THE whole Scripture, conteined in the bookes of the Olde, and Newe Testament, 2. Pet. 1. 21 beeing penned by holy men, as they were mooued by the holy Ghost, must needs be in euery part, of like authority, and certainty. For what difference, in these points can there be reasonably imagined, where one and the same Authour, God himselfe, giueth immediately both warrant to write, and direction in writing? Adde here­vnto, that the maine matter of both, and the chiefe end of the Lord, in both is all one; namely, the knowledge of our Redemption, by the sacrifice of the promised Messiah Iesus Christ. Onely herein doth the later ex­cell the former, that it 2. Pet. 1. 19 deliuereth this great mysterie of Reconciliation, more particularly, and more cleere­ly. In this respect is Mat. 11. 11 the office of Iohn Baptist preferd [Page 2] before the calling of all the Prophets, that went before him, & yet made inferior to the ministery of the Gospel, that was to follow him. Iohn was more then a Prophet; yet he, that is least in the kingdom of Heauen, is greater then he. Then are we vtterly without excuse, if the measure of our knowledge, in the doctrine of our euerlasting sal­uation, be not answerable, in some proportion, to the meanes thereof, in this cleere light of teaching. Let vs therefore I beseech you, with reuerence and good con­science, stirre vp both our soules, and bodies, to the lear­ning of that, which doth so neerely concerne vs, and is so plainly, & plentifully manifested by our Sauiour, & his Apostles, in these books of the new Testament.

Of which (that I may, in this entrance to my labor, say somewhat of them all in generall) some are historicall, some doctrinall. The historicall books declare matters 1 of fact, the sayings, and doings of God, angells, and men: Some of them report of things past, which is the 1 proper office of an history. And of this kind are the fiue first books, the fowre Gospels, containing the discourse of our Sauiour Christs life, death, resurrection, and as­cension; one booke of the Acts, or doings of the Apo­stles: 2 the other historicall book is the Reuelation; wher­in, by way of prophecie, concerning things to come, the estate of the Church of Christ, till the ende of the world, is most truely & wonderfully described. Those 2 treatises of the new Testament, which I call doctrinall, are such as were written by the Apostles, for the instruc­tion of the Church of God; commonly called Epistles, because they were sent: sent I say to them, who had al­ready receiued, and professed the Gospell. But of these I shal say more, if it please God, in my exposition of the Epistle to the Romans.

1. Now, as for those bookes, which we call the Gos­pells, we are to vnderstand, that the generall matter of them all fowre, is an history of those things, that Iesus did, [Page 3] and taught, while hee continued here in the world; as it is euident by Act. 1. 1 S. Luke, and this our Ioh. 20. 30. & 21. 25 Euangelist. But whereas they name (expresly) no more, but his sayings, and doings; we must knowe, that his sufferings, or the things that befell him in this life, are also comprised in them, according to the course of an historie. What is more common in the books of kings, then such speeches as these: 1. King, 14. 19 Ieroboams acts; 29. Rehoboams acts; & 15. 31 The residue of the acts of Nadab, and all that he did, are they not written in the bookes of the Chronicles of the kings of Israell? Yet, who is ignorant, that these histories containe also, be­sides their deedes, a rehearsall, as of other matters con­cerning them, so namely of their death, either naturall, or violent?

2 But let vs come neerer to this our Euangelist; First to the title of the book, then to the historie it self. Tou­ching the former, although Tertullian. lib. 4, contra Mar­cian. cap. 2 I doe not holde all the ti­tles of the books of the new Testament to be (as those of the Psalms are) parts of the Canonical Scripture, en­dited by the holy Ghost; but only directions added by men to giue notice of the Authours, and to shew (in ge­nerall) of what kinde they are: yet surely they are (for the most part) taken out of the books themselues. The writings of the Apostles haue warrant of that name E­pistles, not onely because [...] the Grecians so call the Let­ters sent from one to another, such as those are, but al­so from 1. Thes. 5. 27 S. Paul himselfe; who according to common custome, calls them by that title. So doth 2. Pet. 3. 1. 16 Saint Peter tearme his owne, and the Apostle Pauls writings. But of these, and the other titles of the Actes, and Reuelation, an other time, if God will. This book, and the other three of the same kinde, are called Gos­pells. [...] The word in the Original signifieth as much as good tidings, or a message of some good; appli­ed by the holy Ghost to the doctrine of the Gospell, according to the manner of the seauenty two interpre­ters, [Page 4] who translating the olde Testament out of the Hebrew into Greeke, exprest [...]. the preaching of sal­uation by [...]. a word of the same nature, and kinde Esai. 52. 7. How beautifull upon the mountaines are the feete of him [...]. that declareth & publisheth peace &c. saith the Prophet; where the Greeke hath [...]. Euangelize peace, as it is al­leaged by the Rom. 10. 15. Apostle, and applyed to the preaching of the Gospell. And that the doctrine of saluation by Christ is signified by that name, it may farder appeare by Gal. 3. 8. the same Apostle, where hee sayth, that the Scrip­ture preached the Gospell to Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations bee blessed. But what neede many proofes in so playne a matter? Especially since the first messenger of that ioy, after our Sauiours birth, the holy An­gell, deliuers his embassage in the very same tearmes. Luke, 2. 10 Beholde, [...]. I bring you glad tydings of great ioy. Yea, our Sauiour himselfe hath authorized, and as it were sanctified the vvord, to that purpose, by saying, Matth. 26. 13 Verilie, I saie unto you, wheresoeuer this Gospell shalbe preached, throughout all the world, there shall this al­so, that shee hath done, bee spoken of, for a memoriall of her.

If any man demaund yet farder reason, for applying this title to the History of our Sauiour; Let him hear­ken what Marke, 1. 1. Saint Marke sayth. The beginning of the Gospell of IESVS CHRIST. Vpon this warrant from him, these foure bookes are lawfully and wor­thily called the foure Gospels. Now it hath seemed good to them, that haue translated the new Testament, out of the originall greek into other languages, to retein the greek word in their seueral translatiōs, either wholly without any change, as the Syriack doth or else framed after the fashion of their speech. So is it in the Latine, French, Italian, Spanish, & Printed 1555 the old Flemish, yea in the Scotish to; only our ancestors the Saxōs haue vsed their liberty, to express the meaning of it in their owne tong. [Page 5] and haue changed Euangelie into Gospell. And yet they haue not made this alteration in the Titles, (where they keepe the Latine altogether) but in those parcells which were shared out for the seruice of some speciall daies; & in Math. 4. 23. & 26. 14 Marke, 1. 1. & 14. 9 the text it self, where the Greek word is vsed by the Euangelist. The word then, both in the Originall, and in our english, giueth vs to vnderstand, that the matter of these Histories, or bookes called Gospells, is a mes­sage of ioy, and gladnesse; yea, of suchioy, and glad­nesse, as neither eye hath seene, care hath heard, nor the heart of man is able worthily to conceiue.

And shall I need to vse any one word of exhortation, for the stirring of vs vp to heare these ioyfull newes of peace and saluation? This is that kingdom of Heauen, which, in the daies of our Sauiour Christs preaching Mat. 11. 12 suffered violence: while multitudes ran together in heaps, thronging, & thrusting to heare such gladsome tydings. If the Examples of men bee of small force to moue vs; yet let the testimony of Angells waigh some. what with vs Luk. 2. 10. Behold (saith the Angell) I bring you glad tydings of great ioy, that shall be to all the people. And that we might the rather be perswaded thereof, we haue not only thereport of this one Angell, but the practise and example of a whole army of Angells, Ver. 13. 14 Praising God, & saying Glory be to God in the high heauens, & peace on earth, & towards men good will. Shall the holy Angells of God, whom these things in a manner concerne not, so tri­umph, and glory, for this happy newes; wondering at the infinite mercy of the Lord, and reioycing for our glorious felicitie? and shal we (for whom all this is done) remaine senselesse, & carelesse? At the least, let this dul­nesse, and deadnesse work so much with vs, as to make vs see, how vnworthy we are of so vnspeakeable loue, how vnwilling to receiue the gracious meanes of salua­tion, prouided for vs, and offred to vs, yea thrust vp­pon vs by the Lord, that will not suffer vs to perish. Is [Page 6] it possible wee should be so vnthankfull to God, so vn­kinde to our selues, so iniurious to our posterity, as to neglect driue away from vs, and them, the onely meanes of our, and their euerlasting saluation? Do you thinke those reprobate spirits the Diuells, if the Lord had vouchsafed them so great a mercie, would so des­peratelie haue resused it, or so faintlie accepted of it?

Say not to mee, you are contented to bee saued by Iesus Christ; when you shew your selues so retchless, & backeward to learne how you may bee saued by him. Giue mee leaue to reason a little with you. If an estate in some temporall possession were bestowed on you, by waie of Legacie, woulde you satisfie your selues; or woulde it serue the turne, for you to professe, that you accepted of the gifte: woulde you stay at home, and waite till the Executours should drawe you out, to goe take possession? No, no, you would seeke from one Court to another, make all the friends you could, bestowe your paines, time and charges, to haue liuery and seisin of a fraile and vncertaine in heritance. But in this bountifull, and large graunt of interest to heauen, we haue not so much care, as to knowe what clayme, or title, wee haue to it. And yet it is a my­stery: 1. Tim. 3. 16 Great is the mystery of godlinesse; 1. Cor. 2. 8 which none of the Princes of this world haue knowen. The excellencie, and gloriousnesse of it inflames 1. Pet. 1. 12 the Angells with a desire to look into it; and do we set light by such won­derfull knowledge? let it suffice vs, hitherto in our ignorance we haue beene so carelesse: Now, at the last, let vs put on other mindes, and by our continuall dili­gence (as it were) make amendes to our selues, for so long continued negligence. To which purpose I haue especially made choice of this piece of Scripture. If any man pretende the hardnesse of the matter; what is more easie, or more pleasant then a story? If any [Page 7] man despise the plainenesse of it, as a thing not worth his labour, because a storie; what is more strange, or mysticall then such a Storie? The Gospell is the easiest part of the Newe Testament. But the Gos­pell of Saint Iohn, is the hardest part of all the E­uangelists writings: yea, I dare boldelie saie it, be­cause I am sure I shall speake it truely, there is no one part of all the Scripture, (setting allegories, and prophecies not fulfilled, apart) that conteines mat­ters more needefull, or more hard to be knowen, then this present Gospell, or message of ioyfull tydings, brought to vs by the holy Euangelist, the beloued Dis­ciple of our Sauiour Christ.

2. Of whome that I may speake a little, for the far­der inciting of vs to hearken diligently to that hee writes; first I will entreat of his person, then of his writing. That which 2. Pet. 1. 20. 21 the Apostle Peter sayth of the olde Testament, that no prophecie of the Scripture is of a­ny priuate interpretation, but that holy men of God spake, as they were moued by the holy Ghost, is also to bee applied to the writings of the newe Testament, which procee­ded from the same spirit of God, by the like inspiring, and directing; as it is confessed by all, both Protestants, and Papists, that make any profession of Christian Re­ligion.

For the Apostles of our Sauiour Christ, were the Penners of all these books saue The Gospells of S Marke, and S. Luke, and the Acts. three: and Ioh. 16. 13 to them the holy Ghost was both promised by him, to leade them into all truth, and Act. 2. 3. 4 accordingly sent; so that there can be no question, but the new Testament, as well as the olde, is the certaine truth of God, equall in authori­ty, superior in plainnesse, & knowledge of particulars belonging to euerlasting saluation.

But you wil demand perhaps, how we may be assured, that the Apostles were the immediate Authors of these books. First, we haue the same proof of the new Testa­ment, [Page 8] that wee haue of the Olde, the ioynt consent of Christians, in all ages from time to time. Secondly, who seeth not the admirable prouidence of God in preser­uing these bookes in such glorious reputation, maugre the power & malice of the mighty ones of this world, & their great master, Satan? Thirdly, who can be so sham­lesse, as to deny or suspect the credit of those auncient Christians, who, liuing in the Apostles times, might & did certainely knowe, either by Gal. 6. 11 Col. 4. 18. 2. Thes. 3. 17 1. Cor 16. 21 the hand, or by some marks, which the Apostles vsed (as it were signing and sealing) or by enquirie of the Apostles themselues, that those bookes were indeed of their writing? From them this knowledge came to their next successors, and suc­cessiuely to vs, that now liue, by such a generall consent of so many thousands in all ages, that it were more then impudencie to make question of the matter; howsoeuer our Papists, in these dayes, to make all men depende on them (that they may shew themselues to be Antichri­stian) will haue the assurance of this point, as of all o­ther matters of faith, to be fetcht from them that now liue, from the authority of the Church of Rome, that now is. I may say the like of those other 3. Bookes, the Gospels of Mark, and Luke, and the Acts of the Apo­stles; which were acknowledged by the first Christians to thaue been endited by the spirit of God, and (as August. pro­log. in Ioan. it is recorded by some) to haue beene approued for such by the Apostle S. Iohn; who doubtlesse, liuing till after the decease of all them, that are saide, and belieued to be the writers of these, and the other books of the new Testament, would haue disclaim'd the authority of thē, & informed the Church against them, if he had not cer­tainly knowen, that they were al the holy Ghosts owne enditing.

But it is not my purpose, nor is it necessarie to that I haue in hand, to dispute this question: onely it seemed to me not amisse to speake thus much, in this entrance, [Page 9] as it were by the way, to preuent such obiections, as might perhaps disquiet the mindes of some, not so tho­roughly setled. For whose better satisfaction, I will add that, which is of most importance: namely, the matter conteined in these books; which is apparantly such, for the substance of it, as the heart, and head of man were neuer able to deuise: yea such (witnesse 1. Cor. 2. 9. 10 the holy A­postle Saint Paul) as neither ey hath seene, eare hath heard, nor euer came into any mans heart; But God hath reueiled it to vs, by his Spirit, which searcheth all things, yea the deepe things of God. This strangenesse of the matter is secon­ded in them, that beleeue to saluation, by an vnspeakea­ioy, and comfort in their soules, conceiued vpon a fee­ling of the pardon of their sins, and a certaine hope of euerlasting happinesse in the life to come. In the last place comes the testimony of the spirit of God: which (as it were the broade seale) makes vp the assurance both of the matter, and the bookes: in which it is com­prised.

If you aske me how I can discern the witnesse of the Spirit, from the illusion of Satan, and the imagination of mine owne brain, giue me leaue also to demand a like question of you; How could the Prophets (whose mini­stery it pleased the holy Ghost to vse) from time to time make a difference, betwixt the motions of the Lord himselfe, and the suggestions you mention? were they any more able to express this power of discerning, then the faithfull now are? I grant they could make proofe of their calling, and the reuelations they had, by a miraculous foretelling of things to come. But neither were those prophesies any certaine proofes, till the e­uent confirmed the truth of them, and my question re­maines still vnanswered; How they could discerne, that the things which they prophecied of, were reuealed to them by God, and not suggested by any deceitfull working of the diuel. Beare with mee I beseech you, if I a little forget my selfe [Page 10] in a matter of such importance, and difficulty: where­in I would be yet more bolde, with your patience, but that I trust and purpose to handle this point more at large, vpon some iuster occasion hereafter. The con­clusion is, that no reasonable man, much more, that no Christian, may, without great inciuility, or weakenesse of faith, make any question of the truth of these books: which haue continued in estimation, and autho­rity, by the space of so many hundred years, in despight of so many, so learned, and so mighty enemies; whereas the doctrine it self, by which, through the power of God it hath, and doth preuaile, is so contrary to the desire of flesh, & and blood; taking away all manner of glory from man, and couering him with shame, & ignominy; yea, stripping man of his greatest pride, the freedom of his will: without the comfort wherof, he hath (naturally) no ioy in any of his actions whatsoeuer.

The holy Ghost then is the enditer of these bookes; Men, especially authorised by him, the Penners. A­mongst whome this our Euangelist was not the least; a man singularly affected by our Sauiour Christ, and therefore often thus described, Ioh. 13. 23. & 19. 26. & 20. 2. & 21. 7. 20 The Disciple whom Iesus loued. That this Gospell was of his writing, it appeareth by the end thereof, where it is said; Iohn, 21. 24 This is that Disciple, which testifieth these things & wrot these things. Now what that Disciple was, the twelfth verse sheweth. Then Peter turned about, and sawe the Disciple, whome Iesus loued: vppon that sight of him Peter tooke occasion to question with our Sauiour about him; and in the end of that conference, set downe by the Euangelist, follow the wordes I recited before, This is that Disci­ple. But how shall we knowe, that This beloued Disci­ple. was Iohn? Surely the Gospell no where expresseth who it was: as you may see in the places before alleaged; where there is no signification of his name: and, other place, wherehee is called the beloued Disciple, there is [Page 11] none. Wee are therefore in this point also to haue re­course to the perpetuall iudgement of all Christians: who haue (without any doubting) deliuered this vpon their credit, as it were from hand to hand. Whereof we may the better be perswaded, if we remember & consi­der, how easie it was for them, that liued in this Euange­lists time, and were (as we shall heare anone) the occasi­on of his writing, to informe themselues most certainly of the Author of this Gospell. It may be, some man wil yet doubt, whether the Apostle Iohn were the penner of this Gospel or no, because he hath not named himself, as hee hath done in the Reuelation. For the satisfying of which doubt, it may please him to vnderstand, that this book is an history, as those of the Kings are, that of Ester, of Iob, & such like, to which the Authours of them haue not set their names. But the other of the Reuelati­on is a prophecie, as the writings of Isay, Ieremy, Ezeki­el, Daniel, and the rest; euery one of which hath the Authours name particularly rehearsed in it.

Now for the name it self, if it may adde any credit to the person, or signify any part of his nature, or grace be­stowed vpon him, whom may we prefer before this our Euangelist? whose very name Iohn, in the originall He­brew, soundeth out grace, & fauour. To which if we adioyne that testimony of the holy Ghost so often re­peated in this Gospel, that he was the Disciple whom Iesus loued, what can bee thought wanting, that might com­mend him to vs? For howsoeuer the loue of God be no proof of any excellency in the party beloued, frō which this loue should arise; yet it is a most certain demonstra­tion of some great worth in him, after hee is beloued: Because Ezec. 16. 3. 6. 7 13. 14 the loue of God alwayes bestowes on him, whom it once embraceth, some assured testimony that hee is beloued of God. It findes nothing worth the lo­uing, but it giues something: it makes the party louely, though of himselfe he be worthy of hatred.

And surely if euer this effect of Gods loue appeared in any (as it sheweth it self in all, that are beloued of him, more or lesse) it was euidently to be seene in this our E­uangelist, Matth. 4. 21 who of a poore Fisherman ignorant, and young, became in a short space admirable to all the world, for varietie, and certainety of all diuine wise­dom, and knowledge; insomuch that Basilius homil. in Ioa. c. 1. the most lear­ned and excellent of all the Philosophers, are reported, to haue wondered at the mysteries conteined in the be­ginning of this Gospell, which August. de ci­uit. dei lib. 10. cap. 29. they thought worthy to be written in letters of Gold. And yet, poore souls, they wondred at that, which they fully vnderstood not. If they had been vouchsaf't that honour, and happiness, wherof the Lord in his infinit mercy hath made vs par­takers, To conceiue, & feele the truth of these mysteries to our euerlasting saluation, oh how would they haue triumphed? And is it possible, wee should so lightly e­steeme it? Therfore shall they be our iudges, if we stirre not vp our dead affections to embrace, as it were with both armes, the kinde offer of so glorious, and won­drous knowledge, deliuered by him, who was of all other most deare to our Lord, and Maister Iesus Christ.

Wherof, if any man desire to see more particular proofe, let him looke vpon this our Euangelist, Iob. 13. 23. 24 lay­ing his head louingly, and familiarly in the bosome of our Sauiour; and behold Simon Peter, a man in no small fauour with his Lord Iesus Christ, beckning to him, as one that might bee most bolde, to aske that, which (it seemes) none of the rest durst demande. Hee know­ing the interest hee had in his Lords affection, makes bolde to aske the question, who it was that should betraie him; and presently without any second request, receiues a plaine and sufficient answere. And that it may yet more plainly appeare, what opinion the other Disciples had of our Sauiours especiall loue to him, remember I pray you the question moued by Peter, Iohn, 21. 21 Lord, what shall [Page 13] this man doe? By which it is manifest, that the disciples perswaded themselues, that our Sauiour had a princi­pall care of him aboue the rest: therefore also did they so interpret their masters speech, that it was commonly held amongst them, V. 23 that Iohn should not dye. But there can be no greater argument of our Sauiours entire af­fection to him, & of his strong perswasion of Iohns ex­traordinary loue, then Ioh. 19. 26. 27 28 the commending of his dearest mother to the keeping of Iohn, and Iohns readinesse & willingnesse in accepting, and entertaining her: which is yet the more apparant, if we consider, that Iames, and Iude were of the blessed Virgins, and our Sauiours kin­dred by bloud, & Iohn only by alliance, because of her marriage to Ioseph Page 14. line 21. &c. Onely I mustadde a word, or two of that title, which is commonly set before the names of those, that were the penners of the bookes of the Newe Testament: The Gospell according to S. Mathew, S. Iohn, The Epistle of Saint Paul, Saint Peter, Saint Iames. This title or Epithet, though it be both common & auncient, yet questionlesse was not annexed by any of these wri­ters; as not agreeable to true Christian discretion, and modesty: yea perhaps it was also, if not iniurious, yet likely to proue offensiue to all other beleeuers, that a ti­tle common to euery Christian, should be made proper to som few, though principall members of the Church. You will obiect (it may be) that these writers stile them­selues Apostles; as if they desired to haue their dignity, and office knowen to all men. True it is, that they do so indeed, in their Epist. But neither did that name belong to al the faithfull, or to any, but some certaine men: and it was necessary for the authorizing of their writings. How then? Doe I condemne the title, or the first Au­thours, or the continuers & vsers of it? Nothing lesse. For I gladly acknowledge, both that the Apostles, and Euangelists had especiall interest in that name, and that there could be no danger of scandall; seeing it was [Page 14] not taken by themselues, but giuen to them as an ho­nour, by the consent as it were and with the liking of all true Christians: whose purpose it was, not to make them Mediatours of intercession, betwixt God, and men vpon earth; but to shew the reuerend opinion, they had conceiv'd, and did hold of such worthy, and holy men. And to say the truth, what doth the word signifie but [...]. Holy. How often is it giuen, in the Scriptures, to all, that are members of the true Church, in their seueral Congregations? It shall suffice therfore (to shut vp all in one word) that wee meane not, by this title Saint, to note any office of mediation, but onely to testifie our respect, & reuerence of those, whom it pleased our bles­sed Sauiour to choose, and employ in so excellent, and glorious a seruice. In this sense, I desire to be vnderstood whensoeuer I vse that title; and to be excused, in your charitable construction, if, according to that liberty, which auncient, and later Diuines haue lawfully vsed, I sometimes omit it, in naming this Euangelist, or any o­ther of his fellow Apostles or Euangelists.

I may not forget to adioyne to that, which hath been spoken, a fewe things more, which the Scripture hath recorded of him, namely that hee was Matth. 4. 21 the sonne of Zebede, and brother of Iames, called with him to be a Disciple of our Sauiour, & afterward Luke, 6. 14 specially chosen with the same his brother, to be one of the twelue Apo­stles. All these things are so plainely deliuered in the Scripure, that it is enough to name the places, without any more adoe. But of his mother it is needful to speak more particularly; because it is not so cleer, who she was, though it be as certaine: we are then to vnderstand that his mothers name was Salome; which is thus to be pro­ued. Matth. 27. 56 Saint Mathew reporting the history of the wo­men, that stood afar off looking vpon our Sauior, when he was crucified, writeth thus of them. Among whom was Mary Magdalen, and Mary the Mother of Iames [Page 15] and Ioses, and the Mother of Zebedeus children. Now Ze­bedeus children were Iames the elder, as he was called for difference sake, and Iohn. But how shall we knowe that this womans name was Salome? Marke, 15. 40 Saint Marke tells vs so in these words. There were also women which be­held afarre off, among whom was Mary Magdalen, the Mother of Iames the Iesse, and of Ioses, and Salome. Who seeth not, that she, whom the former Euangelist called the Mother of Zebedeus children, the later nameth Salome?

So that our Euangelist was the son of Zebedeus and Salome; vpon him as vpon the rest, Acts, 2. 3. the holy Ghost de­scended, like fiery clouen tongues, induing them with the admirable gift of vnderstanding, and speaking all strange languages. Neither was he only thus qualified with the rest, but as it should seeme of greater account in the Church then most of the rest. Therefore Gal. 2. 9 the Apostle Paul reckons him with Iames, and Peter, as one of the Pillars of the Christian Church. Yea, our Sauiour himselfe in his life time was wont to admit him, as it were into his priuate counsell: Marke, 5. 37 when he went to raise vp Iairus daughter from death, was not Iohn one of the three, whome he made choise of, to take with him? Matth. 17. 1 was not he one of the 3. witnesses of his glorious transfi­guration in the mount? To conclude, in Mark. 14. 33 that his gree­uous agony in the garden, our Euangelist was one, with whom our Sauiour would bee accompanied. And for the person of Iohn this may suffise, vnless perhaps some man look, that I should adde hereunto, as a farder proof of our Sauiours loue to him, the mention of those won­derfull reuelations, wherin the estate of Christs Church vpon earth, to the very end of the world, is liuely and certainely discyphered. As for other things, which are recorded touching him in the Ecclesiasticall histories, I will craue leaue to omit them, because they little, or no­thing concerne the matter, we haue in hand; & I know there are but fewe present, that are able to search the [Page 16] authors, as Acts 17. 11. the men of Beroea did the Scriptures, to see whether those things be so or no.

I come now from the person, to the writing: where first, for the occasion, & time of penning this Gospel, I wil onely say thus much, Euseb. hist. eccles. lib. 3. cap. 21 that it is commonly thought to haue beene written, after the returne of the Euange­list out of banishmēt, from Pathmos; both to supply that which was wanting in the other three, concerning our Sauiours dooings, and sayings, before Iohn Baptist was imprisoned, and also to satisfie the request of the Chri­stians in Asia, especially the Ephesians, that it might be a counterpoison against those heresies, which Cerin­thus, and Ebion had hatched, and whereby the God­head of our Lord, and Sauiour was called in questi­on. Wherein, if any man shall persume to thinke, that our Euangelist hath not taken such a course, as was fit for the refuting, and suppressing of those heresies; let him learne, first that the holy Spirit, of whose enditing this Gospell was, is not to bee taught by the blind con­ceits of proude ignorant men. Then let him farder vn­derstand, that it was not the Euangelists purpose, nor indeed a matter beseeming the authority of him, whom the Lord vsed for his Secretary, to dispute by writing, with prophane, and blasphemous Apostates: but to in­struct the Church of Christ in the truth formerly deli­uered. And this he hath performed with such maiestie, and authoritie, that we may see in him the grace answe­rable to that name Marke, 3. 17, which his Lord and Master gaue him, euen power to thunder. For who is not astonied with admiration of those wonderfull mysteries, concerning our Sauior Christs eternal diuinitie, which this sonne of thunder as it were ratleth out? Therefore did August. Pro­log. in Ioa. Theo­dor. prodromus in distich. the an­tient writers cōpare him to an Eagle, as one that moun­ted vp aboue the pitch of the other three Euangelists, e­uen to the height of the Godhead, and that vnsearcha­ble mystery of the most glorious, and blessed Trinitie.

There is indeede some diuersitie of opinions amongst the Latin Fathers, to which of the Euangelists the other 3. beasts, Ezech. 2. 5 Reuelat. 4. 6. Ezech. 2. 5. Reuel. 4. 6. should be seuerally referred: but it Although Ire­naeus lib. 3 cap. 11. makes Iohn the Lion, and Marke, the Ea­gle. is generally agreed vpon, that the Eagle belongs to Iohn, for the reason aboue named. Art thou then desirous ro vnderstand the great, & high, points of diuinitie? Cast thy selfe vpon the wings of this Ea­gle, who wil cary thee vp, as it were into the bosome of God, and acquaint thee with such matters, as, but by re­uelation from God himselfe, could neuer possibly haue bin discouered, or imagined.

And that we may the more be rauisht with the loue of this holy Gospell, let me put you in minde of that vari­ety, the mother of delight, which is easie to bee seene therein. How sweetly hath our Euangelist tempered, and as it were allayed, the hard points of profound knowledge, with enterlacing of delightfull Histories? If at any time he soare aloft, that he may seem to be al­most out of sight for the height of those admirable my­steries of our Sauiours diuinity, he comes down againe ere long, and feedes our eyes, with making vs see the vse, and comfort of those glorious instructions. And besides this varietie of matter, which shineth in comparing one part of this Gospel with another; there is yet a farther consideration, to the singular commen­dation thereof. Who is there, if hee haue anie sense of Gods mercy in Christ, but takes great pleasure to reade one and the same thing, diuersly recorded by the other three Euangelists? And what meruaile? Seeing it is, euen in prophane histories, a matter of no small vse, and delight, to haue the memorie renewed, and the affection quickned by the varietie of discourse, as it vvere by the diuerse cooking of some one daintie kinde of meat. But our Euangelist, to the diuersitie of handling, hath added also great store of newe mat­ter, not once touched by any one of the other; the [Page 18] LORD hauing reserued, for him, the perfecting of that knowledge, which the rest did beginne and fur­ther.

Manie excellent things are recorded, by Saint Ma­thew, Saint Marke, & S. Luke, concerning the Ser­mons, and miracles of our Sauiour: yet are there but fewe of these proper to any one of them. Only S. Iohn affords vs, as in so short a Treatise, great plenty of new, and vnknowen variety; Piscator in prooem. ad Ioan. 10. Sermons, fowre miracles and that zealous prayer, full of loue and comfort. The sermons (that I may speake a word, or two, of eue­ry one of them, in particular) are these: First, Iob. 3. 1. 2. &c that kinde dialogue with Nicodemus, and those worthy in­structions, concerning regeneration; whereby wee are taught, that our naturall estate is fleshly, and vn­capable of grace, and glorie, till the spirit of God by the waters of the Scriptures, haue bredde in vs a newe and heauenly conception. In the second place follo­weth Ioh. 4. 7. 8. &c. that sweete, and comfortable discourse, with the Woman of Samaria, concerning the water of life: which beeing once receiued into the soule, turnes in­to a spring, that can neuer bee dryed vp, but sends forth continually aboundance of fresh liquor, to coole, and moysten the heart, in all heate of tentations.

Ioh. 5. 19. 20 &c. The next Chap, presents vs with the third Sermon: wherein vpon occasion of the stiffe-necked Iewes mur­muring against our Sauiour, for willing the man, whom hee had cured, hauing beene thirtie-eight yeares bed­rid, to take vp his bedde, and walke, though it were the Sabbath daie, wee haue a glorious assurance of our Lords eternall God-head, and equalitie with God his Father. But that, which exceedes in all heauenly com­fort, is Ioh. 6. 26. 27. the fourth Sermon; in which, our blessed Sa­uiour, as it were thrusts himselfe into our mouthes, to bee eaten, and drunke; giuing vs full assurance, that the eating of his flesh, and drinking of his bloud, [Page 19] that is, belieuing in him, shall feede vs without hun­gring, or thirsting any more, to euerlasting life; which he, according to his Fathers will, and charge, shal most certainely bestowe vpon all them, that by true faith be­come one with him.

The Ioh. 8. 3. 4. &c. fift Sermon affordes vs a worthie example of our Lord, and masters wisedom, and authoritie to discerne and confound the subtill malice of his wil­full enemies. With what diuine iudgement dooth hee looke into the depth of the Pharisies deceite, who sought to entrappe him about the woman taken in a­dulterie? With what admirable discretion dooth hee driue them away, to their perpetuall shame, and dis­honour? With what a maiestie doth he, a little after, conuince and reprooue them, for their wilfull blind­nesse, and proude conceit of the knowledge, they bragged of, but had not? Let vs come Ioh. 10. 1. 2. &c. to the sixt of those Sermons, which our Euangelist only hath recor­ded. In no place doth our Sauiour more plainly avow himselfe to bee the Messiah: where haue wee the like certainty of his care, and loue deliuered? Hee giues his life for his sheep, and casts himselfe into the very iawes of the Wolfe, that his mouth might be stopped: And to the singular comfort of vs, that are not by nature Iews, hee tells vs, that wee also belong to his sheepfold. In­to which when wee once are receiued, and acknow­ledged for sheepe, no power of sinne, Satan, or death, shall bee able to wring vs out of his hands; because the Father, with whom he is in nature all one, is strong­er then all.

The former sixe Sermons containe especially those benefites whereof wee are made partakers by our Sa­uiour Christ in this life: but Ioh. 11. 25. 26 &c the seauenth expresseth our finall triumph, ouer our last and greatest enemie, Death himselfe. Those helpe both to arme vs to the fight, and to encourage, and further vs in fighting; [Page 20] but this crownes vs after victory. If the body shall rise againe to glorie, we may truely, and safelie chal­lenge Death and sa [...]e 1. Cor. 15. 55 Oh Death, where is thy sting? oh Graue, where is thy victorie? For if our bodies bee made immortall, where is the power of Death be­come? Who then can faint in a battaile? the issue whereof will bee so certaine, and happy? especially if hee remember, what gracious promises he hath from God in Ioh. 14. & 15. & 16. the eight Sermon, of the continuall assistance of the holy Ghost. For, howsoeuer, those glorious matters principally concerne the Apostles, yet hath e­uery Christian his interest in them, according to a cer­taine proportion. The Apostles coulde not erre in a­nie matter of Doctrine. No true Christian shall so erre in matters necessarie to his saluation, that hee shall bee cut off from beeing a member of IESVS CHRIST; but shall haue his measure of Instructi­on, Peace, and Comfort, according to the trialls, that his heauenlie Father hath appointed to make of him.

The two last Sermons do especially concerne two of the Apostles; but were written for our learning, and consolation. In Ioh. 20. 26. 27. &c. the former, our Sauiour instruc­teth Thomas, with a milde reproofe of his not belee­uing, and a sensible demonstration of that he doubted of. To which he addes (to our vnspeakeable comfort) that Verse, 29 all they, which hauing not seene, nor felt, as THOMAS then did, yet beleeue, are trewlie bles­sed.

Neyther is Ioh. 21. 15. 16 the later of the two so appropriated to Saint Peter, but that it affordes vs also this ex­cellent lesson; that the strongest proofe of euery Mi­nisters loue to his Lord, and master Iesus Christ, is the faithfull, and carefull feeding and directing of the sheepe, and lambes committed to his charge. And these are the tenne Sermons, which none of the E­uangelists, [Page 21] but Iohn only, hath mentioned. I deny not, that the points of diuinity, contained in them, may bee gathered (more or lesse) out of the other three; but nei­ther are the Sermons recorded by them, nor the matters (therein deliuered) so plainely, and fully handled, as in this Gospell.

Wherefore, as if we come to a Faire to buy any com­moditie, which wee neede or desire, wee content not our selues, to staie in such a shop, or booth, as can shew vs only one peece, and that made vp so close, that wee can hardly looke into it; but seeke thither vvhere wee may haue choise, and see the wares opened to our full view: So let vs make haste to this Gospell, in which many, and so goodly matters are vnfolded, and eue [...]ory bolte, and pleight layd open. As for the miracles, whereof I will say verie little, they are such as are not once pointed at, nor signified by anie other E­uangelist: Who besides Ioh. 2. 3. 4. &c. Saint IOHN, giues vs a­nie the least inkling of water turned into wine, at a marriage, by our Sauiour, CHRIST? Had not Ioh. 5. 5. 6. &c. that famous miracle, by which the man, that had lyen bed-rid xxxviij. yeares, was cured, so that he present­ly rose and carried awaie his bed, been altogether vn­knowen, and vnheard of, if our Euangelist had not committed it to writing? None but he, tells vs of Ioh. 9. 1. 2. &c. the man, that beeing borne blinde, and hauing conti­nued so, manie yeares, had sight giuen him by such a meanes, as in mans reason, was fitter to haue put out his eyes, if hee could haue seene. But hee that made dust, and spittle, can by dust, and spittle, doe what­soeuer pleaseth him. The Ioh. 11. 38. 35 &c. last miracle, is the raysing of LAZARVS from the dead, not as Marke, 5. 42 IAIRVS daughter was restored to life, lying in her bedde, after the breath vvas departed from her, nor as Luke, 7. 15 the VVidowes sonne had life put into him againe, as hee vvas carrying to be buryed; but euen then, when [Page 22] he had continued till the fourth daie in the graue, and, in his most kind sisters iudgement, could not chuse, but stinke.

Admirable and glorious are these miracles, and such as ought to assure vs of his diuine power, who was able to do things so vnpossible to men, and Angels. But as 1. Cor. 2. 2 the holy Apostle Paul preferred the knowledge of Christ crucified, before all other glorious mysteries, because therein (properly) stands the iustification of a sinner: so haue we very good cause to valew Ioh. 17. 1. 2.&c. that lo­uing and feruent prayer of our Sauiour, aboue all his mi­racles whatsoeuer.

For if euer his loue and care of vs appeared in anie thing, hee did, or spake, (except his passion) in that it shines and shews it selfe most cleerely Verse, 20 With what zeale doth hee commend euery one, that at any time beleeues in him, to God his Father? Ver, 21. 22. 23 How doth he re­peate, and double his request to God, that wee may be made one with God? But I may not stand long vpon these points; especially since they are to be expounded at large hereafter, if it please God.

Now the summe of all is this, that seeing it hath plea­sed the Lord, so graciously, and plentifully to vouchsafe vs the certaine knowledge of such excellent mysteries; and that by one so highly in the fauour of our Sauiour Iesus Christ, and so assuredly directed by the holy Ghost: wee in like sort, should bestowe all paines, and diligence, that this knowledge may bee rooted in our hearts, and bring forth abundance of fruite, in our whole conuersation, to the glorie of his Name, and our endlesse comfort, in the same our Lord, and Sauiour Iesus Christ. Neither let it discourage, or of­fend anie man, that our Euangelist was no learned Di­uine, trayned vp in anie Vniuersitie; nor fitted for such a peece of work, by any extraordinary parts of nature, or study. Yea rather let it encourage, and strengthen [Page 23] him in faith; considering how vnpossible it is, that a poore Fisherman, should haue the head to conceiue, and the heart to vtter, such mysteries, with confidence, and assurance, against the iudgement, & liking of almost, all the learned, and mighty of the world. Could these admirable mysteries be of a Fishermans deuising? What is there in Aristotle, Plato, Pythagoras, or any of the great learned Philosophers, so strange, or profound, as manie points, that are common in this Gospell, which of the heathen writers, euer spake so boldly? or with such au­thority, as our Euangelist? how doubtfully and vncer­tainly doth the In Apolog. Socrat. Plato in Timaeo & pas­sim. learnedst of them write, when he coms to deliuer matters, that concern God, & religion? Surely he, that wisely & heedfully considers the discourses of the best Philosophers, touching these points, shal plain­ly discern, that they labored to make other men belieue those things, whereof they were not able to perswade themselues: & rather meant to assay, whether they could drawe men to such opinions, then to enioy the belief of them, as a certaine truth. But our Euangelist thunders out most admirable secrets, & that without all doubting in himself of the truth therof, & threatens assured dam­nation to all them, who refuse to giue absolute credit to whatsoeuer he hath deliuered. What remains then, but that with all assurance, and reuerence, wee addresse our selues to the learning, & doing of those things, which we find to be taught, & commanded in this Gospell?

In the expounding whereof that wee may proceede the more orderly, wee must diuide the whole Gospell into certaine parts, for the helpe both of vnderstan­ding, and memory. But, may some man say, Wil you not first deliuer the generall argument of the booke, and purpose of the Writer? If that, which hitherto hath beene spoken touching these points, either were not vnderstood, or be not remembred, in effect it was this; that our Euangelist vndertook the penning of this [Page 24] Gospell, partly that hee might finish, and perfect the History of our Sauiour Christs dooings, sayings, and sufferings, all the time of his abode heere vpon the earth: partlie, that hee might confirme the Faith­full in the true Doctrine of his God-head, and leaue his Gospell as a preseruatiue against the poyson of blas­phemous hereticks. So was it intended by him, so it is to be vsed by vs, that as hee comfortably speaketh, Ioh. 20. 31 1 We may beleeue that Iesus is the Christ, the Sonne of God; and beleeuing, haue life, through his Name.

Novv let vs returne to the diuiding of this Gos­pell: Whereof wee may reasonablie and fitly make these two parts; the former, Saint Iohns description of [...] Ioh. 1. 29 to he end of the Gospell. our blessed Sauiour IESVS CHRIST, whose Historie hee vndertakes to penne, Ioh. 1. to verse 29 from the begin­ning 2 of the fift Chapter to the 29. ver. of the same: the 1 later, * The History it selfe; in the rest of that Chapter, and all the other to the end of the Gospell. In the description, our Sauiour is set out, partly by Our Sauiour described, 1. by [...]hings propre to in; 2. by the te­timony of Iohn certaine things, that properly belong vnto him, partly by an outward testimony of Iohn the Baptist. The former are His natures; Diuine. ver. 1. 2 Humane, verse 14 either his natures; diuine ver. 1. 2. humane. ver. 14. or His actions; of his Godhead. His mediator­ship. 2 his actions. His actions proper to his Diuine nature, as those of creation ver. 3. or common to both, as those of mediation verse 4. 5. Iohns testimo­ny signified. ve. 6 Exprest. ver. 15 16. &c. Iohn the Baptists testimony is first signified v. 6. Afterwarde exprest verse 15. 16. 19. As for the other verses from the 6. to the 14. and from the 16. to the 29. they containe certaine explica­tions, which the Euangelist ads, vpon occasions; and belong to som one part, or other of the former diuisions, as in due place shall appeare.

The History it selfe is partly The former part of the Hi­story from chap 1. 29. to chap. 19. 31. a discourse of such things as IESVS did, spake, or suffered, before his death, and to the time of his death, from the first Chapter, Verse, 29. to Chapter 19. Verse, thirtie one: The later part from thence to the end. and partlie a report of those matters, that are [Page 25] to be knowen, and beleeued to haue bene done or sayd, after his death, from Chapter 19. verse 31. to the ende of the Gospell. Irenaeus lib. 2. cap. 39. sed prae­cipue, 1. Chemni­tius prolegom. in harmon. cap. 3. Now the historie it selfe, cannot bee better diuided, then Diuision of the history, accor­ding to the yeres of our Sauiours preaching, after his baptisme. according to the yeeres of our Sauiour, after his baptisme, and the beginning of his ministerie. Whereunto it may well bee thought the E­uangelist himselfe, as it were leades vs by the hand, be­cause hee dooeth so particularly mention the feast of Passe-ouer, from yere to yere. The first Passe-ouer, after our Sauiors Baptisme, is named in Iohn 2. 13. the second Chapter; Chap. 5. 1. the second in the fift. For it shall appeare, when I come to expound the place, that there is great reason, why we should take that feast to bee the Passeouer. Chap. 6. 4. The third we haue in the beginning of the 6. Chap. and that in expresse words. Chap. 13. 1. 2 The fourth, and last was (as eue­ry man knoweth) at the time of his death, Chapter 13. So that I thinke it best thus to diuide the whole historie. Our Sauiour at his baptisme, as we learne out of Luke 3. 23 Saint Luke, was newly entred into the thirtieth yeere of his age, and beganne his ministerie with the beginning of that 30. yeere, more or lesse. The 30. yere of Christs age, the first of his prea­ [...]hing: frō cha. 1. 29. to chap. 4. 1. The first part therfore of this Gospell, for the history it selfe, begins at the 19. verse of the first Chapter, and continues to the beginning of the fourth, conteining the 30. yeere of our Sauiours life. The 31 and 2. from thence to chap. 6. 1. There begins the 31. yere, and second part of this Gos­pell; which endeth at Chap. 6. The 32. and 3. to chap. 10. 22 From whence we rec­kon the third part and 32. yeere to Chap. 10. verse 22. The 33. and 4. to chap. 19. 31 where the fourth part, & 33. yere, take beginning, and end with the life of our Sauiour, Chap. 19. 30. But this 33, yere was cut off in the midst, according to Dan. 9. 27. Daniels prophecie reueald vnto him by the Angel Gabriell, that the Messiah, in the midst of the 62. week shuld cause the sacrifice & the oblation to cease. Namely, by offring vp the true sacrifice, his own body, wherof the sacrifices of the law were but shadows, & could haue no lōger vse, nor place when the body it selfe was sacrificed; as the Apostle [Page 26] proueth at large in Heb. 10. 12. the Epistle to the Hebrewes. The things, that hapned after our Sauiours death, and are to be knowen, and beleeued by vs, are either his buriall. Chap. 19. vers. 31. to the end, or his Resurrection ma­nifested, and prooued diuers wayes, Chap. 20. and 21. The particular distributions I reserue to their seuerall places: now to the text.

1. In the beginning was the word, and the word was with Vers. 1. 2. God, and the word was God; The same was in the beginning with God. Cyrill. prolog. in Ioan. All, that come vp out of diuers Shires and Countries to London, enter here into one, and the same Citie, and haue the generall view of it, and the places of account therein: yet are some more easily, and dain­tily lodg'd, and dieted then other, & admitted to a more particular sight of the principall buildings, and goodly ornaments of it: yea perhaps, made acquainted, some what more specially, with the estate, and gouernement thereof. In like manner whosoeuer readeth, or hearetl [...] any one of the foure Gospels; is vouchsafed the know­ledge of the same historie of our Sauiors life & death, & the same doctrine of saluation by him. But he, that bestowes his time and paines in this Gospell of our Euan­gelist Saint Iohn, is as it were entertained in a more stately, and beautifull lodging, and admitted to the hearing, and vnderstanding of the very secrets, both of his nature, and office, touching his owne Being, and our re­demption. This appeares plainely in the very begin­ning of the Gospell, where the great mysteries of Chri­stian religion are deliuered.

These two first verses conteine a description of our Sauiours diuine nature; propounded in the first verse, and repeated in the second. In the former, he is set out to vs by that, which concerneth the nature of his God­head, and his person in the Godhead. For his nature, he is first said to haue beene eternall. In the beginning. Secondly to be God. And the word was God. Touching [Page 27] his person, he is cald the Word, or Sonne. In the begin­ning was the Word. Secondly his distinction from God the Father, and yet his equalitie with God the father is signified, when it is said, that, Hee was with God. In the second, 3. of the fiue points are repeated, iointly in one sentence. That the word was eternall, equall to God, and di­stinct from God. O glorious, and admirable mysteries! Where are they now, that lewdly, and prophanely scoffe at Christian Religion, because forsooth it tea­cheth nothing, but that, which is common, and ordina­rie. Common and ordinarie? So strange, and extraor­dinarie are the secrets of the Gospell, that no man of himselfe, is able to deuise them, by his wit, or to beleeue them with his heart. Take the deepest points of natu­rall Philosophie (so they bee indeed true) and a man of good capacitie, will quickly, and easily be brought to giue assent to the truth thereof: because hee hath in him the light of naturall reason, whereby they may cer­tainely be discerned. But the secrets of Christian religi­on are such, and so farre aboue the reach of humane reason, that although you make a man vnderstand them neuer so perfectly, yet you cannot possibly make him acknowledge them for truth. Truth in philosophie is such, as that reason, if a man suffer himselfe to be dire­cted by it, will enforce him to beleeue it. Trueth in di­uinitie is such, as that the more we hearken to our natu­rall reason, the lesse we are perswaded of the mysteries of religion. It is for him, and for him onely to incline the heart to the beliefe of those secrets, who first reuea­led them to be beleeued.

But what doe I? While I labour to set out the excellencie of the Gospell, by shewing, that it contei­neth many strange, and hidden mysteries, it may bee feared, that I driue men away from the hearing, and rea­ding of it, by the darkeness, and profoundnesse of these secrets. But be not discouraged (brethren) I beseech [Page 28] you. If they were more obscure, and deepe, then they are, yet who could despaire of sounding the depth ther­of, as long as he may haue so skilfull, and able a Pilot? What though they be mysteries? 1. Cor. 2. 10 Yet hath God reuea­led them to vs by his spirit, euen by that spirit, which sear­cheth all things, yea the deepe things of God. Could not hee ( Iohn 11. 37 say the faithlesse Iewes) that opened the eies of the blind, haue caused that Lazarus should not haue died? And can­not hee (may wee confidently say) that Psal. 8. 2 Out of the mouthes of Babes, and sucklings hath ordeined strength, be­cause of his enemies, that he might still the enemie and the a­uenger, subdue the Rebellion of our corrupt reason, & bring it into obedience, to beleeue his holy trueth? Wherefore hath hee reuealed it, but that it might bee knowen, and acknowledged? For your farder incou­ragement, let our Euangelist S. Iohn be taken as an ex­ample. Art thou young? Hieronym. Catalog. script. in Ioann. & ad Dan. cap. 9 & contr. Ioui. lib. 1. So was our Euangelist; when it pleased our Sauiour to call him to the profession of the Gospell. Witnesse the continuance of his life sixty eight yeeres after his Lord, and Masters passion. But thou hast not beene brought vp to learning. What teaching, and education had hee (thinkest thou) who Mark. 1. 19 was trained vp vnder his father a poore fisherman, to get his liuing in the sweate of his browes by fishing? What time could he haue to goe schoole whose main­tenaunce depended on his labour, and to whom all the paines, he could possibly take, would hardly af­ford some small means of a poore liuing? You will say, This fauour was extraordinarie. Yet so that it was com­mon to him with Matth. 4. 18 his brother Iames, and Iohn 1. 44 with two other brethren his Countrimen, Andrew, and Peter. But what speake I of two or foure? Many, and many thousands continually, from time to time, for almost these one thousand and sixe hundreth yeers, haue beene brought to the knowledge, and beliefe of these mysteries. Is the Lords hand now shortened? [Page 29] Doth he not still in mercy vouchsafe vs the meanes of knowledge, and beleeuing? What doe wee then, with these doubtfull thoughts, and vnthankefull hearts? Away with them Away with them; let vs desire, and and endeuour to learne, and Ioh. 6. 45. wee shall bee all taught of God: Yea, with such a teaching, as shall enlighten our vnderstanding, incline our hearts, confirme our memo­ry, reforme our affections, and continually assure vs both of the truth, that we beleeue, and of the constant loue of God to vs, in our perseuerance in beleeuing. With this desire, and confidence, let vs, in the feare of God, addresse our selues to the hearing vnderstanding, and beleeuing of these glorious mysteries.

The first whereof (for I will handle them as they lie in the Text) is this, that The VVord was in the beginning. Wherein, for your better vnderstanding and memory, The course, that is held in these Sermons. I will first giue the sense of the Text, 1. by expounding the words, and 2. deliuering the meaning of the Euan­gelist. 2. then I will handle the doctrine, by 1. proouing the truth of it, and 2. adding exhortation accordingly, where it shall be needfull. And this course (if it please God) I will follow in all the rest of the Gospell.

In seeking out the sense of this Scripture, wee must enquire, 1. who is meant by the VVord; then wee must consider 2. what the Euangeli [...] [...]aith of him. In the former, we must see how this tearm the VVord belongeth to him, of whom it is spoken. Secondly, why that name is giuen him in this place. In the later part, these 2. points are to bee deliuered, why it is said, The VVord was, rather then Hath beene. 2. What is meant by those wordes, In the beginning. The exposition of the words. Who is meant by the Word. The first point, who is meant by the VVord, is easie and manifest: namely he, of whom the whole Gospell is written; Iesus Christ h Epiphan. haercs. 51. August. de haeres. cap. 8. 10 Theodor. haeret. fabul. lib. 2. the Sonne of God, the promised Messiah. Him, the Heretickes Cerinthus, and Ebion, denied to bee God; blasphemously auouching, that he tooke his first begin­ning [Page 30] of his Mother the Virgin Mary. Against their false, and poysonous doctrine, the holy Euangelist tea­cheth the Church, that The word was in the beginning. But let the Text it selfe speake; Is Ioh. 1. 1. not he called the Word, of whom Verse 7. Verse 4. Verse 7. Iohn came to beare witnesse? At the 4. verse, he is said to be the light of men: In the 7. verse, that Iohn came to beare witnesse of the light: of whom did Iohn beare witness, but of the Messiah Iesus Christ? Iohn seeth Ie­sus Verse 29. comming to him, and saith, Behold the Lambe of God, that taketh away the sinne of the world. And a little after, he Verse 33. professeth, that it was reuealed to him by God, which sent him to baptise, that hee, vpon whom Iohn should see the spirit come downe and tarry still on him, was he, which baptiseth with the holy Ghost. Now vpon Iesus Verse 34. did Iohn see the holy Ghost light and settle, and there­upon confidently affirmeth, that he is the Son of God. I might add hereunto that he is the Word, by beliefe in whom, we haue the prerogatiue to bee the Sons of God. Verse 12. And who knows not that he is Christ? Gal. 3. 26. we are al the Sons of God by faith in Christ Iesus; That Ioh. 1. 14 the word which was made flesh, & dwelt among vs, was no other, but Iesus, of whom Iohn bare witnes. But what should I stand hea­ping vp needless proofes in a matter that is out of questi­on? The conclusion of the first point is this, that the Word, of which our Euangelist speaketh, is Iesus Christ It followeth that we should inquire, how this name The word belongeth to our Sauiour. In which inquiry if I should but euen recite the conceits and subtilties of di­uers writers, I should spend all the rest of this hower in that only, and weary my selfe, and you, to smal purpose. Therfore, to make short, I will commend to your farder meditation, some few reasons of this name, which to me seeme the most likely. These reasons cōcern our Sauior, eitheras he is the Son of God, or as he is the mediator be­twixt God & man. For the former, the Nazian. lib. 2 [...] de filio. Athana sius. Hilarius. Ambrosius. Au­gustinus. Cyrillus &c. ancient, & later Diuines, that haue labored to shadow out that vnspeak­able [Page 31] mysterie of the holy Trinitie, haue thought it fit to giue vs a little glimse of this dazling light, by compa­ring God the Father to our vnderstanding, God the Sonne to that, which inwardly our vnderstanding conceiueth. I will endeauour to speake as plaine, as possibly I can, to the capacitie of the simplest. When a man inwardly discour­seth, and reasoneth with himselfe, it is sure, and cuident, that he frameth in his mind a certaine kind of speech, or sentence, and as it were a word without sound, which is called the conception of the mind. If he desire to commu­nicate this conceit of his to other men, hee formeth some outward speech, and words, either vttering them with his mouth, or writing them with his pen. Thus doth he del [...]uer out a Copie of that, the Originall wherof he reserueth still within, where it was first bred. Let vs, according to the weakenes of humane capacity, apply this to the vnsearch­able mystery of the Sonne of God. Confider them reu [...] ­rently, and humbly, that God being from all eternitie infi­nite in wisedome, hath alwayes had some conception in him, as a man hath, when he discourseth in his vnderstan­ding. This conception in man, though it remaine in the soule, yet is not of the substance of the soule. But in God, that is most simple, and without all manner of compositi­on, there can bee nothing that is not of his Diuine sub­stance. This conception of God is the second person in Trinitie, the Sonne of God. Would any know, why the like conception in man, is not the Sonne of man? Let him remember, that the Sonne must be of the same nature with the Father; as our conception is not without vnder­standing; but Gods is of necessitie, because (as I said ere while) there can bee no composition; I adde, nor imperfection, in the diuine Nature. The first reason then, why the Sonne of God is named the Word, is this, that he is begotten by his father in such manner, as our in­warde word, or conception is framed in vs. These things I confesse seeme to mee, somewhat curious, and sub­till, that I can hardly perswade my selfe, they were inten­ded by the Euangelist: neither would I haue aduentured to propound them to you, but for reuerence of Dionys. Roma apud Athanas. Athanas. de de finit. Euseb. de praepar. Euang. lib. 7. cap. 4. Hi­lar. lib 2. de Trinitate &c. very many learned Diuines, who from time to time haue conti­nued this exposition.

But there is more likelihood, that the holy Euangelist, in giuing our Sauiour this name, had respect to his me­diatorship; Origen lib. 1. in Ioan Clem. Epiphan. haer. 73 Chrysost. hom. 2. in Ioan. Euthymius ad hunc locum. either because it is he, that reuealeth the knowledge of the father vnto vs, or for that he was pro­mised to be the Messiah. That the former is a part of our Sauiour Christs office, and hath bene performed by him, from time to time, it hath bin held, time out of mind; and may be prooued, for these later times, out of the Scripture. Who (almost) is ignorant, that Tertul. contr. Iudae. cap. 9. the ancient writers were of opinion, and the later haue receiued it, as it were from hand to hand, that the second person in Trinitie appeared oftentimes to the Fathers in the olde Testament? euen as often, as he, that appeared, is spe­cified by the holy Ghost to be Iehouah. I shall not need to quote the seuerall places. Begin at Gen. 12. 7. and so goe forward: and where you find, that the Lord appea­red to Abraham, Lot, Isaac, Iacob, or any other of the Fathers in the old Testament, there make account you see, & heare the Sonne of God declaring some part of his fathers will to them, to whom he speaketh. If wee come to the New Testament, whom haue wee there preaching, but the Sonne of God? Heb. 1. 1. At sundry times, and in diuers manners, God spake, in the old time, to the Fa­thers, by the Prophets: in the last dayes he hath spoken to vs by his Son: whom also he hath commanded vs to heare. Mat. 3. 17 This is my beloued Sonne, in whom I am well pleased, heare him. And indeed whom else should wee heare? since Ioh. 1. 18 No man hath seene God at any time: but the onely begotten Son, which is in the bosome of the Father, hee hath declared him Fitly then may hee bee called the VVord, who is the Em­bassador of God his Father, to make his will knowen to mankind, by word of mouth, in his owne person, and by the ministery of them, whom it pleaseth him to employ to that purpose. To make this opinion the more likely, Ioan. Maldon. ad hunc locum. a popish Interpreter, in his Commentarie vp­on this place, confidently affirmeth, that the Chalde [Page 33] Paraphrast translates Iehouah by this word Memar, [...] which signifieth a word, as often as there is any menti­on of Gods speaking to man, helping man, or being conuersant with him: but he neither brings example of it, nor quotes any place; onely hee boldly auoucheth, that the learned shall finde it to be so euery where, and the vnlearned must take it vpon his word, and know­ledge. They, that will, may giue credit to his report: but I am sure, he, that will compare the Originall He­brew, and the Chalde Paraphrase together, shall not finde one place in 20. so translated, if any at all be. It is vsuall with the Paraphrast, to put ^w, for Iehouah, not Memar. I thought good to note this by the way, that all men may know what credit such authors deserue, vpon their word; and yet he is otherwise one of the best in­terpreters, that I haue read of the Papists. But though the Chalde Paraphrast doe not alwayes, nor perhaps often, or euer, so translate the word Iehouah: yet he puts Memar sometime, where God, perchance the second person, is signified. Gene. 22. 16 By my selfe haue I sworne, saith God to Abraham; The Hebrew is so, and so the Apostle ex­poundeth it; Heb. 6. 13. when God made the promise to Abraham, because he had no greater to sweareby, hee swore by himselfe. Here the Paraphrast hath Binenni, by my word. In an other place, where the Lord assureth Iacob, that Gene. 28. 15 he will be with him, and keepe him, the Chalde hath, My word shall be thy helpe. A gaine when Laban pursued Iacob, Moses tels vs, that Gene. 31. 24 God came to Laban the Aramite in a dreame by night & said. The Chalde saith Memar, The, or rather a word came from the face of God. But none of these places, vnles perhaps the 2. need to be, or may be expounded of the 2. Person in the Trinity, our Sauiour Iesus Christ.

There remaines the last, & not the most vnlikely rea­son, why our Sauiour should be called the Word: name­ly because he was so often spoken of, & promised by the Lord. Now a promise, as in our ordinary speech, so in [Page 34] the Scripture, is cōmonly called a word: & the septuagint translate it [...], which is the name, our Euangelist here vseth. Psal. 105. 8. He hath remembred his couenant ( [...]. his word) that he made to a thousand generations. [...]. And in Psal 119. 25. 119. Psal. often, Quicken me according to thy word. Verse 49. Remember the promise, or word made to thy seruant. Verse 65. Thou hast dealt gra­tiously with thy seruant, according to thy word. Verse 74. I haue tru­sted in thy word. Verse 76. According to thy word, to thy seruant. Where the Chalde hath the very word [...] Memar. So psal. 130. 5. Ps. 130. I haue trusted in thy word. The main promise thē be­ing the Messiah, & that indeed, wherupon al other, that are truly blessings, & fauours, depend; it is no meruaile, that the Iewes, should speake ordinarily of our Sauiour, as of him, that was promised, by the name word; or that the holy Ghost, should direct our Euangelist to make choice of that title for him, by which the Iews that tran­slated the old Testament, out of Hebrew into Greeke, so often expressed the promises of God.

Hereupon it followes, that although diuers Tertullian. de Trinit. saepe. Ci­pria. ad Quirin. lib. 2. cap. 3. 6. Hilar. de Trinit. lib. 2. Erasm. Ca­loni. Beza. &c. ancient, & later Diuines haue translated the Greek by the Latin, Sermo, speech: yet it seemes better to cal it Verbū, the word. For a mans promise is not tearmed his speech, but his word. But this reasō of the name is excepted against, by Maldonatus ad hunc locum. a learned Papist, as well because of the authors therof, who, in his Pharisaicall censure, are heriticks, as also for that it hath in it no liklihood of truth; if al, that he speaks, be oracles. Let his slander go: let vs heare his reason If the Son (saith he) be called the word, because he was promised; in the beginning he was not the word, because he was not pro­mised. As if our Euangelist said, He was the word in the be­ginning, & not rather The word was in the beginning: that is, as I will say anon, whē I deliuer the sense of the Text, He that was promised for the Messiah, had already his being, when all created things began first to be. Therfore wee may boldly cōclude, that this respect of the promise is either the true, or (at least) a likely reason of the name, whosoe­uer [Page 35] mislike, or cōdemn it. If any mā be of opiniō, that the Greek should rather be trāslated, Wisdome, or Reason, thē word; as indeed it signifieth the one, as well as the other, Michael de Palatio. in. Ioan. cap. 1. enarrat 1. we may think, that S. Iohn, in this place, alludes to that in the Prou. 8. 22. Prouerbs, where the Sonne of God is brought in vnder the name of wisdom, speaking in this sort; The Lord possessed me in the beginning of his way, before his works of old; I was set vp from euerlasting, from the beginning, before the earth, &c. This may seeme the more likely, because as here, so there also, after the description of the word & wis­dome, followes a discourse of the creation. Here it is said, that Ioh. 1. 3. all things were made by the word. prou. 8. 27. There Wisdome af­firmes, that she was present, whē God prepared the heauens, & set the compasse vpon the deepe. Neither only was she, with him, but as Verse. 30. a nourisher, she maintained & preserued all things: which effect of preseruing, & nourishing, diuers interpreters thinke to be signified in this chap. by those words, Iohn 1. 4. In it was life. All which notwithstanding, I had rather follow the translatiō, which is most generally re­ceiued, especially since it is grounded vpon such great likelihood of reason, & that the Son may wel be signified to be the wisdom of God, because he is the word of God, both conceiued in the Father, as the word, & Isai. 9. 6. reuealing to vs the wisdome of the Father, & promised, 8. Cor. 1. 30. & made to be wise­dome to vs. Therefore then is the Messiah fitly called the Word, because he is in God, as our inward conceptiō in vs; because he hath declared, vnto vs the wil of his Father, and whatsoeuer else it seemeth good to the Lord to acquaint vs withal, as it is manifest in this Chapter; Iohn 1. 18. No man hath seene God at any time: but the only begotten Son, which is in the bosome of the Father, he hath declared him. And lastly, because he is the promised seede; of whom, as it is also in y Iohn 1. 45 this Chapter, Moses and the Prophets did write.

Some man perhaps will inquire yet farder, why hee is called simply The word, and not the word of God; To whō Theodorus Mopsuest. in Cate. graec. we may shortly, & truly answere, that it was meete to leaue out that addition, for distinction sake. [Page 36] For it is well knowen to all men, that by the word of God in the Scripure, either some commandement from God, or some reuelation, or some part of the doctrine of the Scripture, or some such thing is signified. Therefore, that the Messiah might be vnderstood to be here spokē of, it was conuenient, and in a maner necessary, to call him the word, and not the word of God; yet I would be loth to stand too much vpon this reason, because our Euan­gelist Reuel. 19. 13 other where doubts not to call him the word of God.

But you will aske, why the Euangelist would call him the VVord, and not rather The Sonne of God, or The Sonne. was hee affraide ( Basilius homil. in haec verba. Leontius incom­ment. Theop. Euthym. ad hunc locum. as some thinke) Least if hee had named him Sonne, some men, as the Arians afterward did, would haue conceiued grossely, that He must needs haue a mother, as well as a father; & that He was part of his fathers nature, and such absurde, and blaspemous fan­cies, as the Turkes Alcoran is stuffed withall? If hee would not call him the Sonne, yet hee needed not haue named him the word, seeing hee had such choice of titles to giue him; The wisedome of the Father, the Light, the Brightnesse, and many other of the like kind, as is plaine in the Scripture. It is likely therefore, that there was some especiall reason of that choise. What might that be? Surely it is not vnlike, that the Messiah was commonly so tearmed among the Iewes; or that the second person in the Trinitie was knowen best to them, by that name. And this later point may the ra­ther be credited, because Philo. in lib. quod deter. infid. meliori & de opific. mundi. Philo a Iew, and no Chri­stian, who liued within the first hundred yeeres after our Sauiours birth, neuer cals the second person by the name of the Sonne, but as our Euangelist heere dooth, [...], The VVord. Hence also it was, perhaps, that Mercur. Tris­meg. in Piman­dro. Plato in Timaeo. Cicero de vniuersitate rerum. the old Philosophers, who fetched their know­ledge out of Egypt, speake of a second nature, which they tearme [...]; yet (I think) they rather conceiued [Page 37] him to be Reason, or VVisedome, then the VVord, as a man may see in their writings. But the promise of the Messi­ah, being so often renewed, & his comming, according to promise so continually, & earnestly looked for, if I say it be likly, that the Iews knew him generally by that name, I suppose I shal say nothing, which may not rea­sonably bee coniectured. It may bee also thus, if the Chalde Paraphrast (as some affirm he did) vsually tran­slated the word Iehouah, where he thought it belōged to the second person, by Memar a word, the Iews learned of him by the direction of their Rabbins, to call the Messiah by the name of the VVord. But I doe not cer­tainely knowe whether euer hee so translate, or no; that he doth not alwayes, I am very sure: and hee, that will, may see as much, in many places of Genesis, I sai, and Ieremie: I forbeare to recite the particulars, because it were to small purpose for this Auditorie. We see then of whom the Euangelist speakes; let vs hearken what he saith of him.

The Word was; where partly ignorance, and partly curiositie hath bred a needlesse, and fruitlesse question: which though I might not well omit, yet, I will speake as little of it, as possibly I can. The Euangelist saith, Hee was; why not Hath beene? If the question were of the English, euery man could, and would readily aunswere, that it were no good speech: because Hath beene is neuer spoken, but of that which hath an end of being, vnlesse we adde some limitation of time; as when we say, He hath bene there these two howers, dayes, moneths &c. But the Greeke admits no occasi­on of any question in this case. For [...] the Verbe which our Euangelist vseth, hath no such difference of tense, or time; but whether the matter, or thing, you speake of, be as it was, or be not, the same word may bee vsed. I will go no farther then this Gospell for proofe of that I say. Ioh. 1. 44. Philip was of Beth-saida: Iohn. [...]. 1. There was a man of [Page 38] the Pharises named Nicodemus. Ioh. 4. 6. 46 There was Iacobs VVell. There was a certaine Ruler. Iohn 5. 35. Iohn was a burning, & shining Candle. But what name I so many Patriarchs? Euery Chapter affords proofe sufficient. Wherewithall wee may obserue, that our English hath also the like li­bertie in the word VVas, as the examples I alleaged euidently shew. Indeede the Latine may seeme to giue some warrant, for the moouing of this questi­on; because there are Erat, suit. two diuers wordes of the same verbe vsed by the Translater in this verse of our Sauiour, and in the sixt of Iohn Baptist. But neither is there any such difference obserued by good Latine Authors in the vse of the words; and the tran­slater, it should seeme, intended no such thing. For in another place, where the same word is in the Originall, and the same matter handled, by the E­uangelist, he puts the word fuit (which heere hee v­seth) of Iohn; and not erat, which wee haue in thi first verse, of our Sauiour Christ. Ioh. 1. 1. That, which wa [...] from the beginning; fuit, saith the vulgar Latine. Where­fore leauing this conceit, as more subtill, then true let vs content our selues, to vnderstand, that the holy Ghost meanes to teach vs by this word, that euen then when all creatures began to bee, the word was, or had his being already. Which I so speake, as not inten­ding thereby to preiudice Origen. in di­uer. hom. 2. Chry­sost. in Ioan. hom. 3. their iudgement, who are of opinion, that the worde it selfe may learne vs in this place to consider, that the VVo [...]d was eternall. On­ly I take it to be plaine, that no such thing can necessari­ly be drawen out of the nature of the word [...]. VVas.

But when was this VVord? In the Beginning, saith our Euangelist. Here groweth a new question, what should be meant by The Beginning. Clem. Alex­andr. in pro­trept. Origen. in Ioan. tract. 1. Cyril. in Ioan. lib, 1. cap. 1. Greg. Nystem. [...]d Simplicium. The Father, as some think, in whom the Son was, and is. But the word Beginning is neuer so taken; and it is not fit, except necessity require it, to giue a strange sense to a word often vsed. And ther­fore [Page 39] wee may not admit Orig. in Ioan. lib. 1. Athanas contr. Arian. quod verbum e [...] Deo sit. that second interpretation, which by the beginning vnderstandeth God, who is no where so called in Scripture. Both these expositions, for the matter of them, are true, but not warrantable by this place. There are two other explications of this word, which agree for the sense of the place, that our Sauiour eternall being is here signified; though they differ much, in the meaning of the word it selfe. The for­mer will haue the beginning to bee taken for Eternitie; the later referres it to the first creation of all thinges. Against the former, some take exception, because they say the Word Beginning is neuer found in that sense, in the Scripture. But that may well bee doubted of; because it is sayd of our Sauiour, that Iohn 6. 64. Hee knew from the beginning, who they were that beleeued not, and who should betray him; Now this he knew from all eternitie. For Hb. 13 nothing is hidde from him, who is God euerla­sting: but all thinges are alwayes open in his sight. Therefore the word may sometimes bee taken for eternitie: But that will not serue the turne, vnlesse wee can shew some place, wherein it must necessarily bee so vnderstood. Such as that of Iohn is not: nay ra­ther wee are directed by the Euangelist himselfe in a­nother place, to conceiue, that by the beginning the calling of the Apostles is signified. Iohn 16. 4 These things sayd I not vnto you, from the beginning; that is, I neuer tolde you of this matter, from the first day of my being conuersant with you. That place Colos. 1. 18 to the Colossians, Hee is the beginning, and the first begotten of the dead, may also rea­sonably, and more fitly bee referred to our Sauiour, as mediator, then as God euerlasting. So can not that in the Reuelation, where it is certaine by the first, and last part of the verse, that the Lords euerlasting being is descri­bed. Reuel. 1. 8. I am A and Ω the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come. Heere though beginning do not, of it self, note eternity; yet with [Page 40] the ending it doth. There is yet a plainer, and certainer Text to put the matter out of doubt, where 2. Thess. 2. 13 the Apo­stle saith, that God hath from the beginning chosen the Thessalonians to saluation. What is from the beginning, but as the same Apostle speaketh in the like manner in Ephes. 1. 4 another place, Before the foundation of the world? It cannot therefore bee doubted, but that by The beginning, Eternitie is sometimes signified; yet it is not plaine, or certaine that it must so bee conceiued in this place. But wee may reasonably perswade our selues, that if our Euangelist had meant to haue the beginning taken for Eternitie, hee would haue said, as the holy Ghost dooth in the Scripture, [...] From the beginning. For indeed it is no fit speech, to say of any thing, which wee woulde note to be eternall, that it is in Eternitie, but that it hath beene, or was from Eter­nitie. Neither if wee vnderstand Eternitie by the be­ginning, will this speech of Iohn suite so well witl that of Moses, Gen. 1. 1 In the beginning God created hea­uen and earth. To which it is out of question our E­uangelist alludes, and in which Eternitie cannot by any meanes be signified.

What else then can be meant by the beginning, bu [...] the first creation of all things? For what can any man more easily, and readily vnderstand, when hee reades or heares, In the beginning, then the beginning of time at the creation of the world? Which also, the rather to direct vs to this interpretation, the Euangelist presently addes, Ioh. 1. 3 By him were all things made; so shall Moses and Iohn agree, and our Sauiour most fitly be kept out of that lumpe in the creation, within which the blasphemy of heretickes would include him: yea more then that, hee shall easily be conceiued to haue beene from all eterni­ty, if he bee excepted from the generall creation, wher­in all things, that are not eternall, had their first begin­ning.

Whereas then our Euangelist sayth, In the beginning The sense of the Euangelist. was the word, it is all one, as if hee should thus haue spo­ken; VVhen all things, that haue not an euerlasting being, of their owne nature began first to be, by the almighty power of God, the Creator, who made them of nothing, euen then, hee that is the eternall VVord of the Father, hee that from time to time hath declared the will of the Father, he, that was appointed, and promised by the Father, to be the Messiah, bad already an euerlasting being, not by the will of a superior power, as a thing created, but by the necessity of his owne di­uine nature, through the eternall generation of God his Fa­ther. This is that, which by our Euangelist is implyed in those fewe words. This is that, which it concernes all the faithfull to beleeue, without doubting: This is that which blasphemous ^c Ebiō, & Cerinthus denied. This Epiphan. Au [...]. Theodoret. vbi supra. is that, wherby their wicked heresie is condēned. Thou tellest vs (wretched hereticke as thou art) that IESVS CHRIST had no Being, till he was conceiued in the wombe of his mother the blessed Virgine. The holy Ghost sayth, He was in the beginning. Thou wilt haue him younger then Mary; the holy Ghost makes him elder then Adam. In a word thou wouldst perswade vs, that hee had his first beginning almost 4000. yeares after the world was created: the H. Ghost enioyns vs to beleeue, that he had neuer had any beginning. For euen then already he was in perfect being, when all things, that had any beginning, became something of nothing, of not being began to be.

Shall I neede to note the doctrine of this text? Who sees not, that it teacheth vs the eternity of our Sauiour Christ? Shall wee suite it with other places of Scrip­ture? The word of the holy Ghost in any one place is all-sufficient. But let vs yeelde somewhat to hu­mane weakenesse; that by the mouth of two or three witnesses, all excuse of infidelitie may be vtterly cut off. Hearken then what he saith in Reuelat. 1. 8 the Reuelation. I am [Page 42] A & Ω, the beginning and the ending, sayth the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come. Doth it trouble thee, that is, was, is to come, note a kind of succession in being? If in our weakenesse wee could otherwise haue conceiued of euerlastingnesse, the holy Spirit of God would haue spoken otherwise. But who then should haue vnderstood him? Surely, not euery poore soule, whome hee purposed to teach by the Scripture. But if mysteries delight thee, listen to our Sauiour in Ioh. 8. 58. this Gospell. Before Abraham was, I am; what is this, I am, before hee was? I vnderstand, I was, before hee was or before him. And, I am before him: but I am be­fore hee was, passeth my vnderstanding. Yet by this, our Sauiour would teach vs; that in respect of his na­ture, he is alwayes one, and the same; not like vs, first Infants, then Children, afterwardes youthes, in the strength of our age and life, men, in the decay of it old men, and at last no men. Thy yeeres ô my God ( Psal. 102. 24 saith the Prophet) are from generation to generation. Thou hast afore time laide the foundation of the Earth, and the 25 Heauens are the workes of thy hands. They shall perish, but thou shalt indure: euen they all shall waxe olde as dooth a 26 garment; as a Ʋesture shalt thou change them, and they shall bee changed. But thou art the same, and thy yeeres 27 shall not fayle. That this is spoken of our Sauiour Christ, Heb. 1. 10 the Apostle sheweth, by proouing his God-head, from that place.

To speake truely, and properly, we can not say of God either that Hee was, or that hee is to come, but onely that He is. Therfore when Moses would needes knowe his name, God answered, Exod. 3. 14 So rather, then by the future. I AM that I AM. Also hee sayd, Thus shalt thou say to the children of Israell; I AM hath sent mee to you. It is hee onely, that is; as well because hee is of himselfe, without dependance vpon anie other, as also for that hee is absolutely, without any change in himselfe whatsoeuer. As for vs, wee so [Page 43] are, that, in a manner, wee are not; because we neuer continue any time in the same estate, without some al­teration. If we could as plainly see, and as certainely iudge of the inward parts of a man, as wee can of his outward countenance, we should soone perceiue, that hee is continually waxing, or waning: so that hardly can we thinke of any man that He is, but while wee are thinking, hee is not in the ende of our thought (as short a moment as it is) altogether the same, that he was in the beginning thereof. But our most glorious Sa­uiour IESVS CHRIST, being eternall, without begin­ning, without middle, without end, is alwaies most per­fect [...]y the same; was, is, and is to come, are in him without all kind of difference, though to our weake capacitie, it hath pleased him to vouchsafe so to speake of him­selfe, for our better instruction. Come now, thou that desirest to be for euer, ioyne thy selfe to him, of whose daies there shall neuer be end. They, that by faith be­come one with the Lord Iesus, shall be sure to bee one with him in continuance: look not back what thou hast not been heretofore, but look forward what thou shalt be hereafter. Father Ioh. 17. 24 (saith the sameour Sauiour) I will that they, which thou hast giuen me, be with me euen where I am. But where was he, when he spake this? In his hu­mane nature vpon earth. And there the Disciples at that time were, as well as he. But by his God-head, he was euen then also in heauen, where hee will haue all to be with him, who beleeue in him, Ioh. 3. 16 that they may not perish, but haue life euerlasting.

This testimony of the Euangelist concerning our Sauiours eternity, was sufficient to stop the mouthes of those first Heretickes, and to settle the faithfull in the true beliefe therof. But Satan (not discouraged by this fayle) Anno. 290 som 200. years after, stirred vp the turbulent & pestilent spirit of Arius, a man of Alexandria in Egypt, to call the Godhead of our Sauiour again in question. It is [...] [Page 46] Father. The Word, that became flesh, shewed him­selfe by his glory, to be the Sonne of God. Is it not the VVord, of whom it followeth; The onely begotten Sonne, Verse 18. which is in the bosome of the Father, hath manifested God Verse 3. vnto vs? By the VVord all things were made. By the Sonne ( Heb. 1. 1. 3 sayth the Apostle) He made the world. And againe, Col. 1. 16 By him were al things created, which are in heauen & which are in earth. What neede more words? Our Euangelist sheweth through the whole Gospel, that he speaketh of no other word, then the Sonne of God. These things are written ( Ioh. 20. 31 sayth hee) that ye might beleeue that IESVS is the CHRIST, the Sonne of God.

Leaue we therfore these shifting blasphemies, & let vs labour to settle our harts in the assured belief of our Sa­uiour Christs diuine eternity. To which purpose, it shalbe sufficient for vs to remēber that, which we heard ere while out of the Psal. 102. 27 Psalme. Thou art the same, and thy yeares shall not faile: & that testimony of Christ himself, Reuelat. 1. 8 I am A & Ω the beginning, and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, euen the Al­mighty. What can the sottish heathē, the stubborn Iews, or the brutish Turks now say? Come ye that deride, and persecute the true religion of the Lord Iesus; you great wisards, that despise all men as barbarous, in compari­son of your selues. Are not you they that worship stocks and stones, instead of the true God? Are not the Parents of your greatest, and auntientest gods, easily to be kno­wen, & named? I am ashamed to speak it, but your folly wil not suffer it self to be hidden; Tertullian in Apolog. cap. 25 Were not the sepul­chers, & graues of your soueraign god Iupiter, & the rest to be seene, for many years, by all men, when you sot­tishly honoured them for gods in heauen, whose carca­ses lay rotting amongst you in the earth? But our God is eternall, without beginning, without middle, without ending. He became man in time; he was God before all time: he died & was buried. But he ouercame death, & [Page 47] rose again, & ascended (in his body) visibly vp to hea­uen. Look not my brethren, that I should discourse at large of these matters; I haue bin too long already, and I shall haue fitter opportunitie hereafter, if God wil. Let the Iewes with all their malice, & the Romans with all their power, deuise what vntruths, & practise whatsoe­uer cruelty they are able; our God sitteth in heauen, and laugheth them to scorne, causing his religion to conti­nue in despight of both, and thereby assuring vs of his owne eternall being for euer and euer.

As for the Mahometan; though hee be incredibly shamelesse in lyes, & blasphemies: yet hee is driuen to confesse, & that often, in his sensless Alcoran, that Iesus our God, was holy & vertuous, wonderful in miracles, & a great Prophet of the Lord. Would the wretch Ma­homet haue yielded so much to our Sauiour, if euidence of truth, cōtinued so powerfully, had not wrūg it out of him? But how could he be holy, or not most prophane, if hee made himselfe the Sonne of God, and were not? we should be as voide of sense, as his absurde Alcoran, if wee should (vpon his words) doubt of the holy E­uangelists credite and doctrine, that had been so many hundreds of yeares continued, and confirmed by so many glorious Martyrs with their bloud, and maintai­tained against all the wisdom, & power of the world be­fore Mahomet was euer heard of. And yet what brings he, but ignorance, and impudency against the eternitie of our blessed Sauiour? All he can say is this, that if God haue a Son, he must needes haue a Wifeto; not vnder­standing, in his wilful ignorāce, that the Lord God hath no more neede of a Wife to the begetting of his Sonne, then of hands to the making of this world. Yea, if comparison might bee made, it is easier for God to be­get a Sonne like himselfe, which is naturall to him; then to make the World, which dependeth vpon his will, and hath no other necessity of being. Thus wee [Page 48] are faine to speake, according to our poore vnderstan­ding: wee knowe that God hath a Sonne; how, him­selfe knoweth.

As for the Iewes, we will send them to be taught of their owne country-man Iohn the Baptist; whome they worthily magnifie, as a man sent from God. He it is Ioh. 1. 27 (sayth Iohn, of our Sauiour) that commeth after me, which was before me, whose shoo-latchet, I am not worthy to vnloose. But if their owne long continued and greeuous calami­ty, with the destruction of their owne City and Temple, in which they trusted, be not of force to draw them frō the blasphemous errors of their wicked ancestors, sure­ly there is no possibility for any man to perswade them. Therefore we will leaue them to the gracious mercie of God, to be conuerted to the truth, in his good time, Phil. 3. 21. By that mighty power, by which he is able to subdue all things vn­to himselfe; and commend our selues to his fatherly blessing, that we may bee strengthened in faith against all the assaults, and practises of Satan, and his instru­ments, and may neuer doubt of the eternity of our most glorious Sauiour; but alwayes ascribe to him with his Father, and the holy Spirit, one true, immortal, inuisible and onely wise God, all glorie, power, obedience, and thanksgiuing, for euer and euer, Amen.

IT is generally thought, and I thinke not vn­truly, that the blasphemous heresies of Anno, 85 E­bion, and Anno 95 Cerinthus (who denyed that our Sauiour was God, or had anie being, before he tooke flesh of the holy Virgine his mo­ther) was one especiall occasion of writing this Gos­pell. To root out that impious conceit, and to establish the faithful in an assured beliefe of our blessed Sauiours eternall God-head, our Euangelist, truly, and with A­postolicall authority affirmeth, that the VVord was in the beginning. Neither doth he content himselfe therewith­all: but for the further instruction of them that be­lieue, hee addes, that The VVord was with God, and was God, yea that The same VVord was in the beginning with GOD.

The first point of our Sauiours eternitie, was ex­pounded (as it pleased God to enhable mee) in my for­mer exercise: I am now (by his gracious assistance) to goe forwarde with that, which followes; The VVord was with God. Wherein for the words themselues, first wee must enquire, what is meant by God, then what the Euangelist woulde teach vs, when hee sayth, The VVord was with God.

1. Orig. in Ioa. lib. 2. Chrysost. in Ioan. hom. 2 God, when the word is properly taken, not appli­ed to a creature, signifieth either the Diuine nature in all three persons, The Father, the Sonne, and the holy Ghost, or only the first of the three, The Father. Examples of the former are in euerie leafe, and page of the Scrip­ture.

Let vs alleage one or two out of this Gospell. Ioh 4. 24 God is a spirit. Not God the Father onely: but the Sonne also, and the holy Ghost. For this spiritualnesse is a proper­tie of the diuine nature, not of anie one person there­in: else should not the other two bee spirituall. The Ioh. 16. 2. time shall come, that whosoeuer killeth you, vvill thinke, he doth God seruice. Surely no man, that killeth Christians, for beleeuing in CHRIST IESVS, can thinke hee doth seruice to the Trinity. For our Sauiour CHRIST is one of the three. But the idolatrous heathen, and the superstitious Iewes make accompt, that they performe acceptable seruice to God, namely to the diuine nature, when they destroy them, that acknowledge the three persons to bee one God, or deny that there are more Gods then one, or worshippe our Sauiour Christ as God.

Of the later, the old Testament affords vs few exam­ples or none, the new very many: and to make short, wheresoeuer God and the Sonne or Iesus Christ are mē ­tioned together, there by God, the Father is signified. Ioh. 3. 16 So God loued the world, that he gaue his only begotten Sonne; God? what? not the diuine nature. For that hath no Son [Page 51] to giue: else should the second person haue a Sonne, and the third to; because both the Sonne and the holie Ghost are the diuine nature or God, no lesse then the Fa­ther. But euery mans owne reason teacheth him, that the Sonne is the Fathers Sonne. So that by God, which gaue his Sonne, God the Father is vnderstood. The same Father is also meant by the name of God, when hee is mentioned with Christ. Rom. 1. 8 I thanke my God (sayth the Apostle) through IESVS CHRIST, euen him, whom in the next Verse before he had called God our Father; Verse, 7 Verse, 9 and whose Sonne in the ver. following he maketh Iesus Christ. God is my witnessewhome I serue with my spirit in the Gospell of his Sonne. Of the same kinde are all those places, where there is any mention of praying to God, in, or thorough CHRIST. For, to him hath our Sauiour taught vs to pray. Luke, 11. 2 VVhen yee pray saie, Our Father vvhich art in heauen, Ioh. 16. 23 VVhatsoeuer yee aske the Father in my name hee will giue it you.

Now let vs see, in whether of these two significations the word God is to bee taken, in this place. Surelie, not in the former, because then The VVord should haue beene with himselfe: which is no reasonable speech. For who vnderstands not, that euery thing which is said to be with an other, is diuerse from that, with which it is sayde to bee? Therefore if the VVord vverewith God; the VVord was not God. But the Euangelist directly auoucheth, that the VVord vvas God: What remaines then, if by God wee will haue the Diuine nature to bee meant, but that wee must confesse, there are two Gods? The Ʋ Ʋord, and hee, vvith vvhom the Ʋ Ʋord vvas. But it is certaine in Religion and reason, that there is but one God. And therefore God may not at any hand bee conceiued in this place to bee put for the Diuine Nature or Godhead. If it seeme to any man, that the VVord may bee sayd to be with God, though it be God, as a mans soule is said to be with him, whose [Page 52] soule it is; August. de Trinit. lib. 6. cap 2. I must desire him to consider, that the rea­son is not alike. For the soule is part of the man, with whome it is sayd to be; but the word is not part of the diuine nature: which is most simple, and free from all kinde of composition.

It is easie then for any man to conclude, that God in this part of the Verse, is the first person in the Trinitie, God the Father. And that it may the rather appeare, vnto vs, that wee rightly vnderstand and expound the Euangelist, we haue his owne warrant; where speaking of the same our blessed Sauiour, hee sayth of him, that 1. Ioh. 1. 2 Hee was with the Father: I forbeare to enlarge the mat­ter. Euery man may easily perceiue that our Euange. list handles the same point in both places, that hee need not doubt, but that God, [...] with whom the Word was, is God the Father. What shall we say then of that collec­tion, that some make vpon the Article, which is vsed by the Euangelist, in the Greeke? He saith not simply, God (say these men) but The God, giuing vs thereby to vnderstand, that our Sauiour was with the true God; not with him who was God, but onely by fauour, and not also by nature. That, they say concerning God, is true and certaine. But we haue learned, that the per­son is there signified, and not the nature. And there­fore it coulde not bee the Euangelists meaning to note vnto vs the truth of the diuine nature by that article.

Neither (I thinke) was there euer any heretick found, who denied that God, with whome the word is said to haue bin, was God by nature; what thē meaneth the ar­ticle? Doubtless, either it is added only according to the custome of the greeke tongue, wherof there are infinite examples in all authors, and namely in the new Testa­ment; or els (if any thing were intended by it) the Euan­gelist meant to shew, that in this clause of the sentence he put the word God in another sense, then hee doth in the clause following, where the article is omitted: but I rather [Page 53] perswade my selfe, that there is nothing intended ther­in by the holy Ghost; but the manner of speech obser­ued, according to the nature of the language.

Some man perhaps will yet farder demand, why the Euangelist did not speak plainly, as he meant, and call him the Father, rather then God. To whom I answer, that the Euangelist, hauing in the former part named The VVord, and not The Sonne, doth here more fitlie mention God, then the Father. For so the nature of the things seemes to require; The Sonne of the Father, the Word of God. Besides, it helpes that elegancie, which the holy Ghost vseth in this place, making the last word of the former clause, the first of the later. In the be­ginning was the VVord, and the VVord was with God, and God vvas the VVord. For so lie the words in the Greeke, whereof anone. Now if in the second clause, hee had sayde, The VVord vvas vvith the Father, the grace of the speech had beene lost, because he could not haue re­peated the word in the beginning of the clause, that fol­lowes. For it cannot be truely said, that the Father is the VVord, or the VVord the Father: but to say, God vvas the the VVord, is a true and an elegant speech. What if we adde hereunto, that in the olde Testament, where the Messiah is spoken of, there (ordinarily) not the Father, but God is named? when the first inkling of the pro­mise was giuen, who gaue it but God? Then Gen. 3. 14. 15 the Lord God said to the Serpent. Come to the expresse making of the promise, to which the holy Ghost calls vs, Rom. 4. 13. 16 Ga [...]. 3. 14. 16 when he speaks of the promise by name, and which Gal. 3. 8 the A­postle Paul tearmes the preaching of the Gospell: Was it not God that said to Abraham, Gen. 12. 1. 3 In thee shal all the families of the earth be blessed? To be short look from the begin­ning of Genesis to the end of Malachy, and see how of­ten you finde any distinct mention of the first person, vnder the name of the Father. Therefore he that made choise of such a name for our Sauiour CHRIST, as [Page 54] hee was well knowen by, among the Iewes, could not doe better, then by the like wisdom, so to speak of God the Father, as his speech might bee best approued, and vnderstood.

God then, in this second part of the verse, signifies The Father. But what is the Euangelists meaning when hee sayth, The VVord was with God? What is it to bee with the Father? Manie and diuers haue beene the con­iectures of the learned, concerning this matter. That the vnity of nature in the Father, and the Sonne, was hereby signified. But that is sufficiently manifest, by the last clause, where the Word is affirmed to bee God For seeing there can bee but one God, and that the Sonne is auouched to bee God, as well as the Father, who sees not, that they are both one and the same God, and so all one in their diuine nature? But this and most of the other opinions, which I will not trouble you withall in this kinde of exercise, are rather consequents that follow vpon that, which our Euangelist intended, then the verie point it selfe, which hee did intende. First therefore let vs search out the principall drift of these words, and afterwarde as neede shall bee, pur­sue those points, that are necessary. What may then bee the sense of this word with? what shoulde wee seeke farre? Basil. homil. in haec verba. take it as it commonly signifies, and it will agree with Saint Iohns occasion and purpose. Hee had sayde in the former wordes that The Ʋ Ʋord had alreadie his beeing, when all things, that euer were created, began first to bee. What would a man reasonably doubt of heereupon? Was the Word be­fore the world, before the creation, before there was anie time or place, wherein hee might bee? where was he then? To this, our Euangelist answeres plain­ly and readily. The VVord was with God. As if hee should haue saide: Doe you doubt whether the Ʋ Ʋord were in the beginning or no, because you cannot imagine, vvhere [Page 55] hee should bee, when as yet there was no world to be in? Can you conceiue, that God was, who is the Father of the VVord? Looke then vvhere hee vvas, and there vvas the Ʋ Ʋord. For the Ʋ Ʋord vvas vvith God. Euen as the inwarde conception or word, which the vnderstanding of man frameth within him, is with the man, where hee is: so the Word of God, is with God. This I take to bee the plaine and certaine meaning of the Euangelist, and that according to the true iudgement of some auntient and later writers.

Here Arius bestirres himselfe, and hearing that our Sauiour The Ʋ Ʋord was with God, hee dreames, that Hee vvas nothing else, but a created Spirit, created in­deede before the world, but yet created; as (sayth hee) it may euidently bee gathered, because The Ʋ Ʋord being with God, was not God, with whom he was. Who is so blind, as hee, that wilfully refuseth to see? Euery childe can answer Arius, that The Ʋ Ʋord was not God the Father, with whome hee is sayde to haue beene: yet was the same God: distinct in person, all one in na­ture: so then hee was truely with the Father, as ano­ther Alius, nou aliud person, not of a diuerse nature from the Father, a [...] another God.

Giue mee leaue heere, I pray you, to beginne a short examination, and refutation of our Rhemists annota­tions, vpon their Testament; I will take them in my waie, as I goe, from verse to verse. Genebrard. d [...] Trinit. lib. 1. Lindan. dialog 2. Petrus Cams le Ioa. Baptista in praesat. Some of the Pa­pists, of more reading then iudgement, raysed a slaun­der of Caluine, as a blasphemer, because hee denved CHRIST to bee God of God the Father, and affir­med, that being Iehouah, hee was, in that respect, of himselfe. This our Rhemists lay hold on, and boldly e­nough censure him for blasphemy. I haue no purpose to dispute the question with them; neyther indeede, do they so much as offer, eyther to refute Caluines opi­nion, or to confirm their own. If shal be enough therfore [Page 56] to controll their malapertnesse, and to ouer-waigh their presumption, that Bellarm. tom. 1 de Chrisio. lib. 2. cap. 19. Cardinall Bellarmine, where he dis­putes the point of set purpose, after he had considered all that the authours of that slander bring out of Caluin, and examined Caluins writings himselfe, refuseth to condemne him of anie such heresie, as Genebrard, Lindan, Canisius, and these Rhemists charge him with­all. Yea, hee proceedes to alleage proofe out of Caluin, that hee conceiued truely, and writ accordingly, of our Sauiour Christs diuine nature and person. The summe of that which Caluine holdes touching this point, is thus deliuered by Bellarmine: that our Sauiours diuine nature is so of himselfe, that if you remoue from the Son, all relation to the Father, there will remaine nothing, but the diuine essence, which is of it selfe. That is, in playne wordes, If you consider our Sauiour as GOD onely, not as the Sonne, hee is not of the Father, but of himselfe. This is that daungerous heresie, for which our iudici­ous Rhemists haue giuen sentence against Caluine, as a blasphemer. Bellarmine cleares him of the fault, and condemnes onely the tearmes, wherein hee deliuers his minde. But it were easie to iustifie both the one, and the other, by the writings of See Thom. de error. Graec. cap. 4. Guliel. Occhā. Centilog. Theo­log. conclus. 62 Holkot in detec. q. 5. art. 2. ad 6. contra 1. concl. & q. 10. art. 3. the most subtill Schoolemen, if it were fit for this place, and auditory. In priuate I will bee readie to giue anie man satisfacti­on.

But to leaue these matters whereinto the peruerse­ness of men hath drawn vs, & to return to the Euange­lists purpose: It is to be held for an vndoubted truth in diuinity, that our Sauiour, the VVord, was with God before the beginning of the world: will you heare him say as much of himselfe. prouer. 8. 27 Ver. 29. 30 VVhen he prepared the heauens, I was there: when hee set the compasse vpon the deepe. A lit­tle after, when hee appointed the foundations of the earth, then was I with him; Not onely reioycing to see the glo­ry of God his Father, but beeing himselfe full posses­ser [Page 57] of that glory: which shone so bright, that when he came into the world, ouer-shadowed with the darkenes of our humane nature, yet all the Angels of God discer­ned it, and Heb. 6. 1. fell downe to worship him.

The comfort of a poore distressed soule is in 1. Cor. 2. 2. Iesus Christ crucified: But the glory of a Christian is in Iesus Christ reigning with God his Father. Therefore when the ende of his life approached, Iohn 17. 24. He prayed that all which his Father had giuen him, might be euen where he was, that they might behold his glory, which God had giuen him. But what glory meanes he? Any new honour of late vouch saf't him? No, no. It is the same glory, which he alwayes had, and shall haue. Glorifie me thou Father, with Verse. 5. thine owne selfe, with the glory, which I had with thee, be­fore the world was. Let mee speake now to thee poore soule whosoeuer thou art, that findest thy selfe grie­uously vexed, and daungerously assaulted by Sathan, concerning these great mysteries of Religion: would hee haue thee doubt, whether our blessed Sauiour was before his mother or no? The holy Ghost assures thee by the penne of our Euangeiist, that The word was in the beginning. Doth he presse thee farther, to tell him, where he was, as if he could not be, because there was no world for him to be in? Herein also the wisedome of God, hath preuented him. The Word was with God. Thou art perswaded assuredly, that God was before the world: else, how should hee haue created the world? Canst thou tell me where he was? or doest thou thinke hee is any where now, where hee was not then? This goodly frame of the world, which thou beholdest, and wonderest at, not without great cause, is not any new house built for God to dwell in; but a faire peece of workemanship, that thou mightest see a little shadow of the workemans skill, power and glory. God is a Spirit, infinite in all perfections, that cannot remooue from one place to another, because hee is euery where. [Page 58] If thou canst beleeue these things, which the very light of Nature can teach thee, thou hast wherewithall rea­dily to answere Satan; The Word was with God. If thou Satā, dar'st not, nor canst for very shame deny or doubt that God was before the foundations of the world were layd; where thou seest God, I see the Word my ap­pointed Sauiour with him.

This I take to be the true & natural sense of the words, and the very proper meaning of our holy Euangelist, S. Iohn. Now let vs adde the other obseruations, rather then interpretations: which, as before I signified, are not directly intended, but necessarily followe vppon the former doctrine. And first we will con­sider that, which shewes our Sauiours Diuine Na­ture: then we will deliuer those poyntes, which con­cerne his person; both, shortly, and plainely, as it shall please God to vouchsafe assistance. Now the Diuine Nature or Godhead of our Sauiour Christ appeares in this, that being with God, when as yet there neuer had bin any thing created, he culd be no other, but God. For how is it possible, that when there is nothing but God, that, which is then, should not bee God? If you say with Arius, that hee was created; you deny that the begin­ning of all creation is truely described by Moses when he saith, Gen. 1. 1. In the beginning God created heauen and earth. For if that you say bee true, the most excellent part of the creation was already past, namely the making of him, by whom all these things afterward were created. Who taught this strange Diuinity? Where is any such thing recorded in any part of Scripture? Who is so shamelesse, as to say he hath it by reuelation? Who so senselesse as to beleeue him, that will say so? This is our wisedome, to know what it hath pleased God to reueale to vs in the Scripture, either expresly, or by consequence, and to accompt nothing else a matter necessary to bee beleeued. So then, when we read [Page 59] or heare that our Sauiour was with God, wee learne thereby, that hee is himselfe God. For what can be bee but God, that had his being before, and without all creation?

The word perhaps troubles thee, because he is said to haue beene with God, and therefore as it may seeme, not God, but an other. An other? Thou saiest well. Tertullian. contra Praxeā cap. 8. For hee is indeede in person (as I aunswered once before) another. But where thou saiest not God, thou [...]rt deceiued, vnlesse by God thou vnderstand the per­son of the Father. VVith God signifies distinction of per­son, not diuersitie of Nature.

Therefore ⁱ some learned Diuines, by with, thinke the holy Ghost meant to note his coniunction with Hilar. de Tri­it. lib. 2. God the Father, whereby they are one in vnitie of the same Diuine substance. To which also, they apply that which followeth in this Chapter, where Iohn 1. 18. The onely begotten Sonne, is said to bee in the bosome of the Fa­ther, and that Ioh. 14. 10. 11 Chapter 14. I am in the Father, and the Father in me; yea Epiphan. [...]aeres. 93. saith one, He is so with God, that hee is in the substance of God, and his very nature. Wherfore if at any time thou beest disquieted by the word with, as if it [...]mplied some difference betwixt God and the Word, remember that God signifies the person of the Father, [...]rom whom the Sonne is truly and really distinguisht; [...]et not by the nature of his Godhead, which is one in both, but by the property of his being the Sonne, in which the Father and hee are alwayes not one but two: [...]he one the Father, the other the Sonne.

And this last point, concerning our Sauiour Christs person, Tertullian. contra Praxeā cap. 12. is manifestly, & vndoubtedly proo­ued by this part of the verse. For it cannot bee ima­gined, that any thing beeing in all respects, one and the same, should bee saide to bee with it selfe, or in it selfe. The word was with God: If there be no distin­ction betwixt the word & God, how can it be conceiued [Page 60] that the word was with God? I shall neede to spend the lesse time and paines in this matter, because none but August. de haer. cap. 4. the Sabellians, euer made question of it. They decei­ued themselues and other men, with an vnlikely fancy, against euidence of Scripture, that God was but one person; called in diuers respects, sometimes the Father, sometimes the Sonne, & sometimes the holy Ghost. But what respect can make this speech reasonable, if there be but one person in the Godhead? Let vs consider the point a little better. Dauid was in regard of his gouern­ment a king, in respect of his sonne Salomon a father, in relation to his wife Bersheba an husband, for his gene­rall nature a man. May I say of him, because of these diuers respects, that the father of Saelomon, was with Da­uid; or with the man, meaning Dauid? Would not a man laugh at the absurditie of such a speech? It cannot be then, but that hee, which was with God, was really distinct, or was truely and indeed another from him, with whom hee was. No respect will free the speech from a iust imputation of absurditie, if the partie spoken of, bee one and the same, as well for person, as for na­ture. I reserue the farder handling of this matter till I come to the end of the verse following, where I pur­pose if it please God, to deliuer the doctrine of the holy Trinitie.

It may also farder be gathered, that the Euangelist in saying, The word was with God, would haue vs to vnder­stand, that he, Gal. 4. 4. which, in the fulnesse of time appointed by God, tooke flesh of the Virgin Mary, was till that time with God, though vnseene and vnknowen to the world; not as if he were not there still, (for euen while he was here vpon the earth, he was also at the same time continually in heauen; Ioh. 3. 13. & 17. 23. The Sonne of man, which is in heauen: and I will that they be, where I am) but because he came into the world, where before he had not beene in the nature of man. Heereto belongeth that, which is [Page 61] other-where written by the 1. Iohn. 1. 2. 3. same Saint Iohn. VVee de­clare vnto you the eternall life, which was with Father, and was made manifest to vs. Hee was with the Father from euerlasting, he appeared in the world, at the ap­pointed time. So is he now againe with God, because he is no longer visible on earth, as sometimes he was.

We may also adde hereunto, that Ambros. de incarna. domini Greg. Nysten. de fide ad Sim­plic. Rupertus a [...] hunc locum Cyril. Hieorosol. Cateches 11. this being with the Father implies the glory, he had, and hath with him: as if he should haue said, The word which was in the begin­ning, was at the right hand of God, in the glory of the Father, equall to the Father. Why seeke you the Creator a­mongst the Creatures? If you desire to know where the VVord was, consider that he was at the right hand of God the Father, partaker of that glory, which the Lord neither will, nor can giue to any, which is not the same God with him. But of this enough. Let vs come to the last part of the verse.

And the VVord was God; or as the Greeke words lie, God was the VVord: but our tongue will hardly beare that kind of speech, vnlesse the sense be altred. For if you say, God was the VVord, an English man will con­ceiue that you tell him what God was, and not what the Word was. The Greeke, and Latine may well beare such placing of the words, the English will not: yet perhaps it had beene plainer euen in the Greeke, to haue set the words in order, as the sense of them was intended, and to haue said, The word was God.

But the Euangelist (as I noted once before, vpon oc­casion) followed an elegancie of speech, which had bin lost, if he had kept the naturall order of the words. In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and God was the word. The like figure also hath Moses. Gene. 1. 1. In the beginning God created heauen and earth, and the earth was without forme. But our Euangelist affordes vs more examples of it. Iohn. 1. 4. 5 In it was life, and that life was the light of men. And the light shineth in darkenesse, and the [Page 62] darkenesse comprehended it not. Can any man doubt, that the holy Ghost intended to keepe the elegancy of the figure? Are not the Sermons of our Sauiour himselfe beautified with flowers of Eloquence? Doth not the prophecie of Esaie flowe with streames of Rhetoricke? I dare boldly say, It is a very hard matter, to match the beginning of that booke, for varietie and force of Eloquence, out of the writings of any of the heathen Orators, Greeke or Latine, quantitie for quantitie; That we may iustly blame the ignorance, and boldnesse of them, who thinke it a dishonour to the Gospell, that the preaching thereof should be graced with humane Eloquence.

I would know of these men, what it is, they call humane Eloquence: and what Eloquence there is in the Scripture, which may not beare that name, with­out any disgrace thereunto. Are there not the same tropes, and figures, both of the word and the sentence in the writings of men, yea of heathen men, which are in the Scripture? Or if the Scrip­ture haue any, which men haue not yet obserued, may they not learne from thence, asto liue holily, so to speake eloquently? If any man imagine, that the holy Ghost hath either appropriated any ornament of speech to himselfe, in the Scripture, or that he deuised new tropes and figures, for his owne Secretaries the holy Prophets and Apostles; the writings of the heathen (wherein all those elegancies are to bee found) will giue euidence a­gainst his ignorance. I deny not, that there is a certaine maiestie shining in the Scripture, which no man can worthily expresse by imitation, or by meditation con­ceiue sufficiently. But this ariseth, partly from the mat­ter it selfe, and partly from the skill of vsing those Rhe­toricall ornaments, wherein, as in all things, the holy Ghost, that taught them, is perfect; whereas men haue but a shadow as it were of his perfection. But I [Page 63] may not spend too much time in this matter: onely thus much, I will adde; that he, which in his publike ministrie shall either willingly refraine, or carelessely neglect to vse the helpe of humaine learning, and name­ly of Rhetoricke (whereof onely wee haue now oc­casion to speake) shall both faile in his duetie to God, and come short of that worthy effect of preaching, whereby the loue of God to vs, is most gloriously set foorth, and our loue to God most ardently set on fire. It is the spirit of God, that begets faith and obe­dience: But not without those meanes, by which hee hath enabled his seruants to teach, and perswade. The principall thing, is the matter, as it were the dart or arrowe that pierceth the heart of man, by the pow­er of the Spirit. But speech is, as it were the arme; and Eloquence, the thong or string, whereby it is sent with force to the marke it aymes at. He that trusts in Eloquence, makes flesh his arme. Hee that de­spiseth Eloquence, takes strength from his arme. It is our duetie to vse the meanes. It is Gods blessing that the meanes take effect: and of this, vpon this occasion, enough.

Now in expounding the words, ere I come to the meaning of the place, I will first touch a cauill of August. de doctrin. Christia. lib. 3. cap. 2. the Arians, whereby they endeauoured to voyde the euidence, that is brought in heere for our Saui­our Christs Godhead. What could be spoken more plaine, then for the Euangelist to say, The VVord was God? Yet would they shift off the matter, by mang­ling the sentence, in this sort. God VVas; say the Arians; what shall then become of the Word? That (say they) belongs to the next verse, which must thus bee read; The same word was in the beginning with God. I told you before, that the order of the words in the text is, God was the VVord. In our language, word may not bee put before this, or this same: In Greeke it may, [Page 64] and so in Latine. How then shall wee answere the A­rians? Plainely, and truely; that there was no reason, why the Euangelist should tell vs, that God was. For neither did any man doubt of it, and hee had said suffi­cient to that purpose in the former clause, when he affir­med that The Word was with God: with whom the Word, could not be conceiued to be, but that the being of God must of necessitie bee presupposed. Besides, the holy Ghost in the Scripture, neuer speakes of God, to shewe his being by Was, but either by Is, the present tense or time, as we call it; Exod. 3. 14 I am sent me: or by all three times; Reuel. 1. 8. Is, VVas, Shall be; which was, which is, and which is to come: yea the very clauses of the verse might haue taught them, that the VVord must needes belong to this verse. In the beginning was the VVord, and the VVord was with God, and the VVord was God. Cut off the VVord from this last clause, and you make it altogether vnlike the former, and spoile the grace of the speech. Let the A­rians goe then with their foolish shift, and goe wee for­ward in our exposition.

Wherein we are first to learne, what the Euangelist meanes by God, then to shew how the sentence it selfe is to be vnderstood. In the former clause one person of the Trinitie, euen the first, God the Father was signifi­ed, by the name of God, which is common to all the three. Here the same word is taken in the proper sense, nothing the Diuine Nature. There needs no other proofe of this matter, but onely to make you see that if you vn­derstādit of any one persō, you auouch somwhat which is vntrue. For example, will you say God the Father is the Word, or the Word was the Father? By this maner of speech you confound, & so destroy the persons, whose very being necessarily requireth, that the one bee not the other. Neither may we say, that the holy Ghost was the Word, or the Word the holy Ghost. For the same errors ensue thereupon, and the Trinitie of persons is [Page 65] ouerthrowen thereby. It cannot be then, but that God, in this last part of the verse, must of necessity be taken for the Godhead or Diuine nature; whereupon it followes necessarily, that our Sauiour Christ is God.

Against this the Sabellians (who acknowledge no distinction of persons) except; and labour to perswade vs, that the Euangelist is rather thus to bee expounded: God was the Word, that is (say they) That God the Father, with whom the word was, was nothing else, but the word it selfe. How false, & foolish this exposition is, if any man see not by himselfe, he may thus easily discerne. To what purpose could it be, for the Euangelist to tell vs, that the VVord was with God, if hee were nothing else, but God, in no respect truely and really distinct from him, with whom hee is said to haue beene? Had it not bene readier, and fitter for him, to haue added this last clause to the first, and to haue left the middlemost out? If you doubt where This VVord was, who I say was in the beginning, he was God: who can looke for any better answere? For it were a senselesse blasphemie to aske, where God was, whom all men graunt to bee in­finite. But that middle clause, The VVord was with God, troubles the whole sentence, darkens the sense, yea to say the truth, leaues no sense at all, if there be no distin­ction of Persons. For (as I shewed erewhile) no man can either truely say, or reasonably conceiue, that any thing, because of some diuers accidentall respects, is with itselfe. Our Euangelist Saint Iohn was an Apostle of our Sauiour Christ, the Disciple, whom Iesus loued, the brother of Iames, the sonne of Zebede; I might adde many other such differences. But, might I therefore say of him, The Disciple, whom Iesus loued, was with the Euangelist Iohn, and that Disciple was Iohn? It is one thing to be the Euangelist Iohn, another thing to be with the Euangelist Iohn. That agrees to none, but to Iohn him­selfe: this may belong to any, but to him. Therefore [Page 66] howsoeuer these later words, God was the VVord, might of their own nature admit such an interpretation; yet con­sidering the former clause, to which they are ioyned, it is absurd so to expound them. What if I adde herunto, that the holy Ghost himselfe seemes to tell vs, that the word God is not to be vnderstood, in this last clause, as it was in the former, because it is put here without the Article? Surely the Sabellians shall haue nothing to aunswere, but that which will confirme the distinction of the Father, and of the Sonne, as two persons. But of this, by and by.

The order of the words in English, shewes the sense; in Greeke it doth not so: but that word, which is first in place, oftentimes is last in the meaning of the wri­ter, or speaker. God was the VVord, saith our Euange­list. Yet Basil. homil. in haec verba Hilar de Trinit. lib. 7. the first word God in sense followes the last, as if he should haue said, The VVord was God: How shall that appeare, since the wordes will beare aswell the one as the other? It shall appeare by these reasons. First the question was not of God, whether he were before the beginning of the world or no, for that was neither denied, nor doubted of by Christians, or Heretickes. But the eternall Beeing of our Sauiour Christ, and his Godhead were impugned by Cerinthus, and Ebion, which gaue our Euangelist some occasion of writing this Gospell. It was fit therefore, that hee should teach the Church, and confound the Heretickes by saying, that The VVord was God. Secondly, we haue direction for the expounding of this clause, from both the former: wherein The VVord is still the first part of the sentence; and looke what is affirmed, it is af­firmed of the VVord. The VVord was in the beginning: The VVord was with God; In like manner, the Euan­gelist, continuing his discourse, must needs bee vn­derstood to say, The VVord was God; which indeede was the very thing, hee meant to auouch of him. [Page 67] This is farder confirmed, by that, which followes All things were made by it, and without it was made no­ [...]hing, Verse, 3. 4 that was made. In it was life, and so foorth. Do you not perceiue, that all these particulars, here spoken, are spoken of the word? If then both the clauses that goe before, and the sentences, that follow after, belong to the word, and not to God, what shew of reason is there, to take that one peece out of the middest of the rest, and apply it to God, contrary to the whole course of the matter, and intent of the writer? I wil not adde farder (as I might) that not only this beginning of the Gospell, but the whole frame of it, and the maine scope of it, is to teach vs, Iohn, 20. 31 That Iesus is the Christ, the Sonne of God. If any man be so peruerse, as that all, which hitherto hath bin said, will not satisfie him; yet let him be perswaded by the Euangelist him­self, who leauing out the Article before [...] God, and put­ting it before the Word, leades vs to begin at the end, for the sense of that hee writes. This cannot bee exprest in English, nor will be conceiued by them, that haue no skill in the originall Greeke: but in the text it selfe, the difference is very manifest.

Wee haue then the true meaning of the holy Ghost in these words, The VVord was God. He, that was in the be­ginning, and was with God, was also himselfe God. Here ari­seth a doubt, why the Euangelist addeth this clause; see­ing the Godhead of our Sauiour might be certainly, and necessarily concluded out of the two former branches, as it hath manifestly appeared in the opening of them. He, that had a being, when as yet there was no creature, and was with God, when there was nothing that was not God, could not possibly be any other then God. Why then is it added that The VVord was God? Surely (as I take it) to preuent that obiection, which might arise in the conceit of some; If he were with God, it may seeme, that he was not God. To which, the Euangelist [Page 68] thus answeres in effect. Though he were with God, in respect of his person; yet, in regard of his nature, hee himselfe was God. This I graunt was implied in the former: but in a matter of so great moment, it pleased the holy spirit of God to haue a gratious regard of our weakenesse, and to speake so, as the true [...]l might bee euident to all men, and so high a mysterie of Religion haue a cleare and sound demonstration.

The point then, which is here deliuered, is this; Iesus Christ, the promised Messi [...]h, is God. And because, the matter is of especiall importance, and no place so fit, as this, for the handling of it, I thinke it best to follow it somewhat largely: the rather because I meane to doe it now once for all; but as occasion shall be offred, for the cleering of some textes, here and there, in this Gospell. The first proofe that our Sauiour Christ is God, may be taken from those places of Scripture, where the names, that are proper to the true & only God, are giuen to Ie­sus Christ. For it is out of questiō, that howsoeuer some of those titles are, now and then, ascribed to men, with some addition, or in some respect; yet no creature is ab­solutely called God, Lord, the most high, or by any other such name. Of all these the most common, for ordinary vse, is God; which we find oftē in euery leafe of the Scrip­ture, where the true God Iehouah is spoken of. How of­ten is our Sauiour called God? Thomas acknowledgeth him to be so, when he saith vnto him, Ioh. 20. 28. My Lord, and my God; allnding questionless to the ordinary title, which is giuen to God, in the old Testament; The Lord thy God. Exod. 20. 2. I am the Lord thy God. Leuit. 19. 10. I am the Lord your God. Deut. 4. 2. The com­mandements of the Lord your God. And in a word, the same Chapter affords vs the like examples 15. or 16. times. So doth Act. 20. 28. the Apostle Paul call him. Take heed to all the flocke whereof the holy Ghost hath made you ouerseers, to feede the Church of God, which he hath purchased with his owne blood; Who purchased the Church with his blood, but Iesus [Page 69] Christ? Him therefore doth the Apostle call God. And [...]n another place he doubteth not bodly to affirme, that Christ is God ouer all, to be blessed for euer. Of him it is that Rom. 9. 5. Heb. 1. 8. the same Apostle saith, Thy throne (O God) endureth for [...]uer; not only calling him God, but professing him to [...]e that God, which in the beginning created heauen & Verse 10 [...]arth. Thou Lord in the beginning laydst the foundation of of the earth. I wil end, with that in the Reuel. 4. 8. Reuelation; The foure beasts ceased not day, nor night, sying, Holy, holy, holy, Lord God almighty. But how should we be assured, that by this Lord God Almightie, Iesus Christ is signified? That, which followeth, will put the matter out of doubt Chap. 14. 8. which was, and which is, and which is to come. For this [...] [...]he Title, which is giuen to our Sauiour twice in the first Chapter of the same booke. This also the 24. Elders presently after confirme when worshipping the same partie, whom the foure beasts had honoured, they speake thus; Thou art worthy (O Lord) to receiue glory, [...]ap. 4. 11. honour and power: for thou hast created all things. Aske the holy Apostle S. Paul, who is the Creatour of all things. He [...] [...] hath answered already, that the Lord, which laid the foundation of the earth, is IESVS CHRIST, the Sonne of God. The same testimonie of him giueth our Euangelist in the next verse same one; Heb. 1. 10. By him were all things made. Iohn. 1. 3. What should let then, but we may conclude, that Iesus, beeing so often called God in Scripture, is in deed very God?

The like I say of the title Lord, by which the 70. tran­slate [...] that name Iehouah; which is neuer attributed to any in the Scripture, but onely to the true God: nei­ther indeede may it in any sort. For it signifieth him This is spoken not the Greeke, [...]ut of the He­brew word. that hath his being of himselfe, that giues to all things, whatsoeuer being they haue: yea it implieth such a be­ing, as is alwayes one & the same; euen eternall, without beginning, without ending, without chaunge, without successiō. Now if this name be ascribed to our Sauior by [Page 70] holy Ghost, how can it be doubted, but that hee is very God? And doth not Iere. 33. 16 Ieremie ascribe it to him, when he saith, This is the name, whereby they shall call him, The Lord our righteousnesse? or, as it may better be read, He, that shall call her, is the Lord our righteousnesse. It is out of question, that the Messiah is there spoken of, whom the Prophet called Iehouah The Lord: Or if any man will needes apply it to the Church, he shall call her The Lord our righteousnesse (which yet hath no warrant, nor any great reason) let him remember, that the Church cannot haue this title, but onely in respect of Christ her husband, and head; as she is also called Christ. 1. Cor. 12. 12. As the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of the body which is one, though they be many, yet are but one body; euen so is Christ, that is the Church of Christ; which being considered with her Head Christ, is vouchsafed his name, because she is his body. Let vs come to the new Testament: and leauing those places, where the Disciples, and such as intreate fauour (for their curing) of our Sauiour, call him Lord; because neither their word is any warrant for doctrine, and it may be sayd they spake to him by that name, as wee ordinarily doe, when wee say Sir; which indeede was common a­mong the Grecians: Let vs take such textes onely as can admit neither of these exceptions. Of which kinde are the salutations vsed by the Apostles in the begin­ning of their Epistles. Rom. 1. 7. Grace be with you, and peace from God our Father, and from the Lord Iesus Christ. Where not onely our Sauiour is tearmed Lord, but acknowledged to be the Author, and giuer of Grace and peace, with God his Father. But it were a vaine thing to heape vp many testimonies to this purpose. No man can look into the writings of the Apostles, but he shall see them in e­uery page. Being the Lord then, he must needs be God.

What should I stand vpon euery particular at large? Who is the God of glory, but Iehouah the great God of [Page 71] heauen and earth? For so is he called, that appeared to Abraham Gene. 12. 1. 2 in Genesis; The God of glory appeared to our father Abraham, Act. 7. 2. saith the holy Martyr Saint Steuen. Aske the enemies of Christ the Iewes, and they will tell you with one voice, that this was the great God of Isra­el. And yet the Apostle Paul giues this title to our Sa­uiour Christ; where he saith, that if the princes of this world, had knowen the wisedome of God in the my­sterie of our redemption, 1. Cor. 2. 8. They would not haue crucifi­ [...]d the Lord of glory. Hereto belongs that Title; 1. Tim. 6. 15 the King of kings, and Lord of lords. And whereas some vaine men, gouernours of some small part of this little spot of earth, doting vpon their owne imagined greatnesse haue either giuen themselues this vnlimited title, or ac­cepted it, being giuen by the palpable flattery of their base vassals; yet alwayes the wiser sort tooke iust oc­casion thereby, rather to scorne their presumptuous folly, then to bee drawen into any admiration of their glorious power. But the Lord Iesus, our blessed Sa­uiour, hath this name by good right; as hee, of whom [...]ll the Kings of the earth, hold their Crownes and Prou. 8 15. 16 Scepters. By mee ( ^x saith hee, that is the wisedome o [...] God) Kings reigne, and Princes decree iustice. By mee Princes rule, and the Nobles, and all the Iudges of the earth. Psal. 2. 8. Verse 9. For to him hath God giuen the heathen for his inheritance, and the vtmost parts of the earth for his possession. He shall crush them with a Scepter of Iron, and breake them in peeces like a potters vessell. Therefore are they aduised, and charged to kisse the Son, least he be angry, to their destructiō. Verse 12. There is good cause then, why he should be stiled, the Lord of lords, and King of kings. What though he be the Lambe, meeke and tender; yea bound, and slaine? yet Reuel. 17. 14. shall he ouercome the 10. kings that fight against him. For he is the Lord of lords, and King of kings: yea, Reuel. 19. 16. he hath that name written vpon his garment, & vpon his thigh, The king of kings and Lord of lords. His glory & his strength shew [Page 72] him to be no lesse. And can we doubt whether hee bee God, or no? If I should recite the Attributes or Epi­thets, which being proper to God, are belonging to our Sauiour Christ: If I should but name those admirable ef­fects of his, which are aboue the strength of any and all creatures, the time would sooner faile me, then varietie of matter; which doth offer it selfe to me so plentifully, that it is harder to find, where to make an end, thē what to say. Do you wonder at the eternity of God, as a thing not to bee reacht vnto by the conceit of man? Behold him, that is Reuel. 1. 8. A & Ω, the beginning & the ending, which was, which is, and which is to come. What say I, was, is, is to come? Thus indeed hath it pleased our gratious Sauiour, to speake of his eternall being, to our capacity. But let vs heare him speake more like himselfe, that is more like God: Iohn 8. 58. Before Abraham was I am. This is a speech bet­ter beseeming his maiesty. For nothing can be properly said of him, concerning his being, but onely that he is. That, which was, either is not at all, or at the least, is not, in all respects, the same, that it was. That, which is to come, as yet either hath no being at all, or surely no such being, as is signified it shall haue in time to come. But what stand I repeating that, which before I deliuered? Let vs passe from this infinitenesse in time, which wee call eternitie, and come to another like attri­bute: which wants a name, but belongs to quantity; and might be tearmed Immensitie, if our eares and vn­derstanding were acquainted with it. As eternity sig­nifies the infinitenesse of God in time, so doth Immen­sitie in greatnesse. Isai. 61. 8. Thus saith the Lord, The heauen is my throne, and the earth is my footstoole. There is no num­ber of yeeres that can expresse the Lords Eternitie: no compasse of place that is able to containe his Immensi­tie. Psal. 139. 7 Verse 8. Whither shall I flee from thy presence? saith the king of Israel, that had choice enough of roome, wherein to hide himselfe. If I ascend into heauen, thou art there. [Page 73] If I he downe in hell, thou art there. Let me take the wings of Verse 9. Verse 10. the morning, and dwell in the vttermost parts of the Sea: yet thither shall thy hand leade me, and thy right hand shall hold me. But what need many particulars? Hee that is pre­sent in heauen and in earth, can be shut out of no place, whatsoeuer: our Sauiour is ascended into heauen, yet is he still present with his children here in earth: Matth. 28. 2 [...] Behold I am with you, till the end of the world. By his power (you wil say) not by his presence. Doubtlesse an infinite power, such as protecteth the Church of Christ, cannot be in a finite nature. Let vs heare him speake more plaine; Matth. 18. 20 Whersoeuer two or three are gathered together in my name there am I in the midst of them. Or if this also may ap­plied to power; yet that place is without exception: Iohn 3. 13. No man ascendeth vp to heauen, but he that came downe frō hea­uen, the Son of man, which is in heauen. He came downe frō hea­uen, because being God, he became man: he was for all that still in heauen, because being man, he ceased not to be God. Therefore also, while he was aliue on earth, before his passion, he doubted not to auouch, that hee was euen then in heauen. Iohn. 17. 24 Father, I will that they, which thou hast giuen me, be with me, euen where I am, that they may behold that my glory. Where is that to be seene, but in hea­uen? For so hath our Sauiour said himselfe, before in that prayer; And now glorifie me (thou father) with thine Verse 5. owne selfe, with the glory which I had with thee before the world was. Not as if heauen, or neuer so many heauens were able to conteine that his infinite glory, which can be no way bounded by any meanes, but because there i [...] shews it self most apparātly. Shal I need to add hereunto his power, or rather Almightinesse? Reuel. 1. 8 I am A & Ω, the beginning & the ending saith the lord, which is, which was, & which is to come, euen the Almighty. And twice afterward in the same booke, he is called Reu. 4. 8. & 11. 17. The Lord God Almigh­ty. But if the Scripture had not said any such thing of him, yet his admirable works sound out his power & glory. [Page 74] The heauens ( Psal. 19. 1 sayth the Prophet) declare the glory of God, and the firmament sheweth the worke of his hands. Yea the signs, which he did in the sight of his friends & enemies, were so high aboue the power of man, that they may as­sure vs, Ioh. 20. 31 that our Sauiour Iesus Christ was the Sonne of God. But of these in the Gospell oftentimes hereafter, if it please God; euen God the Sonne, IESVS CHRIST, of whom we speake.

But ere I proceed any farder, I must againe encoun­ter the Arians; who bend all their forces to ouerthrowe the God-head of our Sauiour Christ. Do you not per­ceiue (say they) that although hee be called God: yet he is not so indeed by nature, but by fauour? Haue you not obserued, that in the second clause, where the true God is spoken of, there the article is added in the text; [...] The Word was with the God? as you would say, The true God; but here in the third part, the same article is omit­ted: as if the holy Ghost would haue vs know thereby, that he hath his God-head, such as it is, onely by grace: and that diuers from him, that is the true God. O, that foolish men should take such paines to kick against the prickes, and to procure their owne destruction! Can there be more force in the omitting of one poore letter, to make you denie our Sauiours diuine nature, then in so many reasons to wring out of you a confession ther­of? Origen. in Ioa. lib. 2 Too much curiosity, in an opinion of this lear­ned obseruation, hath deceiued you. Is not Iesus Christ the true God, because the article is not added? Or is the article neuer omitted, where the true God is spoken of? I will goe no furder to confute this error, then this present Chap. Was it not the true God, that sent Iohn Baptist before the Messiah? Is not he called the Lord of hosts by Ma [...]ach. 3. 1 the Prophet Malachy? Behold I will send my mes­senger. Who wil send? In the latter end of the ver; Behold he shall come, sayth the Lord of hosts. And yet of him Ioh. 1. 6 saith our Euangelist, There was a man sent [...]. from God, vvhere [Page 75] there is no article: Shall we belieue the Prophet of the Lord, or this false Prophet Arius? The one saith the Lord of hosts sent Iohn the Bap. the other tels vs, Hee, that sent him, was not the true God, because the article is not set before God. This one place were sufficient to con­found that vaine and false exception, especially beeing in the same Euangelist, and within so few lines after the former. But I will briefly note some other, to make it more cleere, if it may be. It cannot bee doubted, but that God, whom no man hath seene at anie time, is the true God. Exo. 34. 20. 23 Thou canst not see my face, saith the true God, to Moses: thou shalt see my back parts, but my face shall not be seene.

Doth not S. Iohn speake of the same true God, when he sayth, Ioh. 1. 18 No man hath seen God at any time? Is not [...]. the Word in this place also, without an article? So is it there, To them he gaue prerogatiue, to be the sons of [...]. God. The like examples are euery where to bee found, in this and the other Euangelists, & in the writings of the Apostles.

And surely, if the addition of the article be suffici­ent to proue, that the true God is signified, wheresoe­uer that is set before, the Arians are manifestly conuin­ced by that place of Rom. 9. 5 Chry­sost. in Ioa. hom. 3. Theophil. a [...] hunc locum. Saint Paul, who is God aboue all: which is spoken of our Sauiour Christ, and yet hath the article, though not immediately before it. If you en­quire more particularly, why the article is put in before God, in the former clause, and left out in the later: First I say the Euangelist might vse his liberty, as all, that write in Greeke doe, to take it, or leaue it, at his good pleasure, where the matter did not require the presence of it. Secondly, it was fit rather to put the word without it, then with it: because (as I signified before) God, in the former place, noteth the person of the Father, who is the first of the three in order; but in the later, the na­ture of God, which is common to all three persons. If he should haue left it, or vsed it in both, the sense would [Page 76] haue bene more darke, and the distinction of the per­sons not so easily obserued. Thirdly, it could not haue bene so plaine or certaine, that the word was to be taken [...]or the former part of the speech; but it would haue beene much doubted, whether the Euangelist meant to tell vs, that God was the word, as the words lie, or that the word was God, as some haue vnderstood him. There­fore there is neuer a word, nor letter in this first verse, wherby our Christian faith, touching our Sauiours God head, can be weakned.

Nor any thing, saith Arius, whereby it may be streng­thened. No? Doth not the holy Ghost auouch, that [...]e is eternall, hauing his perfect being already, when all things created began first to be? Is it not affirmed that He was with God, when nothing had any being but God? your vaine and friuolous exceprions haue bin prooued void. Let all this passe. Can any thing be plainer, then this direct affirmation, that the word was God? The word (saith Arius) was God: but no otherwise then some men are called by that name. The true God Exod. 7. 1 sayd to Mo­ [...]es, I haue made thee a God to Pharaoh: yea to all them, to whom the word of God came, he saith as much, Psal. 82. 6. I haue said, yee are Gods. A poore shift; The very sight of the place affords a sufficient answere. Hilar. de Tri­nit. lib. 7. Mo­ses is made Pharaohs God; and those Rulers were said to be Gods. Doth the holy Ghost say either of Moses, or any other, that they were God simplie, as our Euangelist doth of the VVord. If the VVord had bene made God, or if the Lord had onely affirmed of him, that he had called him God, there might haue bene som occasion of doubting; because there are some such like speeches of other men in the Scripture. But what wilfull wrangling is it, to call so plain a matter into que­stion, vpon so vnlike a maner of speech? Moses was God to Pharaoh, not simply God. They were vouchsaf't the name of gods. They were not simply gods. There was [Page 77] no daunger in either of both those speeches. Hee that reades, I haue made thee God, can readily conceiue, that this made God, is not the true God. And as easie is it for any man to assure himselfe, that those rulers are not God indeed: aswel because they were many (but God is one) is also for that they are presently threatned, Psal. 82: 7 that they shall dye like men: But simply to name him God, whose e­ternity was before auouched, whose presēce with God, before the world, was affirm'd, and to whom afterward the creation of all things is ascribed; had been the rea­ly waie to fill the hearts of men with idolary, if Iesus had not been indeed very God by nature. Therefore it is not possible to perswade any Christian man, whose eyes are not blinded with the mist of preiudice and er­ror, that the holy Ghost would open such a gate to im­piety, calling him God, without addition, limitation or exposition, who had affirmed asmuch of himselfe, and of whome the whole Christian world was so per­swaded, when this Gospell was to be written. Nay ra­ther he would by all meanes haue refrayned to giue the [...]east suspicion of such a conceit, by which men might haue beene drawen into so horrible, and dangerous an [...]eresie. But no truth of reason, no authority of Scrip­ture, could reforme the error, or stop the mouth of that wretched hereticke, till the Lord Iesus himselfe, our God, vtterly destroyed him by a most fearefull iudge­ment. For Ruffin. hist. eccl. lib. 1 cap. 3 at the verie time when hee was ready to goe to the Chruch to maintaine his blasphemous here­sie, being forced, by necessity of nature, to goe aside in­to a cōmon place, appointed for that purpose, as it might be Queen hithe here in London, he voyded (with reue­rence bee it spoken) his very entrails, and so ended at once, both his life and his blasphemie.

Doe wee tremble, at the horror of this iudgement? Oh then let vs take heede, my brethren, how wee like of his doctrine, of whose punishment we are so affraid. [Page 78] And yet, what was this extremity, in comparison of the intolerable wrath of God in the fire of hel? where there is neither ease of pain, nor end of misery. Psal. 2. 12. O kiss the Son, least he be angry, and ye perish in the way. 1. Cor. 10. 22 Doe we prouoke the Lord to anger? Are we stronger then he? Reuel. 6. 15 Doe not the kings of the earth, and the great men, and the rich men, and the chiefe Captaines, and the mightie men, hide themselues in dens, and among the rockes of the mountaines? Doe they not Verse, 16 crie out most lamentably to the mountaines and rockes, Fall on vs, and hide vs from the presence of him that sitteth vp­on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb? Oh mise­rable & comfortless wretches! Flee you from the Lamb? It is hee Ioh. 1. 29 that taketh away the sins of the world. If there be ny drop of mercy, it is by the bloud of the Lamb; if there be any hope of comfort, it is in the gentlenesse of the Lamb. They are absolutely without al possibility of the least relief, that can find no fauor at the hands of the Lamb. If the Lamb frown, who wil look cheerfully vp­on vs? And dare any wretched miscreant nourish in his heart, doubtfull thoughts of our blessed Sauiours e­ternall God-head? For it is almost incredible, that any man should be so desperate, as blasphemously to denie it. If we could heare (but as it were a far off) the hideous shreeks, and most wofull lamentations of that wretch I spake of ere while, our haire would stand vpright on our heads with horror, and our hearts sink in our bodies, for feare. Ioh. 5. 22 Hath not the Father committed all iudgement vnto him? Must we not all stand before his throne, to receiue sentence from him, either of life or death? Oh I where wilt thou bestow thy self, poor, naked, miserable distres­sed soule? It is vnpossible for thee to hide thy selfe. To behold the wrathfull countenance of the Iudge, it is in­tolerable. Oh! how wilt thou tremble, when thou shalt heare that dreadful voice, Luk. 19. 27. Those mine enimies, that would not that I should raigneouer them, bring them hither & slaie them before my face? Slay them? I: but so, that they shal [Page 79] alwaies be dying, and neuer dye. For so is that [...]eatefull [...]entence, which will loose the ioints, & make the knees knock together, when it shall be heard: Mat. 25. 41 Depart from me ye cursed into euerlasting fire, which is prepared for the di­uell and his angells. Is it not better for vs then, to acknow­ledge Iesus Christ to be God, while we liue here, & may learn it, then to be driuē to confess it, when it shal auaile vs to nothing, but to increase our iust damnation? I am sory & a sham'd, that in this cleere sun-shine of the Gos­pell, any man making profession of Christian religion, should make doubt of so main a ground therof. Neither would I haue wearied you & my selfe, with so large an exhortatiō, but that I know too wel, there is too iust oc­casion of it. Yet I may not forget my selfe too much. That, which hath bin said is sufficient, with the blessing of God; without it, nothing that can be say de.

Let vs now come neerer home, and betake our selue [...] to that, which is more proper to our calling. For as the Angells that are ministring spirits, though they be faine oftentimes to oppose themselues, against the malice and fury of satan, & his instruments; yet haue not this office properly assign'd vnto them, but as it furthereth their principle charge, to helpe them forward which shall be heires of saluation: so the ministers of the Gospel must account it their especial duty to instruct & comfort them that are the true members of the body of Iesus Christ. To you therfore beloued in the same our Sauiour, will I now addresse my speech, euen to all you, that beleeue in Christ to iustification. Haue you learned, that the Messiah your Sauiour is God almighty? Do you firmly and stedfastly beleeue this, without wilfull gain-saying or doubting? Assure your selues, the holy Ghost hath set you in the waie to euerlasting life. But me thinkes I heare some poore soule, sighing in himself, & striuing if it were possible, to conceale his own thoughts from his own heart. What is it thou dost so labour to suppresse? [Page 80] what art thou so affray de to be knowen of? Be not dis­maied, nor discouraged: If thou tremble like Marke 5. 33. her, that heard our Sauiour aske, who hath touched him, remem­ber with what ioy to her selfe she was discouered. Pro­mise thy selfe no lesse from him, who will certainly Mat. 11. 28 re­fresh all them, that being heauy laden come vnto him. What? Those, that haue (now and then) some doubt in them of his eternall God-head? I: euen those; in de­spight of Satan and all his treacherie. Let mee reason with thee a little. Dost thou not beleeue, that the scrip­ture is the vndoubted word of God? yes: thou doost. Art thou not perswaded, that the same Scripture tea­cheth thee, that thy Sauiour Christ is very God? Thou art. But thou hast many times some doubting of the point within thy heart. What? Dost thou doubt wil­lingly, as one that either thinkes it not to be so, or at the least, that was neuer resolutely perswaded, that it is so? Let me say more to thee. Wouldst thou haue him bee God or no? If thy affection desire to honour him, all that may be, if thy weake faith labour to ouercome this doubting; Satan would haue thee doubt, & makes thee afraid thou doubtest, but indeed thou dost beleeue. It is not a property of the most sanctified men to bee with­out tentations, but not to yeelde to them with ioy and liking. True faith may be weake, though perfect faith cannot. Weaknes of faith wil admit occasion of doub­ting, but not giue place to doubting. Doost thou not finde it in thy selfe? thy doubting neither brings forth denying, nor receiues any kinde entertainement at thy hands: then art thou wholly free from wilfull gaine­saying, or doubting.

Satan can not make thee beleeue, that thy Sauiour is not God. Only he makes thee afraid, least he should not be God. And how comes hee to this aduantage? Surely by no other meanes, but by driuing thee to ex­amine the point by reason. There can be but one God: [Page 81] which is he, that sent Iesus Christ into the world, and not Iesus himselfe. If thou tell him of the three persons, hee demaunds further, how thou canst conceiue, that there should be three such persons, and all they but one God; As if 2. Cor. 5. 7. wee walkt heere by sight, and not by faith. I know it is possible to beate the Deuill at his owne wea­pons, and by the force of reason to maintaine against him, that there is a Trinity of persons; though that my­stery, by discourse of reason, could neuer be attained to, without reuelation from God. But this is not the ar­mour a Christian trusts to. Thy bulwark must bee the shield of faith, borne vp, and held out by some strong rest of holy scripture. The word was God: Saith our Euangelist. By it were all things made. Let Satan cast his fiery, and poysonous darts against vs: This shield quen­cheth the fury and killeth the strength of their fire and poyson. As for his distinctions and respects, wherby he sweats, and tyres himselfe to proue, that our Sauiour is but God by fauour, not by nature, because he is imploi­ed in such an office, not because he is eternally begotten of God his father: they are sparkles that keepe a crack­ing, with more feare, then hurt; and venom that rai­seth a few Pimples, in the outer skin, with more trou­ble then danger. Keepe thee close vnder the shield of faith: and though Satan make thee stagger, yet hee shall neuer ouerthrow thee.

Being then thus armed at all points, with an assured perswasion of our Sauiour Christs diuine nature, and hauing beaten the enemy that charged vs with such force and fury; let vs peaceably, and carefully consider with our selues, what vse wee may haue of that fort which wee now possesse in safety. Is this Sauiour of ours God eternal, infinite in wisedome, in power, in ho­linesse, in all worth and perfection? Surely then may wee truely and bodly say, that Psal. 89. 19. God hath layed help vp­on one, that is mighty, more mighty to rescue his people [Page 82] out of the hands of sinne and Satan, then Dauid was to free the people of Israell from the Philistines, and all o­ther that oppressed them. Are they mighty, that are a­gainst vs? Hee that is with vs, is more mighty. Doe you not heare the Apostle, as it were defying all the world, in confidence of this assistance? ^r If God (saith he) be on our Rom. 8. 31. side, who can be against vs? What though hee speakes of God the Father? Is not the Sonne our Sauiour the same God, of the same power? Me thinkes I am encouraged by this meditation to dare Satan, and to bid him bat­taile to his face. Let him not spare to magnify the iustice of God, to amplifie the grieuousnesse of my sinne, to lay out to the vttermost the furiousnesse of Gods displea­sure, to set before me the weakenesse of my estate, to rec­ken vp as it were on his fingers, the huge summes of my debt; what is all this, If Iesus Christ be God? Though the iustice of God will not bee corrupted, by feare, pi­ty, bribery, or flattery: yet it will bee satisfied. If the wrath of God be infinite against my sinne, an infinite sacrifice may appease it. I haue nothing to pay. But he, that is God, is all-sufficient. Mic. 67. Will not the Lord bee pleased with thousands os Rams, nor with ten thousand riuers of oyle? Heb. 10. 4. & [...]. 12. Is it vnpossible that the bloud of Buls, and Goates, should take away sinne? Yet Act. 20. 28. hath Iesus Christ, who is God, by his owne blood entred once into the holy place, and obtained eter­nall redemption for vs. God ( ^x saith the Apostle) hath pur­chased the Church with his owne blood. What though M [...]c. 6. 7. the Lord will not accept my first borne for my transgression? Will he also refuse the sacrifice of his owne first begot­ten, yea Ioh. 1. 18. of his onely begotten, which is in his bosome? No, no, he hath proclaimed him from heauen Mat. 3. 17. to be his sonne that beloued one, in whom he is well pleased.

Now, the sufficiency of this worthy sacrifice, ariseth not from the bloud of man, though it be more excellent then that of buls or goates, but frō the inualuable worth of the person, whose blood is sacrifice. Could the [Page 83] bloud of Isaac, of Abell, or of Adam, while he was in­nocent and holy, haue beene a sufficient ransome for sinne, committed against the infinite maiestie of God? Looke how much it lacks of infinitenesse in valew, so much it lacks also of worth to make satisfaction. For no finit sum can discharge an infinit debt. But as God him­selfe, so sin against God is infinit. Multiply any finit nū ber, though neuer so great, that which proceeds of it wil be but finit. And whatsoeuer is finite (imagine it as great as you can in number or measure) is no neerer infinitnes, then the least point or fraction, that can bee conceiued. For there is no kinde of proportion betwixt them: else should finit & infinit be al one. Because that which hath any part of it finit, being compoūded of finite parts put together, must of necessity it selfe be vnderstood to bee finite. For the parts make the whole: and that taketh it nature from these. Now, who knows not that the ho­linesse, and nature of man is finit? Such therfore would the whole lumpe bee, if all that is, or can bee in al men, were gathered together into one. How then can a sa­crifice, which is but finite, make due satisfaction for sin, that is infinite? And that, which I speake of men, I would haue vnderstood also, of all creatures whatsoeuer, Angels or other. For since their nature and worth is finit, it is as farre from infinitenesse (be what it will in comparison of the valew of other finite things) as nothing is from all; that which is, from that which is not.

There is then nothing at all left, wherein wee may haue any trust, or hope of hauing satisfaction made to God for vs, but onely the inualuable sacrifice of our Sauiour Iesus Christ; Heb. 10. 14 VVho with one offering hath consecrated for euer them that are sanctified. Ioh. 1. 29. Behold (saith he that was sent to shew him) the lambe of God that taketh a­waie the sinnes of the world. But whence hath our blessed Sauiour this inestimable valew? I know not (saith one) neither will I trouble my head about it. I beleeue his [Page 84] sacrifice was sufficient; and that serues my turne, with­out any further adoe. Oh my brethren: let vs not be so vnkind to our blessed sauiour, so vnthankfull to God the father, so contemptuous against the holy ghost, so retchlesse of our owne saluation. Is it not monstrous vnkindnesse, to haue so incompatable a fauour done thee, and not to labour to know that, which is most ho­norable to him that did it? How shalt thou worthily lift vp thy heart to praise, and magnifie the Father that sent his sonne for thy redemption, if thou neglect to vn­derstand how glorious he was, whom hee sent? At the least despise not the wisedome, and prouidence of the holy spirit: as if hee had troubled himselfe in vain, with setting his Secretaries on worke to pen the particulars of thy saluation, for thy full satisfaction and comfort. Well, let all this goe: If thou beest not ashamed of so vnreasonable vnkindnesse, vnthankfulnesse, contemp­tuousnesse; yet bee afraid, least thou lose that, which thou thinkest thou hast. Art thou so grounded and set­led in assurance of sufficient satisfaction made by Christ, that it is vnpossible thou shouldst be (I will not say cast downe, but) shaken? Take heed this conceit of thine, bee not like that of the Pharise, Luke. 18. 11. Lord I thanke thee, that I am not like other men. Looke about thee on e­uery side, and behold the spirituall battaile, that is a­gainst thee.

Take a view how thy fellow souldiers are intreated. Thou maist see many a one, that hath bin as confident as thou art, and yet now is to seeke for comfort. Belike thou hast had hitherto either no assault at all, or but some weake battery against thy soule. If thou be once wholly charg'd, and hardly pursued, thou wilt find thy selfe to stand in need of all the ayde, that may possibly bee had. Then thou wilt begin to see, and feele, that if Christ were not God, thy trust in him might easi­ly deceiue thee. Be wise therefore, and while thou hast [Page 85] fayre weather, prouide for the storme, that eyther is comming, or may come: least if it fall vpon thee, and take thee vnprouided, it driue thee on the rocks of de­spaire, to the wracke or hazard of thy pretious soule.

But I am perswaded better things of you my brethe­ren, that you hunger, and thirst after the word of God the food of your soules: that you long to vnde stand the mystery of your glorious redemptiō, that you think nothing vnworthy your learning, which the H. Ghost hath thought worthy of his teaching. Let vs proceede then, in the feare of God: you, with this resolution in your selues; I, with this perswasion of you. Wee see with what excellent wisdome our holy Euangelist hath begunne his Gospell; and we find our selues as it were double arm'd by this blessed instruction, against here­tickes, that would corrupt our iudgement, and against Satan that would ouerthrow our faith. Hearken not to either of these, at any hand: but rest thy selfe stedfastly vpon the authority of the holy Ghost, who telles thee plainly and truly, that The word was God. Being setled in this beliefe, thou art prepared against the assaults of the diuell, when hee shall marshall thy sinnes against thee, and charge thee with them. The greatnesse of sin cannot make any man despaire, that knows the price of his redemption to be the bloud of God infinit in va­lew. The more Satan extolleth the iustice of God, the more he doth assure vs of saluation. For since the satis­faction, which was made for vs, is so inestimable, the iuster God is, the more he holdes himselfe satisfied. If wee had to deale with an vniust tyran, that regarded not iustice & equity, whatsoeuer our satisfaction were, wee could hardly be out of danger. But our most iust God, that valewes all things aright, finding the sacri­fice to be sufficient, cleerly acquites all them, for whom it was offred; yea, holds himself so fully contented, that he will neuer remember their transgressions any more. [Page 86] But of this matter, and of this verse enough. It follow­eth in the next.

This was in the beginning with God. The knowledge of the words leades & directs vs to the vnderstanding of the matter. But there is no word of importance in this verse, which hath not beene alreadie expounded in the former; as I doubt not, but euery one of you perceiue at the first sight or hearing of them. Yet to make a cleere way to the interpretation of them, we must consider to what the first worde This belongeth: and also how this verse dependeth on the former; The originall Greeke giues vs iust occasion of this in quiry, because in it This may be referred either to the word, or to God. The Eng­lish affords the like cause of doubting, though the La­tin do not. But this question is easily answered, that the Euangelist meanes this word & not this God. For neither was there any reason to say, This God was with God; vnderstanding that, in the last clause, it signified the di­uine nature: and if it note the person, out of doubt the Euangelist would neuer haue chāged his former speech, being so plaine & easie, for a doubtfull, & hard word. It is not nothing, that, in all the 3 clauses, The VVord is [...]till the partie, that is spoken of, & that the verses follo­wing are also of him, and not of God. This; namely this World, of which I haue written so excellent things.

The other question is a great deale harder. I will bee as short, and plaine, as the matter will let me. I say then that this second verse maie bee either a repetition, and exposition of the pointes (all or some) formerly deli [...]ered, or an addition of some newe matter to the same purpose. If we adde, that it both expoundeth what was [...]aid before, & declareth also som further matter, I think we shall leaue nothing vnsaid, that may reasonably be coniectured. To repeat that, which went immedi­ [...]tly before, in so fewe wordes, and so plaine, without adding somewhat, is neither vsual in the Scripture [Page 87] [...]or agreeable to the wisedome of our Evangelist. Therefore, that we maie be sure to omit nothing, which the holy Ghost meant to teach vs, let vs take it in the [...]argest sense, it will afford. And first for repetition, wee [...]aue here 2. of the former points, namely the first, and [...]econd, that The VVord was in the beginning, and that He was with God. Leontius ad hunc loc. [...] de Trinit. lib. 2. Some thinke the last also is implied. And so it is, in some sort: But surely it is not repeated. For that only may be truly said to be repeated, which is ex­presly, and plainely deliuered, as the other 2 points are. But why should there be any such repetition? Both that the Heretikes might see and acknowledge their error, and that the faithfull might the better be confirmed in the truth, which they saw doubled, and as it were twice confirmed by the holy Ghost.

But if this repetition bring also an exposition with it, who sees not the necessity and profit of it? What is there then to be learned by the expositiō? Namely that those words In the beginning, which were only in the 1. clause, are also to be referred to the second; that we may knowe, that as the Word was in the beginning: so hee was with God in the beginning: But this (to confesle the truth) is necessarily implied, and so easily to bee ga­thered out of the former verse, that I can hardly per­swade my selfe, it should be the meaning of the holy Ghost to put vs in minde of any such obseruation, by repetition. For when he had said, that The VVord was in the beginning, and added presently, that The worde was with God, did he not plainly tell vs, That the VVord [...] was in the beginning with God? Surely the question was, where The VVord remained, or had his being, before, & in the creation of the world. To which, the Euangelis [...] aunswers that He was with God. Whē was he with God? In the beginning, when all things created, began, first to be. There is then no great likelyhood, that the reasō of this repetition was to teach vs that in the beginning [Page 88] must be added to the second clause, or vnderstood with it. How much easier might it haue bin set down in the place, to which it properly belonged, if there had been any need thereof?

There Tertullian. con. Praxean. ca. 15 is another coniecture somewhat more likely, that it was the purpose of the holy Ghost, to giue vs to vnderstand, that the Word, before the creation, was with God onely, and so continued, though hee were not seene of men, till his incarnation. But this exposition also was needlesse. For where could he be conceiv'd to be, but with God, when as there was nothing, but God? As for the time of his incarnation, the Euangelist sig­nifies that afterward, where hee sayth, The VVord be­came Verse 14. flesh, and we sawe his glory. Yea, the whole Gospel is well knowen to all men, to be nothing els, but an hi­story of his comming into the world, and continuance there, till the time of his ascending vp to heauen. I would not trouble you with this diuersity of interpre­tations, but that I am desirous, now in the beginning, both to speake fully of such matters, as concerne the God-head of our Sauiour, and the holy Trinity, and al­so to giue you som direction, by example, how to iudge of the expositions of Scripture.

Let vs see now what new matter we may gather out of this verse, if it be not intended as a repetition. First, it serues to stop the mouthes of those Heretickes, who fondly and lewdly teach, that there are two Wordes: one which is indeed, as it were, in God; the other with­out him, or not vnited to him. The former (say they) was not the Messiah, but the later: and of the former, S. Iohn speaketh in the beginning of this Gospell. It is hard to say, whether this conceit be more blasphemous, or more absurd. What is it, but blasphemy, to denie, that our Sauiour is the same God with the Father? And what is more absurde, then to dreame of two Words, without anie inkling of such a matter giuen by the E­uangelist? [Page 89] or to imagine, that the word, here spoken of, [...] not the same, that afterward became flesh? First, this [...]erse is apparantly of the same Word, that was descri­ [...]ed in the former: as if the Euangelist had sayd, This [...]ord, which I have auouched to Ioh. 1. 1. 2. have been in the beginning, [...]o haue been with God, and to be God, this same word was in the beginning with God. Is there any least signification here of any Word, but one? what followes? By it were Verse 3. all things made. By what? By the Word. What word, but that which was mentioned before? For, to what else can it possibly be referred? Let vs goe forwarde. In it was life, and so to the sixt verse. Who sees not, that the Euangelist continues his speech of the same Word? Verse 4. Then followes Iohn the Baptists testimony: Of whom, Verse 6. but the same Word, the light of men, as before ver. 4. who is afterward called the true light. What need more Verse 9. Ver. 10. 11 Verse, 12. words? his intertainement, hee had by men, is shewed, and the honour they haue, that receiue him by faith, described. From which, the Euangelist passeth to the in­carnation of (why should I doubt to say so?) the same Ver. 14 Word. And the VVord (saith he) became flesh. Be not so vnreasonable, as to imagin, that the holy Ghost would make a discourse in so many verses of one Word, and vpon a sodaine fal into a new matter of an other Word, neuer heard of, neuer thought of before. Tell mee, I pray you, if you can, to what purpose all the forme [...] speech was, if our Euangelist now first begin to write of him whome only his Gospell dooth concerne. But what doe I spend time in refuting such absurdities? It is one and the same Word, that was in the beginning with God, & that, in due time, took flesh of the blessed Vir­gin Mary his mother.

But these heretickes make shewe of proofe, for that they say; as if they were blasphemous with reason. If Christ (say they) be that Word of the Father; since the Father and the Word are of the same substance, the Fa­ther [Page 90] also must be the word. First this makes no more a­gainst our Sauiours being the Word, then against the the other Word, which you fancy to your selues. For the Father, and that Word also, by the like reason, must be one word, because they are one in substance, that is one God, and yet not one Word; because to bee the word, is a propertie belonging to the person, not to the nature or substance of God; as it shall appeare God willing, when I handle the Doctrine of the Trinitie. They add, that the word being as it were made by speak­ing, must needes differ from the word which is spoken, for the making or producing of it; wilfully refusing to vnderstand, that although the act of speaking, and the word that is spoken be distinct, each from other; yet there are not two Words, but one; namely that which is formed by speaking. The Father doth not speake one word, by which the second is framed; but by speaking frames, & begets the Word. Lastly whereas they tel vs, that the word, which our Sauiour saith hee kept, and which the Iewes heard of him, was not all one with Christ himselfe, they say true, but nothing to purpose. For that worde was not any thing vnited in nature to God, but the Cōmandemēt of God, which is ordinarily in the Scripture called the word of God. As for their grosse & absurd conceite, that the Word meant by our Sauiour in such speeches of his, should be I knowe not what speaking in him, as it were a spirit in a body pos­sessed, it is fitter to be laught at, then laboured against. For how is our Sauiour Christ said, Ioh 8. 55. to keepe the worde of God, which is the place which these fonde Heretikes bring? By hauing it shut vp within him, as it were in prison? & not rather by remembring, and dooing that, which God enioyneth? The other place they alleage is no lesse absurd. Ioh. 14. 24. The word, that yee heare, is not mine, but the Fathers that sent me. Is it not euident, that our Sauiour means the word spokē, the word that I speak? So spake verse 23. he before. If any mā will loue me, he wil keepe my word. And [Page 91] immediatly before the words, they bring, Hee that lo­ueth me not, keepeth not my word; then followeth, And that word, which you heare, is not mine. Hee should rather haue said in your sense. And it is I, that you heare speaking. But to conclude this point, that which our Sauior saith here of the word, he speaks in another place of his doctrine. Ioh. 17. 16. My doctrine is not mine, but his that sent me. Thus much and indeed too much for this sottish heresie.

It is also gathered from hence by some, that the word is coeternall or equal to the Father in eternity. A doctrin very true, & needfull to be knowne; but such as was sig­nified before, when it was said that The VVord was in the beginning, & that it was with God. Neither doth the begin­ning, in this or the former clause note eternity, but the time, when all things began to be created. Wherfore to shut vp the interpretation of this verse with shewing what I concei [...]e to be intended in it, by the holy ghost; I am perswaded, that the purpose of the Evangelist was to repeate that, which in the former verse he had deliuered. For if he had meāt to add a fourth point of the like kind to the other 3; in all liklyhood, he would haue continued the same manner of writing, by coupling this to that, which went before, and haue said; And this was in the be­ginning with God. If any man obiect, that he doth not so in that which followeth: he is already answered, that in the next words the Evangelist comes to a new kinde of argument, wherby he proues that, which before hee had avoucht: namely that the word was in the beginning, & was God, At the least he describes the Word by outward effects towards the creatures, not by his owne nature or properties. Neither is this a bare repetition, but a plai­ner instruction for the simplest, that they may [...]ssure thē ­selues, that the Word was in the beginning with God. I graunt so much was implied before: but not exprest to euery mans capacity. Here the Evangelist speaketh so, that all may vnderstād him, & giues directiō for the interpreting of that clause, The VVord was with God. When was the [Page 92] Word with God? In the beginning. When as yet there was neither time, nor place, euen then had the Word his being with God.

I would gladly adde to all this, that, which is ob­seru'd by Toletus in Io­ [...]n. cap. 1. Annot. 11. some, as I perswade my selfe, not without great likelihood: that the Euangelist by his repetition, would, farther giue vs to vnderstand, that The VVord, not only, was in the beginning, but was then with God a worker in the creation of all things. The ground of this interpretation, is taken from that place in Pro. 8. 22. the Pro­uerbs, where this same Word is described by the name of wisdom. There first his eternal Being is described, Verse 30 The Lord possessed me in the beginning of his waie. I was be­fore his works of old: I was set-vp from euerlasting, &c. This description is continued to the end of ver. 26. In the 27. the holy Ghost proceeds to shew vs, that the same wis­dome was with God, as a nourisher, when hee prepared the heauens, when he set the compasse vpon the deep &c. Yea, it may be somewhat more particularly applyed; Salomon sayth, when he prepared the heauens, I was there. To that answereth this of our Euangelist; This was in the begin­ning with God.

His nourishing as some expound it, his creating or or­dering of all things, the holy Ghost heere expresseth at large, in the words following, By him were al things made. The conference of these two places seemes to warrant this exposition, as we haue seene. I wil not striue much about it; so wee apply this repetition to the strengthe­ning of our fayth. Concerning our Sauiour Christs e­ternall God-head, doubtlesse we attaine to the princi­pall thing intended by the holy Ghost. And of that point, what Christian can doubt, though he would ne­uer so faine? Dost thou not perceiue, that the holie E­uangelist deliuers it with aduise and deliberation? It is not a matter, that hee hits vpon, but a point chosen by him, to begin his Gospell withal. It slips not from him [Page 93] at vnawares: but is repeated, vpon good aduisement. Certainly this doubling of the point, makes it manifest, that the holy ghost would haue vs view and consider it throughly on al sides. It is neither of small importance, that it need not to be learned; nor easie to be beleeued, that it need not to be taught but once. Wherefore is it propounded, and repeated, but that it might be vnder­stood, and remembred? Vnderstood, that no hereticks deceiue vs; remembred, that our hearts faynt not: Hee, that is God Almighty hath redeemed vs: who shall bee able to hold vs Captiues? Let vs not be afraid to defye sin, hel, death and the deuil himselfe? Rom. 8. 31. God is on our side: who can be against vs?

Hauing thus expounded these two verses, and fin­ding in them some poynts, which concerne the admira­rable Doctrin of the most glorious, and holy Trinity; so many things also, beeing spoken euery where, in this gospel, of the Father, the Son, and the holy Spirit: I haue thought it necessarie, both sor your instruction, and the discharge of my dutie, to bestow the rest of this hower in opening that blessed mystery. Wherein (ac­cording to the example of our Euangelist, & the whole course of the scripture) I will content my selfe with the Euidence of the word, without the curiosity of schoole diuinity. It shall be sufficient for vs vnderstand, that the scripture affirmeth, that there is one God, and three persons, though we can see no reason how it can be so: And farder, in shewing that the three persons are in­deed distinct one from another, and not diuers respects of one and the same. I will not stand vpon their nature in themselues, so much as vpon those effects, which beeing ascrib'd to them in the Scripture, cannot, as in shall appeare, bee performed by anie one person. Our Euangelist deliuers the point of our Sauiours di­uine nature in a few words here in the beginning of the Gospell. Hee proues it at large by many wonderfull [Page 94] works of his, through the whole course of his writing. This shal be my example and warrant. Yet I would not haue any man think, that I either condemne their paines and care, who haue laboured to explaine these myste­ries, by the light of reason, or affirme, that the points themselues cannot stand with reason. They are indeed aboue reason, but yet not against reason. As the light of nature, cannot discerne them: so it cannot disproue thē. And the chiefe end of them, that endeuoured to discusse these maters, in some sort by reason, was rather to stop their mouths, that would not beleeue, thē to inforce thē to beleeue. Now this course, in this place and auditorie (I trust) is needlesse; I am sure with the greatest part it would be bootlesse. For how many, or rather how few are there heere present, that are able to examine; or con­ceiue the subtill arguments that haue been deuised, and vsed in these questions? Neither are wee to settle our faith by the waight of humane reason, but to ground it vpon diuine authority. Now to the matter.

Wherein, that I may proceede the more orderly, and be the more easily vnderstood; First I will speake of the vnity of the godhead, that there is but one God; Se­condly of the Trinity of the persons. Where, the first poynt must be to proue, that there are three persons; the second, to shew how they are distinguisht one from an other. And because there is in our Church seruice a trea­tise to this purpose, knowne in part to all, that are pre­sent, commonly called the Creed of Athanasius, who like a valiant champion maintein'd the godhead of Christ, against the Assaults of Arius, I will referre you from point to point to that discourse.

That there is but one God, the same one God witnes­seth himselfe in scripture. Exod. 20. 2. 3. I am the Lord thy God, thou shalt haue none other Gods but me. Which is not ambiti­ously spoken, as if some one God would haue the ho­nor frō all the rest; but enioyned with authority by him [Page 95] who onely had right to claime such preheminence. Els, neither had he done done iustly, that gaue this charge (and how should he be conceiu'd to be God, that is knowne to be vniust) and the Iewes to whom he gaue it, should haue hurt themselues as much, by displeasing all the o­ther Gods, whom they refused to acknowledge, as help themselues by pleasing that one, whome they did ac­knowledge. Vnlesle perhaps wee may ridiculously think, that for quietnes sake, the other Gods were con­tent to put vp this iniury, or that they were all agreed to part stakes, as the heathen absurdly feyne of their three Gods. Whereof Iupiter the eldest took heauen for his share, Neptune the second got the gouernment of the Sea, and Pluto the yongest, rather then he would sit out quite, was content to play small game (as we say) and to take Hell for his part rather then nothing. These are liker fancies of men in a dreame, then discourses of learned writers. And yet neither could these three bro­thers well agree at all times: and to say the truth, Iupi­ter, whom the other two aknowledged for their Soue­raign, was the onely God, in the Iudgement of the hea­then. But whatsoeuer they imagined, wee are sure our God doth so speake of himselfe, Deut. 32. 39. Behold now: for I am he, and there is no Gods with me. That appeares by the ef­fects; I kill (saith he) & giue life, I wound and I make whole. Are not these the works of god? In whose hāds are death & life, but in Gods? But hath this God only that power? Are there not other, that haue it, aswell as he? No sure: as himselfe addeth; There is none that can deliuer out of my hands. Thus he speaketh of himselfe: thus the pro­phet Moses Exod. 33. 11. that talked with him face to face, spea­keth of him; Vnto thee it was shew'd Deut. 435. (saith Moses to I srael) that thou mightst knowe that the Lord hee is God, and that there is none other, but hee alone. And afterward: Vnder­stand v. 39. therfore this day, and consider in thy heart, that the Lord, he is God, in heauen aboue, and vpon the earth beneath, [Page 96] there is none other. I might recken vp many like testimo­nies. But whom will not these content, if enough will content him?

Will any foolish blasphemer now except against these proofes, as if they were to be vnderstood of the general nature of God, not of any one, who onely is God? how fond and absurd must such an exception needs bee! see­ing all men know by reason, that generalls haue not a­ny reall being, diuers from the specials, or species, nor can be said to perform any particular action. For exam­ple (to make the matter as plaine as I can) Man, as it sig­nifieth that nature, which is common, or generall to e­uery seuerall man, is not any thing subsisting by itselfe, but hath it whole being in the particulars of that kind. Therefore also it cannot be said, that the generall nature of man doth reason or speake; but that this, or that man doth so. But God saith, I kill & giue life: neither can the general nature, which is leudly & absurdly conceiv'd, say truely of itselfe; Behold I am hee, and there are no gods with me; neither were such a speech to any purpose or of any vse: as if it were to bee thought that any man could imagin, that there are more, then one general na­ture of any one kinde. There is then but one God only. For if there were more, God could not say, there are no more: euen as Adam, after Caine and Abel were borne, could not affirme, That he alone was man, and that there was none beside him.

The same trueth is confirmed in the new Testament by the 1. Cor. 8 4. Apostle Paule; We know (saith he) that an Idol is nothing in the world, and that there is none other God, but one. As if he should haue said: Howsoeuer there are di­uers idols, of this, and that shape, men idols and women Idols; yet we know there are no such diuine powers in the world, as these (according to the fancy of men) re­present; yea we are are sure, there is but one God. The heathen indeed haue many, whom they call God and [Page 97] Lord: but to vs, that vnderstand the truth, there is but one Ver. 6. God. So doth the Scripture euerie where speake of God, as of one; Rom. 1. 21. 23. When they knew God, they glorified him not as God. The glorie of the incorruptible God. What shal I need to heape vp many testimonies, in a case, that is not doubt­full? All the wise and learned, both Christians, Iewes, & Heathen, agree with one consent, that there cannot be any more, then one God.

All this notwithstanding, wee finde that in the Scrip­ [...]ure there are more then one, that are sayde to bee God First, there is one called the Father, whom al men acknowledge to be God; Rom. 1. 7. Grace be with you, and peace from God our Father. 1 Cor. 8. 6. To vs there is but one God, which is the Fa­ther. Eph. 1. 3. Blessed bee God, euen the Father of our Lord Iesu Christ. Secondly, as I shewed before, Iesus Christ, or the Word, is also vouched to bee God. In the former verse The word was God. Rom. 9. 5. Christ is God ouer all, belssed for euer Thirdly, it is manifest, in the same Scripture, that the ho­ly Ghost, in like sort, is God. For although there be no [...] one place, wherein hee is so tearmed by name: yet the comparing of one text with another, puts the matter out of question. The Lord saith to the people of Israell, that if Num. 12 6. there be a Prophet amongst them, he, the Lord, wil appear to him in a vision, he will talke with him in a dreame. It was the Lord therefore that spake in and by the Prophets This Lord saith 1. Pet. 1. 11. Saint Peter, was the spirit. The spirit te­stified before of Christ. 2. Pet. 1. 21. Prophecie came not in olde time by the will of man: but holy men of God, spake, as they were moued by the holy Ghost. So God is said to bee hee Act. 2. 24. 25. & 1. 16 that spake by the mouth of Dauid: and the same God it tear­med the holy Ghost in an other place. It is welknown that euerie where in the olde Testament the Iewes are accused resisting God. That, Act. 7. 51. Stephen expoundeth of the holy Ghost: O yee of vncircumcised harts, and eares, ye haue alwaies resisted the holy ghost; as your fathers, so you If then there bee but one God and [...]et three distinct [Page 98] one from another, be euerie one of them God; how can it be denied, that there are three persons, Mat. 28. 19. the Father, the Sonne, and the holy Ghost. To this, the beginning as it were of our Profession leades vs, when wee are baptised in or into the name of the Father, and of the Sonne and of the holy Ghost.

Now for the better conceiuing of this great mysterie, touching the three persons: it is necessarie for vs to vn­derstand, what a person is; And then wee shall the more easily perceiue, that euerie one of the three is a person. And here, if I should stand curiously to deliuer an exact definition of the thing, and tell you that a Person is an in­diuiduall [...]ubsistence in an intellectuall nature, or a seuerall or singular thing, that subsisteth by it selfe, in a nature indu­ed with vnderstanding; I should either leaue you more vncertaine, then I found you, or bestowe more time in expounding the wordes, then shall neede (I hope) to make you discerne of the matter it selfe. Wherefore (to speake plainely, rather then artificially) it may please you first to bee perswaded, that although the word person, bee not in the Scripture applyed to the Father the Sonne, and the holy Ghost: yet euerie one of them is so described therein, that wee may, and must needes conceiue him to bee a person, according as wee vnderstand the word. First, who knowes not, that there is no person. but where there is a nature, that hath reason and vnderstanding. For no man euer calles any creature, that is not indu­ed with reason; by the name of a person. Who will, or may say of tenne or twentie Lions, Horses, Oxen, Apes, or any creatures of the like kinde, that there are tenne or twentie persons? For example, if wee haue a denne, or a stall, that will receiue tenne Lions, or tenne Oxen: no man will say, such a denne or stall will holde tenne per­sons. But if there bee a Table, whereat tenne men may sit, it is an vsuall speech, to say, it will holde tenne per­sons. So that first to the being of a Person, it is necessa­ry, [Page 99] that the thing, which wee call a Person, bee by na­ture indued with reason: otherwise, it cannot by any meanes be a person. Secondly, wee are farther to vn­derstand, that the word person notes vnto vs some one of that kinde, and not many considered together. For, it were absurd to say of those tenne men before menti­oned, though necessarily they haue euerie one of them, the vse of reason, that they are a Person. There­ [...]ore by Person wee meane any one of such a kinde. Euery man, euery woman, euery childe is a person; because euery one of them hath vnderstanding by nature, and is seuerall or distinct by himselfe, from al o­ther: so that no other man, woman, or child in the world in heauen or in earth, is or can be the same person. Some man perhaps will imagin, that those qualities, or ver­tues, which are no where to bee found, but where first there is reason, as iustice, wisedome, temperance, fortitude, and such like, may bee tearmed Persons; especi­ally since euerie one of these, is seuerall from other. But that cannot bee: because whatsoeuer is a Person must depend on nothing as a part or property therof, but must be intire of it selfe. None of these qualities are such: but all of them haue their being in some one per­son or other. Salomons wisedom, and Samsons strengt [...] haue no being, but in Salomon, and Samson: with them: they are; if they cease to bee, they are not. The case is farre otherwise with Salomon, and Samson themselues. Let the wisedome of the one, and the fortitude of the other be turned into folly and Cowardise, yet shal each of them be still a person, as before he was: yea, if there were no more Men, Women, nor Children in the world, but they two or either of them: yet should they both, if both continued, or the one of them, if the one continued, bee two persons or one person. So then to the being of a Person it is required, for the ge­nerall, that the thing bee of such a kinde, as hath na­tu [...]ally [Page 100] reason or vnderstanding; more parrticular­ly, that it be one singular thing of that kind, and that it be such a thing, as hath a subsistence by it self, and depend not vpon any other, as a part, or property thereof; whersoeuer we find such a thing, we haue a Person, yea so many Persons as wee haue such things. Now let vs apply this to the blessed Trinity.

And first concerning the nature of God, it neither is nor can be doubted, but that he is the very fountain & spring of all vnderstanding. Frō which, the smal streams continually do flowe, which wee see in the shallowe channelles of the creatures. Psal. 94. 9. Hee, that planted the eare, shall hee not heare? Hee that formed the eye, shall hee not see? Rom. 16. 27. To God only wise, be prayse through Iesus Christ for­euer, Amen. Secondly, it is apparāt in the Scripture, that the Father, the Sonne, and the holy Ghost are distinct each from the two other; so that there is Athanal. Creed. ver. 24. But one Fa­ther, one Sonne, one holy Ghost, and neither the Father is the Sonne, or the holy Ghost: nor the Sonne the Father, or the holy Ghost: nor the holy Ghost, the Father, or the Sonne. Which proueth manifestly that euerie one of these three, hath his subsistence by himselfe, and so is a person. Looke not that I should repeate that, which before I deliuered: take that one place for all: Baptise them in the name of the Father, of the Sonne, and of the holy Ghost. These three names, Father, Sonne, and holy Ghost, doe not signifie three vertues, or qualities of one person, but three distinct persons.

Therfore, are they also alleag'd by the Apostle as three witnesses. I. Iohn. 5. 7. There are three that beare record in heauen, the Father, the Word, and the holy Ghost. But this mater be­longs rather to the second part of this discourse: wher­in I am to shew, how they are distinguisht one from an other. But ere I come to that point (and yet I will ha­sten to it, all I can) I must needes forewarne you, that none of vs, for ought that hath beene, or shall bee sayde, [Page 101] conceiue of God, as of the creatures. There is one ge­nerall nature common to all men, whereby they are men; and so men, as that euerie seueral person, is a seueral man. Paul, Peter, Iames, and Iohn, are foure men, aswell as foure persons. But the Father, the Sonne, and the holy Ghost, are onely three persons, and not three Gods, For the e­stablishing of your faith in this point, I pray you re­member, that I haue made it euident to you, out of the scripture, both that euerie one of these is a seuerall per­son, and also that they are all three but one God. That euery one of them is God, it hath been manifestly proued; and no lesse, that there is but one God. Whereupon it must necessarily follow, that they are all three, not three Gods, but one God. And this is that which you haue, set downe in the Creede named before, Ath [...]nas. Creed. ver. 3. That we worshippe one God in Trinitie, and Trinitie in Vnitie, that is, one God and yet three persons; Three persons, and yet one God.

If any man, for the satisfying of his minde, desire far­ther to vnderstand the reason of this difference, betwixt the Creator, and the Creatures; why euerie seuerall per­son amongst men, should be also a seuerall man, and not all one man: and yet the three persons, but one God; he must knowe, that this proceedes from the diuersitie of nature in God and man. The nature of man being finit, may be multiplyed into many seuerall men of the same kindes: But the nature of God being infinit, cannot possibly admitte any multiplication; because there can­not be many infinits, or infinit substances, as there may be and are verie many finit substances, seuerall and diffe­ring each from other. He, that can with iudgement and learning examine those points, that concerne the nature of God, may conceiue the truth of that I say: they that cannot, haue sufficient ground for their beliefe in the word of that God, who neither can be deceiv'd in discer­ning his owne nature, because he is infinitly wise; nor will deceiue any man, in speaking of it, because hee is infi­nite [Page 102] in truth and goodnes. [...]et vs goe forwarde there­fore to learne of him the doctrine of the Trinitie.

The word Trinitie (as I sayd ere while of Person) is in no place of Scripture: but the thing being there, we are not to refuse, or mislike the word; especially, since it is of good vse, and hath beene of so long continuance in the Chruch. It is enough, if wee vnderstand; that whensoeuer the Trinitie is named, all three persons are signified: as for example; when wee say, the Trinitie is holy, blessed and glorious; wee meane, that the Fa­ther, the Sonne, and the holy Ghost, are holy, blessed, and glorious. When wee say the Trinitie of persons, it is our purpose to shew the nūber of the persons, that they are three. These two points, touching the vnitie of the god head, and Trinitie of the persons, are set out at large in [...]th. mas. Creed. ver. 3. 4. 5 &c. Ver. 4. the forenamed Creed, from the beginning of the third verse, to the ende of the twentie one verse. The summe of all is this, that wee must neither confound the per­sons, nor diuide the substance. To confound, in that place, signifies to mingle together, and so to make one of ma­ny: and that is the verie naturall meaning of the Latine word. So that, when wee are forbidden to confound the persons, wee are taught that wee may not so hold the v­nitie of the Godhead, that we denie the Trinitie of the persons, and in stead of three, make but one; whereas, Ver. 5. according to the next verse, There is one person of the Fa­ther, another of the Sonne, and another of the holy Ghost; and not one of all three.

Neither yet may wee diuide the substance, as if the diuine nature were multiplied, according to the number Ver. 6. 7. of the persons. For (as it followeth immediately) the Godhead of the Father, of the Sonne, and of the holy Ghost is all one, the glorie equall, the maiestie coaeternall. There­fore all the attributes, properties, and titles, which ap­pertaine to God, belong equally, and in the same res­pects, to all, onely they are distinguished by that which [Page 103] is proper to each person. The particulars, whereby Ve. 8 9. 10, &c. this matter is declared in the same Creede, are these; To be vncreated, Incomprehensible, Eternall, Almightie, to be God, and Lord. All these, and all the rest of this kind, which are many, are common to all three persons, be­cause the nature of all three is one, and the same: where­fore although wee must acknowledge euerie person by him­selfe Ver 19. to bee God and Lord: yet wee may not say, there are three Gods or three Lords. Ver. 20.

I haue shewed you, that there is but one God, which is three persons; euerie one of them being alike, and e­quall in all things, that belong to the nature of the god­head. It remaines, that I should speake of the distincti­on of the three persons; onely so farre, as to make vs vnderstand, wherein that distinction consists. For the better conceiuing whereof, wee may say, in one word, that the manner of being, which each person hath pro­per to himselfe, is that, by which they are distinguished; in all other things, there is no reall distinction of any one of them, from another. The very names them­selues, which are giuen to them seuerally in Scripture, point to the distinction, that is amongst them. The Father, as euery man knowes, in that hee is a Father, or, as hee is a Father, is conceiv'd to bee of himselfe, and to giue being to his Sonne. Consider Adam the first man, without looking backe to his creation, by which he had his being from God: but, looke onely forward as hee was his Son Abels Father: Do you not plaine­ly perceiue, that Adam thus considered, is author o [...] Abels being? Apply this to God the Father. Being God, hee canne, in that regard, haue no authour, nor beginning of being. Consider him as the Father: Hee Ver. 21 is of himselfe, not made, not created, not begotten, not procee­ding. It is not possible truly to imagine any thing of his Being; but that Hee is.

May wee reasonably affirme the like of the Sonne? [Page 104] Surely, as hee is God, there can nothing be sayd or con­ceiv'd of the Father, but may truely and must nece­ssarily bee spoken, and thought of the Sonne, and of the holy Ghost seuerally, aswel as of the Father: wherin then lies the distinction? Euery man can readily answer, In his manner of being, or in his being the Sonne. Take the former example. Adam and Abel are both men, & in respect of their humane nature, there is no difference betwixt them. What then? Is there none at all there­fore? yes sure: Adam hath not his being of any other, as hee is a Father; Abell hath his, as hee is a Sonne, of his Father Adam. Let it not trouble you, that I menti­on a difference betwixt Adam and Abell, and acknow­ledge no difference, but onely a distinction betwixt God the Father and the Sonne: the reason is, because Adam and Abell are, as two persons, so two men: God Ver. 22. the Father, and God the Sonne are indeede two per­sons, but not two Gods. Wee see then, that the Father, is truely and really a distinct person from the Sonne: who though hee be neither made, nor created by the Fa­ther, yet is begotten of him; and so hath not his being of himselfe, but of his father, and therefore, in the manner of his being, is distinguisht from the Father.

So is the holy Ghost, or spirit from both of them. You wil aske me, by what he is distinguisht from them. I an­swere Ver. 23. by his proceeding from them. First, it is manifest he is distinct from the father; because he is not of him­selfe, in regard of his person, as the father is. Secondly, although he agree with the Sonne, in that each of them hath his being from a Third, namely the Father; yet in the particular maner of his being, he is distinguisht frō him. For the Sonne is begotten by the Father, & so hath his being: but the holy Ghost is not begotten, but pro­ceedeth. From whome doth the holy Ghost proceed? From the other two persons, the Father and the Sonne. Of his proceeding frō the Father, our Sauiour Ioh. 15. 26. speaks [Page 105] distinctly and plainely, The comforter shall come, whom I will send you from from the Father, the spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father. Therefore also hee is called the spirit of the Father. It is not you that speake Mat. 10. 2 [...] (saith our Sauiour) but the spirit of your Father, which speaketh in you. Now that he also proceedeth from the Sonne, it may thus appeare: All things ( Ioh. 16. 15. saith our Sauior) that the Father hath, are mine. And speaking to the Father he Ioh. 17. 10. sait [...] All thine are mine. The later of these two Texts may be vnderstood (I grant) of those things that are (as wee speake) without God: but because it hath vsually beene applyed to proue this point, I thought fit to alleadge it. You will reply, that all the Fathers, is not the Sons; That personall property, whereby he is the Sonne, is not the Fathers, but the Sonnes: & that, by which the Father is the Father, is not the Sonnes, but the Fathers. Whatsoeuer else the Father hath, the Sonne hath also. But that the holy Ghost proceeds from the Father, is not the personall property of the Father; and therefore the Sonne hath that, and so with the Father, as it were by breathing, produceth the holy Ghost: who therfore is called the spirit of the Sonne, and of Christ, Gal 46. God hath sent the spirit of his Sonne into your hearts. If any man Rom 89. haue not the spirit of Christ, the same is not Christes. It is not said indeed, that the holy Ghost proceedeth from the Sonne, as it is, that he proceedeth from the Father: but since he is called the spirit of the Sonne, as wel as of the Father, wee truely gather, that hee proceedeth no lesse from the Sonne, then from the Father, though the one be exprest, and the other be not.

To conclude then, we see what the properties are, by which the persons are distinguisht among themselues; The Father begetteth, & neither is begotten, nor proceedeth: the Sonne is begotten, but proceedeth not: the holy Ghost neither begetteth, nor is begotten, but proceedeth. All these 3. He that begetteth, He that is begotten, and He that pro­ceedeth, [Page 106] are all one and the same God, to bee blessed and praised for euer and euer, Amen. Therefore are all 3 ab­solutely equall in all matters, appertaining to the na­ture of God: only there are 2 things, wherein the Fa­ther hath as it were some praeeminence among the per­sons. The one I noted by the way before; that He is of himselfe: so is neither of the other, but both are of him. The other is, that the father is the first in order; &, in these respects, he is sometime called by Diuines the fountaine v [...]rse. 25. of the Trinitie. And whereas it is said in that Creed of­tē named, that None of the 3 persons is afore or after other; the meaning is, that none of them is in time afore or af­ter Verse. 26. other, all being eternall, as the next verse sheweth: saying, that All 3 are coeternall, that is alike eternall. The Sonne also hath the like preaeminence aboue the holy Ghost. For both he is in order before him, beeing the second: and the holy Ghost is of him, as well as of the Father. But these praeeminences concerne the per­sons, which are distinct, not the diuine nature, which is wholly & absolutely one; as by which, these 3 persons are one God. To whome be all glory &c.

ALL true knowledge of things a­riseth, either from an vnderstand­ing of their inward nature, or from a consideration of their workes, and actions. The former, teach­ing vs the hidden causes, is the pe­fecter, but the harder; the later shewing vs the secret nature, by the manifest effects, is the lesse perfect, but the more easie. That nothing might be wanting, whereby any man might be drawne or perswaded to the acknowledging of our Sauiour Christs Godhead, our Evangelist hath both laid open the mystery of his nature, and set out to all mens viewe the wonderfull glory of his workes. Hast thou a desire to fill the depth of thy vnderstanding, with the profoūd knowledge of his eternall being? Behold sufficient mat­ter of continuall meditation and study. In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God. &c. Will not thy [Page 108] capacity or leasure serue thee, to sound the depth of these bottomelesse mysteries? Behold a shorter and ea­sier meanes of knowledge, by which thou maist see the glorious Sonne shining in his workes, whome in his naturall brightnesse thy dazled eies cannot looke vp­on. If thou canst not perfectly comprehend the infinit­nesse of his light, yet thou shalt certainely discerne that it is infinite. And with this desire and hope, lette vs come to the expounding of this verse.

Wherein we are first to vnderstand, what it is, that our Euangelist here teacheth; Secondly to see, how it proues our Sauiour Christes diuinity. In the former part, I will speake of the clauses of this verse seuerally; then I wil consider the matter of them, ioyntly both to­gether. By him were al things made; that is, to speake plain­ly, He made all things: I am not ignorant, that Erasmus ad hunc locum. some mē cast more doubts then need, because the word Him, in the greeke, may bee referred either to God, or to the Word; and therfore they thinke it meete and needful so to translate it, that it may be certainly, and necessarily, by the very translation, restrained to the Word; so that in their opinion, we must say, Istud, not Ipsū. It & not Him. For mine owne part, I will not striue about a matter of so small importance: only I see no necessity of any such curiosi­ty in translating. For seeing it is very apparant, that the Evangelist intendeth to describe our Sauiour Christ, of whome the whole Gospell doth intreate, and that al the other verses, and clauses of verses, are applyed there­vnto; he must needs be lesse then a reasonable man, that would pluck this verse out of the midst of the rest, and conceiue that by it, which neuer came into the thought of him, that pend it. But for the translation, reade it as you please, so you vnderstand the meaning of the E­uangelist aright, that the Word or Sonne of God, our Sa­uiour Christ made all things. This being vnderstood, wee are first to enquire what this speech importeth, By him; [Page 109] then what is said of him: namely, what this making was, and what was made.

By him, or By it, By the VVord or by the Sonne: why d [...]th the Euangelist make choise of this kind of speech, and not rather, say plainely, as he might, He made all things? It is, and hath bin alwaies commonly held, that this ma­ner of speaking doth better set out the worke of the Creation, and confirme that former point of doctrine, whereby our Sauiour was affirmed to bee the sonne of God. If it had bin said, that The VVord created all things, it might haue bin imagined, that the Father had had no hand therein: whereas now it is implyed, that the Fa­ther made all things by the Sonne. But surely (sauing their better iudgemēt, that thus reasō) there is no more feare least the father shoulde bee thought not to haue created the world, because the sonne did, then least the holy Ghost, should by the same speech be imagined to haue had nothing to do therein: & it is as much against the truth of religion to deny or doubt of the Godhead of the holy Ghost, as of the fathers being God. Yea, the daunger was greater, concerning the holy Ghost; be­cause not only the Scripture doth more often ascribe that worke of creation to the Father, then to the ho­ly Ghost: but also the generall opinion of al men makes the father a Creator, whereas the diuine nature of the holy Ghost is not so commonly knowne or beleeued. Neither will this kind of speech, which our Euangelist here vseth, though you take it neuer so largely, preuent or remedy that doubt, touching the worke of the holy Ghost in the Creation; but that for ought, that can pos­sibly be implied in this phrase By him, the spirit may be thought to be no creator. But (that I may omit nothing which may be gathered for our instruction, out of a­ny reasonable obseruation) let vs a little consider, how this manner of speaking, may confirme our faith, con­cerning our Sauiour Christs being of his father. When [Page 100] we say By him, we oftē times imply, that there was some other, beside him, of whom we so speak. For example, if I say By Ioab the Ammonits were subdued; I may sig­nifie thereby, that Dauid did sub due them by Ioab. So, By the VVord all things were made; I may hereby giue no­tice, that the father made al things, by the Word. Yet (to say the truth) neither doth this maner o [...] speech vsually imply any such matter; nor the other exclude any that are, or may be held to haue bin doers therein. And ther­fore we are faine to adde only or alone, when we would haue it conceiu'd, that some one was the dooer of this, or that. But let vs grant, that By him signifieth also the wor­king of the Father, that wee maye come to the cheefe thing intended by that obseruation. What if all thinges be made by the Sonne? We must learne thereby that the Sonne hath all that he hath, from the Father, and not of himselfe. The father is said to haue made all things; be­cause he is of himselfe: All things are said to be made by the sonne, for that he is of another. I propound these things to your consideration, not so much with any o­pinion, that the Euangelist had any such meaning, as for the satisfaction of some, who think it not lawfull to leaue any thing vntaught, which hath beene formerly observ'd, and deliuered for truth. And I doe it the of­tener now in this beginning, that I may rather bee ex­cused hereafter, for leauing that out of my expositi­on, which hath no certaine euidence of truth, nor great likelihood of reason. Wherefore I will (for the most part) content my selfe, with the alleaging, and refuting of such interpretations onely, as the heretikes, Papists, and other, haue made for the avowing of some of their errors. For the present, to cleare that, which I haue begunne to speake of, the doctrine of our Sauiours re­ceiuing his being from his Father, yea the very power of creating, if you consider him as a Sonne, is true, and soūd. For being so cōsidred, he is wholly of the Father, [Page 101] and hath nothing of himselfe; that wee may not conti­nue a needlesse, & fruitlesse controuersie, begune slaun­derously by some Papists and ignorantly, as I shewed in my last exerci [...]e, concerning the Godhead of the Sonne. But this Doctrine cannot necessarily be gathe­red from this kind of phrase. But if our Euangelist had intended any such thing, hee would haue said, that the Father made all things by the Sonne: as Heb. 1. 2. the Apostle speaketh, By whome also he made the world: and not thus vncertainely, and to such a purpose obscurely, By him all things were made; Especially, since the same speech may truely be vttered euen of God the Father, or of the Diuine nature, in which all three Persons are compre­hended. I doe therefore rather perswade my selfe, that the Euangelist vsed his libertie: and whereas hee might say either He made all things, or By him all things were made, he did make choise of the later, both for variety, and for elegancy of speech. He had spoken of the Word altogether as yet after one maner of phrase; The Word was: that he now varies, saying not He made, but By him were made: and this suiteth with the next verse very fitly, By him were all things made, In him was life.

There is no question, but that this making, which the Euangelist here noteth, was the creating of the world, whereof Moses speaketh. And how soeuer it is a common opinion, that creating signifieth making without any matter, whereof the things to bee created should be made, whereas making presupposeth mat­ter ready to be framed, and formed; yet indeed there cā hardly be any such distinction wrung out of the words themselues. For neither hath the Hebrew, that Moses vseth, to set out the creation, any such nature, nor the Greeke, by which it is translated. For the former, it ap­peareth manifestly by the ordinary vse of it in the Scripture, and namely by Moses himselfe; who applies the word making to that, which in in the next verse he cals [Page 112] creating; l [...]t vs make man: Thus God created the man in his image. The words are diuers, and yet spokē of the same thing, or action, But what needes any farther proofe, x Gen. 1. 26. 27. then Moses himselfe affords vs in this verse. Thus God created the man in his image, in the image of God created he him; he created them male and female. Do you marke the same word thrice vsed, concerning the making of man? And yet who knowes not, that Gen. 2. 7. The Lord God made the man of the dust of the ground? Would Moses haue called that making of man by the name of Creating, if to Create were to make of nothing? Surely man was not created, being made of the dust, if there be no creating, where there is matter of which he is to bee made. So it is also affirmed by Moses, Gen. 21. that God created the great whales: what of nothing? Nothing lesse. It is well knowne, and recorded euen there by Moses, that the water brought them forth. I wil say more. There is no one place in the history of the creation. where the worde Creating maye be taken, (I doe not say must bee, but may bee taken) for making of nothing, except perhaps the first verse, In the beginuing God created heauen, and earth: only here may the word be so vnderstood, because by heauen & earth, the first matter of all things may be conceiued; which only was created of nothing, all things else of it. As for the greeke, both the vse of it in al kind of writers speaketh for me: & who can imagin, that they who did not beleeue, that euer there was any creation, shoulde deuise a needlesse word to signifie such a thing, as they neuer dreamt of and if at any time they speake of such a question, they expresse themselues, by adding some worde to make; as to make of nothing, or without any pre­existent matter, or such like.

What then? Doe wee deny the thing, because wee say there is no word, that necessarily signifieth To make of nothing? God forbid. We haue taught, and can easily proue, if neede be, that all things, besides God, haue had [Page 113] a beginning of their being. Then were they ether made of nothing, which indeed is most true, or of God him­himselfe, as the matter of them. But the later is meerely vnpossible. For neither is God of any bodily matter, as we see those thinges to be; Iob. 4. 24. God is a spirit: and whatsoe­uer is of his substance, is the same God with him, infi­nit in power, and being: whereas all creatures are finit, in both. Therefore when we meditate on the glorious worke of creation, wee must drawe our thoughts from the cogitation of these things, which we see, feel, heare, smell, and tast, and conceiue aswell, as we can, that there is nothing, but God. How then came all these to be, the world, and the creatures therein? God made them. Of what? Of that first matter, which was without forme, couered all ouer with darknesse. But whereof was that first matter made? Of nothing. That is, when as yet there was nothing at all, but the in comprehensible ma­iestie of God, in his eternall being, it pleased him to wil that all these things should be: and by this will of his, & according to this will, all, and every one of these Crea­turs took their being. First, as God had from all eternity purposed, and willed, that first matter, or lump, had its being, simply of nothing, as all reason shewes vs. For how is it possible to cōceiue, or imagin, that that, which is the first matter, should haue any other matter before it, of which it might be made? Therefore Arist. Phys [...]. lib. 1. the Philoso phers being ignorant of the creation, were inforced to make this first matter eternal: and this was the conceipt I. ucret. de natu­ra rerum. lib. 1. of them all, that did not acknowledge God to bee the maker of that matter. So then if you aske me, what that was, which was made of nothing; I say, the first matter of all things, and in which all creatures were contained. If any man be afraid, least this opinion should deminish the glory of God, in creating the particulars; hee must be put in mind, that both the matter it selfe was made by God of nothing, & that all the creatures were made [Page 114] of it, by no lesse infinit power, then the lumpe it selfe was made. If Adam in his first estate, if all the Angells of God had beene created before this lumpe; and that being made, by the Almighty power of God, had beene brought vnto them, Gen. 2. 19. as the creatures were to Adam: it had not bin possible for them, I will not say to haue made these other inferior creatures, but so much as to haue deuised the forme, and workmanship, which no [...] they see, and wonder at, in the meanest creatures. But of this point in the second part, when I come to shew that the Creation of all things is a certaine proofe of our Sa­uiours Godhead.

It remaines, that wee expounde the last words, All things. What need they any exposition, may some man say. For who is so dull, that he vnderstands not, what is meant by them? what can be meant, but absolutely All things, without exception? Surely it is certaine, that the Euangelists meaning is so; and a man may well maruell that there should be any question made of it: yet such hath bin the malice of Satan, and the miserable shifting of Hereticks, that (I thinke) no one text in this whole Gospell, hath bin more strangely, or diuersly interpre­ted. I will touch some of the errors, point at other, and stand long vpon none. We presse the generalitie of the words All things, which comprizeth whatsoeuer hath any being. Would you think it possible, that these words [...]eing so large, should bee stretcht too farre? Yet haue they bin, most absurdly. For by them Macedonius, who denied the Godhead of the holy Ghost, laboured to e­stablish his blasphemous heresy. If all things (saith hee) then the holy Ghost too, vnles he be nothing. Why dost thou not multiply thy absurdities, and say asmuch of the Fa­ther, and the Sonne himselfe too? For if it seeme ab­surde to thee, as it is, to containe the Sonne vnder these generall tearmes, because hee is the creator or maker; how canst thou imagin such a blasphemy, of the holye [Page 115] Ghost, who is also a Creator with him, being one & the same God? At the least thou canst not exempt the Fa­ther; of whom there is no more mention in this clause, then of the holy spirit. But Ambro [...] [...] sp [...]. S. cap 2. [...]y ril. lib. 1. m I [...] cap. 5. Chry [...]. in Ioa. [...]om. 4 Gro [...]or [...] [...] ora [...]. Thco [...]. 5. the Euangelist (that I may not spend too much time in these fancies) hath answe­red for himselfe, where he restraineth this to the things, that were made. VVithout him was made nothing that was made. Whatsoeuer was made, was made by him: but the holy Ghost being God (as hath bin shewed) hath an eternall being, and was neuer made; though he proceed from the father, and the Sonne.

As Macedonius stretcht those words, farder then they would reach: so on the contrary side, other Hereticks drew them into a narrower roume, then they could en­dure. For whereas by by all things we must vnderstand whatsoeuer had any beginning of being, whether it be visible, as the heauens, the Earth & the Sea, men, beasts, fowles, fishes: or inuisible, as the Angells, and spirites; some Hereticks denied, that the one of these kinds was created by the Word, some that the other. The Valenti­nians were content to grant, that hee made all things, that are bodily, and subiect to sense, yea perhaps the soules of men too, & the Angells: but yet for sooth they dreamt of I knowe not what [...] apud Iren. lib. 1. cap. 1. 2. 3. other conceits, which were not created by him. The Manichees allowed God the creation of all inuisible spirits: but they thought the world, and the creatures in it, too base a peece of worke for so glorious a worke-master; not perceiuing (igno­rant wretches as they were) that the making of the least creature requires infinite wisdome, & power. But what should I enter into any refutation of these Heretickes? All I meane to doe in such cases, is to cleare the Text from such errors, as they loade it withall. Therfore it shall be sufficient against the one, and the other, that the Euangelist not only speakes so generally All things, but also adds, to take away all manner of cauills, that [Page 116] nothing, or not one thing was made without him. Nei­ther will it serue the Valentinians turne, to say, that their fancies were not made because whatsoeuer is not God, had certainely a beginning of being, from and by the Sonne; and therefore those multitudes of their Aeones as they call them, must needes bee made. For being so many, and so diuerse in nature, it is not possible, they hould be God; as themselues also grant. And for the first clause By him were all things made, this may suffice: I come to the second.

And without him was nothing made, that was made. Here, because there is some variety in ioyning, or s [...]ue­ring the words, which makes a difference in the mean­ing of the Euangelist; it behoues vs, first to seeke out the true pointing of the sentence, and then wee may readily proceed, to enquire after the sense thereof. Some min­gle part of this verse, and part of the next together, rea­ding it thus; Without him, was made nothing, that was made in him; taking the two last words In him, from the verse that followeth. But this hath so little shew of reason in it, that to rehearse it, is to refute it. For how idle a speech is it, to say, that nothing was made without him, that was made in him; that is by him? As if any reasonable man could imagin, that somthing was made by him, which was made without him. If any man wil interpret In him, as the words properly signify, it is yet more absurd. For neither are al things Tertull. contra Her [...]g. cap. 2c. in the Word, taking In Properly; and it is a manifest contradiction to say, that a thing is made in this, or that, and yet made without it, that is, not within it. August. an Ioa. tract. 1. Other thrust the later part of this verse, to the fourth, and make it part thereof, in this sort; That which was made, in him was life. And so our Rhemists trā ­slate the place, following the vulgar Latin. But there is more curiosity in this reading, then truth. For who can beleeue, that the Euangelist would trouble them, that should reade, or heare this Gospel, with such a subtility, [Page 117] as few men are able to vnderstand; that all things which which were made before their making, were life in God; because they were God himself, as they thē were [...] and therefore life; because his knowledge, by which they were, is his essence, and so life. These conceipts may perhaps be admitted in the shooles, to exercise schollers witts withal: but they can haue no place in the Scripture; which is appointed for the instruction of the weakest capacities. Besides, in al likely hood, if the Euā ­gelist had purposed to giue vs notice of that matter, he would not haue said (as he doth) That, which was made &c. but rather Those, or All things, that were made, were life in him. I deny not, that this translation hath some authoritie from antiquity. But surely not so much as is commonly thought: & the very euidence of truth, hath made some later Papists also reiect it.

The truest, & plainest course is, to reade it, as we com­monly doe, following the generall consent of almost al the auncient greeke writers: sure the learnedst, and soundest. VVithout him was made nothing that was made. Let no mā trouble himselfe with deuising, what the rea­son should be, why the holy Ghost adds this clause, see­ing hee had spoken sufficient in the former: I will, if it please God, satisfy this doubt, when I haue expounded the words, and come to deliuer the meaning of the E­uangelist in them. Now the words are plaine enough in themselues; but that the curiosity of some men, and the crafty malice of Satan, hath made them doubtfull: yet the doubtes are neither many nor hard. First, by without, Origen. in Ioa. lib. 3. some men will needes vnderstand that, which before I noted; as if the Euangelists meaning were that the word contained al things in him, as the preseruer o [...] them, by his infinit power, and being. The doctrine is true, but nothing to the purpose. It is easie for euery man to discerne, that without him signifies no more bu [...] that, which was said in the former part of the sentence [Page 118] By him; the one affirming, the other denying. If the E­uangelist had said, within him were al things, thē there had bin god reason to expound without, as these men doe. But since he puts By him in the first part, surely in the later, without must haue such a sense, as best agrees with that. Tel me how you would vnderstand my words, if I should speake thus? Dauids battailes were all fought by Ioab, and without him there was none fought. So speak­eth S. Iohn, and so he is to be vnderstood.

But in the word without, only the curiosity of men was to be blamed: in the exposition of the other worde, No­thing, wilful ignorance, and malitious peruerting of the holy Ghosts meaning bewary themselues. If I should aske any reasonable man, how he thinkes those wordes without him was nothing made, are to bee vnderstood; would he not answere me readily, and plainely; that the Euangelist meant to tell vs, that There was not any thing made, but by him? Surely, thus would a reasonable man answere, if hee would answere like a reasonable man. But Manich. apud August. de natu­r [...] boni. cap. 25. the men, of whome I speake, will haue Nothing to be something; And whereas S. Iohn would teach vs, that whatsoeuer was made, was made by him, they would make him say, that there was a thing, yea many hundred, or thousand things, that were not made by him. Nothing was made without him. That is, say the Manichees, hee was not the maker of Nothing; but that was made without him. Could a man deuise to speake more contrary to the holy Ghost, if the would set himselfe to it neuer so ear­nestly? But what is this nothing? No lesse then the heauē, the earth, the sea, and whatsoeuer is contained in al these (except spirits) They might better call these All things, then Nothing. Sure, it is a farre easier matter to perswade men to be Sadduces, and thinke there are no spirits at al, then to make them beleeue, that all these bodily things are nothing. They are nothing (say they) because they are naught, and made by the deuill. Away with these horrible [Page 119] blasphemies, and absurdities. Is the world euill by cre­ation, and not rather wholly by corruption? Or is there any thing in the worlde so euill, that it hath not some good, & profitable vse? Is it possible any thing should haue a being, but from Iehouah, the author of all being? But, I knowe not how, I am almost slipt into a refutati­on of that, which deserues rather to be reiected with de­testation, then refuted by reason; especially seeing the ground of this their building, is so sleight and sandy. What colour is there for this interpretation of theyrs? If wee take the words, in the plaine sense they afford vs, they containe neither impietie, nor absurdity. What then? Doth the circumstance of the place require anye such exposition? Nay rather ot confutes it, as I haue she­wed. Neither doe they brag of any speciall reuelation, for the vnderstanding of it. What should then be their reason for it? Imagin what you will, or can, their con­ceit passeth all absurdity. Forsooth, the Euangelist hath set nothing, in the last place, after was made. O incredible, shall I say ignorance, or wilfull blindnesse? As if for the sense, it were not all one to say, without him was made no­thing, and, without him nothing was made. In English the later kind of speech is more agreeable to the nature of the toong; in greeke it is not so: but the sense, euen in the English, is all one, though the words be not so well placed. But let vs leaue these absurdities, vpon which wee haue dwelt too long, a great deale longer then I purpo­sed, and betake our selues to the matter.

Yet perhaps it will not be amisse to adde a worde or two, first; for the remouing of a doubt, that may arise in some mans minde, who cannot satisfy himselfe concer­ning it. And surely I am the bolder to spende the more time, and labour, in expounding the text, and making al things as plaine, as I can, because I knowe, that one of Satans meanes, to discredit the doctrine, and make the exhortation out of any palce of Scripture, lesse effectu­all, [Page 120] is to cast some doubtes into mens heartes; about the true sense of the text expounded. If hee can shew any likely hood of some other interpretation, then was gi­uen, he makes accompt he hath aduantage enough, to perswade vs not to regard what was taught vs, & what we were exhorted to. For if the foundation bee weake, how should the building be but ruinous? So likewise, if he cannot reasonably obiect against the expounding of the place, yet if hee can raise some doubts, which were not satisfied, he will imploy men therein, and so drawe them away, from the meditation, and practise of that, which was deliuered. The doubt vpon this place, is in the later part of this clause, why the Euangelist should add these words, without him was made: was it not suffici­ent to haue said, All things were made by him? yes surely, it was very sufficient, both for the truth of the thing, and also for the vnderstanding of it. What vse is there then of this repetition? It helpes the memory, and as it were stirs vs vp to greater atttention. But the true reason of it, (as I conceiue) is, that the E­uangelist followeth the Hebrew phrase very common­ly; in which it is ordinary, to double that, by a negation, or deniall of the contrary, which before was affirmed. So I say. 39. 4. 2. King. 20. 15. speaketh Hezekiah to the Prophet I sai, All that is in my house, they haue seene; there is nothing among my trea­sures, that I haue not shewed them So Ier. 42. 4. Ieremie to [...]ohanan, and the people, What soeuer thing the Lorde shall aunswere you, I will declare it to you: I will keepe nothing backe from you. Of this kinde, there are many speeches of our Sa­uiour recorded in the Gospell, that it may appeare it was ordinarie with him, so to set out that hee spake, by affirming, or denying the contrary. Ioh. 8. 29. Hee that sent me, is with me, the Father, hath not left me alone; Ioh. 3. 17. God sent not his Sonne into the world, that he should condemne the world, but that the world through him might be saued. This later Clause indeede hath somewhat more in it, then the for­mer, [Page 121] but it was implyed in it: So in the verse going be­fore, ver. 16. should not perish, but haue euerlasting life. Ioh. 10. 18. Ver. 28. No man taketh it from me, but I lay it downe of my selfe. I giue them eternall life, and they shall neuer perish. This custome of speech vsed also by his Lord and Master, did our Euan­gelist followe, that wee might the rather beleeue, and remember that, he writ.

Thus by the examining of the words, wee are come, at the last, to vnderstand the Euangelists meaning: which is this; that all things whatsoeuer, which had any be­ginning of being (as all things had, except God onely) had that beginning, and being of theirs from the word, or Sonne of God. There is nothing so glorious in heauen aboue, no­thing so meane on earth belowe, nothing so hidden, & vnknowne in the depth of the Sea, but had his whole being from our Sauiour Christ. From him they all re­ceiv'd their substance, and nature; from him they had their qualities, and properties; by him all things liue, that haue life; by him all things moue, that haue motion; by him all things are, that haue any being. But let vs con­sider these matters more attentiuely: First, in generall; then particularly. And because I haue, once or twice already, made mention of a place in the Prouerbes, where this Sonne of God is brought in by Salomon, cal­ling himselfe, by the name of wisedome, and shewing his admirable wisedom by the workes of the Creation, I will begin with his owne report, as it is there descri­bed. VVhen hee (that is God the Father) prepared the heauens, I was there Pro. 8. 27. (sayth this diuine wisedome) when he set the compasse vpon the deepe; when hee established the Cloudes aboue, when he confirmed the Fountaines of the deep. Ver 28. When he gaue his decree to the Sea, that the waters should not Ver. 29. passe his commandement, when hee appointed the foundati­ons of the earth, Then was I with him a nourisher, and I was Ver. 30. dayly his delight, reioycing alway before him. But least any man should be so obstinate, that this testimonie cannot [Page 122] resolue, and satisfie him: I will adde hereunto, the wit­nes of Psal. 102. 25. another Prophet, who calling vpon the Sonne of God, speaketh thus of him; Thou hast afore time, layd the foundation of the earth, and the heauens are the worke of thy hands. If you doubt, whether this bee spoken of the Sonne or no, the holy Ghost shall assure you that it is, by the pen of Saint H [...]b. 1. 10. Paul; who alleageth this place, and applyeth it to our Sauiour Christ; Of whome also hee had affirm'd a little before, that God made the world by him.

It may be, some man would knowe the reason, why our Euangelist, being to describe our Sauiour, as the Creator of the world, doth not vse the same kinde of speech, which Moses doth, and which also is common in the Scripture, to that purpose. Why doth hee not more particularly recite the things, that were created by him, and set out his glory therein at large as Moses doth? I will tell you, in as few words, as I can. And first I say of both questions together, that therefore Saint Iohn did not speake either so, or so largely, as Moses had done before, because Moses had so done, and his purpose was not the same, that Moses had in his writing. More parti­cularly, and more plainely, I say farther of the former doubt; first that it is true, and manifest, that whereas Gen. 1. 1. Moses named expresly the heauen, and the earth, our E­uangelist sayeth in generall, All things. It is also cleere, and certaine, that ordinarily in the Scripture, where God is spoken of, as a Creator, there the same things are men­tioned. Wee heard erewhile seuerall places to that pur­pose; you may finde more at your leasure. Wee preach vnto you (sayth Act 14. 25. the Apostle Paul to the men of Listra) That yee should turne from these vaine things, to the liuing God, which made heauen and earth. So Isay. 37. 16. sayth Hezekiah, Thou art God alone ouer all the kingdomes of the earth, thou hast made the heauen, and the earth. So Ier. 32. 17. Ieremiah; Thou hast made the heauen and the earth, by thy great pow­er: [Page 123] yet saith our Euangelist; By him were all things made. Why so; As well because by these words, all that Moses sayd might and would easily be conceiv'd, as also for that he would haue euen those things to be vnderstood whereof Moses had made no expresse mention. There­fore also doth Col. 1. 16. the Apostle Paul speake otherwise of the creation, then Moses, where hee sayth of our Saui­our Christ, By him were all things created which are in hea­uen, and which are in earth, things visible and inuisible, whe­ther they bee Thrones, or Dominions, or Principalities, or Powers; then follow the very wordes of our Euangelist, All things were created by him. Thus hath Saint Paul taught vs how to expound Saint Iohn, All things visi­ble, and inuisible. Of the later, Moses sayth nothing ex­presly; but rather by his particular description of the vi­sible parts of the world, seemes to tell vs, that hee spake of them onely. So might our Euangelist also haue been vnderstood, if hee had so spoken; whereas now wee are to expound him of both, according as the Apostle di­rects vs. But why doth not Saint Iohn (as the least) fol­low Moses course, and describe the particulars at large? Because Moses was the first, that euer writ that historie of creation, and writ it of purpose, to giue knowledge of it to all posteritie: But our Euangelist neither needed doe that, which which was perform'd so excellently, so long before, by another; and intended, not to set out the historie, but rather to apply it to the present occasion. Hee had also a more worthy matter to handle, whereun­to hee hasted, the redemption of the children of God, by the promised Messiah, our Lord and Sauiour Iesus Christ.

Giue mee leaue I pray you a little to consider the glorie of our heauenly redeemer, and to insult ouer all such miscreants, Iewes, and Turkes, as despise his grati­ous offer of saluation, and refuse him, as not worth the trusting in. Whom dost thou contemne? whose helpe [Page 124] doest thou thinke scorne of? Canst thou not beleeue in him, when thou considerest him in the Virgins wombe? yet beleeue in him, when thou beholdest him in the bo­some of God? what could he be, but mortall, that was made of mortall flesh? Nay, rather, what could hee bee, but immortall, that made both flesh, and spirit? Thou sayest, Hee is accursed, that maketh flesh his arme; and can hee be blessed thinkest thou, that refuseth to make God his strength? Shall the clay say to the potter, Thou art of no power? Shall not so presump [...]uous a Clod of bak't earth, bee broken all to peeces, and beaten to dust? That thou liuest, mov'st, breath'st, that thou art, that thou canst bee thus vnthankefull, it is his and only his goodnes. What doost thou plotting, and deuising to ouerthrow his religion? Beholde, hee will take a way thy breath from thee, and then all thy thoughts shall perish. Doest thou not quake and tremble at the fearefull sound of the thunder, that hee made? Doest thou not flee away, & hide thy face from the flashes of lighting, that come from him? Osc. 2. 8. Doost thou not knowe, that it is hee, that giues thee Corne, and Wine, and Oyle, and multiplies thy siluer and thy golde, which thou wastest in making warre against him? How long wilt thou proceed to har­den thy wicked heart, to thine owne destruction? The weakest, and meanest of his creatures, Exod. 8. 19. 25. Flies, and Lice, are stronger then all thy bandes of Ianizaries.

If the meditation of our Sauiour Christs Almigh­tie power, in creating all things, will preuayle nothing at all with them, but to [...] urage them the more; let vs leaue them to his iust indignation; and apply the knowledge of this doctrine, to the encrease of our owne faith, and comfort. And first, let vs hearten our selues a­gainst the reproches, and scornes of the weake and ig­norant world. They beleeue not in Iesus Christ. Noe maruaile. For they see him not, but in the wombe, in the manger, on the Crosse, in the graue. They see but a peece [Page 125] a it were, or rather the bark only of the tree of life. But we to whom the same Lord, that created the eyes of our bo­dies, & the naturall light of our vnderstanding, hath gi­uen also the supernaturall light of faith. beholde him a farre off, euen beyond the beginning of the world, and looking through the rinde of his humane nature, see the pith, and substance of his euerlasting Godhead; not what it is, but that it is. Why shuld it be thought strange for men to relie wholly vpon him, that made them? Let me reason with you a little. If a Clocke or Watch, a curious peece of worke, had vnderstanding to consi­der its owne nature, and to knowe the workeman, that forg'd and fram'd it, to whose keeping, thinke you, would it committe it selfe, rather then to his, that knew [...]est how to preserue it, because hee deuis'd and made it? Is not euery man desirous to haue that gardiner, if it may be, to looke to his herbs, flowers, knots, arbors, and his whole ground, the excellencie of whose skill he sees con­tinually before his eyes, in the beautie and growth of the things, hee hath fashioned, and planted? And shall not wee rest, and relye vpon him, that created vs? If the skill, and strength of some workeman bee inferior to o­ [...]her of the same trade; yet his loue and affection to his owne worke, & the care of his reputation, will make him [...]ble aboue his power. If that Clocke or Watch I spake of, could finde it selfe decayed in any part, the teeth of the wheeles or pinions to bee ouerworne, the axel to bee growne too thin, or any thing to be displaced, would it not seeke, and call for helpe of the maker? I might say [...]he like of the garden. Who is fitter to amend whatso­euer is out of order, then bee that first set it in that order? To whome then should wee seeke for ayde? but to him, that hauing created vs, is therfore able, and willing to re­store vs to our former, &, if it please him, to a better estate.

Wee see how agreeable it is to reason, that he, which made man, after his owne image and likenes, should re­fresh [Page 126] it being decayed, and restore it being lost. Wee see also, that the same reason teacheth vs, that as many, as desire to bee made partakers of that, for which they were made, must depend vpon him, by whom they were made. Therefore may wee truely say vnto the Lorde; Psal. 72. 25. VVhom haue wee in heauen, but thee? wee haue desired none in the earth with thee. But if the hope of so necessarie, & assured succour bee not sufficient to drawe vs to him, that offers himselfe to repaire his owne workemanshippe: yet let the consideration of our duetie waigh so much with vs, as to make vs yeelde obedience to our Lord and Ma­ker. There is nothing more common in the Mouthes of men and children, then that God made all other thinges for the seruice of man, and man for his owne seruice. Yea, to whom doth it not seeme vnreasonable, that the crea­ture should denie obedience to the Creator? Doo you not heare the Lord complayning of this by the Isay. 1. 2. 3. Prophet Isay; as of a monstrous, and vnnaturall impietie? Heare O heauens, and hearken O earth; for the Lord hath sayde, I haue nourished, and brought vp Children: but they haue re­belled against mee. The Oxe knoweth his owner, and the Asse his maisters Crib; but Israell hath not knowne, my peo­ple hath not vnderstood. Are wee more brutish then the Oxe, more dull then the Asse? They relye on them, by whome they haue their meate; Do wee refuse to rest on him, by whome wee haue our whole being? If they should be giuen ouer by one maister, they would soone bee found by another. If the Lord our Creator leaue vs to our selues, there is no second, that can sustaine vs, but wee shall immediately fall to nothing. Bee not a­frayde then, least thou should'st bee sham'd, when the foolish world shall condemne thee, for beleeuing in Iesus Christ. Aske them boldly, if the creature may not, or ought not to put his trust in the Creator. Let them tell thee, whether they doe not thinke it iust and reasonable, for the workmaister, to haue all command [Page 127] ouer the worke. Thou find'st they selfe to bee wholly out of frame and order: to whome should'st thou goe to bee amended, but to him, that form'd thee? Thou art not able to attaine to the ende, for which thou we [...]t created; who can better, or who will gladlier direct thee, then hee, that appointed that ende for thee? Hee lookes thou shouldst seeke vnto him; hee calls thee, to come vnto him. Hee commaunde [...] thee to trust vnto him. As hee hath made thee a man on earth by creati­on: so hee will make thee a Saint in heauen by regene­ration.

What doost thou vexing, and troubling thy selfe (poore soule) with the continuall sight of thy present deformitie? I was indeed (sayst thou) beautifull, and glorious: but I am deformed, and loathsome. I had once the liuely image of him, that created me, true ho­linesse and righteousnesse: but I haue now the ougly pourtrature of him. that deceiued mee, euen sinne, and wickednesse. If onely the colour were decayed, it might happely be refresht. But when the very form is perished, there is nothing left to bee repayred. O miserable and wretched that I am; Not onely to ose that happinesse which can neuer bee recouered, out also to fall into that miserie, which can neuer be re­nedied. Which way shall I turne my selfe? or to whom hall I flee for succour? It is high time to minister some comfort, when the party is so well prepared to receiue it; especially since it may so easily be had. Doost thou aske, [...]o whom thou shalt flee for succour? To whome else, but to him that offers it? As for the feare of, I know not what impossibilitie to recouer so great a losse, re­member by whom all things were made, and thou shalt see how much thou art deceiv'd. Thou hast lost the perfit beautie thou hadst bestowed on thee, in thy crea­tion: But hee that gaue it, hath not lost his power, to be­stowe new on thee. Is the colour faded? Hee can lay on [Page 128] a fresher, and set an amiable glosse thereon. I [...] the woole forme be perisht, that there remaines no one li [...]e, or place of a line to bee discer [...]ed: yet hath not hee, that created it, forgotten what it was. Is it harder for him to make thee righteous, then it was to make thee? Can not hee, that created the soule it self, enrich it with qua­lities beseeming such a substance? Hee that made the light to shine out of darkenes, can make the sowrest crabstocke, beare most sweete fruite. Hee that created thee, when thou wert not, can create true righteousnes in thee when thou art most vnholy. But, let vs consi­der this worke of the creation more particularly: and first, that our Sauiour Iesus Christ was the Creator of those inuisible Creatures, which we call Angels. Looke you for proofe of this point? By him were all things made Or if that content you not, reade that which followes. And without him, was nothing made, that was made. Then if the Angels were not made by him, either they haue no being at all, or, at the least, had no beginning of their being. The last is vnpossible. For they are seruants to the Lord, who only is eternall, and Psal. 103. 20. Doe his commā ­demēt, in obeying the voice of his word. And indeed thence haue they their name. For what is an Angell, but a mes­senger imployed in the dispatch of some businesse? Gen. 24. 7. He shall send his Angells with thee, saith Abraham to his ser­uant: and againe, The Lord, before whome I walke, will send his Angells with thee, and prosper thy Iorney. The books of the old Testament are full of examples, to this purpose Yea, the new also affords not a few. Mat. 1. 20. & 2. 13. 19. The Angell of the Lord appeared to Ioseph in a dreame, once, twice, thrice. Luk 1. 11. There appeared vnto Zachary an Angell of the Lorde. Therefore it is our of all question, that the Angells had a beginning of their being by creation: and whatsoeuer had so, tooke that beginning from him, without whome nothing was made, that was made. In the acknowledgment of this; Heb. 1. 6. when the Lord brings his first begotten Sonne into [Page 129] the world, he saith, Psal. 97. 7. And let the Angels of God worship him. Wil you see this homage as it were, and seruice perfor­m'd? Before his conception, Luk. 1. 26. the Angell Gabriell was sent to giue notice of it. After his cōception, before his birth, Mat. 1. 20. an Angell appeared to Iosoph, to testifie, that his conception was by the holy Ghost. Presently after his birth, Luk. 2. 9. the Angell of the Lorde brought newes therof, to the Shepheards about Bothlehem; Yea, straight way, there was with the Angell, a multitude of heauenly souldiers, praysing God, for his comming into the world. Which was the mysterie, that the Angells (as 1. Pet. 1. 12. Saint Pe­ter tels vs) desired to behold. After his temptation in the wildernesse, Mat. 4. 11. The Angels came and ministred vnto him. I might go forwarde in this kinde: but what needes it? His they are, and at this commaund to bee imployed.

The Sonne of man shall send foorth his Angels; Mat. 24. 31. Hec [...] Mat. 13. 41. shall send his Angels with a great sound of a Trumpet.

Wilt thou take a view now of some little part of thy happines, by beleeuing in Iesus Christ, the maker of all things, and namely of these holy Angels? Looke a­bout thee then, and behold them guarding thee, and at­tending vpon thee, on euerie side. Psal. 91. 11. 12 Hee hath giuen his Angells charge ouer thee, to keepe thee in thy wayes. They shall beare thee in their hands, that thou hurt not thy foote a gainst a stone. It is thought to be a goodly matter in the world, for a man to be waited on, with a great traine of nis followers: people gaze vpon such an one, and hee himselfe oftentimes, dotes vpon his owne greatnes. So many proper men, in so braue liueries, decked with rich cognizances of silke, siluer, or golde; clad in vel­uet, or Satin; set out with chaynes of golde, scarfes, & brooches; armed with gilt rapiers, and daggers; in a word, what can bee supposed to bee wanting, either for glorie, or for safety? Shall I compare one of these won­ders of the world, with a poore Christian, that beleeueth truely, and soundly in Iesus Christ? Thinke not scorne [Page 130] of the comparison, whosoeuer thou art. All the braue rie of thy gallantest followers, is but beggerie, being compared to the glory of the meanest of his attendāts. The gold, and siluer of thy Retinue glisters in the eyes of them, that gaze vpon it. Thou hadst need haue a faire day, and a bright shunshine, or else halfe thy shew wil be vtterly lost. It is not so with him, whom thou despisest; one of his Angels is able to inlighten any place in the darkest night. Luk. 2. 9. As the Shepheardes were watching their flockes by night, the Angell of the Lord came vpon them, and the glorie of the Lord shone about thē. What is become of thy glistring in the night time? Torches and candles are the light of thy glory: take them away, and all is nothing. There is not so much ods betwixt a black flint, & a well watered diamond, as betwixt the least glimpse of the Angels brightnes, and the greatest light of thy seruants brauerie.

Doost thou boast of thy multitude? How canst thou for shame, if thou remember, how the Prophet Elisha was attended? 2. King. 6. 17. Behold the mountaine was full of horses, and Charets of fire round about Elisha. Dost thou heare? The mountaine was full. Alas, a little hill will holde all thy followers. Thou art faine to stretch them out to the vttermost, by two and two, that they may make som shew. The Prophet had the mountaine full. Hee hath giuen his Angels charge ouer euerie one of his children. He names no certaine number, that wee may knowe the charge is common to all. And though all cannot bee in all places, at once; yet is no place without great multitudes of them. Dan. 7. 10. Hee hath thousand thousands mini string vnto him, and ten thousand thousands standing about him. But admitte (as some men teach, I thinke without sufficient warrant) that euery man had his proper An­gell, and no more; many thousands of men might not bee compared with such a guard, for safetie. 2. King. 19. 35. The An­gell of the Lord went out, and slew, in one night, an [Page 131] hundred fourescore and siue thousand in the Camp of the Assyrians. Yea, the very appearance of an Angell, is not without dread, and terror. Luk. 1. 12. When Zachary saw the Angell, hee was troubled, and feare fell vpon him. So was Ver. 29. & 2. 9. the Virgin Mary; so were the Shepheardes. And yet the messages they brought to these, were full of comfort and ioy. To Luk. 1. 13. Zacharie word was brought by the An­gell, That his prayer was heard. The Angell assured the noly Virgin That shee had found fauour with God. And Ver. 30. & 2. 10. hee that came to the Shepheards, Brought them tidings of great ioy, that should be to all the people. If his presence were fearefull to them, for whose comfort hee was sent, what will it bee to them, against whome hee comes as an Enemie, for their destruction? Who then would not cast himselfe, for his protection, and saluation, vpon him, that was the Creator of these glorious and mighty Angels? Wouldst thou be honorably attended? Behold, the Angels ready to waite vpon thee. Heb. 1. 14 For they are all ministring spirits, sent foorth to minister, for their sakes, which shall bee heires of saluation. Would'st thou be safe­ly guarded? Psal. 103. 20. The Angels excell in strength. Mat. 28. 2. Beholde, there was a great Earth-quake, for the Angell of the Lord descended from heauen, and came and rowled away the stone from the doore of the Sepulchre, wherin our Sauiour was bu­ried and sat vpon it: and his countenance was like lightning, Ver. 3. and his rayment white as snowe: and for feare of him, the kee­ [...]ers were astonied, and became as dead men. What if they Ver. 4. bee not ordinarily to bee seene? Is it not enough, that wee are assured by the holy Ghost, in the Scripture, that the Lord hath giuen them charge ouer vs? Many and many times are wee defended, and guided by them, though wee see them not. As the Diuell laboureth all hee can, to drawe or thrust vs into daunger: So doe they striue against him, to keepe vs from it, or to pull vs vs out of it. How many times haue wee beene stirred vp by them, to the seruice of God, and the workes of [Page 132] our calling? How often haue they made vs remember, and see, that wee were entring into the way of destructi­on? It is indeede, the blessed spirit of the Almightie, that inclines our hearts, and affections, to like of, and yeelde to holy motions; but the Angels are they, that ordinarily make these motions. Beleeue then in Iesus Christ, and thou art presently furnisht of a most suffici­ent guard, both for state and strength. Psal. 34. 7. The Angel of the Lord pitcheth round about them, that feare him, and deliue­reth them. King Salomon in all his royaltie, in the midst of them, 2. Chr. 9. 15. 16 that carried 200, targets, and 300. shieldes of beaten golde, was not so richly, nor so safely guarded: such honour, such securitie doth beleefe in Christ pro­cure all true Christians, how meanely soeuer the worlde account of them. It will here perhaps bee demanded by some, whether those wicked spirits, which we common­ly call Diuells, be of the number of those Angelles, or within the compasse of those All things, which, the E­uangelist sayth, were made by Christ. But the question is aunswered already: because these spirits are not God, and yet haue a true being, it must needes bee, that they tooke their beginning, by Creation, from him, Without whome nothing was made, that was made. Besides, it is not vnknowne (I thinke) to any man, that these euill An­gells, are all one, for the substance of their nature, and be­ing, with those other holy, and glorious spirits: yea, the Lord doth vse them oftentimes, as executioners of his iust wrath, vpon the wicked. I will not stand to inquire, whether euer hee doe imploy those his Angels of Light in any such kinde of seruice or no, or whether this of­fice bee put off to those euill spirites onely: once, it is a matter out of doubt, that these later are sometimes so imployed. 1. Sam. 16. 14. The spirit of the Lord departed from Saul, and an euill spirit sent from the Lord vexed him. And of the Israelites it is sayd, in Psal. 78. 49. the Psalme, That the Lord cast vpon them the fiercenes of his anger, indignation, and wrath, [Page 133] and vexation by the sending out of euil Angels. Such was 1. King. 22. 21. that lying spirit, which offered himselfe to deceiue A­hab, by the mouth of his false Prophets. As for that wic­kednesse of theirs, which now, by long custome, is as it were turned into nature, and hath taken so full possession of them, that they are vtterly reprobat to all goodnesse; it was not made with them, but bred and brought in by them; they receiued not that corruption with their na­ture, but by their choise of euill corrupted their nature. Their estate by creation was happie, their nature holy. Iud. v. 6. But they kept not their first estate, but left their owne habi­tation, as Saint Iude tells vs: and as 2. Pet. 2. 4. the Apostle Peter plainly saith, They sinned. The Lord found no stedfastnesse in them, as Iob. 4. 18. Eliphas affirmeth in the booke of Iob, They are now euill, and nothing but euill: but from the begin­ning they were not so.

Yes saith one, euen from the beginning: witnesse our Sauiour himselfe, who doubteth not to affirme, that The deuill hath beene a murderer, from the beginning. What? From the beginning of his creation? That were indeed to make God the author of sinne, properly and immedi­ately. But how should the Diuell bee a murtherer, when as yet there was none, whom he could murther? yea after that Adam was created, which certainly was after the creation of Angells, who were in all likelihood the be­ginning of Gods workmanship, the Diuell was not y [...] [...] murderer? For Euah, by whome he preuailed to the de­struction of Adam, and her selfe, with their whole poste­rity, was not yet framed. But as soone as the Diuell had seene the man, and the woman, his malice against God, & his enuy at their present happinesse, and future glory, made him attempt that murder, which he so soone com­mitted. So that from the beginning, is nothing else, but from the first time, that hee had opportunitie to doe a murther. I deny not, that hee was ready enough before, to haue done the like; but our Sauiour speakes of that [Page 134] actuall mutther. Neither yet doe I graunt, that hee was naturally so inclyned, by reason of any euill, created in him. But this I say, that being holy by nature, hee wil­fully rebelled against God, before the creation of A­dam, and by that rebellion of his defaced in himself the Image of God, in which hee was created; and was gi­uen vp by God, to his owne wicked heart, without hope or possibilitie of recouerie. This (in part) our Sauiour himselfe, in that place, signifieth; when hee addes, immediatly vpon the former words, that H [...]e a­bode not in the truth. For by this speech hee doth imply, that hee was first in the truth. Let vs not bee afray de then to confesse, that the Sonne of God made the Di­uell: but let vs knowe, and remember, that hee made him not a diuell. Hee is a Spirit by creation; an euill spi­rit by declining from that puritie, wherein hee was crea­ted. His being is from the will of God; his being euill from his owne will. But that, which concernes ve es­pecially, in this matter, is this, that how great soeuer his power seeme to bee, in the world, how extreame soe­ner his malice bee against God, how desirous soeuer he bee of our destruction; yet hee, in whom wee beleeue, that did create him, both hath him at cōmand, as a crea­ture, and would neuer haue created him, if hee had not beene able to bring his owne purpose to passe, for the saluation of those, that trust in him, in despight of Sa­ [...]n, and all his instruments. Therefore take courage to thy selfe, whosoeuer thou art, that hast committed thy selfe to Iesus Christ to bee saued by him. Dooth Satan rage against thee? Dooth hee beleger thee, on euerie side? Dooth heee come with open mouth, like a Lion, to deuoure thee? Hee that made him, and thee, knowes his strength, and thy weakenesse. Sooner shall hee burst himselfe with swelling enuie, or fret himselfe a­way to nothing, with bootelesse anger, then separate thee, from thy Lord and Sauiour Iesus Christ. Hee [Page 135] loue thee, for the first creation; a thowsand times more for the second generation. Though thy first righte­ousnesse was lost by sinne, thy second grace shall ouer­come sinne. But let vs proceede to the creation of visi­ble things.

Whereof I shall neede to say the lesse, because they are (generally) so well knowne to all men, and des­crib'd somewhat largely in the hystorie of the crea­tion. Yet thus much I may, and must say; that if wee did more aduisedly consider, either the whole frame of the world, how each part serueth and beautifieth o­ther, or the particular creatures, euerie one by them­selues, wee should discerne the power, and wisedome of the Creator, in a farre more excellent sort, then e­uer yet wee sawe it. But I will not enter into so large a fielde, least the varietie of most admirable worke­manshippe make mee forget my selfe, and stay mee too long, in the course of my present iorney, to the ende of this whole verse. Onely I will commend to your priuate meditation, for this purpose, the later ende of the booke of Iob, from the beginning of Chapter 38. to the ende of 41. Where the Lord himselfe, from hea­uen, thunders out a wonderfull description of his di­uine power, and wisedome, in the varietie of his workes, and the incredible strength of some speciall creatures; to the vtter confusion of August. de [...]aeros. cap. 46. the wicked Ma­niches, who blasphemously gaue the glorie of these wonders to an Idoll of their owne senselesse deuising, and setting vp. But they, that haue either the light of true reason, or the direction of the holy spirit, cleer­ly see, and willingly acknowledge, that the least, and meanest creature in the world, could neuer haue beene, but by the infinit power of God; and being is a suffi­cient proofe of that power, by which it is. This I speake the rather, because A [...]crroes & aly. some learned fooles, be­ing inforced by the light of nature, to discern the Crea­tor [Page 136] in the creatures, and yet being not willing to assent to the truth of Religion, in the Scripture, haue presu­med to denie both the creation, and prouidence of God in the smaller, and inferiour creatures, and in ordinary matters of no great moment. Why so? Because (for­sooth) they were too base for God to make, or med­dle with. O the nicenesse of vaine men! As if the Sun that shineth out of the heauens, were defiled, or aba­sed, by casting of his beames vpon any place, though neuer so homely, or vncleanely? But of the prouidence of God, vpon some fitter occasion hereafter. For the creation of such small and meane creatures, wee haue authoritie of Scripture to assure vs, they are GODS workemanshippe; and strength of rea­son to proue, that they are worthie to bee acknow­ledged for his.

And for Scripture, what better warrant can wee de­sire, then the testimony of the holy Ghost by Gen. 1. 20. Moses, in the report, he makes of the first creation. God said, Ver. 24. Lette the waters bring foorth in aboundance, euery creeping thing that hath life. And of the earth afterward; God said Let the earth bring foorth the liuing thing, according to his kind; cattell, and that which creepeth. There is not any creature in the Sea, or on the Land, of lesse woorth, then that, which creepeth. Is it not a part of the Serpents pu­nishment, to go on his belly? Gen. 3. 14. Because thou hast done this, thou art accursed aboue all cattell, and aboue euery beast of the field: vpon thy belly shalt thou goe, and dust shalt thou eate all the daies of thy life. Is there any baserfood, then the dust of the earth? And yet that is the ordinary meate of such thinges, as craul vppon the land. As for those, that creepe in the water, mudde and slyme is their ordinary sustenance. Yet are both the one, and the other, created by the Lorde. Therefore also haue they their part, in praising, and magnifying their heauenly crea­tor. Psal: 148. 10. Beasts and all Cattell, creeping things and feathered [Page 137] foules. Yea they are not only the creatures of God, but (howsoeuer for a time they were ceremonially vn­cleane) by nature cleane, & good. So did the Lord him­selfe teach and informe Act. 10. 10. Peter, by a voice from heauen. The holy Apostle was hungry, and while meate was dressing for him, fell into a trance, wherein he saw a ves­sell come downe from heanen, in which were amongst verse. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. other creatures, creeping things. Then there came a voice to him, willing him to kill and eate. Is not this a sufficient proofe of their creation and cleanness? They came now downe from heauen, and Peter was will'd to eate of them. But Peter remembring that they were for­bidden to bee eaten, as vncleane, began to excuse him­selfe. The Lord to cut of all obiections, answers him a­gaine. The thing that God hath purified, pollute thou not. This was so done thrice saith the Text. Why so often? but that all doubt of their vncleannesse might be cleane ta­ken away.

Well, say you: let them be cleane forvse, especially in acase of necessity; yet they are not worthy to be held for the creatures of God. Not worthy, and yet haue be­ing, mouing, and life? Any one of these were sufficient to make them shew some part of his greatnesse, from whom they are. Take the least of the 3. Is there not an infinit difference betwixt not being and being? Or can any power, lesse then infinit, giue being, where there is none? Do not all things as it were, speake, & sound out the excellency of being, when they feare, and striue a­gainst nothing more, then least they should not bee? What hath made some profane wretches, that had no hope of life, after their death in this world, to wish, that they might liue, though it were but in the forme & na­ture of Todes or Spiders? It is an old, and true obserua­tion, euen of the heathen, that euery thing is naturally desirous to continew its being, by all meanes possible. But these fond wise men shall be condemned, by some [Page 138] like themselues. Let vs heare Pharaohs in chaunters giue in their verdict. When they all crauled with lice, & saw that God, who had suffered the Diuel, for a time, to de­ceiue them with vaine shewes, would no longer endure his and their damnable presumption, they cried out to Pharaoh; [...]. 3. 19. This is the singer of God. Surely, if making lice of dust, be not dishonourable to God, but the wretched sorcerers are inforced to acknowledge his power in them, what madnes is it, to deny him the creation of the smallest, and meanest things? Yet I would not be so vn­derstood, as if I thought, that euery kinde of such crea­tures, was made at the first creation, within the compass of those six daies. It is enough for vs to beleeue, and ac­knowledge, that all things had their being from God; both for their nature, and their properties, and that no kind of creature hath bin, is, or shal be, at any time, bred, but according to the appointment of the Lord, and by the meanes, which he from the beginning ordained, & fitted to that purpose. Thence it is, that diuerse liuing creatures are daily bred of dust, mudd, slyme, and such like: Not as if these things fell out thus, by chaunce, or arose from the nature of these matters, without the fore­sight, & foreappointment of God the creatour of them. Nay rather, therefore did he so temper, and order these things, because he had decreed to haue such creatures bred of them from time to time.

Let vs come yet neerer to these dainty ones, and (if it be possible) giue them a full and perfect view of their error. Me thinkes their dealing with God in this matter, is much like to that of Ahaz in another case. Whome when the Prophet willed to aske a signe for his assur­rance from the Lord, his tender heart would not bee so bold with God; Isay. 7. 11. 12. I will not aske (saith Ahaz) neither will I tempt the Lord. He durst not (forsooth) aske the Lord: but he durst refuse to obay the word of the Lord by the Prophet, when he was commanded to aske a signe. In [Page 139] like sort these men, that are so iealous of Gods glory, will not graunte that hee should bee the maker of such meane things: But in the meane while, they are not af­fraid, either to deny him to be the fountaine of al being and so to make him no God, or else to ascribe these cre­atures to some chaunce or necessity, not before deter­mined by him; and so put him then as it were to his shiftes, to make the best of that, which he cannot other­wise helpe. But if these curious men would imploy that time and study, in searching the nature, & parts of these little despised creatures, which they bestow in deuising idle, and foolish arguments, to bewray their bold ig­norance, they should find more cause to wonder at the wisedome of God, in their smalnesse, then to deny him to be the maker of them, because of any imagined base­nes. Is there not beauty in a cleare diamond, though it be but a sparke? May there not bee singular workman­ship shewed, in the caruing of a ladle or potlid, or some other thing of meaner seruice? How much would bee giuen for Myrons Fly sitting on a Charriot, & couer­ing it and the horses with her wings & body? But what are all these, and as many such like deuises, and pecces of workmanship as can be imagined, if you compare them, with these little creatures? Didst thou neuer see a worme, or fly so little, that thou couldst hardly discerne it with thy neeye, though thou lookedst earnestly vpon it, which yet mou'd, and crept, turn'd and return'd this way and that way, with no slowe pase? If thou could'st possibly take a view of the parts of these creatures, with what admiration of them wouldst thou be rauisht? The Anatomy of such a worme would be no lesse wonder­full, then the opening of a Whale, or Elephant. What should I speak of the Bee, or Silkworme? Where is the Architect or spinster to be found, that cā match the cu­rious frame of the one, or the small and euen thrid of the other? Butp whither doth the wondring at these creaturs [Page 140] drawe me? The farder I goe in this course; the more, & more way I see still before me, and am neuer a whit the neerer my iournies end. I will turne aside therefore into that path, which leades vs to a place of strength & comfort.

Hast thou aduisedly considred, that Iesus Christ thy Sauiour, is the mightie and wise creator of all things? I cannot doubt then, but thou manifestly discernest, that thou art sufficiently prouided of all necessaries, that be­long to this presēt life. They are his by creation, whose thou art by regeneration. The interest, thou hast in him, conueies vnto thee a just, and strong title to all the com­forts, and pleasures of this life. Hee himselfe hath no need of them; for he is Gen. 17. 1. God al-sufficient. Els, hee neither could, or would haue indured to bee without the vse of them, from all eternity, till within these 5600. yeares. What then? Were they prouided for his enimies, that his friends might want? Mat. 5. 45. He maketh his Sunne to arise on the euill indeed, and sendeth his raigne on the vniust. And not on the good, and iust? Hee prouideth for both, but with a diuerse affection. Is it not daily seene, that Prin­ces feed, and cloath them (if neede require) that are cō ­demned to death for their misdeedes? Why so? Because they meane to make their loue of Iustice knowne to al men, and to powre on such malefactors the shame, they haue deserued. The Romane Generals had an especiall care, in all their conquests, to haue the principal of their enimies aliue, that they might afterwards leade them in triumph to shew their glory. So doth the Lorde deale with the great, and mighty wicked ones of the world: He feedes them with the best and daintiest meate, hee cloaths them with the costliest, and gayest apparell, hee sets them out as it were to shewe, that all men may take notice of them; to the ende, that at the last, hee may tri­umph ouer them the more gloriously. Thou, that beleeuest in Iesus Christ, perhaps farest hardly, and [Page 141] art meanely attired. Well; rest vpon thy Sauiour, that was the maker of all things. Hee can make supply to thee of all things, when hee will, and hee will when hee fees it best for thee. But it is his power, of which we now speake. The Deuill knew, and confest, that the Sonne of God was able to make bread of stones. But the Son of God told him, that Mat. 4. 3. 4. Man liues not by bread only, but by euery word, that proceedeth out of the mouth of God. Lackest thou bread? The Creator of all things can prouide it, in a moment for thee, or feed thee without it. Who main­tained life, and strength in Ex [...]d. 34. 28. Moses, and 1. King. 19. 8. & 17. 16. Elias when they continued, without any manner of sustenance, by by the space of 40. daies, and 40. nights? Who kept the oyle in the cruse, and the meale in the barrel, that they wasted not? Did not this mighty Creator, thy Sauiour Iesus Christ, Iob. 69. 1 [...]. 11 feed, and fill 5000. persons with 5. bar­ley loues, & a. fishes, & yet leaue 12. baskets ful of bro­ken meate remaining? What shoulde I say more? Hee that made all things, can furnish thee with all things; and so will doe, if thou put all thy trust in him, to saue thee.

There remaines yet one doubt: which I reseru'd, of purpose, for this place, though I had occasion to haue spoken of it before, in the interpretation of the later part of the Text. Some by Nothing, vnderstand Sinne; as if the Euangelist had meant to signifie that Sinne was made, without him that was the Creator of all things: but how then could this speech be true? If something were made without him, how were all things made by him? Surely if we take that diuisiō of the verses for good, and that sense for true, which they, that by Nothing will haue Sinne to be meant, approue and follow; wee may well be suspected, to make God the author of sinne. That which was made (say those men) In him was life: who would not conceiue this to bee spoken of that, which went next before? Let vs make this a little plainer: Thus [Page 142] they reade the text; without him was made nothing. That, which was made, in him was life. Is it not more reasonable to referre these last words, That which was made, to that nothing, which they say was made, then to All things, in the former part of the verse, as I noted before? If it had been the holy Ghostes purpose to seuer these middle words, in sense, where hee speakes of Nothing, from the former, & in the fourth verse to speake againe of those All things, he would not haue said, That, which was made; but those things that were made. If then we take this No­thing, for something, which was made, without the cre­ator, and by Nothing vnderstand sinne, wee affirme in the next words, that sinne was life in him. By Nothing therefore, Sinne is not meant: but the word must be takē as it properly signifieth, and this later part bee vnder­stood as a deniall of the contrary to that, which was de­liuered in the former clause.

Yet because the question, concerning the being of sinne, ariseth from the doctrine, which the Euangelist here propoundeth: It is requisit to say somewhat of it. All things were made by him; If all things then sinne too, vnlesse that be simply nothing, or be, of it selfe, eternall and infinit, as nothing is, but God only. Neither will it serue the turne to say, that All things, that were made, were made by him. For by these words, that were made, nothing is exempted from being made, but he only, that made al all things, God almightie, the Father, the Sonne, and the holy Ghost. It seemes then, that sinne was made; & ma­ker it could haue none, but him that made all things, that were made, that is all things, besides himselfe. Ther fore sinne also was made by him. O blasphemy! God the author of sinne? How shall hee then condemne the world for sinne? For what is there, or can there bee from him, that is nothing, but goodnesse, which is not good? And shall men be iudged for that, which is good? Here, what the Iohn 5. 29. Iudge himselfe saith; They shall come forth that [Page 143] haue done good, to the resurrection of life, and they that haue done euill, to the resurrection of condemnation. Be it far from the Lord (saith Gen. 18 25. faithfull Abraham) to stay the righteous with the wicked: and that the righteous should bee euen as the wicked; be it far from him. And shall not the Iudge of all the world doe right? Therefore this must bee laid, as a maine foundation in diuinity, that sinne, whatsoeuer it bee, is no creature of Gods making. What if I through igno­rance, be not able to make the point cleare? Shall it ther­fore be doubted of? I haue said enough already to proue the truth of the matter, that Sinne is no creature of God; I am now only to describe the nature of it to you, that you may be the better satisfied. If I sayle in this last parte, blame my ignorance, but doubt not of the truth.

What is sinne then? Our 1. Iohn. 3. 4. [...] Apostle answeres, that Sin is the transgression of the law. For where there is no law Rom. 4. 15. saith another Apostle) there is no transgression. The word in S. Iohn is larger, then that in S. Paul. Because the later ex presseth only those sinns, which are committed, by do­ing that, which is forbidden: but the former condemnes all, whatsoeuer is not according to the law. Transgres­sion is as much in english, and so is [...] transgressio. the greeke word in S. Paul, as going ouer. The Apostle compares the law of God, to the pales of a parke, or to the bounds of a for­rest, or chase, wherein the Deere are to remaine, and not to leap ouer them, or breake out into anyother ground. Let them feed where they wil withing, al is wel enough: But if they once passe the pale, or boundes, they haue faulted; and if they come short home, it is no more then they haue deserued. This going beyond their limittes, within which they should keepe, is a transgression, and offence. So is sinne, according to the Apostles word, he there vseth. Yet doubtlesse, though he meant espe­cially to note that, which was best knowne, namely the dooing of euill; wee may not thinke, but it was his pur­pose [Page 144] also, to signifie the leauing vndone of that good, which is commanded. I will make the matter plaine by the former similitude. Lette vs imagin instead of those pales, the lists, or barrs, that are at the end of some race, or gole; to which, all, that make triall of themselues, in that game, or exercise, must needes come, and beyond which they may not go. He that faints, ere he haue at­tained to the marke, is faulty, for leauing vndone which he ought to doe: He that runns out beyond it, makes a contrary fault, by doing that he should not do. Both transgresse; that is, breake the lawe of the game, though the later more properly, in respect of the word transgression. Our Apostle [...] S. Iohn took a word of larger signification, that comprehends whatsoeuer is other­wise, then the law requires: whether we fall short of the marke, that is set before vs, or fly beyond it, wee are still within the compasse of S. Iohns reproofe; and our fact is a straying, or aberration from the lawe.

But whether we offend by too much, or too little, still the sinne is some act, or action, and is comprized in that vsuall distribution, thought, word, and deed. Thought is an action of the inward parts only, the braine, & the heart, or the vnderstanding, and the will. Word addeth to the former a second part, performed by the toong. Deed imployeth the whole body, or some members, or member of it, to the doing of some outward euill. Al are actions, or deeds, to speake truly: but these later haue appropriated that name to themselues, because they haue an effect, that is most sensible, and knowne by feeling. I will keepe my selfe to the point in questi­on: and though many things offer themselues to bee spoken of; yet I will rest content with that, which be­longs to my present purpose, reseruing all other mat­ters to their seueral places, and iust occasions. Sin then (as we haue hitherto spoken of it) is nothing else, but an aberration, or straying from the law of God, by doing [Page 145] that, we should not do, or not doing that, we should do, Can there now bee any reasonable cause of doubting, whether sinne were created by God, or no? Who can i­magin, that it was made by God? What being hath it, but as other actions of men, and Angells, which are their actions, and performed by them, and haue their being in the doing, and cease with the ende of doing? Shall I en­deauour to make it plaine in the seuerall kindes of these Sinnes? First, for the omitting of that we are enioyn'd to doe; who sees not, that this is nothing, that hath any be­ing in nature, but only a fayling in our duty? Neither are we, in this case, guiltie of hauing done euill, but of haue­ing left good vndon. In one word, here is no action at al, nor any substance, the author of the being whereof wee shall need to enquire after. Let vs come to the sinnes that are cōmitted. Whether we consider the inward thoughts of the heart, or the outward actions of the body, what finde we, that we may call a creature? The action, what­soeuer it be, is his, that doth it. Gen. 4. Cain murders Abell: Luke. 22. 48. In­das betraies his Lord, and Master. Is there any substance, or creature made by either of these actions? If you seeke for the auctors of thé facts: they are well knowe. Cain commits the murder, Iudas the treason. What doth God but continue the naturall strength, which he gaue them, whereby they are able to doe all such actions, as belong to such creatures. Cain hath power to giue a stroke, one or more, that may cause death. Iudas hath power to bar­gaine, and couenant with whom he will, to walke into what place he will, to kisse whome he will, to what ende himselfe list. It is no sinne to haue this power, but to vse it otherwise then we ought. That we haue it, is from God; that we abuse it, it is from our selues. But this only by the way, least some scruple should arise in some man: mind, touching Gods actions in the sinnes of men. The conclusion is, that we haue as yet found no sinne, wherof God should be the maker. The hardest point is yet be­hind, [Page 146] concerning the inward wickednesse, and corrupti­on of nature. For although I am perswaded, that the law of the 10 Commandements, is only the rule of our acti­ons, teaching what we should, or should not doe, and not the patterne of our nature, shewing what wee ought to be: yet I am out of doubt, that this proneness to sin, and vntowardnes to al good, which euery mā findeth in him­selfe, is iustly displeasing to God, because his image ther­by is defaced; & iustly charged vpon vs as sinne, because by our fault, it hath seized on vs. Therefore taking this (for the present) as graunted; let vs examin the matter, & see whether there bee any thing, in this naughtinesse of our nature, which may be truly said to be the creature of God. First, it is out of all question, that the soule it selfe, in which this corruption resteth, is the workmanship of God; I breathed as it were by him into the body perfitly Gen. 27. formed, in the creation of man. Whether it bee immedi­atly created by him still, as I doe verily perswade my self, or come frō the parents, as the matter of the body doth, it is not much to our purpose, for the point wee haue in hand. It is enough for the thing, we handle, that wee ac­knowledge God to be the maker of it. Secondly, it is not to be doubted, but that, as the substance of the soule, so the qualities thereof also, proceed from the same God, as from their maker. For hee that Gen. 1. 27. made man after his own image, and likenesse, made those faculties of vnderstan­ding, and will, and those qualities of holynesse and righ­teousnesse, Eph. 4. 24. wherein that image only, or especially con­sists. Is it not thē to be feared, least we should make God the author of this naughtinesse, by which we are prone to euill, since it is a quality abiding in the soule? Some haue thought to shift off the matter, by denying, that the cor­ruption of our nature is any thing else, but an absence of goodnesse, for want of which, wee can neither doe, nor desire ought, that is good. But this doth too much ex­cuse the badnesse of our hearts, which are proclaimed e­very [Page 147] where in Scripture, not only not to incline to that, which is good, but to affect, and like of that which is e­uill; yea to be wholly bent to euill, and to nothing else. Gen. 6. 5. The Lord saw, that all the imaginations of the thoughts of mans heart were only euill continually. Therefore Rom. 6. 17. the A­postle pronounceth of all men, that while they are in their naturall estate, not freed by grace, they are the ser­uants of sinne. And all such I. Ioh. 3. 10. S. Iohn calleth the children of the Deuill: and doubteth not to affirme, that the whole worldlyeth in wickednesse. But what needes any more, or & 5. 19. better proofe, then that discourse, which the Apostle maketh, where he sets out the greeuous misery of our corrupt nature, vpon experience, that he himselfe had, & that all men haue of their vntowardnesse to do good, euē after they haue receiued the spirit of regeneration, Rom. 7. 14. 15. &c. I see a law in my members, rebelling against the law of my minde, and leading me captiue vnto the law of sinne, which is in my members. I leaue it to euery mans considerati­on, to iudge what wee are before grace, if we bee such after it.

If then this our naturall corruption, be more then a pri­uation, or absence of that righteousnesse, which was, and ought to be in vs, what is it, but an euill quality? If a qua­lity, it must needes haue had a beginning, either with the soule, or after it. If so, from whom can it be imagined to haue had that being, but from him, that is the autor of all being? Wherevpon it seemes necessary to follow, that sinne is to be reckned in the number of those All things, that were made by Iesus Christ. But this was disclaimed before, as blasphemous. What shall we say then? Shall we deny that euery quality is made by God? How can wee possibly doe so, with any reason? For euery quality hath a being: and euery being is good. Neither is there any good, but from God, as the autor thereof: Else were not he the only true good; if there were any thing good be­side him, which is not good by him. What remaines, but [Page 148] to affirme, that this Corruption, or naughtinesse, is no qua­lity? How may that appeare? I will endeauour to make it plaine by a likenesse, or similitude. What thinke you of the distempers, that happen often times in the body? When it shakes, and quiuers, with the cold of an ague? when it burnes like fire, with the extreame heate of a feuer? When it flowes with moysture in a dropsie? Are these alterations, new qualities created by God? Consi­der the rottennesse in an apple; or a consumption in the body, I speake of or in any member of it. Can you con­ceiue how these things may bee, without the creation of any new quality? Imagin the like of that corruption, which possesseth the soule of man. Certainely, putre­faction, and rottennesse, are not qualities made by the Creatour; but rather corruptions of the naturall quali­ties, where with hee inriched, and beautified his crea­ture.

What then? Are they nothing, but the priuation, or absence of that, which was giuen by nature? Yes sure. Take example of the apple before named. The colour, and tast of it may be gone, and all vertue to nourish; and yet the fruit not be rotten: The body of a man, or any o­ther creature, may haue lost power to moue, yea life it selfe too, and yet not forth with bee putrified, or sauour. He stinkes before this time (quoth Martha of her brother Lazarus) for he hath beene dead foure daies. The qualities of the soule, being things, that belong to the nature of it, according to the creation, alwaies continue with the soule; but they may be distempred, and disord [...]ed, with­out any new worke of god by creating other, instead of them. Marke I pray you a little, when a man by study attaines to the knowledge of any art, doth the Creator make such a new quality? Doth he not rather blesse him to the perfiting of that, which was as the first created in him? If this knowledge decay by any disease of the bo­dy, or by any carelesnesse of the minde, is the former [Page 149] quality perhaps lately made, as it were vnmade againe? Or may we happely haue the like made, and mard from day to day? I might say the like of morall vertues. The reason is all one. You will say perchaunce; that you see not, how there can be any such corruption, in the qua­lities of the soule, as you discerne plainely to happen in the body. Surely, I confesse mine ignorance in the same point with you. Neither do I any way go about to shew how it is, but me thinks I see by good reasō, that it is so. If we had as much knowledge of the nature of the soule and the qualities thereof, as we haue of the body, and the humours therein, I doubt not, but we should as plainely discerne the one, as we see the other.

Let all this be graunted, may some man say; that this naughtinesse of nature insues, vpon the committing of the first sinne, as a corruption of the created qualities, which the soule was indued withall, at her making: I would faine knowe, why this may not challenge God for the autor of it, as well as those creatures, which you confesse before, to take their beginning from the slyme, and mudde of the earth, and water mingled together. They come of the corruption of those principles of all bodyly things, at the least all vnder the moone; as these are said to be from the decay of those qualities: For the better satisfying of al mē, touching this doubt, I would entreat them to cōsider these manifest differences: First, that the Lord directly, and principally, intending the bringing forth of those creatures, as tending to the per­fection of the world, accordingly fitted the nature of the earth, and water, that, by the power of the Sunn, such thing: might be formed of them.

But the wickednesse of our nature, being not in such sort appointed by God, but only vpon a supposition of the fall of man, by sinne; this corruption proceedes not from necessity of nature, but from the iust curse of God vpon all vs. that sinned. Secondly, it is farder to be [Page 150] obserued, that those creatures so bred, become seuerall & distinct things from that, where of they are bred; ha­uing a being in themselues, and no way depending on the slyme, or mudde. So is not this corruption, we speak of; which hath no being, in it self, distinct from the qua­litie; but so cleaues to it, that without it, it cannot con­ [...]inue one minute, no not so much, as in any reasonable [...]magination. A scion or grift, taken from a tree, and set in some other stocke, or prickt into the ground, may oroue a diuerse plant, and tree, from that, whence it was cut. But a wen, or bunch growing out of the tree, thogh it receiue nourishment from it, and grow with it, is no new creature, nor substance by it selfe. So is it with those things that breede of slime, as with the grists; so with the naughtinesse of our nature, as with vnnaturall swellings in trees, or liuing creatures. Thirdly (which I desire to haue markt) the Lord hath an especiall hand, in giuing life to those forenamed creatures, and in framing their members, that they may be apt for motion. The Sunne, & slime, as it were afford, & temper the matter, wherof they are to be made: but the Former of it is God himself. May we auouch the like of that corruption, where with our nature is defiled? I trow not. God in Iustice will haue it to be, he doth not by creation giue it being. And thus much of the creation of all things, mentioned by our Euangelist; Now let vs consider, why hee doth here mention it, and what he intends to proue by it.

There are 3 seuerall opinions, concerning the Euan­gelists purpose in this verse, al agreeing with the words, & course of the Text; and such, as may well stand, each with other. For if we say, as Leonti [...]s in Io [...]ap. 1. some haue done, that Sain [...] Iohn by telling vs, that Al things were made by him, would exempt him from amongst the creatures, and sette him on the Throne of the Creatour. what say we, that is ei­ther vnworthie of our Sauiours honour, or not agreea­ble to the maine ende of this description? which is to [Page 151] shew, that the promised Messiah had not his first being from the holy Virgin his mother. Neither doth this cō ­trary the iudgement of those writers Alcuinus in Ioa cap. 1. who think, that our Euangelist, following as it were the order of time, first shewes our Sauiours diuinity, then his humanity; & in setting out the former, after hee hath told vs, what he was, before the beginning of the world, proceedes now to informe vs, what he did, at the creation of the world. Doth the third, Ignat [...]us ad Tarsens. ep [...]st. 7 and most common opinion please vs; that this is brought in to proue his Godhead? This in­deed I take to haue bin principally intended; but so, as that both the other are likely. Did hee meane to shewe that our Sauior is God? Certainely hee woulde haue vs knowe then, that he is not a Creature only. These two points imply each other; The third suits with them well enough. For S. Iohn might intend to proue his diuine na ture by the creation of all things, and withall purpose to declare, what he did, in the creation. Which opinion also is somewhat the more likely, because the Euange­list bringes it in, vpon repetition of his being with God; as if he meant to shew, what he did then with God, as well, as that he was with God. But because the proofe of the Messiahs Godhead, is the main scope of this Gospel I will keepe my selfe to to that point, in the rest of my present exercise.

The question is, whether the creation of al things, be a sufficient proofe of his diuine nature, that created them, or no. First, the Euangelists authority is enough, to put the matter out of question. For hee, that being directed, by the spirit of God, could not erre, would ne­uer haue brought this, for a proofe thereof, if it coulde iustly be excepted against. Yet because (as I haue shew­ed) there might bee other reasons of this speech, and some doubt therefore, whether it were the Euangelists purpose to proue that, or no, let vs take some other course. for our full satisfaction. To which end, let vs al­waies [Page 152] remember, that Moses Gen. 1. 1. in the beginning of the Scripture, laies this as a maine foundation of religion, that God created heauen and earth. Who can doubt then, [...]ut it is a sound reason to proue our Sauiour to be God, that All things were made by him? For if it be tru [...], that God was the maker of all things, whomsoeuer wee finde to haue made all things, him we knowe thereby to be God. Therefore the Apostle Paul preaching to the heathen, and perswading them to forsake their Idolles, and to turne to the liuing God, shewes who he is, by this effect of creation. VVe preach vnto you (saith the Act. 14. 15. Apostle) that vee should turne from these vaine Idols, vnto the liuing God, which made heauen and earth, and the sea, and all things, that in them are. Worship him Reuel. 14. 7. (saith an Angel from hea­uen) that made heauen and earth and the sea, and the foun­taines of waters. By this doth 1. Chro. 16. 26 Dauid distinguish the true God, frō Idols. All the Gods of the people are Idols, but the Lord made the heauens. Is not this the proofe of the pow­er of God, whereby he magnifieth himselfe, and ama­zeth Io. 38. 4. 5. &c. Iob with the brightnesse of the glory thereof? By this doth Ezechiah cōclude, that he is the true God. Thou art very God alone, ouer all the kingdomes of the earth; thou hast made the heauens and the earth. Will you heare the Isay 3. 16. & 48. 12. 13. Lord himselfe? I am, I am the first, and I am the last. Sure­ly my hand hath la [...]d the foundation of the earth, & my right hand hath spanned the heauens; when I call them, they stand vp together. Let Heb. 1. 10. the Apostle Paul end this controuersy, who to proue our Sauiours Godhead, brings the place of the P [...]a. 102. 25. Psalme. Thou Lord in the beginning hast establish­ed the earth, and the heauens are the workes of thy handes. From hence then we may certainly, and necessarily con­clude, that the Word, the promised Messiah, our Lord & Sauiour Iesus Christ, is true God. For by him were all things made; and nothing can be made but by God one­ly. This August. in Io [...]. tract. 1. the Arians denied, because they sawe them­selues driuen to confesse, that all things were made by [Page 153] Christ, whom they will not ack [...]owledge to bee God equall to the Father. Therefore, they deuis'd this shift, that our Sauiour did indeed creat all things, yet not as a principall worker, but as an instrument. And to this, they say the Euangelist directed vs, when hee sayd, that All things were made [...] by him. For that, by which a thing is done, is an instrument in the doing of that thing, and not the doer of it. If these men had not blinded their owne eyes with a prei [...]dicat conceite, against God­head of our Sauiour, they might easily haue seene the fondnesse, and falsenesse of this blasphemous excepti­on. The folly of it I shew'd before, when I made it ma­nifest, that it is all one, to say, All things were made by him, and Hee made all things. The falsenesse of it may appeare thus; The scripture sayeth the same of God, which is here affirm'd of Christ, that this or that was by him; and yet (I hope) they will not dare therefore to conclude; that God in those matters, was not a princi­pall efficient cause, but an instrumentall. For example: Rom. 11. 36. [...]. The Apostle sayth, That all things are by God. What? As an instrument? who is then the principall essicient, that imployes God, as his instrument? 1. Cor. 1. 1. 2. Cor. 1. 1. Eph. 1. 1. Col. 1. 1. The same A­postle affirmeth of himselfe, that hee was called to bee an Apostle of Iesus Christ, by the will of God. If the will of God bee but an instrument, wee are content to re­quire no more honour for our Sauiour, so you allowe him to bee one with God in nature, as the Will of God is, which indeede is God himselfe. What say you Gal. 1. 1. to that place, where the Apostle pleades, for the au­thoritie of his Apostleshippe, because it is by Iesus Christ, and God the Father? I doubt mee, wee shall hardly finde any principall efficient at all, where both the Father, and the Sonne are instruments. How ab­surdly then, not onely impiously, doe the Arians con­clude from this word by, that our Sauiour Christ is not God? But you (brethren) haue beene better instructed [Page 154] then to giue eare to such blasphemies; that I holde it altogether needlesse, to bring any father proofe of the matter then I deliuered in my last exercise, or to vse a­ny word of exhortation to beleefe in him, whom wee cleerly discerne to be God al-sufficient. To whom with the Father and the holy Ghost the same God, the most mightie and gracious Creator of all thinges, let vs al­wayes remember to ascribe all glorie, power, and dominion, and to performe all obedience for euer, Amen.

IT is a cleere truth in natural reason, and a rul'd case in diuinitie, that as all thinges proceede from God, as the first cause of their being; so they are all referr'd to God, as the last ende, why they are. In him Acts. 17. 28. (sayeth the Apostle) wee liue, and moue, and haue our being. And to conuince the Heathen [Page 155] by the light of nature, hee addes, As also certaine of your owne Poets haue sayd, Aratus in Phaenomen. For wee are all his generation. To whom then doe wee owe our selues, and whatsoeuer wee are, or haue, but to him onely? Witnesse for na­ture the wisest of all the Philosophers, the Stoikes: for diuinitie, he, 1 King 4. 29. [...]0, that was wiser, then the wisest of the Heathen, Pro. 1. 12 & 16. 4. Salomon, the preacher, King ouer Isreal in Ie­rusalem. The Lord hath made all things for his owne sake: yet so for his owne sake, that Psa [...]. 8. 34. the Prophet is forced to cry out, When I behold the heauens, the workes of thy fin­gers, the Moone and the Starres, which thou hast crealed: what is man (say I) that thou art mindefull of him, and the sonne of man, that thou visitest him? That his gratious re­guard of man, whom the Lord sets in the next place to himselfe, may the better appeare; as the first worke of Creation was for his seruice, so the second of Regenera­tion was for his saluation. This wee learne of our E­uangelist: Ioh. 20. 31. who tels vs, that the ende of writing the Gospell was, That wee might beleeue, that Iesus is the Christ, the Sonne of God, and that by beleeuing wee might haue life through his name. See I pray you, how Saint Iohn hath loyned these two endes together: the for­mer is the glorifying of Iesus Christ, as the Sonne of God; the later, the procuring life to men, by faith in him. According to these two endes the Euangelist hath framed this beginning of his Gospell. First, Ioh. 1. 1. 2. he describes Iesus Christ vnto vs, as hee is in himselfe, God euerlasting. Then hee shewes, what hee is to vs. A crea­tor of vs, when wee were nothing; a Sauiour to vs, when Ver. 3. wee were worse then nothing. Of the former points we haue heard out of the three former verses: now of the Ver 4. 5. later, out of these two that follow. Whereof wee may sitly make these two parts; a description of the Mes­siah, as the a [...]tor of Life, in the fourth verse, and the former part of the fift; His intertainment by men, in the later part of the same verse. In the description, o [...]r [Page 156] Euangelist declareth; first, what hee was in the nature of his mediation; verse 4. then what, in regard of the effect; verse 5. Concerning the nature of that his office, two points are to bee considered: First, that In him was life. 2. that That life was the light of men. The effect is, that The light shineth in darkenesse. But how was this light intertaind? Or rather this light found no entertaine­ment; The darkenesse comprehended it not. Now for the better vnderstanding of these points; First, according to my custome, I wil examine the words, then expound the meaning of the Text. For the wordes, in the first clause (for I will take euery one seuerally, by it selfe) we must consider, both what life, the Euangelist speaks of; and why hee speakes in that manner saying, In him was life. Why hee sayth, In him was life, rather then He was life; why was, rather then Is; seeing it is as true and plaine, that Hee is life, as that life was in him.

But what is this life, hee speakes of? Looke not that I should trouble you, or my selfe, with refuting, or so much as reciting the diuers, & strange interpretatiōs of Heretickes, foolishly grounded vpon that manner of reading, which couples the former part of this verse, with the later ende of the third; That, which was made was life in him. I shewed in my last exercise, that if this had beene intended, by the Euangelist, hee would ra­ther haue said, All things that were made, were life in him. Surely, the manifold, and different expositions, that so many heretickes haue made of these wordes so read, and the absurd errors, and blasphemies, they haue gathered from them, may well seeme a sufficient rea­son, to discredite such a kinde of reading, as hath no better warrant, then the coniectures of men; Howso­euer the vulgar Latine retaine it, with the mislike of ma­ny learned Papists. August. in Ioa. tract. 1. Ambros­de fide lib. 3. cap. 3. and in Psal. 36. Theophyl. ad Ioa. 1. The Manichees deuis'd two se­nerall, and almost contrarie interpretations of them. The [Page 157] Arians a third; The Macedonians a fourth; Hera­cleon a fist: and euerie one of these an erroneous do­ctrine, sutable to his exposition. Yea, Origen. lib. 3 in Ioan. the best sense, that is giuen of the words so read, is so curious, and sub till, that it rather shewes the witte, and learning of the Interpreters, then the meaning of the Writer. And per­haps it were but lost labor, for the greatest part of this auditorie, to take paines, and spend time in striuing to make them vnderstand it.

Wherefore leauing those nice points to another kinde of exercise, and auditorie, let vs take the wordes plainely, and simply, as they offer themselues to bee conceiv'd of all men; Who if they haue any know­ledge at all of the Scripture, or of religion, by rea­ding, or hearing, by this word life vnderstand one of these two things: Either the naturall life, whereby all liuing creatures are sayd to liue; or the spirituall life, by which they, that are regenerate by the spirite of God, liue spiritually in this world by grace, and in the world to come by glorie. Let vs see some examples of the word in these senses, out of the Scripture. For the naturall life, wee haue the very beginning of it in Moses. Gen. 1. 20. God saide, Let the waters, bring foorth in abun­dance, euerie creeping thing, that hath life. And after­ward; Let the earth bring foorth euerie liuing thing, accor­ding Ver. 24. to his kinde. Of man it is particularly written, that Gen. 2. 7. The Lord God breathed in his face breath of life, and the man was a liuing soule. So sayth 1. Cor. 15. 45. the Apostle, alluding to that place; The first man Adam, was made a liuing soule. This is that life, which the Lord threatned hee would take away by the floud. Behold Gen. 6. 17. (sayth hee) I will bring a floud of waters vpon the earth, to destroy all flesh, wherein is the breath of life, vnder the heauen. In this sense the word is not so common in the newe Testament; I thinke not once in this whole Gospell: in other places some times. Luk. 8. 15. Though a man haue abundance, his life stan­deth [Page 158] not in his riches. Act. 17. 25. God giueth to all, life, and breath in all things. 1. Cor. 15. 19. If, in this life onely, wee haue hope in Christ. And as this signification of life is rare in the new Te­stament; so is the other for spirituall life in the old: yet now and then, vnder the title of this present life, the life to come is also implyed. Behold Deu. 30. 15. 19. 20. (sayeth Moses) I haue set before thee this day, life, and good, death, and e­uill. Afterward; life and death, blessing and cursing. And in the next verse; The Lord thy God is thy life, and the length of thy dayes. In the Psalme oftner and playner. Psal. 16. 11. Thou wilt shewe mee the path of life. Psal. 36. 9. With thee is the well of life. So in Pro. 2. 19. the Prouerbes. All they, that goe vnto her, returne not againe, neither take they hold of the wayes of life. Pro. 6. 23. Corrections for instruction are the way of life. That one booke affordes vs more examples of this kinde, then all the olde Testament beside. But the new is full of them euery where. Mat. 7. 14. & 18. 8. The way is narrow, that leadeth vn­to life. It is better for thee to enter into life, halt or maimed then hauing two hands or two feete, to be cast into euerlasting fire. This is that life of glorie, which is verie often cal­led euerlasting life; and whereof our Euangelist spea­keth continually, almost in euerie Chapter of this Gospell, diuers times; especially, in the thirde, the fift, and the sixt. The life of grace is more often in the E­pistles; Rom. 6. 4. & 8. 2. That wee might walke in newnesse of life. The spi­rit of life, which is in Christ Iesus. 2. Cor. 4. 10. That the life of Iesus might also bee made manifest in our bodies. Eph. 4 18. Strangers from the life of God. I haue beene somewhat the larger in this matter, because it helpeth much to the vnderstan­ding of many texts of Scripture, to knowe the different sense of the word in question.

For the place in hand, it is commonly thought to be meant of that natural life, which all liuing creatures, re­ceiue from their creator; as if the Euangelist should haue sayd, that not onely all things were made by him, as the author of their being, but also that they had their [Page 159] life too from him. But this (sauing their better iudgemēt, that so expound the text) seemes to me somewhat vn­likely. For why should the Euangelist repeate that in this verse, which hee had deliuered so fully immediate­ly before? All things were made by him. Was there any feare, that some exception would bee taken to these wordes? could any man imagine, that this making of all things, implyed no more, but the outwarde fashio­ning, and framing of them, and not also the inwarde forme, and wholenature? If wee will giue the wordes leaue to reach as farre, as by their nature, they doe, All things must needes import the same thinges in their best estate, with all their naturall qualities, & pro­perties, and whatsoeuer else belongs to their being that, which they are. For example, let vs speake a word or two of some particulars. By him were all trees made. What would a reasonable man vnderstand by this speech? That the body of the trees onely, or the roots, boughes, and branches, and leaues, and not the life of the Trees was made by him? Surely, to speake according to truth, all these, without the life, and forme, doe no more make a Tree, then a body without a soule doth a Man. I might say the like of men. By him were all men made. If the Lord God had onely framed Adam of the dust of the ground, and not breathed into his face, the breath of life; might hee haue beene sayd, to haue created a man? No surely: vnlesse a carcase bee a man, after the soule is departed out of it. But, let vs thinke the Euangelist might haue such a meaning, would he (trow yee) haue spoken, as hee doth, if he had meant as you say? In him was life, that is, (say you) Hee also gaue life to all things that hee had made. Who can so much de­ceiue himselfe, as to conceiue, that Saint Iohn would deliuer his minde so darkely, and doubtfully? Beside, was not this, you speake of, a creature? If so, it was be­fore compris'd vnder those generall tearmes, All things, [Page 160] and needed no repetition. Neither will this interpretati­on of the word agree fitly with that, which followeth. Is it not euident, that the life, and the light, are of the same kinde, both naturall, or both supernaturall? But, the light, as it shall appeare anone, is that of grace to faith, not of nature to knowledge. For the light of nature did comprehend the Creator so far, as to acknowledge it selfe to proceede from him, and to depend vpon him. Therefore Rom. 1. 20. the Apostle Saint Paul, doth not accuse the heathen of ignorance, for not knowing God, to be their maker; but for not honouring him, according to the knowledge, they had of him. The inuisible things of God (saith hee) that is, his eternall power, and Godhead, are seen [...] by the creation of the world, being considered in his workes, that they might bee without excuse. Because when they knew Ver. 21. God, they glorified him not as God. So then, the Heathen for all the darkenesse of nature, did comprehend the life, that was the naturall light of their soules. If you answere, that they did not perfitly vnderstand all things that concerne him as the Creator: you say true, but not much to purpose. For, who is there, that euer did o [...] can, especially while hee liues in this world, compassed about with this house of clay, so fully conceiue those points, as they are to bee, and shall be, after this life, vn­derstood?

But some man will say, perhaps, that although the giuing of life to all things, was signified in the making of them: yet the preseruing, and maintaining of it, was not. Nor of their being; which can no more bee con­tinued, without the power of God support them in it, then their life can. Therefore the Apostle, describing our Sauiour Christs Godhead, sets it out by this verie worke thereof; when he sayth of him, that Heb. 1. 3. He beares vp all things, by his mightie word: and Act. 17. 28. in another place, where hee tels the heathen, that they liu'd and mou'd in God, hee adde [...] also, that in him they had their being. If [Page 161] then there were no necessitie to expresse the sustaining of all things in their being, no more was there to note particularly the continuing of them in life. Yea, perhaps it might be dangerous to mention the later, and con­ceale the former; least some men should gather, that all thinges stand in neede of God to preserue their life, but not to continue their being. Giue mee leaue to apply one of my former exceptions, to the clee­ring of this matter also. How strangely doth the E­uangelist speake, if his meaning be, as you make it? In him was life. That is, Hee preserues all thinges in life. Could this point bee more obscurely deliuered? What reason can you giue mee, why the holy Ghost should say was, when he intended to signifie the con­tinuall preseruing of life? why did hee not rather say, In him is life; Or in him the life of all thinges is conti­nually preserv'd? But if by life, you will haue the pre­seruing of things in their being signified, I desire to see some warrant of Scripture, or ground of reason, for the vsing of that word, in that sense. Surely there can bee no such found in any place of all the Scripture, either or the word life, or for the phrase, In him was life.

What remaines then, but Clem. Alex andr. pae lagog lib. 1. cap. 6. A thana [...]. lib. 3. [...] hom [...]. Amb [...]o. lib. 3 de fide cap 3. to expound the word, of that supernaturall life, by which wee liue, through faith in Christ? This is the life, of which our Euangelist so often speakes in this Gospell, comming to vs by, and in Christ Let vs heare our Sauiour himselfe speake. Ioh. 5. 24. He that beleeueth in him, that sent me, hath euerlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation, but hath passed from death to life. And in the same Chapter, afterward, hee Ver. 40. reproues the Iewes, because they would not come vn­to him, that they might haue life: Whereas the ende of his comming was, Ioh. 10. 10. That they might haue life; and haue it in abundance. Therefore doth Act. 3 15. the A­postle Peter call him, the Lord of life. But whome shoulde wee rather heare, in this case, then [...] the [Page 162] Euangelist himselfe, expounding his owne meaning? The life appeared, and wee haue seene it, and beare witnesse, and shew vnto you that eternall life, which was with the father and appeared vnto vs. Can any man doubt, but the E­uangelist speaketh of the same life, in the beginning of his Epistle, whereof he intreateth, in his Gospell? Com­pare them together, and see if you can perswade your selues otherwise. Will you heare him speake yet more plaine? & 5. 11. This is the recorde, that God hath giuen vnto vs eternall life, and this life is in his Sonne. This later is called Eternall life in the wordes before. Then surely the Euangelist speaketh in the Gospell also, of eternall life, which the Sonne of God bringeth as mediatator; not of this transitorie life, which hee gi­ueth as Creator. Now because this supernaturall life is double, either of grace in this world, or of glorie in the world to come; I should farther inquire whether of these two is here meant, or whether both be not meant. But of that, as also of the reason, why our regeneration, & sal­uation is tearmed life, I wil speake, when I come to giue the meaning of the place.

In the meane while, let vs goe forward in examining the words: and first let vs see, why he vseth this kinde of speech, In him. Why doth he not rather say, as before, by him? doubtlesse hee might well haue sayde so. For, it is by him indeede, that wee haue life. Rom. 5. 1. 2. By him wee haue peace toward God; By him wee haue accesse, through Ver. 11. faith vnto this grace, wherein wee stand. By him wee haue receiued the attonement. But this manner of speech, though it bee as true as the other: yet it is not so fitte in this place, nor so significant. Not so fitte; be­cause the Euangelist would put a difference betwixt the Creator, and the Mediator. All things were made by him; not in him, though Origen. hon. 2. [...]n [...]uers. some would haue without to imply as much: whome I aunswered the last day. But our spirituall life is, as by him, so in him. The [Page 163] things that are made by him, howsoeuer they al­wayes depend on him, for the continuance of their being, yet they are not one with him. Is it so with them that receiue the life of grace from him? No, no; They are ioyned close vnto him: and the life, that they haue, is from that spirit, by which hee liues. Therefore is Eph. 5. 3 [...] the Church flesh of his flesh, and bone of his bone; yea, all the faithfull are members of his bodie, himselfe being the head. This neere coniun [...] ction with him, could not bee exprest so significantly, if the Euangelist should say, By him was life; as it is, when hee sayth, In him was life: yet doth not say, Hee was life, which also is true; because he [...] speakes of it, not as it rests in him, but as it is commu­nicated by him to vs.

But why sayes hee was, and not rather, Is in him? Is there no life nowe to bee had? Or is there any to bee had nowe, but in hi [...]? No surely. There is no saluation in any other. [...]. 4. 12 For amonge men, there is giuen no other name, vnder heauen, whereby [...]ee must bee saued. How then sayes the Euangelist, that l [...]e was in him? Tolet. in [...] innot. 13. Wee may not imagine, that [...]ee meanes to shewe vs anye other way of attay­ning to life; as if was, excluded is: No more, then wee may conceiue, that the Word is not GOD nowe, because hee sayeth of him, The Worde was God. What may then bee the reason of this manner of speech? It is thought to bee double: either in re­ [...]uard of Gods eternall purpose, or in respect of the [...]mes, before the comming of the Messiah. The for­mer, wee must thus vnderstand; that the Lorde God, fore-seeing the fall of his creature man, decreed in him­selfe, to recouer him, by sending his Sonne to make satis­ [...]action for sin, by sacrificing of himselfe vpon the altar of the crosse. Of this saith 2. Tim. 1. 9. the Apostle, He hath saued vs, and called vs with an holy calling; not according to our works, [Page 164] but according to his owne purpose, and grace, which was giuen vs through Iesus Christ, before the world was. Therefore also sayth our Euangelist 1. Ioh. 1. 2. other where, that this life was with the Father, and appeared vnto vs. When the ful­nesse of time was come (sayth Saint Paul) God sent his Sonne. What fulnesse of time was this, but the very how­er appointed by God? So that Saint Iohn may well say, In him was life. Because, euen before the foundations of the world, were layd, life was setled, and shut vp in the person of the Sonne, who was in due time to become the mediator of mankinde, by taking the nature of man vpon him.

If there bee any man, whome this aunswere doth not content, it may bee the other coniecture will satis­fie him. Let vs not wearie our selues with looking so far as to the eternall decree of GOD, but keepe our sight within the compasse of the worlde: within that time also wee shall finde some reason of this speech. When was life in him? euer since there was any, to whome that life might appertaine, it was ready for him, in the Sonne of GOD, the promised Messiah. Gen. 3. 15. Where had our first parents, Adam and Eue, their spirituall life, after the Curse, but in him? In whom was the couenant established with Gen. 12. 3. Gal. 3. 8. Abraham, but in his seede Iesus Christ? What name I some speci­all men? Did not this life offer it selfe generally vn­to all, that came of Abraham? Brethren, I would not that you should bee ignorant (sayeth 1. Cor. 10. 1. 2. 3. 4. the Apostle) that all our fathers were vnder the Cloude, and all pas­sed through the Sea: And were all baptized vnto. Mo­ses in the Cloud, and in the Sea: And did all eate the same spirituall meate; And did all drinke the same spi­rituall drinke. For they dranke of the same spirituall Rocke, that followed them, and the Rocke was Christ. What though many thousandes dyed, before the Sonne of God became men? were they therefore with­out [Page 165] meanes of life and saluation? Nothing lesse. Heb. 13. 8. Ie­sus Christ yester-day, and to day, and the same for euer. They beleeued in Christ to come: wee beleeue in him being come. They saw him not; but were per­swaded, hee should bee seene, at the time appointed. Neither haue wee seene him; but are out of doubt, that hee was seene, while he liued here vpon the earth. They trusted in him, as the onely and all-sufficient meanes of life. Is not our faith the same? Therefore least any man should imagine that the Fathers, which died be­fore our Sauiour Christ was born, were destitute of spi­rituall life, our Euangelist assures vs, that there was, euen then, life in him.

These reasons may giue some good satisfaction to them, who desire rather to informe themselues, to edifi­cation, then to aime themselues, for contention. Giue me leaue also, I pray you, to propound to your conside­ration, & meditation, at your better leasure, what it hath pleased God I should conceiue of this matter: would a­ny man knowe of me, why the Euangelist saith In him was, rather then In him is life? I think, he may be fully sa­tisfied, if he do aduisedly consider, that hee continueth the course, which he begun, in the first verse, & follow­ed in the second, and third. In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and the word was God. The same was. By him were: without him was. Do not meruaile thē, that the Euangelist sayth here, In him was life. Tell mee how hee could haue spoken more fitly? Hee proceedes in the description of the Messiah, touching his media­torship; whose Godhead he had before declared. Could he doe better, thē to hold on the same manner of speech? But, will you see yet a farther reason? that nothing may be wanting, which may helpe vou forward in the vnderstanding of this scripture. Who knowes not, that the Euangelist, (according to the ordinary course which they take that write the hystories of famous [Page 166] men) settes downe in the beginning a briefe description of him, of whom afterward hee is to intreat at large: by shewing that in particular, which was, at the first, deli­uered in a generall sort? This being so, let vs remem­ber, that the historie is of him, that is not now liuing amongst vs, but departed out of this life from vs. Therefore it was necessarie for our Euangelist to speak of him, as of one that had beene, and now was not. Not as if hee were not now at all: but because hee is not now aliue, in the world, as hee was, when those things were done, the historie whereof is written in this Gospell. So then, we must conceiue, that Saint Iohn, in saying was, hath respect to the time of our Sauiours be­ing herein our nature; and therefore not only might, but ought also to say, In him was, rather then In him is life: because he is totel vs, what he did, here in the world and not what hee doth, now he is out of the world. This the holy Ghost teacheth vs, when he saith Ioh. 20. 30. toward and Ioh 21. 25. in the end of this Gospell; Many other signes also did Iesus, and there are also many other things which Iesus did. Yet the ende of all is, Ioh. 20. 31. that wee might beleeue that Iesus is the Christ; and so, that life is in him, now for vs, as well as it was for them, that liued in his time.

The excellent comfort of this doctrine drawes mee to it with both the hands, but that my promise holdes mee backe very strongly. Let me first discharge this, & then I will bestowe my selfe wholly vpon the handling of that more at large. I vndertooke to shewe these two thinges; what spirituall life is here signified: of grace, or of glorie, or of both; why the tearme life is applyed to note that holinesse, and happinesse. I doubt not, but euerie man perceiues already, that by life, I vnderstand as well our liuing righteously in this world, as our liuing gloriously in the world to come. How else could it note such holinesse, and happinesse? The reason (perhaps) is not so apparant. I will doo [Page 167] my best endeuour, to giue you satisfaction, touching that also. It is verie fitte, if not necessarie, to giue as large an extent to all texts of Scripture, as the circum­stances of the present place, and the ordinarie vse of the wordes will beare; least wee seeme to restraine the meaning of the holy Ghost, more then wee are war­ranted by him to doe. And therefore I could haue beene contented to haue stretched the worde, euen to note the preseruing of naturall life; but that I can finde no such vse of it in the Scripture: neither will that sense well agree, with that exposition, which the light in the second clause seemes necessarily to require; as I hope to make it appeare anone, if God will.

But neither any circumstance of the place tieth life to the one, or to the other: and the word is diuers times taken in both senses. Of eternall life, what shall I need to bring many examples? This Gospell is full of them. I will giue you a taste, by one, or two. Yee search the Scriptures Ioh. 5. 39. 40. (sayth our Sauiour to the Iewes) for in them yee thinke to haue eternall life, and they are they, which te­stifie of mee. Yet yee will not come to mee, that yee might haue life. That, which in the former verse, hee nameth eternall life, in the later hee calleth simply life. The Ver. 24. like wee haue in the same Chapter, not very many ver­ses before; Hee, that beleeueth in him, that sent mee, hath euerlasting life, and shall not come into condemna­tion, but hath passed from death to life. To what life? Euen to euerlasting life, which he was sayd before to haue. The other life, grace in this world, both is implyed often­times in the life of glorie, whereof also it is a part, the Image of God in vs being renewed by it, and is manie times spoken of by it selfe, as I shewed at large be­fore, out of Eph. 4. 24. diuerse places of Scripture. It is needlesse to repeate them, or to adde more to them. What should hinder vs then frō expounding this life so largely, as wee haue done? Nave, might wee not [Page 168] be thought iniurious, to the holy Ghost, if wee should leaue out either of them? By life then, wee vnderstand that spirituall estate of righteousnesse, and glory, of which all, that beleeue in Christ, are made parta­kers, by beeing ingraffed into his mysticall bodie. Would any man knowe, why this estate, into which wee are restored by our Sauiour, should be tearmed life? I aunswere him, in a word, because the miserable estate, into which wee fell by sinne, was called by the name of death. It will not bee vnworthy our labour, to consider this point a little. When the Lord God had made our first parents, and placed them in that palace of pleasure, the garden of Paradise, Gen. 2. 8. Hee charged them to forbeare to eate of the Tree of the knowledge of good and euill; threatning them, that if they brake his commaundement, that day, that they ate thereof, Ver. 17. they should dye the death. Do you perceiue, that the Lord himlelfe hath giuen that condition of ours the name of death? The olde Testament furnish [...]th vs with many examples, to precue the first sinne com­ [...]itted by vs in Adam, cast vs all into the state of death [...]ut this death, so often there spoken of, is partly the mortalitie of the body, and partly the eternall punishment of the soule in hell fire; the other death of sinnei [...]eldome, or I thinke, neuer mentioned, in any of those books. The new Testament supplyes vs with very great plentie of example, of both kindes. Of the one I will say nothing at all, because euery man continually obserue [...] them: Of the other I must needes speak; because per­haps they are not so ordinarily markt of all men. Mat. 8. 22. Let the dead bury their dead, saith our Sauiour. The dead, to be buried, are they, whose carcases are left without life, by the departure of the soules frō thē, as the historie that place manifestly sheweth. But, who bee the dead, that must bee the buriers of those corpses? Who else, bu [...] they, that are dead in sinne, dead to righteousness [...] [Page 169] and so looke after nothing that concernes euerlasting life, any more, then men naturally dead doe after the things of this present life? So saith Luk. 15. 32. the kind Father of the prodigal Sonne: This thy brother was dead. Dead? The parable had said no such thing of him. What thē was that death, the Father speaks of? Questionles the death of sin; whereby he had liued lewdly, & wasted his goods with verse. 13. riotousnesse, and (as his brother angerly obiected) had deuoured them with harlots. This the Apostle expresseth, Verse. 30. when speaking of vs all in our naturall estate before grace, he Epb. 2. 5. 7. saith, that we were dead in sinnes, and trespasses. This may yet farder be manifested, by the title, that is giuen to that condition, into which wee enter by rege­neration. First Ioh. 3. 5. our Sauiour saith we must be borne againe: what needs that if we were neuer dead? And Rom. 6. 2. the Apo­stle S. Paul affirmeth, that they, which are so borne a­gaine, are dead to sinne. Then, till they were so borne a­gaine, they liu'd in sinne. The life of the one is alwaies the dea'h of the other. If thou liue to sinne, thou art dead to righteousnes. If thou liue to righteousnes, thou art dead to sinne. Therefore 1. Pet. 2. 24. S. Peter ioynes them both together, That we being dead to sinne, might liue to righte­ousnesse. S. Paul hath the like speech, in vnlike tearmes. When ( Rom. 6. 20. saith he) yee were the seruants of sinne, yee were freed from righteousnesse. But now being freed from sinne, & Verse. 22. made seruants vnto God. Marke I pray you, how one of these, as it were, destroies the other. A naturall man without grace is free from righteousnesse, yea as free, as a dead man is, from all matters of this worlde. A spi­rituall man indued with grace is free from sinne; yea as free as Lazarus was from all the cares of this worlde, while he lay in his graue, without life or breath. But I may not forget my selfe too much. The summe of all is this, that our Sauiour Christ himselfe, and by his ex­ample, our Euangelist, describeth the estate, into which we are brought, by becomming members of his body, [Page 170] by the tearm of life, because ourformer estate, out of which he deliuered vs, was in name, & nature, an estate o [...] death.

Now hauing examined the words, let vs come to the doctrine it selfe. In him was life: which is all one, as if the holy Euangelist should haue said, This word, or pro­mised Messiah, of whom I haue begun to intreat, and intend to write this story, not only was eternall, hauing his being, before any thing created ever began to be; & that with God, euen then, when there was nothing beside God: but was also himselfe very God. From him al things, that are, or euer were, had their whole being: in him, the spirituall life, both of grace, and glory was so plāted, that who soeuer desires to be partaker of it, must haue it only, as in him, being come into the world. This is that which we are to learne out of this place. In the handling whereof, I will first deliuer the doctrine, that our spiri­tuall life is by Christ; then I will speake of the manner, how it is by him. Concerning the former point, first I wil propoūd it in general: then I wil shew it in those particu­lars of holynes, & happynes, The manner also hath 2. things to bee considered. That this life was in Christ, & that it was in him, euē while he liued here vpō the earth.

Touching the first point, that our estate is to be reco­uered by our Sauiour, Christ, let me put you in mind of those places which I once before alleag'd, & which are indeed the very foundation of the Gospell. By sinne the diuell got dominion ouer vs, God in iustice leauing vs, when we had forsaken him, & Satan iniustly seizing on vs, as it were intruding himselfe into a house void of any owner, to keepe possession. But the Lord God, though he would not presently thrust out by the head, & shoul­ders, or pluck out by the eares that presumptuous intru­der: yet tels him, that he should not imagin, he had got­ten, or should hold quiet possession for euer. I will put enmity Gen. 3. 15. (saith the Lord) betwixt thee, & the woman, & be­tween thy seed, & her seed, What shall be the euent of this long, & doubtfull contention? He shal breake thy head. & [Page 171] thou shalt bruise his beele. Though Satan be strong, & ar­med, & by that meanes may seeme to keepe his palace without disturbance; yet there comes Luk. 11. 11. 22 a stronger then he, that ouercomes him, & takes from him al his armo [...], wherin he trusted, & diuides his spoils. This shews ma­nifestly, that the deuill shall lose his possession; but per­haps he may reenter: or if he do not, yet are wee by this meanes rather freed from misery, then restored to feli­city. Let vs go forward therfore, and heare the promise that God makes to Abraham the Father of the faithfull: Gen. 12. 3. In thee shall all the families of the earth be blessed. Gal 3. 16. S. Paul thus expounds. To Abraham and his seedwere the promises made; He saith not, & to the seeds, as of many, but & to thy seed, as of one, which is Christ. And this promise thus made, the same Apostle cals the preaching of the Verse 8. Gos­pell. The Scripture (saith he) foreseeing that God would ius­tifie the Gentiles by faith, preached before the Gospell vnto Abraham, saying In thee shall al the Gentils be blessed. This belssing our Euangelist describes, where setting downe the end of the Gospel, he tels vs, that Ioh. 20. 31. by beleeuing we shal haue life through his name. What shall I need to heape vp any more testimonies in a matter nothing doubted of? we haue found that we sought, that life is to bee had in Iesus Christ.

See, I pray you, & consider a little with me, how ma­ny & greate reasons we haue, to bee inflamed with the loue of Iesus Christ. If we regard excellency of nature, in which respect Velleius Epi cur. apud Cicer. de nat. deor. l. 1. the graund Atheists of the worlde thought the heathē imagined Gods worthy of honor & seruice, behold he is God. If length of yeers, he is eter­nall, without beginning, or ending. But these things ra­ther cause admiratiō, then moue affection; which is then most effectually stirred vp, when the sense of some be­nefit receiu'd, hath taken ful possession of our hearts. If there be any man, with whom these respects canot pre­uaile, what is he but meerely senslesse, neither knowing [Page 172] what he hath, nor feeling what hee wantes? What said I? Not knowing what hee hath? There needes not so much. If no man can bee ignorant, that hee is, all men must need vnderstand, that they are beholding to him, by whome they are. Looke not vpon the goodly feature of thy body, think not on the excellency of thy soule, vnderstand not that thou hast vnderstāding, for­get, that thou canst remember: only deny not, that thou art, because thou prou'st it, by denying it, and thou has [...] cause enough to loue the author of thy being. Doth this benefit of thy naturall being somewhat affect thee? Oh, how wouldst thou bee rauisht, if thou couldst see the blessednes of thy supernaturall estate? I will not goe a­bout to shew thee the misery, in which thou art now, by the corruption of thy nature; I will not so much as say, thou art miserable. I reserue those points for some other opportunity, the next verse will giue mee occasion to speake somewhat of them. Only giue meeleaue to pro­clayme life in Iesus Christ. Doost thou heare what I say? I wil repeate it againe, and that as loud as I can, that all may heare it. The Word, the promised Messiah, Iesus Christ the Sonne of God, hath life in him, for all, that will be partakers of it. Dost thou sit still at the hearing of this proclamation? No maruaile. How should a dead man stit? Wouldest thou haue a better proofe, that thou art dead indeed? Well; if there be no remedy, but that thou wilt continue stil in death, I wil leaue thee in it, & turne to them, whom I see running vp, and downe, to seeke out this life.

Why do you vexe, & weary your selues with seeking that, which is vnder your noses? Rom 10. 6. The righteousnesse of Verse. 7 this faith speaketh on this wise; Say not in thy heart, who shall ascend into heauen? That is to bring Christ from aboue. Or Verse 8. who shaldescend into deepe? That is to bring Christ againe from the dead. But what saith it? The word is neere thee; euen in thy mouth, and in thy heart. Gen. 21. 15. 16. When Agar, being turn­ed [Page 173] out of Abrahams house with her Sonne Ismaell, had spent the bottle of water, that she brought from home, heleft her Sonne vnder a tree, and went a bowe shoote off, that she might not see him dy. And yet as it appeared afterward she might hard by a well of water, though shee knewe it not, God opened her eies (saith the text) and she Verse 19. saw a well of water. This is the case of those men, to whō I now speake. Are yee turned out of doores from God your heauenly Father? Doe you finde your selues out of all hope, to recouer his fauour? Are you dead, and would you liue, but that you can see no meanes of life? Be of good comfort, and cheere vp your selues. The wa­ter of life is neerer, then you are aware of. You are in it, and knowe it not, It comes vp to your very lips. Doe but open your mouths, and it will run in. Agar sate her downe, and did not so much as looke about her, to see if Verse. 16. she could light vpō any spring, or pit of water to main­taine life in her Sonne; and the Lord himselfe cald vnto her, and fhew'd her, where she might fill many bottels. And will he suffer thee (thinkst thou) to wander from place to place to seeke life? Behold it is in his Son. Thou shalt not need to climbe vp to heauen. lib. 3. 13 Iesus Christ of his owne accord, without thy desire, or thought of any such matter, came downe from thence, & brought life with him. Sound not the depths, to fetch it out from be­low. Luk. 24. 6. Euen from thence also the same Iesus Christ came vp with life, Art thou dead? There is life in him. If thou wert not dead, neither couldst thou receiue, nor he be­stow life vpon thee. Mat 9. 12. Can a whole man be cured, or Ioh. 8. 33. 34. a free man set at liberty? Was Ioh. 11. 6. 39. not Lazarus dead, be­fore he could be raised againe to life? Therfore did our Sauiour stay in the place, where he was, 2. dayes, after he had word of his sicknes, that he might be dead, and buried, ere he should come to restore him to life againe. Tell me not, how long thou hast bin dead. The strength of death growes not by continuance, as sicknesse doth. [Page 174] He, that hath bin dead, but one hower, is as void of life, as he that died a yeere ago. When our Sauiour came to raise Lazarus, he had bin dead 4 daies: Lord said Martha, he stinks by this time. There wanted life: and when that came, neither continuance of time, nor noysmnes of [...]a [...]or, nor the bands at his hands and feete, were able to make any resistance, for the detayning of the prisoner.

If the force of life be so greate, that no contrary pow­er is of strength to make head against it, may it not well seem exceeding strange, that so few recouer life, or once looke after it. Ioh. 5. 39. 40. Our Sauiour complaines of the Iewes, that although they search the Scripturs, with an opiniō that euerlasting life was to be had out of them, & those Scriptures testified of him, that he was the autor of that [...]ife: yet they would not come to him, that they might haue life. There is no reason that we should expect bet­ter intertainement, then he found Hee, that will not be­leeue, that the light shines, when it is plaine to be seene, wil hardly giue credit to him, that tels him afterward, it did shine. Yet me thinks, I cannot chuse but wonder that this life, which is in our Sauiour, should so general­ly be neglected; I am loth to say despised, or refused: b [...] I must of necessity cō [...]ess, it is not embraced, as it sh [...]u [...]d be. Would you know what the reason of it is? what? [...]e we vnwilling to haue life? That is not possible, seing our chiefest care is to maintaine life. Doe wee despaire of means to come by it? The least shew of hope will make a man try any course, that shall be directed him. It is a rare thing, to find any man so void of hope to liue, that he will not take whatsoeuer is offered him, to continue life. Is the remedy more greeuous, then the disease? what is easier in the opinion of ordinary men, then to belieue? Shall I tell you, what I conceiue of the matter? There are 2 lets, that stay vs commonly from the seeking, and embracing of this life. Either we are too wel cōceited of our selues, or not well enough perswaded of him, in [Page 175] whom this life is. Would you haue me seeke for life? Let them looke after it that lack it. I haue life already in my selfe, and need not depend vpon any other for it. I am rich, and increased with goods, and haue neede of nothing, Reu. 3. 17. saith the Church of Laodicea: and yet indeed as our Sauiour there tells her, She was wretched, and miserable, and poore, and blinde, and naked. This conceipt naturally possesseth all men; and where this is rooted, and flou­risheth, there is neither roome for spiritual life to grow, nor will to plant it. But this, because it is so agreeable to the pride of our corrupt nature, is the lesse to bee won­dred at. The other hinderance, whereby wee are helde backe from this life, is more strange, and lesse excuse­able. There are many, that make open profession to all the world, that they knowe themselues to be naturally dead, and to stand in neede of life to quicken them; yea they goe farder; and, in wordes, acknowledge, that the life, they want, is in Christ: and yet (like those Iewes, I spake of ere-while) they care not to ioyne themselues to Christ, that they may be made partakers thereof.

This I take to be generally the estate of most of vs, that are called Christians. Do we not all professe be­leefe in Iesus Christ? Do we not thereby acknowledge, that we are dead in our selues, and looke to receiue life from him? And yet, how few of vs are there, that indeed are so perswaded? Thinke not much, that I make this greeuous cōplaint. If we did truely beleue that in heart which we confesse from the teeth outward, were it pos­ssible we should be so carelesse? where can you find me one amōgst a greate many, that either knowes or cares to knowe how this life is to be come by? Doth thy hart leap within thee for ioy, as oft as thou hear'st, that there is life to be had in Iesus Christ? Gen. 42. 2. When Iacob, in a time of famin, heard that there was food in Aegypt, hee sent his S [...]nns thither with all speed, to buy some. How far [Page 176] would they haue gon for life, that trauailed into Aegypt, for meate? Thou hast heard there is life in Christ; & for [...]ll that, sitst stil thy house; I should say ly'st stil in thy graue, and thinkest it enough for thee, to haue heard of it. Thou doost but deceiue thy owne wretched poore soule: What could it haue auailed Iacob, that hee heard where there was corne to be bought, if hee had not sent his Sonnes to fetch it? But perhaps thou mak'st accoūt, [...]hat thou hast it sure. If I should aske thee, when or how thou camst by it, I doubt me thy answere woulde bee to seeke. Go to: I will not presse thee so far, though well I might. For this life we speake of, doth not ste [...]le into a man, while he lies a-sleeping, but is followed, and sought for, before it be obtained. But I will only demād this one questiō of thee. Hast thou indeed found life in Iesus Christ? Oh that it were as [...]ruly, as it is commonly spoken. I will not examin thee vpon any Interrogato­ries. Let thine owne soule tell thee in secret, betwixt it, and thee, whether thy affection to this autor of life bee such, as the feeling of so greate a blessing can not possi­bly chuse but make it. He, that saith, he beleeues there is life in Christ, and vseth no meanes to become partaker of it, either thinkes he hath no neede thereof, or accoūts it not worth the hauing, or saith, he knoweth not what; deceiuing himself with an empty shadow, the substance whereof he neither hath nor careth for. What shall I say of him who brags he is possest of life in Christ; yet nei­ther honors Christ, nor reioyceth in his own happines? What else? But that his heart beleeues not, what his toong auoucheth.

But I dwel too long in the general. Let vs come now to the particulars; and first to the life of holynes; which is so absolutely from Christ, that the Apostle saith it is not himselfe, that liueth, but Christ, that liueth in him. Will you heare him speake. I through the lawe ( Gal. 2. 19. 20. saith S. Paul) am dead to the law; and that I might liue [Page 177] vnto God, I am crucified with Christ. Thus I liue; yet not I now, but Christ liueth in me. For the spirit, by which wee liue, is Eph. 4. 15. 16. the spirit of Christ resting in him, as in the head, and spreading himselfe abroad into euery one of the members, to giue them their proportion of life, and growth. This is that, which ( Rom. 8. 2. in another place) is call'd the spirit of life, which is in Christ Iesus; and which is there said to haue freed vs from the law of sinne. The Iewes bragd they were free by nature, because they were Abrahams children. Ioh. 8. 33. 34. But our Sauiour aunsweres them, that they were the seruants of sinne, because they committed sin, and could not be made free indeede but by the sonne Ver. 36. onely. This, our Baptisme teacheth vs, as Rom 6. 2. 3. 4. the Apostle sheweth at large: The summe is, that we are buried by Baptisme into the death of Christ, that sinne may be slaine Ver. 11. in vs; and raised againe by the power of his resurrecti­on, that righteousnes may liue, and grow in vs. The con­clusion is this, Make account (saith the holy Apostle) that yee are dead to sinne, but are aliue to God in Iesus Christ our Lord. Eph. 2. 5. In whom wee were quickened, when wee were dead in sinnes. For 1 Cor. 1. 30. Christ Iesus is made vnto vs of God, wisedome, righteousnesse, sanctification, and redemption. Where are they now, who finde themselues so perplexed, with the sight, and sense of that their naturall corruption? Me thinkes I heare the sighes, and grones of a poore soule, lamentably complaining, that shee can finde no ende of her wretchednesse, no bottome of her running sore. If she heale vp one, two breake out for it. If she make head against pride, couetousnesse setts vpon her behinde her backe. While she is busie with all the force she can make, to withstand the lusts of the flesh, that outwardly assault her, her owne thoughts inwardly commit fornication. Though shee keepe her hands from murder: yet her tongue wounds deepely, and deadly, with euill speeches. To conclude, when shee hath ouer night emptied the sinke, in the morning she findes it full againe. What may [Page 178] wee say, to comfort one so distressed? Our Euangelist shall speake for vs: In him was life. Art thou dead to righteousnesse? There is life in him. Dwelles there no good in thee? In him there is nothing but good. Neuer amplifie the strength of thy corruption, as if the life that is in him could not ouercome it. Thinke not thy death can be stronger, then his life. Consider with thy selfe, that it is no easie matter to dispossesse him, that hath so long a time binne willingly enterteyned. Thy cor­ruption is of long continuance, and growth; the grace, that must cure it, newly planted in thee, and tender. If thy not beeing could not withstand thy naturall life, nei­ther shall thy being naught, be able to keepe away from thee, the supernaturall life.

But many occasions will be offred vs, in the whole course of this Gospell, to comfort, and strengthen all them, that feele themselues to bee spiritually dead, and desire to haue life in Iesus Christ. Giue me leaue there­fore, now in the beginning, to discouer the heretickes and idolaters, their erronious opinions, and conceiptes of our Sauiour, and of themselues. The heretikes, that denied his diuinitie, neuer suffi [...]iently waighed the poize of our Euangelists speech; In him was life. For if they had aduisedly considered, that all spirituall life was shut vp in him, so that none at all was to be had, either without him, or out of him, they woulde easily haue discerned, that hee must needs bee very God. Can not naturall life bee setled in any creature, as in the fountaine there­of; and can spirituall life (trow yee) spring in him, that hath not so much as his naturall beeing from himselfe? Let vs imagin the greatest power of this kinde, that possibly can bee in any creature. The most, he can doe, is, to offer the consideration of spirituall matters to our meditation, to make cleere, in some measure, the truth of that, hee saith; to perswade, and vrge vs to beleeue and like of that, which hee deliuers. Alas; all this comes [Page 179] very short of the helpe wee neede. Can he withdraw our minds from the cares, and pleasures of this world, that wee may giue our selues to the meditation, he ex­horts to? Can hee giue vs spirituall eies, to see the truth, of that, he teacheth? Can he incline our vnwilling hearts, and make them willing, to embrace the life, he so com­mends vnto vs? Dares hee say, there is life in himselfe, otherwise then by his depending vpon him, of whom our Euangelist saith, In him was life? The most excellent creatures, for their natures, are the Angells; yet had not they life in them, as the fountaine thereof. For many of them are spiritually dead, hauing no true holinesse, or righteousnesse in them: and as for them, that continue in life, what haue they, that they haue not receiued? If it were possible to digge a new chanell for the sea, and to empty that, wherein now the water runnes, into that new one so prepared, stopping vp the passage betwixt them; might wee account of this, as of the spring of wa­ters? Let the breadth, length, and depth of it bee neuer so great, as long as the springes are not there, it may bee a lake, or poole, and that a great one; but the sea, or beginning of waters it cannot bee. So it is with all creatures whatsoeuer. If the life of righteousnesse, like the water of the sea, could be conceiued to be in them, and they not in Christ; yet were not this the life, wee speake of; which is the well-spring of life, and feeds all riuers with a continuall supply of liuing water. Of his fulnesse (saith S. Iohn) haue wee receiued; and so receiued, that as the sunne beame hath all his light, by continu­ing ioined to the body of the sunne, from which if it should bee separted, it would bee wrapped vp in darkenesse: so haue wee life in Christ; who could not so largely impart it to all his members, if it were not his owne by nature, and in him, as in the first breeder of it. How can hee then bee any lesse, then perfite God? Shall I now compare him with the Idolls of the Hea­then? [Page 180] the auncientest, and principallest of whome were (at the most) but men, as I shewed in my former exerci­cises. The comparison would be too base, and labour lost, to proue them to bee without life, whose mur­ders, adultries, and thefts, are recorded by the chie [...]est of their owne followers. I cannot choose but wonder that the heathen, who worshipt such vncleane, vniust, intem­pera [...]e, and euery way wicked wretches, for Gods, could haue any conceipt of their owne vertues. Doubtlesse if the report they make of their God, be true, and the commendation they giue to many of their philosophers, Sta [...]es men, and Captaines, true also there was more rea­son to honour the [...]a, Gods that liued vertuously, then to account of them, as the fountaines of vertue, that poured out such flouds, and seas of all manner of vici­ousnes. Is not this sufficient to roote out that vaine con­ceipte of the Heathen Philosophers, and other, who are lrangely proud of I know not what vertue they dreame of, that should be in them? Let vs conferre a little, if not as learned, yet as reasonable men. Art thou so conce [...]p­ted of thine own vertues? I maruaile whence thou shoul­dest haue that, thou so much bragst of. Thou wilt not for shame say, that the fountaine of all vertue is in thy selfe. For then how should other men haue any, that ne­uer fetcht drop at thy spring, or streames? How should the world haue done for a new supply, when thou dy­edst? Me think it is against sense, for any of the Heathen to boast of vertue, seeing it is more then apparant, that their Gods the fountaines of it were so dry, & emp­ty. But I will deale with them more kindly: and not call them to account, where they had it; but onely make a little triall, whether they had it, or no. The triall is soone made. Take the opinions of the best, and most vertuous, that euerliued, without the life of righteousnesse in Christ, and you shall finde them full of error; I will not say in matter of religion, without which there can bee no [Page 181] holines, but in iudging of ordinarie duties, betwixt man and man. If I should rehearse some maine grounds, that the wisest, and iustest of them deliuered, vpon ripe, and See Plato de Republ. & Aristo tel. politia. aduised deliberation, in the greatest points of the gouern­ment of states, you would hardly indure the hearing of them. But I will not enter into particulars, whereof there would bee no end. What life of righteousnesse could there be amongst them, which alwaies allowed reuenge to bee most lawfull? I will onely say thus much in one worde, that they laboured to cleanse the outside of the vessell, but within were full of all vncleannesse.

It shall suffize then for the conclusion of this point, that the life of holinesse and righteousnesse, was in Christ in­deede; because no man euer had it, that was not in him; & many haue had, & haue it in abundance, by depending wholy vpō him. The principal point is yet behind, cōcer­ning the life of glory. Which though it properly belong to the world to come: yet there is one chiefe thing, ap­perteining therunto, which is to be had in this world, as an entrance to the other. The death, that insued vpon the breach of that charge; Gen. 2. 17. Thou shalt not eat of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good & euill, was the estate of morta­litie to the body, and of condemnation both to body, and soule. Therefore the life, that was in Christ, must needs affoord vs remedy against both these. Let vs take them in their order. And first, that by death, the separa­tion of the soule, and body was signified; it may euident­ly appeare, as by the words themselues, in their proper sense: so also by the sentence of the Lord, pronounced after the sinne, according to the penalty before threat­ned; In Gen 3. 19. the sweat of thy face shalt thou eate bread, till thou returne to the earth: for out of it wast thou taken: because thou art dust, and to dust thou shalt returne. Adam indeede liued many hundred yeeres after this sentence, but at last the execution of it came. Gen. 5. 5. All the daies that Adam liued, were 930. yeeres, and he died. But this is so well knowne, [Page 182] and generally confest, that it needs no furder proofe. Let vs shew, that there is life in Christ, to destroy this death. Ne ther neede wee goe farre, to seeke for that matter. Remember G [...]n 3. 15. what was threatned the diuell, that the seed of the woman should bruse his head. Heb. 2. 14. If the diuell bee subdued, who hath the power of death, as the Apostle tells vs; what shall become of death, that is vnder his power? The Lord himselfe tells thee, by Heb. 2. 14. his Prophet, e Ose 13. 14. where he triumpheth ouer death, trampling him vnder his feete, O death, I will be thy death: Oh graue, I will bee thy destruction. But this was rather a discouragement of death, then a destruction. Heare 1 Cor. 15. 54. the Apostle proclai­ming the victory, after the fight was ended. Death is swa­lowed Verse 55. vp in victory. He proceeds to insult ouer him. O death, where is thy sting? O graue where is thy victory? The Verse 56. 27. sting of death is sin; and the strength of sinne is the law. But thanks be vnto God, who hath giue vs victory, through I. Chr. Verse 21. 22. our Lord. Giuē vs victory? How doth that appear? For since by man, came death by man also came the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adāal mēdy, so in Christ shal albe made aliue: 2. Tim 1. 10. through Christ (I say) gwho hath abolished death & hath brought life, & immortalitie to light, through the Gospell.

I wish it were so (may some men say) that death were in­deede destoried, & that we need no longer stand in feare of him. But what credit may be giuen to that, which is re­futed by sense, in daily and hoverly experience? Did not A [...]ā die? Are not Abraham, Isaak Iacob, & al the prophets, and Patriarchs dead? Is not there proofe enough in the scripture, that euery man must die? Psal. 89. 48. What man liueth and shall not see death? The Apostle seconds the Prophet; Heb. 9. 27. It is appointed to men that they shal once die. What say you to that great conquerour of death himselfe? The two tneeues, that were executed with him, withstood death longer thē he did. The Souldiers came Ioh. 19. 32. Ver 33. saith the Euange­list) and brake the legges of the first, and of the other, which was crucified with Iesus. But when they came to Iesus, and [Page 183] saw that he was dead already, they brake not his legges. See I pray you; the champion, that should ouercome death, is sooner subdued by death, then either of these two ordi­narie fellowes. It was no wonder though the Iewes vp­braided him, when he hung vpon the Crosse. He saued o­thers (quoth they) but he cannot saue himselfe. Is it possible Mat. 27. 42. to beleeue, that there was life in him, whose death his best friends cōfesse? Doth this seeme vnpossible to thee? What wilt thou say then, if I tell thee of a greater matter? Hee ouercame death by dying. The same stroke, that tooke life from him, through him Heb. 2. 14. slew death himselfe, & him that had power over death euen the diuell. Would you know more particularly, how that could bee? I may not enter into any large discourse of the point: In one word it was thus, The sting of death (as the Apostle taught vs) is sinne: By which the diuell preuailed, to the destructi­on of them, that had sinned. This sting was not onely blunted, and rebated, but pluckt out and cast away by our Sauiour. For his death, being a sacrifice for sin, tooke sinne quite away Iob. 1. 29. Behold the Lamb of God, that taketh a­way the sinnes of the world. So that now the name of death is more terrible, then the thing: there is more feare, then hurt in it. Tell me what it could indanger, or indamage thee, to haue a snake creepe vpon thee, yea if it were into thy bosom; so the sting, teeth, and whatsoeuer els it hath power to hurt withall, were first pulled out? It might perhaps scarre thee, or make thee start, as a litle cold wa­ter will doe, if it be cast (vpon a sodaine) in thy face: but that is all the harme thou couldest haue by it.

Death then is thus disarmd by our Sauiour Christ: but the destructiō of him, is by his resurrection. If thou woul­dest see death dead indeed, look into the graue, where Ie­sus thy sauiour was laid. There shewd death the vttermost of his power. He thought himselfe sure enough of the vi­ctory, when he had shut him vp without life in the sepul­chre, rolled a great stone to the mouth of it, and saw a [Page 184] guard of souldiers set to watch him well: there hee keeps him in that estate, the same day he was crucified, all the next, and the beginning of the third. What ensu­ed? Surely if hee had bin put in aliue, hee would haue bin dead, by that time. There is no question then, but that wee shall finde him dead in the graue. So though his disciples. Who the next day, after the Iewes Sab­boath, Luke 24. 1. Early in the morning, came vnto the Sepulchre, and brought the odors, which they had prepared, to embalme his body withall; They made no doubt, but they should finde him, Mark. 16. 1. Mark 15. 47. where they had seene him laid. For dead men are no starters. Onely their feare was, that they should not be able to roule away the stone, from the doore of the Sepulchre. But that feare lasted not long. Luke 24. 2. 3 When they looked, they saw that the stone was rolled away: And they went in, but found not the body of the Lord IESVS. What should they now thinke? Or how should they come to learne, what was become of him? Sure they were, that there hee was laid; and be­ing dead, had no power to conuay himselfe away from thence. The likeliest was, that some body had ta­ken him vp, and caried him away to some other place. Sir ( Ioh. 20. 15. saith Mary Magdalen to one, who shee thought had bin the Gardiner) If thou hast borne him hence, tell mee, where thou hast laide him, and I will take him away: Thou shalt not neede to bee in feare, of hauing thy gar­den annoyed, or troubled with him any further. Ioh. 20. 2. His Apostles were informed of this doubtfull matter. To Ver. 6. assure themselues the better, they runne to the sepulchre, they find the linnen clothes, in which hee was wrapped, & the Ver. 7. kerchiefe, that was vpon his head; not lying with the linnen clothes, but wrapped together, in aplace by it selfe. Hauing Ver. 17. seen this, they return back, whēce they came. Mary staies: & to her Iesus discouers himselfe. What should I make many words? The proofe of this point, belōgs to an other place. Death had done his worst: & in despite of him, the [Page 185] Lord Iesus is risen again, leauing him ashamed, & cōque­quered. To Luk 24. 5. 6. this the Angels beare witnes; Why seeke yee him, that liueth, among the dead? He is not here n but is risen. I speake of knowne things, it is enough to name them. Wee see for all this goodly discourse, that death still sei­zeth vpon all men: let them be neuer so well setled in Ie­sus Christ, he plucks them vp, & carries them away with him into the graue. What is become of the holy Apo­stles? where is his blessed mother the virgin? Is there life in the head, when the members of the body die so fast, euery day? And not one or two, a ioint or a finger, or a limme, but the very principall parts, yea all, one, & other? Doost thou doubt, whether there bee life in him or no, who hath wrastled with death, and ouerthrowne him? Can death preuaile against him, now he liueth, whom he could not keepe in subiection, when he had him dead & buried? Rom. 5. 9. 10. Christ being raised from the dead, dyeth no more; death hath no more dominion ouer him. For, in that hee died, he died once to sinne, but in that be liueth, hee liueth to God. Sinne had his due; a sacrifice of infinit worth, to pay the price of mans redemption: now must God also haue his due, that hee, that liueth to him, may liue for euer. But I would not haue any man so much deceiue himselfe, as to imagin, that the dying of them, which are in Christ, is an argument of the continuance of the authoritie, or power of death. No, no, beloued, there is an other reason of this dissolution. Alas, alas, death doth not aduance his owne estate, and kingdome by this meanes, but serues the Lords turne, to bring his purpose to effect. It fares with him, in this case, as it did in the death of our Sauiour. That which hee thought to establish his power by, by that he destroied it. So is it in the death of those, that are Christs. The body, as now it is, is neither capable of immortalitie, and fit for the seruice of sinne. How shall it be prepared to receiue the one; how purged and clensed from the other, but by death? Flesh & bloud [Page 186] ( 1. Cor. 15. 50. saith the Apostle) can not inherit the kingdome of God, neither doth corruption inherit incorruption. Wouldest thou haue part in our Sauiour Christs immortalitie, that thou mightest bee free from death? Die then, that thou maiest be ridde of mortalitie. Art thou affraid? Of what? Least death should be too strong for thee, if he once ger thee into his clouches? Hast thou not an example in Christ? I am aliue ( Reuel. 1. 18. saith he) but I was dead; and beholde I am aliue for euermore. But thou fearest, because thy body shall be turned into dust. O foole 1 Cor. 15. 36 saith the Apo­stle) that, which thou sowest, is not quickened, except it die. Keepe thy corne aboue ground; because if thou put it into the earth, it will consume, that thou shalt neuer finde it againe. Where then shall the fresh greene blade appeare? When shall the stalke grow vp? When shall it eare? When shall it flower? Shall not all this glorie bee lost, if the graine bee not sowed in the furrowes of the earth? And art thou so, I will not say fearefull, but foo­lish, and childish, that thou darest not die once, that thou maist liue for euer? Plucke vp thy spirits, and bee no longer a childe, but a man: were it not better for thee to die a thousand deaths, then to bee continually disquieted with the motions of thy corruption? Thou hast now some life of Christ in thee, by the power of his spirit, which inables thee to fight against sinne, and to preuaile. But there is no finall subduing of it, till the bo­dy be destroied, which doth so incline, & draw thee to the seruice thereof: Neither hath the spirit of God quiet, or full possession of thy soule, as long as that corruption a­bides therein. And that, as it was bred with thee, must die with thee: there is no other course appointed by God, to rid thee of it. I doubt not, but thou art now resolu'd to de­sire death, whē it shall please God: seeing there is no way to life, but by it: & with this resolution, I leaue thee, that I may speak a word, or two to thē, that are yet out of Christ

And how shall I addresse my speech vnto them? It is [Page 187] needlesse to inflame them with a desire of life. For they are wholly possest with that already, It is in vaine to per­swade them they shall neuer die, if they be in Christ. For all experience teacheth the contrary. Shall I exhort them not to feare that, which they cannot auoide? They may learne that in the schoole of reason: what remaines then? At the least giue mee leaue to aduise you, how you may make the best of that, which can by no meanes bee esca­ped. You are resolued, there is no way with you, but one. Die you must, and it is vncertaine how soone. Yet if you may die so, that you may be sure to liue againe, & that for euer, what hurt can there be in death, what feare should there be of it? A crab stock, that hauing his head, boughts, & armes cut off, is graffed with a pippin, or some other dainty fruit, can not reasonably complaine of hurt, but ra­ther hath great cause to reioice, and glory. Hath hee any wrong done him, that hauing his cottage of clay pulled downe, hath a goodly palace of stone built for his dwel­ling? But these mē will not beleeue, that there is any such life in Christ. I would to God I were able to perswade thē, but to make som litle trial. O! if they would be cōtented, but to rest vpō him for life, how quickly should they find his promise true, & certain? Be perswaded, be intreated I beseech you by the loue of life, which you so desire: what shall you lose by it? If that we preach be false, yet shal the rest of your yeers be spent in more hope, & cōfort. If you know any better waie to prouide for your selues; in kind­nes, & humanity, impart that at knowledge to vs. If you do not; in quilitie, & good manners cōdemne vs not, till vp­on triall, you can disproue vs. Life you earnestly desire, euen bodily life: refuse it not, when it is oftred you with­out any danger of losse if you should be deceiued.

I am come now at the last, to the chiefe point of all, which is life euerlasting; begun (as I said ere-while) in this world, by the forgiuing of sin, & perfited in the next by the giuing of glory. Of which notwithstāding I intēd not [Page 188] to say much; because, being the maine matter of the Gos­pell, euery chapter almost will afford me necessary occa­sion to intreat therof. Shortly for the proofe of the point, that eternall death, and condemnation are compriz'd in that threating, Gen. 2. 17. Thou shalt die the death; I appeale to the whole course of the scripture, and the ioint consent of all, that euer profest true religion, Iewes & Christians. But it is manifest enough, by the deliuerance, wee haue through Christ; that I may make one labour of two. Iob. 3. 17. God sent not his Sonne into the world, that he should condemne the world, but that the world through him might be saved. He Ver. 18. that beleeueth in him, shall not be condemned: but he that be­leeueth not, is condemned already. Yea such is the redemp­tion, which we haue by Iesus Christ, Iob. 5. 24. that he, which be­leeueth, hath passed from death to life. What is this passing from death to life, but obteining forgiuenes of sinnes, be­ing reconciled to God? whose wrath otherwise abideth in vs, to condemnation. God hath set forth Iesus Christ ( Rom. 3. 25. saith the Apostle) to bee apropitiation, through faith in his bloud, to declare his righteousnesse by the forgiuenes of sinnes, that are past, Rom. 5. 10. If when wee were enemies, wee were reconciled to God by the death of his sonne, much more, beeing reeonciled we shall be saued by his life. But I forget my selfe, in staying too long in this discourse; wherein the new Testament is so plentifull and easie to bee vnderstood.

Neither is the point of euerlasting life, either harder, or rarer. This one Gospell of S. Iohn, hath not so few as twenty seuerall places to that purpose. 10. 3. 16. God so loued the world, that hee gaue his onely begotten sonne, that who soeuer beleeueth in him should not perish but haue life euerlasting. This is the will of him, that sent me, that euery man which se­eth the son & beleeueth in him, should haue euerlasting life, & Ioh. 6. 40. I will raise him vp at the last day. Look not that I should go forward in this course, or spēd time in amplifying the vn­speakable glory of that life. For the one I refer al men to the reading of this gospel; especially the chapters I named [Page 189] before: and concerning the other, all I can possibly say of it, is lesse then nothing in comparison of the thing it selfe. Therefore also I hold it in a manner needlesse, to enter into any course of exhortation. For who can hear of these kindes of life in our Sauiour; and not be carried to him, for the enioying of them, with all speed, and means, he can possibly make? Let it be a small thing, for a man to bee dead in sinne, because perhaps he feeles it not. Let the life of righteousnesse be little accounted of; ov reason of the pleasure we take in sinning. Let vs de­spie bodily death, as a common matter. Let vs not re­guard the resurrection of the flesh, as long as the soul is immortall. Shall not feare of damnation for euer in hel fire affright vs? Shall not hope of eternall ioy in heauen delight vs? Is it nothing to indure most horrible torments, without ease or ende? Is it nothing to be partaker of such pleasure, as cannot be conceiu'd, without danger, or feare of change? What is the immortality of the soule, of which thou bragst, but an immortall miserie? The more thou art perswaded of the euerlasting continuance thereof, the greater know­ledge thou hast of thine owne endlesse calamitie: Whereas if once thou come to bee ioined to Christ; the farderthou seest into the continuance of thy life, the more thou art inflamed with a delight to liue. But now I haue brought thee where this life is to bee had, I will shew thee how it is to bee attained

In him was life: Where though it may seeme that the Euangelist sayes no more, but he is life, or life is by him, yet indeed the speech is more significant. First in respect of life, the manner of speaking makes difference in the thing. For when the scripture saith that Christ is life, the word is to be taken for the cause of life. Iohn. 11. 25. I am the resur­rection, and the life, saith our Sauiour: and again, I Ioh. 14. 6. am the way, the truth & the life. So speakes Col. 3. 4. the Apostle of him. When Christ your life shal appear. Who see not, that by life [Page 190] in these places, the author of life, or life, as it is in the cause thereof, is vnderstood? But in the other phrase, the same thing is noted, as it is imparted by him to vs. 1 Ioh. 5, 11. God hath giuen vs euerlasting life, and that life is in his sonne. Wee haue example of both these in one place; yee are dead (saith Col. 3. 3. 4. the Apostle) and your life is hidwith God in Christ: What life? That same life, which Christ hath communi­cated to you, and by which you liue. What followes? When Christ your life shall appeare. How is Christ their life? By giuing them life. And as in this kind of speech wee may easily discerne some reason of the difference, that the scripture obserueth; so may wee also in the o­ther. Sometimes Cor. 1. 30. the holy Ghost saith, that Christ is made vnto vs wisedome, righteousnesse, &c. What is this els, but that wee receiue these things from Christ, as the autor, and cause therof. Somtimes, life is said to be in him: so we are said to bee in Christ Iesus; 1 Ioh, 5. 11. yee are of him in Christ; as in the place I named before: Rom. 8, 1. There is no con­demnation to them that are in Christ. Now in these spee­ches, and the like, not onely the effect, but also the manner of our comming by it is signified. Will you haue a plaine example of it? 1 Cor. 15. x1. Since by man came death, by man also came the resurrection of the dead. We haue here the effect of Adams transgression, and of Christs resur­rection. The next verse shewes the maner of both more Ver. 22. euidently. For as in Adam (saith the Apostle) all men die, euen so in Christ shall all bee made aliue. How die all men in Adam; but Rom 5. 12. as beeing one with Adam, in whose loines they were, when he sinned, Heb. 7, 9. 10. as Leui was in his fa­ther Abrahams, when he paide tithes to Melchisedech? So are all raised againe in Christ. Not simply all: but all his. 1 Cor. 15. 23. The first fruits is Christs: then they, that are Christs, at his comming.

Wouldest thou then bee made partaker of this life, of which thou hast heard so many admirable, and glorious things? This life is in Christ. How wilt thou do to fetch [Page 191] it out of him? Deceiue not thy selfe: it is not so to he had. Hee, that will enioy the life, which is in Christ, must not thinke to come to him, and take a snatch, and carry it a­way with him. He keepes it close shut vp within him­selfe: Not refusing to impart it to other, but desiring to ioine other to him, that they may bee sure to holde fast for euer, that hee giues them. If hee should commit it to thy custodie, and let thee depart from him with it, what wouldest thou doe, or what meanes couldest thou vse, to keepe it safe? Satan is craftie, and mighty. It is a great venture, but either hee would cosin thee of it by deceipt, or robbe thee of it by force. What say I a ven­ture? It is out of question, thou wouldest neuer be able to keepe it from him. If thou haue any experience of his vndermining, and assaulting thee, thou knowest how hardly, and with what adoe, it is now held, when yet thou art knit by faith to him, in whom the very foun­taine of it is. Doost thou not feele how strongly he pulls, to rent thee from him, that sometimes thou canst scarce tell, whether hee haue seuered thee from him, or no? If thy experience bee small in thy selfe; didst thou neuer see a poore soule stand quaking, and trembling, loo­king ruefully about on euery side, shrieking, and cry­ing out for feare, least hee should bee separated from Ie­sus Christ? At the least perswade thy selfe, it is not for nothing, that our Sauiour himselfe, when hee labours to assure his sheepe, that they shall neuer bee wrung out of his hands, puts them in mind of his fathers Almigh. [...]ie power. Ioh. 10. 27. ver. 28 My sheepe heare my voice, and I know them, ind they follow mee: And I giue them eternall life, and they shall neuer perish: neither shall any plucke them out of my hand: Is not here assurance enough? They know his voice, that they may not bee deceiued by harkning to a stranger. They follow him, hauing him stil in sight, least they should mistake some other for him. Hee giues them eter­nall life. How shall they die, that haue life euerlasting? He [Page 192] secures them, in saying, they shall neuer perish. They haue life, and shall hold it fast to the end. Is there yet more? None shall take them out of his hand. This confirmes all the rest. What though the deuill be haling, and draw­ing of them continually? Hee shall not preuaile. How shall wee bee assured of that? For then wee are safe in­deede. Heare what followes. My father which gaue them mee, is greater then all, and none is able to take ver. 29. them out of my fathers hand. What needed all this, if it bee so easie a matter to keepe life, when once thou hast it? Thou makest account to take life of our Saui­our, and when thou hast it, to be gone with all speed. Alas poore man, thou wilt keepe it but a little while l­wis, if thou haue no better help then thine owne. But if thou cleaue fast to Iesus Christ, and stirre not an inch, or an hayres bredth from his side, thou maist perhaps heare the diuell roaring at thy backe, or see him running vp and downe prying, and seeking some ad­uantage to seize vpon thee: it may bee hee will offer to snatch at thee, and lay holde vpon thee; cling to rhy Sauiour, as the childe dooth to the mother, when hee is in feare: and then doubt not, but he, that is grea­ter then all, will keepe thee out of Satans iawes, maugre all his power, and malice.

Beare with mee, I pray you, if I seeme to be ouer­large in this point. I feele such an increase of comfort, and assurance in the meditation of this matter, that I can not leaue it, till I haue lookt a little neerer into the particulars thereof, especially those, that concerne the temporall death of the body, and the eternall both of it, and the soule.

Now the life, whereby wee are deliuered from the one and the other death, as it hath oft bin said, is in Christ. For the better, and fuller conceiuing whereof, wee must remember, that faith, whereby we are ioined vnto Christ, that wee may partake of that life, which [Page 193] is in him, maketh vs al one with him. There are a simili­rudes, by which the Scripture expresseth this spirituall coniunction: the one is that bond, which is betwixt man, and wife; by which they, that were two, become one flesh. This is most excellently set out by Eph. 5. 23. the A­postle S. Paul; where he shewes, that Christ is the head of the Church, as the husband thereof; that the Lord nourisheth, & cherisheth it, as his owne flesh. And no maruaile though he do so: For (as it followes) we are members of his body, of his flesh, & of his bones. Yea so members of them, that wee are one flesh with him, by reason of this bond of mar­riage, that so chaynes, & links vs together. No man can be so fond, as to vnderstand this of our humane nature; as if therefore wee were said to bee one flesh, because hee & wee are of the same nature. For neither are all men one flesh, though they be all of the same na­ture: & if the Apostle had intended to speake of that point, he would not haue said, that wee are bone of his bone, and flesh of his flesh; but rather that he was bone of our bone, and flesh of our flesh. For it is well knowne to al men, that, in regard of the nature of man, they, that are the Church, I meane a great part of them, euē al that died before our Sauiour, and were partakers of the life we speake of, had it, before he was made man: & but for their sake, & some others, hee had not taken that nature vpon him. But the mysticall coniunction, whereof Eph. 5. 23. 29 the A­postle professeth to speak in that place, hath the begin­ning and ground in Christ, & not in vs. Hee is the hus­band, we are the wife; Eue was bone of Adams bone, not Verse. 30. he of hers. Yet, when they were ioined together in mar­riage, they were both but one flesh. It is then apparant verse. 31. by this similitude, that we being thus spiritually become one with Chr. haue the same life, which is in him; as the Verse. 32. wife hath the same flesh, or rather is the same flesh with her husband. The other similitude is of the head & body; which liue by the same spirit of life. resting originally [Page 194] in the head, and from thence dispersing it selfe into all the members of the body. This also, the same Apostle setteth forth in the same Epistle. It will be sufficient to rehearse his words. Let vs ( Fph 4. 35. 16 saith he) follow the truth, in loue, and in all things grow vp into him, which is the head, e­uen Christ. By whom at the body being coupled, & kint together by euery ioynt, for the furniture thereof, according to the ef­fectuall power, in the measure of euery part, receiueth increase of the body, vnto the edifying of it selfe in loue. Therefore doth he often call the Church the body of Christ. Fph. 1. 22. 23. God hath appointed him ouer all, the head to the Church, which is his body. Fph [...]. 5 23. Christ is the head of the Church; & the same is the Sauiour of his body. Col. 1. 18. He is the head of the body of the Church.

Giue eare now with attention, and take knowledge of the assurance of your life. Why do you shrinke, and quake, at the mention of death? Euen when your are dead, you are still aliue. Are you not one with Iesus Christ? Are you not bone of his bone, and flesh of his flesh? Are not you and he one flesh? Doth not euery man nourish, & cherish his owne flesh: And will Christ (thinke you) suffer his flesh to be destroied by death? What dost thou tell me, of the decay of thy strength? that thy sight waxeth dimme, thy leggs feeble, thine armes weake, and all thy senses begin to fayle thee? Is not Christ aliue? Or canst thou dy, as long as hee liues? Thou art but the least part of thy selfe; thy husband is thy head, and thy life. And whereas thou art now a-dy­ing, it is not for thy destruction, but for the abolishing of that which makes thee subiect to dy. Christ thy hus­band doth not meane to forgoe thee, but to ioyne thee neerer to him. Wouldst thou bring a mortall carcase into heauen? Wouldest thou bee continually in danger of dying? Is it not better once to endure it, then alwaies to feare it? A quarter of an howers worke, will rid thee of all paine for euer. How wilt thou wonder at thy selfe [Page 195] when thou shalt behold the glory of that body, which thou left'st naked, and miserable? Shal I need to put thee in minde of thy happinesse? Dost thou remember, that thou art a part of Iesus Christs body? Hath he any dead part trow'st thou? Thou canst not imagin, that any man of reason would suffer his enimies to dismember his bo­dy, or to depriue the least finger he hath of life or sense? How then should Christ endure such a mayme? But what talke I of bereauing his members of life? As if it were any way possible, that deathshould be in that part in which life is continued? Wait the time, that God hath appointed for thy quicking. Thou art but dressing, & attiring, that thou mai'st be a fit Bride, for an immor­tal Bridegrome.

As for condemnation to hel fire, the second death, be not so iniurious to the Maiestie of Christ, as once to think, that any member of his body can bee lyable to damnation. Rom. 8. 1. There is no condemnation to them, that are in Christ. VVho shall laye anything to the charge of Iesus Christ? Canst thou bee condemned, and hee acquited? Can the head bee in heauen, and the mem­bers in hell? Father ( Iohn. 17. 24. saith our Sauiour) I will that they, which thou hast giuen me, be with me, euen where I am, that they may behold my glory, which thou hast giuen me. Can the first fruites bee holy, and the lumpe vncleane? Can the head raigne in glory, and the members bee plunged in the pit of damnation? Assure thy selfe, if there bee life in Christ, & thou one of his mem­bers, thy part is in it. He bought thee too deare, now to lose thee, or let thee be taken from him. Besides, hee hath openly confest; that hee receiued a charge from God his Father, to see that none shoulde perish, that belieu'd in him: and Ioh. 6 40. hee hath profest, that hee will discharge the trust reposed in him. I will raise him vp at the last day. Hee that eateth my flesh, and Verse. 54. Ver. 56. drinketh my bloud. hath eternall life, and I n will raise [Page 196] him vp at the last day: In him, as it followeth, Christ dwels, and he in Christ. Then must hee needs be sure of euerlast­ing li'e, that lodgeth such a guest.

A guest, that hath life in him, as in the fountaine ther­of, from whence it floweth to al those, that are io [...] ned to him. For although our Euangelist say, In him was life & not Is life; yet he may no more be thought once to haue had it, & now to be without it, thē once to haue bin God, & now not to be so. But that all doubt of this matter may be taken a way, we must call to minde that which we heard before of the reasons, why this maner of speech is vsed. First then (for I will now sett it in the first place, because it is the plainest, & hath least need of any explication) we may well, & reasonably imagine, that the Evangelist continues his former kind of speech; The word was in the beginning, was with God, was God. All things were made by him, nothing was made without him. was it not fitter then, to say, In him was, then, in him is life, that the whole description of him may bee deliuered in the like tearmes? This might serue, in my poor opinion, to satisfy any man, concerning the worde. Yet because there are some other reasons of it alleaged, & those both true, for the doctrine they teach, & not vnfit for the text it selfe, I will make bold to stand a little vpon them; the rather because I perceiue I shall not end these 2 verses in this one exercise, as I purposed, and desired to do.

The former reason of the word was depends vpon the like course the Euāgelist takes in the rest of his descrip­tion: those that now I am to handle, concerne the time, either before our Sauiours being in the world, or while he was in the world. The time before, either reaches to eternity, before all beginning, or at the least makes it self equall to the continuance of the world, after the fall of Adam, til the cōming of Christ in the flesh. If wee apply it to eternity, who can doubt, but life was always in him who only liues of himself, & giues life both tēporal & [Page 197] spiritual to al, euē to euery one that hath it. But because this maner of giuing life is an effect of Godhead; & so, common to him with the Father, and the holy Ghost and not a matter belonging properly to his person, nor any worke of his mediatorship: I will leaue it, as not in­tended in this place; and come to a second considerati­on of life being in him from all eternity, as in the medi­ator betwixt God and man. In what respect then may it be truly, and fitly said, that life was in him from all e­ternity? In respect of the eternall decree of God, where­by he determined to restore to life those, whome hee chose therevnto by the mediation of his Sonne, the word, of whom we speake. Of this Rom. 8. 29. 30 the Apostle speaks: Those, whom he knewe before, he did also predestinate, to bee made like to the image of his Sonne, that he might bee the first borne among many children. Vpon this predestination (as the Apostle adds) followeth calling, iustifying, and at the last glorifying, which is the highest degree of the life, that is in Christ. But in Eph. 1. 3. 4. an other place hee speakes more plainely. Blessed be God, euen the Father of our Lord Iesus Christ; which hath blessed vs with all spirituall blessings in heauenly things in Christ: As he hath chosen vs in him be­before the foundation of the world. Therefore doth the A­postle Peter ascribe the appointing of the meanes, and the execution of it, according to the appointment, to the foreknowledge of God. Act. 2. 23. Him haue ye taken by the hands of the wicked, being deliuered by the determinate counsaile, and fore knowledge of God. The same is acknowledged by the ioynt confession of the Apostles, where they say, that Herod, Pontius Pilat, the Gentiles, and the people of Is­raell, gathered them selues together against the holy Sonne of & 4. 27. 28. God Iesus (whom God had annointed) to doe what soeuer the hande, and counsaile of the Lorde had determined afore to bee donne. VVorthily then doth Saint Iohn avouch, that life was in him; yea before any time was, life was in him. Gal. 4. 4. VVhen the fulnesse of time was come [Page 198] God sent his Sonne. Life did not then begin to be in him, but to shew it selfe to be in him, Rom 3 25. God set him forth (by his incarnation) to be apropitiation. Life was in him be­fore, in regard of Gods eternall counsaile; but not disco­uered, nor manifested to the world, no nor those works of his, which were to bring life, performed: Yet euen thē was life in him.

If it seeme to any man somewhat ouermuch, to go so far for the Euangelists meaning, let him shorten his ior­ney, & containe him selfe, within the compasse of the world created. Shal we not find sufficient reason of this speech In him was life, though wee goe not out of the world? yes out of doubt, very sufficient. For seeing ma­ny worthy Patriarchs, and holy Prophets, many true Is­raelits, & Sonns of Abraham by faith, as well as by na­ture, departed out of this worlde, before our Sauiour came into it, to performe the foreappointed worke of redemption, either these must haue died without life, & so alwaies continue dead, or there was life in him, before he was incarnat. Luk. 10. 24. Many Prophets, and Kings desired to see and heare him, at the Apostles while hee liued heere, saw and heard. Surely then they were not ignorant of him, and that life was in him. But did they not see him? By one, iudge of the rest, Your Father Abraham Ioh. 8. 56. (saith Christ) reioyced to see my day: and hee saw it, and was glad. And yet, what name I one? seeing wee haue a cloud of witnesses, that compasseth vs round about, Heb. 11. 1. 2. 3. &c. sounding out the same assurance of fayth, that we now haue, and looking for the same promises to bee fulfilled, which wee beleeue, and knowe to haue beene performed to the vttermost. Was not our God, Mat 22. 32. the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Iacob? Was not our Sauiour, their Sauiour? Rom. 4. 11. Gal. 3. 16. Dooth not our interest, wee haue in Christ, depend vpon our being the children of A­braham? Heb. 13. 8. VVas not Iesus Christ yester-day, is hee not to day, shall hee not bee the same for euer? Then [Page 199] may wee safely, and truely conclude, that there was life in him, before he was in the nature of man.

But howsoeuer it be true, & certaine, that life was in him, both from all eternity, in regard of the counsaile of God, which is as ancient as himselfe; & in effect, in re­spect of them, that from time to time were partakers of it, euen from Adam to Iohn Baptist: yet it was then most properly in him, when hauing taken our nature vpon him, he ouercame death, and him, that had power ouer it, the Deuill. This was that, which those Kings, & Pro­phets desired, and longed to see. This was that, which good olde Simeon so reioyced at, that he was ready to depart out of this life with full satisfaction, and conten­tednesse, when he had seene the promised Messiah in the nature of man: Lord Luk. 2. 29. 39 (saith he) now lettest thou thy seruant depart in peace, according to thy word. For mine eies haue seen thy saluation. The holy man had a long time be­leeu'd by faith, that saluation was to come, and in hope with patience waited for the comming of it, but he ne­uer saw it til that time. Indeed how should he? For it was neuer to be seene, till then. How could it be? For it neuer was fully, & perfitly till then. It was not enough for the Son of God, that he had infinite power, as God, to giue life to whom he would, to repair the ruins of his image in man, by clensing him frō sin, & cloathing him with righteousnes, by raising him frō death, as he first breath ed the soule of life into him, by vouchsafing him a place in heauen, which was at his command, that had made it. Al this I say would not serue the turne, that the Euange­list might say as he doth, In him was life. For the Lorde God, Father, Son, & Holy ghost, had appointed another course of giuing life, another meanes of saluatiō, not to be perform'd by the Son of God, sitting in heauē; but to be wrought here vpō earth, in the same nature, that had sind, & was dead. He, that made mā holy, & righteous at his creatiō, could, by the same powr, haue restord to him [Page 200] his original righteousnes in a momēt. But it pleas'd him to doe it after an other maner; wherof more hereafter in due place. To say al at once; seing by man cam death, God would haue life to come by mā, & no otherwise.

Let it be graunted (may some man say) that there was no possibility of life, but by the death of the Sonne of God, and that the Sonne of God could not dye, vn­lesse he became man; yet might the Evangelist haue wel said, In him is life. For since it is confest, that hee tooke the nature of man, and continues still in heauen in that nature, surely life was no more in him, while hee was heere, then it is in him, now he is gone from hence. Why then saith S. Iohn, In him was life? I answere in one word, though life be still in him; yet it is in respect of that, which he performed, when he was here on the earth. Here he tooke, and sanctified our nature; here hee bare the chastisement of our peace? here he offred vp that in­valuable sacrifice, for the purging of our sinnes: Here hee triumphed on the Crosse ouer all principalities, and powers: Heere hee rose out of the graue from death to life: Only one thing, which here possibly could not be don, he hath done being gon from hence; that is he hath taken possessiō of our inheritance in hea­uen, & waites there to receiue vs into his owne glory. The Euangelist therefore writing the history of his life & death, while he was here in the world, speaks of him, as of one that was, & is not. But of this enough before.

I should now proceed to the later part of this fourth verse; And that life was the light of men: But I find my self so much ouertaken by the time, that it is in vain to med­dle with it. I will I therefore content my selfe with some word of exhortation, whereby wee maie bee stirred vp to the embracing of that life, which was in Christ. To which purpose what shal I need to say much? The mat ter dooth so highly commende it selfe, that it refuseth to be entreated for. Looke not therefore, that I shoulde [Page 201] desire you to bee willing to liue. Nay, bee vnwilling if you can. Doe but propound the matter to your own hearts, and you will not choose, but like of it. And yet, mee thinkes I see no man make any great haste. Shall I wonder or complayne? It is strange, that life, life e­uerlasting should bee so little set by. It is lamentable that death, eternall death should so little bee feared. If it were any long Iorney, or daungerous way, if hard to come by, or soone lost againe, there might bee per­haps some colour of excuse for this backewardnesse. But when the thing it selfe is neere at hand, the way to it safe, the meanes of attaining to it easie, and the pos­session of it sure, who can excuse himselfe to himselfe (I say not to God) if hee fayle of so glorious a treasure? Do wee not beleeue the Euangelist, that there is life in him? Doe wee flatter our selues with a conceite, that there is life in vs? Why come wee to heare that, which when wee haue heard, wee will not credite? why make wee a shew, as if wee stood in need of life from Christ, when wee thinke our selues, sped of it already? Perhaps it seemes the lesse worth, because it is offered. Who e­uer thought, that the kindnesse of the giuer should a­bate the valew of the gift? Condemne thy selfe, for not seeking to him; not him, for seeking to thee. That hee reueales to thee, hee conceales from many. That which thou vnthankefully refusest, many thousandes would most thankefully receiue. O the frowardnesse of the hearts of men! O the blindnesse of their minds! If this life were in God, they would tremble to come neere him for it, because of his dreadfull maiestie. Now it is in a man (least happely they should be too much a­frayd) they disdaine to take it of him, by reason of his meanenesse. Mat. 11. 19. But wisedome is iustified of her children. He is both God, and man, that thou maist neither feare nor despise him. If thou wilt not liue to shew his mercie, thou shalt die to set foorth his Iustice; For to him be­longeth [Page 202] all glorie, both of mercy and Iustice for e­uer and euer, Amen.

THey that take vpon them to write the liues of famous men, such as the world admires, either for their goodnesse, or greatnesse, ordinari­ly deliuer some generall descrip­tion of them, in the beginning of their histories. These descriptions vsually containe either a rehersal of their pedegree, and descent, together with the place, time, and other mat­ters concerning their birth, and such like; or a commen­dation of them, for some especiall vertues. Wee haue examples of both these kindes in the Scripture. 1. [...]. 1. 1. 2 He, that was the holy Ghosts Secretarie, in penning the hi­storie [Page 203] of Samuell, begins his booke with a recitall of his genealogy, a description of his parents, and diuers other points touching his conception, birth, and education. Iob. 1. 1. 2. Another, whome it pleased the same spirit of God to imploy in writing the life of Iob, makes the entrance in­to his historie, by commending him for an vpright and iust man, one that feared God, and eschewed euill. Our E­uangelist intending to set forth the life and death of our Sauiour Iesus Christ; as the partie, he writes of, was ex­traordinarie: so doth he extraordinarily ioyne both to­gether. And because two other Euangelists, M [...]. 1. 1. 2. 3. &c. Saint Ma­thew, & Luk. 3. 50. 31 &c. Saint Luke, had already set out his humane pe­degree, both for succession in the kingdom, & fornatu­rall descent, Saint Iohn leauing them vntoucht, betakes himself to the declaring of his diuine estate: First, what he was in himself; eternall, with God the Father, & him­selfe very God: Secondly, what he was to vs; a Creator, in making all things for vs; a Sauiour, in giuing life, e­uen spirituall life; life of grace, & pardō, life of immor­tality, & glory. So that whether we respect his greatnes. or his goodnes, neuer was any mā so worthy the writing of, neuer any mā so worthy the knowing, & following.

His greatnesse was magnified in the power of creati­on: his goodnesse shewes it selfe especially in the work of regeneration. Wherein first, the Euangelist declares what he is, and doth: then how he is intertaind. In him was life, and that life was the light of men. What doth hee? According to the nature of light, Hee shines in darkenes. But the darkenesse will not bee inlightned. Of the first of these points concerning life in him, I spake in my last Sermon: now let vs proceede to that, which fol­lowes touching light. And therein (keeping our for­mer course of handling the Clauses seuerally, as they lye) wee must first labour to vnderstand the words, then seeke out the Euangelists meaning. The wordes direct vs to inquire what life it is, that is heere spoken [Page 204] of; to consider what is saide of it: that it is light, and the light of men. For the first worde, a little labour will serue: because there would haue beene no doubt of the meaning, but for the needlesse curiositie of some, that make themselues worke, where they finde none. What reasonable man would make any question, but that the Euangelist in both clauses speakes of the same life? In him was life. What followes? And that life was the light of men. What life thinke you? Any other, then that he named presently, yea immediatly before? I, say these mē; else, why hath hee added the article in this later part, which he had omitted in the former? what needs all this adoe about the Article? How vaine and false the obser­uation is, that hath no better ground, then the presence or absence of the article, I shewed in expounding the first verse, against the Arians. Here is lesse colour for the profe of any difference. First, the course of writing, which the Euangelist hath hitherto kept, in the begin­ning of this Gospell, makes it euident, and certaine, that the same life is meant in both places. In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God. It is ridiculous to i­magine, that the word, which was in the beginning, should be any other word, then that, which was with God. By him were all things made, & without him was nothing made, that was made. Without whom was nothing made? with­out him, by whom all things were made. So in this verse the repeating of the same word teacheth vs, that the same life, and no other, is signified. Secondly, there may suf­ficient reason be giuen, why it was requisite, if not nece­ssary, to adde the article, in the later part. Let vs make the Euangelist speake without it. In him was life. What then? And life was the light of men. Who can reasonably conceiue, what life he meanes? In the first verse I shew'd that there was good reason to place the Article before word, that it might the easilier appeare, whether the E­uangelist intended to say, The word was God, or God was [Page 205] the Word. The case is much a like. Take away the Arti­cle, and wee may well thinke, that Saint Iohn tels v [...], that the light was life, rather then that the life was the light of men. Hee could not then speake otherwise, if hee would speake plaine: In him was life, and that life was the light of men. As for his omitting it in the first place, it is vsuall with all our authors both diuine and humane, to put it in, or leaue it out, at their plea­sure.

The same life then, which was in the Word, was also the light of men. But, what light was that? For the word may bee taken in diuers senses. The most proper, and ordinarie vse of light, is to signifie that visible creature, made by God, Gen. 1. 3. the first day of the creation, by which all things afterward to bee created, might be seene, and they that had eyes might see. But of this light there is no occasion to speake in this place; neither was it in the Messiah, and it is common to all creatures, that can see, as well as to men. From this proper signification, the word is applyed, by a certaine resemblance, to note out the instructing, and teaching of the minde, which is as i [...] were inlightned with knowledge, whereby the vnder­standing is fitted to iudge of truth, as the bodily eye, discerneth colours. This our Sauiour himselfe decleares. both for the proper and figuratiue vse of the word. I thinke it is not amisse to recite the place at large. The light of the bodie Luk. 11. 34. (sayeth hee) is the eye. Not as the fountaine, or spring of light, but as the pipe, which re­ceiues, and conueyes it to the vse of the body. There­fore, when thine eye is single, then is they whole bodie light. As the water, that is taken out of the Well, where it ari­seth pure, and cleane, is so brought to the Cisterne, if the pipe bee sweete, and without filth: so if the eye bee not dimd, nor tainted with any euill humor, the whole bo­dy receiues the light, as it is bright, and cleare. But if thine eye bee euill (sayth the text) then the body is darke. A Ver. 34. [Page 206] bad sight changeth light into darkenesse, or at the least discernes not the brightnesse of it. Take heede therefore (sayth Christ) that the light which is in thee, bee not darke­ned. What is the light, that is in a man, but the vnder­standing? Therefore also it is often called by the name of eyes. Pal. 19. 8. The Commandement of the Lord is pure, and gi­ueth light vnto the eyes. The Sunne inlightens the eyes of the body: but the knowledge of the wil of God is that which maketh the vnderstāding see. Open mineeies (saith the Psal. 1 19. 18. Prophet) that I may see the wonders of thy law. That the eyes of your vnderstanding may be lightned ( [...] ph. 1. 18. sayth the Apostle) that yee may knowe, what is the hope of his calling. This is that, the Iewes commonly bragd of, though falsely, Rom. 2. 19. That they were guides of the blinde, alight to them which are in darkenes: namely, in the darknesse of igno­ [...]ance, not vndestanding the true way of righteousnes.

Now this light, by which the vnderstanding is inabled to knowe, and iudge, is of two kindes; naturall or super­natural, which we also call spirituall. The naturall light, is that, which we haue from God, by nature; either bred in vs with reason, or gotten by reading, hearing, obserua­tion, studying, and such other meanes. Of this speakes Eceles. 1. 13. the wise King; I gaue heart (sayth hee) to search, and finde out wisedome by all things, that are done vnder the hea­uen. This is that wisedome of the Aegyptians, Act. 7. 22. wherein Moses was learned. The supernatural light, is that know­ledge of matters concerning euerlasting life, which wee receiue frō God in the scriptures, or by the ministery of men, according to the trueth therein reuealed. We speak e the wisedome of God in a mysterie (sayth 1. Cor. 2. 7. the Apostle) euen the hidden wisedome, which God had determined, before the world, to our glory. These are the treasures of wisdome, and knowledge, al which Col. 2. 3. the Apostle saith, are hidin Christ, who hath sent his Apostles and Ministers, To make cleere vnto all men, (as Eph. 39. Saint Paul sayth) what the fellow­ship of the mysterie is, which from the beginning of the world, [Page 207] hath beene hid in God, who hath created all thinges by Iesus Christ; to the intent, that now vnto principalities and pow­ers in heauenly places might be knowne, by the Church, the manifold wisdom of God. These are the two kindes of light whereby the vnderstanding of man is inlightned, and instructed. The questiō is, whether of these two, the ho­ly Ghost meaneth in this place.

A question easie to bee aunswered, will some man say. For seeing it was proued, that by life in the former part of the verse, not the naturall, but the supernaturall life was signified; who can doubt but the light in this la­ter part, is of the same nature? It is so, doubtlesse; and therefore wee shall neede to stand the lesse while, vpon the proofe thereof. Yet because it is (for the most parte) otherwise vnderstood, and that one es­peciall ground of interpreting that life, to bee the su­pernaturall, or spirituall life, was fetcht out of this place; I thinke it will not bee amisse to say somewhat, for the better clearing of the matter. First then, the light, here spoken of, must bee conceiued to bee such, as the Scripture otherwhere ordinarily signifieth by the same word. For it were strange, and against reason, to giue the worde such a sense, in this place, as it hath not any where else in the whole volume of the Bi­ble. I denye not, but it is possible, that some one place may haue a word in such a meaning, as is not else­where to bee found. But this I say, that hee, which will aduenture vpon any such vnvsuall, and rare ex­position, had neede bee sure, that the place will not admitany ordinarie interpretation of the word. Here is no such necessitie. All things are agreeable to the Euangelists purpose, and circumstances of the text, if wee take the word light in that sense, which it common­ly beares euerie where in the Scripture. Let vs inquire then, how it is ordinarily taken. Surely, for that super­naturall light, which the Lord reuealeth, for the making [Page 208] knowne of the meanes, whereby hee hath appointed to bring vs to saluation.

It were too much to recite all. I will name some prin­cipall places, by which you may iudge of the rest. With thee is the well of life (sayth P [...]l. 36. 9. the Prophet) and in thy light shall wee see light: Life, and light both in one verse, both of one nature, both supernaturall. Psal. 42. 3. Send out thy light & thy truth, let them leade me. The light of nature, is neuer called the light of God: the truth of God is that, which himselfe hath reuealed by his word. But what doe I ex­pounding it? The next wordes put the matter out of doubt. Let them bring mee vnto thy holy Mountaine, and to thy Tabernacle. Can naturall wisedome guide vs thi­ther? Canne the light of humane learning shew vs that way? 1. Cor. 1. 21. The world in the wisedome of God knew not God by wisedome. It is the word of God, Psal. 119. 105 that is a lanterne to our feete, and a light to our pathes. Pro. 6. 23. Salomen beares witnesse to the same truth. The commaundement is a lanterne, and instruction a light. Therefore doth Isay. 2. 5. the Prophet Esay exhort the Israelites, to walke in the light of the Lord. And in Chap. 60. 1. another place he comes neerer to the light, that Saint Iohn in this place holds out vnto vs. Arise O Ierusalem, (sayth hee) be bright: for thy light is come, and the glory of the Lord is risen vpon thee. For beholde, darkenesse shall couer the earth, and grosse darkenesse the people: but the Ver 2. Lord shall arise vpon thee. And his glorie shall be seene vpon thee And the gentiles shall walke in thy light, and Kings at Ver. 3. the brightnesse of thy rising vp. What is this darkenesse, but the ignorance of the way to saluation? What the light, but the manifesting, and shewing of that way, by the ministrie of the Gospell? Chap. 9. 2. The people, that walked in darkenesse, haue seene great light; they, that dwelt in the land of the shadowe of death, vpon them hath the light shined. Which prophecy as the Euangelist sayth, was then ful­fild, Mat. 4. 14. when our Sauiour preached the Gospell in Galilee.

Therefore also is hee himselfe called A light. Luke. 2. 32. A light to bee reuealed to the Gentiles. And himselfe called his Apostles Mat. 5. 14 The light of the world. Yea, all Christians, truly inlightned by Iesus Christ, are called the children of of light. The children of this world ( [...] [...]uk 16. 8. saith Christ) are wiser in their generation, then the children of light. To conclude God himselfe is said to be Iam. 1. 17. the father of lights, from whom euery good, and perfect gift commeth. To be light, and that without all kinde of darknesse. 1 I Io [...]. 1. 5. God is light; and in him is no darknesse, Them, that beleeue, I. Pet. 2. 9. He hath called out of dark­nesse, into his maruelous light. But what stand I reciting so many particular places? The new Testament is full of the like. As for the other signification of the worde, that by light, natural reason or knowledge should be meant, I am certainly perswaded, that it is not once to be found in the whole course of the scripture. What other proofe of this point shall I neede, then that they, which expound this place of such naturall light, can alleadge no text, but one, that may seeme to make any thing for that purpose? And the most that can be gathered out of that too, is but a see­ming, or shew; Psal. 4. 6. Lordlift vp the light of thy countenance vp­on vs, Who is so desirous to haue light, taken for reason, that he can thinke, the Prophet speaks of it in that place? He compares the wishes of worldly men, with the desires of the faithfull. Many say, who will shew vs any good? Who will teach v [...] how we may gather goods? But what doe the godly pray for? That the Lord would giue them an increase of humane wisedome? Indeede this praier had not bin vnfit for a Philosopher, who knew nothing bet­ter, nor esteemed any thing more, then such manner of knowledge. But the thoughts of Gods children are raised higher, and their happinesse is of an other kinde. The knowledge, and fauour of GOD, are the matters, they labour for. That is the light, which they would haue to shine vpon them, and in them; without which they account themselues to bee in pal­pable [Page 210] darknesse, though they had more knowledge of all other matters, then al men in the world beside. This was fit to bee opposed to the vaine wishes of carnall worldlings.

If then the worde be ordinarily taken for supernatu­rall, or spirituall light, seldome or neuer for the naturall light of reason, and humane knowledge; how should wee vnderstand it, in this place, but according to the ge­nerall vse of it in the scripture, for that light which we re­ceiue from God by reuelation? Whereof that wee may be the better perswaded; let vs consider the significati­on of the worde, as it is commonly vsed by Ioh. 3. 19. 20. 21. this writer. This is condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loued darknesse rather then light. So in the two next verses. What is this light? not naturall reason, nor any knowledge obteined by it; but the mysterie of re­demption; which carnall men cannot fancie, because it ouerthrowes all opinion of any goodnes in man. Let vs goe forward. Iohn (saith Chap. 5. 35. Christ) was a burning, and a shi­ning candle. Not for any extraordinary knowledge in hu­mane learning, whereof he was vtterly voide, as his brin­ging vp shews; but for his innocēt life & preaching of the Messiah, of whom (as Chap. 1. 7. our Euangelist saith) he came to beare witnesse: and that was the light, wherein, as it follow­eth, Chap. 5. 35. the Iewes for a season would haue reioic [...]d; namely in taking him for the promised seed sent from heauen, for their deliuerance, Chap. 1. 19. as it appeareth in this first chapter. I am the light of the world saith our Sauiour. As long as I i Chap 8. 12. am in the world, I am the light of the world. What? To shew Chap. 9. 5. them the way to the wisdome of this world? No such matter. The things, that our Sauiour declared, Luk. 10. 21. were hid from the wise, and men of vnderstanding, and reuealed to the simple, that had no learning. I will not weary you too much with turning your books, or stuffing your memo­ries: looke ouer the whole Gospell, & the Epistles of this Euangelist, & Apostle, at your leasure; you shal neuer find [Page 211] the word otherwise vsed, vnless perhaps once or twice, for the outward light of the sunne, or a torch, or candle.

Whom may not these obseruations suffice? If need be, there is yet more proofe left, and somwhat more direct, if any thing can be more direct, to the place in question. For Saint Iohn proceeds to expound that, he had said, of the light, Iohn the Baptist came to beare witnesse of the light m Ioh. 1. 7. Of what light, but that which was mentioned presently before? And what light was that? The supernatural light, which is not to be seene with the eies of the body, not vn­derstood by the discourse of reason, but beleeued by the vertue of faith. He came for a witnesse, to beare witnesse of the light, that all men through him might beleeue. Beleeue what? Chap. 12. 1 [...] While yee haue light, beleeue in the light, that yee may bee the children of the light. Is it not as cleere as the sunne-shi [...]e, that the light Saint Iohn speakes of, is nei­ther the sunne nor naturall reason; but more excellent, and glorious then either of these in their greatest height and perfection? Shall I goe yet one step furder? Follow me, I pray you a little way, and I shall bring you, where you may rest your selues after this long trauell. Where may that be? but in the same signification of light, which before, I gaue in particular of the life, that was affirmed to be in Christ. The life of grace or sanctification, which is the fountaine of holines in vs, appears euidently in the light of our conuersation. God is light, and in him is no darknes. If wee say that wee haue fellowship with him, and 1. Ioh. 1. 5. walke in darknes, wee lye, and doe not truely. But if we walk [...]er 6. in the light as hee is in the light, wee haue fellowship one with an other, and the bloud of IESVS CHRIST his ver. 7. Sonne cleanseth vs from all our sinnes. Would you see thi more particularly? For the enlightning of the vnder­standing, call to mind that the Apostle Saint Paul, la­bouring to draw the Heathen out of their ignorance, to the knowledge of GOD to their saluation, tells them that hee was sent to open their eyes, that they may Act. 26. 18. [Page 212] turne from darknesse to light. The reforming of the flection is signified by the same kinde of speech. Yee were once darknesse, but are now light in the Lord: Walk [...] 5. 8. as the children of light. So is the out ward conuersation also. The night is past, and the days is at band: Let vs Rom. 13. therefore cast away the workes of darknesse, and put vpon vs the armour of life: So that wee walke honestly as in the Verse. 13. day: not in gluttonie and drunkennesse, neither in Cham­bering and wantonnesse, nor in strife and enuying. But eut you on the Lord Iesus Christ, and take no thought for [...]14. the slesh, to fullfill the Iusts thereof. I confesse, the life of glory in heauen is not so plainely exprest by the name of light; yet both God is said to dwell in light, which no man 1 Tim. 6. 16. may come vnto: and the place of torment is called dark­nesse; whereby wee are giuen to vnderstand, that the contrarie to is light, and brightnes. The children of the kingdome shall be cast out into vtter darknesse. They are wan­dring vat. 8. 12. starres (saith the Apostle Iude, of certaine wicked men) to whom is reserued the blacknesse of darknesse for euer. Iude ver. 13. And this may suffice to shew, that by light in this place su­pernaturall light, and not naturall light is signified.

Which being granted, we may by it discerne, why it is called the light of men; which was the second thing to bee considered in this point. They, that by light vnder­stand August in Ioan. tract. 1. Beda m loan 1. naturall reason, can giue no sufficient satisfaction, why the Euangelist should make mention of men, ra­ther then of Angels; who are furnisht with that vertue, no lesse, if not more, then men. Expound it of superna­turall light, and the reason is euident. For the redempti­on, which is by Christ, is proper to men, and belongeth not to the Angels; who (as S. Peter teacheth vs) are east 2. pet. 2. 4. downe into hell, and deliuered into chaines of darkenesse, to bee kept vnto damnation, namely vnto the iudgement of the Iude ver 6. great day. To Abraham, and his seed were the promises made. Not to the Angels. For he in no sort tooke the Angels, but Gal. 3 16. Heb. 2. 16. he tooke the seede of Abraham. Therefore is he called the [Page 213] light of men, not of Angels, nor any other creatures, who haue no need, or no part of the spirituall life, and light, which is by, and in him. Looke not, that I should magnifie the mercy of God toward mankind, in this respect; or so much as put you in minde, how infinitely wee are all beholding to his Maiestie, for so vnspeake­able, and vndeserued a fauour. Of that in due place: as yet wee haue but searched out the true sense of the words.

From which, I passe now to deliuer the Euangelists meaning, conteined in them. And that life was the light of men. What is it, that the holy Ghost would teach vs, by this kinde of speech? Doubtless, either hee sets out the benefits, wee reape by our Sauiour, in an other par­ticular; or els he intends to shew vs, how we come to the obteyning of them. I will speake shortly of both. Life is the chiefest of all outward blessings; as vpon which all the rest so farre depend, that without it, they cease to bee, What doth any man injoy in this world ap­perteining to his beeing, or well beeing here, which receiues not end with this present life? Health, wealth, friends, beauty, wisdome, learning, valour, and what­soeuer els belongeth to the comfort, or ornament of man, in this world, is bounded on euery side with the limits of this naturall life. Therefore is the com­mandement of not killing set in the first place, of all matters that concerne ordinarie men; because hee, that taketh away life, spoiles a man at one stroke, of all things appeartaining to this present world. Yet ma­ny a man enjoyeth life, who hath little ioy of any thing in life; and to speake according to the point in hand, who lackes a chiefe comfort of life, the sight either of bodie, or of minde, or of both. Therefore although the Euangelist had told vs before, that life was in CHRIST, then which nothing is more excellent: yet hee truely conceiued, that a farther benefit might [Page 214] be added, namely light. So doth our Sauiour some­times speake of himselfe, heaping vp as it were one bounty vpon an other, and setting forth in diuers simi­litudes, the blessings wee receiue by beleefe in him. I am the way, the truth, and the life. And in one place, to ampli­fie Ie [...]. 14 6. the greatnes of the blessing, hee ioineth light and life together. I am the light of the world: hee, that followeth & 8. 12. mee, shall not walke in darknesse, but shall haue the light of life. It is much to haue light, whereby a man may bee guided in his ordinarie course of trauarle; and hee that wants it, wandring in the night, is in the danger of stum­bling, & 11. 9. 10. and falling. But it is a blessing aboue the con­ceit of man, to haue such a light held out vnto him, as shall direct him to euerlasting life: that shall not onely make him able to see the way, that lies before him, but shall goe before him as a guide in the way, to the end of so happie a iourney. This is that then, which Saint Iohn instructeth vs in, that our Sauiour Christ is not onely the fountaine of life, which streameth, and [...]ssueth forth to all them, that by faith cleaue vnto him; but that hee is also the light, that leades, and vsners vs as it were, into the palace of heauen. Thou liuest in him, and by him: Thou hast thy vnderstanding inlight­ned with the true knowledge of God, and cleere sight of the certaine way to saluation. I can hardly stay my selfe from falling into some earnest exhortation, when I consider these wonderous blessings, that are to bee had in Christ. But I must of necessitie forbeare it, till I haue ended the exposition.

Which may reasonably bee thus deliuered; that the Euangelist, in these words, giues vs to vnder­stand, that the life, which hee said was in CHRIST, is conueyed to men, by a certaine inlightning of them, with the sauing knowledge of GOD in CHRIST. As if hee should haue said, Whereas all men naturally are dead in sinne, and by reason of sinne, liable to eternall dam­nation; [Page 215] and also are farder ouerwhelmed with the mist of ignorance in darknesse, that they cannot discerne of the way, that leads to true happiness; He that first created the world, and all therein of nothing, hath taken a second paines to reuiue them, that are voide of life, and to in­lighten them, which are couered with darknesse; that as hee hath prouided meanes of life for them: so they may see, what those meanes are, and seeing attaine vnto them. So that whatsoeuer may bee needefull to the obtaining of euerlasting life; all that, our Sauiour hath gratiously, a [...]d bountifully prouided. Art thou dead? In him is life. Art thou ignorant that thou canst not descerne of the way to life? That life, which is in him, is the light of men. If hee had not brought the former, it would neuer haue come. If he had brought it, and not seconded that faucur with a farder kindnes, to make vs see our owne death, and life in him, all had bin to no purpose. For who will seeke for that, whereof (in his owne conceit) he hath no neede, not vse? who will spend his time about the see­king of that, which he hath no po [...]sibility to find, or ghesse at? Therefore although the maine blessing, & end of all, be life in Chr. yet the discouering of this life is so necessary that without it we should be neuer a whit the better for the other, thē we are for those riches, & tresurs, which are hid in the fardest parts of the world, vnseen, & vnknown to vs.

Hence it is, that our Euangelist addes light to life; fol­lowing the example of his Lord, and maister, who makes so often, and so honorable mention of the light. This is Ioh 3 19. condemnation, that light is come into the world, & men loued darknes better then light. Marke, I beseech you: the refu­sall of the light is the great cause of damnation to the world. Therefore doth he exhort thē, To belecue in the light, & 12. 36. while they haue the light. And least this same light should seeme vnto them a matter of small account, hee tells them, both that he himselfe is the light, and that they shall not alwaies haue it shining to them, as they [Page 216] had then, when perswaded them to make a right vse of it. I am (saith he) the light of the world; he that followeth & 8 12. mee, shall not walke in darknes, but shall haue the light of life: As long as I am in the world, I am the light of the world: walk [...] 9. 5. while yee haue light; least the darknes come vpon you. For hee that walketh in the darke, knoweth not whither he goeth. [...] 11. 35. This is the commendation of the light, not much infe­rior to that of the life it selfe. For it little auailes a man to haue an earnest desire to go to any place, if he know not, nor can learne the way, that should bring him thither. The Athenians had an altar built, and dedicated to the vnknowne God. Were they ought the better for it? They A [...]. 17. 23. worshipt they knew not what: as our Sauiour saith of the [...] 4. 22. Samaritans. The Apostle brings them light. Whom you ignorantly worship, him I shew vnto you. But they loued darknes better then light, and so came not to life. Now, that wee may not bee guiltie of the same sinne, and fall into the same damnation; Let vs stirre vp our dead hearts, by the consideration of the doctrine herein de­liuered.

That life was the light of men: that is, according to the former exposition; The same worde or Messiah, that is the autor of life, is also the fountaine of light vnto vs. With­out life, what are wee but dead carkasses? without light, what are we but blind beetles? Light without life can no more quicken vs, then the fish in the sea, or the beasts in the forrest nourish vs. Life without light can no more guide vs to happiness, then a good appetite with­out meate feede vs. If either faile, neither auailes. But if that life be the light of men; both the end and the way are ready for vs, and open to vs. Refine thy thoughts, to meditate on so high a fauour. Inlarge thy heart, to conceiue so great a kindness. Was it not enough for IESVS CHRIST to bring life into the world, but that hee must also light vs the way to finde it? Had it not bin more then extraordinary loue, to lay [Page 217] it before vs, though hee had not as it were thrust, and forced it vpon vs? Must hee giue thee both meate to feede thee, and stomack to eat it? O incredible fa­uour! O more then admirable kindness! Hee offers thee life. Thou neither regardest it, nor seest it. I would we did not turne away our faces from it. He opens thine eyes, and makes thee see it. Wilt thou shut them a­gaine, and bee wilfully blind? S [...]y not in thy wret­ched vnthankfull heart; Who will shew me the way to life? Behold, the autor of life spreads the beames of light round about thee. The darknes is great, and thick; but the light doth pearce, and scatter it. There is nothing wanting but a willingnes to see. What if it were farre off, that it could hardly bee discerned? Couldest thou reasonably excuse thy selfe, by a feare of ouer-strayning thy sight? It is life thou lookest at. If thou shouldest breake thine eye-strings with thy earnestness in looking, would any man say, it was not worth the venturing? It is better to goe blind into hea­uen, then hauing full sight of both eyes to be cast in­to hell fire. I was purposed to haue spent this exhor­tation in kindling, or inflaming our affection if I could, with the loue of him, that hath so carefully, gratiously, and bountifully prouided for vs: and must I bee faine to bestow my time, and paines in perswading you to ac­cept of so rare a courtesie? But what say I curtesie? Kindnes, fauour, loue, the most affectionate, and for­cible words, that can be deuised, are too cold, and weake, to signifie, I will not say to expresse such vnspeak­able bounty.

But let vs make as light reckoning as possibly we can, of being inlightened. Let vs account it a small fauour to see, that wee are guided in the way to happiness. Let vs despise the pleasure we may take, by knowing what wee haue escap't, and what wee shall come too. At the least, though we care not to know our happiness, [Page 218] ver let vs not bee so senseless, as not to care whether we be hap [...]ie, or no. The life, which we can not choose but desire, is not found, but by the light, which we looke not after. He that walkes in the darke knowes not whither he Ioh. 12. 36. goes. Yet perhaps he may light vpon the place, hee seekes [...]or. O miserable hazard! will any man so aduenture his eternall saluation? How shall hee know it, when hee comes to it? Hee may ouer-shoote his Port. Hee may fall short of it. Hee may bee caried captiue into sa­maria, [...] King. 6. 13. 19. while hee puzzles in the darke to beleger Do­than. Beside, if hee were sure to arriue at the place, hee goes for, he may haue exceeding much foule we­ther, that hee shall neuer know where is; nor be­leeue that, which, at his first putting to Sea, hee see­med to bee assured of. If a man walke in the night (saith our Sauiour) hee stumbleth. Well, let all this bee nothing; though hee can be no wise man, that will beare such an aduenture, when he need not: But let it (as I said) be nothing. It is somthing to lose or misse of feli­citie, and life; howsoeuer the danger of losing, or mis­sing it may be thought a matter of small importance. So a man haue it at the last, it skills not perhaps how hardly, or slowly he come by it.

Be it so. But what if it will not bee had at all, without light? While ye haue light, beleeue in the light, that ye may be Ioh. 12. 35. the children of the light. Marke ye what he saies, that hath life in him? Ye must be children of the light, by beleeuing in the light; how shall that bee, if yee despise the light? Would you attaine to life? Take the light with you, that may shew you where it is, The first step to life, is turning from darknes to light. The Lord sends the Apostle Paul to the Gē [...]ils, that by his ministery they may be brought [...]o life. How is the course of this work described? He must Act. 26. 18. open their eies, that they may turne from darknes to light, & from the power of Satan to God. While we are in darkness, we are also in the power of Satan; when we approche to [Page 219] God, we come out of darknes. After that, followes for­giuenes of sinnes; that is, life in this world, and in heritance among them, which are sanctisied by faith in Christ; that is, glory in the world to come. Knowledge enters vs into the way of life; faith settles our steps in it, that we neither turne aside out of it, nor run backward, whence we came. He, that neuer sets foote in the way, can not goe forward in it. He, that knowes not, what is to be beleeued, can not beleeue. Let a man runne neuer so hard, if he be out of the race, he shall neuer come to the gole, Look vpon the A­postle Phil. 3. 5 6. Paul; see what paines he takes, how temperately he liues, how religiously he worships, how zealously he pur­sues, Act. 26 9. 10. 11. & persecutes thē, whō (in his ignorance) he took to be enemies to God. At your leasure consider his behaui­our, as himselfe hath set it out; What was he the neerer to true happiness, for al this adoe? He found at the last, that his best righteousnes was no better thē dung, & al the re­ward his zelous persecuting could procure him, was faine to be giuē ouer, for the purchase of the pardon therof. So little can it auaile a mā, to make al the speed, that may be, whē he is out of the way. Therfore if any man be desirous to become partaker of the life, which is in Christ, he must of necessity be directed, & guided by the light, that from him shines vnto vs. If thou wilt liue, thou must be inlight­ned. Will life, think'st thou, be found in darknes? no more thē light is in death. Is it not strange then, yea admirable, & incredible, that they which professe, they seeke for life, should wilfully cōtinue in darknes? And yet me thinks it is more strange, if more may be, that those mē should per­swade thēselues, they are in possessiō of life, who feel thē seluesshut vp fast in darknes. Who is ther in this cōgrega­tion, I had almost said in this whole nation, that doth not flatter his own hart with an opiniō of life by Christ? That life is the light of men. Giue me leaue now, after lōg time of error, to aduise with thee of that, which thou shouldest haue bin fully resolvd of, a gret while since. Thou saist, the [Page 220] life that is in Christ hath quickened thee. Thou art que­stionless inlightened. Shall I make bold to aske thee a [...]ew questions, concerning the mysterie of thy redemp­tion; the roote, whereon the life, thou talkest of, grow­eth? Wilt thou not abide to be questioned with of these points? Heare me a little; I doe it not to appose thee, but to instruct thee. At the least, if thou wilt not answere mee, yet giue mee the hearing, while I open this great secret vnto thee. Not that neither? Shall thy pleasure lull thee a sleepe, that thou canst not heare? Shall thy profit carry thee away, that thou wilt not see? I were as good hold my peace, as speake, and not bee heard. All men are willing, and ready to conser of that, where­of they haue skill, and experience. Thou canst not doe a souldiour a greater pleasure, then to put him into some discourse of warre. How gladly doth a Mariner take occasion to intreat of nauigation? So all professions, and trades, easily fall into speech of that, wherein they haue best knowledge. Onely in the profession of christiani­tie, the case is otherwise. You shall finde many a one, (I would I might not truely say very many, I am sure I may say ouer many) that can not indure to speake themselues, or heare other men enter into any discourse of life in CHRIST. Tell me I pray you, what is the rea­son, why other sorts of professions are so forward in talking of their artes, and trades? Is it not because they make account they haue some good skill in them? Could Christians be so backward to reason of matters touching their saluation, but that they are priuie to their owne ig­norance in such cases? Shall a smith, or a shoomaker, de­light to speake of his craft, because he is skilfull in it? and shal we hold off, and shunne speech of our glorious re­demption, because; but I will say no more for very shame of the world. It were not possible we should auoide such communication, if we knewe how to carry our selues in it, without bewraying our ignorance. [Page 221] How then stands the case with vs? Are wee not in­lightened? Then are we not quickened. If wee bee in darkenesse, we are in death too. This, this (it is be fea­red) is the case of many of vs. There is no life in vs, be­cause there is no light in vs: With this light wee may search our hearts, and discerne, whether we be indeede a­liue, or dead, What know I, concerning mine owne na­turall estate? What haue I learned of my first transgressi­on in Adam? What feeling am I come to of the horri­ble corruption, where with my soule, and body are defi­led? What vnderstand I of Iesus Christs natures, and of­fices? Haue I considered the infiniteness of the loue of God, in sending his owne, and onely sonne to be my sa­uiour? Am I well instructed in the doctrine of his suffe­rings? Is the value of his inualuable sacrifice magnifi­ed by me, though not comprehended? Let me yet come a little neerer. How many are there that do not so much, as know what Iesus Christ was? what it is to bee iusti­fied; what it is to beleeue? We are buried in the dark­nesse of death; hauing nothing in vs, but the bare con­ceipt of life. I appeale to thine owne soule, whosoeuer thou art, that wouldest be saued: I desire thee not to let mee see the light, that is in thee, but to looke into thine owne heart, whether therebe any there, or no. The triall is betwixt God, and thee. It is in vaine to say, thou art inlightened. For he knows, what is in thee, bet­ter then thou doost thy selfe. And there is no greater ar­gument of thy blindnesse, then that thou doost not see it. He, that begins to see, perceiues hee wants a great deale of seeing perfectly. But he, that was borne blind, and continues so, knows not that there is any such thing as sight to bee had, but onely as hee heares other men talke of it: Such is the estate of many professed Christians. They haue heard I know not what ru­mours of Adam, and his fall; of CHRIST, and his death, and such other matters: But they know no [Page 222] one point, or other, soundly; and throughly, either to their humiliation, or consolation.

And yet (for I must repeate it againe, and often) with­out light, there is no life, to be had in Iesus Christ. How long, then will you wander in darknesse? When will you approche to life? Let it suffice vs, that we haue hitherto continued in ignorance: yet the light shines vnto vs. Who can tell how soone the Lord will bee weary of waiting on vs, and holding out the light of saluation to them, that will not see? Deceiue not your owne selues with a vaine hope of life, as if it could be seized on, by groping in the darke. Be not wanting to your selues, and assu­redly yee shall be saued. Christ Iesus hath prouided life sor you. The same Christ Iesus is ready to shew you the way to it; nay, hath shewed it to you already, if you would haue vouchsaf't to looke toward it. And be­cause you are not blind onely, but dead also, he hath sent vs his seruants, and ministers, to call vpon you, to cry out vnto you, to intreat you, that you would open your eies, and see the light. It lies shining vpon your eie-liddes; do but lift them vp, and it will enter. What shall you lose by receiuing sight? What will it hurt you to be saued? Is any man so hardly intreated to his owne good? You shall not trauaile alone, in the way to life. Behold heere is company on euery side. I, and my brethren the Mini­sters will carry the light before you; do but follow it, and the light will bring you to life. If any man, for all this, will roust in darknesse; though hee refuse to see the light, yet shall that discouer him both to God and men. Art thou not ashamed to know, that so many see thy blindnesse? Art thou not affraid, that the Lord him­selfe will cast thee into eternall darknesse, since thou takest no pleasure in light? Rowse vp thy selfe, and shake off this drowsinesse, that CHRIST IESVS may giue thee light. If thou wilt not, neuer presse into this, and the like places. God is not deceiued. Thou [Page 223] makest a shew of loue to the light, when thou co­mest hither, where it shines. Is thy sight dim? The light will cleere it. Hast thou no sight at all? The light will giue thee eies to see withall. The light of the sunne appeares not, but where there are eies al­readie, and those open too. But the light of life which is in CHRIST, makes eies where it is de­sired, and causeth life in all, that are willing to haue it.

Whereof if any man doubt, let our Euangelist resolue him: who, proceeding to shew vs the effect of the light, tells vs, that it shines in darknesse; as it were offring it selfe to disperse, and scatter whatsoeuer hindereth or stai­eth our full inlightning. For though it follow in the la­ter part of the verse, that the darknesse comprehends it not: Yet the force of the light appeares in some, who by it at­taine to knowledge, and saluation. But this belongs to an other place and discourse: let vs go forward in our exposition. Wherein we are first to consider the words, then to deliuer the sense. The words are not so doubt­full in themselues as the varietie of interpretations hath made them: which indeede is so great, that if I should handle them at large, both you and I should be sooner wearied, then edified. I will therefore content my selfe with some little speech concerning the diuer­sitie of the expositions. And therein first wee must see what light it is, the Euangelist speakes of: then what hee saies of it; that it shineth in darknes. By light, generallie CHRIST, or his doctrine, or both, are thought to bee signified. The variety of opinions principallie consists in the diuers respects in which hee may bee conceiued to bee spoken of. All which may bee referred to these two heads; his diuine Nature, or his Person. And so much of these respects in ge­nerall: the particulars I must needs reserue, till I haue shewed what is meant by darknes, and not comprehending; [Page 224] for without the knowledge of them, this cannot be vn­derstood. In the meane while. wee may easily ghesse at the Euangelists meaning if wee assure our selues, as there is good cause wee should, that the light here is all one, with that in the former verse. Whereof who can reasonably make any doubt? Hath not the Euangelist held the same course before? One and the same worde was in the beginning, was God, was with God. By the same word, were all things made: nothing was made without him. In him was life: and that life, which was in him, was the light of men. And the light shineth. What light, but that which he named, in the clause before?

Now, that both the person and the doctrine may well bee vnderstood, by this light; it is cleare by that, which our Sauiour often saith of himselfe in this Gospell [...] I am Ioh. 8. 12. & 1. 46. the light of the world. I am come a light into the world. And that this belongs to his person, it is manifest, because he restraines this light to his continuance in the world. While I am in the world, I am the light of the world. walk while yee haue the light; while ye haue the light, beleeue in the & 9. 5. & 12. & 35. 36. light. But what neede I goe any further then this chapter? What was Iohns witnesse, but that Iesus was the Lambe of Ioh. 1. 6. 7. Ver. 29. Ver. 33. God that takes away the sinnes of the world? That hee was the Messiah, whome the father had sent? Therefore doth hee as it were point him out: Iohn seeth Iesus comming vnto him; and saith: Behold the Lambe of God. And Ver. 29. Ver. 36. he beheld IESVS walking by and said; Behold the Lamb of God. What should I vse many words? It not his person signified, when Saint Iohn saith, In him was Ver. 4. life? It is then truely said of our Sauiours person, that hee is light, and shineth. But how is our Saui­our light? Not onely as by his diuine power he giues vs light, through the worke of his Spirit in our hearts, whereof in this place our Euangelist doth not speake; but also in regard of the doctrine of euerlasting life, which hee preached in his owne person, while hee li­ued [Page 225] here amongst men, and now teacheth dayly by those whome hee hath made his Ambassadors, to in­treat men on his behalfe, and in his name, that they 2. Cor. 5. 19. would bee reconciled vnto God. Let vs see howe this may bee prooued. Light is come into the world (saith Ioh. 3. 19. our Sauiour) and men loued darknesse, more then light. What light? Namely, the true knowledge of saluation; whereof our Sauiour had discoursed before to Nicode­mus, not without his wonder, and astonishment. How Ver. 4. can a man be borne which is olde? sayd Nicodemus, when Christ preached to him of regeneration by water, and the spirit, without which, no man can enter into heauen. Afterward, when he labord to instruct him, in the know­ledge of his corrupt naturall estate, and shewd him, that the spirit inlightens whome hee pleaseth, as the winde blowes where it list; How can these things be? sayd Ni­codemus. Ver. 9. The world can not abide this light, which dis­couers the shame, and miserie of her darknes. Men had rather continue a good opinion of their owne vertue, and holines, though with error, then forgoe that proud conceit, they haue naturally of themselues; by seeing their sinnes layde open by the light of truth. Thus was Christ the light of the world, while he was in the world; because Ioh. 9. 5. he preacht the Gospell to as many, as would heare it. And this was the light, which shuld not, as he threatens them, alwaies be with them. So then by light the doctrin of the Gospell, and knowledge of euerlasting, life is vn­derstood, and the person of our Sauiour there by signi­fied, so farre as concernes his deliuering and teaching of that mystery.

This being thus conceiued, it is no hard matter to knowe, what is ment by shining. What else, shewing and manifesting it selfe, so that they which wil may see it, and by it see the way to euerlasting life: No man ligh­teth Mat. 5. 15. a candle to put it vnder a bushel, but to set it on a Candle­sticke, that it may giue light to all, that are in the house. Let [Page 226] your light so shine before men (saith our Sauiour, applying the former similitude) that they may see your good workes. [...] le si [...]. Arian. [...] 3. cap. 3. They, that would haue the place vnderstood of that in­lighting, by which Christ makes vs discerne the truth of that which is taught vs, doe not put any difference betwixt shining, and inlighting; whereas it is plaine, that the holy Ghost, in this place, intends not to entreat of the effect, in the hearts of men, but of the natural pro­perty, and immediate act of the light. Neither doth this sense of word wel agree with that, which followeth; And the darknesse comprehended it not. Is not this contra­ry to the former? If the light shine, so that it inlighten the darknesse, how can it bee said, that the darknesse doth not comprehend it? For it will appeare anone, that by not comprehending, not acknowledging, or not receiuing the light, is signified. But although the darknes bee not cleered and made bright by the light; yet the light it self shineth; that is, casteth, and spreadeth abroad his beams. Doth not the Sun shine, but when it is seene? Shines it not vpon the blind? Euen so the light of truth glistereth brightly, though it be not discernd by thē on whō it fals.

But this (as I noted before) is easily acknowledged; the greatest doubt is, why the euangelist changeth his manner of speech, and speakes of the persent time; The light shineth. We haue had nothing hitherto, but of the time past. The word was in the beginning, was with God, was God; were made, was made, was life; was light; All of that, which is past, according to the ordinary course of an History. So in the clause, that followes, Comprehended not. Only heere, The light shineth, not shined. That our Sa­uiours continuall inlightning vs from heauen is not sig­nified, it appeared before, because of the difference be­twixt that, and shining. Adde thereto, that if Christ in­lighten, the darknesse is inlightned, & so comprehends the light. But the Darknesse sayth our Euangelist did not comprehend it. Shall we refer it to the whole time, since [Page 227] our Sauiours incarnation? Indeed the light hath shined euer since, and doth, & shal shine. If that had beene the meaning, it had been fitter to haue sayd; The darknes cō prehendeth it not, then comprehended it not; vnless we think that the darknes is lesse dark now then it was, when the Apostle writ this Gospell. And in that place, which is brought to proue this expositiō, there is no such diuersi­tie of time, but al runs alike. That which was frō the begin­ning, which we haue heard, haue seene, haue looked vpon, haue 1. Ioh. [...]. [...]. handled; The life appeared, & we have seene it. We shal come neerer to the point, if we vnderstand it of that continua [...] Ver. 2. light, which shineth to vs, by the ministery of the word. Yet wil not the former doubt be remov'd why the Euā ­gelist saith not comprehendeth, and so includes the pre­sent also, which is as vnable and vnwilling to compre­hend the light, as the former times haue beene.

What may then be thereasō, why the holy ghost spea­keth after this sort? The light shineth. It seemes to mee, sa­uing other mens better iudgement, that this speech cō ­cerns the generall nature of the light, to which the sh [...] ­ning of our Sauiour, & his doctrine is resembled. Al mē know that light properly signifieth that by which wee are inabled to see with our bodily eyes: & by a resem blance thereunto, that which informeth the iudgement. & instructeth the vnderstanding, is called by the same name, whether it bee done by naturall, or supernatural, means. The Euāgelist thē hauing giuen this name to our spiritual inlightning by Christ, & to the shining of that supernatural light vpō vs, speaks in these words of light in general, as if the should haue sayd: It is the nature of al light to shine, as of water to moysten, & of fire to burn Therefore doth the Sunne continually [...]end foorth his beames, and as soone shall hee cease to bee, as to shine. For, seeing light is as natural to him, as reason, and life are to men, and beastes; as they leaue to be that they are, whē these actiōs haue an end. so doth the sun perish. [Page 228] whensoeuer he giues ouer shining. What is this to the iu­pernaturall light, which comes from our Sauiour, by his word and doctrine? may some men say, I will tell thee. The holy Ghost will haue vs by this former part of the similitude, to gather, and vnderstand the later, in this [...]ort. The life that is in Christ (sayth Saint Iohn) is that, which inlightens men; giuing them, or at the least af­fording, & offring them the knowledge of their blind­nes, and deadnes, and of light, and life to bee had by, & in Christ. Now it is well knowne, that the light, accor­ding to the nature thereof, shines in darkenes; so did, doth, and will, this supernaturall light, alwayes shewe it selfe to them, that looke after it.

This (I take it) is that, which our Euangelist in­tendes, and implyes, though hee expresse it not. Since wee perceiue, that the light must needes shine, and vn­derstand that the life in Christ is the light of men; how canne wee choose but conclude, that certainely the light did shine, while our Sauiour was in the world?

So then, the light shineth alwayes by nature; But where shineth it? Surely in darkenes. For there is no vse of light, but in respect of darkenesse: and where­soeuer any light shines, there is darknesse, without that light, naturally, and ordinarily. What darknesse is it, wherein this supernaturall light shineth? Question­lesse, a darknesse sutable to that light. For the Sunne in his greatest brightnes, at high noone in summer, shines not to the soule, but to the body of man; & the excellē ­test knowledge, & cleerest light of reasō, helps nothing to the inlightning of our bodily darknes: but the sim­plest idiot, if his sight be good, wil see as wel, as the wisest man in the world, if he haue the sun light. This then must be layd, as the foundation of the building; that by dark­nes, not the absence of naturall light, but the want of spirituall knowledge is signified. And as by light wee [Page 229] vnderstand the person of the Messiah, together with the doctrine hee taught, concerning our spirituall sal­uation; so by darkenesse wee must in like sort conceiue the ignorance of him, and of that knowledge, which hee imparted to the world, whereby onely euerlasting life can bee attained to. What then is this darkenesse, wherein the light shineth? what else, but the blindness of men, by which they are vnable to see, and knowe, what belongs to their eternall saluation; the infidelity of men, whereby they are hindred, and withheld from acknowledging the meanes of it, when they are offred?

Of the doctrine anone; as yet I am in search for the meaning of the word. Which, as all men know, & con­fesse, signifie [...] properly the absēce of this out ward light, to which it is contrary. It is needless to proue this point by example. Take one for all, in the beginning of the scripture. Darkness was vpon the deep. And God sayd, Let Gen. 1. 2. 3. 4. there be light. And God separated the light from the dark­nesse. Wee see cleerely, what darkenes Moses speakes of; that it needes not my exposition. From hence the word is taken, and applyed, to note out the punishment of sin, and sin it selfe: The punishment in this life, aduersity & affliction. He hath set darknesse in my pathes, sayth Iob; Iob. 19. 3. meaning that the Lord had laid greeuous afflictions vp­him. If they look vnto the earth (sayth I say) behold darknes, Isay. 5. 30. & 8. 22. and sorrow, & the light shall be darkened in their skie. Dark­nes is without comfort, and affords a man no sight of a­ny meanes for his deliuerance. Therefore the vse of the word reacheth farther; euen to death, and damnation. Before I goe, and shall not returne (sayth Iob) to the land of Iob. 10. 21. ver. 22. darknesse, and shadow of death, Into a land, darke as darknes it selfe, into the shadow of death, where there is no order, but the light is as darkenesse; Of damnation our Sauiour of­ten speaketh, when hee names, casting into vtter dark­nes. The children of the kingdome shall be cast out into vtter Mat. 8. 12. & 22. 13. & 25. 30. darkenesse. Take him away, and cast him into vtter darknes. [Page 230] This, Iude calleth the blackenes of darknes. For whom, is Iad. ver. 13. reserued the blacknes of darkenes for euer.

When the word is vsed for sinne, it signifieth either the ignorance of the minde, and vnderstanding, or the Rom. 2. 19. wickednes of the heart, and conuersation. Thou perswa­dest thy selfe (sayth the Apostle to the Iewes) that thou art a guide of the blind, a light of them, which are in darknes: namely in ignorance. To this purpose the same Apostle sayth of the Ephesians, before they had been taught by Eph. 4. 18. the Gospell, that Their cogitation was darkened. This is Mat. 4. 16. that Darkenes, in which the people sate, til by our Saui­ours preaching (as Saint Mathew tels vs) They came to see light. That the wickednes of our heart, and the leud­nes of our actions are signified by the same word, it may Rom. 13. 12. appear by these places. Let us cast away the works of dark­nes, and let us put on the armor of light. What these workes of darknes are, the Apostle sheweth in the next verse: Ver. 13. Gluttony, drunkennes, chambering, wantonness, strife, and en­uying: and generally in the verse following, To fulfill the Ver. 14. Ephe. 5. 8. lusts of the flesh. In this respect he tels the Ephesians, that they were once darkenes. And a little after, hee forbids them Ver. 11. to haue any fellowship with the vnfruitfull workes of darknes. But no man speakes more plainely, or more fully to this purpose then S. Iohn himselfe. God is light, and in him is no 1. Ioh. 1. 5. darknes; that is no kind of euill. If we say, that we haue fellowship with him and walke in darkenesse, wee lye, and do & ver. 6. 2. 11. not truely. He that hateth his brother, is in darkenes, & wal­keth in darknes: is in the corruptiō of nature, & behaues himselfe according therunto. And of the word this may suffice, cōcerning the ordinary vse of it in the Scripture.

For this place, wee must needes take it generally, as wee did light, and so apply it to the particular in hand. The light naturally shines in darkenes; and bodily light in bodily darkenesse, the spirituall in spirituall. So did the Messiah shine in the ignorance, and wicked­nesse of men. So did the doctrine of saluation shew [Page 231] it selfe, in the blindnesse, and naughtinesse of the world. The former point of the natural, & bodily light shining in darkenes, is not any matter of diuinity; & besides so well knowne to children, that it were lost labour to say any thing of it. Let vs keepe our selues to the Euange­lists meaning; and after wee haue a little proued the do­ctrine, consider the matter for our farther instruction, and edification. And that the truth may the rather bee acknowledged, let vs call to minde, that the Prophet Isay, many hundred ye [...]res before, gaue notice of this light, and the shining thereof: and not of the shining onely, but also of a farther effect, the inlightning of them, that were in darkenesse. Let vs heare himselfe speake. The people, that walked in darkenesse, haue seene a Isay. 9. 2. great light; they that dwelt in the Land of the shadowe of death, vpon them hath the light shined. My warrant to expound this prophecy, of the light, in the ministery of our Sauiour Christ, is from the authoritie of the holy Ghost, in Saint Mathewes Gospell. Iesus leauing Naza­reth Mat. 4. 13. 14. 15 went, and dwelt in Capernaum, which is neere the Sea, in the borders of Zabulon, & the Land of Nepthalyn by the way of the Sea, Galilee of the Gentiles; The people which sate in darkenesse &c. I spake of this before in expounding the words: the naming of it, this second time, is suffici­ent. Let me second it with an other prophecy out of the new Testament. Olde Zacharie, the Father of Saint Luk. 1. 67. Iohn Baptist, being filled with the holy Ghost, foretold this shining. Through the tēder mercie of our God, the day-spring Ver 78. Ver. 79. (sayth hee) from an high, hath visited vs; to giue light to them, that sit in darkenesse, and in the shadow of death, and to guide our feet into the way of peace. This day. spring, Si­meon in few words tearmeth alight to bee reuealed to the & 2. 32. Gentiles; He mentioneth not the darkenes. True: but we haue learned, that the Gentiles were in darknes; as wel by that of Esay, as by the testimony of Saint Paul: Walke not (sayth he to the Ephesians, turned from Gentilisme) [Page 232] as other Gentiles walked, hauing their cogitation darkened, Eph. 4. 17. 18. and being strangers from the life of God, through the igno­rance, that is in them, because of the hardnesse of their hart: But the brightnes of this light, and the glorious shining thereof, is no where more cleerely to be discernd, then in the course of this Gospell: wherein so many secrets of God, of the Messiah, of the holy spirit, and comforter, of freedome from sinne, of deliuerance from damuati­on, and of euerlasting life are set foorth, & commended to vs.

The doctrine then is easie, and certaine; that our Sa­ [...]iour, being the supernaturall light, shined to the world, and shineth still, and euer, in the knowledge of eternall saluation. Let not the manner of speech trouble any mā; because the Euangelist sayeth, that The light shineth in darkenesse. You will aske me, how this can be. If the light shine, there is no darkenes. It there bee darknesse, the light shines not. How then can the light shine in darke­nesse? Is it all one, as if hee should haue sayde, The Ma'd [...]nat. ad hunc lo cum. light inlightneth the darkenesse, scattering, and dispersing it? But shining, and inlightning (as I shewd before) are diuerse; the former respe [...]ting the nature of the light, the other a second arie effect of the light in things in­lightned. Neither may wee forget, that the darkenes was not inlightned. The darkenesse (sayth Saint Iohn) omprehended it not. How, then, doth the light shine in [...]rkenesse? Surely, as the Sunne in the firmament, shines [...]ongst a company of blind men. The Sunne indeede [...]nes; but the darkenesse to blinde men is neuer a whit [...]he losse. So our Lord, & his doctrin shined most bright­ly in the midst of the blind Scribes, and Pharises; yet were they still in darkenesse. The naturall light doth his office, & shewes his nature, by spreading his beams all about, that all men may see: so doth the supernatu­ [...]al light, deliuering the knowledge of God, & Christ; to saluatiō; yet to the blind the darknes cōtinues: & thogh [...] [Page 233] the darknesse continue, yet the light shines; so the light shines in darknesse.

The ligh in darknesse? what light? What darknesse? Is not the light, you speake of, a dim glimmering? or ra­ther is it not as a candle wasted, and spent to nothing? Is not Christ, the light you brag of? Is not this light put out? You preach Christ crucified. What light is there in death? What shining, when the Sun is set? Where is the darknesse, you vpbrayd the world withall? Is not this Chr. crucified, which in your cōceit shines so brightly, a stumbling block to the Iewes, and foolishnes to the Gentiles? 1. Cor. 1. 23. Are all these in darknes? Nay rather, is not your light a false fire, that flashes, and vanishes? These, these are the proud conceits of the ignorant world. Not without some shew I confesse; (for the deuill must deceiue with some colour) but yet without substance. The shew is great; both in respect of the aduersaries themselves, & for the continuance of the errour. Multitude beares a great sway; and like a mightie land-water caries a waie all it meetes with. But if it come once to bee the greater part, it seemes to challenge allowance and consent; not so much by force, as by equity and reason. What if it proue generally; yea so generall that it comprise all with­in it? One or two may be deceiu'd; but that, which all men agree of, must of necessity be true. And that these men may not be thought to preuail by nūber of voices, but by waight of reason, they are content to argue the matter with vs; Iewes, & Gentiles each a part for them­selues. For though they be at deadly fewd one with an­other; yet they all ioyne in one against God, that wee may be sure they are in darknesse: but let vs heare their seuerall pleas, for the cleering of themselues. Suppose then that Zedekiah Ahabs Prophet, or if you will Cai­phas, 1. King. 22. 24. Ioh. 11. 49. 50. who liu'd in the office of the high Priest, when this light was to be seene, and felt almost with mens fin­gers, should start vp in defence of his nation, of which [Page 234] he was so careful, and speake in this sort; What is he, that accuseth the Iewes of blindesse? Is not Abraham Ioh. 8. 33. & 5. 45. their Father? Is not Moses their teacher? Did not God deliuer the knowledge of his will vnto them? Hee hath Psalm. 147. 20. not dealt so with euery nation, neither haue they knowne his ludgements. Were not all the Prophets sent, from time Icr. 7. 25. to time, for their instruction? Are not they a guide of the blind, a light of them, which are in darknesse? Doe not the Rom. 2 19. Mal. 2. 7. Mic. 4 2. Ioh. 4. 22. Priest lips preserue knowledge? Must not all men seeke the law at his mouth? Doth not the law goe forth of Sion, and the word of the Lord from Ierusalem? for saluation is of the Iews. How then are they in darknesse? All the land of Aegypt may be couered with darknesse, but the children of I sraell Exod. 10. 23. haue light, where they dwell. Thus hath Caiphas cleerd the Iewes (as he thinks) of the imputation of ignorance, which was laid vpon them. But what saith Saint Paul, Iew, and a Pharise? There is none that understandeth, there Rom. 3. 11. 12. Psal 13. 3. is none that seekes after God; They are all gon out of the way. Neither speakes he this, of himselfe; but alleageth it out of the Iewes owne records. Indeed he brings it against the Iewes; and hee giues a sufficient reason of his so do­ing. VVe knowe(saith hee) that whatsoeuer the Lawe saith, Rom. 3. 19. it saith it to them, which are vnder the law. How many wit­nesses might I bring in to bee deposed of this truth? which of the Prophets hath not accused them as gree­uously? Their writings abound with such complaintes. The Oxe knoweth his owner, and the Asse his Masters crib; Esay. 1. 3. But Israellhath not knowne, my people hath not vnderstood. The Lord hath a controuersie with the Land (saith another Ose. 4. 1. Prophet) because there is no truth, nor mercy, nor knowledge of God in the Land. But let vs grant as much as they de­sire, that the Oracles of God were committed to them. Doth not this proue, that, of themselues, they were as blind, as other nations? Is not this the word of the Prophets 2. Pet. 1. 19. which (as S. Peter saith) is a light shining in a darke place? was this any other thing, then the dawning of the dav. [Page 235] before the rising of the Sunne of righteousnesse? But I should shew my selfe to be too blind, if I should spende time to discouer their darknesse. Their greatest Rabbies the Scribes, and Pharises, were blind leaders of the blind: Mat. 15. 14. who professing themselues to bee master builders, had not so much skill, as to know the head stone of the corner; without which, all, that they set vppe, could Mark. 12. 10. not chuse but fall to ruine, as wee see it is come to passe,

Let vs then leaue the Iewes in their ignorance, that we maie incounter the Gentiles, euen the Grecians, the 1. Cor. 1. 22. 23 wisest of them; whose profession it is, to seeke after wise­dome, and who therefore despise the Gospell, because it is foolishnes. These men think foule scorne to be coū ­ted ignorant. If knowledge were lost, & the bookes of learning burnt vp, it might be found among them, & would flame vp, at their blast, out of thevery ashes. Haue not they clim'd vp into heauen, & brought downe from thence the admirable knowledge of the motions, & in­fluences of the starrs? Haue not they taken a full survey of euery Region of the Ayre, & obseru'd the causes; and breeding of Coluds, raine, hail, snowe, Comets, blazing slarrs, frost, dew and all such wonders? Who hath soun­ded the depth of the Sea, and discouered the hidden se­crets of the saltnesse, & ebbing & flowing there of, but the Grecians? who hath rak't, into the bowels of the earth, and fetcht out the treasures of it for the vse of men but the Grecians? Their Philosophy hath taught Prin­ces, how to manage, affairs of State. Of them, masters of families haue learned, how to order their housholds. A­mong them military discipline was bred, and nourisht. They haue instructed men, how to make themselues vertuous. They haue shewed men how to attaine to hap­pines. To conclude, all learning, all vertue, all wise­dome, hath flowed out of their fountaines, and water­ed all the world with streames of knowledge, & Iudge­ment. As for Religion, where had God more Temples, [Page 236] more Priests, more altars? Where was more cost be­stowed on his worship? Where was more wit shew'd in the deuising of it? The like plea make the Romans: who although they cannot deny, that they receiu'd these things, at the second hand, of the Grecians: yet (in their conceyts) all knowledge, and vertue, especially religi­on, had her full growth, and perfection amongst, and from them.

What shall we say to these men; and how shall wee aunswere them? if wee deny them to bee learned, all the world will condemne vs of ignorance, or enuy? Shal we grant, that they shine with learning, & yet accuse them, as hidden in darknesse? What is light, but knowledge? What is darknesse, but ignorance? Either they are in darknesse, because they want knowledge; or if they haue knowledge, they are not in darknes. How stands the case then? Haue we accusd them vniustly? That were to condemne the holy Ghost of falshood; as if hee had made them worse then they are, that he might magnify our Sauiour Christ the more. What if wee proue their knowledge in the things, they most brag of, to be vn­perfect? Cicer. in Acad. & Socrat. apud Plato. We shal say no more, then many of themselues doe, who yet are learned; nor bring any proofe of the light, that shines in darknes. For, the doctrine of the Gos­pel, doth not perfit the learning, whereof the Grecians boast, but teach an other kinde of knowledge, then euer they dreamt of. But that wee may, if not giue them full satisfaction, yet at the least stop their mouthes; let vs ho­nor them with the reputation of learning, and if they wil needes haue it so, with the commendation thereof to: yet with this prouiso that euen in that knowledge, wherein they hold themselues so skilfull, they may ea­sily be proued to haue err'd often, & grossely. But let vs take no aduantage of those errors: lette them al bee wise States-men, expert warriers, greate Clarkes, deepe na­turalists, temperate moralists, cunning artificers, good [Page 237] common-wealths-men for the publike benefit, good husbands for their priuat estates: for all this, they are in darknesse, and ignorance. For what are they but igno­rant, that knowe not the true God; nor how he is to bee worshipt? What light is there in them, that see not the way to their owne happiness, nor vnderstand where it is to be had? I should neuer done, if I should, let me not say refute, but recite their manifold errors, touching God himselfe, the foundation of all religion. Giue mee leaue therefore I pray you to omit them all, saue a very few of the most principall. First, whereas there is but one God, as the very light of Nature sheweth, they set vp, in their blind fancies, infinit multitudes of Gods, & Goddesses, to the number of I wot not how many (I am sure a greate many) thousands; that, as the Prophet saith of the Iewes, according to the number of their Cytties (yea Ier. 2. 28. and far aboue it too) so were their Gods. Yet had this bin the more tolerable (though indeed it were most intole­rable) if they had not added a second errour, worse, if worse may be, then the first. Bee it, that they could not content themselues with one God, but must needs haue heapes of them for fayling; was it possible, they could be so absurde, and senslesse, as not to deuise them all of one kinde, and nature? Say there was some colour, for to imagin there should bee a difference of sexe, and so hee Gods, and shee Gods: yet was there not any the least shewe of reason to conceiue, they might bee of diuerse natures. There is wonderfull variety of nations, & peo­ple in the world: yet all are of one kind; of the same pro­portion of body, of the same nature of the soul. But the Gods of the heathen, many of them (can they heare it without blushing?) are vtterly of a diuerse kind one frō another. Some of them were Gods both by the Father, amd Mother, some only by the Fathers side, some by the mothers, side only, some by neither. What say you to the Sunne the Moone, & diuerse starrs? Could these [Page 238] be of the same kind with the former? Certainely beasts, foules, fishes, creeping things, onions, garlicke, I am a­sham'd to say all I could, were Gods of an other nature then those before mentioned. Do you think these mē, that made themselues such Gods, had any spark of light in them? Is it not pitty, but these companions shoulde be held to be wise, & learned? What dreames of a sick mans distempered braine, what old wiues fable, what idle fancy of a child, that builds Castles in the aire, is ei­ther so absurde, or so impious? And such as their opini­ons were of their Gods, such was their worship; By murders, adulteries, incests, filthy speeches, abhomina­ble gestures, sorceries, coniurations. The least sinne of this kinde, was their doating Idolatry; that hee, which only made an idoll of God, and did him no farder dis­honour, might well be counted a holy man, amongst a route of such prophane miscreants.

Could these men (let them boast of their knowledge as much as they list) could these men, I say, know wher­in their owne happinesse consisted, or how they might attaine vnto it? How should he, that is ignorant of God from whom all things receiue as their being, so their well being, euer vnderstand what felicity is, or how it may be come by? There needes no other, nor can bee a­ny better proofe of their ignorance, in this point, then the multitude of diuerse and many contrary opinions. One of the heathen a learned Roman hath left vs record Varro, apud Aug. de cruitder. of almost 300. seueral conceits touching the soueraingne good, or felicity of man. It were a hard matter for a man to chuse among so many, especially where hee hath no certaine marks, whereby to direct him in his choise. But what a misery is it, for one to vex, and tire himselfe in seeking, when the thing, he seekes for, is not neere the place of his search? To examine the opinions seue­rally were more labour then profite, I wil only point at [...]ome maine errors, as in the other part of their igno­rance, [Page 239] concerning God. First then, what true knowe­ledge can be lookt for at their hands, touching persite happinesse, whose bse thoughts haue imprisoned thē selues within the narrow compass of this short, and vn­certaine life? wherein, there is so little quietnesse to bee found, and so much misery to be indur'd, that their own Cicer. Tuscul quaest. lib. 1. Gods, as they say, haue counted it a mans greatest feli­city, either neuer to haue bin borne, or to dye quickly: yea, haue bestowed death on their fauorits, as the richest reward they could giue them. And if any of them tooke a conceit of the immortality of the soule: yet they spoi­led man of one part of his happiness, by leauing the bo­dy void of al possibility to liue again. Yea what was the felicity they allowed the soule, but such a kinde of vaine pleasure, as the mind of a natural wise mā, would rather despise, then delight in? But these also were very few; the greatest part, not of the commō sort only but of the Phi­losophers too, either denying, or doubting of the im­mortality of the soule. How should such blinde men, knowthe way to true felicity? Or if they might haue lighted on it by chance, how could they haue perceiu'd it? Well: let vs take pitty of their ignorance, & shew thē, that true happinesse is only in the inioying of God. What are they the neerer? Al their learning wil not teach thē how to find him. The best they can imagin, is to pro­cure his fauor by sacrifices, or to deserue his loue by their shadow of vertue. Alas poore wretches! How highly soeuer they value this their painted vaine glory; he, that searcheth the hearts, condemnes it of hypocrisy. To whō dost thou offer thy sacrifices? Which of thy Gods is it, thou wouldst fainest please? Art thou not afraid, least while thou dost thy whole in deauour to serue one, all the rest thinke themselues neglected; Or canst thou haue so base an estimation of their excellency, or so proude a conceit of thine owne worth, as to ima­gine that thou canst doe them all seruice, to their likeing? Art thou so farre in loue with thy owne selfe, [Page 240] that thou neuer perceiu'st, wherein thou offend'st any of them? Let me come neerer to thee; Doth not thy hart tell thee, that the greatest motiue, thou hast to vertue, is the praise, and applause of men? Thou hast it: and in it, thou hast thy full reward.

It is pitty, I confesse, to leaue a man in this desperate estate, if he wil be content to receiue better instruction. But it fareth with the wise men of this worlde, in this matter, as it doth with some melancholie person; whō if a Physician offer to cure, hee wil not bee perswaded, that he standes in neede of helpe: but if you bee earnest with him in the businesse, he will take on against you, as against a foole, or one that meant to murder him. VVee preach Christ crucified (saith the Apostle) to the Iewes a 1 Cor. 1. 23. stumbling block, & to the Grecians foolishnesse. To the igno­rant, you wil say, and vnlearned; not of iudgement, and knowledge. What say you to the Epicures, and Stoiks? were they void of learning, and vnderstanding? I doubt me you wil finde but a very fewe men worthy to bee counted learned, if you condemne them of ignorance? How did they entertaine the doctrine of the Gospell, brought vnto them by the learned, and eloquent Apo­stle Saint Paul? They disputed against him, they called him Act. 17. 28. babbler, they tooke him for a setter out of strange Gods. Yea the greatest fauour, he could find amongst the Atheni­ans, in a learned Vniuersity was this, that some mocked, o­thers said, Wee will heare thee againe of this thing. Some in. Verse. 32. deede claue vnto him, whereof one was a Iudge in the Citty; but neither was his learning the reason of his Verse. 34. yeelding, and what is one amongst so many thousands? The naturall man (saith S. Paul) perceiueth not the things of the spirit of God; for they are foolishnesse vnto him; neither 1. Cor. 2. 14. can he knowe them, because they are spiritually discerned, And is he not then blind, and ignorant, if he neither do, nor can perceiue the secrets of God, touching his owne saluation? Me thinks I discerne a certaine cheerefulnes [Page 241] in your countenances, arising (as I verely perswade my selfe) from the sense of the knowledge you haue, in this greate mystery of your redemption. It will saue mee some labour, that the rest of this short time remaining, may be bestowed vpon the later part of this verse. On­ly giue me leaue in two words, both to abate the pride of our nature, by shewing our ignorance, and to in­crease the joy of the spirit, by looking on the light, that shines about vs, and in vs. There is no one sin, to which we are naturally more subiect, then pride; no pride that doth sooner, or more puffe vs vp, then the opinion of knowledge. For since the vnderstanding is the most principall part of the soule; how can it bee, but a man must principally delight in that, which is the cheefest perfection therof? What should then, in reason, bee of greater force, to make vs strike the saile of pride, then the consideration of our ignorance. Euery one of vs is ready to say to himselfe; Haue not I sharpnesse of witte; soundnesse of iudgement; a quick conceit, to apprehend what I heare; a deepe reach to compasse what I disire? I say nothing of extraordinary learning, because it con­cernes not euery man. And is this that, which makes thee proud? Let me question with thee a little. Art thou indeed so sharpe, so sound, so quicke, so deepe? Make proofe of these excellent parts in a matter, that concerns thee neerely, and imports thee much. Canst thou, by the sharpnesse of thy wit, cleere thy selfe, against the accu­sation of thy conscience? Canst thou, by the soundnesse of thy iudgement, determine wherein true selicity con­sists? Canst thou, by the quicknes of thy conceit, vender­stand readily the whole doctrine of saluation? Canst thou, by the depth of thy reach, procure a place for thy selfe in heauen? What? none of al these? Cal thy wits to­gether; beate thy braines about the matter; Let thy con­ceit work vpon whatsoeuer, nature, or humane learning can teach thee: de [...]ise plot contriue. Comes all to no­thing? [Page 242] O the ignorance, and blindnesse of men! Let vs bee as wise, and skilfull in worldly matters, as we con­ceiue ourselues to be: in true wisedom, and knowledge, we are fooles, and blind. Darknesse, palpable darknes, nothing but darknesse. I make challenge here to all the learned of the world, that euer were, are, or shall bee, to shew their skil, and learning, either in deuising a means to bring a distressed soule to quietnesse, and comfort, or in disprouing the meanes discouered by the Gospel, or in prouing the truth of it, as it is reuealed. If they can doe none of all these, let them confesse, as they must needes, that they are indeed blind, and ignorant.

This being confest, as it cannot be denied; let vs see now, what meanes they are are able to procure of inlight­ning, and instruction. Nature affords them none; for if it did, some man, or other, in all this time, would haue hit vpon it. Will learning helpe them? It is not possible it should. For what is learning, but the perfection of na­ture? If the foundation bee weake, the building must needes bee ruinous. The light of nature may shew thee many defects, and faults, many vices, and vnruly affec­tions: the knowledge of Philosophy may confirme this Iudgement of nature, and adde much to the heape, that thou maist be ouerwhelmed with the consideration of thy wickednesse, and wretchednesse. But neither can both these, by any study, and meditation, fully informe thee of thy miserable, and damnable estate: and when they haue done all, they possibly can, they wil either leaue thee desperate, to consume thy selfe with sorrow, or bring thee into a fooles paradise, and lead thee gaily to destruction, as an Oxe with guilded hornes, & sweet Garlands, to be slaughtered in sacrifice. How then shal we get out of this darknesse? Who wil shew vs the way to knowledge? O that there were this hart in vs indeed! O that wee were as truly desirous to find the right way, as we are asham'd to be thought ignorant of it! How [Page 243] easie were it for vs to be saued! The light shines in dark­nesse. That thou seekest for, if thou seeke it in truth, as thou dost in shew, is neere thee, is about thee, is vpon thee, I had almost said, is in thee. If thou wilt read [...] the Scriptures, it wil thrust in by thine eies. If thou wilt heare the Scriptures, it will winde it selfe in, through thine eares. The light that shines in darknes, wil make thy dark­nes light. Only be contented to be inlightned.

But alas we are not so affected. We despise the light: we delight in darknesse, we hate him that should drawe vs out of it. Neither can our owne misery driue vs, nor his kindnesse allure vs to him. O that wee woulde but a little consider, how extraodinarily we are beholding to this light, that shines in darknes! Let vs take some view of it, in a like matter. Imagine that thou wert wandring, thou knowst not whither, all alone, naked, and com­fortlesse, the darknesse being so great, that thou couldst not see thy hand, the winde blowing through thee, the raine powring downe vpon thee, the colde striking to thy very heart, the way so slippery, that thou couldst not stande vpright, so full of deepe holes, that euery step, thou shouldst bee in daunger of breaking thy leggs, or armes: at the end of thy trauaile, when thou shouldst come to rest, suppose there were al kinde of torments, and tortures prepared for thee, which thou couldst by no meanes escape: tel mee now, canst thou possibly conceiue, how infinitly thou shouldst be boūd to him that should bring thee a light, shewe thee the perils of thy iourney, the certaine destruction in the end thereof; that should set thee in a plaine & easy path, should cloth thee, comfort thee, keep thee company, & bring thee to a place, or palace rather of al pleasure, and happines? What is that darknes to the blindnes of thy soule? What comparison is there betwixt the danger of breaking an arm or a leg, & the hazard of falling into the pit of hel? The glorious brightnes of the Sun doth not so [Page 244] [...]xceed the dimme light of a watching rush candle; as the knowledge of saluation by Christ, excelleth all the [...]arning, and wisedome of the world. And yet do wee [...]rne away our faces from this brightnesse? Doe wee [...]hut our eies against this light? I would this were the worst, though it bee too too bad. Nay we thrust it a way [...]rom vs: we run away from it; we disdaine it, we hate it, we doe all that lies in vs, to put it quite out. But do what we can, the light shines in darknesse; As I said once be­ [...]ore in a former Sermon, if wee will not bee inlight­ned, yet shall our blyndnes and darknes bee discoue­ [...]ed, whether wee will or no; God, his holy Angells, and blessed Saintes shall see our shame, and re­i [...]ce at our iust confusion for continuing in wilfull blindnesse.

I [...] slipt, I knowe not how, into the later part of this verse before I was aware, concerning the intertain­ment, that the light found in the worlde: The darknesse comprehended it not. The light shines, and the darknesse wil not bee inlightned. It will bee worth the dooing, to consider the point more fully. Which that we may lee the better, somewhat must bee said of the wordes, or rather of that one worde Comprehended. For where-as some men seeke a new meaning of the worde Darknesse, and wil not haue it taken in the sense, it had in the former clause, there is more cu­riosity, then truth in their speculation. VVho can imagine, that the Evangelist woulde vse a worde in two diuerse senses, without giuing any notice or inkling of such a chaunge? Is it not contrary to the rest of his course, wherein the same vvorde hath the same signification? The VVorde was in the beginning, The VVorde vvas vvith GOD, The VVorde vvas GOD; Still the same VVorde. But I shewed this sufficiently before; and there is no reason to be alleadged, why S. Iohn should differ [Page 245] in this verse from the former; al things agreeing so wel, if we retaine the sense, as it was formerly deliuered, and vnderstood. Wherefore, vnderstanding, by Darknesse, man in his naturall estate, without any supernaturall grace; let vs enquire what the Euangelist meanes, when he saith, that the darknesse did not comprehend the light. First, what is it, to Comprehend? Variety of opinions, breedes doubtfulnes in resoluing. I will draw all to two principall heads, and in the handling of them discharge my promise, concerning the diuerse interpretations of the light. The word, that is heere vsed by the Euange­list, signifies in the Scripture, either an vnderstanding and attaineing to some thing, for our owne knowledge or benefit; or an apprehending, & taking of somewhat. to the hurt, or disgrace thereof: Of the former significa­tion is the word in this, and such like places; Of a truth I Act. 10. 34. vnderstand or perceiue, that God is no accepter of persons. That yee may be able with all Saints to conceiue or apprehend, Eph. 3, 18. what is the breadth, and length, and depth, and height &c: The Gentiles which followed not righteousnes, haue attained Rom. 9. 30. vnto righteousnes. Of the later these may bee examples; Ioh 8. 3. & 12. 35. 1. Thesl 5. 4. The Scribes and Pharises brought unto him a woman taken in adultery. Walke while yee haue the light, least the darknesse come or seise vpon you. Yee (brethren) are not in darknes, that that day should come vpon you as it were a theefe. According to these 2 significations, so are the interpretations of the word in this Text. Some, acknowledging the light to Greg. Naziac. orat. 4. Theol. O [...]igen. in Ioa. l. [...]. Chrysost in Ioa. hom. 4. be in Christ, will haue the darknesse to be the Deuill, & persecutiō; which could not, say they, ouercome Christ. But though they could not vtterly subdue him, yet they did seise on him to his disgrace, and death, in the world: which is as much, as the signification of the worde w [...]l [...] Apud. Theo­ [...]hilact. ad. huno ocum. beare. Other, that will haue the light to signifi [...] Christ, in respect of his diuine nature, by Darknesse vnderstand his manhood, which coulde not so ob­scure the other, but that it still shined, and shewed [Page 246] it selfe. VVhere shall wee finde warrant for this inter­pretation of Darkenesse? And what is this else, but that, which the Evangelist saith in the fourteenth verse at large? The words became flesh, and wee saw the glory thereof &c. It is vsuall with the spirit of GOD in the Scripture, to call man-kinde, flesh, because the body is one part, whereof they consist: but Darknesse it is neuer called; vnlesse it bee with respect to the corrup­tion thereof, which our Sauiour tooke not with our na­ture. Fulgēt. ad T [...]asi. lib. 2. The same answere may satisfie them, who take­ing light in the same sense, for the diuine nature, make all things else darknesse; which (say they) coulde not taint or defile the light. But where is the word Com­prehended euer vsed so? Therefore they also are de­ceiued, Ma. bom. 2. de pase & hom. [...]. de pentecost. that thinke our Euangelist by not beeing Comprehended, notes our Sauiours being free from sinne. The worde hath no such signification any where.

Let vs come to the other meaning of it. by which it signifies to vnderstand or attaine to somewhat, for our knoweledge, or benefite. The light is Christ; the darknesse, in the opinion of most men, the nature Tatian. orat. ontra gentes. of man corrupted: which (saye some) doth not so comprehend CHRIST, but that still in compari­son of him, it continues darkenesse. But the Euan­gelist speakes not of comparison: neither was it, or coulde it bee lookt for, that men should become equall in knoweledge to the light, that shone vp­on them. If they had acknowledged it, and fol­lowed the direction of it to saluation, they had don as much, as reasonably coulde bee required at their handes. That is more likely, and yet not the Leontius ad hunc locum. true meaning of the Text, that the Godhead of our Sauiour Christ shineth in the creatures, though men in their blindnesse discerne it not. But neither can the knowledge of the creatures teach vs the [Page 247] distinction of the persons, but only the being, pow­er, and wisedome of the diuine nature; and if it could, yet might wee bee in darkenesse, concerning salvati­on, for all that knowledge. It remaines then, that wee take the worde in the ordinary signification thereof; and accordingly vnderstand the Euangelist, as if hee had said in plaine tearmes, that our Sauiour Christ, by the doctrine of the Gospell, which hee preached, and by the miracles, which hee daiely wrought, shewed himselfe to bee the light of the world, and the true meanes of saluation; but men being blind in their iudgement, and peruerse in their affections, would not acknowledge him for their Sauiour, that they might come to life by him. And for the meaning of the worde, let that, which hath bin said, suffice.

If any man be desirous to knowe the reason, why the holy Ghost changeth his maner of speech, and whereas in the next words hee had sayd Shineth, and not Shined, he now saith Comprehended, and not Comprehendeth: hee must remember, that in the former clause, as wee heard, the generall nature of the light is exprest, and the par­ticular shineing of this supernaturall light implied therein. After this manner; the Euangelist hauing told vs, that our Sauiour was the light of men, proceeds to shewe what hee did for the inlighting of them, & what they refused to doe, that they might bee inlight­ned: as if hee should haue said; The light naturally shineth in darknesse, and so did that light I speake o', but the darkenesse woulde not receiue it, to bee inlightned. VVee must farder conceiue, that it shineth continually, and is ordinarily refused of blinde, and ignorant men: but it seemes most likely, that the Euāge­list had special respect to them, that liued in our Sauiors daies, while he was conuersant vpon the earth amongst men; who notably bewrayed their blindnesse by not descerning, and acknowledging so cleere a light; whereof if it please GOD [...]eereafter in this [Page 248] Chapter more particularly, and largely. Now to the doctrine.

There are 2 things, that discouer the blindnesse and folly of mankind vnto vs. The former, that hauing so great a conceit of our naturall parts, and such especiall helpes of education, and instruction, wee shoulde not­withstanding be vnable to deuise, & determin, how we might attaine to the cheefe point of happinesse, that we are capable of: the later, and more shamefull of the 2 is this, that we are so full of darkenesse, and peruersenesse, that we neither will, nor can learne, what belongs to our felicity, when it is kindely, and plainely taught vs. The lesiod. & A­ [...]st. Ethic. heathen were wont to make 2 degrees of wisedome: the one was, for a man to be able to aduise himselfe, what was best, and fittest for him; the other, if he could not at­taine to that height, yet to follow good counsaile, when it was giuē him. If there were any man, that came short of this later, him they wholly condemn'd of extreame folly. And can we thinke our selues wife, yea bragge of our learning, and knowledge, when wee are not able to set one foote vpon this first, & lowest step to wisdome? Doe we thinke much to be charg'd so deepely with ig­norance? He, that knowes vs better, then wee doe our selues, hath long since giuen this testimony of vs; The naturall man perceiueth, or rather receiueth not the things 1. Cor. 2. 14. of the spirit of God. Dost thou marke, what he saith? Hee findes not fault with the slowenesse of thy imaginati­on, that thou canst not of thy selfe, by naturall witte, or learning finde out, what is true happinesse, and how to attaine vnto it. but he shewes thy dulnesse, & blindness, that thou knowest it not, when it is lay'd before thee. I would it were not worse then so. Yes yes: it is a degree lower. Thou canst neither direct thy selfe in the way of life, nor if thou be set in it, perceiue when thou art right, nor by any rea on bee perswaded to acknowledge it, though a man should shew thee, which it is.

Nay (sayth some man) you shall neuer make mee haue so all an opinion of my selfe. Perhaps indeede, I should hardly hit on that waie, without a guide; be­cause I haue not gone it at any time heeretofore: and therefore I grant also, that it is possible I should not knowe it, when I were in it; but I would not haue you thinke me so vnreasonable, that I should refuse to learn that, whereof I am ignorant. Wel sayd: I perceiue thou hast a good conceit of thy selfe: and I will not presse thee too far in thine owne particular; but rather shewe thee thy case in an other mans example. And that I may not seeme to disparage thee in thy wit, and iudge­ment, by any base comparison, let me offer to thy con­sideration the whole people of the Iewes; not as they are now in the state of bondage and miserie, but as they were in that time, when the light we speake of shone a­mongst them. I will not stand to magnifie their excel­lent parts of nature, and learning: I will say nothing of their Scribes and Pharisies; I will not mention their Priests, and Leuites: what they were for their imagi­nation, and vnderstanding, the learned know, the vn­learned may ghesse by the report of them, that haue trade and trafficke with them daily, euen now when their wits are dulled, and their hearts as it were broken, with the continuall sense of their bondage, and misery Surely there is no great reason, why any man shoulde thinke so highly of himselfe, or so meanely of them, as to presume of his owne skill, where their iudgement hath fayled them. Especially in a matter of this nature, concerning God, and euerlasting life; wherein they were extraodinarily instructed by him, that only could teach them. Match thy selfe with them for sufficiencie of naturall gifts, equall them in helps of learning: yet certainly thou must needes come [...]ehinde them in that supernaturall knowledge, which is gotten by reuelatiō from God, bevond the reach of art, and nature. [Page 250] Let vs then make one labour of two; and in shew­ing the truth of that, which our Euangelist sayth par­ticularly, touching the Iewes, that they acknowledged not the light, proue withall the generall ignoraunce, and insufficiency of all men to comprehend that secret mysterie. First, that wee may knowe what to looke for afterwarde, the Prophets foretell vs, how the matter would fall out. Lord (sayeth Isay) who hath beleeued our report? or to whome is the Arme of the Lorde re­uealed? Isay. 53. 1.

And in another place, he brings in our Sauiour him­selfe, complaying of the ill successe of his ministery. I haue laboured in vaine, I haue spent my strength in vaine. & 494. and for nothing. Yea the builders, the great learned men among the Iewes, refused the headstone of the corner, saith Psal. 118. 22. another Prophet. As it was prohesied, so it came to passe. Let themselues giue euidence. When the Mes­siah was come, and had prooued his calling by many admirable, and glorious miracles, and had offred them saluation with all kindness, and authoritie, what insu­ed? Heare them speaking in a Councill. Doth any of the Rulers or the Pharises beleeue in him? Some of the Ioh. 7. 48. common sort flockt after him, but the great men, and Rabbins regarded him not: or if any of them had any better conceite of him, then the rest, hee durst not be knowne of it; but (as it appeared by Nicodemus) was & 3. 1. 2. glad to steale into his company in the darke night. Nay it was not enoughe for them to reiect him, but they persecuted him, and all that fauoured him, accoun­ting & 7. 49. & 9. 34. & 12. 10. 11. & 19. 12. of them as of men accrsed; casting them out of their Synagogues, seeking to make them away, and accusing them as enemies to Caesar, as they beganne to charge Pilat himselfe, for speaking in his behalfe. Nei­ther stayed their malice here, but proceeded without ende, or rest till they had murdered the Lorde of life, A [...] 3 14. 15. with all the disgrace, that possibly they could do him. [Page 251] I doe now but point at these thinges: which, if it please God, shall hereafter bee handled at large. This may suffice; especially the time being past, and occasion of the like discourse offring it selfe often times in this Gos­pell, to shewe with what obstinate blindnesse our Sauiour was withstood, and reiected by the Iewes, and to teach vs, what intertainement wee are like to giue him, if wee bee not other wise taught and in­clined by his holy spirit. To whome with the Father, and the Sonne, one God bee all glorie, &c,

IF there were as much vnderstan­ding, and iudgement in men, to conceiue, and discerne matters of religion, and saluation, as euery one of vs would bee thought to haue; it were inough for vs to haue the doctrine of euerlasting life, by any meanes whatsoeuer propounded vnto vs. For no sooner should any point thereof bee deliuered, but wee should be readie to ac­knowledge, and embrace it. But alas, wee are wonder­fully deceiued in this conceit of our naturall capacity. Which is so slowe, and dull, in things of this nature, that we can neither find them out of our selues, by any dis­course of reason, nor giue aslent to the truth of them, [Page 253] when they are reuealed, and manifested, by especiall order from God himselfe. For proofe of that I say, whither should I appeale rather, then ro euery mans experience, touching the former points, both in him­selfe, and in the whole nation of the Iewes? Which of vs would euer haue thought of any one of those myste­ries, if hee had not read, or heard of them extraordina­rily? Now they are discouered vnto vs, where is there any man to bee found, that, by any naturall skill, or help of learning, can discerne, and yeeld to them, as ture, and certaine? The reasons of this impossibilitie to beleeue, shall be shewed, if it please God, hereafter: for the present I doe but giue a touch, that wee may all consider of it, at better leasure. The darknesse did not Ioh. 1. 5. comprehend the light, when it shone most brightly. Our Sauiour taught them with authoritie, not like the Scribes & Mat. 7. 29. Pharises: Yet did they not regard his doctrine. Hee wrought many admirable miracles among them: Yet would they not acknowledge, that hee came from God. At the least they should haue respected the testi­monie of Iohn, a man of such account, & worth in their owne iudgement. But all was one with them; and no­thing of force sufficient, to bring them to an acknow­ledgement of the light. What remedy then, but to leaue them in their blindnes, and in theirs to see our owne, that we may be so much the more carefull to heed and learne, what the Euangelist doth teach vs in this Gospell.

Where hauing, in the fiue former verses, described the Messiah, of whom hee writes, by his diuine nature, and his office of mediation, hee proceeds to second that, hee hath deliuered, with the testimonie of Iohn; and there vpon takes occasion to inlarge some of the points, that before hee had propounded, and to ampli­fie the benifits wee receiue by our Sauiour, more ful­ly, and plainely. In the former part, concerning the [Page 254] witnesse of Iohn, first wee are to consider the partie as hee is described to vs in the three verses, I read. Se­condly, to waigh his testimony; which is implyed, ra­ther then exprest in the two later: Hee came to beare witnesse of the light. The description is partly of his per­son, verse 6, & partly of his office, ver. 7. 8. To the know­ledge of his person there belong these two thinges; his nature, and his name. By nature hee was a man; but yet not after the ordinarie course of mankinde, but after an ex­traordinary sort, by a special work of God, who sent him as well in reguard of his person, as of his office. Which office of his is first plainely declared, verse 7, then some what amplified, verse 7. 8. The declaration is general: He came for a witnesse. Particular: To beare witnesse of the light. In the description of the person; touching his na­ture, I note two points; that He was a man; that He was sent from God. In the former, wee are to examine the wordes, whether the former of the two was, imply any especial matter or no, why the Euangelist mentions, that He was a man. Then must wee say somewhat of the sense intended by Saint Iohn. For the later point, of his being sent, we will in quire, who sent him; God; the diuine na­ture, or some one of the persons. How he was sent: by an extraordinarie conception; by an especiall appoint­ment, either by some vision, or by reuelation. Touching his name, wee are to learne, what the signification of it is, why the Euangelist doth mention it.

Other reasons, whereby wee proue any matter in question, haue their force, and power to argue, such as it is, more or lesse, from their owne nature; onely a Testimonie fetcheth all the waight it hath, from the credite, or authoritie of him, that giues it. So that where as in ordinarie proofes wee regard what is sayde, rather then who sayth it; in this witnesse bearing, the man is first respected, and then the matter. Our Euan­gelist therefore, being to alleage the deposition of Iohn [Page 255] the Baptist, beginnes with a discription of his person; There was a man Where, by the manner of the Euange­lists Cyril in Ita. lib. 1. cap. 7. speech, There was, some think an especial difference betwixt our Sauiour, and him, is noted; as if the very [...]. Erat. Fu­it. word did note the eternitie of the one, and the begin­ning of the other. We heard of the like curious obserua­tiō before, at the first verse, In the beginning was the word: But it appeared to haue more shew then substance. The diuersitie in that place was to bee drawn from the tense, or time of the Verb, wheras in the originall Greek there is no such varietie; and in the Latine, vpon which many ground, no certainty for the proofe of such a difference, either in the nature, or vse of the two wordes, as I then shewed more at large. Heere there seemes to bee more aduantage; because Saint Iohn vseth another worde, and that such a word, as indeede is neuer applyed but [...] to those things, which haue some beginning of their be­ing. Yet may wee not thereupon conclude that where­soeuer wee finde the worde, there such a difference is implyed, or noted. For it is verie cleare, that it may and must bereferred to that which followes, touching his Chrysost. in Io [...]. hom. 5. being sent; There was a man sent, not There was a man; but, was sent. So haue wee the worde vsed in other pla­ces; Iohn was baptizing in the Wildernesse. Where Mar. 1 4 wee may not seuer was, from baptizing: The sense being no more, but (as it is well translated in Eng­lish) Iohn did baptize or baptized. And there was a & 9. 7. Cloude that shaddowed them. There may seeme to bee more reason in this text, to part the wordes; but the Greeke will not beare, it, which is worde for worde, There was a Cloude shaddowinge them; [...] that is a Cloude shaddowed them. But let vs graunt (which is not ture) that the worde signifies a begin­ning; yet not simply a beginning, but onely of that, which is so spokē of. So that the beginning must belong not to his being absolutely, but his being sent. So saith [Page 256] our Euangelist afterward, The Word became flesh: not be­gan [...] to bee, as if before it had not beene at all, but onely became flesh.

I am not afrayd therefore of being accused, to haue omitted something, which the holy Ghost intended to teach vs, though I say nothing of that difference be­twixt Christ, and Iohn concerning the eternall being of the one, and the others beginning to bee in time. Neither doe I see any necessitie the of expounding the worde, as some other men take it, to note the extraor­dinarie conception, and eduction of the Baptist; which either are not toucht by our Euangelist: or if they bee, are to be deliuered in that point, of his sending. As for the word was, I hope I haue made it plaine, that it be­longs to his being sent, and hath no especiall significa­tion by it selfe.

The like (in my poore opinion) may truely be sayd of the other word Man, that it is indefinitly taken for One, as wee commonly speak in English: There was one sent. Of the likelihood of this interpretation, by and by, it first you will giue mee leaue, to speake a word or two of that, which is generally conceiued by it. Which is, that by Man, the nature of Iohn is signified. To what ende? partly that the former difference, betwixt Christ, and him, might bee more exprest: partly that no man might take him for an Angell, though he be so called by Ma­lachy. But neither of these (sauing their better judge­ment, that are of a contrary opinion) seemes to bee a­ny sufficient reason of such an exposition. First the difference they ayme at, is as plaine, and as great, as may be. The one was in the beginning, was with God, was Ioh. 1. 1. 2. Ver. 6. Ver. 4. 5. Ver. 8. God. The other was sent by God, and no farther matter a­uoucht of him. The one had life in him, and was the light of men. The other was not the light, but came to beare witnes of the light Secondly, the auouching of him to bee a man, doth not expresse that difference. For our Saui­our [Page 257] was also a man, as truely, and naturally as he. The worde became flesh. As by a man came death, so by a man Ver. 14. 1. Cor. 15. 20. came the resurrection from the dead; yea hee is called the man, whom God appointed to iudge the world by. If Act. 17. 31. you say Christ is not onely a man: neither doth the E­uangelist a affirme any such thing of Iohn, by that word; There was a man. Thirdly, who tooke Iohn, to be any other, then a man? The Iewes indeed (many of them) helde him for a Prophet; but none of them euer de­nied Ioh. 1. 21. him to bee a man. Therefore also the second respect, in which hee is called a man, is not much to Mat. 21. 26. bee respected. The Prophet Malachy (you say) calls Mal. 3. 1. him an Angell. Behold I send mine Angell before thy face. What of that? Was it therefore to bee feared, that some men woulde thinke him to bee an Angell by nature? Neither doth Malachy so say; but rather shewes, that hee speakes of his office, because hee giues the same title to the Messiah, though with an additon, The Angell of the Couenant: and who but those, that beleeued the Gospell, acknowledged Iohn to bee he of whome that was written by the Prophet; Besides, his parents and kindred were well knowne, and his birth was extraordinarily famous; yea the whole course of his life, his preaching, and his death, were matters common­ly talkt of among the Iewes.

There was little reason then, why the Euangelist should giue any especiall notice of his nature, in eithe [...] of the respects aboue mentioned. It is more likely (as I noted before) that he vsed the worde in a generall sense [...] as we doe, when we say, There was a man, or there was one. That we may the rather be perswaded hereof, let vs con sider the like vse of the worde, in other places, of the scripture. Man liueth not by bread only. Which we would Mat. 4 4. & 12. 20. Luke 2. 25. thus expresse in our tongue. A man, or one liueth not. There was a man, which had his hand dried vp. There was a man in Ierusalem. And this manner of speech is very vsuall, in the [Page 258] beginning of an historie, or parable. There was a man 1. Sa [...]. 1. 1. [...] 1 S [...]n 9. 1. of the two Ram [...]thaim Zophim. Where, in the Greeke, [...] be very word [...] that our Euangelist here vseth. So of Sauls father. There was a man of Beniamin. The new Testament is full of the like examples: some of them wee heard before; a few more will suffice. There Ioh. 5. 5. & 2. 1. was a m [...] there, saith our Euangelist, speaking of the poole at [...]ethesda. There was a man, one of the Pha­ [...]ises; A [...] 5. 1. & 10. 1. A certaine man named Ananias: There was a certaine man in Caesarea I m [...]ght rehearse many more of the same kinde; but these are more then enow: and by this (I thinke) wee haue sufficient warrant to conclude, that the holy Ghost, in this History of Iohn, speakes, as hee doth ordinarily, in other places of the like kinde; without any intent to signifie his nature, of whom he speakes; and this is the simplest, and Plai­nest interpretation of these former words.

The later, Sent from God, offer these two things to our consideration; who sent: what this sending was. What needs any question of the former? may some man say. Doth not the Euangelist speake plaine enough, and tell vs, that God, was the sender? Hee was sent from God. But we learned in the beginning of this Gospell, that the worde God, somtimes signified the diuine nature, which is but one and the same in all three, persons, sometimes some one of them. And we haue here the more reason to make this inquirie, because one of the persons, namely the second, is he, of whome Iohn was to witnes. Not to vse more words then neede, wee are directed by Iohn himselfe to vnderstand this of GOD the Father. This I prooue by this our Euangelist, in this present chapter; where he reports part of the Baprists tesimo­nie, touching our Sauiour, in this sort; He that sent mee to baptize with water, he said vnto me, vpon whom thou Ioh. 1. 33. shalt see the spirit come downe, and tarry still on him, that is hee, which baptizeth with the holy Ghost. Who is this, that [Page 259] sent Iohn to baptize? Not the diuine nature. For he is distinguisht from the Sonne, and the holy Ghost; who can it be then, but the Father? God the father gaue Iohn a token whereby he should know the Sonne, that was the Messiah; the comming downe of the holy Ghost, and his abiding on him. S. Mathew sets out the point, as di­stinctly. The second Person is in the water, newly bapti­zed, the third sits vpon him in the likenes of a Doue, the first proclaimes him from heauen. This is that my Sonne, Mat. 3. 17. that beloued one, in whome I am well pleased. As if hee should in plaine tearmes haue said to Iohn. This is hee, of whome I sent thee to beare witness. The like di­stinction, for the Father, and the Sonne, wee haue in Saint Luke; where Zachary the father of Iohn, prophe­cying Luke 1. 76. of his sonne, sayeth, that hee shall be called the Pro­phet of the most high, namely of God the Father; as it appeares by the speech of the Angell Gabriell to the virgin Mary: Hee shall be called the Sonne of the most verse. 32. high. Then followes Iohns office, Thou shalt go before the face of the Lord; namely the Lord Iesus, for whome Iohn prepared the way.

But how did God the Father send him? Surely hee may well bee said to haue bin sent, in regard both of his person, and of his office. His person (as it is wel knowne, I will but point at the particulars) was after an extra­ordinarie manner from GOD; as I saac was giuen to Gen. 18. 10. Abraham, and Sarah, by him. His father, and mo­ther were both striken image, and she also barren; in­somuch, Luke 1. 7. that when shee was conceiued with childe, contrarie to her expectation, and beyond all likelihood; and naturall possibilitie, shee, hid her selfe fiue mone­thes, till shee might bee more sure of that, which to Ver. 24. 36. many would seeme vnpossible, and to take away too much occasion of speech, from the common sort. For his office, it was assigned him by GOD; and notice also of that Assig [...]ment giuen to his [Page 260] father, before the child was conceiued. Hee shall goe before him (saith the Angell) in the spirit and power of Elias. Neither was he only thus foreappointed for this excel­ [...]ent office; but when the time came, that hee should en­ter vpon it, he receiued a speciall commission, and war­rant from God, for the execution thereof, The worde Luke. 3. 1. 2. of God came to Iohn the sonne of Zacharias, in the wil­dernesse. It is to no purpose, to spend time, in seeking how this worde came; whether by any inward mo­tion of the spirit onely, or by some outward vision al­so; wee may safely be ignorant of such matters, hath not pleased the holy Ghost to reueale in the scrip­tures: yet if wee may lawfully ghesse, it seemes most likely, that it was without any such outward shew; because the Euangelist makes no mention of it, in setting downe the History. This last sending onely, is thought by some to bee signified in this place. If they had said no more but chiefly, I should ensily haue assented to them: Now they say onely, I doubt whe­ther they haue any sufficient warrant, so to restraine the holy Ghosts words, or no; and therefore thinke it most conuenient, to allow them as large an extent, as they will reasonably beare.

You looke perhaps, that I should now proceede to deliuer the Enangelists meaning, and accordingly to adde such proofe. and exhortation, as may helpe vs for­ward in the embracing of the Gospell. But I thinke it fittest to forbeare that, for a time, till I haue expoun­ded the other part of the verse. that I may take all to­gether. It followeth then to speake of the name, and why the Euangelst records it. The name as it soundeth in our language, hath little resemblance of the originall, whence it commeth. Which if any man thinke a fault, let him take heede that he doe not rashly condemne the ho­ly Ghost, who in the Greeke hath had small care to ex­presse the Hebrew sounds; following continually the [Page 261] custome, howsoeuer not answering the originall tongue. Shall I need to bring any particulars for proofe of that I say? Looke ouer the new Testament, and whereso­euer you finde the name of any Prophet, where the Greeke differs from the Hebrew, you haue an example of that, which I affirme. Begin with Moses if you will, and so goe forward to Malachy: You shall finde, that the holy Ghost keepes one, and the same course, in naming of them, without respect of their signifi­cations, or sounds. The reason of this is, that the par­ties were wel known to the Iewes by those names, accor­ding as the 72. Interpreters had translated them, after the manner of the Greeke tongue. Other languages Except perhaps the Flem [...]sh. by the same warrant, haue iustly taken the same liberty, and not doubted (as they needed not) to fit the He. brew, and Greeke names to the fashion of their seuerall tongues: So that if any man shall either curiously affect, or superstitiously obserue the nature, and sound of those names, which they haue in the originall, he shall not fol­low therin the direction and practise of the holy Ghost, but his owne conceit, and perswasion. Doe I then say, it is vnlawfull to note the sounds of such names, that their interpretations may be knowne? Nothing lesse. But as the Iewes, in the old Testament, haue some thousands of 8000. words, which they vse for expounding the other in the text (whether by their own direction, or by the direction of the spirit of God, as some thinke, I will not dispute) which yet they place in the margin of their bookes; So perhaps it were not vnfit to set these Hebrew and Greek names in the side, following in the scripture it selfe the ordinarie course, which the Lord vseth, to frame the words, according to the nature of the tongue, in which he writes. How far then ought we al to be from condem­ning one another, either of ignorance, or carelesness, for not following the sounds of the originall languages? But I will not presse this too much, till I haue some farder [Page 262] occasion giuen me, in the expounding of this Gospell.

Yet, howsoeuer I see no necessitie, nor conuenience for any such strictness in translating proper names; I de­ny not, that it is fit, and needfull to vnderstand their significations; especially in such of them, as were pur­posely giuen by direction from God himselfe, For they haue alwaies some instruction, ioined with them, concer­ning somwhat that is past; as Isack of sarah [...] laughing, Gen. 18. 12. & 17. 19. or touching some action, or office to bee performed, or some fauour that hee particularly intends. Of the later kinde is this name Iohn, whereby the Lord would haue his people the Iewes to know, and consider, that hee would now visit, and redeeme them, as Zacharie pro­phecied, at the circumcising of him. The name signi­fieth as it were grace, and fauour, which God vouchsa­fed the people, by sending first this second Eliah, to prepare the way of the Lord, and then the Messiah him­felfe, to performe the worke of redemption. This gra­cious mercy of God. Iohn was appointed to preach and publish; extraordinarily called as to that office, so by that name, the end that men might looke for some ex­traordinarie matter of fauour by his ministerie. This vse both the Iewes then, and wee now are to make of the name; not as if it had bin appointed vpon any humour, but as intending a help to that preparation, which was to follow.

This was one reason, why it seemed good to the holy Ghost, that our Euangelist should set downe his name; that with the report of his being sent from God, the na­ture of his message might, in a generall sort, be concei­ued. Especially, if we remember withall, as we cannot almost chuse but doe, that the name was enioined before his conception. by order from God himselfe. Doth the Euangelist tell me, that his name was Iohn? Surely though he writ not the historie at large, yet he would haue mee consider, that his name was of Gods appointing & there­fore [Page 263] of some extraodinarie signification, & vse; that wee may enter into such a consideration of him, as they did, that dwelling neer to his father, heard how matters had passed at his birth, concerning this name. They laid vp those things in their hearts (saith Saint Luke) saying what Luke 1. 66. manner of child shall this bee? If the like should be done in this our time, it would fill all mens mouthes, and eares, though they found it did little, or nothing cōcerne them. And shall we passe ouer, without due regard, a thing, that doth so much import vs? Will neither the significa­tion of the worde, so sweet, and comfortable, delight vs? nor the manner of imposing the name, so extraordina­rie, and wonderfull, stirre vs vp to consider it? nor the au­toritie of him, that appointed it, cause vs to aduise better of it? Let vs take heed, that this carelesnes be not a shreud signe, that we little esteeme the grace it selfe, which the name shadoweth out vnto vs. The last reason why the name is mentioned, is the nature of the writing: which beeing an Historie, requireth that the names. at the least of all principall men in it, should bee recorded. This course our Euangelist heere followes, the rather, that all men may certainly know, whom hee meanes, this description.

What remaines, the words being expounded, but to deliuer the meaning of the Euangelist? which can not well be done, till wee vnderstand, what his purpose is, in that hee sayth. Now of that, there are diuers opini­ons, all reasonable, and of some likelihood. Wee may draw them to these heads; the course of the historie, and the amplifying of the matter, that concernes our Saui­our Christ. They that referre it to the course of the Histo­rie, say no more of it, but that the Euangelist, hauing spoken of our Sauiours diuine nature in the former Chrysost. in Ioa. hom. 4. August. in Ioa. tract. 2. Theophil. in Ioa. verses and beeing to speake of his humane afterward, interlaceth this discourse of Iohn, who was appointed to bee as it were his vsher, and did preach of him, [Page 264] before the manifestation of him to the world. But this seemes be som what too slight an occasion of this dis­course; especially seeing the Euangelist speakes so much of Iohn, after the report of our Sauiours incarnation, [...] 1. 15. 15. &c. & 3. 27. 28. &c. both in this, and the third Chapter; and that the other three had deliuered those matters at large, that concerne the birth and ministerie of Iohn. Neither is that coniec­ture Masculas ad [...] locum. more likely, which imagins, that therefore men­tion is here made of Iohn, because the Messiah began not to bee knowne, till the time that Iohn baptized. What worde hath the Euangelist of Iohns baptizing? It is cleere, that hee passed it ouer without any touch, till hee came almost to the end of the third Ioh. 3. 23. Chapter. Yet if he spake any thing in those verses of our Sauiours beeing famous, there might bee some place perhaps for that couecture: But since hee doth not, I see no great likelihood to approue thereof; cheefely, when there are other opinions, of more probabilitie.

The former whereof, will haue this brought in, as a Aegid. Henni [...] [...] bunc locum. comparison of the lesse; where by the excellencie of our Sauiours person is set out, in that hee is preserred be­fore Iohn Baptist. For, such, and so great was the opi­nion, which the Iewes had of Iohn that hee must needs be a man of extraordinarie worth, to whom Iohn should Luke 1. 66. be thought inferior. Wee heard erewhile, that some great matters were lookt for of him, when hee was newly borne: What manner of child shall this bee? When Mat. 3. 5. 6. hee began to exercise his ministerie, There went out to him Ierusalem, and all Indea, and all the region round a­bout Iordan. Neither went they out onely, but sub­mitted themselues to bee taught, and baptized by him; Ver. 7. and that not without consossing their sinnes. What speak I of the common sort? Many of their great Doctors, Pha­rises, Ioh. 1. 19. 20. and Sadduces, were glad to receiue baptisme at his hands. Yea the rules of the lewes. sem an embassage [Page 265] to him of no meane men, Priests and Leuites, being Pha­rises, as it were being ready and in a manner offring to acknowledge him for the Messiah. Iudge then what reconing hee must bee of among the Iewes, that was of greater dignitie, and excellencie, then a man of such estimation, as Iohn the Baptist. Surely I can not easily discerne, what could be written more to the com­mendation and honor of CHRIST, after the former points of his diuine nature, and mediatorship, then this comparison, by which hee is magnified aboue Iohn And there fore wee may well allow this exposition a place amongst them, that are best to bee liked. Which Iam the willinger to doe, because it agreeth also, with an other, that is of good likelihood. I shewed euen Rollochus ad hunc locum. now, that the Iewes generally, rulers and people, had no small opinion of Iohn Baptist. This perhaps might preiudice our Sauiour CHRIST, as wee see it did, with the disciples of Iohn; who came to their mai­ster, and complained of CHRIST, that he had tooke Ioh. 3. 26. vpon him to baptize, and was followed by all men. To take away this doubt, it is thought by some, that our Euangelist brings in this discourse, wherein he makes Iohn inferior to Christ; and (as it may seeme) not without neede, because (ordinarily) he that comes to Chrysost. in Ioan. hom. 4. beare witnes of any mans credit, or autority, is of grea­ter, or as grear reputation, as himselfe.

These might bee some reasons, why our Euangelist makes mention of Iohn but (me thinkes) it may farder bee added, that hee doth apply this testimonie to the confirmation of that he had formerly deliuered, con­cerning our Sauiours being the light. Therefore saith he in particular, that Iohn came to beare witnes of the light, not onely to testifie that our Sauiour was the Mes­saih. Not, withstanding; I would not haue any man think, it is my meaning to restraine the testimony of Iohn to this particular of the light, where of hee makes no especiall [Page 266] mention by any record of this, or the other Euangelists: but this I say, that therefore this witnes of Iohn is alled­ged, because the Iewes hauing so high a conceit of Iohn, could not reasonably choose, but be extraordinarily well perswaded of him, for his power to inlighten the world, whom Iohn their famous Prophet preferred, in all his Sermons, so farre before himselfe. Iohn was as the day. sfarre, whose appearance giues notice of the sunnes ap­proach. Hee is a light, that brings the dawning of the day: but hee is not that light, which shines to the in­lightning of the world, as the sunne doth; who is truly, and properly called the light of the world. I had ra­ther therefore take this place, as a testimonie of Christ by Iohn, then as a comparison betwixt him, and Iohn. As if our Euangelist, should haue said; That which I haue auouched of him, whome wee set before you, to bee be­leeued in, as the Messiah, is no more, then was affir­med by no meane man, Iohn the Baptist sent from God to beare witnesse of him, that from him onely, life, and light was to bee receiued. Hee came to beare witnesse of the light, that all men, through him might beleeue. He was not the light, but the forerunner of the light, to shew the comming of it.

Thus then is the Euangelist to be vnderstood, that in this verse, and the two next, he confirmes that, which he from the beginning had affirmed, that our Sauiour, of whom hee writes this Gospell, was the Messiah, His autoritie was sufficient, as being the worde of an Apostle: but that all excuse might be taken away from peruerse & vnbeleeuing mē, he addes the testimonie of one, whose memory, when Iohn penned this history, was fresh, and famous; yea of such account amongst al, that knew him, by their owne experience, or report of others, that hee must needes bee held to bee very vnciuill, in the opi­nion of ordinarie men, and impious in the iudge­ment of as many, as were religious, that would call [Page 267] the credit of his testimonie into question: as if hee would haue spoken either rashly of that, hee knew not, or deceitfully against his knowledge; Hee was sent from GOD. Can you suspect him of falshood, whom God imploies in witnessing the truth? Can you require more Autoritie in any man, then to haue him sent from God? With what other commission did euer any of the Prophets come? If he send them, we are bound to heare them. If he giue them instructions, they need no farder teaching.

How can this be, saith one, that his sending from God should autorize him to speake, what he list, and enjoyne vs to beleeue whatsoeuer he speakes? Are not our mini­sters now adaies sent from God? Are we tyed to like o­bedience? what is this els, but to make men Lords of our faith; Why haue wee renounced Popery; if wee haue changed not our estate, but our maisters onely? Were we not better to rest vpon the faith of the church in generall, then to subiect our selues to euery particular mans autoritie, by giuing credit to euery point, hee de­liuers? This complaint will easily bee satisfied, if wee rightly informe our selues, concerning the diffe­rence of sending. All true Ministers are sent by, or from GOD; but not all alike: Some imediately, with­out the ordinary ministerie of men; MOSES, and all the Prophets, and Apostles: Some by the iudge­ment, and discretion of men, according to warrant giuen by GOD, in the Scriptures, to that pur­pose. The former haue, as their calling, so their direction from GOD, that sends them, in such sort, that they cannot erre, or stray from their commission. The later, as they get the knowledge of that, they are to teach, not by reuelation of God to them, but by their prayer to God, and study in the scriptures: So they haue no further assurance of being preserued from errour, then as they faithfully indeauour to perfect their [Page 268] knowledge by the same meanes, whereby they attained to the beginnings thereof. So it comes often to passe, by our want of zeale, and faith in prayer, by our neg­ligence in studie, and by our naturall dulness to conceiue, that wee mistake the matters, whereof wee labour to informe our selues, and other. I say nothing of our corrupt affections, by which wee are somtimes drawne away from seeing that, wee see, and driuen to speake that, wee would haue true, not that wee know to be true; of which passions, in regard of the e­uent, men so especially guided by the spirit of God, as the Prophets, and Apostles were, are wholly freed.

As for our witnes Iohn Baptist, what could there bee extraordinarie, in any mans sending, that was wan­ting in his? Doe not put me to repeat that, I deliuered before of his birth, bringing vp, and calling. Onely take, for your better satisfaction, the prophecies of him, and the performance of them, witnessed in the scrip­ture. A voice cryeth in the wildernes (saith the Pro­phet Esay) Prepare yee the way of the Lord; make Isai 40. 3. straight his pathes. Malachy speakes somwhat more Mal. 3. 1. plaine. Behold I will send my messenger, and he shall pre­pare the way before mee. What voice; what messenger was this? Let S. Mathew shew vs? This is hee (viz. Iohn Mat. 3. 3. Baptist) of whom it is spoken by the Prophet Isaias, saying, The voice of him, that cryeth in the wildernes, &c. The like hath S. Marke, who begins his Gospell with the te­stimonie Mark 1. 2. of Malachy, the last of the Prophets, and ap­plies it to Iohn. Behold I send my messenger, &c. S. Luke al­so Luke 3. 4. beares witnes to the same truth: & that the ioint con­sent of al the 4. may be seene; our Euangelist S. Iohn re­porteth the same thing, from the mouth of Iohn Baptist himselfe; who being asked, by the Priests & Leuites sent from the Iewes, what he said of himselfe, answered I am Ioh. 1. 23. the voice of him, that cryeth in the wildernes, Make straight the way of the Lord. If there bee any man, whome [Page 269] this colud of witnesses cannot perswade, though hee deserue not any farder instruction; yet let him hear­ken to our Sauiour; affirming that this Iohn was that Elias, of whom Malachy prophesied, saying, Behold Mal. 4. 5. I will send you Elias the Prophet, before the comming of the great, and fearefull day of the Lord. If ye will receiue Mat. 11. 14. it (saith Christ) This is Elias which was to come. So had the Angell Gabriell prophecied of him before, to his father Zacharie. Hee shall goe before him (Christ) in the spirit, and power of Elias. There can possibly bee no doubt then, but that hee, which was in such extraordi­narie sort, sent from GOD, both could, and would testifie, according to the truth, hee had receiued by reuelation from him, who imploied him in so wor­thy a seruice.

Is it not strange then, yea almost more then incredible, that the Iewes, for whose sake principally, if not only a messenger of such credit, and authoritie, was sent, should so distast the chiefe point, and the very substance of his Message? I intend not to make any long discourse of the matter, because I shall haue more iust occasion thereof at the 11. verse: Yet I can not paste it ouer wholly in silence. At his circumcision, all that heard Luke 1. 60. Ver. 63. Ver. 64. what had happened; that his mother against the liking of her kinred, and freinds, would needs haue him na­med Iohn, that his father tooke writing tables, and set downe the same name, that therevpon he was restored to the vse of his speech, hauing bin dumbe at the least 9. or 10. monethes; all I say that heard these things were striken with feare, and wonder, saving one to another; What manner of Child shall this be? Now the time was come, that they might cast off that feare, and satisfie themselues, concerning that their wondring. He was growne to mans estate, hee betooke himselfe to the worke of his calling; hee perswaded, and exhorted all men to repent; he shewed them the Messiah; he spake [Page 270] plainely of him, as no prophet euer could, that no man could doubt, whom he meant. Behold the Lambe of God. Ioh. 1. 29. What could they desire more? If the autoritie of the speaker might preuaile with them; All men held Iohn Mat. 21. 26. for a Prophet. If the warrant of his Doctrine were lookt for; the people were generally of opinion, that hee had it from heauen: So that the Pharises & Scribes, durst not say the contrary, for feare of the multitude. What then? Did hee speake obscurely, and darkely, after the manner of prophecies? Hee pointed to the person with his finger. This is hee, of whome I said, After mee commeth a man which is preferred be­fore Ioh 1, 30. me. Hee declared his office in plaine words. Be­hold the Lambe of God, that taketh away the sinnes of Ver. 29. the world. I may well take vp the complaint of the Prophet I say against this people in the like case: What Isai. 5. 4. could the Lord haue done more for them, then he did? Iohn Baptist came neither eating nor drinking, but leading so austere a life, that the very Heathen were moued with reuerence toward him. Herod feared Iohn, know­ing Mark 6. 20. that hee was a iust man, and an holy, and reuerenced him; and when he heard him, did many things, and heard him gladly: But it was a small matter for the Iewes to make little accompt of Herods iudgement, concerning the Baptist; it was much they should not beleeue a man, whom they thought to be sent from God.

Especially considering the end of his sending, which Verse 7. wee haue set downe in these two next verses; The same came for a witnes, to beare witnesse of the light, &c. In the former whereof wee are first to speake of his office, both in the generall, that he came for a witnes, and in the particular, that hee was to beare witness of the light. Se­condly, we must consider the amplification of this his of­fice, by the end; That all men through him might beleeue: and in the next verse, by a deniall of the contrarie there­to, he was not the light; and a repetition of the office, but was [Page 271] sent to beare witnes of the light. In the first part, there is no neede of any long exposition of the words, they are so plaine: onely somwhat must be said of the last of them, a witnes. The Greeke worde doth not signifie a partie that is to bee witnes, but rather the testimonie it selfe, [...] which hee must giue. Therefore our Rhemists take aduantage to make the text as hard, and vnpleasant, as they can. Hee came for testimonie, say they. For te­stimonie? What English should a man pick out of such a strange kinde of speech? Surely if any thing can reasonably bee made of it, wee must vnderstand Te­stimonie for testimoniall; as if the Euangelist had meant to tell vs, that Iohns comming was for testimoniall. But hee had no such thought. For hee came not to haue any testimony of this, or that from other men, but to giue testimonie himselfe to other. So that neither the worde testimonie may bee put for testimoniall; nor if it might, could it serue to expresse Saint Iohns mea­ning. Which is nothing else, but that the Baptist came to beare, or giue witnes. The phrase is some­what diuers in the two clauses: but the sense is abso­lutely one, and the same. May wee then so expound our Popish translation of the Rhemists? This man (say they) came for testimonie; that is, to giue testimony. In­deede, that is the thing that our Euangelist would haue vs know: but the English will not beare it; For testimo­nie, For to giue testimonie: But such strange, and new language, may suite with their strange, and new Re­ligion: English eares mislike the manner of their speech, as Christian hearts doe the points of their do­ctrine. Wee commonly translate the words, for a wit­nes; fitly in regard of the sense, and easily for all mens [...] In testimonium. vnderstanding: This same came for a witnes; that is, This man, who I said was sent from God, came to bee a witness. The Euangelists manner of speech is not fully deliuered: who according to the custome of the tongue hee writ in, [Page 272] saith, worde for word, he came to testimonie, namely to giue testimonie; which the Latin also followes, though that language doe scarce beare it so well, as the Greeke doth. To draw into English such kinde of phrases is not to inrich the tongue, but to corrupt it. Wee haue no way to expresse the Euangelists speech and meaning in English, but to say, To giue or beare testi­monie, or witness.

This was then the office of Iohn Baptist, To be a wit­ness. Now the vse of witnesses is, for the confirmation of some truth, or for manifestation of it. For where there is no doubt, nor question; howsoeuer perhaps in forme of Lawe, there may bee witnesses required: yet indeede there needes none. Where there is neede of them, there the matter is not plaine in it selfe, or at the least not acknowledged to bee true. So that the point, for which Iohns testimonie is to bee had, hath of its owne nature, or by the ignorance, or peruerseness of men, somthing not cleere, or not confest. What if it haue? Could not God haue made it manifest, by some testimonie, from himselfe, without such an extraordi­narie course ossending a witnes, as it were downe from heauen? Yes out of doubt. He, that made the vnderstan­ding of man, can make man vnderstand what pleaseth him. He, that framed the heart, can perswade, and in­cline it, to what himselfe list. But all such courses of re­uelation from God, were as extraordinarie as such a kind of birth and message; and both the one and the other little enough in this case: as the euent shewed. For al­though the Lord testified of his sonne, by his owne voice from heauen, and by Iohn vpon earth, yet was he scarce­ly acknowledged by any man. As for the work of Gods mighty power in the soules of them, that come to beleefe in Christ, it was not wanting to any of these Iewes, who aduisedly & religiously gaue credit to the testimonie of Iohn the Baptist, or set themselues to consider of it, as they [Page 273] ought to haue done; which if they had done, it was not possible, but they should haue seene, both the loue of God in sending them such worthy meanes of instructi­on, and the truth of that, which Iohn deliuered by com­mission from him. Doost thou wonder at the blindnes, and frowardnes of the Iewes, whome the testimony of a man (in their owne iudgement) not to bee excepted a­gainst, could not moue to beleeue? View thy self in this glasse. and consider whether more witnesses, acknow­ledged by thee to be sent from God, & to speake accor­ding to the truth of God, be not of as small credit with thee, in many points, wherein thy obedience is requi­red.

But of this, more anone, when wee haue a little better examined, of what kinde, this testimony of Iohn was. That he might beare witnesse of the light. The words haue beene all expounded already: in the matter there are these two thinges to bee considered; what manner of testimony it was, that Iohn gaue; what it was that he te­stified. A testimony, as all men knowe, is ordinarily gi­uen by word of mouth: wherein some matter in questi­on is either affirmed, or denied; and they, that giue these testimonies, are called witnesses. Amongst Christians there is another kinde of witnesses, tearmed Martyrs by the Greeke name: which is common to all, that te­stifie any thing, especially in matters of Law, and iudge­ment. The same word is heere vsed, to signifie the wit­nesse, that Iohn bare. Those, whome wee call Martyrs, are such, as, by their death, beare witnesse to some truth of God, reuealed in his word; suffering themselues to bee tormented, and murthered, rather then they will denie, or not confesse a knowne truth of God, when they are lawfully demanded of it. Such was Stephen, and so is hee called by Paul; When the bloud of thy Act 22. 20, Martyr Stephen was shed. The same title is giuen Reuel. 2. 13. to Antipas, whome our Sauiour calles his Martyr, [Page 274] when Antipas my faithfull Martyr was staine among you. For this cause Christ himselfe is named a Martyr: from Iesus Christ which is a faithfull Martyr or witnesse; and the first begotten of the dead. As for Iohn, who knowes not that hee was put to death by Herod, for dooing his dutie, in witnessing a trueth of GOD? Yet hee is not thought to bee any of the Martyrs, that giue witnesse by their death; because it is com­monly helde, that the dying for no trueth makes a Martyr, vnlesse the trueth concerne somewhat belon­ging to the profession of the Gospell: so that neither I­say, nor any of the Prophets, are properly to be tear­med Martyrs. I will not striue about the point: espe­cially, since I doe but touch this by the way; onely for Iohn, I thinke hee is not properly to bee recko­ned in the number of the Martyrs: not so much, be­cause the matter, for which hee reprooued Herod, did not appertaine, in any particular sort, to the Gospell as for that he was not executed professedly for that, he had sayde, and did constantly mainetaine; but for satis­fying of the Kings promise, and Horodias malice: but whether that bearing witnesse could make him a Mar­tyr, or no, questionlesse it was not that, which our Euan­gelist here speakes of; for it was not any testimonie of the Light.

How then did Iohn beare witnesse? By preaching of Christ; and auowing, that hee was the Messiah orday­ned; and sent for the saluation of them, that would be­leeue in him. This (may some man say) was com­mon to him, with the Prophets (at the least, with ma­ny of them) and with all the Apostles, that succeeded him, who also therefore are called in the scripture by the name of witnesses.

Let vs make that wee say, apparant to all men. First, for them all in generall, Zachary the Father of Iohn Baptist, speaking of our Sauiour, and redemp­tion [Page 275] by him, sayeth that God spake of him, and his comming to that purpose: By the mouth of his holy Pro­phets, Luk. 1. 70. which were since the world beganne. And the A­postle telles vs, that God had promised the sending of his Sonne, afore by his Prophets, in the holy Scriptures. Rom. 1. 2. In particular. I will make choyse of two onely; Isay, and Daniell. Of which the former is ordinarily called the Euangelicall Prophet, as if he had written the Gos­pell in his Prophecie. And that not without cause. For hee hath spoken very plainely of the birth, life, and death of our Sauiour. Concerning his birth, hee noteth that, which was most strange in it; and which, but by reuelation from God, could not possibly bee knowne, or thought on, Behold (sayth hee) a Virgin shal Isay 7. 14. beare a Sonne.

Neither doth hee onely prophecie of his miracu­lous conception; but also hee signifies the great myste­ry of his person, consisting of two natures, diuine, and humane: She shall call his name Emanuell. Which is Mat 1. 23. by interpretation (sayeth Saint Mathewe) God with vs. His life and death is shortly, but verie liuely described, by the same Prophet. Hee shall growe up before him, as I [...]ay. 53. 2. a braunch, and as a roote out of a dry ground, &c. Hee was cut out of the Land of the liuing. Yea, hee addes Ver. 8. to this the maine point of Redemption, forgiuenesse of sinnes by his sufferings, and death. Hee was woun­ded for our transgressions, he was broken for our iniquities, the chast [...]sement of our peace was vpon him, and with his stripes wee are healed. Daniell describes the verie time, Dan. 9. 25. and settes downe an exact computation, by the di­rection of the Angell Gabriell, till the death of the Messiah; and withall preacheth forgiuenesse of sinnes by him. Were not these, witnesses? were they not sent from GOD to beare witnesse of the Mes­siah? What though they were also imployed in o­ther matters of renroofe, and instruction? So was [Page 276] Iohn too, as it is manifest by all the other 3. Euange­lists Mat. 14 3. 4. Mat. 6. 17. 18. Luk. 3. 19. who shew that the occasion of his death, was the re­buking of Heroa, for taking his brother Philips wife. But the Prophets only spake of such an one, that was to come: they did not witnesse, that hee was come; they did not shew which was he; they did nor say Beholde the lamb of God: This is hee, as Iohn did. Therefore is his mi­nistery, in this respect preferr'd far before theirs, by our Sauiour Christs owne iudgement. Iohn was more then a Mat. 11. 9. 11. Prophet: Among them that are begotten of women arose there not a greater then Iohn Baptist.

Well let him haue the name of a witnesse, aboue all the Prophets, that went before him; yet the Apostles, haue that title giuen them by Christ himselfe, aswell as hee; yee shall be witnesses to me (saith our Sauiour) in Ieru­salem, Act. 1. 8. and in all Iudea, and in Samaria, and (wherein their commission went beyond Iohns) vnto the vttermost part of the earth. And Iohn himselfe, though he were magnifi­ed aboue the former Prophets, in regard of his ministe­ry: Yet is he (euen therin) made inferior to the Apostles. Mat. 11. 11. He that is least in the kingdome of heauen, is greater then he. It is not to be denied, but that the Apostles were wit­nesses, in a very extraordinary sort; being chosen before, to giue notice of such things, as should befall our Saui­our, to all the world. Therefore to them did hee appeare after his resurrection. Him (saith Peter) God caused to bee Act. 10. 40. 41. showne openly Not to all the people, but to witnesses, chosen before of God; to vs which did eate, and drinke with him, after he was risen from the dead. Notwithstanding, the witnesse of Iohn was of an other kinde, then either the Prophets, or Apostles. For the one foretold, that hee should come into the world; the other affirmed, that he had bin in the world; Only Iohn was hee, that shew'd him, while hee was in the world, & who was long before prophecied of for an immediate forerunner of him, at his comming, Luk. 1. 17. and to make ready a people for him. [Page 277] We see of what kinde his testimony was; Iohn came, and preached in the Wildernesse of Iudaea: let vs now in­quire what it was, that hee witnessed. Whereof I shall neede to say verie little, because I spake of it in hand­ling the former point. In one worde, the summe of his testimonie was this, first, that the kingdome of Mat. 3. 2, heauen was at hand; that is, as Saint Luke expresseth the matter, He preachedthe baptisme of repentance, for the re­mission Luk. 3. 3 of sinnes. Hee testified to all the Iewes, and to al that heard him, that there was no means, nor hope of saluation, but by repentance of their sinnes, and re­sting vpon the Messiah, (who was now amongst them, though they knewe him not) for pardon ther­of, by his death, and sacrifice. The second, and most proper part of his testimony, was the poin­ting out, and shewing of him, that was the Messiah; that all men might knowe, and embrace him. Be­hold the Lambe of God, that taketh away the sinne of the world. This was the testimony of Iohn. But that, which principally concerneth the reason, why our Euangelist mentions his bearing witnesse, is to bee fetcht out of the third Chapter of this Gospell; where a Sermon of his is recorded: in which he commends our Sauiour to all mē, as him, who being sent frō God to be the Messiah, spea­keth Ioh. 3. 34. the words of God; so that by him all other are inlight­ned; who are of the earth, and speake of the earth; whe [...]eas Ver. 31. 32. he testifieth nothing but that, which hee had seene, and heard. Truely, therfore he is called the light, who being in the bosome of his father, reueales to men the secrets of his rather, touching their redemption, which no man euer knew, or can knowe, but from, and by him.

What vse then was there of any witnesse? If neither Iohn had any knowledge, but from him, and hee onely was able to inlighten whom hee would, why did God, end the Bapti [...] to beare witnesse of the light? Needes [...]e Sunne the day starre, to shewe him to the world? [Page 278] This was a meanes likelier to make Iohn bee for Ioh. 1. 19. 20. the Messiah, then to credite the Messiah by his re­port [...] as wee see also it came to passe; whereof hereaf­ter. But that no man may either conceiue amisse, or bee euer-much troubled with this doubt, let vs take a shorte viewe of the purpose of GOD herein. The ende of all teaching, and preaching concerning Christ, is to bring men to beleefe in him. This was first to bee done amongst the Iewes. For the better performing whereof, it pleased God to deale grati­ously and bountifully with them, in affording many, and diuers meanes, by which they might bee moued, and perswaded to beleeue. Among the rest this was one, whereof the Lord thought good to make choyse euen to send them a man, after so extraordinary a man­ner, who being in especiall credite, and fauour with them; by his authoritie, and gratiousnesse, might draw them to beleefe. Coulde there anye more likely meanes bee deuised to perswade them? He was look [...] after, as one that would prooue some rare man, from his very Cradle. His course of lise was such, as might yet procure more admiration. When hee came to the execution of his ministerie, how powerfully did hee worke vpon the hearts of them, that heard him? what a fame went there of him farre and neere? what heapes of all sorts of people slocked to him? The couetous Luk. 3. 12. 14. Publicans, were content to heare him reprooue their greedinesse, and extor ion. The desperate souldiers trayned vp in violence, and insolencie, submitted them­selues to his instruction, and baptisme. What should I speake of the proud Pharises, who had bewitcht all Mat. 3 7. men with an opinion of their purity, and holinesse, and none more then themselues? yet were they glad to come to Iohn to be washed, and purified by his Baptisme. The Sadduces, were little better thē professed Atheists, Act. 23. 8. saving, There is no resurrection, neither Angell, nor spirit. [Page 279] What neede these men care for sinne, or damnation? And yet the ministerie, life, & doctrine of Iohn the Bap­tist was such, that euen these Miscreants were drawne to seeke to him. I say nothing of Herod, because I signi­fied before, that hee reuerenced Iohn, and heard him gladly, and followed his doctrine in many things. Tell mee Mark. 6. 20. now, what you could desire more, I had almost sayd, what you canne imagine more in any man, to make him of credite, and authoritie, that hee may bee be­leeued, in that, hee constantly affirmes, If the Lord should haue made a man in Heauen, as hee did A­dam heere on earth, and haue sent him into the world, in the sight of all men, hee could not haue beene of more estimation, then Iohn Baptist was. And was not this a meruailous likely meanes, to begette faith in the Iewes, that such a man, so extraordinarily sent, so admirable in his bringing vppe, so vnblameable in his life, so sound in his doctrine, and (which is all in all to this purpose) of such reputation for his since­ritie, and precisenesse, so plainely, and constantly protested, that Iesus was the Sauiour of the worlde, and himselfe no better then his vnworthie seruant? [...]oh. 1. 27. I am not worthy (sayde Iohn) to vnloose his shooe lat­chet. Let vs therefore acknowledge the goodnesse of God, who voutchsafed to vse such meanes for the teaching, and perswading of so vnkinde, and vnthank­full a people.

But the necessitie of sending Iohn, and the kind­nesse of the LORD in sending him, will the more appeare, if wee aduisedly consider both the igno­raunce of the Iewes, and the meanenesse of our Sauiours estate, while hee was in the Worlde. It is true, that the LORD had (from time to time) giuen notice, and made many promises of the comminge of the Messiah. It is as true, that the sette time of his comminge was foretoulde, [Page 280] and cast vp by Daniell, insomuch that olde Symeon, and Luk. 2 25. 26. (in all likelihood) some others vnderstood, that the time of his appearance was come; and with the good Widowe Anna, looked for it, euery moment But a­lasse, Ver. 36. 37 how few of these were to bee found? The peo­ple generally (as it is now amongst vs) had little know­ledge of the Scriptures. They heard them read, and many times expounded, in their Synagogues, as wee [...]ow doe in our Churehes: but they were as farre from the true vnderstanding of them, as wee commonly now [...]e Daniels weekes were as great mysteries to them, [...] the Reuelation of Saint Iohn is to vs; so that they [...]ere [...]n table to compare his prophecie with the E­ [...]ents, that had fallen out, and to subduct the time, [...]hat was past, that they might see what the rest was. And this I speake of the better sort of the common people. The worst, and greatest part had seldome a­ [...]y thought of these matters; no more then wee now ordinarily) haue of the last day of Iudgement. Be­ [...]ides, the most part of them that desired his comming, [...]ookt for another manner of deliuerance by him, then our Sauiours estate in the World was likely to afford.

And this conceite had taken such roote in their hearts, that our Sauiour Christs owne Disciples held it fast in them, euen till the very time of his Ascension; Act. 1. 6. Lord (say they) wilt thou at this time, restore the king­dome to Israell? It was an outward freedome, and glo­rious estate, in this life, which the Iewes promised thē ­selues, by the comming of the Messiah. What was there in our Sauiours parentage, bringing vp, or course of life, that could feed this hope? His supposed Father Mat. 13. 55. a poore Carpenter, vnder whome hee was imployed [...]mselfe in the same trade, and therefore is called a Car­penter. Is not this the Carpenter, Maries sonne? And Mat. 6. 3. what was his life? hee wandred from place to place [Page 281] no [...]ie [...], [...]ng arm [...]es, not mustring souldiers, not perswa­ding any man to take vppe armes, but disclaiming all worldly autority. Who made me a Iudge, or a diuider, ouer you? inioyning obediēce to Princes, & rulers; Giue vnto Luke 12. 14. Ma [...]. 22. 21. & 20. 28. Caesar, the things that are Caesars. Yea professing, that hee came to serue, and not to be serued. This being at the time of our Sauiours comming, the estate of the lewes, they either carelesse of [...]is assistance, or ignorant of the na­ture thereof, his owne condition also being so meane, and contemptible, was it not gratiously done of God, and in respect of the people, necessarily, to send one of such credit, and autority, to assure them, that Christ was the Messiah in whom they ought to trust; and to teach them, what deliuerance they were to looke for by him? Christ needed no testimony of any man. But the Iewes stood in great need of Iohn, to informe them concern­ing him. It were not lost labour to bestow some time in the consideration of the goodnesse of God, in yeelding so much to the Iewes weaknesse, or r [...]ther in striuing with such patience, and bounty, against their obstinat wilfulnesse. I might also take occasion to stirre vp our selues to trust in God; of whose kindnesse, wee haue so plaine, and so great experience But I am willing to for­beare both these points, till I come to some other place, where they are more directly intended, by the purpose of the Euangelist.

In the meane while, let vs go forward with the ex­pounding of this Scripture; wherein (as we haue heard) the office of Iohn is amplified▪ in this verse, by the ende of it, That all men through, or by him, might beleeue. Where­of that I may speake the more plainely, and certainely, I will first examin what this ende is; To beleeue by him: Secondly I will consider the quality of it, or who they were that should beleeue. The former hath these two doubts, what is here meant by belieuing: to whom this Him must be reffer'd whether to Iohn the witnesse, or to [Page 282] the light, of which he bears witnes, might beleeue through him. Now, because Beleeuing is a word of so common & great vse in the Scriptures, and that this is the first place, where it is mentioned in this Gospell; I hold it not on­ly requisit, but necessary for me, to speake of it somwhat more at large. To beleeue, in matter of religion, is com­monly taken to signifie 3 things: The acknowledging of Gods being; Credere Deum, To beleeue that God is, or that there is a God: Credere Deo, To giue credit to that, which God saith: Credere in Deum, To beleeue in God. And of all these significations, wee haue variety of examples in the Scripture. Giue me leaue, I pray you, for our bet­ter vnderstanding, & memory, to draw them to 2 prin­cipall heades, according to the diuers seat, or place, they haue in the soule of man. To beleeue then, is to holde something for truth, or to trust to something. The for­mer is an action of the vnderstanding; the later of the will. In the one truth only is respected; the other hath an eie to some good, or benefit.

Beleeuing, as it hath place in the vnderstanding, signi­fies either an holding of some point as a truth, by the o­riginall light of nature in vs, or an assenting to som such thing reuealed by some outward meanes, & taken vpō the credit of the teacher. Of the 1. kind is the persuasion, that all men naturally haue, that there is one God; that hee is the Creator of heauen, and earth; that he is almighty, wise, iust, good &c. These things, men are truly, and properly, said to beleeue, because they are not taught them, but bred in them; they receiue them not of other, but haue them of themselues; they come not to the acknowledg­ing of them, by any discourse of reason, but see them by a light, that shines within thē. But this sense of the word, I confesse, is hardly to bee found in the booke of God: which refers vs, for the naturall knowledge of God to the consideration of his workmanship in the creatures. [...]om. 1. 20. The inuisible things of God (saith the Apostle) that is, his e­ternall [Page 283] power, & Godhead, are seene by the Creation of the world: Yea so manifestly seen, that, as the same Apostle testifieth other where, we may in a maner feele the Lorde by groping; seeing in him we liue, & moue, and haue our being. Act. 17. 27 28. Iamblich. de mysteri [...]s cap. 1 Yea the Philosophers themselues acknowledge, that there is in man a certaine notion, or persuasion of God, which goeth before all discourse of reason: & we ordi­narily say of the most barbarous, and ignorant heathen, who haue small vse of reason, that they all belieue there is a God; yea euen those people, which neuer thought on the making of the world, yet haue an opinion, that there is a God to be worshipt; and the grand Atheist E­picurus, that would by no means confess, that the world Veleius apud Cicero. de [...]at. deor. lib. 1. Lucret de nat. rerum. lib. 1. had any Creator of it, doubted not to professe, that hee beleeu'd, there was a God; because Nature hath ingraf­fed that perswasion in euery mans hart. But it is all one to the point, I haue in hand, whether there bee any such opinion in vs, or no; as long as it is granted that we may and do attaine to this beleefe, without any resting vpon other mens report, & credit, it sufficeth to proue the first kind of beleeuing, seated in the vnderstanding. The 2. is an assenting to that, which is affirmed, meerely vpon the credit of him, that speakes it. For if hee bee able to make proofe of that he saith, by any reason, and doe so; and thereby perswade vs of the truth of that, he hath a­vouched, he doth beget knowledge in vs, rather then beleefe which is alwaies grounded vpon the authority and reputation of him, for whose words-sake wee beleeue. This vse of the worde is very common in the old, and newe Testament; where (for the most part) the other signification of trusting to is imply­ed. VVill you see this in some sewe examples? A­braham Gen. 15. 6 belieued God: that is, Abraham was per­swaded, that God would bee as good as his worde, & (accordingly) he trusted to him, or belieued in him [Page 284] for the performance thereof. That thus much is to bee conceiued by that beleefe of Abrahams, is is euident by the Apostles disputation of it. Who hauing alleag'd that testimony of Moses, to proue iustification by faith or beleeuing in Christ, in the applying of it expoundes beleeuing God by beleeuing in him. To him, that worketh Rom. 45. not, but beleeueth in him, that iustisieth the vngodly, his faith is counted for righteousnes: where he deliuers, that in ge­nerall, which before he had said in particular. Abra­ham beleeued God, and it was counted to him for righteous­nesse. Verse. 3. There is the particular touching Abraham. To which, the generall, concerning all other men to beius­tified, must needs agree, if the Apostles reason, be of a­ny force. Abraham beleeued God; To him that beleeueth in him that iustifies the vngodly; that is God; It (his belieuing) was counted to him for righteousnes. His faith (his beleeu­ing) is counted for righteousnes. Do you not see, that to beleeue God, in this example, includs belieuing in God, that is trusting to God, or resting vpon God for that, which Isai. 28. 16. God is to performe? Therefore the Prophet I say directly protesteth; that he, which beleeueth, shall not make haste. So that no man is accounted to beleeue God, but hee that relyeth vpon him, for the fulfilling of that, which hee hath spoken; or, at the least, that beleeuing of God only is accepted of him: which procures a trusting in him for that, which we beleeue he hath truly affirmed. The new Testament is plentiful in such examples; I will giue you a tast of them, and leaue the rest to your farder meditation, and to some other occasion, that shall offer it selfe Rom. 10. 10. [...]ereafter in this Gospel. With the heart (saith S. Paul) man beleeueth to righteousnesse. VVhat beleeuing is this? the Apostle himselfe teacheth vs in the next verse, where he proues that, he had said, by the testimony of the Prophet; whosoeuer beleeueth in him shall not be ashamed. Verse. 11. Ioh. 8. 30. Vers 31. The same is con [...]m'd by our Euangelist. As he sp [...]ke these things many beleeued in him. Then said Iesus to th [...] [Page 285] Iewes which beleeued him. Can any man doubt, but the holy Verse. 31. Ghost, in the later verse, meanes the same beleefe, hee had mentioned in the former? But what should I seeke any farder then this Chapter? That which heere is cal­led beleeuing, afterward is exprest by beleeuing in. Here he saith That al men through him might beleeue. What saith Ioh. 1. 7. Verse, 12. he in the 12 verse? To them, that beleeue in his name. It may seeme perhaps, that I haue stood ouer-long vpon this point: but the necessity of the matter, I doubt not, wil excuseme in any reasonable mans iudgement; espe­cially if he consider, that I haue almost dispatcht the whole question, in that former discourse, hauing shewd (though but by the way) diuerse examples of Beleeuing in, or trusting to; that I may be the shorter in that, which remaines to be handled, concerning beleefe, as it is an action of the will, resting, or relying vpon somewhat, for some benefit to bee receiued. In this signification, when the matter is of beleeuing God to iustification, & saluation, sometimes the word is vsed by it selfe; some­times it hath an other word, which we call a prepositi­on ioined with it. Of the former sort, these may be examples. Ioh. 5. 24. Hee that heareth my word, and beleeueth him, that sent me, hath euerlasting life. What is this beleeuing, but that which we heard of euen now, out of the Apostle? Hee that beleeueth in him that iustifieth the wicked: and that, Rom. 45. which we are to heare of, if it please God, in the course of this Gospell, yee beleeue in God. The like is to bee said Ioh. 14. 1. of that in the Acts, of the Iaylor; He reioiced, that he, with all his housholde, beleeued God. Would you knowe what Act. 15. 34. beleefe this was? We may learne that, out of the Apo­stles former instruction, and exhortation. Beleeue in the Verse 31. Lord Iesus Christ. There is yet a plainer testimony then this, if any thing can be plainer, in the same book; where S. Luke writing the history of Crispus, and his conuersi­on to the faith, speaketh thus. And Crispus the cheefe ru­er Chap. 18. 8. of the Synagogue, beleeued the Lord. The Lord, that is [Page 286] our Sauiour Christ had not spoken to him; but the A­postle Paul had taught him the doctrine of the Gospel, that he was to beleeue in Iesus Christ for saluation. To this he obayed, and therefore is said to beleeue the Lord, that is, to beleeue in him.

When the prepositions are added, the signification of the word is more fully exprest. The most common, and vsuall (whereof wee haue very many examples in this Gospell) is In. His Disciples beleeued in him. Trusted [...] Ioh. 2. 11. Chap. 3. 16. to him, as to the Messiah. That whosoeuer beleeues in him should not perish, but haue life euerlasting. VVhosoeuer resteth vpon him for saluation. Almost euery Chapter affords vs the like examples; so do the other bookes, of the newe Testament, especially the Epistle to the Ro­mans; that I may spare time and labour, and hasten to the other preposition; which though it bee vsed more seldome, yet is most significant. It is as much in english as vpon, or on; It was known throughout all Ioppa, and ma­ny [...] Act. 9. 42. beleeued vpon, or on him. That is, many rested vpon him for Saluation. VVhat must I doe to bee saued? saith Chap. 16. 30. Verse. 31. the Iaylour. Paul and Silas answered him; Beleeue on, or vpon the Lord Iesus Christ, and thou shalt bee saued. But no one place doth so plainely, and fully expresse the nature of this phrase, as that to the Romans. Be­hold Rom 9. 33. I lay in Syon a stumbling stone, and a rock of of­fence; and euery one that beleeueth on it, shall not bee asha­med. Heere our Sauiour is compared to a Rocke, at which many doe stumble, not acknowledging him to bee the Messiah, but seeking other meanes to saue them­selues by. This Simeon foretold of our Sauiour, that hee should be an occasion of falling, to many in Israell. But Luk. 2. 34. they, that shall settle themselues vpon that rocke, and renounce all other causes, and meanes, of attaining to euerlasting life, shall neuer be asham'd of that their trust in him, but shall come to the ende of their hope, euen the eternall saluation of their soules by him. [Page 287] So that, if any man be desirous, or willing to vnder­stand, what it is to beleeue in Christ, this one place may giue him ful satisfaction; out of which (as it hath beene shewed) hee may learne, that it is nothing else, but to cast himselfe vpon Christ to bee iustified, and saued by him.

Thevse of the worde being (as hath beene said) so diuerse; in what sense shall we take it, in this text? That we shall knowe, by vnderstanding, what it was, that Iohn laboured to perswade men to, by his preaching. For wee haue learned, that his witnesse beareing, was Teaching: and wee see heere, that the ende of his teaching was, Beleefe, that all men might beleeue. What was this beleeuing? Onely an aslenting to the truth of that, which they heard Iohn deliuer? If that had beene all, surely hee would neuer haue taken so much paines, and spent so much time, in exhor­ting all men, to consider their owne estate, and in convincing them of sinne, that they might finde, in what neede they stood of deliuerance by the Messiah. But that I may make as short, as I can, wee may fetch the aunswere to this doubt from the Apostle Paul: who thus describes the office, and doctrine of Iohn the Baptist. Iohn verely baptized Act. 19. 4. with the baptisme of repentance (saith the Apostle) saying vnto the people, that they should beleeue in him which should come after him, that is, in Christ Iesus. So then, whereas our Euangelist tells vs, that the ende of Iohns comming was, that all men shoulde beleeue, hee giues vs to vnderstand, that hee taught men the mystery of redemption by Christ (though not so distinctly as it was afterwarde deliuered) with a purpose, and desire, that they shoulde take our Sauiour CHRIST for the Messiah, and rest vpon him, that their sinnes might bee taken away. Beholde (saith hee) the lambe of God [Page 288] that taketh away the sin of the world. It is true, that beleeuing properly signifieth no more, but giuing credit, or assent­ing to the truth; but seeing wee finde the ende of Iohns preaching to reach farder then so, wee must needs hold that the other degrees of beleeuing are implied in this one and first step to faith, by which we are iustified. The like we are to conceiue of the word, wheresoeuer in the new Testament wee finde that ascribed to beleeuing, which cannot be attain'd to, but by faith in Christ. I wil indeavor to make this plaine by an example or two. He Mark. 16. 16. that beleeueth, & is baptized, shallbe saued. What is meant here, by beleeuing? Nothing, but assenting to that, which the Apostles taught, in regard of the truth there­of? But that cannot bring saluation to any man; which is not to be obtain'd, without resting vpon Christ for iustification. Therefore to beleeue, in that text of Mark, is as much as, to beleeue in Christ, or to rely vpō Christ for saluation. Dost thou beleeue in the Sonne of God? saith Ioh. 9. 35. our Sauiour to the man, whome hee had before restored to his sight. He answered and said, Who is hee Lord, that I may beleeue in him? And Iesus said, Both thou hast seene him & he it is that talketh with thee. Then he said Lord I beleeue. What did he beleeue? That Christ was the Son of God. Was that all? Our Sauiour asked him, if hee did beleeue in the Sonne of God. Had it beene sufficient for him to professe, that he beleeued him to be the Sonne of God? No sure. But it behoued him for the answering of the question, to affirme that he beleeued in him. It is need­lesse to heape vp any more examples; These fewe may serue to teach vs, that beleeuing is sometimes put, for be­leeuing in Christ. If it please you to take a view of other places of the same kind, I doubt not, but you will bee confirmed in the truth of this obseruation.

The ende then of Iohns bearing witnesse was, that all men through him might beleeue in Iesus Christ to saluation. There is yet an other doubt, who it is, that the Euange­list [Page 289] meanes by Him, through him. Through whome? For the word in the Greeke may agree either to Iohn the witnesse, or to the light, whereof hee beares witnesse: though in our English there is a plaine difference; be­cause if we would haue it vnderstood of Iohn, wee must translate the word, as we do, Him: but if we referre it to the light, we must say It, that all men by it might beleeue. Let vs see now to whether of the 2 the worde must be­long. By light (as it is apparant) our Sauiour Christ is sig­nified: so that if we vnderstand it of the light, the mea­ning is, that all men should beleeue by Christ. But this is a strange kind of speech, without al warrant of example from the Scripture, concerning him. To beleeue Christ, To beleeue in or on Christ, are vsuall, and ordinary: but to be­leeue by Christ, is a phrase with which the Scripture is not acquainted. And whereas some men would defend the applying of this to the light, by expounding it, that men through Christ, might beleeue in God; they affirme that of Chr. which the Scripture neuer speaketh of him. Where is it said of him, that he taught men to beleeue in God? Once in this Gospell, hee mentions beleeuing in God; but as a thing, to which they needed no instruction of his; because they did already performe that duty. Ye be­lieue in God (saith hee) Beleeue also in mee: I deny not, that Ioh. 14. 1. the Iewes needed to be taught by our Sauiour, how they ought to belieue in God; but I cānot see why we should imagin, that the Euangelist woulde, in this place, speake of such a point, as he no where toucheth, in any other part of his Gospell. It is best therefore to translate, as we read it; and to vnderstand it, not of Christ, but of Iohn: who was sent to beare witnesse of the light, to as­sure the Iewes, that Iesus was he, by whom they were to receiue life, and light; that they being thus instruct­ed, and perswaded by him, might beleeue in Christ, to the obtaining of euerlasting life: and this was the ende of Iohns ministery.

For the farder commēdation wherof, some alleage the generality of it, that it belongd to all, Iewes, & Gentils, one, and other, without exception, as the words (they say) manifestly proue; that all men through him might be­leeue. It is not my desire, nor purpose, to speak any thing, that may darken the glory of so honorable a calling, as Iohns was: as it might, and (I hope) did appeare, when I handled the point of his witnes-bearing. But But I am now to seeke out the meaning of that, which our Euangelist heere reporteth, not to apply my selfe to set forth the largenesse of Iohns commission, or the excellency of his office. The question is, how far these wordes, All men, are to be stretcht, according to the true intent, and meaning of the Euangelist. What needs any question of this matter? saith one. The Euangelist hath spoken plaine enough. Let the wordes haue their full course, and restraine not that to some, which is im­parted to all. If the like speeches were alwaies in Scrip­ture of as large extent, in the holy Ghosts meaning, as they are in their owne nature; there might be no questi­on made, but that in this place they were so to be taken. But who is ignorant, that often times in Scripture, the generall sense of the worde must bee limitted to some particulars? For example, in this very case, concer­ning the ministery of Iohn; Saint Mathew saith, That, All Iudea and all the Region about Iordan went out to him: Mat 3 5. VVho is so vnreasonable, as to expound this All, of all men, woemen, and children? Yea who dare avouch it of all men, or precisely of the greater part? The ho­ly Ghost followeth the ordinary custome of mens daily speech, who, to signifie a great number, are wont to say All: Such is that common phrase, All men, or all the world knowes it. And of the same kind is that in the Gospell, though not so large; All holde Iohn as a Pro­phet, Mat. 21. 26. and yet there might be many, that perhaps had scarsly heard of him: but (generally) hee was taken to [Page 291] be a Prophet.

Shall I alleage a straunger kind of speech, for proofe of that, I haue affirmed? As in Adam all men dy; So in 1. Cor. 15. 22. Christ shall all bee made aliue. Here is the very same worde twice vsed, and yet diuersly. All, in the first part of the verse, signifies euery man, woman, and child, that came from Adam by naturall propagation. But in the later part it is restrained to certaine men, as the next verse makes it plaine: But euery man in his Verse. 23. order: The first fruites is Christs, afterward they that are Christs. Those All are no more, but such, as are Christs. For none, but they, are made aliue in Christ; that is, as members of his body, whereof he is the head. If you presse mee with the oppositi­on betwixt Adam, and Christ, to conclude from thence, that All must bee as generall in the later clause, as in the former; first we haue heard the Apostles limi­tation, They, that are Christs: Secondly, consider the similitude of the first fruites, which sanctifie none, but their owne lumpe: and the wicked are not one lumpe with Christ; no more, then they are part of his body. Lastly, conceiue also the reason of this diuersity, and the opposition will stand, for all this re­straint. In Adam all men dy: simply all men, not one excepted, of any age, sex, or condition. Why so? Because euery man, woman, and child was in Adam, when hee sinned, and is naturally descended from Adam. Shall all men in like sort be made aliue in Christ? Not simply all; because all are not Christs, as all were Adams; yet is there a fit comparison of contraries. For as all Adams dy in Adam; So all Christs liue in Christ.

Seeing it is so cleere, that the word All, neither must, nor may alwaies be extended to the vttermost of the proper signification thereof, I trust no man wil rashly condemne me, If I make inquity, whether it be so gene­rall, in this place, or no, VVould you knowe why I [Page 292] doubt? You haue heard the generall reason thereof; I will come to some particulars. Frst there is no remedy, but it must be some what restrained, because there were many thousands, in the worlde, that could not possibly come to any knowledge of Iohn, or his testimony. Yea I may truly, and therefore boldly say, that the hun­dreth part of men liuing, when Iohn preached, coulde not by any ordinary meanes, so much as haue the least inkling of any such matter. The time of his ministery exceeded not the compasse of 3 yeeres; he trauailed not as the Apostles did afterward, from Country to Coun­try, Luk. 3. 3. but keept himselfe within the bounds of the lande, that God bestowed vpon the Iewes, and there only imployed himself How then should al mē in the world take knowledge of his doctrine? And how straungely did hee carry himselfe, in the discharge of his duty, if being sent to al men, wheresoeuer, he kept continually in the Country, where hee was borne, and bred? Se­condly, the prophecies concerning Iohn, are peculiar to the Iews, and no mention in them of any other people. Comfort yee my people; Speake comfortably to Ierusalem. Isai. 40. 1. 2. 3 A voice crieth in the wildernesse. There was his ordina­ry aboade, till the time came (saith Saint Luke) that hee Luk. 1. 80. should shewe himselfe to Israell. To whome dooth Mala­chy prophecy of his comming, but only to the Iewes, Mal. 3. 1. without any mention of the Gentiles; which yet is not omitted, where that, which is prophecied of, belongs Mal. 4. 5. 6. vnto them? Behold I will send you the Prophet Eliah &c. And he shall turne the hearts of the Fathers to the children. Of what fathers, to what children? Is it not manifest, that Luk. 1. 16. this is proper to the Iewes? Many of the children of Israell (saith the Angel to Zachary)shall he turne to their Lord God. And hee confirmes his speech by that testimony of Malachy. Can you shew mee the like warrant or any at all, concerning his conuerting of the Gentiles? I doe not say, that there was neuer a one of the [Page 293] heathen, proselyte, or other, that had the vse, and benefit of the Baptists ministery; but this was extraordinary, & by an especial mercy of God to those men, not by the generall intendement of the Lorde to all the Gentiles. Thirdly we must remember, that the ministery of Christ himselfe, was confined to the land of Iury, and not suf­fered to be common to all the world. Therefore is hee called the minister of the circumcisiō; & his office ther­in Rom 15. 8. describ'd; for the truth of God to confirme the promise to the fathers. And accordingly he professed, that hee was not Mat. 15. 24. sent, but to the lost sheepe of the house of Israell. Not as if the benefit of his mediation, and redemption, were not cō ­mon to the Iewes, and Gentiles; but for that his ministe­rie, in his owne person, was appointed only for the Is­raelits howsoeuer some one of the heathen, heere and there, might lay hold on him, to saluation, being con­uerted by his preaching. Iohn then, who was to prepare the way for the Messiahs person, had his commission accordingly, not for all the worlde, but for the Iewes only.

I might add many other proofs to the same purpose, but these few are sufficient; both to shewe their misvn­derstanding of this place, who would build the doctrin of vniuersall grace vpon it, and to direct vs, to the true meaning of the holy Ghost therein. For the matter it selfe, whether God haue made no difference, touch­ing election to everlasting life, betwixt one man, and an other, but haue equally ordained all men therevnto or no, I will not, nor may, vpon this occasion, dispute; only it was necessary for me, to put you in mind that no such doctrine can be gathered out of this place. The reason thereof is double; as well because the mini­stery of Iohn, is not appointed by God for the instruc­tion of euery particular man in the worlde: as also for that it is one thinge to say, God affoordes all men the meanes of saluation (supposing that to be true, [Page 294] which I am out of doubt no man can proue) & another thing to affirme, that God intends the saluation of euery [...]euerall man whatsoeuer. But of this enough for the present. It remains, that I deliuer the true meaning of these words; All men: which (as I haue prou'd) must bee parti­cularly vnderstood of the Iewes. This being granted, there ariseth yet an other question; whether vnder this All, euery one of the Iewes be comprised, or no. But me thinks this point should be out of questiō; because many of the Iews, were at that time scattered abroad in diuers Countries, so that they could neither come to Iohn, to receiue the word, & baptisme by his ministry, nor could haue any such knowledge of that, he taught, as that by it, they might be brought to belieue in Iesus Christ for saluation.

Some men therefore haue thought it most fit to ty this [...]enerall word to all the elect, amongst the Iews; as if the Euangelist had intēded to teach vs, that the end of Iohns sending was, that al those Iews, whom God had ordain­ed to euerlasting life, might belieue. And surely if it were the purpose of the holy Ghost, to reueal vnto vs the se­cret counsa [...]l of God, concerning the saluation of some certaine men, there can be no doubt, but the elect only are signified. But this (giue me leaue to speake plainl [...] what I think, without preiudice to any mans iudgemēt seems to me, not so agreeable to the Euāgelists purpose as to make the end of Iohns witnes-bearing, as general as reasonably we may. For it is somewhat liable to exception, in the opinion of al men, that shal read, or heare this point, to affirme, that the Lord would haue so publike a ministery restrained to some few; if he had bard a men, saue some few, from beleeuing. Wherfore I had rather take it as in definitly spokē, without respect of these or those men, that mē might beleeue; yet stil with restrain [...] to the Iewes. Which in the originall may more easily bee done, because the word men being not exprest, we may [Page 295] reasonably vnderstand in place of it the Iewes. That all might beleeue: namely that all the Iewes, to whom only he was sent, might beleeue. And so may we also very well, and fitly translate it, leauing out men.

What then? How shall we vnderstand the place? First we must expound it of none, but the Iewes; because to them only Iohn was sent. Secondly, we must know, that it concernes them all without exception, one & other. Thirdly, let vs remember, that heere is no thought of Gods secret election, but the ende of the ministery of Iohn propounded. The meaning then is this, that God sent Iohn to beare witnesse, that Iesus was the light, to the end that all, to whom he was sent, might acknowledge the Messiah and rest vpon him for saluation. What? Euery one of the Iewes? I: Euery one, none excepted. As concerning the preaching of Iohn; had he any commission from God, to deny any man his helpe, in teaching, and baptising? Had any man charge from God, not to heare, or not to be baptised? Did the Lord with hold any mā from belee­uing, or comming to baptisme? Did hee put a mislike of Iohn, and his ministery into any mans hart? Did he nou­rish any such conceit, or incline any man to the retain­ing of it? It is true indeed, that Iohn was to execute his of­fice only in Iewry, and not to seeke out the Iewes in the seuerall Countries, where they were dispersed. But this doth not proue, that his ministery therfore belongd not to them. There was great reason why he should abide in those parts. There was our Sauiour to bee borne; there to bee baptised by him; there to be showne to the people. That was the lande, in which the people, to whō Iohn was sent, had their ordinary, and proper dwelling. And though many were d [...]sperst here, and there; yet this was the generall rendez-vous, to which all were to resort, for the worship of God, & the expectatiō of the Messiah. If their worldly affairs, & occasions held thēir other places that they [...]āe no [...] to heare Iohn preach, ve [...] [Page 296] was Iohns ministery, in respect of the common end ther­of, as free for them, as for any other of the Iews what­soeuer, that they might haue beleeued.

And shall any of them, that haue perisht, through their own default, or shal any Proctor for them open his mouth, to blame the iustice, or deny the mercy of God, in prouiding for their saluation? What dost thou cli­ming vp to heauen, and prying into the hidden coun­saile of God, to accuse him, or excuse them? Iohn was sent to beare witnesse, that all men might beleeue. Did he not ac­cordingly, shew himselfe to all, that would see him? Did he forbid, or discourage any man from hearing? If at a­ny time he seem'd to driue men, from him, it was to driue them to Christ. I graunt, he was meane in his ap­parell, homely in his diet, solitary in his conuersation, sharpe in his reproofes. But he was faithfull, and paine­full in his ministery. Though hee rebuked many, that came to his baptisme; yet the refused none, that confest their sinnes. It was not his purpose to with-hold bap­tisme from any man; but to prepare all men, that they might bee fit receiuers of it. But what spend I time, in defending of Iohn? These mens quarrell is not to him, but to God. Alas poore wretches! Whome do they pro­uoke? How will they be able to maintaine their quar­rell? Nay rather: O desperat miscreants! O prophane blas­phemers! Was God in fault, that they beleeu'd not? Did he not promise them often, that the Messiah shoulde come? Did he not send his Angel, euen Gabriell, to fore­tell the precise time of his comming? Did hee not pro­uide, that Iohn should preach vnto them, That hee might Mal. 4. 6. turne the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the hearts of the children to the fathers, least he should come, and smite the earth with cursing? And, as if all this had beene a small matter, did hee not take order, that his promises should be left in writing, to the ende that all men might know them? Where was the fault now, that these things were [Page 297] not knowne, and beleeued? Many of them could not read these prophecies. But God had made euerie one of them capable of skill to read. If their parents neg­lected the meanes, or if themselues reguarded not the knowledge, shall God beare the blame of their sinne, and folly? Will you except against the hardnesse of the points, as they are deliuered, in the prophecies of the olde Testament? Nay, rather condemne the hardnesse of their hearts, that would not vnderstand that, which (as for those times) was plainly, and manifestly taught.

There was none so simple, or ignorant amongst them, but he had heard of the Messiah. None almost so carelesse, but lookt for his comming. None so despe­rate, but hoped for some good by his comming. Why then did they refuse him? Refuse him said I? Nay; why did they denie him, disgrace him, hate him, persecute him, murther him? Because they knewe him not. Did they not know him? But they might haue done, if they had beleeued Moses, and the rest of the Prophets, that testified of him. But let all them goe. Admitte they Ioh. 5. 46. had giuen no tokens, by which the Messiah, when hee should come, might be knowne. I will vrge none, but Iohn Baptists testimony; or rather I will not vrge it, but name it. Iohn is sent to them, as it is general­ly knowne amongst them, after an extraordinarie manner; his father, and mother being very olde, and she all her life time time verie barren. An Angell brings his father a message from God, that his wife should con­ceiue, and appoints him to call the child Iohn. The fa­ther makes doubt of this promise, is threatned, and stric­ken with dumbnesse thereupon; which (according to the Angels threatning) continues, till the child be born. The eight day after, when hee is to bee circumcised, the mother names him Iohn: the kindred except against it, because none of their Auncestors, or stocke haue beene so called. His fathers opinion is required. Hee makes [Page 298] signes for a payre of writing Tables, and confirmes his wiues direction, by his consent thus written, His name is Iohn. Presently hereupon, his mouth is opened, and his tongue loosed; and by the spirit of prophecy, hee breakes out into a psalme of prayse, and thankesgiuing to God. These things are noysed all about those parts, and there is great muttering among the people, with wonder at the child, what manner of man hee will prooue. To in­crease this admiration, the course of this childes life is yet more extraordinarie; hee withdrawes himself from the company of men, and liues in the wildernesse, many yeares together: at the last, about the thirteth yeare of his age, as it were, vpon a sodayne, He comes into all the Coasts about Iordan preaching the baptisme of repentāc for the remission of sins. In a short time, his fame growes s [...] great, that the Rulers of the Iewes, are halfe of opinio [...] that he is the Messiah; yea there wanted nothing, bu [...] his owne word, to make him beso acknowledged. He [...] cleares it, and sayes plainely, I am not the Christ. No many dayes after this message, euen the next day while these thinges were fresh in memorie, hee tell them directly that Iesus, whome also hee shewes them being now present with him, is the Messiah, after whom they inqure.

Consider now I beseech you, a little, the strange, and wilfull blindnesse of this people. Iohn the Baptist was a man, in that credit, and fauour with them, that hee might haue beene taken for the Messiah, if hee would haue taken the office vpon him. Hee tels them, he is not the man; he assures them vpon his reputation, that Iesus is hee: to whome hee doth so much submit [...]e himselfe that hee holdes not himselfe worthy to vntie his shooe. Tell mee nowe, and speake boldely, so thou wilt speake reasonably, whosoeuer thou art, what canst thou saye against the Lorde in this case? Deuise a more likely meanes, if thou ca [...]st, to perswad [...] [Page 299] them by. Doth Iohn want authoritie, to moue them? All men held Iohn for a Prophet. Lackes hee credite with them, or fauour? The Scribes, and Pharises durst not so much as denie, that his ministerie was from God, for feare of the people. Perhappes his austeritie in his priuate carriage, and publike preaching, made them growe into some mislike of him. Nothing lesse. They flockt after him by heapes. But they might suspect, that it was a sette match, betwixt Christ, and him, for the aduantage of them both. They were per­swaded of his sinceritie, they hearde his profession, that hee knew not him, to bee the Messiah, but by the signe, that God himselfe had giuen him: They had seene the education of them both, in diuers places, and courses of life. What should I say? I am euen a­mazed to thinke vpon so rare, and incredible, shall I cal it, ignorance, or obstinacie? Let me repeat the matter in a word or two, that you may be Iudges, whether I haue cause to be astonied, or no. A people liuing vpon the hope of the Messiah, seating their happinesse in deliue­rance by him, hearkning, prying. gaping after his com­ming (hauing him shewed to them, by one, whom they iustly admired for his parts and graces, as a man indeed sent from God) like wey warde children, reiect that, when it is offered them, which before they cryed for. Who can giue mee the reason of this refusall? But what speake I of reason, in a matter so vnteasonable? who can tell mee, what pretence, or colour they had for it?

Shall wee conferre with some of them, about the point? I would faine heare what they canne say for themselues. If Iohn say true, why do you not beleeue him? If hee deliuer that, which is false, why doe yee not reproue him? Either leaue following him, if hee teach vntruths: or if yee will needes follow him, giue credite to that, he speakes.

Is his report of Iesus vntrue? Then why doe you wonder at him, as a Prophet sent from heauen? Dooth hee vtter that hee knowes not? How is hee woorth the hearing? Doth he speake contrarie to his knowledge? Hee is to bee hated, not hearkned to. How vnciuill are you (to speake as sparingly as I can) who suspect his faithfulnesse, whome you neuer founde in any fault? How irreligious are you that condemne him of errour, whome God sent immediatly, for your instruction? Bethinke yourselues in time, whome you refuse, and despise. Through Iohns sides you strike at God himself Of him, Iohn receiued his commission. From him hee had instruction, what to teach you. By him hee was di­rected in teaching.

In other points you acknowledge it, to his singular commendation. Why not in this too, which was the maine ende of his Embassage? At the least bee not so vnthankfull, iniurious, blasphemous, as not to acknow­ledge that Iohn was sent to beare witnesse, that yee might all beleeue.

I haue beene longer in this discourse, then I purpo­sed: yet it repents me not; because I doubt not, but you all perceiue, that those thinges, which I haue handled, touching the Iewes, may concern vs also, as wel as thē. For although I perswade my selfe, that these All (as I haue sayd) are the Iewes onely: yet I make no questi­on, but it was the good pleasure of God, that wee also should bee helped forward to beleefe, by the Euange­lists recording this office, and testimony of Iohn. His bearing witnesse did properly informe them, that heard it: but the knowledge of his extraordinary sending, birth, education, conuersation, preaching, and bapti­zing, may, and must confirme the faith of all vs, that dayly heare of it. Ignorance in the nature of the Mes­sias office, proud conceipt of their owne goodnesse, & doating vpon worldly pleasures, and preferments, were [Page 301] great causes of their infidelitie. If wee be blinded with such conceites, and drowned in such gulfes, we shal not see, nor come to Christ for saluation. But wee are better instructed in the redemption, which is wrought by the Messiah, and looke not for any temporall kingdome by him. Therefore wee cannot choose, but discerne (that which the Iewes would not see) that Iesus is hee, by whome the sinne of the worlde is taken away. Onely let mee giue warning, that (seeing God affords vs the Gospell, that wee might beleeue) no man be so wicked, or desperat, as to except against the mercy of God, or his owne saluation, vpon pretence of I know not what conceite, erroneously grounded on the eternall decree of predestination. It is enough (for the present) to name it; I will say more of it hereafter (if it please God) vpon euerie iust occasion.

In the meane while, let vs proceede with that, which followes. Hee was not the light, but was sent to beare witnes Ver. 8. of the light. Where the Euangelist describes the office of Iohn, by denying that, which is contrarie vnto it, and re­peating the substāce of it. He denies him to be the light, he tels vs againe, that hee was sent to beare witnesse of the light. This later point hath beene expounded, and in­larged. If the time, which is almost past, will giue mee leaue, perhappes a word or two shall be added. In the handling of the former, I will speak shortly to these two points; that Iohn is not the light: why our Euangelist addes this caution, in the describing of his ministery. For I holde it altogether needlesse, to shew that Iohn is hee, of whom this being the light is denyed. There is no man, but vpon the reading of the text, discerns as much. Neither is it greatly needful, to inquire in what sēse Iohn is denied to bee the light, seeing our Sauiour profes­seth of him, that Hee was a burning and shining Candle. Ioh. 5. 35. A Candle may bee without light; and a burning Can­dle may giue very little light, that it shal be very hardly [Page 302] perceiued, but a shining candle is light indeed. It may bee whelmed vnder a bushell, and so hid, not from shi­ning, but from being seene to shine; but Iohn spred his light round about, that as it followes in the same place, the Iewes (for a season) would haue reioyced in it. But Cyrillus in Ioa. lib. 1. cap. this doubt is easily satisfied. Iohn was a light: But not the light. What is a Candle to the Sunne? But the difference was greater, and of another kinde. The light shineth of it selfe by nature, as the Sunne dooth. A light is like the Moone, which shineth indeede, but by a borrowed brightnesse receiued from the Sunne, which is the fountaine, from whence all that light streames. So was the Baptist a light; so were the A­postles the light of the worlde. Not shining of them­selues, Mat. 5. 14. but deliuering abroade, as a glasse doth from the Sunne by reflection, the light, which Christ the true light powred vpon, and into them, for the inlightning of others.

Now, that Iohn was not the light, himselfe continu­ally not confessed onely, but professed. The rulers of the Iewes were ready to haue accepted him for the Messiah; and to that purpose, they sent Priests, and Ioh. 1. 20. Leuites, which by their secte also were Pharises, to make offer to him of that honour; but Hee (sayeth our Euangelist) confessed and denied not, and sayde Ver. 21. plainely, I am not the Christ. And when they prest him farther, as if they would haue perswaded him, that hee did but denie it for modestie, hee tolde them, Ver. 23. Isay. 40. 3. He was the voyce, that Isay prophecied of, crying in the wildernesse, that the way of the Lord might be made straight. And as for his baptisme, which as the Pharises truely taught, and vrged, shewed him to bee some extraordi­nary man, hee wild them to consider, that hee baptized but with water, whereas the Messiah should baptise them with the holy Ghost, and with fire. Yea, so farre doth Luk. 3. 16. hee worthily, and truely abase himselfe, in comparison [Page 303] of Christ, that he assures them, he is not worthy to vnty his Ioh. 1. 27. Mat. 3. 11. shooelaetchet, or to carrie his shooes after him. And this hee spake not once onely, but as oft as any iust occasion was offred, appealing to his Disciples knowledge, that they Ioh. 3. 28. could beare him witnes of his protestation against the Iewes offer, to take him for Christ. Therefore did he not Luk. 7, 19. only patiently beare the departure of his followers, to Mat. 11. 2. Christ, but also exhorted them to goe, and sent them to him. Yet all this would not moue the Iewes (O men of vncircumcised hearts, and eares!) to acknowledge the Messiah, though they thought so reuerently and highly of Iohn.

Therefore, that I may come to the second point, it was necessary for our Euangelist, after the descriptiō of Iohn Baptist, and his office, to adde this prouiso, that as great as he was, yet no man should take him for the light. The Iewes (as we know) were strongly cōceited of the mat­ter: & that, which the Euangelist saith here of Iohn, may seeme to nourish and strengthen that conceit. For it fals Chrysost. in Ioa. hom. 4. out often times, that he, whose witnes must procure cre­dit to another man, is greater thē the party, that stāds in need of his testimony. Therfore our Sauior tels the Iewes that he regarded not the deposition of Iohn, nor of any Ioh. 5. 34. man, as if it had beene needfull for him. But because they had so high an opinion of Iohn, therefore he was contē ­ted for their sakes, to vse his testimony, that they might beleeue. Besides, it serues to set out the worth, and ex­cellencie of our Sauiour, to the Iewes, that Iohn, of whom they were so well perswaded, for his greatness, and ho­lines, was but darknes, if he were seuered from Christ, or compared with him. He was not the light.

Yet, let no man conceiue of Iohn, but as of a worthy instrument, to bring the Iewes to faith in Christ; and as of a holy, and admirable person: whose whole cariage was such, that hee might haue beene taken for the Me­ssiah himselfe; as no ordinarie man possibly could bee, [Page 304] especially of the learned, and wise, among the Iewes. The people waited (sayeth Saint Luke) and all men mused Luk. 3. 15. in their hearts, of Iohn, if hee were not the Christ: Inso­much, that Priests and Leuites were sent from the Rulers to Ioh. 1. 19. knowe, if he were not so. Our Euangelist therefore hauing (as it was necessarie for him) denied him to be the light, repeats that which he had formerly deliuered, touching his office, which was to beare witnesse of the light. An office of no mean dignity or vse, to be imploied by God in shewing of the Messiah, that al might beleeue. We are euerie one of vs readie I doubt not, to cry out with open mouth against the in fidelitie, & obstinacy of the Iewes, who would not bee brought to faith by so excellent a ministery. Let vs take heede, that wee condemne not our selues in that, for which wee reprooue them. Iohn shewed them Christ, but in his beginning onely, before he had made any proof of his diuine power, in teachin, and working miracles. We haue the knowledge of all those wonders, and the distinct vnderstanding of the nature, and course of his mediatorship. Wee haue beene made acquainted with his sufferings for our sin, his tri­umphant resurrection, and glorious ascension. And shal we neglect so many, and so worthy points? Nay rather, let vs stirre vp our selues both to learne, and beleeue, that wee may attaine to the ende of our faith, the salua­tion of our soules, through our Lord and Saui­our Iesus Christ: to whome with &c.

THe conception, and birth of Iohn the Baptist were very extraor­dinarie, and strange; his father, and mother being growne olde, shee all her life time, barren. And least these circumstances should not worke with the people, an Angell, was sent from GOD to Zacharias, to giue him knowledge of these things be­fore hand. Hee beleeues not: and thereupon is stri­ken dumbe, till the time of circumcising the childe came; when his speech is restored to him againe: and he, inspired by the holy Ghost, prophecyeth both of his owne sonne, and the Messiah. But what stand I reciting all the particulars? These matters together [Page 306] with the Conuersation, Doctrine, and Baptisme of Iohn draue the Iewes into an admiration of him; and not, in­to an admiration onely, but into a strong conceite, that hee should be the Christ, the deliuerer, for whom they lookt. Neither were the common sort onely of this opi­nion, but the Rulers themselues were drawne to the like perswasion; insomuch [...]h [...] they sent Priests and Leuites to inquire whether he were the Messiah, or no. These things considered, it was not without cause, that our E­uangelist directly affirmes He was not the light, but had an vnder office; To beare witnes of the light. Who then was the light? Euen he, of whom hee spake so much before; and to the description of whom, by way of farder ampli­fication, he returnes saying; That was the true light.

This amplificatiō is continued to the 14, ver: and may thus reasonably be applied to the formerpoints deliuered cōcerning the Word. In the 5. ver. the creation of al things by him was affirmed: In the which it is said, that Hee was in the world, & the world was made by him. The fourth teacheth vs that he was the light of men. To that, the ninth answereth, That was the true light, which inlighteneth e­uerie man, that commeth into the world. And whereas the fist verse tells vs, that the light shineth in darkness; the tenth speaketh of his being in the world, and the ele­uenth of his comming to his owne. The successe is alike in both places; The darknesse comprehended it not, verse 5. The world knew him not, verse 10. His owne receiued him not, verse 11. Thus hath our Euangelist labou­red to set out to all men, the bounty of the Lord, in sending so glorious a light, to shine in the middest of darknes; and the vnkindnes, and blindnes of men, that refuse to bee iulightened. For the distribution of these 5. verses by themselues, wee must obserue, first, that the Euangelist proceedes to describe the light, Verse 9. Then he sheweth the actions thereof, in the later part of the same verse. & the other 4. In the description, the title [Page 307] True is added to the light. The actions of the light, are set downe in generall, It lighteneth euery man, that commeth into the world: And the manner of the in­lightening followes. Where wee consider, how the light offers it selfe. Hee was in the world; Hee came to his owne. How is hee entertained; The world knew him not. His owne receiued him not. In particu­lar, the benefit that comes by the light is declared, verse 12. 13.

Let vs come now to expound the verses seuerally: and in the 9. wee are first to inquire of the translation: then of the distribution thereof: Secondly, of the Euan­gelists meaning, and the doctrine it selfe. The translation in the former words, That was the light, hath two doubts; How wee must supply that, which in the originall is not exprest: How the articles therein vsed are to bee translated. The Greeke hath no more set downe but was a light: The question is, what is heere to be vnder­stood, to make the sentence perfect. One of these two things must needs bee intended by the Euangelist; either hee doth affirme, that there was a true light, though Iohn was not the light, or els hee shewes vs, which was the true light. If the former please vs, then wee must supply that which wants in this sort, There was a true light. But this may well seeme needeless; because both the Euangelist, had auoucht as much before, That life was the light of men: and if there had bin no light, or the matter had bin in question, whether there were any light or no, it had bin in vaine for him to haue said, that Iohn was not the light. For that speech presupposeth, that There was a light, though Iohn were not he. It is therfore more likely, or rather certaine, that the holy Ghost in­tends to shew vs who was the light.

In this point, our Popish Rhemists agree with vs, how­soeuer according to their custome, they will needs differ from vs, as far as they can, in translation. Let vs heare [Page 308] their conceit in translating. It was the true light. Why It? For neither the originall Greeke, which is the authenti­call record, nor the vulgar Latin, which they professe to follow, hath any more It, then there. They had our translation before their face, That was the true light; when they deuised, how they might disagree from vs in words at the least, if not in matter. At last out comes this new nothing. It was the light [...] What is this same It? Who knowes not, that in plaine English, this worde It doth not so fitly, or fully expresse, which was the true light as that doth? Let me shew you that I say, by par­ticular applying it to the matter, wee haue in hand. It is agreed vpon, that in the former verse the Euangelist tells vs, Iohn was not the light, but was sent to beare witnesse of the light. Which then, or who was the light? It was the light, say our Rhemists: who can ghesse almost what they meane? If hee had bin describing of the light, and had affirmed it to bee such, or such, then might this fitly haue bin brought in; It was the true light. But nothing beeing in that sort spoken of it, in this part of the Euangelists discourse; surely it was not fit, to giue vs knowledge of his true meaning, in this place.

This will better appeare by comparing our transla­tion with this affectation of theirs. That (say wee) was the true light. Would you know which that? That light, of which Iohn was sent to beare witnes, was the true light. Who doth not easily conceiue this? Shall wee translate as our English Papists doe; It was the true light? Expresse that you say, like a Grammarian. Must you not be driuen to this, It light, of which Iohn, &c. Make the best of it you possibly can, and you must bee forced to ex­pound It, by That light. It was, that is, That light was. See, see, whither a contentious desire of dissenting from vs, hath drawne you as it were by the neck, against lear­ning, and common sense. You will say perhaps; It is a [Page 309] small matter, about which I make this a doe against them. Bee it so. And yet I discerne not, how it should bee counted a thing of small importance, to make the word of God without any good sense, by a false translati­on. But let it bee as small a matter as you will. What is it to affect, and seeke out such a manner of transla­ting, where the truth is manifest vnto them, and wil­fully reiected by them? It will not serue the turne to say, as some Papists doe without conscience, or ciuill equitie; It is the translation or exposition of Heretikes; Maldon in Ioa. 1. 1 therefore I will not like it; as if the men, and not the matter were to be regarded. I must needs confesse, that when I first lookt vpon this Elephants calfe, that was so long a breeding, I wondred in my selfe, what so strange a shape should portend. But when I had taken a lit­tle better view of it, I perceiued the crafty purpose of the damme in so monstrous a birth. It is a principle in Poperie, that the Scriptures are not to bee read of the common Lay people, as they call them. This be­ing ouerthrowne by the force of the truth in the Gos­pell, when they saw there was no remedy, but they must of necessitie affoord their poore seduced follow­ers some translation of the Bible, they thought, they would so handle the matter, that they should bee little the better for it. Therefore haue they so translated the new Testament, as Aristotle is said to haue set out some of his bookes, as if hee had not set them out at all: Arist in opist. ad Alex. Because they were so hard to bee vnderstood of any, but his owne Schollers. Yet his dealing was farre hone­ster, then these mens, who haue laboured for nothing more, then to make such a translation, as for the hard­ness, and vnpleasantness thereof, might driue all men from the reading and studying of it. If this censure seeme vncharitable, or vnciuill to any man, let mee intreate him to suspend his iudgement, till he haue seene what I can, and will, if it please God, discouer in the exposi­tion [Page 310] of this Gospell, touching their course in transla­ting.

Wee vnderstand what supply is to be made by the ex­pressing of that, which in the Originall might be con­cealed better, then in our English. Now to the Ar­ticles: Which are two, or rather, one twice repeated. For the Text lies thus; The light, the true. It is indeed ve­ry certaine; that the vse of Articles in the Greek is ve­ry vncertaine; as I shewed at the first verse. Yet haue wee two reasons, why wee shoulde looke for some e­speciall signification of it, in this place. First wee see, that in the next verse before, it is of necessarie vse. Hee was not the light. Take away the Article, and reade it thus; Hee was not light, or a light. This were to Ioh. 5. 35. affirme a direct vntruth, contrarie to the Scriptures. For Iohn (as our Sauiour himselfe hath testified of him) was a burning and a shining candle. Therefore must wee so conceiue the Euangelist, that hee denies him to haue bin The light, not a light, or light. Secondly, the doubling of the Article, and applying it both to the Substantiue light, and the Adiectiue true (whereas vsually it belongs onely to the former, in the nature of the tongue, and practise of the Scripture) notes vnto vs some thing more then ordinarie of that kinde, Mat. 3. 17. [...] whereof there is speech. This is that my Sonne, that belo­uedone. If the Article had bin left out in the later word, any sonne might haue bin signified by that voice from heauen, for ought the words necessarily imported. But the repeating of it, ties it as it were to the Person of our Sauiour Christ, who was the onely naturall sonne of God his father. And this is so much the more to bee considered, because it is very rare in the Scripture to find examples of it. Well then; How shall wee translate it? That was the light, the true light. These words expresse the Euangelists sense to the full, & yet leaue the Greek text vnblemished, by putting the first, and last words in a dif­ferent [Page 31] letter from the rest, as it is well obserued in our common translation, that euery man may know what is in the Originall, and what is added to set forth the holy Ghosts meaning, according to the proper­tie of the seuerall tongues, into which the Hebrew, and Greeke are turned, for the peoples vnderstan­ding.

But of the translation in this former part of the verse, enough: that, which I haue to say concerning the later part, I thinke best to reserue, till I haue spo­ken of the distribution of the whole, and come to the seuerall handling of that clause by it selfe. In seeking out the distribution, I doe not inquire, into how many parcels, or members, the matter of it is to bee diuided, which is commonly signified by that tearme distribution; but I am to search first, whether the whole verse be one proposition, or sentence: or els two. In the first verse, to make that I say, plaine, we had three seuerall propositions. 1 The Worde was in the beginning: 2. the Worde was with GOD: 3. the Worde was GOD: The second verse contained but one, The same Worde was in the beginning with GOD. For although there bee, at the least two diuers points in that sentence: (The Worde was in the beginning; and the Worde was GOD) yet they are comprised in one proposition. So are they also in this verse, which I now expound, That was the true light; the light in­lighteneth euery man, that cōmeth into the world. Yet per­haps these two make but one proposition in the Euan­gelists writing. If any man bee desirous to know, why I cast this doubt here, rather then in any of the former verses, all which in a manner haue more sen­tences then one; hee is to vnderstand, that none of them, afforded the like cause of doubting; euery one ha­uing the seuerall propositions so distinct, that they could not well bee tied altogether in one. But heere the [Page 312] case is otherwise, as you shall presently see. For those wordes in the later part, which haue a full sense in them­selues, may notwithstanding reasonably seeme to be­long to the former part, and to make vp the Antecedent or Subiect of the sentence: Beare with mee I pray you a little in these tearmes; I avoide them, all I can: and now I am forced to vse them, I will doe my best to make you vnderstand them. Euery sentence, or proposition hath something as the ground, and matter, some other thing as an appurtenance to that; which is eyther af­firmed, or denied of it. As in the first verse: The Words is the cheefe matter; that which is auoucht of the worde is, that hee was GOD. The worde there­fore in that sentence is the Antecedent, or Subiect; GOD is the Consequent, Attribute or Predicate. Let me not trouble you too much with these words of Art; but rather apply them as shortly as I can to the matter I haue in hand.

How this verse may well consist of two diuers sen­tences, and what they are, I signified before. Let mee shew now in what sort they may bee shut vp, both in one: which may thus be done. That light which in­lighteneth euery man that commeth into the world, was the light, the true light. The Antecedent or Subiect is The light, which inlighteneth euery man, &c. Of this light it is affirmed, that it was the true light. Both the words will beare this disposing of the verse, and the sense will bee good, and fit; yea I may say more: The speech of the Euangelist may seeme, more perfect in it selfe, and to haue lesse neede of any supply, if wee so vnderstand it. For both the Greeke, and the English may conue­niently, and easily bee conceiued, if wee so reade, and expound the verse, without the expresse adding of any oher worde, but That, in the English: The Greeke needes absolutely none at all. Yet I rather choose to diuide the verse into two distinct propositions; partly for [Page 313] the consent of all interpreters of it, which I haue reade; but especially, because beeing so diuided, it seemes to depend better vpon that, which went before. That light of which Iohn came to beare witnesse was the true light: Which light also inlighteneth euery man, that commeth in­to the world If any man list to take it the other way, he may shew the agreement of it, with the former, in this sort. Iohn was not the light: That light which inlighteneth euery man, &c. was the true light: Now this light is CHRIST, as the Euangelist had said, verse 4. That was the light of men. But the other interpretation ioines somewhat more close to the later part of the verse go­ing immediately before; But was sent to beare witnes of the light. That light was the true light, &c. The verse then hath two seuerall propositions, or sentences, to bee handled seuerally, each by it selfe. That was the light, the true light. First of the words what is meant by True: What the Article being doubled imports. Then of the Euangelists meaning, and the Doctrine of the place. Truth in the Scripture is commonly taken, as the nature of the worde requires for that which is contrary to fal­shood. Cast off lying (saith the Apostle) and let euery one Ephe. 4. 25. speake truth to his neighbour. Sometimes it is put for that, which is opposite to the shadowes of the Lawe. The Ioh 1 17. lawe was giuen by Moses, but grace, and truth came by IESVS CHRIST. And this sense hath also war­rant from the vse of the worde, in common speech; where the patterne, or a thing it selfe, that is inuta­ted, or counterfetted is called the Truth. The truth Vritas vincit iantationem. excelleth the imitation. So the Lord is named the true God: This is euerlasting life to know thee, the onely true God. Ioh 17. 3. Some thinke that by this truth, or trueness, the light is signified to bee such by nature, and of it selfe, not by Ciril. in Ioa. lib. 1. cap. 9. grace, or participation. And so may the Lord bee called the true beeing: because he is so naturally, and imparts to all things such being, as they haue. But of this significa­tion [Page 314] I thinke there is no example to bee found in Scrip­ [...]ure. The two former agree very well to our Sauiour, who is indeede the true light, without any darkness of error, or falshood in him. Hee whom God hath sent, spea­keth the words of God; for God giueth him not the spirit by measure. Ioh. 3. 34. And of him were all the ceremonies of the lawe, shadowes, and figures; as the Apostle hath shewed at large in the Epistle to the Hebrewes; especially in the ninth and tenth Chapters.

But the best way to vnderstand the true sense of the worde; is to compare it with other of the same kinde, in the Scripture. For which purpose what shall wee neede to goe any farder, then this Gospell? Wherein wee haue two like speeches, vttered by our Sauiour, of himselfe. My father (saith hee) giueth you the true Ioh. 6. 32. bread from Heauen. What true bread was this? It is euident, that hee speaketh it of himselfe, whom a lit­tle before hee had called the meate that indureth to euerla­sting Verse 27. life. Heere he compares himselfe with that Manna, whereof the Iewes boasted, and wherewith they say Moses fed them, euen with bread from Heauen. To this our Sauiour answereth; that Moses gaue them not bread from heauen: but my father giueth you (saith he) the true bread from Heauen. They had bread from heauen, by the ministerie of Moses, as they proued by the place Psal. 78. 24. of the Psalme. He gaue them bread from heauen. How then saith our Sauiour, that Moses gaue them not bread from heauen, and that his father giues them the true bread? Surely, that bread, which they had by the meanes of Moses, was true bread, and did truely the office of bread, to feed their bodies. What then? Doth he meane, that it was but a figure of the heauenly bread which God was to giue, and now in, and by him, did giue them? This was true indeede; but not so much to purpose, as our Sauiours speech was, beeing rightly vnderstood. Hee Ver. 27. had perswaded them before, to labour for the meat, that [Page 315] endureth to euerlasting life. They would needes haue Ver. 30. Ver. 31. him shew them some signe, that is, worke some mira­cle, whereby they might be occasioned to beleeue him, that there was better bread, then such as their fathers had eaten in the Wildernes. To this our Lord answeres, that Moses gaue them not bread from heauen, namely no such Ver. 32. bread, as could endure, to life eternall. That bread, that could so feede them, was the true bread, and was gi­uen by his father; in comparison whereof, the other was not worthy the name of bread. The vse of the bread is to nourisn, and continue life: and that bread which can not worke such an effect in him, that eates it, is not true bread. Your fathers (saith he afterward) dideate Manna in the Wildernes and are dead. How Ver. 49. Ver. 50. then was that true bread? This is the bread that came downe from heauen, that hee which eateth of it, should not die. Loe: heere we haue the true bread, which performes that in truth to the soule, that the other doth but as it were offer to the body. Therefore also he tells them a little after, that his flesh is truely meate, and his bloud truly Ver 55. drink. A like place we haue in the same Gospell, where he tearmes himselfe the true Vine. I am the true Vine. Why is Ioh. 15. 1. he the true Vine? Because hee doth indeede truely, and effectually nourish, comfort, & susteine those, that cleaue to him by faith; whereas the best Vine in the world, hath somtimes dead branches, and at the last dieth it selfe.

Now then if any man demaund in what sense Christ is the true light; in the very same (say I) in which hee doth affirme, that he is the true bread, and the true Vine. The Sonne, which is the fountaine of this visible light, doth not so truely shine, and giue light to the eyes of the body, as Iesus Christ, doth inlighten the vnderstand­ing; which is the eye of the Soule. Iesus Christ? (may Ambros. de fide contra Arian. cap. 3. some man say.) Why not rather God the Father; or, at least, the whole Trinitie? whose ioint action it is to in­lighten, and not the Sonnes alone. These obiecti­ons [Page 316] are easily answered. For it is more then plame, that our Euangelist speakes only of the Sonne, in this whole description. What reason is there then, to vnderstand this one verse of any other, but of him alone? How should this point, applied either to the Father, or to the Trinitie, haue any due place in this discourse? Is it not also apparent, that the light here spoken of, is the same, whereof Iohn bare witness; and which is said, in the verses following, to haue come vnto his owne, and to haue giuen the priuiledge to men, of becomming the sonnes of God? Consider yet farder, how vnfit it had bin for Saint Iohn, hauing called the Worde by the name of the light, in the former verses, here, vpon a sodaine, to giue the same title to any other of the persons, or the Godhead. Will any man take the worde in such diuers sort, if hee bee not constrai­ned to doe so, by cleere euidence of the Text? But so to vnderstand it, were to couer the place with darknesse, not to make the sense of it cleere, and euident. But the action of inlightening is common to all three Persons. So are all actions of any per­son of the three which concerne any other, beside the Persons themselues. To choose, to iustifie, to sanctifie, to redeeme, to instruct, to inspire, to com­fort, &c. are all common workes of the Diuine na­ture: Yet are they appropriated, in the Scripture, seuerally to the seuerall persons, as all men know, and as I must shew particularly, when I come to the 33. verse

In the meane while, let vs goe forward with the ex­position of this verse; wherein we are next to consider, what the doubling of the article may teach vs. The light; the true light: was it not enough to haue said The light? For surely that implies an especiall excel­lencie of the light, wee meane. There bee per­haps many candles, torches, starres, and moones: but the sunne onely is the light. They are lights, [Page 317] but not the light. If that would not serue the turne, hee might haue said, The true light; then which, what can bee said more? All this contented not the holy Ghost: but that he might rauish vs with the loue, and admiration of this light, hee calls it The light, the true light. Some apply it more particularly, and p [...]ecisely to our Sauiour, in these two considerati­ons. The light (say they) with an Article. to note the excellencie of the Person; The true light, with the same Article repeated, to signifie the glorie and brightness of that knowledge, which flowes to men from that light. I deny not, but the Euangelist comprizeth both vnder these wordes. I doubt whe­ther hee intended to giue vs notice of them so distinct­ly, by the repetition of the Article, or no.

It remaines, that I deliuer the plaine mea­ning of the Euangelist, and declare the Doctrine conteyned in it. Wherein I may, and will bee the shorter, because somwhat hath bin said already of each, in examining the former points. What then meanes Saint Iohn by these wordes; That was the light; &c. Hee had told vs in the last verse, that Iohn the Baptist was not the light, but was sent before, as a seruant, to giue notice, and to beare witness of the light. Now hee proceedes to shew vs the excellencie of that light; in respect of whom, Iohn, though hee were of so rare giftes, and highe account was no body. Looke vpon the Moone in the night time, when shee is at the full, and you would thinke, you had light enough. Surely hee, that had neuer seene the Sunne, would easily bee perswaded, to take the Moone for the Well, or spring of light. But if hee should once come to see the beauty, and brightness of the sunne, hee would be ashamed of his former childishness, and ignorance, [Page 318] that thought that to bee all, which in a manner, was no­thing at all.

The Doctrine is as plaine, and was handled more largely, at the 4. and 5. verses. CHRIST is the true light. There are candles and torches here on earth; men that haue discouered some truth concerning God. There are Starres, and Moones shining from heauen: Such as, by supernaturall illumination, haue reuea­led many, and great mysteries, concerning our re­demption, and saluation by IESVS CHRIST. But all these are nothing to him. If it were possible to ioine all the lights, I spake of, together; would they match the brightnes of the sunne? How much lesse can these torches, and starres, which haue all their light, from the Sonne of God, equall the autor, and giuer of that light? Let the light, they giue, bee as great, as it can reasonably bee imagined to bee, yet are they not the true light. what doe wee then gazing, and gaping vpon Men, as if there were no light, but in them? If any man haue a little more knowledge, then others, that hee can teach vs somewhat, which euerie one is not acquainted withall, wee wonder at him, as the onely light: Yea, wee are oftentimes so carried a­way with a conceite of his brightness, that the light it selfe is either despised or forgotten in compari­son of him. It was somwhat more excusable in the Iewes (though it were intollerable) to preferre Iohn before CHRIST; because they had settled a reuerend opinion of him in their hearts, when they had no thought of any other Messiah: But how shall wee bee excused, that know who is the light, and yet dote vpon other so much, that wee hardly thinke on him? Hee, that fits our humour, either with some point of Diuinitie, which wee knew not, or with some worde of exhortation, that wee desired, is so admired, and followed, that wee are ready to receiue [Page 319] any thing, hee will deliuer vnto vs for truth, without viewing it by the true light. I speake not this to dis­grace Iohn, but to magnifie Christ. Iohn was a light, but not the light. To speake truely, and plainely, Iohn was no light at all; as our Euangelist affirmed in the for­mer verse. Hee was a candlestick, or a torch-bearer, to holde out, and shew the light; but, the light hee was not. Hee glistered in the eyes of men, as a peece of glasse, or any burnisht metall doth, vpon which the sunne, or some other light beates, which is not seene of vs, but by reflexion, at the second hand. To con­clude; that which the Euangelist saith here of our Sauiour, is the very same, that the Baptist woulde teach his disciples, whome hee sent to Iesus, saying; Art thou he, that should come, or shall we looke for an o­ther? Iohn knew well enough, that Iesus was the Sa­uiour, as hee testified at the time of his baptisme, and Mat. 11. 2. 3. afterward: but his Schollers were not so perswaded. Therefore hee sends them on such a message, that they might themselues discerne him to bee the light. This is that, which the Apostles auouched, after his death, that There is no other name vnder heauen, by which we Act. 4. 12. can be saued.

Miserable then, and damnable is the case of those men, who for any benefit, and commoditie in this world, or for any paine, and torment, that can be here indured, for a time, renounce the Sauiour of their soules, and light of eternall life, Iesus Christ. Doe you maruell brethren, what should make me breake out into such a speech, in this Auditorie? All of vs professe beleefe in Christ; we haue all bin baptized; wee haue all bin taught. Put case wee did all beleeue indeede, for the perswasion of the truth, wee now maintaine, as wee haue bin taught; were it therefore needeless to vse any word of exhortation, to confirme vs in the truth? Is not our Faith nourisht, and strengthened in vs, by [Page 320] the same meanes, by which it is begotten? I say no­thing of our naturall ignorance, which had neede of much teaching. I let passe our shuttle memo­ries, which easily forget that, wee haue learned. Let mee omitt our vnruly affections, which draw vs away from the meditation of those things, that concerne sal­uation.

Shall I tell you in one worde, why I haue entred into this course, vpon a point so well knowne, and generally resolued of? Did none of you euer heare of any Christians, of any Euglishmen, that haue denied the faith of CHRIST, and become Renegados? I must needes confesse, I speake vpon report, not vpon sight, or experience; but yet vpon such report as I haue good cause to credit, both for the honestie, and the number of the reporters. It hath come to passe (my heart bleeds within mee to thinke, and vtter it) yea it doth fall out daily, a great deale too often, that men trained vp here amongst vs in the religion of IESVS CHRIST, for some worldly respects, without conscience of their profession, without care of their soules, without regard of their credits, without feare of damnation, haue blasphemed the Lord IESVS CHRIST, that died for them, and turned Turkes. O the weakness of our faith! O the strength of our corruption! O the hypocrisie of our hearts! That, which happeneth to one man, may happen to any man. Doest thou beleeue? So they said, and (like enough) thought too. But thou art strong in faith. Who (almost) thinkes himselfe weake? The pride of our nature doth so puffe vs vp, with a good con­ceite of our owne knowledge, and beliefe, that the eies of our mindes are closed, and our sight dimmed, if not blinded, that wee are not able to giue any true iudgement (naturally) of our greatest imperfections. Feare makes vs wary, least wee shoulde fall. Hope [Page 321] fils vs with presumption, that wee run headlong to our fall.

Be not high minded, but feare: Feare thine owne corruption: suspect thine owne strength. Thy strength say d I? nay, thy weakenes rather. If thou wilt pre­sume vpon Gods powerfull mercy to vphold thee; lay hold vpon the meanes, hee hath appointed for the staying of thee vp. Beleeue, remember, resolue, that Christ onely is the light. I am not to enter into any discourse, whereby I may instruct, or direct thee how to confirme thy faith in this point; but onely to exhort thee thereunto, according as this doctrine giues me iust occasion.

It is not vnlikely, that there are some in this Assem­bly, perhappes (as in such a small company) not a few, whome these thinges may neerely concerne: Mar­chants; a good part of whose estate lyes abroade in Turkey or Barbarie. Maryners, whose course of life, and helpe of maintenance, requires imployment in those parts. Trauaylers, whose desire to see fashions, and learne experience, will draw them into all Coun­tries, and companies. Young impes, who becomming apprentices, shall bee transported out of this nuiserie, where they haue beene bred, to bee planted in those places for many yeeres, euen for the chief time of their growthe. Shall I craue leaue of you, to speake a few wordes to the point in hand, with your fauour and at­tention? I will not aske you, whether you beleeue that the Scripture, contayned in the olde, and newe Testament, bee the worde of God or no. I knowe you beleeue it. As needlesse is it, yea perhappes more needlesse, to tell you, that this Scripture (be­ing the worde of GOD) is of certaine, and vn­doubted truth, both for the whole, and euerie part of it. Let vs come more particularly to the matter, wee are now in handling. The holy Euangelist Saint Iohn, [Page 322] inspired by the holy Ghost, affirmes, vpon the war­rant of that inspiration, that our Lorde Iesus Christ, is the light. Of the trueth heereof thou profeslest, thou art resolued. With this resolution (as thou per­swadest thy selfe) thou saylest, as thy occasions call thee, into Heathen Countries, where Christ, and this truth, concerning him, is not onely doubted of, but denyed, hated, impugned, persecuted. It falles out, while thou art there, that either thine owne mis­demeanor, in the carriage of thy person, or managing of thy businesse, casts thee into some daunger: or the opportunitie of some pleasure, profite, or honour bewitcheth thee with an earnest desire thereof. There is no meanes for thee to auoyde that daunger, or to enioy those benefittes, but to disclayme Iesus Christ, and to embrace Mahomet. Now shewe thy faith; now make proofe of thy constancie: nowe it must, and will bee seene, whether thy profession bee sincere, or counterfaite. What standest thou waue­ring, and tottering this way, and that way? If Ma­homet bee the light, followe him; If Iesus bee the inlightner of thy soule, goe after him. Doubting is not of faith. Thy feete treade one way, and thy face lookes another way. Thy tongue hardely for­beares to denie that, to bee true, which thy heart woulde fayne thinke to bee false. What meanes thy crauing respite to giue in thine aunswere? A [...]orte beleagered, that offers parle, is halfe yeel­ded.

Thy heart is euen gone, and thou carest not, that God sees it, as long as men heare not thy tongue professe it. If, at the last, with much a doe, thou re­solue to continue in thy Christian profession: yet re­member, that hee which is long, ere hee doe that, hee knowes ought to bee done, a greate while would not doe it.

But thou hast somewhat, perhappes, to say for thy selfe in this case. Let vs giue thee the hearing: speake thy minde freely, and spare not. Well; I see what thou wouldest say: that if thou perseuer in acknowledging Christ to bee the light, thou shalt bee sure to bee clapt in prison, and to bee depriued of the light of this worlde: but if thou honour Mahomet, as the tea­cher of truth from God, thou shalt shine in the glory of this life. Is this all? Alas poore wretch; what shall it auayle thee, to escape a few yeeres imprison­ment in this world, and to bee shutte vppe, for it, in the Dungeon of hell, world without ende? What art thou the better, for a little painted glorie, and trash in this life, when thereby thou shalt lose the glorie of God in the life to come? Art thou afrayde of a darke prison; and doost not tremble at the horror of hel­lish darkenesse? why doost thou not consider, that Christ is the light? Can hee bee in darkenesse, that hath the light with him, and shining to him? Be not de­ceiued, nor discomforted. This light shall shewe the more, in that darke Iayle, thou fearest, then the Sunne canne doe, at the noone day, in the open fieldes. As for the shadow of glorie, thou so doatest vpon, what is it to the light of truth? Say thou wert Emperour of Turkey, or didst commaunde the whole Worlde; without this light thou wert couered with more then Aegyptian darkenesse. What canst thou hope for by Mahomet, when all hee coulde deuise to pro­mise, is nothing but a little sensuall, and beastly voluptuousnesse; the happinesse of a Goate, a Swine, or a Dogge, and not of a man? They doe all they can to turne themselues into Beasts, that feede their brutish humour, with the conceit of such filthy pleasures.

How blind must they needes be, that embrace dark­nesse for light? There was som shew for the error of the Iewes. The Turkes haue not the least colour for beleefe [Page 324] in Mahomet: except a fewe knackes of cousinage, which some fooles tooke for miracles. The Alcoran, wherin the light of his knowledge should shine, is such a disorderly bundle of senselesse dreames, and idle tales without head or foote, that a man of any reason cannot read, or heare it with patience. But the true light powreth foorth streames of admirable know­ledge, for the inlightning of all men, that they may, see the truth of God to saluation. So it followeth in my text: which inlightneth euerie man that commeth into the world. This is the other proposition or sen­tence, in which (as in the former) First, of the words, then of the Euangelists meaning. In the words I finde some occasion of doubt, concerning the translation: of which I wonder that our Rhemists tooke not hold, ha­uing so faire an opportunitie. The Greeke worde, which wee translate, That commeth, properly signifi­eth [...] venientem. comming. comming. And the Latine, which the Rhemists professe to followe, with superstitious precisenesse, hath exprest it by a worde of the same kinde, and sig­nification: How chance our newe Translaters, hauing an English word so fit for the purpose, yea fitter for the Greeke then their Latine is, and fully expressing the Latine, did not remember to make their aduantage of it? Doubtlesse, they neuer markt it; For if they had, it is apparant by their ordinarie practise, that they would haue vsed it; especially, seeing it differs from our Tran­slation, & affords a double interpretation, as the Greek doth.

There are two thinges mentioned in this proposi­tion: that which inlightneth, and that, which is inlight­ned; the light, and man. The word comming, in the ori­ginall is such, that it may well agree either with the light, or with man. To the light it may thus bee ioyned; which light comming into the worlde, inlightneth euerie man. If wee referre it to man, wee may translate it [Page 325] thus, which inlightneth euerie man comming into the world, or that commeth into the world. I will not striue much a­bout so small a matter; yet (to speake my minde plain­ly) I hold that word for the better, which comes neerer to the originall, and hath also example from the Latin. Onely there seemes to bee this inconuenience, in fol­lowing of the Greek, and translation of the word com­ming, that wee shall bee thought to restrain this inlight­ning to the time of a mans birth, or comming into the world. For, so much the wordes ordinarily import. Which inlightneth euerie man comming into the world: that is, euerie man when hee comes into the world. And then cannot this bee vnderstood of supernaturall grace, and teaching by reuelation: but of the light of nature; whereas the holy Ghost, in this place, speakes onely of the former: as I shewed at the fourth verse. Yet the Greeke and Latine are both subiect to the like incon­uenience, and the English may bee otherwise vnder­stood; to signifie no more, then the common transla­tion, that commeth. It is somewhat to haue warrant from the Greeke, and consent of the Latine, though it bee not altogether so plaine, as perhappes otherwise it might bee. The Rhemists haue reiected both. But in the next words they haue followed the Latine, and left both vs and the Greeke.

The world, sayeth our translation, according to the [...] Greeke. This world, sayth the Latine, and the Rhemists after it. It is no great matter whether of the two wee read. For this world, and the world, in euerie mans vn­derstanding, signifie the same thing. But who had not rather drinke of the Fountaine, then of the Cha­nell, though the water bee pure, and sweete in both?

But of the translation enough: now a worde or two of the Euangelistes manner of speech: Euerie man, that commeth into the world. Why did not Saint Iohn [Page 326] content himselfe to say Euerie man, but addeth, that commeth into the world. Shall wee imagine, as some haue done very strangely, that the soules of men were created at the first altogether by God, and are reserued by him, to bee coupled to bodies, according to their Origen. de princip. lib. 1. cap. 3 & lib. 2. cap. 8. behauiour, good, or badde, in that world, where they were created? This idle fancy, and fonde error is va­nisht long since, that it were lost labour to spend anic time in the refuting of it.

There is another opinion, in it selfe true, but not fitte for this text; that therefore men are thus des­cribed, because the soules, though they haue not anie beeing with God, before the creation, or making of the bodies, to which they are to bee ioyned; yet they may bee sayde to come into the worlde, be­cause they are not framed of any matter, as the bo­dies are; but haue their originall immediately, in re­gard of their substance, from God himselfe: whereas the bodies so come into the world, that they are fashi­oned, and formed heere belowe of an earthly matter. But this seemes to be ouer-curious, and nothing agree­able to the simplicitie of the Gospell, which enters not into such opinions, as little concerne our knowledge, in any point of Religion.

What is then the meaning of this speech, That commeth into the world? Surely, nothing else, but that is borne; and so it is often vsed in the Scripture, as the contrarie, to goe out of the worlde, is to die. Naked came I out of my mothers womhe (sayeth Iob) and na­ked Iob. 1. 21. shall I returne thither againe. To come out of the wombe, is to bee borne: toreturne, that is, to goe out of the world, or to leaue it, is to die. The same kinde of speech, the wise King vseth: As Hee came foorth of Eccles. 5. 14. his mothers belly, hee shall returne naked to goe as hee came.

To these, adde that of the Apostle; Wee brought [Page 327] nothing into this world, and it is certaine wee shall carrie 1. Tim. 6. 7. nothing out. VVee brought nothing: namely, when by our birth wee came into the worlde; VVee shall carrie nothing out, when wee dye. This bringing, and carrying away, argues a comming, and a depar­ting. But why woulde the Euangelist so describe men? I am wholly of their opinion in this point, who thinke that hee followed the Hebrewe Rabbins herein, who doo oftentimes call a man by the like name; vnder which they comprehend infants too, none excepted.

This manner of speech it is likely the common people had learned of their teachers; and there­fore by it Saint Iohn would farther teach them, that CHRIST is hee, which inlightneth all men, one, and other, that no man may except himselfe. Some expound this comming into the worlde, of re­generation by baptisme. By what warrant? where is it euer so called in Scripture? Howe canne it bee so tearmed? Baptisme rather carries out of the world, then brings vs into it. For in, and by Baptisme wee renounce the world, and dye vnto it; so farre are wee from comming into it thereby. It is therefore best, and safest, to take the wordes in the playnest sense, and to vnderstande by them, To bee borne, which is common to all men whatsoeuer: so much the rather, because our Lorde in the Gospell hath a like speech, by which hee notes all men. Among them, (sayeth hee) which are borne of VVoemen, arose Mat. 11. 11. there not a greater then Iohn Baptist. Is this any more, then if hee had sayd, Among men, there is not a greater then Iohn?

Hauing thus cleered those doubtes, which, by reason of the wordes, might make the Euangelistes meaning more darke, and hard; Let vs come now [Page 328] to the matter, that is heere deliuerd. In the for­mer parte of the verse, our Lorde was sayde to bee the true light; in this later proposition, hee is shewed to bee so, by an especiall effect, which is inlightning euery man. Is euerie man then inlightned? How else, if our Sauiour inlighten euerie man? But there are many, not men only, but nations, that neuer re­ceiued any light of the Gospell, or inlightning from Christ.

This doubt hath made diuers writers expound this place of the light of nature, which wee haue by creation. And this, it is apparant, wee haue of Christ, By whome all thinges were made, who is the life of men. But what reason should leade vs, to apply this to na­turall light? seeing wee haue made it manifest, that in the former verses, it is to bee vnderstoode of that, which is supernaturall. Why should wee giue the worde light, such a signification heere, as it hath no where else, in all the Scripture? But it is no where vsed for the light of reason, which wee haue by nature; nor for that generall knowledge of GOD, which wee partly bring with vs into the world, and partly attaine to, by the contemplation of the crea­tures.

Wherefore wee must needes conceiue, that the Euangelist speakes of that lights which men receiue by Reuelation from GOD, concerning the meanes of euerlasting life, by faith in Christ; of which the greatest part of the worlde neuer had any notice. It behooues vs then to consider the poynt with good aduise, that wee may vnderstande the Euangelists meaning aright; and neither deny, that our Sauiour inlightneth euerie man, nor confesse that euerie man is inlightned with the knowledge of him to sal­uation.

The auncient Diuines of former ages, seeing [Page 329] these inconveniences, and desiring to prouide some re­rredy for them; by their meditation, and learning, did find out, and leaue vnto vs 2 espseciall answers, for the satisfying of these doubts. First they teach vs, that Christ Aug. Enchirid ad Laurent. cap. 103 Depeccat. merit. 8 remiss [...]. 1. c. 25 may truely be said to enlighten euery man, because no man is inlightned, but by him. If there were but one Physician, or one Schoolemaster in this Citty, of that one it might truly be affirmed, that he taught all, that he cured all. This is he (might we say) that cureth euery man: This is he, that teacheth euery one. Not meaning thereby, that euery particular man, woman, and childe, in the Citty, is taught or healed; but signifying in gene­rall, that there is no other Physician, no other teacher, by which any one receiues health, or instruction. So our Sauiour Christ may be conceiu'd to inlighten euery mā; because euery one that is inlightned, hath that light from him; and not because euery one is inlightned. So that Saint Iohns meaning, according to this interpreta­tion, must be thus vnderstood; Iesus, of whome Iohn bare witnesse, was the true light: and whosoeuer is inlightned, is inlightned by him. This exposition, as euery man may easily discerne, agreeth very fitly with the former part, and proueth it very strongly. For indeed what soun­der proofe can we require, to assure vs, that our Lorde was the true light, then that euery man fetcheth all the light, he hath, from him? Either we must grant, that no man at all hath any light of grace; or else yeeld, that he, from whom he hath that light, is the true light. The for­mer is not doubted of; How then shoulde the later bee in question? The second answere doth not so much re­spect the partyes inlightned, as him, that doth inlighten; who shineth to euery man, that will open his eies to be­hold him. For as the naturall light, spreadeth the beames thereof abroad, in al places, and giueth light to euery man, as much as lyes in it, though blinde men see neuer a whit, the better: So this true light, offereth [Page 330] himselfe to al men, shineth vpon euery man, that who so wil may bee inlightned by him. It may seem perhaps to some man, that inlightning signifies a farder matter, then shining vpon a man; and so, I remember, it was obserued at verse the fift, The light shineth in darknesse. Those blind men, I named ere while, had the Sunne shining on them, but yet they were not inlightned: vn­lesse by inlightning we vnderstand no more, but being made visible, that we may be seene. And in that sense indeed, a tree, or a stone, is inlightned by the Sunne, as wel as any liuing creature, that hath eies to see with­al. This cannot bee the meaning of the Euangelist. For he speakes not of any mans being made knowne, or apparant to other men; but of euery mans knowe­ing, and seeing those matters, which concerne his ever­lasting saluation. That is to bee inlightned; to haue the doctrine of saluation declared to him; so that hee discerne, and acknowledge it for such, the truth there­of being made manifest to his conscience; or at the least the sense of that, which is deliuered, being euident, and cleere vnto him. If this later point bee not performed; surely there is no inlightning, but at the most, shi­ning.

The word, which our Euangelist vseth in this place, signifieth in the Scripture, both the holding out of light, by which, things may be made visible to men, and the giuing of them sight, by which they may see. Candles are said, to light vs with their brightnesse; that is, to afford Luk. 11. 36. vs light, by meanes whereof things may bee seene. And in this sense, the things that are seene, to speake truly, and properly are inlightned, and not wee, in whom there is no alteration, by the presence of the light; but only the forme, or shape of that, which is to be seene, is presented to our view by the light shining vpon it, and bringing the proportion, and colours of it to our eies. This signification of the word is the more [Page 331] common of the 2: Iudge nothing before the time, vntill the Lorde come, who will lighten things, that are hid in darknesse. 1. Cor. 4. 5. In this place of Scripture, as euery one sees, the light­ning is referred to the things, that shall be seene; which being hidden shall be discoured, and made visible, or rather layd open to all mens view. But the Scripture hath examples of the other signification also. I cease not (saith the Apostle) to giue thanks for you, making menti­on Eph. 1. 16. of you in my prayers, &c. that the eies of your vnder­standing may bee inlightned, that you may knowe what the Verse. 18. hope is of your calling &c. This inlightning of the eies of the vnderstanding, is not onely affording of light, by which the things themselues, that are to bee seene, may become visible (for that is done by the ministery of the worde, whereby the hidden mysteries of salua­tion are revealed to all, that will heare) but an open­ing of the heart, and an inward teaching of those se­crets; so that a man shall thereby bee perswaded of the truth thereof. For, the Ephesians, to whom the Apostle writ this, had heard the Gospell preached by Saint Paul himselfe; and by that peaching of his, had the light vouchsaf't them, by which the knowledge of sal­uation might be had; and, in some measure also, had at­tained, to the vnderstanding, and acknowledging of the truth, which the Apostles praye to haue far­der reuealed to them, that they might beleeue, and embrace it. This, the same Apostle in an other place, calls the receiuing of light. Many haue light, and Heb. 10. 32. knoweledge offered them, but they receiue it not: either because it seemes not worth the receiuing, or for that they are drawne away by their worldly cares, or some other such respects, from the due consideration of that whereof there is offer made them. But the Hebrewes (as Saint Paul there writes) had receiued the light, that is, had giuen assent to the [Page 332] truth of that, which was taught them, and for the main­taining of it, had indured (as it is there witnesses) greate fight in afflictions.

If we take the word in the former sense, only for shi­ning vpon the things, that are needfull to bee seene, that they may shew themselues vnto vs; it is out of doubt, that, in respect thereof, euery man is inlightned, for so much as concernes the office of the light; which is to make manifest those things that were not, without it, to be seene. For so our Lord hath revealed the will of his Father, concerning the meanes of saluation; which, Ioh. 1. 18. but by him, had neuer beene publisht, and proclaimed to al the world. But this is rather lightning, thē inlight­ning; as he, that carries a candle, or torch with him, in­lightens not the party, before whom he goes, or to whō he comes, but only lights him: and in this sense our Sa­uiour doth but shewe men, what is to bee beleeued. Whereon there growes more question, how it may be said, that euery man is thus lighted. For it is very mani­fest, that there were many thousands in the world, euen then, when our Sauiour himselfe shone so brightly, by his glorious workes, and powerfull preaching, who ne­uer heard, or saw the one or other, nor, in any likely­hood of reason, possibly could do. What say I? There were many thousandes. I may truly say, the thousand man then liuing, neuer had, nor could haue any sight of the light, that then shined among the Iewes. Yet I con­fesse, that the light stretcht, and spread his beames, to the vttermost of his nature, and strength. Take example of the Sunne, which in the height of summer riseth early, mounts highe, shines gloriously, sets late; and yet there are diuers nations in the worlde, which haue not the least glimse of his light, all the while, he shewes himselfe to vs, in these parts of the Hemisphere, most apparant and bright. Therefore when we read or heare, That our Sauiour, the true light, lighteth euery man, as much as in [Page 333] him lies, we must not consider him as God, but as the mediator of mankind become man. As he was God, he could haue giuen euery one, then liuing in the worlde, certaine knowledge, that himselfe was ordained for the Sauiour of the world. But he was heere to demeane him selfe as a person, who, by the diuine power of his God­head, could do al things; but, by the conditiō of his me­diatorship, was to doe no more, then his humane nature might be known to be imployed in, some way or other. He taught the admirable secrets of God, by his voice; he wrought wōderful miracles by his almighty power: but still it appeared to all men, that by the word, and wil of him, whom they saw to be a man, all those wonders weredon. So then, if we take this lightning of euery man, for affording them the meanes of knowledge to salua­tion, we must thus conceiue the matter; that our Saui­our preacht, and shew'd his miracles by himselfe, and his Apostles, and doth daily vouchsafe the knowledge of the truth to euery man, without exception, not for­bidding his ministers to teach any man, nor barring any from learning of them.

Let vs now see, how we are to vnderstand the Euan­gelist, that the true light inlightneth euery man. Inlight­ning causeth him to discerne the truth of that, which is deliuered: so that the doctrine of the Gospell is alwaies effectuall to him, that is inlightned. The Lord opened the heart of Lydia, that shee attended to the things, that Paul Act. 16. 14. spake. All, that heard him, were lighted; but they only inlightned, which beleeued the things, hee spake. How then may Christ be said to inlighten euery man, since it is apparant, many, yea the greatest part, beleeue not? Surely the former answer satisfies this doubt very suf­ficiently. Whosoeuer is inlightned, hath this inlight­ning from the true light. And this interpretation (as I shewed before) agreeth very well with the Euangelists words, and meaning. But let vs apply the common dis­tinction [Page 334] to this purpose. Christ inlightneth euery man as much as lies in him. If wee vnderstand this of his ab­solute power, wherby he is able, as God, to do al things, it is manifestly false. Else should euery man vndoubted­ly beleeue. For he is able to beget faith in the heart of euery man. Therfore the most, that can bee truly a­voucht in this matter, is this, that hee is ready to inlightē euery man. But this interpretation, as far as I can con­ceiue, doth not fully expresse the sense of the place, if wee expound it of inlightning. For it is one thing to inlighten, an other thing to bee ready to inlighten.

What could the Euangelist say more of them, that are actually inlightned? I acknowledge the truth of the doctrine, that our Lord is ready to refresh all, that come vnto him, to teach all, that vse the meanes to learne; but Mat. 11. 28. me thinkes this is not all, that the holy Ghost in this place affirmes. Therefore I had rather interpret the text, either of lightning, that the true light shines to all, without exception, no man being shut out from the hearing, and reading of the Scriptures, by any com­maundement, or restraint of the light it selfe; or of in­lightning, that all, which are made partakers thereof at­taine to it, only by this true light: and both these expo­sitions, are true, and may agree with the words, & mea­ning of the Euangelist, to commend our Sauiour Christ, as the true light of all men.

Now whereas some men herevpon would conclude, that because the true light inlightens euery man, there­fore God hath not made choise of any man, more then of all men, to be heires of his glory in heauen, they ga­ther that, which growes not of the text. I will make it plaine by a short examination of the matter, accord­ing to the former interpretations.

No man is barr'd the ministery of the worde. There­fore saluation is intended alike to all. If you adde, in [Page 335] regard of the ministery thereof, yet that you say will hardly proue true. For though no man, be abbridg'd of liberty to heare, by any charge to the contrary from God; yet many are not vouchsaf't the possibi­lity of hearing. How shall wee affirme then, that in respect of the ministery of the worde, saluation was intended alike to all? I graunt, that the meanes is affoorded in generall; but I deny that therefore there is no difference in Gods purpose, touching lightning of one nation, more then of an other. It is as free (for any restraint made by God) for the Turkes to haue the Gospell, as for vs; For they are Gentiles, as well as wee. But yet it were too greate vnthankfulnesse, and absurdity, to say, that (concerning the ministery of the worde) God meant to light them to saluation, as well as vs. Nomy brethren, let not such a thought enter into your harts, as once to imagin, that the Lord meanes no more good to you, for your saluation, by vouchsafing you the ministery of the Gospel, then to them, whom he suf­fers to continew in their ignorance, to their certaine destruction.

Let no man deceiue you, by saying, that the light, (as much as lies in it) lighteth euery man. It denies no man light, it blinds no mans eies, it hides it selfe from no man that would see it: But it offers it selfe to some men, it shines into their eies, it seeks them out, where they are in darknes, & follows them, when they turne their backs, and flee from it. Haue not wee had experience of this bountifulnes? Call to mind those daies of darknes, when our forefathers lay buried in blindnes, and ignorance. Did we run after the light, or did it come to vs? Was it not scorn'd, reiected, hated? Did it not shine vpō our eylids, when wee shut them, because wee would not see? What rip I vp matters of antiquity? I will say nothing of our returning into Aegypt, in Queene Maryes [Page 336] daies, of our persecuting the truth, and murdering the Saints of God, for holding out the light to vs, that wee might see. Behold, the light is come againe vnto vs, it shines in at our windows, it winds it selfe into our harts, it presents it selfe to our sight, which way soeuer wee turne. And is it possible, any man should be found, that will not acknowledge an especiall purpose, and desire in the light, to make vs see? What? no more, then to light the Turkes? For pure shame I will say no more of the matter: Cheefly because I reserue this point of vniuer­sall grace for a fitter opportunity.

Yet I must needs speake a word or two of the other exposition. The true light is ready to inlighten euery man. Let me graunt that interpretation, what then? There­fore is it not readier to inlighten some, then other some? How shall that be proued? It is ready to inlighten some: Some other it doth inlighten. The former answere may suf­fice. It is ready, so that it refuseth not to giue light to a­ny man; but some men it neuer lins shining vpon, till it haue gotten passage to the vnderstanding, and infor­med that fully of the truth. It is giuen to you (saith our Sa­uiour) Mat. 13. 11. to knowe the secrets of the kingdome of heauen, but to them it is not giuen. The light shone, to the Scribes, Pharises, and people, and as (these men say) was ready to inlighten them: but the Apostles were inlightned in­deed. It was giuen them by him, that, according to his good pleasure, reuealeth the Gospell to babes, & men Luk. 10. 21. of small vnderstanding, and hides it from the wise, and learned. Tel me not of the good vse of Free-wil, or any other preparednesse, in the hearts of them, that are in­lightned; as if the difference were from man, and not from God. I may not stand now to dispute that matter, but wil take the first occasion to handle it, that offers it selfe: I hope in my next Sermon to speake somewhat of it. In the meane time, let it bee enough for vs, touching the point in question, to vnderstand, that the light, as [Page 337] ready as it is (and it is most ready) neuer inlightens any man, whome it selfe doth not first fitte, and dispose to receiue that light; as I will shewe, if it please God, here­after.

It is Christ then, euen the true light, which inlight­ens euery man. Of his fulnesse (saith our Euangelist) Ioh. 1. 16. haue wee all receiued. Yea, I. Baptist himselfe, that shone with such extraordinary brightnesse, had his light Ioh. 3. 34. from him, who had the spirit without measure. There­fore doth he truly, and freely professe himselfe, that hee was not worthy to carry his shooes after him. VVee heard at the fourth verse, the testimonies of Zachary Luk. 1. 78. 79. & 2. 32. and Simeon to this purpose; that hee was the light of the Gentiles. I will not spende time in repeating them: nor in vrging the exhortation, which then I pressed, of trusting to Christ with confidence, how great soeuer our darknesse bee. Only giue mee leaue, I pray you, to apply the generality of this inlightning, to our particular instruction, and comfort.

Christ the true light, lightneth euery man. VVho may then except himselfe, or any other man? Yet there are two sortes of people, that make question of this doctrine: The poore soule, that is priuy to his owne ignorance, and the desperate wretch, that woulde excuse his wickednesse. The one discomfortes his heart, with too much care. The other destroies his soule, with prophane carelesnesse. These mens cases, I con­fesse, are very diuers; yet thus much may be said to them both in generall. The true light shines to euery man in the ministery of the word. What warrāt, or reason haue either of you, to exempt your selues out of this number? Are not you, comprised vnder these generall tearmes, euery one? No Country, no age, no sexe, no estate, is without the reach of them, Let mee come nee­rer.

No particular person whatsoeuer is excluded; but [Page 338] the light shewes his brightnesse for all, and euery one that will see it.

But the question is now of none, but them, who liue in those places, where this light doth shine; that is, where the Gospell is knowne, and profest. Can any such man truly say, the light is not for him? Who tells thee so? The holy Ghost heere affirmes the quite con­trary, It lights euery man.

VVell: let vs examine the matter, somewhat more particularly. Stand foorth, thou, that desperatly settst all at six, and seauen; because (forsooth) God will not haue euery man to bee inlightned, or lighted. If hee woulde haue no man, there were some reason [...]n thy doing. For then, it were in vaine to looke after the light; neither would there haue beene any means afforded to that pupose. But since thou confessest, that some are to be inlightned, what excuse can there bee for thy carelessnesse? All shall not be inlightned; why then should I care to seeke the light? some shall be: why shouldst thou not care then? If all should, it would come vtterly without thy care; Then mightest thou reason in this sort; All shall bee inlightned; and there­fore I too: why should I then trouble my selfe about it? But to disp [...] as thou dost; some shall not be inlight­ned; Therefore I will bee altogether carelesse; argues a senslesse desperatnesse. I am sure thou wilt grant, it is as cleere and certaine, that God will not haue all men to bee learned, or to bee of any one pro­fession, or trade, as that hee will not haue all men to bee inlightned. Answere mee then, why thou dost apply thy selfe to study, or to any course of life whatsoeuer. For I presume, thinke what thou wilt, thou wilt neuer bee so desperate, as to saye, or so absurde, as to imagine. that thou wilt bee of this, or that profession, whether God will, or no. Let mee reason against thee, as thy selfe [Page 339] didst ere while. God will not haue all men to bee Schollers; Therefore will I neuer bestow any paines in study. I may say the like of Marchants. Marriners, Mercers, Grocers, and of euery trade. So that, by this gay reason, no man shoulde euer betake himselfe to any course of life, but wander idly vppe, and downe, or rather lye still and sterue.

And yet such are the goodly argumentes, by which prophane men blaspheame the vnsearchable counsails of God, and procure iust damnation to their own soules. That, which they may cleerely see, they will not looke vpon; That, which they cannot possibly discerne, they wil be alwaies gasing on. They are curious to search out what God hath determined of them in himselfe: Careless to vnderstand what he hath appointed, for thē in his word. It is set downe in plaine words, and often, that God will haue all men to bee saued, and to come to the [...]. Tim. 2. 3. Tit. 2. 11. knowledge of his truth; that the grace of God, which bringeth saluation to all men, hath appeared. The Scripture is full of such speeches. All these are past ouer, as many, an [...] as plaine as they are; and wretched men, to cloake their owne wickednesse, wil heare, and thinke of nothinge, but Gods secret predestination. I haue been too long in this point already, let me conclude in one worde: where the light shines, if any mā be not inlightned, it is because he cares not for the light, not that the light hides it selfe from him.

Then maist thou conceiue good hope, that sighest, & gronest vnder the burden of thine ignorance, seek­ing by al meanes to come to knowledge. VVill hee (thinkst thou) that offereth his light, where it is refus'd, & despised, withdraw it, where it is desired, and sought for? He came (as himselfe professeth) to seeke, and to saue Mat 18. 11. & 12. 28. that which was lost. And wil he cast away those, that seek to him? Com to me al ye that labour, & are heauy laden. Doth he cal them to him, that he may beat them away when [Page 340] come? No, no, the promise followes; And I will refresh you. Him, that comes to mee I cast not away, saith hee in an­other I [...]h. 6. 37. place. But I cannot come to him (saist thou) for want of knowledge; Nay (say I) thou wouldst not come to him, but that thou hast knowledge: knowe­ledge that thou art a sinner, knowledge that hee is a Sauiour. Art thou not inlightned? The darknesse doth not comprehend him. No man acknowledgeth him truly to be the Lorde of life, but hee, that hath learned of God, that hee is so. It fares with thee, as it did with Pe­ter, when the Angell brought him out of prison. Hee rose, and followed the Angell and knewe not that it was true, Act. 12. 9. which was done by the Angell, but thought it had beene a vi­sion. And it is said of the Iewes in the Psalme, that they Psal. 126. 1. were like men that dreamt, when the Lord brought againe the captiuity of Sion. Thy case is much like these mens. Thou hast receiued light, and knowst it not; But admit thou wert not inlightned. Surely thou maist bee, if thou wilt. The light, thou seest, shines all about thee: wherefor but to bee seene, and receiued? why not by th [...], aswell, as by an other? It lights, it inlightneth euery man. Plucke vppe thy hearte, wipe the teares from thine eies, that dymme thy sight. Doe not thinke thou hast no light, because a farre of, thou seest a greater, then thine is. If an other man haue a Torch, or a Cresset to light him, and thou but a candle, to shewe thee the way; yet thou art not without light. Perhaps he hath farder to goe, perhaps his way is more daun­gerous. It may bee, if thy light were greater, thy care, and heedfulnesse would be lesse. God hath pro­portioned out thy light, according to thy need; thou hast light, though not so much, as thou wouldst haue: If thou haue none, thou shalt haue. He inlight­tens Act. 12. 9. Psal. 126. 1 euery man, that commeth into the world.

Such is the effect of the light, in its owne nature, such would it be in the hearts of men, if it were receiued. [Page 341] as it desires, and ought to bee. The Evangelist told vs before, that the light shineth in darknesse, but without any good intertainement. The darknesse comprehended it not. Those two points he amply fieth farder in these verses; first the offer, which the light makes of it selfe. Hee was in the world; He came to his owne. Then the refusall of that offer; the world knewe him not, His owne receiued him not. I will handle the verses, as they ly, and speak seuerally of His being in the world, and not being knowne; of his comming to his owne, and not being receiued by them. So that each verse hath two partes; our Sauiour Christs kind­nesse in offering, and mens vnkindnesse in refusing. In the former verse, the offer is in these wordes. Hee was in the world; the refusall in the rest. For the vnder­standing of the offer; we must consider these 2 things; what is meant by the world, what by being in the world is signified. The knowledge of these two points, will discouer the Euangelists meaning.

First therefore of the world, which hath diuers signi­fications in the Scripture, as this oneverse may teach vs; where it is taken in two different senses, at the least, if not in 3. That I may speake of it as orderly, and as plain­ly as I can; wee are to vnderstand, that The world gene­rally signifies the whole creature, or whatsoeuer was created. The inuisible things of God (saith the Apo­stle) are seene by the creation of the world. This is that Rom. 1. 20. world, which in this verse is said to haue beene made by Christ. The same, a little before, was called All things. By him were all things made. Only it may Verse. 3. well be thought, that in the former place, the Angells are not signified; because Saint Paul speakes of the knowledge of God by the light of nature: which per­haps will not serue to shew vs the Angels. In this sense, also it is to be vnderstood, wheresoeuer there is speech of the beginning, or foundation of the world. As hee hath chosen vs in him, before the foundation of the world; Eph. 1. 4. [Page 342] that is, before any thing was created. All o­ther significations of the worde flowe from this one: which is the first, and principall, varyed as necessity required, or delight perswaded.

The next most generall obseruation is this, that the worde is put for some part, or member of the whole. Sometimes for the whole frame, & compasse of heauen, and earth; wherein the rest of the crea­tures are contained; So speakes the Apostle; God Act. 17. 24. that made the worlde, and all things that are therein. If euery thing that Iesus did, should bee written, I suppose (saith Saint Iohn) the world would not containe the books, Ioh. 21. 25. that should be written. VVhat worlde may bee said to containe, or not to containe, but the space of hea­uen, and earth? Sometimes it is taken, more parti­cularly, for the earth, where men liue; and this Mat. 4. 8. is very common. The Deuill shewed our Sauiour all the kingdomes of the world. As long as I am in the worlde (saith our Sauiour) I am the light of the worlde. Ioh. 9. 5. In what worlde was our Lorde, when hee said so? Heere on earth amonge men, whose light hee vvas. Into this worlde hee sent his disciples; Goe into all Mat. 28. 15. the worlde; that is into all partes, and coastes of the earth. To this signification of the worde be­longes that in the verse next before, and such other places. Euery man that commeth into the world; that is, Verse. 9. Ioh. 16. 21. borne. In an other text it is more plaine; A woman when shee is deliuered of child, remembreth her anguish no more; for ioy that a man is borne into the world. These significations are common, and well knowne; as comming neere to the ordinary, and first vse of the worde.

Besides these, it is very often taken more especially or Men, who are the principall parts of the world, and for whome the whole was made. VVhen the worlde 1. Cor. 1 21. in the wisedome of God, knewe not God by wisedome. Knowledge is proper to men, and belongeth not to any [Page 343] other of these visible creatures. God was in Christ 2. Cor. 5. 19. reconciling the world to himselfe, not imputing their sinnes. To whome are sinnes forgiuen, but to men? Who are reconciled vnto God by Christ, but men? IIee tooke Heb. 2. 16. not the Angells (who shall euer remaine vnreconciled) But hee tooke the seede of Abraham. Thus the world signifieth in generall all kinde of men whatsoeuer. But because that naturally men are naught, and wick­ked, the worde is sometimes put in particular for the wicked, and almost for wickednesse. You are of the world (saith our Sauiour to the Iewes that woulde Ioh, 8. 23. & 77. not beleeue) I am not of this worlde. The worlde cannot hate you, (saith hee in an other place) but mee it hateth. They are of the worlde (saith Saint Iohn, of t [...]e false teachers, that denyed Iesus to bee come 1. Ioh. 4. 5 in the flesh) Therefore speake they of the vvorlde, and the world heareth them. In this respect is the Deuill called the Prince of the worlde. Yea the world is as it Ioh 12. 31. 1. Ioh. 2. 16. were the fountaine of naughtinesse. All that is in the worlde (saith Iohn) as the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eies, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but of the worlde. I may adde in the last place, that the riches, honours, pleasures, and such like, that the worlde affordes, are tearmed sometimes by the name of the worlde, though they bee not so much partes, as appurte­nances thereof. VVhat should it profit a man, though he should winne the whole worlde, if hee lose his owne Mar. 8. 36. soule? VVhat is this whole worlde, but the ho­nours, pleasures, and riches of the world? But I haue stood too long vpon this matter. Let vs now ap­ply it to our present purpose, for the vnderstanding of the holy Ghosts meaning.

But we cannot certainely determine, in what sense the world is here spoken of, till we knowe of what being in the world, the Euangelist is to be vnderstood. Now our Lord may be said to haue beene in the worlde, in two [Page 344] respects; either as he was God, or as he was the Messiah. In the former sense he was alwaies, and is still, and euer shall bee, after the same sort in the world. In the later, he was not in the world, till he tooke flesh of the Vir­gin his mother; nor since his ascension into heauen. As God, by his prouidence, power, and wisdome, he main­taines, and gouernes al things. As the Messiah, he taught and informed the world, of his Fathers will, touching the saluation of mankind. His being in the world as God, was, and is, for the preseruation of naturall life: His presence, as Messiah, was to bring supernaturall life, by the light of grace. Whether of the two is it mo [...]e likely the holy Ghost meaneth in this place? If we vn­derstand it of the former, seeing hee speakes not of the nature of the Godhead (which is the same in all three persons) but of the person of the Sonne; how can the world be iustly condemned for not knowing him whē he was present? For it is a rul'd case in diuinity, that the mystery of the Trinity cannot bee discerned by the light of nature, or gathered from any contemplation of the creatures. It is true indeed, that since it pleased God to reueale this incomprehensible secret, many men haue labored, to set forth the point by similitudes, and to apply somethings, in the creatures, to the mani­festing of the trinity in vnity.

But all the light, they bringe to this point, is such, as rather shewes, that themselues were perswaded of that truth, then is of force to conuince their Iudgement, that will not beleeue. In one worde. they giue vs to vnderstand, that such a thing, in likelyhood, maye bee; they doe not demonstrate, that, of necessity, it must bee. As for those shadowes of this mystery, which seeme toly hid heere, and there, in the writinges of some Philosophers; neither are they sufficient to argue, that the penners of those books [Page 345] acquainted with the doctrine of the Trinitie; and they are so sparingly, and fearfully deliuered, that a man may easily see, they were altogether vncertaine of the truth, and almost of the meaning of that, they writ. And in what authors doe wee meete with any shewe of these matters? but onely in thē, who profess they receiued their instruction from the Egyptians, and Chaldeans; who learned those points by Tradition from Noah, and so from Adam; to whom God reuealed the knowledge thereof; or else are knowne to haue beene the Schol­lers of the Hebrewes from time to time.

Neither doth it suite well with the course of our E­uangelists writing, to expound this being in the world, of such naturall maintaining thereof. For, the whole dis­course, from the beginning of the fourth verse (as I haue shewed) is a description of the Messiah Such was the life, that wee haue in him; such the light, wee receiue from him: wholly supernaturall. Of that, Iohn beares witnesse; not of his creating, or preseruing all thinges. That was it, which he laboured to haue all men beleeue. That is the thing, which our Euangelist denies of the Baptist. Hee was not the light. In regard of that, is our Sauiour called the true light. Who shall perswade mee then, to apply this verse to his diuine power of preser­uation, and not to the gratious worke of his med [...]ation? especially considering the next verse is generally (for the most part) so interpreted, and (as it is apparant by the verse following) ought to be. Wherfore I willingly subscribe to their opinion, who vnderstand this place of Gaudentius in Euang. tract. 12 our Lords being in the world, all the time, he liued here [...]pon earth, in the nature and shape of man. The rea­sons, whereby some men would prooue the contrarie, are of no great force. They say, Saint Iohn would cleere our Sauiour, from being thought to haue beene in fault, that men did not beleeue, and from being suppo­sed to bee a creature. But both these doubts were satisfi­ed [Page 346] before more sufficiently: and the later ariseth one­ly from that, which is heere affirmed; Hee was in the world; as if the Euangelist had made himselfe more worke then needed. It was sayde before, that the light shineth in darkenesse [...] that it lighteth, or inlightneth e­uerie man. Yea, the fault of not beleeuing was layde, where it is; The darkenesse comprehended it not. How then could the light bee suspected? Or how should hee bee taken to bee a creature? but in regard of his manhood; which is no error, nor inconuenience. Hee was auoucht before to be God, and to haue made all things, none excepted.

Now then seeing wee haue found, that This being in the world, is to bee vnderstood of our Sauiours conuer­sing with men, here in the flesh: it is no hard matter to know, what is meant by the world, & from thence to ga­ther the meaning of the Euangelist. What is the world? what else but the earth? Therefore when the Euangelist saith, He was in the world, his meaning is, that the Messiah of whom he hath spoken so much, was conuersant here vpon earth amongst men. This he deliuereth here in this general descriptiō, before he come to the history it self, which setteth out the course of his life, and carriage at large. It is needlesse to say any thing in proofe of this matter. I shall haue necessarie occasion to handle it at the foureteenth verse, & the whole Gospel is of nothing else. Yet I may not forget to note in a word, how grati­ously it pleased the Son of God to deale with the world. He liued amongst men, he kept company with men, he came (as himselfe speaketh) eating, and drinking. He was Luk. 7. 34. familiar with men, hee applyed himselfe to their cu­stomes, and fashions in all thinges lawfull; and (as a worthy Scholler of so excellent a Maister sayth of him­selfe) Hee became all things to all men, that hee might by 1. Cor. 9 19 all meanes saue some. Iohn Baptist (as it was fitte for him) led an austere life; withdrawing himselfe from [Page 347] the company of men, abstayning from the lawfull vse of that varietie, both in diet, and apparayle, which the Lord of his rich bountie, hath afforded to men. They that would in any thing vse his ministerie, either for in­struction, or baptisme, were fayne to come to him, and attend vpon him Our Sauiour was ready (ordinarily) at euery mans call. Who euer came with petition to him and went away vnsatisfied? Sometimes hee defer­red Ioh. 4. 49. the matter, and would make as if hee hearde not; yea, sometimes hee seemed to aunswere somewhat roughly, as to the woman of Canaan; but it was Mat. 15. 21. not to deny their requests, but to encrease their faith. He meant not by such delayes to continue their paine, or trouble, but to double his mercy, both vppon their bodies, and vpon their soules. Where hee sawe neede of helpe, and want of meanes to begge it, by reason of ignoraunce, or some other infirmitie, hee most kindly offred himselfe and his seruice. Wilt thou be made whole? sayth he to the man, that had lyen 38 yeares Ioh. 5. 6. bed-red. To conclude, such was the conuersation of our Sauiour vpon earth, that nothing wanted to shewe who hee was; nothing hindred men (commonly) from com­ming to him, but that, which, in all reason, should haue allured them: so great maiestie, with so great meeke­nesse; such power to helpe, with such readinesse to bee imployed. O the blindnesse of men! sayth one: O the pride, and frowardnesse! sayth another. They worthi­ly perished, that made themselues vnworthie of such vnde­serued kindnesse. What would they haue had, more then was offered them? yea they could neuer haue desired so much, as was afforded them. And could they bee so vnkinde shall I say, or vnwise and wilfull? as to make light ac­count of: stay your sentence a little; we are not come to that point. Take heede least by reprouing of other, you condemne yourselues. What want you, except the bodily presence of Christ, that they had? No one man, [Page 348] sauing those Disciples, that continually followed him heard so many of his Sermons, sawe so many of his mi­racles knew so much of his kindnesse, as wee all doe, or may doe.

That, which they might heare, in a long time, by peecemeale; wee may read, in a few howers, altogether before occasions of manifold busines distract the mind, and confound the memory. Wee see not the blind re­stored to sight, the lame made to goe, the dead raysed to life. What could wee haue seene? There was seldome a­ [...]y outwarde meanes vsed to these purposes, by which [...]he eyes of men might bee fed, If they heard him speak to signifie that he would haue such or such a thing done and sawe the effect ensue accordingly, it was all the ad­uantage they had of vs, that now liue, and euery day may heare, and read the historie of these thinges recor­ded. If hee were then amongst men in his person, hee is now amongst them in his word. I wil say nothing of the difference betwixt these two meanes of bringing men to beleefe. Let the euent speake. It is manifest by the hi­storie of the acts, that more were conuerted to the faith, in one yeare, after our Sauiours death, by the ministe­ry of the word, in the mouthes of the Apostles; then in all the three yeares, and vpwarde of his preaching, and working miracles. The vse of this later was but to cre­dit the persons, that their doctrine might bee receiued. Wee professe, that wee are resolued of the trueth of all things deliuered in the Scriptures. Then certainely our Lord is amongst vs in these dayes, though not in the same māner, yet in as great measure for means of know­ledge, and beleeuing.

What intertainement had hee then by them; hath he now by vs? The former wee must learne of the Euan­gelist, of the later wee shall heare more anone. Concer­cerning the people, that liued in our Sauiour Christs time and heard, and sawe, what he spake, and did; what [Page 349] would any reasonable man looke for, but that they should acknowledge him, and honour him, as the Mes­siah, by trusting in him? So they should haue done. And did they so? Read the record. The world knewe him not. Is it possible there should bee such blindnesse, where there was so good light? Could the light bee vnseene, that shone so brightly? It is woorth the doing, to consi­der this point a little better. And first, let vs examine the wordes, what is meant by the world, what by not knowing. The world in the first part of this verse, sig­nifies the earth, the place, where men ordinarily liue, & abide; so that by Christs being in the world (as I sayd) his conuersing, and liuing vpon the earth among men was noted. In the second part, The worlde was made by him (that I may dispatch this point at once) the worde is taken in the most generall sense, for all thinges crea­ted; heauen, and earth, and whatsoeuer is contained in them. This last clause affordes vs a third signification of the worde, more particularly then either of the o­ther. The world knewe him not. It was not required, nor could bee lookt for, that the frame of the heauens, or the Globe of the earth, that the Sunne, Moone, or Starres, that the beasts of the fielde, the foules of the ayre, or the fishes of the Sea shuld take knowledge of the Messiah. None, but such creatures, as were indued with reason, could bee capable thereof. The Angells it concerned not: neither are they at any time called the world. It remaines then, that by the world men onely are signi­fied.

And of them it is sayd, that They knew not Christ. In what respecft did they not knowe him. As hee is God Almightie, the Creator, and preseruer of all things, he was generally acknowledged, through the world. For there neuer was any people so rude, or barbarous, but they had a perswasion, that there was a God, and that hee was to bee worshipt. But herein, as the Apostle [Page 350] sayth, They are without excuse, because knowing God, they Rom. 1. 21. do not glorifie him, as God, neither are thankefull: yea (as it followeth afterwards) they turne the truth of God in­to Ver. 25. a lye, and worshippe, and serue the creature, rather then the Creator. By which it is manifest, that the Euange­list doth not speake heere, of our Lords being in the world, by his continuall prouidence, and gouernment, as I noted before. Neither may wee vnderstand it of the Person, which by no light of nature, either bred in the soule, or receiued from the creatures, could possibly be descryed.

Therefore wee must needes interpret this knowledge, of acknowledging our Sauiour for the Messiah, and re­sting vpō him, accordingly, for spiritual deliuerance frō sinne, death, and damnation.

It is further to bee obserued, in this part of the verse, that the Euangelist chaungeth his speech, and whereas before hee had spoken the light, to which, It should aunswere; now in steede of that, hee sayth him: The worlde knewe him not. Whome did not the worlde knowe? In the next verse before, hee mentioned the light; Therefore he should now haue sayde; The worlde knewe it not. The Greeke expres­seth neither It nor him, in the two former clauses; but because in this last, the Euangelist expoundes him­selfe, saying him, and not it, therefore wee supply that worde, in both the other. As for the reason, why Saint Iohn vseth the vseth the worde him, wee must remember, that hee speakes of the person of the Messiah, how­soeuer hee describe him, by calling him the life, and the light. Now to the person, Hee, and Him agree verie fitly. In the Originall, The Word is of the same gender, that hee is of; yet might wee not so speake of it in English, but that wee haue respect in our speech, ra­ther to the person, then to any titles, by which he is des­cribed to vs.

Thus then wee are to conceiue the Euangelists meaning, that to amplifie the kindnesse of our Saui­our, in offering saluation to the worlde, hee sets foorth the great, and incredible vnkindenesse of men: who would not, or (at the least) did not acknowledge him, that they might bee saued. But you will say, This com­plaint is too generall against the world; seeing it is well knowne, euen by record in the Gospell it self, that, from time to time, many beleeued in him. This, some men discerning, restraine the worlde to the wicked of the Chrysost. hom. 7. in Ioan. world, who refused to beleeue.

But the accusation in the Euangelist is all one, though wee so expound it. The worlde (sayeth hee) knewe him not. And I thinke wee shall hardly finde the worlde, anye where in Scripture taken for the wicked, but where there is some opposition ex­prest, or signified, betwixt them, and the godly. I pray not for the world, but for them that thou hast giuen mee out of the world. Ioh, 17, 9,

Who sees not, that in this sentence, the world, or wicked are opposed to the godly, whome the Lord hath chosen out of the world? And yet euen in this, and the like examples, we may very well, by the world, vnderstand men in generall. The worlde cannot hate Chap 7, 7. you, but mee it doth hate. What is that else, but as if our Lord should haue sayde, men cannot hate you, but they hate me? It is true indeede, that the reason of this hatred is the wickednesse of men; but this wickednesse is so generall, that it may truly be affirmed of the world, in such generall tearmes. The fore although some few, whose hearts it pleased God extraordinarily to inligh­ten, and incline, did confesse him to bee the Messiah: yet generally, the world did not know him, as Saint Iohn, not without cause, complaynes.

For to whome may it not worthily seeme strange; that a personage of such worth, & excellency, should make [Page 352] himselfe knowne to men, in such a wonderfull sort, and yet not bee acknowledged to bee such an one, as appa­rantly he was? The fame of his doctrine spred it selfe a­broade in all places; in so much, that it was knowne in Rome. The light of his glorious miracles, shone farre and neere to all the Countries, that bordered vp­on Iewrie, or had any ordinarie traffick with the Iewes in those parts. Paul, and Barnabas, hauing wrought a miracle vpon a poore Cripple at Listra, the people lifted vp their voyces, saying in the Lycaonian tongue, Gods are Act. 14. 11. come downe to vs, in the likenesse of men. Yea this opinion rested not among the common sort, but stretched to the wise, and learned; in so much, that Iupiters Priest, Ver. 13. brought Bulles with Garlands, and would haue sacrificed with the people. Behold I pray you, what effect one mi­racle was able to worke in the hearts of so great a mul­titude. The workers of it were taken for Gods; and those none of the meanest; They called Barnabas, Iu­piter: Ver. 12. and Paul, Mercurie. Iupiter was the chiefe of the Heathen Gods, and Mercurie his sonne, of espe­ciall imployment, in all matters of importance. Nei­ther stayed they here, but prepared their sacrifices in the best manner; Bulles with Garlands, and brought them to bee offered vp. Compare our Lords manie and admirable miracles, with this one worke of the Apostles; supposing it had beene done by their owne power, and vertue. Looke not that I should stand to reckon vppe the particulars; take a viewe of them in grosse, as they are reheaised to Iohns Disciples: The blind receiued sight, the halt were made able to goe, the le­pers Mat. 11 5. were cleansed, the deafe had their hearing, the dead were raysed vp. Neither were these things done once onely, but often, and ordinarily. Some, that were borne blinde, had eyes, and sight giuen them, when Ioh 9 1. they were growen to mans estate. Some, that had Chap. 11. 39. 44 lyen in the graue, till they were thought to bee putrifi­ed, [Page 353] were quickned by his voyce, and made to liue a­gaine vpon the earth, to the amazement of al that knew them.

I appeale now to the iudgement of all indiffe­rent men. What could the world imagine, in this case? To deme, that such miracles were wrought, it was absurd, and senselesse. Their owne eyes refu­ted them. Should they haue excepted against the trueth of that, which seemed to bee done? Triall by sense would haue conuinced them. Perhappes, they might ascribe them to naturall causes. All reason, Physicke, and Phylosophy disclayme that power. Must wee not of necessitie confesse (vnlesse we will bee altogether shamelesse) that none but God, was able to doe such wonders? was it possible then, hee should not bee knowne? I see, wee are all rea­die to inueigh against their blindnesse, if they could not; their peruersnesse, if they would not knowe him. And I confesse, they deserue to bee infamous for it, to all posteritie. But it is more honour to rescue a friende, then to kill an enemie: More wisedome to looke, that there bee nothing in our selues worthy or such iust blame, then to reprooue the faults of othe [...] men.

It was the sinne and shame of those times, that the Messiah, liuing in that sort amongst men, was ac­knowledged, by fewe or none of them. Are men in these dayes excusable? you will say I. They are per­swaded, that Iesus is indeede the Sauiour of the world. Whence aryseth this perswasion? It is rather suckt in with our nurses milke, then receiued by the instruction of our teachers. Wee hould it, because it is com­monly beleeued, not because it is certainely true. Wee heare not of any other meanes; and therefore wee are content to accept of these. They are not chosen by vs, vppon our owne iudgement, but ta­ken [Page 354] vpon common credite. We follow the tyde, and streame of the flood, being readie to turne with the wa­ter, whensoeuer it shall ebbe. I would to God olde ex­perience, did not cause new doubt. It is an imputation that lyes vpon our Nation generally, as the writers of histories record, that we cōquer easily, and loose as ea­sily; wee get many Townes, and Forts, yea sometimes Kingdomes, but wee hold them not long. God for­bid it should bee so in religion. Our acknowledging of the truth is not so commendable, or blessed, as our deniall would bee shamefull, and cursed. But I must re­member not so much to what purpose I speake, as what our Euangelist directes mee to speake: yet I could not but touch here by the way, though I bee bound for an­other place. Let it bee my fault, so it bee your bene­fitte.

I come now to the amplification of the worlds vn­kindnesse, and ignorance, that it was made by our Lord and yet would not know him. Wherein (ere we meddle with the matter, that is principally intended) wee must cleere this doubt, for the better vnderstanding of [...]he text, How the creation of the world can bee appli­ed to argue the sinne of men, in not acknowledging Ie­us Christ for the Messiah. This scruple hath made diuers writers expound this whole verse, of the natu­rall knowledge, which is to bee had, by the conside­ration of the Creatures. But there is no reason, to leaue [...]o many good proofes, as drawe vs the other way, to follow this one likelyhood, in so vncertaine a path; I might say, so straying from the truth, which is here pro­pounded to all men. For out of question (as it hath beene shewed) the world cannot iustly bee condemned, for not knowing GOD (because indeede they did knowe him in the creatures) or for ignoraunce of the Messiah by those meanes, which were neuer able, nor intended to giue knowledge of him. Therefore it [Page 355] is agreeable to reason, and diuinitie, rather to seeke, how wee may aunswere this doubt; then, because of it, to forsake a manifest truth in exposition. First them, wee say, Saint Iohn condemnes the world of ignorance, and vnkindnesse, that they acknowledged not our Sauiour liuing amongst them, & conuersing with them, though hee were indeede the verie maker of them, and author of their being. But you will aske me how they should discerne any such matter, by his carriage, and behaui­our in the world. Therefore I aunswere secondly to that point, wherein the whole cause of doubting lyes; that the miracles, which our Sauiour wrought, from time to time, in the sight of all the world, were eui­dent proofes, that hee could bee no other, but the great Commaunder of heauen and earth. Did hee not ouer rule the course of nature? Did hee not giue sight, hearing, health, and life, by his bare worde? Damsell, I say vnto thee arise; and straight way the Mat. 9. 41. mayden, that was dead, arose, and walked; Hee cried with a loud voyce to Lazarus, Come forth. Not as if hee could Ioh. 11. 43. make him, that had lyen foure dayes in the graue, heare without life; but that all men present might knowe, that hee vsed no other meanes, to put life into him, but his commandement onely. Who could worke such wonders, but hee that had power, aboue, and against the course of nature? How could he by any meanes bet­ter assure them, that it was he, that made the world, then by taking the same course in changing nature, that hee had followed before in creating nature? God sayd, let Gen. 1. 3. there be light, and there was light. Young man (sayeth Christ) I say vnto thee arise, and hee that was dead sate vp, Luk. 7. 14. 15. and began to speake. Might not these courses haue taught, and assured the world, that hee, whom they sawe, and heard commanding death it self, and doing whatsoeuer it pleased him by his word, was the same, by whome all things were created?

Consider then the slouthfull carelesnesse, or the wonderfull blindnesse of the worlde, that knewe not him that had made them. Why should they be so car­ried away with the vaine pleasures, or toylesome busi­nesse of this life, as not to bestowe some little time, in the consideration of so straunge, and admirable a perso­nage? Say, they might bee this day, extraordinarily imployed in their worldly affayres, that they could not haue a minutes leasure, to bethinke themselues of the wonders wrought by him: They sawe the like a­gaine next day, day after day, for the space of three yeares together, and vpwardes. It was hard, if in so long a time, they could not steale one hower or two to aduise with themselues, and their friendes, of so ex­traordinarie a matter. Well, let vs yeeld so much to their manifolde occasions, in their ordinary imploy­ments. What will they aunswere for themselues, cōcerning those miracles, which our Sauiour wrought, vpon their Sabbaths? Will they saye, they had no leasure from their businesse, on those dayes? For ve­ry shame, they dare not. Were they not priuie to [...]hem? They were done in their open Synagogues of­tentimes. But I knowe not how I am slipt, ere I was a­ware, into that, which particularly concernes the Iewes, with whom I must deale in the next verse; to which I now come.

Hee came to his owne; and his owne receiued him not. Kindnesse offered, requited with vnkindnesse. Both so great, that the holy Ghost, hauing spoken of them in generall, in the very last verse, repeates them heere in particular, and that with speciall amplification. Hee had sayde before, Hee was in the world. There­fore hee might haue beene knowne of men. He addes now; Hee came to his owne. Therefore hee should haue beene intertained. But the world knewe him not. He was a straunger to them, who lookt not for any such guest. [Page 357] His owne could not plead such ignorance. They had heard of him, they longed for him. For all this, They receiued him not. Is it credible? Is it possible? It is too true. Hee had very meane, or rather very bad in­tertainement at their hands. Wee may not passe ouer the matter so sleightly.

Let vs see the particulars: First, his comming to his owne; then his reiecting by his owne. For the cleerer interpretation of the text, wee must examine what is meant by His owne; because the vnder­standing of that concernes both partes of the verse. That being knowne, in the former parte, wee must consider his comming; in the later, his re­iecting.

Hee came to his owne. Our Rhemists, who ac­count [...] their differing from vs, a high poynt of their popish obedience, would not translate as wee doe, To his owne, but must needes haue a farther tricke, Into his owne. By which translation, first, they must, of necessitie, vnderstand the place, to which he came, or else they speake but ill fauoured English. For no man, that knowes what belonges to our Lan­guage, will say Into, if hee spake of persons, but to them; vnlesse hee meane to signifie such a comming, as is spirituall, into the hearts of men, or into the midst of a multitude; neither of which, in this place canne bee intended by the Euangelist. Secondly, though the place bee signified; yet may our translation ve­ry well bee allowed. I appeale in this case as to all men, that canne speake English; so to these Rhemists, who translate so in other places. From that hower (say they) the Disciple tooke her to his owne. Ioh. 19. 27. Heere is the same word for into; and more reason, be­cause the speech is of Saint Iohns receiuing the Virgin Marie into his house: yet they translate, as we do here, to his owne.

The like example wee haue else where They re­turned vnto their owne. The Disciples at Tyre, hauing [...] [...]1. 6. brought Paul, and his company to the Sea side, and seene them shipt, returned to their owne houses. To, or vnto, which are all one, but not into: Therefore there was (in their iudgement) no necessitie of reie­cting our Translation in this text, and forging a new.

But let the Translation passe: the sense of the wordes is more worth our labour. The Originall Greeke, and the vulgar Latine make difference be­twixt the wordes, His owne, in the former, and the same in the later part of the verse. The Greeke keepes the same word in both, but alters the gender. The [...] Latine chaungeth the word too, aswell as the gender: Both the one, and the other direct vs to expound the first, of the place; and the last, of the persons. Neither our translation nor the Rhemists expresse this diffe­rence.

If they had added to their, into his owne, Countrey, or place, or some such worde to make the Euangelists meaning more plaine, I would haue thought, they had rather indeauoured to bee vnderstood, then striuen to dissent. Well, let vs then by his owne in the former clause, conceiue, that Saint Iohn notes the place, whi­ther our Sauiour came. Thus remaines a great doubt, whether this place, bee the worlde in generall, or the Land of Iudea in particular. Not to trouble you with any long discourse of this point, it seemes most likely to mee (with reuerence of other mens iudgement) that the holy Ghost in this verse speakes particularly of the Iewes. Of the worlds ignorance, and carelesnesse in not taking knowledge of so rare, and extraordinarie a personage, hee had spoken in the former verse: and amplyfied their sin, by nothing, that he, whom they did not know, was their Creator; as the miracles, he wrought [Page 359] in their sight, manifestly testified. If this were a fault in the world (as it was a most greeuous fault) what was it for the Iewes to refuse him? Should that bee obserued by our Euangelist, and this past ouer without nothing? es­pecially since his whole story shewes, that our Lordes Chryso. hom. 7. in loa Cypr [...]n. ad Qu [...]rin. lib. 1. cap. Cyril in loa. [...]b. 1. ca. 11. life, and miracles, were as it were shutte vp within the Land of Iurie? Besides the worde in this later verse leades vs to the Iewes. Hee came to his owne: Com­ming to them argues more, then Being in the worlde. Ignorance was iustly imputed to the world. Not re­ceiuing, is a sinne more fittely to bee charged vpon the Iewes.

If wee consider the wordes vsed by our Euangelist, I thinke wee shall finde small reason, to call the worlde Christs owne. For although it bee true, that the earth is [...] 24 1. the Lords, &c. and that our Sauiour was the maker of it, and the whole worlde; yet who euer obserued that the world was so appropriated to GOD, or to the se­cond person in Trinitie? The possession, that God pro­mised to giue him, is not in regard of Creation; but [...] [...]. 8. [...] [...]unc locum. of Mediation; whereas they, that expound this place, of all the world, make Christs right thereunto consist in the title hee hath to it, as the authour of it. Now that is ordinarily sayde to bee a mans owne, which is proper to him, after some speciall manner, other­wise, then other thinges are. But what canne wee i­magine, to which our Sauiour hath not as good clayme by his interest of Creation, as to the worlde? How then should this bee tearmed His owne? and as some sren. lib. cap. 11 auncient writers haue exprest the word His owne pro­per? But if wee apply it to the Iewes, euery man knowes, that, whereas all the worlde was GODS August. in Ioa. tract. 2. Iu [...]sua propra. hee tooke the Land of Iewry into his especial protection. And howsoeuer all nations were his, by creation; yet hee chose the Children of Israell to bee his peculiar people: so that they, and their Country were his owne [Page 360] not by nature, but by grace indeede; yet in such sort that hee made his aboade visibly amongst them, a [...] hee did not in any part of the world beside. The examples I alledged before, wherein these wordes were vsed by the holy Ghost, shew plainely, that by His owne, his particular place of habitation and his Ren­dez-vous, as it were, is signified. This the Lord had in Iudea; and therefore I may safely conclude, that this verse is particularly to bee interpreted of the Iewes. But the time is past: that which remaines, the next time of this exercise, if it please God. To whom, &c.

THere is (ordinarily) in all men, a speciall affectiō to their Country, & Country-men, where they were bred, & among whom they were brought vp: Either because it pro­ceeds from nature, who takes her aduantage at the first, and settles her selfe in our hearts, while there is no resistance; or for that it pleaseth God, that (according to true reason) we should think our selues most bound to them of whō we receiued most helpe, when wee were least able to helpe our selues. From hence it comes, that there is a mutuall loue betwixt them, that are of the same nation: So that generally an English man affects an English­man; [Page 362] so a Scot, a Spaniard, a French man, euery one his owne Country-men, more then any stranger what­soeuer. Yea, the honour that any one getts, for vertue, learning, wisedome, or valour, redounds to the whole nation; insomuch that euery particular man almost thinkes himselfe interessed therein. Can it choose then, but bee exceeding strange to all men, that our Lord should haue so meane intertainement in his owne Country? Was it not a matter of greate honour to the Iewes, that one of their nation should bee able to doe such admirable things? They bragd exceedingly of the Prophets, that had liued, frō time, to time amōgst them. VVhat were all they, to this one? And yet hee came to his owne, and his owne receiued him not. Neither came hee, as an ordinary man, that the refusall of him should be no more, but a matter of vnkindnesse, by neglecting the common bonde of Country-ship: but this comming to his owne, is of more importance.

For, by His owne, as I shewed in my last exercise, the place, or Country, to which he came, is signified. And not that only, as if he had no farder right to it, thē the title, that euery man hath to the place of his birth, and education; but by those wordes his owne, we vnder­stand an especiall interest, that he had in that Country. To which he came not as a stranger to see, and to bee seene; nor as an heire, to a Lordship, of whome the te­nants had neuer heard any thing; but as one, that was famously knowne to be rightfull honour, and had long before appointed, & was lookt for daily, to take posses­sion. Shall we looke into old Deeds, & euidences, yea better then Deeds, & euidences, auncient records, kept most carefully, and faithfully in the highest court of Roules, where the holy Ghost himselfe is master of the office; & all the Clarks not only sworne, but certainely knowne to be void of ignorance, & free frō alcorruptiō? I will not meddle with the Originall Graunte [...] 3. 15. [Page 363] from GOD, rather signified in a threatning manner against the Deuill; then exprest by any way of promise, to Adam in Paradise. This was too generall, and affordes the Iewes no more aduantage of clayme, then any other people whatsoeuer: because all Chap 9. 26 are Adams posteritie. That blessing of Sem is somwhat more particular; Restrayning the generall, which (by reason of Noah the father) might seeme to bee common to all three sonnes, to one of them onely. Blessed bee the Lord God of Sem. But of Sem came diuers not only fa­milies, but Nations; The Assyrians, Persians, Lydians, Chap. 11. 14. 2 [...] Aramites or Syrians, and Hebrewes. Which of these hath speciall interest to the promise? The Hebrewes, by Abraham; to whome the promise was directly made, that in him all the Families of the earth should bee blessed. Abraham; also had many Children, of whome Ismaell Chap. 12. 3. Chap. 16. 11 was the eldest; but the blessing was settled in Isaac; In Isaac shall thy seede bee called. But wee are not yet cer­taine, Chap. 21. 12. Cha. 25. 2 [...]. 23. where to finde this blessing. Isaac had two sons by his wife Rebeccah, two twinnes, Esau, and Iacob. Of whome God himselfe prophecied to their mother, that the eldest should serue the younger; And accordingly it came to passe; The birthright, and the blessing being cō ­uayed Chap. 27. 3 [...] from Esau to his brother Iacob. We are nowe come where wee may well rest; Because the twelue Patriarkes, the sonnes of Iacob continued one people without any diuision, and (except the time of their cap­tiuitie) in one Countrey, til the time of the Messiahs ap­pearing. But for the greater certainty of the truth, & bet­ter directiō for the knowing of him, whē he shuld come, it pleased God to reueale to Iacob, & by him to his chil­dren, that Shiloh, he that was to be sent should proceede Chap 49. 10. out of the Loynes of Iudah. And as if this had not been enough, he leads the Iewes to the house of Dau. in which this deliuerer should be born, & sit on the throne of his Psal. 132. 11. Luk 1. 3 [...]. 33. father Dauid for euer. Yea the very place of his birth is [Page 364] named, by which afterward the wisemen, that came from the East, were directed; Thou Bethelem Ephrata Mi [...]. 5. 2. Mat. 2. 8. (saith the Prophet) art little, to bee among the thousands of Iudah: yet out of three. shall he come forth to me, that shall bee Act. 10. 34. the ruler in Israell. Of him all the Prophets beare witnes, To him all the shadowes, washings, and sacrifices of Col. 2. 17. Heb. 9. & 10. the law belong, as to their body, and substance: by him the Iewes looke for deliuerance, to him they had an es­peciall title. Saluation is of the Iewes, saith our Sauiour. Ioh. 4. 22. Mat. 15. 24 26. And in an other place more strictly. I am not sent but to the lost sheepe of the house of Israell; in comparison of whome, the Gentiles were as dogges. Doth not the Euangelist then truly say, that our Lorde came to his owne, when he came into that part of the world, which he had before prepared for his comming; whether hee had sent his Heralds to proclaime the time of his comming; as it appeares in Daniell: where the place Dan. 9. 27. Mic. 5. 2. [...]. 1. of his birth was appointed by Micah, as by an Harbin­ger: where Iohn Baptist as his Gentleman vsher had giuen especiall notice of his approach, and stood waiting in the streetes to goe to meete him? Thus came hee to his owne; not stealing in by night, or thrusting into some creeke, where hee might least bee seene, or hiding himselfe in the fardest partes of the lande, that were most vnpeopled; but sending his Angels to reueale his birth to Shepheardes; who Luk 2. 9. without suspicion of any deuise, or complot, might spread the report of it abroade, as they did. Direct­ing Mat. 2. 1. 2. wisemen from the East, by whome Herod, and all Ierusalem might bee informed, that hee was come; shewing himselfe by the space of three yeeres, and an halfe, to al his country-men in those partes, with such a grace, and autority in his teaching, that the Pha­rises Mat. 7. were nothing to him; with such power, and com­maunde, in working miracles, that the windes and Seas obayed him; sicknesse at his worde gaue place to [Page 365] health, blindnesse to sight, yea death was forced to re­signe vp his possession, to life. VVee haue seene his comming: Lette vs take a view of his intertaine­ment.

His owne receiued him not, Perhaps not with such signes of ioy, shewes of triumph, and significations of o­bedience, and subiection, as in such a case it was fit, & necessary, they should haue done. There might haue bin some excuse for them, if they had fayld in the man­ner of his intertainement only. They were vnder the Romans gouernment, and durst not be knowne of any other King they lookt for, till they might see him in the field with banners displayed, professing himselfe to bee in armes, for their deliuerance. But they would not at all receiue him. This behauiour cuts off al excuse, and laies them open to a iust imputation of rebellion. But heere wee must first call to minde, that by His owne, not the place, as in the former part of the verse, but the persons, to whome he came, are signified. Secondly, let vs, in a word, or two, consider their refusall of him; What is meant by not receiuing him: why the holy Ghost vseth this word of the Iewes, whereas he had said no more of the world in generall, but that they knewe him not. The Iewes receiued him not. Did they not receiue him? They flockt after him, in multitudes; they came to him far, & neere, to be cured by him, of al kind of diseases: they ac­knowledg'd the power of God in his miracles; yea so highly did they esteem of him, and so greatly affect him, Ioh 6. 15. that they would needs haue made him a king. How thē is it said, that they would not receiue him? To receiue a messenger, that comes from a Soueraigne Prince to his subiects, is not only to suffer him to come a-shore, to let him haue entraunce into the Citty, to entertaine him with good cheere, to Iodge him well, to giue him some present, to honour his person, but especially to accept of his message, and to performe that, which he requires [Page 366] of them, in his Lord, and masters name. If they be want­ing, in these later duties, let the former be done in neuer so good sort, they may iustly bee charg'd with not re­ceiuing him, that comes. Shal I make it plaine by an ex­ample of the like nature.

Iohn Baptist (as our Euangelist hath taught vs) was sent to beare witnesse of the light, that all by him might be­leeue. Was he receiued by the Iewes, or no? If you looke to his outward entertainement, you shall find, that hee had all the kindnesse shewed him, that hee woulde admitt of, and might haue had much more, but that he continually refused it. Neither was this from the teeth outward, in shewe without substance, but from the very affection of their heartes, which were sette on him, so that hee might haue ledde them like children, whithersoeuer hee woulde. But what say you to the ground of his message, the ende of his embassage from God to them? Did they receiue him or no? Did they beleeue, by meanes of him? If they did not; howsoeuer they accounted of his person, they receiued him not. For the receiuing of him, was the entertaining of his message, that hee brought, by beleeuing that Christ was the light, and resting vpon him to bee inlightned. It is not hard now to vnderstand, what is meant, in this place, by not receiuing. And if it were; the Euange­list makes it plaine, and easie in the next verse; where Ver. 12. hee expoundes receiuing to bee beleeuing in his name. So that not to receiue Christ, with which fault the Iewes heere are charged, is, not to beleeue in him. VVhat that is, I haue already shewed in parte, and must handle it againe, when I come to the expounding of those wordes. In the meane while, lette vs holde this for a certaine truth, that to receiue Christ, is to beleeue in his name, and that the Iewes are challenged for not belee­uing therein.

The world was accused of ignorance, by our E­uangelist. The worldknewe him not. The Iewes, his owne people, haue a farder matter layed to their charge, that They beleeued not in his name: whence ariseth this difference? VVas it enough for the worlde to haue knowne him? VVere the Iewes free from ignorance of him? Neither of both. For they only haue the prerogatiue to bee the sonnes of GOD, that beleeue in his name. The Deuills knewe him to bee the holy one Luk 4. 34. Mark. 3. 11. of GOD; yea, the Sonne of GOD, and made open profession of that their knowledge: as Saint Iames also Iam. 2. 19. testifies of them, They beleeue, and tremble, to their far­der condemnation. And for the Iewes, the Apostle Peter giues this testimony of them, That, Hee knewe, Act. 3. 13. 14. 15. their betraying, and denying of Iesus in the presence of Pilat, their preferring a murderer before him, and their killing of the LORD of life, proceeded from ignorance both in the common sorte, and in their gouernours. Then it coulde not haue auayled the Gentiles to haue knowne him, without they had also beleeued in him; and the Iewes not beleeuing, was of ignorance. Yet of the former the Euangelist saith, They knewe him not: of the later, They beleeued not in his name. In both, hee speakes most wisely, and fitly. The very first steppe to belieuing in Christ, is the acknowledging of him to be sent from God. Of this, his many, and glorious miracles gaue so manifest, and certaine proofe, that the mouths of children were filled with his prayses; Hosanna to the Mat. 25. 15. 16 Sonne of Dauid. Therefore if the world would not take knowledge of our Sauiour, what excuse remaines there for them? How can they bee charged with any lesse? How could they be ignorant of so much?

Now the Iews were faulty in an higher degree. They knewe of olde, that there was a deliuerer to come; that the time appointed for his commong was expired: they heard euery day the Sermons of [...]. Baptist, who assured [Page 368] them, that the kingdome of God was at hand; that hee, whom they, and their Fathers had so many yeeres lookt for, and longed for, was in the midst of them: and that nothing might be wanting to their full instruction, hee pointed out the person with his finger; This is he, Behold Ioh. 1. 26. 29. the lambe of God. But what belongd to the matter, that they might haue benefit by this deliuerer? I see the man, I heare great commendation of him, I find my selfe wel [...]ffected to him; but what is all this, if I know not how to make vse of him, of his power, and skill, to mine own helpe? It is all one, as if I had a boxe of most precious oyntment in my hand, which I knew to bee very soue­raigne, but vnderstood not how it is to be applyed. To shut out this excuse, remember what Iohn Baptists of­fice was. He was sent to beare witnes of the light, that all men through him might beleeue. Cal to minde how faith­fully Ioh. 1. 7. Act. 19. 4. he demean'd himselfe in it. Iohn verily baptized with the baptisme of repentance, saying vnto the people, that they should beleeue in him, which should come after him, that is in Iesus Christ. This being the estate of matters among the Iewes, while our Lorde was here vpon the earth, were they not iustly to be blam'd, for not beleeuing? Or could they plead ignorāce, for excuse? It is true indeed, that they knewe him not to bee the Lorde of life. But this ignorance proceeded of wilfulnesse, and preiu­dice. What can they say for themselues? Did they not knowe, such an one was to come? They had it continu­ally in their mouths; it was the hope of their life, the ioy of their heart, the glory of their nation, whereof they were not a little proude. But they knewe not, that this was hee. But they might haue done: nay, they could not haue chosen but haue knowne, if they had not wil­fully shutte their eies against the light of his miracles, and stopt their eares against Iohns testimony of him. Therefore doth our Euangelist, worthily charge them with not beleeuing in his name, whom Iohn testified [Page 369] and his owne works declared to be the Sauiour, that was promised to Israell.

This then is the point, that the Euangelist offers to our consideration in these wordes; that the Iewes, beeing the peculiar people of GOD, to whome the Re­demption, that was to bee wrought by the Messiah, first and principally appertained, refused to accept him for their Sauiour: It were infinite almost, I will not say to set out, but to set downe the seuerall iniuries, they did him, the indignities they offered him, through the whole course of his life, and ministerie amongst them. His daily wor­king of miracles was imputed to vaine glorie, as if hee sought by them to make himselfe famous in the eies of the world. This vile conceite, his owne kinsmen had of him. Depart hence (say they) and goe into Iudea, Ioh. 7. 3. 4. that thy Disciples may see the workes, that thou doest. For there is no man, that doth any thing secretly, and he him­selfe seeketh to bee famous. If thou doe these things, shew thy selfe to the world. Yea, that diuine power, by which hee cast out Diuels, was maliciously, absurdly, and im­piously Mat. 12. 24. ascribed to Beelzebub the Prince of the Diuels. His familiaritie, and kindnes in conuersing with them, and applying himselfe to their humours, as farre as lawfully hee might, was laden with the reproach of gluttony, and drunkenness. Behold a man, which is a Luke 7. 34. glutton, and a drinker of Wine, a friend of Publicans, and sinners. What should I speake of the monstrous blasphemies, they often vttered against him? That, Hee was a Samaritan, that hee had a Diuell. Yea they Ioh. 8. 48. were not ashmed nor affraide (O the admirable pati­tience of God, waiting for their repentance!) to iusti­fie themselues to his face, in such horrible profaneness. Say wee not well (I quake to repeat it) that thou art a Sa­maritan, ver. 52. and hast a Diuell? And least any thing should bee wanting to the height of all impretie, they adde by and by after, Now know we that thou hast a Diuell. The [Page 370] Diuell himselfe his profest enemie, that cōfest he knew him to be the Son of God. His owne people, for whose sake he came into the world knew that hee had a Diuell. What should I say, or imagine? Whence should so de [...]estable, & damnable a speech proceed? Are men? Are the Iewes? Are Christs owne people, worse then the Diuell?

But I will not presse these things too farre, because they are a degree beyond the not receiuing of him, whereof the Text speakes. If they had behaued them­selues toward him in generall, as kindely, and duti­fully as some in particular, did now and then, vpon occasion, all had bin nothing, as long as they receiued him not by beleeuing in his name. Saul woulde haue offered sacrifice to God (I take it at the best) of the fat­test, and fairest of the Amalakites cattell. But obedi­ence is better then sacrifice. He should haue hearkened 1. Sam. 15. 22. to the voice of the Lord by Samuel, and haue slaine them all. What shall wee giue the Lord? say the people. Thousands of Rammes? ten thousand riuers of Oyle? The first borne, the first fruit of our bodies? Doe iustly, (saith the Mic. 6. 7. 8. Prophet) Loue mercie. So much doth it concerne a man to humble himselfe to the will of God. But this belee­uing was a matter of very great importance; because vp­on it depended all hope of deliuerance, by the Messi­ah. All disobedience, and sinne, is liable to damnation, but yet there is possibilitie of forgiueness, though the transgression bee exceeding great. Onely this one sinne, of not beleeuing, makes a man vtterly vncapable of any Ioh. 3. 29. fauour, as long as hee continues in it. In the maladies of the bodie, though the meanes of Physick be not vsed; yet oftentimes the strength of nature ouercomes the ma­lice of the humour and recouereth the Patient. It is not so in the diseases of the soule, where the corruption e­uery day increaseth, & the fault once cōmitted, as it were the hurt receiued, admits no cure, but by pardon. An easie cure, I confesse, & a ready: So much the greater was their [Page 371] obstinacie and folly) that I may speake of them as fauou­rably as may be) that would not imbrace so certaine, and so present a remedy.

But this will the better appeare, when wee vnderstand more fully, what it is to beleeue in Christ. In the meane while, I will onely put you in minde, to consider a little with your selues of this matter. I am out of doubt, euery one of vs condemnes the Iewes; and not withou [...] cause: Let vs take heede that we giue not an heauy sen­tence against our owne selues thereby. We haue offer of saluation, by the same meanes: wee doe, or may know more, then they could, of the particulars thereto belong­ing; and namely of that, which is required on our part, to beleeue in his name. It is not our assenting to the truth of the doctrine in generall; our particular knowledge o [...] the course of mans redemption; our magnifying the mi­nisters of the Gospell, as the Iewes did Iohn Baptist; our mislike, & detestation of Popery; that can be sufficient to the sauing of our soules. I grát, we go beyond the Iews in acknowledging thus much, & in approuing of it. But there is more required to the pardon of our sins, & obtaining a right to heauē. We must beleeue in the name of Chr: if we do not, it shall profit vs little, that we know so much. The Luke 12. 48. seruāt that knoweth his maisters will, & doth it not, shalbe bea­ten with many stripes. What haue we but a bare knowledge of the Gospel? Yes, you wil say, we beleeue too. Do we in­deed beleeue, that there is no life, nor saluation, but by faith in Christ? and yet beleeue not in him, that we may be partakers of them? What? Doe we not care, whether we be saued or no? It is impossible we should be so desperate: Questionless howsoeuer we deceiueour selues, we do not so much as giue credit to the truth of the Gospell. But of this too much; beeing not intended by the Euangelist.

It followeth, But to as many as receiued him, to them Verse 12. he gaue Prerogatiue, &c. Great was the Iewes vnkind­ness, that reiected our Sauiour Christ, when hee offered [Page 372] himselfe so friendly to them, for the procuring of their saluation. Hee came to his owne, and his owne receiued him not. Was he therefore vtterly refused by all? Our Euangelist in these verses implyes the contrarie: shew­ing what priuiledge they got, who receiued, and enter­tained him by faith. They became the sonnes of God, by beleeuing in his name. Being borne not of bloud, &c. but of God. So that the former of these two verses sets downe the estate of them, that receiued him, that they were the sonnes of God. The later sets forth the point more at large, declaring their birth to bee of God. In the handling of them, I will keepe mine ordinarie course; First to speake of the wordes, as neede requires: then to de­liuer the Euangelists meaning.

Concerning the wordes, I am in the first place, to exa­mine the translation of some of them: Secondly to search out their signification. The translation, that affords some cause of doubt, is of two words in the middle of the verse, Prerogatiue, and to bee. Not Prerogatiue, say our Rhemists, but Power; not to bee, but to bee made: and vpon these wordes so interpreted, they build the Doc­trine of free will. Besides these two, there are also two o­other wordes, which are somewhat doubtfull for their significations, in the later part of the verse. What it is To beleeue in; what is meant by his name. For the better conceiuing of the Euangelists meaning, I will first inquire, how these verses depend vpon the former: Secondly, what it is, that Saint Iohn would teach vs by them.

Of translations a man may say, as of potions: that if they bee not carefully, and faithfully prepared, they may kill, in stead of curing. For although som­times, a man of a strong constitution, by the bene­fit of nature, ouercomes the danger of such an accident: yet where one escapeth, many perish. I [...]falls out so in erronious translations: some by skill in the Originall, [Page 373] can correct the error, when they reade; other (though but a few) discerning some contrarietie, betwixt some one or two places, and the generall course, that is helde in the scripture, can with wisdome reiect that, which with reason they cannot receiue. Those, whom God wil haue especially preserued, haue also a farder teaching of the spirit, by which they are kept from approbation of that, which might ouerthrow their beliefe and saluation. All these are but a small number in comparison of the mul­titude of them, who like fishes swallow vp the hooke with the baite, and feede on Rats-bane, as if it were su­gar. Vpon such our Rhemists ordinarily worke, by that corrupt, and poison-full translation of the new Testa­ment; wherein, either they take aduantage of former er­rors, where they finde any, to continue them, or if they find none, breed some. The vulgar Latin, and our old English translation, before that, which was printed at Geneua, expresse the worde, that our Euangelist here v­seth, by Potestatem, Power. This interpretation the Rhe­mists willingly embrace, & thrust it vpon their followers, and commend it to all that will beleeue them, that they may thereby lay a foundation for free will to stand vpon.

Neither are they contented heerewithall: but in the second edition of their said Testament, printed at An­twerpe, Anno 1600. after their returne to Doway, they condemne the Truth, to establish their Error. For in the margin, at this verse, thus they write. Bezafalsely translateth dignitatem, for potestatem. I wonder, and can not certainely resolue, what the reason should bee, why these English Papists, should forbeare to finde fault with our English later translations and lash out so against Beza. He translates Dignitatem, we prerogatiue. Doth it more concerne your ignorant Lay English, to know what is amisse in Beza, whome some of them (perhaps) neuer heard of, fewe of them are able to vnderstand, none of them almost will vouchsafe to reade, or may without leaue, then to be [Page 374] taught, what is faulty in the English, which is in euery mans hand, and sight? But Protestants make great ac­count of Bezas translation. And great cause they haue so to doe. For although it bewray the infirmitie of man in some places; yet it hath brought exceeding great light, to the true vnderstanding of the Scripture. Could you hope that any Protestant, woulde bee so simple, as to condemne a man so famous in the Church of GOD for his learning, and pietie, vpon the bare word of a few Popish Priests? They, that are able to exa­mine the matter, will cleere him, and cast you. They that haue no such skill, must needes bee voide, not of grace onely, but of reason too, if they will bee perswa­ded, against the truth commonly helde in all protestant Churches, by a simple affirmation of men, whome they know not, who neither can, nor offer to bring any proofe of that, which they confidently auouch.

But it is not my purpose to enter into any com­mendation or defence of Beza, farder, then it con­cernes our owne translation; which can not bee iustifi­ed, if his bee condemned. You say Beza translates falsely, because hee interprets the Greeke Worde, dignita­tem. [...] If the translation bee false in Beza, or our Eng­lish, it is either because the worde will not beare it, or for that it will not stand with the sense of the holy Ghost, in this place. For if it agree with both, out of doubt the translation is warrantable. Now what doth Beza meane by Dignitie, or wee by Prerogatiue, but an Ho­nour, and Autoritie, or Right, by which wee are the sonnes of God? So did Erasmus expound it, before Beza, Erasmus in Pa [...]aphrasi [...]d hun [...] locum. Immanuell Saa­ [...]n Ioa. annot. ad hunc locum. Rom. 13. 1. a man of no meane skill in the Greeke tongue. So since Beza, one of your owne side a famous Iesuite Immanuell Saa; Autoritie, Dignitie, Preheminence: and for proofe of his interpretation, he brings that place of Saint Paul; Let euery soule be sub [...]ect to the higher Pow­ers; for there is no power but of GOD. Heere the [Page 375] worde translated Powers, and Power: in his Iudgement signifies Autoritie, or Dignitie; and, by a trope, them, Metonymia Ad­iuncti. that are in Autoritie, Honour, or Dignitie. Palacius, an other of your owne men, somtimes Diuinitie Rea­der Mi [...]hael Pala­cius ad Ioa. cap. 1. Enarrat 28. §. I am [...]ero. in the Vniuersitie of Salamonca in Spaine, hauing recited diuers Interpretations of this worde, at the last concludes, that the most naturall sense of it, in this place, is to take Potestatem, power, for Dignitatem, Prerogatiue; and hee addes a little after, that if wee tran­slate as the vulgar Latin hath it, Potestatem Power, the Est sensus subob­s [...]urus. sense will be somwhat obscure.

You heare the iudgement of some learned Papists; shall I confirme the point by the Autoritie of some an­cient writers? Cyril expounds Potestatem, to bee Dig­nitatem; that is, hee shewes, that the worde vsed by the Euangelist in Greeke (wherein also Cyrill writ) sig­nifies as much, as Prerogatiue, or Honour; and to this Cyril. in Ioa. lib. 1. cap. 3. purpose is hee alledged by Palacius; who seconds this Iudgement of Cyrill, with the cōsent of Erasmus, though hee will not name him. If all this waigh nothing with our Rhemists; yet I am sure they will bee aduised, how they dislent from Gregory the great, a Saint (as they would haue it) of their Church; indeed a learned and holy man, a Bishop of Rome, the first of that name. Let vs heere how he takes the place? He gaue them (saith Gregor. in Ezech homil. 6. Gregorie) this Dignitie, and Excellencie. Dignitie, and Ex­cellencie? What is that, but Prerogatiue? If Beza tran­slate falsely, what doth Gregory? Doe you not wound him, through the others sides? How shall the one bee acquited, if the other bee condemned? For how­soeuer Gregory makes not profession to translate the place, as Beza doth: yet hee giues vs his iudge­ment of the signification, and sense [...], by alledging it in those wordes. And surely all the Autors, that I haue hitherto brought, serue as well to shewe the meaning of the worde in this Text, as [Page 376] the signification of it in generall. To which may be ad­ded for farder proofe of the matter, the iudgement of all them, who translate, or expound it, Autoritie, or Right: and in a worde, of all them, that acknowledge the Hugo Cardinall Dionys. Carthu. Toletus Maldo­natus. Euangelist to speake in this place, not of power, refting in man, after grace receiued, to make himselfe the sonne of God, but of his actuall being the sonne of God, imme­diately vpon his beleeuing, or hauing of grace. And of this minde are most of the late Interpreters, among the Papists themselues. Yea, Maldonat a great man, and a [...]oan. Maldonat ad hunc locum. principall Iesuite, not many yeares since, Diuinitie Rea­der in Paris, can not choose, but confesse, that by power, as they translate it, right is signified. And when hee had propounded our interpretation (I meane for the sense) all the reason, hee could finde, to refuse it, was no more, but this, that hauing formerly liked of it, afterward hee grew into mislike, because he found it in a certaine hereticall Interpreter. He saith with­all indeede, that hee did better consider of it: But hee, that aduisedly markes, what his better conside­ration affords, may easily discerne, that he had more will, then reason, to dissent from him, whom he standerously calls an heretike.

It appeares then, by the iudgement of the Pa­pists themselues, and of some ancient writers, that the worde in this place, both for the nature of it, and the sense of the text, may well bee translated, Dignitie, or Prerogatiue. But for the better cleering of the matter, and to make way for my answere to these Rhe­mists, touching free will (whereof when I come to han­dle the Doctrine) I thinke it not amisse, to take a lit­tle more paines, in deliuering the significations of the worde. All which may bee drawne to two heads. Autoritie, and Power. Of the former, the Rhemists af­ford diuers examples. I am a man, (saith the Centuri­on) Mat. 8. 9. subiect to Autoritie. They might as well haue [Page 377] said power, as they doe three or foure times together, in an other place; Let euery soule bee subiect to higher Rom. 13. 1. 2. 3. Powers, for there is no Power, but of God. What should I stand to recite the words? You may reade them at your leasure, in these places. Luke 17. 8. Act. 9. 14. & 26. 10 12. 1. Cor. 15. 24. 1. Thes. 3 9. Somtimes they tran­slate the worde Potentates; that is, such as haue Autori­tie, and beare rule, whether lawfully, or vnlawfully. When they shall bring you (saith our Sauiour to his dis­ciples) Luke 12. 11. into the Synagogues, and to Magistrates and Po­tentates. So Ephes. 1. 21. & 3. 10. Col. 1. 16. Tit: 3. 1. 1. Pet. 3. 22. Of vnlawfull Autoritie wee haue example where the Apostle saith, that, Our wrastling is not a­gainst Ep [...] 6. 1. flesh, and bloud, but against Princes, and Potestates; meaning, as it is plaine by the next wordes, the euill spirits, or diuels. Of whome, speaking in an other Epistle, hee saith, that Christ spoiled the Princi­palities Col. 2. 15. and Potestates. Vnder this signification I com­prehend all those texts, where, by this worde, lawful­ness to do this, or that, is vnderstood. For example; our Lord saith, Hee hath power to lay downe his life, and Ioh. 10. 18. power to take it vp againe. What power was this? Lawfull Autoritie; that hee might doe it, without any sinne, or disobedience to GOD his Father. So the Apostle saith of himselfe, and Barnabas; that, They 1. Cor. 9. 3. 4. had power to eate, and drinke, power to leade about a wife; namely, it was lawfull for them. In this sense, our Rhemists once translate it Libertie: Take heede least perhaps this your libertie (say they) become an of­fence 1 Cor. 8 9. to the weake. Our translation hath Power. All is one in effect: Libertie, or Power, signifies there a lawfullnes to eat that meat, which was dedicated to I­dols: Although the Apostle indeede, in that place, speakes but vpon supposition, the thing as it is manifest being vnlawfull in the Idols temple, whereof hee there intreateth. 1. Cor. 10. 21.

When the worde signifies Power, it is put for abilitie to doe somthing, as these examples shew: He gaue them Mark. 3. 15. power, to cure diseases, and to cast out Diuels. This was that, which Simon the Sorcerer would haue bought of the Apostles. Giue me also this power (quoth he) that on whom­soeuer Act 8. 19. I lay my hands, hee may receiue the holy Ghost. So may wee vnderstand that place, where the cheefe Priestes, Scribes, and Elders askt our Sauiour, by what power, hee did those things. And this interpre­tation Luke 20. 2. agrees very well with the blasphemie of the Pharises, who affirmed, that Hee cast out Diuels, Mat. 12. 24. through Beelzebub, the prince of the Diuels. If wee translate it Autoritie, both the worde and the sense will beare it.

But wheresoeuer it may bee translated Power, it ne­uer signifies freewill in any place of the Scripture. That I may make good this point, I must craue a little leaue of you, to examine some especiall texts of the new Te­stament, which seeme to require, or admit that signi­fication. It will not bee lost labour, to bestowe some time, and paines, in a matter of so great importance. The first, and I thinke the principall place, that hath most shew of free will, is that which I brought out of this Gospell; where our Lord tells the Iewes that hee had power to lay downe his life, and power to take it a­gaine. Ioh. 10. 18. I said before, that this power, was lawfull Au­toritie. But I said it onely; which for the present oc­casion was sufficient: now it stands mee vpon to proue it. Which how can I better, or certainlyer doe, then from the Text it selfe? Our Sauiour speakes in the la­ter part of that verse, of a commandement, that hee had receiued from his Father; for the doing of that, which hee saith there, hee had power to doe. Now that, which a man doth by Commission, hee doth by lawfull Autoritie: that which hee doth by commande­ment, is not left to his choise, to bee done, or vndone, [Page 379] at his pleasure. If our Lord had meant to shew his free will in this case, either hee woulde haue made no mention at all of any Commandement; or at least, hee would haue said, that his Father had giuen him Commandement, to doe what hee list in the matter; eyther to die, or not to die; ei­ther to liue againe, or not to liue againe. And yet, to say the truth, I doe not see what reason there is in such a speech; I haue commandement to doe what I list: Nay rather I haue libertie, or at the most com­mission.

Let vs examine the matter, somwhat more par­ticularly. Is it true, that our Sauiour CHRIST had such libertie, as, vpon this grant of free will, must needes insue? I will not aske, how it can stand with the commandement, hee names; that was toucht be­fore. Was it in his choise, whether he would die or no? And when he was dead, whether he would liue againe or no? I suppose, no man will bee hastie to affirme the later, whatsoeuer hee may imagine of the for­mer. For the Apostle Peter, a [...]oucheth in plaine Act. 2. 24. tearmes, that it was vnpossible hee should bee held by Death. Nether was there lesse necessitie of his death, then of his Resurrection (I speake of both in respect of the euent). And therefore himselfe tells the two Luke 24. 26. Disciples; that it could not bee, but that he must haue suffred such things; which hee confirmes afterward to all the Disciples, somwhat more generally: These are the wordes (saith hee) which I spake vnto you, while I was yet with you, that all must bee fulfilled, which is written of mee in the Lawe of Moses, in the Pro­phets, and in the Psalmes. But the handling of this point belongs to an other place; thus much by the way. It will bee obiected perhaps, that the former part of our Lords speech seemes to prooue, that hee speakes of the freedome of his will, because hee saith, [Page 380] that No man takes his life from him, but hee layes it downe of himselfe: whereas if he had not his choise, whether hee would die or no; his life were taken from him, and not not laide downe by himselfe. But who sees not, that our Sauiour speakes of the malice, and craft of men, which hee could easily haue withstood, or preuented, by many meanes, but that hee had vndertaken to yeelde himselfe into their hands. That power remained still in him, by which hee could haue defeated them of their purpose, and preserued his owne life, had hee not wil­lingly made himselfe subiect vnto death. Yet I deny not, but it was free for him, in regard of the nature of his will, which was not altered, or forced, nor can bee, to die or not to die: But (in the euent) it could not possi­bly fall out, that hee should escape. But of this place enough.

There is an other, in this same Gospell of the like nature; where Pilat, at the arraignement of our Lord, saith thus to him; Knowest thou not, that I haue power to crucifie thee, and power to loose thee? Doth Pilat meane Ioh. 19. 10. hee had freewill? No such matter: But that he had au­toritie, and that it lay in his hands, to acquite, or con­demne him. This, our Sauiours answere shewes; Thou couldest haue no power ouer mee (saith hee) except it were giuen thee from aboue. Our Lord doth not meane, that hee could not haue freewill in this case, vnlesse hee had it from God; but that himselfe, had neuer bin at Pilats disposition, except God had before hand so appointed, to deliuer him into his hands. This is that which the Apostles professe in their Sermon to the Iewes, that hee was deliuered, by the determinate Act. 2. 23. counsaile, and foreknowledge of GOD. Which after­ward is repeated in their praier, & speciall mention made of Pilat, Herod, the Gentiles, and the Iewes; who are said Chap. 4. 27. 28. to haue gathered themselues together against Iesus, To doe whatsoeuer the hand, and the Counsell of GOD [Page 381] had determined before to bee done. What reason is there then, to vnderstand the worde in this place, of freewill?

In the booke of the Acts, there are two texts, that seeme to leane this way, toward freewill, signified by the worde heere vsed. It is not for you (saith Christ) to know the times or the seasons, which the father, hath Act. 1. 7. put in his owne power: How hath the father put the times, or seasons in his power, but by reseruing all Autoritie to himselfe, to appoint them, according to his owne will, and to giue men such notice of them, as hee thinkes good? But the other place is somwhat harder. Ananias (you know the story) hauing sold a possession, kept away part of the money, for which he had sold it, and brought a certaine part to the Apostles, making shew, as if that had bin all, that hee receiued for it. Peter reprouing him for this grieuous hypocrisie, reasons thus with him; whiles it remained, appertained it not to thee? And after it was solde, was it not in thine Chap. 5. 1. 2. 3. 4 owne power? Heere, by Power the Apostle may seeme to note, that it was in his owne choise, to dispose of it, as pleased him. And surely this followes vpon the Apo­stles speech. But the worde rather signifies, that hee had full autoritie ouer it, as were after the sale, as before, to doe what he would withall. Was it not in thy hand? Mightest thou not lawfully haue retayned the whole summe? For if we vnderstand the speech of his free will, so hee may bee said to haue it in his power, though it had bin due to the maintenance of the poore? But the Apostle would shewe him, that there was no reasonable excuse for his sinne; because it was not a matter, that lay vppon him by any Comman­dement, or lawe: but a thing that proceeded from his owne choise, whereas lawfully hee might haue done otherwise.

These are the principall places, and in a manner [Page 382] all of them, which (as farre as I am able to discerne) [...]aue any reasonable shew of proofe that the word may bee taken for freedome of will. As for a fewe other in the former Epistle to the Corinthians, it is no hard matter to answere them in a worde. First, where the Apostle speakes of a mans hauing power ouer his owne 1. Cor. 7. 37. will, it is plaine hee meanes not free will, but com­mand ouer that freedome, by which a man hath liber­ty, to keepe or not to keepe his virgin. So that this power determines, and as it were ties the will to the one onely; as the wordes before declare, where he speakes of being firme in his heart; that is as it followeth in the la­ter part of the verse, hauing decreed in his heart, that hee will keepe his virgin. In the ninth Chapter, there is often mention of power to eate, power to leade a­bout a wife, power not to labour, with hands; power to Chap. 9. 4. 5. 6. partake of their goods, to whome they preach. What is this els, but a lawfull Autoritie to doe, or not doe these things, as in spirituall discretion, they shall think most fit, for the edifying of their brethren? Now all, that hath bin said, beeing considered: I thinke I may safely conclude, that the worde, which our Rhemists translate power, vnderstanding by it free will, may well bee expounded Dignitie, or Prero­gatiue in this Text; and is neuer so vsed in any part of the new Testament, that it must needs be taken for freewill.

Of the other worde, the translation and significa­tion whereof I am now to search out, I can not say so: because there are many places, where it can not stand for to bee, but of necessitie must bee taken for to bee made. It is enough to iustifie our translation, so farre as concernes the nature of the worde it selfe, that it signifyeth, and that often, in the Scripture, yea ordina­rily, to bee; as we in this place translate it. I wittingly, and willingly forbeare to alledge any proofe of that, I [Page 383] say, by bringing examples; because it is knowne, and acknowledged by all, that haue any little skill of the Greeke tongue. But since both may be, what reason can we bring, why our to bee should be preferred, before the Papists to bee made? First it is certaine, that all they, which expound the former, by dignitie, excellencie, and such like, vnderstand by this later, a present possession of Son-ship (if I may so speake) and not a future possibili­tie. Secondly, they also, that by it, will haue autoritie, or right to be meant, generally are of opinion, that they, of whome our Euangelist heere speakes, are actually, and in their present estate, sonnes of God, by that grace, which is signified in the other word, though some thinke it may bee lost afterward. Onely Maldonat the Iesuite, fearing, as it may well be thought, least he should be ta­ken for an heritike, as he was somtimes accused to bee; though he confesse, that by the former worde, right is sig­nified; yet he will not at any hand, agree with vs, about this latter point; but chooseth rather to allow of an o­ther exposition; and that none of the best, neither. To them (saith Maldonat) that were already truely, or in­deede Vere. us. the sonnes of God, he gaue right, or title, that they might also be his heyres. Can any man perswade himselfe, that the holy Ghost, if hee had intended to note a [...]arder, and greator honour, then being a sonne, would not haue vsed a word fit for that purpose, and namely Heyre, but haue cōtented himselfe with the common worde sonne [...]? The Apostle Paul, when hee had honoured them, that Rom. 8. 17. truely beleeue in Christ, with the title of sonnes, and as i [...] were indued them with the spirit, as an assurance of their beeing sonnes, addes a farder amplification of their hap­piness, that they were heyres also, euen heyres of God, and ioint heyres with Iesus Christ. Questionless, if the Euange­list had meant to signifie this point, of beeing heyres as di­stinct, and superior to that of Sonnes, hee would either hauespokē as S. Paul had done before him, or haue made [Page 384] choise of that worde, that is proper to that dignitie, and interest.

But let the Euangelist declare his owne meaning. What can bee more plaine, then that, which follow­eth in the next verse; which are borne not of bloud, &c. Ver. 13. They, that beleeue in the name of Christ, are borne of God: Therefore are they sonnes, not onely haue Power, Autoritie, or Right to bee; as if they were not so vpon their beeleeuing, but must procure that after­ward in time, I know not when, by a second grace, to bee purchast by the good vse of the former. The Scripture deliuereth an other manner of Doctrine, tea­ching vs, that all, euen as many as beleeue in Christ, according to the Gospell, are the sonnes of God by faith. Yee are all (saith the Apostle to the Galathians) Gal. 3. 26. the Sonnes of GOD by faith in CHRIST. Nay (say our Papists) not by faith, but by charitie. Faith indeede giues vs a certaine right, that we may become the sonnes of God; but it is charitie, by which wee attaine to this honour. As if our loue to God proceeded not from that spirit of his, by which wee receiued faith, and which teacheth, and stirreth vs vp to call God Fa­ther. Because ye are sonnes, God hath sent forth the Spirit Chap. 4. 6. of his Sonne into your hearts, which cryeth Abba Father. See I pray you; if there bee any difference of times in these matters, wee are sonnes, ere wee haue this spirit of loue. And why, or how, doe wee, or can wee loue God, but in respect of his fatherly kindness to vs in Iesus Christ? we loue, because we are sonnes; we are not made sonnes, because wee loue first. But I may not wade too farre in this matter, which appertaines to the Doctrine heere deliuered; whereas I am yet, but in search for the signi­fication of the words. Wherein wee haue found two things, that wee lookt for; and lighted vpon a third by occasion. First, the worde vsed by our Euangelist, & tran­slated by our Rhemists, Power, doth not signifie free will, [Page 385] but dignity, or prerogatiue. Secōdly, the other word notes our present estate vpon beleefe, that we are the Sonnes of God; not our possibility, that we may be, if we vse the grace we haue receiued, well. In this search, the word Sonne, offered it selfe to vs in its own proper signification, not vsurping the place of his brother heire.

We are now to go forward, in the like examination of two other wordes, or rather phrases: and to enquire, what it is to beleeue in this, or that, and so To beleeue in Christ. Secondly, what is meant by Beleeuing in his name; whether it bee all one with Beleeuing in him, or no. Now of the former I shall need to say the lesse, because I spake of it somewhat largely, vpon the first occasion, that offered it selfe, in this Gospel at the seauenth verse. That all men through him might beleeue. The breefe o [...] Verse. 7. that, which then was deliuered, touching this point, is this; that To beleeue, is an action, either of the vnder­standing, or of the will. The former, that is, Beleeuing as it hath place in the vnderstanding, is either an hold­ing of some point, as a truth ingraffed in vs by nature; as, wee beleeue there is a God: or an assenting to some thing reuealed, vpon the credit of him, that reueales it; as, wee acknowledge the Scripture to be the worde of God, and euery thing in it, to be sure, and certaine; according as wee are perswaded by the holy Ghost, to whome wee giue absolute credit, vpon his owne worde. The other Be­leeuing, which is seated in the will, and ariseth from the former in the vnderstanding, is a resting vpon, or trusting to some person, or thing, for some benefit to be ob­tained thereby. So the Reubenites, Gadites, and the halfe Tribe of Manasseh, when the Hagarenes made warre 1. Chr. 5. 18. 19 20. vpon them, trusted to God for succour, and were holpen a­gainst them, with a glorious victory. But the chil­dren of Israell would not trust to him, or rely on him for food, in the wildernesse; Therefore fire was kindled in Iacob. (as it is in the Psalme) and also wrath came vpon Psa. 78 21 22 [Page 386] Israell; Because they beleeued not in God, and trusted not in his helpe. Of this nature, and meaning, is the worde Beleeuing, when it concernes iustification, or salua­tion. This may easily appeare by those kinde of phra­ses, that the holy Ghost often vseth in this matter; To beleeue in, or vpon God, and Christ. Hee, that be­leeues Ioh. 6. 47. in mee (saith our Sauiour Christ) hath euer­lasting life. Beleeue on the Lorde Iesus! Christ (saye Act. 16. 31. Paul, and Silas to the laylour) and thou shalt bee sa­ued. And whereas sometimes, in this very point of beleeuing to euerlasting life, the worde is not so sig­nificant; I shewed that the sense, and purpose of the Spirite of God notwithstanding is all one.

It will not be amisse perhaps to make it plaine by an example or two; First what is simply to beleeue, in Ioh. 1. 7. this case? Iohn was sent to beare witnesse, that all through him might beleeue. What beleefe was it, that Iohn taught? The Apostle Paul tells vs; that they should beleeue in him Act. 19. 4. which should come after him, that is in Iesus Christ. Do you not see, that vnder the bare word, beleeuing, faith in Christ is implyed? Sometimes there is a little addition; as Abraham is said not only to haue beleeued, but to haue Rom. 4. 3. 4. beleeued God. How doth the Apostle expound this be­leefe? By beleeuing on or vpon God. What is that else, but Verse. 5. resting vpon God? So the same Chapter teacheth vs to vnderstand that manner of speech: which be­leeue on him, that raised vp Iesus our Lord from the dead; Verse. 18. that is, trust to him, to be iustified, and acquited of their sinnes. Adde herevnto, if you please, that of the A­postle Peter, out of the Prophet Isai: Behold, I put in Sion a cheefe corner-stone, elect, and pretious: hee, that 1. Pet. 2. 6 beleeueth theron shall not be ashamed. How is this stone to be beleeued on? but by a mans setling, and reposing himselfe there vpon? Therefore the Hebrew in the Pro­phet Isai. 28. 26. is, shall not make haste: as if he should haue said; shall [Page 387] cast himselfe vpon God to be succoured by him, and wait with patience, for the performance of his gratious promise. The greeke expresseth the euent, that shall in­sue vpon this beleeuing, by a denyall of the contrary, set out to our view by a tropicall speech of being a sham­ed. For he, that lookes for succour, and by fayling of it is ouerthrowne, vsually is ashamed both of his trust, & of his foile. So shall not he be, saith the Lord, that resteth vpon Iesus Christ, as vpon the rock of saluation. This also the Chalde paraphrase expresseth; shall not be moued: Paraph. Chald. ad Isai. 28. 16. Mat. 7. 25. being built (as our Sauiour saith in the Gospell) vpon a Rock, against which the windes, & waues beat in vain, making a great noise, but doing no hurt at all, because the house is grounded vpon a Rock.

But you will say, There are diuers places of Scrip­ture, where that faith, by which wee are iustified, an [...] saued, is confined to the vnderstanding, and signifie no more, but an assent to the truth of that, which is deliuered by God to be beleeued. Such is that, touching Abrahams faith, which was imputed to him for righte­ousnes. First, he is said, not to haue bin weake in faith, not to haue considered the deadnesse of his owne, or his wife Sarahs Rom. 4. 3. 23. body, not to haue doubted of the promise of God, through vn­beleefe &c. Then this faith, or beleeuing is exprest, to haue beene a full assurance, that he, which had promised, was Verse. 21. also able to do it. What is there in all this great commen­dation of Abrahams faith, but only an amplification of his beleeuing God, that he had promised him no more, then he was well able to performe? So in the Epistle to Heb. 11. 3. the Hebrewes, wee are said by faith to vnderstand, that the world was ordained by the word of God: and yet all men graunt, as also the former Chapter euidently sheweth, Chap. 10. 38. 39 that the Apostle speakes of such a faith, as the iust liue by. It is not my purpose to enter into a full dis­putation, or discourse of faith: which I reserue for my exposition of the Epistle to the Romans; yet I [Page 388] may not leaue these doubts vnsatisfied, nor the nature of faith vnknowne. Therefore, to these, and such like places of Scripture, and obiections from them, I an­swere, first in generall, that beleeuing (as it belongs to the vnderstanding) is sometimes mentioned alone; be­cause it is the roote, and fountaine from which the other doth spring, and flow. For it is vnpossible, that any man should rely vpon God, for the performance of that, which he doth not beleeue he hath promised, or doubts whether he be able to doe, or no. Yea, I say farder, that such a beleefe in the minde is signified in all such places, as is alwaies necessarily accompanied with trust­ing to God, for that, which wee beleeue, hee can bring to passe. If you demaund farder, why I should not content my selfe with the former faith only, seeing it is (diuers times) set alone in the point of Iustification; I answere, that therefore I take the other also to bee im­plyed in it, because I find it very often exprest in the Scripture; and a new kind of speech, as it were purpose­ly deuised by the holy Ghost, to make vs the more easi­ly, and fully vnderstand, what faith hee meanes, in the matter of our iustification.

I deny not that the Hebrew addeth the preposition [...] often times, which the 70 sometimes expresse, some­times ouerpasse: but this I say; that the phrase, which the holy Ghost most commonly vseth, in the new Tes­tament to expresse Beleeuing in Christ, is neither in the [...] greeke translation of the old, nor (for ought I could euer yet find) in any greeke Author whatsoeuer, except those that writ since, and tooke it from the Scripture. To be­leeue in God, or in Christ, for the substance, and sense, is no more, but to trust to God, or Christ; and this kinde of speech is vsuall in the greeke tongue, and writers. To helpe vs in the vnderstanding of this, the 70. in their greek afford an other phrase, maruelous significant, To [...] beleeue vpon, or on God. This the holy Ghost might [Page 389] haue contented himselfe withall, vsing it often, as hee doth; and by this, the Hebrew Preposition is now, and Act. 16. 13. Rom. 4. 5. 18. then, exprest in the Greek. But, as if hee would haue vs out of al doubt, touching a matter of so great importāce he becomes autor of a new phrase himselfe. To beleeue in Christ. Shall any man perswade me, that hee meanes [...]. no more by it, but a bare assenting to the truth? What needed this straunge manner of speech, which doth rather darken, then inlighten the vnderstanding, for the right conceiuing of the holy Ghosts true meaning? A­braham beleeued God. Euery man knows what this means; especially if it signifie no more, hut giuing credit to the truth of that, which is spoken. But the Apostle expoūds it by Beleeuing in, or on God. Is not this to make the mat­ter doubtfull, by an exposition, whereas of it selfe, it, was plaine, and certaine enough? It cannot bee there­fore, but that the holy Ghost, by this new kind of speech notes somewhat more, then simply to assent to the truth of God, vpon the autority of the speaker.

In particular I say farder, touching that of Abraham; Rom. 4. 5. first that his beleeuing (as we haue often heard) is a belee­uing in God, or resting vpon God. 2, that beleeuing could not haue profited Abrahā, if he had only acknowledgd the truth of that, which God promised, and not trusted to him, for the performance thereof. What can it auaile any man to Iustificatiō, that he holds IESVS CHRIST to be the only Sauiour, and faith in himt he only means of saluation, if he doe not withall rely vpon him, to bee saued by his mediation? Thirdly, it must bee considered, that the Apostle, applying that particular of Abraham, to all beleeuers; expoundeth that beleeuing, by relying vpon God. Which beleeue on him, that raised vp Iesus our Lorde from the dead. What is it (think you) to beleeue on Verse 24. him, that raised Iesus? To assent to the truth of Scripture, that tells vs, he was raised? Then should the Apostle ra­ther haue spokē thus, which beleeue God, who saith he hath [Page 390] raised him. But it is required, that wee beleeue on him; and there is no speech, nor thought of any thing affirmed by God, which wee should beleeue. Let vs vnder­stand it thus; which beleeue, that God raised Iesus. Cer­tainely if this had beene the Apostles meaning, hee would neuer haue spokē so doubtfully, of so weighty a matter, where he had a plaine, and easy speech to ex­presse that, which he intended, to the vnderstanding of euery man; whereas no man woulde euer conceiue what he meant, by these wordes, if they signified no more, but giuing credit to the truth of our Sauiors resur­rection.

As for the other place out of the Epistle to the He­brewes, what can possibly bee concluded out of it, a­gainst Heb. 11. 7. that, I haue deliuered, touching the nature of that faith, by which we are iustified? What, if by it we vnder­stand, that the world was ordained of GOD? Is this all, that is required to the iustifying of a man, in respect of faith? There is no such thing, either exprest, or im­plyed in the words. Nay rather, all the examples, that follow, are so many proofes, that the faith, whereof the holy Ghost there speakes, can not bee seuered from be leeuing in God. I will not stand vpon the particulars at this time; the later part of the next Chapter before, vp­on occasion whereof the Apostle falles into this dis­course of faith, giues sentence for me. The iust shall liue Chap. 10. 38. 37. by faith. By what faith? by that, which only giues credit to the truth of God? No but by such a faith, as makes vs rest vpon God, for the performance of his promise: which presupposeth the truth thereof. How chance thē that the Apostle in setting forth the nature of faith, as­scribes such effects therevnto, as may bee without any resting vpon God? Shall wee say, that this faith spreds it selfe ouer the whole soule, and is seated aswell in the vnderstanding, as in the affection? I see not how it can stand with reason, to place any habit, or quality in two [Page 391] diuers partes, or faculties of the soule. VVhat then? Is not beleeuing of the truth required to iustification? Yes surely: There is no possibility of saluation, without it. For how shall any man trust in Christ, to be iustified by him, it hee doe not beleeue, that hee is appointed by God, to be a Sauiour of all them, that trust vnto him? But the question is; first, whether Beleefe bee nothing else but an assenting to the truth; Secondly, whether the true nature of that faith, which is availeable to our iustification, consist in resting vpon Christ, to be iustified by him, or no: As­sent is required, as the roote and foundation; but the very forme of iustifying faith, is beleeuing in Christ; as it shall appeare (I hope) when I haue iust occasion to define it, and handle it at large. In the meane while, that no man may bee troubled about that place to the He­brewes, let vs remember, that the Apostle being to sette forth iustifying faith, and to perswade continuance in obedience therevnto, enters into a commendation of fayth in generall, for the amply fying of that parti­cular.

But for the settling of our minds in the true know­ledge of that beleefe, which is required to our iustifica­tion, nothing (I take it) can be of greater force, then the consideration of the worde, as it is vsed (ordinarily) in the olde Testament. VVhen any blessing is to bee receined from God, what beleefe is it, that the Lorde expecteth of his people, to the ende, they may haue his protection, and assistance? A fewe examples will shew the nature of it. Because thou hast rested on the king of Aram, and hast not rested vpon the Lorde thy God, therefore is the hoast of the king of Aram escaped out of thy 1. Chro. 5. 18. 19. 20. hands. Thus did Hanani the Seer reprooue Asa king of Iuda, shewing him that the reason, why hee preuail­ed not against the Aramites, was his not trusting in God. The same point hee amplifyed in the verse fol­lowing; [Page 392] The Aethiopians (saith he) and the Lybians, were Ver. 8. they not a great hoast, with Charrets, & hors-men exceeding many? Yet because thou didst rest on the Lorde, he deliuered them into thy hand. Therefore doth Iehosaphat exhort his people to the like trust in God, and assureth them of deliuerance from their enimies therevpon. Put your trust on the Lord your God (saith he) and yee shall be assured. Chap 20. 20. We heard of the Reubenites before; that the Hagarins were deliuered into their hands, because they trusted in God. 1 Chro. 5. 20. That the wrath of the Lord was kindled, against the Israelits Because they beleeued not in God, & trusted not in his helpe. Psal. 78. 22. To this trust is blessednesse ascrib'd: Blessed are all, that Psa. 2. 12. trust in him. Yea, with such a blessednesse, as shal neuer fayle them. They, that trust in the Lord, shall bee as mount Psal. 125. 1. Syon, which cannot be remoued, but standeth fast for euer. Tast and see (saith the Psalme) how gracious the Lord is: Psal. 34. 8. blessed is the man, that trusteth in him: Such a man will not be afrayd of euill tidings; his heart is fixed, and beleeueth in the Lord. This is to beleeue to saluation, euen to haue his heart settled, and to repose himself wholly, and only Ps. 112 7. Act. 16. 31. vpon Iesus Christ. As for that perswasion, which euery man must haue, and wherein some woulde haue faith consist; it followes him, that is iustified, and goes not before any mans iustification; as faith must needes doe: for the condition, to be performed on our part, to iustification, is to Beleeue.

So then, to beleeue in Christ, is to rest vpon Christ: but what is it To beleeue in his name? Must his name bee rested vpon, as if there were some es­peciall vertue in it? In which of his names? In IESVS, or in CHRIST? For of Imanuell it is needlesse to say any thing, because hee is not once so called in all this Gospell; and if the E­uangelist speake of a name, doubtlesse hee speakes of such a name, as was knowne and ordinary: neither woulde hee haue omitted it in [Page 393] the history, if it had beene of such importance, and vse. It may seeme perhaps, that Iesus is the name, in which all men, that will be saued must beleeue. For that is it, by which Saint Iohn, commonly calls our Lord in his gos­pell; and by which he was well knowne amongst men, as hauing beene giuen him, at the time of his circumcisi­on, Luk. 2. 21. and continued, according to the custome of the Iewes. We haue found him (saith Philip to Nathaneel) of Ioh. 1. 45. whome Moses did write in the law, and of whome the Pro­phets writ; Iesus the Sonne of Ioseph. And of this name Ie­sus, many excellent things are spoken in the Scripture. That is said to haue cured the man, that had beene a cripple Act. 3. 16. 6. from his mothers wombe. At that name, euen at the name of Iesus, must euery knee bow: By that name wonders haue beene Phil. 2. 10. wrought, according as the Apostles prayed to God, that hea­ling, and signes. and wonders might be done, by the name of his Act. 4. 30. holy Sonne Iesus. Neither is this name effectuall for bodi­ly cures only, but (as the Apostle Saint Peter profes­eth) Ver. 12. There is giuen no other name vnder heauen, by which we must be saued.

But is there indeed such power in the name? What then needed our Lord to haue come himself in the flesh? seeing there were more then one of that name, many yeeres, before he was conceiued in the wombe of the blessed virgin in his mother. Iesus the Sonne of Iosedec is Hag. 1. 12. famous in Hagge, being high Priest after the peoples return out of the Captiuity. But much more famous was osua. 1. 1. 2. 3. the other Iesus, who brought the people of Israell into the Land of Canaan, and diuided to euery Tribe his proper in heritance. That the names are all one, though some would make a curious, and an idle distinction be­twixt them, both the nature of the wordes shewe, and the holy Gost in the new testament hath made it mani­fest, by calling Iosua, Iesus, without any kind of diffe­rence in the name. If Iesus had giuen them rest. After­warde, Heb. 4. 8. the Apostle in the same Chapter, hauing occa­sion [Page 394] to name Iesus our Sauiour, that hee might bee vn­derstood to speake of him, and not of Iosua, addes his title, Iesus the sonne of God. What should that haue nee­ded, Ver. 14. if the name it selfe, had afforded sufficient note of difference betwixt them? But it is plaine in the origi­nall Greeke, and in the Syriake, and Latine translati­ons, as also in our English, that there is none. The 70. Iewes, that turned the olde Testament out of Hebrew into Greeke, so exprest the names both of that Leader, and of the high Priest. Iosua. 1. 1. Nowe after the death of Moses the seruant of the Lord, the Lord spake vnto Ioshua (Iesus sayeth the Greeke) and so through out that whole booke. So of Iehoshua the highe Priest. Zach, the third and the first. And hee shew­ed mee Iehoshua or Iesus, the high Priest, & so in the 3, 6, and 8, verses of the same Chap. If the name giuen to our Sauiour Christ, by Gods owne appointment, had been diuers from the other; surely the holy Ghost would not haue confounded them But now of purpose the same is retained, that all men might vnderstand the rea­son of it; as it is partly signified, in that place to the He­brewes, concerning another Rest, into which Iesus Christ hath brought the people of Israell, the true chil­dren of God. Hebrewes, 4 8. For if Iesus had giuen them rest. (who was this Iesus, but Ioshua?) then woulde hee not after this daye haue spoken of ano­ther.

What should I trouble you with many wordes, of this matter? By the name, the partie, whose name it is, is signifyed. Let the Apostle Peter expound himselfe. His name hath made this man sound, through faith in his Act. 3. 16. name. Is it the name, or faith in the name Iesus; and not rather Iesus himselfe, and faith in him? And the faith which is by him (sayeth the Apostle) hath giuen him his perfect health. The like wee haue touchinge [Page 395] the same matter, in the next Chapter; By the name of Iesus Christ of Nazareth, by him doth this man stand heer Chap. 4. 10. before you whole. This sheweth that the Miracles, which were wrought, proceeded from the power of Christ, not from any vertue in his name. How then should saluation come from, or by it? Hearken what the Angell sayth when hee giues the name. Thou shalt Mat. 1. 21. call his name, Iesus; for he shall saue his people, from their sinnes. Not his name, but Hee. For the name had neither bloud, nor life to giue in sacrifice: without which there is no forgiuenesse of sinnes to bee had. Heb. 9 22. Phil. 2. 10. Neither is that honour, Saint Paul speakes of, to bee giuen to the name, as if the sound of those letters, so set together, deserued any speciall reuerence; or as if Iesus were of more excellēcy, thē Christ. For (as I sayd once before) then ought wee to esteeme the name of Iesus the sonne of Nun, and of the other Iesus, the sonne of Iosedeck, more then of Christ the sonne of God. Sure­ly, if any name require bowing of the knee, it is that which God gaue himselfe, euen Iehouah, and the other of the same kind, Eheieh, & Iah. But the person is meant, when the name is mentioned: and the office of being a Sauiour is that, to which all honour is due in heauen, and in earth, and vnder the earth, by Angels, and men; not the Name of sauing, which was common to our Lord, with other men.

Why then doth the Euangelist vse this kinde of speech, To beleeue in his name? would hee thereby note our Lords power; vpon which euery one, that will bee saued must rest, that hee may bee deliuered out of the handes of sinne, and death? This may seeme the like­lier, because that miracle of curing the cripple was wrought by the name of our Lord. In the name of Ie­sus Act. 3. 6. 16. Christ of Nazareth (say Peter and Iohn) rise vp and walke. And where they giue account of their doo­ing; His name hath made this man sound. But I [Page 396] rather perswade my selfe, that Saint Iohn followes the Hebrewe phrase, by which (ordinarily) the name is vsed, for the person. Ahraham called on the name of the Gen. 13. 4. Lord. That is, Abraham worshipt God, and offered vp sacrifize vnto him; for as yet, that glorious name Ieho­uah was not knowne. I hold it altogether needlesse, to Exod. 3. 14. heape vp many examples, in a matter out of question. Nothing is more common, then to haue the name of God, taken for God himselfe. Let him that hath no light Isay. 50. 10. (sayth the Prophet Isay) trust in the name of the Lord, and stay vpon his God. The later expounds the former. To trust in the name of God, is nothing else, but to stay or rest vpon God. So that the name of God, and God himselfe signifie both one thing. His name also is often put for his worshippe; as when the Priests are sayd, to des­pise Mal. 1. 6. the name of the Lord, the meaning is, that they pro­phane his worship, as a matter of no worth. But this cā ­not bee intended by the Euangelist.

For the better vnderstanding of whose meaning, af­ter the exposition of the words, wee must consider how this verse dependes vpon the former; which wee may thus reasonably conceiue: The Euangelist, in the next wordes before, shewed the vnkindnesse, and vnthank­fulnesse of the Iewes, in refusing him, that made offer of himselfe vnto them. His own receiued him not. A strange vnkindnesse, that a man so full of grace, and power, so holy in his life, so gratious in his words, so mighty in his deedes, and that to the benefit of them, among whome heeliued, should notwithstanding all this, bee so pe­remptorily reiected. But was this all? I grant it is not nothing, to bee iustly condemned of such vnciuill, and vnnaturall dealing. But there is worse behind, to shew the folly of these men, in being occasion to themselues of so great a losse. If an olde man of fayre lands, and great wealth, should seeke to bee intertained of his neer kinsmen, or friends, and not bee receiued, would not all [Page 397] the world charge them with extraordinary vnkindnes, and condemne them of singular folly, for depriuing themselues of so goodly an inheritance, and so great an estate, as they weresure to haue enioyed, by receiuing of him? Such was the case, in the Iewes refusall of our Sauiour. As if Saint Iohn should haue sayd; His owne, to whome hee came, receiued him not: but if they had receiued him, they had thereby beene made the sonnes of God.

For that prerogatiue hee gaue to as many, as by faith entertained him. So that our Euangelist in this one verse both implyes the vnrecouerable losse of the Iewes, and all other, that refuse him; and expresseth the inualuable gaine of all, that receiued him, whether they were Iewes, or Gentiles. It seemes a small matter (perhappes) to many a man, not to beleeue in Iesus Christ: yea some men thinke it little better, then sim­plicitie, and basenesse, to rest vpon him. If these wret­ches knewe, what is lost by refusing him, what is gotten by receiuing him, they would run after him with all the haste, they can possibly make, and imbrace him with both their armes.

But I will leaue these points to bee amplyfied anone, when I haue handled the doctrine, that our Euangelist teacheth vs in this place: which is briefly this; that who­soeuer beleeues in Iesus Christ, hath by that beleeuing, the ho­nour to bee the sonne of God. And because the matter is of so great importance, containing the glorie of a true Christian, and the meanes of attaining to it, let vs I be­seech you, stirre vp our selues, with all diligence, to know and doe that, which will, certainely, bring vs to the height of all true felicitie. To which purpose, I wil di­uide my whole discourse into these two parts: The pre­rogatiue to be the sonnes of God; The meanes of obtaining it. In the former, I will first shewe, what it is: that is heere vou [...]chsaf't vs; To he the sonnes of God. Secondly, that [Page 398] it is a prerogatiue; which is amplyfied by the generali­ty of it: that it belonges to all, that beleeue. The later part offers two things to be considered, touching the meanes; That, this prerogatiue is giuen; that, on our part beleeuing in Christ is required. Many other points will fall in here, and there: but I content my selfe with pro­pounding these, that are most generall, and easie to bee discerned in the Text. The first point, concerning our being the sonnes of God, requires that I should shewe some reason, why the Euangelist makes choyse of this benefit aboue the rest: that being declared, I will come to the exposition of the point it selfe.

Many, and excellent are the blessings, which it hath pleased God, of his infinite mercy, to bestow vpon vs, in his sonne Iesus Christ. He saues vs from our sinnes. He re­conciles vs Mat. 1. 21. Rom. 5. 10: 1. Cor. 1. 30. to God; He is made vnto vs wisedome, righteous­nesse and redemption. When should I make an ende, if I should recite euerie particular? The question is, why Saint Iohn passing ouer all other benefittes receiued by him, mentions this, rather thē any other. What if we say, he made especial choise of this, because it is the greatest? Surely wee shall say no more, then is true, and not vn likely. For how could the Iewes be more iustly cōdem­ned, the hearts of all men more inflamed with the loue of faith, or the kindnesse of our Lord more amplyfied, then by propounding the chiefest of all the blessinges, whereof wee are made partakers by him? And what one is comparable to this? The sauing vs from our sinnes, to speake properly, rather frees vs from miserie, then brings vs to happinesse. Sanctification doth no more, but refresh the image of God in vs, which was decayed, or restore it being lost; which can make vs but good seruants, at the best. If any man thinke, that to bee an heire, is a degree aboue being a sonne; he must vnderstand, that this implyes, that Christ makes none sonnes, but hee makes them heyres too, by the same Kom 8. 17. [Page 399] title. And therefore questionlesse, there is no blessing obtained by him, that may stand in comparison with this, To bee the sonnes of God. I deny not then, but that this might bee respected of our euangelist in his choise of this benefit; but I thinke there were also other rea­sons of it.

Hee spake immedately before, of the Iewes not re­ceiuing of the Messiah. Now the Iewes were the men, that held themselues onely to be the sonnes of God, by reason of Abraham; from whom they were descended. Therefore the Lord challengeth them by the Prophet, Mal. 1. 6. that they did not honour him. A sonne honoureth his fa­ther. If I bee a father, where is mine honour? Contrarie to this conceite of theirs, the holy Ghost giues them to vnderstand, that the honour to bee the sonnes of God, is not appropriated to the Iewish nation, as they false­ly imagined, but is common to all the Gentiles, that will beleeue. As for them, their refusall to beleeue in him, made them wholly destitute of that prerogatiue. What other blessing afforded vs by Christ, would so fittely haue met with that proud conceite of the vnbe­leeuing Iewes? Forgiuenesse of sinnes, they little, or not at all regarded; being puft vp with an ouer weening of their owne righteousnesse. They lookt for rewarde, not Cyril. in Ioan lib. 1. cap. 13. for pardon. Fitly therefore, to abate this pride, doth Saint Iohn put them in minde of other sonnes of God, Ambros. de fi­de. lib. 4. cap. 4 August. in tract in Ioa 2. Bed. ad hūc. loc. such as they knew themselues not to bee, for all their bragging. Another reason is added, and may be ad­mitted; that this was therefore especially named, be­cause it is that, which being proper to Christ, hee, and hee onely could giue; that it may appeare, hee hath wholly communicated himselfe vnto vs, if hee haue imparted that, which was so truely, and neerely his owne. Ought wee not then to bee so much the more carefull, both to knowe, and obtayne so incomparable a fauour? Can we content ourselues, to be ignorāt of it? [Page 400] Can wee indure one hower, to be without it? Had we ra­ther bee seruants then sonnes?

First, let vs vnderstand what it is to bee a sonne of God. A matter easily knowne, will some man say. For what is it else, but to haue our beginning, and as it were birth from GOD? So is Adam sayde to bee the Luk. 2. 10. Mal. 2. 10. sonne of God. So speaketh Malachy of the Iewes Haue wee not all one Father? hath not one God made vs? If this bee all; To be a sonne, is no more, then to be a crea­ture; or at the most, such a creature, as is made after the image and likenesse of God. But this wee haue by nature in our creation, not by grace in regeneration. This they haue, that are borne after the ordinary course of men, of bloud, of the will of the flesh, of the will of man. So are not they borne, of whome our Euangelist heere intreateth. Not of bloud (sayth hee) but of God. That manner of birth is common to all men, in all times, and places; this is a priuiledge voutchsaft to some onely. The former was already bestowed vpon the Iewes, in that they were men.

The later was to be receiued by the gift of Christ, by their becomming faithfull, or beleeuing men. To conclude, if the holy Ghost had meant such kinde of sonnes, he would neuer haue required faith in the name of Christ. What is it then, To be the sonne of God? The Euangelist aunsweres in the next verse, To bee borne of God. And are they, to whome our Lord giues this ho­nour of being sonnes, Borne of God? It should seeme then they are the naturall sonnes of God. For what is it, to be the naturall sonne of any man, but to bee borne of him? but this is meerely impossible. Because our Sa­uiour Christ is the onely begotten, or borne sonne of GOD, and is thereby equall to his father, both in time, and dignitie; whereas these sonnes, haue their beginning in time, and are no way comparable to God, in any degree. Therefore wee may not, at any hand, [Page 401] when wee read, or heare of this birth (whereof more hereafter in the next verse, and especially in the thirde Chapter) once imagine, that we are properly sayd to be borne of God; but that the speech is tropical; that is to say, turned from the naturall signification, and apply­ed to another, by way of similitude, or likenesse. I wil M [...]taphora. speake no more of the point at this time, then is neede­full for our vnderstandinge of the matter. For the helpe whereof, let vs consider, how God is our fa­ther and wee his sonnes, in respect of our naturall be­ing by creation.

Euery man knowes, that he is not properly our fa­ther, no nor was Adams. For then must he needs haue beene God by nature; and God hauing begotten him, as his naturall sonne, must of necessitie haue beene such as Adam was, and we all now are. How then is God A­dams father. I confesse he is so, though I doe thinke, that Saint Luke is not so to bee vnderstood in the place for­merly Luk. 3. 38. alleaged; where those words the sonne of God seem rather to belong to Iesus, then to Adam. Well: yet is A­dam the sonne of God: and not the natural sonne. What sonne then? If I shall aunswere directly to the question, I say hee is the Tropicall, and in particular the Metapho­ricall sonne of God. To speake to the capacitie of the meanest, and simplest, who haue as much interest to this knowledge reuealed by God, for our instruction, as the noblest and wisest; Adam is the sonne of God by a bor­rowed speech. For as men are naturally the fathers of them, who haue their being (in particular) from them: so is Adam, so are all men the sons of God; because they haue their first originall from him. Adam also may bee sayde; somewhat more particularly, to bee the sonne of God; because hee was fashioned, and formed by him, of the dust of the ground, without any other meanes, then the will and word of God himself. And in this res­pect may an Image, cut, cast, or painted by any man, [Page 402] [...]e called the sonne of him, that was the maker of it. So may the bookes, that men write, be tearmed their chil­dren. And as all men, in this sense, are the Sonnes of God, touching their naturall being: So are some, euen as many as beleeue in Christ, his sonnes, concerning their spirituall beeing. For it is God, that creates as it were, new hearts in them, that restores that image of his, which they had lost, that giues them spirituall life, and motion to all righteous and holy actions. I do but name the things according to the present occasion, lea­uing the handling of them, to more fit opportunitie in the next verse. It is enough, that we vnderstand, in what meaning wee are the Children of God [...] because wee are borne of him, and yet not his Sonnes by nature.

But is this that, which the holy Ghost intendeth in this place, to signifie, that Christ is autor of regenera­tion to all them, that beleeue? I suppose this is not all. For it is easie for euery man to discerne, that the Text speaketh of such a being sonnes, as followeth faith, and beleeuing: whereas the birth, that is mentioned in the verse following, goeth before faith; which is one of those [...]ces, that are formed in vs, and brought forth by that [...]irth. This is that, the Apostle saith other where; Ye are Gal. 3. 26. ill the Sonnes of God, by faith in Iesus Christ. First wee be­leeue, and then by beleeuing we are the sonnes of God; This is as it were the second birth: the first is that, which necessarily must bee had, before a man can haue any [...]pirituall life in him. For as our Sauiour tells Nicode­mus, That which is borne of flesh, is flesh: and that, that is Iohn. 6. borne of the spirit, is spirit. No man can possibly haue [...]aith, of the flesh: but the spirit must beget a faithfull man. There is no remedy then, but wee must seeke for [...]ome other being sonnes, or, that I may speake more [...]hortly, Sonne-ship. Giue mee leaue to vse the worde, because it is fit, though somwhat harsh, till it be worne [Page 403] smooth with often vsing. Where shall wee finde that Sonne-ship, wee inquire for? Let vs examine what, and how many kindes of Sonnes, wee know amongst men; not speaking of these, which are made sonnes by alliance: who is ignorant, that there are two kindes of Sonnes; by nature, and by adoption? The one is borne, the other is chosen a Sonne. The former kinde is so well knowne, that it were idle to say any thing of it. Of the later we haue small knowledge amongst vs by expe­rience, saue only in them, who by their last Will, and Te­stament, make them their Heyres, that haue no interest to their estate, but onely by the fauour, and appoint­ment of the Testator. Among the old Romans, it was ve­ry ordinary: as their histories, & lawes in that case proui­ded, euidently, & plētifully shew. The scripture affords vs few or none examples of this kinde. Wee haue a sha­dow of it in the course, that Iacob tooke with Iosephs two sonnes, Manasses, & Ephraim. They were indeede his grand children, or nephewes by nature. But by fauour hee made thē equall to the rest of his sons, their vncles; so that they make two of the 12. Tribes. Let my name Gen. 48. 16. (saith Iacob) be named vpon them; that is, Let them be ac­counted my sonnes, as if they had bin begotten of my body. The like may be said of Moses and Esther: who were, after a sort, the adopted Children of Pharaohs daughter, and Mordecai. Of him the Text saith, that his mother after shee had weaned him, brought him to Pharaohs daughter, and he was as her Sonne. Which Exod. 2. 10. Heb. 11. 24. is farder proued by the Epistle to the Hebrewes; that he refused to be called the sonne of Pharaohs daughter, Of her it is recorded in the history, that after the death of her fa­ther, and her mother, Mordecai, who was her cosin Ger­mane, Est. 2. 7. tooke her for his owne daughter. By this Son-ship, the partie thus adopted obtaines a title and interest to the estate of him, that hath adopted him; as if hee were his naturall child.

Of this sonne-ship by Adoption from God, there are [...] in loa. lib 1. cap. 10. two kindes in the scripture; the one a figure, and resem­blance of the other. When the Lord sent Moses to Pha­raoh, for the deliuerance of the children of Israell, hee gaue him this instruction, for the discharge of his Em­bassage; Thou shall say to Pharaoh, Thus sayth the Lord, Exod. 4. 22. Israell is my sonne, my first borne. Would you know what sonneship this was? The Apostle wil resolue you; where speaking of the prerogatiue, that God vouchsaf't the Iewes, he reckens among other blessings, the Adoption: Rom. 9. 4. what was that else, but a choosing of that people, out of all the nations in the world, to be his peculiar, vnder his protection? The Lord (sayth Moses) set his delight in thy fathers, to loue them, and did choose their seede after them, e­uen Deut. 10 15. you aboue all people. Therefore did hee bestow vpon them the Land of Canaan, a land especially furnisht by him, with the blessings of this present life, Flowing with milke, and honey. Glorious was this estate of theirs, their Exod 33. 3. adoption full of fauour, to the enuie of all the world, & their owne happy securitie. But as glorious, and boun­tifull as it was, it was for all that but a shadow of the spi­rituall sonneship.

There is another manner of Adoption mentioned in the new Testament, and imparted to them, that beleeue in Iesus Christ, When the fulnesse of time was come (sayth Galat. 4. 4. 5. Saint Paule) God sent foorth his sonne, made of a woman, made vnder the law, That hee might redeeme them, which were vnder the law, that wee might receiue the adoption of sonnes. According as he had predestinated v [...] (saith the same Eph. 1. 5. Apostle) to be adopted through Iesus Christ. To vs thus a­dopted, he giues the spirit of adoption, whereby wee cry Ab­ba Rom. 8. 15. father. This is the sonneship, the Euangelist speakes of in this place: This is that spirituall Adoption, by which wee are truely made the sonnes of God. I shall not need, to adde any farther proof of the mat­ter, because it hath appeared already, that none of the [Page 405] other Sonneships can agree with that, which is here auou­ched. For to none of them is beleeuing required, espe­cially beleeuing in Iesus Christ, but to this only. To that Sonneship, which is by creatiō, it is neither lookt for, nor possible, that wee should bring faith. For wee must needes be e [...]e wee can beleeue: and our very being, is our being sonnes. So the Iewes, vpon that promise of God to their father Abraham, were borne, not made sonnes; their Adoption consisted not in the seuerall choyse of particular men, but in separating the seede of Abraham, Isaac, and Iacob, from all families, and nati­ons in the world whatsoeuer. Neither is our spirituall sonneship of the former kinde attained to by faith; but by it we are made faithfull. Therefore to be sonnes, is to be adopted by God for his children in Christ.

I will make bolde (with your good liking, I doubt not) to declare the point more fully, and plainely, by the opening of these two things; what adoption is; how God hath adopted vs. Adoption, if wee consider the Adoption. word, for the nature of it, is nothing else, but choosing to a mans selfe, whatsoeuer it bee, that is chosen. From this generall signification, the word is applyed, to note that particular choyse of sonnes or children. The Greek [...]. expresseth the particular, and signifieth an appointing of children. The word being vnderstood, it is no hard matter to knowe the nature of the thing it selfe; which (not to stand vpon any curious definition) is a choosing, or taking of them for our Children, which by nature, are not ours. So (as wee heard) Iacob made choise of Iosephs sons, Ephraim, and Manasses. Pharaohs daughter tooke the childe of an Hebrew, whome shee knew not. Mor­dicai chose Esther, his Vncles daughter, to bee his childe. Let vs apply this to our owne Adoption. The father, that adopteth is God: the childrē to be adop­ted, are men and women. If they must become the chil­dren of God by Adoption, it is cleer, they are none of his [Page 406] by nature. Whose then? I am a shamed and affraide to vtter it. Our Lord himselfe hath told vs discouering the naturall estate of all men, in describing the Iewes. Wee Ioh. 8. 41. are not borne of fornicatiō (say they to our sauiour) We haue one father which is God. But what doth he answere them? Ver. 44. Ye are of your father, the Deuill. If the Iewes, Gods owne children, after an especiall manner, yea his first borne, were notwithstanding the children of the Diuell; surely no man in his naturall estate, can be the childe of God. Rom. 9. 4. They had the Adoption, they had the Couenant. Other people had nothing affoorded them by God, but those generall helpes, which are common to all by nature. What becomes of these children of the Diuell? As ma­ny of them, as beleeue in Christ, are by Adoption, made the sons of God. Being sons, they haue withal conuaied vnto them, not onely an interest, and claime to their fa­thers estate, be it neuer so great, but also the inheritance of heauen. If we be children, we are also heyres. This passeth the ordinarie course of Adoption. A man may adopt many sonnes, and yet not make them all heyres. I doe but name these things now. They shall be amplified, if it please God, in the next point, where the Prerogatiue must be declared. In the meane while, let vs go forward to shew, How we are adopted.

There are two things, that offer themselues to be con­sidered in respect of the party that adopteth; The gene­rall motiues, why he will adopt: The particular reason, why he will make choise of this, or that person. The ge­nerall motiues are ordinarily two: either simply default of naturall issue; or, at the least, want of such children as are fit for such an estate, or inheritance. I confesse it was otherwise with Iacob, who had sonnes enouw of his own body. The case was extraordinarie, & hee directed by the spirit of prophecie, to make choise of them to that dignity. But (ordinarily) the motiues are such, as I named; and, in likelihood, were the same, or one of thē, [Page 407] in Pharaohs daughter, & Mordecat. What place had they, in our adoption by God? Certainly none at all: Touching the former, which is the more cōmon of the two; was God without issue? If he had bin; seeing him­selfe is eternall, as with out beginning, so without end, he needed not feare the decay of his house, for want of Posteritie to succeede him. Dauid was to be gathered to Psal. 132. 11. his fathers: & therefore it was a singular fauour to him, that he should haue children, to sit vpō his throne after him. But he, that neuer dyeth; neuer groweth weake, or weary, hath no neede of a successor, or assistant in his kingdome. But he had issue; euen a sonne, the brightness of the glory, & the ingrauen forme of the fathers per­son. Milk is not so like to milke, as that son is to that fa­ther, being in nature all one with him; differing in no­thing, but that the one is the father & not the sonne, the other the sonne, & not the Father. But perhaps he might be vnfit for the managing of such an estate, & succession to such a father. Go to: let vs, for the better setting out of these points imagin a succession, & conceiue of God, for a while, as of a mā. The vnfitnes in a son for successi­on, is either from the weaknes of his body, that he is not likely to leaue issue behind him, or for the badness of his cariage, want of capacitie, dissoluteness in gouernment, or some such matter. This son of God (that I may not dwell too lōg vpon this point, nor speak any thing with out due reuernce of his maiesty) was euery way so qua­lified, & fitted to his fathers minde, that it was impossi­ble, I will not say that any adopted sonne should come neere him, but that greater fitnes could be desired, or i­magined. This is my beloued sonne (saith the father of him) Mat. 3. 17. Chap. 17. 5. in whom I am well pleased. And he repeats that testimony, the second time, at his transfiguration. It was not for neede then, as it is with men, that the Lord vouchfaf't to thinke vpon adopting of sonnes.

But admit the case had so stood with him, that it had bin requisite for him, to make him sonnes, by Adoption. [Page 408] What is vsually the reason of mens particular choyse? Is it not an affection, or liking, that the partie hath to some one, rather then to another? There may (some­times) be some other respects; but this is the commonest and best, setting that of kinred aside. Consider a little the dealing of our God, in this behalfe. Must he choose som creatures to be his sonnes, and ioynt heires with his owne naturall son? He hath thowsands, and ten thow­sand Dan 7. 10. thowsands of Angelles round about his throne, Glorious in their nature; Obedient in their seruice; Ho­ly in their desires. Neuer a one of these is chosen to this fauour of Adoption. It may be, the Lord intendes to shew the riches of his mercy, by extending compassi­on to thē, that are in miserie. Behold the Angels, that ly 2. Pet. 2. 4. lud. ver. 6. in darkenes, reserued to the iudgement of the last day. Is there any mans estate more desperate? Haue any creatures greater need of succor? Can there be more pit­ty shewed to any? They are left in that damnable estate. The Lord turnes his face away from their misery, and casts his eyes of compassion on our wretchednesse. So makes he difference betwixt men, and Angels. Hee will adopt men, rather thē Angels; because his loue is greater to men, then to Angels. Our Adoption then proceede [...] no [...], for the generall motiues, or the particular respects, from any other spring, then the loue of God, who a­dopteth vs; making vs, of the sonnes of the Diuell, his owne children, and giuing vs a sound, and certaine title thereby, to the inheritance of his glory in heauen.

And shall I neede to vse many words, in amplify­ing so rare a kindnes: in setting out so inestimable a be­nefitte? Small fauours require inlarging; infinite bles­sings will not admitte it. They by amplification may bee made greater, then they are: these, the more you speake of them, the lesse you make them. For what is it, but a diminishing of that, which is infinite, to at­tēpt in any kind of manner, I say not to inlarge, but euen [Page 409] to expresse it? He, that striues to speake much, and al­most makes no ende of commending that, which is ex­cellent, seemes to haue perswaded himselfe, and to de­sire, that other men should beleeue, that hee hath spoken all, that can be said in the matter. As for me, I professe the contrary; assuring my selfe, and you, that when I haue said all that possibly I can deuise, I shall be as farre from the infinitnesse of the benefit, as when I first be­gan to speake of it. Yet may it somewhat helpe our con­ceyt of the matter; though it cannot come neere the ex­cellency of the thing. And with this perswasion, let vs a little consider the prerogatiue of this Son-ship.

There is a great opinion, and not without good cause, of the estate of our first pa [...]nts, Adam, and Eue, while they were in Paradise, before their fall. They had the image of God, wherein they were created, shineing Gen. 1. 26. in them, so gloriously, that all the fishes in the sea, the foules in the aire, the beasts in the earth, and euery thing, that moueth, and creepeth on the earth, were sub­iect, and obedient to them. What adoe haue wee, in our estate, as now it standeth, to make, not Beares, or Lions, but those of whome we haue necessary, and continuall vse, horses, and other cattle, to performe any kind of ser­uice to vs? The whip, the goad, the wand, the spur, the yoke the bit, all the meanes of terror, and extreamity, that wee can possibly deuise, cannot preuaile so much against these tame creatures, as autority, and maiestie, did in them, with those beasts, that are now most fierce, and cruell. The Prophet Dauid, though he were a King of great command, ouer Gods owne free people; yet when he considered those little poore seruices, which the creatures, in our present estate, such as it is, ordinari­ly doe vs, and the gouernement, wee haue ouer them, breaks out into an exclamation of wonder: What is man (saith he to the Lord) that thou art mindfull of him, and Ps. 8. 4. the Sonne of man that thou visitest him! How would hee [Page 410] haue esteemed Adams rule ouer the creatures, that va­lues our gouernement of them so highly? What should I speake of their familiarity with God, who vouchsaf't himselfe to talke with them, to informe, and direct them? It is recorded, as a singular fauour, and honour, done to Moses, that the Lord spake vnto him face to face, as a Exod 33. 11. man speaketh to his friend. How were our first Parents fauoured, & honoured, that were to haue ordinary con­ference with him, from time to time.

But, to come to the point, for which al this is alledg'd; what was their estate, for all these honors, & fauors, but the condition of seruants? They were threatned with death, death both of body, and soule, if they transgrest the bounds, that were set them. Of the tree of knowledge of good, and euill, thou shalt not eate of it: for in the day thou Gen. 2. 17. eatest thereof, thou shall dy the death. Put case, they had cō ­tinued in obedience to God their Creator, according to their allegeance, & duty: What could they haue lookt for, but either a confirmation of that estate, which they then inioyed? or at the most, the reward of their seruice, the wages for their worke? They could neuer haue at­tained to this dignity, To be the Sons of God. And is it not a prerogatiue (trowe you) to be brought by Christ into a more excellent estate, then that, which Adam, in his in­nocency, and glory, had iust cause to wonder at? Blessed may we say, was the day, and houre (Oh the goodnesse & power of God, that brings light out of darknes?) that euer Adam harkened to the voice of his wife perswad­ing him to eate of the forbiddē fruit. Not, that either the sin was small, to transgress the commandement of God; or that it was the purpose of Adam in sinning, to be oc­casion of so great a blessing: But for that the Lord, of his meere affection, & loue, according to his owne former counsaile, & predestination, turned misery to happines, death to life. We were seruants to a bountiful, and gra­tious Lord: we are made Sons to a most kind, & louing [Page 411] Father. Our seruice, if it had beene neuer so good, could haue procured no more but wages: Our Son-ship con­veies vnto vs assurance of a goodly inheritance.

There is no seruant, though hee bee put in neuer so great trust, haue neuer so much autority, bee neuer so highly in the Princes fauour, like Daniell in the pro­uince Dan. 2. 48. of Babell, or Ioseph in the Kingdome of Aegypt; but is many degrees, inferiour, to the Kings Sonne. Gen. 41. 40. Moses was a most faithfull seruant in the house of the Lorde, and disposed of all things, after the direction, and to the especiall liking of his master. Such as his ser­uice was, such was his honor. He had the gouernmēt of the people of God committed to him: no man might re­fuse Heb. 3. 5. to yeeld obedience, or demaunde a reason of that which hee commaunded. VVas hee therefore compa­rable to Christ, who ruled as the Sonne ouer his owne Verse. 6. house? VVhat was Abrahams eldest seruant, to his youngest Sonne? VVhat was Ioab to Salomon? Dauid was a man of no meane imployment vnder Saul, of no small desert toward him, and his whole estate: yet when he was earnestly perswaded by his fellow seruants, to enter into the Kings alliance by marriage, what an­swere made hee? Seemeth it to you a light thing (saith Da­uid) to bee a Kings Sonne in lawe? Did it seeme so 1. Sam. 18. 23. great a matter, to so worthie a seruant, to become Son in law to a King; and can wee thinke it a little ho­nour, to bee made the Sonnes of God? Saul, though hee were a King, was but a man; Dauid though hee were a seruant in condition was a King in true vertue. Wee are men; nay, wretches, wormes, nothing. Hee, that will adopt vs, is God, most mightie, most glorious, euen Iehouah himselfe. Da­uid, though hee should become Sonne in lawe to the King, could haue no title to the Kingdome by that ad­uancement. Our Son-ship makes heauen Gauel kind, & giues euery one of vs a ful intrest to the inheritāce. If yee [Page 412] bee Sonnes, yee are heyres. Moses could not looke for any Rom. 8. 17. such preferment, though Pharaohs daughter tooke him for her Son. And yet it is recorded by the holy Ghost, Exod. 2. 10. as a certaine proofe of his faith, and trust in God, that when he came to age, he refused to be called the Sonne of Heb. 11. 24. Pharaohs daughter. Indeed, he was but to be call'd so. For Pharaohs daughter had not liberty, to adopt whom she list. Well might she be at the charge of his nursing, and allow him maintenance, like a Princess, and honour him with her fauour, and countenance; but shee could not giue him any right to the Crowne of Aegypt. If then it were so greate an honour, to be called the Sonne of Phara­ohs daughter; that Moses, for refusing of it, is registred to all posterity as a man, that preferred the seruice of God before the glory of the world, what a prerogatiue is it To be the Sonne of God?

Dauid when he was vrg'd, and prest by the continual perswasion of many Courtiers, to put himselfe forward and become the kings Sonne in lawe, excuseth himselfe by his pouerty, & the meanness of his reputation. Seem­eth it to you a light thing to be a kings Sonne in lawe, seeing I 1. Sam. 18. 23. am a poore man, and of small reputation? It is no great mat­ter, for a kings Sonne, to marry a kings daughter. There is no disparagement in the match to the wife, no in­crease of honour to the husband. But if a man of meane estate, and birth, be admitted to such aduancement by marriage, how is he preferred, how is hee honoured? It shall be fit therefore, and needfull, to the ende wee may the better conceiue the excellency of our prerogatiue, in being made the Sonnes of God, to consider, as the high estate, to which we arise, so the lowe degree, from which we were raised. Was it not, in euery mans iudge­ment, greater preferment, for Ioseph to be made ruler of all Aegypt, then for Putiphar, to haue beene aduaunced to the same honour and autority? Ioseph was taken from prison, at the lowest step, or rather not neere the stayer-foot: [Page 413] Putiphar was already aboue the midst of the grees and could almost reach the top, from whence he stood. Let vs then cast downe our eies, from the glorious estate of the Sonnes of God, to the, Shall I say meane, or base conditiō? The words are too light. To the wretched, & fearefull damnation of the Sonnes of the Diuell. Oh that I were able to vtter, or you to conceiue, either the misery, in which we were plunged, or the maiestie, to which we are aduaunced. It was cast in Ionathans teeth, as a foule reproche, by his angry Father, that He was the Son of a wicked rebellious woman. And cōtrarywise, Salo­mō 1. Sam. 20. 30. rekons it vp amongst his titles of honor, that he was the Sonne of Dauid; The parables of Salomon, the Sonne of Prou 1. 1. Dauid. For as the dignity of the master, is a credit to the seruant, and the ones dishonour, the others disgrace: so, & much more (as the bond betwixt them is neerer) the glory, or shame of the Father, is the reputation, or discredit, of the Sonne. Who is so vile, so wicked, so odi­our, as the Deuill? His former happinesse makes his pre­sent misery the greater: as heate opens the pores of the body, and prepares a way for the more cold to enter. He is cast out of the presence of God, for euer: he is vt­terly forsaken of all vertue, and goodnes. Hee hath nei­ther power, nor will remaining to doe any good. Hee repines against God; he enuies the Angells; hee seekes, continually, the destruction of men. Such as the Father is, such are the Sonnes; Haters of God, despisers of An­gells, murderers of men; both others, and themselues too.

Are these meete persons to bee made the Sonnes of God? Surely as the children of Israell profest of them­selues, that, when the Lord turned the captiuity of Sion, they Psal. 126. 1. were like them that dreame; so is it with mee, in the medita­tion of this incredible alteration. Am I, that was the child of the Deuill, become the Sonne of God? Haue I a title to heauen: to whō hel had iust intrest? Shal I raign, [Page 414] in the glory of Christ; that seru'd most basely, in the bō ­dage of Satan? I am not worthy (O Lord) to bee called thy Sonne. It is more honour, then I durst hope for, or Luk. 15. 19 almost desire, to be made one of thy hired seruants. There are a greate many degrees betwixt these two estates. It were much that thou shouldst (at all) receiue mee in­to seruice. Yet if it please thee to vouchsafe mee that fauour; the meanest, or lowest place, or office, in thy Palace, were to good for mee. To bee a door-kee­per in thy house? It were a seruice sit for thy holy An­gells, not for mee a prophane man. If thou wouldst needes, of thy wonderfull bounty, preferre me high­er, thou might'st make mee free, at the most, and so ridde thy hands of me. Will not all this serue; but must I haue the prerogatiue to bee thy Sonne too? Me thinks, I should but dreame of these fauours, and not possesse them indeed; they are so farre beyond, not on­ly expectation, but credit too. Peter, when the Angell came to deliuer him out of prison, the night before hee Act. 12. 9. 10. should haue beene executed, though hee arose, and fol­lowed his guide, passing the first, and second watch, go­ing through the iron gate, which opened by it owne accord: yet still thought, that hee had but seene a vision, and could not perswade himselfe that he was indeed set at liberty. How much more vnlikely is it, that poore, mi­serable, damned Sonnes of the Diuell, should find such fauour, as to be made the Sonnes of God?

Sarah laughed, as at a thing vnpossible, when the Gen. 18. 12. LORD told Abraham, that shee should beare him a Sonne and the worthy matrone of Shunem, that enter­tained 2. King. 4. 16. the Prophet Elizah, when he promist her the like blessing from the Lord, could not be perswaded of the truth thereof. Oh my Lord, thou man of God (saith shee) doe not ly vnto thy handmayd. Is it as straunge, for a woman, though shee bee old to haue a Sonne, as for a man to become the Sonne of God? This is that myste­ry, [Page 415] which the Angels desired to behold. As if they coulde 1. Pet. 1. 12. not satisfy themselues, with thinking on it. This was the Ioh. 8. 44. prerogatiue, which some of the Angels could not abide should be vouchsaf't to men, but murmured against 2. Pet. 2. 4. God for it, & rebelled to aduance themselues; where­by they lost both their place, and their honour. It is not so easy a matter (my brethren) to beleeue this point, as it is commonly thought to bee. And whereas it is so generally receiued for truth, of all that professe them­selues to be Christians: I am wholly of opinion, that it is rather a light perswasion, then a grounded beleefe. Doost thou beleeue, that as many, as trust in Christ, are thereby the Sonnes of God? Let mee reason with thee a little, and take that I shall say, in good parte. For I doe it not to weaken thy perswasion, but to streng­thē thy faith. Hast thou euer confidered this point seri­ously, and debated it aduisedly, with thine owne heart? Dost thou truly discerne, and acknowledge that thou art naturally the child of the Diuell? What? Doost thou start at this? Doe I seeme to wrong thee, in abasing thy estate so much? Thou art content to say, thou art a sinner; and it may bee, thou doost indeed thinke thy selfe to haue deserued the wrath of God: but thou canst not abide, to haue it thought, that thou wert at any time the Sonne of the Diuell. This opinion would disgrace thee too much, and affright thee too sore. It were a harde matter, for thee indeed euer to beleeue, that God woulde make thee his Sonne, if thou hadst this perswasion of thy selfe, that thou art the childe of the Diuell. I I am naught (saist thou) as other men are, and I haue neede of Gods mercy, and I hope hee will bee as good to mee, as to any other. But neuer thinke to make me beleeue, that I am so bad. Then indeed I had small cause to hope for any fauour, at the hande [...] [Page 416] of God. Tell me, I beseech you; Are not these the very thoughts of your hearts. Doe you not thus flatter your soules? If you knewe throughly what you are, it were vnpossible you should so easily beleeue, what you may bee.

But perhaps, though you are not willing to knowe the worst of your selues, in your estate by nature: yet you are desirous to vnderstand the vttermost of the ho­nour, you may a [...]taine to, by grace. Well: let vs conferre of this a little. How many weekes, or daies, or houres, haue you spent, in the search of this Adoption, which is vouchsaf't you in Christ? Haue you learnd, what it is to bee a Sonne? Haue you made any estimate of the in­heritance, that is promised? Doe you knowe the diffe­rence betwixt a seruant, and a Sonne? Is not al your trust in the plea of seruants? If I doe my good will (saith one) I knowe God will accept of it. What though I be igno­rant of the mystery of my redemption? Alas! I am no Diuine, no Scholler, not booke learned; God lookes for no such greate knowledge of mee. I can tell, that I must loue God aboue all things, and my neighbour as my felfe. If I doe this, I am sure God will bee mercifull to mee; and I shall goe to heauen, O the blindnesse, the wilfull blindnesse of ignorant men? How long will yee despise the kind offer of the Lord? When will yee be­gin to consider, what honour he hath vouchsaf't you? When will you haue any care, to vnderstand your own happinesse? The Lord God would haue you his Sonnes: you wil continue obstinatly in the conditiō of seruants. Hee would bestow heauen vpon you, as an inheritance: you will needes haue it as wages. Hee offers to giue you title to it, by adoption; you striue to lay clayme to it, by your owne purchase. Would you choose to be ser­uants rather then Sonnes, if you had any knowledge of these 2. estates? You haue heard somewhat of the ioyes of heauen, and you haue (accordingly) a plaine confu­sed [Page 417] motion of the good estate of them, that are there. From hence, ariseth a kinde of desire to bee partakers of those pleasures, and by the flattery of selfe loue, some manner of perswasion, that ye shall enioy them. But yee are as farre from knowing what it is to bee the sonnes of GOD; as I shewed, you were from beleeuing, that you are the Children of the Di­uell.

Is it any wonder then, that wee make so light ac­count of it? who can desire that, hee knowes not? Where mens treasures are, there also their hearts are. Mat. 6. 21. Who is there, that had not rather bee called the sonne of Pharaohs daughter, then the brother of Iesus Christ? To whome doth it not seeme a greater ho­nour, to bee the sonne in lawe of Saul, then the a­dopted sonne of God? A Lordshippe vpon earth is counted more worth, then a kingdome in Heauen. O the basenes of our thoughts! O the error of our iudge­ment! O the vilenesse of our affection! wee bury our selues in the earth, liker wormes then men. Wee esteeme more of the pleasures of sinne for a season, then of the euer­lasting Heb. 11. 19. ioyes of God in Heauen. Wee haue greater de­sire to the vaine titles of worldly honour, then to the high prerogatiue of the sonnes of God? prophane E­sau, Gen. 25. 32. that sold his brithright for a messe of pottage, was a holy man, in comparison of vs. Hee was driuen to the sale, by a kinde of necessitie. Wee, by wan­tonnesse, depriue our selues of this dignitie. Hunge [...] made him part with that, which was demaunded of him. Fulnesse makes vs despise that, which is offered to vs. It was (in his conceite) but a temporall posses­sion that hee should haue enioyed. It is an eter­nall inheritance, that wee might possesse. He remai­ned Isaacs sonne still, though hee lost his birth right: wee, by neglecting the prerogatiue of sonnes, are [Page 418] vtterly shut out of Gods presence, and fauour. It were som what yet, if we might be seruants. For there is no place in the house of God, that is not honourable. But the case stands so with vs, that we must either be sonnes, or nothing. I am sory the time cuts me off, that I can­not follow, and presse these matters, as the worthiness, and necessitie of them requires. The Lord vouchsafe a blessing vpon that, which hath bin spoken, and pre­pare vs to a farder meditation of it in hearts, to his owne glorie, and our present and euer­lasting comfort in Iesus Christ. To wnome with the Father, &c.

THere are two thinges that ordina­rily make men colde, and negli­gent, as in the pursuit of that, they haue some minde to; so in the de­sire of that, which is offered: ig­norance of the worth thereof, and a conceite, that to them, it will bee of small vse, or profit. To what end shoulde a man spend his time, and labour in the search of that, which, when hee hath found it, is not worth the ta­king vp, and carrying away? Or though perhaps it bee of some value, in it selfe; yet if I know not how to make any benefit of it, I were as good spare my paines, as lose my labour. That neither of these [Page 420] two hinderances might holde vs, from receiuing Christ by faith, that we might become the sonnes of God, and heires of euerlasting life in heauen; In my last exer­cise, I shewed both the excellency of this preroga­tiue in it selfe, and the inualuable profitte, that would arise to vs thereof. What greater honour, can there possiblie bee imagined, then to bee heyres appa­rant to the kingdome of heauen? what higher aduance­ment, can the conceite of men, or Angelles deuise, then for the children of the diuell to bee made the sonnes of God?

As for profitte, what should I speake of it? Where is it to bee found, if it bee not in a kingdome: especi­ally such a kingdome, as is furnisht, and full fraught, within it selfe, with all thinges belonging either to commoditie, or pleasure? Wee haue had nowe a weekes time, to bethinke our selues, whether wee will bee the children of God, or no. What speake I of a weeke? We haue, the most part of vs, had ma­ny weekes, and moneths, and yeeres: yea, some of vs some scores of yeers, to cōsider with our selues, whether wee will accept of this offer, which Christ makes vs, in his fathers name, or noe. Wee haue beene, or might haue beene acquainted with these myste­ries, a long time; euer since wee came to yeeres of dis­cretion. Is it not high time, wee had aduised, and resol­ued of the matter? Is there such doubt, or hazard in the choyse, that wee neede take so long a daye, to giue our aunswere? Doo wee make question, whether it bee a prerogatiue, or noe, To bee the sonnes of GOD? If naturall affection canne worke any thing with vs, to whome owe wee more loue, then to him, by whome wee haue our beeing? If wee reguarde iustice, and equitie, to whome doe we rather appertaine, then to him, that first made [Page 421] vs of nothing? So glorious an inheritance were (in reason) to be songht for, by al possible meanes, though it were not offred. An inheritance being offered, were (in kindnesse) to bee accepted, though it were not so glorious. And doe wee yet draw backward? Are wee still vnresolued? Which of vs doth not, with a certaine iust disdaine, condemne the idle excuses of those men, who beeing bidden to the marriage of the Kings Sonne, would suffer themselues to be carried a waie with such vaine imployments? I haue bought Luk. 14. 18. afarme (saith one) and I must needes go out and see it. I pray thee haue me excused. Hast thou bought a farme? Nay rather it should seeme the farme hath bought thee? Art thou so tyed to it, that thou canst not bee without the sight of it, for a dinner time? Other men take Farmes to serue them for their profite. Thou hast bought one, to serue it to thy vnrecouerable losse. Is anie man so madde, as to lose the fauour of a prince, for the sight of a Farme? Another saith, He hath bought fiue yoke of Oxen, and must go proue them, Ver. 19. and therefore prayes to bee excused. Excused? Seemes it a matter, that will admitte any excuse, to refuse the kindnesse of a prince, for the triall of a yoke of Ox­en? Durst thou send thy Land-lord such an an­swere? Wilt thou leaue the honor thy prince vouch­safes thee, to be serued at his owne Table, that thou maiest go waite vpon Oxen? They are not yoakt so fast one to another, as thou art to euery one of them.

Let me put thee in minde of an aunswere, made by our Sauiour Christ, in a case not vnlike to this. He cald one to followe him, who would needs go first, & burie his father. What said he to him: Let the dead bury Luk. 9. 60. their dead; but goe thou, and preach the kingdom of God. So may I say to thee; Let beasts looke to beastes: goe thou and enioy the princes presence, and fauour: it is not this mannerly excusing of the matter, that wil serue the turne. [Page 422] The party whom our Sauiour called, went not rudely away to bury his father but demaunded leaue, that hee might goe. Lord, suffer mee first to goe and bury my fa­ther. Ver. 59. Who shall make this excuse for thee? Shall wee, that are the messengers of God to you in this businesse, seeke to excuse so high a contempt against our Lorde, and Master? Alas! if we should, it would but little avail you; well might we make our selues guilty of your sinne, but wee should neuer acquit you of it. Farmes, and oxen to be preferred before the dinner of a King, at the marriage of his Sonne? O the bouldnesse, & bru­tishnesse of men? Can yee for shame, dare yee for feare, alleage such excuses? The indignitie, you offer the King, is so great, that there will be no means to ap­pease his anger.

And yet, what is a guest to a Sonne? A marriage dinner to an inheritance? If it bee so monstrous an vn­thankfulnesse, not to come to a feast, when the King bids vs: what is it, not to accept of a kingdome, when it is offered? Shall seeing of a farme, or trying of Oxen, drawe vs a way from taking assurance of so greate an estate? VVhat if thou haue marryed a wife? [...] 4. 20. Canst thou not come to GOD because of that? Thou maist bee both an husband, and a Sonne. bring thy wife with thee; shee shall also bee adop­ [...]ed the child of God. Thou shalt not need to make her any ioynture, or assigne her any dower out of thy land; she shall be ioint heire of the kingdom with thee: There is neither Iew, nor Grecian; there is neither bond, nor Gal. 3. 28. free: there is neither male, nor female; For yee are all one in Iesus Christ. There are, in al states, many places of honor & office, whereof the husband is capable; but the wife doth not so much as partake with him in the titles. And what kingdome, or Common-wealth euer equalled [Page 423] women to men? Onely God hath vouchsaf't one, and the same prerogatiue to both, that they may both be­come the children of God. But the amplyfying of this matter belonges rather to the next point, concer­ning the equality of this dignitie, To bee the sonnes of God; then to this, whereof I nowe entreate, tou­ching the prerogatiue, it selfe. With the loue whereof if any man before were not inflamed: Yet (I hope) his affection now is kindled; Sure I am it will bee, if hee doo but enter into a due consideration of the matter. For how is it possible, that a man should so much hate himselfe, as not to desire to bee his sonne, whose seruantes the greatest Princes of this worlde, haue alwayes acknowledged themselues to bee?

What is it then, that wee preferre before this Sonneshippe? It hath beene offered vs, and almost thrust vpon vs, a long time, and often. The dignitie of it, (according to the weake conceite, and capaci­ty of man) hath beene declared, and set out vnto vs. How is it come to passe, that wee haue not layd hould on so extraordinarie a fauour, so long a time?

Are wee loth to take the paines? vnreasonable is that excuse, in a matter of so great worth; and in this matter vntrue also, as the condition propounded e­uidently sheweth. Beleeue and bee a Sonne. Yet perhaps this pretence might carry some better co­lour with it, if it were not made by them, who take infinitly more paines, for things infinitly lesse in valew. Shall wee plead ignorance, either of our owne estate, or of the exceliency of that prerogatiue? Wilfull ignoraunce rather increaseth, then excuseth the fault. And who can bee ignorant, that hath had any de­sire to learne; vnlesse like a man, that lyeth in a ditch, [Page 424] and stre [...]cheth out his hands, calling for helpe to all them, that passe by, hee refuse to set one finger to the ground, for the raysing of himselfe? Doo wee then despise so great an happinesse? Though wee could bee so vnthankefull to God (and yet that were mon­strous) yet howe canne wee bee so iniurious to our selues? What shall I say? Or vpon what shall I lay the blame? It would bee verie strange, and ha [...]sh to most men, if I should accuse them of not beleeuing. Who would not be foreman of the Iurie to finde him guilty? who would make daintie to giue sentence against his life, that doth not beleeue whatsoeuer is deliuered in the Gospell? Not beleeue? sayeth one. Hee is worse then a Turke, or a Iewe, that beleeues not. I con­fesse, it seemes scarcely credible to my selfe, that any man professing religion should not beleeue. But I holde it altogether vnpossible, that a man should in­deede bee per [...]waded in his heart, that by beleeuing in Christ, hee shall become the sonne of God; and yet should bee altogether carelesse of beleeuing. It is not vnlikely, that wee haue a generall opinion of the [...]uth of the Scripture: but either wee neuer markt, or ne­uer considered this, and such like points, that we might be throughly rooted, and grounded in the bleefe ther­of. O that I might intreat so much of you all, and euery one, as that you wold be pleased to bestow a little time, [...]n the meditation of this prerogatiue? I make no que­stion, but if once you did stedfastly beleeue it, you would neuer giue ouer, till you had made your selues sure of so happy, and blessed an estate.

The Prophet Esay, considering a little the backe­wardness of the Iewes, in receiuing saluation, by the promised Messaih: and a great forwardness to other matters, reproues them for it in this sort. Where­fore doe yee lay out siluer (saith hee) and not for Isay. 55. 2. bread? And your labour, and are not satisfied? May [Page 425] not we ins [...]ly take vp the like complaint, against the peruersenesse, and vnto wardnesse of this age? Doe not men beate their braines, spend their spirits, breake their sleepe, wast their time, shorten their liues, by carking, & caring for the momentary trash of this world? We rise erly, we go late to bed, we fare hardly, we cloth our selues simply, we toile, & moile like horses, & al for nothing. What is all the wealth in the world to the riches in hea­uen? What are all the possessions of the earth to the in­heritance of that kingdome? What is all the honor, that the world can heape vpon a man, in comparison of be­ing the Sonne of God? If it continue with thee, as long as thou continuest aliue; yet leaues thee, when thou diest; whereas that heauenly preferment abides with thee, & attends vpon thee after death, or rather lifts thee vp, and carries thee aliue to heauen. For, what though this sinfull earthly carcasse be destroyed? yet the soule mounts, immediatly, vp to heauen, taking possession of that inheritance, and inioying it with al freedome, & comfort, in assured expectation of proportionable glory wherewith the body, in due time, shall be clo­thed, and beautifyed.

And doe wee still lie groueling vpon earth? Wee shewe thereby whose children wee are: vpon thy belly shalt thou goe (said the Lorde to the olde serpent the Diuell) and dust shalt thou eate all the daies of thy life. See Gen. 13. 14. if wee doe not, as much as may bee, resemble him in this curse? Wee roote, and digge into the earth, like Moles, and feed vpon the white, and yellow clay, which with infinite labour, and no small daunger, we rent out of the very bowells thereof: yea (a shame to bee spoken, though wee are not ashamed to doe it our immortall soule, that hath nothing in it of any affi­nity with earth, imploies her vnderstanding, bestowes her affections, perswades, incourages, strengthens, thrusts forward her seruant body, to so wearisome, [Page 426] and so fruitlesse a labour. Think you that a miserable wretch, whē he sits in his counting house, looking ouer his bonds, when his vsury mony will come in (let them be as many thousand poūds, as they are hundred pence) can take half that comfort in his trash, that a poore Chri­stian doth in his meditation, when hee finds himselfe to be the Sonne of God? Set thy selfe vp to the chin in the heapes of thy gold, tumble and wallow in the midst of all thy pe lfe, shouell it vp by bushells into quarter sacks, stuff thy chists, as full as thou canst, till the sides and bottome are ready to fly out, reccon vsury vpō vsury, to the vtmost farthing: but heark: doost thou not heare a fearfull voice, that cries out vnto thee? O foole, this night they shall fetch away thy soul from thee: then whose shal these Luk. 12. 20. treasures be, that thou hast prouided? What? a man of thy state, and aboundance, in a moment come to nothing? quaking, and trembling at the very thought of it, in the midst of al thy wealth? Wouldst thou do so; couldst thou do so, if thou knew'st, thou wert going to a most glori­ous kingdome in heauen? Is it possible, any man of in­different discretion, should be loth to change a Cham­ber in an other man [...] house, for a royal palace in his own Realme, and gouernment.

But why should I so much distrust your capacities, or suspect your aflections? I see you are able to compass great matters, and haue strong desires to those things, you like: if I may but entreate so much of you, as to vouchsase a little time, to the meditation of this prero­gatiue, I make no doubt, but you will both conceiue, and affect it. I doe not goe about to depriue you of any naturall faculty, but as it were to lead you to the right vse of it. I seeke not to roote out your affections, but to grift vpon them such seions, as may bring forth plea­sant, and lasting sruit. Is thy vnderstanding great? Here are greate mysteries, in the search whereof thou maist imploy it. For, what wit, what iudgement, what con­ceit, [Page 427] is able to sound the depth, or valew the worth, or comprehend the extent of this honour, To bee the Sonne of God? Is thy capacity but weake? What is plainer? what is easier, then to vnderstand, that by beleeuing in Christ, thou shalt bee made the Sonne of God, and ioynt heire of heauen with Christ? Yea, this doctrine wil teachthee, how to satisfy thy most insatiable desires. Doth ambition prick thee forward, with loue of ho­nour: Why wilt thou not set thy minde on that, which is true honour indeed? The foolish vanity of men, hath bewrayed itselfe, that the conquest of the whole world would not suffice them. All the autority and glory, that the Emperours of Rome attain'd to, could not quench their thirst of honour, but that some of them would needes be worship [...] as Gods. If they could once haue attained the dignity of being the Sonnes of God, it is apparant they had beene satisfyed to the full. I con­fesse, biulding of Churches, offering of sacrifices, making of prayers, ascribing of all power to them, gaue them no sufficient content. For they could not bee perswaded, that they were (as they were, and would needes be, tearmed) Gods. But had they beene assu­red in their owne true feeling, that they were made Gods indeed, or the Sonnes of God, which later is a pri­uiledge of them, that beleeue in Christ, they had beene settled in full quietnesse of minde, & filled with ioy vn­speakeable. Shall we proudly contemne, carelesly neg­lect, or faintly accept of such an honour? yet if the migh­ty ons of the world, that doate vpō their present greatnesse, care not for, or will not think, that there can be a­ny greater, or better estate, then they now enioy; let not vs refuse so goodly an opportunity, of being made hei­res of such a kingdome, as hath neither measure of glory nor end of continuance: but let vs, with all care & diligene, bestow our selues vpon the purchasing of that prerogatiue, which being once attain'd to, giues vs cer­taine interest t̄o euerlasting happinesse.

Nay; will some man reply, you mistake the matter. The Euangelist speakes not of any such prerogatiue, as you imagin, by which men are actually, and present­ly made the Sonnes of God; but of the power that is gi­uen to them, whereby they haue free will to receiue, or acknowledge Christ, and so at last, to be made the Sons of God. There is no remedy, though I hastned all I could, to the dispatch of that, which remaines, but I must needs make a little stay; that I may the better cleere the way before me. And because our Rhemists are the men, that prepare these forts against vs, I will incounter them hand to hand, as they haue ranged them­selues in order, vpon their best aduisement. There haue beene many skirmishes, and somebattailes, about this hold of freewill, which is the very strength of the king­dome of popery; vpon which, all their satis faction, and merits absolutly depend; so that, if this were once ouer­throwne, the best parte of Romish reuenues, by which their warres are mayntained, were vtterly cut off, and their power exceedingly weakned. It is not my purprse neither haue I any iust occasion, or opportunity, to seeke out all their force [...] of this kinde, in euery corner; but I must, and will content my selfe to take this peece in my way, and to ouerthrowe it by the strength of GOD, and laye it euen with the groumd. But first I will giue you a view of it, as it standes in all the brauery. Because the place, of it owne nature, affords no firme grounde, for such a building, they lay a forced and false foundation. For whereas, the holy Ghost speakes of dignity, and prerogatiue, noting the honour we receceiue, not the strength; they turne vp that ground, and tell vs of I knowe not what power. This fraud of theirs I doe but name, because I discouered it to the full in my last exercise, and digd it vp, with the labour, and tooles of their owne workmen. Now let vs see, what they build vpon this foundation.

Freewill (say they) to receiue, or acknowledge Christ: Rhem. Test. Ioa. 1. annot. 5 and power giuen to men, if they will, to be made by Christ the Sonnes of God, but not forced or drawne thereto, by any ne­cessity. Hee that carefully surueies this building, shall finde, that there is neither bewty, nor strength therein. How ill fauouredly dooth the forefront shewe? Free­will to receiue Christ, and power giuen. What of this free­will? Doe you meane that free will is giuen? Doe you se­uer it from power? It should seeme so by your wordes: for, your Freewill is referred to the receiuing of Christ, your power to being made the Sonnes of God; your building goes beyound your foundation. There is no mention heere but only of power, concerning the later; so that the former stands neither safely, nor handsomely, tot­tering all aside, and ready to fall, with the least breath, that shall blowe vpon it. Besides; how disorderly stand those wordes; If they will? Power giuen to men, if they will, to bee made &c: I pray you make vs vnder­stand your meaning. Wherein lies this choise? If they will receiue the power, meane you? Or, if they will bee made the Sonnes of God? Questionlesse it must needes belong to this later; To bee made the Sonnes of God, if they will. There you should haue set it aboue, and not haue cramd it in, betwixt the other two parts, so rudely. Lastly for the increase of this deformity; the roofe hath no fashion in it, nor proportion to the rest of the building. Viewe them together. Power giuen to be made, but not forced or drawne. This must be diuers from the former; To be made, not forced. It is appa­rant to euery man, that it would haue beene much handsomer, if not needfull, to haue added in the later clause, to be; thus but not to be forced. For that the sentence requires, because of the wordes, that come betweene, to be made, but not forced. VVhat if wee fill vppe the hole with those wordes, is all well? Nothing lesse. Who sees not that it is absurd to say, that power was [Page 430] giuen men to be made, but not to be forced? As if a man needed power to be giuen him, that he might bee for­ced. Nay rather hee had need of power, that he may not be forced. I take no pleasure in this course of reprouing their imperfections: but their owne insolency in con­temning al men, in comparison of their owne faction, & the miserable doating of their followers vpon them, as if there were no learning, but in their heads, makes mee think it not only lawfull, but also needfull, to lay open such palpable defects. Now to the strength of this Fort.

Where Freewill vaunts it selfe, as if it were set vpon a most sure ground. The foundation, as they would haue it, is, power to be made, the Sonnes of God. First, I haue shewed already, that the word which our Euangelist here vseth, though sometimes it signify power, yet is ne­uer taken, in the Scripture, for freedome of wil. But say it were, now, & thē, so taken, & that in this place it belōged to the same matter: yet were it not wel applyed by these Papists. For the holy Ghost, dooth not speake heere of power to receiue Christ, but to bee made the Sonnes of God. Hee had no meaning to shewe, what was giuen men to enable them, for the receiuing of Christ; but to declare, what they should attaine to, by receiuing him: so that this first part of their annotation, hath no war­rant from the Text. If any man think, that they may be excused, as grounding this note of freewill vpon those other words, As many as receiued him; I will shew anone, if God will, against some other popish writers, that no such thing will follow therevpon: in the meane while it is easy to see, that this defence, cannot helpe the Rhe­mists, who raise their building, vpon the words that fol­low, Hee gaue them power.

Power giuen to men (say they) if they will, to be made by Christ the Sons of God. Now power, but honour, or preroga­tiue. But let that passe, as already handled: And so let vs [Page 431] passe ouer the other words, To bee made, though the E­uangelist say to be. I may not forget to note, that they speake craftily, and insufficiently, for the expressing of the Text, Power giuen to men. Why doe they not rather follow the Euangelist? And if they will needes haue it to bee, Power; say as hee doth, giuen to as many as receiue Christ. Giuen to men; say they. To what men? To them that beleeue in the name of Christ. Hee speakes not of comparison, betwixt men, and Angels, but of difference betwixt men, and men. All haue not this prerogatiue, call it power if you will, To be made the Sonnes of God. It is proper to them only, that receiue him, by trusting in him. As many as receiued him, to them he gaue the preroga­tiue. You will say, That honour, or power is denyed no man. It is graunted to no man, but to him that beleeues in Christ. But euery man may beleeue. Of that in the next point. What then? Therefore this power is giuen to men, To be made the Sonnes of God. The question is not so much of the truth of this speech, as of deliuering the Euangelists meaning: who intends not to shewe, what power is giuen to men in generall; but what benefit they (in particular) reape, which by faith receiue Christ that came into the world, and to his owne. Trowe yee it was his purpose to say, that the world, which knewe him not, and his owne, that receiued him not, had pow­er giuen them to be made the Sonnes of God? I dare say yee doe not thinke so. But perhaps freewill was giuen to men. This also appertaines to the next point; yet a word, for answere to the doubt. Either it was not giuen at all, or to them only, that had the Gospell preacht vnto them. For we may not dreame of, I cannot tel what free­dome of will, whereof all men should be partakers, by the vertue, and efficacy of our Sauiours comming into the world. There is no such matter. If free wil to receiue Christ be not common to all men by nature, it is giuen by certaine meanes, to certaine men, and not to other. [Page 432] There is no possibility of being made the Son of God, but vpon a supposition of faith, by the doctrine of the Gospell.

But if by Freewill to acknowledge Christ, and power to be made the Sonne of God, they vnderstood no more, but the contrary to that, which they deny in the last place; namely, being forced, ordrawne therevnto, by necessity; wee would readily, and willingly subscribe to their opinion. For we know it is needlesse, that God should force a man to that, to which he can, without any violēce, per­swade, and incline him. Yea, we confesse it is held by vs for an impossibility, that the will should be forced; that a man should wil, & not wil. But this is the maine matter that must be handled against other adversaries by & by; & I hasten to it. Only giue me leaue to add this one thing, concerning the point of freewil, groūded on this place of Scripture by the Rhemists; that is I grant them their translatiō: yet freewil hath but a slippry foundatiō therevpon. He gaue them power to be made the Sons of God; what of that? Therfore it was in their own choise, whe­ther they would be the Sons of God, or no, & they had power to be, if they would. It is out of questiō, that they could not be, vnless they would, supposing that they were not, vpō their beleeuing. But this freedome of will cannot be drawne necessarily out of these words. Is it al one to say, He gaue them power to be made the Sons of God; & He gaue them free wil to choose whether they wold be made the Sons of God, or no? Power giuen to such a purpose inferrs a kind of faculty, resting in him, to whom it is giuen, to doe that which it is giuen for. This if the holy Ghost had intended to signify, he would rather haue said; He gaue them pow­er, to make themselues the Sons of God, if they would: or at least, By which they might be willing to be made the Sonnes of God, by beleeuing they were made capeable of that prerogatiue. As one that is born, & brought vp in the Coūtry, hath no possibility to becōe Mayor, or sheriff of this Citty: But if hee hath his freedome bestowed [Page 433] vpon him, and he hath there wit hall power giuen him to bee made a giuernour, though his power doe not signi­fie any freewill: So it is with them, that haue attayned to faith, (I speake according to the Rhemists conceite, and translation) who haue power to bee made the sonnes of God, and yet this power proues not any free­dome of will.

Thus, and thus weakely haue our Rhemists built their Forte, for the safety of their kingdome of free will. The foundation is sandy, the building neither faire for sight, nor strong for vse. Some other of the same crue, haue la­boured to make good that point out of this place, by an other kinde of sortification. It is apparant (saith one) that it is the power of free will, or that it is the office of free Michaell de Palacio, in Ioa. c. 1. enarrat. 28. Liberi esse arbit will, to receiue, or not receiue the worde of God; because the Euangelist tells vs that some doe receiue, and some doe not. This man made better choise of his ground, then our Rhemists did. For hee layes his foundation on the very wordes of the holy Ghost rightly vnderstood; His owne receiued him not. But as many as receiued him, &c. The first wordes are plaine of his not being receiued: the later sufficiently implyed that some did receiue him; els would the Euangelist haue said; But if any man had receiued him, he would haue giuen him the Prerogatiue, to be the Sonne of God. A good beginning; but hee failes in the pursuit of the matter. And yet if his meaning were no other, then his words may well beare, hee might bee allowed in that, hee saith. For it is not to bee denied, that it is the will of man, that either receiueth, or refu­seth Christ. This I speake according to the true nature of saith, which is to rest vpon Christ for saluation: and that resting is an action of the will. But if I were to speak, after the opinion of the Papists, (as he should haue done) who place faith in the vnderstanding, I see not how I might truely affirme that it it the office of the will, to re­ceiue, or not to receiue Christ. For it is not in the power [Page 434] of the will, to beleeue, or not to beleeue; that is to acknowledge a thing to bee true, or false, any more then it is for a man to take that to bee white, which hee sees to be blacke, red, yellow, greene, or of some o­ther colour, then white. In such cases, there is no manner of command in the will ouer the vnderstanding. Well may it preuaile so farre, as to hinder the vnderstan­ding in examining of a truth, or in the professing of that it conceiues; yea it may carry a man with vio­lence to make contrarie profession to that, he is per­swaded of and knows: but it cannot possibly be of force to inioyne it, to holde this, or that for truth, otherwise then naturall, or supernaturall light discouers it to be.

It is the will then, that receiues Christ, or refu­seth him, beleeues, or beleeues not: taking faith for trusting in Christ, as wee doe; not, as the Papists doe, for beleeuing the truth of that which is deliuered con­cerning him, in the Scripture. Neither yet is it to bee helde for true, that there is any such power, or office of free will, as the Papists dreame of, to bee concluded out of this place. For I may not runne into a large dis­course of the Doctrine: but must keepe my selfe with­in the compasse of this one Text. The free will, which the Papists fight for, as for their free hold, is an abso­lute libertie in the will of Man, to choose, or refuse, at his owne pleasure. This they say wee haue, and vse in the accepting, or reiecting of grace: which is offe­red vs by God; but so, that it is left to vs, to receiue, or refuse it. This Doctrine say I, can not bee war­ranted by this scripture. Let any reasonable man iudge. Some refuse CHRIST, some receiue him; what will you inferre herevpon? That therefore it is left to e­uerie mans choyse, whether hee will receiue him, or re­fuse him? Tell me, what you thinke of the first grace, by which a man is inhabled to take, or leaue. I will speake as plaine, as by any meanes I can, that euery [Page 435] man may vnderstand mee. It is agreed vpon, on both sides, theirs, and ours, that naturally no man hath any power to receiue CHRIST, or to will to receiue him. Therefore this Abilitie, of the vsing whereof wee dispute, is vouchsaf't to euery one, that hath it, by God, and proceedes of him. Shall I reason now, as as our Papists doe? Some men haue this grace, by which they are able to beleeue, some men haue it not. Therefore there is free will in men to haue it, or want it. Will this follow vpon that? No more will it; that there is free will, because some beleeue, and some doe not.

Indeede, if there were nothing els to bee found, from which this difference might bee fetcht, but onely the will of man; there were some good reason to conclude freedome of will, from choise, and refusall. But the case standing, as it doth, that wee can assigne a better reason of this diuersitie, euen the worke of Gods spi­rit by grace in the hearts of as many as beleeue, the Pa­pists conclusion is weake, and lame. Some receiue, some refuse: Therefore (say they) there is free will, by the power whereof the one sort beleeue, and the other, for not vsing that power, beleeue not. Nay rather (say wee) Therefore the grace of GOD workes more effec­tually in the hearts of some, then of other some. Is there a­ny Christian soule, whom this conclusion of ours will not content better, then that of theirs? Surely he must needs loue his owne glorie, better then Gods, that had rather ascribe his faith, to his owne free will, then to the grace of God. Haue I not yet spoken enough; or not plaine enough? Bee not wearied I beseech you, though I dwell a little longer vpon the matter. I hope I shall better expresse my minde, and you better vnder­stand me. That abilitie to beleeue comes of God, and not of our selues, it is out of question betwixt vs. The doubt is, touching the vse of this abilitie.

For example; Let vs suppose, that both the theeues that were crucified with our Sauiour Christ, had this grace bestowed on them by God, that they were able to beleeue. He on the right hand vseth this grace, and beleeueth; the other doth not vse it, and continueth in vnbeliefe. The question is, whence this difference ari­seth. From the power of free will; say the Papists. From the workes of Gods grace, say wee. Wee deny not (say they), that the grace of God workes more effectually in the one, then in the other: but wee affirme, that the rea­son of this difference in working, proceeds from the di­uers vse of free will, in each of them. If hee, on the left hand, had bin willing to beleeue, the spirit of God would haue begotten faith in his heart. If he had on the right hand bin vnwilling, the grace of God would haue brought forth no faith in him. Yet they touch not the point. I presse them for a farder answere. Whence was it, that the one was willing, rather then the other? Speake out, that all men may heare you. Was it from him­selfe, or from God? From both. They are halfe a­shamed, to bee knowne what they hould, and there­fore striue, to shift of the matter, in this sort. But it will not serue the turne. I looke for a plaine and di­rect answere. When both the theeues were alike vn­willing, and might both alike become willing, whence arose the beginning of difference betwixt them? You cannot say, it came from God; for in respect of him, they were yet both alike. What remaines then to be answered, but that the one, of himselfe, did yeeld to the motion of Gods spirit, the other might haue done, but woulde not. I confesse, you say, there wanted assistance from God, to leade him forward to the obtaining of Faith: but yet you still auouch, that the Originall of the difference was from the free will of man, that yeelded; not from the free grace of God, that inclined him to yeelding. For that grace was com­mon [Page 437] to him with the other, in whome there was no wil­lingness at all.

What was become of the zeale of the glorie of God, when men first broch't these deuises? Is it not enough for vs, that wee are willing to bee saued, but that wee must also take the cheefe glorie of it to our selues? Are wee so puft vp with pride, and selfe loue, that wee had as lieue perish, as bee beholden to GOD for our saluation? Blame mee not, if I charge the pride of mans Nature very deepely in this case. It is a matter, that concernes my Lord, and maister, (on whose message I come) very neere. Hath hee, of himselfe, vouchsafed meanes, by which wee may bee saued; hath hee, meerely of his owne good will, imparted the knowledge thereof vnto vs; hath hee, without any desert, or desire on our part, prouided, to aduance vs to the estate of Sonnes, from the con­dition of Seruants; and doe wee grudge to let him haue the honour of it? A little is too much for God; nothing is enough for our selues. Wee are content (with much adoe) to let it bee thought, and said, that wee are not able without grace, to doe that, by which the fauour of GOD may bee procured. But when wee haue once receiued from God abilitie to beleeue (I speake still, as the Papists doe, against whom I reason) then it lies in our owne power to be saued, or to be dam­ned. There is no question of the later; but the cause of damnation is alwaies in our selues; and so in our selues, that, of our selues, there is no possibilitie, what grace soeuer wee haue receiued, to escape it. But the power to receiue Christ, that wee may bee made partakers of that Inheritance of Sonnes, is wholly frō God, and not from our selues. What said I? The power? It is not enough. The will to vse that power? It is not enough. The will to vse that power, is stirred vp, put forward, and inclined to it, onely, and altogether by God himselfe. The act of the wil in resting vpon Christ [Page 438] is mine. The inclining the will to doe this act, is Gods, and not mine. I doe willingly, and by mine owne choyse beleeue in CHRIST. I am made willing, marke what I say, I am made willing: not onely I am made able to will; but directed, and perswaded, and brought to will, yea inclined to this choise, by the power of the spirit of God.

Doth any man doubt of this point? Hee knowes not or considers not, what it is to giue the glorie of his saluation to God. Shall I so part stakes with God, in this matter, that I take the biggest for mine owne share? I will barely propound the case; let euerie Christian soule iudge vprightly, betwixt God, and himselfe. That there is any possibilitie of saluation for man, it is wholly, and onely from God, who (with­out the counsell, or perswasion of any creature) appoin­ted the meanes to saue vs by, of his meere mercie, and bounty. That I, among many other, attaine to that grace, by which I am inabled to beleeue, and may if I will, it is also from the same goodness, and fauour of the Lord; who doth not altogether leaue mee in this e­state, but moues, and perswades mee by his spirit, to vse the grace I haue receiued, and to beleeue in Christ. What woulde you haue more? saith one. Doe I not giue glory enough to God, by acknowledging, that possibilitie of faith, both in generall, and particular pro­ceeds from his grace. Looke not that I should answere thee. I appeale to thine owne conscience, to giue sentence of the matter. Thou ascribest no more to God, but that he hath giuen thee grace, by which thou mayest beleeue, if thou wilt. Whence hast thou this in­clination to will? From Gods motion, and perswasion. Take heede what thou sayest. How will this stand with that opinion of free will, which makes the first diffe­rence betwixt thee & other mē, that beleeue not, though they haue the like motions, and perswasions from God? [Page 439] It cannot be, if thou wilt speak plaine, but thou must pro­fesse, that this willingness comes from thy selfe. So then thus stands the case; That we can beleeue, if wee list, it is of God: that we list to beleeue, it is of our selues. For ought that God did for mee, I might haue continued in vnbeliefe, and bin damned: that I might be saued, I may thanke him; that I am saued, my selfe. Is there any Christian heart, that doth not rise against this Doc­trine? Can wee indure to thinke, that wee are more beholden to our owne will for faith, then to the grace of God; Can wee be so vnthankfull, so proud? But I will stay my selfe, least I seeme to bee perswa­ded, that so grosse an error can finde place in a true Chri­stian soule.

Nay: saith one. Rather it is a most grosse error to hold, as you doe, that a man is forced, and drawne to be­leeue by necessitie, whether hee will or no. Out of question, it is indeed a grosse error, to haue any such con­ceite of a mans attaining to faith in Christ. And yet (giue me leaue to speake my minde plainely, and freely) I had rather be absurd in destroying the will of man, then im­pious in ouerthrowing the glory of God. But hee, that rightly vnderstands, what wee teach of mans beleeuing, sees there is no cause to feare either the one, or the o­ther. It is cleere, & certaine, that the maine chance is safe, the glorie of God being so carefully prouided for, and maintained: If wee erre, our error is lesse dangerous. For there is not so much danger in depriuing man of his free will, as in robbing God of his glorie. But wee doe man no wrong at all; vnless it be a wrong, to giue more to GOD, then to man, in the begetting of faith. God perswades, and inclines him to beleeue. What for­cing, or drawing is this? Yes: say they. For you teach, that by this inclining of the heart, GOD so workes vpon it, that the partie cannot choose, but beleeue. Not choose? For any force that is vsed, against [Page 440] the nature of his will, hee may choose. In respect of euent, hee can not. I will speake plainer, if I can. God doth not force a man, as the Oxe is drawne to the slaughter, or a peece of Timber thrust forward, by mayne strength; but inclines the heart, sweetely, and gently, according to the nature of it to him perfectly known; yet so powerfully, that it can not come to passe, but the partie shall both will to beleeue, and beleeue in­deede. Wee confesse there is a necessitie, in regard of the euent, that, vpon this inclination, faith shall certain­ly insue; but wee denie all constraining, or forcing, by which the will shoulde lose his vertue, or action. No man beleeues, but willingly. No man is willing, but hee that is inclined thereto by God. No man is forced to willingness by any constraint. I inquire not how the Lord inclines mee. I beleeue, that hee doth in­cline mee. I finde I am, of vnwilling, made willing. I see not any force vsed to make mee willing. Other men refuse Christ willingly: I receiue him willingly. They are borne willingly to all, that is euill: I am made willing to whatsoeuer good, I doe will.

It is not then power of free will, but Prerogatiue of Honour, that our Euangelist saith is giuen to them, that beleeue in Christ. Now for the farder amplify­ing of this mercie, wee must consider the generalitie of the gift. Which is such, that it extends it selfe to all men, whatsoeuer. As many as receiued him, to them hee gaue, &c. There is no distinction of Iewe, or Gentile, male or female, rich or poore, bond or free, one or other; but whosoeuer beleeues in Christ, hath the Prerogatiue to bee the Sonne of God. This (in gene­rall) is that, which the Apostle deliuers. But, for our better instruction, it will not be amisse to handle the point, somewhat more largely; in these two parts: First, to set out the vouchsafing of this priuiledge, to the Gentils, as well as to the Iewes: Secondly, to apply it to [Page 441] the seueral estates, conditions, & differences, that are or­dinarily found amongst men. So shall the generalitie of the benefit appeare more cleerely: So shall euery particu­lar mans comfort be the greater.

There was a time, (as it is not vnknowne (I hope) to any man in this Auditorie) when the Iewes onely were the people of GOD; To whome (as the Apostle saith) the Adoption, and the Glorie, and the Couenants, Rom 9. 4. and the giuing of the Lawe, and the seruice of GOD and the promises appertained. They onely were the Children; all other Nations whatsoeuer, but dogges Math. 15. 26. The bread belonged to them, the most that other peo­ple could haue, was but the crums falling from then Table. What should I proceede in amplifying of this point? I spake of it, at large, in a former exercise, Serm. 7. vpon the eleuenth verse; when I shewed, that the Iewes were Christs owne, though they receiued him not. As for vs the Gentils, what were we? The A­postle Ephe. 2. 12. tells vs, that we were Alians from the common­wealth of Israell, strangers from the Couenants of pro­mise, hauing no hope, beeing without GOD in the world. It is worthily thought a singular fauour of God, that Iacob was preserred before Esau, the yonger bro­ther Gen. 25. 23. before the elder; yet were both sonnes. What a kindness, grace, bounty, (no wordes are able to ex­presse the worth of the thing) is it, to make seruants Sonnes, to adopt them for children, that of themselues, were no better then dogges? The Iewes thought it a strange matter, and a great wrong to their Nation, that the Gentils should bee taught the worde of God. Will hee goe to them, that are dispearsed among the Gre­cians Ioh. 7. 36. (say they of our Sauiour) and teach the Grecians? And when the Apostle Paul tolde them, that hee was appointed to preach the GOSPELL to the Gen­tils, they were not able to indure it, but sared like madde men, crying out, casting off their clothes, and Act. 22. 23. [Page 442] throwing dust into the ayre. What speake I of the Iewes, that might easily bee blinded with enuy and pride? We heard euē now, what account was to be made of the Gentils, by the testimonie of the truth it selfe. Therefore our Sauiour directly affirmeth, that He was not sent, bat to the lost sheepe of the house of Israell. And ac­cordingly Mat. 15. 26. when hee sends forth his Disciples to preach, hee forbids them to goe into the way of the Gentils, or Mat. 10, 5. to enter into the Citties of the Samaritans. This opi­nion was so deepely settled in the hearts of the Apo­stles, Act. 10. 28. that Peter thought it vnlawfull for him to impart the Gospell to the Gentils. Yea so generall was this conceite, that after Saint Peter had by the commande­ment of God, preached, to Cornelius, hee was accused for Chap. 11. 23. it, as guiltie of some hainous crime.

Such was the estate of vs, that were Gentils by na­ture; wee were so farre from beeing Sonnes, that we were not admitted to haue the lowest office, or place in the house of God. Now, by the comming of Ie­sus Christ, this honour is vouchsaf't vs, that euery one of vs, that beleeues in him, doth thereby become the childe of God. They that before might not bee ad­mitted to wash dishes in the kitchin, may now seede on the Lords owne dish, at his table. There is now no difference betwixt Iewe, and Grecian; but all are one in Gal. 3. 28. Iesus Christ. It is one God, who shall iustifie circumcision of faith, and circumcision through faith. But some man Rom. 3. 30. perhaps will say, that this Prerogatiue was alwaies affor­ded the Gentils: for whom it was lawfull to ioyne them­selues to the Iewes; and to be made one with the people of God. It is true indeede, that the Gentils were neuer so excluded, but that, if they offered themselues, to bee cir­cumcised, they might be receiued, and numbred amongst the Iewes. What new fauour then, is vouchsaf't them, by the comming of Christ? A full right, and interest to all the promises of euerlasting life, which before (generally) [Page 443] did not concerne them. Now the Gospell offers our Sa­uiour Christ no lesse to the Gentils (If not more) then to the Iewes. Hee came to his owne, for to them he was Act. 13. 46. first, and principally sent: his owne receiued him not; the Multitude, Rulers, and People refused to take him for their Messiah, and Sauiour. What then? Shall his comming be to no purpose? The Iewes indeede had a conceite, that none, but they, or at the most such as ad­ioyned themselues to them, could bee the Sonnes of God. But they were much deceiued. For as many, a [...] will now beleeue in Christ, though they bee no Iewe [...] by nature or profession, are made the Sonnes of God What remaines then, but to put you in minde of that ex­hortation of the Prophet Esay; Reioyce, O barren, that Isai. 54. 1. diddest not beare; break forth into ioy, and reioyce, thou, that diddest not trauell with childe; for the desolate hath more Children, then the married wife, saith the Lord: Let me adde to this the caueat of the Apostle, and I will con­clude this point. Beholde the bountifulness, and Rom. 11. 22. seueritie of God; toward them, which haue fallen, (that is, which receiued him not) seueritie: but towards thee, bounti­fullness, if thou continue in his bountifulnes, or els shalt thou also be cut off. Wee haue that honour; happy men, if wee can keepe it: and if wee will, wee may. It were in vaine to speake generally of the Gentils, in this place; The exhortation belongs to this Kingdome, this Citie, this Auditorie. Wee are all Gentils, hauing no in­terest in those ancient priuiledges of the Iewes: yet are wee vouchsafed by fauour to bee the Sonnes of GOD, if by faith we trust in IESVS CHRIST. Can wee despise, or neglect, so rare a kindness, so great an honour? Doe wee preferre the profits, the pleasures, the aduancements of this World, be­fore the Inheritance of the Kingdome of Heauen? Let vs remember what wee were; men without God, without hope. See, what wee are; people, to whome [Page 444] Iesus Christ, hath a long time offered, and doth eue­ry day, euen now, at this hower, in this place, offer him­selfe. Consider, what wee shall bee, if wee will be the Sonnes of God; Heyres of Heauen. Will none of these things moue vs? Oh the senseless desperateness of men! O the wilfulness of them, that will not learne! None receiue Christ, but they, that beleeue in him. It is not enough to giue him the hearing, or to bee perswa­ded, that hee is the sauiour of the world: they only are sonnes, that truely rest vpon him, without hope, or de­sire of any other helpe.

All such, whether they bee Iewes, or Gentils, haue the Prerogatiue, to bee the Sonnes of GOD. What? All? Yea all; without exception of any man, woman, or childe whatsoeuer. Wee heard as much erewhile, out of the Apostle; There is neither Iewe, nor Gal. 3. 28. Grecian, there is neither bond, nor free, there is neither male, nor female: for yee are all one in CHRIST IESVS. Doe you marke, how Saint Paul, layes out the point, in diuers particular differences, that hee may take away all exception, and doubt? Looke but two verses before, and you shall see, he speakes of the matter, wee haue now in hand, of beeing the Sonnes of God: for yee are all (saith hee to the Gala­thians) Ver. 26. that belieued in CHRIST, the Sonnes of GOD, by faith in CHRIST IESVS. Who may shut out any, where the Apostle sets open the doore to euery one? Me thinkes, if any sort were to be excepted a­gainst, seruants especially should bee excluded. The A­postle naming seruants, meanes not such as wee haue a­mong vs, which serue for wages, or be apprentices, for tearme of yeeres, but bondslaues, who were wholly their maisters; and reckoned as part of their substance, to bee employed, and disposed of, by sale or otherwise, as it pleased them, whether themselues woulde or no. Euod. 21. 21. This the Apostle himselfe knew very well, and there­fore [Page 445] he forgets not to mention seruants, where hee hath occasion to intreate of these differences. By one spirit 1. Cor. 12. 13. (saith he) are wee all baptized into one body, whether wee be bond or free. Know ye, that what good thing so euer, any man doth (saith the same Apostle other where) that same Eph. 6. 8. shall hee receiue of the Lord, whether hee be bond, or free. These are still remembred; because by reason of their meane account in the world, they might bee much doubted of. That appeares by an other place of Saint Paul; where hee doth especially apply him­selfe, to assure seruants, that beeing in CHRIST, they are safe and well enough, though they conti­tinue slaues still. Art thou called (saith hee) beeing 1. Cor. 7. 21. 22 a seruant? care not for it; yet if thou maist bee free, vse it rather: Hee, that is called in the Lord beeing a ser­uant, is the Lords free man. It is euident then, that the condition of a mans life, bee it neuer so base, cannot keepe him from this Prerogatiue, of beeing the Sonne of GOD, if hee beleeue in Christ.

Is it not an admirable kindness, an incredible fauour, that bondslaues, whome the World ac­counts of, as they doe of their cattle, and housholde stuffe, should be vouchsaf't the honour to become the sonnes of God? Hee, that would esteeme it a great part of happiness, to bee made a free man, in the world, hath offer made him of beeing the Sonne of God. That, which I say of this one kinde of diffe­rence, the baseness whereof seemes to hinder a man from beeing made the Sonne of God, I beseech you conceiue, and apply to all other like matters, which bring contempt, or neglect of men in the world. Po­uertie, lameness, blindness, deformitie, meaneness of parentage, simpleness of capacitie, and all other na­turall Chrysost. in Ioa. [...]omil. 9. imperfections, and infirmities whatsoeuer, are couered with the riches, beauty, nobilitie, and wis­dome [Page 446] of Christ, in as many as trust in him. Goe out quick­ly Luke 14. 21 into the streets, and lanes of the Cittie (saith the Lord, that made a great supper) and bring in hither the poore, and the maymed, the hault, and the blind. What doest thou vexing thy selfe, with the consideration of thy meane estate? Set thy thoughts vpon the honour, thou mayest attaine to. Lift vp thine eyes, that are cast downe vpon thy bodily imperfections, and feede thy selfe, with the sight of heauen, that is offered thee. Art thou ashamed, because thou bearest no armes, to make thee a gentleman? Throwe thy selfe into his armes, who will make thee, the Sonne of the most high. Poore and miserable men (most miserable, because they refuse to be happy) sit without the church doores, begging of an halfe-penny, whereas they might come in, and obtaine a Kingdome. For as many, as receiue him, haue a Prerogatiue to bee the Sonnes of God. We finde, euery day, by common experience in our selues, and others, that if a man haue a Sonne, that is blinde, lame, deafe, dumbe, or any other way deformed, hee will bee ready, and desirous to take some course, if hee be his heyre, to settle his inheritance vpon some other of his Children. Surely I thinke, the man is hardly to bee found, that if hee had no heyre, would adopt such a one for his Sonne, to succeede him in his Inheritance. How should wee then valewe the inestimable fauour of God, that makes offer of an Adoption, and Inheritance, to the most contemptible wretches, that liue vpon the face of the earth? Heere is loue; heere is bounty. The fauours of the great­est Princes are but fancies, not so much as shadowes, if you compare them with the kindness of God. I confesse, they had neede to looke to their owne estate. Their Dominions, and their treasures are finite. The greatest Monarchy, that euer was, diuided amongst as many, as woulde accept of it, could afford but [Page 447] very small shares to euery one. Oh that all men would receiue Iesus Christ! There is roome enough, & wealth enough in heauen, to giue full content to as many, as can desire it.

Come then I beseech you, let vs settle forward to meete Iesus Christ, that wee may receiue him. Let —Non magna relinquam,—Magna sequar-Ouid. metamorph. lib. 7. not Farmes, Oxen, or wiues holde vs backe: They are no great matters, wee shall leaue: They are in­finitly great wee shall attaine to. Is it not better to exchange them now, while wee may doe it with such profit, then to forgoe them, no man knowes how soone when wee can make nothing of them? What is it wee mislike? To be Sonnes? No man is so base, or so foolish, as to thinke bondage, better then free­dome. To bee the Sonnes of God? It were against reason, and nature, not onely against Religion, to refuse such an honour. What should I say? Eyther wee beleeue not, that there is any such Prerogatiue to bee had, or wee thinke, it is not worth the paines, we must take to get it. Wee dare not bee knowne of the former, for the very shame of the world, seeing we professe Christian Religion. If wee pleade the later, our owne heart will condemne vs; which (if wee bee once perswaded, that there is any such thing) esteemes of eternall glorie in heauen, as the greatest happiness, that can bee obtained, or imagined. But what if the paines bee nothing, in comparison of the courses that wee would set our selues, to the obtai­ning of this honour: let vs see what they are, and then iudge.

What is then required of vs, that wee may become the Sonnes of God? The holy Euangelist hath answe­red vs, that Beleeuing in CHRIST, will make vs the Sonnes of GOD. What it it to beleeue in CHRIST? To trust in him, or to rest vppon him. For as we haue learned out of this twelfth verse, [Page 448] As many as receiue Christ, by beleeuing in his name, haue the Prerogatiue to be the sonnes of God. Can any man looke for, I will not say such a Kingdome, but the least kindness that may bee, vpon easier, or better conditions? Naaman the Syrian, desiring to be cured 2. King. 5. 10. of his Leprosie, when he was willd by the Prophet Elisha, to goe wash seuen times in Iordan, went away in an an­ger, as if some hard matter had bin inioyned him. But his seruants (wiser in that point then their maister) came, and spake vnto him, and said; Father, if the Prophet had Verse. 11. commanded thee a great thing, wouldest thou not haue done it? How much rather then, when hee saith to thee, Verse 13. wash and bee cleane? The Noble man, considering that his seruants spake reason, followed the Prophets direction, and was healed. Healed of what? Of a Leprosie. By what meanes? By washing seuen times in Iordan. What is it, that wee desire? To bee made the Sonnes of God. A farre greater matter, then to bee cured of a Leprosie. How may wee attaine to this honour? Beleeue, and thou shalt become the Sonne of God. Shall I need to compare these things together? Beleeue; Wash. Which is sooner done. Wash seuen times. If thou beleeue once it sufficeth. Not as if wee might bee the Sonnes of God, though wee cease to beleeue; but because he, that once true­ly rests on CHRIST, can neuer wholly depart from him. I see not how wee could deuise, to haue so great honour with so little paines; vnless perhaps we would attaine to it, by dreaming of it. Can wee i­magine a readier course of preferment, or an easier la­bour in getting it, then to be made the sonnes of God, by trusting in Christ? Doe but cast thy care vpon him, & thou shalt be sure of that he promiseth & thou desirest.

But it will not be amisse perhaps, considering the im­portance of the matter, to examine these things more particularly; especially in these two points: That belee­ving [Page 449] is necessarily required to adoption; so that without the one, the other is not to be had, that the meanes of enioying heauen, which all men naturally propound to themselues, are of greater paines, and lesse (yea no) certainty: what if I say of meere impossibility? Suspend your iudgement, till you haue heard, and vnderstood the case: then giue sentence freely, and spare not. Now for the better conceiuing of the matter, I will make bold to shewe the mystery of our redemption, so much as is needfull, for the knowledge of that, wee haue in hande; but as shortly, as I can with plainness. It is not vnknown to any man, vnles he be vtterly ignorant of christian Religion, that all mankind, and euery particular man, woman, & child, lost the fauour of God, and with it all hope, and possibility of happinesse, by the transgression of our first parents, in whome wee all sinned. If any man bee desirous to informe himselfe better of this point, the Scripture is open for him: I will content my selfe, with that one testimony of the Apostle. By one man sinne Rom. 5. 12. came into the world, and death by sinne: and so death went ouer all men, by him, in whome all men haue sinned. For the recouery of this losse, it pleased God to ap­point a meanes of reconciliation, that his anger iustly conceiued against vs, might bee appeased, and wee receiu'd againe into his former fauour. This meanes was, his owne Sonne, in our nature, offered vp by himselfe in sacrifice, to God his Father. God was in Christ (saith the 2. Cor 5 19. Rom 5. 10. Apostle) reconciling the world to himselfe. And in an o­ther place, when wee were enimies, wee were reconciled to God, by the death of his Sonne. But the manner of our reconciliation, on Christs part, doth not so much con­cerne the matter, we are now to handle. Let vs see what is required of vs.

There are two things necessary to a sound, and full reconciliation: that the offence, which caused the breach, bee pardoned, that the party offending bee [Page 450] admitted againe into as greate fauour, as hee was in, before he committed that fault. If either of these be wanting, the Reconciliation is vnperfect. Our Saui­our Christ hath fully performed whatsoeuer was need­full, on his part, to procure absolute Reconciliation. The Lord God is willing, and ready to bee reconciled vnto vs. Only the stay is in vs. For the pardon of sinne, iustification is offered, not imputing of sinne. And wher­as 2. Cor. 5. 19. wee were, before the breach, no otherwise in the fa­uour of God, then seruants are, that please their ma­ster; now the Lorde is determined, to receiue vs, not as seruants, but as Sonnes by his free Adoption. God sent his Sonne, &c: that we might receiue the Adoption of Gal 4. 4. 5. Sonnes. Heere is full, and perfite reconciliation pro­uided; Iustification, and Adoption. But how shall wee bee made partakers of it? I will leaue the former point, till I haue some fitter opportunity. Of the later our Euangelist speakes in this place, teaching vs, that if wee beleeue in Christ, wee haue the prerogatiue to be Sonnes. This the Apostle Paul confirmes: yee are al Chap. 3, 26. the Sons of God, by faith in Christ Iesus. There is no ex­ception against 2 such witnesses. No (saith one) if they agreed in their depositions. No (saith one) if they agreed in their depositions. But there is no small difference betwixt them. The one saith wee haue that honor by beleeuing; the other affirms that fayth makes vs the Sons of God. The Euangelist requires the act: the Apostle contents himself with the vertue, grace or qua­litie. S. Paul seemes to looke for no more, but that wee haue faith. S. Iohn calls precisely for the vse of it; Recei­uing, Beleeuing.

Is this all the difference, that can bee found, in their testimonies? Then all is nothing. First it is apparant (to begin withour Euangelist, whom we presently expoūd) that S. Iohn by enioyning vs To beleeue, necessarily re­quires faith, by which we must beleeue: & so his depo­sition includes, & implyes that, which S. Paul affirm­eth. [Page 451] Secondly, the Apostle, vnder the name of faith, cō ­prehends the act of beleeuing; which is neuer any more seuered from it, then burning is from fire. A greater fire burnes more, then a little one doth; but the least, that can be, doth burne, as wel as the greatest. So the strong­est faith trusteth more firmely in Christ; but the weakest more or lesse, relies truely vpon him. But that wee may see the ful agreement of these two witnesses; let vs con­sider how the Apostle declares his owne meaning, of­tentimes in the like matter. The righteousnesse of God vn­to Rom. 3. 22. Chap. 4. 3. all, and vpon all that beleeue. Abraham beleeued God, and it was counted to him for righteousnesse. That Chapter is full of the like speeches. So are his other Epistles, where he hath any occasion to speake of Iustification. And if that, which is former in nature, cannot bee had, but by beleeuing, surely this later, is not to be attain'd to, by the only hauing of faith.

Therefore, as often as we find in Scripture, that Iu­stification, Adoption, Sanctification, Saluation, or any other such fauour, & blessing, is ascribed to faith, we must re­member, that the act of faith, & not the gift, or quality it selfe is signified. Wee Iewes (saith the Apostle) who Gal. 2. 16. knowe that a man is iustified by the faith of Iesus Christ, haue beleeued in Iesus Christ, that wee might bee iustified by the faith of Christ. It is certaine, that Iustification is by saith; the Apostle shewes vs how. Namely by beleeuing in Christ. So must wee vnderstand that, which the same Apostle hath in an other place: To him, that worketh not, but beleeueth in him, that iustifieth the vngodly, his faith is counted for righteousnesse. Shall we say, that the habit of faith was counted for righteousness? S. Paul had opened his meaning, touching that point, a verse or 2 before; A­braham Verse. 3. beleeued God, & it was counted to him for righteous­nes. What was counted? His beleeuing, not his faith, as it was a grace, or vertue in his soule. We may the rather be perswaded hereof, if wee call to minde, & obserue, both [Page 452] that our Euangelist Saint Iohn alwaies vrgeth belee­uing, and not once mentions faith in so many places, where this matter is spokē of, euen diuers times in some one Chapter; and also that our Lorde himselfe, doth most commonly, in all the other Evangelists, follow the same course: and wheresoeuer hee giues any commen­dation to faith, it is manifest hee doth it, in respect of the act thereof. I haue not found (saith hee of the Centu­rion) Mat. 8. 10. so great faith in Israell. How greate faith? As to rest vpon the very worde of Christ, for the curing of a sick man, that was absent. Speake the worde only (saith the Captaine) and my seruant shall bee healed. It woulde bee Verse. 8. too long to stand vpon particulars; That one example may serue for all.

It may bee, some man hearing, that fayth, and belee­uing breed such wonderfull effects, will be desirous to knowe how this may bee. What excelllency is there in faith, more then in other Christian vertues? Why should beleeuing in God bee preferred before louing of God? First I must put you in minde; that it is the act of faith (as I haue often said) by which these sauours are obtained, and not the vertue it selfe. And therefore our Papists, who will haue their first iustification (as they mince matters) to consist of faith, loue, & charity, as they are vertues, habits, graces, qualities, beautifying and sanctifying the soule, cannot reasonably imagin, as they all commonly doe, that the Apostle in the Epi­stle to the Romans entreates of their iustification; because he so often requireth the very act of beleeuing; which, in that iustification of theirs, hath no place: This being markt, and remembred, I say, that the act of fayth, or beleeuing, doth not bring iustificati­on, and adoption, or either of them, by any speciall excellency, that it hath in it selfe, but meerly & only by the place, & office, which the Lord, of his own will, & mercy, hath assign'd it, to be the condition on our parts [Page 453] required, for the atchieuing of these fauours, and ho­nours. The couenant of the law, stood in these tearmes, Hee that doth these things shall liue thereby. So that the Leuit. 18. 5. condition was righteousnesse, according to the ex­act rule of the lawe. By the Gospell, the Lord enters into a new couenant with man, the condition whereof Act. 16. 31. is, Beleeue, and thou shalt be saued.

This is that, which the Apostle teacheth vs, concer­ning the Lords accounting of faith for righteousnesse. Wher­as by the lawe, righteousnesse was necessarily required, that a man might haue an interest to heauen; now by the Gospell. faith is accepted insteed of righteousnes. Do this: saith the law: Beleeue in Christ. saith the Gospell. So that, when the question is of reconciliation, and the parts thereof, or either of them, whether it be by faith, or no, the meaning is this, whether beleeuing bee the condition, which we are to performe, that wee may bee reconcil'd to God, or no. To this doubt the Apostle an­swereth, that Abraham beleeued God; & it (that is) His be­leeuing Rom. 4 3. [...]. was counted to him for righteousnes. Pardon me I pray you, if I doe but touch these things, or rather, but point at them, as I passe along. At some other times (if it please God) now one, then an other of them, shall bee cleered, and proued. Yet, for all my hast, I may not for­get, to deliuer the ground of that, which I haue said, tou­ching the Lords accounting of faith for righteousnes. I shew that the Apostle is so to be expounded, by 2 places of this same Epistle, where the very same maner of speech is vsed. If the vncircumcision (saith Saint Paul) keepe the ordinances of the law, shall not his vncircumcision bee coun­ted Rom. 2. 26. [...]; for circumcision? VVhat is this For circumcision; Insteed of circumcision; as if he were circumcised. The other place affords vs the like wordes, and meaning. Rom. 9. 8. [...]. The children of the promise are counted for the seed. There is no other place in all the newe Testament, out of which wee maye learne the sense of this phrase; [Page 454] & these two are plaine, being alike in themselues, and agreeing with the Apostles wordes, and purpose in that other Text. What should hinder vs then from expoun­ding the Apostle, as we do? Or rather, with what reason can wee refuse such an interpretation, as the Apostle himselfe points vs to? The waightinesse of the mat­ter, hath carried mee farder then I meant to haue gone: I will bee the shorter in that, which remaines.

It is faith then, or rather beleeuing, which the Lorde requires of vs, that we may become his children: not as if there were any excellency in the thing, or merit in the vse of our freewill, for the worthinesse whereof, such a fauour, and honour should be vouchsaf't vs: but onely, and meerely because this is the course, by which the glory, & riches of the mercy of God may bee declared. Therefore the Apostle concludes touching iustificati­on, the former part of Reconciliation, that it is, by faith without the workes of the law; because thereby all boasting is ex­cluded. Rom. 3. 27. 28 The Papists, that make their first iustification to be inherent righteousnesse, consisting of faith, hope, & charity; their second, actuall obedience to God, by the performance of the workes of the lawe, draw away the glory, and thanks from God, to themselues. For the for­mer, I haue shewed, that they will haue the difference, whereby it comes to passe, that one man receiues iusti­fying grace, and an other does not, To proceed from e­uery mans freewill, and not from any speciall grace of God, inclining the soule to beleeue. Neither rest they there; but hauing thus begun to magnify themselues, by the getting of this grace, they go forward to rob God of his honour, & thanks for our saluation; to that ende, they set out the dignity of that righteousnesse, whereof they make account, they are now possest; that Faith, Hope, & Charity, so beautify their soules, that God can­not, but acknowledge them for his children, in whome he sees so liuely, and perfect an image of himselfe. This [Page 455] is the course, that Popish religion teacheth all men to follow, who are desirous to be made the Sonns of God. If wee compare the meanes of attaining to this honor, which according to the Euangelists direction, wee em­brace, with that course, which they present; I doubt not but we may truly say, that our faith, which is counted for righteousnes, is more excellent, then their proud supposed righteousnes so highly magnifyed by them.

For seeing the maine ende of all religion, is the glo­ry of God, by what shall we valew the excellency of a­ny vertue, or vertuous action rather, then by the more, or lesse aduancing of that glory? And by what is, or can God be more glorifyed, in the saluation of man, then by our disclayming, and renouncing of all possibi­bility in our selues, and in all creatures, and resting vp­on him alone, as the only hope of al our happinesse? By this, we acknowledge his sufficiency to bee infinit, his kindnesse to be incomparable. If we trust to him for suc­cour, it is plaine we are throughly perswaded, that hee hath power, and skill to deliuer vs. Wants he wisdome, to discerne by what meanes our deliuerance must bee wrought? How should we rely vpon him, that knows not whereby to helpe vs? Admit his skill were very great, in perceiuing what were to bee done for our suc­cour. What can that availe vs, if hee lack power to doe, or procure that to be done, which hee sees wee stand in need of? Is it not a singular honour to God, to haue his wisdome, and his power thus highly magnifyed? Rea­son confesseth, it is beyond her reach. Learning profes­eth, she can afford vs no instruction for the search ther­of. Experience proclaymeth, shee neuer saw any thing, that might possibly be obserued to giue vs any directi­on in the businesse. Men and Angells are wholly to seeke. All created wisdome fayles vs. God onely, as being only infinite, makes supply of that to the knowledge whereof, it was not possible for any finite [Page 456] wisdome to attaine. Neither is the power of any crea­ture greater, then his knowledge: yea, who knows [...] more, then he can doe? What should I multiply words in so plaine a case? The Sonne of God must be­come man, and by his bloud, powred out in sacrifice, appease the wrath of his Father, & reconcile the world to God, by the pardon of Sin, & adoption into the state of children. What power is there in men, or Angells to procure this fauour?

It is vnpossible to inforce him, that is almightie. And if he do it not willingly, as good not do it at all. For hee, that offers vnwillingly makes his offering of no valew. How then? May they hire him, to do this seruice? What needes he, that is Lord of heauen, and earth, & hath all in his possession? What haue we to giue, who our selues are not our owne? As if a bond-slaue, that hath nothing, nostri Iuris but that, which is his masters, should redeeme himselfe, with giuing some treasure, which before he giues it, is his, to whom it must be giuen. What remaines then, but intreaty? To whom shall we sue? What colour of reason shal we deuise, to ground our petition vpon? With what face shall we come into his presence, to whom our very comming is odious? The neerer wee presse to him, the more we sin. The greater our sin is, the hotter is his wrath. The heauier his displeasure is, the farder wee are from hope of fauour. What shal we but prouok him, by praying to him; incense him, by intreating him? As for making of any means to him, there is none in any place about him, but doth truly, & worthily hate vs, as long as we continue in their Lords displeasure. If we might haue accesse, durst we, trowe you, presume to approche vnto him? When our first parents had broken that one Com­mandement, & afterward heard the voice of the Lord wal­ling Gen. 3. 8. in the garden, in the coole of the day, they hid themselues (saith the Text) from the presence of the Lord God, among the trees of the Garden. Why did they not rather shewe themselues, and fall downe before the Lord, & intreat [Page 457] for mercy? The same conscience of sin, & sense of the wrath of God, would now also take from vs all heart to appeare before him, to make intreatie. But suppose we were admitted into his presence, to offer vp our pe­tition. What should wee say? How might wee begin to make so vnreasonable a request? Is there any man so voyde of sense, as to thinke, that hee can perswade a kinde father, to send his onely sonne, so louing, so belo­ued, not onely to bee infinitly abased in his estate, but also to bee put to a most cruell and shamefull death, & that for strangers? Strangers, sayd I? It were too much if wee were no more, but strangers. What is it then to Rom. 5. 6. send him, for the behoofe of enemies; of rebels & tray­tors? Shall wee try, if wee can preuaile so much with the sonne, as to become a sacrifice for vs? The very vn­reasonablenesse of the suit makes me ashamed to think on it: and is it possible we should moue it? Would you intreat him to dye for you? O absurd, and ridiculous motion! O senselesse, and impious supplication!

But I must remēber that the time passeth, & stay my self in the midst of my race. It is enough, for the matter in hand, that wee vnderstand what honour wee doo to God, by acknowledging his loue, his power, and his wisedom, in resting on him onely for saluation, and gi­uing all the glorie, and thankes for it to his maiesty, and mercy. As for the Papists, that follow the other course, whereby they looke to make themselues the sonnes of God; though they pretend, I know not what extraor­dinarie loue to him: yet in trueth, either they loue him not at all; or if they doe, it is because they imagin, that hee lets them haue the cheefe glorie of their owne salua­tion. Seeme I to any man to speake hardlier of them, then they deserue? I appeale to the vnpartiall iudge­ment of any reasonable man. Thus stands the case betwixt God, and them. Hee, of his owne mercy, hath prouided meanes, by which they may bee saued: [Page 458] but he hath taken no order, that they shall bee saued. If they will make vse of this generall fauour, they may; if they will not, choose them. God hath as it were cast his almes amongst them: happy man bee his dole that seaseth on them. If so, well; if not, so. He, for his part, could be contēted, that euery man shuld lay hold on his offer of saluation. But hee leaues it to their owne choyse, and sittes by, looking on, to see who will, and who will not. If any man beleeue and bee saued, hee may thanke God, that hee might attaine to saluation; but that hee hath attained to it, hee may thanke himselfe. Vnlesse the meanes had beene pre­pared by God, hee could not possibly haue beene sa­ued. Though they were appointed, yet hee might haue been damned, if he had not helpt himselfe, where God faild him. God, indeed gaue him ability to vse the means and perhaps also perswaded him to the vse thereof: but still hee left it wholly to his choyse, whether hee would vse them or no.

So that if he think to challenge any man of vnthankful­nes, he may iustly be aunswered, that they doe him no wrong; as long as they ascribe to him the possibilty of their being saued. There is a general thankfulnes due to him by all men; for that he furnisht them with ability to make choyse of saluation. But for the particulars; euery man is much more beholden to himselfe, then to God, if he come to saluatiō: That he might be saued (for I must repeatit again) he may thank God; that he is saued, hee may thanke himselfe. Now on the contrary side, all the glorie of our saluatiō redounds to God. We do nothing to saue our selues, but commit our selues, to God, to bee saued by him. The faith, wherby we rest on him, is his meere gift. The vse of that gift, is onely frō his grace. He, Hee makes the difference betwixt beleeuers, and vn­beleeuers: they that beleeue not, follow the choyse of their owne wil. They that beleeue are not only perswa­ded, [Page 459] but inclined thereto by the spirt of God; who cer­tainly and (in respect of the euent) necessarily, brings them to beleeue; not making them beleeue, whether they will or no, but making thē willing to beleeue. Thus it comes to passe, that the whole glory, and thankes for our saluation, are giuen to God, to whom only they are due: that we may not wonder, if God vou [...]chsafe the priuiledge of being his sonnes, to as many as beleeue in him through Iesus Christ.

These sonnes of God are farther described vnto vs in the next verse: which are borne (sayeth the Euangelist) Ver. 13. not of bloud, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, Tertullian. de carne Chr. cap. 19. 24. Athanas. lib. 2. de vnica deit. trinitatis. but of God. I am not ignorant, that this hath beene ap­plyed to him, that is the naturall sonne of God, Iesus Christ himselfe; as if Saint Iohn had intended, to sette foorth the excellency of his birth, in whose name wee must beleeue. But this interpretation, though it be very ancient, hath found fewe or none to maintaine, or ap­proue it, but the first author of it; and the words wil not beare it, in any sort. For the Euangelist sayth not, which is born, as speaking of one, but which are born, as signifying [...]. many: And so do all copies, and all translations read the place; that we may safely goe forward with the expo­sition of it, as it lies in our English. And that wee may doe, the more boldly, because wee neede not feare any trouble from our Rhemists thereabout; who agree with vs both in sense, and words. But howsoeuer their agree­ment with vs is so great; yet, that they may shew their itching desire to dis [...]gree, and hold their purpose of ma­king the Scriptures vnpleasant in English, and vneasie, they will not ioyne with vs in the order of the wordes; but set that last, which wee put in the beginning: which are borne (say wee) not of bloud, &c. What English man would write, or speake otherwise? Will you heare the Rhemists? Who not of bloud, nor of the will of flesh, nor of the will of man. All this while, a man wold wonder, [Page 460] what they meant to say. Not of bloud, nor of the will of flesh, &c. What is it, that they deny? we shall know per­haps anone. What followes? But of God. Yet wee are neuer the neerer. At the last comes in, Are borne. Would any man, that knowes how to write English, translate in this sort, if hee were desirous to haue his translation vnderstood, and lik't? what if the wordes Are borne, bee in the last place in the Greeke and La­tine? Hath not euery tongue his especiall property, and grace, which may not reasonably be neglected? Would you not laugh at, or pity him, who vndertaking to tran­slate our of French into English, should thus write; The L'escriture saincte (nous disent- [...]ls) n'est pas suffisante. Scripture holy, to vs say they, not is sufficient? yet might such a Translater aunswere for himselfe, that hee found the words so placed in his author. There is no man al­most so ignorant, but hee easily perceiues, what absurd, and senselesse translations might bee iustifyed, if it were enough to followe the order of the wordes in transla­ting. But the time will not suffer mee to bee any longer in this matter: But calles vppon mee, to bee as short, as I canne, in that, which is yet be­hind.

Therefore I will make but one labour of exami­ning the wordes, and deliuering the sense of the place, and afterward speake somewhat of the matter. The principal scope of the Euangelist, as it is easie to discern, is to shew, that the sonnes, of whome hee made menti­on in the former verse, Are borne of God. This point hee amplifies by a deniall of the contrary: a thing ve­ry vsuall with our Sauiour Christ in his manner of tea­ching, as I noted before, and shall haue occasion to ob­serue Ver. 3. 8. ofter hereafter. Of God, not of man. The later point is farther inlarged, by denying them to bee bred of such matter, as other sonnes ordinarily are made of. Not of blood; or to haue man any way for the author of their being. Not of the will of the flesh, nor of the [Page 461] will of man. Where (by the way) it will not bee amisse for vs to obserue, that the same worde or preposition, of, is applyed both to the matter, and to the maker. Not of bloud; There is the matter, and to that doth the word most properly belong: as when wee say a ship is made of timber, an house is made of brick or stone. In the rest of the sentence, of, noteth the maker; Not of the will of the flesh, or man, but of God. The word, that is ioyn'd with it in this place, signifieth as well to beget as to beare, and is vsed both of the father, and of the mother. Abraham begat Isaac, Isaac begat Ia­cob; Mat. 1. 1. 2. 3. and so often in that one Chapter. Shee shall beare thee a sonne; sayeth the Angell to Zachary, of Luk. 1. 13. his wife Elizabeth: and shee bare or brought foorth a Ver. 57. Chap. 23. 29. sonne: So in another place of the same Gospell. Bles­sed are the barren, and the wombe that neuer bare. But this kinde of phrase is ordinarily referred to the wo­man, in the other Euangelists. Iacob begat Ioseph the Mat. 1. 16. husband of Marie; of whome, that is, of which Ma­ry, Iesus was borne. There are some Eunuches, which were Cap. 19. 12. Luk. 1. 35. so borne of their mothers bellie. That holy thing, that shall bee borne of thee: sayth the Angell to the Virgin Marie. Yet Saint Iohn doth verie often apply this to God, who is as it were the father of his childrē. Except a Ioh. 3. 5. 6. 8. [...]. Ioh. 3. 9. &. 4. 7. &. 5. 1. 4. 18. man bee borne of the holy Ghost: euerie one that is borne of God. I will only name the places, that I may spare time. The difference might haue beene more plaine in English, if wee had translated Of, in the three last clauses, By: By the will of the flesh, by the will of man, by God. But then wee must haue chaunged the word borne, and not haue followed the Euangelists course, who vseth the same worde (as hath beene sayde) in euerie part of the sentence. Our tongue al­so affordes vs libertie to keepe the worde Of, without any neede of farther difference. And so let vs proceed.

Not of bloud. The purpose of the Euangelist, as I signified ere while, in these three Clauses, is no more, but to teach vs, that the sonnes, hee spake of, are not borne after any course of nature, or by any humane power, or meanes, but only of GOD. In this first point hee sets out that doctrine, by denying, that they are made of such matter, as all men consist of. Bloud, as all Philosophers, and Physitians affirme, is no part of the body; but only a nourishment, by which the whole, and euerie member of it, is main­tayned, and fed. The mouth receiues, and chewes the meate, then sends it downe to the stomacke; from whence, after it is, as it were boyled, and concocted, it is put ouer to the Liuer. There it is turned into bloud; and in that nature, spread abroad from thence into all parts of the body; euerie one of which, by a proper, and admirable vertue giuen vnto it by God, changeth the bloud into its owne nature, and thereby receiues maintenance and growth. The like course is ap­pointed, by the prouidence of GOD, for the bree­ding of our bodies; the matter, whereof they are made being principally bloud, as it hath beene certainely obserued; the Liuer, which is the fountaine of bloud, beeing one of the first principall partes, that is for­med.

Much more might bee sayde, and particularly touching our being made of bloud: but I thinke too little is better then too much of such a matter, in such a place, and Auditorie. Therefore also I will forbeare to propound some not very vnlikely coniectures con­cerning the reason, why the holy Ghost, in the O­riginall, sayeth blouds, rather then bloud. Not of blouds, sayeth the Text. Why mentions the Euangelist blouds? I am willingly of their opinion, who take this for an Hebraisme or a speech framed orcording to the Hebrewe phrase: in which it is vsuall, to [Page 463] put blouds for bloud. A bloudy man, a bloudy Citie, 2. Sam. 16. 7. 8. Psal. 6. 7. & 51. 16. is with the Hebrewes, a man of blouds, a Cittie of blouds. But those speeches may well seeme to note a multitude Ezech. 22. 2. Nahum. 3, 1. of murders: Let vs propound some of another kind. If a theefe be found breaking vp, and smitten that hee die, no bloud shall bee shed for him. Worde for worde, Exod. 22, 2. 3. not bloudes for him. So in the next verse. Blouds for him. It may bee the Euangelist, dooth the ra­ther name blouds, then bloud, because hee speakes of manye, and not of anie one. But let it heere suffice vs, that wee vnderstande his mea­ning.

In the next two clauses, there is one worde com­mon to them both; whereof I must needes say some­what, ere I enter into any particular examination of them. What is The will, which our Euangelist speakes of? Is it (as some conceiue and teach, nothing else, but Concupiscence, or lust? I could bee content to thinke so, but that I neuer finde the worde in that sense, in all the newe Testament. Once in­deede the plurall number of it, is put for desires, that are vnlawfull; Among whome (sayeth the A­postle) wee also had our conuersation in times past, Ephe. 2. 3. in the lust of our flesh, in fulfilling the desires of the flesh. But I doubt, whether this bee a sufficient war­rant to take it, in the singular number for lust, or con­cupiscence. For the present, let vs retaine the word, will or desire, and trie, what light wee may haue to discerne the meaning of it, by vnderstanding the other two wordes, flesh and man. By flesh, some would haue the woman, or womankinde to bee meant. What one place of scripture can bee brought, where the worde is so vsed? For that in Genesis, This is now flesh Gen. 2. 23. of my flesh; doth not prooue, that flesh may signifie woman, anie more then that bone may; because Eue is [Page 464] sayde to be bone of Adams bone, as well as flesh of his flesh.

It is out of question, that our Euangelist would haue vs knowe, that the sonnes of GOD, are not borne of women, any more then of men; but it is not likely, that hee intended to signifie so much by that worde: which is neuer vsed to that purpose, in any part, or place of Scripture. By flesh then (as farre as I can yet conceiue) it is best to vnderstand that, which is afterwarde exprest; euen the nature of man, and woman. In this sense the worde is common euerie where in Scripture. All flesh had corrupted his way Gen. 6. 12. Rom. 3, 20. vpon the earth. By the workes of the law shall no flesh be iustified in his sight. The Scripture is full of the like; as I presume you all knowe. The reason of this is manifest. Flesh by a double elegancy of speech, is put for man: the matter, whereof the bo­die, principally consists, is flesh; therefore by flesh Metonymia materiae. Synecdoche membri. the body is signified. The bodie is one part of man: therefore by the body the whole man is vnderstood. Thus flesh comes to be taken for man. In this place we may vnderstand by man, either Mankinde, or the Sexe, as man is diuers from woman. The Greeke worde may seeme to direct vs to the later, because it dooth most commonly note the sexe. Yet it may also, bee taken for both sexes, as in these, and such like places; Blessed is the man, whose vnrighteousnesse is for­giuen. Psal. 32. 1. Rom. 46. [...]. Rom. 11. 4. [...]. I haue left to my selfe 7000. men. And in this sense it will be directly opposit to the later clause, concerning our being borne of God.

You will aske mee perhappes, why Saint Iohn should mention both The flesh, and man, if the mea­ning of both bee one. Doo you not marke, that this doubles the denyall? Not of flesh, not of man. No way, by no meanes of man. Therefore some writers are of opinion, that this last clause, of man, [Page 465] is an explication of both the other; Not of bloud, not of Euthym. ad hunc locum. & ex [...]llo Maldo­natus. flesh. I can hardly perswade my selfe to thinke so. For thought it be true, that by flesh and bloud, man oftentimes is signified; yet the wordes, in that sense, are neuer so diuided, or placed. Let vs take the examples, which they alleage, that so expound these wordes. Flesh, and bloud hath not revealed these things to thee. Flesh, and bloud Mat. 16. 17. 1. Cor. 15. 50 cannot inherit the kingdome of God. All the rest are like these; wherein, who doth not easily marke, both that Flesh, is still set in the first place; and Bloud, neuer; Flesh, and Bloud, not Bloud and Flesh; and also, that they are alwaies ioyned together, and not seuered the one from the other. If our Euangelist had meant to haue spoken of man, by that kinde of speech, hee woulde haue said, which are borne, not of flesh and bloud. May wee diuide those former places? Flesh hath not reuealed: Bloud hath not reuealed: Flesh cānot inherit: Bloud cannot inherit. These were marueilous strange kinds of speech, & not agree­ [...]ble to the phrase of the holy Ghost in Scripture. Where­fore, thoh I acknowledge that interpretatiō to be true, for the generall sense of it: yet I see not, how I may like of it, in the particulars; especially seeing the holy Ghost vseth a diuers manner of speech in these 2 later, from the former. There hee said no more, but Not of bloud; In the other, he denies also the will; or desire: not of the will of the flesh, not of the will of man.

Let vs then, if you please, vnderstand by bloud, the matter; by flesh, the man, the efficient cause, and maker as it were; what shall wee say of the will of the flesh, and man? Surely I will not grratly striue with any man, who thinkes it should be taken for concupiscence: It is enough, that I propounded the reason of my doubt before. Giue mee leaue now to deliuer what I con­ceiue of the matter; which is no more, but this, that I had rather vnderstand by will, desire, then lust. What then shall bee the sense of it? This, as I take it; that the [Page 466] Euangelist giues vs to vnderstand, that the Sonnes, of whom hee intreates, are not borne according to, or by any de­sire of man, which might procure or affect, or wish that kinde of Son-ship. How fitly this will agree with the scope of the place it shall appeare by and by, when I haue ex­amined that, which remaines.

All, that wee haue said hitherto, concerning this birth, is to shew, whence it is not. Not of bloud; not of man. VVhence is it then? Of God. God sometimes notes the nature of the God head, sometimes some one of the three persons. How may wee most fitly ex­pound it, in this place? What if wee referre it to the Ioh. 3. 5. sanlen. in con­cord. Euang. cap. 1. holy Ghost, the spirit of whome euery man must bee borne, that shall enter into the kingdome of God? I doubt mee, wee shall hardly finde any one place of Scripture, where the worde God signifieth any seuerall person, but the Father. I deny not, that in some place, that is said to be don by God, which in som other is par­ticularly ascribed to the Sonne, or to the holy Ghost; but I say, that in those places, where God is so na­med, the nature is to bee vnderstood, nd not any one person.

The compareing of these places together doth teach vs, that the Sonne, and the holy Gost, are by nature God: but it doth not proue, that where God is named there either of these two persons is specially signified. Neither is it necessary to apply this to God the Father. but rather the opposition standeth betwixt the diuine, & humane nature, not of man: that is, not of man-kind, or of the nature of man; but of God, of the diuine nature, which is one, and the same in all three persons.

Thus haue wee the meaning of the Euange­list, that the Sonnes hee spake of, arise not to that dig­nity by any power, or wisedome of man, but meerely and only by the mighty worke of God himselfe; who be­gets [Page 467] them to himselfe, by the effectuall working of his spirit; and of his owne gratious fauour, vouch­safeth to adopt them for his Sonnes.

I doe the rather make the sense so large, be­cause I woulde not willingly omitte any thing, which, it may bee reasonably presumed, the ho­ly Ghost did, or might intende. For the cleerer vnderstanding whereof, let vs cal to minde what was before deliuered, at the twelfth verse: that there is a double Son-ship in respect of GOD; the former is that, whereof our LORD disputes with Nicodemus, by which wee are borne againe Ioh. 3. 35. &c. of the spirit, and fitted for the later, which is our Adoption by GGD the Father. The prerogatiue of being the Sonnes of GOD; is our being a­dopted, which is not vouchsaf't vs by GOD at the first, while wee are in our corrupt naturall estate; but then only bestowed vpon vs, when by beleeuing wee are become one with IESVS CHRIST the naturall Sonne of GOD his Fa­ther.

The other Sonne-ship is but a preparing of vs therevnto; by which that beleefe is begotten in vs, by the powerfull working of the holy Ghost, in the ministery of the worde. In this sense the thirteenth verse dependes thus vpon the last wordes of the twelfth. Saint Iohn had said, that they become the Sonnes of GOD, which beleeue in the name of the Messiah. Hee proceedes to shewe how they attaine to this beleefe: By being borne not of bloud &c: but of God. They haue it not by nature in their birth, they get it not by any naturall desire, or will: but they are borne anew of God, and haue it by him fra­med, and formed in them.

The doctrine of both these points is most true; the wordes will beare them both: they will both stande [Page 468] with the scope of the place, and purpose of the Euan­gelist; Chrylost. in Io. homil. 9. The oph. ad hune locum. that I am not afraid of doing any wrong to the Text, though I make so large an interpretation ther­of. Let vs then, in the feare of God, handle these things some what particularly, but shortly, as the time requi­reth. What a prerogatiue it is, for men to bee the Sonnes of God, wee heard in the last exercise; here the Euan­gelist farder sets foorth the excellency thereof, by shewing the basenesse of our naturall birth: which for the matter of it, is bloud; for the making, at the best, but humane; whereas the other is wholly, and only from God. I will not amplify the former point tou­ching our naturall birth, as I might doe: but only re­ferre you to the consideration of it, by your selues. For your better direction wherein, I will name two Iob. 10. 9. 10. 11. Ezech. 16. 4. 6. places of Scripture, which I commende to your humble, and diligent meditation. In the former, the naturall breeding of man-kind is purposely de­scribed: in the later his birth is shewed; by way of allegory, if wee consider the intent of the holy Ghost; but plainely, and truly, if wee respect the matter it selfe. Reade them both at your leasure; and I make no doubt, but you will bee ashamed to thinke, that beeing so meanely bred, and brought foorth (I speake as fauourably as I can) wee should bee so strangely proud, and insolent, as for the most part wee are.

VVeake and base is our naturall beginning: migh­ty and glorious is our spirituall adoption. By that, wee are borne the Sonnes of men: by this, wee are chosen the Sonnes of God. In our first condition, wee are brought foorth to all kinde of misery: in our second estate, wee are aduaunced to true felici­ty. The one casts vs naked, and forlorne, vpon the bare earth: the other lifts vs vp, from earth to heauen: That brings vs out of prison to punishment: this [Page 469] leades vs from paine to pleasure: with our conception begins our mortality, our adoption giues vs entrance into immortality; And doe we for all this, stand doating, vpon our naturall estate?

Are wee proud of that, of which wee may rather bee ashamed? What art thou, that bearest thy selfe so high? A Gentleman? A Nobleman? A Prince? Heyre apparant to the Empire of the whole earth? Bee it so: yet was thy breeding, and bearing no o­ther, then Iob, and Ezechiell describe. The poorest, and basest wretche, that goeth on the ground, had the same manner of beginning, and being. Remem­ber thy selfe: as thy death shall bee like his, dust to dust; so was thy birth like to his, bloud of bloud, flesh of flesh. Thou art the sonne of an Emperor. Yet of a man. Be not deceiued; thy nature is no better then his; though thy eares, and sorrowes may proue more, and greater.

A gentleman, a nobleman, a King, are not names of diuers natures, but of diuers troubles. Adop­tion, adoption is that, which makes difference be­twixt Humane, and Diuine; Caine and Abell, were both Adams sonnes: Ismaell and Isaac Abrahams: All foure were borne a-like of bloud, of the will of the flesh, of the will of man. But Isaac and A­bell were adopted the sonnes of GOD: Caine and Ismaell were neuer any more, but the sonnes of men.

Looke how much God is more excellent, then man: so much more glorious is it to bee the sonne of God, then of man. Looke how much the spirit ex­ceedes the flesh; so much better is it, to bee borne of the spirit, then of the flesh. If thou bee the adopted sonne of God, by grace; it skils not whose sonne thou art by nature.

Beleeue in Christ, and thou hast the prerogatiue to bee the sonne of GOD. Neuer tell mee, how meane and poore thy parents were. Neuer boast how rich, and noble they were. Bloud, and flesh, & man must hinder either all, or none at all. For in all these, all are equall.

How meane soeuer thy bloud be, it is bloud; How noble soeuer it bee, it is but bloud. Thy nobilitie helpes not, thy basenesse hinders not thy adoption. Not of bloud, not of flesh, not of man, but of God. God needes no such time, and meanes, for adoption, as thy naturall parents neede for procreation. There is no stay, but in thy selfe. Thou shalt no sooner beleeue in the name of Christ, but presently God will accept thee for his sonne. Is so excellent an estate, so easilie to be come by; and doo wee refuse, or delay to vse the meanes? Surely there needes no other proofe, that our second birth of regeneration, is not of bloud, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God; then that so fewe are so borne againe.

I am come now to the last poynt of this Text, and exercise: which I will runne ouer verie briefely. The prerogatiue to bee the sonnes of God, belonges to them onely that receiue our Sauiour Christ; by beleeuing in him. Who are they, that doe so receiue him? They that are borne of GOD. What is it to bee borne of GOD? To haue our vnderstanding inlightned with the knowledge of the Gospell, our hearts inclined to embrace it; so that wee wholly renounce our selues, all trust in our owne righte­ousnesse, all good opinion thereof, and rest onely vpon Iesus Christ to bee reconciled to GOD by him. This estate, as our Euangelist teacheth vs in this place, is not attained to by any power, or de­sire of man; but by the mighty working of GOD, Psal. 51. 10. who creates (as the Prophet sayeth) new hearts in [Page 471] vs, changing stone into flesh; taking our stonie hearts Ezech. 11. 19. Cap. 36. 26. out of our bodies, and giuing vs hearts of flesh. For the naturall man (take him at the best, with all the helpes, that nature, learning, and education canne afforde, is (notwithstanding all these) vnable to acknowledge or like of the meanes, which God in his owne wise­dome, hath appointed for our saluation. The holy Ghost giues vs the reason of it. For (sayeth hee by the penne of Saint Paul) they are foolishnesse vnto 1. Cor. 2. 14. him, and cannot bee discerned, but by the spirit; which no man can haue, but by a second birth from GOD. I cannot stand to inlarge this point by many proofes; neither is it greatly needfull: because it hath beene done already in my former exercises, and shall be done hereafter, if it please God, as occasion shall be of­fered.

Yet I may not at any hand forget, because it es­pecially concernes the glory of God, the ende of all true religion, to call to your remembrance, what hath formerly beene deliuered, touching the worke of God, in bringing men to beleeue in Christ. The summe of it is this, that it is God, which makes vs both able, and willing to beleeue, not waiting for the choyse of our freewill, which, like a free horse, runnes headlong to infidelitie; but gratiously, and powerfully inclining vs to beleeue. Doost thou then beleeue in Christ to saluation, whereas many o­ther, that haue had the same worde, outwardly by the ministerie of men, and the same grace inwardly by the motion of the spirit offered to them, continue in vn­beleefe? Take heede thou doe not imagine, that this difference proceeded from thy selfe. That they doe not beleeue, it is by their owne fault. That thou doest beleeue, it is by not by thine owne vertue. Noe, sayest thou. I knowe that and confesse it. I stood in need of the grace of GOD, as well as other men; I was [Page 472] not able to bee saued without it, nor to procure it. GOD, of his owne goodnesse, found out the meanes, prouided them, gaue mee knowledge of them, inabled mee to embrace them. All this I wil­lingly ascribe to God. Is this all, thou giuest him? ma­ny men, at the least as thou perswadest thy selfe, haue been equall to thee, in all these fauours from God, who yet neuer attained to beleefe in Christ.

I would faine knowe of thee, how this difference grewe, that thou beleeuest, and they doe not. They would not, and I would. Thou sayest well: For indeede noe man euer beleeues, but willingly. Yet this doth not satisfie my doubt. I demaund farther, how came it to passe, that thou wouldest, and they would not. Doe not aunswere mee; Because I would. For if that bee all, thou canst say, thou doest rather condemne thy folly, then commend thy obedience in yeelding. I sawe it was the onely course, I coulde take for my saluation. Did not those other, which beleeue not, see that too, as well as thou? Else the difference proceeded not, from the choyse of thy will, but from the cleerenesse of thy iudgement. I graunt, they sawe as much as I, but they did not like it, as well as I. Wee are neuer a whit the neerer, for all this conference. I aske still, howe thou ca­mest to haue a better liking of it, then they had. I vsed the freedome of my will, better then they did. I perceiue then, when all comes to all, the difference must arise from free well. But our Euangelist sayeth, Not of the will of man. Otherwise there Rom. 3. 27. were verie iust, and great cause in men of boasting, and small glorie, or thankes due to God, euerie man being the principall cause of his owne saluati­on. For as I haue shewed heeretofore, thus might anie man that beleeues, reason with GOD; Why should I bee challenged of vnthankefulnesse? [...]