to the Holy Scriptures and the Catholick Faith received and inviolably preserved by all Orthodox Christians in all the World in all Ages from the beginning of the Church to this present time and as repugnant to the Decrees of Councils especially that of Nice the most Solemn of all that are extant and most worthy of our Faith and Acceptation And lastly as contrary to the Writings of the Fathers especially of St. Athanasius whole Faith and Patience in Defence of the Cause of Christ was great beyond Example will be memorably celebrated wheresoever the Gospel shall be preached II. Moreover We injoyn under the Penalty of the Law all Students not to read the said infamous Libel or any of that kind which do re-call as from Hell those anciently condemn'd Heresies commanding and firmly enjoyning all and every the Praelectors Tutors Catechists and others to whom the Institution of Accademical Youth is intrusted that they diligently instruct and establish those that are committed to their Charge in that chief and necessary Article of our Faith upon which as on a Foundation all the rest do depend by which we are taught to believe and profess That there is One Living and True God and in the Unity of this Nature there are Three Persons of the same Essence Power and Eternity Father Son and Holy Ghost III. We Decree the above-named Infamous Libel to be Burnt by an Infamous Hand in the Area of our Schools The Propositions referr'd to in the Decree Pref. That Mahomet profest all the Articles of the Christian Faith Whether Mahomet or Christian Doctors have more corrupted the Gospel is not so plain by the light of Scripture as it is by that of Experience that the later gave occasion encouragement and advantage to the former For when by nice and hot Disputes especially concerning the Second and Third Persons of the Trinity the minds of the whole People had been long confounded and by the then late Establishment of Image-Worship the Scandal was encreased so that to vulgar Understandings the Doctrine of the Trinity appeared no less guilty of Polytheism then that of Image-Worship did of Idolatry Then was there a tempting Opportunity offered to the Impostor and he laid hold on it to set up himself for a Reformer of such Corruptions as were both too gross to be justified and too visible to be denyed Cap. 7. pag. 40. The great Question concerning the Godhead of Christ is 1. Impertinent to our Lords design 2. Fruitless to the Contemplators own purpose 3. Dangerous Cap. 8. pag. 46. Two Evangelists trace our Lord's Genealogy but as they derive it not from his real but supposed Father so do they take two several ways not to satisfie but to amuse us What is this but to admonish us against Curiosity The Pedigree of his Flesh might easily have been either cleared or unmentioned Had the Evangelists been wholly silent concerning it we had less wondred but that they should profess to instruct us yet doubly disappoint us first by deriving it from a wrong Father and then by distracting us between two ways What is this but to verify the Prophets description Who shall declare his Generation And what doth this so careful Concealment of his Generation according to the Humane Nature signify more plainly than a warning against searching after his Eternal Generation of his Divinity If it were needless and therefore left impossible to prove him derived from David which was one of his most revealed Characters how can it be otherwise to understand that Generation of his which must needs be so much the more above our Understanding as the Nature of God is above our own Pag. 48. And might not a Heathen at this rate justify Polytheism provided his Gods disagreed not among themselves The Schoolmen therefore will not stand to this State of the Question but distinguish between Person and suppositum rationale which yet they cannot so do as to satisfy themselves and therefore shelter themselves in their impregnable Fort Mystery and thence thunder upon the Adversaries both of this and of another no less beloved Mystery For they make this their Cock argument for Transubstantiation That since the Scripture is no less express for the One than the Other and the Contradictions no less gross in the One than in the Other therefore we must embrace the one as well as the other To this Objection of the Romanists and to others of the Unitarians we have found an Answer That we must not infer from our Own Nature to God's for that Ours is finite and God's is infinite Three Persons among Us are Three Men because they agree in one Common Nature but the Divine Nature is not a Common One but a Singular and therefore Three Persons do not make Three Gods If you understand not this you must not wonder or at least you must not Gainsay it for it is a Mystery which Reason may not pretend to fathom Pag. 51. Thus have we pointed and only pointed at some of the many intangling Questions which puzzeled and divided the subtilest Wits of seveal Ages and were at last decided by no other Evidence but of Imperial and Papal Authority sufficient to silence Disputes but not stablish Truth And who is he that is not discouraged from giving a confident Assent to what is this way obtruded upon his Belief Cap. 9. pag. 53. I. There is danger of Blasphemy in examining the Silly Question as he calls it concerning the Eternity of the Godhead of Christ This is a second danger That we have no firm ground to go upon Pag. 54. The only advantage of the Catholicks is long Possession and that after Sentence They have indeed so handled Matters as to hide much and varnish all yet even so we may pick out enough to justify an Appeal by observing how that Possession was first obtained then continued and at last setled The Sentence which first determined the Controversy in the Council of Nice was not by the Merit of the Cause but Interest of the Parties Pag. 56. This long and mischeivous Controversy was at last setled by Theodosius who having received his Instructions and Baptism from a Consubstantialist required all his Subjects to conform to that Religion which Peter the Prince of the Apostles from the beginning had delivered to the Romans and which at that time Damasus Bishop of Rome and Peter Bishop of Alexandria held and that Church only should be esteemed Catholick which worshipped the Divine Trinity with equal Honour and those which held the other should be called Hereticks made infamous and punished This therefore we may call setling the Controversy because thenceforth all succeeding Emperors and Bishops wrote after this Copy and both the Parties have ever worn these Titles which the Emperor by his Imperial Power as the unquestionable Fountain of Honor was pleased to bestow upon them Behold now the Ground upon which one of our Fundamental Articles of Faith is Built behold the Justice of that Plea
set forth at Antioch a third by Narcissus and some Bishops with him the fourth by Eudoxius three others at Sirmium one of which was read at Ariminum the eighth was that of Acacius published at Selucia which was the same that was published at Constantinople with an Appendix forbidding the use of the words Substance and Hypostasis Now all these were conceived and brought forth in a few Years together under Constantius and by the influence of that Arian Emperour who made it his business to advance and propagate that Heresie But what are these scuffles for Interest and Promotion which though favoured by an Arian Emperour were not only strenuously opposed but generally defeated to the constant and unanimous Decrees of the four first General Councils and many others of the Eastern Churches and by all the Western or Latin Churches who constantly asserted the Doctrine of the Trinity I cannot better compare these Alterations in Matters of Faith which were made after the Nicene Council than to the various Revolutions that hapned in this Kingdom after the Dethroning of King Charles I. of blessed Memory wherein the several Factions as they got into Power strove not so much for Religion which was always made the pretence as for Interest and Advantage to the overthrow both of a well-establish'd Government and Religion which now through the Blessing of God are returned to their ancient Channels and may they ever bear down all opposition and run on without interruption to make glad the City of God I cannot omit one Remark more in this place namely how partial the Doctor is in relating the History of Athanasius and Arius He summs up in few words whatever Philostorgus and Sandius the Arians had suggested against Athanasius How he was banished by the Council at Tyre Antioch Sirmium and Ariminum but is ashamed to mention those Sham-Plots that were contrived against him and retorted upon his adversaries to their perpetual Infamy as Dr. Cave and Dr. Sherlock have discovered nor have we a word how at the Council of Millan where the Catholicks were forced to condemn Athanasius Constantius drawing his Sword and telling them That he himself accused Athanasius and ought to be believed and banished such as would not consent to it But as for Arius he pleads for him as if he had been as much a Messenger sent from God as our Saviour in his opinion was as much doth he speak in defence of Arius That he was justified by such as had condemned him by the Emperor and a Council at Jerusalem p. 37. c. 2. And Athasius threatned to be deposed if he did not receive him into communion though the Doctor confesseth he would not admit the word Consubstantial into his Creed That the Eastern Bishops but such as the Doctor says p. 38. c. 2. were generally Arians took Arius his part against Athanasius and condemn'd him in the Council of Sardica But all this trouble was not occasioned upon the account of Athanasius his Faith but the Arian perfidy who falsly accused and maliciously condemned him Wherefore it will be seasonable in this place to give you a short Account of what the most Authentick Historians have related which you shall have presently In the third Proposition he says That the Evangelists in setting down our Lord's Genealogy do not satisfie but amuse us and professing to instruct us do doubly disappoint us first by deriving it from a wrong Father and then by destracting us two several ways which he says is a warning against searching after the Eternal Generation As supposing it to be needless and therefore impossible to prove him derived from David though the Scripture calls him both David's Son and David's Lord he concludes it to be impossible to understand his Eternal Generation And thus the knowledge both of the Generation of our Saviour as Man as well as that as God are both concluded to be impossible to be known because they are above our Understandings So that he first raiseth a doubt of our Saviour's Descent from David according to the Flesh that he may make that a ground of his Eternal Generation by the Father In the fourth Proposition he intimates That a Heathen might justifie Polytheism at the same rate as the Athanasian Fathers have done the Doctrine of the Trinity and that the Papists may justifie their no-less-beloved Mystery of Transubstantiation as he calls it and affirms with them That the Scripture is no less express for the one than the other and the Contradictions no less gross in the one than the other And then ridicules that learned and ingenuous Tract which was lately Printed to shew what better grounds the Doctrine of the Trinity hath in the Scripture than that of Transubstantiation for want of Argument to confute it As if we could as easily apprehend the Nature of Things immaterial and removed above our Reason as well as our Sence as we can of those corporeal Beings such as the consecrated Hosts which contradict both Reason and Sence In the Fifth Proposition he affirms That the Questions concerning the Trinity were decided by no other Evidence but of Imperial and Papal Authority The Pope would be much more obliged and grateful to him than the Church of England if he could prove the Supremacy of the Bishop of Rome over all the Churches and that in Matters of Faith as ancient as Constantine In the Sixth That there is danger of Blasphemy in examining the silly Question concerning the Eternity of the Godhead of Christ and that we have no firm ground to go upon But is not that Rule of Vincent Lirinensis a good ground Quod semper quod ubique quod ab omnibus But in this he joyns with Smalcius to call us Blasphemers and Antichristians In the Seventh That the only advantage of the Catholicks is long possession That they have so handled matters as to hide much and varnish all That the Sentence which determined the Controversie in the Council of Nice was not by the Merit of the Cause but the Interest of Parties Answ Long possession of such Truths as have a good Foundation in the Scripture is a Title beyond any that pretends against it when the Universal Church hath in all Ages except only a short interruption under one or two Arian Princes judged the Doctrine against the Deity of our Saviour as a destructive Herosie If we may thank the Doctor for any thing it is for granting us this long possession even ever since the Gospel was first published In the Eighth Proposition he says This long and mischievous Controversie was at last decided by Theodosius who receiving his Instructions and Baptism from a Consubstantialist required all his Subjects to conform to that Religion which Peter the Prince of the Apostles from the beginning delivered to the Romans and which at that time Damasus Bishop of Rome and Peter of Alexandria held and that Church only should be esteemed Catholick which worshipped the Divine Trinity with equal Honour and those
conceived of them when he thought to present his Naked Gospel to them as if they would have faln in love with its Nakedness And the truth is they saw so many shameful and scandalous Pamphlets demanding Alterations in our Constitutions and Doctrines and a Toleration of Latitudinarian Principles that though they were willing to make some moderate Concessions yet when they perceived there would be no end of demanding such Alterations as they could not consent to they thought it fit to maintain their ground and not give way to unreasonable Propoposals such as these which the Doctor now makes for a Toleration of the Socinian Heresie As for his Charity to the Oxford Convocations the Reflections made on them in his Vindication which hath been already considered do discover that his Charity begins and ends at home and is confined only to Men of his own Perswasion I think I do not conjecture amiss if I say that he hath the same enlarged Charity for us as Smalcius had who concludes his Book De Divinitate Christi thus I doubt not to affirm confidently That none of those who believe Jesus Christ to be God of himself and to have Divine Power can by any means have certain hope of Eternal Life by vertue of his Opinion concerning Christ. And such is the Charity of this Author to all that profess Christ to be their Saviour and say Thou art the King of Gory O Christ Thou art the everlasting Son of the Father If this were the Doctor 's design in writing his Naked Gospel I shall conform to the Apostle who enjoyns That if an Angel from Heaven should teach what is so opposite to the Gospel which the Church in all Ages hath received and believed he deserves an Anathema Thus at last we are like to see a thorough Reformation of the glorious Gospel of our Lord and Saviour even such as we saw of the once Flourishing Church of England under the Government of the most Religious King and Martyr Charles the First It was reformed first by a Presbyterian Parliament which took away her Bishops and Liturgy then by an Independent Army that devoured her Lands and Revenues then by an Inspired General which brought in a Toleration of all sorts of Enthusiasts and after sundry Revolutions by a Naked Rump which if God alone had not prevented it would have left us all in Confusion Thus the Gospel which spread so far and wide under the Ministry of our Saviour and his Apostles was first reformed by a Juncture of Gnosticks Nicolaitans and Ebionites who mixt the Jewish Opinions and Observations with the pure Ordinances of the Gospel and would equal Moses with Christ then by the Samosatenians and Arians who robbed him of that which he thought no Robbery to assume to himself i. e. to be equal with God Then by Mahomet that great Impostor who preferred himself above our Saviour drawing all Sects into a Body under himself And now after various Revolutions by the Naked Gospel which proclaims our Saviour a meer Man as Moses and other Messengers of God were to whom therefore some already do and the rest of the Socinians ought by their Principles to deny any Religious Worship which by their own Confession is due to God only and to no Creature whatsoever And who can foresee with what Viperous Monsters the Naked Gospel is now pregnant which begin to eat through the Bowels of that Church wherein they have been nourished and proclaim Liberty to all sort of Heresies and Blasphemies against the Son of God and the Spirit of Grace as the Apostle speaks Heb. 10.28 Trampling under foot the Son of God and doing despite to the Spirit of Grace When one Pamphlet proclaims the Holy Ghost Dethron'd another The Triple God Buried and the Doctrine of the Trinity is a Popish Antichristian Diabolical Doctrine these dreadful Alarms from the Bottomless Pit should awaken all good Christians unanimously to Invoke the Ever Blessed Trinity to arise and plead its own Cause against such as daily Blaspheme them The loud Blasphemies of these Philistines against not only the Israel of God but the God of Israel hath called me forth to bid Defiance to this Goliah though armed only with a Stone and a Sling not doubting but there are many Worthies in our Israel who will appear and do wonderful things All that I intended was to discover where this Adversary lay hid under the usual Disguise of the Old Serpent that mostly appears as an Angel of Light that he may with less suspicion effect his Works of Darkness and I doubt not but the Church of Christ hath still such good Angels ministring to her before whom such Angels of Satan shall flee and fall as Lightning The Rabbies say That on the Stone wherewith David slew Goliah the Characters of the Messiah were engraven I shall sling a Stone or two in the Name of the Messiah our Blessed Saviour against those Philistines that have blasphemed that Name and commit the success of them to the All-disposing Providence of God the Father Son and Holy Ghost The first Argument that I shall urge is the Harmony of the Old and New Testament which speaks of the Deity of the Messias and apply it to our Saviour The second is drawn from the Doctrine and Faith of such eminent Fathers and Martyrs as suffered for that Faith The third from those Judgments of God executed on those who in their several Ages openly opposed that Faith which may serve as Examples to deter others from tempting Christ lest they be destroyed as those were of whom the Apostle speaks 1 Cor. 10.9 From which Premises we may rightly infer an Equality of Nature and Power in the Father and the Son and conclude the same Honour and Worship due to both When Arcadius an Arian Emperor assumed his Son to a Partnership in the Empire the good Bishop St. Ambrose as I remember addressing himself to Arcadius humbled himself with all due Obeysance but took no notice of his Son Honorius at which the Emperor manifesting his displeasure the good Bishop took occasion to tell him That if he were offended at the disrespect shewn to his Son he might consider that the God of Heaven might be more justly displeased with them that neglected to honour his Son which I leave you to apply Some Socinians deny our Saviour any Worship and others grant him only a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 such an inferior Honor as the Papists do their Saints not that Divine Worship which properly belongs to the Deity It is generally agreed by the Socinians to make the Holy Sripture Judge of this great Controversy concerning the Godhead of our Saviour but they would have Reason to be Judge of the sence of the Scripture and to this we would appeal if they would not seek little Evasions from Particles and Criticisms of their own inventions against the plain Letter of the Scripture for Smaltsius one of their best Champions says Ludum jocum è
which from such a Possession would prescribe to our Belief Pag. 57. of the Interpolated Edition What more ridiculously silly than to build so weighty a Doctrine upon Implicit Faith in two Bishops partial to their own Sees whereof the one gave it Birth and the other Maintenance And what more odious than to persecute as Hereticks and Malefactors all such as should refuse to be so grosly imposed upon Pag. 57. of the first Edition Certainly whoever shall carefully observe how the now established Doctrine was from first to last advanced by gross Partiality of the most guilty kind and at last imposed by a Novice Emperor upon Implicit Faith of two Bishops of whose Sees the one brought it into the World and the other maintain'd it and a new coin'd Tradition lately obtruded by the guiltier of those Sees but unpleaded because unheard of in those former long and miserable Times which it might and ought to have delivered from the Convulsions they suffered Whoever I say shall carefully observe this and withal what foul Tricks the Church of Rome used in the West and with what ill Success in the East whose Churches did at last more Universally embrace Arrius 's Opinion than at first they condemned it may be tempted to number the Athanasian among the Roman Doctrines and cannot but think it fairly dealt with if its boasted Possession pardoned it be left upon the same level with the Arrian equally unworthy not only of our Faith but of our Study Pag. 57. If further we consider what the Historian expresly declareth that at the rise of this Controversie most of the Bishops understood not it's meaning we cannot think it necessary to Salvation that every private Christian should believe that as an Article of Faith which the best Ages of the Church thought not worth knowing This upon second thoughts is thus express'd in a 2d Edition An Opinion which so many wise and good Men as lived within 300 Years after Christ were so far from believing Matter of Faith that they did not receive it as Matter of Certainty nor perhaps of Credibility Pag. 59 Pag. 58. The Athanasians abhor Polytheism no less than do the Arrians If their Positions seem to infer it they deny the consequence if this contradict the Rules of reasoning they avow it for they allow Reason no hearing in Mysteries of Faith if this make them Hereticks it is not in Religion but in Logick On the other side the Arrians profess to believe of Christ whatever himself or his Apostles have spoken and where one expression in Scripture seemeth to contradict another they take such a Course to reconcile them as the Laws and Customs of all the World direct It is very frequent for Rhetorick to exceed but never to diminish the Grammatical Character of a Person whose honour the Writer professeth to advance and upon this account they think it more reasonable that those Expressions which exalt our Saviour's Person to an Equality with the Father should stoop to those which speak him Inferior than that those which speak him Inferior should be strained up to those which speak him Equal And however this is the safer Way since it will lead us to such a Belief as will suffice for that end for whose sake alone Belief itself is required Pag. 70. To this Question Whether any Promise of God does necessarily import a Restitution of the same Numerical Matter He answers That the Words of St. Paul Thou fool that which thou sowest c. plainly deny the Resurrection of the same Numerical Particles P. 70. To another Question Whether it be more honourable to God and more serviceable to the design of the Gospel that we believe the Contrary He answers That it is the same as to ask Whether it be more honourable to salve all his Perfections or to robb one that we may cloath the other The very mentioning of these Opinions is a sufficient Confutation to all such as have heartily imbraced the Doctrine of the Church of England But the Author in his Vindication pretends that what he hath written was only to enlarge Charity i. e. to procure a Toleration of such Opinions as he hath published I shall only discover that Line of Socinianism much blacker than his Ink which runs through his whole Book and then the Reader may judge to what his inlarged Charity doth tend The Design of the Preface is to shew saith the Doctor that the Success of the Gospel which made such great Conquests at first hath been hindred by the difference of the Modern Gospel from the Primitive in its Doctrine which difference he says is so great that if an Apostle should return into the World he would be so far from owning it that he would not be able to understand it Answ If the Gospel which we receive be so intirely corrupted he doth utterly overthrow that Providence of God which he admires in giving it so great a success whereas all good Christians believe the Gospel to be the same and bless the Providence of Almighty God in preserving it pure and uncorrupt to this present time and we still say if an Apostle or an Angel from Heaven shall preach any other Gospel contrary to or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 besides what we have received let him be accursed I hope therefore the Doctor doth not think of setting up any other Judge of Controversies than what the Church whereof he calls himself a True Son doth own and profess if the Success of it hath been hindred in any Age it may not be imputed to the Doctrine therein delivered nor to the Providence of God in preserving it intire but to those false and contrary Doctrines which by the Instruments of Satan transforming themselves into Angels of Light endeavoured to destroy in its infancy such as St. Peter calls damnable errors denying the Lord that bought them and teaching that Jesus Christ was no◠come in the flesh i. e. that God the Word was not made flesh but the flesh was made God Such were Ebion a Jew Cerinthus and Marcion who spread their Errors against the Deity of Christ while St. John was living with which Errors the Church of Ephesus was so infested that she besought St. John to write in confutation of them as he did both in his Gospel and Epistles The other Apostles were diligent in confuting the Errors of the Gnosticks who would have brought in the worshipping of Saints and Angels as inferior Gods These generally condemned St. Paul's Epistles and kept to the Jewish Observations which the Apostles wrote against the Nicolaitans also mentioned Rev. 2.6 were of the like Opinion with the Gnosticks and Cerinthus For hating of whose Deeds the Church of Ephesus is commended Ireneus l. 3. c. 11. says that St. John wrote his Gospel to destroy that Error which had been sown by Cerinthus and before him by the Nicolaitans So that the Success of the Gospel was hindred by not only those false Doctrines but the impure Lives of
recalled him to Constantinople to question him for those Tumults which he had raised there but the same mischief followed him for at Constantinople he found his Friend Eusebius of Nicomedia and Alexander his Adversary whom Eusebius threatned that he should shortly be deprived of his Priesthood if he admitted not Arius into Communion at which Alexander being greatly troubled prays and fasts shutting up himself in the Church called Irene and coming to the Altar prostrates himself on the Ground under the holy Table for many days and nights asking of God and he received what he asked That if the Opinion of Arius were right he might not live to the Day appointed for the Dispute but if the Faith which he professed were true that Arius might suffer the punishment due to his impiety The Emperour in the mean time sent for Arius and willing to be better assured of the Faith which he professed asked him Whether he would consent to the Decrees of the Council of Nice he presently answered He would and did subscribe them in the Emperour's presence at which the Emperour wondered and suspecting some fraud urged him to swear to them and this he did also Now the fraud which he used as I have been informed saith Socrates c. 38. was this Arius had written his own Opinions in a Paper which he had hid in his Bosome and swore that he did in his Mind believe as he had written Then the Emperour commanded Alexander who was then Bishop of Constantinople to receive him into Communion the day following Arius being about to go into the Church with his Companions the Judgment of God seized on him for going out of the Emperour's Palace he walked through the City magnificently guarded by a company of Eusebians drawing all eyes upon him when he came to a place where stood a Porphery Statue a great terrour through the consciousness of his wickedness seiz'd on him and with it a great Looseness in his Bowels and enquiring where he might step aside to ease himself he was directed to a place near at hand where being come his Heart grew faint and he voided his Bowels with his Excrements with much Blood and his Liver and Spleen followed the place is yet to be seen which all that pass by do point at relating the manner of Arius's death These Accidents did greatly confirm the Emperour in the Faith which was decreed in the Nicene Council St. Ambrose compares his Death with that of Judas That is not a fortuitous Death saith he where an Example of the like punishment on the like sin was inflicted before that both should suffer the same punishment who had denied and betrayed the same Lord for Sozom. says as it is said of Judas that he burst asunder I shall only remark here how much mischief one Arian Presbyter by his false insinuations with Men in Authority may occasion in a well-established Church which notwithstanding all his arts and industry by God's good Providence tended at last to the confirmation of the Truth In p. 38. col 1. he tells us of the Settlement of the Controversie by Theodosius though he could not be ignorant that Constantine had done it many years before but he conceals the manner of doing it viz. How that he being sick at Thessalonica was baptized by Ascolius Bishop of that place a Person of great eminency both for his Words and Works and adorned with all the Gifts of the Priestly Office being recovered he resolved to propagate that Faith into which he was baptized and which his Ancestors had profest viz. that of the Nicene Creed and he greatly delighted in Ascolius as being of the same belief as he did also in the Illirians because none of them were infected with the pest of Arian Doctrines and asking concerning the other Provinces he was informed that all the Churches as far as Macedonia did all agree in the same Faith and did worship God the Word and the Holy Ghost equally with the Father and being told of the other Provinces towards the East that they were tumultuous and divided into several Sects especially at Constantinople and then thinking it better to declare unto his Subjects his Opinion of the Deity he sent his Rescript from Thessalonica to the People of Constantinople that from thence as from the Fort of the Empire his Rescript might be speedily issued to other Cities Now all this being in the same Chapter which the Doctor quotes I wonder at the Doctor 's Exclamations Behold now the ground on which one of our Fundamental Articles of Faith is built Behold the Justice of that Plea which from such a possession would prescribe to our belief We have traced it says the Doctor from the Spring with no worse intent than to appeal from the Great Theodosius who put it above dispute to the Greater Constantine who put it below dispute Now seeing he appealed to Constantine we have his Decision which I find the Doctor as faulty as he judged Arius to be In the mean time I suppose from his own Quotation that the claim of possession of this great Article of our Faith is not either from the Great Theodosius nor from the Greater Constantine nor the Council of Nice but from the Scripture of him that is God over all blessed for ever and even Socinus himself agrees with us in this and differs from the Doctor in his Third Epistle to Radecius affirming That even from the first beginning of the Church there were so many Men most famous as well for their Learning as their Piety so many holy Martyrs of Christ which cannot be numbred who followed this otherwise most grievous Errour That Christ is that One God that created all things and that he was begotten of his proper Substance And may not the Church of England admire how one of her true Sons is so much more a Socinian than Socinus himself as to deny all this that her Son should suppress the Testimony which he knew to be true to serve an Errour which he knows to be false and damnable Did the Settlement of Christ's Deity begin with the Reign of Theodosius and because he found some Hereticks that denied it was he the first that founded it Shall we call the Doctor the Author of Socinianism because he first published it in Exeter-Colledge We can shew the Succession of those Apostles and Apostolick Men that have derived the Consubstantiality home to our days in all the Churches Greek and Latine I suppose the Doctor will not glory in the Pedigree of his Heresie for so it hath been accounted ever since St. John's Gospel was written or what temptation could a Man of his Education have to number the Athanasian Doctrine which he hath so long profest if he be not an arrant Hypocrite among the Roman Theodosius indeed recommended it to his Subjects by a good Argument viz. That it was the Faith which St. Peter delivered at the beginning of the Plantation of the Gospel to the Church
their Authority I have but briefly toucht them As to my Method having first considered his Preface in the next place I have considered his Apology 3. I have made some general Reflections on the Book and lastly I have discovered what Socinian Doctrines are covertly delivered in each Chapter for I find his Oracles like those of old to carry a doubtful or double Sence to be as a Reserve and Refuge that being driven from the one he might flye to the other and indeed it is more difficult to discover and draw him forth from those Ambushes wherein he lies in wait to deceive than to baffle his greatest Strength in a plain and open Field the first is my chief endeavour though I have not on occasion declined the other what I have attempted was not in confidence of my own Abilities having never been exercised in this spiny Controversie and being now by Age Miles emeritus but only to excite and provoke others to contend for the common Salvation in the Faith once delivered to the Saints and whatever the success be I hope I shall obtain the Pardon of all good Men seeing I have according to my power cast in my Mite into the Church's Treasury AN ANSWER To a Late TREATISE ENTITULED The Naked Gospel THE Author of the Naked Gospel calls himself a true Son of the Church of England now the Doctrine of the Church of England is declared in her Liturgy her Articles and Homilies in her Liturgy she hath inserted the Three Creeds viz. that called the Apostles the Nicene and the Athanasian these two last our Author would have to be restrained to the Letter of the former because that only is used in the Offices for Administration of Baptism and Visitation of the Sick but if he be a true Son of the Church he hath or should ex animo have given his Assent and Consent to all the Doctrines avowed by the Church However it is well that the Doctor seems to approve of the Apostles Creed because I find the Socinians deny the Godhead of the Son and Holy Ghost being it is not expresly affirmed in that Creed yet certainly they had not been made Objects of our Faith if they were not of the Godhead This Creed is but a larger Profession of our Christian Faith which we made at our Baptism where we dedicate ourselves to the Service of that one God who is Father Son and Holy Ghost The Right Reverend Bishop of Chester hath sufficiently proved the Deity of the Son and Holy Ghost in his learned Exposition of that Creed Nor have we ever heard of any of the Fathers that have interpreted it otherwise than as the Nicene and Athanasian Creeds have done yet I have been credibly informed that a Doctor who stiles himself of the Church of England gravely declared That this Creed also might be reformed But in the Church of England we find the reiterated Acknowledgment of the Blessed Trinity Father Son and Holy Ghost so in the Doxology in the Form used in Baptism and in the Litany O Holy Blessed and Glorious Trinity Three Persons and One God c And in that very ancient Hymn after the Communion it is said of our Saviour Thou only art Holy thou only art the Lord thou only O Christ with the Holy Ghost art most high in the Glory of God the Father In the Te Deum Thou art the King of Glory O Christ thou art the Everlasting Son of the Father In the first Article concerning the Trinity the Church of England says That in the Unity of the Divine Nature there are three Persons of the same Essence Power and Eternity Father Son and Holy Ghost In the Homely for Whitsunday she says The Holy Ghost is a Spiritual and Divine Substance the third Person in the Deity distinct from the Father and the Son Which thing may most easily be proved by most plain Testimonies of God's Holy Word Canon 〈◊〉 1640. And in the Canons it is forbidden to read Socinian Books And in the former Book of Canons we are forbid to teach any thing but what is agreeable to the Doctrine of the Old and New Testament and what the ancient Fathers and Bishops have collected out of them It was therefore a Protestatio contra factum to stile himself a true Son c. and under that Title to publish to the World what is so opposite to her Doctrine May not the Church complain of such Sons in the words of the Prophet Isaiah c. 1. I have nourished and brought up children and they have rebelled against me But God be thanked the Church of England doth not want more dutiful Sons such as on all occasions are ready and able to vindicate her Doctrines and assert her Discipline That famous University whereof the Author was a Member seasonably manifested her Detestation of his Heretical Opinions by condemning them to the Flames that there might not be a Spark left to kindle such dangerous Fires in the Church which Decree for the Reader 's satisfaction is here inserted The Judgment and Decree of the Vniversity of Oxford delivered in a Convocation held August 19th 1690. against some Impious and Heretical Propositions transcribed and quoted out of an Infamous Libel of late perfidiously printed within the said Vniversity and published with this Title The Naked Gospel which do Impugne and Assault the principal Mysteries of our Faith alway retained and preserved in the Catholick Church and especially in the Church of England IMPRIMATUR Jonathan Edwards Vice-Can Oxon. WHereas there is lately published an Infamous Libel entituled The Naked Gospel which under that specious Title destroys the Foundation of the Primitive Faith once delivered to the Saints assaults the chief Mysteries of our Religion and not only denies but reproacheth him that bought us the Lord Jesus Christ who is God blessed for ever And whereas it appears that this Libel deserving to be condemned to eternal Flames hath been by an unheard of Persideousness printed and published within this University therefore for the Honour of the Holy and Individual Trinity for Preservation of the Catholick Doctrine in the Church and moreover for the Defence as much as in us lieth of the Reputation and Esteem of this University which with all care we desire to preserve intire and inviolable We the Vice-Chancellor Doctors Proctors the Regent and Non-Regent Masters convocated in a full Senate of Convocation on the 19th of August 1690 in manner and place accustomed certain Propositions in the said Libel contained which we have caused to be transcribed and hereafter recited being first Read have by our Common Suffrages and the Unanimous Consent and Assent of Us all Decreed in manner following I. We do Condemn all and every of these Propositions and others to them belonging which for Brevity's sake are pretermitted as False Impious and Contumelious to the Christian Religion and especially to the Church of England And we Decree and Declare most of them to be Heretical as contrary
which held the contrary should be called Hereticks made infamous and punished All this Constantine and the Council of Nice had done long before He adds Behold now the ground on which one of our Fundamental Articles of Faith is built The meaning of this is that it is an Imperial Imposition to which we shall give an Answer anon Prop. 9. What more ridiculously silly than to build so weighty a Doctrine upon implicite Faith in two Bishops partial to their own Sees whereof the one gave it Birth the other Maintenance and what more odious than to prosecute as Hereticks and Malefactors all such as should refuse to be so grosly imposed on Answ What can be more falsly said than that this Doctrine hath no other Foundation than what this Author allows it When it was confirm'd by that famous Council not as their own Opinions only but as the constant Doctrine of the Churches of God in former Ages grounded on the Holy Scriptures and therefore to reflect on it as the first and most uncharitable Dispute that ever rent the Christian World doth not become any Christian much less a true Son of the Church of England See p. 55. col 1. In the 10th Proposition he affirms That on his Premises being considered Men may be tempted as it seems he hath been to number the Athanasian among the Roman Doctrines and to leave it on the same level with the Arrian equally unworthy of our Faith and Study It appears then that our Doctor never studied this Doctrine whereof he hath long been a Professor so far as to make it an Article of his Faith and if his Pelagian Doctrines and Sermons concerning Original Sin for which many learned Men have severely censured him with which the University was so offended as to oblige him to explain by way of a Recantation and of his Opinion of Turkish Devotion and his Naked Gospel were duly considered the Considerator must be perswaded that the Doctor had made the Socinian Doctrines his constant study and never thought the Catholick Doctrines worthy of his Study or Faith or that instead of not bestowing one days study in reading Socinian Writers he had not bestowed so much time in reading the Articles or Liturgy of the Church of England In the 11th he saith We cannot think it necessary to Salvation that every private Christian and by the same reason that no private Christian should believe that as an Article of Faith which the best Ages of the Church thought not worth knowing Which in the Second Edition he thus expresseth An Opinion which so many good and wise Men as lived within three hundred years after Christ were so far from believing as matter of Faith that they did not receive it as matter of certainty nor perhaps of credibility Answ St. John lived many Years after Christ he not only received it but asserted it throughout his Gospel and Epistles against Ebion and Cerinthus St. Ignatius calls them Serpents that did deny it Polycarp called Marcion The first begotten of the Devil for believing the contrary these I trust every true Son of the Church of England will acknowledge to have been good and wise Men. But you shall hear anon of an Army of Martyrs that have sealed it with their Blood and what a fruitful Seed of this saving Doctrine the Blood of these Martyrs hath been in the Church of God That learned and seasonable Collection of Mr. Bull 's concerning the Judgment of the Fathers in the first 300 Years after our Saviour shews abundantly what was their belief concerning the Deity of our Saviour which may silence the Dispute and save the labour of any farther Collection an account whereof for my Country-mens sake who either understand not the Latin Tongue or cannot compass the Book I shall present to my Reader and refer the Learned to the Book itself where they may find all their Testimonies vindicated and irrefragably asserted against the Objection of Sandius Petavius and other Socinian Authors in their proper place In the Twelfth Proposition he insinuates That the Positions of the Athanasians seems to infer Polytheism and when they deny the consequence he says They contradict the Rules of Reasoning and that they do so because they allow Reason no hearing in Mysteries of Faith and that this cannot excuse them from being Hereticks in Religion or Logick Whereas for the Arrians he pleads That they profess to believe of Christ whatever himself or his Apostles have spoken and where-ever one expression seems to contradict another they take such a course to reconcile them as the Laws and Customs of all the World direct This shews plainly what Party he adheres to The Rule which he gives us for the justification of the Arians is this It is frequent for Rhetorick to exceed but never to diminish the Grammatical Character of a Person whose Honour the Writer professeth to advance and therefore they think it more reasonable that those expressions which exalt our Saviour's Person to an equality wth the Father should stoop to those which speak him inferiour rather than those which speak him inferiour should be strained up to those which speak him equal As if Christ and his Apostles which wrote the History of Christ did not deal more faithfully in relating the truth concerning his Person as being one and equal to the Father than those Rhetoricians who to advance the Doctrine of Arius would depress him beneath himself and leave him as Naked as the New Gospel doth stripping him of all those glorious Attributes that should support his Worship and depriving the Church of that satisfaction which he made for it when he redeemed it with his own most precious Blood which by the Socinian Doctor 's is trampled under foot and counted a vain thing These Propositions will fall under our farther Consideration of the several Chapters To which I now proceed Chap. 1. He treats of the Gospel preached by our Saviour and his Apostles as necessary to Salvation the Character whereof is either that of a Covenant or a Message Of the Gospel as a Covenant he speaks as slightly as short quoting only Jer. 31.33 and Heb. 8.8 and says It is delivered more succinctly ch 10.17 This Covenant he says Leans on the Law of Nature which also keeps it firm in its place Thus the Covenant of Grace is confounded with the Law of Works though the Apostle sets them in opposition We are not under the Law but Grace That Christ is the Foundation of the Evangelical Covenant ratified and sealed by his Blood the Scripture teacheth so plainly that he that runs may read Covenants were wont to be made by Sacrifice as Dr. Outrede hath proved and so was this Covenant it was sealed in the Blood of the Son of God without which there could be no remission The Apostle calls him the Surety of a better Covenant and bringing in a better hope the first Covenant was Do this and live the second is He that believes and is
baptized shall be saved And this Covenant Dat quod Jubet it assists us in willing and doing what is required Heb. 8.6 'T is a better Covenant established on better Promises And Heb. 8.10 and Rom. 16. This is my Covenant I will put my Law into their hearts and write them in their minds and I will be to them a God and they shall be to me a People and I will be merciful to their unrighteousness and their sins and iniquities will I remember no more But he commends especially the Character of the Gospel as a Message and so makes our Saviour only an eminent Prophet that came to advance the Natural Religion a little higher than other Prophets had done his design being no other than to advance Natural Religion to a higher perfection by nobler Precepts and richer Promises as he says This is no more than what the Turks will grant in Honour of our Saviour But there is another Notion of the Gospel more common than the other two though purposely omitted by the Doctor which is as we render it the New Testament of our Saviour who was not only as Socinus saith a Witness of that Testament but the Testator himself that Testament whereby Christ makes us Heirs of all that he hath purchased for us that Testament which was sealed by his Blood and took effect by his Death and Resurrection for the Salvation of all that believe in him and obey his Commandments Grotius on the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 makes it parallel with the Hebrew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which he says is derived from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifying to kill or cut down But as he observes the Gospel is not called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Covenant in a strict sence wherein two Parties do mutually Covenant but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. the Will or Testament of a Superiour who adds Rewards to the performance of his Will and it is called the New Testament being a Covenant of Grace not of Debt upon our Works but Mercy upon our Faith So that Grotius concludes the most proper Notion of the Gospel is that of a Testament by which the Heir is obliged under certain Conditions and by way of a Trust reposed in him and he defines it to be the Will of Christ confirmed to us by his Death whereby we have a Right to all his Promises on performance of his Commandments But the Doctor carefully avoids any word that might imply the Doctrine of Christ's Satisfaction and therefore as he wholly suppresseth that of a Testament which hath its effect from the Death of the Testator as our Saviour often calls it the New Testament in his Blood Luke 22.20 1 Cor. 11.25 so he slights that of a Covenant as being wont to be confirmed by the Death of the Sacrifice for in all Languages Hebrew Greek and Latin as well as in English to strike a Covenant imported the Sanction of it by shedding of Blood and prefers the Notion of a Message as if Christ had done no more for us than Moses or any of the Prophets i. e. only declared the Precepts of God which is pure Socinianism Chap. 1. p. 1. Col. 2. he says The design of the Gospel is no other than the advancement of Primitive Natural Religion to a higher perfection for which he alledgeth those words of St. John 1 Joh. 1.3 These things we write unto you that you may have fellowship with us c. The Patriarchs knew only the Father but our Fellowship is with the Father and the Son as therefore in the face of Jesus Christ we see more of the Father's goodness so are we thereby obliged to higher strains of love to him and one another which is the sum of Natural Religion And again p. 2. Col. 1. The design of the Gospel is to exalt us to the highest perfection of the Natural Law by making us perfect as our Father which is in heaven is perfect This is the Authentick General Test says he whereby every Doctrine must be tried that claimeth our entertainment as a Gospel truth And thus he equalleth Moral Vertue with Cristian Faith and teacheth Pelagianism which makes the strength of Natural Endeavours sufficient to Salvation without the special Grace of Christ as if that were not necessary to humble us in the sense of our Sins to mortifie our Lusts inlighten our Minds subdue our perverse Wills and purifie our Hearts they may be good Moral Men that conform to the Rules of Reason but no good Christians unless they are assisted by the Grace of the Holy Spirit they may have a form of Godliness but not the power thereof He greatly extols Natural Religion affirming That the Faith which the Gospel requires had its Foundation in Natural Religion Natural Faith as he says is proposed as the Mother of Evangelical p. 14. c. 2. p. 14. Col. 2. I have proved saith he that Faith in God is a Duty of Natural Religion a Moral Vertue a participation of the Divine Nature in one of God's Attributes his Justice to be valued as self-good c. P. 1. Col. 2. He makes the Law of Nature the Foundation on which the New Covenant so leaneth as to be kept firm in its place I fear that the Reason of his thus extolling Natural Religion is because that in its highest perfection it can attain only to the knowledge of the Unity of the Godhead though in the depraved State of Nature Men generally worshipped many False instead of the One true God but this Natural Religion suits better with the design of Arius than of the Gospel and therefore the Author espouseth and magnifies it He adds That as Abraham is proposed as the Father of the faithful Natural Faith is also proposed as the Mother of Evangelical Here therefore we must enquire whether the Faith of Abraham were meerly a Natural Faith and he had no Revelations that begat and strengthened his Faith The Arians grant that as our Saviour says Before Abraham was I am that Christ was before the Creation of the World the Lamb slain from the beginning that by him the World was made yet the Doctor declareth his opinion that the Patriarchs had the knowledge of God the Father only but it is like that of Abailardus contrary to the opinion of all other Doctors of the Church and the tenor of the Scriptures for how then is it said that Abraham rejoyced to see my day and saw it the day of his Incarnation in Isaac's wonderful Conception his Death and Resurrection in Abraham's readiness to sacrifice him and God's delivering him from death from whence Abraham received him in a Figure or Type of Christ Hebr. 11.19 Tertullian thus expounds that place That as Christ being a man was after Abraham so as God he was before Abraham and as being a man he was the son of David but as God he was David 's Lord as man he was born into the world as God he made the world Tertul. de
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he calls it the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Word of God and the Divine Word the Idea of Idea's and says That it is the beginning and end of the good pleasure of God that it abides with God that God had a power of Generation that the First-begotten is comprehended in the Mind only Tractat. Allegor Post sex dies and in the Treatise of the Modesty of Women the first 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is called The Eternal Character of God and is God Now these obscure Notions which both Jews and Gentiles had of the Son of God are by St. John more plainly delivered for the Instruction of all Men and applied to the Person of our Saviour to convince us that he is the true 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Word and that this Word is God that God that was made Flesh and dwelt among Men and that they beheld his Glory the Glory of the only begotten Son of God full of Grace and Truth And the Jews in our Saviour's time concluded That Christ calling himself the Son of God made himself equal When our Saviour requires our belief of such Propositions as exceed our understanding it is a contempt and undervaluing of his Authority and Veracity to expect Demonstrations for them The Notion of a Christian is one that believes in Christ and St. August Serm. de Tempore 189 speaks of Adult Persons that were Baptized saying I am now one of the Faithful and believe what I cannot comprehend And St. Basil de S. S. c. 7. I testifie saith he to all that profess Christ and yet deny him to be God that Christ shall profit them nothing What Philosopher knows the Nature and Motions of his own Soul how it informs the Body and is Tota in toto tota in qualibet parte or by what Ligaments it is united to the Body and shall we presume not to believe the Union of the Godhead to the Manhood and other Revelations of the Gospel because our Reason cannot demonstrate how these things can be Si potes Cape si non potes Crede saith St. August Tract in John 35. The way to get a right understanding in spiritual things is to believe and practice them 'T is not we know and believe in Matters of our Salvation but we believe and are sure as the Original is Joh. 6.69 Believe that thou mayst understand saith St. Aug. on St. John Tract 29. If ye believe not that I am he saith our Saviour i. e. he that said Joh. 8.16 I am not alone but I and the Father that sent me I whom if you had known you should have known the Father also v. 19. I that came to die for your sins If ye believe not that I am he ye shall die in your sins It is well saith an ingenious Commentator that he said not Except you know that I am he ye shall die in your sins Tu rationare ego miror tu disputa ego Credam saith St. Augustine Do you reason I admire do you dispute I will believe And what was that he would believe Ipse Deus tria est unum quodque horum trium Deus est Omnia tria non Dii sed Deus est i. e. God is Three and each of these Three is God and all Three are not many but One God Tertullian was a Person of as profound Reason as any Socinian yet he submitted it to Revelation Natus est Dei Filius non pudet quia pudendum mortuus est Dei Filius prorsus Credibile quia ineptum certum est quia impossibile And Christianorum est Deum mortuum credere contra Marcion l. 2. n. 41. When in the Primitive Times Adult Persons were baptized they were question'd thus Credis in Deum Patrem the answer was Credo and so Credis in Deum filium Credis in Deum Spiritum Sanctam And hence they were called The Faithful St. Ambrose de Sacrament l. 2. c. 7. 1. The Doctor adds And if we descend to particulars in the Doctrines that are imposed as Articles of Faith the more Objections will rise in force and number By the way it is necessary to consider of what sort of Faith and Articles thereof he speaks if of an Antinomian Faith as separated from new Obedience and such Articles as are the Inventions and Impositions of Men then the Doctor acts impertinently and fights his own Shadow which he would ill resent His following Discourse will evidence what Faith he speaks of for p. 13. col 2. It is says he an acknowledged foundation in all Sciences that we must seek Truth by application of generals to particulars and it is the general scope of the Gospel to advance Natural Religion 'T is then the Faith of the Gospel which he treats of under his Notion of advancing Natural Religion and the sting of the Objection he says is this That Faith hath no place among Vertues but Credulity hath one among Vices So that the truth of Evangelical Precepts and Revelations must be sought and approved by application of the Generals in Natural Religion The Objection which he says hath a Sting p. 13. Col. 2. is this That Faith hath no place among Vertues but Credulity hath among Vices The Doctor well knows that the Faith we of the Church of England do profess is such a Faith as for the Objects of it is contained in the Creeds which we receive and such as for the nature of it doth work by Love and doth both purifie the heart and makes the Believer fruitful in every good Work a Faith that keeps us humble and holy not presuming to be justified by the merit of any Works of our own but through the Satisfaction made by Christ for which God will accept us and our sincere Obedience not imputing our Sins to us Moreover we acknowledge this Faith to be the Gift and the Work of God in us as Joh. 6.28 and St. Paul To you it is given not only to believe but to suffer And Phil. 1.29 By faith ye are saved and that not of yourselves it is the gift of God Ephes 2.8 This is the Faith which he would make as Naked as his Gospel as if it were an effect of natural Reason as the Pelagians hold and wholly in our power without any operation of the Spirit of Christ without whom we can do nothing as to obtaining of the Grace of Faith or bringing forth the Fruits of Holiness If this be the Faith which he opposeth a belief of the Holy Trinity the Redemption of Mankind by the Eternal Son of God the Operation of the Holy Spirit in our Sanctification as it clearly appears he leaves all Christians in a State of Nature without any remedy by the Fountain of Grace of whose Fulness we have all received grace for grace In this Chapter Page 14. the Doctor mentioning that Scripture Rom. 4. ult Christ was delivered for our offences and raised again for our justification he says That though the
was apparently designed by the Compilers for some special use to fence the Catholick Faith from the Corruptions Depravations Doubtings and Contradictions of Hereticks as in the Nicene Creed the Oneness of our Lord Jesus Christ was added when the Arians opposed the Apostolick Tradition and by corrupting detected the words of Scripture to their sence which Dr. H. shews more largely in his Note on 1 Joh. 5.7 and of such Additions he says That when the Church hath thought meet to erect an additional Bulwark against Hereticks such as reject them may be deemed to side with those Hereticks p. 86. And this is the summ of what he says concerning the Athanasian Creed the Doctrine whereof he says is well nigh all to assert the Unity of the Divine Nature and Trinity of Persons against those Hereticks who had brought Novel Propositions into the Church of which Doctrinal part he says that Athanasius being only a Father of the Church they were not necessary to be explicitely acknowledged nor absolutely imposed on any but such as were Members of some Church that had actually received Athanasius's Explication or than it appeared concordant with the more authentick universal Confessions as every Doctrinal Proposition of it will be found to do As for the Damnatory Sentences Dr. Ham. supposeth them to be interpreted in opposition to those Heresies that had invaded the Church not that it defined it to be a damnable sin to fail in understanding or believing the full matter of any of those Explications Dr. Ham. having as a wise Master Builder laid this Foundation shews how necessary it is for the end of building on it a holy Life and an uniform universal Obedience to the Commands of Christ in opposition to Idolatry Formality Hypocrisie and to Sacriledge Profaneness and Impiety as also to improve the Vertues of Obedience to Superiours Charity to all Mankind Purity of Flesh and Spirit Contentedness and taking up the Cross and lastly how useful it is to confute false Doctrines 1. Of the Romanists as Penances Indulgences of Supererrogating Merits of Attrition improved into Contrition by the Priest's aid without change of Life Dispensableness of Oaths Arts of Equivocation Purgatory Cessation of Allegiance and especially of Infallibility 2ly Of the Solifidians and Fiduciaries the Predestinarians and irrespective Decrees of Election and Reprobation of the Divine Prescience against the Socinians who deny that God foresees all things and though they grant his Omnipresence and Omnipotence yet question the infinity of his Science which is apparently false as appears by God's Predictions to the Prophets When I considered the Writings of both these Doctors their Foundations and Superstructures it brought to my mind those two sorts of Builders and Building mentioned by our Saviour Mat. 7. the one built on that approved Rock of St. Peter 's Confession the other on that Sand whereon Arius Socinus and that Man of an ominous Name Sandius pitcht their Tabernacles the one stands firm tho' for 1600 Years the Rain descended Flouds came and the Wind blew on it the other tho' like the Walls of Jerusalem it hath been often attempted to be fastned hath still been blown down and may the Fall of it be still great P. 41. c. 2. Our Doctor says If the Relation between the written Word and rational Consequence be so remote as none but a skilful Herald can derive its Pedigree then is a good Christian no more obliged to believe such an Inference than is every good Subject to be a good Herald As if the Ignorant were no ways obliged to follow the Directions of the wise and good Men or as if Subjects were not bound to obey those Laws whereof they cannot ken those Reasons which the wise and consulting Legislators on good Reasons have established for their Security What tho' the Papists do most absurdly infer from Christ's Command to St. Peter to feed his Lambs that all those Popes which pretend to be his Successors are thereby commissioned to Rule and Govern all Nations and Persons in all Ages Cannot so enquiring a Person as the Doctor or one that is more or one that is less rational from such Scriptural premises as God was made Flesh Christ is God over all equal and one with his Father with undeniable Reason infer as the Catholick Church in all Ages hath done That he is the Eternal Son of God But such an Inference is so contrary to the Socinian's Reason that it is equally rejected with contempt and derision as Popish Impositions and by the Doctor numbred among them But Bernardus non videt omnia He undertakes therefore to bless the World with such a description of them that it shall be as easie to know them without pains or art as it was for the meanest Beggar in the street to understand whom King Ahasuerus would Honour when he caused Mordecai in Royal Manner to be publickly honoured and by Proclamation enjoyned the People to bow the Knee as he past by them The Qualifications for Matter of Faith he says must be these 1. It must be easie to be understood by the meanest capacity and therefore he rejects any thing that is called a Mystery though God manifested in the Flesh be so called by the Apostle yea though the same Mystery be implied in that very Scripture which he quotes to prove his assertion viz. Rom. 10.9 If thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus i. e. that Jesus is the Lord which no man can say but by the Holy Ghost i. e. not by a natural Faith but by a supernatural Revelation such as our Saviour says Flesh and blood hath not revealed And it is observable that though in the Title of this Chapter he mentioneth the Word as well as the Matter to be believed yet he makes no mention of the Word by which the Person of our Saviour is generally understood so that Faith in our Lord Jesus Christ the Foundation of our Faith is excluded from being the Object of our belief for he writes the WORD in a larger Character which might induce the Reader to believe that he meant as St. John 1.1 The Son of God which is the adequate Object of Christian Faith but speaks nothing of him in all that Chapter 2ly He says It must be an express Word of God This no Protestant denieth but they do generally urge it against the Papists who teach as necessary Articles of Faith the Commandments of Men And may we not conclude by this Position that they who oppugne such a Fundamental to which Eternal Life is promised may come short of Salvation Christ saith He that believes and is baptized this is but one entire proposition as our Author observes that it is not only he that believes but he that believes and is baptized and Salvation cannot belong to them that put asunder what Christ hath joyned as the Socinians do in the Case of Baptism which they call only a Rite and Ceremony 3ly He says It must be expresly honoured with
Fellow heirs with the believing Jews then it ceased to be a Mystery and surely there is another Mystery in v. 9. of that 3d Chapter which our Doctor cannot yet apprehend thô plainly revealed viz. That God created all things by Jesus Christ See Crellius Heb. 1. v. 10. which though frequently asserted in the Scripture as Col. 1. Heb. 1. c. yet the Socinians utterly deny nor can they apprehend what is that Righteousness which is by Faith as opposed to that which is by the Law or to our Doctor 's Natural Faith but the Doctor tells us of another Mystery little less than a Contradiction as p. 1. c. 2. viz. The Patriarchs knew only the Fathers yet Abraham had the knowledge of Christ and our Saviour says that Moses spake of him and the Doctor affirms the same That Moses spake of Christ Deut. 30.12 for the Doctor saith p. 41. c. 1. that the Apostle applied that place to Christ If thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus and shalt believe in thy heart that God raised him from the dead thou shalt be saved It was not so much in dislike of the Popish Mysteries that the Doctor so often rejects whatever is above human Reason under that Notion as in dislike of the Doctrine of the Trinity and the Eternal Generation of our Saviour of which he speaking p. 34. c. 1. says If you understand not this you must not wonder at least not gain-say it for it is a Mystery which Reason cannot fathom and therefore must be rejected as one of the Packs of Impertinent Mysteries p. 58. c. 2. The Doctor that writes so mystically himself should not be so much displeased if he meet with some Mysteries in other Writings especially in the Scripture wherein as St. Peter observes of St. Paul's Epistles There are some things hard to be understood and will not be fully explained till Elias come And indeed as Naked as his Gospel is it is darkned with so many obscure mists and subtle insinuations that it will appear to some of his most diligent Readers to be one continued Mystery of Iniquity It is a sorry shift which Sandius and others that write against the Trinity make to excuse themselves for thus Sandius pleads see his Appendix p. 107. That he wrote his Book on behalf of the Protestants against the Papists to convince them that the Scripture is the only Rule of Faith because they could not prove the chiefest Articles of their Faith viz. the Trinity Consubstantiality and Coequality from the Tradition of the Fathers of the three first Ages In this our Doctor follows Sandius and would perswade us to renounce the Doctrine of the Trinity because it is a Popish Doctrine See more of this in another Epistle of Sandius p. 261. I have proved saith he that the whole World in the fourth Age was Arian and the Arians enjoyed Temporal Felicity and wrought Miracles to shew against the Papists that these are not marks of the true Church I reckoned diverse Councils of the Arians who condemned the Catholick Faith to shew that we ought not to depend on their Determinations in Matters of Faith but on Scripture only I have shewn that the Church of Rome hath honoured many Arians that were of very evil lives as Saints to shew you what manner of Saints the Papists do Invocate by the Authority of the Infallible Church of Rome c. All this is right but when the whole design of his Book is to shew that the Doctrine of Arius denying the Godhead of Christ and making him a Creature is more consonant to Scripture and Antiquity than that of the Trinity in the Church of Rome is to condemn all other Churches that maintain the same Doctrine for to this purpose tends that which remains in the Third Enquiry concerning the Papists who do impose new Articles of Faith and set their Traditions and Decrees in an equal rank with the Scriptures and sometimes above them with a Nonobstante to Christ's own Institutions as the Socinians do by their Reason let them therefore dispute the Case with each other and let Baal plead for himself He cannot wound the Church of England through their sides unless he can prove the Doctrine of the Trinity to be a Popish Tradition which he doth more than intimate and herein he would do them more service than any of their Champions by proving Popery to be more ancient than the Council of Nice I am now come to the Conclusion of the Author who shuts up his Naked Gospel as generally the Socinians do with a Plea for Toleration to all that confess the Lord Jesus and believe that God raised him from the Dead though they leave him as Naked a Lord as the Doctor hath left the Gospel robbing him of his Eternity and Deity and that Honour and Worship which on those considerations are due to him our Faith in his Name Obedience to his Commands a devout use of his Holy Sacraments and so turn Turks Jews o◠as some English Socinians have done Quakers and live above Ordinances satisfying themselves with a Christ within them and a Natural or Naked Gospel as Mr. Pen in a Socinian Tract hath done This he calls giving Faith its due Bounds by imprisoning it and dismembring it separating Obedience and Love which are inseparable from Evangelical Faith And as for Love saith he we must give it its due boundlesness even to them that love not but deny and bid open defiance to the Godhead of Christ to whom the Apostle denounceth Anathema I wish heartily the Doctor had shewn more Charity to the Church of Christ in general than to think and speak of them as guilty of Idolatry in all Ages for so are they that give Divine Worship to a Creature and that he who stiles himself a Son of the Church of England would not defame her as tainted with Popish because she holds the Athanasian Doctrine for he calls that and the Nicene their Creeds and our Litany their Litany and so becoming a Papist to the Papists and it 's much better to be an Athanasian Papist than an Arian or Socinian Heretick The Doctor tells us in the Vindication p. 7. of his intention to have presented his Naked Gospel to the Convocation that they might be induced to enlarge their Charity at a time when all the Christian World expected it from them And was all the Christian World once more become Arians that they should become Disciples to his Naked Gospel I cannot conceive what compliance the Doctor could presume of from that Convocation he well knows their Prolocutor was the same that agreed shortly after to the burning of it in the Convocation at Oxford and doubtless both he and the several Members would have had the same Resentment of it at Westminster as the Oxford Convocation had When therefore we see a Viper rising out of the Fires of Oxford and hissing p. 5. That the Heresie lay not in the Book but in the
And John 2.11 He manifested his glory and his Disciples believed in him And the Gospel is called The gospel of the glory of Christ 2 Cor. 4.4 That which is added in the Prophet v. 8. The word of our God endureth for ever that is the word of Christ of which himself said Matth. 24.35 Heaven and earth shall pass away but my word shall not pass away It follows in the Prophet v. 10. Behold your God to which that of St. John Baptist answereth Behold the Lamb of God From these Premises it follows that Christ was that God foretold by the Prophet and pointed at by John Baptist The like is Mal. 3.1 compared with Matth. 11.10 of which before Isa 6. compared with Joh. 12.41 I saw the Lord sitting on a high throne c. To this St John refers These things said Isaiah as when 〈◊〉 saw his Glory The Argument is this He whose glory Isaiah saw was the God of Israel but Jesus is he whose glory Isaiah saw there fore he is the God of Israel Both these Propositions are express Scripture Jer. 23.6 compared with 1 Cor. 1.30 The Argument is this He whose name is The Lord our Righteousness is the God of Israel but the King Messias the branch of David Christ is he whose name is The Lord our Righteousness The major is granted the minor appears from the consideration of that Deliverance and Salvation there spoken of which is spiritual and Christ alone is the Author of this Redemption or Salvation Acts 4.10 Neither is there salvation in any other for 1 Cor. 1.30 of God he is made to us wisdom and righteousness sanctification and redemption He then that is the Lord our Righteousness is Jehovah Isa 41.4 compared with Revel 1.11 17. and 2.8 and Chap. 22.13 The words are I am the first and the last which are applyed to our Saviour Revel 1.11 17. The Argument is this He that is the first and the last is the most high God Christ is the first and the last therefore he is the most high God And doubtless our Saviour would never have assumed this Title so derogatory to God so dangerous to his Church if he had been but a Creature as the Socinians say Psal 24. with 1 Cor. 2.8 The Messias in the Psalmist is called the King of Glory Lift up your heads O Gates and the King of Glory shall come in This King of Glory is called The Lord strong and mighty and the Lord of Hosts i. e. the most high God And as this was Prophesied of Christ so it is applyed unto Christ whom the Apostle calls the Lord of Glory and as our Church Thou art the King of Glory O Christ therefore Christ is that Lord strong and mighty and the Lord of Hosts the most high God Zach. 11.13 compared with Matth. 27.9 The words are The Lord said unto me Cast it unto the Potter a goodly price that I was prized at of them c. Matth. 27.9 Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by the Prophet Jeremiah saying And they took the price c. The Argument is this He that in Zachariah was valued at thirty Peices of Silver c. was the Lord God of Israel Christ was he that was thus valued therefore he is the God of Israel Zach. 12.10 compared with Joh. 19.37 Revel 1.7 The words are They shall look upon me whom they have peirced c. So St. John and another Scripture says They shall look on him whom they have peirced The Argument is this He whom the House of David and Inhabitants of Jerusalem are said to look on and to have peirced is the most high God Christ is he whom they should look on and whom they had peirced therefore Christ is the most high God It is evident that he who spake this in Zachariah was Jehovah that would pour out the Spirit of Grace and Supplication which makes the first Proposition undeniable and the Apostle confirms the second so both are undeniable Numb 21.5 6. compared with 1 Cor. 10.9 He for tempting of whom the Israelites perished in the wilderness was the God of Israel For tempting of Christ the Israelites perished in the Wilderness therefore Christ is that God of Israel Isa 52.67 compared with Rom. 10.15 The words are Therefore my people shall know my Name therefore they shall know in that day that I am he that doth speak behold it is I. How beautiful on the mountains are the feet of him that bringeth glad tidings that publisheth peace that bringeth good tidings of good that publisheth salvation that saith unto Sion Thy God reigneth This is a Prophecy of Christ and a certain time is spoken of his appearance In that day they shall know that I am he Ecce adsum Behold it is I. The Argument is this He that says Behold it is I or Ecce adsum is the God of Israel but it is Christ that says it in the Prophet therefore he is that God of Israel Socinus grants this place concerns the time of Christ's coming but would have it to refer to the Deliverance from Babylon But the words of the Apostle Rom. 10.15 O how beautiful are the feet c. plainly refer to the Apostles that preached the Gospel which contains the glad Tidings of Peace which the Prophet spake of with great admiration Behold thy King reigneth And Socinus grants that the Deliverance from Babylon was but a Type of that by Christ the truth or true Deliverance intended was that by Christ the God of Israel Isa 60.1 compared with Eph. 5.14 The words are Arise arise for thy light is come and the glory of the Lord is risen upon thee The Apostle gives the meaning of this Scripture Eph. 5.14 Arise from the dead and Christ shall give thee light which he thus prefaceth wherefore he says i. e. the Holy Ghost in the Scripture and that Christ is spoken of appears from v. 3. And the Gentiles shall come to thy sight agreeable to A light to lighten the Gentiles The Argument then is He that was to enlighten the People of Israel and to be a Light to the Gentiles was the God of Israel but Christ was to be a light to lighten the Gentiles and to be the glory of his people Israel therefore Christ is the God of Israel Isa 54.5 compared with Matth. 9.15 and 25.1 1 Joh. 3.29 2 Cor. 11.12 The words are For thy Maker is thy Husband the Lord of Hosts is his name The Argument is this The Husband of the Church is the God of Israel Christ is the Husband of the Church therefore Christ is the God of Israel The Prophet affirms the first Proposition the second is proved by our Saviour Mat. 9.15 where he calls himself the Bridegroom and chap. 25.1 in the Parable of the ten Virgins He is the Bridegroom Eph. 5. the Apostle speaks of Christ and his Church as of Husband and Wife This Union was prophesied of by Hosea chap. 2.16 In that day thou shalt