Works, Book 4 · Letter 51
EPISTLE LI.
Mr. Mede's Answer to Dr. Twisse's Fifth Letter, expressing the great Candour and Freedom of his spirit as to differences in Opinions, and how little affected he was with the report of Mr. Selden's Censure of his Book. An Answer to an Exception concerning the State of the Millennial felicity in Seculo futuro. A Vindication of Lactantius and others from the calumnies of some Antichiliasts. The reason why Hierom was afraid to mention Iustin Martyr where he speaks of the ancient Chiliasts.
SIR,
SOME business that calls upon me will make me be short at this time. That which I called a Chappel-exercise, was a diverse thing from this I last offered to send you; namely a little thing for understanding S. Paul's allegation out of Psal. 8. Hebr. 2. concerning the exaltation of the nature of Man, to which God hath subjected foreign. This last is a large Discourse upon 1 Tim. 4. delivered first at several times by way of Common-places (as we call them) in the Colledge and in certain Sermons at S. Mary's; but at what time my Notions in the Apocalyps were yet but raw, and the Mystery of the Millenary Kingdom not understood. So you will find in it many things not consentaneous to my present notions, and some other things that my maturer thoughts could now correct or wipe out. Well, whatsoever they be, I send you them both. The little one hath another conceit annexed to it, which I was not so well aware of, viz. of Zipporah's circumcising. I would fain, but could not tell how to separate it from the other, unless I should write it out anew, which I had rather than undergo, hazard (as you see) the imputation of Vanity.
For Mr. Selden; he is a Gentleman by whose Writings I have learned much, and make no slight esteem of; but otherwise utterly unknown unto me. I never saw him in my life, nor he me; nor was there ever any entercourse between us, by letter, word, message, or otherwise. Nor did I ever hear any Censure of his concerning my Book, or any particular therein, till now; much less replyed to any such thing reported to me, or took it unkindly, as you say he told my Lord Herbert. Surely it was but some scheme of discourse that passed from some body gratis, when my Book was discoursed of: But the author of that scheme was more deceived in me than he could have been in any man else. There are, I think, few men living who are less troubled to see others differ in opinion from them than I am (whether it be a Vice or Vertue, I know not:) So far is it from me to take it unkindly that I should not be believed in a Paradox. If any man can patiently suffer me to differ from him, it nothing affects me how much or how little they differ from me: Which disposition so much the more encreaseth in me, as I take dayly liberty to examine either mine own former persuasions or other mens opinions. But if I should go on, I should perhaps discover too much my indifferency this way. Let it pass.
I am no niggard according to my ability to impart what I know; but it is where I find some appetite (as you say;) otherwise my familiarist friends, some of them, are as ignorant of my Notions as any stranger: For if they discover no stomach, I use not to examine them, no not to offer them: and it would be in vain, Pauci enim inviti discunt.
'Tis true that Glorified bodies have no need of inheritance temporal for their maintenance and nourishment; but for their mansion and habitation they have need of a place of abode. The Creatures upon earth were not all made, no not the most of them, for mans eating and drinking; but for his glorifying the Wisdom, Goodness and Power of his Creator in the contemplation of them. Such a use is not unbefitting the Sons of the Resurrection. And what use should many of them have had but this, if Man had continued in the Integrity of his first Creation? Like scruples will arise in a mans mind concerning the State of Beatitude in the heavenly mansions; as, What should a glorified Soul do there with a Body and bodily Senses? What Objects are there to entertain them? Some body, and, if I am not much deceived, our Mr. Perkins, somewhere in his Works (I had thought in his Aurea Armilla, but now cannot find it in the English, nor have I the Latin Copy) moving a question, To what use the Renovated Earth after the Last Iudgment should serve; answers, For the solace of the glorified Saints, who should sometimes live in Heaven and sometimes on Earth; alledging for this conceit that in Apocal. 5. 10. Thou hast made us unto our God Kings and Priests, and we shall reign on earth. Were it not more agreeable to Reason to affirm, That, seeing Man consists of two parts, a Body and a Soul, each shall have his preeminence in order, in respect of the Place of Beatitude; first the Body on Earth, then the Soul in Heaven; Earth seeming more suitable for the entertainment of the one,Rom. 8. and Heaven for the other, yet so as both of them shall be for ever undivided, as in being, so in bliss and fruition of God? The creature hath been ever since the Fall of Man subject to Vanity and the bondage of corruption; that which was made at first to glorifie its Creator under the dominion of Man, being abused to sin, and made the instrument to dishonour him that made it. Under which bondage (to which it is unwillingly subject) it even groaneth and travelleth in pain, expecting one day to be delivered therefrom into the glorious liberty of the children of God. Shall there never then be a Time in which the Creature shall serve and be used to the end for which it was first made, namely, to serve to set forth the Wisdom, Power and Goodness of its Maker, and that too under the dominion of Man, in such a degree and manner as hath never yet been, nor is easy by us yet to be conceived? I say again, The Creature may serve Man for a more noble and divine use than for eating and drinking, though I am not able to comprehend and decipher it. Think what the use of so many Creatures should have been to Man in Paradise, when as yet there was no Commission given to eat flesh, nor had Man need of clothing. Should not Man then first have enjoy'd his happiness in Paradise and on Earth, and after a time have been translated into Heaven? Shall not the Soul come down to receive its Body on Earth? If so, what absurdity is it, that it may stay a while with it*For how should a man interpret that Parable, Luke 19. 11. and so forward, with satisfaction, and other like passages? as Matth. 19. 28. Heb. 11. 8. &c. and that a little before quoted Apocal. 5. 10. And how little footing will be found in the Old Test. of the Life to come, unless we go this way to work? here, and entertain it self together with it in that beginning of Felicity which the Instauration of the Creature may afford them?
There are many Tenets among the Fathers and Schoolmen, Concerning the Day of Iudgment and State of the Resurrection, which most men receive without question. Bring them together with that I represent unto the Lydius lapis of the Scripture, and try which of the two hath most easy footing therein.
S. Peter tells us, Acts 3. 21. of an foreign at the Second coming of Christ, foretold by the mouth of all the holy Prophets since the world began. Try whether you can shew any such thing in the Prophets, according to your manner of exposition.
S. Iohn tells us of a*Apocal. 10. 2 Thess. 1. 10. Mystery of God to be yet finished which he had declared to his Servants the Prophets. Try how well this will be found, according as some interpret them.
But I never meant to have gone thus deep, when I put pen to paper. Now therefore I end with my best respect, and prayers to Almighty God to make us capable of that Felicity he hath prepared for such as look for the Coming of the Lord Iesus, when he shall come to be glorified in his Saints, and to be admired in all them that believe. So I rest
Yours to command, I. Mede. Christ's Coll. April 18. 1635.
In that passage of Lactantius you mention, you may please to observe how wrongfully the ancient Chiliasts, and Lactantius by name, are charged to hold. That the Saints which rise from the dead shall marry and get children; whereas he expresly affirms it of those only qui erunt in corporibus vivi when Christ cometh. Nor did any of the rest, I mean of the Fathers, Iustin, Irenaeus, Melito, &c. think otherwise.N. B. You may observe also that Hierom in so many passages (wherein he names the Fathers that were Chiliasts) doth never mention Iustin Martyr, being afraid, it seems, of the Antiquity and Authority of the man.
I conceive the measuring of the Temple in Ezekiel to have reference to the time of the New Ierusalem; but how to expound it I know not: And no marvel; for I have read some-body of our Writers affirming it was never yet understood by any man what it meant, nor could easily be divined.