THE RESURRECTION Founded on Justice.

THE Resurrection founded on Justice: OR, A VINDICATION OF THIS Great Standing Reason Assigned by the Ancients and Modern: WHEREIN The Objections of the Learned Dr. HODY against it, are Answered: Some Opinions of Tertullian about it, Examined: The Learned Doctor's three Reasons of the Resurrection, In­quired into: And some Considerations from Reason and Scriptures, laid down for the Esta­blishment of it.

By N. B. M. A.

Si Resurrectio non est, neque Deus, neque Providentia. Damasc. lib. 4.
Non sit Particeps in sententiâ caro, si non fuerit & in Causâ. Tertul. de Resur. Carn. cap. 15.

LONDON, Printed for Thomas Helder, at the Angel in Little-Britain. MDCC.


THis small Tract is sent into the World without the shelter and protection of any Patronage; if it be Truth, it needs none; if otherwise, it deserves none; Such as it is, 'tis well meant, and hum­bly submitted to the Judg­ment of the Learned. Being sensible of my manifest in­sufficiency, [Page] no ways fur­nished with Abilities or Advantages to manage the Dispute with the Learned Author; I laid all thoughts of it aside, presuming that some worthy Hand would undertake it: But after a long expectation, finding nothing but a deep Silence, the great opinion that I have of the Argument grew so mightily upon me, as that it has by a strong impulse compelled me to say somewhat for it; not out of any fond conceit of my [Page] own performance, but to provoke others to appear in Vindication of that Doc­trine, which has been Taught, Approved, Applauded by all without exception, in all Ages; and always represented as the Basis and Pillar of this great Article of our Faith. For my Apology I have the Practise of the Long Robe, which allows the Puisney Law­yer to open the great Cause which afterwards is taken and maintained by the most able Counsel: And in [Page] Martial Discipline, no­thing more usual than for a Private Sentinel, seeing the Enemies approach, to give the Allarm to the more Generous Com­manders to come in to the Relief of that Post, which himself was no ways able to maintain. This in truth is the design of this small Essay, to cry out for help, and call in the assistance of Men of Conduct and Learning. It matters not though he who gave the first Charge, fail in the En­gagement, [Page] as too impotent to withstand the more po­werful Arms of his mighty Adversary; [...]ut he has this satisfaction, that he has ap­pear'd in a good Cause, has ac­cording to the proportion of his Talent, contributed his utmost Aid, has with­al the Honour to fall by a great Hand, and like Scaeva in the Poet, overpowered by an unequal Force, he sinks with his Assurance,

—Veniet qui vindicet arces
Dum morimur—

[Page] That some noble Caesar with his puissant Auxilia­ries is at Hand, Some ac­complish'd Pen will take up the Argument and do it Right, which here (tho' I can truly say, is heartily, yet must confess) is very weakly attempted.



  • Chap. I. SHeweth the Import of the Resurrection.
  • Chap. II. What Oppositions it hath met withal.
  • Chap. III. On what Grounds it stands, and how the Objections against it are Answered, with a brief Analysis of this Discourse.
  • Chap. IV. Sets out the State of the Argument, and shews how it has been the great Reason assigned by all Jews, Fathers, Schoolmen, and Moderns.
  • [Page] Chap. V. Containeth the three Objections of the Lear­ned Author against it, with an Answer to the first.
  • Chap. VI. Gives a further Answer.
  • Chap. VII. Offers Satisfaction to the second Objection.
  • Chap. VIII. From several Topicks proves our Bodies to be more than Instruments only.
  • Chap. IX. Contains an Answer to the third Objection.
  • Chap. X. Examineth three Opinions of Tertullian about it.
  • [Page] Chap. XI. Inquireth into the three Reasons of the Do­ctrine assigned by the Learned Author.
  • Chap. XII. Sheweth the third Reason to be the same with that which is here contended for.
  • Chap. XIII, alias XIV. Laies down several Arguments from Reason for the Esablishment of it.
  • Chap. XIV, alias XV. Ʋrges several Authorities from Scripture to the same Purpose. With the Conclusion.


THis one Error the Reader is desir'd more especially to correct, pag. 69. line 12. after not, add fully.

ERRATA. PAge 19. Line 10. read Lirinensis; P. 21. l. 10. r. concession; l. ultr r. de­tected; p. 71. l. 10. for Peter r. Paul; p. 79. l. 13. r. dispossess'd; p. 99. (Notes) l. 4. after Deos dele and the, ib. l. 7 before Old add And the; p. 111. l. 18. r. Graces; p. 126. l. 5. r. implied.

These and what other Errors may have pass'd the Press, the Candid Reader is desir'd to Correct and Excuse.


THE Resurrection of the Dead, is the Grand and most Important Article of our Religion; the Ground-work and Foundation of our Faith, Hope, and Expectation: To fix Men in the Belief of which, was the main Business, Design, and Province of the Apostles, as St Luke once and again has noted This is assigned as the chief Reason of St Matthias's admission into the Apostleship, in the vacancy of Judas Iscariot; that he might be a Witness of the Resur­rection, Acts 1. 22. And the whole Col­ledge is frequently described by this Character, Witnesses of the Resurrection, Acts 2. 32. 4. 33. 10. 41. and Acts 4. 2. They Preached through Jesus the Resurrecti­on of the Dead: This was the first, and great Argument of St. Peter's Sermon upon his Inspiration, on the Day of Pen­ticost, which was attended with the blessed success of the Conversion of more than Three Thousand souls, Acts 2. 41. [Page 2] it filled a great part of the rest of his, and their Discourses. This was the prin­cipal Topick of St. Paul upon all occa­sions: In his Sermon to the People, Acts 13. 'tis interwoven through every Part: In his Disputation with the most learned Philosophers, the Epicureans and Stoicks, in the most learned University of the whole World, He Preached unto them Jesus and the Resurrection, Acts 17. 18. In his conferences with the Scribes and the Pharisees, he Discourses of the Hope and Resurrection of the Dead, Acts 23. 6. In short, he keeps this Text and Theme still before the Rulers and Governors, Felix, Festus, and Agrippa; and Drift, Design, and Nerves of his Discourses meet and concenter in this great Article: Nay it seems plain and undeniable that this was in a more peculiar and especial manner given them in charge, by their great Master, who ordain'd them, as it is clearly intimated by St. Peter, Acts 10. 42. He commanded us to preach unto the People, and to testifie that it was he that was ordained of God to be Judge both of the Quick and of the Dead; the reason of this is visible at the first glance, from the re­peated Description which St. Paul gives of the Resurrection: In one place he calls it [Page 3] The Hope and Resurrection, Acts 23. 6. in another, Acts 26. 6. The Hope of the Promise made of God unto our Fathers, unto which Promise our Twelve Tribes, in­stantly serving God Day and Night, hope to come; for which Hope's sake, King Agrip­pa, I am accused of the Jews: The Apo­stle in the words next, and immediately following, explains himself beyond all doubt. Why should it be thought a thing in­credible with you, that God should Raise the Dead? The Resurrection then is, The Hope of the Promise, or rather the Reward hoped for at the Resurrection, which in truth is the Life and Soul of Religion, the most effectual and powerful motive to Piety, which makes every good Man (notwithstanding the multitude of difficulties and discouragements, with which he is at present surrounded) in love with it, and ingages him chearfully and im­movably in God's Service. The encourage­ments of all our actions and labours here is the expectation of some what lovely which attends them in the end: Wherefore doth the Ploughman Sweat and Toil, Dig and Delve, engage early and late in the pain­ful labours of Husbandry through the whole Circuit of it, Is it not because he has a prospect of a joyful Harvest; when [Page 4] the Vallies shall st and so thick with Corn, that they shall laugh and Sing, Psal. 65. ult. Wherefore doth the Soldier run through so many Hardships, engage in so many Difficulties, expose himself to so many imminent Dangers? What think you? are not the considerations of the Rich Spoils, the Glorious Victory and Triumph, on the other side of this Scene of Blood Slaughter and Death, the strong Mag­neticks to draw him on? Can it be ima­gined that the Combatant at the Olym­picks would put himself at the expence of that Oyl, Exercise and Pains, which are indispensibly necessary to his Char­acter, were it not for the allurement of that Crown at the end of the Goal, which appears in his Eye most beautiful and charming.

Take away the Resurrection, and you cut asunder the Nerves and Ligatures of Religion, secure it and you have set it up; the denial of this shocks, and over­turns the other Articles of our Faith. The Establishment of it fixes them: This I take to be the Import of the Hope of the Promise, and I am confirmed in it from the use of the Hebrews, who were wont to call the Resurrection the Seculum Mer­cedis, the great time of Recompense.

[Page 5] This Argument is professedly and larg­ly handled by the Apostle, in 1 Cor. 15. on both sides; where from the Negative, he acknowledges the Folly, the Vanity, the Madness of preaching, setting up for, or pretending to Religion; then i. e. if this great Truth labour, all that is built on it must of course fall to the ground; then is our Preaching Vain, our Faith Vain: The great Heralds of the Gospel are False Witnesses, we are in our Sins: Then those that are fallen asleep in Christ are perished. The Apostle goes on, ver. 19. If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all Men most miserable. Whereas Chri­stians, with a supposition of a Resurrection and the immediate attendants of it, must be confess'd to take the best, and the wisest course, to have the start and ad­vantage of all Mankind besides: The contrary does most justly charge them with weakness, folly, and distraction; and in the prosecution of the Argument, he plainly lays open the Reasons of the same, ver. 29. Else what shall they do that are Baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at all; why are they then Baptized for the dead, and why stand ye in jepordy every hour? The true intent and meaning of which place (without engaging in the [Page 6] Intricacies and Difficulties of it, which is a thing excentrick to my present pur­pose) I take to be this. To what end do Men tye themselves up to the strict Ob­servations of this Way of Worship, and willingly expose themselves to all man­ner of Butcheries, to most cruel Tortures, Racks, and Deaths? If there be no Re­surrection, this way is the most sensless and ridiculous: If so, the Saints were Fools, the Martyrs were Fools, those that crucified their Bodies by the severities of Mortification and Self-denial, must be confessed weak in their intellectuals; and those that expos'd themselves to Fire and Faggot, to the Torments of the Amphi­theatre, the most Cruel and Barbarous usages which Men or Devils could in­vent to treat them with, were egregi­ously deceived and deluded. The Apo­stle brings home the Argument to him­self, ver. 31, 32. I protest by your rejoycing which I have in Christ Jesus our Lord, I die daily; If after the manner of Men I have fought with Beasts at Ephesus, what advantageth it me if the dead rise not? Let us Eat and Drink, for to morrow we die; where the Apostle counting his Practise, his Perils, his Sufferings, readily grants all these to be mistakes and miscarriages, [Page 7] without the Resurrection; and prefers the Doctrine and Practise of the Epicure before it. To what end should Men Fast, Watch, and Pray, and deny them­selves the injoyments of this World, keep under their Bodies, and bring them into subjection? To what end should Men indure the contradictions of Sinners? To what end should Men expose themselves to all the hardships, and misusages of Men of a wicked and barbarous World if there be no Resurrection? But on the contrary, to our everlasting Comfort and Encouragement, he assures us of a Resurrection; and That a most glorious one too, which is the grand Subject of the remaining part of the Chapter; on which, as on a Foundation impossible to be shaken, he endeavours to fix the Faith and Practice of the Corinthians, and with them, of all that embrace this Holy Profession: Wherefore, my beloved Brethren, be steadfast, immovable, always abounding in the work of the Lord, for as­much as you know that your labour is not in vain in the Lord: Go on with Courage, Resolution, and Perseverance, in the con­scientious discharge of your Profession, assuring your selves that there are Golden Remains of goodness, and incomparable [Page 8] rewards that await Holiness in the other World.


HOwever this great Article of our Faith, hath met with ill treatment in the World; it has in a great measure been made the Scoff, Derision, and Laugh­ter of Mankind, the subject of the pastime of the Scorner's Chair. When St. Paul at Athens preach'd it up, he was, by the learned Professors and Philoso­phers, there called Babbler, and a setter up of strange Gods for his pains, Acts 17. 18, nor did it find a kinder Reception among the People; for so we are expresly told, ver. 32. When they heard of the Resurrecti­on of the Dead, some mocked, others said we will hear thee again of this matter. Nei­ther had it a more civil fate among the Governors, for upon this account Festus declares him beside himself, and pro­nounces him mad, Acts 26. 24. The great Naturalist has given his opinion much after the same rate, and has con­fidently averr'd it to be beyond the power of [Page 9] God himself to bring it to pass. Nat. Hist. lib. 7. cap. 7. The great Emperor and Apostate Julian, though he generally ridicul'd all the Doctrines of our Religi­on; yet this more especially. The inge­nious, though Atheistical Dialogist makes himself merry more than once upon this subject. It would be too tedious to re­count the like behaviour of Porphiry and Celsus, and other the professed adversa­ries of Christianity, in this matter: I shall therefore give it you in a lump and whole-sale from the known Testimonies of Tertullian and St. Austin; The first tells us, there was not one sect of Philosophers whatsoever but oppos'd it: The last assures us, There was no one point of our Religion so vehemently, so pertinaciousty, so stifly, so contentiously rejected▪ they en­tertain'd some other Doctrines with respect and favour; but for this of the Resurrecti­on, they are not meal-mouth'd, they no sooner hear it but it raises their indignation, they instantly reject, censure, condemn it, and with open mouth boldly proclaim it impossi­ble, in Psal. 88.


NOtwithstanding all those Sarchasms and Contradictions of Sinners, this Heavenly Doctrine is fixt on immovable Foundations, and will, and must stand impregnable amidst all the shocks and assaults made against it: 'Tis built on a Rock, against which the Gates of Hell shall not prevail. We are as strongly secur'd here as of any one Article of our Faith, and that without being beholden to the Ludicrous stories of the Jews, or the Idle and Fabulous Reports of Pinto and the Heathens, which do the Doctrine no kindness, but disservice rather. 'Tis supported on the unanimous Testimonies of the Fathers, of the Councils, of the Creeds: The plain and undeniable Autho­rities of the Old, and more especially the New Testament. The word and Pro­mise of an Alknowing, Infallible, Om­nipotent God. So that all, or at least the most considerable Objections that have been brought against it, are dash'd in pie­ces and laid even with the Dust; from the consideration of the Veracity and Alsuffi­ciency of that God, who has bound him­self [Page 11] and his Attributes for the perfor­mance.

I am not ignorant how many learned and ingenious Men have taken much pains to solve, from the principle of Philo­sophy, the Arguments brought against it. I honour and admire them for their pre­formances; but I must freely say, I much question whether the attempts of this kind come up to the point, whether they are not too low and inferiour to give it satisfaction.

My Reason is this, The Resurrection is confessed by all to be a work above Na­ture, and how it can be made out by Natural Philosophy, I cannot under­stand.

Our Reason must be beholding to Re­velation in this matter, and call in the assistance of Faith, without which there can be no Assurance. In short, if we believe the Creation, I cannot see any stumbling block here, that Power who made the World and Man at first, out of nothing, must be readily acknowledged able to raise him from the Grave, and to joyn together the scattered Particles of his dissolved Body. The one seems more easie than the other: This is the great, the Common Argument of the Ancients, [Page 12] and has without doubt been more ef­fectual to the purpose than a Cart-load of Chimical Experiments, than all the notions of the most subtile Philosophers. But this I have said to make way to my Design, which is to enquire into the strength of the Argument for the Resurrection from a principle of Justice; In which I shall take this Method,

1. I shall briefly lay down the State of the Argument

2. I shall shew how it has been the Great, the Principal, the most Topping, and Chiefest Argument of all Ages.

3. I shall offer to answer the Objecti­ons which are levied against it.

4. I shall Examine his Reasons of the Resurrection.

Ʋlt. I shall endeavour to establish the Doctrine by such considerations as I hope will secure it.


THE State of the Argument in short is, The Body and the Soul are here joyned together as sharers in all [Page 13] the Concerns and Actions of this Life which is a state of Probation, and there­fore they are to stand or fall together in the next, which is a state of Remunera­tion. The Body of the Saint and Good Man concurs with his Soul in the exercise of Vertue and Piety in this World; and can there be any thing more equitable than that they should be joyned toge­ther in that which is to come? On the the other hand, the Body of the Sinner must be allowed a Partner with the Soul in Evil; and is there not all the reason in the World that it should stand forth at the Bar, and be joyned with it in the punish­ment? The contrary must be pronounced downright Injustice. Can we have such hard thoughts of the most Righteous Judge, that he should admit the Soul of the Martyr upon his dissolution, to that Glorious Crown which he has promised in the highest Heavens; and mean while have no regard to the Crucified Tor­tured, Body that has born the heat and bur­then of the Day; been the saddest Patient in all the Tragedy; but suffer it to lie neglected in the Grave? Ʋlt. How can we imagine that the Soul of the Repro­bate should be condemned to the Tor­ments of Tophet, for those sins it commit­ted [Page 14] in conjunction with the Body; and that the Body it self should escape scot­free, sleep undisturbed in the Grave, and neither know nor feel any thing of those Flames. In this case have we not reason to cry out with the Prophet Malachy, 2. 17. Where is the God of Judgment? For Justice carries in the very Nature of it a due and impartial distribution of Re­wards and Punishments. If two work together, both have a right to the Wa­ges; 'tis downright injustice to give all to One, and nothing to the Other. This is the substance of the Argument, of which I must take leave further to ac­quaint the Reader, that it has been the great, the standing Argument of all per­swasions of Men in all Ages: In the first place I affirm this was the great reason which the Jews still used and applyed to the same purpose. I would not boast of what I have not, I cannot pretend to Rabbinical Learning; yet I am sure of what I assert, because many learned Men have told me so, and I have seen Maimo­nides their second Solomon, their Renowned Epitomizer in Latin; and many times met with the famous Fable of the Rabbins, which because it comes home and pat to the purpose, I here insert: There was a [Page 15] great Lord who planted a delicious Garden, wherein he placed two Keepers, a Blind Man and a Lame Man, that he might be secure of his Fruit on all hands; but so it was that after some time he found himself Robb'd: He charges the Keepers with the Theft; they both offer very plausible excuses; the Blind Man pleads he could not see the Fruit, and therefore could not Steal it: The Lame Man alledges the Infirmity of his Feet, he could not reach it, and so could not take it away: At last the fallacy was found out, viz. 'Twas done by the mutual combination of both: The Blind Man takes the Lame Man on his back, by whose direction and assistance he is guided to the Trees, lifted up to the Fruit, and so enabled to take it away; whereupon the Master after all their excuses, to no pur­pose, gives them their doom; Both were joyned in the Sin, and Both must share in the Punishment. This is the case of the Body and the Soul, saith the Jewish Masters: The one acts in conjunction with the other; one could not Sin with­out the other, and therefore both must stand and fall together; And I cannot for­bear to add, Nec Lex est justior ulla.

2. I do affirm this to be the constant, profest, most solemn reason, most often and upon all occasions made use of by [Page 16] most, if not all the Fathers without ex­ception. The Learned and vastly read Author in his Elaborate Treatise, has given us a considerable number of them, p. 209. Athenagor as, Tertullian, Gregory Nazi­anzen, St. Chrysostom, Epiphanius, Ambrose, Theodoret, Aenaeas Gazaeus, Damascenus, Nilus, Photius; and has cited the places. And though I cannot pretend to any de­gree of the Doctor's knowledge in the Fa­thers, yet I can easily give him a much larger List, and produce the places too; but this I industriously avoid, because every Common-Place-Book will afford it; and because it would be justly liable to Censure, and because in the present case 'tis altogether needless, forasmuch as the Learned Author has liberally granted, That all the ancient Greeks and Latins agree in this, that God is obliged in justice to re­ward or punish the Body together with the Soul: Nay, Origin himself who has set up a different Hypothesis makes use of the same. 'Tis beside my intention to stuff this small Essay with a multitude of great Names and Quotations.

In the next place I take leave to say that this is the great and main reason, made use of in the present Argument, by the Master of the Sentences. The [Page 17] Angelical Doctor, and the whole Tribe of the Schoolmen, as any one that has but look'd into them must acknowledge, and the Doctor himself has owned. In the last place, I affirm this to be the main, chief, and constant reason urg'd by all Modern Writers, Commentators, and others, not only of our own, but other Nations: For my part I speak it upright­ly, I can cast mine Eyes on no Book on the subject, but I meet with it; and that not among the Scriblers of the lower Rank, but amongst the Masters of the Assemblies, the most celebrated Authors, Men of Renown in their Generations. I could easily fill a great deal of Paper here, but I shall dismiss this Considerati­on with one Authority only, and that is of the Learned Grotius, on Mat. 2. 32. Inter omnia Argumenta quae ad probandam Resurrectionem adhiberi solent, &c.— Amongst all the Arguments which are brought to prove the Resurrection, I know none more effectual and proper, than that which Clement the Bishop of Rome was wont to urge, having received it from St. Peter, that if God be just there must be a Resurrection; and this Doctrine this great Man approves of, and in that place establishes with no mean Authorities. Whither (not to [Page 18] transcribe) I refer the Reader; and be­cause he tells us, 'twas the Doctrine which St. Clement received from St. Peter, I could heartily wish that I could find out this passage in St. Clement, in order whereunto I must confess I have sought after it, and have found it, but not to my satisfaction, among the Dialogues of St. Peter and Simon Magus; the 2d. Dia­logue which bears the name of St. Cle­ment, but no doubt is spurious, and therefore not to be insisted on, nor re­commended, however it may bear some consideration, that so great a Man as Grotius gives this reason the Right-hand, the Priority, and Precedency to all others; beside we have his word and reputation for it, that it was the express Doctrine which the first Bishop of Rome taught his Disciple and Successor; and if we were assured that it was thus Delivered down and derived; we are bound to believe it, notwithstanding all the Quircks and Ni­ceties of Philosophy to the contrary: For the great Apostle's Tongue was guid­ed by an Infallible Spirit. Upon the whole I take, leave to say (upon a much better account than Bellarmine did of the Annals of Baronius) here's turris fortium Solomonis, a mighty Tower of strong [Page 19] Men which in reason may be thought able to maintain the Argument and se­cure it; Defendit numerus juctae (que) umbone Phalanges, was thought a strong Allega­tion in a much lesser Cause. Methinks, the Authorities of so many Learned Men in all Ages, should uphold it, and not suffer it to be lost at this time a-day: Me­thinks here, the standing Rule of Vincentius Liricensis, if any, where, ought to sway; quod semper, quod ubi (que), quod ab omnibus, what all Men, in all Ages, at all Times, have asserted, must stand.


BUT the Learned Author, in his Treatise of the Resurrection, has been pleased to lay it aside; and having paid his Respect and Deference to the ancient Fathers, the avowed Patriots of it; He im­mediately Censures and Condemns it in the words following, Pag. 210. If we seriously and impartially consider this Assertion, we shall find▪ it not to be true, and he gives us those Rea­sons for it; 1st, To speak properly the Body is not capable either of Sinning or doing Well, it [Page 20] is only the instrument of the Soul, and the Arm that stabs, sins no more than the Sword; 'tis the Soul only that is the Murderer: Nei­ther 2dly, Is the Body capable of Re­wards or Punishments, 'tis the Soul that is sensible: Nothing but what is sensible only, can be capable of Rewards and Punish­ments. 3dly, If it be injustice in God, to Punish the Soul alone without the Body, in Conjunction with which she committed the Sin; then all the Matter which constituted the Body when the several Sins were commit­ted, must be raised again and reunited to the Soul; for if some, why not all? But what Monsters of Men should we be in the Resurrection, if all the substance, of which our Bodies consisted from our Childhood to our Death, should be gathered together and formed into a Body.

This is the Sum of the Charge, which the Learned Doctor has to lay against the Doctrine which has been allow'd of by all, and is the Attempt of this Paper to cover and fecure: There are other Passages in the following part of his Dis­course, which shall be accounted for in their proper place.

And here I take it for granted, that there are no other difficulties that lie in the way; no other Objections, at least [Page 21] of any moment, against it, because they come from so accomplished an Author, who must be supposed to have said the most that can be against it.

Without making any Apology, I shall endeavour to give satisfaction to all, ac­cording to the method in which they lye.

And First, I answer by way of Con­fession, that the Body, properly speaking, is not capable of Sinning, or of doing well, considered in its own Nature, ab­stractively in its self; 'tis a passive prin­ciple, and can pretend to no Life, Ener­gy, Sense, or Motion in a single state: 'Tis likewise granted that the Body with­out the Soul, is a Dull, Stupid, Senseless Clod of Earth, a Stinking Carcass, a Sink of Rottenness and Corruption, uncapa­ble of Acting, Doing, Suffering, In­joying all whatsoever, or more than the Doctor can suggest; but in a state of Conjunction with the Soul, 'tis far otherwise, so that it injoys Life, Sense, and Motion; shares and ingages with it in all its concerns: So that in the two first Reasons there is a manifest Fallacy of Di­vision, which runs through every part, visible to every common Eye; and is no sooner de [...]rted, but the whole Fabrick of [Page 22] his subtile Argumentation sinks, and falls even with the dust: Though the Body a­lone cannot, yet in conjunction with the Soul, it may. When a Noble Lord takes to Wife one of the meanest Ex­traction who has no pretensions of her own, to any thing that is great; yet up­on her Marriage she is Dignified and In­dowed, with all the Privileges of her Right Honourable Spouse: This, as near as I can represent it, is the Case of the Soul and Body: The Heaven-born Bridegroom stoops to the Earth for a Partner; Advances, Exalts the Beggar, confers Life, Sense, Motion on her; ad­mits her to Bed and Board, allows her a share in all his Dignities and Injoyments. The Body without the Soul can neither Sin nor do Well: But the happy wedlock has ennobled this piece of Clay, and em­powered it in conjunction to act with it. So that I fancy the Doctor to be under a mistake, when he calls the Body only the Instrument of the Soul: Certainly 'tis more, 'tis an essential Part, and the Man can as well be without the Soul as with­out the Body; to call the Body therefore an Instrument, is too low a Term, when 'tis manifestly the Collegue and Companion of the Soul, and together with it, consti­tutes [Page 23] the Great Prince and Lord of the Crea­tion I shall challenge the most Acute of Philosophers to give me the definition of a Man without a Body: Nec caro sine anima Homo, quae post exilium Cadaver est, saith Tertullian, The Soul without the Body is no more the Man, than the Body without the Soul. If then it must be ac­knowledged a Physical, Indispensible Prin­ciple of his constitution, the one half of the Man; What a disparagement is it to call it an Instrument only? Now that it is so, the Learned Doctor himself ex­presly tells us, Pag. 218. 'Tis a great mistake to imagine, that the Identity or Same­ness of Man consists wholy in the Sameness of the Soul; if Euphorbus, Homer, and Ennius had had one and the same Soul, yet they would not have been one and the same, but three distinct Men. It seems then it is the constituting, the essential, and most distinguishing Principle, it can make three Men of one Soul; and so by consequence threescore: And how worthily 'tis called an Instrument only, let the World judge. I confess 'tis often by Philosophers and Divines set out by this Expression, The Instrument of the Soul, to denote, as I suppose, the transcendent excellency of the Soul above it, and all that Life, [Page 24] Sense, and Activity it can pretend to, as derived from the Soul, and dependent on it; yet, That it is more than an Instru­ment, is acknowledged by the Learned Author, who calls it pag. 198. The Col­legue and Companion of the Soul; and pag 204. Her old Acquaintance; and is un­deniably proved from 1 Cor. 6. 18. He that comitteth Fornication Sinneth against his own Body: Here it is manifestly a Party, and so interpreted and understood by Commentators on the place. The like might be observed of other sins, as of Gluttony, Drunkenness, &c. which are properly called the Lusts or Sins of the Flesh. But 'tis farther Objected, That the Arm that stabs, sins no more than the Sword. Here then is a good plea for Cri­minals at the Bar, and 'tis much it has never been made use of: but I believe the Homicide suspects that it would do him no kindness; it would be received by the Court with Laughter, and rejected with Scorn and Indignation; and reason good, for the Sword is a Tool in its self Innocent and Harmless, 'tis the Arm that weilds it, that impresses it, that' gives it Force and Vigour to destroy; so that if to gratifie the Objection, we allow the Arm to be an Instrument, yet that it is [Page 25] no more concerned in the Matter than the Sword, is notoriously false, because the one is a dead, the other a living In­strument; and there must be a vast diffe­rence between these. The Arm consi­dered a-part, is no more able to kill, than the Sword; nay, less able, because that has not so fit a disposition to pierce thro' the Bowels as the other, being made a­cute for that purpose: But the Arm uni­ted to the Body has Strength, Vigour, Motion in every part, and must be al­lowed the true efficient Cause of the Murther; whereas the other is the Means, the Weapon to effect it: And here also the Fallacy of Division is very plain and visible.


BUT the Objector adds, 'Tis the Soul only that is the Murtherer. If it be so, I wonder then what the Judge, Jury, and Executioner, the Gaol, or Gallows have to say or do to the Body; if it be so, there is an horrible Scene of Injustice all the World over; if so, De­lirant Reges, plectuntur Achivi, was not the single Case of the poor Grecians, who went to pot for the Miscarriages of their Generals, but the common and de­plorable Fate of all Mankind. Certainly if the Soul only be the Murtherer, the Body is free, ought not to be touch'd, is by all Laws whatsoever, discharg'd both from the Guilt and Punishment of that Crime in which it had no hand. For as 'tis Injustice on one side, not to pu­nish the Guilty; so 'tis no less on the other to punish the Innocent. If this quaint Notion of the Philosopher could be made good before the Bench, it would bring him in more Gain than all the Pre­ferments beside: But alas, this nail will [Page 27] never drive. He will never be able to perswade the World of the truth of it. And indeed it does exceedingly labour: For, 'tis not the Soul, but 'tis the Man that is the Murderer. And here also is a manifest Tang of the old Sophism. True indeed, the Soul is the first, chief, and principal Actor in the Tragedy, but we can by no means excuse the outward Part. 'Tis the Soul that bestows on the Body Life, and sense, without which it could not possibly lay claim to either; and e­ven here 'tis Ridiculous to imagine, that the more Spiritual and noble Part, uses the Terrestrial and earthy, as a Tool and Ma­chine, an Instrument only, i. e. bare­ly agitates and moves it, as the Snail does his Shell; the Waterman his Boat; the Rider his Horse; the Fencing-Master his Weapon; the Man his Cloaths. No, this has been sufficiently exploded by the Philosophers and Schoolmen, in the cole­brated Question on the present Subject, being by Both, constantly maintained in the Negative. The Soul, during its Re­sidence with its beloved Bride, is liberal in his Endowments towards her, (as in the foregoing Comparison) furnishes and sets her up with great Accomplishments, bestows Sense, Vigour, Activity, Percepti­on, [Page 28] on on her, so that derivatively she has the Benefit, Use, and Enjoyment of all these. This is a Doctrine disputable; and I believe will not go down with all; but for the Truth of it, I appeal to the Sense of Mankind, and for its Support I briefly offer these Considerations. 1. The Soul diffuses it self through every Part of the Body, according to the known Maxim of the great Peripatetick, and certainly to no other purpose, but to bestow its Larges­ses. The Vegetable Soul gives Life to e­very Particle of the Plant or Tree, and the Rational Soul cannot be supposed to be less liberal. 2. 'Tis undeniable, that there is a mutual and reciprocal Influence of each toward other. The Soul impresses the Body; on t'other hand, That im­presses the Soul. The loving Pair mutu­ally give and receive from each other; the noble Spouse makes his Bride the ge­nerous Presents so often mentioned; She, on the other hand, guides and directs the Soul in his Behaviour; according to the known Axiome, Mores animae sequuntur temper amentum corporis, which I confess I do not understand, unless it come home to the purpose. The different Constituti­ons and Complexions of our Bodies have a powerful influence on our Souls, and [Page 29] do, in a great measure, over-rule and com­mand them. This is allowed by all, and manifestly appears in the Behaviour of Children suitable to their Progenitors: They do, for the most part, follow their Way, and tread in their Steps. The Bo­dy is the perpetual Dictator, and pre­scribes to the Soul the Manner and Me­thod of its Government. Thus, accord­ing to the peculiar Composure of the outward, we find the Dispositions of the inward Man. He in whom the sanguine Complexion is predominant, proclaims his Constitution by his Port and Actions, is Bold, Couragious, Magnanimous and Hero­ick; whereas the Cholerick Man tells the World what he is made of, by his Pee­vishness and Petulancy: And so in all other Cases as all here agree. And least the Su­spicion of Traduction which prevails with some, should enervate the force of the Argument, To put it altogether without dispute, I lay down this as an undenia­ble Position, That the Manners of Chil­dren are not only influenced by their Pa­rents, but Nurses too. The Concessions of Philosophers, Physicians, and confirmed Experience of all, do give me a Superse­deas here, and pronounce the Proof of it altogether needless. There is a Curi­ous [Page 30] Dissertation in Aulus Gellius, lib. 12. cap. 1. of Favorinus the Philosopher on this Subject, to a Noble Woman, perswa­ding her to give suck to her own Child, and not endanger the corrupting of his Manners by a strange Milk. The Dis­course is so full, excellent, and nervous, that I can hardly forbear to transcribe it; and whereunto, for full Satisfaction I refer the Reader. 3. That the Body is endowed with Life and Sensation, is undeniable from the common and daily Experience of it in every part: Even the Extream Parts are endued with a ready and most exquisite Sensation. And, 4. the Truth of it is abundantly confirmed from this usual Ex­periment, That if at any time there hap­pens a Sphacelus, a Mortification in any ex­treme part, instantly there is recourse to the Surgeon and his Saw, to take off the dead part, for the Preservation of the whole; which to me is little less than a Demonstration, That the other Parts are truly and actually alive. The Body even of Adam (if the Supposition may be al­low'd) before its Union with its Hea­venly Partner, was a senseless Clod of Earth; but when God breathed into him the Breath of Life, then Man became a li­ving [Page 31] Soul; a living Man, though we allow it a Carkass, upon its Separa­tion.


THE Objector goes on: Neither is the Body capable of any Rewards or Punishments, 'tis the Soul only that is sen­sible; and nothing but what is sensible can be capable of Rewards and Punishments.

Here again we are assaulted with the old Paralogism, and therefore must dis­miss it with the same Answer. The Body without the Soul is capable of nei­ther Rewards nor Punishments; but in Conjunction with it is exquisitely sensi­ble, and enjoys either. What have we to do to consider the Body in a separate state? This is foreign, impertinent, and beside the Argument in all respects. Our Dispute lies about the Good or Evil that Men do in this Life, and that Remuna­ration which according to their Deserts, shall attend them at the Resurrection: In both which the whole Man is con­cerned, and not one part; neither the [Page 32] Body without the Soul, nor the Soul without the Body, but both in Conjun­ction. And though I will not deny; That the Soul while in the Body, may, and does sometimes act Abstractively, without the Concurrence of the Body, in a Spiritual and Intellectual Manner, in good or bad Desires, Cogitations, and Con­trivances, which are by the Philosophers call'd Immanent Acts; and so by consequence has a separate, distinct Enjoyment of Plea­sure or Pain, according to the Result and Nature of them, wholly peculiar to its self, and altogether independent from the Body; yet all other Rewards and Pu­nishments here, are conferred on the Soul by the Mediation of the Body; so far is the Objection from being true, as that the contrary is undeniable. As the Body is beholden to the Soul for the Capacity of Rewards and Punishments, so all the Rewards or Punishments that are or can be placed on the Soul in this Life, are owing to the Body, without which 'tis altogether impossible it should be invested with either. How is the Soul of the most deserving Courtier pre­ferr'd, but by the Body? How is the Soul of the Valiant Soldier advanc'd to higher Dignity of Command, but by [Page 33] the Body? How is the Soul of the Lear­ned Doctor bless'd with Plurality of Pre­ferments in the Church and Ʋniversity, but by the Body? And so in all other Cases whatsoever. On the other hand, the same is no less visible in the Distributi­on of Punishments: How is the Soul of the Malefactor brought to suffer, but by the Body? Ask the Prisoner in the Dun­geon, with his heavy Load of Fetters on, how the Place and Irons come to affect his Soul; he will readily tell thee, 'Tis by the Body. Ask the petty Thief at the the Cart's Tayl, how his Spiritual Part does rue for his Transgression, and he'll tell thee, 'tis by the painful Stripes in­flicted on his Back. Ask the Man that has undergone the Shame and Torment of the Hot Iron, how the principal Actor in the Crime comes to have a share, he will immediately by his woful Experi­ence resolve the Question, viz. by the scandalous Stigma in his Hand or Cheek; which to his Anguish he has felt, and to his Disgrace must retain. In short, Ask the Man in the Cart, tyed with the fa­tal Halter, and just ready to be turn'd over, how the first and chief Contriver of the Offence for which he is condem­ned, is brought to suffer, and he can give [Page 34] thee no other Answer. The Soul is a Spiritual, Intellectual, Invisible Being, no way subject to the Pleasure, or Jurisdicti­on of any Power on Earth; 'tis no way capable of the Preferment of a Palace, nor of the Confinement of a Prison, but above, and out of the Reach of both, and can have no Colour of pretence to any Rewards or Punishments whatsoever, at present, (excepting those before mention­ed) but in Conjunction with, and by the Mediation of the Body. In Conclu­sion, our Answer here is, 'Tis neither the one nor the other, in a divided or se­parate Sense, that has a Claim or Title to Rewards or Punishments here; 'tis the Com­positum, the Soul and Body in Ʋnion and Conjunction together; i.e. 'tis the Man that can challenge this: And as for an Answer to the Objection, with reference to the Body after the Resurrection, (which is the main Subject of the present Dis­course) if the Body be not capable of Re­wards or Punishments, I would fain have the Learned Dr. to tell me, what doth the Body of the Saint in Heaven, or what makes the Body of the Reprobate in Hell? Sure I am, because so taught by Christ himself, as two Evangelists have record­ed it (Matt. 10. 28. Luc. 12. 4.) That [Page 35] Men are able to kill the Body, and God is able to destroy both Body and Soul. Now you cannot be said, with any Congruity of Speech, to kill that which has no Sense, no Life; and what is liable to be destroy'd in Hell-fire must be allow'd ca­pable of Punishment, and by unavoid­able Consequence, of Sin, whereof this is the Wages. In short, this sacred Au­thority lays the Axe to the Root of the two first Objections, and fells them to the Ground. If the Body can be kill'd, can be destroy'd in Hell-fire; it cannot be deny'd to be sensible, capable of sinning, of doing well, of Rewards and Punishments. All these are manifestly imply'd here.


THat our Bodies are more than In­struments only, is a Truth that clearly shines forth from the Make and Creation of them. Man was brought into the World last of all, and therefore must be acknowledg'd the most perfect and compleat of all the Creatures; He is upon this account, called by the Philo­sophers, the Microcosm, the Little World, the Epitome of the Greater: And tho' the Fabrick of all others, (tho' never so mean) must be own'd to be stupendous; yet there is certainly somewhat in Humane Bodies, surpassing and transcendent; if not in the Matter, yet in the Manner and Fi­gure of 'em. The Consultation of the Eternal Trinity about this Affair, imports somewhat singular; a Product more than ordinary.—Come, Let us make man, (Gen. 1. 26.) the Prince, the Emperor of all the rest. This is taught us in that passage of Elihu in Job 33. 4. The spirit of God hath made me, and the breath of the Almighty hath given me life. The Expression ele­gantly [Page 37] notes the Exactness of his Frame: Man is the Master-piece of the Creation, (as his immortal Commentator (Caryl) has observ'd. Our Bodies are Temples built, and Temples sanctify'd: A living Man, Genes. 2. 7. Man became a living Soul: And upon this account the Royal Psalmist breaks forth into this sublime Rapture, Psal. 139. 14. I will praise thee, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made: marvellous are thy Works, and that my Soul knoweth right well. My substance was not hid from thee though I were made in secret; and curiously wrought in the lowest parts of the earth; Thine Eyes did see my substance yet being imperfect, and in thy Book were all my members written, which day by day were fashioned, when as yet there were none of them.—The Fabrick of Man is of all other the most exquisite: This the Great Mrster of Physick has professedly assert­ed, in a most Admirable Treatise of 17 Books; which Gassendus thinks was penn'd with a Spirit of Enthusiasm, for the Refutation of the Atheistical Do­ctrines of Epicurus: and the Mirrour of of Learning, (Orig. Sacr. lib. 3. cap. 1.) calls it the Hundred and nineteenth Psalm in Philosophy; or, A perpetual Hymn in Praise of the Great Creator; a just Com­mentary [Page 38] on the former Passage of the Psal­mist. The whole Work is a full and pregnant Demonstration of a Deity, to which end 'tis apply'd by that incompa­rable Prelate, who thereupon thinks it strange that Physicians of all Men should be Atheists; who from the Subject of their Science have powerful Arguments to the contrary. When we shall consi­der the admirable Contrivance of Man's Body, the curious Formation of all its Parts, in order to the various Designs, Services, and Uses of 'em; its astonish­ing, and innumerable Excellencies, me­thinks we should account them more than barely Instruments. The Philoso­phers and Divines have entertain'd No­bler Sentiments of it: They have pro­claim'd it aloud to be the One half of that finishing Piece, which came last out of the Almighty's hands; the One half of him, for whose sake and service all o­thers were made; the One half of him, who had the Dignity to be Lord over all; who by his Frame, Endowments, and Advantages, is directed to devote, and conseerate his Whole Self, all that he has, or is, to the Honour and Glory of his bountiful Master.

[Page 39] 2. But if this Consideration will not do, let us for a while contemplate the Assumption, the Incarnation of our Bles­sed Saviour. He took such a Nature as ours, such a Body as ours, with all its Organical Parts. To this purpose he stoop'd to Bethlehem; to the Womb of a poor Virgin, to the Stable and the Man­ger; To this purpose, He that was in the form of God, and thought it not robbery to be equal with God, made himself of no Re­putation, ( [...]) emptied himself, dis­rob'd himself of his Divine Dignity, and took upon him the Form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of man. St. John tells us, John 1. 14. That the Eternal Word that was in the beginning, and crea­ted all things, was made flesh, and dwelt among us: And the Author to the He­brews, chap. 2. 16. gives us a Confirma­tion of it, with an Asseveration, Verily he took not on him the nature of Angels, but the seed of Abraham; i.e. He was an entire Man like any of us (sin only ex­cepted). Nay, what is more, that very Body which he assum'd, in which he li­ved, and in which he was crucified, is ascended up into Heaven, where he sit­teth at the Right hand of God, and by the powerful Rhetorick of his Wounds, [Page 40] the Impression of which he now retains, is our Eternal Expiatory Sacrifice, incessant­ly transacting the great Work of Advo­cation with his Father, still making In­tercession for us.

By this there is conferr'd on Humane Nature, the highest Honour and Dignity imaginable; and this must teach us to put a value on our Bodies, and to look up­on them as more than Machines and Tools only. This (if I mistake not) is an In­ference most genuine, and naturally flow­ing from the Premisses; and 'tis most cer­tainly the express Use which the Ancients would have us to make of it. Thus St. Austine, on the present Subject, (de Verit. Relig. cap. 6.) Demonstravit nobis Deus quàm excelsum locum inter creatur as habet humana natura, in hoc quod in hominibus, in vero homine apparuit: God (saith the holy Father) hath given us a Demonstra­tion of the Dignity and transcendent Excel­lency of Humane Nature, in that Christ, a VERY MAN, lived among Men. And to the same purpose another great Au­thor, (Leo, Serm. 1. de Nat. Dom.) Ag­nosce, O Christiane, dignitatem tuam & divine consors factus naturae, noli in vete­rem vilitatem degeneri consuetudine redire: i. e. Christ, by taking such a Body, has shewn [Page 41] thee the Dignity and Excellency of thine; taught thee not to disparage, dis-esteem it, or use it unworthily.

3. But if neither of these be sufficient, come we in the third place, to cast our Eyes a little on the Redemption; and in that great Work the Whole Man is con­cern'd. The Prince of our Salvation submitted himself to the Cross, and all its shameful, miserable, painful Appendages, to become a Propitiation for Both. Our Bodies as well as Souls are the Price of his Blood: And can any one then account 'em no more but Instruments only? The thing is so evident, as that I think it needless to say any more for it; nor can I imagine what can in the least colour be said against it.

4. Wherefore I pass to the next Ar­gument under this Head, for Confirmati­on of the Doctrine in hand; and that is Bodily Worship. Have not all the Ortho­dox Pulpits echo'd and sounded this aloud. How often have we been told, That we are to serve God in our Bodies as well as Souls; the one is but maimed and imper­fect without the other; the Great Crea­tor has an undeniable and manifold Right [Page 42] to Both. How much, the true Sons of the Church have labour'd in this Argu­ment, cannot be unknown to any who know any thing of the Controversies a­bout the Modification of Worshipping God, which has been the grand Subject of the Dispute of this last Age.—How zealous, good Men have been to relieve that abused and misapply'd Place, John 4. 24. from Captivity, and to discharge it from that hard and unworthy Service which the Dissenters would have imposed upon it, and compelled it to bear; still asserting, that to serve God, as (in Truth) we ought, we must serve him more than in Spirit only? How often has that of the Apostle been made the Text, 1 Cor. 14. ult. That in God's Service regard must be had to Decency and Order? How often have we been told, that we must not make our Approaches to the most High in a slovenly manner, but in the most humble and becoming Postures: To give Testimony of our inward, by the uniform Port of our OUTWARD MAN, and to make the Worship acceptable and compleat, to be careful to join both these together? The truth is, the Body by its self is altogether incapable of the least Per­formance; for as the Psalmist has observ'd, [Page 43] The dead praise not God, neither they that go down to silence. But yet we have the same infallible Assurance, that the living can and do praise him: Do not our Lips, Tongue, and Mouth shew forth his Praise? Do not our Hands serve God when we lift them up toward the Mercy-seat of his holy Temple? Do not our Feet bear a part also here, when they make chearful and di­rect Paths to the place where his honour dwelleth? Do not our Eyes and Ears go Sharers here, when they behold and hear the wondrous things of God's Law, when they are attentively exercised in his Sta­tutes? In a word, Do not our whole Bodies engage in this Divine Work, in their Submissions, Adorations, and Prostra­tions before his Altar? What Nonsense is it for any Man to imagine the contra­ry; when we are so often and pathetically commanded and called upon by God, in his Holy Word to do it? Not to multi­ply Authorities here, the winning and en­dearing Entreaty of the Great Apostle a­lone is sufficient, Rom. 12. 1. Wherefore I beseech you, Brethren, by the mercies of God, that you present your Bodies a living sacrifice, holy, and acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service: And if it be here said, that the Apostle by Bodies [Page 44] means the Whole Man, I have no mind to deny the Allegation; but I reply, that the Body is also concerned, and (as must be acknowledged from the Allusion to the legal Sacrifices) in an especial manner pointed at: And if this be not Proof e­nough, there are other places which can­not be understood in any other sense, which refer peculiarly to the Body. Thus the same Apostle, speaking of the abomi­nable Sin of the Gentiles, says, Rom. 1. 24. That they did dishonour their own Bo­dies between themselves; And to the same purpose he calls upon his Corinthians to glorifie God with their Bodies which are his; and 1 Thess. 5. 23. he prays, that their Spirit, Soul, and Body be preserved blame­less to the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ: Where Both the Objections of the Lear­ned Author are put to silence, and quash­ed by one word, Blameless; which clear­ly supposes our Bodies capable of doing well, or evil, of Rewards and Punishments; otherwise there can be no Congruity in the Discourse of the great Doctor of the Gentiles (who was brought up at the feet of Gamaliel, was so Accomplish'd an Orator, as that 'twas one of the three celebrated Wishes of the great St. Austin, That he might have seen him in the Pulpit; nay, what is more, was inspir'd [Page 45] from above): And he must be allow'd by all, to speak at a very impertinent Rate. I cannot see any doubt or diffi­culty here: The Wicked sin and disho­nour God with their Bodies, and that, properly speaking, by the Lusts of the Flesh, the [...], by the Lusts of the lower Belly, as the Father calls them: The Sins of Gluttony, Drun­kenness, Ʋncleanness, and a multitude of others. Nay, St. John seems to fix Sin more especially on the Body, in his first Epistle, chap. 2. 16. where he reckons them up under three Heads, All that is in the World, the Lust of the Flesh, the Lust of the Eye, and the Pride of Life. On the other hand, the Case is altogether as un­deniable: The good Man serves, honours, worships, and glorifies God with his Body, in adorning it with Sobriety, Temperance, Cha­stity, and other Exercises of Vertue; in keeping it clean, swept, and garnished; a fit Receptacle and Mansion for the Holy Spirit, in a ready Compliance and Con­junction with the Soul in all the Offices of Religion. This most evidently ap­pears to be the Doctrine of our Church, when we are admitted to the highest and nearest Communion with God in the Eucharist, by that Clause which is insert­ed and repeated in both Forms of Admi­nistration; [Page 46] when the Priest delivers the Bread, He prays, That it may preserve thy Body and Soul unto Everlasting Life; and again he uses the same Form when he gives the Cup, The Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, which was shed for thee, preserve thy Body and Soul unto Everlasting Life. Now to reason fairly; Unless our Bodies are capable of Everlasting Life, I know not what sense we can make of the Prayer: And if our Bodies are capa­ble of Everlasting Life, as must be al­low'd, they are necessarily imply'd sub­ject to Everlasting Death, and by unavoid­able Consequence, must be allow'd capa­ble of doing good or evil. To conclude this, St. Paul was so throughly convin­ced of Both, as that he rallies together a multitude of Arguments, to prevent the one, and engage us in the other.

First, In 1 Cor. 6. 13. The Body is for the Lord, i.e. 'Twas made by him, and therefore ordain'd and devoted to his Service.

Secondly, The Lord for the Body, i.e. He redeemed and sanctified it, and so has a farther and improved Right to it.

Thirdly, God will raise our Bodies, v. 14. i.e. The Resurrection lays a farther Ob­ligation upon us.

[Page 47] Fourthly, Our Bodies are the Members of Christ, and therefore they ought not to be the Members of an Harlot: We ought to keep them clean and pure for his sake, as Parts of that Society whereof he is the Head.

Fifthly, He that committeth Fornication sinneth against his own body; i.e. Though there are some Sins without the Body, yet the Sins of Ʋncleanness are properly Sins of the Body.

Sixthly, Our Bodies are the Temples of the Holy Ghost, ver. 19. The Sins of our Bodies turn this Holy Gu [...]st out of doors, and admit another Master, ma­king them the Devil's Brothel-Houses, and Styes.

Lastly, Our Bodies are bought with a price, ver. 20. Therefore not to glorifie God in own Bodies as well as Souls, since by a manifold Right they are both his, is not simply Sin, but Sin of an high Degree, and deep Dye; no less than the Sin of Sacrilege.

After all this, to corroborate the Ar­gument, I might here expatiate upon the great Cost and Expence which the Pri­mitive Christians bestowed in Embalm­ing their dead Bodies; of which Tertul­lian, [Page 48] St. Augustine, and others, give us a large Account, which comes home fully to the Point in hand, and can be apply'd to no other purpose. By this Practice of theirs 'tis plain, they look'd upon their Bodies as perfumed with their Graces here, smelling sweet in their Dor­mitories, deposited as in a Bed of Spices, and resting in full Hope of a Glorious Retribution.

But I conceive I have no need of it; and therefore it may suffice only to have noted it.


I Pass to the Examination of the Third and last Objection, which as a Bar lies in our way, and ought to be remo­ved. If it be Injustice in God to punish the Soul alone without the Body, in Con­junction with which she committed the Sin; then all the Matter which constitued the Body when the several Sins were committed, must be raised again, and reunited to the Soul; for if some, why not all? But what Mon­sters of Men should we be in the Resurrecti­on, if all the Substance of which our Bo­dies consisted from our Childhood to our Deaths, should be gathered together, and formed into a Body?

Without taking notice of the Severity of the Objection, I shall endeavour to give satisfaction to it: And,

First, I Answer; That the Resurre­ction depends upon an All-sufficient and Omnipotent Power; and though I cannot tell with what Matter the Bodies shall [Page 50] arise, yet every good Man ought to rest satisfy'd in this, That a God of infinite Abilities will take care to make good his Word; For there are an hundred things (as the Learned Author has asserted, p. 221.) both in NATURE and DIVINITY, the Existence of which we cannot doubt, and yet the Reason of them we cannot compre­hend. Of which he there gives us a multitude of Instances, (whereunto I refer the Reader) and at last resolves the Resurrection into God's good Plea­sure, as the Highest Reason. 'Tis alto­gether surprizing, how he came to be so positive here, and in this difficult point im­possible to be understood or resolved by the wisest of Men, to be so magisterial; especially considering that unlucky Passage which drops from his Pen, in the Words immediately following, p. 222. I fansie my self (Philalethes) talking to a bold Re­finer on the Promises and Decrees of Al­mighty God, and one of those little Nothings that call themselves Philosophers, that form to themselves Notions and Idaea's, then deal with Revelation as the Tyrant did with the poor Innocents on his Bed, either violently stretch it beyond its natural Reach, or chop off a part to make it commensurate to their Intentions.

[Page 51] I will make no Animadversions here, though I have a fair Opportunity; but I cannot forbear to say, that the Learn­ed Author has made Monsters of all Men at the Resurrection, if it be found­ed on Justice contrary to his own Rea­soning, in the places foregoing, where he professes his Ignorance, and challenges the World to give an account of; as sup­posing it impossible: And yet boldly asserts here, That all the Matter which was of the Body of the Man from his Childhood to his Grave, must be rallied together at the Resurrection, or else there can be no­thing of Justice in the Case.

But, Secondly, I answer; This Asser­tion runs Counter to the Doctrine of the Schoolmen and Ancients, who have with one Mouth determin'd, That the Child shall not arise a Child, nor the Cor­pulent Man with his great Bulk; nor he who sunk under a Marasmus, peep out of his Grave a Skeleton. Nor the Old Man appear at the Resurrection with his Grey Hairs, or any Symptomes of Age; but all shall arise (inter Incrementum & Decrementum humanae naturae) about the Age of 33, in a perfect State; staturā quam habuit vel habiturus est, as Lombard, [Page 52] Sent. 4. Dis. 44. Aug. Civ. Dei, Lib. 22. Cap. 14.

Thirdly, I answer; That this is alto­gether beside the Question; We are to consider the Body fallen, and to prove the Resurrection of that same Body, to be joined to the same Soul, in order to a Judgment; And this is all that in Rea­son can be expected: We are no ways concerned to look back to its various and different States, from his Childhood to his Death; if we can produce the same Pri­soners before the Supreme Tribunal, there can be no Injustice in the Thing; for the Learned Author has granted, and proved that our Bodies, from our Child­hood to our Graves, notwithstanding their constant, innumerable, great, and wonder­ful Changes, are still the same. Pag. 132. Moreover he has granted, That (accord­ing to the Supposition of Philosophers) tho' the Body be changed once in seven Years; (which, obiter, I can never believe, and am sure is impossible to be proved) yet he grants it is still the same. That a Man that has kept his Bed for above seven Years, upon his Recovery rises the same Man, tho' he have not now one Particle the same that he had when he took his Bed; and he gives [Page 53] us the Reason of it, Because the Particles of the Body are gradually changed in a con­tinual Ʋnion with the Soul. The Body (he says) in such a Case is the same, and may properly be said to raise again. And yet the Learned Author in his Argument here, exacts all the Matter which constituted the Body, when the several Sins were committed, to be raised again, to be re-united to the Soul; which how congruous to himself, and how reason­able in its self, I leave others to judge.

Fourthly, I answer; This Objection is too strict and subtile; It impeaches, de­stroys, and overturns all Justice upon Earth, and renders it altogether impossi­ble: The Reason is irresistible; for there are fleeting Particles of Matter, which constantly come and go, ebb and flow in our Bodies, through the whole Course of our Lives, so that the Man is not to day what he was yesterday, nor will be to morrow what he is to day. This is more manifest in long Imprisonments; The Male­factor frequently comes into Gaol, plump and hail, full of Flesh and Blood; but by his long Confinement is emaciated, and appears at the Bar quite another Thing: Yea often times it so happens, that he is so [Page 54] much impair'd in his Health, Strength, Con­stitution, and Complexion, that he is unavoid­ably dropping into the Grave without the Help of the Gallows; and yet no Man ever questions the Justice of his Execution.

Sir Walter Rawleigh was beheaded for a Crime committed above 20 Years before, and though (according to the Imaginati­on of the Philosophers above-mentioned) this Body must be thrice changed in this Interval; yet the Equity of his Sentence was never doubted. The like might be observed of Mary Queen of Scotland.— The Annals of all Nations overflow with Examples of Criminals whose Punish­ments have been a long time protracted without the least suspicion of Injustice.

Fifthly, Therefore I answer plainly, by denying the Consequence, viz. That it does no way follow from the Principles of Justice, That all the Matter which consti­tuted the Body when the several Sins were committed, should be raised up again; My Reason is, because much if not most of this Matter is accidental to the Body; for­asmuch as 'tis plain, the Body can be, and oftentimes is without it. What fre­quent and considerable Alterations all Men undergo in this respect, is abun­dantly [Page 55] confirmed by the Experience of all. Most Men generally are well flesh­ed in Summer, but in the Time of Win­ter fall away. And this is more visible in the Cattle of the Field, being for the most part Fat and Full in the Hot Season of the Year, which affords plenty of Grass and Food: But when the Frost and Snow comes in upon them, and diminishes their Pasture, then they pine away, and are often starved. Men owe the Dimen­sions of their Bodies in a great measure to their Ease, Health, Prosperity, and Af­fluence: Whereas Hunger, Cold, Want, Po­verty, Diseases, will make them dwindle and bring them down to nothing but Skin and Bones. To this purpose I am sure, I have long since met with the Determination of the Royal Society in their Philosophical Transactions, namely, That the Fat and Corpulency of a Creature is nothing but the Repletion of the Parenchy­ma: And that they would undertake to make a Dog or an Horse, Fat, Fleshy, and Full in a very few Days. There is no necessity then for all the Matter to be rallied together at the Resurrection; be­cause much of it is Accidental, not Essen­tial to the Body: It has been, is, and may be without it. Our Doctrine then [Page 56] must stand in spight of this Shock and Assault. The Justice of God is se­cured, and the Saint in no manner of Danger of mounting from his Grave a Monster; nor the Sinner neither in this, though he must be acknowledg'd such in the worst of senses.

Lastly, If all that has been hitherto said cannot put the Objection to silence, I will presume to borrow the mighty Sword of our Opponent, which alone can do the Work, and as effectually as that of Goliah, cut off this Monstrous Head. Pag. 187. his Words are these; ‘It is farther to be considered, that though the same Body that died is to rise again, yet it is not necessary that all the Particles of it should be raised up; 'tis enough that such Particles are raised, as made up the integrant and necessary Parts of the Body. By ne­cessary Parts, I mean those which re­main after the utmost degree of Mace­ration, without which the Body would not be integrant, but imperfect; and these are chiefly the Bones, the Skin, the Nerves, the Tendons, the Liga­ments, and Substance of the several Ves­sels; as long as these, and all that are [Page 57] necessary to Life remain, the Body is truly whole, though never so much ma­cerated; all the Flesh that is added makes nothing to the Wholeness or In­tegrality of the Body, though it con­duce to Strength and Ornament.’—And by and by he adds, ‘If the Bo­dy be extremely maciated, I do not doubt but in the Resurrection it will be restored by foreign adventitious Matter, to its due and just Proportion: So in Bodies that are full and flesby, there is a great deal of Substance that is not necessary, which if it become the Flesh of another Man, the Body may be raised up without it, and yet be Physically whole, and truly the same. In Bodies that are fat and gross there is doubtless a great deal superfluous, which will never be raised up; though it were never made the Ingredient of another Man's Body.’


Having consider'd the Objections, I'm to wait on the Learned Author in what remains, who is labouring to find out a Reason of the Resurrection of the Body, as indeed he is obliged; since he has taken away the main Pillar, and laid that aside: In order whereunto he tells us, pag. 211. That the Soul does not die with the Body, as some ancient Here­ticks and Arabians held.—This is an O­pinion too ridiculous to be confuted. Then pag. 212. he tells us, That the Soul does not sleep until the day of the Resurrection, as the Psychopannychists imagined. All that is to be said here is, That this is a Notion so manifestly false, so contradicti­ous to Scripture, and has been so fully con­futed by many Learned Pens, particular­ly by the incomparable Divine of Geneva, in a Treatise professedly written against it, as that there is no more to be said here. He comes thence to consider the Opinions of Tertullian, and they are di­vided into three Ranks.

[Page 59] First, He asserts the Sensibility of the separate * Soul, That it is of its self capa­ble of Rewards and Punishments; is actu­ally in some measure comforted, or tormented before the Resurrection.

There are a multitude of other Passages of the same Father which testifie the same. And no doubt but that this great Father is Orthodox here.

Secondly, Notwithstanding in other places he seems to set up a quite opposite Doctrine, viz. That the Soul is not capa­ble of suffering without the Body; and this he makes the Reason of the Resurrecti­on [Page 60] a. And elsewhere he asserts the Ne­cessity of the Resurrection, because the Soul without the Body is not capable of feeling either Pleasure or Pain b.

I shall reserve what I have to say to This, to the last place, and take leave to invert the Order, and consider the other Opinion before it, conceiving it more suitable and methodical to the Argument in hand: And that is,

Thirdly, He owns, ‘That separate Souls are actually c rewarded or pu­nished before the Resurrection; and he says 'tis for those good or bad things [Page 61] it did without the Concurrence of the Body.’ He farther says, ‘That tho' the Soul be in its own Nature capable of Rewards or Punishments; yet it is not so fully capable as when uni­ted to the Body. It is capable of greater Pleasure or Torment when uni­ted to the Body, than in a State of Se­paration; and therefore for those things which the Soul did in Concurrence with the Body, must be punished and rewarded in the Body, that the Plea­sure or Torment may be perfect.’

The Learned Author's Animadversion on this is, p. 217. But this is very pre­carious; and if once it be granted, that the Soul is in its own Nature, without an or­ganized Body, capable of Rewards and Pu­nishments, it cannot be denied, but that it is of it self capable of being fully Reward­ed and Punished.

[Page 62] I answer: Not to take any notice of the Tertullianicum (as his Learned Com­mentators call it) of the gross Naevus here, etsi habet corpus, etsi habet membra, which the Father applies to the Soul in a separate State, and is by no means ju­stifiable: Nor to undertake a Defence of him here or elsewhere, in an exact, strict and rigid sense; for 'tis well known, that this African Father is the most dark, ab­struse, and intricate of the Latin Fathers, makes use of uncouth, obsolete Words, which will no way bear a full and exact, but require a moderate and sober Inter­pretation.

Premising this, I cannot see how he is in the main here precarious; to my Un­derstanding there is no begging at all in the Case: The Doctrine seems found and approvable, supported and maintained by the Ancients, who accordingly have pla­ced the departed Souls in Abraham's Bo­som, in Paradise, in outer Porches, in Re­ceptacles, under the Altar, the Promptuary of Saints, the Earnest of the Kingdom; with a multitude of other such Expressi­ons to the same purpose. 'Twere easie here to fill up a great deal of Paper with the Names and Authorities of the most considerable Pillars of the Church, who [Page 63] have espoused this Opinion; but I in­dustriously avoid the Vanity of it, and think it altogether needless in the pre­sent Dispute, because the Learned Au­thor, speaking of the Opinion of Pope John XXII. tells us, That he only held that the Soul does not at all enjoy the Beatisick Vision before the Resurrection; and for Confirmation of it, adds, pag. 212. This indeed was the Opinion of the Primitive Fathers.

And albeit this Doctrine was Censur'd and Condemn'd in the Council of Florence, yet this can have no Influence on us, who know too well what this Council was, and the Age of it. And though it prevail with those of the Church of Rome, yet 'tis observable, how that even the Learned Men that are Bigotted to that way, do not stick to give us their Ap­probation of it. Meminerint hunc erro­rem non efficere pietati, & eruditioni tam illustrium scriptorum, saith Pamelius, i.e. This Opinion is no prejudice to the Piety and Learning of those Great Men: And another Eminent Writer of that Church calls it, Pia & beata opinio veritati facile reconciliabilis per duplicem beatitudinem per­fectam & imperfectam; An holy and bles­sed Opinion, easily reconcileable to the Truth, [Page 64] by the distinction of a perfect and imperfect Happiness: So that the difference be­tween the Opinion and Council seems to be only about the Place, in the Condition both agree. About the Capacity of Se­parate Souls, I am not willing to dispute, 'tis too sublime a Subject, and above our mortal Reach. Nor will I eagerly contend for the Place, where (upon their dislodging here) they are dispos'd of: But this Opi­nion I readily embrace, That before our Saviour's Ascension they were not admitted into Heaven, whatsoever they are since: Nor will I presume to determine for what Things the happy Soul is reward­ed; nor on the other hand, for what the Soul of the Reprobate is punished; but so far I conceive it to be plain, and allow­ed by the Concurrence of all, That Both at present have their different Enjoyments, though imperfect. So that in my Appre­hension the Consequence of the Learned Author does Claudicare, stand in need of a Crutch; it is and always will be a Crip­ple. The Soul of the Saint is at present admitted to Happiness, I see nothing in Reason from hence to infer;—There­fore 'tis capable of being fully rewarded: On the other side, the Soul of the Sinner is in its Separate State capable of Punish­ment, [Page 65] Ergo, 'tis capable of being fully punished. I must freely say, I cannot see the least colour for the Inference; Where-ever the Soul of Lazarus now is, it must be (without doubt) allowed by all to be happy; but that it is as happy as it will be after the Resurrection, I ut­terly deny. On the other side, That the Soul of the Rich Glutton is now in a State of Punishment, must be readily assented to; but that it is in a full, compleat State, will, can, must never be granted. This Assertion runs against the stream and current of Reason, Scripture, and An­tiquity; as will most manifestly appear in the Examination of the other Opinion of Tertullian; which I now come to con­sider.

Thirdly, He seems to affirm in the Pas­sage above-cited, That the Soul is not ca­pable without the Body of Pleasure or Pain, of Punishments or Rewards, and therefore concludes for a Resurrection: 'Tis be­side my intent to attempt the Defence of this Doctrine, tho' the Centuriators have undertaken it: And if the Fire of Hell be real, (as I believe no one will deny, because constantly so represented in the [Page 66] Scriptures) it would gravel the most ac­complish'd of Philosophers, from the Principles of Natural Philosophy only, to resolve how this Fire can affect, and reach the Soul; how a Material can act upon an Immaterial. Beside there are no mean Authorities, and not a few neither, to be produc'd, who have asserted much the same thing: Thus Maldonate, as Lear­ned a Man as most, and incomparably well read, assures us, in Matt. 8. 29. Mi­rum quanto consensu pleri (que) veteres Autho­res docuerint, daemones ante diem judicii non torqueri—It was, it seems, the general Doctrine, That the Damned were not pu­nished before the Day of Judgment; which how it is to be understood he there tells you. Notwithstanding all this, I think the foresaid Passage, in a strict, literal, gross Sense, by no means defensible; we must give some Grains of Allowance to the Writings of this Father, or else we shall make mad Work. We must consider the Drift and Carriage of the Discourse, expound one Passage by another, and judge charitably of all; and then the Meaning will be plain. One while he allows the departed Souls, according to their different Deserts, a present Portion [Page 67] of Pain or Weal: Other while he says, That the separate Souls are rewarded or pu­nished at present for the good or bad things they did without the concurrence of the Body; and that tho' they are ca­pable without the Body of Pleasure or Pain, yet they are not so fully capable as when united to it. In other places he seems to affirm the quite contrary, viz. That the Soul is not capable of suf­fering at all without the Body; that in a divided State it can feel neither Plea­sure nor Pain, and upon this account con­cludes the Necessity of a Resurrection. Now to a favourable Reader, who shall govern himself (as in reason he is obli­ged) suitable to the method but now laid down; here will upon mature delibera­tion appear no Contradiction, no Incon­sistency in all this; the one leads us to the understanding of the other. The se­parate Souls tho' in some measure they do now partake of Rewards and Punish­ments, yet they are in a manner nothing, in comparison to what they shall be; the Height and Accomplishment of both awaits the Resurrection; when Body and Soul shall be again united, then and then only the Condition of all shall be compleat. [Page 68] And that this is the Meaning of this An­cient Writer, is abundantly evident, not only from the whole Thread of the Dis­course, but also from some plain Passa­ges in it: As, ad perfectionem judicii, the Body is required to make the Judgment compleat.—And again, Quae proinde illi non sufficiunt ad sentiendum plaenè que­madmodum ne (que) ad agendum perfecté: i. e. The Members of the Soul (as he expresses it) are not of themselves sufficient to enjoy or suffer fully. Nay, there are many other Passages frequently occurring, which as a Key open the door to the Sense here; as the places above noted, where he again and again allows the separate Souls capable of Pleasure or Grief without the Body: That they can feel, or suffer any thing, licèt exules carnis, without the Body.

I shall neither trouble my self nor the Reader but with two places more, and they are both in one Chapter, (Resur. Carn. cap. 17.) non quâ sentire quid sine carne non possit, sed quâ necesse est illum cum car­ne sentire: And again, Ad perficiendam au­tem operam carnis expectat, sic ita (que) ad patien­dam societatem carnis postulat, ut tam PLAENE per eam pati possit, quàm sine eâ PLAENE agere [Page 69] non potuit: The blessed Soul to make up its Happiness full, requires the Society of the Body; and on the other hand, the condem­ned Soul in its Torments, calls for the Fel­lowship of the Body, that the Punishment might be compleated in both parts, in con­junction of which their Sins were com­mitted.

This then being allowed to be the Sense of the Father (as I do not see how it can well be denied) viz. That the Soul is not capable of Rewards and Punishments without the Body: but by no means (as the learned Dr reports it p. 214;) That the Soul is not capable in its own nature without an or­ganized Body of any Perception; how, that it is not capable without ar humane Body of either. Rewards or Punishments. This seems to be a too rigid, extream, and unreasona­ble Construction of those passages, and woud unavoidably involve the Father in the other Errors of the Death of the Soul, or the slumber of it. But though the Lear­ned Author does represent the Opinion of Tertullian in this matter thus severely, yet he confesses this notion very consistent with the Doctrine of the Resurrection, and the General Judgment that is to follow after it; but he has this to object against [Page 70] it pag. 24. I know not how to make it consistent with some other places of Scripture; here lies the difficulty, the Scripture is plainly against it. I confess it does not well accord with it, as it is here represented; and I cannot for my Heart imagine how he came to inter­pret the Father so grosly Erroneous here who has produced so many places wherein he loudly proclaims the contrary, and plainly and fully expresses himself: in which if we take him, as by all means we are obliged to do, viz. Of the imperfect state of the Soul in its separation, that it is not capable of being fully rewarded or pu­nished without the Body. I see nothing amiss here, this Opinion must be allow­ed consistent with the Doctrine of the Resurrection and the General Judgment which is to follow after it, harmo­niously correspondent with the Analogie of Faith, and the holy Scriptures; even those very places which are alledged by the Learned Author pag. 215. Thus, in that of our Saviour to the Penitent Thief, This day shalt thou be with me in Paradise; in which Words there is a Promise of an happy injoyment to his dislodging Soul, but an imperfect one, for we can Un­derstand Paradise in no other sence but what imports either the Place or Conditi­on [Page 71] of the happy separate Souls, a place, undeniably different from Heaven; a Condition of happiness in hand, but far short and inferiour to that hereafter. The Soul of the Celebrated Penitent was immediately upon its departure, in­vested with a state of Bliss, but the full measure of it cannot be expected before the Resurrection, Thus also in the second Scripture, Phil, 1. 23. where St. Peter wishes To depart and to be with Christ, which is far better. The Expression clear­ly intimates an happiness which would accrue to his Soul by his dissolution, far above any thing that this World could afford, as is Emphatically expressed in the Original by the double comparative [...] The Soul of the great Apostle where-ever he be, is without dis­pute gloriously happy; yet (this is cer­tain) that it cannot arrive to the fulness of it, before it be united to that Body which was his Faithful Companion and Partner, in all his Perils, Dangers, Hard­ships, Sufferings, Conflicts, Labours here. And so in the third place, Rev. 6. 10. in which the Souls of the Martyrs are represented from under the Altar, loudly crying for Judgment. This Text to me [Page 72] is one of the most undeniable and adae­quate proofs of both the Doctrines under present consideration; for as on the one hand it strongly establishes the blessed in­joyment of the separate Souls, so on the other it will not suffer us to doubt of their imperfect state: The completion and height of happiness is put off to the great Day of Recompense. The Text is full, and deserves to be considered: I saw under the Altar the Souls of them that were slain for the Word of God, and for the Testi­mony which they held; and they cryed with a loud Voice, saying, How long, O Lord, Holy and True, dost thou not judge and avengé our Blood on them that dwell on the Earth: And White Robes were gi­ven to every one of them, and it was said unto them, that they should rest yet for a little Season, until their fellow Servants al­so and their Brethren, that should be kil­led, as they were should be fulfilled. Where every Word and Clause makes for our purpose. Whether we understand it (as some) of their Bodies, by a Prosopo­peia, speaking from their Graves, or of their Souls which are said to be under the Altar, i.e. Ʋnder the Protection of Christ, as a Learned Critick does com­ment [Page 73] it: And they cryed with a loud voice, which in my apprehension imports not so much the multitude of them (an inter­pretation much esteemed by some) as the vehemency and intention of their desire which is for justice; and that chiefly in reference to themselves; Namely, that God would translate and advance them to that Happiness which he has promised, and they desiringly do desire. This exactly suits with all that follows after. They had at present the Cha­racter, the Livery, the Priviledge of Saint­ship, the earnest of it: But the full of their Reward, they were not to receive until the time of Harvest, the last Day, when both Parts were to meet again, and when the Noble Army of Martyrs (all Conflicts and Fighting being for ever done away) should in one Body assembled, be Crown'd and Tri­umph together. Excellent is the ani­madversion of Gregory the Great on this place (Praef. in Job.) Singulae stolae quia adhuc solâ mentis beatitudine perfruuntur, binas vero accepturi sunt quando cum gau­dio perfecto animarum, etiam incorruptione corporum restituuntur, i. e. The Souls under the Altar have single Robes now, [Page 74] their Souls are admitted to an incohate imperfect Happiness; but double Robes hereafter, at what time, their Bodies made incorruptible shall be restor'd to their Souls; the glory and joy of both shall be complete. In short, that the in­joyment of those Blessed Souls here at present is imperfect; is plainly intimated by their cries, (both the matter and man­ner of them, they are represented crying with a loud Voice, and that for vengeance;) and is formally expressed in the answer made them—they were to rest yet for a little Season, until their fellow Servants al­so and their Brethren that should be killed, as they were, should be fulfilled.

For farther confirmation of this Do­ctrine, which is of no small moment in our present Argument; I cannot but recom­mend that most full and excellent passage of the Learned* Grotius, in that place above cited.

[Page 75] ‘The Natural love which we all by experience find our Souls to have toward the Body, is an undeniable evidence that the Soul is in it self an IMPERFECT SUB­STANCE, which by perfecting the Bo­dy, is it self also perfected by obtaining its end. Besides JUSTICE will not al­low, that the Body, which by the con­duct and command of the Soul has en­dured much, born the greatest part of all difficulties and conflicts here; should have no share in the Reward.— Add to this, That it is not to be ima­gined but that the Supream Creator should propound some great end in erecting HUMANE NATURE; and that can be conceived to be no less than the Happiness of the WHOLE MAN: Now the Happiness of a part cannot be the Happiness of the WHOLE; but God made the WHOLE Man.’ Thus this most Excellent Man reasons on our side. To the same purpose we may not [Page 76] omit the* Notion of the Philosophers and Schoolmen, (which the Learned Author knows much better than I can tell him) viz. ‘That the Soul hath as natural an inclination to be united to the Body, as a light thing to mount upward;’ beside, if the Philosopher had been silent, this Truth is undeniably established from the sacred Authority but now alledg'd, viz. The earnest cries, and longing desires of the Souls under the Altar, to be again united to their Bodies.

Nay this Doctrine has not only been constantly maintained, but also carry'd on and advanced by the Schoolmen; who in this point are express and full, That the happiness of the Saints shall be greater at the Day of Judgment than now it is or can be; and they are so liberal withal as to give us the manner and reasons of it, why it is so, and how it is brought about; i. e. It is extensively augmented [Page 77] in the Body which before lay in the Grave under the enjoyment only of a negative hap­piness; in an exemption from pain and a rest from all its labours: But is in reu­nion admitted to a positive one; is after a long separation placed in copartner­ship with the Soul, 2ly, 'tis extensively augmented in the Soul which rejoices at the new Nuptials; has no small satisfacti­on, complacency, pleasure, in the ad­vancement and injoyment of his Bride, af­ter so long a separation and Divorce. When two intimate Friends that have not for many years seen one another, hap­pily meet again, how great, how ra­vishing, how superlative is their Joy? if there be joy in Heaven over one sinner that repenteth, as we are sure there is, Luk. 15, If it be one part of the happi­ness of the Inhabitants of that Jerusalem that is above, that they shall know their ancient Acquaintance and Relations with whom they have lived on Earth, and sit down with them there, praising, exalting, congratulating each others condition, as is by many asserted, and is not at all im­probable. This offers fairly for the proof of what the Shools have here de­termined; who in the procedure of the [Page 78] Argument further tells, viz. That the Happiness is intensively also advanced: For­asmuch as the Soul makes the Body perfect; for the support of which they produce the known Axiom which is allowed of in all other cases, and therefore ought to pass muster here; That every part is by its self imperfect, 'tis perfected in the whole. 'Tis true, if we consider the Body as it is represented by the School of Plato, a Se­pulchre, a Prison; or really as it now is, a sink of Infirmities, Diseases, and Indispo­sitions; an heavy load and weight, pressing down the Soul. I do confess I see nothing Beautiful or Charming to make the Soul in love with it. But when we shall draw the Curtain, and change the Scene, when we shall contemplate the glorious quali­ties wherewith it shall be enobled after the Resurrection, when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal have put on immortality; when it shall have obtained a most perfect Victory not only over Death, but all its troublesome antecedents and consequences also: the known miseries of this Life, and the calamities of the Grave; when, I say, the Body has surmounted all these, and sits above 'em; this must induce us [Page 79] strongly to conclude for the Argument in hand. If this be the case, (as in Truth it is) the Happiness of the Saint must be advanced to such a degree, as surpasseth our understanding: All that we have to do is for ever to admire and adore. To conclude this part, 'tis a Truth too plain to be disputed, That the separate Soulson all hands are not under the full injoyment of ei­ther Rewards or Punishments: That this is the case of the Damned Spirits, needs no laboriousness of proof, the single in­terrogation of those disposed in the Gospel, Mat. 8. 29. Art thou come to tor­ment us before the time? Alone is suffici­ent; nor have we less evidence on the other hand. Where-ever the Souls of the departed Saints under the Law were, 'tis certain they were not in Heaven; for the Captain of our Salvation was the first that opened those everlasting Doors, and made his entrance there; that went be­fore to provide mansion Places for his Faithful ones. Wherever the Souls of the Gospel-Believers, since departed, have their Residence, though (as I be­lieve, notwithstanding the determination of the Council of Florence, and others) we can conclude nothing of certainty [Page 80] here; nevertheless we have so much evi­dence that their State is imperfect; as that I do not see how any Man can have the forehead to deny. The Nail of this Doctrine is immovably fastned by the Author to the Heb. 11. and last, where af­ter he had given a large Catalogue of the most renowned Saints departed, together with the Records of their most noble At­chievements; says expresly, That all these having obtained a good report, through Faith, received not the Promise; God having provided some better things for us, that they without us should not be perfect. In the meaning of which place there can be no doubt, because the stream of In­terpreters here run in one Channel, alto­gether undivided; all agreed that this is the sence.—‘The Consummation of the Happiness of those under the Law shall not prevent those under the Gospel; the Day of Judgment is the stated time of both, whenthere shall be a general Resur­rection: The accomplishment of the great Patriarchs under the old dispen­sation, must await ours under the new; the Labourors that entred the Vineyard the first Hour of the Day, shall not be paid off before those that [Page 81] came in the last Hour; the wages of all is not to be expected before the end of all;’ The Promise refers to the Resur­rection, (as was noted in the Preamble) and is put for the Thing Promised; which can be no other than the Glorification of our Bodies in conjunction with our Souls, and this makes the Happiness compleat; which shall not be conferr'd on some, before others, but shall be bestowed on all assembled together in a Grand Con­sistory at the last Audit. This also is the professed Doctrine of our Church, as she has Taught and Injoyned us in her Litur­gy to Pray,—Beseeching God of his Gracious Goodness, shortly to accomplish the Number of his Elect; and to hasten his King­dom; that we, with all those departed in the true Faith of his Holy Name, may have our perfect Consummation and Bliss both in Body and Soul in thy Eternal and Everlasting King­dom. A most Heavenly Prayer; this be­ing incomparably the best Shield, Buckler, the best Antidote and Preservative against the loss of Friends, or the Consideration of our own approaching Mortality, (with respect both to our selves and o­thers) to bouy up our Spirits amidst the Melancholy Apprehensions of the Rotten­tenness [Page 82] and Miseries of the Grave, and exalts us above the Worms, and Cor­ruption of it; directing us assuredly to know and believe that there is a time coming, when there will be an happy meeting of both (though they are now with Grief and Rluctancy divided) when the happiness of both shall be complete: And this is an Authority undeniably Au­thentick, and must (for any thing I can see to the contrary) strongly and irrefrag­ably establish the Doctrine contended for, viz. That our Bodies are capable of Cewards and Punishments hereafter of doing Well or Evil here.


THE Learned Author having laid aside the Opinions of Tertullian, as not serviceable to his purpose; not affording him a Satisfactory Reason of this Decree of Almighty God concerning the Resurrection: To give a true Accounr of it, thinks it necessary to mount a little higher, and to look a little farther and passing by many conjectures, which he finds in the Schools, and in some of our Ancient Writers, and among the Jewish Masters; p. 217. lays before you his own Thoughts; and here he assigns three Rea­sons why God has been pleased to decree, that the Soul in the Day of Judgment shall be again united to a Humane Body In dis­cussing of which, I shall beg leave to in­vert the order of them, as more suitable to the method of my Discourse, and for the advantage of my present Argument; which (if I mistake not) will gain one of those Reasons over to our side and [Page 84] party, as falling over to it, and there­fore ought to go together.

The last Reason, which I here place first, why God will restore us to our Hu­mane Nature, and why he will raise up the very same Body is, p. 219. HE WILL BECAUSE HE WILL, a very bad Reason for the Actions of Man, but a very good one for God's; he will because he hath Promised: Which the Learned Author irrefragably confirms from what follows, p. 222. which I conceive my self obliged to transcribe; and is as follows,—‘I am the Lord, I have said it, and who can say, What dost thou? There is no­thing that God does, but he does for a very good reason: And who are we, that we should call him to an Account for what he does? His Ways and his Counsels are many of them unsearcha­ble to us; and as Job tells us, Chap. 33, 13. He gives not Account of any of his Matter [...] 'Tis his part to Act, ours to Admire and Submit; and as long as our Reason and our Senses are not plainly contradicted, we are only to en­quire WHAT, not How, or WHY. I would fain know of those who deny [Page 85] the Resurrection of the same Humane Body, because they do not know what use we can make of the particular parts in the Life to come, whether they de­ny or doubt the existence of all other things; the Reason of which they can­not comprehend: I would undertake to quiet the Scruples of these Men, and to satisfie all their Queries, if they would be pleased to answer a few Questions of mine: I could ask them the reason of an Hundred things in Nature and Di­vinity.’ —Which he there sup­poses unaccconntable; and particularly in the case about the Resurrection, p. 221. He acknowledges a multitude of diffi­culties altogether inextricable, i. e. for which there is no reason to be given, and therefore must of necessity be resolved in­to this, viz. the Will and Pleasure of God. I willingly concur with the Lear­ned Author here, and presume there is no one that will oppose him. For this without paradventure is the highest and most supream Reason which must put to silence all Objections; remove all Difficul­ties whatsoever, and make things which seem to us impossible, easie. Though with Mary we do not know how this can be, Luke [Page 86] 1. 34, Though our reason cannot fa­thom, cannot comprehend it, yet our Faith must give us an assurance that it will be; and teach us, with the Mother of the Holy Jesus, with submission to conclude, —Behold the Handmaid of the Lord, be it unto me according to thy Word. This is a Reason above all Reasons, allowed and approved of by all, and to which all o­thers (however Philosophical and plau­sible) must submit. This I gladly and readily note, because I expect to receive some advantage from it in the subsequent part of this Discourse, for I am in hopes to prove the Doctrine I have attempted to defend, to be the express determina­tion of God's revealed Will and Word, and then all the most powerful Arguments of the Profoundest Philosophers, must truckle under, and fall to the Ground: But (if I mistake not) this Reason of Gods Word or Decree of the Resurrection of the Body, was not in the least the Subject of the Dis­pute: The Question only arose from the Reason of this Decree. There can be no doubt but that the Resurrection will be, because God hath said and ordained it: The Subject of the enquiry can be no other than the Reason of God's Will and Plea­sure [Page 87] here; Namely why God has De­creed the Resurrection of the same Body; and this obliges the Learned Author to look farther; and therefore,

Secondly, In the the next place he tells us, (p. 219.) That another Reason why God has been pleased to ordain that the same Humane Body that Died, shall Rise again and be reconjoined to the Soul; I take to be this (and that indeed I take to be the first and chief reason of that Decree) we had all been immortal Men if Adam had not sinned; 'twas God's design that we should never Die, but that our Souls should remain for ever uni­ted to their Bodies; this Gracious design being frustrated by Adam's Transgression; he was Graciously pleased to ordain, that as in Adam all Die; so in Christ the second Adam, we should all at last Triumph over Death, and be restored to those Bodies; and that Humane Nature, which he first design­ed should be immortal; by the Death and Resurrection of Christ our losses are to be re­paired which Adam's sin occasioned, but our losses cannot be repaired, unless we are resto­red to those Bodies which by his sinning we lost.

[Page 88] To this Second Reason I say,

First, I have no mind to implunge my self, or Reader in the Decrees of Almigh­ty God, which is an Abyss or Ocean never to be fathomed: Nor am I disposed to concern my self about the examination of that Question, Whether Adam and his Posterity had Died if they had not Sinned? Only I shall briefly and freely deliver my Opinion in this matter. That it seems to me very probable that (allowing the supposition of his and their continuance in their spotless purity) He and his Race af­ter some time, like Enoch or Elias, or some other way, (with Analogy and re­semblance to these,) should have been translated; for 'tis no way conceivable, how that Paradise, (which was but a Garden, as the word imports, and by the bounda­ries and description of it must be acknow­ledged a very small and inconsiderable part of the Earth) should have held, and contained him and his numberless issue in the State of innocency, which state must unavoidably by all be allowed, perfectly and intirely Prolifick, absolutely free and dischargeb from all false Conceptions or Abortions, all Impediments or Indispositions [Page 89] whatsoever, on either side; Passing by all this, I say, that that which the Lear­ned Author takes to be the First and Chief Reason of this Decree of the Resur­rection, I take to be no Reason at all, or at least to be no adequate Reason of the General Resurrection; the utmost that it can pretend to, (as it is here stated) is only the Resurrection of the Just; the Reason is undeniable, for the Learned Author here sets it forth, and expresses it, by a Gracious Design, and the Gracious Pleasure of God. Now how this can agree with, and include the Resurrecti­on on of the Reprobate, let the World judge. The Subject of our Discourse is the Re­surrection of all Men, of which the Wicked are allowed by all to be by far the great­er Number. And this is a Doctrine that can meet with no Opposition; That these are to be called out of their Graves to an Everlasting Death, to be taken out of the common Prison; to be delivered over to Tormentors; to be cast into that Dun­geon whence there is no Redemption; where the Worm dieth not, and the Fire never shall be quenched; where there is utter Darkness and uninterrupted, weeping and gnashing of teeth. In a word, The [Page 90] Resurrection of the Wicked is only in or­der to a Judgment that is altogether in­supportable. He is like the worst of Criminals taken from the Gaol to under­go a much severer Doom. His Resurre­ction ushers in the tremendous Sentence, Depart, ye Cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the Devil and his Angels. Here the Designs carry in them the Ad­vancement of Divine Vengeance, Justice, and Glory, without the least Mite or Crumb of Grace or Favour. The un­done Reprobate placed on the other side of the Great Gulf, is for ever excluded from all Hopes of these; not all his Cries, in his greatest Extremity, can prevail for one drop of Water. There is no place for Favour or Mercy in Hell, so that it seems to me somewhat strange, how the Learned Author came to take up this for a Reason, and to alledge for Confirmation of it, that Passage of the Apostle, (1 Cor. 15. 22.) As in Adam all die, so in Christ shall all be made alive. I am verily perswaded, that this place was never before understood of, or ap­plied to the Resurrection of the Wicked, but of the Righteous only. Ne (que) vivifi­cantur omnes in Christo, sed tantum qui [Page 91] Christo adhaeserunt, saith the Excellent Came­ron, (Eccl. tom. 10.) and all Commenta­tators go the same way: And indeed no one without offering manifest Violence to the Sacred Text, can put any other In­terpretation on it, it being the chief De­sign of the Apostle in that Chapter, (as is evident from the whole Carriage of it) to set forth the Glorious Qualities attending the Bodies of the Righteous at the Resurrection, without touching in the least on the other side: Beside, we have most plentiful Assurance, That Christ's Coming, his Merits, Death, and Resurrection, are so far from being Ad­vantageous to all, that the quite contrary is undeniable. These (greatest of Fa­vours) shall sink those that have despi­sed them into the lowest, deepest, darkest, and most dismal Place of Hell. To this purpose the Prophet Isaiah delivers him­self expresly, chap. 8. ver. 24. He (Christ) shall be for a stone of stumbling, and rock of offence to both the houses of Israel; for a gin and a snare to the Inhabitants of Je­rusalem. Which great Truth two Evan­gelists have left on Record, Matth. 21. 44. Luke 20. 18. Whosoever shall fall on this stone shall-be broken; but on whomsoever it [Page 92] shall fall, it shall grind him to powder. The very self-same Doctrine is taught us by St. Paul, Rom. 9. ult. and prosecuted and amplified at large by St. Peter, 1 Epist. 2. 6, seq.

Beside, 'twere an easie Province to dis­charge this also from being a Reason of the Resurrection of the Righteous, for 'tis a Truth that shineth as clear as the Sun at Noon-day, That this Blessed Change advances the Saint to a State of Happiness and Glory, beyond what Man could ever pretend to, had the still continued in his Primitive Purity. But this is not my Business.

Wherefore I come to consider the Third and remaining Reason, assigned by the Learned Author, Why the Soul at the Day of Judgment is again to be uni­ted to the Body; which is as follows: p. 218.—That as we are Men when we sin, or do well, so we may be Men, when by a judicial Sentence we are punished or re­warded for it: But we cannot be Men, un­less we have Humane Bodies. St. Paul tells us, THAT WE MUST ALL APPEAR BE­FORE THE JUDGMENT-SEAT OF CHRIST, THAT EVERY MAN MAY RECEIVE THE [Page 93] THINGS DONE IN HIS BODY, ACCORD­ING TO THAT HE HATH DONE, WHE­THER IT BE GOOD OR BAD. And as we are to give an account for what we did in the Body; so in the Body we shall give an account, if it be reasonable that we should be Men when we are punished or rewarded for what we did when Men; it seems much more reasonable, that we should be then the same Men: But we cannot be the same Men, unless we have the same Bodies.


I Cannot here forbear with the Philoso­pher, to cry out [...], and with an Extasie of Joy most willingly and gladly receive it. This certainly is a Reason which must be allowed, approved of and applauded by all: A Reason, which de­serves the Inscription of Capital Golden Letters; and, as Job speaks, To be gra­ven with an iron pen and lead in a rock for ever, Job 19. 2. Or, as the Prophet Jeremy expresses it, tho' in a different Sense, To be written with a pen of iron, and the point a diamond, Jer. 11. 1. This is that Reason which, being in love with, I do earnestly contend for, and am very unwilling to lose, THE GREAT AND STANDING REASON OF THE RESURRECTION, IN ALL AGES EMBRACED, AND COMMENDED BY AEL: Which tho' the Learned Anthor has been pleased to censure, condemn, and throw aside as false and untrue, and to give us no less than three Reasons for his Justification; yet [Page 95] here he [...]akes it up again; and notwith­standing his former Reflections on it, give it a new Reputation, and in his most studied, refined, and last Reasons of this most important Doctrine of the Resurrecti­on recommends it to the World in the first place (as no doubt the Flower and Prime of all). Nay, what is more, he sets it on the Foundation of an Infalli­ble Authority, (2 Cor. 5. 10.) which at present I shall wave, because I design to consider [...] it at large in the latter Part of this Discourse, industriously reserving it, as the finishing and concluding Nail wherewith to fix the Doctrine, and render it immoveable.

There is (I confess) some Variation in the Words, and Manner of Expression; but in the Sense there is very little, or none at all; if it be otherwise, I must openly confess my Ignorance: I appeal (in this as in other Cases) to the Impartial Reader. I always have, and ever will pay the Learned Authora just Deference and Re­gard. I honour and admire him for his great Worth, his vast Reading, and his [...], his manifold Learning, and I look upon it almost an Offence to differ from him. But I hope he will pardon my [Page 96] Presumption, for I cannot help it: And 'tis no small Comfort to me, tho' we for­merly differed, yet we are now perfectly agreed, (the Variation of a few Words only excepted): What he calls reasonable, I call equitable and just; what he calls Man, that I can understand no other than his Soul and Body united, (which are allowed by all to be the two Essential Parts of his Constitution) for my part, I see no other Difference. The Ancients and Modern, and in a manner all Divines, (as has been above acknowledged, and proved at large) say, That the Resur­rection is founded upon Justice; i. e. That the same Body is to be united to the same Soul hereafter, that both may receive either Rewards or Punishments, according to their Merits or Demerits here. The Learned Author says expresly, That 'tis reasonable we should be Men when, we are punished or rewarded for what we did when Men. And further adds, That it seems much more reasonable that we should be the same Men: Which to my Understanding is all one.


HAving hitherto attempted the Vin­dication of this great Catholick Doctrin, to give some satisfaction to the Objections brought against it, and to re­scue it from Captivity. Having also considered at large the Opinions of Ter­tullian to this purpose, and the three Rea­sons assigned by the Learned Doctor. That which remains now is to lay down some considerations for the safeguard and Protection of it for the time to come, and I shall divide them into two ranks, viz. Considerations drawn from,

First, Reason.

Secondly, Scripture.

I begin with the first, in order where­unto I beg this as a modest Postulatum which I conceive cannot be denied me, verily there is a reward for the Righteous doubtless he is a God that Judgeth the Earth, the Judge of the whole Earth must [Page 98] do Right, Gen. 18. 25. Justice is one of the most signal attributes of the Divine Nature, more frequently and eminently ascribed unto him above the rest [...], Justice (says the Heathen) is the Eye of God, he will and must soon­er or later render unto every Man (without respect of Person) according to his do­ings.

First, Now it is undeniable both from the frequent Assertions of Solomon and o­ther Holy Penmen, together with the universal Experience of all Ages; that the course of it is interrupted, suspended, darkened, nay inverted in the present ad­ministration of Affairs here. All things come alike to all, there is one event to the Righteous, and to the Wicked, to the Good and to the clean and to the unclean, to him that Sacrificeth and to him that Sacrificeth not, as is the Good so is the Sinner, and he that sweareth as he that feareth an Oath, Eccl. 9. 3. here just Men Perish in their Righteousness and Wicked Men prolong their Lives in their Wickedness, Eccl. 7. 15. With a multitude of other Places to the same purpose. The matter of Fact has always appeared so plain and visible as [Page 99] that there has no attempt at any time been made against it; but constantly al­lowed as an undoubted Aphorism. Upon all occasions taken up and made the out­cry, the stumbling Block, the grand Ob­jection against Providence. It were an easy matter to enlarge here; and to report the loud and heavy Charges of the* Hea­thens in this Arguments as also the fre­quent complaints of Holy Men It may suffice to my purpose only to note how that the Wicked are so far from be­ing treated according to their deserts in this Life, as that the contrary for the most part is bestowed on them, they go away with the Riches, Pleasures, Ho­nours, are accomodated with the prospe­rity, pomp, and Grandure of the World.

[Page 100] Secondly, Tis also certain that the Wick­edness of some is so superlatively great, as that it cannot be sufficiently punished in this Life, by all that can be inflicted on them, the repetition and accumulation of a multitude of Crimes, each of which is in its own nature and by the Law, Capi­tal, must be acknowledged too great to be compensated by one single Death. He that has ran through the whole Circle of Sin (as the case may be Stated) tho he be handled according to the severest Method, both of shame and punishments can make no equivalent or tolerable sa­tisfaction for the same. The firebrand of the World, who with the furys of War has destroyed Countrys, depopulated Nations, sent thousands of Souls to the other World in their Blood and Sins, can make no sufficient attonement, by all that he can do or suffer here.

Thirdly, nor is it less evident on the o­ther side, that the good Man does not (I may safely say) oftentimes cannot re­ceive a just recompence for all his doings and sufferings here; he is encompassed with so thick a Cloud of miseries, that his whole Life is but one continued conflict, [Page 101] with hardships and difficulties, from the first to the last scene, the most doleful of Tragedies. Like the Poor Begger in the Gospel, he has a full measure of evil things, is pinched with Cold, Hunger, Nakedness, boyls and sinks under his complicated calamities: Or like the great Apostle (2 Cor. 11. 25, &c.) can give us a black Role of miseries that have on e­very side attended him thro the whole Race of his Life, and have been his inse­parable Companions to the grave: this was more especially the case of these de­vout Christians that lived in the Fiery days of Persecution, and has been and will always be, more or less, of Pious Souls to the World's end.

Now if we reflect on these passages with a thorough, and serious considerati­on, what conclusion can we possible draw from hence? Shall We take an occasion upon this account as the Heathens have done, to arreign the Justice of Heaven, with open mouth to charge God foolishly, or as we find Holy Men sometimes mut­tering. Tush! God hideth away his face, and he doth not see, there is no knowledge in the Almighty, then have I cleansed my heart in vain, and washed my Hands in Innocency, [Page 102] it is vain to serve God, what profit is there in it. No, verily these are Illogical and false inferences, from these irregularities and failures here, we must firmly conclude there is a time approaching, when the supreme Judge will set all things at rights, i. e. there is a Resurrection, which is at­tended with impartial Justice to all, this I am sure is the great use which the roy­al Psalmist points at and directs us to, Psal. 94. 14, 15. The Lord will not cast off his People, neither will he forsake his inheritance, but Judgment shall return unto Righteousness. Tho now they are at a distance, yet they shall shake Hands and meet again, and then the Wicked shall be punished, and the Godly rewarded.

This I am sure is the Improvement St. Paul makes of it, 2 Thes. 1. 5. where speaking of the Persecutions and Tribulations which the Saints endured, calls them a manifest token of the Righteous Judgment of God. Not [...] but [...] not an example but Demonstration; tho' now the Order of Justice be inverted, tho' the Wicked which deserve punishment are far from it, tho they prosper and triumph, are flo­rishing and spreading like the Cedars in Lebanus, and you that are well deserv­ing, [Page 103] are rudely and barbarously treated, you are to look on this as an undeniable evidence, that there is a day of review ap­proaching, when Justice shall be done to all; this is undeniably the meaning of our Apostle here, as appears not only from the expression but also from what follows, where he expatiates on the Argument. That ye may be counted worthy of the King­dom of God, for which ye also suffer; seeing it is a righteous thing with God to recompence tribulation to them that trouble you, and to you who are troubled rest, when the Lord Je­sus shall be revealed from Heaven, with his mighty Angels in flaming Fire, taking Ven­geance on them that know not God, and obey not the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ, who shall be punished with everlasting Destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the Glory of his Power, when he shall come to be Glorified in his Saints, and to be admired in all them that believe in that day. The natural and genuine Interpretation of which Place can be no other than if the Apostle had said, Have but a little patience and the scene will be inverted, those who af­flict and persecute you shall pay dearly for it, and you that now suffer shall be glorious­ly rewarded at the Resurrection of all, [Page 104] which is designed for Justice to all Men, and to every part of Man.

Lastly, From the foregoing experiences (which must be allowed) there can no inference be thought on more reasonable than that which the same Apostle has else­where repeated, Acts 17. 30. That God hath appointed a Day in which he will Judge the World in Righteousness.

For the farther improvement of the Argument, I think fit to recommend in the next place those various Parables in the Gospel so often mentioned; of the Labourers, of the Talents, of the Hus­bandmen: For 'tis undeniable that all these have a manifest tendency to the bu­siness in hand. All these are to be consi­dered, and according to their behaviour treated, upon the Return of the great Lord at the end of the Day, and of their Work, in all which we have a special and exact Account of every Man's re­compence according to his Works; Ju­stice in all the proceedings being made the standing Rule and Measure, and the Resurrection, the unalterable time, and so by consequence appositely answers our present design. In all these cases we have [Page 105] the repeated Declaration of that great Judge, that he will give to all what he Promised, what is Right, what proper­ly belongs unto him. He that hid his Talent meets with a hard but equitable Doom: He that improved it is advan­ced: In a word, the Loiterer (eo nomi­ne) is punished as such, and the faithful Labourer is promoted. The treatment of all here is proportioned to their for­mer doings and deservings. So we find it expresly noted by St. Luke 19. 17. He who had received five pounds, and by his industry had gained five more, is kindly received with the Character of a good and faithful Servant, and because of his ten pounds, has Authority given him over ten Cities; and so with proportion in the next example, He whose Pound had gained five, has a suitable command over five Cities.

Nor have we less evidence of the point in hand, from the Rewards, the Wages, the Re­compense of reward; which are Phrases that ever and anonoccur in Holy Writ. All these are well known to be metaphorical and relative terms; and therefore for a right understanding, necessarily direct us to the Correlative; and that can be no other [Page 106] than the whole Man: All his Actions, all his Deeds, all his Merits, shall be ta­ken into consideration; the Traffick of his whole life is brought upon examina­tion, and accordingly he shall receive the returns of them; at the setled time of the Resurrection.

Nor may we omit the diversities and de­grees of Rewards and Punishments, which attend the Bodies of Men in the other World, and can result from nothing but Ju­stice; For as it is the essence of it to take care to Punish the Evil Doer, and to Reward the Man of Merit: So is it no less to dis­pence both with respect to the deservings of either. This is the Method of all Tribunals here below, and is industriously observed (as himself has assured us) by the Judge above.

To this purpose all Governments have provided great varieties of all kinds, to answer the infinite cases that come before them, and how plentifully in this the Su­pream Governour is accommodated, the Magna Charta of Heaven will not suffer us to be ignorant.

Forasmuch then as there are in that everlasting Dungeon below different Sta­tions, or at least Punishments provided [Page 107] for such as shall by a dreadful Sentence be fixed there; of which (to pass by all others) the tremendous woes pronoun­ced against Corazin and Capernaum, Tire and Sidon, the outer darkness and greater Damnation are undeniable eviden­ces; it roundly follows that the hand of Justice is conspicuous in all this: On the other side, forasmuch as there are many mansions, higher and lower places of Honour and Glory prepared for the Bo­dies of the Saints in the Empyraean Hea­ven, Of the truth of which we are so abundantly secured, as that it would be a weak [...]upererogation to attempt the proof. We are by all the Rules of Reason and Logick to make the same conclusion as heretofore; it being scarcely possible to derive it from any other cause. If the Bodies of the Twelve Apostles (for the promise cannot be applied to their Souls only, because it is to be made good after the Resurrection, and at the Day of Judgment) are hereafter to be seated up­on Twelve Thrones, as Judges and As­sessors of The Twelve Tribes of Israel, i. e. Of all Mankind. If the Sons of Zebe­dee; the Martyr'd Saints, some of those of the highest form shall fill those immediate [Page 108] places of the Right Hand, and of the Left Hand of Christ of his Kingdom. If the eminent Christians in the Gentile World shall come from the East and from the West, and take their Places next to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, the great Patriarchs of the Promise. If those that have beaten down their Bodies, and brought them into subjeicton (by their unwaried wre­stling with the Flesh have obtained a Victory over it here) shall receive the advantage thereof in their Exaltation above: if (as the Apostle speaks) Eve­ry Man shall receive his own Reward accord­ing to his Labour, 1 Cor. 3. 8. if those that have done and suffered more in this Life; are carried on and encouraged there­to, from an infallible assurance of a suita­ble Retaliation: That is to say, of an em­minent and proportionable Recompence at the Resurrection of the Just; It is I think to any Man who will not shut his Eyes against the Light, a Plain Case, viz. in all this the Justice of God is signal and conspicuous.

Hither tend the advancements of Glory appropriated and applied by the Anci­ents and Schoolmen to three sorts of Men; more especially,

[Page 109] First, To the famous Preachers of the Gospel, who with the great Apostle did very gladly spend and were spent, laboured more abundantly in the Vineyard. Of the truth of this there can be no doubt, since Truth it self has assured us, That they that be wise shall shine as the brightness of the Firmament, and they that turn ma­ny to Righteousness as the Stars for ever and ever, Dan. ult. 3. And that the Righ­teous shall shine forth as the Sun in the Kingdom of the Father, Mat. 13. 43. And this is farther and more fully con­firmed in the above mentioned promise of Twelve Thrones to the first Heralds of the Gospel.

Secondly, To such as have kept them­selves unspotted from the Flesh, have adorned their Conversation with Purity and Chastity, and have fought Valiantly and Victoriously in this Warfare. This is asserted by the Prophet Isaiah, in a lof­ty and Rhetorical strain, (as his custom is) Chap. 54. 4, 5. Thus saith the Lord unto the Eunuchs that keep my Sabbaths, and chuse the things that please me, and take hold of my Covenant, even to them will I give in mine House, and within my Walls, [Page 110] a Place and a Name, better than of Sons and of Daughters: I will give them an Everlasting Name that shall not be cut off. This is alluded to by our Blessed Saviour, Mat. 19. 12. and emphatically noted by St. John, Rev. 14. 4. where those pure Virgins that were not desiled with Women are represented, dignified with extraor­dinary marks of Glory above others, v. 5. They sung a New Song which no Man could learn, they were admitted to follow the Lamb whithersoever he goeth, and are cal­led expresly the first Fruits unto God and unto the Lamb.

Thirdly, The Noble Army of Martyrs, who have chearfully for the testimony of the Faith and a good Conscience, suf­fered the most cruel Torments that Men or Devils could inflict given their Bodies to the [...] Wild Beasts and to the flames.

There can be no dispute of the truth of this point neither, forasmuch as that it is [...] confirmed by the testimony of the infallible Spirit which assigns an eminency of happi­ness to those that were slain for the Word of God, and for the testimony which they held, white robes were given unto them, Rev. 6. 9, 10. [Page 111] And positively pronounces the Right hand, and Left hand, the principal places in the Kingdom of Heaven to belong to those that have drank of Christ's Cup, and been Baptised with his Baptism, Mat. 20. 22. To this purpose excellent is the animadversion of St. Augustine, Videbimus in illo regno in corporibus Martyrum vulne­rum Cicatrices, quae pro Christi nomine pertulerunt non enim deformitas in eis, sed dignitas erit & quaedam quamvis in corpore non corporis sed virtutis pulchritudo fulgebit. Civ. Dei l. 19. c. 3.

We shall see in Heaven in the Bodies of the Martyrs, the marks of those wounds which they received for Christ's sake; and these will be no deformity, but an honour to them; the Beauty of their Grace [...] will gloriously shine forth through these impressions. And again this great Father to the same pur­pose has noted, In cicatricibus Martyrum, sole fulgidioribus extabit Martyrii gloriosissi­mum Monumentum, non autem ullum cor­poris glorificati dehonestamentum. Civ. Dei, l. 6. 22. cap. 19. In the Scars of the Bo­dies of the Martyrs, brighter than the Sun, shall shine forth the most glorious Trophy of Martyrdom. We all allow it for the Ho­nour and Reputation of a Souldier to [Page 112] shew the Foot steps of those wounds which he received in fighting valiantly for his King and Countrey.

And indeed this Consideration makes this Opinion very probable; 'tis gene­rally admitted by the Schools and others, and in the main, cannot be denied; and in my apprehension does not a little con­tribute to the support of that Doctrine which is our business to establish; If the Bodies of some of the Saints in Heaven shall be signalized with Characters of Advancement of Glory, they are certainly capable of Rewards.

For the farther improvement of the argument, I desire that it may be ob­served, how that the Resurrection and Judgment are so interwoven and twisted together, as that the one cannot be sepa­rated from the other; 'tis a truth which neither can nor will be denied; that the one is in order to the other; And as at the Assizes here below, when the Court is set, the Persons concerned are brought from Preson to the Bar, in order to their Trials: So it is in this last and general Assize, the Supream Judge sends out his Officers to remand all out of their Graves, from all Quarters of the World, to make [Page 113] their personal appearance, to answer to their Charge, and abide the final deter­mination of this last Audit. And though there may and will be to the end of the World, prevarications, failures, and devia­tions, in the proceedings of all Earthly Tri­bunals, yet this highest Court of Justice must be acknowledged by all to be alto­gether exempt from these: 'Tis placed beyond the possibility of the least mis­carriage.

Well then, the Reason of the Resur­rection is the Judgment which is im­mediately to follow after it; and if our Bodies are not concerned in the business Transacted, what do they make here?

If they are no other than Instruments only, their appearance is altogether need­less, of which we have a full assurance by all the methods of Judicature upon Earth. To what purpose should al­mighty God put himself to the expence of a miracle, which must be allowed by all equivalent with the Creation? To what purpose, I say, does the omnipotent Power in a more extraordinary and emi­nent manner exert it self, in rallying toge­ther ther the confused and scattered Atoms of all Mankind, in bringing them back to [Page 114] their Ranks and Files, to the same station and order in which they formerly stood; would he (think you) do all this were our Bodies no more than Tools?

Credat Judaeus Apell [...].....

Is this suitable to the solemnity of this great Day when all the World shall be pre­sent, and all the concerns of all Mankind from first to last adjusted; What must the Archangel be sent before to prepare the way, with his mighty Voice and Trump of God to rouze all out of their Graves, to make their Personal appearance? What must the Son of God leave the bosom and right hand of his Father, and now a second time come down in the Clouds of Heaven, attended and environed with Miriads of his Holy Angels, exalted on his Throne to sit in Judgment on things altogether in­sensible, altogether incapable of doing good or evil, altogether incapable of Rewards and Punishments? I cannot conceive how such an imagination should find any the least entertainment with a Man of Reason; was there ever such a thing heard of as a most magnificent Tribunal erected, with all the most solemn preparations and at­tendants, [Page 115] to Examine, Arraign, Try, and Condemn meer Stocks and Stones, Senseless Clods of Earth; which never were capacitated either to commit Sin, or feel Pain? Now the No [...]ion of Phy­losophy with which we are at present en­gaged, seems to charge the Supreme Tri­bunal with all this, for it, says expresly and totidem verbis, viz. The Body is not capable either of Sinning, or doing Well, the Arm which stabbs Sins no more than the Sword, the Body is not sensible, is not capable of any reward or Punishment, Page 210. If then it can be made appear, that our Bodies are in an especial manner concer­ned in the Business and Determination of this great and terrible Day, there needs no farther Proof, to bring the former absurdities home, and Fix them here.

Now, that they are so, seems abun­dantly evident, and undeniable. 1. Be­cause the Souls of all Men departed had passed their Judgment before; immedi­ately upon their respective Dissolutions, the Eternities of them all were Stated, and they accordingly invested (tho their Bodies slept in their Dormitories).

[Page 116] Secondly, all the apparatus, the concomi­tants, and attendance of this Day proclaim this aloud. This the effectual call of the Heavenly Pr [...]o that commands them out of their [...]eds of Dust, this that irre­sistable Power which brings them to the Bar, this their Place and Posture of standing there, this the examination and inspection into their former Lives, this their remuneration accordingly, in a Word, this the whole Process of the Day doth abundantly testifie.

When a Person is remanded from the Goal, and brought directly before the Bench, when his Indictment is Read, when he is Impleaded, when the Witnesses are Ex­amined, when an exact Scrutiny is made, when he is found Guilty, and Sentence is pronounced against him: No one in his right Senses can doubt who was the party concerned at the Tryal.

Nor is it less than a contradiction in terms to imagine that this Party thus han­dled, thus proceeded against, Properly speak­ing, was not capable of doing Good or Evil, was not sensible, was not capable of Rewards or Pu­nishments.

[Page 117] Thirdly and Lastly, To strengthen what we have here asserted, and to secure it from the attack of the Philosopher, I de­sire it may be observed: How that the Holy, Scriptures are on our side, and seem to countenance this Truth. St. John does frequently tell us That the Dead were Judged —and our Blessed Saviour in no less than three Places, is described by this Peri­phrasis, a Judge both of the Quick and the Dead, Act. 10. 42. 1 Tim. 4. 1. 1 Pet. 4. 5. there is no need of a comment here. The word Dead puts all out of doubt, it being properly applicable to our Bodies only. Our Souls are (by the allowance of all) pronounced Immortal; and in the Sense of the Scripture here, neither are or can be subject to Death. So that here, if any where, the caveat of the Apostle ought duly to be regarded. Col. 2. 8. Beware least any Man spoil you through Philosophy and vain Deceit.

From this passage we are plainly taught that there is a sort of Philosophy, both vain and deceitful, and how prejudicial it has been to Divinity, no one (any way con­versant with the Learned) can possibly be Ignorant.

[Page 118] Hence Valentinus owes his Heresie, hence Marcion his, the Jews (in our Savi­our's time) has suckt in the [...] of Pythagoras to the corrupting of their Religion.

And without doubt the Aereal Noti­ons derived from the school of Plato led the most Learned Origen aside in his Doct­rine about the Resurrection, upon this account it was that the Jews in the Days of the Maccabees enacted a prohibition against Philosophy, and the known character that Tertullian gives them (Petriarchas Haereti­corum) can be derived from no other cause.

Of this stamp (if I mistake not) is the Philosophy before us, Fallacious and De­ceitful (as I have above Represented it,) and therefore we ought to be careful, and fearful of it; the surest way not to be en­tangled with it, is to lay it aside: What, tho the subtile Philosopher, urge me with a Syllogism which I am not able to Answer, nor, (as is by him ingenious­ly confessed) himself neither? What, tho he by his Logick entangles me in a difficul­ty which is not easily effoyled? I am not­withstanding all his Quirks to be tenaceous of that Truth, which I have all the Rea­son [Page 119] in the World (except his Fallacy) to believe. When the Philosopher urged a strong and as was supposed an irresistable Argument against Motion, the Respon­dent gave him a sufficient Answer and confutation by his Walking. The Case comes home, the Body is expresly summoned to appear and must be concluded a Party, notwithstanding all that the Philosopher has to say against it.

The Sophister then here labours in the Fire, all his deceitful Logick will never be able to perswade Men of understanding that the Body is barely the instrument of the Soul, tis (as he has been often told) a Part, an essential Part, the one half of the Man, which as such is properly and directly concerned in the Negotiations Traffick and Actions of this State of Pro­bation, and so unavoidably interested in the account and as a Party together with the Soul to Answer for all; and to stand or fall accordingly.

Tis not to be denyed that our Senses are the great inletts of Sin, and therefore ought to be allowed the proper Subjects of Punishment, in order whereunto tis observable how that the greatest part of the Torments of Hell which we find [Page 120] mentioned in its Black Catalogue seem in a peculiar and proper manner to be marked out, and intended to this very Purpose, as most Offensive and displeasing to them: For example here is Darkness, than which nothing can be more offensive to the Sight, and to make it full here is utter Darkness. Is Fire injurious to the Touch? Here tis with a Witness most frequently assigned as the greatest severest Part of Hell. And that the Smell should not escape scotfree, here is an addition of Brimstone.

And farther to affect the Organs of seeing and hearing; there are two other Punishments expresly assigned to the Damned, viz. weeping and wailing, which (unless we will interpret all these Meta­phorically, contrary to the Judgment of all) must be applyed to the Body. In a Word, the Argument is clearly on our side, it being the Doctrine of all (without ex­ception) that there are in that Dungeon below, Punishments provided for and ap­propriated to both Parts.

Lastly, The elaborate Treatise of the Learned Author seems to me a full An­swer and confutation of the Objections.

[Page 121] He has proved the Resurrection of the same Body, from the Antidiluvian Patriarchs, the Jews, the Abissines, Peruvians, Prus­sians, Brasilians, &c.—from all the Heathens—he has proved it to have been the Doctrine of the Primitive Fa­thers; of the Councils; of the Creeds; of the Scriptures: Answered all the Ob­jections against it, and can it be sup­posed that he should take so much pains to no purpose, does he in all this Lear­ned undertaking contend de lana Caprina? It must be confessed and allowed no­thing less if the Body be barely an in­strument, a Machine; if it be not Sen­sible; Materiam superabat opus, certainly he has stooped his noble Pen to too ignoble a Subject, he might very well have spa­red his Labour: To what end should the same Body arise if it never were ca­pable of doing Good or Evil, neither can be of Rewards or Punishments?

No verily, by this accomplished Work, he has obliged the World, and done the Church good Service, effectually Proclaimed aloud the Truth, which is here contended for. The Resurrection of the same Body carries in the very bowel of [Page 122] it a Judgment, together with the conse­quences of it.

And if it be necessary that the same Body should appear, the Actions of the former Life, are unavoidably fastned to it, together with the sutable Re­wards of that which is to come.


IF these Sentiments were not (as we conceive them to be the suggestions of Reason) to mount in the Argument a little higher, come we to Divine Revela­tion, and to enquire what Authorities we can find here for the support of it.

For if our reason of the Resurrection receive any countenance from the Sacred Oracles; its above the shock of the Philoso­pher, and can no more be impressed by all his Notions, than the Creation of the World could be overturned by the known Axiom of the great Stagyrite, ex nihilo nihil fit, out of Nothing Nothing can be made.

I begin with two noted Authorities of our Saviour, which because of a near af­finity to each other, I shall join here in one: That of our Saviour in his Sermon on the Mount, Mat. 5. 30. together with that of the Twelve Apostles when he gave them their Commission, and instru­cted them in their Duty, Mat. 10. 28. For if thy Right Eye offend thee, pluck it out and [Page 124] cast it from thee; for it is profitable for thee that one of thy Members should perish, and not thy whole Body should be cast into Hell: And if thy right Hand offend thee cut it off, and cast it from thee, for it is profitable for thee that one of thy Members should perish and not that thy whole Body should be cast in­to Hell.

And in the Second, Fear not them which kill the Body, but are not able to kill the Soul, but rather fear him which is able to de­stroy both Body and Soul in Hell—in both which places we are again and again assu­red that the Bodies of Men, as well as Souls are liable to the Punishments of Hell, unless we can imagine that Christ here in­tended to alarm the World with a Bru­tum fulmen, an ineffectual Threat (which is most impious to conceive.) To what purpose should he give such frequent ad­vertisements as those, if Hell were not to be the Portion of evil Bodies?

The casting into Hell and destroying in Hell are applied to Bodies; it can be un­derstood in no other Sense but as a com­mination or affirmation, that they shall be doomed upon their miscarriages here to the severest Torments in that Region below.

[Page 125] If Men do not pluck out their Right Eyes, cut off their Right Hand—they are in danger of implunging the whole in the Lake that burns with Fire.

If Men do not fear God above Men, their Bodies as well as Souls are in dan­ger of Hell Fire.

So that from these two places, all those Conclusions follow, and appear as clear as Chrystal diametrically contrary to what the Learned Author would have us to be­lieve, viz.

First, That our Bodies are capable of Punishments because liable to be cast into Hell.

Secondly, That they are capable of do­ing Evil at present, because that portion of misery is here denounced against them, Hell being provided for none but the wicked.

And the two opposites to these are al­together as apparent.

First, Our Bodies are capable of doing well here, we can cut of our Right Hand—we can fear God, or else it had never been here intimated as our Duty.

[Page 126] And Lastly, If we live in the discharge of our Duty, our Bodies shall be admitted to glorious enjoyments in the other World. For this in the Antithesis is ma­nifestly applied.

The first Authority that I pro­duce, shall be that of the Apostle, Rom: 2. Where after he had pronounced the sinner inexcusable who committed the same Sins which he condemned in others; and charged him with the sure Judgment of God, which is according to truth from his impenitency and perseverance in it, tells him, verse 5. That he thereby treasu­reth up to himself Wrath against the Day of Wrath, and Revelation of the Righteous Judgment of God, who will render to every Man according to his Deeds; to them who by patient continuance in well-doing seek for Glory, and Honour, and Immortality, Eter­nal Life; But to them that are contenti­us, and do not obey the Truth, Indignation and Wrath, Tribulation and Anguish upon every Soul of Man that doth Evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile: But Glory, Honour, and Peace to every Man that worketh Good,, to the Jew first and also to the [Page 127] Gentile, for there is no respect of Persons with God. If this Text be well considered, it will afford a good Argument; in order whereunto it is worthy our observation.

First, How that the Man is through the whole course of it charged both with the Sin and consequences of it; as in the 1, 3, 6, and 11. Verses. O Man.

Secondly, That he is said to treasure up wrath, by which elegant metaphor, nothing less can be signified, than that his sins are kept in a safe reconditory to be brought forth against the Man in the great Day of Reckoning.

Thirdly, He is also here infallibly certi­fied of the Justice of all the Proceedings then, and that 1st, From the Nature of the Judgment it self, 'Tis Righteous. 2dly, From the Character of the Judge set forth by this Paraphrase, who will ren­der to every Man according to his Deeds; which most certainly carries an accent and emphasis with it, being so often in Scrip­ture repeated, as Psal. 62. 12. Mat. 16. 27. Rev. 22. 12. 3dly, By another Pro­perty which makes his Justice altogether [Page 128] as conspicuous. [...] he is no respecter of Persons.

Fourthly, We have here withal a large amplification of the different states which attend all according to their Deserts.

Lastly, So universal is this last Scrutiny as that no Man whatsoever is exempt from it, neither Jew nor Gentile; that is, no Per­son at all, The Argument from this Au­thority runs thus. There is a time com­ing when all Men (which unavoidably supposes the conjunction of both parts) shall make their Personal appearance be­fore a most righteous Judge, when all their Deeds, of what kind soever, shall be brought upon the Stage, and they imparti­ally treated without any other respects but their deservings. When, as St. Atha­nasius's Creed expresseth it, All Men shall rise with their Bodies, and give an account of their Works; and they that have done Good, shall go into life everlasting, and they they that have done Evil, into everlasting Fire.

And what is this but Justice both with respect to Body as well as Soul? for both are here joined together, and one is the in­separable concomitant of the other.

[Page 129] The Second Authority which I offer for the confirmation of the Doctrine which I endeavour to vindicate, is John 5. 28. Marvel not at this, for the hour is coming in the which all that are in their Graves shall hear his Voice, and shall come forth; they that have done Good unto the Resurrection of Life, and they that have done Evil unto the Resurrection of Damna­tion.

To bring my Text home to the Argu­ment, we are necessitated to look back into the context; where we find the occasion to be the cure of a Paralitical Man, who had laboured under this Chronical Disease for no less a Space than 38 Years, at which the Spectators deservedly wonder; whereupon our Blessed Saviour gives them an account of a much stranger thing than this—namely, of the Resur­rection of the Bodies of all Men from the first to the last, at the end of the World; Marvel not at this, for the hour cometh when all that are in their Graves, &c.

My observation from this Place for the Advantage of my Argument, is, First, we have here a Resurrection (how strange soever and impossible it may seem to be) confirmed and established from the Mouth [Page 130] of Christ himself; and secondly, we have here the consequence of the Resurrecti­on, and the main Reason of it (which is the matter of our Dispute) and I most willingly appeal to the Reason of all Mankind, whether it be not manifestly held forth in the latter Clause; for tho the illative be suppressed, yet tis manifest­ly implyed, and the latter part is exege­tical, i. e. gives us the Reason of the former.

The Bodies of good Men are to rise again, and to enjoy everlasting Happiness, and the Bodies of the Wicked are to be united to their Souls, to suffer those pu­nishments, in conjunction now, which their Sins, committed in their former Union, have deserved. The most natural Sense of the place is, as if Christ had said, All Men shall rise, that they that have done Good, may go into Life everlasting, and that they that have done Evil unto the Resurrecti­on of Damnation.

The Third and next Text is Rev. 20. 12, 13. I saw the Dead, small and great stand before God, and the Books were opened; and another Book was opened, which is the Book of Life, and the Dead were Judged out of these things which were Written in the [Page 131] Books, and the Sea gave up the Dead which were in it, and Death and Hell deliver'd up the Dead which were in them, and they were Judged every Man according to their Works.

In this Vision St. John represents the general Resurrection, under the popular Scheme of a grand Assize (with allusi­on in all probability to the like passages of the Prophets Daniel and Malachy, Dan. 7. 10. Mal. 3. 16.) at which time the Books of Records, containing the Indict­ments and Charges of those Summoned to appear, are produced, faithfully Read and Examined: And as these are found, so do the Persons at the Bar, either stand or fall: Even so is it to all intents and purposes at the Resurrection, tho there will be no real Written Books of Re­gisters, but the Metaphorical ones of God's Omniscience, and every Man's Conscience (which carries in it the whole Work of the Court, all the Officers of it) we are here­by infallibly secured of the Accuracy of Justice in all the Proceedings.

Every Line and Clause of this Text affords us ample evidence of the Doctrine we contend for: As the Bodies of all Men shall arise to be brought to Judgment, so shall all their Actions be laid open, carefully Scanned, Weighed and Exa­amined, [Page 132] to make the Sentence Righteous. Of which the Books (that is, the Ac­counts, Charges, and Works contained in them) are the unvariable Measure and Rule inviolably to be observed by the Su­preme Judge in the final Determinations of all Men. Now that the force of the Argument of this Text may not be elu­ded, I desire the Reader to consider these three Remarks.

First, The Dead are raised in order to their Tryal, and therefore must by all be allowed in a special manner concer­ned.

Secondly, 'tis said expresly that the Dead were Judged, which cannot be referred to the Souls of Men (which are Immor­tal, no ways subject to Death in the Sense here) it must therefore by an un­avoidable necessity be understood of the Bodies, and so by consequence all the Bu­siness of this Judgment, from first to the last, both the Works and Remune­ration fastned here. And for the full as­surance of which, it ought to be,

[Page 133] Thirdly, Farther noted, how that 'tis twice repeated in the close of both the Verses—The Dead were Judged out of these things which were Written in the Books—and they were Judged every Man according to their Works.

Fourthly, After these I cannot pass by that of Heb. 6. 10. God is not Ʋn­righteous, to forget your Work and Labour of Love in Ministring to the Saints. For our encouragment in well doing, the A­postle directs us, to cast our Eyes on the recompence of reward which shall attend good and charitable Men at last, and se­cures us in this, that Righteousness (which is the same with Justice) shall be the standard of it, and clearly implies that if God should forget, should not recom­pense the Saint according to his Works, he would be Unrighteous.

Fifthly, Nor may we omit that in­fallible assurance which we have received from the Mouth of our Blessed Saviour in that full Place Mat. 25. 31. &c. where we have a large Account of the Resurrecti­on and Judgment, together with the Me­thod, Rule, and Reasons of both.

[Page 134] The cursed Sentence which shall be passed on the Bodies as well as Souls of the Wicked (for they are now both joyned together) has respect to the Sins which in their former conjunction they com­mitted, the one is Assigned the express Reason of the other. So it runs, depart ye cursed into Everlasting Fire, &c. For I was an Hungred and ye gave me no Meat, &c. here the illative, For, is allowed by all Per­swasions, Protestants as well as Papists, to be Causal. And the whole Man was con­cerned in the Sin and must be joyned in the Punishment, and tho' in the adverse Part, when the welcome Invitation is gi­ven, Come ye Blessed of my Father inherit the Kingdom, &c. For I was an Hungred and ye gave me Meat. … some Divines of the Reformation, will not have it here to signifie the Cause but the Consequence, to avoid the Force of the Argument for Meritoriousness of good Works, which seems to me a very strange Distinction (and as I conceive in the present Case al­together needless) for God may, ought, and will reward us for our good Works; not for any real Merit of condignity in them, but because he hath been pleased out of his Goodness and Bounty, to give [Page 135] us his Gracious Promises so to do, and up­on this account is obliged to make good his Word; but be this how it will, so much is certain, and must be acknowledged by all, it is the main drift and design of our Blessed Saviour in the whole Discourse, to represent our Actions here done in the Body, to be the Square and Measure of that Judgment which suitably shall attend both Body and Soul hereafter.

Sixthly, After all this I might here call in to our Assistance, the profess [...]d Argument of the Apostle, 1 Cor. 15. on the pre­sent Subject; but I have considered this in the beginning of this Discourse: I shall therefore now dismiss it with a Remark, or two. As, First, How he represents the Resurrection, as the Basis of Chri­stian Religion: He secures us of the cer­tainty of it, displays for our Comfort the Glorious Qualities of Bodies then: En­courages us to persevere in doing Good here, from an assurance that our Labour will not be in vain hereafter; intimating in the Expression by an elegant [...] a most transcendent incomparable Re­ward: Which must of Necessity be ap­plyed to the Body, whereunto the design [Page 136] of the whole Chapter tends. For it must be acknowledged by all, the main End of it: Now the Reason of all, can result from no other Principle, or at least none so considerable as this, viz. That we have to do with a God who will Reward every Man according to his Work; which fully comes up to what I am to prove.

Can any one imagine that there would be so much ado about our Bodies, if they were not capable of an exalted injoyment in Heaven? No verily, we may depend upon the Truth of the contrary (let the Philosopher say what he pleases) for the same Apostle has elsewhere assigned this as the Reason of it, Phil. 3. last, God shall change our vile Body, that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious Body; because our Con­versation is in Heaven. Our Citizenship lies there; we are free of that Jerusalem above, and this Angelical Alteration is in order to our Investiture into all the unspeakable Privileges of it.

In short, the tendency of the whole Chapter resolves it self into this. That Christians, notwithstanding all the dis­couragments in the way, ought to go on with resolution and chearfulness in the discharge of their Duty, upon the assurance [Page 137] of a Resurrection; when their Bodies as well as their Souls shall receive a recom­pence for all; and if this be the Case of the Saint (as it is here plainly and fully re­presented) what the State and condition of the Sinner will be upon his Resurrection we may easily conclude, not only from the Topick of contraries, but also because he is to bring his Works along with him to the Judgment-Seat, and according to these shall receive his Sentence of him, who will, must, and can do no other, than Judge the World in Righteousness.


This is the very Scripture which the learned Author alledges for the confirma­tion of his Reason for the Resurrection, viz. That as we are Men when we do Well, or Sin, So 'tis reasonable that we should be Men, when we are Rewarded or Punished for it. Which, as was intimated before, is the same Doctrin with ours.

[Page 138] And this is that invictus Cunaeus, that invincible Fort which can never be taken, which will and must maintain the great standing reason of the Resurrection against the Assaults of the Philosopher, being above them all. This is that Place which we have industriously reserved as the last and surest Nail, to fix the Doctrine, and render it immoveable: This is that place which ex­presses and proclaims it as loudly and plainly as Letters, Words, and Syllables can do it.

I do not see how 'tis possible for any one (that is not irresistibly perverse) to avoid the force of it. For here our Bo­dies are cited before this Tribunal, and all the Actions of our Lives are brought with them, to be reviewed, scanned over, sentenced and Judged; all the actions of all sorts of Men, without exception—whe­ther Good or Bad. And the proper wa­ges of either is to be given accordingly, and that in statu composito, the whole Man, his Body as well as Soul. There are a mul­titude of Elegancies observable in the words, the chief of which I cannot for­bear to note. As,

[Page 139] First, The necessity of the Resurrecti­on in order to a Judgment, [...], We must appear, which gives us sure grounds to conclude that our Bodies are more than Instruments, that they are in an especial manner concerned in the busi­ness of the Bench. No upright, full Judgment can be passed without them.

Secondly, We have here the manner of it, significantly set out in the Idium of the word [...], Appear clearly as in the Light, manifestly to be laid open in every part, all that ever was done in the Body must appear with it.

Thirdly, The [...] as some Copies read it; the Body is brought to answer for the proper things it did here, and ea quae corpori debentur, as another of the Learned has Paraphrased it: The Bo­dy shall receive the things which are due, which of right belong unto it; Sicut Justitia dicitur, suum cui (que) dare, as ano­ther of the Criticks comments it; and this is the very nature of Justice, that eve­ry Body shall have the proper Reward which is exactly suitable to his work. And congru­enter ad id quod gessit, as another of no small Repuration has given us the sense of it: The Judgment of every Body shall [Page 140] be tongruous and correspondent to his acti­ons. We see the main indictment is a­gainst the Body, and all the deeds done in the former Life are applied to it, and according to these it is we are either to stand or fall.

Fourthly, 'Tis farther to be noted how that St. Paul expresses himself by a Trope a Metonymie of the Cause for the Effect, the Works for the Wages, the things Done in the Body, for what is Due unto them And if this be not plainly enough exprest to remove all scruples, cavils, doubts and gain-sayings, we have here,

Lastly, The Reason of all this assigned by the infallible Spirit,—THAT EVERY MAN MAY RECEIVE THE THINGS DONE IN HIS BODY, ACCORDING TO WHAT HE HAS DONE, WHETHER IT BE GOOD OR BAD. … Which sounds to me, as if the Apostle had said, To this very end, to this very intent, for this very purpose, for this very reason, The Process of the Day of Judgment requires the appearance of our Bodies, as well as Souls, that Justice may be done to both. I can make no other construction of it. That every Man may receive the things done in the Body according to what he has done, whether it be Good or Bad.

[Page 141] Upon the whole I declare, that ever since I met with the Objections of the lear­ned Author against it, I have been scarce­ly able to put the thoughts of it out of my Head; and the more I considered it, the more I am in love with, the more I am established in it: And whereas the Learned Author would enervate, throw it aside, and make it no reason at all; I on the contrary must confess (beside the will and pleasure of God) that I look on it, as the first and great Reason of the Re­surrection: I do give it the supremacy and precedency to all others. I must freely ac­knowledge, that I cannot, after my ut­most search and inquisition, possibly find out any Reason that can pretend to equal or rival it, that can stand in competition with it. The Resurrection is in order to Judgment, and Judgment and Justice here are all one.

I cannot for my heart Divine upon what other Account but this, the Resur­rection of the same Body, should be so con­stantly by all the Ancients contended for, and expresly asserted, Resurrectionis vocabu­lum non aliam rem vindicat quam quae reci­dit. Tertullian lib. 5. cap. 9. ad Mart. and [Page 142] the Greek word [...] (as the learned Doctor has also noted) clearly implies the Rising again of that which Fell, according to the vulgar saying, Re­surrectio est ejus qui recidit: Suitable to this the Creed of Aquileia has expressed this Ar­ticle by the Resurrection of this Flesh; and accordingly their Bodies were parti­cularly pointed at by those of that Commu­nion as (Ruffinus tells us) when they made Publick Confession of their Faith.

I will not dwell upon this, nor light a Candle to the Sun; but refer you to the Elaborate Treatise of Dr. Beaumont on the present subject, who has proved it to have been the constant Doctrine of the Fa­thers, beyond a possibility of denial.

Now I desire the Philosopher to give me a reason of this Doctrine of which the Ancients have been so tena [...]e [...]us; Why this Body, why this Flesh must arise? (for 'tis but equal that I should give him a question to answer who in his Objections has made a precedent, and done the like) if the Bo­dy be no other ways concerned than an instrument only, if it be not sensible, if it be not capable of doing Good or Evil, Rewards or Punishments, as he has in down right words affirmed. If this be so, I earnest­ly [Page 143] request him to tell me, Why it must be the SAME BODY that must arise? Why not a­nother Body? Why not an Aereal Body? Why any Body at all?

Dic Sodes, dic aliquem,
Dic Quintiliane colorem.

I do verily believe he will have an hard Task of it, and however he may be him­self persuaded, it will (I presume) be a a difficult matter for him to persuade or convince others. For my part, I look on the Doctrine as a most Divine Truth, and am immoveably fixt in the belief of it, not­withstanding all the Arguments the Lear­ned Author has brought against it; and I presume the greatest part of Mankind are and will be of my Opinion.

'Tis most certain that this Doctrine has a most natural tendency to the advance­ment of Piety and suppression of Vice. There can be no Antidote or Cordial, no Shield or Buckler more Sovereign than this to defend and support the devout Christi­an, amidst all the difficulties and hardships with which he is engaged in his present Pilgrimage; they are all silenced, master­ed, disappointed and overcome by one word, Resurgam.

[Page 144] There can be no more powerful mo­tive to engage us in the pursuit of Holiness than this, viz. The consideration of that plenteous recompense which shall be con­ferred on the whole Man hereafter, with respect to his labours here, [...], saith St. Cyrill: The hope of the Resurrection is the Root of well-doing. This must carry us on with Courage and Resolution thro all the difficult, rugged, and uneven passa­ges we meet withal in our present Race; this must reconcile, soften, and sweeten all the assurance that we serve so good a Ma­ster, who will not fail fully to reward all his faithful Labourers in the next World, with respect to their deservings in this.

Lastly, There can be no more effectual dissuasive against Sin, than the Argument before us: If Men have any sense of their State, any love for themselves, any kindness or regard for their Bodies as well as Souls, they are carefully to avoid those ways which will inevitably implunge Both, in everlasting Torments, in the great and ter­rible Day, when they shall be again uni­ted, to the intent that they may be sha­rers in the Wages, who have been Confe­derates in the Work.


This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Text Creation Partnership. This Phase I text is available for reuse, according to the terms of Creative Commons 0 1.0 Universal. The text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission.