as Hierom styleth them will hardly beleeve 3. Bellarmine de Rom. Pontif. 3.6 draweth the second and third part of his third demonstration from two places of Ecclesiasticus The first is Chap. 48. vers 10. Who wast ordained for reproofs in their times to pacifie the wrath of the Lords judgement before it brake forth into furie and to turn the heart of the father unto the sonne and to restore or establish the tribes of Israel First I may answer Ecclesiasticus is not held Canonicall but Apocryphall even by such as for the many divine and admirable things in that book could wish if it were no sinne to wish that it were truely Canonicall And Apocryphals are not held sufficient to settle a point of controversie Secondly it may be also said that Jansenius maintaineth this place evinceth not that Elias shall come personally because Ecclesiasticus wrote according to the received opinion of those times which from the words of Malachi beleeved that Elias was to come in his own proper person Bellarmines reply upon Jansenius is shallow in this point saying d Si it à est ut Jansenius dicit sequitur Ecclesiasticum errâsse falsa scripsisse If Jansenius saith truth it followeth that Ecclesiasticus hath erred and writ some false things as if he who writeth the opinion of others may not relate an errour and write false things though he erre not himself nor beleeveth the false things S. Matthew chap. 2.6 wrote what the Jews said concerning the place of Christs birth the things were miscited and yet no errour or fault in S. Matthew The Spirit of truth hath written that The fool hath said in his heart There is no God Because the fool thought foolishly and untruly God forbid that we should turn fools also and think that the holy Ghost did erre because he truely recordeth an untrue opinion or an untrue thing true onely in the relation This have I said to defend both Jansenius and Ecclesiasticus against Bellarmine Thirdly I might answer Onely these last words have the shadow of an argument To restore or to establish the tribes of Israel which because John did not do Elias must do hereafter For indeed it is but a shadow since as John the Baptist did turn the heart of the father unto the sonne as was before proved so he may be also said to establish or restore the tribes of Israel not to any temporall kingdome which cannot be proved to be intended by Ecclesiasticus for in Malachi there is altum silentium not a word spoken concerning this point but to the true service of God from which they were fallen for he preached unto some of all sorts of the two tribes of the ten tribes yea of the Gentiles There went out unto John Jerusalem and all Judea and all the region round about Jordan Mat. 3.5 and Jordan divided Galilee from Judea yea Christ himself came from Galilee to John to be baptized Matth. 3.13 And he taught both Publicans and Souldiers and Herod and some of all sorts thereabouts Luk. 3.13 14. c. and thus did he restore or establish the tribes of Israel The Bishops Bible hath the controverted words thus To set up the tribes of Israel So Coverdale Vt constitueres tribus Jacob saith Tremellius according to the Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 translated also by the Interlinearie ad constituendum or as Vatablus ad constituendas tribus Jacob to establish the tribes of Israel Many are the significations of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but no where doth it signifie to restore unto a dispersed people their lost kingdome which is the hope of the Jews or the exposition of the Jewishly affected nor is the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so expounded otherwhere either in the Septuagint or in the New Testament or in any classicall Authour It is rendred usually by constituere Restituere is a black swan But mine own opinion is that Ecclesiasticus prophesieth not what should be thereafter viz. after the day of his writing either concerning John or Elias but onely relateth what was past and it is an Eulogie and laudatorie of Elias his worth as appeareth by the antecedent and consequent narratives where all runnes in terms designing out times passed and gone none touching at the present tense or time much lesse at the future and so it can be no prophesie concerning Elias personally to come hereafter especially since there is never a passage in Ecclesiasticus concerning Elias which Elias did not accomplish before his assumption and more particularly he reconciled God to his children the Israelites and turned their hearts to him Thus did he restore or establish the tribes of Israel in his time for 1. King 18.21 Elias said unto all the people that were gathered out of Israel How long will ye halt between two opinions if the Lord be God follow him but if Baal then follow him And then by miracle under God he established them or restored the tribes to the right religion from which they were fallen by idolatrie the fall of all falls fowlest Even Bellarmine himself expounds Restituerunt they restored by Converterunt they converted in this very chapter thus farre truely proving that Zuinglius and Luther were not the Enoch and Elias prophesied of because Elias was to convert the Jews and indeed converted many as I proved before which neither Luther nor Zuinglius did for ought that I have read 4. The second place insisted upon by Bellarmine is Ecclesiasticus 44.16 Enoch was translated being an example of repentance to all generations The Septuagint have it thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Translatus est exemplum poenitentiae generationibus He was translated being an example of repentance to following generations saith the Interlinearie Nationibus to the nations saith Vatablus Vt det Gentibus sapientiam that he may give wisdome to the Gentiles saith the Vulgat edition printed by Petrus Santandreanus 1614 and it hath in the margin Poenitentiam repentance But to leave that varietie the Vulgat is not properly translated for it is not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gentibus to the Gentiles as opposed to the Jews but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Posteris or Generationibus to future posteritie And if it were Gentibus as Bellarmine readeth it yet it maketh the more against him who would have Enoch and especially Elias do greater things for the Jews then for the Gentiles Lastly it is not so much as intended by any word of Ecclesiasticus that Enoch shall hereafter appeare in the flesh personally and then die and be an example of repentance to the Nations for after he had so long pleased God and walked with God in this world and after he was taken by God from amongst men and no doubt much more then pleased God and walked with God if he should come again into this world here to live should he sinne again that he might be an example of repentance The conceit is vast harsh and improbable if the
while of Christs resurrection c Solenne autem fuit priscis illis Patribus ut quisque in suam inferreretur possessionem Each of those Fathers were solemnly brought into their own possession saith the same Masius which is thus confirmed because Abraham did bury Sara in his own possession Genes 23.19 20. Isaac and Ishmael buried Abraham in the field which Abraham purchased of the sonnes of Heth Genes 25.9 10. And to summe up the rest In the cave that is in the field of Machpelah the purchased cave and field which is before Mambre was buried Abraham and Sara Isaac and Rebeka Jacob and Lea Genes 49.30 31. The distance of which cave or field from Calvarie I gathered before from Adrichomius to be 250 Stadia which upon allowance of eight Stadia to one Mile amounteth to one and thirty miles and a quarter from which account S. Augustine differeth but little considering the various reckoning of miles with the diverse measurings of beginnings and endings for Augustine Quaest sup Genes lib. 1. quaest 161. thus reporteth d Dicunt ab eo loco quod ABRAHEMIUM vocatur ubi sunt ista corpora abesse locum ubi crucifixus est Dominus ferè triginta milliaribus From the place called Abrahemium or Abrahams church-yard where are these bodies namely of Abraham and Sara Isaac and Rebeka Jacob and Leah to the place where our Lord was crucified there is almost thirty miles distance Now as the sepulchre of the three Patriarchs was thus farre from Jerusalem South-west-ward so Sychem where Joseph his bones were buried was farther from Jerusalem toward the North. 4 One difficultie more there is and a great one I may not passe it for the length will be recompensed by the sweetnesse Acts 7.15 16. Jacob and our fathers died and were carried over unto Sychem and laid in the sepulchre that Abraham bought for a summe of money of the sonnes of Emor the father of Sychem Which passage seemeth to contradict what out of other parts of Scripture I proved concerning the Patriarchs sepulchre That this is a knot hard to be untied all confesse S. Hierom promised in his 101 Epist to clear it saith Lorinus And in his Questions on Genes saith Beza but he hath not performed his promise say both of them on Acts 7. Nodum nectit Hieronimus nec eum dissolvit saith Erasmus And I onely propound it saith he that the studious reader may be stirred up to discusse it But this is a shallow slurre unfit for so great a Critick for many had done so much before and more then so I come to the point That there are invented many wayes and means of answering cannot be denied but some are vast and improbable some more fair and expedite The absurd answers are two The first That the Originall is there corrupt and that for Abraham Jacob is to be written and read I say not meant expounded or interpreted but exchanged and intruded into the Text and that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 should be expunged as needlesse it being with equall ignorance and boldnesse added by one or other saith Andrew Masius on Josh 24.32 With Masius agreeth Beza in this that the name of Abraham is crept into the Text adding that the erring in notes of number or proper names must not be ascribed to the Authours but to the ignorant transcribers But I say that the erring in a proper name or notes of number may breed as great and unsufferable confusion unlikelihood inconvenience yea untruth as the errour in any other common word And why the errours in proper names should be ascribed to ignorant transcribers rather then errours in other words or that the holy Spirit doth priviledge other words and not proper names or numbers from being mistaken misplaced misadded or superadded in the Text I see not Aretius bluntly blundereth it out that you must understand Jacob for Abraham yet by what example or for what reason he mentioneth not but stumbleth on a truth of which hereafter Drusius Praeterit lib. 5. on the words Quod emit Abraham hath yet some shew of reason It seemeth saith he it was sometimes written EMIT IPSE that is JACOB into whose place the name of ABRAHAM is crept 5. Beza defends it by two parallels the first out of Hierom who in his book de optimo genere interpretandi ad Pammachium noteth that the name of Isaiah was crept into many copies on Matth. 13.35 that afterward the name of Asaph was substituted for Isaiah and now neither of them is there read I answer to the misapplied instances of Beza that I cannot abide to hunt after errours in the Scripture and to cast aspersions on it To question the corruption of the Canon to passe our judgements whether the square or rule be right or crooked to put into the Text or to take from it as some Philologizing Neotericks endeavour in their super-nice criticisme is to tear up the very foundation of religion Whilest other answers may be found though but probable I should not have such a thought as Beza had on Luk. 24.13 where he acknowledgeth both the Syriack and all our Copies have it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sexaginta Threescore and the exact truth is accordant to that reading for Emaus is seven miles from Jerusalem as Mr Sands who rode from Jerusalem to Emaus witnesseth pag. 174. and threescore Stadia allowing eight Stadia to a mile make seven miles and an half which halfe-mile upon diversitie of measures or the beginning of measuring or ends thereof maketh small difference Yet Beza saith Aut hîc peccatum est in numero aut apud Josephum de Bello Judaico 7.27 non rectè scribuntur stadia triginta The more favourable phrase should have been by Beza ascribed rather to the Scripture then to Josephus Or can we think that all Copies do erre He maketh us fight upon the ice and to have no firm footing Why should he use the first part of the disjunction when he might better distinguish and so reconcile all Likewise Beza on Luke 22.20 confessing the uniformitie of reading both in the Syriack and all the Greek Copies which he had seen yet addeth boldly Aut manifestum est soloecophanes aut potiùs cùm haec essent ad marginem annotata ex Matthaeo Marco postea in Contextum irrepserunt Now though he would sleek it over afterwards saying Potest excusari soloecismus c. yet the wound which he gave to the Word of Truth is too deep to be so healed and the very plaister is offensive for he committed a soloecisme who looking on the earth cried out O Coelum and casting his eyes up to heaven cried O Terra Had the Reverend Beza no handsomer word for his plaister might he not have defended it by the Hebrew Idiotisme without calling it a Soloecisme Soloecophanes might have well been spared but Soloecismus is not to be endured Much more might be said but I dwell unwillingly on this point and return
to the first place of Matth. 13.35 and say Who ever denyed but that some Copies have been corrupted and in some of them some words foisted in but all Greek all Latine Copies with the Arabick and Syriack translations reade Abraham and not Jacob Whereas some Copies were alwayes perfect in that place of Matthew Now if you grant corruption in any point or title in all the Greek and all the Latine Copies how will you prove any part or word of the New Testament to be uncorrupt Which razeth up the very Corner-stone of our Faith Mr Beza again objecteth that the name of Jeremie is written for Zacharie Matth. 27.9 I answer that the Authour of the book of Maccabees giveth us to understand that Jeremie wrote other things which now we have not 2. Maccab. 2.1 and so did divers of the Prophets and why may not this be then taken from some of those works which are perished Secondly S. Hierome saith a Jew brought him an Apocryphall book of Jeremie in which he found this testimonie word for word and this book was called APOCRYPHA or OCCULTA JEREMIAE The Apocryphals or hid writings of Jeremie saith Erasmus on Matth. 27. As what S. Paul saith of Jannes and Jambres 2. Tim. 3.8 and what S. Jude saith of Michael the Archangel striving with the Devil is thought to be taken out of the books Apocryphall so might this testimonie be cited also out of Jeremies Apocryphals Thirdly Erasmus supposeth that Zacharie had two names and was called both Zacharie and Jeremie and so no inconvenience followeth Fourthly not onely the Syriack leaves out the name of Jeremie but even in Augustines time the name of Jeremie was not in many Latine Copies as Augustine himself testifieth de Consensu Evangelistarum lib. 3. cap. 7. The ordinarie glosse also saith that in some editions it is onely thus By the Prophet and the name of Jeremie is left unmentioned Fifthly Augustine in the last recited place of his resolveth that the Divine providence purposely set down Jeremie for Zacharie and what the holy Spirit did dictate S. Matthew did truely write And one reason why the Spirit of God confounded the names of Jeremie and Zacharie was this saith Augustine To insinuate that all the Prophets wrote by one Spirit and wonderfully consented in one and therefore we must beleeve that e Quacunque per eos Spâ—itus Sanctus dixit singula esse omnium omnia singulorum What the holy Ghost spake by them is not to be appropriated unto any one but to all and every of them What was said by Jeremie was as well Zacharies as Jeremies and what was said by Zacharie was as well Jeremies as Zacharies God spake not by the MOUTHS but by the MOUTH of all his holy Prophets since the world began Act. 3.21 and they had but one Spirit to guide them into all truth The Prophesie of Amos is called The book of the Prophets Acts 7.42 and the Word of God which in divers places is called in the plurall number Scriptures as John 5.39 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Search the Scriptures is also oftentimes called in the singular number The Scripture as John 2.22 they beleeved the Scripture and the word which Jesus had said Beleef was to rest as well on his Word onely without Scripture as on Scripture though he had said nothing and the word Scripture is not to be restrained onely to that place of Scripture before pointed at but to the whole Word of God written which they beleeved The Scripture hath concluded all under sinne Gal. 3.22 where not one single place onely but either common places of that point or the whole bodie of the Scripture is to be understood A few words of a Psalme of David is called by Christ himself The law of the Jews It is written in their law They hated me without a cause John 15.25 which is onely so written Psal 35.19 Again he saith to the Jews John 10.34 Is it not written in your Law I have said ye are Gods but it is written so onely Psal 83.6 Yea though one and the same thing in effect be written both Isa 28.16 and Psal 118.22 as also Matth 21.42 and Acts 4.12 yet S. Peter reckoneth all but as one All but one Scripture though severally written by these foure It is contained in the Scripture saith he 1. Pet. 2.6 in the singular number he mentioneth Scripture as if what one wrote the rest wrote S. Peter saith not It is contained in the Word with reference to one Spirit inditing or inspiring though that might have also been truely spoken but contained in the Scripture with relation to the unity and consent of the Pen-men Lastly the words of the Evangelist are these Matth. 27.9 Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by the Prophet Jeremie saying And they took the thirty pieces of silver 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 effatum Jeremiae dicentis That which was spoken by Jeremie saying c. Now Jeremiae might say it speak it dictate it which is most true and is all that S. Matthew saith who by the Spirit might also know that Jeremie did teach preach prophesie and utter these words and yet for all this and after all this Zacharie by the same Spirit might write transcribe and insert those words of Jeremie into his own Prophesie which S. Matthew denieth not as Baruch wrote divers things which he had heard from Jeremie as Agur collected some Proverbs of Solomon Again there was no necessitie that all things whatsoever Jeremie as a Prophet did speak g Jerem. 36.2 he himself or Baruch should write much lesse presently since there were many yeares between Jeremie his speaking and his writing for Enoch prophesied as it is in the 14. verse of the Epist of S. Jude but he prophesied Saying c. as it is there written for writing was none till God set the Copie unto Moses by writing the Law in the Tables on the mount Again S. Paul Act. 24.35 remembreth the words of our Lord Jesus how he said It is more blessed to give then to receive yet none of the Evangelists record such words but this might the Apostles relate unto S. Paul or by divine inspiration he might know that Christ spake them or they might be part of the words which Christ himself spake unto S. Paul for there is no certaintie that they were written S. John the Evangelist was commanded to conceal and not to write the words of the seven thunders Revel 10.4 If he had wholly concealed such a thing we could not know it he spake it but wrote it not Jeremie might speak this and not write it or write it and not speak it Any of these answers is better then to incline to Beza that the Text is erroneous or patched up with a false addition or to Erasmus on Matth. 27. intimating there was lapsus memoriae in Evangelistis howsoever he qualifieth it That if there were memoriae lapsus in Nomine duntaxat he
illumination as Gerson styleth it Columna ignis A pillar of fire Exod. 13.21 Stella Magos in Oriente antecedens The starre conducting the wise men of the East Matth. 2.9 An holy undeceiving unambiguous influent coruscation The Spirit of God moving upon the face of the waters Gen. 1.2 This made Abraham not unwillingly to sacrifice his sonne The quenching of this Spirit against the cleare light of his own convicted conscience made the old Prophet more inexcusable then the other officious lying Prophet who deceived him 1. Kings 13.16 c. Nor did an Angel speak unto the seducer by the word of the Lord vers 18. Samuel being but a childe might not indeed as a novice or some others for a while might not know the voice of the Lord as Peter at the present knew not the operation of God by the Angel in his miraculous deliverie But now I know saith he that God hath sent his Angel yea I know of a surety Act. 12.11 Profane ones I will not priviledge from mistaking of God as perhaps lest Satan might out-stretch his Commission from God when he gave Job into his hands God said restrainingly Onely save his life Job 2.6 And S. Augustine de cura pro mortuis gerenda cap. 12. telleth an admirable storie of two men each called Curma to wit How Curma the Countrey-man lay almost dead many dayes onely a little steam of breath coming from him they kept him from buriall though he was without motion or any feeling whatsoever they did unto him in which time he saw many visions So soon as he opened his eyes he said Let one go to the house of Curma the smith Who was found dead that moment in which Curma the Husbandman came to his senses And the surviving Curma related that he heard in the place from whence he was returned that the smith and not himself was to be brought to that place A mistaking there was by the messengers of death though it were after righted Caiaphas might not know the inspiration or instinct propheticall which he had because he was a wicked man Dispensativè illi contigit sermo He did distribute the speech to others which he knew not himself saith Basil in Prooem Isaiae He was a Prophet perchance Casu saith Origen on John Balaam his asse and Caiaphas spake they knew not what The prophesie was transitorie saith S. Augustine Wherefore I conclude as before That wicked men may be punished with mistakings in things divine But that ever any holy man was ignorant to the end that God moved when he moved him or that the righteous were ever deceived by Oraculous anfractuous perplexities or that the Notaries of heaven the writers of any part authentick of either Testament could be deceived in their conceptions is not agreeable to likelihood reason or truth The last Lemma is this The holy Penmen could not erre in writing If they could what difference is there between their Writings and other profane Authours And to what end had they infallibilitie of understanding if what they understood they could expresse erroneously A readie perfect and quick scribe writeth not falsly but My tongue is the pen of a readie writer saith the Psalmograph Psal 45.1 Holy Ezra who was the divine amanuensis of the book of Ezra is called by the same words SOPHIR MAHIR a readie swift exact scribe Ezra 7.6 no question with allusion to the words of the Psalmist John 16.13 When the Spirit of truth is come he will guide you into all truth How into all truth if there be an errour in writing Or had God care that the Apostles should not misse of the truth in their Speeches and yet misse in their Writings If the Prophets could not erre no more could the Evangelists or Apostles for if there were any superioritie in priviledge we are rather to ascribe it to these latter then to those former in regard that the Law of Christ and of Grace is farre above the Law of Moses as the Apostle doth demonstrate to the Hebrews themselves But that the Prophets could not erre is apparent because Christ himself who is Truth would not have appealed from the present more visible pretending Synagogue to them as all-sufficient Judges as he often did if they could erre A perfect rule is not to be tried by an imperfect one Prophets writ their Prophesies and fastened them to the gates of the Temple and other publick places to be read and were rather judged by their Prophesies written then by them as inspired or uttered by mouth The Gnomon of the Sunne-diall which our late Hieroglyphical Poetaster doth make to signifie the Scriptures is better to be judged by a moving clock the curious handie-work of the same great Artist I mean by the Church and Church-men with whom Christ hath promised his Spirit shall be to the end of the world then by the rude masons or rather the senselesse stones and mortar of the walls I mean the ignorant people who have plucked down not onely the Weather-cock by his interpretation the Pope but usurp to themselves a power to judge the Gnomon and to reform and amend the well wrought well ordered clock The shallow phantastick stateth not the question aright when he is so magisterially peremptorie saying That the Clergie may not so judge of the Scriptures as to conclude or teach any thing against them or to vouch unwritten verities if they be certain verities it mattereth not much whether they be written or unwritten Veritie will vouch it self in spight of lying Poets as some call them or Traditions contradictorie to the written Word Which contradictorie Traditions do much differ from unwritten Verities howsoever the Poet confusedly joyneth them For who of us ever taught that the Clergie may teach any thing against the Scriptures when we professe with him that the Church ought to subject it self to be directed by the Scriptures But that fabling rymer may say any thing who in his Sarcasmos and Frontispice is suffered thus to rave No wonder that the Clergie would be Kings whereas we the now unpriviledged Clergie do humbly pray to God to uphold our declining estates from the hands of those Atheists and turbulent Anti-episcopall Anti-monarchicall Reformists perhaps Pensioners of the forcin enemies of our State who under the pretence of Religion labour to pluck down our Church and Ecclesiastick Hierarchie and upon the ruines thereof to arise to the depluming of the Eagle to the bearding of the Lion not onely to the paring of the royall prerogative but also the removing the very scepter and crown from the Anointed of the Lord whom God alwaies mightily defend and to the bringing in of popular government for No Bishop no King said the learned wise and pious King James most truely I return to retort the Church-reforming Poets words upon himself In his Solarie he saith That the diall is the Written Word which is of it self dead and unprofitable without further illumination since none of the Philosophers nor
Either of these wayes is better then that of Canus But the truth is The father of the faithfull knew that though himself did kill Isaac yet God who is able to stones to raise up children unto Abraham Matth. 3.9 was able to raise up Isaac even from the dead Heb. 11.19 and in hope or full assurance thereof might say I and the lad will return and yet intend faithfully to sacrifice his sonne And who knoweth but he might be divinely and extraordinarily assured that his childe should return with him The third Objection consisteth of these parcels 1. Pet. 5.12 By Silvanus a faithfull brother unto you as I suppose 2. Cor. 11.5 I suppose I was not a whit behinde the very chiefest Apostles In both places is used the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 computo supputo Existimo saith the Vulgat I suppose 1. Cor. 7.40 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I think I have the Spirit of God Joh. 21.25 There are many other things which Jesus did the which if they should be written I suppose that even the world it self could not contain the books that should be written 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 arbitror I opine think or suppose From which or the like places the objection thus ariseth Opinion is conversant about those things which are changeable and is onely of all the powers of the soul busied about contingents and is a trembling pendulous shaking and uncertain habit circa complexa upon probable reasons inclining to one side yet fearing or doubting the contradictorie for opinion is framed on likelihood as knowledge is upon truth Where opinion or supposall is there is not certain knowledge But our Apostles did think or suppose Therefore they had not immediate divine revelation or certaintie in the points supposed and therefore wrote somewhat which they knew not I answer to each of these Apostles in particular and first to S. Peter who seemeth to be in doubt and uncertainty what was to be thought concerning Silvanus Divers say he speaketh modestly of him as the Apostolicall men were wont to do of themselves S. Augustine Tract 37. in Joan. averreth that under those words is couched an asseveration As if one should say to a stubborn servant Thou dost contemn me Consider I suppose I am thy master where the seeming supposall makes him neither to be nor seem to be ever a whit the lesse his master But I answer That the holy Ghost having not revealed unto S. Peter fully what the heart of Silvanus was or was like to be left him to suppose and according to the supposall of his soul did dictate unto S. Peter what the blessed Spirit knew better then S. Peter these words The supposall of the Apostle inferreth not a supposall of the Spirit The Spirit was most certain when the Apostle might be dubious The holy Ghost spake if I may so say representing Peter and in Peters person which might be subject to a supposall and yet divinely inspired to know certainly what he wrote namely to know this that he did suppose And that upon good motives Whereas S. Paul saith 2. Cor. 11.5 I suppose I was not a whit behinde the very chiefest Apostles and 1. Cor. 7.40 I think I have the Spirit of God he speaketh not so much doubtingly as humbly To use diminuent and sparing phrases concerning ones self is lawfull 2. Cor. 11.23 I speak as a fool saith S. Paul yet there was as great a dissimilitude between a fool and him as between any I think then breathing Ephes 3.8 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vnto me who am lesse then the least of all Saints is this grace given that I should preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ No man had the like priviledge in every degree as he had in this S. Peter was Doctor Judaeorum the Doctour of the Jews S. Paul Doctor Gentium the Doctour of the Gentiles yet no man can speak more modestly then S. Paul doth of himself Lesse then the least of the Apostles had been much but lesse then the least of all Saints is the depth the heart the soul of humilitie which yet is further evidenced in that he saith not this grace was given when he was a persecuter and so indeed worse then any Saint yea almost worse then any man but to me even now when I am called now when I am turned to me now lesse then the least of all Saints is this grace given Lesse then the least is contrary to the rules of Grammar which admit not a comparative above a superlative contrary to common sense contrary to the literall truth of the things themselves for he was a chosen vessell a chief Apostle few if any more chief though he should boast more of his authoritie he should not be ashamed 2. Cor. 10.8 No whit inferiour 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the very chiefest Apostles 2. Cor. 12.11 A Minister of Christ more then others 2. Cor. 11.23 Now though S. Paul used terminis diminuentibus and spake sparingly and modestly in some places concerning himself yet otherwhere he revealeth the whole truth he knew the certaintie of things to wit that he was not lesse then the least that he was not as a fool and when he said I suppose or I think he did know Dum minus dicit majus innuit Whilest he speaketh the lesse he intimateth the more he was never a trumpeter of his own worth but when he was urged unto it by opposition Concerning the place of S. John thus I answer The Apostle was governed by the holy Ghost to use an Hyperbole or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to the Orientall Idiotisme and perchance aimed at the words Gen. 13.6 The land was not able to bear Abraham and Lot that they might dwell together Or at the place of Amos 7.10 The land is not able to bear all his words as is well observed by the curious Heinsius He also here is guided by the same Spirit to write I suppose or I think that even the world could not contain the books as for other reasons to us unknown so perhaps because both the Spirit would qualifie the Hyperbole and speak within truth which is allowed rather then beyond truth which is disallowable I suppose rather then I know Secondly I answer more punctually If the holy Spirit did leave S. Paul nescient whether he were rapt in bodie yea or no and Paul did know his own nesciencie 2. Cor. 12.2 why might not the same Spirit leave S. Paul S. Peter S. John in supposals and yet no inconvenience ariseth thencefrom since they perfectly knew that they did suppose This is the disciple which testifieth of these things and wrote these things and we know that his testimonie is true John 21.24 as S. John saith of himself To conclude this point No man ever said that whatsoever the holy Penmen mentioned or treated of they understood perfectly invested with all their circumstances for they spake and writ of the day of judgement and other
thoughts were in my heart The like I say of all and every of them Psal 39.2 I was dumbe with silence I held my peace even from good and my sorrow was stirred and vers 3. My heart was hot within me while I was musing the fire burned then spake I with my tongue and vers 4. Lord make me to know mine end From whence appeareth that David was premeditating as other people do and at the last as other mens his thoughts brake forth The similitude is taken from sorrow and grief which being for a while suppressed groweth greater or from fire which being smothered or half quenched with water upon recovery of its strength groweth farre more violent The answer is that David relateth what course he took when he could not exonerate and alleviate his soul by conference with men whose wayes he liked not He poured out his complaints and prayers unto God So Musculus And this no doubt did the Spirit of God stirre him up to do It pleased the holy Ghost to make those thoughts of David which before were pure and divine yet private now to be divine publick and canonicall Again That they might conceive and understand by the Spirit a great deal more then the holy Ghost would have to be written I denie not and on such things they might muse Yet I conjecture that what they wrote in holy Scripture they studied not before-hand the Spirit hath no need of mans studie or learning and I do remove from every part of it all humane premeditation and maintain that the Spirit did frame both matter and words as by Gods grace shall anon appeare pro re nata as occasion offered it self One chief reason may be this That nature which is the right hand of God hath greatest care of greatest matters and lesse of least and equall care of things equall If the Apostolicall and Evangelicall writings are not consideratis considerandis weighing one thing with an other of more esteem then their words were yet let them go as equivalent Then Christ will have as much care of their writings as of their speaking But their speeches were without premeditation and were commanded so to be Therefore all their writings Matth. 10.19 Take no thought how or what ye shall speak you see both the matter and manner is not to be from them For it is not ye that speak but the Spirit of your Father which speaketh in you vers 20. Not they there is the negative but the Spirit there is the positive Likewise Mark 13.11 Take no thought before-hand neither do ye premeditate An absolute inhibition and it had been a great sinne to transgresse it and a distrust of the holy Ghost The like I say concerning all their writings They might have indeed in their meditation before-hand divers of those things which afterwards they wrote but when they thought on them they knew not they should write them and when they did write they wrote them not as copies or extracts of former conceits out of the wombe of their own memories but as freshly and newly inspired apprehended indited and dictated unto them There is one kinde of knowledge proceeding from principles known by the naturall light of the intellect as Arithmetick Geometrie c. Others proceed out of principles known by light of an higher knowledge as Perspective from the principles evinced by Geometrie and Musick from principles known by Arithmetick So is the Scripture beleeved by an higher light even by the revelation of God saith Aquin. part 1. quaest 1. art 2. and not beleeved onely but the matter and manner and words proceeded from a diviner understanding then humane conceit could reach unto and were written by an higher and better hand then the hand of man All was the holy Spirits doing even the leading of their hands whilest they wrote that they could not erre Cornelius Cornelii à Lapide on 2. Tim. 3.16 thus The Spirit did not dictate all Scripture after one manner The Law and the Prophesies are revealed and dictated to a word the Histories and Morall exercitations which before by sight hearing reading or meditation the holy Writers had learned there was no necessitie to be inspired or dictated from the Spirit since they knew them alreadie So John 19.35 He that saw it bare record and Luk. 1.3 It seemed good to me also having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first to write unto thee in order Then doth he mince modifie and qualifie his former saying in this manner But the holy Spirit may be said to have dictated even the latter also First because q Astitit scribentibus nè vel in puncto à veritate aberrarent he was present whilest they wrote that they could not go one jot from the truth Secondly because it stirred them up and suggested that they should write this rather then that r Conceptum ergò memoriam corum quae sciebant non iis ingessit Spiritus Sanctus Therefore the conceptions and remembrance of such things as they knew the Spirit did not inspire into them Thirdly saith he The Spirit did order direct and methodize all their conceits that they might put this in the first that in the second another in the third place In which words of his three things deserve censure even the strict censure of the Inquisition First That the Spirit did not dictate all Scripture after one manner I answer Then all is not of a like dignitie that which is after the divinest manner is to be held best that wherein there is a medly of divine and humane knowledge and wisdome is of an inferiour sort But this may not be granted for All Scripture is of divine inspiration Excellently saith Doctour Estius on 2. Tim. 3.16 Rightly and most truely from hence do we conclude that all the sacred Canonicall Scripture was written by the dictate of the holy Spirit not in that manner say I that he left the Penmen to their own memories and knowledge which as humane were weak and imperfect but f Ità nimirum ut non solùm sententiae sed verba singula verborum ordo ac tota dispositio sit à Deo tanquam per semetipsum loquente aut scribente so that not onely the sentences but every word and the order placing and the whole disposing of the words was from God as speaking or writing by himself But God I dare say hath no need of their memories nor his writing or speech of their hearing reading sight or premeditation Secondly he is to be taxed for saying there was no necessitie that things Morall and Historicall should be inspired I say there was a necessitie that histories and moralities should be inspired if they are to be parts of the sacred Writ otherwise this knowledge and writing are onely parcels of humane learning Though S. John bare record to what he saw his bearing record without the Spirit had been but an ordinary testimonie Not his saying but
the same also I answer that he might speak or write some things like an other man some things unexpressed in their Law but now he speaketh or writeth for they are both one sense in this notion as an Apostle who therefore was equally to be regarded as a Penman of the Law of Grace with Moses a Penman of the Law Leviticall It may yet be objected what S. John saith 2. Epist vers 12. Having many things to write unto you I would not write with paper and ink and 3. Epist John ver 13. I had many things to write but I will not with ink and pen write unto thee From whence a power seemeth to be wholly left in him both whether he would write or no and what he would write I answer to both places If he had said he had writ any thing without or beyond the Spirit or what he was bid not to write he had spoken home to the purpose but these words do not imply that he had either power or will to write any thing of his own head or by the wisdome or learning of man but they fully evidence that the holy Ghost had suggested many things unto him which the same blessed Spirit would not have him to write as being fitter perhaps to be delivered face to face and not concerning posteritie If I knew any more opposite arguments I would endeavour their answer The positive proofs I referre to the last point of all it being the very main hinge of the controversie Onely consider this one thing The Scripture hath a priviledge above all other writings Aquinas on 2. Timoth. 3.15 giveth this reason u Quia aliae traditae sunt per rationem bumanam sacra autem Scriptura est divina Because other writings savour of humane reason but the Scripture is divine Where he excludeth the prudence of man from composing any Scripture If any earthly wisdome wrote any part of it it is no more to be accounted our Scripture Let this suffice for the third conclusion concerning the matter of Scripture wherein the holy Penmen had no libertie left them to put in their own conceits or in writing to adde or blot out what they had done whereby all humane literature and wisdome is removed from sharing part in the holy Writ The fourth conclusion followeth concerning the manner of writing viz. They had no libertie to clothe their inward apprehensions with words of their own Either all the Pen-men had the libertie or none The disjunction stands upon a Da tertium Give me a reason why some should and not others Who were these some and why those But all had not libertie for the very words were dictated unto some of them Ergò c. Either every Penman did apparrell his understanding with words of his own throughout all and every of his own writings or it was practised in some places onely If so then again I enquire what places they were and why those had an especiall priviledge above others S. John indeed was bid to write the things which he had seen and the things which are and the things which shall be hereafter Revel 1.19 I answer This generall command evinceth not that the holy Ghost did not administer as well the words as the matter If it be objected that the Evangelicall Prophet Isaiah and the Psalmograph and some others are most eloquent in the Old and in the New Testament the beloved disciple S. John is compared to an Eagle for his loftie flight and S. Paul may seem to have brought some of the third heaven down with him so heavenly is he but Amos and some others writ more plainly in an homely style I answer If all this were true yet it proveth not that any of them were left to expresse as they would their own dreams visions or illuminations neither did they frame and fit their styles to the Spirit or their words to the matter nor indeed could they For what proportion is there between finite and infinite and how can the shallow capacitie of man comprehend the depth of God God forbad the linsie-woolsie and to the divine truths would he suffer them to adapt humane expressions How often in the Old Testament is both the matter put into their hearts and the manner with the words into their mouthes And is the Law of Grace of lesse worth then the Law of Moses God forbid But whosoever readeth the Prophet Amos and the rest that are undervalued shall finde more in Amos then Amos more in him then in one among the herd-men of Tekoa Amos 1.1 and shall heare the piercing language of the Spirit in others sometimes perhaps attempering it self to the partie writing and making both words and matter easie but at other times it rapteth him above himself and maketh him as it were to prink it in loftie and almost undiscernable towring by infusing things phrasing sentences and dictating words above what was agreeable to the meannesse of his former calling That the holy Ghost can and hath suggested the very words very often I think none will denie That ever he permitted them a libertie of many sentences of many phrases of many variations of words to choose what they liked and to refuse the rest I think few ancient Divines ever said before but to that effect saith Heinsius Els what can his meaning be when he saith S. John saw the Chaldee Paraphrase and Hellenists and had often reference to them and that divers things were taken from the Targummim x Ad Targumistas semper respicit Evangelista The Evangelist alwayes hath an eye to the Targumists saith he pag. 550. If the noble Heinsius had said in any one place which he did not so farre as my remembrance now beareth that the holy Spirit had guided S. John to those Authours and authorities of the Targumists Hellenists and Chaldee Paraphrast I should have subscribed and sat down at his feet But when he so often appealeth from the Greek to the Syriack and saith S. John was so conversant with the forenamed Authours he derogateth in mine opinion from the majestie of the holy Writ whilest he would seem to have ought of it taken from humane reading or wisdome though of an Apostle unlesse it were added That the holy Spirit guided the Apostle unto it and did dictate it unto him not as it was known before to the Apostle but as the holy Ghost thought fit to make use of it and to sanctifie that part of humane literature to dictate I say the words and syllables yea every letter and iota and in the writing to guide their hands aright as a good master of writing over-spreadeth and over-ruleth the hand of his scholar and writeth what copie he pleaseth without reference or regard to the scholars former knowledge but rather to his future instruction This is that which against Heinsius may be averred That though many things which are in S. John and other holy Penmen were before in the Targum Talmud
after death excluding judgement in this life and placing death rather before judgement then any great distance betwixt death and judgement according to the native use of the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of which before The second exposition is of Gregory de Valentia * Tom. 4. Disp 1. quaest 22. punct 9. who applieth the words to the particular judgement immediately upon death So doth Ludovicus de ponte Vallis Oletani * Part. 1. Meditat. medit 9. who sets it down as a veritie of faith * De particulari judicio animae quod sit proximè post mortem judicium singulorum exerceri invisibiliter statim post eujusque mortem Concerning the particular judgement of the soul which is done immediately after death every one is judged invisibly presently after his death and evinceth it by this Text. So doth Joannes * Viguer Instit pag. 692. Viguerius * Bus initio Panarii Antidotorum spiritual Busaeus the Jesuite likewise accounteth * Secundum novissimum est judicium particulare mortem proximè consequens the second last thing to be the particular judgement following death immediately the severitie whereof saith he Job the holy patient feared Job 31.14 What shall I do when God riseth up and when he visiteth what shall I answer him S. Ambrose on this place hath it thus * Post mortem judicabitur unusquisque â—uxta userita sua Every one shall be judged after death according to their own deservings Which words do point at the particular judgement saith Suarez Lastly lest I may seem too eager against the second book of Esdras let me borrow a testimony or two from thence 2 Esdr 9.11 12. They that lothed my law while they had yet libertie and place of repentance open unto them must know it after death by pain And 2. Esdr 7.56 While we lived and committed sinne we considered not that we should BEGIN to suffer for it AFTER DEATH Whence we may probably collect That the beginning of punishment is immediately after death upon the particular judgement and the increase or additament at the generall judgement 2 That some are in torments before the generall day of retribution 3 That the beginning to suffer is not after a long time GOD onely knoweth how long but after death yea presently after it All these proofs on each side make way for the third and best interpretation That the Apostle meaneth not onely either of these judgements but both of them Benedictus Justinian on these words thus * Post eujusque obitum sequitur judicium privatum in quo quisque suarum actionum reddit urus estrationem post finem mundi erit judicium omnium tum hominum tum daemonum After every ones death private judgement follows in which every one is to give an account of his actions after the end of the world shall be the judgement of all both men and devils Of both the Apostle may be understood saith he So also Salmeron and Hugo Cardinalis and Carthusianus Oecolampadius thus * Sive speciale judicium intelligas sive generale uihil refert Whether you understand the speciall judgement or the gener all it matters not Thus have I brought you back to the point where I first began That this text is fitted to my intentions affording me just liberty to write whatsoever may be conceived or expressed concerning the estate of humane souls in their animation or in death or after it in the life future because the words must be expounded of both judgements And now the text being cleared from ambiguities the termes explained the state being made firm and sure not rolling and changeable and being fixed upon its basis and foundation three questions do seem to arise from the first words of the text and each of them to crave its answer before I come to my main intendment First How and when Death came to be appointed for us Secondly Whether Adam and his children all and every one without priviledge or exception must and shall die It is appointed for men to die Thirdly Whether they that were raised up from the dead at any time did die the second time It is appointed to men once to die O Gracious LORD who orderest all things sweetly and who dost dispose whatsoever man doth purpose I humbly implore thy powerfull guidance and enlightning assistance in all this work for his sake who is Alpha and Omega the Way the Truth and the Life thy onely SONNE my blessed SAVIOUR JESUS CHRIST Amen CHAP. II. 1 How GOD is immortall how angels and the souls of men how Adams body was mortall and yet immortall though compounded of contraries 2 Aristotles last words his death Holcot or the Philosophers pray for him Aristotle canonized by his followers Plato and Aristotle compared Vives taxed Adams body was not framed of â—he earth or dust of Paradise 3. Adam should not have been subject to any externall force he was Lord of the creatures inward distemper he could not have Adams bodily temperature Christs who was fairer then the children of Adam the helps for Adams body meat drink and sleep 4. Divers opinions of the tree of life If Adam had eaten of the tree of life before or after his fall he had lived for ever If he had not sinned he had not died though he had not tasted of the tree of life To what use the tree of life should have served 5. The Councel of Millan Cardinall Cajetan Richeomus the Jesuite Julianus Pomerius and S. Augustine think that Adam could not have died if he had not sinned The book of Wisedome Holcot Doctor Estius and two passages of Scripture Canonical are authorities evincing that Adam had in the state of innocency an immortall body 1. TO the full answering of the first question how or why Death was appointed for us I shall need to cleare but these two points That Adam for sinne was appointed to die That Adams sinne and punishment was propagated to us Thus sinne was the mother of death thus we were appointed to die because of sinne As a preparative to the first of these two points I hold it fit to demonstrate that Adam at first was made an immortall creature Concerning Adams soul and the spirits of all men descended from him that they are immortall I hope to prove it so soundly in an other part of this tractate that I will fear no other reproof but this that I bring too much proof for it Therefore supposing or rather borrowing that truth which by GODS grace shall be repayed with interest I now come to shew that Adams bodie was created immortall Immortall I say not as GOD is immortall who neither had beginning nor shall have end with whom is no shadow of change much lesse any reall substantiall change who hath as all other good things else so immortalitie eminently and so eminently that our Apostle in some sort excludeth all others and appropriateth it to him saying 1.
maintain That Adams representation of us and his obedience should have done us equall good to our resisting of the first temptation More might pertinently be said of this matter but besides the precedent tediousnesse of it Ludovicus Vives aurem vellit endeavouring to restrain such speculations to modest bounds Thus he saith on Augustine De Civit. 13.1 Of things which might or might not have happened to man if Adam had not fallen * Quid factum sit magno nostro malo nemo ignorat quid fuisset nescio an ipsi Adam ostensum fuit quantò minùs nobis misellis Nam quid prodest uti conjecturis in re quae conjecturas omnes superat humanas What fell out to our great harm no man is ignorant of what should have befallen I know not whether it was revealed to Adam himself how much lesse to us poore wretches For what availeth it to use conjectures in a thing which is above all humane conjectures But Vives himself is to blame First for his nesciencie or timerousnesse as if Adam knew not what estate he and his should have had if he had persevered in innocency The ignorance of a point so nearely concerning him had argued imperfection which the fulnes of knowledge in which he was created did clearly dispell For if God said to the corrupted World Deut. 30.19 I call heaven and earth to record this day against you that I have set before you Life and Death could uncorrupt Adam be ignorant of the life that was set before him Or did Adam understand the miseries and punishments the orts and effects of Morte Morieris expressely threatned against him in a future contingent estate and could he be ignorant of his present condition of blisse and certain blisse to be increased upon his obedience Did he know the natures of beasts and other creatures could he know the strange production of Eve could he prophetically intimate the strict union of Christ with his Church by his own conjunction with Eve and was it not shewed unto him what state he should have had and we in him Secondly though these things be taxed of nicetie yet the impartiall Reader overviewing this Book perhaps will say It was profitable and delightfull to problematize even upon this very point But other matters invite me hence forward to them and therefore having cleared That it was the sinne of Adam of onely Adam and not of Eve for which Death was appointed Let us proceed to examine Which and what this sinne of Adam was which is next and necessarily to be handled O Most glorious Creator who did'st make us in the First Adam excellent Creatures and wouldest have made us better if he who undertook for us had not brought upon us death and destruction Grant I beseech thee for thy mercies sake in the Merit and Mediation of the Second Adam Jesus Christ our onely Saviour That we may recover our lost Image and be made like unto him here and reigne in Life with him hereafter CHAP. IIII. 1. Adams perfection in Innocencie Our imperfection after his fall contrarie to his both in understanding and will and in the parts concupiscible and irascible 2. Adam had other laws given him but one above all and one onely concerning posteritie 3. What this Law was Adam knew the danger to himself and his of spring The first sinne was against this Law 4. Eve sinned before How she sinned the same and not the same sinne with Adam 5. Zeno the Stoicks and Jovinian confuted Sinnes are not equally sinfull 6 Adam sinned farre more and worse then Eve 7 This sinne of Adam was not uxoriousnesse as Scotus maintained but disobedience or pride The branches of Adams sinne 1 LOmbard saith * Quibusdam videtur quòd Adam ante lapsum non habuerit virtutem Lomb. Sent 2. dist 29. lit B. Some are of opinion that Adam before the fall had no vertue He had not justice say they because he despised Gods commandement nor prudence because he provided not for himself nor temperance for his appetite extended to the forbidden fruit nor fortitude for he yeelded to suggestion We answer saith Lombard He had not these vertues when he sinned but before and in sinning losed them For Augustine in a certain Homily saith Adam was made according to the Image of God armed with shamefastnesse composed with temperance splendent with charitie Otherwhere he saith Adam was endued with a spirituall minde Ambrose saith * Beatissimus erat auram carpebat aetheream He was most happy and led an heavenly life and addeth a good observation * Quando Adam solus erat non est praevaricatus When Adam was alone he transgressed not Which may teach us to fear the enticements of companie This point deserveth not to be so speedily cast off and therefore attend this further enlargement Many very many precepts were graven in the heart of Adam and every branch of the naturall Law was there written by the finger of God at his Creation nor was he ignorant what was to be done or omitted in any businesse Eccl. 17.1 The Lord created man of the earth and verse 2. he changeth the singular into the plural He gave them power over the things therein and verse 3. He endued them with strength by themselves and made them according to his image And then followeth an excellent description of their gifts I conceive and explain the matter thus Foure faculties he had and we have of our souls Two superior Two inferior The two superior are understanding and will The two inferior the part irascible and part concupiscible First the object of his understanding was truth the perfection of it was knowledge but now as we are in the state decaied this truth is darkned with ignorance 1 Corinth 2.14 The naturall man receiveth not nor can know the things of the Spirit of God Eph. 4.18 Their understanding is darkned and their hearts are blinde Psal 49.20 Man in honour understandeth not As Adam was in innocencie he was partaker of the truth The Apostle Ephes 4.23 24. saith Be renewed in the spirit of your minde New we were once in Adam and in him also we grew old we are commanded to be renewed as new as once we were and put on that new man which was created in righteousnesse and holinesse of truth therefore the first Adam was created in truth You have the object Truth the perfection was Knowledge Ecclesiasticus 17.7 God filled them with knowledge and understanding and this is seconded by the Apostle Colos 3.10 The new man is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him Renovation necessarily implieth precedent oldnes and oldnes precedent newnes of knowledge in the first Adam Secondly the object of mans will was and is Goodnesse the perfection Love In the decayed estate the will is infected with vanitie Genes 6.5 Every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was onely evill continually Ephes 4.17 We walk in the vanitie of our
countrey if upon imposed crimes by an appellant the defendant shall yeeld or be overcome in battell b Vâ—imo supplicio punietur cum poena gravi vel graviori secundum criminis qualitatem cum exhaeredatione haeredum suorum omnium bonorum amissione He shall be put to death with a grievous or more grievous pain according to the qualitie of the crime with the disinheriting of his heirs and losse of all his goods Furthermore though he were slain yet the formality of the Common-law proceeding adjudgeth him to capitall punishment that thereby his posterity may suffer the grievous concomitancy of his deserved infamy saith that most learned M. Selden my most courteous and loving friend in his Duello or Single Combat pag. 30. 5. But let us come from the sword where things are cut out with more rigour if not crucltie unto matters Ecclesiasticall and so more civil and peaceable Did not S. Peter stand in stead of all the Apostles when Christ said to him Joh. 21.15 16. Feed my lambes Feed my sheep And again Feed my sheep vers 17. Likewise when Christ said to him Matth. 16.19 I will give unto thee the keyes of heaven and whatsoever thou shalt binde on earth shall be bound in heaven whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven And when this promise to Peter was promised to the rest of the Apostles also Matth. 18.18 and when both these promises were fulfilled and accomplished as they were after Christs resurrection and not before and authoritie given and by a solemne ceremony exhibited by Christ not onely to S. Peter but to all and every of the Apostles saying Joh. 20.21 c. As my Father hath sent me even so send I you And when he had said this he breathed on them and saith unto them Receive ye the Holy Ghost Whose soever sinnes ye remit they are remitted unto them and whose soever sinnes ye retain they are retained Did not the Apostles represent the whole body of the Ministery unlesse you will fable that in the Apostles dayes they had more need of remission of sinnes then we have now or that Christ loveth not his Church now nor affordeth the like means of pardon and reconciliation as he did in those times But by the same deceitfulnesse of cavillation you may say as well that when Christ brake bread and gave it to his Disciples and said Take eat this is my body and gave the cup to them saying Drink ye all of it none but they might eat or drink the Supper of the Lord. But it is undeniable that when Christ said to his twelve Apostles Luk. 22.19 This is my body which is given for you Do this in remembrance of me he spake it to them as representours of the whole Priesthood onely who onely have power to consecrate the body and bloud of our Lord. Indeed Hierome saith c Quid facit Episcopus exceptâ Ordinatione quod Presbyter non facitâ— Epist 85. ad Euag. What doth a Bishop except Ordination which a Priest doth not as if the Apostles represented the Bishops in that point onley and the Centuriatours acknowledge that the first Bishops after the Apostles were made Bishops by the Apostles and they say no more then is confirmed 1. Timothy 5.22 and Titus 1.5 Act. 20.28 But other Fathers extend the comparison between the Apostles and Bishops to other matters appropriating to the Bishops above the Presbyters the power of Confirmation and divers other things All which though we grant yet no man will deny but for preaching baptizing and especially for consecrating of the Eucharist and Sacerdotall Absolution or Ministeriall Remission of sinnes the Apostles represented not the people in any wise nor the Bishops onely but the universall body of Christs Ministers And do not among us the Right Reverend Arch-bishops and Bishops and the Clergy assembled in the Convocation represent the whole Church of England are not they our Nationall Councel do not their Articles of Religion binde in conscience all and every one of the Church of England as much if not more then Civill laws Nor is there the like humane authority on earth for the setling of our consciences in matters of Scripture or Scriptures controverted or to be controverted as the externall publick breathing voice of a true Oecumenical Councel of the Patriarchs Bishops and choice Divines of the Christian world The essentiall universall Church of Christ is and we must beleeve it is the house of God the Church of the living God the pillar and ground of truth 1. Tim. 3.15 It never erred it cannot erre its iudgement is infallible The Spirit leadeth this Church into all truth Joh. 16.13 Of the Church of God consisting of the faithfull in any one age or time I dare say it never did erre damnably or persisted in smaller errours obstinately but alwayes some truly maintained things necessary to salvation and unto this fluctuant militant part of the Church Christ hath promised to be with it to the end of the world Matt. 28.20 The whole visible Church at no time can fall into heresie but some seek after the truth and embrace it and professe it Subject it is to nesciency of some things and perhaps to some kinde of ignorance but it cannot erre in things necessary nor in lesse matters schismatically with obdurate pertinacy Of the representative Church of Christ in Councels this may be said truly and safely viz. Of the first six Generall Oecumenicall Councels not one de facto erred in any definition of matters of faith Of other lawfull general Councels that may hereafter be called though I will not deny but they may possibly be deceived as they are men and therefore are not free from errability but if such Councels may erre or pronounce amisse cannot coblers yet there is least likelihood of their erring Such Oecumenical Councels have the supremest publick externall definitive judgement in matters of Religion if any oppose them they may not onely silence them but censure them with great censures and reduce them into order Private spirits must sit down and rest in their determinations else do the Councels lose operam oleum What S. Ambrose Epist 32. said of one general Councell d Sequor tractatum Niceni Concilii à quo me 〈◊〉 mors nec gladius 〈◊〉 separare I follow the decision of the Nicene Councel from which neither death nor sword shall be able to separate me I say of all true and generall Councels and of the major part of them who binde the rest without which issue the gathering of Councels yea and of Parliaments also would be ridiculous For though it were a true and just complaint of Andreas Duditius Quinquecclesiensis Episcopus That in the Conventicle of Trent the voices were rather numbred then well weighed yet he doth not he cannot finde fault with that course in a just and lawfull Generall Councel but directeth his complaint against the tyrannicall power of the Pope
who made unlearned men Bishops as many as served his turn and more would have made if more need had been Bishops e Pompaticos ostensionales pompaticall and onely for shew as Lampridius said of Perseus his souldiers namely titular Bishops void of learning void of Churches void of good consciences and mercenary parasites Concerning our Nationall Church till a lawfull General Councel may be celebrated both Pastours and people of England are to obey her Decrees Injunctions Articles Homilies and our approved last best Translation above Coverdales Tindals or any private ones Therefore Obey them that have the rule over you and submit your selves for they watch for your souls as they that must give account Heb. 13.17 And you are to follow their faith ver 7. 6. The Devil brought not a more dangerous Paradox into the Church of God this thousand yeares then this That every one illiterate man or woman at their pleasure may judge of Scripture and interpret Scripture and beleeve their own fancies of the Scripture which they call the evidence of the Spirit and the contradicting them though with truth they esteem as the not convincing nor clearing of their conscience So that Nationall Councels are of no esteem Generall Councels not of much the sheep will not heare the Pastours voice but to their pleasure censure them for All may erre The Spirit from heaven as they suppose doth as well dictate the sense to them as it did sometimes the words to the holy Pen-men thereof Let such seduced ones know They have the cart without the horses and horsemen whereas the Prophet Eliah was called and other Church-governours may be called the chariot of Israel and the horsemen thereof 2. Kings 2.12 They have the words with the Eunuch but want both Philip to be their guide and the humblenes of the Eunuch who was willing to be instructed Act. 8.30 Though they have the letter yet they may misse the true literall sense which is not in divers places to be measured by the propriety of the words onely or principally as in proverbiall parabolicall and mysterious sentences The literal sense is the hardest to finde f Simplicem sequentes literam occidunt Filium Dei qui totus sentitur in Spiritu They that follow the bare letter do kill the Sonne of God who is wholly perceived in the Spirit saith Hierome of some men on Matt. 26.21 Presumptuous and illiterate Expositours are like the Carriers or Posts hasting between Princes having letters of truth in their packets but sealed up so that they cannot see nor know them while their mouthes are full of leasings false rumours and lies They have the spirit of self-conceit and pride These men little think that they who wrested some hard places in S. Paul as they did also the other Scriptures wrested them to their own destruction 2. Pet. 3.16 What shall become of those who wrest easie places These dream not that g Ejusdem penè auteritatis est interpretari cujus condere it belongs almost to the same authority to interpret and to make That they are to rest on the Generall Commission given to the Priest Teach all nations therefore others must learn That the Priests lips must preserve knowledge and the people must fetch the Law from their mouth That an implicite belief in depths beyond their capacity is better then adventurous daring to take from the holy word of God that divine sense which it hath and to fasten their own false sense upon it Tertullian saith h Tantum veritati obstrepit adulter sensus quantum corruptor stylus De Praescript advers hętet cap. 17. 38. The truth of the Scripture may be depraved as well by a false glosse as by corrupting the text Hierome thus i Non est in verbis Evangelium sed in sensu non in superficie sed in medulla non in sermonum foliis sed in radice rationis Comment in Galat. 1. The Gospel is not in the words but in the sense not in the outside but in the marrow not in the leaves of speeches but in the root of reason Irenaeus 2.25 k Melius est nihil omnino scientem perseverare in dilectione Dei quae hominem vivificat nec aliud inquirere ad scientiam nisi Jesum Christum Filium Dei pro nobis crucifixum quà m per quaestionum subtilitates multiloquium in impietates cadere It is better for the ignorant to continue in the love of God which quickneth a man and to seek no other knowledge but Jesus Christ the Sonne of God crucified for us then by subtilties of questions and much talking to fall into impieties And Augustine Serm. 20. de verbis Apost l Melior est fidelis ignorantia quà m temeraria scientia A faithfull ignorance is better then a rash knowledge Again S. Hierome ad Demetriadem speaketh of unlearned men m Quum loqui nesciunt tacere non possunt docéntque Scripturas quas non intelligunt priùs imperitorum magistri quà m doctorum discipuli Bonum est obedire majoribus parere praesectis post regulas Scripturarum vitae suae tramitem ab aliis discere nec praeceptore uti pessimo scilicet praesumptione suâ Knowing not how to speak they cannot hold their peace but will needs teach the Scriptures which they understand not and be masters of the ignorant before they be disciples of the learned It is good to obey our elders to submit to those that are set over us and next to the rules of the Scriptures to learn of others how to live and not to be led by our own presumption the worst guide of all others Excellent is the counsel of Gregory Nazianzen to these fanaticall giddy-brain'd private spirits Ye sheep presume not to lead your Pastours c. If a Jew a Turk a Devil convince thy conscience thou must follow it shall the governour of thy soul have no other power over thee then Jew Turk or Devil Or was the Ministery ordained in vain In vain indeed it was ordained if every one be his own judge or a peremptory judge of his guide If great learned men may be deceived may not the ignorant man much more I dare truely avouch that the unlearned single-languaged-interpreting-lay-man hath all the faults whatsoever learned men have and some other especially such as are the offsprings of ignorance That wise Historian Philip de Commines in his 3. book 4. chap. reckoneth it as an unseemly thing to reason of Divinity before a Doctour The world is turned topsi-turvey the great and most learned Archbishop of Canterbury was confronted by a cobler yea confounded if we will beleeve that monster of men that incarnate devill Martin Marre-Prelate who thus sung of his Idol Who made the godly Cobler Cliff For to confound his Grace I warrant you the spirit the private spirit by which the fool presumed that he was guided Sleidan Comment 22. fol. 266. saith it was one of
there followeth with the hideous secret most feared and affrighting torments of the Inquisition confiscation of goods and sometimes shamefull commonly a painfull and violent death If he rely on the advice of the Pastours he sinneth against his own conscience and against truth Who can or will direct this wavering Christian in such uncertainty of wayes that he step not aside nor be out of the right path O gracious God send out thy light and thy truth let them lead me Psal 43.3 Let them direct my discourse and illuminate it that it may be to the anxious and scrupulous conscience as a guide to direct the way and as a lanthorn to give it light in the way S. Hierome and Ockam and Doctour Field of the Church 4.13 three most eminent in three ages a Father a Schoolman and a pillar of our Church do counsel good men in such a case to silence and mourning in secret as the Prophet Jeremy did Men saith he have nothing left unto them but with sorrowfull hearts to referre all unto God I should rather under correction say That a Christian thus perplexed is to take these courses which those Divines perhaps did presuppose as necessary preparatives but did not expresse First I advise that man whose conscience runneth a singular way to wash his heart from wickednesse Jerem. 4.14 to lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godlinesse and honesty which is pointed at as a means whereby men may come to the knowledge of the truth 1. Tim. 2.2 c. For unto the wicked God saith What hast thou to do to declare my statutes or that thou shouldest take my covenant in thy mouth Psal 50.16 Ezek. 20.3 Yes but thou art confident that thou thy self art a guide of the blinde a light of them which are in darknesse an instructer of the foolish a teacher of babes having the form of knowledge and of the truth in the Law Rom. 2.10 I answer Thou must also take the qualifications and necessary appendants to a reformer following in that place immediately Thou therefore that teachest an other teachest thou not thy self c. Thy self must not be ignorant thy self must not steal not commit adultery not commit sacriledge not break the Law not dishonour God For as it is Wisd 1.5 6. The holy spirit of discipline will flee deceit and remove from thoughts that are without understanding and will not abide where unrighteousnesse cometh in For wisdome is a loving spirit Never were the uncharitable ignorant or sinnefull men fit undertakers to contradict established doctrines disciplines or commonwealths But Thou hypocrite first cast out the beam out of thine own eye and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brothers eye Matth. 7.5 Reasons more then ordinary will be expected by God and good men from him who leapeth out of the Church in which he was born and bred kicking at the breasts of his mother running with the bit in his teeth his own wayes I conclude this first point thus He who will needs runne such singular courses had need be a man of rare sanctity and of singular good endowments of knowledge Secondly I would have him earnestly to pray for humility and to practise it By pride Satan cast himself out of heaven Adam him and his out of Paradise David said Psal 131.1 Lord my heart is not haughty neither do I exercise my self in great matters or in things too high for me And vers 2. Surely I have quieted my soul as a childe that is weaned of his mother my soul is even as a weaned childe On which words suffer me to make a little excursion by way of explanation Concerning the first passage If David had appealed to men some scruple might have remained but saying to God the searcher of hearts and reins Lord my heart is not haughty he maketh his humility unquestionable In the second passage observe that though he was a King and a Prophet yet some things were too high for him by his own confession Nazianzen 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 pag. 153. Him I count humble not that speaks humbly and modestly of himself or that speaks courteously and humbly to his inferiour but that speaks modestly concerning God and knows what to speak and what to conceal and in some things can confesse his ignorance and yeeld to them to whom the office of teaching is committed On the contrary a Objectum superbi est ipsemet câ—lsior quà m eâ— convenit The object of a proud man is himself and he is higher in his own conceit then is fit saith Cajetan Pride exalteth a man humilitie casts him down and as all pride shall be at the last thrown down so all true humilitie shall be exalted I would not go to heaven by pride no man ever went to hell by humilitie In the third passage this is the sense May my hopes or God himself fail me may evil betide me for this or some such like imprecation antecedent is to be understood si non posui silere feci animam meam as it runneth in the Hebrew The oath it self or imprecation is not expressed that people may learn to be abstemious in swearing In which regard also it is said Ecclus 23.10 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Jurans nominans He that sweareth and nameth God Where the Vulgat and Septuagint omit the name of God though it be necessarily understood and is expressed in our best translation In the last passage remember that we ought all in this point of humilitie to be as little children if we will enter into the kingdome of heaven Matth. 18.3 David addeth My soul is as a weaned childe not in this respect that newly weaned children are commonly more froward similitudes hold not in every particular but as the mother applieth mustard wormwood and other bitter things to her breasts that she may keep her childe from the milk which he desireth though she know it inconvenient or hurtfull for him so God did wean David by the bitter remembrances of death fear of Gods judgement and the pains of hell and by crosses also of this life sicknesse banishment envy in court insurrection of his own sonnes and the like from those pleasurable things which David affected but God knew to be naught for him There was never any arch-heretick or grand impostour but made private ends his cynosure self-conceit and self-love his card and compasse Even after God had wondrously appeared unto Moses and gave him his mission Moses replied Exod. 3.11 Who am I that I should go unto Pharaoh c. and Exod. 4.1 2. his backwardnesse further appeareth yea after though God by his two miracles confirmed the calling yet twice more did he declare that he was afraid to begin so great an alteration Exod. 4.10 and especially at the 13. vers insomuch that the Lord was angry Humblenesse which is alwayes accompanied with modesty bashfulnesse measuring ones own strength and subjection of spirit is to be
q Qui dissolvit pactum numquid essugiet He that breaketh his covenant shall he escape unpunished S. Hierome truely thus concludeth r Etiam inter hostes servanda fides est Even among enemies faith is to be kept adding a divine caution which compriseth our cause ſ Non considerandum cui sed per quem juraveris Multò enim fidelior est ille qui propter nomen Dei tibi credidit deceptus est te qui per occasionem divinae Majestatis hosts tuo imò jam amico es molitus insidias It is not to be considered to whom but by whom thou hast sworn For he is much more faithfull who for the name of God beleeved thee and was deceived then thou who didst circumvent thine enemie yea now thy friend by abusing Gods sacred Majestie I acknowledge that S. Hierome speaketh of oaths between Kings or such as have been enemies but the reasons reach and extend themselves even to the causes of private men Lying fraud or any collusion by mentall reservation or verball equivocation is wholly to be secluded and abhorred when an oath is taken prudent silence in diverse cases is admitted Yea but if an examinate be adjured shall he then be silent still silent I answer I would have him imitate our blessed Saviour who saying nothing at divers times insomuch that the governour marvelled greatly Matth. 27.14 yet when the high priest said * Matth. 26.63 I adjure thee by the living God that thou tell us whether thou be the Christ the sonne of God though he knew it would cost him his life he concealed not the truth And in such an adjuration upon Religion the examinate is bound to give an account of his faith and to witnesse a good confession though to the expense of his bloud t Contra Marcionem lib. 4. pag. 286. Tertullian seems to be more scrupulous in lesser matters saying u Justa digna praescriptio est in omni quaestione ad propositum interrogationis pertinere debere sensum responsionis Aliud consulenti aliud respondere dementis est It is a just and worthy rule that in every question the answer should be applied to the same sense purpose to which the interrogation is made To answer of one thing when he is asked of another is the part of a mad man Again x Sensus responsionis non est ad aliud dirigendus quà m ad propositum interrogationis quò magìs absit à Christo quod nè homini quidem convenit The sense of the answer is not to be directed to any other thing then that which was propounded in the interrogation So farre is that from Christ which beseems not a meer man So he I answer first Tertullian speaketh of questions in Divinitie to instruct the soul and there it were sinne to delude the simple questionist Secondly he speaketh of questions extra jactum teli cùm aries murum non percusserit of questions not concerning great danger life or limme which doth somewhat vary the case Thirdly an homonymous answer of verball equivocation doth both correspond to the sense of the question which is all that Tertullian requireth and implieth also a second sense which may be understood by an intelligent hearer which in a mentall reservation is impossible to be unlocked opened and cleared except by an hand divine Fourthly Tertullian cannot be thought to condemn verball equivocation the daintie use whereof makes almost as great a difference between a wise man and an idiot as between an idiot and a beast and none but wise men can use it with comfort and delight And the wiser men be as their hearts by divers thoughts are deeper then the fools so their words are more abstruse bivious multivious What writings under heaven of finite men have or can have such multiplicity of meanings as are in Scripture comprised under the words dictated by an infinite Spirit whose whole intire exact depths the meer creature never knew fully and perfectly If I might have my desire quoth S. Augustine I had rather speak in words whose divers senses might give content to divers people of different apprehensions then in words that can have one sense onely The second thing I would commend unto this examinate is to give faire language to his Judges Let him not be bold and malapert nor use clamorous opposition Let not the ignorant Syllogize in Barbara Darii Ferio or marre his cause by ill handling yet if he be unmoveably constant let him say I cannot dispute but I can die let him not provoke the Judge by words or actions ill advised Eulalia being a girle about 12 yeares old did spit in the face of the Judge that he might the rather condemn her The answer of Hannah 1. Samuel 1.15 c. when she was in bitternesse of soul to the misjudgeing and uncharitably zealous Priest Eli was as a sweet incense in the nostrils of God and is a good lesson for all to take out when they are called before the Magistrates though hard measure were offered How long wilt thou be drunken quoth he put away thy wine from thee And she answered No my lord I am a woman of a sorrowfull spirit I have drunk neither wine nor strong drink c. Count not thine handmaid for a daughter of Belial The manner of answering may be sinfull though the matter be good froward behaviour never benefitteth a cause but a gentle answer pacifieth wrath Proverbs 15.1 Taunting recrimination argueth a distempered spirit in the gall of bitternesse How humbly did our blessed Saviour behave himself under the hands of unjust Judges How constantly zealously and boldly because they were inspired immediately from God did the Apostles Act. 4. plead for themselves yet without malapertnesse or irreverence S. Paul his speech to the high priest exacteth a larger discourse Acts. 23.5 Paul said I knew not brethren that he was the high priest Some think that S. Paul knew Ananias to be high priest when he called him painted wall I answer if so it were this is no fit example for sawcinesse to be used in our times towards Magistrates For first if S. Paul did know him he might speak though not as a Prophet yet illuminated and inspired from God which now is not in use Secondly he might speak as a Prophet foredivining an evil end to Ananias as indeed it came to passe saith y Homil. 6. de Laudibus Pauli Chrysostom If any one of them who now revile Magistracy have the spirit prophetical denouncing contingent future things which yet end in accomplishment I will not call him a sawcy presumptuous fellow Thirdly though divers learned men think the contrary and that he spake by an Irony when he said I knew not yet I perswade my self that S. Paul in truth knew not when he spake Ananias to be the high priest for these reasons First because he seemeth to put on the spirit of mildnesse towards them that stood
by him who were also the same 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 standers by who had smit and buffetted him and calling them by the charitable term of brethren whom it had been fitter to reprove it argueth his plain sincerity speaking of his superiour Secondly if S. Paul had spoken by way of jest irrision or Irony when he said I knew not brethren that he was the high priest he might well have ceased there But since he bringeth in the sacred Text seriously truly and sadly to confirm his nesciency and that there is no mocking with the divine veritie with me it shall passe currant that he spake from the bottome of his heart when he said he knew him not to be the high priest The Spirit never taught any inspired to apply Scripture contrary to their knowledge nor to cite the sacred Text of truth to prove an untruth Thirdly consider the Antithests and opposition between the words In the fifth verse he said simply and directly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I knew not where his ignorance is the more seriously professed by the opposition in the sixth verse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But Paul knowing that the one part were Sadduces and the other Pharisees as if the Spirit had said Paul indeed was ignorant who was the high priest but he knew they were divided into factions the word But running with a singular emphasis to this point Fourthly by this exposition we shall cut off that objection which Julian the Apostata used against S. Paul as if by this double dealing he were a very time-server in his words we maintaining all to be done in solemn gravity and reality of truth Fifthly if S. Paul had spoken Ironically that he had not known the high priest when they knew one an other how easily could the high priest have confuted and confounded him and laid lying and imposture to his charge But this he did not do therefore in likelihood S. Paul knew him not Lastly the objections for the former opinion are easily answered How could he be ignorant who was the high priest when he was bred up in their law and well acquainted and familiarly in their Synedrion and had been there when S. Stephen was condemned and when he got letters from the high priest a little before his conversion especially since he appealeth to the high priest as to his witnesse Acts 22.5 To the first point I confesse he was bred up in their law and could not then in likelihood be ignorant who was the high priest or what was his name yet now he might be ignorant for S. Paul had been away from Jerusalem a good while avoiding the storm of persecution and high priests died as other men and at that time there were two high priests which was not of old and with one of them he might not be acquainted Oh but he frequented the Synedrion I confesse that not onely the witnesses laid down their clothes at a young mans feet whose name was Saul Acts 7.58 but that Saul consented to the death of S. Stephen Acts 8.1 and as certain that he as a principall agent received letters from the high priest and all the estate of the elders to search out the Christians and to bring them to be punished Acts 22.5 and so he must needs know the high priest and the elders and they him and therefore in likelihood he was conversant sometimes in their Synedrion But I say as before this might not be that high priest who sat to condemn S. Stephen or to whom S. Paul appealed as witnesse but the other high priest might sit at this time and on this day since now and then one sat now and then an other and sometimes both of them And thus S. Paul might be ignorant who was his Judge Oh but he well knew the high priest by his place and by his clothes I answer The Jews were not now sitting in their Councel-house but where the chief Captain commanded them to appeare Acts 22.30 himself sitting as the Moderatour in his own tribunall which he was not wont to do in their Synedrion neither might the high priest take the proper vestments in such a place by which he might be known from others To close up all If nothing said before do satisfie thee but thou art confident that S. Paul did know the high priest though thou wert better to adhere to the words yet have I found out an other way for the opening of this point which hath perplexed many learned men Observe therefore I pray thee these things First that not onely the high priest but all their Councel were summoned to appeare Acts 22.30 and of the Councel each man had liberty to speak at his pleasure and at such publick trialls there is a great dinne murmures and mutterings so that the speaker is not alwaies discernable whiles many may speak at once and some louder then others Secondly while S. Paul earnestly beheld not the high priest onely but the Councel Acts 23.1 casting his eyes from one to another the high priest commanded him to be smitten on the mouth These words S. Paul might heare and yet not know in such a confused noise which of those his many Judges spake them and in likelihood thought that such an unjust sentence could not proceed out of the high priests mouth but to the authour of those words whosoever he was to that unjust Judge S. Paul sharply and punctually replied God will judge thee thou painted wall But when S. Paul was informed that they were the words of the high priest himself he was sory for his quick speech and said I knew not brethren that he was the high priest So that if S. Paul had known the high priest and the high priest him if they had been well acquainted the one with the other at this time of S. Pauls triall which will never be sufficiently proved yet here is now a new way as probable as any to excuse the Apostle from dissimulation and from using the Scripture as a cloke to it viz. Though S. Paul knew the man to be the high priest yet he knew not at first that it was the high priest who pronounced so unjust and furious a sentence but divers of the seventy two Judges might be speaking one to another and S. Paul might be mistaken at first in the speaker As if he had said I knew not brethren it was the high priest that spake these words concerning me And thus I hope this difficultie is cleared I will onely adde this That divers ancient Fathers from S. Pauls example in this place prove his modesty moderation and undisturbed passions by his sudden wise setled answers And That I hold this paraphrase probable as if S. Paul had said If I had wist that it was the high priest who used those words though I would not have forborn others yet I would have forborn him since God had said THOU SHALT NOT SPEAK EVIL OF THE RULER OF THY PEOPLE But yet this man
The easie things any man may judge of in the more abstruse the voice of the Pastours is to be followed c Quam clavem habebant Legis Dectores nisi interpretationem legis What key had the Doctours of the law saith Tertullian in the same place but the interpretation of the law So the key of interpretation rests in the ministery for things which need interpretation as hard places do though the key of agnition in things unto which their knowledge can aspire is permitted yea commended unto all men and they who withhold this key of knowledge from the people are accursed by Christ Luke 11.52 To the further explaining of my opinion let us consider in a Church corrupted these two sorts of people First the Magistrates either Civil or Ecclesiasticall And we will subdivide them into the Wilfully blinde and the Purblinde Of the first were some Bishops and Nobles and Gentry in Queen Maries dayes who hunted after bloud even the bloud of innocents and strained their authority to the highest Such is now the Inquisition falsly called the holy house with all the chief officers thereof such in the dayes of Christ were divers Scribes Pharisees Sadduces and some Rulers of the people who knowing the truth to be on Christs side by his doing such miracles as no man ever did before did choke and strangle their belief made shipwrack of their consciences resisted the holy Spirit who would neither go into the kingdome of heaven nor suffer others that were entering to go in against whom Christ pronounced wo upon wo Matth. 23.13 c. For they took away the key of knowledge Luke 11.52 and purposely kept the people ignorant and blinde According to their demerits there are reserved for them intima inferni the depths of hell blacknesse of darknesse and the greatest torments thereof without repentance The next tribe or sort are the purblinde Magistracy either Secular or Clergy Such were divers in the dayes of Queen Mary who had learning enough to know that all went not right yet did not vehemently oppose the truth but did swimme with the stream made the time their stern the whole Church turning and returning three or foure times in one age These were seduced as well as seducers Such also at this day are divers in the Papacy more moderate lesse rigid and rigorous concealing some truths they know because they have given up their hearts and beliefs to trust in their Church for such things as they do not know though they have means to learn and capacitie to understand if they would and therefore are faulty Such also were divers in the Jewish Church and State Ye killed the Prince of life saith S. Peter to the people Acts 3.15 And now brethren I wot that through ignorance ye did it as did also your rulers Such were those Pharisees Matth. 15.12 who were offended with Christ of whom Christ saith vers 14. They be blinde leaders of the blinde And if the blinde lead the blinde both shall fall into the ditch d In foveam peecati inferni Into the ditch of sinne and hell saith Hugo Cardinalis on the place e Cùm pastor per abrupta graditur necesse est ut grex in praecipitium ducatur When the shepherd goes by craggie clifts the flock must needs fall headlong and break their necks saith Gregory f Duces praeceptores fovea infernus The guides are the teachers and the ditch is hell saith Faber Stapulensis on the place So much of the purblinde Magistracy Clericall or Laicall in a corrupted Church From the Magistrates in the first place we descend to the people in the second place whom we also divide into their severall ranks and files In the generall they are either learned or unlearned The learned are first such as go against their conscience and practise contrary to their knowledge and belief sailing with winde and tide and because they will be found fault withall by the fewest they will do as the most do Timorous hypocrites they are fearing persecution losse of goods liberty and life more then they fear God who is able to destroy both body and soul for whom is kept the allotment of hypocrites brimstone and fire storm and tempest ignis vermis this shall be their portion to drink without repentance An other sort of learned men professing truth there are in a corrupted Church and each of them forsooth will be a reformer of the publick these despise government are presumptuous self-willed they are not afraid to speak evil of dignities 2. Pet. 2.10 speaking evil of the things that they understand not vers 12. as out of question they understand not all things which in their carping humour they censure people-pleasers ambitious of esteem full of words running as much after their own will as after their consciences hearty enough to draw on danger obstinate enough to provoke death Of these men though they die for some truths yet because they have a mixture of many errours in their intellect perversenesse in their will and ill grounded ill bounded affections wanting those godly endowments of charity before spoken of we may pronounce as the Apostle did They shall utterly perish in their own corruption 2. Pet. 2.12 Such a fellow was he and his like of whom g Anno 1543. Mr. Fox reporteth that when Christ said This is my body interpreted the words to this effect The word of God is to be broken distributed and eaten So when Christ said This is my bloud the blessed words are missensed as if Christ had then said The Scripture must be given to the people and received by them By which forced exposition the seal of our redemption is troden under foot the thrice-blessed sacrament of the bodie and bloud of our Lord is utterly annihilated whereas indeed in the words of consecration there are included verba concionatoria praedicanda words predicatorie and serving for doctrine I will not esteem him as an holy perfect martyr who dieth with such crotchets in his brain such pride in his heart Such an one was Ravaillac who for conscience sake forsooth stabbed the Anointed of the Lord the Heros of our time his naturall Soveraigne Henry the fourth of France He followed his conscience but his conscience had ill guides When he had outfaced tortures and death it self though he thought that he died a martyr if he died unrepentant the powers of hell gat hold upon him Such manner of people were those Jews who in most desperate fashion said His bloud be on us and on our children Matt. 27.25 Do you think they all were wholly ignorant do you think they all swerved against their consciences or rather medled they not in things above their callings were they not too presumptuous Thus though they had the knowledge of some truths and perhaps would have died for them yet their zeal wanted more and better knowledge to have rectified their consciences and they should have called
together and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus Ephes 2.5 6. Our conversation is in heaven Philip. 3.20 From which positive proofs and doctrine that Christ stood in our stead and that almost all if not all his actions and passions as he was the Mediatour between God and man were representative of us let us descend to the comparative and shew that Christ hath done and will do more good unto us then Adam hath done harm Which point I have more enlarged in my Sermon at the re-admitting into our Church of a penitent Christian from Turcisme being one of the two intituled A return from Argier where these five reasons are enlarged First that Adam conveyed to us onely one sinne but Christ giveth diversities of grace and many vertues which Adam and his posterity should never have had as patience virginity repentance compassion fraternall correction martyrdom Secondly Adams sinne was the sinne of a meer man onely but the Sonne of God merited for us Thirdly by Adams offence we are likened to beasts by the grace of Christ our nature is exalted above all Angels Fourthly Adams disobedience could not infect Christ Christs merit cleansed Adam saving his soul and body Fifthly as by the first Adam goodnes was destroyed so by the second Adam greater goodnes is restored and all punishments yea all our own sinnes turned to our further good To which I will annex these things following By Adams sinne we were easily separated from God Satan the woman and an apple were the onely means But I am perswaded saith the Apostle Rom. 8.38 that neither death nor life nor Angels nor principalities nor powers nor things present nor things to come nor height nor depth nor any other creature shall be able to separate us from the love of God Again Rom. 5.13 c. the Apostle seemeth to divide the whole of time in this world into three parts under three laws the law of Nature of Moses of Christ In the first section of time sinne was in the world Neverthelesse death reigned from Adam to Moses saith the Apostle In the law of Moses though death was in the world yet sinne chiefly reigned and the rather for the law Nitimur in vetitum semper cupimúsque negatum This the Apostle confirmeth often especially Rom. 7.8 Sinne taking occasion wrought in me all manner of concupiscence The third part of times division is in the dayes of grace under Christ and now not so much death not so much sinne as righteousnes and life do reigne or rather we in them by Christ and the power of both the other is diminished and shall be wholly demolished If Adam hurt all mankinde one way or other Christ hath helped all mankinde many wayes In this life he giveth many blessings unto the reprobate his sunne shineth on all his rain falleth both upon good and bad and I do not think that there ever was the man at least within the verge of the Church but had at some time or other such a portion of Gods favour and such sweet inspirations put into his heart that if he had not quenched by his naturall frowardnes the holy motions of the Spirit God would have added more grace even enough to have brought him to salvation For God is rich in mercy Ephes 2.4 The Father of mercies 2. Corinth 1.3 Thou lovest all things that are and abhorrest nothing that thou hast made for never wouldest thou have made any thing if thou hadst hated it Wisd 11.24 What thou dost abhorre or hate thou dost wish not to be what thou dost make thou dost desire it should be saith Holcot on the place In our Common-prayer-book toward the end of the Commination this is the acknowledgement of our Church O mercifull God which hast compassion of all men and hatest nothing that thou hast made which wouldest not the death of a sinner but that he should rather turn from sinne and be saved c. God is intituled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Amator animarum A lover of souls Wisd 11.26 Holcot on the place confirmeth it by Ezek. 18.4 All souls are mine saith God Men commonly love the bodies saith Holcot but God the souls b Amat Deus animas non singulariter sic quòd non corpora amet sed privilegialiter quia eas ad se in perpetuum fruendum praeparavit God loveth the souls not onely as if he did not love the bodies but principally because he hath fitted them for the eternall fruition of himself It is not the best applied distinction for whose soever souls shall enjoy God their bodies also shall and that immortally for ever If he had said that God had loved humane souls privilegialiter because man had nothing to do in their creation or preservation he had spoken more to the purpose Nor think I that God forsaketh any but such as forsake him but Froward thoughts separate from God Wisd 1.3 c. For into a malicious soul wisdome shall not enter nor dwell in the body that is subject unto sinne For the holy spirit of discipline will flee deceit and remove from thoughts that are without understanding Concerning the souls of infants dying without the ordinary antidotes to originall sinne baptisme and the pale of the Church though they may most justly be condemned yet who knoweth how easy their punishment may be at least comparatively as some imagine For that some drops of mercy may extraordinarily distill upon them they cannot deny who say That the rebellious spirits of actually sinfull men and Angels are punished citra condignum But to leave these speculations I dare boldly affirm that if there be any mitigation of torments in any of them it is not without reference to Christ Moreover the redeeming of man was of more power then the very creation for this was performed by a calm Fiat but the redemption was accomplished by the agony passion and death of the Sonne of God c Aug. in Joan. Tractatu 72. post medium Augustine on those words John 14.12 Greater works then these shall he do saith thus It is a greater work to make a wicked man just then to create heaven and earth Therefore much more doth Christs merit surmount the fault of Adam In the first Adam we onely had posse non peccare posse non mori A possibility of not sinning a possibility of not dying We should have been changed though we had not died posse bonum non deserere A possibility of not forsaking goodnesse and should by his integrity and our endeavours have attained at the utmost but bene agere beatificari To do well and be blessed By Christ we have not onely remission of sinnes and his righteousnes imputed but rich grace abundance of joy and royall gifts Not a more joyfull but a more powerfull grace saith d Non laetiorem sed potentiorem gratiam Aug. de Correp Gratia cap. 11. Augustine and we shall have non posse peccare non posse
restriction because in it was speech of Adam by whom death came upon all without exception but in the second and opposite member All is not to be taken in the same amplitude sed juxta rem subjectam But according to the subject spoken of All that have grace and the gift of righteousnesse Omnes vivificandi All that are to be made alive saith S. Augustine All that are Christs So much in defence of those who by All understand genera singulorum but not singula generum Some of all kindes but not all of every kinde restraining and imprisoning the word yet as it were in libera custodia The free gift came upon all men to the justification of life that is it came upon all upon whom it did come freely and yet upon many which were not of Christs flock it came not at all If this seem harsh to any there is a second interpretation which came in my minde before ever I had heard or read that any other thought so and amongst a whole army of expounders I never met with any who wholly agreeth with me and never but one whose opinion in part concurreth with mine and he is Cardinall Tolet who is found fault withall covertly by Justinian the Jesuit and by the learned Estius under a generall Quidam vir doctus A certain learned man and expressely by name by Cornelius à Lapide the Jesuit whose judgement otherwise I had been ignorant of as not having Tolets labours on the Romanes The words of S. Paul Rom. 5.18 at the latter end are these By the righteousnesse of one 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life So it is read according to the Vulgat in our late Translation the Bishops Bible hath it Good springeth upon all men to the righteousnesse of life but it is certainly amisse for they take 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whereas there is great discrepancy between them for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is generally confessed to be according to Philosophers that vertue or aggregation of vertue which is named Justice generall or according to Divinity the vertue or the habit of justice the work of grace sanctification righteousnesse or holinesse inherent Neither is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 all one with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for though I would be loath to say as Beza doth on that place I do not admit saith he Nè in anis quaedam argutia tribuatur Apostolo id est Spiritui sancto that these two are all one for this reason among others Lest some vain nicety should be attributed to the Apostle that is to the holy Ghost for if I did admit them to be all one yet I would rather admire the depths of the holy Spirit which I am not able to sound then ascribe any empty or vain nicety to the perfection of divine Scripture l Adoro Scripturae plenitudinem Tert. lib. contra Hermog Whose plenitude I adore that I may use Tertullians phrase whereas Beza intimateth as if the infinite Spirit knew not to dictate what he could not understand yet will I be bold to say there is a main difference between them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 commonly is rendred justificatio For grant that among Heathen writers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be now and then expressed A just cause or The ground-work or foundation of a just cause as l 1. de coelo Aristotle useth it Grant we also that in Scripture 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is used sometimes for the judgement of God as Rom. 1.32 and Revel 15.4 sometimes for the ordinances of God as Luke 1.6 and Heb. 9.1 and 10 verses and Rom. 2.26 yet most properly it is rendred Justificatio and by it is meant the merit of Christ and his righteousnesse imputed to us and is in Christ and not in us Beza saith right in this m 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ipsam justificationis nostrae ut ità dicam materiam hîc declarat ab effecto nempe illam Christi obedientiam cujus imputatio nos juslos in ipso facit quam paulò antè vocavit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quò Deus gratis eam nobit largiatur The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Justification declareth as I may say the very matter of our justification from the effect namely that obedience of Christ the imputation whereof makes us righteous in him which a little before he called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the free gift because God gives it freely to us Thus is the imputation of Christs righteousnesse and our justification all one in effect and onely divers in words to the same sense Thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is used both in the 16 verse and in this present place and thus Rev. 19.8 The fine linen is the righteousnes of Saints Not of themselves not inherent for to the Church was given or granted that she should be arayed ut cooperiat se as some reade it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in fine linen pure white 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 pure in it self 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 white to be seen by others And since our Saviour Revel 19.13 was clothed with a vesture dipt in bloud which Blasius Viegas saith is commonly interpreted of Christs humanitie begored with its own bloud by the Jews which suffer me to term Meritum rubrum as well as the School-men stile it Meritum udum which was pointed at Esai 63.1 Who is this that cometh from Edom with dyed garments from Bozrah and verse 2. Wherefore art thou red in thine apparell and thy garments like him that treadeth in the wine-fat which Tertullian wittily thus expounded n Spiritus propheticus veluti jam contemplans Dominum suum ad passionem venientem carne scilicet vestitum ut in ea passum cruentum habitum carnis in vestimentorum rubore designat conculcatae expressae vi passionis tanquam de foro torcularis quia exinde quasi cruentati homines de vini rubore descendunt Contra Marcionem 4.40 The spirit of the Prophet contemplating as it were his Lord going to his passion clothed with flesh as suffering in it describes by the rednesse of his garments the bloudy habit of his flesh troden and pressed by the force of his passion as by a wine-presse because men come out thence as it were all bloudy with the rednesse of the wine According to that prophesied of him rather then of Judah or of Judah as a type of him Gen. 49.11 He washed his garments in wine and his clothes in the bloud of grapes So that S. John may be thought to expound Esai and Esai to reflect on that prophesie of Jacob and all to designe out our Saviours passive obedience by which that I may so speak our sinnes are most properly washed away or not imputed Upon proportionable semblance of reason permit me to say that the pure and white linen describeth Christs active obedience his fulfilling of the Law in
in a long narration especially if it be sudden he hath mingled and confounded some things a In quibusdam etiam memoriâ lapsus fuerit And forgot himself in some things to wit in such things as belonged little or nothing to the purpose for he was busily musing and intent upon the main matter But saith he S. Luke writing the historie changed not one jot but writ as Steven spoke Now we need not defend Steven from all errour and fault saith he but we must quit the Evangelist For onely the Prophets Apostles and Evangelists did never labi memoriâ or erre in any matter great or small other men did His proofs are these Jephthah in Judges 11.26 pretendeth 300 yeares possession when they were not so many and the divine Pen-man or Historiographer writeth as Jephthah pretended and established not the truth of the thing it self I answer that Salianus in his Annales Anno Mundi 2849 maketh one account wherein the time of the Israelites coming out of Egypt to the instant of Jephthahs arguing is 377 yeares and from the death of Sihon king of the Amorites 337 yeares But the truth is if we will hit the exact number both Salianus and Tremellius and many others say That from the coming out of Egypt and from the giving of the Law unto this present controversie of Jephthah with the King of the Amorites there were 305 or 306 yeares expired And Tremellius well observeth that Jephthah began his narration from their coming forth of Egypt vers 16. Therefore thence beginneth the number and the reckoning Now the shortning of an account is an usuall Ellipsis both in Scripture and in other Authours The 70 Interpreters are cited for 72. Among the Romanes the Centum-viri consisted of one hundred and five men Judges 20.46 all which fell of Benjamin that day were 25000. yet there fell that day 100 more vers 35. So 2. Sam. 5.5 the account is shortened by six moneths lesse then was set down in the precedent verse it being b Synecdoche frequent ad rotunditatem numeri A frequent Synecdoche to make a round and smooth reckoning saith Tremellius If any shall yet contend that Jephthah saith expresly v. 26. Israel dwelt in Heshbon and her towns and in Aroer and her towns and in all the cities that be along by the coasts of Arnon 300 yeares Peter Martyr on the place answereth That the Scripture-account often followeth the greater number Now because the yeares from Sihons death were nearer 300. then 200. Jephthah reckoneth not the refract but the whole number and accounteth them 300 yeares as inclining to the greater number For Sihon was overcome and slain the last yeare of Moses his life being to the present debate 266 yeares saith Abulensis 267 saith Lyranus 270 yeares saith Peter Martyr If Peter Martyrs answer be sleighted I adde that the perfection of Scriptures stands not so strictly on exactnesse of number but that it puts a certain number for an uncertain Instances are obvious So while we plead too much for number we shall as S. Augustine saith forget or neglect both weight and measure Lastly grant that Jephthah either mistook or mispleaded the yeares in a braving fashion and say that the holy Ghost hath penned not what was truth in it self but what Jephthah alledged erroneously or covetously for his prescription for Jephthah had more then one errour yet it followeth not that S. Steven was deceived for he was full of the holy Ghost when he spake this Act. 7.55 and before he spake this he was full of faith and of the holy Ghost Act. 6.5 Full of faith and power vers 8. and they that disputed with Steven were not able to resist the wisdome and the Spirit by which he spake v. 10. Therefore he spake wisely truely and by the Spirit as well as S. Luke wrote by the Spirit and neither of them could in this passage erre though Jephthah be held a man of imperfections 2. Secondly saith Canus the Evangelist hath it Matth. 2.6 That IT IS WRITTEN BY THE PROPHET AND THOU BETHLEHEM IN THE LAND OF JUDAH ART NOT THE LEAST AMONG THE PRINCES OF JUDAH when it is not so written by the prophet who saith Micah 5.2 BUT THOU BETHLEHEM EUPHRATA THOUGH THOU BE LITTLE AMONG THE THOUSANDS OF JUDAH the sense being very different almost contrary In which place S. Matthew reports the words not as they are in Micah but as the chief Priests and Scribes recited them to Herod c Quod testimonium nec Hebraico textui nec 70 Interpretibus convenire me quoque tacente perspicuum est Which testimonie saith Hierome on Micah 5.2 agreeth neither with the Hebrew nor the Seventie as is plain though I say nothing Then followeth his opinion d Arbitror Matthaeum volentem arguere Scribarum Sacerdotum erga divinae Scripturae lectionem negligentiam sic etiam posuisse ut ab iis dictum est I think that S. Matthew being willing to reprove the negligence of the Scribes and Priests toward the reading of holy Scriptures related the words as they were cited by them So that though the Scribes and Pharisees were blinde and seeing the Prophet through a vail took one thing for an other and though the Evangelist purposely reciteth their mistaking that we might discern the fault of these ill guides and ignorant teachers yet it no way followeth that S. Steven did erre or was mistaken or that S. Luke misreported the words of S. Steven But enough of this to testifie my dislike of the second opinion and of such who excusing the Greek Text from corruption wherein I wonderfully applaud them do impute an errour and slip unto the holy powerfull gracefull truth-speaking and dying Protomartyr S. Steven which I cannot endure in them And certes both these former rejected opinions are built on a false ground and idlely do presuppose that there is no reall historicall truth in the words as they are in the Greek and in the Latine Text. But truth there is and though truth lie deep hid as in a well said he of old yet by Gods help we shall winde her up and draw her above ground that every eye may see her though we have many turnings 3. Which that I may the better accomplish I must straggle awhile after two most learned men Cardinall Cusanus and Daniel Heinsius especially Heinsius whom when I have overtaken and wrung and wonne from him some holds which are offensive to the majestie of sacred Scripture then shall I return and descend to the most difficult place of Acts 7.16 c. The learned worthie Heinsius whom I name not without honour though I dissent from him in his Exercitations upon Nonnus and in the Prolegomena beats out certain paths which never any on the earth trode upon before him pag. 27. making the Hellenisticall language to be the best interpreter of the Hebrew and Chaldee and the Hebrew and Chaldee interchangeably the best interpreters of it Before all his
The Lord cometh and the words immediately following make it to have apparent and undeniable reference to the last judgement Nor were the words Maran-atha taken from Moses Deut. 33.2 though he saith The Lord came with 11000 of Saints where is a great similitude of some particulars for there is related what passed at the deliverie of the Law and neither Mara nor Maran is mentioned but rather by the semblance of words we may think Moses alluded to the prophesie of Enoch which long after this S. Jude citeth expresly as prophesying of future punishment to be inflicted for the breach of the Law And indeed Ambrose well expounds our Maran-atha of the second coming of Christ so Clemens Romanus Epist 2. in fine Augustine Epist 178 thus Anathema condemnatus Maran-atha definiunt Donec Dominus redeat Condemned till the Lord return to judgement Most true it is Maran-atha is added to exaggerate the power of the Execration and that it is a form of Execration so was it in the intent of the Donor in Mariana The Talmudists say it signifieth one delivered into the hand of the Tormentour by the judgement of the Lord himself Answerable it is in sense to the words in the 17. Chapter of the 6. Councel of Toledo l Perpetuò Anathemate damnetur May he be perpetually anathematized and Chapter 18. m Anathemate divino perculsus absque uilo remedii loco habeatur damnatus aeterno judicio Being stricken thorough with the divine curse without all hope of remedy let him be esteemed damned by the eternall judgement Therefore indeed foolish were they who thought Anathema Maran-atha to be a kinde of oath as if S. Paul adjured them by the coming of Christ yet so some held saith Peter Martyr More foolish was Cornelius a Lapide the Jesuit who on the place confessing the words to be n Verba execrantis denuntiantis aeternam damnationem imò verba condemnantis Words of imprecation of commination of the eternall damnation yea words of condemnation acknowledging also that Maran-atha is Anathema like to Hasschammata being usually contracted to Schammata which was generally known to be an excommunication of an high form adding also that o Maranus est idem quod 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 excommunicatus ob apostasiam Maranus and a man excommunicate for apostasie are Synonymaes yet for all these things by himself avouched saith expresly * Non sunt verba excommunicantis They are not words of one that excommunicateth But indeed they are words of an excommunication taken from the minatorie prophesie of Enoch recited by S. Jude verse 14. The Lord cometh p Indè ergò nemo non videt deductam illam Anathematis rationem ex primis illius Anathematis verbis minùs aliàs ad alia aliarum sententiarum initia usitatis Anathema ipsum de more Hebraeorum appellatum fuisse From thence therefore every man seeeth that Anathema is deduced and that according to the Hebrew guise it is called Anathema from the beginning or first words of that curse which words are otherwise lesse used to the beginnings of other sentences saith the learned Bertram Maran-atha is q Extremum genus excommunicationis apud Hebraees The highest and greatest degree of excommunication among the Jews saith Drusius in his Henoch pag. 29. who addeth concerning the Apocryphall books of Henoch that the Jews say they have them yet to this day From whence it is likely both that the Jews took their form of excommunication and from the first words of the curse Maran-atha might denominate the intire Anathema Maran-atha as from the beginnings of writs or from the principall words many of our Common-law-writs are so called aswell as the decrees of Popes Nor let any object the unlikelihood that this Anathema is taken from Enochs prophesie because S. Jude hath it not like Maran-atha 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I answer that neither Hebrew nor Syriack nor our English so well endure the placing of the Verb before the Noun as the Greek doth but followeth naturally the naturall sequele of the words and not onely when Enoch spake it but when S. Jude first wrote in the Syriack if in it he wrote that was Maran-atha what after by the Spirit was changed into 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the meaning is all one whether it be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Noun must be construed before the Verb The Lord cometh Maran-atha This excommunication S. Paul briefly and in two words reciteth as an usance of the Jewish Synagogue and fit to be introduced into the Christian Temples and exercised in Ecclesiasticall discipline So much of that An other instance is in Act. 3.21 What is in the Latine and Greek full of Amphibologie diversely at divers editions rendered by Beza and others is plain radiant in the Syriack 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Quem oportet quidē coelum recipere saith the vulgat The sentence is altogether doubtfull both in Greek and Latine saith Bellarmine Tom. 1. pag. 409. whether Jesus suscipiat coelum or coelum Jesum as Cajetan openeth the case Now the Syriack translated by Tremellius hath it Quem oportet coeli capiant Quem necesse est coelis ut capiant as it is varied by the skilfull Linguist Bertram Quem oportet coelum ut capiat saith the Arabick all running to the second exposition that the heavens must contain Christ Which words being firm against the Ubiquitaries they interpret Coelum not properly but figuratively for the glorie reigne and majestie of God r Alioqui enim si sermo esset de loco dictum esset Quem oportet coelo recipi For otherwise if he had meant the place of Heaven it would have been said Who must be received into Heaven So Illyricus in lib. de Ascensione Christi But Illyricus must not teach the holy Ghost how to speak nor be offended if the All-wise Divine Spirit use an Amphibolous phrase in the Greek which is cleared by the more Eastern tongues In my opinion he might rather have said that perhaps by Heaven GOD is meant both because our blessed Saviours last words were Luke 23.46 Father into thy hands I commend my Spirit which most certainly was received into the hands of his Father in heaven as also for that not onely the word Coeli in the plurall number is taken for God according to the use of the Aramaeans and also of the Jews as appeareth in the record containing the jointure and dowrie which Rabbi Moses made to Clarora the daughter of Rabbi David explained by Bertram at the end of his Aramaean and Hebrew Grammar where the Bridegroom saith among other things f Esio mihi in uxorem juxta legem Mosit Israel ego ex verbo Coelorum colam honorabo alam regam te Be thou a wife to me according to the law of Moses and Israel and I according to
good or God saw that it was good as he did at all and every of the other five dayes creation Was it therefore not good Yes verily for Gen. 1.31 God saw every thing that he had made and behold it was very good John 14.16 c. The Comforter shall abide with you for ever even the Spirit of truth whom the world cannot receive because it seeth him not neither knoweth him but ye know him for he dwelleth with you and shall be in you And verse 26. The Comforter shall teach you all things Therefore he shall teach them to write truely the Spirit of truth will not suffer them to write falsly whilest he dwelleth with them and in them as he did when they wrote Inspiration was ordained as a cause and as a means of right conceiving conceiving or apprehension was appointed as a cause and a means of right expression expression was either by word or writing Many words were prophetically and most divinely spoken which were not written not so many were written as were first spoken The vocall expression was more transient and transitorie perhaps concerning some few and those onely of those times the expression permanent and by writing was and is directorie to mankinde to the end of the world Inspiration apprehension and much expression by voice were all as means to this main end that there might be a Scripture Shall the means be certain unerring and inerrable and shall the end be dubious crooked and erring The perfect use of the right means leads on infallibly to an undeceiving and exact end If the Divine Pen-men could not erre or be misled in the former which someâ—imes vanished leaving no footsteps behinde them it is not possible that they should erre in writing which is the master-piece of that divine work lasting for ever the absolute square and judge and canon of all mens thoughts words and deeds unlesse you say God had lesse care to preserve from corruption divine records filed up on eviternitie and necessarie at all times for all persons in all places as the Scriptures now are then he had of inspirations which ended onely in the apprehension if they were not expressed or turned into aire and vanished almost with the breath if they were onely spoken Nor let any man say that writing is further removed from the divine operation then inspiration was and so more subject to errour for it shall appeare ere long that the same Spirit which began by inspiration sat still moving on the waters not leaving his own work till there was a perfect production till the end was accomplished and the will of God was written in words and letters of truth so that not one Iota or tittle had any errour Yea let me go one step further and say that when the Apostles did dictate to their scribes actuaries or secretaries not onely not themselves but not their notaries could erre And yet I have read of two mad stories crosse to my opinion the one in Sixtus Senensis Bibliothecae sanctae 2. pag. 120. on the name Tertius who recordeth out of Diodorus Bishop of Tarsus that this Tertius being no excellent speaker nor writer made the obscure Epistle of S. Paul to the Romanes to be more obscure whilest he laboured to expresse S. Pauls thoughts and sense by more confused and unabsolute sentences and transposed explications As if S. Paul could not write sufficiently himself though he said in humblenesse Rudis sermone sum I am rude in speech 2. Cor. 11.6 yet was he powerfull in writing 2. Cor. 10.10 As if he had not divers most sufficient scribes by him As if he would permit the writing of so divine super-divine an Epistle to an Ignaro a silly fellow As if Tertius himself wrote not this Epistle in the Lord that is by divine authoritie or as Cajetan thinketh these words In the Lord are added to shew that he did not write it as an hireling which sense is made good by some authorities according to the diversitie of punctation As if the Spirit who inspired Paul dictating ruled not the hand of Tertius writing As if S. Paul would make so block-headed a disciple as Tertius is feigned to be to be his scribe and that in his most majesticall and obscurest Epistle Or if Tertius were so that he should be thought worthy to be Iconii Episcopus and have that extraordinarie grace to be crowned with Martyrdome as Ecclesiasticall historie recordeth of him As if S. Peter whom Paul withstood for a smaller matter to the face Gal. 2.11 when he said that there were in all S. Pauls Epistles some things hard to be understood would have commended his fellow-Apostles wisdome as he did 2. Pet. 3.15 and not rather have found fault with his follie and the manner of his writing if not with the matter also if Tertius had been so absurd as Diodorus imagined especially seeing S. Peter saith that the unlearned and unstable wrest some of those writings unto their own destruction which in all likelihood should justly rather swallow up S. Paul for his carelesnesse of inditing and Tertius for his supinenesse or rather blasphemous forgerie of divine truths by mis-writing them if any fault could have been truely imputed to either of them But of this we shall speak by Gods help more at large in the next section save one The second mad storie followeth Because some were wont to forge Epistles in S. Pauls name as is apparent 2. Thess 2.2 where he beseecheth them Not to be shaken in minde or to be troubled neither by spirit nor by word nor by letter as from us therefore he alway subscribed his own name to all his Epistles f Vbicunque sciebat falsos adesse doctores Wheresoever he knew that there were false teachers saith Hierom on Gal. 6.11 On which place he also relateth that a very learned man of those times said S. Paul being an Hebrew knew not Greek letters and because necessitie required that he should subscribe with his own hand to the Epistle t Contra consuetudinem curvos tramites literarum vix magnis apicibus exprimebat He wrote though in ill-shaped unhandsome very great letters shewing this testimonie of a kinde affection that he would endeavour to do for the Galatians what indeed he could not do Whereby he concludeth that S. Paul could not write Greek at least not in a legible good hand S. Hierom wondered at the ridiculousnesse of his exposition as well he might because the Apostle used to subscribe to divers of his Epistles and here he wrote this whole Epistle with his own hand and yet S. Hieroms exposition is almost as forced as the former u Grandibus Paulus literis scripsit quia sensus erat grandis in literis Spiritu Dei vivi non atrameuto calamo fuerat exaratus S. Paul saith he wrote in large long characters or letters because the sense was great in the words and was written by the Spirit of
the living God and not with penne and ink For though the sense and words of this Epistle to the Galatians be from God and most divine yet there is no reason to imagine that S. Paul intended to include that sense under these words Videte or Videtis qualibus literis scripsi vobis manu meâ You see how large a letter I have written to you with mine own hand But if the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth signifie quantitie though S. Paul wrote in great letters and characters yet it might be a verie good and fair hand as there are few fairer writings then some where the letters are large and full drawn and I doubt not but he who gave them the extraordinary gift of tongues and languages did also as a necessarie appendant give them the power to write well those languages especially since their writings were to benefit more then their voices could reach unto We never reade that the holy Apostles Peter James or John were learned or could reade or write before their calling or learned it by degrees after their Apostleship yet they could and did write and as the Spirit guided their thoughts and words so did he their hands and they wrote both divinely for matter and as I think exquisitely for the manner yea more exquisitely then other men as being governed and actuated by the hand of God which is perfect in all his works And indeed the true sense of the place in my opinion toucheth not at the deformednesse of the characters or at the grand-greatnesse of them but at the length or prolixitie of the Epistle which is excellently rendered by our English You see how large a letter I have written as if S. Paul had spoke thus more at large I who before told you that we must not be weary of well-doing but must do good unto all men whilest we have time especially to the houshold of faith I say I my self have not been wearie in writing this Epistle though it be long and whilest I had time I have spent that time in doing you good by writing this letter by writing this long and large letter to you For though I have written longer Epistles yet I did rather subscribe to them and wrote not all of any one of them with mine own hand but you may take it as a token of my heartie love that I wrote all this Epistle my self You see how large a letter I have writ to you with mine own hand And this sense better answereth to the coherence then that of S. Hierom or of the other learned man whom S. Hierom wondered at So much for the third Lemma 8. I come now to the first Question viz. Whether it was necessarie that Scripture should be written for mens instruction That it was not absolutely necessarie must be confest for God might have used other means He is liberrimum agens the freest agent or rather ipsa libertas libertie it self not chained to fate nor bound in with nature or second causes Necessitie freedome of our will or indifferencie to either side and contingencie are the issues of his will Yea God did use other means in the law of nature for above 2450 yeares the Patriarchs were nourished with agraphall Tradition onely No word was ever written till God wrote the Law the two first Tables the work of the onely-wise Almightie The writing was the writing of God graven upon the Tables Exod. 32.16 Written with the finger of God Exod 31.18 The Jews say The book of Genesis was written by Moses before God wrote the Law For though God spake all the words of the Decalogue Exod. 20.1 c. yet he delivered not the Tables to Moses till Exod. 31.18 but Exod. 24.4 it is related that Moses wrote all the words of the Lord and vers 7. that he took the book of the Law and read it in the audience of the people Kemnitius answereth That the things are recorded per Anticipationem seu per 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The last is recorded in the first place for the writing and dedication here mentioned were accomplished afterward Exod. 34.32 The pillar of stone and that other of brick which Josephus Antiq. 1.4 saith the children of Seth did write in before the floud were either fictions or antidated The prophesie of Enoch was not written by him as S. Augustine de Civit. 15.22 and Origen Hom. 28. in Num. think but Enoch prophesied Saying Jude 14. As the prophesie of Adam Genes 2.24 and of God himself Genes 3.15 both of them concerning Christ were spoken in Paradise not written and as the Apostles wrote not the Creed but delivered it onely vivâ voce by word of mouth saith Irenaeus 3.4 and Augustine de Fide Oper. cap. 9. and Ruffinus on the Creed and divers others so is it likely that Enochs prophesie was not written or rather was written long after it was spoken for writing was not so necessarie for the Patriarchs First because they were purer in minde saith Chrysostom Hom. 1. in Matth. And it is the fault of our corrupt nature and we may be rightly impleaded that ever there was any writing as may be gathered from Isidorus Peleusiota lib. 3. epist 106. Secondly the long lives of the Patriarchs supplied the room of writing for Methusalah who lived 240 yeares with Adam with the first Adam who was AETATIS ILLIUS EPISCOPUS Bishop of those times saith Kemnitius in Examine part 1. pag. 13. lived also 90 and odde yeares with Sem and Sem lived 50 yeares in Jacobs time by the calculation of Helvicus and there were not 200 yeares from Jacobs death to the writing of the Law Thirdly besides such aged venerable Prophets as were Adam Enoch Noah and Abraham who was an eminent instructer with authoritie and as it were with a Pretorian power Gen. 18.19 I know that Abraham will command his sonnes and his houshold after him that they keep the way of the Lord other Patriarchs knew the will of God by immediate revelation by dreams and visions 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 At sundrie times and in divers manners Heb. 1.1 Gods speech was in stead of writing But when men grew more impure and upon the increase of sinne mans dayes were shortened God did withdraw himself and his familiar conversation was not so common but because their hearts of flesh were hardened in which was printed the law of nature by them even obliterated and they received new evil impressions in stonie hearts God himself wrote the Morall Law in two Tables of stone and Gods own handie-work being broken by the occasion of their sinne to shew that the Morall Law should continue for ever the broken Tables were removed and none knoweth what ever became of them and Moses was commanded to frame two new whole Tables of stone like the former Two extreams about the written word are here to be avoided The first is of the Papists who too much disgrace the Scripture at least comparatively
Vpon just occasions and newly emergent occurrences the Spirit of God inspired them to write who otherwise would not have written I will say they wrote casually for casualtie in this notion presupposeth things done upon reason and who dareth say that God did ever any thing without good ground or reason saith the divine S. Augustine They wrote fortuitò say the Papists non fortuitò saith Vorstius Cleare the terms by the former distinction and the question is ended No part of Jeremie is in Chaldee but one verse onely and upon what occasion was that The Chaldee Paraphrast thus relateth it saith Vatablus Jeremie wrote to the Elders in the Captivitie If the Chaldean people did say House of Israel worship idols the Israelites should answer The idols which ye worship are idols indeed in which is no profit they cannot draw forth rain from heaven or fruit out of the earth Let them and their worshippers perish from the earth and be destroyed from under heaven And to that effect speak Lyra and Rabbi Solomon but the words of God by the Prophet are thus to be rendered Jer. 10.11 Thus ye shall say unto them May the gods or Let the gods that have not made the heavens and the earth perish from the earth and from under these heavens PEREANT so the Vulgat Vatablus the Interlinearie and translated Chaldee 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 say the Septuagint And this doth somewhat ammuse me why our last English Translation with others embrace the Future tense reading They shall perish when the words are a present execration of past present and future idols I come to the point If the Jews had said the effect of these words in Hebrew the Chaldeans could not have understood it nor had it been written in Chaldee if the Chaldeans had had no intercourse with the Jews and in this sense that verse was written casually As Ananias and Sapphira their with-holding of things consecrated ministred occasion to the holy Spirit both to impart the knowledge of their sacriledge to S. Peter and to inspire into him that particular prophesie Act. 5.9 which S. Peter otherwise had never spoken So if Onesimus had not been a bad servant and after converted S. Paul had not written that Epistle to Philemon at least not the greatest part of it Chemnitius in Examine part 1. declareth at large Quâ occasione propter quam causam in quem usum primùm Scriptura tradita sit à Deo And he speaketh of the Old Testament Concerning the New Testament neither Christ nor any of his Apostles wrote any thing for many yeares nor did any one Evangelist or Apostle singly write till the Church was pestered with Schismaticks Who troubled them with words subverting their souls Act. 15.24 To remedie which discord a Councel was gathered at Jerusalem of the Apostles and Elders with the whole Church and they wrote Letters or an Epistle to the brethren And a Acts 15.28 Visum est Spiritui Sancto nobis It seemed good to the holy Ghost and to us was the forefront of their main decree And this was the beginning of writing of any part of the New Testament saith Chemnitius in his Examen of the Councel of Trent part 1. pag. 32. though others dissent from him I will onely say If that schisme had not been that Councel had not been gathered that Epistle had not been written Briefly thus Eusebius in the second and third book of his historie specializeth the causes and grounds why each of the foure Evangelists did write which is exemplified by Chemnitius in the place before cited even to satietie whilest he at large describeth the occasions and inducements or reasons why all and every book of the New Testament was written Thus the conclusion being firm That the word of God was written casually that is the sacred Pen-men were inspired to write all of it upon just motives and fair occurrences and yet not casually if we take the word in sensu profano usu forensi I proceed to the third Question Whether they were commanded to write They who reade the Scripture may think this question idle and impertinent but who hath been conversant in the thornie paths of controversies shall finde much opposition by our adversaries Bellarmine de Verbo Dei non scripto 4.3 saith thus b Falsum est Dâ—um mandâsse Apostolis ut scriberent Legimus mandatum ut praedicarent ut scriberent nunquam legimus Deus nec mandavit expreseè ut scriberent nec ut non scriberent It is false that God commanded the Apostles to write We have read they were commanded to preach Matth. 28.19 we have not read that they were commanded to write God did not command expressely either that they should write or not write To the place alledged by Bellarmine I answer They are not there commanded Praedicare but his verie Vulgat hath it Docere which may be by writing as well as by preaching The Original hath it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 discipulate or discipulas facite omnes gentes where 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not taken neutro-passively for discipulum esse for that implieth that the Apostles should learn of the Gentiles and not teach them but actively as if it were in the Conjugation HIPHIL ac si dicas DISCIPULARE saith Beza The very word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 praedicate preach used Mark 16.15 doth not necessarily imply onely the Apostolicall preaching vivâ voce in suggesto aloud in a pulpit but doth signifie a publication in generall not onely a going up into the pulpit as idiots imagine for an Angel did 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Revel 5.2 preach or proclaim as it is in our last Translation and Christ preached to the spirits in prison 1. Pet. 3.19 and the possessed of a legion of devils being dispossessed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Mark 5.20 Began to preach or publish how great things Jesus had done for him None of these I dare say climbed up into the pulpit Moreover publication may be by writing aswell as by preaching and more disciples have been made by Evangelicall and Apostolicall writings then ever were by their preachings in their own times I answer again He saith It is false To prove a falshood a man must have expresse truth which he confesseth he hath not and how lamely followeth this Because we now reade it not Ergò they were not commanded He would have laught at such a negative proof of ours Augustine saith c Quicquid Christus de suis factis dictis noâ— legere voluit hoc scribendum Evangelisâ—is tanquam suis manibus imperavit Whatsoever Christ would have us reade of his words and works that did he command the Evangelists as if they had been his own hands to write Bellarmine answereth d Lequitur de imperio interno quod suggestio quaedam inspiratio potiùs quà m praeceptum propriè dictum existimari debet He speaketh of the inward command which is rather a
twelve times to write that he was compelled I reade not The second of Johns Epistle vers 12. the Apostle had many things to write yet would not write with paper and ink or with ink and pen as he phraseth it Epist 3. vers 13. If he would not how was he constrained S. Jude gave all diligence to write vers 3. so farre was he from coaction And it was needfull for me to write saith he in the same place It was not absolutely necessarie he saith not that he was compelled Divers followers of Solomon wrote his Proverbs who coacted them S. Paul wrote according to the wisdome given unto him 2. Pet. 3.15 Was this a power compulsive In the Epistle to Philemon vers 21. Having confidence in thy obedience I wrote unto thee knowing that thou wilt also do more then I say which words imply he would not have writ if he had thought Philemon would have been obstinate or refractarie and would have done nothing at his request howsoever he was free from coaction 2. Tim. 1.5 The remembrance of the unfeigned faith in Timothie in Lois and Eunice was the reason of S. Pauls writing unto him Doth reason use violence By Silvanus I wrote briefly exhorting you saith the Apostle 1. Pet. 5.12 Was he compelled himself who exhorted others m Simpliciter voluntatem cogi ad actum volendi contradictio est It implieth a contradiction to say simply The will was inforced to the act of willing saith Scotus The will may be compelled by God or by the creature quantum ad actus imperatos so farre as belongeth to the commanded acts in which the body is passive Joh. 21.18 Another shall gird thee and carrie thee whither thou wouldest not saith Christ to Peter Many are compelled to go to the Gaol and to be hanged but the will is induced quantum ad actus elicitos by the emanant and distilled acts What the holy Penmen spake or wrote they did freely and willingly void of compulsion The fifth question followeth viz. Whether the holy Pen-men understood all that they wrote Christopher Castrus on the smaller Prophets lib. 3. de vera futurorum cognitione cap. 12. handleth this point at large and to him I ow a great part of these authorities Montanus held that the Patriarchs and Prophets spake in an ecstasie not knowing what they said as Epiphanius Haeres 48. contra Montanistas relateth But he was an heretick for it The devil so moveth the tongues of the rapted or ecstaticall heathen that they neither understand what they speak nor have power not to speak and their speech is low out of the dust and their voice out of the ground Isa 29.4 as with the Montanists their Prophetisses Prisca and Maximilla and among the heathen the Pythonists and divers orders of religious irreligion this day among the Turks especially the Dervises But our Prophets saith the worthy Estius did speak and write propheticall light being infused into them and the knowledge of the mysteries inspired and with the free motion of their will The Father 's run in full streams to this depth Origen Homil. 6. in cap. 16. Ezekielis n Non excidebant mente Prophetae The Prophets were in their right mindes And Tom. 6. in Joan. o Fatendum est quae proprio ore protulerunt Prophetae eos intellexisse inque labiis gestâsse animi candorem We must confesse that the Prophets understood what they spake and carried in their lips the courteous grace of their minde And Periarch 3.3 p Omnes Prophetae vel Apostoli divinis responsis sine ulla mentis obturbatione ministrabant All the Prophets and Apostles were obedient to the words divine without any disturbance or distraction of minde Basil in Prooemio Isaiae q Sunt qui dicunt eos extra se raptos prophetare humanâ mente à Spiritis absorptâ Verùm id abhorret à professione divinae praesentiae â—t amentem reddat qui à numine corripitur cúmque plenus divinorum decretorum esse coeperit tum à Propria mente excidat Quomodo consentaneum est ut quis ex sapientiae Spiritu reddatur simillimus insano Quin potiùs neque lumen caecitatem parit verùm videndi vim à natura insitam expergefacit nec Spiritus tenebras inducit animis Some say that the divinely illuminated do prophesie their humane soul being swallowed up of the Spirit But it abhorreth from the professed truth and goodnesse of the divine presence to make him a mad man who is inspired by God and when he shall begin to be filled with divine Oracles that then hâ— should be out of his own wits Is it likely or convenient that one by the Spirit of wisdome should be made most like to a mad man Rather light stirreth up the visive facultie naturally nor doth light breed blindenesse nor the Spirit infuse darknesse into the mindes of men See the same Basil on Isaiah 13 at the beginning Chrysostom Homil. 29. in primam Epist ad Corinth 12. Hierom in prooem Isaiae Nahum Abacuc in 3. cap. ad Ephes Augustine de Genes ad literam 12.9 and Epist 112. and contra Adamantium Manichaeum cap. 28. Gregorie Moral 11.12 All aim at this mark That they were rapti or in an ecstasie none denieth but there is a double ecstasie The first either from outward and inward senses the minde remaining more enlightened and free and perfect Thus were they sometimes in an ecstasie Secondly there is an ecstasie from the minde it self when it understandeth not Thus they were never in an ecstasie So Philo Judaeus in his book Quis rerum divinarum haeres Cyril lib. 8. in Joannem cap. 3. r Non ad Prophetae rationem id semper exigitâ—r necessarium est ut quae sutura denuntiat intelligat habuit Dauiel complures visiones quas primum non intellexit sed ab Angelo postea est edoctus nomen Prophetae non perdidit It is not alwayes necessarie that a Prophet should understand whatsoever he foretelleth Daniel had many visions which at the first he understood not but was after taught by an Angel and yet he forfeited not the name of a Prophet I answer with Hierom on Daniel 10. They did know what the things signified though they were not presently inlightened Å¿ Vt per moram occasio daretur anepliùs Deum deprecandi lacrymis je junio invocandi Deum ut mitteret Augelum suum qui docereâ— Danielem that upon the delay occasion might be ministred unto them to pray oftner and more unto God and with tears and fasting call upon him that God would send his Angel to instruct Daniel So that every Prophet knew what words he spake and knew the literall meaning of every word but the spirituall meaning they understood not at the first or presently but afterwards So Zacharie saw many things and knew them not but asked the Angel Zach. 6.4 What are these my Lord
bill of divorcement or separation for of this Christ spake expressely Mat. 19.9 Mark 10.11 Luk. 16.18 Therefore S. Paul commanded not but the Lord namely Christ in those places of the Gospel to which he aimed The third objection is out of the 1. Cor. 7.12 To the rest speak I not the Lord. These words compared with the former may seem to carrie it cleare against me For what can be of more force I command yet not I but the Lord and To the rest speak I not the Lord as if S. Paul spake and wrote something by humane wisdome which the Lord bid him not First I answer with Peter Martyr S. Paul saith thus because before he had reference to Christs speech in the Gospel of not easily dissolving matrimonie but now he sets down somewhat of which Christ in the Gospel is not found to have said any thing So now he speaks not the Lord namely not Christ in the Gospel not Christ by word of mouth as he was man and yet on the contrarie side we may as truely say even in this place and to S. Pauls proper sense with the words inverted The Lord speaks not I Not I of my self not I as a man but God from heaven or the holy Spirit speaketh The conclusion is S. Paul speaketh or writeth nothing as an Apostle from himself without the Lord without divine immediate revelation from the holy Ghost but he might relate something which Christ spake not whilest Christ lived on earth something that is not registred in the Gospel And thus S. Paul did speak and not the Lord And thus may an other speak or write and not the Lord. p Ego dico non Dominus Nunquid Dominus non loquebatur per eumâ—Vtique Sed ideo dixit se dicere non Dominum quia hoc praeceptum non continetur in Evangelio dictuÌ„ à ' Domino sicut illud superius I speak not the Lord Did not the Lord speak by him Yes But therefore he said that himself spake and not the Lord because this precept is not contained in any of the Gospels as the other was saith Haymo before Peter Martyr And indeed I remember not that Christ so much as toucheth at this point Whether a beleeving man should put away or dwell from an unbeleeving woman yea or no To the fourth objection 1. Cor. 7.25 I have no commandment from the Lord yet I give my judgement I answer It was matter of counsel not of precept it was left indifferent the doing or not doing had not been sinne q Noluit Deus de virginitate coelibatu praecipere quia visus fuisset damnare nuptias Christ would give no command concerning single life or virginitie lest he should seem to condemn marriage So Augustine in libello de sanct virginit So Hierom against Jovinian So Ambrose saith Peter Martyr Yet the Consilium do I counsel is the advice of such an one as had obtained mercie of the Lord to be faithfull and a faithfull steward will not distribute more or lesse then his Lord appointeth The unjust steward made them write lesse then was due the usurer makes them write more the good and faithfull man followeth his masters will 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 foot by foot So this place proveth not that the Apostle as an Apostle wrote or spake by humane wisdome any thing but what was appointed of God The Rhemists on verse 12 say By this we learn that there were many matters over and above the things that Christ taught or prescribed left to the Apostles order and interpretation wherein they might as the case required either command or counsel and we bound to obey accordingly Doctour Estius goeth further r Satìs autem insinuat hic sermo Praecipio non ego sed Dominus Apostolos eorum successores posse quaedaÌ„ praecipere quae Christus ipse per se non praecepit This speech I COMMAND YET NOT I BUT THE LORD doth sufficiently evidence that the Apostles and their successours can command something which Christ himself by himself commanded not Both of them runne awry in one extream Doctour Fulk answereth to that place of the Rhemists The Apostles had not particular precepts for every case but they had generall rules in Christs doctrine which they were bound to follow in their precepts and counsels I think he approacheth too nigh unto them unlesse he mean that both their precepts and counsels had the divine dictate to guide them especially in things which they wrote And whereas he saith They had not particular precepts for every case I say they had for all cases necessarie especially concerning the whole Church And their generall rules might rather be for guiding matters of order and discipline then of doctrine For he that promised to lead them into all truth would not leave them in the framing of particulars as he doth us and other men who out of generals do deduce these and these specials For there is a great distance and traverse to be placed between those sacred Penmen and other succeeding Expositours of holy Writ And S. Paul doth imply that even his judgement or counsel was according to the Spirit of God as Bishop Andrews well observed and now cometh to be handled The fifth objection is verse 40 in the same verse where he saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 According to my judgement he addeth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I think also that I have the Spirit of God Minus dicit plus volens intelligi He speaketh sparingly but would be understood more largely say I. So verse 26 I suppose and 1. Cor. 4.9 I think that God hath set forth us the Apostles last f Puto autem Sobriè loquitur minúsque dicit majus significat ut sit sensus Certò scio I THINK He speaketh soberly signifying more then he spake and it is all one as if he had said I KNOW CERTAINLY saith Dionysius Carthus with whom accordeth Primasius Do not think that I speak what I do of my self the Spirit of God speaketh in me t Futo non dubietatem significat The word I THINK is not wrapped about with doubtfulnesse Peter Martyr thinks it is an Ironie against the false Apostles who traduced S. Paul as unworthy to be an Apostle And then the Ironie hath as full force as if he had peremptorily avouched The Spirit of the Lord is in me and by it I write what I write Other objections may be made as the 2. Cor. 11.17 I speak it not after the Lord but as it were foolishly in this confidence of boasting Therefore not onely humane wisdome but humane infirmitie may seem to challenge part both in his words and writings It is answered in a few words of Dionysius Carthusianus Non loquor id est Loqui non videor that is It seems not so to some though my self know the contrarie Others may object 1. Cor. 9.8 Say I these things as a man or saith not the Law
Hellenists Chaldee Paraphrase or any heathen Authours yet it doth not necessarily evince that the holy Actuaries or Notaries did oversee reade heare or transcribe those things out of their knowledge from the said Authours but both the names of those Authours and the things themselves were presented to them by that blessed Spirit which knew all things and this among the rest That these words phrases and sentences were fit to be inserted into the holy Writ which now are in it All Scripture is of divine inspiration But the very words are part of Scripture Therefore even they were inspired Revel 19.9 The Angel said Write Blessed are they which are called unto the marriage-supper of the Lambe Did not the Angel speak the words Did not he give the Apostle both matter and words When the Apostle was commanded Revel 14.13 by a voice from heaven to write Blessed are the dead which die in the Lord c. was he commanded to write his conceits and thoughts apprehended in Syriack and translate them into Hellenisticall Greek or did the heavenly voice suggest onely an holy inspiration into him and left him to coyn words as Heinsius would have it or rather did not the voice teach the very words which should be written viz. Blessed are the dead c. Now let us passe to the fifth and last Conclusion in which we must dissent from the worthy Heinsius and disarm him of his often-inculcated but not once proved Tenet The 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Writers of holy Scripture conceived in one language and writ in an other Upon which ground he hath raised a strange structure but his very ground-work is sandie slipperie and false And this I hope to evince by Scripture Authoritie and Reason All which shall be squared to that Corner-stone which more then once before I hewed upon more roughly and now by Gods grace intend to polish namely That the very words and letters were dictated unto the holy Scribes and therefore they had no power to change or transchange to adde or diminish or to expresse by their own words their internall irradiation but in the language which they conceived they also wrote their heavenly dictates 2. Pet. 1.21 The 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 Therefore their very speech being according to the motion of the holy Ghost their words were not of their own choice but from above and not onely divine thoughts but sacred words were also given them 1. Cor. 2.13 S. Paul spake in words which the holy Ghost taught Did the holy Ghost inspire thoughts into them in one language and teach them words to speak in an other language Cui bono To what end and purpose and why not all done in the language which they conceived 2. Tim. 3.16 Scriptura per Spiritum scripta est The Scripture was writ by the Spirit saith the Syriack not onely inspired as it is from the Greek but written and as it was inspired written Revel 19.9 The Angel saith concerning very words which he commanded to be wrote These are the true sayings of God Not inspirations onely of God and the words of Men but the sayings of God Exod. 34.27 Write thou these words for after the tenour of these words I have made a covenant God was not tied to the words Moses was to the writing of the very words Jerem. 30.2 Write thee all the words which I have spoken unto thee in a book He gave him no power to put in words of his own Twelve times in the Revelation was S. John commanded to write and knew he not the words Hos 8.12 I have written to Ephraim the great things of my Law Even all what my Prophets have done I challenge as mine own writing Authorities of men The Scriptures were written y Magisterio Spiritus in obedience to the Spirit saith Sasbout on Peter Therefore the Apostles had not the power left unto them of writing their own conceits but were fitted with words by the Spirit z Si Spiritu saucto inspirati ab eo impulsi locuti sunt Prophetae caeteri librorum sacrorum scriptores Consequens est Scripturam totam esse verbum Dei non aliter à nobis accipiendam quà m si Deus immediatè absque humano vel Angelico ministerio eam edidisset ut ità dicam digito suo scripsisset If the Prophets and other writers of holy Scripture spake by the moving and inspiration of the holy Ghost it followeth that all the Scripture is the word of God no otherwise to be esteemed of by us then if God immediately without the ministery of men or Angels had set it forth and as I may say had written it with his own finger saith the learned Estius Even Cornelius Cornelii à Lapide himself on Timothie thus a Prophetae alii scriptores 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vocantur calami instrumenta Spiritus sancti quast scribae velociter scribentis inspirantis dictantis sacras literas The Prophets and other holy Penmen of Scripture are styled the pens and instruments of the holy Ghost as of that scribe who speedily writeth inspireth and dictateth the divine writ Where he confesseth the holy Spirit not to inspire onely but to dictate yea to write like a swift scribe the holy Scripture Gregorius Praefat. in Job cap. 2. b Scriptores sacri Eloquii quia repleti Spiritu sancto super se trahuntur quasi extra semetipsos fiunt sic Dei sententias quasi de labiis proferunt The writers of the heavenly word because they are filled with the holy Ghost are elevated above themselves in him and as it were out of themselves and so the sentences of God are uttered as it were by their lips Athanasius Epist ad Lib. saith c Christus vetus novum Testamentum composuit Christ made the Old and New Testament d Quid est illud o◠Domini nisi Scripturae per quas loquitur Dominu◠What is the mouth of the Lord but the Scriptures by which the Lord speaketh saith Rupert on Matth. lib. 4. Philo Judaeus in lib. Quis rerum divinarum haeres thus e Propheta nihil ex se proloquitur sed omnia submonente alio A Prophet prophesieth nothing out of his own brain but all things by the prompting of the holy Ghost as he wittily concludeth Therefore not so much as the words are his own Chrysostom de Lazaro Homil. 4. Though a dead man revive and an Angel come from heaven you must beleeve Scriptures above all for the Master of Angels the Lord of the living and the dead he himself framed them The same Chrysostom de expulsione ipsius sheweth the manner I reade his own handwriting c. They are done by his hand the very writing it self is his and therefore called Chyrographum Dei A writing under Gods own hand by Augustine
on Psal 144. Now follow the Reasons why they concelved and writ in the same tongue First there is little or no difference between the Apostles and other men if the Apostles did frame words to their heavenly inspirations For when it pleaseth the blessed Spirit who bloweth where he listeth to drop down into the soul of an ordinary man some thoughts divine and in the language of spirits saith unto the same soul Of these see that you make a prayer the righteous man accordingly obeyeth and of those inward apprehensions shapeth a verbal prayer and poureth it forth before God Almightie and setteth it down in writing Shall the prayer be held as Divine as Scriptures Then may Manasses his Apocryphall prayer immediately before the books of Maccabees as it is in our last translation be no longer Apocryphall but Divine as Divine as any prayer made by the selected holy Penmen To have a thing perfectly Divine is required that heavenly words may be mixed with heavenly illumination Secondly our faith will be questioned if thoughts were inspired and the Penmen should adde what words they pleased f Titutabit fides si Scripturarum vacillat authoritas Our faith will stumble if the authoritie of the Scripture be shaken never so little saith Augustine de doctr Christian 1.37 But the Scriptures authoritie shaketh if God give onely the matter and men the words Thirdly the Prophets and Apostles wrote not alwayes all their own things themselves but sometimes used the ministerie of divers others A Scribe and a Prophet were two distinct persons and offices Jer. 36.26 Jeremie had Baruch Jer. 36.4 Baruch wrote from the mouth of Jeremiah all the words of the Lord so then the words of Jeremiah to Baruch were the words of the Lord to Jeremiah And when that roll was burnt Jeremiah by the word of the Lord was bid to take another roll and write in it vers 28 c. Which Jeremie did not by himself but by Baruch the scribe vers 32. The nine first chapters of the Proverbs of Solomon were written by Solomon himself The rest were writ by others who attended on Solomon and heard them and are like so many precious stones apart and severally though not made up into one jewell or chain nor hanging together in any setled method yet to be esteemed at as high a rate and value as the very writings of Solomon The same Spirit inspired all the same mouth spake all though they were penned by severall hands by the command of the same holy Spirit In the New Testament S. Paul wrote much with his own hand The whole Epistle to the Galatians Gal. 6.11 at least to these very words and to Philemon vers 19. Many saluations 2. Thessal 3.17 18. The saluation of Paul with mine own hand which is the token in every Epistle so I write The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all Amen So that we may soundly gather that whatsoever Epistle under his name hath not that in it it was not written by him There was an Epistle written in his name to the Thessalonians terrifying them as if the generall judgement had been present as may be gathered 2. Thess 2.2 But S. Paul disclaims it It had not belike the salutation with his own hand his friendly farewell and prayer which saith Anselm was in these or the like words Grace c. as all the rest of his Epistles have toward their end though with a little variation of words sometimes larger sometimes briefer even the Epistle to the Hebrews also Hebr. 13.25 Grace be with you all Amen That you may not question but also that is his Epistle whereas no other Apostles have it so fully though S. Peter cometh nearest him 1. Pet. 5.14 For all this he used the help of some others in writing All the second Epistle to the Thessalonians was written with another hand except the salutation at the end saith Estius Rom. 16.22 I Tertius who wrote this Epistle salute you in the Lord. The words will bear this sense I Tertius who wrote this Epistle in the Lord salute you or thus as the Vulgat hath it I Tertius salute you who wrote this Epistle in the Lord. He said IN THE LORD to shew that he wrote not for money saith Cajetan Questionlesse Paul dictated and Tertius wrote the Epistle saith Estius Even those words themselves are not Tertius his own inserted as a private mans or secretaries but are divine Scripture And either by the Spirit he was commanded to write so and that thought was from heaven put into his heart and those words into his mouth to be written by his hand or else which I take to be most likely S. Paul knowing the minde of Tertius perhaps in part by Tertius his own expression but rather and chiefest by Divine revelation that Tertius did salute them in the Lord he willed him so to write I hope Heinsius will not say that Tertius conceived in Syriack and wrote in Greek or when S. Paul made his narrative in the Hebrew tongue Act. 22.2 that Luke conceived in Syriack and wrote in Greek neither can he say the like of the holy secretaries to whom not first thoughts in language spirituall and then words but thoughts by words outward and expressed were revealed Yet Erasmus in his last Annotation on the Epistle to the Hebrews saith thus g Quod affâ—runt hîc quidam Paulum ipsuÌ„ scripsisse Hebraicè caeterùm Lucam argumentum Epistolae quam memoriâ tenebat suis explicuisse verbis quantum valeat viderint alii What some do affirm THAT S. PAUL HIMSELF VVROTE IN HEBREVV BUT S. LUKE DID EXPRESSE IN HIS OVVN VVORDS THE ARGUMENT OF THE EPISTLE VVHICH HE HAD GOTTEN BY HEART let others consider what force and power it hath What will you say nothing to this Not so great a Critick Sure this drop might have fallen from your pen That such manner of writing had savoured no more of the Spirit then any ordinary writing where a skilfull scribe doth amplifie the heads given unto him Again Erasmus on Hebr. 2. in his Answer to Fabers 57 objection relateth that Faber h Quicquid est incommodi offâ—ndiculi id in Interpretem rejicit sed meo judicio parùm prudenter Whatsoever seems incommodious or offensive layeth the fault thereof upon the Interpreters but not prudently enough as I think saith Erasmus and in the answer to the one and fourtieth objection i Faber flagellat Interpretem huius Epistolae qui in Psalmo non verterit ELOHIM A DEO cùm idem fecerint Septuaginta quibus magìs conveniebat hoc imputari Faber scourgeth the Interpreter of this Epistle who did not turn the word ELOHIM in the Psalm FROM GOD when the Septuagint did so to whom this might rather be imputed Again Erasmus saith ibid. of Faber k In â—us trahit Interpretem Epistolae He commenceth a suit against the Interpreter of this Epistle All this
shews Fabers opinion to be That some writers of Scripture had power to use such words as they pleased and used some amisse even such as he found fault withall O novell criticism Wilt thou set thy self no bounds till thou reachest up to heaven and tramplest on the word of God The holy Amanuenses were guided by the Spirit to write as well as the Apostles to dictate When S. Paul accounted and would have his Galatians to account it as a favour above ordinary that he wrote so large an Epistle as that to the Galatians with his own hand and since the Epistle to the Romanes was larger then it and was writ by Tertius let me probably collect that other Epistles of S. Paul as those to the Corinthians and that to the Hebrews and any other if any other be longer and larger were not written by S. Pauls own hand For then his own writing had not been so great a testimonie and argument of his love to the Galatians for the rest were longer and larger but were writ by some other hand except perhaps the close and saluation Fevardentius on 1. Pet. 5.12 and Salmeron Tom. 13. Disput 5. as they are cited by Lorinus Act. 15.23 do think that Paul and the rest of the Apostles wrote seldome with their own hands but did dictate and subscribe which they prove by S. Peter 1. Pet. 5.12 By Silvanus a faithfull brother unto you as I suppose I have written briefly Lorinus answereth That by the same reason Judas and Silas wrote the Epistle of the Councel at Hierusalem Act. 15.23 Let me reply That I see nothing to the contrary in the Text or otherwhere but Judas and Silas being chief men among the brethren might write it as well as any others and might also be joyned in Commission with others to carrie it Concerning which Penmen this is my opinion That even they were led by the holy Ghost both to conceive what the Apostles spake and to write exactly what they dictated so that they did not they could not erre in writing any one word syllable or letter of the first Originals no nor did nor could mis-accent it or mis-point any part thereof nor can it be proved nor seems it likely that ever the Apostles revised or righted what the Penmen had done but subscribed to it took it as their own or rather as the holy Ghosts and sealed it for divine Scripture Oh that the first Originals themselves of the New Testament or of some part of it could yet be found I would go a thousand miles on my bare feet to see them kisse them and in Tertullians phrase I would adore the plenitude of them They would prove an Antidote against many heresies a correctorie of more false opinions which have sprung up from the variation of Copies and the uncertaintie what reading is best By this opinion I am sure one firm anchor-hold is established That humane wisdome and skill is excluded from having part in any parcell of Scripture and the whole Scripture is by me maintained to be wholly and absolutely true certain and most divine which Heinsius and others seem not to do So end I this point I Give thee thanks most gracious God that thou hast freed me of the gout and eased me of the stone that I have been able though in great weaknes to swim through this sea to go through this wildernesse in paths untrodden Lord I beseech thee by thine infinite mercies be mercifull to my soul prepare me throughly for my departure and in the houre of death and judgement good Christ deliver me Amen Amen CHAP. X. 1. Reall truth in the Greek and Latine texts of Act. 7.16 The place expounded thus The Fathers were not Abraham Isaac and Jacob but the twelve sonnes of Jacob. 2. These twelve Fathers were not buried in Abrahemio but in Sychem 3. Abraham in this place is not taken properly but patronymicé 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 used by S. Stephen amphibolous and expounded 5. Two opinions concerning the place of Acts 7.16 propounded 6. The last preferred I Now return to the old matter and Text Act. 7.16 Foure propositions there are in the words of S. Stephen which are all questioned First that the Fathers are said to be carried over into Sychem Secondly that they were laid in the sepulchre of Abraham Thirdly that Abraham bought the sepulchre of the sonnes of Hemor Fourthly that this Hemor was the father of Sychem as our last Translation hath it very truely Now let us see what different or contrary propositions are maintained against these and so labour to reconcile them First that the Fathers were not carried over into Sychem Secondly that they were not laid in the sepulchre of Abraham Thirdly that Abraham bought the field of Ephron the sonne of Zohar Gen. 23.8 Fourthly that Hemor was the sonne of Sychem as the Vulgat and Genevean translations have it That the first proposition may be reconciled to his opposite let us examine what is meant by the word Fathers All the Patriarchs indeed were Fathers and so called Abraham is our Father say the Jews Joh. 8.39 and Art thou greater then our Father Jacob saith the woman to Christ Joh. 4.12 I am the God of thy Fathers the God of Abraham Isaac and Jacob saith God himself or an Angel representing him Act. 7.32 Abraham was a great Father Ecclus. 44.19 These Patriarchs were Patres majorum gentium Fathers of the highest rank if I may accommodate the Romane distinction unto the Jewish Governours And whereas David is called Act. 2.29 according both to the Greek and Latine a Patriarch there by the Arabick Translatour he is termed Princeps Patrum The chief or Prince of the Fathers Yet in the sense of S. Stephen by the word Fathers those first or greatest Fathers and prime Patriarchs are not to be understood but the Patres minorum gentium Fathers of a lower degree onely Joseph and the other sonnes of Jacob the immediate Fathers and Heads of the twelve Tribes And this is apparent by the light of the words themselves where there is a wall of separation between the one and the other Act. 7.15 Jacob died he and our Fathers therefore there were some who were called Fathers after Abraham Isaac and Jacob. Jacob died he and our Fathers Not Abraham and Isaac for they died before Jacob but Jacob died and who els He and our Fathers What more He and our Fathers when they were dead were carried to Sychem But Abraham and Isaac were never carried to Sychem Again such Fathers are meant as died in Egypt for they that died in Canaan needed no carrying over to the place where they were and Jacob went down into Egypt and died there he and our Fathers But Abraham though he went down into Egypt yet died not there but he went up out of Egypt he and his wife and all that he had Genes 13.1 lest you might think that he by leaving ought behinde might be occasioned to return
nothing certain concerning her death nor is her bodie or her tombe-stone found on earth nor did S. John the Evangelist who out-lived her and the rest of the Apostles by all mens consents write any thing of her death much lesse of her assumption though as Christ committed her to him so he took her 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to his own home was a sonne unto her Joh. 19.26 27. Amongst those who assent to her assumption i Monstrosa quaedam discrepantia reperitur there is monstrous diversitie saith Baronius Anno Christi 48. num 4. Which words I wonder he would let drop from his pen or that others of their side would suffer to be printed Of the former instances I say the lesse because if all which was supposed were granted and if they had this priviledge to prevent others in their bodily glorie yet it was long after Christs ascension whereas my principall question was of those many that arose about Christs Passion Who in particular they were 8. The summe is Pineda hath taken great pains to little purpose hath presumed to name those whom the Scripture or any sound tradition hath left unnamed his proofs have been so slender as his conjectures have been bold He convinceth not exactly that any one of those whom he specializeth were raised much lesse to eternall happinesse and I have demonstrated that some of those whom he nameth did not then arise to a glorious immortalitie In the particular instancing in those who arose about Christs death his fellow-Jesuite dares not follow him k Non ausim de ullo particulatim definire I dare not say peremptorily that any such an one was raised saith Lorinus most modestly on Act. 7.29 Yet still it must be confest that many bodies which slept arose c. though the book be clasped the secret reserved and no absolute knowledge can inform us who they were O Lord who didst open the eyes of the blinde to thee do I confesse the blindenesse of my understanding open I beseech thee those eyes of my minde dispell the clouds leading me in the right way amidst by-paths and uncertainties even for thine own sake who art the onely way to the true life So be it Lord Jesus Amen Amen CHAP. XIIII 1. My conjecture that none of the Patriarchs or old Prophets were raised 2. An objection concerning Peters knowing of Moses and Elias on mount Tabor answered 3. A conjecture that the Saints who lived in Christs time and died before him were raised at his Passion Who they were in most likelihood When Joseph the reputed father of Christ did die 4. The end why they were raised To whom they appeared 5. A crotchet concerning the wives of dead men which have been raised IF still you presse the question Who those MANY were or Who were some of those MANY I answer with Lorinus that part of truth lieth hid and covered Amongst conjectures I propound this mine own as probable First negatively That none of the ancient Patriarchs Prophets or Types of Christ in the Old Testament arose for if one Who is he and why not others as well as he and if they had risen Who should have known them or how could they induce the then living to beleeve that they were the same Patriarchs or Prophets They might have been as well thought to have been incarnate spirits for the evil spirits also kept about the tombes and graves of the deceased Unlesse you will multiply miracles upon miracles and say God by miracle did reveal these to be true Patriarchs Otherwise they could not prove it to those who lived 2000 yeares after them And if there had been such miracles the Evangelists would not have slipt them 2. Yea but S. Peter knew Moses and Elias at Christs transfiguration though they were taken away from among men long before And therefore the then living might know the dead Patriarchs and holy men raised though they died long before I answer That S. Peter and the other Apostles James and John might know by the conference between Christ and Moses and Elias who they were Whereas Christ never conversed or conferred with those that were raised for ought that is recorded or probably to be maintained And it is a figment to say or imagine that there was any third person which knew both the then raised on the one side and the living which never had been dead on the other side or could give assurance that the raised were such and such Patriarchs and Fathers Nor were their testimonies to be taken one for another since the deniall or doubt concerning any one draweth in the deniall or doubt of all the rest and upon supposall of one false apparition any one and every one of the rest might be questioned Secondly S. Peter and S. John might know Moses and Elias by divine revelation which to them was not unfrequent as Christs Divinitie was revealed to Peter Matth. 16.17 and Ananias his heart Act. 5.3 c. or as Luke knew by the Spirit that Peter wept bitterly though Peter wept secretly for he went out first Luk. 22.62 and what he went out purposely to conceal shall we think that he did purposely reveal Now though the Apostles had supernall illumination guiding them into all truth yet that by divine revelation extraordinary every one of them then living at Jerusalem knew every one of them who were raised and appeared unto them is unnecessarily to multiply many miracles Now since they knew not the persons of the raised by Christ nor any other third person nor by heavenly instruction they could no way know the raised Patriarchs unlesse by their pictures or statues which of all other wayes is most unprobable as being a course not practised in those times and places The argument now hath received its answer Peter might many wayes and did some way know Moses and Elias and yet I finde not any way whereby the inhabitants of the holy citie could personally know the Patriarchs and Fathers being before buried and incinerated And therefore I probably conclude Not any one of these were raised 3. Secondly my positive probable conjecture is this which also seemeth more likely to Lucas Brugensis That many of those Saints who lived in Christs time and beleeved in him whose memorie was fresh and whose children kindred or acquaintance were yet living and who were known to adhere to Christ and to this opinion Bishop Bilson seemeth somewhat to encline Many I say of those dead Saints now arose and appeared unto many as it may be John the Baptist though the deceitfull miracle-mongers shew the false reliques of that good Saints head in divers places and Zacharie and Elisabeth his parents and those many Luk. 1.66 and those shepherds Luk. 2.8 and those wonderers to whom the shepherds told our Saviours nativitie Luk. 2.18 perhaps some would adde those wisemen who came to worship Christ Matth. 2.2 and old Simeon and Anna the Prophetesse and Joseph Christs reputed father though
some think that Joseph lived after Christs resurrection and yet others say he died the twelfth yeare of Christs age to whom Baronius rather inclineth a Ad annum Christi 12. Joseph being very aged about 80 yeares old when he was espoused to the holiest Virgin as Epiphanius and others do guesse For my part I embrace the mean and tread in the middle path Neither thinking that Joseph died the 12 yeare for when Christ was twelve yeares old Joseph went up to Jerusalem Luk 2.42 and after Christs descent to Nazareth Christ was obedient to Joseph and the all-garacious Virgin vers 51. therefore Joseph could not be dead in the twelfth yeare of Christ which the learned Baronius did supinely and sluggishly passe over and not observe Nor yet do I imagine on the other side that he lived beyond Christs resurrection or till his death since there is frequent mention of Christs Apostles of his holy mother and of his cousins and friends men and women yea of strangers and no mention nor intimation at all See Salianus in his Annals in annum mundi 4065 at large on this point that Joseph lived till Christ began publickly to preach and do miracles much lesse after his death So upon my supposall that he died between the thirteenth yeare of Christ and the twentie ninth Joseph might very well be one of those who were raised at that time and with him perhaps divers whom Christ had healed or to whom he had preached if they died before and many others with whom Christ conversed till he was thirty yeares old 4. And all these did prove and confirm unto the incredulous or wavering Saints their friends or kindred yea and to the very beleevers also the truth of Christs doctrine of his death of his resurrection appearing not promiscuously to Grecians or to Romans not to all no not to all the Jews but to many but to fit persons saith the Interlinearie Glosse whether Jews Grecians or Romans then residing at Jerusalem to such as knew them in their lives and at their deaths This conjecture may passe the more plausibly if we consider that Christ himself appeared not to all indifferently but onely to some and to some oftner times then to others yet no where is said to have shewed himself to any but onely to his followers and Disciples And as the Apostles were confirmed by Christs holy conference so might many other then living beleeve or the rather beleeve the Gospel of Christ upon proof made by the new raised in many particulars strengthning their faith They arose b Vt Dominum ostenderent resurgentem To shew that Christ was raised saith S. Hierom on Matth. 27. c Cum eo debebant resurgere ut ipsum ostenderent resurrexisse They ought to rise with Christ that they might shew he was risen saith Ludolphus the Carthusian That d Debebant they ought savoureth of presumption Dionysius the Carthusian hath more moderate terms he on the place saith They did testifie that Jesus was the Christ that he was truely risen and had destroyed hell Hierom Tom. 3. fol. 50. in his answer to the eighth question of Hedibia thus e Non omnibus apparuerunt sed multis qui resurgentem Dominum susceperunt They appeared not to all but to many who received our Lord risen from the dead And yet let me superadde by his leave If they had appeared to the Disciples and Apostles of Christ who received Christ I cannot think they would have concealed it 5. Among my other diversions and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or winde-abouts let this be one occasionally arising from the odde position which Estius hath in 1. Cor. 7.39 f Rectè ex Apostoli verbis inferunt Aquinas carthusianus Non teneri mulierem ad recipiendum virum de morte resuscitatum Aquin and Carthusian conclude rightly saith he from the Apostle that a woman is not bound to receive her husband newly raised nor may she enjoy him without a new contract What if I answer That a woman is tied to her husband as long as he liveth but he liveth afterward though he had been dead and when the Apostle speaketh of death he speaketh of a compleat death not susceptible in this world of another life For he opposeth the dead man to the living as if one could not be dead and then living but first living and then dead for ever till the generall resurrection Suppose we Lazarus was married had not his wife been his lawfull wife bound to him by their first agreement even after his resurrection I doubt it not Yet this might be the case of some of the many who were raised especially if they died but a while before But I confesse the case differeth and is more perplexed if the partie were dead and the dayes of mourning past and the woman married to another Yet even here 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 O Father most gracious O Saviour most mercifull O holy Spirit most comfortable I humbly begge thy grace mercie and comfort to be shed forth upon me in this life that I may please thee in my vocation and do thy will and fulfill the businesse which thou hast appointed for me And leave not off I beseech thee to guide me by thine enabling counsel here till thou art readie to crown me with thy glorie in the life to come Amen Lord Jesu Amen CHAP. XV. 1. The raised Saints ascended not into heaven with Christ as is proved by Scripture and Reason Suarez his shallow answer Epiphanius strengthening my former positive conjectures 2. If the raised ascended bodily into heaven the Patriarchs should not be left behinde 3. The ascending bodily of the Saints into heaven not necessarie or behooffull 4. Onely Christs bodie was seen ascending 5. In likelihood Christ would have shewed the Patriarchs unto some of his Apostles THat these raised Saints who bare witnesse of Christ setling many pendulous and doubting souls strengthening many followers and Disciples of our Saviour and perhaps converting some unbeleevers by teaching them that their expected Messiah was now come that he did live among them and had died for their sinnes and risen again for their justification That they I say after this office performed again deposited their bodies in the earth and ascended not corporally into heaven you may behold proved by this first reason drawn from Scripture For Christ is compared to the high Priest who alone entred the SANCTUM SANCTORUM Hebr. 9.7 It is true indeed that we enter into the Holiest by the bloud of Jesus Heb. 10.19 but he onely * Hebr. 10.10 by a new and living way through the vail that is to say his flesh * Hebr. 9.12 entred in once into the holy place His entring differing from others entring and differing in this That with his bodie he entred others ascended not into heaven with him bodily Secondly if they had ascended into heaven following Christ their bodies must have been
doubt before thee and thou shalt fear day and night and shalt have no assurance of thy life vers 66. To all the other alledged places of Scripture one answer fitly serveth viz. That the holy Writ speaketh of the ordinary course of Nature and hath no intent to limit Gods power or to binde the Lawmaker but he may exempt from death whomsoever he pleaseth For generall rules are not without exceptions It is most true what Aristotle de Histor Animal 7.10 generally avoucheth d 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 No childe crieth in the mothers wombe and yet extraordinarily it may be true what Libavius in lib. de vagitu uterino and Albertus Magnus lib. 10. de Animalibus and Solinus in his third chapter report to wit Quosdam embriones plorâsse in utero That some Embrioes have wept and cried out in their mothers wombe As on the contrary what Livie lib. 24. recordeth namely Infantem in utero matris IO TRIUMPHALE clamâsse That an infant in the mothers wombe sang the Outcrie used in triumphs And what Appian of Alexandr de bellis civilibus Roman lib. 4. almost in the beginning relateth That a childe spake so soon as it was born which was a prognostick of sorrow against the erection of the TRIUMVIRI Petrus Pomponatius in lib. de incantationibus cap. 10. goeth one step further and though it be a little out of my way yet suffer me to follow him e Haly Aben-Ragel scientiâ syderum scivit praedicere puerum natum statim prophetaturum sicut refert Conciliator Haly Aben-Ragel saith he by Astrologie knew and foretold that a new born childe should presently prophesie as Conciliator relateth So the universall law of all mens dying may stand in full force and vertue and yet be abridged by some extraordinary exceptions through the unlimited command of the most free Lawmaker My proofs that universall propositions do not alwaies exclude some particular contraries shall be of such generall rules as are limited by the Papists themselves because the controversie now in agitation is onely against them The great master of Controversies Bellarmine himself de Purgatorâ—o 1.12 speaking of the taking up of the good thief into Paradise saith f Privilegia paucorum legem uon faciunt A few mens priviledges establish not a law Gerson that learned Chancellour of Paris in his Sermon on the birth of the thrice blessed Virgin the third part thus settleth g Constat Deum misericordiam salvationis suae non ità legibus communibus traditionis Christianae non ità Sacramentis ipsis alligâsse quin absque praejudicio legis ejusdem possit pueroâ— nondum natos intus sanctificare Gratiae suae baptismos vel virtute Spiritus sancti It is apparent that God hath not tied his mercifull salvation to the common laws of Christian veritie no not so to the Sacraments themselves but without prejudice of that law he may sanctifie children in the wombe with the baptisme of his grace or power of the holy Spirit Matthias Felizius pag. 184. acknowledgeth that extraordinarily the souls of good and bad men do sometimes come out of heaven and hell yet are there generall statutes and the ordinary course opposite and contrarie By an argument drawn from speciall priviledge Petrus Thyraeus de locis infestis part 1. cap. 9. maintaineth That humane souls may return out of Purgatorie yea out of Hell h Bonum publicum Legislatori semper propositum est hoc si lege praeteritâ obtineri potest legis ratio magna non habetur The Law-maker saith he hath an eye still aiming at a generall good which generall good if it take place and succeed without the law it is no great detriment or wrong to the law Cardinal Tolet on John 1.3 i Aliquando solemus generatim loqui ad mulâ—itudinem significandam quamvìs non omnes partes multitudinis comprehendantur Sometimes we speak generally to signifie a numerous multitude though we do not mean to comprise all and every parcell of that multitude 1. Cor. 9.25 Every man that striveth for the masterie is temperate in all things But neither do all abstain nor do they who abstain abstain from all things Which truth in the mouth of Tolet might be confirmed at large by the Fathers Let S. Hierom onely give in his verdict Hierom Tom. 3. Epist ad Damasum de Prodigo thus k Canon Scripturarum est Omnia non ad totum referenda sed ad maximam partem It is even a rule in Scripture that the word ALL hath not reference to the whole comprehending every singular particular but to the greatest part And as OMNIS All so likewise NVLLVS None is restrained 1. Kings 18.10 where the words No nation or kingdome extend not through the whole world but are to be reduced and confined to those Nations or Kingdomes which were Achabs subjects or tributaries to whom he might and could administer an oath which he did not could not do in the dominions of other absolute free Princes I must yet come up closer to Bellarmine Gen. 7.18 Repleverunt aquae Omnia in superficie terrae as it is in their Vulgat though it be not so either in the Hebrew or Greek And All the high hills that were under the whole heaven were covered vers 19. Yet Bellarmine in lib. de Gratia primi hominis cap. 4. excepteth Paradise which being on earth was not overflown Genes 7.21 All flesh died and every man and vers 22. All in whose nostrills was the breath of life died and vers 23. Every living substance both man and cattell c. Yet for all these generalities Bellarmine in the place cited excepteth Enoch who then lived upon earth in Paradise as he imagined Rom. 5.12 Death passed upon all for that all have sinned But l Praeventa fuit Maria singulari gratiâ privilegio Dei ut simul esse justa esse inciperet The Virgin Mary was prevented by Gods speciall grace so that she was free from sinne so soon as she had any being saith Bellarmine Tom. 3. de amissione grat statu peccat 4.16 He exempteth her by speciall priviledge from sinne Why may not we by the force of his reason exempt an other from death Moreover Enoch and Elias at what time S. Paul wrote these words were not dead though the Apostle speaketh of things past nor are dead yet as the Papists hold Gorran on the place answereth appositely Death went over all REATV non ACTV by way of guiltinesse not actually 1. Corinth 15.51 c. We shall all be changed at the last trump Yet Bellarmine de Romano Pontifice 3.6 saith that Enoch and Elias shall die and rise again before the generall resurrection till which time the last trump bloweth not And Christ was risen before though the words be large and not Christ alone but if Holcot be not deceived on Wisd 2.5 m De Matre Christi benedicta piè credit Ecclesia quòd sit in
x Putáne piures baeresâ—â— sectas exerituras fuisse fi nuila pâ—nitus Sâ—riptura extitisset quà m nunc cùm Scritura mortalibus à coelo data est Ego certè propior sum existimanti paucioreâ— fuisse futuras Do you think that more sects and heresies would have bubbled up if there had been no Scripture at all then now are when God hath sent us the holy Writ I rather incline to that side who think there would have been fewer divisions saith Gretser in his defence of Bellarm. de Verb. Dei 4.4 Pighius de Eccles Hierarch 1.2 saith y Apostolos quaedam scripsisse non ut scripta illa praeossent Fidei Religionâ— nostrae sâ—d ut suâ—essent potiús That the Apostles wrote some things not that they might rule over our Faith and Religion but be subject rather and concludeth that the Church is not onely not inferiour nor onely equall but in a sort superiour to the Scriptures The Carmelite Antonius Marinarus in the second book of the Historie of the Councel of Tâ—ent pag. 118. is confident z Ecclesiam fuisse perfâ—ctissimam prius â—uam Sanctorum Apostolorii ullas sâ—ripsisset neq Ecclesiam Christi perfectiâ—â—e ullá carituram etiamsi nihil unquam scripto fuisset mandatum That the Church was most perfect before any Apostle wrote and that the Church of Christ had never wanted perfection though never any thing had been written Majoranus Clyp 2.28 thus a Vnus Ecclesiae consensus qui nunquam caruit Spiritu Dei pluris apud nos esse debet quà m omnes eâ—ingues muti codices quoiquâ—t sunt crunt unquam sâ—ripta volumina quae hominum ingemis semper materiam contentionis praebuerunt The uniform consent of the Church which never was destitute of Gods Spirit ought more to be esteemed by us then all the dumbe writings and volumes which are or shall be written which have ministred matter of debate to the wits of men These are accursed errours and easily confuted because traditions are inconstant and their number was never yet determined by themselves but the Scripture is certain and our Saviour both rebuketh the Pharisees for holding of traditions Mark 7.8 c. Luk. 11.39 Matth. 23.18 and commandeth them to search the Scriptures John 5.39 and referreth himself and the whole course of his life and death to be examined by Scripture Luke 24.25 c. The other extream is of such who neglect or deride the Church and the very name thereof because they have the written word and these do as much glory in it as the Jews did in the materiall Temple of Solomon when in truth their contempt of the Church and its power turns to their damnation without repentance and if the frequent divine immediate revelation had been imparted by God to us as it was to the Patriarchs it had been better for us for in that illumination there was no errour no mistaking no doubtfulnesse but an impossibilitie of being deceived So that my discourse endeth in the point in which it began The Scripture was not absolutely necessarie to be written but ex hypothesi conditionally and supposing the divine decree it was necessarie yea upon corruption of manners and doctrine it was not onely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 convenient but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 necessarie not onely the most convenient way but the most necessarie means Otherwise God would never have written it It is necessarie if not as a cause yet as a concause The word as a cause the writing as a concause saith Trelcatius The Scriptures are not simply necessarie ad esse Eclesiae to the being of a Church whatsoever Scharpius saith but ad bene esse to the wel-being for nothing was written of the New Testament in Christs life-time nor in some yeares after Away with the Popish vilifying of Scripture c Materia litis non vox judicis Matter of strife say they and not the voice of the judge Away with the Puritanicall cut disdaining the Church and the interpreters thereof to wit their thrice-reverend Bishops and Priests and priding themselves in their own senselesse private Spirit The second question followeth viz. Whether the holy Penmen or Actuaries wrote the Scripture casually I answer If we take casually for fortè fortunâ for sole chance or onely bare contingencie they wrote not casually Te facimus Fortuna deam coelóque locamus Men think they make Fortune a goddesse a giddie one like the people themselves but indeed God worketh that which we call Fortune amongst men Augustine lib. 80. quaest quaest 24. divinely reasoneth in this sort What is done by chance is done suddenly or rashly what is so done is not done providently but whilest providence administreth all things nothing falls by chance in this world if through it we look up to God as to the universall cause by his providence For nothing falls under our senses but was commanded or permitted from the invisible and intelligible Hall of the highest Emperour saith Augustine de Trin. 3.4 1. Kings 22.34 A certain man drew a bow at a venture or in his simplicitie and smote the King of Israel between the joynts of the harnesse What the 32 Captains of the King of Aram could not accomplish though this were their Commission Fight neither with small nor great save onely with the King of Israel vers 13. that this roving arrow did by chance accomplish and slew the bloudie Ahab yet so by chance as the hand of the Lord did guide it Nec erranti Deus abfuit and it might have been written on the shaft before it was drawn out of the quiver Deus Achabo more certainly then what was written on the arrow that stroke out the eye of Philip of Macedon Astur Philippo A wealthy merchant sendeth two of his Factours one to the East Indies the other to the West each of them not knowing the others employments after certain yeares he appointeth each of them to be at such a port on such a moneth and day if they so can They both meet both wonder both at the first hold it a strange chance when the deep wisdome of their master providently determined all this There is no chance where providence reigneth If we take casually as importing counsel meerly humane led by opportunitie onely and excluding inspiration as men consilium capiunt ex tempore pro re nata Advise according to the fresh occurrences or as bonae leges ex malis moribus oriuntur Good laws are made upon former mis-behaviour thus the holy Prophetâ— Evangelists and Apostles wrote not casually for as the 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 2. Pet. 1.21 so both for the Old and New Testament S. Paul saith All Scripture is given by inspiration of God 2. Tim. 3.16 Is that casuall If we conceive the matter thus The holy penmen wrote casually that is
suggestion and inspiration then a proper command I reply Of precepts properly so called some are hid and secret others more manifest the internall command bindes as much as the externall divine suggestions oft times have the force of an expresse inward precept and commands are sometimes manifested by inspirations Praeceptum propriè dictum which is by word or writing and Imperium internum may be equivalent and so long as it is Imperium internum what need we care though it be not Praeceptum propriè dictum And the command was to write which is an outward act The second Objection brought by Bellarmine against himself is from the Revelation where S. John is commanded divers times to write To this he answereth most unclerk-like That S. John was commanded to write certain hidden visions not the doctrine of the Gospel and precepts of manners But this is easily confuted for Revel 19.9 it is said Write Blessed are they which are called to the marriage-supper of the Lambe Is not this the doctrine of the Gospel what is more Evangelicall He might have considered the marriage-feasts in the Gospels Matth. 22.2 c. and Luk. 14.16 And a voice from heaven said Revel 14.13 Write Blessed are the dead which die in the Lord from henceforth yea saith the Spirit that they may rest from their labours and their works do follow them Are these hidden visions Is not this the doctrine of the Gospel The like might be amplified out of the first second and third chapters of the Revelation where matters of moralitie and precepts of manners are commanded to be written and are written and not hidden visions but rather the doctrine of repentance and of the Gospel Christ saith to his Apostles Act. 1.8 Ye shall be witnesses unto me He forbeareth the word of preaching and useth more generall words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ye shall be witnesses and they bare witnesse by writing Joh. 21.24 This is the disciple which testifieth of these things and wrote these things and we know that his testimonie is true not onely he himself but Peter and the rest WE know that his testimonie is true what testimonie but his writings d Toti operi suo fidem vult conciliare He would have all his works or writings beleeved saith Luc. Brugensis and Maldonate When the seven thunders had uttered their voices I was about to write saith S. John and a voice from heaven saith Write them not Revel 10.4 The Apostles forwardnesse or pronenesse to write argueth not necessarily that he was not commanded first to write but rather presupposeth it and this present inhibition Write not may serve as an exception to a former generall command that he might have to write Indeed there is no expresse record that all and every of the Apostles were enjoyned to write nor is it likely they were for then they would have obeyed whereas not the one half of the Apostles committed any thing to pen ink and paper for ought we know But we are sure that some writers of the Old Testament were commanded to write Exod. 17.14 And the Lord said unto Moses Write this for a memoriall in a book Jerem. 36.2 Take thee a roll of a book and write therein all the words that I have spoken unto thee c. and S. John was commanded eleven or twelve times to write and thence it is more then probable that the rest of the Apostles which wrote were commanded to write they might be expressely appointed to write though in their writings so much be not expressed To say as Bellarmine doth It is false that God commanded the Apostles to write because so much is not written is rash and ill-advised inferring that they were commanded nothing except those things which are written Is every thing false that cannot be proved is nothing true but what can be proved To evince a thing to be false is required a reall proof of truth positive which Bellarmine wanteth and the falsitie may justly be retorted home to the Cardinall himself from the authoritie of a prime man of his own part Wiser Aquinas 3. part quaest 42. artic 4. 2. thus When the disciples of Christ had written what he shewed and spake unto them we must in no wise say that Christ himself did not write since his members wrote that which they knew by the dictate of him their Head For whatsoever he would have us reade of his deeds and words he commanded them as his own hands to write Now let Bellarmine say It is false that the Apostles were commanded by God to write And thus much shall serve for the third question The fourth question Whether the Prophets Evangelists and Apostles were compelled to write As when it is said Luke 1.70 GOD SPAKE BY THE MOUTH OF HIS HOLY PROPHETS per LOQUENDI verbum SCRIPTIONEM quoque comprehendit so what I propound of Propheticall Evangelicall and Apostolicall writing must also be understood of their speaking or dictating Whether they were compelled to it Compulsion is of two sorts Proper and absolute Improper or mixt Proper when a man is forced as we say in spight of his teeth against his will as some who have been drawn to punishment Thus were they not compelled Mixt when a man doth that which he would not do unlesse he feared a greater losse as when a Merchant or Mariner cast their goods into the sea to save their lives which hath in it part of the voluntarie and part of the involuntarie And of this there may be some question for Jonah fled from the presence of the Lord Jon. 1.3 that is was unwilling to do the message Moses again and again refused to be Gods embassadour to Pharaoh Exod. 3.11 and to the Israelites Exod. 4.1 10 13. Isaiah was also backward Isa 6.5 One answer serves for all They were at first fearfull rather then unwilling but when they were confirmed they readily and boldly did their duties So farre were they from shadow of compulsion that they offered their service When the voice of the Lord said Whom shall I send and Who will go for Vs Isa 6.8 the Prophet said Here am I send me Yea but they were impulsi rapti agitati acti 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2. Pet. 1.21 I answer The word rather excludeth voluntarie and arbitrarie will-worship or self-will-service then includeth compulsion for all this was performed Libero motu voluntatis With the free motion of their will or as others take it Salvo pleno usu liberi arbitrii Without any impeachment of the freedome of their will e Acti à Spiritu sancto loqunti sunt à Deo afflati compositos tamen intellige bos motus non quales fuere profauorum vatum They who were led by the holy Ghost spake being inspired by God yet know that their motions and inspirations were setled and composed unlike to the profane heathen priests or prophets for they were wilde senslesse not knowing what they did or said saith Tremellius
Rom. 8.14 Many are led by the Spirit of God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Aguntur is no more in effect then ducuntur If it had been trahuntur yet f Herba trahit evem Meat draweth a sheep to it saith Augustine and all is farre from coaction And this may stop the mouth of Aretius saying on Peter 2.1 g Inviti saepe rapti sunt in hunc ordinem Moses Elias alii qui fuga potiùs hoc munus maluissent declinare Moses Elias and others who had rather have fled from these duties were oft unwillingly drawn to them It may be further objected Act. 4.20 We cannot but speak the things which we have seen and heard Fond is the exposition of the Ordinary glosse We CANNOT that is We WILL NOT. By such a That is I will confound heaven with earth But I answer The words imply no violence the wills of the Apostles were not inforced if the will of man could be compelled it were no longer Voluntas A will but rather Noluntas No will A thing may be said Posse aut non posse fieri To be or not to be made these wayes 1. We cannot but speak that is Non possumus convenienter tacere It is unreasonable that we should be silent Can the children of the Bridechamber mourn Matth. 9.15 is a question without question for certainly they could but while the bridegroom was with them they could not mourn that is It was no fit time for them to mourn Likewise the Apostles could hold their peace but then it became them not and therefore they say We cannot but speak 2. Non possumus licité We cannot lawfully so Lyra expounds the words We can do nothing against the truth saith S. Paul 2. Cor. 13.8 that is We cannot lawfully unlawfully he might and so might any other So here If we do lawfully and as we ought We cannot but speak 3. We cannot but speak that is We are very prone and apt to speak Mat. 12.34 How can ye being evil speak good things and how could the Apostles being good but speak good things their souls were filled with grace which boiled forth into words their mouth could not choose but speak what their heart thought My heart was hot within me while I was musing the fire burned then spake I with my tongue Psal 39.3 4. We cannot but speak that is We speak not of our selves but as God teacheth us Est Deus in nobis agitante calescimus illo When God on us doth blow By him our heat doth grow He moveth us mota faciliùs commoventur Things fixt are not so soon moved as things in motion so the Apostles were silent before but when the Spirit enlightned their understanding and framed their words could they hold their tongues themselves answer We cannot but speak I summe it up all thus It was inconvenient not to speak It was sinfull not to speak It proceeded from the habits of grace and goodnesse that they were so prone to speak It proceeded from the celestiall suggestion actuating their hearts and tongues Therefore say they VVe cannot but speak And yet away with all coaction Others may yet alledge the 1. Cor. 9.16 Necessitie is laid upon me to preach the Gospel and verse 17. If I do this thing willingly I have a reward but if against my will a dispensation is committed unto me Unto the first part I answer The necessitie is not of pressure angariation or force but of precept Obstrictus sum ad hoc I am commanded and bound to this as it is in the translated Arabick for he was often commanded to preach In Damascus Act. 22.15 in the temple of Jerusalem Act. 22.21 at Antioch Act. 13.2 h Si voluntatem adjungo necessitati praecepti mercedem habeo If unto the precept I adde a willing-readie heart I have my reward saith Aquin. But I will freely sacrifice unto the Lord saith David Psal 54.6 and S. Paul will preach rather for love then necessitie The other part of the words against my will evinceth not compulsion but backwardnesse slownesse and ill ends If I preach WILLINGLY that is for the love of Christ of my self of my brethrens souls for Gods honour and glorie and at his command I HAVE MY REWARD But if AGAINST MY WILL that is Vnwillingly or in an unwilling manner i Si solo timore servili praedico If for onely servile fear I preach saith Aquinas if for fear of wo denounced against me if for my private ends of fame or gain yet even to such a mercenary IS THE DISPENSATION COMMITTED 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is opposed to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the words against my will are not so properly expounded though it runne so in our Translation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is with a good will as Coverdale well translates it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth a thing done proprio motu therefore 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is with an ill will grudgingly mercenarily 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is non volens sluggishly drawlingly formally for fashions sake I will conclude this answer with the exposition of the Arabick and Syriack Translatours k Si facio hoc ex proposito mentis meae voluntate meâ est mihi merces si autem cùm facio ingratum est mihi c. If I do this purposely with a full will I have my reward if when I do it it is harsh unpleasant and sowre c. saith Arabs l Si voluntate meâ si praeter voluntatem meam If with my will if besides my will saith Syrus None of this tasteth of coaction There yet ariseth up another objection The same Apostle saith The love of Christ constraineth us 2. Cor. 5.14 I answer The words are diversly expounded Vrget nos Vrgeth us saith the Vulgat Cohibet nos Restraineth us saith Montanus Continet nos Containeth us saith Oecumenius Incendit nos amore Setteth us on fire with love saith Theodoret Charitas Christi constringit nos in hac sententia The love of Christ bindes us fast in this opinion saith Arabs such a constraint as would not be free such a bond or knot as would not be untied such a constraint as when a man is commanded to do that which he would do without command when precept is joyned to voluntarinesse when injunction is interposed between both precedent and subsequent willingnesse So much for the Objections On the other side for the truth these arguments stand forth Luke 1.3 It seemed good unto me to write unto thee saith he This proveth that the Evangelist was not compelled Gal. 6.11 Ye see how large a letter I have written unto you with mine own hand by which words S. Paul seeketh to ingratiate himself with them for that labour But it was neither matter of kindenesse on his part nor thank-worthy on their part if he were compelled No man dares write in a Princes name without his command S. John was spoke to advised commanded