And by the same Reason a man must not deny what God says to be true though he cannot comprehend many things which God says As particularly concerning this Mystery of the Trinity It ought then to satisfy us that there is sufficient evidence that this Doctrine is delivered in Scripture and that what is there declared concerning it doth not imply a Contradiction For why should our finite understandings pretend to comprehend that which is infinite or to know all the real Differences that are consistent with the Unity of an Infinite Being or to be able fully to explain this Mystery by any similitude or resemblance taken from finite Beings But before I leave this Argument I cannot but take notice of one thing which they of the Church of Rome are perpetually objecting to us upon this Occasion And it is this That by the same reason that we believe the Doctrine of the Trinity we may and must receive that of Transubstantiation God forbid Because of all the Doctrines that ever were in any Religion this of Transubstantiation is certainly the most abominably absurd However this Objection plainly shews how fondly and obstinately they are addicted to their own Errors how mishapen and monstrous soever insomuch that rather than the Dictates of their Church how absurd soever should be called in question they will question the truth even of Christianity it self and if we will not take in Transubstantiation and admit it to be a necessary Article of the Christian Faith they grow so sullen and desperate that they matter not what becomes of all the rest And rather than not have their Will of us in that which is controverted they will give up that which by their own confession is an undoubted Article of the Christian Faith and not controverted on either Side except only by the Socinians who yet are hearty Enemies to Transubstantiation and have exposed the absurdity of it with great advantage But I shall endeavour to return a more particular Answer to this Objection and such a one as I hope will satisfy every considerate and unprejudiced mind that after all this confidence and swaggering of theirs there is by no means equal reason either for the receiving or for the rejecting of these two Doctrines of the Trinity and Transubstantiation First There is not equal reason for the belief of these Two Doctrines This Objection if it be of any force must suppose that there is equal evidence and proof from Scripture for these two Doctrines But this we utterly deny and with great reason because it is no more evident from the words of Scripture that the Sacramental Bread is substantially changed into Christ's natural Body by virtue of those words This is my Body than it is that Christ is substantially changed into a natural Vine by virtue of those words I am the true Vine or than that the Rock in the Wilderness of which the Israelites drank was substantially changed into the Person of Christ because it is expresly said That Rock was Christ or than that the Christian Church is substantially changed into the natural Body of Christ because it is in express terms said of the Church That it is his Body But besides this several of their own most learned Writers have freely acknowledged that Transubstantiation can neither be directly proved nor necessarily concluded from Scripture But this the Writers of the Christian Church did never acknowledge concerning the Trinity and the Divinity of Christ but have always appealed to the clear and undeniable Testimonies of Scripture for the Proof of these Doctrines And then the whole force of the Objection amounts to this That if I am bound to believe what I am sure God says tho I cannot comprehend it then I am bound by the same reason to believe the greatest Absurdity in the World though I have no manner of assurance of any Divine Revelation concerning it And if this be their meaning though we understand not Transubstantiation yet we very well understand what they would have but cannot grant it because there is not equal reason to believe two things for one of which there is good proof and for the other no proof at all Secondly Neither is there equal reason for the rejecting of these two Doctrines This the Objection supposes which yet cannot be supposed but upon one or both of these two grounds Either because these two Doctrines are equally incomprehensible or because they are equally loaded with Absurdities and Contradictions The First is no good ground of rejecting any Doctrine merely because it is incomprehensible as I have abundantly shew'd already But besides this there is a wide difference between plain matters of Sense and Mysteries concerning God and it does by no means follow that if a man do once admit any thing concerning God which he cannot comprehend he hath no reason afterwards to believe what he himself sees This is a most unreasonable and destructive way of arguing because it strikes at the foundation of all Certainty and sets every man at liberty to deny the most plain and evident Truths of Christianity if he may not be humor'd in having the absurdest things in the World admitted for true The next step will be to persuade us that we may as well deny the Being of God because his Nature is incomprehensible by our Reason as deny Transubstantiation because it evidently contradicts our Senses 2dly Nor are these two Doctrines loaded with the like Absurdities and Contradictions So far from this that the Doctrine of the Trinity as it is delivered in the Scriptures and hath already been explained hath no Absurdity or Contradiction either involved in it or necessarily consequent upon it But the Doctrine of Transubstantiation is big with all imaginable Absurdity and Contradiction And their own Schoolmen have sufficiently exposed it especially Scotus and he designed to do so as any man that attentively reads him may plainly discover For in his Disputation about it he treats this Doctrine with the greatest contempt as a new Invention of the Council of Lateran under Pope Innocent Ill. To the Decree of which Council concerning it he seems to pay a formal submission but really derides it as contrary to the common Sense and Reason of Mankind and not at all supported by Scripture as any one may easily discern that will carefully consider his manner of handling it and the result of his whole Disputation about it And now Suppose there were some appearance of Absurdity and Contradiction in the Doctrine of the Trinity as it is delivered in Scripture must we therefore believe a Doctrine which is not at all revealed in Scripture and which hath certainly in it all the absurdities in the World and all the Contradictions to Sense and Reason and which once admitted doth at once destroy all Certainty Yes say they why not since we of the Church of Rome are satisfied that this Doctrine is revealed in Scripture or if it be not is defined by the
now to grapple withal And this I hope I have in some measure done in one of the former Discourses Nor indeed do I see that it is any ways necessary to do more it being sufficient that God hath declared what he thought fit in this matter and that we do firmly believe what he says concerning it to be true though we do not perfectly comprehend the meaning of all that he hath said about it For in this and the like Cases I take an Implicite Faith to be very commendable that is to believe whatever we are sufficiently assured God hath revealed though we do not fully understand his meaning in such a Revelation And thus every man who believes the H. Scriptures to be a truly Divine Revelation does implicitely believe a great part of the Prophetical Books of Scripture and several obscure expressions in those Books though he do not particularly understand the meaning of all the Predictions and expressions contained in them In like manner there are certainly a great many very good Christians who do not believe and comprehend the Mysteries of Faith nicely enough to approve themselves to a Scholastical and Magisterial Judge of Controversies who yet if they do heartily embrace the Doctrines which are clearly revealed in Scripture and live up to the plain Precepts of the Christian Religion will I doubt not be very well approved by the Great and Just and by the infallibly Infallible Judge of the World III. Let it be further considered That though neither the word Trinity nor perhaps Person in the sense in which it is used by Divines when they treat of this Mystery be any where to be met with in Scripture yet it cannot be denied but that Three are there spoken of by the Names of Father Son and H. Ghost in whose Name every Christian is baptized and to each of whom the highest Titles and Properties of God are in Scripture attributed And these Three are spoken of with as much distinction from one another as we use to speak of three several Persons So that though the word Trinity be not found in Scripture yet these Three are there expresly and frequently mentioned and a Trinity is nothing but three of any thing And so likewise though the word Person be not there expresly applied to Father Son and H. Ghost yet it will be very hard to find a more convenient word whereby to express the distinction of these Three For which reason I could never yet see any just cause to quarrel at this term For since the H. Spirit of God in Scripture hath thought fit in speaking of these Three to distinguish them from one another as we use in common speech to distinguish three several Persons I cannot see any reason why in the explication of this Mystery which purely depends upon Divine Revelation we should not speak of it in the same manner as the Scripture doth And though the word Person is now become a â—erm of Art I see no cause why we should decline it so long as we mean by it neither more nor less than what the Scripture says in other Words IV. It deserves further to be considered That there hath been a very ancient Tradition concerning three real Differences or Distinctions in the Divine Nature and these as I said before very nearly resembling the Christian Doctrine of the Trinity Whence this Tradition had its original is not easie upon good and certain grounds to say but certain it is that the Jews anciently had this Notion And that they did distinguish the Word of God and the H. Spirit of God from Him who was absolutely called God and whom they looked upon as the First Principle of all things as is plain from Philo Judaeus and Moses Nachmanides and others cited by the Learned Grotius in his incomparable Book of the Truth of the Christian Religion And among the Heathen Plato who probably enough might have this Notion from the Jews did make three Distinctions in the Deity by the Names of essential Goodness and Mind and Spirit So that whatever Objections this matter may be liable to it is not so peculiar a Doctrine of the Christian Religion as many have imagined though it is revealed by it with much more clearness and certainty And consequently neither the Jews nor Plato have any reason to object is to us Christians especially since they pretend no other ground for it but either their own Reason or an ancient Tradition from their Fathers whereas we Christians do appeal to express Divine Revelation for what we believe in this matter and do believe it singly upon that account V. It is besides very considerable That the Scriptures do deliver this Doctrine of the Trinity without any manner of doubt or question concerning the Unity of the Divine Nature And not only so but do most stedfastly and constantly assert that there is but One God And in those very Texts in which these three Differences are mentioned the Unity of the Divine Nature is expresly asserted as where St. John makes mention of the Father the Word and the Spirit the Unity of these Three is likewise affirmed There are Three that bear record in Heaven the Father the Word and the Spirit and these Three are One. VI. It is yet further considerable That from this Mystery as delivered in Scripture a Plurality of Gods cannot be inferred without making the Scripture grosly to contradict it self which I charitably suppose the Socinians would be as loth to admit as we our selves are And if either Councils or Fathers or Schoolmen have so explained this Mystery as to give any just ground or so much as a plausible colour for such an Inference let the blame fall where it is due and let it not be charged on the H. Scriptures but rather as the Apostle says in another Case Let God be true and every Man a liar VIIthly and Lastly I desire it may be considered That it is not repugnant to Reason to believe some things which are incomprehensible by our Reason provided that we have sufficient ground and reason for the belief of them Especially if they be concerning God who is in his Nature Incomprehensible and we be well assured that he hath revealed them And therefore it ought not to offend us that these Differences in the Deity are incomprehensible by our finite understandings because the Divine Nature it self is so and yet the belief of that is the Foundation of all Religion There are a great many things in Nature which we cannot comprehend how they either are or can be As the Continuity of Matter that is how the parts of it do hang so fast together that they are many times very hard to be parted and yet we are sure that it is so because we see it every day So likewise how the small Seeds of things contain the whole Form and Nature of the things from which they proceed and into which by degrees they grow and yet we
plainly see this every year There are many things likewise in our Selves which no man is able in any measure to comprehend as to the manner how they are done and performed As the vital union of Soul and Body Who can imagine by what device or means a Spirit comes to be so closely united and so firmly link'd to a material Body that they are not to be parted without great force and violence offer'd to Nature The like may be said of the operations of our several Faculties of Sense and Imagination of Memory and Reason and especially of the Liberty of our Wills And yet we certainly find all these Faculties in our selves though we cannot either comprehend or explain the particular manner in which the several Operations of them are performed And if we cannot comprehend the manner of those Operations which we plainly perceive and feel to be in our Selves much less can we expect to comprehend things without us and least of all can we pretend to comprehend the infinite Nature and Perfections of God and every thing belonging to Him For God himself is certainly the greatest Mystery of all other and acknowledged by Mankind to be in his Nature and in the particular manner of his Existence incomprehensible by Human Understanding And the reason of this is very evident because God is infinite and our knowledge and understanding is but finite And yet no sober man ever thought this a good reason to call the Being of God in question The same may be said of God's certain knowledge of future Contingencies which depend upon the uncertain Wills of free Agents It being utterly inconceivable how any Understanding how large and perfect soever can certainly know beforehand that which depends upon the free Will of another which is an arbitrary and uncertain Cause And yet the Scripture doth not only attribute this Foreknowledge to God but gives us also plain Instances of God's foretelling such things many Ages before it happened as could not come to pass but by the Sins of Men in which we are sure that God can have no hand though nothing can happen without his permission Such was that most memorable Event of the Death of Christ who as the Scripture tells us was by wicked hands crucified and stain and yet even this is said to have happened according to the determinate foreknowledge of God and was punctually foretold by Him some hundreds of years before Nay the Scripture doth not only ascribe this power and perfection to the Divine Knowledge but natural Reason hath been forced to acknowledge it as we may see in some of the wisest of the Philosophers And yet it would puzzle the greatest Philosopher that ever was to give any tolerable account how any Knowledge whatsoever can certainly and infallibly foresee an Event through uncertain and contingent Causes All the reasonable satisfaction that can be had in this matter is this that it is not at all unreasonable to suppose that infinite Knowledg may have ways of knowing things which our finite Understandings can by no means comprehend how they can possibly be known Again There is hardly any thing more inconceivable than how a thing should be of it self and without any Cause of its Being and yet our Reason compels us to acknowledge this Because we certainly see that something is which must either have been of it self and without a Cause or else something that we do not see must have been of it self and have made all other things And by this reasoning we are forced to acknowledge a Deity the mind of Man being able to find no rest but in the acknowledgment of one eternal and wise Mind as the Principle and first Cause of all other things and this Principle is that which Mankind do by general consent call God So that God hath laid a sure foundation of our acknowledgment of his Being in the Reason of our own Minds And though it be one of the hardest things in the world to conceive how any thing can be of it self yet necessity drives us to acknowledge it whether we will or no And this being once granted our Reason being tired in trying all other ways will for its own quiet and ease force us at last to fall in with the general apprehension and belief of Mankind concerning a Deity To give but one Instance more There is the like Difficulty in conceiving how any thing can be made out of nothing and yet our Reason doth oblige us to believe it Because Matter which is a very imperfect Being and merely passive must either always have been of it self or else by the infinite Power of a most perfect and active Being must have been made out of nothing Which is much more credible than that any thing so imperfect as Matter is should be of it self Because that which is of it self cannot be conceived to have any bounds and limits of its Being and Perfection for by the same reason that it necessarily is and of it self it must necessarily have all perfection which it is certain Matter hath not and yet necessary Existence is so great a Perfection that we cannot reasonably suppose any thing that hath this Perfection to want any other Thus you see by these Instances that it is not repugnant to Reason to believe a great many things to be of the manner of whose Existence we are not able to give a particular and distinct account And much less is it repugnant to Reason to believe those things concerning God which we are very well assured he hath declared concerning Himself though these things by our Reason should be incomprehensible And this is truly the Case as to the matter now under debate We are sufficiently assured that the Scriptures are a Divine Revelation and that this Mystery of the Trinity is therein declared to us Now that we cannot comprehend it is no sufficient Reason not to believe it For if this were a good Reason for not believing it then no man ought to believe that there is a God because his Nature is most certainly incomprehensible But we are assured by many Arguments that there is a God and the same natural Reason which assures us that He is doth likewise assure us that He is incomprehensible and therefore our believing Him to be so doth by no means overthrow our belief of His Being In like manner we are assured by Divine Revelation of the truth of this Doctrine of the Trinity and being once assured of that our not being able fully to comprehend it is not reason enough to stagger our belief of it A man cannot deny what he sees though the necessary consequence of admitting it may be something which he cannot comprehend One cannot deny the Frame of this World which he sees with his eyes though from thence it will necessarily follow that either that or something else must be of itself which yet as I said before is a thing which no man can comprehend how it can be
and Glory Dominion and Power now and for ever Amen FINIS BOOKS Printed for B. Aylmer and W. Rogers ARchbishop Tillotson's Sermons and Discourses in Four Volumes Octavo Six Sermons concerning the Divinity of our B. Saviour 8vo Six Sermons I. Of Stedfastness in Religion II. Of Family-Religion III. IV. V. Of the Education of Children VI. Of the Advantages of an Early Piety In 8vo Price 3 s. In 12s 1 s. 6d Persuasive to frequent Communion in the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper 8vo stitcht 3d. In 12s bound 6 d. Rule of Faith Or an Answer to Mr. Sergeant's Book Discourse against Transubstantiation Octavo alone Price 3 d. Stitcht Books Printed for B. Aylmer THE Works of the Learned Dr. Isaac Barrow late Master of Trinity-College in Cambridge Published by his Grace John late Lord Archbishop of Canterbury in Four Volumes in Folio A Demonstration of the Messias in which the Truth of the Christian Religion is proved especially against the Jews By Richard Lord Bishop of Bath and Wells Also his Lordships Charge to the Clergy of his Diocess A Sermon preached before the Lord-Mayor on Easter-Tuesday on April the 21 st being a Spittle-Sermon As also Three single Sermons on several occasions Writ by Richard Lord Bishop of Bath and Wells A Discourse of the great Disingenuity and Unreasonableness of Repining at Afflicting Providences and of the Influence which they ought to have upon us On Job 2. 10. Published upon occasion of the Death of our Gracious Sovereign Queen MARY of most Blessed Memory with a Preface containing some Observations touching Her Excellent Endowments and Exemplary Life Certain Propositions by which the Doctrine of the Holy Trinity is so explained according to the Ancient Fathers as to speak it not Contradictory to Natural Reason Together with a Defence of them in Answer to the Objections of a Socinian Writer in his newly printed Considerations on the Explications of the Doctrine of the Trinity Occasioned by these Propositions among other Discourses A Second Defence of the Propositions in Answer to a Socinian Manuscript In a Letter to a Friend Together with a Third Defence of those Propositions in Answer to some newly published Reflections c. By Edward Lord Bishop of Gloucester A Sermon preached before the Lord-Mayor on Easter-Wednesday As also Three single Sermons on several occasions Writ by Edward Lord Bishop of Gloucester The Holy Bible containing the Old Testament and the New with Annotations and Parallel Scriptures to which is Annexed the Harmony of the Gospels As also the Reduction of the Jewish Weights Coins and Measures to our English Standard and a Table of the Promises in Scripture by Samuel Clark printed in Folio of a very Fair Letter the like never before in one Volume A Vindication of the Divine Perfections Illustrating the Glory of God in them by Reason and Revelation Methodically digested into several Meditations By the Right Honourable the Lord President Stares in 8vo Books Printed for W. Rogers BIshop of Worcester's Doctrines and Practices of the Church of Rome truly Represented c. 4to Doctrine of the Trinity and Transubstantiation compar'ds in Two Parts 4to Bishop of Norwich's Two Sermons of the Wisdom and Goodness of Providence before the Queen at Whitehall 4to Sermon preach'd at St. Andrews-Holborn on Gal. 6. 7. Of Religious Melancholy A Sermon preach'd before the Queen at Whitehall 4to Of the Immortality of the Soul preach'd before the Kind and Queen at Whitehall on Palm Sunday 4to Dr. Sherlock Dean of St. Paul's Answer to a Discourse entituled Papists protesting against Protestant Popery 2d Edit 4to Answer to the Amicable Accommodation of the Differences between the Representer and the Answerer 4to Sermon at the Funeral of the Reverend Dr. Calamy 4to Vindication of some Protestant Principles of Church-Unity and Catholick Communion c. 4to Preservative against Popery in 2 Parts with the Vindication Discourse concerning the Nature Unity and Communion of the Catholick Church First Part 4to Sermon before the Lord Mayor November 4. 1688. 4to Vindication of the Doctrine of the Trinity 3d. Edit 4to Case of Allegiance to Sovereign Powers stated c. 4to Vindication of the Case of Allegiance c. 4to Fast-Sermon before the Queen at Whitehall June 17. 4to Practical Discourse concerning Death In Octavo Eighth Edition Price 3 s. In Twelves Price 2 s. Practical Discourse concerning Judgment Fourth Edit 8vo Sermon before the House of Commons Jan. 30. 1692. 4to Sermon preach'd before the Queen Feb. 12. 1692. The Charity of Lending without Usury in a Sermon before the Lord-Mayor on Easter-Tuesday 1692 4to Sermon preach'd before the Queen June 26. 1692. 4to Sermon preach'd at the Funeral of the Reverend Dr. Meggot late Dean of Winchester Decemb. 10. 1692. 4to A Discourse concerning the Divine Providence 2d Edit 4to Apology for Writing against Socinians 4to A Sermon at the Temple-Church December 30. 1694. upon the sad Occasion of the Death of our Gracious Queen 4to Dr. Claget's Sermons in Two Volumes 8vo Dr. Wake 's Sermons and Discourses on several Occasions 8vo A Defence of the Dean of St. Paul's Apology for writing against the Socinians 4to A Defence of Dr. Sherlock's Notion of a Trinity in Unity 4to A Commentary on the Five Books of Moses With a Dissertation concerning the Author or Writer of the said Books and a General Argument to each of them By Richard Lord Bishop of Bath and Wells In Two Volumes 8vo Mr. Dryden's Translation of â— A. Du Fresnoy's Art of Painting with Remarks Translated into English Together with an Original Preface containing a Parallel betwixt Painting and Poetry As also an Account of the most Eminent Painters 4to A Practical Discourse concerning Holiness Wherein is shewed the Nature the Possibility the Degrees and Necessity of Holiness together with the Means of Acquiring and Perfecting it By Edward Pelling D D. Rector of Peâ—worth in Sussex and Chaplain in Ordinary to His Majesty The Doctrine of the Fathers and Schools Consider'd Concerning the Articles of a Trinity of Divine Persons and the Unity of God In Answer to the Animadversions on the Dean of St. Paul's Vindication of the Doctrine of the Holy and Ever Blessed Trinity In Defence of those Sacred Articles against the Objections of the Socinians and the Misrepresentation of the Animadverter Part the First By J. B. A. M Presbyter of the Church of England Mr. Wilson's Discourse of Religion shewing its Truth and Reality or the Suitableness of Religion to Human Nature 8vo Discourse of the Resurrection shewing the Import and Certainty of it 8vo Reason and Religion in some useful Reflections on the most eminent Hypothesis concerning the First Principles and Nature of things with Advice suitable to the Subject and seasonable for these Times 12s Mr. Elis's Letter to a Friend c. 4to Reflecter's Defence of his Letter to a Friend c. 4to Protestant Resolv'd or a Discourse shewing the Unreasonableness of his turning Roman Catholick for Salvation 4to Religion and Loyalty inseparable a Sermon preach'd at the Assizes held at Nottingham Sept 5. 1690. 4to Necessity of serious Consideration and speedy Repentance 8vo Folly of Atheism demonstrated to the Capacity of the most Unlearned Reader 8vo A short Scripture-Catechism 12 s. A Sermon preach'd at Nottingham Octob. 4. 1694. 4to Psal 65. 2. Isa 40. 5 6. Matt. 24. 22. Gal. 2. 16. 1 Tim. 3. 16. I. 1 John 1. 1. Prov. 8. 22 23 c. John 17. 5. 1 John 1 2. Gen. 1. Psal 33. 6. 2 Pet. 3. 5. Colos 1. 15 16 17. Rev. 3. 14. Col. 1. 18. Acts 10. 36. Rom. 4. 14. Dr. Stillingfleet now Bishop of Worcester John 3. 13. Acts 20. 28. John 6. 62. John 8. 58. John 13. 3. Joh. 16. 27 v. 28. v. 29 30. v. 31. John 17. 5. v. 8. 1 Joh. 1. 1 2. Phil. 2. 5 6 7 8. 1 Tim. 3. 16. Heb. 13. 8. Rev. 1. 8. v. 17. Rev. 22. 13. v. 16. Heb. 1. 2. Coloss 1. 15 16. Heb. 1. 2. v. 2. v. 7. Ps 104. 4. v. 6. Rom. 1. 4. v. 8. Ps 45. 6 7. v. 10 11 12. * Ne referre quidem haec priora verba de coeli terraeque creatione loquentia ad Christum potuisset Autor nisi pro concesso sumsisset Christum esse summum illum Deum coeli terrae Creatorem praesertim si ea ut necesse soret primò directè ad Christum dicta esse censeas Nam cum omnia Psalmi verba manifestè de Deo loquuntur Christum autem Deum illum esse ne unico quidem verbo in toto hoc Psalmo indicetur necesse est ut si verba illa ad Christum directa esse velis pro concesso sumas Christum esse Deum illum summum de quo in Psalmo seâ—mo est v. 11 12. ch 1. v. 20. 1 John 5. 7. Rom. 1. 25. Gal. 4 8. Hebr. 2. 16. Matth. 14. 31. 1 Cor. 1. 24. Heb. 5. 5. Job 33. 12 13. 1 Cor. 1. 21. Chap. I. v. 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20. III. 1 Tim. 3. 16. Heb. 1. 2. 1 Tim. 2. 5. Heb. 7. 25. Heb. 2. 16 17 18. Heb. 4. 14 15 16. Heb. 2. 14 15. Joh. 5. 22 27. Heb. 12. 14. 1 Joh. 3. 3. 1 Joh. 3. 7. 1 Joh. 1. 20. ver 21. Joh. 3. 16. Heb. 4. 15 Joh. 8. 29. 1 Pet. 2. 22. Heb. 7. 26. 27. Heb. 9. 14. 1 Pet. 1. 18 19. 2 Cor. 5. 21. Eph. 5. 10 1 Pet. 1. 18. Joh. 15. 12. V. 13. Rom. 6. 6 7 8. 1 Cor. 5. 7. Lev. 1. 4. Heb. 9. 28. v. 28. Obj. 1st Obj. 2d Obj. 3d. Obj. 4th 1 Cor. 8. 4. Deut. 4. 35. Isai 44. 6. v. 8. Adversus Marcionem I. 1. c. 10. 1 Cor. 8. 6. Serm. II. L. 5. Joh 15 1. Eph. 1. 23. Deut. 6 4. Mark 12. 2â— 30 3â— Isa 46. 5. 1 Kings 8. 39. Rom. 10. 14. Eph. 4. 6. Mal. 2. 10.
World And if the Author of this Epistle does affirm these words of the Psalmist to be spoken of Christ then they must acknowledge Christ to be the true God who made Heaven and Earth But the Author of this Epistle does as evidently affirm these words to be spoken to or of Christ as he does the words of any other Text cited in this Chapter And for this I appeal to the common sense of every man that reads them These Interpreters indeed are contented that the latter part of this Citation should be spoken of Christ but not the former But why not the former as well as the latter when they have so expresly told us that all the words of this Psalm are manifestly spoken of God What is the mystery of this Could they not as easily have interpreted the former part which speaks of the Creation of Heaven and Earth concerning the moral World and the new Creation or Reformation of Mankind by Jesus Christ and his Gospel as well as so many other plain Texts to the same purpose No doubt they could as well have done it and have set as good a face upon it when they had done it But why then did they not do it It was for a reason which they had no mind to tell but yet is not hard to be guessed at namely that if they had admitted the former words to have been spoken of Christ they knew not what to do with the latter part of this Citation They shall perish but thou remainest they shall wax old as agarment and as a vesture shalt thou fold them up and they shall be changed What shall perish and wax old and be changed Why the Earth and the Heavens which the Son had made that is the moral World the Reformation of Mankind and the new Creation of things by the Gospel All these must have undergone the same fate with the natural World and must not only have been defaced but utterly destroy'd and brought to nothing This they would not say but they did see it tho they would not seem to see it And we may plainly see by this that they can interpret a Text right when necessity forceth them to it and they cannot without great inconvenience to their Cause avoid it But when men have once resolv'd to hold fast an Opinion they have taken up it then becomes not only convenient but necessary to understand nothing that makes against it And this is truly the present case But in the mean time where is ingenuity and love of Truth And thus I have with all the clearness and brevity I could search'd to the very foundations of this new Interpretation of this Passage of the Evangelist upon which the Divinity of the Son of God is so firmly established and likewise of the gross misinterpretations of several other Texts to the same purpose in this Evangelist and in other Books of the New Testament All which Interpretations I have endeavoured to shew to be not only contrary to the sense of all Antiquity of which as Socinus had but little knowledge so he seems to have made but little account but to be also evidently contrary to the perpetual tenour and style of the H. Scripture Before I go off from this Argument I cannot but take notice of one thing wherein our Adversaries in this Cause do perpetually glory as a mighty advantage which they think they have over us in this Point of the Divinity of the Son of God and consequently in that other Point of the B. Trinity namely that they have Reason clearly on their Side in this Controversy and that the Difficulties and Absurdities are much greater and plainer on our part than on theirs Here they are pleas'd to triumph without modesty and without measure And yet notwithstanding this I am not afraid here likewise to join issue with them and am contented to have this matter brought to a fair Trial at the Bar of Reason as well as of Scripture expounded by the general Tradition of the Christian Church I say by general Tradition which next to Scripture is the best and surest confirmation of this great Point now in question between us and that which gives us the greatest and truest light for the right understanding of the true sense and meaning of Scripture not only in this but in most other important Doctrines of the Christian Religion I am not without some good hopes I will not say confidence for I never thought that to be so great an advantage to any Cause as some men would be glad to make others believe it is hoping to help and support a weak Argument by a strong and mighty confidence But surely modesty never hurt any Cause and the confidence of man seems to me to be much like the wrath of man which St. James tells us worketh not the righteousness of God that is it never does any good it never serves any wise and real purpose of Religion I say I am not without some good hopes that I have in the foregoing Discourses clearly shewn that the tenour of Scripture and general Tradition are on our Side in this Argument and therefore I shall not need to give my self the trouble to examine this matter over again Now as to the Point of Reason the great Difficulty and Absurdity which they object to our Doctrine concerning this Mystery amounts to thus much that it is not only above Reason but plainly contrary to it As to its being above Reason which they are loth to admit any thing to be this I think will bear no great Dispute Because if they would be pleased to speak out they can mean no more by this but that our Reason is not able fully to comprehend it But what then Are there no Mysteries in Religion That I am sure they will not say because God whose infinite Nature and Perfections are the very Foundation of all Religion is certainly the greatest Mystery of all other and the most incomprehensible But we must not nay they will not for this reason deny that there is such a Being as God And therefore if there be Mysteries in Religion it is no reasonable Objection against them that we cannot fully comprehend them Because all Mysteries in what kind soever whether in Religion or in Nature so long and so far as they are Mysteries are for that very reason incomprehensible But they urge the matter much further that this particular Mystery now under debate is plainly contrary to Reason And if they can make this good I will confess that they have gained a great Point upon us But then they are to be put in mind that to make this good against us they must clearly shew some plain Contradiction in this Doctrine which I could never yet see done by any Great Difficulty I acknowledge there is in the explication of it in which the further we go beyond what God hath thought fit to reveal to us in Scripture concerning it the more we
have since made it a lawful way of lying which their Father of whom they learn'd it had not credit and authority enough to do And it deserves likewise to be very well considered by us that nothing hath given a greater force to the Exceptions of the Church of Rome against the H. Scripture's being a sufficient and certain Rule of Faith than the uncertainty into which they have brought the plainest Texts imaginable for the establishing of Doctrines of greatest moment in the Christian Religion by their remote and wrested interpretation of them Which way of dealing with them seems to be really more contumelious to those H. Oracles than the downright rejecting of their Authority Because this is a fair and open way of attacquing them whereas the other is an insiduous and therefore more dangerous way of undermining them But as for us who do in good earnest believe the Divine Authority of the H. Scriptures let us take all our Doctrines and Opinions from those clear Fountains of Truth not disturb'd and darkned by searching anxiously into all the possible Senses that the several words and expressions of Scripture can bear and by forcing that sense upon them which is most remote and unnatural and in the mean time wilfully overlooking and passing by that sense which is most obvious and easie to the common apprehension of any unbyass'd and impartial Reader This is to use the H. Scriptures as the Church of Rome have done many Holy and good men whom they are pleased to brand with the odious Name of Hereticks to torture them till they speak the mind of their Tormentors though never so contrary to their own I will now conclude this whole Discourse with a Saying which I heard from a great and judicious Man Non amo nimis argutam Theologiam I love no Doctrines in Divinity which stand so very much upon quirk and subtilty And I cannot upon this occasion forbear to say that those Doctrines of Religion and those Interpretations of Scripture have ever been to me the most suspected which need abundance of Wit and a great many Criticisms to make them out And considering the Wisdom and Goodness of Almighty God I cannot possibly believe but that all things necessary to be believ'd and practis'd by Christians in order to their eternal Salvation are plainly contain'd in the H. Scriptures God surely hath not dealt so hardly with Mankind as to make any thing necessary to be believ'd or practis'd by us which he hath not made sufficiently plain to the capacity of the unlearned as well as of the learned God forbid that it should be impossible for any man to be saved and to get to Heaven without a great deal of learning to direct and carry him thither when the far greatest part of Mankind have no learning at all It was well said by Erasmus That it was never well with the Christian World since it began to be a matter of so much Subtilty and Wit for a man to be a true Christian SERMON III. Concerning the Incarnation of CHRIST Preached in the Church of St. Lawrence Jewry December 21. 1680. JOHN I. 14. The Word was made flesh THE last Year about this Time and upon the same Occasion of the Annual Commemoration of the Incarnation and Nativity of our B. Lord and Saviour I began to discourse to you upon these Words In which I told you were contained three great Points concerning our Saviour the Author and Founder of our Religion First His Incarnation the Word was made or became flesh Secondly His Life and conversation here amongst us and dwelt among us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he pitched his Tabernacle among us he lived here below in this World and for some time made his residence and abode with us Thirdly That in this state of his Humiliation he gave great and clear evidence of his Divinity Whilst he appear'd as a Man and lived amongst us there were great and glorious Testimonies given of Him that he was the Son of God and that in so peculiar a manner as no Creature can be said to be And we beheld his Glory the Glory as of the only begotten of the Father full of grace and truth I began with the first of these namely his Incarnation the Word was made flesh For the full and clear explication of which words I proposed to consider these two things I. The Person here spoken of and who it is that is here said to be incarnate or made flesh namely the Word And this I have handled at large in my two former Discourses upon this Text. I shall now proceed in the II. Second place to give some account of the nature and manner of this Incarnation so far as the Scripture hath thought fit to reveal and declare this Mystery to us The Word was made flesh that is He who is personally called the Word and whom the Evangelist hath so fully and clearly described in the beginning of his Gospel he became flesh that is assumed our Nature and became man for so the word flesh is frequently used in Scripture for Man or Human Nature So that by the Word 's becoming flesh that is Man the Evangelist did not only intend to express to us that he assumed a human Body without a Soul but that he became a perfect Man consisting of Soul and Body united It is very probable indeed that the Evangelist did purposely chuse the word flesh which signifies the frail and mortal part of Humanity to denote to us the great condescension of the Son of God in assuming our Nature with all its infirmities and becoming subject to frailty and mortality for our sake Having thus explain'd the meaning of this Proposition the Word was made flesh I shall in a further prosecution of this Argument take into consideration these three things First I shall consider more distinctly what may reasonably be suppos'd to be implied in this expression of the Word 's being made flesh Secondly I shall consider the Objections which are commonly brought against this Incarnation of the Son of God from the seeming impossibility or incongruity of the thing Thirdly And because after all that can be said in answer to those Objections it may still appear to us very strange that God who could without all this circumstance and condescension even almost beneath the Majesty of the Great God at least as we are apt to think have given Laws to Mankind and have offer'd forgiveness of Sins and eternal life upon their Repentance for sins past and sincere tho imperfect obedience for the future I say it may seem strange that notwithstanding this God should yet make choice of this way and method of our Salvation I shall therefore in the last place endeavour to give some probable account of this strange and wonderful Dispensation and shew that it was done in great condescension to the weakness and common prejudices of Mankind and that when it is throughly consider'd it will appear to be much