in them that may exercise the study of the ablest understandings Now in our searching out the Mind of God in Scripture especially in those darker places the question is what course we are to take and by what Rule we must be guided that we may not bewilder our selves or wrong the Scriptures by our mistakes To prepare the way for a Resolution of this Question I must briefly premise somewhat touching these three Terms the Scripture the Interpretation of Scripture and the Rule of that Interpretation The Scripture we speak of is the entire Volume of Holy Writ containing all those Books both of the Old and New Testament that are generally acknowledged to be Canonical Whereby I mean not the Words or Phrases of Scripture taken singly by themselves but as they are conjoin'd in Propositions or Sentences and as those Propositions stand in such a contexture and with such a dependence on and relation to what goes before and after and as in this Frame and Order they are the Instrument of declaring the Mind of God to Men. Now whereas the whole Scripture though it have the same Divine Original and be directed to the same ultimate end yet contains in it great variety of Matter Doctrine History Prophesie c. It is the two former that we are especially concern'd in and therefore shall wave the Prophetick part what is yet â—…fulfill'd further than it may fall in with any of the other the best and most convincing Interpreter of Prophesies being the event unless God should beforehand unfold them by extraordinary Inspiration which we have not in our days any ground to expect It is therefore the Doctrinal and Historical parts of Scripture that I chiefly intend in this Debate Interpretation is either Verbal or Real The former is all one with that which is commonly called Translation This I shall not meddle with further than as it is a necessary requisite to the latter which is usually called Exposition which is the opening of the true Sense of Scripture or unfolding the Mind of God signified to us by those Words and Sentences of Scripture that we are searching into Now we here suppose two things which to a sober and considerate Reader need no proof First That the Scriptures are not a heap of insignificant Words or unsens'd Characters as some late Romanists who cry up Oral Tradition for the only Rule of Faith so great is the power of prejudice and partial Interest have ridiculously and profanely affirm'd but that they have a true sense Originally and Essentially in themselves given them by their Author when they were first indited To deny or question this were to impute that to the most Wise God that common Civility forbids us to charge upon any man of ordinary understanding Secondly That the Sense of Scripture is fixt and immutable not varying with the times or altering according to the differing practice of the Church which was most absurdly asserted by Cardinal Cusanus in Epistola contra Bohemos as I find it attested by many credible Authors the Sense of Scripture is no other than what it always had and ever will have to the Worlds end The next thing to be considered is the Rule of Interpretation By which we can understand no more than the Measure by agreement or disagreement to which we judge of the Sense of the Scripture whether it be right or wrong whether it be indeed what it pretends the true Sense of the Scripture under Inquiry or a mistaken Sense unduely fasten'd upon it Or in fewer words the Rule of Interpretation is that which gives us the objective Evidence by which the true Sense of Scripture is discern'd and for which it is received Here let it be observ'd that it is one thing to inquire what means we are to use in searching out the Sense of Scripture and another what is the Rule that must guide us in determining what that Sense is For though the Rule he also a Means yet every thing that is to be used as a Means hath not the place of a Rule The Means are many the Rule but one understanding it not of any subordinate or Ministerial Rule but of that which is Supream and Autocratorical For that is the Rule under our present inquiry The Means subservient to the Interpretation of Scripture are either General or Special The General are two Méditation and Prayer 1. There must be a fixed intending of the Mind to consider of what we either read in or hear from the Scripture and of whatsoever we meet with that may help us to understand it This the Psalmist speaks of as the daily practice of every Holy-Blessed Man Psal. 1. 1 2. and professeth it of himself Psal. 119 15. 97. But secondly there is need of Prayer also for Divine Assistance to enable us to understand the Mind of God aright This the Psalmist used Psal. 119. 18. 19 26 27 73. Though he had the Copy of the Law by him according to that command of God which we have upon Record in Deut. 17. 18 19. and did use daily to read it and meditate on it yet he thought not this enough but begs of God to have his Eyes opened c. When our Saviour discoursed with his Disciples after his Resurrection concerning Himself and his Sufferings it is said Luke 24. 45. that he opened their Undestandings that they might understand the Scriptures He did not only open the Scriptures by External Instruction as it is said before vers 27 and 32. But as the Learned Grotius observes upon the place he opened their Minds by the Internal Illumination of his Spirit This the Apostle prays for in the behalf of the Ephesians and Colossians Eph. 1. 16 17 18. Col. 1. 9. though they had the Doctrine of the Scripture already published to them And the same Apostle writing to Timothy having exhorted him to consider what he had said to him he adds this Prayer for him The Lord give thee understanding in all things I would gladly suppose there are none that call themselves Christians but do own the need and use of Prayer for the understanding of Gods Will which necessarily carries with it an interpretative acknowledgement of the need we have of something from God above our natural abilities to understand the Scriptures And I do profess my self to have had the better and more honourable esteem of that great Schoolman Thomas Aquinas since I read this of him that it was his manner whensoever he was either to study in private or discourse in publick to pray fervently to God for assistance that he might learn of Him what he was to teach others and that he did candidly acknowledge in secret to his intimate Friend Reginaldus that what Divine Knowledge he had was attained by Prayer more than by any humane Wit or Labor But whose expects success in seeking Divine Assistance it behoves him to bring with him a meek and humble Heart awed with the holy fear and
reverence of God and of his Word For want of which too many have greatly polluted these Holy Mysteries with the wanton conceits or prophane excursions of an unhollwed Wit and mortally poisoned themselves and others by their corrupt handling this Bread of Life The Special Means of Interpretation are two-fold Some are more remote which I shall only name not intending any Discourse about them because my work lies another way These remote helps are 1. Some competent knowledge of and recourse to the Original Tongues wherein the Scripture was first penned with a due observation of the proprieties of each Language 2. Skil to discern between the proper use of the Words and Phrases of Scripture and that which is Tropical and Figurative In these Grammar and Rhetorick have their use 3. Some insight into the peculiar Laws Customs and Proverbial Speeches of those times and places that the Scripture relates to which requires some knowledge in History There are sundry passages both in the Old and New Testament that have respect to the known Customs of the Gentiles as in their Divinations Idolatrous Worships Publick Games and many more that have relation to the peculiar Rites and Modes of speech in use among the Jews So that there is no part of Phylology but may have its use in the Interpretation of Scripture 4. There is great use of the several parts of Phylosophy not only moral but natural for the clearing of many things in Scripture that are of natural cognisance as about the structure of Mans Body and the faculties of the Soul the nature motion and influence of the Heavenly Bodies the temperament of the several Regions of the World as also about the Elements and Meteors about Numbers and Measures the Nature and Properties of several Creatures Beasts Birds and Plants and many other things treated of in the Bible either by way of History or Parable 5. Logick hath also its use here for the better discerning the dependence of one thing in Scripture upon another and collecting of one thing from another The more immediate Means are chiefly two 1. A due observation of the several circumstances of the Scripture to be Interpreted who it is that speaks where when and to whom upon what occasion Here also comes in the consideration of the coherents with antecedents and consequences together with the scope and design of the Speaker all which are of great use to discover the Sense of Scripture 2. Comparing Scripture with Scripture or consulting other Scriptures whether paralel with or seemingly opposite to the place under consideration Now to the use of all these forementioned Means or Helps both General and Special Remote and Immediate I think all agree But about the Rule of Interpretation there is not so universal an accord The Romanists for the most part will have this Rule to be the Judgment of the present Church meaning their own But I shall not deal with this It 's weakness in what Sense soever taken for they agree not among themselves hath been sufficiently discovered by the worthy labours of many both formerly and of late Some few there are who tell us that the Scripture supposes the Rule and Summary of Religion delivered from one Age to another which we are to be guided by in searching out the meaning of Scripture And this Rule they say is to be found in the Monuments of the Church that is in the Writings of the Fathers and Determinations of Councils from whence we are to receive the Sense of the Catholick Church and thereby know what was the Doctrine delivered by Christ and his Apostles in the first Age and according to that interpret the Scriptures But if this must be our way of proceeding we may very well despair of ever understanding the Scriptures except when they speak with so much plainness that they stand in need of no Interpretation For what a heap of uncertainties must we lay for the Foundation of our Faith It is sufficiently known that the Fathers do oft differ from each other and many times are not consistent with themselves Councils have determined contrary one to another And some things that were as far as appears to us by all extant Monuments of Antiquity agreeable to the common Sentiment in our Age were laid aside in another Besides either the far greatest part of the Doctors of the Church in the first Ages wrote nothing or their Writings are lost and of those that now go under venerable names many are plainly spurious and many dubious nor is it easie in several of them for the most sagacious Reader to find out the right Insomuch as we cannot have any tolerable assurance what was the consentient judgment of the Catholick Church in any one age about the whole Doctrine of Faith if we set the Scriptures aside Therefore to frame such a Rule of Interpretation as this is no better than to build a House of Straw upon a running Stream There were very few Writers in the two first Centuries and in the two following not very many and after this the Church did much decline and degenerate as well in Doctrine as Manners Now suppose we were sure that the Writings in each Age were undoubtedly theirs whose names they bear as it is past doubt we are not who can assure us that what was published by those few was the consentient Judgment of all or the major part of the Doctors of that Age wherein they lived Might there not be a greater number differing from them who either wrote nothing or whose Works are perished The plain truth is That this way of Interpretation does in the upshot resolve the Faith of Christians not into the certain authority of the Divinely-inspired Writings but into the fallible Testimony of the most uncertain Tradition But for the Readers further satisfaction I refer him to Monsieur Daille's learned Treatise about the right use of the Fathers a Piece of that worth that the Lord Vicount Falkland and his dear Friend Mr. Chillingworth did highly esteem it and made great use of it in their Writings against the Romanists as we are informed by Mr. Tho. Smith sometime Member of Christ's Colledge in Cambridge in his Epistle prefixed to the English Translation of that excellent and elaborate Discourse who further also tells us that we have in that Tractat a sufficient Confutation of Cardinal Perron his Book against King James and by consequence of the Marquis of Worcester against King Charles and of Doctor Vane and other Epitomizers of the Cardinal which I do the rather take notice of that it may obviate the groundless prejudices that some have of late entertained against that Incomparable Piece The received Doctrine of the Reformed Churches both ourown and those abroad hath been hitherto that the Scripture is its own Interpreter But of late there hath been an attempt to justle the Scripture aside as to this use and place Reason and Phylosophy in its room There is a Belgick
not silence but regulate and conduct it There is nothing in Religion but what is perfectly rational and suitable to mans intellectual nature It is to our Rational Powers that the Scriptures are propounded and as our belief of them is one of the highest acts of Reason so it is by our Reason in its due exercise that we search into them not only to find out the signification of the Words and Phrases of Scripture and discern the difference between proper and Figurative Expressions besides many other things that tend to their Verbal Exposition but likewise to observe the dependence of one Clause on another and compare the several parts of Scripture together thereby it is that we gather Consequences from Scripture-Principles and hereby do we instrumentally judge of the Mind of God as signified to us by the Words of Scripture Secondly We also grant That the Principles of Reason have their use about those things in Scripture that are discoverable by Natural Light as that there is a God and that God is to be worshipped that the Soul is Immortal that good is to be done and evil to be avoided and many such like But even in these considered as they are delivered by the Spirit of God in Scripture I think Reason is not Magisterially and Authoritatively to Judge of them being under this notion to be received as the Decrees of a higher Court wherein Man's Reason is but a Servant In this Case therefore Reason only gives in its suffrage and ministerially subscribes by vertue of its own impressed notions to Scripture-Dictates Aquinas propounding a question about Mans believing such things as may be proved by Natural Reason resolves it necessary for Mens more speedy more common and more certain attainment of Divine Knowledge that they should receiveby Faith not only those things that are above Natural Reason but those also that are discernable by Natural Light Whereby he plainly gives the pre-eminency to Revelation above Reason even in the Natural Principles of Religion Thirdly I grant that there is great use of Natural Principles in points of pure Revelation viz. To shew that these are not against sound Reason and to disprove the objections that are made against them from a pretended contrariety to Natural Light It was no small advantage to the Christian Cause in the Primitive Times that the Ancient Fathers in their Apologies for the Doctrine of Christ against the Heathen Philosophers turned their own Weapons upon them and repelled their absurd Cavils by their own acknowledged Maxims Fourthly I further grant that no Sense of Scripture is to be admitted for genuine if we do indeed find it to be certainly inconsistent with or contradictory unto any true and undoubted Principle of Reason For God who is the Author of all truth as well natural as supernatural cannot contradict himself This I confess is a very ticklish point and calls for great wariness and circumspection it being so â—asie and so ordinary for Men to be swayed by Imagination Interest and Prejudice to call that Reason which is as far from being so as midnight is from being high noon And Men may through Ignorance Incogitancy or Perversness suppose a contradiction where there is none Nevertheless this we may safely say that whatsoever is certainly and undeniably proved to be a Principle of Reason there can be nothing in Scripture that really contradicts it But Fifthly The Knot of the Controversie lies here whether Humane Reason by its own Natural Principles or those Philosophical Axioms that are thence deduced as its Supream Commanding Rule must guide and determine us in examining and deciding what is the Sense of those parts of Scripture that are purely of Supernatural Revelation And this is that which is here denied The affirmative is maintained by some and indeed it seems to be the great Helena of that sort of Men who have imbibed the new Divinity of Socinus and the Foundation of all their Heterodoxies upon this account it is that they so vehemently oppose the Trinity of Persons in the Godhead the Eternal Deity of our Lord Jesus the Personality of the Holy Ghost the Doctrines of Original Sin of the Satisfaction of Christ and Justification by his imputed Righteousness with sundry other material points that are commonly called to the Bar of Humane Reason by these Doctors of the Racovian Faith Not that they have any sound Reason on their side for their Novelties are extremely irrational as hath been abundantly demonstrated by those judicious Authors that have dealt with them But trusting to their own Reason and its Dictates in matters so far above Nature this hath led them into these dangerous precipices True it is whether in pretence to blind the Eyes of others or out of the conviction of Truth or out of the usual fate of Error to contradict it self these Men sometimes let fall that which carries with it a fair appearance of disclaiming the Judgment of Reason in Matters of Faith as may be seen in their great Master Socinus And such passages in him and his followers may possibly give some colour to the Exercitator to charge the Reformed Divines with wronging the Socinians in saying they make Mans Reason the Rule of Interpretation for himself seems to be ambitious of the honour of finding this out and it may be they have no where asserted it in Terminis or spoken it out so broadly as this Gentleman hath done But notwithstanding all this flourish when they argue against the forementioned Doctrines received upon clear Scripture-warrant by all the Christian Churches in the World from the beginning of Christianity their grand objection is drawn from Reason to which they appeal in all these Controversies as to their Oracle and thereupon set their Wits at work to wrest and winde the Scriptures alledged in defence of those Doctrines every way they can imagine to evade their plain meaning and fasten on them a Sense of their own making suitable to their beloved Maxims Besides many other passages there are of that Party that discover what their Mind is in this point But these are not the first that set this presumptuous Doctrine on foot I find it laid to the charge of the Manichees as irrational and absurd as their Conceptions were that they professedly suspended the Articles of Faith upon the judgment of Reason and required Men to believe nothing but what they could prove by Reason So much we learn from him who was once one of them but happily delivered out of their snare CHAP. II. 1. The first Argument disabling Reason and Philosophy for being the Scriptures Interpreter from the condition of Mans depraved Reason in this lapsed State 2. The Apostles Words in 1 Cor. 2. 14. urged and vindicated from some Mens mistaken Glosses 3. The Argument enforced from the foul mastakes of the most Rational among the Heathen in matters of Religion NOW that Reason or Philosophy cannot in the Sense given be the Scriptures Interpreter
foolishness before he know them this is all one as if he had said a true Philosopher is a Chimaera for it seems he is one who never determines of any thing till he clearly perceives what it is and then what he determines is undoubtedly true whence it will follow that every true Philosopher is infallible And where was such an one ever yet to be found Certain it is that the most eminent Philosophers not inferior in their Natural Learning to this Exercitator or any of his Companions did in the first breaking out of the Gospel make a mock of the whole Doctrine of Christianity Thus did the Philosophers at Athens when they heard St. Paul and thus did Porphyrie Celsus and others after the Apostles dayes Thirdly When this Author will have no more meant here by things Spiritual but things belonging to the Rational Soul which is a Spirit he is grosly over-seen to speak no worse For the Apostles words are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the things of the Spirit of God which certainly is not the Soul of Man but the Holy Ghost And when the Apostle Jude describes the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sensual or natural by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 having not the Spirit surely he did not mean they had no Rational Soul but that they were destitute of the Regenerating Spirit of Grace And that of this Spirit the Apostle Paul is to be understood in the place under present consideration the whole tenour of his Discourse from vers 9 to 15. doth undeniably manifest If at least by this Gentlemans good leave the Scripture might be allowed to interpret it self The wofull ignorance and perversness concerning the things of God that discovered it self in the wisest and best civilized part of the World and such as had improved their natural light to as high a pitch as any other we can read of is an abundant evidence of what I assert concerning the darkness and pravity of Mans Reason They became as the Apostle says vain in their imaginations and their foolish heart was darkned professing themselves to be wise they became fools Rom. 1. 21 22. They acknowledged a Deity and that God was to be worshipped but in the manner and way of worship how wofully were they mistaken yea those times and places that were best cultivated and that flourished most in all Humane Learning were of all other the most sottish in their Idolatrous Worships giving religious adoration to Brute Creatures to Dumb Pictures to Diseases and Humane Passions yea to Hellish Furies And whereas some that were more sagacious than the rest as Socrates Cicero and such like saw enough to condemn that way of Religion that was then in use observing the Rites in fashion tanquam legibus jussa non tanquam diis grata as St. Aug. observes out of Seneca yet when they came to enquire and determine of the true Religion they were confessedly at a loss and acknowledged that they could better cry down the wrong than find out the right They had what is indelibly planted in all men a desire of happiness but they were miserably bewilder'd in their search after it And whereas they were some of them sensible of a dreadfull blow that Man's Nature had received discerning a Combat in themselves between their Reason and their Sensual Appetite and saw the World generally over-run with wickedness and consequently vexed with a continual succession of calamities yet as they could never by natures light find out the source and spring of all this and what it was that first brought sin and sorrow upon Mankind so in vain did they weary themselves in inventing ways of reconciling themselves to God and procuring his Favour whom they saw to be displeased and of curing the Maladies of their disordered and discomposed Natures in both which they took such strange and horrid courses as did but increase the evil they lay under and exceedingly multiply their own guilts Now it being thus how can the Principles of Reason and Philosophy be a safe Rule whereby to interpret the Holy Scriptures CHAP. III. 1. Several Exceptions against the foregoing Argument removed viz. That this holds onely where the Scripture is unknown 2. That it strikes not at Right Reason and Sound Principles 3. That Reason is of God And that Truth is not contrary to Truth TO this Argument all the reply that I can conceive will be made may be reduced to a few particulars which I shall briefly dispatch It will be said That this Argument holds of Man's Reason while he is destitute of the Written Word but reacheth not them who have the Scriptures to enlighten them To pass by other Answers that may be gathered from what hath been already said This Exception yields the Cause For it supposeth Man's Reason unable to discover the Mind of God without Scripture Light And if so then whatsoever Revealed Truth is more darkly delivered in any one part of Scripture must receive light from the Scripture it self somewhere else where it speaks more plainly without which Man's Reason notwithstanding the best Natural Principles to assist it would leave him at a loss consequently it is not the principles of Reason and Philosophy that must be the Rule of Interpretation but the Scripture it self as shall be shewn hereafter But say some when we say Reason by its Principles is to Interpret Scripture we mean it of right Reason proceeding upon sound Principles and not of Reason depraved and Principles corrupted I answer these are smooth Words but what do they signifie There were some colour for this reply if uncorrupt Reason either in the Faculty or the Principles were infallibly to be found The Exception speaks of Reason abstractly and in the Idea supposing it freed from all those depravations and entanglements that have captived and debased it Whereas we are speaking of Reason as it is in Men who are to make use of it And we know what is said of Man Gen. 6. 5. God saw that the wickedness of Man was great in the earth and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was onely evil continually Every Man is thus depraved from his birth so that we have all need of renewing in our highest faculties in the Spirit of our Mind Eph. 4. 23. And this original depravation is increased by a farther contracted malignity through vitious habits and deceitfulness of sinfull lusts In the most it remains wholly thus and in the best in this life it is but in part renew'd and therefore in danger to mistake and that grosly in things Spiritual when it goes to work onely by its own natural Principles And whereas it may be thought or said there is no danger so long as Reason performs it works aright I reply how shall that be known by what Rule shall we examine and find out when Reason passeth a right judgment or how shall the Principles that Reason pretends to use in matters of Revelation be tryed
Resurrection of the same numerical Body proved against the Exercitator to be asserted in Scripture THE Exercitators next Work is to answer the great Argument which he says some urge against his opinion viz. Philosophy and consequently Humane Reason asserts many things that are repugnant to Divinity and the Scriptures and therefore they cannot be allow'd for the Rule of Interpreting Scripture He denies the Antecedent and so do I. What Authors they be in the Reformed Churches that thus argue I know not But this I know that it is no uncommon thing for pugnacious Wits to draw the Sword upon the shadow of a Dream and make Hector-like declamations against Utopian Adversaries Set aside those Authors who are engaged by some Atheological Hypothesis which they have espoused as the Papists and the Lutherans in the Doctrine of the Eâ—charist I know not any Man of Learning and Understanding who hath such a thought that there is any thing in Scripture derogatory or contradictory to true Philosophy or Sound Reason or that believes any thing true in Philosophy to be false in Divinity Whatsoever is true any where is true every where Here therefore our Author may put up his Dagger But there is one thing which I cannot well pass over That the Exercitator pretending to confute those who assert a contrariety between the Principles of Philosophy and Divinity and instancing in these two Ex nihilo nihil fit and Idem non potest numericè reproduci Instead of solving the knot he cuts it and plainly affirms both these Principles to be true absolutely and without limitation both in Philosophy and Divinity confidently asserting that the Scripture doth no where teach us That the World was made of nothing or that the same numerical Body shall rise at the last day And here Wolzogen unworthily deserts the Christian Cause not vouchsafing to write one word in vindication of these grand Truths against this bold Adversary but tells us he is content the Man should enjoy his own opinion though he says he could easily have refuted him Which makes his silence the more inexcusable and brings him under greater suspition of Heterodoxy notwithstanding all his Rhetorical Flourishes But it is time I should return to our Author who if he had not been too much in love with Novelty might without the least prejudice to his Cause unless it have some other Monster in the Belly of it that is not yet come to the birth have answered that these Axioms are true in a limited Sense both in Philosophy and Divinity viz. That by a finite created Power nothing can be made of nothing and that by the like limited power the same numerical Body that perisheth cannot be reproduced But that nevertheless to an infinite Power all things that imply not contradiction are possible But it seems by this Authors words that he disowns the received Doctrine of the worlds Creation out of Nothing and the Reproduction of the same individual Body 1. By denying the former he must necessarily maintain the Eternity of Preexistent Matter whereas if God be the Maker of all Beings besides himself as the Scripture sufficiently assures us then nothing besides himself could be Eternal but he must in making the World make the Matter whereof the World consists which Matter therefore must be made of nothing The first Article in the most ancient Creeds as the Reverend Bishop of Chester hath observed had instead of these words Maker of Heaven and Earth or together with them this Clause The Maker of all things visible and invisible agreeably to that of the Apostle Coloss. 1. 16. which distribution is so comprehensive that it will not admit of any Exception all things whatsoever being either visible or invisible and whatsoever can be supposed necessary to the making of the World it must of necessity come under one of these two Members of the distribution and consequenly be of Gods making And indeed if it were otherwise then something else besides God must have a necessary uncreated independent Being which carries with it so broad a Contradiction as Mans Reason left fair to it self cannot allow Again 2. By disclaiming the latter this Author evidently denies the Resurrection for that imports the rising again of the same Body that fell according to that known Speech of Damascen so oft cited by our Divines 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And if the same numerical Body rise not but another is made de novo for the Soul to animate this is not a Resurrection but a new Creation and then the first Creation of the World may as aptly be called a Resurrection as that which is so stiled by the Holy Ghost in Scripture But I think the Scripture speaks plain enough in this Case though this Author will not own it when it says that at the last day This corruptible must put on incorruption and this mortal must put on immortality And that our Lord Jesus Christ shall then change our vile Body that it may be made like unto his glorious Body And that If the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in us he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken our mortal bodies by his spirit that dwelleth in us Add to this that Argument from the description of the place whence the Resurrection shall begin which I cannot better represent to the Reader than in the words of the learned Bishop of Chester They which sleep in the dust of the Earth Dan. 12. 2. and they which are in the Graves Joh. 5. 28. shall hear the Voice and Rise And Rev. 20. 13. The Sea shall give up the dead which are in it and Death and the Grave deliver up the dead which are in them But if the same Bodies did not Rise they which are in the dust should not revive If God should give us any other Bodies than our own neither the Sea nor the Grave should give up their dead That shall Rise again which the Grave gives up the Grave hath nothing to give up but that Body which was laid into it therefore the same Body which is Buried shall at the last day be revived And whereas the Socinians who are our Adversaries in this as well as in many other Articles of our Faith to evade this Argument will have the Graves spoken of in Joh 5. 28. to be the Graves of ignorance and impiety there meant and the Rising to be Mens coming to the knowledge of Christ c. the aforesaid learned Person answers them That Christ expresly speaks of bringing Men to Judgement vers 27. and divides those that are to come out of their Graves into two Ranks vers 29. neither of which can be so understood The first are those which have done good before they come out of their Graves these therefore could not be the Graves of Ignorance and Impiety from which no good can come The second are such who have done evil
Interpretation here is no such difference as should just give occasion to any to say that our Divines speak variously or uncertainly or that they agree not one with another or with themselves for in the issue the meaning of them all is one and the same Now here I must look back upon what I had said in the Introduction to my Discourse concerning the special immediate means of Interpretation viz. a due observation of the several circumstances of the Scripture to be Expounded and the comparing of Scripture with Scripture In the use of which means lies the applying of the right Rule of Interpretation It is the using of Scripture to expound Scripture And when a dark or difficult Scripture is compared with some other wherein the same Truth or Doctrine is more clearly and perspicuously delivered this is conceived by many learned Men to be intended in that of the Apostle concerning the Analogy of Faith Rom. 12. 6. Whether it be so or no I shall not at present debate much less determine Noâ— shall I inquire whether that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 form of sound Words spoken of by the same Apostle in 2 Tim. 1. 13. be the same with this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as some conceive it is But this I may have leave to say that I see no incongruity or inconvenience in using the Expression or in saying that to explain obscure places of Scripture by such as are more clear and easie is to expound Scripture according to the Analogy of Faith Analogy saith Quintilian is that which the Latines call Proportion the force whereof is this That what is in doubt may be referred to something like it that is out of question that so the uncertain may be proved by the certain And why may not the like use of the Word be allowed in this case Sure I am eminent Writers both of the Roman and Reformed Churches have thus used it Analogie says Aquinas is when the truth of one Scripture is evidenced not to oppose the truth of another The Analogie of Faith saith our learned Whitaker is the constant and perpetual Sentence of Scripture in those places that are undoubtedly plain and obvious to our Understandings I might alledge to the like sense many more Authors whose excellent Worth sets them sufficiently above the contempt of the Exercitator and others of his mind that jear and deride the Analogy of Faith But waving the terms that which I am concern'd to assert is the thing it self that in expounding Scripture we must be regulated and determined by the Scripture it self and that whatsoever it speaks darkly and uncertainly in any place is to be explained by it self in those other places where it speaks more plainly which plain places do sufficiently interpret themselveâ— by their own light Now this way of Interpreting Scripture by it self hath been approved of as the best and safest by most eminent Authors Ancient and Modern Clemens Alexandrinus Iraeneus Hilary and others are cited to this purpose by Chamier Rivet Dr. Holdsworth As Esdras and his Companions of old so should we now interpret Scripture by Scripture comparing among themselves those things that are Endited by the same Spirit saith the learned Grotius plainly referring to that in Neh. 8. 7 8. Mr. Hales of Eaton in his Golden Remains says Other Expositions may give Rules of Direction for understanding their Authors but the Scripture giveâ— Rules to expound it self When the Fathers saith the Bishop of Down confirmed an Exposition of one place of Scripture by the Doctrine of another then and then onely they thought they had the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Scripture demonstration and Matter of Faith and necessary belief and that this was the duty of the Christian Doctors Origen doth expresly affirm And however the Roman Doctors of this latter age especially have vehemently contended against this that the Authority of their Church may take place yet we find that in some of them that comes full up to what we say I shall give one instance Josephus a Costa as I find him cited by Chamier and Riveâ— Nihil perinde Scripturam videtur apâ—rire atque ipsa Scriptura Itaque diligens attenta frequensque lectio â—um meditatio collatio Scripturarum omnium fumma Regula ad intelligendum â—ihi semper visâ— naâ—… ex aliâ—â— Scriptur is aliae optime intelligâ—â—tur Nothing seems to me to open the Scripture like the Scripture it self Therefore diligent attentive and frequent Reading with Meditation and comparing of Scriptures hath alway seemed to me the chief Rule of all for understanding for by some Scriptures others are best understood CHAP. II. Argumentâ— to confirm the Proposition the first from the Scriptures sole sufficiency to be its own Interpreter made good by three things and first by its Perfection I proceed to some Arguments for the confirmation of this Second Proposition I shall pass over many of those that are numerously brought in by other Writers chusing to insist upon those that I take to be of greatest force and against which the greatest endeavours have been used to overthrow them My first shall be this The Scripture is of all other best fitted to be the Rule to guide us in the determining of its own sense and meaning Nothing else is so well qualified for this use And this may be evinced by its three properties its Perfection Perspicuity and Authentickness It is the most Perfect Perspicuous and Authentick Record of the Mind of God Of these Three I must distinctly Treat First this and this only is the perfect Record of the mind of God fully manifesting it to us so far as it is necessary for us to know it in order to our duty and our happiness The Apostle speaks clearly and fully for this 2 Tim. 3. 15 16 17. From a child thou hast known the Holy Scriptures which are able to make thee wise unto Salvation through Faith which is in Christ Jesus All Scripture is given by inspiration from God c. Here two things are evidently Asserted viz. That the Scriptures contain in them what is sufficient both for a Minister of Christ to Teach and for any Christian to know to make him wise unto Salvation Neither of which can be if there be not that in the Scripture it self out of which the Mind of God therein deliver'd may be sufficiently understood without the suppliment of some other over-ruling Principle For 1. How can the Scripture make any man wise unto Salvation if it fall short in point of objective Evidence necessary to beget that Divine Knowledge wherein all saving Wisdom consists 2. How can it sufficiently furnish a Minister for his work of instructing his Hearers and conducting them to Life if from thence he cannot fetch enough to clear the Truth he is to deliver to them CHAP. III. The second branch of the first Argument the Scriptures Perspicuity proved SEcondly the Scripture is a
perspicuous Revelation of God's Will Whatsoever may be the ignorance or darkness of Men which hinders them from knowing what God hath said in these Sacred Records yet the objective perspicuity of them is generally asserted by Protestants against the Romanists Not that all Truths revealed in Scripture are so low and common as in their own Nature to be obvious to Man's Understanding but that as to the manner of their delivery they are so laid down in the Scripture as that they may be understood by and from the Scripture yet we mean not that every part or passage of Scripture is clear For that there are many difficulties therein we acknowledge But that the mind of God is somewhere or other in Scripture plainly propounded so far as it is necessary for us to know it one part of it giving Light to another so that the whole Scripture taken together is a Perspicuous Manifestation of his will This is proved by Moses's words in Deut. 30. 12 13 14. Speaking of the Law and the Apostles words Rom. 10. 6. c. Speaking the same of the Gospel Hence the written Word is frequently compared to a Light and is said to give understanding to the Simple Had not the Scriptures been Perspicuous how could Timothy in his Childhood have understood them How could our Saviour out of them have convinced the Sadduces of the Doctrin of the Resurrection Or the Apostles out of them prove irrefragably the truth of their Doctrin against the gainsaying Jews Or how could the Bereans try the Apostles Doctrin by searching the Scriptures These are undeniable Proofs that the Scriptures are Perspicuous and that they have a plain and certain sense obvious to a considerate Reader But all this will signifie nothing if the Scripture have not that Light in it that may discover it self and clear up its own meaning without borrowing Light from some other Principle Now because much of the stress of this Cause lies on this we must a little consider what is said against it The late Romanists do generally cry out that the Scriptures are obscure partly that they may have the fairer colour to take them out of the Peoples hands lest they should mistake or pervert them though none among them have been more guilty of that than their Doctors of greatest name for Learning partly that they may bring in their unwritten Traditions as expository of Scripture-Revelations and partly also that they may establish a necessity of an Infallible Visible Judge here on Earth to Interpret Scriptures and decide all Controversies Yet I know not any of them but will own that many things in the Scripture are clear But there is a late Writer that denies this My next work therefore shall be to deal with him and clear the Truth from his exceptions in some of the following Chapters of this Discourse CHAP. IV. The Exercitators exception against the Scriptures Perspicuity from the ambiguity of words Answered THe Belgick Exercitator whom I have oft mentioned before that he may make sure work rises higher in denying the Scriptures Perspicuity than any that I have ever met with and with confidence affirms the Scripture to be universally obscure and that no part of it is of it self clear and plain and thereupon denies that one part of Scripture can be expounded by another Yea this he laies as the foundation of his main Assertion against the Scriptures Interpreting it self And one great Reason he gives is what he hath taken a great deal of tedious pedantick pains to prove in his third Chapter That all speech being made up of Words and Phrases is abscure and doubtful because the words whereof it consists are capable of different significations and consequently may be taken in a various sense and thus it is with the Scripture it is universally ambiguous and therefore obscure To this I Answer 1. If this Reason hold then there is no Speech or Writing in the World but will fall under the same unhappy fate No Law of the Land no letter of a Friend no Oral Discourse no Treatise of whatsoever Subject and how accurately soever written shall be accounted Intelligible For all Writings and Discourses are made up of the same kind of Words and Phrases and capable of being adorn'd with the same Tropes and Figures that the Scripture is and every whit as liable to be taken in for different senses And thus no man shall know how to speak or write any thing that can be clearly understood and that excellent gift of Speech which God hath bestowed upon men to be an instrument of society and converse shall be of no other use but to be made an Engine of deceit and treachery Secondly if things be thus to what end did this Author trouble himself to Write and others to read this Book of his if all Speeches and Writings be ambiguous and obscure and not to be understood without an Interpreter of what use is this Jewel of his fancy Did he hope to lead the whole World of Interpreters out of their Labyrinths into the right path by such an ignis fatuus that by its ambiguities and uncertainties may scare and amuse them and carry them hither and thither according to the wind of their own imaginations Or hath he attain'd to a faculty above all other Writers even the best and holiest to write in such Words and Phrases as might open his meaning without entangling his Readers in ambiguities If he thinks his Book be free from this blemish methinks he might have had the modesty to conceive that the Pen-men of Scripture knew how to write as well as he If his thoughts of his Book were otherwise he might have kept it to himself and fed the Moths with it Thirdly yet again if it be thus that all words in whatsoever contexture be so ambiguous and obscure what will become of this Infallible Interpreter which our Author would set up For whatsoever Interpretation be made of any Scripture it must be framed in such words as other men use and as all kind of Writings are drawn up in and if when all is done these be obscure what are we the better For certainly according to this Authors argument even the first Principles of Nature and the most unquestionable Maxims of Philosophy when turn'd into Words and Sentences will be as ambiguous and consequently as dark as the Scriptures Fourthly whereas his impeaching the Scriptures of Ambiguity and Obscurity is not only to disable them from expounding themselves but that he may set up Philosophy as the only Interpreter he instances in several Scriptures which he says are thus Ambiguous and Obscure in the clearing whereof Philosophy cannot possibly afford us any help As for Example when he supposeth of our Saviour's Words in Joh. 5. 39. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That it 's doubtful whether this be to be taken Imperatively search the Scripture or Indicatively ye do search the Scriptures Can any
which the words offer may be plain and easie when the sense that the Author intends by them which is a clean other thing is very dark and obscure And so confident is the Gentleman in this conceit that he superciliously slights Expositors of Scripture for not minding this distinction and for want hereof taking oft times the simple sense for the true one To make this wild and senseless distinon good he instanceth in several passages of Scripture wherein he would make us believe this Two-fold sense is to be found I shall therefore before I proceed endeavour to clear those Passages or the principal of them Sect. 2. One instance he gives is of those expressions in Scripture The Arme and Finger of God The simple sense of which Words and that which they do of themselves offer to the Reader he sayes is very obvious being known by common use but â—he thinks no Divine so void of Wit as to take that obvious sense for the true meaning of the Author By this it appears this Gentleman conceives that the sense which those Words of themselves offer is proper without any Trope or Figure as if God had a bodily Arme or Finger as a Man hath But by his favour he is greatly out The Arme and Finger of God according to common acceptation with any that are vers'd in the Scriptures have no other than an improper sense nor do they signifie any more than the Power of God though the word Arme or Finger either singly taken or applyed to Men signifies somewhat else according to that known Maxime Verba sunt intelligenda secundum subjectam materiam Words are to be understood according to the subject matter about which they are used And this holds in all manner of Speeches and Writings whatsoever the matter in hand directs to the sense of the Words A second instance is in Joh. 14. 6. where our Saviour says I am the Way the Truth and the Life What obvious sense it is that this Author conceives from common use of speech to be in these words different from our Saviours meaning I cannot divine Nor can I see how they can signifie any more or less to him that is acquainted with the Doctrine of the Gospel than what our Saviour means by them who calls himself The Way by no unapt Metaphor because as himself expounds it in the latter end of the Verse it is by Him that Sinners are to come to the Father that is to Reconciliation with him and fruition of him It is by Him that is by the Merit of his Blood by the Light of his Doctrine by the Conduct of his Pattern and by the Power of his Spirit And herein he is The Truth that is the Substance and real Completion of all the Types and Shadows under the Law and consequently he is The Life by a known Metonyme of the effect for the cause in that he is the Author that is the Purchaser and Bestower of that Eternal Life that Sinners come to enjoy in God A further instance is given in those words of our Saviour This is my Body where he affirms That the plain and easie sense which the words of themselves offer to the Reader is that which the Romish Church takes them in but the sense of our Saviour in speaking them which he grants to be that which the Reformed Churches give of them this he says is dark and obscure But I suppose he cannot be ignorant that there are considerable Doctors of the Romish Church eminent for Learning who have acknowledged that they should never have entertained that sense of the words which asserts Transubstantiation if the Authority of the Church had not moved them And our Writers have abundantly manifested the gross absurdity of that sense and among others Dr. Brevint in his late excellent Discourse of the Mystery of the Romish Mass hath clearly and to great satisfaction proved the Protestant sense of that speech of our Saviours from the very words themselves I cannot well understand by this Authors discourse of what setled Perswasion he is in matters of Religion He now and then insinuates something that carries with it a dislike of the Romanists and their way But it is plain enough by this and many other passages in his Book that the Reformed Churches are little befriended by him Lastly He instances in those Scriptures where God is said to be Lord of Heaven and Earth the King of Nations and King of Kings and where he is said to have begotten a Son Psal. 2. and to have loved the World Joh. 3. 16. In all which he says the obvious but mistaken sense and that which the Vulgar apprehend is that God after the manner of men is a Lord and King and doth beget and love which he esteems to be grosly absurd To these I answer distinctly 1. As for the places where God is called Lord and King and said to Reign over the Nations with all of like import in these we are taught by what we find elsewhere in Scripture to remove from God whatever savours of imperfection and to ascribe nothing to him but what suits with a most excellent and most perfect Being Nor do the aforesaid Expressions in their plain and obvious sense signifie either more or less than that God is the Universal Sovereign of the World Ruling his Creatures with infinite Wisdom and Power according to their different natures and conditions the Inferiour sort by instinct and natural necessity his Intellectual Creatures by Laws as the proper Instrument of Moral Government And what the Exercitators sentiments are about this I cannot conjecture If he be for that Novel Opinion of Thomas Anglus ab Albis that God doth not properly Govern us by Laws as Kings do their Kingdoms but as an Engineer doth his Engine by Physical Motion and that therefore he is call'd our Lord and King only in a Metaphorical sense I must enter a dissent against such an absurd and Atheistical conceit and put him to prove his Assertion and answer the Arguments that are in print against it 2. As for the second Of begetting a Son Psal 2. 7. Interpreters do much differ about it Some conceive the first and immediate sense of the words to respect David whom God had delivered out of his great afflictions and rais'd to a Kingdom which deliverance and exaltation was to him as a second Birth And this they illustrate by what is said of the Roman Emperors that they had two Birth-days the one of their Persons when they came into the World the other of their Empire when they were seated in the Throne and that Christ is here intended only as the Antitype prefigured by David Others understand these words properly and immediately of Christ and that with respect to one of these two either 1. To his Eternal Generation in reference to which he is called the Eternal and only begotten Son of God The truth of which Generation we
of Scripture may have correspondency with another and this so far as that the one may expound the other But now the case is alter'd If it be replied in his behalf That these places by him quoted were penned by one and the same Writer and therefore might well have correspondency each with other but this makes nothing for those who interpret one part of Scripture by some other that was not written by the same Hand I rejoin That the first and second Book of Kings were endited by the same Spirit I grant and shall make some use of it in my third Answer to this Authors Objection But that they were both written by the same Hand or suppose they were that the Writer intended by the latter to explain what he had written in the former is more than he or any other for him can prove 3. The Scriptures though written by parts and at several times and by several persons yet they all own God for their Author by whose Spirit they were endited and they are all together to be taken for his Counsel to Sinners And then what injury or incongruity is there in making use of what one hath written more plainly to unfold what was more darkly written by another When we compare the Evangelists together to explain what one says more briefly by what another lays down more fully we do not in this so much inquire into the sense and meaning of the Evangelists as into the Mind of God whose Secretaries they were The like may be said of the Prophets If the Prophets or Apostles spake of their own heads or wrote only a signification of their own private Sentiments there might be some colour for this Objection But the Apostle tells us That no Prophesie of Scripture is of private Interpretation that is the Prophets in their Writings were not the Interpreters of their own Mind but of the Mind of God by whom they were sent and by whose Spirit they were acted as it follows in the next Verse For Prophesie came not in old time by the will of man but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost And thus much the Exercitator acknowledgeth where he saith That God is the Author of the Scriptures and that he did always guide his Amanuenses to write the Truth giving them the assistance of his unerring Spirit and that whatsoever they wroteâ—… pure Truth free from all mixture of Fâ—â—shood or Errour But there is another Discourse prefixed to a latter Edition of the so oft-mentioned Exercitation and thought by many to come from the same Author the Writer whereof sticks not to assert this audacious Falshood That the Prophets in their Narkatives and in all matters of Speculation that is whatsoever was not matter of moral Duty did disagree among themselves and â—onsequently that what is said by one is not to be explained by the words of another Which with other passages of like import does at once call in question the whole Truth and consequently the Divine Authority of the Scriptures For if the Pâ—â—men of Scripture elash one against another in their Writings either God was not the Author of whâ—â— they wrote but themselves or the God of Truth must be charged with Falshood for of two diâ—…ent Opinions both cannot be true Whose design it is that the Author of that Theologico-Political Tractat drives except that of the great Enemy of Mankind I know not But he sufficiently manifests a vile esteem of the Holy Scriptures and a desire to beget the like in others For he takes very earnest pains with the utmost of his art and skill to â—â—ke up and exagitate their seeming disagreements as real contradictions casting a great deal of scorn upon all Expositors as Fools or Madmen that attempt to reconcile them His discourse in this and sundry other odious passages which I abâ—or to mention doth apparently tend to promote the cause of the Antiscripturists besides the help 〈◊〉 affords which is not a little to the Romish Interest The Author indeed would seem by some Expressions here and there to intimate his dislike of the Ponâ—ifician Party But we know it is consistent enough with the Politick Principles of Men of that way to speak much more than he hath done against that very Cause that they are studiously projecting under that Covert to advance But I return from this Digression to what I was about If any thing in the Laws of a Kingdom be difficult and perplex and there be something in some other Law of the same Kingdom though written or printed by other hands that speaks more clearly of that matter what wrong is it to the Law or the Law-maker or Printer if a Learned Council comparing one with another expound that which is more dark in one part of the Laws by that which is more perspicuous in another both proceeding from the same Authority and both obliging to the same persons Judge alike in the present case This Objection therefore is of no force But it is further urged That there are some difficult places of Scripture that are no where explained in any other part and some things that being but once spoken in Scripture cannot be explained by any parallel place And here our â—â—ercitator refers us for instances to his great Friend Stapleton For answer 1. Whereas it is said there are difficulties in some parts of Scripture that are no where cleared how does any Man know this Doth it follow that there is no such thing because we cannot find it Do we think our selves of so piercing or capacious understandings that nothing in the Scripture that is intelligible can escape our discovery Those who have acquainted themselves with Antient and Modern Expositors do know that many difficulties which former Interpreters have in vain struggled with and some that they have wholly left untoucht either as not apprehending them to be difficulties or conceiving them insuperable have been made very clear and plain by some later Writers Verily God will have us know that the opening of his Mind doth not depend only or chiefly upon the pregnancy of Mans Wit but upon his gracious assistance and blessing which he affords or withholds when and where himself sees fit Again the Scriptures were penn'd not only for the past and present but for all succeeding Ages of the Church to the end of the World And as some parts of them which peculiarly concern'd some Ages past were perhaps better understood in those Ages than they can be by us now as certainly many things were that belong'd to the Jewish Oeconomy so I know not but we may rationally suppose that some other parts of Scripture which to us seem unintelligible may have special reference to the Church in after-Ages and that those whom they so nearly concern shall have more light afforded for the understanding of them in their days than we have in ours As without doubt some Prophetick Scriptures not
Authentick Record of his Mind to conduct us in our way to Blessedness and is this all it is good for It seems by this Mans account all the Knowledge that we have any use for is in us already by Natures Light and whatsoever is delivered in Scripture must be tryed by that What could a blind Pagan have said more to the Scriptures dishonour As it is past all doubt that the Lord of Heaven and Earth in whom we live and move and are ought to be worshipp'd and served by his Rational Creatures so me thinks it should be as unquestionable that he cannot be served rightly and acceptably but by such a Worship as is according to the appointment of his own Will The meanest Man living that hath any depending on him looks they should serve him according to his Mind and not according to their own arbitrary choice And shall we think the Great Sovereign of the World will be pleased with a Worship of Mens own â—â—aming without any order or direction from him Now by which way or means could we know what that Worship is which God approves if we were in this inpsed state left to the meer conduct of Natural Light and had nor Divine Revelation to inform and guide us What piâ—…ful Work did the â—…st and learnedst of the. Heathen make about this 〈◊〉 what 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 did they admit into their Religious Worship as I have already 〈◊〉 in the first part of my Discourse Besides there are in Scripture many things Historicalâ— and many Prophetical Can these 〈◊〉 known by Natural Light or can we judge whether these be true or no by the help of Philosophy Moses gives us the Hâ—story of the Creation 〈◊〉 the general Deluge of the Destruction of Sodom of Israels Deliverance out of Egypt by strange Wonders and the bringing of them after forty years wandring into the Promised Land and their Establishment there for some years till for their Idolatry and other sins they were removed is recorded by other sacred Writers besides many other remarkable Histories of more personal concernment Now if we must not take these for truth from the testimony of Scripture which way shall we be satisfied Reason indeed may convince us that these things are not impossible But whether they were really so or so done as is reported all the Principles of Reason all the Maxims of Philosophy will never resolve us The like may be said of the many Prophesies concerning Christ and the after-state of the Church and about the four great Monarchies that were successively to arise with their progress and period If these and such like be examined by Philosophy what can it say to them Must these be all rejected So it seems by this Author's Discourse for he hath no kindness for any thing in Scripture but what may mind us of what we know naturally and may by the Principles of Reason be examin'd and determin'd And then what shall we say to the great Doctrine of Mans Salvation by Christ which is the grand Subject and principal Scope the of Scriptures Was there ever any syllable of this made known to the World otherwise than by Revelation There is indeed a Natural Theologie but I could never yet see ground to be perswaded that there is a Natural Christianity The knowledge of God as our Creator and Preserver is in some measure but very imperfectly attainable by Natural Light But the knowledge of Christ as the Redeemer of Sinners reconciling them to God and delivering them from the power of Satan had never been attained had there not been something above Nature to discover it If any think otherwise let them tell me how it comes about that in those Countries where the Doctrine of the Scriptures was never published there is not the least print or footstep of this great Mystery to be found But certainly he that talks of the Scriptures after the rate of this Author cannot be thought to apprehend himself to stand in any need of a Redeemer or to have any better esteem of the Gospel than that Triple-Crowned Gentleman at Rome is said to have manifested long since in his discourse with Cardinal Bembus For ought I see this Man owns nothing in the Scripture but what may be reduced to three Heads 1. The Being of God and his Attributes 2. The Immortality of the Soul and consequently Man 's future state in another World and 3. The Rules or Laws of Moral Duty because of these we have some notice by Natural Light But how miserably defective is that Light even in these So that here also we stand in need of a further Guide Some knowledge the Heathens had of God and of Mans future state but alas what does all that they have written hereabout come to but some faint guesses and probable conjectures And though they have in their Ethicks many excellent things and of great use yet they fall extream short in sundry particulars of very weighty concernment whereof we should have been utterly ignorant if the Holy Scriptures had not afforded us a more clear and perfect Rule of practice And it hath been observed by some that those Gentile Philosophers who flourish'd after the general promulgation of the Gospel though they continued still in their old Gentilism yet they wrote much more clearly and sublimely of the Nature of God and of Mans Duty here and his Eternal state hereafter than those who were before them Whether the cause of this were the converse they might have with Christians and their Writings or whether that plentiful effusion of the Spirit that was vouchsafed in those times might in some degree as to common enlightenings extend it self beyond the Churches Pale I will not determine But sure something there was beyond mere Natural Light that made them in their Notions of God and Religion so much 〈…〉 of their Predecessors I shall shut up all with this hearty and serious Wish That all who call upon God by Jesus Christ would highly honour and esteem the Holy Scriptures making them their study and delight in order to the bettering of their Hearts and manifesting the power and purity of this Word by a sober righteous and godly Conversation which would more effectually vindicate this Blessed Book from the Scorns and Reproaches of Atheists and Antiscripturists than all Disputes AN APPENDIX Concerning Internal Illumination And other Operations of the Spirit upon the Soul of Man Vindicating the Doctrine of the Protestants and the Practice of all Serious Christians from the Charge of Enthusiasm and other Unjust Criminations In the SAVOY Printed by Tho. Newcomb for Robert Boulter at the Turks Head in Cornhill over against the Royal Exchange 1677. A brief Account of the Contents of the following Appendix CHAP. I. THe Protestants Doctrine concerning the Spirits Illumination explained and defended CHAP. II. The Nature of Distresses of Conscience and Spiritual Joys open'd and the reality of them proved CHAP. III. True Zeal in the Exercises of Religion justified An
Appendix concerning Internal Illumination and other Operations of the Spirit upon the Soul of Man c. CHAP. I. 1. What our Protestant Divines mean by that Illumination of the Spirit which they assert as necessary to the understanding of the Scriptures and the Exercitators censure of it as Enthusiasm approved by Wolzogen 2. The Falshood of that Calumny discovered 3. Wolzogen ' s disingenuity and inconstancy 4. The necessity of the aforesaid Illumination proved 5. In what sense it is supernatural 6. Some of the Exercitators Cavils answered 7. In what sense this Illumination is immediate IN the foregoing Papers designed to clear and vindicate the Protestant Doctrine concerning the Supreme Bule of Interpreting Seripture I have had occasion frequently to deal with the Belgick Exercitator and to take notice of what he hath said that seems to be of any moment so far as concerns that point But whereas he is pleased in the procedure of his Discourse to step out of his way and deridingly to oppose the Doctrine of the Reformed Churches about the Spirits assistance in the Interpretation of Scripture as savouring of Enthusiasm I then waved medling with that part of his Book thinking it more expedient to say something to it in an Appendix by it self this being a Question altogether distinct from that other of the Rule of Interpretation In the Fourteenth Chapter of his oft-mentioned Exercitation he quotes several of our Protestant Authors of great Name and Worth giving in the words of some of them and referring us for others to the cited places The drift of their several Discourses about this point seems to be that there needs an effectual operation of the Holy Spirit to enlighten Mens understandings and cause them rightly to apprehend and readily to approve the Mind of God in Scripture That their meaning may be more clearly propounded we must distinguish of a twofold understanding of Scripture There is a Natural and merely Grammatical perception of the truth of Scripture-Propositions which a Man destitute of the Spirit of Grace may attain by common assistance in the use of ordinary means And there is a Spiritual apprehension of the things themselves contain'd in those Propositions which includes in it a hearty believing and embracing them that is not attain'd without the sanctifying work of the Spirit renewing the mind by enduing it with an heavenly supernatural Light This I find thus express'd and illustrated by the late Reverend Bishop of Norwich Natural Men says he have their Principles vitiated their Faculties bound that they cannot understand spiritual things till God have as it were implanted a new understanding in them framed the heart to attend and set it at liberty to see the Glory of God with open face Though the Veil do not keep out Grammatical Construction yet it blindeth the Heart against the spiritual Light and Beauty of the Word We see even in common Sciences where the Conclusions are suitable to our innate and implanted Notions yet he that can distinctly construe and make Grammar of a Principle in Euclide may be ignorant of the Mathematical sense and use of it Much more may a Man in Divine Truths be spiritually ignorant even where in some respect he may be said to know For the Scriptures pronounce Men ignorant of those things which they see and know In Divine Doctrine Obedience is the Ground of Knowledge and Holiness the best Qualification to understand the Scriptures To this Spiritual Understanding there is need of the aforesaid Supernatural Light And this is that which as far as I can understand our Divines mean when they assert the necessity of the Spirits Illumination Thus speaks the Church of England The Revelation of the Holy Ghost inspireth the true meaning of the Scripture into us In truth we cannot without it attain true saving knowledge Yea of this mind was Erasmus no Enthusiast who thus speaks He erreth vehemently who believes he can ever attain to the true understanding of the Canonical Scriptures unless he be inspired by the same Spirit that endited them And again They have the Book of Scripture but not the Scripture that want the Spirit without which the Scripture is not understood And M. Luther quoting a Speech of Aben-Ezra Sine supra infra i. e. without Points and Accents the Scripture cannot be understood adds a third sine intra without somewhat within viz. the Light of the Holy Spirit Now let us hear the Judgment of the Exercitator and his pretended Answerer Wolzogen about this As for the former If says he the meaning of these Divines were this that no sense of Scripture by what way or method soever found out can be fully certain to any unless by the Natural Light of our understanding we can clearly and distinctly perceive it and be fully perswaded of its truth and that this clear perception and the sense a Man hath of it be that inward perswasion and testimony of the Spirit which they intend this will be granted them But if they mean not the Natural Light of Mans understanding or what is built upon that but a Supernatural Light above and beyond Mans Natural Reason not included in the Mind or acquired by it but infused and inspired from above this says he we disclaim and condemn for Enthusiasm This is the sum of the censure that he passeth upon this Doctrine And Lud. Wolzogen who pretends to take up the Bucklers against him in defence of the Protestant Cause in stead of vindicating the forecited Authors and their Doctrine joins with the Exercitator in the calumny as appears undeniably by his own words for thus he speaks Because the Holy Spirit doth indeed still exert some power in the minds of Men therefore some have believed that he opens the sense of the Scriptures and interprets them to the Faithful Which opinion the Exercitator doth justly decry and determine that it contains mere Enthusiasm Where he expresly approves and applauds what the Exercitator had said against the Doctors of the Reformed Churches charging them with Enthusiasm for maintaining a necessity of a Supernatural Light for a saving perception of the Mind of God in Scripture And himself doth so frequently strike upon this string in several places of his Book that he seems to design the blemishing and defaming of our most eminent Protestant Writers and the Doctrine which they have asserted against Papists and Pelagians These Men cannot be ignorant that the Divines whom they thus impeach have all along in answer to the like imputation from Popish and Socinian Authors expresly and vehemently disclaimed all compliance with Enthusiasts and that some of them have written learnedly and smartly against that sort of Men. They utterly disavow their expecting any such Illumination as was given to the Prophets and Apostles and do plainly deliver their minds that what they assert doth not consist in discovering any new Doctrine unreveal'd in Scripture but in qualifying and
never so inconsistent with or opposite to the Doctrine of the Holy Scriptures or the Dictates of sound and sober Reason And being by this means laid open to Satanical Delusions they were easily drawn to believe the grossest absurdities and some of them to practice the vilest wickednesses contrary to common Honesty and the Publick Peace justifying all by their pretended Revelations This is the Character we have of Enthusiasts both Antient and Modern from Authors of unquestionable credit And if there be any where in this World any of the remainders of that Sect as it 's probable enough there are that entertain such wild and frantick Conceptions let them bear their sin and shame But of this I am sure that the Persons thus charged by Wolzogen and his Complices can safely appeal to all unprejudiced Persons that know them and to the most Wise and Holy God who is greater than all that they are as clear from any compliance with that Infatuated Generation as the best of their Accusers For 1. They heartily own and submit to the Holy Scriptures as the only sure and sufficient Rule of Faith and Life Accordingly whatsoever Conceptions may rise within them or be suggested to them in matters of Religion they bring them to the Bar of Scripture to stand or fall according to its Judgment not imposing their Sentiments upon the Scripture but receiving the sense of Scripture from the Scripture it self according to what hath been asserted in the precedent Discourse 2. In matters difficult and obscure that are more darkly laid down in Scripture especially in the Prophetick parts of it they forbear to determine peremptorily chusing rather to satisfie themselves with a modest hesitancy and abhorring to make their Judgments the measure of anothers Faith or superciliously to censure or despise any for their different apprehensions 3. They plead for no other Spirit of Revelation than what the Apostle prays for in behalf of the Ephesians Chap. 1. Vers. 17 18 19. which Revelation consists not in discovering any New Object to be received unreveal'd in Scripture but only in qualifying the Subject by curing the native and acquired blindness and carnality of our minds that we may rightly understand and embrace the Truths which the Scripture propounds 4. They solemnly profess and declare to all the World that whatsoever they are taught by the Holy Spirit as it is by and from the Scripture so it is in the regular exercise of their rational Faculties and such as they are â—eady at all times to give an account of from Scripture-grounds to any sober intelligent Person that shall demand it They therefore disown and reject the absurd Principles and arrogant Presumptions of the falsly-call'd Mystical Theology set on fooâ— antiently and revived in later years that pretends to Ecstatick Raptures and Deifications of the Soul by an utter cessation of all Intellectual Operations The Original of which Phantastick Theology Dr. Meric Casaubon derives from the Heathen Philosophers intimating withal the great Affinity between this and the New Method so much cried up of late Which those whom it concerns may consider of at their leisure In the mean time I take that for granted which hath been agreeably to plain and evident Scripture the acknowledged Doctrine of the Catholick Church however denied and derided by some late Innovators That the Holy Spirit of God is according to Christs own promise given to dwell in the Hearts of Christians to beget and preserve spiritual life in them to conduct them in their way to strengthen them with might in the Inner Man to shed abroad the love of God in their Hearts and witness their adoption to assist them in holy services and gradually to perfect the work of Sanctification in them To spend many words in proving this which is already so clear to all unbyass'd Judgments were to to light a Candle before the Sun As for that ridiculous sense that some have endeavour'd to fasten upon these or some of these Scriptures as if they were to be understood only of the Spirit as given to the Church in common and not to particular Christians it is so utterly inconsistent with the scope of those respective places and runs so contrary to the whole stream of Scripture and all Antiquity that I think it needless to waste time in refuting it He that will but considerately read over the several places and faithfully examine the Context may easily see the vanity of it That of the Learned Grotius is clear and full Not only the whole Collective Body of the Faithful but also particular Believers are rightly call'd the Temple of the Holy Ghost because the Spirit of God dwelleth in their Minds And if those who are careful according to the Apostles counsel not to quench the Spirit but to stir up the Grace of God in them have their hearts more warm'd and enlarged in holy Duties than others who either want that measure of Gifts or are defective in improving them I cannot conjecture why this should be made a matter of reproach but that some Men are angry at every thing that is not just of their own size or not suitable to their gust and therefore are resolved to revile and calumniate it though by those wounds the heart and life of Religion be found to lie a bleeding To shut up this I might here mind the Objector and those of his way how much it concerns them to acquit themselves of that Enthusiasm which they impeach others for It 's known to be one of the first Principles of that Grand Enthusiast Valentius Weigelius That he who would know the truth must forget whatsoever he hath learnt from Men and Books and lay it all aside as if he had never been acquainted with any thing and retreat into himself and fetch all his knowledge from thence Let this be referr'd to our Authors Consideration wherein this differs from the great Principle of his admired Master But let us hear what is further Objected to justifie these Mens prejudices Secondly It is said by some These heats are but the Frantick Freaks of a Crazed Brain and the product of a Religious Frenzy I answer 1. We need not be much moved with this sensless charge when we find the Pen-men of Sacred Writ to have little better measure made them by the same hand For of them we are told that they wrote many times they knew not what and gave forth Oracles when they were beside themselves his word is alienata mente which was one of the vile Positions of the Montanisis and Cataphrygians rejected and condemned both by Antient and Modern Divines And yet to justifie this Assertion our Author gravely cites Cicero de Divinatione calling the Raptures of their Pagan Vates by the Name of Furor and Virgil calling Sibylla a Mad Prophetess and Justin the Historian Lib. 24. where speaking of the much-famed Oracle at Delphos he tells us of a very
Devotion as may stand with the quiet enjoyment of their lusts and not disturb their dead and sleepy Consciences And therefore the less life and vigour there is in those exercises of Religion wherein they think good to bear a part the more pleasing they are to them they dread all other as much as a Child doth the sound of a Trumpet or the terrible crack of Thunder as that which amazes and affrights them and breaks them of their beloved ease Who is there that looks abroad in the World and sees not this And therefore whenever any have harden'd themselves into the confidence of casting reproaches upon such as are observed to be most hearty and fervent in the Worship of God they usually have the Vogue of the profane multitude to side with them and are by that advantage embolden'd more freely to pour out their venom though sometimes they run so far beyond all bounds of Candâ—r Modesty and Truth that they give the deepest wounds to their own reputation in the esteem of those who are sober and ingenuous Did the Persons thus accused take to themselves the honour of what good they have or do or did they endeavour or attempt to gain or exercise any Dominion over the Faith or Consciences of their Brethren there might be some better colour for this Imputation But it is evident to all that they disown all such self-admiring and self-exalting conceits making themselves Servants to all in order to the furtherance of their Masters honour to whom they desire to sacrifice all they have not seeking their own emolument or advancement but the profit of many that they may be saved But it 's usual with those whose Worldly Interest is their Summa Ratio to measure others by themselves and to lay that at the doors of those whom they distaste which they are conscious of in their own hearts and which every one can discern to be too conspicuous in their lives I shall conclude this with those words of the Apostle Judge nothing before the time till the Lord come who both will bring to light the hidden things of darkness and will make manifest the counsels of the hearts and then shall every Man have praise of God FINIS Books to be sold by Rob. Boulter at the Turks-Head in Cornhil over against the Royal-Exchange FOLIO RUshworth's Collections Baronage of England in two parts by William Dugdal Esq Hooker's Ecclesiastical Policy Cursellei Opera Bishop Taylor 's Cases of Conscience Spiritual Refinings in two parts by Anthony Burgess His 145 Sermons on John 17. His Treatise of Original Sin Curia Politiae or the Apologies of several Princes justifying to the World their most eminent Actions by Reason and Policy A Concordance to the Holy Scriptures with the various Readings both of Text and Margin by S. N. Sixty five Sermons by the Right Reverend Father in God Ralph Brownrig late Lord Bishop of Exeter Published by William Martin M. A. sometime Preacher at the Rolls in two Volumes QUARTO An Exposition with Practical Notes and Observations on the five last Chapters of the Book of Job by Jos. Caryl Husbandry Spiritualized or the Heavenly use of Earthly things by J. Flavel A Treatise of the Sabbath in four parts by Mr. Dan. Cawdry Vindiciae Legis or a Vindication of the Law and Covenants from the Errors of Papists Socinians and Antinomians by Anthony Burgess The Saints Everlasting Rest or a Treatise of the blessed state of the Saints in their enjoyment of God in Glory by Richard Baxter His plain Scripture-proof of Infant-Baptism The saurus medicinae practicae ex praestâ—ntissimorum tum Veterum tum Recentiorum Medicorum Observationibus Consultationibus Consiliis Epistolis summa diligentia collectus ordineque Alphabetico dispositus per Tho. Burnet A Treatise of the right use of the Fathers by John Dailly Annotations on the Book of Ecclesiastes by a Reverend Divine The Doctrine of Justification by Faith by John Owen D. D. Man of Sin or a Discourse of Popery wherein the numerous and monstrous Abominations in Doctrine and Practice of the Romish Church are by their own hands exposed to open sight that the very Blind may see them By no Roman but a Reformed Catholick De Origine Moribus rebus Gestis Scotorum Libri decem Authore Joanne Lesâ—aeo Episcopo Rossensi Large OCTAVO A Discourse of Growth in Grace in sundry Sermons by Samuel Slater late of St. Katherines near the Tower The Grounds of Art teaching the perfect work and practice of Arithmetick both in whole Numbers and Fractions by R. Record A Cloud of Witnesses or the Sufferers Mirrour made up of the Swan-like Songs and other choice Passages of several Martyrs and Confessors to the end of the Sixteenth Century in their Treatises Speeches and Prayers by T. M. M. A. A Treatise of the Divine Promises in five Books by Edw. Leigh Esq The unreasonableness of Infidelity in four parts by R. Baxter His Method for getting and keeping Spiritual Peace and Comfort His safe Religion against Popery Quakerism no Christianity clearly and abundantly proved out of the Writings of their chief Leaders with a Key for the understanding their sense of their many usurped and unintelligible words by John Faldo 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hesiodi ASCRAEI quae extant Cum notis Cornelii Scrivelii A Treatise of the Bulk and Selvedge of the World wherein the Greatness Littleness and Lastingness of Bodies are freely handled with an Answer to Tentamina de Deo by N. Fairfax M. D. Small Octavo and Duodecimo A Saint indeed or the great Work of a Christian opened and pressed from Prov. 4. 23. by J. Flavel Artificial Arithmetick in Decimals shewing the Original Ground and Foundation thereof by R. Jagar § I. * Flac. Illy Cl. Scr. parte 2. Gerard. Loc com de Int. Scr. cap. 2. Glass Philol lib. 2. pag. 280. And. Riveâ— Isagog cap. 18. § 2. Lud. Croc. praeloq in S. Theol. c. 3. ex Ludov Granatensis § 3. * Dr. Stillingflect Dr. Tiliotson Mr. Pool c. §. 4. Philosophia S. Scr. Interpres Exerciâ—atio Paradoxa In Prologo Ib. cap. 5. par 1. Cap. 16. par 8. §. 1. * Ph. Scr. Int. c. 5. par 1. * Lud. Walzog in Censura Censur p. 59. § 2. Aqu. 2. 2â— Q. 2. 〈◊〉 4. § 3. * Lib. de Author Script cap. 1. p. 16 c. 4. p. 66. 71. * Phil Scr. Int. cap. 16 par 7. 8. * Aâ—g Retract cap. 14 de utilitate credendi cap. 1. § 1. Arg. 1. § 2. Duâ—…or Dubitâ—… l. 1. c. 2. Exception 1. Schlicâ—tingiâ—â— Velâ—husius alii Sol. 1. Expos. ep ad Coloss. in cap. 2. 8. Exception 2. Phil. Scr. Int. cap. 7. par 4. Sol. 1. §. 3. Aug. de C. D. l. 61. c. 10. § 1. Exception 1. Sol. § 2. Exception 2. Sol. Duct Dub. lib. 3. c. 3. Inst. Sol. §. 3. Exception 3. Sol. Exception 4. Phil. Scr. Int. cap. 5. par 7. c. 8. par 1.