effectual opperative Faith which all that profess to believe both these Articles have not and to which we appropriate Salvation and therefore the Doctor 's disputing in general of a Notional Faith and a Credulity as he calls it and under that Notion condemns is a Sophistical way of arguing much worse than any that Volkelius himself is guilty of for he discourseth of such a Faith as includes Repentance and Evangelical Obedience not such as is the effect of Natural Reason but of the Opperation of the Spirit of Patefaction as he calls it but more plainly such as he describes from St. Paul 1 Cor. 2.14 The natural man such as he saith are all that are destitute of the Divine Spirit doth not understand the things of the spirit of God and v. 9. Eye hath not seen nor ear heard nor the mind conceived what things God hath prepared for them that love him but God hath revealed them to us by his spirit Spiritu Patifactionis l. 3. c. 14. If these and other Opinions of Volkelius be compared with our Doctor 's Natural Faith it would appear to any impartial Reader that the Doctor is the grosser Socinian of the two On this Subject he spends several Chapters the Contents of the first is to shew he says in what sence Faith justifies but indeed he shews that it doth not justifie and first he condemns it as the unhappy Occasion of the Gnosticism which so much troubled St. Paul by corrupting the Disciples minds from the Simplicity of the Gospel which is all he says and he might as well charge good Laws with all the Villanies that are committed against them for the Scripture had foretold there must be Heresies and there would be Schisms and that men would walk after their own lusts and deny the Lord that bought them though the Evangelical Faith do no more cause these than the Sun doth those Works of Darkness which are committed in its light To make amends for this he says 2ly That it is so happy as to be honoured by our Lord and his Apostles as to be made the sole Condition of our Salvation But after this he asks p. 10. And now what need of Repentance of running the Gantelope of Mortification crossing our Appetites and afflicting our Souls As if the Doctrine of Faith did not include or presuppose Repentance or as if any sort of Repentance were available without Faith and as if the merit of good Works were a necessary and efficacious Ingredient to the Cause of Justification for thus he joyns Justification by Works upon account of Natural Religion with Justification by Faith upon account of the Gospel Hence in the 12th Page he makes a large Harangue Col. 2. What are the great merits of Faith which may any way entitle it to so great a Reward as Everlasting Life Whatever can pretend to worth must make its claim good by shewing how it partaketh the Nature of God who is the first Good but to be credulous is so far from the power of Divine Life that it is a plain confession of Weakness it is nothing else but leaning on another for want of knowledge of its own The simple believeth every word but a wise man looketh well to his going said the wisest of all Men and experience tells us that Children and Dotards Women and Fools the Sick and Ignorant are most easie and by how much any Man is wiser by so much he is warier that he be not imposed on Had it any worth we should have heard of it in Moses and the Prophets and the Philosophers would have allowed it a place among the Vertues and the Old Testament mentions it but once or twice and that not by way of Precept but occasionly and what reward can it possibly deserve if I believe either I do it on good reason or not if I see good reason for my belief I cannot deserve reward because no Man can choose but must necessarily believe as far as reason requires if I believe without reason then I am a Fool and so far from deserving a reward that I deserve blame and if it seem hard to justify our Lord's wisdom in promising so great a reward to a performance that deserves none at all it will appear no less so to justify his goodness in imposing such a Task no less difficult than worthless for whereas no small part of the good Tidings of the Gospel is our Manumission from the Burden of Moses's Law the Yoke of Christ will seem harder of the two it is easier for a rich Man to sacrifice whole Hecatombs when he hath Wealth enough to purchase them than to pull out his Eyes yet can a Man easier pull out the eye of his Body than his Reason which is not only the eye but the heart for it is his very definition without which he cannot be a Man it is God's Image and the Apostle exhorts us to put on the new Man which is renewed in knowledge after the Image of him that created him Now that God should print his Image in our hearts require us to renew it yet promise eternal Life for reward if we deface it is a saying harder to be believed than all the Ceremonies of Moses's Law were to be practised This and more says he is objected against Faith in general and against what Faith but in particular against that of the Holy Trinity and the Eternal Deity of Christ Now when the Doctor so industriously suggests all these Objections against Faith and takes no care to assoile them he betrays that Cause which he would seem to defend as it will appear in his fourth Chapter The Socinians affirm with our Doctor That nothing must be believed that cannot be apprehended and understood by Reason To this we say that it is not contrary to any Principle of right Reason that the Eternal Creator and Law-giver in revealing his will should propose Articles to be assented to upon his own Authority revealing them though his Creatures cannot by their Reason apprehend how those Articles should be true Divine Faith is grounded on a Divine Testimony as it is Divine T 〈…〉 de Pae 〈…〉 Neque enim quia bonum est id circo ausculture debemus sed quia Deus precepit For we do obey the Command not because we judge it good but because God commands it And as St. Augustin Judicatur ad id quod possumus creditur ad quod non possumus How can the corrupt and finite reason of Man comprehend the Reasonableness of an Alwise and Infinite God We allow to all Governors some Arcana Imperii which the Vulgar cannot judge of and shall we not allow it to the only Wise God the Governor of the World is there nothing above the sphear of natural Reason How then comes it to pass that it is baffled in so many natural things in Sympathies and Antipathies and Occult Qualities the Effects whereof are demonstrated but the Causes cannot be known And shall Man
reason than as it is necessary for our encouragement to Holiness in order to Happiness we dishonour him because no other reason is worthy of his Majesty or Goodness This indeed is one great end viz. our Salvation in which the Glory of God and our Saviour are also concern'd that as we believe in God we should also believe in Christ John 5. and that all Men should honour the Son as they honour the Father and the honour of the Son tends to the honour of the Father therefore we need Faith in the Merits of Christ and his Intercession and Mediation to present our Prayers to God and that we may come boldly to the Throne of Grace Nor doth this derogate from the Glory due to God for all tends to the Glory of God the Father And he that honoreth not the Son 〈…〉 honoreth not the Father We cannot honour the Father more than by believing that he so loved the World that he gave his only begotten Son to die for us for the greater the Gift is the greater is our Obligation to Gratitude and Obedience So that what the Doctor urgeth to the disparagement of Faith That the Precepts requiring Faith and the Promises encouraging it were calculated for those Primitive Times and are now ceased is to recommend Infidelity and not Faith and plain it is that his chief design is to exalt Natural Religion on the Ruins of Christian Faith which will also take off the Motives and Encouragements to Obedience and Thankfulness Chap. 6. In this Chapter he enquires what are those saving Truths to the belief whereof Eternal Life is promised These truths he says concern the Person in whom or the Word which we believe on credit of the Person Here he enquires first what kind of Person our Saviour requires us to believe him to be this Person he describes from 7 Dan. 13. To be one to whom was given dominion and glory and a kingdom that all nations and kingdoms should serve him The Title there given him is the Son of Man which in the Jewish Idiom imports the eminence of the Subject spoken of that is a Man of some singular note but a Man still Another Idiom of the Jews for advancing a thing or Person was to intitle it to God as Rivers of God and Mountains of God so Man of God and Son of God by Daniel are made a Character of the greatest Beauty and Majesty but a Creature still He mentioneth also that Character which Christ assumed The only begotten Son of God these Characters speak him a Person of super-eminent and unmeasurable Greatness like his Emblem the Light and that is but a Creature which whatever the Traveller believes it to be still it is his faithful Guide But have we no other benefit from the Sun but its light only Doth it not also warm comfort and enliven us Yet the Scriptures gives more noble operations to Faith it is as much the life of the Soul as the Soul is of the Body it gives spirit and motion to every faculty of the Soul so the Apostle Gal. 2.20 I live yet not I but Christ liveth in me and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God who loved me and gave himself for me But our Doctor frustrates this Grace of God for if Righteousness come by the Law then Christ is dead in vain what good can the Light do to a Traveller that wants legs and life or that is blind from his birth As to his two Idioms I only ask the Doctor Why when that Scripture calls Christ the Son of Man it means a Man of Eminence and Perfection So when it calls him the Son of God doth it not mean a perfect and supreme God The Doctor objects from John 10.36 that our Saviour spake nothing what he had been from Eternity when if ever he ought to have done it but only what he was in relation to other Messengers of God Smalcius confesseth that in this Scripture John 10.36 Christ affirmed himself to be God yet in his Answer to Smaglâ—cius he minceth the matter and says Christ did neither affirm nor deny himself to be God for he doth not say v. 30. Say ye that I blaspheme because I said I am God but say ye that I blaspheme because I said I am the Son of God But Smalcius says as the Doctor does That if Christ had been the very God he ought to have expresly affirmed it See Cloppenburgh's Anti-Smalcius p. 309. This of St. John being one of the best pieces of Armor wherein the Socinians put their trust to defend themselves against all the Arguments for our Saviour's Deity we must trie what Mettle it is made of P. 28. Col. 1. he thus infers That it seemeth plain as by other Evidence so by Christ's own words that a practical Faith is all that our Saviour requires for when the Jews came about him and said How long dost thou make us to doubt if thou be the Christ tell us plainly And he in answer thereto called God his Father They took up Stones to stone him because said they thou being a Man makest thyself God He did not on so urgent occasion assert his Right but abating so much as exceeded their comprehension satisfied himself that he might satisfy them with what might be sufficient for their Conviction to Salvation Is it not written in your Law I have said you are God's c. He speaketh nothing of what he had been from Eternity in himself but what he was in relation to the World and in comparison with all other Messengers of God To them says he God sent his Word by their betters but it is not sent to me by my betters but by me to my inferiors They were sent into the World the common way and were afterward sanctified by receiving God's word N. B. but I was first sanctified and afterward sent and if they who were less extraordinary were honoured with a higher Title can it be Blasphemy in me who am their Superior if I take a meaner Title This Scripture is made the Corner-stone of all the Socinian Babel which they endeavour with all their Art and Might to establish and raise as a Tower of Defence against the Power of Heaven and Earth The late Author of Thoughts on Dr. Sherlock 's Vindication of the Trinity makes it the Subject of his Letter he says p. 3. c. 1. That Christ brought in a sence of Unction and Sanctification instead of a sence of Nature i. e. a Socinian sence instead of an Orthodox And c. 2. That the Orthodox as they call themselves can no way escape because if Christ made use of the reason taken from his Sanctification he has at the same time given away the former from the eternal Generation P. 4. c. 1. he says That the other Passages which Dr. Sherlock alledgeth for Confirmation viz. of the eternal Generation as that the Word was with God he
wicked Mâ—n were risen up in his Diocess teaching such a Defection as may be rightly called A Fore-running of Antichrist I could wish says he this mischief might have been confined among the Apostates but seeing Eusebius of Nicomedia undertakes their Patronage and hath written Letters to recommend them and their Heresie I could not forbear to forewarn you of these Apostates and their Opinions and that you attend not to the Writings of Eusebius The Names of those that have forsaken the Church Arius Achillas Aithales Carpones another Arius Sarmates Euzoius Lucius Julianus Menas Hellodius Gaius and with these Secundus and Theanas who were formerly called Bishops That which they rashly publish is this God was not alway a Father the Word of God was not alway but had its beginning of nothing for God which is created him that was not out of that which was not and so the Son they say is a Creature not like his Father in Substance nor the True Word of God nor his True Wisdom but one of his Works and Creatures but abusively so called being made by the Word and Wisdom which is in God that made him and all things That the Son knows not the Father nor can perfectly know him nor doth he know his own Substance what it is but was made as an Instrument by which God would create us nor had he been made unless God would have made us by him To them that ask whether the Word of God could be changed as the Devil was they answer Yea that he is of a mutable Nature because he was created Arius with great impudence affirming these Things We together with almost an hundred Bishops of Egypt and Lybia did anathematize him and his Adherents but Eusebius hath received them that he may joyn Impiety to Piety Falshood to Truth but they shall not prevail for Truth will overcome for whoever heretofore heard such things or now hearing them doth not stop his Ears who hearing St. John say In the beginning was the Word will not condemn these Mens sayings There was a time when he was not c. These Letters had various effects on a great many and not much to the advantage of Alexander for Arius and his Party were very diligent in writing on the contrary behalf Eusebius also Bishop of Nicomedia heartily espoused his Cause partly out of a private grudge between him and Bishop Alexander and partly through his own Opinion which agreed with those of Arius and the Emperour being then at Nicomedia with whom he was in favour and by this opportunity he had great influence on the neighbouring Bishops to whom he wrote divers Letters on the behalf of Arius he wrote also to Alexander himself admonishing him to receive Arius again into his Communion and by these means the Divisions were so great that not only the Bishops but the People also ran into Parties and the Meletians also joyned with Arius so that they wrote to Alexander to recall the Excommunication against him pleading that his Opinions were right for Arius did so palliate his Heresie as that to the unwary and more ignorant sort both of Clergy and People it seemed nothing different from the Orthodox Doctrine The Emperor also wrote to a contrary purpose to the Church of Alexandria Socrates p 30. That all things concerning the Controversies that were moved had been acurately discussed and examined by the Council But O! what great and grievous Blasphemies some did declare against our Saviour and our Hope of Eternal Life producing things contrary to the Scripture inspired from above and to the Faith yet professing their belief of them whereas therefore more than 300 Bishops which were to be admired for their modesty and diligence conformed by their unanimous consent that which according to the Rule of the Divine Law is the only Faith Arius only was found who overcome by diabolical fraud and design did first sow this mischievous Evil among you and others but let us embrace the Opinion which Almighty God hath delivered and return to our Brethren from whose Fellowship that impudent Minister of the Devil hath separated them for that which hath been decreed by more than 300 Bishops is to be esteemed as the Divine Sentence seeing that the Holy Ghost residing in their Minds hath revealed his Divine Will unto them He assured them also That the Definitions of the Council were not made without diligent examination Wherefore in another Epistle to the Bishops and People mentioned by Socrates p. 32. of the Edition by Valesius he says That the Arians following evil and malitious Men deserved to suffer the same infamous punishment with them and as Porphyry who wrote against the Christian Religion had his Books destroyed and himself branded to Posterity so it is my Command That Arius and his Followers shall be call'd Porphyrians and that if any Book written by Arius be found that it be consumed by Fire that no remembrance of him may remain and that such as conceal his Books shall suffer Death These were the Emperour's second thoughts It hapned that Constantia the Emperour's Sister had entertained an Arian Presbyter who often talkt of Arius complaining to her how much he was wronged by the Council at Nice but she durst not commend his Case to the Emperour till being sick and often visited by the Emperour she commended this Presbyter to the Emperour as a devout and faithful Person who having got into the Emperour's favour he told him as he had done his Sister of the hard measure Arius had from the Council whom he affirmed to be of the same Judgment with them and that if he might be admitted to the Emperour's presence he would declare his consent to their Decrees The Emperour wondered to hear this and said That if Arius would subscribe those Decrees he would not only admit him to his presence but send him home to Alexandria with Honour and wrote to him to that purpose See the Letter Socrat. Hist l. 1. c. 25. wondering that he had not declared sooner seeing as the Historian says the Emperour had often exhorted him to it but being come to Constantinople he with Euzoius and some others presented the Emperour an Account of their Faith in Writing which was this To believe in One God the Father Almighty and in the Lord Jesus Christ his Son who was made by him before all Ages God the Word by whom all things in Heaven and Earth were made who came down and was incarnate who suffered and rose again and ascended and shall come to judge the Quick and Dead and in the Holy Ghost the Resurrection of the Flesh and the Life to come in One Catholick Church of God from one end of the World to the other this we believe as God shall judge us now and in the World to come On this Confession the Emperour ordered his Return to Alexandria whether he went and revived the Divisions among the People framing new Accusations against Alexander the Emperour therefore
which I quote p. 3. speaking to the Christians Mahomet says Say not God hath a Companion equal to him because you know the contrary P. 4. God created the Heavens and the Earth and then ascended into Heaven P. 44. Zachary prayed to God for a Progeny the Angels declared to him from God That he should have a Son called John he shall affirm the Messias to be the Word of God Jesus is with God as is Adam God created him out of the Earth I do not associate God him with any one and acknowledge no other Lord but him P. 46. There is no God but God alone the Omnipotent and Wise P. 86. There be some that alter the Scripture in reading it and will make us believe that what we read is in the Scripture though it be not they blaspheme and know it well God gave not to Men the Scripture Knowledge and Prophesies to say to the People Worship me instead of God but that they should say Observe exactly what you read in the Scripture God doth not command you to adore Angels or Prophets P. 48. We believe in what was inspired by Moses Jesus and generally by all the Prophets Abraham was not of them that believe in many Gods P. 49. Follow ye the Law of Abraham that is pleasing to him he profest the Unity of the Divine Majesty he was not of them that believe in many Gods P. 94. Certainly they that believe Messias the Son of Mary to be God are impious The Messias commanded the Children of Israel to worship God his and their Lord. Paradise is forbidden to him that shall say God hath a Companion equal to him Such as affirm there are Three Gods are impious P. 86. The Messias the Son of Mary is a Prophet and Apostle of God like to the Prophets that came before him His Mother is Holy say to him Who can hinder God to extirminate the Messias and his Mother P. 86. Of the Jews he says few of them shall believe because of their Malice and Blasphemies vomited against Mary They said We have slain the Messias Jesus the Son of Mary the Prophet and Apostle of God Certainly they slew him not neither crucified him they crucified one that resembled him such as doubt it are in a manifest Error for God took him up to himself Such as have the knowledge of the Scripture ought to believe in Jesus before his Death he shall be a Witness against them in the Day of Judgment P. 80 81. You shall hear many Christians that have an inclination towards true Believers and have Priests and Religious that are humble and their eyes full of tears say Lord we believe in thy Law write us in the Number of them that profess thy Unity P. 95. He shall say in the Day of Judgment O Jesus didst thou injoyn thy People to Worship Thee and thy Mother as two Gods Jesus shall answer Praised be thy Name I will take heed of speaking what is not true I delivered nothing but what thou commandest me to speak viz. Worship God your Lord and mine p. 99. Infidels believe not in his Unity p. 101. The Jews say That the Son of God is most just and powerful The Christians say That the Messias is the Son of God their words are like the words of Infidels but God shall lay on them his Curse p. 153. Consider how they blaspheme they adore their Doctors and Priests and the Messias also the Son of Mary who commanded them to worship One God alone there is but one sole God there is nothing equal to him they would extinguish the Ligqt of God but he shall not suffer them How the Naked Gospel agreeth with the Alchoran in most of these particulars might be shewn but he that reads it will be soon satisfied that it is a Commentary on that Text. But since the Doctor or some one for him hath written his Vindication I shall briefly consider what is said in Defence of those Propositions condemned by the University And first I observe That in these Propositions and what may be added to them from the Naked Gospel the quintessence of the Arian and Socinian Controversies is contracted and composed Secundum Artem and by him or some other on his behalf recommended as a safe means to promote a General Comprehension and an enlarged Charity but to the destruction of Catholick Verity Now because these Propositions are not only published in several Impressions of that Libel but defended by the Author or some other on his behalf and the Gangreen begins to spread among prophane and unstable Wits which too much abound it seemed necessary to provide an Antidote against those old Errors to which the Author hath given a new Resurrection like that which he maintains of our Bodies not in the same form but another more agreeable to his new Divinity and Philosophy and equally opposite to the written Gospel as understood by the Primitive Fathers and received by the Church of England The difference which the Author fancieth to be made in the Gospel is the preaching of the Doctrine of the Eternal Deity of our Saviour which this Author explodes as not to be comprehended by his Reason and not agreeable to that Natural Religion which he makes the Foundation of the Gospel now if there be any alteration made it is by those which have denied the Eternal Deity of our Saviour for as I said while St. John was yet living Ebion and Cerinthus began that Heresie Ebion taught That Christ was a meer Man and had no existence before he was born into the World of which the Church of Ephesus then complained to St. John desiring him to write in Confutation of that Heresie and Justin Martyr and Ireneus brand this Heresie as did Ignatius before them and St. John before him who called such as denied that Jesus Christ was come in the Flesh Deceivers and Antichrists Cerinthus held a pre-existence of Reason or the Word which he says descended on our Saviour at his Baptism and ascended from him into Heaven when he was crucified for which Opinions St. John meeting him in a Bath fled from his company as fearing least the Walls of the Bath wherein he was might fall on him Against these Heresies St. John being importun'd wrote his Gospel purposely to assert the Divine Essence of the Son of God as he tells us ch 20.31 These things are written that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ the Son of God and that believing ye might have life through his name And besides the Historical part of that Gospel the whole is one continued Argument for the Confirmation of this Truth which we shall have occasion to speak of more at large and shall only observe here what he says 1 Job 5.20 We know that the Son of God is come and hath given us an understanding to know him that is true This is the true God and eternal life And in the 2 Epistle v. 7. Many deceivers are
which term he may comprehend all sort of Heresies an universal Toleration without any reserve which hath been pleaded for in former times 2. That through the whole Book it is not so much the manner of the Generation that is insisted on but the Eternity of it is denied and to this end the Arguments of the Arrians are applauded and the Reasons and Scriptures that affirm it are either suppressed or ridicul'd To begin with the Propositions referred to in the Decree he tells us That Mahomet did profess all the Articles of the Christian Faith but Mahomet did not profess the Eternal Generation of the Son of God therefore this is no Article of the Christian Faith in the Doctor 's Opinion What the Charity of the Socinians is toward such as hold the Doctrine of the Church of England we may learn from Smalcius at the end of his Book concerning the Divinity of Christ We doubt not to affirm boldly that not one of all those who believe Jesus Christ of himself God can ever by any means have certain hope of Eternal Life by vertue of his Opinion concerning Christ Hence they call us Polytheists Antichristians and say we are not worthy of the Name of Christians This is Charity enlarged In the same Paragraph he says When by nice and hot Disputes concerning especially the Second and Third Persons of the Trinity the Minds of the People had been long confounded so that to vulgar understandings the Doctrine of the Trinity appeared no less guilty of Polytheism than that of Image-worship did of Idolatry then was there a tempting opportunity offered to the Impostor and he laid hold on it to set up himself for a reformer of such corruptions as were both too gross to be justified and too visible to be denied Now what did this Impostor reform but the Doctrine of the Trinity denying the Godhead of the Son and Holy Ghost as such corruptions which were too gross to be justified and too visible to be denied It is a credible History of those Times which I have related that one Sergius a Monk and some other Apostate Christians join'd with Mahomet in compiling the Alchoran these retained so much veneration for our Saviour as to grant him what the Socinians do a kind of Divinity for they acknowledge him to be a true Prophet and so he may be called Divine as we call St. John by way of Eminency The Divine and so our Socinian Reformers agree with the Mahometan some say the Doctrine of the Trinity was laid aside to make way for the Turks to become Christians but we find a contrary effect that many Christians turn Turks I hope the Reader is satisfied by what I collected out of the Alchoran that Mahomet and his Arian Genius purposely designed to overthrow the Doctrine of the Trinity and to represent our Saviour as a meer Man though as a Messenger of God And what less is implied in these words of the Doctor 's That to vulgar understandings the Doctrine of the Trinity appeared no less guilty of Polytheism than that of Image-worship did of Idolatry The next Proposition is This When the great Question concerning the eternity of his i. e. Christ's Godhead first embroiled the World Constantine condemned it as a silly Question fitter for Fools and Children than for Priests or wise Men. Note here The Question was not concerning the Manner of the Generation of our Saviour but the Eternity of his Godhead and how justly this Censure of Constantine's was past on that Question this Author says we may discover in three particulars 1. It was impertinent to our Lord's Design 2. Fruitless to the Contemplator's own purpose 3. It is dangerous This is Socinianism in grain Now because the Author would excuse himself from this Charge by pleading that he only relates the Opinion of Constantine the consideration of that good Emperor's management and determination of this great Question is more strictly and fully to be weighed This Author tells us p. 31. Col. 2. Such was the judgment of the great Constantine when the Game was first set on foot How it was then by the Arian party represented to him is not evident they dealt subtily but after that he had called the Nicene Council and was fully informed of the state of the Question he was so far from thinking it silly and vain that he wrote Letters to several Churches to inform them that after mature consideration the Opinion of Arius was condemned branded the Arians with the Name of Porphyrians caused their Books to be burnt and threatned death to any that should conceal them and hearing of the miserable end of that wretched man as it is described by Socrates he made it his business to extirpate it No doubt the Doctor knew these passages related of Constantine as well as those which he mentions calling it a Silly Question and fitter for Boys than for Priests what can he plead then for proclaiming the one and wholly suppressing the other which were Constantine's second and best Thoughts and his setled Judgment after mature deliberation Yet our Author still ridicules the Athanasian Doctrine as a Pushpin Controversie and says that Leonas reprimanded that party with Go and play the Fools at home Leonas was an Arian sent by Constantius the Arian Emperour to awe the Council nor did he bid them go and play the Fools at home I find no such thing in the place quoted by the Doctor viz. Socrates l. 2. c. 23. But there is a full Character of this Leonas in Soz. l. 4. c. 22. how that Acacius an Arian Bishop held private Conference with him and consulted for that Interest but could not prevail insomuch that when both Parties were met in his Lodgings and he found the Arian Party like to be baffled he bid them in these words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which I think no good Man would translate Go and play the Fools at home Socrates l. 2. c. 40. which signifies only Go and talk it out in the Church Leonas supposing they would be more modest and reverent in that Holy Place than in his House But of this the Historian observes in the next chap. 42 That Acacius and Eudoxius made great advantage For says he they perceiving the Indignation of the Emperour against Macedonius and other Hereticks deposed many of them and advanced Eudoxius to the Bishoprick of Constantinople for the contention was not so much for Religion as for Preferment the contending Parties having deposed each other and Acacius and Eudoxius with their Party did especially endeavour to depose the adverse Party and coined their New Creeds to that end being so confident of the Emperour's Favour and hence grew those various Confessions of some Councils under Constantius whereof p. 34. c. 4. the Doctor says That Socrates reckoned no less than Nine not Nine Councils but Confessions of which the Historian gives this particular Account calling them a Labyrinth of Expositions two of which were
same particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be used in both places yet the Apostle meant not to use it in the same sence in both the sence of it in the former is contrary to the later we rejoyce that our Sins are taken away by his Death but are sorry to have our Justification taken away by his Resurrection we are justified by his Blood because thereby our Sins are blotted out but we are justified by his Resurrection because thereon our Faith is built The inference which he makes is this So plain it is that the Faith which the Gospel requireth had its foundation in Natural Religion We see here how hard the Doctor strains to advance his Natural or Pelagian Religion he will not admit that the Apostle spake sence but contradictions in the same Period he speaks our sence not his own in the first part viz. that Christ died in our stead and we are justified by his Blood because thereby our Sins are blotted out but he speaks his own sence in the other part because he grounds our Justification on his Natural Religion and thereby evidently destroyeth the Evangelical Faith which we assert viz. That Christ by his Death made an Expiation or Satisfaction for our Sins In this the Doctor Yoaks himself with the Socinians for so Crellius speaking of the Propositions 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 says They do not alway signify a meritorious Cause but only a final C. 1. Sect. 6. i. e. That he died for the good of Mankind as St. Paul is said to suffer for the Church and we are to lay down our lives for the brethren Col. 1.24 1 John 3.16 But can this be the sence of those plain places 1 Pet. 3.18 Christ hath suffered for our sins the just for the unjust and 2 Cor. 5.14 He gave himself a ransome for all and to taste death for every man and Luke 22.19 20. This is my bloud which was shed for you and Mat. 20.28 The son of man gave his life a ransome for many And ought we not to interpret this of Rom. 4. by the Analogy of those other places wherein the Scriptures do abound as Col. 1. Eph. 1. 1 Tim. 2. Heb. 7.27 1 Joh. 1.7 Revel 1.5 against all these Socinus urgeth that in 1 Kings 14.16 where it is said God shall deliver up Israel for the sins of Jeroboam who did sin and who made Israel to sin where he contends that the same signification of the words for the sins of Jeroboam ought to be interpreted as we do interpret that of Rom 4. which would be a kind of Blasphemy to say That Christ was delivered for our sins because not only we had sinned but had made him to sin as Jeroboam made Israel to sin Chap. 3. He applauds that Faith which is a Duty in Natural Religion It is saith he a Cardinal Vertue Justice towards God that pays him his due this was taught before Moses brought the positive Law into the World and that the Gospel builds on that foundation read Rom. 4. This speaks of the Faith of Abraham which hath been already considered Another Commendation of Natural Faith is That it is a great Promoter of Obedience wherein the Old Testament being silent as he says he sends us to Heb. 11. in the New Testament But had not those worthies any notice of the promised seed Had they no knowledge of a future state Did not they look for a heavenly country v. 16. And for a city which had foundations v. 10. Did not Abraham receive his Isaac in a type v. 19. Did not Moses see him who is invisible and had respect to the recompence of reward v. 26 27. Did not he write of Christ Did not the rest suffer in confidence of a better resurrection And did natural Faith instruct and enable them to do and suffer all these things If all these were the fruits and effects of a Natural Faith I cannot see what need there was of the Gospel if Nature shewed the way to Life and Immortality which 2 Tim. 1.10 says was brought to light by the Gospel if it taught so much Obedience Constancy and Patience how can Christ say John 14.6 I am the way the truth and the life and no man comes to the Father but by me How is it said That grace and truth came by Jesus Christ in opposition to what was revealed by Moses John 1.17 The law was weak Rom. 8.3 through the flesh and what that could not do God did by sending his own Son c. and made nothing perfect but the bringing in of a better hope Heb. 7.19 This it seems the Doctor would teach the Apostle for Gal. 3.3 This I would learn of you Received you the Spirit by the Works of the Law or by the hearing of Faith was this hearing of Faith the voice of Nature or the preaching of the Gospel It was the knowledge of Christ crucified which the Apostle so valued that he accounted all other vaine and ineffectual to Salvation P. 63. c. 1. And as our Author says What Devotion is there without Love and what Love without some knowledge of the Object And doubtless the more excellent the Object is the more will our love be increased when we consider that he who first loved us was the Eternal Son of God and that he so loved us as to die for us that we might live to and with him this will heighten our love to him above all things for what are Moses and the Prophets or the Apostles were they crucified for us have they redeemed us from the wrath of God They indeed taught us the will of God and gave us Divine as well as Moral Precepts but Christ only can write them in our hearts he only can pardon our sins having obtained Remission at the expence of his own Blood We therefore joyn with the Doctor in recommending the Duties of Natural Religion and say these ought we to do but by no means to leave the Duties of Evangelical Faith undone or disbelieved for though that hath done vertuously in many respects yet this excelleth them all In Chap. 4. he strikes again at the Foundation of Faith under the name of Credulity which he calls a Vice and the danger in this is when we pay that to a * Doth not this insinuate that Châ—â—â—t is a Creature Creature which is due to God only and mentioneth a Question of Mr. Chillingworth's to the Romanists Why implicit Faith in our Lord might not as well avail for Justification as implicit Faith in the Church By implicit Faith in the Church the Romanists mean to believe as the Church believes yet I do not believe the Papists think this implicit Faith will justify them without good Works And if by implicit Faith in Christ he means only a general belief of his Doctrines without obedience to his Commands neither is this available for Justification so that it was no such difficult Question but it might be
do in this Chapter they were such as our Saviour had exasperated against himself calling them Thieves and Robbers that came to no other end but to kill and destroy whereas he came to give them Eternal Life which St. Joh. 20. says was the end of his Writing the Gospel That ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ the Son of God and that believing ye might have life through his name This our Saviour proves stiling himself the good Shepherd that came to lay down his Life for his Sheep i. e. all that should hear his Voice and that they might not doubt of his power to do it he tells them v. 18. I have power to lay it down and I have power to take it again And this he was to do by Commission or Commandment from his Father who loved him v. 17. As being of one will with his Father in this v. 15. As the Father knoweth me even so know I my Father Again he proves his Divine Power by his Works which were such as the Jews confest the Devil himself could not do and to them he appeals v. 37. If I do not the works of my Father believe me not Now the same Divine Works in specie argues the same Divine Power and therefore our Saviour tells them I and my Father are one that is as the Jews themselves understood him One in Essence as well as in Operation the Jews on these Doctrines and Arguments of our Saviour take up Stones to stone him as guilty of Blasphemy who being but a Man made himself God for v. 36. as Christ himself saith it was because he said I am the Son of God so that it seems to be the Son of God and to be God were equivalent terms and so understood by the Jews for by either of these they concluded that he made himself equal with God To silence the Jews Accusation he urgeth a Scripture which they own'd being written in their Law Psal 82.6 Is it not written in your Law I said ye are Gods and the Argument is thus formed and applied à majore ad minus If he called them Gods unto whom the Word of God came say ye of him whom the Father hath sanctified and sent into the World thou blasphemest because I said I am the Son of God This his being the Son of God he proves by another Argument from the Works which he did and they acknowledged that none but God could do therefore he argues thus He that doth the Works of God and such as you grant none but God can do he is God and ye ought to believe that he is in God and God in him v. 38. That is that they are of the same Nature and Essence and in this sence the Jews still understood him for they still sought to take him and stone him So that our Saviour still maintained his Doctrine That he was the Son of God in that sense which the Jews counted Blasphemy our Saviour doth not draw them off from their sense of his being the Son of God by Nature to a sense of his being so only by Unction and Sanctification i. e. to a Socinian instead of an Orthodox But as the Gentleman observes our Saviour answered them in profound Wisdom with regard to the Circumstances of Place Time and Persons all which we shall now consider and manifest our Saviour's Wisdom in respect of all these 1. As to the Persons they were resolved Enemies to the Life and Doctrine of our Saviour and such as would not believe him though he told them never so plainly as our Saviour says when they ask'd him the like ensnaring Question v. 25. If you be the Christ tell us plainly Jesus answered them I told you and ye believe me not because you are not of my sheep Their present Honour and Interest was a barr to their belief How can ye believe that seek the honour that cometh of men and not that which cometh of God They understood not that plainer Parable in v. 6. of the true and false Shepherds And our Saviour tells his Disciples Luke 8. v. 10. To you it is given to know the Mysteries of the Kingdom of God but to others in parables that seeing they might not see and hearing they might not understand These were those obstinate Jews in whom was fulfilled the Prophecy of Isai 6.9 as St. Matthew relates ch 13.13 for this cause probably our Saviour in his Wisdom thought it not fit to cast Pearls before Swine he knew they would not believe though he had asserted his Deity never so expresly 2ly As to the time it was the Wisdom of our Saviour not to expose himself to the Rage of the Jews the Time designed for his Death and the Manner of it viz. by Crucifixion not by Stoning being not yet come and he had many Doctrines to instruct his Disciples more perfectly in them some they could not yet bear and some they knew but imperfectly even that of the Resurrection and these things required his Presence with them for a longer time and therefore he withdrew himself from them Unless this Gentleman will make himself wiser than his Maker he must acknowledge that when our Saviour answered those Jews so as to silence their Accusation of Blasphemy and stop their Rage who sought to stone him though he did not by that Argument which he used assert his Deity which yet he still maintained that he used his profound Wisdom in the Argument which he urged But what if from this Scripture from which this Gentleman would prove that Christ is called the Son of God by vertue of his Mission only it shall appear that he is the Son of God by Nature and Essence may we not then retort that he only casts a Mist on the eyes of the Simple and hath a Spirit of Contradiction if it shall appear that the first Question was Whether our Saviour was the Christ as it is clear v. 24. i. e. the Messiah If 2dly It appears that the Messiah was the Natural Son of God then this Scripture from whence he makes the Objection will be an utter Confutation of it Now this was the sence which the Jews had viz. that Christ or the Messiah was the Son of God and they accused him of Blasphemy because he whom they thought to be but a meer Man made himself the Messias that is God for they would by no means grant him to be the Messiah That the Messiah was to be the Son of God R. Sclemo proves from the second Psalm of which he says our Fathers expounded this Psalm concerning the Messiah of whom it is said Kiss the Son lest he be angry and thou art my Son which explains what is meant by the word Son viz. that it could not agree with any other Interpretation as that of Be ye instructed or worship purely for the Psalmist expounds himself for it being said v. 7. Thou art my Son viz. he whom the Gentiles conspired against it follows according
as his Church and his Body then the Son is said to be subject not the Godhead of Christ but the whole Church of Christ which is the Head and Members which then make one Christ It is the Mediatorial Kingdom that shall be delivered up not his Everlasting Kingdom he shall reign in the one till he hath subdued all his Enemies but of the other there shall be no end P. 27. c. 1. The Doctor restrains his Singularity of being the only begotten Son of God to his being anointed before his coming into the World And p. 26. c. 2. he says That anointing was a Complement of the greatest Kindness and Honor that could be bestowed on a Guest and from that Office in Festivals was preferred to a Ceremony for enseating Kings Priests and Prophets and our Lord by it is character'd but indefinitely whether Prophet Priest or King or all I perswade myself that the Doctor learnt this from Crellius on Heb. 1.9 upon which he says Our Saviour received an immense measure of the Holy Ghost but not as the Scripture says without measure but some degrees more than what other Messengers of God received Chap. 7. is to shew That it is no more necessary that we should understand what the Person of Christ is than for a Traveller to understand the Features of the Sun c. Which he says concerning Constantine's calling this Enquiry a Silly Question hath been already considered to which he adds That our Saviour could not require a belief of the whole truth concerning the Dignity of his Person because the Gospel was preached to the Poor And must they says he be excluded from the means of Redemption because they are excluded from the means of understanding the Mysteries of his Incarnation Must they perish for want of such a belief as is morally impossible for them to acquire Ans But is it morally impossible to believe what the Blessed Jesus hath revealed of himself Indeed if the Traveller shut his eyes he may walk in the Dark though the Sun shine clearly on him And is the Traveller benefited only by the light of the Sun doth he owe nothing to the comfortable influence of it Or the Poor to whom the Gospel belongs are they only the Ignorant and Unbelievers Christ tells us That the poor to whom the kingdom of heaven belongs are the poor in spirit such are sensible that they are naturally blind and miserable and poor and naked not such as are rich and increased in Goods and have need of nothing as the Laodiceans Revel 4.17 This is the Doctor 's Pelagian sence which hath led him into other gross Errors The Poor in the Gospel are such as can submit their understanding to the Revelations of God and though with the Blessed Virgin they doubt a while how these things can be true yet they believe them to be true on the Revelation and this is that Humility and Lowliness for which she is commended and this is the Power of the Gospel which is mighty through God to cast down the strongholds and imaginations of every one that exalts himself against the knowledge of God and brings into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ 2 Cor. 10.4 5 6. Is it not necessary we should know him in whom we believe Then is not the knowledge of God necessary Is it not necessary to know him on the knowledge of whom our Hope and Belief of Eternal Life is founded Then it is not necessary to know whether CHRIST or Mahomet were an Impostor and if Mahomet have delivered as good Natural or Moral Precepts as our Saviour hath done we may make him the Object of our Faith and expect Eternal Life by Mahomet as well as by Christ Therefore doubtless it is necessary to believe of Christ as St. Peter and St. Thomas did That he is the Son of the living God our Lord and our God which Flesh and Blood hath not revealed to us and on which Faith Christ hath promised to build his Church They who saw his Miracles and heard his Doctrine confessed that God was with him but in the Confessions of St. Peter and St. Thomas there was something extraordinary which they believed of the Person of Christ P. 32. c. 1. Two Evangelists says the Doctor trace our Lord's Genealogy but as they derive it not from his real but supposed Father so they take two several ways not to satsfie but amuse us The design of St. Matthew was to shew that Christ descended from Abraham and David by Joseph's being of that Tribe viz. of Juda being the natural Son of Jacob to which it is objected That though Joseph more of that Tribe yet Christ could not be so by descent from Joseph who was not his natural Father and by the Virgin Mary he could not be of the seed of David she being of the Tribe of Levi and not of Juda. Vossius recites the Opinion of some Ancients who thought it was enough to entitle Mary to the Tribe of Juda because she married into that Tribe therefore he proves Mary to be of the same Tribe with Joseph because Numb 36.6 It was not lawful for a Virgin to marry out of her own Tribe Nor would Joseph being a just Man have taken one of another Tribe and this practise of marrying in the same Tribe was especially observed where the Virgin was an Heiress that the Inheritance might be kept not only in the Tribe but the Family and therefore they usually married the next of kin the Virgin therefore having no Brother was married to Joseph who was of near consanguinity with her See Vossius's Genealogy And he proves the same Descent of the Blessed Virgin from St. Luke's Genealogy viz. from David to which I refer the Reader But if it he questioned why if Joseph and Mary had been both descended from David why St. Matthew had not named Mary rather than Joseph who was only a supposed Father To this he answers 1. Because the Husband was not to be bard of his Honour 2. It was not the Custom of the Jews to derive the Genealogy from the Woman and the Kinred of Joseph and Mary being well known there was no necessity of mentioning it among the Jews which dwelt in Palestine to whom the Evangelist wrote And they were very curious in preserving their Genealogies and it would much have prejudiced St. Matthew's Gospel if undertaking to prove the Descent of Christ from David he should have failed in that chief design and in the beginning of the Book and doubtless the Jews who were living at that time when he wrote which was about forty Years after our Lord's Nativity had their Genealogy preserved and probably some of our Lord's Kinred then living and they having seen his Miracles by which they were induced to believe him to be the Son of God knew also that he descended of David according to the Flesh as the Gospel teacheth and there was no Objection made to the contrary by Jews
in Scripture seems to contradict another take such a course to reconcile them as the Laws and Customs of all the World direct i. e. that those expressions which exalt our Saviour should stoop to those that depress him and this he adds is the safer way since it will lead us to such a belief as will suffice for that end for whose sake alone belief itself is required Chap. 10. Is intitled of the Word or Matter which is the Object of Faith Here the Doctor undertakes to give us a Catalogue of Fundamentals and in one or two general Aphorisms to discover why and how far belief is necessary He rejects what Doctor Hammond wrote on that subject as insufficient for satisfaction and says It is like an Advertizement in a Gazett which however exact cannot secure from a mistake though we meet the Man described The reason of this Reflection on Dr. Hammond of whom I shall only say That if in this or the former Age there were any more learned there was not one more pious or if there were any more pious there was none more learned is because he hath so razed the very Foundations of Socinianism that there needs no more to be said against it than what that admirable Man hath written in that excellent Tract which the Doctor hath mentioned as Bathsheba did Adonijah to King Solomon against the Life of his Darling 1 Kings 2.23 for as no Man hath laid a better Foundation of Faith it being the same which the Apostle laid 1 Cor. 3.11 so none hath been more careful of the Superstructure of a Holy Life and to prevent the laying on of such combustible matter as Wood Hay or Stubble of which I shall give the Reader a brief Extract that he may see how invidiously the Doctor reflects on it as insufficient for our satisfaction p. 40. c. 1. I shall begin with p. 11. where Dr. Hammond acknowledgeth that he took the first hint of his Notion from the words of that great Champion of the Catholick Faith set down in the Council of Nice St. Athanasius in Epist ad Epictetum where speaking of the Catholick Faith set down by the Canons of that Council against the Arians and other Hereticks he says The Faith confessed by the Bishops in that Synod according to the Divine Scripture is of itself sufficient for the averting of all Impiety and establishment of all Piety in Christ c. Then p. 27. This one Corner-stone Jesus Christ is a most competent ample Foundation on which to superstruct the largest Pile of Building to erect a Church of pious Livers and to bring all rational Men within the compass of it which he asserts p. 28. against the Doctor 's Natural Religion The Law written in Mens Hearts Naturale Judicatorium and a Light sealed upon us in our first composure because the prescribed Duties wanted their full stature if compared with Christ's super-additions 2. The fortifications against Temptations were too slender there being little knowledge of the Soul's Immortality and of Rewards and Punishments in another Life on which account St. Paul challengeth the wise Men of the World 1 Cor. 1.20 Where is the wise c. Let all the Scribes or Doctors of the Law the Searchers or profound Interpreters of the Scripture bring forth such Evidences of their efficacy in reforming and purifying Mens Lives as the Apostles had done by these so despicable means the Gospel of the Cross of Christ p. 32. Then p. 33. he makes Mahomet who as our Doctor says profest all the Articles of the Christian Faith to have laid the grounds of all impurity in his carnal sensual Paradice and he concludes with a saying of Chalcidius in his Comment on Plato's Timaeus which Dr. H. thinks he had from the Gospel and says it contains the sum of it That the Reason or Word of God no question says Dr. H. the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in St. John 's stile is God taking care of humane affairs and is the cause unto Men of their living well and happily if they do not neglect that Gift granted by the Supreme God Dr. H. having said enough in this to discover the Nakedness of our Doctor and his Natural Religion goes on to shew the Nakedness of his Gospel p. 35. by shewing that Christ crucified i. e. as he is the Sacrifice for the Sins of the whole World the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or means of Expiation or Pardon on our return and change is absolutely necessary to found our hope as that hope is necessary to excite our endeavours This strikes the body of the Socinians to the heart and then shews what is necessary to be believed concerning the Person of Christ from 1 Tim. 3.16 viz. That he was God manifest in the flesh and observes That it is the great Mystery of Piety p. 42. against the Doctor 's deriding of Mysteries of which he says God was so intent on bringing Sinners to Repentance that he was pleased to assume and manifest his will in or by our flesh and as God visible on Earth to preach Reformation to us and hence he says All the Devils countermines in the first Ages of the Church were designed purposely against this one Article the Deity or Godhead of Christ Incarnate N. B. as if he were not what he oft affirmed himself to be the Messias i. e. the Eternal Son of God and God blessed for ever which was so the known Title of the God of Israel that whenever the God of Israel was named in the Jewish Services it was answered by all by their adding these words God blessed for ever p. 46. Had it been only a Prophet tho' never so great and extraordinarily furnished with Signs and Wonders he had been but a Servant of God and there are many Presidents of resisting such but the personal descent of God himself and his assumption of our Flesh to his Divinity was an enforcement beyond all the Methods of Wisdom that were ever used in the World p. 45. And the Doctrine of Ancient and Modern Arians and Photinians who so industriously lessen the Divinity of Christ in pretence of Zeal to God the Father to whom they will not permit him to be equal extreamly takes off from the Mystery of Piety the Foundation of a good Life laid in the Eternal God's coming down to preach it to us and is a direct contradiction to those places where Christ is called God Acts 20.28 Tit. 2.13 And the modern Socinians have taken out this principal Stone from the Foundation God manifest in the Flesh P. 56. he says That Baptism in the Name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost is a Foundation on which they that administred it were commanded to superstruct all the Duties of a Christian Life Mat. 28.20 The Authority of all and each the Persons of the Trinity being purposely engaged in this one great Interest Dr. H. having treated of the Apostles Creed comes in p. 84. to shew That what is superadded
was apparently designed by the Compilers for some special use to fence the Catholick Faith from the Corruptions Depravations Doubtings and Contradictions of Hereticks as in the Nicene Creed the Oneness of our Lord Jesus Christ was added when the Arians opposed the Apostolick Tradition and by corrupting detected the words of Scripture to their sence which Dr. H. shews more largely in his Note on 1 Joh. 5.7 and of such Additions he says That when the Church hath thought meet to erect an additional Bulwark against Hereticks such as reject them may be deemed to side with those Hereticks p. 86. And this is the summ of what he says concerning the Athanasian Creed the Doctrine whereof he says is well nigh all to assert the Unity of the Divine Nature and Trinity of Persons against those Hereticks who had brought Novel Propositions into the Church of which Doctrinal part he says that Athanasius being only a Father of the Church they were not necessary to be explicitely acknowledged nor absolutely imposed on any but such as were Members of some Church that had actually received Athanasius's Explication or than it appeared concordant with the more authentick universal Confessions as every Doctrinal Proposition of it will be found to do As for the Damnatory Sentences Dr. Ham. supposeth them to be interpreted in opposition to those Heresies that had invaded the Church not that it defined it to be a damnable sin to fail in understanding or believing the full matter of any of those Explications Dr. Ham. having as a wise Master Builder laid this Foundation shews how necessary it is for the end of building on it a holy Life and an uniform universal Obedience to the Commands of Christ in opposition to Idolatry Formality Hypocrisie and to Sacriledge Profaneness and Impiety as also to improve the Vertues of Obedience to Superiours Charity to all Mankind Purity of Flesh and Spirit Contentedness and taking up the Cross and lastly how useful it is to confute false Doctrines 1. Of the Romanists as Penances Indulgences of Supererrogating Merits of Attrition improved into Contrition by the Priest's aid without change of Life Dispensableness of Oaths Arts of Equivocation Purgatory Cessation of Allegiance and especially of Infallibility 2ly Of the Solifidians and Fiduciaries the Predestinarians and irrespective Decrees of Election and Reprobation of the Divine Prescience against the Socinians who deny that God foresees all things and though they grant his Omnipresence and Omnipotence yet question the infinity of his Science which is apparently false as appears by God's Predictions to the Prophets When I considered the Writings of both these Doctors their Foundations and Superstructures it brought to my mind those two sorts of Builders and Building mentioned by our Saviour Mat. 7. the one built on that approved Rock of St. Peter 's Confession the other on that Sand whereon Arius Socinus and that Man of an ominous Name Sandius pitcht their Tabernacles the one stands firm tho' for 1600 Years the Rain descended Flouds came and the Wind blew on it the other tho' like the Walls of Jerusalem it hath been often attempted to be fastned hath still been blown down and may the Fall of it be still great P. 41. c. 2. Our Doctor says If the Relation between the written Word and rational Consequence be so remote as none but a skilful Herald can derive its Pedigree then is a good Christian no more obliged to believe such an Inference than is every good Subject to be a good Herald As if the Ignorant were no ways obliged to follow the Directions of the wise and good Men or as if Subjects were not bound to obey those Laws whereof they cannot ken those Reasons which the wise and consulting Legislators on good Reasons have established for their Security What tho' the Papists do most absurdly infer from Christ's Command to St. Peter to feed his Lambs that all those Popes which pretend to be his Successors are thereby commissioned to Rule and Govern all Nations and Persons in all Ages Cannot so enquiring a Person as the Doctor or one that is more or one that is less rational from such Scriptural premises as God was made Flesh Christ is God over all equal and one with his Father with undeniable Reason infer as the Catholick Church in all Ages hath done That he is the Eternal Son of God But such an Inference is so contrary to the Socinian's Reason that it is equally rejected with contempt and derision as Popish Impositions and by the Doctor numbred among them But Bernardus non videt omnia He undertakes therefore to bless the World with such a description of them that it shall be as easie to know them without pains or art as it was for the meanest Beggar in the street to understand whom King Ahasuerus would Honour when he caused Mordecai in Royal Manner to be publickly honoured and by Proclamation enjoyned the People to bow the Knee as he past by them The Qualifications for Matter of Faith he says must be these 1. It must be easie to be understood by the meanest capacity and therefore he rejects any thing that is called a Mystery though God manifested in the Flesh be so called by the Apostle yea though the same Mystery be implied in that very Scripture which he quotes to prove his assertion viz. Rom. 10.9 If thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus i. e. that Jesus is the Lord which no man can say but by the Holy Ghost i. e. not by a natural Faith but by a supernatural Revelation such as our Saviour says Flesh and blood hath not revealed And it is observable that though in the Title of this Chapter he mentioneth the Word as well as the Matter to be believed yet he makes no mention of the Word by which the Person of our Saviour is generally understood so that Faith in our Lord Jesus Christ the Foundation of our Faith is excluded from being the Object of our belief for he writes the WORD in a larger Character which might induce the Reader to believe that he meant as St. John 1.1 The Son of God which is the adequate Object of Christian Faith but speaks nothing of him in all that Chapter 2ly He says It must be an express Word of God This no Protestant denieth but they do generally urge it against the Papists who teach as necessary Articles of Faith the Commandments of Men And may we not conclude by this Position that they who oppugne such a Fundamental to which Eternal Life is promised may come short of Salvation Christ saith He that believes and is baptized this is but one entire proposition as our Author observes that it is not only he that believes but he that believes and is baptized and Salvation cannot belong to them that put asunder what Christ hath joyned as the Socinians do in the Case of Baptism which they call only a Rite and Ceremony 3ly He says It must be expresly honoured with
Conclusion he deserves to be shaken into the Fire again for the impotent Creature doth not only hiss at the mistaken Author of Nolumus leges Angliae mutari but on the whole Convocation for their stiffness to their Constitutions whose very Authors says he in the Conclusion were they now living and true to their own reason must be willing to abolish them This is the Doctor 's enlarged Charity to the deceased Compilers of our Liturgy that they would have done as he desireth i. e. removing the Nicene and Athanasian Creeds the Litany Doxology and I know not what Constitutions besides the Institutions of our Saviour to wit the two Sacraments Baptism and the Eucharist the ends whereof this Doctor with the Socinians doth utterly destroy and retains them only as Rites and Badges of an outward Profession of a Naked Gospel But let us enquire wherein this enlarged Charity of the Doctor 's doth consist Charity is either the love of God or of our Neighbours Now first our love to God ought to bear proportion with the love he hath bestowed on us of which the Apostle Joh. 3.16 saith God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son that whosoever believeth in him should not perish but have everlasting life And Ver. 17. That the world by him might be saved The World then without Christ was in a lost and perishing condition God had for Sin shut them up under a sentence of Condemnation and it was his infinite Goodness and Wisdom to contrive the Means of our Salvation such as might reconcile us to himself to which end he thought this the fittest to send his only begotten Son into the World to dye for our sins the just for the unjust making him to be sin for us that we might be made the righteousness of God in him of this love the Apostle with admiration says Behold what manner of love the Father hath shewn to us c. If God had only sent a Prophet a Man of God to make a fuller Declaration of his Will this had not been a reason of so great Admiration but when he sent his only begotten Son that was one with the Father and laid help on him that was mighty able to save us to the utmost being God and Man this deserves the Sic So and the Ecce Behold and our admiration What manner of Love had he been the Son of God only by a miraculous Conception which freed him from Original Corruption had he only lived a Holy Life and left us a good Example had he only died to confirm the truth of his Doctrine as the Socinians say the Birth of St. John Baptist his austere Life and Death might come near to all this The Gift therefore here spoken of must be such as became the Infinite Goodness of God such as might reconcile his Love to us with his Love to his Justice such as might be sufficient to satisfie for the Sins of all that should believe in his Son and obey the Commands of God by him Which now is the greater Obligation of our Love to God to believe as I have said the Socinians do or as the Catholicks That God sent his only Begotten i. e. his Eternal Son the Wonderful the Mighty GOD to satisfie for our Sins to instruct us in all things that concern the Glory of God and our own Salvation to hear our Prayers and relieve all our Necessities to sanctifie our Souls and make us Partakers of the Divine Nature by the operation of the Spirit of Grace This is Love and this the Gift that God bestowed on us through his Infinite Love and in some proportion we ought so to love God as he first loved us And to think of and esteem of this Gift less than what the Scripture hath valued it at is not rightly to apprehend his Love or our infinite Obligations to make suitable Returns 2. As to our Love to Christ if he were only a Man that taught us the Will of God so did the Apostles if he died only to confirm his Doctrine and give us an Example of Constancy and Patience so have many Martyrs done But Rom. 5.7 8. God commended his love to us in that while we were yet sinners Christ died for us and had he only died for us and not been able to rise again and to take up his life as well as to lay it down had he not destroyed all the Enemies of our Salvation and ascended to Heaven having all Power committed to him we might argue as the Apostle doth If Christ be not risen and if he be not the Eternal Son of God to make Intercession for us and to send the Holy Ghost to sanctifie us then is our Preaching vain and our Faith is vain and we are yet in our Sins but now we may sing ouâ— Epinicion over all our Enemies The stâ—ng of Death is sin and the strength of Sin is the Law but thanks be to God which giveth us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ 1 Cor. 15.56 57. Then for his Love to the Holy Spirit of God it is too well known that the Socinians deny his Deity and say That the Holy Spirit is nothing separate from the Word so that we need not to Baptize in his Name to praise him in our Doxology or to pray to him Come Holy Ghost Eternal God c. Our natural Reason and Faith in God makes the assistance of any other Spirit needless and why then should we wait on the Spirit of God any longer or believe that God will give any other Spirit to them that ask it Is there no other Spirit but that which works in the Children of Disobedience Are not some Souls an Habitation of God through the Spirit Read we not of the Spirit of the Son Gal. 4.6 that helps our Infirmities Do we not read of the divers Gifts of the Spirit and that it is Christ's Vice-Roy as I may say to preside over his Church to the World's end And is there no Love no Obedience due to his Spirit but we must joyn with the Socinians to pluck the Holy Ghost from his Throne 2. As for his enlarged Charity to his Brethren what love doth he manifest to the Church of God that hath been founded on this Rock of the Confession of St. Peter Thou art Christ the Son of the living God when by his Principles they are proclaimed to be Idolaters as worshipping a Creature besides the Creator and giving him and the Holy Spirit which by his Maxims are not God by nature the same Divine Honour which is due to God only And as to the Church of England particularly it hath been declared how contrary his Opinions are to her avowed Doctrines more especially his Charity to the Convocation of the Clergy at Westminster whom he condemns to be too stiff to their Constitutions when he says All the World expected a Condescention from them is not very large It was no very good Opinion that he
conceived of them when he thought to present his Naked Gospel to them as if they would have faln in love with its Nakedness And the truth is they saw so many shameful and scandalous Pamphlets demanding Alterations in our Constitutions and Doctrines and a Toleration of Latitudinarian Principles that though they were willing to make some moderate Concessions yet when they perceived there would be no end of demanding such Alterations as they could not consent to they thought it fit to maintain their ground and not give way to unreasonable Propoposals such as these which the Doctor now makes for a Toleration of the Socinian Heresie As for his Charity to the Oxford Convocations the Reflections made on them in his Vindication which hath been already considered do discover that his Charity begins and ends at home and is confined only to Men of his own Perswasion I think I do not conjecture amiss if I say that he hath the same enlarged Charity for us as Smalcius had who concludes his Book De Divinitate Christi thus I doubt not to affirm confidently That none of those who believe Jesus Christ to be God of himself and to have Divine Power can by any means have certain hope of Eternal Life by vertue of his Opinion concerning Christ. And such is the Charity of this Author to all that profess Christ to be their Saviour and say Thou art the King of Gory O Christ Thou art the everlasting Son of the Father If this were the Doctor 's design in writing his Naked Gospel I shall conform to the Apostle who enjoyns That if an Angel from Heaven should teach what is so opposite to the Gospel which the Church in all Ages hath received and believed he deserves an Anathema Thus at last we are like to see a thorough Reformation of the glorious Gospel of our Lord and Saviour even such as we saw of the once Flourishing Church of England under the Government of the most Religious King and Martyr Charles the First It was reformed first by a Presbyterian Parliament which took away her Bishops and Liturgy then by an Independent Army that devoured her Lands and Revenues then by an Inspired General which brought in a Toleration of all sorts of Enthusiasts and after sundry Revolutions by a Naked Rump which if God alone had not prevented it would have left us all in Confusion Thus the Gospel which spread so far and wide under the Ministry of our Saviour and his Apostles was first reformed by a Juncture of Gnosticks Nicolaitans and Ebionites who mixt the Jewish Opinions and Observations with the pure Ordinances of the Gospel and would equal Moses with Christ then by the Samosatenians and Arians who robbed him of that which he thought no Robbery to assume to himself i. e. to be equal with God Then by Mahomet that great Impostor who preferred himself above our Saviour drawing all Sects into a Body under himself And now after various Revolutions by the Naked Gospel which proclaims our Saviour a meer Man as Moses and other Messengers of God were to whom therefore some already do and the rest of the Socinians ought by their Principles to deny any Religious Worship which by their own Confession is due to God only and to no Creature whatsoever And who can foresee with what Viperous Monsters the Naked Gospel is now pregnant which begin to eat through the Bowels of that Church wherein they have been nourished and proclaim Liberty to all sort of Heresies and Blasphemies against the Son of God and the Spirit of Grace as the Apostle speaks Heb. 10.28 Trampling under foot the Son of God and doing despite to the Spirit of Grace When one Pamphlet proclaims the Holy Ghost Dethron'd another The Triple God Buried and the Doctrine of the Trinity is a Popish Antichristian Diabolical Doctrine these dreadful Alarms from the Bottomless Pit should awaken all good Christians unanimously to Invoke the Ever Blessed Trinity to arise and plead its own Cause against such as daily Blaspheme them The loud Blasphemies of these Philistines against not only the Israel of God but the God of Israel hath called me forth to bid Defiance to this Goliah though armed only with a Stone and a Sling not doubting but there are many Worthies in our Israel who will appear and do wonderful things All that I intended was to discover where this Adversary lay hid under the usual Disguise of the Old Serpent that mostly appears as an Angel of Light that he may with less suspicion effect his Works of Darkness and I doubt not but the Church of Christ hath still such good Angels ministring to her before whom such Angels of Satan shall flee and fall as Lightning The Rabbies say That on the Stone wherewith David slew Goliah the Characters of the Messiah were engraven I shall sling a Stone or two in the Name of the Messiah our Blessed Saviour against those Philistines that have blasphemed that Name and commit the success of them to the All-disposing Providence of God the Father Son and Holy Ghost The first Argument that I shall urge is the Harmony of the Old and New Testament which speaks of the Deity of the Messias and apply it to our Saviour The second is drawn from the Doctrine and Faith of such eminent Fathers and Martyrs as suffered for that Faith The third from those Judgments of God executed on those who in their several Ages openly opposed that Faith which may serve as Examples to deter others from tempting Christ lest they be destroyed as those were of whom the Apostle speaks 1 Cor. 10.9 From which Premises we may rightly infer an Equality of Nature and Power in the Father and the Son and conclude the same Honour and Worship due to both When Arcadius an Arian Emperor assumed his Son to a Partnership in the Empire the good Bishop St. Ambrose as I remember addressing himself to Arcadius humbled himself with all due Obeysance but took no notice of his Son Honorius at which the Emperor manifesting his displeasure the good Bishop took occasion to tell him That if he were offended at the disrespect shewn to his Son he might consider that the God of Heaven might be more justly displeased with them that neglected to honour his Son which I leave you to apply Some Socinians deny our Saviour any Worship and others grant him only a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 such an inferior Honor as the Papists do their Saints not that Divine Worship which properly belongs to the Deity It is generally agreed by the Socinians to make the Holy Sripture Judge of this great Controversy concerning the Godhead of our Saviour but they would have Reason to be Judge of the sence of the Scripture and to this we would appeal if they would not seek little Evasions from Particles and Criticisms of their own inventions against the plain Letter of the Scripture for Smaltsius one of their best Champions says Ludum jocum è
the promise of Eternal Life to the Believer and therefore he says p. 42. Col. 2. Whoever ascribes it to any other Doctrine however true however revealed makes himself equal to Christ in Authority and superiour in Faithfulness If then that Scripture of our Saviour This is life eternal to know thee the only true God and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent Joh. 20.31 And 1 Joh. 5.20 We are in him that is true even his Son Jesus Christ this is the true God and eternal life 1 Joh. 5.20 St. Augustine reads the Text thus To know thee and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent to be the only true God and so doth St. Chrysostom Now if I say Eternal Life be appropriate to this knowledge that Christ is the true God then it is a fundamental Article of Faith P. 43. There can be no need of an Interpreter of Scripture or Determiner of Doubts concerning Matters of Faith saith the Doctor How then comes it to pass that there are so many Controversies concerning Matters of Faith and that each Party denies Salvation to their Adversaries that differ from them His appeal to natural Faith will never be able to determine the Controversies that are yet undecided concerning such Fundamental Doctrines as are necessary to Salvation Socinus de Adoratione Christi says Bonas rationes rectas ex verbo dei consecutiones in sacris disputationibus aspernare nec admittere velle hominis est suae causae parum fidentis He says 3. We need not ought not to be uncharitable to any who differ from us in other Doctrines to the belief whereof the Promise is not appropriate But is Eternal Life any where promised to those that believe that Jesus Christ was only a Creature and a meer Man Can we hope for Salvation without satisfaction to the Divine Justice or can we make satisfaction Is it not good Divinity to say there is no Salvation but in the Name and through the Merits of Jesus Christ who died for our Sins and rose again for our Justification I have shewn you how the Doctor would interpret this latter Scripture Rom. 4. ult Commodius interpretationis as they call them there but if their little Criticisms and false Punctations should be admitted the Scriptures would indeed be made as he says A Nose of Wax witness their interpretation of John 8.58 Before Abraham was I am i. e. say they Before Abraham was made the Father of the Faithful and of many Nations that were converted by the preaching of the Gospel I am viz. the Light of the World So Eniedinus renders the Confession of St. Thomas as an Exclamation directed to God the Father O my Lord and my God as saith he we are wont to do when we behold any strange sight And Christ's words to the Thief Luke 23.43 are thus pointed I say unto thee this day Thou shalt be with me in Paradise viz. When I shall come to Judgement Thus Francis David on the words of St. Stephen Act. 7.59 makes this Comment O God the Father who art the Lord of Jesus receive my Soul In this ch p. 44. c. 2. the Doctor says that the Remission which the prophets promised reached only to temporal punishments but that by Christ to eternal life How then can a natural Faith secure us of Life eternal when that Faith though greatly improved by the Prophets could not do it Ch. 11. in this Chapter he revives and pleads for another Socinian Tenet for the Resurrection not of the same but another Body He propounds the Question thus Whether any Promise doth necessarily import a restitution of the same numerical Matter and undertakes to prove That it is more honourable to God and more serviceable to the Design of the Gospel to believe the contrary But First This is contrary to the Grammatical Signification of the Word and to the Scripture by him quoted viz. That God gives to every seed his own Body And Ruffinus mentions the word Hujus the Resurrection of this Body which though it shall have a kind of Transfiguration by substraction of the old earthly Qualities and the addition of such as are new and heavenly yet the subject shall continue the same which St. Paul means 1 Cor. 15.53 This corruptible shall put on incorruption that as we have born the image of the earthly we may bear the image of the heavenly and as Job says With these eyes see God Job 19.25 And the Justice of God requires this that as the Faithful have born the Marks of the Lord Jesus Christ in their Bodies wherein they were Partakers of the Sufferings of Christ and were consecrated to him as the Temples of the Holy Ghost may partake of the Reward and Crown of Glory in the same Bodies What he says of our being 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 proves as well that we shall have no Bodies as that we shall not have the same The change that shall be made in our vile Bodies doth not alter the form of our Bodies no more than it doth the Body of Christ which though it be now a glorious Body yet is still the same numerical Body and to call that a Load of Carion which the Apostle calls the Temple of the Holy Ghost is not becoming a Christian Doctor As we believe therefore that the same Body our Saviour which suffered is now glorified and that the same Bodies that remain to the last day shall be taken up to meet the Lord in the Air shall be the same Bodies that shall be ever with the Lord. And as we believe that Christ arose from the Grave in the same Body wherein he died so we believe that he carried the same into the heavenly Sanctuary and shall come at last in the same Body to judge both the Quick and Dead that all Eyes may look on their Crucified Saviour and unless it shall be the same Body it cannot properly be called a Resurrection And no doubt but our Resurrection shall be conform with that of Christ's as the Apostle intimates Rom. 8.11 He that raised up Jesus from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies To this purpose St. Augustine Epl. 57. That as Christ glorified his own Body but destroyed not its nature so will he give Glory to our Bodies but not take away the nature of them Nor indeed do other qualities any more alter the nature of our Bodies than of our Souls which for substance shall be the same But lastly if this Enquiry be a matter of Curiosity not of Faith why doth he oppose the Doctrine so long received in the Church to bring in a Socinian Tenet And now p. 50. c. 1. he gives us the Socinian Scheme of the Naked Gospel such as Socinus Crellius Sclichtingius Smalcius and the whole Tribe have fancied and published to the World before him That its business was to reduce the Jews from their Bondage under the Law of Moses and the Gentiles from their worse bondage under the Worship of Devils to the