THE Apostle Paul knowing the excellency of Tongues, and the benefit that might (by the blessing of God) re­dound to the Churches by the right use of them; inas­much as they were then of divers languages, as appeares in 1 Cor. 14.26. and so had need to be instructed every one in his own language, whereby onely they could be edified, appeares in the 9.10. and 11. verses: whereupon Paul saith, I would that yee all spake with Tongues. And this he speaks either to the Prophets in particular, that they might be able to speak to the understan­ding of the Churches ingenerall, who were then of divers tongues; or else to the Church ingenerall, that they might every one, as well as any one, be able to understand the Prophets in what language soever they spake or prophesied.

Now Paul likewise seeing the Church ready to abuse this ex­cellent guift of Tongues to vain ostentation; and withall, ready to preferre it above the gift of prophesy, the most excellent spiritu­all [Page 4] gift, being most of all necessary for the Churches edification: he exhorts them in the first verse, to follow after charity, and to desire spirituall gifts, but rather that they may prophesie, and the reason he gives, verse 2, 3 4 as I before did: and then having shewed the excellency of both these gifts (that each might have their due without offence to either) he shewes the excellency of it above the other, verse 5. I would that yee all spake with tongues, but rather that yee prophesied: for greater is he that prophesieth, then he that speaketh with tongues: as if hee had said, to speak with tongues is the most desirable humane gift; but yet farre inferior to prophesying, which is the most excellent spirituall gift for the Church: For greater is he that prophesieth, then he that speaketh with Tongues.

So then these two are distinct gifts, the one humane, the other divine; the one excellent, the other most excellent; the one ne­cessary for the Churches edification, the other of absolute necessi­ty; the one may be in the Church, the other must be: and as tongues may be without prophesie; so may prophesie be without the tongues. And so the sum of all is this.

Doct. That to speak with tongues is not essentiall to the being of a Prophet: Or,

That Divine Prophesying is not restrained to Humane Lear­ning.

This is very cleare from the words in the Text, Greater is he that prophesieth, &c. Intimating thus much, that they are two di­stinct gifts, and that a man may have the gift of tongues without the gift of prophesie; and that another may have the gift of pro­phesie without the tongues. Yea the same is also specified in the 39. verse, where the Apostle saith, Brethren, covet to prophesie, and forbid not to speak with tongues. And in 1 Cor. 12.10. to another the working of miracles, to another prophesie, to another discer­ning of spirtts, to another divers kinds of tongues, to another the interpretation of tongues. Likewise verse 28, 29, 30. God hath set some in the Church, first Apostles; secondarily, Prophets; thirdly, Teachers: and after that, miracles, then gifts of healings, helps in Government, diversities of tongues; where he sheweth by way of order, both the dignity and distinction of gifts; and a­mong many, those of Prophesie, and speaking with Tonngues.

Then he goes on by way of quaere: Are all Apostles? Are all Prophets? Are all Teachers? Are all workers of miracles? Have all the gifts of healing? Doe all speak with tongues? Doe all interpret? So that it is very cleare, that to speake with tongues, is not essentiall to the being of a Prophet.

Now the reasons why divine prophesying is not restrained to humane learning, may be these:

Reas. 1. Because prophesying is the greater gift: For, greater is he that prophesieth, &c. Now the greater may not, nor must not be restrained to the lesser; but the lesser to the greater: the greater is not tyed to the approbation of the lesser; but the les­ser to the approbation of the greater. And without all contra­diction, The lesse is blessed of the greater, Heb. 7.7. Matth. 23.17.19.

Reas. 2. Because prophesie is one of the capitall fruits and benefits of Christs victory and ascension, derived to his Church, as in Ephes. 4.8.13. Wherefore he saith, When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men: And he gave some Apostles, and some Prophets, and some E­vangelists, and some Pastors, and some Teachers, for the perfe­cting of the Saints, for the work of the Ministery, for the edi­fying of the body of Christ, till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Sonne of God, unto a per­fect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulnesse of Christ. Wherefore divine prophesying cannot bee restrained unto humane learning.

Reas. 3. Because prophesying is restrained to the gift of God onely, Rom. 10.15. How shall they preach except they be sent? And in Heb. 5.4. No man taketh this honor unto him­self, but he that is called of God, as was Aaron.

Reas. 4. Because no true Prophet (though never so profound a Scholar in humane learning) ever did, or will preach, or pro­phesie by vertue of his humane learning, nor will take upon him to preach the Gospel because of it; but by vertue, and because of his spirituall illumination, and sanctification by the Spirit thereunto; and so Paul prophesied and preached Jesus Christ, 1 Cor. 14.18. there, saith he, I thank God, I speake with tongues more then you all: yet Paul prophesied not by [Page 4] vertue hereof, but onely by the grace of God that was in him. Compare this place with 1 Cor. 15.10. where hee saith, By the grace of God I am what I am; and his grace which was bestowed upon me, was not in vain, but I laboured more a­bundantly then they all: (and lest any should yet conceive hee did any thing in the ministery by or of himselfe, he addes) yet not I, but the grace of God which was with me: wherefore to speak with tongues, or humane learning, is not essentiall to the being of a Prophet.

Reas. 5. Our own blessed experience in the times wherein wee live; in which the Lord is pleased in a very large mea­sure to make good his promise this very way even to us, as to his Church in former time, as was prophesied by Joel in his second chapter, v. 16, 17. which was accomplished and ful­filled upon the Apostles, as appeares Acts 2.16, 17, 18. All which I say, is made good unto us in our time: For doe we not (or at least may we not) heare even illiterate men speak in our own tongue, the wonderfull works of God? Acts 2.11. Of whose prophesying (in respect of what Prophets were heretofore) we may say as it was said of Christ by the Scribes. Matth. 7. [...]9. That as Christ, so his people now teach, as ha­ving authority, and not as the Scribes. Wherefore divine pro­phesying is not restrained to humane learning.

Object. We read in 2 Pet. 1.20. that no prophesie of Scrip­ture is of any private interpretation: wherefore privat men, which are unskilled in the Languages and Sciences, are not to preach or prophesie.

Ans. 1. If this be so expounded, then of necessity you must conclude, that Peter hath sealed up the little book, which is no other but the Gospel which Peters Master, and our Lord Jesus, the Lion of the Tribe of Iudah, hath opened to all the illi­terate people, as well as to the greatest Clerkes, if not more fully: For if illiterate men may not adventure the expoun­ding of what they read, to gain the sense and true meaning thereof as they read, they were better not read at all. And whosoever dares maintain this opinion, is not onely guilty of slandring the truth of Christ, but doth also submit to the Pope; whose subtilty it is (as much as in him lieth) to seale up by [Page 5] his Chaplaines and Ministers what Christ hath unsealed and opened; to the very end that all his people, great and small, bond and free, may freely read, expound, and edifie thereby.

Secondly, that this exposition of the words of Peter is false, and they (how profound in learning soever) doe hereby disco­ver themselves to be but private persons, unable to interpret the prophesies of Scripture, will thus appeare; because by private interpretation of Scripture, is meant, first, that we are not to limit or restrain the end, aim, or purpose of any scripture to any particular privat man onely, but that it concernes, and speaks as well to all and every one, as any one; as our Saviour seems to hold forth in that one expression, Mark 13.37. And what I say unto you, I say unto all. Secondly, because by private in­terpretation is meant also, that the Spirit of God hath no one particular meaning onely in any one prophesie of Scripture, but hath many meanings, and all truths, linked (as a golden chain) one in and with another, as is cleare by 2 Tim. 3.16. where the Apostle saith, All Scripture is given by divine in­spiration of God, and is profitable (For what?) for one thing one­ly? Surely no: but for every thing; for Doctrine, for Reproof, for Correction, for Instruction in righteousnesse. Thirdly, be­cause by private interpretation of Scripture, is meant the In­terpretation thereof without the Spirit of God: For all inter­pretation of Scripture (though it be by great ones, publicke persons in a Common-wealth, or by learned ones, by Coun­cels or by multitudes of them; yet if they be but meere natu­rall men, void of the Spirit of God, their own interpretation of Scripture is but private, and for the most part false, 1 Cor. 2.11. For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the Spi­rit of a man that is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God. So that no man that hath not the Spi­rit of God, can know the things of God contained in the Scrip­ture, any more then one man can know what is the heart or mind of another. Now as a man may by chance conje­cture or guesse what is the minde or thought of another man, (as oftentimes men doe;) even so by chance a naturall man, or men, may know or decern the mind of God in the Scripture, and many times they doe; yet it is by chance: and although [Page 6] carnall men that have nothing of God in them at all, have preached many truths; yet it hath not been by themselves, but onely by the light of gracious men that have interpreted the Scriptures by the Spirit of God unto them. So that the inter­pretation of Scripture by men publick or private, learned or unlearned, without the Spirit of God, is privat interpretation; and all interpretation of Scripture by men publick or private, high or low, rich or poore, young or old, one or many, with and by the Spirit of God, is publick and warrantable inter­pretation: for that Spirit is truth in whom it is, it neither de­ceiveth nor is deceived. Both of these are true and cleare, as is made cleare by the same Apostle in the following words, (verse the last) which are a reason of the former, and runs thus: For (saith he) the Prophesies came not in old time by the will of man, (but by the will of God:) For holy men spoke as they were moved by the holy Spirit: which holy Spirit onely knowes its owne mind in the prophesies of Scripture; and holy men of God onely can constantly and truly interpret the prophesies as they, are moved by the holy Spirit: wherefore to speak with tongues, is not essentiall to the being of a Prophet, nor is divine prophe­sying restrained to humane learning.

Object. 2. We rean in 2 Pet 3.16. where the Apostle spea­king about Pauls Epistles, saith, In which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable, wrest, as they doe also the other Scriptures, to their owne destruction: Therefore to speak with tongues is essentiall to the being of a Prophet, and divine prophesying is restrained to humane lear­ning.

Answer. The Apostle there speaks of some of the Church which doubted and questioned the truth of Gods promise; as is plain verse 15. and he in this 16. verse reproves them for it, and shewes them the ground of their doubting, which was, their weaknesse in grace, or faith, and then labouring to beat them off from impatience, and to confirme them in the promise of God by faith, he sets before them a president of their doubt­ing condition, to wit, Those that are unlearned, &c. that is, un­sanctified and untaught of Christ. Now that it is so, the next word (Vnstable) shews. Now who are unstable, wrenching the [Page 7] Scriptures to their own destruction, but onely those that are unsanctified, that had never learned Christ? Jam, 1.8. A double-minded man is unstable in all his wayes: therefore it is not the want of humane learning, but the want of grace that is the cause of mens wrenching the Scripture to their owne destru­ction.

Moerover, if Peter, by unlearned, meant such as had no hu­man learning, then he should here have excluded himselfe as well as many others from the understanding and saving use of the Scriptures; For he was unlearned in that respect, himselfe, Act. 4.13. and then how durst he to have adventured upon Pauls Epistles, and the other Scriptures (as he did in that place of the objection) lest he should wrench them to his own de­struction? Therefore by learning, he meanes divine learning onely, and so excludes none but naturall, unsanctified men from the right and saving use of the Scriptures.

Object. Though Peter was not bled a scholar, and had not human learning, yet both he and the rest of the unlearned A­postles, had the tongues given them from heaven by miracle, or miraculously, to teach us thus much, that to speake with Tongues is essentiall to the being of a Prophet or a Tea­cher.

Answer. To speak with Tongues now, is not as it was then by the unlearned Apostles: in them then, it was a mi­racle, with us, none, but is common: nor is there now a ne­cessity to speak with tongues (by way of miracle wrought from heaven) as the Apostles did, because with us there is not now the same use of it. For first, the Apostles had then to doe with Heathens, who would not have beleeved their report, nor their word to have been of God, unlesse they had spoken miraculously: and so not the tongues, but the miraculous spea­king with them from heaven, was the very cause that made many of them to beleeve, and with wonderfull astonishment to acknowledge God in it, as appeares in Act. 2.11, 12. We doe heare them speak in our own tongues, the wonderfull works of God, and they were all amazed, and were in doubt, saying one unto ano­ther, What meaneth this? whereas, we live in a time wherein there is not that necessity for speaking with tongues miracu­lously [Page 8] from heaven to confirme the Scripture we preach; be­cause all amongst us, and to whom we preach, doe (at least in a common way) beleeve the Scriptures which we hold out to them, to be the word of God: and if they did not, and if there were any such necessity now as was then, I doubt not but God would now confirm it by miracle, either by miraculous spea­king with tongues now, as he did then, or else by some other way by miracle: wherefore, (as Saint Paul saith) this maner of speaking with tongues, is out of date, with us in this time, 1 Cor. 14.21.22. With men of other tongues, & other lips, wil I speak unto this people, & yet for all that they will not hear me, saith the Lord. Wherefore (saith he) tongues are for a signe not to them that be­leeve, but to them that beleeve not; but prophesying serveth not on­ly for them that beleeve not, but also for them that beleeve. And therefore as the Apostles miraculously speaking with tongues from heaven, made Infidels that beleeved not the Word, to be­leeve it, and to acknowledge God in it: so on the contrary this should be a miracle to us that doe beleeve the Word, to make us the more to beleeve and to admire and acknowledge Gods power in the weaknesse of illiterate and unlearned men pro­phesying and preaching with great power the glorious word of Jesus Christ. Secondly, the Apostles were to teach all Nati­ons, Matth. 28.19, 20. who were of divers Languages; and therefore they must of necessity speak with tongues to the un­derstanding of all Nations; whereas we speake or preach but to our own Nation, and they all speaking our own Language.

Answer 2. Though Peter and the rest of the Apostles that were unlearned, had the tongues miraculously, Act. 2.4. yet they had not the Languages as an habituall or perpetuall quali­ty imprinted in them, as the Languages are in those that have them by study and practice; but onely whiles they were speak­ing or preaching to men and people of those Languages, and was onely an actuall gift which shewed it selfe when the mo­tion of the holy Spirit came upon them. seconding their san­ctified desires, as is very probable, 1 Cor. 14.18. where Paul sayes, I thank my God I speak with Tongues more then you all; yet Peter with the rest of the unlearned Apostles, spake with as many tongues as learned Paul himselfe, Act. 2.12. But now [Page 9] this is a Paradox, yea, a contradiction, and how shall these two Scriptures be reconciled, you will say? I answer thus, Paul spake with tongues more then they all, yet not speaking more tongues or languages then Peter and the rest: but as speaking those tongues constantly, without intermission, they be­ing in him an habituall perpetuall quality, gained by hard and tedious study and practice, as they are learned in our dayes; which Peter and the other unlearned Apostles, that spake tongues by the inspiration of the holy Spirit, did not, being at other times ignorant of them,Acts 22.3. and understanding and speaking them onely when and whilst they had to doe with people of those tongues. And as God alwayes put the Word into their mouthes what they should speak, so he gave them the tongue or language in which they should speak it to the understanding of the hearers of what Nation or Language soever: And there­fore the unlearned Apostles, Peter and the rest, had not the tongues in an extraordinary way to understand the Scriptures by, but onely to speak to the understanding of those to whom they preached the Scriptures.

Answer 3. Although Peter and the rest of the unlearned A­postles amongst other tongues, spake also the learned tongues of the Hebrew, Greek, &c, which our learned men now speak, yet in them these tongues were not humane, as they are in us that learn them of men; but divine, having learned them of God onely, Acts 26.4. & 1 Cor. 12.10. Therefore those Apo­stles and others had not the tongues humane, neither had they any humane learning when they could speak the tongues Com­pare Acts 24. with chap. 4.13.

Answer. 4. Peter and the rest of the Apostles had not hu­mane learning, though they could sometimes speak the learned tongues, because humane learning consists not so much in the Languages as in the Sciences. It is possible and usuall for men to speak the languages & tongues, and yet be no Scholars: and again, it is possible and usuall for men to be able Scholars in re­spect of the learned Sciences, and Arts, and yet not able to speak with Tongues. And the pith and marrow of humane learning, is the right understanding and knowledge of the Arts, which I am sure Peter never learned, as he never learned [Page 10] the Tongues. Therefore we cannot gather from the example of Peter, speaking with tongues miraculously by inspiration of God, that to speak with tongues is essentiall to the being of a Prophet, or that divine prophesying is restrained to humane learning.

Object. 3.. Our Translation of the Bible is not according to the originall, but is corrupted, and in many places contrary to the Testament in the Hebrew and the Greek; and therefore, though in the primitive times, to speak with tongues more then wherein the Scriptures were written, was not essentiall to the being of a Prophet; yet notwithstanding, now it is, be­cause our translation of the Bible is nought, and the Hebrew and Greek are the originall, in which the Scriptures were first written.

Answer 1. For my part, I conceive that our English trans­lation of the Bible is but little differing (if any thing at all) from the originall Copies: for I doe beleeve that God that was good and carefull to commit unto his people as much of his will as was necessary for them to know and serve him by, and to bring them (through Jesus Christ) to eternall glory, John 20.30, 31. would not be lesse carefull to preserve it to his people to the end, Matth. 5.18. 1 Pet. 1.25. And to these Scriptures I will adde one main Reason, proving the Scrip­tures that we have and hold, to be Canonicall, and by divine inspiration; and it is because godly men would not devise or in­dite and write a fiction, for truth, to delude and deceive men by. 2. Wicked men, Gods enemies, to wit, Antichrist and o­thers, did not devise or indite our Bible, because it yeelds them no footing for their wayes, but is altogether against their Te­nents, so farre as they are against Jesus Christ; and it is whol­ly and onely for Jesus Christ: whereas if it were the study and work of wicked men, Antichrist and others of Christs ene­mies, they would have made it so, as to, serve their own turns, as we see they have alwayes, and doe still labour with all their wits, policie and power, to wrench and rend the Scriptures to make them for Antichrist, and against Jesus Christ: There­fore, our Bible is the word of God. But now, if in our Trans­lation there be any corruption by the means of ignorance, or [Page 27] malice of Antichrist, through altering, adding, or diminishing of matters of smallest consequence (fundamentals being al­wayes so cleare to the eyes, and so clearly eyed by the Saints of all ages, that they could not be corrupted by the cunning of the enemy. Neither doe I beleeve God would suffer it to be done, nor hath he suffered it: for not onely in our Bible, but also in our translation of it, Christ onely is exalted) yet it is clear, that the understanding Saints are able in due time to find it out, and to discover it. Read Psal. 25.9. Ioh. 7.17. & 8.31, 32. & 10.4, 5, & 14.21. 1 Cor. 2.10, 12, 15, 16. And for the Saints easier and surer proceeding in their preaching, or expounding and disco­vering of the truths of the Scriptures; let them alwayes observe this short Rule: Consider the place of Scripture thou art up­on, thus; 1. Who writ it: 2. To whom it was written: 3. When it was written: 4. Why it was written, and then expound it so, and draw such conclusions from it, as will most of all magnifie God in his severall Attributes and Merits by shewing man his own nothingnesse and misery by nature, or fall in Adam, with his happinesse in or by Christ onely; and with the preservation of the analogy, agreement, harmony, and onenesse of the Scriptures, that there be no jarring nor discord, but concord by the exposition. Thus a godly man (observing this briefe and plain rule in the opening of the Scriptures) may be able to come to know and to preach the very mind of the holy Spirit in the Scriptures.

Answer 2. It is probable, and as likely, that the Bible in all languages and Tongues, is as corrupt as in our Translation or Tongue; & it was as easie to corrupt the Testament in the He­brew & Greek, as it was to corrupt thē in our English tongue, or in any other language. And it is as likely that Antichrist hath (as much as in him lay) poysoned the Scriptures as well in the Hebrew and Greek tongues, as in ours or in any other tongue. Wherefore the corruption of our or any other tran­slation of the Bible, makes not the speaking with tongues to be essentiall to the being of a Prophet: For though we may have the originall tongues of the Bible, yet we have not the originall Copies.

Answer 3. If the Testaments in the Hebrew and Greek, are [Page 12] uncorrupted as we have them now, then neither is the speaking with tongues essentiall to the being of a Prophet, if our English translation be undoubtedly corrupt, because we have all the Scri­ptures translated into English, according to the Testaments now in the Hebrew and Greek, some by one written, and some ano­ther; and therefore, to speak with tongues, is not essentiall to the being of a Prophet, nor is divine prophesying restrained to hu­mane learning.

Answer 4. Besides, if the Testaments in their original tongues (as is by the most conceived we have them) are as true, divine & authentic, as the originall copies were; yet to speak with those tongues, is not essential to the being of a Prophet; because when men do preach to the illiterate and unlearned, they haue no more ground to believe what is said from the originals, then they haue ground from what others haue said from the originals before them, who haue been as honest, and as able, as men are now, and haue laboured faithfully to translate the Bible out of the original tongues. And if any now amongst us, are able to amend our tran­slation, if they be as honest, and as able, they will do it, or at least labour to do it, not only by parcels in the Pulpit, but also whol­ly; and also for the satisfaction and benefit of all; whereby there will then be no need of tongues to the understanding of Scri­pture; and if any can so do, and account their paines too great to effect so great a good, they are not to be accounted faithfull in that which is least (to wit) in what they in a Pulpit by parcels deliver (as they say) from the originall, to the illiterate people; & if men may not believe what able and faithfull men afore-time have spoken and written from the originall tongues, how shall they believe what any particular man sayes from them now in a Pulpit? wherefore, to speak with tongues, is no more essentiall to the being of a Prophet, then they are to the being of a Chri­stian.

Answ. 5. Again, if to speak the originall tongues of the Scri­ptures, be essentiall to the being of a Prophet; then, as well any one of those tongues, as all of them, is essentiall to the being of a Prophet: whence it will follow, that there is not a true Prophet or Preacher to be found in all the world, much lesse in England; for there is not one man in England, nor, in all the world, that [Page 13] can speak all the originall tongues, wherein all the Scriptures in the New Testament were spoken and written: neither doe men now know those tongues: probably, they were those tongues, which the Apostles spake by divine revelation specified, Act. 2. which miracle of speaking with tongues, there was not, as I conceive, only to confirme what they were to speak; but also to speak to the understanding of all Nations, that they were to speak or preach to; that is, that they might be able to preach to every people in their own language, as they did; as appeares, Act. 12. and that this was Saint Pauls practice, appeares in the 1 Cor. 14.18, 19 I thank God I speak with tongues more then you all; yet in the Church, I had rather speak five words with my understanding, that by my voyce, I might teach others also, then ten thousand words in an unknown tongue; and as hee spake to the Churches, so doubtlesse he wrote to the Churches in a known tongue also, that he might teach them in that way also, which out of all question, was likewise the practise of all the rest of the Apostles. Now who can tell me what were the tongues that Paul spake, and wherein he wrote to the Romanes, Corinthi­ans, Galathians, Ephesians, Philipians, Colssioans, Thessalonians, and also to Timotheus, Titus, Philemon, and to the Hebrewes; and like­wise in what tongue St. James his Epistle was written first, and St. Peters Epistles, and St. Iohns 3. Epistles, and St. Iudes? Besides, I would fain know in what tongue, or tongues, the said St. Iohn wrote the Revelation to the 7. Churches in Asia, Revel. 1.4. If any can infallibly tell me, then I ask, who is that one man that can speak all those tongues, and write the same languages, wherein those Epistles were first spoken and written by the Apostles? but there is no such man in all the world, much lesse in England: and therefore, if to speak with the tongues, wherein the Scriptures were written and spoken by the Apostles, be essential to the be­ing of a Prophet, or Preacher of the Gospel in England; then is there no Prophet or Preacher of the Gospel in England, nor yet in the world: but there are true Prophets and Preachers in the world, and in England that have not the tongues, as well as they that have them: therefore, to speak with tongues is not essential to the being of a Prophet.

Obj. 6. We read in the 1 of Cor. 14.5. in the same verse, where [Page 14] the words run thus, I would that you all spake with tongues: but rather that you prophesied for greater, is he that prophesieth, then he that speaketh with tongues, except he interpret, that the Church may receive edifying; therefore, &c.

Answ. This is not at all against what is laid down; for all that St. Paul holds forth unto us here, is briefly this: namely, that it is a good thing to speak with tongues, but that it is far better to pro­phesie: and that it is best of all to speak with tongues, and pro­phesie too in that sence; he there meaneth, as you will plainly see, if you do well ponder the words: Besides, Paul in the 18. verse, is so far from contemning the tongues, that he blesseth God even for this, that he spake with tongues more then they all; & in the 39. verse, he saith, Brethren, covet to prophesie, and forbid not to speak with tongues: So that all St. Paul holds forth, here; is, that to speak with tongues, is excellent in his sence, and that prophe­sying is more excellent, and that they are two distinct gifts, and that where they meet together, they are most sweet and excellent and so humane learning is an excellent servant or hand-maid to prophesying, when it is rightly imployed in its right station; for as in the building of the materiall temple of God, he made use of humane Arts in their time & place: so our humane learned arts may be used in their time and place for the building of the spiri­tuall temple; provided, that they be not used as of necessity, but only as convenient, 2 Cor. 12.16.

Now in the building of the material temple, all humane arts & sciences were used in the woods & quarries, in digging, felling, hewing, squaring & fitting all materials for that building: so that when all the materials were brought together to the place ap­pointed, the whole Fabrick was erected and finished, without so much as the noise of a hammer, 1 Kings 6.7. and the house when it was in building, was built of stone, made ready before it was brought thither; so that there was neither hammer nor axe, nor any tool of Iron heard in the house while it was building.

Even so in the building of the Spirituall Temple, let us use all our humane Arts and Sciences (as convenient, and no more, in the [Page 15] quarries and woods; that is to say, in our closets and studies, where, by the Spirit of God, let us fit our matter or Sermons, that when we come to assay to build, and set up the Temple of Christ thereby, there may appear nothing of man, but all of God: and that there may appear nothing at all of our selves, but all of Christ; and that there may not appeare nor be heard so much as the blow of an hammer or axe of humane learning, but all of rhe holy Spirit, 1 Cor. 14.18, 19. and the 1. and the 17.20. to the 29. So that humane learning, or the Tongues and Arts sanctified, is excellent, and prophesying much more excellent, but both toge­ther most excellent: yet so too, that to speak with tongues is not essentiall to the being of a Prophet, or that divine prophesying is not restrained to Humane Learning.

Thus, the Doctrine being cleared; the Vses thereof, are brief­ly these.

Vse 1.

It may be this, to tell England of her great Idoll and Idola­try, in Idolizing Humane Learning, which hath been so abused; that there is great cause to cry down the blame of our Nation in this particular: for so hath Humane Learning been abused a­mongst us by the idolizing of it, that we have not only made it equall with prophesie, but prophesie it self: So that without it a man though never so gratious and able to preach Christ, was with the consent of our whole Nation, and with their generall power restrained: Whereas another, that had Humane Lear­ning, though he were as black as Hell, and as prophane as the Divell; yet was ordained, entertained, and honoured as the Mini­ster and Preacher of Jesus Christ:

And sometime, when there hath been such a prophane Schol­ler to be ordained Minister by a Bishop, and some amongst us have been ready to except against him, as unfit, in regard of his prophanenesse;

There was commonly this answer made: why? he is a Scholler, & hath taken degrees in the Vniversity, &c. as if a Vniversity pro­phane Scholler were without all exception a Prophet of Christ. [Page 16] whilest others gracious in the eyes of Christ and his People, [...] able to hold forth the truths of God, haue been scorned, rejected, and contemned, and their graces as it were trode and trampled upon; for no other cause, but this, that they were no schollers, & wanted humane learning, or were not University-men, and the like.

Vse 2. Is to exhort all our learned Prophets, that they be so far from endeavouring to seal up the mouthes, and suppressing the graces of our Prophets, which speak not the tongues; that they do their diligence rather to open their mouths, and unlose their tongues, & incourage thē in the holding forth of Iesus Christ, who holds himself out to all, that al that are gifted & graced by his spi­rit, might also hold him forth to others; & let it not be accounted any disgrace to any of the learned▪ that poor illiterate men, which should preach & spread the glory of God our Saviour, remember the modest words & carriage of Moses, that Prophet of the Lord, in his answer to Ioshua, and the young-man that brought tydings that Eldad & Medad prophecied in the Campe, & bad Moses to forbid them, Numb. 11.26, 27, 29. & Moses said unto him; en­viest thou for my sake? would God that all the Lords people were Prophets, and that the Lord would put his spirit upon them; which teacheth us thus much, that a true Prophet of the Lord will not for any by-ends envie the gifts of God in others, nor desire the obscure, but to discover them; wishing, all, as well as some of the Lords people were Prophets; not by putting Vniversity, Arts but: by putting the Apostles approbation in the New Testament, is this, 1 Cor. 14.31. Ye may prophesie all one by one, that all may learn and all may be comforted, all may prophesie; that is, all the Prophets, to wit, all that God hath endued with the Spirit of Prophecie: for there is no restraint, observing their time and order one by one: Wherefore, let none dare to forbid prophecie, where God himself commands, and his Word gives both freedome and al­lowance; for further proof, read Act. 8.4.

Vse 3. It may serve now at length, to call England to give God the glory of his grace, by acknowledging and approving this, that out of the mouthes of very Babes and Sucklings, God hath founded strength; as it is in the Hebrew, Psalm. 8.2. And saith the Apostle, it is written, I will destroy the wisdome of the wise, and bring to no­thing [Page 29] the understanding of the prudent; where is the wise? wher­is the Scribe? where is the Disputer of this World? For, after that in the wisdome of God, the world by wisdome knew not God; it pleased God by the foolishnesse of preaching, to save them that be­lieve: because the foolishnesse of God is wiser then men, and the weak­nesse of God is stronger then men, and God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world, to confound the things that are mighty, & base things of the world, and things that are despised hath God cho­sen; yea, and things which are not, to bring to naught, 2 Tim. 2 7. things that are (consider what the Lord saith, and the same Lord give you under­standing in all things) now the reason of all you haue at last; that is, that no flesh should glory in his presence, 1 Cor. 1.19, 20, 21, 25, 27, 28, 29.

Vse 4. Is to confute the desperate folly of many men, if not most men, in making prophecie a humane thing; and therfore haue ap­pointed their sonnes unto it, as unto a trade, to live by as thus when their children are yet young, they haue resolved what cal­lings or trades to put them to; the eldest happily to be a Lawyer; the second to be a Physitian, or a Chirurgion; the third a Mer­chant, or the like, and commonly the youngest, especially, if hee were in any part deformed, should be a Minister, that should be his trade; concluding it to be in his power, to make him a Mini­ster, by putting him out for a time to the Vniversity, and paying for his learning; as if the gift of God might be bought with mo­ney; a cursed thought indeed, and a damnable ignorant conclusi­on; and let such men look back, and see the effect of it, and trem­ble at the example of Simon Magus, Act, 8.20, 21, 22, & 23, v. But Peter said unto him, Thy money perish with thee, because thou thoughtest that the gift of God may be purchased with money, thou hast neither part nor let in this businesse; for thine heart is not right in the sight of God: Repent therefore of this thy wickednesse, & pray God, if it be possible, if perhaps the thoughts of thine heart may be for­given thee; for I perceive, that thou art in the gall of bitternesse, & in the bond of iniquity.

Vse 5. Is for encouragement of all those to whom the Lord hath given the spirit of Prophesie, to improve their gifts for the best advantage of the Church of Christ and his glory, Rom. 12.6, [Page 16] [...] [Page 29] [...] [Page 30] 7, 8. having then gifts differing according to the grace that is gi­ven to us, whether prophecie, let us prophecie according to the proportion of faith; or Ministry, let us wait on our Ministry; or he that teacheth on teaching; or he that exhorts, on exhorta­tion,

Vse 6. It is a use of excellent comfort to all the people of God; for though outward gifts and all meanes thereof may faile, yet there is a spirit of Prophecie left to all the People of God, by which they shall be made able to know so much of the mind of God, as shall be sufficient to sanctifie them here, and to make them eternally haypy hereafter: So that to speak with tongues, is not essentiall to the being of a Prophet; nor is divine prophesie restrained to humane learning.