione ad errores abjuratos postlimini● redibat . aretii hist. val. gent. cap. 2. p 11. august . 1566 : rescript . senat. genev. habetur in explicat persidiae val , gent. p. 20. ortgo socinianisma a lalto fuit ratione inventiones , a fausto ratione dispositionis . eques polonus in vitâ f socini . dissortatio quam eques polonus f. socini ope●bus pramitti voluit . abraham calov . decas dissertat . i icet tiguri apud helvetios sedem fixisses , ad alias tamen europa regto●es non semelex ●urrebat . veruntamen ut unicuique sua constet laus — me & sententiam illam in iohannis evangel. verbis explicandis , & quae ad eam asserendam vel jam dixi vel posthac dicturus sū magna ▪ ex parte ex laelii socini senensis sermonibus dum adhuc viveret , & post ejus mortē ex aliquibus ipsius scriptis quae in manus meas non absque mirabili dei opera atque consilio pervonerun● & hausisse & desumpsisse non minus libenter quam ingenue fate● or . frag. 4. duorum s●ript . f. socini pag. 4. & 5. vide calovium de origine theol. soci . pag. 6 sect. 16. * haer●tici alogi sive alogiani dict● quia {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} à iohanne descriptum & proindeipsum etiam evangeliū , secundum iohanuē rejiciebant . vide aug. de hares . 30. vide petrum carolinum in explicat . doctr. de uno vere deo. p. 16. nec non eniedinū explic. loc. v. & n. t. pag. 136. viderem romani quidem antichristi regnū ab omnibus dirui atque vastari , idolorumque templ● everti , interim tamen christi regnum non resurgere , e●usque templum nedum à quoquam extrui , sed ne caementa quidem & lapides ad illud extruendū ab aliquo parari . socin. explicat . pri●n . ca. ioh. p. 2. notes for div a32802e-7810 vide libellum ministr. . sarmat . & transyl . alba iulia edit , de falsa et vera , &c. d. wigandi servetianismum . in brestensi synodo in sinibus lithuania . an. 1589. in synodo lublinensi . non exigua indiet facta est accesis● , pracipue inobilib●● & in aula educatis — ut & ● lunierum pastorum ordine , quippe qui propensiores in nova dogmata , n●c adeo in veritate confirmati fuerant , calov . de orig soc. pag. 70. d. calovde dist. theol. soc à theol. ss●i . pag. 73. notes for div a32802e-8320 h. grotit pietas , ad ord. . hollande . error christi essentiam & personam negaus fidem destruit , & christianismum tollit . d. stegm . photin p 6. vide smalci● contra nova monstra . deum invocamus tanquam omnium bonorum solam ac primariam causam , christum ver● tanquam secundariam causam a primaria illâ plane pendentem — à deo quacunque bona petimus à christe ea solum qua ad ecclesiam christi spectant : deus enim christo ea largiendi potestatē concessit , non alia , inquit socinus , disp. de adorat . christi cum chr , frank . vide d. stegman . photin . disp. 1. pag. 6. socinianismū barlaus pestem & ●verr●culū esse christiana fidei dudum cred●d●t , vianoque sternere ad {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} ejus religionis quam precioso suo sāguine aspersit ater●us aterni dei silius . vindis . c. barlai pag. 8. ea quae negantur a socintanu ad duo capita revocari possunt , {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} seu articulum de ss. trinitate , & {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} seu articulum de humani geueru salute . vide cal●v . dist. th. socin , a priscis hares . p. 111. vide stegman . disput. 56. p. 656. a neque patres propterea recipiūt , quia cum scripturâ consentiunt ; sed scripturam ●o mode in intelligendā censen● quia patres ita ex plicarunt . ideoque pri●s de unanimi patrū conciliorūque consensu , quàm de vero scriptura sensu sunt solliciti . brev. disq p. 7. b malle se patribus istis , conciliisque adh●rere , quàm privatum , ubi v●cant , suum de scriptur● sequi iudicium . i● pag. 7. hoe aut●m ann●● est ecclesi● ejusque doctoribus contr●versias cum aliorū obligatione judicādi potestatem adscribere ? brev. disq. cap. 2. pag. 8 , 9. nimirum iudicem ipsi spiritū sanctū statnunt : saltem fine eo nullum cutquam de sacr● judicium concedere volunt . quo ipso rationis sanae judicium ante spiritus sancti illustrationem plane tollitur . disq br . cap. 30. pag. 9. brev. disq cap. 4. vera de judice sententia . itaque neg andum est nullum c●rto assequi verum . quare qui istis sive naturali ingenii b●nitate , sive experientiâ vel mediocriter instructus est , is & ●psas scripturas sacras esse cognoscet &c. brev. disq. p. 35. quid quod princip●orum ●storum ope etiam is qui s●cras literas vel legere non potest , vel nunquam vidit , vel exstare ●●scit , &c. lb. cap. 7. p. 35. reason is in some sort gods word saith mr. chillingworth . answer to the preface , p. 20. arch-bishop of cant. his relation . pag. — 150. the church of rome did promulgate an orthodoxe truth , which was not then catholickely admitted in the church , namely the procession of the holy ghost from the son : if she erred in this fact , confesse her error . the generall councell held at ariminum , did deny the sonnes equality with the father ; the councell at ephesus did confound the two natures in christ . vide calovium de consensu patrum ante concilium nicenum . sociniani trinitatem cerberum , christum spurium , incarnationē christi monstrum absurditatis , satisfactionem commentum appellitant . d. stegman . pag. 22. en christianos chillingworthianos . criminantur resurrectionem ejusdem carnis esse prorsus mahometanam & iudaicam , calov . dist. theol. soc. à pris . hares . p. 104. regem ' sine regn● , caput sine memoris , vitem sine ranis , christum sine ecclesiâ somniant : ●idei articulum de catholicâ ecclesia ●sque ad finem ●nundi evertunt . notes for div a32802e-11090 spreta haud exolesce● ejusmodi calumnia . sed agnita videbitur apud nimis malos , aut nimis credulos , aut minùs ami●os . vind. c. barlas p. 7. naturall reason ( saith mr. chilling . ) then built on principles common to all men is the last resolution unto which the churches authority is but the first inducement ; in the margin . pag. 65. mr. chill . counts himselfe no socinian because he holds supernaturall revelation requisite to help naturall reason . preface sect. 28. yet he saith scripture is not beleeved finally for it self . pag. 65. that a man may be saved who knowes not whether there be any scripture or no . pag. 66. it may be humane prudence and ordinary discretion did advise mr. chillingworth to use no more industry in finding out the truth ; or he hath not been at leisure because of some hindrances and● distraction ; and then he hopes that none of his errours will be imputed to him . p. 19. answer to the preface . i would willingly know whether d. potter doth not take in the socinians into his christian world . p. 255. why he makes the church of england to take part with the jesuites against piscator and calvin , & implies that calvinisme is , as the black-mouthed sorbonist called it , bestiarum religio . p. 256 , 257 , 258. edit. 2. mangones haresium sub praetextu moderatioris theologia ● n●stris ecclesiis verè reformat●s exierunt . ioh. peltius . remonstrantes aiunt sese cum omnibus aliis sectis , imoue socinianis exceptis fraternitatem posse colere , excepta reformata ecclesiâ . apolog. ad censur. prof. leid . arminian●s & socinianes in viginti & ultra articulis per vari●s paragraphos distinctis convenire probatumdedit 1. peltius . non n●gamus ( inquiunt remonstrātes ) esse nonnulla ad salutem creditu necessaria pracise , sed ea pauca esse arbitramur . et hic etiā ( inquiunt profess . leyd ) gentum & spiritū socinianum animadvertimus — paucissima ad sal●tem prorsus necessarta sunt ( inquit socinus ) nempe ut deus & iesus christus divino honore colatur , praesertim verò chartt as erga proximum exerceatur . quam fidē & charitatem putant in eo subsistere qui neget christum esse eund●m cum patre deum & spiritum sanctum esse personam , &c. vide pr●fess . leyd. censurā praefationu re monstr . prefix . confess . sect. 22. a caspar barlaeus iud●os deum abraham● colcre ( quāv● constet eos iesum christū blasphemare ) pios esse posse , deoque acceptos , itemque dei amicos secundum accuratioré theologiam dici posse statuit , uti vedellus de deo synagogae . dr po●ter recites some such passages p. 117. of his own book , but will not take any notice of acontius . dr. potter might have corrected these passages out of his own principles , because for want of clear revelation he frees the church before christ , and the disciples of christ from damnable errour though they beleeved not those things which he who should now deny were no christian , read from p. 245. to 250. of dr. potters book of charity , &c. see dr. page his answer to that treatise ; and a little box of antidotes against some infectious passages in a tract concerning schisme . sum●● religion is socinian● h●c es● , sub spe alterius vit● observare mandata dei , uti calovi●s consid. th so●in prooem p. 86. sufficit ut s●iamus quae reverae praecipiantur vel vetentur à deo , adeo ut si in reliquu error occurrat nemo ob eun dē calo excludatur . socin , epist. 2. ad dudithium . arch-bishops relatiion see pag. 309 , 310 , 311. the arch b●shops relation . pag. 171. the arch-bishop calls socinianisme an hor●id monster of al he●ies , pag. 310. talis non paucis declarantium esset theologia sociniana in pluribus articuli● , quam tamen hacten●● publiee el●gere non ausi funt propter scandalum , ide● ab ●is qua minus i●vtdtosa putarunt insidiose in incipientes , viam illā t●tissimam tentarunt . prefess . leyd. censur. praefat. rem . sect. 23. the old book . p. ●4 . new . 121. the old book . p. 9. the new . p. 31. ab iis quae minus invidiosa putarunt insidiose incip●entes viam illam suam tutissimā tentarūt , ultertus progressu●● si pro vot● succesiss●t — non dubiū est quin remonstr. . soc. & in unam & eandem sectam coaluerint , etsi non in omnibus alits plane conveniant — publice docent unūquemque in sua fide salvari posse , &c. profess . leyd. cens. prafat. sect. 23. notes for div a32802e-15560 the preface to the author , &c. sect. 7 , 8. 11. this is the mother , give her the childe , &c. c. 2. p. 50. the doctrine of indulgences takes away the fear of purgatory , the doctrine of putgatory , the fear of hell ; the love of god will not be kindled in the hearts of ignorāt mē by latine service , nor by the masse if it were in english : because some sins are made veniall , the people may well doubt whether there be any mortall ; because the pope hath struck out the second commandement , the people may think he hath authority to strike out the first . the foundation of all the papists faith , the churches authority , is built lastly and wholly upon prudentiall motives ; ac de atheis quidem non it a fisissem crediturus unquam nisi me tenellum adhue ipsorum agmina , summo discrimine salutu mea s●l●citavissent ante triginta annos , quum li●●ris humanioribus operam in gallia darem ● iunii sac . parallela praefat. libellum de ss. scriptura authoritate dominicus lopez societ . iesu anno 1588. hispali edidit d●calovius de orig. theol. soc. pag. 22. mr. chilling . answer to knots-directio●s to n. n. sect. 18. ideo di●unt re●ōstrantes se nolle hareses aut athelsmū introducere quia nō habent pro hare si id quod revera heresis & atheismus est , & abomns ecclesia qua deum in tribus personis adorat pro heresi & atheismo habetur . uedel . de arean . arminianismi lib. 1. cap 1 lib. 2 c. 10. pag. 86 , 87. vide brochmand . de peccato . c 6. 9. 1. pelagio auxiliares m●nus prabe●t anabaptistae &c. colloqu . frank●a●t . 4 p. 230 , 231. peccatum morte christi it a expiatū & ablatum esse ut infantes naseantur omnis lab●● expertes , ac eapr●pter lavacro regeneration●● nonindigeant . smalcius disp. 2. contr. francium peccatum originis commentum est & fabula . uide conrad . heresb . de factione monast. theod. strack . hist. anabapt . pag 56. * si qui adeo tenera , aut sic à teneru imbutae conscientiae sinc ut credant christian● nulli ne quidem magistratum gerenti licere sanguinem fundere , aut capital●bus suppliciis in sontes animadvertere , remonstiantes eos libenter tolerare paratisunt . exam. cens. cap. 12 pag. 141. * defensio contra injustam vim qu● sine potestate effundendi s●ngu●nem est , non est defensio , sed defensionis larva terrend●s pueris . rem . ubi supra . nam vox gladii quemlibet defensionis modum , etiam quae sine sanguine fi● , significare potest . ibid. accedit quod fie●● non possit ut infirmi isti in quorum gratiā confessi●lus●t homonymtis magistratus , & justos magistratus tolerēt , cū expungant magistratū v●●d●eantē justū ( ex officio nomine d●●●capitali supplicto impiorum ex numer● christia norum , & annumerent infidelibus & homic●dis . isac . iun. exam. apol. r●monstrant . cap. 12. p. 311. satan ejusmodi pestes illum in finem exctavit , ne scil. r●formatio orbis christiani in doctrin● & moribus jam a multo tempore a piis majoribus nostris desiderata , & à deo ter opt. max. tandem per lutherum , zuing. melan bucer . aliosque dei viros suscepta perficeretur . arg. epist. heresbach conr●dus heresbachtus principum iulia cliviae montium &c. institutor & consiliarius qu● notatu digna inter obsidendum occurrebant probe consignavit , utroque insuper principe ju bente retulit , teste theod strackeo . docebat muncerus falsum esse christū satisfecisse pro no bis , quicquid tandē molles isti scribae dicant . h bullinger adversus anabaptistas . lib. 1 p. 2. * socini defens tract de ecclesia sub nomine nicolaidu : omnes qui anabaptista vocantur qui in polonia degunt , — belgio , italia & c — ideoque fraternitatem ●●m omnibus illis ( se . anabaptistis ) inire satagun● ( nempe socini asseclae ) & quo minus res succedat hactenus per eos nullo medo stat sed per illos penes quos ecclesiarum evangelicarum regimen est & gubernatio pag. 62. vide profess . leydens . censuram in confession●m remonstrantium . censur. praesationis . sect. 24. lutherus datis ad senatum melhusanum literis monebat lupum hunc perniciosissimum diligentissime cavendum esse . bullinger adversus anabaptist . lib. 1 ca. 1. anno 1525. in curia tigurina . cyprian and the bishops of ●arthage councell , are cited by anabaptists , but they were not pertinacious in their errour , as the anabaptists now , the arians and donatists of old . there is no command for rebaptization in scripture , nay not so much as example for it , as the a●●baptists did themselves confesse , when they saw that the place , act. 19. 5. made nothing for them , see the conference at frankendale , act. 36. art . 12. vide edictum amplissimi senatus urbis tigurina . bullinger adv. anabap. lib. 1. cap. 5. singuli anabaptista sufficienter nemine impediente & absquejurgiis sententiam suam exposuerunt denuo tamen firmissimis testimoniis sacrarum literarum declaratum est zuinglium cum suis sectatoribus anabaptistas vicisse . serv●tus vetus ille sacrae triadis , id est omnis vere deitatis hostis , adeoque mōs●rū — ne à fanaticis nostroum tē porum sectis abhorrere videretur , baptismum infantium quoque horrendis mod●s flagellavit & abominabilem reddere conatus fuit . strack epist. nuncupat . reliquos articulos muncer● urgebant de verbo dei subtili non script● , de vi●ionibus & reve ●ationibus , &c. bullinger . adversus anabap. lib. 1. cap. 4. the papists allow a divorce & the change of an hereticall wife as well as the anabaptists . iohan. angelius werd in synopsil bodini de repub. nihil a davide georg●o & tal●bus optim●s sanctorum alienum loquutus . abominandes omnes anabaptistas superat blasphemus ille david georgius . bulling adversus ana●ap . lib. 2. c. 14. vide consuram professorum leydensium in confess . remo●strantium , & censur. prafat. remonstr. . in arca a●minianorum ut in arca n●a omnium sp●●ierum animalia , quamus is diverse utentia pabulo , conservantur — politic● stratagemate libertinis omnibus , anataptist● etiam professis , aditum prabent , ut utano sibt parent ad eos opprimendos , quos vident suis conatibus obstare . cens. pr●fat . sect. 23 in synodo sua non obstante confessione sus pad●baptismum non esse creditu necessartum statuunt , nec ministros ( anabapt. ) e● nomine dimovenaos . cens pag. 305 de coena domini error et pontif & luth. rejictunt , non anabaptistarum & soci●ianorum . censur. in cap 23. confess . pag 310. personall defence is lawfull against the suddaine and illegall assaults of messengers sent from the prince , nay if the king himselfe strike at any one he may ward the kings blowes , hold his hands or the like . dr. ferne sect. 2. he doth not condemne the people for hindring the execution of a particular , passionate unlawfull command of the king by a loving violence and importunity . sect. 2. see the book entitled scripture reason , &c. the text rom. 13. doth secure a just ruling prince from all resistance . pag● . magistrates must be submitted to by vertue of gods soveraignty . damnation belongs to obstinate resisters of humane laws which are not opposite to gods law . p. 5. 7. mr. burroughes his sermon of the 1. of hoasts . pag. 45. scripture and reason the book set forth by divers ministers . the conscience is bound to obey the lawfull commands of magistrates , gods wrath is upon the conscience of them that disobey . p. 8. magistr●tes are to be maintained upon the publike stock . p. 8. read pag. 12 , 13. and judge whether these divines doe not plead the kings cause better then dr. ferne ; they say that the very houses of parliament may not resist the authority of the king commanding according to law . pag. 23. read the ministers epistle to the reader , and their answer to the 7. section of dr. ferne . the papists say that although kings doe governe by the lawes of their kingdome , yet because they are against the catholique religion , subjects may rise up against their king and kill him , this doctrine of theirs we abhorre . mr. burroughes sermon of the ● . of hoasts . p. 41. see mr. bridge his answer to dr. fern . the papists doe not only hold it lawfull to depose , & thus to depose their prince , but to kill him also , yea that a private man invested with the popes authority may do thus , all which we abhorre . sect. 5. p. 32. papists owe subjection to a forraine state , crosse centered to this of his majesties , in its interest of state , and meritoriously malitious by its very articles of faith . the fuller answer to dr ferne . p. 23. the name king doth signifie a person invested with different power according to the variety of lawes in seveverall nations . see an answer to the observations printed at oxford by his majesties command . p. 6. what the lawes of the kingdome and priviledges of parliament are , the lawyers books dayly published declare . nemo potest mutare consilium suum in altertus injuriam . there would be no end if the king should undoe what he hath done — there can be no appeale from himselfe to himselfe — he is not to passe sentence in a private but in a publique and judiciall way . answer to the observations , pag. 22. set forth by his majesties command . potestas {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} est {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} by law the king cannot , will not refuse to hearken to his great councell — answer to the observation pag. 28. and pag. 37. he saith that by the happy temper of our government , monarchy is so wisely ballanced , that as we are not exposed to the dangers which attend the rule of the many , so we may avoid the inconveniences which might probably flow from the atbitrary power of one . the same authour doth readily grant that parliaments are good helpes in government . p. 13. ergo they are somewhat more then counsellours . a quemadmodum anabaptistae opinantur quod nullus magistratus in ecclesia esse possit . bulling adv. anabapt. lib. 5. p. 157. see scripture and reason set forth by divers learned ministers . b vide bulling lib. 5. cap. 2. cap. 2. magistratum non posse neque debere curare res religionis . c vide eundem cap. 4 , 5. ejusdem libri . contendunt a●abaptista in ecclesiâ unicuique libe rum esse debero ut agat & credat quod ipsi visum fuerit , ubi supra . cap. 7. d nulla carnalis coercitio nulla poena err●ntibus constituta à deo est — omnes in seipsum armat qui in alios quos errare credit armatur . par omnium in omnes ius est . qui sibi jus tribuit coercendi alio● , idem aliis in seipsum idem justus concedat necesse est . exam. cens. cap. 24. pag. 259. lex ista de apost●tis à christianisnio non agi● nedum de apostatis ad iudaismum , & c — religionem suam liberam christus esse voluit ; qui ab ea deficiant , suo periculo & damno deficiunt . ex censur● cap. 24. p. 264. tub-preachers . nihil tamen ali●d colligetur quam ejectionem hareticorum ex publicis templis ad magistratum pertinētibus licite à magistratu fieri posse , & quidem si necesse sit flagelloè funiculis ei fini facto , ulterius aut plus concludere nemo jure potest . at hoc jus magistratui plenâ manu tribuunt remonstrantes ; hac ergo in parte imitetur magistratus christum . exam. cens. cap. 24. pag. 269. at in p●imá ecclesia institutions cū ordo non est , au● in ejus restitutione cum ordo collapsus est , missionem necessariam esse negant ( remonst . ) proinde cam de essentia muneris ecclesiastici , quod in verbi legitimâ praedicatione consistit , non esse habendam . ex. cen. c. 21. p. 228 aut libertas hac communis esse debet & eo usque extendi quo eam quisque sibi concedi amat , aut vis inferenda aliorum conscientiis exam. cens. c. 24. p 277. remonstrantes causam nullam esse vident cur sententia eorum qu● padobaptismum necessario in ecclesia christi necessitate seu pracepti seu medii retinendum aut usurpandū esse non arbitrantur , ut entolerabilis in ecclesia censenda sit , a● proinde cur pastores isti qui eum p●r conscientiam usurpare non audent — proveris a● degitimis p●storibus christi habendi non sint ? brownists . where the eause of schisme is necessary , there not he that separates but he that is the cause of separation is the schismatique . tract concerning schisme . pag. 4. see mr. chilling . preface , sect. 20. hookers ecclesiast . polit l. 5 sect. 65. mr chill . answer to the preface . p. 16. sect. 22. there cannot be any schisme in leaving communion with any church , unlesse we are obliged to continue in it ; man cannot be obliged by man , but to what either formally or vertually he is obliged by god . was it not lawfull for judah to reforme her selfe whē israel would not joyn ? sure it was or else the prophet deceives me ; that sayes expresly , though israel transgresse , yet let not judah sinne . the archb. of cant. his relation . pag. 149. see mr. chillingworths preface , sect. 44. answer to the 2. motive . there may bee just cause to depart from a particular church in some doct. in s and , practises , though that church want nothing necessary to salva●ion . dr. petter . 2. edit. sect. 3. p. 75. there may be a necessary separation , which yet incurres not the blame of schism : the archb. of canterbury his relation . p. 133. in margine . a nor can you say that israel from the t●me of separation was not a church . see the archb. of cant. relat. pag. 149. b see the defēce of the churches and ministery of england by mr. iacob ag●inst mr. iohnson ; the publishers epistle to the reader prefixed before the booke . non enim si ab hisce coetibus ad alios forte discedat , protinus eos quos deserit contemnit aut à spe salutu exclusos judicat , sed tantummodo ab impurioribus ad puriores se confert , ut veritatem omnem saluti nostrae aliquatenus servientem sibi cura & cordi esse ostendat , & deo ac iesu christo suo conscientiam suam probet , say the arminians in their preface to their confession . * see mr. thomas goodwin his fast sermon preached at westminster . see mr. burroughs his s●rmon of the l. of hoasts . p. 46. the iesuits have ●eene the authors and instruments of all tu●●ults , seditions , &c. as dr. potter shewes , want of charity , &c. sect. 1. pag. 9. the present church of rome perswades men they were as good for any hope of salvation they have not to be christians , as not to bee roman catholiques — be absolutely out of the churches communion , as be out of her communion — whether shee bee not guilty of the same crime with the donatists , and those zelots of the mosaicall law , let reasonable men judge . mr. chillingworth . c. 3. sect. 64. see dr. potter sect. 4. st. augustine and optatus did acknowledge the donatists to bee their brethren , & their baptisme to be true baptisme , vide aug in psal. 32. con 2. epist. 166. et contra donat ●post coll. cap. ult. optat. l. 1. aug. contra crese . lib. 4. cap. 4. de contra donat. lib. 1. c. 10 , 11. dr. potter doth confesse this truth . sect. 4. p. 107 , 108 , 109. the first edition . mr. chillingw . desires that nothing else should be required of any man to make him capable of the churches communion , then that he beleeve the scripture , and that only ; and endeavour to beleeve it in the true sense . his preface to the author , &c. answer to the last motive . ecclesiam nostram in omnibus audiendam esse cōsequttur duo ● us modu , tum quâ mutaverunt pleraque in divinis officiis , tum quâ multa retinuerunt : nam in altero se ad antichristum pertinere declara●unt ; in altero nos esse populum dei , & se esse simias nostras confessi sunt . brist . mot tom. 2. mot. 23. p 242. & seq. see bp. mortons appeale . troubles of frankford . see dr featleys advertisement to the reader , prefixed before ver●●m●us romanus . quare nil dubitamus profiteri athanasium limitem jur● huj us pratergressum esse , quando symbolo suo super●am istam pr●sationē prascripsit . notes for div a32802e-22730 the canterburians selfe-conviction shewes ; 1. their avowed armini●nisme . 2. their affection to the pope , and popery in the grosse , cap. 3. 3. the canterburians joyn with rome in her grossest 1. dolatries , cap. 4. 4. their embracing of popish heresies and grossest errors , cap. 5. 5. their superstitions , cap. 6. 6. the canterburians embrace the masse it self , cap. 7. 7. their maxims of tyranny , cap. 8. see the third edition of this canterb. self-conviction , with the large supplement which containes sundry very materiall passages . mr. chillingworths answer to the preface of charity maintained , which is as it were a second preface , for it followes the preface joyned with an answer to the direction to n. n. p. 9. sect. 7. the answer to the preface p. 19. in the same freface . the second preface . p. 19. * vide vedelium de arc●nu arminianismi : the foure professours of leyden in their approbation of that book declare them to be willfully blind who do not see that it was the scope of the arminians to introduce libertinisme . vtnemo deinceps , quinon sponte cacutire velit , de corum ad libertinismi introductionem scopo dubitare possit approbatio facultatu theologica leydensis . mr. chilling first preface sect. 29. cap. 2 pag 64. * the book of esther , job , ecclesiastes , the epistle of james and jude , the second of peter , the third of john , the epistle to the hebrews , the book of the revelation . we live in a questioning age : & no man knows how soon all the rest may be questioned . you may read more of mr. chillingworths principles , in a book entitled christianity maintained : the passage about henry the 8 , &c. is too famous to be mentioned . nos in diem vivi● mus ; quodcunque nostros animos probabilitate percussit , illud dicimus . it aque soli sumusliberi hoc est sceptici , vide ciceron. tusc. quast . lib. 5. answer to the preface . sect. 26. the arch-bishop himselfe is more sound . a church may hold the fundamentall point literally — yet erre damnably in the exposition of it : and this is the church of romes case — it hath in the exposition both of creeds & councels quite changed and lost the sense & meaning of some of them . the arch bishops relat. pag. 320. vide vedelium de deo synagoga . dr. kellet his tricenium . the laick must trust in his priest , the clergyman in his church . p. 630. the ●u●harist to be adored . p. 637. and received with our hands framed like a crosse . 655. altars adored . p. — 644. the arch bishop of ca●t . his relat. pag. 147. this is the protestant religion which the papists fight for , in thes fighting dayes . behold the protestant religion which the armiminians maintain . mr. chillingworth might have questioned the salvation of the iesuites as well as of the dominicans , ans. to the preface . pag. 20. first preface with an answer to the directions to n. n. sect. 26. mr. wethereld his sermon at saint maries . the arch-bishop of canterbury his relat. sect. 35. punct. . 5. p. 307. a probable conjecture of his graces reason why he altered the service-book . the difference between the scotch li●u●gy and the english is exactly set down in the canterburians selfe conviction p. 97. to 113. see m. newcomen his sermon preached on the fifth of novemb. the large supplement of the canterburian selfe-conviction pag. 19 , 20. bishop mountagu● saith that the ●igne of the crosse is the instrument of divine power and sufficient to drive away devills , it is to be made in the breast or forehead , &c. orig. eccles. tom. prioris parte poster ' pag. 80. scripture and reason , &c. set forth by divers ; ministers . the book called iesuitica negotiatio gave iesuited persons leave to professe the protestant religion , to keep any office , to passe sentence of death upon any person according to his office , so he was as favourable as possible , and gave timely intelligence of any severe sentence . pag. 74. just like the iesuise dr potter speaks of , who hoped well of honest pagans , & rashly dāned the best part of christians . sect. 2. p. 45. i say nothing of dr. sheldon his latine sermon in which he did highly advance the power of the priest . dr potter 2 edit. sect. 3. pag. 68. * impuritas non in dogmatibus fidei reperitur , sed vel in conclusionibus minus certis , vel in ritibus ; alioqui si impuritas ipsum cor & medullam occupet , actum esse de tali ecclesiâ omnes orthodo ●i censent . profess . leyd. censur. praefat. remonst praefix confess . sect. 23. that proud and curst dame of rome , &c. saith dr. potter p. 11. she doth poyson her own children , gives them serpents instead of fishes . p. 14. their charity is contrary to the true nature of charity . p 16 they have more charity for a iew and a turk then a calvinist . p. 17. we are persecuted with fire & sword and cursed into eternall fire by the romane charity , as dr. potter saith . p. 13 * read the cēsure of reverend dr. twisse upon this passage of dr. potter in his treatise of the morality of the fourth commandement . pag. 34. damnable i● themselves is in both editio●s , only corrected in the errata of the second edition , damnable in their issue . d. twisse gives the reason . see dr potter 2d . edition p. 254 , 255. we shall find that in those propositions which without al controversy are universally received in the whole christian world , so much truth is contained as being joyned with holy obedience may be sufficient to bring a manunto everlasting salvation . p. 255. the arminians say no man is an herelike who denies a point which is , or may be controverted , and so they may deny the whole creed . de harcticu quaritur , non qut ea qu● in scrip turis aperte decis● sunt convellere audent , sed qui e● qu● controversa sunt , aut controverti pessunt in dubium vo● cant exam. cens. cap. 24. p. 276. the arch-bishop of cant. his relat. pag. 309 , 310. dr. potter his prayer . an answer to mr. george walkers vindication, or rather, fresh accusation wherein he chargeth mr. wotton, besides his former foul aspersions of heresie and blasphemy, with arianism, mr. gataker with socinianism, dr. gouge and mr. downham with a fase attestation, dr. baylie and mr. stock with self-condemnation, all the eight ministers employed in the busines between himself and mr. wotton with partiality and unjust judgement : upon occasion of a relation concerning that busines / written by the said thomas gataker and by him now again avowed, wherein the said m. walkers vindication is in many things shewed to be an untrue relation. gataker, thomas, 1574-1654. 1642 approx. 297 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 70 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2004-11 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a42456 wing g310 estc r14600 13589255 ocm 13589255 100644 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a42456) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 100644) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 843:14) an answer to mr. george walkers vindication, or rather, fresh accusation wherein he chargeth mr. wotton, besides his former foul aspersions of heresie and blasphemy, with arianism, mr. gataker with socinianism, dr. gouge and mr. downham with a fase attestation, dr. baylie and mr. stock with self-condemnation, all the eight ministers employed in the busines between himself and mr. wotton with partiality and unjust judgement : upon occasion of a relation concerning that busines / written by the said thomas gataker and by him now again avowed, wherein the said m. walkers vindication is in many things shewed to be an untrue relation. gataker, thomas, 1574-1654. [2], 130 p. printed by e.g. for f. clifton ..., london : 1642. reproduction of original in union theological seminary library, new york. "some few things to be supplied or amended": p. [2] created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng walker, george, 1581?-1651. dissenters, religious -england -early works to 1800. dissenters, religious -early works to 1800. arianism -early works to 1800. socinianism -early works to 1800. 2004-08 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2004-08 apex covantage keyed and coded from proquest page images 2004-09 john latta sampled and proofread 2004-09 john latta text and markup reviewed and edited 2004-10 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion an answer to mr. george walkers vindication , or rather fresh accusation : wherein he chargeth mr. wotton ( besides his former foul aspersions of heresie and blasphemy ) with arianism ; mr. gataker with socinianism ; dr. gouge , and mr. downham , with a false attestation ; dr. baylie , and mr. stock , with self-condemnation ; all the eight ministers employed in the busines between himself and mr. wotton , with partiality and unjust judgement . upon occasion of a relation concerning that busines , written by the said thomas gataker ; and by him now again avowed . wherein the said m. walkers vindication is in many things shewed to be an untrue relation . london , printed by e. g. for f. clifton , in new-fish-street . 1642. some few things to be supplied or amended . pag. 2. after line 13. ad , for words spoken of a dead man , himself being . p. 5. l. 16. read , hath at any time ex . p. 6. l. 28. pressure . p. 14. l. 27. he then did , p. 16. l. 28. wrote . p. 38. l. 18. crave leave of . p. 42. l. 14. put in the margine against pointing . see cameron myrothec . p. 25. p. 53 marg put out , * ibid. p. 9● . l. 32. read have past . p 98. l. 26 sift q. p 115. l. 28. post script . p. 119. l. 3. he deemes . had m. walker either dealt more fairely at first , with his christian brother and fellow-minister of christ , m. a. wotton ; or upon second thoughts ( a which are wont to be the wiser ) better considered of what before he had unadvisedly attempted ; he had therein peradventure in part at least , either saved or salved his owne credit : sure i am , he had eased me of some labour , that i had little lust unto . he traduced m. wotton in the pulpit as a vile hereticke , while he lived , what time he knew master wottons tongue , through the iniquity of the times , to be so b tied up , that he could not in publique plead his owne cause . long after his decease he reneweth his revilings of him , and brandeth him againe for the like in print ; when being hence translated , he cannot now either in publique or in private personally appeare for himselfe . a true relation of the carriage of the maine matter in controversie between them , in a meeting of m. walkers owne procuring , wherein m. wotton was acquitted , being hereupon published ; he proceedeth , after his wonted guise , in violent and virulent manner , not onely to charge him , as before , with heresie and blasphemy in the doctrine of justification , but ( yet further to expresse his extream malice and rancor against him ) c with the deniall of the eternall deity of christ ; how soundly , yea or seemingly , for any shew or shadow of reason , let any intelligent reader judge . and over and besides that , ( hoping thereby to help himselfe , where he sticketh fast in the mire ) he sticketh not to d cast foule aspersions upon all those that had any hand in that hearing , not sparing them therein whom himselfe had made choise of . his vindication ( as he tearmeth it ) he beginneth with a preamble , consisting of two parts . in the former whereof , he complaineth grievously of me , and e chargeth me with breach of piety and charity , and defect of humanity and common honesty , in labouring to set upon him foul brands of the like nature , being a minister yet living in gods church ; and in adding thereby affliction to him , who hath suffered persecution and bonds for the truths sake . which passage , when i read , minded me of the italian professor of the civill-law at oxford , who having in some things carried himselfe , neither so religiously , nor so respectively towards divers worthy divines , as had been to be wished ; and being therefore by doctor rainolds in a private letter freely told of it , and withall admonished f to have more regard of piety and modesty in his writings for time to come , then in some formerly he had shewed ; in way of answer to his letter , taketh on and stormeth not a little against that mirrour as well of modesty as of learning , as g having done him no small wrong , in taking upon him so to checke and controle him , who had left his own countrey for his conscience , and was for religion sake content to live as an exile : tho meane while , it may be , enjoying as plentifull an estate here , as ever he had , or might have attained , had he stayed still where before he was . but to come more directly to m. walkers exceptions against me , or prescriptions rather for himselfe , as a sacred person , or a sanctuary man ; and not therefore to be so dealt with , as i have herein dealt with him ; and to discusse them briefly apart . i suppose a little selfe-love , and selfe-respect proceeding from it , had h drawn a filme over m. walkers eyesight , or cast a mist at least before his eyes , when he entered these pleas ; that kept him from considering what the party was whom himselfe had so despightfully dealt with . for first , is m. walker a minister of gods word ? and was not m. wotton the same ? and that peradventure nothing inferiour to m. walker in ought ; however m. walker may please to esteem or deem of him . i at whose doom yet , well it is that he neither stands nor fals . secondly , as concerning survivorship , i have ever held it , and so still shall , having k votes therein with me , i am sure , not a few , untill m. walker shall be able to convince me of errour in it ; that it is a worse matter to traduce the dead , then the living . since that the one may , the other cannot now make apologie for himselfe . besides that it is generally held an argument of l no ingenuous disposition , to insult over , or deale● igorously with the deceased . and it may well be questioned whether an injury done to a saint in heaven , have not the greater guilt , in regard o● his present estate . sure i am , that against those of the romish party , m our writers use it as an argument , and n the apostle may well seeme to adde strength thereunto , that it is a greater wrong to offer any indignity to christs body now glorified in heaven , then it had been to do the like unto him then , when in the state of humiliation he conversed with men here on earth . nor see i ought , why it may not hold as well in the other limmes , as in the head ; that the greater sinne it is to offer any wrong or contumely to them , the more highly they are now honoured and advanced by god. and what greater wrong or contumely can be done to them , then to blast their reputations , to charge them with inexpiable crimes , to damn them to hell , that now reigne with god in heaven ? so o sacred hath the condition of the deceased been deemed , that it hath been accounted a point of p sacriledge , to disturbe their remaines , or to meddle with the monuments wherein their corps lie inclosed . but the godly deceased , q had they sense and understanding of what is here done , ( as they had wont to speake , and r we well may ) would without all doubt , account it , as well they might , a far greater wrong , to have their names tainted with foule aspersions , of this nature especially , even of the highest and most hainous guilt against the divine majesty , then to have their sepulchers defaced , their graves laid open , their bodies digged up , their bones burnt , and their ashes either dispersed into the ayer , or scattered upon the surface of the waters ; or whatsoever other indignity and insolency the vaine rage and fond outrage , not of humane , but of inhumane spite and malice hath exercised upon their remains . let not m. walker therefore deeme his offence in this regard the lesse hainous , because the man is dead , or s deceased rather , whom he thus dealeth with : wherein peradventure , as t he said sometime of sylla , he had dealt more wisely , had he been lesse eager . nor hath he any just cause to complaine , because he surviveth ; if in the necessary vindication of the deceased so wronged , his inconsiderate carriage therein be discovered . if any blemish accrew to himselfe or his ministery thereby , he may blame himselfe rather then any other , who by these violent and outragious courses much impeacheth and impaireth his owne estimation in the minds of all moderate men . for his third plea , in regard whereof he claimeth an immunity from being thus dealt with , to wit. u his persecution and bonds sustained for the truth . of m. walkers restraint for some time , i have heard . during which also i sometime visited him at his brothers house . and that he suffered for the truth , i hope also is true , though it be more then i know ; because i know not for what he suffered . of his bonds , i never heard till now . if he were ever in bonds , ( god be thanked ) he is now free . but however , he might do well to remember , that m. vvotton , upon occasion of a passage used in his prayer , when the setling of church-matters with us was in agitation , ( which as things now stand , i suppose would not be so hainously taken ) that his majesty who then was , might in that weighty businesse , not be swayed with prejudice of long or pretended antiquity , but proceed according to the rule and direction of gods vvord , had for some good space of time before been deprived of the exercise of his ministery , and of the means thence arising for the maintenance of him and his ; his charge then depending upon him being greater , then i suppose m. vvalkers either then was , when he so suffered as he saith , or now is . and that he lay still at that very same time under that heavy presure , ( which he was never wholly quit of to his dying day ) when m. walker pursued ( i may well say , x persecuted him ) with those hideous imputations of teaching y divellish heresie and z blasphemy , and a the most pestilent opinions that ever satan sowed among christians . now whether this his demeanure toward m. vvotton in such times , were to b adde affliction unto affliction , or no , i leave to any man , not of c brasse bowels , and iron entrals , to determine . this am i sure of , that if m. vvalkers troubles , past and overblown now , may aggravate ought here , the storm still continuing might much more aggravate there . but this is the common guise of humane weaknesse , that men are rather prone to tender d their own griefes , then the grievances of others ; and to deny that priviledge of e sanctuary to their adversaries , under which they require yet to finde shelter for themselves . howsoever , a fond thing it is for any man to imagine , that his sufferings for the truth , either should seale him a licence to rave against , and raile upon his christian brethren at pleasure , whether surviving yet , or deceased ; or should protect him against all apology upon such occasions , made either by themselves or by others for them , in their behalfe . for as for all that , which in the next place * he subjoyneth , in his declamatory way , concerning m. wottons assertions ; how sincerely they are extracted from m. vvottons writings , or how depraved with m. vvalkers own glosses and fillings ; as also how by m. vvotton himselfe in writing answered , where they might seem to sound somewhat harshly by collating place with place , and reducing them to the state of the point there in question ; and lastly , what was thereupon concluded , when these things were at large long since debated , in a way that m. vvalker himselfe pressed m. vvotton unto ; you have fully laid down in the relation before mentioned : which m. vvalker also here referreth himselfe unto ; and to transcribe againe therefore , would be but lost labour , both to me and to my reader . that which the rather also i here wave , because i shall be constrained , treading m. vvalkers wild maze ; as now i must do , to meet with them againe more then once or twice , where fitter occasion wil be to consider further of them . after this complaint commenced of me , m. walker proceeds e to lay down the occasion , by which he hath provoked me to proclaim so bitterly against him , and to brand him with breach of piety and charity , and defect of humanity and common honesty ; and to enquire what the cause of my so doing should be . where , first , how i have proclaimed ( as he speaks ) against him , or what bitternesse i have used , either in my preface or postscript , i am well content that others indifferently affected judge . howbeit i see none forwarder to complaine of bitternesse in others , then f those that are most troubled with the overflowing of the gall themselves , and who write ordinarily , as if their pennes were dipped and steeped in no other but that bitter liquor . secondly , i demand of m. walker , where i have thus branded him . true it is , that i do indeed directly and expresly charge him with g unequall dealing ; and h want of candor in his carriage toward m. wotton . and this he returnes never a word unto , nor will be able ever to wash off . with those other defaults here mentioned i doe not my selfe charge him . i affirm only that such carriage as i there describe , i hath been ever generally held a breach of piety and charity , and may well be deemed to argue no small defect of humanity , not to adde of common honesty . and what i therein say , no man , i suppose , will deny ; not m. walker himselfe . but whether m. walker in his late dealing with m. wotton have so carried himselfe , as to contract such guilt , or no , i pronounce not ; * i say nothing , but leave it to be deemed and determined by others , upon that which afterward is related , under the hands , either of m walker himselfe , or of those whom he himselfe chose , and by his own choise of them made competent judges in his cause . the proposition therefore there alone is mine ; which m. walker himselfe doth not , nor i assure my selfe , will deny . the assumption is , either his own or theirs . yea in effect all his own , because the verdict of those , whom he referred himselfe unto . and the conclusion consequently ( which i followeth ever the weaker side ) as it toucheth m. walker , not mine , but theirs ; yea , in very truth , his own . that he charged m. wotton with heresie and blasphemy , he denieth not : that he referred himselfe for the truth of his charge to the hearing of eight grave ministers , his own letter * relateth : that he failed in his proofes , * they testifie under their own hands , whom he referred himselfe unto : that notwithstanding that faile , he hath now so long after that , since m. wottons decease , in print renued that his charge , his booke evidently sheweth . the imputation therefore of such guilt , if all that hath been related do not proove m. walker faulty in such cariage , he remaineth free enough still from , for ought that i say . if it do evince him so to have caried himselfe ; it is not i , but his own cariage , and the verdict of his own judges , that fast●eth the imputation upon him . for , what he here addeth of i my misrep●rts , he hath not hitherto , nor shall ever be able to convince me of misrelation in ought . but come we to his enquiry . where first he moveth doubt , k whether therefore ●be so offended , because he calleth the errour , that he chargeth m. wotton to have been the publisher of , herefie . and if that be the matter he telleth me , that howsoever i and my fellow-subscribers ( that is the scornfull title that now he giveth us ) did not thinke fit ( for some causes , of which hereafter ) to call any thing in his exposition of his speeches by the name of heresie and blasphemy : yet some of them cited in the parallel , are by his own confession manifestly hereticall and blasphemous . and that he rather assented to beza , pareus , and lubbertus , who condemn some things in m. wottons expositions for heresie and blasphemy , then to me and my fellows ( d. bayly , m. balmford , m. randall , m. stock , m. downhum , m. gouge , and m. hickes ) who were pleased to think otherwise . and he hopeth that therein he giveth no offence ; especially having gods woudfor his warrant . where first , i wonder how the matter against m. wotton cometh so much to be aba●ed , that from so many pretended hereticall and blasphemous errours , whereof seven horrible heads at least were represented in the parallel , it should be brought down now to one single errour , to one heresie . m. walkers heart here , it may be , did misgive him ; suspecting that some of them might be generally by all votes acquired of heresie at least , if not of errour . and he thought it therefore the wisest and wariest course to pitch upon some one ; and yet not to tell us , which that one 〈◊〉 ●eant , was , that so he might be free to fasten where he should thinke fittest , if either his proofes concerning any of the other should faile ; or those , whom he calleth in for advocates in his own behalfe , and for witnesses to give evidence against m. wotton , as condemning his opinions for hereticall and blasphemous , should be found voting in some of them rather for him then against him . 2. whereas he telleth us , that there are somethings in m. wottons expositions ( of which tearme here more anon ) which beza , pareus and lubbertus condemn as hereticall and blasphemous ; neither yet doth he shew what those things are , nor where they so stile them . yea , if to avoyd the former exception , he shall say , that the errour he meant and called heresie is this , that l faith , and not christs righteousnesse is imputed for righteousnesse in the act of justification ; because he saith that his new adversary hath so stated the question ; ( with whom yet , or his stating the question , i have nothing here to do ) he must be minded , that in the proposition so conceived there are two positions included ; both which he condemneth as two pestilent and blasphemous heresies , and in m his parallel pointeth at either of them apart . 1. that faith is imputed for righteousnesse . 2. that christs righteousnesse is not so imputed . now for the former , to wit , that faith is imputed for righteousnesse ; besides the apostle n s. paul more then once averring it , ( whom neither these men nor m. walker , i hope will so charge ) two of them are expresse and peremptory for it . for so beza , writing on those words of the apostle , o abraham beleeved god , and it was imputed to him for righteousnesse . p here , saith he , is entreated of that which was imputed to him by god , to wit of his faith . and againe , q paul relating passively , what moyses spake actively , omitteth the affix , which he might have rendered , that thing , to wit , abrahams faith it selfe : but he afterward twice plainely expresseth it in the fifth and ninth verses . and pareus reconciling the greeke with the hebrew : r these two are all one , god imputed faith , and faith by god was imputed . as for the sense , this speech concerning abraham conteineth two things : first , his faith ; abraham beleeved god. then the fruit of his faith ; and ( faith ) was imputed to him for righteousnesse . and againe , s and ( faith ) was imputed to him for righteousnesse . the fruit of abrahams faith is hereby signified , even free justification . t that the verb should be rendered , not impersonally , but passively ; that , to wit , faith was imputed ; it is manifest , both by the hebrew text , and by the apostles declaration in the fifth and ninth verses . which to observe is of much moment for the right understanding of that scripture . and for the latter position , that christs righteousnes is not imputed in the act of justification ; if by christs righteousnesse be understood his habituall holinesse , or his actuall righteousnesse consisting in the perfect observation of the law morall : here also two of m. walkers authours must of necessity leave him , unlesse they will condemne themselves for blasphemous heretickes . for both pareus and lubbe●tus , going ursines and piscators way , hold justification to consist wholly in remission of sinnes . for so pareus expresly ( besides what out of him v elsewhere ) in his commentaries before mentioned ; u the apostle placeth justification in the remission of sinnes alone . nor doth * lubbertus herein depart from him . and both therefore also herein concurre ; that they ground our justification , not upon the righteousnesse of christ , so understood , as hath been said ; but on the merit of , and satisfaction made by his sufferings . that which , as for pareus , by a whole x treatise written of purpose by him about that argument , doth most evidently appeere ; so for lubbertus is also cleere enough , by divers y passages , even in those works which were written by him professedly against the errors of socinus . yea so far doth pareus proceed herein , that he sticketh not to avow that , z those that ascribe the merit of righteousnesse unto christs active obedience or his native holinesse , c do thereby derogate from the death of christ , and do undoubtedly make it vain , or superfluous . now i would gladly understand from m. walker what he thinketh of pareus , and whether he count not him a blasphemous heretike , as well as m. wotton . as for me & my fellows , as in scorn now he calleth them , ( tho peradventure as good men as m. walker himselfe ) i hold it no disgrace to me , to be yoaked with such ; and to have deemed rather as they , then as m. walker either then did , or now doth . mean while how little cause m. walker hath to crake so much of these authors , by what hath been said , may easily be deemed ; and muchlesse to affirm , what so confidently * elsewhere he doth , that he hath all learned divines agreeing with him in what he holds : and that “ the whole stream of learned orthodox divines hold the same doctrine with him concerning justification by christs righteousnesse imputed to beleevers . which in such sense and manner as he maintaines it , he cannot but know to be most untru● ; unlesse he will expunge pareus , piscator , and i know not how many more , generally so esteemed , on● of the list of learned and orthodox divines . 3. yea but m. wotton ▪ 〈◊〉 m. w●lker , is * proved a blasphemous 〈◊〉 by h●…●onf●ssion . i answer in a word . how m. 〈◊〉 ●…th the deniall of christs righteousnesse imp●… to be here●icall and blasphemous ; he plainely ex●resseth himselfe in his a defence ; whence m. walker produceth it . to which therefore , and m. bradshawes preface to his english treatise of justification , i referre the reader : yet so , that of the one , and out of the other , somewhat hereafter also shall be said . 4. how farre forth m. walker hath gods word for his warrant , in condemning m. wotton , not of errour ( for that neither was , nor is the question ) but of heresie and blasphemy ( for that was the point in controversie , when time was ) he hath not yet made to appeare , no more then he did . for what here fondly and ridiculously in that kind he presumeth , by the sentence of his owne delegates , he was not then able to make good . what else is b here ferced in , concerning the cariage of the businesse at that meeting , shall in its due place ( by gods assistance ) be discussed . the other doubt he moveth concerning the cause of my proclaiming so bitterly against him , and being so highly offended with him , is , c whether it be , because he calleth m. wotton by the name of anthony wotton . and if that be the cause , he telleth me , that d therein he did him a favour . for that under that obscure t●●le , his person might have been hid , and not made known to any but those , who are acquainted with all the passages between him and m. walker . but m. gataker is the man , that hath exposed his person to much shame , and stained his name and memory with the brand of heresie , &c. sure he must be some , not merry , but very sad person , not grave and sage onely , that can read this passage without laughing , or smiling at least . which to shew , let me entreat m. walker to make m. wottons case a while here his owne . m. walker , as by his parallell plainly appeares , e denieth faith to be a condition on mans part required unto the attaining of justification . now suppose that some one of his own spirit should thereby take occasion , in a treatise of his published many yeeres after m. walkers decease , to traduce him for the same , by the name of george walker , as the first publisher in this land of a most pestil●●t heresie ; and thereby charge him to have made himselfe f guilty of paganisme , ind●is● and mahumetanism . would it not be ridiculous , for the party having so dealt with him , to demand of one that should write in his defence , why he is so highly offended with him , and whether it be for this cause or no , because he calleth him george walker ? &c. for were it not all o●… , as if some rude fellow , having c●st a shovell of du●t or two upon a man , as he passeth in the street , should aske the party so misused , contesting with him about it , what he aileth to be so offended with him ; and whether it be , because he did not make him a legge , or give him , as we use to say , the time of the day . he might as well have moved question , whether i were not so offended , because he stileth him barely anthony wotton , and not mr. a. wotton : or whether because he calleth him anthony and not antonie , as he usually and rightly wrote his name , save that by the printers correction , or corruption rather , he found it so also in my relation . but that that followeth , is yet more ridiculous , that herein he did m. wotton a singular favour . for under that obscure title he had lien hid and unknown to any , but those alone that had been acquainted with all that had passed between m. walker and him . is the name of antonie wotton then so obscure a title ? or are there so many of note so named , that this our a wotton may lie hid in the heap , among the multitude of them , unlesse be be by some speciall notes and marks otherwise deciphered ? and yet any man , not utterly crackt-brained , would have thought , that g anthony wotton , one that some 28. yeeres agoe lived in london , and there in manuscript pamphlets and printed bookes dispersed his opinions concerning justification , and h by the fame and opinion , which men had of his great learning and no lesse piety , drew many zealous professours into the liking of his errors ; and afterward i ●rought a booke de reconciliati●…e , in latine , &c. any man would thinke , i say , unlesse he wanted his ●its that thus much were sufficient to discover , who the man were , that m. walker meant , though they that read him were not privy to all m. walkers either revilings of him in publique , or baitings of him in private . suppose m. walkers adversary before assigned him , had onely stiled him , george walker , one that so many yeeres agoe had in the city of london out of the pulpit inveighed and declamed oft against m. wottons writings and m. bradshaws works , as containing much heretical and blaspemous matter , &c. were it not enough to let men know who the man were that be meant ( notwithstanding i suppose there be and have been about the city more walkers then wottons ) unlesse they had been acquainted with all things , that either at the solemne meeting of ministers , or in private otherwise , had passed between him and m. wotton . but that , which herein exceedeth all the rest ; is , that i m. gataker by his relation of the businesse that passed between them , and thereby blasoning his armes , hath exposed him to sh●me , and stained his name with the brand of here●ie . i never knew that i had any skill in heraldry before ; nor have heard of staining with brands till now . two new trades m. walker hath here put upon me , both which i must needs professe my selfe utterly unskilfull in . but to let these things passe ; whether of the two , staine a mans name , and expose him to shame ; he that publikely chargeth him with heresie and blasphemy ; or he that publisheth his acquitall from such horrid imputations , by the verdict , and under the hands of those , whom the same party appellant himselfe had made therein his judges ; i am well content that any , not wholly in k orestes his mood , whatsoever else he be , determine . after this preamble thus premised , m. vvalker proceeds to his narration . l the former part whereof is spent in such stories , as m. walker is pleased to entertain his reader withall , of matters foregoing the meeting of the ministers before mentioned , concerning m himselfe and his reading and preaching , n m. richardson and his approbation of m. walkers censures passed upon m. wottons opinion ; o m. wottons dealing , and p the cariage of some of his followers . all which yet i suppose no man is bound to make any part of his creed . such of them especially as are grounded upon other mens reports ; as the frivolous and ridiculous tale , that q his clarke , he saith , told him , concerning some of m. wottons disciples and himselfe ; and may the rather be questioned , because in the ensuing discourse are found some very palpable untruths ; and such as were to be charged upon m. walker himselfe , were they not salved with a some say . and what he reporteth r of m. vvottons jugling repeated againe s in his epistle , and * elsewhere , is by m. vvotton very confidently and peremptorily denied , as shall hereafter be related . as for that he relateth of m. richardsons censure , both t here , and u hereafter , be it true or no ; i say only thus much to it : that if m. richardson shall condemne all those for blasphemous heretiks , who deny the imputation of christs righteousnesse consisting in the perfect observation of the law morall unto justification ; and hold justification to consist wholly in remission of sinnes : ( which i conceive to be m. vvottons principall error , and wherein i dissent both from him and them ) he shall together with m. wotton exclude from life eternall olevian , piscator , ursinus , pareus , scultetus , altingius , cameron , and many other worthies , who were as famons and bright lights in the church of god here , as ever m. richardson was , while he lived ; and ( if the prophet x daniel may be believed ) doe now shine as starres in the kingdome of heaven , and so shall doe for ever and ever ; whatsoever doom m. richardson , or m. walker shall passe on them . for my part i deem this their censure not unlike that other conceit , that i remember to have heard m. walker sometime maintain , and is fathered likewise upon the same party , ( concerning whom , i forbeare to speake my mind , lest i undergoe the lash of m. walkers tongue ) that , the fall of our first parents proceeded not from the mutability of their will : and that all that hold it to have thence proceeded , by so holding , make god the autour of sinne . by which censure all the divines in the world ( for ought i know , m. walker , and m. richardson , if he at least so also held , only excepted ) are condemned of extream impiety ; yea of atheisme , or worse , ( if y m. walkers manner of arguing by deduction may go for currant ) since that z it is much at one , to hold god to be wicked , and to hold him no god at all . but this former part of m. walkers narration , be it what it will , nothing at all concerneth me , who begin my relation at m. walkers letter , and the meeting that thereupon ensued . out of his letter , wherewith he beginneth the latter part of it , i a relate only m. walkers charge and his challenge . which that they are there found , among much other lavish and menacing language , in as many words as i relate them ; by m. walkers owne b transcript of it may evidently appeare . with the main substance whereof , ( being such as sufficiently discovereth by what spirit it was endited ) i shall not much meddle ; but shall only relate what i find written in the margent of a copie of it ( testified to be a true copy by the attestation of m. stephen egerton , and m william gouge thereunto annexed ) with m. wottons own hand . against those words , c if you had not refused to joyn with me in a christian conference , &c. i never had any such offer made me from you . against those words , d you in scorn sent me to one spencer , &c. the party will be deposed , that this is altogether false , against those words , e this your doing when i complained to you of face to face , you excused as done in ignorance of mine intent and desire . this is most false . against those words , f did i not then shew both patience , love , and all good affection ? how true the report of this conference is , they that were by can witnesse : and to them i appeale . upon g that passage , before h also mentioned , and yet before that at large related and pressed , in his epistle prefixed before his socinianisme discovered and confuted , concerning a place of luther , that m. wotton should alledge , covering with his fingers some part of it in the same page , that made against him , against those words , i if you deny this , god is my witnesse , and mine own conscience . god is my witnesse against you , that this is most falsely reported by you . against those words , k they and you were so far from amendement , that you made me amends with all railing and reviling language . if you speake of me , it is most untrue : for others i cannot answer . against those words , related as m. wottons , concerning the bishop of london , l you dare not co●…it your selfe to him , because he is a wicked iudge , and will respect persons in judgement : my friends are too potent with him . the lord let me find no mercy with him , if ever i said so , or thought so of the bishop of london . other notes i let passe , being lesse materiall , or concerning other men rather then m. wotton him selfe . but for the further and fuller clearing of this last clause , i shall subjoyne out of a letter of m. egertons written to m. wotton , dated may 23. 1614 under his own hand , the very words that m. wotton used concerning the bishop . * among some other passages , you had this speech in effect , that you thought that my lord of london would not willingly do any thing , that might impeach m walker , because ( as you had heard ) his brother of cheswick was very gracious with my lo●d . thus much in effect , and not a jot more , did i signifie to m. walker onely by way of demand , &c. how soundly and charitably m. walker collected hereupon , that you either said or intimated , that you durst not commit your selfe to the bishop of london , because he is a wicked man , &c. i leave it to others to determine . this i professe , that neither when i received it from you , nor when i told it to his eare , i did so much as conceive or imagine , that you had any such conceit of my lord of london . thus that reverend divine , now with the lord : by whose testimony may appeare , how prone m. walker is to tenter out mens words , beyond all , not charitable onely , but even reasonable , construction . from his letter , m. walker proceedeth to the meeting or conference therein required ; which he saith is n the subject of mine invective against him . in relating whereof yet i use no invective at all . i report onely what was done and exhibited on both parts : & what resolved by the parties on either side deputed to heare and decide . neither of which m. walker either doth or can deny . but m. walker must give me leave , to deale here a little more freely with him ; and to tell him in plainer tearmes , that many things delivered in this part of his narration , are either utterly untrue , or such as may justly be suspected of untruth . 1. he maketh his very entrance into it with a manifest untruth , tho a matter of no great moment . he saith , that o upon the receit and reading of that his letter , m. wotton sent him a letter of defiance , and therein professed his scorn and disdaine of his threatnings : but the next day he sent him another , wherein he promised to yeeld to his motion . which , tho not much materiall , whether so or no , yet is not true . for m. wotton sent him but one letter with a postscript of diverse date added thereunto : which must needs therefore come to m. walkers hands both at once ; and not the one this day , and the other the next , as m. walker here relates it . m. wotton had indeed begun and gone on a good way in a large answer to m. walkers whole letter ; which is yet to be seen ; and i could well have been content to afford it room here , save that i found it unfinished , and withall was loath to make this discourse overlong . but therein it seems he altered his mind , and sent him this shorter . which , if but to shew the difference of these two mens spirits , i have thought good here to insert . to mr. george walker , peace of conscience , by true zeale with sobriety and charity . sir , if you have any true d●sire of my good , especially testified by prayer to god for me , the lord requite your love , and uphold me in the continuance of the like duty for you now and ever . but i must plainly professe , that i can hardly be perswaded of the truth of your protestation : because i finde your present letters , being the first that ever i received from you , so full of bitternesse . yet could i have been contented to have made some answer to them , but that i see it would be to small or no purpose . for a great part of your vehement accusation concerns other men , and not me : who am not ( in any equity ) to be charged with their faults , ( if any have so faulted ) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . the things , which touch my selfe , are all , either utterly untrue , or misreported by you . and to what purpose were it , for me to deny , and you to affirme ; and so as it were out-vy one anothers credit ? concerning the offer you make of putting the points in question , whether first you doe justly charge me with heresie and blasphemy ; and whether secondly , my writings do not shew me to be a socinian ; i could happily have yeelded thereunto , without excepting against any one whom you name , if you had not so violently sought it , by frighting me ( as you imagined ) with complaining , to my l. of canterbury his grace and the commission , of me , if i refused . good m walker do not think me so childish or foolish , that i can be scared with such terrours and menacings . i am so throughly resolved of the truth i hold , differing immane quantum from socinus blasphemy , and so well perswaded of my lords soundnesse in judgement , and the equall hearing i shall have in that court , that i am not afraid to put the matter there to triall . wherefore use your discretion , either in this , or in any other course , that shall best please you : i will alwaies be ready to maintaine the truth i know , and to acknowledge that , i yet know not , whensoever it shall be discovered to me by the word of god. to whose gracious blessing i commend the pardoning and reforming of this and all other wrongs you have done me , and rest , towerhill , may 5. 1614. yours as it becomes a christian to be antony wotton . postscript . since the writing of this letter , i have been perswaded by them , by whom i am willing to be advised and ruled , to yeeld to your motion , which by this postscript i now signifie unto you ; conditionally , that all things , wherewith you charge me in your letter may also be heard , and the letter it selfe scanned , as they , that shall be and are chosen , shall thinke meet . the manner of this tryall , with the time and pl●ce , must ( in reason ) be left to their wisedomes and liking . whom i will choose , you shal understand from me , upon signification that you accept of this condition . the expectation of your former messenger , who said he would call for an answer , hath made me to put off the writing of this till now . may 12. thus have you m wottons letter of defiance , as m. walker is pleased to stile it , so full of scorn and disdain ; nothing sutable indeed to m. walkers invective , nor savouring at all of his furious spirit . and you have withall in the postscript the reason of the delay of m. wottons answer , returned thereunto not without the postscript because detained by him till then . that which also is testified by m. walkers own letter written in answer hereunto ; wherein he professeth himselfe to have been at the first sight of m. wottons letter much troubled , as in some other respects , so in regard of the refusall of his motion , and the defiance ( as there also he tearms it ) of his threatnings ; untill he found at last to his comfort , an acceptance of his motion , upon the advice of his friends . 2. that which next followeth , hath as little truth in it as the former , being a matter of more moment ; to wit , that p m. wotton , after that by letter to m. walker he had promised to yeeld to his motion about a conference , did by m. mason the bishops chaplen use meanes to make it known to the bishop , in hope that he would forbid the meeting . whereas m. wotton had not yet written to m. walker , that he would accept of that his offer , ( desirous rather of a publike hearing , then a private conference ) untill he had been with the bishop , q whom he importuned for an open and judiciary tryall ; and being pressed by him rather to condescend to the course by m. walker propounded , had thereupon consented and yeelded thereunto ; upon condition that the bishop would assigne one of his chaplens to be a party in the hearing ; who to satisfie m. wottons request therein , appointed m. mason then present , to m. wotton otherwise a meere stranger , to undertake that imployment . after which therefore m. wotton added the postscript above recited , to his letter , lying yet by him , because not yet called for by m. walkers messenger , according to m. wottons expectation and his promise . 3. it is not true , that r m. hicks and my selfe bare our selves at the meeting , towards m. walker as an adversary , or as advocates for m. wotton : unlesse to require the forbearance of railing and reviling terms , and endevouring to have the businesse fairely and calmly caried , without invectives and declamations , which m. walker , if let alone , would never have made an end of , may beare such an interpretation . and yet m. hicks ( a man whom to my knowledge i never saw before or since , nor know i how m. walker knows to be s of m. wottons mind in all points ) spake least in the businesse of the most there present , being the yongest among us , and a man of very modest and moderate cariage . but somewhat must be fastned on a man least known ; because of the better known it would not be so easily beleeved . 4 it is not true that t d. westfield was the onely man there , with whom m. walker had then any great familiarity . for m. stock and he , as they were next neighbours in their charges , so were very familiar ; tho for his kindnesse he have been but ill rewarded by m. walker in some u passages here ensuing . for i leave it to m. walker to reconcile his owne relations ; wherein he telleth us , here , that x he was but a stranger of two yeeres residence in the city at the time of our meeting anno 1614. and yet before in the very entrance , that y the controversie between m. wotton and himselfe began anno 1611. he was belike very busie in the city , before he had any residence in the city . but this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being in his owne acts , himselfe , i hope , will some way assoll . 5. nor is it true , that the parties designed , were a all of them m. wottons old familiar friends . what any of the rest might be , i cannot certainly say ; tho of few of them , i suppose , m. walker is able to make it good . but for my selfe , i was then but lately grown into acquaintance with him by occasion of my removall from lincolns-inne to rederith . besides that there had much strangnesse grown before that time ( as b between the best and holiest sometime it falleth out ) betweene m. stock and m. wotton , a thing too well known to , and much lamented by , many interressed in either . 6. it is not true , that c i derided him , when he gave in his charge of socinian heresie & blasphemy against m. wotton . for i never so did . tho i confesse , i could not forbeare smiling at the reading of d the second point in his parallel condemned as a blasphemous socinian heresie . and i suppose that scarce any sound and judicious divine will be able to read it sine risu aut stomacho . 7. nor is it true , that e dr. baily came in amongst us , as by m. walker designed to succeed in the roome of d. westfield . for d. westfield was expected that very day , that d. baylie intruded himselfe into our company , tho very likely indeed ; not without m. walker● privity and procurement , to disturb our proceedings . yet not pretending to appeare in d. westfields roome , however afterward he supplied it , to make up the number ; but making bold forsooth to associate himselfe with us , f because we met in his church . the most of the rest misliking , and muttering at it among themselves , as desirous rather of his roome then his company . and that , as for some other reasons not so fit to be here related ; so the rather for that no sooner almost he was set down among us , but he began to quarrel with m. wotton about his ap parrell , because he went not in a ministeriall habit . 8. whereas it is added , that g d. westfield refused after our first meeting , to meet any more , ( which yet unto the rest of us he never once intimated ) because he perceived a generall inclination in us all to favour m. wotton , as foreseeing and fearing what followed . as therein m. walker taxeth not me alone , but the whole company of open partiality : so it may rather justly be surmised , that d. westfield being of a mild and moderate disposition , forbare further to present himselfe among us , being wearied out with m. walkers furious and intemperate cariage , sufficient to have tired us all : and this i suppose they will the more incline to , that know the mans temper . 9. it is not true , that h m. walker did at first desire of us , that having in writing paralleld m. wottons words with socinus his , we would give our hands to his parallel , and subscribe , that he had not charged m. wotton with any opinions or words but his owne ; or consuted under the name of socinianisme any words of his , wherein he con●urred not with socinus . for i neither was there at first any mention of a parallel ; nor came the motion of it , when it was afterward mentioned , from m. walker ; but was after some wast of time spent to no purpose in clamorous declamations and invectives , by my selfe propounded ; that we might thereby the better discerne , how the case stood concerning the matters controverted , and bring the businesse to some good issue : nor was any such subscription ever on m. walkers part required ; who as he now seoffeth us by the name of subscribers ; so could not after due hearing endure to heare of any subscribing ; well wotting by the verdict of the whole company , what the subscription was like to be . 10. he frameth k his narration , as if his parallels had been read alone without m. wottons answer : and that l upon the reading and examining of them , they appeared to some of them so cleere , and his cause so just , that the same day at dinner dr. baylie did protest , that m. walker had discovered m. wotton to be as damned an hereticke as ever did tread on english ground : and after againe , that m the said doctor upon the first reading of m. wottons speeches so paralleld , condemned m. wotton for an hereticke , and his errors for blasphemy . to wit , at a private table , as before he had related . now whether d. baylie spake thus or no , i will not call in question ; because m. walker saith he hath sufficient witnesses of it . but this i say : 1. that his parallel was not delivered in before or without m. wottons answer . for so n it was agreed . nor were all the parallels or points paralleld read over at once ; but severally related , considered of , and examined , together with m. wottons answer thereunto , and both withall debated , as they stood in order , and came to hand , some one day , and some an other . 2. for the doctors speech , ( howsoever his judgement , i suppose , so rashly given especially , will beare no great weight with those that throughly knew the man and his manner ) if it were such as m. walker saith ; and were delivered , as he implieth , upon the very first hearing of m. walkers charge onely read , before he had heard m. wottons defence : it may seem , he was of that mind , that o the stoike sometime was , who held it a ridiculous thing to heare any defendant or second party : tho most wise men have ever been p of a contrary judgement ; requiring q the one eare at least to be reserved for the defendant ; and condemning those of r unjust and unequall dealing , albeit the sentence they passe be agreeable to right , that condemne a man unheard . but , if the doctor then said , as m. vvalker saith he did ; and yet afterward did under his hand acquit m. vvotton of heresie and blasphemy , as it is acknowledged that he did ; one of the two must of necessity follow , either that he altred his judgement therein upon the hearing of m. wottons defence , considering better of the businesse then before he had done ; or that he gave sentence and subscribed directly contrary to his owne judgement , and so s in acquitting m. vvotton condemned himselfe . of either whereof let m. vvalker choose which he please , and make the best use of it for his owne advantage . 11. howbeit to afford the doctor a plaister , wherewith to salve his credit , herein somewhat impeached , m. vvalker bringeth in the party , at whose house they dined , demanding , t vvhy they did not then without more adoe justifie m. vvalker , and censure m. vvotton . m. vvalker might much better himselfe rather have askt the doctor , why he said not so much openly at the meeting ; or how it came to passe that he did not there utter any one syllable or title tending thereunto ; whenas at the table now ( whereby any man may deem of the doctors discretion , if all that m. vvalker tels of him be true ) he so freely and fully passed and published his censure . now to this question of his hoasts m. vvalker shapeth this answer , ( in whose person uncertaine ; for m. vvalker is nothing cleere in these his dramaticall discourses ) u they pretended , that they desired to convert , not to confound m. vvotton ; that they perceived him to be afraid of a storm like to fall on him : and that if i would yeeld to let him expound himselfe , he would by a wrested exposition gainsay and contradict his former words and opinions , and run from them : which being gotten from him under his own hand , they would either hold him to it , or shame him for ever , if he did fall back again . such a passage , as i know not , nor any man else , i thinke , what to make of . for first , who be the they , that he speaketh of ? was it the doctor alone , that told all this faire tale , and pretended all this ? how cometh he then to say , they ? or if m. downham be included , who is related to have dined at the same time with them ; how doth m. walker , in his ensuing discourse make him x a mute actor in this scene , one that y by silence only assented to , what the doctor then said ? again , where , think we , meaneth he , that all this was pretended ? was it pretended at the table ? or was it related only there ; but pretended before at the meeting among our selves ? but i shall leave it to any man of ordinary understanding to conceive , how likely it is ; either that m. wottons friends ( for such m. walker saith they were all ) should thus conspire to ensnare him ; or that such a consultation should be had among us in the presence of m. wotton himselfe . for we did nothing at our meetings but in the presence of m. wotton and m. vvalker ; who were neither of them ever excluded , or required to withdraw themselves upon any occasion , during the whole hearing . but m. walker it may well seem , was somewhat distracted in mind , when he writ this ; studying how to bring in handsomely what himselfe had invented , and uncertaine whom to father and fasten it upon . for marke , i pray you , what immediately follows . 12. a this course , saith he , being m. gatakers device , i refused to yeeld unto : because i had never opposed m. wotton , but onely in his opinions formerly published , and and not in future expositions : and because i had fully proved my charge , i desired their verdict and just judgement . but after much importunity i yeelded ; and so lost my cause , and was drawn into a new businesse ; that was , to contend with m. wotton , not about his former opinions , but about new expositions , which he would make in answer to my parallel . in which words are couched many grosse falshoods : nor was the former passage so intricate , but this is much more untrue . 1. he affirmed before , that they pretended this and that ; and thereupon plotted to get i know not what under m. wottons hand . now he telleth his reader , that this course was m. gattakers device . b where at length shall we have him ? 2. true it is indeed , i was the first mover , that m. walker might be requested to make such a parallel ; as c in my relation i acknowledge . but that i ever had any such pretence , as m. walker here talketh of , or ever made any motion for ought under m. wottons hand , is most untrue . m. vvotton onely himself moved , ( as i d elswhere relate ) that he might have the parallels sent him from m. walker a day or two before the next hearing , that he might subjoyn his answer and defence thereunto . 3. that m. walker refused to yeeld thereunto , and was by meere importunity drawn to admit it , is likewise most false . for it was presently deemed most equall on all sides : nor did m. walker in the least manner make any shew of dislike . 4. it is a like true , that upon the giving in of his parallel , he required our verdict ; that course being not as yet condescended unto , which he tearmeth my device . when as the course mentioned , and by m. vvotton himselfe motioned , was agreed upon before his parallel was composed , and much more then , before it was exhibited . so that by m. walkers relation a verdict should have been past by his judges , while the parallel , containing the evidence , was as yet , if as yet at least , in the actors brain only . but to take the businesse , and discusse it a while , as m. walker here relateth it . first , i referre it to any indifferent mans judgement to determine , whether it were agreeable to equity , for m walker to require a verdict of his iudges , ( as he termeth them ) or for them to give it in his behalfe , against m. wotton , upon a bare sight of some positions found as well in m. wotton , as in socinus , ( supposing it so to be ) before m. wottons defence were either exhibited or heard . and here let me crave leave to shew the unreasonablenesse of such a request , and it be but by one instance . m walker in his parallel chargeth this position upon m. wotton , as a point of socinianism , an hereticall and blasphemous assertion , that e faith is a condition appointed by god to be performed on our parts for obtaining of justification . now , it being granted , that the very same words were by m. walker exhibited , ( which yet precisely they are not ) as well out of socinus his works , as out of m. vvottons writings : had it not been , thinke we , a very discreet part of them whom the businesse was committed unto , to have without more adoe , so censured it , as m walker had charged it , and in so censuring it , to have condemned themselves , ( who openly to m. walkers face * professed , that they had oft taught it ) and not themselves alone , but all orthodox divines ( for ought i know ) in the whole world ; yea the apostle s. paul himselfe to boote too , if some of them may be beleeved ; for socinians and blasphemous heretiks ? for i would fain know of m walker , how this differeth that he so chargeth , from what pareus saith , and avoweth to be s. pauls , that f faith is the condition , under which christ is given us for a propitiation . or , not to looke out abroad , but to keep our selves at home ; i should desire to understand from him , what he thinketh of these passages in some writers of our own ; and those men of no mean note neither . first , that of m. fox , g the condition whereby we are properly justified is this , that we beleeve in christ. and againe , * the evangelicall promise requireth no other condition to the attaining of salvation , besides faith onely , whereby we beleeve on the sonne of god. secondly , that of m. perkins , in his reformed catholique ; h in the covenant of grace , two things must be considered : the substance thereof , and the condition . the substance of the covenant is , that righteousnes and life everlasting is given to gods church and people by christ. the condition is , that we for our parts are by faith to receive the foresaid benefits . and this condition is by grace as well as the substance . or if these men be not of that esteem with m. walker , but that he can be content to let them go for damned heretiks , to beare m. vvotton company in the same condemnation , i should crave to be informed , what he deemeth of m. pemble , i some of whose works he hath deigned to honour with a dedicatory epistle ; wherein he commendeth him , as k a righteous and faithfull servant of christ , excelling in grace and vertue , abounding in all wisdome , and in all knowledge , lively sense and utterance of heavenly and supernaturall mysteries , far above all that could be expected from , or is ordinarily found in one of his age and yeers . l nor doubteth therefore , nor is afraid to say of him , that he is ascended up into that supercelestiall glory , towards which he had ever bent all his studies and desires . this m. pemble then , whom m. walker thus extolleth , and not altogether undeservedly , in another of his works hath these words : m there are two covenants that god hath made with man : by one of which salvation is to be obtained . the one is the covenant of works , thè tenor whereof is , doe this , and thou shalt live . the other is the covenant of grace , the tenor whereof it , beleeve in the lord iesus , and thou shalt be saved . the condition of this covenant , n ( required in them that shall be justified ) is faith . the performance whereof differs from the performance of the condition of that other covenant . doe this and live , is a compact of pure justice ; wherein wages is given by debt ; so that he that doth the work obeying the law , may in strict justice for the work sake claim the wages , eternall life , upon just desert . beleeve this and live , is a compact of freest and purest mercy ; wherein the reward of eternall life is given us in favour for that , which beares not the least proportion of worth with it : so that he that performs the condition , cannot yet demand the wages , as due unto him in severity of justice , but onely by the grace of a free promise , the fulfilling of which he may humbly sue for . and againe , o altho the act of justification of a sinner be properly the onely work of god , for the onely merit of christ : yet is it rightly ascribed unto faith , and it alone ; for as much as faith is that main condition of the new covenant ; which , as we must performe , if we will be justified ; so by the performance whereof we are said to obtaine justification and life . thus m. pemble : in which passages ( tho i will not justifie all therein contained ) he fully and cleerely expresseth m. wottons meaning not as his owne judgment only , but p as the doctrine of the reformed churches by them so explained . now i demand of m. walker , whether for this damnable and detestable position , we shall doe well , without further search or triall , ( the rather since that the same , he saith , is found in socinus ) to condemne m. pemble of heresie , and require , if not his bones to be digged up againe and committed to the fire , yet his books at least containing such blasphemous stuffe , to be burnt . which if he shall deem fit , sure pauls epistles , unlesse pareus be much mistaken , must goe the same way . or if he shall be of another mind concerning these blessed men , whether it be not extreame partiality , to let that goe for sound doctrine in m. fox , perkins , pareus and pemble , that in m. wottons writings without further adoe , upon m. walkers bare relating of it , must be condemned for blasphemous heresie . secondly , i desire to have it considered , whether it were equall to censure a man for an heretike , upon bare positions or sayings extracted out of his writings , without any regard had to , or notice taken of , his own expositions of them ; or his reasons alledged to prove his dissent in them from the errors of those whom he is charged to concurre with ; confirmed by collation of place with place in his writings , and by consideration of the maine scope and drift of the dispute , course and tenor of the discourse , and the different sense and meaning of the words and terms used by either . for example , m. walker in his parallel alledgeth a saying of servetus , ( and that is all that he hath out of him throughout his whole parallel ) that q for one act of faith was abraham righteous . and presuming that m. wotton saith the very same , ( though he alledge not any one place at all out of m. wotton , where these words are found ) from hence concludeth , that m. wotton and servetus do in the doctrine of justification hold one and the same opinion in all points . now suppose wee that the very selfesame words were found in m. wottons wrirings : and againe , that that saying in servetus were condemned , yea and that justly , for hereticall : yet were it therefore agreeable to equity , without further disquisition , to passe sentence thereupon , that m. wotton & serv●tus do in all things hold the same opinion in the point of justification ? yea or , that in those very words they speake the same thing ? when it may easily be made evidently to appeare , that servetus speaketh of justification in one sense , and m. wotton intreateth of justification in another sense : and that neither the faith , nor the righteousnesse , nor the manner of imputation of righteousnesse , that they speak of in their writings are the same . that which any may soon see , that shall read r the summe of servetus his discourse , related out of calvin in my postscript . surely by the same reason might m. walker prove s. paul and servetus to be both of them in all things of one mind concerning the doctrine of justification ; because s servetus saith , that abrahams beleeving was imputed unto him for righteousnes : and s. paul expresly in so many t words saith the same . or that musculus agreeth with servetus in all things for the matter of justification ; because he saith in neerer terms to servetus , then any m. walker alledgeth out of m. wotton ; that u abraham for that faith of his was of god reputed just . yea take away all benefit of exposition , and who almost may not be condemned of heresie and blasphemy ? for example : he that shall mention gods x hands and y feet ; as concurring with the audians , z who held that god had the shape , limbs , and lineaments of a man : he that shall affirme , with the evangelist , or with christ himselfe rather , that a the father is greater then he ; as consenting to the arians ; b who maintained an inequality among the persons in the trinity . and here i shall crave of m. walker and my reader to tell a story or two : it is the humour of old men ( such as m. walker and my selfe ) to be now and then telling of tales . i remember , that , while i aboad at lincolns-inne , the night before legate the arian appeared in the bishops consistory at pauls , ( of whose being in trouble i then knew nothing ) there came to my chamber there , at a very unseasonable houre , a gentleman-like man ; who having knockt at the doore , ask'd to speake with me ; and entrance afforded him , reacht me a little scrole , wherein were these words written , whether was the godhead of christ begotten of the godhead of the father from all eternity ? and withall desired me to give mine opinion , whether that were not an error ? i required to know first what the meaning of the party was , that held or affirmed it . he answered me , according to that in the creed , c god of god , light of light . i told him , that these were not the words there used : and that to speake properly , the godhead was not said , either to beget , or to be begotten . if the parties meaning were , that christ being god was begotten of the father , who is likewise god from all eternity ; the sense were sound , but the speech improper . then belike , as it is there written , quoth he , it is an error . as the words sound , replied i , it is : yet it may be not , in his sense that spake it . he requested me to give him that under my hand . i craved his name . he told me , i must excuse him for that . i told him , he should likewise excuse me for this . and so we parted . but the next day , hearing legate in the consistory , as i past thorow pauls , i began to surmise , that this party might be some friend of his ; and that some divine or other , in conference with him having let some such speech slip from him , this party his friend might beate about to get under some other divines hands the censure of it as an error . whence i then gathered , that a man had need to be wary , how he condemne a man of error , of heresie much more , upon a bare relation of words , before he understand what his meaning is . againe , i remember , that a busie separatist being committed to newgate , and there arrogantly challenging to dispute with all commers , and scornfully playing upon and gibing at such as dealt with him ; m bradshaw ( whom we shall find m. walker anon grinning at ) was by some friends brought to him ; who perceiving the mans spirit , and having had some discourse with him , the issue whereof he caused to be set down in writing under both their hands , that he might not talke of this and that , after they were parted ; m. bradshaw a little to represse his insolency , told him , that for all his prating so much of the constitution of a church , ( the common subject of such mens disputes ) yet his skill peradventure might be but mean in the maine principles of religion . and being by him provoked to make triall , if he pleased ; he demanded of him , whether christs deity assumed the person of man or no. to which question the bold bayard without stop or stay returning an affirmative answer , that it did , m. bradshaw told him , it was grosse heresie . and so left him . and indeed , if the words alone be regarded , so it is ; even the heresie of nestorius , d who maintained two-persons in christ , not two natures in one person . and yet neither doe i , nor did m. bradshaw hold the silly fellow to be an heretik ; no more then e those that beare the name of nestorians in the eastern parts , are deemed so to be at this day . and indeed take mens words apa●t from their meaning , and how many shall be ranked , though in judgement never so sound and orthodox , among heretiks , as concurring with such , because the same words and sentences are found in either ? to cleere this a little , consider we an instance or two , salvian bishop of marseiles , a very pious and learned ancient writer , saith , that f our saviour christ is the greatest begger in the world. meaning it of the poverty , which he sustaineth g not in himselfe , but in his , in the severall members of his body mysticall , or spirituall rather , here upon earth . shall he be hold therefore to concurre in opinion with pope nicolas 3. and those other h who maintained , that our saviour christ was a very beggar indeed , and lived here in the very lowest degree of beggary that can be ; which pope iohn 22. i condemneth for an heresie ? againe luther , in his commentary upon the epistle to the galatians , saith , that k christ was the greatest sinner in the world ; meaning it , in regard of l the sinnes of all the faithfull , which he took upon himselfe , and were reckoned as his . and we read of one austen of rome , archbishop of nazareth , who maintained some assertions , not unlike that of luther , to wit , that m christ sinneth daily , and ever so did . understanding what he sp●ke , n of the body of the faithfull , who being o in christ , and p one with christ , have the name of christ sometimes given them q in scripture . the speeches , i confesse , are both overharsh ; and the archbishop was for his taxed in the r councel of basil. yet were it no lesse harsh or hard , to condemne either of them , as concurring in judgement with those blasphemous pharisees , that s said our saviour christ was a sinner ; tho the words were the same with either . yea to ad onely one instance more : s. iohn himselfe faith , that t no regene rate man doth sinne ; u nor can sinne . and yet who dares be so bold as to say , that s. iohn therefore concurreth either with the old x cathari , or with the late familists , who dreaming of an absolute perfection in this life , do y of their illuminate and regenerate ones say the same ? in regard hereof , a man may precisely relate an other mans words ; and yet be a slanderer , a false accuser , a false witnes . for example ; that i may refresh my reader a little with some matter of more abstruse learning , ( yet other mens , not mine own ; lest m. walkers tongue again lash me ) and a season therewith somewhat this not very savoury discourse . suppose we , that those persons , b that were deposed against our saviour , had given in his precise words , as he himself spake them , without addition , detraction or alteration of ought , dissolve this temple , and within three daies , i will reedifie it ; understanding and affirming it ( as it seems they did , and as d the jewes that heard him tooke it ) to have been spoken not as he meant and intended it ( pointing in likelihood , when he spake , to it ) f of the temple of his body , g wherein his deity dwelt ; but of the temple of lime and stone , built by herod , of which they spake when they said , h forty and six yeeres hath this temple been building , as the words may well be translated : and i so long by just computation it is by some deemed , that it had then been in building , and k the former . and indeed it may seeme by n was not yet fully finished : and of which l some understand , not without some good ground of probability , those words of the prophet , m silver is mine , and gold is mine ; or , of silver and gold i have store enough ; the glory of this latter house shall be greater than the glory of the relation of those that saw it , that the o second house , as the jewes tearme it , ( which tho demolished by herod , yet still bare that name , because there was no interruption or intermission by occasion thereof of p the daily solemne sacrifice ) was by that q magnificent king built up againe in more stately manner , then by salomon it was built at first . now suppose , i say , these men , that were suborned to accuse our saviour , had in their evidence to a syllable given in his owne words , and had agreed in their testimony , as r they did not ; had they been ever a whit the lesse false-witnesses therefore ? i trow , not . and here i cannot let passe , as notorious , and yet as grosse and palpable a calumny as ever i read or heard of , of that romish sycophant , that wrote against that acute and nimbleheaded defender of the safe way to salvation by protestants religion ; a worke , which for the main substance of it , as it opposeth popery , i looke not to see answered by that side in hast , however they nibble at some passages here and there in it , and snarle at the author . he renders you the authors words to an heire , not a word , not a syllable , not a letter , not a point , not a title , detracted , added , altered , or displaced . no man that reads the jesuite , having not m. chillingsworths booke by him , but would verily beleeve , he had uttered and meant , the thing spoken , of himselfe . for thus they runne in his relation , s this man ( to wit , m. g. c. ) speakes so irreligiously sometimes , that it may give just occasion for men to enquire what he beleeves concerning the divinity of our saviour christ ; as when he saith , t that the doctrine of transubstantiation may bring a great many others , as well as himselfe to averroes his resolution ; quandoquidem christiani adorant quod comedunt , sit anima mea cum philosophis ; seeing christians adore what they eate , my soule be with the philosophers . which having recited , he begins to debate the matter with the authour , as having said thus of himselfe . u is this matter of eating our saviour such a pill to your understanding , that rather then disgest it , you will turne turke or infidel ? if you beleeved indeed that our saviour christ is truely god , you would not be scondalized , that christians adore him who would and could be eaten , no more then him who stood in need of eating , and whom the iewes might have eaten , even in a capharnaiticall and savage manner if it had been his will to permit it : x perhaps for these reasons , having subjected faith to reason , you wish with averroes a prosessed enemy of christians , my soule be with the philosophers . whereas let any man but lightly cast his eye upon the authors owne discourse ; and the knavery will at the very first sight , without further enquiry , evidently discover it selfe . his words are these , y i should desire you to tell me ingenuously , whether it be not too probable , that your portentous doctrine of transubstantiation , joynd with your forementioned perswasion of , no papists , no christians , hath brought a great many others as well as himselfe to averroes his resolution , quandoquidem christiani adorant , quod comedunt , sit anima mea cum philosophis . you see the authours own words exactly retained , precisely reported ; and yet that resolution thence gathered , and therein fathered and fastned upon the author , then which he nothing lesse there either uttered or intended . which the rather i recite here , partly to shew the desperate shamelesnes of those of that faction , not regarding what lies and falshoods they report as out of our writers , tho the books repaired to may presently convince them of grosse untruth ; ( of which their practise examples not a few might be produced ) and partly to manifest how exactly for words men may cary themselves in this kind , and yet not escape the just censure of fals-witnesbearers , and unjust slanderers of their brethren . lastly , to come full home to our selves ; as he may be a false-witnes , who yet relateth a mans own words : so iury and iudge may both be unjust , tho upon a mans own words , the one cast him , and the other condemn him ; excluding his exposition , and either perverting or mistaking his meaning ; witnes ( to go no further , but content our selves therewith ) those * that cast and condemned our poore countreyman , a citizen and grocer of london , one of m. walkers name , in king edward the fourths time , as guilty of no lesse then high treason ( for which also he was executed ) for saying , he would make his child , if he plied his booke , heire to the crown : thereby meaning no other then his own dwelling house at the signe of the crown in cheapside , commonly known and called by that name . nor , i suppose , could we justly have escaped that censure ; should we , as m. walker here would have us , upon his bare reading of m. wottons words to us , without all further examination of them , or hearing of him , have proceeded to condemn him of heresie and blasphemy ; that is , no lesse , as i take it , then high treason against the highest majesty . but thus much may suffice , if not more then sufficient , to evince the iniquity and inequality of m. walkers here pretended request . which yet he was not so unreasonable then as to motion or mention ; much lesse to presse upon us , being then somewhat more reasonably minded , then ( it seemes ) he now is : and which , had he pressed upon us , as now he saith that he did , had been most unequall and unjust for us to have granted . 13. as far from truth as the former , are those things that in m. walkers narration next follow : to wit , that a at an other day m. wotton brought his expositions ; whereas in truth his answers which he cals his expositions ( the same word for word that by his sonne have since been published ) were delivered in at the same time together with m. walkers parallels , as at first was appointed , that b he desiring to argue with m. wotton face to face against them in strict syllogisms , he refused to answer him ; and their iudges refused to heare him , or to suffer him to have a copy of them , as m. wotton had of his parallels . all which is most untrue . for neither did m. vvotton ever refuse to answer m. walker , offering any orderly dispute : ( which how well m. walker is acquainted with , those that have had dealings with him in this kind , or have read his writings , may soon see ) nor did their iudges ( as he calleth them , but very partiall and unjust ones , it seems , all of them ; and it is well , that herein we suffer all alike from him ) refuse to heare him alledging ought , whereby he might make his charge good . nor was he by them ever denied a copy of m. vvottons answer ; which neither we had our selves , no more then his parallel , nor was at any time by him demanded of us . 14. yet what he addeth here , i confesse , is in part true ; that when he saw he could not have his owne will , nor deterre us from acknowledging under our hands , that we found neither heresie , nor blasphemy , in ought , that he had evinced m. wotton to hold ; c he went away in a rage ; yet , not threatning ( as here he reporteth ) to bring him and us before higher judges ; ( he came not as yet to so high tearms with us ; and is herein therefore not unlike some debauched persons , who to encrease their owne shame , will d vaunt many times of more evill then ever they did ) but not without intimation , that we did more then we could answer in taking upon us to determin heresie ; ( or to tell , belike , what we thought to be , or not to be such ) having forgotten , it seems , his own motion at first , and what himselfe had requested us to meet about : just as if a party appeaching his neighbour of wrong doing , and having pressed him to referre the matter betweene them to arbitrators joyntly agreed on ; should , when he perceived them enclining to acquit his neighbour of the pretended wrong , demand of them , whether they would take upon them to decide right and wrong : and yet why might not we do as much as walker himselfe had done ? for how did not he take upon him to determine what was heresie , when he charged m. wotton with it ? nor again , is it untrue , that afterward he endeavoured to have us called in question for our meeting , tho by himself procured . insomuch that the bishop of london , in regard of his importunate exclaiming against us , did at first pretend to doubt of , yea in a manner deny his giving way to it ; untill being minded of the e motion made for one of his chaplens to be a party in the businesse , and his condescending thereunto , he could not but agnize it . but that which followeth ; and , if m. walker in his narration observe any due order , should be done after his departure , and so in his absence ; to wit ; that f m. wotton should promise to make & publish a large declaration , wherein he would free himselfe from all socinian errors ; and in the mean space begged this favour , that they would subscribe to his expositions , that they found no heresie or blasphemy in them ; and that upon this promise and entreaty they did subscribe , as followeth , &c. to which is a little after added , that g m. wotton begged this beggerly subscription ; ( which sticketh shrewdly in his stomacke ; as well it may ) and that m. gataker procuredit . all this , i say , hath little or no truth in it . neither did m. wotton make any such promise . nor did he beg our censure to be given under our hands , as a favour ; but required it , as a thing just and equall . nor was it by me procured ; unlesse giving my vote among the rest for the grant of it , may be so construed . nor was it upon any such promise condescended unto , as is here pretended . and m. walker certainly had very long eares , if being absent at the doing of it , he could heare what was then and there said : or a quicker eare then the rest of the company , if being present , he heard that , that some , i am sure , and the rest , i verily beleeve , never heard , and yet might have heard as well as he , had it been spoken . howbeit i must here request the reader to take notice of one point of cunning conveyance , in the relation of the forme subscribed , whether committed by the doctor , from whom he saith he had it , ( tho he might have seen it , and had it from us , if he had pleased to stay our subscribing ) or by m walker himselfe , i know not ; and i would be loath to charge him further then i have good ground : he telleth his reader , that h m. wotton begged of us to subscribe to his expositions , and the subscription it selfe he thus layeth down i howsoever we whose names are underwritten , doe differ from m. wotton in some point of the former dectrine of justification conteined in these his expositions ; yet we hold not the difference to be so great and weighty , as they are to he justly condemned of heresie and blasphemy . and againe he subjoyneth , k the expositions thus subscribed . whereas it is testified l under the hands of two of his own delegates , that in the subscription given under our hands , it was not expositions but positions . howsoever positions come now to be turned into expositions ; by what or whose hand i wot not ; and this latter be now pressed , to give some sory colour to m m. walkers late devised shift before mentioned , and there sufficiently discussed , of dealing with m. wottons positions , and not his expositions . which , albeit it wil litle avail m. walker , unles he can shew , that his expositions are such , as either his words wil not beare , or are not consonant to the scope and tenor of his discourse ; yet what was then subscribed , the subscribers themselves witnes . and as for the copy , which n he saith , he hath yet to shew ; unles he can produce the originall , that their own hands are too ; i hope , this yet to be seen under the hands of some of them , and those of m. walkers own party , ( the like whereunto also can be produced under the hands of some of the other side ) wil with any man indifferently affected carry the more credit : especially considering , that m. walker would make men beleeve that they did very unwillingly , what therein they did ; and were afterward ashamed of what they had done : and had reason therefore to mince it all that possibly they might . 15. it is o the usuall manner of delinquents , ( for under that head may be comprehended , as wel those that unjustly appeal others , as those that by others are justly appealed ) when they fail and are found faulty , to complain of their iudges , and exclaim against them , for their iniquity and partiality in the cariage of the businesse ; by impairing their credit , seeking to salve up their own . the very same course doth m. walker take throughout this whole , not so much vindication of himself , as crimination of those , whom himselfe had referred his cause unto . he vilifies them in tearms of scorn and reproach , p m. gataker and his fellows , and his fellow subscribers . he accuseth them of iniquity , partiality , unjust and unequal carriage , against their own judgment , and consequently against their own conscience . or , if a man would speak in m. walkers wonted language , as q wicked iudges , that have respect of persons in judgement ; yea , worse then r the unjust judge in the gospel , that neither feared god , nor regarded man : for s he by the poore widows importunity was drawn to do her right ; whereas t they by m. wottons importunity were induced to do m. walker wrong , and to acquit him of heresie & blasphemy , whom m walker had justly accused of either ; and that against their own knowledge , yea their own acknowledgement , when they both knew and acknowledged him to be guilty of either . howbeit a little to wipe off these foule aspersions again , he saith , u they did it , out of their great love to m. wottons person : and x the better part of them , notwithstanding m. vvottons importunity , would never have yeelded thereunto , but upon his promise of reformation . concerning which i shall not need to repeat what i have formerly related . tho what reformation m. walker here speaketh of , i do not well understand . for , as for those points , wherein m. wotton and they differed , which they pronounce to be neither hereticall nor blasphemous ; neither did they require m. wotton to renounce and revoke his opinion therein ; nor did he promise so to doe . and what else it was , that he should promise to reform , i know not . this may wel therefore go among m. walkers owne fancies ; and so let it passe . onely , for what he saith of y their great love to m. wotton ; i will presume , they did all beare a christian affection , as well to m. wotton as to m. walker , and to m. walker as well as to him . nor is that any sufficient ground to induce any man to beleeve , that they should therefore encline rather to the one then to the other . howbeit m. walker must be remembred , that dr. baylie at the very first shewed little good will to m. wotton , by his quarelling with him about his habit , as before was shewed . and much lesse , by his rash and overhasty ●ensure and sentence passed ( if m. walker may be beleeved ) upon him yet unheard . as also that there had been a breach and interruption of friendly correspondence between m. wotton and m. stock , as was before intimated ; which grew upon occasion of some difference , that rose first between them at a meeting of divers london ministers and some others about the beginning of king james his raigne , and as yet continued ; nor indeed was ever wel peeced up again : whereas between m. walker and m. stock , it was then otherwise . nor have i heard of any great familiarity , that ever was between m. wotton and m. randall . which then also the rather might be the lesse : for that at the conference above-mentioned , that occasioned the breach between m. stock and m. wotton , m. wotton and m. randal were likewise divided . and little reason therefore there is to presume , that these men out of great love to m. wotton should be so partiall in his cause : much lesse , that they should therefore give a sentence in favour of him , directly against their own judgments , and that either privately or publikly professed to the contrary . 16. but this is the salve for those , whom m. walker would excuse . as for the rest , it is not to be mervelled , if they were partiall in the busines . for a m. balmford was m. wottons silenced brother . ( a fit squib to fall from the pen of him , that b erewhile complained so of his owne persecution ) c m hicks was one of m. wottons disciples ; one that would jurare in verba magistri ; that is in plain english , one that would sweare whatsoever m. wotton his master would say . ( a most uncharitable censure , sure enough , for the latter part ; whither true or no , for the former ) and d m. gataker did more angerly and peevishly speake against him , and snarl at him , then his adversary m. wotton himselfe . so that he was forced to challenge him as well as m. wotton , and to offer to dispute against them both : that which once e before also he vaunted of , calling in some to witnes it : ( whom yet because he doubted of , as well he might do , whether they would say with him somewhat more then was true ; he thought good by way of caution , to insert that exception , if their memories faile them not ; as belike in delivery of the attestation they did ) and withall adding , that we both ( daunted it seems , and dasht cleane out of countenance , as conscious of our owne weaknes and inability to encounter such a champion , either severally or joyntly ) did cowardly refuse it , not without shew of scornful disdain . it is true indeed , that m wotton ( whom m. walker is yet content in part to acquit , so be he may thereby the deeper wound me , whom his spite , it seems , is more eagerly bent at for the present ) demeaned himselfe very moderately , throughout the whole hearing ; with great patience enduring much reproachful and despiteful language , whereof m. walker was no whit sparing . and , i suppose , it was fit , that those whom that office was committed unto , should endeavour to represse such clamorous ballings and barkings , as neither beseemed him that used them ; nor did any way further , but hinder rather the issue of that for which we met . in which kind , not i alone , but the rest also , laboured with m. walker what they could ; tho to smal purpose . but that i snarled at him otherwise , is altogether untrue . it is likewise true , that m. walker challenged me once to dispute . ( for , as for dispute with m. wotton , so he would keep to the point , it was never denied him ) upon this occasion . some speech coming in the way , in discussion of the first pretended error , concerning the imputation of christs righteousnes consisting in obedience to the law ; and justification consisting wholly in remission of sinnes ; * m. walker in his heat told me , that it was reported ( for he buildeth much upon reports ) that i was wholly therein of piscators mind : and if i would maintain piscators opinion , he would dispute it out with me . whereunto i then answered , that whether it were so , or no , was nothing to him ; nor was it time for him and me then to dispute ; being met for an other end . and this is also all the scornful disdain then used , or made shew of . as for the report , i shall make bold now to tell m. walker , if he heard so , that he heard an untruth ; as e what i have published , may enform him . against which , if he shall think good to dispute , i hope i shall be as wel able to answer him , as i have done some others already . howbeit suppose we , that m. walker ( f another hercules , or one rather more valiaut then he , that durst not deale g with two at once ) could by dint of argument , wherein ( it seems ) he supposeth himselfe to excell ; though some deem him , ( as one sometime of another , whom m. walker would seem much to admire ) h a man more eager then argumentative , have been able to silence both m. wotton and my selfe ; and to have proved against us both , not those points alone that he charged m. wotton with , ( which yet if he had done , he must have confuted us all , and many more then us all ) but all the positions that ever he had produced , or could produce out of m. wottons writings , to be erroneous and not agreeable to truth : yet would not all this have been sufficient to make good his charge against m. wotton , and to prove him a blasphemous hereticke . how many mens writings may more then seven times seven errors be found in , whom it were yet most uncharitable therefore to censure for such ? 17. but that divers of the subscribers subscribed against their own judgements and consciences ; and all of them were ashamed of what they had done ; he endeavoureth further to shew : the former , by some relations that may justly be questioned ; the latter by avouchment of things altogether untrue . the former concernes others not me , whereof some are deceased ; some yet survive : and is to this effect : 1. that h d. baylie , the first of the subscribers did upon the very first reading of m. wottons speeches in m. walkers parallel , condemn him ( not at our meeting , but at a private table at dinner ) for an hereticke , and his errors for blaspemous . of which sufficient hath been spoken already ; and but for m. walkers repetition of it here , to descredit the subscription , or the subscriber himselfe rather , had for me no more been mentioned . 2. that l m. downham , who heard this his censure uttered at the table ; did by his silence assent thereunto . of which somewhat also before . 3. that k d. gouge hath publiquely confuted m. wottons opinions ; ( but which or what of them he talleth us not : * one of them at least , i am sure , he professed to have taught . ) and in the pulpit condemned them of socinianism . these two latter survive ; and i leave to answer , as they shal see good and thinke fit , for themselves ; the attestation for the subscription to the contrary being under their owne hands . 4. that l m. randal did argue very hotly against m. wottons opinions that same day that they subscribed , and told him before us all , that he had protested against them often in private , and had disswaded him from them ; and that he for his part abhorred them . all which men may , if they please , beleeve , upon the bare word of him , who hath told his reader so many untruths here before . for my part i beleeve no one tittle of it to be true , as it is by m. walker here related ; that is , affirmed to have been then and there by m. randal delivered ; but a meere fiction of m. walkers own invention , * spun like a spiders web out of the bowels of his own brain . besides , i desire to have it considered how probable it is , that m. wotton should make choice of one to be for him in this busines , who had in private formerly professed unto him , not a bare dissent from , or a simple distast , but so deep a dislike of his opiniōs . true it is , that there was that day a dispute among us about a nice question mentioned in my m relation , concerning the worke of redemption performed by christ , and the worke of our insition into christ and our union with him , whether of the twain hath the precedency in the order of nature . wherein some were with m. wotton on the one side for the precedency of the work of redemption ; some were on the other side ( among whom m. randal ) for the precedency of the insition of the faithful into christ and their union with him . but neither was the point argued with any heat at all on either side ; among our selves at least . nor did either m. randal , or any other of the company , no not d. baylie himself , ( tho forward enough , if m. walker may be believed , to censure m. wotton deep enough behind his backe , and over prone , as i have shewed , to pick a quarrell to him otherwise ) at any time , that ever i can remember , during our whole meeting , use any such distastful speeches unto m. wotton , as m. walker is here pleased to attribute to m. randal , being now gon , and not able to deny or avow , what he fastneth thus upon him . the figure n prosopopaeia , it is to be feared , is with m walker here too frequent . 5. that o m. stock did ever abhorre m. wottons opinions , as he oft told m. walker in private . that he did in divers things dissent from him , i doubt not ; that which i also professed in private to him concerning my selfe ; shewing wherein i dissented from m. wotton , as wel to him , as to m. wotton himselfe , having sometime required it of me in writing ; which to m. stock also i imparted . but such terms of abhorring them , i never heard from him ; tho being as intimate , i suppose , as ever m. walker was , with him . the phrase sure better suteth with m. walkers own spirit , then either with m. randals or m. stocks ; both whom he maketh here to speake in the same tone with himselfe . but p by a pretty stratagem ( for so he slileth it ) he brought m. stock before other witnesses to condemn m. wottons opinions for heresie and blasphemy . for at a supper time in a neighbours house , reading as out of some other paper containing new and strange opinions , that assertion of m. vvottons , that in this proposition , faith is counted for righteousnesse , the word faith is to be taken properly , not tropically ; and demaunding of m stock what he thought of it , m. stock acknowledged it to be heresie and blasphemy ; and that none but mad men would subscribe that it was neither . whereupon he shewed him his own hand to the subscription before mentioned . now whether m. stock was thus overtaken or no , to make his tongue and his hand jarre , i know not . if he were , it had been a more friendly part of m. walker , to have concealed his and my friends oversight . but q tros tyriusve , friend or foe ; advocate or adversary ; all is one with m. walker ; another aristides , one that hath no respect of persons , as his partiall judges had . how he disgraceth either any way to help himselfe , he little regardeth . as if the discrediting of them either would suffice , or might well serve to salve his own credit , when it lieth bleeding , and is in danger not to escape without some scar. howsoever , 1. i shall desire any indifferent reader to consider , whether ought rather to sway , a censure drawn from one by a wile , and suddenly shot out , before he were well aware , and well advised ; or a judiciary sentence ( for r iudges m. walker himselfe will have us ) considerately signed ; and that after serious debate , and advice taken with other s grave ministers ( as he is also pleased yet to stile us ) concurring with him therein . 2. i would demand not of m. stock , ( for he is gone ; nor is it certain to me , whether he ever passed that censure so directly contrary to his own subscription ) but of m. walker , what he thinks of these words , faith is that alone wherewith we are by it selfe and properly justified : whether they containe heresie and blasphemy or no ; and what difference he can find between m. wottons words , and these . yet are they m. bucers own t which he ascribeth also to saint paul ; as a principall part of his main argument , concerning the doctrine of justification . and if those other upon the bare recitall appeare to be manifestly hereticall and blasphemous ; then these surely no lesse : and so m. wotton yet shal have one other at least to goe along with him for an heretick , yea a blasphemous heretick : whom yet none i suppose , other then ranke papists ever condemned for such . howbeit m. walker should have done wel , to have delivered m. wottons exposition ( as he tearmeth it ) all out . and not to have hackt it off ( as he hath done ) by the hams . for his words are entire thus , a i never said , or thought , that faith doth justifie us by it selfe . ( and yet had he so said , he had said no more then bucer long before him had done ) this onely i say , that in this proposition , faith is counted for righteousnes , the word faith is to be taken properly , not tropically ; the question being in such propositions , not of the meritorious or formall cause of justification , but of the condition required on our part in stead of keeping the law. to which i may well ad out of his animadversions , which i have by me , on the dispute between lubbertus and bertius , these sayings of his to the same essect . b faith doth not justifie us , as a quality , habitually ; neither is it either the matter , or the forme of our righteousnes ; in that regard alone it is to justification available , as it relieth upon christ , to the obtaining of forgivenes of sins for his obedience . and againe , c faith surely doth not justifie , but onely by and for the obedience of christ. when it is said to be imputed unto righteousnes , it is thereby signified what we must perform , that we may be justified . and a little after , d by faith we are said to be justified , not in a tropicall , but in a proper manner of speaking ; whereby is signified , that faith is that , which god requireth of us to the obtaining of justification for the obedience and sacrifice of christ. for as for those words that m. walker putteth into his third error , that he chargeth upon m. wotton , e that faith doth not justifie us , as it apprehendeth christ and his righteousnes ; they appeare not in any passage at all by m. walker out of m. wottons writings alledged . so that m. walker maketh m. wotton speak , not what he doth , but what himselfe pleaseth ; and then pronounceth him an hereticke , not for what he saith , but for what himselfe would have him say . to make this evident to the meanest understanding . should a man say , the word hand in this proposition , my hand feeds my body ; or in this , this child is fed by hand , is taken properly not tropically ; would it by any reasonable consequence thence be inferred , that the party so saying should therefore affirm , that the hand doth not feed by putting meat into the mouth ? and what m calvins judgment is of that trope in the apostles words of faith , put for christ , may appeare by these words of his in confuting of osiander , the first man ( for ought i can find ) that broached that exposition of them , and brought in that strange trope : f i admit not this sophisters writhing or wrigling some figures , when he saith , that faith is christ. g whereby faith , which is the instrument onely of obtaining righteousnesse , is confounded with christ , who is the materiall cause , and both the autor and minister of so great a benefit . h thus is the knot also unknit , to wit , how the tearm of faith ought to be taken where the point of justification is handled . howbeit as it would justly be deemed unequall , to charge all that hold faith there put for christ , with osianders monstrous opinion , as calvin well tearmeth it , of i know not what essentiall righteousnes , by which christian men are justified : so no lesse unequall is it , to condemn all of socinian heresie and blasphemy , that hold faith to be taken for faith in those i passages of s paul. but of this and some other things concerning that argument , i may peradventure being by divers importuned thereunto , if god shall please to afford life , liberty , ability and leisure , entreat further more largely hereafter ; unlesse i shall find my selfe prevented by some fuller satisfaction given by others , whose labours either are abroad already , or may before that time come abroad . for then my paines will be superfluous . and whether by my weak helps , or the more able work of others , the truth of god either in this , or in any other point be cleered , to me it shall be all one . and thus much for the point , concerning which by m walkers own relation , m. stock upon the very reading of it , should in direct contradiction to his own subscription , passe such a censure . as for the l speech he frameth in the words following , for m. stock to excuse himselfe by : and his inference thence , m how dangerous a thing it is , even for godly men to be judges in a controversie between a familiar friend , as m. wotton was to these men , and a stranger , as himself was to the most of them . as the latter intimateth m. stock , & m. wotton to have been at that time familiar friends , and so d. baylie and the rest ; and on the other side m. stock ( for of him principally here the speech is ) with the most of the rest , and m. walker to have been meere strangers either to other : which is the one of them as true as the other : so it adds little credit to the excuse pretended to be made then by him ; which may well be questioned , considering m. walkers minting and dilating faculty n before shewed , whether much , if not all , of it , came not out of his own forge . and this shall suffice for the suggestions concerning some of m. walkers partiall and unjust judges as he deems them , to prove that they subscribed in favour of m. vvotton against their own consciences and judgements elsewhere , either in publike or in private , delivered directly to the contrary of that they then signed unto . which i might well have leaft to be answered by those whom they concerne ; save that some of them are now deceased : for me they touch not at all , nor my relation , who report only , what they subscribed to ; and that firmed with the attestation of such of them as survive . 18. but for that , which concerns them all , and my selfe among the rest , to prove , that o they durst not openly justifie their subscription ; ( which makes me the rather now to beleeve what i have formerly been informed , that m. walker oft in his table-talk should not stick to give out , that we were all of us ashamed of what we then did . ) he saith that p the expositions ( for so we will now call them , since that m. vvalker will have them so stiled ) thus subscribed , were committed to d. eaylie , with charge that he should keep them close , and not suffer m. vvalker or any other man to see or read them , untill m. vvotton had made a larger exposition , and fully purged himselfe from socinianism . a strict charge , you see , as m. vvalker delivers it , of men wondrous cautious , and as may seem , no lesse timorous of displeasing m. vvalker ; for what else the matter should be , i , for my part , am not able to conceive . and i merveil why he doth not adde , that we conjured one another , to tell no body what we had done . for that was as needfull to prevent our feares , as the keeping of our subscription from sight ; and he might as well have said or written the one as the other . for this also in truth is as farre from truth , as m. vvalker is from faire dealing in the whole carriage of this busines . and here i would crave leave to demand of m. vvalker , whether he were present at the very act of our subscribing or no. if he were present , he might easily heare , what that was , and in what manner it was conceived , that was agreed upon to be subscribed unto ; yea he might have seen our subscriptions to it . for it was not done in any concealed way , but in the view of all then present . and to what end then should such a charge be given to the doctor , that m. vvalker should by no means be admitted to the sight of it ? if he were absent , ( as it is likely enough that he was , wanting patience to endure any longer stay , after he perceived once what was resolved upon ) i would faine know of him , how or from whence he knowes , that it was with such caution committed to the doctors custody . true it is , that it was indeed in some sort committed to his custody ; or rather detained by him , having once gotten it into his hands , in favour of m. vvalker , for ought else could be discerned . the delivery of it or a copy of it to m. vvotton , according to his just request , being not at present resolved on , because it grew late ; but put off to another day . on which meeting again , ( but now without m. vvalker , who came no more at us ) after long expectation the doctor at length presented himselfe to us ; but could not be induced to deliver , either the subscription , or any copy of it to m. vvotton ; upon pretence that he held it not safe so to do ; for that having been lately at lambeth , at the high commission , some ( i know not who ) had cast out some words there to him concerning our meeting , and that we might peradventure be questioned for it , as a conventicle ; especially if our subscription should come abroad under our own hands , and use made of it as an evidence against us . that therefore for the present he durst not part with it : but yet withall promising , that after some time , the noise of the busines being once over-blown , it should be delivered to m. wotton , whensoever it should be demanded of him by two of the parties , one of either side , nominated in his behalfe . and this i do the more confidently avow , being holpen therein for some particulars , by a memoriall leaft in writing under m. balmfords hand and mine own , and made while the businesse was yet fresh in memory ; which i find in the same paper , in which the attestation formerly published is extant , being afterward ( but how long after , i know not ) underwritten . but return we to m. walker , who having thus rather poetically described , then q historically related our meeting and the manner of it , embelished with many meere fictions of his own invention ; ( all which yet never will be of might or weight enough either to take of , or beare down the truth of my relation concerning the issue of it , acknowledged in precise tearms by men of his owne choise ) he proceeds in the next place to tell us , that r upon this it was bruited abroad in the city by m. wotton and his disciples that m. walker could prove nothing against him ; ( and like enough ; of that he charged him with , to wit , heresie and blasphemy ) nor bring any thing out of his bookes or writings to convince him of socinianism : and that the eight learned ministers had justified him , and condemned m. walker for a false accuser . and might they not justly so report , when in effect the ministers under their hands had all joyntly so done ? for sure it is , that he that acquitteth any man of that wherewith he is charged , ( be he faulty otherwise , or no ) doth by necessary consequence condemn him as a false accuser , that so charged him . as for what s he addes , concerning m. wottons essays afterward written , wherein he saith , that m. wotton denies the true , reall , and spirituall union of the faithfull with christ , and christs meriting of justification and salvation for them , &c. ( which collections of m. walkers from m. wottons words may well be as sound as some other above recited ) and his owne antithesis wottonismi & christianismi ; ( a worke in likelihood well suiting with the spirit of the autor ) of m. nids neglecting to make report of it to the archbishop ; ( who , it may be , would have past the like censure upon him , that he did upon m. broad , at the tender of his book ) his own neglect of calling upon him : because t the tidings of it comming to m. wottons eare , strooke such a damp into him , that for feare of afterclaps he silenced both himself and his disciples . ( and yet to silence a man already silenced was no such great matter ) so that now all was husht , & the fire quencht , and no man durst open his mouth to defend m. wottons opinions , tho he ceased not in the pulpit stil to confute and condemn them . this all nothing concerns me , or any relation of mine . but howfarre forth therein he discovereth his own vanity , and his restles disposition , i leave it to the judgement and censure of others . as little concerns me that , that followeth , u concerning m. wottons booke de reconciliatione , written in latine ; wherein he saith , that m. wotton hath vented so much poyson , ( for all is such , that m. walker himself doth not relish ) that the professors at leiden , would not suffer it to be there printed ; ( which whence he hath , or how he knows , or is able to prove , i know not ) yea that at amsterdam also it could not get out ; ( which few will beleeve , that know how free the presse there is ) but was fain to be printed farther off , at the charge of some of his disciples . as also what he x addes of some others , who did privately oppose m. wotton ; as m. woodcock of chessam , who in writing consuted him , and admonished him to forsake his errors . i am not indeed ignorant , that between m. woodcock m. wottons ancient collegue , and m. wotton , disputes passed in writing , with objections and answers , replies and rejoynders , much whereof i have by me , in a faire friendly manner . as also the like did between d. brooks , then reader of divinity in gresham college , ( the place that m. wotton also sometimes held ) which i have seen sometime with a friend ; and gave occasion of writing the book in latine above mentioned : between m. bradsh●w and m wotton ; and in part also between m. wotton and my selfe . but none of these that ever i saw or heard , tho dissenting from him in opinion , did in any of their writings charge him with heresie or blasphemy , or damn him to hel ; as m. walker from m. richardson here doth , y unlesse there be any medium between heaven and hel. neither doth that fierce thunder-bolt , thrown out by m. richardson , any whit scare me ; wherein , as by a pop like anathema , o● a rabinical maranatha , he peremptorily pronounceth , upon his own certain knowledge , that whosoever lives and dies in the beleefe of m. wottons opinions shall never enter into the kingdom of heaven , for so m. walker , as a from m. barlows mouth , being m. richardsons messenger b here reports it . tho , whether m. richardson were in his sentence so peremptory , or no , may be doubted ; the rather becaus● m. walker in his relations of it agrees not all out with himselfe . for whereas here he telleth us , that m. richardson should in a more rigid manner ●ffirm , that he knew m. wottons opinions to be so pestilent and dangerous , that whosoever lives and dies in the beleefe of them shall never enter into the kingdom of heaven . in his second letter to m. wotton he relates it a remisser way , that he protested , that he thovght no man living and dying in his opinion should be saved . and you know , what is wont to be said and thought of those that are taken in two tales . but be m. richardsons doom never so precise and peremptory , it nowhit affrights me : since that neither i live , as i hope , in any such opinions of his , muchlesse looke to die in them , whatsoever else i may concur● with him in , nor do i conceive any whit the lesse hope of m. wottons being in heaven for this his horrid and hideous doom . onely if m. richardson did then passe such a censure , when he was now at point of death , as c m. walker saith he was , i could have wisht more charity , and lesse presumption concerning other mens estates , in a man so neere to the giving up of an account for himselfe . that m. wotton lived and died in some errors i doubt not . nor do i make account , but that i doe live , and looke to die , in many my selfe . if m. walker deem , or hope , otherwise of himselfe ; he presumeth of , and promiseth more to himselfe , then i suppose , ever befell any sonne of adam , our blessed saviour alone excepted . but that any opinion , which m. wotton held was so pestilent and pernitious , as to cut him wholy off from christ , and all interest in christ , who so shall affirme , had need looke to himselfe , lest he bring thereby a greater guilt upon his own soule , then m. wotton contracted by any error that he held . meanwhile , well it is , that the keyes of heaven are not , either in m. richardsons hands , or at m. walkers disposition . were they so , it might well be deemed , that many an one should have been excluded , who i doubt not but have found entrance ; many should be shut out , who i hope , yet shall get in , notwithstanding m. walkers peremptory sentence past upon them for hereticks , and that blasphemous ones too ; such as have no right in christ here , nor shall ever reign with him hereafter . howbeit this fiery thunderbolt did so enflame m. walker , as he telleth us , that d it encouraged him to go on the more boldly in laying open m. wottons abominations , without all feare or regard of his factious and furious disciples , persons belike of the same stamp and temper with himselfe ; if by his writings he may be judged of . from this he passeth to m godwins railing libell ; which he telleth his reader , that e some say , m. gataker counselled him to write against m walker ; which if m. walker will avovch as a truth , i must tell him , that he telleth a notorious untruth ; and such as he could not but know to be most untrue , unlesse i had wittingly in my postscript told a loud lie ; where i professed , f that till of late i had never to my knowledge heard or seen the man ; and then onely but once ; which was not onely much later then the birth of m. godwins worke , but even after m. walkers own booke was come abroad , at what time hearing him named , whom else i had not known , i told him indeed smilingly , that if he were such an one , he was an heretick in print ; alluding to m walkers discovery , which i had not long before lighted on . but whether m. godwins book be a rayling libell , or no ; for my part , i know not , having never read two lines of it , onely seen the title of it in the stationers shop . but let this goe among the bundle of untruths , which m walker hath sluft this his pamphlet with ; that m gataker counselled one , whom he had never seen to his knowledge , nor changed two words with , to write a rayling libel against m. walker . whereas any reasonable man would rather imagine , that m godwin wrote that , whatsoever it be that he wrote , provoked by m walkers own writing against him and railing upon him ; which , it seems , therein he returneth answer unto , and is printed and published by him together with it , and according to the truth , yea , or likelyhood of this report , i am very well content , that credit be given to his other relations ; those at least that g he builds upon the credit of other mensreports ; if not to more then a few , that must rely upon his own . with m. godwins libell he joyneth h m. gatakers invective . for so he is pleased to stile my relation , as i before , so here again . which being abroad , i leave to others to judge , whether it deserve that title , or no ; or , if m. walker so please , whether of the two , that my relation , or this his vindication , may lay better claime to such an inscription . but there is another invective , that he challengeth me for . and it shall not be amisse , by way of anticipation , hereto take it in , and consider of it , as being a branch of the same generall enditement , that in this kind m. walker commenceth against me . he telleth his reader therefore in his ensuing discours ; k that he , the said m. gattaker hath publiquely extolled and commended for orthodox the like treatise ( to those of m. wottons ; hereticall belike and blasphemous , as his ) of m. william bradshaw : and inveighed against some , meaning me , ( saith m. walker ) who had opposed some errors and contradictions , which are in that booke , in his funerall sermon preached at m. bradshaws buriall . wherein m. walker sheweth himselfe no changeling , but still like himselfe . nor am i sory , that m. walker hath thus mentioned m. bradshaw , and thereby given me occasion to speake somewhat of the man , and somewhat also of his worke : that i may thereby further vindicare him a little from m. walkers obloquies ; as i have already in part , from the slanderous calumnies of an other foul mouthed railer , a leader of separatists at amsterdam my rejoynder to whom in defence of m. bradshaw , and his answer to m. fr. iohnsons reasons for separation from the church-assemblies in england , although it came abroad without my consent ; having been advertised by some wel-wishing friends , of somethings in m. bradshawes discourse , that seemed to trench upon the government then established ; and desiring therefore , for better security , to print mine owne apart without it ; which might safely have been done here without more adoe : yet being by that railing and reviling replier required to tell whether it were mine , or not ; i returned him by the messenger who delivered me his letter , this answer , that i had sometime written a defence of m. bradshaw against him . which if it were published according to my copy , i would not refuse to owne . and indeed published it was ; but as without my privity , so exceeding corruptly , whole lines in some passages left out , and the sense in many places perverted and mar●ed ; as by a large list of errata , which i caused to be printed , and annexed to it , so soon as some copies of it came to my hand , may appeare . since which time i finde the rest of that scurrilous worke ( for i dealt onely with the last chapter , that concerned m bradshaw , ) very solidly and learnedly refuted by one m. john ball , a reverend and judicious divine ( who had formerly written in defence of set forms of prayer ) in l a treatise since his decease published by m. simon ash lecturer here in the city . but to returne to m. walker , and his charge here against me . true it is that i preached at m. bradshaws buriall . the worth of the man , though not so commonly known , in regard he lived in a mean and obscure estate , through the iniquity of the times , having his chiefe dependance , and main means of maintenance from a private family , and being naturally not prone to put himselfe forth ; yet highly valewed by those that throughly knew him , and inwardly conversed with him ; and the entire affection and streightest band of friendship , that held inviolably firm unto the very last between us ; deservedly challenging for him from me , not that onely , but much more then my weake ability was ever able to reach to . and i did what i then did , with as much griefe and regret of heart and mind , as ever i performed any office in that kind . the losse of so worthy , and so intimate a friend , ( besides the common losse of one so qualified and endowed , to gods church ) inwardly piercing with me more deeply , then everyone was aware of , or my selfe able easily or suddenly to shake off . but how in my sermon then made , i inveighed against m. vvalker or any other , i shal leave to the equall and indifferent consideration of others , when i shall have precisely related what then i delivered , and subjoyned the occasion , whereupon i spake it . in a short speech , that i had , before i entred upon my text , concerning the occasion of mine appearance at that time in that place ; and of the party deceased , to whose remains that office of christian sepulture was then to be performed ; having spoken somewhat , but very briefly , and over-scantly rather than otherwise , concerning his singular dexterity , as in resolving cases of conscience , so in clearing of controversed points in divinity ; ( in either of which kinds he did so excell , that i have seldome , if ever , known his match ) i added these words concerning the latter ; wherein his labours , tho uncharitably taxed and traduced by some , yet have been , as myselfe can testifie , not onely reverently esteemed by divers of good note in both the universities , professing some of them in my hearing to have profited much by them , and to have been thereby better informed in some particulars , which they conceived not so well before ; but even by some strangers of eminent place and profession beyond the seas , very highly extolled , as by some of their letters to him is yet to be seen . and this , 〈◊〉 protest , is all that i then said ; which m. vvalker here , ( a man it seems , of a very tender eare , tho of too tart a tongue ) terms inveighing against him . but , if it may not be over-troublesome , i shall request my readers patience a while , to receive from me some not overlong relation , concerning the occasion of that short clause , consisting but of foure words at most , that m. walker taketh so much offence at ; that he may thereby be the better enabled to judge aright whether i spake any more , then m. walker had given over-just occasion to speake . m. bradshaw had published , a succinct indeed , but very accurate , ( if sundry men of good parts may be beleeved ) treatise concerning the justification of a sinner before god. in the preface whereunto , having given intimation of some difference among our divines in some particulars concerning this head of divinity ; whence , saith he , many weake minds have been somewhat perplexed ; and some strong ones ( at least in their own conceits ) exceedingly distempered , as th● there were amongst us , which overturned foundations , teaching blasphemous heresies about this matter ; whereas all of us with one mouth professe this , that a sinner is justified not by any formall inherent righteousnesse in himself , but onely by the free and meere grace and mercy of god , through the meritorious satisfaction of our saviour christ , the onely mediator between god and a sinner . wherein we all give all the glory of our justification and salvation to god in christ iesus , and therein hold the main foundation . we differ onely in certain circumstances ; wherein nothing is derogated , either from the mercy of god , or merits of christ , or arrogated to our owne workes . now the former part of this speech m vvalker taking to himself ( as , tho not named , yet conscious to himselfe of his own guilt , he well might ) inveighed fiercely and furiously ( after his wonted guise ) in a serm●n preached in paul , church , against the whole ●…ffirming it to be a booke full of centradictions and heresies ; of the same nature as he had before averred m. wottons writings to be , m to which also he here likeneth it . and withall , by a stationer , whose shop i frequented , he sent me a challenge , that such a book be understood to be mine , ( as true as that n i set m. godwin on worke to write a railing libell against him ) tho it came out in another mans name , ( not unlike that of the amsterdam railer , that o he should father another mans worke written against iohnson ) and that , if i would undertake the defence of it , he would prove it to consist of contradictions and heresies . unto which i returned him this answer , that m. bradshaw was able enough to defend his own worke . that , if he had ought with me , he knew where mine aboad was ; if i ought with him , i knew ( i thought ) where he dwelt , but that i had no desire to have dealings with one of that spirit , of which i perceived him to be . herewith not content , he wrote a booke against m. bradshaw so vile and so virulent , that tendring it for allowance at london-house , he could not obtaine passage for it to the presse . howbeit a copy of it came to m. bradshaws hands , who had also answered some good part of it in a modest manner ; as among the remains of his imperfect writings is yet to be seen . but m. vvalkers pamphlet not comming abroad , it seems , he gave over . the title of m. walkers work was this : a woolfe in a sheeps cloathing . and to give you some small taste of his manner of dealing in it ; ( for p a few drops of sea-water tasted , will sufficiently shew , what relish the whole ocean hath ) he thus begins his onset upon the main body of the book . having before examined the preface word by word , and discovered plainly and largly the impudent calumnies , open lies , desperate errors , and grosse contradictions therein conteined ; i will now proceed to examine and censure the treatise it selfe : wherein he sheweth himself still one and the same man ; to w●t , one of a factious spirit , a desperate maintainer and justifier of our new upstart socinian hereticks , the blasphem●us disciples of servetus socinus & arminius , an horrible and prosane abuser of the word of god , citing it contrary to all sense ; one speaking like the old oracles of apollo , sometimes without any sense , sometimes so ambiguously , as that his words may beare divers & contrary senses , sometimes affirming boldly strange things , without rendring any reason ; as if he were a second peremptory pythagoras , or a new purified pope , whose words or sayings must be received against all reason , as if they were oracles of god ; and in a word , as in the preface , so in the treatise , he doth by his fruits , and his proofes contrary to his pretended titles in every chapter , discover himselfe to be a woolf in sheeps cloathing . and that he may end in no better manner then he began , he thus enters upon the last chapter : this chapter , tho it treat onely of things humane , such as we daily heare and see , and have experience of , yet it hath divers errors : as if the author had vowed to erre in all things ; and to infect heaven and earth , and all things sacred and profane , with his treatise . now whether such a censure as this might not wel beare out as much , if not much more , then i then spake , i am well content , that any man , not wholy forestalled with extream prejudice , be judge . yea but mr. bradshaws treatise , it may be , wel deserved such a censure . i wil not , for satisfaction herein , send you ( tho i wel might ) to the worke it selfe . it may not be at hand ; or you may suspect , if you have it , and shall be pleased to peruse it , that some ranke poison lieth so closely couched in it , that an ordinary sight is not able easily to descry it . and yet , as m. bradshaw well answereth him concerning the preface ; if the calumnies be impudent , the l●es open , the errors desperate , the contradictions grosse , they are such as sufficiently discover themselves ; and m. walkers discovery is therefore in vain , being as tho he should say , he hath discovered the sunne , when it shines out in his brightnesse in every mans face : so that either m. walker hath discovered no calumnies , lies , errors and contradictions at all ; or they are not open , grasse , desperate and impudent . in like manner may i say of the treatise it selfe ; if the errors in it be so p grosse , palpable , abominable , and contrary to all sense , that they doe not onely discover , but even judge and condemne themselves , as m. walker affirmeth of them ; surely any dim sight will suffi●● to discerne what the worke is . nor will i offer to obtrude upon you mine own conceit of it . i might peradventure be deemed partiall , both in regard of mine own opinion ; albeit i concurre not in all things with him ; and in regard of mine entire affection to my friend ; q which i grant may sometime also somewhat oversway . but i shall enforme you , as before i intimated , how it hath been censured by others , men no way engaged ; and that , far otherwise then m. walker hath been pleased to pronounce of it . and here i might entertaine you , with the judgement of r a great lawyer and councellor of state , one in his time reputed a man of some judgement : who in regard of some neere affinitie visiting the gentlewoman , whom m bradshaw made aboad with , in the time of his sicknesse , and lighting accidentally upon this short treatise , after he had runover some good part of it was very much taken with it ; and demanding who was the anthor of it , professed , that he had seldom read a thing more pithily and pregnantly written . but because it may be objected , that this was out of his element ; and yet let me tell you , that some s lawyers have in divinity dealt to good purpose ; and that the tearm of justification being t a law tearm , ( as our divines , with good warrant from u gods word , constantly maintain ) a discourse of that subject is to that profession no stranger . i shall leave him , and in roome of him present you with the judgement of a divine of special note m. lodowik , or lewis , cappel , one of the professors of divinity in the university of salmure in france ; a man among the learned wel knowne by his works . this m. cappel , having received this treatise of m. bradshaws , from m. aaron cappel his kinsman , one of the ministers of the french church here in london , returned backe to him many thanks for it ; requesting him withall to enquire after the autor , and either to deliver , or convey to him his letters inclosed : the superscription whereof was this ; doctissimo atque ornatissimo clarissimoque viro , domino guilielmo bradshaw . the subscription : tui , non studiosus modo sed cultor & admirator , ludovicus cappellus . i translate them not , because the english phrase in such forms , will not so wel fit them . the contents are word for word in part thus : missus est ad me londino à d. capello , ecclesiae gallicanae quae londini est pastore , mole quidem exiguus , sed doctrinâ atque ingenio & acumine grandis , de justificatione libellus , anglicè conscriptus , autore g. bradshaw . is quia perplacebat , & mihi cum d. gomaro exemplar illud erat commune , statim à me in privatum usum gall●cè est redditus . anglicanum exemplar d. gomaro reliqi . dicam ingenuè . nihil in humanis scr●ptis dogmati●is hactenus â me lectum est , quod tam vebementer mihi placuerit ita doctè , acutè , pressè , solidè , nervose , apertè s●…l & mirâ brevitate totum hoc argumentum plenissimè à te est comprehensum atque pertractatum . verba attem quibus illud dignè pro merito suo collaudem atque extollam , mihi non suppe●unt . saepius ille mihi lectus est ; nec unqam ejus satias me cepit . quin eo vehementius sui in me excitavit desiderium quo frequentius repetitus atque relectus : tantus in eo doctrinae , artis atque ingenii splendor & lumen refulget . but thus he , a meere stranger , to a man , whom he had never seen or heard of before ; judging of him onely by that vile , abominable , absurd , senselesse booke , that m. walker ( i hope i may now be somewhat the bolder to speak it ) doth so uncharitably tax and traduce . give me leave a little further to trespasse upon thy patience , good reader . to give m. cappel further satisfaction , and to save much writing at large to and fro ; m. bradshaw resolved to review the work , and having a little better cleered some things , to translate it into latine . that which also he did , and sent a copy of it to m. cappel . who in a second letter after the receipt of it , wrote back to him in these words : scripsi jam antehaec , vir clarissime , me accepisse libellum tuum de justificatione verè aureum , à te auctum latinumque factum , eumque à me extemplò , sed raptim , perlectum esse : ita vehemens me ejus ceperat desiderium , ex priùs lectâ anglicanâ ejus editione . inde à me non semel , sed saepius , & cum otio , perlectus est . quem quo saepiùs relego , eo magis mihi arridet probaturque . ita ad unguem à te exactus est . pacatis & moderatis ingeniis , ab utralibet sint parte , quique non nimio partium studio aguntur , spero probatum iri istum tui ingenii partum atque faetum : licet non omnia utrisque concedas , quae ipsi vellent . ita medius inter utramque incedis sententiam , ut neutris displicere debeas , si verè sint pacis & concordiae amantes . now how this agreeth with m. walkers censure of m. bradshaws book , that thereby he hath shewed himself to be one of a factious spirit , and a desperate maintainer and justifier of blasphemous hereticks , he may easily soon see , that either is not blind , or doth not wilfully winke . i might adde , that if m. walkers censure of m bradshaws booke be admitted , the like must be past upon the writings of some others , publikely allowed , and generally well esteemed of among us ; and by name on m pembles large treatise of justification before-mentioned , and m. torsels briefer discourse of the same subject : both which build mainly on brad●…●…ounds ●…ounds , the latter precisely treadeth in his thus much concerning my deservedly deere friend , who neither living , nor deceased , could scape the scourge of m. walkers tongue ; which a without feare or regard ( to use his own words of himselfe ) he lets flie both at living , and at dead ; and concerning that worke of his , by other pious , learned and judicious so praised and apprised ; which shall ( i doubt not ) survive with its due and deserved approbation from such ; when m. walkers railing pamphlet , wherein he so traduceth it , shall either lie buried in perpetuall oblivion ; or , if ever it come to see open light , shall stinke in the nostrils both of god and good men . but m. vvalker hath not so done with m. gataker . for , if it were not vain expence of precious time , b he could first of all produce socinianism out of his works ; and so make him a party . and so i presume he could also out of bucer , pareus , pemble , piseator , and i know not how many more , as well as out of m. gataker , if he would set himself to it . for m. walker hath a very singular dexterity herein ; as in part hath already been shewed . but i answer him briefly . that c generall charges are generally deemed deceitful ; and will not hold either in law or in conscience . and again , that d if to accuse be sufficient , no man is sure to goe guiltlesse , be his cause never so good . and yet , what were this , could he prove it by m gataker , to dr. gouges and m. downhams attestation , which directly avoweth , that m. walker could not prove it by m. wotton , when time was , and he had undertaken so to doe ? unles this be a good argument ; socinianism may be produced now out of m. gatakers works : and therefore dr. gouge and m. downham with the rest did not so determine , as that they did , under their own hands they doe witnesse . besides , e he could prove m gataker to be thomas of all sides sometimes holding that the elect and faithfull are cloathed with the garment of christs righteousnesse ; and again disputing against their communion and imputation of christs righteousnesse . whereunto i answer . 1. for that scurrilous tearm better beseeming some scoffing jester , then a grave and sage minister of christ. it thal never trouble me by m. walker so to by stiled ; nor by any other either so to be esteemed , if thereby be intimated , that i am such an one , as refuse not to imbrace all truth that i meet with on any side , be the side what it will : no more then i would forbeare , to take up a pearle , wheresoever i should find it , whether in the mother of pearls shell , or with esops cock , either f on the dunghil , or in the durt . or if he intend thereby to note me for such a one , as have in some particulars altered my judgement from what sometime formerly i held ; nor do i refuse in many things so to be deemed . i suppose , that holds not in me alone , but in many others , which g a divine , as well of good , as of great , note , is reported to have said in the councell of dort , when it was objected unto him , that something spoken by him differed from some clause in the catechism ; h we are taught many things when we are yong , that we make doubt of , when we are old . who is he , that is careful to make diligent enquiry into the truth of things , who doth not oft alter his former opinion ? for my part , i freely professe , with that worthy ancient , that i my desire and endeavonr is to be one of those , who write as they profit , and profit as they write . and i may peradventure , following * that pious pattern , if god please to grant me longer life , with strength and leisure , take some time and paines to review those weake works , that i have sormerly sent abroad , to satisfie other men more then my selfe ; and to amend what therein i deem my self to have been mistaken in ; to explain what i doubt may be mistaken by others . nor do i account it any k shame or staine to me , to alter in ought for the better . i hold it a point rather of l pride and solly ( shameful enough either of them ; both together much more ) for any man , to thinke his works blemished , by dashing out of ought in them , that he finds he was deceived in ; when as the standing of it still there is rather a blemish to his bookes . i am , and shal ever be , of that famous , tho heathen , emperours mind : m if any man , saith he , can in ought better inform me , and discover to me mine error , i shal readily yeeld to him . for i seek nothing but the truth , which never wrongs him that finds it . true it is , that in this point of justification , i went sometime another way then now i do ; the same that gomarus and some other still do , and before me did ; untill upon occasion of some lectures of dr. grey , who succeeded m. wotton at gresham-colledge , i fell into conference and disceptation with m. bradshaw about it ; and after many disputes , that passed to and fro in writing between us , wherein i strove stiffely to maintain what then i held ; being at length by force of argument beaten from my hold , i yeelded not so much to my friend , as to the truth ; ( as i was then , and am stil , certainly n perswaded ) which to be overborne by , i shall ever account the best valour , o to be overcome by the fairest victory . and yet thar phrase of being cloathed with the robe of christs righteousnesse , whether i used it before or since , is not materiall . for neither do i now reject it , nor doth it crosse ought , that either i or they , with whom i now concur , hold ; being found frequently in their writings , and p acknowledged by them : since that i maintaine still with them , as alwaies i did , q no other righteousnes , whereby we are justified , that is , discharged of the guilt of our sins in gods sight , but what accrueth unto us from christ , and the satisfaction made by him unto gods justice for them : according to that of the apostle , r him that knew no sin , did god make sin for us ; that we might become the righteousnesse of god in him . as for communion and imputation of christs righteousnes , how farre forth i either maintaine or deny either ; ( for m. walker runs on still in generalities , and after his blundering manner jumbles things together , as if communion and imputation were either the same , or of equall extent , and the not acknowledgment of the one therefore a deniall of the other ) my s works shew , that are extant : wherein if either m. walker , or any other , shal in friendly manner convince me of any mistake , t he shall do me no small pleasure ; as conceiving it u a greater benefit to my selfe , to have mine own errors by others discovered to me , then to be an instrument of discovering other mens ●rrots to them ; since that , ( as he said sometime of things amisse x between man and wise ) y by the one i may help to amend my brethren , but by the other i may be amended my self . mean while , so far am i from being thomas of all sides in some sense , that i professe and shall desire rather in some kind , to be thowas of no side . for i love not siding in gods church ; among christs ministers especially . i love not , i am for this man ; and i am for that man : i am for this side , and i am for that side . a the apostle himselfe liked it not . i love not holding the faith of christ with respect of persons . b an other apostle forbids it . i love not , that any be tied to follow any one man , or any number of men whatsoever , in all things . c the apostles themselves required it not , in matter of fact ; nor may any now living in matter of faith . hence proceed d schismes and factions , and uncharitable censures , many times of those as unsound , that are , it may be , more sincere , have at least as good a share in christ , as those that so censure them . and surely , if the words heresie and hereticke were rightly understood , or if they be so taken ( as i suppose them to be constantly used in scripture ; nor do i thinke that the contrary can be easily evinced ) the one for e faction , the other for f a factious person ; none , i feare , will be found more truly guilty of heresie , or better to deserve the title of hereticke , then those , who ( therein concurring with the papists , whom yet they professe most to abhorre ) are so prone to condemne all as hereticks and tainted with heresie in their sense , that is , as men cut off from christ , and having no interest in him , who do not in al matters of practise comply , or in all points of doctrine concur with thēselves . of their side , lord , let me never be : g let my soul never enter into their secret . neither is it , nor shall ever be my desire , either so to pin my faith upon the sleeve of any part or party , or to engage my judgment to any meere mans or mens opinion , ( the pen men of holy writ onely excepted ) as h to admit hand over head whatsoever he or they shall hold and maintaine : nor yet again ro refuse or reject any truth , which by the light that god shal be pleased to lend me , i shal be able to descry in the writings of any , tho otherwise never so erroneous or unsound . in the next passage yet m. walker is somewhat more charitable . for though he hold me an hereticke , yet he wil pray for me . he prayeth , that i god wil give me a more setled judgment in the truth ; and a more charitable heart to my laborious neighbours . and i willingly put mine amen to his prayer . for m●ne hearty desire and daily prayer to god is , to have mine heart daily more and more k established in the truth . nor do i lesse desire , to carry a charitable affection towards my christian brethren , either laborious , or other ; tho more especially towards those , whom l for their labours sake , i do deservedly the more love . wherein yet , as in other graces and offices , i doubt not but that i may many waies m faile and fall short , during this state of imperfection and humane frailty : and wherein had not m. walker much fayled toward a brother very laborious , while he had liberty to labour in publike ; and no loiterer then , as by n his writings appeares , when he was restrained from his ministeriall employments ; but then also labouring , tho not in publike , which was not permitted him , yet for the publike , what he might ; this expence of pretious time , ( which u he would elsewhere seem so dainty of ) of necessity now wasted in debating these matters , might very wel have been sp●red , and much more profitably been spent otherwise . howbeit m. walkers charity even in his prayer eould not keep it selfe from discovery of some inward rancor mixt with a little tang at least of vain-glory . for p his laborious neighbors , ( saith he , meaning himself ; for i know no other that complaine of any defect or default in me in this kind towards them ) who spend their time in better studies , then writing of treatises for unlawful gaming and carding , and bedaubing margents with many quotations to smal purpose , but onely for ostentation of much reading . to either of which imputations , i shal severally and respectively return some short answer . for the former , 1. i doubt much , whether m. walker spent his time b●…ter in this and the like railing and reviling invectives against his laborious brethren , then i did mine in writing of that treatise q which yet had i not published , had not the iniquity of some , therein not wholy unlike m. walker , enforced me thereunto . 2. the treatise is of the nature and use of lots in general : and the scope of it , to remove , as wel the superstitious practice of them in one kind , as the superstitious conceit of them in another . 3. if any game therein defended , as not simply evil in regard of a lot in it , yea or otherwise , be by m. walker deemed utterly unlawful , let him by evidence of argument evince the same so to be ; and he shal therein r doe more then by any other , that i know , hitherto hath been done . mean while , let m. walker give me leave to tell him , that i do not believe him , nor beleeve that he is able to make his word good . tho i am not ignorant , what he hath bragged of his abilities so to do . for the latter , to wit , my course of quotation : 1. i may wel , i presume , defend my selfe , by the examples of many , of much more worth and esteem , as wel for godlines as for judgement , then either my selfe , or m. walker ; that s living library of all good literature , dr. raynolds , among the rest : unlesse m. walker be able to prove the practise unlawful . but 2. i say onely , that howsoever for the use and end of it ; he be pleased to censure it ; i hope , there wil not want others , whose judgements may wel weigh a little more at least with me , that wil approve of it as useful ; and make a better and more charitable construction of it , ( if not thank me for it ) then he doth . and 3. it may be , if some quoted the authors they alleadge , and pointed to the places they relate to in them , their evil usage of those they deale with , would the more easily be discovered . howsoever , i shal choose rather to have my margent so bedaubed , then my text so stuft as m. walkers is , as wel in this as in some other his writings . lastly , i demand , what either this or the former is to the matter in hand , or the cariage of the businesse between m. walker and m. wotton : or what occasion m. walker had to be girding here at either ; unlesse it be that his fingers itch to be picking of new quarrels , tho they nothing concerne him or the present occasion . or that t being conscious to himself of the badnesse of the cause he here deales in , he is loath to keep close to it , and willing rather to run out into any other thing , tho it have no relation at all thereunto . howbeit , notwithstanding m. walkers laborious employments , he wil yet , it seems , filch a little time from them , to examine m. gataker upon a few interrogatories ; a which unles he can answer with credit , he must of necessity for ever hereafter hold his peace , and blush as of● as he thinks , how by his defence of m. wotton , he hath accused and defamed himself . but here m. walker much mistakes his marke , and shoots at randome . for my relation , which he pretends to refute , is not m. gatakers defence of m. wotton , but m. wottons defence of himself : nor did either i , or any of those that were joyned with me in the meeting related , undertake to defend m. wotton as one free from all error , but delivered onely , what we thought of m. wottons own defence of himself in regard of ought that m. walker had laid to his charge . nor doe i therefore conceive , either that i stand upon me credit engaged to answer to all m : walkers interrogatories ; or that m. vvalker hath any du power thus to bind me over to silence and shame , upon my refusal so to do . yet let us see what they are . the first is , b whether it be truth and honesty to say , that c all the eight ministers with unanimous consent generally resolved and pronounced , that there appeared not to them either heresie or blasphemy in ought that m. wotton was by m. walker convinced to have delivered or maintained : when their subscription shews that they medled onely with his expositions , and not with his hereticall and blasphomous speeches , in which he paralleld him with socinus the heretike , to all which i shall easily answer in a word , that if that which he here relateth as mine , be the same in effect with what is d testified under the hands of d. gouge and m. downham ( as it is evident that it is ) the untruth and dishonesty must be charged upon them : who , i hope , wil be better able to acquit themselves in this busines of either ; then he that so shamelesly chargeth them therewith . as for that , which he addeth , to disprove it , of expositions ; ( which word how it came into the subscription , i suppose , no man surviving , unles himself , now knows ; ) and of speeches heretical and blasphemous , ( words of course with m. walker ) wherein he paralleld m. wotton and socinus ; enough before hath been spoken to satisfie any reasonable reader ; tho not , it may be , m. walker . the second question is , d whether i think , that m. wotton renouncing the law of god and the righteousnes thereof performed by christ in our steed for our justification ; doth not in so doing deny christs ransome paid , and satisfaction made to gods just law , for our redemption and for remission of our sinnes . to which i answer as briefly , as to the former ; that it appeared not to the eight ministers by ought m. walker produced , that m. wotton held ought in this particular , that did necessarily infer , what m. walker thence concludeth . and let m. vvalker give me leave here , if i may be so bold to minister a crosse interrogatorie to him ; to wit , whether pareus , piscator , ursine , olevian , and the rest of them , who deny christs righteousnes in fulfilling the law morall to have been performed by him in our steed , for our justification , do therefore deny all ransome paid and satisfaction made to gods just law for our redemption and the ●emission of our sins , or no. and whether they be therefore all of them blasphemous hereticks . but more especially , what he thinks of that speech of pareus above mentioned , that e those that ascribe the merit of our righteousnes thereunto , ( that which directly crosseth what m. walker here avoweth ) do doubtlesly make christs sufferings of no use or effect . surely , if m. wotton speak no more then pareus , ( and he hardly speaks so much ) pareus must as wel , if not much rather then m. wotton , passe with m. walker for an heretike . and if those that hold as m. walker doth , make christs sufferings of no use or effect , they , one would thinke , should rather go for heretikes , then m. wotton , who , it seems , is of an other mind . the third question is , f whether mans perfect fulfilling of the law in his own person , under the covenant of works , was not formall inherent righteousnesse ; and would have made man worthy of life . and if so , how he can excuse m. wotton for making faith the formall inherent righteousnes of beleevers , in the covenant of grace , by which they are worthy of justification and eternal life . seeing he saith , that faith under the gospel serves to all purposes for obtaining eternal life , as mans perfect fulfilling of the law did in the covenant of works . let me give you but m. wottons own words , out of m. walkers own parallel ; and there shall need to this no further answer . g he that beleeveth , ( saith m. wotton ) is accounted by god to all purposes concerning eternal life , to have done according to the covenant of the gospel , as he should have been accounted to have done according to the covenant of the law , if he had perfectly fulfilled it . for not to stand upon strict terms concerning the word worthie : what doth m. wotton say more here , then that which he saith else-where ? objected also to him by m. walker , as an heretical and blasphemous speech ; h the act of faith , or beleeving brings justification and adoption , ( which what is it other then what the apostle saith , rom. 3. 28. & gal. 3. 26. ) onely and meerly by the place and office , which the lord of his mercy hath assigned it , to be the condition required on our parts for the atchieving of these favours and honours . thereby excluding all matter of worth in faith. which yet , whosoever is possessed of , beleeving in christ , that is relying upon him for justifycation and life eternall , may wel be said to be accounted by god to all purposes ( to wit on our parts required , and therefore to be necessarily by us performed ) to have done as much according to the covenant of the gospel , as he should have been accounted to have done according to the covenant of the law , had he perfectly fulfilled it . but of this also enough before out of our own writers ; and by name out of m. pemble ; whom m. walker having so highly commended , as one i by his writings most useful and powerful to confirm mens minds against the wolves af this age , the disciples of blasphemous servetus and socinus ; wil not now , i hope , condemn him for a socinian and blasphemous heretike ; and having k formerly made no doubt , but that he is ascended up into heaven , wil not ( i presume ) for m. wottons sake now damn him , and throw him down , to send him packing for company with m. wetton , to hell . the fourth question is in effect the same with the two next before going ; onely , to make some shew of variety , usherd in with a list of l true and orthodox te●ets , wherein he saith m. wotton professeth his dissent from socinus ; and wherein indeed m. walker manifesteth his extream partiality , and malignant disposition against m. wotton ; thereby shewing too apparently , that his pretended zeale is not so much against socinus and socinianism it self , as against m. wotton , and against the things taught by him , as coming from him . this he hath too too manifestly discovered in this interrogatory ; spite and malice so blinding him , that m he minded not what he did . for those tenets of socinus , though unsound and containing in them ranke venome , as he meaneth them , and manifesteth himselfe so to doe , wherein m. wotton professeth to dissent from him ; these m. walker , setting a faire glosse on them , contrary to socinus his own intendement in them , alloweth and avoweth them for orthodox and true . for example , the first of them is , n that faith is obedience to christs commandements ; who commandeth us to beleeve and repent . and it is true , that socinus , as o elsewhere i cite him , p maintaines as m. walker here saith that he doth . but what saith lubbertus to him for it ? a man whom m. walker would seem much to admire , and told us at our meeting , that he was by i know not whom stiled orthodoxorum ocellus . q whereas he ( to wit socinus ) saith ( saith lubbertus ) that faith is to do those things that christ hath enjoyned , it is false : r to affirme it to be so , is to be stark mad . so by lubbertus his censure , not socinus onely , but m. walker also should be no better . again , s he teacheth , that to beleeve christ and his words , is to obey him . we deny it . for obedience is an effect of faith . he erreth therefore , that holds faith and obedience to be all one . and yet again , t firm stands that , which beza writes , that faith cannot signifie obedience to the commandements . thus lubbertus , one of m walkers own oracles . and indeed what did socinus hereby intend , but to cut off all relying by faith on christ , as having paid a price to god for our sinnes , or satisfied for them by his death ? yet this is m. walker pleased to blanch over ; as if he conceived his meaning to be nothing else , but that in beleeving and repenting , we obey christs commandement , who u commandeth us to repent and beleeve . and so is content to let it passe for currant , as a true and orthodox tenet in socinus , because m. wotton dissented therein from socinus ; though condemned by lubbertus ( yea by whom not ? ) for a grosse error , and in his intendement very dangerous . the second point , wherein m. walker affirmes m. wotton to depart from socinus , and which he affirmes to be true and orthodox , is q that repentance , which comes not but by faith , is the means to obtain forgivenes of sinnes , which christ hath brought . but he deales here with socinus , to help him out , as he is wont to do with m. wotton , to procure prejudice to him . for he takes part out of one passage , and part out of an other , ( as m. wotton hath b cited him , not expressing how far forth in every particular he concurs with him , or dissents from him ; but onely shewing , how in general he speaks not that , that himself doth ) and so pieces up a proposition , which he would have deemed sound ; withall paring of , what might serve to discover socinus his grosse error , wherein m. wotton intended to imply his departure from him . for , c it is manifest , saith he , that god requireth nothing of us in the obtaining of salvation procured by christ , but repentance and amendment of life . and , d whereas faith is sometime added to repentance ; it is not because faith in christ is required to the obtaining of remission of sins , ( directly contrary to what the apostle e professeth ) as working somewhat more in us besides repentance it selfe , that doth hereunto appertain ; but because repentance comes not but by faith in christ. thus he clips socinus in favour to him ; as he doth m. wotton els-where to a contrary end . and yet further , because lubbertus , socinus his antagonist , in refuting him , beates every where upon this , that f conversion & repentance do not in order of nature go before , but follow remission of sin , and justification ; and g are not causes , but effects of either ; nor the cause of expiation , but a consequent of it : and supposing socinus his meaning to be , h that our repentance is the cause of the remission of our sins ; i this , saith he , we disallow , for , as hath a thousand times been shewed , remission of sins , that is justification , is in nature before repentance : and it is impossible therefore to be the cause of it . k for it is not repentance , but christs sacrifice , that is the true cause of the remission of our sins : l god indeed promiseth pardon to the repentant ; but we deny repentance to be the cause for which god doth pardon . here m. walker strikes in to help socinus at a dead lift , and telleth us , contrary to his text , sure without any warrant at all from it , m that by obtaining forgivenes of sins , socinus means getting the sense and assurance of forgivenesse . a glosse wel-beseeming him , that professeth such a detestation of the very least sent or shadow of socinianism in others . the third point is , n that faith is a beleeving of that which christ taught , and an assurance of obtaining that he promised upon our repentance and obedience . which whether it be a just definition of justifying faith ; ( for of that here the question is ) or do fitly expresse the office of it in the worke of justification , i leave to be discussed by others . m. wotton relateth it , o to shew how that in laying down the nature and office of justifying faith , he goes an other way then socinus doth ; and further then socinus either doth , or can , holding his own grounds , follow him . who indeed thus defines faith , to bring all home to repentance and obed●enee , as in the former point ; and to exclude christs merit , and ought done or endured by him , as satisfactory for mans sin : as appeares plainly by the whole context of his discourse in that chapter , out of which these words are alledged . and i would demand of m. walker , how he can free himself from socinianism , when he maintains such points as these for sound and orthodox in socinus : and what censure himself would hape past upon an other , that should have thus blancht and vernisht over such assertions of socinus . as also i would know of him , with what face he , that condemns in m. wotton as hereticall and blasphemous positions , these propositions , p to beleeve in christ , is to trust in christ , and to rest on him ; to have his heart setled , and to rely wholy and onely on him ; and , this trust is such a faith as makes us rest upon god for the performance of his promise ; doth now pronounce socinus his definition of faith , such as you have heard , to be true , orthodox and sound . but hereby any party , not extreamly partiall , may easily judge what spirit this man is caried with throughout this whole busines . for as for his twenty times sodden coleworts , so oft served in , of q m. wottons taking the word faith in the apostles words in a proper sense ; christs fulfilling the law for us in our steed ; faith being the condition of the gospel , &c. taking out m. walkers fillings and glosses set upon them , which concern m. wotton no more then himselfe ; enough before hath been said . and , if m. walker can prove them to be heretical opinions , many illustrious stars , besides m. wotton , will by a blast of m. vvalkers breath , as by r the dragons tail in the vision , be thrown out of heaven , and not struck down to the ground only , but even hurld into hel. his first question is , s whether m. wotton deny not the free covenant of grace , when he holds , that god covenants not to justifie and give life , but upon a condition performed on our part , equivalent for all purposes to mans fulfilling of the law in his own person in the covenant of works . to which briefly . 1. to covenant to give a thing upon some condition may nothing impeach the freenesse either of the covenant , or of the gift . as to covenant with one to give him a shilling , that you have let fall , lying on the ground , if he will but stoop and take it up . and here by the way to satisfie some , who cannot endure to heare of any condition in the promises of the gospel ; which yet are t every where so propounded : let it be considered , that a gift or a promise may be said to be free , or not free divers waies and in divers respects : 1. free in regard both of condition and of consideration . by consideration understanding some valuable consideration , as in common speech we use to speak . and so it is absolutely , every way free . as if i promise one to bestow a book upon him and to send it home to him , and so do . here being neither condition nor consideration interposed . 2. free in regard neither of condition , nor of confideration , as if i promise one to give him such a book of mine , if he will give me another of his in lieu of it . for here is both condition and consideration ; which both concurring destroy the freenes of it . 3. free in regard of consideration , tho not free in regard of condition . as if i promise to give one such a book gratis , if he wil but cal to me at mine house for it ; supposing that i dwell at next dore , or neer to him . nor doth it derogate ought from the freenes of a gift , if it have been promised upon such a condition ; and the promise made good upon the performance of it . no more then a princes pardon would be deemed lesse free , were it granted upon condition of taking it out , and that free also for any to do , that wil , of free cost , without fee. or his alms , were they propounded and published to all , that would but repaire to the court for them . nor doth m. wotton therefore necessarily denie the freenesse of gods gratious covenant , if he hold justification and life eternal not to be promised therein but upon condition . so m. fox answering those that might object that to him , that m. walker here to m. wotton . * if gods promise be restrained to certain conditions , how shall we maintain with paul the freenes of gods mercy , whereby he freely justifyeth a sinner ? u yes , saith he , i deem and determine goas mercy to be most free in christ. albeit this salvation by the merit of christ be not derived unto us but upon a certaine condition . and m. perkins before recited : w the condition of the covenant is by grace , as wel as the substance . whereunto ad m. pembles reason : that therefore * this covenant is a compact of freest mercy , because therein life eternal is given to that , that beares not the least proportion of worth with it . 2. that this condition is x faith , the performance whereof is as availeable for our good , as perfect obedience at first had been , if it be an heresie ; why doth not m. walker require m. pembles , if not bones , yet books to be burnt , as containing in them hereticall and blasphemous doctrine ? at least why doth he not arraign and condemn him for an heretick as wel as m. wotton ? for he hath , as hath been shewed , the same . as for the word equivalent here , it is not m. wottons , but m. walkers tearm . whose spite and rancor against m. wotton is such , that nothing of his can fairely passe through his fingers . to be equivalent , that is , equall in worth , and value , is one thing ; ( and yet i might tel m. walker that y chrysostome sticks not to affirm , yea stiffly maintains , that faith in christ is of it self a more excellent thing and of greater worth , then the keeping of gods commandements ; as i shew , but disallowing , elsewhere ; and yet is he not therefore deemed or condemned for an heretick : ) to be reckoned or counted by god unto man in the covenant of grace to all purposes , in regard of ought that god requires on his part to be performed , for attaining of life eternal , as if he had in the other covenant kept the whole law , is another thing . i suppose m. walker is not to learne a difference , and that a vast one too , between 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in greek . the sixt question is , a whether m. wotton affirming , that , if we be freely pardoned , then our sins were not punished in christ our head and surety , doth not deny christs satisfaction for sin . to this i answer . he must shew first , where m. wotton so saith . for these words out of m. wotton he never yet produced . read b the parallel error 7. & out of m. wotton what is there alledged ; and c m. wottons answer to what is there alledged by m. walker out of him : and you shal soon see how m. walker here deales with m. vvotton . his seventh question is , d whether m. vvotton be not guilty of heretical tergiversation and grosse contradiction in some passages . the man , you see , can not speak of m. vvotton , but he must needs spit fier and brimstone . every thing is either heretical or blasphemous in him . but am i , or is any man else bound to reconcile whatsoever contradictions are , if any be , or may be found in m. vvottons writings ? or is every one that is taken in grosse contradictions , of necessity thereupon to be condemned for an heretick ? but in this also m. walker may as wel be beleeved , as e where he pronounces the like of m. bradshaws book . were m. vvotton alive , he were best able to reconcile his own seeming differences . and indeed , for the most of them , if not all , he then did it himselfe . for the first , which f he citeth out of my defence , as he tearms it , though out of his own parallel , and m. vvottons own defence indeed . he might , if he had but put on his spectacles , have found it g in the very same place assoiled ; that his dispute being of the formall cause of justification , or that whereby we are made formally righteous , h he denieth any end or use of christs righteousnes imputed to that purpose . but i he denieth not the imputation of it , as the meritorious cause thereof . whereunto , tho sufficient to take away the seeming contradiction , i ad yet further what i touched upon out of k m. bradshaw before , and i find in him elswhere ; that tho he deny imputation of christs righteousnes taken in a stricter sense , as many in this argument would have it ; yet taken it in a larger sense , for that which is reckoned to a man for his benefit , so far forth as it may in that kind be useful unto him , so he denies not the imputation of christs righteousnesse to mans justification . for thus i find in certaine theses of his written in latine of this subject . 1. l if any man hold christs righteousnes to be by way of merit the efficient cause of justification , i am wholly of his mind . 2. m if any maintain not christs righteousnes to be our formal righteousnes , i have no controversie with him . 3. n the imputation of christs righteousnes to our benefit , i acknowledge and professe . 4. o it never came into my mind , not so much as in dream , to deny , that we are justified for the righteousnes of christ. as for what m. walker p addes out of m. vvottons essaies ; they were written after our meeting , as q himself acknowledgeth ; and therefore nothing concern either us or our censure ; nor for my part did i ever see them , nor know what is in them . and yet what is it , that m. walker thence here alledgeth ? that in scripture there is no mention of christs merit . which if he speak of the word merit , who wil , or can deny the truth of it ? yet it will not thence follow , that m. vvotton therefore denies the thing thereby signified , ( the rather since that he useth the tearm of meritorious cause applied unto christ and his righteousnes so frequently himself ) no more then , that calvin denied the doctrine of the t●init● , because r he acknowledgeth that tearm not to be found in gods vvord to the next s likewise he might have found the like solution , in the very place t whence he had it ; if he had been pleased to deal but half so kindly with m. vvotton , as he dealt with socinus . for , why may not faith , tho taken properly , be said to justifie , not per se , or of it self ; ( tho bucer , as i have shewed , u so also say ) albeit the word faith be there properly taken , where it is said to be imputed for righteousnes ? not for it self , as x m vvotton himself expoundeth himself , but for christ , on whom it relies ; as hath formerly been at large related . for , what y is added of imputation , is coincident to the former : but that m. walker with his z cole so o●t new dressed and dished in again , tires out h●s readers , and may wel overturn their stoi●ck● . the a third consists of the b second and c sixt queres ; ( for m. walker loves to turn round ) wherein nothing is truely alledged out of m. vvotton , that any way crosseth christs satisfaction made , or the price by him paid , for us : and shal thither therefore be returned again ; least by running round in a circle after m. walker , we grow turn-sick with him . the d fourth is not so much a contradiction found in m wottons writings to ought of his own , as to the words of the apostle , rom. 5. 19. which yet unles they be understood of formal and inherent righteousnes , ( however e m. walker tax m. bradshaw for confounding these terms ) m. vvottoh contradicteth not at all . and yet is it not sufficient to prove a man an heretick , because he contradicts somewhat conteined in gods word . since that every error whatsoever in any point of divinity must of necessity so do . and m. walker therefore , unlesse he dare professe himself free from all error , must by the same ground withall granted confesse himself to be an heretick . but from his contradictions return we to his questions again . his eighth question , wherein he thinks he hath me now on the hip , is f how m. gataker with a good conscience can justifie and proclaim m. vvotton free from heresie , when he wilfully and perversely denies the very form , essence , and being of justification , to wit , the imputation of christs righteousnes , first simply rejecting it , as being of no use ; and afterwards , as the formal cause of justification ; ( where you have the same colie served you in againe ) seeing he , the said m. gataker hath publikely extolled and commended for orthodox , the like treatife of m. vv. bradshaw in his funerall sermon at his buriall , wherein he makes the imputation of christs righteousnes the form of justification . in which words , as g he sometime said of the people of athens , m. walker blowes and blusters much , but does little . for first , i might demand of him , where i so extolled m. bradshaws book ? what i spake of it in a short speech before my sermon at that time , i have formerly word for word related . but in m. walkers hyperbolical language , every mole-hil is a mountain ; every rivelet or drilling ril , a flood or a faire river ; every but scanty or sleight commemoration or commendation , an extolling ; every light touch , an invective ; every error , at least an heresie . secondly , whether every one that commends a book in such manner as i there did , must of necessity approve it as wholly free from all error . i was by a * worthy knight sometime demanded mine opinion in a point concerning the seat of conscience , wherein two divines of special note , run two divers and cros waies , h the one denying it a place in any natural facultie of the soul , usually assigned ; the other affording it a room in each of them : and professing my self to dissent from either , it was objected to me , that i had by an epistle prefixed commended the worke of the one , wherein that opinion of his was found . to which i then answered that gentleman , and so shal now m. vvalker , that a book may warrantably for the main substance of it be cōmended as useful , yea as excellent ; albeit the party so commending it suppose the author of it to have been mistaken in some things therein contained . so did m. cappel with the same m. bradshaws book ; albeit in some things therein he dissented then from him , when so highly yet he indeed did extoll it , as you formerly have heard : and my selfe did somewhat the like sometime with m. eltons catechetical work to my cost ; though withall k professing , that in divers things contained in that part of it which i had read , i was my selfe of another judgement . thirdly , what if m. wotton and m. bradshaw do not herein at all differ , or crosse either other ? but may very well be reconciled ? may not m. gataker then at least with a good conscience commend m. bradshaws booke , and yet pronounce m. wotton free from heresie , when he saith herein nothing that contradicts that , which m. bradshaw is here said to affirm ? and that it is so indeed , and in m. bradshaws own judgement was so , may be easily made to appeare . for doth not m. bradshaw in his preface plainly shew , that the word of imputation is overstrictly taken by some divines , in which sense m. wotton seems to him to have denied it ; whereas the word might wel be understood in another , and a larger sense , professing himself so to use it ? so that the bare word rejected by the one , and admitted by the other , doth not necessarily imply any contradiction between them . no more then s. pauls words , that l a man is justified by faith without works , doth any way contradict what s. james saith , that m a man is justified by works , and not by faith onely . and here i shall again crave leave of my reader , to insert a short passage out of some writings enterchanged between these two christian brethren ; both , i hope , now with god , and agreeing in all things ; though in some particulars they dissented , while they lived here . m. wotton in his animadversions , which i have by me , on m. bradshaws book , thus excepts . the third opinion denying all imputation of christs righteousnes is said to be somewhat erroneous . yet the same opinion held onely in that strict sense of imputation , which the autor himselfe rejecteth , and that upon good ground , as he acknowledgeth , is therefore cleered from all erroneousnes . for how can that be erroneous , that is held on good ground ? to which m. bradshaw thus answereth : tho upon good ground , as to me seems , you deny imputation in that sense only ; yet your denial of all imputation may notwithstanding that be erroneous ; being grounded upon a supposal of that which i think is erroneous , that there is no other kind of imputation but that , which is answerable to that strict sense aforesaid . by which words it appeares , that the difference herein between them was rather in words , then in points : and that m. wottons error , as m bradshaw apprehended it , was only concerning the use of a word , not concerning any point of faith . fourthly , suppose the difference were not verball , but reall , not in words onely , but in sense and meaning too ; yet would it not therefore necessarily follow , that m. wotton denieth the very form , essence , and being of justification , because he denies that , which m. bradshaw affirms to be the formall cause of it ; or that m. gataker must therefore of necessity pronounce m. wotton an heretick ; unles first it be proved that that is indeed and truth the formal cause , of justification , which m. bradshaw hath assigned : ( which being found onely in a short summary annexed to his treatise , n m. walker himself deems to contradict what is averred in the book ; nor is it at all in the latine edition , ) and that m. gataker also is therein of the same mind with m. bradshaw , which for ought m. walker knowes , he may not be . fiftly , i should desire to know of m. walker , whether he hold not the imputation of christs active obedience to be the formall cause of our justification : and if he so do ; which , i suppose , he wil not deny ; whether he can with a good conscience pronounce pareus free from heresie ; notwithstanding that o he denies the imputation of it unto justification , as derogatory from the al-sufficiency of christs suffrings and his sacrifice ; and consequently ( by m. walkers inference ) takes away the very form , essence and being of justification . if he cannot , how comes it to pas , that he reckons him here so oft among his orthodox writers , that condemn m. wottons opinions as heretical and blasphemous ? if he can , i see not , why m. gataker may not do the like by m. wotton , forought here objected . the argument being as strong ( if not stronger ) against the one as against the other . sixtly , suppose it were an error , and a dangerous one to , that m. wotton maintains ; whence knows m. walker ? or how is he able to prove , that he holds it n wilfully , that is , against his own knowledge , ( for that seems to be intimated ) and perversly , that is , as i conceive him , obstinately ? to make him * a damned heretick . for i suppose , he wil not assume to himself any o extraordinary gift in discerning of spirits . and if he will pretend , that he discernes it by his deeds ; which is hard to do in a point of meer theorie ; let him take heed , what manner of spirit by his carriage in this busines , being matter of practise , he gives men ground , to suspect or conclude himself to be led by . lastly , suppose m. walker to be so sharpsighted , and that he can pierce and peere so narrowly into m. wottons conscience , as to discern that he doth wilfully and perversely maintain what he holds : yet unlesse that m. gataker be as quicksighted herein as m vvalker , and that he be able to descry in m. wotton that wilfulnes and perversnes that m. walker doth , he may still with a good conscience justifie m. wotton , and pronounce him ( for proclamations he makes none ) free from heresie ; as wel as the rest of his reverend brethren have done , notwithstanding all m. walkers evidence given in against him . since that * no man is bound to pronounce or deem of his christian brother , on the wors part especially , further then himself can see . his ninth question ( to cut it somewhat shorter , that the readers stomack may be the les troubled in taking it ) is this , p how the faithful united to christ , as their head , and made thereby partakers of his righteousnes and whole obedience to gods law , and thereby constituted righteous before god , can without hereticall pravity be denied to be formally righteous by that righteousnes . to which i answer : that first he presumes some things here that are to be proved ; and are ( as he wel knows , ) by divines not a few of the best note not acknowledged ; as , that christs righteousnes consisting in his active obedience is part of that whereby the faithfull are made righteous . besides , that many things have the faithful interest in by vertue of their union and communion with christ ; which yet are not imputed unto them for the justifying of them , or for the making of them to stand righteous in gods sight . the wife by vertue of her union and conjunction with her husband , hath a right to , and interest in , all that he hath , yea and in himself to . yet is it not necessary , that whatsoever she hath joint interest in with him , should therefore go to the payment of her debts formerly contracted : especially , if sufficient be found in any part of it . and that without hereticall-pravity therefore , that which m. vvotton is here charged with , may be held ; especially , unles we wil question the sufficiency of christs death for the discharge of our sins ; pareus q his words ( if he be at least of any credite with m. walker ) above-mentioned wil intimate ; yea the whole discourse , whence they are taken , wil evidently shew . for his tenth and last question , the contradiction is the very same concerning imputation , that was r formerly propounded , the first in the seventh question . for m. walker doth but roll s sisyphus his stone up and down here , until he tire , if not himself , yet his reader . the question it self is , t whether m. wotton be not possessed with the spirit of socinian blindnes and giddines , when he derides orthodox divines , for making every beleever justified by imputation of christs satisfactory obedience , a redeemer , saviour and satisfier for all the elect and faithful . what by socinian blindnes and giddines m. walker meanes , i wean not . we use to ask , who are blinder then they that wil not see ? and in this kind m. walker hath bewrayed too much blindnes in this book . as for giddines , i know not , who are more likely to be possessed of it , then such as run round , like an hors in a mil. but how , or where , doth m. vvotton thus deride our orthodox divines ? this crime thus fastned upon m. wotton , m. walker thus makes good . u for in one of his written papers thus he argues : if christs righteousnes and satisfaction be imputed to every beleever , then must every beleever be accounted a redeemer , justifier , and satisfier for all the elect. but this is absurd . ergò , the antecedent is fals . where first , i might demand of m. walker , whether a man must of necessity be deemed to deride him , whom he disputes with , if he shal affirm something to follow from that he holdeth , which he pronounces to be absurd , 2. whether this speech of m. wotton were given in to us at our meeting by m. walker , as part of his evidence , to make good his plea against m. vvotton . which unles it were , as it was not , which may appear by his paralel ; albeit it should contain rank heresie in it ; yet concerns it not us , nor our sentence in clee●ing m. vvotton . for x what iudge is bound to sentence any man upon evidence not produced ? 3. as for the matter it self , if m. vvotton doe not understand aright , what those orthodox divines mean ; as y m. walker affirms : sure the mistaking of another mans meaning , and thereupon supposing therefore , or pretending , that some absurdity follows from what he saith , doth not in my weak apprehension make a man guilty of heresie . or if it be pre●umed that it doth , i doubt much , whether m. walker himself may not be deemed one of the greatest hereticks under the sun. thus much for m. walkers questio●● . whereunto he saith a he could ad divers others . but if they be as little to the purpose as these ; ( which howsoever , one only excepted , concerning mine extolling of m. bradshaws book , do no more concern me to answer , then any other of the eight ) he may do wel to keep them where they are : unles he be desirous to acquaint the world further with his restles spirit ( which he hath sufficiently done here already ) albeit he have neither new matter to enquire of , nor any matter of moment , whereby to take of the truth of that , which under good hands and of oredit sufficient ; hath been related . and the rather may he be advised to conceal them , unles they be more savoury , then what here next ensueth , of b a stinking issue of running cankers in a most foul body , and rotten carcose , that m. gataker , like a sepulchres dog , hath scratched and raked out of the grave , in writing and publishing of his relation : ( in which passage also he shews himself turn-sick again : ) otherwise his readers ( to return his own words ) may wel be forewarned , to stop their noses , ere they offer to read them . hence he proceeds to charge me ; first , as c profuse and prodigal of my reputation , in subscribing to m. wottons positions , that they contain neither heresie nor blasphemy . wherein if my reputation●ly at the stake , theirs must lie together with mine , that subscribed together with me . and secondly , with d breach of piety and charity , virulency , defect of humanity and common honesty , in falsly fathering that on those dead saints , m. randol , and m. stock , and those living pious men , d. gouge and m. downham , a subscription to those errors , that they saw no heresie or blasphemy in them . all which foul imputations , which herein he would make me guilty of , light full upon those , whom he pretends to be wronged by me , rather then upon me , who relate but their testimony under their own hands . for if ought be falsly fathered upon the deceased , whither of the twain stand guilty of it , they that witnes the thing under their hands , or he that barely relates what they witnes ? besides i would fain know , what virulency is , or can be , in a precise relation of an other mans words , if there be no virulent matter or manner of speech in them : or if ought be in them of that nature , who ought to beare the burden of it , the relater , or the autor . as for his old cuckows song , e of his blaming our subscription , protesting against it offer to dispute , and mine interposing so , that he could not be heard , nor obtaine a copy of m. wottons answers , with such other idle repetitions ; they have been before heard and answered : and do here serve onely to raise the bulke of the book ; but do no whit help to prove , what m. walker here intends , that i have falsly fathered ought upon those saints deceased . yea they are of much weight to evince the truth of that , which m. walker here so eagerly opposeth . for what needed m. walker to have kept all this coil , and have made all this ado if no such thing had then been , or were about to ●e done ? as little to the same purpose , or to any purpose at all , is it , what he telleth f of a consutation of so much as he could remember of m. vvottons answers , which he shewed to d. gouge and m. downham . who i hope , wanted no baiting by him , for what they had done . and that afterward he obtained liberty by a friend to copy them out , labouring for nothing ever more earnestly then to have them published ; which they may beleeve him that list : for who or what hindered him from publishing of them , when he had them ? and that he desired so much the publishing of them , to free himself from those fals reports , that m. gataker would now lay & fasten upon him , p. 39. in which whole page there is nothing but a short sum of what was before delivered ; of m. walkers charge and chalenge , and his evidence given in , all under his own hand ; m. wottons answer , as himself penned it ; the verdict and sentence of the persons appealed to , testified under the survivours hands , and m. walkers renewing of his charge in print , which himself wil not deny ; and what fals reports of mine can there be in all this ? or if the publishing of m. vvottons answer wil free m. walker from fals reports , i have therein done m. vvalker , it seems , no smal pleasure , and fulfilled , if we may beleeve him , his earnest desire . so far , he saith , he was from pressing d. bayly to conceal them , as m. gataker would intimate , p. 37. where i say no such matter , but say onely of the subscription , that the doctor refused to deliver it , whether pressed by m. walker to detaine it or no , i wot not , m. vvalker himselfe best knoweth . and indeed what was it to any of us , whether m. walker had had m. wottons answers , or no ? this is therefore all but g smoak and dust , raised to dim or dasel mens eyes , that they may not see that , that m. walker would fain have concealed , and kept ( were it possible ) from their sight . which having thus made some way to , as he supposed , ( therein overflattering himself ; as h what men earnestly desire , they are easily induced to beleeve ) he falleth now again more directly upon it ; and i tels us upon what occasion , m. vvotton by a fals suggestion , drew d. gouge and m. downham some yeers after to give a fals attestation : ( for that is it , that he laboureth throughout this whole pamphlet , wel knowing how neerly it concerns him , to prove ) k which m. stock and d. bayly abhorred to do , repenting what favour they had shewed m. wotton at first . but here stil l aqua haeret , the water stayes , and doth not run cleerly away . nor is m. walker with all his shifts , able to wind himself out . for is the attestation by m. gataker related , and by m. sam. wotton published , truly related , or no ? if it be truely related , then m. gataker in relating it , hath delivered nothing but what is true ; to wit , that two such men have under their hands given such an attestation . again , is the attestation it selfe true , or no ? they that gave it , i hope , wil maintain it to be true . and then have i averred nothing concerning the issue of that meeting , but what is avowed by the testimony of two witnesses , beyond all just exception , and whom m. walker of all other m cannot with any reason reject , being men chosen to heare and sentence the cause by himself . who therefore , if he shall stil persist to affirm it to be fals ; i wil say no more , but as that noble roman sometime accused by a mean fellow of a very unlikely crime , n varius affirms it ; scaurus denies it . whether of the two do you credit ? so i here , m. walker the party interressed saies it ; d. gouge and m. downham two of his iudges ( for * so himself tearms them ) men indifferent and unpartial ( however m. walker is pleased to tax them ) deny it : you may choose whether of the two you wil be pleased to beleeve . thus at length m. walker hath dispatched himself , as concerning our meeting , by himself procured and the issue of it . wherein he hath so laboured to vindicate himself , by many falshoods inserted into his report of it ; and , not so much by recharging m. wotton , as by traducing his iudges , as men partiall and unconscionable , and such as in favour of m. wotton did what they were even then ashamed of when they did it , and by all means therefore contended to have it concealed and kept from the light and sight of others after they had done it ; and lastly by heaping on me a whole load of opprobrious terms , for having a hand in the publishing of it ; that in seeking thus to salve his credit , he may wel therein be deemed , to have done no more then to have o washt over a raw brick but , or to have p covered miry durt with reeking dung . howbeit , tho he have thus rid his hands of our meeting , yet his spite and malice against m. wotton and me is not yet at an end . for , as for my poscript , it is q so frivolous , that a short answer wil serve : r one short breath is sufficient to blow it away . and yet let m. vvalker who thus here vaunteth himself , like an other s pyr gopolinices , know , that with all his boisterous blusterings he hath not stirred it one jot , much les blown it away , as he brags ; having not so much as blown upon a good part of it ; because , it seems , he was loath to spend so much breath in vain , that might better be kept for some other use . my t main charge here against him , he saith , is iniquity ; and indeed so u it is , for yoaking m. wotton with peter abeilard , and with servetus and socinus , as agreeing with them in such damnable and detestable dotages , as they held and maintained , and for which they were condemned as blasphemous hereticks ; and that upon such slight grounds , as hath formerly been shewed . but w the iniquity , m. walker tels me , shal return upon mine own head . and why so ? first , for abeilard , x because s. bernard ( whose saintship yet i suppose , need be no part of our creed ; especially , if all be true that our walter mapes y reports of him ) saith he held , that our sins are not punished in christ , and that it had been injustice in god to punish one for another , and to impute the obedience of one to another . i demand not of m. walker , where abeilard saith ought of the imputing of the obedience of one to another , or where bernard charges him with the deniall of it , as a thing unjust . tho i suppose , he would not easily be able to shew either . but i aske , where m. wotton ever said , what abeilard is here reported to have held , that our sins are not punished in christ ; or , that it were injustice in god to punish one for another . if he cannot shew this ( as hitherto he hath not done ) he is ( and may be deservedly so censured ) a malicious slanderer of his brother . howbeit , if these words of m. vvotton , which m. walker could not be ignorant of , do not speake the direct contrary ; let some part yet of this imputatiou be taken of , if you so please . a christ , saith m ▪ vvotton , hath been punished for us ; we are pardoned for his punishment , esay 53. 5 what can be spoken more plainly ? m walkers iniquity therefore herein , is not wiped of , much lesse returned upon me . besides i find in his latine theses before mentioned this assertion : b this i beleeve , that christs sufferings are imputed to us ; and we for them obtain from god , pardon of our fins , and freedom from the guilt of them . then which i maintain , that nothing can be spoken or conceived more true , or more apt for the unfolding of scripture . which how wel it sorts with what m. walker charges on abeilard , let any man judge . but against m. wotton c the worst comes last . for m. walker wil prove him to conspire with abeilard , servetus and socinus in a wors matter than all this ; and that is in the denial of christs deity . for , d if they denied in plain words the eternal deity of christ ; so also m. vvotton did in effect . for he held that christs obedience did serve only to justifie himself , and to bring him into high favour with god : so that god justifieth us by him as by a favourite , only upon condition of our trusting in him . now where is the infinite valour of his deity , if he needed justification and favour for himself . did ever man read a charge more malicious , or more slenderly backt ? for not to question again , whether abeilard , ( e which m. walker expresly by name affirms apart of him ) did ever deny , and that in plain tearms too , the eternal deity of christ ; or where bernard , or any other saith , that he so did . tho it be a sin ( we say ) even to bely the devil ; any man much more and so far is peter abeilard from denying it in plain terms , that in precise and ful words he affirms it ; ( f i beleeve , saith he , that the sonne is in all things coequal with the father ; to wit , in eternity , power , or autority , &c. g condemning withal and detesting arius ( whom bernard was pleased to say he had some h smach of ) as one i led by a perverse disposition , and led aside by a devilish spirit , for k making degrees in the trinity , and teaching the father to be greater than the son , and the son lesser than the father . that , which it is true indeed , that l bernard chargeth peter to have done ; ( and were it true , yet were not in plain tearms to deny the eternal deity of christ , ) but peter flatly denies to be found in any writings of his ; yea m professing to abhor it , not as heretical onely , but as devilish ; nor refusing to be pronounced , n not an heretick simply , but an arch-heretick , if it could out of any work of his be produced . but to let this passe , i say ; which little concerns us , howsoever it were with abeilard ; save that o the rule of iustice and equity requires to do every one right ; and p that we deale with others as we would be de●lt with our selves . first , suppose that a denial of christs deity might be necessarily deduced from some positions by m. wotton maintained . would it thence follow that m. vvotton denies the deity of christ ? it is no good consequence . for some thing may follow truly and necessarily from what a man holds ; and yet he not hold it , but deny it ; yea strongly and stifly not in dispute only , but even in judgement oppose it , because he deems the consequence , wherby it is thence deduced , unsound , for example : that which the lutherans hold concerning the corporall presence of christs body in the sacrament , together with the bread , doth by necessary consequence overthrow the truth of christs humanity . do any of our divines therefore charge them , ( tho q they walk along with m. walker in the way he here takes , in their writings against us ) with the deniall of christs humane nature ? or wil m. walker therefore dare to pronounce luther an heretick , as denying the truth of christs humanity ? albeit we know that every true , naturall , and humane body is confined to some one certain individuall place or other , and limited with such dimensions as all men we see are ; which of christs cannot be truely said , if that be admitted . yea to turn the edge of m. walkers argument the other way . by the same reason , from some consequences of m. richardsons , ( whose authority m. walker i am sure , wil not waive ) a man may prove , that turks , iews and pagans hold a trinity of persons in the deity , and the evangelical doctrine of christs incarnation . for what turke , iew , or pagan , of any but ordinary apprehension in intellectuals , if he acknowledge a god , doth not hold , that that god doth most perfectly understand himself ? now m. richardson in some essaies of his ; wherein ( directly contrary , as i take it , to what r the apostle averres ; and yet do i not therefore account him an hereticke , no more then that other noble s lord of great note , that hath laboured in the like argument ) he endeavours to prove , that men by the very light of nature and use of reason alone , may attaine to the knowledge of those two main mysteries of faith and grounds of the gospel ; and that they may thereby be demonstrated to those who never heard of or knew them before ; he doth from this position as generally granted and agreed on , by a continued chain of consequences , as so many links or rundels necessarily depending each on other , thus argu : god understandeth himself most perfectly , ergò he is understood of himself most perfectly : ergò there is a most perfect understander , and a most perfect understood ; and both these are one essence . again , a most perfect understander , and a most perfect understood : ergò a most perfect conceiver , and a most perfect conceived : ergò a most perfect begetter , and a most perfect begotten : ergò a production of that which is of the same kind : ergò of a most perfect sonne : ergò by a most perfect father : which are the father and the sonne . again , god understandeth himself most perfectly : ergò to be the most perfect being : ergò he willeth himself as the most perfect good : ergò from the understander and the understood proceeds a mutuall desire of their essence : ergò a spirit or anhelitus to the same : which is the holy ghost proceeding from both . again , what man is there turke , iew , or pagan , that hath any regard of conscience to god ward , but holds that he hath at some time or other offended god by doing unjustly in some one kind or other ? now hence doth the same autor by a stoical sorites , or heap of ergoes , deduce a necessity of our saviour christs incarnation , for that mans salvation , on this wise . mans conscience telleth him , that he hath done unjustly : ergò transgressed the rule of justice : ergò the eternall law : ergò the law of the eternal god : ergo he is obnoxious to the eternal justice of god : ergò to an infinite punishment : ergò he must be answerable to the same : ergò by suffering eternally , if he answer it in himself , or by any other finite : ergò , he must perish eternally , unles an infinite person undertake the same ; who being infinite can infinitely satisfie with finite sufferings : ergò he must perish eternally , or beleeve an infinite person satisfying for him , as an infinite person offended by him ; and that ( in conclusion ) is christ , god and man. for to avoyd prolixity , i wil cut off the residue of this train . thus from m. richardsons grounds , by m. walkers help , there is an incomparablo benefit befaln the whole world , for by this means great part of it , though they never heard of christ , are sodenly become christians . for they hold the main principles of the gospel as certainly , nay more certainly then m. wotton denies christs deity . since that the one follows , you see , necessarily ( unles m. richardson be much mistaken ) from what they hold ; whereas the other by m. walkers good leave , hath not as yet been shewed to follow so from ought by m. wotton maintained . and yet , i doubt much , that if trial be taken , we shal scarce find them sound in the christian faith for all this . in the next place therfore , let us see , what it is , that m. walker , here tels us , that m. vvotton maintained , whereby he hath brought upon himself so heavy a guilt as the denial of the eternal deity of the son of god. he held , saith he , that christs obedience did serve onely to justifie himself , and to bring him into high favour with god : so that god justifies us by him as by a favourite , onely upon condition of our trusting in him . where m. vvotton saith all this , m. walker tels us not : and he that twits m. gataker for his frequent quotations , might justly be taxed both here and elsewhere for a defect , if not default , herein ; and that such , as rendreth him , not without good cause , suspected of some jugling . for that christs obedience serves to justifie himself , i suppose , no man can deny . since that s our saviour himself doth thereby usually justifie himself against the false aspersions of his slanderous adversaries . howbeit to give m. walker herein the more satisfaction , we wil present him with two testimonies , the one a strangers , the other our own countreymans . thus then gomarus , one of the greatest and eagerest anti-arminian . t christ , had he not performed perfect obedience , had himself been a sinner , and to be punished for himself . and thus m. dearing in his lectures upon part of the epistle to the hebrews , u our saviour christ , being the eternall sonne of god , through the work of the holy ghost , was made man of the uirgin mary , and born without original sin ; and by the same spirit filled stil his manhood more and more with grace , til the fulnes of all righteousnes was within him , that so his manhood might inherit salvation , according to the promise , do this , and thou shalt live . but hitherto as he is righteous , so he is righteous for himself ; and only that man is blessed , who was conceived by the holy ghost , and born of the uirgin mary . what more pregnant ? again , that christ for this his obedience was in grace and favour with god , both the evangelist witnesseth , and himself professeth . * the father loves me , saith he , because i lay down my life ; as w my father hath willed me to do . and why not also , x because i do alwaies those things , that are pleasing to him ? and that christ 〈◊〉 a favourite , helps to bring us into grace with god , i hope no true christian , either doubts or denies . y god himself so oft implying and intimating the same , and the apostle so expresly telling us , that z god hath graciously accepted us in his beloved . for as for the condition of trusting in christ , enough hath formerly been said : and he must needs wilfully wink , that refuseth to take notice of that which so a frequently he must needs meet with in the gospel , if he but superficially turn over the books of the new testament . not to ad , that hence christian writers , as wel b ancient as c modern , confirm the deity of christ , because we are d willed , and e said to beleeve in him , and pronounced f happy for so doing ; the very * papists themselves , tho against themselves , applying the same also to this purpose . but that m. vvotton any where hath affirmed , that christs obedience serves for this end onely to justifie himself , ( which comes short of what socinus himself acknowledgeth ) or to bring him into favour with god ; ( as if he had not been in favour with him before ) is more , i beleeve then m. wotton ever writ or sayd : sure i am , more it is , then m. walker gave in in evidence against him , when he laid as mach in his charge as he was able to reach to , no les then heresie and blasphemy . and i am the rather enduced to beleeve that herein he wrongs m. wotton , because no such restrictive particle is found in that passage of m. wotton , out of which m. walker seemeth to have pickt this vile calumny . his words are in a latine discourse g cited thence by m. walker himself , these . all that good will , wherewith god imbraceth us , proceeds from that favour that christ is in with god. now in these things is that for the most part contained , that he is by nature the sonne of god ; that he is perfectly holy ; that he hath performed obedience every way perfect , both by fulfilling the law , and by perfect performance of all things belonging to the office of a mediator . whence it follows , that those that beleeve are gracious with god also for the righteousnes of christ. whereunto i ad , what follows in the same discourse a little after . now faith is , as a mean , a condition , and , if you please , an instrument of partaking this goodwil of god in christ. so the part ( or office ) of faith is no other , then by beleeving in christ and receiving of him , to perform that which god requires of us to the reconciling , that is , the justifying and adopting of us ; that we may be partakers of the redemption and life eternal procured for us by christ. and towards the end : although i grant , that the justification of a sinner , that is , the remission of his sins , is to be fetcht properly frō christs obedience in the suffering of death : yet by his righteousnes also in fulfilling the law , i suppose that we obtain fauour with god. which words of m wotton , how they sute and agree , with what m. walker would here fasten upon him , i leave to be deemed by any one , that hath not his eyes , either blood-shot , or gallshot , as it is to be feared m. walkers were , when he either read that , or wrote this . yea but , how doth m. walker , from what he either finds in m. wotton , or fathers on him , extract a denial of christs deity ? a man had need of a quick fight indeed to discern that , as himself hereafter delivereth himself of it . h now where , saith he , is the infinite valew of christs deity , if he have need of justification and favour for himself ? and is not such a question as this , think ye , enough to stop any mans mouth , or to open it rather , and enforce him to condemn m. wotton without more ado for an arian ? but let us put m. walkers argument into form and figure , that we may the better descry and see the force of it . thus then it must be . whosoever saith ; that christ hath need of justification and favour for himself , denies his eternal deity , for he denies the infinite valew of his deity . but m. wotton holds , that christ had need of justification and favour for himself . therefore he denies christs eternal deity . the proposition of this syllogism may very well be questioned . for doth not the word of god say expresly , that i christ was , and is justified ? doth not the same word say , that k he was in favour , yea that l he grew in favour , both with god and man ? or was not either of these for himself ? yea but , peradventure he had no need of either for himself . surely those things , without which christ as man , could not be , either accepted with god , or entirely happy ; those it cannot be denyed but that be had need of , and need of for himself . but christ as man , unlesse he had been in a justifiable estate , could not have been accepted with god ; nor could he have been entirely happy , had he not been in favour with god. and what wil hence follow , m. walker may easily conceive , if he be pleased so to do . which if to acknowledge be a denial of the infinite valew of christs d●ity , i know not how any sound divine , exactly herein treading in the track of gods word , can be acquitted of arianism . nor could m. walker do the arians or socinians a greater pleasure , then if he were able to prove and make good what herein he affirmeth . true it is indeed , that a man may be said to have need of a thing two waies : first , when a man wants somewhat , that is requisite for him to have , when he should have use of it . and so our saviour christ had need of meat when he was , m hungry ; and of drink , when he was n athirst . but so he never needed any spirituall grace , or favour with god. secondly , when a man can not wel be without somewhat , the continuance whereof with him is useful and requisite for him . and so christ , as man , may wel be said to have had need even for himself of such righteousnes as might justifie him ; ( else he must have been o guilty of some sin , and p such a sinner , as the pharisees unjustly charged him to be ; ) and of such favour with god , as should make him , and whatsoever he should do , acceptable unto god. but some question here may wel be made , what should move m. walker thus to shape his argument , when he comes to conclude it . for in his proposition here , wherein his conclusion lies couched , he qualifieth that , which in his charge against m. wotton that should make up his assumption , with a note of restriction there inserted , but here omitted , he had made to sound much more harshly and hainously , then as here he repeats it . for there it was that m. vvotton should hold , that christs obedience served onely to justifie himself : whereas here the word onely is wholy left out , as no part of his argument . was it , think we , because his conscience gave him some after-check , and told him that he had charged more upon m. vvotton then he was able to make good ? or was it because his own heart suggested unto him , that this was too gros and palpable a falshood to fasten upon him , who every where professeth his opinion to the contrary , affirming the merit and benefit of christs obedience to redound also unto us ? so in the very same place , as m. walker himself also q cites him , he saith , if question be concerning the formal cause of justification , i exclude from it either obedience of christ. ( to wit , both active and passive . ) if of the efficient by way of merit , i maintain it to depend upon both . and his false dealing therefore therein might by his own allegations be easily discovered . but whatsoever it was that made him thus to stagger , is not greatly materiall , onely it may not be unusefully observed , to disclose in m. walker that , wherewith r formerly he taxed m. wotton ; to wit , such agiddines , procured by his so oft turning round , that he forgetteth the medium of his argument , wherein the pith of it should consist , tho laid down but two or three lines before , when he comes to conclude it . as for the charge it self , to cleare m. wotton of arianism ( that which the divel himself , i suppose , would never have charged him with ; but s tho in words , saith m. walker he professe the contrary , yet in effect he maintains ; ) i shal not need to say much : his sermons extant , on the first of s. johns gospel wil superaboundantly plead for him , and shew it to be a most shameles slander : unles that m. walker , by his chymical faculty , by which he is able to extract every thing out of any thing , can pick arianism out of those * discourses , wherein the same is very eagerly opposed , and as substantially refuted . from this fresh charge , which had it been given in , when time was , and that so strongly backt , and cleerly demonstrated , we could not possibly have avoided it , but must of necessity have found m. wotton an heretick , socinian or arian , no great matter whether if not both : he proceeds to t the poornes of m. g●takers defence ; thinking to excuse m. vvotton , by naming other heresies of servetus and socinus , that m. wotton held not , nor did m. walker charge him with : and pleading , that , because they were condemned for other heresies , therefore this was no heresie : which yet m. walker knows to be heresie and blasphemy ; and other learned proclaim it so to be : yea m. wottons own conscience told him that his opinions were condemned for such ; which for fear of shame therefore he sometimes denied ; and frequently contradicted himself , saying and unsaying , as socinus his master often did . to all which punctually in few words . 1. it would deservedly have been expected , that m. walker having charged m. wotton , with t maintaining , teaching , and infecting divers , with the most pestilent and dangerous errors and opinions of all that ever the devil sowed among christian people , the heresies of servetus and socinus , those most damnable and cursed hereticks , the greatest monsters that ever were born within the borders of christs church ; i say , that having thus charged m. vvotton , he should have proved him to consent with them in those monstrous and most pestile●t errors of all , that ever were by them held and taught : otherwise his evidence falleth far short of his charge . and surely one of these two m. walker by vertue of that his charge stands bound to maintain and make good ; either that those prodigious ●●tages and detestable blasphemies of servetus related by calvin , ( to let pas socinus and his denial of christs deity ) yea not those of him alone , but the like of u the ophites , the cainites , the nicolaitans , the basilidians , the valentinians , the carpocratians , the marcionites , the manichees , and the whole rable of abominable old hereticks , whose positions and practises were so hideous and horrible , or so unclean and obscene , that they are not almost to be related ; yet are not so vile and pestilent as are those errors , that either m. wotton indeed held , or were by m. walker ( truly , or falsly , shal be all one ) objected unto him ; or els , that , tho these are not so vile and pestilent as those ; that those were none of them by the devill sown among christian people , but these were . otherwise , if he wil be but judged by his own words , he must acknowledge himself a most notorious sycophant ; that chargeth so deeply , and so poorly and slenderly makes his charge good . and this , unles he wil eat his own words , how he can avoid , i see not . 2. it is most fals , that i use any such plea , that therefore , what m. vvotton held , concurring ( as m walker pretended ) therein with them , was no heresie ; because they were condemned for other heresies . for which assertion , i here charge m. walker with a manifest and palpable untruth : which together with divers others herein avowed by him , until he disclaim and acknowledge , i shal not desire to have further dealing with one that regards no more what he saith . among other things indeed , which he glides by , i question x his candor , in charging m. vvotton to concur with servetus in all points concerning the doctrine of justification ; when he produceth y but one short saying of servetus concerning abrahams faith : wherein yet m. wotton , neither in expresse tearms , and in sense and meaning much les , ( as i have above shewed ) concurreth with him . and withal z i shew by an instance m. walkers iniquity and unequal dealing therein ; such as himself would by no means admit , or endure in his own case . that which m. vvalker being altogether unable to wipe of , he slily slips away , and a insteed thereof shifts in a supposititious absurdity , a brat of his own brain ; to delude his reader , and to make him beleeve , that m. gataker so argues as himself too oft doth . 3. whereas he saith , he knows this ( i know not what , of m. woitons ) to be heresie and blasphemy : what need i say more , but ( as he sometime ) that herein i beleeve him not ; no more then m. richardson , if ( as c before he told us ) he affirmed on his knowledge , that whosoever lived and died in it should be damned . what he knows , i know not . but what he was able to make proof of , when time was , i know ; and men of as good credit every inch ( what if i said , of as great knowledg to in matter of divinity ? ) as m. walker , do give testimony thereunto . 4. what he jangles , so much , and so d oft , of other autors , i leave him to try it out with e him , whom he affirms f to have renewed m. vvottons opinions , and to have filcht all out of his writings . onely making bold to tel m. walker , that , when he hath read over a few of pareus his works , one of the autors he so oft mentions , and by name that * of his concerning christs active and passive obedience , out of which i have presented him with one or two small snips ; i am half of the mind , that he wil pas the like censure on him also for an heretick , that he hath done upon m. vvotton . and it may not without good ground , of probability at least , be conjectured , that therefore he waived medling with the latter part of my postscript ; because i therein g evidently shew , that a man may hold not a few points held by socinus , and yet not be therefore a socinian heretick . and i would but request of m. vvalker , to tel his mind plainly , what he thinks of those , who stifly hold and maintain ; that justification consists wholly in remission of sins ; that christs righteousnes in fulfilling the morall law is not imputed unto us for justification ; and that god without breach of his justice might have pardoned mans sin , requiring no satisfaction at all for the same ; whether they be socinian hereticks , as wel as m. wotton , or no. to which demand if he shal return an affirmative answer , he may be pleased to take notice by h my postscript , if at least he list so to do , what a large list of new hereticks , never before taken among us for such , must upon his doom now be taken in and ranged in that rank . 5. for his peering so narrowly into m. vvottons conscience , as i before , so here ; i shal leave him to render an account unto him , who k challengeth unto himself that prerogative , to see into mens souls ; and whose l power therefore m. walker therein usurps . 6. for m. vvottons pretended contradictions , enough already hath been answered . tho neither is it my part to make them all good ; nor doth it either make him an heretick , albeit they be not all made good ; or prove him conscious to himself , of what m. walker would thence infer . howbeit if m. wottons feare of shame , as m. walker here saies , induced him unto them ; then had m. wotton that , which i feare m. walker too much wants ; since that otherwise he would have been afraid to expose himself so to shame , as by his cariage in this very pam●hlet , besides what elswhere he hath done . as for socinus m. wottons master , as he p●… here to call him : it is no new thing with 〈◊〉 . 〈◊〉 to enlarge socinus his schoole , and to assigns him schollers , whom he lists , more then a few , who yet abhor socinus , it may be , as much as m walker himself doth . for his close , wherein he tels me , thinking thereby to stop my mouth , that m if i wil break forth into a further defence of m wotton , he wil be as ready to resist me ; taxes m. wotton , n for professing himself in some things concerning the point of justification , to dissent from them all , whom he speaks of ; wherein he compares , him to peter abeilard , who in some things professed to dissent from all the divines that went before him ; and lastly professes , in some generall and ambiguous tearms , o what his faith is . for all this a short answer ( as himself p elswhere ) wil serve . 1. i never undertook , nor do undertake , any defence of m. wotton , as holding no error : whom in my former relation q i professed in somethings to dissent from , that which himself also wel knew ; and mine animadversions upon his book de reconciliatione in some marginal notes ( wherewith , after my wonted manner , in reading of autors , for mine own private use , i have ( to use m. walkers r words ) be daubed my margent , and so marred my book ) wil easily and evidently shew the same . all that i have said , and do stil say , is this ; having witnesses beyond exception to beare me out therein ; that m. walker was not able to convince m. wotton of heresie and blasphemy , much les ( as he had charged him ) of the most ●estilent here sies that ever were sowen by the devil , or had sprung up in gods church , in that meeting , which he himself had procured for that purpose . and this , let m. walker shuffle and shift what he can , * like a foul in a snare , or fish in a net , or a wild bull in a toil ; the more he stirres , and strives and struggles , the more he may mash and entangle himself , but he wil never be able to expedite or wind himself out of . for as for his golias like menacing to resist me ; i shal so s ulysses ▪ like shelter my self under their sheild , whose attestation i have delivered , that he must first beare them and their credit down before him , ( which i assure my self he wil never do ) ere he shal be able either to lay me on my back , or to maintain his own ground , and keep himself standing in this encounter . 2. for m. wottons professing to dissent from them all ; wherein he yoakes him with abeilard . who those all are , i wot not , for i have none of that writing , out of which m. walker relates this . nor do i find that of abeilard , that bernard in this kind charges him with , in any writing of his now extant . that work of his , wherein he had it , ( if at least he had it in any , for some books are by t bernard cited as his , u which he professes he never wrote ) may be lost . howsoever , i suppose it no such hainous matter , in something to depart from all writers known to us , that have gone before us . sure i am that iunius and tremellius , in translating and expounding some passages of scripture , departed from all known interpreters that had gone before them : as in that x place of malachy ; for which those of the weaker sex are beholden to them ; that in all , even the best , translations ever before ran ; if thou hate her , put her away . tho y some indeed of the jewish rabbines directed to that , which those famous and worthy men , never sufficiently commended , admitted , against all that had before them taken pains in that kind . and they might wel therefore have said , as bernard sayes that peter abeilard did ; all interpreters before us thus translated this place : but we cannot therein concur with them . yet is not their interpretation , that i know , therefore deemed the les sound yea i suppose , that if all m. walkers own , either sermons or assertions were sifted , the like , omnes alii sic ; ego verò non sic ; would be more then once found in them . he that to prove , the swedes to be the people designed by gods word for the destruction of the romish babylon , should affirm that that prophecy , wherein people are willed to a come from the utmost border , or end ( understanding it , of the world ; which yet is not necessary ) to destroy babel ; was never fulfilled in the destruction of the chaldean babylon ; should therein , i suppose , cros all interpreters of holy writ that are commonly in hands . which whither m. walker , as some report , have affirmed or no , is best known to himself . but sure i am , as i have formerly touched , concerning the ground of mans fall , i have heard him profes himself to dissent from all our divines ; laying withal a very foul aspersion upon all that therein dissented from him . howsoever since that in these latter times , it hath been by gods spirit foretold , that b knowledge should encrease ; yea reason it selfe , besides dayly experience telleth us the self-same : for , notwithstanding the diligentest searches of all foregoing ages . c truth much of it remaines stil undiscovered , and d it is an easier matter to ad to former discoveries , then to discover things at first : they may see most , that come last : and we find it in all other learning and knowledge , that those things have in these latter days been brought to light , which in former ages , for ought that can be discryed , were utrerly unknown ; i suppose , under correction , that it ought not to be deemed any just cause of aspersion , if a man shal , with modesty , rendring at least some reason of good probability for his so doing , profes himself compelled in some things to depart from all those , that to his knowledge have dealt in some argument before him : especially if he shall withall ( as the same peter in the very entrance to his introduction unto divinity doth ) profes himself g ready to give satisfaction in ought said amisse by him to any man ; who either by force of reason , or by authority of scripture , shal thereof convince him ; either by altering , or by expugning it . that so , saith he , tho i be not free h from the evil of ignor●ne ; yet i may not incur the crime of heresie . i for it is not a mans ignorance , but his proud obstinacy , that makes him an heretick . nor , may i wel ad , were the bare profession of dissent in some particulars from all other orthodox divines presumed in either , sufficient to make , either m. vvotton , or peter abeilard an heretick . lastly , as concerning m. walkers profession of k his faith , that l he purposes to live and die in , tho i know not what authority m. vvalker hath to compose a creed for every one to subscribe to : nor do i deem it necessary unto salvation , that every one should in all things be of his belief . yet this his form , ( like m a yragik buskin , that may be drawn on either leg ) is in such generall and ambiguous tearms conceived ; ( lest he should exclude from it some of those writers , whom he crakes so much of , as concurring with him in condemning m. wottons opinions for heretical and blasphemous ) that m. vvotton himself , i verily beleeve , were he alive , would not refuse to subscribe to it . and m. walker wel knows , that , were he put to explaine it , and to declare more distinctly , what he means by christs righteousnes , and the fulfilling of the whole law for him , one at least of those worthies , whom he hath so oft in his mouth , ( to say nothing of another of them , whom yet so highly he extols ) would not only refuse to subscribe to , but condemn some part of his faith o as a vain refuse and subtilty , not agreeable to scripture ; but such as taints the purity of orthodox doctrine , rends in pieces that righteousnes , whereby we stand just hefore god , p derogates from the death of christ , and q makes his cros and his satisfaction by death for our sins , wholy needles and superfluous . which speeches of his ( and pareus his they are ) if , to m. walkers eare they sound not as hereticol and blasphemous , i wonder how ought should in m. wottons writings . and so i shal take my leave of him ; leaving him to reconcile himself to pareus , since that m. wotton is now departed , who yet herein jumpeth not wholy with him ; and wishing him a little more sobriety and modesty toward his christian brethren , that have not so ill deserved , either of him , or of gods church , as to be thus scandalously taxed , traduced , railed upon , and reviled , as by him they are , both here and elswhere . finis . notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a42456-e330 a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . b 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 theophylact. ep . 34. c vindica● . p. 34. d 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . nicet . in andron . l. 1. c. 6. e vindic. p. 1. f ut in eis duarum rerum majorem babeas rationem , pietatis & modestiae . 10. rainold . ad alb. gentil . ep . 1. g quod me modestiae laesae facis tu reum , — non vides te cum eo fic agere imperiosè , qui papae imperium contemp●it , & exulare patriâ potuit & universo regno papali ? alb. gentilis al 〈◊〉 . rainold . ep . 2. h 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . plut. de amie . & adul . & de util . ex inimic . ex platone de leg . lib. 5. i rom. 14. 4. k 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . moschio . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . dionys. trag . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . archiloch . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 euripi● . antigon . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . idem phaeniss . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . sophocl . ajac. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 gregor . stasim . in carm . schol. ad illud aristoph . paco . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . et suidas . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . hinc diverbia illa 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . aristoph . avib . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . soph. ajac. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . laert. menedēm . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . lucian . de sect . et vulgare illud , de mor●…is nil nisi bonum . quod 〈◊〉 solonis lege tractum est , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . plut. sol. è demosth. in leptin . et in baeot. et chilo sparta . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , laert. l 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . p ato politic . l. 5 ael●aao sopb●stae , qui in lmp●ratorem defu●ctum stylum strinxe ▪ rat , phil●stratus , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . hinc antholog . l. 1 , c. 5. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . audet vel lepus exanimi ●●sultare lconi . hectorique jacenti insultat danaûm ignavissimus quisque iliad . 〈◊〉 . et quamlibet ignavi praecipitata premunt . naso trist . lib. 3. eleg . 11. nec plancus illepidè , eum diceretur asini●s pollio orationes in eum parare , quae post mortem p ▪ anci ederentur , ne respondere posset , cum mortuis non nisi larvas luctari : quo apud eruditos nihil impudentius judicatur . plin. praefat . hist. nat . itaque maro aen . l. 11. nullum cum victis certamen & aethere cassis . deest , esse oportet . serv. m see pet. moulins of the eucharist . chap. 13. n hebr. 12. 25. o terra novissimè complex● gremio , tum maximè ut mater operiens , nullo magis sacramento , quam quod nos quoque sacros facit . pl●… . hist. nat. l. 2. c. 65. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . pl●t . de ●olon . leg . p uhi corpus homi●is demortui co●aas , sacer esto . numae lex . sep●●chrorum sanctitas in ipso solo est , quod nul â vi mov●ri nequ● dele●i potest . c●c . philip 9. ebustis defurctorum lapidem movere , terram evertere , cespitem evellere●proximum sa●rilegio majore , nostri semper habu●runt . iulian. cod. l. 9. tit . 19. leg . 5. ●nde emen●andus cod●x . theodos l 9. tit . 17. l 4. defunctorum cineribus violentiam inferre , sacrilega praesum●●● . valent. novel , tit . 5. ne sepu●●hra quidem dirip●r● & ca●avera ●poliare illicitum ducebant ●a●rilegae v●…pilatorum manus . eu●eb . hist. lat. vers . l. 3. c. 4. sacrilegae bus●is abstinuere manus . senec. epigr. 4. q 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . homer . il. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . plato menex . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . isocr● euag. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . polyb ▪ l 8. siquis est sensus in morte . cic. phil. 9. siquis inferis sensus est sen ad po●yb . 6. 18. siquis vit● digressis est dolor . ammian . l. 30. r sic enim & nostri . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . greg. in iul. 1. idem in cae●ar . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . idem in pasc● . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . s abiit , non obiit . ambr. theodos. t 〈◊〉 reliquias dissipari ▪ jussit , acerbiore odio , quam si tam sapiens fuisset , quam v●●emens fuit . cio . de leg● l. 2. u pag. 1. x galat. 4. 29. with gen. 21. 90 y letter to m. wotton vindic. p. 15. z ibid. p. 16. a ibid. p. 10. & relat. p. 4. 5. b psal. 69. 26. c 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . homer . o●ys . 〈◊〉 . & il. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 odys ▪ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . d 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . pindar . n●m . 1. gr●gor . stasim . in iul. 1. & greg. pr●●b . in vit . stas . e res est sacr● , miscr . sen. c. epigr. 4. * pag. 2. e pag. 3. f 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . apud suidam n. q. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . sext. empir . pyrrhon . l. 1. c. 29. alex. aphrod probi . l. 1. q 101. alarcus lmper . co●mert . l. 6. § 57. greg. stas . desed ▪ constant . g relat. p●st●c● . p. 40. h ●…d . p. 55. i relat p. 1. 3. * relat. p. 3. i conclusio partem sequior●m sequitu● . * relat. p. 5. & vindic. p. 16. * relat. p. 38. i pag. 5. k pag. 5. l socsnianisme discovered , p. 1. 4. m parall . error . 1. & 3 relat. p. 11. 14. n rom. 4. 3 , 5 , 9 , 22 , 23 , 24. o rom. 4. 3. p agitur hîc de eo , quod ipsi d de● imputatum est , nempe de lpsius side . beza in rom. 4. 3. q paulus activam locutionem passivè convertens , praetermittit affixum hebraeum , quod vertere potuit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , ipsam videlicet s●…m abrahami . sed hoc ipsum p●stea disertè bis expri●it . nempe versu 5 & 9. ibid. r idem valent , deus imputavit fidem , & sides a deo est imputata . quantum ad sensum duo continet hoc eloquium ; primò fidem abrahae ; credidit a. deo. deinde , fidei fructum , & imputata est ei ( fides ) ad justitiam . par. in rom. 4. 3. s et imputata est ei ( fides ) pro justitiâ . fructus fidei abr. significatur , gratuita justificatio . ibid. t 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , non impersonaliter reddi debere , imputatum est , sed passive , imputata est , nempe fides , ex hebrae● textu , & apostoli declaratione . vers. 5. & 9. manifestum est . quod ad sensum scripturae recte intelligendu●… refert observare . ibid. v relat. postscript . p. 58. u apostolus justificationem in solâ remissione peccatorum constituit . p●ran rom. 4. 7. dub. 5. * manifestum est , non imputar● peccatum , poni pro justificare , lub . ad socin . l. 2. c. 2. p. 124. col . 2. saepe ostendimus justificationem contineri gratuitâ peccatorum remissione . ibid. l. 4. c. 10. p. 551. col . 2. x de justitiâ christi activâ , & passiva epist. ad com. lud. witgen . y in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 est justitia duplex , divina & humana . humana est inhaerens , & acquisita , illam vocant habitualem ; hanc meritoriam . de illa loquitur apus . heb. 7. 26. & 1 pet. 3. 18. de hac rom. 5. 9. per unam satisfactionem . v. 19. lubb. c●ntr . socin . l. 3. c. 5. sanguine , srve obedientiâ christi justificamur formalite● ; fide instrumentaliter . ibid. c. 2. p. 355. duo ad justificationem reqiruntur ; unum , ut christus pro peccatis nostris mortuus sit , atque ita pro eis satisfaciat : alterum , ut nos hanc christi solutionem five satisfactionem vera fide recipiamus . ibid. l. 4. c. 9 p. 547. haec justitia , s●ve obedientia , iive 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 christi , sive denique sacrificium , sive sanguis christi , sive solutio pretii redemptionis nostrae à christo sacta , absolvit nos 〈◊〉 reatu , constituit nos justos , justificat nos , &c. ibid. c. 1. p. 445 , 44● . christi enim obedientia , quam patri in morte pro nobis praestitit , est vera illa justitia , quâ patri reconciliamur . ibid. c. 4. p 472. z qui obedientiae activae , aut sanctitati nativae , meritum justitiae ascribunt , mortem christi sine dubio inanem reddunt . par. de justit . christi activ . & pass . pofit . 5. p. 181. c m●rti christi justificationem contra scripturas derogant . ibid. p 182. * letter to m. wotton . p. 15. “ pag. 6 , 7. * pag. 3 , 4. a answer to error 1. relat. p. 22. b pag. 5. c ibid. d sic scil . beare solet ami●os . e relat. paral. error 2. p. 13. f see relat. p 54. g m. walkers socinianism discovered and confuted . p. 6. h ibid. epist. p. 2. i socin . disc . p. 7. i pag. 5. k nec saui esse ●…is non●…nus jaret orestes pers. sat 3. l pag. 5 9. m pag. 5 , 6. n pag. 6. o pag. 6 , 7. p pag. 8. q pag. 8 , 9. r pag. 7. s pag. 13. * epist. before his discovery p. 5. t pag. 6. u pag. 25 , 26. x dan. 12. 3. y see vindicat. p. 34. 35. z quid interest deos neges , an infames ? senec. ●p . 133. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 plut. de . supers●it . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . porphyr . de abstin . l. 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . epiphani aneor . §. 9. a relat. p. 4. 5. b vindic. p. 9. 18. c vindic. p. 10. d pag. 12. e pag. 12. f pag. 13. g pag. 13. h pag. 7. i pag. 13. k pag. 14. l pag. 15. * m. eg●rtons letter to m. wotton . n vindic. p. 9. o pag. 19. p vindic. p. 19. q see relat. p. 56. r vindic. p. 19. s ibid. t ibid. u pag. 22 , 23. x pag. 19. y pag. 1. a pag. 19. b see of pavl and barnabas , acts 15. 39. chryso●●ome & ep●…mus , s●crates hist. eccl. 〈◊〉 . 6 c. 13. hierome and aug●stine in then ep●stles to either hierome & ruffine , in hieromes epistles and invectives . c pag. 〈◊〉 . d relat p. 13. e vindic. p. 19. f see relat. p 8 , 9. g pag 15. h pag. 19. 20. i see relat. p. 9. k pag. 19 , 20. l pag. 20. m pag. 22. n see relat. p. 10. o zeno phocylidis dictum illud notabat , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . plut. de stoic . contradict . §. 4. p john 7. 51. act. 15. 16. neminem praedamnare incognità causa licet . lactant l. 5. c. 1. q 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . plut. alex. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , anton. m●… . 〈◊〉 . c. 53. r qui statuit aliquid . parte i●auditâ aliera ; aequum licet fiatu●rit , ●aud aequs fuit . sence . med. 1. 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . menand . s iudex damnatur , cum nocens absolvitur . p. syrus . t pag. 20. u ibid. x 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . muta persona . y pag. 22. a pag. 20. b quo teneam vultus mutantem protea nodo ? c relat. p. 9. d relat. p. 9 , 10. e prallel . er●or . 2. relat. p. 13. * relat. p. 36. f fidem inserit , ut d●ccat pidem esse conditi●…m , sub qua christus nobis datus est propitiatorium . pareus in rom. 3. 25. g conditio , qua propriè justificamur , ea est , ut in christum credamus . fox de christ. grat . justif . p. 244. * promissio evangelica nullā exigit conditionem aliam , praeter fidem duntaxat , qua credimus in filium dei. ibid p. 240. h reform . cathol . point . 4. of justificat . the manner , differ . 2. reason 1. i m. wil. pe●bles uindiciae . or , plea for grace , that especially of faith . k m. g. walker epist. to the christian reader . l ibid. m m. w. pemble , vindiciae fidei , or , of justification by faith , sect. 2. chap. 1. p. 23. n ibid. p. 22. o ibid. p. 24. p the reformed churches thus explaine themselves . ibid. p. 23. q parall . error . 4. r relat. postsc● . p. 46. s relat. postscr . p 46. t rom. 4 3. 9. u ubi promittenti deo f●…miter credidit , est illi ejusmodi si●●s loco justitiae imputata ; hoc est , ob ca●a fidem justu● est a deo reputatus . muscal . in gen. 16. 6. x psal. 8. 3. 6. y psal. 74. 3. z epiphan . haer . 70. §. 2. aug. de haeres . c 49. a john 14. 28. b epiph. haer . 69. §. 17. aug. de haeres . c. 49. c creed of constantinople , commonly called the nicene creed . d isidar . origin . l. 7. c. 5. socrat. bistor . l. 7. c. 23. euagr. l. 1. c. 7. e onuphr in vita ius 3. pp. dr. field of the church , l. 2. c. 9. & l. 3. c. 1. breerwood of relig. & langrug c. 25. p. 183. f aio . christian non solum egere cam caeteru sed multo plus egere quam caeteros . sunt enim quibus et si desiat multa , non desunt omnia . chris●us tantummodò solus est , cui nihil est , quod in emni humano g●n●re non desit . salvi an . ad eccl. cathol . l. 4. g non eget mi●●riâ , sed eget misericorata ; noo eget ●eitate prose , sed eget pietate pro suis. ibid. h sext decretal . de verb. si●g 〈◊〉 . exi● t. i extr. de ve● sign . c. ad condi &c. quia quorard●… . k christus summus & maximus peccator . luth. in gal. 3. 13. p. 459. quo nullus major in mun . do . ib. p. 453. l omnium hominum peccata omnia in se suscep● . lbid . p. 458. & 453. p●rsonam 〈◊〉 ●●ndam gerendam ●…pit ; ●…que reus factus est peccaterum totius mu●di . 〈◊〉 . p. 4●6 . m christus quatid●● peccat : & ex quo fuit christus , quotid●… p●… it . aug. d. rom. de sacram . christ. & eccles. l. 1. n nod , ●e capite , sed de membris , que cum christo capite , sunt unus christus . idem . o rom. 8. 1. & 16. 7. p 1 cor. 6. 17. omnes sancti & fideles cum homine christo sunt unus christus . aug. de pecc . mer. & rem . l. 1. c. 31. caput enim & corpus unus est christus . idem de trmit . l. 4. c. 9. & in ps. 54. & de verb. dom. 49. & 65. bed. in ioan , 17. bern. ●p . 190. christus cum totâ suâ ecclesia , una persona est . greg. in ps. paen 5. q gal. 3. 16. 1 cor. 12. 12. r conc. basil. sess . 22. s john 9. 24. t 1 joh. 5. 18. u 1 joh. 3. 9 x epipban . her . 59. § 6. y h. n. terri pacis c. 34. & 36. i. r. of family of love , d. 5 , 6. a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ex platone plut. symp●s . l. 7. c. 5. & 8. & de esu carn . l. 2. & greg. stas . de ma●tyr . & ad iul. exact . b math. 26. 61. marke 14. 58. d john 2. 10. f john 2. 21. g john 1. 14. col. 2. 9. john 2. 19. h john 2. 20. i uideantar ios. scaliger de emendat . temp. l. 6. p. 534 , 535. phil. lansberg . chronol . sacr . l. 3. c. 18. tho. lydiat . emend . temp. a. m. 3991 , & 4037. k 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , ioseph . antiq . l. 20 c. 8. gr. 17. lat. ad albinum abitu●…ntem , circiter quadriennium ante excidium . n math. 24. 1. marke 13. 1 , 2. ios●ph . antiq . l. 15. c. 14. & belli 1. l. 7. c. 26 , 27. gr. lat. 12. vide ri●…n . 45. &c. l hieron . in hagg. 2. chrysost. in 1 cor. orat . 34. fr. ribera in hagg. 〈◊〉 . n. 37-52 . m hagg. 2. 8 , 9. o 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . p 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 dan. 8. 11 , 〈◊〉 ▪ q ios. ant . l. 15. c. 14. r marke 14. 59. s i. h. christianity maintained chap. 9. § 3. p. 66. t preface n. 8. u i h. ibid. p. 66 x ibid. p. 67. y g. c. p●eface to the author of charity maintained , num . 8. * io. speed in ed●… . 4. § 3. a vindicat. p. 20 , 21. b pag. 21. c pag. ●1 . d fingunt , que vera negarent , dum credi , quod non contigit esse , volunt . e relat. p. 6. f v●… . p. 21. g pag. 24. h pag. 21. i ibid. k ibid. l see relat. p. 38. m vindic. p. 20. n pag. 22. o damna●i ubi jam jure sese sense●…t sontes , iniquos conqueruntur judices . sons nemo sese jure damn●tum volet . p vindic. p. 4. q g. w. letter to a. w. vind. p. 15. r luke 18. 2. s luke 18. 5. t pag. 21. u pag. 4. x pag. 22. y pag. 4. a pag. 24. b pag. 1. c pag. 24. d ibid. e pag. 5. * ibid. e in elench● disput . fr. gomari : & disceptatione cum lud. lucio . f 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . aristot. ethic. e●…dem . l. 7. c. 12. pausan. phocic . plut. thes. laert. cleanth aelian . hist. var. l. 12. c. 22. hephaest . nov . hist. l. 5. apud phot. cod . 190. ephipp . pelt . apud athen. l. 7. zenob . adag . 548. varro . satyr . g 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . ne hercules quidem adversus duos . zenob . adag . 549. suid. 1116. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . plat. phaed. & euthyd . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . idem . leg . 11. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . aristid de ●betor , 2. eccles. 4. 12. h guil. tilen . de si●r . lub . h pag. 22. l ibid. k ibid. * paralel . point . or error 2. relat. p. 13. 36. l ibid. * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . plut. de isid. & osir. m relat. p. 35 , 36. n fictio personae . o pag. 22. p pag. 22 , 23. q maro ae● . l. 1. r pag. 21. s pag. 2. t illo per se ac propriè justificamur , quod dum adest nobis , & deus & homines nos justos pronunciant , dum abest , injustos . fides illud unum est , quo si polleamus , deus & homines n●s inter justos numerant ; sin minus , inter injustos . ergo , &c. bucer . praefat . enarrat . epist. paul. c. 7. § 1. syllog . 1. a ans. to err. 3. relat. p. 27 , b fides , tanquam qualitas , habitualiter non justificat ; ncque m●teria est justificatīonis nostrae , neque forms : e● solâ ratione ad justificationem valet , quod in christum recumbat , ad veniam delictorū propter ipsius obedientiam adipiscendam ad dissert . 1. § 9. c fides certè non justificat , nisi tantum per & propter christi obedientiam . cum dicitur ad justitiam imputari , quid nos praestare oporteat , ut per christum justificemur , significatur . ibid. d fide justificari dicimur , non tropicâ , sed propriâ l●cutione : qu● significatur , fidem illud esse , quod deus à nobis flagitat , ad justificationem conseqendam propter christi ●bedientiam & sacrificium . ibid. e parall , error . 3. rela● p. 14 : f neque tamen interea tortuosas bujus sophis●● figurat admitto , quum dicit eidem esse christum . calvin , iastitut . l. 3. c. 11. § 7. g inscitè sidem , que instrumentum est duntaxat p●rcipiendae justitiae , dic● misceri cum christo ; qui materiaris causa , tantique beneficii autor simul est & minister . ibid. h iam expeditus est nodus quomodo intelligi debeat vocabulum fide i , uhi de justificatione agitur . ibid. i rom. 3. 28. & 5. 1. & . 4. 5 , 〈…〉 . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . ma●c . imp. l. 10. § 13. l vindic. p. 23. m ibid. p. 23 , 24 n see m. egertons letter before produced : and his peicing up of m. wottons assertions . o vindic. p. 21. p ibid. q 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . tim●us . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . polyh . l. 12. r vindic. p. 24. s ibid. t ibid. p. 24 , 25. u pag. 25. x ibid. y nul'us reli●tus est ●edius locus , nisi sit vita aeterna , extra r●gnum caelorum ; qui●q●i● ad regnum dei non pertinet , ad damnationem sine dubio pertinet . aug. de verb. ap. 14. credite mihi fratres . duo sunt loca ; & tertius non est ullus . idem . de temp . 232. tertium penitas ignoramus : nec in scripturis sanctis inveniemus . idem hypognost . l. 5. a pag. 25. b pag. 26. c on his death-bed , pag. 25. a dying man. p. 26. d pag. 26. e ibid. f relat. postsc . p. 50. g pag 8. h pag. 24. i pag. 9. k pag. 30 : l answer to two treatises of m io. can. m pag. 30. n pag. 26. o io. can of necessity of separation from non-conformists principles . p. 127. of which see preface to rejoinder , p. 11. p ex pauculis guttis dignoscitur maris 〈…〉 non ebibatur . 〈◊〉 . l. a. c. 34. p chap. 2. & chap. 9. q 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . psal. ●●irac . c●●ib . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . greg. naz. ep . 13 & 27. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . ide● . apolog . fallit enim affectus . pli●… . l. 4. ep . 44. & amantium caeca sunt judicia . hieron . ad ioan. hierosol . r sir edward cook then lord chief justice . s see m. prinnes p●eface to his treatise of the perp●tuity of faith. t ●orense vocabulum . calviu . iustitut . l. 3. c. 11. § 3. chemnit . exam . conc. trid. part . 1. de vocab . justif . pet. mart. in rom. 8. 33. bucer . praefat . in epist. paul. c. 8. par. in rom. 3. 28. & resp . ad dub . 7. chamier . pa●strat . tom . 3. l. 21. c 14. § 10. bellarm. de justif . l. 2. c. 3. except . 1. & 2. u deut. 25. 1. psal. 82. 3. prov. 17. 15. esay 5 23. & 43. 26. that is in english. there hath been sent me from london by m. cappel pastor of the french church there , a little book of justification , small in bulke , but in learning , wit and acutenesse very great , written in english by william bradshaw . this because it much pleased me , and gomarus and i had but one copy between us ; i translated out of hand for mine own use into french , and left the english copy to gomarus . i will speake ingenuously . i never hitherto read ought in any humane writing of dogmaticall divinity , that so exceedingly liked me . so learnedly , acutely , closely , solidly , pithily , both plainly , and yet with ●dmirable brevity , is this whole argument most fully comprased , and thoroughly handled by you . i want words , wherewith to commend and extoll it according to its desert . i have oft read it over ; and yet never had enough of it , but the oftner i repeate it and reade it over againe , the more eagerly is mine appetite stirred up unto it so great splendor and light of learning , of art and wit shineth forth in it . and so forth . for the rest is a discours concerning some particulars , wherein he desired further satisfaction , treading wholy then in piscators steps . that is in english : right worthy sir , i wrote before to you , that i had received your truely golden little book of justification , enlarged by you , and turned into latine ; and that presently , but hostily , i read it over , so eager an appetite had i to it , by reading the other edition of it in english before . since that i have read it over againe , not once but often , and taking leisure thereunto . which the oftner i reade over againe , the more it pleaseth me , and is approved of by me : so accurately and exactly is it composed by you . i hope this birth and issue of your mind will find approbation with peaceable and moderate dispositions , on whether side so ever they are ; albeit you condescend not to them in all things that they require . you pace so in the middest between either opinion , that you ought not to displease either of them , if they truly love peace and concord . a pag. 26. b pag. 26 , 27. c dolosus vers●tur in universalibus . reg. iur. d ecquis innocens esse pote●j●● si acousasse sufficiet ? iulian. apud ammian . l. 18. e pag. 26. f sicnt ex ennii stercore aurum v●rgilius . g math. m●…inius . h multa discimus p●eri , de quibus dubitamus senes . i fat●or me ex corum rum●ro esse co●ari . qui s●ribendo pr●fi eiunt & pro●fiendo scr●…t . aug ●p . 7. * opuscula me● retractanda suscepi , ut nee meipsum in o●…ibus me secutum demonstrem . aug. de persever . c. 21. k nullus mihi pudor est , ad meliora transire . ambr. ep. 31. turpe est n●…tare are sententiam ; sed veram & rectā . nam stultam noxia●ve & laudabile & salubre est . aug. ep . 210. optimi enim est propositi , laudandique consilii , facilè ad veriora traduci . victor apud aug. de orig . anim . l. 2. c. 16. l non est levita● ab errore jam cognitodiscedere . h●ec verò superbae stultitiae persevera●tia est , quod semel dixi , fixumratum sit . semel placita semper maneant , nec ulla in libris meis litura fit . sen. de benef . l. 4. c. 38. & de beat . c. 8. m 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . m. anton. l. 6. n 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . epictet . stob. c. 5. n est virtus summa veritati cedere . o 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . phi●onid . a jure vinci praecluis victoria est . grot. a veritate vinoi res pulcherrima . a veritate ●in . ●i , lau● est , baud probrum . p see pareus de ast. & pass . chr. ohed . pofit . 1. p. 180. q see before m. bradshaws prefac . r 2 cor. 5. 21. s elenchus disput . fr. gomari : & disceptatio cum lud. lucio . t debere me multum profitebor , amicè decteque potior a suggerenti . lud. vr●es praefat . in aug. de civ . dei. in aere me ejus futurum profiteor , qui candidè caftigarit . zinzerlin . promiss . erit . u 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . de●…crit . & isocrat . stob. c. 13. & anton. 〈◊〉 . l. 1. ●78 . x vitium ●xoris aut tollendum , aut f●rendum est . qni tollit vitium , uxorem commodioreet praestat . qui fert , sese meliorem facit . varro . gel. l. n. c. 17. y 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . plato gorg. method . apud epithan . haeres . 84. § 43. gregor . naz. apud max. c. 31. a 1 cor. 1. 12. rom. 16. 18. b jam. 2. 1. c 1 cor. 11. 1. d 1 cor. 3. 3. & 11. 18 , 19. e act. 5. 17. & 15. 5. & 24. 5 , 14. & 26. 5. & 28 , 22. 1 cor. 11. 18 ; 19. gal. 5. 20. f tit. 3. 10. g gen. 49. 6. h 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . plato gorg. nullius addictus jurare in verba magist●i . flac. epist. 1. i pag. 27 : k 2 pet. 1. 12. l 1 thes. 5. 13. m charitas , quandiu hîc vivitur , augeri p●test . quamdiu autem augeri potest , profectò iilud quod minus est quam d●bet , ex vitio est . ex quo vitio non est , qui non p●●cet . aug de perfect . just . c 15. n see a list of them relat. posts● . p. 61. u pag. 26. p pag. 27. q see the preface prefixed to the reader . r legatur antidiatribe ame●●o voeti●que r●po●●ta : & responsio balmfordo reddit● . s 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . âe dionys. longino ennap . in p●rphyr . oui & in aedes . socrates . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . t 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . arifla . thet . l. 3. c. 14. a pag. 27. b pag. 27. c relat. p. 36. d relat. p. 38. d pag. 27. e de act. & pasio . chr. obed. possit . 5. p. 181. f pag. 27 , 2● g error . 4● relat. p. 15. h error . 2. relat. p. 13. i epist. prefixed to m. pembles plea for grace . k ibid. l pag. 28. m 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . democrit . sto● . c : 20. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 de cyro xenoph . instit . l. 1. quâ noceat , ira videt ; quâ caveat , non videt . sen. de irâ . l. 2. c. 12. n pag. 28. o relat. poscr . p. 48. p de christ. servat l. 4. c. 11. q quod dicit , fidem esse ea sacere , quae christus praecepit , falsum est . lubb. ad l. 4. c. 11 p. 561. col . 2. r dicere , fidem esse ea facere , quae christus praecepit , est idem quod , iasanire . ibid. s docet , christo ejusque verbis credere idem esse quod christo obedire : negamus . obedientia enim est effectum sidei . errat igitur , qui contendit fidem & obedientiam idem esse . ibid. p. 582. col . 2. t firmum est , quod beza soribit , fidem non posse mandatorum obedientiam significare . ib. p. 574. col . 2. u mark. 1. 15. q pag. 28. b answer to error . 2. § 4. relat. p 34. & to error 4 p. 28. c manifestum est , in salute per christum partâ , deum nihil aliud à nobis requisivisse quam paenitentiam & vitae correctionem . d poenitentiae addita alicubi est fides , non quia praeter ipsam poenitentiam fides in christū , tanquam aliquid amplius , quod huc pertineat in nobis efficiens , ad peccatorum remissionem consequendam requiratur , sed quia non nisi per fidem in christum ista poenitentia contingit . socin . l. 3. c. 2. p. 321. col . 1. e rom. 3. 25. f peccatorum veniam conversio naturae ordine sequitur , non praecedit . lubb. ad l. 1. c. 5. p. 156. c. 2. naturae ordine justificatio est prior . ib p. 157. c. 1. g resipiscentia justificationis effectum est . ib. p. 58. c. 2. h paenitentia non est causa expiationis , sed ejus consequens . ib. ad l. 2. c. 12. p. 213. c. 2. i reprobamus hanc sententiam , nam , ut jam millies osten sum est , remissio p●ccatorum , hoc est justificatio nostri , est naturâ prior poenitentiâ . quam obrem hanc ejus causam esse est simpliciter impossibile . ib. p. 216. c. 1. & l. 3. c. 2. p. 348. c. 2. & p. 349. c. 1 , 2. k non nostra resipiscentia , sed ipsius sacrificium est vera causa remissionis pee●aterum . ib. l. 2. c. 1. p. 274. c. 2. l deum promittere veniam resespiscenti non negamus : tantum negamus resipiscentiam nostram esse causam , quare deus nobis peccatorum veniam largiatur . ib. l. 3. c. 2. p. 338. c. 2. m pag. 28. n ibid. o answer to error . 2. § 5. relat. p. 252 , 6. p parall . error● 5. relat. p. 17. q pag. 28. r apoc. 12. 4. s pag. 2● . t marke 16. 16. john 3. 15 , 16 , 18. 26. acts 16. 31. rom. 10. 9. * si ad certas conditiones restring●… dei promissio , quomodò gratuitam dei miseri●ordiam cum paul● constituemus , quâ gratis per gratiam justificat impium ? de christ. grat . iustif. p. 237. u imò verò quam maximè gratuitam dei misericordiam in christo & censeo & statuo . cum tamen salus haec per christi meritum , non nisi sub certa quadam conditione ad nos derivetur . ibid. w reform . cathol . point . 4. of means of justif . differ . 2. reas. 1. * plea for grace sect. 2. chap. 1. p. 22. x mark. 16. 16. acts 16. 31. y videatur in disceptatione cum lud. lucio part . 1. sect . 9. luc. script . n. 2. p. 32 , 33. & t. g. animadv . n. 7. p. 35. luke 20. 35. & 21. 36. 2 thes. 1. 5 , 11 which places the papists abuse to build merit and worth of works upon . bellarm , de justific . l. 5. c. 2. and remists notes . a pag. 28 , 29. b relat. p. 19. c ibid. p. 34. d pag. 29. e in his woolf in sheeps clothing . f pag. 29 : g relat. p. 21 , 22. h ib. p. 22. n. 2. i ib. p. 21. n. 1. k preface to treat . of justif . l si justificationis efficientem dicat quis justitiam christi per modum meriti , ego planè cum eo sentio . m si qui● christi justitiā nostram formalem esse justitiam non contendat , nulla mihi cum illo de imputatione est controversia . n iustitiae christi ad beneficium imputationem ego agnosco & prae me fero . o non mihi unquam in mentem ne per somnium quidem , venit neg tre , nos propter christi justitiam justificari . p pag. 29. q pag. 24. r calvin . instit. lib. 1. c. 13. § 3. s pag. 29. t answer to error . 3. propos. 2. relat. p 27. u prae sat . comment . in ep st . paulin. x ad di cept . lub . cum bert. y pag. 29. z occ●… miseros crambe● epe●…●●acc . art . a ibid. b pag. 27. c pag. 18. d pag. 30. e woolf in sheeps cloathing . chap. 1. § 23. f pag. 3. g ●…ibus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . democrates apud stob. c. 22. s●●e , ut plut in m●nit . polit . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . * sir maurice bartlet . h m. rob. harris in s. pauls exercise . m sam ward , in balm from gilead . k in that preface prefixed . l rom. 3. 28. m iam. 2. 24. n woolf. chap. 2. error . 8. on chap. 2. n. 11. the form is the pleading of the said righteousnes or innocency , &c. o de activ . & pass ▪ chr. obed. p. 181. n pag. 30. * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . titus 3. 11. o 1 cor. 12. 10 ▪ * rom. 14. 13. 1 cor. 4. 5. & 13. 5. 7. p pag. 30. q ex de act. & pass . chr. obed. p. 181. r pag. 29. s ●ingens quod sisyphus versat saxum , sudans nitendo , neque p●●ficit hilum . ex epico aliquo ●ic . tuscul. l. 1. t pag. 31. u ibid. x iudex procedere debet secundum allegata & probata . reg. iur. y ibid. a pag. 31. b pag. 32. c pag. 3● d ibid. e i●g . 33. f 〈…〉 . g 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . chrysost. ad olympiad ●p . 13. h 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 dem●…h . olyath . 3. i pag. 33. k pag. 34. l dicit ille multa quidem multis locis : sed aqua ●eret , ut aiunt . cic. offic. l. 3. et ad q. fratr . l. 2. ep . 7. quod dictum fuerat actum iri , non vst actum : in hac causd mihi aqua heret . quod erasm. adag . 1300. malè cepit & accepit ; cum in aqua haerere dictum voluit . quem nec h. steph. expedivit . est graecorum , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . suid m adversus propri● nulla est exceptio . chamier . pa●sirat . tom . 3. l. 3. c. 3. § 4. n varius sucro●e●sis aemylium scaurum regiâ m●rcede corruptum imperium papuli roma●i prodi●isse ●i● : ae●ylius scauru● huic se affinem esse culpae negat . ●iri creditis ? val. max. l. 3. c. 7. ex . 8. fab. instit . l. 1. c. 11. 〈◊〉 . in ci● . pro scaur . * pag. 21 , 24. o 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . zenob . ad . 648. diog. 750. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . theocr. idyl . 16. quod erasm. ad . 1441. nigrum silicem , malè vertit , cum luteum laterem debuisset . ter. pborm . 1. 4. purgemme ? laterem lavem . hier. ad . pelag. l. 1. nugaris , nec meministi illius proverbii , in eo . lem luto volutaris , imò laterem lavas . crudum scil . qui lavando fit lutulentior . p quod est plus , quam 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , ut philostr . epist. lutum lut ▪ purgare . q pag. 34. r pag. 35. s qui legiones difftat spiritu , ut ventus fo●… , au● panniculam tectoriam . plaut . milit. 1. 1. t pag. 34. u relat. p. 19. w pag. 34. x ibid. y in epistolis nondum editis . a answer to error . 7. r●lat . p 34. b iilud 〈◊〉 , & christi p●rp●●siones no●is imp●t●● , & not p●opt●r illas ●●nia●u peccator●m & absolution●m 〈◊〉 reat d deo ●…sequi . quo uno 〈◊〉 ●…us , ni●il ad script●r as explicandas accommodatius , aut di●i , aut c●g tariposse conteu . 〈◊〉 th●s . 5. c furore pestis p●…ma in ●…simo . prad●nt . in rom. d pag. 34 , 35. e pag. 34. f credo filium per omni● patri esse coaequalem ; scil . aeternitate , potestate , &c. petr. abeilard . conses . sid . ●d hel. g nec audis arium . ibid. h sapit arium . bern. ep . 192. i perverso ingenio actus , imò daemoniaco seductus spiritu . abeilard . ubi supr . k gradus facit in trmitate : patrem majorem , fi●ium d●gmatizans min●rem . idem ibid. l ponit in trinitate gradus , constituit deum patrem esse plen●m p●…tiam : i i●●um , quandam p●…tiam : sp. sa●ctum , n●ll●m potentiam . b. 〈◊〉 . ●p . 190. m hec verba per ma●tiam 〈…〉 , 〈◊〉 tam ●…tica quam di●…ca , d●t●stor , 〈◊〉 : eaque cum autore suo p●rit●r 〈◊〉 . 〈◊〉 in ap●l●g . n ●…riat criptis , nen solu●… hereticum , verum etiam heresiarcham 〈…〉 . o ibid. iustitiae est , 〈…〉 cuiqu● trib●ere cicer●… iuvent . l. 2 cornif . ad heren . l. 3. p ma●h . 〈◊〉 . 32. qu●…ri non vis , alterine ●…is . alex. se●●r . hicron . ad algas . bern. de 〈…〉 . l. 1. q legantur alb. g●…eri abs●r●●rum absurdissima , absurda calvinistica . aliaque ejusmodi istorum scripta . r 1 cor. 2. 9. s phil. mornaeus dom. de p●essis lib. de verit . re●●g . christian. s john 3. 21. & 8. 46. 38. & 18. 23. t nifi perfecta ad fuisset obedientia , ipsemet peccator esset , & pro se puniendus . fr. gomar . disput● elenct . de justif . mat . & form . thes . 12. u m. edw. dearing on hebr. le●● . 2. p. 26. in 8. * john 10. 17. w iohn . 10. 18. & 14. 31. x john 8. 29. y math. 3. 17. & 17. 5. z 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . epes . 1. 6. a john 1. 12. & 3. 15 , 16 , 18 , 36. & 6. 35 , 40 , 47. & 7. 38 , 39. & 9. 35 , 36. & 11. 25 , 26. & 12. 36. acts 10. 43. & 13. 39. & 16. 31. rom. 4. 5 , 24. & 9. 33. & 10. 11 , &c. b origen . in io●● . hom . 32. gregor . naz. ●rat . 37 : athanas. cont . arian . orat . 3. cyril . de trindial . 4. c vrsin . catech. explic . quaest . 33. § 3. rat 5. stegman . disput . 5. quaest . 13. d john 12. 36. & 14. 1. e rom. 15. 12. 1 tim. 4. 10. f psalm 2. 12. * bellarm. de christ. l. 1. c. 5. loc 1. et catechism . trident. pii . 5. jussu editus . p. 107. g parallel . error . 6. n. 1. relat. p. 18. h pag. 〈◊〉 . i math. 11. 19. luke 7. 29 , 35. 1 ▪ tim. 3. 16. k math. 3. 17. l luke 2. 52. m math 4. 2. n john 4. 6 , 7. & 19. 28. 〈◊〉 o john 8. 46. p joh. 9. 16 , 24. q parall . error 6. n. 2. relat. p. 18. r pag. 31. s pag. 34. * sermons 1 , 2 , 3. t pag. 35. t epist. to m. wotton , relat. p 4. & vindic. p. 10. u of all which epiphanius and augustine , with others may be seen . x relat. poscr . p. 55. y paral. error . 4. n. 3. relat. p. 15. z relat. posc . p. 56. a tuus est iste syllogismus , non m●us . fingis enim me diccre , quod non dico : concludere , quod non concludo . aug ad . iulian. l. 3. c. 7. alteri●s adversus ipsum convicia rescrenti , tudicas , me illi non credere . c pag. 26. d pag. 3 , 4 , 32. e the socinian iohn . socinianism discovered , p. 8. f ibid. epist. p. 9. answ. to pref. p. 8. & vindic. p. 25. * epistola ad d. lodovicum witgensteinium . oper. tom. 2. & in opuscul . catechet . v●sini explic. cat●ch . subjunctis . g relat. poser , p. 55 , 60. h pag. 58 , 60. i pag. 38. k 1 sam. 16. 7 : jerem. 17. 10. apoc. 2. 23. l 1 kings 8. 39. acts 1. 24. & 15. 9. rom. 1. 12 , 13. 1 cor. 4. 5. m pag. 35. n ibid. o pag. 36. p pag. 34. q relat. p. 7. r pag. 27. * ut●●e suum 〈◊〉 is , quos call●…us 〈◊〉 auc . ps , crus ubi co●… 〈◊〉 volucris , sensitque t●…ri , plangitur , tc tr●pi●la●s assring it vincula motu , externata fagam frustra dum tentai . n●… fabul . l. ●1 . s cui ●jax 〈◊〉 nasonem fab . l. 13. opposui molem clypei , texi 〈◊〉 et mox . post clyp●umque late , & mecum contende sub illo . quod & de teucro arist●les in pana●hen . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . ex homero , qui. il. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . et mox . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . t haec capitula partim in libro theologiae magistri petri partim in libro sententiarum ejusdem reperta sunt . bern. ep . 190. u nun● quā liberaliquis , qui senteniiarum dicatur , à me scriptus reperitur . petr. abeil in apolog. x mala. 2. 16. y ita enim abraham esdr●… silius in hunc vatis locum . a jerem. 50. 26. b da● . 12. 4. c ve●itas ( 〈◊〉 nondum est occupata : multuus ex illa futuris relictum est . sencc ep . 33. d crescit indies . & inventuris inventa non obstant . idem . ep . 79 e vltimi conditio est optima . ibid. f videatur guido pancirola de novis repertis . g paratus semper ad satisfactionem de malè dictis vel corrigendis vel delendis , cum quis me fidelium vel virtute rationis , vel autoritate scripturae correxerit . h vt si nondum ignorantiae vitio caream , haeresis tamen crimen non incurram . i non enim ignor antia haereticum facit , sed magis superbiae obstinatio . k pag. 35 , 36. l pag. 26. m 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , ●●tharunus . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . calceamentum pedi utrique aptum . tam virisi quam & muliebri sexui usurpatum . svid . n sib. lubber●us : de quo sup . p. 13. o hanc distractionem justitiae nostrae coram deo , quod ea vec sacris literis esset consentanea ●adcò odit , ut saepenumerò commotior diceret , mera haec esse inanium subtilitatum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , quae puritatem doctrinae orthodoxae imm●ne quant●… msiccrent . phil. par●us in vità dav parei patris sui . p morti chris●i d●rogat . dav. pareus de ●ct . & pass . ●hr . 〈◊〉 . pr p. 5. q . emmanuel, or, god-man a treatise wherein the doctrine of the first nicene and chalcedon councels, concerning the two natures in christ, is asserted against the lately vented socinian doctrine / by john tombes ... tombes, john, 1603?-1676. 1669 approx. 294 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 119 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2005-10 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a62866 wing t1803 estc r5748 12527345 ocm 12527345 62675 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a62866) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 62675) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 949:13) emmanuel, or, god-man a treatise wherein the doctrine of the first nicene and chalcedon councels, concerning the two natures in christ, is asserted against the lately vented socinian doctrine / by john tombes ... tombes, john, 1603?-1676. [8], 227, [1] p. printed for f. smith ..., london : 1669. reproduction of original in union theological seminary library, new york. table of contents: p. [5]-[7] errata: p. [1] at end. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng jesus christ -divinity. nicene creed. socinianism -controversial literature. 2004-11 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2004-12 apex covantage keyed and coded from proquest page images 2005-01 andrew kuster sampled and proofread 2005-01 andrew kuster text and markup reviewed and edited 2005-04 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion emmanuel ; or , god-man . a treatise wherein the doctrine of the first nicene and chalcedon councels , concerning the two natures in christ , is asserted against the lately vented socinian doctrine . by john tombes , b. d. isa. 9. 6. for unto us a child is born , unto us a son is given , and the government shall be upon his shoulder : and his name shall be called wonderful , counsellour , the mighty god , the everlasting father , the prince of peace . london , printed for f. smith at the sign of the elephant and castle without temple-bar . 1669. imprimatur , ex aed . lambethanis martii 8. 1668. tho. tomkyns r. r in christo patri ac domino domino gilber ▪ to archi-ep . cant. a sacris domesticis . to the reader . whereas this treatise begins with mention of christs words , mat. ●6 . 10 , 33. which carry a shew of impertinency , i think it fit to advertise thee that indeed this is but a s●red of a treatise concerning the kingdom of god , and licensed under the title of theocracy , and because of a writing against the divine nature of christ not long afore vented ( which i was not aware of when i composed it ) i yielded to the motion of publishing this by it self , it being suggested to me , that so printed it would be useful and seasonable , which having told th●e of , i crave thy prayers for him who is thine in the service of our lord christ. john tombes . the contents . sect. 1. the god whose kingdom is to be sought is the father of our lord jesus christ. sect. 2. jesus christ is the son of god in the sense professed in the nicene creed . sect. 3. christs being god in the sense of the nicene creed , is proved from john 1. 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 9. 10 , 14 , 15 , 18. sect. 4. the exceptions against the proof of christs god-head , from john 1. 1 , &c. are set down . sect. 5. the sense of john 1. 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 9 , 10 , 14 , 15 , 18. given by the adversaries , is reselled . sect. 6. the reasons of the adversaries exposition of john 1. 1 , &c. are shewed to be insufficient . sect. 7. christs generation before the world was is proved , from john 8. 58. sect. 8. christs being before the world was , is proved from john 17. 5. sect. 9. col. 1. 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17. is urged to prove the god-head of christ. sect. 10. the proof of christs god-head , from col. 1. 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17. is vindicated from exceptions . sect. 11. heb. 1. 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13. are urged to prove the assertion of christs god-head . sect. 12. the argument from heb. 1. 2 , 3 , 4 , 6 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13. is vindicated from exceptions . sect. 13. heb. 7. 3. is urged to prove the eternal son-ship of christ. sect. 14. christs kingdom is the kingdom of the son of man , so termed according to his excellency above all men . sect. 15. christs consubstantiality with the father , according to his deity , with us , according to his humanity , as the chalcedon councel determined , is asserted and proved from john 1. 14. acts 2. 30. rom. 1. 3 , 4. and 9. 5. sect. 16. the exception against the argument , from acts 2. 30. rom. 1. 3 , 4. rom. 9. 5. is set down . sect. 17 this exception against the argument is refuted . sect. 18. the consubstantiality of christ with the father and us , is proved from 1 tim. 3. 16. sect. 19. the exceptions against this proof . sect. 20. these exceptions are refelled . sect. 21. the same consubstantiality of christ is confirmed , from 1 pet. 3. 18 , 19 , 20. gal. 4. 4. rom. 8. 3. 1 john 4. 2. heb. 2. 14. and 10. 5. john 16. 28. sect. 22. christs consubstantiality with the father and us , is proved from philip. 2. 5 , 6 , 7 , 8. sect. 23. the exception against this argument is recited . sect. 24. the text is explained in order to the refelling of the exception . sect. 25. some objections against the proof , from philip. 2. 5 , 6 , 7 , 8. are answered , particularly objections against expounding the form of god , philip. 2. 6. of the state of empire . sect . i. the god whose kingdom is to be sought is the father of our lord jesus christ. being taught by christ to pray , mat. 6. 10. thy kingdom come , and ver . 33. to seek first the kingdom of god ; it is necessary we know what is meant by the terms [ god the father , the son. ] for explaining whereof we are to consider that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 translated god answering to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ( as i shew in my oath-book lect . 1. sect . 5. ) in its common notion , notes any numen , divine power , which is worshipped , whether real or nominal : agreably to which st. paul tells us , 1 cor. 8. 4 , 5 , 6. as concerning therefore the eating of th●se things that are offered to idols , we know that an idol ( though worshipped as god by deluded gentiles ) is nothing in the world ( hath no power to do good or hurt ) and that there is none other god but ons : for though there be that are called gods , whether in heaven or upon earth ( as there be gods many and lords many ) but to us there is but one god the father , of whom are all things , and we in or for him , and one lord jesus christ , by whom are all things , and we by him : where it is observable that the term [ one god ] is attributed to the father , to wit of christ , who as he is stiled ephes. 1. 2. our father , so v. 3. the god , and father of our lord jesus christ ; who is therefore frequently termed in the writings of the evangelists , especially st. john by our lord christ the father and his father , and distinction is made between one god and one lord , as in this place , so also 1 cor. 12. 5 , 6. ephes. 4. 5 , 6. ( it is 1 tim. 2. 5. one god , and one mediatour between god and men ) and accordingly the apostolical salutations , benedictions , prayers , and valedictions run thus , rom. 1. 7. 1 cor. 1. 3. 2 cor. 1. 2. ephes. 1. 2. philip. 1. 2. col. 1. 3. 1 thes. 1. 1. 2. thes. 1. 2. grace to you , and peace from god our father , and the lord jesus christ with addition of mercy , 1 tim. 1. 2. 2 tim. 1. 2. tit. 1. 4. from god the father . 2 cor. 1. 3. blessed be god even the father of our lord jesus christ. 2 cor. 13. 14. the grace of our lord jesus christ , and the love of god , ephes. 1. 3. blessed be the god and father of our lord jesus christ. ephes. 3. 14. for this cause i bow my knees unto the father of our lord jesus christ. col. 1. 3. we give thanks to god and the father of our lord jesus christ , praying alwaies for you . 1 thes. 1. 2 , 3. we give thanks to god alwaies for you all making mention of you in our prayers , remembring without ceasing your work of faith ; and labour of love , and patience of hope , in our lord jesus christ , in the sight of god and our father . james 1. 1. james a servant of god , and of the lord jesus christ. 2 pet. 1. 2. grace and peace be multiplied unto you , through the knowledge of god , and of jesus our lord. 2 john 3. grace be with you , mercy and peace from god the father , and from the lord jesus christ the son of the father in truth and love . and accordingly where the word [ god ] or [ father ] is put simply it is distinctly applyed to the father of our lord christ , rom. 1. 1 , 3 , 4 , 8 , 9 , and 3. 25 , 26. and 5. 1 , 2. 8. 10 , 11 , 15. and 6 , 4 , 11 , 23. and 7. 4. 25. and 8. 3. 17. 33 , 34 , 39. and 10. 9. and 14. 17 , 18. and 15. 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9. 16. 17 , 19 , 30. and 16. 20. 26 , 27 , 1 cor. 1. 1 , 2 , 9. 24 , 30. and 3. 23. with many more both in the epistles and other writings of the new testament in which god is distinguished from the lord christ , and is therefore meant of the person of the father , concerning whom the apostle doth expresly say , 1 cor. 11. 3. i would have you know , that the head of every man is christ , and the head of the woman is the man , and the head of christ is god. in like manner arch-bishop usher in his diatriba about the ancient apostolical creed of the roman church , and other forms of faith wont to be propounded in catechism and baptism both by the western and eastern christians tells us , pag. 13. out of rufinus , that almost all the eastern churches do thus deliver their faith : i believe in one god the father almighty , and in the following speech , whereas we say , and in jesus christ his only son our lord , they deliver it thus , and in one lord our lord jesus christ his only son , which he shews in the shorter and larger cre●ds hierosolymitan , alexandrian , that of eusebius caesariensis recited at the first nicene councel , and with some addition assented to as their creed dr. pearson exposition of the 8th . article , we have already shewn that the father is originally that one god , which is deried by none . hereby we may understand who is meant by [ the father ] to wit , the father of christ , and therefore the kingdom is termed by christ the kingdom of his father , matth. 26. 29. because it is appointed or delivered to christ by the father , luke 22. 29. matth. 11. 27. and 28. 18. john 3. 35. and 5. 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 26 , 27. and 13. 3. act● 2. 33. 36. 2 pet. 1. 17. and in all his administrations christ expresseth his aim not to be his own , but his fathers glory , john 8. 50. 54. and 14. 13. sometimes it is termed the kingdom of their father , mat. 13. 43. because god appoints it to the saints , luke 22. 29. and 12. 32. and therefore christ saith , mat. 20. 23. to sit on my right hand , and on my left is not mine to give , but it shall be given to them for whom it is prepared of my father , mat. 25. 34. then shall the king say to them on his right hand , come ye blessed of my father , inherit the kingdom prepared for you , from the foundation of the world . acts 1. 7. it is not for you to know the times or the seasons which the father hath put in his own power : for which reason it is said . 1 cor. 8. 6. of him are all things , and believers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for or to him , in the sense in which it is said , rom. 11. 36. for of him , and through him , and to him are all things ; to him be glory for ever , amen : and concerning christ it is aid , phil. 2. 8 , 9 , 10 , 11. because he humbled himself and became obedient unto death , even the death of the cross , therefore god also hath highly exalted him , and given him a name , which is above every name , that at the name of jesus every knee should bow , of things in heaven and things in earth , and things under the earth , and that every tongue should confess that jesus is the lord , ( that is ) god's king , king of kings , and lord of lords , at his appearance and in his kingdom , and this shall be ) to the glory of god the pather : and more fully st. paul expresseth it , 1 cor. 15. 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28. then cometh the end when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to god even the father , when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power : for he must reign till he hath put all enemies under his feet : the last enemy that shall be destroyed is death : for he hath put all things under his feet ; but when he saith , all things are put under him , it is manifest that he is , excepted which did put all things under him , that god may be all in all ; whence you may observe that the term [ god ] is distinctly put for the person of the father , in contradistinction to the son , and that it is the father who appoints the kingdom to the son , that he puts his enemies under his feet , that the son shall deliver up the kingdom to the father , that the issue or end is , that god to wit the father , may be all in all , that is , in all the management of this kingdom from the begining to the end the father may be glorified by the son , and by all others to whom the kingdom is given . sect . 2. jesus christ is the son of god in the sense professed in the nicene creed . this leads us to enquire concerning the terms [ son of god , of man , christ , the lord jesus christ ] which are the titles by which he is expressed , whose the kingdom is said to be , and therefore we cannot rightly conceive of this kingdom without understanding these terms : that the title the son of the living god , given to jesus christ the son of man is a fundamental article of the christian faith , is manifest from christs approbation of peters answer to christs question to his disciples matth. 16. 13. whom do men say that i the son of man am ? to which st. peter answered , verse 16. thou art the christ the son of the living god , whereto it is said jesus answered and said unto him , blessed art thou simon bar-jona , for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee , but my father which is in heaven : and again , when jesus said to the twelve , will ye also go away ? simon peter answered him , lord , to whom shall we go ? thou hast the words of eternal life , and we believe and are sure that thou art that christ the son of the living god , john 6. 68 , 69. and when the eunuch said to philip , acts 8. 36. see here is water , what doth hinder me to be baptized ? philip said , if thou believest with all thine heart thou maist , and he answered and said , i believe that jesus christ is the son of god , verse 37. st. paul acts 9. 20. preached christ in the synagogues at dimascus , that he is the son of god. and john 1. 49. nathanael said to christ , rabbi . thou art the son of god , thou are the king of israel . 1 john 2. 22. he is antichrist that denieth the father and the son. verse 23. whosoever denieth the son , the same hath not the father . 1 john 4. 15. whosoever shall confess that jesus is the son of god , god dwelleth in him , and he in god. 1 john 5. 5. who is he that overcometh the world but he that believeth that jesus is the son of god ? verse 11 , 12. and this is the record ▪ that god hath given to us eternal life , and this life is in his son : he that hath the son hath life , he that hath not the son hath not life . nevertheless there is great difference about this appellation [ the son of god ] whether it import divine nature distinct from humane , or humane nature , yet by divine operation , not by the ordinary way of natural generation as other men are begotten , but by the supernatural operation of the holy ghost according to that of the angel to mary , luke 1. 35. the holy ghost shall come upon thee , and the power of the highest shall overshadow thee ; therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee , shall be called the son of god. whence the samosatenians and photinians of old , so the socinians in this last age deny that jesus christ had being afore his conception by the holy ghost in the virgins womb , but the arians granting him to have a divine nature , say , that he was created by god the first creature out of nothing , and then that by him god the father made all things else : in opposition to whom the creed of the first nicene councel , as it is in eusebius his epistle to the church of caesarea set down by arch-bishop usher in his diatriba de symbolis pag. 16. out of at hanasius operum tom . 2. pag. 48. edit . commelinian socrates lib. 1. hist. c. 5. theodoret. lib. 1. c. 12. and gelasius cyricenus in act. concil . nic. part 3. c. 35. is thus : we believe also in one lord jesus christ born the only begotten of the father , 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 father , by whom all things were made , both the things in heaven , and the things in the earth : in which there are these propositions included , 1. that jesus christ was before any creature was made . 2. that he was begotten of the substance of the father , not made of nothing , as the arians held . 3. that he was very god of very god , of the same substance with the father . 4. that by him all things were made , whether in heaven or in earth , which propositions are proved by these texts of scripture . sect . 3. christ's being the son of god in the sense of the nicene cre●d is proved from john 1. 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 9 , 10 , 14 , 18. the first text of holy scripture which i shall produce to prove them is , john 1. 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 9 , 10 , 14 , 15 , 18. where it is thus said , in the begining was the word , and the word was with god , and the word was god , the same was in the begining with god : all things were made by him , and without him was not made any thing that was made , in him was life and the life was the light of men : and the light shineth in darkness , and the darkness comprehended it not : verse 9. he was the true light which enlightneth every man that cometh into the world , vers . 10. he was in the world , and the world was made by him , and the world knew him not , verse 14. and the word was made flesh , and dwelt among us , and we beheld his glory , the glory as of the only begotten of the father , full of grace and truth . verse 15. john bare witness of him , and cried , saying , this is he of whom i spake , he that cometh after me is preferred before me , for he was before me . verse 18. no man hath seen god at any time ; the only begotten son which is in the bosom of the father , he hath declared him . it is agreed on , that by [ the word ] is meant jesus christ , as appears from verse 17 , 29. and other passages in the text , and therefore thence i argue : he who was in the beginning of the creation with god , was god , by whom all things were made , whose life was the light of men , the true light inlightning every man that cometh into the world , by whom the world was made , who was made flesh , was the only begotten of the father , in the bosom of the father , before john the baptist was , before any creature was made , begotten of the substance of the father , not made of nothing , very god of very god , of the same substance with the father , by whom all things were made : but such was jesus christ , therefore he was , before any creature was made , begotten of the substance of the father , not made of nothing very god of very god , of the same substance with the father , by whom all things were made : the minor is almost the express words of the text , the major is evident from the equivolence of terms , it being all one to be god in the beginning by whom all things were made , the world was made , the only begotten of the father in his bosom before john baptist as to be before any creature was made , begotten of the substance of the father , not made of nothing , very god of very god , of the same substance with the father , by whom all things were made . sect . 4. the exceptions against the proof of christs god-head from john 1. 1. &c. are set down . nevertheless the major proposition of the argument is denied , and for a reason of the denial it is said . 1. that the scope of the apostle , is to set forth by whom the gospel began , as appeareth by the very appellation of [ the word ] here given to christ in regard of his prophetical office in publishing the gospel . 2. that by [ in the beginning ] is not meant the creation of heaven and earth at first , but of the preaching the gospel and the new creation , as is meant mark 1. 1. luke 1. 2. john 6. 64. and 8. 25. and 15. 27. and 16. 4. acts 11. 15. heb. 2. 3. 1 john 1. 1. and 2. 13 , 14 , 24. 2 john 5. 6. which note a special term of beginning , which was the time of christs preaching , in respect of which he is said to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 beginning , luke 3. 23. to wit to preach the gospel when he was about thirty years of age , not as it is translated , began to be about thirty years of age . 3. that he was with god in heaven about that time , being taken up into the third heaven , as paul was , 2 cor. 12. 2. and so was in the bosom of god , as is gathered from iohn 3. 13 , 31 , 32. and iohn 6. 62. 4. that he was a god as moses is said to be exod. 7. 1. because of the power he had to work miracles , and therefore iohn 1. 1 , the word is said to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 without the article 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and should be rendred [ a god ] not [ god or the god. ] 5. that by [ all things made by him ] is not meant the heaven and earth at the first creation , but the things or persons belonging to the new creation by iesus christ expressed in these places , 2 cor. 5. 17 , 18 , 19. ephes. 2. 10. ephes. 3. 9. 6. that when it is said , the world was made by him ] the meaning is , the church was reformed by him , or life eternal was revealed by him , called heb. 2. 5. the world to come . 7. that his life was the light of men by his preaching : or that in him was life upon his resurrection , and that this life was the light of men by saving them , and raising them up from the dead . 8. that it should not be read iohn 1. 14. he was made flesh ; but the word was flesh , that is , a man of humane weakness after he was a man , and so not meant of his humane nature at his incarnation , but his after condition in his life . 9. that as isaack is termed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 heb. 11. 17. by reason of his being abraham's heir , and extraordinary birth , not because he was the only begotten of the substance of abraham : so iesus christ is termed the only begotten of the father , not from his peculiar generation of the substance of the father before the heaven and earth were made , but so other peculiarities , 1. because he was by peculiar operation of the holy ghost generated in the virgins womb , which is the reason of this title of the son of god given to christ by the angel himself , luke 1. 35. 2. because of his special sanctification and mission , which is the reason given by christ himself , iohn 10. 36. 3. because of his resurrection from the dead , which is the reason given by st. paul acts 13. 33. and therefore termed the first begotten from , or of the dead , col. 1. 18. rev. 1. 5. 4. because of his singular exaltation and office , which is agreeable to what is said , psal. 89. 27. and whereby he is termed the first born among many brethren , rom. 8. 29. and by reason of his calling to the office of chief-priest-hood that is applied to him , heb. 5. 5. which is written , psal. 2. 7. thou art my son , this day have i begotten thee . 10. that he was before iohn baptist , not in him , but in power 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 mightier , or stronger than him , which is the word used concerning the same speech in the other three evangelists , matth. 3 , 11. mark 1. 7. luke 3. 16. sect . 5. the sense of john 1. 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 9 , 10 , 14 , 15 , 18. given by the adversaries , is refelled . i reply , 1. that irenaeus lib. 3. adv. heresies , c. 11. and others near the apostles time , say , that the scope of the evangelist iohn in writing this gospel was to oppose the heresies of the gnosticks , ebion , cerinthus , marcion , valentinus , and such others , as whether from platonick philosophy , or other fancies , corrupted the doctrine of the god-head , made christ a meer man , contrary to which st. iohn asserts his divinity in the beginning , and thence got the name of the divine , and his gospel to be that part of scripture which doth most plainly deliver theology or speech of god , and thereby as also in relating many acts and sermons of christ omitted by other evangelists which makes a supplement to their histories . 2. that the series of the apostles words , the expressions compared with gen. 1. 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5. of [ in the beginning was the word with god , all things were made by him , the life was the light of men , the light shineth in darkness , and the darkness comprehended it not ] are so correspondent to each other , that none but will say , that at least st. john did allude to moses his description of the first creation , and that he did use moses his expressions , and therefore meant the same thing , hath been conceived not only by christians , but also by a●relius the platonist , as eusebius , in his book of evangelical preparation , lib. 11. c. 19. relates ; nor is it to be slightly passed over , which john cameron observes in his answers to questions on the epistle to the hebrews , ch . 1. v. 2. concerning gods manner of delivering mysteries in the old testament , that it was to be but dusky , as in the twi-light , until the messias his time , who should fully discover the things of god as the sun , when it is risen , doth things before obscured , and that the apostle knew christs creating the world in the beginning even from gen. 1. for wherefore , saith he , i beseech you , should moses ( which no where else is done in the whole scripture ) so often bring in god speaking , let this and that be made , and after it was made ? for certainly god then used no speech as when he spake to the prophets . it is but a cold answer , that moses did so write , that it might be signified after a humane manner , that god made all things by his beck . for who doubts of that , or doth not indeed know , that to make the frame of the world god used no tools or engines ? besides , if that were the intent , why is not also else-where god brought in using like speech , when he did some great work or miracle ? i do no whit doubt but john had an eye on that place , when he termed christ the word , as if he had said , that christ was pointed out by those expressions ; he said , and it was made , although obscurely indeed , as befitted those times , even as also obscurely mention is made of the holy spirit , in the same chapter , when moses said , and the spirit of god moved upon the waters . for indeed at first view he seems to speak of some wind and so the chaldee paraphrast expounded that place . but because no reason can be given whence that wind should arise , or fit cause why it should move upon the waters , men might be inclined to conjecture that moses in that place had respect to another thing . in the same manner plainly , sith no reason of so diligent and heedful an observation fit enough can be given , that god spake of each thing severally , let it be made and it was made , there must be some mystery couched under those expressions : when therefore in the new testament we are taught , that all things were made by christ , let the jews either open and explain to us that mystery , or let them not shew themselves stiff in this matter . i confess indeed , that without the light of the gospel , we should be hesitant here with the jews ; but sith christ is called the word , and said to be he by whom god made all things , no man hath any more cause of doubting left , but that moses would intimate it by that diligent observation which the words of the psalmist , [ psal. 33. 6. 9. by the word of the lord were the heavens made , and all the host of them by the breath of his mouth : he spake and it was done , besides those word● psal. 136. 5. to him that by wisdom ( which 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies as well as speech ) made the heavens , psal. 148. 5. he commanded and they were created , did so far intimate that the chaldee paraphrast , isa. 45. 12. reads ; i in my word have made the earth , and created man upon it and isa. 48. 13. by my word i have founded the earth , and philo the jew besides other sayings in his book of allegories shewing his inklings of his knowledge of this mystery , though dark saith , the word or reason , ( for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies both ) made the world : these with many other allegations , which might be produced out of jewish writers , and others do evince , that the evangelist means the same creation , when he saith all things were made by him , and the same beginning when he saith , in the beginning was the word , as moses meant , when he said , in the beginning god created the heaven and the earth . gen. 1. 1. 3. the sense of the words in which the force of the argument consists is according to the plain and obvious use of the words and phrases ; the other for the most part without example , and so streined , as that it may easily be perceived , they studied rather to wrest , than to interpret them ; as will appear by comparing the allegations and senses on both sides given in the particulars as they are in order examined in the next section . 4. the adversaries acknowledge , that the intent of the evangelist in that which is said of christ , was to set out christ in what he was singular , and was excellent in him : but to expound his words as they do , is to make the evangelist deliver things common to him with others , as to say , in the beginning was the word , that is , preaching the gospel , or in the beginning of the preaching of the gospel the word christ was , that is , had a being , that he was with god , that is , was known of god , is to say no more than might be said of john baptist ; to say he was with god to learn mysteries is the same which st. paul saith of himself , when he was rapt into paradise , or is true of moses when he conferred with god in the mount ; to say all things were made by him , that is , by his preaching the gentiles were become new creatures , is no more than might be said of peter , paul , and other apostles ; to say he was a god in office , that he had divine power to work miracles , is to say no more of him than might be said of moses , of the apostles , nor do they or can they give any good reason , which may agree with the majesty and wisdom of so divine a writing and writer as this of john , to deliver things so obvious in so obscure phrases , as are not congruous to a divine historian , when the same might be , and were by other evangelists delivered in plainer expressions ; nor why he should prefix those sacred aphorisms before his history , if they contained no mystery , but things easily perceivable by sense ; nor is such an end , as is imagined by some , to shew that john baptist was not the messias , any thing probable to have been propounded by john the evangelist , who wrote long after john baptist was dead ; nor could be , or was by any conceived to be the christ : such things as these can hardly be imputed to the evangelist without some note of dotage . 5. to expound the words [ in the beginning was the word ] that is , in the beginning of the preaching of the gospel was the word , that is , christ was preaching of the gospel , or the preaching of the gospel was , is more like an inept tautology of a trifler , than the holy , wise saying of a divine writer . 6. the sense given by the adversaries is in sundry things not true ; for in the beginning of the preaching of the gospel christ was not with god in heaven , as they expound , verse 1. 2. his being with god , but was come from heaven , and conversed familiarly with men ; nor is it true , that in the beginning of the preaching of the gospel ( be the beginning at john's beginning to preach , or christs , or his apostles , or the continuing of it in the daies of his flesh ) all things belonging to the new creation , the new covenant , the reconciling the world , the preaching and propagating of the gospel were done by him . for the many miracles of christ were not done in the beginning of the preaching of the gospel , nor was his dying for us , nor the sending his apostles , and their impowering by the coming of the holy ghost to them till after his resurrection and ascention : yea those men who expound the words , john 1. 3. all things were done by him of divine and marvelous works , yet many divine marvelous works , as , the opening of the heavens , the descent of the spirit in the form of a dove , the transfiguration and glory in the mount , the rending the veil of the temple , the earthquake , cleaving the rocks , opening the graves , darkening of the sun at his death , his resurrection from the dead , they deny to have been done by christ or the concurrence of his power or operation ; nor is it true in their sense , that without him was nothing done that was done ; for in the business of the preaching of the gospel afore christs manifestation to israel , iohn did preach and baptize , and in the working of miracles there were some that did cast out devils in christs name , who followed not christ , luk. 9. 49. nor is it true , that in their sense the world was made by christ , that is the gentiles reconciled by christs preaching or the world reformed ; for that was done by the apostles after his ascention : and if it be said , that after christs ascention all things were done by him , that the world was made by him , that was not in the beginning , in which they say , he was the word , that is , did preach the gospel , was a god , that is , did work miracles , was with god , that is , was taken up into heaven , and therefore the making of all things , john 1. 3. cannot be understood according to their own exposition of [ in the beginning ] of christs care in ordering and moderating all things belonging to his church after his ascention , nor had any more been said of him as then done than may be said now , which is contrary to the adversaries grant , that some more than ordinary remarkable things is related of christ by st. john in the first verses of his gospel : whence may be justly inferred that the exposition given by them neither is consistent with the truth of things , nor the evangelists words , nor their own sayings . sect . 6. the reasons of the adversaries exposition of john 1. 1 , &c. are shewed to be insufficient . but besides other absurdities , which are in the exposition of the adversaries , the reasons they give are mistakes and insufficient for what they produce them : for in the first there is a great mistake , as if the evangelist used the term [ word ] to intimate by whom the preaching of the gospel began ; for christ is not termed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , which we translate [ the word ] because he was gods messenger to declare gods mind to us in the gospel ; the term [ word ] is not fit to expresse a deputy , but the term [ ambassador , lega●e ] but because it signifies reason , and wisdom , and therefore fitly expresseth christ , who was the wisdom of god , by whom he made all things at the beginning of the creation , psal. 136. 5. prov. 3. 19. with whom he was when he prepared the heavens , prov. 8. 27. to which the evangelist alludes , when he saith , john 1. 2. the same was in the beginning with god , and the authour of the book of wisdom , ch . 9. 2. alluding to that , gen. 1. 26. let us make man in our image , saith , who hast framed man in thy wisdom , or , because all things are said to be made by the word of god , as in the places before alledged , psal. 33. 6. 9. psal. 148. 5. alluding without doubt to the expressions , gen. 1. 3 , 6 , 9 , 11 , 14 , 20 , 24 , 26 , 28. and accordingly the holy writers in the new testament , expresse the first creation , as done by the word of god. st. paul 2 cor. 4. 6. god who commanded the light to shine out of darkness . heb. 11. 3. through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of god. 2 pet. 3. 5. for this they willingly are ignorant of , that by the word of god , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the heavens were of old , and the earth standing out of the water , and in the water , or as it may be read , consisting of water , and by water ; for which reason the chaldee paraphrast in abundance of places , especially where gods creating of heaven and earth is signified , useth this expression , i have done it by my word , as isa. 45. 12. and 48. 13. hos. 1. 7. whence it is apparent that st. john used the term 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the word as a title known to the jews , answering to the chaldee , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; and that , as heinsius arist. sac . exercit . in non . c. 3. observes , it undoubtedly comes from the east , not from the greeks , and that by reason of his relating gods acts , especially the creation , as done by the word , it is not given by the evangelist to christ , to signifie his preaching of the gospel , but his creation of the world at first , and consequently to be understood of his divine nature , in which he created all things in the beginning of the world ; nor doth the speech , 1 john 1. 1 , 2. that what was from the beginning which he and other apostles had seen with their eyes , and their hands handled of the word of life , prove , that the term [ word of life ] imports only christs humane nature , or that he is so termed from preaching the gospel : for it is not said , that they handled or saw the word of life , but they heard , saw , handled , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 concerning the word of life , that is as verse 2. and the life was manifested and we have seen , and witness , and shew unto you that eternal life which was with the father , and was manifested unto us , that is , as is expressed , 1 tim. 3. 16. god was manifested in the flesh ; so that what they heard , saw , handled , concerning the word of life , or divine nature was manifested in the flesh by his words of command to unclean spirits to depart , to the winds and seas to be still , by his miracles which they saw , felt , tasted , whereby he manifested his glory , joh. 1. 14. and 2. 11. and 11. 40. whence christ argues , john 10 , 37 , 38. if i do not the works of my father believe me not , but if i do , though ye believe not me , believe the works , that ye may know and believe that the father is in me , and i in him . john 14. 10 , 11. the words that i speak unto you i speak not of my self , but the father that dwelleth in me , he doth the works : believe me that i am in the father and the father in me ; or else believe me for the very works sake ; nor is christ described , rev. 19. 13. where he is called [ the word of god ] as a prophet to shew that the title [ word of god ] imported his preaching , but as a warriour to shew his power ; not as the essay on rev. 19. 13. because he came immediately from the divine majesty in heaven to publish the gospel to the world , and had full power to do whatsoever miracles he pleased . 2. it is true that [ in the beginning ] is wont to be restrained to the matter in hand , nor is it denied but that in many of the places alledged in the second exception [ in the beginning ] is meant of the preaching of christ , nor is it material in this point , whether [ beginning ] luke 3. 23. be referred to christs age , or the preaching of the gospel , though the latter be lesse probable , because then when christ was baptized of john he had not begun to preach the gospel till after his temptation in the wilderness . but the thing to be proved is , that the preaching of the gospel is the matter in hand , joh. 1. 1 , 2. the word [ the beginning ] is used john 8. 44. 1 john 3. 8. mat. 19. 4 , 8 ▪ and 24. 21. mark. 10. 6. and 13. 19. heb. 1. 10. 2 pet. 3. 4. for the beginning of the creation , and the very expressions , john 1. 1 , 2 , 3 , 〈◊〉 , 5 , 10. and other evidences before alledged shew it , answers to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 gen. 1. 1. gr. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , as john 1. 1. and in both places are delivered with the like agreableness to gods majesty in creating , that even as longinus the philosopher magnified moses his description of the creation , so franciscus junius that eminent divine was taken with the reading of john 1. 1. &c. and from his inclinations to atheism was by it brought to the knowledge of christ , as he relates in the narration of his own life . as for the sense the adversaries give , in the beginning was the word , that is , in the beginning of the gospel was the word , that is , the man christ jesus called the word , in that he was the immediate interpreter of god , by whom he revealed his counsel touching our salvation , as we are wont to disclose our secrets by our words , which reason , it is said , may not obscurely be collected from the 18. v. of the same chapter , and the word was with god , being taken up into heaven , that so he might talk with god , and be indeed his word , or the immediate interpreter of his will , and receive the most certain and absolute knowledge of the kingdom of heaven which he was to propound to men , it hath no colour from the text ; for neither is it said , in the beginning of the gospel , nor the appellation of [ the word ] is given to christ in regard of his prophetical office , nor is it said in the beginning the word was preaching , but simply was , noting his existence , not his acting ; nor will the order of the apostles propositions consist with the sense they give , for then st. john should have said thus : in the beginning the word was with god , and after he had been with god , he came down from heaven and was the word , that is , preached the gospel , and then he was a god , as being endued with divine power and empire , to cast out devils , and to do great works , as moses did ; whereas the first thing he sets down in the being of christ in the beginning , and then his being with god , and his being god , and the making of all things by him , which can be applied in this order to no beginning , but that of the creation , and therefore [ in the beginning ] must be understood of the first creation of all things , and not of the publishing the gospel , as they would have it . 3. this consideration also overthrows their sense of the words [ was with god ] of his being taken up into heaven , that so he might talk with god , and be indeed his word . for if it were meant of his taking up into heaven in a humane body ( as 2 cor. 12. 2. is said of paul ) then it should have been put first , whereas it is the second and fourth proposition , john 1. 1 , 2. and being repeated , v. 2. and then it following , verse 3. all things were made by him , and without him not one thing was made that was made , it plainly shews that the meaning is , that he was with god in the work of creation of the heaven and earth , so as that all things were made by him as the son of god , or god with the father : as for the words , verse 18. of his being in the bosom of his father , they do not shew his receiving instructions from god , as a messenger , taken up into heaven , that he might be sent down again to deliver his message perfectly and amply , but the love ▪ and intimacy and nearness to his father , in that he was his only begotten son , and therefore was perfectly acquainted with him , and his mind : and it seems to me that the evangelist alluded , john 1. 1 , 2 , 18. to the passages which are prov. 8. 29 , 30. when he gave to the sea his decree , that the waters should not passe his commandement , when he appointed the foundations of the earth , then i was by him as one brought up with him , ( hebr. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a foster child , aquila , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nursed as a child in the bosom ) and i was daily his delight , rejoycing alwaies before him , which is the opinion of grotius annot . ad j● . 1. 1. prov. 8. 27. and many others , and shews , that the being in the bosom was not as a servant to be imployed , but as a son , in whom he delighted , as is said , matth. 3. 17. and 17. 5. as for that which hath been immagined concerning the meaning of the words , the word was with god , john 1. 1 , 2. as if it were thus , he was known to god , though unknown to men till he was manifested by john , as it is partly false , sith he was known to mary his mother , zecharias , elizabeth , simeon , anna , joseph , to the wise men of the east , as the son of god , king of the jews , a horn of salvation out of the house of david , the lord , the rising from on high , the light of the gentiles , the glory of the people israel , the lords christ , as may be perceived by reading luke 1. and 2. ch . mat. 1. and 2. so is it frivolous , as being without any example of such use of the expressions , and contrary to the use of the phrase , which still notes presence of being , or subsist●nce , or cohab●●ation , as mat. 13. 55 , 56. mark 6. 3. and 9. 19. luke 9. 41. 1 cor. 16. 6. &c. and signifies joh. 1. 1 , 2. his being with god in the beginning of the creation , as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with thee , joh. 17. 5. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , prov. 8. 30. which the chaldee paraphrast reads , at his side , and exod. 20. 19. let not the lord speak with us by the word which is before the lord , and the wisdom of solomon as it is stiled , ch . 9. 9. saith thus : and wisdom was with thee which knoweth thy works , and was presen● when thou madest the world , where the translators in the margin not unfitly place prov. 8. 22. joh. 1. 1 , 2 , 3 , 10. as parallel texts to shew the presence and co-operation of the word in the making of the world ; which shew the jews had some ●nkling of the words subsistence at the creation , though the writing be apocryphal , nor doth his being with the father john 1. 1 , 2. signifie objective presence , but essential . as for the device of christs being taken up into heaven in his humane body , as it is a late invention , so it is improbable , sith no certain time or other circumstance is expressed in the evangelists , in which it should be , which in so remarkable a thing it 's not likely would have been omitted any more than in paul's narration of himself , 2 cor. 12. 2. if such an ascention had been ; nor is the reason given that he should be taken up to heaven that he might talk with god , and receive the most certain and absolute knowledge of the kingdom of heaven , which he was to propose to men , probable , sith another reason is given of his knowledge , john. 3. 34. for he whom god hath sent , speaketh the words of god : for god giveth not the spirit by measure to him ; nor is he any where said to go from the earth , and to return thither ; and when christ speaks of his going to heaven , he saith , luke 24. 26. ought not christ to suffer these things , and to enter into his glory ? which intimates his going to heaven , to have followed his sufferings , and heb. 9. 12. the authour of that epistle saith , by his own blood he entred in once into the holy place , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whether it be read once , or for once , or at once , it notes but one time entring into heaven with his blood , as his offering was but once , heb. 10. 10. and not often as the high-priest aaronical did . as for what is alledged , [ that john 6. 38 , 46 , 51 , 62. christ affirmeth that he came down from heaven , and had seen god , and that he was the living bread which came down from heaven , whereof whosoever did eat should live for ever ; so the bread which he would give was his flesh , which he would give for the life of the world : and afterwards asketh the jews , what if they should see the son of man ascending up where he was before ? namely , before he began to preach the gospel , as he himself intimateth , john 8. 42. where he saith , if god were your father , you would love me , for i went out from god , and came : for neither came i of my self , but he sent me : and john 16. 28. where he saith , i came out from the father , and came into the world : again ( or rather on the contrary ) i leave the world , and go to the father : which going forth from the father , every one may easily perceive , by the opposition of the following clause , is meant of a local procession of christ from god , and that before the discharge of his embassy : for to come , or to come into the world signifieth to treat with men in the name of god , and to perform a publick office among men , see iohn 1. 15. 27 , 30. and iohn 1. 5 , 20. mat. 11. 3 , 18 , 19. ioh. 17. 18. compared with chap. 16. 21. and chap. 18. 37. ] it evinceth not a bodily ascent into heaven of christ to learn of god afore his publishing the gospel , for it is not said whither he ascended before , but was before , which notes presence there , but not local motion ; nor is it said in his humane body ; though it be said , the son of man was there before ; yet this may be understood by the figure of communication of properties very frequent in speeches of christ , according to his divine nature ; nor is he said to be there before his preaching the gospel , restraining the time to it ; it may be meant of his being in heaven afore the world was , as it is said , iohn 17. 5. nor is it said , christs flesh came from heaven , or that he came from heaven by local motion , or saw god by his eyes of flesh ; his coming and seeing god , may be understood of his divine nature in respect of which he was of heavenly original , though his being bread be meant of his flesh and humane nature in which he suffered , and his coming out from god , and coming john 8. 42. is expounded of his receiving commission from god , as the words shew , neither came i of my self , that is , i have not taken upon me this office , i now administer of mine own motion only , but he sent me ; nor is coming out from the father necessarily understood , of coming out from the father , and coming into the world by local procession ; but the coming out from the father may be meant of receiving commission from his father , or his original being , and his coming into the world either of his humane birth , or as the allegation expresseth it , his treating with men in the name of god , and performing a publick office among men , unto one of which , the texts produced lead us , and not to the sense of local procession in his humane body , nor doth the opposition prove it , for the sense may be right thus : i came out from the father by generation , and taking my commission from him , and came into the world by humane birth , or as it is , iohn 12. 46. a light into the world by my preaching the gospel , and again , or on the contrary , i leave the world by death , or removing from the earth , and go by my bodily ascent to the father : as for iohn 3. 13. neither is the coming down from heaven , nor his being in heaven necessarily understood of removal from earth to heaven , and back again by bodily motion , but may be meant of his being in heaven in his divine nature , and coming down from heaven by being made flesh , or receiving his commission from god , in respect of one or both of which he is said , verse 31. to come from heaven , from above , in opposition to being of the earth by humane generation , or authority . and verse 32. he is said to have seen and heard by his intimacy with his father , and the communication of the spirit . verse 34. not by his bodily eyes or ears upon a supposed personal humane presence and conference with god in heaven . 4. the apellation of god given to the word , job . 1. 1. is not from his office as altogether divine , as being above prophets , whose office , if compared with christs , was humane ; for moses was a prophet of whom god said , numb . 12. 8. with him will i speak mouth to mouth , even apparently , and not in dark speeches , and the similitude of the lord shall he behold : and st. paul was rapt into the third heaven , and heard words unspeakable , 2 cor. 12. 4. and yet neither of them termed god ; yea , st. paul abhorred it with indignation , acts 14. 11 , 15. such persons may be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 divine men , not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 gods : nor is the word termed god , as endued with divine power : for then moses might be so termed , for he was a prophet endued with divine power and empire , so as to controul pharaoh and to work miracles : but moses is not termed god , though god said to him , i have made thee a god to pharaoh , exod. 7. 1. and thou shalt be to aaron 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for or instead of god , that is , as a prince or master to command or direct him exod. 4. 16. but the word , it 's said , iohn 1. 1. was god absolutely , noting what he was in himself , not relatively what he was to another , shewing what he was in nature and power , not what he was designed for , or what his imployment or work should be , or what he was in office , no whit expressing from whom , to whom , for what he was sent , or what he did , but what he was : and his being god is said to be in the beginning , not in the progress of his preaching in which he did miracles , nor after his resurrection when all power was given him in heaven and in earth , mat. 28. 18. nor after his ascention , when he was exalted by the right hand of god , acts 2. 33. god made him both lord and christ , verse 36. but in the beginning of the creation , when he made all things , and therefore was god the creatour , as the authour to the hebrews ch . 3. 4. asserts , he that built , or framed all things is god : where it may be observed , that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 god is put without the article 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and yet by god is there meant not a substituted god by office , but god the creatour , and iohn 1. 6 , 12 , 13 , 18. and in a great number of other places it is likewise used ; and therefore notwithstanding this exception the word is to be believed to have been god creatour , very god of very god in the beginning of the creation at first , as v. 3. is asserted . 5. that the making of all things by the word is not meant of the new creation is proved before sect. 13. and that the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 used iohn 1. 3 ; 10. translated by us made , are used of the first creation is manifest from the use , heb. 4. 3. and 11. 3. 1 cor. 15. 45. as gen. 2. 7. and gen. 1. 3 , 6 , 9 , 11 , 14 , 15 , 20 , 24. and 2. 4. and therefore the creation of all things of the world at first , is fi●ly expressed by those words , iohn 1. 3 , 10. and so the universal creation at first ascribed to the word : nor is it any deminution to christ , that it is said , all things were made by him , and without him was nothing made which was made , and the world was made by him . for the expressions by him , not without him do not note alwaies an instrument , even rom. 11. 36. it is said , all things are of him , and by him , and for him , who is the lord , to whom glory belongs for ever ; but shews the order and co-operation of the father and the word in the creation . as for the passage , 2 cor. 5. 17. it is granted to be meant of the new state of things by christs reconciling the world to god , verse 18. but it is not like the words , iohn 1. 3 , 10. where all things are said , to be made , not made new by him , and old things past away , and all things are said to be made by him in the beginning ; whereas the making all things new by reconciling the world to god , was by christs being made sin for them , ver . 21. by his death , and therefore not in the beginning of his preaching the gospel , and therefore cannot be meant of the same creation , ephes. 2. 10. the ephesians are said to be created in christ iesus unto good works , not by christ jesus , but to be gods work. the words ephes. 3. 9. may be more rightly understood of the first creation , in which christ was co-worker , which the words from the beginning of the world seem to intimate ; however they are not like iohn 1. 3. in expressions , and therefore evince not , that they are to be both understood of the same thing . 6. the term 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 can signifie no other than either the frame of heaven and earth , or the inhabitants in it , as iohn 17. 5 , 17. iohn 1. 9 , 29. and 3. 16. and many more places , and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 can have no other signification , than was made by him , at the first creation . for the world was made by him afore he was in it , and it knew him not , it being put as an aggravation of their perverseness , that the world that was made by him , knew him not , which can be verified of no time , but the first creation ; which is confirmed by the two next verses : for verse 9. coming into the world is meant , of appearing among men , whether by birth or other manifestation , and therefore the world must signifie , verse 9. the earth or men , and so , verse 10. which is apparent in that , when it is said , the world knew him not , it must be expounded , men knew him not , and the words following , he came unto his own , and his own received him not , verse 11. must be understood of men , whether his own be meant of men simply , or men that he had special relation to as country men , or kinsmen . and for the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which we translate [ was made ] as here put , it never signifies any other thing than was , or was made , or was begotten , not revealing , preaching , or renewing . nor does the word [ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the world ] signifie , being put without any further addition or expression , heaven , or immortality , or eternal life . the place , rom. 4. 13. that abraham should be heir of the world , if meant of his own natural posterity inheriting , is to be conceived meant of the promised land ; if of christ , of the empire of the world , as psal. 2. 8. is foretold ; if of his seed by faith , to be co-heirs with christ , rom. 8. 17. if ( as it is most likely from the connexion with the 11th . and 12th . verse ) of the world of believers jews , and gentiles of whom he is father , still it is meant of mens persons , not their meer state and condition , heb. 10. 5. the coming into the world , is coming among men , and that to offer himself in sacrifice , and the preparing of his body is not making it immortal , but fitting it for death , as verse 10 , 12. do plainly shew ; neither of the places , heb. 2. 5. or , 6. 5. have the word translated world , john 1. 10. in the one the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 opposed to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 desart , in the other 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and notes the course of time , place , or generation future ; neither the state it self of eternal life , which is distinct from the world to come , luke 18. 30. and cannot be meant of the world made by christ , john 1. 10. which is not future , but was existent when christ was in it . for the same reasons , by the world made by christ , cannot be meant the church reformed by him ; for if by the world be elsewhere meant the church of the elect , or world of believers reconciled to god ( as is conceived to be meant , iohn 6. 51. 2 cor. 5. 19. &c. ) yet here it cannot be meant , because it is said , the world knew him not , received him not , even that world which was made by him ; but the church of the elect , or , believers reconciled to god , knew him , and received him : nor doth any where the word [ was made ] put as here , signifie was renewed , enlightned , reformed ; nor if it were so used , could it be here , sith the world knew him not , nor received him , which is said to be made by him : and to say that the meaning is , the world was made by him , that is , the world was so far as concerned his action , as much as in him lay , enlightned , renewed , reformed , though not in the event , so as to note christs study and endeavour , not the effect , is without all example ; sith the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth note being , and effect of the thing , not intention or action of the agent , and so the church of elect would be no more made by him than others , and it would be clean contrary to the apostles intention to shew the event of his being in the world , that notwithstanding the world was made by him , yet they were so averse from him , as not to know him , and so perverse as not to receive him ; understanding synecdochically , the greater part ( as 2 pet. 2. 5. and elsewhere the world is put for the multitude , or greatest part ) distinct from them that received him , verse 12 , 13. 7. the life which is said was in the word , was in him in the beginning , not restored to him at his resurrection , and it is said was in him , not as john 11. 25. and 14. 6. he was the life causally and relatively to others , but in him , that is in himself , and so notes what he had in respect of his essence , and natural being , not by his office , or communicated power in that respect . and when it is said , the life was the light of men , it is not said , the life shall be the light of men , but was so in the beginning ; nor is it said , it was the light of men as dead or fallen , but of men simply as men , and so cannot be understood of the light infused by regeneration , or restored by raising from the dead , but communicated by creation , and notes the natural light of reason and understanding wherewith christ inlightens every man which cometh into the world , verse 9. of which more may be seen in my book of the true old light exalted , serm. 1. on joh. 1. 9. nor is it to the contrary , that ver . 5. it is said , and the light shineth in the darkness , and the darkness comprehended it not : for taking the shining by enallage of tense ( as it must be , whether it be meant of shining by creation or preaching ) for the time past , and the sense be , and the light shined in the darkness ; it may be meant of the beginning of the creation allusively to gen. 1. 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5. and in the sense of the apostle , 2 cor. 4. 6. god spake , to wit , by the word , that the light should shine out of darkness , and the darkness did not comprehend it ; or if the sense be , christ the true light when he came into the world , shined among dark men , and they did not comprehend him , or his doctrine which he taught ; it proves not that verse 4. is not meant of christs life by nature , and his life being the light of men , by creation of them with understanding in the beginning . for as ver . 9 , 10 , 11. the stupidity and perversness of men is shewed , that notwithstanding christ made the world , and enlightens all men , yet when he was in the world , and preached to them , they knew not , nor received him ; so in like manner , v. 4. 5. to the same purpose with good congruity of sense and reason the evangelist , to shew the great alienation of men from their creatour , saith , that though in the word was life in the beginning , and his life was the cause of mens natural light in the creation of adam , and eve the mother of all living , yet when he the true light shined by his preaching among men , who were by sin and ignorance in darkness , and the shadow of death , the dark spirits of men did not comprehend , understand , and receive him and his doctrine . 8. that flesh is as much as a man simply as man , is obvious out of many passages in holy scripture , and particularly , john 17. 2 , &c. and that it notes christs humane nature or humane body as such is manifest from john 6. 51 , 52 , 53 , 54 , 55 , 56 , &c. and that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is to be rendred was made , as john 1. 3 , 10. and the sense , as in rom. 1. 3. gal. 4. 4. heb. 2. 14. and such places , is , that he was incarnate or made a man , and that this was a voluntary act in taking a humane nature , not a part of his sufferings is manifest from what is added , he was made flesh , and dwelt among us , which notes an act of his will or choice , and imports his assumption of a humane body , that it might be an everlasting habitation for his divine majesty , and therein converse with man ; and that he was made flesh , not under the notion of weakness but humane nature , is evident from the words following , and we beheld his glory , the glory as of the only begotten of the father , which shews that in his flesh , which he was made , his glory , that is , his divine majesty was beheld in the great works he did in his humane body , and that he dwelt in or among us , full of grace & truth ; which shew [ that he was made flesh ] notes not his weakness but humane nature having power and excellency . adde hereto that the being of the word was expressed before , john 1. 2 , 3 , 4 , 9 , 10. by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he was , therefore 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , verse 14. must be meant of his being made a man besides his being the word . and to say the word , who was a man , was a man ; had been to trifle , to say nothing but what might be said of every man ; yea , and that which was discernable by sense , and so needless to be testified by john , who intended to express divine mysteries concerning christ in things that were singular and excellent , and could be known but by revelation from god : and this reason overthrows this sense , the word that is the interpreter of gods will , was flesh , that is , a man of infirmities ; for then no more had been said of him , than might have been said of john baptist , and other prophets ; the sense then must be this and no other , the word which was in the beginning , was with god , was god , by whom all things were made , and without whom nothing was made that was made , in whom was life , and the life was the light of men , enlightning every man that someth into the world , by whom the world was made , was in the fulness of time made a man in a humane body having his divine majesty dwelling in him full of grace and truth , so that we beheld his glory in his miracles , his grace and truth in his holy and wise doctrine such as manifested him to be the only begotten of the father . 9. the terms , john 1. 15. the only begotten of the father , verse 18. the only begotten which is in the bosom of the father , must be understood of generation , before the world was made , of the substance of the father . for the term notes generation , and so subsistence from his substance , not creation out of nothing , or created matter as adam , nor can he be said to be the only begotten son of the father , from his peculiar forming as man , expressed luke 1. 35. for adam who was formed without the help of man , and called the son of god , luke 3. 38. was so , as much the only begotten son of god , as the word , or jesus christ. nor is he said to be the only begotten of the father by reason of his peculiar love : for the peculiar love is from his peculiar sonship , not that the form or cause of it : nor is he said to be the son of god by regeneration , as they that believe in christ are the sons of god , john 1. 13. for so many are sons of god ; nor from his peculiar mission , resurrection or exaltation . for though these proved him the only begotten of the father as evidences thereof , yet not as causes of his son-ship . but he is intituled the only begotten son of the father from his proper generation and sonship , whence he is stiled his son , rom. 8. 3. his own proper son , verse 32. not adopted but natural , otherwise adam might be from his original as well stiled his own proper son. that christ jesus is in respect of his natural generation , before the world was , the only begotten son of god may be evinced , 1. from mat. 16. 13 , 16 , 17. christ asking , whom do men say that i the son of man am , it being answered , verse 14. some say john the baptist , others elias , others jeremias , or one of the prophets ; our lord christ further presseth them to tell him , whom they said him to be , verse 15. plainly intimating , that these opinions of him were short of what they were to esteem him , whereupon simon peter answered and said , verse 16. thou art the christ the son of the living god , to whom christ replies , verse 17. blessed art thou simon bar-jona , for flesh and blood hath not revealed it to thee , but my father which is in the heavens . which plainly shews , 1. that the confessing him to be the son of god , was more than to be the son of man , john baptist , elias , jeremiah or one of the prophets . 2. that this being the son of god , was such a thing as was not to be revealed by flesh and blood , but by his father in heaven , therefore it was not his being gods son , by the supernatural conception of the blessed virgin , for that she could tell , both by her own knowledge of her virginity , and the angels revelation ; nor by special mission , for that had been , but as one of the prophets , as moses , and had been discernable by flesh and blood upon the sight of his great works , to which he often appealed , as demonstrating him to be sent of his father as the messiah , john 14. 10 , 11. nor as mediatour only ; for then there had been no more acknowledged by peters confessing him to be the son of the living god , than by confessing him to be the christ , therefore he was the son of the living god by generation of his fathers substance before the world was , which his father onely could reveal . 2. this is further proved from these texts of scripture which make it the demonstration of the greatest love of god in giving his only begotten son , john 3. 16. not sparing his own son , but giving him up for us all , rom. 8. 32. but this had not been such a commendation of his love , if christ had been only a supernaturally conceived man specially commissionated as mediatour , if he had not been the son of god by generation before the world was , of his fathers substance , it had not been more than the not sparing holy angels but giving them for us ; therefore he must be the son of god , by such generation of the fathers substance , as he had before the world was . 3. heb. 3. 4 , 5 , 6. our lord christ is preferred before moses , as being a son over his own house , and this house built by himself , who built all things , and therefore god , whereas moses was but faithful as a servant in gods house , not his ow● , therefore christ is the son of god , as he is god with his father , building or framing all things , and consequently the son of god by generation of his fathers substance , before the world was . 4. it is said heb. 5. 8. though he were a son , yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered , which shewed a singular demission of himself in his obedience ; but if he had been only a son by creation as the angels , or as a meer man , by supernatural conception in the virgins womb , there had been ▪ no such demission of himself by agreement or accord as here , and heb. 10. 7. is set forth ; his subjection had not been free but necessary as being gods creature , if he had not been the son of god by natural generation of his substance before the world was . if he had been the son of god , only as sent by god , to be mediatour , there had been a tautology , to say , although he was sent by god to be me●ia●our , yet he did obey as mediatour , and being consecrated or perfected became authour of salvation to them that obey him ; which is as if he had said , though he were mediatour , yet he was mediatour , which had been ●ugatory . as for that which is chiefly objected , that the reason of this title [ the son of god ] given to christ is from the peculiar generation he had by the operation of the holy ghost : besides that which is already said , that such a forming was of adam at first , who was not the son of god in that singular manner that christ was , and if there were no other reason of his being the son of god , but this , he should be termed peculiarly the son of the spirit , whereas he is stiled the only begotten of the father , it is said , that holy thing which shall be born of thee , intimates that what should be born of her was holy , and had being before that birth of the virgin , and that his being called the son of god , was not for that as the cause , at least not the sole cause , and that his being called the son of god , was a consequent of being that holy thing , god with us , as it is mat. 1. 23. the other texts , john 10. 36. acts 13. 33. heb. 5. 5. &c. do only prove , that his singular mission , resurrection , and priest-hood demonstrated him to be the son of god , not made him such ; for then he had not been the son of god before these , whereas the angels words shew , luke 1. 35. and the adversaries yeild , he was the son of god from his generation and birth of the blessed virgin . 10. it is true the speech john 1. 15 , 27 , 30. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being translated , is prefered before me , may be well conceived to be the same , or to answer to that which is mat. 3. 11. mark 1. 7. euke 3. 16. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , is stronger than i , or is more prevalent , or more powerful than i : but the words , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , for he was before me , must note priority of time : for 1. the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was , notes his actual existence , what he was in being , not what he was to be in gods intention . 2. though 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 first , note not only priority of order , but also of rule and power , and is sometimes as much as the chief , yet it cannot be so meant , john 1. 15 , 27 , 30. for 1. that was before expressed by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , rendred well , was preferred before me , noting chiefdom , preheminence or power , and therefore must note something distinct from it , otherwise it would be a tri●ling tautology , and therefore it must be understood of priority of essence , in duration and excellency of being before him , which alone may well be conceived as the cause of his praelation . 2. if christ had not being before john baptist , it could not be well said as it is , v. 16. by him including himself , and of his fulness we all have received , and grace for grace , sith john had his being as man before christ , and was filled with the holy ghost from his mothers womb , luke . 1. 15. sect . 7. christs generation before the world was , is proved from john. 8. 58. christs being the son of god afore his incarnation is proved from his words , john 8. 58. verily , verily i say unto you , before abraham was i am . the occasion of which words was from that which our lord christ in the temple , spake to the jews , ver . 51. verily , verily , i say unto you , if a man keep my saying he shall never see death : which the jews conceived so notorious an untruth , that they inferred he must be possessed by the devil , sith abraham , was dead , and other holy men . to which our lord christ replied , that he honoured , not himself , but his father honoured him , that abraham rejoyced to see his day and saw it and was glad , which did intimate that he had seen abraham , and abraham him , else how could he say , he rejoyced to see his day and saw it , and was glad ? this was accounted by the jews for a greater untruth , so that they reply to him , thou art not yet fifty years old , and hast thou seen abraham , dead near two thousand years before ? to whom christ returns this constant asseveration no whit revoking or mincing his former speech , verily , verily , i say unto you , before abraham was , i am ; which both the occasion , the manner of expression , and the words plainly shew to have this sense , before abraham was a man in rerum naturâ , before abraham was conceived in the womb , or born , i am , that is , have and had a being ; which can be understood of no other than his divine nature , far exceeding the time of abraham's being ; which the jews conceived , he meant as they did , when he said , john 5. 17. my father worketh hitherto and i work ; that he said also that god was his father , making himself equal with god , ver . 18. and when he said john 10. 30. i and my father are one , that being a man he made himself god , ver . 33. which they accounted blasphemy , and would have stoned him for these sayings : yet did not christ revoke his speech , but hid himself , and after went out of the temple , going through the midst of them , and so passed by , verse 59. and therefore his words have this assertion , that he had a being before abraham , which can be no other than his divine nature by generation , of the substance of his father before the world was . the exceptions against this inference , are 1. that it should be read , being in the aorist . before abraham , is to be , or shall be , or is made abraham , that is , the father of many nations by the calling and graffing in the gentiles , into the true olive : i am as it is ver . 12. the light of the world , or the messiah ; as when he said , verse 24. if ye believe not that i am , that is , the messiah , ye shall dye in your sins ; and verse 28. when ye have lift up the son of man ye shall know that i am , that is , the messiah . 2. that jesus was before abraham by divine constitution , which grotius annot . on john 8. 58. makes the sense as john 17. 5. apocal. 13. 8. 1. pet. 1. 20. and dr. hammond in his paraphrase of john 8. 58. thus expounds it : jesus answered that objection of theirs ; you are much mistaken in my age . for 1. i have a being from all eternity , and so before abraham was born , and therefore as young as you take me to be , in respect of my age here , i may well have seen and known abraham . but then 2. in respect of my present appearance here on earth , though that be but a little above thirty years duration , yet long before abraham ' s time , it was decreed by my father , and in kindness to abraham revealed to him , while he lived ; in which respect it is true that he knew me also . to which i reply . 1. that the words either way expounded had been impertinent , as not answering the objection , verse 57. of christs age not exceeding fifty , and therefore he could not see abraham ; for his being a man before the gentiles were called , gods constitution and decree , and the revelation of it to abraham , that in his seed all the nations of the earth should be blessed , was altogether besides the thing christ was to do , to wit , the verifying of this , that he had seen abraham , abraham being a person , not signifying any where the calling of the gentiles , and christs seeing him , an action , which presupposeth an existent substance , in which it must be . and therefore if christs words had imported no more than this , that before the gentiles should be called , christ was the messiah , or god had decreed and revealed his being the messiah to abraham , christs speech might have been false , that he had seen abraham : yea , it had been nugatory , for christ had said no more of himself than might be said by any of the jews , that he was in gods decree before the calling of the gentiles ; and it had been also false , that before abraham was father of many nations , christ had a being , or was the light of the world , if he had no being afore his incarnation , sith abraham was father of many nations , israelites , ishmaeli●es , edomites , and in some sort a spiritual father of many nations , by the adjoyning themselves to the people of the god of abraham , psal. 47. 8 , 9. afore christ was born . and it had been delusory , and aenigmatical to understand the words before abraham's being of the future time , when the objection was of his being long before ; and to make the answer to be of abraham under a spiritual consideration , when the objection was of him as the natural progenitour of the jews , and of christ in respect of his office or imployment , when the objection was of his natural duration , which had been contrary to christs manner of teaching , averring and vindicating his speeches : for though sometimes he answer obliquely , and teach by consequences , leaving his auditors to consider his words , yet still his replies are solid , pertinent and convincing . and though the exposition of some of them have no small difficulty , yet his speeches are not in such an aenigmatical and dark manner as this , by allusion to the etymology or derivation of a name , when other expressions were obvious : besides , if christ did at any time use such dark expressions or manner of answering , yet he cannot be conceived rightly to have done so in this answer , in which his preface , verily , verily i say unto you , shews his answer to have been direct and plain , and was taken by the jews in the sense importing his priority of being , which christ gainsaid not , and all interpreters till this last age , have so expounded them . 2. the words cannot by any instance of the like use of them be shewed to have the sense put on them . for however the aorist may signifie the future time , yet as the occasion , so also christ's averring his own being , antecedent to abraham's , shews it must be understood here of the time past , and be read before abraham was , not abraham shall be . and if he had alluded to abrahams name changed , he should have said , before abraham , shall be abraham : and the objection being about christs age , and so the impossibility of his seeing abraham , the answer is an assertion of his existence , without any thing added : it is granted , that the words , verse 24 , 28. need a supply , yet neither there , nor ver . 58. can the supplement be conceived to be taken from , vers . 12. so as that the meaning should be , unless ye believe that i am the light of the world , ye shall know that i am the light of the world ; before abraham was , i am the light of the world . for the words , v. 20. do shew that the speech he made before was interrupted , and he began a new conference with them , verse 21. and therefore the supplement to be added , v. 24 , 28. is more likely to be from verse 23. unless ye believe that i am from above , ye shall know that i am from above , in which verses the particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that shews it to be an object of faith , which requires something to be known and believed besides his being , which was obvious to their senses ; but ver . 58. the particle is not , nor any thing required of them ; but there 's a plain and direct assertion of his being without any other supplement ; nor is there any difficulty in expounding i am , by i was , the present tense being like manner used for the time past , john 6. 24. and 14. 9. and 15. 27. and , as grotius well observes , there is the like expression in the greek , psal. 90. 2. before the mountains were brought forth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 thou art , that is , thou wast , noting time past continued , and therefore by the syriack interpreter , and no●●us his paraphrase , rightly it is rendered john 8. 58. before abraham was born i was ; nor is it unlikely that he used this expression in the sense in which it is said by god , isa. 43. 10. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i am he , to which john 13. 19. is consonant : the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is neither joh. 17. 5. nor revel . 13. 8. and that neither are understood of gods decre● , is shewed in the next section , vide plac. disp . 11. § . 21. &c. sect . 8. christs being before the world was , is proved from john 17. 5. to these passages in the gospel of st. john for confirmation of the same thing , i shall adde the words of christ in his prayer to his father , john 17. 5. and now , o father , glorifie thou me with thine own self , with the glory which i had before the world was with thee ; which words do evince , that christ had glory with his father before the world was , which is the description of eternity , psal. 90. 2. prov. 8. 23 , 25. whence it follows , that before the world was , christ had a being in glory with his father , which could be no other than his divine nature , as he was son of god , and therefore is to be acknowledged to be begotten of the substance of the father before the world was . to this it is answered , that the glory here is not divine majesty , but glory of immortality and honour to him as man , such glory as was given to him , verse 24. and which he saith he had given to his disciples , ver . 22. as it is said , 2 tim. 1. 9. that god had saved them , and called them with an holy calling , not according to their works , but according to his own purpose and grace , which was given them in christ jesus , before the world began ; to wit in gods predestination . and in the same respect the apostle saith , 2 cor. 5. 1. we have a building of god , an house not made with hands eternal in the heavens , heb. 10. 34. that they had in heaven a better and enduring substance , in the sense in which christ is said to be fore-ordained before the foundation of the world , 1 pet. 1. 20. to be the lamb s●ain from the beginning of the world ; so believers are said to have everlasting life , john 3. 36. & 5. 24. 1 john 5. 12 , 13. not in possession but predestination . to which i reply that it is somewhat difficult to explain what the glory is with which christ prayes his father to glorifie him , and how he would have him glorifie him , by reason of the various meanings of the term glory and waies of gods glorifying . the petition implies it was such glory as he had before the world was , now had not : this may be best understood by considering how he had it with the father before the world was ? two waies are conceived , one by actual possession , the other by predestination or fore-ordaining : for the former , and against the latter are these reasons . 1. from the tense , [ which i had ] in the preterimperfect tense , which if meant of having in purpose only it should be , which i have with thee , sith gods purpose or fore-appointment was still the same . 2. which reason is strengthened from the time , now glorifie me , which intimates he had it not then ; but he was then glorified in purpose . 3. before the world was , which shews when he had it , and how he would have it again , but he doth not petition to have it again only in purpose , but in actual possession . 4. he desires that he may have that glory with his father 's own self . which he had with him : now with his father 's own self , in the one part must be meant of his presence , and that in heaven , as when it is said , 1 john 2. 1. we have an advocate with the father , that is , in his presence in heaven , therefore also in the other part , with thee , cannot be meant , in thy purpose , but in thy presence in heaven . 5. christ had the glory with his father before the world was in a peculiar manner , such ●s none of the elect have , with such love before the foundation of the world , as was singular , verse 24. but , if it were no more than in purpose had by him , it was no otherwise , then all the elect had it before the world was , therefore he had it in actual possession with peculiar imbracing and delight , as john 1. 18. and 3. 35. prov. 8. 30. 6. there is no place of scripture , wherein such an expression of our having , as here , is meant of having only by gods purpose for the future in predestination . the giving , john 17. 24. is not to be understood of an intention for the future , but a present actual collation . the giving , 2 tim. 1. 9. of grace is not meant of gods purpose but donation according to his purpose , which donation was by grant , or promise as it is expressed , tit. 1. 2. where and 2 tim. 1. 9. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not well rendered before the world began , but before the times of ages , noting the times of the ages following the creation , and should be so rendered , rom. 16. 25. as the parallel places , ephes. 3. 9. col. 1. 26. do shew , and so the giving of the grace , 2 tim. 1. 9. is most likely meant of the promise made , gen. 3. 15. as dr. twisse conceives vindic. grat . l. 1. part . 1. sect . 4. digress . 2. c. 5. however though the grace of god might be said to be given in gods purpose , yet not christ be said to have had glory in gods purpose , because giving notes only the act of the donor , but having the act of the possessour , 2 cor. 5. 1. the having a building not made with hands , cannot be meant of having in gods purpose , for it is consequent on the dissolving of the earthly house of this tabernacle , to which , having in gods purpose is antecedent , and therefore notes actual possession , the present tense being put for the future , as grotius rightly notes , heb. 10. 34. the having , cannot be meant of having in god's purpose , it being having in your selves , or your selves , and therefore must be understood of possession for the future , by the same enallage , or of right , or assurance for the present , or of present possession , though not full possession , john 3. 36. & 5. 24. 1 john 5. 12 , 13. believers are said to have eternal life , not by predestination only , afore the person is in being , but by real actual possession , inchoate and continued , though not consummate , as appears by the expressions iohn 5. 24. and cometh not into condemnation , but is passed from death into life , 1 john 3. 14. we know that we have passed from death to life , opposite to verse 15. we know that no murderer hath eternal life abiding in him , and john 3. 36. shall not see life , but the wrath of god abideth on him , 1 pet. 1. 20. shews not what christ had , but how he was fore-known , revel . 13. 8. from the beginning of the world may as well or better be joyned to written as it is revel . 21. 27. than to s●ain , iohn 17. 24. doth not prove , that christ had the glory mentioned , verse 5. only in purpose before the foundation of the world , but rather the contrary . for the love there is a love not onely of benevolence , but also of complacency and delight , as iohn 1. 18. and 3. 35. prov. 8. 30. and so supposeth his being before the world was , and the possession of his glory , which he now desires to repossess ; which cannot be his divine essence , for that he was never emptied of , nor his humane excellency , for that he had not in being before the world was ; but the state and condition of a son , of which he emptied himself , taking the form of a servant , phil. 2. 7. that riches which he had before he became poor for our sake , 2 cor. 8. 9. which was not the relation of sonship to god , for that he still had in his lowest debasement , but the enjoyment of the pleasure he had with his father in his presence , which was in some sort with-held from his person while he was on earth , and the exercise of command and empire over angels afore the world was compleated ( if the angels were created in any of the former daies of the first creation ) and which he now laid aside , and was to pray to his father for the angels ministry ; either of which , or any other ( which we know not of ) communicable in its proportion to our condition with him , according to the words , iohn 17. 22 , may be the glory which he prayes for , iohn 17. 5. to repossesse , and enjoy with his father after the finishing of the work he gave him to do on earth , verse 4. into which he came to glorifie his father , humbling himself therein really , and therefore would be really re-glorified with his father 's own self ; and not only in manifestation to men , as he had it really with him before the world was . sect . 9. col. 1. 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17. is urged to prove the god-head of christ. to those foregoing texts in the gospel of st. iohn , i shall next adjoyn the words of the apostle paul , colos. 1. 12 , 13 , 14. 15 , 16 , 17. where he mentions his thanksgiving to the father , who had translated the colossians into the kingdom of his dear son , or of his love , who is the image of the invisible god , the first-born of every creature . for in or 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 , and he is before all things , and by him all things consist . whence i thus argue : he who is the son of the fathers love , the image of the invisible god , the first-born of every creature , in or by whom all things were created that are in heaven , and that are in earth visible and invisible , whether they be thrones or dominions , or principalities or powers , by whom , and for whom all things were created , who is before all things , and by whom all things consist , was before any creature , was made , begotten of the substance of his father , not made of nothing ; very god of very god , of the same substance with the father , by whom all things were made . but such was jesus christ : therefore , &c. the minor is the express words of the text : but the major proposition is denied : and for a reason of the denial , it is said ; 1. that he is termed the image of the invisible god , not as a child that is begotten by natural generation is the substantial image of his father of the same substance ; but as he resembles god in his wisdom and power , and excellent holiness of life ; wonderful revelation of the mysteries of his counsel , and the great works he did , as the man , in respect of his superiority and authority over the woman , is said to be the image and glory of god , 1 cor. 11. 7. or as dr. hammond's paraphrase is , in whom god who is invisible is to be seen , and his will clearly declared by the gospel ( so that ●e that seeth him , seeth the father , joh. 14. 9. ) which is confirmed by the words following , ver . 10 , 11. believest thou not that i am in the father , and the father in me ? the words that i speak unto you , i speak not of my self , but the father that dwelleth in me , he doth the works : believe me that i am in the father , and the father in me ; or else believe me for the very works sake : which words make christ to be in the father , and the father in him , whereby the father is to be seen , and so he is his image , in his words and works . conformable to the same sense are the words of christ , iohn 5. 19 , 20 , 30 , &c. 2. that he is termed the first-born of every creature , and therefore is of the rank of creatures , as the first-born is taken , heb. 11. 28. as man , the first-born among many brethren , rom. 8. 29. or as it is rev. 1. 5. the first-born from the dead , and the prince of the kings of the earth . the first ( saith grotius annot . on the place ) in the creation , to wit , the new , of which , 2 cor. 5. 17. rev. 21. 5. heb. 2. 5. more amply dr. hammond in his annot . on col. 1. 15. saith thus : the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , beside the ordinary notion of first-born ( which cannot so well here refer to christs eternal generation , because of that which is added to it , the first-born of every greature , which only gives him a precedence before all other creatures , and doth not attribute eternity to him ) is used sometimes for a lord , or person in power , who hath the priviledge of the first-born , dominion over all his brethren , and according to this notion ' ●is used commonly in scripture , for a prince , or principal person , so psal. 89. 27. david is called the first-born of the kings of the earth , i. e. the most glorious among them ; and job 18. 13. we have the first-born of death . and so among the civilians , haeres , heir , signifies dominus , lord , justinian instit. l. 2. tit . 19. de hae●●d . qualit . & diffe . § . ult . and thus may it fitly be a title of christ in●arnate , in respect of his power over his church , the key of the house of david is laid upon him : but it is possible it may peculiarly refer to his resurrection , in which he was the first-born from the dead , verse 18. the first which from the grave was raised and exalted to heaven , and being so risen , all power was given unto him , in heaven and in earth . 3. that thrones and dominions , principalities and powers , th●ngs visible and invisible , in heaven and earth ; all things may be meant of jews and gentiles : these several titles here rehearsed , saith dr. hammond annot. on col. 1. 16. may possibly be no more but the expressions of several degrees of dignity among men ; so thrones may denote kings , or monarchs and princes , dominions ( or lordships ) may be the reguli , the honours ( whether of dukes or earls ) next under princes ; principalities , the praefects of provinces and cities ; and powers , inferiour magistrates ; and if so , then may they be here set down to denote all sorts and conditions of men in the gentile world , by the chief dignities among them here on earth . and annot. on col. 1. 20. and in the like phrase verse 16. all things that are in the heavens , and on the earth , shall signifie no more than what is in other places expressed by the world , as 2 cor. 5. 19. the creation , the whole creation , or all creatures , the whole world of creation , or the whole world without restriction , which signifie all the gentile world in opposition to the jewish enclosure ; not all the creatures absolutely , but all men of all nations . 4. that verse 16. is to be understood of the new creation mentioned , 2 cor. 5. 17. ephes. 2. 10 , 13. and 3. 9. and 4. 24. jam. 1. 18. the things which go before , saith grotius annot. ad col. 1. 16. shew these things meant of christ , which is the name of a man ; more rightly is [ were created ] here interpreted were ordained , go● a certain new state ; angels to men , men among themselves were reconciled under christ ; others that angels were reformed as being brought to a new state of acknowledging the lord jesus christ as their lord , and acting at his beck as being gods instrument for the bringing of that reformation to pass , and therefore it is said they were all created in him and by him , as the mediate cause . 5. that christ is said to be before all things , is meant of the new creation , and that in respect of dignity , not of time. 6. that in him all the new creation consists , or are reformed . sect . 10. the proof of christs god-head from col. 1. 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17. is vindicated from exceptions . 1. i reply , it is true that in respect of other resemblances than of his father's person according to his d●vine nature christ might be termed the image of the invisible god , yet in this place he is not said to be the image of the invisible god in respect of his office as declaring his counsel , or representing his power and holy qualities by his conversation and works ; but as adam's son is said to be begotten in his own likeness after his image , gen. 5. 3. may be proved by these reasons . 1. because his being the image of god is an●ecedent to the creation ; verse 16. therefore he was the image of the invisible ▪ god before it , and consequently , in respect of his divine nature . 2. what christ was to his church is expressed after ver . 18 , 19 20. therefore v. 15. 16 , 17. what he was and did in respect of his divine nature , it being not to be conceived that he would repeat that ver . 18 , 19 , 20. which he had said before , ver . 15 , 16 , 17. 3. an embassadour , though he represents his princes counsels , yet is not said to be his image , an image being a resemblance of a person , not of his counsels . 4. it is not said , that christ was the image of the invisible god to us , but is the image of the invisible god absolutely and simply even then when he was not on earth to declare gods will , and therefore shews what he is in himself throughout all generations . no● is it of any force which is urged : that because he is said to be the image of the invisible god , therefore he must be a visible image ; fo● man that was made after the image of the invisible god , and is renewed after his image , as ephes. 4. 24. col. 3 , 10. is not after gods image in respect of any visible resemblance , but in respect of wisdom , holiness and righteousness of truth , which are invisible qualities . 2. if the reading which isidor pelusiota insists on epist. l. 3 , epist. 31. be right , that it should be read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the first bringer forth of every creature , not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the first-born of every creature , which may seem probable , because it is said verse 16. for by him were all things created , and so it should note not passively his birth , but actively his causality , in which he is said to be the beginning of the creation of god , rev. 3. 14. where 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 princip●um , or the beginning notes not termination of time , or initiation , but signifies ●fficiency ; as when we say from the latins , the principle of a thing . as col. 1. 18. the word is used ( of which more may be seen in sixtin●s amama antibarb . biblic . l. 3. ) the answer were easie , that though he be said to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 yet he is not in the rank of creatures , which the arians did object from this place . but however erasmus like it , yet beza rejects it , for reasons set down by him , annot. ad col. 1. 15. which though they be not all allowed by heinsius exercit. sacr . l. 12. c. 1. yet the reading not agreeing with most copies , nor necessary , that answer is not to be insisted on . that other sense which beza and others embrace , [ he is said to be the first-born of every creature ; that is , he that was born before any creature , conceiving in answer to the hebrew verb , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , it may be as well applied to the fathers generation as the mothers bearing , and so it be all one , as the begotten before all th● creatures ] would pass for current , if there were an example of so using the word as including the preposition governing the genitive case , and referring to the fathers act of generation : in which methinks there should not be much difficulty , sith james ▪ 1. 18. the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which we render hath begotten , and is the act of the father of lights , verse 17. and so notes the fathers act of generation usually , and most properly signifies the act of the mother bringing forth , who is said therefore to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , luke 2. 5. when she is great with child , and is used james 1. 15. as of the same sense with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , bringeth forth and so rendered . and when christ is said , col. 1. 18. to be the first-born from the dead , or revel . 1. 5. the first-begotten of , or from the dead , the act of the father in raising him from the dead is implied , to which his resurrection is ascribed , acts 2. 30 , 32. and 3. 15. and 4. 10. and 5. 30. and 10. 40. rom. 6. 4. 1 cor. 6. 14. ephes. 1. 20. gal. 1. 1. and herein st. paul doth in some sort place his ●egetting of christ , when he said , acts. 13. 32 , 33. god hath fulfilled the promise made unto the fathers unto us their children , in that he hath raised up jesus again ; as it is also written in the second psalm , thou ar● my son , this day have i begotten thee . and although the preposition from , be in those places because of the change or translation from the dead , yet the term first noting priority must needs include also the preposition before , as it doth manifestly , john 1. 15. so that it is easie to conceive this to be the meaning , he was the first begotten before all the creation , or every creature , and therefore the image of the invisible god , and he by whom , and for whom all things were created ; which cannot be meant of his rising from the dead , sith that is mentioned ver . 18. and this title is put before his creating of all things , ver . 16. and as the reason of it : but must be meant of his generation before all times out of the substance of the father , by which eternity is given to him , the precedency in being before all the creation , being in scripture language all one with eternity . and so christ will not be put in the rank of creatures made out of nothing , but the word is to be taken negatively , as the word first applied to god , revel . 1. 11. which is expounded , isa. 44. 6. i am the first , and i am the last , and besides me there is no god , or isa. 43. 10. before me there was no god formed , neither shall there be after me . and when the law appointed the first-born male to be gods , exod. 13. 2. numb . 8. 16. by the first-born was understood that which opened the womb though no other were born after , as the mother of christ understood the law , luke 2. 22 , 23. who is called her first-born , notwithstanding she had-no other , mat. 1. 25. but if this exposition of the title [ the first born of every creature ] be not received , but that it note only christs dominion or inheritance of every creature , yet will this sense prove his generation before all creatures , and his being exempt from the rank of creatures , sith the reason of his being the first-born of every creature , and so lord or heir of them , is ver . 16. because by him and for him they were all created , which must needs prove that he is not one of the creatures , sith he created all things , therefore not himself created , and he must needs have a being before every creature by whom , all were created , and confequently was begotten before all time . nor can this title be applied to christ as man or incarnate as if it , noted that he was first in the new creation or ▪ in respect of his power over his church : for ▪ john baptist , luke 1. 15. was before him in the new creation in time , and it is no● said he was designed or appointed to be the first-born of every creature , but that he is the first-born , not made the first-born of them , but he by whom all were created ; nor can the church peculiarly be meant by every creature , or the new creation , sith it is not said of the creation , or of the new creation , but of every creature , even those that are invisible , as verse 16. shews ; and therefore he cannot be said to be the first-born of every creature as the first-born of man is , because the angels are some of the creatures , verse 16. but not of the same kind with man. 3. that by thrones , and dominions , and principalities and powers , verse 16. are not meant several degrees of dignity among men , and no more , may appear , not only as dr. hammond saith , because they may also signifie the several degrees of angels , and because there follows mention of visible and invisible , and the angels may most probably be contained by the latter of them , as this lower world of men by the former , and because it is the creation that is here referred t● , and the creating of angels as well as men , &c. belongs truely to christ as god , therefore it will be most reasonable in this place to interpret it in the greater extent to comprehend angels and men too , the highest and most eminent of both sorts : but also because it is necessary for these reasons . 1. because these terms do elsewhere signifie in the same apostles writings , invisible beings , powers of the world to come , ephes. 1. 21. principal●ties and powers in heavenly places , ephes. 3. 10. spiritual beings in high or heavenly places , opposed to flesh and blood , ephes. 6. 12. angels , principalities and powers , are reckoned among the most potent beings of most force to separate us from the love of god , rom. 8. 38. angels , and authorities and powers are said to be subject to christ now on the right-hand of god , 1 pet. 3. 22. nor can the spoiling of principalities and powers be understood otherwise than as dr. hammond's own paraphrase of col. 2. 15. explains it , of devesting the evil spirits of their power , grotius annot. ad eph. 1. 21. intelligunt quidam de imperiis terrenis . sed locus col. 1. 16. & quod in his infra est , 3. 10. evincit agi hic de eximiis angelorum clasibus . similis ordinum distinctio etiam in satanae regn● infra , 6. 12. 1 cor. 15. 24. rom. 8. 38. 2. if by them angels were not meant , there should be no invisible beings said to be created , col. 1. 16. whereas the distributive particle [ whether ] is put next after invisible , to shew the thrones , dominions , principalities , powers to be invisible beings . 3. several degrees of dignity and rule among men , neither in this epistle , nor elsewhere , are said to be things in heaven , or invisible . 4. angels may be said to be reconciled , col. 1. 20. and gathered together into one with the church , ephes. 1. 10. christs blood reconciling the gentiles to god by expiating their idolatry , and so reducing them to god , and thereby to the good angels , who rejoyce at their conversion , luke 15. 7 , 10 , observe their order in their church meetings , 1 cor. 11. 10. are their angels , mat. 18. 10. but it could not be said in s. paul's time , when he wrote to the colossians , that the rulers on earth were created by , and for christ , that is , reformed and made new creatures in christ , they were not brought to the obedience of the gospel by christ , but were enemies to it , acts 4. 27. 1 cor. 1. 26. james 2. 6 , 7 ▪ nor were they ordered by christ according to the meaning of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by us translated ordinance , heb. 9. 11. 1 pet. 2. 13. that is , constituted or appointed by christ as mediatour in order to his church for their help , in st. paul's time ; and therefore cannot be said to be created in the sense some would expound creation , col. 1. 16. and meant by thrones , dominions , principalities and powers . 4. hence also may appear that no other sense but of the creation at first out of nothing , can be rightly meant by the creating , col. 1. 16. for the words are general , including all things simply , and that twice expressed , which shews it comprehends all things universally that were created ; and left any thing should be excepted , there 's a threefold division . 1. of things in heaven , and things on the earth . 2. of visible and invisible . 3. of the invisible thrones , dominions , principalities , and powers . of which principalities , the unclean spirits are a part , col. 2. 15. ephes. 6. 12. who cannot be said to be reformed , or constituted , or appointed by christ in the sense , in which creation is taken , either eph. 2. 10. jam. 1. 18. 〈◊〉 cor. 5. 17 , gal. 6. 15. or heb. 9. 11. 1 pet. 2. 13. in the good angels nothing was to be reformed , or new created ; in the evil nothing was , nor were they , o● other things constituted , or ordained by christ as man ; nor is it true , that all things in earth were reformed , or constituted for the church . and for the new creation , which consists in renovation of mind , it was done in many before christs incarnation , ezek. 36. 26. psal. 51. 12. and therefore that creation cannot be meant , when it is said , all things were created by jesus christ , by them who suppose him not to have been afore his incarnation . lastly , neither is there any place brought by them , by which it may be proved , that the work of creation absolutely put is meant of renovation , or reformation , meant by the new creation : nor do the particles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 translated by him , prove christ only a mediate or instrumental cause of the creation . for it is said of him , who is the principal cause , rom. 11. 36. all things are of him , and by him , and for him , as col. 1. 16. and therefore the particles note a principal concurrent or consociate cause : and the particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by or through is applied to god the father , gal. 1. 1. heb. 2. 10. and in is used as by , heb. 1. 1. and applied to god , acts 17. 28. yet it is not to be denied , that there is a priority in the father to the son in respect of being , not of time , but original , as bishop davenant saith , com. on col. 1. 15. christ hath principium originis , a beginning of original , to wit , his father from whom he was begotten , but not a beginning of time , or to use dr. pearsons words in his exposition of the first article of the creed , p. 36. of the second edition , the father hath that essence of himself , the son by communication from the father . from whence he acknowledgeth that he is from him , john 7. 29. that he liveth by him , john 6. 57. that the father gave him to have life in himself , and generally referreth all things as received from him ; so as that the father is by the antients termed the fountain , root , authour , origin , head , cause of the son and the whole divinity , p. 41. whence the son is termed in the nicene creed ; god of god , very god of very god , light of light , and this origination in the divine paternity , hath antiently been looked upon as the assertion of the unity : and therefore the son and holy ghost have been believed to be but one god with the father , because both from the father , who is one , and so the union of them . for if there were more than one , which were from none it could not be denied , but there were more gods than one , p. 44. and answerably here●o there is an order in the operations of the father and the son , so as that there is a priority , if not in some sense a majority in the father , whom some of the antients , cited by dr. pearson , p. 37. understand to be greater than christ as the son of god , john 14. 28. with reference not unto his essence , but his generation , by which he is understood to have his being from his father , who only hath it of himself , and is the original of all power and essence in the son , and consequently some preheminence in working ▪ whence christ saith , i can of mine own self do nothing ; the son can do nothing of himself , but what he seeth the father do : for what things soever he doth , these also doth the son likewise , which intimate a priority of order in the fathers operation , if not a dependance of the son on him therein . and so as mr. gataker in his advers . mis●el . c. 17. saith from col. 1. 16. christ both in making the world , as also in instructing his church is said to exhibit ministery to god the father , and the father by him to have performed and to perform both those things , heb. 1. 2. in which place he is said to have spoken to his people 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by his son , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by whom also he made the worlds . 5. christs priority in dignity is expressed before verse 15. where he is said to be the first-born of every creature , and in respect of the church , vers . 18. where he is termed the head of the body the church , that in a 〈…〉 things he might have the preheminence : therefore he is said to be before all things , ver . 17. in time , and that not only before angels , but all things created , it being 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the same latitude with all things , v. 16. and that not only in the new creation , for so he was not in time before david , psal. 51. 10. john baptist , who was filled with the holy ghost even from his mothers womb , luke 1. 15. but in respect of the first creation . 6. the consistence of all things by christ , is to be understood of all things created , ver . 16. and not only things belonging to the new creation , and of a consistence by sustaining and preserving all things simply by his power and providence , as it is said , 2 pet. 3. 〈◊〉 . by the word of god the heavens were of old , and the earth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 consisting , which is no where meant of evangelical reformation , but of powerful sustentation , as heb. 1. 2 , 3. to which i pass sect 11. heb. 1. 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , are urged to prove the assertion of christs god-head . the same articles of faith concerning christ are confirmed from heb. 1. where christ distinct from the prophets , is termed the son of god , whom he appointed heir of all things , by whom also he made the worlds , verse 1. 2. being the brightness of his glory , and the express image of his person , and upholding all things by the word of his power , verse 3. by so much being more excellent , or better than the angels , by how much he inherited a more excellent name than they , verse 4. of whom god said that which he said not of the angels , thou art my son , this day have i begotten thee ; and again , i will be to him a father , and he shalt be to me a son ; and again , when he bringeth in the first-begotten into the world , he saith , and let all the angels of god worship him , verse 5 , 6. unto the son , or of the son he saith , thy throne o god is for ever and ever : a scepter of righteousness is the scepter of thy kingdom , thou hast loved righteousness and hated iniquity ; therefore god even thy god hath annointed thee with the oyl of gladness above thy follows : and thou lord , in the beginnings hast laid the foundation of the earth ; and the heavens are the work of thy hands : they shall perish , but thou remainest , they all shall wax old as doth a garment , and as a vesture shalt thou sold them up , and they shall be changed , but thou art the same , and thy years shall not fail . but to which of the angels said he at any time , sit on my right hand , until i make thine enemies thy foot-stool ? verse 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13. whence i argue , he , of whom all these things are said , was before any creature was made , begotten of the substance of the father , not made of nothing , very god , of the same substance with the father , by whom all things were made : but of jesus christ all these things are said , therefore , &c. the minor proposition is the express words of the text , but the major is denied ; and as a reason of the denial , it is said . 1. that christ is said to be the son , the first-begotten , this day begotten in respect of his incarnation , resurrection , exaltation as before . 2. that he was the brightness of his glory , ray or beam of gods majesty , that in christ men might have a kind of sight of gods majesty , that he was the express image of his person in respect of his qualities resembling his father , the latter words interpreting the former . for god did as it were imprint his person on christ , that christ might be his substitute upon earth to personate , represen● and resemble the person of god ; to be in wisdom as god , by publishing the mysteries and secrets of god , and by knowing the thoughts of men , and discovering them ; to be in holiness as god without all stain of sin , to be in power as god , having dominion over all gods creatures , over winds , seas , devils . 3. that he was brought into the world , not as being before the world , but being in the world was sent as the great prophet of the church among men , or at his resurection he was raised from the dead , and brought into the world , or it is to be applied to his great exaltation at the last day , when he shall be brought into the world to come , as it is termed , heb. 2. 5. which refers to heb. 1. 6. and so without trajection the word [ again ] shall be read as it stands in the greek text , and the verb of the second aorist of [ bringing into ] be read as of the future time , not as the vulgar , beza , our translation , of the time past , and [ again ] noting another citation out of the psalms : and therefore mr. mede in his opus●ula latina in answer to ludovicus de dieu , would have our english version corrected thus [ and when he bringeth again the first-begotten into the world ] or shall bring , &c. for what things are from thence cited out of the book of psalms to the end of the chapter [ concerning the adoration of angels , the scepter of the rectitude of god , the changing the world , the treading of enemies under his feet ] all , if we believe the apostle , are to be referred to the second coming of christ. to which agree cameron resp . ad quaest . in heb. 1. 6. heinsius exercit . sac . l. 16. c. 1. dr. homes resur . revealed . l. 3. c. 2. &c. 4. that he inherited or possessed a more excellent name than the angels by grant from his father , being appointed heir of all things , not by vertue of his generation before the world , but because of his office , by reason of which the angels were to worship him , as peter did christ as man , luke 5. 8. and all the disciples , luke 24. 52. 5. that he was god by office , and not by nature ; as it appears in that god is said to be his god , he to be annointed by god with the oyl of gladness , and others his fellows , ver . 8 , 9. 6. grotius would have , ver . 2. read , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for whom , not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by whom ; but if it be to be read by whom , it is meant of the new world , not of the heavens and earth , or ages , or times of this world : and v. 10 , 11 , 12. are but accommodated to him in respect of his dissolving the world , and duration of his kingdom , not in respect of the eternity of his person , or operation in the first creation . 7. that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is translated upholding is to be translated ruling with the word , that is at the command of his father , mannaging all things as personating his father , and following his command . gr 〈…〉 in his annotation on the place , saith thus : the manuscripts in which those grammatical spirits are distinguished , have also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ( his , the fathers , not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 his own , as we read it ) and so reads cyril in his 8th . against julian ; the sense is , christ governs all things by the word of his fathers power ( that is command ) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is often to govern , and which chrysostom here adds , with some easiness . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 appears to be put for command , luke 5. 5. and heb. 11. 3. so also 1 kings 1. 27. more to the same purpose hath heinsius exercit. sacr . l. 16. c. 1. and dr. hammond in his annot . on heb. 1. 3. the hebrew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies two things , fero to bear , and rego to rule , and from the latter of them it is , that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is the ordinary word for a prince ; agreeably to this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ] which is sometimes the rendering of the hebrew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , as numb . 11. 14. deut. 1. 9. may accordingly signifie , to rule , to govern , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to administer , as a commander , or governour , or procurator of a province , and so 't is here taken , to denote the regal power of christ , to which he is advanced by his resurrection . 8. that verse 13. is spoken of christ as man exalted to sit on gods ●igh●-hand . sect . 12. the argument from heb. 1. 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13. is vindicated from exceptions . to the first i reply , that none of those reasons are sufficient to verifie the titles given to christ , rom. 8. 32. where he is termed gods own son 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 proper or peculiar to him . john 3. 16. his only begotten son , and here the son , verse 2. as is before shewed sect. in reply to the 9th . exception : by the same arguments the reasons also of the nameless authour of the commentary on the epistle to the hebrews , intituled the expiation of a sinner are shewed to be short of what the appellation of the first-born or first-begotten , heb. 1. 6. imports , whereof the first is , christ is the first-begotten son of god , because god begot him before all his other sons , who are called the brethren of christ ; for god first begot christ , in that manner wherein god is said to beget sons ; for those he begets whom he assimilates and makes like unto himself , and so christ was the first that was assimilated , or made like unto god in holiness ; in such holiness as he require in the new covenant . i reply . 1. this reason is given without proof , and if allusion be to rom. 8. 29. neither is it said there that christ is the first-born by reason of his assimilation to god in holiness before others , nor is the image of christ , to which others are conformed , expressed to be in qualities , it is more likely to be in estate and condition , to wit , of glory . 2. nor is it true , that christ in this respect is the first-begotten , john baptist was before him made like unto god in such holiness as he requires in the new covenant , he was great in the sight of the lord , and filled with the holy ghost , even from his mothers womb , luke 1. 15. that i omit to say any thing of abraham , david , mary , simeon , anna , &c. 2. secondly , saith he , christ is the first-begotten of god by his resurrection , because by the power of god he was raised and brought in again from death to an immortal life ; for which he is called the first begotten from the dead , and the first fruits of them that slept , 1 cor. 15. 20. i reply . 1. it is true , christ is said to ●e the first-born , or begotten from the dead , col. 1. 18. revel . 1. 5. but heb. 1. 6. he is termed the first-begotten simply without relation to the dead , and col. 1. 15. the first-born of every creature , and the reason thereof is , because all things were created by him , verse 16. 2. if this reason were sufficient , enoch might as well be termed the first-begotten , of whom the scripture saith , heb. 11. 5. by faith enoch was translated that he should not see death , and was not found , because god had translated him ; for before his translation he had this testimony that he pleased god. lastly , saith he , he is the first-begotten in all things , whereby the faithful of christ become the sons of god : for christ hath preceded them all , that ( as st. paul speaks ) he in all things might have the preheminence , col. 1. 18. i reply . 1. what those all things are , in which christ preceded all the faithful , whereby they become the sons of god , is not expressed , not do i think he can give an instance distinct from his holiness , and resurrection , except his preaching or fulness of the spirit ; wherein and in other things it is true , christ exceeded all the faithful of christ ; but no where is he said to be begotten , or the first-begotten by reason hereof , or any other thing besides his generation before the world : sure col. 1. 18. there is no such thing said ; though it be true that he is said to be the head of the body the church , who is the beginning , the first-born from the dead , that in all things , or among all he might have the preheminence ; yet not that therefore he is the first-begotten , but he is termed ver . 15. the first-born of every creature ; and the reason is given , ver . 16 , 17. because all things were created by him and for him , and he is before all things , and by him all things consist ; which she 〈…〉 s his generation before the creation , and so no time wherein he was not . the reasons of christs son-ship from the begetting him the day of his incarnation , luke 1. 32. his sanctification , john 10. 36. his resurrection , acts 13. 33. his having all power in heaven and earth given him , mat. 28. 18. his exaltation to be an immortal and universal potentate ; though they may be reasons of his appellation [ the son of god ] as shewing it , and being consequent on it , yet there is an higher reason shewed before , and confirmed from the titles given him , heb. 1. 3. 2. the term [ the brightness of glory ] doth not express what christ was to others as a looking-glass ; that had been better expressed by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , than 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , but what he was in himself , and from whom , to wit , his father , as the beam from the sun. and in the same term wisdom is termed in the book intituled the wisdom of solomon , ch . 7. 26. the brightness of the everlasting light , the unspotted myrror of the power of god , and the image of his goodness : and thence it is to be conceived that in the nicene creed christ is termed light of light : 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , saith sr. norton kna●chbul in his animad version on heb. 1. 3. is as it were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , in phavorinus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the shining out brightness , or splendor , relucency , or as it were beam of gods glory , that is his substance , nature , or being , who is light , 1 john. 1. 5. and glory is often put for light , 1 cor. 15. 41. mat. 17. 2. compared with luke 9. 32. 2 pet. 1. 17. which shews that he is said to be the brightness passively as receiving it from his father , and brightness of his glory , as having his glory communicated to him ; not actively , as shining to others : and the same is to be conceived of his being the character of his person passively , as having it engraven on him , not ingraving it on others . the metaphor is most likely to be from a seal of a ring or some other thing by which there is an ingraving of a figure . now we shall best understand what is meant here by it , if we know what it is that is meant by his hypostasis , and when it was that he was the character of it : the word comes from a verb that signifies to stand under , or to be settled , and so notes some settled thing , that doth not flinch or vanish , opposed to emphasis or appearance , as aristotle in his book of the world ( if it be his ) so the cloud is said to be an hypostasis , the bow in the cloud but an appearance . physitians use it for the sediment , or that which settles in the bottom , as in urine , for the consistence , state or concretion of humours that should be purged . in the greek of the old testament it hath many significations , as deut. 1. 12. your burden is your hypostasis . deut. 11. 6. job 22. 20. that which we read substance , that is goods , is in greek hypostasis : a military station , rendered by us a garrison , is in aquila's translation , saith grot. annot. ad ▪ 1 reg. 13. 4. hypostasis . in the psalms it hath various acceptions , as psal. 39. 5. my age , verse 7. my hope . psal. 69. 2. there is no standing . gr. hypostasis . psal. 89. 47. remember how short my time is , gr. what my hypostasis is . ps. 139. 15. the lxx . reading as it is likely , instead of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , which we render was curiously wrought , the word signifying to be wrought with a needle , either , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as grotius conceives , or as to me seems likely , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , have rendered it by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . nahum 2. 7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . latin et substantia mea , and my substance . in the new testament it is onely 2 cor. 9. 4. and 11. 17. where it is rendered by this confidence , that is , subsistence , settledness , or fi●mitude , which being applied to the mind , notes confidence , unshaken boldness , or security , heb. 3. 14. where we read the beginning of our confidence , used as it is likely , as in the greek , psalm . 39. 7. heb. 11. 1. where it is rendered the substance of things hoped for , by others , the ground , or confidence , i conceive , the assurance or security meant by it : and here , heb. 1. 3. in none of which places , or any other that i can find , hypostasis signifies wisdom , power , and holiness , of a person ; and therefore i see not how it can be expounded the character of his hypostasis , that is the resemblance of his fathers attributes , or his supremacy or soveraign majesty ; but that he is as it were the print , impression , stamp , or as we translate it , express image of his person , or subsistence , or substance , which comes nearest to the use of the word , as it is in the greek version , psal. 139. 15. and that by reason of his being his son by whom he made the worlds ; which will be better understood by considering when he was the brightness of his glory , and the express ▪ image of his person : the participle we translate [ being ] cannot be expounded of being such consequently to his sitting on the right hand of the majesty in the heights , but antecedently thereunto , and to his bearing or upholding all things by the word of his power in order of nature at least , and to his purging our sins in time ; which appears , 1. from the order of the words , he is first said to be the brightness of glory , the character of his person , next to bear all things by the word of his power , than to have purged our sins by himself , and then to have sate on the right hand of the majesty on high , therefore he was a●●ecedently to all the rest the brightness of glory , and character of his person . 2. the connexion between being the character of his person , and up-holding all things by the copulative particle shews these were together , but the up-holding all things was before his sitting on the right hand , therefore also the being the character of his person . 3. then he was the character of his person when he purged our sins , but that was before his sitting on the right hand , therefore also was his being the character of his person . 4. from the use of the participle which is to be interpreted , either of the present or past time , as heb. 5. 8. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 although he were , philem. 9. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being such with many more : whence it follows that these things cannot be said of christ as man , ●ith as such he up-held not all things by the word of his power , but of his divin● excellency in which he is a radiature from god , and is the character or print of his person , before his ascention , or executing his office on earth : besides the titles are so transcendent as exceed the excellency of the angels , and therefore express the divine nature : and the emphasis is put in them that being so excellent he purged our sins ; and if he had been termed the brightness of glory , and character of his fathers person , only in executing the office of mediatour , and representing god to us by his preaching , no more had been said , than was verse 2. that god had spoken to us by his son , and might be said of some of the prophets , specially moses who did reveal gods mind to the people of israel , with whom god spake face to face , his face did shine and was glorious , represented gods majesty , power , wisdom , goodness in bringing israel out of egypt , doing miracles , whence he is said to be made a god to pharaoh , exod. 7. 1. 3. notwithstanding the opinion of so learned men , yet i conceive the bringing into the world is not a thing fu●ure to be done at the last day for these reasons . 1. because if the verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 migh be expounded as of the future time ( the contrary whereof seems true to me ) yet the verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith must be expounded of a time past , and the sense be this , when he did bring his first-begotten into the world he said ; and let all the angels of god worship him . 2. because a determination or purpose concerning a thing future had not been a fit argument to prove his present meliority or superiority above angels . 3. if it had been meant of a future bringing into the world i conceive he would have said , into the world to come , as he speaks , heb. 2. 5. and 6. 5. 4. because where he u●eth the like expression , though not the same words , to wit , heb. 10. 5. when he cometh into the world he saith , it is meant of the time when he had a body prepared for him , which was at his birth : for which reason , and because we find not any mention of the angels of god worshipping after his resurrection , as we find done , luke 2. 13. it is ●o be applied to the time of his birth ; and if it be objected that he was not to be worshipped by the angels till his exalting at the right hand of god , as rev. 7. 10 , 11. the contrary is to be held , ●ith the wise-men , mat. 2. 11. peter , luke 5. 8. the apostles , mat. 28. 17. luke 24. 52. worshipped christ ; and no doubt but the angels did and were to do the like . as for the words heb. 2. 5. that they referre to heb. 1. 6. and so heb. 1. 6. meant of the world to come , because no where else had he spoken of the world to come , i conceive they do not evince what is gathered from them . 1. because he doth not say , heb. 2. 5. of which we have , but of which we do speak . 2. if he did say , of which we have spoken , it might very well refer to heb. 1. 12. which mentions the change of the heavens and earth , which are the same thing with the world to come , though the same word be not used in both places : for which reasons i conceive it better to make a transposition in the word again , and to expound the words thus ; again he saith , when he did bring his first-begotten into the world , using again as he did verse 5. to express another citation ; nevertheless , were mr. medes reading yielded , it must shew a former bringing into the vvorld , and so a being of christ afore his coming into the world , and consequently his being the son of god begotten before the world began . 4. it is true christ had a more excellent name by grant as appointed heir of all things , yet was not the son of god because heir of all things , but heir of all things because his son , by whom he made the worlds , v. 1. 2. which is the reason also given , col. 〈◊〉 . 15 , 16. as the particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because shews : it is true the angels were to worship christ , because of his office , and his exaltation , yet not barely because of his office and exaltation , but also because of his generation , as the son of god , and the union of his two natures in one person , by reason of which he was worshipped afore his resurrection , mat. 2. 11. in his minority . 5. jesus christ is not termed god in respect of his office , but nature , as being the son of god the creatour , by whom he made the worlds , ver . 2. and in respect of his generation , god the father is said to be his god , and he god of god , as in the nicene creed . and being made a man was anointed , and other men were his fellows , or partakers with him , though not in the same measure as he , who had the spirit without measure , job . 3● 34. 6. grotius his change is without any warrant of copy or example , and therefore is too bold an alteration to be allowed ; nor had the apostles assertion of christ , that for him he made the worlds , been so full to his purpose to set out christs excellency , as to say , that by him he made the worlds : besides , sith col. 1. 16. it is said , by him were all things created , and for him , and that made the reason of his being the first-born of every creature , ver . 15. it is in like manner to be conceived , heb. 1. 2. that 〈◊〉 appointed his son heir of all things , because by him he made the worlds : by the worlds is not meant the future world , or blessed immortality , not the making them , the renewing of them ; but the worlds signifie either the frame of heaven and earth at first creation , or the times and generations of men , and their making the creating at the beginning of time , or the forming and continuing of them in their successions . the former sense of making heaven and earth , and their inhabitants , as it is confirmed by the parallel place , col. 1. 16. so it is put out of doubt by the words of the same authour , heb. 11. 3. by faith we understand that the worlds ( the word used , heb. 1. 2. ) were framed by the word of god , so that things which are seen were not made of things appearing , which doth evidently refer to gen. 1. 1 , 2. and heb. 9. 26. the end of the worlds , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is opposed to the foundation of the world ; and in conformity to this sense 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 john 9. 32. is as much as from the beginning of the world : nor can it be meant of a future world , sith the word of making notes a thing already done , and to say he made that which was not yet in being , or which was not yet made , had been to say , that he made that which he did not make , and to say , he made by him the worlds , if he were not then existent had been to say he made the worlds by a not being ; nor can it be shewed that making , that it have various senses , is put for revealing , or that said to be made , which is only made known . heb. 1. 10 , 11 , 12. are a testimony cited concerning christ , as verse 8. the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 unto , or of the son , shew as v. 7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , he saith of the angels , and the copulative conjunction 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 verse 10. shews it to be a distinct testimony from the former , and the words cited together shew all meant of christ ▪ ifs the latter part of them belong to christ it follows , that also the former belongs to him : for it belongs to the same person and power which dissolves or changeth the heavens to lay the foundation of them : nor is there an instance produced either , mat. 12. 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21. or acts 2. 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21. in which words are cited , whereof part only belong to the matter for which they are cited , although mat. 12. 19. alone had fitted the occasion ; nor are there , or any where else words cited as spoken part of one person , part of another , as they would have them , who use this evasion : nor are the words , heb. 1. 10 , 11 , 12. cited only to prove ver . 4. that christ was made so much better tha● the angels , as he hath inherited a more excellent name than they ; but to prove , that by him god made the worlds , verse 2. nor can there be good sense in making the first part , verse 10. to be directed to god , and the other ver . 11 , 12. of christ , when it is the same lord who is spoken to ver . 10 , 11 , 12. nor can that which is spoken of an eternal duration , à parte antè , on the part before , as well as à parte post , the part after , be applied only to the duration of his kingdom which is only eternal à parte post , on the part after , and which is also to be resigned to the father , 1 cor. 15. 24. 7. grotius is still too bold to put 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 his meaning the fathers word or power , instead of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 his own , me●ning the son without any extant copies named by him , and clean against the apostles scope to set out christs excellency : now to rule at his fathers command had noted his obedience , and subserviency , not his excellency ; for so do all holy angels and good magistrates , they rule at gods command : nor is the expression , suitable to his sense : if he had meant , as grotius conceives the sense , he should have said , ruling all things at the command of his fathers authority 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , rather than 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 power , and not have said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the word ; which notes the means of effecting , as heb. 11. 3. but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to his word , as the rule of administration , or as it is luke 5. 5. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 at thy command : besides , heb. 11. 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the word of god , notes not a command to the son to do it , but the powerful word to the world , by which it was made , gen. 1. and the all things he upholds , heb. 1. 3. comprehend not only the church , but the world 's made by him , or all creatures , as heb. 2. 8 , 10. col. 1. 16 , 17 must be understood . it is true , that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies a prince , nor will i deny that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ( as grotius , dr. hammond , heinsius exercit . sacr . l. 16. c. 1. conceive ) signifies to rule or govern , numb . 11. 14. deut. 1. 9. yet it signifies not only to govern , or order them , but also to sustain them by provision , as both the occasion of the peoples desire of flesh , and the words of moses , ver . 11 , 12. [ wherefore host thou affl●cted thy servant ? and wherefore have i not f●und favour in thy sight , that thou layest the burden of all this people upon me ? have i conceived all this people ? have i begotten ( or born , as the greek hath it ) them , that thou shouldest say unto me , carry them in thy bosome ( as a nursing father beareth the sucking child ) unto the land which thou swarest ●●to their fathers ? ] shew ; it is true , deut. 1. 9. bearing notes rule , but not it only , but also provision and sustentation , as the words verse 12. shew ; how can i my self alone bear your ●●mbrance , or wearisom molestation , trouble , as isa. 1. 14. and your burden ; greek , and your hypostasis , that is your subsistence or sustentation by provision , and your ●trif● , in greek , your antilogies , gain-sayings or contradictions . and v. 31. in the wilderness the lord thy god bare thee , as a man doth bear his son , in all the way that ye went until ye came to this place : where saith ainsworth , in his annotation , this word meaneth not the bearing of the body only , but bearing of their infirmities , and suffering the evils and troubles in the education of them , as a father doth in his children which the greek explaineth by etrophophorese a word that paul useth in acts 13. 18. where the syriak expoundeth it nourished : or , as some copies have it , etropophorese , he suffered their manners : dr. hammond ann●t ▪ on acts 13. 18. carried as a nurse : whence i infer , that if heb. 1. 3. the word bearing be used as numb . 11. 14. deut. 1. 9. yet it doth not signifie meer ruling or ordering the church by wisdom and authority , but up-holding , sustaining , maintaining the worlds , or ages which he made , or all things created by the word of his almighty power , by which they were framed at first , heb. 11. 3. which bearing or upholding all things is not limited to the time after christs resurrection , but is antecedent to his death : for so the words are , he by whom god made the worlds , being the brightness of his glory , the character of his subsistence , and bearing all things by the word of his power , having by himself made purgation of our sins , sate at the right ●and of the majesty in the heights : this order of words shews that he was the brightness of glory , and character of gods subsistence , and bare a 〈…〉 things by the word of his power , and made purgation of our sins by himself afore ●e sa●● at the right hand of the majesty or greatness in the heights . 8. it is true that heb. 1. 13. is spoken of christ as man exalted ; yet as christ argued against the pharisees from the same passage of psal. 110. 1. ( which the chaldee renders , the lord said unto his word , meaning christ , saith ainsworth annot. ) mat. 22. 42 , 43 , 44 , 45. that christ must be a greater person than david's son , because david in spirit calls him lord , and therefore to have an higher nature than himself being then his lord ; so we may argue from heb. 1. 13. the scripture proves christ to be lord of angels , because god said , sit thou on my right hand till i make thine enemies thy footstool , therefore he had a nature above angels , and consequently divine : for christ supposeth in that place , that christ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be david's lord , which was not denied , and thereby p●oveth that he must be denied than david , and of another nature than his ▪ ●orasmuch as he that was no more than his son , could not be his lord , the father being superiour to the son in nature , who hath no other nature than what he derive● from himself . sect . 13. heb ▪ 7. 3. is urged to prove the eternal son-ship of christ. to what is said , heb. 1. i shall add what is said heb. 7. 3. concerning me●chizede● , that he is mentioned without father , without mother , without genealogy , that is without speech of his descent or pedigree , neither having beginning of daies , nor end of life ; but made like unto the son of god , remaineth a priest for ever : which intimates , that the son of god , was without father , without mother , without genealogy , neither having beginning of daies , nor end of life , that is , as he was the son of god he was father or mother among me● ▪ in which respect there is no genealogy of him , that he is without beginning of daies , or end of life , therefore he was before any creature was made , begotten of the substance of his father , not made of nothing , very god of the same substance of the father , by whom all things were made : for as the son of man and according to his office he had beginning of daies , and had a mother : nor can the sense be right , that the beginning of daies is meant of the priest-hood of melchizedec , for the other part , nor end of life , is to be expounded of his being , not of his priest-hood ; and therefore also his not having beginning of daies must be meant of his being , as the son of god , not of his priesthood . sect . 14. christs kingdom is the kingdom of the son of man so termed , according to his excellency above all men . the kingdom we are to seek is termed sometimes the kingdom of the son of man , mat. 16. 28. verily i say unto you , there be some standing here , which shall not taste of death , till they see the son of man coming in his kingdom : which title christ often takes to himself , mat. 16. 13. whom do men say , that i the son of man am ? and upon this consideration , he hath the kingdom given to him , according to what our lord christ saith , john 5. 27. that the father hath given him authority , and to do judgment , because he is the son of man : accordingly , where christ fore-tells his chief act of reg●lity he useth this title , mat. 25. 31. when the son of man shall come in his glory , and all the holy angels with him , then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory , and ver . 34. 40. terms this son of man the king. whence it is apparent that this title of the son of man is to be considered , that we may have right intelligence of this kingdom . now this title of the son of man may be understood . 1. as noting him to be a man of the same kind with other men : and in this sense ●he son of man is no more than a man , as numb . 23. 19. psal. 4. 2. & 144. 3. & 146. 3. eph. 3. 5. &c. in which sense it is conceived , that ezekiel is often spoken to by the title of the son of man , as ezek. 2. 1 , 3 , 6 , 8. not importing any excellency above other men , but nature and infirmities common to other men : mr. gataker in his cinnus , l. 2. c. 12. whereas it was said by nebuchadnezzar , dan. 3. 25. as we read it ; lo●● see four men loose walking in the 〈…〉 idst of the fire , and they have no hurt , and the form of the fourth is like the son of god , it ▪ being 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 some will have it translated a son of the gods , as meaning by it an angel , as vers . 28. or a man of excellency and dignity , who were usually stiled sons of the gods , as psal. 89. 7. according to p●gni● , concludes , that according to the profa●e kings mind in our language , if we would rightly render it , we should say , not like the son of god , but like a son of the gods , that is , a person of a most beautiful , and as it were divine form : also in like manner when it is said , daniel 7. 13. behold one came with the clouds like the son of man , it is no more than a certain person indued with human● form , and should be termed like a son of man ; not as it is commonly rendered , like the son of man : as if christ were designed man as well as god , as junius in explaining hath noted ; because he is in the new testiment most frequently named the son of man : for how ●ould the form of the son of god , to be represented in our flesh be then set before daniels eyes , that whom he had seen descending from heaven , he should declare him seen as like to him , whom it is not probable that himself foresaw of what shape ●e should be ? for although it may seem in very deed that he was the son of god , whom the prophet had beheld in that vision to have approached to god the father , the ancient of dayes ; yet nevertheless it should not be therefore said he was like to the son of man , to wit christ ; for this had been as if it were said he was like to himself , but like to a son of man , that is to a man , as ezekiel is often termed son of man , and sons of men for men , then which nothing is more frequent . so also the apostle , made in the likeness of men , and found in fashion as a man , philip. 2. 7. saving that these things are said of him according to what he was , that according to what was represented . in like sort that of the evangelist john is to be taken , which is rev. 1. 13. like to the son of man ; which also the most famous man theodore beza saw , when he turned it , i saw ( some one ) like to a son of man , and in his notes , to a son of man , that is to a man , or who resembled a man ; after the hebrew idiotism . for although he was christ , yet that this is to be taken in general concerning the shape of a man , appears from hence , that the article is not added : also from daniel 10. 5. where a vision altogether like is described : so ●e : to which may be added the parallel place respecting the same person in the same book , c● . 14. ver . 14 one sitting on a cloud like to a son of man , that is a man ▪ 2. he may be said to be stiled the son of man by excellency , as when the philosopher a common name to many is by excellency appropriated to aristotle , or the orator to cic●ro , or the poet to homer ; in which sense christ is termed the seed of the woman , gen. 3. 15. the son of david , mat. 20. 30. and 22. 42 , and in this sense he is termed the second adam , because as the first earthly adam was a common person , comprehending all that from him are propagated by natural generation ; so christ is the second , heavenly adam , 1 cor. 15. 45. the second man , verse 47. because all are comprehended in him , , that are by spiritual regeneration the sons of god. and in this respect it is said , that adam was the type , or figure of him that was to come , rom. 5. 14. and hereupon the parallelism of one to the other is made by the apostle , ver . 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 21. and 1 cor. 15. 21 , 22. and all the members of the mystical body termed christ , 1 cor. 12. 12. and of christ it is said , ephes. 2. 15. that he might make , or create in himself two unto one new man making peace ; which new man is said to be put on , ephes. 4. 24. col. 3. 10. as elsewhere christ is to be put on , rom. 13. 14. gal. 3. 27. and christ is said to be all things , and in all , col. 3. 11. without discrimination of greek , and jew , circumcision and uncircum●●sion , barbarian , scythian , bond and free , and all the members of christ , when they meet together are a perfect man , according to the measure of the stature of th● fulness of christ , ephes. 4. 13. which is expressed to be his body , verse 16. and this is called the church , which is his body , the f●lness of him that filleth all in all , ephes. 1. 22 , 23. in like manner christ is termed the seed of abraham , gal. 3. 16. now to abraham and his seed were the promises made ; he saith not , and to his seeds , as concerning many , but as of one ; and to thy seed , who is christ : which is meant of christ personal primarily , and secondarily of christ mystical ; to wit , all believers , who are termed , verse 7. abraham's children , and verse 26 , 27 , 28 , 29. ye are all the sons of god through faith in christ jesus : for as many as have been baptized into christ have put on christ : there is neither jew , nor greek , nor is there s●rvant , nor free , nor is there male and female , for ye are all 〈◊〉 one man in christ jesus , and if ye be christs then are ye abraham's seed , and heirs according to the promise . and thus it is more probable to me , that daniel 3. 5. is not to be read a son of the gods , to note only a person of a more excellent visage , as the gentiles called men of rare beauty and majesty ; but the son of god , whom he calls the angel , verse 28. who was known in the church of god by the title of the angel of the covenant , mal. 3. 1. the angel of gods presence , isa. 63. 9. on which mr. gataker in the annotations of sundry divines in english hath this note : certain it is that this angel here spoken of , is that angel , of whom god spake unto moses , exod. 23. 21 , 23. termed both jehovah , exod. 13. 21. and 14. 10 , 24. and his face or presence , exod. 33. 14 , 15. and an angel , exod. 33. 2. who that he was no other , than the messias jesus christ , the conducter of them in the wilderness , holy stephen informeth us , acts 7. 38. the eternal son of god , the resplendency of his fathers majesty , and exact image of his person , heb. 1. 3. in whom therefore his name is said to be , exod. 23. 22. he that appeared unto moses in the bush , exod. 3. 2. styled jehovah there , verse 4. and by jacob , the angel that delivered , or rescued him out of all evil , gen. 48. 16. and by malachy lastly , jehovah , the angel of the covenant , mal. 3. 1. termed an angel , or messenger , in regard of his mediatourship , heb. 8. 6. of gods face ; either because he doth exactly resemble god his father , john 14. 9 , 10. col. 1. 15. or , because he appeareth before the face , or in the presence of god , for us , heb. 9. 24. see rom. 8. 34. revel . 8. 3. this angel secured and safeguarded them all the way thorow the wilderness , from egypt to canaan , deut. 8. 2 , 4. and 32. 10 , 12. which it 's not unlikely nebuchadnezzar somewhat understood , as well as that god sent an angel to deliver his servants that trusted in him , verse 28. by daniel , whom god used to reveal to nebuchadnezzar the succession of the four monarchies , whereupon he acknowledged daniels god to be a god of gods , and a lord of kings , and a revealer of secrets , dan. 2. 47. and i judg the opinion of cameron in his praelection on mat. 16. 27. to be right , that the term son of man , dan. 7. 13. notes the messiah , and that the title of son of man is given to him , not as importing any diminution , but his excellency , and that in allusion to that place in daniel , christ , when he speaks of himself , mat. 16. 27. mat. 25. 31. john 5. 27. useth that title of the son of man to shew , that he was meant therein , and that we need not either alter the pointing , as some of the antients , nor make that the reason of committing judgement to him , john 5. 27. because he only of the three persons in the holy trinity is man ; as dr. pearson conceives in his exposition of the seventh article of the creed , but that christ intimates , that all judgment was committed to him , because he was the son of man meant dan. 7. 13. which is also the opinion of grotius annot. ad johan . evang. c. 5. 27. because he is that son of man , of whom daniel foretold , that to him should be given dominion and a kingdom over all nations without end . dan. 7. 13 , 14. nor is it of force to enervate this opinion , that it is said , that he who came before the antient of daies , was as the son of man : for the particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies not only the likeness of a thing , but also the verity of it , as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth , john 1. 14. 2 cor. 2. 17. and if it should note only likeness and not identity , both there , and revel . 1. 13. and 14. 14. it should intimate as if he whom daniel and john saw were not christ , but one like him , and so the person to vvhom dominion was given , and the person described should not be christ : but the words being conceived aright , daniel saw christ the son of man in the apparition ; nor is it absurd to say so of daniel , though christ were not then incarnate . for he had by the spirit christ represented to him , as he was to david when in spirit he called him lord , mat. 22. 43. and abraham rejoyced to see his day , and saw it , and was glad , john 8. 57. and if in the apparations of the angel , that spake to abraham about sodom , to joshua about jericho it were christ that appeared , and so at other times christ appeared in humane shape , as sundry arguments evince ; then daniel could not be ignorant , who the son of man was ▪ nor is the defect of the article , rev. 1. 13. and 14. 14. a sufficient reason to shew the son of man there to be no more than a man ; for the article is also wanting , john 5. 27. and yet the son of man is meant peculiarly of christ : and so is dan. 10. 5. though it be only read a man. it is to be considered that the term son of man is still given by christ to himself , not as maldonat the jesuite conceived , as debasing himself , or speaking of himself diminutively , as psal. 22. 6. but i am a worm , and no man : a reproach of men and despised of the people : for he doth give himself the title of the son of man not in his prayer to god , as psal. 22. 6. but in his speeches to the people , and then when he expresseth his power , mat. 9. 6. mat. 12. 8. mat. 26 64. & 13. 37 , 41. nor do the places alledged prove that the title of son of man is taken by christ to himself , to shew his debasement by it , but to imply , that though he were that son of man to whom dominion over all nations did belong , yet he had not then where to lay his head : and the like is to be said of that mat. 12. 40. that even he who was the son of man by excellency , should be three daies and three nights in the heart of the earth : nor is there mat. 12. 32. a lessening of christs person below the holy spirit implied by the title son of man ; the sin is less which is against the son of man , than the blasphemy against the holy spirit , not because of the excellency of the spirits person above the person of the son of man , but because of the property of that sin , being against the conviction of the spirit by his operation , john 12. 34. the jews enquire , who is this son of man ? not meaning , that the son of man was a diminitive term , but doubting how that son of man should be the messiah , of whom he had said that he should be lifted up , verse 32. and for that place , psal. 8. 6. heb. 2. 6. the son of man doth not express an abject condition , though an inferiour low nature in comparison of gods , but rather christs high dignity ; the authour of that epistle proving , that to no other man were all things made subject , but to him , who being made little lower than the angels , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for a little time ; to wit , the time of his suffering , verse 9. ( as cameron expounds it , praelect . in mat. 16. 27. ) was made superiour to angels , and had all things subjected to him . sect . 15. christ's consubstantiality with the father according to his deity , with us according to his humanity , as the chalcedon councel determined , is asserted and proved from john 1. 14. acts 2. 30. rom. 1. 3 , 4. and 9. 5. however , whether the reason of the appellation be this latter or no , it is certain , that thereby is signified , that christ hath an humane as well as a divine nature ; and according to the doctrine of the councel of chalcedon i determine , that the son of god our lord jesus christ , is truely god , and truely man , the same , of a reasonable soul and body , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , consubstantial with the father , touching the god-head , and consubstantial , or of one essence or substance with us , according to the man-hood : which it were unnecessary to prove , sith his composition of body , birth , growth , properties , actions , sufferings , and what ever else prove a person to be a man , as we are , as plainly are related , and were as fully manifested to have been in christ jesus , as in any other man ; but that as of old valentinus , marcion , and some others denied his body to have been of humane seed as the matter ; holding it to have been imaginary , not real , or coelestial , and to have passed through the virgins womb : so others of late have denied the truth of christs incarnation , and the reason of his being termed the son of man , contrary to the holy scriptures , as shall be shewed by these texts following , which ascribe both a divine and humane nature to one and the same person , the lord jesus christ , both while he was on earth , and as he is now in heaven , and shall appear at his future coming to judgement . to this purpose are the words alledged before , out of john 1. 14. which shew that the same person who is the word , was flesh ; which , because i have before vindicated sect. 6. i shall not insist on here , nor on such proofs as may be made from col. 1. 18. or heb. 1. 3. in which that is ascribed to the son ( whom i before proved , sect. 9 , 10 , 11 , 12. from those chapters to be god ) which proves him a man , to wit his being head of the body the church , the first-born from the dead , who by himself purged our sins , and is sate down on the right hand of the majesty in the heights : but consider other places , where both natures in one person are declared : among which i shall chuse to insist on first , those places , which speak of christ as descending from the fathers according to the flesh , as acts 2. 30. therefore david being a prophet , and knowing that god had sworn with an oath to him , that of the fruit of his loins , according to the flesh , he would raise up christ to sit on his throne . rom. 1. 3 , 4. concerning his son jesus christ our lord , which was made of the seed of david according to the flesh , who was declared or determined the son of god , in , or with power according to the spirit of holiness by the resurrection of , or from the dead . rom. 9. 5. whose are the fathers , and of whom christ according to the flesh , who is over all , god blessed for ever . which texts do expresly teach , that jesus christ had a humane nature , which is termed the flesh , as it is frequent by [ flesh ] to understand a man or humane nature , rom. 3. 20. and 11. 14. isa. 58. 7. gal. 2. 16. for he was of the fruit of davids loins ▪ according to the flesh , which being a restriction cannot limit [ raising up ] but [ christ ] and so notes another part , according to which christ was not raised up out of the loins of david , which must be understood of his divine nature ; according to which he was davids lord , mat. 22. 44 , 45. he was of the seed of david , and of the fathers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , as to that which was according to the flesh ; restrictively after it , implying another nature , according to which , he is of an higher original , even the son of god , rom. 1. 3 , 4. god over all , blessed for ever , rom. 9. 5. whence it is inferred : he who is so davids son according to the flesh , raised up out of the fruit of his loins according to the flesh , made of the seed of david according to the flesh , of the fathers according to the flesh , as that he is also davids lord , the son of god , god over all blessed for ever ; is consubstantial with the father as touching the god-head , and consubstantial with us as touching his man-hood : but such is jesus christ. therefore , &c. sect . 16. the exception against the argument from acts 2. 30. rom. 1. 3 , 4. rom. 9. 5. is set down . against this it is thus excepted : when the apostle saith , that christ came of the fathers according to the flesh , who is over all a god blessed for ever ; the opposition is not entire and exact as wanting the other member : what that member is , another passage of the apostle , wherein you have the same opposition in describing christ , will inform you ; it is rom. 1. 3 , 4. concerning his son jesus christ our lord , who was made ( or rather born ) of the seed of david according to the flesh , and declared to be the son of god with power ( gr. determined , or ordained son of god in power ) according to the spirit of holiness , by the resurrection from the dead : here you see that to those words , according to the flesh , are opposed these , according to the spirit of holiness : again , what this spirit of holiness is , will be no hard matter to find out , if we consider that as the flesh signifyeth a constituting part of christ , namely his fleshly body ; so also must the spirit of holiness , opposed thereunto , signifie a constituting part : if so , then it is not the holy spirit , as every one will confesse , nor the reasonable soul of christ , because he is intimated to have had this spirit by means of the resurrection from the dead , whereas he had a reasonable soul before his death : nor the divine nature , for that is no where in scripture designed by the name of spirit , or spirit of holiness : besides , the adversaries hold , that christ had the divine ▪ nature , whilst he was yet cloathed with flesh . it remains therefore that by the spirit of holiness , which christ had by means of the resurrection of the dead , and is a constituting part of him , is to be understood his holy , spiritual body , whereby he is excepted from other men , being the first-born from the dead , or the first that so rose from the dead , as that he never dyed again , but was cloathed with a spiritual body , and made like to god , who is a spirit . and now the sense of that passage beginneth to appear , heb. 9. 14. how much more shall the blood of christ , who through the eternal spirit ( gr. through an eternal spirit , for no article is prefixed ) offered himself without spot to god ; purge your consciences from dead works to serve the living god ? by eternal spirit is here meant the spiritual body of christ , which lasteth to all eternity ; and this expression is opposed to what the same divine authour speaketh of christ , heb. 5. 7. who in the daies of his flesh , &c. for eternal is contrary to dayes , and spirit to flesh : neither will that which we have here spoken seem strange to him , who having penetrated into that profound epistle to the hebrews , knoweth ( what is there frequently intimated ) that christ then made his offering for our sins ; when , after his resurrection , he entered into heaven , and being endued with a spiritual and immortal body , presented himself before god : for so the type of the levitical high-priest making the yearly atonement for the si●s of the people ( levit. 16. ) did require : for as the atonement was not then made , when he slew the beasts , but when having put on his linnen robes , he brought their blood into the sanctuary before the mercy-seat : so neither did christ offer his sacrifice for our sins upon the cross , but when after his resurrection , being cloathed with robes of immortality and glory , he entered into heaven , the true sanctuary , and presented himself to god. ( wherefore to return to the foresaid passage , rom. 9. 5. ) when it is there said , of whom according to the flesh ( for so the greek hath it ) christ came , who is over all a god to be blessed for ever ; we ought ( by the authority of the apostle himself ) to supply in our mind the other member of the opposition , and to understand the place , as if it had been said ; who according to the spirit of holiness by the resurrection from the dead , is over all a god blessed for ever : but if christ be according to the spirit of holiness by the resurrection from the dead ( that is ) according to his spiritual body , which he received by means of the resurrection from the dead the son of god in power , and accordingly a god over all ; he is not the son of god in power , and accordingly a god over all , by having the divine nature personally united to his humane nature , but by the glorification and exaltation of his v●ry humane nature . sect . 17. this exception against the argument is refuted . i reply , that in this passage there are many errours . 1. that rom. 1. 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is to be rendered [ born ] rather than made : for though i deny not that the participle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may signifie [ born ] yet here it is not so fitly thus rendered , as [ made ] because it is not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 commonly used for birth or generation , as mat. 1. 16. luke 1. 35. 57. & 23. 29. joh. 3. 41. & 18. 37. rom. 9. 11. but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , as gal. 4. 4. nor is it said born of the mother , or woman , as in expressions of birth is usual , job 14. 1. mat. 11. 11. luke 7. 28. and the preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth note , not the womb from whence he came , but the matter out of which he was formed : for doubtless [ of the seed of david according to the flesh , rom. 1. 3. ] is the same with [ of the fruit of his loins according to the flesh , acts 2. 30. ] now [ of the fruit of his loins according to the flesh ] notes the matter out of which he had flesh or a humane body ; and therefore the father or antient progenitour david is mentioned , and his seed , and the fruit of his loins ; as the jew is said to come out of the loins of abraham , and levi to be in his loins , heb. 7. 5 , 10. in respect of the matter out of which they came , not the mother or her womb , as the place from whence : and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 notes the act of god answerable to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 acts 2. 30. raise up , not the act of the mother in bringing forth , and therefore rom. 1. 3. it is rightly translated [ made ] or as piscator [ orti raised ] answerably to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sprang up , heb. 7. 14. 2. it is granted , that [ according to the flesh ] notes a constituting part , but that it notes a constituting part , which christ had only afore his resurrection , and not after his resurrection , is not to be granted : for as it is now , the humane body of christ , or humane nature is made of the seed of david , and raised of the fruit of his loins according to the flesh , sith it is the same numerical body , and christ is still the same man which was made , or descended , or sprang out of david , notwithstanding any alteration in the outward estate , or inherent qualities in his humanity or humane body ; it doth not become a constituting part in its humiliation , and not a constituting part in his exaltation : that very being which was made of the seed of david according to the flesh , which was raised of the fruit of his loins according to the flesh , was to sit on his throne , acts 2. 30. and to reign , luke 1. 32 , 33. and therefore as the exceptor argues , that by the spirit of holiness cannot be meant the soul or divinity of christ , because he had both ( in our opinion at least ) in the daies of his flesh , though the soul were not then glorified ; i may argue , by the spirit of holiness is not meant his glorified body , because he had it , though not then glorified , even in the daies of his flesh . 3. which is more amply confirmed by shewing , that [ according to the flesh ] notes not his fleshly body as he speaks , that is christs humane body in its debasement only , but his humane nature : for according to the flesh , rom. 1. 3. signifies by the same authours opinion , and the evidence arising from comparing the place , the same that it doth , rom. 9. 5. now it signifies rom , 9. 5. the same which it doth ver . 3. where paul calls the israelites his brethren , kinsmen , according to the flesh , but he means not , they were his brethren or kinsmen according to the flesh , that is restrictively to their weakness , debasement , or mortality , in opposition to their glorification , and excluding that as inconsistent with their being his brethren or ki●smen according to the flesh : but he means by according to the flesh , their humane nature as men , and as men descended from the same ancestors , and so in like manner , when it is said , christ was from the fathers according to the flesh ; the meaning is not , according to his weak , or inglorious condition precisely , and exclusively to his glorified condition , but simply according to his humane nature , as descended from them , whether in the daies of his flesh , or exaltation , without any discrimination : which is confirmed by our saviours own speech to his disciples , luke 24. 39. behold my hands and my feet , that it is i my self ; handle me and see , for a spirit hath not flesh and bones as ye see me have ; therefore christ supposed atter his re●urrection that he had flesh , that his humane body was a fleshly body , the same according to the flesh that it was before ; which is also strengthened by the expressions , acts 2. 3 〈◊〉 . that god raised him ●p of the fruit of davids loins according to the flesh bu● god did not raise him up of the fruit of dav●ds loins according to the flesh , barely ●s weak , mortal , and deb●sed , but simply as man descended from him , therefore [ according to the flesh ] imports christs humanity or humane body as from david without restriction to his low estate : and v. 31. when it is said , his flesh did not see corruption ; his body is still termed flesh , the same flesh , and not considered as weak , for as such it saw a change ( which may be termed in some sort a corruption , to wit , a change from that weakness it had to a better form , but as the constituting part of his humane nature . 4. by [ the spirit of holiness rom. 1. 4. ] whether 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 note a constituting part , or an efficient cause , cannot be meant christs holy spiritual body in the exceptors sense . for 1. it would imply that his spiritual body were another constituting part than his fleshly ▪ body , which is already refuted . 2. it would imply that his fleshly body were not his holy body ; whereas that which was born of mary was that holy thing , which should be called the son of god , luke 1. 35. 3. no where is the body of christ termed a spirit , or the spirit of holiness in any estate : for though it be true , that 1 cor. 15. 44. mentions a spiritual body ; yet 1. that is there contradistinguished not to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 fleshly , but to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 natural , or ●oulary . 2. no where termed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a spirit . 3. nor 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the spirit of holiness . 4. after his resurrection christ denies his body to be a spirit , as having flesh and bones , luke 24. 39. and he is said to enter into the holy place by his own blood , heb. 9. 12. and to have consecrated for us a new and living way to enter into the holiest by his blood , through the veil , that is to say his flesh , heb. 10. 19 , 20. it is an errour , that by the eternal spirit , heb. 9. 14. is meant christs eternal spiritual body ; for [ the eternal spirit ] there must be of something distinct from himself ; else the meaning should be , he offered himself by himself , which is tautological and absurd ; but by himself must be meant his body , as heb. 1. 3. having purged our sins by himself , is by his own body : for the thing offered was his own body , or his life or soul , isa. 53. 10. in the type , the thing offered is some body , gift or sacrifice heb. 5. 1. and 8. 3. and 9. 7. 9. and 10. 1. and 11. 4 , 17. whence the body offered is termed the oblation , heb. 10. 5 , 8. in the antitype christ is said to offer himself , that is , his body called his oblation , heb. 10. 10. and this offering is termed , heb. 9. 25 , 26. the sacrifice of himself for the putting away of sin , and this to be not often , but once in the end of the world , ver . 26. he was once offered to bear the sins of many ; verse 28. he needed not daily , as those high-priests , to offer up sacrifice first for his own sins , and then for the peoples : for this he did once when he offered up himself , heb. 7. 27. by the which will we are sanctified , by the offering of the body of jesus christ once for all . heb. 10. 10. but this man after he had offered one sacrifice for sins , for ever sate down on the right hand of god , verse 12. which must be afore he sate down on the right hand of god , and therefore on earth , and this was by his suffering or dying , heb. 9. 26 , 27 , 28. and therefore cannot be referred to his appearing in heaven , but to his blood-shedding , heb. 9. 22. in the daies of his flesh : whereby it appears to be false , that christ did not offer his sacrifice for our sins , on the cross , there being no other time meant by that once when he offered up himself for the sins of the people , heb. 7. 27. and whereas it is sa●d , heb. 9 28. christ was once offered to bear the sins of many . st. peter tells us , 1 epistle 2. 24. who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree , that we being dead to sin should live unto righteousness ; by whose stripes ye were healed : which doth evidently refer to isa. 53. 4 , 5 , 6. whence the last clause is taken , and shews the bearing of our sins by the offering of himself to have been on the cross or at the time of his suffering on earth . and hereby it appears to be false , that christ made not atonement till he came to heaven : for col. 1. 20. it is said , and having made peace through the blood of his cross he reconciled all things to his father , ver . 21 , 22. now hath he reconciled in the body of his flesh through death . rom. 8. 3. god sending his own son in the likeness of sinful flesh , and for sin ( or by a sacrifice for sin , as heb. 10. 8. ) condemned sin in the flesh , which is all one with making atonement . that which is alledged , that the atonement was not then made , when the high-priest slew the beasts , but when having put on his linnen robes , he brought their blood into the sanctuary before the mercy-seat , is partly false , there being atonement made for himself and his house , levit. 16. 5 , 6. before he entered into the holy place ; and partly impertinent , sith the point in question is not where the atonement was made , but where christ offered himself , heb. 9. 14. though both the offering and the atonement are resolved to have been afore his sitting at the right hand of god , heb. 1. 3. and 10. 12. nor doth it appear , that [ eternal spirit , heb. 9. 14. ] is put in opposition to the daies of his flesh , heb. 5. 7. for it is not said , heb. 5. 7. flesh that hath daies , as if it noted a distinction of his body mortal , from his spiritual immortal body ▪ but daies of his flesh , only to note the time of his offering prayers , not the quality or adjunct of his body : nor is it said , he offered by the daies of his flesh , as here by the eternal spirit , but in the daies of his fl●sh , to note the time , which is not intimated , heb. 9. 14. by that term , by the eternal spirit , for then it should rather have been said , by or in the eternity of the spirit : the offering being an act of christ on earth , is no other than the act of his deed and will , whereby he did present himself as a sacrifice to god , as the phrase is , rom. 12. 1. or as it is eph. 5. 2. gave himself for us , an offering and a sacrifice to god for a sweet-smelling savour ; by reason of such acts abraham is said to offer up isaac , heb. 11. 17. and we are said to offer the sacrifice of praise , heb. 13. 15. spiritual sacrifices , 1 pet. 2. 5. which is plainly expressed , heb. 10. 10. by which will we are sanct●fied by the offering of the body of jesus christ once , or for once ; which was no other than that which he expressed in that prayer , which armi●●●● termed rightly the canon or rule of christs sacrifice , john 17. 19. and for them i sanctifie my self , that they also may be sanctified in truth : which being considered , i see not what good sense can be made of it , as many divines expound it , of the divinity of christ making the sacrifice of christ of value to satisfie for sins : for the words [ through the eternal spirit ] have not respect to himself , who was offered , as enhauncing the price of the thing offered , by reason of the union of it to himself , neither the place of it before himself , nor the preposition used , being 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 through or by , not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with or in conjunction , do sute with such a sense ; but it is in construction annexed and referred to the offering , and notes the cause and means of offering : besides the reason of piscator is good in his scholie on the text , that it belongs not to the deity to offer sacrifice , but that is it to which it is offered by a man as a man : and indeed it is not good sense to say , christ offered himself by his god-head to god , it being not easily conceivable what notion the god-head should have in such a speech , which is not absurd or inept : nor do i think piscators opinion good , that by the eternal spirit is meant christs immortal soul , partly because no where is christs humane soul called the eternal spirit , partly because i think it should rather be said in than through the eternal spirit , if christs immortal soul were meant by it , the particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 noting the efficient cause , not the subject in which the act of offering was : and therefore i rather pitch upon it to understand by [ the eternal spirit ] the holy spirit answering to the fire , which kindled the sacrifice , and moving or inflaming the heart of christ with love to us and obedience to god , to give himself an offering and a sacrifice to god for us , ephes. 5. 2. the holy spirit is fitly resembled by fire , mat. 3. 11. and he well termed the eternal spi●it in opposition to the temporary fire kindling the legal sacrifices : but if the allusion be not thereto , yet the sense is good and right : for as it is said that christ had not the spirit by measure , john 3. 34. and that he was full of the holy ghost , luke 4. 1. that the spirit of the lord was upon him , that it anointed him , verse 18. so it is said , that he was moved by the spirit to be tempted to preach , in the same places , and to cast out devils by the spirit of god , god putting his spirit on him he shewed judgment to the gentiles , sent forth judgement to victory , ma● . 12. 18 , 20 , 28. gave commandements through the holy ghost , acts 1. 2. and accordingly here is said to offer himself to god by the holy eternal spirit : nor is the want of the article any more against the expounding the eternal spirit , of the holy ghost , than against the expounding it of christs spiritual immortal body , it being as requisite in respect of use to design the one as the other ; but the truth is , it is not requisite , that it should be prefixed to shew it to be meant of the holy spirit , sith it is omitted rom. 9. 1. and 14. 17. &c. and even in this e●●stl● h●b . 2. 4. and 6. 4. so that the sense may be , notwithstanding any thing i find to the contrary that christ willingly , obediently offered , or yielded , through the holy spirits incitation or operation in him , himself a sacrifice without spot or blemish to god : and as executing the function of priest-hood to which he was anointed above others , heb. 1. 9. and this sense is most agreable to the apostles intent , which is to set forth the efficacy and validity of christs sacrifice above the legal ; which he doth here from the obedience and readiness of will to offer himself as he doth . heb. 10. 10. and the holiness of his person , or his being without spot or blemish , as he doth heb. 7. 26 , 27. 1 pet. 1. 19. no where that i find from the hypostatical union , or the spirituality , immortality , and glory of his humane body , or the immortality of his soul. 5. the term [ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 rom. 1. 4. ] is not rightly rendered [ determined or ordained son of god in power ] for though it be true , that the verb signifies appointment , ordination , or predestination , and that this last is used by the latin vulgar translation , and by sundry of the antients , and the verb is used so in the new testament , luk● 22. 22. acts 2. 23. and 10. 42. and 17. 26 , 31. in which places the appointment , or determination is by god of a thing future : yet that cannot be the meaning , rom. 1. 4. for then the sense should be , that christ should be appointed , or ordained , or determined by god , either that by power , according to his spiritual body by the resurrection of the dead he should be the son of god ; or else that his appointment , ordination or determination that he should be the son of god , was by power according to the spirit of holiness , that is his holy spirituall body , by the resurrection from the dead . this latter sense is most absurd ; it would intimate , as if gods determination were in power according to christs spiritual body by the resurrection of the dead ; whereas the determination of gods purpose , or his ordaining of things future , hath no cause but his will , his ordaining is not an act of power , though the execution of it be ; nor is the former sense true : for then the meaning should be , that christs being the son of god was consequent on the power , the spirit of holiness , and resurrection of the dead , sith ordaining or fore-appointing his sonship to be thereby supposeth them to be before , as the cause is before the effect , and his sonship to be future to them , or after them : but this is contrary to what is confessed by the adversaries , that he was the son of god before his resurrection , and is proved from , luke 1. 35. mat. 16. 16. john 6. 69. and heb. 5. 8. although he were a son yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered , which shews he was a son afore he learned obedience by the things which he suffered : for which reasons i like not to say as dr. pearson doth in his exposition on the second article of the creed , that he was defined , or constituted , and appointed the son of god in power by the resurrection from the dead ; nor that of grotius , that he was made a celestial king after his resurrection , and also before destinated to that kingdom by so many miracles done by divine power proper to him and dwelling in him , where the term son of god standing in contradistinction , to being of the seed of david , according to the flesh , is as much as a celestial king , and the participle determined is expounded by two other , made , and before destinated , the one noting a thing past , the other a thing future , so as that the same word in the same place shall signifie being made a celestial king after christs resurrection , and being aestinated before to that kingdom , and in power according to the spirit of holiness , shall be divine power proper to him ▪ and inhabiting in him by that spirit of holiness , that is force of divinity by which from the beginning of his conception he was sanctified , and by which he did miracles , and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , shall be after the resurrect on from the dead : none of which are made good by heb. 5. 9. acts 2. 30. or acts ●6 . 23. or any other which he produ●eth in his annot. on rom. 1. 4. nor do i conceive can be ; nor do i think d● . hammond his paraphr●se right [ but according to the spirit of holiness , or in respect of that other nature in him , called his eternal spirit , heb. 9. 14. ] ( far above all that is flesh and blood ) that , i say which shone in him most perfectly , after , and through , and by his resurrection from the dead , 2 cor. 13. 4. was set at gods right hand , the son of god in power , to whom accordingly as to a son , all power was given by the father ] for besides what before and after is , or will be said about the spirit of holiness , and eternal spirit , there is nothing of gods right hand in the text , nor doth [ set at gods right hand the son of god in power ] well explain [ determined the son of god in power ] nor is he rightly said to be set at gods right hand according to the spirit of holiness , or in respect of that other nature in him , called his eternal spirit , heb. 9. 14. for his being set at the right hand of god is not precisely according to that other nature , but rather according to that which he had of the seed of david according the flesh : nor is it fitly said that other nature did shine most perfectly after , through or by his resurrection from the dead , 2 cor. 13. 4. for though his being the son of god was proved by it , yet how the divine nature did shine in him through , by , after his resurrection from the dead is hard to understand , nor do any words in the text countenance such a paraphrase : wherefore not mis-liking dr. hammond's translation ▪ demonstrated or defined the son of god i● power ; nor that of the syriak interpreter who turns 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by , who was known ; i stick to that sense , which our translators have chosen , declared , or as chrysostom , in 〈…〉 t s it [ shewed , demo●strated or manifested to be the son of god over and above what he was of the seed of david according to the flesh ] and sundry others with him : and so [ determined ] notes not an act of the will of god concerning the futurity of a thing , but gods sentence as it were , setling the understanding by way of certification of what was surely so , or evidence of it as of a thing already , being to take away doubting , in the sense in which in the schools their resolutions concerning things in question , are called their determinations : in which sense i conceive it taken , heb. 4. 7. where 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by our translators rendered [ limiteth ] is the same which he expresseth , verse 8. he had not spoken of another day : and likewise that which declareth what a thing is , in logick is termed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or a definition of it , and the mood which is indicative , is termed by grammarians 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and the boundaries of lands are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , because they shew what is belonging to a person , and in composition hyppocrates his determinations , or declarations about medicines are entituled his aphorisms , and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a distinct explication of a thing : according to which exposition the meaning is , rom. 1. 4. that god had determined as it were by sentence in the resurrection of him from the dead , that christ jesus had another nature above that he had of the seed of david , to wit , that he was the son of god. 6. the resurrection of the dead cannot be meant of the general resurrection , as if the sense were , he is predestinated or fore-appointed that he shall be the son of god in power when he shall raise the dead , but of christs particular resurrection : for though the general resurrection shall most fully demonstrate the glory of christ , yet the determination being of a thing past , must be understood of his own resurrection : nor is it a sufficient exception against this , that the apostle saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the resurrection of the dead not from the dead , and that it is not by his resurrection from the dead , but the resurrection of the dead : for acts 26. 23. there is in st. paul's speech the same expression , where speaking of what the prophers fore-told of christs resurrection , he useth this expression 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , word by word , that he the first by rising of the dead , that is as he should suffer , so he should be the first or chief risen from the dead , who should shew or publish light to the people and the gentiles . 7. in power , rom. 1. 4. cannot be referred to the power of christ , whereby he did miracles , but to the power of god by which he was raised from the dead , of which the same apostle speaketh , 2 cor. 13. 4. for though he was crucified 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 through , or by reason of weakness , yet he liveth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because of , or by the power of god , 1 cor. 6. 14. and god hath both raised up the lord , and will also raise up us by his own power , rom. 6. 4. like as christ was raised from the dead by the glory ( that is the power ) of the father : which is confirmed in that he is said to be determined the son of god in power , which determination is referred to the fathers , and therefore the power is the fathers by which he is determined to be the son of god. 8. i confess the divine nature of christ is no where that i find , termed the spirit of holiness , or the holy spirit , nor the glorified body of christ , although god be termed a spirit , john 4. 24. and 2 cor. 3. 17. the lord is that spirit , which to me seems most likely to be meant of christ , who is in the epistles of paul most commonly meant by this title [ the lord ] and in the verse before meant , where it is said [ nevertheless when it shall turn to the lord ] that is christ ; and the next verse following [ but we all with open face beholding the glory of the lord ] that is jesus christ distinguished in the same verse from the holy spirit , termed the spirit of the lord , if it be not to be read , as from the lord the spirit , and so applied to christ : it is said that christ knew in his spirit , mark. 6. 8. that he grew , and waxed strong in spirit , or was strengthened by the spirit , luke 2. 40. that he groaned in spirit , joh. 11. 33. which may , or are to be understood otherwise than of his divine nature , john 6. 63. it is the spirit that quickneth , the flesh profiteth nothing , the words which i speak unto you are spirit , and are life , are meant otherwise than of christs divine nature , and 1 tim. 3. 16. justified in spirit , or in the spirit may be meant otherwise than of his divine nature , and so may quickened by the spirit , 1 pet. 3. 18. of which in that which follows : the spirit of christ is , rom. 8. 9. termed the spirit of god , and if the holy ghost , 1 cor. 2. 13 , 14. and 12. 3. and that which was born of mary is said to be that holy thing , which shall be called the son of god , luke 1. 35. and dan. 9. 24. he is termed the holy of holies , or as we read , the most holy , but no where the spirit of holiness . and therefore if the spirit of holiness note not the divine nature of christ , because it is no where in the scripture designed by the name of spirit , or spirit of holiness , the reason is as good against the interpretation of [ the spirit of holiness ] by [ the holy spiritual body of christ : ] nor is there likelehood that by [ spirit ] should be meant [ body ] sith spirit and body are opposed , or contradistinguished , 1 cor. 6. 20. and 7. 34. james 2. 26. 1 thes. 5. 23. &c. as well as flesh and spirit : and if by [ spirit of holiness ] be meant a constituting part of christ distinct from flesh , which he had by means of the resurrection , it cannot be meant of his body , which is the same in substance it was in the daies of his flesh , and so the same constituting part , differing only in quality and external condition , as having an alteration , not another generation or creation , and therefore cannot be rightly termed another constituting part : and this reason with the texts alledged do better countenance the understanding the deity of christ by [ the spirit of holiness ] than his holy spiritual body : yet for my part , i incline to neither , but rather to the opinion , that conceives by [ the spirit of holiness ] is meant the holy ghost , or third person of the sacred trinity , and that for these reasons . 1. because the term [ spirit of holiness ] is all one in sense with [ the holy spirit ] which is the usual title given to that person , mat. 28. 19. 2 cor. 13. 13. 1 john 5. 7. and is according to usual manner of expressing the adjective by the genitive case of the substantive , as the children of wisdom are wise children , children of obedience , 1 pet. 1. 14. obedient children , the children of l 〈…〉 , enlightned children , eph. 5. 8. 2. because the resurrection is ascribed to the spirit , rom. 8. 11. if the spirit of him that raised jesus from the dead , dwell in you , be that raised christ from the dead , shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his spirit that dwelleth in you , 1 pet. 3. 18. being put to death in the flesh , but quickened by the spirit . 3. because the sense thus seems to be easiest , and most agreeable to the apostles scope , who having said , that the son of god was made of the seed of david according to the flesh , noting a being beyond this , adds , that he was declared , determined , defined or resolved to be the son of god beyond his being the son of david with power , by his rising from the dead , which was by power , according to the spirit of holiness , that is the holy spirit , to whom acts of power are usually ascribed , as luke 1. 35. mat. 12. 28. which was an undoubted evidence of his being the son of god , or having a divine nature , sith he foretold it as a thing to be done by himself , john 2. 19. and 5. 25 , 26. and 10. 17 , 18. nor is it necessary that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 should note a constituting part , rom. 1. 4. for it may note an efficient cause mediate , as when it is said mark. 1. 27. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with authority he commandeth the unclean spirits , which is , luke 4. 36. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with authority and power , so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is by might , or mightily , heb. 7. 16. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to the power , is by vertue or reason of the power or proportion and congruity to the agent , as when it is said , rom. 1. 15. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as much as in me lies , and the sense be , in power according to the spirit of holiness , that is , with or through the holy spirit , or congruously , proportionably to the holy spirit ; which if it do not so fully answer the use of the preposition , yet we may say as dr. hammond in a like case , annot on mark. 9. 3. though the preposition do not favour this interpretation , yet the promiscuous uncertain use of prepositions among sacred writers is so observable , that it may take off much of that one objection . so far as my observation hath hitherto attained in the apostles and other writers greek expressions , if the apostle had intended that the spirit of holiness should note another constituting part , he should have put next to [ the son of god ] according to the spirit of holiness , as he did ver . 3. according to the flesh next to of the seed of david , but being put between with power and the resurrection of the dead , it seems not to note a constituting part , but the efficient cause of the resurrection , or subject of that power , by which christ was raised . 9. the distinct mention rom. 9. 5. of christs being of the fathers according to the flesh , that is his humane nature , and then adding , who is over all god blessed for ever , shews that he is over all god blessed for ever , according to his divine nature or deity : nor is the defect of the article a sufficient reason to the contrary , sith it is very frequent to put 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 without the article , where it is meant of god in nature , as 1 cor. 3. 16. 23. and 1. 24. and 2. 5. 7. &c. 10. in that god said to christ , psal. 110. 1. and he was then davids lord , acts 2. 34. when he knew , verse 30. that god had sworn with an oath to him , that of the fruit of his loins he would raise up christ to sit on his throne , it proves that christ was in being and was his lord afore he was his son , and so had a divine nature , though he was his son according to the flesh . sect . 18. the consubstantiality of christ with the father and us , is proved from 1 tim. 3. 16. the next text of scripture i shall insist on to prove the consubstantiality of christ to god and us , is 1 tim. 3. 16. where st. paul saith , and without controversy great is the mystery of godliness ; god was manifested in the flesh , justified in the spirit , seen of angels , preached unto the gentiles , believed on in the world , received up into glory : this passage is undoubtedly meant of the lord jesus , sith of no other are these things true , that ●e was manifested in the flesh , &c. and they are true of him : he was manifested in the flesh being made flesh , justified in , or by the spirit at his baptism , by his miracles , and at his resurrection to be , that which he said himself to be , the son of god , against the false accusations of the pharisees as a deceiver , confederate with satan ; seen of angels at his birth , temptation in the wilderness , agony in the garden , resurrection from the grave , and ascension into heaven , preached to the gentiles by his apostles , believed on in the world even by the gentiles , and received up in , or into glory at his ascension into heaven : now he of whom these things are said is god , therefore the same person , christ jesus is both god and man ; or consubstantial to the father in respect of his god-head , to us in respect of his man-hood . sect . 19. the exceptions against this proof . the exception against this argument is : 1. that the reading god was manifested in the flesh , is suspected to have been altered by nestorians , because the vulgar latin , the syriak , arabian interpreters , and ambrose all read [ which was manifested ] and refer it to the mystery of godliness , and so this sense is given of it , that the gospel was first made known not by angels , but by mortal men , and according to their outward appearance weak , christ and his apostles , as flesh , col. 1. 26. notes a mortal man , 2 cor. 2. 16. 1 john 4. 2. was justified in spirit ] that is , that truth was approved by many miracles , for spirit is miracles by a metonymy , which is , 1 cor. 2. 4. and elsewhere . and to be justified here is to be approved , as mat. 11. 19. so he is said to be justified , who in a contention is a conquerour , because his cause is approved , deut. 25. 1. add psal. 21. 6. ( i imagine grotius means , psal. 51. 4. ) [ seen of angels ] to wit , wi●h greatest admiration : angels le●rned this secret by mortal men , ephes. 3. 10. 1 pet. 1. 12. to see with the hebrews is translated to all manner of knowing : was preached to the gentiles ] that truth was not only declared to the jews , but also to the gentiles , who were most estranged from god , eph. 2. 12. col. 1. 21. believed in the world ] that is in a great part of the world , rom. 1. 8. col. 1. 6. received up in glory ] it was very gloriously exalted , to wit , because it brought much more holiness than any doctrines formerly : to be taken up is to be lifted up on high , and answers to the hebrew verbs 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in glory gloriously , phil. 4. 19. col. 3. 4. see al●●o , 2 cor. 3. 8. so they glorified the word of the lord , acts 13. 48. 2. others thus : god the father was manifested , that is , his will made known in the flesh , that is , with or by the infirmity of christ and his apostles , justified in spirit , taken or acknowledged for true by divine vertue which shined in christ as well as his apostles , or put forth it self powerfully by them ; was seen of angels , the good will of god towards men , was revealed to angels , received up in glory , the will of god was by many chearfully received and constantly retained , or the holy religion of christ was gloriously admitted and received . sect . 20. these exceptions are refelled . to which i reply : 1. that the reading of [ which ] instead of [ god ] should be followed against all copies of the original now extant is unreasonable , and not to be yielded to : the syriak , arabian , and latin are not to be put in the ballance with the greek copies : the latin translation is found and confessed even by romanists to be so faulty , as that it is not of itself to be rested on , much less are ambrose and hin 〈…〉 arus , who were mis-led by it : that nestoria●s should foyst in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 god is not likely , sith it is against their opinion , and was used by chrysostom before nestorius , and by cyril against the nestorians , as dr. pearson shews in his exposition of the creed , artic. 2. page 142. of the second edition . 2. by [ god ] cannot be meant , either god the father , or his will , or the gospel , or the truth of it . 1. because the words cannot be expounded so in either of the senses given : neither is god the father any where said to be manifested in the flesh , justified in the spirit , received up in glory : nor doth god manifested in the flesh signifie god , or his will , or gospel , or truth manifested in infirmity , or christ and his apostles in their infirmity , nor justified in , or by the spirit approved by miracles , nor seen of angels , learned by them from mortal men , nor received up in glory , admitted or received in mens minds : none of all the texts alledged countenance these expositions ; though flesh sometimes signifies mortal weak man , it being a word of very various acceptions , and the gospel is said to be manifested as col. 1. 26. and 2 cor. 2. 14. and gal. 4. 13. st. paul saith , he preached the gospel at first to the galatians through the infirmity of the flesh , yet no where is the gospel said to be manifested in the flesh , or flesh put simply for infirmity . that 1 joh. 4. 2. that jesus christ is come in the flesh , is against his sense of preaching the gospel in infirmity , it plainly noting his coming into the world in a humane nature , in the sense in which he said , john. 1. 14. the word was made flesh , and dwelt among us . though i deny not , that words of sense do often note other knowledge than by sense , yet these words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are scarce ever found to be applied to any thing but that which is descernable by sight : however if they were , yet the sense imagined hath no colour , sith it is not said , seen of angels by the church : 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies not receiving by men that glorifie it , but the glory of the person or thing manifested , phil. 4. 19. col. 3. 4. are not meant of such glory , or alacrity , or rejoycing , as is made the meaning of glory , 1 tim. 3. 16. nor do we find in the greek bibles such language as answers to the pretended exposition of it in that place : and for receiving the gospel , the usual word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , 1 thes. 1. 6. and 2. 14. acts 2. 41. not the word there used . 2. according to that exposition it would be an in●pt tautology to say , he was believed on in the world , and received up in glory if meant of receiving in mens hearts : for what is it to be believed on , but to be received in mens hearts ? which is not to be conceived of the apostle in these concise aphorismes . 3. there would be no mystery much less a great mystery without contradiction in that which the apostle saith , if the meaning were as it is made , sith gods will was often manifested by mortal men , even by all the prophets , who testified before-hand the sufferings of christ , and the glory that should follow , 1 pet. 1. 11. and approved by miracles done by moses , elias , elisha , known by angels who brought messages to daniel and others , preached to the gentiles by jonah at niniveh , believed in the world by the ninivites , received with alacrity ; as by david and others . 3. the words in the plain obvious sense , are truely and rightly expounded of jesus christ who is said to be god , john 1. 1 , 2. to come in the flesh in his humane nature , to be made flesh , john 1. 14. to be manifested in his works , john 2. 11. and his preaching , mark 1. 27. luke 7. 16 , 22. justified in the spirit , or by the spirit , either by the spirits descent on him at his baptisme john 1. 33 , 34. whereby he was proclaimed and proved to be the son of god , or by his miracles , as mat. 12. 28. against the accu 〈…〉 on of colluding with the devil , or at his resurrection as i conceive , rom. 1. 3 , 4. or by giving the holy ghost , acts 2. 33. seen of angels , luke 2. 11 , 12. mat. 4. 15. luke ●2 . 43. and 4. 4 , 5. acts 1. 10. preached to the gentiles , 1 cor. 1. 23. 2 cor. 1. 19. believed on in the world , rom. 1. 8. 1 t 〈…〉 . 1. 7 , 8. received up , the word used 1 tim. 3. 16. in glory , acts 1. 2 , 11 , 12. mark 16. 19. luke 9. 51 and 24. 26. 4. it being said god was manifested in the flesh and this meant of jesus christ proves he was ( before ) god , and then he had flesh , and therefore a humane and divine nature , and consubstantial to the father and to us sect . 21. the samething is confirmed from 1 pet. 3. 18 , 19 , 10. gal. 4. 4. rom. 8. 3. 1 john 4. 2. heb. 2. 14. and 10. 5. john 16. 28. to this i shall subjoyn for confirmation and explication , 1 pet. 3. 18 , 19 , 20. where christ is said to be put to death in the flesh , but quickened by the spirit : where flesh must note a constituting part , and yet the spirit note the efficient : for quickened noting his resurrection , cannot note his eternal holy spiritual body , as was conceived meant by the eternal spirit , heb. 9. 14. and the spirit of holiness , rom. 1. 4. for that was not till he was quickened , and therefore he not quickened in or by it ; nor his humane soul , for that dyed not , and therefore the spirit must note an efficient , and that must be either the divine nature of christ , or , as i conceive , the holy spirit , to whom his resurrection is ascribed , rom. 8. 11. called the power of god , 2 cor. 13. 4. as what is done by the spirit ; is said to be done by the power of god , luke 1. 35. mat. 12. 28. luke 11. 20. and he was quickened by the spirit by which he preached , verse 19. which was the holy spirit , gen. 6. 3. in the preaching of noah , 2 pet. 2. 4. and this was the spirit of christ , 1 pet. 1. 11. the holy ghost , 2 pet. 1. 21. in that spirit he went and preached to the spirits in prison , which were sometimes disobedient in the daies of noah , which those that deny christs divine nature , will not say to have been done in the th●ee daies of his death afore his resurrection , therefore in the da●es of noah , and consequently he had then a being , to wit a divine nature , otherwise he could not be said then to go and preach by the spirit by which he was quickened , nor the spirits in prison to have been disobedient , when once the long-suffering of god waited in the daies of noah , while the ark was a preparing . to these scriptures i add , gal. 4. 4. rom. 8. 3. the sending his son supposeth the sons being before , and so his divine nature , made of a woman , in the likeness of sinful flesh his humane , therefore he had both . to the same effect are those texts which speak of his coming in the flesh , as 1 john 4. 2. his taking part of flesh and blood , heb. 2. 14. where he that was superiour to angels antecedently , was made little lower than the angels , or debased below the angels , partaking flesh and blood , not ashamed to call them brethren , ver . 7 , 11. whom in respect of his native greatness he might have been ashamed to own as such , and therefore is supposed to have a being above man , afore he was a man : his coming into the world with a body prepared for him , out of obedience and compliance of will to his fathers , heb. 10. 5. john 16. 28. shews his being with his father before he was a man , and so a divine nature antecedent to his humane . sect . 22. christs consubstantiality with the father and us , is proved from philip. 2. 5 , 6 , 7 , 8. there yet remains that text , which is , philip. 2. 5 , 6 , 7 , 8. where the apostle speaks thus : let this mind be in you , which was also in christ jesus , who being in the form of god , thought , or counted it not robbery , or a spoil , or prey to be equal to god , or as god : but made himself of no reputation , or emptied himself , and took upon him the form of a servant , and was made in the likeness of men , or when he had been made like to men ( as meric . casaubon diatriba de usu verborum p. 66. ) and being found in fashion , or habit as man or a man , and became obedient , or rather being or becoming obedient unto death , even the death of the cross : in which i confess are sundry unusual expressions needful to be cleared , yet sufficient to prove him to have a divine and humane nature , sith he is said to have been in the ●orm of god first , and then to empty himself , to take on him the form of a servant , to be made in the likeness of men , to be found in fashion as a man , to humble himself to death , whence i may argue : he who be●ng in the form of god , counted it no robbery or prey that he was as god , emptied himself , taking the form of a servant when he was made in the likeness of men , and being found in fashion as a man , humbled himself , becoming obedient unt● death , had a divine and humane nature ; but this is true of jesus chr●st , therefore he had both natures . sect . 23. the exception against this argument is recited . to this argument the exception is thus made : the words and sense being thus : let this mind be in you , which was in christ jesus ; who being in the form of god ( for the exercise and demonstration of divine power , whereby he wrought miracles in as free and uncontrouled a manner as if god himself had been on the earth ) thought it not robbery ( or a prey ) to be equal with god ( that is did not esteem this equality of his with god , consisting in the free exercise of divine power , to be a prey , by holding it fast , and refusing to let it go , as robers are want to do when they have got a prey or booty ) but ( gr. ) emptied himself ( in making no use of the divine power within him to rescue himself out of the hands of the officers sent to apprehend him ) and took upon him the form of a servant ( in suffering himself to be apprehended , bound and whipt as servants are wont to be ) being made in the likeness of men ( that is ordinary and vulgar men , who are endued with no d●vine power ) and being found in fashion ( or habit ) as a man ( that is , in outward quality , condition and acting , no whit differing from a common man ) he humbled himself , and became obedient unto death , even the death of the cross. sect . 24. the text is explained in order to the refelling of the exception . to clear this text , and argument , and so to refel the exception , it will be necessary to enquire what is meant : 1. by the form of god. 2. by being in the form of god. 3. by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . 4. by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . 5. by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . 6. by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . 7. by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . 8. by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . 9. by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . 10. by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . 11. by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . 12. by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . 13. by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . 14. by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . 15. by found . 16. by humbled himself . 17. by becoming obedient . 18. when he was in the form of god. 19. when he emptied himself ▪ 20. when he took the form of a servant . 1. it is true that form 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is most commonly applied to signific something outward which is the object of sight , and therefore grotius conceives , that by the form of god is meant the glory of his miracles . but as dr. casa●bon in the place before cited , rightly observed , where it is used for something which appears to the sight , it is never used for excellent power , or divine power in working miracles , but for the outward visage , when it hath splendour , beauty and excellent lustre , attractive of the eyes , and moving desire or lust , or giving occasion to conceive in the person majesty , or an heroical spirit within , and so awing others , or procuring dread or reverence of him . now it is certain christ had not in the daies of his flesh such a form , but as the prophet foretold , isa. 53. 2. he grew up before god as a tender plant , and as a root out of a dry ground : he had no form nor comeliness : and when he was seen there was no beauty that they should desire him , but in outward appearance he was poor and despicable ; nevertheless the verbs simple and compound do signifie something inward and not conspicuous to the eyes . thus it is meant when st. paul saith gal. 4. 19. my little children of whom i travail in birth until christ be formed in you , rom. 12. 2. be ye transformed in the renewing of your mind , 2 cor. 3. 18. we are transformed after the same image . and if in the holy scripture the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 form signifie not that which is inward and hidden , yet in aristotle and other authours , the word signifies the essence or that constitutive essential part of a substance , which differenceth one substance from another , which is defined by aristotle 2d . physick . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the reason of its being such a thing : and indeed many understand by the form of god , the essence or nature of god. but to the contrary is . 1. that form hath the same notion , phil. 2. 6. in the term form of god , as it hath verse 7. in the term form of a servant ; but in that notion of the essence or nature of a servant , it cannot be said christ took the form of a servant , for that is a m●er relation , and if he had taken the essence of a servant by being incarnate it had been the same with being made in likeness of men , and so he could not have put off the essence of a servant , no more than the essence of a man , if his taking the form of a servant had been by being made a man : besides the nature of man is not the essence of a servant ; man may be lord as christ man is lord of all , acts 10. 36. and yet hath the essence of man , and angels are servants and yet have not the essence of man. 2. it is said , christ emptied himself , to wit , of the form of god in which he was , which notes some lessening or laying aside of the form of god , in wh●ch he was ; but that could not be the divine essence , therefore it is not here meant . nor is it to be conceived , that by the form of god is meant the power of doing miracles : for neither is the power of miracles any where termed the form of god , and if that were all that is meant , it might be said of moses and elias that they were in the form of god : besides he did not empty himself of the power or exercise of it whereby he did miracles at any time , no not when he was apprehended , for even then the souldiers at his word went backward and fell to the earth , john 18. 6. and he restored malch●s his ear cut off by peter , luke 22. 5● . although he did not use his power to rescue himself . therefore it is more likely that by form of god is meant the state or majesty of god , that glory which he had with his father before the world was , john 17. 5. the exercise of his empire , which he had opposite to the state of a servant which he took , and to the obedience which he yielded to his father , ver . 7 , 8. for the estate of god is an estate of empire and command exercising power and dominion , giving of gifts to friends , helping subjects , subduing enemies , which christ did with the father before he took flesh , but emptied himself of it in his humiliation : which is the more confirmed in that his superexaltation , verse 9. restored that which he emptied himself of : now that was his glory and majesty , all things being made subject to him . and this seems best to agree with the use of the term form , as here it seems to be used : for as the form of a servant notes that which made him appear to others to be under the command of another , to wit , of his father , which was that he should lay down his life and take it again , john 10. 18. which was undoubtedly conspicuous to the angels , and also to those who knew him to be the son of god ; so the form of god notes that majesty , glory , exercise of empire which he had with his father , which was apparent to the holy angels , and to abraham who saw his day , and to jacob and other holy persons afore his incarnation , and is the same with his being as god , or equal to god. 2. from hence then we may understand what is meant by his being in the form of god , to wit his possession and enjoyment of that glory he had with his father before the world was , john 17. 5. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 notes the subsistence or being of his person , and the form of god notes his estate of glory and majesty , which i conceive expressed by that of the apostle , 2 cor. 8 , 9. ye know the grace of our lord jesus christ , that though he were rich , yet for your sakes he became poor , that ye through his poverty might be rich . 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may be expounded either as an adjective as our translatours render it , equal with god , or as an adverb , and so it is used twelve times in the greek ve●sion of the book of job , wisdome 7. 3. in homer , and else-where , and answers to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the hebrew , and notes likeness , and may be translated , as god : now whether of these two waies it is to be read , is in my apprehension difficult : i incline to the latter . 1. because nothing is expressed that may be as a substantive to it , whereas if it were an adjective , either 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 himself , used ver . 7 ▪ or as came●arius in his note observes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 his things , should be added : as for that which is by pasor in his lexicon voce 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from zanch. de incarnatione filii dei , lib. 1. c. 2. imagined , as if there were an ellipsis of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and the sense were , that he was equally god , as god , that is the father ; it is a bold supplement , that hath not any thing to countenance it in the text , and gives much advantage to them that say , he is not the same god. in that which he mentions out of posselius his syntaxis , p. 134. [ that it is an hellen●sm , and it is put for the noun substantive equality , as if by the article 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the infinitive mood were turned into a noun , and the sense were as in the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he gives it , he did not snatch , or catch by rapine equality with god ] the interpretation doth suppose , that he counted it not rapine , is all one with , he did not take by rapine , and the verb substantive of the infinitive mood , to be turned into a noun , whereas it is drowned in his sense , and if it were made a noun , it should be thus read , he did not take by rapine being equality with god , whi●h hath no good sense , and the adjective or adverb is made a noun substantive , not the infinitive mood , and the noun of equality is made to govern a d●tive case without any example , when according to that sense by rule god should be in the genitive : i confess where 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is used adverbially it doth most commonly note simili●ude of action , yet similitude of being is sometimes expressed by it , as job 11. 12. in the greek , and elsewhere , and though it note equality , yet also it notes likeness ; and in the same chapter , v. 20. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is translated like minded , and this doth best answer to the use of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , ver . 6 , 7 , 8. which note likeness of estate or condition , yet comprehending withall reality of nature . 2. if it were to be read to be equal with god , it would intimate , that he emptied himself of it as the adversative ; but verse 7. shews , and the phrase , he counted it not a prey , do evince ; but equality with god he could not empty himself of , but must hold it as a prey not to be let go , the contrary whereof the text doth propound for our imitation . 4. whence it seems most likely , that the thing he means by his being as god , was his commanding as god , his like doing with his father mentioned , john 5. 17 , 19. which he did in his presence , and such glory as he had then , and now had not as before , but prayes for its restitution , john 17. 5. of which see what is said before , sect. 16. zanchius parte secunda de tribus elo●im , l. 3. c. 2. § . 4. quasi filius hominis cum nubibus c●li venit , hoc est christus pervenit ad gloriam de●tatis post resurrectionem , sicut ego cum m●gnis viris intelligo . 5. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is a rare word , yet seems to have the same sense with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , &c. and notes either rapinam or raptum , the act of taking or carrying away , or the thing taken , or ca 〈…〉 d away , both which are expressed by the greek word , and by the word [ robbery ] which our t●anslators use to answer it , yet i rather render it prey , or spoil , as expressing only the thing gotten , not the act of getting . 1. because 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 cannot be meant of the acquisition , but the thing possessed . 2. it is more agreable to the phrase of emptying himself , which presupposeth a thing had or possessed , which was the form of god , and being as god , and the thing possessed as robbers or beasts of prey get what they have . 3. the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is so used by the greek interpreters , job 29. 17. isa. 42. 22. isa. 61. 18 , &c. for the thing gotten , although in the latter place it be translated robbery , and the term robbed is as well meant of the person from whom , as the thing gotten by robbery : so also it is used levit. 6. 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , that which he took violently away , ezek. 19. 6. ezek. 18. 7 , 13 , 16 , 18. ezek. 23. 25 , 27. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . 6. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 translated by the vulgar latine arbitratus est , by beza duxit , by ours thought , may either note an act of judgement , or affection , or purpose , or use : in the first sense to think it not a prey is as much as he did not judge , that the being as god was a thing stoln or gotten by any force or fraud , usurped , or plundered from another , but his own whether by inheritance or free donation : but this is not likely , partly because the inward act of judgement or cogitation is not here propounded to be imitated , but some act of will or affection manifested by outward action or patent fact , which is apparent by the exhortation , verse 5. where the apostle saith , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , let the same mind be in you which was also in christ jesus , that is have the same will , purpose , resolution , action as he had , who was so far from doing any thing through st●●fe and vain-glory , that he preferred others before himself , not looking at his own things , but the things of others , which he shewed by his not holding fast his excellency , but emptying himself ; partly also because the act of thinking here denied must be opposite to his emptying himself : for the particle [ but ] being adversative shews the thinking it robbery to be equal with god , or to be as god to be contrary to the emptying ; now if the not thinking were as much as not judging , then the emptying must be an alteration of his thoughts , or a privation of it , which hath no congruous sense : for the emptying was of himself , or that which he was in being , not of his thoughts of himself , or having other thoughts of himself : besides the not thinking it robbery or a prey is not an act of sentence determining what was his own or right he had to a thing , but an act of purpose , that notwithstanding his right or possession , yet his resolution was not to retain it , but ( as the emptying , verse 7. shews ) tending to a dereliction of it for a time in obedience to his father whom he would glorifie on earth , by finishing the work he gave him to do , though by abasing himself , as he saith in his prayer to his father , john 17. 4. where he relates the event of his errand and business for which he came into the world , and for which he took on him the form of a servant : which ●eason evacuates that sense which is given by grotius , heinsius , and if there be any other , that imagine the sense to be according to a speech of john baptist in the syriak liturgy , that he would not assumere rapinam , that is , do such an injurious thing as to pretend to have greater authority than christ , that christ did not think it a wrong to his father that he was equal to him , or had power of miracles , and was beheld as god , as grotius his phrase is : for his act did suppose his ●ight , but expresseth his intent notwithstanding his right , and this antecedent to his emptying himself , taking the form of a servant , being made in the likeness of men , and ●ending thereto removendo prohibens by removing that which might hinder his emptying himself , not disclaiming his right , but relinquishing his possession of what he had , not doing as robbers or others , who hold what they have gotten by violence as long as they have any power to keep it , but freely and voluntarily in dutiful subjection to his father , yielding it up to his hands from whom he received it , in order to the accomplishment of his will , as it is expressed , heb. 10. 9. and this also helps to shew that piscator and those who follow him do mistake in the notion of this phrase , as if it were , as if the apostle had said , he did not as men that have gotten a spoil by victory , triumphantly make shew of it , but did rather conceal , or hide it at least , for the greatest part of his life forbidding the divulging his miracles , and that confession which peter made , mat. 16. 20. and the vision in the mount at his transfiguration , mat. 17. 9. for then his not thinking it a spoil should be after his emptying , which was when he took the form of a servant , being made in the likeness of men , whereas it was before , and in his not thinking should be no act of obedience , whereby he took the form of a servant , nor can be rightly made as tending to the act of emptying himself , which was not in the opinion of others , but in his own diminution , nor did he conceal or hide himself , but both by miracles and expresse speeches shew himself to be the son of god , john 1. 14. and 2. 11. and 10. 30 , 32 , 36 , &c. although for some time he inhibited his disciples to divulge some peculiar revelations , that no impediment might be to the great design of his suffering and rising from the dead , which he should accomplish at jerusalem , according to moses and elias their conference with him , luke 9. 31. nor could these inhibitions to some persons be indeed his emptying himself , or making himself of no reputation , or not thinking it robbery or spoil gotten by conquest that he was as god , by not triumphantly boasting of it , but concealing it : for in the event notwithstanding those prohibitions his glory was so known , that immediately his fame spread abroad throughout all the region round about galilee , mark 1. 28. and he who was forbidden to speak of his curing him , yet went out and began to publish it much , and to blaze abroad the matter , insomuch that jesus could no more openly enter into the city , but was without in desart places , and they came to him from every quarter , mark 1. 45. wherefore i conceive , that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 notes a denial of an act elicite of the mind and affections , in esteeming , valuing , affecting , or making account of his being as god , as men do of a prey gotten by violence , which they do so affect or rejoyce in it that they cannot part with it . 2. of an act imperate of the members in retaining it by claiming or asserting of it , and contending to keep it as a thing which they will not yield up but by force ; and the sense is , christ being in the form of god , that is the glory of his father as associate with him in his empire , did not esteem or hold that his being as god , as if it had been a prey gotten by violence , which he would not relinquish without force ; but &c. which importance of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is agreable to the use of it in this epistle , philip. 2. 3. and 3. 7. 8. where his accounting all things as loss and dung notes his esteem and dereliction of them as such , and the like use is elsewhere , 1 thes. 5. 13. 2 thes. 3. 15. 1 tim. 1. 12. and 6. 1. heb. 10. 29. and 11. 26. james 2. 1. besides what occurs in other authours . and hereunto i may accommodate some of the words which dr. merick casaubon cites in his diatriba de usu verborum p. 52. out of cornelius a lapide the jesuite , as chrysostom and vatablus observe , rapere to catch or take by violence signifies by a metalepsis studiously and contentiously to retain something as if it were snatcht or caught by violence 〈◊〉 rapine , as if he said , christ did not catch , nor ambitiously sought , as lucifer , isa. 14. 13. the equality of god , not as robbers are wont ( while they being guilty of their evil doing , fear least they should lose it ) studiously ke●p and ambitiously defend the thing caught by them ; but rather of his own accord as a lawful lord deposed it , or let it go and emptied himself : for the adversative particle [ but ] which follows , when he saith , but he emptied himself requires this : otherwise it will not be so much an adversative as an explicative , and will be taken improperly , sed , pro , veruntamen , but , for , nevertheless : which leads us to the consideration of verse 7. 7. where i take 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as an adversative rightly rendered [ but ] not [ yet ] or [ nevertheless ] to which answers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the greek , and it notes something contrary to what it is said he did not , verse 6. which being the holding of his being as god , that which he did is to be conceived contrary to it , expressed by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , which our translators render made himself of no reputation , and that is by many conceived to have been by concealing or hiding from men his being as god ; but this , as i shewed before , is not right , sith christ did manifest his glory so as that they beheld his glory as of the only begotten son of god full of grace and truth , john 1. 14. and by his words and works did indeed what did , and might make him of great reputation , so that he was a prophet mighty in deed and word before god and all the people , luke 24. 19. and is contrary to what is said , 1 john 3. 5 , 8. 1 tim. 3. 16. god was manifested in the flesh ; and also must restrain this act to the time of his converse with men , whereas the text makes it to have been either antecedent or coincident with his taking the form of a servant , being made in the likeness of men : nor is it said , he diminished his esteem , or begat in others a low opinion of him , but he emptied or evacuated himself , that is , became less full than he was ; which is not rightly referred by grotius , to his living a poor life , but notes some act antecedent to his conversing with men : heinsius likes it better to render it humbled , than emptied himself , alledging chrysostom exercit. saer . l. 11. c. 2. but sith the apostle useth that word , verse 8. as a further act of christs submission of himself beyond that of emptying , verse 7. they are not rightly confounded , but the emptying is to be taken as an act of privation in some sort of somewhat he had , and the humbling to subjection to what was appointed him to suffer . rightly saith dr hammond in his annotation on philip. 2. 7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies to lessen , diminish ; so pharorinus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to suffer or undergo diminution , so the hebrew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which jerem. 4. 4. ( it should be 2. ) and 15. 9. is ●rendered 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to empty , is joel 1. 10 , 12. nehem. 1. 4. ( mis-printed for nahum 1. 4. ) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to diminish , and hos. 4 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , to make little : a diminution then or lessening , or priva 〈…〉 is expressed by it , which is to be conceived to be the form of god , his being as god , the glory he had in possession with his father , when he commanded with him , but now in respect of use and enjoyment laid it aside , lessened himself from the condition of being lord of all , to that of a subject and ordinary man , as dr. hammond speaks in his paraphrase , which is confirmed in that it is expressed in the words following , taking the form of a servant , being made in the likeness of men , wherein this emptying of himself did consist . 8. the form of a servant cannot be interpreted merely of christs v●sage or outward aspectable form : for 1. there is no such outward form which doth distinguish a freeman from a servant or slave , but that the one is often as comely and beautiful as the other . 2. though it be true that by reason of his suffering , his visage was so marred more than any man , and his form more than the sons of men , as the prophet fore-told , isa. 52. 14. yet he took not this form , but it was put on him by his enemies : his whipping , binding and leading away was not the form of a servant , but of a prisoner , and he took not these , but under-went them when they were inflicted on him : his crucifying it is true , was servile supplicium , the punishment of slaves , but it was inflicted on others also ; even then when he was crucified others were crucified with him , not as servants , but as thieves and robbers , and upon him it was inflicted as on a malefactor , so that it was written in the title of his condemnation , the king of the jews , and he was numbered with the transgressors , mark 15. 26 , 28. and he was made a curse for us , as it is written , cursed is every one that ●angeth on a tree , gal. 3. 13. nor is taking of the form of a servant referred only to his outward poverty , as grotius conceives , that he took on him the form of a servant , in that he had nothing of his own , as he said of himself , mat. 8. 20. for that is not the form of a servant , it may be the estate of a son in minority , gal. 4. 1. and though it were true , that he had no certain dwelling place , yet he had a bag kept by judas , out of which distribution might be made to the poor , john 13. 29. nor is it his humane nature , for then it had been the same with being made in the likeness of men : nor are all mens servants , and he by his super-exaltation , verse 9. left the form of a servant , not his humane nature : besides the form of a servant which he took was not to men , but to god , as appears , from verse 8. where it is said , he became obedient unto death : his obedience was to god his father , as appears from verse 9. therefore god , that is god the father , verse 11. highly exalted him , for his obedience to him , heb. 5. 8. though he were a son , yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered , now rom. 6. 16. his servant any one is to whom he obeys : and therefore christ obeying his father is often stiled his servant , isa. 52. 13. and 42. 1. mat. 12. 18. 9. his taking then the form of a servant was his submission of himself to his fathers command , according to that which he saith , john 6. 38. i came down from heaven , not to do mine own will , but the will of him that sent me , and this was his emptying himself : for it is rightly observed by dr. pearson explic. of the creed , art . 2. p. 135. of the second edition , that the apostle explains the emptying of himself , by adding the taking the form of a servant , not by way of conjunction , but by way of apposition , though i do not conceive , that signifies a clear identity , as he speaks : but that which follows is right , that it is necessary to observe , that our translation of that verse is not only not exact , but very dis-advantagious to that truth which is contained in it : for we read it thus : he made himself of no reputation , and took upon him the form of a servant , and was made in the likeness of men : where we have two copulative conjunctions , neither of which is in the original text , and three propositions without dependance of one upon the other ; whereas all the words together , are but an expression of christs exinanition , with an explication shewing in what it consisteth : and this also sheweth what was the form of god , and his being as god , like , or equal to god , to wit his dominion and empire with his father , that fulness which he emptyed himself of by taking the form of a servant , which was restored to him when he was highly exalted , made universal head over all , ephes. 1. 20 , 21 , 22 , 23. 1 pet. 3. 22. heb. 1. 13 , 14. and by his being made universal judge , philip. 2. 9 , 10 , 11. compared with rom. 14. 9 , 10 , 11. 10. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , by us translated of men , is without ground conceived to note , not the nature of man simply considered , but the state of men in an abject condition : for , 1. there is no example in the apostles writings of the use of it in that notion . 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the likeness of men , is the same with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the likeness of flesh , rom. 8. 3. and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , fashion or shape as a man , which notes humane nature or feature simply considered : nor do the two texts alledged for the interpreting of men as noting an abject condition , serve for that purpose : psal. 82. 7. where it is said , ye shall dye 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as men , is so far from noting an abject condition that it plainly notes the condition of mortality common to all ; and the emphasis is , that though god said , verse 6. they were gods , and all the sons of the most high , in respect of their office and dignity , yet they should dye as common men , and fast as one of the princes ; ainsworth's note is [ as earthly men ] as adam ; that is as any other mortal man : so after , as one of the princes , that is , of the other princes of the world : see the like , judges 16. 7 , 11 , 17. which also shews us how to understand the expression , judges 16. 7 , 11. that sampson said of himself , that he should be weak and be as one of men , where men notes not the state of abject serv●le men , debassd below other men , or peculiar to some men in such a rank or estate , but a state common to other men , not elevated above ordinary men by an heroical spirit , and excellent strength , which is apparent from the expressions , verse 13. i shall be weak as one of men , and verse 17. i shall be weak and be as all men , or as tremellius reads it , sicut unus aliquis homo , as some one man , and so notes this , that then he should have but the strength of one man : nor is that conceit of grot●us in his note on philip. 2. 7. any better , made in the likeness of men ] when he was like to men , to wit , those first men , that is without sin , 2 cor. 5. 21. which hath no example of using [ men ] for [ the first men ] and the apostles expression like to that here , rom. 8. 3. rather ins●nuates the contrary , that he was like to sinful men , when he said , god sending his own son , is the likeness of sinful flesh and for sin condemned sin in the flesh : therefore in the likeness of men is to be expounded of them as men according to their humane nature . 11. likeness of men notes not a bare image or representation , or resemblance as in a vision or picture , but as a child is said to be begotten in his fathers likeness , gen. 5. 3. and so the authour to the hebrews , ch . 2. 17. saith , in all things it behoved christ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be made li●e unto his brethren , that is , to have the same humane nature in all parts that they have : thus it is said , rom. 9. 29. and as esaias said before , except the lord of sabboth had left us a seed , we had been as sodom , and been made like as gomorrah , from isa. 1. 9. where to be , and to be like are the same : more to the same purpose may be seen in heinsius aristar . sac . in nonnum c. 19. 12. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is well rendered made in the likeness of men , but it is without example or reason referred to an act of men , as if they by their injurious usage had thus made him to be as ordinary and vulgar men , who are endued with no divine power , or he had by an act of will made himself in his sufferings as such , but it was by the act of gods power , that he was made in the likeness of men , and it was when he assumed a humane nature , or to use the same apostles words , gal. 4 4. but when the fulness of time was come , god sent forth his son , made or born of a woman made ( the same word which is used , philip. 2. 7. ) under the law , or as it is luke 1. 35. the holy ghost shall come upon the● , and the power of the most high shall over-shadow thee : and therefore it is expounded as expressing the time of his taking the form of a servant , and to be read , when he was made in the likeness of men , or as dr. pearson's exposition hath it , he took the form of a servant by being made in the likeness of men , that is as he after expresseth it , when christs body first was framed , even then did he assume the form of a servant : in which expression he doth rightly make this place parallel to that of heb. 10. 5. a body hast thou prepared me , which answers to psal. 40. 7. concerning which i shall use the words of mr. gataker in his cinnus l. 2. c. 11. junius , and after him pis●ator would have the kingly prophet to have had respect to that right of boaring the servants ear , and fastning it to his masters post , who was willing to be still a servant , mentioned exod. 21. 6. when under the person of the lord christ , he said , psal. 40. 7. thou hast boared mine ears , as if he had said , thou hast addicted me to service and perpetual ministry : whence isa. c. 42. verse 1. behold my servant , &c. for which the greeks , and the apostle following them , heb. 10. 5. but a body hast thou made up for me , because to wit , then he put on the form of a servant , when he assumed humane flesh , and even the likeness of sinful flesh , rom. 8. 3. philip. 2. 7. so that the apostle shews not the identity ▪ but the coincidency of these , the taking the form of a servant , being made in the likeness of men : nor can the taking the form of a servant be referred either to the servile or mean condition he had , when he conversed among men ; or his being made in the likeness of men to any subjection of himself consequent on his apprehension , binding and scourging . 13. the word we translate in fashion , signifies the outward habit of the body , in aristotles categories the shape or figure of it , in geom 〈…〉 the various sc 〈…〉 uations of lines and angles , in rhetorick the various modes or manners of expressions in speech , the gestures of the body , the affections of the mind , the accidents , occurrences , order of things subl●nary , 1 cor 7 31. here it notes the shape or fea●ure of a man , and that with reality of humane nature , as form and likeness were also used . 14. a man notes not either a man in his dejected 〈◊〉 , so as that the sense should be , being found in fashion ( or habite ) as a man ( that is in outward quality , condition , and acting , no whi● differing from a common man ) it being the same with the likeness of men , verse 7. nor as grotius in his note , schema is here axioma , conspicuous dignity , as often with the greeks , which word also the syriak interpreter here used : and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was seen , as a man , as adam , that is with dominion over all the creatures , the sea , winds , bread , water : for which cause that which was said of adam in psal. 8. is applied mystically to christ : for neither is [ man ] put any where in the new testament that i find , for [ adam ] but still either adam , or the first man , nor is it here put with the article 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , as if it noted a special or singular man by excellency , but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a man , that is a man simply considered according to humane nature : nor is the particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as here used as noting only likeness without reality of nature , but as sect. 22. is shewed it to be used , john 1. 14. and elsewhere , as a confirming and assuring particle noting certainty : and surely where that in psal. 8. is applied to christ mystically , heb. 2. 6. it notes not man in conspicuous dignity , but rather as contemptible , as the words , what is man that thou art mindful of him ? and thou hast lessened him for a little time below angels shew , nor is it peculiarly meant of adam , but of men , as men , as the word son of man shews , although it be mystically fulfilled in christ alone , and he be by excellency stiled man , or the son of man. 15. found notes not apprehension of him , when he was betrayed by judas , and laid hold on by the souldiers ; for it was afore his humbling himself and obedience to death , and if the form of a servant did note his whipping , and servile usage which was after his apprehension , and yet is set down by the apostle as antecedent to being found in fashion as a man ; his finding cannot be referred to his apprehension : nor is his being found appropriated to the time of his conspicuity in the exercise of his dominion over the creatures , but the fashion as a man being the same with the likeness of men , it notes only his appearing or being as a man , simply considered among men , the word found frequently noting only being or appearing to be , phil. 3. 9. gal. 2. 17. 2 cor. 5. 3. and 11. 12. 1 pet. 1. 7. rom. 7. 10. luke 17. 18 , &c. 16. that of grotius , he humbled himself ] he did not behave himself according to that dignity , but very humbly , so as to wash his disciples feet , john 13. 12 , 13. as he emptied , so he humbled , are of the form hiphil , but signifie to exhibit or shew himself such : so also the latins say , to make himself courteous ] is not right , the humbling noting not an exercise of the vertue of humility , but patient subjection to affliction , and that not by shewing humility only but by patient undergoing of it : and thus is it used , phil. 4. 8. i know how 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be abased or humbled , as appears by the oposite term to abound , and by other places , where he useth the same of himself , 2 cor. 11. 7. and 12. 21. and is apparent in that the humbling himself is in the text opposite to his superexaltation , verse 9. now that doth not oppose the vertue of humility and the exercise of it , which consists with his exaltation but the state of a person debased , which is removed by his super-exaltation : besides this very place is parallel with that , acts 8. 32. out of isa. 53. 7. where of christ , philip expounds the words of that prophet , he was led as a sheep to the slaughter , and like a lamb dumb before the shearer , so he opened not his mouth ▪ in his humiliation ( the noun in the greek derived from the verb phil. 2. 8. and so explains it ) his judgment ( or right ) was taken away , and who shall declare his generation ? for his life is taken away from the earth . lastly , the text shews wherein his humiliation consists , which was in his being obedient unto death , even the death of the crosse , which is not rightly translated by our translators , and became obedient , putting a conjunction copulative without cause as they did , verse 7. and so obscure the meaning of the apost●e , but it is to be read by apposition , becoming obedient , and so shewing wherein the humbling of himself was . 17. grotius his note here is not right : he was made obedient to wit to men , jews as well as romans : he opposed not that divine power to them that took him , condemned him , slew him : so great injuries he patiently underwent for the good of men ; for it was shewed before that the obedience was to his father , otherwise there had not been such reason of his super-exaliation , as is expressed , vers . 9 , 10 , 11. 18. by this which hath been said , it may appear , that christs being in the form of god ; and not accounting it as a prey to bb equal or as god was afore his being a man , and consequently , that he had a divine being as god afore he was incarnate , and therefore consubstantial to the father as touching his god-head . 19. it may appear that then christ emptied himself , when he took the form of a servant , who was antecedently in the form of god , when he came not to be ministred to but to minister , and to give his life a ransom for many , mat. 20. 28. 20. that then he did this when he was made in the likeness of men , had a body prepared for him , which proves him to be consubstantial to us according to his man-hood , which thing was to be demonstrated . sect . 25. some objections against the proof from philip. 2. 5 , 6 , 7 , 8. are answered . nevertheless i meet with some arguments to the contrary , which i think fit to set down in the authours words . 1. he setteth before them christs example exhorting to humility , and therefore the act of christ which he doth exemplify must be manifest : but to whom was , or could that incarnation , which christians commonly talk of , be manifest , when they themselves say it passeth the understanding of angels to comprehend it ? to which i answer : it was manifest by the angels and others revelation , and the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that it was so was comprehensible , as is proved before , although the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or manner how it was be incomprehensible , we are to imitate god in many of his works , the manner of which is incomprehensible by us , as being performed immediately , or by invisible agents , in secret manner ; as magistrates are to imitate god in his righteous judgement , though it be unsearchable in respect of the manner ; parents are to imitate god in his providence for his creatures , though the manner of doing it be indiscernible , and therefore the incomprehensibleness of the incarnation hinders not , but that it being revealed may be propounded as an imitable pattern : yet in this of our apostle it is to be observed that he propounds not only christs incarnation , but also his humiliation in becoming obedient unto death , as an example to be imitated by the philippians . 2. the apostle speaketh of our lord as a man , in that he giveth him the titles of christ jesus , both which agree to him onely as a man : for he is called jesus as he was a child conceived of the holy spirit in the virgins womb , and brought forth by her , luke 1. 27 , 30 , 31 , 35. and christ signifieth the anointed , john 1. 41. and accordingly jesus is expressly called the christ of god , luke 9. 20. but he was anointed ( as the adversaries themselves will confesse ) as a man , and not as god ; see acts 10. 38. whereto i answer , the title philip. 2. 5. is given to him , who being in the form of god , took on him the form of a servant , being made in the likeness of men , and therefore as god-man : and though the name jesus was given to him upon his conception , or birth , yet it follows not , therefore only as a man : yea the exposition of the appellation as the same with immanuel , mat. 1. 23. the son of god , luke 1. 35. doth intimate the title given to him as god , rather than only as man : it is true , his anointing was as man , and that it may be gathered from acts 10. 38. yet he who was anointed had a divine nature , and under both these is considered , philip. 2. 5. where he is propounded for an example , to wit , in that being in the form of god , he emptied himself , being made in the likeness of men : he who is propounded as an example , was a saviour , and anointed , but yet not to be imitated in his saving and anoi●ting , but in his obedience to his father and condescension to us , by laying aside his glory and maj●sty , and becoming as a servant to his father for us , in which god was with him , and he also god with us , consubstantial with his father afore , with us at his incarnation . 3. had the apostle here spoken of an assumption of the humane nature , he would not have said , that christ became in the likeness of men , and was found in fashion as a man : for if men ( as the adversaries must hold , when they alledge this place to prove that christ assumed a humane na●ure , and became man ) be here considered according to their essence and nature , this would imply that christ had not the essence and nature , but only the likeness and fashion of a man , and so was not a true and real man : by men therefore are here meant vulgar and ordinary men ; for so this word is elsewhere taken in the scriptures , as psal. 82. 6. i have said , ye are gods ; and all of you are children of the most high : but ye shall dye like men , and fall like one of the princes : and judges 16. 7. then shall i be weak , and be as one of men ( so the hebrew ekadh haadam signifieth ; ) see also ver . 11. of the same chapter . i answer hereto , that likeness agrees to substance or essence , and not only to quality or condition , and that in neither of the places alledged men is taken for men as abject , is shewed before : if this objection were of force it would prove christ was made not a really weak man , but in the likeness or fashion of weak men , if [ men ] be considered not as men , but as weak and abject men , philip. 2. 7 , 8. which it concern'd the objector to have heeded as well as the adversaries : notwithstanding then this objection men and man , phil. 2. 7 , 8. may and must be understood of humane essence and nature , not restrainedly as applied only to men of a vulgar , ordinary , low or weak condition , and christ hence proved to be incarnate , and to have both natures , divine and humane . other arguments against the understanding by the form of god the condition or state of empire , which christ had with his father before his incarnation are in the first part of the disputation of josue placeus of saumur concerning the arguments by which it is evinced christ to have been before his conception , disp . 5th . out of philip. 2. 6. § . 18. in these words , yet in very deed the form of god seems not to us to be placed in commanding : for we dare not affirm that god was not in that infinite time , in which he lived blessed before any creature was made , in the form of god ; but neither also dare we deny that he shall be in the form of god after the last day , in which time perhaps there will be no need , that he command the creatures : he is no less in the form of god when he ceaseth from commanding , then when he commands as a king sitting on his throne attended by his guard , crowned with majesty and glory , is in the form of a king , even when he commands nothing . to which i answer , if [ the form of god ] noted only the essence of god , not the state and appearance , it might as well be said of christ , when he did not rule as well as when he did , when he shall not as well as when he shall , that he was in the form of god : but sith the term emptying himself notes a diminution in something of what he was , and this is expressed ●o be the form of god , in which he lessened or emptied himself , and that was by taking the form of a servant , and that as a servant to his father , to whom he was obedient , it seems plainly to be intimated , that his being in the form of god , or as god , was his commanding as god with his father : now as the form of a servant notes not the essence of a man , but the state and appearance of a servant , though it presuppose the being of a man , he taking the form of a servant being made in the likeness of men : so the form of god also is to be conceived to note not the essence of god , but the state and appearance of being god as god , or equal to god in his rule , though it presuppose the essence of god which he had ; and he might empty himself of the form of god in this sense , it being only a relative condition supervenient to his essence from the respect to subjects to be ruled , which might be taken or laid aside without alteration in essence : as the assumption of an humane body , contract with his father , heb. 10. 9. are ascribed to the second person in the god-head peculiarly without subtraction from , or addition to his essence as god : so we say , that christ is mediatour according to both natures , so as to interceed with his father according to his divine nature , and this had a beginning and shall have an end , and yet his divine essence invariable . as for the similitude of a king as it is used , it is not apposite to the point : the king on his throne that is guarded hath some to command ; yet if he do not rule , but only be in the gesture , and wear the habit , and hold the ensigns of a ruler , may be said to be in the habit , not in the form of a king ; as he that hath the place and cloaths of a servant doth not take the form of a servant , without taking the work of a servant , although he be in the habit of à servant . it is added § . 19. it is indeed divine to command , not to command simply , but effectually to rule all things : for masters , and lords , and magistrates command also : yea to command seems not to belong to god as god , but as he is lord : there is some difference between god and lord ; for from all eternity god was actually god , but he seems not to have been actually lord , but when he had servants or subjects , to wit creatures : for it is known that a lord and a servant are relatives , whose nature is that they exist together in time ; but although it be a divine thing to command , yet not whatsoever is divine is the form of god. § . 20. for form is conceived as some permanent thing to command as a transe●nt action : form as something absolute inherent in the thing informed , to command as an action passing from the commander to another : form as that by which the thing is that which it is ; inward indeed as that by which the th●ng is such essentially , but outward as that by which the thing is what outwardly appears : but to command neither is that by which god is god , neither as that by which he is such as he appears to bé . lastly , a form is conceived as that which is before action , for the inward produceth action , the outward the manner of the action : for each thing acts according to its form , and the actions of a king are wont to be agreeable to the form of a king , of a servant to the form of a servant , of a merchant to the form of a merchant , and so in others : to command therefore is an action agreeing to the form of god , not the form of god it self : otherwise christ had in like sort taken and deposed the form of god ; taken it as oft as he commanded either diseases or devils , or the sea , deposed it as often as he ceased from commanding : to end , is it not manifest , that the apostles words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 existing or when he was in the form of god , signifies a state or condition , not action ; a state i say in which he then was when he emtied himself , and which by emtying himself either he deposed or hid , the form of a servant being taken ? to which i answer , if the word [ form ] note a state or condition , as it is granted , and the term [ form of a servant ] also implies ; and it be a divine thing to command or rule all things , then by these grants it may well be expounded [ he was in the form of god ] that is , in the state or condition of an emperour , or co-ruler with his father ; which being a relative state , he might empty himself of , as he may of the state of mediatour ( which yet belongs to his divine nature ) as being a distinct person from the father , although consubstantial or co-essential ; and this state and condition he actually had as soon as any creature was made , the divine essence he had afore any creature was , but the form of god , when there was ; and it might be termed the form by which he appeared to be god , by whom and for whom all things visible and invisible were created , col. 1. 16. though not a permanent or absolute form , as the form of a servant is so termed though not a permanent , or absolute state , or the form of a king or merchant , as he speaks : which being rightly understood answers the four things , by which § . 40. he takes it that he hath proved the form of god to be the divine essence . for , 1. saith he , in what form of god could he be lord afore he was made a man , but in the very nature and divine essence ? to which i answer , in none , yet the form notes not the essence of god but the state or condition of a lord or commander , as the form of a servant notes not the essence or nature of a man , but the state or condition of a servant , although he were so in no other nature , than that of a man. 2. saith he , in the nature of god it self sith he is most simple , the external form cannot be separated from the internal . answ. this i suppose is not true , he had the internal form or essence of god afore he was creatour , and shall have it when he shall cease to be actual judge of all . 3. saith he , the truth of this form proves it : for that form of god in which christ was , was either the true form of god , or the false : if the false , christ was a false god , which even to pronounce my mind abhors : if true , it was not severed from the internal , and essential form of god : for what the external form of any thing as of gold or silver without the inward , that is commonly called false . to which i answer ; it was the true form of god , and yet might be severed , as the form of a mediatour or actual judge of all : nor is his proof right ; for though that which hath the outward form without the inward be alse , yet that which hath the inward without the outward may be true , as gold and silver covered with dirt or drosse , as it is in mines afore it is refinened , is true gold or silver , though the outward form be wanting . 4. saith he , the equality of christ with god proves it : for the external form of god separated from the internal , if any can be , makes him not equal to god , as neither the outward and appearing form of a king alone , makes one equal to a king. answ. that being in the form of god , christ was equal to god , or as god , may be gathered from the text , philip. 2. 6. but not , that the form of god makes him equal to god , which therefore may be though the form of god be laid afide for a time . plaeceus himself in the same place , sect. 24. saith , when therefore christ was in the form of god , equal to god , ●e emptied himself by taking the form not of an inferiour simply , but of a servant ; so as that whether you look on his humane nature , or his condition , or manner of living , or his office , or obedience , he plainly se●med not equal to god ; not the son of god , but the servant , no otherwise than if as heretofore , when there were two emperours at the same time , one the garment of a servant being taken , and commands being reco●ved from the other , should apply all his endeavour in executing th●m , it might be al●owable to say , that he when he was in the form of an emperour emptied himself , the form of a servant being taken ; which is the same with the sense i give : more to the same purpose he wri●es in his second book , disp. 9. sect. 15 , 16. where he makes his obedience mentioned philip. 2. 8. to have been in his divine nature voluntary and undue , and his superexaltation answerable . by this explication the form of god , phil. 2. 6 , 7. and christs exi●an●tion , and the glory he had with his father before the world was , john 17. 4 , 5. may be understood without that imaginary pre-existence of christs soul united with the word and resplendent with celestial glory and beauty among the angels in heaven , fancied by dr. henry moor in his mystery of godliness , first book , chap. 8. p. 23. which would infer that christ was not made an entire man at his incarnation , but only imbod●ed or cloathed with flesh , which is inconsistent with that which is said in the same place , 〈◊〉 emptied himself , being made in the likeness of men , so that he was the second adam , or second man , or son of man , the man christ jesus . and how those expressions of christs coming down from heaven , john 3. 13 , 31. john 6. 38. where he was before , ver . 62. coming forth from the father , and coming into the world , john 16. 28. may be understood without a bo●ily descen● afore his publick preaching , or pre-existence and descent of the soul of the messiah from heaven into an earthly body is shewed before sect. 14. finis . errata . page 6. line 14. read said . p. 11. l. 5. r. c●zicenus , p. 14. l. 5. r. eq●ivalence , p. 17. l. 5. 1. of , i. ult . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , p. 19 l. 1. dele which , p. 17. l. ult . r. being , p 19. l. 16. r. am●tius , p. 29. l. ●3 . read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , p. 32. l. 2. r. christ , l. 20. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , p. 34. l. 6. r. is the being , p. 35. l. ul● r. imagined , p. 36. l. 17. 1. subsistence , p. 39. l. 18. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 66. 1. 26. r. asser — p ▪ 88. l. 26. r. ●lassibus , 〈◊〉 . 122. l. 1. r. without , p. 148. l. 21. dele or . notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a62866-e3950 psal. 148. 5. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . isa. 43. 10. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 notes priority of duration . notes for div a62866-e8000 isa. 46. 10. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . notes for div a62866-e9140 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , deut. 15 , 16. is spoken of a servant cohabiting . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , numb . 22. 9. 1 sam. 22. 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , ver . 23. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . grot. annot. ad rom. 16. 26. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 id est longissimo tempore , ut 2 tim. 1. 9. notes for div a62866-e10670 athanasius , bazil , nazianzen , epiphanius , chrysostom , hilary , augustin , &c. john 5. 19. 30. notes for div a62866-e13710 acts 22. 11. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . 1 sam. 13. 21. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 verse 23. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 jud. 6. 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sustenanc● . so eze 〈…〉 26. 11. the greek hath 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 o●rs ; thy strong garrisons . wisd. 16. 21. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , substantia tua , grot. natura mannae junius , s●●stantia man a te crea●● : sic m●lim ac●iper● quàm referre ad naturam dei. r 〈…〉 th 1. 1 〈…〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 gr. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , hope , 〈◊〉 . 10. 17. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 gr. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , ●e● . 23. 22. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 gr. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , junius ▪ in consiliò meo . ezek. 19 5 ▪ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , her hope . job 22. 20. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . ezek. 43. 11. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 notes for div a62866-e17350 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . chrysost. hom . 12. in jo. 1. 14. annot . on job 24. 14. ( as ) sometimes in scripture language sets not out the similitude , but the thing it self , hos. 4. 4. and 5. 10. john 1. 14. notes for div a62866-e19850 rom. 15. 16. the offering of the gentiles is sa d to be accepted being sanctified by the holy ghost . job 22. 28. additions to esther ch . 14. 9. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , numb . 30. 8. exod. 8. 12. 2 mac. 12. 25. prov. 16. 30. epiphan . panar . l. 1. tom . 1. impress . 19. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 petav. istud diserte significat . grot. in rom. 2. 7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hic idem est quod 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . solent enim ist● particulae permisceri , ut 1 cor. 12. 8. ubi 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 habetur . ephes 3. 3. & alibi in 1. cor. 12. 8. idem ●i● valet 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quod 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in sequentibus . notes for div a62866-e25950 vide danielis heinsij arist sac . in non. c. 19. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 gr. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , ●ob 13. 12. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . ●sa . 51. 23. job 13. 24. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 job 19. 11. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . psal. 137. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . ez●k . 5. a. 12. hebrew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . gr. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , ezek. 28. 7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 isa. 51. 7. vide gatakeri cinnum l. 2. c. 10. p. 288 , &c. vide gataker ad antonin . l. 9. sect. 9. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 philip. ch . 2. ver . 7 , 8. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 idem valent . socinianisme in the fundamentall point of justification discovered, and confuted, or, an answer to a written pamphlet maintaining that faith is in a proper sense without a trope imputed to beleevers in justification wherein the socinian fallacies are discovered and confuted, and the true christian doctrine maintained, viz. that the righteousnesse by which true beleevers are justified before god is the perfect righteousnesse and obedience which the lord iesus christ god and man did perform to the law of god, both in his life and death / by george walker ... walker, george, 1581?-1651. 1641 approx. 344 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 182 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2005-10 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a67126 wing w365 estc r3923 12084997 ocm 12084997 53694 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a67126) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 53694) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 588:2) socinianisme in the fundamentall point of justification discovered, and confuted, or, an answer to a written pamphlet maintaining that faith is in a proper sense without a trope imputed to beleevers in justification wherein the socinian fallacies are discovered and confuted, and the true christian doctrine maintained, viz. that the righteousnesse by which true beleevers are justified before god is the perfect righteousnesse and obedience which the lord iesus christ god and man did perform to the law of god, both in his life and death / by george walker ... walker, george, 1581?-1651. [14], 355, [2] p. printed by r.o. for iohn bartlet ..., london : 1641. reproduction of original in union theological seminary library, new york. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng socinianism. 2004-11 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2004-12 spi global keyed and coded from proquest page images 2005-01 andrew kuster sampled and proofread 2005-01 andrew kuster text and markup reviewed and edited 2005-04 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion socinianisme in the fundamentall point of justification discovered , and confuted . or , an answer to a written pamphlet maintaining that faith is in a proper sense without a trope imputed to beleevers in justification . wherein the socinian fallacies are discovered and confuted , and the true christian doctrine maintained , viz. that the righteousnesse by which true beleevers are justified before god is the perfect righteousnesse and obedience which the lord iesus christ god and man did performe to the law of god , both in his life and death . by george walker b ▪ of divinity , and pastor of s. iohn the euangelists church in watling-street london . a man that is an hereticke , after the first and second admonition reiect , knowing that he that is such is subverted and sinneth being condemned of himselfe . tit. 3.10 , 11. london , printed by r. o. for iohn bartlet , at the signe of the gilt cup in pauls church-yard , neare s. augustins gate . 1641. to his reverend brethren , the godly , orthodox pastors and preachers of gods word , in and about the city of london : the author of this brief discovery and confutation , wisheth all increase of grace , peace and happinesse ; with the abundance of blessings from god on their faithfull labours . my reverend , and dearely beloved brethren , it is not unknown to divers of you , what great conflicts i have had with the adversaries of this socinian faction about this main fundamentall point of justification , what pains i have taken to vindicate the truth above six and twenty yeares agoe , from the opposition and subtile sophistry of a cunning adversary , who by the fame and opinion which men had of his great learning , and no lesse piety , had drawn many zealous professors of religion into some liking of his errours . his written pamphlets went currently through the city and were to be found in the hands of many men , in which he first utterly renounced the law , in whole and part performed by our selves , or any other in our stead , for the justifying of us in the sight of god. secondly , rejected as a meere device of our late divines , the imputation of christs righteousnesse and satisfaction , not onely his habituall righteousnesse , but also his whole obedience , both active and passive ; and affirmed it to be a thing wherof there was no testimony or proof in scripture , nor any necessary end or use thereof . thirdly , he professed and undertook to prove , thot faith , even the act of beleeving and trusting in christ for salvation after a generall and confused manner , as a favourite of god , and not as a perfect satisfyer of his justice and just law ; is that which god accounts and accepts for righteousnesse to justification , in stead of righteousnesse and perfect obedience performed to the will and law of god , either by christ or our selves . these and divers other errors which were here and there interlaced , i did at the first discover in some sermons , to be no doctrines of sacred truth by him digged out of the deep mines of holy scripture ▪ and newly brought to light ( as his seduced disciples proclaymed them to be ) for the inlightning of the blind world in these last dayes of darknesse and perillous times : but the old errors and heresies of servetus and socinus , newly revived and raked out of hell by arminius , bertius , and others of their faction . divers of his friends who had begun to imbrace his opinion , were not a little terrified at the hearing of these things ; and earnestly besought me to give him a meeting , who at that time was to me unknown by face ; i condescended to their desire : but wheras i came with an heart full of tender compassion , and with prayers in my mouth , and teares in mine eyes , layd open before him the danger of his errors , and the evill and mischiefe which by meanes of his obstinate persisting in them , might accrue to himselfe and those who were by him seduced and misled ; he on the contrary hardened his heart to maintain per fas , et nefas , and dolo malo his foresaid erroneous opinions ; shewing out of luther on the galatians , some words which seemed to favour his error , and to exclude the righteousnesse of the law from justification ( which words he applyed to the righteousnesse of the law performed by christ for us , and did most stiffly so urge them : ) but the words which immediately followed , to wit , that god justifies us by the righteousnesse of his son jesus christ , and by his fulfilling of the law for us , he covered with his fingers , till i pluckt the book out of his hands , and read them to those that were present , whereby he was much confounded . now the issue of my fair and christian dealing with him and of my modest and mild opposing of him , without such sharpnesse as the cause and his carriage did require , was the same , which the gentle behaviour of orthodox divines towards perverse hereticks , hath commonly had in all former ages : for his factious disciples did impute it to the weaknesse of my cause , and to his arguments convincing my conscience , that his opinions were not so dangerous as i had censured them to be : but rather unreprovable , yea and laudable . and upon my departure out of the city , immediately after to cambridge , whither my occasions called me ; in my absence they reported , that at our meeting he did so convince and confound me with strong arguments , that i humbled my selfe , to him confessed my ignorance , imbraced his opinions , and promised to hold and maintaine them till death . this wicked and jesuiticall policy which they used to retaine divers of his disciples , who wer ready to fall off from him ; & to recall those who were fallen off already , did produce a quite contrary effect : for when i returned again to the city , and was saluted as a socinian onvert , and informed of their false reports & lying forgeries ; i was inflamed with a double desire to vindicate both the truth of god , and mine own reputation from their slanderous aspersions ; and hereupon i betook my selfe to handle and expound that place of scripture , rom. 5.17 , 18 , 19. which doth most pithily and plainly set forth the doctrine of justification by the communion of christs righteousnes and obedience . and because i discerned in mine adversaries a perverse hereticall spirit , and that they had made lyes their refuge , and did sinne being condemned of themselves ; i did with all zeale confute their errours , lay open the deadly poyson and malignity of them , and cloath them with such reproachfull titles as divers grave and learned divines of the best reformed churches had before shaped and fitted to them . i proved them to be profane and abominable doctrine , even the damned heresie of servetus and socinus , as sibrandus lubertus had before stiled them . and that their denying of the reciprocall imputation of christs righteousnesse and satisfaction to the faithfull , and of their sinnes to christ , was impiety and blasphemy , as learned beza calls it . though by this meanes my adversaries were enraged , and did suggest into the eares and minds of many godly people in the city , to whom as yet i was unknown , that i was a green headed novice carryed away with anger and passion , rather then zeal : yet divers of you , my learned brethren , did judge otherwise of me , and my labours ; and god blessed them , and made them and your assistance of me therein , powerfull and effectuall to the quelling of those errors , and to the suppressing of them at that time , by putting the author of them to silence . and now for 20. yeares , and more , they have been buryed in oblivion , untill this new adversary hath raked them up , as coales out of ashes , and out of a surreptitious booke ( which the first adversary had composed , printed beyond the seas , and procured to be brought in by stealth , and sold underhand ) did bring them into the pulpit , and from thence with a tumultuous noyse proclaymed them most confidently . now because i have sufficiently acted my part heretofore in opposing these errors ; and also divers of you have entered into the lists , and with zeale and courage have begun to fight against the reviver of them , i should have refrayned my selfe from further medling : but because this common adversary hath singled me out , and provoked me by a proud challenge , to answere his writings . i have once more undertaken to answer his challenge , which answer being sent to him privately , might there have rest●d , if his most reproachfull and rayling reply , full of lyes , absurdities , contradictions , blasphemies , and intollerable scoffes and reproaches , had not forced me to send it abroad into the world to justifie it selfe from the rayling and slanderous clamours which he and his disciples , and factious followers have raised against it , i here commend it to your grave censure , in hope that the goodnesse of the cause which herein i maintaine , will cover mine infirmities , and will stirre you up to perfect and finish what i have begun . the truth for which you shall fight is strong , and will prevaile ; all power , might , glory and victory is gods , for whose cause you stand ; and our lord jesus christ , on whose perfect rigteousnesse you strive to keep the crown , hath all power given him in heaven and in earth . to this god eternall and omnipotent , and to his eternall sonne our lord and saviour jesus christ , and to the most holy and blessed spirit , three persons in one god , i commend you and your holy and faithfull labours in my dayly prayers , humbly supplicating to his majesty for this grace , that i may continue till death your fellow soldier and labourer in his vineyard george walker . the answerers preface to the first chapter . the question which is propounded and the state and drift thereof laid down in this first chapter , is ( in the authors own words ) this , whether the faith of him that truely beleeves , or the righteousnesse of christ be imputed for righteousnesse in the act of justification . in this question the imputing of faith is opposed to the imputing of christs righteousnesse , for righteousnesse to justification , which no orthodox christian durst atten●● to doe at any time : for the godly learned in the scriptures , and acquainted with the writings of orthodox divines both ancient and moderne from the time of the apostles to this day , doe alwayes joyne faith with christs righteousnesse in the act of justification , and do never account them such opposites as doe the one exclude the other , and cannot both stand together , and be reputed for righteousnesse to beleevers in justification . though the apostle doth oppose justification by faith , to justification by works of the law performed by every man in his owne person , as two opposites which cannot stand together in gods justification of sinners ; and this all true christians receive , imbrace , and hold for a solid truth , and a fundamentall article of christian religion : yet they abhorre and detest the opposing of faith , and christs righteousnes in gods imputing of righteousnes to beleevers ; and doe with an unanimous consent teach , that in this justifying act of god , christs righteousnesse of which all true beleevers have communion , is that which god in a proper sense is said to accept , and repute for righteousnesse ; and faith as it receives and applies christs righteousnesse , is said to be imputed , but in an improper speech ; the name of the act being used to signifie the object , which we see frequently in scripture , as for example , gal. 3.2.25 . where the name ( faith ) is used to signifie the thing beleeved , that is , the doctrine of the gospell , and coloss. 1.5 . where the name [ hope ] is used , to signifie the thing hoped for ; that is , the inheritance and reward laid up for us in heaven , of which kind many more instances may be produced . but as for them who have called into controversie the imputation of christs righteousnesse ; and having propounded this question , whether faith or the righteousnes of christ is imputed in the act of justification , have set up faith and thrust out christs righteousnesse , they have ever beene branded by all true churches of christ for pestilent heretikes , and enemies of gods saving truth . the first mover of this question was one petrus abilardus , a pestilent and blasphemous heretick , who being full of the spirit of pride and error , did in disputing and writing , deny the communion of christs perfect satisfaction , obedience and righteousnesse ; and the imputation of them for righteousnesse in the justification of true beleevers . this filthie wretch was gelded for corrupting and defiling of a maid , and for his blasphemous heresies , saint bernard , and the bishops of france caused him to be excommunicated and condemned for an heretike , and his blasphemous books to be burned publikely . the next instrument of the devill after him mentioned in former histories was servetus that blasphemous heretike , who for heresies and blasphemies which hee dispersed as a vagabond in several countries , in divers books , was by master calvin discovered & apprehended at geneva , condemned and burned , and dyed blaspheming christ most horribly , as beza testifieth , in vita calvini . the third notorious heretike who in writing and bookes published , did maintaine this wicked errour , and by his disciples dispersed it in transilvania , polonia , and other adjoyning countries , was faustus socinus , whose blasphemous faction and sect still continueth , and infesteth those countries at this day . the fourth grand master and propagatour of this heresie , who brought it into holland nearer unto us was arminius ; he did first secretly teach and instill it into the eares and hearts of many disciples ; and afterwards did openly professe it , as we read in his epistle ad hyppolytum de collibus , wherein he confesseth that he held , faith to be imputed for righteousnesse to justification , not in a metonymicall , but in a proper sense : and although this and other errours held by him are condemned in the late synod of dort : yet his disciples the remonstrants doe obstinately persist in this errour , though some of that sect , would seeme to decline and disclaime it . the fift perverse publisher of this heresie , who first openly professed it in england , and in manuscript pamphlets and printed bookes , dispersed it in london , and from thence into severall places of the countrie about 28. yeares agoe , was anthony wotton , who being discovered and hotly opposed by the author of this answer was by his zeale , and the industrie of some other preachers in london quickly quelled , and his opinion suppressed : but yet because he would uphold a secret faction , he wrote a booke in latine , wherein he seemed to retract , or rather to run from some desperate opinions and speeches , which are to bee seene in his private manuscripts given by him from hand to hand , and formerly dispersed . for whereas in divers of them he professeth in plaine words , his dissent from all our orthodox divines , which had beene before written of justification , saying , i am inforced to dissent from them all ; he in that booke laboured to make a shew of consent with them , and did wrest some of their doubtfull speeches to countenance his socinianisme . this booke intituled de reconciliatione some of his fiery factious , and zealous disciples with much difficulty , after it was rejected at leiden and amsterdam , procured it to be printed at their owne cost , brought over the copies and sold them under hand in london . and out of it ( wee may justly suspect , that this scribler and babler hath stollen the most part of his conclusions , arguments and distinctions , for i am informed that he is a great admirer of that book , and of the author also . so that if this socinian iohn will and must needs have , and usurpe that high title which our saviour gave to iohn the baptist , and will bee called ( as his disciples stick not to stile him ) the shining light of the church in these last dayes : surely he is but a borrowed light or rather a wandring light , like that ignis fatuus which in darke nights leadeth the followers into ditches , loggs , praecipces , and breakneck downfalls , as the philosophers write of it . for the recalling of the ignorant who are by him seduced , for the confounding of them who are by him perverted , and for the stopping of the foule lying , and slanderous mouthes of those factious sectaries his followers , of a scarred conscience , who as they have his person in high admiration , so also are bold to revise and defame all godly and learned preachers , who oppose his errours and preach against them . i will spend a few spare houres to sift his written discourse , at least so much of it as is come to my hands ; hoping by evidence of truth , plaine scriptures , solid reasons , and testimonies of the best writers , to make it manifest to gods people , that he is a mere socinian sophister , and dangerous seducer , and that his discourse is an hotch potch of pestilent errours , and full of ●e●giversations , contradictions , and perverse wrestlings of scriptures , and of the words and writings both of ancient and moderne divines . and that neither he himselfe ▪ nor his clamarous disciples may have the least colour , or occasion to complaine , that i have not dealt fairely with him . i will first set downe his socinianisme , word for word out of his owne writings , without concealing any word or sentence . and to every part thereof i will oppose the contrary doctrine of christ under the name of christianisme . and first i begin with his preface , with which he begins his first chapter . the preface to socinianisme . for the cleare understanding of the state and drift of the question , something would be premised , which for the evidence sake might be privileddg and exempted , from passing under much dispute and contradiction : yet if any thing be not sufficiently prepared for assent in the briefe proposall of it , the ensuing discourse will labour to reconcile the disproportion ; and in the progresse make satisfaction for what it shall receive upon curtesie in the beginning . the answer to the preface . this short preface doth by the affected stile , and phrase of it discover the author to bee one , who hath studied to preach himselfe more then christ , and to set forth his owne absurd conceits in the entising words of carnall wisedome , not to declare the testimony of god in apostolicall plainenesse , nor in demonstration of the spirit , and of power as saint paul did . the loftie words , and short cut speech which hee useth here , and in this ensuing discourse , are so farre beyond the capacity of his rude unlearned followers , that his wooden pulpit shall assoone as they understand them , unlesse he first teach them his grammaticall skill , before hee admit them into his theologicall auditorie . but belike hee knowes the ready way to catch the wavering , unstable , and giddie multitude , those wandering starres of these last times , who are like clowdes without water ▪ carried about with windes of every new and strange doctrine , and of all people are the fittest to bee his disciples . for the mouth which speaketh great swelling words , is admired of them who have mens persons in admiration ; and farre fetcht phrases are fine fooleries to tickle the itching eares , and win the hearts of such as desire to seeme and bee counted something , when indeed they are nothing but bubbles , and empty bladders , who as they admire every bewitching simon magus , as the great power of god , and extoll to the skies his most cursed errours : so they abhorre and revile all sincere and godly preachers , rebukers of their madnesse , blaspheme gods word in their mouthes , and speake evill of the good things , which they understand not , untill in the gainsaying of core they utterly perish . moreover , to give him his due , he appeares to mee in his stile and phrase , a very skilfull artist in his owne way , as cunning as the subtle serpent , in cloathing and trimming his strange doctrines , with strange conceited words fited to them , by which they who affect strange novelties , may easily be allured and insnared . but when the children of truth hunt him by the smell , and strong savours of his rankling errours ( which stink as well as fret like an eating cancer ) and are ready to catch him ; hee doth by his inkhorne termes so obscure and darken his meaning , that onely they who have a sharp , quick and strong sight , can lay fast and sure hold on him . wee may well resemble him to the crafty fish sepia of which we read , that when she is pursued and ready to be taken , she spueth forth a black inke wherewith she darkneth the waters round about , and so escapes away in thick darknesse , through which she cannot be seene and discerned . but to omit his stile , and to come to the matter of his preface , it is a promise and pretence of somewhat by him premised , which shall serve for the cleare understanding of the state of the question , and for evidence sake might be priviledged , from passing under much dispute and contradiction ; but hoc aliquid nihil est , this something is nothing , we find no performance of promise nor truth , in what hee pretendeth ; neither his briefe proposall , nor his ensuing discourse gives us any satisfaction ; neither can his beginning , progresse , or ending receive from us any thing upon curtesie . for if any come to us and bring not the true doctrine of christ , but damnable socinianisme , errour , and heresie , we must not show so much curtesie , as to bid him god speed . 2 iohn 10. the analysis of his first chapter in generall . the first chapter of his socinianisme , which he cals his premising of somewhat for cleare underderstanding of the state , and drift of the question , consists of sixe parts . in the first part he goeth about to rehearse the severall significations of the words justification and justifying , and to determine in what sense the words are used in those scriptures , which speake of the justification of a sinner before god. in the second he layes downe 4. propositions , which he takes for granted on all hands , and by none denyed but heretikes . in the third he comes to speak of imputation of righteousnesse , for justification , or rather of somewhat which god in the act of every mans justification doth impute , for or instead of righteousnesse , to invest him in all priviledges of a man perfectly righteous ; and withall to shew the reason of this imputation , and afterward to determine that faith is that somewhat imputed . in the fourth part hee shewes first negatively , how faith is not imputed , and excludes out of his question fiue severally quaeres . secondly affirmatively , that faith ( as he holds it to be imputed ) is opposed to the righteousnesse of christ , as to a competitor which receives the repulse . in the fift part ( to cover the shame and scandall of his hereticall opinion ) he doth admit christs righteousnesse into part of the honour for peace , and fashion sake , as esau was admitted unto some vanishing participation ▪ of some temporary blessings with iacob . for he forgeth a strange and false kind of imaginary imputation of christs righteousnesse , unto which he laboureth to wrest the words of luther , calvin , and the homilies and articles of our english church . in the last part hee undertaketh to shew more light , that it may be seene to the bottome clearely , what he affirmes and what he denyes in the question propounded ; the particulars whereof we shall see when i come to the answer of them . but first i will begin with the first part , and will proceed to answer the rest in order . socinianisme . that the termes of justifying , justification , &c. are not to be taken in this question , ( nor in any other that are usually moved about the justification of a sinner ) either 1. physico sensu , in a physicall sence ; as if justification signified to make just with any habituall , actual , or any positive , or inhaerent righteousnesse . 2. sensu forensi proprie dicto , in a juridicall , or judiciary sense , properly so called , when the judge hath onely a subordinate or derived power of judging , and is bound by oath , or otherwise , to give sentence according to the rule of the law ; as to justify were to pronounce a man just ▪ or to absolve him from punishment , according to the strict termes or rules of that law wherof he was accused , as a transgressor , though this sense be received , and admitted by many . but 3. and lastly , sensu forensi improprie dicto , in a iudiciary sense lesse properly , and usually so called . viz. where he that sits judge , being supreme magistrate , hath an independency , and soveraignety of power , to moderate , and dispense with the law , as reason and equity shall require : so that justifying in this question , imports the discharging or absolving of a man from the guilt , blame , and punishment of those things , whereof he is or might justly be accused ; not because he is cleare of such things , or justifiable according to the letter and strictnesse of the law , ( for then he could not be justly accused ) but because the judge having a sufficient , and lawfull soveraignety of power , is willing upon sufficient , and weighty consideration , knowne unto himselfe , to remit the penalty of the law , and to deliver and discharge him , as if he were an innocent , and righteous man. as for that physicall sence of making just by inhaerent righteousnesse , though bellarmine and his angels , earnestly contend for it , yet till the scriptures be brought low , and etymologie exalted above them ; til use and custome of speaking , deliver up their kingdome into the cardinalls hand ; that sense must no way be acknowledg'd , or receiv'd , in this dispute : yet , ( to give reason and right , even unto those that demand that which is unreasonable ) its true , that god , in , and upon a mans justification begins to justifie him physically , that is to infuse habituall , and inhaerent righteousnesse into him . but here the scriptures , and the cardinall , are as far out in termes , as in 1000. other things they are in substance and matter : that which hee will needs cal justification , the scripture will as peremptorily call sanctification . concerning that other sense of judiciary justification , usually so called ; wherein the iudge , or justifier , proceeds upon legall grounds , to acquit , and absolve the party guilty , and accused , neither can this be taken in the question propounded , except the scripture be forsaken , because the scripture constantly speakes of this act of god , iustifying a sinner , not as of such an act whereby he will either make him , or pronounce him legally iust , or declare him not to have offended the law , and hereupon justifie him , but as of such an act whereby he freely forgives him all that he hath done against the law , and acquits him from all blame , and punishment due by the law , for such offences : so that in that very act of god , by which he justifies a sinner , as there is a discharge from all punishment due unto sinne , so there is a profession withall , or plaine intimation of the guiltinesse of the person , now to be justified , according to the law , and that he is not acquited , or discharged , upon any consideration that can be pleaded for him according to the law : but that consideration upon which god proceeds to justifie him is of another order : the consideration of somewhat done for him in this case , to relieve him out of the course or order and appointment of the law. he whose justification stands ( whether in whole or in part , it 's not materiall here ) in the forgivenesse of sinne , can in no construction be said to be iustified according to the law , because the law knowes no forgivenesse of sinne , neither is there any rule for any such thing , nor the least intimation of so much as any possibility of any such thing there . the law speakes of the curse , death , and condemnation of a sinner ; but for the justification of a sinner , it neither takes knowledge nor gives any hope thereof . christianisme . in this first part here are onely three significations of the word justification , and iustifying , rehearsed . the first is naturall , or physicall ; that is , making a man just with habituall inhaerent righteousnesse . the second is a iudiciary sense , properly so called , when a subordinate iudge doth according to the strict termes , and rules of the law , acquit , and absolve a man from punishment ( which is due by the law to him being a transgressor ) and doth pronounce him just . the third is a iudiciary sense , lesse properly so called , when a supreme iudge , by soveraignety of power , doth acquit and absolve a man , and remit the penalty of the law , which he deserves , upon weighty consideration , knowne to himselfe , and doth deliver him , and discharge him , as if he were an innocent , and righteous man. the first physicall sense , he rejects , and playes upon bellarmine , for reteining , and using the word iustifie , in that sense : and yet he himselfe immediatly acknowledgeth , that god upon a mans iustification , begins to iustifie him physically , by infusing into him habituall , and inhaerent righteousnesse : but this ( he saith ) is in scripture called sanctification . the second sense he also disclaimes , and in this dispute embraceth the third sense , to wit , that iustification signifies gods forgiving a man freely all that he hath done against the law ; and his acquiting , and discharging of a man from the guilt , and punishment , due by the law , for such offences ; not for any consideration which can be pleaded for him , according to the law , but for somwhat done for him in this case , to relieve him out of the course , order , and appointment of the law : his reason why he embraceth this sense , is because he conceives iustification to stand in forgivenesse of sinne , which belongs to the law in no respect at all . in all this part , and passage , i find not one particle of solid truth , but many grosse errors , and falshoods ; for of all the three significations , of the word iustifie , by him here named , onely the first may passe in some tollerable construction , but not in his sense : for though god in the creation made our first parents after his owne image and similitude , in perfect righteousnesse , indued with a naturall , and habituall uprightnesse , conformable to his revealed will , and law ; and in this respect may be said to have iustified , that is , made them upright , as the wise preacher saith , eccles. 7.29 . god made man upright : yet whether this act of creation was a physicall act of god , or rather a voluntary act of his will & of his wisdome , and counsell , and so may be called artificial , is something disputable . as for the framing and making of the man christ , the blessed seed , by the power of the holy ghost , pure , holy , upright , and iust from his first conception ; this was a spirituall and supernaturall act , and the holinesse and righteousnesse was a supernaturall gift given from above , not introduced by naturall generation , nor raised from naturall principles . that making of men righteous in their sanctification , which bellarmine speaks of , is not iustification in a naturall , but in a spirituall sense ▪ for the spirit of god worketh those habits , and graces of holinesse in men , whom god hath begotten of his owne will in the word of truth . and therefore when bellarmine or goodwin , or any other call this a physicall iustifying , they erre grossely . for if it be any iustification at all , it is spirituall and morall . but for my part , i finde not that by the spirit of god in scripture , any habituall holinesse of men begun in this life , is called righteousnesse simply in it selfe . but as the saints regenerate , and faithfull are called righteous in respect of their communion with christ , and participation of his righteousnes : so their sanctity or habituall holinesse , is called righteousnesse , not simply in it selfe , but by coniunction with the righteousnesse of christ , the head of the body : which as it iustifies them by constituting and making them righteous : so also it iustifies their rectified holy actions , which they performe by the mo●ions of the spirit , and by faith in christ , ( as learned beza well observed , and truth affirmeth . lib. contra anonymum , ) and their sanctification cannot be called iustification , but by reason of coniunction with iustification in the same person . for if it were possible for a sinfull man to be made perfectly holy , and conformable to gods law , in his owne person : yet having formerly transgressed the law , and failed in many things ; ●his n●w conformity to the law , by reason of those sinnes , and failings will prove a lame righteousnesse , not fit to satisfie the law , and to be accepted for perfect righteousnesse to justification , because if a man keepe the whole law , and faile in one point , he is guilty of all . iam. 2 , 10. no righteousnesse can justifie , which is not a perfect obedience , and conformity of the whole man , to the whol , law in his whole life , frō the beginning to the end . secondly , that signification of the word iustification , which hee calls a judiciary sense , properly so called , is , ( as he describes it ) a foolish fiction of his owne braine : for never did any but a mad-man dreame of iustifying sinners by a subordinate judge , absolving them from punishment , according to the strict termes , and rules of the law ; for that were to give a false sentence , and to pronounce a man free from all transgression of the law , and a perfect fulfiller of it in his owne person . all our learned , and iudicious divines , doe hold that the full satisfaction and obedience of christ being communicated , and imputed to true believers , they are absolved , and have their sinnes pardoned , and are counted , and iudged righteous by god : as men who have satisfied the iustice , and iust law of god , by christ their head , and surety , not in their own persons , which the law in strict termes requires , & this is justification in the iudiciary sense , which is approved by the learned . thirdly , that iudiciary sense , improperly so called , which he approves , & allows in this dispute , is an hereticall , and socinian conceipt ; for so long as god the supreme iudge of all the world , is immutable , and infinite in iustice , he neither can , nor will dispense with his eternall iust law , in any iot , or tittle , but will have it perfectly fulfilled either by our selves or some sufficient surety in our behalfe , and will forgive no sinner , without a full suffering , and satisfaction , made to the law in the same kind which the law requires , though not in every mans person ; and this full satisfaction must be communicated to every one , and made his owne by union , with christ his head ; before that god will iudge or account him righteous , and pardon al his sinnes . to imagin a somewhat , in consideration whereof god forgives sinners , and accepts them as if they were righteous ; besides , the full satisfaction of gods justice , and just law , is to conceive god to bee mutable , and not the same in his infinite justice at all times ; and to affirme it , is samosatenian , and socinian blasphemy . fourthly , in arguing against the second sense by him propounded , he wrestles with his owne shadow , and fights against a fiction of his owne braine , and discovers his blindnesse , and ignorance of the dictinction , and difference betweene legal , and evangelicall justification , and righteousnesse : legal righteousnesse is the condition of the first covenāt of works , and consists in perfect conformity , and obedience to the law , performed by every man in his owne person , and no man can be legally justified but by his owne personall righteousnesse . evangelicall righteousnesse , is christs perfect righteousnesse , and fulfilling of the law in the behalfe of all the elect and faithfull : it was not the law , nor our works of the law , which moved god to give christ to be our surety and redeemer ; but he of his owne free love and bounty gave christ , and christ the sonne of god out of his love , humbled himselfe to become man , and to fulfill the law for us . neither doe wee obtaine communion of christs satisfaction and righteousnesse , by the workes of the law ; but by the gospell preached & believed as the apostle teacheth , gal. 3.2 . and therefore though christ his righteousnes be a perfect fulfilling of all obedience , which the law requires of man ; & god did exact of him every farthing , of our debt , both in active , and passive obedience , and in respect of the matter and substance , his satisfaction may be called after a sort legall , and is so called by luther : yet as it was for us , not for himselfe , and performed by him our head , not by every one of us in our owne persons , and is received and applied by faith , not by our workes of the law , and is brought unto us by the gospell , not by the law , and is given to us freely by gods grace , not merited or procured by any thing in our selves ; so it is not legall but evangelicall , and gods justifying of us , and counting us righteous by it , is not a proceeding upon legall grounds , nor pronouncing us legally just , as this calumniator doth , either foolishly imagine , or falsely slander and misreport our doctrine . fiftly in arguing for his owne false , and forged sense of the word justification , he hath three reasons all which are for us , and prove our doctrine not his opinion . for if this make a sense of the word justification , good , because it doth intimate the former guiltinesse of him that is justified , as wel as it doth discharge him from all punishment , ( which is his first reason ) then is our doctrine of justification by imputation of christs satisfaction for all our sinnes , very good and sound , for it intimates a guiltinesse in him who is to bee iustified , as well as a discharge from punishment . secondly we doe not plead for our iustification , any consideration according to the law , that is , wee doe not plead our owne innocency , nor satisfaction and righteousnes performed in our own persons ; but we plead more then somewhat done for us , even all christs obedience active and passive , by gods free grace communicated to us , not obtained , or merited by our works of the law . thirdly though the law iustifies no sinner , but threatens the curse , death ▪ and condemnation as the due reward of the transgressors of it : yet it iustifies all who are free from all sinnes committed against it , and are made righteous by the perfect fulfilling of it to the utmost . and therefore when the gospell hath brought us to the communion of christs full satisfaction , by which we are made free from all sinne , and perfect fulfillers of the law in him our head ; as god doth forgive us our sinnes , and counts us righteous : so the law is no more against us , 1 tim. 1.9 . but is witnesse for us , that in christ we are worthy of remission and iustification . by this are manifest the grosse errours , and absurdities which he uttereth in this first part of his preparative chapter . but that his ignorance in the doctrine of justification , may more fully appeare , i will lay downe the severall significations of the words , justification , and justifying , wherein the spirit of god doth use them in the holy scriptures . first the word iustifie , and iustification signifie , making men righteous , or constituting or seting them in the state of righteousnesse . this signification is justified by several testimonies of scripture , as rom. 5.19 . where many are said to be made , or constituted righteous by the obedience of christ , even as by adams disobedience many were made sinners , and 1 cor. 1.30 . and 2 cor. 5.21 . where christ is said to bee made unto us righteousnesse , and wee are said to be made the righteousnesse of god in him . and rom. 3.24 . and 4 , 5. where we are said to be iustified freely by his grace , through the redemption which is in christ. and god is said to justifie the ungodly , which cannot be meant of counting judging , and pronouncing , but of making them righteous by the communion of christs righteousnesse . for to iustifie the wicked by judging and pronouncing them righteous , without making them such , is ao●mination to the lord , prov. 17.15 . and in this sense preachers of gods word are , as instruments under god , said to iustifie many by bringing them unto righteousnesse , and are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 iustifiers , dan. 12.3 . this iustifying wee may very fitly call radicall , or fundamentall iustification . this luther and other learned divines call actionem individuam , because it is gods action of communicating christs righteousnesse in a moment , and not by degrees successively , and in it men are mere patients , and do not worke with god , no more then adam did in gods first creating of him upright , in his image : even regenerate infants may thus be iustified , and are iustified before they actually beleeve . secondly the word iustifie , signifieth gods iustifying of men by faith , that is , his counting and reputing them righteous , upon their actuall beleeving , and his enableing them to feele themselves partakers of the righteousnesse of christ , and to enioy it by faith , in this sense the word is used , rom. 4. where god is said to iustifie us by imputing righteousnesse , and counting faith for righteousnesse , that is , counting a true beleever a righteous person . and thus the word is to bee taken , where we are said to bee iustified by faith , without the workes of the law. the apostle doth much urge , and presse this iustification , rom ▪ 4 and gal. 3. because though in this taken actively , god onely acteth : yet taken passively as it is received of us , and we by faith feele and discerne in what account we are with god , and by beleeving enioy christs satisfaction for remission of sinnes , and for righteousnes , wee may be said to worke with god , by way of receiving , as a begging hand doth in receiving gifts freely given , and put into it . this iustifying doth necessarily presuppose the former , and doth assure us of it . for the iust god , whose iudgement is according to truth , cannot r●pute us righteous , till we have communion of christs righteousnesse , and be thereby truly righteous . and this justification divines call imputative . it springs from the former as from the root , and is builded on it as on the foundation . thirdly , this word iustifie , signifies a manifesting and declaring of men to be righteous and iustified , and that three wayes . first in foro conscientiae , in the court , or iudgement of our own conscience , when a man being troubled in his conscience with the sight of his sinnes , and his want of righteousnesse , after humble prayer , and poenitent seeking , receives either the inward testimony of the spirit , and is enlightned by god , to see that he is in the state of righteousnesse absolved and iustified ; or by inward sense of his sanctification , faith , and other graces proper to the righteous iustified ; is declared and made manifest to his owne conscience , that he is justified and righteous , and hath all his sinnes pardoned , and is accepted of god for a righteous man. this is that which wee are taught by christ to pray for in that petition , forgive us our debts or trespasses , that is , pacify and cleare our consciences , by manifesting to us that we are justified , and have remission of all our sinnes by thy free grace , and by communion of christs full satisfaction ; and thus wee are to understand the word , wheresoever it is opposed to the accusations of satan , and the horrours and troubles of conscience , as a remedie against them , as rom ▪ 8.33 . secondly it signifies declaring , and proving men righteous in foro humano , in the judgement and sight of men openly , and that by outward fruites of faith , and externall workes of righteousnes , and holinesse . when god enableing us , and moving us to doe such workes , and bring forth such fruites as are by his word continually pronounced , and proclaimed to be righteous , and holy works and evidences of justification , doth thus declare , and prove us to be faithfull and righteous , hee is said to justifie us before men . in this sense the word is used , iob 13.18 . where iob saith that if hee may plead before god the integrity of his life , he knoweth hee shall be justified : as afterward he did cap. 31. and was thereby declared to be righteous , and so justified . and iam. 2.21 . where it is 〈◊〉 that abraham was justified by workes , that is , declared to be a righteous man. thirdly it signifies judging , and declaring men to bee persons justified , and righteous in the universall judgement at the last day , when the lord christ shall by the evidence of their workes of love and charity , done to him in his members , declare them to bee his faithfull servants , and children of his father , justified by the communion of his righteousnes , and in him worthie of eternall life ; and also adjudge them unto the inheritance of the kingdome of glory . in this sense the word is used , rom. 5.16.18 . where it is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 justification of life , and is opposed to the sentence of everlasting condemnation . these are all the significations of the word ( iustifie ) recorded in the scriptures ; and this great promiser here sheweth himselfe ignorant of them all : and therefore how little satisfaction he hath given to any , but such fooles as delight to fill themselves with huskes , let the learned iudge . socinianisme . that iesus christ the naturall sonne of god , and supernaturall sonne of the virgin marie , ran a race of obedience with the law , ( as well ceremoniall as morall ) and held out with every letter , iot and title of it , as farre as it any wayes concerned him , dureing the whole continuance of his life in the flesh ; no mans thoughts ever rose up to deny ; but those that denyed him the best of his being , ( i meane his god-head ) which of you can convince mee of sinne ? was his chalenge to the nation of the iewes , whilst he was yet on earth , iohn 8.46 . and remaines through all ages , as a challenge to the whole world. he that can cast the least aspersion of sinne upon christ , shall shake the foundation of the peace and safety of the church . that this christ offered himself as a lamb , without spot in sacrifice upon the crosse , to make an atonement for the world , and to purge the sinnes of it , i know no spirit at this day abroad in the world that denyes , but that which wrought in socinus formerly , and still workes in those that are baptized into the same spirit of errour with him . i conceive it to bee a truth of greater authority amongst us , then to meet with contradiction from any , that iesus christ is the sole entire meritorious cause of every mans iustification , that is iustified by god ; or that that righteousnesse or absolution from sinne , and condemnation which is given to every man in his iustification , is somewhat , yea a principall part of that great purchase , which christ hath made for the world : even as god for christs sake freely forgave you . forgivenesse of sinnes , or iustification is from god for christs sake , hee is worthie to be gratified or honoured by god , with the iustification of those that beleeve in him . it 's a truth which hath every mans iudgement concurrent with it , that faith is the condition appointed by god , and required on mans part , to bring him into communion and fellowship of that iustification , and redemption which christ hath purchased for the children of men , and that without beleeving no man can have part , or fellowship in that great and blessed businesse . christianisme . in this second part he doth promise foure severall propositions , which hee conceives to bee out of question , and undenyable . by the first proposition hee makes a faire shew in words , but his heart is farre removed , and his meaning is wicked , and so will appeare , if we observe how hee in another place afterwards explaines himselfe . first though hee seemes to acknowledge christ to bee god , yet he takes away the use of his being , god as well as man in the worke of our redemption . for if god by his supreme sovereigne power can dispense with the law of his iustice , and instead of christs full satisfaction made for us to the law , and imputed to us , and made ours , can and doth accept our weake faith for the perfect righteousnesse of the law ; what use is there of christs being god in our nature ? for all orthodox divines doe give this reason , why it was necessary that christ should be god in our nature . viz. that his suffering and righteousnesse performed in our nature , might be of value to iustifie all the sonnes of men , who have communion of them , and to whom they are imputed . this communion and imputation while he denyeth , hee takes away the use of christs being god in our nature . secondly , in affirming that christ obeyed the whole law in every letter , jot , and title , he doth mock , and delude his hearers , and readers ; for he doth not hold , that he fulfilled the law onely for us , but primarily for himselfe ; his words imply so much , for he saith , he obeyed the law , as far as concerned himselfe , while he continued in the flesh : and he dorh hereafter roundly affirme , that christ was bound to fulfill the law for himselfe , which is in effect , a denying of his eternall god-head : for if he be god , infinite in glory , and excellency , his god-head must needes exempt the manhood personally united to it from all bondage of the law , and make it worthy of glory at gods right hand , from the first assumption of it . he continued in the flesh , and obeyed the law , onely for us without all doubt , as the prophet foretold , esa. 9.6 . saying , to us a child is borne , and to us a son is given . thirdly , as he denies the satisfaction of christ to be imputed to us , so he denies the imputation of our sinnes to christ ; and that very closely , and cunningly , under colour of that challenge which christ made to the iewes , which of you can convince me of sinne ? for our saviour speakes of sinne committed by himselfe , and such aspersion none can say upon him ; but all our iniquities god laid upon him , and he bare all our sinnes , esa. 53. and was made sinne for us , 2 cor. 5 , 21. and to cast this aspersion of all our sinnes on him , is a sure foundation of the peace , and safety of the church . in the second proposition , hee doth most notoriously aequivocate , and play the hypocrite ; first in that he seemes to acknowledg the sacrifice of christ to be an attonement , and satisfaction for the world , and a propitiatory sacrifice for the sinne of it . secondly , in that he denyeth his lord , and master socinus , and calles the spirit which wrought in him a spirit of error ; whereas indeed he himselfe is lead by the same spirit , and doth deny christ to be the propitiatory sacrifice for our sinnes , as far as socinus ever did : for in a propitiatory sacrifice , offered to purge sinne , and to make attonement , there were three necessary requisits : first , the thing offered , must be of his owne proper goods , for whom it was offered , so the law required , and therefore david durst not offer for his sinne , that which was not his owne , purchased with his money , 2. sam. 24 , 24. secondly , the owner , whose expiatory sacrifice it was , did lay his hand upon the head of the beast which was to be offered , and thereby in a type imposed all his sinne , and guilt upon it , so that it became 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 his sin , & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 his guilt , levit 5 , 6. and exod. 30.10 . and did beare upon it all his sins , lev. 16.22 . thirdly , this sacrifice offered up by the priest in that manner which god praescribed in the law , god accepted as a propitiation for him , it was set on his skore , and covered his sinne , as the hebrew words signifie , levit. 1.4 . he who denies any one of these , overthrowes the sacrifice of attonement . now this dissembler doth with socinus deny all these things in christs offering of himselfe a sacrifice of attonement to purge sinne . first he denies the true reall spirituall union betweene christ , and the persons pardoned , and justified ; by which christ , and they are made one body , and hee is their head , and they his members ; for if he , and the faithfull be one , then all his goods are theirs , and their debts are his , and his satisfaction , and righteousnesse is theirs , and is set on their skore , which he denyeth , and altogether opposeth , and so denyes their interest , and propriety in christ , and their union with him , as his master wotton did , in expresse word : in his essayes of justification . secondly , he also denieth that the sinnes of the faithfull , were layd on christ , and imputed to him ; and in this he chargeth god , with notorious injustice , who laid the punishments of all our sinnes on christ , without the sinnes : for he saith , that christ bare the punishmēts , though hee had no share in our sinnes by any imputation . thirdly , he denyeth that the sacrifice of christs suffering , and obedience offered up by him , is imputed to us , set on our skore , and accepted for us . and thus in the doctrine of christs sanitisfaction , and attonement , he declares himselfe a true disciple of socinus , lead by the same spirit of error , and of the same opinion , though in words he denyes it . and what he here seemes to grant , is no more but what all socinians yeeld unto . in the third proposition , viz. that christ is the sole , and entire miraculous cause , of every mans justification , &c. hee doth aequivocate , and delude the simple , and while hee deceives them , hee is deceived himselfe , as the apostle saith of wicked seducers , 2 tim. 3 , 13. for if he doth understand his owne words , that christ is the sole meritorious cause of every mans justification , that is justified by god , he must needs grant that christs satisfaction , made to gods justice , and his perfect righteousnesse , as it is meritorious , and of great value in it selfe ; so it is appropriated , communicated , & imputed to him ; that is , it is made actually meritorious for him , and makes him worthy to be counted righteous , and to be iustified ; for his words signify so much , though hee is in his purpose and meaning , as contrary , as darknesse is to light : for he meanes no more , but that christ meritted for himselfe , that god should gratifie , and honour him with the justification of those that believe in him , so hee explaines himselfe in the last words . it is certaine that a thing may be merritorious in it selfe , for the worth of it , but it cannot be meritorious to any particular person , till it be appropriated to him ▪ and set on his skore . wotton his master , ( this point being proved to his face with undeniable arguments ) was driven to disclaime the word ( merit ) denyed christs meritting , for the faithfull , and rejected it as a thing not named in scripture , in his essayes of justification . besides this deceiving of himself● , and misconceiving of his owne words , i find here much absurdity : first , in that he is wavering , and not setled in his iudgment , for in many places he holds faith to be the righteousnesse of a man justified ; and here he calles absolvtion from sinne , and condemnation , the righteousnesse which is given to every man in his justification : i grant that in a man iustified , there is no righteousnesse inhaerent , but his cleanenesse from guilt of all sinnes , both of commission , and omission , and in this sense , calvin , luther , and others say that all the righteousnesse , in a man iustified , is the remission of his sinnes , that is , his cleanenesse from the guilt of them , but this is not the righteousnesse which iustifieth him , and which is communicated to him , to make him cleane , and to worke this cleannesse from the guilt of his sin , that is , the righteousnesse inhaerent in christ , which makes him cleane , and puts him in a stare of righteousnesse before god : but this profound doctor , with that stamp , and superscription of rationall authority , which hee conceiveth to be set on him , hath not yet searched into the deep things o● god. secondly , he is most absurd in imagining that christ hath purchased favour , and honour , wit● god , that he might iustifie the●… that believe in him by procuring , that faith in a proper sense should be accepted for righteousnesse : for christ as he was god , & man , was infinitely of himselfe in favour and honour with god , and humbled himselfe onely for us ▪ and in our behalfe fulfilled the law ; not to purchace honour , and favour , to himselfe , nor to make himselfe worthy to be gratified , and honored by god , as hee affirmeth . thus wee see his absurdities , and his deceiving of himselfe . the fourth proposition is , that faith in the judgement of every man , is the condition required by god , on mans part , to bring him into that communion of justification , and redemption , which christ hath purchased &c. in which i finde delusion , and falshood : first hee doth not meane a gift , grace , or spirituall qualification , appointed by god , by which as by the hand of the soule stretched out , wee must lay hold on christs satisfaction , and righteousnesse ▪ for justification , and redemption , ( though his words pretend so much ) but hee meanes that faith is the condition of the new covenant , which man must on his part performe , in stead of all righteousnesse , which the law requires ; and so it is in the new covenant , the condition of life ; as workes of the law , and of righteousnesse , were the condition of the old covenant : this is the very haeresie , and damned error of socinus . secondly , he doth here make the covenant of grace , a covenant of life , not freely , but upon a condition ▪ performed on mans part , and so a covenant of workes , contrary to scripture , rom. 11.6 . thirdly , hee erres grossly , in imagining faith not to be a free gift of grace , but a worke performed on mans part , as workes were required in the old covenant . fourthly , hee falsely chargeth all honest , and godly men , to be of his judgment . i know that all orthodox divines , abhorre and detest this opinion . fiftly , hee affirmes a manifest untruth , in saying , that without beleeving , none can have part in justification , and redemption ; for no regenerate infants , which die in their infancy , do actually believe ▪ and yet being by the spirit of regeneration engraffed into christ , they have communion of his ransome and righteousnesse , are justified before god , and saved . socinianisme . it 's evident from the scriptures , that god in the act of every mans justification doth impute , or account righteousnes to him , or rather somewhat for , or in stead of righteousnes , by meanes of which imputed , the person justified passeth in account as a righteous man ( though hee be not properly , or perfectly such ) and is invested accordingly with those great priviledges of a man perfectly righteous , deliverance from death and condemnation , and acceptation into favour with god. the reason of which imputation , or why god is pleased to use an expression of righteousnesse imputed , in or about the justification of a sinner , seemes to be this , the better to satisfie the naturall scruple of the weake , and feeble conscience of men , who can hardly conceive , or thinke of a justification or of being justified , especially by god , without a perfect legall righteousnesse . now the purpose and counsell of god in the gospell , being to justifie men without any such righteousnesse : the better to salve the feares of the conscience touching such a defect , and to prevent and stay all troublesome thoughts , or quaeres which might arise in the mindes of men , who when they heare of being justified , are still ready to aske within themselves , but where is the righteousnesse ▪ conceiving a legall righteousnes to be as necessary to justification , as isaac conceived of a lamb for a burnt offering , gen. 22. he ( god i meane ) is graciously pleased so far to condescend to men in scripture treatie , with them about the weighty businesse of justification , as in effect to grant and say to them , that though hee findes no proper or perfect righteousnes in them , no such righteousnesse as passeth under the name of righteousnes with them : yet if they truely beleeve in him as abraham did ; this beleeving shall be as good as a perfect compleat righteousnes unto them , or that hee will impute rihteousnes to them upon their beleeving . christianisme . the first thing in this passage , to wit , god imputing righteousnesse to every man in his justification , is a thing evident by the scriptures , and i willingly grant it . but i abhorre and detest as heresie , that which he adds out of his owne conceit , to wit , that god doth rather impute somewhat in stead of righteousnes , which cannot make a man properly or perfectly righteous . this is a blasphemous imagination , that god can iudge falsly , and account a thing for righteousnes which is not , and esteeme a man righteous who is not properly righteous . secondly that which immediately followes is no lesse blasphemous , to wit , that a man may be invested by god , with the great priviledges of a man perfectly righteous , namely deliv●rance from sinne and condemnation , and acceptation , into favour with god , though he be no such man. for hereby god is charged either with injustice and iniquitie , or with errour in his judgement . thirdly his taking upon him to give a reason of gods purpose , and counsell , is luciferian pride and presumption . for who knoweth the minde of god , or hath beene of his counsell , rom. 11.34 . saint paul who was taken up into the third heaven , could never finde out any such counsell of god , neither durst give a reason of gods purpose and counsell , but onely the good pleasure of his owne will. fourthly in the declaration of his reason i find many errours , and untruths , as first , that a mans conscience can hardly thinke of being justified by god , without a perfect legall righteousnesse . every regenerate man and true beleever can upon his owne knowledge , and experience give him the lye , and tell him that the weakest conscience of any , who hath true faith , being taught by the gospell , can very easily thinke and beleeve , that god justifies him by an evangelicall righteousnesse , even christs perfect fulfilling of the law , which is farre more perfect then that legall righteousnesse , which the law requires of every man in his owne person . this abraham beleeved , and was fully perswaded of it , this david professes , and saint paul preached , and i know no true christian , who doth not both thinke and beleeve it . if any man be found doubting of this , it is because the spirit of antichrist and socinus doth worke strongly in him . secondly the thing which he imagineth , being so notoriously false there can be no reason given of it , but a reason as false as the thing it self . and indeed so it is here . for first hee assure , most falsely that gods purpose in the gospell , is to justifie men without any such righteousnesse , as the law requires in every man , that is the perfect fulfilling of the law. for though god doth not purpose to iustifie men by their owne fulfilling of the law , every one in his owne person : yet by christs righteousnesse and his fulfilling of the law in their stead , and by communicating and imputing that righteousnesse to them , he purposeth in the gospell , and professeth that men shall bee and are by him iustified , and this is in christ such a righteousnes as the law requires , for proofe of this see rom. 8.4 . and 10.4 . secondly the fathers upon god his own false and wicked conceits , to wit first , that god goeth about to cure an infirmity in his people , which is not to be found in any of them , after they are called to beleeve in christ , and to be his people ; for then they bid their owne workes of the law adiew , and do no more dreame of iustification by them . secondly , that god for the cure of their weak consciences tells them in the gospell , that if they beleeve in christ , this beleeving shall bee as good as a perfect compleat righteousnesse : by this hee would make god a pure socinian , one who takes the crowne from christ , and the righteousnes from god and man , and sets it on the head of mans faith , which in the best beleevers , and even in abraham himselfe was mingled with much doubting , and many infirmities . in a word , though all orthodox divines doe according to the scriptures , acknowledge that upon a mans beleeving truly in christ , god doth impute to him the perfect , and compleat righteousnes of christ , which is made his before he can truly apply it by faith. yet it can never enter into the heart of a true christian , but his soule will abhorre to thinke , that any mans beleeving should bee to him as good , as perfect compleat righteousnes , or that god should accept it in stead of perfect righteousnesse , and rather then the righteousnes of christ god and man , who is made unto us of god righteousnes , 1 cor. 1.30 . and in whom we are found to have the righteousnes of god by faith , philip. 3.9 . to conclude this passage , let me adde this as a foule absurdity . for if hee speake by experience , that conscience leads men naturally to thinke that there can be no iustification without righteousnesse , which is a perfect fulfilling of the law. which i confesse my conscience and my reason tell mee , and gods word teacheth ▪ mee plainely : then what is become of his conscience , who contrary to all truth and reason , and the common conscience of all men , will teach iustification , without any true righteousnesse at all either of christ , or our owne , and will crowne mans weak faith with the crown of righteousnesse , which onely belongs to christ and his perfect obedience . socinianisme . so that now the state and drift of the question is , not either first whether faith without an object or as separated from christ , bee imputed for righteousnesse ; for such a faith ( doubtles ) in the point of justification was never dreamt of by any man , that kept his 〈◊〉 company ; men may as well fancy a living man without a soul● , or a wise man without his witts , as a faith without an object ; much lesse was such a faith conceived by any man , to bee imputed for righteousnesse . christianisme . in the fourth part , or passage , he first propounds five foolish quaeres , which he denieth to concerne the state of the question . secondly , he propounds a sixt quaere , and that in plaine , and precise termes hee affirmes . i will first particularly answere the 5. quaeres : and after lay downe the ●i●t at large , and addresse my selfe to the confutation of his discourse upon it . and first , whereas he pronounceth him a mad man , who dreames of faith without christ the object , or thinks that faith which believes not in christ , should be imputed for righteousnesse : here i must be bold to put him in mind ; that thus he dreames in the next chapter , where he boldly affirmes and by divers arguments laboureth , to prove that the faith of abraham which was imputed to him for righteousnes , was not a beleeving in christ , neither was christ and his righteousnes the object of it . and therefore by his owne confession and his owne wordes ; hee doth there play the mad man , and keepes not his wits company , but his fancy runs wild , while he strives to prove that abrahams faith imputed to him for righteousnesse was not a beleeving in christ. the second quaere . neither is it any part of the intent of the question , to enquire , whether faith bee the meritorious cause of a mans justification . for both they that affirme , and they that deny the imputation of faith for righteousnes ; deny the meritoriousnes of faith every way ▪ how ever it is true , that they tha● would seeme most to disclaime it , and cast it further from them , doe yet in some of their most beloved tenets draw very neare unto it ( as will afterwards appeare . ) answer . here behold either grosse ignorance or wilfull lying against knowledge , and conscience . for all the learned know that faith and beleeving are held by the church of rome , to be a principall part of mans righteousnesse , and workes which god imputes and accounts meritorious , of justification , and of eternall life ex condigno . yea he himselfe in the passage next before hath plainely affirmed , that faith to him that beleeveth as abraham did , is as good as perfect and compleat righteousnes ; which if it be true , then faith must needs be , ( as perfect and compleat righteousnesse is ) the meritorious cause of justification . and therefore that which he here saith is verified in himselfe , though he would seeme most to disclaime the merit of faith , and to cast it furthest from him , yet in some of his most beloved tenets , hee drawes very neare to it , yea hee embraceth it with his heart in his whole discourse , the maine drift whereof is to exalt faith into the place of christs most meritorious righteousnesse , and to put the crowne upon it . for what can be imagined more meritorious of justification , then that which god in a proper sense judgeth and counteth for righteousnes , and for which he doth justifie men , and counts them righteous . the third quaere . neither is it the question , whether faith be the formall cause of justification , that is , whether god doth justifie a man with his faith , as a painter makes a wall white with whitenes , or as a master makes his scholler learned with knowledge , or learning conveyed into him ; for both parties make the forme of justification to be somewhat really different from faith ( which is the genuine tenet of arminius ▪ ) answer . this quere is very ridiculous , for to imagine a quality or act in man , to be the formall cause of justification which is gods act , is the fancy of a distempered braine , and the conceit of a mad man. his exposition of his quaere shews his want of logicall skill . for the whitenesse wherewith the painter makes a wall white , is a forme introduced into the wall , it is not the formall cause of his action of painting ; and so learning produced in a scholler , is forma docti , the forme of a scholler as hee is made learned , not the formall cause , of his masters teaching , surely his expounding of his quaere , by such dissonant similitudes , sheweth that hee had need of a master to teach him some better knowledg , and learning , and to set on him some better stamp , and superscription , of rationall authority . his phrase ( of learning conveyed ) is somewhat improper , for learning is not conveyed , into a scholer , but produced , and begotten , in him . let him not therefore condemne tropes of speech , seeing he himselfe can , and doth often speak tropically , and improperly . but to come home to his quaere . if by justification hee meanes imputative justification , in which god justifies a man , by imputing righteousnesse to him ; and man is justified by believing that god counts him righteous in christ ; then wee deny not that faith in some respect , is the formall cause of justification : for in this justification taken passively , as it is mans receiving by faith , that which god imputes to him ; that is , as it is a mans believing , that god reckons him among the righteous , and counts him to be in the state of a justified person ; so his actuall faith , and believing , is the forme of his justification : but take justification , according to his owne opinion , for gods imputeing faith in a proper sense , for righteousnesse ; then is faith that somewhat , by which a man stands in the state of a person justified before god , even his formall righteousnesse , or that at least , which is in stead of formall righteousnes . thus he is every way taken , and entangled in his owne words . lastly , what that is , which hee saith is the genuine tenet of arminius ; hee doth not expresse whether it be , that faith is really different , or not different , from the forme of justification ; for his words are included in a parenthesis , which might very well be left out : onely this i know , that arminius professeth this to be his genuine tenet ; that faith is imputed to the beleever , for righteousnes . sensu proprio , non m●tonymico , in a proper sense , without a trope , in epist. ad hippolitum de collibus , if elsewhere hee alters his tenet , and writes otherwise ; it is but the common disease , the vertigo , and giddinesse of the socinian faction , to doe as here their fellow disciple doth in this his hovering , and wavering discourse ; that is , to say , and gainesay , affirme , and deny , the same things , through the inconstancy of their windy braines , and mindes unsetled . the 4 quaere . nor yet doth the question make any quaere at all , whether christ be the sole meritorious cause of justification of a sinner , for both they that goe on the right hand of the question , and they that goe on the left hand , are knit together in the same mind , and iudgment concerning this . answere . whosoever denyeth such a spirituall union , & communion between christ , and the penitent , and believing sinner iustified , as doth make christs righteousnesse , and satisfaction to become his ransome , and righteousnesse , and to be imputed by god to him , and to make him accepted by god , as one cleane from the guilt of sinne , and righteous in his sight , this man denyeth christ to be the meritorious cause , of the justification of a sinner : for till christ with his satisfaction , be communicated , and appropriated to the faithfull , yea , till his righteousnes be so made theirs , and set on their skore , that they have a right , and interest in it : christ is no more meritorious of justification to them , then hee is to infidels , and reprobates : for it is as impossible for christ to be actually meritorious of justification to any man who hath not an interest in him , as for one mans money to ransom another , who is a captive , upon whose skore it was never set , no● so much interest therein given to him , that it is paid for him and accounted for his ransome . 5 quaere . neither doth the question as it is here propounded , int●nd any dispute at all , whether the active obedience of christ , falling in with the passive , and considered in coniunction with it , be that whereby christ merited the justification of sinners , or that which god hath a principall respect , and recourse unto , in the justification of sinners , for this also is acknowledged on both sides ( at least by the greater partie of both ) answere . bvt while he denyes gods communicating , and imputeing christs whole obedience ▪ hee denies the merit of them in our justification ; and when hee affirmes , that faith , and not christs righteousnesse , is the thing imputed for righteousnesse , to iustification , he denies christs obedience active , and passive , to be that which god hath a principall respect , and recourse unto in the iustification of sinners , and therefore here he contradicts himselfe , and saith untruely ▪ that all sides hold the merit of christs whole obedience , when in his doctrine he utterly overthrowes it . the 6 quaere , which he alloweth , and affirmeth . but lastly the question in plaine tearmes is this , whether the faith of him that truly beleeves in christ , or whether the righteousnesse of christ himselfe , that is that obedience that christ performed to the morall law ( consisting of all those severall and particular acts of righteousnesse , wherein he obeyed in the letter and propriety of it ) bee that which god imputes to a beleever , for righteousnesse in his justification , so that he that beleeves is not righteous onely by account , or by gods gracious reputing and accepting of him for such : but is rigidly , literally , and peremptorily righteous , constituted and made as perfectly and compleatly , and legally righteous as christ himselfe , no difference at all betweene them , quoad veritatem , but onely quoad modum , the justified every whit as righteous as the iustifier , both righteous with the selfesame individuall righteousnes , onely this difference betweene one and the other ; the iustified weares i● as put upon him by another by imputation ; the iustifier weares it as put upon him by himselfe , or by inherency . that the scriptures no where countenance any such imputation of the righteousnes of christ , i trust ( the spirit of truth directing and assisting ) to make manifest in the sequele of this discourse , and to give good measure of truth to the reader , heaped up by testimonies from the scripture , pressed downe by the weight of many arguments , & demonstrations running over , with the cleare approbation of many authors learned and sound , and every way greater then exception . multa fidem promissa levant . answere . to this question laid downe in plaine , and precise termes , i answer . first that to move this question , except with purpose to discover and oppose socinus , and his followers who affirme it , and stand for imputation of faith in a proper sense ; for righteousnes is not to be tolerated among true christians : but to dispute for that damned errour , which takes the crowne from the all-sufficient righteousnes of christ , and sets on the head of mans weake faith , is most hereticall impudency ( as in my whole answere i shall prove aboundantly . secondly his absurd expounding of justification by christs righteousnes imputed ; and how in this question the righteousnes of christ , and the iustifying of men by it , are to be understood ; is a notable point either of calumny in slandering our doctrine , and reporting it corruptly , or of subtilty , that when his opinion is proved to be blasphemous , hee may have some starting holes , through which hee may shift away , and make an escape , pleading that hee mistooke our doctrine of being righteous by christs righteousnesse imputed , and ignorantly did oppose it . first no man standing for the imputation of christs righteousnes , doth affirme that every particular act of christ which hee performed , was necessary to make up a perfect and sufficient righteousnes : but that his righteousnesse containes in it all his acts of obedience , none denyeth . for suppose our saviour by reason of imprisonment , or some other restraint and impediment , had beene hindered from doing divers of those workes of mercy , charity and piety , which hee did performe being at liberty , this had not diminished his righteousnes , so long as he had a ready will to doe good upon all occasions , and did good workes when liberty and opportunity served . secondly none of our divines doe thinke or write , that christs righteousnes imputed , and communicated to beleevers , doth make them rigidly , literally , and peremptorily righteous , constituted and made us perfectly compleatly and legally righteous , as christ himselfe , for though they are iustifi●d by the communion of christs satisfaction , and have so much interest in it , as to make them truely righteous , yet they have it not as christ hath it performed legally by himselfe in his owne person ; neither have they power to give the spirit , whereby they may communicate it to others to justifie them , & to make them righteous . the wife is endowed with her husbands honours and riches , and made honourable and rich , but she is not endowed with her husbands lordship and dominion over them , so far that she may give them away at her pleasure : but onely posseseth them in him and with him , for her owne use . and so it is betweene christ and the faithfull , he is righteous rigidly and legally , according to the letter of the law ; they are righteous evangelically by the communion of his righteousnes , that is , originally righteous , as the head in a naturall body is sensitive , and hath sense and motion in it as the root and fountaine : they are righteous by communion from him , and possesse his righteousnes as all the rest of the members , in a living body possesse life by derivation from the heart , not in the same degree as the heart doth , to communicate it to others ; but every one so far as to be a living member . therefore all that hee here saith is but subtilty , calumny , and falsehood , neither scriptures nor any sound and learned authors will minister arguments , or demonstrations to him to prove any thing contrary to our doctrine , concerning the imputation of christs righteousnes for iustification . the more he strives to wrest and abuse testimonies of scripture , and learned authors , the more evident demonstrations will he give of his wickednesse , and wilfull contending against gods sacred truth . socinianisme . give me leave here to mention that by the way , which prevents many mistakes ( yea and offences too ) in reading the writings of many later divines ( especially of other churches ) touching this point of justification . if we take the phrase of imputing christs righteousnes unproperly , and out of the usuall and formall signification of it ( as luther and calvin , and other divines of the reformed churches sometimes doe in their writings ) viz for the giving out and bestowing ( as it were ) the righteousnes of christ in the returne of it , that is , in the priviledges , blessings and benefits , that are procured and purchased by it for men : so a beleever may be said to be justified by the righteousnes of christ imputed . but then the meaning can be no more but this . a beleever is justified by the imputation of christs righteousnes . that is , god justifies a beleever for christs righteousnes sake , and not for any righteousnes of his owne . such an imputation of the righteousnes of christ as this is , is no wayes denyed or once questioned . and thus such passages as those in calvin , god freely justifies us by imputing the obedience of christ unto us , instit. 1. c. 3.11 , and againe a man is not righteous in himselfe , but because the righteousnes of christ is communicated , or imparted to him by imputation , these and such like expressions in this author , are to be interpreted by such passages as these ( which are frequent in the same author ) christ by his obedience , procured and merited for us , grace and favour with god the father , and againe instit. 1.2.17 . and againe , 1.3 . c. 11.12 . christ by his obedience procured , or purchased righteousnes for us . and againe , in gal. 3.6 . all such expressions as these import the same thing , that wee are justified by the grace of god , that christ is our righteousnesse ; and that righteousnes was procured for us by the death , and resurrection of christ. by all which passages and many more of like importment , that might be produced out of the same author , it s fully evident , that where he mentions any imputation of the righteousnes of christs in justification , the meaning is onely this , that the righteousnes of christ is onely the meritorious cause of our justification , and hee hath procured and purchased this for us at gods hand ; that upon our beleeving we should bee accounted righteous by him ; or ( which is but the same ) that our faith should be imputed for righteousnes to us . to which purpose hee speakes more significantly , and expressely in the place last mentioned , gal. 3.6 . men not having righteousnes lodged in them , they obtaine it by imputation , which imputation he thus explicates and interprets . because god doth impute or account their faith unto them , for righteousnes . divers like passages might be drawne together out of other authors , which must be seasoned with the same salt of interpretation , to bee made savorie and meet for spirituall nourishment . in the homilies of our church , there are severall passages that mention the imputation of christs righteousnes in justification , for the genuine sense whereof if wee consult with the 11. article of religion ( which is concerning justification ) and is framed with all possible exactnes this way ( that so few words are capable of ) that will lead us directly to the same interpretation of them . wee are accounted righteous before god , ( saith our article ) onely for the merit of our lord , and saviour iesus christ by faith , and not for our owne workes or deservings . where it s to be observed , that we are not said to bee constituted , or made righteous before god in justification , but onely that we are accounted or reputed such . 2. it s not said that wee are accounted righteous with the righteousnes , nor yet with the merit of christ , but onely wee are accounted righteous before god , onely for the merit of our lord christ by faith . the merit of christ or of his righteousnes , hath so farre prevailed with god on our behalfe , that by our faith we shall bee accounted righteous before him ; which is in effect the same truth wee maintaine . viz. that god for christs sake , or for christs merits sake doth impute our faith for righteousnes unto us . and thus musculus expresseth himselfe roundly . faith is accounted for righteousnes for christs sake ; and againe loc. com . de justifica . this faith ought to be esteemed of us , as that which god purposeth for christs sake , to impute for righteousnes to those that beleeve in him . so luther also ad gal. 3.6 . god for christs sake accounts this imperfect faith for perfect righteousnes . and chamier calls remission of sinnes , the righteousnes which is imputed to us . therefore wheresoever , whether in the homilies of our church ▪ or in other authors we meet with any such expressions of the righteousnes of christ imputed in justification ; wee must not understand this righteousnesse of christ in the letter , propriety , and formality of it , but in the spirit , or merit of it to be imputed . and this manner of speech to put the name of a thing in the propriety of it , instead of the value , worth , benefit , and returne of it , is both usuall , and familiar in ordinary passage , of discourse amongst us , and very frequent in the scriptures ; when we say , a merchant grew rich by such , or such a commodity , our meaning is , that hee grew rich by the gaine , or returne of it , hee may be made rich by the commodity , and yet have never a whit of it with him ; so when we say , such a man grew rich by his place or office , our meaning is , that he grew rich by such gaine , or profit , as his office afforded him ; we do not meane that the place it selfe , or office , were his riches ; so it may be said , that wee are justified by the righteousnesse of christ , and yet not have the righteousnesse it selfe upon us by imputation , or otherwise , but onely a righteousnesse procured , and purchased by it , really , and essentially , differing from it , viz. remission of sinnes , as will appeare in due time : thus in the scriptures themselves there is no figure , or forme of speech more frequent , then to name the thing it selfe in the propriety of it in the stead of the fruite of it , good or bad , benefit , or losse , vantage or disadvantage , merit , or demerit of it . thus iob 33.26 . god is said to render unto man his righteousnesse , the fruit and benefit of his righteousnesse in the favour of god , and manifestation of it in his deliverance , and restauration ; the righteousnesse it selfe in the propriety of it , cannot bee rendered unto him : so ephes. 6.8 . whatsoever good thing , any man doth , the same hee shall receive of the lord : hee shall receive benefit , and consideration from god for it ▪ so reve. 14.12 . and 13.10 . here is the patience and faith of the saints , that is , the benefit , and unspeakable reward of the faith , and patience of the saints to bee seene ; when the beast , and all that worship him shall bee tormented in fire , and brimstone for evermore , and those that have constantly suffered for not worshiping him , shall be delivered from drinking of that bitter cup : so psal. 128.2 . thou shalt eate the labour of thy hands , that is , the fruite of thy labour . so on the other hand heb. 9.28 . to those that looke for him , hee shall appeare the second time without sin ; without the guilt or punishment of sinne charged upon him . gen. 19.15 . least thou be destroyed in the iniquitie of the citie : that is , in that judgement which fell upon them by meanes of their iniquity : in such a construction of speech , as the holy ghost himselfe useth in these , and such passages in scripture , the righteousnesse of christ may be said to be the righteousnes by which we are justified , or which is imputed unto us in justification . christianisme . this fifth part , or passage , is nothing else , but first the propounding of a new , and strange imputation of christs righteousnesse contrary to sense and reasō , & to the common signification of the phrase of imputing righteousnesse , or counting a thing for righteousnesse . secondly , a wresting , and abusing , of some speeches of scripture , and learned writers , that hee may father on them , an opinion , which they abhorred , and in expresse words , disclaimed , and confuted . first , hee saith , that the phrase of imputing christs righteousnesse , is by luther , calvin , and other divines , taken unproperly , and out of the usuall , and formall signification , for the giving , and bestowing of the returne , that is , the priviledges , blessings , and benefits , which are purchased by christs righteousnesse , for men ; and the meaning can be no more but this ; that god justifies a believer , for christs righteousnesse sake , and not for any righteousnes of his owne . to this i answere , first , that this signification of the phrase , is so unproper , unusual , & deformed , that it is never found in all the scriptures , nor any approved author ( as hereafter i shall make manifest ) onely socinus , & they of his faction are coiners , and forgers , of such strange barbarismes . secondly , it is so contrary to common sense , and reason , that if any man should say , the sun , the ayre , or other elements are imputed to us by god , because god hath given us the benefit of them ; every man would laugh at such a barbarisme , even the most simple would discerne it to be ridiculous . if master goodwin , or any of his disciples , comeing into some country house for shelter from some cruel tempest , which overtooke him as hee travelled on his journy , should for the benefit which hee received under the mans roofe , presently chaleng , that the house is imputed to him , and is to be counted his , and set on his skore , it is a thousand to one , that the owner of the house , would take him for a mad man , and put a fooles feather in his cap , or cast him out of the doores , by the head and shoulders , for a sawcy companion : hee had not best therefore use such speeches , nor write such phrases with his pen , for if they once proceed out of his mouth , and come to other mens eares , hee will thereby purchase to himselfe much scorne and derision . but let us proceed to examine the instances , by which hee goeth about to proue this strange signification , of the word imputing righteousnesse , wherein righteousnesse is put for the fruit of it by a metonymie of the cause for the effect ; imputing is put for bestowing by a new socinian trope , and gods bestowing , for mans receiving , by a monstrous metonymie , of one opposit for another : i wonder here by the way , how this man ( who disclaimes in the next chapter , the apostles using of tropes and figures in the waighty doctrine of justification , and calles it a monster of speech to use two tropes in one phrase ) dares here make in this one phrase , so many tropes , and monstrous figures . the first instance , which hee brings to prove that calvin did use the phrase in this signification is this ; god freely justifies us , by imputing christs obedience to us : and againe , a man is not righteous in himselfe ; but because the righteousnesse of christ is communicated , and imparted to him by imputation . i might here blame his false quotations , to wit , instit. 1. c 3.1.11 . and 1.2.17 . and 1.3.14.17 . in which places no such wordes are to be found ; but i willingly embrace these words as calvins , for they are most cleare , and manifest to prove that god not onely give us the returne or benefits of christs righteousnesse , but also doth by imputation communicate , and impart to us the righteousnesse it selfe : so that if this man had studied all his dayes , to contradict his owne opinion , and to confute his forged signification , hee could not have found more ful , plaine , and p●rspicuous words then these of calvin ; for if a man bee not righteous in himselfe , then is hee not righteous by faith in a proper sense , for his faith in a proper sense , is in himselfe . but let us not bee too hastie to insult over his folly ; it may bee his impudency will catch at some other words of calvin , which do not so expressely contradict him , but are more obscure , and them hee will wrest , and abuse to expound calvins plaine words in a contradictory sense . it is even so indeed , for hee cites in the next place , some more generall and obscure speeches of calvin , to expound his plaine words , and to make them contradictory to themselves . i have heard absurd fellowes derided for going about to shew obscurum perobscurius , that is , to make men see dark things through greater darknesse , and for running ( as the proverb is ) out of gods blessing , into the warme sun : but that any should goe about , to make others see the sun , when it shineth in full strength , by the dimme light of a candle , and to perswade them that the sun is the moone ; this is madnes , & deserves that the lunatike , & melancholike person so doing should be sent to the iland of hellebore , there to inhabit till hee recover his wits . and doth not he so who seekes to make calvins plaine words , to contradict themselves by citing words , wherein he speakes neither so plainely , nor so fully as in them . but let us see those other speeches of calvin , which hee brings for this purpose : one is , that christ by his obedience hath merited , and procured for us favour with god his father . these words doe not prove that the imputing of christs obedience , and righteousnesse signifies the bestowing of the benefit of it on us , that is gods favour : but shew clearely the contrary to that which he intends , namely that christs obedience is made ours , and imputed to us , because it procures to us the favour of god , which we cannot enjoy , nor appeare gracious in his sight , unlesse wee bee cloathed , with christs rich robe of righteousnes , and washed cleane from the guilt of sinne , by his satisfaction imputed to us . another is , christ by his obedience hath purchased righteousnes for us ; the true and plaine sense of which wordes , is no more but this , that christ by his obedience hath fulfilled the law of god for us , and we by that obedience are constituted & made righteous , as the apostle expressely affirmes , rom. 5.19 . another is that , when we are said to be justified by the grace of god , and that righteousnes was procured by the death , and resurrection of christ : these expressions import the same thing with those , that christ is our righteousnes , that is by union with him and communion of his righteousnes , which he purchased by his death and resurrection , and which god graciously gives to us , wee are justified . another is , men having not any righteousnes in themselves , they obtaine it by imputation , that is , neither a mans owne workes , nor faith taken in a proper sense , for a gift grace or worke in him , can be his righteousnes , but onely that which is obtained by imputation , to wit , christs righteousnes apprehended by faith , which when true beleevers have laid hold on , then god doth account them righteous , and in this improper sense god is said to impute faith for righteousnes . thus every speech of calvin which he brings against calvin himselfe , is like a stone cast against a brasen wall , and rebounds against the caster , and dasheth out the braines of his hereticall opinion . and therefore it was his safest course , onely to tell us of more such passages , but not to recite any more out of calvin , or other authors . for being seasoned with the salt of their owne interpretation , they will prove gravell in his mouth , choake him , ( and if it be possible ) put him to shame and silence . from calvin hee comes home to the homilies allowed in our church , and they by his owne confession teach , that we are justified by the imputation of christs righteousnes . but to prove that by the righteousnes of christ , they meane faith taken in a proper sense , that is , as it is the gift of faith in us , and the operation of it in us , even our beleeving : hee brings the words of the 11. article of religion allowed in our church by law. viz. we are ac , counted righteous before god onely for the merit of our lord and saviour jesus christ by faith , not for our owne workes or deserts ; where note , that whereas the articles send us to the homilies , as being very profitable , & plaine expositions of them ; hee on the contrary sets the cart before the horses to draw them after it . hee brings the text to expound the commentary or plaine exposition of it . but hee gets no advantage by doing so , for the words of the article are very exact indeed , and make much for us against his opinion , they shew that the merit of christ apprehended by faith , is that for which wee are accounted righteous before god , and that faith is not our righteousnes , for then wee should bee accounted righteous for a grace in our selves , and for a worke of our owne , performed by us , even our owne beleeving . oh but the article doth not say that wee are constituted , and made , but onely accounted righteous : true indeed , the article doth not speak of fundamentall justification mentioned , rom. 5.19 . but of imputative justification , of which the apostle speakes , rom. 4 , 3. which necessarily presupposeth the other : for god whose judgement is according to truth , cannot judge , and count us righteous , till hee hath communicated christs righteousnesse to us , and by it , constituted , and made us righteous ; which when we by faith , receive , and apply by the assistance of his spirit , which dwells in us , and makes us one spirituall , and mysticall body , with christ ; then god accounts us righteous , and by our faith , and believing , we obtene , as abraham did , this testimony from god , that we are righteous , as iustine martyr saith in the words cited in the next chapter . from the article , and homilies , hee proceedes to musculus , luther , and chamier , who , though in their doctrine they are opposit to his opinion , as heaven is to earth , yet hee snatcheth here , and there , some improper speeches out of their writings , which hee wresteth to his purpose ; though they doe most plainely expound their owne meaneing to bee contrary to his mind . the words of musculus are these , faith is accounted , for righteousnesse for christs sake : that is , faith is accounted for righteousnesse , and the true believer is counted a righteous man : not sensu proprio , nec per se , sed propter christum . that is , by reason of christ , and his righteousnesse , whom the believer apprehendeth , and by faith possesseth his righteousnesse ; and againe , this faith ought to be esteemed of us , as that which god purposeth for christs sake to impute for righteousnesse , to those that believe in him , in which words musculus folowing the phrase of the apostle , intends no more but this , that wee are not to seeke righteousnes by our owne workes , but by faith in christ for if wee can obtaine grace to believe in him , and to lay hold on his righteousnesse ; wee are for christ and his righteousnesse sake , upon our believing counted righteous before god , because by our communion which wee have with christ by the spirit dwelling in us , and enabling us to believe , the righteousnesse of the law is fulfilled in us imputatively , by the righteousnesse of another , even of christ , which is also ours , for we are flesh of his flesh , that is ▪ one with him ; these are musculus his owne words , in which , hee roundly expresseth himselfe in rom. 8.4 . and 10.3.4 ▪ luthers words , at which hee catcheth in vaine , are to the same purpose , in gal. 3.6 . god for christs sake , accounts this imperfect faith , for perfect righteousnesse . here luther doth not charge god with error , or iniquity in judgement , by judgeing , and accounting , that for perfect righteousnesse , which is imperfect ; for his speech is tropicall imitating the phrase of the apostle ; by imperfect faith hee meanes a true believer , by a weak faith , laying , hold on christs righteousnesse , and by perfect righteousnesse a man set in a state of perfect righteousnesse by communion with christ ; and this is the sense of the words , that if a true believer doth lay hold on christ by faith , which in the best of us , is but weake , and imperfect ; yet god accounts him perfectly righteous , with the righteousnesse of christ , which is most perfect , and compleat . thus luther expounds himselfe , 1 tom. pag 32. editionis ienensis : christ ( saith hee ) is in us by faith , yea , one with us , but christ is righteousnesse , and a fulfiller of all gods commaundements , therefore wee also doe by him fulfill all gods commandements , when hee is by faith made ours : and 2 tom. pag. 515. faith puts us upon christs workes of righteousnesse , without our owne workes , and translates us out of the exile of our sinnes into the kingdome of his righteousnes ▪ and tom. 1. pag 106. by faith , our sinnes are made no more our owne , but christs , upon whom god hath laid the iniquities of us all ? and againe , all christs righteousnesse is made ours , for he layeth his hand on us : if a man had the tongue of men and angels , hee could not speake more fully for the communion , and imputation of christs righteousnes to believers , for justification , and of their sinnes to christ for remission : then luther doth in these , and divers other places , as i shall more fully shew in the second chapter . as for chamiers words , who calles remission of sinnes , the righteousnesse which is imputed to us ; they shew that faith is not that imputed righteousnesse , for faith , or believing , is our act ; remission is gods act ▪ who can forgive sinnes but ▪ god ▪ but indeed ▪ the meaning of chamier is the same with calvin , to wit ▪ that our cleannesse from the guilt of sinne , which is passive , remission , or justification , is that which god lookes upon in us , when hee counts us righteous in christ , as i have before shewed : wherefore i conclude with the contradictory of his conclusion ( which hee inferres upon the speeches of our homilies , and of other learned authors ) to weet thus ; that wheresoever we find in the scriptures , or any authors of sound learning ; this phrase of faith , or believing , imputed for righteousnesse , we must not understand faith in a proper sense , but the righteousnesse of christ , even his fulfilling of the law for us , which together with the power , and merit of it , so far as every believer hath need , is communicated to him , and imputed to him for justification : for as a merchant cannot be , said to be enriched by the gaine of a commodity , which never was his owne , and in which hee never had any interest , or propriety , nor any man by an office which was never his owne , nor by him executed : so none can have the merit , and benefit of christs righteousnesse , nor be said to bee thereby justified , neither can any such thing be imputed to them , except they have a propriety in it , and communion of it . thus his instances , and similitudes , are turned against himselfe , to the confusion of his haereticall opinion . but that his sinne may appeare out of measure sinfull , hee doth not content himselfe , with his abusing , wresting , and perverting of the godly sayings of other authors , and using similitudes which are most contrary to his purpose ; but hee also layeth profane hands , on the holy scriptures . that excellent saying , iob 33 , 26. which master perkins learnedly expounds to be meant of christs righteousnesse , which when men humbly seeke to god , by repentance , and faithfull prayers , god renders unto them by renuing their sense and assurance of their communion with christ in his whole satisfaction . this doctor novice most popishly applyes to a mans owne righteousnesse , and saith , that gods rendring to a man his righteousnesse is giving him the benefit of it , not the righteousnesse it selfe : and yet if wee should grant what hee perversely seekes , it will availe him nothing ; for as the fruite , and benefit , which god renders to a man , is not the fruit of a righteousnesse , in which he hath no propriety , or interest , but is his righteousnesse , so the fruite , and benefit , which we receive of christs righteousnesse , god renders to us when that righteousnesse is become ours in the propriety of it : that place ephes. 6.8 . whatsoever good a man doth the same hee shall receive of the lord : it is for us , and against himselfe , for as the good which a man receives from god for well doing , is the good fruite of his owne well doing , so is the fruite , and benefit which wee receive in our justification ▪ the fruite of christs righteousnes made ours , and imputed to us : those speeches revel . 13.10 . and 15.10 . here is the faith and patience of the saints , &c. are not to be understood of the fruite , and reward of their patience ( as the circumstances shew , which are killing , and slaying , and leading into captivitie ) but of the patience , and faith themselves , that in such times they are seene , tride , and proved , and god at such times gives them patience , and faith , by threatning , and foretelling the finall destruction of their enemies ; as learned brightman truely expounds the wordes . besides if patience and faith were here used to signifie the fruit , and benefit of patience and faith : yet he cannot say it is the fruit of any patience , or faith , but of the saints themselves who receive the benefit . likewise if wee grant , that in the other places psal. 128.2 . labour signifies the fruit of labour , and heb. 9.28 . sin signifies the punishment of sinne , and gen. 19.15 . iniquitie signifies the judgement of god on sodom for iniquitie , by a trope or metonymie of the cause for the effect . this proves that faith which is the hand , or instrument of the soule , receiving christ with his righteousnes , may by the same trope be used to signifie that state of righteousnes , which we receive by it as by an hand or instrument . thus while he runs against the invincible rocke of the holy scriptures , and seekes to turne them like a rowling stone against a barke , they rowle and rebound back , and tumbling upon him grind him to powder· for if hee had ten thousand instances of scripture , wherein the fruite and benefit which men receive , are signified by the names of the things which are the causes , and meanes of them ▪ yet still it will appeare that the fruite is not received except men have first an interest , and propriety in the causes and meanes of it . and thus you see his fift part , or passage proved to bee a rotten heap of stinking lyes , absurdities and grosse errors . socinianisme . wherefore to draw towards the close of this first chapter , and withall to give a little more light , that it may bee seene to the bottome cleerely , both what wee affirme , and what we deny in the question propounded : first when we affirme the faith of him that beleeveth to be imputed for righteousnes ; the meaning is not either , 1o. that it should be imputed in respect of any thing it hath from a man himselfe , or as it is a mans owne act , nor yet in respect of any thing it hath from god himselfe , or from the spirit of god producing , & raising of it in the soule ( though it be true , it requires the lighting downe of the mighty arme of god , upon the soule to raise it . neither 3 o is it imputed for righteousnes in respect of the object , or as , or because it layeth hold upon christ , or his righteousnes ( though it be also true that that faith that is imputed for righteousnes must of necessity lay hold upon christ ; and no other faith is cable of this imputation besides ) because if faith should justifie or be imputed as it layes hold upon christ , it should justifie out of the inhaerent dignity & worth of it and by vertue of that which is naturall and intrinsecall to it , there being nothing that can be conceived more naturall , and essentiall to faith , then to lay hold upon christ : this is the very life , and soul of it , and that which gives it its specificall being , and subsistence . therefore to make the object of faith , ( as such ) the precise , and formall ground of its imputation , is to make hast into the midst of samaria , whilest men are confident , they are travailing towards dotha● . it s the giving of the right hand of felowship , to the romish justification , which makes faith the meritorious cause of it ( in part . ) but lastly , when with the scriptures we affirme that faith is imputed for righteousnesse : our meaning is simply , and plainely this , that as god in the first covenant of workes required an absolute , and through obedience to the whole law , with continuance in all things , for every mans justification , which perfect obedience had it beene performed had beene a perfect righteousnesse to the performer , and so would have justified him : so now in the new covenant of grace , god requires nothing of any man for his justification , but onely faith in his sonne , which faith , shal be as availeable , & effectuall to him for his justification , as a perfect righteousnes should have beene under the first covenant : this is that which is meant when faith is said to bee imputed for righteousnes , which is nothing but that which is taught generally by divines , both ancient and moderne . sic decretum dicit a deo , ut cessante lege solam fidem gratia dei posceret ad salutem . ambrosius . in rom. 4. that is , that the apostle saying , that to him that beleeveth his faith is imputed for righteousnes , affirmeth that god hath decreed that the law ceasing , the grace of god will require of men onely faith for salvation : and again upon chap. 9. of the same epistle , sola fides posita est ad salutem , onely faith is appointed to salvation . calvin writing upon rom. 10.8 . hath wordes of the same importance , and somewhat more cleare , and full , ex hac distinctionis nota colligimus , sicut lex opera exigit , evangelium nihil aliud postulas , nisi ut fidem afferrent homines ad recipiendam dei gratiam : that is , from this distinction we gather , that as the law exacted workes ; so the gospell requires nothing else , but that men bring faith to receive the grace of god. if god requires faith in the gospell , for that same end for which he requireth workes , or perfect righteousnes in the law ; it necessarily followes that he shall impute this faith for that righteousnes , that is accept from men upon the same termes , and bee countable unto them the same favours , rewards , and priviledges upon it , that should have beene given unto men , in regard of that righteousnes , had it beene performed or fulfilled : otherwise he should require it for such an end , or upon such tearmes as hee would refuse to make good unto it , when the creature hath exhibited and tendered it unto him . to require it for righteousnes , or in stead of righteousnes , and not to accept it for righteousnesse , when it is brought to him , should bee as apparant a breach of covenant with god , as it would be in a rich creditour , that should compound and agree with his poore debtors for 1. in the pound , or the like , but when they brought the mony to him , should refuse to take it upon any such tearmes , or to discharge them of their debt , and give them out their bonds . christianisme . in this last part or passage which is a meere confusion , and distraction of wordes , hee gives more then a little light , that his socinian heresie in this point of justification maintained with much non sense , may bee seene to the bottome cleerely . first , hee takes upon him to shew that faith is imputed , and how it is imputed . secondly hee strives to shew that christs righteousnes is not imputed . the first is in the wordes before recited . the second followes hereafter . first i will sift his wordes already rehearsed , and after proceed to the second . the summe of his speech last recited , may be reduced into a syllogisme of non sense , without forme mood or figure . the proposition and assumption whereof are contradictory . and the conclusion damned socinian heresie , so that here i may say with the poet. spectatum admissi risum teneatis amici ? his proposition runnes thus . faith is neither imputed for righteousnes , in respect of any thing which it receives from man , the proper subject of it , nor as it is mans act who useth it , and performes the acts of beleeving , nor in respect of any thing which it hath from god , or his spirit in the production of it , nor in respect of the object christ and his righteousnes , nor in respect of the life and soule of it , which gives to it the specificall being , and subsistence , to wit , the application of christ , and laying hold on him . the assumption . bvt faith is imputed to men , and is counted , and accepted as sufficiently for justification , and upon the same tearmes under the gospell , as perfect righteousnes of workes and of obedience to the whole law , was in the first covenant and under the law : so all divines hold both ancient and moderne . the conclusion . therefore upon mens beleeving , god shall bee as countable to them , to give them the same favour , rewards and privileges , that should have beene given unto them in regard of the perfect righteousnesse of workes , and of the law , if they had fulfilled it . first for his negatives heaped up in the proposition , wherein wee have a narration of what he holds not : if we lay them altogether , they will conclude , that faith is no way at all imputed for righteousnes , for neither in respect of the subject in which the habit of it resteth , nor in respect of the actes which man performes by it , nor in respect of any thing , which god by his spirit gives it in the production of it , that is , for no quantity quality , or vertue in it , nor in respect of the object christ , nor in respect of the life , soule , or forme which gives it the specificall being , and subsistence , so hee plainely professeth , and besides these there is no other respect in which it may bee imputed , as al reasonable men do know . therefore the conclusion is , that it is not imputed at all . but yet in affirming nothing , but denying all respects , which reason can conceive in faith , and in roming from himselfe and us , he kicks at us , and by the way snarls and bytes at the truth . for it is most certaine , that faith is said to be imputed in respect of gods production of it by his spirit , and in respect of the object christ , and his righteousnes which it doth lay hold on and apply . for the spirit of regenerarion being shed on us through christ , dwelling in us , and making us one body with christ , & partakers of his whole satisfaction , doth worke iustifying faith in us , and this union and conjunction , which in order of nature , goeth before faith and concurres to the production of it , is the ground , and reason , of the imputation of it . if christ were not made ours , and his satisfaction communicated to us , faith could not truely believe in christ , nor truely apply his righteousnesse , therefore the two last of his negatives are false , and haereticall . besides , it is not to be passed over in silence , that here againe he contradicts himselfe , and grants that christ , with his righteousnesse , is the object of faith , and laying hold on him , is the life , and soule of faith ; which hee utterly denyeth , and disputes to the contrary in the next chapter , as i have touched before . as for his assumption , the sum whereof is , that faith is imputed , and accepted of god , for righteousnesse , upon the same termes , that perfect righteousnes of works should have beene in the first covenant ; this is socinian haeresie , in the highest degree ; so grosse , and palpable , and so openly , and expressely affirmed by him , that no salt of interpretation can keepe it from stinking in the nostrills of any true christian. here also wee may note his ignorance , absurdity , and nonsense ; for instead of shewing in what respect faith is imputed , hee affirmes , that hee holds it to be imputed instead of perfect righteousnesse of our owne workes , and that it is in the new covenant a condition answerable and every way as sufficient and availeable to procure all favours , rewards , and priviledges , to us from god , as the righteousnesse of workes , was in the covenant of workes : and both here , and in the conclusion , hee makes faith as meritorious , and as strong a bond to tye god , and make him countable for all favours , rewards , and priviledges , under paine of being counted a covenant breaker ; as the perfect fulfilling of the law , by every man in his owne person , was in the covenant of workes , and here doth more then give the right hand of fellowship , to popish justification , for hee transcends them , and makes god more obliged to men for them , and more countable then any papists ever did . as for the testimonies which hee brings , out of ambrose , and calvin , they are nothing to his purpose ; they onely affirme , that as the law was mans onely guide to salvation , and the rule of righteousnesse in the old covenant ; so faith in the gospel , is the onely way to salvation in the new covenant , and the meanes by which we receive the grace of god ▪ and the righteousnesse of christ offered to us for justification , and salvation . socinianisme . secondly , when we deny the imputation of christs righteousnes in justification , we neither deny the righteousnesse of christ in it selfe , we rather suppose and establish it , neither 2º doe wee deny the absolute necessity of it , both to the justification , and salvation of a sinner : neither 3º do wee deny a meritorious efficiencie , and causalitie in that righteousnes in respect of the justification of a sinner , but verily believe and conceive , that god justifieth all that are justified , not simply or barely , for christs sake , or for his righteousnes sake ( for a man may doe a thing for his sake whom he much loves , and respects , though he hath not otherwise deserved it at his hands ) but for the righteousnesse of christ , his death being taken into the consideration with it , why god should justifie those that believe in him . but 4º and lastly , that which we deny in denying the imputation of christs righteousnesse , is this , that god should looke upon a believing sinner , and account of him , as one that hath done in his owne person , all that christ did in obedience to the morall law , and hereupon pronounce him righteous : or : ( which is the same ) that god should impute unto him those particular acts of obedience which christ performed in that nature , and property of them , so that hee should stand as righteous before god , as christ himselfe , or ( which is the same ) righteous with the selfe same righteousnesse wherewith christ was righteous , and so god make himselfe countable to him for such obedience imputed in as great matters of rewards as he would have beene for the like obedience personally performed by himselfe ; in a word , this is that which we deny , and this is that which we affirme , concerning the righteousnesse of christ , in the justification of a sinner , that god cloathes none with the letter of it , but every man that believes with the spirit of it . 1. that this righteousnes of christ , is not that , that is imputed unto any man for his righteousnesse ; but is that for which righteousnes is imputed to every man that believeth : a justified person may in such a sense be said to be cloathed with christs righteousnesse , as pauls necessities were relieved , and supplied by his hands . act. 20.24 . these hands ( saith hee ) have ministred to my necessities . paul neither eate his fingers , nor spun out the flesh of his hands , into cloathing , and yet was both fed , and cloathed with them : so may a believer be said to be cloathed with the righteousnesse of christ , and yet the righteousnes of christ it selfe , not to be his cloathing , but onely that which procureth his cloathing unto him , and so calvin calls that clothing of righteousnes wherewith the beleever is cloathed in his justification , justitiam morte & resurrectione christi acquisitam , a righteousnes procured by the death , and resurrection of christ. this righteousnes of christ may be said to be the righteousnes of a beleever , in such construction of speech , as the knowledge of god and of christ , is said to be eternall life . iohn 17.3 . viz. in way of causality , not in that formality of it , and againe the righteousnes of a beleever in his justification , may be tearmed the righteousnes of christ in such sense , as the favour of god in deliverance of a man out of trouble , is called a mans righteousnes . iob. 33. verse 26. or as the nation and people of the jewes are often in the scriptures called iacob , they were not iacob in the propriety of his person , but in his descent and propagation ; so may the righteousnes of a beleever bee called the righteousnes of christ , because it is a righteousnes descended from it , and issuing as it were out of the loynes of it . what hath been affirmed , and what hath beene denyed in the question , wee come now to prove and demonstrate the truth of both . 1 o from the authority of scriptures . 2 o from the grounds of reason ; as for the third way of proofe and confirmation by consent of authors , we shall not assigne a peculiar place for that by it selfe , but interlace our other proofes occasionally with such testimonies as we have received from learned , and judicious men for confirmation of our point to be discussed . christianisme . the second thing in this last part or passage is a profession of his meaning in denying christs righteousnes to be imputed in justification . first because he would have an adversarie for him to triumph over , and least his admired sophistry should be idle , for want of an opposite against which it might magnifie it selfe in the eyes of senselesse sectaries ; hee suffers christs righteousnes to have a being , and doth not deny it in it self , but doth approve and establish it , and so by good hap hee escapes one base absurdity in his disputing , to wit , denying of the subject of the question . secondly , because he would have his competitor , or corrivall to be of some great note , the more to glorifie his victory over him , hee doth not deny an absolute necessity of christs righteousnes , both to the justification and salvation of sinners ; we thanke him , that for saving of himselfe from the hatred and skorne of the world , he would grant so much of truth openly testified in scripture . thirdly he doth not deny a meritorious efficiency , or causality of christs righteousnesse in respect of the justification of a sinner . in this hee comes somewhat neere to us , but i doubt it is not in sincerity and truth , but rather in show , to make the ignorant to conceive better , or at least , not to judge so hardly of his opinion , for marke his slubbering , and dawbing , with untempered morter , i verily believe ( saith hee ) that god justifieth them that are justified , not simply , or barely , for christs sake , or for his righteousnesse sake , but for the righteousnesse of christ , his death being taken into consideration with it : here you see a plaine contradiction , for christs righteousnesse , his death , being taken into consideration with it , is no more but his perfect righteousnesse , because his active obedience , without his passive obediēce to death , is no perfect fulfilling of the law ; so that here is a contradiction , even an affirmation , and negation of one , and the same thing , in one continued sentence . the parenthesis also , which hee inserts to trouble the reader , is false , and frivolous , to wit , ( for a man may doe a thing for his sake , whom hee much loves , and respects , though hee hath not otherwise deserved it at his hands . ) first let mee aske him what is his drift in these words ? it seemes to mee , either to be wholly superfluous , or to intimate that christs righteousnes did not deserve our justification at gods hands , but that god out of love and respect to christs person , without the merit of his righteousnesse , doth accept us , and count us righteous . secondly , let mee tell him , that when a man doth any thing for another out of love , without desert , hee doth it for his owne loves sake , and for the magnifying of his kindnes , and free bounty ▪ and thus god did in giving his sonne for us , undeserving sinners : but when justice doth stand up in strength and pleades for right , as in the justification of sinners , then a full satisfaction must come between , & love can no otherwise be rightly , and lawfully shewed , but by making a satisfaction , or by apposing one who is sufficient to make satisfaction , that no evill but good may be done to the party loved , and respected : and thus the case stands in justification of sinners . thirdly , though a man out of his corrupt , and carnall love , may doe a thing for his favorite , without desert , or just consideration , yea contrary to justice , yet it is not so with god , who is no respecter of persons , in matter of justice , and justification : hee doth never out of his free love decree to doe any thing , but withall , hee decrees , and ordeines a just consideration , why hee should doe it ; so that this is a frivolous parenthesis , both false and from the matter . in the fourth place hee sheweth what hee denies in denying the imputation of christs righteousnesse , viz. that god lookes upon a believing sinner , and accounts him as one that hath done in his owne person , all that christ did in obedience to the morall law , and hereupon pronounceth him righteous , so that he doth stand as righteous before god , as christ himselfe , because righteous with the same righteousnesse ; and so god makes himselfe countable to him for such obedience imputed in as great matters of reward , as hee would have beene for the like obedience , particularly performed by himselfe . in this expression of himselfe , here is much calumny , error , and untruth . first he doth calumniate , and slander the true doctrine of christ professed by us concerning the imputation of christs righteousnesse ; for no man in his right wits did ever hold that imputation of christs righteousnesse to believers , is gods accounting them to have performed in their owne persons , every act of obedience , which christ performed to the law ▪ this is a manifest contradiction , fitter for a giddy fancy to imagine , then for any true christian to professe . the truth which wee professe is this , that true believers being by that one spirit which workes faith in them , united to christ , and made partakers of his righteousnesse , and believing , and applying by faith to themselves , his satisfaction particularly are accounted truly righteous before god by communion , and imputation , not by legall performance in their owne persons : and though the righteousnesse by which they are justified , is the very same which is in christ , and which hee performed , yet it doth not follow , that they thereby are as fully righteous as christ himselfe , for he is originally righteous , by his owne personall righteousnes , as the justifier ; they are righteous by communion , and imputation , as justified : and as the hands and feet , and other inferior members , live by the same life , and are sensitive by the same sense which is originally in the heart , and head of the same body ; yet they are not so lively , and sensitive , as the heart and head , but in a competent measure , and proportion , fit for every one of them . so it is in the mysticall body of christ , betweene him the head , and them his believing , and justified members , as i have before touched . so that here we have an intollerable calumny , and slander , laid upon gods sacred truth , and the true professors of the same . secondly , he utters a notorious untruth when he saith , that to bee righteous by the same righteousnes which christ performed , is nothing else , but to be performers of every act of his obedience in our persons . thirdly , it is a wicked error to thinke ( as hee doth ) that obedience and righteousnes , ether performed by ourselves or communicated to us , should make god countable to us ▪ that is , bound to give us the greatest rewards . for the righteousnes of justification and the holynes , and obedience of sanctification , are onely free gifts which god gives to make us capable of eternall life , and fit to stand in his presence , and to see and enjoy his glory ; not bands to tye himselfe , and to make him countable to us ; for if we be righteous what give we to him , or what receiveth he at our hands ? iob 35.7 . eternall life , though by christ purchased for us ; yet is the free gift of god in christ. rom. 6.23 . here therefore this sublimate doctor doth bewray his owne ignorance in the maine mysteries of salvation , and is as david saith , psal. 14. become filthy , stinking , and abominable in his thoughts , and imaginations , concerning god himselfe , while hee doateth after socinian subtilties , and sets himselfe to be singular , by preaching his fond errors , and heresies . lastly , after all this , in conclusion , hee takes upon him to elude , and evacuate those most plaine testimonies of holy scripture , wherein christ is sayd to cloath , and cover us with the garments of salvation , and the robe of his righteousnesse isa 61.10 . that our sinnes and staines , being thereby covered , psal. 32.1 . sinne might no more be imputed to us ; but we in the robes of his righteousnesse may stand cloathed as with long white linnen robes , revel . 19.8 . and like iacob in the garments of the first borne , yeelding a sweet smelling savour , may be accepted of god our heavenly father . first hee saith , that god in the justification of sinners , cloathes none with the letter of christs righteousnesse , but every man that believes with the spirit of it : that is , not with the righteousnesse it self , but with the fruite and benefit of it : that is , with faith counted for righteousnesse , where note , that ( in his conceipt , ) the righteousnesse of a justified man , is a thing inhaerent in himselfe , and a worke performed in his owne person , not communicated to him from another , ab extra , as garments are , and so no cloathing : here is one grosse absurdity , like as if one should say , a mans cloathes are not on him , but in him . that speech of paul , these hands have ministred to my necessitie , act 20.34 . are nothing to the purpose , for he doth not say his hands were his necessary meat , and cloathes , but by working did get him necessaries ; and so christ by his obedience procured righteousnesse for us , which he doth communicate to us , and cloathes us with , and by god it is imputed to us : and this calvin calles righteousnesse gotten by christs death and resurrection : and all this is for us , and against himselfe . the other instances which hee brings from scripture to prove that christs righteousnesse is by a metonymie of the cause for the effect , used to signifie the fruite and effect of it in us , prove no such thing at all . the first of them iohn 17.3 . ( this is eternall life , to know thee the onely true god , &c. it is mistaken , for to know god , and christ ( that is , to have experimentall knowledge of god , and christ , and to enjoy god in christ , as the word ( know ) by an hebraisme signifies ) is not there mentioned , as the efficient cause of eternall life , but as the thing wherein it doth formally consist : so also that speech , iob 33 , 26. ( as master perkins truely expounds it ) doth not speake of the fruite of a mans righteousnesse , which god renders to him ; but of the righteousnesse of christ , which god renders to a man a fresh , and after temptation , doubting , and distresse , makes him feele and enioy it in himselfe , when by repentance , and humble and faithfull prayer hee seekes it . and although the nation of the israelites are often ( as hee alledgeth ) called by the name of jacob in scripture , because he was their father , and they his naturall progeny : yet this proves onely , that the scripture useth tropes of speech many times , which we acknowledge willingly , and in the next chapter will prove fully . where hee forgetting , and contradicting himselfe , utterly disclaimes tropes and figures , and exclaimes against all the learned , who hold that saint paul useth a trope in saying that faith is imputed for righteousnesse : well , for the present wee will grant him , that our cleannesse from the guilt of sinne , and the state of righteous , and justified persons , wherein we stand before god , being the issue and fruite of christs satisfaction communicated to us , may very well be called by a trope the righteousnesse of christ ; but this doth not overthrow , but rather strongly prove the communion , and imputation of christs righteousnes to us . thus we see how hee labours in the fire , and in vaine beats his braines , and out of the confusion , and distemper of them , doth say , and gainsay , affirme and deny the same things oftentimes ; being like a clowd without water , carried about with winds , sometimes one way , and againe the contrary way , and never settling upon solid truth , nor building upon a sure foundation . now what he promiseth in the conclusion of this chapter ▪ you shall see how hee performeth by my answer , to his second chapter , wherein as he begins here , so he goeth on entangling and beating himselfe , forging and falsifying , and in every passage discovering his ignorance and folly , mingled with much impudency & hereticall perversenesse and pravity , which that it may better appeare , and that we may see his socinian heresie to the bottome clearely , i will lay downe the chiefe heads of the doctrine of justification , as it is taught in the scriptures , and maintained by all orthodox divines , both ancient and moderne . justification taken in a full sense is that act of god , by which he justifies his elect , and faithfull in his son iesus christ by the communion of his spirit ; that is , doth make them righteous by christs perfect righteousnes , and full satisfaction spiritually made theirs , and doth count them righteous by imputing the same unto them , and doth declare them to be righteous inwardly to their owne consciences by the inward testimony of his spirit , and the inward sense and experience of inward grace ; and outwardly in this life before men , and publiquely in the last judgements by their good workes , which are evidences of their faith , and of their union and communion with iesus christ , and of their regeneration by his spirit , and adoption unto god in him . first god the father is the primary efficient cause of our justification . rom. 3.26.30 . and 4.5 . and 8.33 . secondly the inward moving cause is gods owne free grace favour and love rom. 3.24 . tit. 3.7 . the outward moving or impulsive cause is christs mediation isa 53.11 . iohn 1● . 21 . 1 john 2.2 . the instrumentall cause is christ the mediatour communicating his whole obedience to us , when by the spirit which god sheds on us through him , wee are made one body with him , 1 cor. 12.13 . tit. 3.6 . the meanes by which wee come to bee justified are , either principall ; viz. the lively operation of the spirit , spirituall union with christ , the pure and holy humanity of christ , or lesse principall ▪ the word and ministery thereof , the sacraments , faith and the like , as appeares , rom. 3.25.28 . and 10.14 . gal. 3.8 . heb. 9.14 . 1 iohn 1. ● . dan. 12.3 . the materiall cause , that is , the righteousnesse it selfe by which they are justified , that is , made , counted , and declared to be righteous , is christs perfect righteousnes obedience and satisfaction , which he , god and man performed in our nature , in the state of humiliation , rom. 3.24.25 . rom. 5.19 . and 8.4 . the formall cause of justification is that communion between christ and us , and that reciprocall imputation of our sinnes to christ , and of his righteousnes , and full satisfaction to us , which communion ariseth , and floweth from the spirit which god sheds on us through christ , which spirit dwelling in us ( in some measure , so as he dwelleth in the man christ , from whom hee is derived to us ) doth make us one spirituall body with christ , and works in us faith and all holy graces , & affections by which we adhere and cleave to christ , and apply and inioy his righteousnes , so that it is our formall righteousnes not inherently , but imputatively , and by spirituall communion , for it is that which doth constitute , and make us righteous , rom. 5.17 , 18 , 19. and 8.4 . and ●0 . 4 . and 2 cor. 5.21 . the immediate fruit and benefit of our iustification , is the state of righteousnes and of cleanenesse from the guilt of sinne , and acceptation with god , rom. 3.25 . and 4.2 . also peace with god , rom. 5.1 . the end and use of our iustification is the satisfaction and declaration of gods iustice , in that he iustifieth us by the full satisfaction of christ , and not otherwise , neither by it till he communicates it to us and makes it ours ; also the manifestation of his mercy , free grace and bounty , in that he would give his sonne to become man , and to make satisfaction to the full , when no other could bee found able to satisfie for us , neither could his iustice by any other meanes be satisfied , also in that hee would give us his spirit to unite us to his sonne , and to bring us to a true communion of his righteousnes , and to worke faith in us by which we receive and enioy christ with all his benefits , rom. 3.24.26 . tit. 3.4 . ephes. 1.6.12 . the contrary doctrine of socinus ▪ and his faction . though they grant that god is the chiefe efficient cause , and his free grace , mercy , and love , the inward moving cause ; yet they erre in the impulsive and instrumentall cause , and make christ and his righteousnes no otherwise meritorious , but by procuring that god should count faith in a proper sense , for righteousnes to them that beleeve , neither any other way an instrument of iustification , but by bringing faith to this honour , to be accepted for , or in stead of righteousnes . secondly they deny all causality of christs righteousnes in justification , except onely by way of efficiency : whereas indeed and in truth it is the matter about which justification is exercised , for what is justification but the communicating of that righteousnes to men , and the imputing of it , and declaring of them to be thereby righteous ? the very name of justification signifies so much : and what is the forme of a justified man as he is righteous , but righteousnes ? to imagine a righteous , and justified man without righteousnes , is as if one should dreame of a living man without life or soule . thirdly they deny the principall ground of justification , to wit , spirituall union and communion with christ , which cannot stand without imputation of christs righteousnes ; for communion and union doe necessarily bring with them imputation . if wee have communion of christs satisfaction and righteousnesse , god must needs judge and count them to be ours , for his judgement is according to truth . and faith which is an inferiour and subordinate meanes , they set up in the place of christs righteousnes . fourthly as they deny the materiall cause of iustification , by reiecting christs righteousnes from being the proper matter about which it is exercised ; so also the forme or formall cause , even the mutuall communion , and reciprocall imputation of our sinnes to christ , and christs satisfaction and righteousnes to us , whereby it is made our formall righteousnes not inherently , but spiritually and imputatively , for they acknowledge no formality , but inherency . fiftly they deny the immediate fruit and benefit of justification , to wit that state of righteousnes , cleannesse from the guilt of sinne , and acceptation with god , wherein the justified are firmely established before god , and stand in his sight , which is the chiefe honour and prerogative of gods saints , and their greatest comfort in all their afflictions , and temptations . lastly , they take away the true end , and use of justification , to wit , the revelation of gods infinite justice , mercy , bounty , and free grace ; for they overthrow his infinite justice , while they teach that god by his soveraign power puts his justice to silence ; and without christs full satisfaction , made to it , for us , and made ours by communion , and imputation , doth accept our weake faith in stead of it , and makes himselfe as countable for it in all rewardes , as hee would doe for the perfect fulfilling of the law by our selves , or by christ in our stead . they extenuate and vilifie gods mercy , bounty , and free grace ; by setting up faith in stead of christs perfect righteousnes , and making it the condition of the new covenant . for whatsoever is given or promised to us , upon a condition to be on our part performed , is not a gift of free grace and bounty . and when justice may bee turned out of doores , without a compleat satisfaction ; there is nothing left for mercy wherein to shew the power of it . the infinite mercy of god doth appeare in this , that , when his infinite iustice required that wee should all be damned without a full satisfaction ( which none could make but the sonne of god in our nature ) and that performed for us , and made ours ; hee would give his onely sonne for us to satisfie in our stead , and his holy spirit to unite us to his sonne , and to bring us to communion of his satisfaction . thus wee see that they shut up the doore of heaven , and stop that onely way to eternall life , by overthrowing justification , which is the making and accounting of men righteous , by that onely righteousnes of christ , besides which there is not any other to be found sufficient , and able to beare us out before gods tribunall of justice . now let all true christians well weigh and consider the difference , betweene truth and errour , life and death , true christianity and antichristian infidelity ; for such is the damned socinianisme before discovered . and if any man in the midst of the light of the gospell shining so clearely , and discovering so plainely cursed heresie , will be blind ; let him bee more blind still ; and if any will be filthie , let them bee more filthie still . and if any love not the lord jesus , but hate and blaspheme his truth , let him be anathema maranatha . amen . the second chapter , of socinianisme . wherein the imputation of faith for righteousnesse ( in a proper sense ) is undertaken to be proved from the scriptures , and the interpretation of those scriptures confirmed both by reason , and authority , as well of ancient , as moderne divines . the preface . what it is that should be imputed for righteousnesse in justification ; all the wisdome , and learning under heaven , is not so fit or able to determine , as the holy ghost speaking in the scriptures , being the great secretary of heaven , and privie to all the wayes , and counsels of god : and therefore there is none to him , to take up any difference , or to comprimise betweene the controverters , about any subiect in religion . all the difficulty , and question is , because though hee speakes upon the house top , yet hee interprets in the eare : all the christian world either knowes ( or readily may know ) what hee speakes in the scripture : but what his meaning and intent is in any thing , he leaves unto men to debate , and make out amongst them . to some indeed hee reveales the secret of his counsell , the spirit of his letter , in some particulars ; but because these are not marked in the forehead , therefore their apprehensions and thoughts ( though the true begotten of the truth ) are yet in common esteeme , but like other mens , till some stamp or superscription of rationall authority be set upon them to make the difference , yea many times , the nearer the truth , the further off from the approbation of many , and sometimes , even of those , that are greatest pretenders to the truth . the answere . the first part or speech , is a solid truth , to wit , that no wisdome , and learning under heaven , is so fit or able to determine what is imputed , for righteousnes in justification , as the holy ghost speaking in the scriptures . but this truth he contradicts in the next words which follow immediately , where he saith , that the holy ghost leaues his meaning , and intent to men to debate , which if it be true , then men are to determine , and to take up every difference about any subject in religion . this beginning with contradiction is very ominous , and prodigious : and from hence we may gather , what we are likely to find in his ensuing discourse . the rule by which men are to judge of , the spirits meaning is the stamp , and superscription of rationall authority , set upon them : so hee here expressely affirmes , and in this hee openly professeth himselfe , to be of the faction of the socinian , and arminian remonstrants , who doe teach that the best judge of the meaning , of the scriptures is , recta ratio , that is , their owne carnall reason , rectified by the art of sophistrie . againe , hee affirmes , that all the christian world knowes , or readily may know , what the holy ghost speaks in the scripture . if this be true , then they are all taught of god , and the spirit leaues not his meaning to men to debate , and to promise betweene controverters . here is another contradiction . hee proceeds yet further in his absurdities , and tells us that the holy ghost reveales not to all the christian world , but to some , the secret of his counsell , the spirit of his letter : this is a contradiction to that which went next before . and whereas before hee saith , that all the christian world knowes what the holy ghost speakes in scripture , that is all saving truth : here hee saith , that hee reveales the secret of his counsell , but in some particulars : thus in every thing he contradicts himselfe , and like a lunatick broken out of bedlam , he raves , first saying , and affirming , and immediately denying , and gainesaying , in the same things . but yet a lunatick persons have high conceits of themselves , that they are of noble , and royall blood , right heires to crownes , kingdoms , and empires : or if not the holy ghost himselfe , yet persons wonderfully illuminated , and inspired by him . and many times they will not utter their conceits in expresse words , but tell you of such great persons , and complaine of your blockish dulnesse , and stupidity , if you doe not presently discerne that they speake of themselves , and they are the men . so here doth this illuminated doctor deale with us : he tells us of some speciall ones , to whom the spirit interprets in the eare , and reveales the secret of his councell , the spirit of his letter , who are the true begotten of the truth : and that hee takes himself to be a chiefe among these , it appeares , first by his undertaking to give a reason of the counsell and purpose of god in his former chapter , ( as i have there noted . ) secondly , by his taking upon him , here to determine this question , which none but such illuminated ones can be able to do . and hee breakes off his prologue with a kind of complaint , and exprobration full of disdaine , namely this , that because they , ( meaning himselfe , and his fellowes ) are not marked in the forehead , by the spirit of illumination ; therefore their thoughts , and apprehensions , are yet in common esteeme like other men ( you see , non sapit humanum , nec est mortale quod optat ) till some stamp , and superscription , of rationall authority , be set upon them to make the difference . here hee seemes in this last clause , to take courage , and to conceive some hope , that by the rational authority , of his new coined logick , ( of which he lately gave us a tast , whē he told us , that causes are opposit , ex diametro & therefore the efficient , impulsive instrumentall materiall , formall , and finall causes , of mans justification , and salvation , cannot all , or the most of them concurre in one person christ , though god and man ) hee will make the difference knowne betweene his excellency , and other mens ignobility , and obscurity . the last clause of his complaint , wherewith hee concludes his preface , is an overthwart blow to some , where speaking of those first begotten of the truth , he saith , yea many times the nearer the truth , the further off from the approbation of many ; and sometimes even of those , that are the greatest pretenders to the truth . a shrewd nip ( if you marke it ) to you learned doctors , & preachers of the citie of london , who are great pretenders to the truth : and yet the nearer that hee is come to the truth , and makes his unlearned followers able to see it to the bottom ( as he hath often told us ) the further off hee is from your approbation . if hee be thus bold , and ready to nip you who doe not approve his opinion , it is no marvaile that his rude followers , doe lay all slaunders , reproach , and aspersions on us , who oppose him , and charge him with socinian haeresie , and blasphemy , whom they admire , and proclaime to bee the great light of gods church in these last dayes . socinianisme . foure things there are especially , which much commend an interpretation , when they are found in conjunction , and establish , it like that king upon his throne prov. 36.31 . against whom there is no rising up . first if the letter , or grammar of the scripture will fairely and strongly beare it . 2º if the scope of the place will close directly and intirely with it . 3º when the interpretation which is set up against it , cannot stand before the circumstances of the text . 4º and lastly , when the judgement of able , learned , and unpartiall men are found in concurrence with it . if these foure be sufficient to furnish out an interpretation with authority , and power , then shall wee need no more scriptures , to prove the innocency of our affirmative . viz. the imputation of faith for righteousnes ( the truth of the negative inseparably accompanying it ) but that one chapter onely , rom. 4. christianisme . in these wordes hee makes his enterance , into the disputing of the point before propounded , to wit , faith in a proper sense is imputed for righteousnes in justification ; which speech excludes the righteousnes of christ from being the onely righteousnes by , which being communicated , and imputed to true beleevers , they are justified and stand righteous before god. first he propounds foure things , which when they are found in coniunction , with an interpretation of any scripture , they commend and establish it ( as he saith ) like that king upon his throne against whom there is no rising up , prov. 30.31 . these foure things . first the literal sense strongly bearing it . secondly the scope of the place concurring . thirdly the inconsistence of the circumstances of the place , with the interpretation which is contrary . fourthly the judgement of able learned men agreeing with it , these i say may passe for current . but whether that one place of scripture , in the interpretation whereof these concurre , bee alone without more scriptures , sufficient to prove the innocency of an assertion which is agreeable to that interpretation , is a question , many interpretations seeme to have all these , and yet are contradicted by other scriptures , as that place hosea 11.1 . when israel was a child , out of egypt have i called my sonne , being interpreted of the nation of the israelites , was borne up by the letter , concurred with the scope , and circumstances more then many contrary expositors , and all the learned and able jewes so understood it : and yet the gospell expounds it another way , mat. 2.15 . the place of scripture upon the interpretation whereof established by these foure things , hee intends to build his whole dispute in this chapter , is the fourth chapter of the epistle to the romans ; so that his proofes by which hee goeth about to set the royall crowne , which is due to christ and his righteousnes , on the head of mans imperfect faith , are according to these foure things , divided into foure rankes . first he undertakes to prove , that the letter of that scripture , rom. 4. doth beare up his interpretation , to wit , that faith in it selfe , and in a proper sense is said to bee imputed for righteousnes in justification . secondly by the scope of the place . thirdly by shewing that the circumstances of that scripture , cannot beare the doctrine of christs righteousnes imputed . fourthly by the judgement , and testimonies of able learned and unpartiall men . but how poorely he performes his undertakings , and how pitifully hee faileth in them , wee shall in the progresse shew . that his disputation is like to be very illogicall , we may gather from the foule flaw which appeares in his logicke , in this his first enterance , where hee saith wee need no more scriptures , to prove the innocency of our affirmative , viz. the imputation of faith for righteousnes ( the truth of the negative inseparably accompanying it ) but that chapter onely , rom. 4. first it is against all true reason and logicke , that the affirmative should be innocent from untruth , and that the negative which is opposed to it , should have truth accompanying it . if his affirmative ( faith is imputed for righteousnesse , in a proper sense ) be true , then the negative must needs be false , to wit , faith in a proper sense is not imputed : but perhaps by the negative , he doth not meane the negative of his affirmative , but some other negative proposition , the subject whereof , is different from the subject of his affirmative . his hatred and envy , against christs righteousnesse , least it should get the crowne from faith , is so great , that wee may well conceive , that by the negative hee in heart meanes , this ( christs righteousnes is not imputed in justification ) which if hee doth , wee cannot but blame him for speaking ambiguously , which logick in a disputation abhorreth . but i leave his trifling , and come to the ground and foundation of his discourse , even that fourth chapter of the epistle to the romans , on which he labours to build his hereticall opinion . the words of that chapter which seeme most to favour him are these . verse 3. abraham beleeved god , and it was counted to him for righteousnes , and verse 5. to him that beleeveth , his faith is counted for righteousnes , and verse 9. for we say that faith was reckoned to abraham for righteousnes . that the truth may more plainly appeare , and the contrary falshoode , and errour be made more fully manifest , i will first lay down the true orthodoxe exposition of the words , which is according to the common judgement of the most godly , learned , and judicious divines , of the best reformed churches . secondly i will truely rehearse the corrupt exposition of the apostles wordes , made by the hereticke socinus , and his followers the arminians , and other fanaticall sectaries , unto which this adversary adheres , and grounds his whole disputation upon it . the orthodox exposition i will illustrate and confirme by the scope , and circumstances of the rext , and by arguments drawne from other scriptures . the corrupt exposition also i will prove to be false , and hereticall . and afterwards i will proceed to answer this adversaries discourse in every particular . the true exposition explained . first these wordes , that abraham beleeved god , and it was counted to him for righteousnes , are generally held to be improper , and tropicall , and that the meaning of them is not , that abrahams faith , or act of beleeving by it selfe in a proper sense , was counted to him for righteousnes : but that the object of his faith even that which he beleeved , to wit , christ promised for righteousnes and salvation , was that which by god was ( upon abrahams beleeving ) counted to him for righteousnes . it was not his faith simply considered in it selfe , but his faith embracing christ promised , and possessing him with his righteousnes , and satisfaction which was reckned to him for righteousnes , and as to him , so to every one that beleeveth his faith is counted to him for righteousnes . for all true beleevers who by faith lay hold on christ , the promised seed of abraham , and beleeve god to be their shield , and exceeding great reward in him , they are by one spirit baptised into one spirituall body with christ , united to him their spirituall head , and made his lively members , and sensible partakers of his perfect obedience , righteousnes and full satisfaction , for redemption , remission of sinnes , justification , and perfect salvation ; and need not any more to seeke the reward of blessednes , by the righteousnes of their owne workes ▪ performed according to the tenour of the law , by every man in his owne person ; but in the lord iesus christ ( who is iehovah zid-kenu the lord our righteousnes , ier. 23.6 . and the end and fulfilling of the law for righteousnes to every one that beleeveth , rom. 10.4 . ) they have perfect righteousnes . and in him god is become their reward , and the lot and portion of their inheritance , psal. 16.5 . and that gracious and free favour which god shewed to abraham , when hee beleeved in christ promised , and firmely without staggering applyed to himselfe , the blessing promised , being fully perswaded that god who of his free grace promised , was by his power able to performe , though by the course of nature , and by reason of the deadnesse of sara's wombe he himselfe seemed to bee , and indeed was uncapable of that blessing ; the same hee will shew to all true beleevers , who are abrahams faithfull seed , and children of promise , that is , as hee reckoned abrahams faith for righteousnes ; so hee will count their faith to them for righteousnes ; that is , he will accept and account them for righteous persons ( as indeed they are ) not for any workes of their owne , nor by any righteousnesse performed according to the letter of the law in their owne persons , but by the righteousnes , which is through the faith of christ , and is called the righteousnes of faith , because it is the righteousnes of christ god and man , given to them of god , and of them apprehended , and applyed by faith . for being thus justified by faith , and having communion with christ of his full satisfaction and righteousnes , god whose judgement is according to truth doth certainely judge and count them ( as truly they are ) righteous in his sight , & becomes in christ their shield , and exceeding great reward . this is the orthodox exposition of the apostles wordes in this chapter , generally received by all , both ancient and moderne divines , famous for learning and godlinesse . the corrupt and hereticall exposition of the apostles words , made by socinus , and maintained by his followers the arminians , and other fanaticall sectaries . they of the socinian faction , doe generally hold and obstinately affirme , that abrahams beleeving and his faith , taken in a proper literall sense without any trope , is here said by the apostle to be counted to abraham for righteousnes , in stead of all righteousnes which either abraham himselfe , was by the law bound to performe in his owne person , or any surety could performe for him . and in like manner to every one that beleeveth , his faith is in a proper sense said to bee counted for righteousnes , even his faith by it selfe , and not the righteousnes of christ with it . this is their exposition . and upon these wordes of the apostle thus falsly , and corruptly interpreted , they build all their hereticall opinions , and doctrines concerning justification of the faithfull before god , namely these following . first that faith , as it is in every beleever , even as it is inherent in him , and is his owne faith and beleeving ; is the onely thing which god of his grace and mercy , and out of his absolute soveraigne power and dominion , is pleased to ordaine , appoint , and account for all the righteousnes , which a man shall have for his justification ; though in truth , and according to law and the rule of justice , it is not righteousnes , being weak oftentimes and full of imperfections . secondly that the spirit of god in these wordes of the apostle , did not intend or meane any communion of the righteousnes , and perfect obedience performed by christ to the law , as our surety , and in our stead , nor imputation of that righteousnes to every true beleever for justification , nor gods accepting of the faithfull for righteous by that righteousnes communicated to them , and of them applyed possessed and enjoyed by faith . by faith , and believing , they do not understand that applying faith , which is a gift and worke of gods spirit , in the elect , regenerate , and sanctified , by which they do believe and are perswaded , that they are in christ , and christ is their head , and they as lively members of his mysticall body ▪ have communion of all his benefits , even of his full satisfaction and perfect righteousnes , for justification , and full remission of all their sinnes . but by faith , and believing , they understand onely a confidence in god , that hee will performe his promises made in christ , and an assent unto his word that it is true . the tenour of which word , and promises , they conceive to be this ; that christ in his pure unspotted humane nature , hath by his righteousnesse , suffering and obedience , unto death , meritted , such high favour with god ; that god in honour to him is pleased to accept and account the faith of them that believe in him , and rest on him for their saviour , for perfect righteousnesse , and requires no other righteousnesse to constitute , and make them in any sort formally righteous in their justification . when they acknowledge that the perfect righteousnesse , and satisfaction of christ , is the meritorious cause of our justification : they do not meane that they are communicated to us , and so apprehended , and possessed of us by faith , that we are thereby indeed , and in gods account righteous before god , and justified ; or that they deserve and are worthy , that god should so account us for them . but their mind , and meaning is , that christ by his righteousnesse hath merited , that god for his sake , and in favour to him should account faith to us for righteousnesse , without either our owne workes , of the law , or christs righteousnesse imputed to us and made ours by communion . and when they say that faith is imputed for righteousnes as an instrument , they doe not meane as the instrument or spirituall hand , applying christ his righteousnes to bee after a sort , the formall righteousnesse of the believer , but that faith , as it is the instrument by which the believer doth believe that christ hath purchased this favour , that his believing should be the only thing , accounted to him for righteousnes ; so onely and no other way , god reckons to him for righteousnes . the orthodox exposition i will in the first place prove , and confirme , frō the words of the apostle himself , & by other strong reasons ▪ & afterward confute & overthrow the socinian , hereticall exposition . the true exposition proved and confirmed . for the right understanding of the apostles wordes , three things come first to be considered , and explained . 1. what is here meant by faith , and believing . 2. what righteousnes is here meant . 3. what is meant by imputation . first , by faith in this text , wee must not understand , that naturall habit and power , which is common to all reasonable men ; who upon their apprehension , and knowledge of things spoken , and promised , do give willing assent unto them that they are true , either for the authority of the speaker whom they doe respect and judge to bee faithfull , or because they see good reason in the things spoken and promised : and if the things spoken and promised bee such as tend to their owne good ; they rest upon them confidently , and perswade themselvs , that they are sure and certaine of them already , or shall receive and enjoy them in due time without faile . but here by faith we are to understand that supernaturall gift , and grace of beleeving wrought in the elect , regenerate by the spirit shed on them abundantly through iesus christ , tit. 3.6 . which is therefore called most holy faith , iud. 20. verse . this faith agreeth with the other in foure points . first as that is an habit and power of beleeving , so is this . secondly as that containes in it , notitiā in intellectu , and assensum in voluntate , that is , both a notice and knowledge of the things spoken and beleeved , and an assent of the will , so doth this also . thirdly as that faith when it goeth no further then knowledge and assent is called hlstoricall ; so this also . fourthly as that faith when it reacheth to good things promised to our selves particularly , to apply them , and to rest on them , hath also fiduciam in corde et affectionibus , a trust and confidence of the heart and affections in it ; so hath this also , and is called a firme perswasion , trust and confidence . but they differ in divers things . first that is a naturall power or habit , this is a spiritual wrought in men by the spirit of god dweling in them , and uniting them to christ in one mysticall body . secondly , that hath in it no knowledge , but naturall , arising from light of naturall reason , nor any assent of the will , or confidence in the heart and affections , but such as are drawne , stirred up and wrought by meanes of naturall light , and common causes . this hath in it a spirituall knowledge arising from the spirit of god , inlightning the understanding ; the spirit also inclines and moves the will to give assent , and confirmes the heart with confidence , and firme perswasion . thirdly that is common to all reasonable men ; this is proper to the elect regenerate and sanctified by the holy ghost , shed on them through christ , and is the first and as it were the radicall grace and vertue of renovation . fourthly that hath for the object or things beleeved , either naturall and worldly things onely ; or things heavenly and supernaturall , seene , and discerned through the dimme mist of naturall reason , and assented to and rested on with a carnall and unsanctified will and heart . this hath for the object things supernaturall , heavenly and spirituall , discerned by supernaturall light , assented to with an holy and sanctified will , confirmed to the heart by a spirituall sense , and sweet taste of the things promised , wrought by the holy spirit in the true beleever apprehending and applying them . but to come nearer to the text , the believing which the apostle speakes of in 3.9 . and 22. verses , is the faith and believing of abraham , who divers yeares before this act of believing , which it here said to be counted to him for righteousnesse , was called out of his owne country , and by faith obeyed god calling , and went and soiourned in the land , promised to him , and his seed , as appeares , heb. 11.8 , 9. he had overcome and slaughtered foure mighty kings , and their victorious armies , by faith and confidence in gods promises . and melchizedek , king of salem , the priest of the most high god , had blessed him , as we read , gen. 14. and after these things , the lord appeared to him , and sayd , feare not abraham ▪ i am thy shield , and thy exceeding great reward ; and withall hee renued the promise of the blessed seed , by meanes of which seed , all the families of the earth should be blessed in abraham , and should become his faithfull children ; besides , his naturall seed , and posterity , which should come of the son , and heire of his owne bowels , as appeares , gen. 15. verse 1.4 . these were the promises which god made to abraham , and which abraham believed to be true , and resting upon the lord by firme faith , and beliefe , for the performance of them , the lord counted it to him for righteousnesse . gen. 15.6 . or as the apostle expresseth the same sentence , in the same sense , though in words somewhat different , it was counted to him for righteousnesse . verse 3. even faith was reckoned to him for righteousnes , verse 9. now this faith was first an holy and spiritual beliefe , and the faith of a man , long before called of god , sanctified by his spirit , and made obedient to god and his word . secondly , it was a beliefe not onely of the promise of christ the blessed seed in generall , but more specially , that christ the blessed seed , should according to the flesh come out of his owne bowels , and that by christ the son of god , made man of his seed , the redemption both of him , and of his faithfull seed , all true believers should be wrought , and performed , gods wrath appeased , the law fulfilled , and justice satisfied , and perfect righteousnes brought in for their justification ; and by his , and their union with christ by one spirit , and communion of all his benefits , they should have god for their portion , and reward , and for their shield and defence , and should not need to seeke the blessing and reward from their owne workes , or their righteousnesse , and fulfilling of the law in their owne persons , but merely from the free grace of god , and of his free gift in christ as a reward of christs righteousnesse , freely given to them , and of them apprehended by faith , and believing . thirdly , this faith of abraham was not a weake , but strong faith and beliefe , without staggering , even a full perswasion that god who quickeneth the dead , and calleth those things which be not , as if they were , was able to make good , and to performe what hee had promised , yea , it was a believing in hope , against hope , that god could out of a dead body , and womb raise up a lively seed , and make them spiriritually righteous , which are by nature , and according to the law wicked sinners . all these things are manif●st by the place before cited . gen 15. and by the expresse words of the apostle in this chapter , from the tenth verse , to the end of the chapter . and thus it is plaine what is meant by faith , which is here said to be imputed for righteousnesse . secondly , the righteousnesse here meant , is not the righteousnes which is according to the strict termes , and tenour of the law , that is , righteousnes of a mans own workes , performed by every man in his owne person to the whole law of god , for the apostle doth dispute altogether against that righteousnes , and proves that neither abraham was justified , or counted of god righteous for it , as appeares in the 2.5.6 . and 13. verses ; nor any other at any time , as he shewes in the chapter next before , and in the chap. 8.3 . and 9.32 . and 10.3 . but here is meant an evangelical righteousnes which doth not consist in any worke , or workes performed by man himselfe in his owne person , nor in any grace or vertue , inhaerent in himselfe , but is a righteousnes which god of his owne free grace , doth impute to the true believer , who by one spirit is united to christ , and hath communion with him , and which is called the righteousnes of faith , ( because by faith men lay hold on it ) and doth exclude legal justification by righteousnes of a mans owne workes ▪ as appeares by the apostles whole discourse in this and the former chapter , and in divers other places of this epistle , especially verse 13 , of this chapter , and in chap. 3.27.28 . thirdly the phrase of imputing or counting a thing to one , signifies both in the old and new testament , an act of judgment and estimation , by which a thing is judged , esteemed , reckoned , and accounted to be as it is indeed , and then it is just according to truth ; or else judged thought , and esteemed to bee as it is not , and then it is unjust and not according to truth . gods thoughts are alwayes right and just , and his judgement is according to truth . rom. 2.2 . and therefore a just counting and imputing is here meant , for god doth account , and judge of persons , and things so as they are . of uniust counting , and imputing falsely , we have some instances in scripture , as 1 king 1.21 . where bethsheba saith to david , i and my sonne salomon shall bee counted offenders , that is usurping adoniah , and his wicked company will esteeme and iudge us , and use us accordingly , of reputing and counting truely as the thing is , wee have examples also , as nehem. 13.13 . where it is said of the chosen levites that they were counted faithfull , viz. upon former experience of their faithfulnesse , and therefore the office of distributing to their brethren was committed to them . and levit. 17.4 . where it is said , blood shall be imputed to that man , he hath shed bloud , and shall be cut off from among his people , and psal. 22.30 . a seed shall serve him , it shall be counted to the lord for a generation . moreover this word impute , or count , signifies sometimes in the most proper sense , a bare act of judgement and thought . prov. 17.28 . where a foole is said to bee counted wise , when hee holdeth his peace , that is , men for the present so thinke , and judge him to be at least in that point of silence . sometimes it signifies in a more full sense not onely thinking , counting and judging persons to bee good , or bad , just or unjust , innocent or guilty ; but also dealing with them , and using them accordingly , as in the place before named , i king 2.21 . neh. 13.13 . psal. 22.30 . and 1 sam. 22.15 . where ahimilech purging himselfe before saul , from the offence of conspiracy with david against him , as doeg had falsely accused him , saith , let not the king impute any thing to his servant , that is , let him not count his servant guilty , nor use him as a conspiratour . sometimes it signifies by a metonymie of the cause , for the effect condemning , and punishing an offence in a guilty person as hee hath deserved , and to deale with him as hee is justly thought and judged to have deserved , as shimei said , 2 sam. 19.19 . let not my lord impute iniquitie to mee , hee doth not desire that david would not thinke , nor count his iniquitie to bee no iniquitie , that had beene against all reason : but that for the satisfaction which hee had made in comming , first before all the house of joseph to meet david , and to bring him againe to his kingdome , david would graciously pardon his offence , and not proceed against him and punish him according to his fauit , though guilty and worthy of punishment . sometimes it signifies by a metaphore to count one thing , as if it were another , or no better then another , or of the same value , as prov. 27.4 . where a flattering salutation , or blessing given with a loud voice is said to be counted a curse , that is , esteemed no better then a curse . sometimes to use one as if he counted him of another condition , as gen. 31.15 . where it is said that laban counted his daughters strangers , that is , used them as he had counted them strangers , and iob 31.10 . where iob saith that god counted him for his enemy , that is , afflicted and plagued him as if he had counted him his enemy . sometimes the word signifies to skore up , or put upon a mans account , either the offence or debt which he runs into himselfe , as rom. 5.13 . where it is said , that sinne is not imputed where there is no law , that is , it is not so skored up , that they are punished for it , it is not judged and punished in them ; or the debt which he takes upon him for another , as philemon verse 18. if hee hath wronged thee or is indebted to thee , put that on mine account , that is , impute and count it to me , set it on my skore . now the severall significations of the severall wordes being thus laid open , i proceed more particularly to every word to shew the true sense , and meaning of it in these speeches of the apostle , and to shew how farre the speeches may bee extended . and first by faith and beleeving which is counted to every true beleever , and was counted to abraham for righteousnes ; i here understand ( according to the judgement of the most orthodox divines ) the true holy , spirituall faith and beliefe , which is before shewed to have beene in abraham , and which is proper to the elect regenerate , and is said to be imputed for righteousnes . by righteousnes is here meant evangelicall righteousnes ( which is opposed to the legall righteousnes of workes , which is inherent in every man , and is every mans fulfilling of the law in his owne person ) even the righteousnes and perfect satisfaction of christ , god and man , our mediatour and surety , which he the sonne of god in mans nature performed to the law , and which is apprehended by every true beleever , and applyed to himselfe by a lively faith , whereof also he hath true communion , and is truely made partaker by his spirtual union , with christ , of whose mysticall body , hee is a member , being thereinto engraffed and baptized by one spirit . by the imputing , and counting of that faith for righteousnes to abraham , and to every one of his faithfull seed , is here meant gods setting of christs righteousnes on every true beleevers skore , and putting it on his account , and judging , counting , and esteeming him no more guilty of sinne , but perfectly righteous by that evangelicall righteousnes , which is called the righteousnes of god , 2 cor. 5.21 . because god performed it in mans nature ; and the righteousnes of faith , rom. 4.13 . and not of workes , because it is applyed and enjoyed by faith , philip 3.9 . for the confirmation of this exposition and iustifying of this truth , wee need seeke no other arguments , but such as may bee gathered from the apostles owne words as in other of his epistles , so especially in this to the romans . argument 1 the first argument is drawne from the 2. chapter of this epistle ; v. 26. where this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as it signifies to bee imputed or counted , is first used by the apostle in the very same phrase , as here in this chapter 4.3.5 ▪ 9. if ( saith he ) the uncircumcision keep the righteousnes of the law , shall not his uncircumcision be counted for circumcision ? by uncircumcision , in the first clause , we must necessarily understand a gentile uncircumcised ( as learned beza in his notes observes ) and that by a trope of speech which is called metonymia adjuncti , for with some reason it may be supposed that an uncircumcised man , may observe the precepts of righteousnes contained in the law ; but it is against common sense , to suppose that the fore-skin of any mans flesh not cut off , should performe the righteousnes of the law , no man in his right wits will father such a senseles meaning upon the learned apostle . the same word in the second clause ( as beza also well observes ) cannot with any reason bee thought to signifie the foreskin of mans flesh not cut off , that is uncircumcision in a proper sense , for that cannot but most falsely be reputed , and counted for circumcision , because they are contradictories one to another . but here by a trope or metonymie ( called metonymia signipro re signatâ ) the word uncircumcision signifies the state of gētilisme . neither doth it signifie that state barely considered by it selfe , but as comprehending in it the righteousnes of the law , which the uncircumcised man hath kept and performed in that state , as the wordes necessarily imply , for the apostle doth not say that uncircumcision simply , but uncircūcision which hath kept the righteousnes of the law , shall bee counted for circumcision . so that here is a metalepsis or double trope , to wit , first uncircumcision put for gentilisme , of which it is a signe or adjunct , and secondly put not onely for that state of a gentile , but also for the righteousnesse of the law , kept by the man in that outward state of a gentile , uncircumcised which is a metonymie of the subject containing for the thing contained . yea if wee looke thoroughly into the phrase , wee shall see that the state of the man uncircumcised , or the man in that estate , put for that which hee hath done , and performed even the righteousnes of the law. by circumcision we cannot with reason understand , the outward cutting away of the foreskin of mans flesh , neither taken literally and carnally as the corrupt & blind iewes did take it , for a worke of righteousnesse and obedience to the law for justification . the apostle affirmes , galatians 5.3 . that so taken it was an obligation , by which the circumcised was bound , under paine of cutting off for ever , to performe the whole law. and for a righteous gentile to bee brought under this bondage was no benefit , but a miserable condition an ill reward of his keeping the law. neither can circumcision be here taken sacramentally as it was an outward signe and seale of the righteousnes of faith , and of mortification , and all vertues of holynesse by which men are sanctified to god , and become his peculiar people . for ishmael , esau , and all the sonnes of belial in israel , even elies wicked sons , and the rest were partakers of the outward signe and sacrament of circumcsion , and yet being destitute of the inward grace , signified , their circumcision was no reward to them , but was a witnes to condemne them . but the circumcision here mentioned by the apostle is an honour , benefit , and a good condition , and therefore undoubtedly signifies , the inward circumcision of the heart in the spirit , and not in the letter , so the apostle doth expound himselfe , verse 29. that is true mortification , and sanctification . the word ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) shall be counted , signifies here in a full sense , judging , counting , approving , accepting , and using accordingly . now all laid together , the meaning of the apostle must necessarily be this , without any contradiction . that if a man uncercumcised , do keep and observe with all holy endeavour the commandements of gods law , and the righteousnesse thereof , his state of gentilisme , and of outward uncircumcision comprehending in it a conscionable observing of gods holy commandement , shall be accounted , and judged by god and by all who judge aright , ( as it is indeed ) the state of mortification , and sanctification , which by the prophets is called circumcising of our selves to the lord , and puting away the foreskin of our hearts ier. 4.4 . and this man though uncircumcised in the flesh and a gentile in outward estate , shall be counted of god for a true israelite , without guile , circumcised with circumcision of the heart in the spirit , whose praise is not of men , but of god. this sense and meaning of the words of this phrase is so cleare , and manifest , and so perfectly agreeable to all true reason , that no man can deny it , unlesse hee will set himselfe to rebell against the light and this phrase being the same with that which is made the ground of this dispute , rom. 4. where the same apostle saith , that faith , and believing , were counted to abraham , and so are to every true believer , for righteousnes : yea , being the onely place in all this epistle wherein the apostle useth the phrase of imputing , or counting , except onely in this 4. chap. and once in the 5. chapter , where hee saith , sinne is not imputed , it must needs give light to these speeches , and words , in controversie , and as it hath the first place in this epistle , so it deserves to goe before as a guide to lead us to the understanding of the rest . wherefore if we will follow the apostle himselfe , and tread in the same steps after him , being the surest guide , and best expounder of his owne meaning : we must by abrahams believing , by a metalepsis , or double trope ( with our learned divines ) understand abraham setled in the state of a true believer , united by one spirit unto god in christ , and having communion of his satisfaction , and righteousnes , which were of force and efficacy from the beginning , to save & justifie all the faithfull , and to make god their reward . and by faith imputed we must not understand faith by it selfe in a proper sense , but the state and condition of a faithfull man , and also that which faith comprehends , and includes in it , even the perfect righteousnesse , and full satisfaction of christ , god and man ( for there is a metalepsis or double trope , as in the place before expounded ) by righteousnes we must understand the state of a man justified , and made righteous by the communion of evangelicall righteousnesse , and by counting , and imputing , we must understand , the accepting , approving , esteeming , and judging of abraham and every true believer , to bee in the state of a man justified , and gods setting on his skore , and imputing to him being faithfull , the righteousnesse of christ apprehended by faith , which no man can truely by faith lay hold on untill by one spirit he be united to christ , and have communion with him . heare then the true sense and meaning of the speeches in question , parallelled with the sentence and speech before expounded chap. 2.26 . which i thus lay down paraphrastically . abraham upon a true inward spirituall sense of his union , and communion with christ did believe and was surely perswaded that god was his reward , and this beliefe , and faith apprehending christ , and after a sort containning in it , as by a fast holding and possessing hand of the soule , christs righteousnesse , god counted it to him for righteousnes , that is , set it on his skore , and reckoned to him for justification , and judged , esteemed , and accepted him for a man truely righteous , as indeed hee was by evangelicall righteousnes . and so , whosoever doth not rest on his owne workes for justification , nor seeketh thereby to be iustified , but by faith feeling himselfe by nature ungodly , fleeth to christs righteousnesse , and by faith feeles himselfe to have communion of it , and holds it fast , and applies , and enioyes it . his faith is to him an evidence of his righteousnes , and god ▪ who iudgeth according to truth knowing him to have share in christs righteousnes , doth accept it for him , and counts him righteous , and useth him as a man truely iustified . thus you see how the apostles former using of this phrase in the second chapter , doth shew the true meaning of it here where it seemes to be more doubtfull . the summe of the argument reduced into a short syllogisme is this . that exposition of a doubtfull phrase , which is most agreeable to the manifest sense and meaning of the same phrase used by the same author , in the same discourse , is the best : our exposition of the phrase in question , to wit , faith and believing is imputed for righteousnesse , is most agreeable to the manifest sense of the same phrase of speech used by this same apostle cap. 2.26 in this same epistle . therefore undoubtedly , our exposition is best . argument 2 secondly , wheresoever the apostle useth the phrase 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is , of imputing one thing for another , there the thing imputed differeth from that , for which it is imputed , and cannot in any proper sense be called the same , as in the place before cited , rom. 2.26 rom. 9.8 . and so it is , psal 106.31 . where phineas his executing of judgement , is said to bee counted to him for righteousnesse . and wheresoever a thing is said in a proper sense to be counted , or imputed , or set on ones skore , it is said simply to be counted , imputed , set upon a mans account , as rom 4.4 . where the reward is said to be counted of debt to him that worketh , and verse 6. and 8. where god is said to impute righteousnes , and not to impute sinne ▪ and verse 11. that righteousnes might be imputed unto them . and rom. 5.13 . sinne is not imputed when there is no law. & 2 cor. 5.19 . not imputing their trespasses to them , & 2. tim. 4.16 . i pray god it may not be laid to their charge , or counted to them ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and philem. 18. put that on my account . now here in the speeches controverted faith and believing are not said simply to be imputed to believers , but to be imputed for righteousnes , and therefore faith is not said to be imputed in a proper sense , neither can it truely be counted or called righteousnes by it selfe , and in a proper sense ; but the speech is tropicall , and improper . a third argument is drawne argument 3 from the apostles words in the 4. verse where hee saith to him that worketh the reward is not reckoned of grace , but of debt ; these words imply , that the righteousnesse here said to be imputed brings the reward of blessednes to the believer , which reward is of grace , and not of debt . now there is nothing which can bring the reward of blessednesse in eternall life to him unto whom it is counted and set on his skore , but the perfect righteousnesse , and satisfaction of iesus christ. that all do grant to be meritorious of eternall life to all that are partakers of it , and because the communion , and imputation of it is of gods free grace , and the faith by which we receive and apply it is gods free gift , therefore the reward of it , to wit , eternall life is of free grace , and not of debt , as the apostle here saith , whereupon the conclusion followes , that the righteousnes which god accepts , and imputes , is properly the righteousnes of christ apprehended by faith . fourthly , the apostle teacheth , argument 4 expressely , verse 6. and 7. that the thing imputed simply , and properly , by god , is righteousnes , and such a righteousnes , as being imputed , brings forgivenes of iniquity , & covers sinnes , and so makes the believer blessed . now there is no righteousnes to be found among all mankind but christs perfect righteousnes , and satisfaction , and that is a perfect propitiation for all sinnes , and an expiation of all iniquity to them , who by faith have put on christ , therefore it is the righteousnes which is imputed to every believer for justification . fiftly , that which is said to be imputed to abraham , and to every true believer , is righteousnes , argument 5 to justification : for the discourse of the apostle both here , and in the chapters next going before , & that which next followeth is altogether of justifying , as appeares , chap. 3.24 25.26 , 28 , 30. and chap. 5.1 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19. in all which places , he names expressely justification , & justifying : and here in this 4. cap. he brings abrahams example , and davids testimony , to shew how we are justified . now there is nothing which doth serve to us for justification , but that which is found in christ our mediator , even his righteousnes and perfect fulfilling of the law , so he plainely affirmes and teacheth chap. 5 , 19. and 8 , 3 , 4. and 10.3 , 4. and therefore his righteousnes upon the true believing of abraham , and the faithfull , is counted , and imputed to them , and set on their skore , and they by it are justified . argument 6 lastly , as the imputing of any thing for righteousnes , is to be taken in other places of scripture , wheresoever it is mentioned , so undoubtedly , it is here to be taken . for the scripture is the best expounder of it selfe ; and the spirit of god therein speaking doth best understand & shew his own meaning . now the onely place in all the scripture where any thing besides faith , and believing is said to be counted to man for righteousnes , is that place of the psalmist , psal. 106. and 31. where the godly zealous act of phinees , in executing just judgement on zamri , and cosbi is said to be counted to him for righteousnes . now the meaning of the wordes there cannot be , that this act of phinees was accepted of god , and counted to him for righteousnes to justification . for then it will follow that a man may bee justified before god by one act , or worke of his owne . which the apostle here utterly condemneth as a grosse errour , and bends his whole discourse against it . the true sense and meaning of the phrase is no more but this , that phinees performing such an act of godly zeale , as is proper onely to a faithfull righteous man , who by the spirit of regeneration , dwelling in him is so united unto christ , that by faith he was a true partaker of his righteousnes . god upon this act gave him the testimony of righteousnes , and declared and judged him to bee a righteous man truly justified . therefore the apostles phrase of counting faith to the beleever for righteousnes , which he often useth in this chapter , signifieth after the same manner , gods counting a true beleever for a righteous man , and giving him the testimony of righteousnes , because he is righteous indeed by communion of christs righteousnesse which hee hath apprehended , applied , and enjoyeth by faith . the confutation of the false hereticall exposition of the apostles wordes maintained by the socinian faction . first whereas they hold that faith considered by it selfe in a proper literall sense , without consideration of the object , or laying hold on christ , and his righteousnes , is counted to the beleever for righteousnes to justification , and god requires in and of us , no other thing for righteousnes , neither our owne workes performed in our owne persons according to the law , nor christs perfect righteousnes and fulfilling of the law made ours by spirituall union and communion with christ , and accepted of god for us . this i prove to bee false hereticall and blasphemous , by these arguments following . first faith taken in a proper sense is a part of our conformity , and argument 1 obedience to the law of god , which above all things requires that wee give honour to god by beleeving him and his word , and by trusting in him as our onely rock , & the god of our strength , and salvation . they therefore teaching that faith in a proper sense is counted for righteousnes , doe teach that wee are iustified by a worke of obedience , to the law performed in our owne persons , and god requires on our behalfe , no other righteousnes for justification , which doctrine the apostle utterly condemnes . therefore their opinion and exposition is hereticall , and more impious then the pelagian and popish heresies concerning iustification . secondly that which was properly argument 2 imputed to abraham , and is so imputed to true beleevers is righteousnes , so the apostle in plaine wordes expresseth , verse 6. and 11. but faith in a proper sense is not righteousnes . for righteousnes is perfect conformity to the law , as sinne is transgression of the law , yea humane righteousnes is a mans keeping of the whole law , and his observing to doe all gods commandements with his whole heart all the dayes of his life , as wee read deuteronomie 8. thirdly that which chargeth argument 3 god with errour and falshood , in his iudgement is blasphemous . this opinion that god counts faith for righteousnes , that is , thinketh , iudgeth , and esteemeth it to bee righteousnes , in a proper sense , chargeth god with errour and falshood in his iudgement . for faith is not any true righteousnes properly . therefore this opinion is blasphemy , if they plead that god by his absolute soveraignty of power , may accept and repute that for righteousnes which is not true righteousnes : this doth but more entangle them and involve them in errour . for god and his soveraigne power are all one : as god cannot lye , nor make contradictories true , so his sovereignty of power , cannot either make that to bee righteousnes which is not , or truely iudge it so to bee . neither can his infinite iustice bee satisfied without perfect fulfilling of his law , nor allow any man to bee iustified without righteousnes , nor will his truth suffer him to count any iust who is not iust . therefore by this base shift , and wicked pretence devised to hide , and cover their blasphemy , they do runne further into blasphemy , and make his soveraigne power , a tyrant and oppressour of his iustice and truth . argument 4 fourthly that opinion which taketh away , and denyeth the meanes by which god is revealed to be infinitely iust , mercifull and wise , and makes the satisfaction of christ , and his perfect fulfilling the law , a vaine and needlesse thing , is most hereticall , impious , and blasphemous . this opinion , that god by his sovereigne power can , and doth accept and count imperfect faith for perfect righteousnes , takes away the meanes by which gods iustice , mercy , and wisdome are revealed to be infinit , yea it extenuates and vilifies gods iustice , mercy , bounty , and wisdom , and makes christs full satisfaction , a vaine , superfluous and needlesse thing . therefore it is an impious and blasphemous opinion . first that which reveales god to be infinitly iust is , that he cannot be reconciled to men that have sinned without execution of iustice to the full , and a full satisfaction made according to his iust law , if not by men in their owne persons , which is impossible , yet by their mediator and surety , in their behalfe , and by him communicated to them , and made theirs , as truly as if they had fulfilled the law in their owne persons . and though this satisfaction be of infinit value , yet it cannot profit them , nor actually merit for them till they be partakers of it truely , and really by spirituall communion . this is that meanes by which god is known to be infinitly iust . secondly , when gods infinite iustice was so strict , that nothing could satisfie it , nor redeeme mankind , but a satisfaction of infinite value made for them . and when all the world was not able to find such a satisfaction ; that his wisedome should finde one out , and have it ready before hand in her eternall treasures , even a full satisfaction performed in mans nature , by god the eternall son , and also the meanes to make it truely and really the satisfaction of every man truely beleeving , that is , by the holy ghost shed on them through the sonne christ , and making them one spirituall body with him . this reveales god to be infinite in wisedome . thirdly in that god the father would in this case give his onely begotten sonne , to be humbled in our nature , and to obey , suffer , and make such a satisfaction for poore miserable men , in that the sonne would willingly take all this upon him ▪ to doe and suffer whatsoever iustice could require , and in that the holy ghost , when this satisfaction could not otherwise profit men nor bee made theirs , doth not disdaine to take up for his constant dwelling , the earthly tabernacles of mens bodies , and to worke in them all graces needfull , to conforme them to christ , and to make them sensibly to enjoy him with all his benefits . this most wonderfully shewes gods infinite mercy , bounty and free goodnesse . and all these meanes which are manifested and maintained by our doctrine of justification , this wicked opinion of the socinians doth utterly take away . first it denies gods justice to require mans communion of such an infinite satisfaction made by christ for him : it treads gods justice under foote by his soveraignty of power , and maugre justice , it makes mans imperfect faith to go current for righteousnes , and to be accepted for perfect righteouses , to justification . secondly if god by soveraignty of power can beare downe justice , and make any weak and imperfect thing such as mans faith is ; serve in stead of christs full satisfaction and perfect righteousnes : then hee might by the same power have appointed the sacrifice of a lamb , or any cleane beast , or the satisfaction of any mere man , and so it will follow that the giving of his son to bee made man , was no point of wisedome , but a going farre about , and spending much , even christs blood , when lesse might have served the turne . as for gods goodnesse mercy and bounty , they are hereby made painted shewes and shadowes , yea needlesse prodigality , and christs satisfaction is made vaine and superfluous . therfore this opinion which brings in such impious consequences , is blasphemous and hereticall . fiftly , that opinion which overthrowes the sacraments of the gospel , and takes away the true use of them , is heriticall , prophane , and impious . this opinion that christs righteousnesse is not imputed to the faithfull , doth so . for the sacraments are seales of our union , and communion with christ : baptisme seales our engraffing into christ in our new birth , by which we become one with him . the lords supper is such a lively seale of our communion with christ , in the benefits of his death , passion , and full satisfaction , expressed under the termes of eating his flesh , and drinking his blood , that it is commonly called , the communion of the faithfull , when it is rightly received . but these hereticks while by imputing faith in a proper sense , they exclude the imputation of christs righteousnes to the faithfull , they deny their communion , and union with christ , they take away the truth and the use of the sacraments , for if the faithfull are regenerate , and by one spirit ingraffed into christ , and united unto him , as baptisme signifieth , and sealeth : and if they have spiritual communion with christ of his righteousnes , and all other benefits which the lords supper signifieth , and is thereof a seale to them : then god whose judgment is according to truth , cannot but impute christs righteousnes to them , and accept it for them , and account it theirs . they who deny gods imputing of it do either charge god with injustice , and error of judgment in not counting , and iudging that to be theirs in which they have communion , and interest , or else they deny the union and communion of the faithfull with christ , and make the sacraments lying signes , and seales of false things , and things which are not . therefore their opinion is most abominable , profane , impious , and blasphemous . argument 6 sixtly , that opinion which is invented , and maintained by heretiks , who deny the eternall godhead of christ , and tends mainely to perswade that there is no use of christs being god , and man , in one person , is hereticall and blasphemous . such is this opinion of the socinians , it is an invention of haretiks , and tends to take away the use of christs being god , and to perswade men that there is no necessary use of his being god , and man in one person . for all orthodox divines give this reasō , why it was necessary that christ the mediator should be god in our nature , even that the obedience & suffering which he did under goe in mans nature , might be the obedience and suffering of god , and so of infinite value , and though of him alone , and but for a time , yet of more worth , then if all men in their owne persons had obeyed as much as hee did and suffered for ever in hell. they teach also , that first for the removing of so great evils , as the infinite wrath of god , eternall death , and torment in hell : and secondly , for purchase of so great a good , as is the state of righteousnesse , and of grace , and also of eternall glory in heaven . gods justice could require no lesse satisfaction , and righteousnes , nor be satisfied with any other , but that which is performed by him , who is god and man , in one person , that is the perfect righteousnes and satisfaction of christ which alone by the infinite value which it receives from his god-head , is fit to remove so infinite an evil , and to procure so infinite a good to men ▪ but the maintainers of this socinian opinion by denying that gods infinite justice stands in strength to exact such a satisfaction being over-ruled , and oppressed , by absolute soveraignty of power ; and by teaching that mercy , and bounty run beyond reason , freeing men from all need of such an infinite satisfaction to be communicated & imputed to them , and justifying them freely without righteousnes , they do take away the use of christs god-head in his mediation , and the causes , and reasons , for which it was necessary that he should be god as well as man : and in conclusion , in places where they dare be bold to disclose the secret thoughts of their hearts , they roundly deny christ to be the sonne of god , of the same substance with god the father . therefore this their opinion is most impious , blasphemous , and hereticall : and indeed it is never found in histories , to have been maintained by any but samosatenian heretiks , deadly enemies to christs deity . lastly , that opinion which is builded upon an hereticall , and blasphemous ground , and is upheld , and maintained by blasphemous arguments , which do shake , and even raze the maine foundations of true religion , must needs be most wicked and blasphemous : and such is this opinion ; for it is builded upon this blasphemous ground , that god by his soveraigne power may do and will , things contrary to his justice , that is , count and accept that for righteousnes , which is no righteousnes , nor worthy to be accounted an act of perfect righteousnes , for such is the faith of fraile man taken in a proper sense . the arguments by which it is commonly maintained are also blasphemous , and wicked ; to wit ▪ first they argue , that christs righteousnes is not imputed to true believers , neither can be made or counted theirs by god. because christs righteousnes is the righteousnes of another far different from them : and god cannot iustify one , by anothers righteousnes , and therefore we are not iustified by christs righteousnesse , neither is it imputed in iustification . now what is this but a denying of the union , of the faithfull with christ , for if he be one with us , and we one with him , then are our sinnes made his by communion , and in him satisfied , and his righteousnes and satisfaction is made ours , and we thereby are pardoned , and iustified , by it as it , is made ours , and is not the righteousnes of a stranger , nor of one who is another so different from us , but that he and we are one spirituall body , and all his benefits are ours , and we have an interest in them , and possesse them , and enioy them ; so far as every one hath need of them . as this argument tends to overthrow our union with christ , so a. wotton in a manuscript of essayes , doth professe that our union with christ is onely metaphoricall . secondly , they argue that the righteousnes of christ cannot be sufficient for the elect , nor counted to them for all righteousnesse which is in effect a denying of christ to be god and man in one person , for if they acknowledg him to be god , they must needs hold that his righteousnes and fulfilling of the law , is of more worth and value , then if all men in the world had fulfilled the law , in their owne persons without failing in one point . thirdly , they argue that if christ his righteousnes , and satisfaction be so made ours , and imputed to us that the law may be said to be fulfilled in us , & we may said to have satisfied gods iustice , in him our head , and by him our surety , then is there no place left for pardon , and free forgivenesse of our sinnes , for pardon and satisfaction are contrary . by which they overthrow the doctrine of redemption , and of christs satisfaction for us , and deny christ to be our redeemer , and to have paid our ransome , and made a full satisfaction to the justice of god for our sinnes , contrary to the scriptures , and the judgement and beliefe of all christian divines , who teach that christ hath paid our ransome , is our 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and properly called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 our redeemer . and though gods justice exacted of christ our surety a full ransome , and did not abate him the least farthing of our debt , yet we are freely pardoned , and have free forgivenesse , and are freely iustified by gods grace , because hee did freely give his owne son to satisfy & fulfill the law for us , & doth freely by his grace , and the free gift of his spirit unite us to christ , and make us partakers of his satisfaction , & imputing his satisfaction freely to us doth for it freely forgive our sinnes , and justifie us . fourthly while they argue that faith in a proper sense is all the righteousnes which the faithfull have for justification ; and yet faith is not any formall righteousnes , by their owne confession , yea they deny that any formall righteousnes is required in justification ; hereby they deny the saints justified to be righteous contrary to the scriptures which call them the righteous , and the generation of the righteous , psal. 1.6 . and 14.5 . and the righteous nation , isa. 26.2 . and in many other places , which title gods spirit would never give to them , if they were not formally righteous , by righteousnes , communicated to them after a spirituall & heavenly manner . for to hold as they doe , that men are justified and counted righteous without any formall righteousnes , which doth constitute and give being to a righteous and justified man , as he is righteous and justified , is a monstrous opinion contrary to reason . fiftly while they deny that the faithfull are constituted and made formally righteous by the obedience of christ communicated , and imputed to them , which the apostle in expresse wordes doth affirme , rom. 5.19 . and 8.4 . and rom. 10.4 . they in heate of argument fall into the pelagian heresie , and are forced to deny , that adams sinne and disobedience is communicated and imputed to his posterity , so as that they are formally sinners by it . and rather then they will yeeld that infants which dye before they commit actuall transgression in their owne persons , are punished with death , because they are guilty of adams sinne ; they doe blasphemously affirme , that god being offended and moved to wrath , by the sinnes of parents , will out of the magnificence of his judgement , and rage of his iustice , destroy innocent babes with their sinfull parents , for terrour to others ; which is contrary to gods word , and law which teach that children shal not dye for the sinnes of their parents , unlesse they bee partakers with them , either by communion and imputation , or by imitation and approbation . whereas they bring for instance , that the children of korah were destroyed with their father , though they were innocent , and not partakers in the sinne ; herein they contradict the scriptures , which expressely affirme that the children of korah dyed not . numb . 26.11 . for they undoubtedly upon moses his threatning of sudden destruction , fled from their fathers tents and escaped , and onely they perished who would not be admonished by moses , to separate themselves from the congregation of korah , but adhering to him were partakers of his conspiracy , and sinne of rebellion . sixtly when they to colour their heresie , proclayme christs righteousnes to bee the meritorious cause of iustification , and yet deny communion and imputation of it to true beleevers ; what is this but to hold that christs righteousnes is meritorious to them , who have no interest in it ? which being granted it , will follow , that christs righteousnes doth merit for infidels and damned reprobates , and doth as much for the justifying of them , as it doth to justifie the elect and faithfull . for true reason can conceive no cause , why christ doth merit more , or conferre more to the justification of the elect and faithfull by his righteousnesse , then hee doth to infidels and reprobates ; but onely this , that he communicates it to the elect , gives them a proper interest in it , and makes them truely partakers of it , so that it is imputed to them , and made their meritorious ransome : this while these men deny , they deny christs righteousnes to merit any more for the faithfull , then for damned reprobates . and thus their bent is to set up pelagian and arminian free will , and to make this the onely difference betweene them that are justified and them that are damned , that whereas both alike have equall share in christs merits , and christ hath merited as much for the one , as the other , and given as much grace for iustification : the one having power of free will doth use it , and will beleeve , and so is iustified by his faith imputed for righteousnes ; the other will not use the universall grace given to him , nor beleeve , which he might doe if he would ; and therefore is damned : which is a most horrible and abominable doctrine , and hereticall opinion . lastly they argue , that as in the first covenant , god required workes of the law performed by every man in his owne person , and this was the condition which man was to performe for iustification , and eternall life , and so that covenant was not free , but conditionall . so in the new covenant god requires faith and beleeving , which wee on our part must performe for iustification , life and salvation . and hereby they abolish the freedome of the new covenant , and make it a covenant conditionall , and not of free grace . for what soever is covenanted-and promised , upon a condition to be performed , is not absolutely free nor freely given ; and so according to their doctrine , they that are iustified by faith are not freely iustified by grace , whereas they plead scripture for their errour , and alledge that iustification and life is promised upon condition of beleeving . if you beleeve , you shall be saved . i answer that , this is a grosse and absurd mistake . for every conditionall proposition doth not propound the conditition of a covenant , which the party to whom a thing is promised , must performe , that the promise may bee made good to him ; for such a condition whensoever it is performed , makes the thing covenanted a due debt which the promiser is bound to give . ) but oftentimes a conditionall proposition propounds the meanes , by which a free gift is received ; or the qualification by which one is made capable , and fit to receive , and enjoy a free gift , as for example , it is often said in scripture . if yee will heare and hearken , yee shall eate the good of the land , and shall live , and not be destroyed . isay 1.19 , ier. 26.3 . and many other places . if we love one another , god dwelleth in us . 1 iohn 4. if we walke in the light , we have fellowship one with another . 1 iohn 1.2 . if we confesse our sinnes , hee is faithfull , and just to forgive . 1 iohn● . 9 . if a man be just , and do that which is right he shall surely live . ezech 18.5.21 in all which , and the like places , there is no condition of the covenant propounded , but onely the way and meanes to receive blessing , or the quality & condition , by which men are made capable and fit to enjoy the blessing , and somtimes the signes , tokens , and effects of them , that are in a blessed estate . and even so when gods word saith , if you believe , yee shall be saved , there is no condition of the covenant , propounded to be performed on our part , for justification , and salvation , but onely the qualification ; by which god of his free grace doth qualify , and fit us to be iustified , and saved , and the meanes by which hee enables us to receive righteousnes , and to lay hold on salvation , which is freely given to us in christ. vpon these particulars severally observed out of their owne words , and writings , i strongly conclude , that this opinion being builded upon such a blasphemous , and hereticall ground , and upheld , and maintained by such blasphemous arguments , must needs be most impious , hereticall , and blasphemous . having already proved the socinian and arminian opinion , to be most false , and abominable , i proceed to answere the particular arguments , contained in this 2. chapter , which was by the authors owne hand delivered unto me to be answered : and because he and his followers shall not complaine , of misrelating any of his words ▪ i will ( as i have done in the former chapter . ) first lay downe his owne words . socinianisme . the first argument brought to prove that faith and believing are in a proper sense , rom. 4. said to be imputed to the believer for righteousnes in justification , and not the righteousnes of christ. first , the letter of this scripture speakes what we affirme plainely , and speakes no parable about it : yea , it speakes it once , and twice , yea , it speakes it the third , and fourth time , and is not ashamed of it . abraham beleeved god , and it was imputed to him for righteousnes verse 3. againe to him that worketh not , but believeth in him that justifieth , the ungodly his faith is counted to him for righteousnes , verse 5. and yet againe verse 22. and therefore it was imputed to him for righteousnes . the same phrase and expression is used also verse 23.24 . certainely there is not any truth in religion , not any article of our beliefe , that can boast of the letter of the scripture more full , expresse and pregnant for it ; what is maintained concerning the imputation of faith , hath all the authority , and countenance from the scriptures , that wordes can lightly give , whereas the imputation of christs righteousnes ( in that sense which many magnifie ) hath not the least reliefe either from any sound of wordes , or sight of letter in the scripture . christianisme . his first argument reduced into the forme of a syllogisme , runs thus . that opinion which hath the letter of the scripture , more full expresse and pregnant for it , then any truth in religion , or article of our beliefe , and hath all the authority and countenance from the scripture , that wordes can lightly give , is certainely true . this opinion concerning the imputation of faith in a proper sense is such . therefore it is a true and sound opinion . that this imputation of faith , may boast of the letter of scripture , and of all the authority and countenance that wordes can give , hee proves , because the letter of the scripture speakes it once , twice , yea thrice and foure times , to wit , in this chapter , rom. verse 3.5 . 22 , 23 , 24. to which i will adde a fift time verse . 9. the more true that the proposition is , the more false is the assumption , wherein hee assumes most falsely to his opinion , that which in no wise belongs to it , and thereupon inferres a most false conclusion . i answere therefore that his assumption is an heap of impudent lyes . first the killing letter of the scripture may give some countenance to it , that is , speeches of scripture understood , and urged literally , which are spoken by gods spirit tropically and in a figure . this saint austin calls the killing letter , because they who take the words properly , and so urge them obstinately , they slay their owne soules . but the true literall sense of the wordes , which are improperly literall , will never give any countenance to this hereticall opinion , as i have shewed before most fully . 2 i cannot but accuse him here of most intollerable impudency in that he affirmes , that this most hereticall opinion hath more full expresse , and pregnant testimony from the letter of the scripture , then any truth in religion , or any article of religion , and hath all the authority and countenance from the scripture , that words can give , when as in all the scripture , faith is not once said to be imputed for righteousnes , in a proper sense , in all the word of god , and is onely seven times said to be counted , or imputed for righteousnes , and that tropically ; while the apostle useth the phrase borrowed from that improper speech which is spoken of abraham , gen. 15.6 . that when abraham believed god , he counted it to him for righteousnes . for it is manifest that in this . chapter , he altogether insists upon that speech , and doth but repeat it six times : and so likewise gal. 3.6 , saint iames also once useth it , speaking of declarative justification , to prove that abraham was justified by workes , iam. 2.23 . that is , declared before men to be righteous , because the scripture saith , abraham believed god , and it was imputed to him for righteousnes . so that of saint iames may be believed , faith is not the righteousnesse for which man is accepted with god , ( as the socinians teach ) but that by which man obteines the testimony of righteousnes , as iustine martyr understands this phrase . now that christ , and his fulfilling of the law is truely , and properly , the righteousnes by which all believers are justified , constituted , and made righteous before god : the scriptures do in proper literall speech , as well as improperly more often affirme , as isa. 61.10 . rom. 3.24 . rom. 4 ▪ 6. rom. 5.17 , 18 , 19· rom. 8.4 . and 10.3.4 . and phil. 3.9 . and 1 cor. 1.30 . and 2 cor. 5.24 . these twelve places do plainely teach and affirme , that the righteousnes by which men are made and constituted righteous in iustification , is christs obedience and satisfaction , made to the law , for our redemption , and nine of them are proper speeches ; so that here wee see the communion of christs righteousnesse which hee opposeth , hath more authority , and countenance from the scripture , and more full expresse , and pregnant testimony from the letter of it . if i should instance in other truths of religion , as that there is one true god , even jehovah , and none beside him ; or that hee created all things , or concerning the deity of christ , and of the holy ghost , or concerning redemption by christ , or the last iudgment , resurrection and life eternall : ten expresse , and pregnant testimonies of scripture might be brought to prove any one of them ; for every one wherein imputation of faith is named . so that here we see what he cannot proue by argument , he goeth about by impudent outfaceing to impose upon his hearers , and readers . but let us examine the proofe of this bold assertion even his assumption , which certainely is as poore weake , and begerly , as his forehead is strong , like brasse , in impudent affirming it . the letter of the scripture , ( saith hee ) affirmes it plainely once and twice , yea a third and fourth time . therefore it is most certainely true . to this i answere , that the letter of the scripture affirmes that faith and believing was counted to abraham , and is to other believers , but not in a proper sense , but tropically ; and so many things are often affirmed by the letter of the scripture , which if we understand them in a proper sense , are most false , as for example . god is said to repent gen ▪ 6. two severall times , to wit ▪ ver . 6.7 . and ier. 26. three severall times , viz. ver . 3 , 13.19 . and amos ▪ 7.3 , 6. and iud 2.18 . and 1 sam. 15.11 . psal. 135.14 . ier. 18.10 . with many more . so likewise an hand , and armes , and eyes , and mouth , are often attributed by the letter , of the scripture to god , which speeches if wee should understand in a proper sense they would prove a killing letter to us ; therefore this is a most absurd and ridiculous proofe well beseeming the thing which it is brought to prove . and as he falters in his logick and his reasons , so he shewes ignorance of rhethorik , for he takes it for a certaine truth , that one phrase foure times used must needs be taken in a proper literall sense . but rhetorik would have taught him that to use divers tropicall speeches together , is an allegory , and elegancy of speech often used in scripture , as the places last cited shew . to which let me add one most pregnant instance , gal. 3. where the word faith in a discourse of justification is used ten times in an improper sense , for the gospel which is the word of faith , and teacheth iustification by christ , and by believing in him , and not by our owne workes , which the law requires , to wit , verses 3 , 5 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 12 , 14 , 22 , 23 , 25. now it may be he perceived little strength in his argument brought for his imputation of faith , notwithstanding , his great braggs , and therefore he shootes one fooles bolt against the imputation of christs righteousnes , which is an argument or syllogisme , consisting of an assumption without a proposition , or a conclusion expressed : but i can coniecture what he meant to conclude , namely , that the imputation of christs righteousnes in iustification , is a mere faction , and ought not to be believed . the imputation of christs righteousnesse , ( in that sense which many magnifie ) hath not the least reliefe , either from sound of words , or light of letter in the scripture . to which i answer , first that if this were granted ( which is most false ) yet it doth not follow that faith alone in a proper sense is imputed . ridiculum caput ( saith he in the comedie ) quasi necesse sit , si justitia christi non dicitur imputari , fidem reputari pro justitia . it is a ridiculous conceipt , to thinke that if christs righteousnes be not imputed , therefore faith alone in a proper sense must be said to bee imputed . david tells us that phinees his executing of iudgement , was imputed to him for righteousnes , and saint iames saith that abraham was iustified by works , & not by faith alone : why then are not works as well as faith imputed ? but secondly i answer that his assertion is most false , and i prove it from the very wordes of the apostle in the 4. chapter , verse 6. where he saith that to the blessed man righteousnes is imputed without workes , and verse 11. where he gathereth that to the beleeving gentiles , though uncircumcised , righteousnes shal be imputed . now faith is not righteousnes ( as hee himselfe confesseth ) for righteousnes is perfect conformity to gods law ; & this is not to bee found in all the world , but only in christ , he alone hath in mans nature fulfilled the law . as for faith , evē in abrahā himselfe it was stained with many doubtings , and feares at some times as when he called his wife his sister for better safety : and so it is in the best beleevers . beleeving also is but a dutie and a worke of obedience to the law ; but this which is here said to bee imputed , is a righteousnes without workes , or any thing performed in our owne persons ; therefore faith is not the righteousnes which is here said to be imputed ; but the righteousnes of christ apprehended by faith , and couched under the name of faith and beleeving . socinianisme . secondly the scope of the place rejoyceth also in this interpretation , that faith should be taken properly in all those passages cited , and from tropes and metonymies it turneth it selfe away . it is apparent to the circumspect reader , that the apostles maine intent and drift in this whole discourse of justification , was to hedge up with thornes ( as it were ) that false way of justification which lay through workes , and to put men from attempting any going that way , and to open and discover the true way of justification , wherein men shall not faile to attain that law of righteousnes before god : that is , in plaine speech , to make knowne unto them what they must doe , and what god requireth of them to their justification , and what he will accept at their hands this way , and what not ? now that which god precisely requires of men to their justification , in stead of the works of the law , is their faith , or to beleeve ( in the proper and formall signification . ) he doth not require of us the righteousnes of christ , for our justification , this hee required of christ himselfe ; that which hee requires of us for this purpose is our faith in christ. therefore to certifie or say unto them , that the righteousnes of christ should be imputed to them for righteousnes , would fall short of his scope and intent this way , which was plainely and directly this , to make known unto them the counsaile and good pleasure of god , concerning that which was to be done and performed by them to their justification , which he affirmeth from place to place , to be nothing else but their faith in christ or beleeving , whereas to have said thus unto them that , they must be justified by christ , or by christs righteousnes , and withall not to have plainely signified , what god requires of them and will accept at their hand to give them fellowship in that righteousnes . for justification which is by christ , and without which they could not be justified , had beene rather to cast a snare upon them then to have opened a dore of life , and salvation unto them . christianisme . his second way of arguing to proue his opinions from the scope of the place , and the intent of the apostle in this discourse of justification . his maine argument reduced into forme runs thus . the scope of the place , and intent of the apostle is to hedg up with thornes , the false way of justification which lay through works , and to turne men from it ; as also to discover the true way to them , to wit , what they must do , and what god requireth of them , to their justification , and what hee will accept at their hands , instead of the workes of the law : and that is it which he here saith is imputed for righteousnesse . but faith , and believing ( in a proper and formall signification ) is that which they must do , and performe to their justification , which also god requires of them , instead of workes of the law , and will accept at their hands instead of them . therefore faith in a proper sense , is here said to be imputed to this argument i answere , first , that in the first proposition there is some truth affirmed , but immediately contradicted , and many falsehoodes intermingled . that the apostles scope and intent is to hedge up the false way of , justification , which lay through workes , and to discover the ture way , we grant for truth . but like a mad , or drunken man , he immediately contradicts the truth which he had affirmed , and tels us that the right way is doing , and performing , something which god requires at our hands to our iustification . and what is this , but the way which lyes through workes ? for to doe and perform somthing required of us , that it may be accepted of god at our hands to our justification , is to seek justification by the way of working in the judgement of men , that are sober and in their wits . besides this manifest contradiction , i find also much falshood and evill meaning . 1. in saying the truth , that the false way lyeth through works , that is , works performed in obedience to the law by every man in his own person ( which is the true intent and meaning of the apostle ) he hath a further wicked meaning , namely , that our seeking after the righteousnesse of christ , which consists in his works of obedience to the law , is the way which lyeth through works to justification , and therefore the false way . and this he declares to be his meaning in that he immediatly after labours to beat men off from christs righteousnesse . wherfore , i justly tax him here , not onely of blasphemy , in calling the righteousnesse christ ( who is the way , the truth , and the life ) and seeking justification through it , a false way : but also of stupidity and blindnesse , in that he cannot see the difference between our seeking justification by the righteousnesse offered to us in the gospel to be apprehended by faith , even christs righteousnesse ; and our doing works of the law for our justification ; or christs performing works of the law in his own person . for christs righteousnesse as it was performed by himselfe , was legall and according to the strict termes of the law : but as it comes to us by communion , and is applyed by faith , it is euangelicall . 2. in that he saith god requires somthing to be done of men for their justification , which god imputes to them , and accepts at their hands instead of the works or righteousnesse of the law. hereby he sets up justification by some thing which a man doth , and performeth , which the apostle altogether opposeth in this discourse and his whole scope is bent against it ; and his whole intent and drift is to shew , that we are justified , not by giving or doing , but by receiving that which is freely given of god , and reputed for righteousnes , even the righteousnesse of him , who is god , and is called therfore the righteousnesse of god , chap. 3.21 . and 10.3 . hereby also he brings in a doing and performing of somthing by men , which is accepted of god , over and above that which the law requireth , which is a meere popish fiction , tending to dishonour the law , and to make it an imperfect rule of mans wel doing . and withall he makes the new covenant a condicionall covenant , and not of free grace , promising justification and salvation upon condition of mens doing . in the second place , his assumption , wherein he affirms that faith and beleeving in the proper and formall signification , is that which men must doe and performe , and which god requires and will accept at their hands instead of works of the law for justification : it contains in it most grosse socinian errour , and much absurdity and untruth . first , in that he calls faith and beleeving a thing done and performed by men , this is directly contrary to the apostle , who teacheth , that faith is not of our selves , but is the gift of god , ephes. 2.8 . and that we of our selves are not sufficient to think much lesse to do that which god can accept : but our sufficiencies of god , 2 cor. 3.5 . and it is god which worketh in us both to will and to doe of his good pleasure , phil. 2.13 . so that faith and beleeving are not a condition performed by us to oblige god ; but a part of the grace freely promised in the covenant , and given to us , even the worke and motion of his spirit in us . secondly , in that he sets up faith instead of all righteousnesse and perfect fullfilling of the law : hereby he doth professe himselfe a socinian hereticke in plain terms , and conspires with those heretickes to overthrow the justice of god in our justification , and to make christs satisfaction vaine and needlesse , as i have before shewed . after his arguing for the imputation of faith , he proceeds here in his second way of arguing , as he did in the former , to dispute against gods imputing of christs righteousnes in iustification . his reasons are 3. first , because god required christs righteousnes of christ himselfe , and therefore it is not required of god for our righteousnesse , to iustification . secondly , because the scope of the apostle is to shew what must be done , and performed by us , and what god requires at our hands , to iustification , and christs righteousnesse is not any thing performed by us , and therefore is not here said to be imputed . thirdly , if the apostle had said that we must be iustified by christ and his righteousnesse , without any other thing performed by us , this had beene to cast a snare upon us , rather then to open to us a dore of life , and salvation . to which i answere , that as his denying of christs righteousnes to be imputed , is hereticall , so also are his reasons brought to confirme his opinion . first in that he saith god doth not require of us the righteousnes of christ , for our iustification ; this phrase is not onely harsh , and unsavory , but also full of calumny , and close slander . it is harsh and absurd , like as if one should say , that god requires the same particular , and individuall act , done by another , to be not done by him , but by us , which implies a grosse contradiction . it is also full of close calumny , for hereby he goeth about to make men beleeve , that the orthodox doctrine of iustification by the communion , and imputation of christs righteousnes , is a teaching , and supposing , that god requires of us for iustification , that we be performers of the same individuall works of the law , in the propriety , and formality of them , which christ performed , and so he openly expresseth his mind in another place , which is a base slander , as i have before shewed . secondly , in that he saith , god required christs righteousnesse of christ himselfe , and not for our iustification ; this implies , that christ had need of iustification , and was bound to fulfill the righteousnesse of the law , as a thing requisit for himselfe , and it savours very rank of the samosatenian , and socinian heresie , which denyeth christs eternall deity , for if christ his humane nature , being from the first conception most pure , upright , and holy , was personally united to the eternall son god , equall with the father , and so was the son of god , and heir of all things : who can doubt but that he in himselfe was worthy of glory at gods right hand from his birth ; as his taking of our nature upon him was altogether for us , so his infirmities , sufferings , death , and continuance on earth for the performance of all righteousnes and obedience to the law was for us , and for all the elect , both them who of old before his comming beleeved in him promised and to come ; and also for them who now doe beleeve in him already come exhibited and exalted to glory in his humanity . to say or thinke that he had need to iustifie , and make righteous himselfe by his workes , and to merit glory in heaven by his righteousnes ; is in effect to deny that hee is god infinitely worthy of all glory , as he was the onely begotten sonne of god , and heire of all things . his second reason is a manifest falshod , to wit , that the scope of the apostle is to shew what is to be done , and performed by us , which god may accept at our hands to our justification . for the apostles scope is to shew that wee are justified freely by gods grace , by the things which christ did for our redemption , cap. 3.24 ▪ and that obedience , righteousnes , and satisfaction of christ , we must not obtaine by any workes of our owne according to the law , it is freely given us of god , and faith is the hand by which wee receive it , and our evidence , that we are justified by it . his third reason is blasphemy , and contradiction of christs owne words . for our saviour professeth and affirmeth that he alone is the dore , john 10.7 . & the way , iohn 14.6 . and hee who makes him the way and dore , and seeks justification life and salvation by the way of his righteousnes , hee is a true disciple of christ , and his apostles . but to call the teaching of men in this way , the casting of a snare upon them is blasphemy . far be it from me , and from all true christians not to detest and ▪ abhorre such impiety , and not to thinke him worthie of the curse of anathema maranatha , who with his mouth proclaimeth , and with an obstinate heart maintaineth , that teaching of iustification by christ and his righteousnes is casting of a snare on men , and not of the dore of life and salvation to them . socinianisme . thirdly that interpretation which is set up against it , and contendeth for the imputation of christs righteousnes , is cleerely overthrowne by severall circumstances , and passages in the context ; first it hath no appearance of a likelyhood in it , that the apostle in the great and weighty point of justification , wherein ( doubtlesse ) he desired , if in any subject besides , to speak with his understanding , as his owne phrase is , that is , that what hee himselfe conceives and understands may bee clearly understood by others , should time after time and in one place after another without ever explaining himself , or changing his speech throughout the whole disputation , use so strange & harsh and uncouth an expression , or figure of speech , as is not to be found in all his writings besides , to say that faith and beleeving is imputed for righteousnes , but to meane that indeed it is the righteousnesse of christ that is imputed ; were to speake rather that he might conceale his mind then reveale it . christianisme . in this third way of arguing he layeth downe his arguments against the true orthodox interpretation of saint pauls speeches , concerning imputation of faith for righteousnes ; which interpretation he goeth about to overthrow by severall circumstances , or passages in the context . i will first sift his first argument here laid downe , and then propound and answer the rest . answer to the first argument . in this argument there are more impudent lyes then full pauses , or sentences . the first impudent lye is , that the apostle expressing the state of righteousnes , or of a man justified by christs righteousnes ; by the name of faith , and beleeving imputed for righteousnes to him , should use an harsh strange and uncouth speech , and expression : what is the man so ignorant of the first grounds of rhetorick , that a trope or figure of speech , is harsh strange and uncouth with him ? it is but a metonymie to expres by the name of faith , and beleeving , the state of a beleever or a faithfull man , or the object of faith , which faith hath laid hold on so fast , that they cannot be separated , but he who hath the one hath the other also , and by righteousnes to expresse the state of a righteous man justified . and when we say faith is imputed for righteousnes , to meane that the state of a beleever is counted the state of righteousnes , or of a man justified ; or that faith as it comprehends christs righteousnesse , is counted to him that hath it righteousnes : and christs righteousnesse which the beleever by faith possesseth , is set on his skore for iustification . a second notorious untruth is , that such a figure of speech as this , is not to be found in all the apostles writings besides . for the same expression and figure of speeches used by this apostle , cap. 2.26 . as i have before plainely shewed . yea foure times in the foure last verses is the same trope used , uncircumcision first for a man uncircumcised , and secondly for the state of an uncircumcised gentile , and circumcision for a circumcised iew , and againe for inward sanctification whereof circumcision was the signe and sacrament , and ten severall times doth he tropically by faith meane the gospell , and doctrine thereof , which is the obiect of faith , gal. 3 ( as i have before noted , where he discourseth about this weighty point of iustification . a third impudent lye , and manifest falshood is that the apostle time after time , and in one place after another useth the word faith or beleeving imputed , without ever explaining himselfe , or changing his speech . for that which he calls faith and beleeving , and faith it is imputed for righteousnes , vers . 3. and 5. he explaining himselfe , and changing his speech , v. 6.11 . calls it righteousnes , and saith god imputeth righteousnes , and righteousnesse is imputed . in a word i doe challenge him to shew one place in all the writings of this apostle , wherein he useth this phrase of faith , or beleeving , imputed for righteousnes , except onely here in this chapter , and in gal , 3. in both which places he cites that testimony of moses , concerning abraham , that god counted faith to him for righteousnes , and urgeth it in the phrase of moses , but in all other places , where he writes of iustification , he useth his owne expressions , and saith that wee are iustified by christs satisfaction made for our redemption , as rom. 3.24 . and by his obedience and fulfilling of the law rom. 5.19 . and 8.4 . and 10.3.4 . and that christ is made to us righteousnesse , 1 cor. 1.30 . and we are made the righteousnes of god in him , 2 cor. 5.21 . if he cannot shew any place besides these , then let him bee ashamed of his doings , in that he hath bent his tongue and pen like a bow for lyes , and shootes out in every passage so many notorious untruthes , that hee may bee suspected to have full furnished his quiver , from the armorie of the father of lyes , the prince of darknesse . the second argument . secondly verse 5. it is said , that to him that beleeveth his faith is imputed to him for righteousnes . from which clause it is evident , that that faith ( whatsoever we understand by it ) which is imputed is his , somewhat that wayes truely , and properly called , his , before such imputation of it bee made unto him . now it cannot be said of the righteousnesse of christ , that it is any mans before the imputation of it to him , but faith properly taken is the beleevers before it be imputed ( at least in order of nature , though not in time . ) therefore by faith which is here said to be imputed , cannot be meant the righteousnesse of christ. answer . the righteousnes of christ by spirituall union , and communion , which every true beleever hath with christ , is as truely his , as his faith . for christ is made unto him righteousnesse , 1 cor. 1.30 . and he is made the righteousnesse of god in christ , 2 cor. 5.22 . and that in order of nature before it is counted his righteousnesse . for god whose judgement is according to truth , doth not count that to the beleever , which he hath not before communicated , or at the same time doth communicate to him . secondly i answer , that if faith which is here called his faith , be faith in a proper sense , and be imputed for righteousnesse to justification , then is man justified by his owne inherent righteousnesse , and by a worke done and performed in his owne person , which every orthodox divine will tell him is flat popery or worse . the third argument . thirdly granting a trope , or metonymie in this place , and that by faith is meant the object of it , or the thing beleeved ; yet it will not follow from hence , that the righteousnesse of christ should be said to bee imputed here , but either god himselfe , or the promise of god made to abraham for it is said verse 3. that abraham beleeved god , not that he beleeved christs righteousnes , except we set up another trope to maintaine the former , and by god will say is meant the righteousnes of christ , which would bee not a trope or figure , but rather a monster of speech . therefore the righteousnesse of christ is not here said to be imputed for righteousnesse , but faith properly taken . yea whereas the object of faith as justifying , is expressed with great variety of words , and termes in scripture , in all this variety there is not once to bee found the least mention , of the righteousnes of christ : as if the holy ghost foreseeing the kindling of this false fire , had purposely withdrawne , or withheld all fuell that might feed it . sometimes christ in person is made the obiect of this faith , iohn 3.16 . besides many such expressions . sometimes christ in his doctrine , or the doctrine and word of christ , iohn 5.46 . had yee beleeved moses , yee would have beleeved mee . sometimes christ in the relation of his person , and that either as he stands related unto god as his father , iohn 20.31 . or else as hee stands related to those ancient promises of god made unto the iewes concerning a messiah , to be given and sent unto them , iohn 8.24 . except yee beleeve that i am hee , yee shall dye in your sinnes . sometimes the raising up of christ from the dead , as rom. 10.9 . sometimes god himselfe is made the obiect of faith . 1. pet. 1.21 . sometimes the record or testimony of god concerning his sonne , is made the obiect of faith , 1. ioh. 5.10 . in all this variety or diversity of expressing the obiect of faith , as iustifying , there is no sound or intimation of the righteousnes or active obedience of christ. not but that the righteousnesse of christ is , and ought to bee beleeved as well as other things revealed , and affirmed in the scriptures : yea it is of nearer concernment to the maine to beleeve it , then the beleeving of many things besides comprehended in the scriptures as well as it , but the reason i conceive ) why it is not numbred or reckoned up among the obiects of faith , as iustifying is , because though it ought , and cannot but be beleeved by that faith which iustifyeth , yet it may be beleeved also by such a faith , which is so farre from iustifying , that it denyeth this christ ( whose righteousnesse notwithstanding it beleeveth ) to be the sonne of god. thus some of his owne nation ( the iewes ) have given testimony to his righteousnesse and innocency , who yet received him not for their messiah , nor beleeved him to be god. and this is the frame & constitution of the turkish faith ( for the most part ) at this day . answere . in this third argument he undertakes to prove , that if faith were said to be imputed by a trope or metonymie , and that by faith were meant the object of it , yet christs righteousnesse cannot be meant , because the object of that faith which is said to be imputed , is god himselfe , or the promise of god : but to understand , that by god is meant christs righteousnes , would be not a trope or figure of speech , but a monster of speech . to which i answere , that abrahams faith which was imputed , was a believing that god in christ was his shield , and his exceeding great reward . gen. 15.1 . now no man can in believing by a true faith separate the righteousnes , and full satisfaction of christ god and man , from christ himselfe . to beleeve god to be our reward is to believe that god is become our righteousnes , and so our reward ; for the reward of blessednes is the reward of righteousnes , and is called the crowne of righteousnes . 2. tim. 4. so that the argument may be turned thus against himselfe . whosoever truely believes god to be his reward , he believes that god is righteousnesse , and so christ as he is iehovah , his righteousnes . abraham when his faith was counted to him for righteousnesse , believed that god was his reward : therefore hee believed that god was his righteousnes , and so christ as hee is iehovah our righteousnes , was the obiect of his justifying faith . secondly , he hath here one most grosse and absurd speech , which shewes either his palpable ignorance in rhetorick , or desperat impudency . that is , that if one should speak of believing god , and meane believing christs righteousnes ; this were not a trope or figure , but a monster of speech . here i will intreat him to tell me ingenuously whether he doth hold the lord christ ( who appeared , and spake to abraham , and the fathers , and whom they believed ) to be the true god. if he denyeth him to be the true god , then wee shall take him to be in all points of heresie a compleat socinian : if hee grants that christ is god , and his righteousnes performed in our nature , is the righteousnes of god and inseparable from his person ; then hee who truely believes in christ , and enjoyes him , must needs believe his righteousnes , and enjoy it , and to speak of believing in christ god our shield , and reward , and to meane not his godhead barely or his naked person , but his righteousnes also , and that he is iehovah our righteousnes ; this is but a metonymie of the subject , which non cane call a monster of speech , but hee who is ignorant in the grounds of rhetorick . thirdly , in his denying , that christs righteousnes is the object of justifying faith , he doth most openly contradict that which hee hath writ in the former chapter , in the 6 part , where hee professeth that christ and his righteousnes , is the object of that faith which is imputed ; and if it doth not lay hold on christ , it is not capable of imputation . his rehearsing of the variety of the objects of faith , mentioned in the scripture , and denying christs righteousnes to be any object , or thing beleeved : hee doth notoriously delude and gull his readers , and shewes great impudency ; for what more often required in the scripture to be beleeved , then that christ is our true sacrifice for sinne , and our sacrifice of righteousnes , and that he is the end and fulfilling of the law , for righteousnes to every one that beleeveth ? yea , he gives himselfe the ly , and by his owne argument overthrowes his conclusion : for among the things which the scriptures require that we should believe , he reckons christ himselfe , and the doctrine of christ , and the promise of christ , the testimony which god hath given of his son , and the resurrection of christ , every one of which includes in it christs righteousnes ; for if wee believe in christ aright , wee believe him to be the righteous servant of god , in whom his soule delighteth , who hath fulfilled all righteousnesse , is the end of the law , for righteousnesse to every beleever , and is iehovah , our righteousnes ; such a one he was promised to be . the gospel which is his doctrine , teacheth him to be such a one . the testimony which god hath given of him , is that in him we have eternall life , which is the crowne of righteousnes . his resurrection is the evidence of his righteousnes , and that the law was fulfilled by him , and death therefore could not hold him captive : so that by rehearsing these as the objects of faith , hee confuts himselfe , and confirmes our doctrine . and lastly , he professeth vaine tergiversation , openly , by granting that christs righteousnes is to be believed . but whereas hee saith that turkes , and iewes , believe not christ , and yet believe his righteousnes ; this is a monster in speech , sense , and reason ; for how can a man beleeve that a person which is not is righteous , and that righteousnes may subsist without a subject . none can beleeve christs righteousnes to be , as the scripture calles it , the righteousnes of god , unlesse he believe christ to be god. some turks acknowledg christ to have beene a prophet , but his perfect righteousnes performed to the whole law for us , they do not believe . and the iewes to this day blaspheme christ and call him a lyar , an impostor , a deceiver , and malefactor , justly crucified for his wickednes . and therefore in this argument he sheweth that his tongue and pen are applied to ly , and forge , to contradict himselfe , and to be constant in nothing but in holding obstinately his hereticall conclusions . 4 argument . fourthly , that faith which is said to be imputed to abraham for righteousnesse ver . 3. is that faith by which he believed in god , that quickeneth the dead , and calleth the things which are not as if they were . ver . 17. but the righteousnesse of christ can in no tollerable construction or congruity of speech be called that faith by which abraham beleeved in god , that quickeneth the dead . therefore the righteousnes of christ is not that faith which is here said to be imputed for righteousnesse . answere . i answere , first that a true believer may truely say , my righteousnes which i have in christ is this , that i believe in god , who quickneth the dead , and graciously calleth and counteth me ( who am not righteous in my selfe nor by my owne righteousnes ) a righteous and justified person . secondly , that god did not quicken and raise up christ , till he had perfectly fulfilled all righteousnesse , and satisfied the law for us as our surety . neither doth hee quicken any dead but through his righteousnes and by his spirit communicating it to them , the debtor or his surety , layd up in prison , cannot be released , til the debt be fully discharged . and therefore christs righteousnes is comprehended by that faith which believeth in god who quickeneth the dead , because quickning the dead , necessarily presupposeth their communion of the righteousnes of christ , and under the name of that faith may by a metonimie be truely said to be imputed to justification . 5 argument . fiftly , the faith imputed to abraham , ver . 3. is that faith wherein he is said not to be weak , ver . 19. and is opposed to doubting of the promise of god through unbeliefe ver . 20. but the righteousnes of christ cannot be conceived to be that . wherein abraham was not weak , neither doth the righteousnes of christ carry in it any opposition to doubting of the promise , through unbeliefe , being a thing of a differing kind and nature from it ▪ but betweene faith properly taken , or a firme beleeving , and doubting through unbeliefe , there is a direct and perfect opposition . and therefore it is faith in this sence , and not the righteousnes of christ which is said to bee imputed for righteousnesse . answer . i answer , that though christs righteousnesse bee a thing different from the beleevers faith : yet when the beleever by a strong faith , and without doubting possesseth christ , and his faith doth spiritually comprehend in it christs righteousnesse ; then god counts it to him for righteousnes , that is , judgeth him a righteous man by communion of christs righteousnesse , but doth not iudge his faith and christs righteousnes to be one the same very thing . this argument is not to the matter . it may bee turned against himselfe thus . the more strong a man is in faith , and farre from doubting of the promise through unbeliefe , the more firmely he is united to christ , and the more full communion hee hath of christs righteousnesse , and with more reason may hee being so faithfull be counted righteous , and christs righteousnes under the name of faith be imputed to him : this was abrahams case he was strong in faith and doubted not , and therefore having firme union with christ , and communion of all his benefits , god justly imputed faith to him for righteousnesse , and counted him so beleeving iustified , and righteous by christs righteousnesse , and so in like case god will deale with other beleevers . the sixt argument . sixtly , that faith which was imputed to abraham was that by which he was assured , that he who had promised , was able also to doe it , verse 21. and 22. but the righteousnesse of christ is not capable of any such description as this , that by it abraham was fully assured , &c. therefore it is not that , which was imputed to abraham . answer . i answer to this , as to the former . it is not to the matter , untill he first prove that the name of one thing , may not bee used by a metonymie to expresse another , except these two things be both one , & the same thing ; we wil deride such foolish arguments . though christs righteousnesse be not one and the same thing with faith : yet the more it doth assure us of the performance of gods promise in christ , the more closely it comprehends christs righteousnes , and the more iust cause there is ▪ that under the name of faith , christs righteousnesse should be imputed by a metonymie . the seventh argument . seventhly that which shall be imputed unto us , for righteousnesse is said to be our beleeving in him , that raised up christ from the dead . verse 24. but the righteousnesse of christ is not our beleeving on him that raised christ from the dead , therefore it cannot be that , that is said to bee imputed for righteousnesse unto us . answer . there is no faith under the name whereof christs righteousnesse may so fitly bee expressed , as that which is a beleeving on him who raised up christ from the dead , for we cannot truely beleeve gods raising of christ from death , but withall wee must beleeve that gods justice is by him our surety fully satisfied , and his law fulfilled in our behalfe , and we being partakers thereof and enjoying it by faith , god may justly impute this faith to us for righteousnesse . thus his arguments being all from his matter ; are easily turned upon himselfe . 8 argument . eightly whereas the question , or point of imputation in justification , is handled onely in this passage of scripture ( for those other places gal. 3. and iames 2. onely mention it , but insist not at all upon any declaration , or explication thereof ) it is no wayes probable but that the apostle should speake somewhat distinctly , and plainely of the nature of it , otherwise hee might seeme rather to lay a stumbling block in our way , then to have written any thing for our learning and comfort . if wee take the word faith or beleeving so often used in this chapter in the proper and plaine signification of it , for that faith whereby a man beleeves in christ then the tenour of the discourse , is as cleere and full as may be , the streame of the whole chapter runnes limpid and untroubled ; but if wee bring in a tropicall , and metonymicall signification , and by faith will compell paul to meane the righteousnesse of christ , we cloath the sun with sackcloath , and turne pauls perspicuity into a greater obscurity , then any light in the scripture knoweth how to comfort or to relieve . the word faith being a terme frequently used in scripture , is yet never found to signifie the righteousnesse of christ , the holy ghost never putting this sword into that sheath , neither is there any rule of grammar or figure in rethorick , that knowes how to salve up the inconsistence of such an interpretation . answer . this argument is no more but his owne bare affirmation , that it is probable the apostle in this place where he handles the point of imputation , would speak plainly , and it is more plaine to speak of faith , imputed in a proper sense : the tropicall and metonymicall sense or interpretation brought in , is a compelling of paul to meane by faith the righteousnesse of christ , and thereby we cloath the sun with sackcloath , in which multiplicity of words , wee finde much vanity . as for imputation in justification , it is not the maine and principall point which the apostle insists upon , the maine and principall points of justification are in the 3. and 5. chapter handled plainely , and in the 8 , 9 , and 10. chapters , where he plainely teacheth that the righteousnes by which wee are constituted , and made righteous before god , is christs obedience and fulfilling of the law. the imputation of faith comes in onely by the way , being occasioned by that testimony of moses concerning abraham , which the apostle brings to prove that iustification is not by our owne performance , or workes of the law , but by a righteousnes which god gives , even the fulfilling of the law by christ for our redemption , which wee receive and enioy by faith so certainely , that if we bee faithfull beleevers in christ , then are wee righteous euen in gods account ; for true faith cannot be nor subsist in any who hath not communion of christs righteousnesse . this to all iudicious men is more plaine , and limpid and cleere , then to take faith in a proper sense , and to set on it the crowne of christs righteousnesse , especially seeing the apostle in the 6. and 11. verses sheweth that the thing properly imputed is righteousnesse , and therefore not faith , which cannot properly be called or counted righteousnes : yea he tells us , it is a propitiation to cover our sins , which in no case can bee properly said of faith . as for his words wherein he affirmes , that there is more comfort in faith imputed , then in the righteousnesse of christ imputed ; they are most wicked and more hatefull then any poperie , yea blasphemous in exalting mans faith into the royall throne of christs righteousnesse , and calling the teaching of the imputation thereof , the laying of a stumbling block in our way . it is to be feared that he who thus speakes and writes hath stumbled at christ the precious stone , which god hath laid in his zion , as the apostle intimates , speaking of them who make the righteousnes of christ a stumbling block , and stone of offence . rom. 9.33 . in the next place after these frivolous arguments , hee takes upon him to answer some places of the apostle which are produced by us and objected against him , wherein faith and hope are used to signifie their obiects , that is , the things beleeved and hoped for , as gal. 1 . 22· and 3.23 . and colos. 1.5 . and here he doth use notable trifling , and most absurd tergiversation . first hee grants the apostle doth use in his writings such tropes of speech , which is a thing so manifest , that impudency it selfe is ashamed to deny it . and by granting this , he contradicts what hee hath before affirmed , to wit , that in all the apostles writings such a trope is not to be found . secondly hee opposeth what before hee granted , by a forged and false distinction , affirming that the habit of faith may bee used to signifie the obiect , but not the act , cujus contrarium est verissimum . for in the places obiected , the act as well as the habit , and especially the act of faith and hope are to be understood , for the habit is ordained to be exercised about the proper obiect , but it never is exercised about it , nor reacheth to it but by the act , faith by believing comprehends christ and his righteousnes , and so doth hope by the acts of it , reach that within the vaile . and indeed , if wee observe it , we shall see in this discourse , that faith which signifies the habit , as well as believing which is the act , is here said to be imputed for righteousnes , as ver . 5. and 9. and therefore this distinction helpes him nothing at all . thirdly , hee contradicts himselfe againe , and grants that the act may be used to expresse the object , but then he flees to his old shift saying that christs righteousnesse is not the object of justifying faith , or of faith as justifying , which error i have before confuted , and indeed it is contrary to all reason ; for the proper object of faith , as it is an instrument of justification is nothing else but righteousnes . fourthly , he utters a notable untruth , when he saith , that the scripture where it speakes of faith as justifying , makes not the least mention of christs righteousnes , and fulfilling of the law. let him read rom. 3.24 . and 10.4 . and tell me whether the believing of the man , to whom christ is the end or fulfilling of the law , for righteousnes be not justifying faith , & when we are said to be justified by the redemption which is in jesus christ , whether our beleeving of that our redemption be not a true justifying faith . lastly , he argues without reason , that though christs righteousnes be a thing which is to be belived , & so is a partial object of faith , yet it is not the object of justifying faith , because creation of the world , & christs being born of a virgin , and his ascention are partiall objects , and yet not of faith as it is justifying ; but either christ himselfe , or the promies of god , concerning the redemption and salvation of the world by him . to which i answere , 1 that his sylogism is without mood or figure : it is as if i should thus reason , that master goodwin , though he be a living creature , yet because some living creatures , as asses , and apes , are not reasonable creatures , therefore he is not a reasonable creature . 2. i must tell him there is but one true saving faith , and that is iustifying faith : and he who can by true holy faith beleeve aright the creation , or the nativity of christ borne of a virgin , or his ascention , he hath iustifying faith , though when faith is acting about iustification , the proper obiect is righteousnes , even christs full satisfaction for our redemption , and salvation , and the iustifying act , is beleeving that christ is made unto us of god righteousnes , and we are made the righteousnes of god in him . and faith imputed for righteousnes , ver . 3. is righteousnes imputed . ver . 6. and 11. thus you see all circumstances in the context stand up in contestation with his exposition , which by faith here said to be imputed , understands faith in a proper sense , and per se , not faith in respect to christs righteousnes . but that i may not seeme to conceale any thing , nor give any thing for his upon trust , i will set downe these tergiversations in his owne words . socinianisme . if it be obiected , that faith is sometimes put for the obiect of faith , as gal. 3.23 before faith came , and gal. 1.22 . he preacheth the faith , &c. and may be so used with a good propriety of speech , ( marke this bull , that faith put for the obiect of it , is a proper speech ) as hope is put for the thing hoped for , which is an expression usuall in scripture . to this i answere , first by concession , it is true , the name of the faculty is sometimes put for the obiect appropriated to it , neither is there any hardnes or cause of offence ▪ or mistake in such an expression , but it rather addes a grace and countenance to the sentence wherein it is used seasonably , and with iudgement , as might be exemplified by severall scripture instances , if it were pertinent . but 2. by way of opposition , i answer ( here observe how he playes jack a both sides . ) first though the faculty bee sometimes put for the obiect , yet the act is seldome or never ( to my remembrance ) the act or exercise of hope , is never put for the things hoped for ; but hope it selfe is sometimes found in that signification , as col. 1.5 . for the hope which is laid up in heaven , so tit. 2.13 . looking for the blessed hope . now that which is here said to bee imputed to abraham for righteousnesse was not the habit of his faith , but abraham beleeved god , that is exercised or put forth , an act of faith , and it was imputed to him for righteousnesse . secondly though it should bee granted , that as well the act , as the habit or faculty may be sometimes put for the object , yet when the act and object have beene named together , and the act expressed and specified by an object proper to it , and somewhat immediately ascribed to the act under that consideration , all which is plainely seene in this clause ( abraham beleeved god , and it was imputed to him for righteousnesse ) in this case to conceive or to affirme , that what is so ascribed is neither ascribed unto the act it selfe , there mentioned ( which is here abrahams beleeving ) nor to the obiect mentioned likewise with it ( which is here god , abraham beleeved god ) but to something really differing from them both , & not so much as once mentioned in all the discourse ( as namely to the righteousnes of christ , what is this but to turne a mans back upon the text , to looke out an interpretation & to exchange that which is plainly affirmed , with what is not so much as is obscurely intimated , or implyed , & to make the apostle to speake as never man spake besides , not for the wisedom and excellency of his speech , but for the uncouth abstrusenes of his meaning . doubtlesse no instance is to be found of any author whatsoever sacred , or prophane , who so farre abhorred to be understood in what he spake , as to put his mind into wordes of such a construction . thirdly and lastly , neither is the righteousnesse of christ the object of faith , as justifying ( as hath bin said ) nor doth the scripture where it speaks of faith , as justifying , which are places not a few , make the least mention , or give the least intimation of such a thing . it is true the scriptures often propound the righteousnes of christ , or his obedience to the law , as that which is to be beleeved , and so it may be termed a partiall object of faith , somewhat that is and ought to be beleeved : but so the creation of the world is propounded to bee beleeved , and that cain was adams sonne , is somewhat to bee beleeved . and generally whatsoever the scriptures affirme , may be called a partiall obiect of faith . but the obiect of faith properly as it iustifieth , is either christ himselfe , or the promise of god concerning the redemption and salvation of the world by him . the righteousnes of christ is no more the object of faith as iustifying , then either his being borne of a virgin , or his ascending into heaven , or the like , and either the one or the other might as well be here said , to be imputed to abraham for righteousnes , in that respect as his righteousnesse . thus you see at large how many passages and circumstances in the context , stand up in contestation with that exposition which by pauls faith in this chapter , will needes understand christs righteousnesse . answere . that which i have noted before gives light to see many tergiversations , and much trifling in this passage . let mee onely here desire him to repeat the wordes which he chiefly stands upon , to wit , abraham beleeved god , and it was imputed to him for righteousnesse , and tell mee whether righteousnes bee not named , which was imputed to abraham ▪ and all who truely beleeve , as appeares , verse 6. and 11. and what righteousnesse can bee found fit to justifie a man before god , besides christs righteousnesse ? socinianisme . fourthly and lastly , this interpretation we contend for , according to which the word faith , or beleeving is to bee taken properly in all the passages mentioned , and not tropically or metonymically ) was the common interpretation anciently received , and followed by the church of god from the primitive times , and for 1500. yeares was never questioned or contradicted , neither did the contrary opinion ever looke out into the world , till the yesterday of the last age , i speak this somewhat above the analogie , and proportion of mine owne reading in matters of antiquitie , ( which i confesse will not amount to any such confidence ) but i am confident in this behalfe upon the undertaking of another , who searched diligently what interpretation of this scripture ruled amongst the learned and orthodox writers from time to time , so that it is but a calumny of evill report brought upon the opinion and interpretation of this scripture which we maintaine , unworthy the tongue or pen of any learned or sober man , to make either arminius or socinus the authors , or first founders of either . and for the last hundred yeares and upward , from luther and calvins times , the fairest streame of interpreters so runs , as to water and refresh the same interpretation : you will easily incline ( i presume ) to beleeve both the one and the other , that both former and latter times have beene friends and favourers to the interpretation given ; if you will please with diligence , and without partiality , to examine these few testimonies , and passages following , as they stand in their severall authors respectively . christianisme . here he enters into his fourth & last way of confirmation , that is , to confirme his opinion , and interpretation , by testimony of learned divines , both ancient and moderne writers , even from the primitive times , to the yeare 150. after christ. his beginning is with great swelling words , and with wonderfull confidence , though builded not upon any reading , or knowledg , of his owne , but upon the testimony of another , doubtles of some socinian braggadogo , or impudent arminian , whom hee is ashamed to name , who are all of this spirit , that when they build upon weakest ground , and are most strongly convinced by testimonies of scripture , and unanswerable arguments , then they affirme and outface most impudently , and brag and ly , as if they contended to winne the whetstone : nay , we think that this confession of his small reading , is out of modesty , or out of satanicall subtilty ? that as the divel in the person of the serpent vented his lies to our first parents , so he may belch out desperate lies and forgeries under the person of another concealed author , verily i feare the latter . because on anothers word , hee doth so boldly , and impudently , charge all the learned of the best note in this age with calumny , and false report , raised upon his opinion , ( unworthy the tongue and pen , of sober and learned men ) in that they make arminius or socinus , chiefe and first authors of it , and with out blushing affirmes that the fairest streame of interpreters from the time of luther , and calvin runnes as water to refresh his interpretation . in both which i find such manifest falsehood , that no man of any reading can so speake and affirme , without a brasen face , maintaining wilfull and manifest lies against his owne conscience . first to the bold charge of our learned divines with calumny , for taxing socinus , and arminius , as chiefe and first authors of his opinion , i answere , that although that infamous heretick , petrus abailardus , who was gelded for his incontinence , by a man whose daughter hee had abused ) laid the first ground of this opinion , that christs satisfaction is not imputed to iustification : ( as saint bernard shewes , epist. 190. ) yet the first authors who expressely affirmed that fides per se , that is , faith by it selfe in a proper sense , without a trope , is by the apostle said to be imputed , for righteousnes , were servetus , as calvin shewes , in opusculis , socinus , part 4. cap. 4 and 11. de christo servatore . and arminius in epist. ad hippolitum de collibus . thes . 5. secondly to his false pretence of the maine streame of writers , since luther , and calvin : so running as water to refresh his interpretation , i do answere and confidently affirme , that there is not one orthodox writer to be found since that time , which ever held , that faith in a proper sense is imputed for righteousnes , and denyed the imputation of christs righteousnes . servetus , socinus , arminius and the rest of their sect , branded for hereticks , are the onely maintainers of that opinion . to his testimonies and his impudent boasting of the generall consent of interpreters , i answere , first joyntly and in generall , that of all the testimonies which hee hath cited , there is not one which either affirmes that faith taken in a proper sense is imputed for righteousnesse , or denies the imputation of christs righteousnes . moreover , that all divines who are the most zealous opposers of his interpretation , may say the same words which he cites out of authors : and yet hold justification by christs righteousnes imputed , yea and in proving that truth may with good reason presse and urge the same words rightly understood . soe that a more odious example of folly and impudency cannot be shewed then hee here shewes himselfe by , making his folly strive for mastery with his impudency . secondly , for the particular testimonies which he brings both out of ancient and moderne writers . they say no more but what saint paul saith , and wee all acknowledg and embrace for truth , viz. that abraham beleeving that in christ , and through his satisfaction , god was become his reward , was thereupon counted righteous , and god counted faith to him for righteousnes , and so are we all iustified , not by our owne righteousnes of workes performed to the law in our own persons , but by faith laying hold on the righteousnes of christ , which is counted for righteousnes , not in a proper sense , but relatively , as it comprehends christ and his righteousnes , which calvin calls apprehending the goodnes of god , and trusting in it . first for tertullians words , i take them , as he doth render and rehearse them , and so the rest in order , and will take a light view of them , that wee may see his vanity , in citing testimonies which make nothing for him , but some directly against his opinion . tertulian lib. 5. c. 3 against marcion . bvt how the children of faith ? and of whose faith , if not of abrahams ? for if abraham beleeved god , and it was deputed to him for righteousnesse , and hee thereby obtained the name of the father of many nations ; wee by beleeving god are therefore much rather iustified , as abraham was . and lib. de patientia cap. 6. abraham beleeved and was deputed by him to righteousnesse ; but hee tried his faith by patience , when he was commanded to sacrifice his sonne . all this wee grant , for here is not a word of imputing faith in a proper sense , onely an affirmation that abraham by beleeving , obtained this at gods hands , that he was accounted and reputed to be in the state of a righteous man , which we all professe . origen in epist. ad romanos , cap. 4. verse 5. it seemes in this present place , that whereas many beleevings of abraham werk before , now in this beleeving his whole faith was gathered together , and so was reputed to him for righteousnesse , and againe in the same place abraham was not by god testified to bee righteous , for his circumcision , but for his faith , for before his circumcision , hee beleeved gods and it was counted to him for righteousnesse . if origens meaning be , as beza gathered from these , and other wordes in that place , that abrahams faith and all his acts of beleeving made up a perfect righteousnesse , and conformity to god , will and law ; then is hee in as great an errour , as the papists who set up iustification by a mans owne inherent righteousnesse , and his testimony is to be abhorred . but if his meaning bee that by his beleeving , and not by his circumcision , he obtained from god this testimony , that he was righteous by a righteousnesse beleeved , then he is full for us , and against his interpretation . justine martyr dialog . with trypho . abraham not for his circumcision , but for his faith obtained the testimony of righteousnesse : for before he was circumcised , it is said of him , abraham beleeved god , and it was counted to him for righteousnesse . wee grant that abraham beleeving god to bee his reward in christ ; this faith was the evidence of his being righteous by apprehension of christ , and his righteousnesse , and therefore by it he obtained a testimony from god , that he was in the state of righteousnes . and justine martyres words say the same , and so he is cleare for us against them , who make faith the righteousnes imputed in a proper sense , and not the evidence of righteousnesse . chrysostome on rom. 4.23 . saith that the apostle having spoken many and great things concerning abraham and his faith , saith , wherefore is it written but that wee might learne , that we also are justified as hee was , because wee have beleeved the same god ? and on gal. 3.6 . for what was he the worse for not being under the law ? nothing at all , for his faith was sufficient to him for righteousnesse . all this we grant . for as abrahams faith laying hold on god , as his reward in christ by communion of his righteousnesse , was sufficient to him for righteousnesse , so is our faith also sufficient for us to iustification , because by it wee possesse christs righteousnesse . augustine on the 148 psal. saith , for by beleeving wee have found what the iewes lost by not by unbeleeving , for abraham beleeved god , and it was imputed to him for righteousnesse , and on psal. 140. for i beleeve in him who justifieth the ungodly , that my faith may be imputed to mee for righteousnes , and in his book de natura & gratia . for if christ dyed not in vaine , the ungodly is justified in him alone , to whom beleeving in him that justifieth the ungodly , faith is accounted to him for righteousnesse , and in his 68. sermon de tempore , abraham beleeved god , and it was imputed to him for righteousnesse . see that without any worke hee is iustified by faith , and whatsoever was possible to be conferred on him by his observation of the law , his beleeving alone gave it all unto him , where note that beleeving gives righteousnes , and is not the righteousnes given in iustification . primasius on rom. 43. saith . abrahams faith by the guift of god was so great , that both his former sinnes were forgiven , and this faith alone is said to be accepted before all righteousnes : that is , before all righteousnes of his owne , not instead of christs righteousnes . for if it had not laid hold and possessed the full satisfaction of christ , it could not have gotten pardon of his sinnes . beda's words which he citeth concerning the faith which is imputed , are onely these , not every faith , but that onely , which worketh by love . this is a certaine truth , for no faith can bring to us a true sense and assurance of our communion with christ , but that which worketh by love . haymo on rom. 43 , saith , quia credidit deo , &c. because hee beleeved god , it was imputed to him for righteousnesse , that is , for remission of sinnes , because by that very faith by which hee beleeved , he was made righteous : these wordes shew that faith by way of efficiency , and as an instrument makes men righteous , even as it brings remission of sinnes by applying christs satisfaction to them . anselmes wordes are , that hee beleeved so firmely , this was by god counted to him for righteousnesse , that is , by this beliefe he was reputed righteous . and i say there was good reason , that he who by firme faith is partaker of christs righteousnesse , should bee reputed righteous before god. these are his testimonies which he cites out of the ancients whose maine streame , as he boasted , did so runne as to water his opinion . but we see they so run as to overwhelme and wash away his muddie , and slimie opinion and interpretation . not one syllable of faith in a proper sense counted for righteousnesse : thus the mountaines have travelled of a child , and have roared out , and have made a terrible sound , and bustling , and when it comes forth in the birth , it is ridiculus mus , nay not so much as a poore drowned mouse , in the eyes of judicious readers . i proceed to his testimonies of moderne divines . lvther on gal. 3.6 ▪ christian righteousnes is an affiance or confident resting on the son of god , which confidence is imputed for righteousnes , for christs sake , and a little after , god counts that imperfect faith for perfect righteousnes for christs sake , in whom i have begun to believe . we cannot desire plainer words to prove that faith is not the righteousnes by which we are justified , nor so in a proper sense counted , but propter christum , that is , by reason , of him which it possesseth with all his benefits and full satisfaction . bucers wordes are , abraham beleeved god , & he accounted this faith to him for righteousnes : & therefore ( saith he ) by beleeving he obtained this , that god esteemed him for a righteous man. these words shew , that his faith was not his righteousnes , but the thing by which he obtained the estimation of a righteous man. peter martyrs words are , to be imputed for righteousnes in another sense , signifieth that by which we our selves are reckoned in the number of the righteous , and this paul atributs to faith onely , marke the words , hee doth not say , that faith properly is our righteousnes , but the onely thing by meanes of which we com to be reckoned in the number of the righteous calvin on rom 4.3 . abraham by beleeving , doth embrace the grace offered to him , that it might not be frustrate : if this be imputed to him for righteousnes , it followes , that he is no other way righteous , but because trusting in gods goodnes he hath boldnes to hope for all other things from him . and againe ▪ on verse 4. faith is counted for righteousnes , not because it brings from us any merit unto god , but because it apprehends the goodnesse of god. these and such speeches of calvin affirme no more , but that faith is imputed for righteousnes , not properly in it selfe , nor for any merit or worth of it , but meerely for that which it apprehendeth and embraceth when it is tendered . that is , gods goodnes in giving christ with all his benefits , and righteousnes . musculus in his common places . ss . 5. this faith ought to be commended , not in respect of any proper quality , but in respect of gods purpose , by which he hath appointed , that it , to believers in christ , should for his sake be imputed in the place of righteousnes . these words cut the throat of his interpretation ; for they tell us , that faith is imputed for righteousnes , not for it selfe , or any proper quality in it , but for christs sake , which is his righteousnes sake . also on gal. 3.6 . what did abraham that should be imputed to him for righteousnes , but onely this , that hee believed god ? indeed , believing is the onely meanes to receive christs righteousnes , and therefore by beleeving onely we come to be counted righteous . also on gen. 15. hee so speakes of abrahams faith , that it is plaine hee disputes of that faith by which men do not simply believe god , but believe in him . that is , trust onely in god , and rely on the righteousnes of christ , god and man. again afterwards : but when he firmely believed god , promising , that faith was imputed to him in the place of righteousnes , that is , he was reputed of god righteous for that faith , and absolved from all his sinnes . it is true , it must be an holy faith , and a firme beliefe which must so receive christ and his righteousnes , that it may be reputed to us for righteousnes , and we may be reputed righteous , and absolved from our sinnes . bullinger on rom 4. abraham committed himselfe to god , and that very thing was imputed to him for righteousnes . these wordes shew , that faith in a proper sense , is not imputed , but our committing of our selves wholly to god , by faith , and relying on his righteousnes , is that which is counted for righteousnes . he addes also on gal. 3.6 . that same faith of abraham by which hee beleeved on god was imputed for righteousnes : and very well it might , for by that he laid hold on god , as his reward , and his righteousnesse , and shield . gualthers words on rom. 4.4 . are no more but the bare words of moses gen. 15.6 . abraham believed god , and it was counted to him for righteousnes . you see hee is put hard to it , when hee cites the bare words themselves to prove his interpretation of them . aretius his words prove , that faith is so acceptable to god , that he counted abraham righteous upon his believing , by the righteousnesse of christ , imputed and set on his skore , not inherent in him : for thus his words run , ( as he here cites them ) rom. 4 he imputed righteousnes , that is , he so far accepted his faith , as thereupon to account him righteous , by a righteousnes which is imputative . that is , not by any righteousnes of faith , or other workes or graces inherent in him , but by christs righteousnes , which is imputative , such as may be communicated spiritually , and set on the beleevers account . also on verse 22. a faith so firme and pious , was imputed to abraham for righteous . hereby he notes that it must be a firme and godly faith which is accepted of god , for no other but a firme and pious faith can possesse christs righteousnes , by reason of which it may be imputed to the believer for righteousnes . illyricus on rom. 4.3 . that same beleeving was imputed to him for righteousnes , yea , for true righteousnes . these words shew that the righteousnes for which faith is said to be counted is true righteousnes , that is , onely the righteousnes of christ onely , for faith of it selfe is no true righteousnes . the wordes cited afterwards are directly against himselfe . that begging faith laying hold on christs righteousnes , was imputed to him in the place of his own inherent righteousnes : it is not therefore faith per se proprio sensu , but faith holding fast christs righteousnes , which is counted for righteousnes . pelican in gen. 15.6 . hee simply believed gods word , and asked no signe of the lord , and hee did impute that very faith unto abraham himselfe for righteousnes , by which god is believed to be propense or ready for our good . hunius also saith , the faith by which abraham believed god promising was imputed to him for righteousnes . beza saith , here the busines is concerning that which was imputed to him , namely , his faith ▪ inius , and tremellius on gen. 15.6 . god esteemed or counted him for righteous , though wanting righteousnes , and reckoned him to be in the state of righteousnes , because by firme faith he embraced the promises . paraus rom. 4.3 . wee understand by the word faith , which is said to be imputed for righteousnes , abrahams resting , not in himselfe , or his owne merits , but in the promise and good will of god. these testimonies are brought to begge the question , for they onely affirme , that faith is imputed : and by believing , men come to be counted righteous : but there is not in any one the least intimation , that faith is imputed in a proper sense , but their owne words in the same places shew , that faith by reason of that which it beleeveth , and apprehendeth , that is , christ with all his merits , and benefits , is counted for righteousnes , which is our true , genuine & orthodox exposition of the apostles words . and thus i have answered all whatsoever hee hath said for his interpretation , onely his severall falshoods , and manifest untruthes in severall phrases , and boasting wordes prefixed before the testimonies , of every author whom he nameth . i leave to the reader to observe ; for indeed they are most palpable , that every man of understanding may run and reade them . but because i will not have such a forger , and false suborner of witnesses escape away without the iust brands of forgery , and notorious impudency . i will bring in the best learned of the ancients and also of late orthodox divines , even those whom hee calls to witnesse for him ; and will make them speake in their owne wordes , and testifie to all the world , that by faith imputed for righteousnesse , they understand not faith by it selfe in a proper sense ; but the satisfaction and righteousnesse of iesus christ god and man , performed according to the law , in our nature and in our behalfe , that through him the righteousnesse of the law might be fulfilled in us , who beleeve in him , and are lead by his spirit . first iustin martyr testifieth that we being in our selves transgressors , and ungodly , cannot possibly bee iustified but in the onely sonne of god : now if onely by being in him , and by that union and communion which all have with him who are in him , then onely by his righteousnesse . for as the same author saith in the same place , it is his righteousnes and nothing else , which can cover our sinne . iustin martyr in epist . ad diognetum . and in exposit● fidei , hee saith that christ as well by his exact conversation of life ( that is , his perfect righteousnes ) as by his undeserved death hath abolished and covered our falls and failing which came in by adam . irenaeus is so strict for our communion with christ in his obedience unto death , and for our reconciliation and iustification therby , that he imputes christs obedience to us , and saith . jn secundo adamo reconciliati sumus , obedientes usque ad mortem facti . in the second adam wee are reconciled , being made obedient even unto death . lib. 4. c. 14. adversus haereses . athanasius in his 2 tom. pag. 270. of cornelius edition , saith that it is most necessary for us to beleeve the scriptures , that christ who hath freed us from the curse , is the first fruites of the masse of mankind who are by him redeemed , and that the perfect fulfilling of the law by him the first fruites , is imputed to the whole masse , his wordes in greeke are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . and in his booke de incarnat . verbi , hee affirmes that we shall live , and bee saved , because wee are partakers of the righteousnes without spot , which christ god in the flesh brought into the world . gregory nyssen orat. 2. in cantica saith , christ having the filth or guilt of my sins transferred upon himselfe , hath communicated his perfect purity to mee , and made mee partaker of that beauty which is in himselfe . ambrose saith , as adam is the patterne of death because of sin , so christ is the patterne of life , because of his righteousnesse , in cap. 7. lucae lib. 5. and our iustification by faith , and not by workes , he saith was prefigured by jacobs getting of the blessing in sweet smelling garments . iacob was a type of every true beleever under the gospell , rebecca of the church . the garments of the first borne christs righteousnesse . the iewes of the elder testament , like esau , sought righteousnesse by their owne workes , and true beleevers put on the righteousnes of christ by faith , being so taught by the church their mother , and obtaine by the merit of it the blessing . ambrose lib. 2. c. 2 de iacob & vita beata . chrysostome saith , if a iew aske thee how can all the world be saved by the righteous doings of one christ ? thou mayest answer him , even as all the world is condemned by one adams disobedience , on rom. 5. homil . 10. and in his booke de recta fide , it is absurd ( saith he ) to thinke that wee should bee made heires of the punishment of the first adam , by his disobedience , and should not bee partakers of the righteousnesse of the second adam , who doth bring us to life by his most perfect obedience , theodoret . serm. 10. de curand . graec. affect . saith , it is very convenient that he who highly praised righteousnesse , should in his comming in the flesh fulfill righteousnesse for men . augustine enchirid. ad laurent . c. 41. saith , he was made sin , that we might be made righteousnes , not our owne , but gods righteousnesse ; not in our selves but in him : even as he was sinne , not his owne sinne , but ours ; not in himselfe , but in us . and serm . 6. de verb. apost . he saith , god the father made him sinne , that wee might bee made the righteousnesse of god in him . behold here two things : the righteousnesse of god not our own● 〈…〉 not in our selves . leo the 〈◊〉 , epist. 70 ▪ saith ▪ that , by the innocency of one we are all made innocent , and that by righteousnesse from him , derived unto men , who hath taken mans nature upon him . bernard . epist. 190. as one hath borne the sinnes of all , so the satisfaction of one is imputed to all . it was not one which forfeited , and another which satisfied : for the head , and the body is one christ. also in serm . ad milites templi he saith , death is made to flee away in the death ▪ of christ , and christs righteousnesse is imputed to us : and a little after , hee who hath willingly beene incarnat , willingly suffered , and willingly crucified , will hee keep back his righteousnesse from us ? and againe one man sinned , and all are made guilty , and shall the innocency of one ( christ ) bee imputed onely to one ? anselme on rom 5. saith , that by the righteousnes of one , comming upon all the elect , they come unto justification , that they may bee justified by participation of christs righteousnesse . these with many other testimonies which might easily bee gathered out of the ancients from the primitive times , untill luther , doe abundantly shew the impudency of this man , who so peremptorily affirmeth , that the communion and imputation of christs righteousnesse for iustification , was never dreamed of among ancient writers , but onely faith imputed for righteousnesse in a proper sense , all these ancients before named testifie the contrary . but to descend to orthodox writers , of this last age since luther : it is well knowne that they generally hold imputation of our sinnes to christ , and of christs satisfaction and righteousnesse to us for iustification , to bee the forme of iustification , by which beleevers are iustified . luther acknowledged , that it was the doctrine of saint bernard , concerning iustification by christs righteousnesse imputed , and not by our owne workes ; which moved him to suspect the popish doctrine , and to grow into dislike , and loathing of their religion . and in his commentary on galat . where he doth debase the righteousnesse of workes , and doth most highly extoll the righteousnesse of faith , he telleth us , that faith being weak in many of gods children , cannot be accepted for righteousnesse of it selfe , that is , in a proper sense , and therefore there is necessarily required imputation of righteousnesse for iustification , on galatians 3.6 . in editione jenensi . tom. 1. pag. 32. hee saith , faith obtaines what the law commands , and what is that but obedience and righteousnesse ? and againe , by faith christ is in us , yea one bodie with us ▪ but christ is righteous and a fulfiller of the law ; wherefore wee all doe fulfill it , while christ is made ours by faith . also tom. 3. p. 539. when paul ascribes iustification to faith , wee must of necessity understand , that hee speakes of faith laying hold on christ , which makes christ of efficacy against sinne and the law. also tom. 2. pag. 515. faith settles us upon the workes of christ without our owne workes , and translates us out of the exile of our sinnes , into the kingdome of his righteousnesse . and tom. 1. pag. 410. sinne is not destroyed unlesse the law be fulfilled , but the law is not fulfilled , but by the righteousnes of faith , and page 437. to keepe the law is to have and possesse christ the fulfiller of the law. and tom. 4. pag. 44. faith iustifieth because it comprehendeth and possesseth that treasure , to wit , christ and page 45. wee say that christ doth forme faith , or is the forme of faith . and tom. 2. upon genesis the laying hold on the promises is called sure and firme faith , and doth justifie , not as it is our work . these speeches shew plainely , that luther conceived christs righteousnes to be after a sort the formall righteousnes of the believer , though not formally inherent , yet formally possessed , and enjoyed by faith . concerning this justifying righteousnes luther also teacheth , that it is not in our selves , but in christ , even his fulfilling of the law , for us , made ours ▪ and imputed to us . tom. 1. pag 106. by faith ( saith hee ) are our sinnes made no more ours , but christs , upon whom god hath laid the iniquities of us all , and he hath borne our sinnes : and on the other side , all his righteousnes is made ours , for he layes his hand upon us . and pag 178. the righteousnes of a christian is the righteousnes of another , and comes to him from without . it is even christ , who is made unto us of god righteousnes ; so that a man may with confidence glory in christ , and say , christ his living , doing , and suffering , is mine , no otherwise then if i had lived , done , and suffered , as he did : as the married man possesseth all that is his wives , and the wife all the goods which are her husbands , for they have all things common , because they are become one flesh : and so christ and the church are one spirit ; by faith christs righteousnes is made ours , and all his are ours , yea , himselfe is ours . and tom. 2. pag 86. the righteousnes by which we are justified before god , is not in our owne persons , but without our selves in god , because man shall have no cause to boast of his owne proper righteousnes before god. and tom. 2. pag 385. a christian is not formally righteous , by reason of any substance or quality in him , but relatively in relation to christ , in whom hee hath true righteousnes . melancthon in epist. ad rom. 8.4 . saith , wherefore pauls meaning is thus to be taken ; that christ is given for us , that we may be counted to have satisfyed the law , by him , and that for him we may be reputed righteous ; although we our selves do not satisfie the law , anothers fulfilling of it is freely given to us , and is imputed to us , and so the law is imputatively fulfilled in us . and so when the apostle saith that christ is the end of the law for righteousnes , that is , hee who hath christ is righteous , hee is reputed to have satisfied the law , and hee imputatively hath that which the law requires . and on chap. 10.4 . upon these wordes ( christ is the end of the law for righteousnes , &c ) hee saith , this is the simple meaning , christ is the fulfilling of the law to the believer , and hee who hath christ , that is , believes in him , is righteous , and hath imputatively , what the law requires . the booke of concord subscribed by so many hundreds of evangelicall ministers , of the reformed churches in germany , in the articles of justification saith , that when we speak of justifying , it is to be knowne that these three objects concurre , which are to be believed . 1. the promise of the benefit , that is , mercy for remission of sinnes , and justification , 2. that the promise is most free , which excludes our merits . 3. the merits of christ , which are the price and propitiation , and a little after , faith doth not justify , because it is a worke worthy by it selfe , ( that is , in a proper sense ) but onely because it receives the mercy promised . and againe , how shall christ be our mediator , if in justification we do not use him for our mediator : that is , if we do not feele that for him we are reputed righteous . the divines of the augustane confession , condemned osiander , who held that the righteousnes of faith , was the essentiall righteousnes of god , and also them who taught that christ is our righteousnes , onely according to his humane nature . and in the epitome of the articles , controverted by some , they with one consent affirmed ▪ that the righteousnesse of faith , is remission of sinnes , reconciliation , and adoption to be sons of god , for the obedience of christ onely which by faith alone of meere grace is imputed to all beleevers . artic 3. de fidei justitia . and this obedience of christ which is imputed for righteousnes , they affirme to be the obedience which hee performed both in his death and passion , and also in his fulfilling of the law , for our sakes . ibid. artic 3. and concerning faith , they teach that in justification before god , it trusteth neither in contrition nor love , nor any other vertues but in christ alone , it is the onely meane and instrument which receives the free grace of god , the merit of christ , and remission of sinnes , and resteth on christs most perfect obedience , by which hee fulfilled the law for us , which obedience is imputed to beleevers for righteousnes . ibid artic. 3. calvin is so zealous , and so plaine and perspicuous in teaching and maintaining the doctrine of justification , by the communion and imputation of christs perfect obedience to the law , even his full satisfaction , and righteousnes , that among christians who read calvins institutions , one would think the very father of lyers , the divel himselfe should , if not blush and be ashamed , yet in policy and subtilty be afraid , to call calvin for a witnes on his side , in this point , least the most simple should see and discerne him for an open lyer , and forger , and abhorre and hisse him out with derision . the doctrine of calvin concerning justification , i will lay downe in certaine articles , gathered from his owne writings , especially his institutions . lib. 3. cap. 11. and 12. first hee affirmes in plaine wordes ▪ that justification consists in remission of sinnes , and the imputation of christs righteousnes . cap 11. ss 2. as for the word remission of sinnes , hee useth it two wayes ; somtimes in a large sense , for that act of god , by which he doth communicate , and impute the full satisfaction of christ unto his elect , and faithfull , so that the whole guilt of all sinnes , both of commission , and omission , is thereby taken away , and they are no more accounted , nor appeare in his sight as sinners . in this sense he calls remission of sinnes in his comment on rom. totum justificationis , and in his instit. 3. cap. 11. sect 4 totam justificationem . for indeed when the guilt of all sinnes of omission , and commission are taken away by that part of christs satisfaction imputed , which is called his passive obedience , or voluntary suffering of the penalties of the law , and the defects which come in by the sinnes of omission , supplied by his active obedience , in fulfilling the righteousnes which the law requires , which is the other part of christs satisfaction imputed ; so that now the elect are reputed , and esteemed as righteous men , who have the defects which came by omission supplied , and , have no more the sinnes of commission or omission imputed , the guilt being taken away : this is perfect and whole justification , and is very fitly called by the name of remission , to distinguish it from justification by our own workes , and by our owne inherent righteousnes . but sometimes hee useth this word remission , in a more strict sense , for that part of gods act of communicating , and imputing christs satisfaction , which respects the passive obedience of christ , which takes away the guilt of sinnes committed , but doth not supply the omission of righteousnesse , and in this sense he makes remission of sinnes , but a part of justification . and gods imputing of the active part of christs satisfaction , and counting the faithfull righteous by it imputed ; hee makes the other part of iustification in the wordes before cited , lib. 3. cap. 11. ss . 2. secondly he constantly teacheth , and affirmeth that there is no righteousnesse , by which a man can stand before gods tribunall , and bee accepted for righteous in his sight : but onely the full satisfaction of iesus christ , and his perfect righteousnesse , which he god and man performed in our nature . for that which is not intire and absolute , and without all staine , and spot of sinne , such as never hath beene nor shall bee found in any meere man , can never be accepted of god , but is with him sleighted and vilified beyond all measure . and whosoever prate of any righteousnes in mens owne workes , or doings , they have no true thought , nor least sense of the justice of god , but make a mock of it . instit. lib. 3. cap. 12. ss . 1.3 . and 11.16 . thirdly he affirmeth that man is justified by faith , when hee is excluded from the righteousnesse of workes , and by faith layeth hold on the righteousnesse of christ , with which hee being cloathed doth appeare in the sight of god , not as a sinner but as a righteous man , instit. 3. cap. 11. ss . 1. and the same chap. ss .. 11. this is that admirable way of justifying , that being covered with christs righteousnesse , men doe not feare the iudgement of which they are worthy , and while they deservedly condemne themselves , they are reputed righteous without themselves . fourthly concerning the office of faith in iustification , he teacheth , that faith being in it selfe weake , imperfect , and of no dignity , worth , price or value , is never able to iustifie us by it selfe , but by bringing christ unto us , who is given to us of god for righteousnesse , it is not our righteousnesse , but it makes us come with the mouth of the soule wide opened , that we may bee capable of christ. and it is as a vessell or pot ; for as the pot full of money enricheth a man , so faith filled with christ and his righteousnes , is said to iustifie us , and to bee counted for righteousnesse . it is a foolish thing to mingle our faith , which is onely the instrument of receiving righteousnesse , with christ who is the materiall cause , and both the author and minister of this great benefit , cap 11. ss . 7. and againe , ss . 17. faith is hereupon said to iustifie , because it receiveth and embraceth righteousnesse offered in the gospell . fiftly hee affirmeth that the righteousnesse by which beleevers are iustified , and stand righteous before god , is not in themselves , but in christ , even his perfect obedience , and righteousnesse communicated to them by imputation . ss . 23. lastly hee sheweth how this righteousnesse comes to bee the righteousnesse of beleevers , and to bee so communicated to them , that god doth justly impute it to them for justification , and accepteth it as if it were their owne , to wit , by meanes of their spirituall union , and conjunction with christ , by which they are made partakers of christ , and with him and in him , possesse al his riches , sect. 10.20.23 . this is the summe of calvins doctrine , concerning iustification briefly comprised , and collected out of his wordes in the places before cited , where the reader may bee fully satisfied . beza in the doctrine of iustification , by faith doth fully agree with luther , and calvin , in all the former articles . first he saith , that faith is not any such virtue as doth iustifie us in our selves before god , for that is to set faith in the place of christ , who alone is our whole and perfect righteousnesse . but faith iustifieth , as it is the instrument which receiveth christ , and with him his righteousnesse , that is most full perfection , and we say , that wee are iustified by faith onely ; because it embraceth christ , who doth iustifie us , with whom it doth unite and couple us , that wee may bee partakers of him and all his goods , which being imputed to us , are sufficient that wee may bee absolved before god , and deemed righteous . confess . cap. 4. ss . 7. in notes on romans 3.22.24 . secondly , that faith sends to christ for perfect righteousnesse , to justification , and that it assures us of salvation through his righteousnesse alone , because whatsoever is in christ is imputed to us , as if it were our owne , if so bee wee embrace him by faith : the righteousnesse of christ which is imputed , hee describeth to bee the greatest , and most absolute perfection of righteousnesse , consisting in these two things . first that he hath no sinne in him . secondly that hee hath fulfilled all the righteousnesse of the law. confess . cap. 4 ss . 8. in his notes on rom 3.22.26 . and rom. 4.5 . and 5.12 . and phil. 3.9 . thirdly hee sheweth that wee come to have communion of christs righteousnesse , by spirituall union , and mariage with christ. if ( saith he ) wee bee united , and ioyned together into fellowship with christ by faith , nothing is more properly ours then christ , and whatsoever is christs , confess . 4. ss . 9. fourthly hee pronounceth that it is no lesse then wicked blasphemie to denie the mutuall and reciprocall imputation of the sinnes of beleevers to christ , and of christs perfect satisfaction to beleevers , lib. contra anonymum de justificatione . fiftly hee affirmes , that righteousnesse which iustifieth men before god , must bee both a full satisfaction for sinne , and also a perfect fulfilling of gods commandements in every part , on rom ▪ 3.20 . our learned whitakers in his answere to campions 8th . reason , pag●8 ●8 . and in the 8 book against duraeus pag 177.182 183. doth pithily dispute , and stoutly maintaine the doctrine of the righteousnes of christ imputed , which he proves to be the onely perfect righteousnes , able to justifie us before god. master perkins also in his golden chaine . chap. 37. makes the translation of the beleevers sinnes , to christ , and christs righteousnes to the beleever , by a mutuall & reciprocall imputation , the very forme of iustification . polanus in syntagmate theolog l. 6 c. 36. doth maintain the same d●ctrine with luther , calvin , melācthon , beza , & whitakers , & proves every point fully by plain testimonies , & invincible argumēts out of the holy scriptures . and in his symphonia catholica , he brings testimonies of the ancients affirming every article of our doctrine , and in his theses de iustifi . hee shewes the consent of the most famous orthodox divines of the reformed religion since luther . as for musculus and junius , whom hee brings as favourers of his errour , with other later d●vines , let their owne writings speake , and declare how wickedly hee doth abuse them in bringing their wordes to overthrow the imputation of christs righteousnes . musculus on rom. 8.4 . expounds the apostles wordes , ( that the righteousnesse of the law might be fulfilled in us ) to be meant , first of all imputatively by the righteousnesse of another , even of christ , which is also ours , for wee are members of his body , of his flesh and of his bones , and rom. 10.3.4 . and by the righteousnesse which iustifieth beleevers , hee understands christs perfect righteousnesse imputed to us . also iunius , thes . 35. and 36. doth affirme that the righteousnesse of faith imputed to beleevers , is the righteousnesse which the law requires , performed by christ , differing onely in this , that legall righteousnesse is every mans fulfilling of the law , in his owne person ; but this evangelicall is the fulfilling of the law by christ , god and man , our surety and mediatour . and for this socinian hereticall opinion of faith , imputed in a proper sense , for righteousnesse in iustification , no man can shew greater enmity against it , nor with greater detestation oppose and condemne it , then paraeus in his commentary on the romans , and in other his workes . thus much for the vindicating of the best learned both ancient writers , and moderne divines from the foule slanders , most falsly belched out against them by this most impudent forger of false witnesses without any feare of god , or shame of men . and by their owne testimonies , and plaine wordes rehearsed out of their owne writings , i have made manifest their unanimous consent in the true doctrine of iustification , by the righteousnesse of christ imputed to true beleevers , and of them apprehended , and applyed by faith . now i leave it to all indifferent readers , and zealous christians to consider whether it bee not their dutie , both to take heed to themselves , and also to admonish others , that they have no fellowship with so openly profest socinian sectaries , as this man and his followers are : you see the doctrine which they maintaine is wicked , and blasphemous heresie . and after many admonitions given by grave , & learned divines & divers publick cōfuatations , & censures often passed in publique , against this errour , they still persist in their pestilent heresie , and are more mad to disperse it then before . and when truth cannot help them , they flee for aide to the father of lyars , and make lyes their refuge , and in forging lyes they sinne being condemned of themselves , even against their knowledge , and conscience , as the apostle foretold of heretikes , tit. 3.11 . how wilfully against the known truth , and his owne conscience , this desperate man hath proclaimed luther , calvin , beza , musculus , iunius , and others to bee of his opinion , i have sufficiently proved ; & if ever he hath looked into the writings of any of them , his own eyes have taught him how opposite they are to his heresie . but it is no new and strange thing for heretikes to sin being condemned of themselves , when they are once subverted . the apostle hath foretold us that we must expect no better from such , in that place before named . tit. 3 11. now in conclusion , i appeale to all christian readers , and desire their opinion and judgement , in the particulars following . first whether i have not in all this answere declared , and expressed what i meane by the righteousnesse of christ , which i have proved to be imputed to beleevers for justification . if i have made manifest by plaine profession , that by the righteousnes of christ , i understand his perfect fulfilling of the whole law of god , and performing whatsoever the law requires of man for righteousnesse , even a full satisfaction made in mans behalfe , to the law of justice ; then i appeale to the judgement of all reasonable men , whether my adversary hath not most wickedly belyed me in word and writing : for he hath both wayes charged me , that i neither hold christs habituall holynes , and uprightnes , of his humane nature , nor his active obedience to the whole law , or any righteousnes of workes by him performed , nor both these together , to be the righteousnes of christ imputed , and thereupon he clamours against me , that i hold and teach a righteousnes of christ , which never was in christ : i confesse i have ever taught and held , that neither the habituall nor actuall righteousnes of christ , alone nor both together , without his satisfaction of justice , by bearing our sinnes , and suffering the punishments due to them , are a sufficient ransome to redeeme us , nor a compleat and perfect obedience and fulfilling of the whole , able to justifie us , in the sight of god , and to reconcile us to him . now to affirme that all three together are imputed , is not to deny the imputation of the two first , though they that are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 calumniators may so wrest the words . secondly , whether hee who hath beleeved and preached , and in writing maintained , for 28 yeares last passed to this houre , what hee in this answere hath professed , held and maintained , can without wilfull lying , and more then jesuiticall forging , be reported abroad , & confidently charged for a turnecoat , whom this adversary by this his socinian learning , and sophistry hath so confounded , and convinced him , that hee is wholly turned to be of the same opinion , and hath vowed to maintaine his socinianisme , both publikely , and privatly , to the utmost of his power . so this mans followers have reported , and have withall added , that so many as have come within his breath , are all illuminated by him , and being converted to his opinion , do rejoyce in the light , by which he hath shined into their hearts . thirdly , whether this answer to his socinianisme be such , that both it , and the author of it have nothing in them but words and passion , and that herein hee is strangely , and monstrously metamorphosed from a minister of christ , into an angell of darknes , besmearing the brightnes of his face , with the foot and grease of hell , that the words and phrases of this answere , are the black princes coine , and there is little in it besides cursing , and rayling . for many such fiery darts hath this adversary throwne against the answerer in a scurrilous libel fraught with lies , forgeries , absurdities , contradictions , and blasphemies , and sent forth under the name of a replie ; which is also confuted by the answerer , and the filthynesse thereof so plainely discovered , that all true christians , and modest men , will say of it , that the reciting of it , is a full confutation . from all such wicked spirits , the god of truth defend his church and people , and grant a free passage to his gospel , and to his faithfull ministers , a doore of utterance , that they may preach among all men every where , the unsearchable riches of christ. to this god of truth , let us consecrate our tongues , and pens , and resolve with both to maintaine his truth , by his grace , and the assistance of his spirit , so long as strength , breath , and life shall last . and to him let us give all glory , now and ever , amen . fjnjs . december . 8. 1640. jmprimatur thomas vvykes . notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a67126-e240 epistolica collatio cum bertio , pag 1. & 2. lib. con . anonymum . wotton de reconciliatione . notes for div a67126-e1000 1 cor. 2.12 . 1 part. 2 part. 3. part. 4. part. notes for div a67126-e9550 ans. answer answere answere christs eternal existence, and the dignity of his person asserted and proved in opposition to the doctrine of the socinians : in several sermons on col. i, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21 verses / by the reverend tho. manton. manton, thomas, 1620-1677. 1685 approx. 306 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 129 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2003-09 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a51837 wing m520 estc r33496 13415300 ocm 13415300 99480 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a51837) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 99480) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 1552:19) christs eternal existence, and the dignity of his person asserted and proved in opposition to the doctrine of the socinians : in several sermons on col. i, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21 verses / by the reverend tho. manton. manton, thomas, 1620-1677. [8], 248 p. [s.n.], london printed : 1685. dedication signed: tho. jacomb. error in paging: p. 135-150 repeated in numbering. reproduction of original in the university of illinois (urbana-champaign campus). library. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng jesus christ -person and offices. jesus christ -divinity. socinianism -controversial literature. sermons, english -17th century. 2003-03 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2003-05 spi global keyed and coded from proquest page images 2003-06 rina kor sampled and proofread 2003-06 rina kor text and markup reviewed and edited 2003-08 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion christs eternal existence , and the dignity of his person asserted and proved . in opposition to the doctrine of the socinians . in several sermons on col. 1.17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21. verses by the reverend tho. manton , d. d. london , printed in the year , 1685. to the christian reader . here are presented to thy view , some of the further profitable and pious labours of that eminent divine dr. manton ; ( now with god ) : who though like a tree full of fruit , he has already yielded much fruit , yet still more and more falls from him . since his much to be lamented death , two very large volumes ( with some lesser ) of his sermons , have been published ; which give a clear discovery to the world of his great abilities for , and great diligence in , the office and work of the ministery . now this small piece succeeds ; which in comparison of the former , is but a poor stripling , but as the shaking of an olive tree , as the gleaning grapes when the vintage is over . yet let it not be rejected or slighted upon that account ; for though 't is not so bulky as they , yet ( according to its proportion ) 't is of equal value , and shews the same head and heart which they do . my pen , ( upon this opportunity , ) would fain be launching forth into the commendation of the worthy author , but i will not suffer it ; considering , how little he needs that from any , and how much he is above it as from me . neither will i suffer it to run out in the commending of these sermons ; for i hope , to impartial and judicious readers they will commend themselves , ( the best way of commending . ) i only recommend them , as judging them worthy of the perusal of all who are desirous of a fuller knowledge of our lord jesus . for he is the grand subject treated of in them . his person , offices , works , blesssings , are here described , asserted , vindicated , and improved . our redemption by his blood ; his being the image of the invisible god , the first-born of every creature ; his creating and sustaining all things ; his headship over the church , prae-existence before all created beings , his being the first-born from the dead , the union of the two natures in his person ; his reconciling of sinners to god through the blood of his cross , these are the heads insisted upon in these sermons , ( the author following the apostle , col. 1.14 . ad 20. ) and are not these great points ? of a very sublime nature ? containing the very vitals of gospel revelation ? can ministers preach , print , too much of them ? can private christian hear , read , meditate too much of them ? oh they are the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the deep things of god! in which is manisfested the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the manifold wisedom of god ; which the angels desire to look into : which are the wonder and astonishment of heaven , which put such a transcendent excellency upon the knowledge of christ. should we not therefore thankfully receive and diligently peruse all discourses , that may clear up our light in and about these profound mysteries . i hope the consideration hereof will make these sermons acceptable to many gracious souls . they all hanging upon this string , and pointing to this argument ( of what christ is , has done , suffered and procured for believers , ) they are not unfitly put together , and printed by themselves , in this small volume . several of the points mentioned are controversial ; for a long tract of time there has been hot disputes about them ; what volumes pro and con have been written , both by antient and modern divines about them ! but our reverend author does not so much concern himself in what is polemical and controversial , but chose rather in a plainer way ( as best suiting with sermon-work ) , to assert and prove the truth by scriptural testimonies and arguments : and that he has done to the full . reader , whoever thou art into whose hands these sermons shall come , let me assure thee , they are the genuine work of the person whose name they bear . they were copyed out from and according to his own notes , by one who i am sure would be as exact therein as possibly he could . but how earnestly could i wish , if god had not seen it good to order it otherwise , that the author himself might have lived to have reviewed and polished them ! ( for what hand so fit to polish the stone as that which cuts it : ) but now what is amiss , must be left to the understanding reader to discover , and to the candid reader to pardon . christian , i commit thee to god ; he bless thee , and all the labours of his faithful servants ( whether living or dead ) to the promoting of thy spiritual and eternal good . which he ardently desires who is , thine to serve thee in our lord iesus , tho. iacomb . redemption by christ . serm. i. col . 1.14 . in whom we have redemption through his blood even the forgiveness of sins . the apostle in the former verse , had spoken of our slavery and bondage to satan , from which christ came to deliver us ; now because sin is the cause of it , he cometh to speak of our redemption from sin : in whom we have redemption through his blood , even the forgiveness of sins . here is i. the author . ii. the benefit . iii. the price . the point is this . doct. that one principal part of our redemption by christ is remission of sins . here i shall shew you , 1. what remission of sins is . 2. the nature of redemption . 3. that remission of sins is a part , and a principal part of it . 1. what remission of sins is . both terms must be explained , what sin is , and what is the forgiveness of sin . for the first . sin is a violation of the law of the eternal and living god. 1 ioh. 3.4 . whosoever committeth sin , transgresseth also the law , for sin is the transgression of the law . god is the law-giver , who hath given a righteous law to his subjects , under the dreadful penalty of a curse . in his law there are two things ; the precept and the sanction : the precept is the rule of our duty , which sheweth what we must do , or not do . the sanction or penalty sheweth what god will do , or might justly do , if he should deal with us according to the merit of our actions : accordingly in sin , there is the fault and the guilt . ( 1. ) the fault . that man who is gods subject , and so many ways obliged to him by his benefits , instead of keeping this law should break it upon light terms , and swerve from the rule of his duty , being carried away by his own ill disposed will , and base lusts. it is a great and heinous offence , for which he becometh obnoxious to the judgment of god. ( 2. ) the guilt : which is a liableness to punishment , and that not ordinary punishment , but the vengeance of the eternal god , who every moment may break in upon us . where there is sin , there will be guilt ; and where there is guilt , there will be punishment , unless we be pardoned and god looseneth the chains wherewith we be bound . secondly , forgiveness of sin , is a dissolving the obligation to punishment , or a freedom in gods way and method , from all the sad and woful consequences of sin . understand it rightly . 1. 't is not a disanulling the act , as it is a natural action ; such a fact we did , or omitted to do ; factum , infactum fieri nequit : that which is done , cannot be undone . and therefore though it be said , ier. 50.20 . the iniquity of iacob shall be sought after , and the sins of iudah , and they shall not be found ; for i will pardon them whom i reserve . yet that must not be understood as if god would abolish the action , and make it , as if it had never been , for that is impossible . but he would pass by , and overlook it as to punishment . 2. nor is it abolished as a faulty or criminal action , contrary to the law of god , the sins we have committed are sins still , such actions as the law condemneth . forgiveness is not the making of a fault to be no fault ; an accused person may be vindicated as innocent , but if he be pardoned , he is pardoned as an offender . he is not reputed as one that never culpably omitted any duty , or committed any sin , but his fault is forgiven upon such termes as our offended governour pleaseth . i will be merciful to their unrighteousness , and forgive all their sins , heb. 8.12 . they are pardoned as sins . 3. nor is the merit of the sinful act lessened : in it self it deserveth condemnation to punishment . merito operis , it is in its self damnable , but quoad eventum , rom. 8.1 . there is no condemnation to them that are in christ iesus , &c. because the grace of the gospel dischargeth us from it , we must still own our selves deserving the wrath of god , which maketh for our constant humiliation and admiration of grace : so that he that is pardoned , still deserveth punishment . 4. it remaineth therefore that forgiveness of sin , is a dissolving the obligation to punishment , or passing by the fault , so as it shall not rise up in judgement against us to our confusion or destruction : the fault is the sinners act , the punishment the judges , which he may forbear on certain termes stated in the law of grace . he passeth by the fault so far , that it shall not be a ground of punishment to us . i prove it 1. from the nature of the thing : for there is such a relation between the fault and the guilt , the sin and the punishment , that the one cannot be without the other : there can be no punishment without a preceding fault and crime : therefore if the judge will not impute the fault , there must needs be an immunity from punishment , for the cause being taken away , the effect ceaseth ; and the sin committed by us , is the meritorious cause of punishment . if god will cover that , and overlook it , then forgiveness is a dissolving the obligation to punishment . 2. from the common rule of speaking used among men ; for surely the scripture speaketh intelligibly . now in the common way of speaking , he cannot be said to forgive or remit a fault , that exacteth the whole punishment of it . how can a magistrate be said to forgive an offender , when the offender beareth the punishment , which the law determineth ? and what do men pray for to god , when they pray for the forgiveness of sins , but that they may be exempted from the punishment which they have deserved . 3. it would seem to impeach the justice and mercy of god , if he should exact the punishment where he hath pardoned the offence . his iustice , to flatter men with hopes of remitting the debt , where he requireth the payment . his mercy , in making such fair offers of reconciliation , when still liable to his vindictive justice ; there may be indeed effects of his fatherly anger , but not of his vindictive wrath . 4. the phrases , and way of speaking in scripture by which forgiveness of sin is set forth , shew , god doth blot out our sins ; psal. 51.2 . wash me throughly from my iniquity , and cleanse me from my sin . and cover them ; psal. 32.1 . blessed is he whose transgression is forgiven , whose sin is covered . to cast them behind his back ; isa. 38.17 . thou hast cast all my sins behind thy back . and cast them into the bottom of the sea ; micah 7.19 . thou wilt cast all their sins into the depth of the sea. to remember them no more ; ier. 31.34 . i ●ill forgive their iniquity , and i will remember the●r sin no more . by such emphatical metaphors doth it express gods free and full forgiveness , if we seriously enter into his peace : and do clearly shew , that if god punisheth sins , he doth remember them ; if he avenge them , he imputeth them ; if they are brought into the judgement against us , they are not covered ; if he searcheth after them , he doth not cast them behind his back : if he bringeth them into light , he doth not cast them into the depths of the sea : much more if he punish us for them . secondly , the nature of redemption . what is redemption by the blood of christ ? in opening it to you , i shall prove six things . 1. a captivity or bondage . 2. that from thence we are freed by a ransom , or price paid . 3. that none but christ was fit to give this ransom . 4. that nothing performed by christ was sufficient , till he layed down his life . 5. that thence there is a liberty resulting to us . 6. that we do not actually partake of the benefit of this ransom , till we be in christ. 1. our being redeemed , supposeth a captivity and bondage : all men in their unrenewed estate are slaves to sin and satan , and subject to the wrath of god : that we are slaves to sin , appeareth by scripture and experience ; titus 3.3 . serving divers lusts and pleasures . ioh. 8.34 . whosoever committeth sin , is the servant of sin . men imagin a life spent in vanity and pleasure , to be a very good life ; it were so , if liberty were to be determined by doing what we list , rather than what we ought . but since it is not , experience sheweth that they are convinced of their brutish satisfactions as mean and base , yet they cannot leave them , for that true , and solid happiness offered by christ : now as they are under sin , so they are under satan , who worketh in the children of disobedience , eph. 2.2 . and hath a great power over wicked men in the world , who fall to his share , as the executioner of gods curse , and are taken captive by him at his will and pleasure , 2 tim. 2.26 . this is the woful captivity and servitude of carnal men , that they fall as a ready prey into the mouth of the roaring lion : now for this they are liable to the curse and wrath of god : therefore called children of wrath even as others , eph. 2.3 . that is , obnoxious to his righteous displeasure and punishment : thus were we lost in our selves under sin , satan , and the wrath of god , from which we could no way free our selves , and if grace had not opened a way for us to escape what should we have done ? 2. to recover us , there was a price to be paid by way of ransom to god. we are not delivered from this bondage by prayer or intreaty , nor by strong hand or meer force , nor yet by the sole condescension and pity of the injured party , without seeking reparation of the wrong done ; but by the payment of a sufficient price , and just satisfaction to provoked justice . this price was not payed indeed to satan who detaineth souls in slavery as a rigid usurping tyrant , or merciless gaoler ; ( from him indeed we are delivered by force ) but the price was paid to god. man had not sinned against satan , but against god , to whom it belongeth to condemn or absolve : and god being satisfied , satan hath no power over us , but is put out of office . as the executioner hath nothing to do , when the judge and law is satisfied . now that redemption implyeth the paying of a price is clear , because the word importeth it , and the scripture often uses this metaphor , matth. 20.28 . the son of man came not to be ministred unto , but to minister ; and to give his life a ransom for many . 1 tim. 2 : 6. who gave himself a ransom for all , to be testified in due time . redemption in the general , is a recovery out of our lost estate . god could have saved men by the grace of confirmation , but he chose rather by the grace of redemption . this recovery was not by a forcible rescue , but by a ransom . christ in recovering his people out of their lost estate , is sometimes set forth as a lamb , sometimes as a lion : in dealing with god , we consider him as the lamb slain , rev. 5.5 , 6. in dealing with satan , and the enemies of our salvation , he doth as a lion recover the prey . but why was a ransom necessary ? because god had made a former covenant , which was not to be quit and wholly made void , but upon valuable consideration , least his justice , wisdom , holiness , veracity , authority should fall to the ground . 1. the honour of his governing justice was to be secured and freed from any blemish , that the awe of god might be kept up in the world ; rom. 3.5 , 6. and gen. 18.25 . that be far from thee , to do after this manner , to slay the righteous with the wicked : and that the righteous should be as the wicked , that be far from thee : shall not the judge of all the earth do right ? if god should absolutely pardon without satisfaction equivalent for the wrong done , how should god else be known and reverenced as the just and holy governour of the world ? therefore , rom. 3.25 , 26. 't is said , whom god hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood , to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past , through the forbearance of god : to declare i say at this time his righteousness ; that he might be just , and the justifier of him which believeth in iesus . 2. his wisdom : the law was not given by god in jest , but in the greatest earnest that ever law was given : now if the law should be recalled without any more ado , the law-giver would run the hazard of levity , mutability and imprudence in constituting so solemne a transaction to no purpose . paul was troubled when forced to retract his word , 2 cor. 1.17 , 18. that his word should be yea to day , and nay to morrow : therefore when god had said , thus i will govern the world , he was not to part with the law upon light termes . 3. his holy nature would not permit it . there needed some way to be found out , to signifie his purest holiness , his hatred and detestation of sin , and that it should not be pardoned without some markes of his displeasure . his soul hates the wicked , and the righteous god loveth righteousness , psal. 11.6 . 4. his authority . it would be a derogation from the authority of his law , if it might be broken , and there be no more ado about it . now that all the world might know , that it is a dangerous thing to transgress his laws and might hear and fear , and do no more presumptuously , god appointed this course , that the penalty of his law should be executed upon our surety , when he undertook our reconciliation with god , gal. 4.4 . 5. the veracity and truth of god. it bindeth the truth of god which sinners are apt to question ; gen. 3.5 . hath god said ? and deut. 29.19 , 20. we look upon the threatnings of the law as a vain scare-crow , therefore for the terror and warning of sinners for the future , god would not release his wrath , nor release us from the power of sin and satan , which was the consequent of it , without a price and valuable compensation . thirdly , none was sit to give this ransom but jesus christ , who was god man : he was man to undertake it in our name , and god to perform it in his own strength : a man that he might be made under the law , and humbled even to the death of the cross for our sakes , and all this was elevated beyond the worth of created actions and sufferings by the divine nature which was in him , which perfumed his humanity and all done by it , and in it . this put the stamp upon the mettal , and made it current coin , imposed an infinite value upon his finite obedience and sufferings . by taking humane nature a price was put into his hands to lay down for us , heb. 10.15 . and his divine nature made it sufficient and responsible , for it was the blood of god , acts 20.28 . feed the church of god , which he hath purchased with his own blood. and heb. 9.13 . for if the blood of bulls and goats , and the ashes of an heifer , sprinkling the unclean , sanctifyeth to the purifying of the flesh ; how much more shall the blood of christ who through the spirit offered himself without spot to god , purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living god. it was that flesh and blood which was assumed into the unity of his person ; as a slip or branch grafted into a stock is the branch of the stock , and the fruit of it is the fruit of the stock . a naked creature without this union , could not have satisfied the justice of god for us : this made his blood a precious blood , and his obedience a precious obedience . in short god-man the son of god , and the son of adam , was he that redeemed us . so in short there were different parties to be dealt with before the fruit of redemption could be obtained . god , satan , man ; god was an enemy that could not be overcome but must be reconciled ; satan was a usurper and was to be vanquished with a strong hand ; man was unable and unwilling to look after the fruits of redemption , and our obstinacy and unbelief could onely be overcome by the spirit of christ. fourthly , nothing performed by christ could be a sufficient ransom for this end unless he had crowned all his other actions and sufferings , by laying down his life and undergoing a bloody and violent death . this was the compleating and crowning act . partly to answer the types of the law , wherein no remission was represented without a bloody sacrifice . partly from the nature of the thing , and the fulness of the satisfaction required untill all that was finished , iohn 8.20 . death was that which was threatned to sin , death was that which was feared by the sinner . many ignorant people will say the least drop of christs blood was enough to save a thousand worlds , if so his circumcision had been enough without his death , but christ is not glorified but lessened by such expressions . surely his death was necessary or god would never have appointed it , his bloody death suited with gods design . gods design was to carry on our recovery in such a way as might make sin more hateful , and obedience more acceptable to us . 1. sin more hateful by his agonies , blood , shame , death , no less remedy would serve the turn , to procure the pardon and destruction of it , rom. 8.3 . by sin he condemned sin in the flesh , that is by a sin offering . god shewed a great example of his wrath against all sin by punishing sin in the flesh of christ , his design was for ever to leave a brand upon it , and to furnish us with a powerful mortifying argument against it , by the sin-offering and ransom for souls . surely it is no small matter for which the son of god must dye ! at golgotha , sin was seen in its own colours . there he shewed how much he hateth it , and loveth purity . secondly , to commend obedience : christs suffering death for the sin of man at the command of his father , was the noblest piece of service , and the highest degree of obedience that ever could be performed to god ; beyond any thing that can be done by men or angels . there was in it so much love to god , pity to man , so much self-denial , so much humility and patience , and so much resignation of himself to god , who appointed him to be the redeemer and surety of man , to do this office for him , as cannot be parallel'd . the great thing in it was obedience ; rom. 5.14 . by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous . so ' phil. 2.7 . god was not delighted in mere blood , but in blood offered in obedience . all his former actions together with his death and sufferings make but one intire act of eminent obedience ; but his painful and cursed death so willingly and readily undergone , was the crowning act. the formal reason of the merit , was that christ came to fulfil the will of god ; by which will we are sanctified . heb. 10.10 . therefore his death was necessary . fifthly , from this ransom and act of obedience , there is a liberty resulting unto us , for the redeemed are let go , when the ransom is paid . now this liberty is a freedom from sin that we may become the servants of god , rom. 6.22 . being made free from sin ye became servants of righteousness . christ came not to free us from the duty of the law , but the penalty and curse thereof ; to free us from the duty of the law , is to promote the devils interest . no , he freed us from the wrath of god that we may serve him chearfully , to establish gods interest upon surer and more comfortable terms , to restore us to gods favour and service : to gods favour by the pardon of sin , to his service by writing his laws on our hearts and minds . sometimes our redemption from the curse is spoken of , gal. 3.13 . christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law being made a curse for us . sometimes our redemption from sin. tit. 2.14 . who gave himself for us , that he might redeem us from all iniquity . and so by consequence from the power of the devil , which is built on the curse of the law , and reign of sin. satans power over us doth flow from the sentence of the condemnation pronounced by the law against sinners , and consists in that dominion sin hath obtained over them : if the curse of the law be disanulled , and the power of sin broken , he is spoiled of his power , col. 2.14 , 15. blotting out the hand-writing of ordinances that was against us , which was contrary to us , and took it out of the way , nailing it to his cross . and having spoiled principalities and powers , he made a shew of them openly triumphing over them . sixthly , that we are not partakers of this liberty , nor of the benefit of this ransom , till we are in him , and united to him by faith ; for the text saith , in whom we have redemption by his blood . certainly we must be turned from satan to god , before we are capable of receiving the forgiveness of sins ; acts 26.18 . we do not actually partake of the priviledges of christs kingdom , till we be first his subjects : who hath delivered us from the power of satan , and hath translated us in the kingdom of his dear son ; in whom we have redemption through his blood , the forgiveness of sins . christ and his people are an opposite state to the devil and his instruments : while we are under the opposite power , we belong not to christ ; and the priviledges of his kingdom belong not to us : but as soon as we are translated , and put into another estate , then we have the first priviledge , remission of sins . look as in the fall , there was sin before guilt ; so in our reparation , there must be conversion , renovation , or repentance , before remission : we are first effectually called or sanctified , and then justified and glorified . mans recovery to god is in the same method in which he fell from him . it is first brought about by a new nature , and communication of life from christ. he regenerateth , that he may pardon , and he pardoneth that he may farther sanctifie , and make us everlastingly happy . thirdly , that remission of sins is a part , and a principal part of redemption . i. how is it a part or fruit of redemption ? i answer , redemption is taken either for the impetration , or application . 1. the impetration or laying down the price , that was done by christ upon the cross. so it is said , heb. 9.12 . christ by his own blood obtained eternal redemption for us . then was god propitiated , the deadly blow given to the kingdom and power of the devil , and the merit and ransom interposed , by the virtue of which we are pardoned ; the obtained redemption and remission of sins is a fruit flowing from it , and depending upon it as an effect upon the cause . 2. the scripture considers redemption in its application . besides laying down the price there is an actual deliverance and freedom by virtue of that price . this is either begun or compleat : the compleat redemption , or freedom from sin and misery is that which the godly shall enjoy at the last day . rom. 8.23 . we which have the first fruits of the spirit , even we our selves groan within our selves , waiting for the adoption , to wit , the redemption of our body . eph. 4.30 . grieve not the holy spirit of god , whereby ye are sealed unto the day of redemption . eph. 1.14 . in whom also after ye believed ye were sealed with that spirit of promise which is the earnest of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession . the inchoate , or begun deliverance , is that measure of deliverance , which believers enjoy now by faith ; which consists of two parts ; iustification and sanctification . sanctification , 1. pet. 1.18 . tit. 2.14 . who gave himself for us that he might redeem us from all iniquity and purifie unto himself a peculiar people zealous of good works . when we are free from the power and weight of sin . iustification ; so it is in the text , and eph. 1.7 . when sin is freely pardoned , and our debt cancelled , and we are delivered from evil and wrath to come . ii. as it is a part , so it is a principal part . this will appear , if you consider the evil we are freed from . as 1. the power of the devil is destroyed : all the advantage which he hath against us is as we are sinners , guilty sinners before god : for we are put into his hands when we have forfeited the protection of our righteous lord ; but forgiveness of sins gives us a release from him , acts 26.18 . when christ came to procure it , he destroyed the devils power ; when we are converted we are interessed in the priviledge . 2. the reign of sin is broken : for sanctifying grace is inseparable from pardoning grace ; yea , i will venture to say , that the gift of the sanctifying spirit is a part of our pardon , executed and applyed for a part of the punishment of sin was spiritual death , or the loss of gods image ; col. 2.13 . he hath quickned you together with christ having forgiven all your trespasses . when god pardoneth , he sanctifieth and createth us anew , that we may be fit for his service ; so that we are renewed by the spirit , as well as recovered out of the s●ares of the devil . 3. we are eased of tormenting fears in a great measure . man can have no firm peace and comfort in his own soul , while sin remaineth upon him , our case is dangerous , whether we be sensible of it or no ; because our condition is not to be valued by our sense and feeling , but by the sentence of the law of god , which we have broken and violated ; if there be any difference in the case , the more insensible we are , the more miserable : the generality of men indeed are senseless and careless , put far away the evil day from them , and so make light work of reconciling themselves to god , but are they the more safe for this ? no , if they will dance about the brink of hell , and go merrily to their execution , it argues not their safety , but their stupidness : the thoughts of danger is put off when the thing it self is not put away ; but if they be serious they cannot be without trouble . rom. 1.32 . knowing the judgement of god , they conclude that they that do such things are worthy of death . the very light of nature will revive many unquiet thoughts within them . the justice of the supream governour of the world will still be dreadful to them , whose law they have broken , and whose wrath they have justly deserved . they may lull the soul asleep by the stupifying potion of carnal delights , and while conscience is asleep , please themselves with stoln waters , and bread eaten in secret , which is soon disturbed by a few serious and sober thoughts of the world to come . god is offended , and what peace can they have ? 4. death is unstinged . that 's the usual time when convictions grow to the height , and the stings of an awakened conscience begin to be felt , 1 cor. 15.28 . then the thoughts of death and judgement to come , are very terrible to them : and men begin to see what it is to bear their own sins , and how happy they are , who are sure of a pardon . 5. the obligation to eternal punishment ceases : pardon is dissolving and loosing that obligation . now the punishment is exceeding great ; hell and damnation are no vain scare-crows . eternity makes every thing truly great ! the poena damni , an everlasting separation from the comfortable presence of the lord , matth. 25.41 . go ye cursed . luk. 13.27 . depart ye workers of iniquity . when god turned adam out of paradise his case was very sad , but god took care of him in his exile , made him coats of skin , gave him a day of patience , afterwards promised the seed of the woman , who should recover the lapsed estate of mankind , intimated hopes of a better paradise . that estate therefore is nothing comparable to this , for now man is stripped of all his comforts , sent into an endless state of misery , whence there is no hopes of ever changing his condition . so for the poena sensus , the pain , mark 9.44 . where their worm never dieth and their fire is never quenched . the worm , is the worm of conscience , reflecting on past folly and disobedience . see here a man may run away from the rebukes of conscience by many shifts ; sleeping , sporting , distracting his mind with a clutter of business ; but there , not a thought free , but is always thinking of slighted means , abused mercies , wasted time , the offenses done to a merciful god , and the curse wherein they have involved themselves : the fire is the wrath of god , or these unknown pains that shall be inflicted on body and soul , which must needs be great when we fall into the hands of the living god! if a little mitigation , a drop to cool your tongue , be thought a great matter , oh what a blessedness is it , to be freed from so great an evil ! perhaps you coldly entertain the offer of a pardon now , but then to be freed from wrath to come , oh blessed jesus ! 1 thes. 1.10 . 2. the good depending on it , luk. 1.77 . to give us the knowledge of salvation by the remission of sins . eternal life dependeth on it , for you are not capable of enjoying god , till his wrath be appeased . as all evil was introduced by sin , so all happiness by pardon . this is an initial blessing , which maketh way for the rest . vse . of exhortation : to perswade you to seek after this benefit : all of us once needed it , and the best of us till we are wholly freed from sin , still need it . 1. we all of us once needed it ; for we are not onely criminal persons liable to condemnation , but actually condemned in the sentence of gods law , ioh. 3.18 . he that believeth not is condemned already . now should not a condemned man make means to be pardoned , and should not we accept of gods terms especially when there is but the slender thred of a frail life between us and execution ? he that securely continues in his sins , despiseth both the curse of the law , and the grace of the gospel . oh consider , nothing but a pardon will serve the turn , not forbearance on gods part , not forgetfulness on yours . 1. not forbearance of the punishment on gods part : god may be angry with us , while he doth not actually strike , as the psalmist saith , psal. 7.11 , 12 , 13. god is angry with the wicked every day , if he turn not , he will whet his sword . he hath bent his bow and will make it ready . god who is a righteous judge , will not dispense with the offences of wicked men , by which he is continually affronted and provoked : though in the day of his patience he doth for a while spare , yet he is ready to deal with them cominus , hand to hand ; for he is sharpening his sword , eminus at a distance , for he is bending his bow . the arrow is upon the string , and how soon he may let it fly we cannot tell . we are never safe till we turn to him , and enter into his peace , and so the obligation to punishment be dissolved . 2. on our part ; our senseless forgetfulness will do us no good . carnal men mind not things which relate to god , or the happiness of their immortal souls , but they are not happy that feel least troubles , but they that have least cause . a benummed conscience cannot challenge this blessedness , they put off the thoughts of that which god hath neither forgiven nor covered ; and so do but skin the wound , till it festers and rancle into a dangerous sore ; our best course is to see we be justified and pardoned . 2. the best of us still need it , partly because though we be justified , and our state be changed , yet renewed sins need a new pardon . we are still sinning against god , either we are omiting good , or committing evil , what will we do if we be not forgiven ? renewed sins call for renewed repentance : we do not need another redeemer , or another covenant , or another conversion , yet we do need renewed pardon . partly , because our final sentence of pardon is not yet passed , nor shall be passed till the last judgment , act. 3.19 . repent ye therefore and be converted , that your sins maybe blotted out , when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the lord. we are now pardoned and justified constitutively by the tenour of the new covenant , and there by description . the sincerity of our faith and repentance is not presently evident ; it is possible , but difficult to know that we are sincere penitent believers ; but at last when our pardon is actually pronounced by our judges mouth sitting on the throne , then all is clear , evident , plain and open . and partly because daily infirmities call for daily repentance . we do not carry our selves with that gravity and watchfulness , but that we need to cry for pardon every day . sermon . ii. col . 1.15 . who is the image of the invisible god , the first born of every creature . the apostle having mentioned our redemption , doth now fall upon a description of the redeemer . he is set forth by two things : first , his internal relation to god. secondly , by his external relation to the creature . doct. it is a great part of a believers work to have a deep sense of the redeemers excellency imprinted upon his mind and heart . here i shall shew , i. how it is set forth in this verse . ii. why this should be much upon our minds and hearts ? i. how it is set forth in this scripture . 1. that he is the image of the invisible god. 2. the first-born of every creature . for the first expression , there i shall consider , 1. what belongs to an image . 2. in what respects christ is the image of god. 3. how he differeth from other persons . 1. what belongeth to an image , and that all this is in christ. in an image there are two things , impression and representation ; both are in christ. there is a divine impression upon him , and he doth represent god to us . 1. for impression : there is ( 1. ) likeness ; for an image must be like him whom it representeth . an artificial image of god , or such as may be made by us , is forbidden upon this account , isa. 40.18 . to whom then will ye liken god ? or what likeness will ye compare unto him ? what is there among all the creatures that can be like such an infinite and almighty essense ? or by what visible shape or figure would they represent or resemble god. ( 2. ) deduction and derivation : the image is taken from him whom it is intended to represent , it is not some casual similitude between two men that have no reference or dependance one upon another ; but such as is between a father and his onely begotten son ; as it is said of adam , gen. 5.1 . he begat a son in his own image , and so it is verified in christ because of his eternal generation . like him , because begotten of him . ( 3. ) there is not a likeness in a few things , but a compleat and exact likeness , so christ as the second person is called , heb. 1.3 . the express image of his person . there is not onely likeness but equality . god cannot make a creature equal to himself , nor beget a son unequal to himself . 2. representation : for an image it serveth to make known and declare that thing whose image it is : if light produce light , the light produced doth represent the light & glory producing ; & the more perfect and immediate the production is , the more perfect is the resemblance ; a lively expression of the pattern and exemplar . and this is the reason why the word ( invisible ) is added , because god who in his own nature is invisible , and incomprehensible to man , revealeth himself so far as is necessary to salvation , to us by christ : visible things are known by their visible images with more delight , but not with more accuracie . the image is not necessary to know the thing ; but here it is otherwise , we cannot know god but by christ , ioh. 1.18 . no man hath seen god at anytime , the onely begotten son which is in the bosom of the father he hath declared him . god is invisible , and incomprehensible by any but jesus christ , who being his onely son , and one in essence with the father , he doth perfectly know him , and reveal unto mankind all that they know of him . thus you see what belongs to an image . 2. in what respects christ is the image of god. ( 1. ) in respect of his eternal generation . so , christ is the express image of his ' person : not substance , but subsistence : we do not say that milk is like milk , nor one egg like another , because they are of the same substance ; so christ is not said to be of the same substance , but of the same subsistence . he is indeed of the same substance with him whom he doth resemble , but the image is with respect to the subsistence ; so he resembleth the father fully and perfectly . there is no perfection in the father , but the same is in the son also ; he is eternal , omnipotent , infinite , in wisdom , goodness and power . ( 2. ) as god incarnate , or manifested in our flesh : so the perfections of the godhead shine forth in the man christ jesus , in his person , word and works . 1. in his person : they that had a discerning eye might see something divine in christ , iohn 1.14 . we beheld his glory , as the glory of the onely begotten of the father . there is the as of similitude , and the as of congruity , as if a mean man taketh state upon him , we say he behaveth himself as a king , but if we say the same of a king indeed , we mean he behaveth himself king-like , that is becoming the majesty of his high calling . so we beheld his glory as , &c. that is such a glory as was sutable and becoming gods only son : so christ was angry with his disciples because they were too importunate to see the father , though they saw him ordinarily , conversing with him : iohn 14.7 . if ye had known me ye should have known my father also , and from henceforth ye know him and have seen him . the f●ther is no otherwise to be known , but as he hath revealed himself in christ , and having seen and known christ , who was his image , they might both see and know him : and when philip saith , shew us the father and it sufficeth us ; this will convince us all without farther argument ; christ answereth , verse 9. he that hath seen me hath seen the father . they might see the fathers infinite power acting in him , his wisedom teaching by him , his goodness in the whole strain of his life : so that in christ becoming man , god doth in and by him , represent all his own attributes and properties ; his wisdom , goodness and power . 2. in his word : where god is revealed to us savingly , so as we may be brought into communion with him , so it is said , least the light of the glorious gospel of christ , who is the image of god , should shine unto them , 2 cor. 4.4 . as god shineth forth in christ , so doth christ shine forth in the gospel : there we have the record of his doctrine , miracles , and the end for which he came into the world ; and this is the great instrument by which the virtue and power of god is conveyed to us , for the changing of our hearts and lives , 2 cor. 3.18 . ' beholding the glory of the lord as in a glass , we are changed into his image and likeness from glory to glory . some sight of god we must have , or else we cannot be like him : the knowledge or sight of god , with mortal or bodily eyes is impossible , the external manifestations and representations in the creature is imperfect , and sufficeth rather for conviction , then coversion , or to leave us without excuse , then to save the soul , rom. 12.1 . ( they have not the excuse of faultless ignorance . ) to know him in the law , or covenant of works doth but work wrath , rom. 4.15 . or revive in us a stinging sense of our hopeless condition . to know him in person , or to see his glorious works , or hear his glorious words , was a priviledge vouchsafed but to few , and to many that made no good use of it ; therefore there is onely reserved his word , to bring us into communion with god. or the glass of the gospel to represent the glory of the lord , that we may be changed into his likeness from glory to glory . there the knowledge of god is held out powerfully in order to our salvation . 3. his works : all which in their whole tenure and contexture shewed him to be god man. if at any time there appeared any evidence of humane weakness , least the world should be offended and stumble thereat , he did at the same time give out some notable demonstrations of his divine power : when he lay in a manger at his birth a star appeared , and angels proclaimed his birth to the shepherds : when he was swadled as an infant , the wise men came and worshipped him : when he was in danger of suffering shipwrack , he commanded the winds and the waves , and they obeyed him : when he was tempted by satan he was ministred unto by angels : matth. 4.11 . when they demanded tribute for the temple , a fish brought it to him , matth. 17.26 . when he was deceived in the fig-tree , ( which was an infirmity of humane ignorance ) he suddainly blasted it , discovering the glory of a divine power : when he hanged dying on the cross , the rocks were rent , the graves opened , the sun darkned , and all nature put into a rout . though he humbled himself to purchase our mercies , yet he assured our faith by some emissions and breakings forth of his divine power : well then , though it be our duty to seek and find out gods track and foot print in the whole creation , and to observe the impressions of his wisedom , goodness , and power , in all the saints ; especially this is our duty to admire his image in jesus christ ; for his humanity , the perfections of the godhead shine forth in the highest lustre . what ever perfection we conceive to be in his person , word or works , the same may we conclude to be in the father also . did the winds and seas obey christ ? the whole creation is at the beck of god , did christ shew himself to be the wisdom , goodness and power of god , surely god is infinitely wise ! was christ holy and undefiled , surely so is god , light in whom is no darkness at all : was christ loving , pityful , and compassionate , not abhorring the most vile and miserable , whether in soul or body , that came to him for relief , surely god is love , and he will not be strange to those that seek him in christ. 3. how he differeth from other persons : for the saints also are made after the image of god , col. 3.10 . and have put on the new man which is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him , eph. 4.24 . and that ye put on the new man which after god is created in righteousness and true holiness ? i answer , there is a great difference between the image of god in man , and the image of god in christ. 1. man resembleth god but imperfectly , man was made , and is new made after the image of god , but with much abatement of this high perfection which is in christ , for he hath all the substantial perfection which his father hath . in other creatures , there is some resemblance but no equality , other creatures are made like god , but he is begotten like god. 2. it is derivative from christ : god would recover man out of his lapsed estate , by setting up a pattern of holiness in our nature , rom. 8.29 . whom he did foreknow he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his son , that he might be the first-born among many brethren . none was fit to restore this image of god that was lost , but god incarnate , for thereby the glory of god was again visible in our nature ; god is a pure spirit , and we are creatures , that have indeed an immortal soul , but it dwelleth in flesh , therefore to make us like god , the word was made flesh , that he might represent the perfections of god to us , and commend holiness by his own example . secondly , the next thing ascribed to christ is , that he is the first born of every creature , that is , born of god before any creature had a being ; or begotten of the father of his own proper essence , and equal with him before any thing was created : and brought forth out of nothing . but here , the adversaries of the eternal godhead of christ , triumph , and say , the first born of the creatures is a creature , one of the same kind . i answer , if we grant this that they alledge they gain nothing , for christ had two natures , he was god , man , as god he is the creator , not a creature ; for the apostle proveth , that by him all things were made : but as man so he is indeed a creature : this double consideration must not be forgotten , rom , 1.3 , 4. our lord jesus christ was made of the seed of david according to the flesh , but declared to be the son of god , with power according to the spirit ; therefore we must distinguish between christ and christ , what he is according to the spirit , and what he is a according to the flesh . 2. i answer , that metaphors must be taken in the sense in which they are intended ; now what is the apostles intention in giving christ the appellation of the first-born . four things are implyed by this metaphor . 1. identity of nature . 2. likeness of original . 3. antiquity . 4. dignity . nothing else can be insinuated into the mind of man by such a form of speech , but identity and sameness of nature between the brethren which is true as to christs humanity , heb. 2.14 . for ●smuch then as the children are partakers of flesh , and blood , he also took part of the same , or else sameness of stock , which is true also ; fo● the same reason , heb. 2.11 . for both he that sanctifieth , and they who are sunctified are all of one , for which cause he is not ashamed to call them brethren , or priority of time , for the first born is before all the rest , or else , dignity authority and preheminence : now which of these doth the apostle intend , the two last : the preexistence of christ before any thing was made as appeareth by this reason , v. 16. for by him all things were made , whether they be in heaven or in earth ; and also his dignity and authority above them , as appeareth by the frequent use of the word . for the first-born in families had authority over the rest : when iacob had got the birth-right this was a part of isaacs blessing , gen. 27.29 . let people serve thee and nations bow down to thee , be lord over thy brethren , and let thy mothers sons bow down to thee . soveraignty was implyed in the birth-right , so david is called the first-born of the kings of the earth , psal. 19.27 . as the most glorious amongst them . so here nothing else is intended but that christ is in time and dignity before all creatures . thirdly , though christ be called the firstborn of every creature , it doth not imply that he is to be reckoned as one of them , or accounted a creature . it is true , when he is said rom. 8.29 . that he is the first-born among many brethren , it implyeth that he is head of the renewed estate , that he and all new creatures are of the same kind , allowing him the dignity of his rank and degree , for god is his god , and their god , his father and their father : but here it is not the first-born amongst the creatures , but the first-born of every creature . and for farther confirmation , here is not identity of nature , for he is not at all of the same nature with the angels , those principalities and thrones , dominions and powers spoken of in the next verse , nor issued of the same stock with any of them : mark , he is called the first-born , not first created , which must be understood of his divine nature , and eternal generation of the father before all creatures . the creatures are not begotten and born of god ▪ ●ut made by him : so christ is primogenitus , that unigenitus the first-born , that onely begotten . in the following verse he is brought in not as a creature , but the creator of all things . the first-born is not the cause of the rest of the children : peter was the first-born , yet may be a brother to iames and iohn , but not a father to them . now all the rest of the creatures are created , and produced by him : he is not reckoned among them as one of them , he is the image of the invisible god. 2d . why this excellency of our redeemer should be so deeply impressed upon our minds and hearts ? for many reasons . 1. this is needful to shew his sufficiency to redeem the world , the party offended is god , who is of infinite majesty , the favour to be purchased is the everlasting fruition of god , and the sentence to be reversed , is the sentence of everlasting punishment . therefore there needed some valuable satisfaction to be given to reconcile these things to our thoughts ; that we may be confident that we shall have redemption by his blood , even the remission of sins : there are three things that commend the value of christs sacrifice , the dignity of his person , the greatness of his sufferings , and the merit of his obedience . but the two latter without the former will little quiet the heart of scrupulous men : his sufferings were great but temporary and finite , the merit of his obedience much , but how shall the virtue of it reach all the world : and if he be but a meer creature , he hath done what he ought to do . i confess a fourth thing may be added gods institution , which availeth to the end for which god hath appointed it ; but the scripture insists most on the first , the dignity of his person , which putteth a value on his sacrifice , act. 20 , 18. heb. 9.13 , 14. at lest there is an intrinsick worth , this answers all objections . his sufferings were temporary and finite , but it is the blood of god ; he hath offered up himself through the eternal spirit . 2. to work upon our love , that christ may have the chief room in our hearts : there is no such argument to work upon our love , as that god over all blessed for ever , should come to relieve man in such a condescending way , 1 iohn 3.16 . hereby we perceive the love which god hath to us in that he layed down his life for us , that very person that dyed for us was god. there was power discovered in the creation , when god made us like himself out of the dust of the ground , but love in our redemption , when he made himself like us . the person that was to work out our deliverance was the eternal son of god. that god that owes nothing to man , and was so much offended by man , and that stood in no need of man , having infinite happiness and contentment in himself ; that he should come and dye for us ! hereby perceive we the love of god. when we consider what christ is , we shall most admire what he hath done for us . thirdly , that we may give christ his due honour . for god will have all men to honour the son , as they honour the father , iohn 5.23 . he being equal in power and glory : the setting forth of his glory , is a rent due to him , from all creatures : we are to praise him both in word and deed : in mind , and heart , and practise , which we can never do , unless we understand the dignity of his person : we are apt to have low thoughts of christ , therefore we should often revive the considerations , that may represent his worth and excellency . fourthly , that we may place all hope of salvation in him , and may make use of him , to the ends which he came to accomplish : we can hardly consider the work of redemption , but some base thoughts arise in our minds , nor entertain this mistery with due respects to the truth and greatness , and admirableness of it , whithout raising our thoughts to the consideration of the dignity of the person who is to accomplish it , heb. 3.1 . therefore brethren , consider the lord iesus the great high priest and apostle of our profession . fifthly , that we may the better understand two things . 1. the humiliation of the son of god. 2. the way how we may recover the lost image of god. 1. the humiliation of the son of god : certainly he that came to redeem us , was the brightness of his fathers glory , and the express image of this person ; now how did he humble himself ? was he not still the image of god in our nature ? yes , but the divine glory and majesty was hidden under the vail of our flesh , little of it did appear , and that only to those who narrowly did observe him ; the brightness of his glory did not conspicuously shine forth : was this all ? no , his dignity was lessened , there was capitis diminutio , the lessening of a mans estate or condition . as of a man degraded from the senatorian order to the degree of knight , thence to the plebian . thus was the eternal son of god lessened , less then god , as mediator , iohn 14.28 . my father is greater then i. as god incarnate he took an office designed to him by god , and obeyed him in all things : they were one in essence , iohn 10.30 . yet with respect to his office to save souls , he was lessened : nay not only less than god , but lesser than the angels , heb. 2.7 . he was made a little lower then the angels . not born so , but made so . man is inferiour to an angel as a man in the rank and order of beings ; the angels dye not , therefore his incarnation and liableness to death , is a great lessening of his dignity ; so not in respect of office only , but humane nature assumed . 2. it sheweth us how the image of god may be recovered : if we be changed into the likeness of christ , for he is the image of god ; his merit should not onely be precious to us , but his example ; it is a great advantage not only to have a rule , but an example : because man is so prone to imitate , that an example in our nature maketh it the more operative : his execuse is ready at hand , we are flesh and blood what would you have us do ? therefore christ came incarnate to be an example of holiness : he had the interests of flesh and blood to mind , as well as we ; and so would shew that a holy life is possible to those that are renewed by his grace : he obeyed god in our nature , therefore in the same nature we may obey , please and glorifie god , though still in a self-denying manner : the foundation of it is layed in the new birth : the spirit that formed christ out of the substance of the virgin , the same spirit is ready to form christ in you : he maketh new creatures , so that there is not onely christs example , but christs power . use 1. then let the excellency and dignity of christs person be more upon your minds and hearts , think often of those two notions in the text ; that he is the image of the invisible god , that therein you may be like him . you cannot be the image of god so as he was , but you must be in your measure , the fullness of the godhead dwelt in him bodily , but you must be partakers of the divine nature . he shewed himself to be the son of god by his works , when the jews said he blasphemed , when he said he was the son of god , ioh. 10.27 . if i do not the works of my father believe me not , he allowed them to doubt of them , if he did not those works which were proper to one sent from god , certainly this is the glory of man , to be the image of god : there is no greater perfection then to live in the nearest resemblance to his creator : christ is more excellent because he hath more of the image of god upon him . 2. consider again that he is lord of the whole creation , and therefore calle● the first-born of every creature . well th●n we should he subject to him , and with greater diligence apply our selves to the obedience of his holy laws , and use the means appointed by him to obtain the blessedness offered to us . there is in us a natural sentiment of the authority of god , and we have a dread upon our hearts if we do what he hath forbidden , but we have not so deep a sense of the authority of christ , and play fast and loose with religion , as fancy , and humour and interest lead us : now from this argument you see we should honour the son , as we honour the father , and be as tender of his institutions , as we are of the commandements evident by natural light ; for he is not onely the messenger of god , but his express image , and the first-born of every creature : not to believe him , and obey him , and love him is to sin not only against our duty , but our remedy , and the law of our recovery . sermon iii. col . 1. 16. for 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 . the apostle had told us in the former verse , that jesus christ is the first-born of every creature : the arrians thence concluded that he himself was created out of nothing in order of time before the world : but it is not the first created of any creature , but the first-born , which noteth a precedency , not only in point of antiquity , but dignity ; and is as much as to say , lord of every creature . for the first-born was the lord of the rest , and the title may be given either relatively or comparatively . 1. relatively ; when the rest are of the same stock , or have the relation of brethren to him that hath the preheminence . so it is given to christ with respect to new creatures , rom. 8.29 , that he might be the first-born among many brethren . 2. comparatively onely : when several persons or things be compared , though there be no relation between them ; so david is called the first-born of the kings of the earth , psal. 89.27 . that is superior in dignity and honour . so here it is taken not relatively , for so christ is primogenitus , the first-born ; that he is also unigenitus , the onely begotten : none went before , or come after him , that are so begotten of god. what he asserteth in that verse , he now proveth by the creation of all things , in this 16th . verse , and the conservation of all things , verse 17. we are now upon the first proof : surely he that created all things , is supream lord of all things ; or hath the right of the first-born over them . two ways is christ said to have a right to the creatures : as god , and as mediator . his right as god , is natural and perpetual ; his right as mediator is by grant and donation . it is a power acquired and obtained ; his natural right is antecedent to his actual susception of the office of mediator ; for it comes to him by creation . he made all , and it is fit that he should be soveraign and lord of all ; but the other power and soverainty is granted to him , as a part of his reward , and recompense for the sorrows of his humiliation ; phil. 2.9 , 10. wherefore god also hath highly exalted him , and given him a name above every name , that at the name of iesus every knee should bow of things in heaven and ●hings in earth and things under the earth . the apostle speaks not of this latter now , but of the former ; his right as the onely begotten son of god ; he is the first-born , that is , lord of the whole creation . and good reason , for by him were all things created that are in heaven , and that are in earth , &c. in the words , the creation of the world is ascribed to christ : take notice 1. of the object of this creation . 2. christs efficiency about it . 1. the object of creation , is spoken collectively and distributively . 1 collectively ; by him were all things created . 2 distributively : they are many ways distinguished . ( 1. ) by their place : things in heaven , and things in earth . ( 2. ) by their nature : things visible and invisible . ( 3. ) by their dignity and office : thrones , dominions , principalities and powers : words often used in scripture to signifie the angels whether good or bad . the good angels ; eph. 1.21 . far above all principality and power , and might and dominion : ep● . 3.10 . that unto principalities and powers in heavenly places might be known by the church , the manifold wisdom of god. sometimes this term is given to the bad angels : we wrestle not against flesh and blood , but against principalities and powers , eph. 6.12 . and rom. 8.38 , nor angels , nor principalities , nor powers . so that the meaning is , the angelical creatures together with their degree and dignity as well among themselves as over the lower world , of what rank and degree soever they are , they are all created by him : he insisteth more on them then on the other branches , because some cryed up the dignity of the angels , to the lessening of the honour and office of christ ; and because they were the noblest and most powerful creatures ; and if the most glorious creatures were created by him , surely all others had their being and life from him . well then , there is a gradation notable , in setting forth the object of the creation . christ made not onely things in earth , but things in heaven ; not onely the visible things of heaven , the sun , moon , and stars ; but the invisible , the angels : not the lower sort of angels onely , but the most noble and most potent thrones , dominions , principalities and powers . 2. christs efficiency about them ; in these words , they were created by him and for him . 1 by him ; as an equal co-operating cause , or co-worker with god the father : ioh. 5.19 . whatsoever things the f●ther doth , those doth the son likewise . to bring a thing out of nothing , belongeth unto god : the distance of the terms is infinite , so must the agent be : creation is an act of divine power . 2 they are for him : they are by him as their first cause , they are for him as their last end . god is often represented in scripture as first and last ; isa. 41.4 . i the lord the first and the last , i am ●e . isa. 44.6 . i am the first and the last , there is no god besides me , so isa. 48.2 . i am the first , i am also the last . now all this is repeated and applied to christ ; rev. 1.17 . he said unto me , fear not , i am the first and the last , i have the keyes of death and hell . rev. 2.8 . these things saith the first and the last , which was dead and is alive . rev. 22.13 . i am alpha and omega , the beginning and the end , the first and the last . now these expressions do imply his eternal power and godhead : he hath been before all things were made , and shall be when all things in the world are ended : he is the first being , from whom all things are , and the last end to whom all things are to be referred . he is the efficient and final cause of all the creatures . doct. that all creatures , angels not excepted , o●e their very being to christ the son of god , our blessed and glorious redeemer . i shall take the method offered in the text , and shew you , first , that all things were created by him . secondly , why the creation of angels is so particularly mentioned and insisted upon ? thirdly , that all things were created for him . first , for creation by him : this is often asserted in scripture , ioh. 1.3 . all things were made by him , and without him was not any thing made that was made . iohn begins his gospel with the dignity of christs person , and how doth he set it forth ? by the creation of the world , by the eternal word ; and what he saith , is an answer to these questions , when was the word ? in the beginning ; where was the word ? with god ; what was the word ? he was god : what did he then do ? all things were made by him : what , all without exception ? yes , without him nothing was made that was made : be it never so small , never so great , from the highest angel to the smallest worm , they had all their being from him . two things are to be explained ; 1. how he made all things ? 2. when he made the angels ? 1. how he made all things ? freely , and of his own will : rev. 4.11 . thou art worthy , o lord to receive honour and glory and power for thou hast created all things , and for thy pleasure they are and were created . they use three words to set forth the honour that is due to christ for creating the world ; glory , because of his excellencies discovered ; honour , which is the ascription or acknowledgement of those excellencies ; and power , because the invisible things of his godhead and power are seen by the things that are made , rom. 1.20 . for in the creating of the world , he exercised his omnipotency , and this they do not express their affection but his own due desert : thou art worthy o lord : the reason they give , is because he hath created all things for his own pleasure , or according to his own will , not out of necessity , there was no tye upon him to make them , but onely he of his good pleasure thought fit to do so . he might have done it in another manner , or at another time , or in another order . there is nothing in the world that hath a necessary connexion with the divine essence , so as if god be , that must be ; nothing external commeth from god by necessity of nature , but all is done according to the counsel of his own will. some thought all created things did come forth from the creator , by way of emanation , as rivers flow out of their fountain , but there is no stream floweth out of any fountain , but it was before a part of that fountain while it was in it ; but that cannot be said of any creature in respect of god , that it was any part of god before it came out from him : others say the creatures came out from god by way of representation , as an image in the glass from him that passeth by or looketh on it ; b●t before the world was made , there was no such glass to represent god : others would express it thus , that the world cometh out from god as a shadow from the body , but yet this will not fit the turn neither ; for the shadow doth not come out from the body , but follows it : because of the deprivation of light from the interposition of another body . others say , all cometh from god as a foot-print , or tract in clay or sand , from one that passeth over it ; but there was nothing on which god by passing might make such an impression : what ever good intention they might have by setting forth the creation by these expressions , yet you see they are not proper and accurate . these expressions may have their use to raise mans understanding to contemplate the excellency and majesty of the creator ; for they all shew his incomparable excellency and perfection , together with the vanity , nothingness , or smallness of the creature , if compared with him , as great a bulk as it beareth in our eye . they are but as a ray from the sun , a stream from the fountain , or a drop to the ocean ; an image in the glass , or a shadow to the substance , or like a foot-print of a ma● in the clay or sand ; and so are but certain signs leading up to the thing signified ; or letters and syllables out of which we may spell god. as the streams lead us to the fountain , the image to the man , the shadow to the body , or the track to the foot that made it . but the scripture leaving those comparisons , sheweth us that the world came out from the creator , as the workmanship from the artificer , the building from the architect , heb. 11.10 . now every artificer and builder worketh merely out of the counsel of his own will , and herein they resemble god , but onely what they do with great labour , god doth with the beck of his own will and word : psal. 33.6 . by the word of the lord the heavens were made , and all the host of them by the breath of his mouth . a bare word of his immediately created all the world ; the heavens and earth and all that is in them . 2. when did he make the angels ? for in the history of moses , there seemeth to be a great silence of it . i answer , we read gen. 1.1 . that in the beginning , that is , when god did first set himself to create , that then he created the heaven and the earth ; but we read again in the 20th . verse , that in six dayes the lord made heaven and earth and the sea , and all that in them is . i argue that if within that compass of time , the lord made heaven and earth , and all things that are in them , angels are included in that number ; being the inhabitants of heaven , as men and beasts are of the earth , and fishes of the sea : as here by things in heaven the apostle principally understands the angels , and by things on earth men : therefore as things on earth were not made , but after the earth ; so things in heaven were not created but after the heavens were created : the heavens were not created till the second day , nor perfected and fitted till the fourth . therefore as god did furnish the earth with plants and beasts before men , so did he adorn the heaven with stars , before he filled it with angels : for he first framed the house and adorned it , before he brought in the inhabitants . therefore probably they were made the fourth day . is this seemeth too short a time before the fall of the apostate angels , you must remember how soon man degenerated : some think he did not sleep in innocency quoting that psal. 49.12 . man being in honour abides not , but is like the bea●ts that perish . the word signifies a nights lodging in an inne ; shall no● lodge or stay a night : others make his fall on the next day , the sabbath : for at the end of the sixth day , all was good , very good . the angels fell from their first state as soon as they were created : so short and uncertain is all created glory . secondly , all things were created for him ; that is , for the honour of the son , as well as for the honour of the father , and the holy ghost : now this is necessary to be thought of by us , because there is a justice in the case that we should return and imploy all in his service , from whom we have received all , even though it be with the denial of our nearest and dearest inte●est . he is worthy of this glory and honour from us , and that we should trust upon him as a faithful creator , in the midst of all dangers . 1. i will prove , that the gre●t●st glory the creature is capable of , is to serve the will , and set forth the praise of its creator : for every thing that attaineth not its end is vain . what matter is it whether i be a dog or a man , a beast or an angel , if i serve not the end for which i was made ? and that is not the personal and particular benefit of any creature , but the glory of the creator : for god made all things for himself ; prov. 16.4 . whether he made beasts or man or angels , it was still with a respect to his own glory and service . god is independent , and self-sufficient of himself , and for himself . self-seeking in the creature is monstrous and incongruous : 't is as absurd , and unb●seeming , to seek its own glory , as to attribute to its self it s own being ; rom. 11.36 . of him and through him , and to him are all things . gods glory is the end of our being , and doing ; for being and doing are both from him , and therefore for him alone . above all it concerneth man to consider this , who can glorifie god not onely objectively , by the impressions of god upon him , and passively as god will overule all his actions to his own glory , but actively as he is the mouth of the creation , not onely to honour god himself , but to give him the praise which resulteth from all his works : it was well s●id of a heathen , si essem lus●inia ; if i were a nightingal , i would sing as a nightingal , si alauda : if i were a lark , i would pere as a lark . when i am a man , what should i do but know , love and praise god without ceasing and glorifie my creator . things are unprofitable , or mis-placed , when they do not seek or serve their end ; therefore for what use are we meet , who are so unmeet for our proper end ? like the wood of the vine that is good for nothing , not so much as to make a pin whereon to hang any thing , ier. 20.15 . good for nothing but to be cast into the fire , unless it be fruitful . what are we good for , if we be not serviceable to the ends for which we were created . 2. the design of god was , that the whole creation should be put in subjection to the word incarnate : not onely this lower world , wherein man is concerned , but the upper world also . our r●●eemer who hath bought us , hath an interest in all things that may concern us ; that they may be disposed of to his own glory , and our good and advantage : all are at the making and at the disposal of our lord jesus christ : therefore it is said , heb. 2.10 . for whom are all things , and by whom are all things . god that frameth all things , ordereth all things to their proper end . his works are many , and some are more excellent and glorious than others , and one of the chief of them , is the salvation of man by jesus christ. therefore all things are subordinated thereunto , to the glory of the mediator , by whom this is accomplished ; 1 cor. 8.6 . but to us there is but one god the father , of whom are all things , and we in him , and one lord iesus christ , by whom are all things , and we by him . thirdly , why the creation of angels is so particularly and expresly mentioned ? i answer , for three reasons : 1. to shew the glory and majesty of the redeemer . the angels are said to excel in strength ; psal. 103.20 . and else-where they are called mighty angels : this potency they have from their creator , who giveth power and strength to all his creatures as it pleases him ; their strength may be conceived by that instance , that one angel in a night slew one hundred and eighty five thousand in senacheribs camp. now these potent creatures , are infinitely inferiour to our redeemer , by whom , and 〈◊〉 whom they were made : though they are the most excellent of all the creatures , yet they are his subjects , and ministers at his beck and command ; both by the law of their creation , as christ is god : and also by the fathers donation , as he is mediator and god incarnate : 1 pet. 3.25 he is set down on the right hand of god , angels , authorities and powers being made subject to him . and again , eph. 1.22 . he hath set him far above all principality and power and might and dominion , and every name that is named , not onely in this world , but in that which is to come . they have a great name , but christ hath a more excellent name than they , heb. 1.5 . for they are all bound to worship him , ver . 6. and serve him ; for he employeth them for the defence and comfort of the meanest of his people : they are subject not onely to god , but to christ , or god incarnate . look , as it is the glory of earthly kings to command mighty and powerful subjects ; are not my princes altogether kings , isa. 10.8 . that so many princes held under him as their soveraign , and served him as their commander ; and when god speaks of the assyrian , he calleth him a king of princes , hos. 8.10 . namely , as he had many kings subject and tributary to him , so is this the majesty of our redeemer , that he hath these powerful creatures the mighty angels in his train and retinue : these heavenly hosts make up a part of that army which is commanded by the captain of our salvation . 2. this is mentioned to obviate the errors of that age : both the iews and the gentiles had an high opinion of spirits and angels , as gods ministers and messengers . for he doth not alwayes immediately administer the affairs of mankind . now as they were right in the main , as to their service , so they added much of curiosity and superstition to the doctrine of angels , and by their vain speculations infected the minds of many in the christian church , who were but newly come out from among them , insomuch that they fell to the worshipping of angels as mediators to god. as the apostle intimateth , col . 2.18 . now because this was to the disparagement of christ , the apostles did set themselves to check this curiosity of dogmatizing about angels , and the superstition or idolatry of angel-worship , thence growing apace . now this they did , by asserting the dignity of christs person and office : as paul , col. 2. and the author to the hebrews , chap. 1.2 , 3. hath in these last dayes spoken unto us by his son , whom he hath appointed heir of all things , by whom also he made the worlds , who being the brightness of his glory , and the express image of his person , and upholding all thing by the word of his power , when he had by himself purged our sins , sat down on the right hand of the majesty on high . it is true , christ was sent from heaven as the angels are , and he came in a despicable way of appearance , to promote our salvation and recovery , as they assumed bodies sutable to their message ; yet his superiority and preheminence above the angels is clear and manifest : he was not onely equal to them , but far above them , heb. 1.3 . seven things are observable in that verse , 1. christ came as the eternal son of god ; he hath spoken unto us by his son. when he cometh to the angels , he sai●h , they as servants and ministring spirits . for a short while he ministred in the form of a servant in the days of his flesh , they continue to be so from the beginning to the end of the world. 2. he was heir of all things : that is , lord of the whole creation : they onely principalities and powers , 〈◊〉 certain ends , to such persons and places , over which christ sets them . 3. he was the creator of the world : by whom also he made the worlds , saith the apostle , they are noble and divine creatures indeed , but the work of christs hands . 4. he is the brightness of his fathers glory , and the express image of his person : that is , the essential image of god. they onely have some strictures of the divine majesty . 5. the upholding all things by the word of his power ; that is , the conserving cause of all that life and being that is in the creature . the angels live in a continual dependance upon christ as their creator , and without his supporting influence , would be soon annihilated . 6. by himself he purged our sins . he was sent into the world for that great and glorious work of mediation , which none of them was worthy to undertake , none able to go through withall , but himself alone . they are sent about the ordinary concernments of the saints , or the particular affairs of the world ; he is the author of the whole work of redemption and salvation , and they but subordinate assistants in the particular promotion of it . 7. he sat down on the right hand of the majesty on high . they are spirits near the throne of god , ever in his presence , attending on him like princes . god never made any of them universal and eternal king for he set christ at his right hand , not the angels . to sit at gods right hand , is not only to be blessed and happy in enjoying those pleasures which are there for evermore , not onely to be advanced to the highest place of dignity and honour next to god ; but to be invested with a supream and universal power above all men and angels . take these , or any one of these , and he is above the angels , though they be the most noble and excellent creatures that ever god made . 3. because christ hath a ministry and service to do by them . he makes use of them partly to exercise their obedience , without which they forsake the law of their creation and swerve from the end for which they were made ; psal. 103.20 . they do his commandments , hearkening to the voice of his word . they do whatsoever he commandeth them , with all readiness and speed immaginable , and therein they are an example to us . matth. 6.10 . thy will be done in earth as it is in heaven . they are our fellow-servants now in the work , hereafter in the recompence ; when we are admitted into one society , under one common head and lord , heb. 12.27 . who shall for ever rejoyce in the contemplation of gods infinite excellencies . well then , if these excellent creatures , so great in power , be alwayes so ready and watchful to do the will of god and count it their honour to assist in so glorious a work as the saving of souls , or do any other business he sendeth them about ; how should we that hope to be like the angels in happiness , be like them in obedience also . 2. because the churches safety dependeth upon it . we stand in need of this ministry of angels . the service of the angels is protection to the people of god , vengeance on their enemies . 1. for protection ; christ hath the heavenly host at his command , and sendeth them forth for the good of his people , psal. 68.17 . the chariots of the lord are twenty thousand , even thousands of angels , the lord is among them in sinai in the holy place . mark , that thousands of angels are his chariots , conveying him from heaven to earth , and from earth to heaven ; and mark , the lord is among them ; that is , god incarnate ; for he presently speaketh of his ascending up on high . thou hast ascended up on high , and led captivity captive , thou hast received gifts for men , ver . 18. among them in his holy place , that is , in heaven : it is added as in mount sinai ; that is , as at the giving of the law , they were then there , and still attend on the propagation of the gospel . for more particular cases , see heb. 1.14 . are they not all ministring spirits sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation . so psal. 34.7 . the angel of the lord incampeth round about them that fear him , and delivereth them . all that obediently serve and wait on god , have the promise of his protection . 2. the other part of this ministry and service , is to restrain and destroy the devil and his instruments . the scripture often speaks of gods executing judgements by the angels : their influence doth not always personally appear , yet it is great and powerful . though the powers and authorities on earth , and their messengers and forces be of●en imployed against the saints , yet the captain of our salvation is in heaven , and all the mighty angels are subject to him , and at his disposal . by this means the prophet elisha confirmed himself and his servant , when the king of syria sent chariots and horses a great host to attacque him in dothan , ● king. 6.14 , 15. and when his serva●t saw it early in the morning , he said , alas my master ! what shall we do ? the prophet answered , verse 16. they that ●e with us , are more than they that be against us . and then verse 17. he prayed , lord open his eyes that he may see . and the lord opened his eyes , and behold the mountain was full of chariots and ●orses of fire , round about elisha . these fiery horses and chariots were nothing else but the angels of god. here is force against force , chariots against chariots , horse against horse , if we could open the eye of faith , and shut that of sense . we read acts 12.23 . that an angel smote herod in the midst of his pride and persecution : the angel of the lord smote him . vses . i. let us more deeply be possessed with the majesty of our redeemer : he is the creator of all things , of angels as well as men , and so more excellent than all the men in the world , whether they excel in power or holiness , which the psalmist expresseth thus , fairer than the children of men , psal. 45.29 . but also then the most excellent and glorious angels , he is their creator as well as ours , head of principalities and powers , as well as of poor worms here upon earth . surely the representing and apprehending of christ in his glorious majesty , is a point of great consequence . 1. partly , to give us matter for praise and admiration , that we may not have mean thoughts of his person and office ; he is a most glorious lord and king , that holdeth the most powerful creatures in subjection to himself . if christians did know and consider how much of true religion consists in admiring and praising their redeemer , they would more busie their minds in this work . 2. partly , to strengthen our trust , and to fortifie us against all fears and discouragements in our service . when we think of the great creator of heaven and earth , and all things visible and invisible , angels , men , principalities , &c. surely the brightness of all creature-glory should wax dim in our eyes ; our god is able to deliver us , dan. 18. and will , as he did by his angel. this was that which fortified stephen , acts 5.55 , 56. he saw iesus standing at the right hand of god. it is easie for him who made all things out of nothing to help us . see psal. 121.2 . my help standeth in the name of the lord who made heaven and earth . the almighty creator , ruler and governour of the world , what cannot he do ! as long as i see those glorious monuments of his power standing , i will not distrust he can afford me seasonable help by his holy angels through the intercession of his son who hath assumed my nature . 3. partly , to bind our duty ; all creatures were made by him and for him , therefore we should give up our selves to him , and say with paul , acts 27.23 . his i am and him i serve . his by creation and redemption , therefore every thing we have and do , ought to have a respect to his glory & service . there is ● variety of creatures in the world , of different kinds and different excellencies : in the whole and every kind there is somewhat of the glory of god and christ set forth . now this should strike our hearts ? shall we onely who are the persons most obliged , be a disgrace to our lord both creator and redeemer , when the good angels are so ready to attend him at his beck and command , and that in the meanest services and ministries . shall poor worms make bold with his laws , slight his doctrine , despise his benefits ? heb. 2.2 , 3. if the word spoken by angels was stedfast , and every transgression and disobedience received a just recompense of reward , how shall we escape if we neglect so great salvation . 4. and lastly , to make us more reverend in our approaches to him , for he sits in the assembly of the gods , the holy angels are round about him . psal. 138.1 . before the gods will i sing praise to thee : that is , in the presence of the holy angels ; 1 cor. 10.10 . eccl. 5.6 . suffer not thy mouth to cause thy flesh to sin , neither say thou before the angel that it was an error . the angels in heaven observe our behaviour in gods worship ; what vowes we make to god , what promises of obedience . but above all , there is our glorious redeemer himself , heb. 12.28 , 29. with what reverence and godly fear should we approach his holy presence . ii. use. is to quicken us to thankfulness for our redemption ; that our creator is our redeemer . none of the angels did humble himself as christ did do , to do so great a piece of service , and yet he is far above them . there is a congruity in it , that we should be restored by him , by whom we were made : but he made the angels as well as men , but he did not restore them . no , they were not so much as in a condition of forbearance and respite : he assumed not their nature , he created all things , but he redeemed mankind . his delights were with the sons of men ; he assumed our nature , and for a while was made a little lower then the angels , heb. 2.9 . we cannot sufficiently bless god for the honour done to our nature in the person of christ , for it is god incarnate that is made head of angels , principalities and powers . god in our nature , whom all the angels are called upon to adore and worship . the devil sought to dishonour god , as if he were envious of mans happiness , gen. 3.8 . god doth know that in the day that ye ●at thereof ye shall be a● gods. and he fought to depress the nature of man , which in innocency stood so near to god , now that his humane nature should be set so far above the evangelical , in the person of christ , and be admitted to dwell with god in a personal union ; this calleth for our highest love and thankfulness . iii. use. is an encouragement to come to christ for sanctifying and renewing grace . i have three arguments . 1. the person to whom we come : to whom should we come , but to our creator , god infinitely good , wise and powerful . the creation sheweth him good , and whatever is good in the creatures , is wholly derived from his goodness : it is but like the odour of the sweet ointments , or the perfume that he leaveth behind him where he hath been , iam. 1.19 . he is infinitely wise when he created and setled the world. he did not jumble things in a chaos and confusion , but setled them in a most perfect order and proportion . which may be seen , not only in the fabrick of the world , but in the disposition of the parts of mans body ; yea or in any gnat or fly. now cannot he put our disordered souls in frame again ? if the fear of god be true wisdom , to whom should we seek for it , but from the wise god ? his infinite power is seen also in the creation , in raising all things out of nothing . and if a divine power be necessary to our conversion , to whom should we go , but to him who calleth the things that are not , as though they were , rom. 4.17 . according as his divine power hath given unto us all things that pertain unto life and godliness , 2 pet. 1.7 . 2. from the work it self , which is a new creation , which carrieth much resemblance with the old ; eph. 2.10 . for we are his workmanship created in christ iesus unto good works . 2 cor. 4.6 . for god who commanded the light to shine out of darkness , hath shined into our hearts to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of god in the face of iesus christ. it is such an effect as comes from a being of infinite power , wisdom and goodness ; that man may be in a capacity to love , please and serve god. what was lost in adam , can onely be recovered by christ. 3. from the relation of the party that seeketh it . psal. 119.73 . thine hands have made me , and fashioned me , give me understanding that i may learn thy commandments . we go to him as his own creatures . this plea hath great force because of gods goodness to all his creatures . not onely the angels , but every worm and fly , had their being from christ ; there is a great variety of living things in the world , but they are all fed from the common fountain : therefore we may comfortably come to him for life and quickning , ioh. 1.4 . we need not be discouraged by our baseness and vileness , for the basest worm had what it hath from him . 2. that christ as creator beareth such affection to man as the work of his hands : is it good unto thee that thou shouldst despise the work of thy hands ? iob 10.3 . artificers when they have made an excellent work are very chary of it , and will not destroy it , and break it in pieces , iob 14.15 . thou wilt have a desire to the work of thine hands . as creatures , beg relief and help ; if you cannot plead the covenant of abraham , plead the covenant of noah . 3. god forsakes none of the faln creatures , but those that forsake him first ; 2 chron. 15.2 . the lord is with you while you be with him , and if ye seek him he will be found of you , but if ye forsake him he will forsake you . 1 chron. 28.9 . if thou seek him , he will be found of thee , but if thou forsake ●im he will cast thee off for ever . 4. especially will christ be good to man seeking after him for grace , that we may serve and obey him . for he is no pharaoh , to require brick , and give no straw . creating grace layed the debt upon us , and his redeeming grace provideth the power and help that we may discharge it . now when we acknowledge the debt , and confess our impotency to pay it , and our willingness to return to our duty . will christ fail us ? a conscienc● of our duty is a great matter , but a desire of grace to perform it is more : therefore come as creatures earnestly desiring to do their creators will , and to promote his glory . god will not refuse the soul that lyeth so submissively at his feet . sermon . iv. col . 1.17 . and he is before all things and by him all things consist . the apostle had asserted the dignity of christs person , by ascribing the work of creation to him : now the work of conservation and providence : by the same divine power by which christ made all things , he doth preserve and sustain all things . in this verse two things are ascribed to christ. first , his precedency in point of time , or his antiquity before all creatures : and he is before all things , that is he had an eternal being before any thing that now is created . secondly , his sustaining all things by his almighty power , and by him all things do consist . all creatures owe their continua●ce and preservation to him . the first point is his precedency and pre-existence before all creatures whatsoever . doct. that iesus christ had a being before any of the creatures were made . 1. that he had a being long before he was born of the virgin , for he was in the time of the patriarchs , as ioh. 8.48 . before abraham was i am , to say nothing of that godlike way speaking i am ; not i was but i am , that which i now plead for , is that he was before abraham : the words are occasioned by christs saying that abraham saw his day and was glad : which the jews understood not of a prophetical , but of a real vision , and therefore objected the impossibility , that he was not yet fifty years old and how could he see abraham ? or abraham see him ? christ doth not answer to their ill interpretation , but sheweth that their very objection contained no absurdity , if taken in their own sense ; for he was not onely in the time of abraham , but long before , and so affirmeth more then that objection required : the jews thought it absurd that christ should be in the time of abraham , but christ affirmeth more , and that with a strong asseveration ; he was not only by the constitution of god , but really existing before abraham : for the predestination not only of christ but of abraham and all the elect was before the foundation of the world. if in respect of special prediction , mark then what must follow , then cyrus must be in the time of isaiah , iosiah must be in the time of ieroboam . the calling of the gentiles must be in the time of moses , for they prophesied of these things . 2. that he had a being at the time of the creation that is also clear : for it is said in the beginning was the word , iohn 1.1 . that is when christ set himself to create all things , the word beginning signifies many things ; but chiefly the beginning of all time , especially when it is put absolutely without any limitation to the matter in hand . so iohn 8.44 . the devil was a murderer from the beginning , that is almost as soon as created , matth. 19.4 . he that made them at the beginning made them male and female . so heb. 1.10 . and , thou in the beginning hast layed the foundations of the earth , and in many other places . therefore christ had a being when the world and all creatures were made , visible and invisible : so prov. 8.22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31. the lord p●ssessed me in the beginning of his way , before his works of old . i was set up from everlasting , from the beginning , or ever the earth was . when there was no depths , i was brought forth : when there were no fountains abounding with water . before the mountains were settled ; before the hills was i brought forth : while as yet he had not made the earth , nor the fields , nor the highest part of the dust of the world. when he prepared the heavens i was there : when he set a compass upon the face of the depth : when he established the clouds above : when he strengthned the foun●ains of the deep : when he gave to the sea his degree , that the waters should not pass his commandement : when he appointed the foundation of the earth : then i was by him , as one brought up with him : and i was daily his delight , rejoycing always before him : rejoycing in the habitable parts of his earth , and my delights were with the sons of men . there the wisedom of god or the eternal word describeth the antiquity of his person , all the question is what this wisdom is , that is there spoken of . 1. it is not humane but divine : for the wisdom there spoken of was before the world was . 2. whatever it be it is not a divine attribute , but a divine person : for those things which are there ascribed to wisdom cannot properly belong to an attribute , to be begotten , brought forth , verse 23 , 24. to have the affections of love , verse 27. delight , verse 31. all along the expressions agree onely to a person . that wisdom which inviteth sinners , promises the spirit , threatens eternal destruction to those which hearken not to him , commendeth not the lawes of moses , but requireth obedience to his own laws , what can this wisdom be but a person : if the intent were only to express that god is wise , what strange expressions would the●e be , to what purpose were it to give us notice that he was wise from the beginning , if there were no other mistery in it . 3. this person was christ who is the wisdom of god , 1 cor. 1.24 . and in whom are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge , col. ● . 5 . thirdly , that christ was before the world was , from all eternity : micah 5.2 . his goings forth are from everlasting . the prophet there speaketh of his birth at bethlehem : and his eternal generation , and distinguishes the one from the other , but thou bethlehem ephratah , though thou be little among the many thousands of iudah , yet out of thee shall come forth to me he that is to be ruler in israel , whose goings forth have been from old , from everlasting , or from the dayes of eternity . this last clause is added least any should look upon this ruler as only man , and begin●ing to be at his incarnation , he that was born at bethlehem was also true god , begotten of the father from all eternity . fourthly , that christ was god s●bsisting in the divine nature , i shall bring two places to prove that , the first , phil. 2.6 . who being in the form of god , thought it no robbery to be equal with god , but empted himself and made himself of no reputation , he was first in the form of god before he appeared in the form of a servant , the form of god is his divine glory and blessedness , every way equal to god. the form of a servant is either his coming in the similitude of sinful flesh . or his subjecting himself to the curse of the law , or his humble and mean condition while he lived among men , it consists in one of these or in all three , now before he submitted to this he existed in the form of god , that is , was cloathed with divine majesty and in all things equal with god the father , his being and existence which he then had was truly divine . the form of god is the very divine essence , as cloathed with glory and majesty , this did justly and naturally belong to him , and was not usurped by him : the other place is christs prayer , iohn 17.5 . and now o father glorifie thou me with thy own self , with the glory which i had with thee before the world was . god is said to glorifie any person when he giveth him glorious qualities and powers ; or by revealing and manifesting those glorious qualities which he hath ; or when he doth receive him and treat him agreeably to his glory . the meaning of christs prayer then must be of one or other of all these senses : when he prayeth that the father would glorifie him with that glory that he had with him before the world was , if you take it in the first sense , he d●sireth that god would bestow upon him as mediator or god incarnate a glory sutable to that glory he had with him from all eternity . if in the second sense , he desireth his glory may be revealed , or become conspicucus in his humane nature . if in the third , that god would receive him honourably and agreeably to that glory , which sense is the chiefest , for it containeth the other two . the meaning then in short is , that he might be received to the full enjoyment of that glory which he had before the world was . christ was from all eternity the glorious god , this glory of his godhead by his humiliation was not diminished and lessened , but obscured and hidden : and therefore prayeth that he may be received by the father , and openly declared to the world to be the son of god. or that the glory of his godhead might shine forth in the person of christ god-man . well then before any creature was christ had a divine glory , how had it he ? the enemies of this truth say by decree , or designation not by possession , but that cannot be , he that is not hath nothing : if he had not a divine being , how could he have divine glory before the world ? none can say paul was an apostle of christ before the world was , because he was appointed or designed to this work , yea none can say he had faith and brotherly love when he was yet an unbeliever and persecutor , yet it pleased god to separate him from his mothers womb , and predestinated him to have these things . again , then all true believers may thus pray to god , glorifie me with , &c. for they are thereunto appointed , but this is absurd . besides , if he had it then how could he want it now ? the decree is the same , it remaineth then that christ had a being and substance in the godhead before any of the creatures were made . vse . 1. this serveth for the confutation of those atheists that say , christ took upon him the appellation of a god to make his doctrine more authentick and effectual ; they confess the morals of christianity are most excellent for the establishment of piety and honesty , but mens inclination carrying them more powerfully to vice then vertue , this doctrine would not be received with any reverence if it came recommended to them by a mere man , and therefore christ assumed the glorious appellation of the son of god , or pretended to be god : a blasphemy very derogatory both to the honour of christ and christianity : and quite contrary to the drift of the scriptures , both of the old and new testament . the messiah promised in the old testament was to be god all the prophets agree , in that jesus christ proved himself to be god both by his word and works : and the apostles still assert it : could they that lived in so many several ages , as the prophets and apostles did , lay their heads together and have intelligence one with another , to convey this imposture to the world ? surely if christ be the messiah promised in the old testament as clearly he is , then he is god , for that describeth him to be such : and if christ usurped this honour , how did god so highly favour him with such ex●raordinary graces , by i●spiring him with the knowledge of the best religion in the world , to authorise him with miracles , to raise him from the dead . and must this religion that condemneth all frauds , and doing evil that good may come of it be supported by a lye ? or cannot god govern the world without countenancing such a deceit ? or is it possible that such holy persons as our lord jesus and his apostles were , could be guilty of such an imposture ? did they do this by command of god ? no surely , for god which is the god of truth would not command them to teach a lye , or to make use of one : he hath power enough to cause the truth to be embraced by some other means ; and a greater injury cannot be done him , then to go about to gratifie him with what he hateth , much less would god have commanded a mere man to call himself his eternal son , and god equal to him , which is a blasphemy and sacriledge as well as a lye , the greatest of the kind , for mortal man to take upon himself to be the eternal god. if it were not by his express commandment , would he suffer such an attempt to go unpunished ? would he witness from heaven this is my beloved son in whom i am well pleased ? would he have raised him from the dead , and so ingaged the world to believe in him and adore him , acts 17.31 . 2. if christ were before all things , let us prefer him above all things : this consideration is of great use to draw off our hearts from all created things , and to lessen our respects to wordly vanities , that they may be more earnestly fixed on what is eternal and glorious . he that was before the world was , will be when the world shall be no more : christ is from everlasting to everlasting , psal. 90.2 . to him should we look , after him should we seek , he is first and last , the beginning and ending . it is for an everlasting blessedness , for the injoyment of an eternal god that our souls were made . he that was from the beginning , & will be when all things shall have an end ; it is he that should take up our minds and thoughts : how can we have room for so many thoughts about fading glories , when we have an eternal god and christ to think of ? what light can we see in a candle when the sun shineth in his full strength ? all things in the world serve onely for a season , and then wither ; and that season is but a short one . you glory in your riches , and preeminence now , but how long will you do so ? to day that house and lands is thine , but thou canst not say it will be thine tomorrow : but a believer can say my god , my christ , is mine to day , and will be mine to all eternity . death taketh all from us honours and riches , and strength and life , but it cannot take god and christ from us , they are ours and everlastingly ours . secondly , we come now to the second point , his sustaining all things by his almighty power , and by ●im all things consist . doct. ii. that as christ made all things , so he doth sustain them in being and working . let me explain this how the creatures are preserved by christ. 1. this is to be understood not only meritoriously as a moral cause , but efficiently as a natural cause of the creatures sustentation : for the apostle doth not consider here so much what christ doth as a mediator , as what de doth as god. it is true christ as mediator hath reprieved the world from that ruine ▪ which might come upon it for mans sin , but here his merit is not considered , but his power , heb. 1.3 . he upholdeth all things by the word of his power . the weight of the whole creation lyeth upon his hands , as daniel telleth belshazzar , that his breath and his wayes were in the hand of god , dan. 5.23 . so is the being , life , and operation of all the creatures ▪ if he should withdraw his withholding hand , they would quickly return to their first nothing , which sheweth the great power of our redeemer . moses complaineth , numb . 11.11 , 12. thou hast layed the burden of all this people upon me , have i conceived this people ? have i begotten them that thou shouldst say unto me , carry them in thy bosom , but christ hath the care and charge of all the world , not to rule them only , but to sustain them . a king or a governour hath a moral rule over his subjects , but christ giveth them being and existence ; and doth preserve and keep them in their present state and condition from dissolution . 2. not only indirectly but directly : indirectly christ may be said to sustain and preserve the creatures , as he keepeth off evil or removeth those things that may be destructive to them : as he preserveth a town that repelleth their enemies , but directly he preserveth them as he continueth his providential influence , acts 17.28 . for in him we live , and move , and have our being . as the root feedeth the fruit , or the breath of the musician maintains the sound , psal. 104.29 . thou takest away thy breath and they dye , and return to their du●t . life and all the joyes and comforts of it every minute depend upon god. it is by his providential influence and supportation we subsist . the greatest creature cannot preserve it self by its power and greatness , and the lest is not neglected , both would sink into nothing without this continued influence . thirdly , he doth this not only mediately by means appointed , but immediately as his efficacy pierceth through all . god preserveth the creatures by means , for he giveth them those supplyes , which are proper for them : as to man food and rayment : for other creatures what may relieve them . and the wise dispensing these supplies without any care and solicitude of the creatures , is a notable part of his providence . but here we consider his intimate presence with all things by which he upholdeth their beings ; which all the means of the world cannot do without him . god doth as it were hold the creatures in his own hand , that it may not sink into its old nothing , as a man holdeth a weighty thing . this is supposed to be alluded unto , iob 6.9 . let him loose his hand and cut me off . if he doth but loose his almighty grasp , all the creatures fall down . fourthly , christ doth this so , as that he doth not overturn their nature : he worketh by natural and necessary causes necessarily , with voluntary causes voluntarily : he that inlightneth the world by the sun , causes man to discourse and reason ; the sun would not shine if christ were not the light of it , nor man discourse if he did not continue the faculty , ioh. 1.4 . in him was life , and this life was the light of man. it is man seeth , man heareth , man talketh , man acteth , but yet the seeing eye , and hearing ear , is of the lord , prov. 20.12 . as god hath made both , so he sustaineth both in their operation and exercise : all that we do naturally and spiritually we have from christ. fifthly , he is not the bare instrument of god in sustaining the creature , but as a coequal agent . as he made the world , and with the father created all things , so he doth support and order all things . it is as well the work of the son as of the father ; for he is god equal with him in glory and power , iohn 5.17 . my father worketh hitherto and i work , and he hath a command of all the creatures , that they can do nothing without him , how much soever they attempt to do against him . 2. let me give you the reasons of this , why all things must subsist by him . 1. because preservation is but a kind of continued creation , or a continuance of the being which god hath caused : gods will in creation maketh a thing to be , his will in preservation maketh it continue to be : the same omnipotency and efficacy of god is necessary to sustain our beings , as at first to create them . therefore it is said psal. 104.2 . thou stretchest out the heavens like a curtain , which noteth a continued act , god erected them at first and still sustaineth them by his secret power in this posture : so that with respect to god it is the same action to conserve as to create . that the creature may have a being the influence of god is necessary to produce it , that the creature may continue its being , it is necessary that god should not break off that influence , or forsake the creature so made : for the being of the creature doth so wholly depend on the will of god , that it cannot subsist without him . nothing can be without the will of god , which is the cause both of the being and existence of all creatures : therefore their being cannot be continued unless god will : therefore it belongeth to the same power to make any thing out of nothing , and to keep any thing that is made from returning to its first nothing . 2. it is impossible to cut off the dependance of the creature upon the first cause , for no creature hath a self sufficiency to maintain and support it self . things of art may subsist without the artificer , as a carpenter maketh a house and then leaveth it to stand of it self ; the shipwright maketh a ship , and then leaveth it to the pilot to guide it : but all things of nature depend upon god that made them , because they have their whole being from him , matter , and form : which be continueth no longer then he pleaseth , whether they be things in earth , or things in heaven , visible or invisible . no impression of the agent remaineth in the effect when his action ceaseth ; when the effect wholly dependeth on the cause : as when the air is inlightned which receiveth light from the sun , but when the sun is gone the light ceases : so when god withdraws the creature vanishes : for they have no other being then god is pleased to bestow upon them . 3. if it were not so many absurdities would follow , as for instance 1. if things do subsist by themselves then they would allwayes be : for nothing would destroy it self . 2. then the creature would be independent , and whether god will or no they would conserve their being , and then how should god govern the world ? therefore it undenyably followeth , thou hast made all things , and thou preservest them all . 4. it would destroy all worship , and our piety and respect to god would be cold and languid . the service we owe to god is reducible to these four heads . 1. adoration of his excellent nature above all other things . 2. affiance in his goodness , with expectation of relief from him . 3. thankfulness for his benefits . 4. obedience to his precepts and commands . now unless we acknowledge his intimate presence with , and preservation of all things ; these necessary duties will either be quite abolished or degenerate into a vain and needless superstition . 1. the adoration we owe to his excellent nature above all other things in the universe , alass , we see how little reverence and respect we have for the great potentates of the earth whose fame we hear of indeed , but are not concerned in their favour or frowns , or have no dependance on them at all : the least justice of peace or constable in our neighbourhood is more to us then all these mighty forreign princes , with whom we have nothing to do but onely to hear and read the reports of their greatness , when we have no other business to divert us . so cold and careless would be our respect to god if we did not depend on him every moment , and were neither concerned in his wrath nor love : those practical atheists that were settled on their lees , and lived in a secure neglect of god , they sos●ered it by this presumption , tush he will neither do good nor evil , zeph. 1.13 . fine things may be told us of the excellency of his nature , but what is that to us , he hath so shut up himself within the curtain of the heavens , that he takes no notice or care of things here below . how soon would such a conceit dispirit all religion , and take away the life and vigor of it ; but if you would plant a reverence and due veneration of god you must do it by this principle , in his hands is the soul of every living thing , and the breath of all mankind . no creature can subsist without him for a moment : now this respect is due not only to god the father , but our lord jesus christ. 2. as to trust and dependance on his goodness for relief in all our streights and necessities : this is the grand principle that keepeth up an acknowledgment of god in the world , by prayers and supplications , psal. 62.8 . trust in the lord at all times ; ye people , pour out your heart before him . when you retire your souls from all secular considences , and repose all you trust in him , you will be instant in prayer , and earnestly beg his relief : you see all things subsist by him , and it is in vain to expect any real assistance from the creatures , but what god will communicate to us by it ; now if it be not so , but the creatures could stand of themselves , and live of themselves : this would blast all devotion , and prayer be withered and dryed up at the root , humbling our selves to god in our streights and necessities would look like dejection or poorness of spirit , whining to no purpose . 3. for thank fulness for benefits received , which is the great means to knit the hearts of men to god , and the bellows which bloweth up the fire of love , and religion in our hearts : how can we ascribe our deliverances to god , if he hath not a hand in all things , but when we acknowledge his sustaining and governing power , we see god in the face of the creature , and every benefit we receive representeth his goodness to us . but alass , they have no thought or care of praise and thanksgiving that think not themselves obliged to god for the least hair of their heads : god is banished out of their sight , because they look for all from the creature ; but they cannot enough praise and bless god who is the strength of their lives , and the length of their days : they acknowledge that every good gift cometh from him , that he heareth their prayers , relieveth their necessities , continues their lives to them every moment ; therefore god is all in all with them , but to others he is a shadow or nothing . his memory is kept up in the world by his benefits , acts 14.17 . 4. for obedience and service to him : certainly dependance begets allegiance and observance . we are obsequious to those from whom we expect our dole and portion , psal. 131.2 . as the eyes of servants look to the hand of their masters , and the eyes of a maiden unto the hands of her mistress , so do our eyes wait on the lord our god. the masters give the men-servants their portion and allowance ; and the mistriss to the maid-servants , they looked for all from their hands , and therefore to them they performed their service , so do the people of god. what reverence do we owe to him who is our creator and preserver as well as redeemer ? as he made all things so he supporteth all things . did we see god in us and in all things round about us , these thoughts would be more frequent in us , and we will still be considering what we shall render unto the lord for all his benefits towards us ? but obedience soon languisheth where men think they subsist of themselves without god , psal. 55.19 . because they have no changes , therefore they fear not god. they are not interrupted in their sinful course , and therefore have no reverence and respect to god. vse . this doth strengthen our dependance and reliance on our blessed redeemer , by him all things do subsist , therefore he can hear all prayers , relieve us in all our straits , supply us in all wants , preserve us in all dangers . all nations are in his hands , our whole life is in his keeping and upheld by his intimate presence with us , our dayes cannot be longer nor shorter then he pleaseth , if he were absent from us he might forget us or neglect us , but he is within us , and round about us in the effects of his power and goodness ; since he is so near us , why should we doubt of his particular care and providence . all nations are in his hands , the lives and hearts of friends and enemies , therefore our eyes should be upon him , psal. 16.8 . i have set the lord alwayes before me , he is at my right hand , i shall not be moved , we set the lord before us both in point of reverence and dependance , for fear and trust agree in their common nature , and so it may note our care to please him or our trust and quietness in him , all means are nothing to us , can do nothing for us without him . 2. it teaches us a lesson of humility . we depend on him every moment , can do nothing without him , either in a way of nature or grace ; not in a way of nature , for god hath not left us to stand by our selves on the first foundation of our creation , the creatures are not capable of subsistence without dependance on the first cause , but meerly live and act by his power , in him we live and move and have our being , psal. 104.29 . thou takest away their breath and they dye , and return to their dust , the withdrawing his concurrence and supportation is the cause of all our misery , when he sees fit all the creatures soon return to the elements of which they are compounded ; all the strokes and judgements which light upon them are dispensed according to his pleasure . in a way of grace we are nothing , can do nothing without him , iohn 15.5 . he must have all the praise , luke 16.14.1 cor. 15.10 . gal. 2.20 . the more perfections we have , the more prone we are to fall if he sustain us not : witness the faln angels , and adam in innocency . 3. it teaches us a lesson of reverence and obedience , if god be so near let us observe him , and take notice of his presence : he knoweth what he doth , when he sustaineth such a creature as thou art . this thought should continually affect us , that god is with us , still by us , not onely without us , but within us , preserving our life , upholding our being . it should be a check to our sluggishness , and mispense of time : doth god now continue me ? to what end and purpose ? if god were absent or gone , it were more justifiable to loiter , or indulge the ease of the flesh ; but to spend my time vainly and foolishly , which he continueth for service , what have we to say ? sermon . v. col . 1.18 . and he is the head of the body the church , who is the beginning , the first-born from the dead , that in all things he might have the preheminence . the context is spent in representing the dignity and excellency of christ : he is set forth by three things . 1. by the excellency of the benefits we have by him : the greatest the faln creature is capable of for the present , verse 14. 2. by the excellency of his person : so he is set forth as the eternal and only begotten son of god , verse 15. and proved by his being the creator and preserver of all things : the creator , verse 16. the preserver , verse 17. now the apostle cometh to the third thing . 3. the excellency of his office : this is done in the text ; where observe that next after the son of god , there is nothing more venerable & august then christs being head of the church : and again that christ hath another title to us then that of creator , he is redeemer also : the same god that created us by his power hath redeemed us by his mercy . by the one he drew us out of nothing , by the other he recovered us out of sin : therefore after he had declared what christ is to the world , and the church too ; he sheweth what christ is particularly to the church . he hath a superiority over angels and all creatures , but he is our head , eph. 1.22 . he hath put all things under his feet , and gave him to be head over all things to the church . christ is the sovereign of the world , but by a special relation to his people , he is the head of the body the church , who is the beginning , the first-born from the dead , &c. in which words observe , 1. the titles which are given to christ with respect to the church , he is the head , the beginning , the first-born from the dead . 2. the consequence of it : that in all things he might have the preheminence . 1. the titles ascribed to christ , they are three . the first is , the head of the body the church : where observe two correlates , the head , and the body ; the head is christ , the body is the church : the head is the most eminent part of the body , the noblest both as to nature , and place , or situation : as to nature , the head is the most illustrious throne of the soul , as being the seat not only of the nerves and senses , but of the memory and understanding : in place , as nearest heaven : the very situation doth in a manner oblige the other parts to respect it , these things agree to christ who as to his essence is infinitely of much more worth then the church , as being the only begotten son of god : as to office , in him there is a fulness of perfection to perform the office of an head , to such a crasie and necessitous body as the church is . all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge are in our head for the use of the body , col. 2.3 . and he is also the fountain of life , and grace to every particular member , ioh. 1.16 . and for place he reigneth in heaven with his father , and from thence he vieweth all the necessities of the body , and sendeth forth such influences of grace as are needful to every particular member . 2. for the other correlate , the church is the body : by the church is meant the church mystical , or all such as are called out of the world to be a peculiar people unto god. now these considered collectively , or together they are a body , but singlely and separately every believer is a member of that body , 1 cor. 12.29 . now ye are the body of christ and members in particular , all the parts and members joyned together are a spiritual body , but the several persons are members of that body . yea though there be many particular churches , yet they are not many bodies , but one body , so it is said 1 cor. 12.12 . as the body is one and hath many members , and all the members of that body being many are one body , so also is christ. he is the head , and the many and divers members of the universal christian church are but one body . the universal invisible church of real believers is one mystical body knit by faith , to christ their head ; and by love among themselves : and the visible universal church is one politick body conjoyned with christ their head , and among themselves by an external entring into covenant with god , and the serious profession of all saving truths . they have all the same king and head : the same laws the word of god , the same sacraments of admission and nutrition , which visibly at least they subject themselves unto : and have a grant of the same common priviledges in the gospel , but of this more anon . 2. the next title is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the beginning ; i understand it that he is the root and the beginning of the renewed estate , the same degree which christ hath in the order of nature , he hath in the order of grace also : he is the beginning both of creation , so also of redemption ; he is origo mundi melioris : still the beginning and ending of the new creature as well as the old , rev. 1.8 . he is called in short the beginning , with respect to the life of grace , as in the next title , the first-born from the dead , with respect to the life of glory . 3. the third title is , the first-born from the dead : he had before called him the first-born of every creature , now the first-born from the dead , rev. 1.5 . the first begotten from the dead , because those that arise from the dead are as it were new-born , whence also the resurrection from the dead is called a regeneration , matth. 19.20 . and st. paul referreth that prophesie , psal. 2.7 . thou art my son this day have i begotten thee . in acts 13.33 . to the resurrection of christ. things are said to be when they are manifested to be , compare rom. 1.4 . declared to be the son of god with power according to the spirit of holiness by the resurrection from the dead : he was declared to be the true and everlasting son of god and head of the church : so the adoption of believers shall appear by their resurrection , rom. 8.19 . and 23. the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of god , verse 23. we our selves groan within our selves , waiting for the adoption , to wit , the redemption of the body . 2. the sequel and consequent of these things , that in all things he might have the preheminence , that is as well in the spiritual estate of the church , as in the creation and natural estate of the world , rom. 8.29 . that he might be the first-born among many brethren . i begin with the first . doct. i. that this is the honour appropriate and peculiar to iesus christ , to be head of the church . 1. here i shall shew what the church is , to which christ is an head. 2. how is he an head to this body . 3. the reasons why this body must have such an head. 1. what the church is : a society of men called out of the world by gods effectual grace , according to the purpose of his election , and united to christ by faith and the participation of his spirit , and to one another by the band of charity , that after remission of sins obtained in this world , together with regenerating grace , they may at length be brought to eternal life . let us a little open this description , by effectual calling god worketh faith , which uniteth us to christ , and that effectual calling is the fruit of election , and the effect of this union is remission of sins , and the necessary consequence of this communion is salvation or eternal life : this society of men is called a church in the text : the word church is taken in divers acceptations . first and most properly , it signifies these whom i have now described , the universal collection of all , and every one of those , who according to the good pleasure of god , are or may be called out of a state of sin into a state of grace to obtain eternal glory by our lord jesus christ. this is the church of the first-born , whose names are written in heaven , heb. 12.22 . that chosen generation , that royal priesthood , that holy nation , that peculiar people , whom to shew forth his praises , god hath called out of darkness into his marvelous light : 1 pet. 2.9 . this church most generally and properly taken , is the kingdom of god , the body and spouse of christ , cant. 6.9 . my dove , my undefiled one , is but one . this is that one fold under one shepherd , ioh. 10.16 . and it was prophesied of christ that he should dye to gather together in one the children of god that were scattered abroad , iohn 11.5 . secondly , of this universal church there are two parts , one of travellers , the other of comprehensors : or the church militant , and triumphant : they both belong to gods family , eph. 3.15 . of whom the whole family whether in heaven and earth is named , so col. 1.10 . that part of the family which is in heaven triumpheth with god there , that which is in earth is yet warring against sin , satan , and the world. thirdly , this part which is the military comes in the 2d . place , to be called by the name of the universal church ; because being scattered & dispersed throughout the whole world , it comprehendeth all and every one that belongeth to christs flock , which are found in several folds : known to god they are , and to themselves , and do indeed belong to christs body and his kingdom , this is often and not undeservedly called the invisible church : because so far as it is the church of god their reality and sincerity is rather believed by faith , then seen by the eyes of the body . this church , this kingdom of god , though it be yet in this world , yet it is not of the world , neither doth it come with observation : for the faithful have this kingdom of god within them ; luke 17.20 . the world knows them not , other believers know them not , but god knoweth those that are his , 2 tim. 2.19 . fourthly , the universal visible church , while they are in the way , and in the midst of their conflicts it is possible many hypocrites may take up the profession ; as in the great house are many vessels , some to honour , some to dishonour ; from these ariseth an external promiscuous multitude , who also are called the catholick church for the sake , and with respect to those holy ones among them who truly belong to christs mystical body . we read often the kingdom is like to a net wherein are good and bad fishes , matth. 13. to a threshing floor wherein is chaff and wheat . to a field wherein groweth good corn and also tares , matth. 13.24 , 25. now all these wayes is the universal church taken . fifthly . there are particular churches wherein the ordinances and means of grace are dispensed as the church of corinth , cenchrea , galatia , greek , roman : none of these particular churches contain all believers or the elect of god , that out of them or any of them there should be no salvation : again the universal church may remain in the world total and intire though these particular churches are , or other of them may successively be destroyed , as it hath often faln out . and it is a great sin so to cry up a particular church , as to exclude all the rest from saving communion with christ ; and for any one particular church to arrogate power over the others , they being but members . 2. this church is called a body in two respects . 1. in regard of the union of all the parts . 2. dependance upon one and the same head . 1. with respect to union , as in man all the members make but one body , quickned by the same soul , so in the mystical body of christ all the parts make up but one body , animated by the same vital principle which is the spirit of christ , and are joyned together by certain bonds and ligaments , faith and love , and all is covered with the same skin , the profession of the faith of christ. look what the soul is in man , the form in the subject , life in the body , and proportion in the building ; that in the universal church of god is the union and communion of the several and single parts , with the head among themselves . take away the soul from man , the form from the subject , life from the body , proportion and conjunction from the parts of the building , and what will man be but a carkass , and the building but ruine & confusion ? so take away union and communion from the universal church , then ierusalem will become a babel , and bethel a be●haven , and for life there will be death , and for salvation eternal destruction . how else shall all that come out from one , return again to one , and all and every one have all things in one ; that at length they may acquiesce in the injoyment of one , that is god , as their chiefest good . alass , without this union with the head , and among themselves in necessary things , what can they expect but wrath and the curse , and everlasting destruction . 2. with respect to dependance on one head , rom. 12.5 . we being many are one body in christ , and every one members of one another , that is , all things make up one body of which christ is the head ; and are fellow members in respect of one another . as necessary and as desirable as it is to be united to god , to life and glory everlasting , so necessary and desirable it is to depend upon christ the head : for no man after the entrance of sin can return to god , or enjoy god , without christ the mediator , iohn 14.6 . i am the way , the truth and the life ; no man cometh to the father but by me , acts 4.12 . there is no other name under heaven by which we can be saved but only iesus christ , 1 cor. 3.11 . other foundation can no man lay but that which is layed iesus christ , 1 iohn 5.12 . he that hath the son hath life , and he that hath not the son hath not life . god proclaimed from heaven , matth. 3.17 . this is my beloved son in whom i am well pleased , he being one god with the father and the spirit , of the same substance and essence , he only can procure , merit , and effect our union with god : he first assumed our nature , and united it to his own person , and so became one flesh with us , but then all those that belong to that nature , if they believe in him , and enter into his covenant , are not onely literally one flesh , but mystically one body , and so also one spirit , 1 cor. 6.17 . that is , by the bond of the spirit he hath brought them into the state and relation of a body to himself . to gather up all : mans return to god is necessary to his blessedness , that he may be inseparably conjoyned to him as his chiefest good , to this purpose the son of god assumed our nature in the unity of his person , and thereby bringeth about the union of the church with himself as our head , and our communion with one another in faith and charity , if we desire to be blessed , and so is according to christs prayer , iohn 17.21 . that they may be all one , as thou father art in me and i in thee , that they also may be one in us , verse 23. i in them and thou in me , that they may be made perfect in one , so that as there is one god , and one mediator between god and men , and one church united to christ as his body ; to this church we must every one of us be united if we mean to be saved , and in the church with christ , and by christ with god , therefore out of this mysticall body there is no salvation . 2. how is christ an head to this body ? this must be explained by answering two question . 1. what are the parts of his headship ? 2. according to what nature doth this office belong to him , divine or humane . 1. the parts and branches of this headship : he is our head with respect to government and sovereignty ; and in regard of causality and influence : he governeth , he quickneth . 1. it implyes his authority to govern as is manifest , by eph. 5.22 , 23. wives submit your selves to your own husbands as unto the lord , for the husband is the head of the wife even as christ is the head of the church . so that to be the churches head , implies superiority or right to govern . 2. for the other notion in regard of influence , that is evident in scripture also , col. 2.19 . not holding the head from which all the body by joynts and bands , having nourishment ministred and knit together increases with the increase of god , the head is the root from whence the vital faculty is disfused to all the members . we use to say 〈◊〉 arbor inversa , a tree turned upsided 〈…〉 if this be so , the head is the 〈…〉 tree . so doth life flow from 〈…〉 the church , the spirit is from 〈…〉 begin the union or to con●●nue the 〈…〉 but let us speak of these branches apart . 1. his authority and power to govern : his excellency gives him fitness , but his office right to rule and govern the church : when he sent abroad his officers and embassadors to proselyte the world in his name , he pleadeth his right , math. 28.18 . all power is given to me both in heaven and in earth . now the acts which belong to christ as a governour may be reduced to these heads . 1. to make laws that shall universally bind all his people . 2. to institute ordinances for worship . 3. to appoint officers . 4. to maintain them in the exercise of these things . 1. the first power that belongeth to a governing head , is legislation or making laws : now christs headship and empire being novum jus imperii , a new right which he hath as mediator for the recovery of lapsed mankind , his law is accordingly : it is lex remedians a law of grace which is given us in the gospel of our salvation . the sum of his own proper remedial laws are faith in our lord jesus christ , and repentance towards god , acts 20.21 . without repentance our case is not compassionable , without faith we do not own our redeemer , by whom we have so great a benefit : yet because this new right of empire is accumulative not privative , beneficial to us indeed , but not destructive of our duty to god : therefore the whole law of god as purely moral hath still a binding force , upon the consciences , as it is explained in the word of god. now to these laws of christ none can add , none diminish , and therefore christ will take an account of our fidelity at the last day , 2 thess. 1.8 . 2. he hath instituted ordinances , for the continual exercise and regulation of our worship , and the government of his people that they may be kept in the due acknowledgement and obedience to him : such as the preaching of the word , sacraments , and the exercise of some government : now all the rules and statutes which christ hath made for the ordering of his people must be kept pure until his coming : his institutions do best preserve his honour in the world : great charges are left , 1 tim. 5.21 . i charge thee before god and our lord iesus christ and his elect angels that thou observe these things , where he speaketh of ecclesiastical censures and disciplines he conjureth him by all that is sacred and holy , that it be rightly used ; 1 tim. 6.14 . keep this commandment without spot and unrebuka●le unto the appearing of iesus christ. the doctrines are so determined by christ , that they cannot be changed , the worship not corrupted , the discipline not abused to serve partial humors and private or worldly interests . 3. god hath appointed officers who have all their ministries and services under christ and for christ ; eph. 4.11 . he gave some apostles , some prophets , and some evangelists and some pastors and teachers , for the perfecting of the saints , for the work of the ministry , for the edifying of the body of christ. mark there , he doth not describe all the officers , for the deacon is not mentioned , but onely such as labour in the word and sacraments ; and observe , he mentioneth ordinary and extraordinary ; apostles to write scripture , prophets to attest it , pastors and teachers to explain and apply it . and mark , [ christ gave some ] it is his prerogative as head of the church to appoint the several sorts of offices and officers . he gave them at first , and will raise up some still , according as the exigence of the times requireth it . the end why , to perfect the saints ; that is , to help them on to their final perfection , and for the work of the ministry . all offices under christ are a ministry , not a power ; and imply service , not lordship or domination over the flock of christ. lastly , the great end is to prepare and fit men more and more to become true members of christs mystical body . 4. to maintain and defend his people in the exercise of these things , to preserve the verity of doctrine and purity of worship : alass , many times where neither worship nor government is corrupted , yet the church may be in danger to be dissipated by the violence of persecutions : now therefore it is a part of christs office as head of the church , to maintain verity of doctrine , purity of worship and a lawful order of government , for all which he hath plenty of spirit . the papists think this cannot be without some universal visible head to supply christs office in his absence ; and so are like the israelites , exod. 31.1 . make us gods that shall go before us . they would have a visible head that should supply christs room in his absence , an external infallible head , but that is a vain conceit , for since the pope hath his residence in rome , and cannot perform these functions but by the intervention of ordaining pastors , why should it be more difficult for christ in heaven to govern the church , than for the pope in rome ? when he sitteth at the right hand of god , till he hath made his ●oes his footstool ? is he less powerful to govern the church , and to preserve and defend his people against the violence of those that would root out the memorial of religion in the world ? who is more powerful than jesus christ , who hath all judgement put into his hands , 1 iob. 4.4 . 2. in regard of influence . so christ is an head to the church as he giveth us his spirit : that spirit which gives life to believers is often called christs spirit , gal. 4.6 . god hath sent forth the spirit of his son into your hearts . it is purchased by his merit , tit. 3.6 . conveyed to us by his power , ioh. 15.26 . i will send the comforter from the father . the communication is by his ordinances : the word , 2 cor. 3.18 . beholding as in a glass the glory of the lord , we are changed into the same image from glory to glory , even as by the spirit of the lord. sacraments : 1 cor. 12.13 . for by one spirit are we all baptized into one body , whether we be iews or gentiles , whether we be bond or free , and ●●ve all been made to drink into one spirit . to ●●omote the religion which he hath est●●●●●hed , ioh. 16.13 , 14. when the spirit 〈◊〉 ●ruth is come , he will guide you into all tr●● 〈◊〉 for he shall not speak of himself , but wh●● 〈◊〉 ever he shall hear that he shall speak . and he will shew you things to come and he shall glori●ie me , for he shall receive of mine and shall shew it unto you . he comes to us as his members , and by influence from him , as in the natural body the animal spirits are from the head , are by the members conveyed to all the parts of the body ; so christ in this spiritual union worketh in us a quickning spirit ; eph. 4.15 , 16. we grow up to him in all things which is the head even christ : from whom the whole body joyned together maketh increase , &c. the spirit is not given to any one believer , but derivatively from christ to us . first it is given to christ as mediatour , and to us onely by virtue of our union with him . he is in christ as radically inherent , but in us operatively , to accomplish certain effects ; or he dwelleth in our head by way of radication , in us by way of influence and operation . 2. according to what nature doth this office belong to christ , divine or humane ? i answer , both ; for it belongeth to him as god incarnate . 1. he must be man that there may be a conformity of nature between the head and the rest of the members ; therefore christ and the church have one common nature between them ; he was man as we are men ; bone of our bone , and flesh of our flesh ; eph. 5.30 . we read of a monstrous image that was represented to nebuchadnezzar in a dream , where the head was gold , the breast and arms of silver , the belly and thighs of brass , and the legs and feet part of iron , and part of clay , dan. 2. all the parts of a different nature . in every regular body there is a proportion and conformity , so it is in the mystical body of christ ; because the brethren took part of flesh and blood he also took part of the same . the godhead which was at such a distance from us , is brought down in the person of christ in our nature , that it might be nearer at hand , and within the reach of our commerce ; and we might have more incouragement to expect pity and relief from him . 2. god , he also must be . none was sit to be head of the church but god , whether you respect government or influence . 1. for government ; to attend all cases , to hear all prayers , to supply all wants : defend us against all enemies , to require an absolute and total submission to his laws , ordinances and institutions , so as we may venture our eternal interests upon his word , psal. 95.11 . he is thy god worship thou him . 2. for influence ; none else hath power to convey the spirit , and to become a vital principle to us , for that is proper to god to have life in himself , and to communicate it to others , 1 tim. 6.13 . i charge thee in the sight of god who quickneth all things , &c. whatever men may think of the life of grace , yet surely as to the life of glory he is the onely life-making spirit ; 1 cor. 15.45 . now this honour is not given to the angels , much less is it due to any man , nor can it be imagined by him , for none can influence the heart of man but god. 3. the reasons why this body must have such an head. 1. every society must be under some government , without which they would soon dissolve and come to nothing : much more the church , which because of its manifold necessities , and the high ends unto which it is designed , more needs it than any other society 2. the priviledges are so grea●●hich are these ; pardon of sins , and 〈◊〉 grace , and at length eternal glo●● . ( 1 ) pardon of sins . by this union with him , he is made sin for us that we might be made the righteousness of god in him , 2 cor. 5.21 . a sacrifice for sin , that we might be justified and accepted with god. ( 2. ) sanctifying grace by the communication of his spirit . we not onely agree with him in the same common humane nature , but the same holy nature may be in us that was in christ , heb. 2.11 . we are doubly a-kin , ratione incarnationis suae , & regenerationis nostrae . ( 3 ) at length eternal glory followeth ; for what is the condition of the head , that is also the condition of the members ; first christ , then they that are christs . and also christ is set up as a pattern , to which the church must be conformed , rom. 8.29 . bating the preheminence due to the head , we are to be glorious as he is glorious . 2. the duties are far above bare humane power and strength ; therefore we need the influence of our head , ioh. 15.5 . to obey god , to believe in his name , to deny our selves in what is most dear and precious to us in the world , to be fortified against all temptations , are duties not so easily done as said . 2. we have so fouly miscarried already that he will no more trust his honour in our hands ; but hath put the whole treasure of grace into the hands of christ for our use , ioh. 1.16 so ioh. 3.35 , 36. the father hath put all things into his hands : he that believes on the son hath overlasting life , and he that believes not the son hath not seen life . god would not leave us to our selves to live apart from him , but hath put all things that belong to our happiness into his hands , that being united to him vertue might be communicated to us , even all the gifts and graces of the spirit . they are not intrusted with us , but with him ; and we shall have no more of pardon , grace and glory , but what we have in and from the son of god. vses . use i. is information : to shew how much we are bound to god for putting this honour upon us , that christ should be our head . christ is over the angels in point of superiority and government , but not properly said to be an head to them , in that strict notion which implies relation to the church : as to influence , he is not an head to them : you will say they are confirmed by him ; but the mediation of christ presupposes the fall of adam , for christ had not been mediator , if adam had never fallen . now if christ should come to confirm angels , if this had not been , is groundless ; besides christ merited for those that have benefit by him , and the consummate act of his merit is his death ; but where is it said that he died for angels . ii. it informs us of the shameless usurpation abetted by the papists , who call the pope head of the church . none can be a head of the church , to whom the church is not a body ; but it would be strange to say the church is the popes body . none can be a governing head of the church but he who is a mediatorial head of vital influence . the papists indeed distinguish these things , ascribe the one to the pope , the other to christ , but the scripture allows not this writ of partition ; none can be the one but he must also be the other . but they say he is a ministerial head ; but a ministerial universal head , that shall give law to other churches and christian societies , and if they depend not on him , shall be excluded from the priviledges of a christian church , this is , as to matter of right , sacriledge ; for this honour is too great for any man , and christ hath appointed no such head , and therefore it is a manifest usurpation of his royal prerogative without his leave and consent . and as to matter of fact , it is impossible the church being scattered throughout all parts of the world , which can have no commerce with such an head in matters essential to its government and edification . they that first instituted such an universal head , besides that they had no authority or commission so to do , were extreamly imprudent , and perverters of christianity . therefore let us consider how it came up at first , and how it hath been exercised : it came up at first for the prevention of schisms and divisions among christians , they thought fit the church should be divided into certain dioces●es , according to the secular division of the empire , which at first were thirteen in number under the names of patriarchs and bishops of the first see , who should join in common care and counsel for the good of the christian common-wealth : among these , some , who in regard of the cities wherein they resided , were more eminent than the rest , and began to incroach upon the others jurisdiction , till at length they were reduced to four . the bishop of rome being the imperial city , had the precedency , not of authority super reliqous , but of place and order inter reliquos . it was potestas honoraria , a difference or authority by courtesie , afterwards ordinaria , an ordinary power , then what was de facto given , was afterwards challenged de jure . 2. let us consider how this power hath been exercised to the introduction of idolatry , and divers corruptions and superstitions , to the destruction of kingdoms , the blood of the martyrs , and tumults and confusions , too long to relate . ii. vse . to perswade you to accept christ as your head , we are to preach him as lord , 2 cor. 4.5 . you are to receive him as lord , col. 2.6 . our consent is necessary . god hath appointed him , and the church appointeth him : god by authority , the church by consent . we voluntarily acknowledge his dignity and submit unto him , both with a consent of dependance and subjection . some god draweth to christ and gives them to him , and him to them ; ioh. 6.44 . all that live within hearing , have means to seek this grace , and if they so do , they shall not lose their labour . gods set not men about unprofitable work , mind but the duties of the baptismal covenant , and the business is at an end , acts 2.39 . iii. vse . to put us upon self-reflection . if christ be your head , 1. you must stand under a correspondent relation to christ ; be members of his mystical body , which is done by faith and repentance . 2. none can be a true members of christ body who doth not receive vital influence from him ; rom. 8.9 . it is not enough to be members of some visible church , they that are united to him , have life ; there is an influence of common gifts according to the part we sustain in the body . a common christian hath common graces , those gifts of the spirit which god gives not to the heathen world ; as knowledge of the mysteries of godliness , ability of utterance about heavenly things , heb. 6.4 . 3. if christ be our head , we must make conscience of the duties which this relation bindeth us unto : as obedience , and self-denial . 1. obedience to his laws , and the motions of his spirit . his laws ; luke 6.46 . why call you me lord , lord and do not the things which i say . the motions of his spirit , rom. 8.14 . as many as are led by the spirit of god , they are the sons of god. 2. self-denial . christ spared not his natural body to promote the good of his mystical body , he exposed his life for our salvation , we should hazzard all for his glory . nature teaches us to lift up the hands to save the head . 4. there must be sutableness and imitation , 1 ioh. 2.6 . he that abideth in him , ought to walk as he walketh . 5. if you be planted into his mystical body , you will make conscience of love and tenderness . iv. vse . let us triumph in this head , depend on him . there are two arguments , his ability , and his sympathy . 1. his ability : he can give us life , strength , health , eph. 3.16 . that he would grant you according to the riches of his glory to be strengthned with might by his spirit in the inner man. col. 1.15 . strengthned with all might , according to his glorious power unto all patience and long-suffering with joyfulness . 2. his sympathy : he is touched with the feeling of our infirmities : heb. 4.15 . we have not an high priest , which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities ; but was in all points ●empted like as we are , yet without sin . the head is concerned for the members . sermon vi. col . 1.18 . who is the beginning , the first born from the dead . i come now to consider the first particular title which is given to christ : there are two other titles given to christ ; the one respects the state of grace , the other the state of glory : and first , with respect to the state of grace , he is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the beginning ; that is , origo mundi meli●ris , the beginning of the new creature , as well as the old ; for the same place and dignity which christ hath in the order of nature , he hath in the order of grace also . therefore he is called the beginning of the creation of god , rev. 3.14 . the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not taken there passively , as if it were the first thing that was created , but actively , that he giveth a being and beginuing to all things that are created ; and by the creation of god is meant the new creation . so that the point is . doctrine . that iesus christ is the author and beginning of the new creati●● . i shall briefly explain this , and pass to the next branch . christ is the beginning two wayes : i. in a way of order and dignity . ii. in a way of causality . 1. in a way of order . as first and chief of the renewed state . this is many ways set forth in scripture . two things i shall take notice of . 1. that he is the builder of the church . 2. the lord and governour of it . 1. as founder and builder of the church , matth. 16.18 . thou art peter , and upon this rock will i build my church . christ challenges it to himself as his own peculiar prerogative to build the church . more fully the apostle , heb. 3.3 , 4 , 5. for this man was ●●unted worthy of more glory than moses , in as much as he that builded the house , hath more honour than the house , for every house is built by some man , but he that buildeth all things is god. and again moses was faithful in all his house as a servant , but christ as a son over his own house . the scope of the apostle is to prove that christ must have the preheminence above all others that have been imployed in and about gods house : moses was one of the chief of that sort , that had greater familiarity with god than others , and intrusted by him in very great and weighty matters ; yet christ was not onely equal to moses , but far above him : he proveth it by a comparison taken from a builder , and an house ; and from a lord of the house , and a servant in the house ; but christ is the builder of the house , and moses but a part of the house : christ is the lord , and moses but the servant ; therefore christ is more excellent and worthy of greater honour . one of the nobl●st works of god is the church of the first-born ; none could build , frame and constitute this but the son of god coming down in our flesh , and so recovering the lost world into an holy society , which might be dedicated to god. for the materials of this house are men sinful and guilty ; neither men nor angels could raise them up into an holy temple to god ; none but the eternal word , or the son of god incarnate , ●e that buildeth all things is god : 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , all these things ; the things treated of , he doth not speak of the first creation , but the second ; the restoring of the lapsed world to god. 2. the other honour is , that christ is lord of the new creation , as well as the founder and builder of it ; for the world to come is put in subjection to him , not to the angels , heb. 2.7 . by the world to come is not meant the state of glory , but the state of the church under the times of the gospel . it is made subject to god , the redeemer , it is solely and immediately in his power , and under his authority , and cast into a dependance upon him . ii. in a way of causality . so he is the beginning , either as a moral , or efficient cause . 1. as a moral meritorious cause : we are renewed by gods creating power , but through the intervening mediation of christ : or gods creating power is put forth with respect to his merit . the life of grace , is purchased by his death : 1 ioh. 4.9 . god sent his onely begotten son into the world , that we might live by him . here spiritually , hereafter eternally . for life is opposite to death incurred by sin . we were dead legally , as sentenced to death by the law ; and spiritually , as disabled for the service of our creator . and how by him ? that he speaketh of verse 10. by his being a propitiation . we were in the state of death , when the doors of mercy were first opened to us , under the guilt and power of sin ; but we live , when the guilt of sin is pardoned , and the power of sin broken ; but this life we have not without christs being a propitiation for our sins , or doing that which was necessary , whereby god without impeachment of honour might shew himself placable and propitious to mankind . 2. as an efficient cause by the efficacy of his spirit , who worketh in us as members of christs mystical body . wherefore it is said , 2 cor. 5.17 . if any man be in christ he is a new creature . and eph. 2.10 . we are his workmanship created in christ iesus unto good works . whatever grace we have , cometh from god , through christ as mediator , and from him we have it by virtue of our union with him . it is first applied by the converting grace , and then continually supplied by the confirming grace of the spirit . the influence we have from him as our head , is life and likeness . 1. life : gal. 2.20 . i am crucified with christ , nevertheless i live , yet not i , but christ liveth in me , and the life which i now live in the flesh , &c. christ is the beginning of the new life ; therefore he is called the prince or author of life . all life is derived from the head to the body , so we derive life from christ , ioh. 6.57 . as i live by the father , so he that eateth me shall live by me . we derive life from christ as he from the father . 2. likeness : gal. 4.19 . my little children of whom i travel in birth till christ be formed in you . and 2 cor. 3.18 . it is for the honour of christ that his image and superscription should be upon his members to distinguish them from others . in short , as to life he is the root : ioh. 15.1 , 2. i am the true vine , and &c. as to likeness , he is the pattern , rom. 8.29 . whom he did foreknow , he also did predestinate , to be conformed to the image of his son , that he might be the first-born among many brethren . secondly , the reasons of this . 1. it is for the honour of the son of god that he should be head of the new world. in the kingdom of christ all things are new . there is a new covenant which is the gospel , a new paradise ; not that where adam enjoyed god among the beasts and trees of the garden , but where the blessed injoy god amongst the angels . a new ministry , not the family of aaron , or tribe of levi , but the ministry of reconciliation whom god hath qualified and fitted to be dispensers of these holy mysteries . new ordinances , we serve god not in the oldness of the letter , but the newness of the spirit ; new members , or new creatures , that are made partakers of the benefits ; therefore also a new head , or a second adam that must be the beginning of this new creation ; and that is the lord jesus christ who is made a quickning spirit to all his members , 1 cor 15.45 . the first adam was made a living soul , the second a quickning spirit . adam communicated natural life to his posterity , but from christ we have the spirit . 2. it is suited to our lost estate . we were in a state of apostasie and defection from god , averse from all good , prone to all evil : now that we might have a new being and life , the son of god came in our nature to rectifie the disordered creation : the scripture representeth man as blind in his mind , perverse in his will , rebellions in his affections , having no sound part left in him to mend the rest ; therefore we must be changed ; but by whom ? who shall make us of unclean to become pure and holy ? not one amongst all the bare natural sons of men , iob 14.4 . of carnal to become spiritual . we must be new made and new born , ioh. 3.6 . that which is born of the flesh is flesh , and that which is born of the spirit is spirit . that we may mind the things of the spirit , and not of the flesh ; of worldly to become heavenly : he that formeth us for this very thing is god , 2 cor. 5.5 . he that is the framer and maker of all things ; a god of infinite wisdom , power , and love , he frameth and createth us a-new . vses . i. to shew us the necessity of regeneration . ii. the excellency of it . i. the necessity . we must have another beginning , than we had as bare creatures ; it is one thing to make us men , another to make us saints or christians . we have understanding , will , affections and senses as men , but we have these san●●●●d as christians : the world thinketh christianity puts strange names upon ordinary things , but is it an ordinary thing , to row against the stream of flesh and blood ? and to raise men to those inclinations , and affections to which nature is an utter stranger ? to have a divine nature put into us ? 2 pet. 1.4 . the necessity is more bound upon us , if we look upon our selves not onely as men , but christians : for whosoever is in christ is a new creature . some are in christ by external profession , de jure , they are bound to be new creatures , that they may not dishonour their head. others by real internal union ; they not onely ought to be , but de facto are , new creatures , because they are made partakers of his spirit , and by that spirit are renewed and sanctified . little can they make out their recovery to god and interest in christ , who are not sensible of any change wrought in them , who have the old thoughts , the old discourses , the old passions , and the old affections , and their old conversations still : the same deadness to holy things , the same proneness to please the flesh , the same carelessness to please or honour god ; and the drift and bent of their lives is as much for the world , and as little for god and heaven as before . ii. the excellency of regeneration , or renewing grace . what a benefit it is , it appeareth in two things . 1. that it is the fruit of reconciling grace ; 2 cor. 5.18 . all things are of god , who hath reconciled us to himself by iesus christ , and hath given to us the ministry of reconciliation . god gives grace , onely as the god of peace , as pacified by the death of christ , the holy spirit is the gift of his love , and the fruit of this peace and reconciliation which christ made for us . our lord jesus christ merited this grace by the value of his sacrifice and bloody sufferings , tit. 3.5 , 6. 2. it is applyed to us by the almighty power of his spirit . christ is first the ransom for , then the fountain of life to our souls , and so the honour of our intire and whole recovery is to be ascribed onely to our redeemer , who as he satisfied the justice of god for our sins , so he also purchased a power to change our hearts , and he purchased this power into his own hands , not into anothers , and therefore doth accomplish it by his spirit , 2 cor. 3.18 . we should often think what a foundation god hath layed for the dispensation of his grace and how he would demonstrate his infinite love in giving us his son to be a propitiation for us , and at the same time sheweth forth his infinite power in renewing and changing the heart of man , and all to bring us back to him to make us capable of serving and pleasing him . i come now to the other title which respects the life of glory : the first-born from the dead . the same appellation almost is given to christ when he is called , rev. 1.5 . the first begotten from the dead . the reason of both is because those that arise from the dead are as it were new born , and therefore the resurrection from the dead is called a regeneration , matth. 19.28 . and as to christ in particular , the grave , when he was in it , is represented as being under the pains and throws of a woman in travel , acts 2.24 . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , god having loosed the pains of death , for it was not possible that he should be holden of it . but which is not onely a metaphor , but an higher mistery , st. paul referreth that prophesie , psal. 2.7 . thou art my son , this day have i begotten thee ; in acts 13.33 . to the resurrection of christ : god hath raised up iesus from the dead , as it is also written , thou art my son , this day have i begotten thee . things are said to be done , when they are manifested to be done . compare , rom. 1.4 . declared to be the son of god with power , according to the spirit of holiness , by the resurrection from the dead . so the adoption of believers shall appear by their resurrection ; rom. 8.19 . the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of god. verse 23. and not onely they , but our selves also , which have the first fruits of the spirit , even we our selves groan within our selves , waiting for the adoption , to wit the redemption of our body . 1 joh. 3.2 . it doth not yet appear what we shall be , but we know that when he shall appear we shall be like him , for we shall see him as he is . this for the title of first-born from the dead . doctrine . that christs rising from the dead is the evidence and assurance of a christians happy resurrection . 1. let me open the terms . 2. vindicate the notion . 3. shew you how this is an evidence and assurance to all good christians of their happy and joyful resurrection . 1. for the terms . he is here called the first-born from the dead . if the grave was as the womb to him , and his resurrection as a birth , then christ was in a manner born when he rose again . onely he hath the precedency , he is the first-born , he rises first , and surely others will follow after him . so we read , acts 26.23 . that he should be the first-born that should rise from the dead ; as he saith elsewhere , first christ , then they that are christs . christ hath the primacy of order , and the principality of influence . so again , he is said to be the first fruits of them that slept , 1 cor. 15.20 . as in the consecrating of the first-fruits , the whole harvest is also consecrated ; so christ by rising himself , raises all others with him to eternal glory and happiness . and so his resurrection is a certain proof that others shall have a resurrection also . 2. let us vindicate the notion here used by the apostle . how was he the first-born ? the first-fruits ? the first-raised from the dead ? two objections lye against it . 1. that many were raised from the dead before christ. 2. concerning the resurrection of the wicked . they are not parts of his mistical body , and in respect of them how could christ rise as the first-born , and the first-fruits . 1. for the first objection , how was christ the first , since many were raised before him ? as the widow of sarepta's son , that was raised to life by elijah , 1 kings 17. the shunamites son by elisha , 2 kings 4. a dead man by the touch of elisha's bones , 1 kings 13.21 . our saviour in his life time raised the widow of nains only son , luk. 7.15 . iairus's daughter , luke 8.55 . lazarus , iohn 11.44 . some others at his death matth. 27.52 . how was he then the first , i answer we must distinguish of a proper and an improper resurrection : christ was the first-born from the dead , because he arose from the dead by a proper resurrection which is to arise again to a life immortal ; others were raised again to a mortal estate , and so the great disease was rather removed then cured . christs resurrection is a resurrection to immortality not to dye any more , as the apostle saith , death hath no more power over him , they onely returned to their natural life , they were raised from the dead but still mortal ; but he whom god raised again shall see no corruption , acts 13.34 . 2. others are raised by the power and vertue of his resurrection , but he hath risen again by his own power , ioh. 10.18 . i have power to lay down my life , and power to take it up again , raising the dead is a work of divine power , for it belongs to him to restore life who gave it at first . therefore christ is said not only to be raised again , but to rise from the dead , rom. 4.25 . he dyed for our offences , and rose again for our iustification , as the sun sets and rises by his own motion . 3. all those that rose again before christ arose onely by special dispensation , to lay down their bodies once more when god should see fit , and rose only as private and single persons , but christ rose as a publick person . his resurrection is the cause and pattern of ours , for head and members do not rise by a different power , he rose ato gain shew the vertue that should quicken our mortal bodies , and raise them at length . 2. the second objection is concerning the raising of the wicked , christ cannot be the first-born or the first-fruits to them , they belong not to his mystical body , the first-born implyeth a relation to the rest of the family , and offering of the first-fruits did not sanctifie the tares , the cockle or the darnel , or the weeds that grow amongst the corn , but only the corn it self . i answer , 1. certain it is that the wicked shall rise again , there is no question of that , act. 24.15 . i believe a resurrection of the dead both of the just and unjust , all that have lived whether they have done good or evil , matth. 5.45 . he makes his sun to rise on the evil and the good , and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust , and it is said iohn 5.28 , 29. all that are in their graves shall hear his voice , and shall come forth , they that have done good to the resurrection of life , and they that have done evil to the resurrection of damnation , both must rise that both may receive a full recompence according to their several wayes , and though it be said psal. 1.6 . the ungodly shall not stand in the judgement , nor sinners in the congregation of the righteous , it doth not infringe this truth , the sense is those unhappy miscreants shall not be able to abide the tryal , as being self condemned : to stand in the judgment is to make a bold defence , and whereas it is said also they shall not stand in the congregation of the righteous : you must know that at the day of doom , there is a congregation or a gathering together of all men , then a segregation , a separating the sheep from the goats , then an aggregation , he shall set the sheep on his right hand and the goats on his left , so that they make up two distinct bodies , one of the good which is there called the congregation of the righteous ; the other of the wicked , who are to be judged by christ as a just and righteous judge , assisted with his holy angels and the great assembly and council of saints : not one of the sinners shall remain in the company of the righteous , nor appear in their society . 2. the wicked are raised , ex officio iudicis , not beneficio mediatoris : they are raised by christ as a judge , but not by him as a redeemer : the one sort are raised by the power of his vindicative justice , the other by the holy ghost by vertue of his covenant , rom. 8.11 . he shall quicken your mortal bodies by his spirit that dwelleth in you : the one by christs power from without , put forth by him as judge of dead and living ; the other by an inward quickning influence that flows from him as their proper head . when the reaper gathers the wheat into his barn , the tares are bound in bundles and cast into unquenchable fire , matth. 15.30 . 3. the wicked are forced to appear ▪ and cannot shift that dreadful tribunal , the other go joyfully forth to meet the bridegroom , and when the sentence of condemnation shall be executed upon the one , the other by vertue of christs life and resurrection shall enter into the possession of a blessed and eternal life , wherein they shall injoy god and christ , and the company of saints and angels , and sing hallelujahs for ever and ever . thirdly , how is this an evidence and assurance to all good christians , of their happy and glorious resurrection ? 1. the resurrection of christ doth prove that there shall be a resurrection . 2. that to the faithful it shall be a blessed and glorious resurrection : 1. there shall be a resurrection , it is necessary to prove that ; partly because it is the foundation of all godliness , if there were not another life after this , there were some ground for that saying of the atheists , let us eat and drink for to morrow we shall dye , 2 cor. 15.32 . if there be no future estate nor being after this life , let us enjoy the good things of the world whilst we can , for with in a little while death cometh , and then there is an end of all . these atheistical discourses and temptations to sensuality were more justifiable if men were annihilated by death , no , the soul is immortal and the body shall rise again , and come into the judgment , and unless we live holily , a terrible judgement it will be to us . partly because we cannot easily believe that the same body shall be placed in heaven , which we see committed to the grave to rot there . of all articles of religion this is most difficultly assented unto , now there is relief for us in this business in hand , christ is the first-born from the dead . there were many praeludia resurrectionis , foretokens and pledges of the resurrection given to the old world , in the translation of enoch , the rapture of elijah , the reviving of these few dead ones which i spake of before , but the great and publick evidence that is given for the assurance of the world , is christs rising from the grave ; this makes our resurrection 1. possible . 2. easie. 3. certain and necessary . 1. possible , the least that we can gather from it is this , that it is not impossible for dead men to rise , for that which hath been may be . we have the proof and instance of it in christ , see how the apostle reasoneth , 1 cor. 15.13 . if there be no resurrection from the dead , then christ is not risen , and then our whole faith falleth to the ground , for all religion is bottomed on the resurrection of christ , if therefore christ be risen why should it seem an incredible thing to us , that others should be raised also . 2. it is easie , for by rising from the dead he hath conquered death and gotten the victory of it , 1 cor. 15.57 . a separation there will be of the soul from the body , but it is not such as shall last for ever . the victory over sin is the victory over death , and the conquest of sin makes death an entrance into immortality : the scriptures often speak of christs destroying the power of death , heb. 2.14 , that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death . the devils design was by tempting men to sin , to keep them for ever under the power of death , but christ came to rescue men from that power by a resurrection from death to life . again it is said he hath abolished death and brought life and immortality to light in the gospel . he hath voided the power of death by taking a course for the destruction of sin , and made a clear revelation of that life and immortality which was not so certainly known before . we look to the natural impossibilities , how what is turned to dust may be raised again , because we do not consider the power of god , but the moral impossibility is the greater , for the sting of death is sin , and the strength of sin is the law , that which makes sin able to do us hurt is the guilt of sin , otherwise it would be but as a calm sleep , and this guilt is bound upon us by the law of the righteous god , which threatneth eternal death to the sinner . now get free from sin and it is easie to believe the conquest of death : i will prove two things , that christs r●surrection shews both his victory over sin , and his victory over death . 1 , his victory over sin : that he hath perfectly satisfyed for sin , and appeased the wrath of god , who is willing to be reconciled with all those that come to the faith and obedience of the gospel , which could not be if christ had remained under the power of death , for the apostle saith , 1 cor. 15.17 . if christ had not risen ye are yet in your sins , that is , god is not pacifyed , there is no sufficient means of atonement or foundation layed for our reconciliation with him but his resurrection declareth that he is fully satisfyed with the ransom paid for sinners by jesus christ , for it was in effect the releasing of our surety out of prison , so it is said , rom. 4.15 . he was delivered for our offences , and raised up for our iustification : he dyed to expiate and do away sin , and his resurrection sheweth it was a sufficient ransom , and therefore he can apply the vertue of it to us . 2. his victory over death : for he got out of it , which not only shews there is a possibility for a man by the power of god to be raised from death to life , but a facility ; as a second adam , he brought resurrection into the world ; there were two adams : the one man brought death , and another brought resurrection into the world. the sentence of death is gone out against all the children of adam as such , and the regenerate believers that are recovered by christ shall be raised to immortal life , he hath gotten out of the power of death , so shall we . 3. certain and necessary . for several reasons . 1. our relation to christ , he is the head of the body , now the head will not live gloriously in heaven and leave his members behind him , under the power of death : believers are called the fullness of him that filleth all things , eph. 1.23 . head and members make up one perfect man or mystical body , which is called the fullness of christ , eph. 4.13 . otherwise it would be a maimed christ , or a head without a body , and therefore we should not doubt , but he will raise us up with him . secondly , the charge and office of christ which he will attend upon and see that it be carefully performed , iohn 6.39 . this is the fathers will which hath sent me , that of all which he hath given me i should lose nothing , but raise it up again at the last day : as none so nothing in the prophets expression concerning the good shepherd , not so much as a leg or a piece of an ear , that he should be carefull to preserve every one who belongs to his charge , and what ever befalls them here , he is to see them forth coming at the last day , and to give a particular account of them to god. now certainly christ will be very careful to fulfill his charge and make good his office . thirdly , there is the mercy of god through the merits of christ towards his faithful ones who have hazarded their bodies , and their bodily interests for his sake , 1 thess. 4.14 . if we believe that iesus dyed and rose again even those also which sleep in iesus , will god bring with him . upon the belief of christs death and resurrection depends also the raising of their bodies that dye for the testimony of christ , or by occasion of faith in christ , and that so certainly and speedily , that they that dye not at all shall at the day of judgment have no advantage of those that have layen in the grave so many years , the raising of the one being in the same twinkling of an eye with the change of the other , for the apostle saith , they that are alive shall not prevent them that are a sleep . so 2 cor. 4.14 . knowing that he that raised up the lord iesus , shall raise us up also with iesus , and present us with you . he gives it as the reason why he had the same spirit of faith with david , who in his sore afflictions professed his confidence in god , because he believed he spake . so they do profess the faith of christ , though imminent death and danger is always represented to them , as before their eyes : because they stedfastly believed that god would raise them to a glorious estate through christ , therefore did they openly proclaim what they did believe concerning him . to the same purpose to confirm timothy against all danger of death , 1 tim. 6.13 . i give thee charge in the sight of god who quickneth all things , that is , as thou believest that god is able and will raise thee from the dead , that thou hold out constantly unto the death and do not shrink for persecution . 2. it proveth that to the faithful it shall be a blessed and a glorious resurrection : 1. because christs resurrection is not only a cause but a pattern of ours ; there is not onely a communion between the head and members in the mystical body but a conformity . the members were appointed to be conformed to their head as in obedience and sufferings , so in happiness and glory here in the one , hereafter in the other , rom. 8.29 . he hath predestinated us to be conformed to the image of his son : as christ was raised from the dead , so we shall be raised from the dead , god raised him from the dead , and gave him glory and honour , that your faith and hope might be in god , 1 pet. 1.21 . so god will raise us from the dead and put glory and honour upon us . there is indeed a glory put upon christ far surpassing the glory of all created things ; but our glory is like his for quality and kind , though not for quantity , degree and measure , as to those prerogatives and priviledges which his body in his exaltation is endowed withall . such a glory it is that christ shall be admired in his saints , the world shall stand gazing at what he means to do . 2. by the grant of god. they have a right and title to this glorious estate , being admitted into his family ; they may hereafter expect to be admitted into his presence . the holy spirit abideth in them as an earnest , till it be accomplished , eph. 1.14 . ye were sealed with that holy spirit of promise , which is the earnest of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession . the spirit of holiness marketh and distinguisheth them as heirs of promise from all others : the mark or seal is the impression of christ's image on the soul ; this seal becomes an earnest or part of payment , which is a security or assurance to us that more will follow , a fuller conformity to christ in the glorious estate , and this earnest doth continue till the redemption of the purchased possession ; the purchased possession is the church , and their redemption is their final deliverance , eph. 4.30 . when their bodies are redeemed from the hands of the grave . see rom. 8.28 . vses . i. vse . is to perswade you to the belief of two grand articles of faith ; the resurrection of christ , and your own resurrection . 1. the resurrection of christ. the raising of christ from the dead is the great prop and foundation of our faith , 1 cor. 15.14 . if christ be not risen , then is our preaching vain , and your faith also is vain . all the apostles preaching was built upon this supposition , that christ died and rose again . partly because this is the great evidence of the truth of the christian religion ; for hereby christ was evidenced to be what he gave out himself to be , the eternal son of god , and the saviour of the world , whereof he hath given assurance to all men , in that he raised him from the dead , acts 23.31 . that is the ground of faith and assurance . so acts 13.33 . god hath raised iesus from the dead , for it is written , thou art my son , &c. partly to shew , that he is in a capacity to convey life to others both spiritual and eternal ; which , if he had remained under the state of death , could not be : the life of believers is derived from the life of christ , ioh. 14.19 . because i live , &c. if he had been holden of death , he had neither been a fountain of grace nor glory to us ; 1 pet. 1.3 . he hath begotten us unto a lively hope , by the resurrection of christ from the dead . partly , because the raising of christ is the pledge of gods omnipotency , which is our relief in all difficult cases ; the power which raised christ , exceedeth all contrary powers , eph. 1.20 , 21. now the resurrection of christ , besides the veritableness of the report , manifested by the circumstances , when a great stone was rolled at the mouth of the sepulchre , a guard of souldiers set to watch against all fraud and impostures , yet he brake thorow ; his frequent apparitions to the apostles , yea to 500 disciples at once ; 1 cor. 15.6 . a great part of which were alive to testifie the truth of it , for some competent space of time ; his pouring out of the spirit ; the apostles witnessing the truth of it in the teeth of opposition ; his appearing from heaven to paul ; the prophesies of the old testament foretelling of it ; the miracles wrought to confirm it ; the holiness of the persons who were employed as chosen witnesses , their unconcernedness in all temporal interests ; their hazarding of all , their success : it would make a volum to give you the evidences . 2. your own resurrection , what may facilitate our belief and hope of it ? 1. consider it is a work of omnipotency . we are apt to say , how can it be , that when our bodies are turned into dust and that dust mingled with other dust , and hath undergone many transmutations , that ●very one shall have his own body and flesh again ? why consider the infinite and absolute power of god , and this will make it more reconcileable to your tho●ghts , and this hard point will be of easier digestion to your faith. to an infinite power there is no difficulty at all , phil. 3.21 . according to the working whereby he is able to subdue all things to himself . he appeals to gods power , how much gods power out-works our thoughts ; for he were not infinite if he might be comprehended . we are not fit judges of the extent of his power ; many things are marvellous in our eyes , which are not so to his , zech. 8.6 . therefore we must not confine god to the limits of created b●ings , or our finite understandings . alass ! our cockel-●hell cannot empty an ocean ; we do no more know what god can do , than a worm knoweth a man. he that made the world out of nothing , cannot he raise the dead ? he that brought such multitudes of creatures out of the dark chaos , hath he forgotten what is become of our dust ? he that gave life and being to that which before was not , cannot he raise the dead ? he that turned moses rod into a serpent , and from a serpent into a rod again , cannot he raise us out of dust into men , and ●u●n us from men into dust , and from the same dust 〈◊〉 us up into the same men and women ●●ain ? 2. we have a releif from the justice of god. all will grant that god is , and that god is a rewarder of good and bad . now in this life he doth not dispense these rewards : many times here , instruments of publick good are made a sacrifice to publick hatred , and wicked men have the world at will ; therefore there is a judgment , when this life is ended ; and if there be a judgment , men must be capable to receive reward and punishment . you will say , so they are by having an immortal soul ; i , but the soul is not all of a man , the body is a part ; it hath had its share in the work , and therefore it is most equal to conceive it shall have its share in the reward and punishment . it is the body which is gratified by the pleasure of sin for a season , the body which hath endured the trouble and pain of faithful obedience unto christ , therefore there shall be a resurrection of just and unjust that men may receive according to what they have done in the body . god made the whole man , therefore glorifies and punishes the whole man. the apostle urgeth this as to the godly , 1 cor. 15.29 . 3. gods unchangeable covenant-love , ●●●ch inclines him to seek the dust of his ●onfederates . god hath taken a believer into covenant with himself , body and soul ; therefore christ proveth the resurrection from gods covenant-title ; matth. 22.31 , to be a god , is certainly to be a benefactor , gen. 25.26 . not blessed be shem , but blessed be the lord god of sem. and to be a benefactor , becoming an infinite eternal power . if he had not eternal glory to bestow upon us he would not justifie his covenant-title , heb. 11.16 . to whom god is a benefactor , he is a benefactor not to one part onely , but to their whole persons : their bodies had the mark of his covenant upon them , their dust is in covenant with him , and where-ever it is dispersed , he will look after it . their death and rotting in the grave doth not make void his interest , nor cause his care and affection towards them to cease . 4. we have relief also from the redemption of christ , which extendeth to the bodies of the saints , as it is often interpreted in scripture ; as where christ speaks of his fathers charge , this was a special article in the eternal covenant ; ioh. 6.39 , 40. this is the will of my father , that of all that he hath given me i should lose nothing , but raise it up at the last day . christ hath ingaged himself to this , he is the guardian of the grave , as rispah kept the dead bodies of sauls sons , 2 sam. 21.10 . christ hath the keyes of death and hell , he hath a charge of the elect to the very day of their resurrection that he may make a good account of them , and may not lose so much as their dust , but gather it up again . what shall i say ! when the intention of his death is spoken of , 1 thes. 5.10 . that whether we wake or sleep , we should live together with him ; that is , whether dead or alive ; for they that are dead in the lord , are said to be fallen asleep . whether we live or die we should live a spiritual life here , and eternal life in glory hereafter : so where the obligation , 1 cor. 6.20 . ye are bought with a price . there would be no consequence if christ had not purchased the body as well as the soul , and christ will not lose one jot of his purchase , if he expect duty from th● body , you may expect glory for the body ; so redemption is particularly applyed to the body ; rom. 8.23 . waiting for the adoption the redemption of our bodies . then is christs redemption full , when the body is exempted from all the penalties induced by sin . 5. the honour which is put upon the bodies of the saints . 1. they are members of christ , 1 cor. 6.15 . know ye not that your bodies are members of christ , shall i then take the members of christ and make them members of an harlot , god forbid . no members of christ can for ever remain under death , but shall certainly b● raised up again . when a godly man ●●eth , the union between soul and body is dissolved , but not the union between him and christ , as christs own natural body in the grave was not separated from his person , and the hypostatical union was not dissolved ; it was the lord of glory which was crucified , and the lord of glory which was l●yed in the grave , so the mystical 〈◊〉 is not dissolved between christ and 〈…〉 , who are his mystical body , 〈◊〉 they are dead . 2. they are temples of the holy ghost ; therefore if they be destroyed they shall be built up again , 1 cor. 6.19 . know ye not that your bodies are temples of the holy ghost . as christ redeemed not the soul onely , but the whole man , so the spirit in christs name takes possession both of body and soul ; the body is cleansed and sanctified by the spirit , as well as the soul ; and therefore it is quickned by the spirit ; rom. 8.11 . if the spirit of him , that raised iesus from the dead , dwell in you he shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his spirit which dwelleth in you . the holy ghost will not leave his mansion , or dwelling-place ; the dust of believers belongs to them who were once his temple . so it is a pledge of the resurrection . now therefore labour with your selves , think often of it . sermon . vii . col. 1.19 . for it pleased the father that in him should all fulness dwell . with chap. 2.9 . for in him dwelleth all the fulness of the godhead bodily . these words are produced to prove , that there is no defect in the evangelical doctrine , and therefore there needeth no addition to it from the rudiments of men . that there is no defect , he proveth from the author of it jesus christ , who was not onely man , but god ; and beyond the will of god , we need not look : if god will come from heaven to teach us the way thither , surely his teaching is sufficient , his doctrine containeth all things necessary to salvation . this is the argument of these words , for in him dwelleth all the fulness of the godhead bodily . in which words observe three things : first , the house , in him. secondly , the inhabitant , all the fulness of the godhead . thirdly , the manner of dwelling in the word bodily . first , the house , or place of residence , in him. in the man christ jesus ; or in that humane nature in which he carried on the business of our salvation : as despicable and abject as it was in the eyes of men , yet it was the temple and seat of the godhead . secondly , the inhabitant : the fulness of the godhead . not a portion of god onely ; or his gifts and graces ( as we are made partakers of the divine nature , 1 pet. 1.4 . ) but the whole godhead . thirdly , the manner 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , bodily . the word may relate , 1. to the shadows and figures of the law , and so it signifieth essentially , substantially ; god dwelt in the tabernacle , temple , or ark of the covenant ; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , because of the figures of his presence . in christ , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , bodily . as his humane nature was the true tabernacle or temple in which he resid●th . christ calls his humane nature a temple , ioh. 2.19 . or else , 2. with respect to the intimacy and closeness of the union ; so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may be rendred personally : for body is often put for a person ; the two natures were so united in him , that he is one christ. doctrine . that iesus christ is true god , and true man in one person . i shall prove the point . i. by testimonies of scripture . ii. by types . iii. by reasons taken from christs office. i. by testimonies of scriptures . i shall pass by those that speak of the reality of either nature apart , and onely alledge those that speak of both together . now these do either belong to the old testament or the new. i begin with the former , the t●stimonies of the old testament , because this union of the two natures in the person of christ ; is indeed a mystery , but such as was foretold long before it came to pass ; and many of the places wherein it was foretold were so understood by the ancient iews . the controversie between them and christians was not whether the messiah were to be both god and man , they agreed in that ; but whether this was fulfilled , or might be applied to jesus of nazareth . but the lat●er iews finding themselves not able to stand to the issue of that plea , say that we attribute many things to jesus of nazareth , which were not foretold of the messiah to come ; as namely , that he should be god-man in one person : therefore 't is necessary that this should be proved , that the old testament aboundeth with predictions of this kind . let us begin with the first promise touching the messiah , which was made to adam after his fall , for the restoring of mankind , gen. 3.15 . the seed of the woman should bruise the serpents head. that is to say one of her seed , to be born in time , should conquer the devil , death , and sin. now when he is called the seed of the woman , 't is apparent he must be man , and made of a woman : and when 't is said that he shall break the serpents head , who can do this but onely god : 't is a work of divine omnipo●●ncy , for satan hath much more power than any bare man. therefore 't is said , rom. 16.20 . the god of peace shall bruise satan under your feet shortly . come we next to the promise made to abraham , gen. 12.3 . in thee shall all the families of the earth be blessed . in thee , that is , in thy seed , as it is often explained , gen. 22.18 . in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed . this seed was christ the messiah to come . now he was to be god-man : he was to be man , for he is the seed of abraham ; god , because that blessedness is remission of sins or justification : for 't is said , gal. 3.8 . the scripture fore-seeing that god would justifie the heathen through faith , preached before the gospel unto abraham , saying , in thee shall all nations of the earth be blessed . regeneration , and the renovation of our natures is also included in it , as a part of this blessing , acts 3.25 , 26. ye are children of the prophets , and of the covenant which god made with our fathers , saying unto abraham , in thy seed , shall all the kindreds of the earth be blessed . therefore unto you first god , having raised up his son iesus , sent him to bless you , in turning away every one of you from his iniquities . there is also redemption from the curse of the law , and the gift of eternal life , included in it : now all these are works proper to god alone . let us come to the promise made to david , 2 sam. 7.12 , 13. i will set up thy seed after thee , and i will establish the throne of thy kingdom for ever . 't is spoken in the type of solomon , but in the mystery of christ , who is true man as davids seed ; and true god , for his kingdom is everlasting : and so david interpreteth it , psal. 45.6 . thy throne , o god , is for ever and ever . the kingdom of the messiah is never to have an end . and the apostle affirmeth expresly , that those words are spoken to christ the son of god , heb. 1.7 . let me next alledge iobs confession of faith , which was very ancient , iob 19.25 , 26. i know that my redeemer liveth , and that he shall stand at the latter day upon the earth , and though after my skin , worms destroy this body , yet in my flesh i shall see god. his redeemer was true man as appeareth by his title goel ; and because he shall stand on the earth , and be seen by his bodily eyes . true god , for he calleth him so , i shall see god. go we on in the scriptures , isa. 4.2 . christ is prophesied of ; in that day the branch of the lord shall be beautiful , and glorious , and the fruit of the earth shall be excellent and comely . when he is called the branch of the lord , his godhead is signified ; when he is called the fruit of the earth , his manhood . so again , is● . 7.14 . a virgin shall conceive and bear a son , and thou shalt call his name imm●●uel . that is to say , god with us ; which can agree to none but to hi● that is god and man. so that this mystery of god incarnate , was not hid from the church of the old testament , for his very name did import god with us , or god in our nature reconciling us to himself . so isa. 9.6 . to us a child is born , to us a son is given , and the government shall be upon his shoulders , and his name shall be called the wonderful counseller , the mighty god , the everlasting father , the prince of peace . who can interpret these speeches and a●●ributes , but of one who is god-man ? how could he else be a child , and yet the everlasting father ; born of a virgin , and yet the mighty god. so isa. 11.1 . with the 4th . verse . a rod out of the s●em of iesse , and a branch out of his roots : therefore man. and verse 4. he shall smi●e the earth with the rod of his mouth , and with the breath of his lips shall be slay the wicked : therefore god. so isa. 53.8 , he shall be taken from prison and judgement ; therefore man : yet who shall declare his generation ? therefore god. so ier. 23.5 , 6. a branch raised unto david , from his dea● stock ; therefore man : yet the lord , or iehovah our righteousness ; therefore god. shall i urge that speech , whereby jesus did silence divers of the learned pharisees ; psal. 110.1 . the lord said to my lord , sit thou on my right hand , until i make thy foes , thy footstool . he was born in the mean estate of humane flesh , and king davids seed , and yet davids lord ; which he could not be , if he were not god himself , the king of kings , and lord of lords . well then , he was davids son as man , but davids lord as he was god. and so do many of the ancient iewish rabbins interpret this place . so again , micah 5.2 . thou bethlehem sphratah , though thou ●e little among the thousands of iudah , yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me , that is to be ruler in israel : whose goings forth have been from old , from everlasting . he is born in bethlehem , yet his goings forth are from everlasting . he came out of bethlehem , and therefore man ; his goings forth are from everlasting , and therefore god. so zech. 12.10 . i will pour out the spirit of grace and supplication , and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced . he is god because he giveth the spirit of grace ; man because he is pierced or crucified : so zech. 13.7 . against the man my fellow . a man he was , but gods companion , his only begotten son , and co-essential with himself , and so god. secondly , come we now to the new testament , in which this mystery is more plainly and fully demonstrated : there often the son of man is plainly asserted to be also the son of god. thomas calleth him his lord , his god , ioh. 20.28 . we are told that the word was made flesh , ioh. 1.14 . that god purchased the church with his own blood , acts 20.28 . which can be understood of no other but christ ; by whose blood we are redeemed , and who being incarnate , hath blood to shed for us ; but god as a pure spirit , hath not flesh , and blood , and bones as we have . so rom. 1.3 , 4. iesus christ was made of the seed of david , according to the flesh , but declared to be the son of god with power according to the spirit of holiness , &c. in respect of his divine subsistence , he was begotten not made ; in regard of his humane nature , made , not begotten . true man as david was , and true god as the spirit and divine nature is . again , rom. 9.5 . whose are the fathers , and of whom as concerning the flesh , christ came , who is over all , god blessed for ever . than which , nothing can be said more express , as to that nature which is most apt to be questioned ; for surely he that is god over all , cannot be said to be a mere creature . the jews confessed him to be man , and one of their blood , and paul asserteth him to be god over all : they accounted him to be accursed , and paul asserteth him to be blessed for ever : they thought him inferiour to the patriarchs of whom he descended , and paul over all ; so that no word is used in vain : and when he saith according to the flesh , he insinuateth another nature in him to be considered by us . the next place is , 1 cor. 2.8 . they crucified the lord of glory . he was crucified , there his humane nature is acknowledged , but in respect of the divine nature he is called the lord of glory , as in the 24th . psalm , the lord or king of glory , is iehovah sabaoth , the lord of hosts . go we farther , phil. 2.6 , 7. who being in the form of god , thought it not robbery to be equal with gon , but made himself of no reputation , and took upon him the form of a servant , and was made in the likeness of men . by the form of god is meant not only the divine majesty and glory , but also the divine essence it self : for without it there can be no true divine majesty and glory . now this he kept hidden under his humane nature , letting onely some small rayes sometimes to shine forth in his miracles : but that which was most sensible and conspicuous in him , was a true humane nature in a low and contemptible estate . again 1 tim. 3.16 . great is the mystery of godliness , god manifested in our flesh. that is the eternal son of god became man , and assumed the humane nature into the unity of his person . once more 1 pet. 3.18 . he was put to death in the flesh , but quickned in the spirit . that is dyed according to his humane nature , but by his divine nature raised from the dead : 't is not meant of his soul : quickned , signifies not one remaining alive , but made alive ; that power belongeth to god. secondly , by types . those that come to hand are these . 1. melchisedec : gen. 14.18 . melchisedec king of salem , brought forth bread and wine to abraham . which type is interpreted by the apostle , heb. 7.2 , 3. first being by interpretation king of righteousness , and after that also king of peace . without father , and without mother ; having neither beginning of dayes , nor end of life , but made like unto the son of god abideth a priest continually . what melchisedec was is needless to dispute . the apostle considereth him only as he is represented in the story of moses , who maketh no mention of his father or mother , birth or death . certainly he was a very man , but as he standeth in scripture , there is no mention of father or mother , beginning or end , what he was or of whom he came . so is christ as god without mother , as man without father : as god without beginning ; as god man without ending of life . 2. another type of him was iacobs ladder . the top of which reached heaven , and the bottom reached earth , gen. 28.12 . and the angels of god were ascending , and descending upon it . this ladder represented christ the son of man , upon whom the angels of god ascend , and descend iohn 1.51 . the bottom which reached the earth , represented christs humane nature , and conversing with men : the top which reached heaven ; his heavenly and divine nature ; and in both his mediaation with god for men : ascende per hominem , & per venies ad deum , christ reaches to heaven in his divine original , to earth in his manhood , and him the angels serve . by his dwelling in our nature , this commerce between earth and heaven is brought about . the third type is the fiery cloudy pillar , exod. 13.21 . and the lord went before them in the day in a pillar of a cloud , and by night in a pillar of fire to give them light , to go by day and night , this figured christs guidance and protection of his church , travelling through this world to his heavenly rest : the cloud signified his humanity , the fire his divinity : there were two different substances , the fire and the cloud , yet but one pillar . so there are two different natures in christ , his divinity shining as fire , his humanity darkning as a cloud ; yet but one person . that pillar departed not from them all the while they travelled in the wilderness ; so while the churches pilgrimage lasteth christ will conduct us , and comfort and shelter us by his presence . his mediatory conduct ceaseth not . the fourth type is the tabernacle , wherein god dwelt symbolically , as in christ bodily : there god sat on the mercy seat which is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , heb. 9.5 . so christ rom. 3.25 . a propitiation . he there dwelt between the cherubims , and did exhibit himself graciously to his people , as now he doth to us by christ. the next shall be of the scape goat on the day of expiation , lev. 16.10 . one goat was to be slain , the other kept alive . the slain goat signified 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , his flesh , or humane nature suffering , the live goat , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , his immortal deity , or as the apostle expresseth it , 2 cor. 13.4 . that christ was to be crucified through weakness , yet to live by the power of god , or as we heard before , 1 pet. 3.18 . put to death in the flesh and quickned by the spirit . because these two things could not be shadowed by any one beast , which the priest having killed could not make alive again ; and it was not fit that god should work mir●cles about types ; therefore he appointed ●wo , that in the slain beast his death might be represented ; in the live beast his immortality . the like mystery was represented also in the two birds for the cleansing of the leper , lev. 14.6 , 7. thirdly , i prove it by reasons taken from his office ; which may be considered in the general . and so it is expressed by one word mediator , or in particular according to the several functions of it , expressed by the terms of king , priest and prophet : or with respect to the persons that are to be considered and concerned in christs mediation . 1. his office considered in the general , so he is called , iesus the mediator of the new testament , heb. 12.24 . it was agreeable that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , a mediator should 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , a middle person of the same essence with both parties , and that his operative mediation , should presuppose his substantial mediation , that being god man in the same person he should make an atonement between god and man : sin hath made such a breach and distance between us and god , that it raiseth our fears , and causeth backwardness to draw nigh unto him , and so hindreth our love and confidence in him . how can we depend upon one so far above us , and out of the reach of our commerce , therefore a mediator is necessary ; one that will pity us , and is more near and dear to god then we are . one in whom god doth condescend to man , and by whom man may be encouraged to ascend to god , now who is so fit for this as jesus christ , god manifested in our flesh : the two natures met together in his person , and so god is nearer to man , then he was before 〈◊〉 the pure deity ; for he is come down to us in our flesh , and hath assumed it into the unity of his person , and man is nearer to god , for our nature dwelleth with him , so closely united , that we may have more familiar thoughts of god , and a confidence that he will look after us , and concern himself in our affairs and shew us his grace and savour , for surely he will not hide himself from his own flesh , isa. 58.7 . this wonderfully reconcileth the heart of man to god , and maketh our thoughts of him more comfortable and doth encourage us to free access to god. 2. come we now to the particular offices , by which he performeth the work of a mediator ; and they all shew the necessity of both natures : these offices and functions , are those of prophet , priest , and king. 1. our mediator hath a prophetical office belonging to his administration , that he may be made wisdom to us , and therefore he must be both god and man : god that he may not onely teach us outwardly , as an ordinary messenger or minister , but inwardly putting his law into our minds , and writing it upon our hearts , heb. 8.10 . and 2 cor. 3.3 . ye are manifestly declared to be the epistle of christ ministred by us , written not with ink , but with the spirit of the living god , not in tables of stone , but in the fleshly tables of the heart . men may be the instruments , but christ is the author of this grace , and therefore he must be god : to convince mens understandings of their duty , and to incline their hearts to perform it , requireth no less then a divine power . if such an infinite vertue be necessary to cure the blindness of the body ; how much more to cure the natural blindness and darkness of the mind ! and man he must also be ; for the great prophet of the church was to be raised up among his brethren , like unto moses , deut. 18.15 . till such an one came into the world they were to hear moses , but then they were to hearken to him : he that was to come , was to be a lawgiver as moses was , but of a far more absolute and perfect law : a lawgiver that must match and overmatch moses every way . he was to be a man as moses was in respect of our infirmities , such an one as moses was whom the lord had known face to face , but of a far more divine nature : and approved to the world , by miracles , signs , and wonders as moses was . again 't was prophesied of him , that as the great prophet of the world he should be anointed , that he might come and preach the gospel to the poor , isa. 62.1 . which could not be if he had spoken from heaven in thunder , and not as a man conversed with men : again he was to approve himself as one who had grace poured into his lips , psal. 45.2 . that all might wonder at the gracious speeches that came from his mouth , as they did at christs . in short that wisdom of the father , which was wont to assume some visible shape for a time , when he would instruct the patriarchs concerning his will , that he might hide his majesty and put a vail upon his glory , was now to assume our nature into the unity of his person , not a temporary and vanishing appearance . that god who at sundry times , and in divers manners speak in time past unto the fathers by the prophets , might in these last dayes spake to us by his son , heb. 1.1 , 2. then god delivered his will by parcels , now by him he would settle the whole frame of the gospel . 2. jesus christ as he is the apostle of our profession ; so also he is the high priest , heb. 3.1 . and so must be both god and man : man , that he might be made sin for us : god , that we might be made the righteousness of god in him , 2 cor. 5.21 . man to undertake our redemption ; god to perform it : man , that he might suffer , god that he might satisfie by suffering , and make our attonement full . we are purchased by the blood of god. man , that he might have a sacrifice to offer , god , that the offering might be of an infinite price and value , heb. 9.14 . man , that he might have a life to lay down for us ; god , that the power of laying it down and taking it up again , might be in his own hands , iohn 10.17 , 18. i lay down my life , that i may take it agai● , no man taketh it from me , but i lay it down of my self , i have power to lay it down , and i have power to take it again . this was sit , that his suffering should be a pure voluntary act , required indeed by god , but not enforced by man : he had a liberty at his own pleasure , as to any thing men could do , and thereby commendeth his love to sinners . what shall i say ? he was man that he might dye , he was god that by death he might destroy him that had the power of death . he was man , that by his death he might ratifie the new covenant ; god , that he might convey to the heirs of promise these precious legacies of pardon and life . man that he might be a merciful high priest touched with the feeling of our infirmities ; god , that we coming boldly to the throne of grace , might find mercy and grace to help in every time of need , heb. 9.15 , 16. 3. his kingly office , he that was to be king of kings , and lord of lords , needed to be both god and man : god that he might cast out the prince of this world , and having rescued his church from the power of darkness , might govern it by his word and spirit , and finally present it to himself , a glorious church without spot or wrinkle , or any such thing . man he needed to be for his own glory , that he might be the first-born among many brethren . and head and members might suit , and be all of a piece ; and for our consolation that we might be heirs of god , and joynt heirs with christ , rom. 8.17 . and for the greater terrour and ignominy of satan , that the seed of the woman might break the serpents head. in short , god that he might govern and influence a people so scattered abroad upon the face of the earth , and raise them up at the last day : man , that our nature ( the dignity of which was so envyed by satan , ) might be exalted at the right hand of majesty , and placed so near god far above the angelical . thirdly , with respect to the persons who are to be considered , and concerned in christs mediation : god to whom we are redeemed , satan from whom we are redeemed ; and we our selves who are the redeemed of the lord. and you shall see with respect to god , with respect to satan , with respect to our selves : our mediator ought to be both god and man. 1. god he need to be , with respect to god ; that he may be appeased by a valuable compensation given to his justice : no meer man could satisfie the justice of god , appease his wrath , procure his favour , therefore our surety needed to be god to do this . and with respect to satan , that he might be overcome ; now none can bind the strong one , and take away his goods , but he that is stronger then he , luk. 11.21 . now no mere man is a match for satan , the conqueror of the devil must be god , that by strong hand he may deliver us from his tyranny . and with respect to man , that he may be saved : not onely because of the two former respects must he be god ; but also there is a special reason in the cause , the two former respects evince it : for unless god be appeased , man cannot be reconciled , and unless the devil be overcome , man cannot be delivered : if a god be needful for that , man cannot be saved unless our redeemer be god : but there is a special reason , because of our own obstinacy and rebellion , which is onely overcome by the divine power . 't is necessary man should be converted and changed , as well as god satisfyed , and satan overcome . now who can convert himself , or chang● his own heart ? that work would cease for ever unless god did undertake it by his all conquering spirit . therefore our mediator must be god , to renew and cleanse our hearts , and by his divine power to give us a divine nature . 2. man also he ought to be with respect to these three parties : with respect to god , that the satisfaction might be tendered in the nature which had sinned : that as by man came death , by man also might come the ressurection from the dead , 1 cor. 15.21 , 22. that as in adam all dye , so by christ shall all be made alive . so with respect to the devil ; that he might be overcome in the nature that was foiled by his temptations . and with respect to us , that he that sanctifyeth and they that are sanctifyed , might be of one , heb. 2.11 . the priest that wrought the expiation , and the people for whom 't was wrought were of one stock : the right of redeeming belonged to the next kinsman : christ is our goel who redeemed us , not onely jure propreitatis , as his creatures : to god as god : but iure propinquitatis , as his kinsmen : so as man , we are of kin to him , as he came in our nature , and as he sanctifieth : doubly a kin , not only by vertue of his incarnation but our regeneration ; as he was made of a woman , and we born of god. these are the reasons , vse . let me press you to admire this mystery of godliness : the man christ jesus in whom the fulness of the godhead dwelt bodily . the life and strength of our faith depends upon it , for as he is true man , flesh of our flesh , and bone of our bone , he will not be strange to us : and as he is god , he is able to help us . two things i will press you to . 1. consider what a fit object he is for your faith to close with . 2. own him as your lord and your god. 1. to raise your trust and confidence , consider what a fit object he is for your faith , how he is qualified for all his offices , of prophet , priest and king : 1. as your prophet : consider how necessary it was that god dwelling in mans nature should set a foot the gospel : partly because when ever you come seriously to consider this matter ; this thought will arise in you , that this blessed gospel could not be without repealing the law of moses , given with such solemnity by god himself : and it was not fit it should be abrogated by any but him who was far above moses , to wit , by the son of god himself , not any fellow servant equal to moses . the apostle telleth us that moses was faithful in gods house as a servant , but christ as a son over his own house , heb. 13.5 , 6. the servant must give place when the son , and lord himself cometh , but rather take it from what moses foretold himself , deut. 18.18 , 19. i will raise them up a prophet from among their brethren like unto thee , and i will put my words into his mouth , and he shall speak unto them all that i command him , and it shall come to pass , that he that will not hearken to my word which he shall speak in my name , i will require it of ●im . now these words cannot be verified in any other prophet after moses untill christ , for that of these prophets there arose none in israel like unto moses , deut. 34.10 . they had no authority to be lawgivers as moses had , but were all bound to the observation of his law till christ should come , whom moses calleth a prophet like unto himself , that is a law-maker , exhorting all men to hear and obey him . none of the prophets did take upon them that priviledge , they must let that alone till the messiah should come , whose office it is to change the law given upon mount sinai , and instead thereof to propagate or promulgate a new law to begin at sion , isa. 2.3 . the law shall go forth of sion , and the word of the lord from ierusalem . and in another place , the isles shall wait for his law , isa. 42.4 . well now this is a mighty confirmation of our religion , and bindeth both our faith and obedience , to consider christs authority , that a greater then moses is here . partly because it concerneth us to receive the gospel as an eternal doctrine that shall never be changed ; for 't is called an everlasting covenant ; and nothing conduceth to that so much , as to consider that it is promulgated by the eternal god himself : by him in whom the fulness of the godhead dwelleth bodily . partly because the gospel , if we would profit by it , is to be received by all believers , not only as an everlasting covenant ; but as certain , perfect , and saving . now if the fulness of the godhead dwelt in him , who gave this covenant , we cannot deny either the certainty or the perfection or the savingness of it ; for if we receive it from him who is truth it self , we cannot be deceived . 't is certain if he taught us in person , surely all his works are perfect : ( subordinate ministers may mingle their weaknesses with their doctrine , ) if we have it from a saviour , surely it is a doctrine that bringeth salvation . 2. consider what a fit object here is for your faith , as christ is a priest : so his great business is to reconcile us to god , in the body of his flesh through death , who once were strangers and enemies , col. 1.21 . consider how fit he was for this , god and man were first united in his person , before they were united in one covenant . if you consider the fruits of his redemption and reconciliation . the evil from whence we were to be delivered , the good that was to be procured ; christ is every way a commodious mediator for us , as god man : if you consider the evil from whence we are delivered , he was man : that the chastisement of our peace might be put upon his shoulders : god , that by his stripes we might be healed , isa. 53.5 . or if you consider the good to be procured ; he doth it as god-man : he was a man , that as by the disobedience of one many were made sinners , so by the obedience of one many might be made righteous : god , that as sin reigned unto death , so grace might reign through righteousness unto eternal life by jesus christ our lord , rom. 5.19 , 21. as he is god , his merit is full ; as he is man , we are partakers of the benefit of it . 3 , consider how fit an object he is for our faith as king : for as the fulness of the godhead dwelt in him bodily , he is the greatest and most glorious person that ever was in the world : infinitely superior above all power that is named in this world or in the world to come . the man who is our shepherd is fellow to the lord of hosts . the thought of immanuel , maketh the prophet startle , and brake out into a triumph when senacherib break in with his forces , like a deluge in the land of iudah . they fill thy land o immanuel , isa. 8.8 . then verse 9 , 10. associate your selves and ye shall be broken in pieces , gird your selves and ye shall be broken in pieces , take counsel together it shall come to nought , speak the word it shall not stand : for god is with us . or because of immanuel . surely christ is the foundation of the churches happiness , and may afford us comfort in the most calamitous condition : we are in his hands , under his pastoral care and protection , ioh. 10.28 . i give unto them eternal life , and they shall never perish , neither shall any pluck them out of my hand . neither man nor devil can break off totally and finally their union with him . in short , he that assumed our nature to himself , will communicate himself to us . all union is in order to communion , here is a commodious and a blessed saviour represented unto you . secondly , own him as your lord and your god. this was the profession of thomas's faith , iohn 2● . 28 . my lord and my god , i shall insist on that scripture . in the history there are these remarkables . 1. thomas his absence from an assembly of the disciples , when christ had manifested himself to them , verse 24. being absent he not only missed the good news which many brought , but also the comfortable sight of christ ; and was thereby left in doubts and snares . 2. when these things were told him , he bewrayes his incredulity , v. 25. when they told him he said unto them , except i see in his hands the print of his nails ▪ and put my finger into the print of the nailes , and thrust my hand into his side , i will not believe . this unbelief was overruled by gods providence for the honour of christ. his in●redulity was an occasion to manifest the certainty of christs resurrection : if credulous men , or those hasty of belief had only seen christ , their report had been liable to suspicion ; solomon maketh it one of his proverbs , the simple believeth every word . here is one that had sturdy and pertinacious doubts , yet brought at last to yield . however this is an instance of the proneness of our hearts to unbelief ; especially if we have not the objects of faith under the view of the senses : and how apt we are to give laws to heaven , and require our terms of god. 3. christs condescension in two things . 1. in appearing again verse 26. on the first day of the next week , to shew how ready he is to honour and bless his own day ; and to give satisfaction to poor doubting souls , by coming again to them : and it was well thomas was there at this time . 2. in giving thomas the satisfaction of sense , verse 27. reach hither thy finger , and behold my hands , and reach hither thy hand , and thrust it into my side . with what mildness doth our lord treat him , though under such a distemper ! unbelief is so hateful to christ , that he is very careful to have it removed ; and in condescension grants what was his fault to seek . 4. the next thing is thomas his faith , verse 28. and he answered and said my lord , and my god. he presumeth not to touch christ , but contents himself onely to see him , and having seen him makes a good confession , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . 1. observe , the two titles given to christ : god and lord : he is god the fountain of all our happiness , and lord , as he hath a dominion over us , to guide and dispose of us at his own pleasure . 2. observe , the appropriation or personal application to himself . my god and my lord. hence we may observe , 1. that god leaveth some to themselves for a while , that themselves and others may be more confirmed afterwards . thomas his faith was as it were dead and buried in his heart , and now upon the sight of christ quickned and revived : we must not judge of men by a fit of temptation , but stay till they come to themselves again . who would have thought that out of an obstinate incredulity , so great a faith should spring up suddainly . 2. we may observe thomas , that is with much ado awaken'd , makes a fairer confession then all the rest . they call him their lord , but he his lord and god. 3. we may observe again that true believing with the heart , is joyned with confession of the mouth , psal. 116.10 . i believed therefore have i spoken . 4. hence you may take notice of the reality of the two natures in the unity of christs person , for he is both deus & dominus . but how cometh he to acknowledge christs godhead , he did not feel the divinity of christ in hands , or side , or feet . videbat , tangebatque hominem , & confitebatur deum , quem non videbat , neque tangebat , saith austin . herein his faith was beyond sense , he felt the manhood , and acknowledgeth the deity . 5. hence we may observe , that those that are rightly conversant about christ and the mysteries of his death and resurrection , should take christ for their lord and their god : thomas saith my lord and my god , and his confession should be the common confession of all the faithful . i shall quit the three first , and insist only on the two last . i therefore begin with the fourth observation . 4th . hence you see the reality of the two natures in the unity of christs person : the name of god is joyned with the title of lord ; therefore the name of god belongeth to him , no less then the title of lord : thomas when he saith my lord , he seemeth not to have satisfyed himself till he had added this other name and title my god : now this importeth the reality of his divine nature , for these three reasons . 1. those things which are proper to god , cannot , ought not , to be transferred to a meer creature ; but this title of my god is a covenant title , and so often used in scripture , and therefore christ was god. 2. to whom truly and properly the names and titles of things do belong , to him that which is signified by those names , and titles doth belong also : for otherwise this would destroy all certainty of speech , you cannot speak or write , unless words signifie what in vulgar use they are applyed unto : there could be no reasoning a signo ad rem significatum , from the sign to the thing signified . if i should call a brute a man , or a creature god , how can we understand what is spoken or written : the argument is the more cogent , because a name is an implicite contracted definition , as a definition is a name explained and dilated , as when i say a man is a reasonable creature , so a god is one that hath power over all blessed for ever . 3. the greater any person is , the more danger there is of giving him titles that do not belong to him ; for that is to place him in an honour to which he hath greater pretensions then others : but no right , especially doth this hold good in religion , it is true in civils . ( to give one next the king , the title of king , would awaken the jealousie of princes , and breed much inconvenience ) but especially doth this hold good in religion , where god is so jealous of giving his glory to another , isa. 42.80 . therefore the greater the dignity of christ was above all other creatures , the more caution was necessary , that the name of god might not be ascribed to him , if he were only mere man , and it did not properly agree to him : for the more dangerous the error the more cautiously should we abstain from it . 4. consider the person by whom this title was given ; by a godly man : no godly man would call an idol , or a magistrate , or a teacher , or a king or an angel , or any created thing above an angel , his lord , and his god. but this was done by thomas , one bred up in the religion taught by moses and the prophets ; and the chief point of that religion was , that god is but one ; deut. 6.4 . hear o israel , the lord our god is one lord. this was one of the sentences written on the fringes of their garments , and 't is quoted by christ , whose disciple thomas also was , mark 12.29 . and explained by a learned scribe which came to him , mark 12.32 . well master , thou hast said the truth , for there is but one god , and there is none other but him . now thomas knowing this , and the first commandment , thou shalt have no other gods before me . if he were not perswaded of it , would he say to christ , my lord , and my god ? 5. the person to whom he spake it ; he said to him : not to the father , but to jesus of nazareth ; my lord , and my god. surely as the saints would not derogate from god , so christ would not arrogate what was proper to his father . therefore as his disciples would have been tender of giving it to him , so he would have refused this honour being so holy , if it had not been his due . but christ reproved not , but rather approved this confession of faith ; therefore it was right and sound . christ had said to him , be not faithless but believing , and then thomas saith , my lord and my god. and iesus saith to him , thomas , because thou hast seen me , thou hast believed , blessed are they that have not seen , and yet have believed . there is no rebuke for ascribing too much to him . 6. the conjunction of the divine and humane nature is so necessary to all christs functions and offices , that less would not have been sufficient than to say , my lord , my god. the functions and offices of christ are three , to be a prophet , priest and king. 1. to be a prophet , matth. 23.10 . one is your master even christ. now to be our master and teacher , 't is necessary that he should have the humane nature and divine conjoyned : the humane nature , that he might teach men by word of mouth , familiarly and sweetly conversing with men ; and also by his example , for he perfectly teacheth that teacheth both wayes , by word , and deed . and 't is a mighty condescension , that god would come down , and submit to the same laws we are to live by : his divine nature was also necessary , that he might be the best of teachers ; for who is such a teacher as god , and that he might teach us in the best way , and that is , when god taking the nature of man , doth vouchsafe to men his familiar conv●rse , eating and drinking and walking with them , offering him●●●f to be seen and heard by them . as he of ol● taught abraham , gen. 18. accepting his entertainment , nothing more profitable , or honourable to men can be thought of . in christs prophetical office , four things are to be considered : 1. what he taught . 2. how he taught . 3. by what arguments he confirmed his doctrine . 4. how he received it from the father . 1. what he taught : christ preached , but chiefly himself : he revealed and shewed forth god , but by revealing and shewing forth himself , ioh. 14.9 . he called men , but to himself ; he commanded men to believe , but in himself ; ioh. 14.1 . he promised eternal life , which he would give , but to men believing in himself : he offered salvation to miserable sinners , but to be had by himself : he wrought a fear of judgement to come , but to be exercised by himself : he offered remission of sins , but to those that believed in himself : he promised the resurrection of the dead , which he by his own power and authority would bring to pass . now who could do all this but god ? a meer man , if faithful and holy , would have turned off men from himself to god : 2 cor. 4.5 . for we preach not our selves , but christ iesus the lord , and our selves your servants for iesus sake . they designed no honour to themselves , but onely to christ ; they were loth to transfer any part of this glory to themselves : so would christ if he had not been god. therefore what should his disciples say , but my lord , my god. 2. how he taught . there is a twofold way of teaching ; one humane , by the mouth , and sound of words striking the ear ; the other divine , opening and affecting the heart . christ used both wayes : as the humane nature was necessary to the one , so the divine to the other . as the organs of speaking cannot be without the humane nature , so the other way of teaching cannot be without a divine power . when the disciples came to christ , lord increase our faith , luk. 17.5 . he did not answer as iacob did to rachel , ( when she said , give me children or i dye ) am i in the place of god ? christ after his resurrection , did not onely open the scriptures as was said before , but luk. 24.45 . he opened their understandings , that they might understand the scriptures . and he opened the heart of lydia , acts 16.14 . and poured the holy spirit on the apostles , on the day of pentecost ; acts 2. and by the same efficacy teacheth the church , wherever it is scattered . 3. if you consider , by what arguments he confirm'd his doctrine , by many , and the greatest miracles , not done by the power of another , but his own ; and her required men to believe it , matth. 9.28 . believe ye that i am able to do this ? whence had he the power to know the thoughts of men , to cure all sorts of diseases in a moment , to open the eyes of the blind , to raise the dead , to dispossess devils ; but from that divine nature which was in him ? was it in his body and flesh , then it was finite , and in some sort material : was it in his soul , understanding , will , or phantasie , or sensitive appetite ? how could it work on other mens bodies . therefore it was from his divine nature ; my lord , my god. 4. how he received this doctrine from the father ? did god ever speak to him , or appear to him ? is there any time , or manner , or speech noted by the evangelists when god made this revelation ? none at all . if he were a mere creature , or nothing but a man , surely , that should have been done . he revealed the most intimate counsels and d●crees of god , as perfectly knowing them ; but when , or how they were revealed to him by his father , is not said , which if he had been mere man , would have conduced to the authority of his message and revelation . but all this needed not , he being a divine person of the same essence with his father : therefore , my lord , my god. 2. his priestly office : the humane nature was necessary for that , for the reasons alledged by the apo●●le , h●b . 2.14.17 . and also the divine nature , that there might be a priest a● well as a sacrifice : there had been no sacrifice i● he had not been man : and no p●●●●t , if he had not been god to offer up hims●lf through the eternal spirit , heb. 9.14 . the sacrifice must suffer , the pri●●t act ; and besides , he could not ●nter in●o the h●●venly sanctuary to present himself b●for● god for us , heb. 9.24 . th●n ●he h●●venly sanctuary and tabernacle , need 〈◊〉 to be made , before he entred : for as the earthly priest made the earthly tabernacle before he ministred in it , so the true priest was to make the heavenly tabernacle , as the author to the hebrews saith in many places . but to leave that ; the priest was to expiate sins , by the offering of a sacrifice instead of the sinner : so christ was to satisfie the justice of god for sinners by his mediatory sacrifice : now this he could not do unless he had been god as well as man. the dignity of his person , did put a value upon his sufferings ; without this , how shall we pacifie conscience , representing to us the evil of sin , and the dreadfulness of gods wrath , and the exact justice of the judge of all the world ? rom. 3.25 , 26. especially when these apprehensions are awakened in us by the curse of the law , and the stinging sense of gods threatnings , which are so absolute , universal , and every way true and evident ; unless we know a sufficient satisfaction hath been made for us . if you think the promises of the gospel are enough ; alass , when the threatnings of the law are so just , and built upon such evident reason , the soul is exposed to doubtfulness : and if the threatnings of the law seem altogether in vain , the promises of the gospel will seem less ●irm and valid . the truth and honour of gods government , must one way or other be kept up , and that will not be unless there be a fair passage from covenant to covenant , and that the former be not repealed , or relaxed , but upon valuable consideration , as it is , when our mediatour and surety beareth our sorrows and griefs , and satisfieth for us . but now if he were mere man , it would not have that esteem and value , as to be sufficient for so many men , and so many sins as are committed against an holy god. therefore he needeth to be god also . 3. his kingly office : how can that be exercised without an infinite power ? because by our king and judge , all our enemies are to be overcome ; the world , sin , death and the devil : and what is necessary to do this , every man may soon understand . and as an infinite power is necessary , so an infinite knowledge ; that all things in heaven and earth may be naked and open to him , and that he search the heart , and try the reins ; and then , that he may subject all things to himself , raise all the dead to life , govern and protect the faithful in all the parts of the world ; that he may be present with them , in every age and place , to help and relieve them . in short , to do all things both in heaven and in earth , that fall within the compass of his office . now what is a divine , and infinite power if this be not ? what can the father do which the son cannot do also ? yea what doth the father do which the son doth not likewise ; ioh. 5.19 . is there any work which the one doth , but the other cannot do ? besides there needeth infinite authority and majesty , therefore the king of the church must be infinite . but how is he infinite , if he hath onely a finite nature , such as a mere creature hath ? or how could his finite nature , without change and conversion into another nature , be made infinite ? for without doubt , that nature is infinite , which hath an infinite power of understanding , willing and acting . well then , christ cannot be truly owned , unless he be owned as lord and god. 5. those that are rightly conversant about christ , and the misteries of his death and resurrection , should take christ for their lord and their god. every one of them should say my god , on whom i depend ; my lord , to whose use i resign my self . i shall 1. explain in what sense these words may and ought to be used . 2. give you the reasons , why it becomes christians to be able to say my lord , my god. 1. in what sense these words may , and ought to be used , my lord , and my god. there are two things considerable in those words : ( 1. ) an appropriation , or a claim and challenge of interest in him . ( 2. ) a resignation or dedication of our selves to his use and service . both are implyed in these titles , my lord , my god. christ was his god , or benefactor ; and also his lord and master . however that be , in the mutual stipulation of the covenant 't is evident , cant. 2.16 i am my beloved , and my beloved is mine . there is the appropriation of faith , and the resignation of obedience . ezek. 36.28 . ye shall be my people , and i will be your god. zech. 13.9 . i will say 't is my people , and they shall say the lord is my god. 1. the one is the fruit and effect of the other . god saith , i am thy god ; and the soul answereth , i am thy servant : as when christ said mary , she presently said rabboni . god awakeneth us by the offer of himself , and all his grace to do us good , and then we devote our selves to his service , and profess subjection to him . if he will be our god , we may well allow him a dominion and lordship over us , to rule us at his pleasure . we choose him , because he chooseth us , for all gods works leave their impression upon our hearts : he cometh with terms of peace , and we with profession of duty . god loveth first , and most , and purest ; and therefore his love is the cause of all . 2. the one is the evidence of the other : if god be yours , you are his . he is yours by gift of himself to you : and you are his , by gift of your selves to him . the covenant bindeth mutually . many will be ready to apply , and call god their god , that do not dedicate and devote themselves to god. if you be not the lords , the lord is not yours . he refuseth their claim , that say , hosea 8.2 . israel shall cry unto me , my god we know thee . israel hath cast off the thing that is good . in their distress , they pleaded their interest in the covenant , but god would not allow the claim , because they denied obedience . 3. the one is more sensible and known to us than the other . a believer cannot always say god 〈◊〉 mine , but he will always say , i am his ; psal. 119.94 . i am thine save me . i am thine , and will be thine , onely thine , wholly thine , and always thine . appropriation hath more of a priviledge in it , resignation is onely a duty . we have leave and allowance to say god is my god , but we cannot alwayes say it without doubt and hesitancy , because our interest is not alwayes alike evident and clear . when you cannot say my god , yet be sure to say my lord. we know god to be ours , by giving up ou● selves to be his . his choice and election of us is a secret , till it be evidenced by our choice of him for our god and portion : our act is more sensible to the conscience . be more full , and serious in the resignation of your selves to him , and in time that will shew you your interest in god. 4. gods propriety in us , by contract and resignation , speaketh comfort , as well as our propriety and interest in god. you are his own , and therefoe he will provide for you and care for you ; 1 tim. 5.8 . if any provide not for his own , he hath denied the faith , and is worse than an infidel . interest doth strangely endear things to us : the world will love its own , iob. 5.19 . and will not god love his own , and christ love his own , iob. 13.1 . you may trust him , and depend upon him , and serve him chearfully for you are his own : so that if we had no interest in god established by the covenant , if god had not said to us i am yours , yet our becoming his , would make it comfortable ; for every one taketh himself to be bound to love his own , provide for his own , and to defend his own , and do good to his own : indeed god is ours , as well as we are his ; but our being his , draweth along with it much comfort and blessing . but to speak of these apart . 1. the appropriation , or claim of interest is a sweet thing . if god be your god , why should you be troubled ? ' psal. 16.5 , 6. the lord is the portion of my inheritance , and of my cup. thou maintainest my lot . the lines are faln unto me in pleasant places , yea i have a goodly heritage . you have a right to god himself , and may lay claim to all that he hath for your comfort and use . his attributes yours , his providences yours , his promises yours , what may not you promise your selves from him ? support under all troubles , relief in all necessities . you may take hold of his covenant , isa. 56.4 . and lay claim to all the priviledges of it . 't is all yours . 2. this dedication , this resignation of our selves to gods use , to be at his disposing , without reservation , or power of revocation is often spoken of in scripture ; isa. 44.5 . one shall say i am the lords , another shall call himself by the name of iacob , and another shall subscribe with his hand to the lord , and surname himself by the name of israel . the meaning is , to give up their names to god , to be entred into his muster roll , and to be listed in his service , rom. 6.13 . yield up your selves to god , as those that are alive from the dead . 't is the immediate fruit of grace and new life infused in us : a natural man liveth to himself , to please himself , and give satisfaction to his own lusts. grace is a new being and life , that inclines us to live and act for god ▪ as soon as this life is begotten in us , by the power of his spirit , our hearts are inclined towards god , and you devote your selves to serve and please him . as your work and business was before to serve the devil , the world and the flesh ; so now to please , serve and glorifie god. secondly , the reasons why it becometh christians to be able to say , my lord , my god. 1. because our interest in him is the ground of our comfort and confidence . 't is not comfortable to us that there is a god , and that there is a lord , that may be terrible to us : the devils believe , and the damned spirits feel there is a god , and there is a lord ; but their thought of god is a part of their misery and torment , iames 2.19 . the more they think of god , the more their horrour is increased ; to own a god , and not to see him as ours , the remembrane of it will be troublesome to us , 2 sam. 30.6 . david comforted himself in the lord his god. there was the comfort , that he had a god to go to when all was lost , and that god was his god. so heb. 3.18 . i will rejoyce in the lord , i will joy in the god of my salvation . if god be our god , we have more in him , then trouble can take from us . so luk. 1.47 . my spirit hath rejoyced in god my saviour . when you make particular application to your selves , it breeds strong comfort . 2. because nothing strikes upon the heart with such an efficacy ; as what nearly concerns us , affects us most . the love of christ to sinners in general , doth not affect us so much as when 't is shed abroad in our own hearts by the spirit ; gal. 2.20 . he loved me , and gave himself for me ; that draws out our hearts to god again , and is quickning motive to stir us up to the life of love , and faith. so eph. 1.13 . in whom ye trusted after ye heard the word of truth , the gospel of your salvation . 't is not sufficient to know that the gospel is a doctrine of salvation to others onely ; but to find it a doctrine of salvation to themselves in particular . that they may apply the promises to their own heart . a christian is affected most with things according as he is concerned in them himself . it bindeth our obedience the more firmly , when we know that we are particularly ingaged to god , and have chosen him for our god , and our lord. 3. bacause without a real , personal entring into covenant , the covenant doth us no good unless every one of us do choose god , for our god and lord , and particulary own him . every man must give his hand to the lord , and personally ingage for himself . 't is not enough that christ ingage for us in being our surety , but we must take a bond upon our selves : something christ did for us and in our name , he interposed as the surety of a better testament , heb. 7.22 . something must be done personally by us before we can have benefit by it . you must give up your selves to the lord. it is not enough that the church ingage for us , but every man must engage his own heart to draw nigh to god , ier. 30.21 . who is he that ingageth his heart to d●●●●igh to me . 't is not enough that our parents did engag● for us ; deut. 29.10.11 , 12. they d●d in the name of their little ones avouch god ●o be their god ; as we dovote , dedicate and ingage our children to god in baptisme : but no man can savingly transact this work for another . we ratifie the covenant in our own persons , 2 cor. 9.13 . by a professed subjection to the gospel of christ. this is a work cannot be done by a proxy , or assignes ; unless we personally enter into covenant with god for our selves , our dedication by our parents will not profit us , we shall be as children of the aethiopians unto god , amos 9.7 . though children of the covenant , all this will not serve ; these are visible external priviledges . but there is something required of our persons ; every one must say for himself , my lord , and my god. and this must not onely be done in words , and by some visible external rites , that may signifie so much : as for instance coming to the lords supper ; that is the new testament in christs blood ; luk. 22 . 2● . 't is interpretativè , a sealing the new covenant , between christ and us : god giveth , and you take the elements as a pledge and token that god and you are agreed . that he will give you himself , his christ and all his benefits ; and you will walk before him in newness of life : now to rest in the ceremony , and neglect the substance , is but a mockery of god : as many rend the bond , yet prize the seal ; care much for the sacram●n● , that never care for the duty it bindeth them unto . if your hearts be hearty and well with god , you come now personally ●o enter into covenant with him : but this business must not be done onely exter●ally , but internally also : 't is a business done between god and our souls , though no outward witnesses be conscious to it . god cometh speaking to us by his spirit in this transaction ; psal. 35.3 . say unto my soul , i am thy salvation . and we speak to god , lam. 3.24 . the lord is my portion saith my soul. there is verbum mentis , as well as verbum oris . this covenant is carried on in soul language ; psal. 16.21 . o my soul thou hast said unto the lord , thou art my lord. so psal. 27.8 . when thou saidst seek ye my face , my heart said , thy face lord will i seek . the lord offereth , or representeth himself as our lord , and we prosess our selves to be the lords . no eye seeth , or ear heareth , what passeth between god , and the soul. now without this personal inward covenanting , all the priviledge of the covenant will do us no good : and this personal inward covenanting amounts to full as much as my lord , my god. therefore it concerneth every one of us see whether we have thus particularly owned christ , if there hath been any treaty between god , and our souls ; and whether it came to any conclusion , and particular soul engagement . that you could thus own christ. not only as god , and lord , but as your god , and your lord. sermon . viii . col. 1.20 . and having made peace by the blood of his cross , to reconcile all things to himself , by him i say , whether they be things in earth , or things in heaven . in these words observe , first , what christ was to do . secondly , the manner how he did it . or , first , the end for which he was appointed . to be our mediator and redeemer , and accordingly promised and sent into the world to reconcile all things to god , whether they be things in heaven , or things in earth . secondly , the means by which he accomplished it . having made peace by the blood of his cross ; that is , by his bloody sacrifice on the cross , thereby answering the sacrifices of attonement under the law. in the first branch take notice of 1. the benefit , reconciliation with god. 2. the person procuring it , by him ; and it is repeated again , i say by him . 3. the persons to whom this benefit is intended , expressed ( 1. ) collectively , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , all things . ( 2. ) distributively : whether they be things in earth or things in heaven . as they are collectively expressed , it teaches us that grace is revealed and offered in the most comprehensive expressions that none may be excluded or have just cause to exclude themselves . as it is distributively expressed , the latter clause is of a dubious interpretation ; some , by things on earth , understand men ; but by things in heaven , the angels : surely not the fallen angels , for they are not in heaven , neither was christ sent to reconcile them , nor relieve them in their misery , and reduce them to god , heb. 2.16 . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , what then shall we understand by things in heaven ? some think the holy angels ; others the glorified saints . 1. those that assert the first , argue thus ; that the angels are properly inhabitants of heaven , and so fitly called things in heaven ; and they are enemies to men whilst they are ungodly , idolatrous and rebels to god ( as good subjects hold with their prince , and have common friends and enemies with him ) but are reconciled to them as soon as they partake of the benefits of christs death ; as we are told of joy in heaven among the angels of god , at the conversion of one sinner , luk. ●5 . 10 . now if there be so much joy over one sinner repenting , how much more when many sinners are snatched out of the jawes of hell. they make the sense to be thus ; before , for the sins of men they we●● ali●nated from them , but then reconciled : but this scripture speaks not of the reconciliation of angels and men , but the reconciliation of all things to god ; for so it is expresly in the text to reconcile all things to himself . now the good angels cannot be said to be reconciled to god , for there was never a breach between them ; s● nunquam cum matre in gratiam rediisse . 2. therefore i interpret it of the glorified saints : see the like expression , eph. 1.10 to gather together in one all things to christ which are in heaven , and in earth : and more clearly eph. 3.15 . of whom the whole family in heaven and earth is named . meaning thereby , the faithful , who are already in heaven , and those who are now remaining upon earth . this is a comfortable note , and tea●h●s ●s , 1. that the apostle paul knew no purgatory , or third place for souls after death . 2. that the saints departed are now in heaven as to their souls , and gathered to the rest of the spirits of just men made perfect . 3. the souls now in heaven once needed the merit of christ , even as we do . none come thither but they were first reconciled to god. by him their peace was made and they obtained remission of sins by the blood of his cross as ye do . in short all that go to heaven go thither by the mediation , sacrifice and meritorious righteousness of the same redeemer . doct. one great benefit we have by christ , is peace and reconciliation with god. here i shall shew , 1. what this reconciliation is . 2. how it was obtained . 3. what assurance we have that it is obtained . 4. how and upon what terms it is applied to us . 1. what this reconciliation is ? i answer , it is not an original peace , but a returning to amity after some foregoing breach : now the breach by sin consisted in two things ; an aversion of the creature from god , and an aversion of god from the creature ; so before peace and reconciliation can be made , two things must be removed ; gods wrath , and our sinful nature ; god must be pacified and man converted . gods wrath is appeased by the blood of christ , and our natures are changed and healed by the spirit of grace . first gods wrath is appeased , and then the spirit is bestowed upon us ; for while god is angry and offended , no saving benefit can be expected from him . this text speaks not how he took away our enmity , but how he appeased god for us , not so much of the application as the impetration of this benefit . the application is spoken of verse the 21. how it is applied to us , but here the apostle more directly speaks of the impetration , how it was procured and obtained for us ; namely by christs satisfying gods justice for that wrong , which caused the breach or the dying of the son of god for a sinful world. now this hath an influence on gods pardon , and our conversion , for by vertue of this reconciliation we are justified and pardoned . therefore we are said to be justified by his blood , rom. 8.9 . that is the price is paid by christ and accepted by god , there needeth nothing more to be done on the mediators part , by virtue of the same peace made we are also sanctifyed , and converted unto god , 2 cor. 5.18 . the gift of the sanctifying spirit is given us as the fruit of christs death . 2. how it was obtained , by the blood of his cross he made peace . this implyeth death , and such a death as in appearance was accursed ; for the death of the cross is the vilest and most cruel death , gal. 3.13 . christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law , being made a curse for us , for it is written cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree . now we must see the reasons of this course or way of reconciling the world , that we may not mistake gods design , nor be possessed with any imaginations which are derogatory to gods honour ; as suppose if we should hence conceit that god is all wrath and justice , unwilling of himself to be reconciled to man , or that he delighteth in blood , and is hardly drawn to give out grace . oh no these are false misprisions , and misrepresentations of god. therefore let us a little inquire into the reasons why god took this way to reconcile all things to himself , and ordained christ to bear the chastisement of our peace . i answer , that the justice of god might be eminently demonstrated , the lawgiver vindicated , and the breach that was made in the frame of government repaired , and god manifested to be a hater of sin , and yet the sinner saved from destruction ; and that the love of god might be eminently and conspicuously discerned , and our peace the better secured . as let us a little see these things more particularly i begin . 1. with the holyness of gods nature , who is of purer eyes then to behold iniquity , hab. 1.13 . that is so as to approve of it , or altogether connive at it , so as to let it go without punishment or mark of his displeasure : therefore some way must be found out to signifie his purest holiness and his hatred and detestation of sin , and that it should not be pardoned without some testimony of his displeasure against it , we are told god hateth the workers of iniquity , psal. 5.5 . and the righteous lord loveth righteousness , psalm 11.7 . and therefore when god was to grant his universal pardon he would not do it without this propitiatory atonement . 2. the honour of his governing justice was to be secured , and freed from any blemish , that the awe of god might be kept up in the world. in the mystery of our redemption we must not look upon god onely as pars laesa , the wronged party ; but as rector mundi , god was to carry himself as the governour of the world. now there is a difference between a private person and a governour : private persons may pass by offences as they please , but a governour must do right , and what conduces to the publick good . there is a twofold notion that we have of publick right , iustum est quod fieri debet , and justum est quod fieri potest . that which ought to be done or we are unjust , as for instance to punish the righteous equally with the wicked , that abraham pleadeth , gen. 18.25 . that be far from thee to do after this manner to slay the righteous with the wicked , and that the righteous should be as the wicked , that be far from thee , shall not the iudge of all the earth do right . not that abraham mindeth god of his office but he was confidently assured of the nature of god , that he could not do otherwise . but now there is justum quod fieri po●est , which if it be done or if it be not done , the party is not unjust , the first part of justice is paying of debts , the second exacting or requiring of debts . now the judge of the world doth all things wisely and righteously , the question is therefore whether god passing by the offences of the world without any satisfaction required doth deal justly ? as a free lord he may make what laws he pleases , but as a just judge with respect to the ends of government , he doth that which is for publick good . the right of passing by a wrong , and the right of releasing a punishment are different things , because punishment is a common interest , and is referred to a common good to preserve order and government , and for example to the future . the government of the world required it that god should stand on the satisfaction of christ , and the submission of the sinner : that he may be owned and reverenced , as the just and holy governour of the world a valuable compensation is insisted on for this end , rom. 2.25 , 26. whom god hath set forth to be a propitiation through fa●th in his blood , to declare his righteousness for the remi●●ion of sins that are past through the forbearance of god. to declare i say at this time his righteousness , that he might be just and the justifier of him which believeth in iesus . 3. to keep up the authority of his law. god had made a former covenant which was not to be quitted and wholly made void but upon valuable consideration ; therefore if it broken and no more ado made about it , all respect and obedience to god would fall to the ground . the law may be considered either as to the precept or sanction : the authority of the precept is kept up by christs submission to the law , and living by the same rules , we are bound to live by , and performing all manner of obedience to god , for it behoved him to fulfill all righteousness , matth. 3.15 . being set up as a pattern of holiness in our nature , to which we are to be conformed . but that which is most considerable in this case is the sanction or penalty ; if this should be relaxed , and no satisfaction required , it might leave upon god the blemish of levity , mutability and inconstancy : the law was not given in jest but in the greatest earnest that ever law was given ; and so solemn a transaction was not constituted to no purpose , therefore god will not part with the law upon light terms , gal. 4.4 , 5. when the fulness of time was come god sent forth his son made of a woman , made under the law , to redeem them that were under the law. that men may k●ow that it is a dangerous thing to transgress his law , and that they may fear and do no more presumptuously : p●rtly that it might not foster in us hopes of impunity which are very natural to us , gen. 3.5 . the devil s●●ks to weaken the truth of gods threatning● , deut. 29.19 , 20. we are apt to look upon the threatnings of the law as a vain scare-crow . therefore for the terror and warning of sinners for the future , god would not release us from the punishment , till our surety undertook our reconciliation with god by bearing the chastisement of our peace . 4. christ death was necessary to make sin odious , and obedience more acceptable to us . 1. sin more odi●us or hateful , no other remedy would servé the turn to procure the pardon and destruction of it , then the bloody death of th● cross , rom. 8.3 . surely it is no small thing for which the son of god must dye , when you read or hear of christs sufferings , you should never think an extenuating and favourable thought of it more . 2. to commend obedience : for christs suffering death at the command of his father was the noblest piece of service , and highest act of obedience that ever could or can be performed unto god : it is beyond any thing that can be done by men or angels . there was in it so much love to man , so much self-denyal , humility and patience , so much resignation of himself to god who had appointed him to be our redeemer that it cannot be parallel'd . the great and most remarkable thing in christs death was obedience , rom. 5.18 . phil. 2.7 , 8. god delighted not in more blood , but blood offered in obedience as the best way to impress upon man a sense of his duty , and to teach him to serve and please god at the dearest rate . 5. this death commendeth the love of god to us , for it is the great demonstration of it . many draw a quite contrary conclusion as if he were with much a do brought to have mercy on us , but they forget that he is first and chief in the design , 2 cor. 5.19 god was in christ reconciling the world unto himself , christ came from heaven to declare to us the greatness of gods love . god thought nothing too dear for us , not the son of his love , nor his death , ignominy and shame , rom. 5.8 . god commendeth his love in that while we were yet sinners christ dyed for us . when we had alienated our hearts from god , refused his service , and could expect nothing but the rigour of his law and vindictive justice , then he spared not his own son to bring about this reconciliation for us . 6. as god is pacifyed , so it gives us hopes : our business lyeth not with a god offended , but with a god reconciled : if we had not to do with a pacifyed god , who could lif● up his face to h●● , or think a comfortable thought of him , but this gives us hope , rom. 5.10 . for i● when we were enemies , we were reconciled to god by the death of his son , much more being reconciled we shall be saved by his life . we were enemies by sin in us which god hateth , and declareth his wrath against it in the law. then by the satisfaction wrought by christ , we were restored to his favour , so far that free and easie conditions were procured in the gospel , and his spirit is offered to prepare and fit us for a life of glory . we have heard what christ hath done . thirdly , what assurance have we that this peace is obtained . consciences are not easily settled , therefore some visible evidences are necessary that god is pacifyed , i shall name three or four . 1. christ resurrection and ascension into glory , this shews that god was propitiated and hath accepted the ransom that was given for souls . we read rom. 4.25 . that he dyed for our offe●ces and rose again for our justification , his dying noteth his satisfaction , his rising again the acceptance of it . god by raising him up from the dead shewed that he had received the death of his son , as a sufficient ransom for our sins ; for he dyed in the quality of a surety , and in that quality was raised up again : by his death he made the payment , by his resurrection the satifaction of it was witnessed to the world , for then our surety was let out of prison , isa. 53.8 . he shall be taken from prison and from judgment , in his death he was in effect a prisoner , under the arrest of divine vengeance , but when he rose again he was discharged , therefore there is great weight layed upon it as to our acquittance , rom. 8.34 . yea rather that is risen again , who is even at the right hand of god. there is some special thing in his resurrection comparatively above his death which hath influence on our justification ; that is , it was a visible evidence given to the world , that enough was done for the expiation of sins , and to assure us of our deliverance if we be capable , and his ascension into glory doth further witness it , he being exalted to the greatest dignity is able to defend and protect his people , and hath the advantage of interceding with his father for the supply of all our wants . 2. the grant of the new covenant which is therefore called the covenant of his peace , isa. 54.10 . the covenant of my peace shall not be removed , ezek. 37.26 . i will make a covenant of peace with them , it is so called not only because thereby this peace and reconciliation is offered to us , but the terms are stated and the conditions required are far more equitable , gracious , and commodious for us then the terms of the law covenant : man as a sinful creature is obnoxious 〈◊〉 gods wrath for the violation of the law of nature , and so might perish without remedy , and no impeachment to gods goodness can happen thereby , but when god will give bounds to his soveraignty over him ▪ and c●ter into terms of covenant wit● him , and give him a bottom to stand upon , whereon to expect good things from him , upon the account of his faithfulness and righteousness ; this is a condescension , and so far condescended in the first covenant , that after that man hath cast away the mercies of his creation , and his capacity to fulfill that covenant , this was mere mercy and grace ; that god would enter into a second covenant , it is not from any mutableness in god , but from the merit and satisfaction of a redeemer . surely there must be some great and important cause to change , alter and abrogate , a covenant so solemnly made and established , to lay aside one covenant and to enter into an other , especially since the former was so holy , righteous and equal , fit for god to give , and us in the state we then were in to receive . now what was the important reason ; christ came to salve gods honour in the first covenant , and to secure the ends of his government , though a second covenant should be set up , the blood of his cross hath made this covenant everlasting , heb. 13.20 . and upon gracious terms doth convey great and precious priviledges to us . 3dly . the pouring out of the spirit , which certainly was the fruit and effect of christs death , and also an evidence of the worth and value of it : the apostle telleth us , that christ was made a curse for us , that the blessing of abraham might come upon the gentiles by faith in iesus christ. and what blessing was that ? the gift of the spirit , gal. 5.13 , 14. and in another place when he interpreteth the types of the law. he telleth us , that the fathers did all eat of the same spiritual meat that we do , and did all drink of the same spiritual drink , for they drank of the rock that followed them , and that rock was christ. if the rock was christ , the water that g●shed out of the rock was the spirit , often compared to waters in scripture , iohn 4.14 . and iohn 7.38 , 39. and the rock yielded not this water till it was smitten with the rod of moses : a figure of the curses of the law christ was stricken and smitten of god , and so procured the spirit for us , iohn 7.39 . the holy ghost was not yet given , for iesus was not yet glorifyed . that is had not finished his passion , and the acceptance of it was not yet attested to the world , till he was advanced at the right hand of god ; and then this effect declared it . the spirit was given before , but more sparingly , because it was given upon trust , and with respect to the satisfaction that was afterwards to be made , and accepted : and then it was witnessed to the world by a more copious and plentiful effusion of the spirit . therefore 't is said , acts 2.33 . therefore iesus being by the right hand of god exalted , and having received of the father the promise of the holy ghost , he hath shed forth this which ye now see and hear . the merit and value of the sacrifice is thus visibly attested , therefore this is one of the witnesses , acts 5.30 , 31 , 32. the god of our fathers raised up iesus whom ye slew , and hanged on a tree , him hath god exalted with his right hand to be a prince , and a saviour , for to give repentance to israel , and remission of sins . and we are his witnesses of these things ; and so is also the holy ghost , whom god hath given to them that obey him . and what was the evidence given to the church in general , is the evidence given also to every particular believer . 4thly . some have obtained the effects and fruits of christs death , this peace begun here hath been perfected in heaven . the text saith he hath reconciled all things to himself , whether they be things in heaven or things in earth . here many are pardoned and accepted with god , and have the comfort of it in their own souls . others are gone home to god , and have the full of this peace . all were by nature children of wrath , under the curse as well as others . now if some in all generations have injoyed the love , favour and friendship of god in this world and upon their departure out of it have entered into glory ; upon this account it is evident that christ is accepted to the ends for which god sent him ; thus abraham the father of the faithful , and all the blessed souls who are gathered into his bosom , and are alive with god in heaven . certain it is they were all sinners by nature , for there is no difference between any of the children of men , and yet god admits them into his peace . was it a personal priviledge peculiar to them only ? no the apostle tells us , rom. 4.23 . it was not written for his sake alone , and paul obtained mercy for them that should hereafter believe on christ , for life everlasting , 1 tim. 1.16 . therefore all penitent believers may be assured that this sacrifice is sufficient , and will avail for their acceptance with god. we take it for a good token of a healing water , when we see the crutches of criples that had been cured , all the blessed saints in heaven are witness to a sincere soul ; they all obtained this blessed condition through the blood of his cross reconciling them to god. there is none in glory but had his pardon sealed through the blood of christ. 4. how and upon what terms is it applyed to us : for we have considered hitherto onely how christ hath made peace or made the atonement . yet if we receive not the atonement we may perish for ever , for all that , besides the work done on the cross by christ alone , there is a work to be done in our hearts , the work of making peace is sufficiently done by christ , there needeth nothing to be added to it , no other ransom , nor sacrifice , nor propitiation : christ hath so fully satisfyed divine justice , that he hath obtained the new covenant , but we are not actually admitted 〈◊〉 this peace till we have personally accepted the covenant . now here it sticketh : god hath been in christ reconciling the world unto himself , there was the foundation layed ; but therefore we pray you to be reconciled , 2 cor. 5.20 . there is our title , claim , actual right , security . but how do we receive this atonement ? or how are we interessed in it ? the conditions and terms are gracious , such as the nature of the business calleth for : as to our entrance into this peace , no more is required but faith and repentance . the gospel is offered to all , but the penitent believer as being onely capable is possessed of it . 1. faith is required that we believe what the son of god hath done , and purchased for us , rom. 5.1 . being justified by faith , we have peace with god , through our lord iesus christ. if we sincerely embrace the gospel , we are reconciled to god , and accepted with him . the faith that justifieth , is partly an assent to the truth of the christian religion , especially the fundamental truth , that jesus is the son of god , and saviour of the world. and partly an acceptance of christ as god offers him , a serious , thankful , broken hearted acceptance of christ as your lord and saviour , serious because of the weight of the business , broken hearted because of the condition of the person accepting : a self-condemning sinner , or one that hath an awakening sense of his sin and misery . thankful because reconciliation with god and fruition of them in glory is so great a benefit , and you take him as lord , for every knee must bow to christ , he is a saviour by merit and efficacy . by his meritorious righteousness you obtain all benefits , by the efficacy of his spirit , you perform all duties ; the last thing is trust and dependance , eph. 1.13 . trust is such an expectation of the benefits offered by christ , that forsaking all other things you entirely give up your selves to the conduct of his word and spirit . 2. the next thing is repentance which is a turning from sin to god , we turn from sin by hatred , and we turn to god by love. we turn from sin by hatred ; hatred of sin is the ground of all mortification , there is a twofold hatred , of abomination and of enmity . we turn to god by love which is the great principle to incline us to god , and is the bottom of vivification or living to god. now all this is necessary to actual peace , for our refreshing begins in conversion , acts 3.19 . there is no peace allowed to the wicked , we must take christs yoke , or we shall find no rest for our souls , matth. 11.29 . we are not reconciled to god till our enmity be broken and overcome , then of enemies we become friends , of strangers , intimates ; then we are reconciled . this then is required of you , onely let me add this caution , what is at first vows and purposes , must be afterwards deeds and practises , and having ingaged your selves to god to live to him , to keep your selves from sin , and to follow after holiness ; this must be your business all the dayes of your lives . for so you continue your peace and interest in god , gal. 6.16 . and as many as walk according to this rule , peace be on them , and mercy , and on the israel of god. vse . 1. to exhort you to enter into this peace that you may be partakers of the fruit of christs blood , and the virtue of his cross may be effectual in you . 1. let me reason a periculo , from the danger , consider what it is to be at odds with god , and how soon and how easily he can revenge his quarrel against you , and how miserable they will be for ever , that are not found of him in a state of peace , psal. 7.11 , 12 , 13. god is angry with the wicked every day , if he turn not , he will w●et his sword ; he hath bent his bow , and will make his arrows ready . there the psalmist representeth god and man as in a state of hostility against each other . the wicked man affronts his holiness , questions his justice , slights his wrath , breaks his laws , wrongeth his people , and saith tush , i shall have peace though i add drunkenness to thirst . god for a while giveth time and warning , but every moment can break in upon us , for he is able easily to deal with us , cominus hand to hand , for he hath his sword ; eminus at a distance , for he hath his bow : he is not only able to deal with them but ready , for he is whetting his sword and hath bent his bow , the arrow is upon the string though not as yet sent or shot out , what remedy then is there . there is but one exception if he turn not ; if he be not reduced and brought home to god by a timely repentance , he falleth into the hands of the living god. now no persons are in so dangerous an estate as those that have peace offered and despise it , isa. 27.4 . let him take hold of my strength . when god is ready to strike . a man that is faln into the power of his enemy will take hold of his arm , we are always in gods power , his vengeance may surprize us before we are aware , what is our business but to be found of him in peace . 2. ab utili , from the happiness of being at peace with god : your great work is over , and you have a world of benefit by it , you stop all danger at the fountain head . when you are at peace with god , you are at peace with the creatures , ezek. 34.25 . i will make with them a covenant of peace and will cause the evil beasts to cease out of the land , danger might way-lay us at every turn : then for men , prov. 10.17 . when a mans ways please the lord he makes his enemies to be at peace with him . then peace in your own consciences , rom. 15.13 . now the god of hope fill you with joy and peace . in believing to have a mans conscience settled on sound terms is a great mercy . peace with the holy angels instead of being instruments of vengeance , they are ministring spirits , heb. 1.14 . lastly communion with god himself , rom. 5.1 , 2. therefore being justified by faith we have peace with god through our lord iesus christ , by whom also we have access by faith , &c. eph. 2.17 , 18. preaching peace by whom also we have access by one spirit unto the father . 3. i reason from the confidence we may have of this benefit if we submit to godly terms . 1. god is willing to give it , verse 19. it pleased the father that in him all fullness should dwell , there is gods authority and good pleasure in it . the first motive came from god who received the wrong , not from him that gave it . god was in christ , 2 cor. 5.14 . among men the inferiour should seek to the superior . the party offending to the party offended , the weaker to the stronger , they that need the reconciliation to him that needeth it not , but here all is contrary . 2. you may be confident of it upon another ground , the sufficiency of christ to procure all fullness . the whole divine nature did inhabit and reside in the man christ jesus , and so he is compleatly fitted , and furnished for this work : he hath paid a full price for this peace when he bare our sins and carryed our sorrows , and by his spirit he changes our hearts as well as pacifies the wrath of god. and then he preserveth this peace by his constant intercession , heb. 2.17 , 18. now shall we doubt of it ? but that we may get it . 1. let us take the way of entrance by faith and repentance . it concerns us much to see whether we be in peace or trouble , if in trouble you see the cure , if in peace the next question is , is it gods peace ? that 's had by the blood of christ , the merit of which we must depend upon and devote our selves to god , break off our old league with sin , and bind our selves with a bond to live unto god , to be the lords for evermore . 2. when this peace is made be very tender of it , that no breach fall out between you and god , psal. 85.8 . he will speak peace to his people and to his saints , but let not them turn again to folly . 3. let us be thankful to god for this fruit of christs death , it is an act of free and undeserved mercy , and to be imputed to nothing but his mere grace that god hath appointed such a way : it pleased the father to bruise him , isa. 53.9 . that he sendeth ambassadors to publish it , acts 10.36 . the word which god sent unto the children of israel preaching peace by jesus christ he is lord of all , and that he appointeth a ministery . it is a great priviledge in it self ; for by this peace we have not onely the beginnings but the increase of grace till all be perfected in heaven , heb. 13 . 2● , 21. now the god of peace that brought again from the dead our lord jesus , make you perfect in every good work , to do his will working in you that which is well pleasing in his sight , 1 thess. 1.23 . the god of peace sanctifie you that you may be preserved blameless unto the coming of our lord iesus christ. this peace doth encourage us in all temptations from the devil , rom. 16.20 . the god of peace shall bruise satan under your feet shortly . from the world , eph. 6.15 . shod with the preparation of the gospel of peace . fears of the wrath of god , and doubts about our eternal condition , rom. 14.17 . the kingdom of god is not meat and drink but righteousness , peace and joy in the holy ghost , here are three words , comfort , peace and ioy , these succeed one another as so many degrees , comfort is support under trouble , peace a ceasing from trouble , joy a lively sense of the love of god. finis . the socinian creed, or, a brief account of the professed tenents and doctrines of the foreign and english socinians wherein is shew'd the tendency of them to irreligion and atheism, with proper antidotes against them / by john edwards ... edwards, john, 1637-1716. 1697 approx. 357 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 147 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2003-01 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a38033 wing e212 estc r17329 13372408 ocm 13372408 99330 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a38033) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 99330) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 787:23) the socinian creed, or, a brief account of the professed tenents and doctrines of the foreign and english socinians wherein is shew'd the tendency of them to irreligion and atheism, with proper antidotes against them / by john edwards ... edwards, john, 1637-1716. [24], 264 p. printed for j. robinson ... and j. wyat ..., london : 1697. caption and running title: the tendency of the socinian doctrines to irreligion & atheism. errata: p. [24] "a postscript, being brief reflections on a late book entituled a short discourse of the true knowledge of christ jesus, with animadversions on mr. edwards reflections on the reasonableness of christianity, and on his book entituled socinism unmask'd, by s. bold, rector of stedple, dorset". (p. [237]-264) with half title. reproduction of original in huntington library. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng bold, s. -(samuel), 1649-1737. -short discourse of the true knowledge of jesus christ. edwards, john, 1637-1716. -socinianism unmask'd. socinianism -early works to 1800. 2002-06 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2002-07 apex covantage keyed and coded from proquest page images 2002-08 john latta sampled and proofread 2002-08 john latta text and markup reviewed and edited 2002-10 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion the socinian creed : or , a brief account of the professed tenents and doctrines of the foreign and english socinians . wherein is shew'd the tendency of them to irreligion and atheism . with proper antidotes against them . by john edwards , b. d. sometime fellow of st. john's college in cambridge . 2 tim. iii. 9. they shall proceed no further : for their folly shall be manifest unto all men . london , printed for j. robinson at the golden-lion , and j. wyat at the rose in st. paul's church-yard , 1697. to the right reverend father in god edward , lord bishop of worcester . my lord , i presumed to dedicate my former writings to two eminent persons of your high order in the church : and now this present undertaking comes to find shelter under your lordships patronage . which i despair not of because you have let the world sufficiently know how greatly you disapprove of the sentiments of those men whose character is offer'd in the following treatise . it was observ'd that even in your early years you chose to encounter the pontifician and racovian impostors ; not unlike hercules ; that in his very minority grappled with serpents and monsters . crellius felt the strength of your arm , and hath laid a baffled and prostrate foe ever since , for there never yet appear'd any thing that had the face of an answer to your book . and lately , when socinus's followers began to take heart again , and to lift up their bruised heads , your lordship successfully struck at them , and publickly vindicated the mysteries of the christian faith from the bold and blasphemous insults of these persons . in your former attempts you were wont to exceed others , but now you outvied your self ; such were the extraordinary acuteness and sagacity of your thoughts on this subject , such the inimitable pregnancy of your reasons , such the matchless weight and nervousness of your arguments , such your close application of scripture every where . which the adversaries were sensible of , and accordingly ( that they might not be thought to be idle ) advanced some feeble considerations against your lordship's excellent discourse . here , to support their tatter'd cause , they made a stir with trifling sallies and excursions , with faint shews of criticism , with pedantick flourishes of wit , with mean and languid efforts of seeming logick . but chiefly these socinian sharpers endeavour'd to run down the truth by their unparallell'd confidence , and by treating your lordship , as well as it , with disrespect and disdain . but so it is , they have shew'd themselves rude to their immortal shame . and yet at the same time , by attempting to lessen your worth and deserved fame they have inhansed them ; as all envious and malicious persons do when they detract from those of great merit . all the learned world unanimously vote your lordship to be the chief of this number : even those who disagree in all other things , agree in your lordships praises . for without the least shew of adulation it may be most truly said , that your name is now not so much the name of a person or family , as it is the name of profound learning and solid religion . but i shall offend against your lordship's modesty , and call forth blushes from those reverend cheeks , which have so boldly look'd your adversaries in the face , if i proceed any further thus ; wherefore i am forced here to a period . only let me be permitted to add my hearty wishes and prayers , viz. that the allmighty would vouchsafe to bless your lordship with long life , health , and vigour , to accomplish those great things which you have designed against the church's common foes , papists and socinians ; that you may be a terrour and scourge to rome and racovia ; that you may give an effectual check to the sly pretences of deists , that you may bridle the insolence of atheists , and be successful in mortifying all such sworn enemies of the christian faith and practise . so prayeth your lordships most humble and entire servant and honourer john edwards . the preface . some eminent persons of our church having been pleas'd to honour me with their approbation of what i have lately writ against the socinians in defence of the orthodox faith , i presume once more to assert and vindicate this noble cause . and i am further animated and encouraged to such an undertaking from what i meet with in the learned bishop of worcester 's preface to his discourse concerning christ's satisfaction lately reprinted , where he directly charges the socinians with the promoting of deism , and promises to make good his charge against them in a discourse . and in the close of his preface he tells us that he will let the world know that he is no stranger to the pamphlets of the modern racovians . thus we see the cause doth not die : nor indeed can it , when so able a person is willing to uphold it , and hath engaged himself to do it ; one whose name is as terrible to the socinians as that of duke d'alva heretofore to the dutch. till this great champion shews himself anew , i will make bold to enter the lists , and to attack our common foe , and thereby prepare the way for the conquests of so renowned a pen. but let me declare this , and that with the greatest sincerity imaginable , that it is not from any pleasure i take in contending with any party of men , or from a desire to provoke and exasperate them ( for i bear a hearty charity and good will to all mankind , and especially i love and honour all sincere and good men , all that have the impressions of a christian spirit upon them ) nor is it from any other undue principle , but wholly from a sense of my duty , and that alone , that i appear again in this cause . at first i purposely check'd my self , and forbore to produce all those arguments and proofs whereby i might have evinced the inclinableness of the socinians to irreligion and a spirit of infidelity . and this i did for several reasons , partly to suit my self to the then present juncture , partly to let the world see that i was not hasty and forward in censuring any sort of persons , and partly to allow my self time to enquire further into the matter , both to satisfie my self and others . because what i then suggested , was design'd to be in the way of an essay or introduction , i only offer'd some few heads of my charge against them : but now i intend to give the reader a farther account of some of them ; and likewise to superadd several articles to the former charge and indictment . i will set before him other different-demonstrations of that atheistick tang , that irreligious genius which i tax'd them with . so then , i believe , they will have little occasion to say that * i mollifie that in a treatise , which was much more harsh when preach'd in a sermon . though i must profess to the world that i loath all harshness and severity which are inconsistent with the candor and meekness of a christian , and which are not absolutely requisite for the vindicating of the indispensable truths of religion . our racovians may remember that they lately presented the world with a paper entituled . the trinitarian scheme of religion : and now i hope they will not be offended ( i am sure they ought not ) when i publish the anti-trinitarian scheme of religion ( if i may so call it , ) or rather ( to speak plainly and impartially ) of their irreligious opinions and placits . they had no credible authors to vouch their scheme , but fill'd it up with what they thought fit . but i have taken another course , and have all along annex'd the particular authors whose assertions i mention , and i have set down the particular places in their writings . i have been very exact and faithful in rehearsing their words , that i might neither wrong them nor the truth . and in order to this i have perused the authors themselves , and have taken nothing on trust . nor have i gather'd their opinions from some few or dubious expressions in their writings , or from some scraps and sentences , but from the plain tenour and scope of what they write . so that the reader may absolutely depend upon what i offer to him concerning their sentiments . all the socinian writings ( till some few of late ) being in latin , the learned can consult the places which i have cited when they please , and bear witness to my faithfulness in alledging them . but i knew it would be of no use to the mere english reader to transcribe the quotations in that language : wherefore i chose rather to give him them in his own tongue . and besides , it is to be supposed that the learned are not unacquainted with these things : but because others , who are the greatest numbers , are in great measure ignorant of them , i thought it requisite to publish them to the world , that it may be known what are the wild and extravagant notions which are wafted over to us from racovia . if i had not read their books , i might peradventure have entertain'd a more favourable opinion of them than i now have , saith the * excellent bishop before mention'd . and so without doubt many others would have entertain'd a tolerable opinion of these gentlemen if they had not perused their writings , and found what a numerous train of unsound propositions are there upheld , and if they had not observ'd that pernicious tendency and drift of them . people hear socinianism much talk'd of of late : and one or two of the most vulgar points of it are partly known to them , and they are sollicited perhaps to give their assent to them . but if they had a discovery of all the rest of their opinions , it is probable they would be moved by them to disapprove of those others . most men may think perhaps that the socinians fail only in their disbelief of the trinity , and particularly their disowning the deity of the son of god , but that as to other principles of christianity they believe and profess the same divine truths which are embraced by the generality of christians . for as in the late reign popery was misrepresented , all its doctrines were dress'd up in a very specious and plausible garb by the bishops of meaux and condom , and other dexterous penmen , in so much that it did not seem to be what it was said to be before , ( for they knew that popery truly represented would never go down with us ; therefore when the roman catholicks had hopes of gaining this nation once again to their church , it was thought requisite to set their religion before us in a wrong posture : ) so hath it fared lately with socinianism , the english racovians have given us such a character of it that it appears to be quite different from what it was , yea and what it really is : they have given it such a gloss and varnish that many are thence perswaded to have a good opinion of it : for they were sensible that if it were set forth and known in its true nature , few wise and considerate persons would imbrace it : therefore they found it necessary to give us a false account of it , to render it ( if possible ) plausible and acceptable . but if we narrowly look into it , we shall find it to be another thing than it is pretended to be : we shall see that it is a dreadful compound of errors and heterodoxies , a detestable farce of exploded heresies , a horrid perverting of the christian faith , and the nurse of irreligion and prophaness . to be plainer yet , he that hath any close thoughts and remarks of things at this day must needs be sensible that the great indifferency and scepticism which reign among us have open'd a door to socinianism , which is a sure project for deism , and this for atheism . for it is apparent that the atheists of our times politickly make use of this engine to compass their designs , that is , to banish the deity and religion out of the world , and to introduce universal licentiousness , immorality and debauchery . i appeal to any thoughtful , serious and observing man whether this be not a true and right view of our present affairs with relation to the matter in hand . i apprehended therefore it would be good service to my countreymen to represent this monster to them in its true and genuine colours , in its native and proper features ; which will certainly acquaint them with its deformity , and ( as the effect of that ) render it loathsome and abominable , as it ought to be to all that are concerned for religion . this is the design of the following discourse , and the holy and blessed trinity ( whose cause i defend ) knoweth that herein i intend not the aspersing of any sort of men , i aim not at the exposing of or reflecting upon any party : but my whole business is to assert and vindicate the truth which hath been owned by the catholick church in all ages of christianity , and to obviate the growing evil and mischief of socinianism . in undertaking of this , i will suggest nothing out of heat and passion : i will labour to refute , not to reproach our adversaries : i will endeavour to approve my self an advocate for truth without being an enemy to civility and candour . but yet i shall by the divine aid ( which most heartily i implore , and beg the reader to joyn his earnest devotions with mine ) use that freedom and plainness which become the truth and an unprejudic'd asserter of it . my faults in my former book , it seems , were wit and eloquence , if he who wrote the * vindication of the late treatise concerning the reasonableness of christianity be a judg of either . now , i hope , i have mended these faults , or chang'd them for two others , viz. argument and down-right language , which yet will be as much disliked by that gentleman and his partisans . however , i will venture it , and perhaps this free and open dealing may have some good effect even upon the minds of our adversaries , at least on some of those that are in part tinctur'd with their opinions : especially when they shall see that it is not my intention to represent the disciples of socinus worse than they are ( which as to some things can hardly be done ) but to give an impartial account of them in such particulars wherein it is plain and evident that they swerve from the truth , and profess such doctrines as have a direct tendency to irreligion and impiety . nor do i comprehend all socinianized persons in this character : i entertain some hope that there are some innocent and well-meaning people among them , who being inveigled by the plausible pretences of their leaders have taken up some of their notions , but are ready , upon a discovery of the falshood and perniciousness of them , to lay them down , and wholly to abandon them . those that are of this sober disposition , will , i question not , find this present undertaking beneficial to them ; and will be so far from censuring them , that they will thankfully acknowledg my setting them right in perswasions of so great moment and importance , such as are either of the foundation of religion , or have a near alliance to it , or have a necessary influence on our christian practice . in short , when principles and truths of the highest nature are struck at by bold assailants , when the main doctrines of religion are depraved and perverted , and when christianity it self is endanger'd , shall we sit still , and not be concern'd ? * if these foundations be destroy'd , if these forts , these bulwarks , these strong-holds ( as some render the word ) be demolish'd , what can the righteous do ? if these fundamental principles be overthrown , what a wretched state will religion and the professors of it be reduced to ? which is the very thing which we may justly fear at this time , when we behold such a great and signal defection from the truths of christianity , from the faith of the gospel , even in the christian world. how few are there at this day that can endure sound doctrine ? how many are there that call themselves protestants , and yet grow weary of those main articles of religion which have been owned ever since the reformation , and have been defended and vindicated by the pens of the religious and learned ? and shall we silently and tamely permit this ? no certainly , that charity which beareth all things , endureth all things , cannot suffer this . yea , it is the highest charity in such a dangerous juncture to acquaint persons with the true state of affairs , to discover the methods and artifices of seducers , to lay open before the world their cheats and delusions , and to shew what errors they substitute in the place of truth . and this is that which is design'd in my present performance ; wherein i have all along discover'd the poyson of our adversaries doctrines in the first place , and then i have been careful to administer an antidote . errata . page 6. line 1. before is insert it , p. 29. l. penult . for to the first of r. first to , p. 35. l. 10. place ‖ before episcopius . p. 95. l. 13. f. of r. or . p. 103. l. 7. r. needs . p. 108. l. 13. r. deletion . p. 123. l. 14. r. strange . p. 125. l. 3. before it insert in . p. 126. l. 6. before and begin the parenthesis . p. 183. l. 5. f. professed r. pretended . p. 184. l. 24. f. this r. that . p. 197. l. 16. after as insert to . p. 214. l. 13. r. looks . p. 243. l. 5. after it make ) . the tendency of the socinian doctrines to irreligion & atheism . chap. i. there is an obligation on the author to give the world an account of the irreligious sentiments of the socinians . their abusing of the holy scriptures is a proof of their prophane genius . they hold there are mistakes and errors in the bible as to lesser matters . they disparage the books of proverbs and ecclesiastes , the epistle to the hebrews , and the writings of st. john. they are wild and extravagant ( though very crafty and subtile ) in their interpreting and expounding of scripture . a particular instance of it in their interpretation of i john 1 , 2. other instances of their false and perverse dealing . their notion of a double ascension of christ confuted , and the texts which they alledge for it explain'd . their vilisying , wresting and perverting of scripture are tokens of their irreligion . i am obliged to let the world see that i did not reproach and injure the socinians when i laid to their charge the favouring and promoting of atheism , and consequently that what i said of them was not ( as they have suggested ) hastily and rashly spoken , or written without due premeditation : and thence it will appear that i am not to be represented as a censorious or uncharitable person , which are imputations which i always abhorr'd , and have carefully laboured to avoid . thus then i make good what i said , some of this sort of men cannot well be thought to have any true and right sense of god and religion , especially the christian , because they have in their publick writings renounced some of the most considerable things relating to doctrine , worship , discipline , and practise in the church of christ. these are the four general heads of my following discourse . i begin with the first . as to the doctrinal part of religion , these men are very faulty , and upon examination will be found to be favourers of very irreligious and prophane opinions . and here i will reduce what i have to say unto these five particulars , viz. their notions concerning the scriptures , concerning god , concerning the first man , concerning the future state , and concerning christianity it self . first , it is no mean proof of their prophane genius that they delight to vilifie and abuse the holy scriptures . as to some lesser matters , and such as are of small moment , the bible hath repugnancies and mistakes , saith the great * founder of socinianism , i. e. he from whom it takes its denomination . and herein he is follow'd by † volkelius , another great and admired writer among those of the racovian perswasion . smalcius grants ‖ some depravation in scripture as to things of no great moment . * episcopius , ( who is owned to be a socinian by the ‖ party themselves ) tells us that the penmen of the scriptures were left to their own humane frailty in delivering those things which appertain to circumstances of fact , as time and place , and the like . and in the same place he attributes these mistakes and errors in the bible to the want of knowledge , or weakness of memory in the writers . where then is their infallibility , which hath been owned by all christian churches ? or , can they be infallible , and yet err ? what is the difference between these writers and others but this , that they were immediately inspired by the holy ghost , and consequently are not liable in the least to mistakes and misapprehensions ? those then that deny this must needs deny the writers of the holy scripture to have been inspired , and to have been infallible , yea they must say that they were ( like other men ) faulty and erroneous in their writings . this , you will say ( and that justly ) is an ill beginning , here is a bad specimen of their sentiments concerning the doctrinal part of religion , of which our right conceptions concerning the holy scriptures is a considerable branch , not to say root . but this is but mean and inconsiderable in respect of what they further hold and maintain . for they not only find fault with some passages here and there , but they question the authority of whole books , and even vilifie the old testament it self . what think you of those words of the ‖ ring-leader of the party ? the precepts of the old testament are for the most part such , that it is hard to believe that they proceed from god , they are either so light , or vain , or superstitious , or even foolish , and ridiculous ; and , in sum , they seem not to be worthy of god. is this the language of one that hath a due respect and reverence for the scriptures ? and in an * other place you will find him particularly disparaging the book of the proverbs of solomon . and † one of his friends declares , that when solomon in his proverbs speaks any thing concerning manners , if it be not expresly spoken , that is , either commanded or forbid by moses in the law , is no more obligatory than the wise advice and doctrine of any other man. what is this but bringing down this inspit'd author to the same level with plato and seneca , or any other honest moralist ? but would you know what is the true reason of their slighting and undervaluing this royal penman who dictated all by an infallible spirit ? it is this without doubt , because there is in that book so remarkable a confirmation of the doctrine of christ's divinity , chap. 8. v. 22. to 32. where any unprejudic'd man cannot but see that by wisdom is meant the son of god christ jesus , whose eternal being and godhead are there in plain terms express'd . i might observe how an * other celebrated racovian disparages those writings of solomon which bear the title of ecclesiastes , but i shall have occasion to mention this more particularly afterwards . then for the new testament , we are rightly told by an excellent pen that ‖ our unitarians undermine the authority of these books , and so introduce deism amongst us . there are some of these writings either slily carp'd at , or more positively call'd in question by them . the subtilty of enjedinus ( an overseer of the socinian churches in transilvania ) is to be taken notice of in his explication of the epistle to the hebrews , who though he saith he hath an esteem for this book , and will not detract from the authority of it , yet thus speaks , it is to be known that this epistle is very much suspected among the most , nor hath it obtain'd the same repute and dignity with the other writings of the new testament . and then he assigns his reasons why he questions the authority of this epistle : one whereof is this , the things which this author writes concerning the tabernacle , chap. 9. v. 1. may be confuted out of the old testament . an other is , that he seems to use foolish arguings , and to assert some things which are manifestly false . and lastly , this epistle seems to favour certain heretical and erroneous opinions . all this , and much more he rehearses in contempt of the divine authority of this epistle , and saith not one syllable to shew his dislike of it , or to let the world see how these cavils may be confuted . the true reason is because this part of st. pauls writings is such an eminent and illustrious attestation of the divinity of our saviour , and of his making satisfaction unto god the father by the offering of himself a sacrifice upon the cross for us . again , the writings of st. john the evangelist and apostle have been struck out of the canon of scripture by these men . it is the frank acknowledgment of our new english unitarians ( as may be seen in one of their * late prints ) that the antient unitarians generally disregarded the gospel and epistles which are ascribed to this author , and held that they were writ by cerinthus an heretick in those days . but this must be said , they pitch'd upon a very unlikely man to be the author of those writings ; for this cerinthus ( as irenaeus , eusebius , and others of the most credible writers of the church inform us ) was the chief man in those days that opposed the divinity of christ , and held him to be a mere man , whereupon st. john drew his pen against him . can we think then that the gospel of st. john was writ against cerinthus , and yet that cerinthus writ it ? besides , it is easily proved that both the gospel and the first epistle which bear this apostle's name were universally held to be canonical scripture , and written by him , as ‖ eusebius testifies : nay , a professed * unitarian writer firmly vouches this . wherefore it is probable that the only reason why any of the old unitarians disallow'd of st. john's writings was because there are such passages as these in them , in the beginning was the word , and the word was with god , and the word was god. the same was in the beginning with god. all things were made by him , and without him was not any thing made that was made . the word was made flesh , and dwelt among us , and we beheld his glory , the glory as of the only begotten of the father . i and my father are one . he that hath seen me , hath seen the father . i am in the father , and the father in me . whosoever denieth the son , the same hath not the father . there are three that bear record in heaven , the father , the word , and the holy ghost , and these three are one . in brief , because these writings assert the holy trinity , and more especially the divinity of christ , thence they are resolved to defame the authority of them : thence our very † modern unitarians publickly declare that st. john makes use of certain terms and phrases ( as life , light , fullness , only begotten , &c. ) by chance ; and by other crafty insinuations they would diminish the esteem of those writings . nay , they endeavour to blast the credit of all the canonical books , by telling us that some have been modelling the common bibles far above twelve hundred years . so saith the author of the considerations on the explications of the doctrine of the trinity , and he speaks in the name of all the rest . thus they would make the world believe that the whole sacred volume is corrupted , and thereby our religion and faith are rendred uncertain and dubious , which is the thing aimed at . moreover , their vilifying and abusing of the holy scripture are seen in their wild interpretations of it , merely to evade plain texts which are against them , and to establish their own fond principles . i deny not that some of them have very laudable descants on several passages of the bible . faustus socinus hath excellent discourses and commentaries on sundry texts ; he treats excellently of the authority of the scriptures , and very admirably and judiciously of the truth of christianity . but at other times he generally dodges and higgles , and uses quirks and subterfuges to support his cause . so true is that of our learned stilling fleet , * f. socinus seeing the bent of the scripture so much against him , sets himself to the finding out ways to avoid the force of them . it is granted likewise that some of socinus's followers are very useful in their expositions of the new testament . they settle the sense and scope of the words , and furnish the reader with several criticisms of good use . he that denies this is to be suspected of causeless prejudice and ill-will against them . but then , it must be said that they too often pervert the native sense of the words , and force the texts to speak what they please : and generally the arguments they offer are weak and unmanly , groundless and precarious : but they have a way of shoving them on with some craft and subtilty . they are all very dexterous at this , but enjedinus , crellius , and slichtingius's comments on texts are of this sort especially . it would create wonder sometimes to see their elaborate sophistry in finding out trajections and transpositions in several places , in altering the genuine and obvious sense of texts , in their subtile ways of perverting and wresting of some clear passages of the bible . it must be said they have exercised the height of their wit and parts in this performance . but as it was said of old of the dice-player , the better he was at the game , the worse he was ; so here it is most true , the more these men excel in this way of cheating and imposing upon mankind , the more is their badness discover'd , and the greater is their crime . and our domestick socinians agree with the foreigners in this , for they use the same little arts and tricks to deprave the sense of holy writ , and to render it serviceable for their turn . if i should instance only in their strange and unaccountable interpreting of the first verses of the first chapter of st. john's gospel , that would be sufficient to let us see what a marvelous talent they have of misinterpreting and wresting the holy book . in the beginning , say * they , is as much as in the beginning of the gospel , or the gospel-state , though there is not the least colour for any such gloss from the whole context , and though all expositors both antient and modern have understood it otherwise . the word was with god , i. e. when christ ascended into heaven , viz. some time before his publick ministry , though there is no foundation for any such surmise , as i shall immediately shew . and the word was god , or a god , ( for so these nice criticks will have us read it , though it is well known to the learned that the omission of the article is not argumentative ) i. e. he was appointed to be a kind of god , or god's representative , as magistrates are call'd gods. all things were made by him , i. e. all things were not made by him , but only reform'd and renew'd . the world was made by him , i. e. it was new modell'd : or , the spiritual world , the world of the messias was made by him . from these and such like conceits , which their writings abound with , you may discern the air and genius of these men : you cannot but take notice that they love to play upon words and phrases , they delight in coining sophistical evasions , they study artifice and shifts . by which they shew themselves to be no spurious offspring , but the true sons of arius , who ( as the ecclesiastical historian acquaints us ) * was not unskill'd in logical querks . and an † other of the antients observes that the arian cause was managed by old subtile disputants , such as had been bred up to controversies , and knew how to make the best of their ill arguments , and to dissemble when they thought there was occasion for it . our late revivers of the cause are furnish'd with the same skill , and use it as advantageously . they will pretend to own christ's divinity , they will say christ is god , and true god ; and yet if you come to the trial , they wholly renounce it , and tell you ‖ christ is only god's minister , his messenger , his embassador . this is all you can get from an other of their writers , * only the father , saith he , is true god , and the lord christ is his prophet , his embassador , his messenger : so that christ is no more than what the turks confess mahomet to be . though our blessed saviour be so often stiled god and lord in the new testament , yet the antitrinitarians would needs persuade us that the meaning of it is no other than this , that he was a great and eminent man : whence it follows , that they hold christ to be lord and god in the same sense that the papists talk of their lord god the pope . so they will tell you that the death of christ is an expiatory sacrifice for the sins of mankind , and yet , whatever they pretend , they really own no such thing , as the reverend bishop stillingfleet rightly remarks , and irrefragably proves , beyond all exceptions , in his admirable treatise against crellius . and in several other instances it might be shew'd that they intolerably abuse and deceive the world . in brief , never was prejudice more rampant , never were fallacies so often placed in the room of arguments , never was reason so grosly abused , never was logick so ill employ'd , never were grammer and criticism so scandalously thrown away as in the writings of these men : and all is done to distort the word of god , to elude the meaning of the holy ghost , to plead against the lord of life and glory , and against the only way and means of their salvation . here , under this first head , viz. their abusing of scripture , i will take notice of one particular instance of it , which to the common reader perhaps may be a rarity . they thinking it necessary that christ , being but a mere man , ( for they hold him to be no other ) should be extraordinarily instructed by god as to his office of the messias , and therefore it would be requisite that he should ( like st. paul ) be taken up into the third heaven , and there be taught particularly how to discharge his office , and how to teach men upon earth ; accordingly they were to find out some texts of scripture which might be strained to support this fiction , viz. that christ went up into heaven in the time of the forty days fast , or some time before he began to preach , that he might receive instructions from god concerning the gospel-dispensation , and concerning the things that he was to deliver upon earth . to this purpose they pitch upon john 3. 13. no man hath ascended up into heaven , but he that came down from heaven , even the son of man who is in heaven , and they would persuade us that these words are spoken concerning that ascension which they fancy . but this meaning cannot be fastned upon them , because we are here plainly inform'd that christ came down from heaven first , and then afterwards ascended thither ; whereas it is their assertion that he first ascended , and then came down thence . it is impossible therefore to stretch these words so as to make them serviceable to the foresaid conceit . but they alledg another text , what and if ye shall see the son of man ascended up where he was before ? john 6. 62. but this is as wide from their purpose as the other , for these words were spoken after christ began to preach , and therefore can't be understood of that ascension which they dream of , because they suppose that to have been before his publick preaching , whereas our saviour here speaks of something to come , what and if ye shall , &c. his ascension therefore was not past at that time . and further , our saviour acquaints us here that he was in heaven before his ascension thither , which is a plain and undeniable proof of his divinity : for he was not there before as to his humane nature ; that these gentlemen themselves acknowledg , and consequently the words must be meant of his being in heaven with his father from all eternity , and of having the same glory which he had with him before the world was , as he speaks himself , john 17. 5. and the other forecited place confirms this , for 't is expresly said he came down from heaven ( and he could not do that unless he were before in heaven ) yea and is in heaven , which both passages are meant of his divine eternal nature , as to which he always was and is in heaven . he is said to come down thence when he undertook to assume our human nature , to be made flesh , and with this ascended a short time after his resurrection , and not before . thus they have unwarily made choice of these texts , from which the very deity of christ is so plainly deduced , a doctrine which they can't endure to hear of . besides , from what hath been said it appears that these texts are nothing to that purpose for which they alledg them : and particularly this latter is spoken of the ascension of christ which was then to come , and therefore can't be meant of that which they talk of . yet notwithstanding this the socinian writers hold a double ascension of our saviour ; and they had it from their * great master , who was the first inventor of this figment . † smalcius ( a racovian minister , the author of the racovian catechism , ) ‖ crellius ( a german , but resident at racovia ) ** slichtingius ( a polonian knight ) †† volkelius and others publish it as a very great truth , nay they fancy it to be the first step to all christ's undertakings , and therefore must be of mighty concern . the new set of socinian writers hold the same , before christ enter'd on his office , he was taken up into heaven , say ‖‖ they , to be fully instructed and inform'd in the nature and quality of his office , and of that whole charge which he was to deliver to men . yet , this invention hath nothing in the whole evangelical history to favour it . if there had been any such thing , the new testament would not have been silent : it would have been mention'd by the evangelists , or one of them at least , as a very considerable part of christ's transactions . yea , the apostles creed without doubt , which mentions his ascension into heaven after his resurrection , would have particularly mention'd this , if he had before ascended , it being ( as they say ) of such eminent importance , viz. to fetch down from heaven a religion for us , as they are pleas'd to speak . this ancient symbol would have taken notice that our saviour went up twice into heaven , once to take his instructions from god the father , and afterwards to sit at his right hand . but neither here , nor in the whole narrative of his actions in the gospels do we meet with any thing concerning the former ascension . if the reader is desirous of a farther confutation of this antecedent or preparatory ascension , let him consult the admirable * bishop pearson , who excellently shews the improbability , unreasonableness and absurdity of it . i will only add this as observable , that they confute their new doctrine themselves , for concerning the very texts which they alledg for it , which speak of christ's being in heaven , and coming down from heaven a late writer of the socinian perswasion saith thus , † these texts amount to no more than this , that the lord christ is a messenger , really come forth from god to men : as much is true of every prophet . and so every prophet ascended up to heaven as much as our saviour did . thus they baffle themselves : and they must needs do it , it cannot be help'd because they make use of scripture to such evil purposes , because they study to pervert and distort the sense of it . their business is to bring the bible to their sentiments and opinions , and not to form these by that . nay , if scripture be so express against them that they know not how to evade it , they abandon it rather than they will quit their own conceptions . this is the way of them all : and one of them who was more open-hearted than the rest , le ts us know by his own practice what those of his perswasion should do on the like occasion ; * i would not , saith he , believe that the son of god was incarnate , though i should find it in express words in scripture . and † socinus hath something like this concerning the satisfaction of christ : for my part , saith he , though it were extant in the sacred monuments of the scripture , and there written not only once , but many times , i would not for all that believe it . to summ up all then that hath been said , i ask whether the socinians asserting of repugnancies in the holy scripture , whether their questioning the authority of some of the books , and representing the whole as deprav'd , whether the wilful wresting of particular places to establish their own opinions , whether ( i say ) these be not plain marks of irreligion , and such as directly tend to make men atheists . chap. ii. the writings of some of the socinians , as well as of vaninus and machiavel , who seem to assert a god , prove them not to be no atheists . they have a licence to dissemble . socinus allows not of the proof of a deity either from any inward dictates in a mans mind , or from any outward operations in the world. some of the chief of gods attributes are question'd , if not denied , by the racovians . they admit not of his spirituality . the absurdity of which opinion is discovered . they reject his omnipresence . which doctrine of theirs is shew'd to be repugnant to reason and holy writ . they deny his foresight of future contingent actions . which perswasion is evinc'd to be inconsistent with the nature of god , the discoveries made by the inspired writers , the predictions recorded in the holy scriptures , the providence of god which extends to future events which depend on the free will of man. their notion concerning god's eternity is unscriptural , and unworthy of his excellent nature . therefore no learned writer allows of a successive duration in god , properly and strictly speaking . secondly , we will see what their opinions and apprehensions are concerning god , which is the next particular i propounded to speak of . it is true , some of them in their writings have laudably asserted and maintain'd the being of a god. * crellius is the only man among them that hath professedly and designedly undertaken this task , and he hath done it learnedly and substantially , and i verily believe heartily , for i count it an injury to detract even from an adversary . but there is another sort of men who act under a disguise , and cunningly undermine that cause which they seem to promote . an example of this was vaninus , who was an arrant atheist , and was burnt for being so , and yet writ for the existence of a god , declaim'd against the most pestilent sect of atheism , as he calls it in his amphitheatrum divinae providentiae . machiavel often hints that there is a god , he talks very favourably in behalf of religion , he makes it the very basis and foundation of all civil government , and the cause of all that success and prosperity which attend commonwealths , * where religion is , saith he , there good laws and good discipline take place , from whence the fortunate and happy events of things , especially in warlike expeditions , proceed . as on the contrary , if you take away religion , the commonwealth must needs sink , for where the fear of god is taken away , there follows impiety , and from that the ruine of governments . and afterwards he professedly shews that it is necessary for the preservation and flourishing of kingdoms and common-wealths that religion and the worship of god should be maintain'd . and yet hear what the foresaid crellius saith of this man , † it appears from many passages in his writings that , notwithstanding what he seems to say sometimes , ( for it was necessary to cover his atheism in some manner ) he did not acknowledg any religion at all . and again afterwards thus , ‖ he plainly enough shews that he really acknowledges that there is no god , and ( notwithstanding this ) that he hath no excuse to alledg why he doth not acknowledg a god. if a socinian author ( and one of the learnedest and ablest of them ) thus censures this writer , then there may be ground to suspect that some of those of the party who defend the being of a god , are not sincere in doing so , but make that a pretext and shew to disguise the badness of their other opinions : and it may be thought that as machiavel and socinus were countrymen , so in other respects they are more nearly allied . the racovians will patiently suffer a man to dissent , or seem to dissent from them in many things , if they know him to be right as to the main . they will permit him to use his pen against some of their beloved doctrines , and yet at the same time they will own him as theirs . there is a plain proof of this in those two eminent persons , grotius and episcopius . the former seem'd to be a great abhorrer of socinianism , as appears from an * oration which he pronounced before the states of holland , where he calls it the poison of the church and the worst of heresies , at the mentioning of which all pious men are horribly afraid . and it is well known that he defended the satisfaction of christ ; and yet he is reckon'd and acknowledg'd by the socinians to be of their perswasion . the latter hath in his writings seemingly oppos'd some of the points which socinus's followers adhere to , at least he doth not throughly comply with them , and yet our modern undertakers for the cause put him into the catalogue of their writers . whence we may infer that the party have a licence to dissemble ; their words and profession do not always correspond with their apprehensions ; and consequently when some of them assert a divine being , we cannot thence conclude their real belief of it : or when they seem to confute the contrary opinion , we can't certainly infer that they are in good earnest . wierus , some say , was too well acquainted with diabolical magick , though he writes against it , and defies it . our hopkins , the witch-finder , some think , was vers'd in the black art himself , and practis'd it . i would offer it to the consideration of wise and discerning men whether socinus hath not gratified the atheists ( not to say , that he hath shew'd his own inclination to be one ) when he not only tells us that there is no proof of a god from any innate apprehensions of his being and nature , ( the notion of god , * saith he , is not written in mens hearts , there is no inward principle in their breasts whereby they can by the use of reason come to the knowledg of god. ) but adds likewise that he cannot be proved from without , that is , from any of the works of the creation ; though these have been always voted by the wisest men ( both pagans and christians ) to be a sufficient topick whence we may argue a deity . yet he stiffly denies it , and will not admit of the argument , nay though his denial be a direct opposing of st. pauls words , rom. 1. 20. the invisible things of god , from the creation of the world , are clearly seen , being understood by the things that are made , even his eternal power and godhead . the being and attributes of god , though they are invisible , are understood , and as it were seen by the visible things of the creation . this is the plain meaning of the text , and yet he will not by any means acknowledg it , but by an unaccountable forcing of the words labours to pervert the sense of them , against all the evidence of grammar , criticism , reason , the context , &c. this looks very ill , that we have no notice of a divine being from our own natural reasons , nor from the make and structure of the world. who but faustus socinus would have believ'd this ? and who but a well-willer to atheism would have broach'd it ? especially seeing it is so groundless and senseless an opinion , and so easily to be confuted , for if there be no inward impressions of the being of god on mens minds , and no arguing from the outward and visible works of the creation , then it is certain no pagans could have arrived to the notion of a god , which yet we see they have , and there is no man denies it . wherefore one would suspect that the foresaid gentleman had a great mind to maintain and divulge a paradox which he could not but be sensible would be very grateful to the worst sort of men , if atheists are such . but i wave this , and will consider the socinian opinions concerning god with respect to the first of his properties and attributes , and after that to the trinity of persons , and then particularly to the godhead of christ. i taxed these me●… ( in my discourse concerning the causes 〈◊〉 occasions of atheism ) with denying of the self-existence , spirituality , omnipresence , and omniscience of god. as to the first , i know very well the discipl●… of socinus generally uphold the self-existence of the deity , chiefly to make us●… of it for forming of an argument against the divinity of our saviour , but the * author whom i cited was unmindful o●… that in his hot pursuit after his lordship of worcester , and by the ambiguous matching of self-existent with unoriginated labours to fetch his lordship into the noose which he thought he had prepar'd for him . but because this modern racovian may make some shew of evading my charge by pretending his words were spoken in another's person , and not his own , i will not any further insist upon it , because the reader shall thereby be made apprehensive that i am averse from contending in any dubious matter . i proceed therefore to the next attribute , viz. the spirituality of god , the denial of which i tax'd the racovians with . and here i will first prove the charge , and then briefly represent the unreasonableness and absurdity of this notion which the socinians frame of god. for the sake of the english reader i will translate out of the latin the very words of one of their principal authors , * when we ( saith he ) name a spirit , we understand a substance void of all grossness , such as we behold in visible bodies . thus we say that angels are spirits , and so we call our diviner part ( which philosophers rather call a soul ) and the air ( though it lie open to some of our senses , as the touch ) and other bodies like to this : every one of which hath so much the more this name ( viz. spirit ) allotted to it by how much it is the more subtile . again he expresses it thus , † spirit or spiritual essence is that which is opposed to that essence which is corporeal , that is , which is crass , viz. of such things which we behold with our eyes , especially of those that are terrene . and a ‖ third time he vouches this , for he reckons god and angels and the souls of men in the same rank with air and subtile bodies , telling us that these are spirits in the proper and strict sense . our home-socinians think and speak the same , as is apparent from * j. bidle , who openly declares that god is of a visible and corporeal shape . thus it is plain that the immaterial nature of the deity is discarded by them , and the best notion that they can frame of him is that he is a thin airy body . which how disparaging it is to the divine being cannot but be conceiv'd by every serious thinking man. for let matter be never so fine and subtile , yet still it is matter . the animal spirits ( as they are generally call'd ) are bodies as well as any others : and when they are never so agile and brisk , they have still a corporeal nature : and being such they are finite and circumscribable , which is unworthy of the nature of the supreme being . therefore this was the rational dictate of improv'd minds that god is incorporeal : this was the sense of plato ( as † tully tells us ) and of the all ancient philosophers , by whom he was acknowledg'd to be an incorporeal and infinite mind . again , all matter of it self is unactive and dull , because it hath no inward principle to act and inform it . whatever motion and agitation it hath is from without first of all : all its influence is put into it by another . which to conceive of god is the greatest blasphemy , as well as absurdity . further , all matter or mere body is in its own nature void of sense and perception : and it is not the fineness and agility of it that will make it think and apprehend . the reason is , because cogitation or apprehension is another distinct thing , and quite different from a material being : and therefore it is ridiculous to imagine that what is merely corporeal hath a faculty of thinking or conceiving , of understanding or willing . to be cogitative is far different from being divisible or extended : and the notion of cogitation doth not in the least involve in it the notion of division . there is such a disparity between the ideas of these things that no rational man can bring it into his thoughts that matter is capable of perceiving or performing the acts of the mind . there is an absolute necessity therefore of asserting god to be incorporeal ; we must be forced to subscribe to what our infallible instructer ( who was also god himself ) hath taught us , that god is a spirit , john 4. 24. which words , it is observable , * socinus most grosly depraves , merely to avoid the acknowledgment of this attribute . because 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not in the greek , he makes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the accusative case , and will have it refer to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the foregoing verse , as much as to say , go●… seeks a spirit . this extravagant work doth he make , although the words are a plain proposition , and the grammer of them is easie and obvious . but i have already taken notice of these mens palpable abusing of scripture for their own ends. the next attribute of god which socinus's scholars disallow of is his omnipresence . i had leisure only just to mention this before : now i will produce some evidence of what i said . it is not necessary to believe that the essence of god is immense , saith their great † patriarch . and he hath these strange words in a fragment of his catechism , [ though god's power and wisdom be not circumscribed by any limits , yet it follows not thence that his essence is infinite , ] as if his essence and attributes were not alike as to infinity . he hath more of this nature in another place of his catechism , and in other parts of his writings . * smalcius and † crellius ( two of his fast friends ) deny that god is present every where by his nature and essence . ‖ vorstius limits the presence of god by absolutely denying the ubiquity of his essence . and episcopius ( who is to be taken into the number of the racovians , as i observ'd before from their own words ) enclines this way , telling us that it is not necessary to believe that god is present every where as to his substance and entity , and he proceeds to bring arguments ( such as they are ) to maintain what he saith . and other authors ( not excepting the ** moderns ) might be alledged to the same purpose , but i think it will not be required , because their opinion in this case is so well known . but how derogatory is it to the excellent and perfect nature of the deity ? it is no other than limiting and confining the divine being , and making that finite which is infinite . if god's ubiquity be denied , his infiniteness must be so too . and yet ( which shews the absurdity and inconsistency of their notions ) these foresaid writers pretend to acknowledg that his wisdom and power are infinite , as if infinite perfections could be seated in a finite subject . or rather , these perfections may be said to be god himself , and therefore if they be infinite , the nature of god must needs be such . his transcendent nature is of that kind that it hath no bounds , no dimensions ; and what is so , is every where , and in all places , though not circumscribed by any . but they have such a kind of notion concerning god as pliny had of him , who denies the universal presence of god in the world ( as also his concern for it ) because , saith he , * the divinity must needs be polluted by so base and manifold a ministry . this is the very reason which some of them assign why they refuse to acknowledg the divine ubiquity . but it is the grossness of their conceptions that makes them think thus , for the nature of god is such that he is incapable of being defiled and polluted by being any where . the most filthy places cannot annoy his person and essence . wherefore here ( as at some other times ) they have very unphilosophical apprehensions , and are palpably mistaken about the nature of god. i might shew likewise how repugnant their assertion is to that discovery of the divine nature which we have from the inspired writings . the heaven , and heaven of heavens cannot contain him , 1 kings 8. 27. whither 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 . if i take the wings of the morning , and dwell in the uttermost parts of the sea , even there shall thy hand lead me , and thy right hand shall hold me . psal. 139. 7. &c. which excellent variety of expressions is made use of on purpose to signifie this grand truth , that it is impossible to assign any place where god is not present . and this necessarily results from his infinite nature , which is without measure and quantity : yea , it is the very result of the concessions of the socinians themselves , for seeing they grant the power of god is inseparable from his essence , it must needs follow that this is immense ( and consequently omnipresent ) as well as that . notwithstanding this , the socinians represent god as confined , and , as the epicureans did , shut him up in heaven . if this in them was counted an approach to atheism , why may it not be reckon'd as such in the persons i am speaking of ? and is not the same atheistick tang discernible in their denying god's foreknowledge of future contingencies ? which was another thing i charg'd them with ; and now i stand ready to make it good against them . * smalcius and † crellius are peremptory in asserting that things of this nature cannot possibly be foreknown , for they are not the object of knowledg , therefor●… god doth not know them . the latter o●… these authors designedly undertakes the defence of this , and is very large upon it . and in his comment on the ‖ epistl●… to the romans he stands to this proposition , that god hath no foresight of future contingencies . this doctrine they borrow from their * italian instructor , who spends two whole chapters in the asserting and maintaining of it , and two more in taking off ( as he thinks ) the objections against it . our english writers of the racovian way are of this strain , witness bidle's catechism , chap. 2. and the examiner of my exceptions against the reasonableness of christianity , p. 18. but doth not any unprejudic'd person see that such a notion and belief are very injurious to the deity , who by vertue of the excellency and transcendency of his nature cannot but know and foresee all things ? the perfection of the divine understanding is such that it is able to penetrate into the wills of men , be they never so free , and can infallibly discern and foresee which way they will incline , yea which way they will certainly turn . for the nature of all futurities , whether they be necessary or whether they be contingent , is the same as to god. who can read those words in deut. 31. 21. and not acknowledg this ? concerning the israelites and their future behaviour thus god himself speaketh , i know their imagination which they go about , even now before i have brought them into the land which i sware . which is meant of free and voluntary actions , as appears from what is said in the foregoing verse , when i have brought them into the land which i sware unto their fathers , then will they turn unto other gods , and serve them , and provoke me , and break my covenant . whence it is evident that the most contingent events are foreseen by god. who can read that remarkable passage of the psalmist , and not believe this ? thou knowest my down-sitting and my up-rising , thou understandest my thought afar off . thou compassest my path , and my lying down , and art acquainted with all my ways . for there is not a word in my tongue , but lo , o lord , thou knowest it altogether . psal. 139. 2 , 3 , 4. here are the ways or actions , here are the words , here are the thoughts of men distinctly specified ; and they are all pronounced to be the object and matter of god's foreknowledg . and i desire the reader to observe this further , that this holy man owns the doctrine of god's omniscience though there were difficulties in it , though he could not reach the manner of it . such knowledg , saith he , is too wonderful for me : it is high , i cannot attain unto it , v. 6. as if he had said , how god knoweth and foreseeth all that i think , speak , and act , i am not able to determine : it is too sublime a matter for me to search into ; i am not able to give an account of it . but , however , i am satisfied concerning the truth and reality of it , because god can do more than i can comprehend . but socinus was of another strain , he professedly declares that he disowns the divine prescience because he sees unanswerable difficulties in it , and he can't understand how it is : and his brethren speak after the same rate . but how can they deny god's prescience of futurities when it is made the peculiar character of the deity ? or otherwise we can't make sense of those words isa. 41. 22 , 23. let them shew us what shall happen , and declare us things to come : shew the things that are to come hereafter , that we may know that ye are gods. this sort of knowledg , viz. of those things that depend on the free actions of men , of which the prophet here speaks ( as appears from v. 25 , &c. ) distinguishes the true god from false and counterfeit ones , whereas the knowledg of some other future things is vouchsafed to men , to finite creatures . but this is here propounded as an infallible argument and evidence of the deity , and this is to be found in him alone . it is strange therefore that the socinians should deny that to be in god which is proper to him only , which is his sole prerogative . this certainly is a great eclipsing of the divinity , and it can be resolv'd into nothing but this that they have a design to impair and affront the essential attributes of the godhead as well as the persons belonging to it . but then , how wild a thing is it to assert that god can have no knowledg of these things , when we plainly see it confuted by the manifold predictions concerning future contingencies which the sacred scripture hath recorded ? it is to be wondred at that , notwithstanding this , these men should be so blind : it is strange and unaccountable that they take no notice of their being baffled by the fulfilling of those predictions . likewise , who sees not that the providence of god extends it self to this sort of future actions and occurrences ? for he manages these for great and excellent ends in the world . but how can he do this if he hath no knwledg of them ? can his care and providence be exercised about them , and yet he be wholly ignorant of them ? thus it is evident that at the same time that these men deny the divine prescience , they do also take away providence , for it is impossible that god should dispose , order and take care of those actions and events which he knows nothing of . which shews how absurd and ridiculous that passage in socinus is , viz. * that this prescience ( which we assert to be in god ) doth in some part take away and obscure that continual care which he takes of humane affairs , and renders him in a manner idle . one would not imagine that such an inconsistent thought should come into a mans head , and much less that it should be propagated , as we see in † vorstius and others . if they had not a strong propension to diminish and disparage the divine nature , and to foster atheism , certainly they could not thus discourse , certainly they could not maintain that god is ignorant of what any man will say , think or do the next moment , and that he hath no notice at all of such future occurrences as depend on the free will of man , till they actually come to pass , i. e. when every intelligent creature hath a knowledg of them . there is yet another attribute of god , concerning which they have a very unbecoming notion , and such as is inconsistent with the perfection of the divine nature . god's eternity is represented by them to have in it a succession of duration , as there is in time. they are the very words of * socinus and † crellius . and the ‖ english socinians shew themselves to be of this mind , placing the nature of eternity in a continual succession . and as for the contrary notion , it is laught at by ** some of them as a whimsical paradox . but certainly this is no other than confounding of finite and infinite , and making time and eternity the same . where there is a succession there was a beginning or first moment , which plainly demonstrates that there is no succession in god's duration , because all things are together and at once ; those things which are past , present , and to come are always coexistent and present with him . one day is with the lord as a thousand years , and a thousand years as one day . psal. 90. 4. which denotes that there are not in god those three differences of time before mention'd , which are in the duration of other things ; and consequently there are no parts , and no succession in the eternal duration of god. this i think no man will deny to be rational , that the permanency of the existence of god should be differenced from that of creatures , and accordingly that he should not be measured by time as they are , i go upon this ground , that we ought to attribute the most excellent things to god , and on the contrary that we must not ascribe any thing to him that hath the least shew of imperfection , and will diminish his divine nature . this is a safe and sound bottom , and on this i build my assertion , viz. that a temporal and successive duration ought not to be attributed to god. if the persons i am now dealing with had attended to this rule , had built on this basis , they would not have pronounced such strange things as they do concerning the deity , they would have had more reverent conceptions of him , they would not have vented such undue opinions and surmises concerning the divine nature . but they , having taken up these perswasions , endeavour to defend them : and it hath happen'd that some persons of good parts have undertaken the cause , and have rendred it very plausible to such as have not an eye to the infinite and superlative excellency of god , the supreme being . i grant that there are some learned me●… that are no socinians who seem to allow 〈◊〉 a successive duration in him , but if we duly weigh what they say we shall find tha●… they chiefly set themselves against the nice speculations of the schoolmen concerning succession , but they apply no●… this way of duration in a proper and strict manner unto god. they ow●… some kind of resemblance of it in eternity , but there is no such thing formally and really . the reason is , because succession implies in it parts , divisibility , motion , and change : but an eternal undivide●… being is not capable of these , and by consequence not of such a duration . wherefore it follows that the eternity of god is in a manner denied by the socinians . 〈◊〉 leave it to the reader to apply the censure . chap. iii. the socinians renounce the doctrine of the trinity , though it be attested by the scriptures and fathers . they prophanely ridicule it . they are demonstrated to be atheists from st. john's words epist. 1. ch . 2. v. 23. the argument thence is reduced into an unanswerable syllogism . the doctrine of the trinity intended to be particularly treated of hereafter by the author . christ's own words evince his divinity . the socinians denying him to be god , consequently deny his satisfaction . that text rom. 3. 25. is urged against them . whence are inferr'd the unreasonableness and impiousness of their cavils . christ's satisfaction proved from isai. 53. 5. &c. from those texts which speak of reconciliation made by him . from other places which mention his suffering and dying for us , his being a propitiation , an atonement , a sacrifice , his redeeming us . both the former and present socinians agree in reviling , deriding and blaspheming the merits and satisfaction of our saviour . thus far we have seen how defective they are in their notions concerning god , as he is considerd in respect of his attributes . we will in the next place observe how faulty they are in their conceptions concerning him as he is to be considered in regard of the persons contain'd in his godhead . the holy scriptures , especially of the new testament , bear witness that though there is but one living and true god , yet in unity of this godhead there is a trinity of persons , of one substance , majesty , power and glory , viz. the father , the son , and the holy ghost , and that these are the very eternal god. there is abundant proof of this from a vast number of plain and obvious texts : and yet the disciples of socinus stubbornly disown this clear truth . they have but a text or two on which they pretend to build their belief of christ's ascending into heaven before he preach'd the gospel , and yet these ( though distorted and misapplied ) they think a sufficient basis for that conceit of theirs : but behold , there are above fourty clear places of scripture that express the plurality of persons in the deity , and yet they refuse to attend to them . which shews that their eyes are blinded , and that they wilfully give themseves up to mistakes . the ancient fathers and writers of the church ( who may well be supposed to have some knowledg and insight into this catholick doctrine ) unanimously assert the distinction of persons or subsistencies in the godhead . which is freely acknowledg'd by their * great master , who expresly tells us that the fathers both before and after the nicene council asserted the same doctrine that we do . and this hath been the constant profession of the orthodox churches of christ in all ages . but notwithstanding this , there have been † some since ( unmindful of what their master had acknowledg'd ) that have endeavour'd to make the writings of those ancients speak for them , therein both contradicting socinus and the truth it self . nay , even among the late tracts published by the socinians there is a formal collection of the testimonies of greek and latin fathers against the doctrine of the trinity . so contradictory are these men to one another . there is no need of quoting any particular authors under this head , for they all appear in a full body against the doctrine of the trinity . here the whole posse of the racovians shew themselves , unanimously and without exception declaring that there is but one person , viz. the father in the deity , and that the son and holy ghost are not god. as for the blessed son of god , who is the word of the father , begotten from everlasting by him , they affirm him to be no other than a man , dignified with the title of god. and as for the holy ghost , who is co-essential with the father , some of them ( who adhere to bidle ) hold he is an angel or messenger of god , and consequently a person ; but the rest of them deny his personality , and averre him to be only the power or influence of god , and so is only a quality or operation : as if the apostles were commanded to baptize all nations in the name of an operation , and at the same time were enjoyn'd to baptize in the name of two persons . this is very harsh , yea it is very inconsistent and absurd . however , these gentlemen are resolv'd to adhere to it , and they bid open defiance to the contrary doctrine . one of the new racovians tells us that the doctrine of the trinity * hath been partly the direct and necessary cause , and partly the unhappy occasion of diverse scandalous and hurtful errors and heresies . and in an * other place he declares that this doctrine is as little consistent with piety towards god as it is with reason . but this is very mild and gentle in respect of what some other unitarians belch forth . † servetus , when he speaks of the eternal generation of the son of god , ridicules it in such blasphemous terms as are not to be mention'd ; and he often calls the trinity the three-headed cerberus . others of them stile it a monstrous idol , a fiction of antichrist , an infernal imposture . nay , our very modern socinians , our english unitarians discover a very prophane spirit when they speak of this sublime point . the language of the church , say ‖ they , concerning the trinity is barbarous , the faith of it is monstrous . and how elegantly do they express themselves when they tell us that the doctrine of the trinity is ** a dry and empty notion , a bone without marrow or meat ? what can be more prophane than their stiling the three divine persons a * trinity of cyphers , a † club or cabal of gods , a ‖ council or committee of gods , where sometimes one is president , and sometimes another is in the chair ? and in another place , a ** castle in the air . let any one peruse their late prints , and observe the freedom of their stile , and he will find it light and frothy ( as one of their late converts expresses it , ) he will find them irreverently deriding this profound mystery , in such terms as i forbear to rehearse , because they are most unworthy of christian and pious ears : he will find that there was reason to tax them with irreligion and prophaneness , and that i did not reproach them when i laid these to their charge . but more especially as to the imputation of atheism ( which is yet a more heinous crime ) i request the reader to consider and weigh 1 john 2. 23. whosoever denieth the son , the same hath not the father . take it thus with the preceding verse , which will lead us to the true sense of it , who is a liar but he that denieth that jesus is the christ ? he is antichrist that denieth the father and the son. as much as to say , if there ever was a person that might be truly call'd a liar , if ever any one deserved that name , then certainly he that gainsays so plain a truth as this ( that jesus is the messias ) is an egregious liar and falsifier , and merits to be call'd so . yea , to such a one belongs not only the title of a liar but of antichrist , because he is a direct opposer of christ as he is the son of god the father , and therein he denies both the father and the son. for it follows , whosoever denieth the son , the same hath not the father , i. e. he denieth the father as well as the son : for not having the father is the same with denying him , as is most evident from the preceding clause , where it is call'd the denying of the father . now , i suppose the socinians will grant that the denying of the father is atheism : wherefore they must also acknowledg that the denying of the son is atheism , because in this is included ( according to these words of st. john ) the denying of the father . this is a text which it may be they never thought of , i. e. of the force and influence of it : therefore i intreat them to ponder it now , and therein to see a character of themselves . there were , in st. john's days some of their perswasion , some that opposed the doctrine of the trinity , and especially the deity of the second person : they labour'd to perswade the people ( as their successors do in our days ) that the father only was god , and that the son was excluded wholly from the divinity . against these this apostle writes , and lets them know that the son as well as the father is god , and that he who hath the confidence to deny the deity of the former , doth also deny the deity of the latter . for such is the nature of the godhead that one of these cannot be alone . the father is not without the son , neither can be , as this latter cannot be without the other . they are so mutually joyn'd together that they cannot be separated . this coherence is inviolable , and therefore he that denies the eternal son of god , denies the father : he that holds christ is not the son of god by eternal generation , in effect disowns the godhead of the father : and if he doth so , he is an atheist . this is a text that is not question'd by the socinians , though the next clause in the verse hath been doubted of by them and some others . these are words of the beloved disciple , who lay in his master's bosom , and had extraordinary communications of the spirit , and was favour'd in a peculiar manner with divine discoveries and revelations . this is he that may be called the great eagle ( and that name was given him by the ancient christians , and much more deservedly than maimonides was called so by the modern jews ) because he soared so high , and was so quick-sighted in the mysteries of the gospel , and had so piercing and sagacious judgment . therefore on all these accounts i urge this text upon socinus's followers , wishing them to be sensible of the force of it . the denyal of the son , i. e. the denying of his divinity , which consists in his being the eternal son of god , is a denyal of the father also . they that deny the deity of the second and third persons , in whom the divinity as truly subsists as in the first , deny the deity of the first person . whence it irrefragably follows that a socinian is an atheist . he is so if this syllogism will prove him to be one , he that denies the existence of the true god is an atheist , the socinian doth the former , therefore he is the latter . the major is the definition of an atheist , and therefore can't be question'd . the minor therefore must be proved , which is easily done thus , he that denies christ to be the true god , i. e. of the same substance with the father , denies the existence of the true god : but a socinian denies christ to be the true god , i. e of the same substance with the father , ergò . the second proposition will not be denied by these gentlemen , therefore i am to clear the major , and that is soon done thus , if the denying of the divinity of the son be the denying of the divinity of the father , then he that denies christ to be the true god , &c. denies the existence of the true god : but the denying of the divinity of the son is the denying of the divinity of the father , ergò . the first proposition will be yielded , i conceive therefore i am to take care of the second , and that is soon done from the forecited text , which is the very substance of it , whosoever denieth the son , the same hath not the father . the socinians do the former , therefore they are guilty of the latter . there is such a connection between these two , the father and the son , they being co-essential and co-eternal , that if you deny the divinity of the one , you deny that of the other . therefore they are atheists that deny the divinity of our saviour : therefore in the interpretation and accounts of the apostle st. john socinians are such , for they deny the divinity of christ , and in denying of that deny the divinity of the father . and this was the sense of the primitive christians , and pious professors of that holy religion , for we find that baptism is called * the renouncing of atheism , and the acknowledgment of the deity , because in the form of baptism the trinity is professed and owned , or the deity as it contains in it three distinct persons . those therefore who deny these are chargable with atheism ; more especially according to the tenour of st. john's words , and the acception of the gospel those are to be taxed with it who deny the divinity of our saviour . perhaps it may be expected here that i should maintain the contrary truth , and formally prove and defend the doctrine of the blessed trinity : but because there have been so many treatises lately published on this subject , and because i design a just discourse upon it my self , among others which i intend to offer to the world upon the articles of the creed , i will dismiss this point at present , after i have made this one request to the reader , that he would vouchsafe in the most serious manner to consult the writings of the new testament , and studiously to compare those places together which refer to this sublime matter ; and then he will clearly discover the truth and reality of it . nay , he will be convinced of this from what our saviour himself saith concerning it : for though ( for certain good reasons ) he was not forward to declare his divine nature and dignity , yet he often uttered such words as implied that he was the eternal son of god ; as when he said , before abraham was , i am , john 8. 58. i and my father are one , john 10. 30. ( which the jews well understood , when they laid this to his charge , thou makest thy self god , v. 32 , 33. ) he that hath seen me , hath seen the father , because we are but one. john 14. 9. i am in the father , and the father in me , v. 10. and to the very last he owned this , mat. 26. 63 , 64. mark 14. 62. whereas the socinians as resolutely persevere in the denial of it . and denying him to be god , they consequently disown his satisfaction , which is another black crime chargable upon them , and that very justly . they allow christ to be a saviour , but on this account only because * he shews us the way to salvation , and will afterwards bestow it upon us . as to his death , they acknowledg that it was to confirm the new covenant : by shedding of his blood he ratified it , as before under the law the old covenant was made by effusion of blood . but that there was any thing meritorious and properly expiatory in his death , they stiffly deny : for it is the peremptory decision of † socinus himself that christ did not merit by any thing that he did ; and ‖ volkelius expresly saith the same . nay , the former of these , to explain himself , undertakes to shew that ** christ had nothing in him that was singular , and that he neither did or suffered any thing that was so . and †† elsewhere he hath these very words , whatsoever christ suffered can have in it no greater vertue than if any mere man whosoever had suffered the same . this is the opinion they have of the passion and death of our blessed lord. and to propagate this they endeavour by all means to vilifie his priesthood . they manifestly confound his * sacerdotal and regal office. and they would perswade us that his † priestly office did not commence here on earth , but was first exerted in heaven . and such like inventions they have to evade the satisfaction of christ , which they resolve never to admit of . accordingly socinus hath no less than fifteen chapters against it in one ‖ book : and the three first parts of an ** other treatise are wholly spent on the same subject , and are indeed but a repetition of what he said before . and he again insists upon this in his disputation with francken . his †† friends unanimously assert the same doctrine , and professedly declare that christ did not by his death satisfie the divine justice for our sins , and thereby reconcile god to us . and in the same places of their writings where they assert this , they also add that god remits the sins of men without any compensation to his offended holiness and justice , for this they say is contradictory to the other . nay , they tell us that * there is not in god that justice whereby he is moved to punish sin. but shall we believe the racovian catechism or st. paul's words ? god set him ( i. e. christ ) forth to be a propitiation , to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins . rom. 3. 25. and in the next verse , to declare his righteousness , that he might be just , i. e. to make it appear that god would not pardon sin without satisfaction made to his justice . the holiness and righteousness of god's nature , and the opposition of them to sin oblige him to animadvert upon it . wherefore sin cannot go unpunish'd , and consequently it cannot be forgiven without satisfaction ; that is , either the guilty person must suffer , or the fault and punishment must be transferr'd on another . and whereas these great masters of reason alledg that christ could not be punish'd because he was an innocent person ( for it is injustice to punish the innocent , ) they cannot deny this to be a maxim of clear reason that an innocent person may voluntarily undertake to suffer for one that is guilty as a man may take another's debt upo●… him , and oblige himself to discharge i●… for him . this is an act of mercy an●… generosity . and much more such w●… christ's undertaking to discharge o●… debts , to expiate our sins by suffering fo●… us . and seeing he gave himself for 〈◊〉 tit. 2. 14. i. e. willingly offer'd himself seeing it was an act of his choice an●… consent , we may conclude that the●… was no injustice done him when the gui●… of our sins was laid upon him , and whe●… he bore the punishment which was primarily due to us . this is so plain a thin●… that any man of correct thoughts m●… needs discern it . the case then is thi●… god would not pardon the sins of me●… committed against him without som●… recompence and satisfaction : but we●… could not make satisfaction for our selves therefore an other did it . christ underwent the punishment which we deserved , and which should have been inflicted on us , and thereby he fully satisfied god's justice , which , as he is absolute and supreme governour of all the world , requires that sin should be punished . how unreasonably then do the socinian writers cry out against this just and wise dispensation of heaven ? yea , how irreligious and prophane are they in exploding and scoffing at that which is the only way of man's salvation ; i may justly take up the words of an ancient and pious father on the like occasion , * i doubt not but if god had taken another way to effect our salvation , they would also have found fault with that , for they are fastidious , and hard to please , and are only skill'd to cavil at the mysteries of the divine dispensation . so far as we know , this particular method of redeeming lost man was necessary , because satisfaction could not otherwise be made to the offended majesty of heaven , nor could the injury done to him be fully repaired . but we are sure of this that this satisfaction and reparation were really made by christ the son of god. this is evident from those texts of scripture which acquaint us that he took the guilt of our sins upon himself . he was wounded for our transgressions , he was bruised for our iniquities : the chastisement of our peace was upon him , and with his stripe●… we are healed . — the lord hath laid o●… him the iniquity of us all . — for the transgression of my people was he stricken . isai. 53. 5 , 7 , 8. in which words it is as eviden●… as any thing possibly can be that the penalty which was due to us for our sins and transgressions was transferr'd on him , and he thereby satisfied for us . and this is the meaning of heb. 9. 28. christ was once offer'd to bear the sins of many : and of gal. 3. 13. he was made 〈◊〉 curse for us , he underwent the punishment for sin which we in our own persons should have undergone , and particularly he suffer'd that cursed death of the cross. his satisfying for us is plainly denoted by the frequent mention of reconciliation , i. e. doing some great thing whereby he purchased the favour of god for us , when we were enemies to him . when we were enemies , we were reconciled to god by the death of his son , rom. 5. 10. god hath reconciled us to himself by jesus christ , 2 cor. 5. 18. or , in other terms , v. 19. god was in christ reconciling the world unto himself . it pleased the father that in him should all fulness dwell , and ( having made peace through the blood of his cross ) by him to reconcile all things unto himself , col. 1. 19 , 20 , 21. and accordingly , you hath he reconciled in the body of his flesh through death , v. 22. and in several other places this reconciliation is expresly mention'd . and whereas they acknowledg ( being convicted by these plain texts ) that christ reconciled us unto god , but then object that it is not said , he reconciled god to us , it is a vain and childish suggestion , and a mere playing upon words , and therefore is not worthy of a serious man , for our being reconcil'd unto god and his being reconcil'd to us amount to the same : one is included in the other , or one at least follows upon the other . if we are reconcil'd to god , it is a natural consequence that god is so to us : and therefore these objectors shew themselves here ( as they do upon several other occasions ) to be very triflers . the satisfaction made by our saviour is likewise manifest from those places of the new testament which make mention of his sufferings for us , dying for us , laying down his life for us , mat. 20. 28. john 10. 11 , 15. rom. 5. 6. 2 cor. 5. 14 , 15. 1 thess. 5. 9 , 10. heb. 2. 9. 1 pet. 2. ●…1 . 3. 18. and many other places which inform us that christ freely substituted himself in the room of lost men , and suffer'd in their stead . and this doctrine is undeniably proved from those texts which represent christ as a real * propitiation and † atonement for our sins , and consequently as a true and proper expiation for them , i say proper , because socinus and his brethren are not backward to acknowledg that he expiated for sin , but then they mean it not in the proper sense , i. e. that he deliver'd us from the guilt of sin by the efficacy and merit of his blood. this likewise is plainly set forth to us in those texts , 1 cor. 5. 7. christ our passover ( i. e. our paschal lamb ) is sacrificed for us . ephes. 5. 2. he hath given himself for us an offering and a sacrifice for a sweet-smelling savour : especially those in the ‖ epistle to the hebrews , which speak of christ's offering himself , and being a sacrifice , and thereby making an atonement unto god for us upon earth : which destroys that senseless fiction of theirs , that he was not a priest till he came to heaven . this is undeniable that where the oblation of the sacrifice is , there is the priest ; now , it was here upon earth that he was a sacrifice , he offer'd his own blood upon the cross , and therefore he was a priest upon earth . therefore it is said , when he had by himself purged our sins ( viz. here by his blood ) he sat down on the right hand of the majesty on high , heb. 1. 3. he first offer'd himself a propitiatory sacrifice for us , and then appear'd in glory and triumph in heaven . other texts speak of christ's ransoming us , mat. 20. 28. 1 tim. 2. 6. and of redeeming us , rom. 3. 24. 1 cor. 1. 30. and this redemption was by his blood , eph. 1. 17. 1 pet. 1. 18. call'd the blood of god. acts 20. 28. this was the price that was paid for us , and so it was a proper redemption . this price was paid to god's justice , to free us from the penalty which was due by the law , to rescue us from eternal wrath and misery . this is the doctrine which the holy scripture teacheth us , and this is the faith of all who rightly understand those writings , viz. that christ suffer'd and died to satisfie the divine justice in our stead , and thereby to expiate for our sins , and to redeem us from death and hell , and to purchase life and salvation for us . the socinians deny this , and thereby subvert the whole gospel , turn christianity upside down , ruine the very foundations of our religion , and pluck it up by the roots . according to the doctrine of these men we are yet in our sins , for there is no true expiation for them ; we are in a state of misery , we are overwhelm'd with our own guilt , we are hopeless helpless creatures , and our condition is deplorate , for there is no satisfaction made to god for our transgressions . nay , they are not content barely to renounce the contrary doctrine , but they explode it with great derision and reproach . first , as to christ's merits , we are told by * smalcius that it was taught by socinus and ostorodus that the opinion of those is false , absurd and pernicious who have invented and feigned that there is any such thing as merit in christ. and smalcius himself is bold to call it † the fictitious merit of christ : and in another place , ‖ that dream of merit . then , as to the satisfaction it self , he is not afraid to stile it ** a fiction that hath its rise from the brains of curious men . and in his * catechism he hath these reproachful words , though now it is vulgarly thought by christians that christ by his death merited salvation for us , and fully satisfied for our sins , yet it is a deceitful opinion , erroneous and very pernicious . yea , this doctrine of christ's satisfaction is termed absurd and impious by † socinus . i appeal now to the reader whether i need prove that those who use such language deserve the last of these epithets themselves . but are the english and modern gentlemen of the same opinion ? yes ; as you may see in mr. bidle's scripture catechism as he calls it , but very unjustly ) chap. 12. where he shamefully corrupts the sense of scripture to render his opinion plausible . if you consult ‖ one of their later writers you will find him in a deriding manner thus representing the doctrine of the trinitarians , viz. that god the son being incarnate in our nature fulfill'd for us all obedience by his active righteousness , and by his passive one he more than exhausted all that punishment that is or can be due to sin. whatever he did , was for us , and what he suffer'd was in our stead : and one drop of his blood was sufficient to ransom a thousand worlds from the demerit of their sins . and then they labour to shew that the belief of such doctrine is of very ill consequence , it 〈◊〉 the cause of the decay of piety , and it is tha●… which bolsters men up in their wicked courses afterwards in way of derision they thus express the doctrine of christ's satisfaction , because they ( i. e. the trinitarians ) pretend that god was incarnate and suffer'd in our stead , they are forced to this conclusion , that god hat●… freely pardon'd , and yet was infinitely overpaid for all our transgressions and sins ; that of his mere grace , the abundance and riches of his grace ( forsooth ) he will pardon and save the peniten●… because he hath received for them ( 〈◊〉 you 'll believe it ) a price of redemption , &c. these tenents they scoff at a●… branches growing upon the trinitarian stock , these they brand as scandalous , absurd , and heretical doctrines , p. 11. 12 , 14. i●… an * other place they declare that the oblation which christ made of himself , was not made to the justice of god , or by way of a full reparation to it , but as all other sacrifices ( of beasts ) formerly were , an oblation or application to the mercy of god , and ( as 't is added ) by way of humble suit . in the same place they represent christ's satisfaction as a monster , and scoffingly call it the trinitarians fetch-back , though presently after they seem to retract this jargon . in a pretended * letter to the clergy of both universities these new racovians again ridicule this doctrine , and so they do in some others of their late pamphlets ; which makes their character very wretched and dismal , and to be abhorr'd by all good men and sincere lovers of christianity , for it is too manifest that † they tread under foot the son of god , and count the blood of the covenant an unholy thing , and do despite unto the spirit of grace . thus you see how the doctrine of socinianism , as it respects god in general , and more particularly the persons of the godhead , and in a more especial manner the second person or lord christ jesus and his undertakings , you see ( i say ) how extremely vitiated it is , and fitted to the conceptions and notions of prophane and atheistical spirits . chap. iv. they maintain that the first man was not created in a state of uprightness ; notwithstanding the writings of the old and new testament expresly assert the contrary . original sin , though attested in the same holy writings , is pronounced a fable by them . their groundless notion concerning the spirit and divine assistance . with the pelagians they hold that man 's natural strength is sufficient in order to faith and obedience . what are vain and lying words according to slichtingius . their strange conceptions concerning the future state. it is their opinion that the souls of the deceased are void of all perception and sense ; that they live not , yea that they exist not . which notions are proved to be contrary to scripture and reason . the immortality of humane souls is shock'd by these men. which shews their irreligious and atheistical propension . some of them disbelieve the resurrection of the wicked . they deny that the dead shall rise with the same bodies . it is unreasonable to deny this merely because of some difficulties that attend it . though we should suppose an annihilation of human●… bodies , yet god can raise them the same . much more may we conceive the same bodies to be rais'd out of something . the very notion of resurrection implies the rising again of the same individual body . this doctrine is founded on the eviden●… testimony of scripture . it is shew'd i●… what respects the contrary opinion is an argument of impiety . thirdly , i proceed to consider the groundless and irreligious sentiments of these men concerning the first man , and the state he was in at his first creation . they all agree in this , tha●… though adam had a natural ability to do what god enjoyn'd him , yet he was not created in a state of uprightness . he is said , to be made upright , eccl. 7. 29. because he was not created depraved , but if we speak properly , he had no natural rectitude or righteousness . so * socinus . and therefore he gives us his judgment very decisively thus , let us conclude that adam even before he transgressed the commandment of god , was not truly just. † ostorodus hath the very same thoughts of him : and another * warm gentleman ( who is much applauded and admired by the party ) tells us plainly , but in no very clean language , that it is an old , stinking fable that the first man was adorn'd from his very creation with holiness and supernatural gifts . but what if this fable be in scripture ? yes most certainly : that which he in such vile terms represents as such , is the doctrine of the old and new testament . god created man in his own image , gen. 1. 27. and that we may be more ascertain'd of it , it is repeated in the very same place , in the image of god created he him . and that this image consists in holiness and righteousness is clear from eph. 4. 24. and col. 3. 10. where the apostle speaking of the image of god in which man was at first created , places it in righteousness and true holiness , as well as knowledg . how then can it be said by these writers that the image of god wherein our first parents were created did not consist in sanctity and righteousness ? how can it with truth be said by them that there was no positive moral goodness and rectitude in them ? this is directly contrary to what the inspired writers deliver concerning them . let the reader now judg on which side the fable is , and at the same time let him judg how impiously the foresaid writer represents the word of god as an old stinking fable . to proceed , there being according to these new theologists no original righteousness in the first man , his posterity can't be deprived of it , and accordingly they deny original sin , i. e. though they hold man's nature is corrupted and depraved , yet they say it was not at all derived from our first parents : there is no defect , blemish or depravity , propagated to their posterity . * socinus frequently vouches this , and so do † several of his partizans , who appear in great throngs upon this occasion , and with one consent profess that by adam's apostacy the nature of man is not depraved : men are not born with a propension and inclination to that which is vitious by reason of that first defection . the contrary opinion is according to socinus an arrant cheat and imposture , for these are his own words , * whatever evil effects in mankind the evangelicks ( i. e. the protestants ) and papists attribute to the first sin of our first parent , it must needs be that they are vain fictions and dreams of men . whatever divines dispute about original sin , it is all of it clearly to be reckon'd as the mere invention and forgery of humane wit. and then he pretends in another place to trace its pedegree , and to give you the rise of it , † that device of original sin is a jewish fable , and brought into the church from antichrist . if this be true , then st. paul's doctrine is fabulous , by one man sin enter'd into the world , rom. 5. 12. by one man's disobedidience many were made sinners , v. 19. and this great and infallible apostle himself must be reputed judaical and antichristian when he adds that death enter'd by sin ( i. e. by that one man's sin spoken of before ) and so death passed upon all men , for that all have sinned , viz. in that first man. and again , v. 17. by one man's offence death reigned by one . hence it is evident that adam and his race became mortal because of this first transgression . but socinus is of another opinion , for it is the first thing you meet with in his pr●…lections , that the first man before his f●… was by nature mortal . * smalcius will by no means grant that adam was created in a state of immortality , but that he was naturally mortal , and though he had not sinn'd , yet he should have died . with whom agrees † volkelius , confidently asserting that mortality is not the effect and punishment of the fall. and the rest of them hold that adam's sin endamaged himself , but no body else : his posterity suffer'd not ; they derived no infection , no stain , no depravity from him . but are the english socinians of this mind ? yes , for the effects and consequences which we ascribe to adam's fall are flatly denied by bidle in his scripture-catechism , chap. 3. and in ‖ one of their late prints the natural depravity of man , i. e. his propensity to evil and his aversness to good are represented as false and absurd . and a little before they peremptorily deny that adam's race have any sin derived , much less imputed to them , and that they are punish'd for it . god cannot possibly do this , they say ; yea they have the confidence to add these horrid words , * that this is the just character of an almighty devil . accordingly they cry down original sin as a mere sham and imposture . and hence issue a great many unsound assertions , which are in great vogue with all socinians . if there be no corruption convey'd to adam's race , if they receiv'd no hurt by his fall , then they have ( as he had ) a natural power to do all that god requires of them . they still have an ability by nature to imbrace all good , and to avoid all evil ; which are the express terms used by their † writers . and hear what their ‖ catechism saith : qu. is there not need of the inward gift of the holy spirit that we may believe the gospel ? a. not at all . and the reason is assigned afterwards , namely because this is a gift that is confer'd upon such as already believe the gospel . here you see what is the racovian divinity , it is not the spirit of god that enlightens mens minds , and enables them to receive the truth : the spirit of god is not the original of all grace in us . this is clear from that notion which they form concerning the holy spirit , by which is meant , say * they , in the writings of the new testament , first the gospel , secondly a firm and certain hope of eternal life . this is the only acception of the word spirit in the new testament so far as we that are under the present dispensation of the gospel are concern'd . as for the former , all christians enjoy it ; as to the latter , it is given only to those that believe and obey the gospel ; whence it necessarily follows that it is not requisite before our belief or obedience . there is no such thing as the spirit in order to these , i. e. in order to the producing of them in our hearts and lives . but though they thus in plain terms renounce the spirit , is there not some divine help necessarily requisite for the begetting of faith and holiness in us ? yes , † they grant there is an outward help vouchsafed , viz. the promises and threatnings in the scripture . and there is an inward one , but what is that ? it is no other than this , * god's sealing what he hath promised , in the hearts of those that obey him : which is the same with what was mentioned before , viz. a certain hope of eternal life , and this is wrought in those that already believe and obey . so that it is manifest when they speak of the spirit and divine help , they mean no previous assistance or operation in order to believing and obeying . these spiritual acts according to them are not the product of divine grace , and the help of the spirit , for they do not follow these , but go before them . this is the exact account of the racovian perswasion concerning this matter . the present set of unitarians hold the same : they scoff at the particular aids and efficacy of the spirit in order to conversion ; † they mock at the inward word which god speaks to the heart , whereby the word written or preach'd is rendred effectual , whereby sinners are first convinc'd , and then reclaim'd . they , with nicodemus , profess that * they know nothing of this marvellous doctrine , they can't imagine what kind of thing this inward word is . they will not by any means allow † that all is done in religion by the grace of god and the assistance of the spirit , beginning , continuing and perfecting good actions in us . this was the very heresie of pelagi●…s ; he and his abettors held it was in every man's natural power to believe and repent , without any inward operation of the grace of god , or influence of the holy ghost . in this the socinians agree with the old pelagians , if the writers of those times give us a true account of them . these let us know that it was confidently affirmed by them that it is in the power of man to choose spiritual good without the special assistance of god : yea , that it is possible to keep the commandments so strictly and exactly that they shall not stand in need of pardon : that they may arrive to such a perfection in this life that they shall be able to live without sin , as ‖ st. jerom and ** st. augustin ( who narrowly inquir'd into the sentiments of these men ) expresly inform us . that the socinians have a touch of this last ( to say no more ) might easily be proved from what is said by * smalcius and † crellius , and ‖ bidle , and others of them ; and indeed it partly follows from the abovesaid principle . but the falseness and impiety of it are discernible by those who regulate their thoughts and apprehensions by the holy scriptures , and who attend to that ** article of our church , 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. wherefore we have no power to do good works pleasant and acceptable to god , without the grace of god by christ preventing us , that we may have a good will , and working with us when we have that good will. there is nothing plainer and clearer in the new testament than this , that man can do nothing without the particular assistance of god that will be available to his salvation . and if any man asserts the contrary , he makes void the undertakings of jesus christ , for he came to redeem us and save us because we were not able of our selves to effect any such thing . wherefore to say we that can of our selves and by our own natural strength do the things that are acceptable to god , and will be conducible to our eternal salvation , is to render the redemption of christ useless and unnecessary . and this is that which the persons i am speaking of drive at , and thereby undermine christianity it self . in brief , judg of the doctrines of the socinians from what we find in * one of the heartiest souls of them all , who in his commentary on the epistle to the ephesians reckons these following particulars among vain and lying words , i. e. groundless and false doctrines , viz. justification by the grace of god , and not by good works ; christ's obedience , and his dying for our sins , faith in christ , confession , repentance , remission of sins , baptism and the other sacrament . also he reckons up among these the fall of adam , divine predestination and election , and afterwards false opinions concerning god , and christ , and the holy spirit , i. e. ( according to his meaning ) the believing of the sacred trinity . need i now come with my old charge ? do not these men talk like infidels ? fourthly , i proceed to display their strange conceptions concerning the future state , and those things which relate to it ; and to examine whether upon that account they deserve the character that was given them . i will reduce all to these four heads , viz. their perswasions concerning the souls of the deceased , concerning the general resurrection , concerning the last judgment , and concerning the punishment that follows it . and the reader will soon perceive that their apprehensions about all these speak them to be irreligiously disposed . nay , it will be as plain and evident as any demonstration in mathematicks that these writers promote the cause of atheists in the world . first , as to the souls of those that are dead , * socinus holds that till the resurrection they are devoid of all perception and sensation . in these formal words he speaks , the soul of man , after this life doth not so subsist of it self as that it is sensible of any rewards or pains , or that it is capable of feeling them . and he adds that this is his firm opinion . and that we may not mistake him , he adjoyns this , it sufficiently appears that my sentiment is this , viz. that the soul of man doth not so live after his death , as that of it self it is capable of rewards and punishments . his friend smalcius is more positive and down-right , for these are his words , * we firmly believe that the deceased saints exist not : for ( as he explains himself ) the body perishes , and the soul hath no life and perception ; therefore it may be said that the saints exist not at all ( null●… modo . ) in an † other place he asserts that souls departed live not the life of spirits , and adds that it is contrary to scripture to assert otherwise . and further , if souls lived thus , it could not be said , that the dead are not , because they are as is their chief part . if you would know the ground of this opinion , it is this , the soul ( they say ) can't live without the body , and therefore when this dies , the other doth so too . the foresaid author expresses it thus , ‖ as the body without the spirit is a carkase , so the spirit without the body can exert no actions , i. e. is as it were a carkase , is dead : and in an * other place he is as peremptory . † slichtingius labours to prove that humane souls live not on this side of the last and general resurrection , which appears from their not having a sense of any thing between the time after their departure hence and the resurrection . the dead are not sensible , saith he , and accordingly separate souls having no sense and perception are concluded to have no life . again in an ‖ other place in his commentary he saith the souls of the just are not sensible of happiness till after the resurrection . ** volkelius would seem at first to be a trimmer , for he tells us the soul neither dies nor lives , it is neither mortal nor immortal . but when he comes to explain himself , he lets us see that he is no dissenter from his brethren , but concludes with them that the souls of the departed are insensible of any thing before their re-union with the bodies . nay , as you shall hear afterwards , he improves this insensibility into an extinction . i will mention * crellius in the last place , though he is a racovian of the first rate ; he gives it us as his perswasion that the souls of the dead have no perception , no knowledg of any thing . and in an † other place he determines that the departed saints enjoy not the happiness of heaven before the end of the world. and ‖ afterwards he undertakes the proof of this , and produces eight arguments for this purpose ; but he generally founds it on this hypothesis , that there is no perception without the body , and therefore till there be a reunion of soul and body the deceased can have no feeling of celestial joys , they remain destitute of all s●…se . thus they all agree that humane spirits after death have no life or activeness ( for one is synonymous with the other ) no capacity of exerting themselves . but what can be more contrary to those discoveries which are made to us in the sacred and inspired writings ? our blessed saviour saith , god is not the god of the dead , but of the living mat. 22. 32. which words are spoken of abraham , isaac and jacob who are long since departed this life , wherefore it is undeniably evident that these patriarchs live . but they do not live as to their bodies , therefore it must be meant of their souls . the same infallible instructer ascertains us that he who hears his word , and believes in him who sent him , is passed from death to life , john 5. 24. which words though they may be interpreted concerning a state of spiritual death and spiritual life in this world , yet they have a fuller meaning , and comprehend in them the passing of believers at their death into a better life than they had before , viz. that which is everlasting , of which he speaks in the very same verse . and such are said to be passed ( as if it were already done , which is usual in the scripture-stile ) because of the certainty of the thing hereafter . but the socinian theology runs counter to this , they say believers pass from life to death , to a state that is wholly uncapable of sense , life or action . those words of our saviour , this day shalt thou be with me in paradise , luke 23. 43. prove that the soul enjoys it self immediately after death , and is in a state of bliss and happiness . the apostle had a desire to depart , and to be with christ , phil. 1. 23. and assigns this as a reason , which is far better , that is , far better than to abide in the flesh , to continue in this world , which he speaks of both before and after these words . but according to socinus's followers it is far worse , for after the soul's departure from the body it hath no understanding , no perception at all of christ , or any thing appertaining to him . again , these men confront not only scripture but reason : they shew themselves as bad philosophers as divines , for if they had a right apprehension of the nature of humane souls , they would not talk after this rate . their notion destroys the very soul of man , for it deprives it of its essential and inseparable quality , which is thinking . and besides , they grosly imagine that the body helps the soul in its operations , yea that this cannot subsist without the assistance of that ; whereas according to the best notions we can form of the body , as it is now corrupted , it is a hindrance to the operation of the soul. and as for the soul , it is so far from being worsted by its separation that it is in a much better condition as to its actings than it was . death is but snuffing of this candle ( so 't is call'd prov. 20. 27. ) it makes it shine the brighter . when the soul leaves the body , it becomes more brisk and active than ever , being freed from that fleshly clog and luggage which depressed it . this is true philosophizing , but the other is the very dregs of epicurism . it degrades the rational part of man , especially that of good men , for all separate souls according to them go to the same place , the wicked and the godly are alike as to that , there is no difference between them till the resurrection and last judgment . which is a great deal worse than the doctrine of the church of rome , which assigns different limbus's to the good and bad . and then , they are all equal as to this , that they are senseless , and uncapable of knowing or acting , or any ways exerting themselves . though the soul exists , yet it is as if it were not , it hath nothing of its true nature , which is in a manner thrusting the rational spirit out of its being . who doth not see that the belief of the insensibility and inactivity of the soul makes way for the belief of its non-subsistence after the death of the body ? and so all religion is dampt , and the hopes of a future state are quite laid in the dust . the socinian writers verge upon this : thus from the pen of one of the authors before mention'd we have such words as these concerning the soul , * properly speaking , it neither dies nor lives , but only causes life as long as it is joyn'd to the body : wherefore properly speaking , it can't be said to be immortal , for immortality belongs only to those beings which themselves actually live . and speaking another time concerning the souls that are separated from their bodies , he intimates their non-existence for a time , for he applies those words to this purpose , † for to be rais'd from the dead is no other than to exist again after a ceasing to be . and you heard before what another of their writers said , viz. that the saints departed exist not . why is this said but to shake the belief of the soul's immortality , and to make men stagger about this important point ? it is said that servetus held the soul to be mortal , and ‖ one of their late writers ( a german noble man who left his countrey , and came over to racovia , one that hath a great encomium from the party ) makes way for this epicuréan notion by publishing to the world that though it be easily granted that the soul is not made of bone or flesh or muscles , or nerves , &c. yet it remains doubtful whether it be not a very thin body consisting of vapour , or air , or ether diffused through this crass body . and indeed if god himself be but a finer sort of body ( as these racovian writers represent him ) it is no wonder that they imagine the soul of man to be such , for why should they exalt it above the nature of the supreme being ? so the everlasting subsistence both of god and of the souls of men is hereby shock'd . as to the latter of which i desire it may be observed that though smalcius ( one of their great scribes ) will by no means be thought to deny the immortality of them , because that may seem a little too gross , yet he industriously and purposely evades , yea opposes ( and so do some others of the perswasion ) those texts of scripture which are made use of by divines to prove the soul's immortality and subsistence after the death of the body . this shews what they are inclinable to , this acquaints us that they have but an indifferent opinion of the immortality of humane souls , which the very pagan philosophers with great earnestness and concern asserted . is not here then 〈◊〉 great defect of religious principles ? i●… not here a demonstration of the impio●… disposition of their minds ? do they no●… discover a tendency to that receiv'd doctrine of the atheists , that the soul is of 〈◊〉 perishing condition , and survives not th●… funerals of the body ? which opens 〈◊〉 broad door to all licentiousness and prophaneness . then as to the resurrection , which i●… the next thing i am to speak of , the●… have been some of the socinian way tha●… absolutely denied the resurrection of th●… wicked , and in order to that their subsisting after this life . let any man impartially scan what their adored * patriarch●… and what † ostorodus saith , and he wil●… suspect them to have enclin'd this way . but it is true the former of these professes himself unwilling ‖ to give offence to some , and therefore doth not wholly deny that the impious shall rise at the last day . i confess i find not any of their celebrated writers plainly and expresly asserting this ; yea , one or two of them very expresly declare against it . but this is that which may unexceptionably be laid to their charge , that though generally they own a future rising from the dead both of the just and unjust , yet they deny that they shall rise with the same bodies . they are the express words of smalcius , * we believe not that these bodies , which we now carry about us , shall rise again , volkelius expresses the sense of the rest when he tells us that our bodies which shall be raised at the last day † shall have not only other qualities , but another matter of substance , and in plainer terms , other bodies shall be substituted in their room . and what is the reason ? because , saith he , these bodies which we now have shall vanish , perish , and consequently we shall never more have any thing to do with them . these great pretenders to reason cannot digest the identity of the dying and rising body , because they think it is a doctrine too hard to be conceiv'd , it contains many difficulties in it which it is not easie to solve . but what then ? must it therefore be counted unreasonable and incredible ? i deny the consequence , for there are many things which are hard to be understood , and yet we freely give assent to the truth of them . we meet with several occurrences , of which we can't give an exact and punctual account . some secrets in nature are inveloped with an impenetrable veil . god hath done more than we are in a capacity to comprehend . he is pleas'd to reserve some things from our clear and distinct knowledg , and yet every wise man believes the reality of them . it is so here , a christian man believes that the same flesh which was dissolved by death shall be united to the soul at the last day , although he is not able to assign the manner and way of it . but he looks upon the thing it self as very reasonable , because raising of the same flesh is possible with him with whom nothing is impossible . suppose the bodies of the dead to be reduced to nothing ; notwithstanding this , he can bring them again into being , for this was the case of all things at first : they were not , and afterwards they were by god's almighty power . shall we then think it impossible for him to resuscitate the same body , though we should grant it to have been for a time annihilated ? it is true , god cannot make the same body to be , and not to be at the same time , because this is a plain contradiction , but he can make the body to exist at the last day which had lost its existence for a time . and so all the objections about humane bodies being eaten and devour'd by men or beasts , and those beasts eaten by men , &c. are easily removed . but we need not go so high to solve the phoenomenon , for supposing no annihilation , it is sufficient to say that * he that made the body of nothing will much more raise it again when it is something : or with another of the ancients , † he that made all things with a word can easily restore man's body , for it is much easier to renew what is decay'd than to make those things which are not , without materials . and , as another primitive writer argues , ‖ it is more difficult to begin that which is not , than to iterate that which was . and again in the same place , that doth not perish with god which is taken out of our sight . the body is chang'd this and that way , and seems to disappear , but ** it is kept safe by the great guardian of the elements , he that takes care of all bodies . and thence he concludes that there shall be a resurrection of the same individual body at the last day . and truly this is so reasonable a thing that , if we deny it , we deny the resurrection it self , for if the rais'd bodies at the last day shall not have the same substance that they now have , they will not be our bodies , and consequently there is no rising again of our bodies . for nothing is rais'd but what fell or was laid down ( for rising answers to these , ) but that matter which is supposed to be substituted in the room of our bodies did not fall , was not laid down , therefore it cannot rise , and consequently there is no rising again at all . this argument is thus represented by a * great man , the identity of the body rais'd from death is so necessary , that the very name of the resurrection doth include or suppose it ; so that when i say , there shall be a resurrection of the dead , i must intend thus much , that the bodies of men which lived and are dead , shall revive and rise again . for at the death of man nothing falleth but his body : the spirit goeth upward , and no other body falleth but his own ; and therefore the body , and no other but that body , must rise again , to make a resurrection . so that it follows hence that those who disbelieve the resurrection of the same body , in effect deny the article of the resurrection of the body , for the same body must rise , or none at all . this is evident from 2 cor. 5. 10. we must all appear before the judgment-seat of christ , that every one may receive the things done in his body . the same individual body that died must revive , that the same bodies wherein sin was committed may be punished for sinning . and who can resist the force of those plain words , rev. 20. 13. which are spoken of the general resurrection at the last day ? the sea shall give up the dead that are in it , and death and the grave deliver up the dead which are in them . what means this giving and delivering up the dead in those places , unless the very same bodies that fell are to rise ? for bodies might be made and shaped out of matter in any other places , if the dead were not to appear at the day of judgment in their own bodies , in the very bodies they laid down in the grave , or in the sea , or any other place . it is true , they shall not be the same as to their condition and quality , for this corruptible must put on incorruption , and this mortal immortality , but their identity shall be preserv'd in respect of their nature and substance , these being the same that they were at their fall . this doctrine ( saith that excellent writer before named ) is most agreeable to the language of the scriptures , to the principles of religion , to the constant profession of the church . and being so , it is no wonder that it is disrelish'd by the persons i am speaking of , who are wont to disregard the sacred writings , to subvert the principles of christianity , and to slight the suffrage of the universal church . in all which they manifest an irreligious temper : and more especially in disbelieving and opposing this explication of the article of the creed they have shew'd an atheistical spirit , which always disgusts that truth which flows from the scriptures , and is revealed to us by the holy spirit in them ; for herein they let us see that they are backward to give credit to the supreme truth god himself . and besides , there is a farther tang of impiety in this opinion of theirs , because it bereaves god of the glory of his infinite power in reuniting the same bodies to the same souls at the last day : it eclipses the honour of his mercy in rewarding believers in the same flesh wherein they serv'd and worship'd him in this life : it obscures his justice in punishing sinners in those very fleshly vehicles which they had here on earth , and wherein they did so much mischief in the world . and lastly , it being such a diminishment of the doctrine of the resurrection , it is to be fear'd it will have too great an influence on the lives and conversations of men . they being dissetled as to the full belief of this , they will waver in their faith of the future state , they will be regardless of that mighty concern , and they will be backward to fit themselves for it . thus the racovian doctrine is an impediment to religion , and a nourisher of vice and ungodliness . chap. v. their false apprehensions concerning the last judgment are detected . they are not consentaneous to the design of that great transaction . they are contrary to that description which is given of it in scripture . they are a gratification to atheists . it is their belief and profession that the ungodly after the resurrection shall not suffer torment , but shall be annihilated . this is disproved from luk. 10. 14. mat. 18. 8. mark 9. 44. 2 cor. 5. 10. an objection answered . the perniciousness of this doctrine , and its tendendency to atheism on several accounts . i●… is no wonder that socinianism , for the sake of this doctrine , is plausible . nevertheless the doctrine is irrational and groundless , and exploded by some of the wisest pagans . this will be further discover'd in their notion concerning the last judgment : which , say they , consists not in any trial or judging of the world , in any calling them to account , but only in assigning them their different lots and conditions . to be judg'd , saith * slichtingius , is to be rewarded or punish'd . † volkelius makes no distinction between the judging and punishing of the wicked . the judg knows who are to be saved , and who to be damn'd , and therefore need not use any formal citation , or lay open mens lives . but those who talk thus should remember that human actions are to be exposed at that day , not because god hath not a perfect knowledg of them , but because it is his pleasure that men should be acquainted with them , that the good actions of the righteous may be applauded , and that the evil ones of the unrighteous may be condemned in the face of the whole world. that this is the will of god we learn from the sacred writ : and where can it be learnt but there ? therefore for these men to argue , and reason the matter , notwithstanding the express will and appointment of god , is a sign of a very perverse and irreligious frame of mind . is not the transaction of the last day represented to us as a formal judiciary process ? doth not the scripture speak of the judg , acts 10. 42. 2 tim. 4. 8. heb. 12. 23. jam. 5. 9. of the judgment-seat , rom. 14. 10. 2 cor. 5. 10. or the throne or tribunal for judgment , rev. 20. 11 ? and yet will there be no judging ? is it not said with particular respect to that day , that god will bring to light the hidden things of darkness , and make manifest the counsels of the hearts ? 1 cor. 4. 5. is it not said , he will bring every work into judgment , with every secret thing , whether it be good , or whether it be evil ? eccl. 12. 14. and do we question then whether there will be this judicial action , which we properly call judging or trying ? i●… there shall be this manifestation of the hearts and actions of men , can we imagine that rewarding and punishing at that day are the very same with judging ? further , it is said expresly that then men shall give an account , viz. of their words and actions , mat. 12. 36. heb. 13. 17. 1 pet. 4. 5. and can any but volkelius imagine that * this form of speech signifies that they shall be punished , if they be guilty of such and such crimes ? again , in the description of the general resurrection and last judgment it is said , the books were opened , and the dead were judged out of those things that were written in the books , rev. 20. 12. which imports that there shall be a scanning of their lives ; their thoughts , words and deeds shall be plainly discover'd : these as well as the persons of men shall appear before the judgment-seat of christ , they shall be manifested and laid open . thus the socinian error , as it is repugnant to good reason and common sense , so it contradicts the holy book of god , and the revelation made to us there . but this is not all , can there be a greater gratification ( excepting what i shall mention next ) to all atheists than this , that none of their actions shall be accounted for ? let men blaspheme , curse god and man , abjure religion , persecute the faithful professors of it , give themselves up to all manner of debauchery and immorality , and live and die in the commission of all that is impious and execrable : yet they shall never hold up their hands for this at the last bar , there shall be no particular account given or taken of any thing of this nature . yea , let men live all their days in a course of dissembling , in a mere form of godliness , in an external shew of religion , whilst they inwardly abhor all that is good and vertuous : nay , let them be guilty of the most horrid villanies and impieties in secret , let them privily commit murder , adultery , incest , and whatever fact is horrid and detestable , and let them descend into the grave with the guilt of these upon them , without the least motions of godly sorrow and repentance ; yet be it known to them that they shall never be examined concerning any of these past actions , no not concerning the most secret of them . whatever enormities they have been guilty of here , they shall be passed by in silence hereafter , and never be mention'd to their shame and reproach . surely this doctrine was calculated for the meridian of those whom i before named . surely none but persons of atheistical principles could , o●… would vent such conceptions as these , and none but those who are lovers of them can embrace them . the last thing which i propounded to speak of under this head of my discourse is the punishment which is awarded at that final close of the world . and here i shall shew that the socinians have wretchedly perverted the holy scriptures , and have thereby gratified those persons who live without god in the world , and make their lusts the only rule of their actions . though they generally grant that the ungodly shall rise at the last day , yet they tell us that immediately after that they shall be annihilated , or , which is the same thing , they shall utterly cease , and eternally perish , * as socinus expresly saith . this perishing of the wicked was at first but hinted by this writer , and therefore a † judicious author calls it the covert doctrine of the socinian : but afterwards ‖ he and others were plain and open enough : for according to him the punishment of the wicked is a total and eternal dissolution ; not a perpetual torment , but a perpetual extinction . ** smalcius interprets mat. 10. 28. where christ threatens destruction both of soul and body in hell , of the utter perdition of them , and not of the tormenting of them . †† he propounds it as credible that ungodly men , as well as devils , are to be utterly destroyed and annihilated , and that the righteous only shall survive . and if he did not believe it , why did he make reply to those places of scripture which are produced to prove the contrary , as you may see in his disputation concerning the last judgment ? in the * same place he hath these words , the soul or spirit can't be cast into hell , because according to solomon it returns unto god. † slichtingius is positive that all the future punishment of the reprobate is that they shall be eternally destroyed or consumed . according to ‖ crellius the punishment of christ's enemies after the day of judgment ends in the delection of them . i 'll mention ** one writer more , whose words are these , god will inflict upon 〈◊〉 man a punishment that is greater than his demerits : now , there can be no sins so grievous as to equal eternal torments . eternity is a long time , and this is the greatest punishment that can be to be deprived for ever of eternal happiness , and to perish for ever . as for the english socinians , they are presumed to write after the copy of their †† countryman , who hath publickly told the world that all the wicked are to be burnt up , and to perish eternally , and never to be any more . and i have lately receiv'd it from a professed friend of the gentleman whom i have had to do with about the one article , that he hath sometime express'd his thoughts to this purpose concerning the eternity of hell-torments , when it hath been propounded to him : but he knows best whether he hath given occasion for such a report . it is certain that this is a doctrine disallow'd of by the church of christ in all ages , and therefore disallow'd because repugnant to those discoveries of god's will which we have in the infallible writings of the evangelists and apostles . our saviour told the inhabitants of cho●…azin and bethsaida that it should be more tolerable for those of tyre and sidon in the day of judgment than for them , luke 10. 14. and again , he saith , it shall be more tolerable for sodom and gomorrain that day than for that city which receiv'd not his apostles , mat. 10. 15 but could he thus speak if the racovian position be true , that the punishment allotted to the wicked at the last day is their utter dissolution ? can the condition of some persons be more tolerable than that of others , if their punishment be the very same ? and must it not be the same if it be annihilation ? this makes the punishment of all equal , for one can't be more annihilated than another , and consequently it can't be more tolerable for one than another . but if we embrace the other assertion , viz. that the wicked being raised to life at the last day shall be continued i●… that life for ever , that thereby they may suffer that torment which they deserve for their sins , then we may understand what our saviour saith , then we may apprehend how it shall be more tolerable for some than others at the day of judgment : that is , the misery of the damned shall be proportion'd to the●… crimes , they shall be punish'd according to the heinousness of their enormities mighty men shall be mightily tormented . but there can be no such thing as this , if there be an utter extinction of the wicked at the last day ; if their very persons perish , they are uncapable of any punishment ; and if that be true , it can't be said it shall be more tolerable for one than another , which yet is the determination of our saviour himself . again , is it reasonable to believe that the reprobate shall perish and be extinct when the holy scriptures assure us that they shall be cast into everlasting fire ? mat. 18. 8. which is call'd hell-fire in the next verse ; and when we are ascertain'd they shall at the last day depart into everlasting fire , mat. 25. 41. which in the last verse of that chapter is call'd everlasting punishment ; is it the meaning of this direful doom that they shall cease to be ; and sink into nothing ? is it the punishment of the cursed at that day that they shall be void of all sense of pain and misery , i. e. that they shall be uncapable of any punishment ? yes , this is the interpretation which the socinians put upon the words . particularly * smalcius and † crellius urge this notion of everlasting fire , and make it to be of the same signification with eternal perdition , destruction , or annihilation . but how absurdly is this done , when this everlasting fire , to confirm us in the belief of the endless perpetuity of it , is in other places of the gospel term'd unquenchable fire , as in mat. 3. 12. and in ‖ five verses ( which is exceeding remarkable ) in mark 9. it is call'd the fire that is not quenched , and that never shall be quenched . i argue then thus , that fire which is unquenchable , which shall never be extinguish'd is of endless duration : but hell-fire is such , therefore it is of endless duration . it is impossible to withstand the force of this argument . i do not say it is impossible for a whiffling disputer , one that delights in cavelling , to raise an objection against it , for what truth is there ( though never so great ) which the wit and sophistry of wrangling heads cannot suggest something against ? but this i say , it is impossible that any one who is serious and in good earnest , and hath a reverence for the holy scriptures should not acknowledg that the eternity of the infernal torments is fully declared and confirmed by this foresaid expression of unquenchable fin. and we are to reckon all the forementioned texts as so many different and distinct proofs of the eternal duration of that punishment which the wicked shall undergo . and this is call'd not only fire that is not , and shall not be quench'd , but the worm that dies not , mark 9. 44 , 46. which cannot with any shew of sense or reason be synonymous with annihilation . shall these men then be call'd rational ( tho i know none call them so but themselves and their admirers ) who assert the contrary ? do they not shew themselves masters of great reason when they tell us that the worm which dies not , is that which utterly ceases to be , when they hold that not to be at all is being in everlasting fire or punishment ? those that can assent to these propositions are reasonable men indeed : yes , in their own esteem , but not otherwise . whence perhaps it was that volkelius ( who in other matters sticks close to the racovians ) by reason of the gross inconsistency of this opinion was offended at it , as appears from socinus's sixth epistle to him : and we do not find in his writings ( as is noted by * bishop pearson ) that he ever assented to it . i might alledg 2 cor. 5. 10 , a place which not only shews that the same body rises ( for which i made mention of it before ) but also that the wicked shall be punish'd afterwards in their bodies , for the receiving the things in their bodies ( the word done being not in the original , nor need it be in the translation ) is their being dealt with in way of punishment or reward as to their bodies , which cannot be unless they subsist both in body and soul , to endure that punishment , or to enjoy that reward . this i conceive is very clear , and it is impossible to reconcile it with their being reduced to nothing , with their perishing for ever . but it is objected that in the scripture it is often said of the wicked , that they shall be destroyed , they shall perish , they shall die , which is as much as to say , they shall be annihilated , they shall be deprived of their essence . i answer briefly , they mistake the meaning of those expressions , for it is plain and manifest from what hath been premised that these terms , destruction , perdition , death denote not the privation of existence , but of the former state and condition which they were in , and their changing it for one that is eternally miserable . to an unprejudiced and discerning eye , and that attends to the stile of scripture , it is evident that these expressions signifie the utter separation of the damned from god ; and the undergoing of his wrath to eternity ; and consequently they imply pain and torment , yea the never-ceasing infliction of them unto endless ages . this is that which is meant by the second death threatned to the wicked , rev. 20. 14 , 15. 21. 8. for in those places we find that the lake of fire and the second death are synonymous , which shews that the death of the damned is no other than their everlasting punishment , their being tormented in the flames of the everlasting fire before mentioned . but notwithstanding this , the socinians persist in their opinion , and flatly deny the perpetuity of hell-torments . which is that which the atheist would have , that which he constantly professes as his belief , that after death the soul perishes ; or if it chances to hold out in its subsistence some time , yet at last it will vanish into a non-entity . there cannot be a more pernicious doctrine than this , for first it diminishes the guilt of sin , as if it did not deserve eternal torments , as if these were above the demerits of the greatest sins and enormities , for so the racovian writers speak . again , this gives men occasion to deny the wisdom and justice of god , which is a considerable step to atheism . to what end and purpose do reprobates rise again , and are brought to judgment , if there shall immediately follow an utter extinction of them ? doth the great ruler of the world shew himself just if they be neither punish'd in this life ( as often it happens ) nor in another ? shall not the judg of all the world do right ? and can he do so if they that have done all the mischief imaginable to others , shall feel none themselves here or hereafter ? moreover , this encourages men in the commission of sin , for they chear themselves with this that they shall presently have an end of their misery , there shall be a speedy release from their pains , their torments ( if there be any ) shall quickly have an end , for they are told by socinus's disciples that everlasting fire wil●… soon be extinguish'd , that the worm which never dies is mortal . this , i say , mu●… needs animate men in their sinful and vitious enterprizes : for they will not be backward to make such conclusions as these , we may venture to live as we list seeing there will be no penalty inflicted upon us that will last long , seeing the punishment of our sins will soon have a period . indeed such an inference from the doctrine is genuine , and no other could be expected to be made by these persons . wherefore as long as the premises are entertain'd , we must look for no other deductions . it is true , it hath happen'd sometimes that their own principles and maxims have not had an immediate influence upon them in their acting , they do not follow the natural conduct of them . but this is certain , the nature of their principles promotes a vicious life : these are in themselves apt to excite men to all sin and wickedness . as on the contrary , the belief of the endless punishment which is denounced against impenitent sinners quickens men in their repentance , is an effectual motive to them to forsake their sins , is a powerful incitement to the performance of all christian offices , and whatever is pleasing unto god. take away this , and what a damp is there to vertue and religion ? shall the worst and vilest men live here in splendor and in a fruition of all things according to their hearts desire , and shall they afterwards meet with no penalty for all their cursed actions ? must they only be deprived of their beings , and at the same time of the sense of all that is painful or hurtful ? in short , shall they neither be punish'd here , nor hereafter ? or is this all their punishment , not to suffer any ? then hell is but a fable ( as some of the poets represented it , ) then damnation is but a fiction . and who will not add , that this is the high road to atheism ? these are the things that make socinianism so plausible at this day , this makes all men of atheistical principles and debauch'd lives cry it up , for it quenches the flames of hell-fire , which men have been so much affrighted with . hence we may guess that racovianism will be a fashionable doctrine , if there be no check put to it . it is no wonder that so many persons favour it , that those who defend it are applauded . the reason of this is plain , they present them with such a scheme of religion ( for it is likely they 'll call it so ) as is grateful to their vicious inclinations , and assures them of impunity after all the most heinous and enormous actions of their lives . these men truly are to be pitied , for they can discourse and argue very well if they please ; some of them have a good talent that way , only they abuse it . they are great admirers of reason , and yet they are so far misled as to imbibe such an irrational and groundless notion as this , that not only the bodies but the souls of all the wicked shall perish and be annihilated . some of the wise pagans express'd their belief of the immortal state even of the worst men : but these rationalists absolutely renounce it , and thereby shew themselves worse than pagans , ( and which is worst of all ) miserably plunge themselves and others into that lake of everlasting fire which they scoff at . chap. vi. these men have dangerous assertions concerning christianity , as 1. that there is but one single article of christian faith necessarily requisite to be believed , viz. that jesus is the messias . some reflections on the writer that lately maintain'd this opinion . remarks upon those that applaud his sentiments . his unhappy enterprize briefly described and condemned . he and his friends by their publick silence confess their inability to return an answer . but yet they are heard to rage , and thereby discover an impotent passion , which argues guilt . 2. they hold that all doctrines in christianity are to be subject to the strictest test of humane reason . this shew'd to be the sense of the very english socinians . how the rule of reason is to be applied . what the foreign and english unitarians assert at one time , they deny at another . thereby they give proof of their changeableness . at the same time they betray their cause , and against their wills befriend the truth . 3. they hold that there are no mysteries in christianity . the late asserter of this opinion reflected on . it is against reason and scripture . some exceptions answered . christianity 〈◊〉 self is endangered by this doctrine . fifthly , their notions concerning chr●…anity it self are very unsafe and dangerous . i will take notice here of three of them : the first is an assertion lately vented , or rather lately furbush'd up , and in some formality presented to the world by one that is a well-willer to the racovian way . i mean mr. lock : for now it is the catholick belief and vogue of his very friends and favourers that he is the author of the late treatise concerning the reasonableness of christianity . and seeing his own friends and admirers call it by his name , i hope it is no offence in me to do so . the summ of it is this , that in all the books of the new testament there is but one single article of christian faith necessarily requisite to be believed and assented to by us : and this article is no other than this , that jesus is the messias . i have elsewhere proved this to be a socinian doctrine : and it is well known that a professed unitarian ( of a considerable standing in the world ) hath publickly asserted this proposition in terminis , and hath labour'd to defend it , and dedicates his undertakings to mr. lock . they both confidently aver that the sole believing of this constitutes a christian , and a member of christ ; and there is no necessity , in order to salvation , that any thing more should be the object of our belief . this is the doctrine which they industriously maintain : but how unreasonable and groundless it is , i have made evident in another place ( to which i refer the reader ) where i have shew'd that this is one way to extirpate the christian religion out of the world , and to introduce infidelity . only at present i insert it here to make up the socinian farce . it was not proper to leave it out of the rhapsody of heretical opinions which those men are professors of . having spoken so largly of it already . i will now only make two or three reflections on it and its author , and so dismiss it . it may be observ'd that * he began first to deny the natural notions and principles that mens minds furnish them with : and this was an introduction to his late enterprize . he by no means allows of connate idea's , those treasuries of all natural knowledg . it is remarkable that he that is so much against the scholastick way , and systems , yet maintains the old maxim of the schools , that the understanding is a mere blank , with nothing written in it . where it might be noted further that herein he exactly agrees with † socinus , whose words i quoted before . though these natural impressions in all mens minds are the foundation of religion , and the standard of truth as well as of morality , yet he wholly renounces them . but if this gentleman had followed socinus in nothing but this , or matters of the like nature , i should never have mention'd it , for though it is my perswasion that there are these innate notices and idea's in humane souls , yet i censure no man for his mere dissenting from me in this speculative point . that which i only observe now is that from his laying aside those natural principles he proceeds to slight the christian ones , to curtail the articles of our faith , to ravish christianity it self from us . and whereas he tells us he designed his book for novices and weak christians , he cannot but be ashamed of such an evasion ; for whether christians be weak or strong , the necessary and indispensable doctrines of christianity must not be conceal'd from them , much less must they be denied for their sake . this were to make a double christianity , which is a strong and unaccountable representation of it , not unlike the conceit of some jewish doctors , who say there is a messias the son of joseph , and a messias the son of david , a humble and poor messias , and a glorious or pompous one . surely the gentleman cannot forbear blushing at such pitiful inventions as these , which are so like his own . i know nothing can excuse him but what his own pen hath suggested in another place , where he cries out * is there any thing so extravagant as the imaginations of men's brains ? where is the head that hath no chimaera's in it ? here i would observe likewise what sort of people admire his notions , and applaud his late enterprize about one article of christianity only . there is very much to be gathered from this , viz. what kind of persons are eager to imbrace his sentiments , and to commend them to the world . the author of a late little piece , entitul'd a letter to the deists , declares that * all that jesus christ made essential to christianity is evidently a●… improvement of natural religion , in which words he comprises the summ of deism , and consequently lets us know what he is , and that he writ that letter to himself . to give us a farther insight into his own character , he falls upon preachers , and stiles their sermons pedantick forms of pulpit-speeches , pag. 133. and in the same place talks of tricking the priests out of their trade which is so much complain'd against . and then , within a few pages after comes mr. lock 's encomium , pag. 136 , &c. though the priests and pulpit-men of this age be so intolerable , yet mr. lock makes amends for their defect . this great figure compounds for those cyphers . wherefore in a religious fit ( as it were ) he blesses god for this writer's reasonableness of christianity , and professes he finds it an evidence that he is not able to resist , because ( poor gentleman ) he is not willing . then he rehearses mr. lock 's beloved proposition , and vouches it , viz. that * nothing but this alone , namely that [ jesus christ is the messias ] is required absolutely to denote and characterize a man a christian. and this zealous proselyte adds further that all are sectaries that offer other notions than mr. lock hath in that book , that draught of christianity , as he calls it . thus we see who are mr. lock 's admirers . deism and an antipathy against priests ( i. e. all professed ministers and guides in religion ) are necessary qualifications in order to being his converts . an † other writer compares him to david , good king david ( so he words it ) and me to shimei , as if the reasons i had offer'd against his late writings had been no other than cursing of him . but would you know what manner of man this is that is such an abettor of the author of the late reasonableness of christianity , and so severe upon the animadverter on it ? you may partly learn it from this position which he publickly maintains , that in the beginning of the book of job there are odd , if not impossible passages told of satan and the sons of god , of job himself , his wife , his children and friends . and he determines it to be a mere f●…k made by some idle jew : and afterwards he calls it a monstrous story . and abundance of such like impious stuff you may me●… with in the pamphlet he hath published to the world . this may in some p●… satisfie the reader what kind of men they are that defend and patronize mr. loc●… late assertions . a man may for the most part make a judgment of an author by those that approve of and extreamly magnifie his undertakings . and generally those that publish them are of the like kidney . if these be for divine machiavel , it is probable the writer proves so too . i am apt to think well of the gentleman himself who was the collector of the reasonableness of christianity , but i pity him for his unhappy choice of his notion , and his more unhappy and successless defending it , wherein he strains upon his reason and conscience , to support his cause : otherwise he would not have used such arguments as he doth , and repeated them . he had got some credit by his former attempts concerning humane understanding and education ; and now his name being up , he is further tempted to shew his parts , and to discover his great antipathy against systems , which he every where strikes at ; the design of which is to establish one of his own , or to foster scepticism by beating down all others . he unfortunately ingages in a province above his capacity , and boldly attempting to correct and amend christianity , overthrows it . he makes our saviour a coward , he turns the epistles of the apostles into wast paper , he perverts the plain words of the gospels , and he misrepresents and doubts of the most fundamental articles of the christian religion . one would wonder that such wild conceptions should possess any thinking head . it is strange that any serious man can believe these things , and frame such thoughts of christianity . it is true , the fundamental articles of our belief are few ; but there is a difference between a few and but one only , which is the thing that this writer maintains , even with the hazard of his judgment , and the forfeiture of his formerly acquired reputation . but he and his friends ( the one-article-men ) seem to have made satisfaction by their profound silence lately , whereby they acknowledg to the world that they have nothing to say in reply to what i lately laid to their charge , and fully proved against them , both with relation to this gentleman in particular , and to the professed socinians in common . some of them faintly give out that i have mistaken mr. lock ; if so , then they would oblige the world by shewing the mistake , and letting men see wherein and in what instances i have misapprehended his sense and meaning . he that pretends to bear such a love to the bulk of mankind , should now shew it : and so he would , if he could . if their case had not been desperate , i should have heard from them before this , for 't is well known that our modern unitarians court all opportunities of setting the press on work . and they had time to do it before his majesty's injunctions were publish'd : not to say , that some of them have ventured to the press since . besides , these injunctions , i conceive , debar them not not from clearing themselves ( if they could ) from those substantial objections and exceptions which have been made against their assertions . wherefore i take it to be an unquestionable verity , that these men , who were voted such champions by the party , are vanquished , and that they have not answered because they could not . but from all hands i hear that their more retired language and countenances speak their extraordinary disturbance and disorder of mind . it is observed that some of them cannot conceal their great regret and passion , but in a raving manner express their dislike of what i have writ . which i take to be an infallible argument that they are baffled , that they are wounded under the fifth rib . for they having no supports from reason and arguments , therefore they fly to down-right raillery . thus they let their cause die , because they cannot keep it alive . and indeed , as it is observ'd of less perfect animals , which are hastily form'd and produced , that they are short-lived ; so fares it with opinions that are defective and imperfect , and found out of a sudden , they are generally exploded in a short time , and scarcely survive their chief authors . this , it is probable , will be the fate of the foresaid deficient and maim'd opinion about one article : this mushrom notion that hath no root and foundation , will soon decay and come to nothing . another dangerous notion relating to the christian religion is , that every thing in it is to be submitted to the exactness of reason , and what will not bear that test , is no part of christianity . socinianism was first of all founded on this basis , this was the main thing that was insisted upon . socinus makes it his business to destroy the doctrines of original sin , of the holy trinity , of christ's satisfaction , of baptism , &c. by force of reason . demonstrations are to be required in all things that concern our salvation , saith * smalcius . and even at this day this suggestion of theirs is as useful to the new socinians as the rain-deers of lapland to the inhabitants of that country , which serve them for all uses . they can evade plain places of scripture , they can overturn the foundations of religion , they can settle their own opinions , they can impose upon the belief of mankind by this one artifice . it is but setting up this idol , and then presently they sacrifice all the great mysteries and truths of christianity to it . when the trinitarians assert the doctrine of christ's divinity , when they maintain the incarnation of the son of god , when they affirm that there are three personalities or subsistencies in the deity , and when they profess their assent to other the like articles of the christian faith , they are cried out against because they are not level to humane conceptions , no idea can be formed of them , they contradict our natural notions ; and for this reason alone they are laid aside by them as contradictions , absurdities , impossibilities , pure non-sense , for so they are wont to express themselves in their late writings . they boast that * theirs is an accountable and reasonable faith , when they deny the trinity . in an † other place they reject this doctrine because it is against the dictate of reason : and they argue from this against the incarnation , or the union of the two natures in christ. at an ‖ other time they are for reducing all things to common sense . and lastly , they peremptorily determine that * what is above our reason to apprehend , is also above our belief ; and consequently because the doctrine of the trinity ( as well as some other sublime points ) is above their reason , it staggers their belief , nay ( which is more ) it is utterly renounced by them . i thought fit to add these passages ( out of their modern prints ) to those which i had occasion to mention before in my discourse concerning the causes of atheism , that it may appear , whatever the late unitarians pretend , that they own this maxim , that every thing in religion is to be submitted to the searches of reason . but certainly this is a principle that destroys christianity , for a great part of this is founded on mere revelation , and the discoveries of god's will which transcend our reasonings : and therefore it is a vanity to think that reason must determine all in the christian religion . it is true , natural reason was placed in us by him who is the father of lights , and we must not attempt to extinguish it : but neither must this candle presume to take upon it the office of the sun , to act beyond its proper strength and power . reason is like the rule with which we measure things : to know the length or breadth of them we apply the rule to them , and so find out the just dimensions of them . but then we undertake to measure bodies , which are of a certain length and breadth , such as our rule will serve to measure : else there is no use of the rule . in a resembling sort , what we would measure and comprehend by the rule of reason must be finite , i. e. proportioned to our reason . the things which are infinite and immense are not to be measured by this scanty rule ; such are the divine nature , the sacred trinity , the union of god and man , &c. reason must act according to its due measures , and be employed according to the strengths which are allow'd it . it must not determine in those things which are not of its cognizance , and such are supernatural and divine mysteries . there are no demonstrative arguments in things of this nature , neither are they necessary . we are to acquiesce in god's word : that is sufficient reason . and accordingly all the great and wise men of this age , ( as well as of former ones ) all persons of the most penetrating judgment , of the most extraordinary sagacity rest in this , and are satisfied . but the new disciples of socinus pretend to be men of greater sense and understanding , and demand of us to make out every thing in the christian religion , even the profoundest matters of it , by strict rules of reason and logick . thus ( as i had occasion not long since to observe ) they joyn with the deists to root out christianity , and use the same methods and art that they do . they irrationally extol humane reason , and extravagantly oppose it to reveal'd religion , so as to exclude this latter , and to vilifie the author of it . and thus it will appear at last that atheism lurks under the refined name of deism . this very notion of the excessive sway of natural reason in matters of religion , hath had a great and malignant influence upon some others , who are not profess'd socinians , as a * learned writer ( though of a different perswasion from the church of england ) hath observed , in pursuit ( saith he ) of the same principles with those of the men of this way , not a few begin absolutely to submit the scripture and every thing contain'd in it to the judgment and sentence of their own reason , which is the true form and spirit of socinianism visibly acting it self with some more than ordinary confidence . what is suited unto their reason they will receive ; and what is not so , let it be affirmed an hundred times in the scripture , they will reject with the same ease and confidence as if they were imaginations of men like themselves . both books that are written to this purpose , and the common discourses of many do fully testifie this advance of the pride of the minds of men . and he is careless about these things who seeth not , that the next stage is downright atheism . this is that dunghil which such blazing exhalations of pride at last fall into . it seems there are others , besides me , that have had an apprehension that socinianism tends directly to atheism . but see the mighty prevalency of truth ! it will forcibly make its way , even from the mouths of its professed adversaries . the old and new socinians ( as you heard before ) agreed in this that reason is the sole judg in matters of faith , and that what is above reason is not the object of our belief . and yet both these sorts of men at other times abjure these propositions as false and erroneous , and thereby palpaby contradict themselves , * smalcius expresly avers that faith is above ( though not contrary ) to reason . and in his † catechism he lets us know the knowledg of the way to immortal life and happiness far exceeds humane reason ; and he quotes 1 cor. 2. 14. for it . again , he grants that ‖ there are things which we ought to believe , though we cannot render any reasons of them . and in the margin , things expresly written are to be believed , although the reasons of them appear not . and more fully yet , in the name of the racovian brethren he makes this confession , ** we freely acknowledg that there are many things in the christian religion which surpass reason , but yet they are of necessity to be believ'd by us , on this very consideration , that though they exceed reason , yet they are deliver'd in sacred scripture , and they are very agreeable to that reason which they exceed . but how do our late penmen approve of this ? very well , for they declare that * revelation is to be preferred before the clearest demonstration of our reason . whence it appears that the unitarians deny what they have in other places affirm'd , they disown what at other times they assert . and so they betray their own cause , and patronize ours : so truth discovers and defends it self , though for a while stifled or disguised . and thus it is manifest that we are in the right , even our enemies themselves being judges . only here it is worth observing how fli●…ting , how shifting , how changeable sozzo's pupils are . are they not to be deem'd very slippery gentlemen when they thus say , and unsay ? they have alter'd the racovian catechism more than once , and they may do it again when they see occasion . and it is visible how our english socinians vary their note , and affect to differ from themselves . whereby they let us know that they are unmindful of the jewish proverb , when occasion serves we may gainsay others , but at no time must a man contradict himself . the third beloved conceit of theirs concerning christianity is , that there are no mysteries in it . which indeed follows upon the former opinion , for if nothing is to be believ'd in the christian religion but what is made out by exact reason , then there is nothing mystical and obscure in it . this is a point mightily urg'd of late by our homebred racovians and their adherents , who have publish'd a small essay entituled [ an impartial account of the word mystery as it is taken in the holy scripture , ] where they cantingly tell us that mystery is the tutelar god of the new systems framed by worldly christians : and it is the vail of absurdities , and such like foolish representations they make of it ; and think themselves very witty and piquant when they call the trinitarians mystery-men , as doth the examiner of the exceptions against mr. l's reasonableness , &c. but ( which is far worse ) they pervert the meaning of the sacred writ , and wilfully ( i fear ) represent the word mystery otherwise than it is used in the new testament , of which i hope to give the reader an account some other time , and to settle the true sense and import of the word as it is applyed in those holy writings . all that i will say at present is that true and substantial reason informs us , if we attend to it , that god's bare word is sufficient to determine our assent and belief : and the holy scriptures acquaint us that there are unsearchable * mysteries in the christian religion ; that there is hidden wisdom , 1 cor. 2. 7. that there are deep things of god , v. 10. that there are things hard to be understood , 2 pet. 3. 16. that we know in part , and see through a glass darkly , 1 cor. 13. all which , and many other passages in sacred writ assure us that there are unfathomable depths , unconceivable abstrusities in christianity , and that it is out of our ken and reach to apprehend them . therefore we are obliged to believe some things which are unaccountable to our knowledg and reason . yea indeed , the proper matter of faith are those things which we cannot have any notice of by the mere natural exercise of our faculties . revelation here is enough , as was said before , and we ought ( and that with the greatest reason ) to depend upon it entirely , because we know it is infallible . but because i intend at another time to insist particularly on the proof of this proposition , that christianity not only was , but is a great mystery , i will not prevent my self here . let it only suffice at present that i have caution'd the reader against our adversary's groundless assertion , that there is nothing dark and obscure in the christian doctrines , that there is no such thing as mystery in any of the articles belonging to this holy institution . they pretend to oblige the world by divulging and laying all open to the vulgar . others are dark , intricate , perplex'd and muddy , but they only are the authors that are clear and bright , and write with shining japan ink. in brief , they and the deists talk much of the oracles of reason , and brag of their making all things out by these , though generally they prove as vain and idle as the reasons of etymologists , and the common rationale's of the roman service and rites . but here perhaps it will be objected that i have in this and the foregoing particular misrepresented these men , for it will be said that in one of their writings it is positively asserted that * there are some mysteries and incomprehensible secrets in religion . to which i answer , this author explains his meaning afterwards , and thereby shews what he holds , for this is one of his propositions , that we must not give the name of mystery to those doctrines which are contrary to the light of nature or reason , and he means by these doctrines all those divine truths in the gospel which are above our natural reason , and which we cannot comprehend and discern by the light of nature ; and so it appears that this writer , though he seems to allow of mysteries , yet in reality he disowns them , which is no infrequent thing with them . but it will be said that another of their authors is of opinion that * there are some things to be believed which we cannot comprehend . i answer 1. whatever he and some of late assert , it is certain that it was a receiv'd and acknowledg'd opinion among the socinians heretofore that nothing is to be believed but what we can comprehend . it was a standing principle with them all , not to admit any article into their creed but what they could make out by exact reason ; and therefore it is well known that they rejected the doctrine of the trinity and other great articles of the christian faith because they could not fathom them by reason . this was the approved notion in socinus's days , and in crellius's ( as hath been shew'd in another place ) . 2. i answer that this very author himself in that place where he throws off this old socinian doctrine , takes it up again , and falls to proving that there is nothing in religion , be it never so high , but may be comprehended ; he is so bold and confident as to say that we have as clear , distinct and adequate a conception of what is infinite and unbounded as of a spire of grass , and that the nature of one is as comprehensible as the other . 3. i add this , that though this writer and some others of the party endeavour at other times to shift off that foresaid principle , yet it is plain that it is good socinianism at this very day , as i have proved from some express * quotations out of the writings of the new english racovians . but it will be said again , that the same author tells us that the men of his party deny the articles of the trinity and incarnation of christ , &c. not because they are mysteries , or because they do not comprehend them , but because they are contradictions , impossibilities , and pure non-sense . but who sees not that mysteries and contradictions , &c. are the same with these persons , and that therefore they call them by that former name , because ( as they would make us believe ) they can't comprehend them , they have no idea , no notion of them ( as they speak at other times : ) and what is this but to say , they are mysteries ? only they choose to cloth it in a more bold and prophane sort of language , calling them non-sense , contradictions , &c. thus it is evident that they impose upon the world , and whilst they cry out of contradictions , are guilty of them themselves , and whilst they make a shew of believing some things above reason , are really of another perswasion . it is plain then that it is their business to lift up reason , so as to depress christianity : it is to be fear'd that some of them are very eager against mysteries , thereby to extirpate that which is deservedly stiled by the apostle the mystery of godliness : especially they are inraged against the main branch of it ; god manifest in the flesh . one who is no over-valuer of mysteries , no not of that he treats of , tells us that * he hath no small reason to believe there are several who strike at christianity it self , under the pretence of bringing down the value of mysteries : much more than by the downright denying of all mysteries in christianity . by this polonian stratagem they undermine all religion , yea , the being , nature and attributes of god himself , which contain great abstrusities , depths , and mysteries in them : and so in the sequel of this their opinion which they so warmly defend and stickle for there is a strong biass to atheism . chap. vii . the foreign unitarians hold that divine worship may be given to a creature . the english ones do in effect assert the same , though they pretend the contrary . reason and scripture are against them . they can't blame either pagan or popish idolatry , being idolaters themselves . their idolatry is absurd and contradictious . they deny prayer to have been a part of god's worship commanded under the old testament . the contrary proved from the writings of the old testament . their evasions and objections particularly answered , and found to savour of impiety . the observation of the lord's day is held by them to be a ceremonious rite , and therefore abolish'd . and yet they allow of the keeping it as lawful . the observing of the seventh day is in some respect moral . the lord's day is of evangelical institution , and therefore we are obliged to celebrate it . the sacraments were appointed to be signs and helps of some spiritual good things . the socinians oppose this , and most abusively treat those sacred ordinances . whence we are not to wonder at their deriding and renouncing of other parts of christianity . water-baptism ( as they call it ) is voted by them to be unlawful . yet they hold it not unlawful to retain the practice of it in the church . this argues a double irreligion . and now i come to the next general head of this present discourse , viz. to give an account of the socinian worship . we found their doctrines to be very bad : i believe i shall make it appear that they are as faulty as to their apprehension concerning religious service and adoration . for they deny the divinity of christ , and yet they assert that he is to have the same honour and worship given to him that ought to be given to the father , the eternal , allmighty , all-wise and infinite god. it is said in the * brief history of the unitarians that the socinians generally not only grant , but earnestly contend that christ is to be worship'd and pray'd to . the polonian unitarians were so zealous in this matter that they excommunicated and deposed from their ministry such of their own party as denied that christ might be prayed to , and worship'd with divine worship . socinus ( de invocatione christi ) peremptorily asserts the invoking and worshiping of christ , though he be a created thing , as he speaks . in an * other place he largely defends the lawfulness and necessity of it . and so he doth more amply yet in his answer to francis david's defence of the contrary opinion . in † one of his epistles he contends that our saviour should be worship'd with divine and religious worship , and that for this reason , because such worship may be given to an other besides god : nay , not only to an other person , but to an other thing , for his opinion is that ‖ god may command a log or a stone to be worship'd if he pleases : and if he commands these to be worship'd , he is ready to do it . he defends this ** again with great zeal and earnestness against his adversaries that wrote against this doctrine . and to render this the more plausible , he blesses the world with this strange notion , that †† the first commandment concerning worshiping of god and him alone , doth not take away from god the power of commanding us to worship some other besides himself , but it only forbids us to do so of our own heads : and again in the same place , he hath the confidence to aver that the commandment concerning worshiping of god only was temporary , and belong'd only to the times of the old testament . this is the summ of socinus's divinity , concerning divine worship , and certainly it cannot but create astonishment in any sober reader . * volkelius agrees with him in both the latter propositions , but a man may from that ( as well as from other passages in his book ) gather that he had little cause to entitle that book [ of the true religion . ] an † other of socinus's abettors tells us that he may be worship'd for a god. i. e. with divine worship , who by nature or essence is not god ; and particularly that god can command that any man ( even socinus himself ) shall be acknowledg'd as god , and worship'd as such . and he adds that such a one is a true god. he largely insists on this , that there may be more gods worship'd than one. and at an ‖ other time he undertakes the defence of this again . nay , he advances thus far , * it is possible for a created being to be equal to god , nor doth it imply any contradiction and absurdity , yea it is most worthy of god : and consequently the power of a created thing may be equal to that of god , and so there is no infinite disproportion between the power of god and the power of a creature . these are the extravagancies he runs himself into . and this he and others of the party are forced to do , that they may maintain their worshiping of christ , notwithstanding he is but a creature . it is true , one of the † modern prints saith , they have not these seven years in any book professed that the like or the same honour is to be given to christ as to god. but this new gang of unitarians is not the standard of socinianism . there 's no reason to listen to these upstart pretenders in this present case , for we know that all the arians , and all the followers of socinus have held it lawful , nay necessary to worship christ with divine worship . nay the gentleman himself , whom i have quoted , soon after confesses that there is a classis of unitarians at this day who pay divine honour to our saviour , who put up their prayers to him : and prayer is a signal act of divine worship . and a * late writer who very well knows what the socinians are , and what they hold , finds fault with them for this at least , that they worship a creature-god , which he condemns ( and that justly ) as not reconcileable to reason . and hear what a profess'd unitarian of this age writ about two or three years ago , † that our lord christ is to be worship'd , was never made a question by the unitarians . the question is concerning the kind or sort of worship : trinitarians say , he is to be worship'd as god : we say , he is to be worship'd as one whom god hath exalted to be a priest and a saviour , one whom god hath given to be head over all things to the church . this distinction is to no purpose , for even the new socinians hold that christ is god ( and they will not stick to say , truly god ) as he is thus exalted , and as he is the head over all things ; therefore according to them he is to be worship'd as he is truly god. this is very plain , and though they may make use of their shifts and subterfuges to evade it , yet any discerning man may discover the vanity of their attempt . an * other of their late writers asserts the worshiping of christ with religious worship , and particularly tells us that † the father hath given christ authority and dominion which makes him a fit object of worship . this is the same that the other gentleman said , he is made a god by his being exalted ; by his being head over all things he is constituted a god , and is truly so , and as such is to be worship'd by all christian men. thus the old and new socinians agree , though these latter pretend to dissent from the former about this point . i will here add what an ‖ other of their moderns saith , christ is our god by reason of his divine sovereignty over us , and worship due to such sovereignty . they are the very words of one of the late prints , which was first extant in the year 1648 , but was reprinted in 1691 , and therefore vouch'd by this present set of socinians . their reprinting it is a plain owning of it , and yet they say they have not been of this opinion these seven years . it seems these men are not acquainted with their own authors , and know not what their own people say . it was unadvisedly said that they had not , for so long a time professed a parity of worship due to the father and the son , for it is evident that they in effect own it . but from that saying of theirs they would hint this , that once in seven years or thereabouts socinianism changes , and we must expect some new discoveries . this is to prepare us against the next climacterical year of it , when it is likely they will agree to present us with more refined notion concerning the worshiping of christ. for truly this which comes down from the old unitarians is very gross and inconsistent . it is very strange and surprizing that persons who lay claim to a greater share of reason than the rest of mankind , should assert that a creature is the proper object of divine adoration , that christ is to be worship'd with sacred and religious worship , and yet that he is not a god. these are unaccountable positions , and such as destroy the very nature of the deity , for god is to be worship'd because of his transcendent nature , which is such that no creature , no finite being hath it communicated to it . this makes god the sole object of divine worship ; according to what we read , mat. 4. 10. thou shalt worship the lord thy god , and him only shalt thou serve . it is express'd exclusively : therefore a mere man cannot be exalted to the honour and worship which are due only to god. and consequently the foregoing assertions null the nature of god , and make the creatures equal with him . we find that when cornelius fell down at peter's feet and worship'd him , peter took him up , saying , stand up , i my self also am a man , acts 10. 25 , 26. which one place vacates all their adoration of christ , for if peter would not let cornelius worship him because he was but a man , as himself was , then neither ought any one to worship christ if he be but a man. the reason is the fame here that it was there . or if he had an angelick nature , that doth not make him capable of being worship'd , for as st. peter forbids cornelius , so the angel would not suffer st. john to give this divine honour to him : see that thou doest it not , rev. 19. 10. though he was god's minister and messenger , and was a god in the very same sense that these men say christ is god , yet he was not to be worship'd . it appears hence that adoration is founded only in divinity , and that what is but humane or angelical is not adorable . are these the men that talk and write against the superstition and idolatry of the church of rome as well as that of pagans ? yes , some of them have done so , but can it be believed that it was in good earnest , when it is one of their grand articles that the divine honour which is due to god may be derived to another who is not god ? according to this principle neither pagan nor popish idolatry can be condemned , nay they must be allowed of . if creatures may have divine adoration given them , then angels and saints , and the images of these latter may be adored , which is the doctrine and practice of the roman catholicks , and then that text , i will not give my glory to another , isa. 42. 8 , which all the protestant writers make use of against the papists to prove their foresaid practice unlawful , is to no purpose . and why then do the persons i am speaking of , whilst they follow the example of the romanists , seem to condemn them ? they give divine worship to one whom they acknowledg not to be god , strictly and properly speaking : and the papists do no other . these may as well adore the saints and angels as the socinians do christ , if he be but a fellow-creature , as they assert him to be . this was the sense of the ancient fathers , who charg'd the arians with idolatry . and there is the same , nay greater reason ( as i could easily demonstrate , because the arians exalted the nature of christ to a higher pitch ) to tax socinus and his followers with this crime , seeing they assert and defend the giving of divine worship to christ , though he be not god , i. e. the infinite eternal omnipotent being , but only a god by office and institution , by place and dignity , as kings are said to be gods. it is plain then that whilst the socinians stigmatize the papists as idolaters , they cannot shift off the charge of idolatry themselves : for how that worship which is peculiar to god can be given to a creature ( i. e. one that is acknowledg'd to be so ) and yet no idolatry be committed , is impossible to reconcile . wherefore we conclude that the socinian worshipers are idolaters . this is another proof of their justly lying under the imputation of irreligion , yea and such as is mix'd with those absurdities that can never be enough exploded . they first deny christ to be god , and then they pay the adoration to him which is due only to god. they abjure his divinity , and degrade him into the state of a creature ; and then , to make amends as it were , worship him as a creator . they destroy his deity , and then think to repair it by this means . orestes was not half so wild when he kill'd his mother clytemnestra , and then celebrated a feast in her honour . what strange contradiction is this , to reckon our saviour as a fictitious god , and yet to pretend to venerate him as a true one ? one would scarcely imagine that such extravagancies should be entertain'd by men that boast of their faculty of reasoning . but they having once admitted so great an error as the denial of christ's divinity , it is no wonder that they plunge themselves into innumerable others , it is no wonder that they run themselves into idolatry it self , that most hateful and abominable enormity , that worst of prophanations , which by degrees will extinguish the notion of the true god , and bring in direct atheism . surely then here is more than a smack of irreligion , more than an atheistick tincture . prayer is an eminent act and part of divine worship , and therefore it is proper under this second general head of my discourse , where i treat of worship , to observe what thoughts the gentlemen have concerning this . they are agreed that the first table of the decalogue , which prescribes the worship of god , requires not prayer , and that in no part of the old testament this act of worship is mention'd as a duty , but that it was added afterwards by christ , and not till then . these are the express terms of * socinus , of † volkelius , of ‖ smalcius , and of his * racovian catechism . but can any man that forms right thoughts concerning the jewish dispensation , and their religion of which god was the immediate author , think that it contain'd not in it the precept of prayer , which is so natural a part of religion and worship ? was not that first commandment thou shalt have no other gods but me , and that comment upon it thou shalt fear the lord thy god , and serve him , deut. 6. 13. a general precept for god's worship , and can any man conceive that prayer , which is so signal a part of it , and appropriated only to god ( though it seems the socinians are not of that mind ) is not comprehended in it ? can we think it is not necessarily included , though it be not expressed ? nay , who can imagine that there were not particular and plain injunctions for praying when the publick worship of the jews and their sacrificing was always attended with this part of devotion ? as is clear from 2 chron. 6. 19. 7. 12. prov. 15. 8. luke 1. 10. but they will say , their meaning is that there is no express command for praying in the old testament . if this be it that they mean , then lo an express confutation in psal. 50. 15. call upon me in the day of trouble , and i will deliver thee , and thou shalt glorifie me . here is not only invocation but thanksgiving or praising of god ( which is an other part of prayer ) in plain and explicit terms commanded . but have they nothing to reply ? yes , for they never want some evasion . but certainly there never was any so silly , so impertinent , so foreign as that which one of their great penmen makes use of . * he flies to socinus's ( i might have said to bellarmine's ) distinction of counsels and precepts , and hath the boldness to tell us that these words of the psalmist , or rather indeed of god himself , are only a perswasion or counsel , but not a command . you will think , i suppose , he was put hard to it when he was forced to give such an answer as this , which is not only founded on a gross conceit of the romanists , but is no way applicable to the present purpose , for the foresaid words concern all men at one time or other , but counsels have respect only to some particular persons , and some peculiar emergencies . it is true , this author adds concerning this passage of the psalmist , that if it be not admitted that it contains a counsel only , then he is willing to grant that a command is comprehended in it , but with this proviso , that the command be not counted equal with the other precepts contain'd in the law. which is as bad an exposition as the former , and shews what sorry apprehensions they have concerning the great and solemn office of prayer , as if this were not of equal importance with the rest of the precepts of the law , or ( which is yet worse , and yet is implied in his words ) that some precepts of the divine law comprised in holy scripture are to be observ'd , but others may be dispens'd with , as not being of equal authority with the rest . this favours of impiety as well as the other evasion before mention'd . but let us hear what other reasons these men pretend to give of that which they thus fondly dream of , viz. that there was no precept for praying under the law. first , they tell us that * whatever good things the israelites had and enjoyed , were due to them by right , because they were promised them by the law , and therefore there was no need that they should pray for them . it seems it was superfluous to ask those mercies and blessings of god , which he was bound to give them . they were a debt , and therefore were to be claimed without any imploring of god. is not here again a plain siding with the roman doctors , and their device of merit and perfection ? for they suppose that the blessings which those people enjoy'd were the deserved wages of their work , and might be demanded of god as their right , not ask'd as a favour : and also this is supposed that they perfectly and without the least defect and fault obey'd all the divine laws ; otherwise their very imperfection and failing would have been cause sufficient why they should pray unto god for pardon and forgiveness . but it seems they wanted not these , and therefore it was needless to make their addresses to him . these are the rare notions of the racovian divines : or , to speak more plainly , these are the prophane sentiments of these persons . another reason assigned in the same place is to this effect , those who were under the old law had no precept given about praying , because those duties which the law prescribed them and required of them were of that nature that they might be performed without any singular help and assistance from god : why therefore should they invoke the divine aid ? and an other of their writers joyns with him , the commandments ( saith he ) that were in the law did not in themselves surpass humane strength : and the earthly happiness which was promised was not so great that there was need of prayers to obtain it . the former reason was ill enough , but this is much worse , and hath more than a tang of that which i objected to them . it is indeed the common and frequent usage of these writers to admire and cry up the natural strength and abilities of man , asserting him to be such a creature as can do all his work of himself , and by his own native power . nay , under the law it seems ( when man had not those helps and advantages which he hath now ) he was able to keep all god's laws , and entirely and perfectly obey all his commandments without the divine aid , for god gave no precept about praying to him and asking his assistance . and if there was no precept then there was no obligation upon them to do any such thing ( nay , as some of these gentlemen seem to confess , it had been a sin to pray to god , because there was no law or command for it . ) consequently since they were commanded to observe all the divine precepts and rules , they had power enough of themselves , without any assistance from god , to do it fully . therefore prayer was an idle impertinent piece of devotion ; and when abraham , isaac and jacob , ezra , nehemiah , david , and the other holy men whom we read of in the old testament , poured out prayers and petitions unto god , it was more than they need have done , more than they were obliged to , because there was no command for it . what shall we think of these socinian writers that discourse after this rate ? can it be believed that they have any great reverence for the scriptures , that they have a sense of the weighty and important duty of prayer , that they have due thoughts concerning the weakness and imperfection of man's nature , that they have becoming apprehensions concerning the divine help and power ? in a word , can it be thought that they speak and think of god as if they had a real belief of him ? unto worship without doubt belongs the solemn time appointed by god himself for his service . wherefore let us see what the judgment of the unitarians or socinians is concerning this matter . the observation of a seventh day is not of divine right , neither is it to be celebrated as such by christians , say * volkelius and the author of the † racovian catechism . and the latter of these adds that it is a ceremonial observance , and therefore not obligatory under the gospel , for the religion of christ , saith he , as it utterly takes away all ceremonies , so the choice of days , for which he quotes col. 2. 16. and yet see how consistent these men are with themselves : though this and all ceremonious observances are quite abolished by an express command and authority , yet in the next clause they are pleas'd to be so indulgent as to suffer the observation of the lord's day , since it was celebrated of old by christians , we grant the same liberty to all christians . it is very graciously done of them to grant that which they before asserted to be contrary to the word of god , for if it be utterly taken away by that word , it is now contrary to it , and is no longer to be permitted . whence then have these men authority to suffer the observation of the lord's day , since they themselves vouch the utter abolishing of it ? they are very great folks , you must know , and can do what they please . they have a power , a prerogative above others , and by vertue of this they can give a licence to observe that day which st. paul in the forenamed place , they say , utterly condemned . who knows where to have this people ? first , they pronounce the keeping of this day to be unlawful , and then they tell us it is lawful to keep it . it is evident from this contradiction that they have nothing of solidity and consistency to alledg in behalf of their opinion . to vote the seventh day to be part of the ceremonial law is ridiculous , because the observing of it was practised before the ceremonial law was given , and therefore is none of that law. it hath a generally moral and perpetual foundation , because right reason ( which is in all men , and is immutable ) dictates the celebration of it , in as much as it is reasonable that we should imitate god in whatever he commands us . he resting from the works of the creation on the seventh day , thereupon instituted a cessation of all worldly labour and business among all mankind on that day , and so dedicated it to his honour and worship , gen. 2. 2 , 3. whereby the observance of it becomes , on that account , and in that respect moral . it is not strictly moral , but because the devoting some certain and peculiar time to god's service is moral , therefore so far the observing of a seventh day is moral . and as for that particular seventh day , or that one day in seven which we now keep , it was separated and hallowed by the apostles ( who had authority from christ to do it , ) and so it became an evangelical institution , and consequently is more than moral . wherefore the socinians who , with the quakers and some other high-flown sects , hold that * there is no obligation to keep the first day of the week more than any other , despise the gospel . institution , prophane the time which was particularly destined to the service of god , and more especially of the eternal son of god , our blessed saviour and redeemer , who by his miraculous resurrection consecrated this day , and set it apart for holy and religious duties . he therefore that accounts it not a holy day , and keeps it not as such , plainly manifests a spirit of impiety and prophaneness . it is not to be question'd that the evangelical sacraments of baptism and the lord's supper appertain to religious worship . therefore in the next place we are to examine how piously the racovians express themselves with regard to these divine institutions . it hath been , and is the general belief of the orthodox professors of christianity that the sacraments ordained of christ ( as † our church well expresses it ) are not only badges or tokens of christian mens profession , but that they are certain sure witnesses and effectual signs of grace and god's good will toward us , by which he doth work invisibly in us , and doth not only quicken , but also strengthen and confirm our faith in him . and particularly , as to baptism , they agree with ‖ our church , that it is not only a sign of profession and mark of difference , whereby christian men are discerned from others , but whereby , as by an instrument , they that receive baptism rightly , are grafted into the church . the promises of the forgiveness of sin , and of our adoption to be sons of god , by the holy ghost , are visibly sign'd and seal'd , faith is confirmed , and grace increased by vertue of prayer unto god. and indeed this hath been the constant perswasion of all understanding and religious men : this hath been their firm and grounded belief concerning the sacraments , that these ordinances were appointed for great and excellent purposes , viz. that they should be , when rightly and effectually administred , chanels of grace and of the holy spirit , pledges of god's good will in the gospel , and signs of the remission of our sins : and more particularly that the sacrament of the eucharist should be a help to our faith and all our other graces , and a solemn seal and assurance of the divine favour to us , as well as a memorial of the death of our saviour . but the gentlemen whom we are now giving an account of are of another mind , for * they with one consent declare that there is no collation of any grace , no confirmation of our faith , no bestowing of any spiritual blessing in the use of the sacraments . and generally they hold with † volkelius that there is no other end of instituting the sacrament of the lord's supper but thankfulness . the ‖ racovian catechism teaches that this sacrament is of no use to ratifie and seal the benefits purchas'd for us by our saviour ; yea that it is not useful to put us in mind of his death , notwithstanding his own words , do this in remembrance of me . an * other writer peremptorily determines that there is no other use of the lord's supper but to stir up our thankfulness for christ's death . it is falsly said ( saith he ) that it is a seal of grace and divine favour , a confirmation of the promises and of our faith in them . it is erroneously said that it was instituted to be a memorial of christ's death : though he had in express terms said a little before , there is no other end of this sacrament than that the remembrance of christ together with giving of thanks and setting forth his cruel death should perpetually remain in the church . whereby it appears he had forgot what he had said : but he was not forgetful to disparage this sacrament . but can we be so uncharitable as to think that the unitarians of our times are guilty of this ? verily it is no breach of charity to think so of them since they have expresly declar'd as much . first , they tell us * they like not the word [ sacraments ] because it is no scripture-word , for which profound reason some of them have profess'd that they dislike the word trinity : then they declare that neither of the sacraments work ought in us , and particularly as for the effects and consequences ascrib'd to the right partaking of the lord's supper , they can find them no where but in the books and sermons of the superstitious admirers or idolaters of external things , i. e. the books and sermons of all protestants . and here it will not be amiss to take notice how both the sacraments are most abusively treated by these english socinians , which will further evince that they have a right to the character which i have given them . their language is as follows , p. 24. let a man in black sprinkle you with some of the church's water , or give you a bit of bread , or a sup of wine , over which he hath pronounced the wonder-working words prescribed in mother church's ritual ; though by nature you are as bad as the devil , you shall presently be inclin'd to as much good as will save you from hell , and qualifie you for heaven . and this no less certainly , if you are one of the elect ( for else the churches incantation produces only a momentary effect and a false appearance of good ) no less certainly , i say , than by tying the norman knot you may gain the love of the person you desire , or by other devices recorded in the learned books of magick you may cause hatred , raise winds , and do a thousand other feats which have no more natural and real agreement with those causes that are said to produce them , than faith and obedience have with a bit of bread or with a sprinkling of water . it can't be said he speaks this of the way of administring baptism and the eucharist in the church of rome , for in this place he is designedly speaking of the protestants , and especially of the church of england in her prayers and offices of the service-book , and in her articles and homilies : so that it is plain he means the celebration of both sacraments according to the custom and manner of reformed churches , and more particularly of ours . and that he makes himself merry with the protestant , not popish manner of administring the lord's supper is evident further from this , that he mentions not only the giving a bit of bread , but a sup of wine , which latter is not given to the people in the church of rome , as is well known , and this author knows as well as any man. wherefore he must of necessity speak of the sacraments as they are administred in the protestant churches , and you see what jolly work he makes of it . mother-church is with him a term for any eminent reform'd church : as it is indeed the style of these men , they in their late writings usually call any church of note that differs from them , mother-church . the lawful minister that attends on the sacred institutions of baptism and the lord's supper hath no better title with them than the man in black . baptism forsooth is the churches water , and the other sacrament cannot be more decently express'd by him than by a bit of bread and a sup of wine : and the words of institution pronounc'd by our saviour himself are scoffingly call'd the wonder-working words , and ( which is yet more prophane and impious ) an incantation , a charm , a spell . then he scandalously uses the terms of devil , hell and heaven , as if he believ'd no such things : and to confirm us in this perswasion concerning him he proceeds ( after he had jeer'd the elect ) to compare the solemn and evangelical ordinances of baptism and the lord's supper to the lewdest , vilest , and most prophane things imaginable , yea to the feats of magick art. it is no wonder that the most sacred matters of our religion are derided by this sort of men , who by such passages as these discover themselves to be of a very unsanctified temper . it is no wonder that those who give themselves up to this wild and prophane way of talking , blaspheme even the son of god and the holy ghost , vilifying the blessed undertaking of the former , and disregarding the powerful assistance and aids of the latter , and denying the divinity of both . it is no wonder that they abuse and debauch christianity , and all the excellent principles of it , when they give themselves this liberty , and let fly against all that is sacred and venerable . who will not say ( and that on just grounds ) that here is more than a vergency to that cursed genius which i have before mention'd ? but let us go on , and enquire more particularly into their apprehensions about baptism . concerning this they have espoused this groundless conceit , that now among christians it is an insignificant rite . the determination of their * great master is this , baptism was prescribed to none but heathens : among those who make publick profession of christianity there is no need of it : at this time it doth not concern the church at all , but is a mere indifferent thing . most of his followers represent it after the like manner , and say † there was no command for water-baptism , as they call it . baptism is ceas'd , saith ‖ volkelius , it belonging only to those first times . and if you urge the express words of the institution of it , mat. 28. 19. go teach all nations , baptizing them , * socinus answers that it is not meant of the baptism of water . and in the same place he undertakes to prove that this was not enjoyn'd by christ , but was only freely taken up by the apostles , and was a temporary rite . to which their chief † doctors say amen . and if you ask the reason why it is not obligatory now , they will put you off by saying , the christian religion is internal and spiritual , and admits not of such an external and corporal ceremony as baptism . and yet these sons of reason apply not this to the other sacrament , but acknowledge it to be perpetual in the christian church , though it be an outward sensible rite : this interferes not with the spirituality of the christian religion . which lets us see how partial they are in their arguing . further , let us mark the inconsistency of these men : notwithstanding there is no precept for this sacrament , notwithstanding it is a mere ceremonial rite , notwithstanding it is abolish'd ( for all this they hold and maintain ) yet they defend the lawfulness of retaining it . it may be used , they say , in the christian church , especially when they have any turkish or jewish proselytes ( for ‖ they mention these particularly ) for because they are come over to the turks in the point of the trinity , they expect i suppose that some of them will return the kindness , and be converts to some parts of their religion . so , it seems , the sacrament of baptism is kept up only for the sake of some mahometans and jews , who are expected to honour socinianism with their conversion . but though baptism , as it hath respect to adult persons , is in some sort tolerated by these men , yet the baptizing of infants is utterly condemned by them † all , as a practice founded on no precept or example . they agree with the old pelagians and anabaptists that children have nothing to do with this rite , and they give the same reasons ( if we may call them so ) for their tenent that they did , as appears from the very words of the * racovian catechism , which excludes infants because they cannot themselves , by reason of their age , acknowledge christ for their saviour . and † one of their chief rabbies determines in brief thus , infants not knowing what they do , or what is done to them , are not to be baptized . and therefore an * other calls it a vain and childish action . and he thinks he is facetious when a little after he stiles it the childish baptism of children . and this is the sense of the unitarians of the last edition , the baptists or anabaptists , say † they , worthily labour in the vindicating of baptism to those that are capable of it , from those that are uncapable of it . ‖ they determine that baptism was appointed by christ to initiate jews and heathens into the christian church , and consequently none but these are to be enter'd into the church by this rite : herein exactly following their master * socinus , who tells us that if any heretofore left their judaism or paganism , they were to be baptised ; but those that are born of christian parents are not to be baptised . then they add ( in the same place ) that no person is capable of baptism but such as can profess and intend the thing signified by baptism , viz. a clean conscience and a new life : consequently all infants are excluded . and now who would not think that paedobaptism were wholly discarded by the socinians , and that they cannot with a safe conscience allow of it ? but behold yet a farther proof of their repugnancies , of their jarring with themselves as well as with the truth , of their contradicting their own sentiments as well as those of the christian church . though they have spoken so contemptibly of this sacred institution , though they openly confess that children are not capable of it , though they publish to the world that there is neither command nor practice for it , yet some of their authors whom i have mention'd hold it may be practised in the church . what therefore is it that these men will not say or do , if they have a mind to it ? the whole sect of anabaptists are against paedobaptism , and so far they are to be commended that they approve not of that in others which they are perswaded is unlawful in it self . but here is a sort of religionists that cry down the baptising of children as an empty and childish ceremony , as void of all allowance from scripture , and unreasonable and absurd in it self , and yet the practice of it is not unlawful in the church . he that hath a talent of solving contrarieties , let him use it here , for here is great occasion for it . but this must be said indeed , that * some of the high-fliers among them , who are most consistent with themselves and their own principles , cry out against the baptising of children as anti-christian , and not to be tolerated by any means in the christian church : for truly if it be of that nature which we have heard it represented to be , there is no reason it should be suffer'd any longer . wherefore those of the party before mention'd are guilty of a double irreligion , first in slandering this sacrament , in prophanely scoffing at this institution , this evangelical rite ordain'd by our lord himself ; secondly in allowing the administring of it in the church , notwithstanding they have thus reproach'd it , and represented it as a thing utterly unlawful . what will the impious despisers of religion , what will the atheists say to this ? are they not hereby confirm'd in their dislike and contempt of what is sacred ? are they not taught to open their mouths against god and whatever is religious , and yet ( notwithstanding that ) to make some shew of outward allowing them ? is not here an example set them for this purpose , and do we not see it daily followed ? thus it appears that these men strike at religion , yea strike it down , and then would pretend to raise it up as it were : but this is only adding dissimulation to their gross impiety , which renders their guilt the greater , and mightily aggravates their crime . chap. viii . the socinians deny that there is any distinct order of men in the christian church . this is disproved from the evangelical writings . though they are for gather'd churches , yet they contradict this in their practice . they can give no account of this , and of their censuring other congregations . their indifferency in religion is inferr'd from their having no publick assemblies . as also from their concealing their names and persons . something worse than cowardize is taken notice of in them . they hold officious lies to be lawful . the ground of this opinion is shewed to be unreasonable . socinus's explication of mat. 5. 28. justly censured . they assert that immodesty , intemperance , wantonness , impure desires and lusts were not forbid under the law : the badness of this assertion laid open . they are enemies to the civil powers . they will not permit them to punish any offenders ( no not murderers ) with death . herein they oppose themselves to the authority of the old and new testament . the reason guess●…d at why they take the sword out of the magistrates hand . they condemn all going to war as unchristian and unlawful . having dispatch'd two of the general heads which i propounded , i pass to the third , viz. ecclesiastical discipline or government . the socinians deny that there is any distinct order of men in the church , to whom it peculiarly and solely belongs to preach the word and administer the sacraments . * socinus indeed grants that one man may be chosen out of the rest to preach the word of god , and he sees no reason to the contrary , he saith . but neither he nor his followers admit of any call or mission requisite in order to this . the † racovian catechism positively determines it so : for though it seems to grant that it is more fitting and decent that professed and set ministers should perform the publick offices in the church , and the primitive churches they grant observed this , yet they assert that it is not necessary , because the scripture doth not require it . * smalcius expresly maintains this . † volkelius gives us his judgment in these words , that the pastor or minister should dispense to the rest the supper of the lord , is wholly an indifferent thing , seeing it is not commanded us by christ , nor can there be any reason given why it ought to be done at all . it cannot be proved , saith an ‖ other , that it is lawful for no man to do those things ( which he mention'd just before , viz. preaching , baptizing , administring the lord's supper ) unless he be call'd , and sent for that purpose , and he endeavours to prove it by alledging several arguments . the ** racovian catechism hints that the eucharist may be administred by the hands of private christians , and such as are not devoted to the ministry . and what saith their famous master ? †† as to the lord's supper , there is no reason why we should suspect that it may not be celebrated by any one that professes the name of christ. and again , * any christian man may exercise the office of preaching and administring the sacraments . and the rest of them agree with him that there is not a necessity of a distinct order of persons in the church , and that a layman may administer the sacraments . what their opinion concerning preaching is , may be learnt from the racovian † catechism , which tells us that there is no use of it since the conversion of the gentiles , and since christianity is setled in the world . there is no necessity of it , saith an ‖ other friend of theirs . and yet in the evangelical writings ( which are the infallible rule we are to direct our selves by , and whence we are to learn what ecclesiastical constitutions are to take place ) we find that the distinction and peculiarity of the ministerial office , and its peculiar function are settled , 1 cor. 12. 28 , 29. eph. 4. 11 , 12. a peculiar mission is expresly required , rom. 10. 15. 1 tim. 5. 5. tit. 1. 5. a particular call is made necessary , acts 14. 23. heb. 5. 4. upon which that article of our church is grounded , it is * not lawful for any man to take upon him the office of publick preaching or ministring the sacraments in the congregation , before he is lawfully call'd and sent to execute the same . but this is disregarded by our new modellers of religion . and who could expect any other thing ? for they who have so abused and perverted christianity it self , would not fail to treat the ministers of it with contempt and disgrace , yea wholly to make void their office and charge . this is a fresh evidence of the truth and reality of what i formely tax'd them with . one thing further i will observe that according to the socinian writers there is a † necessity of openly adhering to some congregation professing christ's discipline ; and that congregation must be such as they think to be purer than the rest . this is the whole design and subject of socinus's book de officio hominis christiani , to shew that they must be of some church , and particularly of those who were then call'd arians or ebionites . that is in plain terms , those who are of the anti-trinitarian perswasion must have a gather'd church , and there make publick profession of their belief , and openly teach those doctrines which they are perswaded to be true . and yet i offer it to be taken notice of that though this be profess'd in their writings to be an indispensable point of religion , &c. yet they regard not the practising of it . none of our english socinians have any set meetings for the propagating of their doctrine , as men of other perswasions have at this day . we cannot but take notice that all parties who think their way to be true and good hold distinct congregations on the lord's day , or at other solemn times , and then make profession of their particular way and worship . it is well known that this is the usage and practice of all the different parties of religion . they did it even when they had a prohibition from the government , but now much more openly when they are not restrained by publick authority . but there is not so much as one single meeting in the way of religion and worship upheld by the socinians , tho it is certain that their way of worship differs from that of all other parties , because the very object of worship is different , i mean as to their consideration of it , for they look upon our saviour as a creature , and no other . which one thing should make them assemble together in a distinct place and manner from all other professors of religion . they should , if they acted according to their own principles , have a peculiar church , and openly preach up their perswasions , and declare against the false and idolatrous worship of all professors of christianity but themselves , for so it seems they esteem it . thus , i say , they are obliged to do , if they will be consistent to themselves . they must form an assembly of their own , and if they want members , they know where to have them : it is but sending for some more of their brethren in transylvania , poland , &c. and so they may be stock'd . i do not see how they can possibly omit the meeting together as a church , suppose in london or some other convenient place , for their principles of ecclesiastical government or discipline oblige them to this . if they say that some prudential considerations prevail with them to do otherwise , then it is clear that their prudence is of such a sort that it outweighs , yea wholly excludes their duty : and surely men of their reason and judgment will not boast much of such a prudence . besides , if they pretend discretion and prudence for their not assembling together , then in so doing they tax all the meetings and congregations of other perswasions as herds of imprudent and impolitick men : and whether such a charge as this savours of prudence i leave it to themselves to judg . to say the truth , these gentlemen can be as smart upon the dissenters ( when they think fit ) as upon church-men : we are told in the * trinitarian scheme of religion that the former have separated from the church of england for small and inconsiderable causes . and in an † other of their late essays they rattle all dissenters at a high rate , charging them with great inconsistency to themselves and their own principles : and afterwards they call them wi●…-worshippers , telling them that their worship is without any warrant of scripture , either by precept , or so much as one example , nay against the full current of scripture-worship . then they add , their worship i●… , of their own invention , and soon after they call it , a popish invention . now , one would think that these men who thus condemn all dissenters , and declare for●… purer congregation and worship than other men , should have particular and distinct assemblies of their own : but they have not , they mix with others , and particularly sometimes with the churches of the conformists : yea , some of them have been , and are still professed members of the church of england , joyning in that service ( particularly the li●…any where the three persons of the god-head are invoked , and the doxology which is so frequently repeated ) wherein the deity not only of the father , but of the son and of the holy ghost is publickly professed and owned . socinus had other thoughts when he endeavour'd to prove that * the people of the kingdom of poland and of the great dutchy of lithuania ought to joyn themselves to the assemblies of those that were call'd arians , that is , those who profess'd socinus's doctrine . now , will not any rational and considerate man infer hence that our english socinians are very cold and unconcerned in their religion ? for though according to the scheme of their church-government they ought to meet together in a visible and solemn manner , yet they are so indifferent that they will not , or so cowardly that they dare not do it . which breeds a suspicion of them that they only act a part , and that at another time they will be at something else . which appears from this likewise that , tho they under hand manage their cause , and write in defence of it , yet they conceal their names and persons . they are against mysteries , but they keep in the clouds , and will not let the world know who they are . this evidently convinces us how indifferent they are , for if they were verily perswaded that their doctrine is really true , and that it contains in it substantial and necessary points of faith and religion , they would not , they could not act thus under a disguise ; but they would be sensible that it is absolutely requisite to discover themselves , and to deal above board , and to be plain and free in their owning of the cause ; for if they be verities of necessary concern in religion ( as they sometimes pretend ) then they are worth the publick owning , and these persons may glory in the defence of them . but we see they dare not ( even in this juncture when liberty was allow'd them , and they might safely speak their minds ) appear with open face , and set their names before their writings . this shews that they have no true zeal for their cause , yea that at the bottom they are but little or not at all concerned . and if they be not deeply concerned for that which is their darling point , what can we think of them as to the rest ? but it is not only cowardize , but something of a worse nature that makes them thus mask themselves . these knights errant ( who come not like those of old to do kindnesses to the distressed ) will not vouchsafe to lift up the beavers of their helmets , and let us see who they are , because by this concealment they are abler to do the greater mischief . they lie hid , and publish not their names , that thereby they may have the advantage of saying what they please , and aspersing whom they will with their audacious pens ; that by this means they may have free liberty to disturb the world , to unsettle men in their opinions , to beget disputes and wranglings , to bring in scepticism and indifferency in religion , and at last atheism . i could moreover add , under this third general head , their unscriptural notion concerning the church , viz. that , like other societies , it may be extinct . whereas it hath been the constant profession of all protestants ( as well as those of the roman communion ) that the church of god is perpetual , and shall never be wholly extirpated , these men vouch that there is no necessity of asserting any such thing . so * volkelius and † ostorodus : and smalcius against frantzius holds the same : and the reason they give is because it is in every man's power to apostatize and deny the faith , and consequently it may so happen that there may be no church in being in the world . as much as to say , god's word , and his faithfulness on which it is founded can be superseded by man's will and pleasure . we are ascertain'd of the contrary from such expres●… and direct promises as these , god is i●… the midst of her , she shall not be moved , psal. 46. 5. god will establish her for ever , psal. 48. 8. the gates of hell shall not prevail against it , mat. 16. 18. i am with you always even unto the end of the world , mat. 28. 20. from these and several other plain passages in the writings of the old and new testament it is evident that this is a truth impregnable , that the true church of christ shall never fail , that god's special providence attends it , that it hath been and shall be preserved in all ages , and that it shall endure to the world's end. but their contrary perswasion shews us what a mean esteem they have of what is delivered in the holy scriptures , and how indifferent they are as to the duration or extinction of the church of christ. fourthly and lastly , i come to consider what their sentiments are in reference to practice and morality . but i sincerely declare i intend not here any reflection upon their persons or actions , for i am a perfect stranger to them : i know nothing of the gentlemen but their books : or if i knew any thing that were a blemish in their conversation , if i were able to rake up materials to represent them blameable in point of morals , i should think it an unworthy act so much as to mention it , for those are weak and feeble arguers who make use of such methods . it is irrational to judg of opinions from the personal miscarriages of any men . my business at present is to set before the reader the thoughts and apprehensions of some of their chief writers concerning some points of morality . officious lies were never forbidden either by moses or christ in the old or new testament , & consequently are lawful saith * volkelius . and he adds this reason , because they are profitable to some : as if that would render them lawful , when the apostle hath instructed us in the contrary , rom. 3. 8. we are not to be induced to do evil , that good may come of it . the consideration of advantage and profit cannot render that lawful which is otherwise in it self , as all lying is ; and the reason is because it is a transgression of the divine law. to prove that this profitable lying is not unlawful , they alledge examples out of the old testament ; but we may observe that at other times they make nothing of examples thence , because ( say they ) the gospel requires of persons greater perfection than the law did , as their gloss upon mat. 5. evidences . but now , though they must not swear at all , yet they may lie , i. e. if it be in an officious and serviceable way , notwithstanding those general prohibitions of all lying , exod. 23. 7. lev. 19. 11. prov. 6. 17. 12. 22. 13. 5. eph. 4. 25. col. 3. 9. if this doctrine were generally preach'd ( as it is by these men ) it would have a pernicious effect in the world , and all lies would be reckon'd some way or other officious , and truth and sincerity would soon leave the earth . i might mention socinus's explication of mat. 5. 28. whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her , hath committed adultery already with her in his heart ; which he restrains to looking on a married woman , not on any other : and he favourably speaks of the motions of concupiscence , even when he is discoursing of the perfection of the christian law above that of moses , which looks very strange . and besides , he strikes in with the doctors of the church of rome who determine concupiscence to be no sin. * some of them hold that polygamy and concubinate were not forbid by the divine law , whereas the contrary is evident from our saviours words , mat. 19. 8. from the beginning it was not so ; for the institution of god in the beginning was this , they two shall be one flesh , gen. 2. 24. by which primitive law is condemn'd the plurality of wives . bernardinus ochinus and david george , both of them fierce anti-trinitarians , held polygamy under the gospel lawful . but i will not make use of their opinion against the main body of the anti-trinitarians , because i verily believe they approve not of it : and some of them have particularly shew'd their dislike and abhorrence of it . what their thoughts are as to some other acts of immorality , we may learn from † one of their writers , god commanded nothing , saith he , at all by moses that concerns modesty , temperance or sobriety , but granted them leave to seek out pleasures in meat and drink , in apparel and the like . and again , the law did not forbid unprofitable words , jests , gibes , no nor lying , swearing , railing . this he saith notwithstanding what we read in prov. 23. 31. look not thou upon the wine when it is red , &c. and in isa. 5. 11. woe to them that rise up early in the morning to follow strong drink &c. ‖ socinus himself avers that drunkenness was not forbid under the old testament , nor was it punishable by god on its own account . and ( that you may know what thoughts these men have concerning the penmen of holy scripture ) a * famous unitarian pronounces thus concerning ecclesiastes , it is too certain that he doth not only in his way permit those things which belong to the pleasures of the flesh , but he also in a manner exhorts to them . and he further adds in the same place his opinion concerning this and other writers of the old testament , whatever precepts appertaining to morality are alledged out of ecclesiastes and other such like books ( as the psalms , the proverbs , &c. ) they indeed belong to the making of a well-moraliz'd and religious man , but no person under the law was necessarily bound to observe them , nor did he lose the name of a worshipper of god who observ'd them not . this is the mean and low esteem they have of the sacred writings of the old testament : it was , according to them , indifferent whether what they enjoyn'd , was observ'd or not : and particularly sobriety and moderation were no set vertues under the law. this is the doctrine of an * other of them , obscene words , saith he , revelling , luxury , excess in eating and drinking mere tolerated , and permitted to the israelites . and he further adds that the patriarchs of old , the jews , and all the people under the old testament , sinn'd not in living licentiously , in indulging of all manner of riot , gluttony , drunkenness , wantonness , turpitude , all but downright adultery and fornication . the law did not forbid these , for christ , he saith , was the first that by his law forbad them . therefore they might indulge themselves in all beastly pleasures of the body , and impure desires and lusts , and all immoderation in eating and drinking , and the greatest provocatives of the most filthy lusts . these are his very words , and it would scarcely be thought that they could fall from the pen of a writer who professedly treats of the true religion . but when we consider that it is the socinian religion ( whatever he calls it ) which he means , our wonder may cease . and yet it will rise again when we remember what shew of piety and exactness in religion these men make , and would have us believe that they are a perfecter sort of christians than others . yet they are not ashamed to give this account of the religion of the holy patriarchs and saints till the coming of christ. how high an affront is this to the divine majesty , that he should allow and approve of these impurities and immoralities ? for this they must necessarily hold because they declare that these were no sins , nor were they disliked by god , otherwise he would have forbid the practice of them . if i have any understanding in theology , these are vile notions , and vented to corrupt the minds and manners of men . though the very law of nature and reason forbids these gross enormities , yet they have the face to assert that they were not sins under the law. under gentilism they were vices ( as appears from their being inveighed against by the pagan moralists ) but not under the old testament . mens natural consciences condemn these flagitious practices , but god doth not . this is the divinity of the socinians , and who can expect any moral truths from them when they discourse after this manner ? when they vouch the most immoral actions to have been lawful all the time till our saviour's coming ? when those very things which were judged to be vices by the pagans ( their very natural reason dictating so much to them ) are said to be lawful practices among god's own people ? certainly these mens notions which are so corrupted as to natural religion , must needs be very unsound as to that which is reveal'd . if their ethicks be so depraved , what can we think of their christianity ? we can think nothing less than this that the former charge is to be renewed here , and that with very great and apparent reason . to their perswasions referring to practice i will here annex what they say concerning the civil power , and the executing of it . it is true , sli●…htingius is of opinion that magistracy is lawful , and he speaks of it with some respect and deference , as you may see in his questions concerning magistracy . but others express themselves in a different strain and stile , representing the civil powers as unlawful under the gospel . no christian can with a good conscience be a magistrate , saith * wolzogen . it is not to be tolerated in the kingdom of christ that one should rule ov●… others , and exercise power and dominion . this he pursues with great warmth . and in an † other place he tells us that the magistrate's office is useless ; which he backs with divers arguments , and accordingly explodes that punishing and rewarding which are generally annex'd to the magistratick office. and ‖ again , he asserts and defends that christ in those words , mat. 20. 26. it shall not be so among you , &c. condemns all earthly dominion and superiority : and he labours to prove from this place that all civil power is utterly forbid under the gospel . others indeed are not so rigid and fierce , they do not hold magistracy to be altogether unlawful and unchristian ; but yet that which is really a great part of it is voted to be so by them , for it belongs not to the higher powers , they say , to punish any offenders with death . * socinus asserts this without any limitation . it is not lawful in the times of the gospel for a magistrate to shed any man's blood , and bereave him of life , saith an † other . the magistrate ought not to use any capital or deadly punishment , saith a ‖ third . and a ** fourth designedly undertakes to prove that according to christ's laws no malefactors , no not murderers , are to be punish'd with loss of life . would you know the reason of it ? †† one of the foremention'd authors assigns it in these words , it is now a time of grace : the most perfect love towards our neighbour is commanded . he that doth not see that it manifestly follows hence that it is not lawful to take away the life of criminals , that man is blinded by his own flesh , or by the spirit of antichrist , and 〈◊〉 long accustoming himself to do evil . but if we consult what this author saith a little before , we shall find that he was blind himself , for he saith , it is not lawful for a christian magistrate to shed blood , and to deprive any of life , but by some other ways which are more severe to restrain and punish them . observe it , he would prescribe a more severe penalty , yet he rejects the other way because it is so severe and harsh , and because the gospel-dispensation is loving and gentle . if these be not contradictions , tell me what are . but i will briefly shew that both socinus and these his followers herein oppose themselves to the authority of the holy scriptures , and the appointment of the universal lawgiver of the world , which is no mean instance of their irreligious inclination . that ancient law , gen 9. 6. whoso sheddeth man's blood , by man shall his blood be shed , is not abrogated , and therefore is still in force . the magistrate hath here a commission to put to death persons for murder . here is a divine warrant for this bloody execution . and our saviour's words have been applied this way by very judicious interpreters , they that take the sword , shall perish with the sword , mat. 26. 52. i. e. they that use the sword unlawfully , they that unjustly shed humane blood , are worthy of death , and this generally is their portion . st. paul's words to the roman governor , acts 25. 11. shew plainly that it is lawful for magistrates to put to death those whose crimes deserve it . if i be an offender , saith the apostle , or have committed any thing worthy of death , i refuse not to die . both capital judicatures and punishments are authorized by the same apostle , rom. 13. 4. where speaking of the magistrate , he saith , he beareth not the sword in vain , i. e. he beareth it so as strike with it , to do execution with it , when there is occasion . so ridiculous is that exposition of the place which * one of the socinian writers gives , viz. it is said , he bears the sword , but yet he must not use it . it is evident from this text ( as well as from those before mention'd ) that god himself hath put this weapon into the magistrate's hand , and why then should any presume to disarm him ? i acknowledge a christian ruler ought to be very cautious and tender in the point of mens lives , and perhaps it would be better to be sparing of them in some cases , where generally according to the laws , as they are now in force , there is a forfeiture of life . it was very rare heretofore among our ancestors to inflict death for some of those crimes which now are made capital . the executioner had not so much work when banishment and confiscations were more in use . but it is certain that there are such flagitious enormities , such heinous and detestable villanies as require no less a recompence than death it self . especially in the case of blood-shedding a retaliation is due , for blood calls for blood . this fatal retribution is founded not only on the foremention'd positive law given to the patriarchs , and never since repeal'd , and also on the allowance of the new testament ( as you have heard ) but on the common law of equity and justice . wherefore the magistrate hath authority , when publick justice and necessity require it , to take away mens lives . which our church thought fit to make * one of her articles . the laws of the realm may punish christian men with death for heinous and grievous offences . nay , the publick ministers of justice are so far from offending in doing this , that they are extraordinarily guilty if they omit it , especially if they suffer murderers to go thus unpunish'd , for blood-shed is the way by gods appointment for the avenging of willful homicide and murder . i mention these things that we may see how injurious the unitarians are both to the ecclesiastical and civil ministers . they not only null the function and jurisdiction of the former ( as i shew'd you ) but they rob the latter of a great and considerable part of their office. they will not allow them a power to punish offenders , especially capitally . with the donatists of old and some anabaptists afterwards they agree to defend this proposition , that no man ought to be put to death , let his crime be never so black and bloody : they hold that the effusion of humane blood is in all cases unlawful . they had this immediately from the italian innovator , who knew it would serve his followers to very considerable purposes . for it was convenient to begin first with the magistrate , l●…st he should have begun with them . they take away his punitive power , and then they know he can't hurt them . they are against all capital inflictions , lest they should tast of them themselves . the design of these opposers of magistracy is that they may have a licence to vent what doctrines they please , that they may even expel out of the world some of the fundamental truths which have been embraced in all ages of the church . it is to be fear'd that the design at the bottom is that all magistrates should throw away their swords , divest themselves of their power to punish , that hereby there may be a liberty to do what they please ; and then at last it is likely they will usurp the sword , and take upon them that office which they denied to the magistate . though they despoil the praetor of his axe as well as rods , yet they will make use of them themselves . here i might let you see likewise that it is their opinion that * it is not lawful for a christian man to go to war. thus their great casuist determines , and in † other places he saith we may not repel force with force by taking up arms , though we are justly assaulted . and he is back'd by * smalcius , who peremptorily asserts the same . but i believe the reader would think it loss of time to insist here , and to shew the unreasonableness of this opinion , and therefore i dismiss it . chap. ix . the socinians agree with the papists in the doctrine of evangelical counsels , and several other tenents . the author 's designed brevity . the socinian creed summ'd up , and faithfully represented in its several articles . an objection answered . another objection more particularly and distinctly answer'd . thus i have gone through the several particulars and members which make up the body of socinianism : and i have now only this further to adjoyn , that both as to some of the instances before mention'd , and as to one or two which i have not yet taken notice of , they apparently symbolize with the papists . they joyn hands with them in asserting evangelical counsels , as we may satisfie our selves from what their great doctor and dictator saith on mat. 5. 43 , 44. it is true , in his explication of v. 17. of that chapter he rejects the popish distinction of precepts and counsels , as it is there on that occasion applied . but behold his shifting ! in this place he makes out his opinion by using that distinction , only he disguises it under the term of monitions , instead of counsels . he holds that of solomon , prov. 25. 21. if thine enemy be hungry , give him bread to eat , &c. to be of this sort ; it is an advice which we may follow , or not , as we please : it is not a command , no man is enjoyn'd to do this . but after this rate any of the plain commands in holy scripture may be evaded , for we may alledg this which socinus here starts that though the words are propounded in the way of a precept , yet they have not the force of one , but only are admonitions or counsels , which a man may observe if he thinks fit , else not . and so in other particulars i have hinted their correspondence with rome , as in their vilifying of the scriptures , and holding them to be corrupted : likewise in their notion of divine worship , which they say is not proper and peculiar to god ; the papists excuse the worship which is paid by them to angels and saints by alledging that this honour may be communicated to others besides the deity ; and so doth socinus stiffly maintain that this divine honour is not appropriated to him that is by nature god. both parties agree in the doctrines of merit and perfection . both accord in this likewise that the magistrate must not meddle with the church , that he hath no authority to punish offenders in point of religion . moreover , they agree in the distinction of venial and mortal sins . see crellius , eth. l. c. 5. and volkelius , l. 4. c. 23. * smalcius peremptorily asserts that those are venial sins which do not merit eternal death , and that there are such sins . but the rest only say god hath not constituted eternal punishment as the just recompence of all sins . † volkelius's express words are , venial sins are those for which god hath not appointed the penalty of eternal death , so that of themselves they deprive no man of eternal life . but this contradicts the apostle , who speaks without any reserve and limitation , the wages of sin is death , rom. 6. 23. and you may be satisfied that even eternal death is included in that general term , for death in this former clause of the verse is directly oppos'd to eternal life in the latter one . that they symbolize in the doctrine of praying for the dead may be gather'd from what a great man among them saith , * it is no wonder that those who believe no middle state of the dead , pray not for them . but those that believe this , do well in praying for them . he adds , there is a much more certain succour and aid in the prayers of the living for the dead , than in the prayers of the dead for the living . they affect the way of the church of rome in the manner of excusing their worshiping the son of god , although they hold him not to be god , but a creature : for as the romanists palliate their idolatrous worship in praying to saints and angels , &c. by saying that this adoration is paid ultimately to god himself , so not only the old but the new socinians use the same language , telling us that * the worshiping of the son is not terminated in him as its utmost scope , but passes by and through him to the father . lastly , i might add that the author of the considerations on the explications of the doctrine of the trinity speaks favourably of transubstantiation . all these things evidence that there is no such great gulf fixed between the papists and socinians but that they can hold commerce with one another , and in time , if there be occasion , come closer together . i charge not these latter with any formed intentions of promoting the roman cause ; but they may be factors for rome , though perhaps they know it not . however , i desire it may be consider'd how inconsistent these men are when they make a shew sometimes of being great enemies to the roman religion , and yet at other times abet and befriend it . would not a thinking man be induced to believe that they are at the bottom favourers of the pontifician interest ? lastly , i appeal to any considerate man whether this be not more probable than what the socinians charge the trinitarians with , viz. that * they are the causes and occasions of those errors and heresies which compose the gross body of popery . thus i have offer'd a brief scheme of the anti-trinitarian and socinian doctrines . these things might have been further enlarged upon , but i was willing to bring all into a narrow compass , for the sake of the meanest readers , such as have not time and leisure to peruse great volumes , or are not able to purchase them . i hear that there is a reverend and worthy person of my name , of the university of oxford , who hath undertaken to give a larger account of matters referring to this subject ; but for my own part , i purposely design'd brevity , for the reasons aforesaid , and because i have other work of greater importance upon my hands ; for though the handling of the foregoing points be of great use ( otherwise i should not have employ'd my self about them ) yet i give practical theology the precedence to them . that the reader may have a summary view together of all the preceding doctrines of the socinians , i will be yet briefer , and couch the whole in a narrower draught , which you may call , if you please , the creed of a socinian . it may be drawn up in this form and manner : i believe concerning the scripture that there are errors , mistakes and contradictions in some places of it : that the authority of some of its books is questionable , yea that the whole bible hath been tamper'd with , and may be suspected to be corrupted . i believe concerning god that he is not a spirit , properly speaking , i. e. immaterial and incorporeal , but that he is such another sort of body as air or ether is : that he is not immense and infinite , and every where present , but is confined to certain places : that he hath no knowledg of such future events as depend on the free will of man , and that it is impossible that these things should be foreknown by him : that there is a succession in god's eternal duration as well as there is in time , which is the measure of that duration which belongs to finite beings . i believe further concerning god , that there is no distinction of persons or subsistencies in him , and that the son and holy ghost are not god , the former of these being only a man , and the latter no other than the power or operation of god : that there was nothing of merit in what christ did or suffer'd ; that therefore he could not make satisfaction for the sins of the world : and the contrary assertion is deceitful , erroneous and pernicious . i believe concerning the first man that he was not created in a state of uprightness , that the image of god in which he was made , consisted not in righteousness and holiness , and consequently that he did not lose these by his fall , for he could not lose what he had not : that adam's posterity have receiv'd no hurt , have had no stain or blemish derived to them by his apostacy , and the contrary opinion is a fable , a dream , a fiction of antichrist : that mankind ( having receiv'd no damage by the fall of our first parents ) have still an ability by nature to desire and imbrace all spiritual good , and to avoid all that is sinful and vitious : that therefore there is no need of the help of the holy spirit , and that men may believe and repent and perform all religious acts without his operation and influence ( yea indeed the spirit is but an operation it self : ) that men are counted righteous before god , not for the merit of christ jesus ( for he had no merit ) but for their own good works . i believe concerning the future state that the souls of the deceas'd have no knowledg , no perception of any thing , they are not sensible of any rewards or pains , neither are they capable of feeling them , so that in a manner they may be said not to exist , for their life , activity and sensibleness are vanish'd , and their very nature is absorpt . i believe that we shall not rise with the same bodies , which we have now , at the last day , but that another matter or substance shall be substituted in their place . i believe that men shall not at the day of judgment be required to give an account of their actions : the most flagitious sinners shall not be examined concerning any thing of their past life , they shall not be tried or judged . only they shall be punished , and their punishment is this , to utterly eease and perish for ever : the unquenchable fire is nothing but annihilation . i believe , as to christianity it self , that every thing in it is to be submitted to the dictates of humane reason , and what cannot be explain'd and made out by this is no part of the christian religion : and consequently that there are no doctrines appertaining to it which are mysterious and superiour to our reason . i believe , as to divine worship , that it may be given to another besides god , that a creature may ( if god thinks fit ) be the object of adoration , and consequently christ ( who is but a creature ) may be worship'd with divine worship , even the same that is paid to god the father . i believe that prayer ( as eminent an act of worship as it is ) was not required in the old testament , for god's people had no need of praying then , they were able to do all that was commanded them in their religion without the divine assistance , and therefore the invoking of god became not a duty till christ's time . i believe the lord's day ( commonly so call'd ) is a ceremonious observance , and abolish'd by the gospel , which takes away all choice of days . i believe that there is no spiritual blessing convey'd or conferr'd in the use of the sacraments ; and particularly that baptism is an useless rite which the christian church under the gospel hath nothing to do with , but more especially the baptizing of children is insignificant , vain and childish , and hath neither precept nor example to commend it to us . i believe there is no distinct function or office of ministers in the christian church , and that the lord's supper it self may be administred by any private christian or brother . as to moral points i believe that officious lies are lawful , that the motions of concupiscence are not vitious , that idle or obscene words , gluttony , drunkenness , riot , luxury , and all impure desires and lusts were not forbidden till christ's time , and consequently were no sins . i believe , concerning magistrates , that they have no power of life and death , it is not lawful for them now under the gospel to inflict capital punishments on any offenders or malefactors , no not murderers and cut-throats . concerning some other articles , i believe as the church believes , i mean the church of rome , for we symbolize with them in several points of doctrine . lastly , after all i believe that though the foresaid articles are necessary to make a man a socinian , yet the belief of only one is enough to make a man a christian : and that one article is , that jesus is the messias ; in which it is not included whether he be god or man , whether he satisfied the divine justice for our sins , and by vertue of his death purchas'd life for us . but when i say , i believe jesus is the messiah , i mean only this that such a man of nazareth was anointed , ordain'd , and sent of god to be a saviour , and that this is he who was foretold and promis'd to be sent by god. this is all i believe , and there is no necessity of believing any thing more . this is the socinian creed , and i have faithfully drawn it up out of their own admired and applauded writers . i know it will be said here that some besides professed socinians hold some of these things . to which i answer , i made it not my present business to observe what others say , but to represent what that body of men , who are known by the name of socinians , profess and own . again , it is not one of these opinions alone ( excepting that concerning the blessed trinity ) which can give the denomination of socinian : it is the complication of them that must do it . therefore iinsist not on any one single opinion of lesser importance . those that bear upon them the general and complex characters which i have layd down in the preceding discourse are the persons that i design'd . in short , i write not ( and never will by god's assistance ) to humour and gratifie any party of men , but to assert and vindicate the truth , which is pleasing to all good men. and therefore if any sort of persons shall censure my freedom , i shall have recourse to my own innocence and integrity , that is , my hearty designs and indeavours to advance that cause which i verily believe hath truth on its side , because it hath the scriptures on its side . if they shall say ( and what will they not say ) ? that the english socinians give not their suffrage to all these particulars , which i have produced and named , and therefore my charge against the foreigners doth not reach them , i desire these following things may be considered , and then this evasion will be found to be very weak and useless , and nothing to their purpose : and it will appear that this scheme of socinianism belongs to them as well as to the rest . first , we are not sure that some of those who go under the name of english socinians are not foreigners . is not crellius's stock somewhere harbour'd among them ? have there not been seen strange outlandish books at the press of late ? may we not suspect some transylvanians and polanders employ'd in the work lately ? are we not sure that there are some irish as well as english ingaged in the service ? why then are we nice in distinguishing , when they are not differenc'd as to their work and design ? secondly , as for our very english and native socinians , they borrow'd their opinions from those foreigners , they fetch'd them from those writers , and they maintain them by the same arguments that they did . they use the very same texts , and urge them after the same manner : they follow them step by step , vouch their reasonings , applaud their discoursings ; only they dress up their notions in an english garb , and give them a more modish turn than they had before . that 's all the difference between those authors and these of late in england . thirdly , though some of the moderns are so politick as to be silent about some of the points that i have mention'd , yet we have no reason to gather thence that they are not inclin'd to imbrace them . it is a remarkable hint of a very * observing person , there is reason to suspect ( saith he ) that the socinians have some other odd tenents ; which they think fit rather to conceal than to deny . for we must consider this , that they would first gain their main point , the overthrow of the trinity , and all the maxims that relate to that . this is the leading card with them , and therefore they chiefly insist on this , intending ( we may suppose ) to urge the rest afterwards . for it would be too much to undertake at one time to defend all the other doctrines . and besides , it would be too odious to reject so many receiv'd propositions at once . therefore they go not this way to work , lest they should be universally cried down . it is their cunning to proceed gradually , and to undermine christianity by steps . that is the reason they have not in their writings touch'd upon some of the foresaid opinions . but it is not to be question'd but that they have a good esteem of them , and will in time ( when they have dispatch'd their main business ) betake themselves to the hearty defence of them . but , fourthly , if i were to give a scheme of the roman or popish religion , should i not discharge that province sufficiently if i gave a true account of it from the writings of the generality of divines of that communion and profession in other countries , though i had not consulted every individual papist in england about the points ? yes surely . and so it is here , socinianism was not begot in britain , it is of foreign breed , and therefore the writings of those foreigners who were profess'd socinians are to be consulted and produced when we are to give a true pourtraiture of socinianism , and accordingly this method i have taken . it was not necessary to ask every little pretender or retainer to it in every corner of this countrey whether he was exactly of the same cut with the outlandish writers in every thing , as if socinianism were to be measured altogether by their sentiments and perswasions . no : socinianism is not to be defined by what one or two upstart writers dictate : this , as popery , is to be judged and estimated according to the generality of the persons that profess it . and that is it which i have been doing , i have been giving an estimation of it according to the greatest numbers of those who own themselves to be socinians . in this i have dealt fairly , and no man can blame me for it . nay , fifthly , i have decipher'd socinianism not only according to the judgment of the most who own and profess it , but of the chiefest and learnedest . i have not only brought upon the stage the opinions which are held by the main body of them , but i have consulted the choicest writers on the several subjects . there are other socinian writers , whom i have not mention'd , as goslavius , voidovius , gittichius , &c. but i chose out those that are renowned among them . i could have produced the assertions which are to be found in servetus , valentinus gentilis , bernardinus ochinus , franciscus davidis , sommerus , georgius blandrata , who made way for the reception of socinus's doctrine against the holy trinity . i could have quoted a later author , one pr●…ovius who in his * writings hath said something concerning most of the points before mentioned . yea , this volume of his is order'd by the party to be adjoyn'd to the bibliotheca patrum polonorum . and besides , the reprinting of it in the year 1692 shews that it is authentick among the modern socinians . but i have omitted this polonian knight ( for such they tell us he was ) he being not so well known to the world as the rest that i have named . i chose rather to make use of those names which are of general repute and credit among the unitarians , and whose writings they have a great and universal regard for , so great and universal that they take all they say from them . if i had always listned to the majority of voices , to only what the biggest part of them say , ( though that were sufficient ) it is likely they would have blamed me : but now seeing i have likewise attended to the determination of those who are reckon'd the most eminent among them , i 'm sure they can have nothing to object against me . they must not think to shuffle us off by saying the foreign and english unitarians are not the same , for you see that these latter are included in the former , and both of them make up one body of men who are known by the name of socinians , and who are all of them profess'd and sworn opposers of the sacred trinity . thus , i suppose , i have fully answer'd what was objected , and it is manifest that our own countreymen no less than foreigners are concern'd in the character which i have given of these men . chap. x. the author concludes with inferences from the whole , viz. 1. socinianism is a complication of old and new errors . quakers and muggletonians sprang thence . 2. it is strange boldness in the socinians to pretend to ground their opinions on scripture . 3. what hath been said gives us a right idea of these persons . it appears they are no christians : but great favourers of judaism and turcism , especially of the latter . 4. we must entertain none of their principles . 5. we are to take notice of the tendency of them to irreligion and atheism . socinians and atheists at this day friendly agree . yet the former have the confidence to charge the trinitarians with idolatry and atheism . the author writes nothing in way of recrimination , but from a sense of the reality of the things themselves . he appeals to the judgment of the sober and religious . he thinks not himself concern'd to take notice of every scurrilous or trifling opponent . now from the whole i will make some brief remarks and reflections , and so conclude . first , see how faulty , how erroneous , how dangerous , how pernicious the theology of the socinians is . it fails not in one or two points only , but in a vast number , as i have let you see . it is patch'd up of several different opinions fetch'd from sundry quarters , it is a fardle of mix'd and disagreeing notions , it is a nest of heterodoxies , a gallimafrey of old and new errors , a medley of heresies taken from ebion and cerint●…us , the sabellians , samosatenians , arians , photinians , macedonians , who corrupted the doctrine of the holy trinity . they joyn with jews , pagans and mahometans in disowning and denying this great mystery of religion . other false opinions they have borrow'd from the pelagians , ( a sort of antient hereticks ) concerning adam's fall , and the effect of it , and man's natural strength and ability in spiritual matters : so that these men deal in brokers ware , old opinions trimmed up anew . again , they comply with the papists ( as i have shew'd ) in several of their sentiments and perswasions : and if there be any idolatry in the church of rome , it is certain the socinians cannot clear themselves of that crime . they tread in the steps of the old sadducees , and of the epicureans , and of several antient and modern libertines about the nature of spirits , of separate souls , of the resurrection of humane bodies , of the last judgment , and of hell. they espouse the cause of anabaptists , they follow those enthusiasts who disallow of the solemnizing of any special time , particularly the lord's day , who disbelieve the benefit and use of the sacraments , and deride the office and call of ministers in the church . it is observable that in their late pamphlets they with great rudeness and incivility speak of preaching . in one place , i remember school-boys and preachers rhetorick are joyn'd together by them : and in five or six other places they have a fling at the pulpit , which they mention with great disdain . it seems the profess'd instructors of the people are very much out of their favour . they laugh at the orthodox ( as they call them ) for thundring it from their pulpits , that matters of faith are above reason . so the letter to the clergy of both universities , chap. 10. and those that will not reject the trinity and other doctrines exploded by the socinians are priest-ridden . letter of resolution , p. 19. they adhere to other enthusiastick spirits as to their mistaken conceits concerning magistracy and the secular sword. they perfectly accord with the quakers in their opinions about the trinity , christ's satisfaction , original corruption , concerning the ministerial function and mission , concerning infant-baptism , the observation of the christian sabbath , going to war , &c. so that any considerate man may observe that quakerism is the spawn of socinianism . nay , they seem to have given rise to the wild sect of muggletonians , who from them have learnt to hold but one person in the godhead , viz. god the father , and to call the trinity or a god of three persons ( as they speak ) a monster ( as our gentlemen are pleas'd also to express themselves . ) they have been taught from them to renounce the power of the christian magistrate , and the office of a christian minister : they are instructed by them in their tenents concerning the spirits or souls of men , viz. that they can't act without the body , and that therefore they are extinct as soon as they are separated from it . they are the very words of this late party , and they are taken from the racovians . an other detachment is that the bodies of the deceased , wherein they lived and died , shall not rise again , shall not appear any more . this is their language : whence it is evident that reeve and muggleton suck'd their principle from faustus socinus and his adherents . and thus you see that as the socinians borrow from several sects , so they set up others : they receive and distribute poison , and thereby doubly endanger mankind . lastly , it is apparent that they borrow from deists and atheists , and thereby yet further bring mischief upon the world . and from the whole it is evident that these persons are corrupted not only in some matters of lesser moment , but in those that are of the highest concern : not only in merely speculative doctrines , but such as immediately relate to practise : not only in some principles that respect the circumstances of christianity , but in those that are substantial and fundamental , those that are of the very essence of the christian faith. let this be seriously thought of , that we may have a true apprehension of the mischief of socinianism . secondly , observe the strange boldness , as well as falshood , of these men . they are often in their writings insinuating into their readers that they build all their assertions on the scriptures , and thence they require their assent to what they deliver . but from the several particulars which i have insisted upon it is clear that they have no ground to require or claim it upon that account , for i have manifestly discover'd the opposition of their tenents to the plain dictates of the holy spirit in the bible . there they are condemned as spurious and adulterate notions , there they are rejected as pernicious and poisonous doctrines . and yet they have the confidence to ground these on the authority of the inspired writings , the sacred oracles of truth , yea * one of them tells the world that he was brought to these perswasions by reading the scripture ; that hereby they may the more effectually impose upon the minds of men , who they think will be ready to attend to that which they pretend is bottom'd on the word of god. thirdly , these things which have been suggested may be serviceable to give us a right idea of the persons i have been dealing with . surely those who have thus mangled and abused religion , cannot be thought to have a good intention in the work which they are about at this day , yea they must be thought to have a very bad one . we may argue thus , it is no wonder that they that pervert and deprave so many doctrines of religion , do more especially enervate the mystery of the blessed trinity . if it were only on the account of all their other wild notions , we might have reason to suspect , yea to condemn their blasphemous opinion concerning our lord jesus christ , viz. their flat denial of his godhead , and of his satisfaction , &c. it is not to be marvel'd at that they proceed thus far , having done so much besides , having in other points of christianity shew'd what a faculty they have of perverting and distorting the truths of the gospel . what i have said therefore will be useful to enlighten the reader , that he may understand what manner of persons these are ; that ( to speak plainly ) he may be convinced that they are no christians . whatever pretences they make to that title , it is impossible they should with reason lay claim to it , for they neither are baptised into the christian faith , nor do they make profession of it , as you have heard : but on the contrary they subvert christianity it self , and deny the divine author of it . how then can these men challenge the name of christians ? nay , i could observe that they industriously comply with jews and turks , in opposition to and defiance of all sober christians . to gratifie the former , they think fit to renounce the avowed principles of the latter . herein they follow their old friend servetus , who had convers'd a long time with jews and mahometans , and had espoused many of their opinions , and was a great admirer of them . especially he declar'd his approbation of the alcoran , and thought it reconcileable with the new testament , if the doctrine of the trinity were laid aside . it is often mention'd by socinus and other racovian writers that this doctrine and that of the incarnation hinders jews and turks from embracing the christian religion . and even the * late socinian penmen in their new tractates talk much of this , that the doctrine of the trinity puts a stop to the conversion of jews , mahometans , and heathens : and thereupon they are very earnest with their readers to abandon this great point of christianity , in mere complacency with those infidels . and more particularly it is observable how favourably they speak of mahometism or turcism : they profess themselves forward to believe that * mahomet had no other design in pretending himself to be a prophet , but to restore the belief of the unity of god , which at that time was extirpated among the eastern christians by the doctrines of the trinity and incarnation . mahomet meant not his religion should be esteemed a new religion , but only the restitution of the true intent of the christian religion . therefore the mahometan learned men call themselves the true disciples of the messias . they further ( in the same place ) insinuate their approbation of the mahometan religion above that of christianity , they magnifie the alcoran , and the more plausible sect of mahomet , as the saracens call'd it ; and at the same time they represent the modern christianity ( which professes the doctrines of christ's incarnation and the trinity ) no better or other than a sort of paganism and heathenism . these are their very terms , p. 19. and they are answerable to what was said by them before , viz. that the trinitarian doctrines are of heathen descent and original , p. 15. and afterwards ( to vary the phrase ) of paganick extraction , p. 16. i appeal now to the reader whether this be not right sclavonian , whether it be not the very language and dialect of the polonian divines ; which shews that these are identified with the english unitarians as to this matter ; and at the same time it yields us a true pourtraiture of the persons i have been representing to the reader . fourthly , we should be very careful that we entertain none of their foresaid opinions . i question not but the reader would have made this inference , though i had not . but this i request of him , that he would out of choice and judgment do this , as being throughly apprehensive of that evil and danger which attend those principles . for this purpose i have display'd them , and i hope that special hand of providence ( for i cannot but acknowledg it as such ) which directed me to it , will back it with a blessing . fifthly and lastly , see the tendency of the unitarians , and of the whole mass of the socinian points to atheism . they vilifie the scipture , they adulterate the true meaning of it , they introduce unbecoming sentiments concerning god and religion , they decry the great and necessary truths of the gospel , they baffle the apprehensions which we ought to have of a future state : and what doth all this drive at but the undermining of religion , yea and divinity it self ? so fitly was this question inserted by a * learned man , above sixty years ago , among his other enquiries at the end of his compendium of ecclesiastical history , whether socinianism be not an introduction to atheism ? so truly was it said lately by an observing pen , † in several respects our socinians seem to be serving the designs of the atheists . i wish the christian world would open their eyes , and see this betimes , and thereby prevent the unexpressible danger which otherwise will unavoidably follow . i offer it to be taken notice of that the socinian and atheistical party joyn hand in hand at this time , and agree together in a very friendly manner to laugh at and defie the fundamental principles of religion . such a reflection methinks should be dismal to those of the modern penmen of the socinian perswasion who are sober and considerate . they write ( whether they know it or no ) to please and humour the wild gallants , those in city and countrey that are of lewd principles , or of none at all . nothing is more evident at this day than that the socinian writings are highly acceptable to those that espouse the cause of atheism , to the profes●…edly prophane and irreligious . these are the men that applaud them , and cry them up , and think they are fraught with great wit , argument and reason . i appeal to impartial judges whether this doth not shew the near affinity , if not identity between these persons and those i am mentioning . he that doth not see this , sees nothing . to conclude , if what i have said sound harsh in these gentlemens ears , i request them to call to mind how severe they have been in censuring the trinitarians , and particularly in charging them with idolatry . though slichtingius and one or two more are unwilling to say in express terms that we are idolaters , yet both he and all the party assert that which is equivalent , for they say we worship a mere figment , a fancy of our own ( for so they blasphemously stile the holy trinity ) we set up an idol of our own brain for an object of divine worship . but our home-bred unitarians are yet bolder , and speak it out without any mincing that * the trinitarians are idolaters , and pagans , and much worse , and this they often inculcate . but certainly , to tax us with idolatry when they themselves professedly worship a creature ( as hath been observ'd before ) is the wildest conceit that ever enter'd into any man's head : the boldness , inconsistency and non-sense of it are so great that we can't sufficiently stand amazed at it . nay , not only idolatry but atheism is laid to our charge . i find that † servetus calls the trinitarians atheists very frequently . and even the modern unitarians in their late writings expresly fix this crime upon them , for their words are these concerning the doctrine of the trinity , ‖ by its natural absurdity and impossibility it did not only at first give a check and stop to the progress of the gospel , but ever since it hath served to propagate deism and atheism . the doctrine it self cannot do this without its being urged and managed by those that assert it : therefore it is as much as if they had said , those who defend the trinity propagate atheism . now , it will not be denied , i think , that those who propagate atheism are atheists . wherefore according to these men a trinitarian is an atheist . in an * other place they say , he may be justly suspected of atheism , and they mention on what account . others of them tell us that † whatever zeal the trinitarians may pretend to have for religion , they take the right way to make men scepticks and atheists . and the last man that wrote in defence of the socinian cause complains of us , that ‖ we make that a fundamental of religion which contradicts the best reasonings of mankind whereby they prove the existence of god. — thence loose men deny there is any god at all . thus you see what the socinian charge is against us . whence you may perceive that mine is but a counter-charge , and therefore they have no reason to find fault with the foregoing retaliation , especially when with the utmost sincerity i declare that my charge against them was not founded upon theirs , or occasion'd by it , for it was since the time that i drew up mine against them that i found this accusation in some of their papers . which may convince any unprejudiced person that what i have said with reference to the anti-trinitarians is not in way of recrimination , for i did not know that their writings had any thing of that nature against those that defend the trinity . but it was and is from a sense and perswasion of the truth of the thing it self , and that alone that i have , and do at present thus tax them , and turn their obloquy upon themselves . and truly i have done it with a sensible compassion all the while , for i cannot rejoyce ( as some seem to do ) at finding an occasion of censuring and blaming others . i submit what i have said to the consciences of all sober , faithful and judicious men , all sincere lovers of god and religion . let these judg between us and our adversaries . and now , to shut up all , if any one with calmness and sobriety , laying aside all levity and scurrility , all artifice and sophistry , shall offer any thing as substantial in way of reply to what i have said , i shall not be backward to meet him with a rejoynder . otherwise i shall not think my self concern'd to attend to what he saith . if he appears like a generous man of war , i will engage him : but if i see him come on in a privateering way , i tell him before hand , i will make off from him . i will not refuse to encounter any fair adversary , but if any man shall make it his business to cavil and raise trifling objections against what i have said , i will take no other notice of him than to despise him . he must not think that i will throw away my time and arguments upon every squib that is flirted . i have something else to do than to mind the wagging of every goose-quill . in a word , i think not my self obliged to write a vindication every time a perverse scribler will be dashing ink against me . a postscript : being brief reflections on a late book entituled , [ a short discourse of the true knowledge of christ jesus , with animadversions on mr. edwards 's reflections on the reasonableness of christianity , and on his book entituled , socinianism unmask'd . by s. bold , rector of steeple , dorset . ] reflections on mr. bold's sermon . when half of the sheets of my foregoing discourse were printed off , my bookseller sent me a little piece with mr. bold's name to it : but i presently cast my eye upon the bottom of the title-page , and there saw that these papers came from the lower end of pater-noster-row , and thence i gather'd who had a hand in them . i found that the manager of the reasonableness of christianity had prevailed with a gentleman to make a sermon ( i thank him for doing me that honour ) upon my refutation of that treatise and the vindication of it . indeed it was a great master-piece of procuration , and we can't but think that that man must speak the truth , and defend it very impartially and substantially who is thus brought on to undertake the cause . but truly i am exceedingly oblig'd to the penman for the course he hath taken , for he hath saved me the labour of a formal confutation in mode and figure , he having himself contradicted the very proposition which he lays down , viz. that there is but one point or article necessary to be believ'd for the making a man a christian. this he pretends to maintain as an undeniable truth , and yet he declares that other points are necessary to be believ'd . serm. page 32. and again , there are many points ( besides this ) which jesus christ hath taught and revealed , and which every sincere christian is indispensably oblig'd to endeavour to understand . p. 29. and afterwards , there are particular points and articles , which , being known to be reveal'd by christ , christians must indispensably assent to . p. 33. and he reckons up several of these articles and propositions , which are the very same which i had mention'd in my * discourses against the conceit of one article . now , if there be other points and particular articles , and those many , which a sincere christian is obliged , and that necessarily and indispensably to understand and believe and assent to , then this writer doth in effect yield to that proposition which i maintain'd , viz. that the belief of one article is not sufficient to make a man a christian , and consequently he runs counter to the proposition which he had laid down . for i bring the business to this issue , if the believing of one single article be enough to constitute a man a christian , yea a sincere christian , then the belief of something more is not necessary and indispensable , for though the knowing or believing of more may be some ornament and embelishment to him , yet it can't be said that it is necessary and indispensable , because nothing is so in christianity but what contributes to the making a man a christian , a sincere christian. wherefore it undeniably follows that when this gentleman acknowledges that there are more articles , than this one , proposed to be believ'd , and that necessarily and indispensably , he must needs grant that those articles , which are thus necessary and indispensable , are necessary to make a man a christian , and consequently the assenting to that single article jesus is the messias , doth not constitute a man a member of christ , or a true christian. for if more propositions and articles are necessary , indispensably necessary , then that one is not sufficient . this is a plain case , and none but such as are master'd with prejudice can possibly resist the evidence of it . he goes on still to confute himself , saying , a true christian must assent unto this , that christ jesus is god , p. 35. observe it , he must , he owns here that there is an absolute necessity of this belief . whereupon i ask him , is this belief necessary to make a man a christian , or not ? he cannot say it is not , because to believe him to be god who really is so is no indifferent thing in christianity , it is absolutely requisite to constitute a man a christian , a true christian , for a man can't be such unless he hath a knowledg of him that is true god. this surely none will undertake to deny . hence then it inevitably follows that this author must hold that the assenting to this proposition , that christ jesus is god , is necessary to make a man a christian. and if this be necessary , then something else besides the believing of jesus to be the messias ( as the author of the reasonableness of christianity and ●…his abettors understand and explain that proposition , for they include not the divinity of christ in it ) is absolutely necessary to make a man a christian. which is the thing that mr. bold denies , and yet we see it is a natural and unavoidable consequence from what he asserts in his sermon . so that in effect he positively saith , the believing of more than that one article before mention'd is absolutely requisite to make a man a christian. in another place speaking of the account which the scripture gives of the holy spirit , viz. that he is god , he adds that a true christian is as much obliged to believe this as to believe that jesus is the christ , p. 40. see here the force and energy of truth , it will make its way through the teeth of those that oppose it . he that had professedly asserted and maintain'd that the knowledg of this one point , that jesus is the christ , constitutes a person a christian , now as plainly and professedly contradicts this position , by declaring that we are as much obliged to give assent to this , viz. that the holy spirit is the true god , as to that one point . for this is the case , if a true christian be as much obliged to believe one as the other , then 't is certain that christianity is as much concerned in the belief of one as of the other : and if so , then a man can't be a christian without this belief ; whence it irrefragably follows that the one point he speaks of is not sufficient to make a man a christian : unless he will submit to this nonsense that a man can be a christian , a true christian though he believe not those things without which he can't be a christian . this is sufficient , i suppose , to give you a tast of mr. bold's self-contradiction , and at the same time of the unreasonableness and groundlessness of the notion which the author of the reasonableness of christianity hath publish'd to the world . i wish for the sake of this our present penman , who seems to be a man that hath some relish of religion and piety , that he had not thus expos'd himself and his friend together . there hath been a pair of advocates for this conceit of a christian of one article : the one a layman , the other a churchman : the first a professed socinian , and , having little to say for his friend , stuff'd his pamphlet with what crellius afforded him : the latter , you see , ( after great study and deliberation ) hath made as inconsiderable advances in the cause ; and though he appears in the form of a preacher , yet he hath said nothing answerable to the specious title of his sermon , the true knowledg of christ jesus ; but on the contrary hath said very ill things , to the lessening and impairing , yea to the defaming of that knowledg and belief of our saviour , and of the articles of christianity which are necessarily required of us . from what he hath delivered we may infer that there hath been one vain effort more in the world than there was before . and this is his just and deserved character that he hath betrayed the cause he undertook , and hath dispatch'd himself and it with his own weapons unwarily handled . but let me address my self to this gentleman a little more closely ( if i can speak more closely than i have already : ) verily , sir , it is strange that a man of your sobriety and temper should be thus easily drawn off , that you should so far debase your self and the post you are in , as to be mr. l's journeyman , ( he having himself it seems , given over working at the trade ) that you should accept of the office of an under-puller for racovianism . was it not enough that the author of the reasonableness of christianity had been publickly defended by deists and scepticks , that he had been approved of and vindicated by the profess'd votaries and disciples of socinus , that he had the good word of all the indifferent and neuters in religion , that he was caressed and admired by the men of wit about the town who make it their business to banter christianity , and ( in a word ) that he was cried up by the atheistical and debauched , who as concernedly railly all religion as the late field-officer doth priests ; was it not enough , i say , that the rationalist found all these to be his patrons , but must mr. bold strike in with this company , and vote this writer to be the christianissimo ( next to louis ) of this age ? not that i would be thought to detract in the least from the gentleman's worth , for ( to give him his due ) it is most readily granted that he hath a'great share of metaphysicks ( as his first book he publish'd sufficiently demonstrates ) and of oeconomicks ( as his next book testifies ) and of politicks , as some late papers assure us , wherein he hath abundantly shew'd how acute and ingenious a projector he is in the point of trade and money , especially guinea's and the lowering of them . but i am not obliged to think that his talent lies so advantagiously towards theology , especially christianity . i can't approve of his introducing a clipt christianity , and thrusting upon us a false coin , a counterfeit stamp in religion . i cannot ( and never will ) conceal my dislike of his teaching the men of this too giddy age to truck their old christianity for a new notion or fancy of the pretended reasonableness of that christianity which he shapes to himself . and yet , sir , you are pleas'd to take part here , and that with no common zeal . which strange behaviour , or rather unaccountable fascination hath stagger'd not a few of your friends and admirers , who ( with my self ) own that you have done much good by your former writings , but fear now that you will do as much harm . the devout and pious had other apprehensions of you when they look'd into your practical sermons , invitations , and meditations ; and therefore they stand amazed since they have perus'd your late productions , and observing there that you are come to the necessity of but one article of faith , they expect that you may in time hold that none is necessary , which is the scope and design ( whether you take notice of it or no ) of those that have lately influenc'd upon you . let me be free with you , and tell you that it is the sense of your friends that , if your pen runs for the future in this strain , you will write rather like a turkish spy than a christian preacher . i beseech you therefore , sir , by all that is good and sacred , and by that repute which you have heretofore gain'd among the religious and pious , that you would not dissemble with your self , and choak your inward perswasions , and abuse your self and the world too . i wish with all my heart that you would account with your self for this late backsliding , and consider how scandalous it will be when your auditors and readers shall find that you are sailing to racovia with a side-wind . i beg of you by the bonds of our most holy christianity that you would , whilst it is time , prevent a final apostacy . wear not the detestable character of a renegade . sir , i most passionately request you to ponder that smart and upbraiding query which our blessed saviour used to some of his disciples , when he saw that they went back , will ye also go away ? john 6. 67. remember , good sir , that going away ended in betraying . reflections on the animadversions . let us come next to the animadversions which are tack'd to the sermon . and truly i am inclined to clear the gentleman under whose name this pamphlet goes from being the composer of this part of the book . i can scarcely believe that mr. bold would offer such a crude and shallow thing to the publick : but i am partly of the mind that these animadversions were transmitted to him , and he was desired to publish them as his own , that it might be said ( which was never said before ) that a man with a name , and with open face , that one without a vizour warranted the late author of the reasonableness of christianity ; that it might be said that a clergy-man , the reverend rector of steeple vouched these strange notions . but i must needs say i do not take him to be the animadverter : one reason of which conjecture is because i have heard that these very objections and cavils which are here used were made use of by the party , and therefore it is probable that though they appear under the name of s. b. yet they might more truly have had j. l. or a. & j. c. ( who took care to send them ) prefix'd to them . i will likewise offer other probable reasons which may induce any considering man to think that the person who made the sermon was not the author of the animadversions : for first i appeal to any man that knows the difference of stiles , whether this be not observable in these two pieces . indeed when different matters are treated of by the same writer , there may be a great inequality in the strain , but it is never or very rarely observ'd when the same subject is handled by the same author , as is pretended in the present case . secondly , there is this mark to distinguish the first part of the book from the latter , the one is printed in two different characters , all along the words and sentences which mr. b. thought were more emphatick or remarkable than the rest are put in a letter which distinguishes them from the other words and sentences in his discourse . but you may observe that there is not this distinction in the animadversions , they ( like the reasonableness of christianity and its vindication ) are ( excepting a very few places ) all in the same character . it is not the way of that author in his writings to distinguish words , or express their emphasis by the difference of letters . this to me is no inconsiderable thing , for you scarcely find any author of late that writes after that manner . however , we may be almost sure that this part of the book is not mr. bold's , for the same author in the same book would not vary as to this thing we are speaking of , as we see here done . again , thirdly , you can't but take notice that the animadversions are printed in a larger and fairer character than the sermon : which thing you will seldom or never find in the same book , written by the same author , and upon the same subject , and printed together . this discovers mr. b to have no title to the latter part of this undertaking , and it likewise discovers the imprudence of the publisher who would suffer those papers to come into the world with such apparent marks whereby they may be known to be composed by two different persons , and yet at the same time would have but one author's name to the whole . add to all this that unsufferable blunder in the epistle to the reader before the animadversions ( which we may suppose was made for mr. b. ) when the book against the reasonableness of christianity fell into my hands ( faith this writer ) i thereby came to be furnish'd with a truer and more just notion of the main design of my own treatise or sermon than i had upon my looking over it cursory ( i suppose he would have said cursorily ) presently after it was publish'd : as if the design of his own treatise could be made known to him by an other man's writings . which carries that inconsistency and even nonsense with it which i believe mr. b. will not own himself to be the author of , and therefore i cannot but impute it to that jumble of two writers in this volume , which confounded the epistolizer's notions , and made him discover , before he was aware , that mr. bold was not the true parent of this off-spring to which the epistle is prefix'd . no , no : he that drew up this epistle had some acquaintance with the king of ham. here is strong fancying and personating , here is direct counterfeiting and falsifying . they have made a tool of mr. b. and under the shelter of a clergyman's name have impos'd their notions upon the reader . but whoever was the author of the animadversions , i will make a few remarks upon them , and with that calmness of temper which the epistolizer acknowledges to be in my former productions , but insinuates is wanting in my latter ones . as to which i have only this to say to him , i can be deemed to be too warm a writer by none but such as are too cold and phlegmatick . the the animadverter hints that i give vent to something to which he will not adventure to assign a proper name p. 32 : but though he will not do this latter , i will , that is , i sincerely protest to him and the reader that i intend to give vent to truth ( and that only ) which hath been smother'd and stiffled by him in his late undertakings for the one article . my business shall be to shew in brief by what weak and impertinent methods he hath done this . the proposition which he would be thought to patronize is this , that jesus and his apostles did not teach any thing as necessary to be believ'd to make a man a christian but only this one proposition , that jesus of nazareth was the christ or the messiah . animadv . p. 1. but he maintains this post with as little success as the foremention'd gentleman did , for afterwards he declares it his opinion , that a convert to christianity ( i. e. a christian , as he explains it in another place ) must necessarily believe as many articles as he shall attain to know that christ jesus hath taught . p. 21. which wholly invalidates what he had said before , for if a christian must give assent to all the articles taught by our saviour in the gospel , and that necessarily , then all those propositions reckon'd up in my late discourse , being taught by christ or his apostles , are necessarily to be blieved , and consequenly one point only is not necessary . but he will say , the belief of those propositions makes not a man a christian. then i say , they are not necessary and ( as the other gentleman adds ) indispensable : they may be said to be useful and convenient , but he can't pronounce them necessary and indispensable , for what is of absolute necessity in christianity is absolutely requisite to make a man a christian. whence it is evident , and that from his own words , that there is no foundation for this proposition , jesus and his apostles taught nothing as necessary to be believed to make a man a christian , but only this one article that jesus was the christ : and therefore this animadverter contradicts himself . and who can expect any other , when he takes no care of what he saith himself , and minds not what others suggest in this matter . it is worth the readersobserving that notwithstanding i had in * twelve pages together ( viz. from the 8th to the 20th ) proved that several propositions are necessary to be believ'd by us in order to our being christians , yet this sham-animadverter attends not to any one of the particulars which i had mention'd , nor offers any thing against them , but only in a lumping way dooms them all in these magisterial words , i do not see any proof he produceth , p. 21. this is his wonderful way of confuting me , by pretending that he can't see any argument or proof in what i alledg ; and all the world must be led by his eyes . thus , though i had in five or six pages together evinced this truth , that the son of god , and the messias are not terms of the very same signification , nay that among the jews they were not reckon'd so ( as i made appear from several texts ; especially acts 8. 37. ) yet after all i have this for my pains , i do not perceive , saith he , that he ( meaning me ) pretends to offer the least proof that these terms were not synonymous among the jews , p. 47. yet he doth not so much as offer one syllable to disprove what i had deliver'd and closely urg'd on that head thro' the greatest part of a chapter . this is the guise of our sagacious animadverter . he out-doth the famous gladiator ( whom olaus magnus tells us of ) that was wont to blunt the edg of all his adversaries weapons only with looking upon them , but this marvelous fencer doth it without seeing or perceiving . so when i had reduced the sum of my discourse into a syllogism , he tells me i there stop , whereas i should have proceeded to prove that jesus christ or his apostles taught that no man can be a christian , or shall be saved unless he hath an explicit knowledg of all those things which have immediate respect to the occasion , author , way , means and issue of our salvation , and which are necessary for our knowing the true nature and design of it , p. 23 , 24. and yet the reader may satisfie himself that this is the very thing that i had been proving just before , and indeed all along in the foregoing chapter : and therefore it was not necessary to add any farther medium , and to proceed to another syllogism , i having secured my proposition before . yet the heedless gentleman tells me , i here stop : which may convince the intelligent reader that he eares not what he saith . it may be guess'd from what he hath the confidence to say p. 31 , viz. there is no enquiry in the reasonableness of christianity concerning faith subjectively consider'd , but only objectively , namely , with what sort of faith the articles of christianity are to be believed , i say it may be guessed from this what a liberty this writer takes to assert what he pleases ; for let any man consult p. 191 , 192 in that treatise , and he shall find that the subjective faith is spoken of ( though not there call'd subjective ) but it is very much mistaken and perverted . again , how can this animadverter come off with peremptorily declaring that subjective faith is not enquir'd into in the treatise of the reasonableness of christianity when in another place p. 35 , 36 he avers that christian faith and christianity consider'd subjectively are the same . what a mighty arguer doth he shew himself to be when , to what i said and fully proved in my fourth chapter of socinianism unmask'd , he most gravely and profoundly replies , i think it needless for me to say any thing to it . p. 30. and further this great disputant shews his parts in another very clever way that he hath of dealing with me , and that is this , when he finds something that he dares not object against , he thus shifts me off , his reasoning is to me , saith he , so ●…ouded by his way of expressing himself , that i am too dull to perceive what his reasons are , and wherein the strength of them doth lie , p. 9. and again , concerning a whole chapter he thus pronounces , i shall say no more of it , saith he , but that my dullness is such i can't discern the least appearance of reasoning in it , p. 49. here is nothing tolerable or excuseable in all this but this one thing , his truth and modesty in confessing himself to be dull , which yet the reader was convinc'd of before this acknowledgment . the reader cannot but take notice that in the other parts of this author's animadversions he makes it his whole business either merely to repeat what he pleases in the reasonableness of christianity or the vindication of it , and to vouch it with much confidence , or else when he alledges any thing that i have asserted to throw it off by barely denying what i say . this is the great excellency which this gentleman is admirable for . thus you see the genius of this writer , you see what weak and sorry stuff ( to return him his own words ) he troubles the press with . he doth not make any offers of reason , there is not the least shadow of an argument ; he scorns to pretend to any thing of that nature . one would think a man might be ashamed to appear in the world with such poor tackling . as if he were only hired to say something against me , tho not at all to the purpose . and truly any man may discern a mercenary stroke all along . i seriously advise him ( whoever he is ) not to enter the lists again unless he be better provided : for i find that persons are more confirm'd than ever in the truth of what i have writ , since such dablers as himself , set on by a parcel of polonian squires and a few town-sparks , have attempted to oppose my assertions . if a score of such easie writers as this were all upon me at once , i could bear it very well . a man need not fear being hurt by such feeble scribes , who make it their main business to confute themselves , not me . and hereby ( we thank them ) they promote our cause ( which is that of truth ) and even with their own pens baffle those errors which they are the authors of , as scorpions and vipers afford antidotes against the mischiefs they cause . it may not be amiss to take notice of some things in the close of the animadversions , for here seems to be a parting blow of wit in our author ; which being a mighty rarity ( i. e. in the stile of pater-noster-row a black swan ) with this sort of writers , it must not be omitted . and out of respect to mr. b. i will the rather take notice of it , because though this reverend author was not the compiler of the animadversions , yet it is probable ( they coming into his hands ) he might prick in here and there a fine flower . the reasonableness of christianity , saith he , will as certainly be the cause of much mischief as tenterton-steeple was the cause of goodwin sands , p. 49. look you what a dainty piece of ingenuity is borrow'd from an old thread-bare saw. but it is quite spoilt when i have told him that it is an other steeple ( that in dorsetshire ) from whence we may justly fear such sands and shelfs on which the christian faith will be endanger'd to be shipwrackt . but there is another ingenious touch , p. 52. the men of art in all the parties are agreed not to speak favourably of the reasonableness of christianity . but who are these men of art ? ay , there lies the conceit . not to hold the reader in suspense , these men of art ( written in letters different from the rest , and thence we may guess the author of the sermon , which is mark'd and distinguish'd after this manner , had a hand in it ) are university men , or men of university-education , whom a late writer exposes because they are not adjusted to his , * thoughts of education . again , these men of art are the general body of the clergy of this nation , and they are the far greatest part of those that dissent from our church in the point of discipline and ceremonies . they are all the sober heads of both these perswasions , who unite in the main articles of religion profess'd and subscrib'd to by the church of england . nay , they are the whole body of the protestant and reformed churches abroad as well as at home . these are the men of art , who by this gentleman's friends are at other times call'd systematick-men , and sometimes mystery-men , and by way of derision orthodox . these are the men of art who are also so called you must know in contradistinction to the plain fellows , for so the racovians stile themselves in their treatise of the trinitarian scheme of religion . but when this writer saith these men of art are in an evil conspiracy , what is the meaning of that ? it is no other than this , that they joyntly agree to disallow of and condemn a late upstart conceit , viz. that the belief of one sole article of christianity is sufficient not only to denominate but to constitute any man a christian. now , would not a considerate man perswade himself that this unanimous concurrence of all the learned , wise , sober and religious in this matter is rather to be deemed a happy union than a conspiracy , and that an evil one ? and whereas this writer tells us that the book of the reasonableness of christianity is of eminent use to overthrow and ruine faction , p. 51 , i must needs declare that i 'm of the contrary opinion , and i conceive i have abundantly proved , in a late * discourse i publish'd , that the notions which the treatise of the reasonableness of christianity is fraught with administer to faction , and something worse amongst us , which i have been warning the reader of in the preceding discourse . the short is , this gentleman and i can't agree about mr. l.'s book , for he at least saith ( for we are not certain of his thoughts ) and that without any proof , that it is one of the best books that hath been publish'd for at least these sixteen hundred years , p. 52 : but i 'm of opinion , and i 'm sure i have proved it , that it is one of the worst that hath appear'd in the world since the date of christianity . finis . notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a38033-e600 * vindication of the reasonableness of christianity , p. 3. * preface to his discourse concerning christ's satisfaction . * p. 33 : psal. 11. 3. notes for div a38033-e1780 * socin . de author . s. script . cap. 1. † de vera relig . l. 5. c. 5. ‖ cat. racov. de scriptura cap. 1. * institut . theolog. lib. 4. ‖ a brief history of the unitarians . ‖ socin . epist. 2. ad dudith . * explicat . 5. mat. 4●… . † ostorodus in institut . cap. 30. * smalc . cont . frantz . ‖ bishop stillingfleet's pref. to the discourse of christ's satisfaction . * considerations on the explications of the doctrine of the trinity , p. 49 , 50. ‖ eccles. hist. l. 3. c. 24. lib. 5. cap. 8. * sandius de script . eccles. † considerations on the explications , &c. p. 49. * preface to the discourse of christ's satisfaction . * an accurate examination of the principal texts alledged for christ's divinity , p. 24 , 25 , 26. * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . socrat. hist. l. 1. c. 3. † sulpit. lib. 2. ‖ an answer to a letter touching the trinity . * an accurate examination of the principal texts alledg'd for christ's divinity , chap. 5. * socin , in catechesi . † de divin . christi . cip . 4. cont. frantz . exam. cent . errorum . ‖ in epist. ad hebr. cap. 1. v. 6. ** commentar . in heb. 1. 6. †† de v. r. l. 3. c. 5. ‖‖ an accurate examination of the principal texts alledg'd for christ's divinity . chap. 5. * on the 2d article of the creed . † considerations on the explications of the doctrine of the trinity . * smalc . hom. 8. in cap. 1. johan . † de servatore . cap. 6. * de deo & attributis . * disp. de repub. l. 1. c. 11. † de deo & attrib . cap. 5. ‖ cap. 6. * h. grotii pietas , ad ordines holland . * praelect . cap. 2. * considerations on the explications of the doctrine of the trinity . * crellius de deo & attribut . cap. 15. † commentar . in johan . 4. 24. ‖ comment . in 1. epist. ad corinth . cap. 15. v. 45. * scripture . catechism . chap. 2. † sine corpore ullo deum vult esse , ut graeci dicunt , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . de nat. deor. l. 1. * tractat. breves de diversis materiis , &c. † socin in catechismo . * cont. frantz . disp. 1. de trin. † de deo & attrib . cap. 27. ‖ institut . l. 4. c. 13. ** bidle , scripture-catechism . chap. 2. the exceptions of mr. edw. in his causes of atheism examined . p. 18. * plin. nat. hist. l. c. 7. * cont. frantz . disp. 1 and 12. † de deo & attrib cap. 24. ‖ cap. 9. 11. * socin . praelect . cap. 8 , 9 , 10. * praelect . cap. 8. † not. ad disp. 5. de deo. † de deo. cap. 18. ‖ considerations on the explications of the doctrine of the trinity . ** the trinitarian scheme of religion . p. 4. praelect . cap. 8. * socin . cont . wiek . cap. 9. † moscorov . cont . smiglecium . slichting . cont . meisnerum . * a letter to the clergy of both universities . p. 11. * p. 5. † lib. 1. de trinit . error . ‖ an answer to a letter touching the trinity . ** a postscript to the answer to a letter touching the trinity . * letter to the clergy of both universities , p. 15. † p. 24. ‖ p. 26. ** of worshiping the holy ghost , p. 12. * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . greg. naz. orat : 32. * socin . de servat . par . 1. c. 2 , 3. † de servat . par . 3. c. 5. ‖ de v. r. l. 5. c. 20. ** praelect . cap. 18. †† de christo servatore . par . 3. cap. 4. * cat. racov. de prophet . christi munere . † socin . de servat . par . 2. c. 15. praelect . cap. 24. cat. racov. c. 8. de prophet . christi munere . item , de munere christi sacerdotali . qu. 8. ‖ praelect . theolog. ** de christo servat . †† smalc . de satisfactione contr . smiglec . cat. racov. de prophet . christi mun . cap. 8. crellius contr . grotium . * cat. racov. cap. eod . * theodoret. de provid . serm. 6. * rom. 3. 25. 1 john 22. 4. 10. † rom. 5. 11. ‖ chap. 9. 26. 10. 10 , 12. and other places . * cont. frantz . disp. 4. † ibid. ‖ disp. 6. ** homil . 4. in 1. johan . * de morte christi . qu. 12. † de servatore . ‖ a letter of resolution concerning the doctrine of the trinity . p. 7. * the antitrinitarian scheme of religion . p. 18. * chap. 6. and 8. † heb. 10. 29. * pr●…ct . cap. 3. † instit. cap. 1. * smalc . contr . smiglec . de dei filio . cap. 7. * praelect . cap. 4. de christo servatore . par . 4. cap. 6. de officio viri christiani , cap. 5. † volkelius de v. r. l. 5. c. 18. smalc . disp. 4. de justificat . de pecc . orig. disp . 2. de poenitent . disp . 2. catech. racov. de libero arbit . qu. 2. slichting . comment . in rom. 5. 12 , 13. comment . in johan . 9. 3 , 34. episcop . instit. l. 4. §. 5. c. 2. * quòd regn. polon . &c. cap. 5. † di●…g de justificat . * de div. christi . cap. 7. † de v. r. l. 3. c. 11. ‖ the trinitarian sche●…e of religion . p. 21 , 22. * p. 11. † socin praelect cap. 5. smalc de justific . disp . 4. ‖ de prophet . christi munere cap. 6. qu. & resp . 9. * cat. rac. de proph . christi mun . c. 6. resp. 8. † ibid. cap. 10. qu. & 〈◊〉 . 8. * resp. 9. † trinitarian scheme of religion . p. 24. * p. 26. † p. 21. ‖ epist. ad cresc . ** lib. 2. de peccat . merit . * cont. frantz . disput . 12. † eth. l. 2. c. 6. ‖ scripture . catechism . chap. 16. ** the 10th . * slichting . in eph. 5. 6 * epist. 5. ad volkel . * exam. cent . errorum . † de vero & nat . dei filio cap. 6. ‖ cont. frantz . disp . 7. de extremo judicio * de div. christi . cap. 13. † comment . in 〈◊〉 c●… . 20. ‖ in heb. 11. 40. ** de v. r. l. 3. c. 〈◊〉 * in epist. 1 petr. cap. 1. v. 5. † in epist. ad hebr ●…p . 11. v. 40. ‖ in epist. ad hebr. cap. 12. v. 22. * volkel de v. r. l. 3. c. 11. † lib. 3. cap. 19. ‖ wolzogen in 6 meditat. m●…phys . c●…rtes . * epist. 6. ad volkel . † instit. cap. 41. ‖ epist. praedict . ad volkel . * exam. cent . ertorum . † de v r. l. 3. c. 35. * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . isidor . pelus . epist. l. 2. † theodoret. de provid . orat. 9. ‖ difficilius est id quod non sit incipere quàm id quod fuetit iterate . minut. felix . ** deo elementorum custodi reservatur . ibid. * bishop pearson on 11th . article of the creed . * in heb. 9. 27. † de v. r. l. 3. c. 33. * de v. r. l. 3. c. 34. * in johan . 1 11. † bishop pearson on the 12 article of the creed . ‖ resp. ad defens . puc . cap. 8. ** cont. meisner . †† disp. de baptismo . disp. 7. de extremo judicio . * cont. frantz . disp . 7. de extremo judicio . † in hebr. 10. 27. ‖ comment . in 1 cor. 15. ** wolzogen comment . in 25. chap. matth. v. 46. †† j. bidle . script . catech. chap. last . * cont. frantz . disp . 7. † comment . in 1 cor. 15. ‖ 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 48. * on the 11th . article of the creed . * in his treatise of humane understanding , book 1. † praelect . cap. 2. * essay of humane understanding , book 4. chap. 4. * p. 151. * p. 149 , 150. † see miscellaneous letters for the month of september , 1695. page 465. * refut . lib. de verbo incarnato . cap. 3. * history of the unitarians , pag. 24. † a defence of the brief history of the unitarians . ‖ some thoughts upon dr. sherlock's vindication of the trinity . * letter to the clergy of both universities . chap. 10. * dr. owen , of apostacy . * refut . lib. de verbo incarnato . cap. 9. † de via salut . cap. 1. qu. & resp. 7. ‖ refut . lib. de v. j. cap. 8. ** cont. frantz . disp . 3. de sacrament . * a letter of resolution concerning the doctrine of the trinity . p. 1. * mat. 13. 11. 1 cor. 2. 7. eph. 6. 19. col. 2. 2. 1 tim. 3. 16. * an impartial account of the word mystery , &c. * considerations on the explications of the doctrine of the trinity . * some thoughts concerning the causes of atheism p. 71 , 72. * some considerations concerning the trinity . p. 7. * p. 33. * respons . ad johan . nievojev . † 3. ad radec. ‖ examinat . argument . pro trino & uno deo. ** disp. cont . francken & wiek . †† disp. praedict . * de v. r. lib. 5. c. 29. † smalc exam. cent . error . ‖ de errorib . arianorum . * exam. cent . error . † considerations on the explications of the doctrine of the trinity . * christianity not mysterious . † an accurate examination of the principal texts alledg'd for christ's divinity , chap. 10. * of worshiping the holy ghost , &c. † p. 7. ‖ a confession of faith touching the holy trinity according to the scriptures , p. 12. * explicat cap. 5. matth. † de v. r. l. 4. c. 9. ‖ de divin . christi . * de prophet . christi mun . cap. 1. * volkel . de v. r. l. 4. c. 9. * smalc . de div. christi cap. 5. volkel . l. 4. c. 9. * lib. 4 c. 14. † de prophet . christi mun . cap. 1. * barclay's apology . † article 25. ‖ article 2●… . * socin . in paraenesi cap. 4. epist. 3. ad radec. volkel . l. 4. c. 12. l. 6. c. 14. smalc . cont . frantz . disp . 5. de ministr . eccles. item , disp. 9. de hypocr . item , disp. 3. de sacramentis . † lib. 4. c. 22. ‖ de coena , qu. 5. * wolzogen comment . in mat. 26. 26. † trinitarian scheme of religion . p. 25 , 26. * socin . 2 epist. ad radec. † volkel . l. 6. c. 10 , 14 , 19. smalc . disp. de baptismo . ‖ lib. 3. cap. 9. * de baptismo aquae , cap. 2. † volkel . l. 6. c. 14. smalc . disp . de baptismo . ‖ socin . de baptismo aquae . volkel . l. 6. c. 14. ostorod . instit. cap. 39. † socin . de bapt. aquae . smalc . cont . frantz . cat. racov. de prophet . christi munere . cap. 4. moscorov . de baptismo . slichting . cont . meisner . * de proph. mun. christi . cap. 4 , qu. 2. † slichting . comment . in 1 pet. 3. 21. * wolzogen compend . relig. christianae . † of wor shiping the holy ghost . p. 5. ‖ trinitarian scheme of religion . * de baptismo aquae . * lib. ministrorum transylvan . de unius dei cognitione . * epist. 2. ad radec. ‖ de ecclesia . cap. 2. qu. 15. * cont. frantz . disp. de ministr . eccles. item , disp. de ord. eccles. † lib. 4. cap. 22. ‖ ostorod . instit. cap. 42. ** de coen . dom. qu. 2. †† socin . epist. 2. ad radec. * tractat. de ecc●…esia . † de eccles. cap. 11. ‖ episcop . disp. 28. par . 3. * art. the 23. † see socin . epist. 3. ad radec. * p. ●…8 . † of worshipping the holy ghost . p. 4 , 5. * lib. de officio hominis christiani . * v. r. l. 5. c. 4. † inst. cap. 42. * de v. r. cap. 19. * ostorod . instit. cap. 4. smalc . contra frantz . † ostorod . instit. cap. 30. ‖ explicat . cap. 6. matth. * smalc . cont . frantz . disp . 7. * d●… volkel . l. 4. c. 17. * instructi●… ad utilem lection . n. t. cap. 7. † commen●… , in mat. 5. ‖ comment . in mat. 20. * epist. ad arcisse●…ium . † smalc . cont . frantz . disp. 〈◊〉 de robus civilibus . ‖ ostorod . instit. cap. 28. ** wolzogen instruct. ad util . lection . n. t. cap. 4. †† smal●… disp . 6. de rebus civilibus . * smalc . cont . frantz . disp . de rebus civisib . * the 37th . * socin . epist. 7. ad lublin . † quod regni polon . &c. cap. 3. them. 24. de offic. christi . * disp. 6. de reb . civilib . * cont. frantz . disp . 9. de hypocr . † lib. 4. cap. 23. * slichting comment . in 2 tim. 1. 16. * of worshiping the holy gh●…st , &c. p. 8. * a letter of resolution concerning the trinity . p. 1●… . * dr. wallis . 4th . letter concerning the trinity . p. 5. * cogitata sacra varii tractatus . * j. bidle in the pref. to his scripture-catechism . * a letter of resolution concerning the trinity , p. 17 , 18. * the same letter , p. 18. * in his introduction for the reading of history . † bishop of sarum's letter to dr. williams . * a letter to the clergy of both universities . † de trinit erroribus . ‖ a letter of resolution concerning the trinity . p. 17. * trinitarian scheme of religion . † a letter to the clergy of both universities . cap. 6. ‖ the exceptions of mr. e. &c. examin'd . p. 43. notes for div a38033-e29190 * the causes of atheism . socinianism unmask'd . * in socinianism unmask'd . * p. 145 , 158 , 162 , 164. * socinianism unmask'd . an answer to an heretical book called the naked gospel which was condemned and ordered to be publickly burnt by the convocation of the university of oxford, aug. 19, 1690 : with some reflections on dr. bury's new edition of that book : to which is added a short history of socinianism / by william nicholls. nicholls, william, 1664-1712. 1691 approx. 382 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 72 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2007-01 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a52291 wing n1091 estc r28145 10432963 ocm 10432963 45010 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a52291) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 45010) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 1388:11) an answer to an heretical book called the naked gospel which was condemned and ordered to be publickly burnt by the convocation of the university of oxford, aug. 19, 1690 : with some reflections on dr. bury's new edition of that book : to which is added a short history of socinianism / by william nicholls. nicholls, william, 1664-1712. bury, arthur, 1624-1713. naked gospel. [23], 108 p. printed for walter kettilby, london : 1691. reproduction of original in the union theological seminary library, new york. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng bury, arthur, 1624-1713. -naked gospel. socinianism. 2006-05 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2006-05 aptara keyed and coded from proquest page images 2006-06 judith siefring sampled and proofread 2006-06 judith siefring text and markup reviewed and edited 2006-09 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion an answer to an heretical book called the naked gospel , which was condemned and ordered to be publickly burnt by the convocation of the university of oxford , aug. 19. 1690. with some reflections on dr. bury's new edition of that book . to which is added a short history of socinianism . by william nicholls , m. a. fellow of merton college in oxford , and chaplain to the right honourable ralph earl of mountague . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . greg. nazianz. orat. 25. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . phot. nomoc. tit. 12. c. 2. london , printed for walter kettilby , at the bishop's head in st. paul's church-yard , 1691. to the right honourable ralph earl of mountague , &c. my lord , i am induced to lay these papers at your lordship's feet , both from the relation i bear to your lordship , which does exact all my labours as a tribute and acknowledgment of my duty and obligation , as also from the knowledge of the great affection and zeal you have always continued to shew for the true religion ; assuring my self that whatsoever shall be offered in defence of that , especially against the now growing heresie of the times , will find no small acceptance in your lordship's favour . it is sufficiently known , my lord , what a signal example of true christian piety and courage , against the anti-trinitarian heterodoxes , was shewn by the excellent sir ralph winwood * , your lordship's grandfather , when he was embassadour in holland for king james i. in so strenuously opposing vorstius the socinian's accession to the professorship of leyden ; whose advice , if the states had then been so prudent as to have taken , the socinian heresies had not made the progress in the world as now they have , from the lectures of him and his successours in that chair . and therefore , my lord , i am encouraged to think that your lordship , who does possess all the noble endowments of that great and good statesman , your ancestor , will favourably look upon that which is designed against those heretical tenets , the seeds of which have been mostly sown in this nation by the books of vorstius and his successours , though often under colour of opinions of a more specious name . may it therefore please your lordship to accept these my poor endeavours in defence of the true faith , which i have here presumed to entitle to your lordship's protection ; and be pleased to look on them as a small token of the duty and service which shall be always owing to your lordship , from , my lord , your lordship 's most dutiful chaplain , and most obedient servant , w. nicholls . the preface . the occasion of writing this treatise was to hinder the mischief that the book it is designed to answer was like to do , which having lain so many months without an answer , i did reasonably presume there was none design'd , and therefore i thought such a one as i could supply , would be better than none at all . i should never have troubled the world with this , if i had had the least item of mr. long 's design ; but that was perfectly unknown to me till these papers were wrote out fair for the press . as to the method i have taken in the answering this book , i have followed the authour in his own , and have given his titles to each of the chapters . in those chapters , in which he most impugns our saviour's divinity , i have traced him step by step , and given an answer to every shadow of an argument that he brings . in other chapters , where there are only oblique stroaks against the doctrine of the trinity , or which are only introductory to his main design , i have only summed up the substance of them , and so given an answer to them in general ; or at least to so much of them as seemed to make against the truth of this doctrine , or any other important truth of our religion . now , it may , by some perhaps , be thought unfair , when i use these expressions , the authour would insinuate , would pretend , &c. when he does not , in express terms , assert that thing in his book . but it must be considered , that it was the authour's design , not to let his book appear with too heretical a face , but to lay his premises so , that the reader should often draw his consequences for him , without his setting them down in express words . this is a subtilty which is common to all such sort of writers , that dare not speak out their full minds ; though , by the way , i think this authour has as little minced the matter as any . but however , i have carefully endeavoured not to pervert his sense ; but to take his words in that meaning , which any indifferent reader would think the author designed they should be understood in . if i have any where mist his meaning , 't is thro' mistake , and not thro' wilfulness . and in truth , i am not absolutely sure , after the greatest diligence , that i have always hit his sense : for he has a peculiar way of writing , different from all the writers of the age , his periods are long and uneven , filled with odd sort of similes and affected phrases , broken with unnatural parentheses , and almost constant hyperbatons ; which , to be sure , will occasion obscurity in his book : so that if i have mistaken his meaning upon this account , he is to charge that upon himself , and not upon his answerer . in short , i have performed this task , with all the fairness i could , with a design , not to triumph over my adversary , but to evince the truth ; to vindicate the honour of my blessed saviour , which was here so highly calumniated , and to assert the doctrine of the holy , undivided trinity , into the belief of which i was baptized , and in which i hope , by god's grace , to die . the contents of the answer to the preface . the doctrine of the trinity could give no incouragement to mahometanism . the true reasons of the great prevailing of mahomet's religion . animadversion upon the authour's mistake about the establishment of image-worship . — vpon his saying mahomet professed all the doctrines of the christian faith. the heterodox greater furtherers of mahometanism than the orthodox . that the belief of the trinity is very consistent with the simplicity of the christian religion . that the requiring a belief of this doctrine does not suppose unlearned men to understand all the disputes about it . the socinian doctrines much fuller of niceties than the orthodox . chap. i. necessary to be believed , and necessary to salvation , not the same . the chief rules of christianity , not easily discernible by the light of nature , by instance of tully and aristotle . doctrine of the trinity not contrary to the fewness of christian precepts . how all the gospel is faith and repentance ? chap. ii. that we are justified by faith alone , proved by scripture , antiquity , &c. this faith ought to be orthodox in all fundamentals . the reason why faith is so pleasing to god , as to justify men by it . chap. iii. what natural faith is ? faith under the gospel is an inspired habit or grace , proved by scripture , antiquity , &c. the faith of abraham and the fathers , the true christian justifying faith. chap. iv. credulity not an excess of divine faith. what deference is to be paid to general councils . that they cannot err , à piè credibile . they are the best expedients of vnity . chap. v. the belief of christ's divinity , one of the difficulties in the planting the gospel . the belief of this frequently incouraged by our saviour . the belief of christ's divinity useful to religion . 1. by gaining authority to his laws . 2. by improving our love and gratitude . 3. by assuring us of pardon . chap. vi. our saviour's titles not hyperbolical . not called the son of god , as a great mountain is called the mountain of god , &c. he is not the son of god as angels are . the splendor of his nature no bar to our being certain of his divinity . chap. vii . the authour's testimony of constantine , concerning the doctrine of christ's divinity , examined . constantine ' s judgment of arianism . the supposition of a plurality of worlds , no argument that the eternal son of god should not dy for the sins of this . no argument against the trinity , because it is not said expresly in scripture , that every one to be baptized must believe in it . the ancient christians , before baptism , always instructed in this doctrine . a testimony out of justin martyr examined . a testimony of leonas in socrates examined . chap. viii . another testimony of constantine examined . in what sense our saviour's original is unknown . how melchizedeck is a type of christ. the authour 's saying , that the evangelists do confound the genealogies , on purpose to puzzle us , considered . a vindication of bishop alexander's contest with arius . a citation out of socrates concerning the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , examined . athanasius's explication of the trinity defended . not absurd to believe a mystery . account of the proceedings of the council of syrmium . no necessity , that christ having two natures , should have two persons . his being but one person does not make him have but one nature . an account of the condemnation of eutyches . an account of the heretical council at ephesus that restored him . the wickedness of the eutychians in that council . the reason of the honour done to leo in the council of chalcedon . the favour granted to the eutychians by basiliscus , no argument against the orthodox doctrine . monothelitism not owing to the doctrine of the trinity . an account of the rise of it . chap. ix . to assert our saviour's divinity , does not dishonour him by making him comprehensible . an account of the saying of the council of antioch , which the authour alledges . the arians were never the less such for all their subscriptions to the council of nice . a vindication of athanasius's flying to julius the roman bishop , and of julius . an account of the council of sardica . athanasius purged from his pretended crimes . a schism between the two churches did not arise from the disagreement of the arians , with the orthodox at sardica . the troubles in the church , not imputable to the orthodox doctrine . the prevailing of the orthodox doctrine did not proceed from the greatness of the bishop of rome . nor from the ignorance of the ancient roman church . a vindication of theodosius's decree for the establishing the orthodox doctrine . of charity to hereticks from the example of alexander . the ill consequences of heresies , though not foreseen , yet imputable to it . arian and socinian expositions of scripture unreasonable to make the greater compellations of christ stoop to the smaller . chap. x. of the authour's reflection on dr. hammond's treatise of fundamentals . the doctrine of the trinity agrees with the authour's first qualification of matter of faith , viz. to be sufficiently understood by the meanest capacity . his second qualification considered that it must be the express word of god. the trinity proved by scripture . his third qualification considered . eternal life promised to the belief of our saviour's divinity . the use and necessity of creeds in the church . the promise of eternal life , not only made to the belief of the resurrection . why this promise was made so expresly to that . chap. xi . the necessity of mens rising with the same numerical bodies evinced , from reason , scripture , and antiquity . the authour 's first argument answered . — his second . his third . his fourth . enquiry ii. the orthodox extend faith no further than the scripture does . they do not exalt faith above holiness . taking hold on christ by faith , imputed righteousness , &c. not phrases purely calvinistical , but used by the ancients . we do not advance faith above charity . how far our charity to hereticks is to extend . the behaviour of the ancient christians to hereticks . we do not advance faith above reason . the use of the word mystery in prophane authours , in scripture and fathers . we use the word in the same sense it is used in scripture . enquiry iii. the unfairness of the authour in laying his charge against the orthodox , and making it out against the papists . the doctrine of the trinity not prejudicial to our lord's honour , in hindring the progress of the gospel . not prejudicial to the tranquillity of christians minds . — nor to the peace of the church . conclusion . that the church of england does recommend the three creeds to our belief . the authour's arguments to the contrary answered . his reflection on the late convocation considered . contents of the reflections on the new edition . the authour's excuses for his first book considered . his new explication of the trinity . the council of alexandria did not condemn the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and substantia , proper words to explain what is meant by them ; and the latins did understand by one what the greeks did by the other . the same shewn of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and persona . none but the hereticks refused these words . the doctor 's explication of the trinity downright sabellianism . how sabellius explained the trinity . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not explained by the ancients by being the wisdom of the father . nor the holy ghost by being an energy . neither st. austin , nor dr. sherlock of our author's opinion . an answer to the preface . the authour in this , by as much as can be gather'd from him , goes upon two arguments to overturn the doctrine of the blessed trinity ; the first is , because , as he pretends , the disputes about this have been the decaying of christianity , and the prevailing of mahometanism in the east : the second is , because , as he says , this doctrine is contrary to the great simplicity in which the gospel was deliver'd , and , which it does recommend . in the proof of the first of these he spends half his preface , and indeed has got through four of his long columns , before he comes to any thing that looks like a conclusion from his premises . soon he is admiring the swift progress of christianity through the world , notwithstanding the power and malice of its adversaries , and the meanness of its propagators ; and soon again he is as humble an admirer of the good fortune of mahomet's religion ; and withal , makes this most christian conclusion , that the wonderful progress of the gospel was not a more powerful evidence of its divine authority , than the progress of mahometanism was for that of the alchoran . but then again , upon second thoughts , he is a little for recalling himself , and gives the advantage somewhat on the gospel side , from the power of arms , which the arabian doctor used , and something from the imparity of his doctrines themselves , and the life of their authour , whom he calls a lewd , brain-sick scoundrel , with much more good manners and reverence than he termed our saviour , just before , a crucified vagabond . and then , a little after , he is so just to christianity again , as to grant , that mahometanism had not the advantage against her in truth of doctrine , but only by permission of divine providence , which had predicted the removal of the candlestick out of its place ; but the great occasions of this removal , he tells us , were the great innovations made in christianity , and the hot disputes , especially concerning the first and second persons of the trinity ; which had so changed the gospel , that were an apostle to return into the world , he would be so far from owning , that he would not be able to understand it ; and so leaves it as a moot point , whether mahomet or the christian doctors have more corrupted the gospel . though at last he seems to determine it against the doctors , and for mahomet ; because he allows him to have professed all the doctrines of the christian faith , which the doctors it seems had destroyed , and because their doctrines ( of the trinity ) had provoked our lord to divorce himself from his churches , and so did incourage , and impower the false prophet to seduce and ruin them . this is the substance of half his preface , the parts of which hang so loose , without any connection , and are so odly jumbled together , that i dare say , hardly ever any man of letters , before our author , drew a conclusion from premises so loosely laid ; and i am afraid his friends , the socinians , are too great lovers of reason to hope for much credit or advantage to their cause , from one that is so little a master of ordinary logick . for in all this ●●ddle of words , here is not one tittle of proof of the thing he would be at ; and what is worse , 't is somewhat difficult to know what that is ; all that one can guess from what he has been saying , is , that the determinations of the councils , and the writings and disputes of the fathers , concerning the blessed trinity , against the hereticks , were the chief causes of the prevailing of the mahometan religion . he mentions indeed with these the doctrine of image-worship , but that is only to shew the doctrine of the trinity in bad company ; for 't is plain , by the tenour of his book , that his design was not against the worship of images . i shall therefore shew , first , that the doctrine of the trinity could give no occasion to the progress of mahometanism . secondly , what were the occasion of the prevailing of it ; and this , i presume , will be a full answer to the first half of his preface . first , that the doctrine of the trinity could give no occasion to the progress of mahometanism . as for the doctrine it self , i cannot see how that should gain mahomet proselytes , any more than any other doctrine of christianity : the impostor himself disliked it , 't is true ; because as long as this doctrine was believed , his pretended revelations would never be received ; for 't would be in vain for him to offer to the world his doctrines , which were contrary to those that were before delivered by the eternal son of god. he pretended to be no more than a meer prophet , and therefore could never presume to undo what was believed to be setled personally by god himself . besides the silliness of his arguing against the generation of the son , shewed , that he little understood the merits of that cause , one of whose arguments is , what servetus * the reviver of this authour's heresy , borrowed from him , because god , forsooth , † has no wife . so that there is the same reason why this deceiver should condemn this doctrine of our lord's divinity , which obstructed his ambition , as he did that of christian mortification and self-denial , which obstructed his lust . and the author , with the same reason , might arraign all the admirable lectures the holy scripture gives us of abstinence and chastity for false doctrine too , only because they were condemned by this impostor . but as for the disputes about this doctrine , at the time of mahomet's appearing , they were well-nigh laid asleep ; the arian doctrines were almost forgot by the eager disputes in the apollinarian , nestorian and eutychian controversies , and the council of chalcedon had fully determined the last controversy nigh 200 years before the world heard any thing of mahomet . the number of the arians at this time was very small , and they were chiefly at that time , according to * sandius himself , in spain † , and their disputes there could not give any great scandal to the saracens on the other side the world. the greatest controversies now on foot were in the east , the monothelites , or the assertors of one will in christ ; in the west was still remaining the controversy about the celebration of easter . and these the impostor takes no notice of , unless he includes them in the general , amongst the divisions which he did condemn amongst the christians . * 2. now secondly , as to the certain reasons why mahometanism should with such a violent inundation of a sudden over-run the eastern world , they can be known only to god himself , the great disposer of all events , whose judgments are unsearchable , and his ways past finding out . but if we turn our eyes upon second causes , we may find several at this time , which either of themselves helped the spreading of this false prophet's impostures , or at least provoked god to permit this contagion to prevail . which were first , the calamitous estate of christendom at that time ; nay , the whole world was under that commotion which it never felt before , and by god's grace never may again . the goths , and hunns , the avares , lumbards and bulgarians , were ravaging all the western empire , the saxons not long before had over-run britain , and the persians were making as great devastations in the east ; so that the christians were not in a capacity of resisting their other enemies , much less of hindering the incursions of the saracens . secondly , the negligence of the popes and patriarchs , who lay wrangling in the defence of their errours , and in gaining privileges and precedencies to their sees † , and did not lend any assistance towards the securing their flocks from this wolf , till 't was past all recovery ; and even the holy wars which the popes were so zealous for afterwards , seem'd designed more to keep the hands of active princes a-work , least they should attempt any thing against their see , or out of an odd superstition to the holy land , and our saviour's sepulcher , than out of any truly pious design to revive christianity . thirdly , the method he took to propagate his religion by fire and sword ; for he had no sooner conquered any city or country , but the poor wretched inhabitants were forced to abnege their former religion , and to embrace his forgeries , or * else were immediately to be butcher'd by his souldiers . fourthly , but the great causes of all which provoked god to suffer the candlesticks to be removed from these churches , were , the great decay of piety in the world , and the many errours and superstitions which had then crept into the church , whose doctrine and practice had then so vastly degenerated from those of the christians in the first ages . that love and charity , which was so exemplary in the primitive professors , was turned into pride and contention , and a pertinacious obstinacy in disputes and desire of innovations , the former strictness and circumspectness of life , was changed , after the peace in the church under christian emperours , into dissoluteness and luxury , and the other concomitants of those vices . errours and superstitions were every day crowing into the church , the sacrifice of the mass , prayers for the dead , reliques , doctrine of merits , prayers in an unknown tongue , purgatory , prohibition of marriage in the clergy , monastick life , superstitious meats , vests , tonsures , &c. all which were brought in before , or in some measure used by this age ; and image-worship , which our authour mentions , began a little to appear † , though it was far from setling till the second council of nice , a. d. 787. so that our authour is a little out in his chronology , when he says , the then late establishment of image-worship , gave a tempting opportunity to the impostor , &c. for that impostor set on foot his doctrines above 150 years before the estblishment of image-worship . for from the year 622 , the year of mahomet's slight , sometime after he had disseminated his doctrines , to the year 787. are precisely 165 years , and so much the authour is out of his argument and his chronology ; unless he will allow the arabian doctor , by his prophetick spirit , to have foreseen so far the determinations of this council . and now , i hope , i have made it appear , that the determinations of the first council of nice , about the trinity , which was 300 years before mahomet , gave no more incouragement to his imposture , than the second council of nice did , which was 150 years after ; and if i have done so , i am very well contented . i have but one word more to say in vindication of the orthodox belief from this aspersion , which is , that i do not find any of her professors to have been abettors of mahomet's doctrine ; but i wish our authour's friends , among the heterodox , could say so much ; for we read , that there assisted him in his forgeries , one sergius a nestorian , and johannes antiochenus an arian . * nay , 't is a report commonly received , that servetus borrowed his heresy from the mahometans in africa † so that it seems a professor of the arian doctrine did assist in composing the alchoran , and the alchoran did conduce to the reviving of arianism ; and now let the reader judge which have contributed more , the orthodox or the hereticks , to the propagation of mahomet's religion . as to his vnchristian assertion , that mahomet professed all the doctrines of the christian faith , which the vniversity have condemned in their decree , it may be expected i should say something to that ; but that is an expression so horrid in all christian ears , that it needs no antidote ; 't is a blasphemy so loud and palpable , that it exacts rather the iron of the hangman , than the answer of a christian. blessed jesus ! that ever thy holy religion should be thus vilified ! that a christian should assert , that such a profligate wretch , that carried on his impostures by villainy and lewdness , that tolerated in his followers , murders and thefts , rapes and sodomies , and was himself most eminent in all these wickednesses , that he should be said by a christian to profess all the articles of thy holy religion , which commands the utmost goodness and purity , both of body and soul. ii. the second argument which our authour goes upon to invalidate the doctrine of the trinity is , because , as he would insinuate , it is contrary to the simplicity of the gospel . and in proving of this he uses as much prevarication and shuffling , as if he had been trained up in a college of jesuits . for when he should shew his reader , how much the doctrine of three persons , being one god , is contrary to the gospel simplicity , he runs off from this to several other corruptions which have happened to the gospel , and which the maintainers of this doctrine are not the least concerned to answer for . 't is one of the excellencies of the christian religion , as he well observes , that the poor have the gospel preached unto them ; that is , that the doctrines of the christian religion are such , as the meanest capacities may understand ; the truths which it does deliver are not strange philosophical notions , or expressed in high , rhetorical strains , or ( as the apostle speaks ) in enticing words of mans wisdom . but how does he prove that it may not be so for all the doctrine of the trinity ? why , the authour is pretty civil as to that point , and because he would not be too hard upon the orthodox , turns the point of his argument against the old gnosicks , and fetches a text or two out of st. paul to confound them . if any one preach another jesus whom we have not preached — you might well bear with him , or as the authour translates it , could you well bear with him ? 2 cor. 11. 1. which , by the way , is a false translation : for there is no authority for any such reading by way of interrogation . the words in the text are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ye might well bear , without the word him . and if our translation were to be altered , it ought rather to be , you might well bear with me ; for that is most agreeable to the apostle's design : for he is desiring the corinthians to excuse his boasting , as v. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and i pray bear with me . the like he endeavours to prove from gal. 1. 6. i marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of christ unto another gospel , which is not another . if an angel from heaven preach any other gospel , let him be accursed . from all which he draws these four theses . first , 't is possible the gospel may be so disguised by innovations , that though it still retain its genuine principles , it may appear another . secondly , 't is possible such innovations may be so obvious , that people may discover them . thirdly , those that depart from such innovators are not schismaticks , but faithful believers . fourthly , be the innovators never so high in authority , we must be so far from paying them implicit faith , that we must not pay them ordinary charity , but hold them accursed . the author has been here at a great deal of pains to lay his matter in order , though i believe it will make little to his purpose . for we will grant all that he has been here saying is true , if he lets the matter lie , as the apostle left it , against the gnosticks . nay , but perhaps the trinitarians will not so easily get off here . and truly any one that understands the design of the authour's book , would expect from these propositions some wonderful confutation of the trinitarian doctrines . but our authour very cunningly lets that alone , and by a hocus-pocus trick , claps before our eyes some romish corruptions , which were occasioned , he tells us , by people that heaped to themselves teachers , having itching ears , and those teachers heaped to themselves doctrines to scratch that itch ; and so the monks by scratching and clawing one another , scratched themselves into all the errours of the school-divinity . therefore he concludes , that there being such errours that destroy the gospel simplicity , and we being not to be saved by the greatest humane authority ( he means general councils ) or to put our souls in a lottery ; we must therefore see what those doctrines are , which destroy the gospel simplicity ; which cannot better be managed , he tells us , than by the three enquiries of his book . now though for all the authour has said to this point , the doctrine of the trinity is very safe , yet because he would slily insinuate , that this doctrine is one of those romish errours that destroy the simplicity of christianity , i think fit to make him this answer . first , that the belief of the blessed trinity is very consistent with the simplicity of the christian religion . for if there be nothing in that doctrine , but what a man of ordinary capacity may understand , as much at least as is requisite for his belief , and as far as his judgment tells him 't is reasonable to suppose such a thing should be understood ; i cannot see why this doctrine should derogate from the simplicity of christianity . now first in this doctrine there is nothing but what a man of mean parts may understand , as far as is requisite for his belief ; for 't is not requisite that such a man ( or indeed any man ) should fully understand all that he does believe ; for that would not be belief but science : 't is enough for belief , that a man has undoubted testimony that such a thing is so , whether he understands the manner , or perhaps the possibility of its being so or not . we are wont to take many things upon trust from the mouths of men learned in their respective sciences , the reasons of which we are far from understanding ; and mathematicians can demonstrate many truths , and which men unlearned in their science take upon their words , though to them they seem otherways impossible . now if it be reasonable , that a plain unlearned man should believe many things which he does not understand from the testimony of wiser and more knowing men , i think it a less imposition upon the understandings of plain men , to require them to believe a revealed truth from the testimony of the all-wise and all-knowing god. secondly , a plain man understands as much in this doctrine , as his judgment tells him it is reasonable he should understand in a matter of that nature ; and 't is highly unreasonable for any man to expect more . if any one indeed , how wise soever , should tell the plain man that bread is flesh , the plain man would think this unreasonable to believe ; because he knows the difference between bread and flesh , as well as any one can tell him ; and because then he is required to disbelieve his senses in a matter of which they are the properest judges . but if this plain man be informed , by an undoubted testimony , of something which indeed he does not understand concerning god , whose nature and essence his reason tells him is not to be understood , or any one else , though of the greatest learning or reason ; this he is with an humble submission ready to believe , and when he has full assurance of the undoubtedness of the testimony which confirms this , his belief does not in the least boggle at what ' is so delivered . for a person of the ordinariest reason that believes a god and his attributes , must be sure , that in that infinite being there are infinite mysteries , that is , truths which are not to be understood by finite capacities ; and if it has pleased god's wisdom , to reveal the esse of one of these mysteries to us , that there are father , son and holy-ghost , three persons and one god ; though the modus of this truth does surpass our understandings , yet he acknowledges , that this belief is reasonable , because 't is irrational for him to think his finite understanding should comprehend all the mysterious truths in an infinite deity . secondly , 't is not requisite that every plain simple man , of whom the belief of the trinity is required , as being a divine truth revealed in scripture ; that he should understand all the questions , which are controverted by learned men about this doctrine : all the disputes about hypostasis's and personalities , generations and processions ; for there were thousands of good christians went to heaven before these controversies were started in the world , or before these terms were ever heard of . so that 't is a great mistake of the adversaries of this doctrine , to think that we impose it as necessary to every ordinary man's salvation to understand , and to give an express assent to all the determinations of these questions : 't is enough for him to believe the doctrine in general , as he finds it revealed in scripture ; and to leave the more particular disquisition of it to more learned men. and besides , 't is not the fault of the orthodox in the church , that ever these disputes happened , or that ever these names were coined : we may thank the hereticks for all this , for they began first to oppugn the received faith by new doctrines and strange glosses upon scripture , and then the true christians , in their own defence , were forced to vindicate the orthodox faith ; and so because by reasoning upon supernatural truths , which never came into so strict disquisition before , they had occasion to invent new words to express these truths by , to prevent long ambages and circumlocutions in discourse ; or otherwise the world had never been troubled to this day with hypostasis's , homoousios's , or consubstantiality . but after all this clamour against the orthodox , the socinians themselves ( not to mention the arians ) build their points of faith upon greater niceties , or else how come they to bring in their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 into divinity ? that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 without 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 should signify the supream god , but not with it ; which is a false as well as a foolish criticism . or else how come they to make use of that pretty distinction of a god by nature , and a god by office ? then follow his three queries , in which he promises to act no less sincerely than courageously , but i am afraid he has failed in the former ; for if , i mistake not , his confidence has generally the transcendent of his sincerity , which is the common fate of all hereticks . his queries are these . 1. what was that gospel which our lord and his apostles preached as necessary to be believed ? 2. what alterations or additions have after ages made in it ? 3. what advantage or damage hath thereupon ensued . now as to these queries , i am willing to follow him in the search of them ; and i pray god to give him grace to be better resolved in them hereafter , than he was , or at least would be thought to be , when he was writing this book . and so i shall take my leave of his preface . an answer to the naked gospel . chap. i. what was the gospel our lord and his apostles preached , as necessary to salvation . here the authour shews a little sophistry , whilst in his query at first he says necessary to be believed , but in his transcribing it in the front of this chapter , he says necessary to salvation . the first expression he uses , as the more soft , to make his queries , as they lie together , seem more reasonable ; the second he makes use of , as the more harsh , thereby to insinuate the uncharitableness of the orthodox , who make a right belief of the trinity necessary to salvation . now , though we will not quarrel with the authour about this change of his terms , which is never to be allowed in fair disputes , especially in the question it self which is to be discussed ; yet we must allow a great deal of difference between a thing 's being necessary to be believed , and being necessary to salvation . a thing may be necessary to be believed , when it is a certain truth plainly revealed in scripture ; so that a man cannot , in all points , believe aright without the belief of that too , and the belief of that point is necessarily required to make him a full , compleat , orthodox believer ; but then , a thing is necessary for salvation , when it is so of the very fundamentals of religion , that the scripture does not allow of salvation without the belief of this ; but whether the doctrine of the blessed trinity be of this necessity is another dispute : only from hence it appears , that necessity of believing , and necessity in order to salvation are not equivalent expressions , and which , i am persuaded , the authour did not use without design . the authour , in the beginning of this chapter , gives an account of the excellence of the christian religion , and that it was propagated by our saviour , to deliver us from the discipline of the ceremonial law , and to exalt natural religion to its utmost perfection : and so far right — then he goes farther to tell us , that its doctrines were the same which were so legibly imprinted in the most ignorant minds , that every one , without any instructer , might read and understand . and so , with this notion of the christian religion in his head , and this test , as he calls it , in his hand , very champion-like , as he safely may 〈…〉 . 1. what was the gospel which our saviour and his apostles preached ? and here our authour , to make short work , at first dash reduces the doctrines to two , faith and repentance ; and then to faith and no repentance ; and then again to repentance and no faith ; he might as well have rung the changes once more , and have reduced it to no faith and no repentance , and then he had cut the gospel short enough . now from all this he would make us believe , that the doctrine of the blessed trinity , which the orthodox require to be believed of good christians , is contrary to what our saviour required of his followers . now here are three things which lack a little animadversion . first . his saying that the doctrines of christianity were so legibly imprinted in the most ignorant men's minds , that every one , without any ●●structor , might read and understand them . secondly , that the doctrine of the trinity is contrary to this plainness . thirdly , that this doctrine is contrary to the sewness of the christian precepts . as to his first assertion , i will readily acquit our authour of socinianism as to this point ; for the gentlemen of that persuasion are generally so civil to our saviour , notwithstanding their depriving him of his divinity , as to allow him to be a distinct * legislator from moses , not only to have rectified and improved the old law , but to have given new precepts , and to have advanced morality to that height and perfection , which it could never have come up to without such revelation . but our authour here would have our blessed saviour , who , himself tells us that he came 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , to fill up the law , and to compleat it ; and of whose doctrines the apostles give the great eulogiums of a spiritual law , and a perfect law ; only to have told the world something which they knew well enough before , and which any ignorant man , in our author's phrase , could understand without an instructor . who the authour calls ignorant men i know not ; i am sure , some men of the greatest natural knowledge have not been able , by the light of nature , to come up to the knowledge of some of those laws which our saviour does recommend in his sermon upon the mount. the jews , who one would think should be most knowing in these truths , as having the assistance of so many particular revelations , yet they lived in opinions contrary to them all , as appears by the whole tenor of that discourse of our saviour : and even the most learned of the heathen were far from embracing the generality of them . 't would be too long here to shew the great defect of the heathen philosophy , in respect of this admirable lecture of our saviour : but to let our authour know how far ignorant men are from coming up , by the pure light of reason , to the knowledge of these laws , let him consider how much aristotle and cicera , two men of the greatest strength of natural reason , perhaps , that ever were in the world ; how much , i say , these great men were mistaken in the rules of charity which our blessed saviour does deliver . he commands us to love our enemies , to do good to them that hate us , matth. 5. 44. but * aristotle tells us , that that man is void of all sense ▪ and pain , that , though he does forbear to be angry , does not seek revenge . but 't is the part of a slave , being contumeliously used , to bear it . so cicero , among the rights of nature , places revenge , † by which , says he , we propel an injury or an affront . and again in one of his epistles to atticus he shews his prectice as well as his opinion . ‖ i hate the man , and i will hate him , and i wish i could be revenged of him . now i suppose cicero and aristotle were none of the most ignorant men ; and , if they could not search out these truths without an instructor , i cannot imagine how our authour 's ignorant men should . so that , in short , this opinion of our authour 's is not socinianism , but 't is socinianism revers'd ; 't is a heterodoxy of his own coining ; 't is such an odd piece of stupid heresie , as not only his beloved rationalists , but even his ignorant christians will be ashamed of . secondly , as to what he would inferr , that the doctrine of the trinity is contrary to the plainness of the gospel , i have given an answer already to that when i considered his preface . i shall only add , that the doctrine of our saviour's divinity should , i think , give greater credit and authority to his laws ; and ordinary christians should sooner believe and practise them upon account of their having so admirable and divine an authour . thirdly , as to the doctrine of the trinity its being contrary to the fewness of the christian doctrines , which our authour would have but two at most , faith and repentance : i answer , 't is true , faith and repentance , in a large acceptation , are the summ of the christian religion : and 't is as true , that the doctrine of the trinity is neither faith nor repentance by way of identical predication ; but , i hope , it may be contained under one of them as a species under its genus . faith and repentance , in a large sense , do take in all christianity ; under one are contained the credenda , and under the other the agenda of our religion . but then , what is this to our authour's purpose ? if it be any thing it must be this , our saviour has reduced all his religion to faith and repentance ; nay , sometimes to each of them : ergo , the doctrine of the trinity ought not to be believed , or those that teach that doctrine preach another gospel . now , how glorious a piece of logick is this ! would not this be as good a conclusion to all intents and purposes ? aristotle tells us , that all things in the world are substance or accident ; nay , he has reduced both these to ens ; therefore there is no such thing as homo or brutum ; or therefore he that says so teaches another philosophy than aristotle . certainly every one that understands any thing of his religion must know , that faith , in this general acceptation , must take in a firm belief of all things necessary to salvation , a stedfast trust and reliance upon god , and an undoubted hope in all his promises , and an express assent to all truths he has revealed in his word , &c. and that repentance does contain not only a bare turning from sin , but a constant practice of all christian vertues . so that our authour , by this argument , might have as well proved hope and charity to be no christian graces , that there is no such vertue under the gospel as temperance or chastity , because our saviour has only preached faith and repentance . chap. ii. of faith , in what sense it justifies . our authour , in the beginning of this chapter , is of a sudden turned pretty orthodox , and falls a-disputing very shrewdly against the gnosticks and antinomians : and then he applauds himself mightily , in his bringing an illustration out of act. 27. 18. of st. paul's saying to the centurion , except the mariners stay in the ship , we cannot be saved , when he had told them before , that there should not be the loss of any man's life ; now , by this instance , he illustrates the necessity of good works to justification ; and tells us , that by this all the questions about justification may be solved ; though he knows not of any one before him , which has honoured it with a mention . i shall not go about to disturb him in his dispute against the antinomians , though i think 't is a little unseasonable in this place ; nor shall i go to rob him of the honour of his instance , nor that place of scripture of the honour of his mention : for i don't remember i have read it used in this controversie before ; though i am sure it has been urged with greater advantage against the patrons of absolute predestination . and now one would think the authour had a mind to have a little controversie with luther , or calvin , or bellarmine , or to state the question of justification among the moderns ; but truly he leaves it just as he finds it , and runs off to a long indictment he has drawn up against faith , by which , i suppose , he would prove its ineffectualness to justification . which , in short , he brings to this dilemma : either by faith , we believe what is reasonable , and so we can't help it , and then we have no pretence to a reward ; or else , we believe without reason , and then we are fools : ergo , we are not justified by faith. one may be apt to wonder to what purpose the authour should bring in this question into his book ; for one would think , at first sight , that the decision of it for works , would make more for the papists than the anti-trinitarians : but yet , upon second thoughts , one may easily find , that the authour was aware that the usual solution of this question , by the merits of christ who is our righteousness , would too far advance his satisfaction , and consequently his divinity ; and that , for a true justification by faith , there would be required a full , orthodox belief in all fundamentals : and therefore , this chapter was , i suppose , to obviate these objections . though , for ought i can see , there is nothing proved against any but the anti-nomians , unless he would have all such that are not socinians . but because the authour does here endeavour to destroy the effectualness of this divine grace , the express attestation of god's word , the constant suffrage of the church , and the satisfaction too of our saviour's sufferings . i shall give him an answer , by shewing these three things ; which , i suppose , will be a compleat answer to this whole chapter . first , that we are justified by faith alone . secondly , that this faith must be orthodox in all fundamentals . thirdly , to give a reason why faith is so pleasing to god , as to justifie men by it . first , we are justified by faith alone . there cannot be any thing more expresly asserted in scripture , than that we are justified by faith onely . the righteousness of god , which is by faith in jesus christ , is revealed unto all and upon all that believe , rom. 3. 22. and ● . 24. being justified freely by his grace . and v. 30. it is one god , that justifieth the circumcision by faith , and the uncircumcision by faith. and so chap. 5. v. 1. being justified by faith , we have peace with god , through our lord jesus christ . and so eph. 4. 8. by grace ye are saved through faith , and not of your selves ; it is the gift of god , and not of works , least any one should boast . and our church informs us , * that to be justified by faith onely , is a wholsome doctrine , and full of comfort . besides , this has been the constant doctrine of † learned men in the most uncorrupted ages . from which 't is plain , that 't is faith alone that does justifie , and not works ; yet not faith exclusive of good works : for a true justifying faith cannot be without them , they do ( as our church speaks ) ‖ spring out necessarily of a true and lively faith , in so much that a true and lively faith may be known by them , as a tree is discerned by its fruit. but still it is faith , not works that do justifie : for they , having no intrinsick value of their own , cannot conferr it on any , but faith alone , which takes hold , as some speak , of the all-sufficient merits of our blessed saviour ; or as our church speaks , * sends us directly to christ for the remission of our sins , and by which we embrace the promise of god's mercy and of the remission of our sins ; which thing none other of our vertues or works properly doth , therefore the scripture useth to say , that faith without works doth justifie . not that even faith it self is a proper and necessary cause of justification ; but that it has pleased god to accept it as a cause or means , by embracing or taking hold of the merits of christ , which are the true , proper , meritorious cause of justification . which justification or righteousness , which we so receive of god's mercy and christ's merits , embraced by faith , is taken , accepted , and allowed of by god as our perfect and full justification . and this is the reason that the gentlemen of the authour's persuasion are so unwilling to have faith onely to justifie . secondly , this ought to be an orthodox faith , in all fundamentals at least ▪ all the admirable effects , which the scripture does attribute to faith , must be understood of a true faith , such as is agreeable to god's word , which is to be the rule of our faith , and not of a false or heterodox faith , which any one takes up from a party of men , or from his own imagination . a heterodox faith is no more faith than a dead man or a painted man is a man , they agree in one common equivocal name , 't is true , and in nothing else . so that an heterodox faith can no more pretend to those supernatural effects , which a true faith , by god's grace , does produce , than a dead man can pretend to all the properties and operations of a live one . there is but one faith as well as one baptism ; so that to hope to be justified by a false or another faith , is as unreasonable as to expect to come into the church by another baptism . so that they that teach a justification by works , or any other faith than an orthodox one , do themselves , for ought as i see , teach another gospel . thirdly , the reason why faith is so pleasing to god , as that he should make this the great means of justification . and here i hope to give an answer to the authour's dilemma ; and to shew that our faith in christ is not irrational , and then we are no fools , and as for our merit by faith , we are far from pretending to it : we acknowledge it as an infinite mercy of our gracious god , that he will accept our faith in christ's blood for our justification , and do not go about to argue the worth of it , which is none . and as for the grounds of our faith in christ for justification , i know not what can be more reasonable , than to expect only to have our weak performances accepted , for the sake of his all-sufficient merits . and of all our actions that we can perform , i know not what can be more pleasing and acceptable in the sight of god , than for an humble and desponding christian , considering his own unworthiness and the insufficiency of his repentance it self , and all other vertues , to incline god to mercy , so far as for their sakes to accept him for just and innocent , he , as the last refuge he hath , quitteth all worth and merit in himself and fleeth with a full and undoubting faith in all god's revelations , and a firm confidence in all his promises , unto the free grace of god revealed in christ jesus , and hopes , for the sake of his righteousness alone , that he will justifie his imperfect performances . this certainly , when we have done the utmost of our endeavours , is more pleasing to god than any action we can do more . for if we could be justified by our works , it would tempt us to reflect with pride upon our vertuous actions ; but this teaches us a pious despondency in our selves , and to cast all our hopes upon our blessed saviour . and this is the summ of the apostles arguments , eph. 2. 8. for by grace ye are saved through faith , not of your selves , nor of works , least any one should boast . and the learned * cassander , though a papist , says thus much in favour of this doctrine of the protestants , that in this question , by the word faith , they mean only the grace of god which is correspondent to faith ( quae fidei ex adverso respondet ) ; and to be justified by faith alone , signifies the same as by grace alone , in opposition to all kind of works . chap. iii. what figure faith made in natural religion ? our authour , in the beginning of this chapter , lays down faith as a duty in natural religion , that it is a branch of justice , by which we pay to god what is due to his veracity ; that this was before all positive law , and that upon this the gospel is built ; because the faith of abraham ( which is recommended for our pattern , rom. 4. ) was nothing else but this justice ; that the lack of this faith was reproved by the angel in sarah , and was punished in lot's wife , gen. 18. and in the incredulous lord , 2 king. 7. and that this is the faith lastly which is commended in the worthies mentioned , heb. 11. and last of all he endeavours to shew the excellency of abraham's faith , to consist in believing god against so many difficulties , from this natural notion of his veracity . any one that understands the nature of the authour's book , will easily see into his design here ; which is to bring down all faith to be a meer creature of reason , to be no longer that which the schools call an infused habit , or the inspiration of god , but only a bare rational belief upon divine testimony . now as to his notion of faith , its being a branch of justice , and that by the light of nature we are taught to believe god upon his testimony ; this is in some measure most certainly true , as appears by the practice of the heathens themselves † , who had nothing but the light of nature to walk by , in their believing their oracles , auguries , prophesies , &c. and in suiting their actions according to them . so that 't is plain , that natural religion tells us , god is to be believed upon his testimony ; so that when a man under natural religion does believe any thing upon god's testimony , our authour may , if he pleases , call this faith. but theological faith , or faith under the gospel , is quite of another kind ; this is not only an assent of the understanding , but a divine grace , or habit infused , though our authour would have them the same , by saying the gospel is built upon this : and moreover , that faith in abraham , which the scripture does recommend for our pattern , was not this bare rational assent but an inspired vertue , that was founded and excited in him by the preventing and co-operating grace of god. 1. for first , faith under the gospel is a spiritual grace , or an inspired habit , 't is a true and stedfast belief in , and reliance upon god , through the merits of jesus christ , and the sanctification of the holy spirit , not by the bare assent only of our reason , but by the co-operating grace of god. i know not for my part any truth in all our religion more expresly revealed , than that faith is a grace inspired by god. it is said to be the gift of god , eph. 2. 8. and again , for unto you is given in the behalf of christ , not only to believe on him but to suffer for him , eph. 1. 29. upon peter's confessing our saviour's divinity , christ tells him , flesh and blood hath not revealed this unto thee , but my father which is in heaven , matth. 16. 17. we are not sufficient of our selves to think any thing as of our selves , but our sufficiency is of god , 2 cor. 3. 5. it is god that worketh in us both to will and to do , phil. 2. 13. no man can come unto me except the father which sent me draw him , joh. 6. 4. and so gal. 5. 22. faith is reckoned among the gifts of the spirit . and the father of the demoniack , mark 9. 24. cries out , lord , i believe , help my unbelief . now if all our vertues and good thoughts are the effects of god's grace , most certainly this eminent vertue of faith must ; if the inspiration of god be requisite , even for st. peter's faith , it must surely likewise be so for ours ; if we are to be drawn to the belief of the gospel by god , we cannot come then upon our own pure accord ; if the belief of one that was an eye-witness of our saviour's miracles , did lack help and improvement from god , ours likewise cannot stand in need of less . i do not say , that god inspires this belief into us without any concurrence of our own judgments , that he moves our assents as if we were meer machines ; but his preventing grace does first excite our belief , and his assisting grace does still further it , by giving a blessing and effectualness to the word ; and without this divine assistance , according to the present measures of god's dispensations , it is impossible we should ever attain it . for the certainty of this divine truth we have scripture , * councils , † fathers and learned men in all ages , the ‖ doctrine of our own church , and all sober christians ; but only a few * socinians and remonstrants that are for levelling all scripture and revelations to their own sense and humour . nay , i am apt to think that this doctrine will be look'd upon as too calvinistical by some , since the systems of the † remonstrants , which condemn this doctrine are so admired in the world ; but 't is not systems , but god's word , we are to be governed by ; and from hence we have proof enough to maintain this doctrine against all the remonstrants and socinians in the world. 2. now as to his making the faith of abraham , by which he is said in scripture to be justified , to be only a natural faith ; i answer , first , though we should not allow this faith of abraham to be the true christian justifying faith , or a faith in christ jesus ; yet we cannot allow it to be only a plain moral act or habit : for if it were only a bare credence out of justice to god's veracity , that too must be allowed to come from god , because without him we are not able to think a good thought , much less to do a good action . though by the light of natural religion a man might be covinced that it was his duty to believe god in all his promises ; yet when these promises , by their difficulties , seem strangely incredible , flesh and blood will be apt to shrink and give way , and rather to fall a disputing the possibility of them , than readily , upon god's authority , to believe ; unless their faith be strengthned by the assisting grace of of god's holy spirit . and so * philo the jew says in this case of abraham , that 't is not so easie a matter to believe in god alone , by reason of that cognation we have with that mortal part we are yoked to , which is the cause that we trust in money and glory , in honours and friends , and the like ; but to be purged from all these , and to distrust all created things , which are unfaithful in themselves , and to trust in god alone , who is always faithful , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , is the work of a great and heavenly mind , that is , an inspired one . secondly , but besides , this faith of abraham was a formal , christian , justifying faith , or a faith in christ jesus . it was the opinion of the ancients , that all the patriarchs and all other good men , both before and under the law , were saved by an express faith in christ . * eusebius tell us , that all the fathers before abraham were christians , though not in name , yet in reality ; and that they followed the faith of him whom we now follow . and † st. hierom , that the saints that were of old , were justified by faith in christ . and ‖ st. gregory , that as we are saved by faith in the past passion of our saviour , so the ancient fathers by faith in his passion which was then to come . nay * cyril goes farther , and makes abraham , from the seeing of the three angels , to have believed in the consubstantial trinity . and if we look into scripture , we shall find that these great men had reasons enough to ground them in this opinion : for our saviour tells the jews , joh. 8. 56. your father abraham , rejoiced to see my day , and he saw it and was glad . now , what should all this gladness and rejoicing be for ? but that from the promise which god had made him , gen. 11. 35. that in his seed all the nations of the earth should be blessed : he was fully persuaded , that god , in his good time , would send such a person as christ into the world , that should save the people from their sins , that should die for the sins of the whole world , to reconcile them to god ; now the consideration of this was matter of the greatest joy to him then , as it is now to all good christians : so that ( as st. gregory says ) there is little difference in this between his faith and ours , but that ours is after and his before christ's passion . so likewise st. peter tells the jews , act. 4. 12. neither is there salvation in any other but christ , for there is no other name under heaven given among men , whereby we must be saved . now , whereas 't is certain , by scripture , that these good patriarchs were saved , as appears by god's declaring himself to be their god , and by making a lying down with abraham , and isaac , and jacob to be an expression for everlasting happiness ; it from hence follows , that they must be saved by a faith in christ , or else they would be saved by faith in another name . i say , they must be saved by faith in his name ; for that is the onely means of salvation god has proposed . that was one of the express terms of reconciliation agreed upon with the father to be performed on man's part ; so that they could reap no benefit from this covenant , without performing that condition . as to his other instances to prove faith in the old testament , to be only a natural faith , as of enoch , moses , josuah , rahab , &c. i answer , first , 't is very certain that the word faith , in scripture , is taken in very diverse acceptations , sometimes for the profession of the gospel , sometimes for a belief of christ's being able to cure diseases , sometimes for a trust and reliance upon god's promises in general , which are all distinguished from the particular reliance upon god's mercy and promises through the merits of jesus christ , which is the only true justifying faith. now , 't is true , the apostle , in the eleventh of the hebrews , where he reckons up all those eminent examples of faith , does not understand by faith here , strictly the justifying faith ; but only a firm reliance upon god's promises , that he will , in his good time , deliver his servants ; and therefore he urges these precedents of faith and trusting in god , to encourage the christians to a chearful undergoing of their sufferings , and a perseverance in their belief , that god will shortly deliver them , by destroying the jews , which were their bitterest enemies : for in the verses immediately preceding this chapter , he comforts his fainting converts in these words , yet a little while , and he that shall come will come , and will not tarry . now the just shall live by faith , but if any man draw back , my soul shall have no pleasure in him . by which it is plain , that the examples that are afterwards brought to comfirm those wavering christians in this sort of faith or perseverance in their sufferings , must be famous for their perseverance in afflictions , upon account of this faith or reliance upon god's promises to deliver them ; and that this sort of faith is that which is chiefly recommended here . but then , secondly , it no ways follows that these good men , whose examples are here proposed , had no other faith but this . these , and all other good men under the old testament , had a formal faith in the messias or christ jesus , which is the true justifying faith. moses wrote of christ , act. 3. 2 , to the end , as our saviour tells the jews , that they might believe on him , joh. 5. 46. and many prophets and righteous men have desired to see the things which they saw , matt. 13. 17. and that many kings have desired it , luk. 10. 24. jacob , when he was dying said , that he had waited for the salvation of the lord , gen. 49. 18. anna the prophetess spake of christ to all them that looked for redemption at jerusalem , luk. 2. 38. philip said that he had found him of whom moses in the law , and the prophets did write , joh. 1. 45. the samaritan woman knew that christ cometh , joh. 4. 25. st. paul speaks in his oration to agrippa , of the promise made unto the father , unto which the twelve tribes instantly serving god day and night , hope to come , act. 26. 6. from all which it is plain , that all these good servants of god did believe in christ the saviour of the world ; and that this faith of theirs was imputed unto them for righteousness . and so now what is become of our authour 's natural faith which he makes to be the mother of the evangelical ? the faith of these good men was the gift of god as well as ours , they were justified by faith , and so are we , gal. 3. 8. they live by faith in christ jesus as well as we , they disclaimed all righteousness in works as well as we ; so that if theirs be a natural faith , ours must be so too . and so now by our authour 's natural faith , and other mens moral grace , we are in a fair way to have all christianity dwindled into downright paganism . chap. iv. that credulity is not faith , but an opposite vice. our authour being resolved to carry on his notion of natural faith , and to make it a compleat heathen virtue , has resolved to bring it to the test of the heathen philosophy ; and to make it to suit the better with the aristotelian vertues , has gotten it two extream vices to surround it , infidelity in the defect , and credulity in the excess . but 't is credulity is the vice that our authour has the pique against ; and therefore spends all this chapter to prove , that credulity is not faith. and this we could readily have granted him , without all his pains of proving it . now one would think , that this was easy enough to prove , and yet he has unluckily failed in the attempt . for instead of proving , that credulity is not faith , which is easy enough of all conscience to do , he first goes to prove , that credulity is an excess of faith , as fool-hardiness is of valour , or prodigality of bounty . and secondly , that they that believe contrary to reason , are guilty of credulity . now one would think , that when our authour had before laid down , that faith was only justice to god , he would make credulity , which he would have the excess of this justice , to be summum jus , and so consequently , to be summa injuria towards him ; and this he should do , if he kept up to his own rules , and the analogy of these moral vertues . but he very fairly lets that alone , and falls again to proving , that which no body will deny ; that men must not believe , in contradiction to their reason , in compliance with any humane authority . now for ought that the authour has gained of his point in this chapter , he might as well have proved , that a bear was not a man , or a man was not a mouse ; all that ever he could propose to himself , was , to insinuate into his unwary readers , that our faith , in the blessed trinity , is not faith but credulity ; and that we are therefore credulous , because he would suppose we ground that faith only upon humane authority , by which 〈◊〉 means chiefly the authority of ancient councils . therefore what 〈◊〉 shall say to this chapter , i shall reduce to two heads , and shew , first , that credulity is not excess of divine faith. secondly , that an acquiescence in the determinations of general councils in matter of faith , is not credulity . first , that credulity is not an excess of divine faith. credulity is a vice by which we easily give our assent to the relation of another , without just reasons and motives for it . now this vice , in its ordinary notion , is only opposite to that just humane belief that is owing to one another , as we are men. for humane faith or belief of what another man says , when neither the matter it self , nor the relater , is liable to any just exception , is a social duty ; and which any man that speaks truth , and has not justly lost his reputation , may claim from us , as fellow creatures . but when the matter related is incredible , or which my reason tells me is not enough probable , or when the relater is sufficiently exceptionable , or if any thing else accompany the relation , which will give sufficient suspition of falsity to a prudent man ; then if i believe such a relation , i am truly said to be credulous ; because there i make my belief exceed its just bounds , i give more credit to the relater than he ought to have : whereas my faith in this case ought to stop at the confines of probability , i let it pass over them , and believe things improbable . but there can be no such thing in a divine faith , for taking that in our authour's sense to be only a piece of justice to god , there can be no excess in believing what he reveals or relates to us : 't is impossible there should lie any exception against him as a relater , for he is most true , and cannot deceive us : as to whatever difficulty there lies in the matter related , he is most powerful , and can make good what he promises ; his wisdom is infinite , and knows exactly the express modus of those truths he had revealed to us ; which our finite understandings cannot comprehend . it is impossible for us to believe too much what god affirms , unless we could suppose , that our belief could be greater than god's veracity , or that god could say something was so which we knew impossible to be so . so that to make credulity an excess of faith , is to prescribe bounds how far men should believe god , and to give them caution , that they should not credit him any farther than they saw reason for it ; but when his relations began to them to seem unreasonable , that then they should choose whether they would believe him or no , that then they should stand upon their own guard for fear of being censur'd for easy men , and being thought the worst of all fools , the credulous . so that in short , whatever credulity is , 't is not an excess of divine faith , unless we could believe god too true , or that god could tell us something was true which was manifestly false . secondly , that an acquiescence in the determinations of general councils , though in matters of faith , is not credulity . i would not have our authour think , that we ground our faith in the blessed trinity , upon the determinations only of general councils , which he means by his greatest humane authority , as if we had nothing in scripture to urge for it ; we have arguments enough from thence to confound all the force and subtilties of our heretical adversaries , and several learned men in the beginning of this age , have brought so much from thence , as perfectly silenced this heresy for a time , and has baffled their cause for ever ; i am sure , at least , against all such espousers of it as this authour seems to be . and as for councils , when we rely upon their determinations , in asserting and explaining the ancient faith , i do not think we are so much credulous , as these fort of gentlemen are saucy , to say no worse , when they bespatter these august assemblies , with so much contumely and buffoonry as they use to do . there are none of our church , that look upon the determinations of general councils , to be the infallible oracles of god ; they are , as our authour speaks , humane authorities , but then they are the greatest humane authority upon earth , they are the representatives of the church universal ; and if our judgments are apt to be inclined by the authority of single doctors , they ought to be much more so , by the authority of such a number of good and learned men , convened from all the parts of the christian world. we do not run up the authority of councils so high , as to give them power to constitute new articles of faith , as the papists do ; but then we look upon them to be the best judges in the world of old ones , and of what was the true , ancient and catholick faith ; to declare what doctrines , according to * lirinensis's rule , have universality , consent , antiquity , when they come to be contested by hereticks . † for the members of these councils being bishops drawn from all parts of the world , are able to give an account of the belief of the faithful , in their districts , and of the uncorrupted writings and traditions of their fore-fathers . neither yet do we allow them , if they shall oppose their opinions or traditions against the express word of god ; but only when they declare the truth of their doctrine , as theodoret ‖ speaks of the nicene fathers , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , out of scripture words piously understood ; of which there is no o●e but must allow them to be the most excellent and the most authentick expositors . and yet though we cannot grant it to be an article of our christian faith , that general councils cannot err , because there is no such proposition found in scripture , nor by any necessary consequence to be deduced from thence ; but most good men look upon it as a theological verity , for which there are some probable arguments out of scripture alledged , as mat. 18. 20. when two or three are gathered together in my name , i will be in the midst of them , and joh. 16. 3. when the spirit of truth is come , he will guide you into all truth : and the most good and learned men in all times , have generally thought , that the inerrability of a general council , that was fairly called , and duly celebrated , was one of the piè credibilia , which a good man , though he is not necessitated , is yet well disposed to believe . for if we consider the great love which god does bear to his church , and the peculiar providence he does exercise over it ; if we consider the promises that he has made to it , that it is his desire , that all men should be saved , and should come to the knowledge of all necessary truth ; there is no good man but will be inclined to believe , that god out of his infinite love and goodness , which he has declared to bear to his church , will not suffer the representatives of it in these sacred assemblies , to err in any important matter of faith ; that he will not permit any deadly poison thus to sink into the bowels of his church , when they use all the fair and honest means they can to avoid it ; but that he will give his holy spirit to direct them in settling the true faith , as may be best for the edification of his church . but though general councils have not a divine inerrable authority , yet they have in matters of religion , the greatest humane and coercive one ; especially when owned and confirmed by the secular power : therefore though we were certain , that they had determined something erroneously , and which our own reason and judgment told us was so ; yet we ought to keep this reason to our selves , and not to oppose the concurring judgments of so many great and holy men , with our private sentiments : 't is more probable , that we should be deceived than they , and though god might pardon our mistakes when we take care they should go no farther than our selves , yet we cannot be so sure of that , when we endeavour to bring others likewise into our errours ▪ a good man , though he could not be convinced of the truth oft heir determinations , yet out of duty and respect to so great an authority , would not go openly to condemn them ; for though he looked upon their determinations not as inerrable declarations of faith , yet he would take them for the best expedients of unity ; so that if he happened to be mistaken in his sentiments , which are contrary to their declarations , and should withal endeavour to corrupt others by diffusing them ; this would be to make breaches in the church , which would be more prejudicial to him than his own errour ; this might make him guilty , at the same time , of heresy and schism too . so that i take an acquiescence in the determinations of general councils , or any such like humane authority , to be so far from credulousness , that 't is a great part of prudent caution and wariness ; and that we should be far the more credulous and conceited fools , if we could believe , that our private opinion was sufficient to weigh down theirs ; or that god would suffer the establishments of these great and holy men , to be pulled down and destroyed by the propagation of our conceptions . chap. v. why faith made a greater figure under the gospel , than it did under the law ? the authour spends this long chapter in shewing , what a greater necessity there was in the primitive times of christianity of a strong faith , than there is now ; which made our saviour to recommend it then so much to his disciples . which he illustrates by the instance of loyalty ; which is but mean and inconsiderable in peaceable times , and not worth a reward from the prince : but in time of danger , when a man ventures his life to serve him , 't is then a virtue of a larger extent , and ought to be encouraged by the greatest rewards . he proceeds to shew the particular necessity of faith at that time . first , from the difficulties which hindred the believing of the gospel , to the gentiles who despised the meanness of the gospel , to the jews who were prejudiced by the fond opinion they had of their own law , and by the expectation of a pompous messias . secondly , from the danger which the gospel brought , in exposing its professors to persecutions , &c. thirdly , upon account of the methods of the gospel , which was to be preached to the whole heathen world. these are the extraordinary means , he says , why faith was so much recommended at that time ; the ordinary were , the serviceableness of this vertue to religion and holiness , which do continue still , so that god does not load his servants with more faith than is absolutely necessary to salvation ; for if he should do this , he says , he must do it with reason or without reason ; if without reason , that would contradict his wisdom ; if with reason , that can be no other but in order to the piety and happiness of man. and this is the sum of this chapter . now any one may see what the design of all this is , to make the belief of our saviour's divinity , and the doctrine of the trinity , to be no part of the faith delivered to the saints ; and that those great exhortations to faith the scripture gives , had no relation to the faith of our saviour's divinity ; and that they were not urged to strengthen them against any difficulties they might conceive in this doctrine , but only to confirm them against those other difficulties and dangers , which he there mentions . now though 't is very true , that these difficulties which the author mentions , were such as did deter many from espousing christianity ; so that there was need of a greater faith than ordinary at that time to conquer them , yet he does not enumerate all the difficulties their faith was to superate , but leaves out that principal end of faith , which was to give life to all the rest , that jesus christ was the eternal son of god. this doctrine was so strange and wonderful , both to jews and gentiles , that it frighted many proselites away from christianity ; so that how much soever the fondness of the jews , to their own law , and the meanness of our saviour's appearance , might hinder them from complying with his religion ; yet this doctrine of his , being the eternal son of god , and equal with his rather , was such a hard saying , a truth so difficult to mens natural reason at first appearance ; that they ought to have had as great incouragement to confirm their faith in this point , as to support them against any of those difficulties which our authour mentions . and this we find to be the great scandal all along to the jews . for joh. 5. when our saviour declares to them his original , his being the son of god , and his co-operating with the father : my father worketh hitherto and i work , therefore the jews sought the more to kill him , because he not only had broken the sabbath , but said also , that god was his father , making himself equal with god. and so joh 6. 58. when our saviour declares himself to be the bread which came down from heaven , many of his disciples when they heard this , said , this is a hard saying , who can bear it ? and so likewise , v. 52. what if ye shall see the son of man ascend up where he was before ? it follows , that from that time many of his disciples went back , and walked no more with him . and again , joh. 8. upon our saviour's declaring to the jews , that he was the son of god , they are all so enraged , as to tell him , that he is a samaritan , and hath a devil , joh. 8. 15. and so likewise v. 58. upon his saying , before abraham was i am , they took up stones to cast at him . the like offence they took at his forgiving sins , mat. 9. 11. or at any other word or action of his , which did any ways seem to infer his divinity . so that there was a great deal of need of a very strong and vigorous faith , to believe in the divinity of christ at that time , especially when they had so many prejudices to deterr them from it . and besides we find , that our saviour does greatly incourage and commend those , that did heartily believe , and make a ready profession of it . thus mat. 16. when peter made that eminent confession of our saviour's divinity , thou art the son of the living god , he immediately gives him his blessing , and entails that great promise upon him , thou art peter , and upon this rock will i build my church , and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it , joh. 16. 18. and so joh. 20. 28. when thomas made that most express confession of our lord's divinity , upon occasion , of his being certified of the resurrection , my lord and my god , our saviour gives his blessing , not only to him , but to all those that shall believe this , without being eye-witnesses of his resurrection to confirm them in it : blessed are they which have not seen , and yet have believed . and thus we find our saviour did many of his miraculous cures , in requital of their faith , and their ready confession of his divinity ; as on the blind man , mat. 20. that cryed out so vehemently , have mercy on me , o lord , thou son of david : and luke 17. when the blind man cries out jesus , thou son of david , have mercy on me , our saviour tells him upon his cure , thy faith hath saved thee , v. 4. * where by the son of david is meant the messias , who according to the jewish doctors was to be god. so that this confession of his being the son of david , was a confession of his divinity , which was a great means to incline our saviour to work their cure ; and to tell one of them that his faith had saved him . and thus we have let our author know there was some other use of faith , at the beginning of the gospel , than what he mentions ; and that there was not only a need of faith to strengthen them against the dangers , &c. which the gospel brought on them ; but to make them believe in christ's divinity , and to profess that most important article of our christian faith. 2. the next thing which the authour in this chapter would have , is , that faith in the gospel has no relation to christ's divinity ; because , he says , god like a good prince , would not load his good subjects with unnecessary burdens , but only such as there was reason for , and which were necessary to piety and a good life . now i hope that our authour and his friends , for all their pretence to reason , will not be so bold with god almighty , as to give the rationale of all his commands , and exactly to shew the motives that inclined his eternal will , whose judgments are unsearchable , and his ways past finding out . i confess i have always lookt upon it as a very daring piece of confidence in these sort of authours , to say in case of a positive command , that god has not commanded such a thing ; or , this command must not be understood in this manner , because there is no reason that he should thus command us : or as our authour says , 't is to dishonour god , to believe him to require faith for any other reason , than because it is necessary for our incouragement to holiness ; or as he says afterwards , for its serviceableness to the divine life . for though we could see no reason for such a command , yet god may : and 't is but reasonable as well as modest to think , that god understands the reason of his own laws best , and that he that gave us these precepts , best understood the ends for which he designed them . but because the authour should not triumph too much over us poor dull trinitarians , or think there is no reason to be given , why faith in the persons of the blessed trinity , should be commanded us ; or in particular , that the belief of the divinity of our saviour ( which it is our authour 's chief design to impugn , as appears by his following chapters ) least i say he should think , this belief does contribute nothing to religion and piety , let him be pleased to take with him these considerations . first , that to believe the divinity of our saviour is necessary to religion , because by it there is gained a greater authority to his laws . for we find that men are more and more inclined to respect rules and laws from the dignity of the person that gives them . the rules and injunctions of ordinary persons are usually contemned and slighted , though if the same came from a great and magnificent person , they would be embraced with a great deal of eagerness and veneration . therefore in compassion to this infirmity of mankind , it has pleased the infinite wisdom and goodness of god , to let a person of the divine nature , the son of his bosom , to take our nature upon , him to be himself the propounder of these heavenly rules of his holy gospel , to be himself the promiser of all those glorious rewards , which he vouchsafes to propose to those that shall obey his precepts . now such a person as this could be liable to no exceptions , though a prophet might be mistaken in his revelation , might outgo or misapply his credentials ; yet when god himself undertakes the embassage , malice it self can except nothing here ; so that this will be proof against the utmost infidelity . secondly , this belief does further religion because it improves our love and gratitude to god upon consideration of so immense a benefit . indeed it had been a great token of god's love to mankind any ways to have contrived our redemption , to have rescued us from that forlorn miserable estate into which we were fallen ; and to have placed us in a capacity of attaining everlasting happiness . but then his love is far greater to us , when he hath sent his only begotten son to die for our sins , and to purchase our redemption by such an unvaluable price . and we may take notice , that the apostles do place the choisest mark of god's love , in chusing such extraordinary means to work mens salvation by , as the incarnation and death of his own son. god so loved the world , that he gave his only begotten son , joh. 3. 16. god spared not his own son , but delivered him up for us all , rom. 8. 32. herein is love , not that we loved god , but that he loved us , and sent his son to be the propitiation for our sins , 1 joh. 4. 10. and truly this consideration , that a person of the glorious trinity , one that is god blessed for ever , should for the sake of us wretched sinners , undergo such an exinanition , as to take our nature upon him , to live a miserable life , and to die a shameful death , to reconcile us unto god ; this consideration , i say , is of all most apt to work upon generous minds , to hinder them from offending so good and gracious a god , after such an unparallel'd mercy ; and nothing can be so effectual to make men ashamed of the ingratitude of their sins , if they have any the least spark of generosity or vertue , when they reflect upon this so inexpressible goodness . thirdly , because this belief does secure us of the remission of our sins , by an assurance we now have of the compleat satisfaction which christ has made for the sins of all men. we know our saviour came into the world , that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name . now we are certain , that it is not possible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sin , heb. 10. 4. and we are as certain , that the blood of meer man would be as far from doing it as the other ; so that we could have no assurance of our redemption at all , unless we were redeemed by the blood of god , act. 10. 28. for because our sins had received an infinite aggravation , by being against a god of infinite dignity , as all offences are increased proportionably as the person offended is of greater worth ; and therefore these sins had entailed upon them an infinite punishment ; it was impossible that any satisfaction could be made by any thing less than an infinite person , because none but such an one could pay the infinite price that was due ; and he might do it , because the temporary punishment in the infinite dignity of his person , was a full equivalent to the infinity of punishment which was due to us . so that this belief of our saviour's divinity , is necessary to the believing the remission of our sins , and so to be sure is necessary to piety . chap. vi. of faith in christ as the saviour of the world. the authour here divides the faith of christ into two objects of belief . i. the person in whom we believe . ii. the word in which we believe upon the credit of the person . in treating of the first of these , he declares , first , what kind of person our lord requires us to believe him to be . secondly , what is meant by believing in him . and when he comes to shew what kind of person our saviour declares himself to be , he makes a fine company of socinian glosses upon scripture , which it will be worth our while a little to consider . for whereas he is mightily afraid , that the titles of the son of god , &c. would be a pregnant proof of our saviour's divinity , he is resolved to distinguish them of by a few polish criticisms . for first he says , that god in scripture is used to express something which is indefinite , and which implies more than we can readily express . from whence he would inferr , that the title of son of god , is no argument for christ's divinity ; but only that he is some extraordinary remarkable person . but let us a little examine the instances he brings . the first is god do so to me , and more also . now can any mortal man conclude from hence , that the word god is used to signify something indefinite ? the word more does signify something indefinite indeed , but the word god signifies no more than it does in other places , and the authour might as well have transcribed all the texts in the bible , in which he found the word god as this ; and they would have been as much to his purpose . i know not what particular text the authour does refer to for this expression , for 't is in many ; and as far as can be collected , 't was a form of cursing in use among the jews , about the time of samuel , and some time after ; for 't is found only in the historical writers of those times , 1 sam. 3. 17. and 4. 44. and 25. 22. 2 sam. 3. 9. and 35. 2 sam. 19. 3. 1 kings 2. 23. 2 king. 6. 13. sometimes by way of adjuration to another , as of old eli to samuel , god do so to thee , and more also if thou hide any thing from me of all the things that he said unto thee , 1 sam. 3. 17. that is , i charge thee to tell me all the threatnings which god tells thee ; or else may all , and more than he threatens , light on thee . other times by way of imprecation of mischief on ones self , as in the case of solomon , 1 king 2. 23. god do so to me , and more also , if adonijah have not spoken this against his own life ; i. e. i will for this crime take away adonijah's life , or else may god take away mine , or punish me worse than i intend to punish him . and so in the other places , where the word god has not an indefinite sense ; but there is only a wishing of some evil or punishment which is indefinite , greater than the evil there pointed at , but not expressed of how large a degree of greatness . his second instance is out of joel 4. 12. because i will do this unto thee , prepare to meet thy god , o israel . now , i don't see what more indefinite signification there is in the word god here , than in other places . indeed there is the severest denunciation of god's judgments upon an irreclaimable people , after famine , pestilence , sword , and fire ; so that god tells them , seeing they are proof against all these scourges , he will try what they can do against him , when he personally becomes their adversary , and see if they are able to cope with him too . prepare then to meet thy god , o israel . 't is not the word god , here , that does signifie any indefinite number of evils ; but that god does sarcastically upbraid their obstinacy , after all his judgments having been ineffectual upon them , by proposing his infinite power as a match for them , if nothing else can be . prepare , &c. a bitter sarcasm , says the excellent * dean of paul's , as if a man could be a match for god , and a poor weak creature be , in any wise , able to encounter him to whom power belongs . another notion the authour has got , why christ should be called the son of god , is , because he is a considerable person , one of great note and eminence ; it being the scripture idiom , to advance things , by entitling them to god ; as the mountains of god , and the rivers of god , were those that were most eminent in their kind . it is true , that this sort of expression is usual in scripture , to denote something that is great ; as the mountain of god , the cedar of god , nimrod was a mighty hunter before the lord , or a hunter of god. with great wrestlings have i wrestled with my sister , says rachel , or with the wrestlings of god , baptholi elohim , luctationibus dei. but it does not follow from hence , that our saviour was called the son of god , because he was a great person . by this way of speaking , he might well enough be stiled the man of god , or the prophet of god , to denote him a great man , or a great prophet , but in no propriety of speech the son of god : for the word son does not denote the person but relation ; so that the son of god is one to whom god does bear the relation of a father . therefore 't is not his greatness that entitles him thus to god , but his filiation ; for if it was only his greatness that entituled him to this character , the mighty nimrod , or the great mountain might , upon this account , be called the sons of god as well as he ; because they were great in their kind as well as he . well , but , says the authour , daniel makes the son of god be a character of one of great beauty and majesty , by calling the fourth person in nebuchadnezzar's furnace by that name . there is no reason to assert , that this fourth person here , was the second person of the blessed trinity : for , as the authour says , we can't suppose nebuchadnezzar to have seen the son of god before , and , upon that account , to have known him . all that nebuchadnezzar or daniel , who relates this matter , understood by the son of god , was an angel , who from their nigh conversation with god , from the great portion of happiness and glory he communicates to them , and their so resembling him by their purity and the spiritualness of their nature , and from their living in heaven with him , like children under the wing of their parent ; from these and the like circumstances , they were , and not improperly , called the sons of god ; as we find in many places of scripture , as psal . 82. i said ye were angels , or the children of the most high. so job 1. 6. there was a day when the sons of god , or angels , presented themselves before the lord. and the lxx . translate this very place in daniel by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the form of the fourth was like the angel of god. so that we must grant , that the son of god , here mentioned , was an angel of god. but our blessed saviour was the son of god in another manner than his : for his sonship is not founded upon any such analogy as theirs is ; but upon the eternal generation of the father ; for he being made so much better than the angels , as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they , heb. 1. 4. in short , 't is impossible , that our saviour's sonship should be such a sonship as that of the angels ; because the apostle spends this whole chapter to prove him a person distinct from and above the nature of angels , and does besides set the son of god in direct opposition to the angels of god. and of the angels he saith , &c. v. 7. but unto the son he saith , &c. v 8. when he bringeth in his first begotten into the world , he saith , let all the angels of god worship him , v. 6. so that christ's sonship must be of another kind than that of the angels : or else there would be no ground for their contradistinction , unless he was in a peculiar manner the son of god , in a supereminent extraordinary way not at all common to them . the authour having made these remarks upon this title of our saviour , the son of god , he proceeds to reckon up some others , as the messias or christ , onely begotten son of god ; which characters he allows to speak a person of unmeasurable greatness , a person like his emblem , the light so glorious , that by our most intent view we cannot discover any thing of it , but this , that we cannot discover . now for all our authour's haste , one would imagine that something was discoverable in our saviour , by these eulogies ; that god did design to manifest or discover something to us of him , by these revelations , and not to make revelations of things that were not revealable . 't is not to be expected indeed , that , by the help of revelation , we should dive into the nature of our saviour's eternal essence : for we are so far from a possibility of doing that , that we are ignorant of the essential constitutions of the most inconsiderable being we are conversant with . but though we are ignorant of this , yet we can tell , when 't is revealed to us by god , what kind of nature our saviour's is , whether finite or infinite , whether divine or humane . the gloriousness of his nature does not so dazzle our eyes as to make us confound distinct and express idea's . i have a certain , though not an adequate idea or notion of god , as a being infinite , incorporeal , &c. and when i am informed by revelation t●at such a person is that infinite , incorporeal being ; or that he has , in such revelation , those characters ascribed to him , as are inseparable from the divine nature ; i must conclude , that such a one is a person of the divine nature , such an infinite , incorporeal , &c. being , which is my notion of god. indeed the gloriousness of this being keeps men from discovering its essence , and from prying into its nature ; but yet we may observe such marks and properties in it , so as to have a distinct conception of it , from all other beings in the world. the sun is a glorious body , and the more we strive to pry into its constitution by gazing on it , the more we are blinded ; and what then ? don 't we know the sun when we see it for all this ? because our eyes are so weak that we cannot stare into the furnace of the sun , must we therefore take it for a candle ? the person of our saviour is glorious , and if it were a thousand times less glorious than it is , i might not understand its nature ; but when i am told , that this person is god , that he is one of the persons of the divine nature , my understanding tells me very clearly , that all the marks and properties i have in my mind of the divine nature must be attributed to this person , and though i understand nothing of his essence , or the precise modus of his hypostasis ; yet i am sure he is that being , which i have a certain idea of , and which i call god. so that 't is a great fallacy in the authour to say , we don't know what our saviour is , because we cannot dive into his essence : for our discriminative knowledge of one thing from another , is not by discovering the essences , or internal constitutions of them , but by regarding their outward marks and properties ; and these every one has a knowledge of : for a child knows a rose from a stone as well as a philosopher , though it knows not the qualities and internal constitutions of either . therefore when i am infallibly informed , that such a person is god , i am infallibly assured he is that kind of being i have the fore-mentioned idea of : though i am infinitely short of understanding its nature . ii. our authour now comes to shew what is meant by believing in his person , which he branches into two parts . first , believing in him with respect to his word . second , in respect to his person . the first of which onely he speaks to in this chapter , and says that christ is to his followers as the sun to travellers . 't is no matter what they think of its magnitude , or whether they think it be no bigger than a bushel , it guides them all alike ; and thus it is , he says , with the sun of righteousness , 't is no matter what we believe him to be , if we have but a practical faith ; which is all our saviour , he says , requires . and this he attempts to prove out of joh. 10. a place , than which , one would have thought , he should rather have chosen any text in the new testament besides , how long dost thou make us to doubt , if thou be the christ tell us plainly ? jesus said , i told you ( by calling god my father ) and ye believe me not , joh. 10. 24 , 25. and presently after he tell them , i and my father are one , v. 30. at which they took up stones to stone him , saying , thou being a man makest thy self god. now , what can the authour draw from this ? why , he says , our saviour , upon so pressing an occasion as their endeavouring to stone him , did not assert his right of divinity ; but contented himself with this answer , is it not written , in your law , i have said ye are gods ? if he called them gods to whom the word of god came , and the scripture cannot be broken , say ye of him whom the father hath sanctified and sent into the world , thou blasphemest , because i said i am the son of god. let the authour make out of this place what he can for his opinion ; i am sure this place is as pregnant a proof of our lord's divinity , as most places in the bible are ; and whatever the authour thinks , he does exactly answer to the jews question , and tells them plainly , he is what they expected the messias to be , the son of god , and very god. for first , in this place he tells them , i and my father are one , v. 30. we two persons are the same god : and 't is plain , that the jews understood that to be his meaning , by their great rage which followed , and their answer to his question , why they should so barbarously use him , after so many of his kind and saving miracles . for a good work we stone thee not , but for blasphemy , and because that thou being a man makest thy self god. and secondly , he gives them a reason why he might claim the title of god , without blasphemy ; whereas rulers to whom the word of god came , or who had their power and authority from him , are called gods in scripture , psal . 2. 1 , & 6. why has not he whom the father has sanctified , &c. a better claim to this title ? but besides , he farther tells them , that he was god in a more peculiar manner than they , and in a proper and not metaphorical sense , by a personal union with the father ; that ye may know and believe that the father is in me , and i in him . this cannot be , as the socinians pretend , by the power of god , co-operating in christ : for though 't is true that then god would be in him , yet he could not be in god. and besides , to say he is in the father and the father in him , denotes an equality in each , and his being in the father in the same manner that the father is in him . and thus much to shew , that our saviour did assert his divinity , and prove it too , upon this occasion ; and so consequently , did not only require them to believe in his word , but in his person also . chap. vii . of belief , with meer respect to the person of christ . inquisitiveness concerning his incarnation censured . first , because impertinent . the first argument which the authour uses to prove the belief of christ's divinity to be impertinent , is drawn from the testimony of the emperour constantine in his letter to alexander and arius . i shall not now dispute , whether this letter in eusebius be exactly the same which constantine sent by hosius into alexandria , though 't is certain many of these things were feigned or interpolated , and though the same letter be in socrates , yet , probably he might have it only out of eusebius ; and so it still may rely upon his sole authority , who was too great a friend to the arian cause to suffer any very favourable opinion to be passed upon its adversaries . but after all , the emperour does not here condemn the belief of the orthodox as impertinent ; but writes chiefly to temper the hearts of bishop alexander and arius , who might be both perhaps something too warm ; and therefore exhorts them so affectionately to mutual peace and reconciliation , because of the quarrels , and schisms , and other evils , which this hot and pertinacious disputing was like to bring into the church . indeed the emperour calls the controversie arius had raised , * a little part of a question , and † a question not very necessary ; for truly the shuffling of arius , and the ambiguous terms he used , made the emperour think 't was only a controversie about words . but however the emperour looked upon arius to be in the wrong , as appears by what he says in his letter to him ; and you arius have inconsiderately asserted ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) what you ought not so much as to have thought of at first , or when you had thought of it , you should have passed it over in silence . but what , after all , though the emperour thought 't was no matter who was in the right , arius or alexander and though he was of our authour's opinion , that a right belief of our saviour's divinity signified nothing ? yet this is but the single opinion of one , who was but a novice in christianity ; and 't is most reasonable to think , that alexander and the other learned bishops , better understood the importance of that question , than the emperour , whose arms and other business of the empire drew his thoughts another way . but besides , afterwards when constantine was better informed , of the mischievous consequences of the arian tenets , he quickly alter'd his sentiments of their cause , and did not then treat them with such soft and favourable expressions . after the conclusion of the nicene council , in his epistle to the church of alexandria , he triumphs mightily that truth has at last prevailed , and blesses himself at the thoughts of the arian blasphemies . ‖ * how great , says he , and how execrable contumelies , ( good god! be thou propitious and merciful to us ) do they irreligiously and wickedly cast upon our venerable saviour , our hope and our life ; and have not only impudently asserted things contrary to the divinely inspired scriptures and our holy faith ; but have openly professed , that they believe them too ? in this epistle he calls arius , impudent minister of the devil , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; and in his other letter to the bishops and people , he says , it seems to him requisite , that arius and his followers should be called porphyrians , that they may be known by their name , whose manners they follow . and there orders , if any book be found of arius's , that it be immediately burned , that not only his execrable doctrine may be throughly rooted up ; but that there may be no monument left to posterity . and now let the authour make the best he can of constantine's judgment ; and if his other arguments will support him no better than this , his cause , i am afraid , will soon come to the ground . his next argument is drawn from the similitude of the sun , that 't is not necessary the traveller should understand the dimensions of that body , when he goes by its light ; so it is not at all necessary to know what our saviour is , to practise his commands . but this argument i have already answered in the fifth chapter ; when i shewed what influence the belief of our saviour's divinity had upon men's lives . but his argument which follows , is very fine and philosophical . that when he considers the great disproportion between our earth , and so many worlds , which he fansies to be from the innumerable stars we discover with and without the telescope , each star being the sun or the center of a world , from this consideration he cannot imagine , that our great creatour should be so greedy of a little of our corrupt breath , as to purchase it with a fall from heaven . this would be to disgrace our lord from the dignity of a benefactor , to the vileness of an unskilful tradesman ; who buys vile ware , and pays for it infinitely more than it is worth . indeed i have hardly patience to answer this abominable blasphemy ; to see a foolish philosopher thus horridly to affront his creatour , and in this witless buffoonry to ridicule the infinite satisfaction of his blessed redeemer ; because he cannot make it agree with his system of physicks . but pray let him consider , that we do not think , the dignity of our nature , or the beauty of our world inclined god , who has no respect of persons , to work our redemption : this was only the effect of his infinite mercy , which we can never enough admire and praise . and besides , what signifies the largeness and gloriousness of the heavenly bodies , in comparison with mens immortal souls ? the sun is the most glorious body we see ; and yet a fly is a more noble creature than that . the sensitive soul , that this is endowed with , advances its excellence far above any the most glorious inanimate being , that can be imagined . but the immortal soul of one man is of more dignity than all the corporeal creation , and if there had been no other way to redeem mens souls that were lost , but by the destruction of all the other creation , 't would not have been unbecoming the divine wisdom to have destroyed all them , to have redeemed these ; because these are of infinitely more value than they . but it may be that the authour thinks , there are an infinite number of worlds , all stocked with rational creatures , of , it may be , much more dignity than we ; so that it was not worth god's while to take care of such insignificant creatures as we are . now we know nothing of these great bodies , and for what use providence designed them , besides for the benefits we receive from them ; and therefore men talk at random when they ascribe any other to them . but supposing there were rational creatures in ten millions of earths , that were moving round their respective suns , must god less take care of our world , because he has a great many more to take care of ? this is to attribute a foolish weakness to the deity , and to think it is with him as it is with some parents , who when they have a great number of children , do not love any particular child so well , as if they had but that alone , or but fewer . certainly god bears a fatherly love to all his creatures , and will provide whatsoever is necessary for them ; 't is not his providing for innumerable other creatures , that can hinder him from providing for us : his omniscience cannot be distracted by innumerable operations , and his infinite power and love can , and will do all things that are necessary for us . so that if it be requisite to repair the forfeited souls of mankind ; that a person of the godhead should make an infinite satisfaction , for sins against an infinite majesty , and which do deserve an infinite punishment ; 't is not the gloriousness of the other worlds which should hinder him from doing it ; for his fatherly compassion reaches to us as well as them , and he would not stick to use these means for our redemption , if no other could effect it . but the authour says , that then christ has paid infinitely more than the ware was worth , like an unskilful tradesman , as he calls him . i shall not now dispute , whether god could have pardoned the sins of the world , any other way than by the blood of god ; 't is enough for us to know , that god has done it only by these means , and to be sufficiently thankful to him for it . and when the authour , or any of his party , shall think fit to engage upon a dispute of satisfaction , the pens of those excellent defenders of our religion of late against popery , will not be silent in this dispute , if they shall think fit to begin it ; though all the tribe down from servet to this authour , will not be able to shake any part of the treatises on this subject , by the most excellent grotius , and the bishop of worcester . but because the authour here offers nothing but his bare assertion , and because i have in part answered this objection already in the fifth chapter ; i shall proceed to his next argument , which is , that it is not supposable that our lord should require a belief in his divinity , because it was not required of some of the first embracers of christianity , such as philip's eunuch , and the like ; who were baptized into the christian faith , he says , without any knowledge of his divinity . it is very certain , we do not find in scripture any set form , to be recited by all persons to be baptized , that declares an express belief in our saviour's divinity ; but such a declaration has been the custom of the church in the most early times , and therefore though the scripture do not assert any such declaration , yet such a silence , especially considering the compendious way of writing in the authours of these books , cannot conclude , that there was no such form used by them , or that all that were to be baptized did not give an express assent to , and belief in the doctrine of the trinity . it is most certain , they were baptized with a form of words which does imply that doctrine , viz. in the name of the father , of the son , and of the holy ghost . so that unless we will suppose , that they were baptized into names which they did not understand , which we cannot suppose any reasonable men should ; they must understand the meaning and purport of these names , and so have a belief in the person as well as in the doctrine of our saviour : for how can we suppose , but that when any new converts to christianity , should see others baptized before them into these three names of father , son and holy ghost , they should never trouble themselves to know who they were ? if they were jews , they would by this be afraid of running into the gentile polytheism , and would be sure to be well instructed in this matter , for fear of idolatry . if they were gentile converts to hear this form without any farther instruction , they would be apt to think this was but to keep in their own religion still , and only to retrench the number of their gods from 300 , to 3 ; which would be still as much contradiction to the principles of their conversion , as their former tenets . so that we must needs think , that the apostles did explain this form of baptism to all that were baptized , how suddenly soever , and did inform them , what these three persons , into whose names they were baptized were , and how they were consistent with the unity of the deity ; which would give them the full notion of the doctrine of the trinity . and though all that is recorded of the belief of this eunuch is , that he believed that jesus christ is the son of god , yet it is to be supposed , that he believed in god the father too , or else philip would not have baptized him ; and 't is also very reasonable to think , that he that was so inquisitive about the sense of the prophecies , would not be less exact in endeavouring to understand the meaning of this strange form of his baptism , a ceremony which was of so grand import . but we find in latter times , when history and relations are more distinct , that persons to be baptized were to recite their creed , into which they were throughly instructed before by a full explanation of all its articles ; and if in case of extream danger , they were like to die before they were sufficiently instructed , * though they were then baptized , yet they were obliged to be sufficiently instructed afterwards , if they recovered . they were also particularly obliged to give their assent in baptism to each single person of the trinity † , upon each of the three immersions . now this trine immersion , in token of the faith in the trinity * , st. jerom says , was observed by ancient tradition in the church , and that they were thrice immerged , that there might appear one sacrament of the three persons . nay the same † father tells us farther in another place , that 't was a custom in the church , for the forty days before baptism , that in the days of lent , ( they being baptized at easter ) the persons to be baptized , should be throughly instructed in the doctrine of the trinity . so that whereas it was the use of the church , in the most early times , to instruct persons to be baptized in the doctrine of the trinity , and this custom was deliver'd down to them by tradition , and it being not to be supposed , but that men of sense would enquire , of their own accord , into the meaning of the form of their baptism , which would lead them into the knowledge of this doctrine ; for to be baptized into the name of any one , is to be baptized into the belief and worship of him , so that this does necessarily inform them of three persons to be believed in , and worshipped , which three persons they are sure can be but one god ; therefore these primitive proselytes were instructed in the mystery of the trinity . the next argument the authour urges , is from a place in justin martyr , in whose days the authour acknowledges the doctrine of our saviours divinity to be the doctrine most received ; but because justin says in a very soft expression , there are some my friends among us , who profess him to be christ , and affirm him to be man born of men ; therefore they that did believe so were reckoned true believers . i know not but that the authour was helped to this argument by faustus socinus † , who brings this authority of justin to prove , that many in that age held christ only to be meer man. but however ; if by unbelievers the authour means perfect infidels , that did not own the doctrine of jesus christ , or that he was sent of god , but looked on him as a downright imposter ; i do not think that those persons justin speaks of were such , or were reputed such in the church at that time : yet though they were not reckoned unbelievers in that sense , they were reckoned false believers , or heterodox ; they were probably ebionites , or some such hereticks , that looked upon christ as meer man , or else an angel incarnate , or something of that nature : and though they were reputed christians , it was never as orthodox ones ; though they might be thought to be in a state of salvation , yet they were always lookt upon to be in very gross errours . but it does not follow , that their opinions were harmless , because justin calls them friends , he undoubtedly had friends among the heathens as well as the hereticks ; and i suppose our authour would take it very ill , if all orthodox christians should commence enemies to him for his opinions in this book . so that the good nature and charitableness of this good man , could no more palliate the guilt of these mens wicked heresies , than their blasphemies could lessen his vertues . the authour afterwards begins to be very gay and florid , and says , that the orthodox belief of our saviour's divinity , which he pretends to be contrary to that of the ancients , is like diamonds , costly , hard , and useless , that our saviours being brought into questions of this nature , is like gold being made into a pin , which is only to debase his dignity , and to employ it at boys-play . but who ever said , that our lord's name , being in any proposition , gave truth or dignity to it purely as such ? our authour may be as merry with his push-pin simile , as he pleases , but i think there is as little sense in this declamatory stuff , as there is ( to use his expression ) of that noble metal in the point of his pin. but though the question of our saviour's divinity does not receive its importance , by having our saviour's name in it , yet it may from the command of god , who has obliged us to believe aright in this point ; it may from the conducibleness of such a belief to a good life , as we have proved before , and then all these fine simile's are not to much purpose . but our authour as he began this chapter with the testimony of an emperour , he ends it with one of a lord ; though perhaps he had plaid the orator better , if he had given out his least testimony first , and have begun with the lord and ended with the emperour . though this testimony i believe will stand him in no more stead than the former , as upon examination will appear . now this testimony is of one leonas a courtier in constantius's court , who was sent by that emperour to preside in the council of seleucia , who seeing the bishops fierce and endless ( he says ) at this push-pin doctrine of our lord's divinity , dismissed them with this reprimand , go and play the fools at home . the authour quotes socrates for this , though these words are not in him : there are indeed these words , * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . get you gone , and play the fool again in the church , or in church matters . but i cannot imagine why the author should translate it as he does , unless perhaps he has met with some latin translation of socrates , or some latin authour , that quoted this place out of him , which led him into this errour . and this in all probability is the true case . he finds 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , translated by abite domum , or ite domum , and so thinks the word [ domum ] belongs to the latter part of the sentence ; not to [ abite ] , but to [ nugas agite ] the translation of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and so renders it into english , play the fool at home . but whether this be the case or no , it is no great matter , the testimony is not very considerable ; and besides , it does not make any thing against the orthodox believers . leonas himself , was in all probability an arian , as being such a favourite of constantius , and being sent to preside in that council which did mostly consist of arians : and if any plaid the fool in this council 't was the arians ; for the two quarrelling parties here were both arian , both agreed against the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , in the nicene creed : the opinion of the acacian party we may see at large in socrates * , in their creed which they set forth , when they met again at constantinople , an. 364. and the other party † subscribed the creed , set out by the council of antioch , which was arian too . so that leonas might well think them to play the fools , when they were both agreed upon the point , and were very unanimous , as to the main of their heresy , that they should wrangle , and squabble , and fall to loggerheads about nothing . for all their bustle was , whether they should express their arian notions , by altering an old creed to their purpose , or by framing a new one . chap. viii . a belief , with respect to the person of christ , fruitless towards the inquirers own satisfaction . the authour begins this chapter with a testimony from the emperour constantine again , who , in his * letter to arius and alexander , says , that the question they were disputing about was so abstruse , that they could make few among the multitude to understand it . and what then ? the matter of alexander's belief might be plain enough , and yet they , by their disputes might render it abstruse and puzzling . i have known ordinary questions in logick and morality drawn into such fine threads by argumentation , that both the disputants have lost the sight of the question , and have hardly at last understood their own meaning . and this might be the case of arius and alexander , for ought i know . but the reason why the emperour thought the question it self so puzzling , was , because he could see little difference between their opinions ; for he could not so well understand their distinction of a generation and a production out of nothing , he thought this was only a metaphysical notion too transcendent for vulgar brains , but was not aware of the consequence which arius drew from the son 's being produced out of nothing , that this must make him a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , or creature . then he proceeds to shew , that the messias was a person of whom the scripture did foretel that his generation should not be known . but he does not produce any of these prophecies , and therefore i shall not be obliged to answer those ; which some others have brought to our authour's purpose . all that he brings is a text out of john , and another out of the hebrews ; the first is , we know whence this man is , but when christ cometh no man knoweth whence he is , joh. 7. 27. this place does not prove , that christ is not the eternal son of the father ; nay , it rather makes for it than against it ; because , by the phrase , no man knoweth , it supposes a generation above all humane understanding . but it no ways proves , that we cannot tell whether christ be the son of god or no ; and this it must prove , if it will do the authour any kindness . all that this text proves , is , that the jews thought , that christ was to be of no earthly extraction , not the son of any man , but of god. but we know , say they , whence this man is , that he is born of joseph and mary ; this is the carpenter's son , and therefore he cannot be the messias , who is to be of a heavenly original , the son of god in a manner we cannot tell : for if it was not to be known whether the messias were to be the son of god or no , why does our saviour call himself so , and require others to believe him such ? and if he was the son of god , then it was to be known whence he was , in this sense ; so that all that can be drawn from this text , is , that christ is not of an earthly original ; and this we would have granted him , without his pains of proving it . the other text is out of heb. 7. where melchizedeck being brought as a type of our saviour , and being there declared to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , without father , and without mother , without descent , therefore christ's original is not known . indeed christ is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , without mother , in respect of his divinity ; but he is not without father , unless that we suppose him falsly to call god his father , in so many places . but neither was melchizedeck without father , and without mother , as not being of an earthly extraction ; he was without father , without mother , without descent , in relation to the aronical priests , whose fathers , and mothers , and all their pedigree was exactly set down and preserved in the jewish records ; but there was no constat of melchizedeck's pedigree ; the scripture is perfectly silent of his original , and no other records give an account of it . but our saviour's original , according to the flesh , is set down by the evangelists , an exact catalogue given us of all his progenitors : therefore melchizedeck is no type of our saviour , in this respect . his being like unto the son of god ( as the apostle speaks ) in his abiding a priest continually , v. 3. that is , being of that blessing kind of priesthood , which shall always continue , when the other of the jews shall be abolished . well , but the authour says , that the evangelists derive christ's pedigree from a wrong father , and two different ways , on purpose to amuse us . this is a bold stroke , to tax these inspired writers with errour and deceit , and to make the holy spirit of god the spirit of delusion . but what though the evangelists do shew christ's descent two different ways , they may be both true for all that ; the intermingled marriages of families , in our modern manner , where all nigh degrees are prohibited , do often occasion one person to descend from another two ways , which must be much more so among the jews , who were often to marry their nighest relations to keep up their families . therefore 't is no wonder if the evangelists relate this pedigree divers ways , where as it might have been related several other ways and all true : for 't were easie to draw his present majesties descent only from william the conquerour , in it may be seven or eight different branches . but if any one has a mind to see the difficulties of this genealogy explained , he may see it at large in those excellent men * grotius and † bochartus ; for it would be too long to enter upon a discourse of this nature here . so that 't is a most impudent falsity in the authour to say , that it is left impossible to prove our saviour deriv'd from david , when the evangelists have written these genealogies for that end . next the authour quarrels with the bishop of alexandria , for offering to explain the doctrine of christ's divinity ; or , as he speaks , for boldly answering , i will declare his generation . we know not at this distance , what this explication of that bishop was ; socrates tells us , that * he acted the divine something philosophically , and with a desire of honour concerning the trinity , asserting an vnity in trinity . but this had been done often before alexander's time ; tertullian had wrote a book of it against praxeas , and we may see as curious disquisitions , probably as this was , of our saviour's divinity , in many of the fathers before alexander : nay , the authour allows the doctrine of our saviour's divinity to be mostly received in justin martyr's time . therefore we cannot suppose that it was this curious disquisition of alexander that so offended arius ; for if so , he might as well be offended with tertullian and several others : but theodoret gives us the true state of the case , * arius was nettled at alexander's advance to the bishoprick , but could not vent his spleen against him by any accusation of him , though he watched him narrowly , by reason of the excellent circumspectness of his life , and therefore took this opportunity to cavil at his doctrine , only for saying , the son is of equal honour with the father , and of the same substance . this arius had the confidence to contradict in the face of the congregation , and to say , what was never said before , ( says sozomen ) † that the son was produced out of nothing , that there was a time when he was not . so that let alexander be as wary in his expressions as he could , 't is ten to one but some time or other he had been catched up by arius , who only waited for an opportunity to oppose him ; and probably it would have been indifferent to him to have broached any other heresie , if he could , with any plausibility , have contradicted alexander . but notwithstanding this insolence of arius in the midst of the congregation , and his ‖ endeavouring to gain proselytes to his opinion , by disputes open and private ; notwithstanding all this boldness , his bishop alexander desires only that he would come to a fair dispute , to try the truth of his doctrine : and there was a dispute held , in which the bishop supplied the moderator's part very calmly ( as the historian says ) * encouraging each side as they deserved commendation ; but in the end of the dispute he determined it against arius , and forthwith commands him to renounce his errour , which he and his followers pertinaciously refusing , he at last excommunicates them . and truly i think the bishop had patience enough to suffer so long the pride and heresie of this haughty presbyter ; and i cannot but admire his clemency , in allowing him a conference before excommunication , after so impudent an affront to his diocesan : and one would be apt to think , that when the authour blames alexander so much for this action , he had some little foresight of his own case . then followed the great council of nice , which excommunicated arius , and those bishops which would not subscribe to its determinations in this point ; and truly the authour is so civil to let this council pass over without reflection , but runs off again to the bishop of alexandria , whom he censures for his disobedience to the imperial letters for the restoring of arius , upon account of his being excommunicated by the council , and his wanting the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in his confession . but 't is not the same bishop of alexandria now as was before , which the authour's words do imply ; for alexander , whom he was so fierce against before , was dead , he living but * five months after the nicene council , and athanasius was chosen bishop in his room , to the great grief of the arians . neither was this excellent person , whom all the arian party strove to load with the most heavy accusations , and which the authour would make guilty of great disobedience , any ways to be blamed in the matter of restoring arius . before this matter happened , eusebius of nicomedia , and theognis , two famous arian bishops , that had been deposed by the council and banished by the emperour , were restored , upon their exhibiting a fraudulent and dissembling libel to the emperour , in which † they pretend to be sorry for what they had done , to consent to the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and promise to live peaceably for the future , without any further contradiction ; and add , that they do not this , to be freed from their banishment , but only because they would not be thought to be guilty of errour : but as soon as ever they were restored , they made very little of all these promises , but were as violent in propagating their arianism as ever ; and as socrates says , ‖ abusing the favour that was granted them , raised a greater tumult in the world than they had before . * they labour earnestly to get arius restored , especially eusebius , who deals with an arian priest , who was chaplain ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) to constantia the sister of constantine , to use his interest for his restoration : this priest makes the lady believe , that arius's opinions were not such as were reported , but she does not dare to tell the emperour so much ; but the emperour visiting her oft in her sickness , she recommends this priest to him for his piety and loyalty . this priest having thus gained an interest in the emperour , he tells him what he had done to constantia before ; and besides , that arius would willingly subscribe to the decrees of the nicene council . upon this relation the emperour declares , that if this be true , † if he join with the council , and be of their opinion , that he will not only suffer him to approach his presence , but will send him back honourably to alexandria . upon which , the emperour writes to arius , to wait on him at constantinople ; which accordingly he does , with his friend euzoius , who was in the same circumstances ; and , upon the demand of the emperour , they jointly give him in a summ of their belief , which is to be seen in the historians , cunningly enough worded , it seems , to impose upon the emperour ; which creed , sozomen says , did 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , look both ways , might be either orthodox or arian , as 't was interpreted . upon this the emperour is willing they should be restored ; ‖ but did not think fitting to do it of himself , without the judgment and approbation of those who are the proper declarers of this matter according to the law of the church . and therefore he writes to the synod of bishops which were then congregated at jerusalem , to take the matter into their consideration , and to inspect their creed , which he sent with them to the synod . but this synod consisting mostly of eusebius's creatures ; * for most of the orthodox party had retired after the solemnity of the dedication of the temple was over ; they that were diligent favourers of arius [ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ] taking an opportunity [ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ] took off his excommunication . upon this the same faction in the council writ a synodical epistle † to the church of alexandria , the bishops and clergy of aegypt , thebais and libya to receive arius and euzoius with willing minds as being restored , they say , by so great a synod ; and they write another to the emperour , to give him an account of what was done , and to desire him to see them actually restored . arius then comes to alexandria ; but athanasius , who understood all the fraudulence of the proceeding , looking on him still as excommunicate , ‖ avoided him as an execrable person , and would not restore him . then arius strives , by infusing his heresie into the people of the city , to raise a tumult , thereby to attain his end that way , but this not succeeding , eusebius procures a letter from the emperour , to command him to it . this athanasius civilly answers , and informs him , that arius being anathematized by a general council , he cannot be restored by him again . this very much inflames the emperour , not well understanding the merits of the cause , and occasions an angry letter from him , in which he threatens his deposing him from his bishoprick , upon refusal . this opportunity eusebius gladly improves , and suborns one * ischyras , a rascally fellow that had usurped the priesthood without ordination in the diocess of athanasius , but being detected by him , flies to eusebius in nicomedia , who receives him as a priest , and promises him a bishoprick if he would accuse athanasius , which having done he did afterwards procure him . then were trumpt up the forgeries of the broken chalice , and the cutting off arsenius's hand , and using it for magick , &c. which were the subject of the debates of the arian council at tyre , and have , of late , made such a noise in our socinian . pamphlets . now in all this , here is no real disobedience at all of the bishop to the emperour , as the authour would pretend ; for the emperour will not have him restored , unless he be of the opinion of the nicene council ; and besides , he does not think it a point in which he ought to meddle , but leaves it to the council , which he thought orthodox when it was mostly arian . but athanasius finds that arius's creed was drawn up so ambiguously , that any one might see he designed nothing but shuffling ; the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , which was the test of arianism , was left out , and arius still as fond of his doctrines as ever ; and moreover , that the council which pretended to restore him , was but provincial at best , and most of the orthodox in it retired , and the eusebian party taking off his excommunication by a trick , and therefore thinks , he may very well , upon these considerations , refuse to restore him , notwithstanding the imperial letters . and truly he , or any other bishop , that would take into his flock such a wolf as this upon these terms , would little deserve the name of a good pastour ; and he that should refuse to do so , might justify himself from disobedience to any earthly authority whatsoever . he that will see more of athanasius's vindication , may see it in his own apologies . i have been more full in the vindication of this good man , because the scurrillous pens , of late , have made it their business , after so many hundred years , to calumniate him again . the next thing that the authour offers , is against the word consubstantial , and this from a saying of socrates , lib. 1. cap. 18. ( not book the 2. as he quotes it ) in which the authour would have him to condemn the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , as a word which did trouble mens minds , and which the bishops themselves did not understand . now socrates is friend enough to the orthodox cause , every one knows , which makes the authour brand him with the name of partial , and in many places shews , he had no dislike to the word consubstantial : but he has one fault which is common to many historians , that he makes too many remarks upon his relations , and oftentimes in matters , the true reason of which we was far from understanding . but 't is no great matter what the historians remarks are , 't is their relations , and not their reflections which we are to value ; and yet after all , socrates does not in the least reflect upon the orthodox doctrine , or the test of it , the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . he shews his dislike indeed to those that made too nice explications of it , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , those that crumbled this question into many little cavils , and raised upon it some nice disputes , and therefore they that did so were to blame ; but they might believe what was signified by the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , without any of these cavils , and they might without any of these niceties stand up for the word , as being thought , by the wisdom of the council , to be the best test to discover the arian heresy . then the authour applauds himself mightily , in fansying that the doctrine of the trinity is not the same now , as it was in athanasius's time ; because he in his dialogues explains this mystery by the similitude of three men , who are one in their common nature , and three in their individual capacity ; this the authour would have to infer a tritheism , and as well to justify the heathen polytheism as the trinity . now these dialogues , though bound up with athanasius's works , are not his , but according to the opinion of most learned men , are maximus's : but however , there is nothing in them which would infer any thing like that which the authour pretends to . he and several other of the fathers , give many illustrations , to explain , as far as possible , to humane understandings , this mystery ; but yet they , as all other similitudes , must not be strained farther than the authours designed them ; 't is enough if they bear that analogy or likeness which are there singled out , not that these should have , in their whole nature , an uniform similitude . now peter , james and john , three individual men , and yet agreeing in one common nature man , are a very good illustration of the blessed trinity ; for as peter is man , james is man , and john is man , and yet there is but one man ( that is ) one common nature of humanity ; so the father is god , the son god , and the holy ghost god , and yet there is but one god , that is , one common divine nature ; but yet this illustration does not bear an universal analogy with the trinity ; for peter , james and john , agree only in the same common collective nature , and are only collectively one , but father , son and holy ghost , are essentially one . so that i say , this illustration of the trinity , may be very good , though it does not hold universally : 't is enough if the three persons in each agree in a general unity , though they differ in the specification of this unity ; 't is enough if both are three and yet one , though one be by a collective , and the other an essential oneness . so bishop , priest , and deacon , agree in one common office of ministry in general , and this is brought by the same father , as a farther illustration of this mystery : and so may any other three species of a genus , or any three individuums of a species ; but then they must be carried no further than it was meant this illustration should go ; for to expect an universal similitude , is rather to expect a sameness than a likeness . and now if men should take the boldness to rack , and tenter , and sport themselves with the similes and parables in the new testament , of our saviour's church , doctrines , kingdom and the like , as our late socinian ▪ pamphlets have done these of the ancient fathers , i dare say they might , with as great ease , ridicule the whole christian religion , as they do this doctrine of the trinity . as to what the authour says of the word mystery , which he calls an impregnable fort , and the papists cock-argument for transubstantiation , and his saying , the contradictions are no less in transubstantiation than the trinity ; this is all bold and impudent assertion , without proof , and therefore requires no answer : but if any one has a mind to see all these objections for ever silenced , let him read the two incomparable dialogues printed in the time of the late popish controversy , and entituled , the doctrine of the trinity and transubstantiation compared . well , but the authour says , if the trinity be a mystery , why should we dispute any longer about it ? to dispute concerning a mystery ( says he ) and at the same time acknowledge it a mystery , is a contradiction , as great as any in the greatest mystery . i see our authour is all for contradictions , and will have no mystery without them . i thought a mystery had been an unintelligible truth , and not a contradictious falsity . but however , why should we not dispute concerning a mystery ? if the mysterious truth be denied , it is to be defended as well as other truths : it is not the less a truth because it is mysterious , any more than a conclusion in algebra is not true because i do not understand it . but besides , such a truth has more reason to be contended for , as it is of greater importance , and such we have proved this doctrine of the holy trinity to be . indeed if men did dispute about a mystery as a mystery , there would be something in the authour's objection ; for then men would pretend to understand something by their disputes , whose name imported it was not to be understood . but there is no such thing in the arguments of the orthodox , for the defence of the trinity : they do not dispute this doctrine as a mystery , but as a truth , which in some measure may be understood ; they do not dispute about the modus of the trinity , which is unintelligible , but about the existence of it , which is a truth can be understood ; they do not pretend to shew how they are three in one , but that they are three in one. there is a vast difference between understanding how things are , and that they are ; for a man may understand there is such an arts as algebra , by seeing oughtred , or diophantus , and yet understand nothing of the way of reduction of equation , nor one tittle of the rules of that art. but still the authour will have this doctrine a mystery in his sense , that is , a falsity full of contradictions , from the contrary determinations of councils , and the various expositions of others , and by the wavering , as he calls it , of the council of sirmium , which changed their opinion , and would have called in the copies of one of their creeds . as to the contrary determinations of councils , that to the grief of the christian church is but too true , if we may call the arian synods by that name ; for the arian heresy , by god's permission , did so much prevail , that by the countenance of an arian emperour , the world almost became arian ; and then 't was an easy matter for the bishops of that perswasion to form themselves into assemblies , and to declare what ever orthodox opinions they pleased for heresy . the authour , if he had said any thing to his purpose , should have proved , that the determinations of orthodox councils , had been contrary one to another , but what are the contradictions of the hereticks to them . truth can be but one and the same , though errour may be infinite ; and therefore the conformity of the orthodox doctrines to one another , shew their verity , whilst the disagreement and clashing of the heretical creeds , are an infallible proof of their falsity . the orthodox always very fairly stick to their old test , the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , but the hereticks are soon for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and soon for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and sometimes for neither . well ; but the council of sirmium has contradicted it self . 't is very true , and 't is the misfortune or many heretical opiniators to do the same . but by the way , i am afraid the arian cause has but a very poor patron of this authour ; for when ever he has a mind to charge any slip or misdemeanour upon a council , he always singles out an arian one for it . he lately blamed the arian council at seleucia for tumult , and now he charges one of the same stamp at sirmium for contradictions . now the matter at sirmium stands thus . the arian heresy about the year 357. had gotten large footing in the world , and * they began now to disdain the name of a sect or heresy , and to affect the name of catholicks ; and to this end would congregate in councils , not only to defend their own particular tenets , but also to condemn heresies . † and upon this account 't was , that they met at sirmium in the foresaid year , to condemn the heresy of the photinians , who following sabellius and samosatenus , would have christ to have no being before the conception of the blessed virgin. this heresy therefore they condemn , and frame a creed in opposition to it , where are these words ‖ , those that shall say , that the son was from a no being before , and from another substance , and not from god , or that there was a time when he was not , those the holy and the catholick church , doth esteem aliens from her , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . and this creed , socrates says , was drawn up by marcus arethusius , who was a notorious arian . now these words 't is true were very pat against the photinians , and served to excellent good purpose for the condemnation of this heresy : but when they came to renew their quarrel against the orthodox , they found too late , that they had in a manner given up their cause ; for here , at one dash , they had confounded all that arius had been contending with his bishop alexander , about christ's being 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , from a no being , and that there was a time when he was not ; which though it served to silence photinianism , yet it totally would ruin the cause of the arians . therefore they set themselves to work anew to frame another creed , that might be more arian , which they publish in latin , in which every thing relating to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , &c. is left out , and in which they declare , they are ignorant what our saviour is , and bring as a proof of this , that text of isai . 53. who shall declare his generation ? but then , upon second thoughts , least the people should laugh at their inconstancy , they themselves revoke this second creed , and strive to get in all the copies of it , and procure an edict from the emperour , which threatens all those that shall detain them . now indeed we may see here a very foolish inconstancy in these hereticks , and that they had a very ill hand at making creeds , to oblige all the world , under the pain of an anathema , to believe such a thing at one time , and the next day to disbelieve it themselves ; but this is nothing to the orthodox faith , which stood always firm and unchangeable . after the authour has been spitting his venom against the union of the three persons , he now begins to do the same against the union of christ's divinity , with his humanity . for he would have , that upon supposition there are three persons in the same individual nature , that either the nestorian , or the eutychian doctrine was the true . for , says he , there are but two ways imaginable in reason : either christ must be two persons , because he has two such different natures ; or he must have but one nature , because he is but one person . but for all our authours hast , why can't we imagine a third way , that he should be two natures , and but one person ? this is as easy to imagine , and i am sure as reasonable too . for first , it does not follow , that because he has two natures , he must be two persons , for nature and personality , are not reciprocal terms , for there may be two or three , or more natures , where there is but one person . the athanasian creed most excellently expresses this , as the reasonable soul and flesh is one man , so god and man is one christ . there is the sensitive nature in man as well as the rational , there is the rational soul , one distinct substance united to the body , another distinct substance ; and yet these two so distinct natures , are but one person . now what more contradiction does it imply , that there should be a personal union between divinity and humanity , than there does between rationality and sensibility ? if there be any more difficulty in one than the other , it is this , that in the former , the union of the divinity , with the humanity , there is an union of two reasonable natures , which are distinct persons of themselves as all rational individuals are ; and therefore they must be as distinct persons after the union as before ? but why so ? if they are united they are not distinct , for all union is a negation of distinction or division . two single pieces , or pounds of gold are two distinct substances or bodies , but if these be united by melting down into one , they are still two pounds , but yet they are but one individual body . and so it is in the union of all other bodies . well , but what is this to the union of spirits , or rational beings ? yet it is something ; for if spirits be united , they must follow the laws of union as well as other beings . if they be united , they must be one in something , for to be one in nothing is no union at all . now in the union of the divinity with the humanity , wherein possibly can their oneness consist , but only in their personality ? their natures are most certainly distinct , for gods is one nature , and mans is another ; and therefore if they be one in any thing , it must be in their personality . upon this union they acquire an oneness , which they had not before ; and as the two distinct pounds of gold , upon their melting become one individual piece , which is the oneness they gain ; so the divinity and humanity upon their union , gain one individual personality , which is the oneness they acquire . well , but here are two rational natures united , which must have two reasons and two wills , and therefore must be two persons . it does not therefore follow , that because there are two reasons and two wills , there must therefore be two persons , any more than it follows , that a man is three living creatures , from the union of the vegetative , the sensitive and the rational soul in his nature . for as the subordination of these souls one to another , make him but one vivens , so the subordination of these rational natures , one to the other , make them but one person , or rational suppositum . the divine nature is indeed the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , or governing principle in the union of the godhead with the humanity , as the rational soul is in the union with the two other souls ; and therefore though there are two reasons , and two wills , yet those of the inferiour nature are subordinate to the superiour , and therefore are determined by the operations of that . nor , secondly , is it necessary that if he be one person , he should be but one nature ; because nature and person are not reciprocal terms ; and because , as we have already shewn , that more natures may be united into one person : for 't was the person of the godhead that took upon him the humanity , so that he has no other personality than what he had from all eternity ; but yet he has another nature than what he had from all eternity : because he likewise took upon him our nature , which he had not from eternity , but took it upon him at that time , when he was conceived in the womb of the blessed virgin. though he still continued one person , yet he had two natures , the nature of god , which he had from all eternity ; and the nature of man , which he assumed at that particular time ; and this without any change , but only in the manner of his subsisting which was before in the pure glory of the son of god , and afterwards in the habit of our flesh . all the properties of each nature , are as distinguishable now , as before , the properties of the humanity are incommunicable to the divinity , and those of the divinity to the humanity . 't is proper only to the divinity to be the cause of all things , to be immense , eternal , omnipresent , &c. and 't is proper only to the humanity to have a beginning , to be circumscribed in place , to be passible &c. if , therefore , they have these distinct and incommunicable propertie , they must have distinct natures , from which these properties flow , though they be united into one person . and thus i think i have answered every thing that is material in this chapter , and i could very willingly have done with it , but only because it may be expected i should say something to those invidious remarks he makes upon some of the first holy councils , for the determinations they made in matters of faith , and the condemnation of hereticks . as to what he says about the heresie of nestorius , 't is not worth considering ; but he has a little too grosly represented the matter of eutyches , which i must not pass over without a little reflection . he would insinuate , that eutyches was first condemned by a provincial council , and restored by a general one , which is false . the council indeed at constantinople — which condemned eutyches , was but provincial , convened by flavianus bishop of that place , but it did consist of orthodox members , and their determinations were very free ; wherein eutyches had a fair hearing , to answer every thing he would , that was objected against him by eusebius bishop of dorylaeum , his accuser ; who , before the meeting of this council , did kindly endeavour to reclaim him ; but when nothing would do , he impeaches him in a * letter to flavianus , who cites him to the council ; but he resolutely , at first , there avows his heresie , that christ had but one nature after the union ; and , at last when he began something to abate of his stiffness , he would by no means recant his opinion : therefore the council , who , after several sessions , could get nothing from him but shuffling , nemine contradicente , condemn him ; to which condemnation not only the present bishops subscribe , but 23 of the archimandrian clergy that were there . but this so general a council , as the authour calls it , which restored eutyches , was that , which , for its goodnes , has been all along entituled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the thievish council , or the synod of robbers , that packt conventicle at ephesus , which was obtained by this means . eutyches , vext at his condemnation by the council , flies to dioscorus bishop of alexandria , and of eutyches's opinion , and persuades him to espouse his quarrel : he readily complies , and forthwith procures him an interest in the eunuch chrysaphius , president of the palace , that was a late proselyte to the eutychian heresie , and was very angry with flavianus , for his procedure in the late council at constantinople ; so he , by his own , and the interest of the empress eudocia , obtains of the emperour theodosius , that there might be a council held at ephesus ; upon pretence , to give eutyches a fairer tryal , but in reality to be revenged on flavianus , and to establish eutychianism . dioscorus gets to be president of this council , and brings with him a great number of egyptian bishops of his opinion : and obtains an * order from the emperour , that none that were judges of eutyches before should be so now , in this council ; that though they were present , yet they should not vote as judges , but only expect the suffrages of the other fathers ; because this was to be a judgment passed upon what they had judged before . what followed after this practising may easily be imagined : the faith of eutyches is approved , and eusebius and flavianus are condemned . but yet it was not easy neither to get the subscriptions of the bishops to this , till they were frightened to it by the arms and threats of the souldiers : † and after all , they set their names only to blank paper , to which the abdication of those bishops was afterwards affixed . for thus some of the bishops complain afterwards in the council of chalcedon . ‖ we subscribed only to the pure paper , with compulsion and violence , having suffered many ill treatments , we did unwillingly , and forced by power , set our hands . they kept us even till night shut up in the church , and being sick they would not suffer us to rest , nor would grant us any refreshments ; but the souldiers , with swords and staves , stood over us , and made us subscribe . the authour indeed grants , that dioscorus was accused in the council of chalcedon of some uncanonical proceedings , and in truth they were uncanonical with a vengeance . for besides all this underhand dealing , and tumultuous proceeding in the synod , he was accused of no less than the murder of flavianus ; to whom he gave a * kick in the synod , upon which he died three days after ; that he had † contrived the death of theodorus , and used several other illegal proceedings against him , only because he was the friend of cyril his predecessour ; of no less than notorious incontinency , of keeping company with one pansophia , an infamous woman , and according to the information of sophronius , of downright adultery ; of ‖ blasphemy against the trinity ; of being an origenist ; of usurping the imperial authority ; and if all these crimes can be wiped off with so soft a word as uncanonical proceedings , i know not what things in the world those are , which men call lewdness and villaniny ; unless hereticks by a special title , can claim an immunity from these names , where they are guilty of the crimes . this council in which these things were made out against dioscorus , the authour says was procured by leo , because his letters were slighted in the last , though zonoras † tells us , that leo , and anatolius bishop of constantinople , intreated this council of the emperour , least the blasphemous opinions of eutyches should be left uncondemned . this council the authour does endeavour to render vain and tumultuous , by crying out , this is the faith of the fathers , apostles , &c. leo believes so , cyril believes so . now i think it a very laudable occasion for christian mens exultation , when their faith is defended against the poison of hereticks ; for to be still and unconcerned upon such an occasion , would shew they had little love or regard for the faith they profess . but the reason why they used leo and cyril's name so expresly , was , because of their excellent explications of faith , which were publickly read in the council , and universally approved ; and such defenders of orthodoxy do in all ages deserve as great commendation . but the authour would pretend the council did not understand their own meaning , when they propounded the question , whether they would agree with dioscours , who said christ consisted of two , or with leo , who said there were two natures in christ ; which question the authour says is a mystery , and was designed only to advance the dignity of the roman see. but yet this is no very great mystery to any one that considers dioscorus , or eutyches's doctrine , who held indeed but one nature in christ , but yet in compliance with the orthodox , would say christ consisted of two natures . they would allow christ at first to be compounded [ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ] of two natures , but then upon the union or composition , they ceased to be two ; but the orthodox held , there were two distinct natures after union , which did both retain their distinct properties without confusion . so that there is a great deal of difference between saying , christ does consist of two natures , and , there are two natures in christ ; for the first does suppose them two only before union , the latter two before and after . but the reason why leo is put in opposition to dioscorus , is to confront that heretick with a sound orthodox believer , and to do an honour to leo for taking such pains , to defend the true faith , which dioscorus had used so much artifice to destroy . well , but the emperour basiliscus did not own this council , but sent circulatory letters to burn its decrees . this is very true , and several other eutychians , as well as basiliscus , had as little kindness for it . but what disgrace is it to this council to be condemned by an heretick and an usurper , as basiliscus was both ? for he had drove his master , the emperour zeno , from his throne , and had embraced eutychianism , by the instigation of his wife zenodia . but the authour need not lay any great stress upon basiliscus's circulatory letters ; for within a little time after ( his usurpation continuing but two years , after which zeno was restored ) he sends other circulatory letters to countermand the former , and to condemn eutyches and his followers ; and what 's most pleasant is , he entitles them in the front the * contrary circulatory letters of basiliscus . now this fickle temper of the usurper , the heretical clergy , that had subscribed his first circulatory letters , were much afraid of , which made them desire him to send no other contrary to them , for fear the world should be over-run by sedition , the council of chalcedon having occasioned infinte blood-shed : which expression the authour would make advantage of against the council , though it comes to nothing at all . for what can we suppose those men to say or do , which out of base compliance to a wicked emperour , had denied their faith ? to be sure they would do all they could to keep up his present resolution ; for if he should alter it , and encourage again the orthodox , they knew very well what a condition they would then be in , after so scandalous a condescention . to hear these men rail against the council of chalcedon , would signify as much , as to hear one of our clergy , that had read the declaration in the late reign , to exclaim against the sanguinary laws of the nation , and the spirit of persecution in the church ; which no one to be sure would believe any thing the more for their saying so ; because every one must expect they would have something to say , to justify so infamous a compliance . as to what the authour mentions farther about the dispute of the two wills in christ , this was in no ways owing to the orthodox doctrine of the trinity , but altogether to the innovations of the hereticks . the authour gives us some short account of the rise of this heresy , but neither so fair nor so clear as he ought ; for as for the name catholicus he mentions , i cannot imagine whom he should mean , unless athanasius the patriarch of the jacobites , who is the person , i suppose , he must aim , at , though i cannot find he was ever called by that name ; indeed he pretended to be a catholick , and * baronius in the margin of his annals , when he relates something of this matter , writes in large letters , athanasius simulat se catholicum , and perhaps this might lead him into this errour . but in short , the rise of † monethelitism , which was only a spawn of the eutychian heresie , was this , as paulus diaconus informs us . when the emperour , that is heraclius , was at hierapolis , athanasius ( the authour 's catholicus ) patriarch of the jacobites , a subtil man and of a shrewd wit , coming to the emperour , and talking of religious matters ; heraclius perceiving his parts , promises him he should be patriarch of antioch , if he would subscribe to the council of chalcedon , that there were two natures in christ . he , greedy of the prey , pretends to subscribe ; but then , to beguile the emperour , he subtilly subjoins , but what think you of the wills and operation in christ ? are there two wills , and two kinds of operations , or but one ? the emperour , no understanding these subtilties , sends to sergius bishop of constantinople , and cyrus bishop of phaselis ; who , as they were of a corrupt judgment ( that is eutychians ) answer , that he had but one will. in this manner the emperour being entangled , he desires to draw others into his opinion . this was the rise of monothelitism , which is no ways owing to the doctrine of the orthodox , it being only a corollary of the eutychian heresie ; and was propagated only by those that were poisoned with eutyches's tenets . what the opinions of these hereticks particularly were , is no great matter ; or what was determined for them in some little by-synods of their own packing ; it is enough to know , that the catholick church condemned this heresie , as soon as it began to gain footing in the world , by a general council , the second of constantinople . chap. ix . it is dangerous . and when the authour comes to shew this , he is for a home charge at first onset , and makes this danger we incur , by the orthodox belief of our saviour's divinity , to be no less than that of blasphemy . this is a hard accusation ; but the best on 't is , 't is difficult to prove ; and the author is so civil , as far as i can see , not to attempt it . he has in this paragraph a quotation out of socrates , not much to the purpose , and a little talk about precipices , and children's walking upon the top of high and narrow walls , but not a tittle of the blasphemy business ; unless this be something , when he says , that this doctrine makes us have so mean an opinion of our lord's person as to think it comprehensible . but , by the authour's favour , who ever , of the orthodox , said , our lord's person was comprehensible , or ever pretended to comprehend it ? he was just now charging us for flying to the word mystery , as an impregnable fort in this doctrine ; and now he is angry because he fansies we don't think it enough mysterious . this is a pleasant way of arguing the authour has got , to talk thus backwards and forwards , and within a page or two ; so that i am sure if the authour cannot believe , he can write mysteries . but why must every explication of the possibility of the existence of a thing make it comprehensible ? indeed every thing that is explained , is so far comprehensible as it is explained , and so may any thing that is infinite be so far comprehensible . i can comprehend the possibility of an infinite division of quantity , but yet i cannot comprehend the modus of such a division farther than the numbers guide me , which i have a perfect notion of . i can comprehend the necessity of god's being eternal , tho' 't is impossible i should have an adequate idea of his particular duration , or of that infinite time he has already been , or is to be . that our saviour is god , is all the orthodox pretend to comprehend , but not the manner of his being god. they endeavour to make this truth as intelligible as they can , which the hereticks would make both false and unintelligible . 2. the second danger of this our belief , he would have to be , because , he says , we have no firm ground to go upon . as for scripture , he says , the arians capt texts with the orthodox ; antiquity they claim'd with equal confidence ; and councils determined sometimes on one side and sometimes on the other , according as emperours influenc'd them ; so that the only advantage of the catholicks , is , long prescription and that after sentence . now this is all bold assertion without one word of proof , and i hope the authour does not expect his reader should take his word for it all . but what though they did cap scripture ? they might do it just as the authour does , nothing at all to the purpose : their confident claim to antiquity does not give them any just title to it : neither does our authour's saying the councils determined according to the influence of emperours , any ways prove they did so . when he can prove that the arian arguments from scripture , were as good as the orthodox ; that the arian belief was apostolical ; that the four first councils were conventicles pack'd of emperour's creatures ; then he will say somewhat : but till then he had better hold his tongue , than to talk thus impiously against the catholick faith , and so irreverently against these august assemblies , and yet offer nothing at last but impudent assertion . for there is nothing of these three things made out , or so much as pretended to be so ; but instead of making out these charges , he falls a giving a history again , after his manner , of the controversie of the orthodox with the arians , with a few of his heretical remarks upon it . he says , this controversie was decided first by the great council of nice , and this every body will allow , the authority of which council has ever been esteemed equal to scripture , even by those who in other things reneg its authority ; which by the way is more than most will allow . well ; but he says the authority of this council is to be waved rather in this point , than in any thing else it did . but why so ? one would have thought that their authority had been most significant in this point , especially because they were called together to settle it . now certainly this must be some very great reason , which must invalidate the authority of this council , even in this matter above all the rest . and truly the authour has brought a notable one ; one of his own i dare say : for no mortal man , i believe , ever thought on 't before . this is a reason which he draws from a saying of an arian council that of antioch , which he says confirmed the decrees of the council , of nice , which saying was this : we do not follow arius , but receive him when he cometh to us ; for how can it be said , that we that are bishops , follow arius , who is a presbyter ? i believe the reader does not see the reason yet . but 't is the authour's gloss upon it , which makes it one . if this have any sens ( says he ) it must be of as good force at nice , as at antioch ; and thereby we may judge of the sentence which first determine the controversie ; not by the merit of the cause , but by the interest of the parties . now suppose we should say this saying of the bishops in this council has no sense at all , then i am afraid our author's reason has none at all neither . nay , i will undertake to make out that there is no sense at all in this saying , or one that is as good as none at all to our authour's purpose . but to shew how this case stands , and how fairly he has represented the matter , i will give a short account of this council , and of the occasion of this expression . there was a design , that this council should be called in another place , in the western parts , but this the eusebian party * would not agree to , as not being willing to have a council where no count should be present , no guards at the door , and where all things should not be done according to the prescript of caesar ; and therefore feign some foolish excuses that they cannot come to it , by reason of the persian war , &c. upon which occasion athanasius , in this epistle , wittily asks the question , what have bishops to do with the war ? afterwards they get an opportunity to meet at antioch , a. dom. 341. in which synod there were bishops , according to sozomen † , who reckons almost ninety seven , and only thirty six profess'd arians . but then he does not reckon the eusebians , who were arians in their judgments , and would , by their practice upon all occasions , declare it , though they would often protest against the name , as appears in many instances , and most particularly by their actions in this council . besides , 't is evident enough that the majority of this council were of the same heretical stamp , by their chusing georgius to be bishop of alexandria , in the place of athanasius , who was a notorious arian , and , as athanasius says * , hardly a christian , but only for his advantage . this council resolving to establish arianism , though they carefully avoid the name , as being too odious ; they preface their confession of faith with this sentence , which the authour alledges . now what sense is there generally in mens excuses , when they are resolved to do an ill thing , and want something to say for the doing of it ? here the synod is resolved to make an arian confession of faith , but yet they will not own 't is arian ; though 't is plain enough 't is such , by the tenour of it ; which we may see at large in socrates † upon this account they can't say , they do not follow that doctrine which arius professes ; but that they do not follow arius , or the doctrine for arius's sake , as being men of a greater character themselves in the church than arius , they being bishops , and he but a presbyter : which , at best , is but a simple evasion , to make their heretical confession , among unwary people , to go down the better . but what is this idle excuse of an arian conventicle to the great orthodox council of nice ? though they were so vain , as to value their determinations upon the interest of parties , this does not found the nicene decrees upon this bottom ; though the arian faith was established upon pure telling of noses , yet the orthodox might be grounded upon scripture and antiquity : and till the authour makes it otherways appear , we shall presume to take it for granted . 2. the progress of this controversie , the authour says , was of the piece ; from athanasius's refusing to restore arius upon his submission ; so that the controversie was transplanted from bishop against presbyter , to ecclesiastick against secular authority . but the main of this matter we have consider'd in the last chapter . but one thing the authour adds more than he said before , which is , that athanasius's pretences , in this matter , were mere evasion ; because many , who had subscribed to the council of nice , seconded the emperour against athanasius , and condemned him in the council of tyre . now 't is very true , that many bishops subscribed to athanasius's condemnation , who had before subscribed to the decrees of nice : but they did not do this out of point of justice , to secure the emperour against the pretended contempt of athanasius , as the authour would have it , but chiefly to be revenged of such an adversary . for every one knows with what equivocations subscriptions were made by the arians to the nicene determinations , as particularly in the case of eusebius of caesarea ; so that of all the arians in the council , there was none but did subscribe to the confession then made , and but five * that did refuse to subscribe to the condemnation of arius . so that their subscriptions to that council did not make them the less arians , because 't is plain they were as zealous for arianism afterwards as before ; this did not make them to act what they did to vindicate the emperour's honour , but only to get a fair riddance of such an excellent defender of the orthodox doctrine as athanasius was . and to find here eusebius bishop of caesarea , and the other of nicomedia , theognis of nice , maris of chalcedon , patrophilus of scythopolis , &c. will never make one think them ever the more equitable judges to athanasius , for their subscribing to the nicene council ; when their practices , both afterwards and before , did so manifestly contradict it . next the authour proceeds to give a farther account of the suffering of athanasius , all which i shall not trouble the reader to animadvert upon ; only what he says concerning athanasius's flying to the bishop of rome , deserves a little reflection . the matter , in short , was this : when athanasius was frightned away the second time from alexandria , by the threats of the emperour † upon the feigued story of obstructing the coming of the emperour's fleet ; he flies to his friend ‖ julius bishop of rome , as any one would to a friend that would receive him in distress , especially being so kindly invited by him . julius then writes a second letter to the bishops of antioch in favour of him , accuses them , that they had in a clancular manner innovated in the nicene faith ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) that , contrary to the laws of the church , they had not called him to the council , there being an ecclesiastical canon that pronounces void those things which are done without the consent ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) of the bishop of rome . in this he reprehends them for the calumnies they had cast upon athanasius , without good proof . this is the substance of julius's letter in favour of athanasius and paulus this second time , which the historians give , and in this there is not a word of any threatning , which the authour would have ; though there was indeed in his 〈◊〉 , which the authour confounds with this : where he cites some of them , in the name of the rest , to give an account of the justice of their proceedings ; and for the rest , he threatens he shall not * abstain from them , unless they leave off their innovation . but here is not one word neither of his threatning deprivation which he talks of . now when julius saw that this second letter prevailed no more with the greek bishops than the other he had sent before , which they answered only , as the historian speaks , by a letter full of ironies ; he relates the whole matter to the emperour constans , who writes to his brother constantius , that he might send some bishops to rome , to answer for the abdication of athanasius and paulus . and to this end three are sent , * narcissus bishop of irenopolis , theodorus of heraclea , and marcus of arethusa . but these being found shuffling in giving an account of their faith , and to have delivered in a form of belief , contrary to the nicene . constans easily perceived that they had persecuted athanasius and paulus , not for any fault , but only for the matter of their belief ; and therefore sends them back as they came . notwithstanding all the intreaties of constans to his brother , athanasius and paulus could not yet recover their sees , and therefore they desire of the emperour constans that a council may be called , and accordingly there is one called to meet at sardica in illyrium . the † western bishops meet , as appointed , at sardica but the greeks meet at philopopolis in thrace ; and from thence write to the western bishops that they drive the excommunicates , athanasius and paulus , from the council , or otherwise they will not come thither . but at last , to sardica they come , but then they resolutely protest ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) that they will not enter into the church , in which those persons they had excommunicated were . to this the western bishops answer , by letter , that they never avoided communion with them , neither would they do it ; especially since julius the roman bishop had diligently inspected their cause , and had not condemned them ; and besides , that they came thither to justifie themselves , and to answer the accusations brought against them . so , at length , nothing coming of this epistolatory dispute ; the eastern bishops being chiefly arian , will not associate with the western on these terms , and therefore are resolved to act separately . these bishops being , in all , but seventy six , according to sozomen , put on a conciliar authority , and the first thing they do , is to excommunicate the bishop of rome , and hosius , &c. for communicating with the abdicates they are nevertheless invited to the council , by a letter wrote by ‖ hosius , but they still refuse to come ; therefore the fathers , in the council , without them , proceed to the examination of the crimes objected against athanasius ; which having considered , they pronounce him innocent ; and send their letters into egypt , alexandria , and libya , that athanasius and his friends were wholly innocent , and that their accusers were ill men , sycophants , and any thing rather than christians . † now the bishops that subscribed to this absolution of athanasius , were , as appears , 284. after these so contrary proceedings of the bishops , the ‖ historian , indeed , makes this remark , that the bishops of the east and west did not use that familiarity with one another as before ; and from hence the state of the church , as in all probability it would , was disturbed by dissentions , and lay under calumnies . but here did not from hence arise an immortal schism in the church , as the authour would pretend : for the orthodox held a good correspondence still with their brethren in the west , however averse to their friendship & communion the arians might be ; and we may see , in many councils after this , their mutual friendship and agreement . but what though there did arise some troubles in the church , upon this dispute of our saviour's divinity ? are the orthodox to blame that asserted it , or the hereticks that denied it ? certainly these troubles are owing to those only , whose blasphemous assertions denied so important a truth , and not to those that defended it , though their defence might accidentally occasion some troubles to ensue . for the person that does the wrong is answerable for all the accidental damages that follow upon it ; or otherwise the honest possessor may be blameable for the defending his own goods to the damage of the unjust aggressour . and in good truth , thieves may , with as good a face , charge honest men with the tumults they may accidentally raise , in defending themselves or their goods ; as the hereticks to charge the orthodox with making distractions in the church , by defending their faith which was thus heretically opposed . the authour next gives two pretty reasons why the latin bishops were more easily lead by the bishop of rome than the greeks were , ( he supposing their zeal for the orthodox doctrine to be only in compliance with that bishop ) which are , first , by reason of the greatness of his city ; and , secondly , the smallness of their understandings . i believe he brought in this great and small rather for a witticism than a reason . but why should they be lead by the greatness of his city ? men are wont to be jealous of every over-grown power , and are sooner apt to oppose than assist it . but why should not the bishop of constantinople , by the same rule , have as many always at his command ? and why should not poor athanasius bishop of alexandria , a mighty city too , draw as many of his neighbours of his side ? but the authour is afraid that this argument from the greatness of the city wo'n't do much , and therefore he don't much insist upon it ; but that from the smallness of the latin bishops understandings , he thinks , is a good one ; and this he endeavours to back with some proof , viz with a story of the latin bishops not apprehending a captious question , which was put in the council of ariminum . now , every one knows how easie it is for designing knavery to impose upon well-meaning honesty . a little subtilty , with a great deal of dishonesty , will over-reach a great number of wise and honest men. several of these tricks all that have read this history know , were used in this very council . the question was put , whether they believed in homo-ousium or in christ ? if the orthodox had said they believed in homo-ousium , the arians would have scoffed at them for believing only in a word . and when they said they believed in christ , and not in homo-ousium , they pretended they had given up their cause by discharging the homo-ousium . now 't is but too frequent to find in many great assemblies , that the espousers of the true side are cheated out of their voices by the fraudulent putting of the question , and that possibly might be the case here . but besides , there was another reason for their then refusing the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , because the hereticks had gotten a sense of the word which favoured their heresy ; so that the * fathers did not reject the word , but only their sense of it . this long and mischievous controversy ( as he calls it ) he says was at last setled by theodosius , which according to his compute in his last paragraph , was ( as he expresses it ) after a hundred and fifty years strugling . but i am afraid he is a little out of his chronology again , for he is mistaken but the odd hundred years , or thereabouts . for set the contest of arius with alexander the highest in the year 315 , from that time to this edict of theodosius , in the year 379 , are but 64 years , which are much short of his 150. but to pass over this , what though this controversy was setled by theodosius ? oh! the authour has an abundance to say to that in his reflections at last upon his whole relation . that this doctrine now established ( i. e. the doctrine of our saviour's divinity ) was advanced by gross partiality of the most guilty kind , and at last imposed by a novice emperour , upon implicit faith , in two bishops , &c. and so on with a long ranting period of some twenty lines . but to consider this a little . a novice in christianity , it is true , this emperour was , because he received baptism that year , or the year before he published this edict , and yet the edict might be never the worse for all that ; but to be sure he sufficiently understood the christian religion before he was admitted to baptism ; and generally persons that come into the church at those riper years , do take better care to inform themselves before baptism , than others do after it . but why must this be an implicit faith in two bishops ? he draws his consequence from what * sezomen says , when he gives an account of this edict , that the emperour wills , that all his subjects should embrace that religion , which peter , the prince of the apostles , had from the beginning deliver'd to the romans , and which damasus bishop of rome , and peter bishop of alexandria , held . if here be an implicit faith here is one in three bishops , for peter the apostle was as good a bishop as the other two , and the same faith is said to be of all three . but how can he draw from these words , that he had an implicit faith in the other ? one certainly may use anothers summary of faith , having found it conformable to god's word , without believing implicitly as that other does ; as well as i can use another mans form of devotion , without praying implicitly with him . now the reason why these two names are used by the emperour is , because these bishops were eminent professours of the orthodox faith , amidst the many heretical doctrines then in the world , and were particular defenders of it against arianism . if any man should say , he is for believing as the ancient fathers believed , for continuing in that faith , in which the athanasius's cyrils , chrysostoms , nazianzens did ; that faith which is still embraced and defended by the great and learned men of our church , and not for believing as the little heedless authour of the naked gospel does . this would not be to believe implicitly on these great men right or wrong , but only to shew 't is more probable , that their faith is better grounded , than that of every little trifling heretick . 't is not worth while to examine all the declamatory stuff he has brought towards the end of this chapter , for 't is a sure sign that men want reason when they begin to declaim in such subjects ; but in truth the authour has no very good hand at this neither ; for his strokes will raise no mens passions , unless their anger , to see their religion abused by such impudent , and withal witless scurrility . and indeed 't is enough to raise a christians zeal to an unusual temper , to hear him at the end of his false and patch'd relation of this controversy , to plume himself and vaunt , as if he had struck the orthodox cause for ever dead . behold now the ground ( says he ) on which one of our fundamental articles of faith is built . behold the justice of that plea , which from such a possession would prescribe to our belief . this , and what after he says , that the athanasian are to be numbred with the roman doctrines , is but common-place talk , and what may be said upon any thing a man has a mind to vilify , though it be never so sacred . the authour , in the close of this chapter , has hooked in some arguments to make us have a favourable opinion of the arians , and their tenets , though 't is nothing at all , as far as i can see , to his design in this chapter . the first is a very good one . if alexander himself , the head of the party , could tolerate the arians , we can ill pretend to charity , if we allow them no title to god's favour , or the churches communion . what alexander's thoughts were of the arians , as to god's favour , i believe our authour can't tell , nor any one else at this distance , and therefore he can be no rule to us as to this matter . that he did excommunicate some of these hereticks , arius himself , and some others mentioned by the historians , are sufficient instances ; that he did not more was owing to their numbers , and not to his opinion of their not deserving it . but as to his saying , we allow them no title to god's favour ; i suppose few will prescribe rules to that , any further than they find them prescribed by god himself . god almighty may save , for ought as we know , thousands of hereticks and schismaticks , but he has not in any ways let us know so much in his holy word : we find but one faith there that we can be saved by , but one church to communicate in , and to both which the promises of the gospel are made ; whatsoever god may do more is unknown to us , 't is possible that he may do it , but he has no where declared he will. if he does afford salvation to such persons , 't is not by the ordinary methods of the gospel , and what his extraordinary methods are , god himself only knows . the ordinary way he has marked out to us there , is the rule for us to judge by , and those that do not walk by this , we may with charity say , they are out of the common way of salvation . the next excuse the authour makes for them is , because they may not see the ill consequences of their doctrines , for he says , if this make them hereticks it is only in logick . as for the arian doctrine , that was not heresy by consequence , but a downright denial of our lord's divinity , and that was plain enough by arius's disputes at first , though his followers afterwards began to mince the matter , and to spin their heresy a little siner when it became too odious to the vulgar , after the nicene determinations . but however , heresy by deduction is still heresy , as the conclusion is vertually contained in the premises , and the corollaries in a proposition . the heretical consequence is not less heresy , because it is a little further removed than ordinary ; for whatsoever is true after a thousand deductions , is true still , and 't is the same in all manner of falsities . nay there is a guilt contracted from this reductive heresy as well as from the other ; though such heretical person may not observe himself these heretical , or other wicked consequences . for as in matter of practice , if a man does a thing unlawful , though he may not apprehend all the ill consequences that may attend such an action , he is answerable for these consequences when they come to pass ; because he has entred upon an ill action at first , and therefore must bear himself off afterwards as well as he can : thus it is in heresy , though the heretick denies a truth in god's word , the denial of which , at first sight , does not seem to have so much of impiety ; yet for this first fault , he is chargeable with the other impious consequences , which are drawn from it . thus when the arians said , there was a time when christ was not , though they did not expresly deny his divinity , yet they are guilty of this too : though they pretend to abhor idolatry , yet they are guilty of this , if they believe christ to be a created being , and yet do worship him . a third excuse for the arians is upon account of their expounding scripture , because , he says , they reconcile places , seemingly contrary , by the fairest methods ; and so because 't is not the custom of writers ever to diminish , but generally to advance the character of the person they write of ; therefore 't is reasonable , that those places which make christ equal to the father , should stoop to those that make him inferiour . this would be very true , if the persons here spoke of had but one nature . if a poet or oratour , should call achilles , or alexander , a god , and in other places a man , 't would be but reasonable for the reader to take the latter compellation to be the truest , and the other title of god to be only an hyperbolical expression ; because these persons , according to their characters , could not be gods and men too , because they had only one humane nature , but were only stiled gods from some great and godlike qualities , which were inherent in them . but our saviour having two natures , the divine and the humane , united into one person , both compellations , in a grammatical sense , might agree to him , without any figure or hyperbole . but besides , our saviour does not claim the name of the son of god , as a great magnificent title , to aggrandize his office ▪ as princes use to emblazon their dignity by great swelling characters ; he came with another design into the world , than to make a fine glaring shew here ; he came to preach up meekness and humility , and was the most perfect instance of them that ever was in the world. therefore if christ was not god really and essentially , and should withal take upon him this title of god , which is the greatest of all titles , on purpose only to raise him an esteem in the world , as all hyperbolical titles are assumed for ; he would be then far from maintaining his character of being a person of the greatest humility ; as he most certainly is , if being by nature really god , he has condescended to take upon him our flesh . so that here is no need of running to a figure to interpret these places , we may understand them easily enough in their bare grammatical sense ; for there is a thousand times more to be said for this , than for any of the socinians figurative constructions . and so i think i have spoke to every thing material in this chapter . chap. x. of the word or matter which is the object of faith. the authour begins this chapter with a discourse about fundamentals of belief , and by the way casts an odd sort of censure upon the excellent treatise of dr. hammond on that subject ; which he says , is like an advertisement in a gazette , which however cannot secure one from mistake , if he meets the man described . i am sure that is an excellent treatise , whatever the authour thinks of it , and i am sure too , that admirable man , has handled this subject a thousand times more learnedly and honestly , than the authour has done it in this chapter . 't is certain , that the authour's heresy will not stand with the doctor 's enumeration of fundamentals , and that 's the reason , in all probability , that he speaks so slightingly of it ; and moreover , to say , the doctor 's enumeration every one will not receive for adequate , for i believe he is one of that number : but certainly it is no defect in that discourse , that it cannot secure every one from mistake that will blind his own eyes ; for the fundamental doctrines of religion are plainly enough described there , but if the authour wo'n't see them , the doctor can't find him eyes and description too . but let us see how the authour has mended the matter in his handling the point . but instead of giving us an enumeration of the particulars , he has given us only some marks and qualifications of things to be believed , which too , if he had done it fairly enough , would have been pretty well . 1. and now the first qualification he makes for matters of faith , is , that they be easily understood by the meanest capacity . i hope the authour does not mean , that men must understand every thing as far as they believe them , and to believe nothing but what they have a perfect knowledge of ; for this would be to exclude all faith out of the world , and to make men scepticks in every thing , but of which they had demonstrative science . if he means that there are no fundamental truths to be believed , but what the meanest capacity can adequately comprehend the express modus of them , this , i am sure , is more than ever he will be able to make out , however he may attempt it . as for what he brings of the poor having the gospel preached unto them , and that the light of the gospel cannot be hid , but to those whose eyes are blinded , and of the simplicity which is in christ ; these texts the authour has foisted in to no purpose , and contrary to their intent and meaning ; for they are spoke only to shew , that the christian religion did not consist in pharisaical glosses , or deep philosophical niceties , knowable only by a few learned men ; but in plain truths , which any one of a mean capacity might perceive , as far as was requisite for his salvation . and one of these i have shewn the doctrine of the holy trinity to be , as to the belief of its existence , in the answer to the preface . but the authour will have the apostle st. paul , rom. 10. 9. to judge it a great defect of faith , if there were any difficulty in it . for my part , i see nothing like such a judgment in this place of the apostle , that it argues a defect of faith to have the matter of it difficult to believe . nay the reasoning of the apostle there seems to be grounded upon the contrary to this . if thou shalt believe in thine heart that god raised christ from the dead , thou shalt be saved . that is , if thou shalt believe such a wonderful thing as christ's resurrection , which is so strange and difficult to be believed by all carnal men , thou shalt be saved . but why should difficulty make a defect of faith ? it has been generally looked upon as a great increase and exaltation of faith , when the matter has been hard to believe , as in abraham , who believed against hope , and whose faith , for this very reason , the authour did extraordinarily celebrate a chapter or two before , however he may have forgot himself now . the calling of the gentiles indeed , he allows to be something of a mystery , and difficult to believe under the gospel , but he is very positive , that in no other word of scripture we meet the least intimation , that faith hath any hard task for the understanding to perform . but i thought there might have been some difficulty in the belief of the gospel it self ; by reason of our saviour's calling his religion a yoke , wherein mens carnal reasons were to be subjugated as well as their affections , by his being set for the fall of many ; by reason that the gospel was a stumbling block to the jews , and to the greeks foolishness , &c. all which plainly shews , there is at least some intimation of a difficulty for faith under the gospel . 2. his second qualification , is , that matter of faith must be the express word of god. this rule of the authour holds well enough , yea so well , that i am afraid he will never stand by it , when it comes to the issue . for if the socinians , or other opposers of christ's divinity , would once come to be determined by express texts of scripture , that controversy would quickly be at an end . for there are so many express texts against them , that we cannot desire more ; and these they will own are express , as to the word and letter , but then are forced to put false and strained interpretations upon them , to make them look another way . for our saviour is expresly called god , joh. 1. 1. the word was god. of whom , as concerning the flesh , christ came , who is god over all , blessed for ever , rom. 9. 5. thomas calls him my lord and my god. so heb. 1. 8. thy throne , o god , is for ever and ever . so the divine attributes are ascribed to him . omnipresence joh. 14. 23. matth. 28. 20. and 18. 20. omnipotence phil. 3. 21. rev. 1. 8. immutability heb. 1. 11 , & 12. omniscience joh. 21. 17. joh. 11. 25. rev. 11. 23. so likewise the holy ghost is called expresly god , act. 5. 4. why hath satan filled thy heart to lie unto the holy ghost , — thou hast not lied unto men , but unto god , v. 4. so are the divine attributes ascribed unto him . as omnipresence psal . 139. 7. 1 cor. 3. 16. & 6. 19. eternity 1 cor. 11. 10. joh. 15. 26. omniscience 1 cor. 11. omnipotence luk. 11. 20. luk. 1. 35. 1 cor. 1. 11. these are not the tenth part of the places in scriture which may be alledged for the proof of the trinity , besides that express one to prove a trinity in unity , 1 john 5. 7. though without that , there is enough to establish this doctrine in the minds of all unprejudiced men. and to see what work the socinians make to invalidate these proofs , what jejune and foolish interpretations they pass upon them , so contrary oftentimes to the whole design and tenour of the authours , this would make any one think , that they had taken up a paradox to defend , and were resolved to say any thing to maintain it , rather than to be perfectly silent , well! but what if the relation between the written word and the rational consequence , be so remote , that none but a skilful herald can drive its pedigree ? why this is not the case of the doctrine of the trinity , for all the authour's hast . for first , this is plainly asserted in that famous place of st. john , 1 joh. 5. 7. and the authority of this text is good for all our adversaries appeal to some manuscripts to the contrary ; and we have * st. cyprian to vouch for it , who is older than any manuscripts they can pretend to . but secondly , supposing this text was wanting in scripture , the doctrine of the trinity is plain enough for all that . we have express assertion there , that each of the three persons are god , by the places for instance we just now alledged ; and we are likewise assured , as well from natural reason as from scripture , that god is but one , hear , o israel , thy god is but one god , deut. 6. 9. now any man , without any great skill in heraldry , or logick either , can from hence conclude , that god is in some manner , he does not understand , three and yet one , which is all the notion any one can have of the trinity . here is no such remote distance between the word and the consequence , but any one of the meanest capacity may find out ; for men in their ordinary business every day make conclusions at a wider distance from their premises than this , or else i am sure they are not fit to live or deal in the world. as to what he instances in the consequence , which the papists draw from christ's bidding peter seed his lambs , the papists , when they think fit , may answer that for themselves . 3. the third qualification he gives for matter of faith , is , that it be expresly honoured in scripture with the promise of eternal life . now 't is a little arbitrary methinks in the authour , to lay down a rule here as he does , and give no reason for it , especially such a one as he might reasonably expect would be contested : and 〈◊〉 one should make bold to deny it , he would , i believe , have a difficult task of it to prove , that every particular article , of only the apostles creed , had the promise of eternal life expresly annexed to it in scripture he first tells us a wonderful thing , that every thing in scripture , though it be equally true , yet it is not equally gospel ; and for the proof of this , he brings in the business of paul's cloak , which he left behind him . but , i hope , the doctrine of our saviour's divinity is of something more importance , to those that believe it especially , than the relation of paul's cloak . and if we should ask any socinian in the world , whether , supposing it true , it was not of greater importance than this ; i believe the vnitarian himself would give such an answer , as would make the authour ashamed of such an impudent and saucy comparison . and now one would think , that the man that would be so bold , as to make this comparison , would bring something to prove , that the belief of christ's divinity had not eternal life promised to it ; or that all other doctrines , which were required to be believed , had . but , instead of this , he brings one text of scripture which makes perfectly against the doctrine he designs to establish ; and that is mark 16. 15. go ye into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature . he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved , and he that believeth not shall be damned . now if the doctrine of our saviour's divinity be revealed in the gospel , as we have shewn it is , and the belief of the gospel have eternal life promised to it ; then the belief of christ's divinity has a title to this promise , as well as the belief of the resurrection , or any other christian doctrine ; because it is revealed in the gospel as well as that . from this rule , thus firmly established , he draws four corollaries . first , there is no need of an interpreter of scripture , or determiner of doubts in matter of faith. secondly , the scriptures cannot be denyed to be sufficient . thirdly , we need not , ought not to be uncharitable to any , who differ from us in other doctrines , to the belief whereof the promise is not appropriated . fourthly , there is no need of a catalogue of fundamentals . how well these corollaries follow from his proposition , i shall not now dispute ; though upon examination , i believe , the consequence would not be so genuine , and there might be some occasion for one of the authour's heralds to derive it ; but as for the two first of them , they make nothing at all against the orthodox doctrine of the trinity , which the authour knows well enough we do not ground upon infallibility and pure tradition ; but only he has a mind to give us a cast of his heretical malice , by blackening this doctrine as much as he could , and by making it look something more of a romanish complexion . as to his third corollary . first , that is grounded upon supposition , that the belief of christ's divinity has not the promise of eternal life annexed to it . now i wonder with what confidence the authour can go about to invalidate a truth , which is so firmly established even upon his own principles . how often in one chapter of st. john's gospel , joh. 3. is eternal life promised to belief in the son ? god so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son , that whosoever believeth on him should not perish , but have everlasting life , joh. 3. 16. he that believeth on him is not condemned , v. 18. he that believeth on the son hath eternal life . by all which believing is meant a believing in christ's divinity , and not a believing the truth of his doctrine : for believing in is only attributable to god , as implying an unlimited trust and relyance in him ; which it is idolatry to afford to any creature . * for there is a great deal of difference between credere deo , believing god , and credere in deum , believing in him ; which is a distinction which is made great use of by some of the latin fathers and the school-men ; they allowing bare believing to be applicable to a creature , but that none is to be believed in but almighty god. but besides there are other texts of scripture , which do promise eternal life , namely and expresly to the belief of christ's divinity . this is life eternal , that they may know thee the only true god , and jesus christ whom thou hast sent , joh. 17. 3. now what can be meant by knowing jesus christ , but knowing or believing his divinity ? that he was man they could not chuse but know , that he was a prophet his miracles shew'd ; so that they could know him no other way truly , but only by knowing his divinity . and this was the purport of our saviour's prayer just before , that god would glorifie him , that is , would make his divinity conspicuous to the world , v. 1. which he puts out of all doubt , by his explaining his meaning , v. 5. and now , o father , glorifie thou me with thy own self , with the glory which i had with thee before the world was . now that glory which he had before the world , could be only the glory of his divinity ; therefore the promise of eternal life was made , to the knowing or believing christ's divinity . the same thing is as plainly expressed , 1 joh. 5. 20. and hath given us an understanding , that we may know him that is true : and we are in him that is true , even in his son jesus christ . this is the true god , even eternal life . where he that is the true god is said to be jesus christ , and the knowing him to be the true god ( i. e. ) believing him to be such , is promised to be rewarded with eternal life . secondly , as to his saying we ought not to be uncharitable to those , that differ from us in points which have not this promise ; this depends upon the truth of his assertion , that those truths , he means , have not such a promise in scripture , which we have proved the doctrine of our saviour's divinity to have . so that , upon our authour 's own principles , we may reason thus . if eternal life be promised to those , and to those only , that believe christ's divinity , then those that do dis-believe it have no title to eternal life . but we have proved that christ has promised it to those , and to those only , that believe his divinity , therefore , &c. for christ's promising eternal life to those that should believe his divinity , supposes the promise is to them only ; for if it were to be given to others , it were no kind of invitation and encouragement to them for to believe it ; seeing then they might attain it without it . if the consequence , which is naturally drawn from this , be uncharitable , 't is what results from the author 's own principles , which he himself has laid down ; and then he may thank himself for that . as to his fourth corollary , that then there is no need of a catalogue of fundamentals ; this is a stroke too of his usual confidence , by which he taxes no less men than the very apostles themselves , of a foolish uncessary labour . for if there was no need of a catalogue of fundamentals , why should the apostle exhort timothy so earnestly to hold fast the form of sound words , which was undoubtedly in our authour's phrase , a catalogue of fundamentals , or some brief summary of faith , probably that creed which we have now under the apostles names ? why should the apostles , or some other apostolical men set themselves to collect together the chief heads of our christian faith , for the instruction of their new converts , if it were nothing but a needless work ? the apostles hands were then too full of business , to do any thing but what was absolutely necessary ; and the holy spirit , which was to guide them into all truth , would certainly keep them from writing what was unnecessary , as well as what was false ; for impertinence , though it is not a contradiction to , yet , is a hindrance of truth as well as falshood . i shall not insist here how he reflects by this upon the actions of so many venerable councils ; for 't is the usage of this gentleman's tribe to be saucy with those sacred assemblies ; but methinks he should be more civil to his beloved friends , the arians and socinians . will he allow , that arius , and euzoius , and eusebius of caesarea , &c. were only playing the fools , whilst they were drawing up their creeds ? will he own his celebrated arian councils of antioch , ariminum , seleucia , &c. to be only at his push-pin , whilst they were contriving their heterodox forms of faith ? and had the socinian brethren nothing to do , when they wrote their summaries of religion , which are catalogues of their fundamentals ? i am afraid this is something more than , upon second thoughts , he will readily grant . but for all our authour's positiveness , a creed is no such unnecessary work as he may think . what though the scripture be a compleat rule of faith , a creed may not be a needless one for all that . though the scripture contains every thing necessary to salvation , yet comments upon scripture , and sermons and catechisms , i hope , are not wholly impertinent . all the necessary points of faith , 't is true , are found somewhere or other dispersed through the bible , but 't is too difficult for children and novices , and many others , who have not so much leisure to search them out there ; therefore 't is very necessary , for these , to have a brief summary of faith to be drawn up out of them for their use ; which they may quickly read over , and easily remember . besides creeds are of great advantage in the church , to shew us the belief of the primitive ages ; which as they were nigher to the apostolick times , so they could know better the apostolick faith , than others , that were at a remoter distance ; and therefore by these we have a better knowledge of the primitive faith , than if we had the assistance of the scripture only . though the scripture it self is a good and sufficient rule , yet these ancient creeds are useful explanations of it : though the scripture be the great primary rule of faith , yet the creeds of the ancient church may be secondary ones , as being formed by the first , and more adapted to some particular capacities , and some peculiar circumstances . the authour next , i find , is afraid that he has not laid his first proposition firm enough , upon which he has been building all these corollaries ; and therefore he is for butteressing it afterwards , as well as he can . but instead of this he has unluckily made his foundation weaker than it was before ; for whereas at first he allowed some truths to be honoured with the promise of eternal life , here he will allow but one in all the bible to be so ; and that is the belief of our saviour's resurrection . and now having brought the q. of the 10th . of the romans , v. 9. to prove this , if thou shalt believe in thy heart that god hath raised [ jesus ] from the dead thou shalt be saved ; he very triumphantly asks the question , do we in the whole new testament find any other doctrine so honoured ? yes , we have proved the doctrine of our saviour's divinity to be so honoured ; and i wonder what the authour thinks of the doctrine of repentance ; whether any man can be saved without that , or whether eternal life be not promised to it ? whether it is not promised to the belief of the true god ? this is life eternal , to know thee the onely true god , &c. joh. 17. 3. in short , eternal life is promised , either expresly or vertually , to every article of the christian belief , and to the practice of every christian precept , but not to one singly without the other . the apostle tells us , rom. 8. 24. we are saved by hope : and yet undoubtedly he requires the exercises of other vertues with it : and though salvation is promised to the belief of christ's resurrection , yet , to be sure , god expects our assent likewise to all other articles of the christian faith. bare hope will as well save a man without faith and charity , as a bare belief of our saviour's resurrection without a belief of his divinity ; for one is revealed in scripture as well as the other , and each of them have the same promises of eternal life annexed to them . but suppose one of them lacked this promise expresly made to it , it were not less to be believed for all that ; any more than we do not think our selves at liberty to neglect the practice of charity , because we are not in scripture said to be saved by it , as we are by hope . the reason why the scripture , particularly the epistles of the apostles , does often back the belief of the doctrine of the resurrection with this promise , is , because this point , of all others in the christian religion , was the most difficult to go down with the heathens which the apostles had to do withal ; it was so contrary to the received principles of their * philosophy , and the avowed opinions of the great masters in the grecian schools ; and therefore 't was but reasonable , that the apostles should give the greatest encouragement they could , to further the belief of it , when it lay under so many prejudices amongst them . chap. xi . of the manner of the resurrection ; whether in the same body , or another . i cannot imagine why the authour should single out this heterodoxy alone , out of all the socinian errours , to join with his denial of our saviour's divinity . one would have thought , he might rather have contested the doctrine of the satisfaction ; or the divinity of the holy ghost ; which would have made his book look more of a piece , than now it does . but why he should single out this , above all the other points of the socinian controversie , i can give no reason for , unless having talked about resurrection in the last chapter , that gave him a hint to make a ramble into a discourse of it here . how ever the case stands , i shall give an answer to what he says against the received doctrine of the church , in this point , as short and as plain as i can . and , in order to this , i will shew , first , the necessity of mens rising again in the same numerical bodies . secondly , i shall answer those arguments which this authour brings against the truth of this doctrine . first , the necessity of mens rising again with same numerical bodies they laid down in the grave . 't is not easie to guess , what 't is these socinian gentlemen would have to rise again , if not the body ; 't is impossible that the soul should be said to rise again because that never fell ; for all rising supposes a falling . resurgere non est nisi ejus quod cecidit , nothing can rise but what has fell , says tertullian , in the same case , adv . marc. lib. 5. cap. 9. therefore it does necessarily follow , that 't is the body must arise , if there be any resurrection . besides , our saviour , who is the great * original and archetype of our resurrection , or , as the apostle speaks , the first fruits of them that sleep ; he arose in the same body that he deposited in the grave ; and therefore our bodies that are to be fashioned like to his glorious body , must be the same bodies , as his was the same ; or else they will not be conformable to their original : but farther , i know not what truth can be revealed plainer than this is , in the holy scripture . not to insist upon job 19. 26. i know that my redeemer liveth , &c. nor on dan. 12. 2. many of them that sleep in the dust , &c. though these are evident proofs enough of this doctrine , yet several texts in the new testament are unexceptionable , as particularly , joh. 5. 28 , 29. for the hour is coming , in which all that are in the graves , shall hear his voice , and shall come forth : they that have done good unto the resurrection of life , and they that have done evil unto the resurrection of damnation . † now what is that which is in the graves , but only the bodies of men ? to be sure , their souls are not there ; therefore if these words have any propriety of speech it must be , that then the bodies of men that are in their graves shall arise . the consequence of this is so plain , that ‖ smaltzius the socinian will have this to be understood only in a figurative sense , that nothing is meant here but the calling of the gentiles ; that by the dead are meant aliens from the faith ; that by hearing the voice of the son is understood the hearing the gospel preached : but how foolish this interpretation is , may be known from the distinction which is here made , of those that are to arise , into good and bad. for if here be meant only such a resurrection as he means , from sin to grace , then all were bad , because they all were in a state of sin ; and so there is no room for the other branch of the distinction , those that have done good , so that this must be perfectly superfluous . and so again , this is as plain from rom. 8. 11. he that raised up christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his spirit which dwelleth in you : where those bodies which are to be quickned or revived , are the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the mortal or dying bodies , and therefore the bodies to be quickned or raised cannot be any other bodies , than those which did die . besides , those bodies are said to be quickned , in which the holy ghost dwells ; now they are these very bodies which are the temples of the holy ghost , 1 cor. 3. 16. cap. 6. 15. therefore they are these very bodies which are to be quickned or raised again . to this may be added the constant consent of the catholick church . the latins understood this by their carnis resurrectionem in their creed , and the greeks by the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in theirs ; but of all , the * aquileian creed was most particular , for this had hujus carnis resurrectionem , the resurrection of this very flesh . this was the doctrine of the ancient fathers of the church , justin , tertullian , anaxagoras , cyprian , austin , hierom , and all others , till the socinians began to turn all the articles of the christian faith upside down , and , among the rest to overthrow the orthodox belief of the resurrection . this is enough to shew , that this was the belief of * learned men in the first ages of the church ; not was it less the belief of other christians . or else what should be the cause that this doctrine of the resurrection should seem so difficult † to be believed , if the ressurrection was nothing but the soul 's being cloathed with another body , why should that be more hard to be credited , than that god could cloath it with a body at first ? for he that gave it a body at first , could with as great ease give it another body , when that was gone . here is no difficulty at all here : but this was the thing that confounded their faith , ‖ how a body should be raised again , that had so long lain rotten in the grave , that had passed through so many transmutations , that was turned into the substance of so many different bodies , how all these scatter'd parts should leave the bodies , they should then help to make up , and be ranged together into their old form . this indeed would be apt to strain the faith of a great many , but no one could be so foolish to stand out against christianity , upon the incredibility of the other opinion . besides , if this was not the faith of the ancient christians , what meant those malicious exprobrations of the heathens to them , by shewing them the bodies of their martyrs , half devoured by lyons , by burning their bodies , and then scattering their ashes into rivers ? but only because they thought this did make the resurrection they believed utterly impossible . what else could be the meaning of the great care which the primitive christians took of the bodies of their deceased friends ; upon which * tertullian says , they were more prodigal , than the heathens were in incensing their gods. if they thought their dead friends souls would never have any further relation to their bodies , they would certainly never have treated them with that extraordinary respect and honour , as they did . secondly , as to the answering of the objections which the authour makes against the truth of this doctrine , i shall consider them singly as they lie in his book , which i shall do within a little compass ; for though his chapter is long , his arguments are but few , and what is somewhat better , those not over-strong neither . his first argument is grounded upon the words of the apostle , thou fool thou sowest not that body which shall be , but god giveth it a body as it hath pleased him . doth not this ( says the authour ) plainly deny a resurrection of the same numerical particles ? as plain as this is , no one can see it without a pair of socinian spectacles , and how clear sighted they may make a man , i thank god i do not know . but let us see a little , how plain this is . this place alledged is at best but a similitude the apostle uses , to explain the resurrection by , and therefore it must not be drawn further than the apostle designed it should ; we must not extend it beyond his purpose , which was only to inform us of the quality of the bodies we are to arise with , and not to assert a substantial diversity . but to keep to the instance ; the body which is here sown is not the body which arises in respect of the quality indeed , but yet it is in respect of the substance ; the substance is the same still , though it be changed by alteration of quality , or augmentation of quantity ; it does not arise such as it was sown 't is true , but yet it does arise the same ; it arises 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , as the apostle speaks , though not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . for augmentation does not make a thing not the same , it only increases the bulk , but does not diversify the individuum ; as a tree , which is grown to a fathom or two about , is the same tree ; as when it was but an inch or two over . but however , it is not necessary that this simile of the seed should hold universally , as to the matter of the resurrection ; for there is no need of that extraordinary addition of quantity to our bodies which are to arise , as there is to the grain to be changed into the blade . 't is not necessary that our bodies should be larger than they are now , that there should be need of growth to increase them , as there is to increase the grain : therefore our bodies will be more the same , than the bodies the apostle instances in are ; for they need not so great an addition of matter as the grain does and so may be the same as to quantity too . his second argument is , that there is no reason , that the same numerical body should arise upon that account , which many of the ancients have given ; that those bodies which were sharers in the sin , should be sharers in the punishment : * because matter ( says he ) has no share in either ; it neither acts nor perceives , and therefore is not liable to punishment . this indeed is an argument which several of the ancients use to prove a resurrection of the same body , which they do not lay such stress upon , as if the whole truth of this doctrine was built on this : they use it as a probable argument , which though by it self is not of so great weight , yet when joined with others , it may add some strength to them . but to examine this a little . it is true , matter in its own nature is not capable of being punished , because it has no perception ; but yet matter is capable of undergoing the divine malediction , god may set a mark of his displeasure upon it , or in the scripture language curse it , and that in inanimate beings is analogous to punishment in sensible ones . and thus we find god frequently curses inanimate things , for some relation they have or had to guilty persons ; thus he is said , gen. 3. 17. to curse the ground for mans sake . thus the places where the wicked inhabitants of sodom and gomorrah dwelt , lie under such a malediction , suffering the vengeance of eternal fire , jud. 7. thus the prophet tells the people of judah , because of the abomination they have committed , their land is become a curse , jer. 44. 22. now though the body , being considered purely as matter , cannot undergo punishment , properly so called , because it cannot suffer pain ; yet it may undergo the divine execration , as other inanimate bodies do , and so be raised up to suffer this in lieu of a proper punishment , for being so nighly related to a wicked soul. but however the body is not to be esteemed as only pure insensible matter , and only an instrument of pain and pleasure ; for the body it self is sensible by an internal principle of its own , and not by the rational soul , though that be the governing principle ; and is therefore of its self capable of suffering pain , and enjoying corporeal pleasure , without relation to the soul. now though the body , in this sense , cannot be said to deserve punishment , because it cannot contract guilt , as wanting reason , yet as being an essential part in the composition of a man , it is reasonable , that that should partake of all the rewards and punishments , which the soul doth : and because it was the whole man , the compositum of body and soul that sinned , so likewise it is reasonable , that the whole compositum should suffer . and upon this account * tertullian would have the body , in a manner , to undergo a judgment ; because it is not so much an instrument of the soul as a servant ; which though it does not act of it self , is yet a portion of that which does act . his third argument is , that though god might by his omnipotence , raise up the same numerical bodies , yet it would argue a defect in his wisdom , to exercise his omnipotency when less means will serve . i am sure the authour , by this argument , does undervalue the divine nature a thousand times more than that opinion he endeavours to overthrow by it . for he supposes things are difficult and easy , in respect of god , which is a manifest absurdity . for to be difficult and easy , for any thing to do , does suppose an imperfection , because it supposes a limited power . for a thing is then difficult to be done by any person or thing , when the power that resists is almost equal to the power which acts ; and a thing is easy to be done , when the power which acts is much greater than the power which resists ; but this always supposes a limited power . but in an infinite power there is no proportion with any thing that is finite , and therefore nothing can be difficult or easy in respect of that . god does every thing by his omnipotent power , he does one thing with as great ease as another , because the greatest thing he does , is as far from setting his omnipotent power as the smallest ; his power to act is infinitely greater than any power to resist , and though one thing may seem more difficult than another to us , because we find their resistibility to be so much greater or less than our limited power of acting , yet god's power is infinitely greater than the most difficult of them ; and therefore can do one as easily as the other . it seems to us indeed , that have a finite narrow understanding , that can attend to and discern only a few things that are just before us , very difficult , to find out so many scatter'd atoms , that lie it may be in so many millions of different places ; because we cannot discern different things lying in different places , and therefore all such disorder confounds our understandings ; but god , who is omniscient , and knows exactly all things every where , nothing can lie disorderly to him ; he knows where every such atom lies , as well as when it possessed its place in the organized body ; and can , with as great ease , make them return to their former station , as to make the new separated soul go back to the body , that lies yet entire . nay 't is not so great an act of god's power to range all this scattered matter together , as to create another body for the soul to be united to ; for 't is possible , that all this matter might be gathered together from never so many different places , by a finite power only ; and 't is not improbable to think god may do this by the ministry of his holy angels : but 't is god alone that can create another body , and therefore this would be rather ( in our authour's phrase ) to make god unaccountably exercise his omnipotency ; because it would put god to the expence of a new creation , to make a body to be united to the soul , when the old one would do as well . his fourth argument is against those that make it some advancement of the joys at the resurrection , that we shall be united to our old bodies , which will be like the joyful meeting and embracing of old friends ; which he says will not be of old friends but of old enemies , because of the war between the flesh and the spirit , rom. 7. and therefore the soul cannot rejoice at her being united to her former body . 't is true indeed , that several ancient and modern writers have made use of this , as a rhetorical argument , to set forth , in some part , the joy of that happy day ; and truly i think not without some reason . for we find the soul has a great love to the body , both by reason of its being so loth to part with it , and because it is found to hanker after the body , after its separation ; which is the account which some give of spectrums . but besides , we find in men a secret love and esteem for every thing that has any relation to themselves ; they love their relations , as being born of the same stock , they have an esteem for every thing belonging to their native country ; they have an extraordinary kindness for their nutriculi lares , the house in which they were born and bred : and this love seems always greater , after a considerable time of absence from them . now when a mans body is the most nighly related to him , as being an essential part of himself , he cannot but be more joyed to be united again to that which is so near to him than to see his native country , or the house he was born in after a long time of absence from him . as for the enmity between the flesh and the spirit he mentions , that is only an enmity metaphorically so called ; because all proper enmity is between two rational beings , which are endowed with free wills , which the soul and the body are not ; nay , that reluctancy of the sensual nature to the dictates of the understanding , which is metaphorically expressed , by war or enmity , between the flesh and spirit , that is very well appeased in the regenerate man ; so that he has no reason to hate his body for that , especially now he has master'd it ; for these inward strugglings of the flesh , have made his vertue greater to overcome them , and therefore he may reasonably expect for this a greater reward in proportion to his vertue . enquiry ii. what changes or additions latter ages have made in matters of faith ? our authour has been hitherto giving us a hodge-podge of arianism and socinianism , and some heresie of his own which wants a name ; and this he calls giving us an account , what was the gospel our lord and his apostles preached , as necessary to salvation , which was the first enquiry . and now , when he enters upon his second , what additions latter ages have made in matters of faith , one would expect , that , according to the tenour of his book , he should give an account , how the doctrine of the trinity came into the world ; what platonick notions gave rise to the opinion of our saviour's divinity ; that plato's doctrine of the logos came from the greeks to the hellenistical jews , and so from them to the christians ; one would , i say , have expected something of this matter , which is used to fill up the books of the late socinians and atheists , when they have a mind to blaspheme the ever blessed trinity . but our authour , i find , either wants courage , or reading , or something else to set upon this enterprize , and therefore contents himself only with a little nibbling at this doctrine ; but turns the whole current of his argument against the papists , and their innovations . indeed his charge of innovations seems to lie against the orthodox in general ; but when he comes to make good his challenge , he shams us off with an instance or two against the popish errours . but let us consider what these innovations are , he so boldly charges us with . 1. he says , we extend the empire of faith as far as possible ; and this he proves very strenuously , by that vast army of new doctrines of faith , which the school-men have got , by the bishop of rome's setting up for an oracle to declare that matter of faith , which was before matter of curiosity ; by implicit faith in the church , &c. but what does all this stuff signifie to us of the church of england ? or who else does he mean by this we ? if he means we papists , and so reckons himself one of that number , his brethren will give him little thanks for thus exclaiming against their corruptions . if he means we protestants , or church of england , here is not one tittle of proof of the charge against us ; we abhorr all these romish corruptions , as much as the authour possibly can do . we extend faith no farther than the holy scripture does ; what that tells us we ought to believe , that we readily do believe ; but do not take into our belief anything , but what the scripture does expresly assert , or but what may , by manifest deduction , be drawn from it . and when the authour shall offer any proof that we do , he shall not want an answer . but i hope he does not take this for proof , to lay down propositions against the orthodox in general , and make his proof only against the papists . 2. his second charge of innovation is , that we exalt faith above holiness , and against it too . but here he lets the papists alone , and turns his pen chiefly against the maintainers of justification by faith alone , and those that hope to be justified by the application of christ's merits to themselves : and is very angry with some modern authours , for using the expressions , of application of christ to our selves , the hand of faith , imputed righteousness , &c. there is no intimation , says he , of any such doctrine as this in the scriptures , but it was invented by false apostles . this is a bold charge , in good truth ; and if the authour's arguments were as good as his confidence , he would make something of it . but instead of argument he gives us nothing but a simple parable about a physician and his nostrum ; which as it proves nothing , so 't is not worth reciting . as to justification by faith alone , i hope i have made that point good , in answer to the second chapter , and there too we shewed how the doctrine of our relying on christ's merits , for our justification , was founded on scripture . i know not how some men may abuse this doctrine , by talking so much of , and infusing such notions of christ's imputed righteousness into their disciples , as to exclude all good works of their own , and to make them take little care , what wickedness they do themselves , if they have but confidence enough to think they shall be saved by christ's righteousness . this is a wretched abuse of a good and comfortable doctrine ; but after all , 't is by faith , and not by works we are justified : 't is christ's infinite merits that god does accept as the true meritorious cause of our justification , and 't is faith only can apply these merits to our selves ; i say apply these merits to our selves : for these terms of applying and taking hold of christ's merits are not only to be met with in calvin and amesius , &c. but in several of the greatest men of antiquity . but to consider a little who those persons are , which the authour thus entitles with the name of false prophets . and truly these false prophets are no less persons than st. chrysostom , st. basil , theophylact , oecumenius , with several others of the latin church . * st. chrysostom , in his second homily upon the romans , on these words of st. paul , i thank my god , &c. he does not say , i thank god , but , i thank my god , who , as the prophets , makes that proper to himself , which is common to all . and so on the words of st. paul , who hath loved me , &c. he thus comments . what say you , o blessed paul ? you said just before who spared not his own son , now you say who loved me 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and apply to your self , or make your own the common benefit . id. hom. 34. in gen. st. † basil says , 't is the son of god that is righteousness , and that we are righteous , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , by change of his righteousness for ours . if you desire to attain righteousness , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , lay but hold upon christ by faith , and you shall have all . now if these great men must be branded with the name of false prophets , for asserting that we are justified by applying god's promises to our selves , by faith ; by ‖ taking hold on christ for righteousness , that we are justified by a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of his righteousness . i know not who in god's church were true pastours , for i think very few , if any , have bore a greater character than these . his third charge is , that we advance faith above charity . if he means by this [ we ] the church of england , he has answered himself a page or two further ; where he says , * she is the best constituted church in the world , because in her departure from the church of rome she departed not from charity . but besides , we extend our charity as far as we can with our duty ; we make the terms of salvation as large as the gospel allows them ; but we must not , with our charity , make other terms of salvation , than what our saviour has done : we may hope , and have a charitable opinion that a man does perform these conditions of salvation ; but we can never hope that a man can be saved without them . we hope that such a one has repented , and is therefore saved ; but 't is unreasonable to hope he can be saved without repentance . now faith is as much necessary to salvation as repentance ; and therefore we cannot hope that any one can be saved , without such a faith as the gospel does require . what god may do by dispensing with his own laws is nothing to us ; but 't is his revealed will that is to govern our thoughts and actions , and not his hidden and unrevealed one , which we know nothing at all of . and thus much i have to say , as to the charity of our thoughts to hereticks . as to the charity of our actions ; we are to allow them all the courteous treatment that the laws of the church and realm will allow , and to converse with them , if occasion require , so far as to avoid scandal and contagion . we ought not , to be sure , to make a bosom-friend of a heretick when st. paul bids us to reject him : we are to do him any good turn we can ; but he has no right to our ordinary conversation , as other good christians have , till he returns again to the catholick faith. the ancient * writers tell us , that st. john the evangelist , when he entered into a bath where the heretick corinthus was , he hastened out again , and desired his friends to do the like , least the bath should fall upon them , whilst such a wicked heretick was there . the apostolick canons prohibit all communion with them † , and the council of laodicea ‖ forbids to pray with them , or to * contract marriage with them ; and certainly heresie , in this age , is not grown more innocent than it was then , to deserve our charity so much the more . as to the punishing of hereticks , which the authour makes another breach of charity against them ; whatever the romanists do , our church contents her self with punishment purely spiritual , and leaves all the other to the secular power : or to speak in the words of photius , † we are taught to cut off hereticks from the body of christians , but otherwise to punish them we have not learned ; but when they grow incorrigible we deliver them over to the civil power , that sentence may be passed on them by the magistrates . neither is our secular power in the least to be taxed with severity now , the act de haeretico comburendo , to the authour's comfort , has now for some time been repealed , or else perhaps , — taedâ luceret in illâ quâ stant arden● — and might as deservedly , it may be , have followed his friends ‖ gentilis and servet out of the world the same way . nor can it reasonably be thought , that any sanctions can be too severe , to maintain such important points of our faith against the blasphemy of hereticks ; and it would shew our state to have too little regard for religion , to punish the defacing of our coin with death , and to have no punishment for those that shall presume to adulterate our faith. fourthly , his next charge of innovations upon us , is , that we advance faith above reason , and against it . but here is not a word of the proof of this . he tells us indeed that we must not believe god's word any further than we have reason to believe it is god's word ; and that it is unreasonable to believe a mystery ; and that is all he says to this point . 1. now , as to the believing in god's word , we never say , but that our belief is grounded upon better reason than that of the anti-trinitarians is , for all their great pretence to it ; and i am sure our arguments , from scripture , are a thousand times more rationally deduced than our adversaries are ; and as to antiquity , they have not the least pretence to that . indeed we do not pretend to understand all that our reason tells us we ought to believe ; and i think it is more reasonable to think we should not understand god's nature , than that we should . 2. as to our believing a mystery , that is not less to be believed upon that account , if we are sure it is true ; for we do not believe it because it is a mystery , but because it is a truth , well , but he says , this word mystery has not the same sense in the scripture , and other ancient authours as we put upon it . as to the use of this word among prophane authours , they understand by it , a truth , which is known only to some few men , and is not further to be divulged . and so principally the rites of ceres and proserpine were called mysteries , because they were esteemed to be of so great sacredness , as in no ways to be revealed . and therefore * suidas derives the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , from shutting the mouth . but then , by analogy , all other things that were kept secret were called mysteries . so tully , speaking of his letters , says , † which have so much of mysteries in them , that i ought not to trust them to my amanuenses . and in the holy scripture there are other senses of the word than what the authour mentions ; for every thing that is called a mystery there , is not a spiritual truth wrapped up in a sensible , nor yet only a truth hidden from some ages ; which two senses only the authour will allow . for sometimes a thing altogether incomprehensible , as the trinity is , is called a mystery . 1 tim. 3. 16. without controversie great is the mystery of godliness , god manifest in the flesh , &c. where the incomprehensible truth of christ's incarnation is called a great mystery . and therefore says an ancient father admirably well , ‖ great is the mystery of godliness ; not that it is unknown , but because it is incomprehensible ; for it exceeds all power both of expression and of vnderstanding . this perhaps the apostle calls a great mystery , in allusion to the ceremonies of those deities , that were called great , far inconsiderable mysteries in respect of this . thus diana who was worshipped with these mysterious rites , is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , act. 19. 27. and proserpine and ceres , that were worshipped with the eleusinian mysteries , were stiled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and their rites 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , athen. now , whereas these mysteries and deities were great only by their not being discovered ; this mystery of our saviour , in a more peculiar manner , is great , by its being incomprehensible . now the definition which st. chrysostom gives of a mystery , takes in all these notions of the word , * a mystery is that which is unknown and secret , and has also a great deal wonderful in it , and a great deal incomprehensible . but the authour says 't is more than a hidden mystery , that is , in his phrase , a plain contradiction , that the same thing should be hid and open to the same persons ; and who denies it , if he mean in the same respect ? but a thing may be hid in one respect , and open in another : 't is open and reveal'd to us , that our saviour's divinity is , de facto , united to his humanity ; but the express modus how this union is performed is hid to us . that father , son , and holy-ghost are one god , is revealed or open to us , but the manner of their hypostatical union is altogether hid . that these things are so , is plain and open to us ; but how they are so is altogether unintelligible . and this i think is no contradiction . enquiry . iii. what damages or advantages have ensued upon the changes and additions which latter ages have made in the gospel . there need little be said to this chapter , because i hope i have made it , in some measure , appear , that the doctrine of the trinity , and particularly of the divinity of our saviour , is no addition made to the gospel ; but is that which was first delivered by our saviour and his apostles : and therefore this supposition of the authour 's being false , whatever conclusions he draws from it , without any more ado , will fall of themselves . but because he has before reckoned the doctrine of the trinity among the papal corruptions , or , as he speaks , the athanasian among the romish doctrines ; and , by the tenour of his whole book , has been proving this doctrine an innovation , though he do not particularly mention it here , but only innovations in general : i shall therefore follow him in his method , and shew , that this doctrine has in no ways occasioned those damages and corruptions in the church , which he would seem to lay to its charge ; and which 't is apparent those papal doctrines he mentions have . he tells us there have ensued upon these changes and additions , i. damages . ii. advantages . the damages which have ensued he says are . 1. to our lord's honour . 2. to private christians . 3. to the christian church in general . the damages which he would have to proceed from these innovations to our lord's honour . first , because they make him capricious and humoursome , by commanding things to be believed without reason . secondly , because they hinder the progress of the gospel . now how far the romish corruptions deserve this censure , i shall not examine ; but i am afraid the authour will have a difficult task to prove this upon the orthodox doctrine of the trinity , or the divinity of our blessed saviour . i have before shewn , how unreasonable it is to expect we should be able to give an account of the true reason of all god's positive laws , and how impudent it is for men to refuse their obedience to them , because they do not understand those motives , that inclined his eternal wisdom to command them . it no ways follows , that he is a humoursome or capricious being , because we do not understand the reason of his commands ; because he may have reasons that lie far beyond the fathom of our finite understandings . a wise statesman , or a mathematician , is not therefore capricious and humoursome , because he does several things which the ignorant spectator can give no account of . and certainly god may have commanded us several things for our belief , which we cannot imagine how they should any ways conduce to our good and happiness , ye he himself may know it , as his providence does several things for our benefit , by means to us seemingly contrary . but besides we have proved , that the doctrine of our saviour's divinity is an admirable motive to our piety , and it were as easy to do the same , if it were not too long here , as to the divinity of the holy spirit . so that it is so far from capriciousness , that it shews the inexpressible wisdom of the deity , that every person of the blessed trinity should be particularly concerned in the salvation of mens souls in our creation , redemption and sanctification , and each of them should lay the strictest obligation upon us to piety . 2. neither does the doctrine of the trinity hinder the progress of the gospel , though the romish doctrines may . the idolatry of that church is an eternal bar to jews and mahometans , but the doctrine of the trinity is not such . we worship one god as well as they , and acknowledge only in that unity of essence , a trinity of persons , which was a truth the ancient jews had something of a notion of in their doctrine of the logos , or word , as appears from their rabbins , and other writers ; nor can we suppose , that the mahometans should so stand out against this truth , unless they had been prejudiced against it by their false prophet , whose interest it was to have it denied . but when ever it shall please god to call home the jews , and to bring in the fullness of the gentiles , this truth will be no obstacle to it , this divine mystery shall be believed in , and adored , when all the romish hay and stubble shall be burnt up . 2. he makes the damages which have proceeded from innovations , pernicious to private christians . first , by hindring godliness . secondly , inward joy and tranquillity of mind . now we have proved often enough , that the orthodox doctrine is so far from hindering piety , that it does extraordinarily improve it . if there happen what the authour mentions , too much eager disputing about it , then the fault is not in the doctrine , but in the undue managing of it ; if men have taken more care to contend for the faith , than against their lusts , and endeavoured more to confound hereticks , than to obey god's commands ; they are to answer for that themselves , but their faults are not to be charged upon this doctrine . so secondly , if the joy and tranquillity of the church has been disturbed by the defending of this doctrine , that is a thing purely accidental to it , it does not make it less true , because it has cost the orthodox so much pains to vindicate its truth against the fraud and violence of so many hereticks . whatever damages good men have suffered in this controversy , that is , to be charged upon those wicked hereticks that have denied this doctrine , and not upon the doctrine it self , or the defenders of it . thirdly , he makes these innovations prejudicial to the church of christ in its general capacity . but in the proof of this , he only tells us some stories of the slaughter of the albigenses , and waldenses , and the cruelty of the duke d' alva , &c. which have no relation at all to the doctrine of the trinity . he cannot say , that the orthodox , in the primitive times , butchered the hereticks , as the papists have done the protestants , and therefore the orthodox doctrine has nothing to answer for upon this account . ii. he then proceeds to shew the advantages which have accrued by the changes which latter ages have made in the gospel . but here is nothing offered , as to the doctrine of the trinity , nor which can any ways conclude against this , and therefore i shall spare my self and my reader , the trouble of saying much to this paragraph . he tells us here a great deal of the pope's merchandise , and by the honour and power which he has got , by pretending to be christ's vicar , and brings some sayings from the papists , that the pope is as much better than the emperour , as the sun than the moon ; that a priest is as much better than a king , as a man than a beast ; that catholick kings are asses with bells , &c. with some other proofs of the roman clergies aggrandizing themselves by their doctrines ; which would have done well enough in a controversy in the late reign , but are something impertinent in a book designed against the trinity . but what though the popish doctrines of pardons and indulgences , merits , &c. have for so many years kept up the apostolick chamber , though the doctrine of purgatory has gained them so many stately monasteries , tho' the pretended supremacy and infallibility of the pope has raised his authority so high , though transubstantiation and the being able , as they sometimes blasphemously call it , to make a god , has raised the esteem of their priests among the people ; yet the doctrine of the ever blessed trinity , never brought any advantage to the clergy , and therefore this can never be justly censured upon this account , as a humane invention , and the product of priestcraft , as those others justly are . the conclusion . and here the authours says , the end of all , what he has been saying , i suppose he means , is to determine between faith and love , to give unto faith the things that are faiths , and unto love the things that are loves . but i wish he had made his words good throughout his book , for that had saved me all this trouble , and the world all the mischief that his book has done . as to love he has not said much to that , but as for faith , he has given so little to that , that granting his principles , it would be hard to find such a christian vertue in the world. for all that belongs to faith he has given to reason , and what would not go down with his reason , he is resolved shall neither belong to faith nor reason , but shall pass for downright contradiction . but now at last for a parting blow , to shew how little faith is to be esteemed , especially in respect of love , he brings the opinion of our own church , that in her offices of baptism and visitation of the sick , declareth , that our faith is not to extend beyond the simplest of the creeds , and therefore if she says any thing elsewhere , that seems to contradict this , it is her charity , in becoming a papist to the papist , that by all means she might gain some of the papists . of the admirable charity of our church , i am very well convinced of , but i never heard of her hypocrisy before , or at least to have it commended too . and truly if what our authour would make us believe , be true , that she entertains the athanasian and nicene creeds , only in complaisance to the papists , when in reality she disbelieves them , she is guilty of the most abominable hypocrisy in the world. 't is true indeed , she uses the apostles creed only in those offices he speaks of , because they are the most ancient , and the shortest , and therefore the fittest for these occasions , but yet by the words of the apostles she understands the substance of what is contained in the other , which she looks upon as comments upon this . but however , to be sure her use of it in those offices , does not shew her to disbelieve the other creeds any more , than the use of the athanasian or nicene in the other offices of the prayer-book shews , that she disbelieves the apostles . one would have thought , that her using all three , did shew her belief of all three , for that i am sure is the more natural consequence , and not that her using one in one place , does shew that she does not believe the other two she uses in other places . well , but this may be in compliance with the papists that she uses them . but how does he prove that ? has he any 〈◊〉 , that the compilers of the common-prayer designed any such thing ? do the rubricks , canons , articles , or any other publick authority of the church say any thing like it ? till the authour could have found some such grounds to have gone upon , he had better have kept his foolish surmise to himself , and not so senslesly have taxed the best church in the world with such a wicked compliance . but what more ample satisfaction could our church have given to the world , of her believing these two creeds , and the injunction of the same to all her members , than by what she has done ? she recommends all the three creeds in her articles , and tells us , * they ought throughly to be believed : for they may be proved by most certain warrants from holy scripture . in her rubricks she has ordered the athanasian creed to be used upon all the great festivals of the year instead of the apostles , by which it is plain , she looks upon it , at least , an equivalent to it . and this is to be said by the minister , not as something declaratory to the people , but as something they do assent to , and in his words do they openly profess ; as appears by the rubricks , ordering the people to stand at this creed , as at the apostles , which is a token of their assenting to , and of their making an open profession of what is then read . now can we suppose , that the church should exact so solemn a profession of the faith contained in this creed , upon these great days , if she did not expect they should believe what they so solemnly profess ? if the authour can believe this , he should never tax the orthodox again with the absurdity of their faith. the nicene creed is ordered to be said every sunday and holiday , and in the communion service just before the receiving the blessed sacrament , if a sermon does not intervene , in the same manner the other creeds are recited . and can we suppose , that the church should oblige her members to make such an hypocritical confession , at a time when she supposes them to have the best thoughts , and the most pious resolutions , and to seal this their hypocrisy with no less than immediate perjury ? if she did do this , instead of being the best , she would be the most wicked church in the world , this one injunction would serve to set against forty romish corruptions ; but in truth the romanists had never forehead enough to object this against her , so that it seems the hereticks , upon occasion , can outdo the jesuits in this qualification ; for this authour , by this one calumny against the church , has said enough to silence all the lying slanders of the jesuits , down from sanders and parsons , to the little scriblers in the late reign . as to his saying ( speaking of the convocation last year ) that it will be a great disappointment to his majesty , and his good people , if such an opportunity prove fruitless , i cannot so well understand what he means ; if he means fruitless towards the incouraging his opinions , or for the taking away of these creeds ; i believe it was more than his majesty , or any of his good people ever thought of , or would have been satisfied with , if it had been done ; nor could any but the authour be so simple to imagine , that when the state , so lately , by an act of parliament , had excluded the anti-trinitarians , even from the benefit of toleration , that they should be let into the church by an act of convocation . the end . some reflections upon the naked gospel . as it is last published and owned , by d r bvry . since these papers were in the licensers hands , the bookseller told me , it would be expected , i should say something to the book dr. bury has since published , under his name , so much altered from what it was before . i do not think this is absolutely necessary to do in point of justice to the authour ; for i have not concerned my self at all , who was the authour of that book : i only took care to answer the false and heretical doctrines i found there , which were like to do any mischief in the world , which might still do harm enough , for all its authour's retractation . it is his first book that requires an answer , and not this last ; for that is such a poor toothless adder , the poison of which is so much drained out , that we may venture it any where without an antidote : indeed 't is easy still to discern here the tracts of the heresy in his former book , but now they appear so thin and discoloured , that the reader , whose gust lies the socinian way , will throw aside this insipid heterodoxy , for something of the same kind that is more substantial . here is still , for the most part , the old heretical body , with here and there an orthodox limb ; so that his book looks now like one of our old saxon idols , half man , and half monster . now whatever of his erroneous opinions he has altered , or retracted in this last book , i shall not concern my self with them at all ; and truly , i am glad he is come to own them to be such ; i shall only make a transient remark or two upon those places in this edition , where instead of recanting , he has multiplied his heterodoxies . but by the way , it will be worth while a little to consider the apology , the doctor makes for his first book , in his preface to this . he says this was drawn up against the sitting of the late convocation , at a time he had not patience to be silent in , to enlarge some of their minds with a more comprehensive charity , with an intention to communicate what , he had wrote to the members of that convocation , and therefore he penned it with less caution , than was necessary , for what was to be exposed to every vulgar eye . now is not this a pretty excuse after so long hammering out ? the doctor writes a socinian book , wherein he condemns the belief of nineteen parts in twenty of all the christians in the world , only to enlarge the minds of the convocation with a more comprehensive charity . this would have been a pretty piece of comprehensive charity indeed , to have damned all the members of the catholick church for so many ages , for worshipping a creature for god , out of pure tenderness to socinian consciences . well , but he penned it with less caution than if it had been to be exposed to every vulgar eye . now i should have thought it had been requisite to be more exact in composing what was to be viewed by the more judicious ; and that it had been a little too presuming to offer a parcel of uncorrected stuff to so learned an assembly . i am sure 't is but a course complement of the authour 's to those learned gentlemen , to write what was to be read by them at that rate , as he would not care should be view'd by every vulgar eye . but though we should let this excuse pass for some of his uncouth expressions , or little slips in his quotations and chronologies , &c. i am afraid it will never bear him out for all the premeditated heresy of his book . though he be ready to own , that there are some scattering sphalmata in that treatise , yet i believe he would be loth to have it thought one total and uniform erratum . are all his chapters about the socinian notions of faith nothing but slips in the penning ? are so many arguments against our saviour's eternal generation nothing else ? are all his scandalous reflections upon the doctrine of the trinity and the assertors of it , his malicious censures upon so many good and holy counsels only owing to the want of a little caution in the writing ? if this be so , 't is impossible to know any author's mistakes from his general design ; for if ▪ it was not the doctor 's design to invalidate the truth of christ's divinity , he designed nothing at all ; for there is not one chapter in his whole book , but some how or other , tends that way . but he designed , he says , only to communicate his book to the members of the convocation ; this is a very fine excuse indeed , to make that venerable body , whose business it was to detect and condemn all heresies , to become patrons to his : but however , this is but an usual piece of socinian confidence , not unlike that of the editor of the racovian catechism , who dared to dedicate so heretical a piece to so orthodox a member of the church , as king james the first . but , why this to the convocation ? whom of his stamp did he find there , that he could dare to communicate such a book to ? this is such an infamous scandal to those great representatives of our church , that he can never atone for ; to presume that ever they would steer their actions by the direction of such an heretical treatise as that . what would a foreigner upon reading this plea be apt to think of the members of that august assembly , that the doctor should design that book for their use , which the university as soon as detected , condemned to the fire ? but after all , what constat is there that he designed this to be handed only to those members ? which by the way can be no excuse neither ; for such a private handing to all the members of such a publick body gathered from all the different parts of the nation , is as effectual a spreading of his heresy as any publication whatsoever . but i say , what constat is there that he designed only this ? why , truly none at all , but only his saying so ; and how far his word will go in this matter , i cannot tell . 't is plain , the copies of his book were not essayed to be spread , till the lent after the convocation was broke up . the gentlemen in oxford to whom he delivered copies were not all members of that body ; and the 500 which * litchfield in his deposition said he printed , were more far than the number of which the convocation did consist . those copies which were sent to the bookseller , and afterwards upon the dislike of the book recalled , were not i presume all designed to be sold to convocation men. nay , if the good providence of god and the watchful care of some of our excellent governours in the university had not interposed , we might have had every yound lad in the university to have gotten one of these wicked books into his study . so that 't is ridiculous evasion , for the author to say in the title page of this edition , that the book is now first published by him ; for he published it , as much as he could , before he put the copies of it into the publishers hands , which was all he could do for his part ; and that they were stopped there , was owing to the intervention of other authority . and so much for the doctor 's excuses ; to pass by his saucy treating of the late convocation by the reproachful names of uncharitable , stubborn , stiff , &c. which is such billingsgate stuff , as is like calling whore first ; to fasten those ill names upon them to avoid , if he can , the deserved one of heretick upon himself . i now come to speak a word or two to the errors of this new edition : and those i think mostly lie within his * chapter of the trinity , which is the only new one in his book ; for all his others are but the old heresy pared away , and something better varnished over than before . and indeed in this chapter there is something new , for there is such an explication of the trinity , as no mortal ever heard before . here is a mixture of platonism , hobbism and sabellianism , with some other peculiar notions of the doctor 's own , jumbled together . quantum mutatus ab illo ! is this the author that has been declaiming so much against mysteries , and the explaining of mysteries , and has at last stuffed us out a chapter with so much mystical jargon ? but after all , this second notion of the doctor 's is no farther distant from socinianism , than a trinominal deity is different from him that is personally one , without such nominal distinction ; or just so much as the doctrine of sabellius differed from that of samosetanus or photinus . now the first thing that the doctor does to advance this notion , is to be angry with the terms 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , substance and person . he says , † it was proposed in the council of alexandria , that all persons should forbear those terms ; tho' i do not find any such thing was proposed there . there were indeed some rules given for caution in using them ; because they said the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was not used in scripture ; and the apostle used the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 upon necessity of his matter ; but otherways , they ‖ decreed that these words were to be admitted because they do explode the opinion of sabellius ; that we may not through want of words call god under three names , but that every name of the trinity should signify god under a distinct or proper person 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . and what other use do we desire to make of them than this ? indeed we will allow the doctor , that some of his celebrated councils in his other book , to have done as much as he would have this council to have done , or more . his good council of sirmium * published an impious or atheistical exposition of faith , which forbid nature or essence to be predicated of god ; and the famous council of † ariminum did the like . next , he is much displeased that the latin schools have over-translated the first of these terms 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , by rendring it substance , which bears too great a cognation with matter . but whatever substance signifies in its primitive acceptation is no matter at all here ; it is enough if we understand what is meant by it in its philosophical or divine sense . we know as well the precise signification of a word used metaphorically , when we know 't is used so , as we do when it is used properly ; so that 't is a silly exception against this word , to say it is metaphorical ; for unless some words were to be used metaphorically , ten times as many words as we have , would not serve us . but if the latins mean the same by substance as the greeks do by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , where is all the harm that is done then ? now the only way of knowing the sense of words is by their definitions ; and both the latins and the greeks define the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and substantia alike , and therefore they must have the same signification . aquinas * defines substance to be a thing which has a being , by which it is by its self , and is neither in a subject nor is predicated of a subject , and * cyril defines a substance or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , a thing that subsists by its self , which wanteth not any thing else to its constitution or subsistence ; and so ‖ suidas to the same purpose . so that if the latins and the greeks , understand the same thing , as 't is plain by these definitions that they do , then there is no injury done by rendring 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by substantia . so again , i can see no harm in translating the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by persona , if the same thing be understood by both words , as 't is plain the later authors in both languages do understand . indeed the latins at first , did very much except against the word hypostasis as the greeks used it , because they generally translated that word by substantia , ( who * by the scantiness of their language , could not distinguish hypostasis from essence or substance ) and not by persona or substantia ; and therefore to assert three hypostasis , was the same with them as to make three gods. now this mistake indeed about the sense of the word , did occasion some contention for a while , till the council of alexandria was celebrated in the year 372 , and then they came to a right understanding , and † ever after , both latins and greeks used the word alike . indeed the arians did always except against the word hypostasis , as acacius ‖ and his faction in the council of constantinople , and the eusebians in the synods of * ariminum and seleucia ; but that i hope will be no prejudice against it , for they excepted against the word and the sense of it too . so that we have no reason to quarrel with these terms which serve so excellently to express these divine truths of this holy mystery : we only ought to take care to understand and them aright , which is easy enough to do by their so long and constant use in the church ; and not to run off from these to any new whimsical explications . next the doctor sets to work to his exposition of the trinity , which because he will not have it be mysterious , he is resolved to have it demonstrable by the light of nature ; for he says , the light of nature doth demonstrate what st. john affirmeth , there are three persons that bear witness , &c. there are a great many in the world that the doctor would oblige with a little of this demonstration ; but whatever we may expect from him hereafter , since this wonderful illumination ; i am sure , what he has given us in this chapter , is far enough from it . he tells us , that the three persons in the trinity are mind , reason , and power ; the reason , or the logos is begotten or conceived of the mind , the father , both which are imperfect , unless perfected by power , or action , which is the holy-ghost . now , is this the explication that agrees to a syllable , both to the holy scripture , and the church of england ? is this the putting the old materials into a new and better frame , which he so boasts of ? they are old materials indeed , as old as sabellius and the other hereticks of his stamp , but neither older nor newer than their heresies . for , i pray , what difference is there between sabellius's explication of the trinity and the doctor 's ? the * sabellians taught , that the father , son , and holy-ghost were the same ; so that there were three names in one person ; and as in a man there is body , soul , and spirit or mind , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . so the body is , as it were , the father ; the soul , the son ; and that which is the spirit in man , is the holy-ghost in the deity . all the difference between these two notions of the trinity , is , that sabellius's inclines a little more to the epicurean , and the doctor 's to the platonick philosophy ; but both of them are far enough from truth and scripture . nay , the doctor 's explication is the more sabellian of the two , because his distinction of the persons is the more nominal ; for body , soul , and spirit , are more distinct than mind , reason , and operation . so that by striving to avoid sabellianism , as he pretends , he has out-done sabellius himself in his own heresie . but , after all , what can we make of our author's trinity , which any vnitarian will not agree to ! mind , reason , and action — why , are not all these in every man , and every rational being , as well as in god ; and i hope he will not make as many trinities as there are intelligent beings . besides , mind , reason , and energy or action , are but divers modus of the same thing . mind , is the rational principle , simply considered ; reason , is the same soul , considered discursive or reasoning ; and action or energy , is the soul putting the determination of such reasoning into act : but still these are but distinct modus's of the same soul. but what are these to three distinct persons in one essence ? there every person is , by a proper personal difference , distinguished from each other , not by any particular modality , but by a true and real subsistence . but when the doctor makes the son to be only reason , he can only make him an accident , or at best but a modality of the father . for if he only be the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , or what answers to it , the internal conception of the father's mind , he would be only an accident , or attribute , or mode , or what else you 'll please to call it , but would be far enough from that which the church has all along called a person . and therefore the learned fathers in the church have been always careful , to distinguish between this * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , between the prolative , or enunciative word , and the essential and substantial one . for the son is not therefore called the word , because he is the reason of the divine mind , or the father , but because he is generated of the father † without passion . for they explained this generation by the production of a thought or word , which was not produced by ‖ division or separation of parts , which implies passion ; but in a certain manner incommunicable to all corporeal beings . so when the doctor makes the holy ghost to be only the power , or energy , or action of god , what is this more than what the socinians contend for , and the samosetanians and followers of simon magus were condemned for ? nazianzen says , that * the simonians thought the holy spirit was only an energy ; and leontius tells us , † that paulus samosetanus held the like . besides , if the holy ghost be only an action , with what propriety of speech can he be said to act or do ? with what tolerable sense can an action be said to speak ? and the spirit said unto peter , act. 10. 20. the holy ghost said uno them at antioch , act. 13. how can an action or energy be said to search all things , to make intercession for us , to divide to every man severally as he will , to reprove the world , to guide us into all truth ? 't is the nature of an action ‖ to be acted , but it can in no propriety be said it self to act . but the doctor says , this doctrine is stated by the * fathers , as he has done it . i hope , by his fathers , he does not mean such as the ministers of alba julia † call so , the famous fathers berillus , samosetanus , photinus , &c. and indeed some of these we have shewn to have explained the trinity something at this rate , but none of the orthodox ones , that i know of , say any thing like it . but he says , st. austin , the oracle of the schoolmen , states it thus , whom dr. sherlock follows , in his book of the trinity . i know st. austin in his books de trinitate ( if he means those ) has a great many strange platonick notions , which i confess i do not understand , and which perhaps st. austin himself had no clear conceptions of when he wrote them ; but however there is enough in those books to shew , that st. austin never designed such a nominal distinction in the trinity , as this authour does . what dr. sherlock says on this matter , i have not time now to consult ; though when i read his book , i don't remember he gave any countenance to this opinion ; nay , on the contrary , some have been displeased * with that learned doctor , for making too great a distinction between the persons of the trinity ; not for making them three names , or modus's , as our doctor does , but for making them three distinct minds or spirits , which are one by mutual consciousness . but what though these great men should speak more nicely than ordinary of these mysteries , though they should wade deeper into them than other men , the great genius's of these admirable persons , and the strength of their natural reason will help to bear them out ; but i would advise our authour to a little more cautiousness ; he poor gentleman may be out of his depth before he is aware , and therefore i am sure 't is his best way to keep within the ordinary compass . finis . a short history of socinianism . the heretical persuasion of our blessed saviour's being only mere man , and the consequent doctrines which ensue thereupon , have , of late years , been called socinianism ; from the two socinus's , the most famous inventors and propagators of this doctrine , in the last age : for though the heresie it self , as to some parts of it , was much older , yet it had been altogether unknown for many ages , till by the books of servet , the socinus's , and some other hereticks in the last age , it was revived . the first that set up this damnable doctrine , was the heretick cerinthus , who lived in the apostlick times , and was contemporary with st. john the evangelist . he asserted , a that jesus was mere man as others were , and that he did not excell the rest in justice , or wisdom , or prudence . the confutation of this heresie b was a special motive to st. john to write his gospel , or at least to be more express than the rest of the evangelists , in asserting our lord's divinity . ebion , the scholar of cerinthus , c followed after his master in this heresie , and propagated his doctrines in asia , cyprus , rome , and elsewhere ; he asserted , that christ was but [ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ] d pure man , [ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ] only common and mere man. this heresie , in the second age , was propagated by one theodotus scytes , or the currier , who taught likewise , that christ was [ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ] e mere man ; and was excommunicated by victor bishop of rome f for this blasphemy . artemon followed theodotus , who said , g that christ was mere man , only more excellent in vertue or power [ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ] than the prophets . against this artemon there was a famous book wrote , which h eusebius mentions , in which it was proved , that the ancient christians did not believe his doctrine as he pretended ; and , in which the authorities of justin martyr , miltiades , tatian , clemens , are brought to confute him . sixty years after his death , i in the third age , about the year 270 , paulus samosetanus disseminated this doctrine ; and asserted , k that christ had only the common nature of man. he was condemned in the council at antioch 272. much about this time , or somewhat before , sabellius broached his heresie , not much unlike the rest of these ; he held , l that there was but one person in the deity , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , under three names , which does , in effect , ( as l st. basil says upon this account ) deny christ's divinity . arius who followed after , and made such a noise in the world with his heresie , whatever his thoughts might be , yet he did not expressly assert christ to be mere man ; but only to be a creature produced in time ; yet one that had a being long before his conception in the womb of the virgin : and therefore he cannot so properly come into the list of these hereticks . but soon after the nicene determinations against arius , photinus , one of the old cerinthian race , starts up , who was bishop of sirmium , and asserts again , that christ was mere man , and m had no being before the ages , and , n that he , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , had his sole beginning from the time he was conceived in the virgin 's womb. these were the chief propugners of this heresie in the primitive times , there being none of any considerable note after these ; for then almost all the heresies ran into arianism , nestorianism , eutychianism , &c. the prevailing heresies of the succeeding ages : and indeed this heresie seemed to be quite lost , till petrus abelardus , in the twelfth century , did revive it . he , about the year 1140 , was a famous philosopher and divine , and professor at paris ; he asserted o that he could comprehend the godhead with humane reason , totum id quod deus est humanà ratione comprehendere ; p and wrote such things of the trinity , of the generation of the son , and the procession of the holy ghost , and innumerable things of the like nature , as were unheard of , by catholick ears : he affirmed , q the holy-ghost not to be of the essence of the father , and denied r original sin , and ſ the satisfaction of christ . which are all the true characteristicks of the socinian heresie . these were the most remarkable of this sort of vnitarian hereticks till the time of the reformation : and the first then that stood up for this heterodoxy was michael servetus a spaniard , by profession a physician , who having travelled into africa , and being instructed in the principles of mahometanism , t set up for the vnitarian doctrine in europe . he in the year 1531 , published his book , entituled , lib. 7. de error . trinitatis , which was printed at basil . this book was filled with innumerable blasphemies and impious mockeries upon the holy trinity ; upon which account most of the copies of it were soon after publickly burnt at frankford . but notwithstanding this , they were privately handed about , so that many that were inclinable to a separation from the romish errours , were poysoned by this book into worse . and therefore philip melanchton u writes a letter from lipsick , 1539. to have the senate of venice put in mind of suppressing his heresy . but servet in the mean time uses all imaginable diligence , to disseminate his doctrines ; and to this end , goes from place to place , practising physick under the feigned name of michael villonovanus ; when he wrote a book of syrops , and as munster says , a comment on ptolemies geography . he afterwards wrote some other heretical pieces alike blasphemous with the other ; as one entituled , a dialogue de restitutione christianismi , quoted by bullinger , an apology to melanchton and the ministers of geneva , calvin , &c. in which books calvin in his confutation , says , plus centum , &c. he more than a hundred times over , calls the holy trinity , the three headed cerberus , a diabolical phantasm , the monster gerion , the illusion of satan , &c. his book of the restitution of christianity , which was a large volume , he published at vienna allobrogum , where for the same , he was cast into prison ; but he escaped from thence to geneva , where he was discovered , and afterwards condemned and burned in the year 1568. by the desire of the evangelick cantons . the next follower of servetus , and the fore-runner of socinus , was valentinus gentilis , born at consenza in italy , who agreed with servetus in his doctrine , that the father was the only divine essence ; but asserted that the son was essentiated by him , and made another god , as likewise the holy ghost : so that there were not three persons in one essence , but three distinct essences in the god-head , or rather one primary god , and two secundary or deisied ones . these blasphemies he having for some time vented in the world , particularly at geneva , he was by the magistrates of that city thrown into prison , where not having staid long , he of his own accord , promises amendment , recants his errors , and desires to be freed . but the magistrates resolved not to free him , unless he will undergo the pennance they prescribe him , which accordingly he did , y to be stripped to his shirt , and barefooted and bareheaded to kneel down and beg pardon for his crimes , and with his own hands to throw his heretical writings into the fire , to be prepared for that purpose , and in this habit to be led through all the streets of the city , declaring his repentance before all the people . this having performed , he petitions again for his enlargement , which would not ye be granted , unless he would swear not only to forbear the spreading of his heresy , but that he would never go out of the city without leave from the senate . and this too he readily did . but no sooner was he freed , but he little valuing his oath , flies from geneva to his friend gribaldus , living at a place called farges in the canton of bern ; where he had conference with alciat a famous vnitarian in order to the spreading their heresy . from thence he went to lyons to diffuse his doctrine there ; from thence to grenoble ; from thence to cambray , and so to farges again ; where the governour of gaia , to whose jurisdiction farges does belong , imprisons him again ; but upon promise of living quietly , releases him . from thence he goes again to lyons , and was there imprisoned a third time by the governour of that city ; but he perswading the papists there , that his controversy was only against calvin ; they thinking thereby to do calvin a spight , forthwith release him . afterwards , he having spread his poyson in france and italy , flies to poland , where he joyns with blandrata and alciat to infect the polish church . here not having staid more than two years , these heresiarcks fall out among themselves ; blandrata turning down-right arian , and alciat , mahometan ; so gentilis passes to moravia , and strikes in for some time with the anabaptists there , from thence he goes for austria , and afterwards for savoy ; and so roving from place to place , and disseminating his blasphemies , he came at last again into the province of bern , where being discovered , he was tried for several blasphemous positions there and being convicted , was executed , persisting in his heresy to the very last ; blasphemare simul & vivere desiit . georgius blandrata , who was another zealous vnitarian about this time , was a physician by profession , and propagated his doctrines at geneva , where he had several disputes with calvin , in whose work is extant responsum ad quaestiones blandratae ; but he flew from thence presently after gentilis did , suspecting that the magistrates had a design against him too . from thence he went and practised physick in poland and transylvania , thereby to have the better covert for his heresy ; and the more easily to instill it into persons of the highest quality . he wrote a book in answer to georgius major , against the trinity , full of blasphemous expressions , such as symbolorum de patre & filio figmenta , deum confusum & tripersonatum , ex tribus personis compositum ; and calls the orthodox tritheites , and athanasius , tritheitarum antesignanum . he got a great sum of money by his practice in the polish court , but was at last , as a signal example of god's vengeance , a murdered in his bed by his nephew , whom he designed to make his heir . paulus alicatus , who was the intimate friend of blandrata , and a busy vnitarian of this time , was born at millain a souldier by profession , a man of fiery zeal for his opinions , as appears by those blasphemous expressions he used against the trinity . for calvin relates that he was wont to say , that we worshipped in our trinity three devils , worse than all the idols of the papists . so that the divine judgment was very remarkable , in suffering him to fall away into the mahometan infidelity after so great impiety . franciscus stancarus , a mantuan , was now likewise a violent asserter of the same kind of heresy ; who tho' he began his heterodoxy at first , by denying only christ's mediatorship as to his divine nature , yet he proceeded at last to deny the persons of the trinity , and with sabellius to make god only 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , one person under three names . he was , as zanchius says , a learned man , but only unquiet and proud , and too curious , which lead him into these errors . franciscus lismaninus , was another heretick of this time of the same stamp , he was doctor of divinity , and formerly a franciscan monk , who after a pertinacious spreading of his opinions , died mad . bernardus ochinus , was another promoter of the anti-trinitarian doctrine ; who , as f beza says of him , was something cunninger than the rest of the vnitarians , and like the academicks , would seem rather to doubt of , than to define any thing . for in his dialogues against the trinity , he makes his other collocutor to oppose the trinity , and himself to defend it ; tho' by such mean arguments , as always gave away the victory to his antagonist : he was a favourer of polygamy too , as appears by his 21 dialogue ; which has this title thus made up of mirth and prophaneness ; to all husbands that complain of their wives , and all wives that complain of their husbands , bernardus ochinus wishes patience in christ jesus . in which dialogue , he lets his antagonist , telipolygamus , strenuously make good his point against himself . franciscus davidis , was another very famous one of these hereticks , who assisted blandrata in his book against major ; he was superintendent or bishop , as sandius says , of the vnitarians in transylvania ; but tho' he agreed with the rest of the vnitarians in denying the divinity of our saviour , yet he dissented from most of them about the invocation of him , and did to his death maintain , that as he was not god , so he was not to be worshipped . there were besides these several others , that were fore-runners to socinus , or else contemporaries with him , who did not agree to all the system of his heresy , which now the vnitarians do generally maintain . such as were nicolaus parula an italian , a great friend of laelius socinus ; andreas tricicius modrevius , a polish knight ; adam pastor , who had several disputes with the anabaptists ; gregorius paulus , who was first a h tritheite , and afterwards an vnitarian ; petrus statorius , formerly beza's scholar ; paulus latomirskius , and simon budnaeus a violent man afterwards in the anti-adoration faction ; with several others i . but however , these at best were but labourers or coadjutors in the building up the socinian heresy ; but the two great master-builders were laelius and faustus socinus , of whom now we come to speak . laelius socinus , k was born a. d. 1525. at siena in tuscany of a noble family ; his fathers names was marianus junior , a famous lawyer in italy at that time ; his mothers name was camilla , the daughter of paulus salvettus . he was an auditor of servetus when he was in italy , and before he was of age , he began to model a new system of divinity upon the vnitarian principles . he as the * author of the life , says , l reading the scriptures chiefly to further him in the study of the laws , and relying only upon his own judgment , finds many of the doctrines of the church contrary to the divine testimony , as he thought , and therefore explains them , without farther search , according to his own judgment . he , having thus for a considerable time been laying the grounds of his heresie , travelling into england , france , holland , germany , he fixed his seat , at last , at zurick in helvetia ; yet not so , but that after this he goes twice into poland , a. d. 1551 , and again 1557 ; where he infected many of the polish nobility . he infected also his own brothers celsus , cornelius , and camillus , and faustus his brother alexander's son. and zanchius in his preface to his book de tribus elohim , further says , he , for many years pursued the samosetanian heresie , and drew as many as he could into the same errour , and those were not a few : he endeavoured likewise by many temptations to pervert me into the same errour , and to involve me in the same eternal destruction with himself . whilst he lived at zurick , or in his travels , he contracted some familiarity with melancton , brentius , musculus , bullinger , and calvin ; and therefore calvin , when he heard of his audacious curiosity in divinity , wrote to him , to dissuade him from it , si tibi per aëreas illas speculationes volitare libet , sine me quaeso humilem christi discipulum ea meditari quae ad fidei meae aedificationem faciunt . you may , if you please , fly through these aereal speculations , but suffer me , an humble disciple of christ , to meditate upon those things which serve to the edification of my faith. and now so many of the family of the socinus's being perverted by laelius , the whole family began to be suspected for heresie ; which brought a storm upon all the house ; so that , as the authour of the life says , the harvest was spoil'd in the springing blade , cornelius being imprisoned , and the rest being either forced to fly , or afraid to profess their opinion . this fear drove young faustus , being now but twenty years old , not only from his place of abode but from italy ; who went to live for some time at lyons in france , in the same year , in which the magistrates of basil digged up the body of david george , after he had been dead three years , and burned it . laelius continued still to study at zurick , till he died , which was in the year 1562. on the 16th . of may. he was the first that brought to light that notion of the person of christ , and his sufferings , &c. which the socinians do since maintain , and was forming some great designs for the furthering his heresie , but did not live to perfect them . the only books that he published , were the dialogue between calvin and vaticanus , against the persecution of hereticks upon the occasion of servet's execution , in which he makes calvin a great instrument : which book was reprinted in holland , by some of the remonstrant party 1612. and has commonly been attributed to castellio ; though 't is apparent it is not castellio's by the reflection that is made upon his translation of the scripture . he wrote likewise a treatise of the sacraments , and a book de resurrectione corporum , published by crucellaeus . whatever other designs he had projected , and whatever books he wrote fell into his nephew faustus's hands ; who made all the possible haste he could to zurick , to secure his books and papers , fearing least it should fare with laelius , as it had done before with david george . faustus socinus , the nephew of laelius , was the son of alexander socinus , and of agnes , the daughter of burgesius petruccius prince of siena ; by which he was related to three popes , pius ii. and iii. and paul v. he was born december 5. 1539. at siena , being but fourteen years younger than his uncle : and he being now dead , and faustus having gotten his books and papers into his hands , he returns into italy , being now at the age of twenty three years , and spends twelve years in the court of the duke of florence . and now whilst faustus kept close in italy , the vnitarian cause was carried on by others , and not a little by castellio , by publishing to the world ochinus's dialogues ; of which faustus socinus says , * his sense of our saviour christ was plainly expressed and inculcated ; though castellio , in his defence , said , he only published them as a translator , being wont to get his livelihood by translating books . neither were the vnitarians themselves wanting to carry on their design ; for in the year 1566 , there was a book printed at alba julia , with this title , demonstratio falsitatis docrina pauli melii , & reliquorum sophistarum , per antitheses , unà cum refutatione veri & turcici christi . and afterwards another , entitled , de falsâ & verâ unius dei , pat. fil. & sp. sanct. cognitione , supposed to be wrote by laelius socinus , though sandius denies it , from the difference of the style , &c. and about the same time , jacobus acontius published his book , call'd satane stratagemata , which did considerable service to the vnitarians . in the year 1568 , there came out a book , set out by the ministers and seniors of the consenting churches in transylvania , de mediatoris jesus christi hominis divinitate aequalitatéque ; in which , speaking of the trinity , they say , the three-one god of antichrist is buried , and say , it was wickedly done of the roman church to condemn those famous fathers berillus , samosetanus , arius , donatus , helvidius . artemon , &c. and in the year 1569 , they publish another , of the kingdom of christ and anti-christ , with a treatise of paedo baptism and circumcision ; the conclusion of which book is this , whosoever does truly believe that the pope is anti-christ , does truly believe that the trinity , and infant baptism , and the other sacraments of the papists , are the doctrines of devils . the next year , being the year 1570 , faustus socinus published his first book of the authority of the holy scripture , in italian , afterwards turned by himself into latin , and set out under the name of dominicus lopez , at sevil , 1588. and again set out by vorstius at steinfort , 1611. in which book says a * learned man , instead of making good the scripture's authority against atheists , he weakens it among christians . in the year 1574 , he leave the duke's court , and comes to live at basil , where he spends three years in furbishing up that model of divinity , which was left him by his uncle laelius ; for he himself , by his own confession , was able then to add but little to them . for in his answer to the defence of puccius , he says , he understood not much of ‖ greek , and but little or nothing of hebrew . and indeed , forterus's lexicon was his whole treasure of hebrew knowledge , which he was forced to recur to , upon all occasions , his knowledge in logick was but small at best , and he had wrote † several of his books before he had any knowledge at all of it . in the year , 1577. he published his disputation de jesu christo servatore , which he had with jacoc●bus covetus , pastor of the french church at basil . and in the year 1578. he published another disputation , of the state of the first man before the fall , against francisus puccius . in his book de christo servatore , he revived first of the modern vnitarians , abelardus's heresie of the redemption and satisfaction of christ ; making the merits of christ to be purely exemplary . in the year 1578. he sets out castellio's dialogues of predestination , election , free-will , and faith , and writes a preface to them , under the feigned name of faelix turpio vrbevetanus . his explication of the first of st. john , was wrote about the year 1562. as he himself says * ; though not published till afterwards . in the year 158● . he sets out his synopsis of justification ; from which the remonstrants since have borrowed so much . but in this year there happened the great schism among the vnitarians , concerning the adoration of christ ; especially between blandrata and franciscus davidis ; the ministers of alba julia siding with the one , and those of claudiopolis or clausburg with the other . upon this , blandrata invites socinus into poland , to be moderator in this difference , and gets socinus to lodge in the same house with fr. davidis blandrat , during his stay , bearing all his expences . so that within a few months afterwards followed that famous conference held at clausburgh , concerning the invocation of christ , which was afterwards printed in the year 1594. after the end of which conference , franciscus davidis being very stiff in his opinion , and his antagonists exaggerating the wickedness of it , he was forthwith imprisoned by order of the prince of transylvania , and afterwards in a few months was either made away there , or died . from hence was raised a great clamour by the anti-adoration party against socinus and blandrata , that they had been the authours of this persecution , which was so much credited , that they lost their esteem with many . this forced socinus to write an apology to the transylvanians , the followers of franciscus davidis , to shew that franciscus drew this calamity upon himself , that contrary to his promise given to him and blandrat , he had procured several things in the synod of thord , to be decreed against the invocation of christ ; and once , when he preached in the great church , he expresly asserted , that it was the same thing to pray to christ , as to pray to the virgin mary , or any other of the dead saints . after the death of franciscus davidis the anti-invocation party in transylvania were not quiet , but did resolutely maintain , that as christ by nature was not god , so without idolatry he could not be worshipped ; and for this side of the controversie there appeared strenuously franciscus davidis's son , palaeologus , glirius , sommerus , and others , who in their books and discourses did grievously accuse socinus and blandrata . socinus not being easie under all these contradictions and accusations , forthwith leaves transylvania , and being now 40 years old , goes for poland , and there joyns himself to the congregation of them , that following servet , do pray to christ as the son of the eternal god , but not the eternal son ; who , as * socinus says , in poland , and in the great dukedom of lithuania , are called arians and ebionites . and here he formed the remaining part of his heresie , which differs so much from that of the other vnitarians before socinus . for whereas servetus and his followers were content only to destroy the doctrine of the trinity , and to retain the other points of religion , he was for innovating in all , and in a strict sence , for teaching another gospel . thus he taught that the principle and foundation of faith was in a man of himself , soc. tract . de just . that justified persons are in a state of unsinning perfection , syn. 2. de just . & dial. de just . p. 14. that mortality was necessary to man if he had not sinned , part. 3. de serv. chris . c. viij . that adam had not the promise of eternal life , nor could he avoid his fall , resp . ad def . pucc . de prim . hom. stat & lib. suas . quod regn . pol. &c. p. 56. that christ was a new legislatour , and gave moral laws , which were not so before , de offic. chr. p. 4. de conv. & diff. v. & n. test . p. 33. that christ abrogated all the judicial precepts of the law , as well as the ceremonial , de off chr. p. 5. that notorious offenders are not to be punished with death , ibid. that the lord's supper is not a conveyance of grace , but only an act of commemoration , tract . de . coen . dom. that baptism is not necessary for christians , that it was a rite only of john and not of christ , de bapt. aq. c. xvi . that it is a thing indifferent whether children be baptized or no , or any other , that it is not a sin if they be , but it ought not to be enjoined , ibid. cap. 17. that the messias was not promised to all the jews , frag. de justif . jux . fin . nor were they at all obliged to believe that the messias should come , ibid. that christ did not suffer and die for us , to rescue us from punishment , but only to shew us an example how we ought to suffer for righteousness sake , rel. chr. brev . inst . p. 87 , 88. & brev . disc . de rat . sal. p. 15. that christ was called our saviour , because he manifested the terms of salvation to us , de chr. serv. c. 1 , & 5. that he is called a mediatour , not because he reconciles god and us , but because he was embassadour from god to us , to reveal his will , rel. chr. inst . p. 85. that christ ascended up into heaven , before he entered upon his prophetick office , to be informed of god's will , and therefore in scripture when 't is said christ came down from heaven , 't is to be meant of his descent after this ascension , rel. chr. inst . p. 127. in disp . cum erasm . joh. christ was not god before his glorification , which was after the ascension , and then he was so only by office and immortality , anti-wiek . cap. 6. rel. christ . inst . p. 25. that christ was mere man , and the holy ghost only an attribute , ibid. these and many more are the heterodoxes of his books , which the socinians do at this day maintain , and others there are which are more covertly delivered in socinus's books , though more expresly asserted by his followers ; such as the denying an eternity of torments , and the rising again with the same bodies , the hints of which also they took from socinus ; so that in him , was in a manner wholly perfected the heresie which does still go under his name . 't is true , the anti-adoration faction , who were the followers of franciscus davidis and symon budnaeus , did a long time stifly oppose him , but in the synod of brest in the confines of transylvania , he so cunningly managed the matter , that though he chiefly pretended a dispute for the adoration , he brought the adverse party to receive his notions of the death and sacrifice of christ , of justification , and of the corruption of mens nature , which they had lately condemned . afterwards he drew over to his opinion the famous vnitarian petrus statorius , a man of a great popular eloquence , who made socinus's doctrines go down more easily with the people by his pulpit harangues . he himself too , by a strange artifice , brought over to his heresy , every day , many of the better quality , several the courtiers and nobility that happened to abide at lubernick , and several of the younger clergy , that were not well grounded in their religion . and none of the vnitarians , after a while , objected against this new mode of socinus , but only nemojevicius , and czechovicius , who resisted him strenuously for a time , and nemojevicius , after a while too , assented to him , and czechovicius , though he held out to the last , seeing no body to abett him , was forced to be still . so that within four years time , all the whole church of the vnitarians , did subscribe to the doctrines of socinus , which they had so lately almost universally condemned . thus was this heresy perfected , after so many struglings among the vnitarians themselves , which is swallowed down so crudely , and without consideration , by many in our ages , that make pretence to the greatest reason and cautiousness . socinus lived several years after the general reception of his doctrines , and died in the year 1604. the other vnitarians that have been famous since faustus socinus , have been but as the schoolmen to lumbard , have commented only upon his text , and only more audaciously sometimes explained his notions . the first vnitarian of note , after socinus had formed his heresy , was georgius enjedinus , an hungarian , superintendant of the socinian churches in transylvania , and moderator of the gymnasium at clausburg . he was a follower of socinus in most of his doctrines , only in the matter of invocation , which socinus endeavours to disswade him from , in a long letter to him a. d. 1596. he wrote the celebrated socinian piece upon the texts of the old and new testament , upon which the trinity is grounded , though the other tracts attributed to him are doubted . ostorodus was another disciple of socinus ; he was a saxon by birth , the son of a lutheran minister ; he was master of a school for some time in pomerania , but being found to be heretical in his principles , he was deprived of that , and so in the year 1585. he came into poland , where he was some time minister of the vnitarian church of g●dan . his most famous piece is his institutions which he wrote in dutch. next was johannes volkelius born in the province of misnia in saxony . his chiefest piece is his five books de verâ religione , or his institutions of socinianism , which was excellently answered by maresius . ernestus sonerus , a norimberg physician , professor of natural philosophy and medicine at altorf , he was the master of crellius . he wrote the famous heretical piece against the eternity of hell torments , entituled demonstratio theolog. & philosophica , quod aeterna impiorum supplicia non arguant dei justitiam , sed injustitiam . he died 1612. valentinus smaltzius , by birth a saxon , of the province of thuring , rector of the school of smigla , afterwards of lublin , and at last minister of the congregation of racow , born a. d. 1572. he was most famous for his two pieces , the one de divinitate jesus christi , in which he took away our lords true divinity , and gave him a metaphorical one , such as the old divi were supposed to have , after their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 : the other the racovin catechism , in which he had the chiefest hand , though assisted somewhat by moscorovius , and by the catechism put out before by sacinus and statorius . this was wrote first in polish , and printed at racow , 1605. which afterwards moscorovius translated into latin , and had the confidence to dedicate it to king james i. an. 1612. his chiefest adversaries were smiglecius , and frantzius , and schopperus . he died , crellius says , 4 decem. 1622. johannes crellius , born at helmetzhelm in ...... 1590. he was first rector of the school at racow , and afterwards minister of the congregation . his life may be seen , as it is wrote by joachimus pastorius , and bound up among the fratres poloni . he is most famous , besides for his comments on scripture , for his book de uno deo patre , answered by bisterfield . his book of satisfaction , in answer to grotius , which was since admirably answered by the bishop of worcester . he died 1633. samuel przipcovicius , a polish knight , born about the year 1590. and died 1670. he wrote several pieces which were never published , vid sand. biblioth . but the most famous piece is the life of faustus socinus . there is attributed to him a celebrated piece , printed at eleutheropolis 1630. anonymi dissertatio de pace ecclesiae , thought at that time to be wrote by simon episcopius , professor of the remonstrants in holland . jonas slichtingius , a bukowiec , a polish knight , was the next socinian of note , his most famous pieces are , his confession of faith , and his book of the trinity and the sacraments , against meisnerus , besides his comments in the fratres poloni . he died at zelichow in the dutchy of brandenburg , 1661. johannes lodovicus wolzogenius , was another late famous socinian ; he was a nobleman in austria , but turning protestant , he left his country , and setled in poland , where , after a time , he embraced the doctrines of socinus . his works are many , the most considerable of which are bound up with the fratres poloni . he died 1658. florianus crusius , a physician , petrus morscovius , and andreas wissowatius , were famous socinians likewise at the same time . the socinian doctrines had hitherto contained themselves within poland and transylvania , and there was only some little colony of them lurking among the remonstrants in holland , but other parts of the world were generally free from this infection , especially our nation , till in the time of the late rebellion and usurpation it became the sink of all heresies . and then john bidel , master of arts of the university of oxford ▪ brought in this heresy here , and held a congregation of socinians in london . he wrote two socinian catechisms , a large one , and a shorter for the use of the more ignorant ; which were translated into latin by a young scholar of his , one nathaniel stuckey ▪ the son of one mr. stuckey a cloathworker in london . he wrote likewise a treatise against the diety of the holy ghost , wherein he does not follow socinus in making him only an attribute , but a person , and one of the higher rank of angels . there were several books of the socinian stamp published about that time , by some of the other sectaries , as one against the eternity of torments , entituled , the twelve pillars of hell torments shaken , &c. and some other papers of the same nature sent abroad , which occasioned dr. hammond to write his excellent treatise of hell torments . soon after this , in the year 1658. came out the edict of john casimire , king of poland , against the socinians , wherein he ordered the statute of his predecessour vdislaus to be revived , and put in 〈◊〉 force against the vnitarians ; that no one , under pain of death ▪ should teach of profess that religion : but if any one would continue in that communion , they must within three years leave 〈…〉 , which time should be allowed to dispose of their effects 〈◊〉 possessions . but for some considerations or other this time was shortened , and in the year 1660. they who would not renounce their heresy , were forced to leave poland and lithuania , which accordingly many did , and setled , some in prussia , some in silesia , others in the marquisate of brandenburg , and some in holland . since which time christoph . sandius has been the only vnitarian of note , famed most for his nucleus hist . ecclesiasticae , his tractatus de origine animae , and his problema paradoxum de spiritus sancto . though in most points he was a socinian , yet as to the matter of our saviour's person , he was a violent arian . he was the son of christopherus sandius a prussian and vnitarian , who was counsellour and secretary to the elector of brandenburgh , but discovering his perswasion , was deprived of his offices 1668. he was born at koningsberg in prussia , 1644. and died at amsterdam , 1680. in england we have since that time been free from this infection , till mr. f — n's papers of late came out , and the book called the naked gospel ; but god be thanked , the strength of these pieces is not so great , as to fear from them any mighty contagion : for though they have all the malice and heresy , they have little enough of the wit and reason of the former socinians . errata . pag. 51. lin . antepenult . pro almost leg . most . pag. 68. dele q. of the. pag. 78. not. † leg . bas . hom de poen . pag. 79. leg . stantes ardent . finis . notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a52291-e270 * s r ralph winwood's remonstrance and protestation to the states against vorstius's election , in wilson's life of k. james . notes for div a52291-e2710 * debuissent ergo dicere , quòd habebat uxorem quandam spiritualem ; vel quòd solus ipse masculo-soemineus , aut hermaphroditus , &c. serv. de err. trin. lib. 1. † alch. cap. 15. * sand. nucl . eccl. ad annum . † where they were condemned by the first council of toledo . an. 587. * alch. cap. 20. † a little before this time , according to bede , a. d. 1612. the supremacy and title of oecumenical bishop , was granted to boniface the third , by the wicked parricide phocas , who murdered his master and predecessour in the empire , mauritius . * joh. de oppido . vincentius . alch. cap. 52. † and miracles pretended to be done by them . niceph. hist . lib. 18. cap. 41 , & 42. * zonaras tom. 3. paul. diac. lib 18. vincent . lib. 23. † vid. stegmanni photinianismum . disp . 1. q. 4. * socinus in matt. 5. ejusd . respons . ad jac. palaeol cap. 4. crell . in matt. 5. ludo. walsengenii compend . christ . relig. p. 2. in edit . fratrum pol. * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . arist . de mor. ad nicom . † per quam vim aut contumeliam defendendo aut ulciscendo propulfamus . cic de inven . lib. 11. ‖ odi hominem & odero : utinam ulscisci possem . cic. epist . ad att. lib. 1. * art. 11. vid. hom. of justification . † 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . bas . hom. de humil. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . chrys . hom. 2. in rom. vid. orig. ad rom. lib. 4. hilar. can . 8. in matt. ambros . in 3. rom. theod. therap . 7 o. hieron . in 4. rom. august . cont . ep . pelag . chrysol . serm . 34. theophyl . 9. rom. oecum . in 1. rom. p. 250. ‖ article 12. * homil. salv. part 3. homil. salv. part 1. * georg. cassand . in consul . de art. 4. aug. confess . p. 18. † testimoniorum quae sunt genera ? divinum & humanum . divinum ut oracula , ut auspicia , ut vaticinationes & responsa sacerdotum , aruspicum , conjectorum . cic. orat. partit . * concil . melevit . cap. 4. & conc. carth . 7. concil . araus . cap. 6 , 7 , & 25. † 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . chrys . lib. de virgin. cap. 42. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . theophyl . in 1 cor. 2. orare deum gratia spiritualis est . amb. citante august . contra 2 ep. pelag. cap. 11. munus in fide manendi à deo esse . id . com. in matt. vid. com. ejusdem in psal . 123. theophyl . in 1 eph. clem. alex. strom . 2. chrys . 1 cor. cap. 4. v. 7. and indeed this was the unanimous doctrine of the ancient church , and none were for our authour's opinion of natural faith , that i can find , but only the followers of the heretick basilides ; who , as clemens says of them , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , did look upon faith as only natural . clem. alex. strom . 2. p. 362. ‖ cum homo assentiendo his quae sunt fidei elevatur suprà naturam suam , oportet , ut hoc insit ei ex supernaturali principio ipsum movente , quod est deus ; & ideo fides quatenus ad assensum , qui est principalis actus fidei , est à deo interiùs movente per gratiam . thom. 22. qu. 6. art. 1. vid. schol. omnes in lib. 3. sent . * vid. socin . crellium , &c. in fratr . pol. & libros remonstr . † vid. episc . instit . lib. 4. cap. 11. curcellaeum & limbourg . in cap. de fide. * philo lib. quis rerum divinarum haeres . * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , &c. euseb . eccl. hist . lib. 1. c. 4. † hier. in gal. 2. ‖ greg. m. in ez. 1. hom. 6. * cyril . contra julian . lib. 1. * vinc. lirin . contr . haer. cap. 3. † quid unquam aliud conciliorum decretis enisa est ecclesia , nisi ut quod antea simpliciter credebatur hoc idem postea diligentius crederetur ? — hoc , inquam semper , nec quicquam praeterea haereticorum novitatibus excitata conciliorum suorum decretis catholica perfecit ecclesia , ut quod priùs à majoribus solâ traditione susceperat , hoc deinde posteris etiam per scripturae chirographum consignaret . id. cap. 32. ‖ theod. hist . lib. 1. cap. 8. * vid. chald. paraph . in gen. 49. 18. & targum hierosol . in loc . eundem , & phil. de agr. lib. 2. * dr. tillotson's ser. vol. 2. serm. 1. * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . euseb . vit. const . lib. 2. & socr. lib. 1. † 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . ibid. * soc. eccl. hist . lib. 1. cap. 6. * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ( not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as in binius ) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . conc. laod. can. 47. cyril . catech. ambros . de sacram. lib. 2. cap. 7. † non semel , sed ter ad singula nomina in personas singulas tingimur . tertul. adv . praxeam . cap. 26. baptizandi ter ad quamlibet immersionem , interrogati articulos fidei confessi sunt , viz. se credere in verum deum patrem omnipotentem ; se credere in dominum nostrum jesum christum & carnem ejus : se credere in spiritum sanctum . ambr. de sacr. l. 2. cap. 7. * multa sunt quae per traditionem in ecclesiis observantur , velut in lavacro ter mergitare . hier. adv lucifer . ter mergimur ut trinitatis unum appareat sacramentum . id. in cap. 4. eph. 2. this custom of the trine mersion seems to be very ancient in the church , if not apostolical . 't was a custom before the writing of the apostolick constitutions , which depose any bishop or priest that shall baptize without it . can. apost . can. 49. and the authour under the name of the areopagite mentions the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ▪ dionys . areop . hierarch . eccl. cap. 1. p. 2. p. 217. and eunomius an anti-trinitarian heretick was the first that dared to alter this custom , and bring in the simple immersion . soz lib. 6. cap. 26. and it continued in the church generally till about the year 600 , when the orthodox in spain began to disuse it , because the hereticks had taken it up . vid. greg. magn. ep. ad leandr . ep. hisp . & concil . tolet. can. 5. † consuetudo apud nos istiusmodi est , ut his qui baptizandi sunt per quadraginta dies publicè tradamus sanctam & adorandam trinitatem . hier. ad pamach . adv . er . joh. hierosol . † faust . socini resp . ad jac. wickam . * socr. his . ecc. lib. * socr. lib. 2. cap. 32. † id. cap. 31. * euseb . de vitâ const . lib. 2. * grot. annot . in luk. 3. † sam. bocharti phaleg . * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . socr. lib. 1. cap. 3. * theod lib. 1. cap. 14. † soz. lib. 1. cap. 14. ‖ theod. lib. 1. cap. 2. * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . soz. lib. 1. cap. 14. * theod. lib. 1. cap. 26. † soz. lib. 2. cap. 15. ‖ socr ▪ lib. 1. cap. 18. * id. cap. 18. † 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . socr. ib. ‖ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . soz. lib. 2. cap. 20. * baron . annal. an. 335. soz. † athan. de syn. soz. ib. ‖ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . * socr. lib. 1. cap. 20. * epiphan . her. 37. † athan. lib. de syn. ‖ socr. lib. 2. cap. 25. * liber . brev. cap. 11. niceph. lib. 24. act. 1. conc. chalced . * evag. † evag. lib. 2. cap. 4. ‖ con. chalced . act. 1. * evag. lib. 2. cap. 2. † con. chalced . act. 3. ‖ ib. † zon. in marcian . * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 evag. lib. 3. cap. 7. * baron . annal. an. 629. † so called as some would have it ( niceph. ) from jacobus the syrian a great eutychian , or for that they pretended to be converted by james the apostle . before the council of chalcedom , they belonged to the patriarch of antioch ; but afterwards they set up a distinct patriarch of their own , schismatically professing the doctrine of eutyches . their name has remained long since in the greek church , having changed their opinions , as appears by the confession of the jacobites . * athan. ad solitar . † soz. lib. 3. cap. 5. * athan. lib. de synod . † socrat. lib. 2. cap. 7. * soc. lib. 1. cap. 5. † ib. lib. 2. cap. 14. ‖ soz. lib. 3. cap. 9. * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . * soz. lib. 3. cap. 9. † id. cap. 10. ‖ athan. ep. ad solitar . † for athanasius says , apol. 2. the bishops that signed to his innocence , in and out of the synod , were 344 ; and that 60 , before the synod , subscribed it , therefore there must be , at least , in this synod 284 bishops ; the remainder of the former number by deducting 60. there are some objections against this computation . vid. causab . ex . bar. and d r comber's roman forgeries . ‖ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . soz. ib. * vid. soc. lib. 1. cap. 23. & soz. lib. 2. cap. 11. * soz. lib. 7. cap. 4. * vid. cypr. cum notis episc . oxon . * nunquam aliquis apostolorum dicere auderet , qui credit in me . credimus apostolo , sed non credimus in apostolum tract . 54 in psal . and again , credimus paulo , sed non credimus in paulum ; credimus petro , sed non credimus in petrum . and so again , in another place , he distinguishes between credere christium , & creder in christum . multum interest utrum credat ipsum esse christum , & utrum credat in christum . i lle credit in christum , qui & sperat in christum , & diligit christum . tract . 29 in joh. vid. aq. sum. 2. 22. q. 2. §. 2. durand . in 3. sent . disp . 23. q. 7. §. 6. * this was a point so difficult to be believed , that synesius the philosopher could not be perswaded of the truth of it , not only till after he became a christian , but till he had for some time been priest . evag. lib. 1. cap. 15. * si ad exemplum christi resurgemus qui resurrexit in carne ; jam non ad exemplum christi resurgemus , si non in carne & ipsi resurgemus . tertul. de resur . car. cap. 18. † nemo poterit aliud mortuos interpretari qui sint in monumentis nisi corpora & carnem , quia nec ipsa monumenta aliud quam cadaverum stabula . id . ib. cap. 37. ‖ contr. frantz . p. 414. & 170. * pro eo quod caeteri dicunt carnis resurrectionem , nos dicimus hujus carnis resurrectionem . ruff. apol. adv . hier. * justin . mart. resp . 53. ad orthodox . & resp . 60. athanag . de refut . mort. prope finem . tertullian . loc . citatis . cypr. expos . symb. hier. com. in job . 19. aug. in ps . 62. theophyl . in 1 cor. 15. chrysost . in job . &c. † the valentinians were the chief , if not the only hereticks that denied the resurrection of the same numerical body in ancient times . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . ep. haer. 31. ‖ durius creditur resurrectio carnis qudm una divinitas . tertul . de res . carnis cap. 1. * si arabiae queruntur , sciant sabaei pluris & carioris suas merces christianis sepeliendis profligari , quam diis fumigandis . tertul apol. cap. 23. quid sibi saxa cavatae , quid pulchra volunt monimentae ? nisi quod res creditur illis , non mortua , sed data somno . prud. hym. 10. circa exeq . 〈◊〉 * omne praemium emnisque poena vim eatenus reverâ habet quatenus sentitur , spiritu autem fieri , ut sentiamus , non corpore quâ corpus est ; corpus instrumentum tantum esse nec per se puniri . says crellius on the 1. cor. 15. and from whence probably the authour has his argument . * natura carnem non instrumentum praestat in operationibus , sed ministerium . ita & ministerium tenebitur judicio etsi de suo nihil sapiat , quia portio est ejus quae sapit , non supellex . tert. de res . car. where the word ministerium , signifies a servant , not service . or the act or office of serving . as publica ministeria dicimus etiam quae extra urbem nobis ministrare consueverunt . paul. ic. quindecim convivarum ac ministerii capace triclinio . plin. lib. 12. * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . chr. 2 hom. rom. † 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . ‖ vid. hom. of salvation , of the pas . where are used the terms of embracing and taking hold of christ's merits . * pag. ult . * iren. lib. 3. cap. 3. euseb . hist . lib. 4. cap. 14. theod. haer. fab. lib. 2. cap. 3. † can. apost . ‖ can. 45 , 46 , &c. * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . conc. laod. can. 33. id . can. 30. † 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . phot. in nomocan . tit. 9. ‖ servetus was burnfor blasphemy against the holy trinity at geneva , by the advice and desire likewise of the switz-cantons , an. dom. 1553. and valentinus gentilis was executed for the same at berne , an. dom. 1558. * suid. in verb. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . † quae tantum habent mysteriorum ut nè librariis quidem committamus . cic. ep. at. l. 3. ‖ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . isodor . pelus . ep. 192. * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . chrys . hom. 19. in rom. * eccl. ang. artic. 8. notes for div a52291-e19880 * litchfield , the printers deposition in the account , &c. exeter coll. &c. * chap. 7. of the new edition . † p. 44. ‖ soc. lib. 3. cap. 5. * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 libel . syn. in bib. jur. can. tom. 2. p. 182. & socr. lib. 2. cap. 30. † athan. de syn. arim. theod. hist . lib. 2. cap. 17. * substantia est res habens quidditatem , cui debetur esse per se & non in alio scilicet subjecto . aq. 1 part. qu. 3. art. 5. * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . cyr. expos . orth. fid. ‖ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , &c. suid. in verb. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , &c. greg. naz. orat. 21. † greg. nazian . or. 39. ‖ soc. lib. 2. cap. 41. * athan. de syn. arim . & seleuc. * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . &c. epiph. haer. 62. * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . ign. ep. ad magn. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . theod. therap . ser. ii. so athanasius calls the son 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . athan. de def . tom. 2. ed. par. p. 53. vid. dam. orth fid. lib. 1. cap. 18. † 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . dam. orth. fid . lib. 1. cap. 9. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . theod. ep. div. decr. cap. 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . bas . mag. in 1. joh. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . chrys . hom. 116. id. in psal . 45. ‖ see this at large in st. chrysostom's 116. hom. tem. 5. p. 747. * greg. naz. or. 37. † leont . de sect. act. 3. ‖ so theoph in 1 cor. 1. says of the holy ghost , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . so nazianz. or. 37. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . * p. 50. † see the history of socinianism which follows . * dr. wallis's letters . notes for div a52291-e22000 a iren. lib. 1. cap. 15. b iren. lib. 3. cap. 11. hier. in prol. joh. augus . haer. 1. theophyl . prol. in joh. c epiph. haer. 30. euseb . eccl. hist . lib. 4. d ign. ep. phil. e euseb . hist . eccl. cap. ult . f euseb . ib. niceph. hist . lib. 4. cap. 21. g theod. haer. fab. l. 2. c. 5. h hist . eccl. lib. 5. cap. ult . i august . haer. 44. k eus . hist . lib. 7. cap. 24. theod. ep. 104. l bas . mag. ep. 64. l bas . mag. ep. 64. m soz. lib. 4. cap. 5. n greg. naz. orat. 25. o samson . rhemensis epist . in liter . ad pont in oper . abelardi ad car. p. 296. p s t bern. epist . ad . ep. & card. cur. q id. ep. ad innoc. r abel . com. in rom. 5. p. 597. ſ bern. ep. ad innoc. abel . in rom. 3. 14. servetus 1530. t this wiekus objects out of lindanus , and socinus in his answer does not deny it . vid. socin . anti-wiekum cap. 1. u epist . phil. melan . lib. 1. p. 335. valentinus gentilis . y vid. aretij vit . val. gentilis . idem . georgius blandrata . a socin . in anti-wiek . paulus alciatus . franciscus stancarus . franciscus lismanin . bernard . ochinus . f bez. ep. 81. franciscus davidis . h bez. ep. 81. i vid sand. biblioth . anti-trin . k laelius socinus . * vit. socin . per eq. polon . l id. p. 10. 1559. favstus socinvs * sententiamsuam de christo servatore apertè expressam in illis esse & inculcatam . ep. ad marc. vadovit . 1570. * hornbeck soc. conf. ‖ graecos enim fontes , ut egomet omnibus dico , leviter admodum degustavi , hebraeos vixdum attigi . resp ad def. fran. puccii . † disputationes meas quarum quadam sunt editae , cum nondum dialecticae ullam operam dedissem , cujusmodi est disputatio de servatore , adversus puccium palaeologum , fr. davidis , &c. * socin . ep. ad dudithium . 1579. * in the title of his book , quid regni polon . &c. 1588. ostorodus . volkelius . flor. 1595. flor. an. 1603. smaltzius . crellius . 1630. przipcovicius . slichtingius . wolzogenius . 1650. m r bidel . 1658. vid. edictum in vitâ wissowatii . 1660. an account of mr. lock's religion, out of his own writings, and in his own words together with some observations upon it, and a twofold appendix : i. a specimen of mr. lock's way of answering authors ..., ii. a brief enquiry whether socinianism be justly charged upon mr. lock. milner, john, 1628-1702. 1700 approx. 378 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 97 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2003-01 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a50867 wing m2075 estc r548 13167054 ocm 13167054 98257 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a50867) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 98257) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 428:18) an account of mr. lock's religion, out of his own writings, and in his own words together with some observations upon it, and a twofold appendix : i. a specimen of mr. lock's way of answering authors ..., ii. a brief enquiry whether socinianism be justly charged upon mr. lock. milner, john, 1628-1702. locke, john, 1632-1704. selections. 1700. [4], 188 p. printed and sold by j. nutt ..., london : 1700. written by john milner. cf. bm; halkett & laing (2nd ed.). errata: p. [2]. reproduction of original in union theological seminary library, new york. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng locke, john, 1632-1704. socinianism -early works to 1800. 2000-00 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2001-12 apex covantage keyed and coded from proquest page images 2002-01 tcp staff (michigan) sampled and proofread 2002-01 tcp staff (michigan) text and markup reviewed and edited 2002-02 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion an account of mr. lock's religion , out of his own writings , and in his own words . together with some observations upon it , and a twofold appendix . i. a specimen of mr. lock's way of answering authors , out of his essay , l. 1. c. 3. where he takes upon him to examine some of the lord herbert's principles . ii. a brief enquiry whether socinianism be justly charged upon mr. lock . london , printed ; and sold by j. nutt near stationers-hall . m dcc . mr. lock 's treatises out of which the following account is collected . 1. his thoughts of education , edit . an. 1693. 2. his essay of humane understanding , an. 1695. 3. his reasonableness of christianity , an. 1696. 4. his vindication of it , an. 1695. 5. his second vindication of it , an. 1697. 6. his first letter , an. 1697. 7. his second letter , an. 1697. 8. his third letter , an. 1699. errata . page 4. line 9. for conquently r. consequently . p. 42. l. 12. for preceeded r. preceded . p. 45. l. 33. after limits r. it . p. 50. l. 37. for 384. r. 284. p. 57. l. 7. dele of . p. 77. l. 11. for certainly r. certainty . p. 80. l. 33. for heb. r. hab. p. 105. l. 12. for memorio r. memoria . p. 112. l. 5. for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . and l. 15. for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . a premonition to the reader . in his preface to his reasonableness of christianity , mr. lock tells us , that the little satisfaction and consistency that is to be found in most of the systems of divinity that he had met with , made him betake himself to the sole reading of the scripture ; and what he receiv'd from thence he deliver'd to his reader in that treatise . and as the little satisfaction and consistency which he found in some systems of divinity , was the occasion of his writing and publishing that discourse ; so , the little satisfaction and consistency which i found in his system , ( viz. his reasonableness of christianity foremention'd ) was one occasion of my drawing up the following account and the observations upon it . when mr. lock says , the little satisfaction and consistency to be found in most of the systems of divinity that he had met with ; these words most of the systems imply , that he had met with some systems in which more satisfaction and consistency may be found ; and he would have oblig'd the world , if he had pleas'd to acquaint us what systems those are . in giving an account of his religion , that neither he might have cause to complain , nor the reader to suspect that i have misrepresented him ; i judg'd it necessary to do it out of his own writings , and in his own words . i thought this would be the most effectual course to satisfie both him and others , that i had no design to represent him to his disadvantage . it was also necessary to set down that which mr. lock hath deliver'd agreeably to the form of found words , and to the doctrine which is according to godliness , as well as that in which he departs from the truth , and from the words of wholsome doctrine ; for otherwise the account would have been imperfect ; and withal , if i had omitted that which is good and justifiable , and presented the reader only with that which is to be dislik'd and disapprov'd in his religion , i should have incurred the guilt of disobeying the charge given 1 tim. 5. 21. to do nothing by partiality , or inclining to one part more than the other . i am so far from envying mr. lock the honour of having said some things well , that i heartily wish he had said all so ; and that there had been nothing reprebensible , or deserving censure , in his religion . besides , there may be those who will more willingly learn some truths from mr. lock than from others , embracing them more readily upon the account of his approbation or recommendation ; and for the sake of these i thought it not amiss to transcribe that which was consonant to truth , as well as that which i found dissonant from it . by this means also the reader may better perceive the little consistency that there is in mr. lock 's writings , how he destroys that which he had built up , asserts the truth in one place , and seeks to obtrude on us the contrary errour in another . the account is divided into chapters , and in every chapter i first set down what mr. lock says upon those heads that are mentioned in the contents of it , and then subjoin some brief observations upon it . and that the reader may more readily find any passage transcrib'd out of mr. lock , i have directed him to the book , chapter , and section of his essay , and to the page in his other treatises ; as i have also signified what editions of them i have made use of . i am very sensible , how little encouragement there is from without , for any man to appear in the maintenance of those weighty truths which are treated of in the following account and the observations upon it . the consideration of which may perhaps incline the reader more firmly to believe , that it is only a desire to be useful and serviceable while he is in the world , and a real concern for the truth and for religion , that put the author upon this work , upon which account he hopes that his sincere , though weak , endeavours will be more favourably accepted . the result of those endeavours he here presents to publick view , humbly commending it to the blessing of heaven ; and if by it he hath done any acceptable service to god and his church , he hath his desire ; and may that holy and blessed trinity , the father , son , and holy ghost , have the glory . an account of mr. lock's religion , out of his own writings , &c. chap. i. of god. to come to the being certain that there is a god , i think we need go no farther than our selves , and that undoubted knowledge we have of our own being . i think it is beyond question , that man has a clear perception of his own being ; he knows certainly that he exists , and that he is something . in the next place , man knows , by an intuitive certainty , that bare nothing cannot produce any real being . if therefore we know there is some real being , and that non-entity cannot produce any real being , it is an evident demonstration , that from eternity there has been something ; since what was not from eternity had a beginning , and what had a beginning must be produc'd by something else . next it is evident , that what had its being and beginning from another , must also have all that which is in , and belongs to its being , from another too : all the powers it has must be owing to , and received from the same source . this eternal source then of all being , must also be the source and original of all power ; and so this eternal being must be also the most powerful . again , a man finds in himself perception and knowledge . we have then got one step farther ; and we are certain now , that there is some knowing intelligent being in the world. there was a time then , when there was no knowing being , and when knowledge began to be ; or else there has been also a knowing being from eternity . if it be said , there was a time when no being had any knowledge , when that eternal being was void of all understanding ; i reply , that then it was impossible there should ever have been any knowledge : it being impossible that things wholly void of knowledge , and operating blindly , and without any perception , should produce a knowing being . thus , from the consideration of our selves , and what we infallibly find in our own constitutions , our reason leads us to the knowledge of this certain and evident truth , that there is an eternal , most powerful , and most knowing being ; which whether any one will please to call god , it matters not ; the thing is evident . mr. lock , essay l. 4. c. 10. § . 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6. there is no truth which a man may more evidently make out to himself , than the existence of a god , essay , l. 1. c. 4. § . 22. we have a more certain knowledge of the existence of a god , than of any thing our senses have not immediately discover'd to us . nay , i presume i may say , that we more certainly know that there is a god , than that there is any thing else without us . the being of a god is so fundamental a truth , and of that consequence , that all religion and genuine morality depend thereon . essay , l. 4. c. 10. § . 6 , 7. thus mr. lock . observations . though the essay says so much of our certain knowledge of the existence of a god ; yet it also tells us , that he hath given us no innate ideas of himself ; he has stamp'd no original characters on our minds , wherein we may read his being . so l. 4. c. 10. § . 1. it also informs us , that navigation hath discover'd whole nations , amongst whom there was to be found no notion of a god ; adding , that perhaps if we should with attention mind the lives and discourses of people not so far off , we should have too much reason to fear , that many in more civiliz'd countries have no very strong and clear impressions of a deity upon their minds . see l. 1. c. 4. § . 8. now as to the second of these , the discovery of whole nations , amongst whom there was to be found no notion of a god ; some think that mr. lock had done better if he had not urg'd it : for they judge that it tends to the invalidating the argument which is made use of , not only by christians , but also ( as they tell us ) by the wisest and greatest men among the heathens , to prove the existence of a deity . the argument is drawn from the universal consent of mankind , as to the being of a god. what says mr. lock to this ? he denies that he doth invalidate it , and it concern'd him to deny it ; for he who had said in his first letter , that no arguments that are made use of to work the persuasion of a god into mens minds , should be invalidated , granting it to be of ill consequence ; should be very careful that he do not invalidate any such arguments . but i ask , doth not mr. lock invalidate the argument from the universal consent of mankind , who says expresly , that besides the atheists , taken notice of amongst the ancients , and left branded upon the records of history , navigation hath discover'd whole nations , amongst whom there was to be found no notion of a god ? can there be an universal consent , when besides particular persons , there are whole nations that do not consent ? yea , so far they are from consenting , that they have not so much as any notion of a god : yet notwithstanding all this , mr. lock asserts , that he hath not said one word that does in the least invalidate the argument for a god , or does at all tend to the invalidating it . for ( says he ) i think that the universal consent of mankind , as to the being of a god , amounts to thus much , that the vastly greater majority of mankind have in all ages of the world actually believ'd a god ; that a majority of the remaining part have not actually disbeliev'd it ; and conquently , those who have actually oppos'd the belief of a god , have truly been very few . see his third letter , p. 447 , 448. where some perhaps would ask , 1. what mr. lock means by the vastly greater majority of mankind ? if he had said , a very great majority of mankind , he might have been understood ; but , the vastly greater majority of mankind , implies that we may divide mankind into two majorities , the one of which is vastly greater than the other . 2. they may perhaps also ask , whether all that do not actually oppose the being of a god , or not actually disbelieve it , do consent to it ? if they all do not , then though they that actually oppose be truly very few , yet they that consent not to it may be many : and though it should be granted to be true , that the majority of those that believe not that there is a god , do not yet actually disbelieve it , it will not follow that the majority of them do consent to it : for i am prone to think , that none do truly and inwardly consent to it , who do not believe it . and therefore that which mr. lock says of not disbelieving , and the fewness of those that oppose , doth not help the matter at all . 2. the question then is , whether ( to use his own words ) in respect of the incomparably greater majority of those who have own'd the belief of a god , it may be said to be the universal consent of mankind ? or , whether that can be said to have the universal consent of mankind , to which , besides particular persons , whole nations do not consent . now i think there are very few that will not answer it in the negative . i cannot imagine that they who have urg'd the universal consent of mankind as an argument , did believe that , besides particular persons , whole nations did not consent . and therefore it this which mr. lock urgeth be true , the argument from universal consent seems to be totally invalidated . wherefore it will be necessary to examine how he hath acquitted himself in the proof of it ; viz. that there have been not only particular persons atheists , but also whole nations who had no notion of a god. 1. he mentions the atheists taken notice of amongst the ancients , and left branded upon the records of history ; but this only in general : if he had descended to particulars , perhaps it would have been found , that at least some of them were branded with atheism , because they did not favour the heathen polytheism ; or , because they thought those that were accounted gods , not to be gods : which was the accusation against socrates . see diog. laert. in vit . socrat. and 't is very observable , that cicero , de natura deorum , l. 1. names only two that thought there were no gods ; viz. diagoras melius and theodorus cyrenaicus : and clemens alcxandrinus defends them , saying , that they were men of a sober life ; and expressing his admiration how it came that they call'd them atheists . see him in admonit . ad gentes , p. 11. 2. he brings testimonies to prove , that navigation hath discover'd whole nations , amongst whom there was to be found no notion of a god ; so far were they from consenting to the existing of a deity . he alledges the relations of several writers , but he should have been so kind , as to have transcrib'd their words for us , ( for i find that they are not to be met with every where , ) whereas he hath only given us the words of two of them , or three at the most . the words which he sets down out of nicolaus de techo's relatio triplex de rebus indicis caaiguarum , are these ; reperi eam gentem nullum nomen habere quod deum & hominis animam significet , nulla sacra habet , nulla idola . see the essay , l. 1. c. 4. § . 8. out of mr. ovington's relation of his voyage to surat , he gives us these words , they are sunk even below idolatry , are destitute of both priest and temple , and saving a little shew of rejoycing , which is made at the full and new moon , have lost all kind of religious devotion . nature hath so richly provided for their convenience in this life , that they have drown'd all sense of the god of it , and are grown quite careless of the next . he adds , that coore , an inhabitant of the country , who could speak english , assur'd mr. terry , that they of soldania had no god : see the third letter , p. 450. now as to these testimonies , 1. it must be remembred that mr. lock would prove from them , that there are whole nations amongst whom there is found no notion of a god : whereas it is not said in any of these testimonies , that the nations spoken of had no notion of a god. nicolaus de techo tells of a people that have no idols or images , no sacred offices or services , no name for god : but he doth not say , that they had no notion of him . he says likewise , that they had not a name for man's soul ; but it doth not follow thence , that they had no notion of something within them that did think , understand , will , reason , &c. coore says , that they of soldania had no god ; i. e. they had no particular god ( as other heathens might have ) which their whole nation worshipp'd : but it cannot be inferr'd hence , that they had no notion of a god. mr. ovington says , that they are sunk even below idolatry ; but he doth not say , that they are sunk so low , as that they have not so much as any notion of a deity . 2. yea , mr. ovington's testimony is clearly against mr. lock ; for , when he says , saving a little shew of rejoycing which is made at the full and new moon , they have lost all kind of religious devotion ; it is manifest that , according to him , they express'd some religious devotion every full and new moon . and when he says , that they have drown'd all sense of the god of it ; doth not this necessarily imply that they had a sense of him before they drown'd it ? not to add , that too many among us seem to have drown'd all sense of a god , and are grown quite careless of a future life ; though they profess the belief of a god , and of the life of the world to come . besides these three , mr. lock names sir tho. rhoe apud thevenot , p. 2. and jo. de lery , c. 16. sir tho. rhoe apud thevenot , i have not met with . of joannes lerius his historia navigationis in brasiliam , c. 16. i can give some account . it is true that he says of his tououpinambaultii , that they are ignorant of the true god ; and also , that they acknowledge no false gods , whether celestial or terrestrial . but afterwards he proposes the question , whether these americans liv'd without any religion ? where though he first answers , that they want but a very little of it ; yet he adds , that they believe the immortality of the soul , and that the souls of the vertuous shall live in perpetual pleasure and delights , but the souls of the rest in everlasting torments after this life . he tells also , that they had their priests , and their assemblies once in three years , in which they believ'd that a spirit talk'd with them . he takes notice also of their trembling at the hearing of thunder , which ( says he ) argues a dread of some power . and finally , he makes frequent mention of a cacodaemon which they said was seen by them , sometime in one shape , sometime in another , and did most miserably vex them . from all this he concludes , that religion was not quite extinguish'd , but some sparks of it remain'd among them . thus i have examin'd all mr. lock 's testimonies , ( except sir tho. rhoe's , which i could not meet with ; ) and now the reader may judge how firmly he hath prov'd , that amongst some whole nations there is found no notion of a god. and if it appear that he hath not firmly prov'd it , then not only the argument for the existence of a god , drawn from the universal consent of mankind , is left in full force , and that holds true which tully saith , de legibus , l. 1. nulla gens est , neque tam immansueta , neque tam fera , quae non etiamsi ignoret qualem habere deum debeat , tamen habendum sciat ; but also mr. lock 's principal argument to prove his darling notion , that we have no innate ideas of a god , falls to the ground . his principal argument that he urgeth for proof of that notion , is this which i have insisted upon , that whole nations are found to have no notion of a god : and we see how far he is from evincing this . as to the argument which follows in the same place , ( viz. essay , l. 1. c. 4. § . 8. ) whereby he would prove that beloved notion , that we have no innate ideas of a god , drawn from the atheism which is among us , which ( says he ) some profligate wretches do barefacedly own , and others would , if the fear of the magistrate's sword , or their neighbour's censure , did not tie up peoples tongues , it signifies nothing ; unless mr. lock could assure us ( which he cannot ) that their atheistical discourse is the language of their hearts , as it is too plainly the language of their lips and lives . for any thing that he knows , their hearts may give their tongues the lye , and there may be inward fears and whispers that there is a god , at the same time that they most stoutly deny it : or if not at the same time , yet afterward sickness , or the approach of death , may awake the sense of a deity , which they hop'd they had laid asleep , never to awake ; and make the notions and characters which they had labour'd to obliterate , as legible as ever . before i leave this , i cannot but observe , that , though in his essay , l. 4. c. 10. § . 7. mr. lock would not examine how far the idea of a most perfect being does or does not prove the existence of a god , yet in his first letter , p. 119. he clearly determines it in the negative , saying , that the complex idea , for which the sound [ god ] stands , will not prove the real existence of a being answering that idea , as p. 121. he tells us , that he thought it would not prove it when he writ his essay . i take notice of this , because hereby he invalidates another argument for proving the existence of a deity , when but a little before , viz. p. 114. he had affirm'd it to be of ill consequence to invalidate any arguments that are made use of to work the persuasion of a god into mens minds , and when otherwhere , viz , essay , l. 4. c. 10. § . 7. he blames others for endeavouring to invalidate such arguments . why then doth he that himself , which he condemns in others ? he tells us , in his first letter , p. 115. that when he writ his essay , he was unwilling to shew the weakness of the argument from the idea of god ; but when he writ that letter , he had taken courage , and pronounceth roundly , that the idea mentioned will not prove the existence of a god. but to conclude , how blame-worthy soever mr. lock may be for weakening these two arguments made use of to prove the existence of a deity , the one from the universal consent of mankind , as to the being of a god , the other from the idea that we have of him ; yet we should not judge charitably , if we concluded thence , that he doth not believe a god. chap. ii. of the attributes of god. i do not pretend to say how the attributes are in god , who is infinitely beyond the reach of our narrow capacities . they do , without doubt , contain in them all possible perfection . mr. lock , essay , l. 2. c. 17. § . 1. his wisdom , power , and goodness . his power , wisdom , and goodness , are inexhaustible , incomprehensible , &c. essay , l. 2. c. 17. § . 1. i judge it as certain and as clear a truth as any can any where be deliver'd , that the invisible things of god , from the creation of the world , are clearly seen , being understood by the things that are made , even his eternal power and godhead , essay , l. 4. c. 10. § . 7. he has in his hand rewards and punishments , and power enough to call to account the proudest offender , essay , l. 1. c. 3. § . 6. what god can do , must not be limited to what we can conceive of it : this would be to make our comprehension infinite , or god finite . if you do not understand the operations of your own finite mind , do not deem it strange that you cannot comprehend the operations of that eternal , infinite mind , who made and governs all things , essay , l. 4. c. 10. § . 19. god is truly above all passive power , essay , l. 2. c. 21. § . 2. he knows our frailty , pities our weakness , and requires of us no more than we are able to do ; and sees what is , and what is not in our power , and so will judge as a kind and merciful father , essay , l. 2. c. 21. § . 53. his knowledge , happiness , and veracity . the eternal being must also be knowing , and all other knowing beings must depend on him , and have no other ways of knowledge , or extent of power , than what he gives them : and if he made those , he made also the less excellent pieces of this universe , all inanimate beings ; whereby his omniscience , power , and providence , will be established , and all his other attributes necessarily follow , essay , l. 4. c. 10. § . 12 , 13. god sees men in the dark , essay , l. 1. c. 3. § . 6. perception and knowledge in that one eternal being , where it has its sourse , 't is visible must be essentially inseparable from it , the third letter , p. 410. god almighty is under the necessity of being happy , essay , l. 2. c. 21. § . 50. the veracity of god is a demonstration of the truth of what he hath revealed , the third letter , p. 420. an infinitely powerful and wise being cannot but be veracious . besides , i speak in more places than one of the goodness of god , another evidence , as i take it , of his veracity , answ. to remarks , p. 3. he cannot deceive , nor be deceiv'd , the third letter , p. 147. his immateriality , eternity , and ubiquity . 't is past all doubt , that every one that examines and reasons right , may come to a certainty , that god is perfectly immaterial , the third letter , p. 147. the idea of an eternal , actual , knowing being , hath a connexion with the idea of immateriality , the first letter , p. 139. god fills eternity , and 't is hard to find a reason why any one should doubt that he likewise fills immensity . his infinite being is certainly as boundless one way as another , essay , l. 2. c. 15. § . 3. we can conceive the eternal duration of the almighty far different from that of man , or any other finite being . his duration being accompanied with infinite knowledge , and infinite power , he sees all things past and to come , and they are no more distant from his knowledge , no farther removed from his sight , than the present . they all lie under the same view : and there is nothing which be cannot make exist each moment he pleases , essay , l. 2. c. 15. § . 12. we apply our idea of infinite to the first and supreme being , primarily in respect of his duration and ubiquity , essay , l. 2. c. 17. § . 1. motion cannot be attributed to god , not because he is a spirit , but because he is an infinite spirit , essay , l. 2. c. 23. § . 21. his infinity , and other perfections . the great god , of whom and from whom are all things , is incomprehensibly infinite ; but yet , when we apply to that first and supreme being our idea of infinite , in our weak and narrow thoughts , we do it primarily in respect of his duration and ubiquity ; and , i think , more figuratively to his power , wisdom , goodness , and other attributes , which are properly inexhaustible and incomprehensible , &c. for when we call them infinite , we have no other idea of this infinity , but what carries with it some reflexion on and intimation of that number , or extent of the acts and objects of god's power , wisdom , and goodness , which can never be supposed so great or so many , which these attributes will not surmount and exceed , let us multiply them in our thoughts with all the infinity of endless number , essay , l. 2. c. 17. § . 1. whatsoever is first of all things , must necessarily contain in it , and actually have at least all the perfections that can ever after exist , essay , l. 4. c. 10. § . 10. thus mr. lock . observations . when mr. lock says , that god is truly above all passive power , i shall not trouble my self to enquire whether the expression , passive power , be proper or no : his meaning is , that he can receive no change. that is most true which he saith of the eternal duration of god , that we can conceive it far different from that of man , or any other finite being ; for his duration hath not either beginning or end of days , which agrees to no finite being , neither to man nor angel. but as to the difference which mr. lock assigns , it is manifest , that it is not in the duration it self , but in the knowledge and power which accompany it : god sees all things past , present , and to come , they all lie under the same view ; and he can make any thing exist each moment that he pleases : but this cannot be said of any finite being whatsoever . so that mr. lock shews that there is a great difference between the knowledge and power of god , and ours ; but as to the eternal duration of god , of which he was here speaking , that is a distinct attribute . when he saith , that when we apply to god our idea of infinity in our weak and narrow thoughts , we do it primarily in respect of his duration and ubiquity , and , i think , more figuratively to his power , wisdom , and goodness , and other attributes , which are properly inexhaustible and incomprehensible , &c. it may be enquir'd what he means by more figuratively : is it his meaning , that we apply it to him less figuratively , in respect of his duration and ubiquity ? if so , we apply it to him figuratively , even in respect of them ; and consequently we do not apply infinity to god properly in any respect ; which conclusion surely mr. lock will not own . besides , if it be true which mr. lock says , that the power , wisdom , goodness , and other attributes of god , are properly inexhaustible and incomprehensible , why is it not as true that they are properly boundless or infinite ? it may be enquir'd also what mr. lock means when he speaks of our multiplying the acts and objects of god's power , &c. in our thoughts , with all the infinity of endless number . if our thoughts can multiply them with all the infinity of endless number , how are they narrow thoughts , as mr. lock often saith they are ? besides , he says they may be surmounted and exceeded , which they cannot be , after that we have multiply'd them with all infinity of endless number ; for infinity cannot be exceeded . lastly , i am not satisfied , that we can have no other idea of the infinity of god's power , wisdom , and goodness , but what carries with it some reflexion on the number and extent of the acts and objects of those attributes ; for those perfections of infinite power , wisdom , and goodness , would have been in god , though there had been no acts or objects of them . chap. iii. of the idea of god. that of a god is such an idea as is agreeable to the common light of reason , and naturally deducible from every part of our knowledge : for the visible marks of extraordinary wisdom and power appear so plainly in all the works of the creation , that a rational creature , who will but seriously reflect on them , cannot miss the discovery of a deity . thus mr. lock , essay , l. 1. c. 4. § . 9. observations . i am far from questioning the truth of any thing of this . i only take occasion here to intimate , that i cannot but agree with those that think , that mr. lock and others , had done better , if they had not amus'd the world so much with the term idea as they have done . and mr. lock 's using it so much in his essay , seems not to be very consistent with his promise and profession in the preface or epistle to the reader , p. 4. where his words are these , my appearing in print being on purpose to be as useful as i may , i think it necessary to make what i have to say as easie and intelligible to all sorts of readers as i can . now there are that think , that mr. lock had made his essay more easie and intelligible to all sorts of readers , if he had made use of other terms , and not fill'd every page almost with the mention of ideas . yea , not only others are of that opinion , but i might appeal to mr. lock himself , if he be of the same mind that he was when he writ his first letter , where , p. 127. speaking of his essay , l. 4. c. 10. he hath these words , i thought it most proper to express my self in the most usual and familiar way , to let it the easier into mens minds by common words , and known ways of expression : and therefore , as i think , i have scarce us'd the word idea in that whole chapter , but only in one place . here mr. lock says plainly , that he therefore scarce us'd the word idea in that chapter , that he might let things the easier into mens minds : and then why did he not likewise forbear the use of it in other chapters , especially when he had engag'd to his reader , that he would make things as easie and intelligible to all sorts of readers as he could ; and here also confesses , that things are let more easily into mens minds by common words , and known or familiar ways of expression . chap. iv. of the worship of god , and of the heart . god is to be worship'd in spirit and in truth , with application of mind , and sincerity of heart . in publick assemblies , where some actions must be open to the view of the world , all that can appear and be seen is to be done decently , and in order , and to edification . decency , order , and edification , are to regulate all the publick acts of worship . praises and prayer humbly offer'd to god , is the worship he now demands , and in these every one is to look after his own heart . mr. lock reasonab . of christian. p. 286 , 287. 't is his peculiar care of mankind , most eminently discover'd in his promises to them , that shews his bounty and goodness ; and consequently engages their hearts in love and affection to him . this oblation of an heart fixed , with dependence and affection on him , is the most acceptable tribute we can pay him , the foundation of true devotion , and life of all religion . ibid. p. 248. thus mr. lock . observations . mr. lock says very well , that in publick assemblies all things are to be done decently ; but it is also true , that in private or secret prayer , a decent or reverent gesture is to be used . st. peter kneeled down , and cried , or pray'd , acts 9. 40. i bow my knees to the father of our lord jesus christ , says st. paul , ephes. 3. 14. yea our lord himself , st. luke 22. 41. did the same . in like manner , when mr. lock says , that praises and prayer are the worship which god now demands , it is true that they are parts of it ; but there are other parts of it , as sitting at his feet , and hearing his word , and so devout receiving the sacrament , swearing by his name , when we are lawfully call'd to it , &c. in all which we must chiefly look after the heart , it being that which god principally regards : indeed he regards nothing where it is wanting . the heart must bear the greatest part in every service , though ( as i said ) a reverent outward gesture is to be used also . chap. v. of the works of god ; of the creation particularly ; also of the image of god. the works of nature shew the wisdom and power of god. mr. lock reasonab . of christian. p. 248. the infinite omnipotent creator of all things out of nothing , &c. the third letter , p. 152. you will say , is it not impossible to admit of the making any thing out of nothing , since we cannot possibly conceive it ? i answer , no ; because it is not reasonable to deny the power of an infinite being , because we cannot comprehend its operation . we do not deny other effects upon this ground , because we cannot possibly conceive the manner of their production . we cannot conceive how thought ( or any thing but motion in body ) can move body : and yet that is not a reason sufficient to make us deny it possible , against the constant experience we have of it in our selves in all voluntary motions , which are produc'd in us only by the free thoughts of our own minds . 't is an over-valuing our selves , to reduce all to the narrow measure of our capacity , and to conclude all things impossible to be done , whose manner of doing exceeds our comprehension ; essay , l. 4. c. 10. § . 19. when the thing is wholly made new , so that no part thereof did ever exist before , as when a new particle of matter doth begin to exist in rerum natura , which had before no being , we call it creation ; essay , l. 2. c. 26. § . 2. adam being the son of god , s. luke 3. 38. had this part also of the likeness and image of his father , viz. that he was immortal ; jesus christ being also the son of god , was , like his father , immortal . the great evidence that jesus was the son of god , was his resurrection , acts 13. 32 , 33. then the image of his father appear'd in him , when he visibly enter'd into the state of immortality . and that immortality is a part of that image wherein these ( who were the immediate sons of god , so as to have no other father ) were made like their father , appears probable , not only from the places in genesis concerning adam , above taken notice of ; but seems to me also to be intimated in some expressions concerning jesus the son of god , in the new testament . reasonab . of christian. p. 202 , 203 , 207. thus mr. lock . observations . i agree with mr. lock , that immortality is part of that image of god in which adam was created ; but as to christ , he , as man , was not made like his father in that part of his image , till he was raised from the dead : for before that , as man , he was was mortal . as man he did partake of our infirmities , and was in all things made like unto us , only without sin ; and so he was made like us , in being mortal . he was indeed made man for the suffering of death , heb. 2. 9. which he did ; for it follows in the same verse , that by the grace of god he tasted death for every man ; wherefore god highly exalted him , and crown'd him with glory , honour , and immortality . the first place in the new testament which , according to mr. lock , intimates that immortality is a part of that image wherein christ , as man , was made like his father , is col. 1. 15. where he is call'd the image of the invisible god , and the first-born of every creature . but how appears it that he is call'd so as man ? certainly , as god , he is most properly the image of the invisible god. but you will say it follows , the first-born of every creature ; and so he is spoken of in this place as a creature , i. e. as man. to which i answer ; 1. suppose i should grant that the apostle speaks of him as a creature in this latter expression , doth it follow that he must speak of him as such in the former ? might he not call him the image of the invisible god , as god ; and the first-born of every creature , as man ? 2. i do not grant that the apostle in these words , the first-born of every creature , speaks of him as man. the meaning may be , that he was begotten of the father before any creature whatsoever did exist ; and therefore it immediately follows , ver . 16 , 17. by him were all things created , that are in heaven , and that are in earth , visible and invisible , whether thrones or dominions , or principalities , or powers , all things were created by him and for him . he is before all things , and by him all things consist . which agrees with s. john 1. 2 , 3. the word was in the beginning with god. by him all things were made , and without him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not as much as any one thing was made that was made . and we are told , ver . 1. that this word was god. these words therefore , the first-born of every creature , do not hinder but that the former words , who is the image of the invisible god , were spoken of christ as god ; and then they make not for mr. lock 's purpose , who would have him here call'd the image of the invisible god as he is man. i know that mr. lock saith , that the words the first-born of every creature are explain'd ver . 18. where he is term'd the first-born from the dead . but i conceive that these are distinct things , and that we need look no farther for the explication than ver . 17. he is the first-born of every creature , ver . 15. i. e. he is before all things , v. 17. chap. vi. of christ. the son of god whilst cloath'd in flesh was subject to all the frailties and inconveniences of humane nature , sin excepted . mr. lock , essay , l. 3. c. 9. § . 23. christ , after a life illustrious in miracles and good works , attended with humility , meekness , patience , and suffering , and every way conformable to the prophecies of him , was lead as a sheep to the slaughter , and with all quiet and submission brought to the cross , though there were no guilt or fault found in him . reason . of christian. p. 61. christ's coming into the world was not for such an end as the over-turning the measures of right and wrong , and thereby introducing and authorizing irregularity , confusion , and disorder in the world ; but , on the contrary , to reform the corrupt state of degenerate man , and out of those who would mend their lives , and bring forth fruit meet for repentance , erect a new kingdom . ibid. p. 215. the chief end of his coming was to be a king ; and as such , to be received by those who would be his subjects in the kingdom which he came to erect . ibid. p. 217. thus mr. lock . observations . what means mr. lock when he says , the son of god was cloath'd with flesh ? is it his meaning , that the eternal son of god , the second person in the trinity , was cloath'd with flesh ? if so , it was to be wish'd that he would do that justice to himself , plainly to declare it , and thereby remove out of mens minds the jealousies they have of him as to this point . it may be enquir'd also , what he means by that expression , whilst cloathed in flesh ? as there was a time before the son of god was incarnate or cloath'd with flesh , so hath he after his incarnation ceas'd to be cloath'd with it ? particularly , will mr. lock say that he was not cloath'd with it after his resurrection ? if so , i ask whether he will not plainly contradict our blessed saviour , who told his disciples , after his being risen from the dead , that he had flesh and bones , s. luke 24. 39. it may then concern him to explain himself as to this also . mr. lock 's meaning also is not very plain , when he says , that the chief end of christ's coming was to be a king , and to be receiv'd as such . it is most true , that the prophets foretold that he should be a king ; and it may be said , that he came to fulfil the prophecies that had been of him , as it is also true that he was a king. but i do not remember that it is said , that the chief end of his coming was to be a king. it is written , that he came into the world to save sinners , to seek and to save that which was lost , that whosoever believes in him should not perish , but have everlasting life ; that he was manifested to take away our sins , and to dissolve the works of the devil , 1 joh. 3. 5 , 8. that he appear'd to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself , heb. 9. 26. and when pilate ask'd him , whether he was a king ? he did not answer , for this cause came i into the world , that i might be a king ; but , for this cause i came into the world , that i should bear witness to the truth , s. john 18. 37. among these several ends , i do not find the being a king expresly mention'd for one ( as every one of these is ) much less is it call'd the chief end. finally , mr. lock himself , reasonab . of christian. p. 241. mentions something else as the great end. his words are , pardon and forgiveness of sins , and salvation by him , was the great end of his coming . chap. vii . of our advantages by christ. it will possibly he ask'd , what advantage have we by jesus christ ? answ. 1. he found the world in a state of darkness and error , in reference to the true god ; but the clear revelation he brought with him dissipated the darkness , made the one invisible true god known to the world. 2. a clear knowledge of their duty was before wanting to mankind ; but now there needs no more , but to read the inspired books : all the duties of morality lie there clear and plain , and easie to be understood . there is not , i think , any of the duties of morality , which he has not somewhere or other , by himself and his apostles , inculcated over and over again to his followers in express terms . 3. the outward forms of worshipping the deity , wanted a reformation : to this also our saviour brought a remedy in a plain , spiritual , and suitable worship . 4. another great advantage receiv'd by him , is the great encouragement he brought to a vertuous and pious life , great enough to surmount the difficulties and obstacles that lie in the way to it , viz. by bringing life and immortality to light , and by putting into the scale , on the side of vertue , an exceeding and immortal weight of glory . 5. one advantage more we have by jesus christ , is , the promise of assistance ; if we do what we can , he will give us his spirit to help us to do what and how we should . thus mr. lock , reason . of christian. p. 257 , 263 , 267 , 284 , 285 , 286 , 287 , 290 , 291 , 292. see also p. 234. observations . here where mr. lock is treating purposely and largely of the advantages that we have by christ , it is justly thought strange , that he should not once make mention of his being a propitiation through faith in his blood , rom. 3. 25. a propitiation for our sins , yea also for the sins of the whole world , 1 joh. 2. 2. our having redemption through his blood , the forgiveness of sins , eph. 1. 7. col. 1. 14. such an unconceivable advantage as this that we have by him , should not have been forgotten . if mr. lock say , that otherwhere in his reasonableness of christianity he doth mention our redemption by christ , i grant it ; but , 1. i do not at present remember that he any where in it mentions redemption through his blood . 2. if he do speak of it otherwhere , how easie had it been for him to have nam'd it here among other advantages , and to have referr'd his reader to the places where he had spoken of it ? if mr. lock say again , that he set down as much as his argument requir'd ; i answer , that he did not : having moved the question , what advantages we have by christ ? and making it his business to answer it , his argument requir'd that such a transcendent advantage as this should not have been omitted . the truth is , innumerable are the advantages that we have by christ ; so that it would not have been expected that he should give an account of them all . to instance in some ; beside the benefits mention'd above , we have by him vocation , repentance , justification , peace with god , adoption , sanctification , audience of our prayers , acceptance of our persons , victory over persecutions , afflictions , and death it self ; salvation or glorification , &c. and therefore that mr. lock , though he intimates that our advantages by christ are great and many , should insist only upon four or five , and overlook all the rest , especially that he should take no notice of that which is the foundation of many of the other , viz. christ's redeeming us by his blood , and being the propitiation for our sins , is thought strange by others , whatsoever he himself may think of it , chap. viii . of the death and satisfaction of christ. he that hath incurred death by his own transgression cannot lay down his life for another , as our saviour professeth he did : mr. lock reasonab . of christian. p. 208. he declares , joh. 10. 1. — 21. the laying down his life for both jews and gentiles , ibid. p. 118. he freely gave up himself to death for us , second vindicat. of reason . of christian. p. 400. the design of his coming was to be offer'd up a lamb blameless , and void of offence , ibid. p. 75. satisfaction may plainly be collected out of several places in my reasonab . of christian. some whereof , which i took out of the gospels , i mention'd in my vindication , p. 5. and others of them which i took out of the epistles , which i shall point out to you now . as , i say , the design of our saviour's coming was to be offer'd up , and again i speak of the work of our redemption , words which in the epistles are taken to imply satisfaction . second vindicat. of the reasonab . of christian. p. 157. thus mr. lock . observations . it had been taken notice of , that mr. lock mentioning the advantages of christ's coming into the world , hath not one syllable of his satisfying for us . mr. lock , in vindication of himself , among other things says , that satisfaction may be plainly collected out of his reasonableness of christianity , where he alledges some passages out of the gospels , and some out of the epistles ; and he adds , that those in the epistles are taken to imply satisfaction . he doth not say that he himself takes the words in the epistles to imply satisfaction , but only they are taken to imply it ; and those that do so take them to imply it , may collect satisfaction from them : but mr. lock doth not declare plainly that the words do imply satisfaction , or that satisfaction may be rightly and firmly concluded from them . in defence of himself he saith farther , that none can blame his prudence , if he mention'd only those advantages which all christians are agreed in . the reason then of his not mentioning satisfaction , is , because all christians are not agreed as to it . but , 1. are all that call themselves christians , agreed as to all the other advantages which he mentions ? 2. if this was the true reason , why did it not restrain him from mentioning other things wherein he , and some that are called christians , do not agree ? mr. lock will not deny that more points than one are mention'd in his reasonableness of christianity , in which the ordinary systems and he disagree : and i hope he will allow the authors of those systems the name of christians . chap. ix . of redemption by christ ; also of his precepts and perfect sanctity . they that think there was no redemption necessary , and consequently that there was none , make jesus christ nothing but the restorer and preacher of pure natural religion , thereby doing violence to the whole tenour of the new testament . mr. lock reason . of christian. p. 2. the doctrine of redemption , and consequently of the gospel , is founded upon the supposition of adam's fall , ibid. p. 1. admirable is the contrivance of the divine wisdom in the whole work of our redemption . ibid. p. 160. our saviour was the just one , act. 7. 57. and 12. 14. who knew no sin , 2 cor. 5. 21. who did no sin , neither was guile found in his mouth , ibid. p. 208. in the precepts of christ there is nothing too much , nothing wanting , but they are such a compleat rule of life , as the wisest men must acknowledge tends entirely to the good of mankind ; and that all would be happy if all would practise it . ibid. p. 285. thus mr. lock . observations . both the places out of the acts in which our saviour is stil'd the just one , are misquoted ; whether through the author's fault , or the printer's , i know not . instead of act. 7. 57. read act. 7. 52. and act. 3. 14. instead of act. 12. 14. mr. lock speaking of the advantages that we have by christ , largely sets forth the excellency of the precepts , or rule of morality , which he hath left us in the new testament . such a body of ethicks i think no body will say the world had before our saviour's time : so mr. lock , reasonab . of christian. p. 273. again , where was there any such code that mankind might have recourse to as their unerring rule , before our saviour's time ? ibid. p. 275. and certainly this is a subject which christian writers , both ancient and modern , have insisted much upon ; i mean , the excellency of the precepts of christ : but i conceive that we are to understand them so , as that they had no design to disparage the precepts or rules for holy living which are left us in the old testament . the jews were not without their code of excellent laws , to which they might have recourse as to an unerring rule . none will have the confidence to deny that the writings of moses and the prophets , and other inspired persons , do contain many excellent instructions for the regulating mens lives and manners . yea , doth not our saviour himself , and likewise the apostles , urge several duties in the words of the old testament , and making use of its authority ? i shall instance only in the two great precepts of doing as we would have others do to us , and loving enemies . all things whatever ye would have men do to you , do ye also to them ; for ( says our saviour ) this is the law and the prophets , s. matt. 7. 12. and then for loving enemies , if thine enemy hunger feed him , if he thrist give him drink , for doing this thou shalt heap coals of fire upon his head , says s. paul , rom. 12. 20. transcribing the words of prov. 25. 21 , 22. as they are faithfully translated by the septuagint . here then s. paul , in the very words of prov. 25. presseth upon his romans this great command to love enemies , to love them not in word and in tongue , but in deed and in truth , to testifie it by relieving them in their necessity ; and then to encourage them to do this , he sets before them the benefits of it : 1. they would perform an act of charity to their enemy , melt him , and reduce him to a better mind . 2. they would gain a friend instead of an enemy ; instead of hatred returns of love. 3. solomon adds , that god also would reward them ; thou shalt heap coals of fire upon his head , and the lord shall reward thee , says solomon . and this excellent lecture he here reads us , may , i think , be call'd ( in the words of an ancient writer ) the top of philosophy . i only add , that there are the like commands to love enemies , and testifie that love by doing them good , in exod. 23. 4 , 5. chap. x. of the name christ ; also of his offices and kingdom . christ is us'd by the evangelists and apostles , in several places , for a proper name , particularly by s. luke , as act. 2. 28. 3. 6 , 20. 4. 10. 24. 24 , &c. in two of these places it cannot , with good sense , be taken otherwise ; for if it be not in act. 3. 6. and 4. 10. us'd as a proper name , we must read those places thus ; jesus the messiah of nazareth . and i think it is plain in those others cited , as well as several other places of the new testament . mr. lock , second vindicat. of the reasonab . of christian. p. 374. the three offices of priest , prophet , and king , are in holy writ attributed to our saviour , reasonab . of christian. p. 217. christ publish'd the kingdom of the messiah , that is , his own royalty , under the name of the kingdom of god , and of heaven , reasonab . of christian. p. 73. he spake of the kingdom of heaven , sometimes in reference to his appearing in the world and being believ'd on by particular persons ; sometimes in reference to the power should be given him by the father at his resurrection ; sometimes in reference to his coming to judge the world at the last day , in the full glory and completion of his kingdom , ibid. christ's obedience and suffering was rewarded with a kingdom , ibid. p. 208. thus mr. lock . observations . whether christ be us'd in scripture as a proper name or no , is not material ; but because mr. lock insists upon it , it may not be amiss to examine briefly how he proves it . he says , that christ is us'd as a proper name , act. 2. 28. 3. 6 , 20. 4. 10. 24. 24. &c. but i ask , how does that appear ? 1. in two of these places ( says he ) it cannot with any good sense be taken otherwise ; for if it be not in act. 3. 6. and 4. 10. us'd as a proper name , we must read those places thus ; jesus the messiah of nazareth . 2. i think it is plain in the other places cited . thus mr. lock . but to the former i say , what if we read those places thus , jesus the messiah of nazareth , i. e. jesus the messiah that was of nazareth ; is not this good sense ? besides , these texts might have been produc'd rather to prove the contrary , for in them his proper name is express'd , viz. jesus , to which is superadded this of christ , given him from his unction . as to the latter , it is enough to say , that mr. lock 's word will scarce pass for a sufficient proof . but farther , the other places are act. 2. 38. ( not 28. as it is misquoted in mr. lock ) 3. 20. 24. 24. now it is so far from being plain that christ is us'd in them as a proper name , that there is no ground at all to think that it is : yea , as to act. 2. 38. and 3. 20. there is ground to think the contrary . that which mr. lock adds ( second vindicat. p. 375. ) that long before the acts were writ the name of christ did denote the person of our saviour as much as jesus , is nothing but what every one knows ; and therefore in vain doth he trouble either chronologers , or suetonius and tacitus , about it . but how doth he prove that it denoted the person of our saviour as a proper name ? or if it did , doth that prove that it is us'd as a proper name in those places of the acts ? when mr. lock says , that christ's obedience and suffering was rewarded with a kingdom , it must be understood of that kingdom or power which was given him by god the father at his resurrection ; for , that he was a king before his suffering death , mr. lock does not deny . chap. xi . of the son of god , and the messiah . believing jesus to be the son of god , and to be the messiah , was the same thing . the jews , luke 22. 70. asking christ , whether he was the son of god ; plainly demand of him , whether he were the messiah : which is evident by comparing that with the three preceding verses . they ask him , ver . 67. whether he were the messiah ? he answers , if i tell you , you will not believe : but withal tells them , that from henceforth he should be in possession of the kingdom of the messiah ; express'd in these words , hereafter shall the son of man sit at the right hand of the power of god. which made them all cry out , art thou then the son of god ? i. e. dost thou then own thy self to be the messiah ? to which he replies , ye say that i am . this was the common signification of the son of god. mr. lock , reasonab . of christian. p. 34 , 35. confessing jesus to be the son of god , is the same with confessing him to be the messiah ; those two expressions being understood among the jews to signifie the same thing . ibid. p. 96. messiah and son of god were synonymous terms at that time among the jews . ibid. p. 50. the son of god and the messiah are one in signification . second vindicat. of the reasonab . of christian. p. 353. the answer of our saviour , set down by s. matthew chap. 26. 64. in these words thou hast said ; and by s. mark chap. 14. 62. in these i am ; is an answer only to this question , art thou then the son of god ? and not to that other , art thou the messiah ? which preceded , and he had answer'd to before ; though matthew and mark contracting the story , set them down together , as if making but one question , omitting all the intervening discourse : whereas 't is plain out of s. luke , that they were two distinct questions , to which jesus gave two distinct answers . in the first whereof , he , according to his wonted caution , declin'd saying in plain express words , that he was the messiah ; though in the latter he own'd himself to be the son of god. reasonab . of christian. p. 144 , 145. thus mr. lock . observations . here i conceive it will not be very easie to reconcile that which mr. lock says p. 34 , 35. and otherwhere , with that which he hath p. 144 , 145. he says p. 34 , 35. that the jews asking christ whether he were the son of god , plainly demand of him whether he was the messiah ; and again , they cry out , art thou the son of god ? i. e. dost thou then own thy self to be the messiah ? so that here mr. lock plainly makes art thou the son of god ? and , art thou the messiah ? one and the same question . and yet p. 145. he says expresly , that they are two distinct questions , to which jesus gave two distinct answers . yea , he appeals to one and the same evangelist , s. luke , for the truth of both these . it is evident by comparing luke 22. 70. with the three preceding verses , that the jews asking whether he were the son of god , demanded of him whether he were the messiah ; says mr. lock p. 34. it is plain out of s. luke , that they are two distinct questions , says he p. 145. and indeed it is very plain out of s. luke , that they are two distinct questions , not only from our saviour's giving two distinct answers to them , but also from hence , that they ask'd the former question touching his being the messiah of their own accord ; the latter , whether he was the son of god , upon occasion of his mentioning his sitting at the right hand of the power of god , s. luke 22. 69. i might add , that i question whether they would have accounted it blasphemy , if he had answer'd affirmatively to the former question , as they did when he own'd himself to be the son of god. this directly overthrows all that mr. lock saith about the son of god , and the messiah , as being synonymous terms , or one in signification ; for if they be expressions of one and the same signification , these two , art thou the messiah ? and art thou the son of god ? cannot be distinct questions , as ( according to mr. lock ) 't is plain out of s. luke that they are . no man will say that art thou the christ ? and art thou the messiah ? are two distinct questions , because messiah and christ are known to signifie the same thing ; and if the son of god and the messiah did likewise signisie the same thing , those other could not be said to be two distinct questions . and therefore mr. lock must either retract this , that 't is plain out of s. luke that art thou the messiah ? and art thou the son of god ? are two distinct questions ; or else renounce his beloved notion , which takes up a great part of his reasonableness of christianity , that the son of god , and the messiah , are synonymous terms , and one in signification , though not in sound . the truth is , the account which mr. lock himself gives of the signification of the son of god , and of the messiah , is sufficient to overthrow that notion of his . in his reasonah . of christian. p. 30. mr. lock having alledg'd those word , the messias , which is , being interpreted , the christ , john 1. 42. tells us , that christ is but the greek name for the hebrew messiah , and that both signifie the anointed . so p. 216. he says , the faith required was , to believe jesus to be the messiah , the anointed . he was anointed to three great offices , viz. of priest , prophet , and king ; see him p. 217. concerning the other title , the son of god , he says , p. 303. who being conceiv'd in the womb of a virgin ( that had not known man ) by the immediate power of god , was properly the son of god ; for which he cites luk. 1. 35. according to mr. lock then , the son of god signifies our saviour's having been conceived in the womb of a pure virgin by the immediate power of god , whereas messiah signifies his being anointed to the offices of a priest , a prophet , and a king. since then , by his own confession , these titles have two so different significations , how he can say , and defend , that they are one in signification , i know not . if when he says that they are synonymous terms , expressions of the same thing , one in signification , &c. his meaning was only this ; that the same person is express'd or signify'd by them ; that both these titles agree to the same person ; or , that the same person is both the son of god and the messiah ; there would be no controversie as to it : for , it is that which was never question'd . but mr. lock will not be satisfied with this , as appears from his reasonableness of christianity , and the two vindications of it , especially the latter . for it was acknowledg'd more than once , that the titles agree , or are apply'd to the same person ; and yet he is so far from acquiescing , that he disputes the point as earnestly as ever . see second vindication , p. 349 , &c. chap. xii . of two natures in one person , and of the trinity . i do not remember that i ever read in my bible either of these propositions in these precise terms , there are three persons in one nature , or there are two natures and one person . i do not here question their truth , nor deny that they may be drawn from the scripture ; but i deny that these very propositions are in express words in my bible ; for that is the only thing i deny here . mr. lock , third letter , p. 224. observations . it is well known how much mr. lock complains that he was join'd with the unitarians . see his second letter , p. 7. the world ( says he ) will be apt to think , that i am the person who argue against the trinity , ibid. p. 24. that i am one of the they and them that oppose the doctrine of the trinity , p. 27. i might transcribe much more to this purpose : but might not mr. lock do well ( instead of complaining of others ) to consider whether he himself hath not given the world reason to suspect that he is no friend to the doctrine of the trinity ? as by taking no notice of s. matth. 28. 19. in his reasonableness of christianity , where our saviour being about to leave the apostles , and to be taken from them to heaven , and instructing them what they should teach the unbelieving nations , and how they were to admit them into his church , says , go teach all nations , baptizing them in ( or into ) the name of the father , and of the son , and of the holy ghost . this lay directly in mr. lock 's way when he was acquainting us what the apostles were to preach to unbelievers ; so that it may be justly suspected , that there was some special reason of his omitting it ; and particularly , that the reason was , because these three , the father , the son , and the holy ghost , are mention'd here . so whereas it is believ'd that this title , the son of god , doth in sundry places include or denote that christ is god ; mr. lock very studiously and industriously opposeth this : and by so doing , hath likewise given persons reason to think that he is no friend to the doctrine of the trinity . thus he contends , that in s. luk. 4. 41. s. mar. 3. 11 , 12. s. matth. 16. 16. s. job . 11. 27. s. luk. 22. 70. s. matth. 27. 54. act. 8. 37. the term the son of god doth not denote our saviour's being god. see his second vindication , p. 361 , 362 , 363 , 364 , 366 , 367 , 368 , 369 , 374. i shall not consider all that he saith of these texts , but with reference to s. luk. 22. 70. i would ask him , whether the jews understood not this appellation , the son of god , so as that it denoted the person so call'd to be god ? and therefore as soon as he had own'd himself to be the son of god , v. 70. they said , what need we any farther witness , for we have heard from his own mouth ? ver . 71. we have heard , viz. his blasphemy , as s. matthew and s. mark expound it ; then the high priest rent his cloaths , saying , that he had spoken blasphemy , what farther need have we of witnesses ? behold ye have now heard his blasphemy ? s. matth. 26. 65. see also s. mar. 14. 63 , 64. if they had not understood that by owning himself to be the son of god he had made himself god , how could they say that he blasphem'd ? this matter is fully clear'd by s. job . 10. 33 , 35 , 36. the jews said , for a good work we stone thee not , but for blasphemy , and because thou being a man , makest thy self god. jesus answer'd , if your law call'd them gods to whom the word of god came , and the scripture cannot be broken , say ye of him whom the father hath sanctified and sent into the world , thou blasphemest , because i said i am the son of god ? here it is plain , 1. that the jews made christ to be a blasphemer , because being a man he made himself god. 2. that according to them , he made himself god , by saying that he was the son of god. 3. that our saviour doth not blame the jews for making this inference ; but contrarywise , maintains that he did not blaspheme in saying that he was the son of god , and so god , by alledging the psalmist's words , i said ye are gods. if the psalmist did not blaspheme in recording these words , i said ye are gods ; how say ye that he whom the father hath set apart and sent into the world , doth blaspheme , because he said that he is the son of god , and so god ? but mr. lock most especially gives the world just reason to suspect that he is not a friend to the doctrine of the trinity , in his third letter : as , 1. by refusing to follow the friendly advice that was given him for removing all jealousies and suspicions of him as to this particular . he was told , that the way to clear himself , had been by declaring to the world , that he own'd the doctrine of the trinity as it has been receiv'd in the christian church . but this he would not be persuaded to do , alledging , that he needed not to reply to what was never objected , and clear himself from what was never laid to his charge . 2. that what was laid upon him , was what he could not do without owning to know what he was sure he did not know . for ( says he ) how the doctrine of the trinity has been always receiv'd in the christian church , i confess my self ignorant . thus mr. lock , in his third letter , p. 7 , 9. to the former of which i say , suppose it was not objected that he did not favour the doctrine of the trinity , yet if it was only insinuated , this was a sufficient reason why he should clear himself . no man should be silent in the case of such insinuation . now mr. lock was not ignorant that this had been insinuated , being so well acquainted with two discourses , one intituled some thoughts concerning the several causes and occasions of atheism , the other socinianism unmask'd ; both publish'd before that he was put in mind to clear himself . the very title of the latter doth insinuate it ; and if he would see it plainly objected , he may consult p. 82. where are these words : my next charge against this gentleman ( i. e. mr. lock ) was this ; that those texts of scripture which respect the holy trinity , were either disregarded by him , or were interpreted by him after the antitrinitarian mode . and this he is so far from denying , that he openly avows it . by which he hath made it clear , that he espouses that doctrine of the socinians . here it is plainly laid to his charge ; and yet mr. lock did not think fit , either in his reply to this socinianism unmask'd , nor any where else , to clear himself , by declaring to the world that he owns the doctrine of the trinity . as to the latter , that he is ignorant how the doctrine of the trinity has been always receiv'd in the christian church , it is not to the purpose : for it was not requir'd of him that he should declare his owning the doctrine of the trinity as it has been always receiv'd in the christian church , ( the word always is mr. lock 's addition ; ) it was only mention'd that he should declare his owning it as it hath been receiv'd in the christian church : and if he had only declar'd his owning it as it hath been receiv'd in the church of england , it would have been judg'd sufficient . therefore both these are apparently mere shifts and evasions . 2. mr. lock gives the world just reason to suspect that he doth not favour the doctrine of the trinity , by his disputing so largely and earnestly about the terms nature and person , and his ridiculing that which had been said for clearing the sense or signification of them . this dispute takes up no small part of his third letter , ( see p. 253 , &c. and again p. 352 , &c. ) after that he had enlarg'd so much upon them in his two former letters : see his first letter , p. 148 , &c. and the second letter , p. 98 , &c. lastly , in the words that i have transcrib'd out of this third letter , p. 224. he gives the world just cause to doubt that he is no friend to this doctrine . the words are ; i do not here question the truth of these propositions , there are three persons in one nature , or there are two natures and one person , nor deny that they may be drawn from the scripture ; but i deny that these very propositions are in express words in my bible . for that is the only thing i deny here . if mr. lock had said , i do not question the truth of these propositions , nor deny , &c. he might have given some satisfaction . but here is a dead fly that makes his ointment to send forth no good savour , viz. the word here added , and that twice . he doth not here question their truth , and that is the only thing he denies here : i.e. for this time , and upon this occasion , he did not think fit to express his questioning the one , or denying the other : but he doth not absolutely say that he doth not question or deny the one or other . he saith , for that is the only thing i deny here ; whereby i perceive that mr. lock has his priviledg'd particles , as he says that others have theirs : for what the particle for doth here i know not . chap. xiii . of the scriptures , particularly of the epistles ; also of the interpretation of them . the holy scripture is to me , and always will be , the constant guide of my assent ; and i shall always hearken to it , as containing infallible truth , relating to things of the highest concernment . and i shall presently condemn and quit any opinion of mine , as soon as i am shewn that it is contrary to any revelation in the holy scripture . mr. lock , first letter , p. 226 , 227. every true christian is under an absolute and indispensible necessity , by being the subject of christ , to study the scriptures with an unprejudiced mind , according to that measure of time , opportunity , and helps which he has ; that in those sacred writings be may find what his lord and master hath by himself , or by the mouths of his apostles , requir'd of him either to be believ'd or done . second vindicat. of the reason . of christian. p. 446. i think it every christian's duty to read , search , and study the holy scriptures , and make this their great business . ibid. p. 201. all that we find in the revelation of the new testament being the declar'd will and mind of our lord and master , the messiah , whom we have taken to be our king , we are bound to receive as right and truth , or else we are not his subjects . but it is still what we find in the scripture ; what we , sincerely seeking to know the will of our lord , discover to be his mind . where it is spoken plainly we cannot miss it ; where there is obscurity , either in the expressions themselves , or by reason of the seeming contrariety of other passages , there a fair endeavour , as much as our circumstances will permit , secures us from a guilty disobedience to his will , or a sinsul errour in faith. if he had requir'd more of us in those points , he would have declar'd his will plainer to us . ibid. p. 76. the holy writers of the epistles , inspired from above , writ nothing but truth , and in most places very weighty truths to us now , for the expounding , clearing , and confirming of the christian doctrine , and establishing those in it who had embraced it . but yet every sentence of theirs must not be taken up and looked on as a fundamental article necessary to salvation , without an explicit belief whereof no body could be a member of christ's church here , nor be admitted into his eternal kingdom hereafter . if all or most of the truths declared in the epistles were to be receiv'd and believ'd as fundamental articles , what then became of those christians who were fallen asleep , ( as s. paul witnesses , in his first to the corinthians , many were , ) before these things in the epistles were revealed to them . most of the epistles not being written till above twenty years after our saviour's ascension , and some after thirty . reasonah . of christian. p. 300. the epistles resolving doubts , and reforming mistakes , are of great advantage to our knowledge and practice . i do not deny but the great doctrines of the christian faith are drop'd here and there , and scatter'd up and down in most of them : but 't is not in the epistles we are to learn what are the fundamental articles of faith , where they are promiscuously , and without distinction , mixed with other truths . we shall find and discern those great and necessary points best in the preaching of our saviour and the apostles , to those who were yet strangers and ignorant of the faith , to bring them in and convert them to it . ibid. p. 298. many doctrines proving and explaining , and giving a farther light into the gospel , are published in the epistles to the corinthians and thessalonians : these are all of divine authority , and none of them may be disbeliev'd by any one who is a christian. second vindicat of reason . of christian. p. 319. generally , and in necessary points , the scriptures are to be understood in the plain direct meaning of the words and phrases , such as they may be suppos'd to have had in the mouths of the speakers . reasonab . -of christian. p. 2. he that will read the epistles as he ought , must observe what 't is in them is principally aim'd at , find what is the argument in hand , and how managed ; he must look into the drift of the discourse , observe the coherence and connexion of the parts , and see how it is consistent with it self , and other parts of scripture . the observing of this will best help us to the true meaning and mind of the writer . ibid. p. 294. the scripture gives light to its own meaning , by one place compar'd with another . vindicat. of reasonab . of christian. p. 22. thus mr. lock . observations . how happy would it be , if mr. lock , and i , and all of us , could presently condemn and quit any opinion of ours , so soon as it is shew'd that it is contrary to any part of scripture . i do not know any one that affirms that all or most of the truths contain'd in the epistles are fundamental articles , so necessary , that without an explicit belief of them , none can be a member of christ's church here , or admitted into his eternal kingdom hereafter . mr. lock , without any necessity , takes upon him to determine a chronological question , and is very positive in his determination . most of the epistles ( says he ) were not written till above twenty years after our saviour's ascension , and some after thirty . but there are who refer our lord's ascension to his thirty third year , and the date of the first and second epistles to the corinthians to an. dom. 53 , that of the first to the thessalonians to an. dom. 49 , ( making the second to the thessalonians to have been writ shortly after it , ) the date of s. peter's first epistle to an. dom. 44 , as there are who refer that of the first epistle to the corinthians , and of both the epistles to the thessalonians , to an. dom. 50 ; so that according to them , here are five epistles of which it cannot be said , that they were not written till above twenty years after our saviour's ascension . if mr. lock say , suppose it were so , that these five were not written above twenty years after the ascension , it is true still that most of the epistles were not written till above twenty years after it ; i reply , that a person that is so positive should not barely say it , but also prove it . how knows he , that there are not some other epistles which were not written after twenty years after christ's ascension ? as to that which he adds , that some were written after thirty years from our saviour's ascension ; it may be observ'd , that he is so prudent as not to let us know what epistles they are . and farther , the martyrdom of s. peter , s. paul , and s. james , is supposed by some not to have been after thirty years from our lord's ascension , and their epistles were certainly all writ before their martyrdom ; and therefore it is impossible that their epistles should be writ later then the thirtieth year after christ's ascension , it being suppos'd that that their martyrdom was not later then that year . according to jos. scaliger , the martyrdom of the two great apostles s. peter and s. paul was exactly thirty years after the lord's assension , according to syncellus nine and twenty , according to lydiat eight and twenty ; and s. james's martyrdom , according to all of them , preceeded theirs : so that if we follow the account of these three great masters in chronology , the epistle of s. james , the two epistles of s. peter , and those of s. paul , could not be writ after the thirtieth year from christ's ascension . there remain the epistles of s. john and s. jude , and how will mr. lock prove that those were writ after thirty years from our saviour's ascension ? one that spent much time and pains in the study of the chronology of the old and new testament , says , that among all the apostolick epistles , there is none about whose time of writing we are so far to seek , as about those of s. john. if mr. lock say , that there are who give other accounts of the time of the writing the first epistle of s. peter , and of those to the corinthians and thessalonians , as also of the time of s. peter's suffering , and s. paul's , different from those that are given here of them , i grant it ; but what can be inferr'd from this disagreement of expositors or chronographers , but the uncertainty of the time of the date of the epistles , which should caution men not to be so positive in such things , as too many are . many of the things which mr. lock saith of the epistles , may be apply'd also to the gospels . for instance , all or most of the truths contained in the gospels are not to be look'd on as fundamental articles , so necessary that without an explicit belief of them , none can be admitted into christ's church here , or his eternal kingdom hereafter . also fundamental articles are promiscuously , and without distinction , mixed with other truths in the gospels . so he that will read the gospels as he ought , must observe what 't is in them that is principally aim'd at , find what is the argument in hand , and how managed ; must look into the drift of the discourse , observe the coherence and connexion of the parts , and see how it is consistent with it self and other parts of scripture . finally , there are some fundamental articles that are distinguish'd from other truths in the epistles : as in rom. 10. 9. if thou confess with thy mouth the lord jesus , and believe with thy heart that god rais'd him from the dead , thou shalt be saved . so 1 tim. 1. 15. it is a faithful saying , and worthy of all acceptation , that christ jesus came into the world to save sinners . and so heb. 11. 6. he that cometh to god , must believe that he is , and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him . chap. xiv . of the preaching of christ ; as also the commission he gave to his apostles , and the lxx disciples , and their preaching . the religion our saviour and his apostles proposed , consisted in that short , plain , easie , and intelligible summary , which i set down in my reasonab . of christian. in these words ; believing jesus to be the saviour promised , and taking him now raised from the dead , and constituted the lord and judge of men , to be their king and ruler . mr. lock vindicat. of the reasonab . of christian. p. 28. as to our saviour and his apostles , the whole aim of all their preaching every where was to convince the unbelieving world of these two great truths : first , that there was one eternal invisible god , maker of heaven and earth ; and next , that jesus of nazareth was the messiah , the promised king and saviour . second vindicat. of the reason . of christian. p. 237. our saviour preach'd every where the kingdom of god , and by his miracles declar'd himself to be the king of that kingdom . the apostles preach'd the same ; and after his ascension , openly avow'd him to be the prince and saviour promised . ibid. p. 252. by these and the like places we may be satisfied what it was that the apostles taught and preach'd ; even this one proposition , that jesus was the messiah . ibid. p. 282. this one doctrine , that jesus was the messiah , was that which was propos'd in our saviour's time to be believ'd as necessary to make a man a christian : the same doctrine was likewise what was propos'd afterward in the preaching of the apostles to unbelievers , to make them christians . ibid. p. 318. there is yet one consideration remaining , which were sufficient of it self to convince us that it was the sole article of faith which was preach'd ; and that is , the commissions of those that were sent to preach the gospel . our saviour's commission , or end of his being sent , and the execution of it , both terminated in this , that he declar'd the good news , that the kingdom of the messiah was come , and gave them to understand by the miracles he did , that he himself was he . so the commission that he gave the apostles was , that they should acquaint their hearers that the kingdom of the messiah was come ; and let them know , by the miracles they did in his name , that he was that king and deliverer they expected . and his commission to the seventy whom he sent to preach , was so exactly conformable to that which he had before given to the twelve apostles , that there needs but this one thing more to be observed to convince any one that they were sent to convert their hearers to this sole belief , that the kingdom of the messiah was come , and that jesus was the messiah . ibid. p. 289 , 290 , 296 , 299. accordingly , the preaching of the apostles every where in the acts tended to this one point , to prove that jesus was the messiah . reasonab . of christian. p. 31. what that word was through which others should believe on christ s. joh. 17. 20. we have seen in the preaching of the apostles all through the history of the acts , viz. this one great point , that jesus was the messiah . ibid. p. 186. observations . it is strange that mr. lock should say in so many places , without any restriction or limitation , that this , that jesus is the messiah , is the sole doctrine , that one point or article , which was preach'd ; when he himself otherwhere puts so many restrictions and limitations upon it : as , 1. when in his reasonab . of christian. p. 195. he says , this was the only gospel-article of faith which was preach'd to them . he doth not say , the only article of faith , but the only gospel-article . he grants that the apostles preach'd the article of one true eternal and invisible god , maker of heaven and earth , ( see reasonab . of christian . p. 43 , 44. ) but he doth not call this a gospel-article . 2. when he says that it was the only article necessary to be believ'd to make a man a christian , the sole doctrine , upon their assent to which , or disbelief of it , men were pronounced believers or unbelievers , and accordingly receiv'd into the church of christ. ibid. p. 195. 3. he limits to the preaching of our saviour and his apostles , to those who were yet strangers and ignorant of the faith , to bring them in , and convert them to it . ibid. p. 298. see also p. 295. and 297. it is strange also that he should contend so much that this was the only article of faith that was preach'd , when he acknowledges that several other articles were preach'd . indeed now after his death , his resurrection was also commonly required to be believ'd as a necessary article . so mr. lock , ibid. p. 31. their great business was to be witnesses to jesus of his life , death , resurrection , and ascension ; which , put together , were undeniable proofs of his being the messiah . so the same mr. lock , ibid. p. 188. speaking of the apostles , who certainly did not fail to execute their great business , which was to preach , or bear witness to the articles of christ's life , death , resurrection , and ascension , and not only that of his being the messiah . in the next page , ( viz. 190. ) he hath these words , we see what it was that was to be preach'd to all nations ; viz. that he was the messiah that had suffer'd , and rose from the dead the third day , and fulfill'd all things that was written in the old testament concerning the messiah , and that those that believ'd this , and repented , should have remission of sins through this faith in him . and p. 191. he tells us , that s. paul preached that jesus was the messiah , the king who being risen from the dead , now reigneth , and shall more publickly manifest his kingdom in judging the world at the last day . surely nothing can be more plain , than that by mr. lock 's own acknowledgment , the apostles preach'd the articles of our dear lord's suffering , rising the third day , fulfilling all the prophecies of the old testament concerning him , now reigning , and future coming to judge the world , and that those who truly believe and repent , shall receive remission of sins through faith in him ; and not one article only . and therefore he very fitly calls them concomitant articles ; since the apostles , in their preaching , often join'd them with that article , that jesus is the messiah . the belief of jesus of nazareth reth to be the messiah , together with those concomitant articles of his resurrection , rule , and coming again to judge the world , &c. thus mr. lock , reasonab . of christian. p. 293 , 294. to reconcile these acknowledgments with his doctrine of one article , he tryeth many ways , but all in vain . 1. as to the article of the resurrection , he would persuade us that the article of jesus's being the messiah and it are but one . these two important articles are inseparable , and in effect make but one . for believe one and you believe both , deny one of them and you can believe neither . so mr. lock in his second vindication , p. 309. but every one sees , that all he could say is , that in effect they make but one ; and that with the same breath he expresly calls them two articles . there is therefore no necessity of our insisting upon this , they that please may see what he himself saith in the same vindication , p. 25 , 26. 2. he insists much upon it , that our saviour's crucifixion , death , and resurrection , are mentioned and made use of as arguments to persuade men of this fundamental truth , viz. that jesus was the messiah ; they were not propos'd as fundamental articles , which the apostles principally aim'd at , and endeavour'd to convince men of . second vindicat. p. 268 , 269. so again , p. 323. he urges that his death and resurrection were matters of fact , which happen'd to him in their due time , to compleat in him the character and predictions of the messiah , and demonstrate him to be the deliverer promised ; they were no more necessary to be believ'd to make a man a christian , than any other part of divine revelation , &c. thus mr. lock . but the question is not , whether the crucifixion , death , and resurrection of christ were propos'd by the apostles as the fundamental truths which they principally aim'd at , and endeavour'd to convince their hearers of ; but whether they were not propos'd by them as fundamental truths . whether this , that jesus is the messiah , be the principal article ; and , whether it was the only article preach'd by the apostles , as necessary to the making men christians , are different questions . mr. lock , in his reasonab . of christian. p. 31. says expresly of the article of christ's resurrection , that it was also commonly requir'd to be believ'd as a necessary article . where we may observe the word also ; which denotes , that not only the article of jesus's being the messiah , but also this of the resurrection , was commonly requir'd as necessary . and accordingly the same mr. lock says presently after , that our saviour's resurrection is necessary now to be believ'd by those who would receive him as the messiah . it is true , that in a place lately cited , viz. his second vindication , p. 323. he says , that the articles of christ's death and resurrection are no more necessary to be believ'd to make a man a christian , than any other part of divine revelation ; but then it immediately follows , but as far as they have an immediate connexion with his being the messiah , and cannot be denied without denying him to be the messiah : and so he plainly grants , that so far as they have such a connexion with his being the messiah , they are necessary to be believ'd to make a man a christian : which is as much as we need desire ; for thence it follows , that this , that jesus is the messiah , was not the sole doctrine that was preach'd as necessary to be believ'd to that end . i must not forget that mr. lock also saith , that our saviour's crucifixion , death , and resurrection , were mention'd and made use of to prove that jesus was the messiah . if so , these articles , that jesus was crucify'd , that he died , and that he rose from death , were the premisses ; and this , that he was the messiah , the conclusion . now it must be acknowledg'd , that the premisses are necessary to be believ'd before we can believe the conclusion : and therefore this makes against mr. lock , not at all for him . if we cannot believe that jesus was the messiah unless we believe that he rose from the dead , ( which mr. lock confesses , ) then the article of the resurrection was necessary to be preach'd and believ'd to make a man a christian. 3. he says that his resurrection and some other articles , are put for his being the messiah , and proposed to be believ'd in the place of it ; but i shall ●●ve occasion to examine this very shortly . to proceed then , how can mr. lock say , that this , that jesus was the messiah , was the only gospel-article preach'd by the apostles to unbelievers , to bring them to the faith ; when he grants , that in some of their discourses it was omitted , yea and other articles at the same time insisted on ? thus , in his reasonab . of christianity , p. 31. he says , that christ's resurrection was sometimes solely insisted on . so in his second vindication , p. 284. he plainly confesses , that in the story of what paul and barnabas said at lystra , the article of the messiah is not mention'd ; tho' at the same time they preached the article of the one living god. see also ibid. p. 307. where he says , that 't is not at all to be wondered , that his resurrection , his ascension , his rule and dominion , and his coming to judge the quick and the dead , should sometimes in scripture be put alone as sufficient descriptions of the messiah . thus act. 10. our saviour , in peter's discourse to cornelius , when he brought him the gospel , is described to be the messiah by his miracles , death , resurrection , dominion , and cocoming to judge the quick and the dead . here he grants in express words , that our lord's resurrection , ascension , dominion , and judging the quick and dead , are sometimes put alone ; and if they be sometimes put alone , then the article of his being the messiah is sometimes omitted . to the same purpose he says , ibid. p. 308. these , where they are set alone for the faith to which salvation is promised , plainly signifie the believing jesus to be the messiah . here he grants again , that the four articles just now mention'd are sometimes set alone , and that the article of jesus's being the messiah is only signified ( viz. by those four articles ) and not express'd . and indeed this is mr. lock 's usual evasion , that tho' other articles are only insisted on in some places , yet the article of our saviour's being the messiah is signified by those articles , the believing them is put for believing him to be the messiah , they are proposed to be believ'd in the place of it ; see his second vindication , p. 307 , 327. where we may be sure , that his meaning is not , that the other articles were to be believ'd , and the article that jesus is the messiah was not to be believ'd ( tho' the words , proposed to be believ'd in place of it , are capable of that sense : ) but if i do not mistake , his meaning is , that those articles were propos'd to be believ'd , that believing them they might believe also , that jesus was the messiah , because those were convincing proofs of this . but whatever his meaning is , this is manifest , that they were proposed by the apostles to unbelievers , as necessary to be believ'd to make them christian : and this is sufficient for the confutation of those who say , that only one gospel-article was preached as necessary to be believ'd to that end . before i leave this , i must not omit to take notice , that mr. lock doth assign a reason why paul and barnabas did not mention the article of the messiah , which i shall set down in his own words , having ( says he ) begun their preaching with that of one living god , they had not time to proceed farther , and propose to them what yet remain'd to make them christians , but they were by the instigation of the jews fallen upon , and paul stoned , before he could come to open to them this other fundamental article of the gospel ; thus mr. lock , second vindication p. 384 , who certainly rely'd very much upon his reader 's credulity when he writ this , presuming that he would never consult the history of the acts. for this , that the apostles had not time to proceed to the article of the messiah , is his mere fiction , there is no ground for it , nor the least footstep thereof in that history ; tho' he hath the confidence to say that it is apparent ; yea the quite contrary appears , that they had time to finish their discourse , and did finish it . for s. luke , act. 14. having set down their words , or the sum of them , v. 15 , 16 , 17 , says v. 18. and with these sayings scarce restrained they the people , that they had not done sacrifice to them . this shews that they had finished their discourse ; as it also shews what effect it had , it did restrain the multitude from sacrificing to them , but with difficulty . the people were at that time so far from stoning them , or giving them any disturbance or interruption , that they looked upon them as gods come down to them in the likeness of men , and would have honour'd them as such . tho' after this ( and how long after , mr. lock , with all his skill in chronology , cannot tell us ) jews came from antioch and iconium , who persuaded the people , and they stoned paul. see act. 14. 19. lastly , is it not strange that he should say , that this , that jesus is the messiah , was the only gospel-article preached by our saviour and his apostles ; and yet maintain that the apostles did not in plain and direct words preach this doctrine , of his being the messiah , till after his resurrection , and that our saviour did not in plain and direct words declare himself to the jews to be the messiah , till near the time of his death ? thus in his reasonableness of christianity , p. 55 , &c. having observed that there is a threefold declaration of the messiah , 1. by miracles , 2. by phrases and circumlocutions , that did signify and intimate his coming , tho' not in direct words pointing out his person ; he comes , p. 59. to the third or last , which is , by plain and direct words declaring the doctrine of the messiah , speaking out that jesus was he ; as we see the apostles did when they went about preaching the gospel after our saviour's resurrection . this was the open clear way , and that which one would think the messiah himself , when he came , should have taken , especially if it be of that moment , that upon mens believing him to be the messiah depended the forgiveness of their sins . and yet we see that our saviour did not , but on the contrary , for the most part made no other discovery of himself , at least in judea , and at the beginning of his ministery , but in the two former ways , which were more obscure . thus mr. lock . so that according to him , as our saviour did not take the open clear way of discovering himself to be the messiah , so his disciples did not speak out that he was so , till after his resurrection . yea he insists largely upon our saviour's concealment of his being the christ. now i say , is it not strange that he should dwell so long upon his concealing his being so , and yet maintain at the same time , that his being the messiah was the only gospel-article preach'd by him ? since mr. lock appeals so confidently to the history of the evangelists , and of the acts , and abounds so much in citations out of them to make good his pretentions , insomuch that some have computed that this takes up about three quarters of his reasonableness of christianity , it might have been expected that i should have examined the texts by him alledg'd ; but that would have swell'd this tract too much ; withal , i may have an opportunity hereafter of doing this , ( tho' that which hath been said might save that labor ) for it will be easie to shew that many of the places he produceth make indeed against and not for him . as to the commission given to the apostles , how comes it that he takes notice of that which they had when christ sent them to preach to the jews , and makes no mention of that which he gave them when taking his solemn farewel of them , he sent them to preach to all nations ? he ought certainly to have taken notice of the one as well as the other . this commission we have s. mat. 28. 19 , 20. go teach all nations , baptizing them in the name ( or , into the name ) of the father , and of the son , and of the holy ghost , teaching them to observe all things what soever i have commanded you . the apostles were to teach adult persons before they baptiz'd them ; and what were they to teach them ? surely the necessary doctrine concerning those in or into whose name they were to be baptiz'd ; and so concerning the holy ghost , as well as touching the father and the son. if mr. lock will translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 make disciples , it comes to to the same ; for they could not be made disciples without being taught . we see then what their commission was , viz. to teach the doctrine of the holy , blessed , and glorious trinity , the father , son , and holy ghost , and so to admit men into the church by baptism . and we are sure that they faithfully executed their commission , and did that which their lord and master gave them in charge . whence it is clearly manifest , what the apostles were to teach all nations ; and consequently , what they did teach them . chap. xv. of the fall of adam . what adam fell from , was the state of perfect obedience . by this fall he lost paradise , wherein was tranquility and the tree of life , i. e. he lost bliss and immortality . the penalty annex'd to the breach of the law stands thus , gen. 2. 17. in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die . how was this executed ? in the day he did eat he did not actually die , but his life began from thence to shorten and waste , and to have an end . death , i. e. a state of death and mortality , enter'd by sin : mr. lock , reason . of christ. p. 3 , 4. by death here , i can understand nothing but a ceasing to be , the losing of all actions of life and sense . such a death came on adam and all his posterity by his first disobedience in paradise , under which death they should have lain for ever , had it not been for the redemption by jesus christ : ibid. p. 6. as adam was turned out of paradise , so all his posterity was born out of it , out of the reach of the tree of life ; all like their father adam , in a state of mortality , void of the tranquility and bliss of paradise . ibid. p. 7. though all die in adam , yet none are truly punished but for their own deeds . ibid. p. 9. thus mr. lock . observations . expositors are not agreed what death it is which god threatned to adam upon his eating the forbidden fruit. mr. lock ( if i mistake him not ) can by death here understand nothing but that which we call the death of the body , or a natural or temporal death : and i believe few will deny that this death was threatned in the words thou shalt surely die , gen. 2. 17. the great objection against this , is that which mr. lock intimates , viz. that it is said , in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die ; whereas it was above nine hundred years after his eating , that adam died this death . but hereto it may be answer'd , 1. that in the day that he did eat ( taking the words in the strict sense ) this death became due to him , or he became a child of death . god might have said to him as solomon to abiathar , 1 kings 2. 26. thou art worthy of death , but i will not at this time put thee to death . 2. in that day he became liable to diseases , which were harbingers of this death , which did by degrees weaken the strength of nature , and at last introduce death . 3. st. hierom and theodoret do testifie that symmachus , instead of thou shalt surely die , translates thou shalt be mortal ; and the rendring is approv'd and commended by s. hierom in tradit . hebr. in gen . now according to it there is no difficulty , for adam did become mortal that day . 4. some say that adam repented , and that upon his repentance the execution of the threatning was respited ; as others say that it was respited upon the account of the remedy which god had prepared , viz. the seed of the woman . lastly , there is no necessity that the words in the day be taken so strictly , we may understand them more largely ; viz. at what time thou shalt eat thereof , know assuredly , that thou shalt die the death . as solomon says to shimei , on the day thou goest out , and passest over the brook kidron , thou shalt know for certain that thou shalt surely die , 1 kings 2. 37. it could not be solomon's meaning , that shimei should surely die the very same day that he passed over kidron ; for he could not foresee that shimei would return to jerusalem the self same day , or that word would be brought to him the self same day that he had passed over ; he only tells shimei , that if he should pass over , he would forfeit his life , and be certainly put to death , whensoever he should please to give order for the execution of the sentence . therefore , notwithstanding the foremention'd objection , we may conclude , that adam was to die that death which we call the death of the body , or a natural death : and thus far mr. lock is in the right . the question is , whether he be in the right , when he says that by the death threatned gen. 2. 17. he can understand nothing but this death . what thinks he of a death of afflictions , outward sufferings and calamities ? may not this be comprehended under the word death , gen. 2. ? is not the word death taken in this sense in other places of scripture ? when s. paul says of himself , that he was in deaths oft , may we not interpret it in sufferings oft ? see 2 cor. 11. 23. in like manner , when he says 1 cor. 15. 31. i die daily , may we not suppose that he had respect to the afflictions and sufferings that came daily upon him for the sake of christ ? but most plainly the word is thus to be understood exod. 10. 17. where pharaoh says to moses and aaron , intreat the lord your god , that he may take away from me this death only . here by death is understood nothing but the plague of locusts . with respect to these afflictions and calamities , one says , incipimus enim , si forte nescis , tum mori , cum primum incipimus vivere , & mors cum vita protenditur . and thus adam begun to die , i.e. to be liable to the afflictions and miseries of life , that very day that he sinn'd . but mr. lock informs us more particularly what he cannot understand by death genesis 2. saying , 1. some will have it to be a state of guilt , wherein not only he , but all his posterity , was so involv'd , that every one descended of him deserv'd endless torment in hell-fire . 2. they would have it be also a state of necessary sinning , and provoking god in every action that men do : see reasonab . of christianity , p. 4 , 5. whereas he cannot subscribe to either of these significations of the word death . but i must acknowledge my self so ignorant , as not to know the authors of these two interpretations . it would have been more satisfaction to his readers , if mr. lock had given us the names of them , together with their express words , and directed us to the places where we might have found them . but he not having done this , it cannot be expected that any notice should be taken of what he says concerning them . there are who say , that by death , gen. 2. we are to understand not only that natural death , and that death of external afflictions and sufferings of which we have spoken , but also a spiritual death , ( so they call the loss of so much of the image of god as consisted in perfect righteousness and true holiness , and of that light and strength which adam had before his fall , ) and likewise of everlasting death . they conceive that all these are comprehended under the penalty threatned gen. 2. and if mr. lock had disputed against these , i should perhaps have consider'd his arguments . it may be said , that he doth argue against those who make everlasting death to be comprehended in that threatning ; for , that which we call eternal death , he calls eternal life in misery . his words are these : it seems a strange way of understanding a law , which requires the plainest and directest words , that by death should be meant eternal life in misery . could any one be suppos'd by a law that says for felony you shall die , not that he should lose his life , but be kept alive in perpetual exquisite torments . thus mr. lock , reasonab . of christian. p. 5. labouring to expose those who make a double death both of body and soul , not only temporal but also eternal , to be threaten'd to adam ; but it cannot be said that he argues against them , for here is nothing that looks like an argument . 1. he says , it is strange that by death should be meant eternal life in misery ; but instead of eternal life in misery , he should have said eternal death in misery ; for a life in perpetual exquisite torments and misery , is more truly a death than a life . the margin of our bibles , gen. 2. 17. instead of thou shalt surely die , hath , dying thou shalt die ; which words seem very properly to express mens dying everlastingly . 2. i cannot say that he doth say , but i believe that he would have said , that he who says for felony thou shalt die , cannot be suppos'd to mean ( not that he should lose his life , but ) that he should be kept alive in perpetual exquisite torments . but the cases are not parallel , for they that expound the words thou shalt surely die , of a double death , say that he should both lose or depart out of this present life , and also after his departure suffer those perpetual exquisite torments . besides , an earthly lawgiver , who can only kill the body , when he says thou shalt die , cannot be supposed to mean that the person should suffer such torments ; but it cannot be inferr'd hence , that when the heavenly lawgiver , who after he hath kill'd is able to destroy both soul and body in hell , says thou shall die , he may not fitly be suppos'd to threaten eternal death as well as temporal . but that which gives greatest offence is still behind ; and that is , that he describes that which we call a natural or temporal death , not only by losing all actions of lise and sense , but also by ceasing to be . his words are these ; by death here i can understand nothing but ceasing to be , the losing of all actions of life and sense , see reasonab . of christian. p. 6. and so again p. 15. this being the case , that whoever is guilty of any sin should certainly die , and cease to be . that when men die their bodies lose all actions of life and sense , we need not be told ; but ceasing to be is a quite different thing , and according to the known sense of the words can signify nothing but the being annihilated . it will therefore concern mr. lock to find out some other sense of the words which we know not of , for it seems very strange that he should make death an annihilation . when mr. lock says , that none are truly punished but for their own deeds , reasonab . of christian. p. 9. we may gather from that which immediately follows , that his meaning is , that there will be no condemnation to any one , at the great judgment , but for his own deeds ; but that persons have suffer'd otherwise for the sins of others , there are sundry instances in holy writ , and mr. lock here alledges the words of the apostle , affirming that in adam all die . chap. xvi . of the law of nature , and of moses's law. the law of nature is a law knowable by the light of nature ; i. e. without the help of positive revelation . it is something that we may attain to the knowledge of , by our natural faculties , from natural principles : mr. lock , essay , l. 1. c. 3. § . 13. the existence of god is so many ways manifest , and the obedience we owe him so congruous to the light of reason , that a great part of mankind give testimony to the law of nature : ibid. § . 6. every christian , both as a deist , and as a christian , is obliged to study both the law of nature and the revealed law , that in them he may know the will of god , and of jesus christ whom he hath sent . second vindication , p. 77. the civil and ritual part of the law delivered by moses obliges not christians , tho' to the jews it were a part of the law of works ; it being a part of the law of nature , that man ought to obey every positive law of god , whenever he shall please to make any such addition to the law of his nature . but the moral part of moses's law , or the moral law , ( which is every where the same , the eternal rule of right ) obliges christians , and all men , every where , and is to all men the standing law of works : reasonab of christian. p. 21 , 22. no one precept or rule of the eternal law of right , which is holy , just and good , is abrogated or repeal'd , nor indeed can be , whilst god is an holy , just and righteous god , and man a rational creature . the duties of that law arising from the constitution of his very nature , are of eternal obligation ; and it cannot be taken away , or dispens'd with , without changing the nature of things , and overturning the measures of right and wrong : ibid. p. 214. thus mr. lock . observations . it is known to be mr. lock 's darling notion , that there are no innate ideas , and no innate law , and consequently , according to him , the law of nature is not innate ; but he tells us , that the knowledge of it is attain'd by the light of nature , or by our natural faculties from natural principles . but i would ask him , whence we have these natural principles , from which , by our natural faculties , we attain to the knowledge of the law of nature ; for he denies all innate principles . will he say then , that we owe them to the superstition of a nurse , or the authority of an old woman , or our educations ? for these he mentions essay , l. 1. c. 3. § . 22. and 26. where he is giving an account how men commonly come by their principles . if he say this , i would know why he calls those which are taught us by old women , or our nurses , parents , and school-masters , natural principles . if mr. lock please to satisfie us as to these queries , i may possibly farther consider his description of the law of nature . farther , i believe that there have been many that have not made use of the light of reason , and the natural faculties which god hath given them , as they should have done , and withal have not had the advantage of any revelation , or of being taught , who yet have had some knowledge of the duties and dictates of the law of nature , and have assented to them as just and good , as soon as they were proposed to them . chap. xvii . of natural and revealed religion , or of the light of reason , and that of revelation . it is not to be wonder'd , that the will of god , when cloath'd in words , should be liable to that doubt and uncertainty which unavoidably attends that sort of conveyance . and we ought to magnifie his goodness , that he hath spread before all the world such legible characters of his works and providence , and given all mankind so sufficient a light of reason , that they to whom this written word never came , could not ( whenever they set themselves to search ) either doubt of the being of a god , or of the obedience due to him . since then the precepts of natural religion are plain and very intelligible to all mankind , and seldom come to be controverted , and other reveal'd truths which are convey'd to us by books and languages , are liable to the common and natural obscurities incident to words ; methinks it would become us to be more careful and diligent in observing the former , and less magisterial , positive , and imperious , in imposing our own sense and interpretations of the latter . mr. lock , essay , l. 3. c. 9. § . 23. whatsoever truth we come to the discovery of from the knowledge and contemplation of our own clear ideas , will always be certainer to us than those which are convey'd to us by traditional revelation : for the knowledge we have that this revelation came from god , can never be so sure as the knowledge that we have from our own clear and distinct ideas . the history of the deluge is convey'd to us by writings which had their original from revelation ; and yet no body , i think , will say he has as certain and clear a knowledge of the flood as noah that saw it , or that he himself would have had , had he then been alive and seen it . for he has no greater assurance than that of his senses , that it is writ in the book suppos'd writ by moses inspired ; but he has not so great an assurance that moses writ that book , as if he had seen moses write it ; so that the assurance of its being a revelation is less still than the assurance of his senses . ibid. l. 4. c. 18. § . 4. a man ought to hearken to reason , even in immediate and original revelation , where it is suppos'd to be made to himself ; but to all those who pretend not to immediate revelation , but are requir'd to pay obedience , and to receive the truths reveal'd to others , which by the tradition of writings or word of mouth are convey'd down to them , reason hath a great deal more to do , and is that only which can induce us to receive them . ibid. § . 6. whatsoever is divine revelation , ought to over-rule our opinions , prejudices , and interests . whatever god hath reveal'd is certainly true , no doubt can be made of it . but whether it be a divine revelation or no , reason must judge , which can never permit the mind to reject a greater evidence for that which is less evident , or preser less certainty to the greater . there can be no evidence that any traditional revelation is of divine original in the words we receive it , and in the sense we understand it , so clear and so certain , as those of the principles of reason . ibid. § . 10. no proposition can be received for divine revelation , or obtain the assent due to all such , if it be contradictory to our clear intuitive knowledge . ibid. § . 5. no proposition can be receiv'd for divine revelation , which is contradictory to a self-evident proposition . the third letter , p. 230. give me leave to ask your lordship , whether where there be propositions , of whose truth you have certain knowledge , you can receive any proposition for divine revelation which contradicts that certainty . ibid. p. 218. there is one sort of propositions that challenge the highest degree of our assent upon bare testimony , whether the thing proposed agree with common experience and the ordinary course of things or no. the reason whereof is , because the testimony is of such an one as cannot deceive or be deceived ; and that is of god himself . this carries with it certainty beyond doubt , evidence beyond exception . this is call'd by a peculiar name , revelation ; and our assent to it , faith , which has as much certainty as our knowledge it self , and we may as well doubt of our own being as we can whether any revelation from god be true . only we must be sure that it be a divine revelation , and that we understand it right . essay , l. 4. c. 16. § . 14. i think it is possible to be certain upon the testimony of god , where i know it is the testimony of god. the third letter , p. 133. all divine revelation requires the obedience of faith , and all the parts of it are to be receiv'd with a docility and disposition prepared to embrace and assent to all truths coming from god. reasonab . of christan . p. 302. natural religion , in its full extent , was no where that i know taken care of by the force of natural reason . it should seem that 't is too hard a thing for unassisted reason to establish morality , in all its parts , upon its true foundation , with a clear and convincing light. ibid. p. 268. 't is no diminishing to revelation , that reason gives it suffrage too to the truths revelation has discovered . the apostles delivered no precepts , but such , as tho' reason of it self had not clearly made out , yet it could not but assent to when thus discover'd , and think it self indebted for the discovery . ibid. p. 281 , 284. i gratefully receive and rejoice in the light of revelation , which sets me at rest in many things , the manner whereof my poor reason can by no means make out to me . i readily believe what ever god has declared , tho' my reason find difficulties in it which i cannot master . the third letter , p. 443 , 444. though the light of nature gave some obscure glimmering , some uncertain hopes of a future state ; yet humane reason could attain to no clearness , no certainty about it , but it was jesus christ alone who brought life and immortality to light through the gospel . ibid. p. 439. thus mr. lock . observations . every one must observe how much mr. lock in his essay , speaks on the behalf of natural religion ; telling us , that the precepts of it are plain and very intelligible to all mankind , and seldom come to be controverted ; whereas ( says he ) reveal'd truths are liable to the common and natural obscurities and difficulties incident to words , and therefore he recommends the precepts of natural religion to our careful and diligent observation . god ( says he farther ) hath spread before all mankind such legible characters of his works and providence , and given them so sufficient a light of reason , that they to whom this written word never came could not ( whenever they set themselves to search ) doubt of the being of a god. thus mr. lock . but how doth this last , that they could not doubt of the being of a god , agree with that which he says other where ( viz. essay . l. 1. c. 4. § . 8. ) concerning the atheists among the ancients , and those at the bay of soldamia in brasil , &c. who ( if he might be believed ) had not as much as any notion of a deity ? mr. lock perhaps will say of them of the bay of soldamia and brasil , that they did not set themselves to search : but surely he will not say this of those reputed atheists that were anciently , among the inquisitive greeks . in like manner , how can mr. lock say that the points of natural religion were so seldom controverted ? were there no controversies among the ancient greeks about things relating to ethicks or morality , as well as about those that appertain'd to other parts of philosophy ? were not the several sects of philosophers divided about these things as well as about others ? will he say that there were no controversies among the inquisitive heathen , about the nature and immortality of the soul , and that the sufficient light of reason ( of which he speaks ) made all clear as to this ? no ; for contrariwise , he tells us , that cicero enumerates several opinions of the philosophers about it , and also how uncertain cicero himself was about it , and that christ alone brought immortality to light : see the third letter , p. 438 , 439. so as to man 's chief good or happiness , were there no controversies , no diversity of opinions , about that ? doth not the same cicero , tuscul. quaest. l. 5. vers . fin . take notice of the various sentiments about it ? yea , doth not varro apud s. august . de civit. dei , l. 19. c. 1. speak of two hundred eighty eight sects or several opinions concerning it ? i might add , that the legible characters of god's works and providence spread before all the world ( of which mr. lock speaks ) have not prevented all controversies among heathens about god himself ; and therefore cicero , in the very beginning of his books de natura deorum , takes notice of the different opinions about that subject ; de qua tam variae sunt doctissimorum hominum , tamque discrepantes sententiae , &c. i may conclude therefore , that we have little reason to say that the principles and precepts of natural religion are so plain and very intelligible to all mankind , and so little controverted , as mr. lock would make them to be . and we have as little reason to be satisfied with that which mr. lock says of the obscurity of the truths of revealed religion . his only reason here is , because they are convey'd to us by books and languages , and so liable to the common and natural obscurities and difficulties incident to words . and so a little before , that it is not to be wonder'd that the will of god , when cloath'd in words , should be liable to that doubt and uncertainty which unavoidably attends that sort of conveyance , essay , l. 3. c. 10. § . 23. so then , according to mr. lock , doubt and uncertainty , obscurities and difficulties , unavoidably attend words ; they are not only common , but even natural to them . and so all the will of god , all revealed truths , since they are convey'd by words , according to him , are obscure , difficult , and uncertain . so that love god and love thy neighbour , fast and pray , do as you would be done unto , would have been , according to him , dark or obscure instructions , if they had all of them been reveal'd only , and none of them also precepts of the law of nature . so love your enemies , bless them that curse you , do good to them that hate you , pray for them that persecute you , and blessed are ye when men shall reproach and persecute you , and speak all evil against you fulsly for my sake , for great is your reward in heaven ; are all dark and obscure . yea finally , all that mr. lock hath writ is obscure , if this be true , that doubt and uncertainty , obscurity and difficulty , do unavoidably attend words , and are natural to them ; for in writing he makes use of words . doth not mr. lock himself confute this notion concerning the obscurity of words , when he faith that christ brought life and immortality to light by the gospel ? ( see his third letter , p. 439. ) for christ and his apostles made use of words in preaching the gospel , as the evangelists also did in writing it . and when ( ibid. p. 443. ) he so gratefully receiv'd and rejoic'd in the light of revelation , i suppose he did not judge revealed truths to be so dark and obscure as he did when he writ his essay . if any would be satisfied about the law of nature , and that of scripture , and the plainness or clearness of them , i should advise them to read mr. hooker eccles. pol. l. 1. § . 12. as to the question , whether , and how far , reason is to judge of revelation , we need not dispute it , since now there is no new revelation expected , and it is certain that nothing which is already reveal'd in holy writ is contrary to reason . as to mr. lock , he expresses himself very variously in this matter : as , 1. no proposition can be receiv'd for divine revelation , if it be contradictory to our clear intuitive knowledge , essay , l. 4. c. 18. § . 5. 2. nothing that is contrary to , or inconsistent with , the clear and self-evident dictates of reason , has a right to be urg'd or assented to as a matter of faith. ibid. § . 10. 3. no proposition can be receiv'd for divine revelation , which is contradictory to a self-evident proposition . the third letter , p. 230. perhaps he will say that contradictory to our clear intuitive knowledge , and to the clear and self-evident dictates of reason , and to a self-evident proposition , are in effect the same , only different expressions of the same thing . to which i answer ; suppose it be so , yet if , descending to particulars , we are uncertain whether such or such propositions be self-evident or no , of what use is this rule to us ? according to some , such propositions are self-evident ; but others will not allow that they are : as for instance , this , that the essential properties of a man are to reason and discourse , which others reckon among self evident propositions , yea maxims , is flatly deny'd to be such by mr. lock in his third letter , p. 263. mr. lock , in his essay , l. 4. c. 18. § . 3. distinguishes between original and traditional revelation . the former he also calls immediate , because it is reveal'd immediately by god ; the latter is that which is deliver'd over to others by word or writing . he also tells us ( ibid. § . 6. ) that a man ought to hearken to reason even in immediate and original revelation , and in traditional reason hath a great deal more to do . but i would ask him , whether abraham ought to have hearken'd to reason in that revelation concerning the offering isaac . it was faith , ( heb. 11. 17. ) not reason , that induced him to receive it as a divine revelation . had he consulted reason , that would have told him positively , that it could not come from god , since it commanded that which was so clearly forbidden , not only by the laws which god himself had given to noah , and before him to adam , but also by the law of nature . there could not be any thing more contradictory to the clear and self-evident dictates of reason , than this injunction which abraham so readily obey'd was . in his essay , l. 4. c. 18. § . 4. he hath these words ; no body , i think , will say that he has as certain and clear a knowledge of the flood as noah that saw it , or that he himself would have had , had he then been alive , and seen it . and i readily grant , that no man , who understands what he says , will affirm that he has as clear a knowledge of the flood , and of the circumstances of it in every particular , as noah had that saw it : but this i shall be bold to say , that i know not but that there may be some who as firmly and certainly believe that there was such a flood as is describ'd in the book of genesis , as if they had been then alive and seen it ; as i hope that there may now be some of those blessed ones , who though they have not , with the apostle thomas , seen the print of the nails , yet do as certainly and firmly believe our lord's resurrection , as if they had seen it . in the same essay , l. 4. c. 16. § . 14. he writes thus , the testimony of god is call'd by a peculiar name revelation , and our assent to it faith , which has as much certainly as our knowledge it self . where i would have these last words observ'd , faith has as much certainty as our knowledge in self , because otherwhere mr. lock denies all certainty of faith. chap. xviii . of mysteries , or things above reason . i wish i could say there were no mysteries in the holy scripture : i acknowledge there are to me , and i fear always will be . mr. lock , in his first letter , p. 226 , 227. things are distinguish'd into those that are according to , above , and contrary to reason . 1. according to reason are such propositions whose truth we can discover by examining and tracing those ideas we have from sensation and reflexion , and by natural deduction find to be true or probable . 2. above reason are such propositions whose truth or probability we cannot by reason derive from those principles . 3. contrary to reason are such propositions as are inconsistent with or irreconcilable to our clear and distinct ideas . thus , the existence of one god , is according to reason ; the existence of more than one god , contrary to reason ; the resurrection of the body after death , above reason . above reason also may be taken in a double sense ; viz. above probability , and above certainty , and in that large sense also , contrary to reason , is , i suppose , sometimes taken , essay , l. 4. c. 17. § . 23. there being many things wherein we have very imperfect notions or none at all , and other things of whose past , present , or future existence , by the natural use of our faculties , we can have no knowledge at all ; these are beyond the discovery of our natural faculties and above reason , and reason hath directly nothing to do with them . thus , that part of the angels rebelled against god , and therefore lost their first happy estate , and , that the bodies of men shall rise and live again ; these , and the like , are beyond the discoveries of reason . ibid. c. 18. § . 7. observations . mr. lock , in his second letter , complains that he is join'd with unitarians , and the author of christianity not mysterious , p. 7. and that therefore the world would be apt to think that he is the person who argues against the trinity , and denies mysteries , p. 24. wherefore that he might clear himself from this latter imputation of denying mysteries , he says , that there are mysteries in holy scripture to him , and he fears that there always will be . but if hereby he only means , that there are some things in scripture hard to be understood , and which he fears he shall never understand , i know not but that the author of christianity not mysterious may say the same . however , he distinguisheth very well of things according to , above , and contrary to reason ; but when in his essay , l. 4. c. 18. § . 7. he had reckon'd this , that the bodies of men shall rise and live again , among things above reason ; in his third letter , p. 210. he tells us , that in the next edition of his essay he shall change these words , the bodies of men shall rise , into these , the dead shall rise . but i shall take farther notice of this , when i reflect upon his doctrine of the resurrection . chap. xix . of the law of works , and the law of faith ; also of justification . the law of works , is that law which requires perfect obedience without any remission or abatement ; so that by that law , a man cannot be just , or justified , without an exact performance of every tittle . the language of this law is , do this and live , transgress and die ; no dispensation , no atonement . under the law of works is comprehended also the law of nature , as well as the law given by moses . nay , whatever god requires any where to be done without making any allowance for faith , that is a part of the law of works . so the forbidding adam to eat of the tree of knowledge , was part of the law of works . the civil and ritual part of the law delivered by moses , was to the jews a part of the law of works ; but the moral part of moses's law , or the moral law , obliges all men every where , and is to all men the standing law of works . but christian believers have the privilege to be under the law of faith too , which is that law whereby god justifies a man for believing , though by his works he be not just and righteous ; i. e. though he come short of perfect obedience to the law of works . god alone does or can justifie or make just those who by their works are not so ; which he doth , by counting their faith for righteousness , i. e. for a complete performance of the law. the difference between the law of works and the law of faith , is only this ; that the law of works makes no allowance for failing on any occasion . those that obey are righteous , those that in any part disobey are unrighteous , and must not expect life , the reward of righteousness . but by the law of faith , faith is allowed to supply the defect of full obedience , and so the believers are admitted to life and immortality as if they were righteous . were there no law of works , there could be no law of faith. for there could be no need of faith which should be counted to men for righteousness , if there were no law to be the rule and measure of righteousness which men fail'd in their obedience to . mr. lock , reasonab . of christian. p. 16 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22. the rule therefore of the covenant of works was never abolished , tho' the rigour were abated . the duties enjoyn'd in it were duties still . their obligations never ceased . ibid. p. 225. the law of faith is for every one to believe what god requires him to believe , as a condition of the covenant he makes with him , and not to doubt of the performance of his promise . ibid. p. 24 , 25. righteousness or an exact obedience to the law , seems , by the scripture to have a claim of right to eternal life . ibid. p. 11. observations . mr. lock , who thinks it our duty , as far as we deliver any thing for revelation , to keep close to the words of the scripture , ( see his third letter , p. 210. ) doth not observe his own rule when he says , that god justifies a man for believing ; this not being the scripture-language , as far as i remember . we are often said to be justified by faith , and if he will also , just by faith , as faith is oft said to be impated to men for righteousness , and god is stil'd the justifier of him that believes ; but i do not find that the scripture useth these words , that he is the justifier of any man for believing . having said that exact obedience to the law seems to have a claim of right to eternal life , mr. lock alledges for it rom. 4. 4. and revel . 22. 14. see his reasonab . of christian. p. 11. in rom. 4. 4. 't is said , to him that worketh the reward is not reckon'd of grace , but of debt . in rev. 22. 14. the words in our translation are blessed are they that do his commandments , that they may have right to the tree of life . mr. lock adds in the same character , which is in the paradise of god ; but nothing of this is in the text. besides the word that is here translated right is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , which ( as is well known ) signifies license or power , as well as right , and not only by the vulgar , but also by the syriack , arabick , and aethiopick , it is rendred power . and this signification agrees exactly with the text , blessed are they that do his commandments , that they may have power or licence to eat of the tree of life . in this place therefore there is nothing concerning any claim of right , and consequently it is not at all to the purpose : i might have added , that mr. lock speaks of exact obedience to the law , and perhaps he would not find it an easie matter to prove that by doing his commandments here is meant such exact unsinning obedience . but tho' rev. 22. 14. will not prove his claim of right , yet if he use those words in a larger sense , as they may denote a right by promise , i do not deny that his former text , viz. rom. 4. 4. may prove it . to him that worketh , the reward ( which god is suppos'd to have promised in the covenant of works ) is reckon'd as debt ; he may lay claim to it as his right by virtue of that promise . but if he take them in the strict sense , as if exact obedience had properly merited the reward , and might have claim'd it of right , tho' no such promise or covenant had interven'd , he will hardly prove that from rom. 4. yea our saviour seems to have determin'd very plainly against such a claim , s. luke . 17. 10. when ye shall have done all things which are commanded you , say , we are unprofitable servants , we have done that which was our duty to do . chap. xx. of faith in general . faith is nothing else but an assent founded upon the highest reason . mr. lock , essay , l. 4. c. 16. § . 14. the matter of faith being only divine revelation , and nothing else , faith , as we use the word ( call'd commonly divine faith ) has to do with no propositions but those which are suppos'd to be divinely revealed . so that i do not see how those who make revelation alone the sole object of faith , can say that it is a matter of faith and not of reason , to believe that such or such a proposition , to be found in such or such a book , is of divine inspiration ; unless it be reveal'd that that proposition , or all in that book , was communicated by divine inspiration . without such a revelation , the believing or not believing that proposition or book to be of divine authority , can never be matter of faith , but matter of reason , and such as i must come to the assent to only by the use of my reason . things beyond the discovery of our natural faculties , and above reason , are , when revealed , the proper matter of faith. whatever proposition is reveal'd , of whose truth our mind , by its natural faculties and notions , cannot judge , that is purely matter of faith. where the principles of reason have not evidenced a proposition to be certainly true or false , there clear revelation , as another principle of truth , and ground of assent , may determine ; and so it may be matter of faith. ibid. c. 18. § . 6 , 7 , 9. faith has as much certainty as our knowledge it self . faith is a settled and sure principle of assent and assurance , and leaves no manner of room for doubt or hesitation . essay , l. 4. c. 16. § . 14. to talk of the certainty of faith , seems all one to me , as to talk of the knowledge of believing ; a way of speaking , not easie to me to understand . bring faith to certainty , and it ceases to be faith. when it is brought to certainty , faith is destroy'd ; 't is knowledge then , and faith no longer . the second letter , p. 95 , 96. my bible , heb. 10. 22. expresses the highest degree of faith , which the apostle recommended to believers in his time , by full assurance . i find my bible speaks of the assurance of faith , but no where , that i can remember , of the certainty of faith ; though in many places it speaks of the certainty of knowledge ; and therefore i speak so too , and shall not , i think , be condemned for keeping close to the expressions of our bible . the third letter , p. 122 , 123. i say with mr. chillingworth , c. 6. § . 3. that i do heartily acknowledge and believe the articles of our faith to be in themselves truths , as certain and infallible , as the very common principles of geometry and metaphysicks . but that there is not requir'd of us a knowledge of them , and an adherence to them , as certain as that of sense or science ; and that for this reason , ( among others given both by mr. chillingworth and mr. hooker ) viz. that faith is not knowledge , no more than three is four , but eminently contain'd in it : so that he that knows believes , and something more ; but he that believes , many times does not know ; nay , if he doth barely and merely believe , he doth never know . these are mr. chillingworth's own words , c. 6. § . 2. that this assurance of faith may approach very near to certainty , and not come short of it in a sure and steady influence on the mind , i have so plainly declar'd ( essay , l. 4. c. 17. § . 16. ) that no body , i think , can question it . there i say of some propositions wherein knowledge ( i. e. in my sense , certainty ) fails us , that their probability is so clear and strong , that assent as necessarily follows it , as knowledge doth demonstration , ibid. p. 124. herein lies the difference between probability and certainty , faith and knowledge ; that in all the parts of knowledge there is intuition , each immediate idea , each step , has its visible and certain connexion ; in belief , not so ; essay , l. 4. c. 15. § . 3. to say that believing and knowing stand upon the same grounds , would be , i think , to say that probability and demonstration are the same thing . the third letter , p. 223. he that says he barely believes , acknowledges that he assents to a proposition as true , upon bare probability , ibid. p. 159. i think it is possible to be certain upon the testimony of god , where i know that it is the testimony of god ; because in such a case , that testimony is capable not only to make me believe , but , if i consider it right , to make me know the thing to be so : and so i may be certain . for the veracity of god is as capable of making me know a proposition to be true , as any other way of proof can be ; and therefore i do not in such a case barely believe , but know , such a proposition to be true , and attain certainty . ibid. p. 133. faith , as contradistinguished to reason , is the assent to any proposition not made out by the deductions of reason , but upon the credit of the proposer , as coming immediately from god. essay , l. 4. c. 18. § . 2. faith is nothing but a firm assent of the mind , which , if it be regulated as is our duty , cannot be afforded to any thing but upon good reason , and so cannot be opposite to it . he that believes without having any reason for believing , may be in love with his own fancies , and seeks not truth as he ought . ibid. c. 17. § . 24. where i want evidence of things , there yet is ground enough for me to believe , because god hath said it . the first letter , p. 227. s. paul , in his epistles , often puts faith for the whole duty of a christian. reasonab . of christian. p. 199. thus mr. lock . observations . when mr. lock says that the matter or object of faith is only divine revelation , and nothing else , if by divine revelation be meant the whole scripture , the historical part of it together with the rest ( for all scripture is given by the inspiration of god , 2 tim. 3. 16. writ by men inspired and guided by his infallible spirit ) it is very true . and as to that which he infers , that then it cannot be said , that it is matter of faith and not of reason , to believe that such or such a proposition to be sound in such or such a book is of divine inspiration , unless it be reveal'd that that proposition or all in that book was communicated by divine inspiration , we need not contend much with him about it , since in the place just now alledg'd viz. 2 tim. 3. 16. we have a divine testimony or revelation that all the books of scripture which were writ and receiv'd before the writing of the second epistle to timothy ( which as is concluded by all was writ very late ) are divinely inspir'd . mr. lock sometimes saith , that faith hath as much certainly as our knowledge it self , and that it leaves no manner of doubt or hesitation ; yet other where he declaims against the certainty of faith. now i would know how he can reconcile himself to himself in this . he says that to talk of the certainty of faith seems all one as to talk of the knowledge of believing , that certainty destroys faith , when it is brought to certainty faith is destroyed , 't is knowledge then and faith no longer . for to him to know and be certain is the same thing ( see his second letter , p. 93. ) and certainty the same thing with knowledge ; see his third letter , p. 122. now if this be so , if certainty and knowledge are the same thing , then as he says , that to talk of the certainty of faith seems all one as to talk of the knowledge of believing ; so he might have said , that to talk of the certainty of knowledge seems all one as to talk of the knowledge of knowing , and that to talk of certain knowledge seems all one as to talk of known knowing ; a way of speaking not easy to be understood . yea , as often as mr. lock useth these expressions certainty of knowledge and certain knowledge , so oft he confutes this fancy of his , that knowledge and certainty are the same thing . as when we say a certain persuasion or a certain truth , these expressions imply that there may be a persuasion or a truth not so certain ; so when we say certain knowledge , it seems to imply that there may be a knowledge not so certain . and so when mr. lock says , we certainly know , and we have a more certain knowledge , essay , l. 4. c. 10. § . 6. doth he not plainly imply , that there is a knowledge less certain ? so that it is clear from his own expreshons that knowledge and certainty are not the same thing . but that which i chiefly desire to know is , how mr. lock will reconcile his denying certainty to faith with his saying that faith hath as much certainty as our knowledge it self . whereas , mr. lock , says that he finds his bible speaks of the assurance of faith , but no where that he can remember of the certainty of faith ; i desire that he would please to let us know the difference between assurance and certainty , or between full assurance and certainty . as to the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , heb. 10. 22. which is translated full assurance , i suppose the translators ( if they had pleased ) might have rendred it full certainty , or full persuasion , or certain persuasion , as erasmus and others render it by certitudo . as mr. lock craves leave to use the words of mr. chillingworth , so he ought to crave his reader 's pardon for not transcribing his words so largely as he ought to have done . for though it sufficiently appears from so much as he hath cited from him , that mr. chillingworth makes against , and not for him ; yet it would have been more apparent , if he had alledg'd him more fully . mr. chillingworth , as mr. lock cites him , says , that there is not requir'd of us a knowledge of the articles of faith , and an adherence to them as certain as that of sense or science . in which words , if by an adherence to them be meant an assent to or belief of them , certainty is plainly ascrib'd to belief or faith , ( which mr. lock will not allow ) though not a certainty equal to that of sense or science . but let us take a view of mr. chillingworth's words at large ; i do ( says he ) heartily acknowledge and believe the articles of our faith to be in themselves truths as certain and insallible , as the very common principles of geometry and metaphysicks . but that there is requir'd of us a knowledge of them , or an adherence to them , as certain as that of sense or science ; that such a certainty is requir'd of us under pain of damnation , so that no man can hope to be in the state of salvation but he that finds in himself such a degree of faith , such a strength of adherence : this i have already demonstrated to be a great errour , and of dangerous and pernicious consequence . thus mr. chillingworth , c. 6. § . 3. we see now , what it is that this great man saith ; viz. that a certainty equal to that of sense or science is not requir'd of all men under pain of damnation , so that no man can be in a state of salvation that hath it not . but god may grant that degree of certainty to some which he doth not require under pain of damnation of all . mr. lock farther tells us , that there is not required of us a knowledge of the articles of our faith , and an adherence to them as certain as that of sense or science , and that for this reason among others ; viz. that faith is not knowledge , no more than three is four , but eminently contain'd in it ; so that he that knows believes , and something more , but he that believes many times does not know ; nay , if he doth barely and merely believe , he doth never know . these are mr. chillingworth's own words . thus mr. lock . and i grant that the words faith is not knowledge , &c. are mr. chillingworth's ; but these , and that for this reason among others , are not his , but mr. lock 's own . mr. chillingworth would never have offer'd such a reason to prove that there is not requir'd of us a knowledge of the articles of our faith , and an adherence to them as certain as that of sense and science . he , and other worthy men of our church who writ in his time , were not wont to argue so loosly ; and withal , he gives it as a reason of something else : see him cap. 6. § . 2. there every one may also see , that when he says faith is not knowledge , he takes the word knowledge in a different sense from that in which he takes it § . 3. where he speaks of the knowledge of the articles of our faith. when he speaks of knowledge of the articles of faith , he , by knowledge , understands only an apprehension or belief ; but when he says faith is not knowledge , he takes the word properly and exactly in the sense in which he uses the word science . by this time mr. lock may see what the task is that he hath set himself ; viz. he is to prove this consequence , faith is not knowledge , therefore there is not requir'd of us under pain of damnation , an apprehension or belief of the articles of faith as certain as that of sense or science . but , since mr. lock mentions mr. hooker together with mr. chillingworth , as if they countenanced his notion of faith and certainty ; i have consider'd that which they say of this matter , and find that he hath no countenance at all from those excellent persons . he makes knowledge and certainty to be the same thing , and faith to be only probability : let him shew where either mr. hooker or mr. chillingworth doth either of these . he distinguishes between assurance and certainty ; yea , he makes full assurance of faith to come short of certainty : i would know where those excellent persons do this . he ridicules the certainty of faith , but mr. hooker and mr. chillingworth ascribe a certainty to faith. they both of them speak of a certainty of evidence , and a certainty of adherence ; and when mr. hooker ( in his sermon upon heb. 1. 4. ) says , that this certainty of adherence is greater in us than the other , he plainly implies , that both the one and the other certainty is in us , but not both in the same degree . and as to mr. chillingworth , when he says of this hypothesis , that all the articles of our faith were revealed by god , we cannot ordinarily have any rational or acquired certainty more than moral , ( see him c. 1. § . 8. ) he grants that we may have a moral certainty of that hypothesis . but § . 9. he adds , yet this i say not , as if i doubted that the spirit of god being implor'd by devout and humble prayer and sincere obedience , may and will , by degrees , advance his servants higher , and give them a certainty of adherence beyond their certainty of evidence . but what god gives as a reward to believers is one thing , and what he requires of all men , as their duty , is another ; and what he will accept of , out of grace and favour , is yet another . to those that believe , and live according to their faith , he gives by degrees the spirit of obsignation and confirmation , which makes them know ( though how they know not ) what they did but believe : and to be as fully and resolutely assur'd of the gospel of christ , as those which heard it from christ himself with their ears , which saw it with their eyes , which look'd upon it , and whose hands handled the word of life . if mr. lock will say thus much with mr. chillingworth , more will not be requir'd of him . i said that mr. lock makes faith to be only probability ; and i have in this chapter transcrib'd sundry passages from him which make this out . herein lies the difference between probability and certainty , faith and knowledge , says he in essay , l. 4. c. 15. § . 3. where as knowledge is in his sense certainty , so faith is probability . so again , he ( says he ) that says he barely believes , acknowledges that he assents to a proposition , as true , upon bare probability . and again , to say that believing and knowing stand upon the same grounds , is , i think , to s●y that probability and demonstration are the same thing . see his third letter , p. 159 , 223. mr. lock ( in his third letter , p. 124. ) ha●h these words : that this assurance of faith may approach very near to certainty , and not come short of it in a sure and steady influence on the mind ; i have so plainly declar'd ( essay , l. 4. c. 17. § . 16. ) that no body , i think , can question it . if you ask in what words he declares it , he tells us , that speaking of some propositions wherein knowledge ( i. e. in his sense certainty ) fails us , he says , that their probability is so clear and strong , that assent as necessarily follows it , as knowledge does demonstration . thus mr. lock . but how does he so plainly declare that the assurance of faith may approach very near to certainty , and not come short of it in a sure and steady influence on the mind , when neither in the words which he cites , nor in that whole section out of which he cites them , there is any mention either of the assurance of faith , or of faith it self . he speaks indeed of probable mediums , the probability of some of which may be so clear and strong , that assent necessarily follows it ; and perhaps he would have us to apply this to the probable grounds of faith , for he will not allow the grounds of faith to be more than probable . but as he saith of probable mediums , that they cannot bring us to the lowest degree of knowledge , so probable grounds of faith cannot bring us to the lowest degree of certainty ; and so , according to him , our faith cannot advance it self above probability , as was observ'd before . when mr. lock says in his third letter , p. 133. i think it is possible to be certain upon the testimony of god , where i know that it is the testimony of god , should he not rather have said , it is impossible for him who knows that god is true , yea truth it self , not to be certain upon the testimony of god , provided he know that it is the testimony of god ? and after all , what is this to us who live now ? since , according to mr. lock , it is impossible for us ( unless we had an immediate revelation from god himself ) to know that it is the testimony of god ; and so by this proviso he makes it impossible for us ( without such an immediate revelation ) to be certain upon the testimony of god , though we should be suppos'd to have a certain knowledge of his veracity . chap. xxi . of abraham's faith , and the faith of those that liv'd before our saviour's time . the faith for which god justified abraham , what was it ? it was the believing god when he engaged his promise in the covenant he made with him . the faith which god counted to abraham for righteousness , was nothing but a firm belief of what god declar'd to him , and a stedfast relying on him for the accomplishment of what he had promised . abraham believ'd that tho' he and sarah were old , and past the time and hopes of children , yet he should have a son by her , and by him become the father of a great people which should possess the land of canaan . the thing promis'd to him was no more but a son by his wife sarah , and a numerous posterity by him which should possess the land of canaan . these were but temporal blessings and ( except the birth of a son ) very remote , suchas he should never live to see . but because he question'd not the performance of it , but rested fully satisfied in the goodness , truth , and faithfulness of god who had promis'd , it was counted to him for righteousness . the faith whereby those believers of old ( i. e. before our saviour's time ) pleased god , was nothing but a stedfast reliance on the goodness and faithfulness of god , for those good things which either the light of nature or particular promises had given them grounds to hope for . this was all that was requir'd of them , to be persuaded of and embrace the promises which they had . they could be persuaded of no more than was propos'd to them , embrace no more than was reveal'd . they had a belief of the messiah to come ? they believ'd that god would , according to his promise , in due time send the messiah to be a king and deliverer . all that was requir'd before the messiah's appearing in the world was , to believe what god had reveal'd , and to rely with a full assurance on god for the performance of his promise , and to believe that in due time he would send them the messiah , this anointed king , this promised saviour and deliverer , according to his word . thus mr. lock p. 23 , 24 , 247 , 249 , 252 , 253 , 254. of his reasonab . of christianity . observations . here in reasonab . of christian. p. 23. mr. lock says , this faith for which god justified abraham , as p. 24. he says ahraham was justified for his faith , and in like manner p. 22. god justifies a man for believing : now ( as it was observ'd above , chap. 19. ) this is not the scripture-language , he constantly reads in his bible justified by faith , not for it . it may therefore be justly wonder'd that mr. lock , who is so much for keeping close to the expressions of his bible , and thinks it our duty to do it ( see his third letter , p. 123. and 210. ) should affect to say so often that god justifies for faith. but perhaps he will correct it in his next edition . it is also just matter of wonder , that he should say , that no more than temporal blessings were promis'd to abraham , and that the faith which god counted to him for righteousness was nothing but his believing those promises , and resting fully satisfied of their performance ; ( see reasonab . of christian . p. 24. and 249. ) especially when speaking of those believers of old mention'd heb. 11. ( of whom abraham is one ) he says expresly , that they had a belief of the messiah to come , and that they believ'd that god would , according to his promise , in due time send the messiah : see ibid. p. 253 , 254. and he that consults the new testament , will find , that as to the promise of the messiah , and the belief of it , there is more said of abraham than of the rest . abraham saw christ's day , and rejoyc'd , s. john 8. 56. in thy seed shall all the kindreds of the earth be blessed , act. 3. 25. to abraham were the promises made , and to his seed , which is christ , gal. 3. 16. chap. xxii . of our faith under the gospel . the belief of one invisible eternal omnipotent god , maker of heaven and earth , &c. was requir'd before the revelation of the gospel as well as now . the gospel was writ to induce men into a belief of this proposition , that jesus of nazareth was the messiah ; which if they believ'd , they should have life . after his death , his resurrection was also commonly requir'd to be believ'd as a necessary article , and sometimes solely insisted on . salvation or perdition depends upon believing or rejecting this one proposition , that jesus was the messiah . i mean , this is all is requir'd to be believ'd by those who acknowledge but one eternal and invisible god , the maker of heaven and earth . for , that there is something more requir'd to salvation besides believing , we shall see hereafter . all that was to be believ'd for justification was no more but this single proposition , that jesus of nazareth was the christ , or the messiah . this , that jesus was the messiah , was all the doctrine the apostles propos'd to be believ'd . above three score years after our saviour's passion , s. john knew nothing else requir'd to be believ'd for the attaining of life , but that jesus is the messiah , the son of god. whoever would believe him to be the saviour promised , and take him now rais'd from the dead , and constituted the lord and judge of all men , to be their king and ruler , should be saved . mr. lock , reasonab . of christian. p. 25 , 29 , 31 , 43 , 47 , 93 , 194 , 304. that this , that jesus of nazareth is the messiah , is the sole doctrine pressed and required to be believ'd in the whole tenour of our saviour's and his apostles preaching , we have shew'd through the whole history of the evangelists and the acts. and i challenge them to shew that there was any other doctrine upon their assent to which , or disbelief of it , men were pronounced believers or unbelievers , and accordingly receiv'd into the church of christ , or else kept out of it . ibid. p. 195. thus mr. lock . observations . mr. lock challenges others to shew any other doctrine , when he shews it himself . he says , that our lord's resurrection was also commonly requir'd to be believ'd as a necessary article , reasonab . of christian . p. 31. what can be more plain ? so the belief of one invisible , eternal , omnipotent god , maker of heaven and earth , &c. is requir'd . ibid. p. 25. we must believe him to have been raised from the dead , and constituted the lord and judge of all men , and to be our king and ruler ; for if we do not believe these , how can we take him now rais'd from the dead , and constituted the lord and judge of all men , to be our king and ruler , which he expresly requires ? ibid. p. 304. he says , ibid. p. 30. that we may gather what was to be believ'd by all nations , from what was preached to them by the apostles . now he expresly tells us , that the apostle s. paul preached that jesus being risen from the dead , now reigneth , and shall more publickly manifest his kingdom in judging the world at the last day . ibid. p. 191. in like manner , p. 190. we see what it was our saviour preached to the apostles , and what it was that was to be preached to all nations ; viz. that he was the messiah that had suffer'd , and rose from the dead the third day , and fulfill'd all things that was written in the old testament concerning the messiah ; and that those who believ'd this and repented , should receive remission of their sins through this faith in him . here mr. lock plainly testifies , that beside this one article , that jesus is the messiah , the apostles preach'd , that he suffer'd , rose again , fulfill'd all things that were written in the old testament concerning him , that he now reigneth , shall judge the world at the last day , and that those that repent , and believe the gospel , shall receive remission of sins . is it not then matter of greatest admiration , that the same person should tell us that salvation or perdition depends upon believing or rejecting this one proposition , that jesus was the messiah , ibid. p. 43. that all that was to be believ'd for justification , was no more but this single proposition , p. 47. that this was all the doctrine the apostles propos'd to be believ'd , p. 93. that for three score years after our saviour's passion , s. john knew nothing else requir'd to be believ'd for the attaining of life but this , p. 194. and that this is the sole doctrine requir'd to be believ'd , p. 195. especially when in his vindication of his reasonab . of christian. p. 29. he seems to complain of those that blam'd him for contending for one article ? having ( says he ) thus plainly mention'd more than one article , i might have taken it amiss , &c. and so in his second vindication , p. 26. he hath these words , that there is one god , and jesus christ his only son our lord , who rose again from the dead , ascended into heaven , and sitteth at the right hand of god , shall come to judge the quick and dead , are more than one article , and may very properly be call'd these articles . now in the foregoing page he refers us to places in his reasonab . of christian. where he makes the belief of all these necessary , which ( says he ) is evidence enough that i contended not for one single article , and no more . all that i can say is , that it is not easie to reconcile mr. lock to himself , or to make out that sundry passages in his reasonab . of christianity do not clash with each other . he says , in reasonab . of christian. p. 31. that christ's resurrection was sometimes solely insisted on , and yet he will confess that we cannot thence conclude that to be the sole article that is necessary to be believ'd . why then doth he urge so much that this , that jesus is the christ , is the sole doctrine , the only article , that one proposition , that is requir'd to be believ'd , because perhaps it is sometimes solely insisted on ? mr. lock , ibid. p. 43. having said that s. paul tells the jews at antioch , act. 13. 46. it was necessary that the word of god should first have been spoken to you , but seeing you put it off from you , we turn to the gentiles , adds , here 't is plain that s. paul's charging their blood upon their own heads , is , for opposing this single truth , that jesus was the messiah , that salvation or perdition depends upon believing or rejecting this one proposition : thus mr. lock . but i would know how all this is plain from the words which he alledges from acts 13. 46. for 't is certain that it is not said in express terms , either that the charging their blood on their own heads is for opposing this single truth , that jesus is the messiah , or that salvation or perdition depends upon believing or rejecting this one proposition . it is true , when the apostle says , ye put it from you , he intimates , that it was wholly their own fault that they did not receive benefit by the words being spoken to them , and that may look something toward the charging their blood upon their own heads ; but as to all the rest , there is not the least ground or footstep of it , act. 13. 46. perhaps mr. lock will say , that by the word of god there is meant no more than this one proposition , that jesus is the messiah : but who will not rather believe , that when st. paul said , it was necessary that the word of god should first have been spoken to you , he thereby meant that word of god which he had preach'd to them of antioch in pisidia , ( as is recorded in that chapter , ) and which the jews contradicted . he had preached , that god had of the seed of david , according to promise , raised up to israel a saviour jesus , v. 23. that the jews at jerusalem had condemn'd him , and desir'd pilate to put him to death , and in so doing , fulfill'd the voices of the prophets , and the things that were written concerning him , v. 27 , 28 , 29. that he was also buried , and that god rais'd him from the dead no more to see corruption , according to the prophecies of him , and that he was seen for many days after his resurrection , v. 29 , 30 , 31. usque ad 38. and that every one that believes should receive remission of sins by him , and be justified from all things , from which they could not be justified by the law of moses , v. 38 , 39 all these are more than one single truth , or one proposition , and are all comprehended under the word of god , mention'd , v. 46. and it may be observ'd , that in all that sermon , from the beginning of v. 16. to v. 42. there is not express mention as much as once made of jesus's being the messiah , or king , tho' there is of his being a justifier and saviour . in his reasonab . of christian. p. 47. mr. lock hath these words , so that all that was to be believ'd for justification , was no more but this single proposition , that jesus of nazareth was the messiah . the words , so that , import , that he deduceth this from one or more of the texts of scripture which he there alleadges , and , if i mistake not , from the last of them , viz. act. 10. 43. where 't is said , to him ( i. e. jesus of nazareth ) give all the prophets witness , that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins . here indeed is mention of remission of sins , or justification ; but that all that was to be believ'd for justification , was that single proposition which he so often mentions , will never be prov'd from that text. yea , mr. lock , speaking of st. peter's sermon to cornelius , act. 10. ( of which that text is a part ) doth not say that there is in it any express mention of our saviour's being the messiah , but ( says he ) he is described to be so by his miracles , death , resurrection , dominion , and coming to judge the quick and the dead : see him in his second vindication , p. 307. in his reasonab . of christian. p. 93. he alledges the words of act. 8. 4. they that were scattered abroad , went every where preaching the word . which word was nothing ( says he ) but this , that jesus was the messiah : but if you ask how he proves this , he only says , as we have found by examining what they preach'd all through their history . where , by their history , he means , undoubtedly , the history of the apostles ; and when he says , they preach'd , that they must be the apostles , whereas they that are said to have preach'd the word , acts 8. 4. were not the apostles ; for we are told , v. 1. that the apostles were not scatter'd abroad as those were that are mention'd , v. 4. but to wave this : whereas mr. lock so often saith , that by examining what the apostles preach'd all through their history , he had found , that the word preach'd by them was nothing but this , that jesus was the messiah , i have just now shew'd , that it is easie for any one to find the contrary , by examining only that part of the history of the apostles , which we have , acts 10. from v. 34. to v. 44. and acts 13. from v. 23. to v. 42. where , by mr. lock 's own confession , they treated of the miracles , death , resurrection , and dominion of our saviour , and of his coming to judge the world , as also of remission of sins by him . see him in reasonab . of christian , , p. 41. and second vindication , p. 307. in his reasonab . of christian. p. 194. mr. lock says , above threescore years after our saviour's passion , st. john knew nothing else required to be believ'd , for the attaining of life , but that jesus is the messiah , the son of god. but will he hold to this , that st. john knew nothing else requir'd to be believ'd , and admit of no limitation , or exception ? did he not know that it was necessary to believe one only true god ? st. john 17. 3. did he not know that it was necessary to believe , that god rais'd the lord jesus from the dead ? but what shall we say to the words of st. john 20. 31. which mr. lock alledges , ibid. p. 193. and from which he inferrs this , these are written , that ye may believe that jesus is the messiah , the son of god ; and that believing , ye may have life in his name ? i answer , that it may be said , 1. that here it is as much required , that we believe jesus to be the son of god , as 't is to believe him to be the messiah . 2. that these , that jesus is the messiah , and that he is the son of god , are two principal articles , and therefore mention'd by st. john ; but he does not say , these are written that ye may believe that jesus is the christ , the son of god , and only this ; neither does he say , and that believing this alone , ye may have life : but , and that believing in general , i. e. believing all that the holy ghost makes necessary to be believ'd . if thou believe in thine heart , that god rais'd the lord jesus from the dead , thou shalt be saved , rom. 10. 9. because in these words our lord's resurrection is solely insisted on , mr. lock will not conclude , that st. paul knew nothing else requir'd to be believed for attaining life but that : and then why should he conclude , concerning st. john , that he knew nothing else requir'd to be believ'd but these two articles , that jesus is the messiah , and that he is the son of god , because st. john 20. 31. he mentions only these ? i know that mr. lock does not allow us to call them two articles ; but i am so little moved with his saying ( and not proving ) that messiah and the son of god are two expressions signifying one and the same thing , that i make bold to do it without his license . mr. lock , perhaps , will think that i neglect him , if i do not take notice of his chronology . he says , that above threescore years after our saviour's passion , st. john knew nothing else required to be believ'd . his reason is , because st. john's gospel was written so long after , as ( says he ) both epiphanius and st. jerom assure us . i shall grant , that st. john's gospel might , perhaps , be writ so long after our lord's crucifixion ; for st. hierom , in catalogo , and in lib. 1. con . jovinian , says , that ecclesiastical history makes st. john to have liv'd threescore and eight years after the lord's passion . but i cannot but take notice of mr. lock 's caution ( some may call it his prudence ) in not referring us to the places where epiphanius , and st. hierom , assure us , that it was writ so late . as to epiphanius , it is true , that in haeres . 51. he says , that st. john writ his gospel after the ninetieth year of his age ; and if he had also told us how old st. john was at the time when our saviour was crucified , we might have known whether , according to epiphanius , st. john writ his gospel above threescore years after our lord's passion ; but i do not remember that epiphanius hath any where told us st. john's age at the time of our saviour's suffering . and as to st. hierom , i have not found that he doth acquaint us , either in what year of his own age , or how long after his lord's passion it was that st. john writ his gospel . chap. xxiii . of saving faith and vnbelief . they that believe jesus to be the messiah , their king , but will not obey his laws , and will not have him to rule over them , they are but greater rebels , and god will not justifie them for a faith , which doth but increase their guilt , and oppose diametrically the kingdom and design of the messiah , who gave himself for us , that he might redeem us from all iniquity , and purifie to himself a peculiar people , zealous of good works , tit. 2. 14. and therefore st. paul tells the galatians , that that which availeth is faith ; but faith working by love , and that faith without works , i. e. the works of sincere obedience to the law and will of christ , is not sufficient for our justification , st. james shews at large , chap. 2. only those who believe jesus to be the messiah , and take him to be their king , with a sincere endeavour after righteousness , in obeying his law , shall have their past sins not imputed to them , and shall have that faith taken instead of obedience . mr. lock 's reasonab . of christian. p. 213 , 214 , 215. none are sentenced or punish'd for unbelief , but only for their misdeeds . they are workers of iniquity on whom the sentence is pronounced . every where the sentence follows doing or not doing , without any mention of believing or not believing : not that any , to whom the gospel hath been preach'd , shall be sav'd , without believing jesus to be the messiah ; for all being sinners , and transgressors of the law , and so unjust , are all liable to condemnation , unless they believe , and so through grace are justified by god for this faith , which shall be accounted to them for righteousness . but the rest wanting this cover , this allowance for their transgressions , must answer for all their actions , and being found transgressors of the law , shall , by the letter and sanction of the law , be condemned for not having paid a full obedience to that law , and not for want of faith : that is , not the guilt on which the punishment is laid , tho' it be the want of faith which lays open their guilt uncover'd , and exposes them to the sentence of the law against all that are unrighteous . ibid. p. 243 , 245 , 246. thus mr. lock . observations . of the expression , justified for faith , whereas the scripture-language is justified by faith , i took notice before chap. 19. and 21. here i cannot but observe how apt men are to run into extremes . there are some that say that unbelief is the only sin for which men shall be condemn'd ; they shall be condemn'd not for their other sins , but , solely , for this . mr. lock , on the other hand , would persuade us , that men shall not be condemned at all for unbelief : the sentence ( says he ) follows not doing , without any mention of not believing . he alledges for this , st. john 5. 28 , 29. st. matth. 7. 22 , 23. 13. 14 , 49. 16. 24. 25. 24 , &c. st. luke 13. 26. but , 1. in many of these places , as st. john 5. 28 , 29. st. matth. 13. 41. ( not 14 , as it is in mr. lock , ) and 49. st. matth. 16. 27. ( not 24. as mr. lock , ) there is not the least mention of any sentence , therefore it is manifest that they do not tell us for what men shall be sentenced . 2. those who are mention'd , st. matth. 7. 22 , 23. and st. luke 13. 26 , 27. were believers , and so could not be sentenc'd for unbelief . i do not say , that they believ'd to the saving of their souls , or with a saving faith , a faith working by love , and bringing forth the fruits of good works ; for the contrary is most manifest , they were workers of iniquity , or unrighteousness : but i say , that they were believers , they should say unto christ , lord , lord ; yea , they were such believers as not only own'd him for their lord , but also prophesied , cast out devils , and did many mighty works in his name ; and therefore , if they were not sentenced for unbelief , but only for their misdeeds , it cannot be thought strange . 3. let it be suppos'd that they were unbelievers , all that these texts say , is , that workers of iniquity shall hear that sentence , i tell you , i know you not , depart from me . and if it may be hence inferr'd , that they are to be condemn'd only for working iniquity , then from st. mark 16. 16. where it is said , he that believes not , shall be damn'd , it may be concluded that he shall be condemn'd only for unbelief ; that the sentence shall follow not believing , without any mention of not doing . but this inference mr. lock will not allow . they are workers of iniquity , on whom the sentence is pronounced , says mr. lock , out of st. matth. 7. 23. they are unbelievers who shall be condemned , say i , out of st. mark 16. 16. and if from st. mark 16. mr. lock will not conclude that men shall be condemn'd only for unbelief , and not for working iniquity , why does he conclude from st. matth. 7. that they shall be condemn'd only for working iniquity , and not for unbelief ? 4. as to st. matth. 25. 24 , &c. which may seem to be more to mr. lock 's purpose than the former ; for this tells us expresly for what men shall be sentenced to punishment , which the other do not , ( the judge shall say to those on his left hand , depart from me , ye cursed ; for i was hungry , and ye gave me not to eat , &c. ) it is enough to say , that if , because the sentence of extreme malediction shall be pronounced upon men , because they did not feed the hungry , give drink to the thirsty , take in the strangers , cloath the naked , visit the sick and imprison'd , he can inferr , that men shall be condemn'd only for their not having done these things , and not for their unbelief ; then certainly , because st. john 3. 18. it is said , he that believeth not , is now condemned , because he hath not believ'd in the name of the only begotten son of god , we may inferr , that men are and shall be condemn'd only for their not believing , and not for their not doing . if men shall be condemn'd only for the sins mention'd st. matth. 25. then they must be condemn'd only for sins of uncharitableness . impenitence is not expresly mention'd in these places of scripture , produced by mr. lock , any more than unbelief . will he say , that men shall not be condemn'd for their impenitence ? the truth is , that he may with as much reason say that , as say that the sentence shall not be pronounced on them for their infidelity . why should mr. lock think it strange that men should be condemn'd for not paying obedience to the command of christ , who hath commanded all men every where to believe and repent ? unbelief is a sin which is the cause of all our other sins , which would be prevented , if we did unfeignedly , and with a lively faith , believe the gospel : it is also that which , as it were , binds and fastens the guilt of our other sins upon us ; they will not be forgiven , unless we believe and repent : and yet , according to mr. lock , men shall be condemn'd for their other sins , and not for this . i have perhaps dwelt too long upon this , yet i think it not amiss to give a brief account why i render st. john 3. 18. he that believeth not is now condemn'd , whereas in our translation it is , he that believeth not is condemn'd already . the words are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , is now condemned , or is now judged , as most worthy of condemnation . now that god hath express'd such wonderful love to the world , by sending his only begotten son into it , not to condemn it , but that by him the world might be saved , ( see v. 16 , 17. ) and now that he is come into the world , and hath wrought such miracles , he that believes not must be most justly worthy of condemnation , because he believes not in the name of the only begotten son of god , being given , that every one that believes in him should not perish , but have everlasting life . now that light is come into the world , if men will not believe in the light , every one will judge that they are justly worthy of condemnation , as our saviour says in the very next words , v. 19. this is the condemnation , ( i. e. that which chiefly deserves condemnation , ) that light hath come into the world , and men have loved darkness more than the light. if this rendring and exposition of the words be receiv'd , commentators will not need to trouble themselves so much as they have done , with enquiring in what sense the unbeliever is said to be already condemn'd , since this which i offer is a plain and easie interpretation , he that believes not , is now condemn'd , ( now , after the son of god's being actually come into the world , after miracles wrought , and the gospel preach'd by him , ) because he believes not in the name of the only begotten son of god. this text then plainly shews the danger and desert of not believing , and therefore it concerns us to beware , lest as the israelites , of whom the apostle speaks heb. 4. did not enter into the promised land , by reason of unbelief , v. 6. so we be excluded the heavenly canaan for our unbelief , v. 11 , chap. xxiv . of repentance , baptism , and remission of sins . repentance is as absolute a condition of the covenant of grace as faith , and as necessary to be perform'd as that . this was not only the beginning of our saviour's preaching , but the summ of all that he did preach , viz. that men should repent and believe the good tidings which he brought them . believing jesus to be the messiah , and repenting , were so necessary and fundamental parts of the covenant of grace , that one of them alone is often put for both . repentance is not only a sorrow for sins past , but ( what is a natural consequence of that sorrow , if it be real , ) a turning from them into a new and contrary life . it is an hearty sorrow for our past misdeeds , and a sincere resolution and endeavour , to the utmost of our power , to conform all our actions to the law of god. it does not consist in one single act of sorrow , ( tho' that being the first and leading act , gives denomination to the whole , ) but in doing works meet for repentance , in a sincere obedience to the law of christ , the remainder of our lives . it is in other words well express'd by newness of life : and sometimes turning about is put alone to signifie repentance . mr. lock , reasonab . of christian. p. 197 , 198 , 200 , 201. to be baptized into his name is to enroll our selves into the kingdom of jesus the messiah , and profess our selves his subjects . by baptism we are made denizons , and solemnly incorporated into that kingdom , ibid. p. 212 , 213. baptism was made use of by our saviour to be that solemn visible act whereby those who believ'd him to be the messiah receiv'd him as their king , and profess'd obedience to him , were admitted as subjects into his kingdom . so peter began , acts 2. 38. repent , and be baptiz'd ; these two things were required for the remission of sins , ibid. p. 199 , 200. god propos'd to the children of men , that as many of them as would believe jesus his son to be the messiah , the promised deliverer , and would receive him for their king and ruler , should have all their past sins , disobedience , and rebellion forgiven them ; and if , for the future , they liv'd in a sincere obedience to his law , to the utmost of their power , the sins of humane frailty , for the time to come , as well as all those of their past lives , should for his son's sake , because they gave themselves up to him to be his subjects , be forgiven them : tho' in consideration of mens becoming christ's subjects by faith in him , whereby they believe and take him to be the messiah , their former sins shall be forgiven , yet he will own none to be his , nor receive them as true denizons of the new jerusalem , into the inheritance of eternal life , but leave them to the condemnation of the unrighteous , who renounce not their former miscarriages , and live in a sincere obedience to his commands . ibid. p. 211 , 212 , 241. thus mr. lock . observations . believing jesus to be the messiah , and repenting , are so necessary and fundamental parts of the covenant of grace , that one of them alone is often put for both ; so mr. lock , reasonab . of christian. p. 198. but i would know why they are the more necessary and fundamental parts of the convenant of grace , on this account , that one of them alone is oft put for both ; or how this , that one of them alone is oft put for both , doth prove that they are necessary and fundamental parts of it . withal , how appears it , that one of them alone is oft put for both ? all the proof that he tenders for it is in the words immediately following : for ( says he ) st. mark , chap. 6. 12. mentions nothing but their preaching repentance , as st. luke in the parallel place , chap. 9. 6. mentions nothing but their evangelizing or preaching the good news of the kingdom of the messiah . thus mr. lock . but how will he hence make good this inference , therefore , of these two , believing and repenting , one alone is oft put for both ? there is no mention of believing in either place : st. luke says , that the apostles preach'd the gospel ; st. mark says , that they preach'd , that men should repent ; of believing here is not a word . but from both texts we may gather that this , that jesus is the messiah , was not the only article which the apostles preach'd : for in st. mark 6. 12. they preach'd , that men should repent , or that they should have their sins remitted upon their repentance , as st. peter afterward preach'd , repent , and be baptiz'd for the remission of sins , acts 2. 38. and , as our saviour says , st. luke 24. 47. that repentance and remission of sins should be preach'd ; so that it is clear , that the apostles preach'd this article of remission of sins upon our repenting . and then , in st. luke 9. 6. they preach'd the gospel , which comprehends more than that one article , that jesus is the messiah , as the good news , that a saviour was born into the world , &c. mr. lock , in reasonab . of christianity , p. 201. having said , that sometimes turning about is put alone to signifie repentance , cites st. matth. 13. 15. and st. luke 22. 32. where the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and why that should be rendred to turn about , rather than to convert or turn , i am to be taught . ibid. p. 212. he says , that to be baptiz'd into the name of christ , is to enroll our selves in the kingdom of jesus the messiah . but as we are said to be baptiz'd in or into the name of the lord jesus , so we are also said to be baptiz'd in or into the name of the father , and of the son , and of the holy ghost , st. matth. 28. 19. now to be baptiz'd in the name of the holy ghost , cannot signifie the enrolling our selves in the kingdom of the holy ghost ; for we do not read in holy writ of the kingdom of the holy ghost , as we do of the kingdom of the dear son of god : and why then should we make in or into the name to signifie one thing when it is spoken of the son , and another when it is spoken of the holy ghost , or of the whole blessed and glorious trinity ? as then to baptize in or into the name of the father , of the son , and of the holy ghost , is to baptize , 1. by authority and commission from them ; 2. into the worship and faithful service of them all the days of our life : so i conceive we are to interpret the being baptiz'd in or into the name of the lord jesus . ibid. p. 241. mr. lock says , in consideration of mens becoming christ's subjects by faith in him , whereby they believe and take him to be the messiah , their former sins shall be forgiven . but other where he makes men become the subjects of christ by baptism as well as by faith , and both repentance and baptism to be required for the remission of sins , ( alledging acts 2. 38. ) and not faith only . and therefore he might have express'd the gospel-terms , or the conditions of forgiveness , more fully , by saying , that if men repent , and believe the gospel , and be baptized , they shall , through the merits and death of their blessed saviour , have their former sins forgiven . chap. xxv . of the immortality of the soul , and the signification of the word spirit . if that will not serve his turn , i will tell him a principle of mine that will clear the soul's immortality to him , and that is the revelation of life and immortality by jesus christ , through the gospel . mr. lock , answer to remarks , p. 5 , 6. perhaps my using the word spirit for a thinking substance , without excluding materiality out of it , will be thought too great a liberty ; but the most enlightned of all the ancient people of god , solomon himself , speaks after the same manner . nor did the way of speaking in our saviour's time vary from this . i would not be thought hereby to say , that spirit does never signifie a purely immaterial substance : in that sense the scripture , i take it , speaks , when it says god is a spirit ; and in that sense i have proved , from my principles , that there is a spiritual substance , and am certain that there is a spiritual immaterial substance . the first letter , p. 68. 71 , 72 , 73. observations . mr. lock , in his answer to remarks , p. 5. hath these words , i suppose this author , ( i. e. the author of the remarks ) will not question the soul's immateriality to be a proof of its immortality : doth he not then , by taking so much pains to persuade us that its immateriality cannot be demonstratively prov'd , manifestly weaken one proof of its immortality ? mr. lock , in essay , l. 4. c. 3. § . 6. says , that he would not any way lessen the belief of the soul's immateriality : but he cannot expect that we should believe words against the evidence of deeds . yet , in his essay , l. 2. c. 23. § . 18. he hath let fall some words , from which i think the soul's immateriality may be prov'd : the ideas we have belonging and peculiar to spirit , are thinking and will. thus mr. lock . now ( say i ) if thinking and willing are peculiar to spirit , then the soul which thinks and wills is a spirit . and that by spirit he in that chapter means an immaterial substance , is evident ; for he opposeth spirit to material substance . besides the complex ideas we have of material sensible substances , we are able to frame the complex idea of a spirit . so mr. lock , § . 15. and so what he in the very next sentence calls immaterial substances , in his margin he calls spiritual substances . if then thinking and willing are peculiar to spirit , the soul which thinks and wills is a spirit , or spiritual immaterial substance . i cannot reconcile the immortality of the soul with mens ceasing to be when they die . mr. lock , who useth that expression of ceasing to be , more than once , ( see above , chap. 15. ) must invent some unknown sense of it , which may reconcile them . i shew'd , just now , that mr. lock , in essay , l. 2. c. 23. did by spirit understand an immaterial substance ; and indeed he doth own that he doth so , in his third letter , p. 430. i shall transcribe his words at large : from the ideas of thought , ( says he , ) and a power of moving of matter , which we experience in our selves , there was no more difficulty to conclude there was an immaterial substance in us , than that we had material parts . these ideas of thinking and power , of moving of matter , i in another place shew'd , did demonstratively lead us to the certain knowledge of the existence of an immaterial thinking being , in whom we have the idea of spirit in the strictest sense , in which sense i also apply'd it to the soul , in that 23d . chapter . thus mr. lock . and yet , in his first letter , p. 68. he tells us of his using the word spirit ( not in that which he calls the strictest sense , but ) for a thinking substance , without excluding materiality out of it . he sets himself also to defend his using it thus . this he doth , first , by the anthority of cicero and virgil , ( ibid. p. 69 , 70. ) who ( as he says ) call the soul spiritus , and yet do not deny it to be a subtile matter . but supposing this which he says , to be true , we may return answer in his own words , in his third letter , p. 126. that latin sentence , nil tam certum est quam quod de dubio certum , being objected , he taking it to be a saying of the romans , answers thus , as i take it , they ( i. e. the romans ) never use the english word certainty ; and tho' it be true , that the english word certainty , be taken from the latin word certus ; yet that therefore certainty in english is us'd exactly in the same sense that certus is in latin , that i think you will not say . the very same say i , as i take it , cicero and virgil never us'd the english word spirit ; and tho' our word spirit be from the latin spiritus , yet that therefore spirit in english , is us'd exactly in the same sense that spiritus is in latin , mr. lock i think will not say . if he thought this a sufficient answer to others , why should it not be a sufficient answer to him ? but farther , mr. lock having said in his first letter , p. 69. that both cicero and virgil call the soul spiritus , in answer hereto it was suggested concerning cicero , that in his tusculan questions , in the entrance of the dispute about the soul , he takes animus for the soul , and neither anima nor spiritus ; and that spiritus is taken by him for breath . now if this be true , that is not which mr. lock says , that cicero calls the soul spiritus . what says he in his third letter to this ? not a word , nor doth he take the least notice of it , neither doth he in that long reply in his third letter , p. 431 , &c. produce one place out of cicero , wherein he useth spiritus for the soul. if it be said that he had done that in his first letter , i answer , that he there cites only one place , where he takes the words on trust , and sets them down thus : vita continetur corpore & spiritu ; see him , p. 70. but if he had consulted cicero himself , he would have found ( in orat. pro marcello , vers . fin . ) the words to be these : nec haec tua vita dicenda est , quae corpore & spiritu continetur , illa , inquam , illa vita est tua caesar , quae vigebit memorio . saeculonum omnium , quam posteritas alet , quam ipsa aeternitas semper intuebitur . let mr. lock himself now judge whether spiritus here must be necessarily understood to signifie the soul , and whether it can be more fitly interpreted than in the sense in which cicero most constantly useth it , as signifying breath , even the breath of our nostrils , without which the body cannot live , and which is so necessary to preserve this mortal life , which the orator tells caesar was not his life . as to virgil , mr. lock only cites these words out of him , dum spiritus hos regit artus , saying , that he speaks of the soul ; see his first letter , p. 70 in answer to this , he was told , that spiritus is there taken for the vital spirit ; and that virgil did believe the soul to be more than a mere vital spirit , and that it subsisted and acted in a separate state : to all which , mr. lock , in his reply in his third letter , p. 440 , 441. says nothing at all , nor does he take the least notice of it . but mr. lock , to justifie his using the word spirit in such a signification , alledges the authority of one greater than cicero or virgil , or the most enlightned person of the heathen world , viz. solomon himself , eccles. 3. 19 , 21. that which befalleth the sons of men befalleth beasts , even one thing befalleth them ; as the one dieth , so dieth the other ; yea , they have all one spirit . who knoweth the spirit of a man that goeth upward , and the spirit of a beast that goeth down to the earth , see mr. lock 's first letter , p. 71. to which i answer , 1. how appears it that these are solomon's words , and not the sayings of others , which solomon only repeats ? is it probable that solomon would affirm absolutely , as his own sense , that man hath no pre-eminence above a beast ? which words we have , v. 19. tho' they are omitted by mr. lock . if they be not solomon's words , then it is clear that he hath not the authority of solomon ; yea , then he hath not the authority of our translators , who ( this being suppos'd ) applied not the word spirit to beasts ; but they , whose words the preacher repeats , apply'd the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to them , which word our translators render breath , v. 19. and spirit , v. 21. 2. but let it be supposed ( tho' not granted ) that they are solomon's words and sense , i need only borrow once more mr. lock 's words : as i take it , solomon never us'd the english word spirit ; and tho' it be true that the hebrew word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is often rendred spirit , yet that therefore spirit in english hath exactly the same signification that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hath in hebrew , i think mr. lock will not say ; for then spirit must signifie the wind , breath , &c. since 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is apply'd to these . in vain therefore doth he pretend that he hath the authority of solomon . and yet he seeks to justifie his use of the word also by the authority of one greater than solomon . when our saviour ( says he ) after his resurrection stood in the midst of them , they were affrighted , and suppos'd that they had seen 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a spirit , s. luke 24. 37. but our saviour says to them , v. 39. behold my hands and my feet , that it is i my self , handle me and see , for a spirit hath not flesh and bones as you see me have . see mr. lock , first letter , p. 71 , 72. who forgot to tell us who the they and them are ; but they are the apostles : and from our saviour's words to them he here argues . and if he would argue directly , he must do it in this or the like form ; if our saviour say that a spirit hath not flesh and bones , then he useth the word spirit as signifying something from which matter is not excluded . but mr. lock must have invented a new logick before he could have made good this consequence : he therefore goes another way to work both in his first and in his third letter . i shall briefly examine what he says in both . in his first letter , p. 72. he says , that these words of our saviour's put the same distinction between body and spirit that cicero did in the place above cited , viz. that the one was a gross compages that could be felt and handled , and the other such as virgil describes the ghost or soul of anchises : ter conatus ibi collo dare brachia circum , ter frustra comprensa manus effugit imago , par levibus vent is , volucrique simillima somno . thus mr. lock . so that in short , according to him , in those words of our saviour an image is call'd a spirit . and can we not conceive an image that doth not include matter ? i may instance in those ideas or images which are the immediate objects of mr. lock 's mind in thinking , are they material ? likewise in the images that we see in our dreams , which latter instance i the rather mention , because virgil , in these very verses , compares the image of which he speaks to sleep , or to an image appearing in sleep , ( formam apparentem in somnis ) as some interpret it . in his third letter , p. 444 , he says , that from these words of our saviour , a spirit hath not flesh and bones , it follows , that in apparitions there is something that appears , and that that which appears is not wholly immaterial : thus mr. lock . in answer to it , i shall remind him , that in his second vindication of the reasonab . of christian. p. 228. he mentions a request which mr. chillingworth puts up to mr. knot , and i think it no less necessary to be put up to him : sir , i beseech you , when you write again , do us the favour to write nothing but syllogisms : for i find it an extreme trouble to find out the concealed propositions which are to connect the parts of your enthymems . as now , for example , i profess to you , that i have done my best endeavour to find some glue , or sodder , or cement , or thread , or any thing , to tie the antecedent and this consequent together . thus mr. chillingworth . here mr. lock 's enthymem is this , a spirit hath not flesh and bones , ergo , in apparitions there is something that appears , and that which appears is not wholly immaterial . if mr. lock can find some glue or sodder to join the antecedent and this consequent together , it is well : but if he cannot , i shall make bold to add , that no body else can . neither can he evade by saying that it was not from those words only , ( viz. a spirit hath not flesh and bones , ) but from the whole text s. luke 24. 37 , 39. that he draws that consequence , that what appears is not wholly immaterial ; for the case is the same . this may suffice as to his authorities , which are found to do him no service at all . he subjoins in his first letter , p. 72 , 73. i would not be thought hereby to say that spirit never signifies a purely immaterial substance . in that sense the scripture , i take it , speaks , when it says god is a spirit ; and in that sense i have us'd it , and in that sense i have prov'd , from my principles , that there is a spiritual substance , and am certain that there is a spiritual immaterial substance . thus mr. lock . but might he not have left out those words i take it , and affirm'd positively that when the scripture says god is a spirit , the word spirit signifies a purely immaterial substance ? he tells that he is certain that there is a spiritual immaterial substance , and i therefore hope that he is certain that god is such : and if it be a certain truth that god is a spiritual immaterial substance , in what sense can the scripture be judged to say that he is a spirit but in this ? god is a spirit , and the worshipers of him ought to worship in spirit , s. john 4. 24. i. e. with their minds ( or , with application of mind , as mr. lock interprets it in his reasonab . of christ. p. 286. ) which minds are likewise spiritual immaterial substances . chap. xxvi . of conscience , consideration , and freedom . conscience is nothing else but our own opinion of our own actions , mr. lock , essay , l. 1. c. 3. § . 8. 't is a mistake , to think that men cannot change the displeasingness or indifferency that is in actions into pleasure and desire , if they will do but what is in their power . a due consideration will do it in some cases . any action is render'd more or less pleasing only by the contemplation of the end , and the being more or less persuaded of its tendency to it , or necessary connexion with it . this is certain , that morality , establish'd upon its true foundations , cannot but determine the choice in any one that will but consider ; and he that will not be so much a rational creature as to reflect seriously upon infinite happiness and misery , must needs condemn himself , as not making that use of his understanding he should . ibid. l. 2. c. 21. § . 69 , 79. by a due consideration , and examining any good propos'd , it is in our power to raise our desires in a due proportion to the value of that good , whereby it may come to work upon the will , and be persued . the mind having in most cases , as is evident dent in experience , a power to suspend the execution and satisfaction of any of its desires ; and so all , one after another , is at liberty to consider the objects of them , examine them on all sides , and weigh them with others . in this lies the liberty man has , and from the not using it right comes all that variety of mistakes , errours , and faults , we run into in the conduct of our lives , and our endeavours after happiness ; whilst we precipitate the determination of our wills , and engage too soon before examination . were we determined by any thing but the last result of our minds , judging of the good or evil of any action , we were not free . if we look upon those superiour beings above us who enjoy perfect happiness , we shall have reason to judge they are more steadily determin'd in their choice of good than we ; and yet we have no reason to think they are less happy or less free than we are . even the freedom of the almighty hinders not his being determin'd by what is best . the constant desire of happiness , and the constraint it puts upon us to act for it , no body i think accounts an abridgment of liberty , or at least an abridgment of liberty to be complain'd of . the suspending any particular desire , and keeping it from determining the will , and engaging us in action , is standing still , where we are not sufficiently assur'd of the way ; examination is the consulting a guide ; the determination of the will upon enquiry is following the direction of that guide ; and he that hath a power to act or not to act according as such determination directs , is a free agent ; such determination abridges not that power wherein liberty consists . the care of our selves , that we mistake not imaginary for real happiness , is the necessary foundation of our liberty , and the stronger ties we have to an unalterable persuit of happiness in general , which is our greatest good , and which , as such , our desires always follow , the more are we free from any necessary determination of our will to any particular action , or from a necessary compliance with our desire set upon any particular and then appearing greater good , till we have duely examin'd whether it has a tendency to , or be inconsistent with our real happiness . let not any one say that he cannot govern his passions , nor hinder them from breaking out and carrying him into action ; for , what he can do before a prince , or a great man , he can do alone , or in the presence of god , if he will. ibid. § . 46 , 47 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 53. god having reveal'd that there shall be a day of judgment , i think that foundation enough to conclude men are free enough to he made answerable for their actions , and to receive according to what they have done . the third letter , p. 444. thus mr. lock . observations . when mr. lock writ his essay , he had not tied himself so strictly to use the scripture-language in speaking of matters of religion , as he had when he writ his third letter . this appears , as from other instances , so from his definition or description of conscience . if he had been so much for the using scripture-language then as he was afterward , he would not have describ'd conscience to be nothing else but our own opinion of our own actions . he had spoke more consonantly to scripture-language , if he had put the word knowledge , or testimony , or judgment instead of opinion . for , according to scripture , conscience is that within us which knows , and also witnesses , and judges of our actions , conversations , &c. as it also judges of the actions and conversations of others . 1. knowledge is in scripture attributed to the heart or conscience . thus eccles. 7. 22. thine own heart knows , that thou thy self hast cursed others . the vulgar reads , thy conscience knows , &c. heart is frequently put for conscience ; see 1 sam. 24. 5. and 2 sam. 24. 10. and 1 joh. 3. 19 , 20 , 21 , &c. the hebrew word which both the seventy and also our translation in the margin renders conscience , eccles. 10. 20. viz. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 denotes knowledge , as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the word which the chaldee paraphrast there useth also doth , they both coming from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , curse not the king , no not in thy thought : so our translation hath it in the text ; but in the margin , instead of thy thought we have thy conscience ; and so the meaning is , curse not the king , though thou do it so secretly that none but thine own heart or conscience can know it . and it is observable , that gen. 43. 22. where joseph's brethren say we know not who put our money in our sacks , instead of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we know not , the vulgar hath non est in nostra conscientia . 2. conscience is frequently said in scripture to bear witness ; my conscience bearing me witness , so the apostle rom. 9. 1. who also , 2 cor. 1. 12. speaks of the testimony of his conscience ; and rom. 2. 15. says of the heathens , that their conscience did bear witness . 3. judging is also attributed to the heart or conscience in scripture . thus 1 john 3. 20. if our heart ( i. e. our conscience ) condemn us : and so again , if our heart ( or conscience ) condemn us not . so s. paul , 1 cor. 8. 7. some with conscience of an idol to this hour eat of somewhat as offered to an idol . with conscience of an idol , i. e. their conscience judging that an idol was something . and so s. peter , if a man for conscience toward god endure grief , 1 pet. 2. 19. for conscience toward god , i. e. because his conscience judgeth that he ought to obey god. thus we read of conscience its knowing , witnessing , and judging ; but where will mr. lock find any thing that favours his description , viz. that it is nothing else but our opinion , & c. ? in his essay , l. 4. c. 15. § . 3. he makes opinion to be the receiving a proposition for true , without certain knowledge that it is so : but conscience both knows , ( as we have seen , ) and also certainly knows . there is one indeed that is greater than our consciences , and knows all things , and with such certainty as that nothing can compare with him : but that transcendent certainty of the divine knowledge being excepted , there is no knowledge that can pretend to greater and more absolute certainty than that of conscience . and therefore , even according to mr. lock , it is impossible that conscience should be an opinion . but this is not the only fault in mr. lock 's description of conscience : it is ( says he ) our own opinion of our own actions ; as if mens consciences had to do only with actions , yea , only with our own actions . but conscience will not have its authority or jurisdiction confin'd within so narrow limits : it will sit as judge , not only upon mens actions , but also upon their speeches , yea , upon our thoughts , affections , aims , purposes , or intentions , and the sincerity of them . none of these is or can be hid from the eye of conscience , which knows them all , and is thereby qualified to be both witness and judge of them . st. paul , rom. 9. 1 , 2. appeals to his conscience as witness of his speaking the truth , and of the great affection he bare to his country-men : i say the truth in christ , i lye not , my conscience bearing me witness , that i have great heaviness and continual sorrow in my heart , &c. and in like manner , 2 cor. 1. 12. he tells of his conscience's bearing testimony of his conversation and sincerity : our rejoycing is this , the testimony of our conscience , that in simplicity and godly sincerity we have had our conversation in the world. i add , that tho' mr. lock only mentions our own actions , yet it is apparent , even from scripture , that conscience also judgeth of the actions and conversations of others . we commend our selves to every man's conscience , says the apostle , 2 cor. 4. 2. i. e. we endeavour to order our speech , actions , and conversation so , as that every man's conscience cannot but judge and think well of them . so , 2 cor. 5. 11. we ( says he ) are made manifest to god , and i trust that we are also made manifest in your consciences ; q. d. god knows and is witness of our sincere purpose , and i hope that your consciences are also satisfied of it , and ready to bear testimony to it . add to these 1 cor. 10. 28 , 29. if any man say to you , this is offer'd in sacrifice to idols , eat not for his sake that shew'd it , and for conscience sake : conscience , i say , not thine own , but the others ; for why is my liberty judg'd of another man's conscience ? in this case , tho' i am satisfied in mine own conscience , that i am at liberty , and may lawfully eat ; yet i must forbear , for the sake of the other man's conscience : for , why should my liberty be judged by another's conscience ? i. e. why should i use my liberty , and eat then , when another man's conscience will judge that i have sinn'd in eating , and entertain jealousies or hard thoughts of me . this may suffice for mr. lock 's description of conscience . he might have express'd himself more plainly than he has done , when he says , that morality establish'd upon its true foundations , cannot but determine the choice in any one who will but consider . he hath not plainly told us what those true foundations are ; but if he mean by them that infinite happiness and misery , those rewards and punishments of another life , which he mentions in the words following , i would ask , whether it be not rather the consideration of those foundations which so effectually determines the choice , than the consideration of the morality that is established upon them . i the rather ask this question , because mr. lock , in this very place ( essay , l. 2. c. 21. § 70. ) says expresly , that the rewards and punishments of another life , which the almighty hath establish'd as the enforcements of his laws , are of weight enough to determine the choice against whatever pleasure or pain this life can shew . he speaks also of the foundations of morality , in essay , l. 4. c. 3. § . 18. but there likewise he doth not acquaint us what those foundations are . his words are these , the idea of a supreme being , infinite in power , goodness , and wisdom , whose workmanship we are , and on whom we depend , and the idea of our selves , as understanding rational creatures , being such as are clear in us , would , i suppose , if duly considered and persued , afford such foundations of our duty , and rules of action , as might place morality amongst the sciences capable of demonstration ; wherein i doubt not but from principles as incontestable as those of the mathematicks , by necessary consequences the measures of right and wrong might be made out . mr. lock says , ( in essay , l. 2. c. 21. § . 48. ) were we determin'd by any thing but the last result of our own minds , judging of the good or evil of any action , we were not free . now if this be true , that the last result of our mind judging of the good or evil of any action , determines us , and nothing else , how comes it that he affirms , ( ibid. § . 31 , 33 , 34. ) that uneasiness determines the will , and also takes so much pains to prove it , ibid. § . 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 ? i would know whether uneasiness doth determine the wills of those who enjoy complete happiness , as the spirits of just men made perfect do . tho' i do not deny that too many mens desires and sensual appetites causing uneasiness in them , do determine them to act contrary to the last result of their minds , judging the action to be evil : and so ( to use mr. lock 's words , ibid. § . 35. ) they are from time to time in the state of that unhappy complainer , video meliora proboque , deteriora sequor ; which sentence is allow'd for ●rue , and made good by constant experience : therefore in the heathen poets we meet with many such complaints . the words immediately preceding those , video meliora , &c. are these , sed trahit invitam nova vis , aliudque cupido mens aliud suadet : that unhappy wretch , ( viz. medea ) complains , that tho' her mind saw , and approv'd , and persuaded her to the better , yet the vehemence of her desire persuaded , yea , even hurried her to the worse , and made her unwillingly follow it . in like manner , in euripides's medea , act 4. vers . fin . she complains that her passion overcame her reason , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . yea , we find the like complaints in holy writ , i delight in the law of god after the inward man : but i see another law in my members , warring against the law of my mind , and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin. so then i with the mind indeed serve the law of god , but with the flesh the law of sin , rom. 7. 22 , 23 , 25. and so he in lactantius , l. 4. c. 24. volo equidem non peccare , sed vincor : sentio me peccare , sed necessitas fragilitatis impellit , cui repugnare non possum . i readily grant , that men in this state are not free , ( for the apostle tells us , that they are captives and slaves , sold under sin , and have reason to cry out , wretched man that i am ! who shall deliver me ? ) and that ( as mr. lock says in essay , l. 2. c. 21. § . 47. ) 't is the perfection of our nature to desire , will , and act , according to the last result of a fair examination ; and therefore it would be a great happiness , if we were determin'd by nothing else but the last result of our minds , judging those actions to be good or evil which are really so . but , alas ! too frequent experience evinceth , that mens sensual desires , and the uneasiness which those desires do cause in them , do determine them many times to do contrary to the right judgment of their minds ; and so , tho' with their minds they serve the law of god , i. e. their minds judge that they should do that which the law of god requires ; yet with their flesh they serve the law of sin , i. e. their fleshly desires prevail and determine them to act contrary to the law of god. chap. xxvii . of the securing our future state , and the punishment of those that would not follow christ. since our natural faculties are not fitted to penetrate into the internal fabrick and real essences of bodies , but yet plainly discover to us the being of a god , and the knowledge of our selves , enough to lead us into a full and clear discovery of our duty , and great concernment ; it will become us , as rational creatures , to employ those faculties in those enquiries , and in that sort of knowledge which is most suited to our natural capacities , and carries in it our greatest interest , i. e. the condition of our eternal estate . no man is so wholly taken up with the attendance on the means of living , as to have no spare time at all to think on his soul , and inform himself in matters of religion . were men as intent upon this as they are on things of lower concernment , there are none so enslav'd to the necessity of life , who might not find many vacancies that might be husbanded to this advantage of their knowledge . mr. lock , in essay , l. 4. c. 12. § . 11. and c. 19. § . 3. the punishment of those who would not follow him , ( i. e. christ , ) was to lose their souls , i. e. their lives , mark 8. 35 — 38. as is plain , considering the occasion it was spoke on . reasonab . of christian. p. 15. thus mr. lock . observations . when mr. lock says , that the punishment of those who would not follow christ , was to lose their souls , i. e. their lives . this is usher'd in with the words , and therefore ; and yet it is not easie to perceive how this is inferr'd from that which mr. lock had said before , or how it proves or illustrates it ; so that perhaps these conjunctions , and therefore , are here to be look'd upon as some of mr. lock 's privileged particles . but to wave that , he alledgeth for this , st. mark 8. 35 — 38. whereas , in v. 38. there is not that expression of losing their souls , but it is said , that the son of man will be asham'd of them when he cometh in the glory of his father with the holy angels ; and consequently he will not then own them , but contrariwise say , i know you not , depart from me into everlasting fire prepar'd for the devil and his angels . this may help us to understand what is meant by the losing the soul , v. 35. mr. lock understands by it their losing their life , or ( as he expresses it a little before ) their dying , and ceasing to be : but how can ceasing to be consist with the suffering the torment of the everlasting fire prepar'd for the devil and the other lapsed angels ? they shall lose their souls , i. e. their lives , as is plain , considering the occasion it was spoke on . thus mr. lock . we must therefore look back to find on what occasion this was spoken . we are told , st. mark 8. 31 , 32 , 33 , 34. that our saviour having openly foretold that he should be put to death , and rise again , simon peter rebuked him for it ; but he , when he had rebuk'd peter , call'd to him the multitude , together with his disciples , and said , if any one will come after me , let him deny himself , and take up his cross , and follow me . then follows the mention of the losing their souls , v. 35. whosoever ( says he ) will save his soul , shall lose it . we see now the occasion of christ's speaking these last words ; and i would know how it makes it plain , that by losing the soul here is meant losing the life , in mr. lock 's sense , i. e. as it signifies dying , and ceasing to be . for my part , i cannot but think that we may most safely rely on st. luke's exposition : he , c. 9. v. 24. hath these words , whosoever will save his soul , shall lose it , i. e. his soul ; but , v. 25. instead of lose his soul , he hath lose himself : what is a man profited , if he gain the whole world , and lose himself ? thus st. luke . nothing is more usual in scripture than for the soul to be put for the whole person ; and so st. luke teaches us to expound it here . when other evangelists say , and lose his own soul , ( see st. matth. 16. 26. st. mark 8. 36. ) st. luke says , and lose himself . the punishment then of him that will not deny himself , and follow christ is to lose his soul , i. e. himself , both body and soul , to have both soul and body destroy'd in hell. hi corpus & animam perdunt pariter in gehennam , says origen , homil. 36. in s. luke . chap. xxviii . of the church , also of infallibility , and transubstantiation . it was upon this proposition , that jesus was the messiah , the son of the living god , owned by st. peter , that our saviour said he would build his church , matth. 16. 16 , 17 , 18. the confession made by st. peter , matth. 16. 16. is the rock on which our saviour has promis'd to build his church . mr. lock , reasonab . of christian. p. 27. 48. the romanists say , 't is best for men , and so suitable to the goodness of god , that there should be an infallible judge of controversies on earth ; and therefore there is one . and i by the same reason , say , 't is better for men that every man himself should be insallible . i leave them to consider , whether by the force of this argument they shall think that every man is so , essay , l. 1. c. 4. § . 12. i know no other infallible guide but the spirit of god in the scriptures ; second vindication of reasonab . of christian. p. 341. the ideas of one body and one place , do so clearly agree , and the mind has so evident a perception of their agreement , that we can never assent to a proposition that affirms the same body to be in two distant places at once , however it should pretend to the authority of a divine revelation : since the evidence , 1. that we deceive not our selves in ascribing it to god ; 2. that we understand it right , can never be so great as the evidence of our own intuitive knowledge , whereby we discern it impossible for the same body to be in two places at once , essay , l. 4. c. 18. § . 5. observations . mr. lock often repeats it , that the confession made by st. peter , st. matth. 16. 16. was the rock on which christ would build his church . we have it in his reasonab . of christian. not only in the places already alledg'd , but also in p. 102 , 103 , and 104 , 105. if he would inferr thence , that this article alone , that jesus is the messiah , is necessary to make men christians ; or , that only these two articles , that he is the messiah , and , that he is the son of god , are so necessary , he may know that this cannot be deduced from it . if he argue thus , the church is founded upon these articles , as upon a rock , therefore only the belief of them is necessary to make a man a member of the church ; i deny his consequence , for more than the believing the first foundation of the church may be necessary to make a man a member of it . as to the words , this rock , it is acknowledged that sundry of the ancient expositors have interpreted it to be the faith which st. peter confess'd . upon this rock will i build my church , i. e. the faith which thou hast confess'd ; so st. chrysost. in st. matth. homil. 55. christ called this confession a rock , &c. for it really is the rock of godliness ; so st. basil. seleuc. orat. 25. what is this , upon this rock i will build my church ? upon this faith on that which is said , thou art christ the son of the living god ; so st. august . tract . 10. in primam joannis . i may add theophylact : peter having confess'd the son of god , he ( i. e. christ , ) saith , this confession which thou hast confess'd shall be the foundation of believers . thus theophyl . in loc . but tho' these and other ancient writers do by this rock understand the faith which was confess'd , yet there want not among them those who make it to be the author and finisher of our faith , viz. christ. upon those words , 1 cor. 3. 11. other foundation no man can lay , than that which is laid , which is jesus the christ. theodoret says thus , blessed peter laid this foundation , or rather the lord himself : for peter having said , thou art the son of the living god , the lord said , on this rock i will build my church : be not ye therefore denominated from men , for christ is the foundation . the interlineary gloss in st. matth. 16. 18. says , this rock , i. e. christ , in whom thou believest . and our anselm , ibid. as plainly , on this rock , i. e. upon my self i will build my church , q. d. thou art so peter , from me ( petra ) the rock , as that yet the dignity of being the foundation is reserv'd for me . but st. austin , tho' he was alledged as favouring the former exposition , yet is otherwhere as clearly and fully for this as you can desire . therefore the lord saith , on this rock i will build my church , because peter had said , thou art christ the son of the living god. therefore , says he , on this rock which thou hast confess'd , i will build my church . christ was the rock upon which foundation even peter himself was built ; for other foundation no man can lay than that which is laid , to wit , christ jesus . the church therefore which is founded on christ , &c. st. august . tratat . 124. in joannem . and again , thou art peter , and on this rock which thou . host confessed , on this rock which thou hast known , saying , thou art christ the son of the living god , i will build my church , i. e. upon my self , the son of the living god , i will build my church ; i will build thee upon me , not me upon thee . men that were willing to be built upon men , said , i am of paul , i of apollos , i of cephas , i. e. peter ; but others who would not be built upon peter , but upon petra a rock , said , i am of christ. thus st. august . de verbis domini ; see matth. serm. 13. these plainly make this rock to be christ himself . besides these already mention'd , there occurrs in the writings of some of the fathers a third interpretation of the rock here spoken of , viz. that which makes st. peter to be the person to whom christ makes promise of so great a dignity , that he would build his church upon him . the romish writers abound with citations to this purpose , and tho' because some of them are out of writings that are not judg'd to be of sufficient authority , and in others of them they have not shew'd that fidelity they ought to have done , many of them are of no weight , yet it is granted that some of the ancients have inclin'd to this sense of the place ; and therefore there is no necessity that i should give my self the trouble to transcribe their words . mr. lock may perhaps say , that this exposition is so much for the advantage of the papal interest , and in favour of the bishop of rome's universal pastorship , that protestants must not admit of it . but i answer , why is it more for the advantage of the papal interest that st. peter should be the rock on which christ would build his church , than it is that he would give him the keys of the kingdom of heaven ? why do they who say that these words , on this rock i will build my church , were spoken personally of peter , more favour popery than they who will have those words , to thee i will give the keys of the kingdom of heaven , to be said personally to peter ? for why may we not argue as strongly for the universal pastorship from the latter words , as from the former ? and yet mr. lock himself tells us expresly , that the latter words were said personally to peter ; see his reasonab , of christian. p. 105. i think it not amiss here to transcribe the words of episcopius , in loc-concedi atque indulgeri posse putaverim pontificiis , quod per hanc petram intelligatur ipsa persona petri , idque quia probabilibus valde nituntur argumentis . at vero dicet quis , sic datur pontificiis quod volunt . id vero pernegatur consequi . etsi enim petro hic aliquid promittatur , aut de eo aliquid futurum affirmetur , id tamen non fit cum aliorum discipulorum aut apostolorum exclusione . aliud enim longe est petro hoc dici , aliud soli petro ea dici quae aliis non competant , aut eodem saliem jure aliis discipulis tribui nequeant . prius concedi posse putamus , posterius vero negamus , id enim sufficit plusquam satis ad primatum petri , & quae ei ( si quis fuisset ) ridicule admodum & stolide superstruitur pontificis romani praerogativa , evertendum . thus episcopius . and there are protestant divines of great esteem for their learning and judgment , and who have engaged as zealously as any other against the papal interest , who have gone farther , have not only made the person of st. peter to be meant by the rock , but also somewhat peculiar to be granted him , and yet shew that this affords not the least advantage to the pope's pretensions that he is universal pastor . to omit some of our english divines , they that please may consult cameron either in his praelections , in st. matth. 16. 18. or in the great criticks . episcopius says that this , that the church should be built on him as on a rock , was granted to peter in common with the other apostles . and to the same purpose speaks origen , tractat. 1. in matth. if thou thinkest that the whole church was built upon peter alone , what wilt thou say of john the son of thunder , and every one of the apostles ? shall we dare to say that the gates of hell could not prevail against st. peter only , but could prevail against the rest ? and a little after , if that saying , to thee i will give the keys , was common to the other apostles , why was not the rest which was then said as to peter common to them too ? so that this may be a fourth exposition , that by the rock is meant st. peter , not alone but together with the other apostles . as he made that confession , thou art christ the son of the living god , not for himself only , but also in the name of the other apostles ; so , according to this sense , he receiv'd this grant for the rest of the apostles as well as for himself . i have alledged the foresaid testimonies to satisfie mr. lock , that persons of approved piety as well as learning , have judged our saviour's words , on this rock i will build my church , capable of other interpretations than that which is mention'd by him , viz. that the faith which was confessed by st. peter , 〈◊〉 those articles , that jesus is the christ , and , that he is the son of the living god , are the rock on which the church is built . this is the only interpretation that can do mr. lock any service , and therefore he takes no notice of the rest . but he should not be himself guilty of that which he condemns so much in others , i. e. the imposing his interpretations of scripture upon us . and therefore he must not be displeas'd , if we do not grant that which mr. lock here affirms without any proof , that this proposition , that jesus is the messiah , the son of the living god , was that rock on which our lord said that he would build his church . mr. lock says , that the evidence that we deceive not our selves in ascribing a revelation to god , can never be so great as the evidence of our own intuitive knowledge ; where , if his meaning be , that we can never be so certain that any revelation ( suppose the scripture ) is from god , as we are of the object of our intuitive knowledge , i must deny it ; for i firmly believe that there have been and may now be those , who are as certain that the scriptures are the word of god , as they can be of that which they clearly see , and distinctly perceive by any other of their senses . and i am confirm'd in this belief by the words of mr. chillingworth , c. 1. § . 9. to those ( says he ) that believe and live according to their faith , god gives by degrees the spirit of obsignation and confirmation , and to be as fully and resolutely assur'd of the gospel of christ , as those which heard it from christ himself with their ears , which saw it with their eyes , which look'd upon it , and whose hands handled the word of life . chap. xxix . of fundamentals , and the apostles creed . god alone can appoint what shall be necessarily believ'd by every one whom he will justifie ; and what he has so appointed and declared is alone necessary . no body can add to these fundamental articles of faith , nor make any other necessary , but what god himself hath made and declared to be so . and what these are which god requires of those who will enter into and receive the benefits of the new covenant , has already been shewn . an explicit belief of these is absolutely requir'd of all those to whom the gospel of jesus christ is preached . mr. lock , reasonab . of christian. p. 301. the primitive church admitted converted heathens to baptism upon the faith contain'd in the apostles creed . a bare profession of that faith , and no more , was required of them to be receiv'd into the church , and made members of christ's body . how little different the faith of the ancient church was from the faith i have mention'd , may be seen in these words of tertullian : regula fidei una omnium est sola immobilis , irreformabilis , credendi scilicet in unicum deum omnipotentem , mundi conditorem , & filium ejus jesum christum , natum ex virgine maria , crucifixum sub pontio pilato , tertia die resuscitatum a mortuis , receptum in coelis , sedentem nunc ad dextram patris , venturum judicare vivos & mortuos , per carnis etiam resurrectionem . hac lege fidei manente caetera jam disciplinae & conversationis admittunt novitatem correctionis : tert. de virg. velan . in princip . this was the faith that in tertullian's time sufficed to make a christian. and the church of england only proposes the articles of the apostles creed to the convert to be baptiz'd ; and upon his professing a belief of them , asks whether he will be baptiz'd in this faith ; and upon the profession of this faith , and no other , the church baptizes him into it . the apostles creed is the faith i was baptiz'd into , no one tittle whereof i have renounced , that i know . and , i heretofore thought that gave me title to be a christian. second vindicat. p. 177 , 178 , 182. thus mr. lock . observations . mr. lock tells us , in reasonab . of christian. p. 301. that it had been already shewn what the fundamental articles of faith are . but i ask , how had it been shewn ? he had sometimes affirm'd positively , that this , that jesus of nazareth is the only gospel-article of faith that was requir'd , reasonab . of christian . p. 195. that salvation or perdition depends upon believing or rejecting this one proposition , that jesus was the messiah . ibid. p. 43. that this was all the doctrine the apostles propos'd to be believ'd . ibid. p. 93. at other times he had said , that it was also requir'd for the attaining of life , that they should believe that jesus is the son of god. ibid. p. 194. he had also spoken of concomitant articles , viz. christ's resurrection , rule , and coming again to judge the world , saying , that these , together with jesus of nazareth's being the messiah , are all the faith requir'd as necessary to justification . ibid. p. 293 , 294. otherwhere he mentions his suffering , and having fulfill'd all things that were written in the old testament concerning the messiah ; adding , that those that believ'd this , and repented , should receive remission of their sins through this faith in him . ibid. p. 190. thus mr. lock had shewn what the fundamental articles of the faith are , or rather , had shew'd how wavering and uncertain he himself is concerning them , assigning sometimes only one , sometimes two , sometimes more . he brings the words of tertullian . de virg. velan . to shew how little different the faith of the ancient church was from the faith he hath mention'd : but , 1. it would have been more for his reputation , if the faith which he mentions had not been at all different from that of the ancient church . 2. tertullian's words there do not shew that the faith of the ancient church differ'd little from his . for by comparing the rule of faith which he lays down here with that which he gives us in lib. de praescript . adv . haeret. and in lib. adv . praxeam , it fully appears , that he did not design this for a complete account of the faith of the ancient church ; for , some things that are in this are omitted in the other ; as , omnipotentem ( a word certainly very material ) is left out in both of them : and more things are added ; as , universa de nihilo produxerit per verbum suum . id verbum filium ejus appellatum , &c. carnem factum , &c. misisse vicariam vim spiritus sancti , is all added in lib. de praescript . and so sermo ejus per quem omnia facta sunt , & sine quo factum est nihil . ex ea ( i. e. virgine ) natum hominem & deum , mortuum & sepultum ; qui miserit spiritum sanctum , is all superadded in lib. adv . praxeam . tertullian therefore will not be found to be a friend to mr. lock , who might rather have said , that it may be seen in tertullian , how far different the faith of the ancient church was from the faith he hath mention'd . he tells us , that the apostles creed is the faith he was baptiz'd into , and that he hath not renounced one tittle thereof that he knows . but hath he not renounced the article of the resurrection of the body , when he tells us , that in his next edition of his essay of humane understanding he will have the word body blotted out , and change these words of his book , the dead bodies of men shall rise , into these , the dead shall rise ? see his third letter , pag. 210. chap. xxx . of vertue and vice , self-denial and education . god hath , by an inseparable connexion , join'd vertue and publick happiness together , and made the practice thereof necessary to the preservation of society , and visibly beneficial to all with whom the vertuous man has to do . mr. lock , essay , l. 1. c. 3. § . 6. the laws that men generally refer their actions to , to judge of their rectitude and obliquity , seem to me to be these three ; 1. the divine law. 2. the civil law. 3. the law of opinion or reputation , if i may so call it . by the relation they bear to the first of these , men judge whether their actions are sins or duties ; by the second , whether they be criminal or innocent ; and by the third , whether they be vertues or vices . by divine law , i mean that law which god has set to the actions of men , whether promulgated to them by the light of nature , or the voice of revelation . vertue and vice are names pretended and suppos'd every where to stand for actions in their own nature right or wrong ; and as far as they really are so apply'd , they so far are coincident with the divine law above-mention'd . but yet whatever is pretended , this is visible , that these names of vertue and vice , in the particular instances of their application through the several nations and societies of men in the world , are constantly attributed only to such actions as in each country or society are in reputation or diseredit . thus the measure of what is every where call'd and esteem'd vertue and vice , is this approbation or dislike , praise or blame , which by a secret or tacit consent establishes it self in the several societies , tribes , and clubs of men in the world ; whereby several actions come to find credit or disgrace among them , according to the judgment , maxims , and fashions of that place . by this approbation and dislike they establish among themselves what they will call vertue and vice. esteem and discredit , vertue and vice , do yet in a great measure every where correspond with the unchangeable rule of right and wrong which the law of god hath established ; there being nothing that so directly and visibly secures and advances the general good of mankind in this world , as obedience to the laws he hath set them ; and nothing that breeds such mischiefs and confusion as the neglect of them . and therefore men , without renouncing all sense and reason , and their own interest , which they are so constantly true to , could not generally mistake in placing their commendation and blame on that side that really deserv'd it not . nay , even those men whose practice was otherwise , fail'd not to give their approbation right , few being deprav'd to that degree , as not to condemn at least in others the faults they themselves were guilty of ; whereby even in the corruption of manners , the true boundaries of the law of nature , which ought to be the rule of vertue and vice , were pretty well preserv'd . so that even the exhortations of inspir'd teachers have not fear'd to appeal to common repute , whatsoever is lovely , whatsoever is of good report , if there be any vertue , if there be any praise , &c. ibid. l. 2. c. 28. § . 7 , 8 , 10 , 11. the foundation of vice lies in wrong measures of good. ibid. l. 4. c. 19. § . 16. reputation is not the true principle and measure of vertue , for that is the knowledge of a man's duty , and the satisfaction it is to obey his maker in following the dictates of that light god has given him , with the hopes of acceptation and reward . i place vertue as the first and most necessary of those endowments that belong to a man or a gentleman , as absolutely requisite to make him valued and belov'd by others , acceptable or tolerable to himself ; without that i think he will neither be happy in this nor the other world. of education , p. 61 , 157. it seems plain to me , that the principle of all vertue and excellency lies in a power of denying our selves the satisfaction of our own desires , where reason doth not authorize them . this power is to be got and improved by custom , made easie and familiar by an early practice . he that has not a mastery over his inclinations , he that knows not how to resist the importunity of present pleasure and pain for the sake of what reason tells him is fit to be done , wants the true principle of vertue and industry . this temper therefore , so contrary to unguided nature , is to be got betimes ; and this habit , as the true foundation of future ability and happiness , is to be wrought into the mind as early as may be , and so to be confirm'd by all the care and ways imaginable . ibid. p. 37 , 38 , 46. christ commands self-denial , and the exposing our selves to suffering and danger , rather than to deny or disown him . reasonab . of christian. p. 224. as the foundation of vertue , there ought very early to be imprinted in the minds of children a true notion of god , as of the independent supreme being , author and maker of all things , from whom we receive all our good , that loves us , and gives us all things , hears and sees every thing , and does all manner of good to those that love and obey him , and consequent to it a love and reverence of him . they must be taught also to pray to him . the lord's prayer , the creeds , and ten commandments , 't is necessary they should learn perfectly by heart . the knowledge of vertue all along from the beginning , in all the instances they are capable of , being taught them more by practice than rules , i know not whether they should read any other discourses of morality but what they find in the bible . of education , p. 157 , 158 , 185 , 220. thus mr. lock . observations . when mr. lock , in essay l. 2. c. 28. § . 7. having nam'd three distinct laws , the divine law , the civil law , and the law of opinion or reputation ( as he calls it ) says , that by the first men judge whether their actions are sins or duties , by the second whether they be criminal or innocent , by the third whether they be vertues or vices , doth he not plainly distinguish sins and duties from vices and vertues ? for , 1. he makes men to judge of vices and vertues by one law , of sins and duties by another . 2. they judge by an infallible rule of the one , by a very fallible one of the other . 3. criminal and innocent , are plainly distinct from sins and duties ; and so we cannot but judge , that according to mr. lock , vices and vertues are distinct from both . now if so , it might not be amiss , if he would inform us where the distinction between them lies ; for i have always thought that there is a very near affinity as between vice and sin on the one hand , so between vertue and duty on the other hand . but tho' , according to mr. lock , men do judge of vertue and vice by his law of opinion and reputation ; yet he will not say that they ought to do so . he tells us here , § . 11. that the law of nature ought to be the rule of vertue and vice , and expresses it more largely in his epistle to the reader : the law of nature , says he , is that standing and unalterable rule by which men ought to judge of the moral rectitude and pravity of their actions , and accordingly denominate them vertues or vices . but i had rather say , that the law which ought to be the rule whereby men judge of sins and duties , ought also to be the rule by which they are to judge of vices and vertues , and that is the divine law , which ( mr. lock himself being judge ) comprehends more than the law of nature . by the divine law ( says he here , § . 8. ) i mean that law which god has set to the actions of men , whether promulgated to them by the light of nature , or the voice of revelation . so ( say i ) the law of god comprehending both the law of nature and his revealed law , is the rule whereby men ought to judge of vertues and vices . but mr. lock will prove , that his law of opinion or reputation , or ( as he also expresses it ) approbation or dislike , praise or blame , is the common measure of vertue and vice. this ( says he ) will appear to any one who considers that every where vertue and praise , vice and blame , go together . vertue is every where that which is thought praise-worthy , and nothing else but that which has the allowance of publick esteem is call'd vertue . thus mr. lock here , viz. l. 2. c. 28. § . 11. but i would know whether he speaks of true and real , or of reputed vertue : if of reputed , it is not to the purpose , since every one will grant , without proof , that his law of reputation is the rule of reputed vertue ; and it signifies no more than this , that that is reputed vertue which is reputed such . besides , how can it be worth the while to enquire after the rule of reputed vertue ? if on the other side , he speak of true real vertue , i believe that no man before him ever said that true vertue and praise every where went together . constant experience may teach every man the contrary . it is very rarely that true vertue hath met with such entertainment in the world : but , on the other hand , it would fill large volumes , if we could set down all the instances of reproach'd and despis'd vertue , which the several ages of the world have afforded . mr. lock goes on , and tells us , that vertue and praise are so united , that they are call'd often by the same name . his meaning is , that vertue is call'd often by the name of praise ; but he gives us only two instances of it . the one is out of virgil. aeneid . l. 1. sunt sua praemia laudi ; where laudi is by some interpreted virtuti , by others factis laudabilibus , or gestis bellicis : but the whole verse is this ; en priamus , sunt hic etiam sua praemia laudi : and why may not laudi have here the usual signification ? certainly , though i shall not be confident that it is the right interpretation of the verse , yet if referring sua to priamus i should construe it thus , lo priamus , here also are his rewards to his praise , i believe mr. lock would not find it very easie to confute it . the other instance is out of cicero , tusc. qu. l. 2. whose words mr. lock hath transcrib'd , but i shall do it more fully : nihil habet praestantius , nihil quod magis expetat ; quam honestatem , quam laudem , quam dignitatem , quam decus . hisce ego pluribus nominibus unam rem declarari volo , sed utor , ut quammaxime significem , pluribus . volo autem dicere illud homini longe optimum esse , quod ipsum sit optandum per se , a virtute profectum vel in ipsa virtute situm , sua sponte laudabile ; quod quidem citius dixerim solum quam summum bonum . thus cicero , who himself declares what that one thing is which he would signifie by all those names , viz. the chief or rather only good , which is praise-worthy and desirable for it self , proceeds from vertue , or is placed in vertue . we need then no other commentary but tully's own . that which he signifies by honestatem , laudem , dignitatem , decus , is the chief good , concerning which he would not determine whether it proceed from vertue , or consists in it . it doth not appear then by these citations out of virgil and tully , that they call'd vertue and praise by the same name . but i shall be so liberal to mr. lock , as to suppose that those two great persons , and other good writers , have call'd vertue by the name of praise , it will do him no service after all , unless they did this for the reason which he assigns , viz. because vertue and praise are united , and every where go together ; and therefore it is incumbent upon him to prove that they did it for this reason , which is a very difficult task . i on the other side can easily assign more probable reasons why they might do it . if any call vertue by the name of praise , they had good ground for doing it , because true vertue is always praise-worthy , and men ought evermore to praise and celebrate it , tho' it too often meets with a contrary reward from the world , is reproached and despis'd ; as vice on the other hand is too frequently magnified and extolled . but mr. lock endeavours to persuade us that reputed and true vertue are in a great measure the same . for so he says here , that esteem and discredit , vertue and vice , do in a great measure every where correspond with the unchangeable rule of right and wrong , which the law of god hath established . and again , men without renouncing all sense and reason and their own interest , could not generally mistake in placing their commendation and blame on that side that really deserved it not . again , in the corruption of manners the true boundaries of the law of nature , which ought to be the rule of vertue and vice , were pretty well preserved , for which he alledges , phil. 4. 8. he had said in the words immediately preceeding , that even those men whose practice was otherwise fail'd not to give their approbation right , few being deprav'd to that degree as not to condemn at least in others the faults they themselves were guilty of . thus mr. lock , in essay , l. 2. c. 28. § . 11. and in his epistle to the reader he says , that men in that way of denominating their actions did not for the most part much vary from the law of nature . for answer to this , 1. how doth that which mr. lock says ( viz. that few were deprav'd to that degree as not to condemn at least in others the faults they themselves were guilty of ) agree with rom. 1. 32. and other places of scripture ? in rom. 1. 32. it is said , that they ( i. e. the gentiles ) not only did the same ( viz. the things that are mentioned in the foregoing verses ) but took pleasure in them that did them . they were not ignorant , that they who commit such things are worthy of death , and yet practis'd them themselves , and not only so but they also approv'd of others that practis'd them . for so the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may be rendered comprobant . st. chrysostome , in loc . expounds it by praising , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and so again 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and is follow'd by o●●umenius . theophylact interprets it by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , they patronize or defend others that do them , appear as advocates for them , so far they are from condemning them . so they that forsake the law will praise the wicked man , prov. 28. 4. those that keep the law ( as it follows there ) will contend with wicked men , but those that forsake it will be so far from contending with them , or condemning them , that contrarywise they will praise them . the apostle also tells of some whose glory is in their shame , phil. 3. 19. how then can mr. lock say that there are few deprav'd to that degree as not to condemn in others the faults they themselves are guilty of ? when the scripture speaks of those that make their shame matter of glorying , and of so many that instead of condemning did praise , approve , and take pleasure in those that live in the practice of most heinous sins . also , how can he say as he doth , that vice and blame every where go together ? when we are so plainly told in holy writ , that vice and praise so often go together , that vice in this world meets with the reward due to vertue , is approved , applauded , commended . 2. how can he say that reputed vertue and vice , in a great measure , every where corresponds to that which the law of god hath establish'd to be vertue and vice ? when he tells us , that what is counted a vertue in one country , passes for vice in another : for the opinions of these countries being directly contrary the one to the other , it is impossible that both of them should in any measure correspond with the law of god. if the divine law have determin'd on the part of that country which esteems such a thing to be a vertue , then the opinion of the other country in which it is reputed to be a vice cannot be agreeable to that law ; and if it hath not determin'd either way , either that it is a vertue , or that it is a vice , then neither of the two opinions can pretend to agree with it . i know what mr. lock saith , though what was thought praise-worthy in one place escaped not censure in another , and so in different societies vertues and vices were changed ; yet as to the main , they for the most part kept the same every where . but , 1. we may observe how cautiously and timorously he expresseth it ; as to the main , and for the most part : it seems the one expression would not secure him , without superadding the other . 2. it will be no difficulty to shew that as to the main , and for the most part , they were not the same : for , all that is necessary to this is , to make it appear , that the opinions of the philosophers among the heathens concerning vertue and vice , were not the same ( as to the main , and for the most part ) with the opinions of those who judged of them by the rule of the law of god. aristotle politic. l. 7. c. 16. teaches it to be lawful to procure an abortion before that which is conceived hath life and sense . diogenes laertius , in the life of zeno , tells of some that taught not only the lawfulness of self-murther , but also the reasonableness of it . cicero de invent. l. 2. vers . fin . joins revenge with religion , piety , veracity , &c. and refers them all to that which he calls natura jus ; and it is a known speech of his , ad attic. l. 9. c. 14. odi hominem & odero , utinam ulcisci poscem . and aristotle , ethic. l. 4. c. 11. will scarce excuse him from being faulty that doth not revenge himself . they that please , may see how much cicero in orat. pro m. coelio says in defence of meretricii amores , si quis est qui etiam meretriciis amoribus interdictum juventuti putet , est ille quidem valde severus , &c. the community of wives , and murthering such infants as were weak and sickly , or deformed , was taught by the laws of lycurgus ( see plutarch , in lycurgo ; ) and community of wives by xenophon , de republ. lacedaem . we are told also by tertullian apologet. c. 39. that socrates among the greeks , and cato among the romans , lent their wives to others ; and strabo , l. 11. with several others , testifies the same of cato , and adds , that this was the ancient custom of the romans . yea diogenes the cynick , and plato , and the stoicks zeno and chrysippus , were all of opinion that wives ought to be common , as diogenes laertius in zenone informs us ; and they that desire to see plato's judgment , may consult him de republ. l. 5. and other where . as these that i have mention'd agreed with lycurgus as to the community of wives , so there were too many that were for the lawfulness of exposing or murthering children , as he was . we may justly admire that seneca , de ira , l. 1. c. 15. should give such advice as he does . at corrigi nequeunt , nihilque in illis bonae spei capax est . tollantur e coetu mortalium . portentosos foetus extinguimus , liberos quoque si debiles monstrosique sint editi mergimus : so he . cicero , de natur. deor. l. 3. vers . fin . counted it a fault to acknowledge that we owe any vertue to god ; that ( says he ) is not a gift from god , we have it of our selves . his words are these ; virtutem nemo unquam acceptam deo retulit , nimirum recte . propter virtutem enim jure laudamur , & de virtute recte gloriamur , quod non contingeret , si id donum a deo non a nobis haberemus . i shall add only one instance more out of sextus empiricus pyrrhon . hypotyp . l. 3. where he shews that the stoicks allow'd paedaresty , together with the foulest incests , citing the words of zeno and chrysippus . the very same is charg'd upon that sect by theophilus antioch , ad autolyc . l. 3. and as to paedaresty , the words of tatianus , con . graecos , p. 164 , 165. are most apposite to our purpose , especially if the latin interpreter hath rendred them right : barbari puerorum amores damnant , iidem apud romanos praerogativa dignantur . much more might have been added , but this is more than enough to confute mr. lock 's strange assertion , that esteem and discredit , vertue and vice , do in a great measure every where correspond with the unchangeable rule of right and wrong , which the law of god hath established ; or ( as he expresses it in his epistle to the reader ) that men in denominating vertue and vice , did not , for the most part , much vary from the law of nature . but mr. lock will prove this from scripture : even the exhortations of inspired teachers have not fear'd ( i suppose he means even inspir'd teachers in their exhortations have not fear'd ) to appeal to common repute . whatsoever is lovely , whatsoever is of good report , if there be any vertue , if there be any praise , &c. phil. 4. 8. thus mr. lock , essay , l. 2. c. 28. § . 11. but in what words doth the apostle appeal to common repute ? not in the word vertue , for by that he undoubtedly means real vertue ; not in the word praise , for by it is understood that which is truly praise-worthy , ( sua sponte laudabile , as tully says ; ) not in the words , whatsoever is lovely , for oecumenius in loc . teaches us to understand thereby whatsoever is amiable in the eyes of god , or of the faithful , ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . ) is it then in the words , whatsoever is of good report , that he appeals to it ? it must be in these if in any . but , 1. as oecumenius teaches us to understand the former words , whatsoever is lovely , not in the eyes of all men but of the faithful ; so why may we not restrain the latter words thus , what soever is of good report , i. e. with good men , or with those who know how to make a right estimate of things , who have their senses exercis'd to discern between good and evil ? 2. or may not the words be expounded thus , whatsoever is in it self , or of its own nature , such as deserves that we should be well spoken of for it , or such as men cannot but speak well of us for it , whosoever they be , whether christians , or those that are without . st. paul would have us to do all such things as men ought to speak well of , but not every thing which any one may speak well of , for some may speak well of the covetous , whom the lord abhorreth , psal. 10. 3. and that may be highly esteemed with men which is an abomination in the sight of god. it is then a great mistake to think that the apostle here appeals to common esteem and repute ; which is so uncertain , that if it was the measure of vertue and vice , by reason of the different temper , education , fashion , judgment , maxims , and interest of men in several ages and places , it would fall out , that what is vertue in one age would be vice in another , as mr. lock confesses , that what is accounted vertue in one place , passes for vice in another . that which is so uncertain and changeable cannot but vary much from the certain and unchangeable rule of right and wrong , viz. the law of god , let mr. lock pretend to the contrary what he will , and plead as much as he will for his law of opinion and reputation . when mr. lock says , that men are so constantly true to their interest , he cannot surely mean their chiefest interest , viz. the interest of their souls ; for he must needs be sensible how regardless men are of that , and how ready to betray it . tho' in his treatise of education , p. 61. he says , that reputation is not the true principle and measure of vertue , yet he adds , that it is that which comes nearest to it . but it may do well , if he please , to explain what he means by its coming nearest the true principle and measure of vertue . when in his treatise of education , p. 185. he says , the lord's prayer , the creeds , and ten commandments , &c. doth he by the creeds understand those three creeds which we have in our liturgy , call'd the apostle's , the nicene , and athanasian ? or is creeds put for creed by the mistake of the press ? chap. xxxi . of the resurrection of the body , the day of judgment , and eternal rewards and punishments . the resurrection of the body after death is above reason : that the bodies of men shall rise and live again , this being beyond the discovery of reason , is purely a matter of faith , with which reason has directly nothing to do , mr. lock , essay , l. 4. c. 17. § . 23. and c. 18. § . 7. divine justice shall bring to judgment at the last day the very same persons , to be happy or miserable in the other , who did well or ill in this life . he who at first made us begin to subsist here sensible intelligent beings , and for several years continu'd us in such a state , can and will restore us to the like state of sensibility in another world , and make us capable there to receive the retribution he has design'd to men according to their doings in this life , ibid. l. 1. c. 4. § . 5. and l. 4. c. 3. § . 6. we groan within our selves , waiting for the adoption , to wit , the redemption of our body , rom. 8. 23. whereby is plainly meant the change of these frail mortal bodies into the spiritual immortal bodies at the resurrection , when this mortal shall have put on immortality , 1 cor. 15. 54. reasonab . of christian. p. 206. this being the case , that whoever is guilty of any sin should certainly die and cease to be , the benefit of life restor'd by christ at the resurrection , would have been no great advantage ( for as much as here again death must have seiz'd upon all mankind , because all had sinned ; for the wages of sin is every where death , as well after as before the resurrection ) if god had not found out a way to justifie some , ibid. p. 15. the scripture is express , that the same persons shall be rais'd and appear before the judgment-seat of christ , that every one may receive according to what he has done in his body . the third letter , p. 196. in the new testament i find our saviour and the apostles to preach the resurrection of the dead , and the resurrection from the dead in many places ; and the resurrection of the dead , i acknowledge to be an article of the christian faith. but i do not remember any place where the resurrection of the same body is so much as mention'd . nay , i do not remember in any place of the new testament ( where the general resurrection of the last day is spoken of ) any such expression as the resurrection of the body , much less of the same body , ibid. p. 166. when i writ my essay , i took it for granted , as i doubt not but many others have done , that the scripture had mention'd in express terms the resurrection of the body ; but looking more narrowly into what revelation has declar'd concerning the resurrection , i find no such express words in the scripture , as that the body shall rise or be raised , or the resurrection of the body . i shall therefore , in the next edition of it , change these words of my essay , l. 4. c. 18. § . 7. the dead bodies of men shall rise , into these of the scripture , the dead shall rise . not that i question that the dead shall be rais'd with bodies , ibid. p. 210. tho' i do by no means deny that the same bodies shall be rais'd at the last day , yet i see nothing said to prove it to be an article of faith. ibid. p. 195. the apostle tells us , at the great day , when every one shall receive according to his doings , the secrets of all hearts shall be laid open . the sentence shall be justified by the consciousness all persons shall have , that they themselves are the same that committed those actions , and deserve that punishment for them , essay , l. 2. c. 27. § . 26. christ himself , who knew for what he should condemn men at the last day , assures us in the two places where he describes his proceeding at the great judgment , that the sentence of condemnation passes only on the workers of iniquity , such as neglected to fulfil the law in acts of charity , matth. 7. 23. luke 13. 27. matth. 25. 42. that men may not be deceived by mistaking the doctrine of faith , grace , free grace , and the pardon and forgiveness of sin , and salvation by christ , ( which was the great end of his coming , ) he more than once declares to them , for what omissions and miscarriages he shall judge and condemn to death even those who have own'd him , and done miracles in his name , when he comes at last to render to every one according to what he hath done in the flesh , sitting upon his great and glorious tribunal at the end of the world ; see john 5. 28 , 29. matth. 13. 14. 16. 24 , &c. reasonab . of christian. p. 9. 241 , 242 , 243 , 244 , 245. i am going to a tribunal that hath a right to judge of thoughts . the third letter , p. 98. the eternal condition of a future state infinitely outweighs the expectation of riches , or honour , or any other worldly pleasure we can propose to our selves . the happiness of another life shall certainly be agreeable to every one's wish or desire . the rewards and punishments of another life , which the almighty has establish'd as the enforcements of his law , are of weight enough to determine the choice against whatever pleasure or pain this life can shew , when the eternal state is consider'd in its bare possibility , which no body can make any doubt of . he that will allow exquisite and endless happiness to be but the possible consequence of a good life here , or the contrary state the possible reward of a bad one , must own himself to judge very much amiss , if he does not conclude that a vertuous life , with the certain expectation of everlasting bliss which may come , is to be preferr'd to a vicious one , with the fear of that dreadful state of misery which 't is very possible may overtake the guilty , or at best the terrible uncertain hope of annibilation . this is evidently so , tho' the vertuous life here had nothing but pain , and the vicious continual pleasure , which yet is for the most part quite otherwise , and wicked men have not much the odds to brag of , even in their present possession , nay , all things considered rightly , have i think the worst part here . but when infinite happiness is put in one scale against infinite misery in the other , if the worst that comes to the pious man if he mistake , be the best that the wicked man can attain to if he be in the right , who can without madness run the venture ? who in his wits would chuse to come within a possibility of infinite misery , which if he miss , there is yet nothing to be got by that hazard : whereas , on the other hand , the sober man ventures nothing against happiness to be got if his expectation comes to pass . if the good man be in the right , he is eternally happy ; is he mistake , he is not miserable , he feels nothing . on the other side , if the wicked be in the right , he is not happy ; if he mistake , he is infinitely miserable . must it not be a most manifest wrong judgment that does not presently see to which side in this case the preference is to be given ? i have forborn to mention any thing of the certainty or probability of a future state , designing here to shew the wrong judgment that any one must allow he makes upon his own principles , laid how he pleases , who prefers the short pleasures of a vicious life upon any consideration , whilst he knows and cannot but be certain that a future life is at least possible , essay , l. 2. c. 21. § . 38 , 65 , 70. nothing of pleasure or pain in this life can bear any proportion to endless happiness or exquisite misery of an immortal soul hereafter . let a man see that vertue and religion are necessary to his happiness , let him look into the future state of bliss or misery , and see there god the righteous judge ready to render to every one according to his deeds ; to them that by patient continuance in well-doing , seek for glory , and honour , and immortality , eternal life ; but to every soul that doth evil , indignation and wrath , tribulation and anguish : to him , i say , who hath a prospect of the different state of perfect happiness or misery , that attends all men after this life , depending on their behaviour here , the measures of good and evil that govern his choice , are mightily changed , ibid. § . 60. our saviour requires the obedience of his disciples to several of the commands of the moral law he afresh lays upon them , with the enforcement of unspeakable rewards and punishments in another world , according to their obedience or disobedience , reasonab . of christian. p. 234. the son of god would in vain have come into the world , to lay the foundation of a kingdom , and gather together a select people out of the world , if ( they being found guilty at their appearance before the judgment-seat of the righteous judge of all men at the last day ) instead of entrance into eternal life in the kingdom he had prepared for them , they should receive death , the just reward of sin , which every one of them was guilty of . this second death would have left him no subjects , ibid. p. 211. open mens eyes upon the endless unspeakable joys of another life , and their hearts will find something solid and powerful to move them to live well here . the view of heaven and hell will cast a slight upon the short pleasures and pains of this present state , and give attractions and encouragements to vertue , which reason and interest , and the care of our selves , cannot but allow , ibid. p. 291 , 292. thus mr. lock . observations . as to the article of the resurrection , the first enquiry must be , whether there are to be found any such express words in the scripture , as that the body shall rise or be raised , or the resurrection of the body , where the general resurrection is spoken of . if , when mr. lock denies that such express words are found in the scripture ( see his third letter , p. 210. ) his meaning be , that those very express words are not found , i grant that they are not ; but if he mean farther , that express words which signifie the very same thing are not to be found , the contrary will easily appear . in rom. 8. 23. there are these express words , the redemption of our body ; and mr. lock , in reasonab . of christian. p. 206. tells us , that thereby is plainly meant the change of these frail mortal bodies into the spiritual immortal bodies at the resurrection , when this mortal shall have put on immortality . in the same chapter , v. 11. we find these express words , quicken your mortal bodies . he that raised up christ from the dead , shall also quicken your mortal bodies , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , shall make them to live , restore them to life after death , as he restor'd the crucified body of christ to life ; so that to quicken our mortal bodies , is the same with raising them . and mr. lock , in his third letter , p. 199. saying , that in the new testament it is said , raise the dead , quicken or make alive the dead , the resurrection of the dead , clearly makes to quicken and to raise to signifie the same . and st. chrysostom ( not to mention occumenius and theophylact , who follow him , ) gives a reason why st. paul says , quicken or give life to our mortal bodies , rather than raise them , viz. because he here speaks only of those who should be raised to life , ( i. e. a blissful or happy life , ) viz. the faithful , who have the spirit of god dwelling in them ; not of the wicked , who shall also be rais'd , but ( says he ) unto punishment , not unto life . there is a third text which hath so near a resemblance to these , that it may well be join'd with them , viz. phil. 3. 21. who shall change our vile body , that it may be conformed to his glorious body . when shall the saviour the lord christ effect this wonderful change , that our vile body shall be made conformable to his glorious body ? surely then , when he shall quicken or raise it , and that will be when he comes from heaven to judge the world , see v. 20. here is not indeed the word raise , but it is plainly imply'd . the blessed jesus when he comes from heaven will raise our vile body , and make it conform'd to his own glorious body . will mr. lock say that the general resurrection is not spoken of in these places ? he cannot say it of the first , viz. rom. 8. 23. without retracting his own express words in reasonab . of christian. p. 206. he cannot say it of the third , viz. philip. 3. 21. because the immediately foregoing verse points us to the time of christ's coming from heaven to judge the world. he may perhaps say it of the second , viz. rom. 8. 11. because some before him have said that the general resurrection is not spoken of in that text , particularly calvin and piscator . calvin in loc . hath these words , mortalia corpora vocat quicquid adhuc restat in nob is morti obnoxium , ut mos illi usit at us est crassioram nostri partem hoc nomine appellare . unde colligimus non de ultima resurrectione quae momento fiet haberi sermonem ; sed de continua spiritus operatione , quae reliquias carnis paulatim mortificans caelestem vitam in nobis instaurat . he tells us , that by mortal bodies is understood whatsoever remains still in us obnoxious to death ; which we may grant him , for our souls are not obnoxious to death ; and therefore our mortal bodies contain all that remains in us liable to death . he tells us also , that it is the apostle's usual manner to call the grosser part of us by that name , i. e. by the name of body ; and we may likewise grant him this , for every one grants that the body is the grosser part of us . but now what would he gather from this ? whence ( says he ) we collect that the last resurrection is not spoken of . his argument put into form , is this , the apostle by mortal bodies understands whatsoever remains still in us obnoxious to death ; therefore the last resurrection is not spoken of . mr. lock may try , if he pleases , whether he can find out any thing to tie this antecedent and consequent together , but i can pronounce that it will not be very easie for him to do it . piscater's words are these , quum certum sit apostolum hic non lequi de resurrectione corporum sed animarum . tho' our own eyes tell us , that the apostle uses the word bodies , ( not souls , ) yet , if we will believe piscator , it is certain that here he speaks not of the resurrection of bodies , but of souls : and how is it certain ? mr. calvin hath said it , that is all the assurance that i know of . he that raised up christ from the dead , shall also quicken your mortal bodies , these are the apostle's words . if when he says he raised up christ from the dead , he speaks of the resurrection of his body , not of his soul , how can we be certain that when he says , shall quicken your mortal bodies , he speaks of the resurrection , not of their bodies but of their souls ? we see then , that if mr. lock fly to this , to say that the general resurrection is not spoken of , rom. 8. 11. he will not be much help'd either by calvin or piscator . i confess that there is one who makes the words to be capable of a two-fold sense , and that is crellius . according to him they may be interpreted either of the future raising or quickening our mortal bodies , or of the spiritual quickening them , which consists in this , that they live unto righteousness and unto god. but he makes the former the principal sense , the latter only secundary . as mr. lock says of the resurrection of the body , so he says of the resurrection of the same body , viz. that he does not remember any place in the new testament where it is so much as mention'd ; see his third letter , p. 166. and my answer will be the same , viz. that these very express words , the resurrection of the same body , are not to be found , but there are words that signifie so much , or from which it may be clearly and necessarily inferr'd . i may instance in the three places above-cited , rom. 8. 11 , 23. phil. 3. 21. where st. paul by our body , our vile body , and our mortal bodies , certainly understood the bodies which he , and the romans , and the philippians , then had , and says of these , that they should be redeemed , quickned , changed . who shall change our vile body , that it ( i. e. that vile body ) may be conformed to his glorious body , philip. 3. and ( as i have observ'd before ) mr. lock , reasonab . of christian. p. 206. says , that by the redemption of our body , rom. 8. 23. is plainly meant the change of these frail mortal bodies into spiritual immortal bodies at the resurrection , when this mortal shall have put on immortality , 1 cor. 15. 54. thus he . it is observable also , that in his third letter , p. 197. when the words of that text , 1 cor. 15. 53 , 54. were urged to prove the resurrection of the same body , he returns no answer to them , and did very prudently in returning none : for doth not st. paul expresly affirm , that this corruptible must put on incorruption , and this mortal must put on immortality ? i. e. this corruptible , this mortal , must be rais'd to a life of incorruption and immortality . and doth he not also repeat it , when this corruptible , & c. ? what can be more plain ? this corruptible , this mortal , ( which are the apostle's repeated expressions , ) these frail mortal bodies , ( which is mr. lock 's own expression , ) shall be rais'd , the light of the brightest day cannot be more clear . some perhaps will say , that mr. lock does by no means deny that the same bodies shall be raised at the last day ; they are his own words in his third letter , p. 195. to which i answer , 1. if he do not deny it , why doth he dispute so earnestly against it ? why doth he endeavour , to the utmost of his power , to baffle the arguments that are urged for the proof of it ? a great many pages of his third letter being taken up in the discussing this one point . 2. he says he does by no means deny it , but does he believe it ? if he do believe it , it is not upon the account of any argument drawn from reason , for he tells us more than once in his essay , that the resurrection of the body is above reason ; reason has directly nothing to do with it , but it is purely matter of faith ; see his essay , l. 4. c. 17. § . 23. and c. 18. § . 7. he must then believe it upon the account of some arguments drawn from scripture , or being convinced by some texts of scripture which teach this truth . if so , he deserves to be sharply reprehended , for that he would not acquaint us what texts of scripture they are that teach it so clearly : especially having taken so much pains to shew that the places of scripture alledged by others did not prove it , he ought to have directed us to those scriptures which did , and by the cogency of which he was brought to believe it . but the truth is , he says plainly , that there are no scriptures that do prove it ; affirming that the scriptures propose to us , that at the last day the dead shall be raised , without determining whether it shall be with the very same bodies or no ; see his third letter , p. 168. tho' therefore he does say , that he by no means denies that the same bodies shall be rais'd at the last day , yet it clearly appears that he does not believe that they shall ; for , according to him , there are no arguments either from scripture or reason to induce him to believe it . mr. lock 's doctrine concerning adam's fall , and our redemption by christ , is this : god told adam , that in the day that he did eat of such a tree he should surely die ; where , by death , mr. lock can understand nothing but a ceasing to be , the losing all actions of life and sense . such a death came on adam and all his posterity by his first disobedience , under which death they should have lain for ever , had it not been for the redemption by jesus christ , who will bring them all to life again at the last day ; see for this , reasonab . of christian. p. 3 , 6 , 11. but then he tells us , p. 15. that this being the case , that whoever is guilty of any sin , should certainly die , and cease to be , the benefit of life restor'd by christ at the resurrection , would have been no great advantage , if god had not found out a way to justifie some . the reason of which he gives in a parenthesis , for as much ( says he ) as here again ( i. e. after the resurrection ) death must have seiz'd upon all mankind , ( all mankind must have died and ceas'd to be the second time , ) because all had sinned ; for the wages of sin is every where death ( which death is a ceasing to be ) as well after as before the resurrection . this death after the resurrection is that which , p. 211. he calls the second death ; which ( says he ) would have left christ no subjects , if god had not found out a way to justifie some . as to those who at the resurrection shall be found unjustified , that second death shall seize upon them , and sweep them away ; so that , according to mr. lock , they shall cease to be , i. e. be annihilated , for i can find out no other sense that these words , cease to be , are capable of : tho' i confess i do not see that this sense can be consistent with several other expressions which he uses , viz. that dreadful estate of misery , the infinite misery , the exquisite misery of an immortal soul , the perfect misery , the indignation and wrath , tribulation and anguish , which shall be after this life . but it may be mr. lock can put such a sense upon these expressions , and the like to them , viz. everlasting fire , and everlasting punishment , in the words of our saviour cited by him , reasonab . of christian. p. 244 , 245. as may consist with ceasing to be , or being annihilated . when mr. lock says , in essay , l. 2. c. 21. § . 60. that the measures of good and evil govern the choice ; and § . 70. that the rewards and punishments of another life are of weight enough to determine the choice against whatever pleasure or pain this life can shew ; this seems to be not very consistent with that which he had said in the same chapter , § . 30. that the greater good in view is not that which determines the will , in regard to our actions ; and again , § . 35. that good , the greater good , tho' apprehended and acknowledged to be so , does not determine the will : for what is the meaning of the measures of good and evil , their governing the choice , but that it is govern'd by the greater good and greater evil ? or why are the rewards of another life of weight enough to determine the choice against the pleasures of this , but because they are the greater good ? so that in the expressions which he uses , § . 60. and 70. he seems to say that the greater good doth determine the choice ; whereas , § . 30. and 35. he is of the contrary opinion , that it is not of sufficient weight to determine the choice , until our desire rais'd proportionably to it , makes us uneasie in the want of it . let a man ( says he ) be never so well persuaded of the advantages of vertue , that it is as necessary to a man who hath any great aims in this world , or hopes in the next , as food to life ; yet till he hungers and thirsts after righteousness , till he feels an uneasiness in the want of it , his will will not be determined to any action in persuit of this confessed greater good. thus mr. lock . and i readily grant that a bare view or prospect of future rewards and punishments is not of force to determine the choice against present pleasure and pain ; but it is necessary that we firmly believe them , and be fully convinced of the certainty of them ; as also , that we have them frequently in our thoughts , and seriously meditate upon the transcendent happiness of the one , and the unspeakable miseries of the other , that so our souls may be inflamed with an hearty desire of the rewards , and possess'd with a real fear and serious dread of the punishments , before we shall apply our selves in good earnest to work out our salvation from the unhappiness of the one , and to secure our enjoyment of the felicity of the other . as to that which he says , that vertue is as necessary to a man who has any great aims in this world , as food to life , tho' it will seem a paradox to some , yet i shall not contradict it ; for i know that it is necessary for all men , yea , as necessary as food is for our bodily sustenance ; but i wish that mr. lock could persuade those that aim at great things in this world , that vertue is so absolutely necessary for them . a specimen of mr. lock's way of answering persons : out of his essay , l. 1. c. 3. §. 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19. mr. lock , in the third chapter of the first book of his essay , hath twice set these words in his margin , lord herbert's innate principles examin'd , perhaps because he would have it taken notice of that he durst undertake to grapple with so great a person . i have therefore taken more especial notice of that which he saith against that excellent writer , and also represented it at length to the reader 's view , that he may likewise take the more notice of it ; the rather , because it will afford him a specimen of mr. lock 's way of answering authors . mr. lock , in his essay . l. 1. c. 3. § . 15. when i had writ this , being inform'd that my lord herbert had in his books de veritate assign'd these innate principles , i presently consulted him , hoping to find in a man of so great parts something that might satisfie me in this point , and put an end to my enquiry . in his chapter de instinctu naturali , p. 76. edit . 1656. i met with these six marks of his notitiae communes , 1. prioritas , 2. independentia , 3. universalitas , 4. certitudo , 5. necessitas , i. e. as he explains it , faciunt ad hominis conservationem , 6. modus conformationis , i. e. assensus nulla interposita mora . and at the latter end of his little treatise de religione laici , he says this of these innate principles , adeo ut non uniuscujusvis religionis confinio arctentur , quae ubique vigent , veritates . sunt enim in ipsa mente caelitus descriptae , nullisque traditionibus five scriptis five non scriptis obnoxiae , p. 3. and veritates nostrae catholicae , quae tanquam indubia dei effata in foro interiori descripta . thus having given the marks of the innate principles or common notions , and asserted their being imprinted on the minds of men by the hand of god , he proceeds to set them down , and they are these : 1. esse aliquod supremum numen , 2. numen illud coli debere , 3. virtutem cum pietate conjunctam optimam esse rationem cultus divini , 4. resipiscendum esse a peccatis , 5. dari praemium vel poenam post hanc vitam transactam . these , tho' i allow them to be clear truths , and such as , if rightly explain'd , a rational creature can hardly avoid giving his assent to , yet i think he is far from proving that they are innate impressions in foro interiori descripta : for i must take leave to observe , § . 16. first , that these five propositions are either not all , or more than all , those common notions writ on our minds by the finger of god , if it were reasonable to believe any at all to be so written . since there are other propositions which even by his own rules have as just a pretence to such an original , and may be as well admitted for innate principles , as at least some of these five he enumerates , viz. do as thou wouldst be done unto , and perhaps some hundreds of others when well consider'd . § . 17. secondly , that all his marks are not to be found in each of his five propositions , viz. his first , second , and third marks agree perfectly to neither of them ; and the first , second , third , fourth , and sixth marks agree but ill to his third , fourth , and fifth propositions : for besides that we are assur'd from history of many men , nay , whole nations , who doubt or disbelieve some or all of them ; i cannot see how the third , viz. that vertue join'd with piety is the best worship of god , can be an innate principle , when the name or sound vertue is so hard to be understood , liable to so much uncertainty in its signification , and the thing it stands for so much contended about , and difficult to be known . and therefore this can be but a very uncertain rule of humane practice , and serve but very little to the conduct of our lives , and is therefore very unfit to be assign'd as an innate practical principle . § . 18. for let us consider this proposition as to its meaning ( for it is the sense , and not sound , that is and must be the principle or common notion , ) viz. vertue is the best worship of god , i. e. is most acceptable to him ; which is vertue be taken , as most commonly it is , for those actions , which according to the different opinions of several countries are accounted laudable , will be a proposition so far from being certain , that it will not be true . if vertue be taken for actions conformable to god's will , or to the rule prescribed by god , which is the true and only measure of vertue ; when vertue is us'd to signifie what is in its own nature right and good , then this proposition , that vertue is the best worship of god , will be most true and certain , but of very little use in humane life , since it will amount to no more but this , viz. that god is pleased with the doing of what he commands ; which a man may certainly know to be true , without knowing what it is that god doth command , and so be as far from any rule or principle of his actions as he was before . and i think very few will take a proposition which amounts to no more than this , viz. that god is pleased with the doing of what he himself commands , for an innate moral principle writ on the minds of all men , ( how true and certain soever it may be , ) since it teaches so little . whosoever does so , will have reason to think hundreds of propositions innate principles , since there are many which have as good a title as this to be receiv'd for such , which no body yet ever put into that rank of innate principles . § . 19. nor is the fourth proposition , viz. men must repent of their sins , much more instructive , till what those actions are that are meant by sins are set down : for the word peccata , or sins , being put , as it usually is , to signifie in general ill actions , that will draw on punishment upon the doers , what great principle of morality can that be to tell us we should be sorry , and cease to do that which will bring mischief upon us , without knowing what those particular actions are that will do so . indeed this is a very true proposition , and fit to be inculcated on and receiv'd by those who are suppos'd to have been taught what actions in all kinds are sins ; but neither this nor the former can be imagin'd to be innate principles , nor to be of any use if they were innate , unless the particular measures and bounds of all vertues and vices were engraven in mens minds , and were innate principles also , which i think is very much to be doubted : and therefore i imagine it will scarce seem possible that god should engrave principles in mens minds in words of uncertain signification , such as are vertues and sins , which amongst different men stand for different things : nay , it cannot be in words at all , which being in most of these principles very general names , cannot be understood , but by knowing the particulars comprehended under them . and in the practical instances , the measures must be taken from the knowledge of the actions themselves , and the rules of them abstracted from words , and antecedent to the knowledge of names ; which rules a man must know what language soever he chance to learn , whether english or japan , or if he should learn no language at all , or never should understand the use of words , as happens in the case of dumb and deaf men. when it shall be made out , that men ignorant of words , or untaught by the laws and customs of their country , that it is part of the worship of god not to kill another man , not to know more women than one , not to procure abortion , not to expose their children , not to take from another what is his , tho' we want it our selves , but on the contrary to relieve and supply his wants ; and whenever we have done the contrary , we ought to repent , be sorry , and resolve to do so no more : when , i say , all men shall be proved actually to know and allow all these and a thousand other such rules , all which come under these two general words made use of above , viz. vertues and sins , there will be more reason for admitting these and the like for common notions and practical principles ; yet after all , universal consent ( were there any in moral principles ) to truths , the knowledge whereof might be attain'd otherwise , would searce prove them to be innate : which is all i contend for . thus far mr. lock , and this is all that he answers to the lord herbert ; it remains that i briefly reply to it . ad. § . 15. here in his text mr. lock speaks of the lord herbert's assigning innate principles , giving marks of these innate principles , and saying so or so of them : also in his margin he hath these words , lord herbert's innate principles examined ; and the very same words are found again in his margin ad § . 19. and yet i do not observe that the lord herbert , either in his treatise de veritate , or in that which he intitles religio laici , doth as much as once mention either the expression innate principles , or the word innate ; nor doth mr. lock direct us to any place in either of those treatises where he doth mention them . 't is true , that in his treatise de veritate there is frequent mention of communes notitiae , and in his religio laici of veritates catholicae , and we may suppose that mr. lock took these common notions or notices , and catholick verities , to be the same with his innate principles : in which , if he be mistaken , he both makes the lord herbert to say that which he doth not ; and withal , while he goes about to prove that those catholick verities are not innate principles , he says nothing at all against that honourable person , who never affirm'd them to be so . if it be said that the lord herbert affirms these catholick verities to be written by god upon the hearts of all men , which is the same with their being innate ; i answer , that it is very true that he doth say more than once , that they are in foro interno , or in foro interiori descriptae , & in mente humana a deo o. m. descriptae ; but i question whether it will be for mr. lock 's advantage to say , that the being written by god in the heart , and being innate , are the same ; for it may endanger the overthrow of all that he says concerning innate principles , and force him to quit his darling opinion that there are none : for if the question be put whether there be any principles written in the hearts of men , st. paul seems to resolve it affirmatively that there are , rom. 2. 14 , 15. when ( says he ) the gentiles not having the law do by nature the things of the law , these not having the law are a law to themselves ; who shew the work of the law written in their hearts , their conscience bearing witness , and their thoughts accusing or excusing one another . by the work of the law here may be understood either , 1. that work which the law prescribes , or the duties that are required by it ; or , 2. the effect of the law , or that which it effecteth , i. e. the knowledge of our duty , or of that which we ought to do , as also of the contrary , i. e. of that which we ought not to do , as the apostle says expresly , rom. 3. 20. by the law is the knowledge of sin ; or , 3. by the work of the law we may understand ( as origen , theodoret , and several others , seem to do ) the law it self , i. e. not the letters and syllables of the law , but the sentence , summ and substance of it . which soever of these expositions we follow , the sense is in effect the same ; so that when st. paul says that the gentiles had the work of the law written in their hearts , his meaning is , that they had the sentence and substance of the law , or many of the duties prescribed by it , and the knowledge of them ingraven or imprinted in their hearts . and is it not as clear from hence as any thing possibly can be , that they had some principles or communes notitiae written in their hearts ? and therefore if the lord herber . only say that there are some common principles or catholick truths written in the hearts or minds of men , he says no more than the apostle doth ; and mr. lock , from the apostle's saying that the work of the law was written in the hearts of the gentiles , may infer , that he held innate principles , with as good reason as he doth from the lord herbert's affirming some truths to be written in the hearts or minds of men , that he held such principles . and the truth is , there have not wanted some prudent and learned persons who have expounded these words of the apostle of innate notices or principles . quod inquit paulus opus scriptum in cordibus , significat has notitias naturales dona esse attributa naturae , & nobiscum nascentia ; they are the words of melancthon in loc . mr. lock having transcrib'd five of the lord herbert's notitiae communes , adds , these , tho' i allow them to be clear truths , and such as , if rightly explain'd , a rational creature can hardly avoid giving assent to ; yet i think he is far from proving them innate impressions in foro interiori descriptae : where i shall not stand to ask mr. lock what answers to the word these , but i must desire the reader to bear in mind that he allows all the five notitiae communes to be clear truths , and such as , if rightly explain'd , a rational creature can hardly avoid giving his assent to : for this intimates that there is something of them written in the heart , which is the reason why we can hardly avoid assenting to them so soon as they are propos'd to us , and we understand the terms of them . to that which he says farther , that he thinks that the lord herbert is far from proving them innate impressions , i briefly answer , that as mr. lock hath not shewn , so i have not found that the lord herbert any where uses the phrase innate impressions . it is true that he says that his catholick verities are in foro interiori descriptae ; and if it be said that mr. lock thinks that he is far from proving them to be so , i reply , that it will best appear whether he be far from proving it or no , by examining the reasons of mr. lock 's thinking so ; which we may expect to find , if any where , in the following sections . ad § . 16. here mr. lock observes , that the five propositions set down by the lord herbert are either not all , or more than all the common notions writ on our minds by the finger of god , if it were reasonable to believe any at all to be so written . to which i answer , if mr. lock could prove that the five propositions mention'd by the lord herbert , are more than all those common notions writ in our minds by the finger of god , it would follow , that some of them are not such notions , and that would make directly against the lord herbert . but mr. lock hath not proved this , and if he had , it would not be for his advantage , unless he could prove farther that none of them are such notions ; for his known tenet is , that there are no notions or principles at all that are so written in mens hearts . on the other hand , if mr. lock can prove that these five are not all those common notions writ in our minds by the finger of god , this makes not at all against the lord herbert , who never said or thought that they were all ; as mr. lock might have seen if he had given himself leisure seriously and deliberately to peruse his treatise de veritate . he would have found that he very frequently names other common notions , and particularly he takes notice that there are many notitiae communes in mathematicks , which they call postulata , ( p. 181. edit . 1633. ) and speaks of tota notitiarum communium series , p. 206. he would also have found , that where the lord herbert sets down those five propositions , he is not speaking of common notions in general , but of those only which concern religion ; notitiae communes circa religionem is the title : yea , in setting down those five he did not design to give us all the common notions that concern religion . he himself plainly tells us this , notitias communes solenniores circa religionem praemittendas curavi , says he , p. 207. he did not take care to premise all the common notions that concern religion , but only the solenniores . yea , p. 227. he makes all the ten commandments to be notitiae communes . mr. lock says , that this , do as thou wouldest be done unto , and perhaps some hundreds of others may as justly pretend to be notitiae communes , as at least some of those five . to which i answer , 1. the lord herbert never design'd to exclude do as thou wouldest be done unto from being notitia communis , for he more than once mentions it as such , viz. p. 54 , and 57 , and 106. 2. when mr. lock says perhaps some hundreds of others , tho' possibly he intended it only as a rhetorical flight , yet i question whether the lord herbert would have deny'd that there are hundreds of notitiae communes . however , i think it is plain that there is nothing in this section that makes against that honourable person , and if mr. lock had carefully read his treatise de veritate , i believe he would have wholly omitted it . ad § . 17. this section begins thus , all his ( i. e. the lord herbert's ) marks are not to be found in each of his five propositions , viz. his first , second , and third marks agree perfectly to neither of them . thus mr. lock . now 't is impossible to make sense of these last words , to neither of them ; and therefore i conclude that it is a false print , but know not what words to substitute instead of them . perhaps in the copy it was thus , his first , second , and third marks agree perfectly to neither of the two first . if this was his meaning , that we may judge the better of the truth thereof , we are to know that the six marks assign'd by the lord herbert , are to distinguish the common notions which we have by natural instinct from those that we have not without the help of discourse . the former are distinguish'd from the latter by , 1. priority , 2. independency , 3. universality , 4. certainty , 5. necessity , 6. the manner of conformation . thus the lord herbert . now ( if i do not mistake in correcting the errour of the press ) mr. lock says , that the three former marks do not perfectly agree to the two first propositions , viz. 1. that there is a god , 2. that he is to be worship'd : whereby he more than seems to intimate that the three latter marks do agree perfectly to them . and if so , yea , if only the last of all , i. e. the manner of conformation , doth agree perfectly to them , the three first marks must agree likewise to them . if the minds of men assent to them without delay as soon as they hear them , and consequently without the help of any reasoning or discourse , this assent must be , 1. before discourse , 2. independent upon it , 3. there must be an universal consent to them . it follows in this section , that the first , second , third , fourth and sixth marks agree but ill to his third , fourth and fifth propositions . as before he did not say that the first , second and third marks do not agree at all to the first and second propositions , but only that they do not agree perfectly ; so here he does not say plainly the first , second , third , fourth , and sixth marks do not agree to the three last propositions , but only that they agree but ill with them . but i would ask mr. lock whether the fourth mark , viz. certainty , doth not perfectly agree to them ? did he not , § . 15. allow them to be clear truths ? and can they be clear truths , and yet not certain ? but mr. lock gives a reason why five of the six marks agree so ill to the three last propositions : for ( says he ) besides that we are assur'd from history of many men , nay whole nations , who doubt or disbelieve some or all of them , i cannot see how the third , viz. that vertue join'd with piety is the best worship of god , can be an innate principle , when the name or sound vertue is so hard to be understood , liable to so much uncertainty in its signification , and the thing it stands for so much contended about , and difficult to be known . thus mr. lock . now to the former part of this reason there needs no other answer than this , that tho' mr. lock says that we are assur'd from history , yet he doth not acquaint us what or whose history it is that gives us the assurance . if he had given us the names of the historians , or their words , and the places where they are to be found , we might have examin'd them , and so judged whether they were to his purpose or no , as also of what authority his history-writers were . the lord herbert , in his treatise de veritate , p. 214. tells of one that had said that in a certain remote country there was no form of religion to be found , but adds , that he was confuted by another , who objected to him his ignorance of the language of that country ; and certainly if a man be not skill'd in the language of a country , it is not an easie thing for him to know the religion and manners of it . but let us suppose that which mr. lock says to be true , that history assures us that many men , nay whole nations , doubt or disbelieve some or all of the three last propositions , what will he gain by this ? for the question is not whether some men may doubt of , or disbelieve these truths , or some of them ; but whether there be any that have not some notion of them : even of those that profess themselves christians , some may possibly doubt of or disbelieve these truths , but it cannot be said that they have no notion of them . lastly , if nothing else could be said against this part of the reason , it only shews that the third mark , viz. universality , doth not agree to the three last propositions , it doth not at all affect the other marks . i pass to the latter part of the reason , and that is , that mr. lock cannot sec how the third , viz. that vertue join'd with piety is the best worship of god , can be an innate principle . and i do not see how this can be any reason of that which hath gone before , tho' the word for ( unless it be here one of mr. lock 's privileged particles ) plainly tells us that it was intended for such . should it be put into form , how strangely would it look ? the third proposition , viz. that vertue join'd with piety is the best worship of god , cannot be an innate principle ; therefore the first , second , third , fourth , and sixth marks agree but ill to his third , fourth , and fifth propositions . what cement can be found to join this antecedent and consequent together i know not . but let us hear the reason why mr. lock cannot see how the third proposition fore-mention'd can be an innate principle . it is because the name vertue is so hard to be understood , liable to so much uncertainty in its signification , and the thing it stands for so much contended about , and difficult to be known . now tho' it is true that the word virtus hath various significations , ( which may be seen in our dictionaries , ) yet in the proposition so often mention'd it is easie to be understood , its signification is certain , and the thing it stands for is easie to be known , and there can be no contention about it . yea , mr. lock himself , who here speaks of its being hard to be understood , could understand it easily enough when he writ the 15th . section of this chapter . there he allows this proposition to be a clear truth ; but how could he pronounce it to be a clear truth , if he did not understand the terms of it ? he saith farther , that it is so clear a truth , that , if rightly explain'd , a rational creature can hardly avoid giving his assent to it ; which clearly shews that he knew then the right explication of it , or when it is rightly explain'd : how then comes that which he understood so easily then , to be difficult to be understood now when he writ the 17th . section ? mr. lock concludes this section thus , and therefore this can be but a very umcertain rule of humane practice , and serve but very little to the conduct of our lives , and is therefore very unfit to be assign'd as an innate practical principle . but i must conclude contrariwise , seeing the signification of the terms of this proposition is so certain , it cannot but be a very certain rule of humane practice , and of excellent use for the conduct of the lives of men , and very fit to be assign'd ( if not as an innate practical principle , yet ) as a practical principle written in mens hearts , which is as much as the lord herbert affirms . ad § . 18. when the truth of a proposition is so clear , that the answerer cannot but see and acknowledge it , the usual way is to add to it , or leave some words out , or substitute others in the place of them , and so to mould it into another form , till he thinks that he can say something to it which may pass for a confutation with the unwary reader . mr. lock thought it necessary to take this course , and so he here leaves out the words join'd with piety , and represents the proposition thus , vertue is the best worship of god , i. e. ( says he ) is most acceptable to him . but this , according to the lord herbert's sense of the word vertue is most false ; for vertue join'd with piety is more acceptable to god than vertue alone , not having piety its associate , is . let the proposition then stand as it ought to do , and as it is in the lord herbert , vertue join'd with piety is the best worship of god , and let us see what mr. lock offers . 1. if ( says he ) vertue be taken for those actions , which according to the different opinions of several countries are accounted laudable , the proposition will not be true ; i. e. if vertue be taken for that which is not vertue , the proposition will not be true ; but if it be taken for that which really is vertue , ( and so the lord herbert took it , as mr. lock knew very well ) it is most certainly true , and confess'd by him a little before to be a clear truth . how vain then is it ( if not contradictious ) here to make a supposition of its being taken in a sense , which would render the proposition not true . he says here , that vertue is most commonly taken for those actions , which , according to the different opinions of countries , are accounted laudable ; but he only says it , he does not alledge as much as one author who takes it so . withal , if it was true that it is most commonly taken so , yet it is not to the purpose , since mr. lock knew that the lord herbert did not take it so . 2. if ( says he ) vertue be taken for actions conformable to god's will , or to the rule prescribed by god , then this proposition will be most true and certain : and i do readily grant that it is here taken for actions conformable to the will of god , and rule prescrib'd by him ; but it is to be observ'd , that in this proposition it is distinguished from piety , and therefore as the actions conformable to god's will , and the rule prescrib'd by him , which relate to god , are comprehended under piety , so under vertue are comprehended all other actions that are conformable to the divine will and the rule prescrib'd us , whether they relate to our duty towards our neighbour , or that toward our selves . and this being manifestly the sense of the word which the lord herbert intended , the proposition , vertue joined with piety is the best worship of god , must be acknowledged to be most true and certain : but ( says mr. lock ) however true and certain it may be , it is of very little use in humane life ; and therefore i think very few will take it for an innate moral principle writ on the hearts of all men. to which i answer , that if it depend upon this , i must look upon mr. lock 's cause as desperate ; for i am so far from granting that this proposition is of very little use in humane life , that contrariwise i positively assert that it is impossible that any general rule should be of greater use than it is . i challenge mr. lock to name any general rule which is of greater force to incite men to the study and practice of true piety and vertue than this , that vertue join'd with piety is the best worship of god. but what reason doth mr. lock give of this his strange assertion , that the fore-mention'd proposition is of very little use in humane life ? his reason is as strange as his assertion , because it amounts to no more than this , that god is pleas'd with the doing of what he commands . to which i answer , 1. suppose this was true , that it amounts to no more , it would not follow that it is of very little use in humane life : for ought not this , that god is pleased with it , be an especial motive to and enforcement of that great duty of taking care to do god's commandments ? 2. we may admire that mr. lock should say that it amounts to no more than this . doth this , that it is the best worship of god , amount to no more than this , that god is pleased with it ? surely it can amount to no less than this , that it is the worship that best pleases him ; as also , that by it we best express our inward veneration of him , our belief of his promises , and desire to please him , and by it most honour him , &c. he that offereth praise honoureth me , psal. 50. ult . and so he that performeth any other action of piety , or any vertuous action , honours or glorifies our father which is in heaven ; as also , he provokes others , and gives them an occasion to glorifie him , st. matth. 5. 16. we see then that it amounts to much more than this , that god is pleas'd with the doing that which he commands . mr. lock adds , a man may certainly know this to be true , ( viz. that god is pleas'd with the doing of what he commands , ) without knowing what it is that god doth command , and so be as far from any rule or principle of his actions as he was before . but whether this be true or no , i am not at all concern'd to enquire ; it is certain that we cannot know this proposition ( vertue join'd with piety is the best worship of god ) to be true , without knowing something of what it is that god commands , for he commands the practice of the very things express'd in it , viz. vertue and piety ; yea , these two are the greatest and weightiest things of the law , or , if you will , the two commandments on which hang all the law and the prophets , st. matth. 22. 40. and we may observe that the lord herbert in his appendix ad sacerdotes de religione laici , sets down this third common notion or proposition more largely thus , virtutem & pietatem una cum fide in deum amoreque ejus intimo conjunctam , esse praecipuam partem cultus divini . so that here is added express mention of faith in god , and an hearty love of him , which are also things commanded by god. here is nothing more in this section that deserves consideration . as to his rhetorical flight concerning hundreds of propositions , it hath been touch'd upon before . ad § . 19. here mr. lock passes to the lord herbert's fourth common notion or proposition , that men must repent of their sins if they expect or desire to have them forgiven . he grants that it is a very true proposition , and fit to be inculcated ; and otherwhere , ( viz. in reasonab . of christian. p. 256. ) he tells us , that the light of nature reveal'd to the heathens this way of reconciliation , this hope of atonement , that god would forgive them , if they acknowledged their faults , disapproved the iniquity of their transgressions , begg'd his pardon , &c. so that even according to mr. lock 's doctrine , this proposition , men must repent of their sins if they would have god atoned and their sins forgiven , bids fair for being a common notion or principle writ in the hearts of men. but mr. lock says that this fourth proposition is not much more instructive than the third . to which i answer , that if it be but as instructive as the third , it is very fit to be receiv'd as a common notion writ in the hearts of men : and then surely it is fit to be receiv'd as such when it is acknowledged by mr. lock to be more instructive , yea much more instructive when it is set down what those actions are that are meant by sins . i took notice a little before , that mr. lock says that this proposition is fit to be inculcated : but on whom is it to be inculcated ? his words are these , fit to be inculcated on and received by those who are suppos'd to have been taught what actions in all kinds are sins . but if it is fit to be inculcated on and receiv'd by none but those who are taught what actions in all kinds are sins , i fear that it is fit to be inculcated on and received by very few : for i doubt there are few that know what actions in all kinds are sins . perhaps mr. lock himself has not attain'd to know this ; there are perhaps some actions that are sins , and yet he doth not think them to be so . but he proceeds farther , and asserts confidently enough , that neither this ( fourth proposition ) nor the former ( i. e. the third , ) can be imagin'd to be innate principles , nor to be of any use if they were innate , unless the particular measures and bounds of all vertues and vices were engraven in mens minds , and were innate principles also , which i think is very much to be doubted . thus mr. lock . now this seems very high , that no man can imagine them ( or either of them ) to be innate principles , when according to him the lord herbert did imagine them to be such ; and that they should be of no use , when he himself had intimated before that they are of use : for when , § . 18. he says of the third proposition that it is of very little use in humane life , and that it teaches little , this implies that it is of some use , and teacheth something . and § . 19. when he saith of the fourth proposition , that it is not much more instructive than the third , he grants that it is more instructive , tho' not much more . mr. lock says , that they cannot be imagin'd to be of any use , unless the particular measures and bounds of all vertues and vices were engraven in mens minds , and were innate principles also . but uppose the particular measures and bounds of some vertues and vices only were engraven on mens hearts , and innate principles , would not these propositions be of excellent use for inciting us to practise those vertues , and eschew those vices ? and therefore is not mr. lock too severe in pronouncing them to be of no use at all , unless the particular measures and bounds of all vertues and vices were innate principles ? but the truth is , he will not allow that any measures of vertue and vice are innate principles . mr. lock 's next words are , and therefore i imagine it will scarce seem possible that god should engrave principles in mens minds in words of uncertain signification , such as are vertues and vices , which amongst different men stand for different things . but how the words and therefore come here i know not ; for i cannot see how this can be drawn as a conclusion from that which hath gone before . he had said a little before , that the word sins is usually put to signifie in general ill actions that will draw on punishment upon the doers . so that here he makes the signification of the word sins to be certain , and can he inferr thence that it scarce seems possible that god should engrave principles in mens minds in words of uncertain signification , as the word sins is ? as to the other word vertue , i have shew'd above in answering the 17th . and 18th . sections , that the signification of it is not uncertain . but does not mr. lock give a sufficient proof that both the words are of uncertain signification , when he says that among different men they stand for different things ? i answer , no ; for tho' some may say , this is a vertue , when others may account it a vice ; and this is a sin or vice , when others may say that it is a vertue ; yet by the words vertue and sin they mean the same thing , viz. by sin an ill action , by vertue a laudable one . mr. lock proceeds , and says , nay it cannot be suppos'd to be in words at all , viz. that god engraves principles in mens minds : and to the same purpose he had said before , in the beginning of § . 18. it is the sense and not the sound that is and must be the principle or common notion . but against whom doth he say this ? not against the lord herbert , who is for our having little regard to words and names as much as he can be : non tam nomina ( quae si neglexerimus , magnum in sapientia progressum faciemus ) quam res ipsas respicientes consensum illum universalem tanquam veritatem indubiam amplectamini ; so he de veritate , p. 40. and therefore he much varies the words of these two propositions , viz. the third and the fourth . in the third proposition , instead of virtutem cum pietate conjunctam , ( as he expresseth it in his religio laici , ) he in his appendix ad sacerdot . de relig. laici , hath virtutem & pietatem una cum fide in deum , amoreque ejus intimo conjunctam ; and in his de veritate , p. 215. probam facultatum conformitatem ; and in the same de veritate , p. 220. vitae sanctitatem . so his fourth proposition , in his religio laici he expresses thus , resipiscendum esse a peccatis ; but in his de veritate , p. 217. more largely thus , vitia & scelera quaecunque expiari debere ex poenitentia . hence it most plainly appears that the lord herbert made not words but the sense to be the notitia communis . we are come at last to mr. lock 's conclusion , which he begins thus , when it shall be made out that men ignorant of words , or untaught by the laws and customs of their country ; but he doth not tell us what is to be made out concerning them ; for there is no verb for this nominative case , men ignorant of words , &c. but i suppose that it is to be supply'd out of that which follows ; so that his meaning is this , when it shall be made out , that men ignorant of words , or untaught by the laws and customs of their country , and all men whatsoever , do actually know and allow that it is part of the worship of god not to kill a man , not to know more women than one , not to procure abortion , not to expose their children , not to take from another what is his , tho' we want it our selves , but on the contrary relieve and supply his wants ; and whenever we have done the contrary , we ought to repent , be sorry , and resolve to do so no more : when , i say , all men shall be prov'd actually to know and allow all these and a thousand other such rules , all which come under these two general words , vertues and sins , there will be more reason for admitting these and the like for common notions and practical principles . thus mr. lock , who seems to deal very hardly with the lord herbert's third and fourth propositions , in that he will not admit them to be common notions , or as much as practical principles , until it be prov'd that all men in the world , even those that are ignorant of words , and untaught by the laws and customs of their country , do actually know and also allow of all these and a thousand other such rules . methinks if all men did actually know these , and but half a thousand other such truths , we might see very great reason for admitting those two propositions to be of great use for directing our practice , and consequently to have a good title to be accounted practical rules or principles . st. paul , rom. 1. instanceth in many things , which the gentiles actually knew to be ill actions , that will draw on punishment upon the doers , and consequently ( according to mr. lock ) sins ; for having enumerated them , from v. 24. to v. 32. he says v. 32. that they knew that those who do such things are worthy of death . now must not every one confess that the lord herbert's fourth proposition , that men must repent if they would have those sins forgiven , and escape the punishment due for them , would have been of very great use to them ? yea , if men have but means to know that many things are vertues or vices , the two fore-mention'd propositions must not be deny'd to be practical principles , and such as might be very useful in humane life , because through their own default many do not actually know that they are vertues or vices . the lord herbert makes that golden rule , st. matth. 7. 12. whatsoever things ye would that men should do unto you do ye so to them , to be a common notion writ in the hearts of men ; and would they but call it frequently to mind , and apply it to particular actions , by the light of this they might know whether they have the nature of sin or no. the application of this rule to particular actions would help us to the knowledge of a great part of our duty toward our neighbour ; and therefore our saviour says , that this is the law and the prophets : all my duty toward my neighbour depends upon it , the whole law concerning that is fulfill'd in it ; it is the foundation of all justice and charity to men. hence it was that the emperour severus alexander having heard this sentence from the jews or christians ( we may rather think christians ) caus'd it to be proclaim'd by the cryer , and to be writ on the palace , and on publick works ; see jul. capitolinus in alexandro severo . to conclude then according to the lord herbert , as that proposition , they must repent of their sins , if they would have god aton'd to them , is writ upon the hearts of men ; so also is this sentence , all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you do ye likewise to them : by which ( if they be not wanting to themselves ) they may know in a great measure what particular actions are sins , and what they ought to do ; so that if that proposition be not useful and instructive to them , it is their own fault . mr. lock having said , that when all men shall be prov'd actually to know and allow all these and a thousand other such rules , there will be more reason for admitting these for common notions , lest this concession should be too liberal , adds , yet after all universal consent ( were there any in moral principles ) to truths , the knowledge whereof might be attain'd otherwise , would scarce prove them to be innate ; which is all i contend for . thus mr. lock . but i do not well understand the meaning of the last words , which is all that i contend for . doth which relate to that which is here express'd , viz. that universal consent to truths , the knowledge whereof might be attain'd otherwise , will scarce prove them to be innate , so that this is all that he contends for ? or doth it refer to something not express'd , mr. lock having a privilege to use words otherwise than ordinary persons are allow'd to do . to this latter i incline , that it is his meaning , that he contends for no more than this , that the lord herbert's propositions are not innate , tho' this is not express'd . but let the one or the other be his meaning , unless we were certain that by his notitiae communes or catholick truths written in the minds of men , the lord herbert meant the same that mr. lock doth by his innate principles , we cannot say that that honourable person is at all concern'd , or that mr. lock 's conclusion doth contradict any thing that he hath deliver'd . thus i have consider'd all that mr. lock hath said in these five sections , wherein he hath to do with the lord herbert . and now must it not seem strange that he should take upon him to examine what is written by a person so eminent for his parts as well as his quality , and after all have so little to say against him ? he only toucheth very slightly upon three of his propositions , or notitiae communes , viz. the first , second and fifth ; and as to the third and fourth , he had done better if he had pass'd them by as slightly , unless he had said something more to the purpose . yea , he is so far from confuting , that he comes very far up toward the confirming all that the honourable person design'd . for he says plainly , § . 15. that all the five propositions are such truths , as , if rightly explain'd , a rational creature can hardly avoid giving his assent to . now of such things , as so soon as they are alledged , all men acknowledge them to be true or good , they require no proof or farther discourse to be assured of the truth or goodness of them , we need not fear to say , that they seem to have a good title , to be receiv'd for common notions or catholick truths written in the hearts of men ; which is all that the lord herbert contends for . the reader may also observe mr. lock 's way of answering persons . how often doth he complain of others , that they make him to say that which he doth not , bidding them shew where it is that he says or pretends such a thing ? and may we not likewise ask him where it is , that the lord herbert mentions innate principles or innate impressions ? another way very frequently us'd is , to single out one or two particulars , and pretend to say something to them ; and then the unwary reader must believe that the whole is answer'd : so mr. lock singles out the third and fourth of the lord herbert's propositions , pretending to say something to them , but takes little or no notice of the other three . a third way is , to say the same thing that their adversary doth , and yet to pretend that he is confuting him all the while : and thus doth mr. lock , § . 18. and 19 , when he inculcates that it is the sense ( and not the words ) that is the principle or common notion . there is a fourth way , which i have set down at large in the beginning of my answer to § . 18. and shall not need to repeat . the last way , most usual with mr. lock , is , to pretend that he doth not understand that which he doth ; as here it is apparent , that when he writ the 15th section he knew well enough the signification of the word vertue in the third proposition ; and yet § . 17. he says it is hard to be understood ; and § . 19. pretends it may either have this or that sense . concerning socinianism . whether it is justly charged upon mr. lock . it is well known , that some have publickly , in plain and express words , charged socinianism upon mr. lock ; and that others conceive that there is too much reason to suspect that he is leaven'd with many of the doctrines of socinus , and his followers . mr. lock , on the other hand , seems to be much displeas'd that he should be loaded with such an imputation , yea that he should be so much as join'd with those that are enemies of the doctrine of the trinity . he seems also to plead not guilty ; says , that there is not one word of socinianism in his book , ( i. e. in his reasonab . of christian. ) see his vindication , p. 13. he professes that he never read the racovians , ibid. p. 22. and his words in his second vindication , p. 350. are these ; i never read a page in either of those socinians : he means slichtingius and socinus ; though how he can call socinus a socinian , i know not . yea , in that second vindication , p. 214. he gives the socinians a parcel of not very good language : i shall transcribe his words at large . as far as i can observe ( says he ) the same genius seems to influence them all ( i. e. all the differing sects ) even those that pretend most to freedom , the socinians themselves . for when it is observed how positive and eager they are in their disputes , how forward to have their interpretations of scripture receiv'd for authentick , though to others , in several places , they seem very much strain'd ; how impatient they are of contradiction , and with what disrespect and roughness they often treat their opposers ; may it not be suspected that this so visible warmth in their present circumstances , and zeal for their orthodoxy , would ( had they the power ) work in them as it doth in others ? they in their turns would , i fear , be ready with their set of fundamentals , which they would be as forward to impose on others , as others have been to impose contrary fundamentals on them . thus mr. lock , expressing some dislike of the temper and carriage of the socinians . but our question is about their doctrine , and whether he doth as much dislike that . that we may the better judge of this , the way will be , to enquire first what the socinians hold ; then , how far mr. lock doth maintain or disclaim their doctrines . as to the doctrines of the trinity , the incarnation of the son of god , and his satisfaction , it is so well known what the socinians hold , that it is wholly needless to cite or set down the words of any of them : and if mr. lock had been pleas'd to let the world know plainly what he held as to these weighty points , he would have done a great kindness to others in freeing them from their jealousies of him , and certainly no small kindness to himself . but he hath not been willing hitherto to do himself and others this favour , as i have largely shew'd above , chap. 8. and 12. but it is not too late to do it still ; and therefore i will hope that he may at last condescend so far , as to declare his thoughts plainly as to these particulars . whereas our saviour is frequently , in scripture , call'd the son of god , the socinians deny that he is so call'd with respect to his eternal generation , or being begotten of his father before all world's ; as also they deny that his divinity can be prov'd thence . thus enjedinus in joh. 5. 18. non sequitur , si christus alio modo sit filius dei quam homines & angeli esse naturalem filium & ex essentia dei natum ; and he had said the same before in joh. 1. 14. so in the racovian catechism de persona christi , the answer to the 74th question is , ex iis omnibus attribut is christi nullo modo probari posse naturam ejus divinam . those attributes or appellations are , the son of the living god , his own son , his onely begotten son : from these ( says the catechism ) christ's divine nature cannot be prov'd . and socinus himself , contra wickum , cap. 5. throughout his long answer to the first argument , makes it his business to shew , that the generation of christ from the substance of the father , and that he is the true god , cannot be prov'd from those appellations ; and at last concludes it thus , arbitror me satis dilucide ostendisse , quomodo christus sit dei filius , & quidem unigenitus , quamvis ex ipsius dei substantia generatus non fuerit : and again , videre possunt pii ac cordati omnes qualem vim habet ad probandum quod christus sit ille unus verus deus , adversariorum argumentum , ab eo ductum quod christus sit dei filius : thus socinus . they all agree in this . see slichtingius comment . in joh. 1. 50. and 20. 31. wolzogenius comment . in matth. 16. 16. ( neque inde sequitur petrum agnovisse christum pro tali filio dei , qui ab omni aeternitate ex essentia patris generatus sit , & ipse nihilominus sit deus altissimus : so he . ) crellius comment . in 1 pet. 1. 3. ( necesse non est , says he , vocis filii dei significatum ab aeterna quadam ex substantia , patris generatione arcessere ; ) not to mention many others . in like manner mr. lock , though this appellation the son of god occurs so frequently in the texts which he cites in some of his writings , yet never expounds it as importing the deity of christ , but draws it to another sense . in his second vindication , p. 360 , &c. he alledges s. joh. 1. 34. and 3. 35 , 36. also s. joh. 1. 50. s. luk. 4. 41. s. mar. 3. 11. s. matt. 16. 16. s. joh. 11. 27. s. luk. 22. 70. s. matt. 27. 54. ( not luke 27. 54. as by the fault of the press it is in mr. lock ) and of all these texts he says , p. 369 , that we must give up this argument ( viz. from christ's being call'd the son of god ) and allow that this phrase in these places do's not necessarily import the deity of our saviour , and the doctrine of the eternal generation ; unless we think that the eternal generation of jesus the son of god was a doctrine that had entred into the thoughts of john the baptist , nathaniel , s. peter , s. martha , the sanhedrim , yea even of the roman centurion and the soldiers that were with him watching jesus : and he supposes that few think this . it do's not necessarily import , says mr. lock , just as crellius says , necesse non est . and particularly of s. luk. 22. 70. he says , that if the son of god be to be taken for a declaration of his deity , common and coherent sense will hardly be made of it . as to s. luk. 4. 41. and s. mar. 3. 11. he asks , who can entertain such a thought , as that the unclean spirits had a mind to acknowledge and publish to the people the deity of our saviour ? and as to s. matth. 16. 16. he says , that s. peter can be taken in no other sense , but barely to signifie that jesus was the messiah ; as he also saith , that the phrase of the son of god is us'd by s. martha joh. 11. 27. to signifie the messiah , and nothing else . farther , the socinians make these expressions , the messiah , and the son of god , to have the same signification . saepissime in scripturis filius dei & christus idem denotant ; so crellius in 1 pet. 1. 3. ut adeo nomen christus seu messias & nomen filius dei ex usu judaeorum pro eodem sumeretur . wolzogenius in s. matth. 16 , 16. comparing this place with mar. 8. 29. and luk. 9. 20. and also alledging joh. 1. 49. and luk. 22. 67 , 68 , 69. idem est messiam seu christum & filium dei esse . enjedinus in s. mat. 28. 19. so slichtingius in s. joh. 1. 50. ex nathanaelis confessione videmus filii illius dei & regis illius israel , i. e. christi titulum , idem significare . usitatum enim erat apud hebraeos messiam vocare filium dei. again , in comment . in s. joh. 20. 31. christi & filii dei titulus pro synonymis usurpantur . thus also socinus himself cont . wickum , cap. 5. in resp. ad argum . 1. perspicuum est idem reipsa esse christum & illum dei filium . idem est esse illum regem israelis quod esse christum . caiaphas & alii judaei aliud nihil filii dei nomine intellexerunt quam christum ; so he , alledging matth. 26. 63. mar. 14. 61. s. joh. 20. 31. together with the places above-cited by wolzogenius . i shall only add volkelius de vera religione , l. 5. c. 12. where having compar'd matt. 16. 16. with mar. 8. 29. and luke 9. 20. he concludes thus , ut facile appareat in locis istis filium dei & christum esse eandem habere significationem : and he also adds , that the same is manifest ( viz. that they are expressions of the very same thing , or that have the same signification ) from luke 22. 67 , 70. joh. 1. 50. and sundry places in s. joh. being compar'd . and thus mr. lock , the son of god and the messiah are one in signification , second vindicat. p. 353. messiah and the son of god were synonymous terms at that time among the jews , reasonab . of christian. p. 50. confessing jesus to be the son of god , is the same with confessing him to be the messiah ; those two expressions being understood among the jews to signifie the same thing , ibid. p. 96. and therefore almost everywhere in his reasonab . of christian. when he alledges any place where christ is said or confess'd to be the son of god , he interprets it of his being the messiah . finally , he proves that these titles have the same signification , by comparing s. matt. 16. 16. with s. mar. 8. 29. and s. luke 9. 20. and by those other texts which are made use of by socinus , wolzogenius , and volkelius , to that purpose : see reasonab . of christian. p. 102. and otherwhere . please to see also what i have said above , chap. ii. enjedinus , in matth. 28. 19. saith , that no other faith was requir'd of the gentiles when they were baptiz'd , than to believe that jesus is the messiah or son of god. nulla alia fides fuit requisita a gentibus cum baptizabantur , quam ut crederent jesum esse messiam , seu christum , vel filium dei. he also tells us , that this is that which all the writers of the new testament urge , yea , that it was the scope and design of writing the history of the gospel , alledging s. job . 20. 31. and that this is the faith by which the gentiles were made the people and children of god. thus enjedinus . now the reader needs not be admonish'd of how near affinity hereto that is which mr. lock so earnestly and frequently inculcates ; viz. that all that was to be believ'd for justification , was no more but this single proposition , that jesus of nazareth was the messiah . reasonab . of christian. p. 47. that s. john knew nothing else requir'd to be believ'd for the attaining of life , but that jesus is the messiah , the son of god. ibid. p. 194. that this is the sole doctrine pressed and requir'd to be believ'd in the whole tenor of our saviour's and his apostles preaching . ibid. p. 195. and that the gospel was writ to induce men to believe this proposition , that jesus of nazareth was the messiah ; for proof of it alledging s. job . 20. 31. as enjedinus doth . some of the socinians ( as crellius comment . in 1 corinth . 15. 14. and welzegenius in acts 8. 37. ) make this proposition , jesus christ is the son of god , to be a brief summary of the christian faith or profession , comprising many things in few words : and if they who say that this is all the faith that is requir'd , had plainly declar'd that they took it in this comprehensive sense , as a brief summary of all that we are requir'd to believe concerning christ , as that he is the only son of god , our lord , was conceived by the holy ghost , born of the virgin mary , &c. ( as in the creed ) it would not have given so much offence . therefore it would not be amiss if they would make such a plain declaration of their meaning now . socinus , in his praelectiones theologicae , cap. 2. says , that there is not any opinion or notion of a deity naturally implanted in the mind of man. receptior hodie sententia est homini naturaliter ejusque animo insitam esse divinitatis alicujus opinionem , quam sententiam nos falsam esse arbitramur . and one reason why he thought thus , was , because not only some single persons , but also whole nations , are found , which have no sense or suspicion of a deity . he instances in the province of brasil ( or bresil , as he calls it ) and appeals to historians for the truth of it . how near mr. lock comes to this , the reader may judge , who in his essay , l. 4. c. 10. § . 1. says expresly , that god hath stamp'd no original characters on our minds , wherein we may read his being ; and his first and principal reason for this , l. 1. c. 4. § . 8. is , because besides the atheists taken notice of among the ancients , there have been whole nations amongst whom hath been found no notion of a god. he instances , as in other places , so in brasil , and appeals to navigators and historians for the truth of it . the socinians say , that the soul , separated from the body , hath no sense , cannot perform any action , or enjoy any pleasure , till the resurrection . smalcius frequently inculcates this , spiritus a corpore separatus nullo sensu praeditus est , & nulla voluptate fruitur ante adventum christi . and again , spiritus sine corpore nullas actiones exercere potest . so smalcius de extremo judicio , § . 3. and in examine errorum , error . 88. non credimus spiritum qui ad deum redit aliquid sentire , aut beatitate aliqua frui ante christi adventum . in like manner , socinus himself , in his 5th epistle to volkelius , declares it to be his firm opinion , post hanc vitam animam hominis non it a per se subsistere , ut praemia ulla poenasve sentiat , vel ista sentiendi sit capax . see also to this purpose , crellius in heb. 11. 40. and slichtingius in 1 cor. 15. 32. as to mr. lock , they that have leisure may enquire whether his words in his reasonab . of christian. p. 6. do not look toward this , when he says , that death is the losing of all actions of life and sense . for it is not easie to conceive how this can be true , unless when men die the soul lose all actions of life and sense as well as the body doth . socinus and his followers deny original sin , and the corruption of our nature , because of adam's transgression . concludimus nullum peccatum originale esse , i. e. ex peccato illo primi parentis nullam labem aut pravitatem universo humano generi necessario ingenitam esse sive inflictam quodammodo fuisse : so socinus in his praelectiones theolog. cap. 4. he is follow'd by the racovian catechism , cap. 10. quaest. 2. peccatum originis nullum prorsus est , nec e scriptura id peccatum originis doceri potest : et lapsus adae , cum unus actus fuerit ; vim eam quae depravare ipsam naturam adami , multominus vero posteriorum ipsius posset , habere non potuit . to the same purpose are the words of volkelius , de vera religione . l. 5. c. 18. mr. lock is not so positive as they are ; but he says , that the new testament doth not any where take notice of the corruption of humane nature in adam's posterity , nor tells us that corruption seiz'd on all because of adam's transgression , as well as it tells us so of death . the socinians say , that the same bodies shall not arise at the general resurrection . corpora haec , quae nunc circumferimus , resurrectura non credimus , sed alia nobis danda esse ab apostolo edocti statuimus : so smalcius in examin . errorum . err. 89. corpora in quibus reviviscent & venient mortui non ea sunt corpora in quibus mortales vixerunt , & quorum corruptione mortui sunt , sed illa sunt longe istis praestantiora , slichtingius comment . in 1 cor. 15. 37. illi vim argumentationis apostolicae convellunt , qui in eisdem numero corporibus nos aliquando resurrecturos statuunt , crellius comment . in 1 cor. 15. 13. they that please may also consult volkelius de vera religione , l. 3. c. 35. as to mr. lock , a large account hath been given above , chap. 31. of what he saith as to this particular ; viz. the same bodies being rais'd . where we may also see that he proceeds farther than perhaps the socinians do , saying , that he finds no such express words in the scripture as that the body shall rise or be raised : see the third letter , p. 210. to which something hath been said in the forecited chap. 31. and now , by way of farther answer , i desire that 1 cor. 15. 42 , 43 , 44. may be consulted . it is sown in corruption , it is rais'd in incorruption ; it is sown in ignominy , it is rais'd in glory ; it is sown in weakness , it is rais'd in power ; it is sown a natural body , it is rais'd a spiritual body . now i ask , what is it that is rais'd in incorruption , in glory , in power , and a spiritual body ? mr. lock will surely answer , that it is the body . and if the body be so necessarily understood , it is the same as if it was express'd . besides , the words v. 44. may be rendred , the body is raised spiritual ; and so we have the express words , that the body is raised . the wicked's suffering eternal torments after this life , is deny'd by the socinians . impios futuros immortales , nempe in aeternum opprobrium , nec usquam sacrae literae comprobant , nec quicquam ex illis afferri posse videtur , unde sententia illa probari possit : so smalcius in refut . frantzii , p. 415. ut deus in omnibus justitiae tenax est , ita hic quoque super neminem extendet paenam meritis ejus majorem . nulla autem esse possunt peccata tam gravia , quae sempiternis cruciatibus possunt aequari . wolzogenius comment . in matth. 24. 46. the like hath ernestus somnerus in his demonstration , intituled , demonstratio theologica & philosophica , quod aeterna impiorum supplicia non arguant dei justitiam , sed injustitiam . as to socinus himself , that he was of the same opinion , appears sufficiently from his disputation with puccius , and the letters which past between volkelius and him about it . what mr. lock 's opinion is as to this , i shall not determine : on the one hand his making the death which was threatned to adam , and which he says is the wages of sin as well after as before the resurrection not to be an eternal life in misery , or the being kept alive in perpetual exquisite torments , but a ceasing to be , may incline us to think that in this great point he holds the same that the socinians do : see his reasonab . of christian. p. 5 , 6 , 15. on the other hand , how far his mentioning infinite misery , exquisite misery , unspeakable punishments , perfect misery , tribulation and anguish , indignation and wrath which shall be after this life , and his transcribing the words of our saviour in which he speaks of everlasting fire and everlasting punishment , may argue that he doth not hold with them , i know not . finis . a discourse in vindication of the doctrine of the trinity with an answer to the late socinian objections against it from scripture, antiquity and reason, and a preface concerning the different explications of the trinity, and the tendency of the present socinian controversie / by the right reverend father in god edward, lord bishop of worcester. stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. 1697 approx. 512 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 188 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2004-08 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a61548 wing s5585 estc r14244 13589086 ocm 13589086 100626 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a61548) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 100626) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 851:30) a discourse in vindication of the doctrine of the trinity with an answer to the late socinian objections against it from scripture, antiquity and reason, and a preface concerning the different explications of the trinity, and the tendency of the present socinian controversie / by the right reverend father in god edward, lord bishop of worcester. stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. [2], lxii, [4], 292 p. printed by j.h. for henry mortlock ..., london : 1697. reproduction of original in cambridge university library. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng trinity -early works to 1800. socinianism -early works to 1800. 2004-02 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2004-04 spi global keyed and coded from proquest page images 2004-05 olivia bottum sampled and proofread 2004-05 olivia bottum text and markup reviewed and edited 2004-07 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion a discourse in vindication of the doctrine of the trinity : with an answer to the late socinian objections against it from scripture , antiquity and reason . and a preface concerning the different explications of the trinity , and the tendency of the present socinian controversie . by the right reverend father in god , edward , lord bishop of worcester . london , printed by i. h. for henry mortlock at the phoenix in s. paul's church-yard , 1697. the preface . when i was desir'd , not long since , to reprint the discourse lately published , concerning the doctrine of christ's satisfaction , i thought it necessary to look into the socinian pamphlets , ( which have swarmed so much among us within a few years ) to see how far an answer had been given in them to any of the arguments contained in it ; but i found the writers of them thought it not for their purpose to take any notice at all of it ; but rather endeavour'd to turn the controversie quite another way , and to cover their true sense under more plausible expressions . of which i have given a full account in the preface to the late edition of it . but among those treatises which ●or the general good of the nation are gather●d into volumes and dispers'd abroad to make either proselytes or infidels ) i found one , wherein there is p●etended to be an answer to my sermon about the mysteries of the christian faith , ( reprinted with the former discourse ▪ ) and therein i meet with a passage , which hath given occasion to this vindication . for there are these words , that i had utterly mistaken , in thinking that they deny the articl●s of the new creed , or athanasian religion , because they are mysteries , or because , say they , we do not comprehend them ; we deny them , because we do comprehend them , we have a clear and distinct perception , that they are not mysteries , but contradictions , impossibilities and pure nonsense . which words contain in them so spitefull , so unjust , and so unreasonable a charge upon the christian church in general , and our own in particular ▪ that i could not but think my self concerned , especially since they are addressed to me , to do what in me lay ( as soon as my uncertain state of health would permit ) towards the clearing the fundamental mystery of the athanasian religion , as they call it , viz. the doctrine of the trinity , ( which is chiefly struck at by them ) without running into any new explications , or laying aside any old terms , for which i could not see any just occasion . for however thoughtfull men may think to escape some particular difficulties better , by going out of the common roads ; yet they may meet with others , which they did not foresee , which may make them as well as others judge it , at last , a wiser and safer course to keep in the same way , which the christian church hath used , ever since it hath agreed to express her sense in such terms , which were thought most proper for that purpose . for in such cases , the original and critical signification of words is not so much to be attended , as the use they are applied to , and since no other can be found more significant or proper for that end ; it looks like yielding too great advantage to our adversaries , to give up the boundaries of our faith. for although there be a difference between the necessary article of faith it self , and the manner of expressing it , so that those may truely believe the substance of it , who differ in the explication ; yet since the sense of the article hath been generally received under those terms , there seems to be no sufficient reason to substitute new ones instead of the old , which can hardly be done , without reflecting on the honour of the christian church , and giving occasion for very unreasonable heats and disputes , among those , who , if we may believe their own words , agree in the same fundamental doctrine ; viz. a trinity in unity , or three persons in the same undivided divine essence . i am so little a friend to any such heats and differences among our selves especially when we are so violently attacked by our common adversaries , that were there no other reason , i should for the sake of that alone forbear making use of new explications ; but there is another too obvious , which is , the mighty advantage they have taken from hence to represent our doctrine as uncertain , as well as unintelligi●le . for as soon as our unitarians began to appear with that briskness and boldness they have done now for several years , some of our divines thought themselves obliged to write in defence of the doctrine of the trinity . thence came several answers to them , and in several methods , as the persons thought most subservient to the same end ; but whatever their intentions were , our adversaries were too much pleased to conceal the satisfaction which they took in it . for soon after , we had the several explications set forth and compared with each other ; and all managed so , as to make the cause to suffer by the disagreement of the advocates for it . and from hence they have formed a fivefold trinity . 1. the ciceronian trinity , because tully had used the word personae for different respects ; sustineo ego tres personas ; and according to this acceptation , three persons in the godhead are no more than three relations , capacities or respects of god to his creatures , which say they , is downright sabellianism : and is no manner of mystery , but the most intelligible and obvious thing in the world. 2. the cartesian trinity , which maketh three divine persons , and three infinite minds , spirits and beings to be but one god. 3. the platonick trinity , of three divine co-eternal persons , whereof the second and third are subordinate or inferiour to the first in dignity , power , and all other qualities , except only duration . 4. the aristotelian trinity , which saith the divine persons are one god , because they have one and the same numerical substance . 5. the trinity of the mobile , or that which is held by the common people , or by such lazy divines , who only say in short , that it is an unconceivable mystery ; and that those are as much in fault who go about to explain it , as those who oppose it . but that which hath made the most noise , and caused the greatest heat and ferment among us , hath been a difference first begun between two learned divines of our church , about the second and fourth ; and the account which our unitarians give of both is this , that the one is a rational and intelligible explication , but not true nor orthodox ; the other is true and orthodox , but neither rational , intelligible nor possible . i do not mention this , as though their words were to be taken as to either ; but only to shew what advantage they take from both , to represent that which is set up for the churches doctrine , either not to be truly so , or to be neither rational nor intelligible . the design of the following discourse , is to make it appear , ( 1. ) that the churches doctrine , as to the trinity , as it is expressed in the athanasian creed , is not liable to their charges of contradiction , impossibilities and pure nonsense . ( 2. ) that we own no other doctrine than what hath been received by the christian church in the several ages from the apostles times : ( 3. ) and that there are no objections in point of reason , which ought to hinder our assent to this great point of the christian faith. but the chief design of this preface , is to remove this prejudice which lies in our way from the different manners of explication , and the warm disputes which have been occasion'd by them . it cannot be denied , that our adversaries have taken all possible advantage against us from these unhappy differences ; and in one of their latest discourses they glory in it , and think they have therein out-done the foreign unitarians : for , say they , we have shewed , that their faiths concerning this pretended mystery are so many and so contrary , that they are less one party among themselves , than the far more learned and greater number of them are one party with us : this is spoken of those they call nominal trinitarians ; and for the other whom they call real , they prove them guilty of manifest heresie ; the one they call sabellians , which they say is the same with unitarians , and the other polytheists or disguised pagans , and they borrow arguments from one side to prove the charge upon the other ; and they confidently affirm that all that speak out in this matter , must be driven either to sabellianism , or tritheism . if they are nominal trinitarians , they fall into the former , if real , into the latter . this is the whole design of this late discourse , which i shall here examine , that i may remove this stumbling block , before i enter upon the main business . 1. as to those who are called nominal trinitarians . who are they ? and from whence comes such a denomination ? they tell us , that they are such who believe three persons , who are persons in name only ; indeed and in truth they are but one subsisting person . but where are these to be found ▪ among all such , say they , as agree that there is but one only and self-same divine essence and substance . but do these assert , that there is but one subsisting person , and three only in name ? let any one be produced who hath written in defence of the trinity ; for those who have been most charged , have utterly deny'd it that learned person , who is more particularly reflected upon in this charge , is by them said to affirm , that god is one divine intellectual substance , or really subsisting person , and distinguished and diversified by three relative modes , or relative subsistences . and mr. hooker is produc'd to the same purpose , that there is but one substance in god , and three distinct rela●ive properties , which substance being taken with its peculiar property , makes the distinction of persons in the godhead . but say they , these modes and properties do not make any real subsisting persons ; but only in a grammatical and critical sense , and at most , this is no more than one man may be said to be three persons on the account of different relations , as solomon was son of david , father of rehoboam , and proceeding from david and bathsheba , and yet was but one subsisting p●rson . this is the force of what they say . but then in a triumphing manner they add , that the realists have so manifest an advantage against them , that they have no way to de●end themselves but by recrimination , i. e. by shewing the like absurdity in their doctrine . and thus they hope either side will baffle the other , and in the mean time , the cause be lost between them . but in so nice a matter as this , we must not rely too much on an adversaries representation ; for the leaving out some expressions , may make an opinion look with another appearance , than if all were taken together , it would have . we must therefore take notice of other passages which may help to give the true sense of the learned author , who is chiefly aimed at . 1. in the very same page he asserts , that each of the divine persons has an absolute nature distinctly belonging to him , though not a distinct absolute nature ; and to the same purpose in another place . 2. that the eternal father is and subsists as a father , by having a son , and communicating his essence to another . and elsewhere , that the relation between father and son is founded on that eternal act , by which the father communicates his divine nature to the son. 3. that the foundation of the doctrine of the trinity is this , 1. that there can be but one god. 2. that there is nothing in god but what is god. 3. that there can be no composition in the deity with any such positive real being , distinct from the deity it self . but the church finding in scripture mention of three , to whom distinctly the godhead does belong , expressed these three by the name of persons , and stated their personalities upon three distinct modes of subsistence , allotted to one and the same godhead , and these also distinguished from one another by three distinct relations . what do these men mean , to charge one who goes upon these grounds with sabellianism ? doth he make the three persons to be mere names , as s. basil in few words expresses the true nature of sabellianism , that it was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , one thing with different denominations ? can the communicating the divine essence by the father to the son , be called a name , or a mode , or a respect only ? and these men of wonderfull subtilty , have not learnt to distinguish between persons and personalities . where is the least intimation given , that he look'd on the divine persons as modes and respects only ? that is impossible , since he owns a communication of the divine essence , and that each of the divine persons hath the divine nature belonging to him ; could it ever enter into any man's head to think , that he that owns this should own the other also ? but the personality is a thing of another consideration . for it is the reason of the distinction of persons in the same undivided nature . that there is a distinction , the scripture assures us ; and withall , that there is but one divine essence . how can this distinction be ? not by essential attributes , for those must be in the divine essence , and in every person alike , otherwise he hath not the entire divine nature ; not by accidents , as men are distinguished from each other , for the divine nature is not capable of these ; not by separate or divided substances , for that would be inconsistent with the perfect vnity of the godhead ; since therefore there can be no other way of distinction , we must consider how the scripture directs us i● this case ; and that acquaints us with the father , son and holy ghost , as having mutual relation to each other ; and there is no repugnancy therein to the divine nature , and therefore the distinction of the persons hath been fixed on that , as the most proper foundation for it . and these are called different modes of subsistence , on which the distinct personalities are founded , which can be no other than relative . but a person is that which results from the divine nature and subsistence together ; and although a person cannot be said to be a relative , consider'd as such , yet being joyned with the manner of subsistence , it doth imply a relation , and so a person may be said to be a relative being . but say they , if the three persons have all the same individual substance , then they are truly and properly only three modes ; and therefore a●though among men , personalities are distinct from the persons , because the persons are distinct intelligent substances , yet this cannot hold where there is but one individual substance . the question is , whether those they call nominal trinitarians , are liable to the charge of sabellianism ; the answer is , that they cannot , because they assert far more than three names , viz. that each person hath the divine nature distinctly belonging to him . but say they , these persons are but mere modes . no , say the other ; we do not say that the person is only a modus , but that it is the divine nature , or godhead subsisting under such a modus , so that the godhead is still included in it , joyned to it , and distinguished by it . grant all this , the vnitarians reply , yet where there is the same individual substance , the person can be only a modus . to which it is answer'd , that this individual substance hath three distinct ways of subsisting , according to which it subsists distinctly and differently in each of the three divine persons . so that here lies the main point , whether it be sabelliani●m , to assert the same individual substance under three such different modes of subsistence . if it be , the most learned and judicious of the fathers did not know what sabellianism meant ( as i have shewd at large in the following discourse ) for they utterly disowned sabellianism , and yet asserted , that the several hypostases consisted of peculiar properties in one and the same divine substance . but it is not the authority of fathers which they regard , for they serve them only as stones in the boys way when they quarrel , viz. to throw them at our heads . let us then examine this matter by reason without them . persons among men , say they , are distinguished from personalities , because they have distinct substances , therefore where there is but one substance , the person can be only a mode , and therefore the same with the personality . i answer , that the true original notion of personality is no more than a different mode of subsistence in the same common nature . for every such nature is in it self one and indivisible ; and the more perfect it is , the greater must its vnity be . for the first being is the most one ; and all division comes from distance and imperfection . the first foundation of distinction is diversity ; for if there were no diversity , there would be nothing but entire and perfect vnity . all diversity comes from two things , dissimilitud● and dependence . those philosophers ( called megarici ) did not think much amiss , who said , that if all things were alike , there would be but one substance or being in the world ; and what we now call different substances , would be only different modes of subsistence in the same individual nature . the difference of substances in created beings , arises from those two things . 1. a dissimilitude of accidents , both internal and external . 2. the will and power of god , whereby he gives them distinct and separate beings in the same common nature . as for instance , the nature or essence of a man consider'd in it self , is but one and indivisible ; but god gives a separate existence to every individual , whereby that common nature subsists in so many distinct substances , as there are individuals of that kind ; and every one of these substances is distinguished from all others ▪ not only by a separate internal vital principle and peculiar properties , but by such external accidents , as do very easily discriminate them from each other . and the subject of all these accidents is that peculiar substance , which god hath given to every individual , which in rational beings is called a person ; and so we grant that in all such created beings the personality doth suppose a distinct substance ; not from the nature of personality , but from the condition of the subject wherein it is . the personality in it self is but a different mode of subsistence in the same common nature , which is but one : but this personality being in such a subject as man is , it from thence follows ▪ that each person hath a peculiar substance of his own ; and not from the nature of personality . but when we come to consider a divine essence , which is most perfectly one , and is wholly uncapable of any separate existence or accidents , there can be no other way of distinction conceived in it , but by different modes of subsistence , or relative properties in the same divine essence . and herein we proceed , as we do in our other conceptions of the divine nature , i. e. we take away all imperfection from god , and attribute only that to him , which is agreeable to his divine perfections , although the manner of it may be above our comprehension . and if this be owning the trinity of the mob , i am not ashamed to own my self to be one of them ; but it is not out of lazyness or affected ignorance , but upon the greatest and most serious consideration . they may call this a trinity of cyphers , if they please , but i think more modest and decent language about these matters would become them as well as the things themselves much better . and they must prove a little better than they have done , that different modes of subsistence in the divine nature , or the relations of father and son are mere cyphers , which is so often mentioned in scripture , as a matter of very great consequence ; and that when we are baptized in the name of the father , son and holy ghost , we are baptized into a trinity of cyphers . but our unitarians proceed , and say that the same author affirms not only the personalities , but the persons to be merely relative . for he saith , that every person , as well as every personality in the trinity , is wholly relative . but it is plain he speaks there , not of the person in himself , but with respect to the manner of subsistence , or the relative properties belonging to them . but if the notion of a person doth besides the relative property , necessarily suppose the divine nature together with it ; how can a person then be imagined to be wholly relative ? but they urge , that which makes the first person in the trinity to be a person , makes him to be a father , and what makes him to be a father , makes him to be a person . and what follows from hence , but that the relative property is the foundation of the personality ? but by no means , that the person of the father is nothing but the relative property ? the instance of solomon is not at all to the purpose , unless we asserted three persons founded upon those different relations in his individual nature . who denies , that one person may have different respects , and yet be but one person subsisting ? where doth the scripture say , that the son of david , the father of rehoboam , and he that proceeded from david and bathsheba were three persons distinguished by those relative properties ? but here lies the foundation of what we believe as to the trinity ; we are assured from scripture , that there are three to whom the divine nature and attributes are given , and we are assured both from scripture and reason , that there can be but one divine essence ; and therefore every one of these must have the divine nature , and yet that can be but one. but it is a most unreasonable thing to charge those with sabellianism , who assert , that every person hath the divine nature distinctly belonging to him , and that the divine essence is communicated from the father to the son. did ever n●etus or sabellius , or any of their followers speak after this manner ? is the divine essence but a mere name , or a different respect only to mankind ? for the asserting such relative persons as have no essence at all , was the true sabellian doctrine , as will be made appear in the following discourse . and so much is confess'd by our unitarians themselves , for they say , that the sabellians held , that father , son and spirit are but only three names o● god given to him in scripture , by occasion of so many several dispensations towards the creature , and so he is but one subsisting person and three relative persons ; as he sustains the three names of father , son and spirit , which being the relations of god towards things without him , he is so many relative persons , or persons in a classical critical sense , i. e. persons without any essence belonging to them as such . but those who assert a communication of the divine essence to each person can never be guilty of sabellianism , if this be it , which themselves affirm . and so those called nominal trinitarians , are very unjustly so called , because they do really hold a trinity of persons in the unity of the godhead . 2. let us now see what charge they lay upon those whom they call real trinitarians : and they tell us , that the nominals will seem to be profound philosophers , deep sages in comparison with them . these are very obliging expressions to them in the beginning . but how do they make out this gross stupidity of theirs ? in short it is , that they stand condemned and anathematized as hereticks by a general council , and by all the moderns , and are every day challenged and impeached of tritheism , and cannot agree among themselves , but charge one another with great absurdities ; and in plain terms they charge them with nonsense in the thing , whereas the other lay only in words . because these assert three divine subsisting persons , three infinite spirits , minds or substances , as distinct as so many angels or men , each of them perfectly god , and yet all of them are but one god. to understand this matter rightly , we must consider that when the socinian pamphlets first came abroad , some years since , a learned and worthy person of our church , who had appear'd with great vigour and reason against our adversaries of the church of rome in the late reign ( which ought not to be forgotten ) undertook to defend the doctrine of the trinity against the history of the unitarians , and the notes on the athanasian creed ; but in the warmth of disputing , and out of a desire to make this matter more intelligible , he suffer'd himself to be carried beyond the ancient methods which the church hath used to express her sense by , still retaining the same fundamental article of three persons in one undivided essence , but explaining it in such a manner , as to make each person to have a peculiar and proper substance of his own . this gave so great an advantage to the author of those treatises , that in a little time , he set forth his notes with an appendix in answer to this new explication . wherein he charges him with heresie , tritheism and contradiction . the very same charges which have been since improved and carried on by others ; i wish i could say , without any unbecoming heat or reflections . but i shall now examine how far these charges have any ground , so as to affect the doctrine of the trinity , which is the chief end our adversaries aimed at , in heaping these reproaches upon one who appear'd so early , and with so much zeal to defend it . we are therefore to consider these things : 1. that a man may be very right in the belief of the article it self ; and yet may be mistaken in his explication of it . and this one of his keenest adversaries freely acknowledges . for he plainly distinguishes between the fundamental article and the manner of explaining it , and affirms , that a man may quit his explication without parting with the article it self . and so he may retain the article with his explication . but suppose a man to assent to the fundamental article it self , and be mistaken in his explication of it , can he be charged with heresie about this article ? for heresie must relate to the fundamental article to which he declares his hearty and unfeigned assent ; but here we suppose the mistake to lie only in the explication . as for instance , sabellianism is a condemned and exploded heresie , for it is contrary to the very doctrine of the trinity ; but suppose one who asserts the doctrine of three persons , should make them to be three modes , must such a one presently be charged with heresie , before we see whether his explication be consistent with the fundamental article or not ? for this is liable to very obvious objections , that the father begets a mode instead of a son , that we pray to three modes instead of three real persons , that modes are mutable things in their own nature , &c. but must we from hence conclude such a one guilty of heresie , when he declares , that he withall supposed them not to be mere modes , but that the divine essence is to be taken together with the mode to make a person ? yea , suppose some spitefull adversary should say , that it is a contradiction to say , that the same common nature can make a person with a mode superadded to it ▪ unless that be individuated , for a ●erson doth imply an individual nature , and not a mere relative mode . is this sufficient to charge such a person with the sabellian heresy , which he utterly disowns ? is not the like equity to be shew●d in another though different explication ? suppose then a person solemnly professes to own the fundamental doctrine of the trinity as much as any others ; but he thinks , that three persons must have distinct substances to make them persons , but so as to make no division or separation in the godhead , and that he cannot conceive a communication of the divine essence without this ; must this presently be run down as heresie , when he asserts at the same time three persons in the same undivided essence ? but this is said to be a contradiction ; so it was in the other case and not allow'd then and why should it be otherwise in this ? i speak not this to justifie such explications , but to shew that there is a difference between the heresie of denying an article , and a mistake in the explication of it . even the greatest heresie-makers in the world , distinguish between heresies and erroneous explications of articles of faith , as any one may find that looks into them . and even the inquisitors of heresie themselves allow the distinction between heresie and an erroneous proposition in faith , which amounts to the same with a mistaken explication of it ; and they all grant that there may be propositions that tend to heresie or savour of it , which cannot be condemned for heretical . and even pegna condemns melchior canus for being too cruel in asserting it to be heresie to contradict the general sense of divines , because the schools cannot make heresies . 2. it is frequently and solemnly affirmed by him , that the unity of the godhead is the most real , essential , indivisible , inseparable unity ; that there is but one divine nature , which is originally in the father , and is substantially communicated by the father to the son , as a distinct subsisting person , by an eternal ineffable generation , and to the holy ghost by an eternal and substantial procession from father and son. do the others who maintain a trinity deny this ? by no means . for we have already seen that they assert the same thing . so that they are fully agreed as to the main fundamental article . and even the unitarians yield , that from the beginning he asserted , that the three divine persons are in one undivided substance . wherein then lies the foundation of this mighty quarrel , and those unreasonable heats that men have fallen into about it ; to the great scandal of our church and religion ? in short it is this ; that the same author asserts , ( 1. ) that it is gross sabellianism to say , that there are not three personal minds , or spirits , or substances . ( 2. ) that a distinct substantial person must have a distinct substance of his own proper and peculiar to his own person . but he owns , that although there are three distinct persons , or minds , each of whom is distinctly and by himself god , yet there are not three gods , but one god , or one divinity ; which he saith , is intirely , and indivisibly , and inseparably in three distinct persons or minds . that the same one divine nature is wholly and entirely communicated by the eternal father to the eternal son and by the father and son to the eternal spirit without any division or separation ; and so it remains one still . this is the substance of this new explication , which hath raised such flames , that injunctions from authority were thought necessary to suppress them . but those can reach no farther than the restraint of mens tongues and pens about these matters , and unless something be found out to satisfie their minds and to remove misapprehensions , the present heat may be only cover'd over and kept in ; which when there is a vent given ▪ may break out into a more dangerous flame . therefore i shall endeavour to state and clear this matter so as to prevent any future eruption thereof , which will be done by considering how far they are agreed , and how far the remaining difference ought to be pursued . 1. they are agreed , that there are three distinct persons and but one godhead . 2. that there are no separate and divided substances in the trinity ; but the divine nature is wholly and entirely one and undivided . 3. that the divine essence is communicated from the father to the son , and from both to the holy spirit . so that the charge of sabellianism on those who reject this new explication is without ground . for no sabellian did or could assert a communication of the divine essence . which being agreed on both sides , the dispute turns upon this single point , whether a communicated essence , doth imply a distinct substance or not . on the one side it is said , that there being but one god , there can be but one divine essence , and if more essences more gods. on the other side , that since they own a communicated essence necessary to make a distinction of persons in the son and holy ghost , if the essence be not distinct , the foundation of distinct personalities is taken away . but how is this clear'd by the other party ? they say , that it is one peculiar prerogative of the divine nature and substance , founded in its infinite and therefore transcendent perfection , whereby it is capable of residing in more persons than one , and is accordingly communicated from the father to the son and holy ghost . so that the communication of the divine nature is owned to the persons of the son and holy ghost . but how then comes it not to make a distinct essence , as it makes distinct persons , by being communicated ? the answer we see is , that it is a peculiar prerogative founded on the infinite and therefore transcendent perfection of the divine nature . but they further add , that when the son and holy ghost are said to have the same divine nature from the father , as the origin and fountain of the divinity ; not by the production of a new divine nature but by a communication of his own ; which is one and the same in all three without separation , difference , or distinction ; that this is indeed a great mystery , which hath been always look'd upon by the greatest and wisest men in the church , to be above all expressions and description . so that the greatest difficulty is at last resolved into the incomprehensible perfection of the divine nature ; and that neither man nor angels can give a satisfactory answer to enquiries about the manner of them . and the author of the animadversions saith , that in the divine persons of the trinity , the divine nature and the personal subsistence coalesce into one , by an incomprehensible , ineffable kind of union and conjunction . but do those on the other side think , that the asserting three distinct substances in one and the same individual substance tends to clear and explain the notion of the trinity and make it more easie and intelligible ? the divinity , they say , is whole , intire , indivisible , and inseparable in all three . but can one whole entire indivisible substance be actually divided into three substances ? for if every person must have a peculiar substance of his own ; and there be three persons , there must be three peculiar substances , and how can there be three peculiar substances , and yet but one entire and indivisible substance ? i do not say , there must be three divided substances in place , or separate substances , but they must be divided as three individuals of the same kind , which must introduce a specifick divine nature , which i think very inconsistent with the divine perfections ; but of this at large in the following discourse . i do not lay any force upon this argument , that there can be no ground of the distinction between the three substances , if there be but one substance in the godhead , ( as some have done ) because the same substance cannot both unite and distinguish them ; for the ground of the distinction is not the substance but the communication of it , and where that is so freely asserted , there is a reason distinct from the substance it self , which makes the distinction of persons . but the difficulty still remains , how each person should have a substance of his own ; and yet there be but one entire and indivisible substance , for every person must have a proper substance of his own ; or else according to this hypothesis , he can be no person ; and this peculiar substance must be really distinct from that substance which is in the other two : so that here must be three distinct substances in the three persons . but how then can there be but one individual essence in all three ? we may conceive one common essence to be individuated in three persons , as it is in men ; but it is impossible to conceive the same individual essence to be in three persons , which have peculiar substances of their own . for the substances belonging to the persons , are the same essence individuated in those persons : and so there is no avoiding making three individual essences and one specifick or common divine nature . and maimonides his argument is considerable against more gods than one ; if , saith he , there be two gods , there mu●t be something wherein they agree , and something wherein they differ ; that wherein they agree must be that which makes each of them god ; and that wherein they differ must make them two gods. now wherein doth this differ from the present hypothesis ? there is something wherein they differ , and that is their proper substance ; but maimonides thought that wherein they differ'd sufficient to make them two gods. so that i fear it will be impossible to clear this hypothesis as to the reconciling three individual essences with one individual divine essence , which looks too like asserting that there are three gods and yet but one . and the author of this explica●ion doth at last confess , that three distinct whole inseparable same 's , are hard to conceive as to the manner of it . now to what purpose are new explications started and disputes raised and carried on so warmly about them , if after all , the main difficulty be confess'd to be above our comprehension ? we had much better satisfie our selves with that language which the church hath receiv●d and is express'd in the creeds , than go about by new terms , to raise new ferments , especially at a time , when our united forces are most necessary against our common adversaries . no wise and good men can be fond of any new inventions , when the peace of the church is hazarded by them . and on the other side , it is as dangerous to make new heresies as new explications . if any one denies the doctrine contained in the nicene creed , that is no new heresie ; but how can such deny the son to be consubstantial to the father , who assert one and the same indivisible substance in the father and the son ? but they may contradict themselves . that is not impossible on either side . but doth it follow that they are guilty of heresie ? are not three substances and but one a contradiction ? no more , say they , than that a communicated substance is not distinct from that which did communicate . but this whole dispute we find is at last resolved into the infinite and unconceivable perfections of the godhead , where it is most safely lodged ; and that there is no real contradiction in the doctrine it self , is part of the design of the discourse afterwards . but here it will be necessary to take notice of what the unitarians have objected against this new explication , viz. that it was condemned by the ancients in the person of philoponus ; in the middle ages , in the person and writings of abhor ioachim ; but more severely since the reformation , in the person of valentinus gentilis , who was condemned at geneva , and beheaded at bern for this very doctrine . to these i shall give a distinct answer : 1. as to joh philoponus , i do freely own , that in the greek church , when in the sixth century he broached his opinion , that every hypostasis must have the common nature individuated in it , this was look'd upon as a doctrine of dangerous consequence , both with respect to the trinity and incarnation . the latter was the first occasion of it ; for as leontius observes , the dispute did not begin about the trinity , but about the incarnation ; and philoponus took part with those who asserted but one nature in christ after the vnion , and he went upon this ground , that if there were two natures there must be two hypostases , because nature and hypostasis were the same . then those on the churches side , saith leontius , objected , that if they were the same , there must be three distinct natures in the trinity , as there were three hypostases ; which philoponus yielded , and grounded himself on aristotle's doctrine , that there was but one common substance and several individual substances , and so held it was in the trinity , whence he was called the leader of the heresie of the tritheius . this is the account given by leontius who lived very ●ear his time , a. d. 620. the same is affirmed of him by nicephorus , and that he wrote a book on purpose about the vnion of two natures in christ , out of which he produces his own words concerning a common and individual nature , ( which he calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) which can agree to none else . and the main argument he went upon was this , that unless we assert a singular nature in the hypostases , we must say , that the whole trinity was incarnate ; as unless there be a singular humane nature distinct from the common , christ must assume the whole nature of mankind . and this argument from the incarnation , was that which made roscelin , in the beginning of the disputing age , a. d. 1093 , to assert , that the three persons were three things distinct from each other , as three angels or three men , because otherwise the incarnation of the second person could not be understood , as appears by anselm's epistles , and his book of the incarnation written upon that occasion . but as a●selm shews at large , if this argument hold , it must prove the three persons not only to be distinct , but separate and divided sub●●ances , ( which is directly contrary to this new explication ) and then there is no avoiding tritheism . but to return to joh. philoponus , who , saith nicephorus , divided the indivisible nature of god into three individuals as among men : which , saith he , is repugnant to the sense of the christian church ; and he produces the testimony of gregory nazianzen against it , and adds , that leontius and georgius pisides confuted philoponus . but in that divided time . there were some called theodosiani , who made but one nature and one hypostasis ; and so fell in with the sabellians ; but others held , that there was one immutable divine essence , but each person had a distinct individual nature : which the rest charged with tritheism . which consequence they utterly rejected , because although they held three distinct natures , yet they said , they were but one god , because there was but one invariable divinity in them . nicephorus saith , that conon's followers rejected philoponus ; but photius mentions a conference between conon and others , a●out philoponus , wherein he defends him against other severians . photius grants , that conon and his followers held a consubstantial trinity and the unity of the godhead , and so far they were orthodox : but saith , they were far from it , when they asserted proper and peculiar substances to each person . the difference between conon and philoponus about this point , ( for conon wrote against philoponus about the resurrection ) seems to have been partly in the doctrine , but chiefly in the consequence of it ; for these rejected all kind of tritheism , which philoponus saw well enough must follow from his doctrine , but he denied any real division or separation in those substances as to the deity . isidore saith , that the tritheists owned three gods , as well as three persons ; and that if god be said to be triple , there must follow a plurality of gods. but there were others called triformiani , of whom s. augustin speaks . who held the three persons to be three distinct parts , which being united made one god ; which , saith he , is repugnant to the divine perfection . but among these severians , there were three several opinions : 1. of philoponus , who held one common nature and three individual . 2. of those who said there was but one nature and one hypostasis . 3. of those who affirm'd there were three distinct natures , but withal , that there was but one indivisible godhead ; and these differ'd from philoponus in the main ground of tritheism , which was , that he held the common nature in the trinity , to be only a specifick nature , and such as it is among men. for philoponus himself in the words which nicephorus produces , doth assert plainly , that the common nature is separated from the individuals , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , by a mere act of the mind ; so that he allow'd no individual vnity in the divine nature , but what was in the several persons ; as the common nature of man is a notion of the mind , as it is abstracted from the several individuals , wherein alone it really subsists ; so that here is an apparent difference between the doctrine of joh. philoponus and the new explication , for herein the most real , essential and indivisible unity of the divine nature is asserted ; and it is said to be no species , because it is but one , and so it could not be condemned in joh. philoponus 2. we now come to abbat joachim , whose doctrine seems to be as much mistaken , as it is represented in the decretal , where the condemnation of it by the lateran council is extant . but here i cannot but observe what great authority these unitarians give to this lateran council , as if they had a mind to set up transubstantiation by it , which they so often parallel with the trinity . thence in their late discourse they speak of it as the most general council that was ever called , and that what was there defined , it was made heresie to oppose it . but by their favour , we neither own this to have been a general council , nor that it had authority to make that heresie which was not so before . but that council might assert the doctrine of the trinity truly , as it had been receiv'd , and condemn the opinion of joachim justly but what it was , they do not or would not seem to understand . joachim was a great enthusiast , but no deep divine ( as men of that heat seldom are ) and he had many disputes with peter lombard in his life , as the vindicator of joachim confesses . after his death , a book of his was found , taxing peter lombard with some strange doctrine about the trinity , wherein he called him heretick and madman ; this book was complained of in the lateran council , and upon examination it was sound , that instead of charging peter lombard justly , he was fallen into heresie himself , which was denying the essential vnity of the three persons , and making it to be vnity of consent . he granted that they were one essence , one nature , one substance : but how ? not by any true proper unity , but similitudinary and collective , as they called it , as many men are one people , and many believers make one church . whence thomas aquinas saith , that joachim fell into the arian heresie . it is sufficient to my purpose , that he denied the individual vnity of the divine essence , which cannot be charged on the author of the new explication , and so this comes not home to the purpose . 3. but the last charge is the most terrible , for it not only sets down the heresie , but the capital punishment which follow'd it . yet i shall make it appear , ( notwithstanding the very warm prosecution of it by another hand ) that there is a great difference between the doctrine of valentinus gentilis , and that which is asserted in this explication . 1. in the sentence of his condemnation it is expressed , that he had been guilty of the vilest scurrility and most horrid blasphemies against the son of god and the glorious mystery of the trinity . but can any thing of this nature be charged upon one , who hath not only written in defence of it , but speaks of it with the highest veneration ? 2. in the same sentence it is said , that he acknowledged the father only to be that infinite god which we ought to worship , which is plain blasphemy against the son. but can any men ever think to make this the same case with one , who makes use of that as one of his chief arguments , that the three persons are to be worshipped with a distinct divine worship ? 3. it is charged upon him , that he called the trinity a mere human invention , not so much as known to any catholick creed , and directly contrary to the word of god. but the author here charged , hath made it his business to prove the doctrine of the trinity to be grounded on scripture and to vindicate it from the objections drawn from thence against it . 4. one of the main articles of his charge was , that he made three spirits of different order and degree , that the father is the one only god , by which the son and holy ghost are excluded manifestly from the unity of the godhead ; but the person charged with his heresie saith , the reason why we must not say three gods , is , because there is but one and the same divinity in them all ; and that entirely , indivisibly , inseparably . but it is said , that although there may be some differences , yet they agree in asserting , that there are three distinct eternal spirits or minds in the trinity ; and genebrard is brought into the same heresie with them but genebrard with great indignation rejects the doctrine of valentinus gentilis , because he held an inequality in the persons , and denied the individual vnity of the godhead in them ; but he saith , he follow'd damascen in asserting three real hypostases ; and he utterly denies tritheism , and he brings a multitude of reasons , why the charge of tritheism doth not lie against his opinion , although he owns the hypostases to be three distinct individuals , but then he adds , that there is an indivisible and insep●rable union of the divine nature in all three persons . now to deal as impartially in this matter as may be , i do not think our understandings one jot helped in the notion of the trinity by this hypothesis ; but that it is liable to as great difficulties as any other , and therefore none ought to be fond of it , or to set it against the general sense of others , and the current expressions of divines about these mysteries ; nor to call the different opinions of others heresie or nonsense , which are provoking words , and tend very much to inflame mens passions , because their faith and vnderstanding are both call'd in question , which are very tender things . but on the other side , a difference ought to be made between the heresie and blasphemy of valentinus gentilis , and the opinion of such who maintain the individual and indivisible unity of the godhead ; but withal , believe that every person hath an individual substance as a person , and that sabellianism cannot be avoided otherwise . wherein i think they are mistaken , and that the fathers were of another opinion ; and that our church owns but one substance in the godhead , as the western church always did , ( which made such difficulty about receiving three hypostases , because they took hypostasis for a substance ) but yet i see no reason why those who assert three hypostases , and mean three individual substances should be charged with the heresie of valentinus gentilis , or so much as with that of abba● joachim or philoponus , because they all rejected the individual unity of the divine nature , which is constantly maintained by the defenders of the other hypothesis . but it is said and urged with vehemency , that these two things are inconsistent with each other ; that it is going forward and backward , being orthodox in one breath and otherwise in the next ; that all this looks like shuffling and concealing the true meaning , and acting the old artifices under a different form. for the samosatenians and arians , when they were pinched , seem'd very orthodox in their expressions , but retained their heresies still in their minds ; and there is reason to suspect the same game is playing over again , and we cannot be too cautious in a matter of such consequence . i grant very great caution is needfull , but the mixture of some charity with it will do no hurt . why should we suspect those to be inwardly false , and to think otherwise than they speak , who have shew'd no want of courage and zeal , at a time when some thought it prudence to say nothing , and never call'd upon their superiours then to own the cause of god , and to do their duties as they have now done , and that in no very obliging manner ? and if the same men can be cool and unconcerned at some times , ( when there was so great reason to be otherwise ) and of a sudden grow very warm , and even to boil over with zeal ; the world is so ill natur'd , as to be too apt to conclude there is some other cause of such an alteration than what openly appears . but there is a kind of bitter zeal , which is so fierce and violent , that it rather inflames than heals any wounds that are made ; and is of so malignant a nature , that it spreads and eats like a cancer , and if a stop were not given to it , it might endanger the whole body . i am very sensible how little a man consults his own ease , who offers to interpose in a dispute between men of heat and animosity ; but this moves me very little , when the interest of our church and religion is concerned , which ought to prevail more than the fear of displeasing one or other party , or it may be both . i do heartily wish , that all who are equally concerned in the common cause , would lay aside heats , and prejudices , and hard words , and consider this matter impartially ; and i do not question , but they will see cause to judge , as i do , that the difference is not so great as our adversaries for their own advantage make it to be . and since both sides yield , that the matter they dispute about is above their reach , the wisest course they can take is to assert and defend what is revealed , and not to be too peremptory and quarrelsom about that which is acknowledged to be above our comprehension , i mean as to the manner how the three persons partake of the divine nature . it would be of the most fatal consequence to us , if those weapons , which might be so usefully imploy'd against our common adversaries , should still be turned upon one another . i know no manner of advantage they have against us , but from thence , and this is it which makes them write with such insolence and scorn towards those who are far their superiours in learning and wit , as well as in the goodness of their cause . and is it possible that some of our most skilfull fencers should play prizes before them , who plainly animate them against each other for their own diversion and interest ? sometimes one hath the better , sometimes the other , and one is cried up in opposition to the other , but taken alone is used with the greatest contempt . one man's work is said to be learned and accurate , and the more , because it follows , that he concerns not himself with the socinians . the wiser man no doubt , for that reason . at another time it is called the birth of the mountains , and the author parallel'd with no less a man than don quixot , and his elaborate writings with his adventures , and they ridicule his notion of modes as if they were only so many gambols and postures . and then for his adversary , they hearten and incourage him all they can ; they tell him , he must not allow to the other the least title of all he contends for , least their sport should be spoiled ; and to comfort him , they tell him , that his adversary is a socinian at bottom , and doth not know it ; that all his thingums , modes , properties are only an addition of words and names , and not of persons properly so called , and that his whole scheme is nothing but socinianism drest up in the absurd cant of the schools . that his book hath much more scurrility than argument , that his usage of him was barbarous , and a greater soloecism in manners , than any he accuses him of in grammar or speech ; and in short , that his explication of the trinity is a great piece of nonsense , ( though it comes so near to socinianism . ) but how doth the other antagonist escape ? what , nothing but good words to him ? in this place they had a mind to keep him in heart , and only charge him with a heresie which they laugh at ; but in another place , they set him out with such colours , as shew they intended only to play one upon the other . they charge him not only with heresie but polytheism , which , they say , is next to atheism ; that his vindication is a supercilious , disdainfull and peevish answer : that he had neither humanity nor good manners left : that there is nothing considerable in his books but what he borrow'd from them. these are some of the flowers which they bestow on these persons of reputation in polemick squabble as they call it , which plainly shew , that their aim is , as much as may be , to divide and then to expose us . and shall we still go on to gratifie this insulting humour of theirs , by contending with one another , and afford them still new matter for books against both ? as we may see in their late discourse about nominal and real trinitarians , which was intended for a rare shew , wherein the two parties are represented as combating with one another , and they stand by and triumph over these cadmean brethren , as they call them . neither are they the socinians only , but those who despise all religion ( who i doubt are the far greater number ) are very much entertained with such encounters between men of wit and parts , because they think , and they do not think amiss , that religion it self will be the greatest sufferer by them at last : and this is the most dangerous , but i hope not the most prevailing party of men among us . the socinians profess themselves christians , and i hope are so , ( especially if but one article of faith be required to make men so ) but i cannot but observe that in the late socinian pamphlets , there is too strong a biass towards deism , ( which consideration alone should make us unite and look more narrowly to their steps . ) i do not charge their writers with a professed design to advance deism among us ; but their way of managing their disputes , is as if they had a mind to serve them . and such men who are enemies to all revealed religion , could not find out better tools for their purpose than they are . for they know very well , that in such a nation as ours , which is really concerned for the profession of religion one way or other , there is no opening professed schools of atheism ; but the design must be carried on under some shew of religion . and nothing serves their turn so well , as setting up natural religion in opposition to revealed . for this is the way by degrees to loosen and unhinge the faith of most men , which with great reason is built on the scripture as the surest foundation . but here it is fit to observe the several steps they take in order to this advancing deism , and how our unitarians have complied with all of them . i. the first point they are to gain is , the lessening the authority of scripture , and if this be once done , they know mens minds will be left so roving and uncertain , that they will soon fall into scepticism and infidelity . ii. the next is , to represent church-men as persons of interest and design , who maintain religion only because it supports them ; and this they call priest-cra●t , and if they can by this means take away their authority too , the way lies still more open for them ; for it is more easie to make a prey of the flock , when the shepherds are suspected only to look after their fleeces . since such a suspicion takes away all trust and confidence in their guides ; and they know very well , how little others will be able to defend themselves . iii. another step is , to magnifie the deists as men of probity and good sense ; that assert the just liberties of mankind , against that terrible thing called priest-craft ; and that would rescue religion from false glosses and absurd notions taken up from the schools and taught in the universities , on purpose to keep under those principles of universal liberty as to opinions , which those of freer minds endeavour to promote . but especially they are great enemies to all mysteries of faith , as unreasonable impositions on those of more refined vnderstandings , and of clear and distinct perceptions , as they have learnt to express themselves . these they account intolerable vsurpations on men of such elevations as themselves ; for mysteries are only for the mob , and not for persons of such noble capacities . iv. the last thing is , to represent all religions as indifferent , since they agree in the common principles of natural religion , especially the vnity of god , and all the rest is but according to the different inventions of men , the skill of the contrivers , and the several humors and inclinations of mankind . these are the chief mysteries of deism in our age ; for even deism hath its mysteries , and it is it self a mystery of iniquity , which i am afraid is too much working already among us , and will be more if no effectual stop be put to it . i call it deism , because that name obtains now , as more plausible and modish ; for atheism is a rude unmannerly word , and exposes men to the rabble , and makes persons shun the company and avoid the conversation and dealing with such who are noted for it . and this would be a mighty prejudice to them , as to their interests in this world , which they have reason to value . but to be a deist , seems to be only a setting up for having more wit , than to be cheated by the priests , and imposed upon by the common forms of religion , which serve well enough for ordinary people that want sense , and are not skill●d in demonstrations ; but the deists are so wise as to see through all these things . and therefore this name gains a reputation among all such as hate religion , but know not how otherwise to distinguish themselves from prosessed atheists , which they would by no means be taken for ; although if they be pressed home , very few among them will sincerely own any more than a series of causes , without any intellectual perfections , which they call god. a strange god without wisdom , goodness , iustice or providence ! but i am now to shew , how in all these points the present unitarians have been very serviceable to them , in the books which they have lately published and dispersed both in city and country . 1. as to the authority of scripture : they have been already justly exposed for undermining the authority of s. john's gospel , by mustering up all the arguments of the old hereticks against it , and giving no answers to them . and what defence have they since made for themselves ? no other but this very trifling one , that they repeat their reasons but do not affirm them . what is the meaning of this ? if they are true , why do they not affirm them ? if they are false , why do they not answer them ? is this done like those who believe the gospel of s. john to be divine , to produce all the arguments they could meet with against it ; and never offer to shew the weakness : and vnreasonableness of them ? doth not this look like a design to furnish the deists with such arguments as they could meet with against it ? especially , when they say , that s. iohn doth not oppose them why then are these arguments produced against his gospel ? men do not use to dispute against their friends , nor to tell the world what all people have said against them , and give not a word of answer in vindication of them . but they say , the modern vnitarians allow of the gospel and other pieces of s. iohn . a very great favour indeed , to allow of them . but how far ? as of divine authority ? not a word of that . but as ancient books which they think it not fit for them to dispute against . but if the ancient ebionites were their predecessors , as they affirm , they can allow none but the gospel according to the hebrews ; and must reject the rest and all s. paul's epistles ; and in truth , they make him argue so little to the purpose , that they must have a very mean opinion of his writings . but of these things in the discourse it self . as to church-men , no professed deists could express themselves more spitefully than they have done , and that against those to whom they profess the greatest respect . what then would they say of the rest ? they say in general , that it is natural to worldlings , to mercenary spirits , to the timorous and ambitious ; in a word , to all such as preferr not god before all other , whether persons or considerations , to believe as they would have it . but although the words be general , yet any one that looks into them may s●e● find that they were intended for such church-men who had written against their opinions . and the insinuation is , that if it were not for worldly interests , they would own them to be in the right . whereas i am fully perswaded , that they have no way to defend their opinions , but to reject the scriptures and declare themselves deists ; and as long as we retain a just veneration for the scripture , we can be of no other opinion , because we look on their interpretations as unreasonable , new , forced , and inconsistent with the circumstances of places and the main scope and tenor of the new testament . but their introduction to the answer to the late archbishop's sermons about the trinity and incarnation , shew their temper sufficiently as to all church-men . he was the person they professed to esteem and reverence above all others , and confess that he instructs them in the air and language of a father , ( which at least deserved a little more dutifull language from them . ) but some mens fondness for their opinions breaks all bounds of civility and decency ; for presently after , mentioning the archbishop and other bishops who had written against them , they say it signifies nothing to the case , that they are great pensioners of the world. for it is certain we have a mighty propensity to believe as is for our turn and interest . and soon after , that their opposers are under the power of such fatal biasses , that their doctrine is the more to be suspected because it is theirs . for the reason why they maintain the doctrine of the trinity is , because they must . the plain meaning of all this is , that the late archbishop ( as well as the rest ) was a mere self-interested man , ( which none who knew either the outside or inside of lambeth could ever imagine ) that if he were really against them ( as none could think otherwise , who knew him so well and so long as i did ) it only shew'd what a strange power , interest hath in the minds of all church-men . but what bias was it , which made him write with that strength and iudgment against their opinions ? let us set aside all titles of respect and honour as they desire , let reason be compared with reason ; and his arguments with their answers ; and it will be soon found that the advantage which he had , was not from any other dignity than that of a clearer iudgment , and a much stronger way of reasoning whereas their answers are such , as may well be supposed to come from those , who had some such bias , that they must at least seem to answer what in truth they could not . as hath been fully made appear in the vindication of him , to which no reply hath been given , although other treatises of theirs have come out since . in the conclusion of that answer they say , that they did not expect that their answer should satisfie us , and in truth they had a great deal of reason to think so . but what reason do they give for it ? a very kind one no doubt ; because prepossession and interest have taken hold of us . as though we were men of such mean and mercenary spirits , as to believe according to prepossession without reason , and to act only as serves our present interest . but we never made mean addresses to infidels to shew how near our principles came to theirs , nor made parallels between the trinity and transubstantiation , as some did , and defended them , as well as they could , when popery was uppermost . but enough of this . 3. we have seen how much they have gratified the deists by representing church-men in such a manner , let us now see in what manner they treat the deists . it is with another sort of language ; and which argues a more than ordinary kindness to them . in one place they say , that the deists are mostly well-natured men , and men , of probity and understanding ; in effect that they are sincere honest-hearted men , who do good by the impulse of their natural religion , honesty and good conscience , which have great influence upon them . what another sort of character is this from that of the greatest , and in their opinion the best of our clergy ? this must proceed from some intimacy and familiarity with them ; and it is easie to imagine from hence , that they are upon very good terms with one another , because they must be unitarians , if they believe a god at all . but where else are these honest , conscientious deists to be found ? it is rare indeed for others to find any one that rejects christianity out of pure conscience , and that acts by principles of sincere virtue . i never yet could meet with such , nor hear of those that have . and i would fain know the reasons on which such conscientious men proceeded ; for truly the principles of natural religion are those which recommend christianity to me ; for without them the mysteries of faith would be far more unaccountable than now they are ; and supposing them , i see no incongruity in them , i. e. that there is a just and holy god , and a wise providence , and a future state of rewards and punishments ; and that god designs to bring mankind to happiness out of a state of misery ; let these be supposed , and the scheme of christianity will appear very reasonable and fitted to the condition and capacity of mankind . and the sublimest mysteries of it are not intended to puzzle or amuse mankind , as weak men imagine ; but they are discover'd for the greatest and best purposes in the world , to bring men to the hatred of sin and love of god , and a patient continuance in well-doing , in order to a blessed immortality . so that this is truly a mystery of godliness , being intended for the advancement of real piety and goodness among mankind in order to make them happy . but as to these unitarians , who have such happy acquaintance with these conscientious deists ; i would fain learn from them , if they think them mistaken , why they take no more pains to satisfie and convince them ; for i find they decline saying a word against them . in one place they compare the atheist and deist together ; and very honestly and like any conscientious deists , they impute all the deism and most part of the atheism of our age to the doctrines of the trinity and incarnation . is it possible for men that live in our age to give such an account as this of the growth of deism and atheism among us ? what number of atheists is there , upon any other account than from a looseness of thinking and living ? where are those who believe god to be an incomprehensible being , and yet reject the mysteries which relate to his being , because they are incomprehensible ? suppose any reject spiritual substance as nonsense and a contradiction , as they do the trinity on the same pretences . is this a sufficient reason or not ? they may tell them , as they do us that they can have no ideas , no clear and distinct perceptions of immaterial substances ? what answer do they give in this case ? not a syllable ; although they take notice of it . but i hope they give some better satisfaction to the deist ; no , for they say , this is not a place to argue against either atheist or deist . by no means : some would say , they were not such fools to fall out with their friends . and it cannot be denied , that they have been the greatest incouragers of such kind of writings , which serve their turn so well ; and in pure gratitude they forbear to argue against them . iv. to shew how near they come to an indifferency in religion , they speak favourably of mahometans , and jews , and even tartars , because they agree with them in the vnity of the godhead . what an honest-hearted deist do they make that impostor mahomet ? one would hardly think such a character could have come out of the mouth of christians . but these are their words , mahomet is affirmed by divers historians to have had no other design in pretending himself to be a prophet , but to restore the belief of the unity of god , which at that time was extirpated among the eastern christians by the doctrines of the trinity and incarnation . who are those historians who give this character of him ? why are they not named , that their authority might be examin'd ? was the morocco ambassador one of them ? or paulus alciatus , who from a unitarian turned mahometan ? but by the best accounts we can meet with , we find that he was a very cunning impostor , and took in from the jews and ishmaelites his countrymen , circumcision ; from the christians , an honourable mention of christ , as a prophet , and as the the word and spirit of god , and owned his miracles ; from the ancient hereticks he denied his suffering , but owned his being taken up into heaven . yea , he owned , that he had his gospel from heaven ; but that his disciples changed it after his death , and attributed more to christ than he assumed to himself . which shews that he had so much sence , as to discern , that if the books of the new testament were genuine , more must be given to christ , than either mahomet or the unitarians do allow . let any indifferent reader compare their character of mahomet with that of athanasius , which these men give , and they will easily find that they take as much care to blacken one , as they do to vindicate the other . what christian ingenuity is here ? but mahomet was a deist , and athanasius a trinitarian . but they go on . whatsoever the design of mahomet was , its certain , that mahometism hath prevailed over greater numbers and more nations , than at this day profess christianity . but how ? was it not by force of arms and the prevalency of the saracen and turkish empire ? no , say these learned historians , it was not by the force of the sword , but by that one truth in the alcoran the unity of god. it were endless to quote the historians , who say , that it was mahomet's principle , to subdue all by force of arms who opposed his religion ; but the authority of elmacinus alone is sufficient ; for in the beginning of his history he owns that it was his principle , to make war upon those that would not submit to his law. and others say , that in remembrance of this , their law is expounded by their doctors , with a sword drawn by them , and that it is the law of the alcoran to kill and slay those that oppose it . what liberty the turkish empire allows to christians in the conquer'd provinces is not to this purpose , but by what means mahometism prevailed in the world. but say they , the jews as well as mahometans are alienated from us , because they suppose the trinity to be the doctrine of all christians . and what then ? must we renounce the christian doctrine to please the jews and mahometans ? must we quit christ's being the messias , because the jews deny it ? or the suffering of christ , because the mahometans think it inconsistent with his honour ? but if this be the truth of the case , as to jews and mahometans ; no persons are so well qualified to endeavour their conversion , as our unitarians ; which would be a much better imployment for them , than to expose the christian doctrine by such writings among us . i am ashamed to mention what they say of the tartars , when they call them , the shield and sword of that way of acknowledging and worshipping god. so that mahometans , jews and tartars are fairly represented because they agree in the grand fundamental of the vnity of the godhead ; but the christian church is charged with believing impossibilities , contradictions , and pure nonsense . and thus we find our unitarians serving the deists in all their methods of overthrowing revealed religion and advancing deism among us . and if this will not awaken us to look more after them , and unite us in the defence of our common cause against them , i do not think that other methods will do it . for it is become a restless and active , although as yet , but a small body of men , and they tell the world plainly enough that they are free from the biasses of hopes and fears ; and sit loose from the awes and bribes of the world. so that there is no way of dealing with them , but by shewing the falsness & weakness of the grounds they go upon ; and that they have no advantage of us as to scripture , antiquity or reason : which is the design of this vndertaking . worcester , sept. 30. 1696. e. w. the contents . chap. i. the occasion and design of the discourse . pag. 1. chap. ii. the doctrine of the trinity not receiv'd in the christian church by force or interest . p. 10. chap. iii. the socinian plea , for the antiquity of their doctrine , examined . p. 15. chap. iv. of the considerable men they pretend to have been of their opinion in the primitive church . p. 29. chap. v. of their charge of contradiction in the doctrine of the trinity . p. 54. chap. vi. no contradiction for three persons to be in one common nature . p. 68. chap. vii . the athanasian creed clear'd from contradictions . p. 101. chap. viii . the socinian sense of scripture examined . p. 121. chap. ix . the general sense of the christian church , proved from the form of baptism , as it was understood in the first ages . p. 177. chap. x. the objections against the trinity , in point of reason , answer'd . p. 230. errata . pag. 113. l. 12. for our r. one . p. 122. l. 12. r. heb. 1.5 . for unto which . p. 124. l. 7. add n. 11. p. 126. l. 29. for damascenus r. damascius . p. 129. l. 21. for appointed r. appropriated . p. 181. l. 22. after them put in not . p. 192. l. 19 for we r. were . p. 211. l. 1. dele that . p. 217. l. 6. for hypostasis r. hypothesis . p. 234. l. 6. for intermission r. intromission . p. 283. l. 21. r. as well as . a discourse in vindication of the doctrine of the trinity : with an answer to the late socinian objections . chap. i. the occasion and design of this discourse . it is now above twenty years since i first published a discourse about the reasons of the sufferings of christ , ( lately reprinted ) in answer to some socinian objections at that time . but i know not how it came to pass , that the socinian controversy seemed to be laid asleep among us for many years after ; and so it had continued to this day , if some mens busie and indiscreet zeal for their own particular opinions ( or rather heresies ) had not been more prevalent over them , than their care and concernment for the common interest of christianity among us . for it is that which really suffers by these unhappy and very unseasonable disputes about the mysteries of the christian faith , which could never have been started and carried on with more fatal consequence to all revealed religion , than in an age too much inclined to scepticism and infidelity . for all who are but well-wishers to that , do greedily catch at any thing which tends to unsettle mens minds as to matters of faith , and to expose them to the scorn and contempt of infidels . and this is all the advantage which they have above others in their writings . for upon my carefull perusal of them ( which was occasion'd by re●rinting that discourse ) i found nothing extraordinary , as to depth of judgment , or closeness of reasoning , or strength of argument , or skill in scripture or antiquity , but the old stuff set out with a new dress , and too much suited to the genius of the age we live in , viz. brisk and airy , but withal too light and superficial . but although such a sort of raillery be very much unbecoming the weight and dignity of the subject ▪ yet that is not the worst part of the character of them ; for they seem to be written , not with a design to convince others , or to justifie themselves , but to ridicule the great mysteries of our faith , calling them iargon , cant , nonsense , impossibilities , contradictions , samaritanism , and what not ? any thing but mahometism and deism . and at the same time they know , that we have not framed these doctrines our selves ; but have received them by as universal a tradition and consent of the christian church , as that whereby we receive the books of the new testament , and as founded upon their authority . so that , as far as i can see , the truth of these doctrines and authority of those books must stand and fall together : for from the time of the writing and publishing of them all persons who were admitted into the christian church by the form of baptism , prescribed by our saviour , were understood to ●e received members upon profession of ●●e faith of the holy trinity ; the hymns and doxologies of the primitive church were to father , son and holy ghost ; and those who openly opposed that doctrine were cast out of the communion of it : which to me seem plain and demonstrative arg●ments , that this was the doctrine of the christian church from the beginning , as will appear in the progress of this discourse . the chief design whereof is to vindicate the doctrine of the trinity , as it hath been generally received in the christian church , and is expressed in the athanasian creed , from those horrible imputations of nonsense , contradiction and impossibility ; with which it is charged by our vnitarians ( as they call themselves ; ) and that in the answer to the sermon lately reprinted , about the mysteries of the christian faith : which i first preached and published some years since , upon the breaking out of this controversie among us , by the notes on athanasius his creed , and other mischievous pamphlets one upon another . i was in hopes to have given some check to their insolent way of writing about matters so much above our reach , by shewing how reasonable it was for us to submit to divine revelation in such things , since we must acknowledge our selves so much to seek , as to the nature of substances , which are continually before our eyes ; and therefore , if there were such difficulties about a mystery which depended upon revelation , we had no cause to wonder at it ; but our business was chiefly to be satisfied , whether this doctrine were any part of that revelation . as to which i proposed several things , which i thought very reasonable , to the finding out the true sense of the scripture about these matters . after a considerable time , they thought fit to publish something , which was to pass for an answer to it ; but in it , they wholly pass over that part which relates to the sense of scripture , and run into their common place about mysteries of faith ; in which they were sure to have as many friends , as our faith had enemies : and yet they managed it in so trifling a manner , that i did not then think it deserved an answer . but a worthy and judicious friend was willing to take that task upon himself , which he hath very well discharged : so that i am not concerned to meddle with all those particulars , which are fully answer'd already , but the general charge as to the christian church about the doctrine of the trinity , i think my self oblig'd to give an answer to upon this occasion . but before i come to that , since they so confidently charge the christian church for so many ages , with embracing errors , and nonsense , and contradictions for mysteries of faith , i desire to know ( supposing it possible for the christian church to be so early , so generally and so miserably deceived in a matter of such moment ) by what light they have discovered this great error . have they any new books of scripture to judge by ? truly they had need , for they seem to be very weary of the old ones ; because they find they will not serve their turn . therefore they muster up the old objections against them , and give no answer to them ; they find fault with copies , and say , they are corrupted and falsified to speak the language of the church : they let fall suspicious words , as to the form of baptism , as though it were inserted from the churches practice ; they charge us with following corrupt copies and making false translations without any manner of ground for it . and doth not all this discover no good will to the scriptures , at least , as they are received among us ? and i despair of meeting with better copies , or seeing a more faithfull translation than ours is . so that it is plain , that they have no mind to be tried by the scriptures . for these exceptions are such , as a malefactor would make to a jury , he is afraid to be condemned by . but what then is the peculiar light which these happy men have found in a corner , the want whereof hath made the christian church to fall into such monstrous errors and contradictions ? nothing ( they pretend ) but the mere light of common sense and reason ; which they call after a more refined way of speaking , clear ideas and distinct perceptions of things . but least i should be thought to misrepresent them ; i will produce some of their own expressions . in one place they say , we deny the articles of the new christianity , or the athanasian religion , not because they are mysteries , or because we do not comprehend them ; we deny them , because we do comprehend them ; we have a clear and distinct perception , that they are not mysteries , but contradictions , impossibilities , and pure nonsense . we have our reason in vain , and all science and certainty would be destroy'd ▪ if we could not distinguish between mysteries and contradictions . and soon after , we are not to give the venerable name of mystery to doctrines that are contrary to nature's and reason's light , or which destroy or contradict our natural ideas . these things i have particular reason to take notice of here , because they are published as an answer to the foregoing sermon about the mysteries of the christian faith : and this shews the general grounds they go upon , and therefore more fit to be consider'd here . to which i shall add one passage more , wherein they insinuate , that the doctrine of the trinity hath been supported only by interest and force . their words are ( after they have called the doctrine of the trinity , a monstrous paradox and contradiction ) this is that , say they , which because all other arguments failed them in their disputations with the photinians and arians , they at last effectually proved , by the imperial edicts , by confiscations and banishments , by seizing and burning all books written against it or them , by capital punishments , and when the papacy ( of which this is the chief article ) prevailed , by fire and faggot . this is a new discovery indeed , that the doctrine of the trinity , as it is generally receiv'd in the christian church , is the chief article of popery ; although it were embraced and defended long before popery was known ; and i hope would be so , if there were no such thing as popery left in the world . but if every thing which displeases some men must pass for popery , i am afraid christianity it self will not escape at last : for there are some who are building apace on such foundations as these ; and are endeavouring what they can , to remove out of their way all revealed religion , by the help of those two powerfull machines , viz. priest-craft and mysteries . but because i intend a clear and distinct discourse concerning the doctrine of the trinity , as it hath been generally received among us ; i shall proceed in these four enquiries . ( 1. ) whether it was accounted a monstrous paradox and contradiction , where persons were not sway'd by force and interest ? ( 2. ) whether there be any ground of common reason , on which it can be justly charged with nonsense , impossibilities and contradiction ? ( 3. ) whether their doctrine about the trinity or ours , be more agreeable to the sense of scripture and antiquity ? ( 4. ) whether our doctrine being admitted , it doth overthrow all certainty of reason , and makes way for believing the greatest absurdities under the pretence of being mysteries of faith ? chap. ii. the doctrine of the trinity not received in the christian church by force or interest . as to the first , it will lead me into an enquiry into the sense of the christian church , as to this doctrine , long before popery was hatched , and at a time when the main force of imperial edicts was against christianity it self ; at which time this doctrine was owned by the christian church , but disowned and disputed against by some particular parties and sects . and the question then will be , whether these had engrossed sense , and reason , and knowledge among themselves ; and all the body of the christian church , with their heads and governors , were bereft of common sense , and given up to believe nonsense and contradictions for mysteries of faith. but in order to the clearing this matter , i take it for granted , that sense and reason are no late inventions , only to be found among our vnitarians ; but that all mankind have such a competent share of them , as to be able to judge , what is agreeable to them , and what not , if they apply themselves to it ; that no men have so little sense as to be fond of nonsense , when sense will do them equal service ; that if there be no biass of interest to sway them , men will generally judge according to the evidence of reason ; that if they be very much concerned for a doctrine opposed by others , and against their interest , they are perswaded of the truth of it , by other means than by force and fear ; that it is possible for men of sense and reason to believe a doctrine to be true on the account of divine revelation , although they cannot comprehend the manner of it ; that we have reason to believe those to be men of sense above others , who have shew'd their abilities above them in other matters of knowledge and speculation ; that there can be no reason to suspect the integrity of such men in delivering their own sense , who at the same time might far better secure their interest by renouncing their faith ; lastly , that the more persons are concerned to establish and defend a doctrine which is opposed and contemned , the greater evidence they give , that they are perswaded of the truth of it . these are postulata so agreeable to sense and common reason , that i think if an affront to human nature to go about to prove them . but to shew what use we are to make of them ; we must consider that it cannot be denied , that the doctrine of the trinity did meet with opposition very early in the christian church , especially among the iewish christians ; i mean those who strictly adhered to the law of moses , after the apostles had declared the freedom of christians from the obligation of it . these ( as i shall shew by and by ) soon after the dispersion of the church of ierusalem , gathered into a body by themselves , distinct from that which consisted of iews and gentiles , and was therefore called the catholick christian church . and this separate body , whether called ebionites , nazarens , or mineans , did not only differ from the catholick christian church , as to the necessity of observing the law of moses , but likewise as to the divinity of our saviour , which they denied , although they professed to believe him as the christ or promised messias . theodoret hath with very good judgment placed the heresies of the first ages of the ch●istian church , under two distinct heads , ( which others reckon up confusedly ) and those are such as relate to the humanity of christ , as simon magus , and all the sets of those who are called gnosticks , which are recited in his first book . in his second he begins with those which relate to the divinity of christ ; and these are of two kinds : 1. the iewish christians who denied it . of these , he reckons up the ebionites , cerinthians , the nazarens , and elcesaitae , whom he distinguished from the other ebionites , because of a book of revelation , which one elxai brought among them ; but epiphanius saith , he joyned with the ebionites and nazarens . 2. those of the gentile christians , who were look'd on as broaching a new doctri●e among them : of these he reckons artemon as the first , then theodotus ; whom others make the first publisher of it , as tertullian , and the old writer in eusebius , supposed to be caius , who lived near the time , and of whom a considerable fragment is preserved in eusebius , which gives light to these matters . the next is another theodotus , who framed a new sect of such as set up mel●hisedeck above christ. then follow paulus samosatenus , and sabellius , who made but one person as well as one god , and so overthrew the trinity ; with whom marcellus agreed in substance , and last of all photinus . but theodoret concludes that book with this passage , viz. that all these heresies against our saviour's divinity were then wholly extinct ; so that there were not so much as any small remainders of them . what would he have said , if he had lived in our age , wherein they are not only revived , but are pretended to have been the true doctrine of the apostolical churches ? had all men lost their senses in theodoret's time ? and yet there were as many learned and able men in the christian church then , as ever were in any time . chap. iii. the socinian plea for the antiquity of their doctrine examined . but this is not the age our vnitarians will stand or fall by . they are for going backward ; and they speak with great comfort about the old ebionites and nazarens as entirely theirs ; and that they had considerable men among them , as theodotion and symmachus , two translators of the hebrew bible . and among the gentile christians , they value themselves upon three men , paulus samosatenus , lucianus , the most learned person , they say , of his age , and photinus bishop of sirmium . as to the vnitarians at rome , ( whom they improperly call nazarens ) they pretended that their doctrine was apostolical , and the general doctrine of the church till the times of victor and zepherin . this is the substance of their plea , which must now be examin'd . i begin with those primitive vnitarians , the ebionites , concerning whom , i observe these things : 1. that they were a distinct , separate body of men from the christian church . for all the ancient writers who speak of them , do mention them as hereticks , and wholly divided from it , as appears by irenaeus , tertullian , epiphanius , theodoret , s. augustin , and others . eusebius saith of them , that although the devil could not make them renounce christianity , yet finding their weakness , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , he made them his own . he would never have said this of any whom he look'd on as members of the christian church . but wherein is it that eusebius blames them ? he tells it in the very next words ; that it was for the mean opinion they entertained of christ ; for they look'd on him as a meer man , but very just . and although there were two sorts of them ; some owning the miraculous conception , and others not ; yet saith he , they at last agreed in the same impiety , which was , that they would not own christ to have had any pre-existence before his birth ; nor that he was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , god the word . it 's true , he finds fault with them afterwards for keeping to the law of moses ; but the first impiety he charges them with , is the other . that which i inferr from hence is , that eusebius himself ( to whom they profess to shew greater respect than to most of the ancient writers , for his exactness and diligence in church-history ) doth affirm the doctrine which overthrows the pre-existence and divinity of christ to be an impiety . and therefore when he affirms the first fifteen bishops of the church of ierusalem who were of the circumcision , viz. to the siege of it by hadrian , did hold the genuine doctrine of christ , it must be understood of his pre-existence and divinity ; for the other we see he accounted an impiety . and he tells us the church of ierusalem then consisted of believing iews , and so it had done from the apostles times to that of hadrian 's banishment of the iews . which is a considerable testimony to two purposes : 1. to shew that the primitive church of ierusalem did hold the doctrine of christ's pre-existence and divinity . but say our vnitarians , this doth not follow . for what reason ? when it is plain that eusebius accounted that the only genuine doctrine . no , say they , he meant only the miraculous conception , and that they held that , in opposition to those ebionites who said that he was born as other men are . this is very strange ; when eusebius had distinguished the two sorts of ebionites about this matter , and had blamed both of them , even those that held him born of a virgin , for falling into the same impiety . what can satisfie such men , who are content with such an answer ? but say they , eusebius only spake his own sense . not so neither : for he saith in that place , that he had searched the most ancient records of the church of ierusalem . yes , say they , for the succession of the first bishops ; but as to their doctrine he had it from hegesippus , and he was an ebionite himself . then eusebius must not be the man they take him for . for if hegesippus were himself an ebionite , and told eusebius in his commentaries , that the primitive church of ierusalem consisted of all such , then eusebius must suppose that church guilty of the same impiety with which he charges the ebionites ; and would he then have said , that they had the true knowledge of christ among them ? no , say they , eusebius spake his own opinion , but hegesippus being an ebionite himself , meant otherwise . but eusebius doth not use hegesippus his words , but his own in that place ; and withal , how doth it appear that hegesippus himself was an ebionite ? this , one of their latest writers hath undertaken , but in such a manner , as is not like to convince me . it is thus , hegesippus was himself a iewish christian , and made use of the hebrew gospel , and among the hereticks which crept into the church of jerusalem , he never numbers the ebionites or cerinthians , but only the gnosticks . i will not dispute , whether hegesippus was a jewish christian or not . grant he was so , yet how doth it appear that all the iewish christians were at that time ebionites or cerinthians ? it seems they were neither of them hereticks , although they were opposite to each other ; the one held the world created by inferiour powers , the other , by god himself : the one , we see , made christ a mere man ; but the cerinthians held an illapse of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 upon him , and so made him a kind of a god by his presence , as nestorius did afterwards . but honest hegesippus took neither one nor the other for hereticks , if our vnitarians say true . but yet it doth not appear , that hegesippus was either one or the other . for he speaks of the church of ierusalem , as is plain by eusebius , and the cerinthians and ebionites , were in other parts ; the former in egypt and the lesser or proconsular asia ; and the latter about decapolis and coelesyria , from whence they spread into arabia and armenia , as appears by epiphanius . but origen saith , that all the iewish christians were ebionites . what! no cerinthians among them ? were not those iewish christians ? or were they all turned ebionites then ? no such thing appears by origen's saying . but we are not enquiring now , what they were in his time , but in the church of ierusalem . doth origen say all the iewish christians there were such ? and as to his own time , it is not improbable that those who then made up the separate body of jewish christians were ebionites . but what is this to the first christians of the church of ierusalem ? very much , say they , because the first christians were called nazarens , and the nazarens held the same doctrine with the ebionites . but the title of nazarens did not always signifie the same thing . it was at first used for all christians , as appears by the sect of the nazarens in tertullus his accusation of s. paul ; then it was taken for the christians who stay'd at pella and setled at decapolis and thereabouts , as epiphanius affirms ; for although all the christians withdrew thither before the destruction of ierusalem , as eusebius saith , yet they did not all continue there , but a great number returned to ierusalem , and were there setled under their bishops ; but those who remained about pella kept the name of nazarens , and never were united with the gentile christians , but kept up their old jewish customs , as to their synagogues , even in s. ierom and s. augustine's time . now these nazarens might be all ebionites , and yet those of the church of ierusalem not so at all . 2. the next thing observable from this place of eusebius is , that while the nazarens and ebionites were setled in coelesyria , and the parts thereabouts , there was a regular christian church at ierusalem , under the bishops of the circumcision , to the siege of hadrian . eusebius observes , that before the destruction of ierusalem , all the christians forsook not only ierusalem , but the coasts of iudea . but that they did not all continue there , is most evident from what eusebius here saith of the church and bishops of ierusalem ; between the two sieges of titus vespasian and hadrian , which was in the 18 year of his empire , saith eusebius . who produces another testimony out of iustin martyr , which shews that the christians were returned to ierusalem . for therein he saith , that barchochebas in that war used the christians with very great severity to make them renounce christianity . how could this be , if all the christians were out of his reach , then being setled about pella ? and although eusebius saith , that when the iews were banished their country by hadrian 's edict , that then the church of ierusalem was made up of gentiles ; yet we are not so strictly to understand him , as though the christians who suffer'd under barchochebas , were wholly excluded . orosius saith , that they were permitted by the emperor's edict . it is sufficient for me , if they were connived at , which is very probable , although they did not think fit to have any such publick persons as their bishops to be any other than gentiles . and hegesippus is allow'd after this time , to have been a iewish christian of the church of ierusalem : so that the church there must consist both of iews and gentiles ; but they can never shew that any of the ebionites did admit any gentile christians among them , which shews that they were then distinct bodies . 2. they were not only distinct in communion , but had a different rule of faith. this is a point of great consequence , and ought to be well consider'd . for , since our vnitarians own the ebionites as their predecessors , we ought to have a particular eye to the rule of faith received by them , which must be very different from ours , if they follow the ebionites , as i doubt not to make it appear . they say , the ebionites used only s. matthew 's gospel . but the christian church then , and ever since , have receiv'd the four gospels , as of divine authority . eusebius , one of the most approved authors in antiquity by our vnitarians , reckons up the four evangelists and s. paul 's epistles , as writings universally received by the christian church ; then he mentions some generally rejected as spurious ; and after those which were doubted , among which he mentions the gospel according to the hebrews , which the iewish christians follow'd . now here is an apparent difference put between the gospel according to the hebrews , and s. matthew 's gospel ; as much as between a book receiv'd without controversie , and one that was not . but if the gospel according to the hebrews were then acknowledged to be the true gospel of s. matthew ; it was impossible a man of so much sense as eusebius , should make this difference between them . but it is worth our observing , what our vnitarians say about this matter . and by that we may judge very much of their opinion about the gospels . i shall set down their words , for fear i should be thought to do them wrong . symmachus and the ebionites , say they , as they held our saviour to be the son of ioseph and mary ; so they contended that the first chapter of s. matthew's gospel was added by the greek translators . s. matthew wrote his gospel in hebrew , when it was translated into greek , the translator prefaced it with a genealogy and narration that our saviour was conceived by the holy spirit of god , and was not the son of ioseph , but this genealogy and narration , said symmachus and the ebionites , is not in the hebrew gospel of s. matthew , nay is the mere invention of the translator . as for the other gospels , the ebionites and symmachians did not receive the gospel of s. luke : and for that of s. iohn , they said it was indeed written by cerinthus , to confirm his platonick conceits about the logos or word , which he supposed to be the christ or spirit of god , which rested on and inhabited the person of jesus . let us now but join to this another passage , which is this , those whom we now call socinians , were by the fathers and the first ages of christianity called nazarens ; and afterwards they were called ebionites , mineans , symmachians , &c. if this be true , they must have the same opinions as to the books of the new testament ; and hereby we see what sort of men we have to deal with , who under the pretence of the old ebionites , undermine the authority of the new testament . as to s. matthew's gospel , i see no reason to question its being first written in the language then used among the jews , which was mixt of hebrew , syriack , and chaldee : since this is affirmed , not merely by papias , whose authority never went far ; but by origen , irenaeus , eusebius , s. ierom , and others . but i must distinguish between s. matthew's authentick gospel , which pantaenus saw in the indies , and that which was called the gospel according to the hebrews , and the nazaren gospel . s. ierom in one place seems to insinuate , that s. matthew's gospel was preserved in the library of pamphilus at caesarea , and that the nazarens at berrhaea in syria had given him leave to transcribe it . but if we compare this with other places in him , we shall find , that he question'd whether this were the authentick gospel of s. matthew or not ; he saith , it is so called by many ; but he confesses it was the same which the ebionites and nazarens used . in which were many interpolations , as appears by the collections out of it in s. ierom's works and other ancient writers ; which some learned men have put together . and s. ierom often calls it the gospel according to the hebrews . and so do other ancient writers . from the laying several passages together , erasmus suspects , that s. ierom never saw any other than the common nazaren gospel , and offers a good reason for it , viz. that he never made use of its authority to correct the greek of s. matthew , which he would not have failed to have done in his commentaries ; and he produces the nazaren gospel upon sleight occasions . but how came the preface to be curtail'd in the ebionite gospel ? of which epiphanius gives an account , and shews what was inserted instead of it : no , say the ebionites , the preface was added by the translator into greek . from what evidence ? and to what end ? to prove that christ was born of the holy spirit . this then must be look'd on as a mere forgery ; and those ebionites were in the right , who held him to be the son of ioseph and mary . what do these men mean by such suggestions as these ? are they resolved to set up deism among us , and in order thereto , to undermine the authority of the new testament ? for it is not only s. matthew's gospel , but s. luke's and s. iohn's which they strike at , under the pretence of representing the arguments of these wretched ebionites . if their arguments are mean and trifling and merely precarious , why are they not slighted and answered by such as pretend to be christians ? if they think them good , we see what we have to do with these men ; it is not the doctrine of the trinity , so much as the authority of the gospels , which we are to maintain against them : and not those only , for the ebionites rejected all s. paul 's epistles ; and called him an apostate and a transgressor of the law. what say our vnitarians to this ? why truly , this comes from epiphanius , and because he quotes no author , it seems to be one of his malicious tales . this is a very short way of answering , if it would satisfie any men of sense . but they ought to have remembred that within a few pages , they alledge epiphanius as a very competent witness about the ebionites , because he was born in palestine , and lived very near it . but we do not rely wholly upon epiphanius in this matter . for those whom they allow to be the best witnesses as to the doctrine of the nazarens , say the same thing concerning them . as the most learned origen , as they call him , who lived a long time in syria and palestine it self ; and he affirms , that both sorts of ebionites rejected s. paul 's epistles : and theodoret , who they say , lived in coelesyria , where the nazarens most abound , affirms of them , that they allowed only the gospel according to the hebrews , and called the apostle an apostate : by whom they meant s. paul. and the same is said by s. ierom who conversed among them ; that they look on s. paul as a transgressor of the law , and receive none of his writings . have we not now a very comfortable account of the canon of the new testament from these ancient vnitarians ? and if our modern ones account them their predecessors , we may judge what a mean opinion they must have of the writings of the new testament . for if they had any concernment for them , they would never suffer such scandalous insinuations to pass without a severe censure , and a sufficient answer . but their work seems to be rather to pull down , than to establish the authority of revealed religion ; and we know what sort of men are gratified by it . chap. iv. of the considerable men they pretend to have been of their opinion in the primitive church . i now come to consider the men of sense they pretend to among these ancient vnitarians . the first is theodotion , whom they make to be an vnitarian . but he was , saith eusebius from irenaeus , a iewish proselyte , and so they may very much increase the number of vnitarians , by taking in all the iews as well as proselytes . but must these pass for men of sense too , because they are against the doctrine of the trinity , and much upon the same grounds with our modern vnitarians ? for they cry out of contradictions and impossibilities just as they do ; i. e. with as much confidence and as little reason . symmachus is another of their ancient heroes ; he was , if epiphanius may be believed , first a samaritan , and then a iew , and eusebius saith indeed , that he was an ebionite , and therefore for observing the law of moses . s. augustin saith , that in his time the symmachiani were both for circumcision and baptism . s. ierom observes , that theodotion and symmachus , both ebionites , translated the old testament in what concerned our saviour , like iews , and aquila who was a iew , like a christian ; but in another place he blames all three for the same fault . eusebius goes somewhat farther : for he saith , symmachus wrote against s. matthew 's gospel to establish his own heresie , which shew'd he was a true ebionite . the next they mention as one of their great lights , was paulus samosatenus , bishop and patriarch of antioch . but in another place , they have a spiteful insinuation , that men in such places are the great pensioners of the world ; as though they were sway'd only by interest ; and that it keeps them from embracing of the truth . now paulus samosatenus gave greater occasion for such a suspicion than any of the persons so unworthily reflected upon . for he was a man noted for his affectation of excessive vanity and pomp , and very unjust methods of growing rich . it is well we have eusebius his testimony for this ; for they sleight epiphanius for his malicious tales , and s. ierom for his legends ; but they commend eusebius for his exactness and diligence . and i hope theodoret may escape their censure , who affirms , that paulus samofatenus suited his doctrine to his interest with zenobia who then governed in those parts of syria and phoenicia , who professed her self to be of the iewish perswasion . athanasius saith , she was a iew and a favourer of paulus samosatenus . what his opinions were , our vnitarians do not take the pains to inform us , taking it for granted that he was of their mind . eusebius saith , he had a very mean and low opinion of christ , as having nothing in him above the common nature of mankind . theodoret saith , he fell into the doctrine of artemon to oblige zenobia , and artemon , he saith , held that christ was a mere man born of a virgin , but exceeding the prophets in excellency . where the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are used to express the opinion of artemon , which ought to be taken notice of , because our modern vnitarians say , that those words among the ancient writers were taken in opposition to the miraculous conception of our saviour . but paulus samosatenus was universally disowned by the christian church of that time ; although as long as zenobia held her power , he kept his see ; which was for some time after he was first called in question for his heresie . but at first he made use of many arts and devices to deceive the christian bishops of the best reputation , who assembled at antioch in order to the suppressing this dangerous doctrine , as they all accounted it . for hearing of his opinions about our saviour , they ran together , saith eusebius , as against a wolf which designed to destroy the flock . now from hence it is very reasonable to argue , that the samosatenian doctrine was then look'd on as a very dangerous novelty in the christian church . for , although the ebionites had asserted the same thing , as to the divinity of our saviour , yet they were not look'd on as true members of the christian church ; but as s. ierom saith , while they affected to be both iews and christians , they were neither iews nor christians . artemon whoever he was , was but an obscure person ; and theodotus had learning , they say , but was of no place in the church ; but for such a considerable person as the bishop of antioch to own such a doctrine must unavoidably discover the general sence of the christian church concerning it . paulus samosatenus wanted neither parts , nor interest , nor experience ; and he was supported by a princess of great spirit and courage , enough to have daunted all the bishops , at least in those parts , from appearing against him . but such was the zeal and concernment of the bishops of the christian church in this great affair , that they not only assembled themselves , but they communicated it to dionysius bishop of alexandria , and to another of the same name , bishop of rome , and others ; and desired their advice and concurrence , who did all agree in the condemnation of his doctrine . the former said , he would have gone himself to antioch , but for his extreme old age ; and he died soon after the first council , which met at antioch on this occasion ; but he sent his judgment and reasons thither , which we find in an epistle of his still extant , whereof mention is made in the epistle of the second synod of antioch to dionysius bishop of rome , and maximus bishop of alexandria , and all other bishops , priests and deacons of the catholick church , wherein they give an account of their proceedings against paulus samosatenus , and they say , they had invited the bishops of the remoter parts to come to antioch for the suppression of this damnable doctrine ; and among the rest dionysius of alexandria , and firmilian of cappadocia , as persons of greatest reputation then in the church . firmilian was there at the former synod , ( of whom theodoret saith , that he was famous both for divine and humane learning ) and so were gregorius thaumaturgus and athenodorus bishops of pontus , and helenus bishop of tarsus in cilicia , and nicomas of iconium , and hymenaeus of ierusalem , and theotecnus of caesarea ; who all condemned his doctrine , but they spared his person upon his solemn promises to retract it ; but he persisting in it when they were gone home , and fresh complaints being made of him , firmilian was coming a third time to antioch , but died by the way : but those bishops who wrote the synodical epistle do all affirm , that they were witnesses and many others , when he condemned his doctrine , but was willing to forbear his person upon his promise of amendment , which they found afterwards was merely delusory . dionysius alexandrinus , they say , would not write to him , but sent his mind about him to the church of antioch . which epistle is mention'd by s. ierom , ( as written by him a little before his death ) as well as by eusebius and theodoret ; and i do not see sufficient reason to question the authority of that , which fronto ducaeus published from turrian's copy , although it be denied by h. valesius and others . it 's said , indeed , that he did not write to him , i. e. he did not direct it to him , but he might send it to the council in answer to his letters , which he mentions . how far it differs from his style in other epistles , i will not take upon me to judge ; but the design is very agreeable to an epistle from him on that occasion . it 's true , that it seems to represent the opinion of paulus samosatenus after a different manner from what it is commonly thought to have been . but we are to consider , that ●e made use of all the arts to d●sguise himself that he could ; and when he found the making christ to be a mere man would not be born , he went from the ebionite to the cerinthian hypothesis , viz. that the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 did dwell in him , and that there were two persons in christ , one divine and the other humane ; and two sons , the one by nature the son of god , who had a pre existence , and the other the son of david , who had no subsistence before . this is the opinion which dionysius sets himself against in that epistle ; and which therefore ●ome may imagine was written after nestorius his heresie . but that was no new heresie , as appears by the cerinthians ; and it was that which paulus samosatenus fled to , as more plausible ; which not only appears by this epistle , but by what athanasius and epiphanius have delivered concerning it . athanasius ▪ wrote a book of the incarnation against the followers of paulus samosatenus , who held , as he saith , two persons in christ , viz. one born of the virgin , and a divine person , which descended upon him and dwelt in him . against which opinion he disputes from two places of scripture ; viz. god was manifest in the flesh ; and the word was made flesh : and from the ancient doctrine of the christian church , and the synod of antioch against paulus samosatenus . and in another place he saith , that he held , that the divine word dwelt in christ. and the words of epiphanius are express to the same purpose ; that the logos came and dwelt in the man iesus . and the clergy of constantinople charged nestorius with following the heresie of paulus samosatenus . and photius in his epistles saith , that nestorius tasted too much of the intoxicated cups of paulus samosatenus ; and in the foregoing epistle , he saith , that paulus his followers asserted two hypostases in christ. but some think , that paulus samosatenus did not hold any subsistence of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 before , but that the word was in god before without any subsistence of its own , and that god gave it a distinct subsistence when it inhabited in the person of christ ; and so marius mercator and leontius understand him ; who say that he differ'd from nestorius therein ; who asserted a divine word with its proper subsistence . but according to them paulus by the word unders●ood that divine energy whereby christ acted , and which dwelt in him ; but dionysius saith he made two christs , and two sons of god. but the doctrine of the christian church , he saith was that there was but one christ , and one son , who w●s the eternal word , and was made flesh. and it is observable , that he brings the very same places we do now to prove this doctrine , as in the beginning was the word , &c. and before abraham was i am . it seems that some of the bishops who had been upon the examination of his opinions before the second synod , which deposed him , sent him an account of their faith and required his answer ; wherein they declare the son not to be god , according to god's decree , ( which he did not stick at ) but that he was so really and substantially ; and whosoever denied this , they said , was out of the communion of the church , and all the catholick churches agreed with them in it . and they declare , that they received this doctrine from the scriptures of the old and new testament , and bring the same places we do now , as , thy throne o god was for ever , &c. who is over all , god blessed for ever . all things were made by him , &c. and we do not find that paulus samosatenus , as subtle as he was , ever imagin'd that these places belong'd to any other than christ , or that the making of all things was to be understood of the making of nothing ; but putting it into mens power to make themselves new creatures . these were discoveries only reserved for the men of sense and clear ideas in these brighter ages of the world. but at last , after all the arts and subterfuges which paulus samosatenus used , there was a man of sense , as it happen'd , among the clergy of antioch , called malchion , who was so well acquainted with his sophistry , that he drove him out of all , and laid his sense so open before the second synod , that he was solemnly deposed for denying the divinity of the son of god , and his descent from heaven , as appears by their synodical epistle . it is pity we have it not entire ; but by the fragments of it , which are preserved by some ancient writers , we find that his doctrine of the divinity in him by inhabitation was then condemned , and the substantial union of both natures asserted . i have only one thing more to observe concerning him , which is , that the arian party in their decree at sardica , ( or rather philippopolis ) do confess that paulus samosatenus his doctrine was condemned by the whole christian world. for they say , that which passed in the eastern synod , was signed and approved by all . and alexander bishop of alexandria , in his epistle to alexander of constantinople affirms the same . and now i hope , i may desire our men of sense to reflect upon these matters . here was no fire nor faggot threatned , no imperial edicts to inforce this doctrine , nay the queen of those parts , under whose jurisdiction they lived at that time , openly espoused the cause of paulus samosatenus , so that here could be nothing of interest to sway them to act in opposition to her . and they found his interest so strong , that he retained the possession of his see , till aurelian had conquer'd zenobia , and by his authority he was ejected . this synod which deposed him , did not sit in the time of aurelian , as is commonly thought , but before his time , while zenobia had all the power in her hands in those eastern parts , which she enjoy'd five years ; till she was dispossess'd by aurelian , from whence ant. pagi concludes , that paulus kept his see three years after the sentence against him ; but upon application to aurelian ; he who afterwards began a persecution against all christians , gave this rule , that he with whom the italian bishops , and those of rome communicated , should enjoy the see , upon which paulus was at last turned out . by this we see a concurrence of all the christian bishops of that time against him , that denied the divinity of our saviour ; and this without any force , and against their interest , and with a general consent of the christian world. for there were no mighty awes and draconic sanctions to compell , of which they sometimes speak , as if they were the only powerfull methods to make this doctrine go down . and what greater argument can there be , that it was then the general sense of the christian church ? and it would be very hard to condemn all his opposers for men that wanted sense and reason , because they so unanimously opposed him . not so unanimously neither , say our vnitarians , because lucian , a presbyter of the church of antioch , and a very learned man , joyned with him . it would have been strange indeed , if so great a man as paulus samosatenus , could prevail with none of his own church to joyn with him , especially one that came from the same place of samosata , as lucian did ; and probably was by him brought thither . he hath an extraordinary character given him by eusebius , both for his life and learning ; and so by s. ierom , without the least reflection upon him as to matter of faith. but on the other side , alexander bishop of alexandria in his epistle concerning arius to alexander of constantinople , doth say , that he follow'd paulus samosatenus , and held separate communion for many years , under the three following bishops . he doth not say that he died so , when he suffer'd martyrdom under maximinus at nicomedia ; neither doth he say the contrary . upon which learned men are divided , whether he persisted in that opinion or not . petavius and valesius give him up ; on the other side baronius vindicates him , and saith , the mis-report of him came from his zeal against sabellianism ; and that alexander wrote that of him before his books were throughly examin'd ; that athanasius never joyns him with paulus samosatenus ; that the arians never produced his authority in their debates , as they would have done , since the emperor's mother had built a city in the place where he suffer'd martyrdom . it cannot be doubted that the arian party would have it believed that they came out of lucian's school , as appears by arius his epistle to eusebius of nicomedia ; but on the other side , the great argument to me is , that this very party at the council of antioch , produced a creed , which they said , was there found written with lucian's own hand , which is directly contrary to the samosatenian doctrine . now , either this was true or false : if it were true , then it was false that he was a samosatenian ; if it were false , how came the arian party to give it out for true ? especially those who valued themselves for coming out of his school . they were far enough from being such weak men to produce the authority of lucian at antioch , where he was so much esteemed , for a doctrine utterly inconsistent with that of paulus samosatenus , if it were there known , that he was his disciple , and separated from three bishops on that account . for therein the son is owned to be god of god , begotten of the father before all ages , perfect god of perfect god , &c. suppose they had a mind to subvert the nicene faith by this creed under the name of lucian , ( only because 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was left out ) yet what an improbable way did they take , when they supported the main points by his authority , and that at antioch , where it was greatest ? if philostorgius may be credited , the great men of the arian party had been his scholars , as besides eusebius of nicomedia , maris of chalcedon , theognis of nice , leontius of antioch , and several other leading bishops , and even arius himself pretended to it . which makes me apt to think , that alexander knowing this , and at first not being able so well to judge of lucian's opinion , charged him with following paulus samosatenus , from whence the odium would fall upon his scholars . for his design is to draw the succession down from ebion , and artemon , and paulus samosatenus , and lucian to arius and his associates ; and charges them with holding the same doctrine , wherein he was certainly mistaken ; and so he might be about lucian's separation from the following bishops on that account . the last our vnitarians mention among their great men , is photinus bishop of sirmium . they take it for granted that he was of their opinion . this is certain , that whatever it was , it was generally condemned , as well by the arians as others ; and after several councils called , he was deposed for his heresie . the first time we find him condemned , was by the arian party in a second council at antioch , as appears by the profession of faith drawn up by them , extant in athanasius and socrates . there they anathematize expressly the disciples of marcellus and photinus , for denying the pre-existence and deity of christ. but by christ , they understood , the person born of the virgin , who was the son of god ; but they did not deny the pre-existence of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and never dream'd that any could think that christ was to be called the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , from his office of preaching , as our modern vnitarians assert . but photinus his opinion was , that the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was before all ages , but not christ , or the son of god , which divine word was partly internal , and so it was ever with god , and partly external , when it was communicated to the person of christ , whereby he became the son of god. but the arians there declare their belief , that christ was the living word , and son of god before all worlds , and by whom he made all things . the next time he is said to be condemned , was in that which is called the council at sardica , but was the council of the eastern bishops after their parting from the western . this is mention'd by epiphanius and sulpitius severus , the latter saith he differ'd from sabellius only in the point of vnion , i. e. because sabellius made the persons to be merely denominations which was then called the heresie of the vnionitae ; and therefore photinus must assert an hypostasis to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , or else he did not at all differ from sabellius . and it appears by epiphanius , that photinus did distinguish between christ and the word . in the beginning was the word , said he , but not the son , which title was promised and foretold , but did not belong to christ till he was born of the holy ghost and mary , so he expresses it . herein , saith epiphanius , he follow'd paulus samosatenus , but exceeded him in his inventions . in answer to him , he saith , that s. iohn's words are not , in the beginning was the word , and the word was in god , but the word was with god , and the word was god. little did either side imagine that this was to be understood of the beginning of the gospel , as our modern photinians would make us believe they think ; but photinus himself was a person of too much sagacity to take up with such an absurd and insipid sence . i pass over the fresh condemnations of photinus in the councils at milan and rome , because his opinion is not to be learnt from them ; and come to that at sirmium , where it is more particularly set ●orth , as well as condemned . but here we must distinguish the two councils at sirmium ; in the former , he was condemned , but the people would not part with him ; but in the second , he was not only condemned , but effectually deposed , the emperor constantius a professed arian , forcing him to withdraw : but it was upon his own appeal to the emperor against the judgment of the council , who appointed judges delegates to hear this cause : and basilius ancyranus was the manager of the debate with him , wherein he is said to have been so much too hard for photinus , that the emperor himself order'd his banishment . and i can find nothing of his return ; but our vnitarians have found out ( but they do not tell us where ) that the people recalled him , and so he planted his doctrine among them , that it overspread and was the religion of the illyrican provinces , till the papacy on one hand , and the turk on the other , swallow'd up those provi●ces . this looks too like making history to serve a turn , unless some good proof were brought for it . but instead of photinus his returning , and his doctrine prevailing and continuing there , we find valentinian calling a council in illyricum , and establishing the nicene faith there : and a council at aquileia against the arians , where the bishop of sirmium was present , and declared against arianism , and joyned with s. ambrose , who condemns photinus for making christ the son of david , and not the son of god ▪ paulinus saith in his life , that he went on purpose to sirmium to consecrate an orthodox bishop there ; which he did , notwithstanding the power of iustina the empress , who favoured the arians . s. ierom in his chronicon saith , that photinus died in galatia which was his own country ; so that there is no probability in what they affirm of photinus his settling his doctrine in those parts , till the papacy and the turk swallow'd those provinces ; for any one that looks into the history of those parts may be soon satisfied , that not the pope nor the turk , but the huns under attila , made the horrible devastations not only at sirmium , but in all the considerable places of that country : so that if these mens reason be no better than their history , there is very little cause for any to be fond of their writings . but as though it were not enough to mention such things once ; in their answer to the late archbishop's sermons , they inlarge upon it . for he having justly rebuked them for the novelty of their interpretations , they , to avoid this , boast of the concurrence of the ancient vnitarians , the followers of paulus and photinus , who , they say , abounded every-where , and even possessed some whole provinces . this passage i was not a little surprized at . since theodoret , who , i think , was somewhat more to be credited than sandius , doth so expresly say , that the samosatenians and photinians were extinct in his time , in a place already mentioned . but upon search i could find no other ground for it , but a passage or two in sandius , who is none of the exactest historians . in one place he saith from an obscure polish chronicle ( extant in no other language but of that country ) that the bulgarians when they first received christianity embraced photinianism . and is not this very good authority among us ? from hence he takes it for granted , that they all continued photinians to the time of pope nicolas , who converted them . but all this is grounded on a ridiculous mistake in platina , who in the life of nicolas saith , that the pope confirmed them in the faith , pulso photino ; whereas it should be pulso photio ; for photius at that time was patriarch of constantinople , and as appears by his first epistle , assumed their conversion to himself ; and insisted upon the right of jurisdiction over that country . sandius referrs to blondus ; who saith no such thing , but only that the bulgarians were converted before ; which is true ; and the greek historians , as ioh. curopalates , zonaras , and others , gives a particular account of it ; but not a word of photinianism in it . so that the archbishop had very great reason to charge their interpretation with novelty ; and that not only because the photinians had no such provinces , as they boast of ; but that neither paulus samosatenus , nor photinus , nor any of their followers , that we can find , did ever interpret the beginning of s. john , as they do ; i.e. of the new creation , and not of the old ; and so , as the word had no pre-existence before he was born of the virgin. i do not confine them to the nicenists , as they call them ; but let them produce any one among the samosatenians , or photinians , who so understood s. iohn . and therein sandius was in the right ( which ought to be allow'd him , for he is not often so ) when he saith , that no christian interpreter before socinus ever held such a sense of the word , as he did ; and therefore his followers he saith , ought to be called socinians only , and not ebionites , samosatenians , or photinians . but to return to photinus his opinion . it is observable , what socrates saith , concerning his being deposed at sirmium , viz. that what was done in that matter was universally approved , not only then , but afterwards . so that here we have the general consent of the christian world , in that divided time , against the photinian doctrine . and yet it was not near so unreasonable as our vnitarians ; for photinus asserted the pre-existence of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and its inhabiting in christ from his conception ; wherein he differ'd from paulus samosatenus who asserted it to have been upon the merit of his virtue . in the anathema's of the council of sirmium against photinus , one is against any one that asserts that there is one god , but denies christ to have been the son of god before all worlds , and that the world was made by him in obedience to the will of the father . others , against him that asserts that there was a dilatation of the divine substance to make him the son of god , who was a man born of the virgin mary ; this appears from anath . 6 , 7 , 9. put together . which is best explained by hilary himself in another place , where he mentions this as the photinian doctrine , that god the word did extend himself so far , as to inhabit the person born of the virgin. this he calls a subtle and dangerous doctrine . and therein he saith photinus differ'd from sabellius ; that the latter denied any difference between father and son , but only in names ; but photinus held a real difference , but not before the nativity of christ ; then he said , the divine word inhabiting in christ made him to be the real son of god. the only doubt is , whether photinus held , the word to have had a distinct hypostasis before or not . marius mercator an author of good credit , who lived in s. augustin's time ( and to whom an epistle of his is extant in the new edition of his works ) gives a very particular account of the opinion of photinus with relation to the nestorian controversie , in which he was very well versed . in an epistle written by him on purpose , he shews that nestorius agreed with photinus in asserting , that the word had a pre-existence ; and that the name of son of god did not belong to the word , but to christ after the inhabitation of the word . but he there seems to think , that photinus did not hold the word to have had a real hypostasis before the birth of christ : but when he comes after to compare their opinions more exactly , he then affirms , that photinus and nestorius were agreed , and that he did not deny the word to be con●substantial with god ; but that he was not the son of god till christ was born in whom he dwelt . by which we see how little reason our vnitarians have to boast of photinus as their predecessor . as to the boast of the first unitarians at rome , that theirs was the general doctrine , before the time of victor ; it is so fully confuted by the ancient writer in eusebius , who mentions it , from the scriptures and the first christian writers , named by him , that it doth not deserve to be taken notice of ; especially since he makes it appear , that it was not heard of among them at rome , till it was first broached there by theodotus , as not only he , but tertullian affirms ; as i have already observed . thus i have clearly proved , that the doctrine of the trinity , was so far from being embraced only on the account of force and fear , that i have shewed there was in the first ages of the christian church , a free and general consent in it , even when they were under persecution ; and after the arian controversie broke out , yet those who denied the pre-existence , and co-eternity of the son of god were universally condemned ; even the arian party concurring in the synods mention'd by hilary . but our vnitarians are such great pretenders to reason , that this argument from the authority of the whole christian church , signifies little or nothing to them . therefore they would conclude still that they have the better of us in point of reason , because they tell us , that they have clear and distinct perceptions , that what we call mysteries of faith , are contradictions , impossibilities , and pure nonsense ; and that they do not reject them , because they do not comprehend them , but because they do comprehend them to be so . this is a very bold charge , and not very becoming the modesty and decency of such , who know at the same time that they oppose the religion publickly established , and in such things which we look on as some of the principal articles of the christian faith. chap. v. of their charge of contradiction in the doctrine of the trinity . but i shall not take any advantages from thence , but immediately proceed to the next thing i undertook in this discourse , viz. to consider what grounds they have for such a charge as this , of contradiction and impossibility . in my sermon which gave occasion to these expressions ( as is before intimated ) i had undertaken to prove , that considering the infinite perfections of the divine nature , which are so far above our reach , god may justly oblige us to believe those things concerning himself which we are not able to comprehend ; and i instanced in some essential attributes of god , as his eternity , omniscience , spirituality , &c. and therefore , if there be such divine perfections , which we have all the reason to believe , but no faculties sufficient to comprehend , there can be no ground from reason to reject such a doctrine which god hath revealed , because the manner of it may be incomprehensible by us . and what answer do they give to this ? they do not deny it in general , that god may oblige us to believe things above our comprehension ; but he never obliges us to believe contradictions , and that they charge the doctrine of the trinity with ; and for this they only referr me to their books , where they say it is made out . but i must say , that i have read and consider'd those tracts , and am very far from being convinced that there is any such contradiction in this doctrine , as it is generally received in the christian church ; or as it is explained in the athanasian creed . and , i shall shew the unreasonableness of this charge from these things . 1. that there is a difference between a contradiction in numbers , and in the nature of things . 2. that it is no contradiction to assert three persons in one common nature . 3. that it is no contradiction to say that there are three distinct persons in the trinity and not three gods. if i can make out these things , i hope i may abate something of that strange and unreasonable confidence , wherewith these men charge the doctrine of the trinity with contradictions . 1. i begin with the first of them . and i shall draw up the charge in their own words . in one of their late books they have these words . theirs , they say , is an accountable and reasonable faith , but that of the trinitarians is absurd and contrary both to reason and to it self ; and therefore not only false but impossible . but wherein lies this impossibility ? that they soon tell us . because we affirm that there are three persons , who are severally and each of them true god , and yet there is but one true god. now , say they , this is an error in counting or numbring , which when stood in is of all others the most brutal and inexcusable ; and not to discern it is not to be a man. what must these men think the christian church hath been made up of all this while ? what ? were there no men among them but the vnitarians ? none that had common sense , and could tell the difference between one and three ? but this is too choice a notion to be deliver'd but once ; we have it over and over from them . in another place , they say , we cannot be mistaken in the notion of one and three ; we are most certain that one is not three , and three are not one. this it is to be men ! but the whole christian world besides are in brutal and inexcusable errors about one and three . this is not enough , for they love to charge home ; for one of their terrible objections against the athanasian creed is , that here is an arithmetical , as well as grammatical contradiction . for , in saying god the father , god the son , and god the holy ghost , yet not three gods but one god , a man first distinctly numbers three gods , and then in summing them up brutishly says , not three gods but one god. brutishly still ! have the brutes and trinitarians learnt arithmetick together ? methinks such expressions do not become such whom the christian church hath so long since condemned for heresies . but it may be with the same civility they will say , it was brutishly done of them . but can these men of sense and reason think , that the point in controversie ever was , whether in numbers , one could be three , or three one ? if they think so , i wonder they do not think of another thing ; which is the begging all trinitarians for fools ; because they cannot count one , two and three ; and an vnitarian jury would certainly cast them . one would think such writers had never gone beyond shop-books ; for they take it for granted , that all depends upon counting . but these terrible charges were some of the most common and trite objections of infidels . st. augustin mentions it as such , when he saith , the infidels sometimes ask us , what do you call the father ? we answer , god. what the son ? we answer , god. what the holy ghost ? we answer , god. so that here the infidels make the same objection , and draw the very same inference . then , say they , the father , son and h. ghost are three gods. but what saith s. augustin to this ? had he no more skill in arithmetick than to say there are three and yet but one ? he saith plainly that there are not three gods. the infidels are troubled , because they are not inlightend ; their heart is shut up , because they are without faith. by which it is plain , he look'd on these as the proper objections of infidels and not of christians . but may not christians have such doubts in their minds ? he doth not deny it ; but then he saith , where the true foundation of faith is laid in the heart , which helps the vnderstanding ; we are to embrace with it , all that it can reach to ; and where we can go no farther , we must believe without doubting : which is a wise resolution of this matter . for there are some things revealed , which we can entertain the notion of in our minds , as we do of any other matters , and yet there may be some things belonging to them which we cannot distinctly conceive . we believe god to have been from all eternity ; and that because god hath revealed it ; but here is something we can conceive , viz. that he was so ; and here is something we cannot conceive , viz. how he was so . this instance i had produced in my sermon , to shew that we might be obliged to believe such things concerning god , of which we cannot have a clear and distinct notion ; as that god was from all eternity , although we cannot conceive in our minds , how he could be from himself . now , what saith the vnitarian to this , who pretended to answer me ? he saith , if god must be from himself , then an eternal god is a contradiction ; for that implies , that he was before he was ; and so charges me with espousing the cause of atheists . i wish our vnitarians were as free from this charge as i am . but this is malicious cavilling . for my design was only to shew , that we could have no distinct conception of something which we are bound to believe . for upon all accounts we are bound to believe an eternal god , and yet we cannot form a distinct and clear idea of the manner of it . whether being from himself be taken positively , or negatively , the matter is not cleared ; the one is absurd , and the other unconceivable by us . but still i say , it is a thing that we are bound to believe stedfastly , although it is above our comprehension . but instead of answering to this , he runs out into an examination of one notion of eternity : and as he thinks , shews some absurdities in that , which are already answer'd . but that was not my meaning , but to shew that we could have no clear and distinct notion of eternity ; and if his arguments were good they prove what i aimed at , at least as to that part ; and himself produces my own words to shew , that there were such difficulties every way , which we could not master ; and yet are bound to believe , that necessary existence is an inseparable attribute of god. so that here we have a clear instance of what s. augustin saith , that we may believe something upon full conviction , as that god is eternal ; and yet there may remain something which we cannot reach to by our understanding , viz. the manner how eternity is to be conceived by us : which goes a great way towards clearing the point of the trinity , notwithstanding the difficulty in our conceiving the manner how three should be one , and one three . but s. augustin doth not give it over so ; let us keep stedfast , saith he , to the foundation of our faith , that we may arrive to the top of perfection ; the father is god , the son is god , the holy ghost is god ; the father is not the son , nor the son the father , nor the holy ghost either father or son. and he goes on . the trinity is one god , one eternity , one power , one majesty , three persons one god. so it is in erasmus his edition ; but the late editors say , that the word personae was not in their manuscript . and it is not material in this place , since elsewhere he approves the use of the word persons , as the fittest to express our meaning in this case . for since some word must be agreed upon , to declare our sense by , he saith , those who understood the propriety of the latin tongue , could not pitch upon any more proper than that , to signifie that they did not mean three distinct essences , but the same essence with a different hypostasis , founded in the relation of one to the other ; as father and son have the same divine essence , but the relations being so different that one cannot be confounded with the other , that which results from the relation being joyned with the essence , was it which was called a person . but saith s. augustin , the caviller will ask , if there be three , what three are they ? he answers , father , son and holy ghost . but then he distinguishes between what they are in themselves , and what they are to each other . the father as to himself is god , but as to the son he is father : the son as to himself is god , but as to the father he is the son. but how is it possible to understand this ? why , saith he , take two men , father and son ; the one as to himself is a man , but as to the son a father ; the son , as to himself is a man , but as to the father , he is a son : but these two have the same common nature . but saith he , will it not hence follow , that as these are two men , so the father and son in the divine essence must be two gods ? no , there lies the difference between the humane and divine nature . that one cannot be multiplied and divided as the other is . and therein lies the true solution of the difficulty , as will appear afterwards . when you begin to count , saith he , you go on , one , two and three . but when you have reckon'd them what is it you have been counting ? the father is the father , the son the son , and the holy ghost , the holy ghost . what are these three ? are they not three gods ? no , are they not three almighties ? no , they are capable of number as to their relation to each other ; but not as to their essence which is but one. the substance of the answer lies here , the divine essence is that alone which makes god , that can be but one , and therefore there can be no more gods than one . but because the same scripture , which assures us of the unity of the divine essence , doth likewise joyn the son and holy ghost in the same attributes , operations and worship , therefore as to the mutual relations , we may reckon three , but as to the divine essence , that can be no more than one. boëthius was a great man in all respects , for his quality , as well as for his skill in philosophy and christianity ; and he wrote a short but learned discourse to clear this matter . the catholick doctrine of the trinity , saith he , is this ; the father is god , the son god and the holy ghost ; but they are not three gods but one god. and yet ( which our vnitarians may wonder at ) this very man hath written a learned book of arithmetick . but how doth he make this out ? how is it possible for three to be but one ? first he shews , that there can be but one divine essence ; for to make more than one must suppose a diversity . principium enim pluralitatis alteritas est . if you make a real difference in nature as the arians did , then there must be as many gods , as there are different natures . among men , there are different individuals of the same kind ; but , saith he , it is the diversity of accidents which makes it ; and if you can abstract from all other accidents , yet they must have a different place , for two bodies cannot be in the same place . the divine essence is simple and immaterial , and is what it is of it self ; but other things are what they are made , and consist of parts , and therefore may be divided . now that which is of it self can be but one ; and therefore cannot be numbred . and one god cannot differ from another , either by accidents or substantial differences . but saith he , there is a twofold number ; one by which we reckon ; and another in the things reckoned . and the repeating of units in the former makes a plurality , but not in the latter . it may be said , that this holds where there are only different names for the same thing ; but here is a real distinction of father , son and holy ghost . but then he shews , " that the difference of relation , can make no alteration in the essence ; and where there is no diversity , there can be but one essence , although the different relation may make three persons . this is the substance of what he saith concerning this difficulty , which , as he suggests , arises from our imaginations , which are so filled with the division and multiplicity of compound and material things , that it is a hard matter for them so to recollect themselves as to consider the first principles and grounds of vnity and diversity . but if our vnitarians have not throughly consider'd those foundations , they must , as they say to one of their adversaries , argue like novices in these questions . for these are some of the most necessary speculations for understanding these matters ; as what that vnity is which belongs to a perfect being ; what diversity is required to multiply an infinite essence , which hath vnity in its own nature : whether it be therefore possible , that there should be more divine essences than one , since the same essential attributes must be , where ever there is the divine essence ? whether there can be more individuals , where there is no dissimilitude , and can be no division or separation ? whether a specifick divine nature be not inconsistent with the absolute perfection , and necessary existence which belongs to it ? whether the divine nature can be individually the same , and yet there be several individual essences : these and a great many other questions it will be necessary for them to resolve , before they can so peremptorily pronounce , that the doctrine of the trinity doth imply a contradiction on the account of the numbers of three and one. and so i come to the second particular . chap. vi. no contradiction for three persons to be in one common nature . ii. that it is no contradiction to assert three persons in one common nature . i shall endeavour to make these matters as clear as i can ; for the greatest difficulties in most mens minds have risen from the want of clear and distinct apprehensi●ns of those fundamental notions , which are necessary in order to the right understanding of them . 1. we are to distinguish between the being of a thing , and a thing in being ; or between essence and existence . 2. between the vnity of nature or essence , and of existence or individuals of the same nature . 3. between the notion of persons in a finite and limited nature , and in a being uncapable of division and separation . 1. between the being of a thing , and a thing in being . by the former we mean the nature and essential properties of a thing ; whereby it is distinguished from all other kinds of beings . so god and his creatures are essentially distinguished from each other by such attributes which are incommunicable ; and the creatures of several kinds are distinguished by their natures or essences ; for the essence of a man and of a brute are not barely distinguished by individuals , but by their kinds . and that which doth constitute a distinct kind is one and indivisible in it self : for the essence of man is but one and can be no more ; for if there were more , the kind would be alter'd ; so that there can be but one common nature or essence to all the individuals of that kind . but because these individuals may be or may not be , therefore we must distinguish them as they are in actual being , from what they are in their common nature ; for that continues the same , under all the variety and succession of individuals . 2. we must now distinguish the vnity which belongs to the common nature , from that which belongs to the individuals in actual being . and the vnity of essence is twofold : 1. where the essence and existence are the same , i. e. where necessary existence doth belong to the essence , as it is in god , and in him alone ; it being an essential and incommunicable perfection . 2. where the existence is contingent , and belongs to the will of another ; and so it is in all creatures , intellectual and material , whose actual being is dependent on the will of god. the vnity of existence may be consider'd two ways . 1. as to it self , and so it is called identity ; or a thing continuing the same with it self : the foundation whereof in man is that vital principle which results from the union of soul and body . for as long as that continues , notwithstanding the great variety of changes in the material parts , the man continues entirely the same . 2. the vnity of existence as to individuals may be consider'd as to others , i. e. as every one stands divided from every other individual of the same kind ; although they do all partake of the same common essence . and the clearing of this , is the main point , on which the right notion of these matters depends . in order to that , we must consider two things . 1. what that is , whereby we perceive the difference of individuals ? 2. what that is , which really makes two beings of the same kind to be different from each other ? 1. as to the reason of our perception of the difference between individuals of the same kind , it depends on these things . 1. difference of outward accidents , as features , age , bulk , meen , speech , habit and place . 2. difference of inward qualities and dispositions ; which we perceive by observation , and arise either from constitution , or education , or company , or acquired habits . 2. as to the true ground of the real difference between the existence of one individual from the rest , it depends upon the separate existence which it hath from all others . for that which gives it a being distinct from all others and divided by individual properties , is the true ground of the difference between them , and that can be no other but the will of god. and no consequent faculties or acts of the mind by self-reflection , &c. can be the reason of this difference ; because the difference must be supposed antecedent to them . and nothing can be said to make that , which must be supposed to be before it self ; for there must be a distinct mind in being from all other minds , before it can reflect upon it self . but we are not yet come to the bottom of this matter . for as to individual persons , there are these things still to be consider'd . 1. actual existence in it self , which hath a mode belonging to it , or else the humane nature of christ could not have been united with the divine , but it must have had the personal subsistence , and consequently there must have been two persons in christ. 2. a separate and divided existence from all others , which arises from the actual existence , but may be distinguished from it ; and so the humane nature of christ , although it had the subsistence proper to being , yet had not a separate existence , after the hypostatical vnion . 3. the peculiar manner of subsistence , which lies in such properties as are incommunicable to any other ; and herein lies the proper reason of personality . which doth not consist in a meer intelligent being , but in that peculiar manner of subsistence in that being which can be in no other . for when the common nature doth subsist in individuals , there is not only a separate existence , but something so peculiar to it self , that it can be communicated to no other . and this is that which makes the distinction of persons . 4. there is a common nature which must be joyned with this manner of subsistence to make a person ; otherwise it would be a meer mode ; but we never conceive a person without the essence in conjunction with it . but here appears no manner of contradiction in asserting several persons in one and the same common nature . 5. the individuals of the same kind are said to differ in number from each other , because of their different accidents and separate existence . for so they are capable of being numbred . whatever is compounded is capable of number as to its parts , and may be said to be one by the union of them ; whatever is separated from another is capable of number by distinction . but where there can be no accidents nor division , there must be perfect unity . 6. there must be a separation in nature , where-ever there is a difference of individuals under the same kind . i do not say there must be an actual separation and division as to place , but that there is and must be so in nature , where one common nature subsists in several individuals . for all individuals must divide the species , and the common nature u●ites them . and this philoponus understood very well , and therefore he never denied such a division and separation in the divine persons , as is implied in distinct individuals : which is the last thing to be consider'd here . 3. we are now to enquire how far these things will hold as to the persons in the trinity , and whether it be a contradiction to assert three persons in the godhead and but one god. we are very far from disputing the vnity of the divine essence , which we assert to be so perfect and indivisible , as not to be capable of such a difference of persons as is among men. because there can be no difference of accidents , or place , or qualities in the divine nature ; and there can be no separate existence , because the essence and existence are the same in god ; and if necessary existence be an inseparable attribute of the divine essence , it is impossible there should be any separate existence ; for what always was and must be , can have no other existence than what is implied in the very essence . but will not this overthrow the distinction of persons and run us into sabellianism ? by no means . for our vnitarians grant , that the noetians and sabellians held , that there is but one divine substance , essence or nature , and but one person . and how can those who hold three persons be sabellians ? yes , say they , the sabellians held three relative persons . but did they mean three distinct subsistences , or only one subsistence sustaining the names , or appearances , or manifestations of three persons ? the latter they cannot deny to have been the true sense of the sabellians . but say they , these are three persons in a classical critical sense . we meddle not at present with the dispute which valla hath against boethius about the proper latin sense of a person ( and petavius saith valla's objections are mere iests and trifles ) but our sense of a person is plain , that it signifies the essence with a particular manner of subsistence , which the greek fathers called an hypostasis , taking it for that incommunicable property which makes a person . but say our vnitarians , a person is an intelligent being , and therefore three persons must be three intelligent beings . i answer , that this may be taken two ways . 1. that there is no person where there is no intelligent nature to make it a person , and so we grant it . 2. that a person implies an intelligent being , separate and divided from other individuals of the same kind , as it is among men : and so we deny it as to the persons of the trinity , because the divine essence is not capable of such division and separation as the humane nature is . but say they again , the fathers did hold a specifical divine nature , and the persons to be as so many individuals . this they repeat very often in their late books ; and after all , refer us to curcellaeus for undeniable proofs of it . let us for the present suppose it , then i hope the fathers are freed from holding contradictions in the doctrine of the trinity ; for what contradiction can it be , to hold three individual persons in the godhead , and one common nature , more than it is to hold that there are three humane persons in one and the same common nature of man ? will they make this a contradiction too ? but some have so used themselves to the language of iargon , nonsense , contradiction , impossibility , that it comes from them , as some men swear , when they do not know it . but i am not willing to go off with this answer ; for i do take the fathers to have been men of too great sense and capacity to have maintained such an absurd opinion , as that of a specifick nature in god. for either it is a mere logical notion , and act of the mind without any real existence belonging to it as such , which is contrary to the very notion of god , which implies a necessary existence ; or it must imply a divine nature , which is neither father , son , nor holy ghost . which is so repugnant to the doctrine of the fathers , that no one that is any ways conversant in their writings on this argument , can imagine they should hold such an opinion . and i am so far from being convinced by curcellaeus his undeniable proofs , that i think it no hard matter to bring undeniable proofs that he hath mistaken their meaning . of which i shall give an account in this place , because i fear his authority hath had too much sway with some , as to this matter . i shall not insist upon his gross mistake in the very entrance of that discourse , where he saith , that the bishops of gaul and germany disliked the homoousion , and gave three reasons against it ; whereas hilary speaks of the eastern bishops whom he goes about to vindicate to the western bishops , who were offended with them for that reason ; as any one that reads hilary de synodis may see . but i come to the main point . his great argument is from the use of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which may extend to individuals of the same kind . who denies it ? but the question is whether the fathers used it in that sense , so as to imply a difference of individuals in the same common essence ? there were two things aimed at by them in their dispute with the arians . ( 1. ) to shew , that the son was of the same substance with the father , which they denied , and made him of an inferior created substance , of another kind . now the fathers thought this term very proper to express their sense against them . but then this word being capable of a larger sense than they intended , they took care , ( 2. ) to assert a perfect unity and indivisibility of the divine essence . for the arians were very ready to charge them with one of these two things . ( 1. ) that they must fall into sabellianism , if they held a perfect unity of essence : or ( 2. ) when they clear'd themselves of this , that they must hold three gods ; and both these they constantly denied . to make this clear , i shall produce the testimonies of some of the chief both of the greek and latin fathers , and answer curcellaeus his objections . athanasius takes notice of both these charges upon their doctrine of the trinity : as to sabellianism he declared , that he abhorred it equally with arianism ; and he saith , it lay in making father and son to be only different names of the same person ; and so they asserted but one person in the godhead . as to the other charge of polytheism , he observes , that in the scripture language , all mankind was reckon'd as one , because they have the same essence ; and if it be so , as to men , who have such a difference of features , of strength , of vnderstanding , of language , how much more may god be said to be one , in whom is an undivided dignity , power , counsel and operation . doth this prove such a difference , as is among individuals of the same kind among men ? no man doth more frequently assert the indivisible vnity of the divine nature than he . he expresly denies such divided hypostases , as are among men ; and saith , that in the trinity there is a conjunction without confusion , and a distinction without division ; that in the trinity there is so perfect an vnion , and that it is so undivided and united in it self ; that where-ever the father is , there is the son and the holy ghost , and so the rest , because there is but one godhead , and one god who is over all , and through all , and in all . but saith curcellaeus , the contrary rather follows from this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or mutual inexistence , for that could not be without distinct substance , as in water and wine . but this is a very gross mistake of the fathers notion , who did not understand by it a local in-existence as of bodies , but such an indivisible vnity that one cannot be without the other , as even petavius hath made it appear from athanasius and others . athanasius upon all occasions asserts the unity of the divine nature to be perfect and indivisible . god , saith he , is the father of his son 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , without any division of the substance . and in other places , that the substance of the father and son admit of no division , and he affirms this to have been the sense of the council of nice ; so that the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 must be understood of the same indivisible substance . curcellaeus answers , that athanasius by this indivisible vnity meant only a close and indissoluble vnion . but he excluded any kind of division , and that of a specifick nature into several individuals as a real division in nature ; for no man whoever treated of those matters denied , that a specifick nature was divided , when there were several individuals under it . but what is it which makes the vnion indissoluble ? is it the vnity of the essence or not ? if it be , is it the same individual essence , or not ? if the same individual essence makes the inseparable union , what is it , which makes the difference of individuals ? if it be said , the incommunicable properties of the persons ; i must still ask how such properties in the same individual essence , can make different individuals ? if it be said to be the same specifick nature ; then how comes that which is in it self capable of division to make an indissoluble vnion ? but saith curcellaeus , athanasius makes christ to be of the same substance as adam , and seth , and abraham , and isaac are said to be con-substantial with each other . and what follows ? that the father and son are divided from each other , as they were ? this is not possible to be his sense ; considering what he saith of the indivisibility of the divine nature . and athanasius himself hath given sufficient warning against such a mis-construction of his words ; and still urges that our conceptions ought to be suitable to the divine nature , not taken from what we see among men . and it is observable , that when paulus samosatenus had urged this as the best argument against the term 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , that it made such a difference of substances as is among men ; for that reason saith athanasius , his iudges were content to let it alone , for the son of god is not in such a sense con-substantial ; but afterwards , the nicene fathers finding out the art of paulus , and the significancy of the word to discriminate the arians , made use of it , and only thought it necessary to declare , that when it is applied to god , it is not to be understood , as among individual men. as to the dialogues under athanasius his name , on which curcellaeus insists so much ; it is now very well known that they belong not to him , but to maximus ; and by comparing them with other places in him , it may appear , that he intended no specifick nature in god. but saith curcellaeus , if the fathers intended any more than a specifick nature , why did they not use words which would express it more fully , as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ? for that very reason , which he mentions from epiphanius , because they would seem to approach too near to sabellianism . s. basil was a great man , ( notwithstanding the flout of our vnitarians , ) and apply'd his thoughts to this matter , to clear the doctrine of the church from the charge of sabellianism and tritheism . as to the former , he saith , in many places , that the heresie lay in making but one person as well as one god , or one substance with three several names . as to the latter , no man asserts the individual unity of the divine essence in more significant words than he doth . for he uses the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , . as s. cyril of alexandria doth likewise , and yet both these are produced by curcellaeus for a specifick nature . but saith curcellaeus , s. basil in his epistle to gregory nyssen doth assert the difrence between substance and hypostasis to consist in this , that the one is taken for common nature , and the other for individual , and so making three hypostases , he must make three individuals , and one common or specifick nature . i answer , that it is plain by the design of that epistle , that by three hypostases he could not mean three individual essences . for he saith , the design of his writing it , was to clear the difference between substance and hypostasis . for saith he , from the want of this , some assert but one hypostasis , as well as one essence ; and others , because there are three hypostases , suppose there are three distinct essences . for both went upon the same ground , that hypostasis and essence were the same . therefore saith he , those who held three hypostases , did make 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a division of substances . from whence it follows , that s. basil did look upon the notion of three distinct substances as a mistake : i say distinct substances , as individuals are distinct ; for so the first principles of philosophy do own that individuals make a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , or division of the species into several and distinct individuals . but doth not s. basil go about to explain his notion by the common nature of man , and the several individuals under it ; and what can this signifie to his purpose , unless he allows the same in the godhead ? i grant he doth so , but he saith the substance , is that which is common to the whole kind ; the hypostasis is that which properly distinguisheth one individual from another ; which he calls the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the peculiar incommunicable property . which he describes by a concourse of distinguishing characters in every individual . but how doth he apply these things to the divine nature ? for therein lies the whole difficulty . doth he own such a community of nature , and distinction of individuals there ? he first confesses the divine nature to be incomprehensible by us ; but yet we may have some distinct notions about these things . as for instance , in the father we conceive something common to him and to the son ; and that is the divine essence : and the same as to the holy ghost . but there must be some proper characters to distinguish these , one from another ; or else there will be nothing but confusion : which is sabellianism . now the essential attributes and divine operations are common to them ; and therefore these cannot distinguish them from each other . and those are the peculiar properties of each person , as he shews at large . but may not each person have a distinct essence belonging to him , as we see it is among men ? for this s. basil answers : ( 1. ) he utterly denies any possible division in the divine nature . and he never question'd , but the distinction of individuals under the same species was a sort of division , although there were no separation . and the followers of ioh. philoponus did hold an indissoluble vnion between the three individual essences in the divine nature ; but they held a distinction of peculiar essences , besides the common nature , which they called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; as appears by photius , who was very able to judge . and it appears by one of themselves in photius , that the controversie was , whether an hyposiasis could be without an individual essence belonging to it self ; or whether the peculiar properties and characters did make the hypostasis . but as to s. basil's notion , we are to observe ; ( 2. ) that he makes the divine essence to be uncapable of number , by reason of its perfect unity . here our vnitarians tell us , that when s. basil saith , that god is not one in number , but in nature , he means : as the nature of man is one , but there are many particular men , as peter , james and john , &c. so the nature of god , or the common divinity is one , but there are as truely more gods in number , or more particular gods , as there are more particular men. but that this is a gross mistake or abuse of s. basil's meaning , i shall make it plain from h●mself . for , they say , that he held , that as to this question , how many gods ? it must be answered , three gods in number , or three personal gods , and one in nature , or divine properties ; whereas he is so far from giving such an answer , that he absolutely denies that there can be more gods than one in that very place . he mentions it as an objection , that since he said , that the father is god , the son god , the holy ghost god ; he must hold three gods ; to which he answers , we own but one god , not in number , but in nature : then say they , he held but one god in nature and more in number . that is so far from his meaning , that i hardly think any that read the passage in s. basil , could so wilfully pervert his meaning . for his intention was so far from asserting more gods in number , that it was to prove so perfect a unity in god , that he was not capable of number , or of being more than one . for , saith he , that which is said to be one in number , is not really and simply one , but is made up of many , which by composition become one ; as we say , the world is one , which is made up of many things . but god is a simple uncompounded being ; and therefore cannot be said to be one in number . but the world is not one by nature , because it is made up of so many things , but it is one by number , as those several parts make but one world. is not this fair dealing with such a man as s. basil , to represent his sense quite otherwise than it is ? as though he allow'd more gods than one in number ? number , saith he again , belongs to quantity , and quantity to bodies , but what relation have these to god , but as he is the maker of them ? number belongs to material and circumscribed beings ; but , saith he , the most perfect vnity is to be conceived in the most simple and incomprehensible essence . where it is observable , that he uses those words which are allow'd to express the most perfect and singular unity . which petavius himself confesseth , that they can never be understood of a specifick nature : and curcellaeus cannot deny , that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being added to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , doth restrain the sense more to a numerical vnity , as he calls it . how then is it possible to understand s. basil of more gods than one in number ? and in the very same page he mentions the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the sameness of the divine nature , by which the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is better understood . but curcellaeus will have no more than a specifick vnity understood . before he said , that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 would have signified more , but now he finds it used , the case is alter'd : so that the fathers could not mean any other than a specifick vnity , let them use what expressions they pleas'd . but these , i think are plain enough to any one that will not shut his eyes . in an other place , s. basil makes the same objection and gives the same answer . one god the father , and one god the son ; how can this be , and yet not two gods ? because , saith he , the son hath the very same essence with the father . not two essences divided out of one , as two brothers ; but as father and son , the son subsisting as from the father , but in the same individual essence : 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . but curcellaeus hath one fetch yet , viz. that s. basil denied god to be one in number , and made him to be one in nature , because he look'd on a specifick vnity or vnity of nature as more exact than numerical . s. basil look'd on the divine nature as such to have the most perfect vnity , because of its simplicity , and not in the least speaking of it as a specifick vnity ; but curcellaeus himself calls this , an vnity by a mere fiction of the mind ; and can he imagine this to have been more accurate than a real unity ? these are hard shifts in a desperate cause . after all , our vnitarians tell us , that s. basil doth against eunomius allow a distinction in number with respect to the deity . but how ? as to the essence ? by no means . for he asserts the perfect vnity thereof in the same place , even the vnity of the substance . but as to the characteristical properties of the persons , he allows of number , and no farther . but say they , this is to make one god as to essential properties , and three as to personal . how can that be ? when he saith , so often there can be but one god , because there can be but one divine essence ; and therefore those properties can only make distinct hypostases , but not distinct essences . and is this indeed the great secret which this bold man , as they call him , hath discover'd ? i think those are much more bold , ( i will not say impudent ) who upon such slight grounds , charge him with asserting more gods than one in number . but gregory nyssen , saith curcellaeus ▪ speaks more plainly in his epistle to ablabius ; for saith he , to avoid the difficulty of making three gods , as three individuals among men are three men ; he answers , that truly they are not three men , because they have but one common essence , which is exactly one , and indivisible in it self , however it be dispersed in individuals ▪ the same , he saith , is to be understood of god. and this petavius had charged him with before , as appears by curcellaeus his appendix . this seems the hardest passage in antiquity for this purpose , to which i hope to give a satisfactory answer from gregory nyssen himself . 1. it cannot be denied , that he asserts the vnity of essence to be indivisible in it self , and to be the true ground of the denomination of individuals ; as peter hath the name of a man , not from his individual properties , whereby he is distinguished from iames and iohn ; but from that one indivisible essence , which is common to them all , but yet receives no addition or diminution in any of them . 2. he grants a division of hypostases among men , notwithstanding this indivisibility of one common essence : for saith he ; among men , although the essence remain one and the same in all , without any division ; yet the several hypostases are divided from each other , according to the individual properties belonging to them . so that here is a double consideration of the essence : as in it self , so it is one and indivisible ; as it subsists in individuals , and so it is actually divided according to the subjects . for although the essence of a man be the same in it self , in peter , iames and iohn ; yet taking it as in the individuals , so the particular essence in each of them is divided from the rest . and so philoponus took hypostasis for an essence individuated by peculiar properties ; and therefore asserted , that where-ever there was an hypostasis , there must be a distinct essence ; and from hence he held the three persons to have three distinct essences . 3. we are now to consider , how far gregory nyssen carried this , whether he thought it held equally as to the divine hypostasis ; and that he did not , appears to me from these arguments : 1. he utterly denies any kind of division in the divine nature ; for in the conclusion of that discourse , he saith , it is not only 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ( a word often used by the greek fathers on this occasion , from whence athanasius against macedonius inferr'd an identity , and caesarius joyns 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; and so s. basil uses it ) but he adds another word , which is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , indivisible . yes , as all essences are indivisible in themselves ; but they may be divided in their subjects , as gregory nyssen allows it to be in men. i grant it , but then he owns a division of some kind , which he here absolutely denies as to the divine nature ; for his words are , that it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in any consideration whatsoever . then he must destroy the hypostases . not so neither , for he allows that there is a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as to the hypostases however . for he proposes the objection himself , that by allowing no difference in the divine nature , the hypostases would be confounded . to which he answers , that he did not deny their difference , which was founded in the relation they had to one another ; which he there explains ; and that therein only consists the difference of the persons . which is a very considerable testimony , to shew that both petavius and curcellaeus mistook gregory nyssen's meaning . but there are other arguments to prove it . 2. he asserts such a difference between the divine and human persons , as is unanswerable , viz. the vnity of operation . for , saith he , among men , if several go about the same work , yet every particular person works by himself , and therefore they may well be called many ; because every one is circumscribed : but in the divine persons he proves that it is quite otherwise , for they all concurr in the action towards us ; as he there shews at large . petavius was aware of this , and therefore he saith , he quitted it and returned to the other ; whereas he only saith , if his adversaries be displeased with it , he thinks the other sufficient . which in short is , that essence in it self is one and indivisible ; but among men it is divided according to the subjects ; that the divine nature is capable of no division at all , and therefore the difference of hypostases must be from the different relations and manner of subsistence . 3. he expresses his meaning fully in another place . for in his catechetical oration , he saith , he looks on the doctrine of the trinity as a profound mystery ( which three individual persons in one specifick nature is far from . ) but wherein lies it ? chiefly in this , that there should be number and no number ; different view and yet but one ; a distinction of hypostases , and yet no division in the subjects . for so his words are , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; which is contrary to what he said of human hypostases . now , what is the subject in this case ? according to curcellaeus his notion , it must be an individual . but since he asserts there can be no division in the subjects , then he must overthrow any such individuals , as are among men. these are the chief testimonies out of the greek fathers , whose authority curcellaeus and others rely most upon , as to this matter , which i have therefore more particularly examin'd . but s. ierom , saith curcellaeus , in his epistle to damasus , thought three hypostases implied three distinct substances ; and therefore when the campenses would have him own them , he refused it and asked his advice . then it is plain , s. ierom would not own three distinct substances , and so could not be of curcellaeus his mind . but saith he , s. ierom meant by three substances , three gods different in kind , as the arians did . but how doth that appear ? doth he not say , the arian bishop , and the campenses put him upon it ? but who was this arian bishop , and these campenses ? no other than the meletian party ; for meletius was brought in by the arians , but he joyned against them with s. basil and others , who asserted three hypostases ; and the campenses were his people who met without the gates , as the historians tell us . but it is evident by s. ierom , that the latin church understood hypostasis to be the same then with substance ; and the reason why they would not allow three hypostases , was , because they would not assert three substances . so that curcellaeus his hypothesis hath very little colour for it among the latin fathers ; since s. ierom there saith , it would be sacrilege to hold three substances , and he freely bestows an anathema upon any one that asserted more than one . but hilary , saith curcellaeus , owns a specifick vnity , for in his book de synodis , he shews , that by one substance , they did not mean one individual substance , but such as was in adam and seth , that is of the same kind . no man asserts the vnity and indiscrimination of the divine substance more fully and frequently than he doth ; and that without any difference or variation , as to the father and the son. and although against the arians he may use that for an illustration , of adam and seth ; yet when he comes to explain himself , he declares it must be understood in a way agreeable to the divine nature . and he denies any division of the substance between father and son , but he asserts one and the same substance to be in both ; and although the person of the son remains distinct from the person of the father , yet he subsists in that substance of which he was begotten , and nothing is taken off from the substance of the father , by his being begotten of it . but doth he not say , that he hath a legitimate and proper substance of his own begotten nature from god , the father ? and what is this , but to own two distinct substances ? how can the substance be distinct , if it be the very same ; and the son subsist in that substance of which he was begotten ? and that hilary ( besides a multitude of passages to the same purpose in him ) cannot be understood of two distinct substances will appear by this evidence . the arians in their confession of faith before the council of nice set down among the several heresies which they condemned ; that of hieracas , who said the father and son were like two lamps shining out of one common vessel of oil. hilary was sensible that under this that expression was struck at , god of god , light of light , which the church owned . his answer is , luminis naturae vnitas est , non ex connexione porrectio . i e. they are not two divided lights , from one common stock ; but the same light remaining after it was kindled that it was before . as appears by his words , light of light , saith he , implies , that it gives to another that which it continues to have it self . and petavius saith , that the opinion of hieracas was , that the substance of the father and son differ'd numerically as one lamp from another . and hilary calls it an error of humane understanding which would judge of god , by what they find in one another . doth not s. ambrose say , as curcellaeus quotes him , that the father and son are not two gods , because all men are said to be of one substance ? but s ambrose is directly against him . for , he saith , the arians objected , that if they made the son true god , and con-substantial with the father , they must make two gods ; as there are two men , or two sheep of the same essence ; but a man and a sheep are not said to be men , or two sheep . which they said to excuse themselves , because they made the son of a different kind and substance from the father . and what answer doth s. ambrose give to this ? 1. he saith , plurality according to the scriptures rather falls on those of different kinds ; and therefore when they make them of several kinds , they must make several gods. 2. that we who hold but one substance , cannot make more gods than one. 3. to his instance of men , he answers , that although they are of the same nature by birth , yet the● differ in age , and thought , and work , and place from one another ; and where there is such diversity , there cannot be vnity : but in god , there is no difference of nature , will , or operation ; and therefore there can be but one god. the last i shall mention is s. augustin , whom curcellaeus produces to as little purpose ; for although he doth mention the same instance of several men being of the same kind ; yet he speaks so expresly against a specifick vnity in god ; that he saith , the consequence must be , that the three persons must be three gods ; as three humane persons are three men. and in another place , that the father , son and holy ghost , are one in the same individual nature . and what saith curcellaeus to these places , for he was aware of them . to the latter he saith , that by individual , he means specifick . this is an extraordinary answer indeed . but what reason doth he give for it ? because they are not divided in place or time , but they may have their proper essences however . but where doth s. augustin give any such account of it ? he often speaks upon this subject ; but always gives another reason . viz. because they are but one and the same substance . the three persons are but one god , because they are of one substance ; and they have a perfect vnity , because there is no diversity of nature , or of will. but it may be said , that here he speaks of a diversity of nature . in the next words he explains himself , that the three persons are one god , propter ineffabilem conjunctionem deitatis ; but the union of three persons in one specifick nature , is no ineffable conjunction , it being one of the commonest things in the world ; and in the same chapter , propter individuam deitatem unus deus est ; & propter uniuscujusque proprietatem tres personae sunt . here we find one individual nature ; and no difference but in the peculiar properties of the persons . in the other place he is so express against a specifick vnity , that curcellaeus his best answer is , that in that chapter he is too intricate and obscure . i. e. he doth not to speak his mind . thus much i thought fit to say in answer to those undeniable proofs of curcellaeus , which our vnitarians boast so much of , and whether they be so or not , let the reader examine and judge . chap. vii . the athanasian creed clear'd from contradictions . iii. i now come to the last thing i proposed , viz. to shew , that it is no contradiction to assert three persons in the trinity and but one god ; and for that purpose , i shall examine the charge of contradictions on the athanasian creed . the summ of the first articles , say they , is this , the one true god is three distinct persons , and three distinct persons , father , son and holy ghost are the one true god. which is plainly , as if a man should say , peter , james and john , being three persons are one man ; and one man is these three distinct persons , peter , james and john. is it not now a ridiculous attempt as well as a barbarous indignity , to go about thus to make asses of all mankind , under pretence of teaching them a creed . this is very freely spoken , with respect , not merely to our church , but the christian world , which owns this creed to be a just and true explication of the doctrine of the trinity . but there are some creatures as remarkable for their untoward kicking , as for their stupidity . and is not this great skill in these matters , to make such a parallel between three persons in the godhead , and peter , iames and iohn ? do they think there is no difference between an infinitely perfect being , and such finite limited creatures as individuals among men are ? do they suppose the divine nature capable of such division and separation by individuals , as human nature is ? no , they may say , but ye who hold three persons must think so : for what reason ? we do assert three persons , but it is on the account of divine revelation , and in such a manner , as the divine nature is capable of it . for it is a good rule of boethius , talia sunt praedicata , qualia subjecta permiserint . we must not say that there are persons in the trinity , but in such a manner as is agreeable to the divine nature ; and if that be not capable of division and separation , then the persons must be in the same undivided essence . the next article is , neither confounding the persons , nor dividing the substance ; but how can we , say they , not confound the persons that have , as ye say , but one numerical substance ? and how can we but divide the substance , which we find in three distinct divided persons ? i think the terms numerical substance , not very proper in this case ; and i had rather use the language of the fathers , than of the schools ; and some of the most judicious and learned fathers would not allow the terms of one numerical substance to be applied to the divine essence . for their notion was , that number was only proper for compound b●ings , but god being a pure and simple being was one by nature and not by number , as s. basil speaks ( as is before observed ) because he is not compounded , nor hath any besides himself to be reckon'd with him . but because there are different hypostases , therefore they allow'd the use of number about them , and so we may say the hypostases or persons are numerically different ; but we cannot say that the essence is one numerically . but why must they confound the persons , if there be but one essence ? the relative properties cannot be confounded ; for the father cannot be the son ▪ nor the son the father ; and on these the difference of persons is founded . for , there can be no difference , as to essential properties , and therefore all the difference , or rather distinction must be from those that are relative . a person of it self imports no relation , but the person of the father or of the son must ; and these relations cannot be confounded with one another . and if the father cannot be the son , nor the son the father , then they must be distinct from each other . but how ? by dividing the substance ? that is impossible in a substance that is indivisible . it may be said , that the essence of created beings is indivisible , and yet there are divided persons . i grant it , but then a created essence is capable of different accidents and qualities to divide one person from another , which cannot be supposed in the divine nature ; and withall the same power which gives a being to a created essence , gives it a separate and divided existence from all others . as when peter , iames and iohn received their several distinct personalities from god ; at the same time he gave them their separate beings from each other , although the same essence be in them all . but how can we but divide the substance which we see in three distinct divided persons ? the question is , whether the distinct properties of the persons do imply a division of the substance ? we deny that the persons are divided as to the substance , because that is impossible to be divided ; but we say , they are and must be distinguished as to those incommunicable properties which make the persons distinct . the essential properties are uncapable of being divided , and the relations cannot be confounded ; so that there must be one undivided substance and yet three distinct persons . but every person must have his own proper substance ; and so the substance must be divided if there be three persons . that every person must have a substance to support his subsistence is not denied , but the question is , whether that substance must be divided or not . we say , where the substance will bear it , as in created beings , a person hath a separate substance , i. e. the same nature diversified by accidents , qualities and a separate existence , but where these things cannot be , there the same essence must remain undivided , but with such relative properties as cannot be confounded . but may not the same undivided substance be communicated to three divided persons ; so as that each person may have his own proper substance , and yet the divine essence be in it self undivided ? this is not the case before us . for the question upon the creed is , whether the substance can be divided ? and here it is allow'd to remain undivided . yes in it self , but it may be divided in the persons . the substance , we say , is uncapable of being divided any way ; and to say , that a substance wholly undivided in it self , is yet divided into as many proper and peculiar substances , as there are persons , doth not at all help our understanding in this matter ; but if no more be meant , as is expresly declared , than that the same one divine nature is wholly and entirely communicated by the eternal father to the eternal son ▪ and by father and son to the eternal spirit , without any division or separation ; it is the same which all trinitarians assert . and it is a great pity , that any new phrases or ways of expression should cause unreasonable heats among those who are really of the same mind . for those who oppose the expressions of three distinct substances as new and dangerous ; yet grant , that it is one peculiar prerogative of the divine nature and substance , founded in its infinite , and therefore transcendent perfection , whereby it is capable of residing in more persons than one ; and is accordingly communicated from the father to the son and holy ghost ; but this is done without any division or multiplication . now if both parties mean what they say , where lies the difference ? it is sufficient for my purpose that they are agrred , that there can be no division as to the divine essence by the distinction of persons . and so this passage of the athanasian creed holds good , neither confounding the persons nor dividing the substance . the next article , as it is set down in the notes on athanasius his creed , is a contradiction to this . for there it runs , there is one substance of the father , another of the son , another of the holy ghost . they might well charge it with contradictions at this rate . but that is a plain mistake for person ; for there is no other variety in the copies but this , that baysius his greek copy hath 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and that of constantinople 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , but all the latin copies persona . but what consequence do they draw from hence ? then , say they , the son is not the father , nor is the father the son , nor the holy ghost either of them . if they had put in person , as they ought to have done , it is what we do own . and what follows ? if the father be not the son , and yet is the one true god , then the son is not the one true god , because he is not the father . the one true god may be taken two ways : 1. the one true god , as having the true divine nature in him , and so the father is the one true god ; but not exclusive of the son , if he have the same divine nature . 2. the one true god , as having the divine nature so wholly in himself , as to make it incommunicable to the son ; so we do not say , that the father is the one true god , because this must exclude the son from being god ; which the scripture assures us that he is ; and therefore though the son be not the father , nor the father the son , yet the son may be the one true god as well as the father , because they both partake of the same divine nature , so that there is no contradiction in this , that there is but one true god , and one of the persons is not the other . for that supposes it impossible , that there should be three persons in the same nature ; but if the distinction of nature and persons be allow'd , as it must be by all that understand any thing of these matters , then it must be granted , that although one person cannot be another , yet they may have the same common essence . as for instance , let us take their own , peter , iames and iohn . what pleasant arguing would this be , peter is not iames nor iohn , nor iames nor iohn are peter , but peter hath the true essence of a man in him ; and the true essence is but one and indivisible ; and therefore iames and iohn cannot be true men , because peter hath the one and indivisible essence of a man in him ? but they will say , we cannot say that peter is the one true man , as we say , that the father is the one true god. yes ; we say the same in other words , for he can be said to be the one true god in no other respect , but as he hath the one true divine essence . all the difference lies , that a finite nature is capapable of division , but an infinite is not . it follows , the godhead of the father , and of the son , and of the holy ghost is all one , the glory equal , the majesty co-eternal . to this they say , that this article doth impugn and destroy it self . how so ? for , if the glory and majesty be the same in number , then it can be neither equal , nor co-eternal . not equal for it is the same , which equals never are , nor co-eternal for that intimates that they are distinct . for , nothing is co eternal , nor co temporary with it self . there is no appearance of difficulty or contradiction in this , if the distinction of persons is allowed ; for the three persons may be well said to be co-equal and co-eternal ; and if we honour the son , as we honour the father , we must give equal glory to him . but one great point of contradiction remains , viz. so that the father is god , the son is god , and the holy ghost is god , and yet there are not three gods ; but one god. first , they say , this is as if a man should say , the father is a person , the son a person , and the holy ghost a person , yet there are not three persons ; but one person . how is this possible , if a person doth suppose some peculiar property , which must distinguish him from all others ? and how can three persons be one person , unless three incommunicable properties may become one communicated property to three persons ? but they are aware of a distinction in this case , viz. that the term god is used personally , when it is said god the father , god the son , and god the holy ghost ; but when it is said , there are not three gods , but one god , the term god is used essentially , and therefore comprehends the whole three persons , so that there is neither a grammatical , nor arithmetical contradiction . and what say our vnitarians to this ? truly , no less , than that the remedy is worse , ( if possible ) than the disease . nay then , we are in a very ill case . but how i pray doth this appear ? 1. say they , three personal gods , and one essential god make four gods ; if the essential god be not the same with the personal gods : and tho' he is the same , yet since they are not the same with one another , but distinct , it follows , that there are three gods , i. e. three personal gods. 2. it introduces two sorts of gods , three personal and one essential . but the christian religion knows and owns but one , true and most high god of any sort . so far then , we are agreed , that there is but one , true and most high god ; and that because of the perfect vnity of the divine essence , which can be no more than one , and where there is but one divine essence , there can be but one true god , unless we can suppose a god without an essence , and that would be a strange sort of god. he would be a personal god indeed in their critical sense of a person for a shape or appearance . but may not the fame essence be divided ? that i have already shew'd to be impossible . therefore we cannot make so many personal gods , because we assert one and the same essence in the three persons of father , son and holy ghost . but they are distinct , and therefore must be distinct gods , since every one is distinct from the other . they are distinct as to personal properties , but not as to essential attributes ; which are and must be the same in all : so that here is but one essential god , and three persons . but after all , why do we assert three persons in the godhead ? not because we find them in the athanasian creed ; but because the scripture hath revealed that there are three , father , son and holy ghost ; to whom the divine nature and attributes are given . this we verily believe , that the scripture hath revealed ; and that there are a great many places , of which , we think no tolerable sense can be given without it , and therefore we assert this doctrine on the same grounds , on which we believe the scriptures . and if there are three persons which have the divine nature attributed to them ; what must we do in this case ? must we cast off the vnity of the divine essence ? no , that is too frequently and plainly asserted for us to call it into question . must we reject those scriptures which attribute divinity to the son and holy ghost , as well as to the father ? that we cannot do , unless we cast off those books of scripture , wherein those things are contained . but why do we call them persons , when that term is not found in scripture , and is of a doubtful sense ? the true account whereof i take to be this . it is observed by facundus hermianensis , that the christian church received the doctrine of the trinity before the terms of three persons were used . but sabellianism was the occasion of making use of the name of persons . it 's true , that the sabellians did not dislike our sense of the word person , ( which they knew was not the churches sense ) as it was taken for an appearance , or an external quality ; which was consistent enough with their hypothesis , who allow'd but one real person with different manifestations . that this was their true opinion , appears from the best account we have of their doctrine , from the first rise of sabellianism . the foundations of it were laid in the earliest and most dangerous heresies in the christian church , viz. that which is commonly called by the name of the gnosticks , and that of the cerinthians and ebionites . for how much soever they differ'd from each other in other things ; yet they both agreed in this , that there was no such thing as a trinity , consisting of father , son and holy ghost ; but that all was but different appearances and manifestations of god to mank●nd . in consequence whereof , the gnosticks denied the very humanity of christ , and the cerinthians and ebionites his divinity . but both these sorts , were utterly rejected the communion of the christian church ; and no such thing as sabellianism was found within it . afterwards , there arose some persons who started the same opinion within the church : the first we meet with of this sort , are those mention'd by theodoret , epigonus , cleomenes , and noëtus , from whom they were called noe●ians ; not long after , sabellius broached the same doctrine in pentapolis , and the parts thereabouts ; which made dionysius of alexandria appear so early and so warmly against it . but he happening to let fall some expressions , as though he asserted an inequality of hypostases in the godhead , complaint was made of it to dionysius then bishop of rome ; who thereupon explained that , which he took to be the true sense of the christian church in this matter . which is still preserved in athanasius : therein he disowns the sabellian doctrine , which confounded the father , son and holy ghost , and made them to be the same ; and withal , he rejected those who held three distinct and separate hypostases ; as the platonists , and after them the marcionists did . dionysius of alexandria , when he came to explain himself , agreed with the others and asserted the son to be of the same substance with the father ; as athanasius hath proved at large : but yet he said , that if a distinction of hypostases were not kept up , the doctrine of the trinity would be lost ; as appears by an epistle of his in s. basil. athanasius saith , that the heresie of sabellius lay in making the father and son to be only different names of the same person ; so that in one respect he is the father , and in another the son. gregory nazianzen in opposition to sabellianism , saith , we must believe one god , and three hypostases ; and commends athanasius for preserving the true mean , in asserting the vnity of nature , and the distinction of properties . s. basil saith , that the sabellians made but one person of the father and son : that in name they confessed the son ; but in reality they denied him . in another place , that the sabellians asserted but one hypostasis in the divine nature ; but that god took several persons upon him , as occasion required : sometimes that of a father , at other times of a son ; and so of the holy ghost . and to the same purpose , in other places he saith , that there are distinct hypostases with their peculiar properties ; which being joyned with the vnity of nature make up the true confession of faith. there were some who would have but one hypostasis ; whom he opposes with great vehemency ; and the reason he gives , is , that then they must make the persons to be meer names ; which is , sabellianisn . and , he saith , that if our notions of distinct persons have no certain foundation they are meer names , such as sabellius called persons . but by this foundation he doth not mean any distinct essences , but the incommunicable properties belonging to them , as father , son and holy ghost . it is plain from hence , that the necessity of asserting three hypostases , came from thence , that otherwise they could not so well distinguish themselves from the sabellians whose doctrine they utterly disowned ; as well as arianism and iudaism ; and it appears by the testimonies of athanasius , gregory nazianzen and s. basil , that they look'd on one as bad as the other ; and they commonly joyn iudaism , and sabellianism together . but yet there arose difficulties , whether they were to hold one hypostasis or three . the former insisted on the generally received sense of hypostasis for substance or essence ; and therefore they could not hold three hypostases without three distinct essences , as the platonists and marcionists held . upon this a synod was called at alexandria to adjust this matter , where both parties were desired to explain themselves . those who held three hypostases were asked , whether they maintained three hypostases as the arians did , of different substances and separate subsistences , as mankind and other creatures are ? or as other hereticks , three principles or three gods ? all which they stedfastly denied . then they were asked , why they used those terms ? they answered , because they believed the holy trinity to be more than mere names ; and that the father , and son , and holy ghost had a real subsistence belonging to them ; but still they held but one godhead , one principle , and the son of the same substance with the father ; and the holy ghost not to be a creature , but to bear the same proper and inseparable essence with the father and the son. then the other side were asked , when they asserted but one hypostasis , whether they held with sabellius or not ; and that the son and holy ghost had no essence or subsistence ? which they utterly denied ; but said , that their meaning was , that hypostasis was the same with substance ; and by one hypostasis , they intended no more , but that the father , son and holy ghost were of the same individual substance ; ( for the words are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and so they held but one godhead and one divine nature : and upon these terms they agreed . from whence it follows , that the notion of three hypostases , as it was received in the christian church , was to be under●●ood so as to be consistent with the individual vnity of the divine essence . and the great rule of the christian church was to keep in the middle , between the doctrines of sabellius and arius ; and so by degrees , the notion of three hypostases and one essence was look'd on in the eastern church , as the most proper discrimination of the orthodox from the sabellians and arians . but the latin church was not so easily brought to the use of three hypostases , because they knew no other sense of it , but for substance or essence ; and they all denied that there was any more than one divine substance , and therefore they rather embraced the word persona ; and did agree in the name of persons , as most proper to signifie their meaning , which was , that there were three which had distinct subsistences , and incommunicable properties , and one and the same divine essence . and since the notion of it is so well understood , to signifie such a peculiar sense , i see no reason why any should scruple the use of it . as to it s not being used in scripture , socinus himself despises it , and allows it to be no good reason . for when franciscus davides objected , that the terms of essence and person were not in scripture ; socinus tells him , that they exposed their cause who went upon such grounds ; and that if the sense of them were in scripture , it was no matter whether the terms were or not . h●ving thus clear'd the notion of three persons , i return to the sense of scripture about these matters . and our vnitarians tell us , that we ought to interpret scripture otherwise . how doth that appear ? they give us very little encouragement to follow their interpretations , which are so new , so forced , so different from the general sense of the christian world , and which i may say , reflect so highly on the honour of christ and his apostles , i. e. by making use of such expressions , which if they do not mean , what to honest and sincere minds they appear to do , must be intended ( according to them ) to set up christ a meer man to be a god. and if such a thought as this could enter into the mind of a thinking man , it would tempt him to suspect much more as to those writings than there is the least colour or reason for . therefore these bold inconsiderate writers ought to reflect on the consequence of such sort of arguments , and if they have any regard to christianity , not to trifle with scripture as they do . but say they , the question only is , whether we ought to interpret scripture when it speaks of god , according to reason or not , that is like fools or like wise men ? like wise men no doubt , if they can hit upon it , but they go about it as untowardly as ever men did . for is this to interpret scripture like wise men , to take up some novel interpretations , against the general sense of the christian church from the apostles times ? is this to act like wise men , to raise objections against the authority of the books , they cannot answer : and to cry out of false copies and translations without reason , and to render all places suspicious , which make against them ? is this to interpret scripture like wise men , to make our saviour affect to be thought a god , when he knew himself to be a mere man , and by their own confession had not his divine authority and power conferr'd upon him ? and to make his apostles set up the worship of a creature , when their design was to take away the worship of all such , who by nature are not gods ? is this like wise men , to tell the world , that these were only such gods , whom they had set up , and god had not appointed ; as though there were no real idolatry but in giving divine worship without god's command . chap. viii . the socinian sense of scripture examined . but they must not think to escape so easily for such a groundless and presumptuous saying ; that they interpret the scripture not like fools , but like wise men : because the true sense of scripture is really the main point between us ; and therefore i shall more carefully examine the wise sense they give of the chief places which relate to the matter in hand . 1. is this to interpret scripture like wise men , to make the author to the hebrews in one chapter , and that but a short one , to bring no less than four places out of the old testament , and according to their sense , not one of them proves that which he aimed at ? viz. that christ was superiour to angels , heb. 1.5 . as will appear by the sense they give of them . for unto which of the angels said he at any time , thou art my son , this day have i begotten thee ? these words , say they , in their original and primary sense are spoken of david , but in their mystical sense are a prophecy concerning christ. was this mystical sense primarily intended or not ? if not , they are only an accommodation and no proof . but they say , even in that mystical sense , they were intended not of the lord christ's supposed eternal generation from the essence of the father , but of his resurrection from the dead . but if that be not taken as an evidence of his being the eternal son of god , how doth this prove him above angels ? heb. 1.6 . and again , when he bringeth his first begotten into the world , he saith , and let all the angels of god worship him . this , one would think home to the business . but our wise interpreters tell us plainly , that the words were used by the psalmist on another occasion , i. e. they are nothing to the purpose . but being told of this , instead of mending the matter , they have made it far worse ; for upon second thoughts , ( but not wiser ) they say , the words are not taken out of the psalm , but out of deut. 32.43 . where the words are not spoken of god , but of god's people ; and if this be said of god's people , they hope it may be said of christ too , without concluding from thence , that christ is the supreme god. but we must conclude from hence , that these are far from being wise interpreters ; for what consequence is this , the angels worship god's people , therefore christ is superiour to angels ? heb. 1.8 . thy throne o god is for ever and ever , i. e. say they , god is thy throne for ever . and so they relate not to christ but to god. and to what purpose then are they brought ? heb. 1.10 . thou lord in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth , and the heavens are the work of thy hands . these words , say they , are to be understood not of christ , but of god. which is to charge the apostle with arguing out of the old testament very impertinently . is this interpreting the scriptures like wise men ? is it not rather exposing and ridiculing them ? is this to interpret scripture like wise men , to give such a forced sense of the beginning of s. john's gospel , as was never thought of from the writing of it , till some in the last age thought it necessary to avoid the proof of christ's divinity from it . for the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was never taken , in the sense they put upon it , for him that was to preach the word , in s. iohn's time ; but the signification of it was then well understood from the alexandrian school ( as appears by philo ) whence it was brought by cerinthus into those parts of asia , where s. iohn lived when he wrote his gospel : and one of themselves confesses , that cerinthus did by the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 mean something divine , which rested upon , and inhabited the person of iesus , and was that power by which god created original matter and made the world , but as the christ or the word descended on iesus at his baptism , so it left him at his crucifixion . that which i observe from hence is , that there was a known and current sense of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 at the time of s. iohn's writing his gospel , very different from that of a preacher of the word of god ; and therefore i cannot but think it the wisest way of interpreting s. john , to understand him in a sense then commonly known ; and so he affirms the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to have been in the beginning , i. e. before the creation ( for he saith afterwards , all things were made by him ) and that he was with god , and was god ; and this word did not inhabit iesus , as cerinthus held , but was made flesh and dwelt among us . and so s. iohn clearly asserted the divinity and incarnation of the son of god. and in all the disputes afterwards with paulus samosatenus , and photinus , it appears , that they understood the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not for any meer man , but for some divine power , which rested upon the person of iesus . so that this was a very late , and i think no very wise interpretation of s. iohn . and even sandius confesses , that socinus his sense was wholly new and unheard of in the ancient church ; not only among the fathers , but the hereticks , as i have before observed . for they agreed ( except their good friends the alogi who went the surest way to work ) that by the word no meer man was understood . let them produce one if they can , saith sandius ( even the learned and judicious sandius . ) did they all interpret the scriptures like fools , and not like wise men ? but if the christian interpreters were such fools ; what think they of the deists , whom they seem to have a better opinion of , as to their wisdom ? what , if men without biass of interest , or education think ours the more proper and agreeable sense ? the late archbishop to this purpose had mentioned amelius the platonist , as an indifferent iudge . but what say our wise interpreters to this ? truly they say , that the credit of the trinitarian cause runs very low , when an uncertain tale of an obscure platonist of no reputation for learning or wit , is made to be a good part of the proof , which is alledged for these doctrines . if a man happen to stand in their way , he must be content with such a character , as they will be pleased to give him . if he had despised s. iohn's gospel , and manner of expression , he had been as wise as the alogi ; but notwithstanding the extraordinary character given of friend amelius ( as they call him ) by eusebius , by porphyrius , by proclus , and by damascenus , this very saying of his sinks his reputation for ever with them . what would iulian have given for such a wise interpretation of s. iohn ? when he cannot deny , but that he did set up the divinity of christ by these expressions ; and upbraids the christians of alexandria , for giving worship to iesus as the word and god ? with what satisfaction would he have received such a sense of his words ; when he complemented photinus for denying the divinity of christ ; while other chrians asserted it ? but they do not by any means deal fairly with the late archbishop as to the story of amelius ; for they bring it in , as if he had laid the weight of the cause upon it ; whereas he only mentions it , as a confirmation , of a probable conjecture , that plato had the notion of the word of god from the jews ; because that was a title which the jews did commonly give to the messias , as he proves from philo , and the chaldee paraphrast . to which they give no manner of answer . but they affirm in answer to my sermon , p. 9. that socinus his sense was , that christ was called the word , because he was the bringer or messenger of gods word . but were not the iews to understand it in the sense it was known among them ? and if the chaldee paraphrast had used it in that sense , he would never have applied it to a divine subsistance , as upon examination it will appear that he doth . of which rittangel gives a very good account , who had been a iew , and was very well skilled in their ancient learning . he tells us , that he had a discourse with a learned vnitarian upon this subject , who was particularly acquainted with the eastern languages ; and he endeavoured to prove , that there was nothing in the chaldee paraphrasts use of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , because it was promiscuously used by him for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 where it was applied to god. this rittangel denied ; and offer'd to prove , that the chaldee paraphrast did never use that word in a common manner , but as it was appropriated to a divine subsistance . he produces several places where 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is put , and nothing answering to word in the hebrew , as gen. 20.21 . the chaldee hath it , the word of iehovah shall be my god. exod. 2.25 . and iehovah said , he would redeem them by his word , exod. 6.8 . your murmurings are not against us , but against the word of iehovah , exod. 19.17 . and moses brought the people out to meet the word of iehovah , levit. 26.46 . these are the statutes and iudgments , and laws , which iehovah gave between his word and the children of israel by the hand of moses , numb . 11.20 . ye have despised the word of iehovah whose divinity dwelt among you , numb . 23.21 . the word of iehovah is with him , and the divinity of their king is among them , deut 1.30 . the word of iehovah shall fight for you , deut. 2.7 . these forty years the word of iehovah hath been with thee , deut. 1.32 . ye did not believe in the word of iehovah your god , deut 4.24 . iehovah thy god , his word is a consuming fire , deut. 5.5 . i stood between the word of iehovah and you , to shew you the word of the lord , deut. 32.6.8 . iehovah thy god , his word shall go with thee , with many other places , which he brings out of moses his writings ; and there are multitudes to the same purpose in the other books of scripture ; which shews , saith he , that this term the word of god , was so appointed for many ages ; as appears by all the chaldee paraphrasts and the ancient doctors of the iews . and he shews by several places , that the chaldee paraphrast did not once render 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 when there was occasion for it ; no , not when the word of god is spoken of with respect to a prophet ; as he proves by many testimonies ; which are particularly enumerated by him . the result of the conference was , that the vnitarian had so much ingenuity to confess , that unless those words had another sense , their cause was lost ; and our faith had a sure foundation . but it may be objected that morinus hath since taken a great deal of pains to prove the chaldee paraphrasts , not to have been of that antiquity , which they have been supposed by the iews to be of . in answer to this , we may say in general , that morinus his great proofs are against another chaldee paraphrast of very small reputation , viz. of ionathan upon the law ; and not that of onkelos , which rittangel relied upon in this matter . and none can deny this to have been very ancient ; but the iews have so little knowledge of their own history , but what is in scripture , that very little certainty can be had from them . but we must compare the circumstances of things , if we would come to any resolution in this matter . now it is certain , that philo the alexandrian iew , who lived so very near our saviours time , had the same notion of the word of god , which is in the chaldee paraphrast : whose testimonies have been produced by so many already , that i need not to repeat them . and eusebius saith , the jews and christians had the same opinion as to christ , till the former fell off from it in opposition to the christians ; and he particula●ly instances in his divinity . but if morinus his opinion be embraced , as to the lateness of these chaldee paraphrases , this inconvenience will necessarily follow , viz. that the iews when they had changed so much their opinions , should insert those passages themselves which assert the divinity of the word . and it can hardly enter into any mans head that considers the humour of the jewish nation , to think , that after they knew what s. iohn had written concerning the word ; and what use the christians made of it to prove the divinity of christ , they should purposely insert such passages in that paraphrase of the law which was in such esteem among them , that elias levita saith , they were under obligation to read two parascha●s out of it every week , together with the hebrew text. now , who can imagine that the iews would do this upon any other account , than that it was deliver'd down to them , by so ancient a tradition , that they durst not discontinue it . and it is observed in the place of scripture which our saviour read in the synagogue , that he follow'd neither the hebrew nor the greek , but in probability the chaldee paraphrase ; and the words he used upon the cross , were in the chaldee dialect . the later iews have argued against the trinity , and the divinity of christ like any vnitarians , as appears by the collection out of ioseph albo , david kimchi , &c. published by genebrard , with his answers to them . and is it any ways likely , that those who were so much set against these doctrines , should themselves put in such expressions , which justifie what the evangelist saith about the vvord , being in the beginning , being with god , and being god ? the substance of what i have said , as to s. iohn's notion of the word is this ; that there is no colour for the sense which socinus hath put upon it ; either from the use of it among other authors , or any interpretation among the jews . but that there was in his time a current sense of it , which from the jews of alexandria , was dispersed by cerinthus in those parts where he lived . that for such a notion there was a very ancient tradition among the jews , which appears in the most ancient paraphrase of the law , which is read in their synagogues . and therefore according to all reasonable ways of interpreting scripture , the word cannot be understood in s. iohn , for one whose office it was to preach the word , but for that word which was with god before any thing was made , and by whom all things were made . 3. is this to interpret scripture like wise men , to give a new sense of several places of scripture from a matter of fact of which there is no proof , the better to avoid the proof of the divinity of the son of god ? this relates to the same beginning of s. iohn's gospel , the word was with god ; and several other places , making mention of his descent from heaven . the sense which these wise interpreters put upon them is , that christ was rapt up into heaven , before he entred upon his preaching . but where is this said ? what proof , what evidence , what credible witnesses of it , as there were of his transfiguration , resurrection and ascension ? nothing like any proof is offer'd for it ; but it is a wise way they think of avoiding a pressing difficulty . but they have a farther reach in it , viz. to shew how christ , being a mere man , should be qualified for so great an undertaking as the founding the christian church ; and therefore they say , that before our lord entred upon his office of the messias ▪ he was taken up to heaven to be instructed in the mind and will of god ( as moses was into the mount , exod. 24.1 , 2 , 12. ) and from thence descended to execute his office , and declare the said will of god. in another place , that when it is said , the word was with god ; that is , the lord christ was taken up into heaven to be instructed in all points relating to his ambassage or ministry . in a third , they say , that our saviour before he entred upon his ministry , ascended into heaven , as moses did into the mount , to be instructed in all things belonging to the gospel doctrine and polity which he was to establish and administer . now considering what sort of person they make christ to have been , viz. a mere man ; this was not ill thought of by them ; to suppose him taken up into heaven and there instructed in what he was to teach and to do , as moses was into the mount before he gave the law. but here lies a mighty difference ; when moses was called up into the mount , the people had publick notice given of it ; and he took aaron and his sons , and seventy elders of israel with him ; who saw the glory of god , v. 10. and all israel beheld the glory of the lord as a devouring fire on the top of the mount , v. 17. and after the 40 days were over , it is said , that moses came down from the mount , and the children of israel saw him with his face shining , exod. 34.40 . now if christ were taken up into heaven , as moses was into the mount , why was it not made publick at that time ? why no witnesses ? why no appearance of the glory to satisfie mankind of the truth of it ? and yet we find , that when he was transfigured on the holy mount , he took peter , and james , and john with him ; which circumstance is carefully mention'd by the evangelists . and peter , who was one of the witnesses then present , lays great weight upon this being done in the presence of witnesses . for we have not follow'd cunningly devised fables , when we made known unto you the power and coming of our lord iesus christ , but were eye-witnesses of his majesty . for he received from god the father , honour and glory , when there came such a voice to him from the excellent glory — . and this voice which came from heaven we heard , when we were with him in the holy mount. now let any one compare this with the account which they give of christ's ascension into heaven . the transfiguration was intended only for a particular testimony of god's favour , before his suffering ; but even in that , he took care there should be very credible witnesses of it . and is it then possible to believe , there should be such an ascension of christ into heaven , for no less a purpose , than to be instructed in his ambassage , and to understand the mind and will of god as to his office ; and yet not one of the evangelists give any account of the circumstances of it ? they are very particular , as to his birth , fasting , baptism , preaching , miracles , sufferings , resurrection and ascension ; but not one word among them all as to the circumstances of this being taken up into heaven for so great a purpose ? if it were necessary to be believed , why is it not more plainly revealed ? why not the time and place mention'd in scripture , as well as of his fasting and temptation ? who can imagine it consistent with that sincerity and faithfulness of the writers of the new testament , to conceal so material a part of christ's instructions and qualifications ; and to wrap it up in such doubtfull expressions , that none ever found out this meaning till the days of socinus ? enjedinus mentions it only as a possible sense ; b●t he confesses , that the new testament saith nothing at all of it ; but , saith he , neither doth it mention other things before he entred upon his office. but this is a very weak evasion , for this was of greatest importance with respect to his office , more than his baptism , fasting and temptation ; yet these are very fully set down . and after all , our vnitarians themselves seem to mistrust their own interpretations ; for in their answer to my sermon , they say , it is not the doctrine of all the unitarians , and refer me to another account given of these texts in the history of the unitarians . there indeed i find grotius his interpretation ( as they call it ) prefer●d before that of socinus . but they say , grotius was socinian all over , and that his annotations are a compleat system of socinianism ; and his notes on the first of s. john are written artificially , but the sense at the bottom is theirs . in short , that the word , according to grotius , is not an eternal son of god , but the power a●d wisdom of god ; which abiding without measure on the lord christ , is therefore spoken of as a person and as one with christ , and he with that . and this notion of the word leads a man through all the difficulties of this chapter , with far more ease than any hitherto offer'd . but these wise interpreters have as much misinterpreted grotius , as they have done the scriptures , as i shall make it appear . ( 1. ) grotius on iohn 6.62 . interprets christ's ascension into heaven , of his corporal ascent thither after his resurrection , where the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or word was before , of whom it is said , that the word was with god. but how comes christ to assume that to himself which belong'd to the word ? he answers , why not , since we call body and soul by the name of the man ? but if no more were meant by the word , but a divine attribute of wisdom and power , what colour could there be for the son of man taking that to himself , which belonged to an attribute of god ? what strange way of arguing would this have been ? what , and if ye shall see the son of man ascending where he was before ? for according to this sense , how comes a divine attribute to be called the son of man ? how could the son of man be said to ascend thither , where a divine attribute was before ? the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , must relate to him spoken of before ; and how could the power and wisdom of god be ever said to be the son of man ? but if we suppose a personal union of the word with the human nature in christ , then we have a very reasonable sense of the words ; for then no more is imply'd , but that christ , as consisting of both natures , should ascend thither , where the word was before ; when it is said , that the word was with god ; and so grotius understands it . ( 2. ) grotius doth not make the word in the beginning of s. john 's gospel to be a mere attribute of wisdom and power , but the eternal son of god. this i shall prove from his own words . 1. he asserts in his preface to s. iohn's gospel , that the chief cause of his writing was universally agreed to have been to prevent the spreading of that venom which had been then dispersed in the church ; which he understands of the heresies about christ and the word . now among these , the heresie of cerinthus was this very opinion which they fasten upon grotius ; viz. that the word was the divine wisdom and power inhabiting in the person of iesus , as i have shew'd before from themselves . and besides , grotius saith , that the other evangelists had only intimated the divine nature of christ from his miraculous conception , miracles , knowing mens hearts , perpetual presence , promise of the spirit , remission of sins , &c. but s. john , as the time required , attributed the name and power of god to him from the beginning . so that by the name and power of god , he means the same which he called the divine nature before . 2. he saith , that when it is said , the word was with god ; it ought to be understood as ignatius explains it , with the father ; what can this mean , unless he understood the word to be the eternal son of god ? and he quotes tertullian , saying , that he is the son of god , and god ex unitate substantiae ; and that there was a prolation of the word without separation . now what prolation can there be of a meer attribute ? how can that be said to be the son of god begotten of the father , without division , before all worlds , as he quotes it from iustin martyr ? and that he is the word , and god of god , from theophilus antiochenus ? and in the next verse , when it is said , the same was in the beginning with god ; it is repeated on purpose , saith he , that we might consider , that god is so to be understood , that a distinction is to be made between god , with whom he was , and the word who was with god ; so that the word doth not comprehend all that is god. but our wise interpreters put a ridiculous sense upon it ; as though all that grotius meant was , that gods attributes are the same with himself ( which although true in it self , is very impertinent to grotius his purpose ) and that the reason why he saith , that the word is not all that god is , was , because there were other attributes of god besides . but where doth grotius say any thing like this ? is this wise interpreting ? or honest and fair dealing ? for grotius immediately takes notice from thence of the difference of hypostases ; which he saith was taken from the platonists , but with a change of the sense . 3. when it is said , v. 3. that all things were made by him ; grotius understands it of the old creation , and of the son of god. for , he quotes a passage of barnabas , where he saith , the sun is the work of his hands ; and several passages of the fathers to prove , that the world and all things in it were created by him ; and he adds , that nothing but god himself is excepted . what say our wise interpreters to all this ? nothing at all to the purpose ; but they cite the english geneva translation ( when they pretend to give grotius his sense ) and add , that the word now begins to be spoken of as a person by the same figure of speech , that solomon saith , wisdom hath builded her house , &c. doth grotius say any thing like this ? and yet they say , let us hear grotius interpreting this sublime proeme of s. john 's gospel . but they leave out what he saith , and put in what he doth not say ; is not this interpreting like wise men ? 4. the vvord was made flesh , v. 14. i. e. say the vnitarians as from grotius ; it did abode on , and inhabit a humane person , the person of iesus christ ; and so was in appearance made flesh or man. but what saith grotius himself ? the word that he might bring us to god , shew'd himself in the weakness of humane nature ; and he quotes the words of s. paul for it , 1 tim. 3.16 . god was manifest in the flesh : and then produces several passages of the fathers to the same purpose . is not this a rare specimen of wise interpreting , and fair dealing with so considerable a person , and so well known , as grotius ? who , after all , in a letter to his intimate friend ger. i. vossius , declares that he owned the doctrine of the trinity ; both in his poems and his catechism ; after his reviewing them ; which epistle is printed before the last edition of his book about christ's satisfaction ; as an account to the world of his faith as to the trinity . and in the last edition of his poems , but little before his death , he gives a very different account of the son of god from what these vnitarians fasten upon him . and now let the world judge , how wisely they have interpreted both s. iohn , and his commentator grotius ? iv. is this to interpret scripture like wise men , to make our saviour's meaning to be expressly contrary to his words ? for when he said : before abraham was , i am ; they make the sense to be that really he was not , but only in gods decree , as any other man may be said to be . this place the late archbishop ( who was very far from being a socinian , however his memory hath been very unworthily reproached in that , as well as other respects , since his death ) urged against the socinians , saying , that the obvious sense of the words is , that he had a real existence , before abraham was actually in being , and that their interpretation about the decree is so very flat , that he can hardly abstain from saying it is ridiculous and the wise answer they give is , that the words cannot be true in any other sense , being spoken of one who was a son , and descendant of abraham . which is as ridiculous as the interpretation ; for it is to take it for granted , he was no more than a son of abraham . v. is this to interpret scripture like wise men , to say , that when our saviour said in his conference with the iews , i am the son of god , his chief meaning was , that he was the son of god in such a sense , as all the faithful are called gods children ? is not this doing great honour to our saviour ? especially when they say , that he never said of himself any higher thing than this , which is true of every good man , i am the son of god. and yet the iews accused him of blasphemy , for making himself the son of god ; and the high priest adjured him to tell , whether he were the christ the son of god. did they mean no more , but as any good man is ? but mr. selden saith , that by the son of god the jews meant , the word of god ( as he is called in the chaldee para●hrast ) which was all one , as to profess himself god : and our learned dr. pocock saith , that according to the sense of the ancient iews , the son of god spoken of , psal. 2. was the eternal son of god , of the same substance with the father . and by this we may understand s. peter's confession , thou art the christ , the son of the living god ; and nathanael's , thou art the son of god. but it is plain the iews in the conference thought he made himself god , by saying , i and my father are one. not one god , say our wise interpreters , but as friends are said to be one. and what must they think of our saviour the mean time , who knew the iews understood him quite otherwise , and would not undeceive them ? but they say , the jews put a malicious construction upon his words . how doth that appear ? do they think the iews had not heard what passed before in some former conferences , when they thought he had made himself equal with god ; and that he said , that all men should honour the son , even as they honoured the father ? these sayings no doubt stuck with them ; and therefore from them , they had reason to think that he meant something extraordinary , by his saying , i and my father are one. and if they were so wise in interpreting scripture , as they pretend , they would have considered , that if these things did not imply his being really the son of god , according to the old jewish notion , he would have severely checked any such mis-constructions of his meaning , and have plainly told them , he was but the son of man but s. paul's character of him doth plainly shew , that he was far from any thing like vanity or ostentation , although he was in the form of god , and thought it no robbery to be equal with god ; which must imply that he was very far from assuming any thing to himself ; which he must do in a very high measure , if he were not really the son of god , so as to be equal with god. the meaning whereof , say our wise interpreters , is , he did not rob god of his honour by arrogating to himself to be god , or equal with god. but what then do they think of these passages in his conferences with the iews ? was he not bound to undeceive them , when he knew they did so grossly mis-understand him , if he knew himself to be a meer man at the same time ? this can never go down with me , for they must either charge him with affecting divine honour , which is the highest degree of pride and vanity , or they must own him to be , as he was , the eternal son of god. vi. is this interpreting scripture like wise men , to deny divine worship to be given to our saviour when the scripture so plainly requires it ? when i had urged them in my sermon with the argument from divine worship being given to christ ; they do utterly deny it , and say , i may as well charge them with the blackest crimes . this i was not a little surprized at , knowing how warmly socinus had disputed for it . but that i might not misunderstand them , i look'd into other places in their late books , and from them i gather these things . 1. they make no question but some worship is due to the lord christ , but the question is concerning the kind or sort of worship . 2. they distinguish three sorts of worship . 1. civil worship from men to one another . 2. religious worship given on the account of a persons holiness , or relation to god ; which is more or less , according to their sanctity or nearer relation to god 3. divine worship which belongs only to god ; which consists in a resignation of our vnderstandings , wills and affections , and some peculiar acts of reverence and love towards him . the two former may be given to christ , they say , but not the last . from whence it follows , that they cannot according to their own principles , resign their vnderstandings , wills , and affections to christ ; because this is proper divine worship . are not these very good christians the mean while ? how can they believe sincerely , and heartily what he hath revealed , unless they resign their vnderstandings to him ; how can they love and esteem him , and place their happiness in him , if they cannot resign their wills and affections to him ? i think never any who pretended to be christians , durst venture to say such things before and all for fear they should be thought to give divine worship to christ. but they confess , that they are divided among themselves about the invocation of christ. those who are for it , say , that he may be the object of prayer , without making him god , or a person of god , and without ascribing to him the properties of the divine nature , omnipresence , omniscience , or omnipotence . those who deny it , they say , do only refuse it , because they suppose he hath forbidden it , which makes it a meer error . and in the new testament , they say , the charge is frequently renewed , that they are to worship god only . and as great writers as they have been these last seven years , they affirm that , they have wrote no book in that time in which they have not been careful to profess to all the world , that a like honour or vvorship ( much less the same ) is not to be given to christ as to god. and now i hope we understand their opinion right as to this matter . the question is , whether this be interpreting those scriptures which speak of the honour and worship due to christ , like wise men ? and for that i shall consider , 1. that herein they are gone off from the opinion of socinus and his followers , as to the sense of scripture in those places . 2. that they have done it in such a way , as will justifie the pagan and popish idolatry ; and therefore have not interpreted scripture like wise men. 1. that they are gone off from the opinion of socinus and his followers , who did allow divine worship to christ. this appears by the disputes he had with franciscus davidis and christianus francken about it . the former was about the sense of scripture . socinus produced all those places which mention the invocation of christ , and all those wherein s. paul saith , the grace of our lord iesus christ be with you all ; and the lord iesus christ direct our way , &c. and all those wherein a divine power and authority is given to christ as head of the church , for the support of the faith and hope of all those who believe in him in order to salvation . and this socinus truly judged to be proper divine worship . georg. blandrata was unsatisfied , that socinus did not say enough to prove the necessity of the invocation of christ , which he said he could do from his priesthood and his power , from the examples of the apostles , and the very nature of adoration . and blandrata was a man of great authority among the vnitarians ; and he thought socinus ought to assert the necessity of it ; or else he would do injury both to christ and to his cause . in the dispute with francken , socinus went upon this ground , that divine authority was a sufficient ground for divine worship , although there were not those essential attributes of omnisciency and omnipotency . but i observe , that socinus did not look on this as a matter of liberty , as our vnitarians now seem to do ; for in the preface to the former dispute , he calls the error of denying the invocation of christ , not , as they now do , a simple error or a mere mistake ; but a most filthy and pernicious error , an error that leads to iudaism , and is in effect the denying of christ ; and in the latter dispute he saith , that it tends to epicurism and atheism . and smalcius saith , that they are no christians who refuse giving divine worship to christ. 2. is it like wise men , to go upon such grounds as will justifie both pagan and popish idolatry ? this they have been charged with , and we shall see what wise men they are , by the defences they make for themselves . 1. as to pagan idolatry , they say , 1. they had no divine command for such a worship . this was well thought of , when they confess , that some among themselves deny that there is any command for invocating christ , and therefore they must charge all those who do it with idolatry . but this is no very wise notion of idolatry , which depends upon the nature of the worship , and not the meer positive will of god. 2. they set up the creatures more than the creator , as s. paul saith . s. paul doth not think them such fools , that they took the creatures to be above the creator , which was impossible , while they owned one to be the creator and the other the creatures ; but that they g●ve such acts of worship to them , as belonged only to the creator , and exceeded in the worship of them those bounds which ought to be between them . 3. they set up an infinite number of gods who had been mere men. this is , as if the question were only , whether one , or a great many were to have such worship given them : as if it were a dispute about a monarchy or a common-wealth of gods. but if it be lawfull to give divine worship to one creature , it is to a hundred . 4. their worship was terminated on them , and so they made true gods of men. suppose they asserted one supreme god , and made the rest subordinate to him , and appointed by him to be the immediate directors of humane affairs . i desire to know , whether the adoration of such were idolatry or not ? if it were , they cannot be excused who give adoration to christ , while they esteem him a mere creature ; if not , all the wiser pagans must be excused . 2. as to the papists , the difference they make , is not like wise interpreters of scripture ; for they say , 1. they have no text of scripture , which commands them to worship s. peter , s. paul and s. francis. so some among them say , there is none for the invocation of christ , and with them the case is parallel . but if socinus his principle be true , that communicated excellency is a sufficient foundation for worship , because it is relative to the giver , then the papists must be justified in all their relative acts of worship without any text to command it . 2. they exceed the bounds of honour and respect due to glorified saints . but who is to set these bounds but themselves in all acts of relative worship , because they depend upon the intention of the persons ? and they hold the very same things concerning communicated knowledge and power from god , which our vnitarians make use of to justifie their notion of the invocation of christ. vii . is this interpreting scripture like wise men , to turn s. paul's words , of whom as concerning the flesh christ came , who is over all , god blessed for ever , into a thanksgiving to god for the exaltation of christ , i. e. god who is over all be blessed for ever . but what reason do they give for such a forced and unusual sense , besides the avoiding the difficulty of having the name of god given here to christ ? a very substantial one . if the words had been intended of christ , it would have been in the greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , which they have taken up from erasmus and curcellaeus . but beza , who understood greek as well as either , ( and curcellaeus owned him for his master in that tongue ) saith , he could not sufficiently wonder at this criticism of erasmus , and thinks it a violent and far-fetched interpretation , and not agreeable to the greek idiom , and that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is the same there with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . and which may signifie more to our vnitarians , one of the learnedst men they have had among them , utterly disowns this interpretation , and saith , that the whole verse belongs to christ. but if that will not do , they have another fetch in the case , viz. that it is very probable that the word god was not originally in the text. how doth this appear to be very probable ? of that , we have this account : grotius observes , that the greek copies , used by the author of the syriac , had not the word god , and that erasmus had noted , that the copies of s. cyprian , s. hilary and s. chrysostom had only blessed over all , or above all , without the word god ; upon which he charges his adversary with no less than impiety in concealing this ; and calls it , cheating his reader . but how if all this prove a gross mistake in him ; unless it be only , that grotius and erasmus come in for their shares . it 's true , that grotius saith , that the word god was left out in the syriac version . but f. simon , whose authority they sometimes magnifie as to critical learning , saith plainly , that grotius was mistaken , and that the word god is in all the old copies , and in all the old versions . and upon his bringing erasmus to prove that it was not in s. cyprian , s. hilary , and s. chrysostome , he cries out , where is sincerity ? erasmus had met with one faulty edition which had it not , but he saith , all the rest of the mss. have it . and the learned oxford annotators , both on s. cyprian , and the greek testament compar'd with mss. ( which excellent work we hope will shortly appear more publickly ) declare , that they found it in all the mss. they could meet with ; and even erasmus himself saith , that the omission in s. hilary might be only by the negligence of the transcribers ; and so it appears by the late edition out of the best mss. where the words are , ex quibus christus qui est super omnia deus . and for s. chrysostom , all that is said , is , that it doth not appear that he read it , but he thinks it might be added afterwards . but what a sort of proof is this against the general consent of mss. for s. chrysostom doth not say he thought so . erasmus very plainly saith , that it is clearer than the sun , that christ is called god in other places of scripture ; but grotius can by no means be excused , nor those that rely upon him as to this place . viii . is this interpreting scripture like wise men , to take advantage of all omissions in copies , when those which are entire ought to be preferr'd ? this i mention for the sake of another noted place , 1 tim. 3.16 . god was manifest in the flesh. here our wise interpreters triumph unreasonably ; viz for , they say , it appears by the syriac , latin , aethiopick , armenian , arabick , and most ancient greek bibles , that the word god was not originally in this text but added to it . but the arabick in all the polyglotts hath god in ; the syriac and aethiopick , if we believe their versions , read it in the masculine gender , and therefore in the king of spain's bible , guido fabricius boderianus puts in deus . as to the armenian , i have nothing to say , but what f. simon tells us from vscan an armenian bishop ; that there was great variety in their copies , and that their first translation was out of syriac and not out of greek . and the main point is , as to the old greek copies ; and we are assured , that there is but one , viz. the clermont copy which leaves out god , but that it is in the alexandrian , the vatican and all others ; and curcellaeus mentions no more than the clermont copy . it is therefore necessary to examine in this place , the authority of this clermont copy , ( as it is called ) whose reading is set up against all other ancient greek copies . beza affirms it with great confidence , that all the greek copies have god with one consent . but how comes he to take no notice of this difference of the clermont copy ? for that he had a sight of that part of it , which hath the epistles of s. paul , appears by his notes in which he refers to it . for he mentions it three times in his notes on rom. 1. v. 13.29.32 . and in one he calls it a very ancient manuscript written in large letters . what should make beza pass it over here ? it seems by morinus that in the clermont copy , there was a correction made by another hand ; which is put into the various lections of the polyglott in morinus his words . but how doth it appear , that beza's clermont copy was the very same which morinus had ? morinus saith , he had it from the f. f. puteani ; ( and is the same i suppose with that in the king of france's library ; of which they were then the keepers ) but morinus intimates that it was an old copy , which fell into their hands ; and so might come into the french king's library , when they gave their own manuscripts to it . this seems to have been the same which p. pithaeus speaks of ; for the description exactly agrees with it ; but pithaeus , who was a person of great integrity and learning , affirms , that this volume of the epistles in great letters came out of the monastery of corbey ; and so it could not be the clermont copy which beza had . and i shall make it appear from the very places mention'd by morinus , that beza's copy did differ from that which morinus perused , as rom. 4.9 . morinus his copy had 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; beza takes notice of it only in the vulgar latin ; which he would never have done , if it had been in the clermont copy , rom 5.6 . for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 morinus reads in that copy 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and saith it is the true reading : but beza condemns it , and never intimates that his copy had it , rom. 7.25 . morinus saith , the reading of his copy is the true , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 : beza saith , it is against all the greek copies but one , and that hath 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; whether beza were mistaken as to other copies is not our business to enquire ; but if the reading had been in his copy as morinus found it ; he could never have said , that but one copy had that different reading . rom. 8.13 , morinus his copy had it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; beza takes no notice of any difference . rom. 10.8 , morinus reads 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . beza saith , it is not in the greek copies ; and he had then the clermont by him : but it is both in that of the french king's library , and of s. germain's ; which agree with each other , where beza's copy differs ; and beza upon rom. 7.6 . and 11.6 observes , that his clermont copy differs from the rest ; by which we see how careful he was to observe the variuos readings in it ; and so upon rom. 15.24 , 33 , 16 , 27. rom. 14.6 . beza observes , that the vulgar latine leaves out part of the verse , but that it is found in all the greek copies ; here morinus charges beza with negligence , or dis-ingenuity ; because it was left out in the clermont copy ; but how doth he prove he had the same copy ? he saith indeed , that the ancient copy , which he had was lent to beza ; but he tells not by whom , nor in whose possession it was afterwards . but if beza were a man of any ordinary care or honesty , he would never have concealed those things , which morinus found in it . 1 cor. 6.20 , beza saith , that those words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , are in all the greek copies ; morinus saith , that they were wanting in that which he made use of . it 's true , they are wanting in the alexandrian , and some others ; but in none that beza had the sight of ▪ if he may be believed . these are sufficient to shew , that there is no good proof , that the ●opy which beza had was the same which morinus borrow'd ; and therefore his authority is not to be slighted in this matter , when he affirms , that all the greek copies agreed in reading god manifest in the flesh ; and i cannot imagine beza so intolerably careless as he must have been , if morinus his copy and beza's were the same . but whether it were in beza's copy or not , it 's certain , they say , that it is not in that ancient manuscript , which is called the clermont copy ; which is affirmed by morinus , and taken for granted by others , therefore we must enquire a little farther into the authority of this ancient copy . it appears by those who have view'd and considered them , that there are two very ancient copies of s. paul's epistles , so exactly agreeing , that one is supposed to be the transcript of the other ; one is in the king's library , the other in the monastery of s. germains . which mabillon saith is a thousand years old . these two copies are in effect but one , agreeing so much where they differ from others ; and having the old latin version opposite to the greek . monsieur arnauld had so bad an opinion of both parts of this clermont copy , ( as it is called ) that he charges it with manifest forgery , and imposture ; inserting things into the text without ground . f. simon who defends them cannot deny several things to be inserted , but he saith , it was through carelessness and not design . but he confesses , that those who transcribed both those ancient copies of s. paul 's epistles did not understand greek , and hardly latin . and now let us consider , of what just authority this different reading of the clermont copy ought to be against the consent of all other ancient copies . we find some good rules laid down by the roman criticks , when they had a design under vrban 8th . to compare the greek text of the new testament , with their ancient manuscripts in the vatican , and elewhere , and to publish an exact edition of it ( which collation was preserved in the barberin library , and from thence published by pet. possinus . ) and the main rules as to the various lections of manuscripts were these , 1. that the text was not to be alter'd but a concurrence of all , or the greatest part of the manuscripts . 2. that if one manuscript agreed with the vulgar latin , the text was not to be alter'd , but the difference to be set down at the end of the chapter . but it is observable in that collation of twenty two manuscripts , there is no one copy produced , wherein there is any variety as to this place . i know they had not twenty two manuscripts of s. paul's epistles , ( they mention but eight ancient manuscripts ) but they found no difference in those they had . and now i leave any reasonable man to judge , whether this clermont copy ought to be relied upon in this matter . but i have something more to say about the greek copies . 1. that god is in the complutensian polyglott , which was the first of the kind , and carried on by the wonderful care and expence of that truly grea● man cardinal ximenes , who spared for no cost or pains in procuring the best ancient copies both hebrew and greek ; and the fittest men to judge of both languages . and in pursuit of this noble design , he had the best vatican manuscripts sent to him ( as is expressed in the epistle before his greek testament , ) and what others he could get out of other places , among which he had the codex britannicus mention'd by erasmus . but after all these copies made use of by the editors , there is no intimation of any variety as to this place ; although the vulgar latin be there as it was . but erasmus mentions the great consent of the old copies as to the vulgar latin , and whence should that come , but from a variety in the old greek copies . to that i answer , 2. that the greek copies , where they were best understood had no variety in them ; i. e. among the greeks themselves . as appears by gregory nyssen , s. chrysostom , theodoret , oecumenius and theophylact. but doth not monsieur amelote say , that the marquiss of velez had sixteen old manuscripts , out of which he gathered various readings , and he reads it o! i cannot but observe , how he commends fabricius and walton , for rendring the syriac version according to the vulgar latin ; but that will appear to be false , to any one that looks into them ; the former is mentioned already ; and the latter translates it , quod manifestatus sit in carne . but as to the marquiss of velez his copies , there is a secret in it , which ought to be understood , and is discover'd by mariana . he confesses , he had so may manuscripts , eight of them out of the escurial , but that he never set down whence he had his readings . and in another place , he ingenuously confesses , that his design was to justifie the vulgar latin ; and therefore collected readings on purpose , and he suspects some , out of such greek copies , as after the council of florence were made comfortable to the latin . which readings were published by la cerda , whose authority amelote follows . and now what reason can there be , that any such late copies should be prefer'd before those which were used by the greek fathers ? 3. that the latin fathers did not concern themselves about changing their version , because they understood it still to relate to the person of christ. so do s. ierom , leo , hilary , fulgentius , and others . as to the objections about liberatus , macedonius and hincmarus , i refer them to the learned oxford annotations . ix . it is not wisely done of these interpreters , to charge our church so much for retaining a verse in s. iohn's first epistle , when they had so good authority to do it ? the verse is , there are three that bear record in heaven , the father , son , and holy ghost , &c. from hence they charge us with corrupted copies and false translations ; as an instance of the former , they produce this text , which they say , was not originally in the bible , but is added to it , and is not found in the most ancient copies of the greek , nor in the syriac , arabick , ethiopick , or armenian bibles , nor in the most ancient latin bibles . notwithstanding all which , i hope to be able to shew , that our church had reason to retain it . for which end we are to consider these things ; 1. that erasmus first began to raise any scruple about it . for , however it might not be in some mss. which were not look'd into , this verse was constantly and solemnly read as a part of scripture both in the greek and latin churches , as mr. selden confesses , and that it was in wickliff's bible . so that here was a general consent of the eastern and western churches for the receiving it ; and although there might be a variety in the copies , yet there was none in the publick service , and no objections against it that we find . but erasmus his authority sway'd so much here , that in the bibles in the time of h. 8. and e. 6. it was retained in a different letter . as in tyndell's bible printed by the king's printer , a. d. 1540. and in the church bible of king e. 6. in both which they are read , but not in the same character . yet erasmus his authority was not great enough to cast it out , if he had a mind to have done it . which doth not appear , for he saith himself , that finding it in the codex britannicus , as he calls it , he restored it in his translation as well as the greek testament , out of which he had expunged it befo●e in two editions . and the complutensian bible coming out with it , added greater authority to the keeping of it in , and so it was preserved in the greek testaments of hervagius , plautin and r. stephens and others , after the mss. had been more diligently searched . morinus saith , it was in seven of rob. stephens his mss. but f. simon will not allow that it was in any but the complutensian , which is a strange piece of boldness in him . for beza saith , he had the use of them all from him ; and h. stephens let him have his father's copy compared with 25 mss. and he affirms , that he found it in several of r. stephens his old mss. besides the codex britannicus and the complutensian copy , and therefore he concludes , that it ought to be retained . ( and so it was , after these copies were come abroad in the bishop's bible , under queen elizabeth , without any distinction of character , as likewise in our last translation . ) and it is observable , that amelote affirms , that he found it in the most ancient greek copy in the vatican library ; but the roman criticks confess , it was not in their 8 mss. yet they thought it fit to be retained from the common greek copies , and the testimonies of the fathers agreeing with the vulgar latin. 2. this verse was in the copies of the african churches from s. cyprian's time , as appears by the testimonies of s. cyprian , fulgentius , facundus , victor vitensis , and vigilius tapsensis , which are produced by others . f. simon hath a bold conjecture , of which he is not sparing , that victor vitensis is the first who produced it as s. john 's saying ; and that it was s. cyprian 's own assertion and not made use of by him as a testimony of scripture . but they who can say such things as these , are not much to be trusted . for s. cyprian's words are , speaking of s. iohn before , et iterum de patre & filio scriptum est , & hi tres unum sunt . and it was not victor vitensis , but the african bishops and eugenius in the head of them , who made that address to huneric , wherein they say , that it is clearer than light , that father , son and holy ghost are one god , and prove it by the testimony of s. john. tres sunt qui testimonium perhibent in caelo , pater , verbum & spiritus sanctus , & hi tres unum sunt . 3. in the former testimony , the authority of the vulgar latin was made use of : and why , is it rejected here ? when morinus confesses there is no variety in the copies of it . vulgata versio hunc versum constanter habet . and he observes , that those of the fathers , who seem to omit it ( as s. augustin against maximinus ) did not follow the old latin version . lucas brugensis , saith only , that in 35 old copies , they found it wanting but in five . as to s. ierom's prologue , i am not concerned to defend it ; but erasmus thought it had too much of s. jerom in it , and others think it hath too little . f. simon confesses , that p. pithaeus and mabillon think it was s. ierom's , and that it was in the mss. but i conclude with saying , that whoever was the author , at the time when it was written , the greek copies had this verse , or else he was a notorious impostor . x. the next thing i shall ask these wise interpreters of scripture , is , whether , when the scripture so often affirms , that the world was made by the son , and that all things were created by him in heaven and in earth , it be reasonable to understand them of creating nothing ? for after all their shifts and evasions it comes to nothing at last . but that we may see , how much they are confounded with these places , we may observe , 1. they sometimes say , that where the creation of all things is spoken of , it is not meant of christ but of god. for in the answer they give to the place of the epistle to the colossians , they have these words : for by him all things were created , are not spoken of christ , but of god : the sense of the whole context is this , the lord christ is the most perfect image of the invisible god , the first born from the dead of every creature ; for , o colossians , by him , even by the invisible god were all things created ; they were not from all eternity , nor rose from the concourse of atoms , but all of them , whether things in heaven , or things in earth ; whether thrones , or dominions , or principalities , or powers , are creatures , and were by god created , who is before them all , and by him they all consist . this is a very fair concession , that of whomsoever these words are spoken he must be god. 2. but in the defence of this very book they go about to prove , that the creation of the world is not meant by these words . is not this interpreting like wise men indeed ? and they tell us , they cannot but wonder , that men should attribute the old or first creation to christ. wise men do not use to wonder at plain things . for what is the old or first creation , but the making the world , and creating all things in heaven and earth ? and these things are attribu●ed to the word , to the son to christ. but say they , the scripture does never say in express words ▪ that christ hath created the heaven and the earth . what would these wise interpreters have ? doth not by whom all things were created in heaven and earth imply , that heaven and earth were created by him ? but they have a notable observation from the language of the new testament , viz that christ is never said to have created the heaven , the earth , and the sea , and all that therein is ; but we are apt to think , that creating all things takes in ●he sea too , and that in the scripture language heaven and earth are the same with the world , and i hope the world takes in the sea ; and the world is said to be made by him , and do not all things take in all ? no , say they , all things are limited to all thrones , principalities and powers , visible and invisible . then , however the making of these is attributed to christ. and if he made all powers , visible and invisible , he must be god. not so neither . what then is the meaning of the words , by him were all things created that are in heaven and in earth , visible and invisible ; whether they be thrones , or dominions , or principalities , or powers , all things were created by him and for him ? surely then , these dominions and powers were created by him . no , say they , that which we render created , ought to be rendred , modelled , disposed , or reformed into a new order . were ever wise men driven to such miserable shifts ? one while these words are very strong and good proof of the creation of the world against atheists and epicureans , and by and by they prove nothing of all this , but only a new modelling of some things called dominions and powers . do they hope ever to convince men at this rate of wise interpreting ? well , but what is this creating or disposing things into a new order ? and who are these dominions and powers ? they answer , men and angels . how are the angels created by him and for him ? did he die to reform them , as well as mankind ? no , but they are put under him . and so they were created by him , that is , they were not created by him , but only made subject to him . but who made them subject to him ? the man christ iesus ? no , god appointed him to be the lord of every creature . then they were not created by christ , but by god ; but the apostle saith , they were created by christ. but god made him head of the church , and as head of the body he rules over all . this we do not at all question ; but how this comes to be creating dominions and powers , visible and invisible . did god make the earth and all the living creatures in it , when he made man lord over them ? or rather was man said to create them , because he was made their head ? if this be their interpreting scripture like wise men , i shall be content with a less measure of understanding , and thank god for it . xi . lastly , is this to interpret scripture like wise men , to leave the form of baptism doubtful , whether it were not inserted into s. matthew's gospel ; or to understand it in another sense than the christian church hath done from the apostles times ? i say first , leave it doubtful , because they say , that learned criticks have given very strong reasons why they believe these words . in the name of the father , and of the son , and of the holy ghost , were not spoke by our saviour , but have been added to the gospel of s. matthew , from the common form and practise of the church . why are these strong reasons of learned criticks mentioned , but to raise doubts in peoples minds about them ? but they declare afterwards against them . not too much of that . for they say , only , that they are not without their weight , but they have observed several things that make them think , that this text is a genuine part of scripture . very wisely and discreetly spoken ! the reasons are strong and weighty ; but they think otherwise . i wish they had told the world , who these learned criticks were ; lest it should be suspected that they were their own inventions . but i find a certain nameless socinian was the author of them ; and his words are produced by sandius ( a person highly commended by them for his industry and learning , but as much condemned by others , for want of skill or ingenuity . ) the reason of writing these reasons sandius freely confesses was , because this place clearly proved a trinity of persons against the socinians . but what are these very strong and weighty reasons ? for it is great pity , but they should be known . in the first place he observes , that s. matthew's gospel was written in hebrew , and the original he saith is lost ; and he suspects that either s. jerom was himself the translator into greek and latin ( who was a corrupter of scripture , and origen ) or some unknow person : from whence it follows , that our gospel of s. matthew is not of such authority , that an article of such moment should depend upon it . is not this a very strong and weighty reason ? must not this be a very learned critick who could mention s. ierom , as translator of s. matthews gospel into greek ? but then one would think this interpreter might have been wise enough to have added this of himself . no ; he dares not say that , but that it was added by transcribers . but whence or how ? to that he saith , that they seem to be taken out of the gospel according to the egyptians . this is great news indeed . but comes it from a good hand ? yes , from epiphanius . and what saith he to this purpose ? he saith , that the sabellians made use of the counterfeit egyptian gospel , and there it was declared that father , son and holy ghost were the same . and what then ? doth he say they borrowed the form of baptism from thence ? nothing like it . but on the contrary , epiphanius urges this very form in that place against the sabellians : and quotes s. matthew's authority for it . but this worthy author produces other reasons , which sandius himself laughs at , and despises ? and therefore i pass them over . the most material seems to be if it hold , that the most ancient writers on s. matthew take no notice of them , and he mentions origen , hilary , and s. chrysostom , but these negative arguments sandius thinks of no force . origen and s. chrysostom , he saith , reach not that chapter ; the opus imperfectum , which was none of his , doth not ; but his own commentaries do , and there he not only mentions the form , but takes notice of the compendious doctrine delivered by it , which can be nothing else but that of the trinity . in the greek catena on s. matthew there is more mentioned , viz. that christ had not then first his power given him ; for he was with god before , and was himself by nature god. and there gregory nazianzen saith , the form of baptism was in the name of the holy trinity ; and he there speaks more fully . remember , saith he , the faith into which thou wert baptized . into the father ? that is well , but that is no farther than the jews go ( for they own one god , and one person . ) into the son ? that is beyound them , but not yet perfect . into the holy ghost ? yes , saith he , this is perfect baptism . but what is the common name of these three , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . plainly , that of god. but this learned critick observes , that hilary in some copies takes no notice of this form. that is truly observed , for the very conclusion is not hilary's , but taken out of s. ierom ; but if he had look'd into hilary's works , he would have found the form of baptism owned , and asserted by him . for he not only sets it down as the form of faith , as well as our baptism appointed by christ ; but argues from it , against the sabellians and ebionites , as well as others . thus we see how very strong and weighty the arguments of this learned critick were . chap. ix . the general sense of the christian church , proved from the form of baptism , as it was understood in the first ages . but our vnitarians pretend , that they are satisfied , that the form of baptism is found in all copies , and all the ancient translations ; and that it was used before the council of nice , as appears by several places of tertullian . but how then ? there are two things stick with them . ( 1. ) that the ante-nicene fathers do not alledge it to prove the divinity of the son , or holy ghost . ( 2. ) that the form of words here used , doth not prove the doctrine of the trinity . both which must be strictly examined . 1. as to the former . it cannot but seem strange to any one conversant in the writings of those fathers ; when s. cyprian saith expressly , that the form of baptism is prescribed by christ , that it should be in plenâ & aduna●â trinitate : i. e. in the full confession of the holy trinity ; and therefore , he denied the baptism of the marcionites , because the faith of the trinity was not sincere among them , as appears at large in that epistle . and this , as far as i can find , was the general sense of the ante-nicene fathers , as well as others . and it is no improbable opinion of erasmus , and vossius , two learned criticks indeed , that the most ancient creed went no further than the form of baptism , viz. to believe in the father , son and holy ghost ; and the other articles were added as heresies gave occasion . s. ierom saith , that in the traditional creed , which they received from the apostles , the main article was , the confession of the trinity ; to which he joyns the vnity of the church , and resurrection of the flesh ; and then adds , that herein is contained , omne christiani dogmatis sacramentum , the whole faith into which christians were baptized . and he saith , it was the custom among them to instruct those who were to be baptized for forty days in the doctrine of the holy trinity . so that there was then no question but the form of baptism had a particular respect to ●t ; and therefore , so much weight is laid upon the use of it , as well by the ante-nicene fathers , as others . for , tertullian saith , that the form of baptism was prescribed by our saviour himself as a law to his church . s. cyprian to the same purpose , that he commanded it to be used s. augustin calls them , the words of the gospel , without which there is no baptism . the reason given by s. ambrose is , because the faith of the trinity is in this form. but how if any one person were left out ? he thinks , that if the rest be not denied , the baptism is good ; but otherwise , vacuum est omne mysterium , the whole baptism is void . so that the faith of the trinity was that which was required in order to true baptism , more than the bare form of words . if there were no reason to question the former , s. ambrose seems of opinion that the baptism was good , although every person were not named , and therein he was followed by beda , hugo de sancto victore , peter lombard and others . and s basil in the greek church , asserted that baptism in the name of the holy ghost was sufficient , because he is hereby owned to be of equal dignity with the father and son ; but it is still supposing that the whole and undivided trinity be not denied . and he elsewhere saith , that baptizing in the name of the father , son and holy ghost is a most solemn profession of the trinity in vnity , because they are all joyned together in this publick act of devotion . but others thought that the baptism was not good , unless every person were named ; which opinion generally obtained both in the greek and latin church . and the late editors of s. ambrose observe , that in other places he makes the whole form of words necessary as well as the faith in the holy trinity . the baptism of the eunomians was rejected , because they alter'd the form and the faith too , saying , that the father was uncreate , the son created by the father , and the holy ghost created by the son. the baptism of the samosatenians was rejected by the council of nice . s. augustin thinks it was because they had not the right form , but the true reason was , they rejected the doctrine of the trinity . and so the council of arles i. doth in express words refuse their baptism who refused to own that doctrine . that council was held a. d. 314. and therefore bellarmin , and others after him , are very much mistaken , when they interpret this canon of the arians , concerning whose baptism there could be no dispute till many years after . but this canon is de afris ; among whom the custom of baptizing prevailed ; but this council propounds an expedient as most agreeable to the general sense of the christian church , viz. that if any relinquished their heresie and came back to the church , they should ask them the creed , and if they found that they were baptized in the name of the father , son and holy ghost , they should have only imposition of hands , but if they did not confess the trinity , their baptism was declared void . now this i look on as an impregnable testimony of the sense of the ante-nicene fathers , viz. that they did not allow that baptism which was not in the name of the father , son and holy ghost ; or ( which they understood to be the same ) in the confession of the faith of the trinity . how then can our vnitarians pretend , that the ante-nicene fathers did not alledge the form of baptism to prove the trinity ? for the words are , if they do n●t answer to this trinity let them be baptized , saith this plenary cou●cil , as s. augustin often calls it . what trinity do they mean ? of mere names or cyphers , or of one god and two creatures joyned in the same form of words , as our vnitarians understand it ? but they affirm , that the ancients of 400 years do not insist on this text of s. matthew to prove the divinity or personality of the son or spirit . therefore to give a clear account of this matter , i shall prove , that the ante-nicene fathers did understand these words , so as not to be taken , either for mere names , or for creatures joyned with god ; but that they did maintain the divinity of the son and holy ghost , from the general sense , in which these words were taken among them . and this i shall do from these arguments ; 1. that those who took them in another sense , were opposed and condemned by the christian church . 2. that the christian church did own this sense in publick acts of divine worship as well as private . 3. that it was owned and defended by those who appeared for the christian faith against infidels . and i do not know any better means than these , to prove such a matter of fact as this . 1. the sense of the christian church may be known by its behaviour towards those , who took these words only for different names or appearances of one person . and of this we have full evidence , as to praxeas , noëtus and sabellius , all long before the council of nice . praxeas was the first , at least in the western church , who made father , son and holy ghost , to be only several names of the same person , and he was with great warmth and vigor opposed by tertullian , who charges him with introducing a new opinion into the church , as will presently appear . and his testimony is the more considerable , because our vnitarians confess , that he lived 120 years before the nicene council , and that he particularly insists upon the form of baptism against praxeas . but to what purpose ? was not his whole design in that book to prove three distinct persons of father , son and holy ghost , and yet but one god ? doth he not say expresly , that christ commanded that his disciples should baptize into the father , son and holy ghost , not into one of them ; ad singula nomina in personas singulas tingimur . in baptism we are dipped once at every name , to shew that we are baptized into three persons . it is certain then , that tertullian could not mistake the sense of the church so grosly , as to take three persons to be only three several names . he grants to praxeas , that father , son and holy ghost are one , but how ? per unitatem substantiae , because there is but one divine essence : but yet he saith , there are three , not with respect to essential attributes , for so they are unius substantiae , & unius status , & unius potestatis , quia unus deus . and therefore the difference can be only as to personal properties and distinct capacities , which he calls gradus , forma , species , not merely as to internal relations , but as to external dispensations , which he calls their oeconomy . for his great business is to prove against praxeas , that the son and holy ghost had those things attributed to them in scripture , which could not be attributed to the father . for praxeas asserted , that the father suffer'd ; and thence his followers were called patripassians and monarchici , i. e. vnitarians . the main ground which praxeas went upon , was the vnity of the godhead , so often mention'd in scripture , from hence tertullian saith , that he took advantage of the weakness of the common sort of christians , and represented to them , that whereas the doctrine of christ made but one god , those who held the trinity according to the form of baptism , must make more gods than one . tertullian answers , that they held a monarchy , i. e. unicum imperium , one supreme godhead , and a supreme power may be lodged in distinct persons and administred in several manners ; that nothing overthrew the divine monarchy , but a different power and authority , which they did by no means assert . they held a son , but of the substance of the father , and a holy ghost from the father by the son : he still keeps to the distinction of persons , and the vnity of substance . and he utterly denies any division of essences or separate substances ; for therein , he saith , lay the heresie of valentinus , in making a prolation of a separate being . but although he saith , the gospel hath declared to us , that the father is god , the son god , and the holy ghost god , yet we are taught that there is still but one god : redactum est jam nomen dei & domini in unione , c. 13. whereby the christians are distinguished from the heathens who had many gods this is the force of what tertullian saith upon this matter . and what say our vnitarians to it ? they cannot deny that he was an ante-nicene father ; and it is plain that he did understand the form of baptism so as to imply a trinity of persons in an vnity of essence : to which they give no answer . but i find three things objected against tertullian by their friends : 1. that tertullian brought this doctrine into the church from montanus , whose disciple he then was . so schlichtingius in his preface against meisner , grants , that he was very near the apostolical times , and by his wit and learning promoted this new doctrine about the trinity , especially in his book against praxeas . but how doth it appear , that he brought in any new doctrine ? yes , saith schlichtingius , he confesses , that he was more instructed by the paraclete . but if he had dealt ingenuously , he would have owned that in that very place , he confesses , he was always of that opinion , although more fully instructed by the paraclete ? this only shews that montanus himself innovated nothing in this matter , but endeavoured to improve it . and it is possible , that tertullian might borrow his similitudes and illustrations from him , which have added no ●●rength to it . but as to the main of the doctrine he saith , it came from the rule of faith delivered by the apostles , before praxeas , or any hereticks his predecessors . which shews , that those who rejected this doctrine were always esteemed hereticks in the christian church . and this is a very early testimony of the antiquity and general reception of it , because as one was received the other was rejected , so that the assertors of it were accounted hereticks . and the sense of the church is much better known by such publick acts , than by mere particular testimonies of the learned men of those times . for when they deliver the sense of the church in such publick acts , all persons are judges of the truth and falshood of them at the time when they are deliver●d ; and the nearer they came to the apostolical times , the greater is the strength of their evidence ; this i ground on tertullian's appealing to the ancient rule of faith , which was universally known and received in the christian church , and that such persons were look'd on as hereticks who differ'd from it . which being so very near the apostles times , it 's hardly possible to suppose , that the whole christian church should be mistaken as to what they received as the rule of faith , which was deliver'd and explained at baptism , and therefore the general sense of the form of baptism must be understood by all who were admitted to it . so that the members of the christian church cannot be supposed better acquainted with any thing than the doctrine they were baptized into . here then we have a concurrence of several publick acts of the church . 1. the form of baptism . 2. the rule of faith relating to that form , and explained at baptism . 3. the churches rejecting those as hereticks who differ'd from it : which tertullian applies to those who rejected the trinity . and praxeas his doctrine was then condemned , not by a particular sentence , but by the general sense of the church at that time . for optatus milevitanus reckons him among the condemned hereticks , and joyns him with marcian and valentinus , as well as sabellius , who follow'd him in the same heresie . how was this possible , if praxeas deliver'd the true doctrine , and tertullian brought in a new opinion as schlichtingius fansies . tertullian was at that time a declared montanist ; and if he had introduc'd a new doctrine about the trinity , can we imagine those would have been silent about it , who were sharp enough upon tertullian for the sake of his paraclete ? some of the followers of montanus afterwards fell into the same opinions with praxeas , as theodoret tells us , and tertullian saith as much of those cataphrygians who follow'd aeschines : but these montanists are distinguished from the rest . and rigaltius observes , that tertullian follow'd montanus chiefly in what related to discipline , and that himself was not so corrupted in point of doctrine as some of his followers were . 2. it 's objected , that tertullian's doctrine is inconsistent with the doctrine of the trinity ; for he denies the eternal generation of the son ; and only asserts an emission of him before the creation . but my business is not to justifie all tertullian's expressions or similitudes ; for men of wit and fancy love to go out of the road , and sometimes involve things more by attempts to explain them ; but i keep only to that which he saith , was the faith of the church from the beginning ; and i see no reason to call in question his fidelity in reporting , however he might be unhappy in his explications . 3. tertullian himself saith , schlichtingius , in other places , where he speaks of the rule of faith , doth not mention the holy ghost ; and therefore this seems added by him for the sake of the paraclete . but this can be of no force to any one that considers , that tertullian grounds his doctrine not on any new revelation by the paraclete , but on the rule of faith received in the church long before ; and upon the form of baptism prescribed by our saviour . will they say , the holy ghost was there added for the sake of montanus his paraclete ? and in another of his books , he owns the father , son and holy ghost to make up the trinity in vnity . wherein petavius himself confesses , that he asserted the doctrine of the church in a catholick manner ; although he otherwise speaks hardly enough of him . the next i shall mention , is novatian , whom schlichtingius allows , to have been before the nicene-council ; and our modern vnitarians call him a great man , whoever he was , and very ancient . and there are two things i observe in him . 1. that he opposes sabellianism ; for , before his time praxeas and noetus were little talked of , especially in the western church ; but sabellius his name and doctrine were very well known by the opposition to him , by the bishops of alexandria and rome . he sticks not , at the calling it heresie several times ; and disputes against it , and answers the objection about the vnity of the godhead . 2. that he owns , that the rule of faith requires our believing in father , son and holy ghost ; and asserts the divine eternity of it , and therefore must hold the doctrine of the trinity to be the faith of the church contained in the form of baptism . for he saith , the authority of faith , and the holy scriptures admonish us to believe not only in the father and son , but in the holy ghost . therefore the holy ghost must be considered , as an object of faith joyned in the scripture with the other two , which is no where more express , than in the form of baptism , which as s. cyprian saith , was to be administred in the full confession of the trinity , in the place already mention●d . and it is observable that s. cyprian rejects the baptism of those who denied the trinity at that time , among whom he instances in the patripassians , who it seems were then spread into africa . the dispute about the marcionites baptism was upon another ground , for they held a real trinity , as appears by dionysius romanus in athanasius , and epiphanius , &c. but the question was , whether they held the same trinity or not . s. cyprian saith , that our saviour appointed his apostles to baptize in the name of father , son and holy ghost , and in the sacrament of this trinity they were to baptize . doth marcion hold this trinity ? so that s. cyprian supposed the validity of baptism to depend on the faith of the trinity . and if he had gone no farther , i do not see how he had transgressed the rules of the church ; but his error was , that he made void baptism upon difference of communion , and therein he was justly opposed . but the marcionites baptism was rejected in the eastern church , because of their doctrine about the trinity . in the parts of asia about ephesus , noetus had broached the same doctrine , which praxeas had done elsewhere . for which he was called to an account , and himself with his followers we cast out of the churches communion , as epiphanius reports , which is another considerable testimony of the sense of the church at that time . epiphanius saith , he was the first who broached that blasphemy ; but theodoret mentions epigonus and cleomenes before him ; it seems , that he was the first who was publickly taken notice of for it ; and therefore underwent the censure of the church with his disciples . when he was first summon'd to answer , he denied that he asserted any such doctrine ; because no man before him saith epiphanius , had vented such poison . and in the beginning he saith , that noetus out of a spirit of contradiction had utter'd such things , as neither the prophets , nor the apostles , nor the church of god ever thought or declared . now what was this unheard of doctrine of noetus ? that appears best by noetus his answer upon his second appearance which was , that he worshipped one god , and knew of no other , who was born and suffer'd , and died for us ; and for this he produced the several places which assert the vnity of the godhead , and among the rest one very observable , rom. 9.5 . of whom as concerning the flesh christ came , who is over all god blessed for ever . from whence he inferr'd that the son and the father were the same , and the same he affirmed of the holy ghost . but from hence we have an evident proof that the most ancient greek copies in noetus his time , which was long before the council of nice , had god in the text. epiphanius brings many places of scripture to prove the distinction of persons in the unity of the godhead ; but that is not my present business , but to shew the general sense of the church at that time . i do not say that noetus was condemned by a general council ; but it is sufficient , to shew that he was cast out of the church , where he broached his doctrine , and no other church received him , or condemned that church which cast him out , which shews an after consent to it . now what was this doctrine of noetus ? the very same with that of praxeas at rome . theodoret saith , this his opinon was , that there was but one god the father , who was himself impassible , but as he took our nature , so he was passible and called the son. epiphanius more fully , that the same person was father , son and holy ghost ; wherein he saith , he plainly contradicts the scriptures , which attribute distinct personalities to them ; and yet assert but one godhead . the father hath an hypostasis of his own , and so have the son and holy ghost ; but yet there is but one divinity , one power , and one dominion ; for these distinct persons are , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; of the same individual essence and power . but epiphanius was no ante-nicene father : however in matters of antiquity , where there is no incongruity in the thing , we may make use of his authority ; and i think no one will question , that noetus was condemned ; which was the thing i produced him to prove . but although noetus was condemned , yet this doctrine did spread in the eastern parts ; for origen mentions those who confounded the notion of father and son , and made them but one hypostasis , and distinguished only by thought , and denomination . this doctrine was opposed not only by origen , but he had the sense of the church concurring with him , as appears in the case of beryllus bishop of bostra , who fell into this opinion , and was reclaimed by origen ; and eusebius gives this account of it , that there was a concurrence of others with him in it , and that this doctrine was look'd on as an innovation in the faith. for his opinion was that our saviour had no proper subsistence of his own before the incarnation ; and that the deity of the father alone was in him . he did not mean that the son had no separate divinity from the father , but that the deity of the father only appeared in the son ; so that he was not really god , but only one in whom the deity of the father was made manifest . which was one of the oldest heresies in the church , and the most early condemned and opposed by it . but those heresies , which before had differenced persons from the church , were now spread by some at first within the communion of it ; as it was not only in the case of noetus and beryllus , but of sabellius himself , who made the greatest noise about this doctrine ; and his disciples , epiphanius tells us , spread very much both in the eastern and western parts ; in mesopotamia and at rome . their doctrine , he saith , was , that father , son and holy ghost were but one hypostasis , with three different denominations . they compared god to the sun , the father to the substance , the son to the light , and the holy ghost to the heat which comes from it ; and these two latter were only distinct operations of the same substance . epiphanius thinks that sabellius therein differ'd from noetus , because he denied that the father suffer'd ; but s. augustin can find no difference between them . all that can be conceived is , that a different denomination did arise from the different appearance and operation ; which our vnitarians call three relative persons , and one subsisting person . sabellius did spread his heresie most in his own country ; which was in pentapolis of the cyrenaick province , being born in ptolemais one of the five cities there . of this dionysius bishop of alexandria gives an account in his epistle to xystus then bishop of rome , wherein he takes notice of the wicked and blasphemous heresie , lately broached there against the persons of the father , son and holy ghost . letters on both sides were brought to him , on which occasion he wrote several epistles , among which there was one to ammonius bishop of bernice , another of the cities of pentapolis . in this , he disputed with great warmth against this doctrine of sabellius , insomuch , that he was afterwards accused to dionysius of rome , that he had gone too far the other way ; and lessen'd the divinity of the son by his similitudes ; of which he clear'd himself , as appears by what remains of his defence in athanasius . but as to his zeal against sabellianism it was never question'd . dionysius of rome declares his sense at large in this matter against both extremes , viz. of those who asserted three separate and independent principles , and of those who confounded the divine persons ; and he charges the doctrine of sabellius too with blasphemy , as well as those who set up three different principles , and so made three gods. but he declares the christian doctrine to be , that there were father , son and holy ghost ; but that there is an indivisible vnion in one and the same godhead . it seems dionysius of alexandria was accused for dividing and separating the persons , to which he answers , that it was impossible he should do it , because they are indivisible from each other ; and the name of each person did imply the inseparable relation to the other , as the father to the son , and the son to the father , and the holy ghost to both . and this judgment of these two great men in the church concerning sabellianism , was universally receiv'd in the christian church . and this happen'd long before the nicene council . 2. another argument of the general sense of the christian church is from the hymns and doxologies publickly received ; which were in the most solemn acts of religious worship made to father , son and holy ghost . the force of this argument appears hereby , that divine worship cannot be given to mere names , and an equality of worship doth imply an equality of dignity in the object of worship , and therefore , if the same acts of adoration be performed to father , son and holy ghost , it is plain , that the christian church did esteem them to have the same divine nature , although they were distinct persons . and if they were not so , there could not be distinct acts of divine worship performed to them . s. basil mentions this doxology of africanus , ( that ancient writer of the christian church ) in the fifth book of his chronicon , we render thanks to him who gave our lord iesus christ to be a saviour , to whom with the holy ghost be glory and majesty for ever . and another of dionysius alexandrinus in his 2d . epistle to dionysius of rome . to god the father and his son our lord iesus christ with the holy ghost , be glory and power for ever and ever , amen . and this is the more considerable , because he saith he did herein follow the ancient custom and rule of the church ; and he joyned with it , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , praising god in the same voice with those who have gone before us , which shews how early these doxologies to father , son and holy ghost , had been used in the christian church . but to let us the better understand the true sense of them , s. basil hath preserved some passages of dionysius alexandrinus which do explain it , viz. that either the sabellians must allow three distinct hypostases , or they must wholly take away the trinity . by which it is evident , that by father , son and holy ghost he did understand three distinct hypostases , but not divided ; for that appears to have been the sabellians argument , that if there were three , they must be divided : no saith dionysius , they are three whether the sabellians will or not ; or else there is no trinity : which he look'd on as a great absurdity to take away , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the divine trinity . of what ? of mere names or energies ? that is no trinity ; for there is but one subsisting person of separate and divided substances : that the sabellians thought must follow but both the dionysius's denied it . and in another passage there mention'd , dionysius of alexandria asserts the trinity in vnity . but before dionysius , he quotes a passage of clemens romanus concerning father , son and holy ghost , which attributes life distinctly to them . now life cannot belong to a name or energy , and therefore must imply a person . but that which is most material to our purpose , is the publick doxology in the church of neo-caesarea , brought in by gregory thaumaturgus . s. basil gives a very high character of him , as of a person of extraordinary piety and exactness of life , and a great promoter of christianity in those parts , and by him the form of doxology was introduced into that church , being chiefly formed by him ( there being but seventeen christians when he was first made bishop there ) which was , glory to god the father , and son with the holy ghost , which ought to be understood according to the sense of the maker of it . and gregory hath deliver'd his sense plainly enough in this matter : for in that confession of faith , which was preserved in the church of neo-caesarea , he owns a perfect trinity in glory , eternity and power , without separation or diversity of nature , on which doctrine his form of doxology was grounded . which s. basil following , exceptions were taken against it , by some as varying from the form used in some other places . for the followers of aetius took advantage from the expression used in those doxologies , glory be to the father , by the son , and in the holy ghost , to infer a dissimilitude in the son and holy ghost to the father , and to make the son the instrument of the father , and the holy ghost only to relate to time and place . but s. basil takes a great deal of pains to shew the impertinency of these exceptions . they would fain have charged this doxology as an innovation on s. basil , because it attributed equal honour to father , son and holy ghost , which the aetians would not endure ; but they said , that the son was to be honoured only in subordination to the father , and the holy ghost as inferiour to both . but s. basil proves from scripture an equality of honour to be due to them : and particularly from the form of baptism , c. 10. wherein the son and holy ghost are joyned with the father , without any note of distinction . and what more proper token of a conjunction in the same dignity , than being put together in such a manner . especially considering these two things . 1. the extream jealousie of the jewish nation , as to joyning the creatures with god in any thing that related to divine honour . but as s. basil argues , if the son were a creature , then we must believe in the creator , and the creature together ; and by the same reason that one creature is joyned , the whole creation may be joyned with him ; but saith he , we are not to imagine the least disunion or separation between father , son and holy ghost ; nor that they are three distinct parts of one inseparable being , but that there is an indivisible conjunction of three in the same essence ; so that where one is , there is the other also . for where the holy ghost is , there is the son , and where the son is , there is the father . and so athanasius urges the argument from these words , that a creature could not be joyned with the creator in such a manner , as in the form of baptism ; and it might have been as well said , baptize in the name of the father , and any other creature . and for all that i see , our vnitarians would have liked such a form very well ; for they parallel it with those in scripture ; and they worshipped the lord , and the king ; and they feared the lord and samuel . but the iews understood the different occasion of such expressions too well , to have born such a conjunction of creatures with the creator in the most solemn act of initiation into a profession of religion . 2. the iews had a notion among them of three distinct subsistences in the deity sutable to these of father , son and holy ghost . this hath been shew'd by many as to the son , or the divine word ; and rittangel makes out the same as to the holy ghost . among the three subsistences in the mercavah ( which rittangel had proved from their most ancient writings ) those which are added to the first are wisdom and intelligence , and this last is by the old chaldee paraphrast rendred 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and he proves it to be applied to god in many places of the pentateuch , where such things are attributed to him , as belong to the holy ghost . and he particularly shews by many places , that the schecinah is not taken for the divine glory , but that is rendred by other words ( however the interpreters of the chaldee paraphrast have rendred it so ) but he produces ten places where the chaldee paraphrast uses it in another sense ; and he leaves , he saith , many more to the readers observation . if the iews did of old own three subsistences in the same divine essence , there was then great reason to joyn father , son and holy ghost in the solemn act of initiation : but if it be denied , that they did own any such thing ; they must deny their most ancient books , and the chaldee paraphrast , which they esteem next to the text , and rittangel saith , they believe it written by inspiration . that which i chiefly urge , is this , that if these things be not very ancient , they must be put in by the later iews , to gratifie the christians in the doctrine of the trinity ; which i do not believe any iew will assent to . and no one else can imagine this , when our vnitarians say , that the doctrine of the trinity is the chief offence which the iews take at the christian religion . how then can we suppose the iews should forge these books on purpose to put in such notions , as were most grateful to their enemies , and hateful to themselves ? morinus hath endeavoured to run down the credit of the most ancient books of the iews ; and among the rest the book iezirah , the most ancient cabbalistical book among the iews , which he learnedly proves was not written by abraham , ( as the iews think . ) i will not stand with morinus about this ; however the book cosri saith , it was made by abraham before god spake to him , and magnifies it to the king of cosar , as containing an admirable account of the first principles above the philosophers . buxtorf saith , that the book cosri hath been extant nine hundred years , and in the beginning of it , it is said , that the conference was four hundred years before , and therein the book iezirah is alledged as a book of antiquity : and there the three subsistences of the deity are represented by mind , word , and hand . so that this can be no late invention of cabbalistical iews . but our vnitarians utterly deny that the jews had any cabbala concerning the trinity . and they prove it , because the jews in origen , and justin martyr deny the messias to be god. they might as well have brought their testimony to prove jesus not to be the messias ; for the iews of those times , being hard pressed by the christians , found they could not otherwise avoid several places of the old testament . but this doth not hinder , but that they might have notions of three subsistences in their ancient books : which contained neither late invention , nor divine revelations ; but a traditional notion about the divine being , and the subsistences in it : and i can find no arguments against it , that deserve mentioning . for when they say the iewish cabbala was a pharisaical figment , &c. it needs no answer . but what do they say to the old paraphrases , whereon the main weight as to this matter lies ? all that i can find is , that they do not speak of distinct persons ; but they confess that philo speaks home , and therefore they make him a christian . but philo had the same notion with the paraphrasts ; and their best way will be to declare , that they look upon them all as christians ; and they might as well affirm it of onkelos , as they do of philo ; but i doubt the world will not take their word for either . but to proceed with the christian doxologies . n●●hing , saith s. basil , shall make me forsake the doctrine i received in my baptism , when i was first entred into the christian church ; and i advise all others to keep firm to that profession of the holy trinity , which they made in their baptism ; that is , of the indivisible vnion of father , son and holy ghost . and , as he saith afterwards , by the order of the words in baptism , it appears that as the son is to the father , so the holy ghost is to the son. for they are all put without any distinction or number , wh●ch he observes agrees only to a multitude . for by their properties they are one and one ; yet by the community of essence the two are but one : and he makes it his business to prove the holy ghost to be a proper object of adoration , as well as the father and son , and therefore there was no reason to find fault with the doxology used in that church : and that , firmilian , meletius and the eastern christians agreed with them in the use of it , and so did all the western churches from illyricum to the worlds end : and this , he saith , was by an immemorial custom of all churches , and of the greatest men in them . nay , more he saith , it had been continued in the churches , from the time the gospel had been receive'd among them . and nothing can be fuller than the authority of his testimony , if s. basil may be believed . to these i shall add the doxology of polycarp at this martyrdom , mentioned by eusebius , which is very full to our purpose ; i glorifie thee by our eternal high-priest iesus christ thy beloved son , by whom be glory to thee , with him in the holy ghost . what can we imagine polycarp meant by this , but to render the same glory to father , son and holy ghost ; but with such a difference as to the particles , which s. basil at large proves come to the same thing ? and to the same purpose , not only the church of smyrna , but pionius the martyr , who transcribed the acts , speaking of iesus christ , with whom be glory to god the father , and the holy ghost . these suffer'd martyrdom for christianity , and owned the same divine honour to the father , son and holy ghost . what could they mean , if they did not believe them to have the same divine nature ? can we suppose them guilty of such stupidity to lose their lives , for not giving divine honour to creatures , and at the same time to do it themselves ? so that , if the father , son and holy ghost were not then believed to be three persons and one god , the christian church was mightily deceived ; and the martyrs acted inconsistently with their own principles . which no good christian will dare to affirm . but some have adventured to say , that polycarp did not mean the same divine honour to father , son and holy ghost . but if he had so meant it , how could he have expressed it otherwise ? it was certainly a worship distinct from what he gave to creatures ; as appears by the church of smyrna's disowning any worship but of love and repect to their fellow creatures ; and own the giving adoration to the son of god ; with whom they joyn both father and holy ghost . which it is impossible to conceive , that in their circumstances , they should have done , unless they had believed the same divine honour to belong to them . s. basil's testimony makes it out of dispute , that the doxology to father , son and holy ghost , was universally receiv'd in the publick offices of the church , and that from the time of greatest antiquity : so that we have no need of the te●timonies from the apostolical constitutions ( as they are called ) to prove it . but i avoid all disputable authorities . and i shall only add that it appears from s. basil , that this doxology had been long used not only in publick offices , but in occasional ejaculations , as at the bringing in of light in the evening , the people , he saith , were wont to say , glory be to the father , and to the son , and to the holy ghost , &c. this , he saith , had been an ancient custom among the people , and none can tell who brought it in . but prudentius shews , that it was continued to his time ; as appea●s by his hymn on that occasion , which concludes with this doxology , and s. hilary ends his hymn written to his daughter , in the same manner . 3. i come therefore to the last proof , which i shall produce of the sense of the christian church , which is , from the testimony of those who wrote in defence of our religion against infidels . in which i shall be the shorter , since the particular testimonies of the fathers , have been so fully produced , and defended by others , especially by dr. bull. iustin martyr in his apology for the christians , gives an account of the form of baptism , as it was administred among christians , which he saith , was in the name of god the father of all , and of our saviour iesus christ , and of the holy ghost . and that he spake of them as of distinct persons , as appears by his words afterwards . they who take the son to be the father , neither know the father nor the son , who being the word and first begotten is god. and when he speaks of the eucharist , he saith , that it is offer'd to the father of all , by the name of the son , and the holy ghost : and of other solemn acts of devotion , he saith , that in all of them they praise god the father of all , by his son iesus christ , and the holy ghost . and in other places , he mentions the worship they give to father , son and holy ghost . indeed he mentions a difference of order between them ; but makes no difference as to the worship given to them . and all this in no long apology for the christian faith. what can be the meaning of this if he did not take it for granted , that the christian church embraced the doctrine of the trinity in baptism ? iustin martyr was no such weak man to go about to expose the christian religion instead of defending it ; and he must have done so , if he did not believe this not only to be a true , but a necessary part of the christian faith for , why did he at all mention such a mysterious and dark point ? why did he not conceal it , ( as some would have done ) and only represent to the emperours , the fair and plausible part of christianity ? no , he was a man of great sincerity , and a through christian himself ; and therefore thought he could not honestly conceal so fundamental a point of the christian faith , and which related to their being entred into the christian church . for if the profession of this faith had not been look'd on as a necessary condition of being a member of the church of christ ; it is hard to imagine , that iustin martyr should so much insist upon it , not only here , but in his other treatises : of which an account hath been given by others . athenagoras had been a philosopher , as well as iustin martyr , before he professed himself a christian ; and therefore , must be supposed to understand his religion before he embraced it . and in his defence he asserts , that the christians do believe in father , son and holy ghost ; in god the father , god the son , and the holy ghost . and he mentions both the vnity and order which is among them . which can signifie nothing unless they be owned to be distinct persons in the same divine nature . and in the next page , he looks on it , as thing which all christians aspire after in another life , that they shall then know the vnion of the father , and the communication of the father to the son , what the holy ghost is , and what the vnion and distinction there is between the holy ghost , the son and the father . no man who had ever had the name of a philosopher would have said such things , unless he had believed the doctrine of the trinity a● we do , i. e. that there are three distinct persons in the same divine nature , but that the manner of the union , and distinction between them , is above our reach and comprehension . but our vnitarians have an answer ready for these men , viz. that they came out of plato 's school , with the tincture of his three principles ; and they sadly complain , that platonism had very early corrupted the christian faith as to these matters . in answer to which exception , i have only one postulatum to make ; which is , that these were honest men , and knew their own minds be●t , and i shall make it appear , that none can more positively declare , than they do , that they did not take up these notions from plato , but from the holy scriptures ; iustin martyr saith he took the foundation of his faith from thence , and that he could find no certainty as to god and religion any where else : that he thinks , plato took his three principles from moses ; and in his dialogue with trypho , he at large proves the eternity of the son of god from the scriptures ; and said , he would use no other arguments , for he pretended to no skill but in the scriptures , which god had enabled him to understand . athenagoras declares , that where the philosophers agreed with them , their faith did not depend on them , but on the testimony of the prophets , who were inspired by the holy ghost . to the same purpose speaks theophilus bishop of antioch , who asserts the coeternity of the son with the father , from the beginning of s. john's gospel ; and saith , their faith is built on the scriptures . clemens alexandrinus owns not only , the essential attributes of god to belong to the son ; but that there is one father of all , and one word over all , and one holy ghost who is every where . and he thinks , plato borrowed his three principles from moses ; that his second was the son , and his third the holy spirit . even origen hims●l● highly commends moses above plato , in his most undoubted writings , and saith , that numen●us went beyond plato , and that he borrowed out of the scriptures ; and so he saith , plato did in other places ; but he adds , that the doctrines were better deliver'd in scripture , than in his artificial dialogues . can any one that hath the least reverence for writers of such authority and z●al for the christian doctrine , imagine that they wilfully corrupted it in one of the chief articles of it ; and brought in new speculations against the sense of those books , which at the same time , they professed to be the only rule of their faith ? even where they speak most favourably of the platonick trinity , they suppose it to be borrowed from moses . and therefore numenius said , that moses and plato did not differ about the first principles ; and theodoret mentions numenius as one of those , who said , plato understood the hebrew doctrine in egypt ; and during his thirteen years ●ay there , it is hardly possible to suppose , he should be ignorant of the hebrew doctrine , about the first principles , which he was so inquisitive after , especially among nations , who pretended to antiquity . and the platonick notion of the divine essence inlarging it self to three hypostases , is considerable on these accounts : 1. that it is deliver'd with so much assurance by the opposers of christianity ; such as plotinus , porphyrius , proclus and others were known to be , and they speak with no manner of doubt concerning it ; as may be seen in the passage of porphyrie preserved by s. cyril and others . 2. that they took it up from no revelation ; but as a notion in it self agreeable enough ; as appears by the passages in plato and others concerning it . they never suspected it to be liable to the charge of non-sense , and contradictions , as our modern vnitarians charge the trinity with ; although their notion as represented by porphyrie be as liable to it . how came these men of wit and sense , to hit upon , and be so fond of such absurd principles which lead to the belief of mysterious non-sense , and impossibilities ; if these men may be trusted ? 3. that the nations most renowned for antiquity and deep speculations , did light upon the same doctrine , about a trinity of hypostases in the divine essence . to prove this i shall not refer to the trismegistick books , or the chaldee oracles , or any doubtful authorities ; but plutarch asserts the three hypostases to have been receiv●d among the persians , and porphyry , and iamblicus , say the same of the egyptians . 4. that this hypostasis did maintain its reputation so long in the world. for we find it continued to the time of macrobius ; who ment●ons it as a reasonable notion , viz. of one supreme being , father of all , and a mind proceeding from it , and soul from mind . some have thought that the platonists made two created beings , to be two of the divine hypostases ; but this is contrary to what plotinus and porphyry affirm concerning it , and it is hard to give an account , how they should then be essentially different from creatures , and be hypostases in the divine essence . but this is no part of my business , being concerned no farther , than to clear the sense of the christian church , as to the form of baptism in the name of the father , son and holy ghost ; which according to the sense of the ante-nicene fathers , i have proved , doth manifest the doctrine of the trinity , to have been generally receiv'd in the christian church . 2. let us now see what our vnitarians object again●t the proof of the trinity from these words . 1. they say , that there is a note of distinction and superiority . for christ owns ▪ that his power was given to him by the father . there is no question , but that the person who suffer'd on the cross , had power given to him , after his resurrection ; but the true question is , whether his sonship were then given to him . he was then declared to be the son of god with power , and had a name or authority given him above every name ; being exalted to be a prince and a saviour , to give repentance , and remission of sins : in order to which he now appointed his apostles to teach all nations ; baptizing them in the name of the father , the son and the holy ghost . he doth not say in the name of iesus , who suffer'd on the cross ; nor in the name of iesus the christ now exalted ; but in the name of father , son and holy ghost : and although there were a double gift with respect to the son and holy ghost ; the one , as to his royal authority over the church ; the other , as to his extraordinary effusion on the apostles , yet neither of these are so much as intimated ; but the office of baptism is required to be performed in the name of these three as distinct and yet equal ; without any relation to any gift , either as to the son or holy ghost . but if the ancient iews were in the right , as we think they were , then we have a plain account , how these came to be thus mention'd in the form of baptism , viz. that these three distinct subsistences in the divine essence , were not now to be kept up as a secret mystery from the world ; but that the christian church was to be formed upon the belief of it . 2. they bring several places of scripture , where god and his creatures are joyned , without any note of distinction or superiority ; as , the people feared the lord , and samuel , 1 sam. 12.18 . they worshipped the lord , and the king , 1 chron. 29.20 . i charge thee before god the lord iesus christ , and his elect angels , 1 tim. 5.21 . the spirit and the bride say come , revel . 22.17 . but can any man of sense imagine , these places contain a parallel with a form of words , wherein men are entred into the profession of a new religion , and by which they were to be distinguished from all other religions ? in the former places , the circumstances were so notorious as to god , and the civil magistrate , that it shews no more than that the same external acts may be used to both , but with such a different intention as all men understood it . what if s. paul name the elect angels in a solemn obtestation to timothy , together with god , and the lord iesus christ ? what can this prove , but that we may call god and his creatures to be witnesses together of the same thing ? and so heaven and earth are called to bear witness against obstinate sinners : may men therefore be baptized in the name of god and his creatures ? the spirit and bride may say come without any incongruity ; but it would have been strange indeed , if they had said , come be baptized in the name of the spirit and the bride . so that these instances are very remote from the purpose . but they say farther , that the ancients of the first four hundred years do not insist on this place , to prove the divinity or personality of the son or spirit . as to the first three hundred years , i have given an account already ; and as to the fourth century , i could not have thought , that they would have mention'd it : since there is scarce a father of the church in that time , who had occasion to do it , but makes use of the argument from this place to prove the divinity and personality of the son and spirit . athanasius saith , that christ founded his church on the doctrine of the trinity contained in these words ; and if the holy ghost had been of a different nature , from the father and son , he would never have been joyned with them in a form of baptism , no more than an angel , or any other creature . for the trinity must be eternal and indivisible , which it could not be , if any created being were in it , and therefore he disputes against the arian baptism , although performed with the same words , because they joyned god and a creature together in baptism . to the same purpose argue didymus , gregory nazianzen , s. basil and others , within the compass of four hundred years , whose testimonies are produced by petavius ; to whom i refer the reader , if he hath a mind to be satisfied in so clear a point , that i cannot but think our vnitarians never intended to take in the fathers after the council of nice , who are so expressly against them ; and therefore i pass it over as a slip . 4. they object , that the form of baptism implies no more , than being admitted into that religion which proceeds from god the father , and deliver'd by his son , and confirmed by the testimony of the holy ghost . so much we grant is implied , but the question still remains , whether the son and holy ghost are here to be consider'd only in order to their operations , or whether the persons of the son and holy ghost , from whom those effects came , are not here chiefly intended ? for if no more had been meant , but these effects , then the right form of admission had not been , into the name of father , son and holy ghost ; but in the name of the father alone , as revealing himself by his son , and confirming it by the miraculous works of the holy ghost . for these are only subservient acts to the design of god the father , as the only subsisting person . 5. they tell us , that it is in vain , not to say ridiculously pretended , that a person or thing is god , because we are baptized into it ; for some were baptized into moses , and others into john's baptism , and so moses and john baptist would be gods ; and to be baptized into a person or persons , and in the name of such a person is the same thing . grant this ; yet there is a great difference between being baptized in the name of a minister of baptism , and of the author of a religion , into which they are baptized . the israelites were baptized unto moses ; but how ? the syriac and arabic versions render it per mosen ; and so s. augustin reads it . and this seems to be the most natural sense of the word , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , being put for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as it is , act. 7.53 . compared with gal. 3.19 . and the force of the apostle's argument , doth not lie in the parallel between being baptized into moses , and into christ ; but in the privileges they had under the ministery of moses with those which christians enjoyed . the other place implies no more , than being enter'd into that profession , which john baptized his disciples into . but doth any one imagine , that because iohn baptist did enter his disciples by baptism , therefore they must believe him to be god ? i know none that lay the force of the argument upon any thing parallel to those places . but it depends upon laying the circumstances together . here was a new religion to be taught mankind , and they were to be entred into it , not by a bare verbal profession , but by a solemn rite of baptism ; and this baptism is declar'd to be in the name of the father , son and holy ghost : which cannot be understood of their ministery , and therefore must relate to that faith , which they were baptized into , which was concerning the father , son and holy ghost . and so the christian church understood it , from the beginning , as i have proved in the foregoing discourse . and from hence came the instruction of catechumens , who were to be baptized about the trinity ; and the first creeds which related only to them , as i have already observed . and so much our vnitarians grant in one of their latest pamphlets , that a creed was an institution , or instruction what we are to believe in the main , and fundamental articles , especially concerning the persons of father , son and holy ghost . but they contend , that the creed which bears the name of the apostles , was the original creed framed by the apostles themselves , because they suppose this creed doth not assert the son and holy ghost , to be eternal and divine persons , and therefore they conclude , that the makers of this creed , either did not know , that any other person but the father is god , or almighty , or maker of heaven and earth , or they have negligently , or wickedly concealed it . this is a matter so necessary to be clear'd , that i shall examine these two things before i put an end to this discourse . 1. what proofs they bring that this creed was framed by the apostles . 2. what evidence they produce , that this creed excludes the divinity of the son and holy ghost . 1. as to the proofs they bring , that this creed was framed by the apostles . we believe the creed to be apostolical in the true sense of it ; but that it was so in that frame of words , and enumeration of articles , as it is now receiv'd , hath been called in question by some criticks of great judgment and learning , whom i have already mentioned . erasmus saith , he doth not question the articles being apostolical ; but whether the apostles put it thus into writing . and his chief argument is from the variety of the ancient creeds ; of which no account can be given so probable , as that they were added occasionally in opposition to a growing heresie . as for instance , the word impassible was inserted with respect to the father in the ancient eastern creed , against the doctrine of sabellius ; but it was not in the old western creed . and he argues , that the apostolical creed ended with the holy ghost ; because the nicene creed did so . and vossius thinks the other articles which are in cyril , were added after the nicene council ; which would not have omitted them , if they had been in the former creed . and when there were so many creeds made afterwards , it is observable , that they do all end with the article of the holy ghost ; which they would never have done , in so jealous a time about creeds , if they had left out any articles of what was then receiv'd for the apostolical creed . the first creed after the nicene , which made great noise in the world , was that framed at antioch ; and that creed not only ends with the article of the holy ghost ; but mentions the form of baptism ; and our saviours commanding his apostles to baptize in the name of the father , son and holy ghost ; as the foundation of the creed . for it hereby appears , that the father is true father , and the son true son , and the holy ghost true holy ghost ; not bare names , but such as import three distinct subsistences . for hilary observes , that this council chiefly intended to overthrow sabellianism , and therefore asserted tres subsistentium personas , as hilary interprets their meaning , and so doth epiphanius ; which was to remove the suspition , that they asserted only triplicis vocabuli vnionem ; as hilary speaks . the next creed is of the eastern bishops at sardica , and that ends wi●h the holy ghost , and so do both the creeds at sirmium ▪ and the latter calls the article of the trinity , the close of our faith ; which is always to be kept according to our saviour's command , go teach all nations , baptizing them in the name of the father , son and holy ghost . so that in all these creeds , about which there was so much heat in the christian church , there was not the least objection , that any articles of the apostolical creed were omitted . it is no argument , that there was then no contest about these articles ; for they were bound to give in an entire creed ; and so the council of antioch declares , that they would publish the confession of the faith of the church : and how could this be , if they left out such articles which had been always receiv●d from the apostles times ? but certainly our vnitarians would not attack such men , as erasmus , and vossius in a matter relating to antiquity , if they had not some good arguments on their side . their first business , is to shew , that some of vossius his arguments are not conclusive ; such as they are , i leave them to any one that will compare them with the answers . but there are two things they lay weight upon . 1. that the whole christian church east and west , could not have agreed in the same creed , as to number and order of articles , and manner of expression , if this creed had not come from the same persons , from whom they receiv'd the gospel and the scriptures ; namely , from the apostles and preachers of christianity . 2. that it was receiv'd by a constant tradition to have been the apostles ; not a bare oral tradition , but the tradition of the ancient commentators upon it . now these i confess to be as good arguments , as the matters will bear ; and i will no longer contest this point with them , provided , that we be allowed to make use of the same arguments ; as to the second point ; wherein they undertake to prove , that the apostles creed doth exclude the divinity of the son and holy ghost . what is now become of the general consent of the christian church , east and west ? and of the commentators upon this creed ? if the argument hold good in one case , i hope it will be allowed to do so in the other also . and what greater testimony can be given of such a consent of the christian church ; than that those who opposed it , have been condemned by it , and that the church hath expressed her sense of it in publick , and private acts of devotion , and divine worship , and have defended it as a necessary part of the christian faith , against the assaults of infidels and hereticks ? so that although the apostles creed do not in express words declare , the divinity of the three persons in the vnity of the divine essence ; yet taking the sense of those articles , as the christian church understood them from the apostles times , then we have as full , and clear evidence of this doctrine , as we have that we receiv'd the scriptures from them . chap. x. the objections against the trinity in point of reason answer'd . having in the foregoing chapters endeavour'd to clear the doctrine of the trinity from the charge of contradictions , and to prove it agreeable to the sense of scripture , and the primitive church ; i now come in the last place to examine the remaining objections , in point of reason ; and those are , 1. that this doctrine is said to be a mystery , and therefore above reason , and we cannot in reason be obliged to believe any such thing . 2. that if we allow any such mysteries of faith as are above reason , there can be no stop put to any absurd doctrines , but they may be receiv'd on the same grounds 1. as to this doctrine being said to be above reason , and therefore not to be believ'd ; we must consider two things ; 1. what we understand by reason ; 2. what ground in reason there is , to reject any doctrine above it , when it is proposed as a matter of faith. 1. what we understand by reason . i do not find that our vnitarians have explained the nature and bounds of reason in such manner , as those ought to have done , who make it the rule and standard of what they are to believe . but sometimes they speak of clear and distinct perceptions , sometimes of natural ideas , sometimes of congenit notions , &c. but a late author hath endeavour'd to make amends for this , and takes upon him to make this matter clear ; and to be sure to do so , he begins with telling us , that reason is not the soul abstractedly consider'd ; ( no doubt of it ) but the soul acting in a peculiar manner is reason . ( and this is a ver● peculiar way of explaining it ) but farther we are told , it is not the order or report ( respect i suppose ) which is naturally between all things . ( but that implies a reason in things . ) but the thoughts which the soul forms of things according to it , may properly claim that title , i. e. such thoughts which are agreeable to the reason of things are reasonable thoughts . this is clear and distinct . and i perfectly agree with him , that our own inclinations , or the bare authority of others is not reason . but what is it ? every one experiences in himself a power , or faculty of form●ng various ideas , or perceptions of things ; of affirming , or denying according as he sees them to agree or disagree , and this is reason in general it is not the bare receiving ideas into the mind , that is strictly reason , ( who ever thought it was ? ) but the perception of the agreement , or disagreement of our ideas in a greater of lesser number ; wherein soever this agreement or disagreement may consist . if the perception be immediate without the assistance of any other idea , this is not call'd reason , but self-evidence : but when the mind makes use of intermediate ideas to discover that agreement or disagreement , this method of knowledge is properly call'd reason or demonstration . and so reason is defined to be that faculty of the soul , which discovers the certainty of any thing dubious , or obscure by comparing it with something evidently known . this is offer'd to the world , as an account of reason ; but to shew how very loose , and unsatisfactory it is , i desire it may be consider'd , that this doctrine supposes , that we must have clear and distinct ideas of whatever we pretend to any certainty of in our minds , and that the only way to attain this certainty , is by comparing these ideas together . which excludes all certainty of faith or reason , where we cannot have such clear and distinct ideas . but if there are many things of which we may be certain , and yet can have no clear and distinct ideas of them ; if those ideas we have , are too imperfect and obscure to form our judgments by ; if we cannot find out sufficient intermediate ideas ; then this cannot be the means of certainty , or the foundation of reason . but i shall keep to our present subject ; and our certainty of it in point of reason , depends upon our knowledge of the the nature of substance , and person and the distinction between them : but if we can have no such clear ideas in our minds concerning these things , as are required from sensation , or reflection ; then , either we have no use of reason about them , or it is in sufficient to pass any judgment concerning them . 1. i begin with the notion of substance . and i have great reason to begin with it ; for , according to this man's principles there can be no certainty of reason at all about it . and so our new way of reason is advanced to very good purpose . for we may talk and dispute about substance , as long as we please , but , if his principles of reason be true , we can come to no certainty ; since we can have no clear idea in our minds concerning it , as will appear from his own words ; and the method he proceeds in . ( 1. ) he saith , that the mind receives in ideas two ways . 1. by intermission of the senses , as colours , figures , sounds , smells , &c. 2. by the souls considering its own operations about what it thus gets from without , as knowing , doubting , affirming , denying , &c. ( 2. ) that these simple and distinct ideas , thus laid up in the great repository of the vnderstanding , are the sole matter and foundation of all our reasoning . then it follows , that we can have no foundation of reasoning , where there can can be no such ideas from sensation , or reflection . now this is the case of substance ; it is not intromitted by the senses , nor depends upon the operations of the mind ; and so it cannot be within the compass of our reason . and therefore i do not wonder , that the gentlemen of this new way of reasoning , have almost discarded substance out of the reasonable part of the world. for they not only tell us . that we can have no idea of it by sensation or reflection ; but that nothing is signified by it , only an uncertain supposition of we know not what . and therefore it is parallel'd , more than once , with the indian philosophers , he knew not what ; which supported the torto●se , that supported the elephant , that supported the earth ; so substance was found out only to support accidents . and , that when we talk of substances we talk like children , who being ask'd a question , about somewhat which they know not , readily give this satisfactory answer , that it is something . if this be the truth of the case , we must still talk like children , and i know not how it can be remedied . for , if we cannot come at a rational idea of substance , we can have no principle of certainty to go upon in this debate . i do not say , that we can have a clear idea of substance , either by sensation or reflection ; but from hence i argue , that this is a very insufficient distribution of the ideas necessary to reason . for besides these , there must be some general ideas , which the mind doth form , not by meer comparing those ideas it has got from sense or reflection ; but by forming distinct general notions , of things from particular ideas . and among these general notions , or rational ideas , substance is one of the first ; because we find that we can have no true conceptions of any modes or accidents ( no matter which ) but we must conceive a substratum , or subject wherein they are . since it is a repugnancy to our first conceptions of things , that modes or accidents should subsist by themselves , and therefore the rational idea of substance is one of the first , and most natural ideas in our minds . but we are still told , that our vnderstanding can have no other ideas , but either from sensation or reflection . and that , herein chiefly lies the excellency of mankind , above brutes , that these cannot abstract , and inlarge their ideas as men do . but how comes the general idea of substance , to be framed in our minds ? is this by abstracting and inlarging simple ideas ? no , but it is by a complication of many simple ideas together : because not imagining how these simple ideas can subsist by themselves , we accustom our selves to suppose some substratum wherein they do subsist , and from which they do result , which therefore we call substance . and is this all indeed , that is to be said for the being of substance , that we accustom our selves to suppose a substratum ? is that custom grounded upon true reason or not ? if not , then accidents or modes , must subsist of themselves , and these simple ideas need no tortoise to support them : for figures and colours , &c. would do well enough of themselves , but for some fancies men have accustomed themselves to . if it be grounded on plain and evident reason , then we must allow an idea of substance , which comes not in by sensation or reflection ; and so we may be certain of some things which we have not by those ideas . the idea of substance , we are told again , is nothing but the supposed , but unknown support of those qualities we find existing , which we imagine cannot subsist , sine re substante , which according to the true import of the word , is in plain english , standing under , or upholding . but very little weight is to be laid upon a bare grammatical etymology , when the word is used in another sense by the best authors , such as cicero and quintilian , who take substance for the same with essence ; as valla hath proved ; and so the greek word imports ; but boethius in translating aristotle's predicaments , rather chose the word substance as more proper , to ●xpress a compound being , and reserved essence , for what was more simple and immaterial . and in this sense , substance was not applied to god but only essence , as s. augustine observes , but afterwards , the names of substance , and essence were promiscuously used , with respect to god and his creatures . and do imply , that which makes the real being , as distinguished from modes and properties . and so the substance , and essence of a man are the same ; not being taken for the individual substance , which cannot be understood without particular modes and properties ; but the general substance , or nature of man abstractly from all the circum●●ances of persons . and i desire to know , whether according to true reason , that be not a clear idea of a man ; not of peter , iames or iohn , but of a man as such . this is not a meer universal name , or mark , or sign ; but there is as clear and distinct a conception of this in our minds , as we can have from any such simple ideas , as are convey'd by our senses . i do not deny that the distinction of particular substances , is by the several modes and properties of them , ( which they may call a complication of simple ideas if they please ) but i do assert , that the general idea , which relates to the essence without these is so just , and true an idea , that without it the complication of simple ideas , will never give us a right notion of it . i must do that right to the ingenious author of the essay of humane vnderstanding ( from whence these notions are borrowed to serve other purposes than he intended them ) that he makes the case of spiritual , and corporeal substances to be alike , as to their idea's , and that we have as clear a notion of a spirit , as we have of a body , the one being supposed to be the substratum to those simple ideas we have from without , and the other of those operations we find within our selves . and that it is as rational to affirm , there is no body , because we cannot know its essence , as 't is called , or have no idea of the substance of matter ; as to say , there is no spirit , because we know not its essence , or have no idea of a spiritual substance . from hence it follows , that we may be certain , that there are both spiritual and bodily substances , although we can have no clear and distinct ideas of them . but , if our reason depend upon our clear and distinct idea's ; how is this possible ? we cannot reason without clear ideas , and yet we may be certain without them : can we be certain without reason ? or doth our reason give us true notions of things , without these idea's ? if it be so , this new hypothesis about reason must appear to be very unreasonable . let us suppose this principle to be true , that the simple ideas by sensation or reflection , are the sole matter and foundation of all our reasoning : i ask then , how we come to be certain , that there are spiritual substances in the world , since we can have no clear and distinct ideas concerning them ? can we be certain without any foundation of reason ? this is a new sort of certainty , for which we do not envy these pretenders to reason . but methinks , they should not at the same time assert the absolute necessity of these ideas to our knowledge , and declare that we may have certain knowledge without them . if there be any other method , they overthrow their own principle ; if there be none , how come they to any certainty , that there are both bodily and spiritual substances ? as to these latter ( which is my business ) i must enquire farther , how they come to know that there are such . the answer is by self-reflection , on those powers we find in our selves , which cannot come from a mere bodily substance . i allow he reason to be very good , but the question i ask is , whether this argument be from the clear and distinct idea or not ? we have ideas in our selves of the several operations of our minds of knowing , willing , considering , &c. which cannot come from a bodily substance . very true ; but is all this contained in the simple idea of these operations ? how can that be , when the same persons say , that notwithstanding their ideas it is possible for matter to think . for it is said , that we have the ideas of matter and thinking , but possibly shall never be able to know , whether any mere material being thinks or not ; it being impossible for us by the contemplation of our own ideas , without revelation to discover whether omnipotency hath not given to some systems of matter , fitly disposed , a power to perceive or think . if this be true , then for all that we can know by our ideas of matter and thinking ; matter may have a power of thinking : and if this hold , then it is impossible to prove a spiritual substance in us , from the idea of thinking : for how can we be assured by our ideas , that god hath not given such a power of thinking , to matter so disposed as our bodies are ? especially since it is said , that in respect of our notions , it is not much more remote from our comprehension to conceive that god can , if he pleases , super-add to our idea of matter a faculty of thinking , than that he should super-add to it another substance , with a faculty of thinking . whoever asserts this , can never prove a spiritual substance in us , from a faculty of thinking ; because he cannot know from the idea of matter and thinking , that matter so disposed cannot think . and he cannot be certain that god hath not framed the matter of our bodies , so as to be capable of it . it is said indeed elsewhere , that it is repugnant to the idea of sensless matter , that it should put into it self sense , perception and knowledge : but this doth not reach the present case ; which is not what matter can do of it self , but what matter prepared by an omnipotent hand can do . and what certainty can we have that he hath not done it ? we can have none from the ideas ; for those are given up in this case ; and consequently , we can have no certainty upon these principles , whether we have any spiritual substance within us or not . but we are told , that from the operations of our minds , we are able to frame the complex idea of a spirit . how can that be , when we cannot from those ideas be assured , but that those operations may come from a material substance . if we frame an idea on such grounds , it is at most but a possible idea ; for it may be otherwise ; and we can have no assurance from our ideas , that it is not : so that the most men may come to in this way of idea's is , that it is possible it may be so , and it is possible it may not ; but that it is impossible for us from our ideas , to determine either way . and is not this an admirable way to bring us to a certainty of reason ? i am very glad to find the idea of a spiritual substance made as consistent , and intelligible , as that of a corporeal ; for as the one consists of a cohesion of solid parts , and the power of communicating motion by impulse , so the other consists in a power of thinking , and willing , and moving the body ; and that the cohesion of solid parts , is as hard to be conceived as thinking ; and we are as much in the dark about the power of communicating motion by impulse , as in the power of exciting motion by thought . we have by daily experience clear evidence of motion produced , both by impulse and by thought ; but the manner how , hardly comes within our comprehension ; we are equally at a loss in both . from whence if follows , that we may be certain of the being of a spiritual substance , although we have no clear and distinct idea of it , nor are able to comprehend the manner of its operations : and therefore it is a vain thing in any to pretend , that all our reason and certainty is founded on clear and distinct ideas ; and that they have reason to reject any doctrine which relates to spiritual substances , because they cannot comprehend the manner of it . for the same thing is confessed by the most inquisitive men , about the manner of operation , both in material , and immaterial substances . it is affirmed , that the very notion of body , implies , something very hard , if not impossible to be explained , or understood by us ; and that the natural consequence of it , viz. divisibility ; involves us in difficulties impossible to be explicated , or made consistent . that we have but some few superficial ideas of things ; that we are destitute of faculties , to attain to the true nature of them ; and that when we do that , we fall presently into darkness and obscurity ; and can discover nothing farther , but our own blindness and ignorance . these are very fair and ingenuous confessions of the shortness of humane understanding , with respect to the nature and manner of such things , which we are most certain of the being of , by constant and undoubted experience . i appeal now to the reason of mankind , whether it can be any reasonable foundation for rejecting a doctrine proposed to us , as of divine revelation , because we cannot comprehend the manner of it ; especially , when it relates to the divine essence . for as the same author observes , our idea of god is framed from the complex ideas of those perfections we find in our selves , but inlarging them so , as to make them suitable to an infinite being , as knowledge , power , duration , &c. and the degrees or extent of these which we ascribe to the soveraign being , are all boundless and infinite . for it is infinity , which joyned to our ideas of existence , power , knowledge , &c. makes that complex idea , whereby we represent to our selves the best we can , the supreme being . now , when our knowledge of gross material substances is so dark ; when the notion of spiritual substances is above all ideas of sensation ; when the higher any substance is , the more remote from our knowledge ; but especially when the very idea of a supreme being implies its being infinite , and incomprehensible , i know not whether it argues more stupidity , or arrogance to expose a doctrine relating to the divine essence , because they cannot comprehend the manner of it . but of this more afterwards . i am yet upon the certainty of our reason , from clear and distinct ideas : and if we can attain to certainty without them , and where it is confessed we cannot have them ; as about substances : then these cannot be the sole matter and foundation of our reasoning , which is so peremptorily asserted by this late author . but i go yet farther : and as i have already shew'd , we can have no certainty of an immaterial substance within us , from these simple ideas ; so i shall now shew , that there can be no sufficient evidence , brought from them by their own confession , concerning the existence of the most spiritual and infinite substance , even god himself . we are told , that the evidence of it is equal to mathematical certainty ; and very good arguments are brought to prove it , in a chapter on purpose : but that which i take notice of is , that the argument from the clear and distinct idea of god is passed over . how can this be consistent with deducing our certainty of knowledge from clear and simple ideas ? i do not go about to justifie those , who lay the whole stress upon that foundation ; which i grant to be too weak to support so important a truth ; and that those are very much to blame , who go about to invalidate other arguments for the sake of that ; but i doubt all this talk about clear and distinct ideas , being made the foundation of certainty , came originally from those discourses , or meditations , which are aimed at . the author of them was an ingenious , thinking man , and he endeavour'd to lay the foundations of certainty , as well as he could . the first thing he found any certainty in , was his own existence ; which he founded upon the perception of the acts of his mind , which some call an internal , infallible perception that we are . from hence he proceeded , to enquire , how he came by this certainty , and he resolved it into this , that he had a clear and distinct perception of it ; and from hence he formed his general rule , that what he had a clear and distinct perception of was true . which in reason ought to go no farther , than where there is the like degree of evidence : for the certainty here , was not grounded on the clearness of the perception , but on the plainness of the evidence which is of that nature , that the very doubting of it proves it ; since it is impossible , that any thing should doubt or question its own being , that had it not . so that here it is not the clearness of the idea , but an immediate act of perception , which is the true ground of certainty . and this cannot extend to things without our selves ; of which we can have no other perception , than what is caused by the impressions of outward objects . but whether we are to judge according to those impressions , doth not depend on the ideas themselves , but upon the exercise of our judgment and reason about them , which put the difference between true and false , and adequate , and inadequate ideas . so that our certainty is not from the ideas themselves , but from the evidence of reason , that those ideas are true , and just , and consequently that we may build our certainty upon them . but the idea of an infinite being hath this peculiar to it , that necessary existence is implied in it . this is a clear and distinct idea , and yet it is denied , that this doth prove the existence of god. how then can the grounds of our certainty arise from clear and distinct ideas ; when in one of the clearest ideas of our minds we can come to no certainty by it ? i do not say , that it is denied to prove it ; but this is said , that it is a doubtful thing from the different make of mens tempers and application of their thoughts . what can this mean , unless it be to let us know , that even clear and distinct ideas , may lose their effect by the difference of mens tempers and studies ; so that besides ideas , in order to a right judgment , a due temper and application of the mind is required . and wherein is this different , from what all men of understanding have said ? why then should these clear and simple ideas be made the sole foundation of reason ? one would think by this , that these ideas would presently satisfie mens minds , if they attended to them . but even this will not do , as to the idea of an infinite being . it is not enough to say , they will not examine how far it will hold : for they ought either to say , that it doth hold , or give up this ground of certainty from clear and distinct ideas . but instead of the proper argument from ideas , we are told , that from the consideration of our selves , and what we find in our own constitutions , our reason leads us to the knowledge of this certain and evident truth ; that there is an eternal , most powerful , and most knowing being . all which i readily yield ; but we see plainly , the certainty is not placed in the idea , but in good and sound reason from the consideration of our selves and our constitutions . what! in the idea of our selves ? no certainly ; for let our idea be taken which way we please , by sensation or reflection , yet it is not the idea that makes us certain , but the argument from that which we perceive in , and about our selves . but we find in our selves perception and knowledge . it 's very true ; but how doth this prove that there is a god ? it is from the clear and distinct idea of it . no , but from this argument : that either there must have been a knowing being from eternity , or an unknowing ; for something must have been from eternity : but if an unknowing , then it was impossible there ever should have been any knowledge ; it being as impossible , that a thing without knowledge should produce it , as that a triangle should make it self three angles bigger than two right ones . allowing the argument to be good , yet it is not taken from the idea , but from principles of true reason ; as that no man can doubt his own perception ; that every thing must have a cause ; that this cause must either have knowledge or not : if it have , the point is gained ; if it hath not , nothing can produce nothing ; and consequently , a not knowing being cannot produce a knowing . again , if we suppose nothing to be first , matter can never begin to be ; if bare matter without motion eternal , motion can never begin to be ; if matter and motion be supposed eternal , thought can never begin to be . for , if matter could produce thought , then thought must be in the power of matter ; and if it be in matter as such , it must be the inseparable property of all matter ; which is contrary to the sense and experience of mankind . if only some parts of matter have a power of thinking , how comes so great a difference in the properties of the same matter ? what disposition of matter is required to thinking ? and from whence comes it ? of which no account can be given in reason . this is the substance of the argument used , to prove an infinite spiritual being , which i am far from weakning the force of ; but that which i design , is to shew ▪ that the certainty of it is not placed upon any clear and distinct ideas , but upon the force of reason distinct from it , which was the thing i intended to prove . 2. the next thing necessary to be clear'd in this dispute is , the distinction between nature and person , and of this we can have no clear and distinct idea from sensation or reflection . and yet all our notions of the doctrine of the trinity , depend upon the right understanding of it . for we must talk unintelligibly about this point , unless we have clear and distinct apprehensions concerning nature and person , and the grounds of identity and distinction . but that these come not into our minds by these simple ideas of sensation and reflection , i shall now make it appear ; 1. as to nature , that is sometimes taken for the essential property of a thing , as when we say , that such a thing is of a different nature from another , we mean no more than that it is differenced by such properties as come to our knowledge . sometimes nature is taken for the thing it self in which those properties are ; and so aristotle took nature for a corporeal substance , which had the principles of motion in it self : but nature and substance are of an equal extent ; and so that which is the subject of powers , and properties is the nature , whether it be meant of bodily or spiritual substances . i grant , that by sensation and reflection we come to know the powers and properties of things ; but our reason is satisfied , that there must be something beyond these ; because it is impossible that they should subsist by themselves . so that the nature of things propery belongs to our reason , and not to meer ideas . but we must yet proceed farther . for , nature may be consider'd two ways . 1. as it is in distinct individuals , as the nature of a man is equally in peter , iames , and iohn ; and this is the common nature with a particular subsistence proper to each of them . for the nature of man , as in peter , is distinct from that same nature , as it is in iames and iohn ; otherwise , they would be but one person , as well as have the same nature . and this distinction of persons in them is discerned both by our senses , as to their different accidents ; and by our reason , because they have a separate existence ; not coming into it at once and in the same manner . 2. nature may be consider'd abstractly , without respect to individual persons , and then it makes an entire notion of it self . for however , the same nature may be in different individuals , yet the nature in it self remains one and the same : which appears from this evident reason ; that otherwise every individual must make a different kind . let us now see , how far these things can come from our simple ideas , by reflection and sensation . and i shall lay down the hypothesis of those , who resolve our certainty into ideas , as plainly , and intelligibly , as i can . 1. we are told , that all simple ideas are true and adequate . not , that they are the true representation of things without us ; by that they are the true effects of such powers in them , as produce such sensations within us . so that really we can understand nothing certainly by them , but the effects they have upon us . 2. all our ideas of substances are imperfect and inadequate ; because they refer to the real essences of things , of which we are ignorant , and no man knows what substance is in it self : and they are all false , when look'd on as the representations of the unknown essences of things . 3. abstract ideas are only general names , made by separating circumstances of time and place , &c. from them , which are only the inventions , and creatures of the vnderstanding . 4. essence may be taken two ways . 1. for the real , internal , unknown constitutions of things , and in this sense it is understood as to particular things . 2. for the abstract idea , and one is said to be the nominal , the other the real essence . and the nominal essences only are immutable ; and are helps to enable men to consider things , and to discourse of them . but two things are granted , which tend to clear this matter . 1. that there is a real essence , which is the foundation of powers and properties . 2. that we may know these powers and properties , although we are ignorant of of the real essence . from whence i inferr . 1. that from those true and adequate ideas , which we have of the modes and properties of things , we have sufficient certainty of the real essence of them : for these ideas are allow'd to be true ; and either by them we may judge of the truth of things ; or we can make no judgment at all of any thing without our selves . if our ideas be only the effects we feel of the powers of things without us ; yet our reason must be satisfied , that there could be no such powers , unless there were some real beings which had them . so that either we may be certain by those effects of the real being of things ; or it is not possible , as we are framed , to have any certainty at all of any thing without our selves . 2. that from the powers and properties of things which are knowable by us , we may know as much of the internal essence of things , as those powers and properties discover . i do not say , that we can know all essences of things alike ; nor that we can attain to a perfect understanding of all that belong to them : but if we can know so much , as that there are certain beings in the world , endued with such distinct powers and properties , what is it we complain of the want of , in order to our certainty of things ? but we do not see the bare essence of things . what is that bare essence without the powers and properties belonging to it ? it is that internal constitution of things from whence those powers and properties flow . suppose we be ignorant of this ( as we are like to be , for any discoveries that have been yet made , that is a good argument to prove the uncertainty of philosophical speculations about the real essences of things ; but it is no prejudice to us , who enquire after the certainty of such essences . for although we cannot comprehend the internal frame , or constitution of things , nor in what manner they do flow from the substance ; yet by them we certainly know that there are such essences , and that they are distinguished from each other by their powers and properties . 3. the essences of things as they are knowable by us , have a reality in them : for they are founded on the natural constitution of things . and however the abstract ideas are the work of the mind ; yet they are not meer creatures of the mind ; as appears by an instance produced of the essence of the sun , being in one single individual ; in which case it is granted , that the idea may be so abstracted , that more suns might agree in it , and it is as much a sort as if there were as many suns as there are stars . so that here we have a real essence subsisting in one individual , but capable of being multiplied into more , and the same essence remaining . but in this one sun there is a real essence , and not a meer nominal or abstracted essence : but suppose there were more suns ; would not each of them have the real essence of the sun ? for what is it makes the second sun to be a true sun , but having the same real essence with the first ? if it were but a nominal essence , then the second would have nothing but the name . therefore there must be a real essence in every individual of the same kind ; for that alone is it , which makes it to be what it is . peter , and iames , and iohn , are all true and real men ; but what is it which makes them so ? is it the attributing a general name to them ? no certainly , but that the true and real essence of a man is in every one of them . and we must be as certain of this , as we are that they are men ; they take their denomination of being men from that common nature , or essence which is in them . 4. that the general idea is not made from the simple ideas by the meer act of the mind abstracting from circumstances , but from reason and consideration of the true nature of things . for , when we see so many individuals , that have the same powers and properties , we thence infer , that there must be something common to all , which makes them of one kind : and if the difference of kinds be real , that which makes them of one kind and not of another , must not be a nominal , but real essence . and this difference doth not depend upon the complex ideas of substance , whereby men arbitrarily joyn modes together in their minds ; for let them mistake in the complication of their ideas , either in leaving out , or putting in what doth not belong to them , and let their ideas be what they please ; the real essence of a man , and a horse , and a tree , are just what they were : and let their nominal essences differ never so much , the real common essence , or nature of the several kinds are not at all alter'd by them . and these real essences are unchangeable : for , however there may happen some variety in individuals , by particular accidents , yet the essences of men , and horses , and trees remain always the same ; because they do not depend on the ideas of men , but on the will of the creator , who hath made several sorts of beings . 2. let us now come to the idea of a person . for , although the common nature in mankind be the same , yet we see a difference in the several individuals from one another : so that peter and iames , and iohn are all of the same kind ; yet peter is not iames , and iames is not iohn . but what is this distinction founded upon ? they may be distinguished from each other by our senses , as to difference of features , distance of place , &c. but that is not all ; for supposing there were no such external difference ; yet there is a difference between them , as several individuals in the same common nature . and here lies the true idea of a person , which arises from that manner of subsistence which is in one individual , and is not communicable to another . an individual , intelligent substance , is rather supposed to the making of a person , than the proper definition of it ; for a person relates to something which doth distinguish it from another intelligent substance in the same nature ; and therefore the foundation of it lies in the peculiar manner of subsistence , which agrees to one , and to none else of the kind ; and this is it which is called personality . but how do our simple ideas help us out in this matter ? can we learn from them , the difference of nature and person ? we may understand the difference between abstracted ideas , and particular beings , by the impressions of outward objects ; and we may find an intelligent substance in our selves by inward perception ; ●ut whether that make a person or not , must be understood some other way ; for , if the meer intelligent substance makes a person , then there cannot be the union of two natures , but there must be two persons . therefore a person is a compleat intelligent substance , with a peculiar manner of subsistence ; so that if it be a part of another substance , it is no person ; and on this account the soul is no person , because it makes up an entire being by its union with the body . but when we speak of finite substances and persons , we are certain that distinct persons do imply distinct substances , because they have a distinct and separate existence ; but this will not hold in an infinite substance , where necessary existence doth belong to the idea of it . and although the argument from the idea of god , may not be sufficient of it self to prove his being ; yet it will hold as to the excluding any thing from him , which is inconsistent with necessary existence ; therefore , if we suppose a distinction of persons in the same divine nature , it must be in a way agreeable to the infinite perfections of it . and no objection can be taken from the idea of god , to overthrow a trinity of co-existing persons in the same divine essence . for necessary existence doth imply a co-existence of the divine persons ; and the unity of the divine essence , that there cannot be such a difference of individual substances , as there is among mankind . but these things are said to be above our reason , if not contrary to it , and even such are said to be repugnant to our religion . 2. that therefore is the next thing to be carefully examin'd , whether mysteries of faith , or matters of revelation above our reason , are to be rejected by us . and a thing is said to be above our reason , when we can have no clear and distinct idea of it in our minds : and , that if we have no ideas of a thing , it is certainly but lost labour for us to trouble our selves about it ; and that , if such doctrines be proposed which we cannot understand , we must have new powers , and organs for the perception of them . we are far from defending contradictions to our natural notions ( of which i have spoken already ) but that which we are now upon is , whether any doctrine may be rejected , when it is offer'd as a matter of faith upon this account , that it is above our comprehension , or that we can have no clear idea of it in our minds . and this late author hath undertaken to prove , that there is nothing so mysterious , or above reason in the gospel . to be above reason , he saith , may be understood two ways . 1. for a thing intelligible in it self , but cover'd with figurative and mystical words . 2. for a thing in its own nature unconceivable , and not to be judged of by our faculties , tho' it be never so clearly revealed . this in either sense is the same with mystery . and from thence he takes occasion to shew his learning about the gentile mysteries , and ecclesiastical mysteries , which might have been spared in this debate , but only for the parallel aimed at between them , as to priest-craft and mysteries ; without which a work of this nature would want its due relish with his good christian readers . others we see have their mysteries too ; but the comfort is , that they are so easily understood , and seen through ; as when the heathen mysteries , are said , to have been instituted at first in commemoration of some remarkable accidents , or to the honour of some great persons that obliged the world by their vertues and useful inventions to pay them such acknowledgments . he must be very dull that doth not understand the meaning of this ; and yet this man pretends to vindicate christianity from being mysterious . but there are some , he saith , that being strongly inclined out of ignorance , or passion to maintain what was first introduced by the craft or superstition of their forefathers , will have some christian doctrines to be still mysteries in the second sense of the word ; that is , unconceiveable in themselves , however clearly revealed . i hope there are still some , who are so throughly perswaded of the christian doctrine , that they dare own and defend it , notwithstanding all the flouts and taunts of a sort of men , whose learning and reason lies most in exposing priest-craft , and mysteries . suppose there are such still in the world , who own their assent to some doctrines of faith , which they confess to be above their comprehension , what mighty reason , and invincible demonstration is brought against them ? he pretends to demonstrate ; but what i pray ? the point in hand ? no. but he will demonstrate something instead of it ? what is that ? why truly , that in the new testament mystery is always used in the first sense of the word . and what then ? doth it therefore follow , that there are no doctrines in the gospel above the reach and comprehension of our reason ? but how doth it appear , that the word mystery is always used in that sense ? when s. paul saith in his first epistle to timothy , chap. 3. v. 9. that the deacons must hold the mystery of faith in a pure conscience ; doth he not mean thereby the same with the form of sound words , which timothy had heard of him , 2 tim. 1.13 . and are not all the main articles of the christian faith comprehended under it ? especially that whereinto they were baptized , in the name of the father , son and holy ghost : and if the doctrine of the trinity were understood by this form , as i have already proved , then this must be a part of the mystery of faith. and in the same chapter , v. 16. he makes god manifest in the flesh ; the first part of the mystery of godliness . if it extends to all the other things , doth it exclude this , which is the first mention'd ? ( and that our copies are true , is already made to appear . ) there is no reason therefore to quarrel with our use of the word mystery in this sense ; but the debate doth not depend upon the word , but upon the sense of it . and therefore i pass over all that relates to the bare use of the word , as not coming up to the main point ; which is , whether any point of doctrine , which contains in it something above our comprehension can be made a matter of faith ? for our author concludes from his observations , that faith is so far from being an implicit assent to any thing above reason , that this notion directly contradicts the end of religion , the nature of man , and the goodness and wisdom of god. but we must not be frighted with this bold conclusion , till we have examin'd his premises ; and then we shall find , that some who are not great readers , are no deep reasoners . the first thing he premises is , that nothing can be said to be a mystery , because we have not an adequate idea of it , or a distinct view of all its properties at once , for then every thing would be a mystery . what is the meaning of this , but that we cannot have an adequate idea of any thing ? and yet all our reason depends upon our ideas according to him , and our clear and distinct ideas are by him made the sole foundation of reason . all our simple ideas are said to be adequate , because they are said to be only the effects of powers in things which produce sensations in us . but this doth not prove them adequate as to the things , but only as to our perceptions . but as to substances we are told , that all our ideas of them are inadequate . so that the short of this is , that we have no true knowledge or comprehension of any thing ; but we may understand matters of faith , as well as we understand any thing else , for in truth we understand nothing . is not this a method of true reasoning to make us reject doctrines of faith , because we do not comprehend them , and at the same time to say we comprehend nothing ? for i appeal to the common sense of mankind , whether we can be said to comprehend that , which we can have no adequate idea of ? but he appeals to the learned ; for he saith , that to comprehend in all correct authors is nothing else but to know . but what is to know ? is it not to have adequate ideas of the things we know ? how then can we know , that of which we can have no adequate idea ? for if our knowledge be limited to our ideas , our knowledge must be imperfect and inadequate where our ideas are so . but let us lay these things together . whatever we can have no adequate idea of is above our knowledge , and consequently above our reason ; and so all substances are above our reason ; and yet he saith , with great confidence , that to assent to any thing , above reason , destroys religion , and the nature of man , and the wisdom and goodness of god. how is it possible for the same man to say this , and to say w●thal , that it is very consistent with that nature of man , and the goodness and wisdom of god , to leave us without adequate ideas of any substance ? how come the mysteries of faith to require more knowledge than the nature of man is capable of ? in natural things we can have no adequate ideas ; but the things are confessed to be above our reason ; but in divine and spiritual things , to assent to things above our reason is against the nature of man. how can these things consist ? but these are not mysteries . yes , whatever is of that nature that we can have no idea of it , is certainly a mystery to us . for what is more unknown than it is known is a mystery . the true notion of a mystery being something that is hidden from our knowledge . of which there may be several kinds . for a mystery may be taken for , 1. something kept secret , but fully understood as soon as it is discover'd ; thus tully in his epistles speaks of mysteries which he had to tell his friend , but he would not let his amanuensis know ; no doubt such things might be very well understood as soon as discover'd . 2. something kept from common knowledge , although there might be great difficulties about them when discover'd . thus tully speaks of mysteries among the philosophers , particularly among the academicks , who kept up their doctrine of the criterion as a secret , which , when it was known , had many difficulties about it . 3. something that persons were not admitted to know , but with great preparation for it . such were the athenian mysteries which tully mentions with respect , although they deserved it not : but because they were not communicated to any but with difficulty , they were called mysteries . and this is so obvious a piece of learning , that no great reading , or deep reasoning is required about it . only it may be observed , that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is opposed to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and so the mysteries related to those who were initiated and not made epoptoe ; i. e. to those who did not throughly understand them , although they had more knowledge of them than such as were not initiated . olympiodorus , in reckoning up the degrees of admissions , mentions the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 before 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . so that they were properly mysteries to such , who knew something ; though there were other things farther to be discover'd , but they did not yet know what they were , as the epoptoe did . from hence the ancient christian writers did not only call the sacraments , but more abstruse points of faith by the name of mysteries ; so s. chrysostom calls the resurrection , a great and ineffable mystery . and isidore pelusiota in his epistle to lampetius saith , that s. paul , when he speaks of the great mystery of godliness , doth not mean that it is wholly unknown to us , but that it is impossible to comprehend it . theophylact saith , it is therefore called the great mystery of godliness ; because although it be now revealed to all , yet the manner of it is hidden from us , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , for this reason it is called a mystery . but this is in the way of reading ; let us now come to deep reasoning ; and see how strongly he argues against this sense of the word mysteries : his words are these ; they trifle then exceedingly , and discover a mighty scarcity of better arguments , who defend their mysteries , by this pitiful shift of drawing inferences from what is unknown to what is known , or of insisting upon adequate ideas ; except they will agree as some do , to call every spire of grass , sitting and standing , fish and flesh to be mysteries . and if out of a pertinacious or worse humour , they will be still fooling , and call these things mysteries , i 'm willing to admit as many as they please in religion , if they will allow me likewise to make mine as intelligible to others , as these are to me . it is easie to guess whom these kind words were intended for : and are not these very modest and civil expressions ? trifling , fooling ; out of a pertinacious , or worse humour ; but why , fooling about mysteries , to call such things by that name , which are in some measure known , but in a greater measure unknown to us ? and if these are real mysteries in nature , why may not the same term be used for matters of faith ? and i think in so plain a case , no great store of arguments need to be used . but in these natural things , he saith , we have distinct ideas of the properties which make the nominal essence , but we are absolutely ignorant of the real essence , or intrinsick constitution of a thing , which is the ground or support of all its properties . are not then ( without trifling and fooling ) these real essences mysteries to them ? they know there are such by the ideas of their properties , but know nothing of their real essence ; and yet they will not allow them to be mysteries ? if they do understand them , why do they say , they do not , nor cannot ? and if this be true , let them call them what they please , they must be inexplicable mysteries to them . so that all this is mere quarrelling about a word , which they would fain be rid of , if they knew how ; but they involve and perplex themselves more by their own deep reasonings against the trifling and fooling of others . but he saith , that some would have the most palpable absurdities and gross contradictions to go down , or words that signifie nothing , because men cannot comprehend the essence of their own souls , nor the essence of god , and other spiritual substances . we utterly deny , that any article of our faith contains in it any palpable absurdities , or gross contradictions ( as i hope hath been proved already as to the doctrine of the trinity which is chiefly struck at ) but surely your deep reasoners may find a difference between gross contradictions to our reason , and barely being above it , or not having any distinct conception of the nature of it . and that is all that we assert , and which they grant as to all substances . if this be their way of arguing , they may even return to transubstantiation again , without any great lessening of their understandings . but none are so bold in attacking the mysteries of the christian faith ; as the smatterers in ideas , and new terms of philosophy , without any true understanding of them . for these ideas are become but another sort of canting with such men ; and they would reason as well upon genus and species , or upon occult qualities , and substantial forms , but only that they are terms out of fashion . but we find that the change of terms doth neither improve nor alter mens understandings ; but only their ways of speaking ; and ill gamesters will not manage their game one jot the better , for having new cards in their hands . however , we must see what work they make of it . although we do not know the nature of the soul , yet we know as much of it , as we do of any thing else , if not more , i. e. we really know nothing by any adequate idea of it , but we must believe nothing , but what we have a clear distinct idea of . is not this a rare way of fixing the boundaries of faith and reason ? as to god and his attributes , it is said , that they are not mysteries to us for want of an adequate idea ; no not eternity . and in another place , as to god , we comprehend nothing better than his attributes . let us try this , by the attribute pitched on by himself ; viz. eternity . we see he pretends to comprehend nothing better than the divine attributes ; and eternity as well as any ; ( which i am very apt to believe ) but how doth he comprehend eternity ? even by finding , that it cannot be comprehended . is not this subtle and deep reasoning ? but reason he saith , performs its part in finding out the true nature of things ; and if such be the nature of the thing , that it cannot be comprehended , then reason can do no more , and so it is not above reason . was there ever such trifling that pretended to reason ; and that about the highest matters , and twith scorn and contempt of others whom he calls mysterious wits ? the question is , whether any thing ought to be rejected as an article of faith , because we cannot comprehend it , or have a clear and distinct perception of it ? he concludes it must be so , or else we overthrow religion , and the nature of man , and the wisdom and goodness of god. here is an essential attribute of god , viz. his eternity . am i bound to believe it or not ? yes , doubtless . but how can i comprehend this attribute of eternity ? very easily . how so ? do not you comprehend that it is incomprehensible ? what then ? doth this reach the nature of the thing , or only the manner of our conception ? if the nature of the thing be , that it cannot be comprehended , then you rightly understand the nature of the thing , and so it is not above your reason . let the case be now put as to the trinity ; do you believe the doctrine of it , as of divine revelation ? no , god hath given me the nature , and faculties of a man ; and i can believe nothing , which i cannot have a distinct and clear idea of ; otherwise i must have new faculties . will you hold to this principle ? then you must believe nothing , which you cannot have a clear and distinct idea of . very true : but can you have a clear and distinct idea of what you cannot comprehend ? a clear idea , is that whereof the mind hath a full and evident perception . a distinct idea , is that whereby the mind perceives the difference of it from all others . is this right ? yes . but can you have a full and evident perception of a thing , so as to difference it from all others , when you grant it to be incomprehensible ? if you have a full perception of it , you comprehend its nature , and especially if you can difference it from all other things ; but when you say , its nature is incomprehensible , and yet believe it , you must deny it to be necessary to faith , to have a clear and distinct idea of the thing proposed . and if it be repugnant to your faculties to reject the trinity , because you cannot have a clear and distinct idea of it , for the same reason , you must unavoidably reject his eternity , and all other attributes which have infinity joyned with them . but we must stop here , because this admirable undertaker hath said , that he despairs not of rendring eternity , and infinity as little mysterious , as that three and two make five . and till then i take my leave of him . and so i return to our professed vnitarians , who in answer to my sermon fell upon the same subject , and it is necessary that i consider so much , as tends to the clearing of it . in my sermon i had urged this argument to prove , that we may be bound to believe some things that are incomprehensible to us , because the divine nature , and attributes are acknowledged to be so ; and i had said , ( 1. ) that there is no greater difficulty in the conception of the trinity , and incarnation , than there is of eternity . not but that there is great reason to believe it , but from hence it appears , that our reason may oblige us to believe some things , which it is not possible for us to comprehend . and what say our vnitarians to this ? they charge my notion of eternity ( as they call it ) with a contradiction . the best way of proceeding will be to set down my own words which are these . we know that either god must have been for ever , or it is impossible he ever should be , for if he should come into being when he was not , he must have some cause of his being , and that which was the first cause would be god. but if he was for ever , he must be from himself , and what notion , or conception can we have in our minds concerning it ? to this say they , to say a person , or thing is from it self is a contradiction ; it implies this contradiction , it was before it was . and they are sorry an eternal god must be a contradiction . what a false and spiteful inference is this ? but it had look'd like very deep reasoning , if i had said , that god was the cause of himself . for , that would have implied the contradiction he had charged it with : but i had expressly excluded his being from any cause ; and the thing i urged was only the impossibility , of our having a clear and distinct conception of eternity . for , if he could have no cause , what could we think of his being eternal ? if to be from himself as a cause , be unconceivable , ( as i grant it is ) then it proves what i designed , that we cannot have any distinct idea of eternity . but to be from himself in the sense generally understood , is a meer negative expression ; for no men were such fools to imagine any thing could be before it self , and in this sense only , learned men have told us , that it is to be understood by those ancient and modern writers , who have used that expression . as when s. ierom saith , that god is self originated ; and s. augustin , that god is the cause of his own wisdom ; and lactantius , that god made himself ; all these and such like expressions are only to be negatively understood . but i confess i aimed at shewing , that it was impossible for us to have any clear and distinct idea of eternity , and therefore i took in all possible ways of conceiing it , either by gods being from himself , or his co-existing with all differences of time , without any succession in his own being ; or his having a successive duration . from all which i argued the impossibility of a clear notion of eternity . and now what do these men do ? they dispute against one of these notions , and very triumphantly expose , as they think , the absurdities of it . and what then ? why then this notion will not do . but i say none will do . i prove there can be no successive duration in a being of necessary existence ; and that it is not to be conceived , how without succession god should be present with the being , and not being , the promise and performance of the same thing ; and yet one of these ways we must make use of . from whence i concluded , that all we can attain to is , a full satisfaction of our reason concerning god's eternity , although we can form no distinct conception of it in our minds . but when these men instead of answering the argument from all the notions of eternity , only dispute against one notion of it , they apparently shew the weakness of their cause , if it will bear no other defences , but such as this . for i take it , that the main debate in point of reason depends upon this , whether we can be certain of the being of a thing , of which we can have no clear and distinct idea ? if we may , then it can be no objection in point of revelation , that we can have no clear and distinct idea of the matter revealed ; since there can be no reason to tie us up stricter in point of revelation , than we are without it . if we can be certain in reason of many things , we can have no such ideas of , what imaginable reason can there be , that a point of faith should be rejected on that account . 2. i urged another attribute of god , viz. his spirituality for the same reason ; viz. that we are satisfied in point of reason that god must be a spirit ; and yet we cannot have a clear distinct positive notion of a spirit . and what answer do they give to this ? as wise as the former . why truly , i had no cause to object this against them , because they own the spirituality of god's nature , and none since biddle have denied it . very well ! but doth my argument proceed upon that , or upon the not having a distinct and clear idea of a spirit ? it was hardly possible for men so to mistake my meaning , unless they did it , because they had no other answer to give . 3. i argued from god's prescience , which i do expresly assert , and prove that they cannot have a distinct notion of it , nay that socinus denied it , because he could not understand it . 〈…〉 they tell me , i cannot defend our 〈…〉 against theirs without finding contra●●●tions in god●s eternity and foreknowledge . if this be the ingenuity and justice and charity of the vnitarians ; commend me to the honest-hearted deists , if there be any such , as they assure us there are . one had better be charged with trifling and fooling with mysteries , than with undermining the main foundations of religion , by charging them with contradictions . but nothing could be farther from my thoughts , than any thing tending that way . and such a base calumny is too much honoured with a confutation . but do they offer to clear the difficulty and give us a clear and distinct idea of god●s fore-knowing future events without a certain cause to make them future . nothing like it . for the question is not , whether a thing be necessary because god foresees it as certain , ( as they suppose . ) but how of a thing merely possible it comes to be certain without a certain cause ; and how a thing which hath no certain cause can be certainly foreknown , and what clear and distinct notion we can have of this in our minds . if they had answer'd this , they had said something to the purpose . to resolve all into god's infinite wisdom is a good answer from us , but not from them . for we think it our duty to satisfie our selves with what god hath revealed , without prying into the manner of things above our comprehension ; but these men who will receive nothing but what they have clear and distinct ideas of , ought to shew the manner of this , or else we must be excused on the same reason , if we allow the manner of the divine subsistences in the same essence to be above our comprehension . 4. i shew'd how unreasonable their demands were , when the nature of god is owned to be incomprehensible , and his perfections infinite . and now of a sudden they are quite turned about ; for before they were only for fencing and warding off blows , but at last they come to the point , and own the being of god to be comprehensible by them ; and that they have clear and distinct ideas of god's infinite attributes . this is indeed to the purpose , if they can make these things out . but fencers have many tricks , and i wish we find none here . i had said , that in consequence to the assertion , that nothing is to be believ'd , but what may be comprehended , the very being of god must be rejected too , because his being is incomprehensible , and so they must reject one god as well three persons . to this they reply , that to comprehend the being or existence of god , is only this , to comprehend that god is , and if we cannot comprehend that , all religion ceases . is not this a fine turn ? what i said of god as to the perfections of his nature , they will have it understood of his bare existence , which i do not mention . when god is said to be an incomprehensible being ; who before them did understand the meaning to be , that we cannot comprehend that there is a god ? this is not mere trifling , for it looks like something worse ; and yet they presently after say , that to comprehend a thing is to have a clear adequate conception of it . and will they pretend to have such a one of the divine essence , when they confess but a little before , that we converse every day with very many things , none of which we comprehend , and that i might have spared my pains in proving it ? but what can be the meaning of these sayings , they cannot comprehend the common natures of things , nor have a clear and distinct idea of them , but they can comprehend an infinite being , whom all mankind own to be incomprehensible . but as to divine attributes , they say , they have clear distinct and adequate conceptions of them ; and instance in eternity , power , wisdom and iustice. we do not deny that in such attributes which we apply to god , because we find them to be perfections in us , we have a distinct and clear perception of them , as they are consider'd in themselves , for that is the reason why we attribute them to god. but for such as peculiarly belong to god as eternity doth ; and for the degrees of other attributes as they belong to him , as they are infinite , so they are above our comprehension . ( 1. ) as to eternity , say they , it is a clear and distinct notion of eternity , to say , it is a duration without beginning and without end . but we can have no clear and distinct notion of duration , when applied to a being that hath necessary existence . for duration , they say , consists in a succession . and what succession can there be in a being which always is the same , if there were no difference of times , i. e. god was the same being before time was , and is the very same being under all the differences of times ; he hath not any other duration now than he had before , and what succession could there be where there was no time ? but we make use of duration with respect to things done in time , and for the help of our und●●standings apply the measure of time to divine acts. but in a necessary existence , there can be no past , present , or to come ; and in a successive duration , there must be conceived a longer continuance from time to time ; which is repugnant to the notion of a being , which always is . so that , if we cannot conceive eternity wi●hout duration , nor duration without succession ; nor can apply succession to a being which hath necessary existence , then we can have no clear and distinct notion of god's eternity . ( 2. ) as to the infiniteness of god's perfections , they say , that although the mind be in it self finite , yet it hath an infinite comprehension , for what is finite with respect to its extension of parts may be infinite in other respects , and with respect to some of its powers . but how doth it appear that we have any power to comprehend what is infinite ? all the power we have extends only to adding and enlarging our ideas without bounds , i. e. we can put no stop to our apprehensions , but still they may go farther than we can possibly think , but is this an infinite comprehension ? so far from it , that this shews our capacities to be finite , because our ideas cannot go so far as our reason . for our reason tells us , we can never go so far , but we may still go farther : but it is impossible for our understanding to have distinct ideas of the infinite moments in an eternal succession of the utmost bounds of immensity , or of the extent of infinite power and knowledge , since the very notion of infinite implies , that we can set no bounds to our thoughts ; and therefore although the infinity of the divine attributes be evident to our reason , yet it is likewise evident to our reason , that what is infinite must be above our comprehension . ii. i come now to the last enquiry which is that if we allow things above our reason , what stop can be put to any absurd doctrine , which we may be required to believe ? and this is that which our vnitarians object in all their late pamphlets . in answer to my sermon they say , that on our principles , our reason would be in vain , and all science and certainty would be destroy'd , which they repeat several times . and from hence they do so frequently insist on the parallel between the doctrine of the trinity and transubstantiation : they say , that all the defence we have made for one will serve for the other , or any other absurd and impossible doctrine . that what we say , will equally serve all the nonsense , and impossible doctrines that are to be found among men ; and they particularly instance in transubstantiation . i need mention no more . but i did not expect to have found this parallel so often insisted upon , without an answer to two dialogues purposely written on that subject , at a time when the doctrine of the trinity was used as an argument to bring in transubstantiation , as that is now alledged for casting off the other . but i must do them that right to tell the world , that at that time a socinian answer was written to those dialogues , which i saw , and wish'd might be printed , that the world might be satisfied about it and them . but they thought fit to forbear ; and in all their late pamphlets where this parallel is so often repeated , there is but once , that i can find , any notice taken of those dialogues , and that in a very superficial manner . for the main design and scope of them is past over , and only one particular mention'd , which shall be answer'd in its due order . but in answer to the general enquiry , i shall endeavour to state the due bounds between faith and reason , and thereby to shew , that by those grounds on which we receive the doctrine of the trinity , we do not give way to the entertainment of any absurd opinion , nor overthrow the certainty of reason . 1. we have no difference with them about the vse of our reason as to the certainty of a revelation . for in this case , we are as much as they , for searching into the grounds of our faith ; for we look on it as a reasonable act of our minds , and if we did not allow this , we must declare our selves to believe without grounds . and if we have grounds for our faith , we can express them in words that are intelligible ; and if we can give an account of our faith in an intelligible manner , and with a design to give others satisfaction about it , i think this is making use of our reason in matters of faith. 2. we have no difference with them about the use of our reason , as to the true sense of revelation . we never say , that men are bound to believe upon the bare sound of words without examining the sense of them . we allow all the best and most reasonable ways of attaining to it , by copies , languages , versions , comparing of places , and especially the sense of the christian church in the best and purest ages , nearest the apostolical times and express'd in solemn and publick acts. by these rules of reason we are willing to proceed , and not by any late and uncertain methods of interpreting scripture . 3. we differ not with them about the right use of the faculties which god hath given us , of right vnderstanding such matters as are offer'd to our assent . for it is to no purpose to require them to believe , who cannot use the faculties which are necessary in order to it . which would be like giving the benefit of the clergy to a man with a cataract in both his eyes . and it would be very unreasonable to put his life upon that issue , whether he could read or not , because he had the same organs of seeing that other men had ; for in this case the whole matter depended not on the organ but the vse of it : this needs no application . 4. we differ not with them about rejecting some matters proposed to our belief which are contradictory to the principles of sense and reason . it is no great argument of some mens reason , whatever they pretend to talk against admitting seeming contradictions in religion ; for who can hinder seeming contradictions ? which arise from the shallowness of mens capacities , and not from the repugnancy of things : and who can help mens understandings ? but where there is evident proof of a contradiction to the principles of sense and reason ; we are very far from owning any such thing to be an article of faith , as in the case of transubstantiation . which we reject , not only , as having no foundation in scripture , but as repugnant to the common principles of sense and reason ; as is made to appear in the two dialogues before-mention'd . but our vnitarians find fault with the author of them , for laying the force of his argument upon this , that there are a great many more texts for the trinity than are pretended for transubstantiation ; whereas many other arguments are insisted on , and particularly the great absurdity of it in point of reason , dial. 2. from p. 33. to the end . and it is not the bare number of texts , which he relies upon , but upon the greater evidence and clearness of the tex●s on one side than on the other , which depends upon figurative words , not capable of a literal sense without overthrowing the doctrine designed to be proved by it . see with what ingenuity these men treat the defenders of the trinity , and the enemies to transubstantiation , which they call only a philosophical error or folly ; but the doctrine of the trinity is charged with nonsense , contradiction , and impossibilities . but wherein then lies the difference in point of reason ? for thus far i have shew'd , that we are far from overthrowing reason , or giving way to any absurd doctrines . it comes at last to the point already treated of in this chapter , how far we may be obliged to believe a doctrine which carries in it something above our reason ; or of which we cannot have any clear and distinct ideas . and of this i hope i have given a sufficient account in the foregoing discourse . finis . notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a61548-e160 consideraton the ezplications of the doctrine of the trinity , by dr. w. &c. p. 10. p. 9. p. 13. discourse concerning the real and nominal trinitarians , a. d. 1695 , p. 3. letter to the universities , p. 15. discourse of nominal and real trinit . p. 7. p. 10. p. 11. p. 13. tritheism charged , &c. p. 157. animadvers p. 245. animadv . &c. p. 243. ibid p. 240. basil ep. 64. considerat . on the explication , p. 23. animadv . p. 291. tritheism charged , p. 306. chap. vii . letter to the university , p. 15. discourse of nominal and real trinitarians , p. 10. tritheism charged , &c. p. 157. discourse of nominal and real unitarians , p. 18. discourse of nom. &c. p. 19. p. 32. consideraton the explication of the trinity , p. 12. tritheism charged , &c. p. 309. direct . inquisit . part ii. quaest . 2. p. 226. modest examin p. 19. p. 27 , 28. notes on athanasius his creed , edit . 2. p. 19. modest examin p 15. p. 17. p. 29. p. 30. remarks upon the examinat . p. 33. remarks p. 34. p. 36. ibid. animadv . p. 36. modest examin p. 30. tritheism charged , p. 262. p. 264. more nevoch , par . ii. c. 1. modest examin . p. 30. considerat . on the explication of the trinity , &c. p. 12. leont . de sectis act. 5. niceph. callist l. 18. c. 46 , 47. anselm . epist. l. 2. ep . 41. de fide trinit . &c. c. 3. c. 48. c 49. phot. biblioth . cod. 24. phot cod. 23. isid. orig. l. 7. de haeret de trinit . aug. de haeres●● 74. modest examin . p. 19. discourse of real and nominal trinit p 4 greg de laur apol . joachim abb●t , c. 66. decret . greg. l. 1. c. 2. comment . in decret . opusc . 24. bri●f account of valentin . gentilis , p. 132. ibid. modest examin . p. 20. brief account , &c. p. 40. brief account , &c. p. 41 , 42 , 43 , 45. modest examin . p. 29. genebrard de trinit l. 2. p. 91. l 2 p 159. p. 153. od●●at rixas & jurgia , p●aesertimque inter eruditos ; ac turpe esse diceb●t viros indubitatè doctos canina rabie famam vicissim suam rodere ac lacerare scriptis trucibus , tanquam vilissimos de plebe cerdones in angiportis sese luto ac stercore conspurcan●●● . nic rigalt . vit . p. 〈◊〉 , p. 48. considerat . on the explication by dr. w. &c. p. 12. p. 13. p. 22. p. 23. p. 25. p. 19. p. 13. defence of the notes on athanasius his creed . p. 24. p. 31. vindication of the archbishop's sermons . p. 5. answer to dr. bull , p. 47. history of the unitarians , p. 10. considerat . on the explication by the archbishop , &c. p. 13. answ●r to the archbish . serm. p. 43. p. 44. answer to the archbishop p. 65. some thoughts upon dr. sh. vindication , p. 21. letter of resol . concerning the trinity and incarn . p. 18. letter of resol . p. 5. letter of resol . concerning the trinity and incarn . p. 18. elmacin hist. sarac . p. 4. levin . warner . de alcoran . acts of athanasius , p. 5. ricard . confut . legis saracen . c. 10. letter of resol . p. 19. answer to the archbishop p. 44. p. 66. notes for div a61548-e10340 considerat . on the explications of the trinity , by dr. w. &c. p. 22 , 32. defence of the history of the unit . p. 5. answer to the archbishop's sermon , p. 4. answer to the archb. serm. p 50. explic●● of the t●●nity , p. 29. answer to milbourn , p. 15 , 23. history of the unit. p. 43. answer to the archb. p. 29 , 30. answer to my sermon p. 4. ans. to dr. wallis 's four letters , p. 4. theodoret haeret . l. 1. & 11. epiphan . haeres . 19. n. 5.29 . n. 17. tertull de praescript . haeret c 52. euseb. hist. eccl. l. 5. c. 28. hist. of the unit. p. 10. edit . ii. euseb. l. 3. c. 27. ante-nicenism . p. 37. answer to milb . p. 20. euseb. l. 4. c. 5. resp. ad judic . eccles . p. 176. answer to dr. bull , part i. p. 41. euseb. l. 4 , c. 22. act. 24.5 . epiphan . haer . 29 n. 7. euseb. l. 3. c. 5. l. 4. c. 8. l. 4 c. 6. oros. l. 7. c. 13. answer to dr. bull , p. 42. answer to dr. bull , p. 39. euseb. l. 3. c. 24 , 39. l 5. c. 8.10 . l. 6. c. 25. hieron . c. pelag. l. 3. hieron . de script . in matth. comment . in matth. c. 12. in isa. c. 11. in ezek. c. 18. erasm. advers . stunic . c. 1. answer to dr. bull , p. 35. p. 40. p. 39. origen c. cels. l. 5. p. 274. theodor haeret . l. 2. c. 1. hieron in matth. c. 12. euseb. l. 5. c. 8. epiph. de ponder . & mens . n. 16. euseb. l. 6. c. 17. august . c. crescon . l. 1. c. 31. hier. in heb. c. 3. advers . ruffin . answer to the archb. sermon p. 44 , 66. euseb. l. 7. c. 30. reflect . on dr. bull , p 35. answer to milbourn , p. 20. athan. ad solit . vit . agent p. 857. euseb. l. 3. c. 27. respons . ad judicium ecclesiae p●r i● . bull , p. 150 restaurans pauli samosatensis artes & dolos . decret . conc. sardin . apud hilar. fragment . p. 1310. ed. par. 1693. euseb l. 7. c. 27. theodor. haer . fab . l. 2. c. 8. athanas. desentent . dionysii , p. 558. euseb. l. 7. c. 30. athan. de incarn . to i. p. 591. p. 635. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . epiph. haer . 65. n. 1. concil . ephesin . part i. supplicatio basilii , &c. phot. epist . 35. marius mercat . de 12 anath . nestorii , n. 16. leontius de sectis p. 436. edit . basil. euseb. l. 7. c. 30. leont . c. nestor . l. 3. hilar. fragment . p. 1321. theod. l. 1. c. 4. pagi critica in bar. a. 272. n. 2. answer to the archbishop , p. 54. euseb l. 8 , 13 , 9. c. 6. theod. l. 1. c. 4. petav. de trinit . l. 1. c. 4. n. 13. h. valesius in theod . l. 1. c. 4. baron . a. 318. n. 75 , &c. soz. l. 3 c. 5. philost . l. 2. c. 15 , 16. athanas. tom. 1. p. 898. socr. l. 2. c. 19. athan. de synodis arim. &c. p. 897. epiph haeret . 71. sulpit . sever. l. 2. p. 397. prudent . apoth . epiph. n. 2. n. 1 , 2. n. 4. epiph. haeret . 71. socr. l. 2. ● . 30. soz. l. 4 c. 6. hist. tripart . l. 5. c. 8. hist. of the unit. p. 10. concil general . to. ii. p. 888. ib. p. 989. ambros. apol. david . c. 4. ans. to the archbish. serm p. 53. theodor. haer●t . fab. l. 2. in photino . sand. hist. enucl . l. 3. p. 357. p. 372. blond . dec. 2. l. 2. sand. hist. eccles. l. 1. p. 64.93 . socr. l. 2. c. 29. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . hilar. de synod . p. 1175. ed. paris . hilar. de trinit . l. 10. n. 50. hilar. de trin. l. 7. n. 7. august . ep. 193. ma●ii mercat . oper . par. 2. p. 17. 〈◊〉 12. a●●th . n●s●orii p. 128. euseb. l. 5. c. 28. answer to the serm. about the trinity , p. 4 , 5 , 8. history of the unitar . p. 9. n. 7. d●fence of the history of the unitarians , p. 7. a●t o● athanasiu● , p. 13. interrogant enim nos aliquando infideles , & dicunt , patrem quem dicitis , deum dicitis ? respondemus deum . filium quem dicitis , deum dicitis ? respondemus deum spiritum sanctum quem dicitis , deum dicitis ? respondemus deum . ergo inquiunt , pater & filius & spiritus sanctus tres sunt dei. respondemus , non. turbantur , quia non illuminantur , cor clausum habent quia clavem fidei non habent aug. in ioh. tr. 39. nos ergo fratres , fide praecedente , quae sanat oculum cordis nostri , quod intelligimus sine obscuritate capiamus , quod non intelligimus sine dubitatione credamus . ibid. answ. to serm. p. 5. a fundamento fidei non recedamus , ut ad culmen perfectionis veniamus . deus est pater . deus est filius , deus est spiritus sanctus , & ramen pater non est qui filius : nec filius est qui pater , nec spiritu● sanctus . patris & filii spiritus , pater est aut filius . ibid. trinitas unus deus , trinitas una aeternitas , una potestas , una majestas , tres personae sed non tres dii . non audemus dicere unam essentiam tres substantias , sed unam essentiam vel substantiam , tres autem personas , quemadmodum multi latini ista tractantes & digni auctoritate dixerunt , cum alium modum aptiorem non invenirent , quo enunciarent verbis , quod sine verbis intelligebant . aug. de trinit . l. 5. c. 8. nunc mihi calumniator respondeat , quid ergo tres ? ecce inquit tres dixisti , sed quid tres exprime ? immo tu numera . nam ego compleo tres , cum dico , pater & filius & spiritus sanctus . id. ubi supra . id enim quod pater ad se est , deus est , quod ad filium est , pater est : quod filius ad seipsum est , deus est ; quod ad patrem est , filius est . sed non quomodo illi duo homines sunt sic isti duo dii . quare hoc non est ita ibi ? quia illud aliud , hoc autem aliud est , quia illa divini●● est , haec humanitas . ubi cogitare coeperis , incipis numerare ; ubi numeraveris , quid numeraveris , non potes respondere . pater , pater est ; filius , filius ; spiritus sanctus , spiritus sanctus est . quid sunt isti tres ? non tres dii ? non. non tres omnipotentes ? non , sed unus omnipotens . hoc solo numerum insinuant , quod ad invicem sunt , non quod ad se sunt . boëth . oper . p. ● 121. numerus enim duplex est , unus quidem , quo numeramus , alter verò qui in rebus numerabilibus constat ; ergo in numero quo numeramus , repetitio unitatum facit pluritatem ; in rerum vero numero non facit pluralitatem unitatum repetitio . ita igitur substantia continet unitatem , relatio verò multiplicat trinitatem . nam idem pater qui filius non est ; nec idem uterque qui spiritus sanctus . idem tamen deus est , pater filius & spiritus sanctus . answer to milb . p. 52. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . porphyr . isag. c. 2. ●6 . niceph. callist . l. 18. c. 47. discourse concerning the nominal and real trinitarian , p. 16. petav. de trinit . l. 4. c. 4. defence of the history of the unit . p. 5. ib. ib. answer to la moth. p. 5. explic. p. 13. letter to the university , p. 13. curcell . devocibus trinit . sect. 70. athanas. de sentent . dionys . p. 558 , 567. orat. 4. de arian . p. 456. de communi essent . &c. p. 214. expos. fidei , p. 25● . in illud omnia mihi trad p. 154. ep. ad serap . p. 259. orat. 4. c. arian . p. 554 , 456 , 459. &c. curcell . sect. iii. petav. de trinit . l. 4. c. 16. de decret . synod . nic. p. 259.269 , 274 , 276. orat. 5. c. arian . p. 514. de decret . synod p. 275. curcell . dissert . n. 106. curcell . n. 82. athanas. de synod . arim & seluc . p. 916 , 920 , 928. p. 919. curcell . n. 84. maxim. oper. t. ii. p. 384. t. i. p 413. curcell . sect. 73. a discourse conc●rn●●g no●●●●l and real unitar . p 26. basil hom. ●7 . p. 60● , 604. epist. 141 , 391 , 64. t. i. p. 605. t. ii. p. 9●6 . cyril alex . dialog . de trinit . 3. p. 498 , 500. curcell . n. 74. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 810. b. phot. cod. 24. cod. 234. discourse conce●ning the nominal and real unitar . p. 26 , 27. basil. ep. 141. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . basil. t. ii. p. 926. petav. de trinit . l. 4 c. 13. n. 10. cur. n 106. basil. t. i. p. 604. cur n. 113. n. 105. t. ii. p. 30. cur. n. 106. greg. nyssen . t. iii. p. 17. petav. de trin. l. 4. ● 9 n. 2 , 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 niceph. calist. hist. l. 18. c. 47. athan. t. ii. p. 280. caesar. quaest. 3. p. 12. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . greg. nyssen , tom. iii. p. cur. n. 48. n. 107. cur. n. 89. hilar. de synod . n. 67. hilar. de trinit . l. 4. n. 6. hilar. de synod . n. 18. hilar. de trinit . l. 6. n. 12. lumen ex lumine , quod sine detrimento suo naturam suam praestat ex sese , & quod dat habet , & quod dederit habeat , nascaturque quod sit . petav. de trinit . l. 5. c. 8. n. 9 , 12. curcell . n. 96. ambros. de fide l. 5. c. 3. ed. nov. curcell . n. 97. aug. de trinit . l. 7. c. 6. c maxim l. 1. curcell . n. 114. august . de trinit . l. 4. c. 21. l. 5. c. 3 , 5 , 8. l. 6. c. 1. de ago●e christ. c. 16. c. maxim. l 3. c. 10. curcell . n. 114. notes on athanasius his creed , p. 11. basil. ep. 141. notes on athanas . his creed , p. 13. facund . l 1. p. 19. ed. serm. theod. haeret . fab. l. 2. c. 3. athan. de sent. dionys . p. 558. athanas. de decret . fidei nicen . p. 275. athanas. de sent. dionys. basil de sp. sancto c. 29. athan. orat . 4. c. arian . p. 456. greg. nazian . or. i. p. 16 , 17. or. xxi p. 380. basil. hom. 27. p. 602 , 604. basil. epist 141. ●pist . 64.391 . athanas. ● . 567. greg. naz. p. 16. basil. hom. 27. ruffin . p. 211. hist. l. 1. athan. ep. ad antioch , p. 577. socin . vol. l. p. 778. notes on athanas . his creed , p. 13. answer to my sermon , p. 14. hist. of the unit. p. 15. edit . 2. hist of the unit. p. 17. defence of of the hist. of unitar . p. 35. hist. of the unit. p. 16. ibid p. 17. answer to dr. wallis his letter , p. 9. answer to my sermon , p. 9. reflections no dr. bull , p. 39 , 46. sand. p. 93. answ. to the archbishop , p. 54. eus●b . pra●p . evang . l. 11. c. 18. cyril . c. julian , l. 10. p. 427.335 . julian ep . 51. facund . l. 4. p. 163. rittangel in jezirah p. 96. morinus exerc. biblic . l. 3. exerc. 8. c. 6. eusebius dem. evang . l. 4. c. 1. bichin . happerasch p. 21. paris , a. d. 1566. joh. 1.1.3.13.6.38 , 62.8.42 . answer to the archbishop's serm. p. 56. answer to my sermon , p. 10. hist. of the unit. p. 29. answer to my sermon , p. 9. ans. to the archbishop , p. 56. matth. 17.1 . mar. 9 2. luk. 9.28 . 2 pet. 1 16. 17. 18. enjed. in joh. 6.62 . answer to my sermon , p. 10. history of the unit. p. 26. p. 11 p. 2● . h. grot. opusc p. 294 t. 3. christe caput rerum vitae melioris origo , immensi mensura patris , quem mente supremâ miratus sese genitor , de lumine lumen fundit , & aequali se spectat imagine totum . h grot. syl. p. 8. ed. 1643 ▪ joh. 8.58 . answer to the archbishop . p. 58. joh. 10.36 . answer to milb . p. 31. ib. p. 30. joh. 19.7 . matt. 26.63 . selden de jure nat. & gent. l. 2. c. 12. pocock not. miscel . ad maim . p. 307. &c. matt. 16.16 s. joh. 6.69 . 1.49 . 10.30.33 . hist. of unitar . p. 29. answer to milb . p. 29. joh. 5.18.23 . phil. 2.6 , 7. hist. of unitar . p. 38. answer to serm. p. 13. answer to milb . p. 49. ib. col. 1. answer to archbish. serm p. 25. p. 59. de divin . christi , c. ●4 . defence of the hist. of the unit. p. 54. rom. 9.5 . hist. of the unit. p 35. answer to milb p 35. ante-nicen . p. 29 , 78. answer to milb p 34. ans. to the archbishop , p. 29. answer to milb p. 3. histoir critique du nov. test. to. iii. c. 54. p. 813. annot. in cypr. advers . judaeos . hilar. in psal. 122. hist. of the unit. p. 40. hist. critique du nov. to. ii. c. 17. verum repugnant perpetuo consensu omnes graeci codices . bez. motinus exercit. bibl. l. 1. ex. 2. c. 4. simon . dissert . sur le ms. du nov , test p. 14 rigalt . vit . p. puteani , p. 62. p. pithae de latino interpret . p. ii. mabil . de re deplomat . l. 5. p. 346. dissert . surless ms. du nov. test. p. 17. alavarez gomez de rebus gestis fr. ximenii , l. 2. & 3. amelote in loc. marian. edit . vulg . c. 17. praef. ad schol. hier. in loc. leo epist. 34. ad fl. hilar de trinit . l. 11. fulg. ad thra. c. 4. 1 joh. 5.7 . consider on the explic. p. 29. history of unit. p. 43. ans. to the archbishop , p. 29. selden de syned . l. 2. c. 4. morin exercit bibl. l. 1 , 2 , ex. 2. simon dissert . de mss p. 14. bez epist. ad nov . testam . critique in nov . test. c. 18. morin . exercit . bibl. l 1. ex. 2. c. 1. n. 9. critique to. i. c. 9. joh. 1.3 . heb. 1.2 , 10. col. 1.16 . hist. of the unit. p. 38. defence of the history of unitar . p. 13 , 14. p. 10. answer to milb . p. 15. p. 16. sand. interp . et paradox . p. 115. epiph. haer . 62. n. 2. n. 4. hilar. l. 2. de trinit . p. 17. cypri●n . ad jul. ep. 73. erasm. ad cens. paris . tit. ii. vossi . de symb. diss . i. n. 38. hierom. ep. 61. tertul. de bap●ism . ● 13. de praescript . haeret . c. 20. cyprian . ep. 27.73 . ed. ox. aug. de baptism . c. donat. l. 6. c. 25. ambros. de sp. sanct. l. 1. c 3. bed. in act. 19. hugo de s vict. de sacr. l. 1. c. 13. lomb. 4. sent. dist. ● . c. sed qd . basil c eunom . l. 5. c. 3. c. 10. epiph. haer. 76. ad fin . concil . nicaen . c. 19. aug. de haeres c. 44. concil . arel . i. c. 8. bellarm. de bap. l. 1. c. 3. answer to mi●b p. 18. p. 17. advers . prax. c. 26. c 2. tertul. de praescr . haeret . c. ult . con. prax. ● . 3. c. 4. alium autem quomodo accipere debes jam professus sum , personae non substantiae nomine , ad distinctionem , non ad divisionem , caeterum ubique teneo unam substantiam in tribus cohaerentibus . advers . prax. c. 12. et sermo erat apud deum & nunquam separatus à patre aut alius à patre , quia ego & pater unum sumus . haec erat probola veritatis , custos unitatis qua prolatum dicimus filium à patre , sed non separatum . c. 8. schlicht . ad m●isn . de trinit . p. 13 , 14.17 . advers . prax. 2. nos vero ut semper nunc magi● ut instructiores per paracletum , &c. hanc regulam ab initio evangelii decueurrisse etiam ante priores haereticos , n●dum praxean hesternum . optat. mil. l. 1. theodor. haer l. 3 c. 2. tertul. de praefer . c. 5. rigalt . in tertul. ad praxean . ante-nicen . p. 27. p. 12. in quo est trinitas unius divinitatis , pater , filius & spiritus sanctus . de pudicit . c. 21. petav. t. 2. l. 1. c. 5. sect. 4. schlichting . praef p. 30. ante-nicen . p. 27. novatian . de trinit . c. 12.21 , 31. c. 29. et cum spiritus sancti divina aeternitate sociari . cypr. ep. 37. basil epist. canon , 47. epiph haeres . 57. n. 1. n. 2. theod. haer . l. 3. c. 3. epiph. 57. n. 2. comment . in matth. p. 470. euseb. l. 6. c. 33. epiph. haer . 62. aug. in joh. tract . 36. discourse of nominal . and real unit. p. 1● euseb. l. 7. c. 6.26 . athan. de decret . synodi nicaenae , p. 275. athanas. de sentent . dionysii , p. 561. basil de sp. sancto c. 29. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . greg. thaumat . p. 1. athanas. c. serap . p. 10. answer to milb . p. 18. rittang . p. 81. p. 113. p. 117. answer to dr. bull , p. 59. morin . exercit. l. 2. l. 10. c. 8. cosri part. 4. p. 316. p. 302. p. 61. de sp. sancto , c. 10. c. 17. c. 18. c. 29. euseb. l. 4. c. 15. vales. ad euseb. p. 73. coteler vii . p. 1●27 . c. 29. prudent . cath. hymn . 5. hilar. op. n. e. p. 1214. apol. 2. p. 94. p. 26. p. 97. p. 98. p. 56. p. 60. athenag . p. 11. defence of the hist. of the unit. p. 5. resp. ad judic . eccles p. 174.178 . just. apol. 2. paraei . ad graec. p. 18 , 22 , 24. dial. cum trypho , p. 274 , &c. athenag . p. 8 , 9. theophil . ad autolyc . p. 100. clemens paed. l. 3. c. 7. str. l. 4. p. 517. prof. p. 68. paed l. 1. c 6. str. l 5 p. 598. orig. c. celf l 1. p. 16. l 4. p. 198 l. 6. p. 275 , 2●9 , &c. 308. l 7. p. 351 , 371. clem alex . str. 1. euseb. praep. l. 8. theod. serm. 1. cyril . c. jul. l. 1. & l. 8. plutarch de isid. & osirld . p. 369. ed. fr. eusebius praep. e. l. 3. c. 11. jamb . de myst. sect. 8. c. 2. macrob. in som. scipion . l. 1. c. 14. answer to milb p. 17. athan. ep. ad serapion , p. 14. tom. 2. ad serap . tom. 1. p. 186 , 179. or. 3. c. arian p. 413. petavius t. ii. l. 2. c. 12. sect . 8. hist. of the unitar . p. 25. aug. in psal. 77. answ. to dr. bull , p. 17. eras. ad cens. paris . tit. ii. voss de tribus symb. dissert . 1. sect. 47. hilar. de synod . p. 1169. epiphaninius haer . 73. n. 17. clausula fidei in edit . nuperâ paris . ex mss. p. 27. p. 28. answer to my sermon p. 4. letter of resolution , p. 3. christianity not mysterious , p. 8 , 9. chap. i. human understanding , l. 1. chap. 4. sect . 18. l. 2. c. 13. sect . 19. chap. 23. sect . 2. l. 2. ch . 1. sect . 5. l 2. ch . 23. sect . 1. valla disput . dial. l. 1. c. 6. chap. 23. sect . 5. humane underst . i. 4. ch . 3. sect. 6. 2d . ed. p. 310 book . iv. chap. 10. sect . 5. book . ii. chap. 23. sect . 15. sect. 27. sect. 28. sect. 31. sect. 32. sect. 33 , 34 , 35. sect. 36. book iv. chap. 10. sect . 1. sect. 7. sect. 6. sect. 5. sect. 10. humane underst . l. 2. ch . 30 , 31. chap. 32. sect . 18. book 3. chap. 3. sect . 6. ib. sect . 15. sect. 19 , 20. book chap. sect. 1. christianity not myst. p. 28. p. 67. p. 71. p. 73. p. 145. p. 75. ad. attic. 4.87 . ed. r s. acad. 4.18 . de leg. l. 2. c. 14. chrys. hom. de resurrect . isidor . pelus . l. 2. ep. 192. christianity not myst. p. 80 , 81. p. 84. p. 86. p. 81. p. 88. p. 82. p. 8● . answer 1● serm. p. 5. possevin . appar . in genebrard . p. 6. p. 7. p. 7. p. 5. p. 8. answer to the archbishop , &c. p. 4. p. 17. p. 67. letter of resolut p. 3. considerat . on the explication , &c. by dr. w. p. 30. considerat . on the explication by dr. w. p. 30. answer to the archbishop , p. 21.