this we use the Scripture Terms but must confess we cannot frame a distinct Apprehension of that which is so far above us This begetting was from all Eternity If it had been in time the Son and H. Ghost must have been Creatures but if they are truly God they must be Eternal and not produced by having a Being given them but educed of a Substance that was Eternal and from which they did Eternally spring All these are the Natural Consequences of the main Article that is now to be proved and when it is once proved clearly from Scripture these do follow by a natural and necessary deduction The first and great proof of this is taken from the words with which St. Iohn begins his Gospel John 1.1 2 3. In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God the same was in the beginning with God All things were made by him and without him was not any thing made that was made Here it is to be observed That these words are set down here before St. Iohn comes to speak of Christ's being made in our Nature This passage belongs to another Precedent Being that he had The beginning also here is set to import That it was before Creation or Time Now a Duration before Time is Eternal So this beginning can be no other than that Duration which was before all things that were made It is also plainly said over and over again That all things were made by this Word A Power to Create must be Infinite for it is certain That a Power which can give Being is without Bounds And although the Word make may seem capable of a larger Sense yet as in other places of the New Testament the stricter Word Create is used and applied to Christ as the Maker of all things in Heaven and Earth Visible and Invisible so the Word Make is used through the whole Old Testament for Create so that God's making the Heaven and the Earth is the Character frequently given of him to distinguish him from Idols and false Gods And of this Word it is likewise said That he was with God and was God These words seem very plain and the place where they are put by St. Iohn in the Front of his Gospel as it were an Inscription upon it or an Introduction to it makes it very evident That he who of all the Writers of the New Testament has the greatest Plainness and Simplicity of Stile would not have put words here such as were not to be understood in a plain and literal Signification without any Key to lead us to any other sense of them This had been to lay a Stone of Stumbling in the very Threshold particularly to the Iews who were apt to cavil at Christianity and were particularly jealous of every thing that savoured of Idolatry or of the Plurality of Gods And upon this occasion I desire one thing to be observed with relation to all those Subtile Expositions which those who oppose this Doctrine put upon many of those places by which we prove it That they represent the Apostles as magnifying Christ in words that at first sound seem to Import his being the True God and yet they hold that in all these they had another Sense and a Reserve of some other Interpretation of which their words were capable But can this be thought fair dealing Does it look like honest Men to write thus not to say Men Inspired in what they Preached and Writ and not rather like Impostors to use so many Sublime and Lofty Expressions concerning Christ as God if all these must be taken down to so low a Sense as to signify only that he was miraculously Formed and Endued with an Extraordinary Power of Miracles and an Authority to deliver a New Religion to the World And that he was in consideration of his Exemplary Death which he underwent so patiently raised up from the Grave and had Divine Honours conferred upon him In such an Hypothesis as this the World going in so naturally to the excessive Magnifying and even the Deifying of Wonderful Men it had been necessary to have prevented any such mistakes and to have guarded against the belief of them rather than to have used a continued strain or Expressions that seem to carry Men violently into them and that can hardly nay very hardly be softened by all the Skill of Criticks to bear any other Sense It is to be considered further That when St. Iohn writ his Gospel there were Three sorts of Men particularly to be considered The Iews who could bear nothing that savoured of Idolatry so no Stumbling-block was to be laid in their way to give them deeper Prejudices against Christianity Next to these were the Gentiles who having Worshipped a variety of Gods were not to be indulged in any thing that might seem to favour their Polytheism In Fact we find particular caution used in the New Testament against the Worshipping Angels or Saints How can it therefore be imagined That words would have been used that in the plain Signification that did arise out of the first hearing of them imported that a Man was God if this had not been strictly true The Apostles ought and must have used a particular care to have avoided all such Expressions if they had not been literally true The Third sort of Men in St. Iohn's Time were those of whom Intimation is frequently given through all the Epistles who were then endeavouring to corrupt the Purity of the Christian Doctrine and to accommodate it so both to the Iew and to the Gentile as to avoid the Cross and Persecution upon the account of it Church-History and the Earliest Writers after St. Iohn assure us That Ebion and Cerinthus denied the Divinity of Christ and asserted that he was a mere Man Controversy naturally carries men to speak exactly and among Human Writers those who let things fall more carelesly from their Pens when they apprehend no danger or difficulty are more correct both in their Thoughts and in their Expressions when things are disputed therefore if we should have no other regard to St. Iohn but as an ordinary cautious and careful man we must believe that he weighed all his words in that Point which was then the Matter in Question and to clear which we have good Ground to believe both from the Testimony of Ancient Writers and from the Method that he pursues quite through it all that he Writ his Gospel And that therefore every part of it but this Beginning of it more signally was Writ and is to be understood in the Sense which the Words naturally Import That the Word which took Flesh and assumed the Human Nature had a Being before the worlds were made and that this Word was God and made the World Another eminent Proof of this is in St. Paul's Epistle to the Philippians in which when he is exhorting Christians to Humility Phil. 2.6.7 8 9 10 11. he gives
seldom awakened But what is the proper proportion of Time that can best agree both with mens Bodies and Minds is only known to the great Author of Nature Howsoever from what has been said it appears that this is a very fit matter to be fixed by some sacred and perpetual Law and that from the first Creation because there being then no other method for conveying down Knowledge besides Oral Tradition it seems as highly congruous to that State of Mankind as it is agreeable to the words in Genesis to believe That God should then have appointed one day in seven for commemorating the Creation and for acknowledging the great Creator of all things But though it seems very clear that here a perpetual Law was given the World for the separating the Seventh day yet it was a meer Circumstance and does not at all belong to the standing use of the Law in what end of the Week this day was to be reckoned Whether the first or the last So that even a less Authority than the Apostles and a less occasion than the Resurrection of Christ might have served to have transferred the day There being in this no Breach made on the good and moral design of this Law which is all in it that we ought to reckon sacred and unalterable The degree of the Rest might be also more severely urged under the Mosaical Law than either before it or after it Our Saviour having given plain Intimations of an Abatement of that rigour by this general Rule That the Sabbath was made for man Mark 2.27 and not man for the Sabbath We who are called to a state of freedom are not under such a strictness as the Iews were Still the Law stands for separating a Seventh day from the common Business of Life and applying it to a Religious rest for acknowledging at first the Creator and now by a higher Relation the Redeemer of the World These Four Commandments make the first Table and were generally reckoned as four distinct Commandments till the Roman Church having a mind to make the Second disappear threw it in as an Appendix to the First and then left it quite out in her Catechisms Though it is plain that these Commandments relate to two very different Matters the one being in no sort included in the other Certainly they are much more different than the coveting the Neighbour's Wife is from the coveting any of his other concerns Which are plainly two different Acts of the same Species And the House being set before the Wife in Exodus though it comes after it in Deuteronomy Exod. 20.17 Deut. 5.21 which being a repetition is to be governed by Exodus and not Exodus by it stands for the whole Substance which is afterwards branched out in the particulars and so it is clear that there is no colour for dividing this in two But the first two Commandments relating to things of such a different sort as is the worshipping of more Gods than one and the worshipping the true God in an Image ought still to be reckoned as different And though the reason given from the Jealousy and Justice of God may relate equally to both yet that does not make them otherwise one than as both might be reduced to one common Head of Idolatry so that both were to be equally punished In the Second Table this Order is to be observed There are Four Branches of a man's Property to which every thing that he can call his own may be reduced His Person his Wife and Children his Goods and his Reputation So there is a Negative precept given to secure him in every one of these against Killing committing Adultery Stealing and bearing false Witness To which as the chief acts of their kind are to be reduced all those acts that may belong to those Heads Such as Injuries to a man in his person though not carried on nor designed to kill him every Temptation to uncleanness and all those excesses that lead to it every act of Injustice and every Lye or Defamation To these Four are added two Fences the one Exterior the other Interior The Exterior is the settling the Obedience and Order that ought to be observed in Families according to the Law of Nature And by a parity of Reason if Families are under a Constitution where the Government is made as a common Parent the establishing the Obedience to the Civil Powers or to such Orders of Men who may be made as Parents with Relation to Matters of Religion This is the Foundation of Peace and Justice of the security and happiness of Mankind And therefore it was very proper to begin the Second Table and those Laws that relate to human Society with this without which the World would be like a Forest and Mankind like so many Savages running wildly through it The last Commandment is an inward Fence to the Law It checks Desires and restrains the Thoughts If free Scope should be given to these as they would very often carry men to unlawful Actions for a man is very apt to do that which he desires so they must give great disturbance to those that are haunted or overcome by them And therefore as a mean both to secure the quiet of mens minds and to preserve the World from the ill effects which such desires might naturally have this special Law is given Thou shalt not covet It will not be easy to prove it Moral in the strictest sense yet in a Secondary Order it may be well called Moral The Matter of it being such both with relation to our selves and others that it is a very proper Subject for a perpetual Law to be made about it And yet as St. Paul says Rom. 7.7 he had not known it to be a Sin if it had not been for the Law that forbids it for after all that can be said it will not be easy to prove it to be of its own nature Moral Thus by the help of that distinction of what is Moral in a primary and in a secondary Order the Morality of the Ten Commandments is demonstrated That this Law obliges Christians as well as Iews is evident from the whole Scope of the New Testament Instead of derogating from the Obligation of any part of that Law our Saviour after he had affirmed That he came not to dissolve the Law but to fulfil it and that Heaven and Earth might pass away Matth. 5.17 18. but that one tittle of the Law should not pass away he went through a great many of those Laws and shewed how far he extended the Commentary he put upon them and the Obligations that he laid upon his Disciples beyond what was done by the Iewish Rabbies All the rest of his Gospel and the Writings of his Apostles agree with this in which there is not a Tittle that looks like a slackning of it but a great deal to the contrary A strictness that reaches to idle Words to passionate Thoughts and to
the Philistines put the People under a Curse if they should eat any Food till Night and this was thought to be so obligatory that the Violation of it was Capital and Ionathan was put in hazard of his Life upon it Thus the High-Priest put our Saviour under the Oath of Cursing Matth. 26.63 64. when he required him to tell Whether he was the Messias or not Upon which our Saviour was according to that Law upon his Oath and though he had continued silent till then as long as it was free to him to speak or not at his pleasure yet then he was bound to speak and so he did speak and owned himself to be what he truly was This was the Form of that Constitution but if by practice it were found that mens pronouncing the words of the Oath themselves when required by a Person in Authority to do it and that such Actions as their lifting up their Hand to Heaven or their laying it on a Bible as importing their Sense of the Terrors contained in that Book were like to make a deeper Impression on them than barely the Judges charging them with the Oath or Curse it seems to be within the compass of Human Authority to change the Rites and Manner of this Oath and to put it in such a Method as might probably work most on the minds of those who were to take it The Institution in general is plain and the making of such Alterations seems to be clearly in the Power of any State or Society of men In the New Testament we find St. Paul prosecuting a Discourse concerning the Oath which God sware to Abraham Heb. 6.13 14 15. who not having a greater to swear by swore by himself and to enforce the Importance of that it is added An oath for confirmation that is Ver. 16. for the affirming or assuring of any thing is the end of all controversy Which plainly shews us what Notion the Author of that Epistle had of an Oath He did not consider it as an Impiety or Prophanation of the Name of God Rev. 10.6 In St. Iohn's Visions an Angel is represented as lifting up his hand and swearing by him that liveth for ever and ever And the Apostles even in their Epistles Rom. 1.9 Gal. 1.20 that are acknowledged to be writ by Divine Inspiration do frequently appeal to God in these words God is witness which contain the whole Essence of an Oath Once St. Paul carries the Expression to a Form of Imprecation 2 Cor. 1.23 when he calls God to a record upon or against his soul. These seem to be Authorities beyond exception justifying the use of an Oath upon a great occasion or before a competent Authority according to that Prophecy quoted in the Article which is thought to relate to the Times of the Messias And thou shalt swear The Lord liveth in truth in judgment and in righteousness and the nations shall bless themselves in him Jer. 4.2 and in him shall they glory These last words seem evidently to relate to the days of the Messiah So here an Oath religiously taken is represented as a part of that Worship which all Nations shall offer up to God under the New Dispensation Against all this the great Objection is That when Christ is correcting the Glosses that the Pharisees put upon the Law whereas they only taught that men should not forswear themselves but perform their oaths unto the Lord our Saviour says Swear not at all neither by the Heaven nor the earth Matth. 5.34 35 36 37. James 5.12 nor by Ierusalem nor by the head but let your communication be yea yea and nay nay for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil And St. Iames speaking of the enduring Afflictions and of the Patience of Iob adds But above all things my brethren swear not neither by the heaven neither by the earth neither by any other oath but let your yea be yea and your nay nay lest ye fall into condemnation It must be confessed that these words seem to be so express and positive that great regard is to be had to a Scruple that is founded on an Authority that seems to be so full But according to what was formerly observed of the manner of the Judiciary Oaths among the Iews these words cannot belong to them Those Oaths were bound upon the Party by the Authority of the Judg in which he was passive and so could not help his being put under an Oath Whereas our Saviour's words relate only to those Oaths which a man took voluntarily on himself but not to those under which he was bound according to the Law of God If our Saviour had intended to have forbidden all Judiciary Oaths he must have annulled that part of the Authority of Magistrates and Parents and have forbid them to put others under Oaths The word Communication that comes afterwards seems to be a Key to our Saviour's words to shew that they ought only to be applied to their Communication or Commerce to those Discourses that pass among men in which it is but too customary to give Oaths a very large share Or since the words that went before concerning the performing of Vows seem to limit the Discourse to them the meaning of Swear not at all may be this Be not ready as the Iews were to make Vows on all occasions to devote themselves or others Instead of those he requires them to use a greater Simplicity in their Communication And St. Iames's words may be also very fitly applied to this since men in their Afflictions are apt to make very indiscreet Vows without considering whether they either can or probably will pay them as if they would pretend by such profuse Vows to overcome or corrupt God This Sense will well agree both to our Saviour's words and to St. Iames's and it seems most reasonable to believe that this is their true Sense for it agrees with every thing else whereas if we understand theâ— in that strict Sense of condemning all Oaths we cannot tell what to make of those Oaths which occur in several Passages of St. Paul's Epistles and least of all what to say to our Saviour's own answering upon Oath when adjured Therefore all rash and vain swearing all swearing in the Communication or Intercourse of Mankind is certainly condemned as well as all Imprecatory Vows But since we have so great Authorities from the Scriptures in both Testaments for other Oaths and since that agrees so evidently with the Principles of Natural Religion we may conclude with the Article That a man may swear when the Magistrate requireth it It is added in a Cause of Faith and Charity for certainly in trifling matters such Reverence is due to the Holy Name of God that swearing ought to be avoided But when it is necessary it ought to be set about with those regards that are due to the Great God who is appealed to A Gravity of Deportment and an Exactness of weighing the truth of what we say are highly necessary here Certainly our Words ought to be few and our Hearts full of the Apprehensions of the Majesty of that God with whom we have to do before whom we stand and to whom we appeal who knows all things and will bring every work to judgment with every secret thing whether it be good or whether it be evil FINIS
of the Scriptures depends The Second Proposition in the Article is That there is but one God As to this the common Argument by which it is proved is the order of the World from whence it is inferred That there cannot be more Gods than one since where there are more than one there must happen diversity and confusion This is by some thought to be no good reason for if there are more Gods that is more Beings infinitely perfect they will always think the same thing and be knit together with an intire love It is true in things of a Moral Nature this must so happen For Beings infinitely perfect must ever agree But in Physical things capable of no Morality as in creating the World sooner or later and the different Systems of Beings with a thousand other things that have no Moral Goodness in them different Beings infinitely perfect might have different Thoughts So this Argument seems still of great force to prove the Unity of the Deity The other Argument from Reason to prove the Unity of God is from the Notion of a Being infinitely perfect For a Superiority over all other Beings comes so naturally into the Idea of infinite Perfection that we cannot separate it from it A Being therefore that has not all other Beings inferior and subordinate to it cannot be infinitely perfect whence it is evident That there is but one God But besides all this the Unity of God seems to be so frequently and so plainly asserted in the Scripture that we see it was the chief Design of the whole Old Testament both of Moses and the Prophets to establish it in opposition to the false opinions of the Heathen concerning a diversity of Gods This is often repeated in the most solemn Words as Hear O Israel 6. Deut 4. the Lord our God is one God It is the First of the Ten Commandments Thou shalt have no other Gods but me And all things in Heaven and Earth are often said to be made by this one God Negative words are also often used 44. Isa. 6 8. There is none other God but one besides me there is none else and I know no other the going after other Gods is reckon'd the highest and the most unpardonable act of Idolatry The New Testament goes on in the same strain Christ speaks of the only true God and that he alone ought to be worshipped and served 17. Joh 3 4. Mat. 10. 1 Cor. 8.5 6. all the Apostles do frequently affirm the same thing They make the believing of one God in opposition to the many Gods of the Heathens the chief Article of the Christian Religion and they lay down this as the chief ground of our Obligation to mutual Love and Union among our selves 4. Eph. 4.5 6. That there is one God one Lord one Faith one Baptism Now since we are sure that there is but one Messias and one Doctrine delivered by him it will clearly follow that there must be but one God So the Unity of the Divine Essence is clearly proved both from the Order and Government of the World from the Idea of Infinite Perfection and from those express Declarations that are made concerning it in the Scriptures which last is a full proof to all such as own and submit to them The Third Head in this Article is that which is negatively expressed That God is without Body Parts or Passions In general all these are so plainly contrary to the Ideas of Infinite Perfection and they appear so evidently to be Imperfections that this part of the Article will need little Explanation We do plainly perceive that our Bodies are clogs to our Minds And all the use that even the purest sort of Body in an Estate conceived to be glorified can be of to a Mind is to be an Instrument of local Motion or to be a repository of Ideas for Memory and Imagination But God who is every where and is one pure and simple Act can have no such use for a Body A Mind dwelling in a Body is in many respects superior to it yet in some respects is under it We who feel how an Act of our Mind can so direct the Motions of our Body that a thought sets our Limbs and Joints a-going can from thence conceive how that the whole extent of Matter should receive such Motions as the Acts of the Supreme Mind give it But yet not as a Body united to it or that the Deity either needs such a Body or can receive any trouble from it Thus far the apprehension of the thing is very plainly made out to us Our thoughts put some parts of our Body in a present Motion when the Organization is regular and all the parts are exact and when there is no Obstruction in those Vessels or Passages through which that heat and those Spirits do pass that cause the motion We do in this perceive that a thought does command matter but our Minds are limited to our Bodies and these do not obey them but as they are in an exact disposition and a fitness to be so moved Now these are plain Imperfections but removing them from God we can from hence apprehend that all the Matter in the Universe may be so intirely subject to the Divine Mind that it shall move and be whatsoever and wheresoever he will have it to be This is that which all men do agree in But many of the Philosophers thought that Matter though it was moved and moulded by God at his pleasure yet was not made by him but was self-existent and was a Passive Principle but coexistent to the Deity which they thought was the Active Principle From whence some have thought that the belief of two Gods one good and another bad did spring Though others imagine that the belief of a bad God did arise from the corruption of that Tradition concerning fallen Angels as was before suggested The Philosophers could not apprehend that things could be made out of nothing and therefore they believed that Matter was co-eternal with God But it is as hard to apprehend how a Mind by its Thought should give Motion to Matter as how it should give it Being A Being not made by God is not so easily conceivable to be under the acts of his Mind as that which is made by him This conceit plainly destroys infinite Perfection which cannot be in God if all Beings are not from him and under his Authority besides that successive duration has been already proved inconsistent with Eternity This Opinion of the World 's being a Body to God as the Mind that dwells in it and actuates it is the foundation of Atheism For if it be once thought that God can do nothing without such a Body then as this destroys the Idea of Infinite Perfection so it makes way to this conceit That since Matter is Visible and God Invisible there is no other God but the vast extent of the Universe It is true God has
an Argument for it from our Saviour's Example He begins with the dignity of his Person expressed thus That he was in the form of God and that he thought it no robbery to be equal with God Then his Humiliation comes That he made himself of no reputation but took on him the form of a servant the same Word with that used in the former Verse after which follows his Exaltation and a Name or Authority above every Name or Authority is said to be given him so that all in Heaven Earth and under the Earth which seems to Import Angels Men and Devils should bow at his Name and confess that he is the Lord. Now in this Progress that is made in these words it is plain That the Dignity of Christ's Person is represented as Antecedent both to his Humiliation and to his Exaltation It was that which put the value on his Humiliation as his Humiliation was rewarded by his Exaltation This Dignity is expressed first That he was in the Form of God before he humbled himself He was certainly in the form of a Servant that is really a Servant as other Servants are He was obedient to his Parents he was under the Authority both of the Romans of Herod and of the Sanhedrim Therefore since his being really a Servant is expressed by his being in the form of a Servant his being in the form of God must also import That he was truly God But the â—ollowing words That he thought it not robbery to be equal or be held equal for so the word may be rendred with God carry such a natural Signification of his being neither a Made nor Subordinate God and that his Divinity is neither precarious nor by concession that fuller words cannot be devised for expressing an entire Equality Those who deny this are aware of it and therefore they have put another sense on the words in the form of God They think That they signify his appearing in the World as one sent in the Name of God representing him Working Miracles and delivering a Law in his Name and the words rendred he thought it no robbery they render he did not catch at or vehemently desire to be held in equal honour with God And some Authorities are found in Eloquent Greek Authors who use the words rendred he thought it not robbery in a figurative sense for the earnestness of desire or the pursuing after a thing greedily as Robbers do for their Prey This rendring represents St. Paul as Treating so sacred a Point in the Figures of a high and seldom-used Rhetorick which one would think ought to have been expressed more exactly But if even this sense is allowed it will make a strange Period and a very odd sort of an Argument to enforce Humility upon us because Christ though Working Miracles did not desire or snatch at Divine Adorations in an Equality with God The Sin of Lucifer and the cause of his Fall is commonly believed to be his desire to be equal to God and yet this seems to be such an extravagant piece of pride that it is scarce possible to think That even the Sublimest of Created Beings should be capable of it To be next to God seems to be the utmost heigth to which even the Diabolical Pride could aspire So that here by the Sense which the Socinians put on those words they will import That we are persuaded to be humble from the Example of Christ who did not affect an Equality with God The bare repeating of this seems so fully to expose and overthrow it that I think it is not necessary to say more upon this place Acts 20.28 1 Joh. 3.16 1 Joh. 5.20 Tit. 2.13 Jam. 2.1 The next head of Proof is made up of more particulars All the Names the Operations and even the Attributes of God are in full and plain words given to Christ. He is called God his Blood is said to be the Blood of God God is said to have laid down his life for us Christ is called the true God the great God the Lord of Glory the King of Kings and the Lord of Lords and more particularly the Name Iehovah is ascribed to him in the same word in which the LXX Interpreters had Translated it throughout the whole Old Testament Rev. 1.8 Rev. 19.16 So that this constant Uniformity of Stile between the Greek of the New and that Translation of the Old Testament which was then received and was of great Authority among the Iews and was yet of more Authority among the first Christians is an Argument that carries such a weight with it that this alone may serve to determine the Matter The Creating the Preserving and the Governing of all things is also ascribed to Christ in a variety of placâ—s but most remarkably when it is said That by him were all things created that are in heaven and that are in earth Visible and Invisible Whether they be Thrones Col. 1.16.17 â—ohn 2.25 Mat. â—1 27. Mat. 9.6 Joh. 15.26 Joh. 14.13 Joh. 5 25 26. Joh. 6.39 40. or Dominions or Principalities or Powers all things were created by him and for him And he is before all things and by him all things consist He is said to have known what was in man to have known mens secret thoughts and to have known all things That as the Father was known of none but of the Son so none know the Son but the Father He pardons Sin sends the Spirit gives Grace and Eternal Life and he shall raise the dead at the last day When all these things are laid together in that variety of Expressions in which they lie scattered in the New Testament it is not possible to retain any reverence for those Books if we imagine that they are writ in a Stile so full of approaches to the Deifying of a mere Man that without a very Critical studying of Languages and Phrases it is not possible to understand them otherwise Idolatry and a Plurality of Gods seem to be the main things that the Scriptures warn us against and yet here is a pursued Thread of Passages and Discourses that do naturally lead a man to think that Christ is the True God who yet according to these men only acted in his Name and has now a high Honour put on him by him This carries me to another Argument to prove that the Word that was made Flesh was truly God Nothing but the True God can be the proper Object of Adoration This is one of those Truths that seems almost so evident that it needs not to be proved Adoration is the humble Prostration of our selves before God in Acts that own our dependance upon him both for our Being and for all the Blessings that we do either enjoy or hope for and also in earnest Prayers to him for the continuance of these to us This is testified by such outward Gestures and Actions as are most proper to express our Humility and Submission to God All this has
that very credible For this we have only the Testimony of the Apostles who did all attest that they saw it being all together in an open Field When Christ was Walking and Discoursing with them and when he was Blessing them he was parted from them They saw him Ascend till a Cloud received him and took him out of their sight And then Two Angels appeared to them and assured them Acts 1. â—1 That he should come again in like manner as they had seen him Ascend Here is a very particular Relation with many Circumstances in it in which it was not possible for the Apostles to be mistaken So that there being no reason to suspect their Credit this rests upon that Authority But Ten days after it received a much clearer Proof When the Holy Ghost was poured out on them in so visible a manner and with most remarkable effects Immediately upon it they spoke with divers Tongues and wrought many Miracles and all in the Name of Christ. They did often and solemnly disclaim their doing any of those wonderful things by any power of their own They owned that all that they had or did was derived to them from Iesus of Nazareth Acts 3.12 16. of whose Resurrection and Ascension they were appointed to be the Witnesses Christ's coming again to judge the World at the last day is so often affirmed by himself in the Gospel and is so frequently mentioned in the Writings of his Apostles that this is a main part of his Doctrine So that his Resurrection Ascension together with the Effusion of the Holy Ghost having in general proved his Mission and his whole Doctrine this is also proved by them Enough seems to be said in Proof of all the parts of this Article it remains only that somewhat should be added in Explanation of them As to the Resurrection it is to little purpose to Enquire whether our Saviour's Body was kept all the while in a compleat Organisation that so by this Miracle it might be preserved in a Natural State for his Soul to re-enter it Or whether by the Course of Nature the vast Number of the inward Conveyances that are in the Body were stopt and if all of a sudden when the time of the Resurrection came all was again put in a vital State fit to be animated by his Soul There must have been a Miracle either way So it is to little purpose to enquire into it The former though a continued Miracle yet seemes to agree more fully to these words Thou wilt not suffer thy Holy One to see corruption It is to as little purpose to enquire how our Saviour's new Body was supplied with Blood Since he had lost the greatest part of it on the Cross. Whether that was again by the power of God brought back into his Veins or whether as he himself had formerly said That Man lives not by bread alone but by every word that proceeds out of the mouth of God Blood was supplied by Miracle Or whether his Body that was then of the Nature of a Glorified Body though yet on Earth needed the supplies of Blood to furnish new Spirits for serving the natural Functions He Eating and Drinking so seldom that we may well believe it was done rather to satisfy his Apostles than to answer the Necessities of Nature These are Curiosities that signify so little if we could certainly resolve them that it is to no purpose to enquire about them since we cannot know what to determine in them This in general is certain that the same Soul returned back to the same Body so that the same Man who died rose again and that is our Faith We need not trouble our selves with enquiring how to make out the Three Days of Christ's being in the Grave Days stand in the common acceptation for a Portion of a Day We know the Iews were very exact to the Rest on the Sabbath so the Body was without question laid in the Grave before the Sun-set on Friday so that was the First day the Sabbath was a compleat one and a good part of the Third day that is the Night with which the Iews began to count the day was over before he was raised up As for his stay on Earth forty days we cannot pretend to give an account of it whether his Body was passing through a slow and Physical Purification to be meet for Ascending or whether he intended to keep a proportion between his Gospel and the Law of Moses that as he suffered at the time of their killing the Passover so the Effusion of the Holy Ghost was fixed for Pentecost and that therefore he â—ould stay on Earth till that time was near not to put his Apostles upon too long an expectation without his Presence which might be necessary to animate them till they should be endued with Power from on high As to the manner of his Ascension it is also questioned whether the Body of Christ as it ascâ—nded was so wonderfully changed as to put on the Subtility and Purity of an Ethereal Body or whether it 〈…〉 same Form in Heaven that it had on Earth or iâ— it puâ— on a new one It is more probable that it did and that the wonderful Glory that appeared in his Countenance and whole Person at his Trâ—â—sâ—â—gurâ—tion was a manifestation of that more permanent Glory to which it was to be afterwards exalted It seems probable from what St. Paul says 1 Coâ— 15.50 That flesh and blood shall not inherit the kingdom of God which relates to our glorified Bodies when we shall bear the Image of the second and the heavenly Adam that Christ's Body has no more the modifications of Flesh and Blood in it and that the Glory of the Celestial Body is of another Nature and Texture than that of the Terrestrial It is easily imagined how this may be and yet the Body to be numerically the same Ver. 40. For all Matter being uniform and capable of all sort of Motion and by consequence of being either much grosser or much purer the same Portion of Matter that made a thick and Heavy Body here on Earth may be put into that Purity and Fineness as to be no longer a fit Inhabitant of this Earth or to breath this Air but to be meet to be transplanted into Ethereal Regions Christ as he went up into Heaven so he had the whole Government of this World put into his hands and the whole Ministry of Angels put under his Command even in his Human Nature So that all things are now in subjection to him All Power and Authority is derived from him 1 Cor. 15.27 28. and he does whatsoever he pleases both in Heaven and Earth In him all fulness dwells And as the Mosaical Tabernacle being filled with Glory the Emanations of it did by the Urim and Thummim enlighten and direct that People so out of that Fulness that dwelt Bodily in Christ there is a constant Emanation of his
reed or quench the smoking flax ver 8. he was to bring forth judgment to the Gentiles and the Isles were to wait for his Law There is a whole Chapter in the same Prophet Isa. 53. setting forth the Mean Appearance that the Messias was to make the Contempt he was to fall under and the Sufferings he was to bear and that for the Sins of others which were to be laid on him so that his Soul or Life was to be made an Offering for Sin in reward of which he was to be highly exalted In another place his Mission is set forth not in the Strains of War or of Conquest but of Preaching to the Poor Isa. 61. setting the Prisoners free as in a Year of Jubilee and comforting the afflicted and such as mourned In the two last Chapters of that Prophet mention is made more particularly of the Gentiles that were to be called by him and the Isles that were afar off out of whom God was to take some for Priests and Levites Which shewed plainly that a new Dispensation was to be opened by him in which the Gentiles were to be Priests and Levites which could not be done while the Mosaical Law stood that had tied these Functions to the Tribe of Levi and to the House of Aaron Ieremy renewed the Promise to the House of David of a King that should reign and prosper Jer. 23.5 in whose days Iudah and Israel were to dwell safely whose name was to be The Lord our Righteousness It is certain this Promise was never literally accomplished and therefore recourse must be had to a Mystical Sense The same Prophet gives a large Account of a new Covenant that God was to make with the house of Israel Jer. 31.31 not according to the Covenant that he made with their fathers when he brought them out of Egypt We have also Two Characters given of that Covenant one is That God would put his Law in their inward parts and write it in their hearts that he would be their God and that they should all be taught of him The other is That he would forgive their iniquities and remember their sin no more One of these is in opposition to their Law that consisted chiefly in Rituals and had no Promises of Inward Assistances and the other is in opposition to the limited Pardon that was offered in that Dispensation on the condition of the many Sacrifices that they were required to offer There is a Prediction to the same purpose in Ezekiel Ioel prophesied of an extraordinary Effusion of the Spirit of God on great Numbers of Persons Old and Young Ezek. 36.25 Joel 2.28 that was to happen before the great and terrible Day of the Lord that is before the Final Destruction of Ierusalem Micah after he had foretold several things of the Dispâ—nsation of the Messiah Miâ—â—h 5.2 says that he was to come out of Bethlehem Ephratah â—ag 2.6 â— 8 9. Haggai encouraged those who were troubled at the meanness of the Temple which they had raised after their return out of the Captivity It had neither the outward Glory in its Fabrick that Solomon's Temple had nor the more real Glory of the Ark with the Tables of the Law of Fire from Heaven on the Altar of a Succession of Prophets of the Urim and Thummin and the Cloud between the Cherubims which last strictly speaking was the Glory all which had been in Solomon's Temple but were wanting in that In opposition to this the Prophet in the Name of God promised That he would in a little while shake the heavens and the earth and shake all Nations words that import some surprizing and great Change upon which the desire of all nations should come and God would fill the house with his Glory and the Glory of this latter house should exceed the Glory of the former for in that place God would give Peace Here is a plain Prophecy That this Templs was to have a Glory not only equal but superior to the Glory of Solomon's Temple These Words are too August to be believed to have been accomplished when Herod rebuilt the Temple with much Magnificence for that was nothing in comparison of the real Glory of the Symbols of the Presence of God that were wanting in it This cannot answer the Words That the desire of all Nations was to come and that God would give Peace in that Place So that either this Prophecy was never fulfilled or somewhat must be assigned during the Second Temple that will answer those solemn Expressions which are plainly applicable to our Saviour who was the Expectation of the Gentiles by whom Peace was made and in whom the Eternal Word dwelt in a manner infinitely more August than in the Cloud of Glory Zechary prophesied That their King by which they understood the Messias Zech. 9.9 was to be meek and lowly and that he was to make his Entrance in a very mean Appearance riding on an Ass but yet under that he was to bring Salvation to them and they were to rejoyce greatly in him Malachi told them That the Lord whom they sought Mal. 3.1 even the Messenger of the Covenant in whom they delighted should suâ—denly come into his Temple and that the Day of his coming was to be dreadful that he was to refine and purify in particular the Sons of Levi and a terrible Destruction is denounced after that One Character of his coming Mâ—l 4.1 was That Elijah the Prophet was to come before that great and dreadful Day who should convert many Old and Young Now it is certain that no other Person came during the Second Temple to whom these Words can be applied so that they were not accomplished unless it was in the Person of our Saviour to whom all these Characters do well agree But to conclude with that Prophecy which of all others is the most particular When Daniel at the End of the Seventy Years Captivity was interceeding for that Nation Dan. 9.24 25 26 27. an Angel was sent to him to tell him That they were to have a new Period of Seventy Weeks that is Seven times Seventy Years 490 Years and that after Sixty two Weeks Messiah the Prince was to come and to be cut off and that then the People of a Prince should destroy the City and the Sanctuary and the end of these was to be as with a Flood or Inundation and Desolations were determined to the end of the War They were to be destroyed by Abominable Armies that is by Idolatrous Armies They were to be made desolate till an utter End or Consummation should be made of them The Pomp with which this Destruction is set forth plainly shews that the Final Ruin of the Iews by the Roman Armies is meant by it From which it is justly inferred not only that if that Vision was really sent from God by an Angel to Daniel and in consequence to that was fulfilled then the
God had been their God Ver. 31.32 but still was their God Now when God is said to be a God to any by that is meant that he is their Benefactor or exceeding rich reward as was promised to Abraham Exod. 3.6 And that therefore Abraham Isaac and Iacob lived unto God that is were not dead But were then in a happy state of life in which God did reward them and so was their God Whether this Argument rests here our Saviour designing only to prove against the main error of the Sadducees that we have Souls distinct from our Bodies that shall outlive their separation from them or if it goes further to prove the rising of the Body it self I shall not determine On the one hand our Saviour seems to apply himself particularly to prove the Resurrection of the Body so we must see how to find here an Argument for that to Answer the Scope of the whole Discourse Yet on the other hand it may be said that he having proved the main Point of the Soul 's subsisting after death which is the Foundation of all Religion the other Point which was chiefly denied because that was thought false would be more easily both acknowledged and believed As for the Resurrection of the Body all that can be brought from hence as an Argument to prove it is That since God was the God of Abraham Isaac and Iacob and by consequence their Benefactor and Rewarder and yet they were Pilgrims on this Earth and suffered many Tossings and Troubles that therefore they must be rewarded in another State or because God promised that to them he would give the Land of Canaan as well as to their Seed after them and since they never had any Portion of it in their own possession that therefore they shall rise again and with the other Saints reign on Earth and have that Promise fulfilled in themselves From all this the Assertion of the Article is as to one main Point made good That the Old Fathers look'd for more than Transitory Promises It is also clear That they looked for a further Pardon of Sin than that which their Law held forth to them in the Expiation made by Sacrifices Sins of Ignorance or Sins of a lower sort were those only for which Sin or Trespass-offerings were appointed The Sins of a higher Order were punished by Death by the Hand of Heaven or by cutting off so that such as sinned in that kind were to dye without Mercy Heb. 10.28 Yet when David had fallen into the most heinous of those Sins he prays to God for a Pardon according to God's Loving-kindness Psal. 51.1 2 16 1â— and the Multitude of his tender Mercies For he knew that they were beyond the Expiation by Sacrifice The Prophets do often call the Iews to repent of their Idolatry and other crying Sins such as Oppression Injustice and Murder with the Promise of the Pardon of them even though they were of the deepest Dye as Crimson and Scarlet Since then Isa. 1.18 for lesser Sins an Expiation was appointed by Sacrifice besides their confessing and repenting of it and since it seems by St. Paul's way of arguing that they held it for a Maxim That without shedding of blood there was no remission of sins this might naturally lead them to think that there was some other consideration that was interposed in order to the pardoning of those more heinous Sins For a greater degree of Guilt seems by a natural Proportion to demand a higher degree of Sacrifice and Expiation But after all whatsoever Isaiah Daniel or any other Prophet might have understood or meant by those Sacrificatory Phrases that they use in speaking of the Messiah Isa. 53. Dan. 9. yet it cannot be said from the Old Testament That in that Dispensation it was clearly revealed that the Messias was to die and to become a Sacrifice for Sin The Messias was indeed promised under general terms but there was not then a full and explicite Revelation of his being to dye for the Redemption of Mankind Yet since the most heinous Sins were then pardoned though not by virtue of the Sacrifices of that Covenant nor by the other means prescribed in it we have good reason to affirm that according to this Article Life was offered to Mankind in the Old Dispensation by Christ who was with relation to the obtaining the Favour of God and Everlasting Life the Mediator of that as well as of the New Dispensation In the New Testament he is set in opposition to the Old Adam that as in the one all died so in the other all were made alive Nor is it any way incongruous to say That the Merit of his Death should by an Anticipation have saved those who died before he was born For that being in the view of God as certain before as after it was done it might be in the Divine Intention the Sacrifice for the Old as well as it is expresly declared to be the Sacrifice for the New Dispensation And this being so God might have pardoned Sins in consideration of it even to those who had no distinct Apprehensions concerning it For as God applies the Death of Christ by the secret Methods of Grace to many Persons whose Circumstances do render them incapable of the express Acts of laying hold on it the want of those for instance in Infants and Ideots being supplied by the goodness of God So though the Revelation that was made of the Messias to the Fathers under the Old Dispensation was only in general and Prophetical Terms of which they could not have a clear and distinct knowledge yet his Death might be applied to them and their Sins pardoned through him upon their performing such Acts as were proportioned to that Dispensation and to the Revelation that was then made And so they were reconciled to God even after Sins for which no Sacrifices were appointed by their Dispensation upon their Repentance and Obedience to the Foederal Acts and Conditions then required which supplied the want of more express Acts with relation to the Death of Christ not then distinctly revealed to them But though the Old Fathers had a Conveyance of the Hope of Eternal Life made to them with a Resurrection of their Bodies and a Confidence in the Mercy of God for pardoning the most heinous Sins yet it cannot be denied but that it was as a light that shined in a dark place till the day-star did arise 2 Pet. 1.19 and that Christ brought life and immortality to light by his Gospel giving us fuller and clearer discoveries of it both with relation to our Souls and Bodies and that by him also God has declared his righteousness for the remission of sins Rom. 3.24 25. through the forbearance of God through the redemption that is in Christ Iesus and through Faith in his blood The Third Branch of this Article will not need much Explanation as it will bear no dispute except with Iews
or Descendents that is Parents and Children that by an Eternal Reason can never marry for where there is a Natural Subordination there can never be such an Equality as that state of Life requires But Collateral Degrees even the nearest Brothers and Sisters are not by any Natural Law barred Marriage and therefore in a case of necessity they might marry Yet since their intermarrying must be attended with vast Inconveniences and would tend to the Defilement of Families and hinder the Conjunction of Mankind by the Intermixture of different Families it becomes therefore a fit Subject for a perpetual Law to strike a horror at the thought of such Commixtures and so to keep the World pure which considering the Freedoms in which those of the same Family do live could not be preserved without such a Law It is also the Interest of Mankind and necessary for the careful Education of the rising Generation that Marriages should be for Life for if it were free for married Persons to separate at pleasure the Issue of Marriages so broken would be certainly much neglected And since a Power to break a Marriage would naturally inflame such little quarrelings as may happen among all Persons that live together which will on the contrary be certainly repressed when they know that the Marriage cannot be dissolved and when by such a Dissolution of Marriages the one half of the Human Species I mean Womankind is exposed to great Miseries and subject to much Tyranny it is a fit Subject for a perpetual Law so that it is Moral in a Secondary Order It were easy to give Instances of this in many more Particulars and to shew That a Precept may be said to be Moral when there is a Natural Suitableness in it to advance that which is Moral in the first Order and that it cannot be well preserved without such a Support It will appear what occasion there is for this distinction when we consider the Ten Commandments which are so many Heads of Morality that are instanced in the highest act of a kind and to which are to be reduced all such acts as by the just Proportions of Morality belong to that Order and Series of Actions The Foundation of Morality is Religion The Sense of God That he is and that he is both a Rewarder and a Punisher is the Foundation of Religion Now this must be supposed as Antecedent to his Laws for we regard and obey them from the persuasion that is formed in us concerning the Being and the Justice of God The two first Commandments are against the two different sorts of Idolatry which are the worshipping of False Gods or the worshipping the True God in a Corporeal Figure The one is the giving the Honour of the True God to an Idol and the other is the depreâ—â—ing the True God to the resemblance of an Idol These were the two great Branches of Idolatry by which the true Ideas of God were corrupted Religion was by them corrupted in its Source No body can question but that it is Immoral to worship a False God it is a transferring the Honour which belongs immediately and singly to the Great God to a Creature or to some Imaginary Thing which never had a real Existence This is the robbing God of what is due to him and the exalting another thing to a degree and rank that cannot belong to it Nor is it less immoral to propose the Great and True God to be worshipped under Appearances that are derogatory to his Nature that tend to give us low Thoughts of him and that make us think him like if not below our selves This way of worshipping him is both unsutable to his nature and unbecoming ours while we pay our Adorations to that which is the work of an Artificer This is confirmed by those many express Prohibitions in Scripture to which Reasons are added which shew that the thing is Immoral in its own nature It being often repeated that no Similitude of God was ever seen And to whom will ye liken me All things in Heaven and Earth are often called the work of his hands Which are plain Indications of a Moral Precept when Arguments are framed from the Nature of Things to enforce Obedience to it The Reason given in the very Command it self is taken from the Nature of God who is jealous that is so tender of his Glory that he will not suffer a diminution of it to go unpunished and if this Precept is clearly founded upon Natural Justice and the proportion that ought to be kept between all Human Acts and their Objects then it must be perpetual And that the rather because we do plainly see that the Gospel is a refining upon the Law of Moses and does exalt it to a higher pitch of Sublimity and Purity And by consequence the Ideas of God which are the first Seeds and Principles of Religion are to be kept yet more pure and undefiled in it than they were in a lower Dispensation The Third Precept is against false Swearing For the Word Vain is often used in the Scripture in that sense Ex. 23.1 Lev. 19.12 Mat. 5.33 And since in all the other Commandments the Sin which is named is not one of the lowest but of the chief Sins that relate to that Head there is no reason therefore to think That Vain or Idle Swearing which is a Sin of a lower Order should be here meant and not rather false Swearing which is the highest Sin of the kind The Morality of this Command is very apparent for since God is the God of Truth and every Oath is an Appeal to him therefore it must be a gross Wickedness to Appeal to God or to call him to vouch for our lies The Fourth Commandment cannot be called Moral in the first and highest sense for from The Nature of Things no reason can be assigned Why the Seventh day rather than the Sixth or the Eighth or any other day should be separated from the common business of Life and applied to the Service of God But it is Moral that a man should pay homage to his Maker and acknowledge him in all his works and ways And since our Senses and sensible Objects are apt to wear better things out of our Thoughts it is necessary that some solemn Times should be set apart for full and copious Meditations on these Subjects This should be universal lest if the Time were not the same every where the Business of some men might interfere with the Devotions of others It ought to have such an eminent Character on it like a cessation from Business Which may both awaken a curiosity to enquire into the reason of that stop and also may give opportunity for Meditations and Discourses on those Subjects It is also clear That such days of rest must not return so oft that the necessary Affairs of Life should be stopt by them nor so seldom that the Impressions of Religion should wear out if they were too
Scriptures in ascribing all good things to God and in charging us to offer up the Honour of all to him seems very expresly to favour this Doctrine Since if all our good is from God and is particularly owing to his Grace then Good Men have somewhat from God that Bad Men have not for which they ought to Praise him The Stile of all the Prayers that are used or directed to be used in the Scripture is for a Grace that opens our Eyes that turns our Hearts that makes us to go that leads us not into Temptation but delivers us from Evil. All these Phrases do plainly Import that we desire more than a Power or Capacity to Act such as is given to all Men and such as after we have received it may be still ineffectual to us For to pray for such Assistances as are always given to all Men and are such that the whole good of them shall wholly depend upon our selves would sound very odly whereas we pray for somewhat that is special and that we hope shall be effectual We do not and cannot pray earnestly for that which we know all Men as well as we our selves have at all times Humility and Earnestness in Prayer seem to be among the chief means of working in us the Image of Christ and of deriving to us all the Blessings of Heaven That Doctrine which blasts both which swells us up with an Opinion that all comes from our selves and that we receive nothing from God but what is given in common with us to all the World is certainly contrary both to the Spirit and to the Design of the Gospel To this they addO bservations from Providence The World was for many Ages delivered up to Idolatry and since the Christian Religion has appeared we see vast Tracts of Countries which have continued ever since in Idolatry Others are fallen under Mahometanism And the State of Christendom is in the Eastern Parts of it under so much Ignorance and the greatest Part of the West is under so much Corruption that we must confess the far greatest part of Mankind has been in 〈◊〉 Ages left destitute of the Means of Grace so that the Promulgating the Goâ—pel to some Nations and the denying it to others must be ascribed to the Unsearchable Ways of God that are past finding out If he thus leaves whole Nations in such Darkness and Corruption and freely chuses others to Communicate the knowledge of himself to them then we need not wonder if he should hold the same method with Individuals that he doth with whole Bodies For the Rejecting of whole Nations by the lump for so many Ages is much more unaccountable than the Selecting of a few and the leaving others in that State of Ignorance and Brutality And whatever may be said of his extending Mercy to some few of those who have made a good use of that dim Light which they had yet it cannot be denied but their Condition is more deplorable and the Condition of the others is much more hopeful so that great Numbers of Men are Born in such Circumstances that it is morally impossible that they should not perish in them whereas others are more happily Situated and Enlightned This Argument taken from common Observation becomes much stronger when we consider what the Apostle says Rom. 9 11. particularly in the Epistles to the Romans and the Ephesians even according to the Exposition of those of the other side For if God loved Iacob so as to chuse his Posterity to be his People and rejected or hated Esau and his Posterity and if that was according to the purpose and design of his Election if by the same purpose the Gentiles were to be grafted upon that Stock from which the Iews were then to be cut off and if the Counsel or Purpose of God had appeared in particular to those of Ephesus though the most corrupted both in Magick Idolatry and Immorality of any in the East then it is plain that the applying the means of Grace arises meerly from a great Design that was long hid in God which did then break out It is reasonable to believe That there is a proportion between the Application of the Means and the Decree it self concerning the End The one is resolved into the Unsearchable Riches of God's Grace and declared to be Free and Absolute God's chusing the Nation of the Iews in such a distinction beyond all other Nations is by Moses and the Prophets frequently said not to be on their account or on the account of any thing that God saw in them but meerly from the Goodness of God to them From all this it seems say they as reasonable to believe that the other is likewise free according to those words of our Saviour's I thank thee O Father Lord of Heaven and Earth because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent and hast revealed them unto babes The reason of which is given in the following words Matth. 1. 25.26 Ibid. 21 22 22. Even so Father for it seemed good in thy sight What goes before of Tyre and Sydon and the Land of Sodom that would have made a better use of his preaching than the Towns of Galilee had done among whom he lived confirms this That the means of Grace are not bestowed on those of whom it was foreseen that they would have made a good use of them or denied to those who as was foreseen would have made an ill use of them The contrary of this being plainly asserted in those words of our Saviour's It is further observable That he seems not to be speaking here of different Nations but of the different sorts of Men of the same Nation The more Learned of the Iews the Wise and Prudent rejected him while the simpler but better sort the babes received him So that the difference between Individual Persons seems here to be resolved into the good pleasure of God It is further urged that since those of the other side confess that God by his Prescience foresaw what Circumstances might be happy and what Assistances might prove efficacious to Bad Men then his not putting them in those Circumstances but giving them such Assistances only which how effectual soever might be to others he saw would have no efficacy on them and his putting them in Circumstances and giving them Assistances which he foresaw they would abuse if it may seem to clear the Justice of God yet it cannot clear his Infinite Holiness and Goodness which must evâ—r carry him according to our Notions of these Perfections to do all that may be done and that in the most effectual way to rescue others from misery to make them truly good and to put them in a way be happy Since therefore this is not always done according to the other Opinion it is plain that there is an unsearchable depth in the ways of God which we are not able to fathom Therefore it must be concluded That since
Mercy And since the Scripture proposes God to us most frequently under those Ideas they think that we ought to fix on these as the primary Ideas of God and then reduce all other things to them Thus both Sides seem zealous for God and his Glory Both lay down General Maxims that can hardly be Disputed and both argue justly from their First Principles These are great Grounds for mutual Charity and Forbearance in these Matters It is certain That one who has long interwoven his Thoughts of Infinite Perfection with the Notions of Absolute and Unchangeable Decrees of carrying on every thing by a positive Will of doing every thing for his own Glory cannot apprehend Decrees depending on a foreseen Free-will a Grace Subject to it a Merit of Christ's Death that 's lost and a Man's being at one time loved and yet finally hated of God without horror These things seem to carry in them an appearance of feebleness of dependence and of changeableness On the other hand a Man that has accustomed himself to think often on the Infinite Goodness and Mercy the Long-suffering Patience and Slowness to Anger that appears in God he cannot let the Thought of Absolute Reprobation or of determining Men to Sin or of not giving them the Grace necessary to keep them from Sin and Damnation enter into his Mind without the same horror that another feels in the Reverse of all this So that the Source of both Opinions being the different Ideas that they have of God and both these Ideas being true Men only mistaking in the Extent of them and in the Consequences drawn from them here are the clearest Grounds imaginable for a mutual Forbearance for not judging Men imperiously nor censuring them severely upon either Side And those who have at different Times of their Lives been of both Opinions and who upon the Evidence of Reason as it has appeared to them have changed their Persuasions can speak more affirmatively here For they know that in great sincerity of Heart they have thought both ways Each Opinion has some Practical Advantages of its side A Calvinist is â—aught by his Opinions To think meanly of himself and to ascribâ— the honour of all to God Which lays in him a deep foundation for Humility he is also much inclined to secret Prayer and to a fixed dependence on God which naturally both brings his Mind to a good state and fixes it in it And so though perhaps he cannot give a coherent account of the Grounds of his Watchfulness and Care of himself yet that Temper arises out of his Humility and his Earnestness in Prayer A Remonstrant on the other hand is ingaged to awaken and improve his Faculties to fill his Mind with good Notions to raise them in himself by frequent Reflection and by a constant Attention to his own Actions He sees causâ— to reproach himself for his Sins and to set about his Duty to purpose Being assured that it is through his own fault if he miscarries He has no dreadful Terrors upon his Mind nor is he tempted to an undue Security or to swell up in perhaps an imaginary Conceit of his being unalterably in the Favour of God Both Sides have their peculiar Temptatiâ—ns as well as their Advantages The Calvinist is tempted to a false Security and Sloth And the Arminian may be tempted to trust too much to himself and too little to God So equally may a Man of a calm Temper and of moderate Thoughts balance this Matter between both the Sides And so unreasonable it is to give way to a positive and dictating Temper in this Point If the Arminian is zealous to assert Liberty it is because he cannot see how there can be Good or Evil in the World without it He thinks it is the Work of God that he has made for great Ends and therefore he can allow of nothing that he thinks destroys it If on the othâ—r hand a Calvinist seems to break in upon Liberty it is because he cannot reconcile it with the Sovereignty of God and the Freedom of his Grace And he grows to think that it is an Act of Devotion to offer up the one to save the other The common Fault of both Sides is To charge one another with the Consequences of their Opinions as if they were truly their Tenets Whereas they are apprehensive enough of these Consequences they have no mind to them and they fancy that by a few distinctions they can avoid them But each Side thinks the Consequences of the other are both worse and more certainly fastned to that Doctrine than the Consequences that are urged against himself are And so they think they must chuse that Opinion that is the least perplexed and difficult Not but that Ingenuous and Learned Men of all Sides confess that they feel themselves very often pinched in these Matters Another very indecent way of managing these Points is That both Sides do too often speak very boldly of God Some petulent Wits in order to the representing the contrary Opinion as Absurd and Ridiculous have brought in God representing him with indecent Expressions as Acting or Decreeing according to their Hypothesis in a manner that is not only Unbecoming but that borders upon Blasphemy From which though they think to escape by saying That they are only shewing what must follow if the other Opinion were believed yet there is a Solemnity and Gravity of Stile that ought to be most religiously observed when we poor Mortals take upon us to speak of the Glory or Attributes the Decrees or Operations of the Great God of Heaven and Earth And every thing relating to this that is put in a burlesque Air is intolerable It is a sign of a very daring Presumption to pretend to assign the Order of all the Acts of God the Ends proposed in them and the Methods by which they are Executed We who do not know how our Thoughts carry our Bodies to obey and second our Minds should not imagine that we can conceive how God may move or bend our Wills The hard thing to digest in this whole Matter is Reprobation They who think it necessary to assert the freedom of Election would fain avoid it They seek soft words for it such as the passing by or leaving Men to perish They study to put that on Adam's Sin and they take all the methods they can to soften an Opinion that seems harsh and that sounds ill But howsoever they will bear all the Consequences of it rather than let the Point of Absolute Election go On the other side Those who do once persuade themselves that the Doctrine of Reprobation is false do not see how they can deny it and yet ascribe a free Election to God They are once persuaded that there can be no Reprobation but what is conditionate and founded on what is foreseen concerning Mens Sins And from this they are forced to say the same thing of Election And both sides study to begin the
condemn them of Heresy and to proceed against them with Church-Censures but that they had a Power to depose them to absolve their Subjects from their Oaths of Allegiance and to transfer their Dominions to such Persons as should undertake to execute their Sentences Tâ—is they have often put in execution and have constantly kept up their 〈…〉 it to this day It will not serve them to get clear here to say That these were the violent Practices of some Popes What they did in many particular Instances may be so turned off and left as a Blemish on the Memories of some of them But the Point at present in question is Whether they have not laid Claim to this as a Right belonging to their See as a part of St. Peter's Authority descended to them Whether they have not founded it on his being Christ's Vicar who was the King of kings and Lord of lords Dict Papâ—e l. 1. Ep. Greg. 7. Post Ep. 55. Extravag de Major Obâ—d c 1. to whom all power in heaven and in earth was given Whether they have not founded it on Ieremy's being set over nations and kingdoms to root out pluck down and to destroy and on other places of Scripture not forgetting that the first Words of the Bible are In the beginning and not In the beginnings from which they inferred That there is but one Principle from whence all Power is derived And that God made two great lights the Sun to rule by day which they applied to themselves This I say is the Question Whether they did not assume this Authority as a Power given them by God As for the applying it to particular Instances to those Kings and Emperors whom they deposed that is indeed a personal thing Whether they were guilty of Heresy or of being favourers of it or not And whether the Popes proceeded against them with too much Violence or not The Point now in Question is Whether they declared this to be a Doctrine that there was an Authority lodged with their See for doing such things and whether they alledged Scripture and Tradition for it Conc. Lat. 3. cap. 27. Conc. Lat. 4. Can. 3. Con. Lug. Now this will appear evident to those who will read their Bulls In the Preambles of which those Quotations will be found as some of them are in the Body of the Canon Law And it is decreed in it that the belief of this is absolutely necessary to Salvation This was pursued in a Course of many Ages General Councils as they are esteemed among them have concurred with the Popes both in General Decrees assâ—rting this power to be in them and in special Sentences against Princes This became the universally-received Doctrine of those Ages No Vniversity nor Nation declaring against it not so much as one Divine Ciâ—â—â—lian Canonist or Casuist writ against it as Card. Perron truly said Câ—rd Perron Harangueau tiers estat It was so certainly believed that those Writers whom the deposed Princes got to undertake their defence do not in any of their Books pretend to call the Doctrine in General in question Two things were disputed One was Whether Popes had a direct power in Temporals over Princes so that they were as much subject to them as Feudatory Princes were to their Superior Lords This to which Boniface the 8th laid claim was indeed contradicted The other Point was Whether those particulars for which Princes had been deposed such as the giving the Investitures to Bishopricks were Heresies or not This was much contested But the power in the case of manifest Heresy or of favouring it to Depose Princes and Transfer their Crowns to others was never called in Question This was certainly a definition made in the Chair ex Cathedra For it was addrest to all their Community both Laity and Clergy Plenary Pardons were bestowed with it on those who executed it The Clergy did generally preach the Croisades upon it Princes that were not concerned in him that was deposed gave way to the publication of those Bulls and gave leave to their Subjects to take the Cross in order to the Executing of them And the People did in vast Multitudes gather about the Standarts that were set up for leading on Armies to Execute them while many Learned Men writ in defence of this Power and not one Man durst write against it This Argument lies not only against the Infallibility of Popes but against that of General Councils likewise And also against the Authority of Oral Tradition For here in a Succession of many Ages the Tradition was wholly changed from the Doctrine of former times which had been That the Clergy was subject to Princes and had no Authority over them or their Crowns Nor can it be said That that was a Point of Discipline for it was founded on an Article of Doctrine Whether there was such a power in the Popes or not The Prudence of Executing or not Executing it is a Point of Discipline and of the Government of the Church But it is a Point of Doctrine Whether Christ has given such an Authorityto St. Peter and his followers And those Points of Speculation upon which a great deal turns as to practice are certainly so important that in them if in any thing we ought to expect an Infallibility For in this case a Man is distracted between two contrary Propositions The one is That he must obey the Civil Powers as set over him by an Ordinance of God so that if he resist them he shall receive in himself Damnation The other is That the Pope being Christ's Vicar is to be obeyed when he Absolves him from his former Oath and Allegiance and that the new Prince set up by him is to be obeyed under the pain of Damnation likewise Here a Man is brought into a great strait and therefore he must be guided by Infallibility if any thing So the whole Argument comes to this Head that we must either believe that the Deposing Power is lodged by Christ in the See of Rome or we must conclude with the Article that they have Erred and by Consequence That they are not Infallible For the Erring in any one Point and at any one Time does quite destroy the Claim of Infallibility Before this Matter can be concluded we must consider what is brought to prove it What was laid down at first must be here remembred That the Proofs brought for a thing of this Nature must be very express and clear A Privilege of such a sort against which the appearances and prejudices are so strong must be very fully made out before we can be bound to believe it Nor can it be reasonable to urge the Authority of any Passages from Scripture till the Grounds are shewn for which the Scriptures themselves ought to be believed Those who think that it is in general well proved That there must be an Infallibility in the Church conclude from thence that it must be in the Pope For if
there must be a living speaking Judge always ready to guide the Church and to decide Controversies they say this cannot be in the diffusive Body of Christians for these cannot meet to judge Nor can it â—e in a General Council the meeting of which depends upon so many accidents and on the consent of so many Princes that the Infallibility will lie dormant for some Ages if the General Council is the Seat of it Therefore they conclude That since it is certainly in the Church and can be no where else but in the Pope therefore it is lodged in the See of Rome Whereas we on the other hand think this is a strong Argument against the Infallibility in general That it does not appear in whom it is vested And we think that every side does so effectually Confute the other that we believe them all as to that and think they argue much stronger when they prove where it cannot be than when they pretend to prove where it must be This in the Point now in hand concerning the Pope seems as evident 〈◊〉 thing can possibly be It not appearing That after the words of Christ 〈…〉 the other Apostles thought the Point was thereby decided Who 〈…〉 should be the greatest For that Debâ—â—e was still on foot and was 〈◊〉 among them in the very Night in which our Saviour was betrayâ—d Nor does it appear That after the Effusion of the Holy Ghost which certainly Inspired them with the full understanding of Christ's words that thâ—y thought there was any thing peculiarly given to S. Peter beyond the â—â—st He was questioned upon his Baptizing Cornelius He was not singly appealed to in the great Question of Subjecting the Gentiles to the Yoke of the Mosaical Law he delivered his Opinion as one of the Apostles After which St. Iames summed up the Matter and setled the Decision of it He was charged by St. Paul as guilty of dissimulation in that matter for which St. Paul withstood him to his Face And he justifies that in an Epistle confessed to be writ by Divine Inspiration St. Paul does also in the same Epistle plainly assert the equality of his own Authority with his And that he received no Authority from him and owed him no Dependance Nor was he ever Appealed to in any of the Points that appear to have been Disputed in the times that the Epistles were written So that we see no Characters of any special Infallibility that was in him besides that which was the effect of the Inspiration that was in the other Apostles as well as in him Nor is there a Tittle in the Scripture not so much as by a remote Intimation that he was to derive that Authority whatsoever it was to any Successor or to lodge it in any particular City or See The Silence of the Scripture in this Point seems to be a full proof that no such thing was intended by God Otherwise we have all reason to believe that it would have been clearly expressed St. Peter himself ought to have declared this And since both Alexandria and Antioch as well as Rome pretend to derive from him and that the Succession to those Sees began in him this makes a decision in this Point so much the more necessary When St. Peter writ his 2d Epistle in which he mentions a Revelation that he had from Christ of his approaching dissolution though that was a very proper occasion for declaring such an important Matter 2 Pet. 1 1â— he says nothing that relates to it but gives only a new Attestation of the truth of Christ's Divine Mission and of what he himself had been a witness to in the Mount when he saw the excellent glory and heard the voice out of it He leaves a Provision in Writing for the following Ages but says nothing of any Succession or See So that here the greatest of all Privileges is pretâ—nded to be lodged in a Succession of Bishops without any one Passage in Scripture importing it Another set of difficulties arise concerning the Persons who have a right to chuse these Popes in whom this Right is Vested and what number is necessary for a Canonical Election How far Simony voids it and who is the competent Judge of that or who shall judge in the Case of two different Elections which has often happened We must also have a certain Rule to know when the Popes judge as private Persons and when they judge Infallibly With whom they must consult and what Solemnities are necessary to make them speak ex Cathedra or Infallibly For if this Infallibility comes as a Privilege from a Grant made by Christ we ought to expect that all those necessary Circumstances to direct us in order to the receiving and submitting to it should be fixed by the same Authority that made the Grant Here then are very great difficulties Let us now see what is offered to make out this great and important Claim The chief Proof is brought from these Words of our Saviour when upon St. Peter's confessing That he was the Christ the Son of the living God Mat. 16. 16 17 18 19. He said to him Thou art Peter and upon this Rock I will build my Church and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it I will give unto thee the keys of the Kingdom of heaven and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven This begins with an Allusion to his Name and Discourses built upon such Allusions are not to be understood strictly or Grammatically By the Rock upon which Christ promises to build his Church many of the Fathers have understood the Person of Christ others have understood the Confession of him or Faith in him which indeed is but a different way of expressing the same thing And it is certain that strictly speaking the Church can only be said to be founded upon Christ and upon his Doctrine But in a Secondary sense it may be said to be founded upon the Apostles and upon St. Peter as the first in order which is not to be Disputed Now though this is a Sense which was not put on these Words for many Ages yet when it should be allowed to be their true sense it will not prove any thing to have been granted to St. Peter but what was common to the other Apostles who are all called the Foundations upon which the Church is built That which follows of the gates of hell not being able to prevail against the Church may be either understood of Death Eph. 2.20 Rev. 21.2 14. which is often called the gate to the grave Which is the sense of the Word that is rendred Hell And then the meaning of these Words will be That the Church which Christ was to raise should never be extinguished nor die or come to a period as the Iewish Religion then did Or according to the Custom of the Iews of holding their
Courts and Councils about their Gates by the Gates of Hell may be understood the Designs and Contrivances of the Powers of Darkness which should never prevail over the Church to root it out and destroy it for the Word rendred prevail does signify an intire Victory This only imports That the Church should be still preserved against all the Attempts of Hell but does not intimate that no Error was ever to get into it Mat. 3.2 Mat. 4.17 By the words Kingdom of Heaven generally through the whole Gospel the Dispensation of the Messias is understood This appears evidently from the words with which both St. Iohn Baptist and our Saviour begun their Preaching Repent for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand And the many Parables and Comparisons that Christ gave of the Kingdom of Heaven can only be understood of the Preaching of the Gospel This being then agreed to the most natural and the least forced Exposition of those words must be that St. Peter was to open the Dispensation of the Gospel The proper use of a Key is to open a Door And as this agrees with these words He that hath the Key of the House of David that openeth and no man shutteth Rev. 3.7 Luk. 11.51 and shutteth and no man openeth and with the Phrase of the Key of Knowledge by which the Lawyers are described for they had a Key with Writing-Tables given them as the Badges of their Profession So it agrees with the accomplishment of this promise in St. Peter who first opened the Gospel to the Iews after the wonderful Effusion of the Holy Ghost And more eminently when he first opened the Door to the Gentiles preaching to Cornelius and Baptizing him and his Houshold to which the Phrase of the Kingdom of Heaven seems to have a more particular relation This Dispensation was committed to St. Peter and seems to be claimed by him as his peculiar Privilege in the Council at Ierusalem This is a clear and plain sense of these words For those who would carry them further and understand by the Kingdom of Heaven our Eternal Happiness must use many distinctions otherwise if they Expound them literally they will ascribe to St. Peter that which certainly could only belong to our Saviour himsâ—lf Though at the same time it is not to be denied but that under the figure of Keys the power of Discipline and the Conduct and Management of Christians may be understood But as to this all the Pastors of the Church have their share in it nor can it be appropriated to any one Person As for that of binding and loosing and the confirming in Heaven what he should do in Earth whatever it may signify it is no special Grant to St. Peter For the same words are spoken by our Saviour elsewhere to all the Apostles So this is given equally to them all The words binding and loosing are used by the Iewish Writers in the sense of affirming or denying the Obligation of any Precept of the Law that might be in dispute So according to this common Form of Speech and the sense formerly given to the words Kingdom of Heaven the meaning of these words must be That Christ committed to the Apostles the Dispensing his Gospel to the World by which he Authorized them to dissolve the Obligation of the Mosaical Laws and to give other Laws to the Christian Church which they should do under such visible Characters of a Divine Authority impowering and conducting them in it that it should be very evident that what they did on Earth was also ratifyed in Heaven These words thus understood carry in them a clear sense which agrees with the whole Design of the Gospel But whatsoever their sense may be it is plain that there was nothing given peculiarly to St. Peter by them which was not likewise given to the rest of the Apostles Nor do these words of our Saviour to St. Peter import any thing of a Successive Infallibility that was to be derived from him with any distinction beyond the other Apostles Unless 〈◊〉 were a Priority of Order and Dignity and whatever that was there is 〈◊〉 so much as a hint given that it was to descend from him to any See or Succession of Bishops As for our Saviour's praying that St. Peter's Faith might not fail And his restoring him to his Apostolical Function by a thrice repeated charge Feed my sheep feed my lambs that has such a visible Relation to his fall Luk. 22.31 John 21.15 16 17. and to his denying him that it does not seem necessary to enlarge further on the making it out or on shewing that these words are capable of no other Signification and cannot be carried further The Importance of this Argument rather than the Difficulty of it has made it necessary to dwell fully upon it So much depends upon it and the Missionaries of the Church of Rome are so well Instructed in it that it ought to be well considered for how little strength soever there may be in the Arguments brought to prove this Infallibility yet the colours are specious and they are commonly managed both with much Art and with great Confidence ARTICLE XX. Of the Authority of the Church The Church hath Power to decree Rights or Ceremonies and Authority in Matters of Faith And yet it is not lawful for the Church to ordain any thing that is contrary to God's Word written neither may it so expound one place of Scripture that it be repugnant to another Wherefore although the Church be a Witness and Keeper of Holy Writ yet as it ought not to decree any thing against the same so besides the same ought it not to enforce any thing to be believed for necessity of Salvation THIS Article consists of Two parts The first asserts a Power in the Church both to decree Rites and Ceremonies and to judge in matters of Faith The second limits this Power over matters of Faith to the Scriptures so that it must neither contradict them nor add any Articles as necessary to Salvation to those contained in them This is suitable to some Words that were once in the Fifth Article but were afterwards left out instead of which the first words of this Article were put in this place according to the Printed Editions tho they are not in the Original of the Articles signed by both Houses of Convocation that are yet extant As to the first part of the Article concerning the Power of the Church either with relation to Ceremonies or Points of Faith the dispute lies only with those who deny all Church-Power and think that Churches ought to be in all things limited by the Rules set in Scripture and that where the Scriptures are silent there ought to be no Rules made but that all Men should be left to their Liberty And in particular That the appointing new Ceremonies looks like a reproaching of the Apostles as if their Constitutions had been so defective that those defects
executing the many trifling performances to which Indulgences are granted has brought in among them such a Prostitution of Holy Things that either it must be said that those are publick Cheats and that they were so from the beginning or that their Vertue is now exhausted though the Bulls that grant them are perpetual Or else a Man may on very easy Terms presâ—rve himself and redeem his Friends out of Purgatory If the saying a Prayer before a priviledged Altar or the Visiting some Churches in the time of Jubilee with those slight Devotions that are then enjoined have such efficacy in them it is scarce possible for any Man to be in danger of Purgatory The Third Head rejected in this Article is the Worshipping of Images Here those of the Church of Rome complain much of the Charge of Idolatry that our Church has laid upon them so fully and so severely in the Homilies Some among our selves have also thought that we must either Renounce that Charge or that we must deny the Possibility of salvation in that Church and in Consequence to that conclude that neither the Baptism nor the Orders of that Church are valid For since Idolaters are excluded from the Kingdom of Heaven they argue That if there can be no Salvation where Idolatry is committed by the whole Body of a Church then that can be no Church and in it there is no Salvation But here we are to consider before we enter upon the Specialties of this Matter that Idolatry is a general Word which comprehends maâ—y several Sorts and Ranks of Sins under it As Lying is capable of many Degrees from an officious Lye to the swearing falsly against the Life of an innocent Man in Judgment The one is the lowest and the other is the highest Act of that kind But all are Lying And yet it would appear an unreasonable Thing to urge every thing that is said of any Act in General and which belongs to the higest Acts of it as if all the Inferior Degrees did necessarily involve the Guilt of the highest There is another distinction to be made between Actions as they signify either of themselves or by the publick Constructions that are put on them by those who Authorise them and those same Actions as they may be privately intended by particular Persons We in our weighing of Things are only to consider what Actions signify of their own Nature or by Publick Authority and according to that we must Form our Judgments about them and in particular in the Point of Idolatry but as for the secret Thoughts or Intentions of Men we must leave these to the Judgment of God who only knows them and who being infinitely Gracious slow to Anger and ready to Forgive will we do not doubt make all the Abatements in the weighing Men's Actions that there is Reason for But we ought not to enter into that Matter we ought neither to aggravate nor to mollify Things too much We are to judge of Things as they are in themselves and to leave the Case of Mens Intentions and secret Notions to that God who is to Judge them As for the Business of Images we know that the Heathens had them of several Sorts Some they believed were real Resemblances of those Deities that they Worshipped Those Divinities had been Men and the Statues made for them resembled them Other Images they believed had a Divine Vertue affixed to them perhaps from the Stars which were believed to be Gods and it was thought that the Influences of their Aspects and Positions were by secret Charms called down and fastened to some Figures Other Images were considered as Emblems and Representations of their Deities So that they only gave them occasion to represent them to their Thoughts These Images thus of different Sorts were all Worshipped some more some less They kneeled before them they prayed to them and made many Oblations to them they set Lights before them and burnt Incense to them they set them in their Temples Market-places and High-ways and they had them in their Houses They set them off with much Pomp and had many Processions to their Honour But in all this though it is like the Vulgar among them might have gross Thoughts of those Images yet the Philosophers not only after the Christian Religion had obliged them to consider well of that Matter and to express themselves cautiously about it but even while they were in the peaceable Possession of the World did believe that the Deity was not in the Image but was only represented by it That the Deity was Worshipped in the Image so that the Honour done the Image did belong to the Deity it self Here then were two false Opinions The one was concerning those Deities themselves the other was concerning this way of Worshipping them and both were blamed Not only the Worshipping a false God but the Worshipping that God by an Image If Idolatry had only consisted in the acknowledging a false God and if the Worshipping the true God in an Image had not been Idolatry then all the Fault of the Heathenish Idolatries should have consisted in this that they Worshipped a false God but their Worshipping Images should not of it self have been an additional Fault But in opposition to this what can we think of those full and copious Words in which God did not only forbid the having of false Gods but the making of a graven Image Deut. 4.12 15 23. or the likeness of any thing in heaven in earth or under the earth The bowing down to it and the worshipping it are also forbid Where besides the copiousness of these Words we are to consider that Moses in the rehearsal of that Law in Deuteronomy does over and over again add and insist on this that they saw no manner of similitude when God spoke of them lest they should corrupt themselves and make to them a graven Image an enumeration is made of many different likenesses and after that comes another species of Idolatry their worshipping the host of heaven and therefore Moses charges them in that Chapter again and again to take heed Verse 23. Deut. 12.30 Levit. 26.1 Deut. 16â— 22. to take good heed to themselves lest they should forget the covenant of the Lord their God and make them a graven Image And he lays the same charge a third time upon them in the same Chapter A special Law is also given against the most Innocent of all the Images that could be made They were required not only not to have Idols nor graven Images but not to rear up a standing image or pillar nor to set up any image of stone or any carved stone such were the Baitulia the least tempting or ensnaring of all Idols They were not to bow down before it and the reason given is For I am the Lord your God The importance of those Laws will appear clearer if they are compared with the practice of those times and particularly in those symbolical
therein and was the Lord of Heaven and Earth and therefore was not to be Worshipped by mens hands that is Images made by them who needed nothing since he gives us life breath or the continuance of Life and all things He therefore condemns that way of Worship as an effect of Ignorance and tells them of a day in which God will judge the World It is certain that the Athenians at that time did not think their Images were the proper resemblances of the Divinity Tully Cic. de Nat. Deor. l. 1. cap. 27. who knew their Theology well gives us a very different account of the notion that they had of their Images Some Images were of no Figure at all but were only Stones and Pillars that had no particular shape others were Hieroglyphicks made up of many several Emblems of which some signified one perfection of the Deity and some another and others were indeed the Figures of Men and Women but even in these the Wiser among them said they Worshipped One Eternal Mind and under him some Inferior Beings Demons and Men who they believed were subordinate to God and governed this World So it could not be said of such Worshippers that they thought that the Godhead was like unto their Images since the best Writers among them tell us plainly that they thought no such thing St. Paul therefore only argues in this against Image-Worship in it self which does naturally lead Men to these low thoughts of God and which is a very unreasonable thing in all those who do not think so of him It is contrary to the Nature and Perfections of God Few men can think God is like to those Images therefore that is a very good Argument against all Worshipping of them And we may upon very sure grounds say that the Athenians had such elevated Notions both of God and of their Images that whatsoever was a good Argument against Image-Worship among them will hold good against all Image-Worship whatsoever But as St. Paul staid long enough at Athens to understand their Opinions well and that no doubt he learned their Doctrine very particularly from his Convert Dionysius so at his coming to Corinth from thence when he had learned from Aquila and Priscilla the state of the Church in Rome and no doubt had learned among other things that the Romans admired the Greeks and made them their Patterns he in the beginning of his Epistle to them having still deep impressions upon his Spirit of what he had seen and known at Athens arraigns the whole Greek Philosophy Rom. 1.20 to the end and specially those among them who professed themselves wise but became fools who though they knew God yet glorified him not as God nor were thankful but became vain in their imaginations so that their foolish heart was darkened They had high speculations of the Unity and Simplicity of the Divine Essence but they set themselves to find such excuses for the Idolatry of the Vulgar that they not only continued to comply with them in the grossest of all their practices but they studied more laboured Defences for them than the ruder multitudes could ever have fallen upon They knew the true God for God had shewed to them that which might be known of him but they held the truth in unrighteousness and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man and to birds and fourfooted beasts and to creeping things Which seems to be a description of Hieroglyphick Figures the most excusable of all those Images by which they represented the Deity This St. Paul makes to be the original of all the Corruption and Immorality that was spread over the Gentile World which came in partly as the natural consequence of Idolatry of its debasing the Ideas of God and wounding true Religion and Virtue in its source and first seeds and partly as an effect of the just Judgments of God upon those who thus dishonoured him That was to a very monstrous degree spread over both Greece and Rome Of these St. Paul gives us some very enormous Instances with a Catalogue of the Vices that sprang from those vitiated Principles These two passages the one of St. Paul's Preaching and the other of his Writing being both applied to those who had the finest Speculations among the Heathen do evidently demonstrate how contrary the Christian Doctrine is to the Worshipping of Images of all sorts how speciously soever that may be disguised If these things wanted an Explanation we find it given us very fully in all the Writings of the Fathers during their Disputes with the Heathens They do not only charge them with the false Notions that they had of God the many Deities they Worshipped the absurd Legends that they had concerning them but in particular they dwell long upon this of the Worshipping God in or by an Image with Arguments taken both from the pure and spiritual Nature of God and from the plain Revelation he made of his Will in this matter Upon this Argument many long Citations might be gathered from Iustin Martyr Just. Mart. Apol. 2. Clem. Alex. Strom. l. 1.5 Protr Orig. Cont. Cels. l. 2.3.5.7 Tertull. Apol. Cypr. de Idol Vanitate Arnob. Lib. 5. Minut. Felix Oct. Euseb. praep Evang. l. 3. Lactan. l. 2. c. 2. Ambros Resp. ad Sym. August de Civitate Dei l. 7. c. 5. Orig. Con. Cels. l. 7. Euseb. Praep. Ev. l. 3. c. 7. Max. Tyr. diss 38. Jul. Frag. Ep. Euseb. praep Evan. l. 4. c. 1. from Clemens of Alexandria Origen Tertullian Cyprian Arnobius Minutius Felix Lactantius Eusebius Ambrose and St. Austin Their Reasonings are so clear and so full that nothing can be more evident than that they condemned all the use of Images in the Worship of God And yet both Celsus Porphiry Maximus Tyrius and Iulian told them very plainly that they did not believe that the Godhead was like their Images or was shut up within them they only used them as helps to their Imagination and Apprehension that from thence they might form suitable thoughts of the Deity This did not satisfy the Fathers who insisted on it to the last that all such Images as were made the objects of Worship were Idols so that if in any one thing we have a very full account of the sense of the whole Church for the first Four Centuries it is in this matter They do not speak of it now and then only by the way as in a Digression in which the heat of Argument or of Rhetorick may be apt to carry men too far they set themselves to treat of this Argument very nicely and they were engaged in it with Philosophers who were as good at Subtleties and Distinctions as other Men. This was one of the main parts of the Controversy so if in any Head whatsoever they writ exactly upon those Subjects They attack'd the established Religion of the Roman Empire and this was not to be done with Clamour nor
unless we do thus believe It were not suteable to the Truth and Holiness of the Divine Nature to void a Covenant so solemnly made and that in favour of wicked men who will not be reformed by it So Faith is the certain and necessary Mean of our Salvation and is so put by Christ since upon our having it we shall be saved as well as damned upon our not having it On the other hand the nature of a Ritual Action even when commanded is such that unless we could imagine that there is a Charm in it which is contrary to the Spirit and Genius of the Gospel which designs to save us by reforming our Natures we cannot think that there can be any thing in it that is of it self effectual as a Mean therefore it must only be considered as a Command that is given us which we are bound to obey if we acknowledge the Authority of the Command But this being an Action that is not always in our power but is to be done by another it were to put our Salvation or Damnation in the power of another to imagine that we cannot be saved without Baptism and therefore it is only a Precept which obliges us in order to our Salvation and our Saviour by leaving it out when he reversed the words saying only he that believeth not without adding and is not Baptized shall be damned does plainly insinuate that it is not a Mean but only a Precept in order to our Salvation As for the Ends and Purposes of Baptism St. Paul gives us two the one is that we are all baptized into onâ— body we are made members one of another 1 Cor. 12.13 We are admitted to the Soâ—â—â—ty of Christians and to all the Rights and Priviledges of that Body which is the Church And in order to this the outward action of Baptism when regularly gone about is sufficient We cannot see into the sincerity oâ— mens Hearts Outward Professions and regular Actions are all that fall under mens Observation and Judgment But a second End of Baptism is Internal and Spiritual Of this St. Paul speaks in very high terms when he says that God has saved us according to his mercy Tit. 3.5 by the washing of regeneration and the renewing of the Holy Ghost It were a strange perverting the design of these words to say that somewhat Spiritual is to be understood by this washing of regeneration and not Baptism when as to the word save that is here ascribed to it St. Peter gives that undeniably to Baptism and St. Paul elsewhere in two different places Rom. 6. Col. 2. makes our Baptism to represent our being dead to sin and buried with Christ and our being risen and quickned with him and made alive unto God which are words that do very plainly import Regeneration So that St. Paul must be understood to speak of Baptism in these words here then is the inward effect of Baptism It is a death to sin and a new life in Christ in imitation of him and in conformity to his Gospel So that here is very expresly delivered to us somewhat that rises far above the Badge of a Profession or a Mark of difference That does indeed belong to Baptism it makes us the visible Members of that one Body into which we are Baptized or admitted by Baptism but that which saves us in it which both deadens and quickens us must be a thing of another nature If Baptism were only the receiving us into the Society of Christians there were no need of saying I Baptize thee in the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost It were more proper to say I Baptize thee in the Name or by the Authority of the Church Therefore these august words that were dictated by our Lord himself shew us that there is somewhat in it that is Internal which comes from God that it is an admitting men into somewhat that depends only on God and for the giving of which the authority can only be derived by him But after all this is not to be believed to be of the nature of a Charm as if the very act of Baptism carried always with it an inward Regeneration Here we must confess that very early some Doctrines arose upon Baptism that we cannot be determined by The words of our Saviour to Nicodemus were expounded so as to import the absolute necessity of Baptism in order to Salvation for it not being observed that the Dispensation of the Messias was meant by the Kingdom of God but it being taken to signifie Eternal Glory that expression of our Saviour's was understood to import this that no Man could be saved unless he were Baptized so it was believed to be simply necessary to Salvation A natural consequence that followed upon that was to allow all Persons leave to Baptize Clergy and Laity Meâ— and Women since it seemed necessary to suffer every Person to do that without which Salvation could not be had Upon this these hasty Baptisms were used without any special Sponsion on the part of those who desired it of which it may be reasonably doubted whether such a Baptism be true in which no Sponsion is made and this cannot be well answered but by saying that a general and an implied Sponsion is to be considered to be made by their Parents while they desire them to be Baptized Another Opinion that arose out of the former was the mixing of the outward and the inward effects of Baptism It being believed that every Person that was born of the Water was also born of the Spirit and that the renewing of the Holy Ghost did always accompany the washing of Regeneration And this obliged St. Austin as was formerly told to make that difference between the regenerate and the predestinated for he thought that all who were Baptized were also regenerated St. Peter has stated this so fully that if his words are well considered they will clear the whole matter He after he had set forth the miserable state in which Mankind was under the figure of the Deluge in which an Ark was prepared for Noah and his Family says upon that The like figure whereunto even Baptism doth also now save us 1 Pet. 3 21. Upon which he makes a short digression to explain the nature of Baptism not the putting away the filth of the flesh but the answer or the Demand and Interrogation of a good conscience towards God by the Resurrection of Iesus Christ who is gone into Heaven The meaning of all which is that Christ having risen again and having then had all power in heaven and in earth given to him he had put that vertue in Baptism that by it we are saved as in an Ark from that miserable state in which the world lies and in which it must perish But then he explains the way how it saves us that it is not as a Physical action as it washes away the filthiness of the flesh