blood he himselfe here saith it He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood dwelleth in me and I in him and for this reason his flesh is meat indeed and his blood is drink indeed the onely meat and the onely drink which men should hunger and thirst after Other meates and drinks should be sought for yea life bodily it self should be desired onely to this End that by the prolonging of it wee might be partakers in greater measure of this meat and drink which preserves the Bodie and soul unto everlasting life 5. The Questions then to be discussed are Two First What it is to eat Christs flesh and drink his Blood Secondly What it is for Christ to Dwell or abide in us and us to dwell or abide in Him All agree that there is A Twofold eating of Christs Bodie and A Twofold drinking of his Blood One meerly Sacramental and another Spiritual Which agreement notwithstanding There ariseth A Third Question viz. What manner of eating Christs Flesh and drinking his Blood is in this place either onely or principally meant For the Resolution of this Question we are breifly to explicate each member of this Division viz. 1. What it is to eat Christs Bodie and drink his Blood Sacramentally onely 2. What it is to eat his Bodie and Drink his Blood Spiritually First then All that are partakers of this Sacrament eat Christs Bodie and Drink his Blood sacramentally that is they eat that Bread which Sacramentally is his Bodie and drink that Cup which Sacramentally is his Blood whether they eat or drink faithfully or unfaithfully For All the Israelites 1 Cor. 10. Drank of the same Spiritual Rock which was Christ Sacramentally All of them were partakers of his presence when Moses smote the Rock Yet with many of them God was not well pleased because they did not faithfully either Drink or participate of his presence And more displeased he is with such as eat Christs Bodie and Drink his blood unworthily though they eat and drink them Sacramentally For eating and drinking so onely that is without faith or due respect they eat and drink to their own Condemnation because they do not Discern or rightly esteem Christs Bodie or presence in the H. Sacrament May we say then that Christ is Really present in the Sacrament as well to the unworthy as to the faithful receivers Yes this we must grant yet must we add withal that he is really present with them in a quite contrary manner really present he is because virtually present to both because the operation or efficacie of his Bodie and blood is not metaphorical but real in both Thus the bodily Sun though locally distant for its substance is really present by its heat and light as well to sore eyes as to clear sights but really present to both by a contrarie real operation and by the like contrary operation it is really present to clay and to wax it really hardneth the one and really softeneth the other So doth Christs Bodie and Blood by its invisible but real influence mollifie the hearts of such as come to the Sacrament with due preparation but harden such as unworthily receive the consecrated Elements If he that will hear the word must take heed how he hears much more must he which means to receive the Sacrament of Christs bodie and blood be careful how he receives He that will present himself at this great Marriage Feast of the Lamb without a wedding garment had better be absent It was alwayes safer not to approach the presence of God manifested or exhibited in extraordinarie manner as in his Sanctuarie or in the Ark then to make appearance before it in an unhallowed manner or without due preparation Now when we say that Christ is really present in the Sacrament our meaning is that as God he is present in an extraordinarie manner after such a manner as he was present before his incarnation in his Sanctuarie in the Ark of his Covenant and by the Power of his God-head thus extraordinarilie present he diffuseth the vertue or operation of his Humane Nature either to the vivification or hardning of their hearts who receive the Sacramental Pledges So then a man by eating Christs bodie meerly Sacramentally may be hardned may be excluded from his gracious presence But no man hath Christ dwelling in him by this manner of eating his flesh and drinking his blood unlesse withal he eate the one and drink the other Spiritually The Eating then of Christs bodie and drinking his blood meerly Sacramentally is not the eating and drinking here meant 6. They are said to eat Christs Flesh and drink his Blood Spiritually which rightly apprehend his Death and Passion which by Faith meditate and ruminate upon them making application to themselves aswel of the great danger which may ensue upon the neglect of such great benefits as he hath purchased for them as of the inestimable good which alwayes accompanies the right esteeme or contemplation of his Bodie which was given for them and of his Blood which was shed for them He which thus eateth Christs Flesh and drinketh his Blood by Faith although he do not for the time present eat his Bodie or drink his blood Sacramentally hath a true interest in this promise He that eateth my Flesh and drinketh my Blood dwelleth in me and I in him so he do not neglect to eat his Bodie and drink his Blood Sacramentally when occasion requires and opportunitie serves So that Spiritual eating and drinking Christ by Faith is the true preparative for the worthy receiving of his bodie and blood Sacramentally He that doth not so prepare himself for the receiving of his body and blood doth receive him unworthily whilest he receives him Sacramentally The main Question is Whether Christs words be to be understood at all of Sacramental eating and drinking or of Spiritual eating and drinking onely 7. Many there were and yet are in Reformed Churches which deny this place to be meant of Sacramental Eating But as Beza amongst others well observes they which deny this place to be meant at all of Sacramental eating err no lesse then they do which restrain it only to Sacramental eating Their error which deny it to be meant at all of Sacramental eating is so much the worse because it gave advantage to our Adversaries of the Romish Church which want no wit to work upon all advantages given To omit others Jansenius and Dr. Hessels two of the most exquisite expositors of Scriptures and most Judicious Divines which the Romish Church had after the Reformation was begun by Luther and Zuinglius and prosecuted by Calvin expressely deny our Saviours dispute in this Chapter with the Jews to be meant at all of Sacramental eating or drinking The Reason which enforced these two great Divines to slight the authoritie of most writers in their own Church and to wave the authoritie of most ancient Fathers which it is evident do understand this
place of Sacramental eating and drinking was because they saw no possibilitie how to maintain the peremptorie decrees of the Councels of Constance and Basil concerning Communion under one kind if the words of our Saviour ver 53. of this Chapter be to be understood of Sacramental eating and drinking For it is granted by all that the Consecrated bread is Sacramentally his Bodie not his Blood and that the Cup is Sacramentally his Blood not his Bodie And yet our Saviours words are express Except ye eate the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood ye have no life in you So that all which hope to have life must Sacramentally drink his blood aswel as eat his flesh if this place be meant of Sacramental eating That evasion which most oâ—â— modern Priests and Jesuites use for eluding rather then answering this Objection was too palpable in the Judgement of these two great Divines as it since hath seemed to others of that Church which yet maintain that the former words of our Saviour are to be understood of Sacramental eating Christs flesh and drinking Christs blood The evasion of modern Priests and Jesuits is that he which Sacramentally receives Christs Bodie under the shape or form of Sacramental bread doth with it receive his blood per Concomitantiam by way of concomitancie because there is blood conteined in his bodie which they thus receive But this cannot satisfie any Romish Divine which understands himself or the ancient Doctrine which that Church pretends to follow For this device of receiving Christs blood in the bread per concomitantiam was but a late invention little above 200. years before Jansenius or Hessels lived And the newnesse of this imagination or invention which was generally applauded in the Romish Church in his time was one special motive why that Reverend Pastor of Blessed memorie Mr. Gilpin did disclaim the Romish Churches Doctrine in the Point of Transubstantiation as Bishop Tunstall his Uncle before him had done Secondly Admitting the bread were turned into Christs very bodie and after this conversion had blood in it as truly as flesh and bones yet all this would not salve the literal sense of our Saviours words in the 53 d verse if the eating and drinking which he there speaks of were Sacramental For suppose a man should feed upon raw flesh or upon flesh which had visible or material blood in it we might say indeed that he did eat blood per concomitantiam by way of concomitancie because the flesh which he eats had blood in it But no man would say That he did drink blood per concomitantiam For eating and drinking are two distinct acts and incompatible at one and the same time He that eateth flesh with blood in it doth not eat the flesh and drink the blood whilest he only eats but eats both together the one as principal the other as an appurtenance if he eat as a man and not as Swine do draugh which is no more an eating then a drinking Or if a man should drink blood mingled with some small portions of flesh we might say He did drink flesh by way of Concomitancie but no man would say that he did eat blood per concomitantiam albeit there were flesh in the blood which he drinks for he drinks both together he doth not eat either And for these reasons Pope Innocent expressely denies that he which eats Christs bodie whilst he only eats it doth drink his blood In his fourth Book Myster Evangel Legis ac Sacramenti Eucharist Chap. 21. Edit Venet. in quarto 8. The only refuge which the most learned in the Romish Church since Jansenius and Hessels dyed have found out for answering the former Objection of Reformed Writers is That the words of our Saviour Except ye eat the Flesh of the Son of man And drink his blood ye have no life in you are to be Expounded disjunctively as thus Except ye eat the Flesh of the Son of man Or drink his blood ye have no life in you The use or Corollarie of this Exposition is That if Christian people do Sacramentally Either eat Christs flesh Or drink his Blood as they ought that is with due preparation this will suffice seeing as they pretend there is no Divine precept which enjoynes all Christian People Sacramentally to receive Christs bodie and blood under both kindes Nor all Priests but only such as do Officiate or Consecrate The precept of Institution Bibite ex hoc omnes Drink ye all of this was punctually directed as they alledg to our Saviours Apostles only who were at this time made Priests and authorized to minister Christs bodie and blood after his death Yet were they not by their leave at this time Sacerdotes conficientes Our Saviour Christ himself did Consecrate both the Bread and Wine the Apostles were as much inferior to him as the meanest Lay-people are to the greatest Priest in the Romish Church to the Pope or summus Pontifex himself But the further Discussion of this Point belongs more properly to the words of the Institution The other Point of expounding et by vel or of shuffling in Or for And belongs to the Cognizance of the 53 and 56. verses To justifie this exposition Cardinal Tollet would perswade us That St Johns Greek Text is full of Hebraismes and there is nothing more familiar with Moses or with other sacred Hebrew writers then to use And for Or Et for Vel. And he brings divers instances to this purpose As for example that in Exod. 21. 17. He that curseth father And mother shall surely be put to death So it is word for word in the Hebrew and yet our English Translation as well as the Vulgar Latin renders the Original thus He that curseth father Or mother shall surely be put to death And it would be an ungodly Evasion for any Magistrate not to censure him as a transgressour of this Law which curseth his father albeit he do not curse his mother or which curseth his mother albeit he do not curse but rather blesse his father But must the true interpretation of such as are to judge according to this Law be derived from the peculiar phrase or dialect of the Hebrews No this was Cardinal Tollet's Errour for the Rule of Interpretation so the matter or circumstance be the same would hold as true in any dialect or language whatsoever The Question then is What certain general Rule we have when or in what cases the conjunctive particle And doth produce this or the like disjunctive sense or may warrant this or the like Exposition of this Law He that curseth father And mother shall surely die that is he which curseth Either father Or mother shall surely die For the like Exposition the Rules are Two One General and infallible Rule is this Whensoever the particle And doth couple not two parts of one and the same proposition but two intire propositions together That which is thus conjunctively affirmed of
two propositions coupled together must be disjunctively expounded of either proposition divided one from the other Now when it is said He that curseth Father And Mother shall die there be two intire propositions coupled together by this particle And implicitly the explicit sense or Resolution of which speech is this He that curseth his Father shall surely die And he that curseth his Mother shall surely die And if both these propositions conjunctively taken be true this disjunctive will be as true He that curseth either father or mother shall die Secondly the Rule is universally true When two incompatible attributes are conjunctively avouched of one and the same subject in one and the same ê“position universally taken the particle And in this case must be resolved into the particle Or when the universall ê“position or subject of it is divided into its parts Quae dicuntur conjunctim de genere dicuntur divisim de specie As for example the Philosopher describing the native propertie of quantitie saith maximè proprium est quantitati ut ex ea dicantur res aequales inaequales But in as much as equalitie and inequalitie are incompatible if wee apply them to the the same particular things which are compared together for quantitie hence it is that every particular substance which is compared to or measured with another must either be equal or unequal unto it That one and the same particular substance should be both equal and unequal to another for quantitie is impossible So the Philosopher saith and it is a naturall truth which none can deny that the living or sensitive creature universally taken is rational and irrational but because one and the same living Creature cannot be both rational and irrational when wee descend to particular living creatures wee cannot say that any of them is both rationall and irrationall but either rationall or irrationall Yet in as much as every particular living creature is either endowed with reason or not endowed with reason the living creature universally taken that is as it comprehends every particular living creature must be both rationall and irrationall For Quicquid dicitur divisim de Specibus dicitur conjunctim de Genere 9. To give such a direct and punctuall answer to the Cardinals instance out of Exod. 21. 17. He that curseth father and mother shall dye as may satisfie all the rest which he brings or can be brought to like purpose we say as was intimated before there be two intire propositions 1. He that curseth his father shall dye 2. He that curseth his mother shall dye and the explication or unfolding of these two propositions is disjunctively set down by our Saviour himself Matth. 15. 4. He that curseth father or mother shall surely dye But there are not two propositions but one proposition in this Text He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood dwelleth in me and I in him He doth not say here or elswhere He that eateth my flesh dwelleth in me and I in him and he that drinketh my blood dwelleth in me and I in him Nor is this disjunctive any where in Scripture exprest That he which eateth Christs flesh or drinketh his blood dwelleth in Christ and he in him That instance which the Cardinall would wrest to justifie his interpretation of our Saviours words in the 53. and 56. verses doth make against him His instance is 1 Cor. 11. ver 27. Whosoever shall eat this bread or drinke the cup of the Lord unworthily is guiltie of the body and blood of the Lord. For in as much as S t Paul had said before vers 26. that as often as wee eat this bread and drink this cup wee shew the Lords death till he come it will necessarily follow that albeit wee eat the bread not unworthily and yet put such a Case drink the cup unworthily we become guiltie both of his Body and Blood because in both wee solemnize the memory of his death and he that should both eat the bread and drink the cup unworthily is twice guiltie of the body and blood of the Lord As he that curseth both farther and mother is worthy of double death because he that curseth either father or mother is guiltie of death Nor can it be alledged that the severall parts of this proposition He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood dwelleth in me are incompatible or cannot be performed at one and the same sacramentall action by one and the same man or that they are to be universally or collectively understood of the whole Church as consisting of Priests and Laicks and not distributively of every man and therefore to seek a disjunctive sense of these words to this or like effect he that eateth my flesh or drinketh my blood dwelleth in me and I in him is to seek a knot in â—â—ulrush or a division in Unitie Again The form of our Saviours speech ver 53. is exceptive Except ye eat the Flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood ye have no life in you The form is the very same as if we should say Except a man honour his Father and Mother his seed shall not long prosper upon earth Now it would be impiously absurd to make this construction of that Commandment Except a man honour Either his Father Or his Mother his seed shall not long prosper upon the earth And no better then Thus is the Construction which Cardinal Tollet or his followers make of our Saviour's words in the 53. verse Our Saviour had told them before that He was the Bread of life which came down from heaven And pressing the Belief of this Point upon them further not by division but by addition he addeth ver 51. That The Bread which he meant was his Flesh And when the Jews ver 52. strove about this He further adds ver 53. Verily Verily Except ye eat and drink ye have no life in you 10. But besides the former plunge whereto the best Scholars in the Romish Church are put in justifying their practice for Deteining the Cup from the Laitie if This Chapter be meant of Sacramental eating there is another Difficultie which neither the late Device of Drinking Christs Blood per concomitantiam nor the Cardinals interpretation of ver 56. by Disjunction will any way touch much lesse satisfie And the Difficultie is this If these words be literally meant of Sacramental eating and drinking their literal sense must be as plain and as void of all Trope or Metaphor as the words of the Institution related by Saint Matthew Chap. 26. 26. are by them supposed to be Now when Christ saith in Saint Matthew That the bread is his Bodie this speech in the literal sense as they contend inferreth a substantial change of the Bread into the substance of his bodie Now our Saviours words are in this place as plain and as certain as in that He avoucheth again and again that he is the bread of life that the bread which he will
give is his flesh that his flesh is meat indeed that his blood is drink indeed Now if the sacramental bread in S t Matthew cannot literally be said to be his body unlesse it be converted into the substance of his body then cannot Christ himselfe literally be said to be bread unlesse his substance be converted into the substance of bread His flesh cannot literaly be said meat indeed unlesse it be really and substantially converted into meat his blood cannot be said drink indeed unlesse it be really transubstantiated into drink If they grant these words to be meant of Sacramental eating or to be equivalent to the words of the Institution Now to deny these words to be meant of sacramentall eating is every way lesse expedient for reformed Churches than for the Romish And yet to restrayn them either to Sacramental eating onely or to Spirituall eating excluding sacramental is worst of all We are therefore to consider that sacramental eating and spiritual eating are not opposite or incompatible but subordinate Our eating of Christs body and drinking of Christs blood are then compleat when they are Sacramentally spiritual or spiritually sacramentall For as Calvin excellently observes albeit such as professe themselves zealous followers of him either do not understand him or do not second him to eat Christs body and drink Christs blood Sacramentally is more then to beleive in Christ more than to have our faith awaked or quickned by the sacramentall pledges For no man can spiritually eat Christ but by beleeving his death and passion yet sacramental eating addes some what to spiritual eating how quick and lively soever our faith be whilest wee eat him onely spiritually For though our faith were in both the same as well for degree as qualitie yet the object of our faith is not altogether the same at least the Union of our faith unto the same object is not altogether the same in sacramental and in spiritual eating Christs body and blood are so present in the Sacrament that wee receive a more speciall influence from them in use of the sacrament than without it wee do so we receive it worthily or with hearts prepared by spiritual eating precedent that is by serious meditation of Christs death and passion It is not all one either not to think on Christs death and passion out of the sacrament or to think on them negligently or not reverently and to receive the sacrament of his body and blood unworthily negligently or irreverently Now as the effects or consequence of the unworthy Receiving the Holy Sacrament is more Dangerous then the Effects or Consequence of not eating Christ Spiritually or of Careless Meditation upon Christs death and passion so the Effect of Sacramental Receiving worthily and faithfully performed is a Greater refreshing to the Soul then the effect of Receiving Him Spiritually onely though reverently and as becomes us Now unto the reverent and worthy Receiving of Christs Bodie and Blood both ways that is both Spiritually and Sacramentally as being the most complete performance of the Condition required is the Promise of our Saviour most immediatly annexed He that So eateth my Flesh and drinketh my Blood Dwelleth in Mee and I in Him The meaning of which Promise was the Second Point proposed paragraph the 5 th and should be next handled but that the Application here desireth to be inserted 11. What hath been spelled apart let us now put together He that intends aright to eat Christs flesh and drink his Blood Sacramentally to his Souls Health must come prepared by a right and worthy receiving of Both Spiritually Now we Spiritually eat Christs Flesh and drink his Blood as often as we reverently and faithfully meditate upon Christs Death and remember it aright And this we do when we take a true Estimate of ourselves and of his death and sufferings for us For this is both duely to examine our selves or our own soules and rightly to Esteem or Discern the Lord's Bodie To Discern his Bodie from the bodies of other men we cannot unlesse we believe and acknowledge it to be The Bodie of the Son of God The bodie of God Blessed for ever as was shewed at large before in other Tracts and in the fore-part of this Book And this we may do and yet not rightly esteem that Love which Christ shewed unto us in offering his Bodie and Blood in respect of the love of others which would perhaps adventure their Bodies and shed their blood for us 12. To remember a A Good turn done by a friend and not to value and prize it as we ought is rather to forget then to remember his Friendlinesse Now no man can rightly prize the Death of Christ and the benefits thereof unlesse he truely believe that Christ Dyed for him But is Every one bound to believe This Yes He that doth not believe This doth not believe that Christ is The Messias or the Redeemer of the World To doubt of This is a degree of Infidelitie to denie it is more then Heresie a point of Jewish Infidelitie Yet to believe thus much and no more doth not immediately make a good Christian or worthy receiver of the Holy Sacrament What more then must every one believe That Christ dyed for him in particular certainly he must Nor doth the belief of This make him sure of his Salvation Every one must believe that Christ dyed for him in particular that he may be a worthy Receiver And Every One must worthily receive this Holy Sacrament that is worthily remember Christs death that he may make his Election sure But in what sense must Every one believe that Christ dyed for him in particular not Exclusively as if he dyed not for others as well as for him for this were to have the faith of Christ with respect of persons without charitie and contrarie to reason For if Every one must believe that Christ died for him in particular then every man must believe that Christ dyed for all men as well as for him Otherwise some men should be bound to believe an untruth But if he died for all men how is he said to die for thee and me in particular Verie well Thus. Though He dyed for all as well as for Thee or me yet did he not Die partly for thee and partly for me and partly for others but intirely for every one 13. Plato as Seneca in his 6. Book De Beneficijs Cap. 18. tells us thought himself obliged in kindnesse to one that had Transported him over a River without paying his Fare he reckoned it Positum apud Platonem officium But when he saw others partakers of the same Benefit he Disclaimed the Debt Hence Seneca draws This Aphorism It is not enough for him that will oblige me unto him to do me a good Turn unlesse he do it as to my self directly non tantùm mihi sed tanquà m mihi If upon the like considerations or to the end that they may think themselves obliged to
place either expresly or implicitly to direct our prayers to God the Father that he would be pleased to forgive us our sins to be reconciled unto us and bestow such blessings upon us as he hath promised to such as shall be reconciled unto him In the Second place either expressly or implicitly we are to beseech him to forgive us our sins to be reconciled and blesse us for the merits of his only Son who hath made satisfaction for us This is a Point which every Christian is bound expressely to believe that God the Father doth neither forgive sins nor vouchsafe any Term or Plea of Reconciliation but only for the merits and satisfaction made by the sacrifice of the Son of God who by the eternal spirit offered himself in our humane nature upon the Crosse In the next place we are to believe and acknowledge that as God the Father doth neither forgive nor vouchsafe Reconciliation but for the merits and satisfaction of his only Son so neither will he vouchsafe to conveigh this or any other blessing unto us which his Son hath purchased for us but only through his Son not only through him as our Advocate or Intercessor but through him as our Mediator that is through His humanitie as the Organ or Conduit or as the only Bond by which we are united and reconciled unto the Divine Nature For although the Holy Spirit or Third Person in Trinitie doth immediately and by Personal Proprietie work faith and other spiritual Graces in our Souls yet doth he not by these Spiritual Graces unite our souls or Spirits immediately unto himself but unto Christs Humane Nature He doth as it were till the ground of our hearts and make it fit to receive the seed of life But this seed of righteousnesse immediately flows from the Sun of Righteousnesse whose sweet influence likewise it is which doth immediately season cherish and ripen it The Spirit of life whereby our Adoption and Election is sealed unto us is the real participation of Christs Bodie which was broken and of Christs Blood which was shed for us This is the true and punctual meaning of our Apostles speech 1 Cor. 15. 45. The first man Adam was made a living soul or as the Syriack hath it Animale Corpus an enlivened bodie but the second Adam was made a quickning spirit and immediately becometh such to all those which as truely bear his image by the Spirit of Regeneration which issues from him as they have born the Image of the first Adam by natural propagation And this again is the true and punctual meaning of our Saviours words John 6. 63. It is the Spirit that quickneth the flesh profiteth nothing the words that I speak unto you are spirit and life For so he had said in the verses before to such as were offended at his words what if you should see the Son of man ascend up where he was before The Implication conteined in the Connexion between these two verses and the precedent is this That Christs Virtual presence or the influence of life which his Humane Nature was to distil from his heavenly Throne should be more profitable to such as were capable of it then his Bodily presence then the bodily Eating of his flesh and blood could be although it had been convertible into their bodily substance This distillation of life and immortalitie from his glorified Humane Nature is that which the Ancient and Orthodoxal Church did mean in their Figurative and lofty speeches of Christs Real presence or of eating His very Flesh and drinking His very Blood in the Sacrament And the Sacramental Bread is called His Bodie and the Sacramental Wine His Blood as for other reasons so especially for This that the vertue or influence of his Bloody Sacrifice is most plentifully and most effectually distilled from heaven unto the worthy Receivers of the Eucharist And unto this Point and no further will most of the Testimonies reach which Bellarmin in his books of the Sacraments or Maldonat in his Comments upon the sixth of Saint John do quote out of the Fathers for Christs Real Presence by Transubstantiation or which Chemnitius that Learned Lutheran in his Books De duabus in Christo naturis and de Fundamentis sanae doctrinae doth avouch for Consubstantiation And if thus much had been as distinctly granted to the Ancient Lutherans as Calvin in some places doth the controversie between the Lutheran and other Reformed Churches had been at an end when it first begun Both Parties acknowledging Saint Cyrill to be the fittest Umpire in this Controversie The end of the Third Chapter A Transition of the Publisher's IT must not be dissembled that I had no Intimation much lesse Commission of the Author's to Insert the Two following Chapters herein this place Yet besides that I knew not of any fitter place where to dispose of them I had these Reasons so to do 1. I held it fit that His Powerful Disputes against the Church of Rome about The Lords Supper in the fourth Chapter and about another Point in the fifth should immediately follow his Learned Argument with the Lutheran 2. The sequence seems very Methodical The Subject of the first Chapter being partly About Christs Exaltation by becoming The Chief Corner-Stone cut out of the Rock or quarrey by his Resurrection from The New Scpulchre lifted up by his Ascension and placed at the Chief Corner by his Sitting at Gods Right-hand and partly about The Union of Christ with true Christians which Union is both a Considerable part of the fourth Chapter and was happily touched upon in the Close of the Third 3. In case any Restive soul should perhaps some faint Dejected Spirit having read Christs Great Exaltation may say Who shall ascend into Heaven that is to bring Christ down from above Such an one besides the quickenings he may hear from other Remembrancers Saint Peter telling us that we are pilgrims here and Saint Paul that we seek a Countrie and look for a Citie Jerusalem that is Free and that being Fellow-Citizens with the Saints and of Gods hous-hold our Conversation or Traffick is to be in heaven for those things which are above where Christ sitteth at Gods Right-hand c. may receive mightie encouragement by Experimenting the Contents of these two next Chapters The avowed neer approach and Intimacie of our Lord Jesus Christ with the Believing and Receiving Christian The word is nigh thee even in thy mouth and in thy heart When the holy Sacramental pledges be in the mouth and Faith in the heart The Word the Eternal Word that was made flesh is nigh indeed For Verily Verily He that eateth my Fesh and drinketh my Blood dwelleth in Me and I in Him CHAP. 1111. A Paraphrase upon the sixth of St. John In what sense Christ's flesh is said to be truly Meat c. What it is To eat Christs Flesh and drink his Blood Of eating and drinking Spiritual and Sacramental And whether of them is meant
John 6. 56. Of Communion in one Kind and receiving Christs Blood per Concomitantiam Tollet's Exposition of Christs words Except ye eat And drink by Disjunction turning And into Or Confuted And Rules given for Better Expounding like places How Christ dwels in us and we in him The Application All which be seasonable Meditations upon the Lords Supper John 6. 56. He that eateth my Flesh and Drinketh my Blood dwelleth in Me and I in Him Or abideth in me and I in him 1. SEeing these words contain the Grand Mystery of godliness not only of God manifested in the Flesh but of God still with us yea dwelling in us and seeing they are withal the Conclusion or Centre of our Saviours long dispute with the murmuring Jews It will be necessarie to unfold the chief Contents of this Chapter At the tenth verse you may read how our Saviour had satisfied five thousand hungry souls with five barley loves and two fishes and filled twelve baskets with the fragments upon the Experience of this strange wonder this great multitude sought to make him their King A good Project I must confesse if we value it onely by the usual measure or aime of popular Elections What people would not be willing to have such an one for their King as were able to feed a whole Armie without Contribution Tax or Toll from them without any further toil and care either on their part or his then giving of thanks and distribution of extemporarie provision by his Ministers But besides this politick motive they had a Prenotion that their expected Messias or King should enter upon his Kingdom at the Feast of the Passover a little before which time this Miracle was wrought And it was a received Opinion as Tacitus telleth us that there should a great King about this time arise in Judah Nor did this people err much in the circumstance of time wherein their Messias should be enthron'd in the Kingdom of David for so he was at or soon after the Passover following But they utterly mistook the nature of his Kingdom and the manner of his Reign Yet in that they sought to make this man for so and no more then so they conceived him to be their King it is more then probable that they took him for their expected Messias And indeed upon sight of the Miracle which he had wrought they expressly confesse so much ver 14. This is of a truth That Prophet which should come into the world But seeing neither his Kingdome was of this world nor was he to be instated in it by the voyces and suffrages of men he who knew all times and seasons knew this was not the time of his Coronation and therfore when he perceived that they would come and take him by force to make him a King he departed again into a mountain himself alone ver 15. And his Disciples being for the present discharged of their attendance crost the sea without him to Capernaum which was the place of his and their abode ver 16 17. The people which had been more then eye-witnesses of the former miracle having observed that he could not come to Capernaum where the next day they found him by ship or boat demand of him ver 25. Rabbi when camest thou hither The strange manner of his coming thither before them did it seems no lesse affect them then the former miracle though neither did affect them as was fitting for so our Saviour plainly tells them ver 26. Verily verily I say unto you ye seek me not because ye saw the miracles but because ye did eat of the loaves and were filled These were the same men which saw the miracle but in seeing it they did not see it that is they did not in heart consider that he had fed their bodies with corporal bread to no other end save only to stir up the appetite of their souls after celestial food So our Saviour testifies unto them ver 27. Labour not for the meat which perisheth but for that meat which endureth to everlasting life which the Son of man shall give unto you for him hath God the Father sealed that is he was to be a King of Gods appointing not of theirs 2. Now albeit the former miracle of five loaves and two fishes had extorted that confession from them before mentioned Of a truth this is that Prophet which should come into the world yet this reproof of our Saviour's provokes them to question the validitie of their former verdict for they demand a further sign of him before they will acknowledge that he was indeed the Great Prophet or one whom they might believe was sent from God for so they say ver 30 31. What sign shewest thou then that we may see and believe thee What dost thou work our Fathers did eate Manna in the desert as it is written he gave them bread from heaven to eate The question at last comes to this issue Whether the Manna which their Fathers did eate in the wildernesse were the true bread of life or bread from heaven better then which they were not to expect Our Saviour maintaines the negative ver 32 33. Verily Verily I say unto you Moses gave you not that bread from heaven but my Father giveth you the true bread from heaven For the bread of God is he which cometh down from heaven and giveth life unto the world All this they can well brook in Thesi or General for so they reply ver 34. Lord evermore give us this bread But when our Saviour comes from the Thesis to the Hypothesis or from the general Doctrine which they so well approved to make this particular Application I am the bread of life he that cometh to me shall never hunger and he that believeth on me shall never thirst ver 35. They leave their questioning and fall to murmuring taking a sudden occasion or strange hint of offence at his person or Parentage Whereas before they were forward to make him their King they now reply Is not this Jesus the son of Joseph whose father and mother we know How is it then that he saith I came down from heaven vers 42. 3. Thus their fathers had murmured against Moses and Aaron in the wildernesse one while for want of bread Exod. 16. 2. accounting their estate in Egypt much better than their present condition in the wildernesse Another while they murmur for water Exod. 15. 24. And again Exod. 17. 3. Wherefore is this that thou hast brought us up out of Egypt to kill us and our Children and Cattle with thirst Thus they murmured against Moses whom they had seen to work so mightie wonders And thus their foolish posteritie murmured against Him whom for the former miracle they had acknowledged the great Prophet whom God had promised to raise up unto them like unto Moses in all things and therefore like unto him in this in that he endured their murmurings against him with greater patience
the Son of God more then other men are some in our dayes have taught That Christ did not only suffer all for them but as for them in particular all others being not such as they deemed themselves to be that is not truly Elect being excluded from the Benefit of his sufferings This is the best Use and most Charitable construction that can be made of so unuseful and uncharitable a Doctrine Though to gather any good Use from it is as impossible as to reap Figgs of Thistles Howbeit as well as they who hold That Christ died for the Elect only as they which teach That he dyed for all must beware lest they mis-apply That Rule of Seneca's touching ordinarie benefits or Common courtesies unto that Extraordinarie loving kindnesse of Christs sufferings Quod debeo cum multis solvam cum multis That which I owe amongst others I will not pay alone His meaning is That for Common benefits he is only bound to pay his share or portion Far be it from any one that nameth the Name of the Lord Jesus to reason thus in his heart or secret thoughts Christ died for the many hundreds of thousands now living and for the more hundreds of ten thousands late or long since dead as well as for me therefore I owe him love and thankfulnesse but pro ratà suppose the exact number was certainly known I am but to acknowledge such a part of his sufferings to have been undertaken for me as I am of that great multitude Every humane soul is indebted to Christ for the whole not every single man for his part of mans Redemption That which St. Bernard speaks in a Case not altogether the same is most true of the Benefits of Christs sufferings Nec in multitudinem divisa sunt nec ad paucitatem restricta If Gods love to mankind be infinite and if the value of Christs blood or sufferings be truly infinite as they truly be they cannot be divided amongst many much lesse can they be restrained to some few both these being against the nature of Infinitie And if the value of Christs sufferings cannot be divided into parts Everie one must acknowledge that He paid an infinite price for his Redemption in particular A price lesse then infinite could not have Redeemed any one of us and a price more then infinite could not be given for all If Christ became a second Adam to die and suffer for redeeming man he dyed and suffered for all men for every man albeit the number of men which proceed from the first Adam could be infinite Had it been the Will or Purpose of the Son of God to have taken upon him the Form of a Servant immediately upon the First Woman's sin of Disobedience his sufferings for her could not have sufficed unlesse they had been of value infinite And being of value infinite for her they had been of the same value for everie living Soul that issued from her to the Worlds end If then the price he laid down for thee were infinite that is without measure or Bounds thy Love and thankfulnesse to Him must be without Stint or limit Though He died for others as well as thee yet art thou bound to love Him no lesse then if he had died for thee alone Thus must Thou think of Christ's Death and Passion if thou remember it aright And as often as thou Readest Hearest or makest Confession with thy Lips That Christ's Blood was shed for thee make this Comment or Paraphrase in thine heart He shed his whole Blood for me every drop that fell from Him either in the Garden or on the Crosse or elsewhere was poured out for my sake for me in particular Yea every one which hears of Christ is bound to believe that he dyed for him and as for him that the benefit of his Passion redounds et mihi et tanquam mihi and charitie if it spring from Faith will teach us to exclude none from Title to the benefits of Christs Death and sufferings 14. This Doctrine of Christ's Dying for All of His purpose to dissolve the works of Satan in all I am bold to professe in every place where Christ's Name is called upon in every place where I have or may have oportunitie to make Christ known The bolder because it sets forth not only the Love and Mercie but the Justice of God a great deal more then the contrarie Doctrine can do It makes mans sinfulnesse and unthankfulnesse appear much greater then by the contrarie Doctrine can be apprehended or acknowledged Besides it makes our Ministrie of preaching more useful then otherwise it could be For if we grant That Christ dyed only for the Elect we might acquit our selves with safetie of Conscience from the burden of preaching or Catechizing save only in those Congregations which we know to be of the number of the Elect or men alreadie regenerate Howbeit even in respect of Them our preaching could not be so useful as it would be harmful to others We could but testifie that to the Elect which they already know that is that they shall be saved But if once we teach that the Elect only or some few perhaps one of a Thousand not one of five hundred have any interest in Christs sufferings every man which is not as yet regenerate nor in the state of Election would forthwith conclude that it is a thousand to One more then five hundred to One that he can receive no benefit from Christs sufferings having no interest in the everlasting inheritance purchased by them And were it not much better to be silenced then by our preaching to put such stumbling-blocks in their wayes whom we are sent to call unto Christ For we are not sent to call the righteous or men alreadie regenerate but sinners to repentance to the state of regeneration How true soever in the Event it may prove That but a Few shall be saved in respect of them that perish though the most part of men do die in their sins yet their blood shall be required at their hands who have taught that they could not be saved that Christ did not die did not suffer for them But if we teach as God in his Word hath taught us That Christ Dyed and suffered for all men no man can doubt whether Christ dyed for him or no and not doubting that Christ dyed for him he need not Dispair of Salvation by him we leave him without excuse for not repenting and seeking Christ Again This same Doctrine sets forth the Glorie of God much more then the other can For albeit Gods mercies unto One man be truly infinite or rather infinite in themselves yet if according to this infinitie they be extended unto all they are extensively much greater If God had created only these inferior Elements and man their creation would necessarily infer the infinitie of his power for without infinite power nothing could have been made of Nothing but yet his praise or glorie would
he hath a more peculiar right of Dominion over us over all that pertain unto his Church then by right of Creation he hath as God then by right of Redemption or Attonement he hath as God and Man For That part of our nature that flesh and blood which he took of his Mother was his by a more peculiar Title and real property then it was God the Fathers or the Holie Ghosts and we by mystical and spiritual union with that part of the humane nature which he assum'd into the Unitie of his Divine Person are His at least He by this union is our Head and Lord by a more strict and proper Title then God the Father or God the Holie Ghost is By the former Title of Redemption or satisfaction made for us he is our Lord and we his servants By this Title of mystical Union with him he is the Bridegroom or Head the Church is his Spouse and being Head of the Church every member of it is bound as God by the Psalmist exhorts the Spouse Psal 45. to worship him as our Lord and God for the husband is Lord of the wife He bought all our souls being in the state of Aliens or bond-servants and after cleansed and purified them that they might be espoused to him and finally presented to his Father He hath purchased the Church of God saith St. Paul with his own blood Acts 20. 28. And again Eph. 5. Christ gave himself for the Church that he might Sanctifie it and cleanse it by the washing of water through the word That he might make it unto himself a glorious Church c. ver 25 26 27. CHAP. VIII What our Confession of Christ to be The Lord importeth and how it redounds to the Glory of God the Father 1. EVery tongue must confess that Jesus Christ is Lord Our Lord by a peculiar real Title To this Confession every Son of Adam to whom God hath given the use of the tongue is bound de Iure but many sons of Adam to whom God hath given the use of the tongue do not confess so much de Facto The Jews with their tongues flatly deny him to be the Lord or their promised Messias The Turks and Mahumetans confess him to be a Lord of Christians but deny him to be The Lord The chief Lord under God the Father This title of Chief Lord they ascribe to Mahomet and under his right they pretend a title of dominion over Christendom The Heathens which know not God do not so much as question whether he be a Lord or whether He or Mahomet be under God the chief Lord. But as for us Christians we all to whom God hath given the use of the tongue do confess him to be The Lord As for those to whom the use of the tongue is by the course of nature and Gods ordinarie providence denyed others for them do ingage themselves at Sacred Baptisme that they when God shall grant them a heart to understand and a tongue to speak shall confess him to be the Lord and to be unto them their Lord. And in case they dye before they come to possesse the use of their hearts or of their tongues the Church or parish wherein this profession of faith was made on their behalfs are bound to profess thus much for them And as God no doubt accepts the prayers of the Church wherein they are baptized for them which cannot so much as speak to men much less pray to God or to Christ That they may be admitted into his visible Church and be reputed as members of his mystical bodie so doubtless he will accept the prayers of the Church and of every faithfull member of the Church wherein they live and dye that they may be accepted into the Church Triumphant and to us invisible albeit they never attained unto the use of the tongue or when as the Lord which gave others this blessing hath taken it from them For even of the tongue or of the use of the tongue that of Iob is most true and to be resumed by all as well by the dying as by the living by him for his owne part and by the living on his behalfe the Lord hath given and the Lord hath taken away blessed be the name of the Lord Job 1. 21. 2. Thus every tongue is bound de Jure to confess that Jesus Christ is the Lord that Lord whom Job so long before did confess But though every tongue of men throughout the world every tongue of Christians of Jewes of Mahumetans or Infidels should from their birth confess thus much would this be enough for that acknowledment which here is required that Jesus Christ is the Lord or would such acknowledgement of every tongue be sufficient to pay that tribute which is due unto the Glorie of God the Father from this Confession which is here required that Jesus Christ is the Lord No it is not the Confession of every tongue that will suffice albeit the acknowledgment or Confession of every tongue be de jure required In this speech Every tongue must confess c. there is a Twofold Universalitie included The One of the Parties thus confessing or aknowledging The Other of the Duties or services to be performed by everie party thus acknowledging Christ to be the Lord. To begin with the Former when the Apostle saith That every tongue must Confesse that Jesus Christ is THE LORD You must take this Universal note to be equivalent to that phrase so often used in the Book of the Revelation by the Evangelist and Apostle all nations and Kindreds all people and Tongues every one of all Sorts of the Sons of Adam are bound de Jure to confesse That Jesus Christ the son of God and the son of man conceived by the Holy Ghost born of the virgin Marie is THE LORD of the Dying and of the Living of the Quick and of the Dead As for all such as do not either in heart or tongue or in both either by themselves or by others for them truly acknowledge Him in this life to be such a Lord they shall acknowledge Him to be such A Lord after their Resurrection from death of which likewise He is Lord. 3. But the acknowledgment of Every Tongue or of every one to whom God hath vouchsafed either a tongue or the use of the tongue will not suffice to find him a Gracious Lord at the resurrection from the dead and at the day of finall Judgment There must be as is said an Universalitie as well of duties and services to be performed by every particular person to whom God hath given an heart to understand as an universalitie of tongues or lips which are to make this confession The real language of every heart will be sufficient for every one in particular whom God hath deprived or denied the use of the tongue But unto him to whom God hath given an understanding heart and the use of the tongue also the hearty prayers and
very Bodie and Blood to be locally present in every place where and at all times when that blessed Sacrament shall be celebrated This we deny And the former Principle or Antecedent That God is able to create the self same body as often as it pleases him will never infer their intended Conclusion Not to question what God can do we further add For Christs body or whole Christ God and man to be bodily present by this means in many places at once or in all places at all times wherein that blessed Sacrament shall be celebrated is one of those things which according to their rules as well as ours cannot be done as implying an evident Contradiction in nature It may not be believed nor imagined because God did never bind any man to believe such an impossibilitie or Contradiction as is involved in this doctrine It is altogether without the compass of the most miraculous work which God hath at any time wrought or ever promised to work All the former Instances or Cases possible concerning Gods Power to make one and the same man again after he had been annihilated are most unlike to their intended Conclusion All the former Instances or suppositions are free from all color or suspition of Contradiction in nature This supposed Creation of Christs Body often since his death implies as many and as manifest Contradictions as there have been Masses in the Romish Church Not only these Assertions but the dissimilitude also of the Case in question to the former Cases will be immediately made clear from the very Definition of Creation To create a body is to make it of nothing and to make the self same Body which formerly had been but is resolved into Nothing out of Nothing again is but a second exercise of his Creative Power and whatsoever God before hath done he is able to do the same again But the Body of Christ they acknowledge to be immortal and absolutely exempted not only from Annihilation or resolution into Nothing but from all danger of Corruption or diminution Again whatsoever is Created whether at the first second or third time hath no Actual being until it begin to be by Creation Now to make that very thing begin to be or to begin to be out of nothing which already actually is is something is immortal and more glorious then any other creature implies a manifest Contradiction But Christs Body they grant to be immortal since his Resurrection more unalterable then the heaven of heavens so immortal that it can never cease to be what it is therefore it is impossible that it should begin to be by a new creation or be created again For that which is created or may be created again must first be resolved into nothing or cease to be before it can be created again seeing creation is the making of that which is not out of Nothing or be made again by means miraculous If then Christs Body be locally present in the Sacrament it must either be created again and this supposeth either annihilation or dissolution of it or else it must be brought out of the heavens into the Priests hands or else the presence of it in many places must be created but Local Presence is altogether uncapable of Creation for it is a Meer Relation which can neither be created nor made but resulteth from or followeth upon the motion of things created from one place to another or from their creation or beginning to be in that place wherein they are said to be created 12. So it fares with our Adversaries in this Argument as it doth with Boot-halers or night-riders which have caught an unlawful prey being hotly pursued by the right owners Now their manner is to divide the spoil and their company that they may carry one part one way and another part another way that so whilst one is pursued others may escape without pursuit or rescue of the prey Through the ignorance or carelesness of Gods people which should have kept a better watch over their own souls the Romish Priests had made a gainful prey by transporting the native sense of our Saviours Words in the institution of the Sacrament to justifie the doctrine of Transubstantiation And since they have been pursued by reformed Writers as Cozeners and Cheaters of Gods people some of them run one way some another Some of them seek to maintain Christs local presence or Transubstantiation by the former doctrine of Gods Almighty Power which is able to create one and the same body often Others seek to maintain the same doctrine and carry away the prey by the manner of Angelical motion from one place to another in an instant or moment of time And if they could draw such as pursue them into these straits and subtilities they hope to make their part good against such as are not much conversant in the School-mens nice disputes concerning the nature or motions of Angels or know not the difference between the nature and motions of Spirits and Spiritual Bodies Others seek to maintain the same doctrine by the infinitie of divisible quantities as if it were possible for a flies wing to overspread the whole earth as a hen doth her chickens And that Christs Body may by this kind of Infinitie be in many places at once in as many as God shall appoint hoping by this means to cast a mist before the eyes of such Readers as know not the difference betwixt a real material or substantial and a mathematical or imaginary quantitie But all these fictions or suppositions they cast forth only to offer play unto their adversaries or to gain some time for invention of new shifts None of them dare pitch upon any or all of these wayes or imaginations or put the Case upon this issue Whether any of them be in nature possible or agreeable to the Analogie of Faith The only point wherein they agree is the submission of their judgments or imaginations to the authoritie of the Church which is no better agreement then if amongst a multitude of unlearned men one of them should maintain that snow is white another black another pawn his estate that it is blew and a fourth that it is green and yet in the end refer themselves to be tried by some Philosopher which had written of the nature of Snow in a language that none of them understands whose books they know not where to find For what the Church is that cannot err or of whom it consists the French and Italian Catholicks do not agree Or if we take the Church for the Trent Council confirmed by the Pope the Jesuites themselves cannot agree about the meaning of it in this point Divers of them do in Effect deny any Transubstantiation in this Sacrament albeit that Council under pain of curse enjoyneth all Christians to believe That there is a true Conversion of the bread into the substance of Christs Body and of the wine into the substance of his Blood and
that this conversion is rightly called Transubstantiation So that in fine the unitie whereof the children of that Church do so much brag is not an unity of faith or belief but an unity of faction or conspiracy for their own gain such as may be between the Jews the Turks the Heathens and the Arian hereticks which denied the Divinity of Christ to rob or spoil the Orthodoxal or true Catholick Christians 13. Most men have often read All almost have often heard of a Twofold Resurrection The one from death in sin unto newness of life The other from bodily death unto glory and immortality The second Resurrection is the End of our whole life here on earth the first Resurrection from death in sin to newness of life is the mean most necessary for attaining this joyful and happy End Now as the second Resurrection from bodily death unto glory is the End of the first Resurrection from sin to newness of life So is the first Resurrection the End of the blessed Sacrament or solemn commemoration of Christs death till he come to Judgment And although the Omnipotent Power of God by which all things were created of nothing be the most prime and powerful Cause of the second Resurrection yet of our Resurrection unto that Glory and Immortality whereof Christ is now possest Christ as man is not only the Idaeal or Exemplarie but the immediate Efficient or working Cause also Howbeit the power of his Efficiency or working as man be derived from the Omnipotent Power of the Godhead dwelling in him bodily But unto the real participation of this All-powerful Influence from Christs humanity by which the dead shall be quickned by which these mortal bodies shall be cloathed with glory and immortality the bodily or local presence of Christ is not required by the Romish Church It doth not hold it necessary that all or any body which shall be quickened or raised to Glorie shall first swallow Christs Body or be touched by it Of Angelical ministerie or service for gathering the dispersed reliques of mens bodies which have been dissolved by death some use there shall be in the last day as some Romanists with divers Antients think but no use at all of any Mass-Priest to make Christs Body to be locally present unto all that shall be quickened by it There shall be no need then of Transubstantiating Sacramental bread into Christs Body or wine into his bloud for giving life unto those that have been long dead or for effecting that change which shall be wrought in the living Now if by the meer virtual presence of Christs Body and Blood the men which have been long dead shall be restored to perfect life immortalitie shall not the souls of all which receive him in the Sacrament by Faith and true repentance be raised to Newness of life by the same virtual presence without any local touch of His Body but only by that sweet Influence which daily issueth from this Sun of righteousness now placed at the Right hand of God as in its proper Sphere This manner of Christs presence of his real presence in the Sacrament to wit by powerful Influence from his Humanitie our Church did never deny nor doth God the Father or Christ the Son deny this Real Influence of life unto any that hunger and thirst after it in the Sacrament CHAP. XIV 1 COR. 15. 36 c. But some will say How are the dead raised up and With what body do they come Thou Fool That which thou sowest is not quickened except it die c. That this Argument drawn from Seed sown is a Concludent Proof of the Resurrection of The Bodie THe Questions are Two First How the dead shall be raised The second With what bodies shall they come forth The former imports thus much How is it possible that the Dead shall be raised Or it being admitted that it is possible for the dead in some sort or manner to arise to life the next branch of the same Question is in what particular manner they shall de Facto arise as whether by Gods Creative Power by which he made all things of nothing or by his Conservative Power by which he preserveth all things that are in their proper Being or advanceth them to an higher estate or better Tenure of Being The second Question or Quaerie is With what kind of bodies shall the dead arise Whether with the self same bodies wherein they died Or if not every way the same what alteration or change shall be wrought in them Unto Both these Questions our Apostle vouchsafeth but this one Answer 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 O Fool that which thou sowest is not quickened except it die But this Answer may seem in the first place to break the Rule of Christian Charity For many of these Corinthians though in this point of the Resurrection erroneous and ignorant were yet Christian though weak brethren and the Law is general he that shall say unto his brother THOU FOOL shall be guilty of Hell fire Matth. 5. 22. The Rule indeed is General if this or the like opprobrious speech be hatched out of malice leavened wrath or invetered hatred But this sentence they do not incur out of whose mouthes these or the like speeches issue by way of just reproof or instruction as from a Master to his Scholers or from a Lord to his Servants in points wherein they err and are to be corrected or instructed by him In these cases or upon these occasions their censure passeth rather upon the folly then upon the persons of them whom they so chastise correct or seek to instruct And it is not altogether impertinent which some have noted upon that place That our Apostles censure doth not aim at any particular or determinate person but it is indefinitely directed to all those which seriously make the former questions either concerning the Possibilitie of mens arising from the dead or the particular Manner how this Resurrection should be wrought or with what bodies they should come forth But many such as will confess his reason or Argument to be free from breach of Christian Charitie or good manners will question the Logical strength or pertinence of it The strength or efficacy of it is questionable upon These points As first How the dayly experiment of seed-corn which first dies and is quickned again can inferr the Fundamental conclusion by our Apostle intended to wit the Resurrection of mens bodies which have been dead and rotten for many hundred years and their Reliques dispersed into so many several Elements or places that if the seed-corn which men sow were but dispersed into half so many places the husband-man should in vain expect an increase or his seed again Secondly admitting this yearly experiment of the seed dying and reviving were of force sufficient to inforce our belief of the former conclusion that the bodies of men dead may be raised to life again yet the
meaning if I render it thus Israel that very day committed seven deadly sins at once that is without interposition or intervention of any good work or thought First They allege Zechariah was their High Priest and to kill a Priest though of inferior rank was a sin amongst all Nations more then equivalent to the killing of a meer secular Potentate A sin sometimes more unpardonable then any sin could be committed within this Kingdom besides the making of Allom. Secondly As these Jews allege Zechariah was a Prophet and to kill a Prophet was the next degree of comparison in iniquity unto the laying of violent hands upon Kings and Princes for he which forbid To touch his annointed did also forbid to do his Prophets any harm both are given in the same charge Thirdly Zechariah was a second Magistrate among his People and to kill a prime Magistrate is more then murther or at least a mixture of Murther and Treason Fourthly This Priest and great Magistrate by the Testimony of their sons who murthered him was upright and entire in the discharge of all his Offices and a man unblemished for his life and conversation Fifthly they polluted the Courts of the Lords House within whose precincts Zechariahs bloud was shed without such reverence to the place as Jehoiada his Father upon a farre greater exigencie for the preservation of Ioash and his Kingdom did observe For he would not suffer Athaliah though guilty of murther of the Royal Seed and of high Treason against the Crown of David to be put to death within the Courts of the Temple but commanded her to be killed at the Gates of the Kings House Chap. 23. 14. Sixthly As these Iewish Rabbins observe Their fore-fathers polluted the Sabbath of the Lord for on a Sabbath day as it is probable not from their testimony only but from the Text Zachariah was thus murthered That which makes up the full number of seven and the measure of their unexpiable iniquity the Sabbath wherein this unexpiable murther was committed was the Sabbath of the great Feast of Attonement All these transgressions or deadly sins for every circumstance seems a transgression or principal sin not an accessary were committed in one day or at once Another circumstance these later Iews charge their fore-fathers withal That they did not observe the Law of the * Deer or of the Hart after they shed Zachariah's innocent blood for they did not so much as cover it with dust But this Circumstance will fall into the discussion of the Third General proposed The sins or circumstances hitherto mentioned were enough to sollicitate the Execution of Zachariah's dying prayers or imprecations Lord look upon it and require it Another circumstance for aggravation of this sin specially on King Io ash his part omitted by the later Iews might here be added For that this good man this godly Priest and Prophet of the Lord Zachariah was by birth and bloud of nearest kindred as we say Cousin Germane to Ioash as being the Son by lawful descent of Iehoshabeath daughter of Iehoram sister to Ahaziah and so Aunt to King Ioash whom Iehoiada the Priest had to wife 2 Chron. 22. 11. 7. But did these Aggravations or curious Commentaries of later Jews upon this and the like sins of their fore-fathers any way help to prevent the like diseases in such as made them Rather their Exclamations against them and Rigid Reformation of them and their affected Zeal unto the Prophets whom their Fathers had murthered did cast them into farre worse diseases of pride and hypocrisie whose symptomes were fury madness and splenctical passions which in the issue brought out more prodigious murther as will better appear in the Second General proposed which was The Emblematical portendment of this cruel and prodigious Fact against Zechariah or the accomplishment of his imprecations according to the mystical sense For proof of our last Assertion or Conclusion of the Literal sense no better Authority can be alleged or desired then the authority of our Saviour Christ No better Commentaries can be made upon the mystical sense of the former History then he who was the Wisdom of God made upon it Matth. 23. verse 29. Wo to you Scribes and Pharisees hypocrites so he had indicted them seven or eight times in this Chapter before But the height or rather the depth of their hellish hypocrisie was reserved unto this verse and the original thus expresseth it Because ye build the tombs of the Prophets and garnish the sepulchers of the righteous and say If we had been in the dayes of our Fathers we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the Prophets wherefore ye be witnesses unto your selves that ye are the children of them which killed the Prophets What if they were so What will follow Must the children be punished for their fathers sins or for the acknowledgment of them Surely no! if they had repented of them But to garnish the Sepulchers of the Prophets or the righteous men whom their Fathers had killed was no good Argument of their true Repentance So farre was this counterfeit Zeal unto the memory of deceased Prophets from washing away the guilt of blood wherewith their fore-fathers had polluted the Land that it rather became the nutriment of hatred and of murtherous designs against the King of Prophets and Lord of life And to this effect the words of the Evangelist St. Luke chap. 11. ver 48. would amount were they rightly scann'd and fully express'd Truly ye bear witness and allow the deeds of your fathers for they killed them to wit the Prophets and righteous and ye build their sepulchres In building the Sepulchres and acknowledging their fathers sins which killed the Prophets they did bear Authentick Witness that they were their sons And in not bringing forth better fruits of Repentance then the beautifying of their Graves they did bear witness against themselves that they were but as Graves as our Saviour saith in the 44. verse which appear not or do not outwardly shew what is contained in them and the men that walk over them are not aware of them 8. That the Scribes and Pharisees who were respectively Priests and Lawyers did more then witness that they were the sons of them which killed the Prophets that they did though not expresly yet implicitely more then allow their Fathers deeds and were at this instant bent to accomplish them is apparent from our Saviours fore-warnings or threatnings against them Matt. 23. 32 33. Fill ye up then the measure of your fathers ye generation of vipers how can ye escape the damnation of hell or the judicature unto Gehennah That the Scribes and Pharisees and the People misled by them were now prone to make up the full measure of their Fathers sins is apparent from Matth. 23. 34 and 35. Wherefore behold I send unto you Prophets and Wisemen and Scribes and some of them ye shall or will kill crucifie and some of
them ye shall scourge in your Synagogues and persecute them from City to City That upon you may come all the righteous blood that was shee l upon the earth from the blood of the righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias the son of Barachias whom ye slew between the Temple and the Altar Verse 36. Verily I say unto you all these things shall come upon this Generation Or as it is in St. Lukes Narration of our Saviours Comment upon this Story taken by himself or by others who heard him in the very same words wherein he uttered it Therefore also saith the Wisdom of God I will send them Prophets and Apostles some of them they shall or will slay persecute That the blood of all the Prophets which was shed from the foundation of the world may be required of this Generation from the blood of Abel unto the blood of Zacharias which perished between the Altar and the Temple Verily I say unto you it shall be required of this Generation This vehement reiterated Asseveration literally and punctually referrs unto the words of my Text. The Implication or Importance is as much as if he had said Ye Scribes and Pharisees may call to mind that when your Fore-fathers whose murtherous acts ye acknowledge did slay Zacharias the High-Priest he expired with these words in his mouth Lord look upon it and require it His innocent blood was then in part required upon King Ioash upon the Princes of Judah and other chief offenders But shall now again be required in full and exact measure of this present Generation more murtherous and bloody then their idolatrous fore-fathers at any time were 9. What shall we say then That this last Generation was guilty of the murther of Zachariah or to be plagued for their fathers sins in murthering him This Point will come to be discussed in the Third General And however that may be determined This Case is clear that These later Iews did make up the full measure of their fore-fathers iniquity in killing Gods Prophets especially in murthering Zechariah who was the most illustrious Type of Christ the Son of God in the Manner of his death and for the Occasions which these several Generations took respectively to murther them both The special Occasion which their fore-fathers took to kill Zachariah the Son of Iehoiada or Barachias for he bore both names though both in effect the same or one equivalent to the other was because he taxed them for their idolatry and laboured to bring them again to the worship of the true God The only quarel which the malice of the later Jews could pick against our Lord and Saviour was because he taxed their hellish Hypocrisies which their too Curious Reformation of their fore-fathers Idolatry had bred And taught them how to worship God in spirit and truth not in Ceremonies or meer bodily observance Neither Generation were so blind as to persecute men whom they did acknowledge to be immediately sent from God Yet were both furiously prone to persecute such as indeed were sent from God for pretending or promulging their Commission from God or taking the names of Prophets upon them so often as their doctrine did crosse their practises or violent passions This later Generation of Scribes and Pharisees after they had failed in their Proofs of any Capital matter of Fact or point of doctrine delivered by Christ condemned him for answering affirmatively to this Question proposed Tell us art thou the Son of God or as St. Mark more punctually expresseth it Art thou the Christ the Son of the Blessed Mark 14. 61. Zechariah as was now said was Christs true Picture for Quality for Office and for the Relation of Names and kindred For Zechariah was a Prophet and a Priest the Son of Iehoida which signifieth as much as The knowledge of God or as our Saviour expresseth the Reality answering to his name The son of Barachias that is The blessed of God And our Saviour was The Son of the only wise God the wisdom of God and The blessed of God the very God of blessing being the Great Prophet of God and high-Priest of our souls Lastly the Princes of Iudah having by glozing flattery perswaded their King to authorize their projects against Zechariah the High-Priest and Prophet of the Lord put them in execution upon the solemn Feast of Attonement or expiation The Scribes and Pharisees equal or Superior to these Lay-Princes in cruelty importuned Pilate by pretended observance and loyal obedience to the Roman Caesar to sacrifice The Son of the Blessed whom they had unjustly condemned unto their malice at that solemn Feast which was prefigured by the Feast of Expiation the Feast instituted in the memory of their deliverance out of Egypt CHAP. XLII MATTH 23. verse 34 35 36 c. Wherefore behold I send unto you Prophets and Wise men and Scribes and some of them ye shall or will kill and crucifie and some of them shall or will ye scourge in your Synagogues and persecute them from City to City That upon you may come or by which means will come upon you all the righteous blood shed upon the earth from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias the son of Barachias whom ye slew between the Temple and the Altar Verily I say unto you all these things shall come upon this Generation 2 Chron. 24. 22. The Lord look upon it and require it Luke 11. 51. Verily I say unto you it shall be required of this Generation THese words were uttered by our blessed Lord and Saviour against the Scribes and Pharisees with their Associates in Blood a little before the Feast of the Passover Whether that Last Passover wherein this Lamb of God prefigured by that Solemn Feast as also by the Death of Abel and his Sacrifice was offered upon the Cross is or may be a Question amongst the learned not at this time to be disputed But rather if occasion serve in the explication of the last verse Verily I say unto you ye shall not see me henceforth till that ye say Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord. For gathering the true and full Connexion of this Passage with the former Relations it shall suffice to observe that as our Saviour never spared the Scribes and Pharisees So at this time above others he reproves them most fully and sharply The Matter of this Reproof was their avarice and hypocrisie The End partly to prevent the like desire of vain-glory with other Enormities in his Disciples Partly to cure if it were possible the Scribes and Pharisees of their hereditary disease Hence whereas they most affected Complemental Greetings in publick places or glorious Titles of Rabbies Our Saviour to allay this humour for respectful Salutations presents them Woes instead of glorious Titles he instyles them Hypocrites For striking at seven several Branches of their Hypocrisie he seven times in this Chapter begins his speech in this style Wo
Womans seed And whereas they thought themselves of all men most free from stain of the Prophets blood whose tombs they garnished our Saviour in my Text layes that especially to their Charge indicting them of all the murther committed from the beginning of the world until that present time or at least till Zechariahs death 3. The Indictment we must believe to be most true and just because framed by Truth it self But what the true meaning of it should be is not expressed by any Interpreter we have hitherto met with Such as a man in reason would soonest expect best satisfaction from for the most part pass it over in silence Others like young Conjurers which raise spirits they cannot lay cast such doubts as they are not able to assoil For acquainting you with as much as my reading or Observation upon late desires to satisfie my self in a point so difficult and useful have attained unto give me leave to reflect upon 2 Chron. 24. 22 and to look fore-right also into the words of St. Luke chapt 11. verse 51. Verily I say unto you it shall be required of this Generation Which few words include the greatest measure of righteous blood most unrighteously shed that ever was laid to any People or Nations Charge And yet laid to the charge of the Jewish Nation not indefinitely taken or according to several successions or generations but to the present Generation of this People and so laid by One that could not erre either in giving of the Charge or in point of Judicature upon any matter within the Charge For the Charge is laid by the Wisdom of God by the supreme Judge of quick and dead as you may see from the forty ninth verse Therefore also saith the wisdom of God I will send them Prophets and Apostles and some of them they shall or will slay and persecute that the righteous blood of all the Prophets which was shed from the foundation of the world may be required of this Generation from the blood of Abel unto the blood of Zechariah which perished between the Altar and the Temple Verily I say unto you it shall be required of this Generation The same Charge though with some variation of words yet with full Aequivalencie of sense we have in my Text Wherefore behold I send unto you Prophets and Wise men and Scribes c. But however the Charge and the Emphatical Ingemination for laying this Charge upon this Generation of Serpents in both Evangelists be for equivalency of sense the very same Yet St. Luke as I take it reherseth the Charge in the self-same words wherein our Saviour uttered it It shall be required of this Generation And in thus saying he declared himself to be Vates tam preteritorum quam futurorum better knowing the true meaning or importance of Zecharias his Imprecation or Prophecy and the time wherein it was to be fulfilled then Zecharias himself although both an High-Priest and a Prophet did when he uttered it The Imprecation or Prophecie of that Zecharias unto whom as I suppose the words recited out of St. Matthew and St. Luke have a peculiar Reference are recorded the 2 Chron. 24. 22. And when he died or as the Original hath it when he was a dying or in the very moment of death he said The Lord look upon it and require it The Exposition of which words First according to the Literal or Grammatical Sense with the Historical Circumstances precedent and subsequent And Secondly according to the Mystical Sense or the Emblematical Portendment of that Prodigious Fact which provoked that Godly High-Priest and Prophet to utter the fore-cited Imprecation Lord look upon it and require it hath been the Subject of my meditations of late delivered in A less and yet a greater Audience The Third General then proposed but left untouched comes now to be handled in this learned Auditory upon another Text. And that was The Discussion of such Questions or Cases of Conscience as were emergent whether out of the Literal or Mystical Sense of Zacharias the son of Jehoiada his dying words especially of such as be useful either for this present or future Times 4. And of such Questions the first is Who this Zachariah in St. Matthew and St. Luke is Whether it be He that was slain as is told 2 Chron. 24. 22. or some other of that name The Second supposing the same Zecharias to be meant in all three places Why the Wisdom of God after he had laid the blood of all the righteous men and Prophets whom their fore-fathers had slain or haply whom they intended to slay should instance in Zachariah the son of Jehoiada or of Barachiah as the last man whose blood was to be required The Third Whether the blood of Zecharias or other Prophets or righteous men slain by their fore-fathers or the blood of the Son of God himself or of his Apostles of whom this present Generation were the murtherers was in strict and Logical Construction of these words required of this present Generation Or in other Terms thus Whether the murther of Our Saviour or of his Apostles plotted or practised by this present Generation or rather the cruelties practised by their Fore-fathers upon the Prophets and other righteous men were the true and Positive Cause of all those unparalleld Plagues and Calamities which befel the Jewish Nation within forty or more years after our Saviours death of the desolation of Jewry and the Jews utter extirpation thence by Titus and Adrian The Fourth In what Cases or how farre the posterity or successors of any people or nation are liable to the punishment of their Ancestors sins or what manner of repentance is required for the known and grosse sinnes of their Fathers The Fifth VVhether it were lawful for any of Christs Apostles or other of his followers at this day upon the like provocations as Zacharias had to curse their persecutors in such manner as he did his upon their death-beds or when they are a dying The Sixth which might as well have been the First is VVith what Intent or to what End The Wisdom of God did send Prophets Apostles and VVise men unto this present Generation or their fore-fathers As whether to rescue them from the Plagues denounced against them by Zachariah and other Prophets or to bring their Righteous Blood upon them 5. To the first Question VVho this Zacharias was Some have questioned whether He was Zechariah Coaeval to Isaiah and witness of his Espousal Isai 8. Others there be of opinion this Zachariah here meant should be Zachariah the Prophet whose Prophesie is extant in the Sacred Volume the last in order but one as he was one of the last in time and prophecied about this peoples return from Babylon And it is true indeed that this Prophet was the Son of Barachiah as appears from the very first words of his Prophecie But this opinion is obnoxious to the same exceptions the former is viz.
it is neither warranted by Scriptures nor by any good Writer Neither is it credible that the Jews then living would kill the Prophet of the Lord immediately after their deliverance from captivity At least the Reverence to the Temple then scarce finished would have made them abstain from shedding his blood within the walls of it near the Altar Others there be amongst the Ancients but few later Writers of better note which think this Zacharias should be John Baptists Father what reason they should have so to think I cannot conjecture save only Our Saviours words in the 35. verse VVhom ye slew between the Temple and the Altar This in ordinary speech may seem to implie that this just man had been killed by this people now living not by their Fathers For so our Saviour happly had said Whom your Fathers slew not Whom YE slew But it is a Rule in Divinity to gather our Saviours and his Apostles meaning by the usual Phrase of Scriptures not by our common manner of speech Now it is usual to the Prophets and Sacred Writers to lay the fathers sins unto the childrens charge if they continue in the like or repent not for them And if this people now living must be plagued for the ancient Prophets blood no question but they were guilty of it and may be said to have slain them in the same sense they are endicted as guilty of it That our Saviour should not mean John Baptists Father is more then probable for these reasons First His death is not mentioned in the New Testament nor in any Good Ecclesiastical Writer Secondly Because it no way benefits the Authors of this Opinion but rather increaseth the difficultie For if he were slain by Herod the Great who was a Philistine by Parentage why should not John Baptist's death be laid to their charge being slain by Herods Son Nay why not our Saviours or his Apostles whom he fore-tels they would shortly kill and persecute This plainly argues that the reason why he names this Zacharias was not his slaughter And besides this reason there is none why we should think this Zacharias was John Baptist's Father As for the Apocriphal Stories or Traditions which are pretended for this guesse or groundless conjecture we have just cause to suspect that it rather brought forth them then that they should first deliver it Not to trouble your patience with any more Reasons for refuting those Opinions it is agreed upon by most late Writers I have read Papists or Protestants and by St. Hierom the best in this kind of all the Ancient that this Zachariah here spoken of was the son of Jehoiada the Priest whose death we have set down 2 Chron. 24. verse 21. And they conspired against him and stoned him with stones at the Commandement of the King in the Court of the House of the Lord. In what Court it is not specified but it is most probable from the circumstance of the Text that it was in the Court where the Priests offered sacrifices or in the place where he instructed or blessed the people for it is evident that Zechariah was slain in his Pue or publick seat appointed for instructing the People And hereunto the ancient Jews in their Traditions accord This is that our Saviour saith in my Text that he was slain between the Temple and the Altar By the Temple we are to understand the outward Courts or Iles or as we distinguish betwixt the Church and the Chancel the body of the Temple comprehending Atrium Israelis mulierum the Courts wherein the Congregation of men and women stood By the place between these and the Altar the Court where the Priests taught or celebrated their service And so it is said verse 20. That Zachariah should stand above the people when he delivered that message unto them for which they stoned him to death Why this Zachariah should be called the son of Barachiah divers Expositors bring divers reasons all probable in themselves and each agreeable with other Some think his father as was not unusual amongst the Jews had two names or a name and a sur-name Jehoiada and Barachiah Others think that our Saviour did not so much respect the usual Name whereby the Prophets father was called as his Conditions or vertues unto which the name of Barachiah did as well or better agree then Jehoiada although the one of these cannot much disagree in sense from the other for the one signifies The knowledge of the Lord the other to wit Barachiah The blessing of the Lord or Man blessed of the Lord. Well might both names befit that Famous High-Priest famous both for his wisdom and piety every way blessed of God and a great blessing to this people For as it is said 2 Chronicles chap. 24. verse 16. He had done good in Israel both towards God and towards his house In which respect he was buried in the City of David amongst their Kings Admitting then Jehoiada either usually had or were for the reasons intimated capable of these two Names it is not without a special Reason perhaps a Mystery that our Saviour in this place should call Zachariah rather the son of Barachiah then of Jehoiada For the more blessed his Father was of God the greater blessing he had been to Israel the more accursed was this ungratious people in killing his vertuous and religious son in the House of the Lord for disswading them from Idolatry And the more fully did they prefigure the sin of this wicked generation their children which for the like cause did now go about to kill the Son of God Christ Jesus Blessed for ever For hereafter they were to acknowledge Him to be the True Barachiah as it is intimated in the last verse of this chapter Blessed is he that cometh in the Name of the Lord. Thus much of the first Point Who this Zachariah was gives some light unto the Second 6. And the Second Question Why our Saviour should make such special instance in or peculiar mention of the Blood of Zachariah is the least difficult of all the rest and yet a Question not so easily answered as the learned Spanish Iesuite Maldonate in his Comments upon this place would perswade us His best Answer to this Question solemnly proposed by him is This. Christs purpose was only to instance in those Prophets whose slaughter was expresly testified in the Bible least the Scribes and Pharisees might deny them to have been slain by their fore-fathers Now of Prophets whose deaths are mentioned in Scripture Zacharias the son of Jehoiada was the last We have just occasion to suspect his conjecture were it true to be impertinent because the Reason whereby he seeks to confirm it is evidently untrue Seeing Zacharias the son of Jehoiada was not the last of all the Prophets whose bloody deaths are recorded in Scripture For in the 26. chap. of Ieremie There is express mention of one Uriah the son of Shemaiah of
Kiriath-jearim who for prophesying against Hicrusalem was put to death 240. years after Zechariah by Jehoiachim King of Judah and by his Council of State and of Warre and was fetcht back from Egypt whither he had fled for refuge by Elnathan the son of Achbor a great Counsellor of State and other Commissioners for this purpose unto Iehoiachim who slew him with the sword and cast his dead body into the graves of the common people And this Prophets blood and other indignities done unto him and to his Calling after his death were Required of that Present Generation of the King especially For as Ieremie perhaps taking his hint from this Bloody Fact had foretold so it came to pass that Iehoiachim was cast out of Ierusalem not into the Graves of the Common people but into the Open Fields for he had no other burial then the Burial of the Ass or other like contemptible creature But however the blood perhaps of this Prophet amongst many others was to be further Required of this Present Generation Yet Zacharias was the Last and I think the First of all the Prophets which at the moment of his death did beseech God to Require his blood and to revenge his death And this I take is the true Reason why Our Saviour after he had indicted the Jews of the blood of all the Prophets and righteous men shed from the foundation of the world should instance only in Abel the son of Adam and Zacharias the son of Iehoiada or Barachiah Christs Instance in Abel literally and punctually referres to that Dialogue betwixt God and Cain Gen. 4. 10. The Lord said unto Cain where is Abel thy Brother And he said I know not Am my brothers keeper And he said what hast thou done The voyce of thy brothers blood cryeth to me from the ground and now art thou cursed from the earth which hath opened her mouth to receive thy brothers blood from thy hand But did the voyce of Zacharias his blood cry in like manner unto the Lord after his death or sollicit the like Curse or vengeance upon them which shed it or their posteritie as Abels did yes besides the fore-mentioned Imprecation Lord look upon it and Require it which was uttered by him after a great part of his blood and Spirits were spent his blood spake as bad things as that of Abels For so the Iewish Rabbins besides that Cluster of seven deadly sins committed by their fore-fathers at once in the murther of Zacharias mention another Circumstance subsequent not recorded in Scripture or not so plainly as a Christian Reader without their Comment or Tradition would take notice of it which in my Opinion doth better illustrate that passage of Scripture whereon they ground or seek to countenance it then any Christian Commentator hath done Our Fathers say they in shedding Zacharias's blood did not observe the Law of the blood of the Deer or Hart For so it was commanded Levit. 17. 13. Whatsoever man there be of the children of Israel or of the strangers that so journ among you which hunteth and catcheth any beast or fowl that may be eaten he shall even pour out the blood thereof and cover it with dust But Zacharias blood though shed in the Temple was not so covered it was apparent To this purpose they allege that of the Prophet Ezekiel chap 24. 6. Wo unto the bloody City Her blood is in the middest of her she set it upon the top of a rock she poured it not upon the ground to cover it with dust that it might cause fury to come up to take vengeance No question but the Prophets entire purpose was to indict Jerusalem as our Saviour doth in my Text of all the Innocent blood that had been shed before his time within her Territories and withall to note her Impudence in committing such foul sins so openly without care to cover the conspicuous marks of her own shame Yet this no way argues that the Prophets did not point out some Memorable and Prodigious Fact which might serve as an Emblem of her shameless carelessness in all the rest Such Allusions to particulars sufficiently known in their own times are very usual in the Prophets This is the special Reason why their Writings in General are so obscure to us why some of their Metaphors seem harsh or farre fetcht because in truth their speeches in these Cases are not meerly Metaphorical but include Historical References to some famous Accidents present or fresh in memory From the same Cause all antient Satyrists or such as tax the capital vices of their own times are hardly understood by later Ages without the Comments of such as lived with them or not long after them as our Posterity within few years will hardly understand some passages in the Fairie Queen or in Mother Hubbards or other Tales in Chaucer better known at this day to old Courtiers then to young Students It may be these murtherers sayd of Zachariah as their posteritie said of our Saviour His blood be on us and on our Children It is not likely they would be careful to cover it with dust or wipe the stain of it whilest fresh out of the wals or stones of the Temple because they had solemnly forsaken the House of the Lord and made a league to serve Groves and Idols willing perhaps to let the Print of his blood remain to terrifie others from beeing too forward in reproving the King and His Council for their offences against God But whether the marks of it were left on purpose or through mere forgetfulness of this people God in his Providence as the Prophet intimates suffered it so to remain To cause fury to come and to take vengeance For whereas this fact or forgetfulness to cover it was in the words before attributed to Jerusalem Her blood is in the middest of her she set it up on the top of the Rock she poured it not upon the ground to cover it with dust The Prophet after intimation of the Cause why it so remained To cause fury c. Immediately adds in the Person of God I have set her blood upon the top of a rock that it should not be covered Of these words no meaning can be rendred more natural then This To wit That God did suffer the print of Zachariah's righteous blood to remain in the Temple as it were to sollicit vengeance for all the rest that had been or should be shed in Jerusalem to crie unto him as Abel's did from the earth which as it seems was not covered certainly the voice of it was not smothered with dust How long the stain of blood especially dashed out of the body by violence will be apparent upon stones or moist wals experience doth not often teach because it is usually covered or wiped off whilest it is fresh Yet some prints of blood have longer remained unless Domestick Traditions be false on stones then the blood it self could have done by course of
destroy but rather to save and heal you If your impenitencie and perverseness have moved me to speak severely or threaten you it is still for your good Severum medicum ager intemperans facit Your obdurate hearts have caused me oft-times the mildest Physician that ever took cure of the body or soul upon him to use tart speeches unto you yet shall it never provoke me to be cruel in my practice So farre am I from seeking your blood or harm that my blood which you have continually sought whensoever you shed it shall make an Attonement for you shall procure a Free and Gracious General Pardon for all your sins and for all the sins of your fore-fathers in shedding the Blood of Prophets sent unto them But when I have done all when all is done that could be done unto this Vineyard which my Father planted according to the Rules of Equity of mercy and benignity without wrong or prejudice to eternal Iustice Unless by sincere Repentance as well for your own sins as for the sins of your fore-fathers wherein you have been too deep part-takers with them you submit your selves unto my Fathers will and with all humility crave allowance of that most Free and Gracious Pardon which my blood shall purchase for you and for all the world besides The City of Abel's and of Zachariah's blood will at the last prevail against you the blood of both of them and of all the Prophets whom your fore-fathers have slain will be Required of this Generation in fuller measure then it was of those which slew them and this will be a burden too heavy for you to bear much heavier then the punishment of Cain albeit neither my blood nor the blood of any of mine Apostles or Disciples do come at all upon the Score or Reckoning wherewith Moses in whom ye trust and the Prophets whose Tombs and Sepulchres ye build and garnish will be ready to charge you in the day of your Account or Visitation For if the blood of Christ or of his Apostles had been Required at their hands which shed it me thinks this Emphatical Ingemination Verily I say unto you it shall be required c. should not be so needful and weighty as were all the words uttered by Him who spake as never man spake 10. But may we from any or all these Premisses conclude that This present Generation was not punished at all for putting our Saviour to death Or that his death or the indignities done unto His more then sacred Person at or before his death was no Cause at all of those Exemplary Punishments or unparalleld plagues which fell upon Ierusalem and Iudah upon this whole present generation God forbid The Question is not Whether our Saviours death was any Cause at all of the exemplary punishments but What manner of Cause it was or In what sense they may be said to be plagued for wronging him thus We answer that the indignities done unto Him at his death and at his arraignment were such Causes of the ensuing Woes and calamities which came upon this Generation as Absentia Nautae is naufragii The Case or Species facti is thus Suppose a skilful Navigator and experienced Pilot which had long governed some tall and goodly Ship with good success in many difficult voyages should at the length either by the greediness of the Owner be casheerd or inforced to leave his place and a storm upon his departure should arise and through want of good steerage or sounding should run them on ground or dash them against the rocks we may say without Solecisme that the Abandoning or Absence of the former Master or Pilot was the Cause of the shipwrack or the loss of men or goods although he neither were any Cause of raising the storm nor prayed against them as Zacharias did against his persecutors nor gave them any wrong directions before he left them Now the Son of God from the time of his peoples thraldom in Egypt but more especially from the time of their deliverance thence had been in Peculiar manner the King and Governor of the Iews in all their Consultations of Peace or Warre their only Pilot in all their storms And however throughout their several Generations they were often greivously punished yet were they alwayes punished Citra condignum much less then their iniquities had deserved Briefly by His wisdom he preserved them safe in such distresses as without his only skill would utterly have overwhelmed the State and Nation And by his Intercession prevented the Out-bursting or fall of that hideous storm which had been secretly and by degrees more insensible gathering against them then that Cloud which Eliah's servant saw rising out of the Sea even from the death of Zachariah the son of Iehoiada and other Prophets and righteous men whose blood their fore-fathers before and after his had shed But after this last Generation had both by express words and practice verified that saying of God to Samuel They have not cast off thee from being King over them but they have cast off Me. That other prophesie or sweetly mild fore-warning for which they took occasion to stone Zachariah to death in the Courts of the Lords House was exactly fulfilled in upon them This Prophecie or fore-warning we have 2 Chron. 24. verse 20. Thus saith God Why transgress ye the Commandements of the Lord that ye cannot prosper because ye have forsaken the Lord he hath also forsaken you This Prophesie with that other of Samuel was most exactly fulfilled Tam verbis quam factis male ominatis mala ominantibus when they solemnly protested before Pilate that they had no other King but Caesar From this time the hideous storms of Gods wrath and anger against them for their own sins and the sins of their fore-fathers did dayly encrease and at last were poured out in full measure upon them when they had no Prophet nor any man that understood any more no Signs or Tokens but such as were dismal no Pilot or skilful Governor to direct them no pious Priest to make Intercession for them For having thus solemnly abandoned The Son of God their King and Lord who had been their continual Sanctuary the destroying Angels who had long waited their Opportunity to put their Commission in Execution did Arrest their bodies delivering up some to the Famine some to the Sword others to the Fowls of the air and Beasts of the field and did seize upon their Land which God had given to their Fore-fathers for the use of others even for the most wicked of the Heathens first bestowing it upon the Romans afterward upon the Saracens and last of all upon the Barbarous Turk under whose heavy yoke the inheritance and some of the posterity of Iacob have long groaned and still must groan until they confess their own sins and the sins of their fore-fathers and return unto the Allegiance of their Gracious Lord and Sovereign whom their Fore-fathers this
present generation in my Text had crucified But so returning unto him by true Repentance he will return unto them in mercie and be as gracious and favourable to the last Generations of this miserable people as he was of old unto the first or best of their Fore-fathers For in this Case especially and in this and the like alone that Saying of our Apostle which some in our dayes most unadvisedly and impertinently mis-apply and confine to their own particular state in Grace or Gods Favour is most true The Gifts of God are without repentance That Lord and God whom they solemnly forsook hath not finally forsaken them but with unspeakable patience and long-suffering still expects their Conversion For which Christians above all others are bound to pray Convert them Good Lord unto the Knowledge and us unto the Practise of that Truth wherewith thou hast elightened our souls that our Prayers for them and for our selves may ever be acceptable in thy sight O Lord our strength and our Redeemer Amen Amen CHAP. XLIII The Second Sermon upon this Text. MATTH 23. verse 34 35 36. Wherefore Behold I send unto you Prophets and some of them ye will kill c. That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth c. Verily I say unto you All these things shall come upon this Generation 2 Chron. 24. 22. And as he was dying he said The Lord look upon it and Require it Luke 11. 51 Verily I say unto you IT that is ver 50. The blood of all the Prophets shed from the Foundation of the world shall be Required of this Generation 1. OF several Queries or Problems emergent out of these words proposed unto this Audience a year ago One and that one of greatest difficultie was How the sins of former Generations can be required of later specially in so great a distance of time as was between the death of Abel and of Zachariah and this last Generation which crucified the Lord of life the Discussion whereof is my present Task In this disquisition you will I hope dispense with me for want of a formal Division or Dichotomie because the Channel through which I am to pass is so narrow and so dangerously beset with Rocks and shelves on the right hand and on the left as there is no possibility for two to go on brest nor any room for Steerage but only Towage One passage in my Disquisition must draw another after it by one and the same direct Line For first if I should chance to say any thing which either Directly or by way of Consequence might probably inferre this Affirmative Conclusion That God doth at any time punish the children for the fathers sins or later generations for the Iniquities of former This were to contradict that Fundamental Truth which the Lord himself hath so often protested by Oath Ezek. 18. 1 2 c. And the word of the Lord came unto me again saying What mean ye that ye use this Proverb concerning the Land of Israel saying the Fathers have eaten sour grapes and the Childrens teeth are set on edge As I live saith the Lord God ye shall not have occasion any more to use this Proverb in Israel Behold all souls are mine as the soul of the Father so also the soul of the Son is mine the soul that sinneth it shall die And again verse the last I have no pleasure in the death of him that dyeth saith the Lord God wherefore turn your selves and live ye Now to contradict any Branch of these or the like Protestations or Promises would be to make shipwrack of Faith more dangerous then to rush with full sail upon a Rock of Adamant On the other hand if I should affirm any thing either directly or indirectly which might inferre any part of this Negative That God doth not visit the sins of the Fathers upon the Children or of former Generations upon later This were to strike upon a shelf no less dangerous then to dash against the former Rock directly to contradict Gods solemn Declaration in the second Commandement of His Proceedings in this Case which are no less just and equal then the former Promise Ezekiel the 18. By this you see the only safe way for passage through the straits proposed must be to find out the middle Line or Mean whether Medium Abnegationis or Participationis or in one word The difference betwixt this Negative God doth not punish the Children for the Fathers sins and the other Affirmative God visiteth the sins of the Fathers upon the Children even unto the third and fourth Generation c. 2. But in the very first setting forth or entry into this narrow Passage some here present perhaps have already discovered a shelf or sand to wit that the passage fore-cited out of the second Commandement doth better reach or fit the Case concerning Josiah his death and the calamity of his people then the present difficultie or Problem now in handling For Josiah was but the third in succession from Manasseh and dyed within fewer years then a Generation in ordinary Construction imports after his wicked Grand-father But if the blood of Zachariah the son of Jehoiada or other Prophets slain in that Age or the Age after him were required of this present Generation God doth visit the sins of Fore-fathers upon the Children after more then three or four after more then five times five Generations according to St. Matthew's account in the Genealogie of our Lord and Saviour Yet this seeming Difficulty to use the Mariners Dialect is rather an Over-fall then a shelf or at the worst but such a shelf or sand as cannot hinder our passage if we sound it by the Line or Plummet of the Sanctuary or number our Fathoms by the scale of sacred Dialect in like Cases For when it is said in the Second Commandement that God doth visit the sins of the Fathers upon the Children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate Him This is Numerus certus proincerto aut indefinito an expression or speech equivalent to that of the Prophet Amos. For three transgressions of Damascus and for four I will not turn away the punishments thereof For three transgressions of Tyrus and for four for three transgressions of Ammon and for four c. Throughout almost every third verse of the first Chapter and some part of the Second The Prophets meaning is that all the Kingdoms or several Sovereignties there mentioned by him especially Judah and Israel should certainly be punished not for three or four only but for the multitude of their continual transgressions and many of them transgressions of a high and dangerous nature Both speeches as well that in Amos as in the Second Commandement reverently to compare magna parvis are like to that of the Poet O terque quaterque beati that is most happy So that unto the third and fourth generation may imply more then seven
true Comment on my Text Therefore said the wisdom of God I will send them Prophets and Apostles and some of them they shall slay That the blood of all the Prophets shed from the foundation of the world may be required of this generation from the blood of Abel unto the blood of Zacharias Verily I say unto you it shall be required of this generation Luke 11. v. 49 50 51. The Emphatical resuming of the Terms which Zacharias used It shall be required of this generation implies as much as if our Saviour had said The day of vengeance and execution which Zacharias sollicited against your fathers for their Apostasie from God and their Cruelty towards him is yet to come His innocent blood which was in part required of that wicked King and the Princes which shed it shall be required in fuller measure of this generation which is more bloodily minded then that was and herein worse then all the former in that it will not take warning either by Cain's punishment or the calamities which befel this people for their cruelty towards Zacharias and other Prophets For the Army of the Syrians came with a small company and the Lord delivered a very great hoast into their hands because they had forsaken the Lord So they executed judgment against Joash And left him in great diseases and his own servants conspired against him for the blood of the sons of Jehoiadah the Priest and slew him 2 Chron 24 24 25. 5. Yet some there be which question Whether Zacharias did not use these words only by way of Prophecie fearing belike least his using of them by way of Curse or Imprecation might argue he died not in perfect charity But seeing he was a Prophet he might foresee many reasons unknown to us not to pray for them but against them Or if out of the bitterness of his soul or indignation at this graceless Kings ingratitude he did thus pray against him and his people we may not condemn him of sin although it would be a damnable sin in us to imitate him in like Cases Nor is it necessary we should think he did wish their eternal destruction but only indefinitely desire that God would not suffer such an Execrable Conspiracie to go unpunished least others should be emboldened to do the like And though we know not upon what motives or warrants all other Prophets of God or Types of Christ in their perplexity and distress so zealously pray for vengeance against their malicious persecutors yet we should know One true Use or End of these their usual practises to be this that the world might note the difference between them and the promised Messias who though he had suffered greater indignities more open shame and more greivous vexations at this peoples hands then all his fore-runners had done yet never complains never prayes against them but for them even whiles they crucifie him This his peculiar Character argues he came into the world not to condemn but to save it And when his Disciples desire him to call down fire from heaven as Elias did he derives his sharp Check from this Principle which they should have known Ye know not what Spirit ye are of for the Son of God is not come to destroy mens lives but to save them Luke 9. 55. Did then Elias or Elisha his Scholar sin in taking vengeance upon the enemies of their God Who dare avouch it Or if to execute vengeance were lawful to them as they were Prophets was it unlawful for Zacharias upon greater personal indignities to desire the Lord would revenge his death Yet Christs Disciples might not do so because they were to be of another Spirit as having a better example set by their Master at his death 6. But whence is it that Zacharias's curse should take better effect against this Generation which had never offended him never known him then our Saviours prayers powred out for their safety whiles he offered himself in sacrifice Was it possible Zacharias's spirit of cursing and indignation should be stronger so long after his death then the spirit of prayer and blessing was in the Redeemer of Israels living mouth God forbid Rather this Generation by reviving their fore-fathers sins awaked Gods Justice to renew their plagues and by their impenitencie made themselves uncapable of that General Pardon which Christ had procured for all that be penitent or would rightly use it But neither did he pray that their stubbornness might be pardoned nor did Zachariah's curse make them stubborn Their impenitency is from themselves and whiles they continue stubborn and impenitent they can have no Allowance of that General Pardon which they will not plead or stand to as standing too much upon their own integrity Since Christs death they have been perpetually punished for their impenitencie yet not punished with perpetual impenitencie for putting him to death But take we them as they are in their impenitency may we think they were thus grievously punished for shedding His Blood or for the blood of Abel Zacharias and other Prophets unjustly shed by their fore-fathers for their personal hatred against him as the Son of God or for their habitual hatred and opposition unto that truth which made his person and presence as it had done all the Prophets before him so hateful unto them They were plagued questionless for that Blood which was required of them And that was Zacharias's and Abel's Blood not Christs 7. That this multiplication of punishment cannot be meant only of the same persons multiplying the same or the like offences but withall of different ages or successions is apparent partly because it is spoken generally of the whole State or Nation partly from the different specifical qualitie or extent of the plagues here mentioned often inflicted on several generations of the Israelites But specially from the Tenour and purpose of the Law it self strictly enjoyning the scattered Reliques of this people after execution of the last plague To confess the iniquity of their Fathers as an especial Duty to be performed on their parts and as a necessary mean in Gods Ordination for their Absolution or deliverance And if without Confession of their fathers iniquitie they cannot be absolved from their own their fathers iniquitie not repented of was their own so was the punishment due unto it The Consequence is evident to Reason but more evident from the express words of the Text Ye shall perish among the heathen and the land of your enemies shall eat you up And they that are left of you shall pine away in their iniquity in your enemies lands and also in the iniquities of their fathers shall they pine away with them If they shall then confess the iniquities of their fathers with their trespass which they trespassed against me and that also they have walked contrary unto me And that I have also walked contrary unto them and have brought them into the land of their enemies If then their uncircumcised
Prophets Wise men and Apostles to reclaim them if they would have hearkned to him or his Messengers Admonitions S. Luke puts this out of Controversie for repeating part of this story he saith expresly Therefore also said the Wisdom of God I will send them Prophets c. And Christ is styled The Wisdom of God not as man but as God and Consequently He spake these words not as man only but as God The same compassion and burning Love the same thirst and longing after Jerusalems safety which we see here manifested by a manner comprehensible to flesh and blood in these words of our Saviour in my Text or the like uttered by him Luke 19 with tears and sobs we must believe to be as truly as really and unfeignedly in the Divine Nature though by a manner incomprehensible to flesh and blood How any such flagrant desire of their welfare which finally perish should be in God we cannot conceive because our minds are more dazeled with that inaccessible Light which he inhabits then the eyes of Batts and Owles are by gazing on the Sun To qualifie this Incomprehensible Glorie of the Deitie the Wisdom of God was made Flesh that we might safely behold the true module or proportion of Divine Goodness in our Nature as the eye which cannot look upon the Sun in his strength or as it shines in the Firmament may without offence behold it in the water being an Element homogeneal to its own substance Thus should all Christs Prayers desires or pathetical wishes of mans safetie be to us as so many visible pledges or sensible Evidences of Gods Invisible and Incomprehensible Love and so he concludes his last Invitation of the Jewes I have not spoken of my selfe but the Father which sent me he gave me Commandment what I should say and what I should speak And I know that his Commandment is everlasting life whatsoever I spake therefore even as the Father said unto me so I spake Joh. 12. ver 49 50. And what saith our Saviour more in his own then the Prophet had done in the Name and Person of his God Isai 49. v. 14. Sion complained the Lord hath for saken me and my Lord hath forgotten me But he answered Can a woman forget her sucking Child that she should not have compassion on the son of her womb yea they may forget yet will I not forget thee Behold I have graven thee upon the palmes of my hands c. These and the like Places of the Prophets compared with our Saviours speech here in my Text give us plainly to understand That whatsoever Love any mother can bear to the fruit of her womb unto whom her bowels of compassion are more tender then the fathers can be or whatsoever affection any dumb Creature can afford unto their tender brood the like but greater doth God bear unto his children Unto the Elect most will grant But is his Love so tender towards such as perish Yes the Lord carried the whole Hoste of Israel even the stubborne and most disobedient as the Eagle doth her young ones upon her wings Exod. 19. 4. Earthly Parents will not vouchsafe to wait perpetually upon their children The Hen continueth not her Call from morning to night nor can she endure to hold out her wings all day for a shelter to her young ones as they grow great and refuse to come she gives over to invite them But saith the Lord by his Prophet I have spred out my hand all the day unto a rebellious people which walketh in a way that was not good after their own thoughts A people that provoketh me to anger continually to my face that sacrificeth in gardens and burneth incense upon Altars of bricks which remain among the graves and lodg in the monuments which eat Swines flesh and broth of abominable things is in their vessels which say adding hypocrisie unto filthinesse and Idolatry stand by thy self come not neer unto me for I am holier then thou Isai 65. ver 2 3 4. Such they were and so conceited of our Saviour with whom he had in his life time oft to deal and for whose safetie he prayed with teares before his Passion These and many like passages of Scripture are pathetically set forth by the Spirit to assure us That there is no desire like unto the Almighties desire of sinful mans Repentance no Longing to his Longing after our Salvation If Gods Love to Iudah comen to the height of rebellion had beene lesse then mans or other Creatures Love to what they affect most dearely If the Meanes he used to reclaim her had been fewer or lesse probable then any others had attempted for obtaining their most wished End his Demand to which the Prophet thought no possible Answer could be given might easily have been put off by these incredulous Jewes unto whom he had not referred the judgment in their own Cause if they could have instanced in man or other Creature more willing to do what possibly they could do either for themselves or others then he was to do whatsoever was possible to be done for them And now O Inhabitants of Jerusalem and men of Judah judg I pray you betwixt me and my Vineyard what could more have been done to my vineyard that I have not done to it Wherefore when I looked that it should bring forth grapes brought it forth wild grapes Isa 5. v. 3 4. 6. But the greater we make the Truth and Extent of Gods Love the more we increase the difficultie of the Second Point proposed For amongst women many there be that would amongst dumb Creatures scarce any that would not redeeme their sucklings from death by dying themselves Yet what is it that they can do which they would not do to save their owne lives And did not God so love the world that he gave his only begotten Son for it Yes for the world of the Elect I see not why any should be excluded from the number But to let that passe Gods desire of their repentance which perish is undoubtedly such as hath been said Yet should we say that he hath done all that could be done for them How chanceth it that all are not saved Was the Vineyard more barren then Sarah the fruit of whose womb he made like the Stars of the sky or as the sands by the Sea shore innumerable Was it a matter more hard to make the impenitent Jew bring forth fruits worthy of Repentance then to make a Virgin conceive and beare a son If it were not how chanceth it the Word of the Lord and that but a short one should bring the One to joyful Issue whilst the other the repentance of the Jewes and other ungodly men after so many exhortations and threatnings after so many promises of comfort and so many denunciations of woes as the Prophets the Apostles and their Successors have used is not to this day nor ever will be accomplished If repentance of men born and brought up in
29 § 9. Fol. 3586. I suppose this was preached at St. Ma. in Oxon. Nothing is called Little or great but in Comparison with other things Lev. 23. 27. ☜ The occasion of Baruchs complaint Two Doctrines or two Propositions A Corollarie added to the former Things indifferent yea lawful things by Circumstances become unlawful He means some man that had turned to the Church of Rome Good men are and ought to be most religious in worst Times Sympathie planted in Bruites See the Sermons upon this Text. Fol. 3610. ☞ ☜ Apathie a Symptom of a graceless obdurate mind Numb 32. 6. 2 Sam. 11. Uriah Godfrey of Bulloign Argia in Statius Of Portia see Plutarch in vita Bruti The Author omits the Second Doctrine to be handled in the next Sermon and passeth to the Corollarie which he proves by Instance A Great Warning and a Greater Truth Libro 6. de providentia Dei See more Instances of Stupidity in the end of the Attributes Salvian This was preached in Oxon after the visitation by the Plague A Forward Souldier Petrus Strozius See Val. Maximus de Cupiditate Uiae Epist Lib. 1. Epist 22. See Lanoue Paradox second Page 204. Thuanus Lib. 26. pag. 543. colum 1. See Busbequius his fourth epist De Rebus Turc Lament 4. 10. Zephaniah 2. 3. The Doctrine handled in Hypothesi An Objection 1 King 21. 2 Kings 22. 18. 19 20. The Objection pressed home The Answer to the former Objection 2 Chron. 32. 25 26. 2 King 23. 30. 2 Chron. 35. 21 24. Ezek. 14. 20 21. From a double Aspect A twofold Sympathie ariseth See Chap. 14. §. 6. Fol. 3439. Quaere whether he mean his Sermons upon Jer. 26. and other Texts printed 1637. Or Pharaohs Hardning See Book 10. Fol. 3222. ☞ See the following Sermon upon Matthew 23. 37. ☜ I suppose he means His Treatise of Prodigies or divine Fore-warnings betokening Blood which was lost in his life time and cannot yet be found Salvian in his 6. 7. Books de Gubern Matth. 7. 1. Rom. 14. 4. The Text is A Conclusion Q. From what Premisses inferred The Limitation of the Conclusion The Extent of the Conclusion Another Limitation ☞ Two Instances in Ahab and David who by judging others did condemn themselves See Book 10. Fol. 3018. and 3099. The Minor of the foregoing Syllogism ☞ ☜ See Book 4. or justifying Faith Sect. 2. The composition of Hypocrisie Pharisaical Two special sins of the Ancient Jews The Antient Jews sins The later Jews Reformation See a following Sermon upon that Fact Christs true Exposition of the Negative part of the fourth Commandement Take we heed of condemning our selves by judging the later Jews See the fourth chapter of this Book Fol. 3342. See Book 8. ☜ ☜ ☞ A Romish error requiring Reformation An Error of the Contraire extreme disparaging The Reformation A Factious Schismatical Book modestly Censured Apostolical and Episcopal Power under heathen Princes and after Princes were Christianed The Antient Heathens gave and Turks give more to their Priests then some professing Christianity do to theirs both for Power and Maintenance A Precept will be in force when pretences will be out of date The main Error of the Romish Church Infallibilitie both in expounding holy Scripture and in attesting Traditions See the second and third Books The Two former Romish Errors well Reformed The Temper Bounds of the Right and Rigid Reformer The Cure of the Error by the Right Mean The Error extreamly Contrary to the Romish Error ☞ In his Sermon before the King upon Jer. 26. pag. 32. he saith divide the sins of 40. years last past into ten parts the sins of the Pulpit and the Presse would be a large Tenth See signes of the Times pag. 57. 58. Three Points purposed A Romish Eror causing Doubt of Salvation viz The intention of the Priest c. A Romish Priest may damn an Infant through neglect or malice by the Doctrine of that Church See Soto in 4. Senten dis 1. Q. 5. Art 8. Romish Priests have a strange Negative voice The Second Point The Remedie of the Contrarii as bad as the Diease About This Point See Book 4. and Book 10. cha 51 52 53. and Serm. on Jer. 26. pag. 13. and signs of the Times p. 62. Upon this Text See Book 7. Chap. 18 19. See Book 10. Fol. 3274. Where this Author sayes 300. Bellarmines 300 Valentiaes could not do the Protestant Religion so much harm as Dr. Hessels did taking advantage of this Doctrine Of this Division see Lib. 10. Fol. 3153 3275. See Book 10. Fol. 3262 and signes of the Time p. 63. The Third Point How Fides is Fiducia see Book 10. cap. 52. See Chapt. 4. Fol. 3338. Idolatry transforms the Divine Nature into unfit similitudes The late R. R. Bishop of Winchester B. Andrews in his Sermon on that Theme The Worshipping of Imaginations the root of Idolatry See the fifth Book ☜ Some Writers not Papists transform the Divine Nature Paraeus See Book 10. Fol. 3012. ☜ See Book the Fifth The Sayings of dying men remarkable Three points considerable The Circumstance of time Observations and Uses out of the story and circumstances Touching Retaliation see the 6. Book or Treatise of Gods Attributes 2 part §. 4. chap. 31. page 343. A Cluster of Deadly Sins in the Horrible murther of Zechariah the High-Priest Levit. 17. 13. See the next Sermon upon this Text. Gen. 19. 9. Pto. 28. 4. Wisd 2. 12. 1 Joh. 3. 12. Of Pharisaical Hypocrisie See Book 4. and second Sermon on Jer. 26. See the Sermen upon that Text immediately precedent The Former Sermon on 2 Chron. 24. 22 I suppose was preached at Court This at Oxford Of the Jews Calamities see Book 1. chap. 23. and 27. The first Question Who this Zechariah was This punctually agrees with the Copy The Temple and the Altar Why Zachariah called the son of Barachiah See Dr. Hammonds Notes on Matth. 23. fol. 125. where he cites Josephus Lib. 4. cap. 19. for another Zacharias killed by the Zelots immediately before the Seige which puts a short end to this Question The Second Question Why our Saviour instanceth in Zechariah Zachariah the only Prophet that dyed with an Imprecation See Fol. 3721. ☞ The Third Question A Paraphrase or Exegesis of Christs loving and threatning expressions A Paraphrase or Exegesis of our Saviours meaning or Implication How Christs death was A Cause of the Jews Calamities The Son of God in a peculiar manner to the Jews King of Old Psa 74. 10 Luke 4 6. Ezek. 7. 21 24. Dan. 4. 17. See fol. 3729. where this was the 4 Question propounded From Abels to Zachariahs death were 3000. years from Zach. to these words spoken were 00. or 900. See a following Sermon on 2 Kings 23. 26. A Generation contains thirty years betwixt Manasseh's and Iosiahs death were about thirty three years The Objection is hardened by taking in Abels Blood Zechariah was slain 900. years Abel 3800. years before Christ spoke
the words of the Text. ☞ What it is to punish Children for their fathers sins What it it is to visit the sins of fathers c. Two particulars hastening and justifying the visiting of the Fathers sins upon the children Note here 1. That God made this Covenant with them and their Posterity in successive Generations as with one man or one aggregate Body or Corporation 2. It was not only a Covenant of Life and Promises but of Threatnings and Death also God left Israel a Register of Good and Evil How neglect of Gods Forewarnings past hastens judgements See this Author's second Sermon upon Ier. 26. How Children are bound to repent of Fathers sins See this Authors second Sermon on Jerem. 26. A short Application This referres to the third Question propounded Fol. 3729. handled Fol. 3733. See Fol. 3341. and Book 8. in quarto pag. 142. Luke 23. 34. They know not what they do Doth God punish men for what they would have done in such and such Cases Quaye According to this opinion Matth. 12. 32. may have a very commodious Interpretation This relates to the fifth Question This relates to the third Question After the Citation of Levit 26. 14 c. and multiplication of the plagues by seven This followed relating to the fourth Question Le. 26. 38. ☞ See one example in the next Sermon ☜ See St. Chrysost upon the fifth of Isaiah Judahs Climacterical Seasons 1. at the death of Zechariah Second Climacterical of Judah at the carrying into Babylon This Referres to the sixth Question The Third Climacterical Period of Judah at Christs coming Though there be a Sermon upon Matth. 23 37. yet I thought it best to intersert This here before it Levit. 26. Deut. 7. 14. and 28. Amos 3. 2. Confession of fore-fathers sins a necessary Ingredient of Repentance ☞ Reasons why a people lesse actually sinful is more plagued Psal 78. ver 34. ☜ A view of the Kingdom of Judah through out David Solomon Rehoboam 1 Kin. 14. 25. Abijam Asa Vid. Ecclus. Cap. 49. 4. All except David Hezekias and Iosias committed wickedness for even the Kings of Iudah forsook the Law of the most High and failed Iehoshaphat Ahaziah Athaliah Ioash Amaziah Uzziah Iotham Ahaz Hezekiah Manasses 2 King 21. 16. Amon. Good Iosiah See this Auchor's Sermons on Jer. 26. Ezek. 14. 14. Ier. 15. Francis Sforza It is significantly added He should be put in his grave in peace because he is the last King of Judah whose Funeral Rites are not at their enemies disposing See the foregoing Sermon upon Jer. 45. fol. 3668. ☞ 2 Chr. 35 22 Iohanan or Iehoahaz Iehoiakim * Quaere See 1 Chr. 3. 15 where Johanan is called the first-born yet Josephus l. 10. c. 5. in english sayes that Eliakim who is also Jehoiakim was elder brother to Iehoahaz ☜ See the foregoing Sermon on Matth. 23. 34. See Signs of the Times pag. 24. Two Points propounded God earnestly desires the conversion of such as perish The former Point Isai 56. 4 About this distinction see Book 6. or Attributes chap. 15. and Book 9. chap. 5. An odd Glosse refuted Luke 11. 39 The 2 d Point How is it possible they should not be gathered if God so earnestly will c. as fol. 3 769. Quare whether he mean not Jer. 44. 22. Three Objections against this Doctrine Answer to the first Second Objection and Answer The third Objection Answer Another Objection with the Answer thereto See this Authors 6 Book or Attributes Chap. 16. and Chap. 20. See Book the 6. The whole Use of this Doctrin See Fol. 3341. See Book 8. cha 6 7. c. See Fol. 3412 c. a Discourse upon this Subject The Question What Word is here meant Verbum Domini or Verbum Dominus Paraeus his Reason why he denies it to be meant of God the Word Yet doth S. John 1 Ep. 1. 1. call Him The Word of Life and Rev 19. 13. The Word of God Two Points proposed Iustin Martyr expresses 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by Ratio Rationem reddere S. Chrysostom Theophylact