A Scourge for a Railer, Treatise · Part 6
The 6. imputaton of errors.
The accusation.
1. That Christ hath two kingdoms belonging vntounto him, one as God, an other as God and man: and that his kingdome as hee is God, is incommunicable to any. 2. b. p. 201.2. b. p. 201.
2. That the Godhead is inuisible, incomprehensible: ibid. He counteth these paradoxes, contrary to the holy scriptures, and wondreth how they could fall from the Replyers pen.
3. Augustine taketh the spirit, 1. Pet. 3. 19. not for the diuine nature of Christ, but for the operation of the holy Ghost: which two you most erroneously confound, saith this error finder. 3. b. p. 127.3. b. p. 127.
4. He calleth it a strange position, that the true ioyes of heauen are in this world. 2. b. p. 207.2. b. p. 207.
The iustification.
1. THis Erring Censor, at the first erreth in misreporting the Replyers words, which are these; that kingdome, whereof Christ promiseth to make the theefe partaker, is not that kingdome, which belonged to him as God (for that is not communicable to any creature) but which is due to him, as Messiah. Limbomast. p. 18. It is not affirmed here, that Christ hath two kingdomes, but that it beeing one and the same kingdome, yet hath a diuers respect, one as it belongeth to Christ as God, an other as he is the Messiah, both God and man.
And that this diuers relation and respect of the kingdome of Christ, is not contrarie to the Scripture, (as this ignorant scripturian saith) but most consonant and agreeable to the same: it appeareth euidently by that diuine testimonie of S. Paul, 1. Cor. 15. 24. Then shall the ende be when he hath deliuered vp the kingdome to God, euen the father, when he hath put downe all rule, and all authoritie and power: v. 25. for he must raigne till he hath put all his enemies vnderunder his feete: v. 28. and when all things shall be subdued vntounto him, then shall the Sonne also himselfe be subiect vntounto him, that did subdue all things vnderunder him, that God may be all in all.
But because the deciding of this question,Diuers expositions brought of that place, 1. Cor. 15. 24. Then shall the Sonne himselfe be subiect. consisteth in the right vnderstanding of this Scripture, I will deliuer diuers expositions thereof, and approoue the best: I finde eight seuerall interpretations of these words: then shall the Sonne himselfe also be subiect.
1. The Sabellians, which denied the distinction of the three persons of the glorious Trinitie, and the Marcionites ioyning with them, did thus vnderstand it: Ista filij subiectio futura est; cum in patrē filius refundetur: this subiection of the sonne shal then be, when the sonne shal be resolued into the father: meaning that the person of the sonne, shall runne into the person of the father.Ambr. l. 5. de fid. …. But Ambrose confuteth this wicked opinion, by this reason: Tum omnia, quae filio subiecta erunt, in filium & patrem resolventur: Then all those things, which were subiect to the sonne, shall also be resolued into the sonne and the father: as they say the sonne shall be resolued into the father: which were absurd to say: which was one of those grosse errors, imputed to Origene: that vponupon those words of S. Paul, that God may be all in all, groundeth this erronious fancie:Hieron. ad Avitum. vniuersa creatura redigetur in eam substantiam, quae omnibus melior est, divinam scilicet: that eueryevery creature shall be brought to that substance, which is the best of all, that is, the diuine.
2. An other exposition as bad as this, was, that the humane nature of Christ should be conuerted into his diuine, & penitus absorbendā à divinitate, and should be wholly swallowed vp of his deitie:Lib. 1. de Trin. c. 8. & 10. so Augustine reporteth. But this hereticall sense is ouerthrowne by the Apostles direct words: for in that the sonne is said to be subiect, it sheweth, that there remaineth somewhat to be subiect, otherwise there could be no subiection.
3. Some referre it to the bodie of Christ the Church, and vnderstand it of his faithfull members, in whom there yet remaineth some sinnes and imperfections: which till they be subdued vntounto God, Christ in his members is not subdued:Orig. hom. 7. in Levit. c. 10. so Origene: donec ego non sum subditus patri, nec ipse dicitur patri esse subiectus: while I am not subdued to the father, neither is he said to be subiect to the father.
4. Others take it to be vnderstood of vnbeleeuers, not yet conuerted to the faith, which are not yet subiect: so that pars membrorum eius non est subiecta fidei, part of his members is not subiect to the faith: but in the ende, when as they also acknowledge the kingdome of Christ, then Christ with his whole bodie, shall be subiect vntounto God: so Hierome. Hieron. Amando. tom. 4.But both these expositions are taken away by the Apostles words: for he is made subiect vntounto the father, to whome he subdued all things, but to the sonne are all things subdued, therefore he speaketh of the subiection of the person of the sonne.
5. Some take this subiection to be spoken of the person of Christ, that thereby is meant nothing els, but that the sonne had his beginning and was begotten of the father: so Theophylact and Oecumenius vponupon this place: and Ambrose to the same effect saith,Ambr. in 1. Cor. c. 11. Deus caput Christi dicitur, quia ab eo genitus, that God is said to be Christs head, because he was begotten of him. But there can be no subiection in the godhead: seeing the father and sonne are of the same nature in the Godhead; so one can not be said to be subiect to an other.
6. Others doe vnderstand this subiection, in respect of Christs humane nature,Ambr. l. 5. de fid. c. 7. as Ambrose: fecundum humanae naturae assumptionem erit illa subiectio: according to the assumption of the humane nature shall be that subiection. But then why should Christ be saide to be subiect now more, then in the daies of his flesh: if it be answeared, that it may appeare, that the man Christ, euen beeing glorified; is subiect vntounto God: yet this doth not satisfie, for euen now Christ is entred into his glorie, and yet this time of the subiection of the sonne is not come.
7. There remaine then two expositions of Augustines▪ the first is, that Christ is saide to deliuer vp the kingdome to his father,qu. 63. lib. 83. quest. non quod tunc incipiet, sed cognosci incipiet: not that then it beginneth to be, but beginneth to be acknowledged: now also the father raigneth, but then the kingdome of the father shall be made manifest. But neither doth this explanation fully satisfie: for neither now is the kingdome of Christ made manifest to all the world, but then shall appeare vntounto all at his comming: if then the manifestation of the kingdome of the father, be the deliuering of it vp vntounto him; then also the manifestation of the kingdome of the sonne, in that day, should also be the deliuering of it vntounto him: and so in effect, he should be said to deliuer it vp, when it is (in that sense) deliuered to him.
8. The last therefore and best exposition is: that the Apostle speaketh of surrendring vp and resigning that kingdome of Christ vntounto his father,How the sonne shall be subiect to his father. which was giuen him, as he was manifested in the flesh, vntill all his enemies be subdued:Calvin. in 1. Cor. 15. v. 25. as Calvine very well saith, Pater eum hac conditione ad dextram suam collocavit, &c. The father placed him vponupon this condition at his right hand, that he should not leaue the gouernment, which he had receiued, before his enemies were brought vnderunder.Iun. annotat. in hunc locum. Likewise, learned Iunius▪ Illud puta foreign, quod filio imposuit pater, nam illud divmum, &c. He shall deliuer vp his Oeconomicall kingdome, which the father hath laide vponupon his sonne, not that diuine and eternall (kingdome) common to the father, the sonne, and the holy Ghost: which was neuer laide downe by any person of the Trinitie, no not for a moment.
This diuers respect of the kingdome of Christ,Chrysost. in 1. Cor. 15. Chrysostome long since touched, in these wordes: Regna Dei Scriptura duo novit, alterū adoptionis & familiaritatis, alterum creationis, &c. The Scripture acknowledgeth two kingdomes of Christ, the one of adoption and familiar (care,) the other of creation: he is therefore by the law of workemanship and creation the King, of Iewes, Ethnikes, Deuills, and aduersaries; but of the faithfull, and such as willingly commit and subiect themselues, by familiar care. This kingdome also is said to hauehave a beginning: for of this it is spoken in the second Psalme, Aske of me, and I will giuegive thee the nations for thine inheritance. And he himselfe said to his Disciples: all power is giuen vntounto me of my father: referring all as receiued of his father: not because he was not sufficient, but shewing that he was the sonne, and not vnbegotten: this (kingdome) therefore he will deliuer, that is, restore.
Here this learned father maketh two kingdomes of Christ (which are rather diuers respects or relations of one and the same kingdome) Christ is king ouer all creatures, as God and creator: and hee is king of his Church, as redeemer. This respectiue kingdome hee shall render vntounto God.
Augustine treadeth in the same steps:Augustin. vbi prius. that as Christ ruleth the creatures, he shall raigne for euer: vt autem militat, &c. See Augustine further hereof. Imp. 11. recrim. 7. August. 7.but as he warreth against the diuell, there shall be an ende of his kingdome. And this is agreeable to the Apostle, Hee must raigne till hee hath put all his enemies vnderunder his feete. How Christs kingdome shall hauehave no end, & yet be deliuered vp.This is that kingdome which was giuen vntounto Christ, as the Messiah. But it will be obiected, that the kingdome of the Messiah shall be euerlasting, as the angel said to Marie, Of his kingdome shall be no ende, Luk. 1. 33. The answere is, that the kingdome of the Messiah, in respect of the glorie and power thereof is euerlasting, the humanitie of Christ beeing by an euerlasting & inseperable vnion ioyned to his godhead in one person: but in regard of the manner and execution it shall determine:in 1. Cor. 15. 28. as Caluin excellently toucheth this point, Deum quidem agnoscimus rectorem, sed in facie hominis Christi, &c. Now we acknowledge God to be the ruler, but in the face of the man Christ: but then Christ shall restore the kingdome which he receiued, that we may perfectly adhere vntounto God: neither by this meanes shall hee abdicate his kingdome, but shall drawe it after a manner from his humanitie to his diuinitie. And againe, then the vaile beeing remooued, wee shall manifestly see God raigning in his Maiestie. Neque amplius media erit Christi humanitas: neither shall Christs humanitie neede to come betweene (or to be a meane) &c. His meaning is, that in the kingdome of God, when Christ hath brought vsus to his glory, there shal not then be such vse of the mediation and intercession of Christ, for remission of sinnes, for the subduing of our enemies, and such like,August. vbi prius. because then, as Augustine saith, fides cessabit, & pleno aspectu Deum intuebimur: faith shal cease, and we shall behold God with full sight. Now then, if this place of the Apostle be well waighed, where he speaketh of Christs kingdome, which shall bee deliuered vp vntounto God: a kingdome wherein he that gaue it shall put down all things vnderunder him: a kingdome that is but vntill all his enemies be put vnderunder his feete:The Confuter ignorant in the principles of di…inity. a kingdome, the gouernor whereof, shall himselfe be subiect to his father: no man can without blasphemy vnderstand this of the euerlasting kingdome of God, which hee neither receiued of any, neither shall it hauehave end, neither is hee himself subiect to any. It is therefore grosse error, and foppish ignorance in this new fangled nouice, to denie that the kingdome of Christ is to bee respected one way, as it belongeth vntounto him as God; and another, as it is giuen him, as the Messiah.
2. As grosly ignorant doth hee shew himselfe in deciphering of the next error: in that the Replyer holdeth the deitie of God to be inuisible and incomprehensible: which this deepe diuine in his newe Theologie counteth paradoxes. And hereupon insulting, hee goeth on, flying from the point in question,The question discussed, whether the godhead be visible and comprehensible. whether the deitie shall bee, or can be of the creature comprehended. He busieth himselfe to prooue, that though not in this mortall and s…nnefull life, yet in the next, we shall behold the glory of God. To this purpose he alleadgeth scriptures, that we shall see him as he is, 1. Ioh. 3. 2. of Fathers, as of Augustine, that the blessed Trinitie can no waies bee seene with humane eies, but with those eies, &c. of Ambrose, that wee shall then see with vncouered face the glorie of God. 2. b. p. 203.2. b. p. 203. He telleth vsus of certaine heretiks that helde, that they which awake at the last day, shall not see God at all in his diuine essence and nature. Of which opinion was one Abailardus, against whom Bernard writeth. p. 207.2. b. p. 207. And thus hee fighteth with his shaddow, leauing the point in controuersie, whether the Godhead may be comprehended.
Briefly therefore to open this point, I finde that there hauehave beene two principall opinions concerning the vision of God, and the one contrary to the other. It is noted as one of Origens errors by Hierom, ad Avitum.that hee should thinke the Godhead of the father to bee so invisible, as that it could not be comprehended of the sonne. As this opinion maketh the Godhead altogether inuisible in one extreame; so some were so grosse and carnall, as that they held, Verbi Dei naturam, non solum mutabilem, sed etiam visibilem: that the nature of the word of God, was not onelyonly mutable,August. lib. 2. de Trinit. cap. 8. & 9. but visible; as Augustine reporteth their opinion: vntounto these the heretiks Anomoei came neere, of the which sort, Eunomius was a principall, who helde, se naturam Dei comprehendisse, that hee comprehended the nature of God:Theoph. in 3. Ephes. as Theophylact testifieth.
Now out of this question of the Comprehending of the Deitie, Christ, euen as touching his humane nature is to be excepted: of whom the diuine nature, because of that hypostaticall vnion, was fully seene and comprehended. Yea, Gennadius in his catalogue maketh mention of one Servus which writ against those who denied Christ when he liued here in the flesh, Deum carneis oculis vidisse, to hauehave hauehave seene God with the eies of his flesh.
Concerning then this point, a distinction is here to be receiued, touching the knowledge of the Godhead: there is cognitio simplex, & comprehensiua, a simple (that is absolute) and comprehensiue knowledge: & cognitio pro modulo & apprehensiua, and a knowledge in a certaine measure, and apprehensiue (onelyonly.) This latter way God may bee seene and knowne:August. lib. 1. de Trin c. 6. But vponupon these two conditions, as Augustine well obserueth, Humano visu nullo modo potest, &c. That first God can not be seene by any humane sight, but with that whereby they that see, are no men, but beyond men. Secondly, nemo vidit per seipsum, &c. No man hath seene by himselfe, that is, by his flesh and blood, but by the reuealing of the father, and enarration of the sonne. As the Euangelist saith, No man hath seene God at any time, the onelyonly begotten sonne hath declared him. Thus God may and hath beene seene and knowne of the Saints in this life, as of Moses and Paul; but more fully in the next, whē we shall see the sight of God as he is.August. lib. 12. de Genes. ad liter. c. 10. But (as Augustine in another place) quantum eum capere creatura rationalis & ctualis potest) as much as a reasonable and intellectuall creature is capable of.
But touching the other kinde of knowledge, though God be cognoscibilis ex gratia, Espens. ex Aquinat. in 1. Tim. 6.to bee knowne by grace, comprehensibilis tamen a nemine quam seipso, yet hee is comprehended of none but himselfe. The reason is, because the deitle is infinite, the creature finite: so that which is of a finite nature, cannot comprehend that which is infinite. Augustine saith, si sanctis Angelis iam equales essemus, de Genes. ad Lit. lib. 4. c. 6.non vtique ita nota esset nobis diuina essentia, sicut ipsa sibi: if we were equall to the Angels, the diuine substance should not bee so knowne to vsus, as it is to himselfe.
But here commeth in this quaint distinguisher with this glosse; God is not called incomprehensible, as if there were any thing of his, He speaketh contradictions.which his Saints shall not see, but because they see him not so perfectly, as hee is visible of himselfe. 2. b. p. 204.2. b. p. 204. Wherein he speaketh contradictions; for if God cannot be seene of vsus, as he is of himself, then there is somewhat in the Godhead which we cannot see, which himselfe seeth. Then by grace apprehend him wee may, but comprehend him we cannot:August. epist. 50. ad Elpidium. Plenitudinem diuinitatis nemo de coelestibus etiam virtutibus conspexit: The fulnesse of the diuinitie none of the celestiall powers hath seene: but if there be nothing of his, which the Saints shall not see, then they should see his fulnesse.
Now then it is euident, which of the twaine holdeth a paradox: the Replyer, that saith the deitie of Christ is incomprehensible, or the erroneous Reprehender, which enclineth to the contrarie. He saith further, that the Replyers peremptorie words seeme to encline to those Errors, or rather heresies, of certaine Armenians, which denied that the Saints in the next world should see God at all in his diuine essence. p. 207.2. b. p. 207. But as the Replyer detesteth from his heart that erroneous opinion: so let this newfangled Dogmatist take heede, least in his comprehensiue fancie, he apprehend not and lay hold of the heresie of the Anomaeans before spoken of, that affirmed, they comprehended the essence of God.
3. As good successe hath this trifler in the third pretended error: for first, he misconceiueth (himselfe would here hauehave said, after his vnmannerly phrase, belieth) Augustine, that he taketh not the word spirit, for the diuine nature of Christ, but for the operation of the holy ghost: for Augustines words are these:Epist. 99. saepe antea veniebat in spiritu ad quos volebat, he came often before (that is, his incarnation) in the spirit to whome he would: doth he speake, I pray you, of the operation of the spirit here, and not of the spirit himselfe: to confound the spirit, and the operation of the spirit, is both great error and ignorance. Againe an other vntruth is, that Augustine by the word spirit, taketh not the diuine nature of Christ. If Augustine may be credited, he himselfe saith otherwise: Et ipse quidem filius in substantia deitatis spiritus est;& quid facit silius sine spiritu sancto vel sine patre, Epist. 99.cum inseperabilia sunt opera trinitatis? Both the Sonne himselfe is a spirit in the substance of the deitie: and what doth the Sonne without the holy Ghost, or without the Father, seeing the workes of the Trinitie are inseperable? Doth it not now appeare that Augustine indifferently taketh the spirit here, either for the diuine nature of Christ; or for the holy Ghost? say also then that Augustine doth ignorantly confound them.
Further, doth not the Scripture indifferently sometime ascribe the same worke to Christ, sometime to the holy Ghost: as our Sauiour saith, The spirit of my father speaketh in you, Math. 10. 20. which Marke nameth the holy Ghost, Mark. 13. 11. and S. Paul saith, Seeing ye seeke experiment of Christ, that speaketh in me, 2. Cor. 13. 3. So the Apostle saith, that Christ offered himselfe, Hebr. 7. 17. and thorough the eternall spirit he offered himselfe: chap. 9. 14. which Ambrose vnderstandeth of the holy Ghost.Lib. 1. de spir. c. 8. Say also that the Apostles ignorantly confound the diuine nature of Christ, and the holy Ghost.
But that it may fully appeare, who is both the ignorant, and errant too, (to vse his owne words) what a dangerous and suspitious speach is this, taking the word spirit, for soule, I might hauehave diuided Christ, and his spirit, without all suspition of ignorance, and his imputation of error: 3. b. p. 97.3. b. p. 97. yea,The ignorant Confuter diuideth Christ and his spirit. and dare any presumptuous spirit diuide that, which God hath inseperably vnited, the deitie, and humanitie, (to the which belongeth the soule … spirit) in one person in Christ. Our Sauiour said vponupon an other occasion, Let none put asunder that which God hath coupled together, Math. 19. 6. which rule holdeth in generall, that it is no lesse presumption, to diuide the humane soule from the person of Christ, which is hypostatically vnited for euer: I may here say with Hierome, Hieron. ad Damasum.Nescio quid veneni in syllabis latet: I can not tell what poison lieth hid vnderunder these syllables. But to returne his owne words, it may be that these things hauehave slipt from you, thorough heate of contention, rather then perswasion of heart: 2. b. p. 207.2. b. p. 207. yet I say againe with Hierome, Non bonae suspicionis est, cum in eodem sensu verba dissentiunt: it is no good suspition, when in the sa…e sense the words doe dissent. If he hold the hypostaticall vnion of Christs soule and bodie with his Godhead, why doth he in words diuide them?
4. Concerning the fourth position, which he calleth straunge, the words of the Replyer are these: the ioyes of heauen may be truly, though not fully felt in this life: whosoeuer counteth this position strange, sheweth himselfe indeede a straunge fellow, and a straunger from such true feeling of heauenly ioyes. What thinketh he of those three,Svnops. p. 1013. Ambr. epist. 11. Peter, Stephen, and Paul, whome Ambrose giueth in instance: Petrus in monte Domini aspiciens gloriam Christi: noluit descendere, Stephanus cum Iesum vidit, lapidari non formidabat: Paulus raptus in Paradisum, vsum proprij non sentiebat corporis: Peter in the mount of the Lord beholding the glorie of Christ, would not descend: Stephen, when he sawe Iesus, feared not to be stoned: Paul, being rapt into Paradise did not perceiue the vse of his owne body. Thinketh hee, that they euen in earth felt not the true ioyes of heauen, though not so fully as they enioy it now? Yea this wrangler himselfe confesseth vponupon these words of Peter with our eies we saw his maiestie: 2. Pet. 1. 16.that they enioyed the sight of his glorious maiestie in this life. 2. b. p. 205.Could he then be so forgetfull, as to call it a straunge position, that the true ioy … heauen may be felt in this life: is it not a true heauenly ioy to see the Maiestie of God? how say you, (Sir Medler) speake out, is it not? your owne mouth doth condemne you:Coelum (inquit Deus) mihi sedes est, anima ergo iusti coelum est. in Psal. 121. What if the Replyer had said with Augustine, that heauen may be in this life, in the soule of the righteous: or with Ambrose, that the spirit of grace maketh the regenerate heauenly and celestiall: he would also hauehave thought in his vnheauenly blindnes,Cum coelestem faciat gratia spiritualis, multo magis terrenum creavit, Ambr. l. 2. de spir. c. 9. that he had spoken straungely also: for where heauen is, and men are become heauenly, what should let them, but to hauehave a feeling also of heauenly ioyes.
The Recrimination.
Now let vsus turne aside a little to take a view of his blinde errors.
1. He holdeth, that the originall text of the Scriptures is corrupt, in these words; And say we must goe to the originals: I will runne with you to those fountaines, whose pure waters if the foule feete, and vncleane hands of some had not corrupted, &c. there could neuer be so many grosse and filthie errors drawne and deriued thence. 1. b. p. 26.1. b. p. 26.
2. The Syriake together with the Greeke he holdeth to be the originall tongues of the new Testament: ibid. whereas there can be but one originall tongue to the rest: if hee graunt the Greeke be the true originall, then the Syriake is not, which was translated out of the Greeke. So in an other place he reprooueth the Replyer for reiecting the Syriake,3. b. p. 57. as contrarie to the originall.
3. He preferreth the Latine text before the originall Greeke. Act. 2. 24. reading, the sorrowes of hell, for the sorrowes of death, as the originall Greeke hath: saying, I see no cause,3. b. p. 30. why I should not approoue the old Latine text: 3. b. p. 30. so also,Bellar. lib. 2. de verb. Dei. c. 10. 2. b. p. 154. shewing hereby of what house he commeth, and whose disciple he is, iustifying the Latine translation against the originall: of the which further, he thus vnreuerently writeth: As for that vulgar Greeke now extant, whether it be the true Authentike originall or no, is a question, because it is neither the most auncient, nor that which was most vsed in the Auncient Church: and beside that it is not free from corruption in diuers places. 3. b. p. 14.3. b. p. 14. What could be spoken more to the derogation of the authoritie of the Scriptures,The originall Greeke text of the new Testament disgraced. then thus to abase that originall, wherein the Apostles themselues did write. And in this prophane, and (little better) then Popish assertion, he hath vttered three great vntruths: that the Greeke originall, which we now hauehave, is not the most auncient; that it was not most vsed in former times; that it is in some places corrupt: none of these slaunders of the text, shall he euer be able to iustifie.
4. He calleth the booke of Ecclesiasticus, which the Church of England counteth among the Apocryphall bookes,Artic. 6. the word of God: 2. b. p. 70.2. b. p. 70. and in the next page before, he calleth it Scripture, I thinke it fit to ioyne Scripture with Scripture, making mention of Ecclesiasticus. And that we may see, he is no chaungeling; in an other place hauing alleadged a place out of Ecclesiasticus, he addeth, by which Scriptures it is plaine. 2. b. p. 136.2. b. p. 136. Such a diuine as he is, such is his Scripture: how audacious is this fellow, that contrarie to the iudgement and determination of this Church, dare make Ecclesiasticus a booke of Canonicall Scripture?
5. The question beeing demanded, why the soule may not be taken for his (that is Christs) whole person, as well as holy is vnderstood to be his flesh? answere is made, because cause it (that is, the soule) is no part at all of the whole person, while it remaineth seperated from the body: for of these two the whole person consisteth, when they are ioyned together liuing, &c. 2. b. p. 162.2. b. p. 162▪ Where, seeing the demaund is made concerning Christs soule, the answere containeth two manifest errors, or rather heresies: the one, that the soule seperated from the body, The confuter intangleth himselfe by his owne words, with an inclination to the heresies of the Apollinarists and Nestorians.was no part of Christs person: which sauoureth strongly of the heresie of the Apollinarists, that made the man Christ without a soule: the other, that the soule and body ioyned together (that is, in Christ, for of him the question is proposed) make his whole person; which inclineth to the heresie of the Nestorians, that made two persons of Christ; one, as he was the sonne of God; the other, as he was the sonne of man: which was the heresie also of Theodorus, condemned in the 5. Synod. ca. 12. I am right sorie, and it pitieth me for this poore man, that so windeth himselfe in his owne wordes, as that hee hath made a maze and labyrinth for himselfe, out of which he cannot get out. He, if he had met with the like aduantage, would hauehave cried out with open mouth (heresie, heresie) as he doth notwithstanding in diuers places vntruely obiect.Pref. to the 1. booke. p. 5. and 2. b. 43. But we forbeare him that tearme, as hauing slipped here rather of ignorance, and as one, to vse Hieroms words,Puritan heresie obiected. qui magis misericordia dignus, quam invidia: which had more neede to be pitied, then enuied.
6. Alleadging the corrupt translation of the Septuag. Iob. 38. 17.Dialog. 1. aduer. Pelagian. foreign, Did the porters of hell at the sight of thee shrinke for feare, or rather were astonished? whereas the true reading according to the originall is this: hast thou seene the gates of the shadow of death? he saith, they were here propheta… verius, quam interpretes, Prophets more like then interpreters, and iustifieth their faulty translation against the original. 2. b. p. 178.2. b. p. 178.
7. He saith that Iehouah is the essentiall name of God, or rather the very essence it selfe, because his name and nature are all one. 2. b. p. 196.2. b. p. 196. Who but this blinde archer would shoote such blinde bolts? if hee had said Iehouah signified the very essence of God, he had said wel; but that it is the very essence of God, is an absurd speech: for then the essence of God may be seene and vttered, as this word Iehouah can: then should it be lawfull to adore this name wheresoeuer we see it painted or written, if it were the very essence of God.
8. This is the guerdon laid vp for Gods children, 2. b. p. 202.to participate euen with his Godhead, for to this ende he tooke vponupon him our humane nature, that we might be capable of his diuine substance: 2. Pet. 1. 4.and to this ende he alleadgeth Saint Peter, that by them we should be made partakers of the diuine nature. What strange speeches are these? that wee shall participate and be capable of the godhead and diuine nature, as Christ was of our humane? How much differeth he now from the Origenists error, that vniuersa creatura redigetur in diuinam naturam, that eueryevery creature shall be resolued into the diuine nature; noteda6. imputat. iustific. expos. 1. before: or frō the family of LoueLove, that say they are godded with God. It is held to be a great error in Osiander, that man is iustified by that iustice, not which Christ had as man, but whereby he was essentially iust as God: and this is well confuted by that Popish champion,Bellar. lib. 2. de iustificat. c. 5. both by scriptures and fathers: as Augustine expoundeth what this iustice is; qua nos eius gratia iusti sumus, &c. cum iuste viuimus, &c. non qua ipse iustus est, aeterna sua & incommutabili iustitia: wherby we are iust through his grace, when we liue iustly, &c. not by his eternall and immutable iustice, whereby he is iust himselfe. This error, this wandring discourser cannot bee free from, for if Gods children shall participate with the godhead and diuine substance, then also with the essentiall iustice, which is inherent in that diuine substance.
As for that place of Peter, it serueth not to prooue any such participation of the diuine substance, vnlesse hee will say, that euen in this life we are also capable of the godhead: for the Apostle speaketh of that conformitie to the diuine nature, which is in the Saints in this life; namely, in flying the corruptiōs of the world, as the next words shew, which doe serue to expound the former: so that (as a good interpreter saith) it is to be noted, that the name of nature here doth not signifie the substance, Marlor. in hunc locum.but the qualitie: yea, that great defender of the Pope-catholike faith (whom it may be he more respecteth,Bellar. ibid. then our Ecclesiasticall expositors) doth hit the right meaning of this place, expounding it by the like:Psal. 82. 6. and Ioh. 10. 32. as, I said ye are gods, and ye all are children of the most high: and, behold (saith the Apostle) what louelove the father hath shewed on vsus, 1. Ioh. 3. 1.that we should be called the sonnes of God: 1. Ioh. 4. 7.and, eueryevery one that liueth i… borne of God. This partaking then of the diuine nature, is not in the communication of his substance,vt conformes deo reddam…r: id est, quasi deificari. but our conformation in holinesse and louelove: so that we are as it were deified, in beeing made conformable to God: as M. Caluine speaketh, and long before him Bernard vsed the same phrase,Lib de diligend. deo. thus writing: Oportet nos in eundem affectum transire, vt quomodo Deus omnia propter seipsum esse voluit, sic & nos ipsos propter ipsum esse volumus: sic affici, deificari est. We must passe into the same affection with the creator, that as God would hauehave all things for himselfe, so that we be willing to bee our selues for him: so to be affected, is as it were to be deified. This our deifying, is not in passing into the same identitie of nature with God, but in imitating the diuine qualitie: not in beeing transformed into the same condition of substance, but in beeing chaunged into the like affection. It was the wicked opinion of the Manichees,ex Marlor. in hunc locum. that as wee were made out of Gods nature, so we should returne to it againe. Let this braine-sicke concluder take heed that hee fall not downe into this pit, standing so neere the brinke: saying, that we shall be partakers of the diuine substance & Godhead: in which sense also if hee vnderstand the blisfull fruition of the godhead, to be made partakers and capable of the diuine nature and godhead, as it seemeth his meaning is: it is also an erroneous speech, and neither agreeable to the scripture, nor antiquitie, as hath beene shewed: what that fruition of God shall be,In festiuit. sanctor. serm. 4. Bernard well sheweth: tripliciter in aeterna illa beatitudine fruemur Deo, &c. wee shall three waies enioy God in that eternall blessednesse, beholding him in the creatures, hauing him in our selues, and knowing the very Trinity in it selfe.
9. To descend, is a voluntarie action, whereas to suffer torments, is a violent passion. 3. b. p. 201.3. b. p. 201. In which vnaduised speech, he must either confesse, that Christ indured no torments for vsus vponupon the crosse, contrary to the Prophet; he was wounded for our transgressions, and broken for our iniquities: or that he suffered them violently, and so not voluntarily, Ioh. 10. 18.contrary to our Sauiours owne words: No man taketh it (that is, my life) from me, but I lay it down of my selfe.
10. He calleth certaine points of doctrine (exempli…ied by the Replyer in another booke, for straunge and vnsound positions) most true and sound positions. 2. b. p. 20.2. b. p. 20. and yet afterward he confesseth, that the very first thereof, which is this,The ignorant confuter windeth himselfe by his owne words into suspicion of Arrianisme. that Christ is not originally God, is the most damnable heresie of Arrius, ibid. p. 21. Thus he ignorantly maketh himselfe an Arrian; for thus may his owne speeches be retorted against him: whosoeuer saith that Christ is not originally God, is an Arrian: this proposition is his owne: but so holdeth this confused confuter, in calling it a true and sound position: this also is his owne, for he calleth all those true and sound positions, there excepted against, whereof this is the first. Ergo: by his owne confession he draweth himself into suspiciō of Arrianisme. Indeede, this (heresie-mouther) that hath often in his mouth, heresie, heretike, obiecteth Arrianisme, but very simply to the Replyer, because alleadging the words of S. Paul of our Sauiour, iustified in the spirit, he by the spirit, vnderstandeth his diuine spirit and nature: as quickned, saith he, in your sense signifieth to be made aliue, so must iustified to be made iust, which is ranke Arrianisme: 3. b. p. 60.3. b. p. 60. poore silly fellow: and doth he know what Arrianisme meaneth: for though the Replyer medleth not here with the signification of the word iustified, but alleadgeth this sentence, for the vse of the word spirit: neither doth he take the word iustified, in the actiue signification, as we are said to be iustified: but passiuely, as when wisdome is saide to be iustified of her children, Math. 11. 19. that is, approoued and declared to be iust: yet if it be referred to Christs humanitie, it is no Arrianisme to say, that he as man was iustified, not from sinne, which he had not, but preserued by the inhabitation of the spirit from all sinne. If this be Arrianisme? then is Chrysostome an Arrian, who deliuereth these two expositions of this place:Chrysostom. in hunc locum. Sive hoc intelligi potest, &c. whether this may be vnderstood, because wisdome is iustified of her children, or because he did none deceit, as the Prophet testifieth, saying: Who did no sinne, neither was any guile found in his mouth: he vnderstandeth this iustification, of his preseruing from sinne. And what is it more, to say that Christ as man was iustified, or that he was sanctified: but our Sauiour saith of himselfe, whome the father sanctified, Ioh. 10. 36. if for Christ to be made iust, be Arrianisme; then also to be made holy? Then he seeth who is charged with Arrianisme in his sense, which once to thinke, were horrible blasphemie. I therefore say vntounto him,Contra Pe…il. l. 2. c. 101. concerning this imputation of Arrianisme, Vides ne quomodo ista non sententia, sed vescia, non solum mani sonitu, sed in capite vestro crepuerit: See you not, how this, not sentence, but bladder, not onelyonly with a vaine cracke, but is broken vponupon your owne head.
11. He affirmeth, that the baptisme of Infants, is not to be found in Scripture, by any (expresse) literall mention: 2. b. p. 170.2. b. p. 170. for though he leaue out that word expresse, yet he of whome he borroweth this opinion,The ignorant Confuter not sound, concerning the baptisme of Infants. vseth that terme: and he may put literall in his purse: his meaning is, that it is not expressely deliuered in Scripture: for there he impugneth that conclusion, that nothing is to be admitted, that is not expressely deliuered in Scripture. Now then that baptisme is expressely grounded vponupon Scripture, and not vponupon tradition: which must follow vponupon the other, it is diuersly euident.Mark 10. 14. As because Christ commandeth little children,Eph. 5. 26. not to be forbidden to come vntounto him: the Church is cleansed by the washing of water through the word: of which Church, infants are members: Christ commandeth to baptize all nations,Math. 28. 19. among the which children are counted. And seeing infants were circumcised, in stead whereof baptisme succeedeth,Coloss. 2. 1…. which the Apostle likeneth to circumcision: it is euident that the baptisme of infants is founded vponupon Scripture: it is also the doctrine of our Church,Artic. 27. that the baptisme of infants is most agreeable with the institution of Christ: but where is the institution of Christ to be found, but in expresse Scripture: what shamelesse dealing then is this, to say that they which hold the contrarie, namely that the baptisme of infants is not expressely found in Scripture, doe maintaine the doctrine of the Church, when they directly impugne it. And this vncertaine and wandring opinion, giueth occasion to the wicked heresie of the Anabaptists: that affirme the baptisme of Infants to take beginning from the*Disput. cont. Anabap. sub Egidio Hun. art. 77. Bishops of Rome, and not from the Apostles.
12. He further among those things, which are not expressely deliuered in Scripture, giueth in instance, our beleefe in the blessed Trinitie: 2. b. p. 170.2. b. p. 170. whereas the auncient Fathers of the Church, hauehave principally out of the Scripture prooued this Article concerning the Trinitie: as Origene vrged that place in the 51. Psal. where mention is made of three spirits:Homil. 5. in Ier. principalis spiritus pater, &c. the principall spirit is the father, the right spirit the sonne, and the free spirit the holy Ghost. But more pregnant is that place which Ambrose selecteth;1▪ Cor. 13. 13. the grace of our Lord Iesus Christ, the louelove of God, and the communion of the holy Ghost, Ambr. in hunc locum.be with you all: Trinitatis hic complexio est, & vnitas potestatis: here is a coniunction of the Trinitie, and the vnitie of power. Augustine doth conclude the Trinitie from that heauenly vision in the baptisme of our Sauiour: Apparuit manifestissime Trinitas, Tract. 6. in Ioan.&c. The Trinitie appeared manifestly, the Father in the voice, the Sonne in man, the holy Ghost in the doue. But of all other those places are most full for the Trinitie: Math. 28. 20. Baptizing them in the name of the Father, and the Sonne, and the holy Ghost: and that other, 1. Ioh. 5. 7. There are three which beare record in heauen, the Father, the Word, and the holy Ghost: who of any iudgement reading these places, can denie for shame, but that the blessed Trinitie, is expressely deliuered in Scripture.
13. The coeternitie of the Sonne with the Father, is an other point obiected,2. b. p. 107. not expressely deliuered in Scripture: which is euident by the words of the Euangelist, that the word was in the beginning with God. Tract. 71. in Ioann.Augustine out of those words of our Sauiour, I and my father are one: concludeth his equalitie with God: & so consequently his coeternitie. Bernard inferreth it out of those words of the Prophet:Bernard. ser. 2. de nativit. Isa. 53. 8. Who shall declare his generation. And further he thus saith, Commendant nobis sacrae literae Christum ex patre, in patre, cū patre, &c. quod dicitur ex patre, ineffabilis est nativitas, quod in patre, consubstantialis vnitas, quod cum patre, equalitas maiestatis: … verb. Isa. serm. 5.The sacred letters doe cōmend vntounto vsus Christ of his father, in his father, with his father: that which is said of his father, is his ineffable natiuitie, in his father, his consubstantiall vnitie, that with his father, the equalitie of his maiestie.
These fathers held, that these mysteries were not to be learned els where, then in the Scriptures, as most plainely therein expressed.
14. The proceeding of the holy Ghost, he thinketh also not to be expressely deliuered in Scripture: 2. b. p. 170.2. b. p. 170. whereas notwithstanding, our Sauiour saith directly, Whome I will send vntounto you from the father:Ioh. 15. 26. and, whome the father will send in my name.Ioh. 14. 26. Augustine would prooue it out of those wordes in the Gospel, Mark. 5. 30.vertue went out of him: for it is cleare that the holy spirit is called vertue: but that other place is more euident, which Augustine vrgeth also: August. tract. 99. in Ioann.He shall not speake of himselfe: and, he shall receiue of mine:Ioh. 16. 13▪ 14. Audire illi scire est, scire ess…, à quo ergo illi essentia, ab eo scientia: to heare, is to him to know, to know, is to be: from whome his essence is, from him his science: seeing then he heareth and receiueth from the sonne, he also hath his essence and proceeding from the sonne.
These holy mysteries of the Trinitie, the coeternitie of the Sonne with the Father, the proceeding of the holy Ghost, the fathers take to be expressely set downe in Scripture, as Bernard, speaking of the mysterie of the Trinitie: Non potuit expressius commendari, Bern. serm 5. de verb. Isa.&c. It could not be more expressely commended, then it is necessarie to beleeue. To say therefore,The ignorant consuter giueth aduantage vntounto the heretiks the Sabellians, Arrians, Macedonians. that these points of doctrine, are not expressely deliuered, is to giuegive way vntounto those wicked heretikes, the Sabellians that denied the first, the Arrians the second, the Macedonians the third.
Beside these errors, adde as many more, which he calleth true and sound positions, beeing indeede vnsound and corrupt doctrines,Pref. to Antilog. Eccles. triumph. p. 90. 91. as is partly touched before: slaund. 10. and more at large els where: which I will not now repeate, because I am onelyonly to deale here with this froward spirit, leauing to prouoke those of more modest cariage, though in some things otherwise minded.
Now, what hath this blind obiecter of error gained to himselfe, but his owne shame, who reckoneth that for errour and falsitie in others, which agreeth with truth and veritie; and seeth not his owne grosse and erring ignorance. He with a curious eye obserueth others slippes, and tripping (nor that neither) while himselfe stumbleth, and falleth downe flat: the Prophet saith, Woe vntounto them that speake good of euill, Isa. 5. 20.and euill of good, which put darknesse for light, and light for darkenesse: I pray God he be not of that number. Ambrose saith well,Lib. offic. 2. c. 17. talis consiliarius sit, qui nihil nebulosum habeat: He that aduiseth others, must not bee (darkened) or ouercast with clouds himselfe.Ad Nepotian. And Hierom wel admonisheth, Non confundant opera sermonem tuum: Let not thy workes confound thy words. And this blinde guide, while he noteth other mens wandrings, should not hauehave gone himselfe out of the way: he telleth the Replyer most disdainefully, and withall vntruely, that hee hath neuer a good thought of his owne. 2. b. p. 106.2. b. p. 106. while his own heart is pestered with erroneous and malitious cogitations: and no maruell, for as Iosephus well saith, foreign: a temperate heart is the hauen of (good) meditations: while the heart therefore boyleth with intemperate enuie, the spring head being troubled, the waters issuing from thence cannot be cleane: I wish hee may hauehave grace to see his errors, and to confesse his ignorance. Tully hath a good saying,Philip. 12. Cuiusuis est hominis errare, nullius nisi insipientis perseuerare in errore: Any man may erre, but none but vnwise men continue in error. Let him not thinke it folly to reuerse with iudgement, what hee hath written with error: It is a wise mans part rather to amend what is amisse, and to straighten that which is crooked, & to rectifie by the line of truth, that which hath beene set downe against the rule of truth: and so againe I commend vntounto him, that worthy sentence of Cicero, Optimus est portus poenitenti, Philip. 12.mutati. consilij: the best hauen to repentāce, is to change the (heart and) purpose.