A sermon of the credibility of the mysteries of the Christian religion preached before a learned audience / by Tho. Smith ...

A sermon of the credibility of the mysteries of the Christian religion preached before a learned audience / by Tho. Smith ...

Table of contents

Title page

§

§

ERRATA.

A SERMON Preached before a Learned Audience.

Appendix.

§

[Page]

[Page]

A SERMON OF THE Credibility of the Myſteries OF THE CHRISTIAN RELIGION, Preached before a LEARNED AUDIENCE.

By THO. SMITH, Fellow of St. Mary Magdalen College in Oxon.

LONDON, Printed by Tho. Roycroft, for Ric. Davis Bookſeller in Oxford, 1675.

§

[Page]

Imprimatur,

Sept. 7h. 1674.

C. Smith R. P. D. Epiſc. Lond. à Sacris Domeſt.

§

[Page]

Nobiliſſimo Viro,

D. ROBERTO BOYLE,

Verae ac Solidae Pietatis,

Summae eruditionis,

Inſtaurandae ſanioris Philoſophiae,

Optimè de literis tam Sacris quam

Humanioribus merendi

Famâ longè celeberrimo,

Magno aevi Exemplo & Ornamento:

T. S.

Hanc Concionem (unà cum Appendice)

coram Academicis Oxonienſibus,

ſolenni S. Marci Evangeliſtae Feſto,

In ſacello Collegii B. Mariae Magdalenae

Superiori anno habitam,

In debitae obſervantiae [...],

Lubens merito dedicat conſecrátque.

ERRATA.

[Page]

P. 7. l. 10.— [...]. p. 15. l. 13. belief. p. 17. l. 7. the ordin▪ l. 23. ingenious. p. 21. l. 24. for its read his. p. 26. l. 10▪ revealed,. p. 28. l. 15. when. p. 34. l. 14. belongs. p. 42. l. 5. for I, read we▪ p. 45. l. 12▪ the onely. p. 48. l. 24.— [...].

The Appendix refers to Page 47.

A SERMON Preached before a Learned Audience.

[Page]

1 TIM. III. the former part of the 16. verſe.‘—Without Controverſie great is the Myſtery of Godlineſs.’

HOW much the Doctrine of Chriſtianity tends to the improvement of Reaſon and Learning, how it has brought into the World a better and more certain knowledg of God and of our ſelves, how it has advanced the common notices of nature, and has chaſed away with the clear evidences of its truth thoſe thick ſhades [Page] of error, that had darkned the underſtanding, and has removed all thoſe prejudices, that were taken up from ſenſe and a very partial and deceitful obſervation of things, may be fully demonſtrated by comparing the former eſtate of Mankind, before the coming of Chriſt in the fleſh, with the preſent, wherever it is received in its truth and power. Men before were led by opinion and conjecture and fancy only, as to matters of Religion and the concerns of another World: They had fears upon them indeed of a divine juſtice, that would revenge the violation of the law of nature either here or hereafter; and a reflection upon the ſtrange traverſes and difficulties of life had taught them to expect another life after this: but their eyes were dim however, and they could not ſee far into futurity; they could have no clear deductions of particular truths for want of a right knowledg of true and certain principles: hence it was, that they were ſo inconſtant and wavering, and knew not well where or what to fix on. But Chriſt by his appearance and manifeſting the will of God to us, [...] Tim. 1. 10. hath brought life and immortality[Page]to light through the Goſpel, and children and perſons of an ordinary reach and capacity may now eaſily apprehend thoſe things, that is, in reference to God and his attributes, the miſery we are in by ſin, the means of our recovery from this woful eſtate of life, the immortality of the Soul, and the like; which before thoſe great Philoſophers, notwithſtanding all their vaunts and queſts after learning, notwithſtanding they ſet up Schools and were ambitious to give names to Sects, had but a very imperfect knowledg of.

But while theſe truths were received by thoſe, that were willing to be taught, and to ſubmit themſelves to the dictates of reaſon, and convictions of miracles, which were added to give all poſſible ſatisfaction to the underſtanding, others, who were reſolv'd before hand not to be convinced, who had rather remain in their ignorance and idolatry and their ſins, then be converted to a new Religion, and reduced to ſuch ſtrictneſs of life, as that requires, from their debaucheries and brutiſh pleaſures, who had rather fall down before a Statue or a Picture, becauſe their Fathers had [Page] done ſo before them, and becauſe it was the eſtablished Religion of their Country, than acknowledg and adore a Crucified Saviour, reject it upon the account of the Myſteries of Faith, without ever examining the weight of the arguments, that would have enforced them upon their belief: They could not in the mean while but acknowledg the happy and glorious change, that Chriſtianity had wrought in the World, how much it exceeds and goes beyond all the morality of the wiſest and beſt Lawgivers and Founders of Republicks, how it not only laies down rules for the right ordering of life, but furniſhes its votaries with a power to practiſe them; not only ſhews us a way to walk in, but takes us by the hand and leads us in it: but the difficulties, it ſeems, that are to be met with in conceiving ſome of its myſteries, offended them. This was their pretence and their plea for their infidelity; they would have demonſtration for every thing, they would be taught and convinced by Syllogiſm, their Pride and their Self-conceit and the opinion they had of their own learning would not permit them to believe. [Page] They made their underſtanding the meaſure of all truth, and what did not ſuit with thoſe narrow and low principles they had taken up, was ſcornfully rejected by them. The Jews, ſaies the Apoſtle, 1 Cor. 1. 22, 23. require a Sign, and the Greeks ſeek after Wiſdom; but we preach Chriſt crucified, unto the Jews a ſtumbling-block, and to the Greeks fooliſhneſs. But how irrational was the demand of both? for what greater ſign could there be to the Jews, than the fulfilling of all the Propheſies in the perſon of Chriſt, even to the minute circumſtances of his life and death, and thoſe mighty miracles that ſhewed forth themſelves in him? what greater wiſdom could the Philoſophers pretend to or deſire, than the wiſdom of God in a myſtery, as it is called, 1 Cor. 11. 7. than thoſe clear diſcoveries of the divine nature and the eſſential perfections of the Godhead, than the admirable contrivances of the redemption of mankind by the ſufferings and death of Chriſt, the Son of God, than the ways and means of recovering the dignity of our nature, and of living here like men, and of living hereafter like Angels? Such a wiſdom, as will not only gratifie our earneſt deſires and [Page] purſuits after knowledg, but will make us happy too for ever. Their weak and blear eyes could not endure ſuch a great light that brake in upon them, and therefore they were deſirous to retire into the ſhade. They could not fully conceive and comprehend them, they ſeemed therefore fooliſh and impoſſible notions, that were owing wholly to an ungovern'd imagination. And hereuponThus Euſebius ſums them up in general, it being the common argument of the Heathen Philoſophers againſt the Chriſtian religion— [...]. p. 4. Pariſiis, A. C. 1628. they proceed to calumniate the Chriſtians as a company of well-meaning and honeſt and good-natur'd, but very ſimple and over-credulous people, who took all things upon truſt, without enquiring into their truth, and certainty; for ſuch were the ſlanderous accuſations ofThe words of Celſus, as we find them, in Orig [...]ns firſt book againſt that Epicurean Philoſopher, are theſe— [...]. p. [...]. edit. C [...]ntab. In this latter part he alludes to S. Pauls words, 1 Cor. 3. 18. which he moſt horribly and maliciouſly perverts, as Origen ſhews p. 12. He had before, out of his great Philoſophical warineſs, adviſed his readers not to take up opinions upon truſt, without following reaſon and a rational guide, which he imputes to the Chriſtians, and reckons them among the [...], &c. ſuch as raſhly believe juglers and pretenders to Legerdemain tricks, whoſe credulity and ſimplicity they aluſe to evil deſigns and intents. So in the third book▪ he moſt falſly accuſes the whole body of Chriſtians, [...], as diving away every wiſe man from the doctrine of faith, and only admitting perſons void of underſtanding, and of a baſe and ſervile temper. p. 121. Celſus, [Page] De morte Peregrini, ſpeaking of the Chriſtians, whom he makes a company of idiots, eaſily cheated— [...]. Lucian, andIn Euſebius, in the confutation of his impious book (which he intitl'd [...]) wherein he compared Apollonius of Tyana to our moſt bleſſed Saviour, where he objects to the Chriſtians— [...]—lightneſs and eaſineſs of nature, p. 512. and calls them— [...]—fools and ruſiicks. p. 514. edit. Paris: in fine librorum de demonſtratione Evangelica. Hierocles, and the reſt of the learned enemies of the Chriſtian Religion: They upbraided the Chriſtians of their times, with whom they converſed, in their writings and in their diſcourses, that they received all [...], with an irrational Faith and an haſty aſſent, paſt without any examination, that they could bring no proof or demonſtrative argument of what they held ſo pertinaciouſly, that nothing was required to make a Chriſtian a Believer, as they uſed to ſpeak by way of Scorn, but [...], an unjudicious and groundleſs Faith; yes certainly, a good life and a sanctified underſtanding, and an humble opinion of a mans ſelf. But theſe are but words, and men are not to be laughed and rallied out of their faith and a well-grounded perſwaſion; there is nothing of argument in ſcorn and paſſion; they only ſhew the weakneſs of the cauſe, and [Page] want of reaſon in thoſe, who make uſe of them.

But now after ſo many myriads of Converts to the Chriſtian Faith, after the atteſtation and conſent of ſo many ages, who have examined ſeverely the principles, on which it is founded, who would expect that any one ſhould dare now to queſtion the truth of it again, that men who have been baptized into it, ſhould abjure and renounce it, ſhould no longer acknowledg Chriſt their Saviour, ſhould deny him to be God, or that he had any commiſſion from Heaven to inſtitute a new Religion, ſhould act over the part of the Jews, and arraign the Son of God as an impoſtor, and ſide with the Heathen Philoſophers againſt Chriſtianity, as a doctrine not to be endured and embraced, and make uſe of their very arguments for the defence of their infidelity? But we know whence the malice and the infidelity of theſe Theiſts proceed; they have abandoned themſelves to a wicked life, they are immerſed in ſenſual pleaſures, which they make the only end of life. They are convinced, that Chriſtianity, which is a Doctrine according to Godlineſs [Page] is not conſiſtent with ſuch practices, which yet even nature and right reaſon utterly condemn.

The Mysteries of Faith do not ſo much trouble theſe men, as the ſeverity of its commands. Theſe they cannot away with, their luſts help them to arguments againſt the other, and they content themſelves with little pieces of Sophiſtry, and think to vindicate the ill courſe of life, they have taken up, this way. Natural conſcience and an ordinary reflexion upon the works of nature will not permit them, it may be, to deny a God, though they live, as though there were none: They will acknowledg him, it may be too in a good humour, the Creatour of the World, but not the Judg and Governour of it; they look upon themſelves, as only born to gratifie their ſenſual appetite; They declare equally for a liberty of living and thinking as they pleaſe. They will have no reſtraint laid upon their underſtanding, or their lives. Christianity is too ſtrict, and therefore too difficult for them; They may have the wit perchance, but not the morality of the Philoſophers, whoſe very lives notwithſtanding [Page] will condemn them as much as the Chriſtian doctrine▪ Their evil education and cuſtome and prepoſſeſſion, thoſe great hinderances of truth, made their refuſing Chriſtianity the leſs inexcuſable upon the account of its myſteries, while they acknowledged the rules and inſtitutions of it to be according to the higheſt reaſon, and the exaltation of the humane nature, while theſe men pretend its myſteries to be therefore incredible, becauſe the rules of it, which thwart their luſts ſo much, are ſo ſevere. Little or no good I know is to be done upon theſe men by perſwaſion or argument, of which they are ſcarce capable, who turn all things into Burleſque and ridicule: They it ſeems are too witty (for ſo they call their boldneſs and want of judgment) either to underſtand or embrace the principles of Chriſtianity; but their ill lives ſhew, that were they as clear as the principles of Geometry, ſo long as a ſtrict and holy life is as neceſſary and eſſential to the being of a Christian, as a right and ſound faith, they would except and cavil at them, and at laſt reject them; and if the Goſpel be hid, be eſteemed [Page] after ſo many clear and undoubted revelations, after ſuch evident proofs and convictions, an obſcure and incredible doctrine, it is hid to them that are lost, or rather, [...], in them that are lost; it is only ſo to ſuch deſperate and obſtinate wretches, whom reaſon it ſelf cannot ſatisfie, in whom the God of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, leaſt the light of the glorious goſpel of Chriſt, who is the image of God, ſhould ſhine unto them. 2 Cor. iv. 3, 4.

But theſe are wild and extravagant perſons, of debauched underſtandings and lives, and only to be confuted by the ſeverity of laws; and of the two the Chriſtian religion has ſuffered more by the ſecret underminings of Hereticks, than by their bold attaques. Theſe are the more dangerous enemies, who deny the truths and myſteries of it, upon a pretence of warineſs and caution, and go ſoberly about to deſtroy it. But all their objections, how plauſible ſoever, muſt at laſt reſolve into obſtinacy and pride: They fancy things muſt be, and are, as they would have them, or elſe [Page] they cannot be at all: They vainly ſuppoſe themſelves able to ſearch into the depths of all divine and humane knowledg, and being once prepoſſeſſed with this conceit, they grow peeviſh and angry becauſe the Chriſtian Religion propoſes things to their belief, which they cannot graſp, and are too big for their underſtanding; and rather than forego this beloved Principle, they will deſtroy the Fundamentals of Chriſtianity, and to apply that of In Apologetico cap. 5. where he mentions an old decree of the Ron an Senate, Ne qui Deus ab Imperatore conſecraretur, [...] à Senatu prebatus; and hereupon he tells us, that the Emperor Tiberius moved by the report of thoſe [mighty] works, which declared the truth of our Saviours Divinity, he received out of Pal [...]ſtine, detulit ad Senatum cum praerogativa ſuffrag [...]i ſui; though the Senate were not diſposed to admit him into the number. Tertullian to them, niſi homini Deusplacuerit, Deus non erit, homo jam Deo propitius eſſe debebit: Chriſt ſhall not be God, nor ſatisfie the divine juſtice for the ſins of mankind, becauſe this ſeems incongruous to them; it is a difficulty, that doth puzzle their underſtanding; it is above the ſtrength of their fancy; their reaſon, they ſay, tells them, this cannot be; allowing of no ſuch thing as faith, which is the great duty of the Goſpel, and forgetting, that Chriſtianity is, as it is undoubtedly, the great mystery of Godlineſs.

Thus under a pretence of clearing the truth [Page] of Religion, and making it the more eaſily intelligible, to Turks and Jews, they reſiſt it in the true notion of it, and corrupt and deſtroy it; to whom fully agrees that character, which St. Paul gave of the followers of Simon Magus, 2 Tim. iii. 8. [...], men of corrupt minds, and reprobate concerning the faith; ſuch whoſe underſtandings are wholly vitiated and perverted, notwithſtanding the great and fierce claims they laid to knowledg, as if they were the only men, that underſtood the will and mind of God; ſuch who reject the eſtablish'd truths of the Goſpel, who have no regard to the heavenly doctrine of the Evangeliſts and Apoſtles, the truth of which they ſealed and confirmed with their blood; but do [...] [...] to uſe the words of St. [...]: ex editione Reverendiſſimi Uſſerii Armachani, p 20. This perchance more particularly reſpects Marcion the heretick; for by that name he called him to his face: as we read in Irenaeus 3. lib. adv. haereſes, cap. 3. Polycarp in his Epiſtle to the Philippians, that is, by their fraudulent devices model the oracles of God according to their own fancies and luſts; who ſet up a new Religion, which the Catholick Church of Chriſt never knew or was [Page] acquainted with, and endeavour to deſtroy the faith of Chriſtianity, and think in the mean while they have reaſon on their ſide for ſo doing: and how far by their arts and ſubtilties and plauſible inſinuations, by this their ſlight and cunning craftineſs, whereby they lie in wait to deceive (for it is nothing elſe, however blancht over and diſguiſed with ſhews of ſober reaſon) they have prevail'd upon this Age, is too ſad to conſider; ſo that now it chiefly concerns us to ſecure the ground-work, the principles of the doctrine of Chriſt, and to oppoſe this growing evil, to watch and ſtand faſt in the faith, and quit our ſelves like men, and not to be like children, carried away with every blaſt and wind of doctrine, and especially of the vain doctrine of Socinus, as it will appear, when the varniſh and falſe colours are waſht of, but to be eſtabliſht in the truth of the holy Goſpel, as the Church hath taught us to pray in the Collect of this anniverſary of St. Mark.

To evince therefore the unreaſonableneſs of their pretenſions, I ſhall endeavour in the following diſcourse to make out theſe two particulars.

1. That the great myſteries of Religion cannot, [Page] and ought not to be any way prejudicial to the truth of it.

2. That the Chriſtian Religion requires us to believe theſe myſteries, upon ſuch grounds, as we cannot reject, without doing violence to our faculties, and conſequently, that the rejecting and disbelieving them muſt be unreaſonable.

1. The great myſteries of Religion cannot and ought not to be any way prejudicial to its truth.

They who find fault with Christianity for propoſing ſuch great myſteries to our beliefs, and would have all things ſo plain and obvious, that they ſhould command and force aſſent, ſhould firſt trie their reaſon in ſolving the difficulties of nature; and if notwithſtanding all their labour and toil, after the moſt accurate reſearches into the nature of ſenſible beings, of things that we daily ſee and handle, of things that ſeem to lie level with our underſtanding, and are no way diſproportionable to it, they cannot pretend to a perfect knowledg of them, if the ordinary operations of nature be ſo abſtruſe, and unintelligible, and theſe depths are [Page] not to be fathomed, if her ſecrets are beyond the diſcovery of the moſt piercing judgment and reaſon; Religion with greater reaſon muſt be allowed to have its myſteries; there being ſuch a vaſt diſproportion between things relating to God and his nature, and the things of the world. The contemplation of nature is curious and uſeful; it is a part of the ſervice and worſhip we owe to God the Creatour, to admire his wiſdom and power in the beautiful frame and order of things, which is beſt done by enquiring into their natures and properties, into their powers and operations and qualities, by examining the curious contexture and the fitneſs and uſefulneſs of their parts, and there is nothing in the whole univerſe, but deſerves to be conſidered, and very much conduces to this end.

This is the buſineſs of Philoſophy, and what contemplative minds labour in the ſearch of, to diſcover and make out how things were at firſt made, and are ſtill continued in their being, and to find out their peculiar virtues, whereby they produce ſuch a variety of effects, and how they may be altered or improved for [Page] the farther uſe and benefit of mankind. Nothing of which can be effected, at leaſt but very imperfectly, and in a way ſcarce tolerable, by acquieſcing in general obſervations, derived from weak and ſlight notices, without deſcending to ſevere trials and experiments, or by relying upon the principles of ordinary Philoſophy, that are confeſſedly unintelligible, and which inſtead of explaining nature, do but perplex and confound the underſtanding, and which have nothing to maintain and keep up their credit, but the authority of a name and the immoderate love of antiquity. But whatever hypotheſis we fix upon, they who have the deepeſt inſight into nature will be forced to confeſs, they ſee but a little way, and all that they can pretend to is but conjecture and probability, that when they may ſeem to arrive at ſome ſatisfaction in the order and connexion of things, it is very poſſible and likely, that things may be made and exert their cauſalities otherwiſe, than they ſuppoſe, be their fancy never ſo ingenuous, and their reaſon never ſo profound and ſtrong (for who will be ſo preſumptuous, as to limit either the wiſdom or [Page] power of God, that he can do no more, or muſt do what they fancy?) that there are thouſands of things, that they cannot give any ſatisfactory account of, and that the more they ſeek to comprehend the reaſon of things, the more they are at a loſs, the more they are diſſatisfied, and the effect of their ſtudy is nothing but diſorder and trouble of mind.

Now if we are convinced of the weakneſs and inſufficiency of our reaſon in our ordinary ſpeculations, if it fails us, when we attempt to give an account of our ſelves, and the operation of our minds, and when we have to do with plain matters of ſenſe, how unfit and unable muſt it be to comprehend and make out things, that ſtand at that infinite diſtance from it, to which it bears no proportion? They may as well pretend that all theſe great difficulties and perplexities, we meet with in the conceptions of things, ſhould be taken away, that all men ought to be born compleat Philoſophers, and be inſpir'd with the perfect knowledg of things, which they cannot attain to after ſeveral years, ſpent in labour and ſtudy, that nothing ſhould exiſt, but what we can conceive, [Page] and that the truth and poſſibility of things ſhould not derive from the will and pleaſure of God, and from that Idea he has in his divine underſtanding, but only take their meaſures, and be judged by thoſe narrow conceptions, we borrow from ſenſe. Men are not to be diſputed out of the belief of their ſenſes, that there is no ſuch thing as motion, or continuity of parts in extended matter, becauſe of the great difficulties, that attend the conception of them, and things are daily produced and by degrees arrive at the perfection of their being, and perform actions ſuitable to their reſpective natures, though Philoſophers diſagree in their opinions, and are diſſatisfied one with another, and cannot tell how or in what manner they do all this.

2. Thus Nature has its Mysteries; and who will undertake to explain Secondly, the Mysteries of Providence, and account for all thoſe extraordinary events, which have hapned in all ages of the world; O the depth of the riches both of the wiſdom and power of God! how unſearchable are his Judgments, and his wayes past finding out! Rom. xi. 33. It is preſumption to enquire too [Page] buſily into the ends and reaſons of God's proceedings with men, as well as impiety to find fault with them. This ſhould ſatisfie us, that God, who is of infinite perfection, neither does nor can do any thing, that is unjuſt; that he governs the World by an infinite wiſdom, that he permits men to act according to the liberty of their will; and that they ſtand accountable to him for the actions of their lives; and that they are but his inſtruments to bring about his eternal purpoſes and decrees; and that nothing comes to paſs without his ordering or foreſight; and that all thoſe croſs diſpensations are for wiſe ends, beſt known to himſelf. Why things are thus, for inſtance, why the Jews were ſelected by him to be his peculiar people; why the coming of the Meſſias in the fleſh was deferred ſo long; why ſo many Heathen Nations lie yet unconverted, and the like, muſt be referred wholly to his divine will and pleaſure, which is guided by rules of eternal rectitude and wiſdom. Let it abundantly content us in all changes and chances of this mortal life, in all thoſe diſtinguishing acts of Providence, that are every where viſible between Nation [Page] and Nation, or between man and man in reſpect of the outward conditions and ſtates of being, that God will have it ſo. God is wonderful in his doings with the children of men. Theſe things call for our admiration: They are ſecrets not to be enquired into; which way ſoever we look, whether up to heaven, or down upon the earth and ſea, and obſerve what is done in each, or whether we turn our eyes inward, we ſhall find our ſelves ſurrounded with wonders, too great for our knowledg, and enough to baffle and confound our curioſity, and to convince us, that there is as well an infinite diſtance between God and us, in reſpect of wiſdom, as of power. Now would theſe men have the ſtate of things altered and changed, and the world new modelled, and new laws given to mankind, and a new nature too, and all things reduced to an eaſier order, and regulated by their fancies, that ſo nothing may be above their capacity and underſtanding? What is this, but the effect of a fooliſh pride, that is diſcontented and troubled, that ſo many things are out of his reach and power, and that will ſcarce be brought to acknowledg, that God [Page] can do, more than they fancy or comprehend?

3. Beſides, thoſe who object againſt the instituted religion of our Saviour, the greatneſs of its myſteries, may uſe the ſame arguments againſt the principles of natural religion. That there is an infinite being, in whoſe Idea is eſſentially included all poſſible perfection, is the voice and dictate of nature, right reaſon, and conſcience, and evidenced by the conſtant and uninterrupted order and courſe and frame of the univerſe, and by the univerſal conſent of mankind, who have rites and ceremonies of religion, their Prieſts and their Sacrifices, to whom they offer up prayers and oblations, to whom they appeal for juſtice when injured, and to whom they flie for refuge and ſuccour, when they are diſtreſſed and in danger, as it were by inſtinct, and without any deliberation. But notwithſtanding this evidence and clearneſs and demonſtration of the exiſtence of a God, they will not pretend to underſtand fully the nature of the Godhead. That God is infinite in eſſence and power, and that all things owe their being to his will, they muſt be forced to confeſs, or elſe deny his being, and fancy an [Page] infinite ſeries of cauſes, infinite periods of motions, and an infinite ſucceſſion of generations, which is abſurd and contradictious and impoſſible, though they have only a negative notion of infinity. Our underſtandings cannot reach ſo far, as to have a compleat and comprehenſive notion of it▪ and when we cannot give ſatisfactory accounts concerning the affections of a natural body, as motion, place, time; much leſs can it be expected, that we ſhould do this concerning eternity, immenſity, or the other neceſſary and eſſential attributes of God: ſo that the difficulty of conceiving a thing does not any way hinder the truth and poſſibility of its exiſtence. However the moſt ſcrupulous and inquiſitive may be ſatisfied, that there are ſuch attributes, and that conſequently upon a reflection, not only on the nature of God, but on the ſcant meaſures of knowledg in creatures, it is neceſſary, they ſhould be above our reach and comprehenſion. As we may diſcover much in a curious piece of art, or wonder of nature, as the Load-ſtone, or any Electrical body: we may find out ſome virtue in a plant, or mineral, or peculiar ſort [Page] of earth; and yet oftentimes after a laborious ſearch, the beſt Naturalists are forced to confeſs, that there is or may be at leaſt a great deal more, than what they have diſcovered.

But here, they ſay, that the underſtanding neither does nor can admit of any thing incredible; and we ſay ſo too. God doth not, and conſequently the Christian Religion, which is the doctrine and revelation of God, does not propoſe any thing to us, as the object of our faith, that is really impoſſible in it ſelf, and involves in it a perfect and manifeſt contradiction; and nothing leſs can or ought to be judged incredible. But when they pretend, that no propoſition ought or can be believed farther, than it may be cleared up to the underſtanding by the evidence of natural reaſon, or of the things themſelves contained in it, we reject it as an unjuſt and unreaſonable demand, which will fully appear by ſhewing the falſeneſs of both parts of the ſuppoſition.

1. It is utterly falſe, that nothing is credible, but what can be proved and made out by [Page] reaſon. There are indeed ſeveral degrees of credibility, according to which the mind does admit ſome things with a greater eaſe and freeneſs than others. But however be the matter propoſed never ſo unlikely or unuſual, if the authority be juſt and good, it muſt not therefore be pronounced incredible, becauſe perchance it is not fully agreeable to the preſent ſtate of affairs and practice of the World, or becauſe I have ſome little prejudice againſt it. For as in a matter of fact, where there are ſufficient proofs given of a Relators both honeſty and knowledg, when I have all the aſſurance in the World, that ſuch a matter is capable of, and that he could not miſtake in underſtanding it, and that his words and thoughts do not in the leaſt diſagree, when I can object nothing but a groundleſs ſurmiſe, that poſſibly, and for ought I know, it may be otherwiſe, this will challenge my aſſent, and be a ſufficient warrant to me to believe it, whether I have a clear Idea of it or no: for this unlikelineſs and ſeeming repugnancy of it, may ariſe from my being ignorant of ſeveral circumſtances, the knowledg of which would render it probable and eaſie: [Page] ſo is it in matter of Doctrine; whatſoever is propoſed by God, becomes thereby immediately credible, and my aſſent is rational and juſt, though the thing be above my apprehenſion; and this I muſt aſcribe to the greatneſs of the object, and the imperfections of my reaſon, which neither is nor can pretend to be an arbiter and judge in ſuch matters, which are too high for it: ſo that before a man can ſafely pronounce a doctrine, that is revealed, incredible, and reject it as ſuch, he muſt queſtion the power and veracity of God, and maintain, that nothing is poſſible, but what we can comprehend; and thus under a pretence of caution, betray the greateſt immodeſty in the world, when he himſelf believes ſeveral other things, upon the bare teſtimony of men, which neither his wit nor curioſity, nor his reaſon can ever be able ſatisfactorily to make out and demonſtrate.

2. It is equally falſe, that no Propoſition ought to be believed, but what may be cleared up to the underſtanding by the evidence of the things themſelves. The falſeneſs of which aſſertion I ſhall fully evince in theſe three particulars; by ſhewing

[Page] 1. That it deſtroyes the nature Faith.

2. It takes away the bleſſedneſs and rewardableneſs annext to it.

3. It reflects on the Wiſdom and Soveraignty of God, who may, if it pleaſes him, propoſe ſuch things to us, and command us to believe them.

1. It deſtroyes the nature of Faith. To believe in general, in the proper notion of it, is to aſſent to things upon the diſcovery and atteſtation of others, which are not evident and apparent of themſelves; that is, when I have no demonſtrative or ſenſible knowledg of things, I admit and judge them to be true, not becauſe I either ſaw them, and can aſſure my ſelf of them by any of my other ſenſes, or becauſe they are ſo evident to my reaſon, that I muſt needs embrace them, as a principle or concluſion in Philoſophy, but becauſe I have received them from another, who informs me and gives me this account of them, for whoſe ſake I aſſent to them as real and certain. By which it is diſtinguished from ſcience, which is grounded upon the evidence and clearneſs of [Page] the apprehenſion of the reſpective propoſitions or objects, when things are ſo plain that they do neceſſitate our aſſent, as that the oppoſite members of a true and perfect contradiction cannot belong to the ſame thing at the ſame time, that equals added to equals make equals, that in a triangle, three angles are always equal to two right angles, and the like. And the like aſſurance and certainty of knowledg is gained, when we draw concluſions according to rule and the laws of method from firſt principles, which are aſſented to, aſſoon as they are propoſed, and the terms underſtood; whence there is an immediate dependance and connexion of things, and one thing naturally follows another; Then we are ſaid to know a thing, when we can run it up to its firſt principles, can trace its original and cauſe, and underſtand its effects and operations.

This diſtinction being ſo juſt and natural, to call for evidence and demonſtration in things propoſed to be believed, is to confound different aſſents of the mind, to turn Religion [Page] into Science, to deſtroy the truth of Hiſtory, and Tradition, and Revelation, and to fall into Scepticiſm, and doubt whether any thing be certain, but what we ſee and can prove and repreſent by a Scheme, and at laſt queſtion whether our Senſe, and what we call our Reaſon do not deceive us, or elſe, which is the effect of a greater phrenſie, run our ſelves into this groſs abſurdity, that we are as wiſe as God, and that he can do no more, than what our groſs fancies will have him.

That then ſome of the grand articles of Religion are not ſo clear, as Propoſitions in Metaphyſicks or Theorems in Geometry, or indeed are not clear at all, cannot be objected againſt their credibility. They are in themſelves as certain and as infallible; nay more certain and more infallible, if infallibility may be ſuppoſed to admit of degrees; but in reaſon, it cannot be expected, our knowledg of them ſhould be as explicit and as clear: Supernatural Truths are not, cannot be determined or judged of by proofs, derived from nature or ſenſe; they have proper [Page] proofs of their own, as all other arts and ſciences have.

To judge of theſe things therefore by our narrow conceptions, is a moſt falſe and unwarrantable way of procedure; and indeed it cannot ſeem ſtrange, that ſo much Error and Blaſphemy and all that direful train of Hereſies, in matters relating to God and Religion, which have ſo much diſturb'd the peace of Chriſtendome, ſhould ſpring from this one abſurd and corrupt principle. Hence it was alſo, thatSee the excellent diſcourse of Plato about this ſubject, toward the latter end of his ſecond book de Republica, p. 377. &c. lomi ſecundi ex editione Serrani. Orpheus, and the other Greek Poets have dresſed up their Gods in the habit and figure of men, and cloathed them with all the infirmities and pasſions incident to humane nature, and hereby made way for all the debaucheries and ſuperſtitions, that luſt could poſſibly ſuggeſt, or a troubled fancy invent. They made uſe of no other faculty to judg of God, but a groſs imagination; In his Epiſtle to Herodotus, as it is extant in Diogenes Laertius— [...]. edit. Londinenſis p. 285.—This he eſtablisht as one of his [...], or main principles of his Philoſophy, [...], p. 300. and laid down therefore in the firſt place by his great admirer and follower Lucretius in the beginning of his philoſophical Poem, to make the better way for the Atheiſm, which was to follow, that is, to exclude God, with a fairer pretence, from having any thing to do, either with the framing or governing of the world, and to deny a providence: that cenſure, which Cotta in Tully mentions to have bin paſt upon him by ſeveral, being exactly true—Video non [...]ullis videri Epicurum, ne in offenſionem Athenienſium caderet, verbis reliquiſſe Deos, re ſuſtuliſſe. lib. 1. de Nat. Deorum, ſpeaking of this very Atheiſtical afhoriſm. Epicurus upon this very ſlight pretence excluded God from having any thing to do in the ordering [Page] and governing of the world, becauſe he fancied, this could not be done without anxiety and trouble, like the due management of a great charge or employment, which takes up ones whole time, and requires contrivance and ſtudy and foreſight to keep things in an equal poiſe, to prevent diſorders, to apply remedies to the leaſt inconveniences, that otherwiſe might quickly grow and improve into a mischief, and to ſecure all by an equal diſtribution of rewards and puniſhments; forgetting that God's power is infinite and inexhauſtible; that his eyes reach from one end of the world to the other, and ſee into the very eſſences of things; that all things are at his abſolute diſposal and command; that trouble only ariſes either from fear of ſucceſs, or when we are overwhelm'd with buſineſs, or our ſtrength is not proportionable or any way ſufficient to ſuſtain ſo great a weight. Aetius preſently rejects the eternal[Page] [...][Page] [...][Page]generation of the Son of God, becauſe this does not in all things agree with natural generations; and becauſe it cannot be ſo with men, he impiouſly and dogmatically concludes, it is an impoſſible notion, and thinks he has reaſon for his blaſphemy and peremptorineſs, by laying down ſeven and forty arguments for it, as they are numbred and confuted byIn haereſi An [...]maeorum, quae eſt LXXVI. Epiphanius in his Panarium. The ſame groſs fancies have the Mahometans of this article of faith to this day, who deride the Chriſtians, by aſking impious queſtions concerning it, and even in their Devotion renounce it with a great deal of earneſtness, with a far be it from thee, what the Chriſtians impute to thee; as if man were the meaſure and ſtandard of all things, even of God himſelf, who made him, and who is of infinite perfection, beyond the utmoſt reach of fancy, or conception. His actions and underſtanding muſt needs as much tranſcend ours, as does his eſſence. His ways are not as our ways, nor his thoughts as our thoughts. Isa. lv. 8.

2. This Hypotheſis of theirs, that nothing is or ought to be believ'd but what is cleared up to the underſtanding by the evidence of the [Page] things themſelves, does wholly take away the Bleſſedneſs and Rewardableneſs annext to Faith.

One neceſſary condition to make any action capable of reward or commendation is, that it flow from a principle of liberty; and herein man, who is endowed with reaſon, the only true foundation of it, has the preeminence above all other creatures, that act only by inſtinct, or the force of appetite, or by neceſſity ofPrincipiorum Philoſophiae parte primâ, ſect. XXXVII. Nature; He becomes hereby as it were Lord of himſelf, and can act or not act, according as he is guided by counſel and rational motives, or meerly as it pleaſeth him; and according either to the right or ill uſe of this liberty, he is to be judg'd, whether he has deſerved well or no. That Chrystals ſhoot out into curious and exactly regular figures, that the flakes of Snow are Hexagonal, and ten thouſand other Rarities of Nature, are not to the commendation of the things themſelves: They ſhew admirably the wiſdom of the firſt contriver of them: the Artiſt, not the Pendulum, is praiſed, though it meaſures time ſo exactly, and performs all its various motions without any interruption or inequality, becauſe this necesſſarily [Page] ariſes from a due proportion of weights and wheels, and from a juſt adaptation of the ſeveral parts of it; 'tis the perfection of a man, that he acts freely, and conſequently that he is virtuous out of choice, notwithſtanding all the allurements and inclinations of ſenſe. And the like is to be ſaid of the ſeveral aſſents of the mind; if the truths of Religion were in themſelves ſo clear and evident, that we could not but aſſent, whether we would or no, if they could be prov'd by arguments, deriv'd from ſenſe or nature, where then would be the bleſſedneſs of Faith our Saviour ſpeaks of,Joh. 20. 29. which belong to thoſe, who have not ſeen, and yet have believed? when we have a clear and diſtinct perception of a thing, then we know it; and he muſt be very ſtupid and very pertinacious, that [...]ill not ſubmit to the truth, and evidence, and conviction of a demonſtration. How ridiculous would it be to raiſe a diſpute, and heap up arguments againſt clear evidence, and pretend diſſatisfaction in the midſt of ſo great certainty, as ſcience affords? If there were no difficulty in the notions, where were that Obedience of Faith, the Apoſtle St. Paul mentions? [Page] where would be our ſubmiſſion and humility? for a trial of which I am perſwaded, that many Myſteries are now propoſed by God, which hereafter as a reward of our Faith ſhall be more clearly made out to us, and that this ſhall be one principal part of the glory that ſhall attend the bleſſed in the other world, when we ſhall be diveſted of thoſe circumſtances, that now hinder the exertions of Reaſon, when our underſtandings ſhall be enlightned, and our capacities enlarged, and our thoughts heightened and exalted; not that it is poſſible for the moſt refined and raiſed intellect ever to attain to a full and comprehenſive knowledg of them (for the Angels, thoſe glorious ſpirits, who attend the throne, and are continually in the preſence of God, humbly vail their faces and adore) but that what we now know by Faith and Revelation only, we ſhall have a ſomewhat clearer inſight into, and be as fully and ſatiſfactorily convinced of, as for inſtance, that there is a Trinity of Perſons in one undivided Eſſence, as if we underſtood the manner of their ſeveral ſubſiſtences.

3. It reflects upon the Wiſdom and Power [Page] of God, who may, if he pleaſe, propoſe theſe things to us and command us to believe them. For that God may do this, who can queſtion? or deny, that we are as much obliged to give up our judgments and underſtandings, as our wills, to his will, to aſſent to any ſpeculation or truth of doctrine revealed by him, as to any mode of inſtituted worſhip commanded by him, or any precept of Morality; and that I am not to object and throw in my little conjectures and probabilities, becauſe it is not altogether, or in the leaſt, evident to my reaſon, when the nature of the thing renders it impoſſible that it ſhould, or if it did not, yet his command ſhould be enough to force my aſſent? now to fancy, that nothing is or ought to be credible, but what can be made out and cleared up to the underſtanding by the evidence of the things themſelves, deſtroyes this ſuppoſition, which has its certainty from, and is ſupported by, ſeveral of the divine attributes. The Wiſdom and Power of God are both infinite, and therefore he knows more, and can do more, than what we poſſibly can conceive: otherwiſe we muſt equal our little knowledg, which we [Page] chiefly derive from the images and repreſentations of things in our minds, and which every contemptible inſect and vegetable is too big for, with his; and upon the ſame account, we muſt fancy our power equal too: which is the effect of an irrational pride and madneſs, like that of the Apostate Angels, and by conſequence, throw off our dependence upon him, and deny to yield obedience to his laws, becauſe they do as much croſs our vitious and corrupt inclinations, as the Mysteries of our Faith do our narrow conceptions and ſentiments. An infinite underſtanding only can fully comprehend an infinite perfection; ſuch a proportion between the faculty and the object being altogether neceſſary: for if it could be comprehended by a finite intellect, it would immediately ceaſe to be infinite. How inſufferable then is ſuch an inſolence! How vain and fooliſh are ſuch imaginations! and every high thing, as the Apostle ſpeaks, extravagant fancies and conceits, that get into the brain, that exalt themſelves againſt the knowledg of God, which ought to be captivated and made ſubject upon the higheſt Reaſon in the World to the obedience [Page] and doctrine of Chriſt: which will appear by deſcending to the

2. Second Particular, I propoſed to make good, that the Chriſtian Religion requires us to believe its Mysteries upon ſuch grounds, as we cannot reject without doing violence to our faculties, and conſequently, that the rejecting and disbelieving them muſt be unreaſonable.

Now the grounds are chiefly theſe two.

1. That we believe and admit the divine Revelations.

2. That we yield obedience and ſubmit our underſtandings and all the powers of our minds to the Will of God.

1. That we believe and admit divine Revelations; becauſe God is of infinite veracity, and to deceive is repugnant to the holineſs of his Nature; there is an utter impoſſibility in it. Now if we repoſe ſo much truſt and confidence in a friend, becauſe we have tried him, and know that he is a man of great integrity, and that he abhors the very thought of deceiving any one with the leaſt falſehood, and ſpeaks exactly according to his knowledg without any reſerved or ſecret meaning or equivocation, or [Page] concealing part of the propoſition in his mind that it may be otherwiſe underſtood than he intends it; much more with all the readineſs of ſubmiſſion of mind imaginable are we to receive, whatever comes from God, without the leaſt demur, or doubt, or contradiction. This an infinite and eternal rectitude does juſtly challenge from us; for God may aſſoon deny his being, as falſifie his word; ſo that whoever goes about to queſtion or disbelieve any thing that God has revealed, will run himſelf upon one of theſe two groſs and abſurd impieties, either doubt whether God himſelf has an exact and perfect knowledg of thoſe things, he has propos'd to our belief, or whether he has been juſt and true to deliver what he knows. It is a moſt rational concluſion of St. John 1 Epist. v. 10. he that believeth not God, has made him a lyar. No difficulty then can or ought to deter me from the belief of a thing, if God has once revealed it; nor can the mind of man poſſibly deſire a greater ſatisfaction than this.

2. That we yield obedience and ſubmit our underſtandings and all the powers of our minds to the will of God, for

[Page] 1. That there are thouſands of things de facto above our knowledg and conception cannot be deemed by any, without the higheſt immodeſty, an unjuſt poſtulatum.

2. That all or at leaſt moſt of our knowledg deriving from ſenſe, the more things are freed and abſtracted from the entanglements of groſs matter, the more difficult is the conception; becauſe they fall leſs under the examination of our ſenſes, from which we receive ſo great prejudices in our infancy and childhood, which make that deep impreſſion on our fancies, that they are not eaſily to be removed.

3. God by virtue of his abſolute dominion and ſoveraignty may command us to aſſent to things above our reach, and conception, and knowledg. Faith is not to chooſe its Object, no more than a mans will can preſcribe and ſet to him a Law, becauſe its whole and only power conſists in the liberty of obeying or not obeying of a Law preſcrib'd by a ſuperiour Power. Whatſoever Doctrine therefore is delivered and revealed by God, becomes immediately credible, by reaſon of the authority, that does accompany it, and enforce it upon [Page] us. The Articles of Faith carry along with them ſufficient motives of Credibility, but then theſe motives muſt not be fetched from the nature of the things themſelves, as if they were to be ſo evident, that our Reaſon might fully discover their connexion and dependance, but from without; that is, my Faith is rightly grounded, and an obligation lies upon me to believe, what is propoſed by God, if it be evidenced ſo to be, by juſt and rational proofs; and if the authority be certain and infallible: God therefore declaring his Will, and confirming the Revelations he has made of it by his divine Power, this latter is a ſufficient proof, and a juſt and rational ground of my Belief; for how abſurd would it be for any one, becauſe he cannot comprehend and make out a thing fully, which in the nature of it, and by reaſon of our weakneſs and incapacity, is incomprehenſible, and which he ought to acknowledg to be ſuch, unleſs he will preſume to meaſure Eternity and graſp Infinity with a ſpan, therefore to doubt of ſo plain a truth, as this is, that the divine Power cannot be made uſe of to confirm any Propoſition, but what is exactly true and certain? [Page] ſo that this is not to forego our Reaſon, as the Socinians plead, for nothing is more agreeable to the principles of right Reaſon, but to act according to it: and therefore to ſay that we Believe I know not what, if they mean, that the objects of our Faith cannot be proved to exiſt with the ſame kinds of proofs, as what is preſented to our ſenſes, or as a propriety may be demonſtrated of the ſubject of a ſpeculative Science, this cannot be any prejudice at all to our belief, becauſe in all Faith, whether Humane or Divine, there cannot be the ſame clearneſs and evidence, but that there are ſuch Objects of our Faith we are as certainly aſſured, as if we had a particular demonſtration of each.

Now that the Mysteries of Chriſtianity are confirm'd by ſuch an authority, and therefore are to be believed by us, and conſequently that the Christian Religion requires our aſſent to no more, than what is apparent to be God's Will, we have this aſſurance, that they were atteſted and made good by the miracles of our Saviour; by theſe he proved his Commiſſion to be deriv'd from Heaven. This was the belief of the Jews in general, both Learned and Unlearned▪ Nicodemus [Page] was fully convinced of the truth and evidence of it, Joh. iii. 2. Rabbi, we know, that thou art a Teacher come from God, for no man can do thoſe miracles, that thou doſt, except God be with him. In the caſe of the blind man, who was reſtored to his ſight, the doubt was rational, How can a man, that is a ſinner do ſuch miracles? Joh. ix▪ 16. If this man were not of God, he could do nothing, v. 33. that is, he could not do ſuch things, as are above the power of a meer Man, which we ſee him do. It was nothing, but a moſt unjuſt prejudice to our Saviours Perſon, and to the meanneſs of his Birth and Parentage, ariſing from a falſe principle concerning the temporal Kingdom of the Meſſias, through a miſunderstanding of the Propheſies, that made them, againſt their Belief and Conſcience, reject the authority of ſo many evident and often repeated miracles; and though they would not acknowledg him for their Meſſias, that came in a way of humility and meekneſs, ſo oppoſite to their humours and expectations, who thought of nothing, but triumphs and revenge; yet they are forced to acknowledg, that the Meſſias could not do greater; and laſtly our bleſſed Saviour appeals [Page] to miracles, as to his credentials, as being a moſt rational motive to work faith in the minds of the moſt ſcrupulous; if ye believe not me, believe the works that I do. This then is a ſufficient confirmation of our Saviours miſſion, and of the doctrine He and the Apoſtles delivered from him, and preach'd through the ſeveral parts of the World, which they travelled, and after put in writing for the benefit and greater ſatisfaction of all ſucceeding Generations. Nor are we now at this great diſtance of time to call for new ſigns from Heaven, or to deſire a farther confirmation of what hath been received ſo univerſally for ſo many ſucceſſions of Ages. The holy Scriptures are the authentick Regiſters of the Doctrine and Revelations of God, and that I may add this by the way, were they but of humane authority, they deſerved not to be drolled upon, but to be treated with an equal, if not a greater, reſpect, than Polybius, or Livy, not only upon the account of their Antiquity, but for thoſe excellent remarks they contain, and the Theiſts of our Age may as well doubt, whether there were ſuch a man as Cyrus and Alexander, as Moſes and Joſhua, and queſtion [Page] whether Cicero wrote thoſe Orations, and the other excellent Books, that go under his name, or Virgil thoſe admired Poems, as whether St. Mathew or St. John, who were the known Diſciples of Chriſt, and converſed daily with him for above three years together, wrote thoſe Goſpels, which contain the Hiſtory and Acts of his Life and Death.

Upon theſe evidences our aſſent is raiſed, which make it rational and juſt; our Faith is reſolv'd into the teſtimony of God, which is only the rule of it, we believe nothing, but what our Saviour and his Apoſtles taught, for which we have the authority of their words, and what the whole number of Chriſtian People embraced and received, as the juſt and true meaning of them. Now becauſe we cannot reconcile theſe expreſs and clear Revelations of the Goſpel, laid down in plain expreſſions, as that Chriſt is the ſon of God, was in the beginning with God, before the world was made, God manifeſted in the fleſh, God bleſſed for ever, and that he and the father are one (not to deſcend to the other Articles, which are laid down as clearly) with our narrow conceptions of things, is moſt irrationally [Page] to conclude againſt God in favour of our ſelves, meerly for this only reaſon, becauſe we cannot tell or underſtand, how it can or ſhould be, when he hath told us expreſly it is ſo. Hereupon they heap up ſtrange and abſurd interpretations of Scripture, and which are impoſſible to be true; they deny to words their proper, and natural and genuine ſignifications; they fancy nothing but improprieties and ambiguities of expreſſion; and admit of abſurd notions for all their high vaunts and pretences to reaſon, which deſtroy the very deſign and inſtitution of Chriſtianity. Thus our moſt bleſſed Saviour, the only begotten ſon of God muſt be only ſo [...], or [...], God only by grace and favour, and for the holineſs and excellence of his life, as [...]. Epiphanius in haereſi Ebionaeoru [...] ▪ q [...]ae eſt XXX. ſect. XVIII, ex edit. Pet [...]vi [...]. Peris [...]is 1622. pag. 142. Ebion, andEpiphanius in haereſi A [...]i [...]ncrum, quae eſt LXIX. ſect. XVIII. p. 741. Arius, andGregorius Abulpharagius, in hiſtoriâ Dynaſtiarum, Arabicè, p. 129. edit. Oxon. 1663. Eu [...]ychius in Annalibus Alexandrinis Arabicè, edit. Oxon. parte primá p. 397. & 441. Paulus Samoſatenus uſed to blaspheme of old, or Deus Factus, a Created God only, ſuch by Deſignation and Office, as our modern Socinians impiouſly diſtinguish, when, not only the name, but the eſſential Attributes of [Page] the Godhead are aſcribed to him. Thus the Doctrine of the Ever bleſſed Trinity, which is clearly contain'd in the form ofThis argument drawn from the Form of Baptiſm, is generally made uſe of by all the antient Fathers, againſt the blasphemy of Sabellius, Arius, and the reſt of the Hereticks, who had departed from the true faith, eſtablisht at firſt, to follow phanſies and inventions of their own. But reſerving theſe numerous citations for another work, I ſhall content my ſelf at preſent to ſay with the Author of the Breviarium fidei adverſus Arianos, who lived above 1200 years ſince, put out by the moſt learned Sirmondus, to whom the world is ſo much obliged, for his publiſhing ſeveral writings of the antients, out of MSS.—Qui [Spiritus ſanctus] ſi Deus non eſſet, non in baptiſmo in uno nomine Deitatis patris & filio ſociaretur, ſicut ſcriptum eſt, ubi regulam baptiſmi poſuit ipſe Dominus: Ite, inquit, baptizate omnes gentes in nomine Patris, & Filii, & Spiritus Sancti. Quod ſolum teſtimonium deberet haereticis ſufficere ad credulitatem inſiparabilis Trinitatis, quia nec ipſe audent aliter baptizare, ne regulant Domini corrumpere videartur. Et ubi unum nomen dicitur, ibi & mejor & miner excluditur. Baptiſm, as might fully be made good againſt the exceptions and cavils of Wolſogenius, and in St. Joh. v. 7. (a Of this ſee the Appendix. Verſe written by the ſame hand that wrote all the reſt of the Epiſtle, as it is moſt evident from the verſes in conjunction with it, which would be altogether defective and imperfect without it, however it be omitted in the Alexandrine Manuſcript, rather by chance (for that is not the only omiſſion in that Copy) than deſign, as if it had favoured the Hereſie of the Antitrinitarians;) this Doctrine of the Trinity, I ſay, muſt be exploded, becauſe they cannot ſatisfie their bold curioſity, as why the emanation of the Deity ſtops at three Hypostaſes, that is, why the Divine Eſſence is not communicated to more than Three Perſons, and how it can be Communicated, [Page] and yet altogether remain Vndivided, and the like. That this Article was explicitly believed in the very beginnings of Chriſtianity, may, to omit at preſent other wayes of proofs, be evinced hence, that the Heathens of thoſe times uſed to upbraid the Christians with the belief of ſo unlikely a Doctrine. Thus Critias in the Dialogue Philopatris (which if not Lucians, was written however in Trajan's time, whoſe victories and ſucceſſes in the East, and particularly in the taking of Cteſiphon and Babylon and other places from the Perſians, and in repreſſing the incurſions of the Scythians, as hapning juſt at that time, are there mentioned) when Triephon had expreſſed the belief and ſenſe of the Chriſtians about this Article, by adjuring [...], makes a mock at it, and replies with a great deal of impudent raillery, [...]. [Page] So far is that from having the leaſt truth in it, which the Enemies and Oppoſers of this Doctrine affirm, without the leaſt ſhew of Reaſon and Authority, that it derives wholly from Pythagoras and Plato, and was learned in their Schools, and afterwards dreſt up by the Fathers, who were admirers of that Philoſophy, and not heard of till the Third or Fourth Century. So that upon the whole it will appear, that the Chriſtian Religion has juſt and ſure evidences, and therefore to fancy, which is the only thing they can alledge in behalf of their Unbelief, that nothing is or can be believed, but what ought to be fully comprehended by the Underſtanding, is ſo fooliſh, ſo unjuſt, ſo unreaſonable a thing, that nothing but intolerable Pride and Obſtinacy can poſſibly ſuggeſt ſuch a Thought, and conſequently that before any one can become an Arrian or a Socinian, he muſt forego his Reaſon, and forget that God is of infinite Perfection, and forget too, that he himſelf is a Man.

To draw towards a Period. Christianity being a Great Myſtery, and neceſſarily ſuch:

[Page] It is but a natural inference, that all our enquiries into the Articles of it be ſober and modeſt; that we expect not a comprehenſive knowledg of them; that we be not too buſie and curious in our Searches into the Secrets of God; that being conſcious to our ſelves of the defects, and ſhallowneſs, and weakneſs of our Reaſon in leſſer matters; how imperfect and untrue oftentimes our collections are of ſenſible beings, to which our faculties may ſeem proportionate; and to what errors and deluſions we are ſubject, by taking up falſe notions, by fancy and prejudice; we learn to be wiſe unto ſobriety, and not to think of our ſelves, above what we ought to think. It was nothing at firſt, but an overbold curioſity, not content with Revelation, and with juſt proofs of it, that raiſed in the mind thoughts of Diſbelief; but it ſtopt not here; it ſoon improved into a proud conceit of maſtering all the difficulties of Religion by the ſtrength of Reaſon; and to this we may juſtly impute the original and growth of all thoſe Hereſies and Blaſphemies, that have been vented from the very firſt Preaching of the Goſpel to this [Page] day. It is a vain thing to think to do this; 'tis a paſſing beyond the bounds which God and our own Nature hath ſet us; a piece of Sacrilegious raſhneſs, as Salvian juſtly words it, in his third Book De Gubernatione Dei, ſpeaking of the various diſpenſations of Providence: Hoc ipſum genus quaſi Sacrilegae temeritatis est, ſi plus ſcire cupias quàm ſinaris: The Articles of Faith, as they are not to be tried, ſo neither to be proved by the Principles of Mathematicks or Natural Philoſophy. It is as great folly to attempt it, as to expect it, both ariſing from a wantonneſs of Wit, which quickly looſes it ſelf in a Labyrinth of wild Opinions, and pleaſing it ſelf with new Notions and Ideas, is more and more perplext and entangled, and is ſcarce ever reducible to a right and ſober temper.

What ill ſucceſs the Schoolmen have had in their attempts this way upon the Articles of Religion, Christendome has long ſince had ſad experience of; theſe men guilty of the other extream would ſcarce acknowledg any thing of Myſtery in it; all things ſeemed ſo clear to them, as if they had had a particular [Page] Revelation; they have thrown open the Vail, that covers the Ark; they define boldly, and obtrude their Conjectures for Oracles. St. Paul and St. John ſhall be explained and proved by the Writings of Plato and Ariſtotle; thus proſtituting the Majeſty of the Sacred Scriptures, and corrupting the Simplicity of the Chriſtian Religion by their niceties and ſubtilities of Diſtinctions, and expoſing it the more to the Cavils of Hereticks, who obſerving the falſeneſs of their Principles, and the weakneſs and incompetency of their Proofs, are more encouraged to reject the truth of it. Hereby too a Contentious and Diſputative Theology has been introduced in the Schools; and unneceſſary and bold queſtions ſtarted, impoſſible to be reſolved with any ſatisfaction, which perplex and confound the Underſtanding, and are ſo far from Building us up in our Holy Faith, and from explaining the Doctrine of it, that it has ſcarce ſuffered by any one thing more. Some things we may underſtand, but we ſee more to admire, which with all our art and ſubtility we can never attain to. It is enough, that the Chriſtian[Page]Religion doth perſwade us by Rational Arguments to the acknowledgment of its Doctrine, that it laies down ſufficient grounds of the certainty and neceſſity of our Belief, that it gives us all the aſſurance we can, with any modeſty, pretend to, and all the proofs the nature of the things, propoſed to our belief, are capable of and will bear. 'Tis Faith in Chriſt, that He is the Son of God and the Saviour of the World, that denominates us Chriſtians; to deny this, how excellent a Perſon ſoever we make him for Meekneſs and Holineſs of Life, is to renounce Chriſtianity, and in effect to turn Mahometans; for they acknowledg Chriſt to have been a Great Prophet, to have been born of a Virgin, to have been aſſumed into Heaven, and the like. Satis ſit pro univerſis rationibus Author Deus; as the ſame Salvian has it. This is that, that is equivalent to ten thouſand Demonſtrations; this will level all thoſe objections, that are raiſed againſt the Myſteries of Chriſtianity; that will ſilence all the Sophiſtry of Corrupt Reaſon, and cut off all thoſe Arguments, which preſumptuous Men are wont to make: and certainly if we rightly [Page] conſider it, the Mysteries of Chriſtianity, as they are propoſed in the Scriptures, are by reaſon of the great difficulties, that attend the conception of them, ſo far from being incredible, that they ought thereby to become more credible; that is, they are more worthy of the infinite Majeſty and perfection of God, by how much they are above the reach of our Faculties.

2. Let us remember that Chriſtianity is a Myſtery of Godlineſs, and conſequently that the Great Myſteries of it ought to have an influence upon our Lives and Practices. As on the one hand, to ſay, that theſe Great Articles of our Faith are nice Speculations, and the explicit Belief of them, as they are propoſed, not neceſſary, and to queſtion that Senſe of them, in which they have always been received by the Catholick Church, is to undermine the Fundamentals of Chriſtianity; So on the other ſide, it takes off very much from the obligation to Obedience, and dulls thoſe affections, which a reflexion on theſe Great Myſteries muſt needs cauſe in the mind.

That God ſhould ſend his Son into the [Page] world to diſcover this Myſtery to us in Perſon, and in order to our Redemption, was the Effect of an Infinite Wiſdom, and of an Infinite Love; that God ſhould be Manifested in the Fleſh for our ſakes, and ſubmit himſelf to the weakneſſes, and imperfections, and contumelies of the humane nature; that the Second Perſon of the Trinity, Co-eſſential and Co-eternal with the Father, ſhould condeſcend to aſſume fleſh, and therein to ſuffer; a reflection on this cannot but fill us with admiration and love. One great part of the Worſhip we owe to God conſiſts in our admiring his infinite Perfections; all our Praiſes and Thanksgivings are but the outward ſignifications of this, and faint expreſſions of our thoughts, which looſe themſelves in the contemplation of them. Now theſe Myſteries afford us eternal matter for our admiration. Beſides, what greater obligation to Obedience can there poſſible be, than the Revelation of this Myſtery, upon which our Salvation is founded? A Holy and Religious Life then is the beſt evidence of our belief of theſe Articles of Chriſtianity beyond all ſubtility of Diſputation. This eſpecially [Page] concerns us, who are dignified with the Holy Priesthood, who are Miniſters of Christ, and Stewards of the Myſteries of God. This ſhews, that we do more than barely aſſent to the truth of them, when they produce in us all, both Prieſts and Lay, theſe effects, for which they were principally diſcovered; that ſo living in obedience to the will of God revealed to us by his Son, whom he ſent out of his own Boſom, and in all holy converſation and godlineſs, we may at laſt be admitted to the ſight and fruition of his glorious Godhead, to ſing Praiſes and Hallelujah's to the bleſſed Trinity for ever and ever, Amen.

Appendix.

[Page]

IT muſt be confeſſed, that this Verſe is not to be met with in ſeveral Old MSS. as particularly in the mentioned Alexandrine, now in the Kings Library at St. Jame's, brought out of Egypt by Cyrillus Lucari, when he removed from the See of Alexandria to the Patriarchate of Conſtantinople, who was ſtrangled by the Turks in the year 1638, and ſent to K. Charles I. though not ſo antient, I believe, as is pretended, as if it had been wrote by the hand of Thecla, an Egyptian Woman of an honourable Extraction, and a Martyr for the Chriſtian Faith, condemned to the Amphitheatre under Diocleſian, as Euſebius relates in the Supplement to the Eight Book of his Eccleſiaſtical Hiſtory, which is found in ſeveral Copies, if it be his (cap. 3.) before the firſt Council of Nice, which is barely ſaid and conjectured; and I ſuppoſe, that it may be proved, that the Vatican exemplar is the more Genuine [Page] of the two, and comes nigher the Original. It is omitted alſo in an ancient Manuſcript in the Archives of our Colledg Library, containing the New Teſtament entire (except the Apocalyps) with the Pſalter and ſeveral Hymns collected out of the Old Teſtament, the words [...] being alſo wanting in the eight verſe, and in ſeveral others. Upon this the Enemies of this Doctrine triumph and boldly pretend, that it was inſerted by the Catholicks: Thus to mention only one for all, Socinus himſelf in his Commentary on theſe words—Satis conſtat illa eſſe Adulterina, & ab hominibus, qui ſuum dogma de trino & uno Deo quâcun (que) ratione defendere & propagare volebant, in hunc locum infarcta. But let the appeal lye to any indifferent Perſon, which is moſt likely, that thoſe, who profeſſed their belief of this Doctrine, which was grounded too upon ſeveral other Texts of Scripture, and was derived down to them from the firſt Ages of the Church, and which they contended for with ſo much earneſtness, ſhould without any neceſſity dare commit, ſuch a Forgerie, which could not but be taken notice of by their watchful Enemies, or that this ſhould be done [Page] by the Oppoſers of this Doctrine, who were arraigned in general, by all the Catholick Writers, who had to do with them, as falſifiers of the ſacred Records, and were ſo much concern'd to do it in defence of their private tenets and fancies, and eſpecially to raze this Text, with which they were ſo oppreſſed, out of ſeveral Copies, from which by Tranſcripts it might eaſily be propagated into others: And conſequently it is not to be admired, that ſeveral of the Fathers, no not Athanaſius himſelf, nor Cyril of Alexandria, not St. Hilary, who defended with ſo much learning the truth of this great Myſtery, did not make uſe of this Teſtimony, they lighting upon ſome of theſe Tranſcripts; which is to be ſaid alſo for St. Austin, in his Book 3. Chap. 22. againſt Maximinus an Arian Biſhop, for St. Leo in his Epiſtle to Flavian Biſhop of Constantinople, againſt the Hereſie of Eutyches, Ep. 10. Cap. 5. for Eucherius de questionibus N. Teſtamenti, and for Oecumenius in his Commentary on this Epiſtle, and ſeveral others. The ſame reaſon holds for the omiſſion of it in the Syriack, Arabick, and Aethiopick Tranſlations, the two former of which, as they are now extant, as [Page] is moſt probable, were made long ſince the times of Arius, notwithſtanding the pretenſions of ſome to a far greater Antiquity, the laſt is confeſſedly of a later Date. The ſcarcity of Copies in thoſe days, and the malitious induſtry and cunning of the Hereticks render the conjecture ſufficiently probable, if no Copy were to be found with this Verſe entire, and that we had only the authority of ſome of the Antients, who cite it as authentick, as having met with it in their Books. The Divines of Lovain in collating the N. T. with a great number of Latin Copies, found it only wanting in five. R. Stephanus in his Edition of the N. T. had the uſe of fifteen or ſixteen old Greek MSS. above half of which retain'd it. So the Edition of the N. T. at Complutum compared with antient MSS. printed in the beginning of the Reſtauration of Polite Literature in Chriſtendome, at the expences of the great Cardinal Ximenes, only with this variation, [...]. Thus Eraſmus confeſſes he met with a Manuſcript in England, which he calls by the name of Codex Britanicus, which had [Page] the whole ſeventh Verſe, as we now read it, and the eight Verſe, the latter part thus altered, [...]. I ſhall lay no ſtreſs upon two Writings, which paſs under the name of Athanaſius, where this Verſe is cited, becauſe it is not to be met with in thoſe larger works of his, which are acknowledged genuine, the one is an account of a disputation, according to the title, had with Arius in the Council of Nice; but the title is faulty, as appears from the Diſcourse it ſelf; nor was Arius the Perſon diſputed with there, but one of his followers; and the reaſon of the miſtake of the title may be aſcrib'd to an ignorant Librarius, putting down Arius for Arianus, and the Dialogue not real, but ſuppoſed, as was uſual amongſt the Fathers, introducing the Hereticks pleading their Cauſe, and the Orthodox refuting their Cavils and defending the Truth. And if this may paſs for likely, there can be no great reaſon to ſuſpect the Authenticalneſs of it, the 1 V [...]l. p. 147. Pariſtis. 1627. words are, [...]. The other is in a Book extant only in Latine Tom. 2 p. 55 [...]. lib. 1. de unitâ [Page]Deitate Trinitatis ad Theophilum, dicente Joanne Evangeliſtâ in Epiſtolà ſua, tres ſunt, qui teſtimonium dicunt in Coelo, Pater, & Verbum, & Spiritus. But this piece, I confeſs, is very juſtly rejected as none of his, though perchance wrote not many years after his time. St. Cyprian, who ſuffered Martyrdome about the year of Ch. 258. Galienus and his Son Valerianus being then Emperours, about ſixty years before the calling of the Council of Nice, in his book de unitate Eccleſiae Catholicae, cites this Text expreſly, as found in the Copies of his time:—Dicit Dominus, Ego & Pater unum ſumus, & iterum de Patre & Filio & Spiritu Sancto, & hi Tres unum ſunt. It is not any way material to the deſign and purpoſe of this Scholion to inquire, in what ſenſe St. Cyprian underſtood theſe words, but only to vindicate the antiquity of the Copies, that retained this reading, though it might eaſily be proved that it was a thing uſual with the Fathers, as no one can be ignorant, who has turn'd over their Writings, to interpret places of Scriptures ſometimes, not according to their primary intent, but by way of accomodation. Which teſtimony is ſo clear and convincing that Sandius in [Page] his Appendix quaeſtionum Paradoxarum, p. [...]8 [...]. uſes all his art and skill to avoid the force of it, by pretending, that ſeveral things have been changed, added, taken away, and ſome other way varied in the Epiſtle, as appears by the obſervation of Poſſevinus, who took the pains to compare the printed Copies with four MSS. and the acknowledgment of others, Perkins, James, and Rivet: from which premiſes he concludes very boldly upon a meer poſſibility, that this place was never cited by that bleſſed Martyr, but put in by ſome body elſe; Quam facile ita (que) etiam hic locus interſeri potuit ab his, qui non exhorruerunt ſacras literas corrumpere propter metum Hereticorum. But firſt this is barely ſaid without the leaſt proof, and without the authority of any MS. Secondly neither Pamelius nor Rigaltius, nor any other, as I know of, who put forth St. Cyprian, make mention of any various reading in this place, all agreeing in it. Now that this Epiſtle is St. Cyprians is undoubted: St Cyprian himſelf referring to it, and that the reading is the ſame now, as it was in the old Copies written above eleven hundred and forty years ago, appears from Fulgentius, who not only cites this ſeventh verſe in [Page] his book de fide Catholicâ adverſus Pintam Epiſcopum Arianum, p. 772. in his teſtimonies del rinitate, and in his book de Trinitate ad Felicem Notarium, c. 4. which thus begins, En habes in brevi alium eſſe Patrem, alium Filium, alium Spiritum ſanctum, alium & alium in perſonâ, non aliud & aliud in natura; & idcirco ego, inquit, & pater unum ſumus; unum, ad naturam referre nos docens, ſumus, ad perſonas: ſmiliter & illud. Tresſunt, inquit qui teſtimonium dicunt in Coelo, Pater, Verbum, & Spiritus, & hi tres unum ſunt. Audiat Sabellius, ſumus: audiat tres: & credat eſſe tres perſonas, & non ſacrilego corde blaſphemet, dicendo, ipſum ſibi eſſe Patrem, ipſum ſibi Filium, ipſum ſibi Spiritum ſanctum, tanquam modo quodam ſeipſum gignat, aut modo quodam a ſeipſo ipſe procedat, cum hoc etiam in naturis creatis minime inveniri poſſit, ut aliquid ſeipſum gignere valeat. Audiat ſcilicet & Arius unum, & non differentis filium dicat eſſe naturae, cum natura diverſa unum dici nequeat, p. 591 ex Editione Theophili Ranaudi, Soc. Jesu, [...]ariſiis 1671. printed with St. [...] Maximus T [...]urinensis, and four others which make up the [...]pras [...]raesulum. but cites this very place of St. Cyprian, in his book contra objectiones Arianorum, in his anſwer to the tenth or laſt objection. His words are theſe,P. 447. In Patre & Filio, & Spiritu ſancto unitatem [Page]ſubſtantiae accipimus, perſonas confundere non audemus; beatus enim Johannes Apoſtolus teſtatur, dicens, tres ſunt, qui teſtimonium perhibent in Coelo, Pater, Verbum, & Spiritus, & hi tres unum ſunt. Quod etiam beatiſſimus Martyr Cyprianus in Epiſtolâ de unitate Eccleſiae confitetur, dicens, qui pacem Chriſti & concordiam rumpit, adverſus Chriſtum facit: qui alibi praeter Eccleſiam colligit, Chriſti Eccleſiam ſpargit. At (que) ut unam Eccleſiam unius Dei eſſe monſtraret, haec confeſtim teſtimonia de Scriptur â inſeruit, dicit Dominus, Ego & Pater unum ſumus, & iterum, de Patre & Filio & Spiritu ſancto ſcriptum eſt, & hi tres unum ſunt. If it be said, that St. Cyprian cited only the latter part of the 8. v. where the vulgar Latine has thoſe very words, & hi tres unum ſunt lib. 1. p. 16. ex Edit. I. Sirmondi Pariſiis 1629. and that thus Facundus, Epiſcopus Hermianenſis, in the time of Juſtinian, to whom he dedicates his book, which he wrote pro deſenſione trium capitulorum Concilii Chalcedonenſis, ſeems to underſtand it, without taking any notice of the 7. v. citing this place of St. Cyprian, though by a lapſe of his memory he ſaies it is to be found in Epiſtolâ ſive libro, quem de Trinitate ſcripſit: I reply firſt in general that [in] might eaſily be left out by the oſcitancy of the Librarii, not to ſay, razed out by the Hereticks; the Syriack Interpreter reading in his Greek Copy, what we find in [Page] ours, as to the latter part, [...], and accordingly tranſlating it ſo, & tres ſunt teſtes, Spiritus & Aqua & Sanguis, & hi tres in uno ſunt [...] Bechad, and ſo the Arabick Interpreter [...] in uno, only the Aethiopick conforming to the preſent reading of the vulgar Latine. But what will they ſay to the Alexandrine MS. which they ſo much adore, which has the ſame reading, [...]; which are the words alſo of our MS. ſo in the Copies, which Oecumenius followed [...] St. Hierom's tranſlation leaves out in the 8. v. & hitres unum or in unum ſunt, and ſo the Greek of Arias Montanus, and the Complutenſian Edition; in the Margin of which later it is noted, that Aquinas in the expoſition of the ſecond decretal de ſummâ Trinitate againſt Abbot Joachim, who perverſely interpreting the end of the 7. v. of the unity of will and conſent, alledges the end of the 8. v. for his authority and juſtification, had made this obſervation, ſed hoc in veris exemplaribus non habetur, ſed dicitur eſſe appoſitum ab Hereticis Arianis ad pervertendum intellectum ſanum auctoritatis praemiſſae de unitate eſſentiae trium perſonarum. I ſuppoſe the great [Page] reſpect Aquinas had for the vulgar Latin, made him rather ſuſpect the whole to be added, than that it was ill tranſlated, which he would eaſily have acknowledged, had he conſulted any Gr. MS. But this kind of learning they were not acquainted with in that Age of Scholaſtical ignorance and barbarouſness. Secondly, as they take it for granted, that this was the reading of the vulgar Latine at that time, ſo they more vainly and weakly ſuppoſe, that St. Cyprian made uſe of the ſame vulgar Latine edition, the contrary of which appears in ſeveral of his citations, and it is more likely, that he might tranſlate ſo literally the latter part of the 7. v. and not at all regard the 8. v. or the vulgar tranſlation, and ſo it appears from the teſtimony of Fulgentius, cited above, that he underſtood it.

Afterward when ſeveral, out of an evil deſign to overthrow the Myſtery of the moſt bleſſed and adorable Trinity, omitted in their tranſlations of the Scriptures into the Latin Tongue this Verſe (a liberty which, it ſeems, every Pretender almoſt made uſe of, and it may well be ſuſpected, that an Arian then, as a Socinian now, in his tranſlation would be overfavourable to his own opinions, by leaving out and putting in what might make for them, and accordingly [Page] interpreting what was retained to their beſt advantage:This Preface is printed in an old edition of the N. T. with the interlineary Gloſs, and I find it in ſeveral MSS both in the Bodleyan and our own Colledg-Library before the Catholick Epiſtles. The Stile is exactly St. Hierom's and queſtionleſs his, and acknowledg'd as ſuch, both by Eraſmus and Socinus, however omitted by Eraſmus in his edition of St. Hierom's works at Baſil. St. Hierome in his preface to the Canonical Epiſtles, vindicates the antient reading, and laies open the baſeneſs and perfidiouſneſs of theſe men. I ſhall here put down the whole Preface; Non ita ordo est apud Graecos, qui integrè ſapiunt, & fidem rectam ſectantur Epiſtolarum ſeptem, quae Canonicae nuncupantur, ſicut in Latinis codicibus invenitur: Quod quia Petrus primus est in numero Apoſtolorum, primae ſunt etiam ejus Epiſtolae, in or dine caeterarum; ſed ſicut Evangelistas dudum ad veritatis lineam correximus, ita has proprio ordini Deo juvante reddidimus. Eſtenim prima earum una Jacobi, duae Petri, & tres Johannis, & Judae una. Quae ſi ſicut ab eis digeſtae ſunt, ita quo (que) ab Interpretibus fidelitèr in Latinum verterentur eloquium, nec ambiguitatem legentibus facerent, nec ſermonum ſeſe varietas impugnaret, illo precipuè loco, ubi de unitate Trinitatis in primâ Johannis Epiſtolâ poſitum legimus, in quâ etiam ab infidelibus tranſlatoribus, multum err atum eſſe à fidei veritate comperimus; tria tantummodo vocabula, hoc eſt, aquae, ſanguinis, & ſpiritus in ipſâ ſuâ editione ponentibus, & Patris verbi (que) ac ſpiritûs teſtimonium omittentibus, in quo maximè & fides Catholica roboratur, & patris ac filii ac spiritûs ſancti una divinitatis ſubſtantia comprobatur. In caeteris vero Epistolis, quantum[Page]à noſtra aliorum differt editio; Lectoris prudentiae derelinquo. Sed tu Virgo Christi, Euſtochium, dum à me impenſius Scripturae veritatem inquiris, meam quodammodo ſenectutem invidorum dentibus corradendam exponis, qui me falſarium corruptorem (que) ſacrarum Scripturarum pronunciant. Sed ego in tali opere nec aemulorum meorum invidentiam pertimeſco, nec ſanctae Scripturae veritatem poſcentibus denegabo. Eraſmus and Socinus are ſo urged with this teſtimony of St. Hierome, that they are forced to make uſe of very pitiful and dis-ingenuous arguments to invalidate it. Socinus had ſaid before—fortaſſe ante Hieronymum vix ullus invenietur, qui testimonium iſtud hoc in loco planè agnoverit, the falſity of which conjecture, however ſo warily laid down, has been diſproved; hereby craftily concealing the citation out of St. Cyprian, he very boldly accuſes St. Hierome of Forgery, who having got a Copy or Copies, in which this verſe was added, adverſus fidem aliorum omnium exemplarium, tam Latinorum, quam Graecorum, lectionem particulae iſtius tanquam germanam defendere & promovere coepit, conquerens publicè eam culpâ & fraude hereticorum abraſam à vulgatis codicibus fuiſſe. But St Hierome has ſufficiently confuted the falſeneſs and boldneſs of this Cavil. He was uſed to this kind of language, as if [Page] he had corrupted the Scriptures, but he was no way moved by it; though this accuſation of thoſe of his own time perchance may not ſo much be referr'd to this place, as to his tranſlation in general, and may proceed not ſo much from heretical malice and pravity, as envy of ſeveral of his contemporaries, who were orthodox in the faith, but were no friends to his new tranſlation. He charges the omiſſion upon theſe unfaithful Tranſlators (queſtionleſs Sabellians and Arians) and upbraids them with it as a thing manifeſt and notorious, and eaſily demonſtrable; and certainly he would not have made himſelf ſo obnoxious, unleſs he had grounded his confidence upon the authority of ſeveral Greek Copies: with what little pretence of reaſon therefore Eraſmus and Socinus fancy St. Hierome to have changed the publick and common reading, let any indifferent perſon judge. But ſuppoſing that the Copies of thoſe times varied, which Eraſmus grants (and therefore St. Hierome is moſt falſely and unjuſtly accuſed by Socinus to have been the author of this interpolation) He enquires, quonam argumento docet utrum ſit rectius, utrumve ſcriptum ſit ab Apoſtolo, praeſertim cum quod reprehendit, turn haberet publicus uſus Eccleſiae? To this it may be anſwered, 1. that ſome [Page] vitiated and defective Copies, ought not to prejudice the authority of entire and better Copies, whether Latin or Greek. 2. that St. Hierome had reaſon to prefer and vindicate that reading, which gives ſuch an evident proof of this great Article of the Chriſtian Religion, agreeable to the doctrine of the Catholick Church, derived down to them by an univerſal Tradition, and acknowledged as ſuch, by all, excepting a few, whom either diſcontent, or pride and conceitedneſs of their own parts, and a love of innovation and of being the author of a Sect, had drawn into the contrary heretical opinion. Beſides, his words are ſo clear, that one might juſtly wonder, that Eraſmus ſhould pretend any difficulty or perplex ſenſe in them, as he does in his, non ſatis video, quid ſibi velit hoc loco Hieronymus; but that we have too juſt cauſe to ſuſpect, how that great Scholar was biaſt and perverted in his judgment, concerning thoſe great myſteries of Faith; though he is ſo wary and cunning, as not to diſcover himſelf too openly. He indeed is forced to confeſs the nature of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghoſt to be ſimple and undivided, and the eſſence the ſame, though he is peremptory, that it cannot be proved from this Text, conſtat hic agi de fide teſtimonii, non de ſubſtantia perſonarum, [Page] herein followed byde illâ ( [...]) ut mihi quidem videtur non agitur hoc in loco; quod & gloſſa iſta interlinearis, quam vocant, agnoſci [...]. Beza, and with a great deal of ceremony confeſſes it to be pious to ſubmit our underſtanding to the judgment of the Church, as ſoon as ſhe ſhall declare herſelf (as certainly ſhe has done in this in her publick Creeds, to the great ſhame and conviction of Hereticks, who reject her authority) yet ſtill for all this demureneſs, he pleads for a liberty of interpreting Scripture, as if the truth were not yet wholly reveal'd, and the Church might err in her declarations, nec interim nefas est citra contentionem ſcrutari verum, ut Deus aliis alia patefecit (which is alſo the pretence of Socinus and his followers:) and accordingly he interprets ſeveral places of Scripture in favour of Arius and the other Hereticks, and particularly this, cum totus locus ſit obſcurus, non poteſt admodum valere ad revincendos Haereticos (the ſame pretence being made uſe of for all places, though never ſo plain) and endeavours to elude the force of that famous place in 1 Tim. 3. 16. by expunging the word [...], as much as in him lies, that is, by pretending it was added by the Arian Hereticks. So that we need the leſs value the cenſure he paſſes upon S. Hierome in this matter, where nothing but pure zeal for the truths of God could make him ſo concern'd and fervent—Ille ſaepe numero[Page]violentus est parum (que) pudens, ſaepe varius, parum (que) ſibi conſtans.

Idacius Clarus a Spaniſh Biſhop, who died about the year 388, at what time the elder Theodoſius and Valentinian were Emperours, cites both verſes, though as to their order tranſpoſed, and with a little alteration, in his book againſt Varimadus an Arian Deacon, Tom. 4. Bibliothecae veterum Patrum. Paris. 1610. pag. 372. reſponſione 3.—Item ipſe (i.e. Johannes Evangeliſta, whoſe Goſpel he had juſt before cited) ad Parthos, tres ſunt, inquit, qui testimonium perhibent in terrâ, Aqua, Sanguis, & Caro, & tres in nobis ſunt: & tres ſunt, qui testimonium perhibent in coelo, Pater, Verbum & Spiritus, & hi tres unum ſunt; which very citation is made uſe of, as being borrowed hence, by the author of the collections of the decretal Epiſtles, which beyond all doubt are proved to be counterfeitConſule Epiſtolarum Pontificalium cenſuram à D. Blondello editam Genevae. A. Chr. 1628. pag. 190. and ſuppoſititious, in the 1 Epiſtle of Hyginus, and by this is to be corrected, Item ipſe ad Parthos, tres ſunt, qui testimonium perhibent in terram, Aqua, Sanguis & Caro; & tres in nobis ſunt, qui teſtimonium perhibent in coelo, Pater, Verbum, & Spiritus, & hi tres unum ſunt. There is like variety of reading in both verſes in ſeveral old Copies, ſome leaving out [...] and [...], others retaining them▪ For this [in terrâ] Socinus confeſſes to be [Page] found in quibuſdam emendatis exemplaribus, though that we may gain nothing by this confeſſion, he tells us immediately after, it is not extant in emendationibus. It might eaſily be foreſeen, that if either had been leſt, and particularly this latter; the one would have infer'd the other juſtly and neceſſarily, and therefore it cannot ſeem ſtrange, if the firſt corrupters of this Scripture, to make all ſure, and to render their falſe and perfidious dealing the more unſuſpected, omitted both; ſo too in that antient MS. Grotius made uſe of, though he gives us no proof of its antiquity in that place, and ſuppoſe it were written a thouſand years ſince, we are not to be ſwayed by it, as if it were authentick, [...], and no more, who thereupon conjectures theſe words [...], with the former verſe to have been added by the Arians to prove the father, ſon and holy ghoſt, to be one in conſent only, but afterwards removed and altered by the Catholicks, and added to the former verſe, which is ſaid without any the leaſt proof either from reaſon or antiquity, and has nothing to maintain the fancy, but the great name of the Author of it.

That whichIn appendice Interpretationum Paradoxarum p. 381. Sandius and ſeveral others allege [Page] in the firſt place, that eo omiſſo meliorem eſſe verborum connexionem, the connexion is far better, if the 7 v. were omitted, and that therefore it ought to be ſo, and was antiently omitted; if the ſuppoſition were true, is not only vain and frivolous, but very bold and immodeſt to ty the ſpirit of God to ſuch a way of writing, as pleaſes their humours and fancies beſt, and ſavours moſt of humane artifice, and by the ſame argument they may reject not only verſes, but whole chapters in the N. T. for the meanneſs and inaccuracy of the ſtile, and the ſeeming careleſneſs of the method, which is not always conformable to the rules of the Gr. eloquence. 2. Indignum eſt ſummo Deo eſſe testem, inio coram quo judice teſtis foret? is a groundleſs and bold cavil; for this witneſſing is nothing elſe but the declaration of God to mankind by evident ſigns and tokens concerning our Saviours being the true Meſſias, and of his being born in the fleſh, and that he came from him. This God has atteſted and ſufficiently made known to the World, and in this ſenſe the Word often occurs in the Scriptures, without the leaſt indignity offered to the Divine Nature. The only pretence he has for his fancy is a baſe and unworthy compariſon he conceives in his mind between Gods [Page] being a witneſs, and mans being a witneſs in our Courts of Judicature, forgetting the genuine and eaſie ſenſe of the word, as I have above expreſſed it. 3. That it is highly probable that this verſe was inſerted by a Sabellian, the contrary whereof is moſt true. 4. That in ſeveral MSS. and Editions of modern languages, there is a tranſposition of theſe two verſes. The ſame before was acknowledged to be found in ſome Greek copies, which no way proves the pretended interpolation, but only that antient copies do not all agree. 5. That this v. does very highly favour the Arians, but this is ſuch a ſtrain of fancy, that he may as well allege the firſt words of the Book of Geneſis, to prove Ariſtotles opinion of the eternity of the World. If men out of a prejudicate opinion, againſt the doctrine of the Catholick Church, allow themſelves to interpret Scripture according to their own fancies, it cannot ſeem ſtrange to any, that they ſhould go about to prove and juſtifie their blaſphemies from the plaineſt texts of Scripture, that in the judgment of all ſober perſons, who are free from thoſe prejudices, do moſt evidently refute them.

FINIS.

[Page]

Information about this book

Title statement

A sermon of the credibility of the mysteries of the Christian religion preached before a learned audience / by Tho. Smith ...

Smith, Thomas, 1638-1710.

Edition statement

1675

Publication

Publisher

Text Creation Partnership,

Place of publication

Ann Arbor, MI ; Oxford (UK) :

Date

2005-12 (EEBO-TCP Phase 1).

ID [DLPS]

A60586

ID [STC]

Wing S4250

ID [STC]

ESTC R10064

ID [EEBO-CITATION]

13773207

ID [OCLC]

ocm 13773207

ID [VID]

101752

Availability

This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Early English Books Online 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.

Series

Early English books online.

Notes

(EEBO-TCP ; phase 1, no. A60586)

Transcribed from: (Early English Books Online ; image set 101752)

Images scanned from microfilm: (Early English books, 1641-1700 ; 850:29)

Source

— A sermon of the credibility of the mysteries of the Christian religion preached before a learned audience / by Tho. Smith ..., Smith, Thomas, 1638-1710..

Extent

[4], 76 p.

Printed by Tho. Roycroft for Ric. Davis ...,. London :: 1675.. (Errata: p. [4]) (Reproduction of original in Huntington Library.)

Creation

Created by converting TCP files to TEI P5 using tcp2tei.xsl, TEI @ Oxford.

Editorial practices

EEBO-TCP is a partnership between the Universities of Michigan and Oxford and the publisher ProQuest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by ProQuest via their Early English Books Online (EEBO) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). The general aim of EEBO-TCP is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic English-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in EEBO.

EEBO-TCP aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the Text Encoding Initiative (http://www.tei-c.org).

The EEBO-TCP project was divided into two phases. The 25,363 texts created during Phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 January 2015. Anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source.

Users should be aware of the process of creating the TCP texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data.

Text selection was based on the New Cambridge Bibliography of English Literature (NCBEL). If an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in NCBEL, then their works are eligible for inclusion. Selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. In general, first editions of a works in English were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably Latin and Welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so.

Image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. Quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in Oxford and Michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet QA standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. After proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. Any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. Understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of TCP data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. Users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a TCP editor.

The texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the TEI in Libraries guidelines.

Copies of the texts have been issued variously as SGML (TCP schema; ASCII text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable XML (TCP schema; characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless XML (TEI P5, characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or TEI g elements).

Keying and markup guidelines are available at the Text Creation Partnership web site.