Why a man that should be perfect, may al­ways increase in Knowledge, but not in Goodnesse.

WE read that Jesus Christ, as man, had his progression in Knowledge and Experience, Luke 2.40. Heb. 5.8. but not that he grew in Sanctity; for nothing [Page 2]could be added to the perfection of his innocence. Goodnesse hath some limits which it cannot passe, when it is arrived to a certain point or degree where there is the accomplishment of its fulnesse: but Knowledge hath no bounds, but may go forward in infini­tum. If at this day there were found upon the earth a man perfectly holy, yet he would have need every day to learn. Goodnesse hath its stature or growth limited; so that a man cannot ever increase in it: but he may and ought every day to encrease in Know­ledge.

To love God without knowing him, is the most irregular of all affections.

Many men have blinde affections, as well toward God as toward men. To­ward men, forasmuch as they are ignorant of their defaults: Toward God, forasmuch as they are ignorant of his perfections or his intentions. The Superstitious have oftentimes [Page 3]more love toward God then those that are Orthodox: but this love is without Knowledge, and consequently irregular, Rom. 10.2, 3. It is also enor­mous in the effects of it: for no fol­lies nor excesses have been equal to those which have been committed for the love of God, that is to say, for Re­ligion, guided by principles of igno­rance.

Why the wisest Nations have had more paltry or horrible Gods then those that were barbarous.

The Nations that have been the most civilized and more learned, have been always the greatest fools in matter of Religion. Those to whom they gave the name of Barbarians, a­dored the Sun and the Moon: this was the most specious Idolatry of any. But the Egyptians, who were the first tea­chers of Sciences, had an Ox for their god. The Grecians, that far excelled them, placed Fevers and humane Passi­ons [Page 4]among the deities. And the Ro­manes, that surmounted them all in Wisedom, have followed them in the like horrours, worshipping even the Furies of Hell. At this day, the poor Americans adore the Thunder: but the Chinois, so sharp-sighted in every thing else, adore the devil.

Certainly the Justice of God hath been willing to punish the ingratitude of Nations. Those that had the most light to know God, did not glorifie him as God: by reas [...]n whereof, he hath left them to the vanity of their sense, permitting, that the wiser they were, they should become the greater fools. And this is a thing very ordi­nary, that if a worldly wise man hath in him the spirit of Superstition, he be­cometh more superstitious then the vulgar.

Quest. Whether it be a sufficient reason for adhering to a Religion, to alleadge that in it may be sound salvation.

All the enquiry which many men make, when a Religion is in dispute, is onely to ask if in it a man may be saved. It is of no importance that there are falshoods in their Religion, provided, say they, that they may work out their salvation. I speak not here, whether they have any good ground for their opinion, to think to be saved in a Re­ligion in which themselves know that there are falshoods. But supposing that such a crime hindereth not their salvation, surely it is incompatible with the honour and love which we owe to the Author of salvation, who abhorreth whatsoever is false in matter of his service. It is an horrible con­tempt of God, and a mad ingratitude, to be well contented that God be dis­honoured, and that by our selves, pro­vided that we may be saved. Again, [Page 6]is there none other way to go to hea­ven? God sheweth me the truth, which leadeth to salvation: Why then should I chuse rather to be saved in the profession of a lye, (if this might be) then in the profession of the truth? To refuse the truth, because salvation may be also found in a lye, of it self rendereth a man uncapable of salva­tion.

Such as a man is in his own nature, such he imagineth that God is. Strange horrid conceits of the spirit of man concerning this subject.

There is not a man, if you consider him onely under the dictate of his own nature, which doth not figure God unto himself quite other then he is. All men conceive a God like unto themselves, that is to say, conforma­ble to their humours and inclinations, or imagine that he ought to be so. One (as he is a Libertine) by no means will believe that God is so se­vere [Page 7]as he declareth himself to be; but attributeth to him an unreasonable in­dulgencie. Another fancieth to him­self a god harsh and difficile. Ano­ther, who is afflicted by God, com­plaineth of the excesse of his Justice. Behold yet an horrible thing! The most infamous wicked man maketh himself to believe that God is like unto him. God hath said unto the wicked, Thou thoughtest that I was altogether such an one as thy self, Psal. 50.21. Hardly could we believe that man could be capable of so prodigious a madnesse, if God himself had not spoken it. Many will object against this, that they are far from it, that such thoughts ne­ver entred into their hearts. But though these cogitations come not to their full shape or form, yet they are formed in part: And howsoever a man choketh them in their conception, yet there still remaineth some bud or other of them in the heart of man. I passe by them who commit unlawful actions, thinking that God also will [Page 8]take them as indifferent, and that in this he resembleth them. The first man, from whom we inherit this dis­ease of spirit, imagined that God en­vied him, that he was an enemy of his happinesse, and by consequence, ma­lignant. To know God well, it beho­veth us first to divert this secret incli­nation, which moveth us to look upon him thorow the glasse of our own hu­mours.

Of all the Attributes of God, which is that which we see first? And which is that which we see least?

The most visible of all, and that which presenteth it self first to our eyes, is his Power: For howsoever all his Attributes are written in his works, yet some are read before o­thers. And in the contemplation of this great masse of the Universe, the first thing that cometh into our thought, is the Power and Greatnesse of the Maker. In the order therefore [Page 9]of the lessons which the Apostle affir­meth to be contained in the works of God, his Power is first named; as that which presenteth it self to be seen be­fore all other his Attributes, Rom. 1.20.

On the other side, that which we see last, and know least, is his Wisdom. This proceedeth from many causes. One of the courses which the Wisdom of God taketh, is to conceal his Wis­dom. It worketh oftentimes by means ridiculous and abject: it employeth means quite contrary to what it inten­deth to produce: it permitteth disor­der and confusion in the world: it giveth the upper hand to them that blaspheme against it: it buildeth up, and throweth down: yea, it hath chosen the folly of the world for one of its principal agents, 1 Cor. 1.27. In all this, the Wisedom of God is so much the greater, by how much the lesse it appeareth: But since to us it is very hardly to be perceived in the greater part of these actions, it is very [Page 10]hard to know God by his Wisedom. Naturally men may know him by his Power, because it is seen as it were to the eye: but in the Wisdom of God, the world by wisdom knew not God, 1 Cor. 1.21. Now in effect, this is not to know God, if a man know not his Wisdom. Hence it cometh, that ma­ny fall into Atheism: For if on the one side they see a Soveraign Power supporting all things, on the other part they see a confused multitude of events which seem not to be governed by a Soveraign Wisdom. But one of the Attributes of God cannot be with­out the other. It is impossible that he which is perfectly Powerful, should not be perfectly Wise, though his Wisdom be not so visible unto us as his Power.

The two greatest points of Religion.

The one, is the Love of God toward man; the other, is the Love of man towards God. The one is the greatest [Page 11]point of the Gospel; the other of the Law. As all Religion is reduced to the Law and the Gospel; so the Law and the Gospel are referred to these two heads. For as the first and great­est Commandment of the Law is, that we love God; so the first and greatest Article of the Gospel is, that God-lo­veth us. About these two Poles do move all the Luminaries of Religion.

Which are more culpable, those who dis­trust the Power of God, or those that doubt of his Mercy toward them?

The Power of God is universal; but the effects of his saving Mercy are not universally communicated unto all: For, he hath mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth, be­cause it is requisite that his Justice should appear as well as his Mercy. The Israelites, who believed not that it was in the power of God to provide them bread and flesh in the wilder­nesse ( Psal. 78.19, 20, 21.) were more [Page 12]culpable in that particular, then Cain and Judas, who believed not that God would pardon them. It is ever cer­tain that God can do all that is possible; but it is not always evident what he will do.

The extent of Faith, and the diversity of the objects of it.

OF the objects which present them­selves to the eye of our Faith, some are without beginning and end­ing; they have been always, they shall be for ever, as the Deity, the Three Persons. Others have had beginning and ending, as the Creation, the Suf­ferings of Christ. Others have had beginning, but none ending; as the Sitting of our Lord at the right hand of God, the Church, Life everlasting. [Page 13]Others have not as yet been, but are to have beginning and ending; as the Resurrection, and the Day of the last Judgement. Thus our Faith begin­neth her course at the Eternity of God; from thence traverseth the ages, assembling that which is past, and that which is to come, together with what is present; yea, rendring present, what is already past, and what is yet to come: And at last concludeth with eternal Life, where that Article closeth up the Creed.

Three degrees of language of God in the Creation.

The Scripture representeth God speaking, when he made the world, but in three several sorts.

When he would give being to those creatures which as yet were not, or distinguish those that were insensible, or bring forth those kindes which he in­tended to produce, he spake not direct­ly to them, to command them to be, or [Page 14]to serve his designe or purpose: but he he said, Let there be light; Let there be a firmament; Let the waters be gathered toge­ther in one place; Let the earth bring forth, &c. But after he had made living crea­tures, as fishes and fowls, he addres­sed his speech to them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters, Gen. 1.22. But when the creation of man cometh to be spoken of, God spake to himself, Let us make man in our own image. Terms which expresse, as every one knoweth, the Unity of the Divine Essence, and the Plurality of the Persons. This shall serve as a preparative to the following question.

Why God never speaketh of himself in the Plural number, nor is ever brought in as consulting, but where it concerneth man.

In certain occurrences, God hath spoken as holding a Councel, and pro­ceeding with deliberation. The Scri­pture [Page 15]hath marked out eight, in which God hath consulted about several sub­jects.

1. About the creation of man, as we have already spoken according to all Expositors.

2. About his marriage; For Adam, there was not found an help meet for him: God said, It is not good that the man should be alone. The result of this consulta­tion is expressed; I will make him an help meet for him.

3. About the banishment of him, after his fall: And the Lord God said, Be­hold, the man is become as one of us, knowing good and evil: And now lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and live for ever, &c. Gen. 3.22.

4. About the Deluge: The Lord said, My spirit shall not always strive with man; for he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty yeers, Gen. 6.3.

5. About the Tower of Babel: And the Lord came down to see the city and the tower which the children of men had built: And the Lord said, Behold, this people is [Page 16]one, and they have all one language, and this they begin to do, and now nothing will be re­strained from them which they have intended to do. Go to, let us go down, and confound their language, that they may not understand one anothers speech, Gen. 11.5, 6, 7.

6. About the way which the Isra­elites were to take when they went out of Egypt: And it came to passe, that when Pharaoh had let the people go, that God led them not thorow the land of the Philistines, though that were neer: for God said, Lest peradventure the people repent, when they see war, and they return to Egypt. But God led the people about thorow the wildernesse of the Red-sea, Exod. 13.17, 18.

7. About the means to ruine Ahab: And the Lord said, Who shall perswade Ahab, that he may go up and fall at Ramoth-Gilead? 1 Kings 22.20.

8. About sending a Prophet to the Jews: Also I heard the voice of the Lord, saying, Whom shall I send, and who will go for us? Isai. 6.8.

In many of these passages, God speaketh of himself in the plural [Page 17]number: Let us make man. The man is become as one of us. Let us go down. Who shall go for us? But never doth he use this style, nor yet ever doth he speak in the phrase of one consulting, but when he dealeth concerning man, whether it be to give him his being or his well-being, or to guide him, or to preserve him, or to destroy him, or to admonish him. What may be the reason of this? It is, Not onely because man is a sub­ject of greater importance then any other that is in the world; rather, For­asmuch as among all corporeal crea­tures, man onely is capable of counsel, onely capable of deliberating. For the holy Spirit would shew us, that God hath particular influence upon man, to give him the power of con­sulting. Moreover, it is to admonish man, that he work with counsel, where the businesse requireth it. Further­more, it is to assure us, that where our counsel is unprofitable, as where we are uncapable of consulting, God him­self consulteth for us. Finally, be­cause [Page 18]man oftentimes opposeth his Counsel to the Decrees of God, God would shew us, that he hath a counsel which prevaileth above ours. For these reasons, he never entereth into counsel, but when the question con­cerneth man.

The diversity of habitation which God hath given to two kindes of creatures which bear his image; that is, to Angels and Men.

GOd hath placed all his works in their proper places, with order and proportion: witnesse, among an infinite number of examples, that the earth hath not so great living creatures as the sea, nor in the like number, nor so fruitful in multiplying: And this to avoid too great a waste of food which [Page 19]would be consumed, to the prejudice of man, by the beasts of the Land, if they equalled those of the Sea either in number or greatnesse of body.

But that which is a point more sub­lime, there being two kindes of crea­tures made after the likenesse of God, to wit, the Angelical and Humane na­ture; yet they are seated in places mainly different, and very far distant the one from the other; the one in heaven, the other on the earth. God would have his image placed in the two extremities of the world, as in two several Tables. He hath placed the one in the highest story of the Uni­verse, the other in the lowest; the one at the centre, the other in the circum­ference: To the end that on what part soever our soul casteth the eye, be it on heaven or on earth, we may contem­plate God himself in the one or the o­ther of these two kindes of creatures which bear his image.

What ought to be gathered from this, That God imposed names upon the day, the night, the heavens, the earth, the sea; yet hath given no general name to signi­fie the whole world.

God hath given particular names to all the great pieces of the Universe, Gen. 1.5, 8, 10. but hath not given a name to all of it together. Likewise the Hebrew Tongue, in which God pronounced his first Oracles, never na­meth the world in one onely word, but expresseth always either the heaven or the earth, or both of them together, when it would say the world.

I passe by the question, Why in the Creation God hath not given a word which should universally signifie this whole bulk, in which is comprehended the entire assembly of all his works. But we are to learn by his example still to make a difference between heaven and earth: The earth, in which man was made; the heaven, for which he [Page 21]was made. Without this distinction, it is impossible to know what is the world.

Whence cometh it, that the spirit of man is pleased with variety?

Not onely the Spirit, but also the Sen­ses, the Sight especially, & the Taste, love variety. This instinct proceedeth from a secret intelligence. The wisedom of God could not well be taken notice of, but in a great diversity of works, of matters and forms, different, unlike, yea, oft times contrary in qualities, mo­tions and circumstances. Hence it is that it hath brought forth so many kindes of food, so many of savours, so many of colours, and generally so great a variety of objects, as well for the Senses as the Spirit. Now to the end that man should study them, to know the perfections of their authour, God hath given that curiosity, to invite him to passe from one object to another, as by change of Lecture, which [Page 22]ought to render him more know­ing.

Why the Scripture oftener nameth the Hand or the Arm of God, then the Heart of God.

VVE see better the works of his hand, then the intentions of his heart. His works and actions are perceptible to our eyes: but the rea­sons are, for the most part, hidden from our souls, and inclosed in the brest of that great Worker: For, Who hath known the minde of the Lord? Hence it cometh, that himself speaking unto us, oftener mentioneth his Hand, of which we see the effects, then his Heart, of which we know not the secrets.

Of the fundamental Law of the Creation, and of the excellent instructions which issue from it.

In the Creation, God hath formed the principles of all Laws; yea, the Creation is a Law visible and speaking. If it were well considered, many que­stions would be cleared, which remain undecided; and many opinions against which we dispute, would not [...]eed any other confutation then what is found written in this primitive Law. I speak not of that which is well known unto all, to wit, That by this Law it is for­bidden to pervert the order established from the beginning, to separate what God hath joyned, or joyn together what God hath separated. Hence it cometh to passe that the Scripture con­demneth Polygamie, because God cre­ated but one wife for Adam. Hence also proceedeth the superiority of the man over the woman, because he was first created of them, 1 Tim. 2.

By this Law of the Creation, it is forbidden to multiply the number of species which God hath created at the beginning, or to confound them one with another. Hence it cometh, that the Scripture hath noted with infamy him that first invented the procreation of mules, a bastard kinde which God created not, Gen. 36.24.

By the same Law, it is forbidden to destroy a whole species, of what crea­ture soever, even of those that are most contrary to man. It was in the power of Noah, when he had within the Ark Tygers, Vipers, and other per­nicious creatures, to destroy them, to cause the whole breed to be lost; for then there were no more of them in the world: But it was not permitted to him; rather to the contrary, he had order to preserve them. It is lawful for us to destroy the particular of such kindes, but not to proceed to a suppres­sion of the whole kinde, though it lay in our power: for this were to tear out a leaf of that great Book which [Page 25]containeth the catalogue of the works of the Creation.

By the same Law, it is impossible to reduce any creature to nothing, that is to say, to make it simply nothing. One matter may be changed into another, as a living body is resolved into dust; but it never cometh to be nothing. The Church of Rome doth not formally say that the bread & wine are annihilated in the Eucharist, but it saith that they vanish, without withdrawing themselvs to some other place, without entering into the body of Christ, without being turned into any other matter. Now according to these suppositions, it is necessary that the bread and wine be annihilated and come to nothing: But this pretended annihilation, is contra­ry to the fundamental Law of the Cre­ation. It is impossible and unlawful. It is impossible: for as God alone had the power to create all things out of nothing; so he alone can reduce any thing to nothing. It is unlawful: for God himself, though he can, yet never [Page 26]did annihilate any of his creatures, no not the devils.

O Eternal God, all thy works sub­sist by thee. If thou withdrawest thine hand, they will fall into nothing: but if thou sendest forth thy Spirit, they shall be as of new created.

How many times the general order of the world hath been interrupted since the Creation.

Three times it hath had an interrup­tion, to wit, twice in heaven, once on the earth. In heaven, when the Sun and the Moon were stayed, in the time of Joshua; and again, when the Sun went backward, in the days of Hezeki­ah. For these two wonders changed the measures of the day and night, prolonging the light in one half of the world, and the darknesse in the other beyond their times. In the earth also, when the waters of the Deluge made it not habitable for the space of a whole yeer; and in the six later [Page 27]months of that yeer, there was neither born nor died any humane creature, nor any beast of the earth, nor fowl of the air; God having for a time sus­pended both birth and death. For no creature either was born or died with­in the Ark.

An example of instructions wherewith the Providence of God hath furnished man, by creatures most contemptible.

Jonas attended with impatience the destruction of Nineveh. God disputed against him by four things of no value. By a plant which lasted no more then one day; by the worm that gnawed it; by a little winde; and, by the shadow of that plant, Jon. 4. Though there be nothing more vi [...]e then a shrub that lasteth but a night, nor any thing more paltry then a little worm, nor any thing lesse sordid then the winde, nor any thing more vain then the shadow of a leaf; yet of these four things God composed an excel­lent [Page 28]lesson for Jonas, where the con­clusion expresseth the care which God had not onely of man, but of the poor beasts.

Whence cometh it, that in divers disputes and dialogues which we read to have passed between God and man, it seemeth (without blasphemy be it spoken) that man reasoneth better then God himself.

Let God be true, and every man a lyar, as it is written, that thou mayest be justified in thy sayings, and clear in thy judgements. But such is the blindnesse of our spirit, that our thoughts dare welnigh ascribe more reason to man then God. We read, Gen. 20, the plea of Abimelech. This Prince would have taken in Mar­riage her whom he believed to have been the sister of Abraham, and who her self said that she was so: He pro­ceeded with a good faith, and in inte­grity of conscience; God himself hath given him this testimony. Neverthe­lesse upon this occasion, all the family of Ab [...]melech were struck with divine [Page 29]punishment, and himself is threatened with death. He replieth, that in case himself were guilty, yet it behoved not that the innocents should suffer the penalty, especially that of the last pu­nishment, death. At the hearing, these reasons seem invincible. But that which maketh us so judge, is, because being men, we well comprehend the reasons of man, but we comprehend not at all the reasons of God. It be­hoveth us here diligently to observe a point very necessary. When God sheweth us a reason, we never see it fully entire, or in its full extent, but onely in some little parcels, as it were half broken: Hence it cometh that we cannot see the perfection of it. If the reasons of God were visible in all their dimensions, we should finde, that in respect of them, all the best reasons of man were brutish and unreasonable. Moses, Exod. 5, could not compre­hend what reason the wisdom of God had to have sent him to Pharaoh in fa­vour of the Hebrews, to whom this [Page 30]Ambassage served onely to redouble their misery. But that reason, which was wrapped up in apparences contra­ry to reason, unfolded it self by little and little, and manifested that great piece of work wherein God had la­boured with so much art. O man, who art thou, that dispu [...]est against God? Hast thou seen the measure or the square which he held in his hand when he framed the world? Hast thou soun­ded the depth of the Sea, or hast thou walked to the bottom of the Abysse? Hast thou seen the gates of the shadow of death? Knowest thou which way to go to the spring of the light? Hast thou entered into the magazines of hail and snow? And finally, whence hast thou any wisdom, or any spirit, but from the Spirit of God?

Notable examples of the Providence of God, in the Fatalities of Times, of Places, and other circumstances.

Two Dreams occasioned the captivi­ty [Page 31]of Joseph; two other Dreams occa­sioned his deliverance; and two o­ther Dreams were the occasion of his greatnesse: For his brethren sold him into slavery, by reason of two Dreams which he rehearsed to them. And the two Dreams which he interpreted in the Prison to the two Officers of Pha­raoh his house, served for a preparatory to his liberty. Finally, he was promo­ted to the Government of all Egypt, by the occasion of two Dreams which he expounded to the King.

The measures of Times appertain to this Soveraign Providence. See here an example worthy admiration. Before the Captivity of Babylon, the Is­raelites had possessed the land of Ca­naan the space of 840 yeers: The ten Tribes were carried away a little be­fore the end of this term; but the Tribe of Judah continued the full time. For after the yeer in which they had finished the conquest of the land, which was the sixth yeer of the Government of Joshua, to the first [Page 32]yeer of the Captivity, you finde pre­cisely the number of 840 yeers, which make 12 times 70 yeers; so many se­venties of yeers, as there was of shares when they divided the land, according to the number of the twelve Tribes. And the Captivity of Babylon lasted 70 yeers, the twelfth part of the time which they or their fathers had posses­sed the land of promise.

Among the vicissitudes which we call fatal, this is considerable. The Israelites going out of the desert, en­tered in arms into the land of Canaan, to make themselves masters of it. The war lasted six yeers, and in the seventh yeer they obtained peaceable possessi­on. Now having held it about 1500 yeers, comprehending in that time some interruptions, even that which happened at the destruction of Jerusa­lem under Vespasian; finally, the time being come in which they were to be dispossessed for ever, the Romanes, under the Empire of Adrian, chased them fully out by the sword. This [Page 33]War lasted six yeers, according to the Jews own report, who since that time never were able to make a body of an Estate, nor the body of an Army: So that as by a War of six yeers they were established in the Land of Canaan, by a War also of six yeers they were cast out of it.

Among the Provinces of that Coun­try, Galilee, so famous in the holy Hi­story, presented to our sight an admira­ble circle of fatal events. Galilee was the first that forsook the service of the true God, to receive Paganism. After that, it was the first that God chastised, when he sent the Assyrians to destroy the kingdom of Israel. Afterward, it was the first to which Jesus Christ preached the Gospel; as it had been foretold, that in the land of Zebulun and Naphtali, Galilee of the Gentiles, a light should spring up, Matth. 4. Finally, it was the first that the Romanes plun­dered, before the destruction of the second Temple: for before they be­sieged Jerusalem, they began the War [Page 34]in Galilee, and brought it back under their yoke. Surely, so great a concur­rence of revolutions in the same place, as if it were marked out by the finger of God himself, could not proceed from any casual adventure.

We have seen something alike in our days. In the precedent age, the light of Reformation appeared first in Germany, from thence it spread it self in France; and after that, in this Island. That age passed, the Civil Wars, by which God would chastise our ingrati­tude, first afflicted the Churches of Ger­many, afterward them of France, and in the end this scourge is come as far as us. The same order which God hath kept in the dispensation of his graces, hath appeared in the distribution of his judgements: For they whom his mer­cy first visited, have been the first that have been visited by his justice; and in succession others, according to the date of the time of their en­lightning.

Of many kindes of scourges equally dread­ful and unavoidable, which ought to be chosen, if God should leave the choice to us? or, which is more to be desired?

I speak not of those three scourges of which God gave the choice to Da­vid, to wit, Plague, War, and Famine. The question is cleared, 2 Sam. 24. But there are an infinite number of other scourges, general and particular, where oft-times we are constrained to chuse the one, that we may escape the other, or at least, we desire the one rather then the other; it concerneth us that our desire be lawful. We set aside that which dependeth not at all on our choice, or of which there can be no dispute but in vain, as, which is worse to be born deaf, or to be born blinde? Or which is more grievous, Leprosie, or perpetual Infamy? But for example, A man guilty of a capital offence who is permitted to chuse the kinde and fa­shion of his punishment; or a dangerous [Page 36]labour of a woman, where the life of the mother cannot be saved with that of the childe; and many other occur­rences or different afflictions that en­counter one another in the front, and reduce us to a necessity of chusing one: I conceive that it behoveth to chuse that in which God is lesse offended. The choice of David was judicious, preferring the Pestilence before the other two scourges, not onely for the reason by him expressed, but also be­cause in War and Famine there are committed more sins, and more enor­mous, then in a Pestilence. War or­dinarily is a torrent of villanies, and Famine produceth unnatural horrours, so far, as to induce a mother to eat her own childe. Now concerning other kindes of adversities in which it is re­quisite that we make a choice, we ought to look well upon every one with their circumstances, to take no­tice of that which affordeth the least occasion [...]o offend God.

Whence cometh it that among publike scourges, those that passe the hand of men, are more frequent, more univer­sal, and of longer durance, then those which come immediately from God?

For one Famine that you read in Hi­stories, you shall finde ten Wars: and Famine also it self, for the most part, cometh from a preceding War. Now War proceedeth immediately from man. Neither Famine, nor Pestilence, have ever been so universal, nor of so long continuance as divers Wars. The Providence of God would make men know, that they procure to themselves more mischief then heaven hath sent upon them.

It maketh for the glory of God, that there be more wicked then good men.

I am not here to shew why it is ne­cessary that there should be wicked men. God, who hath made nothing in [Page 38]vain, hath made all things for himself, even the wicked for the day of evil, Prov. 16.4. Neither am I to declare how it is necessary that God should suffer them: If his Justice should extirpate all the wicked, the greater part of the earth would become a desert; and in stead of being peopled with men, would be peopled with savage beasts; and this would redound to the prejudice of them that are good, who from thence would receive a thousand discommodi­ties. This was the reason why God would not destroy all at one blowe the inhabitants of Canaan, for fear left the Countrey should fall to be a wilder­nesse, and should be replenished with cruel beasts, which would have given more trouble to the Israelites, Exod. 23.

But how can it serve to the glory of God, that the number of the wicked should surpasse the nūber of the good? On the contrary, doth it not seem that the glory of God would be more illustrious, and of a greater extent, if the good were in greater number then [Page 39]the wicked? If it were so, the sub­sistence of humane society, and the policy by which it is maintained, would seem rather to depend upon the good­nesse of men, then upon the Provi­dence of God. But this is a wonder, that there being far more wicked men then good, neverthelesse there is a Providence which hindereth the wic­ked from doing all the evil that they might do. For whence cometh it, that being in a far greater number, they do not altogether ruine the good? Certainly, it is the work of God, who maintaineth a handful of men in the midst of a world of wicked.

The greatest good that God hath done to the world, is come to passe by means of the greatest crime that men could com­mit.

The greatest sin that men ever com­mitted, was to crucifie the Prince of glory. It was impossible to perpetrate one more enormous. Yet neverthe­lesse [Page 40]from this crime, managed by the wisdom of God, hath been brought forth the greatest good which men have received from heaven, to wit, the benefit of Redemption. This is won­derful, that God hath taken the advan­tage of the greatest sin that the world could commit, to cause to issue from it the greatest good that the world could receive.

Nature it self hath restrained the forces and ability of man, to the end to bound his desires, and the effects of his malice.

All the cares of man cannot adde one cubit to his stature. If this could be brought to passe, we should see pro­digious bodies, every one striving to attain to an unmeasured height. The same Providence which hath limited the stature of man, hath denied him that which it hath granted to the birds, to wit, the liberty of going to and fro in the air. He seeth those creatures [Page 41]passing swiftly thorow that element over his head, while he cannot lift himself above the earth. This is to the end that he may not extend his vi­olence so far, nor so easily, nor so ge­nerally: For howsoever violence tra­verseth the sea, and climbeth up to the top of the highest mountains, it would yet be more formidable, and more pernicious, if it had the wings of an Eagle; and innocence, which often findeth refuge in places inaccessi­ble, would have no more a sanctuary in the world.

Of the marvellous Providence of God permitting that the righteous die by the hand of the wicked.

The first righteous man of the Old Testament (to wit, Abel) and the first righteous of the New (to wit, John the Baptist) were both thrust out of the world by the hand of wicked men. God would that the first-fruits of the [Page 42]just in both Testaments, should fall down under the hand of wicked men.

Furthermore; the last man that is named in Scripture, is a just man; to wit, Antipas, Apol. 2. And this just man was put to death by the wicked. So that the first and the last of the righteous, lost their lives by the fury of those that were perverse. The Scri­pture beginneth the catalogue of good men in their blood, and endeth it in their blood. The beginning and the closure teach us, that the most bloody adversaries of the children of God, are not dispensed but by his order.

Among the resemblances between Moses and Christ (the one of which gave the Law, the other brought the Gospel) there is one notable likenesse: that is, that the birth of both of them was made memorable by the death of in­nocents. That of Moses, by the cruelty of the Egyptians, who drowned in the water the children of the Hebrews. That of Christ, by the barbarousnesse of Herod, who caused the cutting of [Page 43]the throats of the children of Beth­lehem.

Why in War the people of God have been often beaten by their enemies; and why a good cause hath been overthrown.

Run thorow the holy History: All the times that the people of God have been overcome in War, you shall finde that this hath come to passe through their own fault; to wit, either because they have undertaken a War without cause; as Josiah, who quarrelled with the King of Egypt: Or because they have concluded upon a War without enquiring at the mouth of God; as the Israelites against the Tribe of Benjamin: Or that they have fought against the expresse prohibition of God; as the Hebrews that set upon the Amalekites encamped on the mountain, Numb. 14. Or because they have abused a prece­dent Victory; as the children of Israel, who having purloined of the accursed thing of Jericho, were presently after [Page 44]beaten by the inhabitants of Ai: Or for having consulted with the enemy of God; as Saul, who had recourse to a Sorceresse, to learn what successe the battel should have: Or for having broken the faith given to the enemy; as Zedekiah, who brake the agreements past between him and Nebuchadnezzar: Or in sum, by putting themselves out of the protection of God; as the Isra­elites in the days of Eli the Priest; to whom the contempt of Religion cau­sed the losse of that lamentable Battel in which the Ark of God it self was taken, and carried in triumph by the Philistines.

In most of these examples, we may see that a good cause hath been van­quished; but with reason. The justice of the cause hath come to nothing, through the injustice of them that ma­naged it, or through the injustice of the proceedings.

Sometimes also, two parties that make War together, may both have a just cause in part, although one of [Page 45]them may have the lesse right of the two. The Wars which the Christians have moved against Mahomet, have had for their cause the honour of the Name of Christ. On the other side, Mahomet declareth that he hath taken arms to avenge the honour of God, defiled by the Idolatries of Christians. This cause, which is but too true in regard of many men, hath given him so many Victories over Christendom.

Why God never sent above one Angel, or two at most, when he intended to destroy men; and hath often sent many, when he intended to preserve one man.

Three Angels came to Abraham, to promise him the birth of Isaac; but there were but two which went to destroy Sodom. To protect one Elisha, an army of Angels appeared, in the likenesse of charets of fire; but to put to death one hundred fourscore and five thou­sand men in one night, in the camp of Sennacherib; to cause to die of the Pe­stilence [Page 46]seventy thousand in three days, by reason of the sin of David, who had numbred the people; to de­stroy all the first-born of Egypt in an hour, God employed not above one Angel. Whence cometh it, that to protect one man alone, God sendeth sometimes whole legions of Angels; and to destroy thousands of men, yea, whole Nations, he sendeth but one Angel? Surely the Angels were crea­ted for the preservation of men, not for their destruction. And although God useth them for the execution of his judgements, neverthelesse, to shew that this is as by accident, and beyond the scope of their creation, he never employeth above one or two when the businesse is to destroy man; where on the contrary he employeth many when it is to save. The Psalmist was not ignorant of this Divinity: For when he prayeth against his enemies, he desireth that the Angel of God (the Angel in the singular number) might persecute them, Psal. 35. But when he [Page 47]promiseth to the faithful the protecti­on of God, He shall give, saith he, his Angels charge over thee. We know that in another place he speaketh, in the singular, of the Angel that encampeth about them that fear him, and that often God is content to send onely one Angel to defend a great number of men: But withal he hath often used the service of many Angels to this effect; whereas to destroy man, he never would employ in any occasion, above onely one Angel, or two at the most.

If man had persevered in original justice, there had never been Miracles, but onely of one kinde.

Miracles have been wrought to con­vince the incredulity of man; and therefore they had not been at all ne­cessary, if man had not first become in­credulous. Besides, Miracles have been wrought to teach men that which all Nature together knew not how to teach them, to wit, the benefit of Re­demption, [Page 48]which presupposeth the fall of man.

Certainly, if man had remained in his first integrity, he had never seen the waters of the deluge, nor Lot's wife turned into a statue of Salt, nor any of all those wonders which have served to chastise man: Neither had he seen those miraculous healings, nor the dead rai­sed: for neither death nor diseases, which have furnished the subject of these Miracles, had had any place in the state of innocency.

The onely kinde of Miracle which God would have shewed unto man, if he had stil persisted in his integrity, had been, according to all probability, to transport him at the last from earth to heaven, without passing thorow death. And this is a notable point, that after the Creation, God wrought no Miracle till the translation of Enoch, who was carried up from earth to heaven. God began his Miracles with that kinde of Miracle which onely ought to have had place, if man had still continued righte­ous.

A consideration of the divers Names and Titles of our Saviour: And the dif­ferences that ought to be observed in expressing them.

VVHen we name him, sometimes we call him onely Jesus; sometimes we say, Jesus Christ; some­times we say onely Christ; sometimes we call him Our Lord; sometimes we joyn all these names together, Our Lord Jesus Christ; sometimes we say, The Son of God. Now it seemeth indiffe­rent by which of these Names we call him; and we pronounce the first that cometh in our mouth: But howsoe­ver all these names designe the same Person, neverthelesse every one of these doth not mark out to us all the qualities and relations which we con­sider [Page 50]in that person; rather, one signi­fieth him in one regard, and another hath to it self also a particular mean­ing: So that these Names ought not to be used confusedly, or without choice; but we are to pronounce that or those among them which have re­lation more to the subject of which we treat. If we speak of him who hath saved us, the name of Jesus is appro­priate to him. If the question be of the means by which he hath saved us, they are comprised under the name of Christ. If we mention his Commandment, we should say, This is the Ordinance of the Lord. If we consider him as au­thour of the communion which we have with his Father, there presenteth it self to us the title of the Son of God. There are also other subjects, to every one of which there may be referred one or more of these titles.

It will be said upon this, The Scri­pture it self doth not observe these di­stinctions, useth these names indiffe­rently, upon every occasion. Now I [Page 51]confesse that in so great a multitude of passages of the New Testament, in which these names are repeated, it is impossible to say why one is rather ex­pressed then the other. Yet there are some reasons: And then when all these names, or the greater part of them are found joyned together, it is to expresse the plenitude and perfecti­on of him to whom all these titles ap­pertain.

In the History of the Gospel, he is almost everywhere called Jesus, with­out other epithet or attribute; because this was the onely name which men gave him, while he conversed in the world: The man whom they call Jesus, said the man that was born blinde, Joh. 9.11. Sometimes, the Apostles them­selves call him Jesus of Nazareth: but this is when they speak to the Jews, who called him so. This language would not be so convenient at this day.

I passe by a question which might be moved, Why the Apostle ( Philip. 2.) [Page 52]saith that every knee shall bow at the name of Jesus: And why he doth not say at the name of Jesus Christ, nor at the name of the Lord Jesus. A reason might be given: But for the rest, We adore not the syllables, but him that is represented by that name. And the Name of Christ, or the Name of the Son of God, are no lesse venerable then then the Name of Jesus.

But I am to make an observation a­gainst the ordinary practice of Christi­ans, and of the greater part of Prea­chers themselves. When they pro­nounce the name of Christ alone, this is either by way of abbreviation, or else by way of custom, without think­ing whether it be to purpose to say onely Christ, or to say Jesus Christ, or Our Lord Jesus Christ. It is therefore to be noted, that when the Scriptures speak of his sufferings and his death, ordinarily they give him none other then the onely name of Christ. Christ is dead; Christ hath suffered; It was necessary that Christ should suffer; The suf­ferings [Page 53]of Christ, &c. This may be, for­asmuch as the name of Christ includeth that of Priest, which is the quality in which Christ offered himself to death. The Apostle ( Rom. 6.8, 11.) saith that we are dead with Christ, but living in Jesus Christ our Lord. I know that there may be opposed some excepti­ons, yet in every one of them there is a particular cause why one of those Names is rather used then another.

I will produce one example. There is no man that thinketh he speaketh a­misse, when he saith, The Supper of Christ, or, The Supper of Jesus Christ. And of a truth, this is not an heresie, but ne­verthelesse it is an impropriety: For if we will speak according to the Scri­pture, we should say, The Supper of the Lord, not The Supper of Jesus Christ. This is a particularity remarkable, that in the whole description of the Supper, exhibited by the Apostle (1 Cor. 11.) and in all the discourse which he ma­keth of this subject and the authour of it, he never giveth other name then [Page 54]that of The Lord. The Supper of the Lord; I have received of the Lord that which also I have delivered unto you; The Lord, in the right in the which he was betraid, took bread; You shew the Lords death; The cup of the Lord; The body and blood of the Lord; Not discer­ning the body of the Lord. I forbear to speak why in all this deduction the name of Christ is not once mentioned, and that of the Lord is continually ex­pressed. But this example teacheth us that we ought to use discretion even then when we pronounce the ti­tles of him to whom God hath given a name above every name.

Wherefore Jesus, who received the Sacra­ments as well of the one as the other Testament, had not that external An­ointing which was given to Prophets, Priests and Kings.

He received the Sacraments com­mon to the whole Church, to shew, among many other reasons, the com­munion which we have with him. And [Page 55]for other causes he would not have that material Unction which was par­ticular to certain persons: Not the Royal anointing, which was a mark of a temporal dominion; whereas the Kingdom of Christ is of another na­ture: Not the Priestly, that was for Aaron; for the Priesthood of Christ is not of that order, but according to the Order of Melchizedek: Not the Prophetical: for when one Prophet anointed any other to be a Prophet, by this action he declared him his succes­sour: So El [...]sha was anointed to suc­ceed Elijah. But our Soveraign Pro­phet, who preceded all the Prophets, succeeded none of them, and therefore ought not to receive their Unction.

Whence cometh it that divers discourses uttered by Jesus Christ, seem to be without method? And an admirable se­cret, which ought to be observed.

The History of the Gospel reciteth un­to us divers Sermons & other excellent [Page 56]discourses which Jesus Christ made when he conversed among men. Now we may observe that in the same dis­course Jesus Christ passeth oftentimes from one matter to another which is very far distant, and seemeth to be quite beside the subject. It seemeth to us to see pieces brought from seve­ral places, ill joyned, and without any dependance or tie one with another. Expositours labour hard to finde the contexture thereof: but their ordi­nary Logick which they bring, with all their Analyses, can never attain it.

I passe by, that Jesus Christ preach­ing had the perfection of Divinity. We have but the shreds of this Sci­ence, a little scantling of this great piece, and some few drops of that O­cean; but in Christ are inclosed all the treasures of wisdom. Now he had the entire body, and we have but a few parcels; so his style hath other rules and other measures then ours.

But behold the secret which we ought here to consider. Jesus Christ [Page 57]saw the thoughts and the hearts of those to whom he spake. If an Ora­tour had this advantage to see the thoughts of them that hear him, he would apply himself to them, rather then to the ordinary rules of his Rhe­torick, which knoweth not this me­thod. This desultory style which we see in the discourses of Jesus Christ, hath been often occasioned by the thoughts of his hearers: According as these were formed in them, he ad­dressed himself to them; and accor­ding as others thoughts were bred in them, he turned his discourse on that side. The ways of this method are transcendent, and appertain to none but him who can read in our hearts.

A conjecture of what our Lord wrote, when the Pharisees demanded his judgement touching the punishment of the adulteresse, Joh. 8.

Once onely we finde that he read, and once onely we finde that he wrote. [Page 58]That which he read, is recited Luke 4. but that which he wrote is not expres­sed. The holy History saith, that up­on the demand made to him by the Pharisees, stooping down, he wrote with his finger upon the ground, two several times. Some of our most emi­nent Divines think that they were not characters that bare any signification, but that they were lines onely or marks drawn without any other mean­ing or designe, but to divert the im­portunity of the Pharisees, and to make them know that they were un­worthy of any other answer. But to take it so, this action doth not seem sufficiently grave and serious, nor, which is more, sufficiently worthy of the wisdom of the Son of God. It is therefore more credible that this wri­ting was significative. Now though it be hard to finde what was contained in it, since the History hath passed it over in silence, neverthelesse many Expositours, ancient and modern, have brought their conjectures. Let [Page 95]it be permitted to me to expresse mine.

The Law ( Numb. 5.) ordained that a woman suspected of adultery should appear before the Priest; who, among divers other ceremonies, took of the dust which was on the floor of the Ta­bernacle, and mingled it with water in an earthen vessel: afterward, ha­ving put the woman to her oath, he wrote in a note those curses to which she had submitted; and finally blotted out the writing in the water, which he gave her to drink; having first decla­red that if she were innocent, that drink, which contained the blottings of this writing mingled with the dust, should not be hurtful to her.

Now between this Law and the pro­ceeding of our Saviour toward the Pharisees, there are found divers re­semblances. The businesse is concer­ning a woman, an adulteresse. The Pharisees alleadge the Law of Moses. Our Lord would that they should ex­amine themselves. He writeth in the [Page 60]dust on the floor of the Temple, where this action passed; as if he should say, You your selves, are you inno­cent? Could you drink this dust which beareth the writing of the oath of execration? Let him among you that is without sin, cast the first stone at her.

Why God sent for the forerunner of his Son, a Prophet rather then a King: And why there was no Christian King for the space of three hundred yeers af­ter the nativity of Jesus Christ.

God could have raised a King, in stead of a man clothed with Camels hair, to prepare the way before the Messiah: But it would have seemed that the foundations of the Kingdom of Christ, which is not of this world, had been laid through the strength of the arm of man. The Divine calling also hath appeared more evi­dently in the sending of a Prophet: for men can make a King, but [Page 61]none but God can make a Pro­phet.

For the same cause, the wisedom of God would that the Gospel should be spread thorowout the world, long time before any King or Emperour embraced the Christian Religion: for it is not easie to finde in History any Prince which made profession of it before Constantine the Great. Now the Gospel had been before preached for the space of two hundred and eighty yeers. To declare that it was not at all planted under the shadow of humane greatnesse.

An excellent gradation in the four E­vangelists describing the Genealogi [...] of Jesus Christ.

ALl the Evangelists exhibite unto us the Saviour, but every one of them in his particular method. Saint Mark describeth not at all the Genea­logie of Jesus Christ, but beginneth his History at his Baptism. Saint Mat­thew searched out his original from A­braham (chap. 1.) Saint Luke follow­eth it backward as far as Adam (chap. 3.) Saint John passeth further upward, e­ven to the eternal generation of this Word that was made flesh ( chap. 1.) So they lead us to Christ, mounting up four several steps in the which he is re­presented to us.

In the one, we see him onely among the men of his own time, then when he conversed with them.

In the second, he is seen in the tent of Abraham.

In the third, he is yet higher, to wit, in Adam.

And finally, having traversed all ages, thorow so many generations, we come to contemplate him in the beginning, in the bosome of the Fa­ther, in that Eternity in which he was with God.

Beyond this general harmony re­sulting from the agreement of all the Evangelists together, there is another particular which I shall by and by ob­serve.

Why the Scripture giveth the name of An­tichrist to him that denieth the Huma­nity of our Saviour, rather then to him that denieth his Divinity.

This is Antichrist, which denieth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh, saith Saint [Page 64] John in his first Epistle, chap. 4. This Heresie is marked as the most capital, and as the greatest opposition to Chri­stianity. To deny the Humanity of Jesus Christ, is to deny his death, and consequently his resurrection, and all the dispensation of salvation. The Humanity of Christ is more neer un­to us, and more perceptible by us, then his Divinity. So that it is an inexcusa­ble crime in man, not to acknowledge the Man Jesus Christ.

Why Jesus Christ, after his resurrection, called himself no more the Son of man, as before-times.

Jesus Christ, before his resurrection, is oftener called the Son of man, then the Son of God: But after he was risen, when he speaketh of himself, he is no more called the Son of Man. Surely, the resurrection hath not brought to nothing his Humanity: but this name of the Son of Man includeth the weaknesse and sufferings to which [Page 65]he had rendred himself subject as man. Now after being delivered out of this abasement, and being declared the Son of God by the resurrection from the dead, he hath changed his style, and is no more called the Son of Man, which was the name by which he called him­self ordinarily before his resurrection. After this, he spake divers times to his disciples, calling to their remembrance the necessity of his death, of which he had before advertised them: But he no more expressed the name of the Son of Man. When he was yet mortal, It behoveth (saith he) that the Son of man suffer: But being raised from the dead, Ought not Christ (saith he) to have suf­fered?

Why the most glorious miracles which our Lord wrought, were often preceded by some action which witnessed those weak­nesses to which his humane nature was made subject.

In the same time that our Lord went [Page 66]to display his divine power, by some extraordinary miracle, he often begin­neth with some act of humane weak­nesse. If he appease the tempest, it is after he hath been overcome with sleep. If he give hearing to the deaf, it is after having fetched a deep sigh. If he cure him that was born blinde, it is after having made clay of his spittle. If he cause the figtree to be dried up, the occasion of it is the hunger that pressed. If he raise Lazarus from death, it is after having groned and wept. Fi­nally, if he cause the earth to tremble, if he rend the rocks, if he open the se­pulchres, it is after having given up the ghost. In the most glorious demon­strations of his Deity, and even before he bringeth them forth, he would have us to see that he was truely Man.

Of an admirable harmony which is found between the three periods of the three fourteens numbred in the first chapter of Saint Matthew.

The Evangelist beginneth at those generations that descended from Abra­ham to Christ; and at first presenteth to our sight a long rank of Patriarchs and Kings, which enrich the frontis­pice of the New Testament, as so many speaking statues, so many precious stones set in the brestplate, or so many stars that went before the coming of the Sun of righteousnesse. All these generations are divided into three fourteens; every one of which endeth in some remarkable change: For we know that Saint Matthew reckoneth from Abraham to David fourteen ge­nerations; from David to the Capti­vity, fourteen generations; from the Captivity unto Christ, fourteen gene­rations. The first fourteen therefore ended in David, in whom began the [Page 68]Kingdom of Judah, the Tribe from whence our Lord sprang. The second ended at the Captivity of Babylon, which overthrew the Throne of Da­vid. The third and last ended in Jesus Christ himself, who reestablished that Kingdom, and concludeth the Genea­logies. So these three periods have three limits, which are

• 1. David.
• 2. The Captivity of Babylon.
• 3. Jesus Christ.

Now that which I have to note here, is, that the life of David, who endeth the first fourteen, was of seventy yeers. The Captivity of Babylon, in which was accomplished the second fourteen, was of seventy yeers. And the time cur­rent from the nativity of Christ, who boundeth the last fourteen, and all the Genealogies, to the ruine of Jerusalem, in which perished the registers and ca­talogues of the families of the Jews, was seventy yeers: For the most exact [Page 69]Chronologie placeth the destruction of Jerusalem presently after the seventieth yeer of Jesus Christ. So that the di­vine providence hath measured

• Seventy yeers for the life of Da­vid, from whom Christ was to descend.
• Seventy yeers for the Captivity of Babylon.
• Seventy yeers after the birth of Jesus Christ, for the verification of his genealogie, in the regi­sters of the Jews.

An admirable conformity; which sheweth among so many lights all of them celestial, that never other spirit then that of God, could have dictated the Scriptures.

Two notable preludiums of the birth of Jesus Christ; and the agreement of the one with the other.

Two women brought forth chil­dren [Page 70]beyond their age of childbearing, and beyond likelihood: The one, in the Old Testament, to wit, Sarah; the other in the New, to wit, Elizabeth: The one, the wife of him who first used Circumcision; the other, the mo­ther of him who first administred Ba­ptism, which succeeded Circumcision. God would that Isaac and John the Ba­ptist should be born of mothers who were past the yeers of having chil­dren: This was to prepare the souls of men to attend yet a greater mira­cle, to wit, a man born of a Virgin. The shadow then of this mystery pas­sed first by the Old Testament, in I­saac; afterward to the New, in the person of John the Baptist, whose birth was immediately followed by that of Jesus Christ.

God hath never published by miracles the birth of any person, except that of Je­sus Christ.

Some few (to wit, Ishmael, Isaac, [Page 71]Samson, John Baptist) have had this ho­nour that their birth hath been fore­told and promised by the mouth of Angels: but when they have been come into the world, none Angel hath published their nativity. This glory was reserved for the Saviour of the world, whose birth being come to passe, as it had also been promised by the Angels; so beyond that, it hath been published and solemnized by them, with applause and great expres­sions of joy, Luke 2.

This happie birth hath been also followed by another signe from hea­ven, by the apparition of that star which carried the news as far as the East, and served as a guide to the wise men. Never the nativity of any other hath been proclaimed or cele­brated by miracles. This also hath been particular to Jesus Christ.

Wherefore hath not the Scripture set down the day of the Nativity of Jesus Christ?

It is not mine aim here to report the divers opinions of them who have searched in what season of the yeer, in what month and in what day our Sa­viour was born. Some place his birth, according to the common opinion, at the Winter-Solstice; others in the Au­tumnal Equinoctial; others in that of the Spring; and all have nothing but conjectures, more ingenuous then con­cluding: For the History of the Go­spel, by its silence, hath left this point in question.

Now this is it which I will at this present consider, to wit, Why none of the Evangelists, nor other of the sacred Writers, have set down a day so remarkable; the day, I say, of the Nativity of our Saviour.

This is so much the more strange, be­cause the Scripture sheweth us the days of divers occurrences which are of lesse [Page 73]consideration. It marketh the month and the Day on which the Deluge be­gan: the Day on which the Ark rest­ed upon the mountains of Armenia; the Day on which the waters were dri­ed from the earth; the day on which Noah began to set foot again on the earth: afterward; the Day on which the Israelites went up out of Egypt; the Day of the deliverance of the Jews, in the Book of Esther; the Day on which the Temple was burned by the Babylonians. Wherefore hath it not also set down the day on which Je­sus Christ was born?

It might also be asked, why the holy History mentioneth the time of the yeer and the Day of the death of Christ, that of his resurrection, that of his ascension; and never mention­eth either the Day or the season of the yeer of his nativity.

To say that the Evangelists were ignorant of it, or that they had forgot­ten it, or that they were silent through inadvertency, or that they neglected [Page 74]it as being not at all considerable, this would be to run into a thousand absur­dities, easie to be confuted. There must therefore be other reasons of this si­lence, and something that is mysteri­ous. Now I vaunt not my self to have found out the depth; onely I will touch the superficies.

We are therefore to note as a Ma­xime, that the Scripture never setteth down the Birth-Day of any Person. It speaketh of the Birth of many, it rehearseth their genealogies, it reckon­eth their yeers, and other particulari­ties; but never speaketh on what Day they were born.

We finde that in speaking of some, it expresseth the Day of their death; as we see in the history of the ten sons of Haman, Esth. 9. but of whomsoever it speaketh, be they Pa­triarchs, or Kings, or private men, or good, or bad, it never expresseth the Day of their Nativity, though such a date may seem to import greatly the sacred Chronologie.

Now wherefore the Scripture never nameth the Day of the Birth of the children of Adam, no, nor one of them, there is without doubt some reason, though to us it be obscure. But what­soever that reason be, the Birth Day of Jesus Christ is clouded in the same silence. Wherefore? Surely, to the end that among other things which are common to him with the other chil­dren of Adam, he might also be com­prised among them in this point, not to have his Birth-Day expressed in the holy History. But what doth it con­cern us that this day is not expressed, more then that of other men? As much as it doth concern us that Jesus Christ hath been reckoned among sin­ners, even from his Birth. Neither doth it serve for an Objection, that he hath been put into their rank more e­vidently, when he was circumcised, and when he underwent that purification which the Law imposed upon the first-born: for this truth excludeth not others that second it, though they be [Page 76]not founded upon expresse words of Scripture. It is enough that they are implied. This is out of doubt, that the Scripture never said on what day a man was born. It is also out of doubt, that Jesus Christ is comprised in this universal rule. The question is, Wher­fore? If I have not found the true reason, I have at the least pointed out a principle upon which it may be searched.

Adde to this, that in stead of the Birth Day of Jesus Christ, the Scri­ptures expresse that of his death. That is, among divers other reasons because he died on the same day on which A­dam was created, to wit, the sixth day of the week. The creation of the first Adam, and the death of the second, met in the same day. The impurity of our birth, which we have from the first, had not been purged but by the death of the second.

Of the service which the Angels have done to the Son of God, from his manifestation in the flesh, until his Ascension.

Ten times they have served him in this space of time.

1. They carried the message of his miraculous conception to the Virgin.

2. They advertised Joseph, whom the ignorance of this mystery had held perplexed.

3. They published his birth unto the shepherds.

4. They gave order to carry him in­to Egypt, to avoid the fury of Herod.

5. They had care to cause him to be brought back into Judea, after the death of the tyrant.

6. They accompanied him and mi­nistred unto him, after his temptation in the wildernesse.

7. They comforted him in his ago­ny, in the garden.

8. They rolled back the stone from [Page 78]the door of the sepulchre wherein he had been enclosed.

9. They declared his resurrection.

10. They instructed his disciples, who looked up after him ascending in­to heaven, that one day he would re­turn.

Never did the Angels serve any person so often, nor in so great a num­ber of occurrences, nor in so high charges, nor through such diversity of means, as they served the Son of God. This also ought to be reckoned among the marks of the preeminence of our Lord.

Of the advantage of the New Testament above the Old, in regard of the num­ber of persons which have had the gift of Miracles.

IN all the extent of the Old Testa­ment, there are not above seven men to whom God gave the power of work­ing Miracles.

Moses and his brother Aaron, famous for the wonders wrought by them in Egypt, in the Red-sea and in the wilder­nesse.

Joshua, who stayed the Sun and Moon in their course.

Samuel, who changed the whole face of the air in an instant, affrighting Israel by [Page 80]thunders and miraculous rain, 1 Sam. 12.

A Prophet (mentioned 1 King. 13.) who rent, by his word alone, the Al­tar set up against the Ordinance of God, and scattered the ashes. The same Prophet also healed the hand of Jeroboam, which was dried up.

Elijah, who shut and opened heaven, caused fire to come down, raised from death the son of the widow, &c.

And lastly, Elesha, famous for di­vers great Miracles.

There have been none but these se­ven men, upon whom this power hath been conferred. The other Miracles which are recited in the Old Testa­ment, or which have gone before the coming of the Son of God, have been wrought without the intervention of men.

There may be, to speak this by the way, some allusion or reference of the seven Angels of the Revelation, work­ing upon the Sun and upon all the ele­ments, to these seven men which have [Page 81]heretofore exercised this miraculous power. But this matter concerneth not the present subject.

That which I have here to say, is this; That the New Testament hath been furnished with a greater number of persons endued with the power of Mi­raeles, then the Old was; yea, with a very far greater number. At one one­ly time, the Lord ordained seventy men, with power to heal the sick, to cleanse the lepers, to raise the dead, to cast out devils, to tread upon serpents and scorpions, and upon all the force of the enemy: And this, without rec­koning the twelve principal disciples, who were also provided of the same gift: and those which afterward had it, as Saint Paul and others. I account this point among the advantages of the New Testament, that in it the miracu­lous power of God hath raised so great a number of instruments, in compari­son of them which it employed for the Old Testament.

Wherefore till the coming of the Son of God, there have passed many ages with­out that any person hath had the gift of Miracles.

The last of all those which wrought Miracles before the coming of our Lord, was Elisha. Now from Elisha till that time when the Son of God began to manifest his glory by Miracles, there passed welnigh eight hundred yeers. In so long an interval of yeers, there was not found a person that had the gift of Miracles, although many had that of Prophecie.

Certainly, the wisdom of God would that this great length of time should serve to make them desire that which had not been seen after so many ages, to wit, Miracles wrought by the hand of man; as afterward, those that were spectatours glorified God, that had done this honour unto men in gi­ving them this power, Matth. 9.8. That it should dispose their spirits to the ex­pectation [Page 83]of the Messiah, who was to come with miraculous works. That it should serve to make them the bet­ter to weigh the importance of his Mi­racles, after so long a surcease of the gift of Miracles. And lastly, that which is the principal, that it should serve to distinguish him from other men.

To see how, behold this that ought to be considered. We say, and it is true, that the Miracles of our Lord have demonstrated that he is the Christ. This proof seemeth not suffi­cient: for Elijah, Joshua, Moses, and the others which we have mentioned, wrought Miracles also, and yet no man ever thought that any of them was the Christ. But this was because none of them came at the time which had been set down for the coming of the Messi­ah, but all preceded it very far. The Divine Providence did purposely in­terpose a long distance of ages between them and the time which was destined for the coming of Christ, to the end to [Page 84]shew that none of them could be the Christ. If then when the coming of Christ approached, some other had ap­peared with the gift of Miracles, he might have been taken for the Messiah himself, considering the concurrence of time: but this inconvenience hath been prevented. The following que­stion is referred also to this.

Why none of them from whom Christ is descended according to the flesh, hath had the gift of Miracles.

This is remarkable, that of so many ancestours of whom Christ is issued, there is not one that hath wrought a Miracle: Neither Enoch, nor Abraham, nor David, nor so great a number of other famous men, have been honored with this gift. And it is especially to be considered, that none of the Tribe of Judah wrought Miracles, till our Lord came.

This Tribe had been designed a­mong all others, to be that of which [Page 85]Christ ought to be born. It was im­portant then that none of this race should work any Miracle before our Lord, to the end that none other might be taken for the Messiah. Of all those which have wrought Miracles, there was not one of the Tribe of Judah. Not Moses nor Aaron, who were of the Tribe of Levi. Not Joshua, who was of Ephraim. Not Elijah nor the others, the Tribe of whom is either different or uncertain. Our Lord is the first of the lineage of Judah, that wrought Mi­racles. And before him, God would never grant that power to any person of that Tribe.

Why John the Baptist had not the gift of Miracles.

The birth of so great a man, who was more then a Prophet, was truely preceded by Miracles, but himself ne­ver wrought any Miracle. This is al­so, in part, for the same cause which I have already spoken, to the end that [Page 86]it might not be thought that he was the Christ, whereas he was none other then his forerunner. And indeed, already eyes were cast upon him as if he had been the Messiah. But there is also another reason which ought here to be considered.

The first that wrought Miracles un­der the Old Testament, was the same man that gave the Law, to wit, Moses. The first also that wrought Miracles in the New Testament, was the same that brought the Gospel, to wit, Jesus Christ. This prerogative appertained to him, to be the first which should seal the New Testament by Miracles, as Moses had been the first that sealed the Old. This could not be agreeable to John the Baptist.

Of the divers degrees or steps by which our Lord displayed his miraculous power toward the bodies of men.

The Son of God began his Miracles at the nourishments of the body of [Page 87]man, when he changed the water into wine. Afterward he manifested his power in healing the sick. And lastly, continuing still to do good unto the li­ving, he proceeded so far as to raise the dead.

Sometimes he hath brought forth one great Miracle, to be the forerunner of a greater Miracle. Having healed the servant of the Centurion, who was neer unto death, on the morrow he raised him who was perfectly dead, to wit, the young man of Naim, Luke 7. Having healed her who had been sick twelve yeers, the same day he raised her that had been dead, being of the age of twelve yeers, Mark 5.

It behoveth here to note the divers ages of sicknesses and infirmities of those which he healed. Some had been afflicted since twelve yeers; as the wo­man already spoken of. Others, since eighteen yeers; as the woman bowed together, Luke 13.11. Others, since eight and thirty yeers, Joh. 5.5. Others, from their infancy; as the Lunatick, [Page 88] Mark 9.21. Others, from their birth; as he that was born blinde, Joh. 9.1. So that the Son of God, be it in healing the bodies of men, or raising them from the dead, hath extended his power from their cradle to their grave.

Of the divers actions which Jesus Christ hath done in the Temple of Jerusalem.

He entered into the Temple divers times, in divers qualities, and for di­vers functions.

1. He entered as a private person, and a member of the Common-wealth of Israel; when he was presented to the Lord, fourty days after his nativity, Luke 2.22.

2. He did the act of a Disciple, at the age of twelve yeers, hearing the Do­ctors, and asking them questions.

3. He did the act of a Doctor, when he preached and taught.

4. He did the act of a Redeemer, when he pardoned the adulteresse.

5. He did the act of the Lord and [Page 89]Master of the Temple, when he cha­sed out the buyers and sellers that pro­faned it.

6. He performed also the act of a Soveraign, in the Miracles which he wrought. And this furnisheth us with the Consideration following.

Why no man ever wrought Miracle within the Temple of God, except the Son of God. An observation upon this sub­ject.

We are not of the opinion that this came to passe casually, or for want of occasion, or without cause worthy to be considered, that our Lord was the alone man that hath exercised the power of Miracles within the house of his Father: This is one of the marks of his preeminence, and of the jurisdiction which he had in that place. Many men have wrought Miracles in divers parts, but none of them wrought them within the compasse of the Tem­ple. It was promised ( Malach. 3.) that [Page 90]the Lord, which is the Messiah, should come into his Temple. Now Jesus Christ willing to shew that it was him­self that was to come, caused himself to be taken notice of within the Tem­ple it self, by the Miracles which there he produced; there, I say, where none other had that power.

It may be observed here, that there have been two persons that have been struck with miraculous plagues in the Temple; a King, and a Priest; to wit, Uzziah, and Zacharias the father of John the Baptist. The one became le­prous, and the other dumb; 2 Chron. 26. Luke 1. But never any sick or im­potent were miraculously healed in the Temple, till the comming of the Son of God, who there healed the blinde and the lame, Matth. 21.14.

Why Jesus Christ, when he was hungry, or thirsty, or weary with travel, never helped himself by his miraculous power, to give himself refreshment.

When others wanted drink, he turn­ed water into wine: But when him­self was thirsty, he desired water of the Samaritan woman. When others were hungry, he multiplied the loaves, and satisfied thousands of men: But when himself was pressed with hun­ger, and had addressed himself to the fig tree which had no fruit, he caused none to be brought forth, though he could have done it forthwith. So he endured the wearinesse of the way, ( Joh. 4.6.) although he might have caused himself to have been carried by Angels, or lifted up by the Spirit, as Philip afterward was, Acts 8.39, 40. In sum, he never used Miracles for his own refreshment.

As he came for others, so all his Mi­racles have been for others. And this [Page 92]is one part of his annihilation of him­self, that using his miraculous power for the refreshment of others, he never used it for his own.

Why the Son of God, after he was raised from the dead, ceased from healing the sick.

Our Lord being in the world, healed corporal maladies, so long as he him­self was burdened with our infirmities, that is to say, before his Resurrection. After that he was raised from death, he remained upon the earth fourty days, conversed with men, wrought divers Miracles, but healed not any that was sick. This is not because his power was impaired, since it was become more glorious; nor that he had lesse charity then afore-time; nor that there wanted those that were sick in Israel: But that he healed no more, was because he had appropriated that kinde of Miracles to the time of his humiliation. Wherefore the Scripture [Page 93]( Matth. 8.17.) rehearsing his curing of divers sick men, saith, that by such acts was verified that Prophecie that saith that he took our infirmities, and bare [...]ur sicknesses: For that place setteth them down as terms equivalent, as far as concerneth bodily infirmities, to have undergone them in his person, or to have healed them in others; for he never wrought these miraculous cures, but so long as himself was capable of infirmity.

A Consideration why the names of di­vers wicked men are set down in the history of the Passion of Christ.

SOmetimes the Scripture expresseth the name of a man who seemeth to be of little importance, and sometimes it suppresseth the name of another which should be more considerable. It tells us the name of the robber whom the Jews preferred before Jesus Christ, when Pilate gave them the choice to release to them one of the two: Yet it nameth not the thief which was converted, although that it should seem that his name ought ra­ther to be mentioned then that of the other. Now setting aside the reasons of this silence, we will retain this, that when the Scripture expresseth the [Page 96]name of a wicked man, this is not al­ways onely to set down the circum­stances of the History, but often for other causes.

Among all the wicked men which are comprised in the History of the Passion, there are seven marked by their names: Judas, Annas and Caia­phas, Malchus, Herod, Barabbas, and Pon­tius Pilate. Now it seemeth that the Scripture, which reciteth how all sorts of men contributed to the death of Christ, would also name one of every condition: One of the houshold of Christ; One High Priest, and another inferiour; One servant; One King; One Judge; yea, one thief. This doth not exclude the particular reasons for which every one of these men a­foresaid hath his name in this History. It importeth that Malchus, who was none other then a servant, was named as well as Caiaphas; and Barabbas, as well as Pilate, though the one be more considerable then the other.

The name of the Romane Empire hath in­tervened both in the birth and death of Christ.

The Edict of Cesar, who caused the inrolment mentioned Luke 2, ser­ved to prepare the place where Christ ought to be born: and the authority of Cesar served to procure the death which Christ ought to die. It was re­quisite that all the mysteries of the Redemption should be fulfilled in that time in which this great Monarchy commanded in Judea; yea, it was re­quisite that it should be one of the in­struments, even in acts quite contrary. It lodged Christ coming into the world, and afterward caused him to go out of the world. It provided a Cradle for his Birth, and afterward the Crosse for his Death.

Four glorious occurrences, distant many ages one from the other, and coming to passe on the like day.

THe calling of Abraham, when God drew him from Ur of the Calde­ans: The going of the Israelites out of Egypt, after having kept the Passeover: The Decree of the restauration of Je­rusalem, mentioned by the Angel to Da­niel, chap. 9.25. And finally, the death of Christ, are four points of an high consideration, and admirable in their correspondencies.

Now although they are separated the one from the other, by divers so long distances in regard of yeers, yet they all meet together in the same day. The History teacheth us that the Isra­elites [Page 99]went out of Egypt within that proper day and the same night in which came to be expired the four hundred and thirty yeers which had past after the calling of Abraham. That calling then came to passe on the same day, Exod. 12. The day also of the death of Christ, which is that of the Passeover, doth concur with the other: and the same day, according to the best computation, ended the seventy weeks of Daniel; whence it followeth that they began on the same day, the day on which went forth the Decree to rebuild the holy City.

This wonderful concurrence presen­teth to our eyes Jesus Christ dying on the same day on which Abraham depar­ted out of Caldea, that Israel went out of Egypt, and that the Decree was pro­nounced to raise again the walls of Je­rusalem. Thus the death of Christ ex­tendeth it self as far as those ages that have past long before it, and his Day is found also within the fairest days of the Patriarchs.

An advertisement touching the Name of Altar improperly ascribed to the Crosse.

I repeat now what I have said in an­other Treatise. There is nothing more ordinary in this subject, then to hear named The Alter of the Crosse; un­der the pretext that Jesus Christ was offered on the Crosse. But it followeth not that the Crosse had the place or quality of an Altar in this Oblation. Neither doth the Scripture ever call it so, although it speaketh so often of the Crosse and of the Sacrifice of Christ.

Let it not displease so many learned men who have authorized this vulgar phrase, That Christ was offered on the Altar of the Crosse. The Crosse was not the Altar of this incomparable Sacri­fice. The name of Altar is of greater importance then many men consider. This is an irrefragable Maxime, That the Altar is greater then the Offering [Page 101]in as much as it is the Altar which san­ctifieth the Offering, Matth. 23.19. Whence would follow, that which none should dare to think, that the Crosse should be more excellent then the Body of Jesus Christ, yea, that it had sanctified it.

All that can be said, when the name of Altar is given to the Crosse, is this, that it is not understood so in effect, but onely by way of similitude or allusion. But such a similitude transferreth to the Crosse a title which appertaineth to none but Christ; for on the Crosse himself was the Altar, the Sacrifice, and the Priest altogether. Under the Law, these were different things, be­cause one of these figures alone could not represent Christ in all these three qualities; but in him they are found united, and no creature hath had part in this honour. Why then should we communicate it to the wood of the Crosse? Either this phrase hath help­ed toward the adoration of the Crosse; or it hath proceeded from that Super­stition; [Page 102]or howsoever it be, it hath been unwisely introduced, without ta­king heed to the consequences which it draweth after it.

Why the Scripture speaketh of what matter the Crosse was made, yet expresseth not the form of it.

It concerneth us to know that it was of wood. This particularity should seem little considerable, if the Apo­stle had not opened the mystery, shew­ing that Christ hath delivered us from the curse, insomuch as he was hanged on the tree; because this kinde of death was cursed by the Law, Deut. 20.23. Gal. 3.13. But for the structure of it, of how many pieces it was composed, how they were placed, and in sum, what fi­gure it had, this is that which the Scri­pture passeth under silence, as not ne­cessary. The form which is common­ly given to the Crosse, is contradicted by the learned, which represent it quite another.

We shall observe from hence, that supposing we had the true figure of the Crosse, and that it were an object of adoration, as the Church of Rome teacheth, this honour would not ap­pertain to any but Crosses of wood; for Jesus Christ was not crucified on a Crosse of stone, or silver. Neverthe­lesse they make Crosses of all things; but this is to falsifie that of Christ, un­der pretext to represent it.

None hath wrought Miracles at his death, except the Son of God.

This is remarkable against the Jews. Divers great servants of God have wrought Miracles in their life, but never in their death. Was there ever man at whose death appeared such wonders as at the death of Christ? Whence cometh it that neither Moses, nor Joshua, nor Samuel, nor Prophet, nor King, nor Patriarch, hath wrought any Miracle dying? And whence cometh it that this crucified having given up [Page 104]the Ghost, rendeth the Veil of the Temple, darkeneth the Sun, cleaveth the Rocks, shaketh the Earth, and opened the Sepulchres? The exploit of Samson dying, howsoever prodigi­ous, yet it was not miraculous, to speak properly; nor doth it approach any thing neer to those great wonders which our Lord wrought in his death. Wherefore is Jesus Christ the onely man among all men, whose death hath been honoured with visible miracles, if not to distinguish him from all other men, by a mark so illustrious? So, as I have observed before, as well the Birth as the death of Christ have been signa­lized by miracles; and never any man whatsoever hath had the like honour.

Three signes from heaven, exhibited in three several passages, by the which Je­sus Christ hath been declared publikely to be the Messiah.

In the course of the life of Jesus Christ, in the days of his humiliation, [Page 105]we consider his Nativity, his Baptism, and his Death. His Nativity, in which he began to appear in the world. His Baptism, by which he entered into the functions of his Office. And his Death, by which he finished the work of the Redemption.

Every one of these mystries was im­mediately followed and overtaken by a signe from Heaven, and that way shewed unto the world.

His Birth, by the Star which carried the news as far as the East, preceded by the acclamation of Angels publish­ing this happie Nativity.

His Baptism, by the opening of the Heavens, and the descent of the holy Ghost in the shape of a dove, accom­panied by the voice of God.

His Death, by the miraculous dark­ning of the Sun, which filled all the earth with darknesse.

When the Jews demanded that Je­sus Christ should authorize his calling by some signe from Heaven, they should have learned that which passed [Page 106]at his Birth and his Baptism; and af­terward, they ought to have consider­ed that which happened at his death. They had then seen his calling attested by three signes from Heaven.

Why the High Priest, who represented Je­sus Christ, never came neer to the dead; and yet Jesus Christ did the contrary.

The Law forbade the High Priest to touch a dead corps, yea to enter in­to any house in which there was one deceased, yea to shew any signe of grief, were it for his own father or mother, Levit. 21.10, 11. Whence it appeareth, that if he found himself in any place where any person was at the point of death, it behoved him to de­part from thence immediately; his presence being incompatible with that of a dead body.

But on the contrary, Jesus Christ entered into the house where lay the dead body of the daughter of Jairus: Himself took her by the hand: He [Page 107]touched the Coffin of the young man of Naim, that was carrying to the grave: He shed tears over Lazarus al­ready putrified. These particuiars are more important then they seem to be.

Certainly, the defiling which the Law findeth in dead bodies, might bear a reflexion upon the Priest, be­cause he was not capable of removing the corruption of death. But he which is able to give life unto the dead, is above this Law, and the reach of this infection. Here is seen a notable dif­ference: The Mosaical Priesthood a­bandoneth the dead, and leaveth them in their uncle [...]nnesse, because it can­not remedy it: But the true and eter­nal Priest, because he raiseth the dead, hath conversed with them, and his touch hath restored their life. He com­eth to search us, yea, within our graves, yea, he guardeth our bones.

Why the fear of death was more excusable in the Saints of the Old Testament, then it is now: And why we ought not to imitate them in all that which have spoken concerning this subject.

We should finde it strange that the apprehension of a natural death should make a Christian to speak so as Heze­kiah spake, when he believed he should die, Isai. 38; or as David, Psal. 6. It is a matter of astonishment that these great men have been so exceeding fearful of their departure out of this world. Here I passe by the particular causes from whence proceeded this weaknesse. But in general, before that Jesus Christ died, death was more dreadful then it hath been since; for as yet death was not swallowed up in Victory; and the faithful of the Old Testament had not the example of Je­sus Christ dead, as we have. The fear of death therefore was more just in them, then it can be in us: From [Page 109]whence it followeth, that it is not still permitted to us to speak as they did when we are menaced with death. It would be very hard to approve that a Christian should complain of this, that he should no more behold God in the land of the living, and that he is de­prived of the conversation of this world; or to alleadge, that he might not die, that the dead praise not God. These complaints and the like discour­ses which the Fathers of the Old Te­stament have uttered upon this sub­ject, have no more place since that Christ died and rose again; as I shall speak more particularly upon the Ar­ticle of the Resurrection.

An observation upon the words of the Apostle, Rom. 10.6, 7. forbidding to ask who shall ascend into heaven, or who shall descend into the abysse?

AMong so many men signalized by extraordinary events, there are two remarkable; one of which ascen­ded into heaven, and descended; the other descended into the deep, and re­ascended. The first is Elijah, who was carried up into heaven, and afterward came back to the earth, to accompany the Son of God in his Transfiguration. The other is Jonah, who went into the bottom of the gulfs, and returned li­ving. But the one and the other were but a shadow of Christ, to whom all these passages and returns agree more [Page 111]particularly: For not onely he de­scended into the Abysse and returned, but he is also ascended into heaven yet once more to come down.

Now I go not about to examine in what sense he said, even before his Ascension, that already he had ascend­ed into heaven, and already had de­scended from heaven, Joh. 3.13. But concerning his descent into the deep, the Apostle explaineth it openly, when he opposeth those two one to the o­ther, To descend into the deep, and To be brought back from the de [...]d. For from thence followeth, that to be brought back from the dead, is to reascend from the Abysse. And this also pre­supposeth, that to descend into the Abysse, is none other thing then to be reduced to the estate of the dead. As for the name of the Abysse, it is known that Jesus Christ calleth his Sepulchre the heart of the earth, comparing it to the place where Jonah had been in the Abysse, Matth. 12.40. From hence it cometh, that many understand by [Page 112]the descent of Christ into hell, that after his burial he was yet farther hum­bled so far as to sojourn in the estate of the dead, that is to say, within his Sepulcher, from whence he was raised by his Resurrection.

Why Christ being on the Crosse, pronounced the first words of the 22 Psalm.

These words expresse the complaint which he made of being forsaken of God. And many Orthodox men take that extreme humiliation of Christ for his descent into hell. Now why he did use the words of this Psalm, a rea­son is given. There is not a passage in all the Old Testament which better representeth the estate of Christ upon the Crosse. There is seen the parting of his garments, the casting of lots for his coat, his hands and feet pierced, his enemies wagging the head, and vomit­out their mockeries. He therefore u­sed this Psalm, as having been dictated for him.

But to this reason, which is notori­ous to every one, I will adde another, which I ground upon an hypothesis maintained by some interpreters. The first action, say they, that the Priests and the Levites daily did in the Tem­ple, into which they entered at break of day, was to sing this two and twen­tieth Psalm; the which, upon this occasi­on, beareth for the title, A Psalm of the dawning of the day, and beginneth, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? I observe from hence, that the first words with which the Priests began the first hour and the first act of their Functions, are the same which Christ uttered in the last hour and the last act of the Redemption: For having been already three hours upon the Crosse, upon the point of rendering up his spi­rit into the hands of his Father, and of declaring that all was finished, he cried out, My God, my God, why hast thou for­saken me? He ended where the Priests began, to shew that all the ancient Priesthood, and all the service of the [Page 114]Temple, from their beginning, then expired and finished in him, who is the end and closure of the Law.

Why the Son of God deserred so long time to come and expiate the sins of the world.

THis question, which the ignorant will blame of rashnesse, is suggest­ed unto us by the Scripture it self, which hath set down the solution of it. It is not enough to say, according to the fashion of the ignorant, that Je­sus Christ came not sooner, because God would not have it so. We are to know why he would it not, since him­self hath shewed us the causes, in the which are seen the rays of his wonder­ful wisdom.

About four thousand yeers passed after the fall of Adam, before the Son of God came: Sin multiplied with the multiplication of mankinde: Death destroyed one generation after ano­ther: All ages groaned for the Deli­verer; but he appeared not till after so long a time.

Now setting aside the marvellous Oeconomy by which God measured and divided the times which preceded the coming of Christ, in which is seen an infinity of steps and proportions, as so many stars which marched before the Sun; we will onely say, That it was important for the glory of God, and to render so much the more glori­ous the benefit of Redemption, that sin and death should reign a long time, and devour a long rank of generati­ons, before the Saviour should shew himself: For that long durance of sin and death, extending it self thorow so many ages, and infolding all the suc­cessions of people born the one after the other, hath caused to be seen how [Page 116]great was the misery of mankinde, and the necessity of the remedy; and how great is the vertue of Christ who hath healed an evil so universal, and so in­veterate, Rom. 5.14.

That for these ends, and to shew the abundance of Grace, God permitted that sin should abound; and that it might abound, the Law intervened, Rom. 5.20. It behoved therefore first that there should passe a long time be­fore the Law should begin her raign, and a long time before she should yeeld place unto Christ.

That the sin of Adam lost those that came after him; but the death of Christ hath saved both them that went before and came after it. As there­fore the first Adam hath caused to die those which were born many ages after him; so the second Adam hath quick­ned them which were dead many ages before him. And this hath been one of the causes of the retarding of his coming, to wit, that he would shew his power working backward to the fore­going ages.

And finally, That it was conveni­ent, before Christ died, to make it known to the world that the expia­tion of sins could not be wrought any other way. To this effect, God pro­posed first the blood of beasts in Sacri­fices; afterward, the blood of man in Circumcision; afterward, an infinite number of washings, with all the works of the Law; as if he would that men should assay all the means which could be imagined for the expi­ation of sins. But this was to the end that they should acknowledge their impotency, and should cast their eyes upon the future Sacrifice of Christ. Now it was requisite that a good part of the age of the world should passe in the studie of these rudiments, before God should send his Son, Gal. 4.1, &c.

An admirable concurrence of the time of Redemption with the times of the most famous Ceremonies of the Law. An observation upon this subject.

It concerneth us that we know the Yeer, the Season, the Days, yea the Hours, in the which Christ perfected the work of the Redemption. The Law hath marked certain Times as no­table among all others. Among Yeers, that of Jubilee, which returned from fifty to fifty yeers, in the which servants were set at liberty, and lands alienated returned to their first owners. Among the annual Feasts, that of the Passeo­ver, which was the first and principal of all the solemnities of the yeer. A­mong the Days, the Sabbath, of which the preeminencies are sufficiently no­torious. Among the Hours of the day, that between the two vespers, which we reckon the third after noon; in which every day was offered the e­vening Sacrifice, which was the con­clusion [Page 119]of all daily Ceremonies, Exod. 29.39. and in which also was slain the Paschal Lamb, when his yeer-day was come, Exod. 12.6.

Now the Redemption met in all these times; in the Yeer of Jubilee, in the Passeover, in the Hour of the E­vening Sacrifice, and in the Sabbath. In the Yeer of Jubilee, according to the most exact Chronologie, which rec­koning every fiftieth yeer after the di­vision of the Land of promise to the yeer in which Christ died, findeth that he suffered in the yeer of Jubilee: in the Passeover, as it is evident by the History of the Passion: in the Hour of the Evening Sacrifice, which the Jews called the ninth hour, in the which Je­sus Christ gave up the Ghost: And finally, in the Sabbath, our Saviour all that day resting in the Sepulchre. I know that many, long time agone, have considered all these particulari­ties, but in parcels, every one separate­ly. That which I here observe, is the general concurrence of all the times [Page 120]the most famous in the Law, with the time of the Redemption, which com­prised and determined all.

To all this I will adde this Observa­tion. The yeer of Jubilee began the tenth day after the Equinoctial of Se­ptember, Levit. 15.9. and Jesus Christ died a few days after the Equinoctial of the Spring following: Whence it ap­peareth that he died in the midst of the yeer of Jubilee, between the six first months and the six last: But the last six months which his death anticipated, have been disjoyned from the prece­dent, as appertaining no more to the yeer of Jubilee, which hath been cut asunder in the middle, that it might be rendered wholly dead.

A mysterious reason of the name which the Apostle giveth to the Sacrifice of Christ, calling it A Sacrifice of a sweet smelling savour, Ephes. 5.2.

Many read these terms of the Apo­stle, without knowing the importance, [Page 121]nor seeing at what they aim. The common Expositours will be conten­ted to tell us, that the Sacrifice of Christ is of a good smell, that is to say, pleasing to God. We know that this is true: but to know it well, we ought to learn from whence the Apostle fetched this phrase, and what it is at which he looketh back.

It behoveth therefore to observe that there were two kindes of Oblati­ons under the Law. One sort was ac­companied with a perfume of Incense which was burned with them; and for this cause they are called Offerings of a sweet savour, Levit. 2.2.9. The others, howsoever approved by the Law, bare not the name of Oblations of a sweet sa­vour, because they were without per­fume, Levit. 2.12. And particularly it is to be noted, that it was forbidden to burn any perfume upon the Oblations which were presented for sins, Levit. 5.11. in which the Law-giver gave to understand, that the memory of sin, yea the Sacrifices which mentioned [Page 122]them, were not of a sweet savour, Numb 5.15.

Upon this, we are to consider why the Law declared that that which was offered for sins, could not be of a sweet savour, seeing that Christ was offered for sins, and yet his Oblation was of a sweet savour to God his Father. The reason is, that the Legal Oblations re­moved not at all the infection of the sin which they represented, rather themselves remained burdened with it: But Christ bearing our sins upon him, vanquished and carried away this cor­ruption. This point furnisheth us with an invincible argument against the Jews. By the own sentence of the Law, all the Expiatory Offerings which it prescribed, failed of a sweet favour, and could not content the ju­stice of God. From whence it follow­eth (otherwise we are for ever mise­rable) that there is another kinde of Offering, another Sacrifice of Expiati­on, quite other then those of the Law, which abolisheth the stench of our [Page 123]crimes. And this quality cannot ap­pertain but to the body of Christ, Isai. 53 5, 6.

Nine examples of the Resurrection of the dead, which have gone before or followed the Resurrection of Christ. An Harmony between those that were raised under the Old Testament, and those that were raised by the Son of God, while himself was yet mortal.

THe Wisdom of God hath shewed the Resurrection of the dead in divers examples, which it hath distri­buted with order and proportion.

• Three before the coming of Je­sus Christ,
• Three by Jesus Christ himself be­fore his death, And,
• [Page 124]Three after the Resurrection of Jesus Christ.

Before the coming of Christ, God raised the son of the widow of Sareph­ta, the son of the Shunamite, and one dead man that had been cast into the Sepulchre of Elisha, 1 King. 17. 2 King. 4 and 13.

Jesus Christ, before his death, raised the son of the widow of Naim, the daughter of Jairus, and Lazarus, Luke 7.15. Matth. 9. Joh. 11.

After the Resurrection of Christ, God hath first caused to be seen that of many Saints which were raised out of the dust, Matth. 27.52, 53. Afterward, that of Tabitha, Acts 9.40. And for the third example, that of the young man Eutychus, Act. 20.9, 10, 11, 12.

There are notable resemblances be­tween the three that were raised under the Old Testament, and the three which Jesus Christ raised before his death. The first raised from the dead in the Old Testament, was the onely [Page 125]son of a widow; and the first raised [...]n the New Testament, was the onely son of a widow. The one in Sarephta, the other in Naim. In both the Testa­ments, God began the Resurrection of the dead by the demonstration of his Mercy, as well as that of his Power. Moreover, the last of the three raised before the coming of Christ, was al­ready entered into the grave, where he touched the bones of the Prophet Eli­sha; and the last of the three raised by Christ, to wit, Lazarus, had already stayed four days within the Sepulchre.

Why Christ rose not again the day after his death; but suffered the whole Sabbath day to passe over, before he returned to life.

I passe by the ordinary reasons which are brought concerning this, and will onely observe a Maxime which I finde in this matter, to wit, That never any dead man was raised again on the Sabbath day. The Son of God hath healed [Page 126]many sick on the Sabbath day, but ye read not that on that day he raised any dead. And in sum, none of all those which were returned to life, as well under the one as the other Testament, and of whom we have considered the catalogue and the order according to which they are ranked, hath been rai­sed on the Sabbath day. I shall verifie this, when I shall come to expound the fourth Commandment of the Deca­logue. For the present question, we may say that Jesus Christ, who is the Head of the Resurrection, would shew the communion which is between him and others that are raised, in whom we have a preludium of the general Re­surrection. And forasmuch as none of them recovered life on the Sabbath day, he also, not to seem to disjoyn himself from them, would not that his Resurrection should fall on that day. This excludeth not the other reasons of the time of his stay among the dead.

A comparison of the time which God em­ployed in the Creation, with that which he employed in the Redemption: And of the days of the one and the other.

The time of the Creation was six Days; that of the Redemption was but of three Days, which is the lesse by one half. But the Wisdom of God hath divided the time of the Creation in two equal parts, each of three days; the first three being distinguished from the three following, by a most evident mark.

The first three days of the world, with their nights, had neither Sun, nor Moon, nor Stars, but preceded the be­ing of all these lights; in which they have been different from all other days that since have come. As therefore the Creation hath had three days ex­traordinary, so the Redemption in the which the world hath been as created anew, hath had these three marvellous days in the which Christ continued [Page 128]among the dead; It is to be observed, that himself speaking of the three days of his stay within the bowels of the earth ( Matth. 12.) which ought not to be understood of three entire days, had regard to the history of the Creation, which reckoneth the Evening and the Morning for a Day, a part for the whole, Gen. 1.5, 8.

The first and neerest cause of the three days detaining of Jonah in the whales belly.

The intention of God indeed was to present unto men in Jonah a type of the Resurrection of Christ, as every one knoweth. But there was first ano­ther reason for which the Prophet was not delivered before the third day.

The chastisement of the sinner of­tentimes answereth to the fault, even to circumstances. This happened to Jonah. His History telleth us that Ni­neveh was a City of three days journey, chap. 3.3. For having refused to take this walk of three days in Nineveh, he [Page 129]was condemned to keep prison three days, within the whale. The three days which he would not passe over in a great City among men, it was necessary for him to passe in the intrails of a fish, out of the sight of men and sun. From this historical consideration, we come to that of this great mystery which is enclosed in the detention and deliver­ance of Jonah.

The Resurrection of Christ figured in He­zekiah, by a double resemblance.

It is sufficiently known that this Re­surrection, as touching the circum­stance of the Third Day, hath been prefigured in Isaac, in Jonah, in Hezeki­ah: A Patriarch, a Prophet, a King, have been the types. Isaac destined to be offred an whole-burnt-offering, and remaining as dead in the brest of his father, is as returned to life on the third day, Gen. 22. Heb. 11.19. And this, for the more ample correspondence, happened very neer the same place [Page 130]where Christ afterward was buried, and where he rose from the dead. Jonah issuing from the depth of the sea, gi­veth the term of fourty days to the Ninevites: And this figure which marketh out the Resurrection of Christ on the third day, extendeth al­so all along the fourty days which Christ gave unto the world after his Resurrection, before he left the earth. The healing also of Hezekiah is consi­dered as a type. He was held in the rank of the dead, and his bed was to him a grave. He was raised up mira­culously on the Third Day, as it were surviving himself, 2 Kings 20.5.

But that which I observe concerning this last, and which I adde to the ob­servations of those which have gone before me, is another correspondence which is found between the wonders that befell in this subject; the one in the sicknesse of Hezekiah, and the other in the death of Christ. In both these there was a Miracle in the Sun: For the Eclipse of this Luminary, which [Page 131]happened at the death of Christ, was supernatural, as well as the going back in the sicknesse of Hezekiah. So that this type meeteth with Christ dead and raised from the dead by a double re­semblance. But the shadow which re­turned ten degrees backward, to fore­shew the return of Hezekiah to the course of his life, was not so miracu­lous as the return of Christ from a­mong the dead, verified by ten Appa­titions, by which, as by so many de­grees, he shewed himself living again upon the earth, before he ascended in­to heaven.

Why none ever was raised again the third day after his death, but onely Christ.

Of all those whom God hath caused to return into the world after they were dead, there is not one whom the Scripture saith to have been raised on the Third Day. If there had been any one, this circumstance had not been omitted in History. All have [Page 132]been raised either before or after the Third Day after their decease, but none on that day. The son of the wi­dow of Sarephta, the daughter of Jai­rus, Eutychus, were certainly raised a­gain the very day of their death. The son of the Shunamite, he of Naim, Tabi­tha, and the man which was raised from death in the Sepulchre of Elisha, most probably had not yet reached to their Third Day among the dead, when they returned to life: As on the contrary, many others have been raised after their third day, to wit, Lazarus, and the Saints that rose from the dust, when Christ rose again.

This circumstance of the Third Day for the Resurrection, hath been appro­priated to Christ, and marked out for him in the Calender of the Prophets, to the end that among other signes which distinguish him from all others that were raised, he might be known also by this, as particular to him, to wit, that his Resurrection befell on the Third Day, according to the Scriptures.

When Lazarus was dead, our Lord let passe the Third Day, before he raised him, and stayed till the Fourth, Joh. 11.39. Among divers reasons of this delay, I reckon this. The Son of God would not raise Lazarus the same day of his decease, nor before he en­tered into the Sepulchre, because he had already raised two dead which had not as yet been put into the earth, to wit, the young man of Naim, and the daughter of Jairus which was deceased but a few hours before. Now his in­tention was to extend his power yet farther, to wit, as far as within the grave; as he did, when from thence he fetched Lazarus. But this dead man had not his Resurrection on the Third Day, our Lord having deferred if till the Fourth, and hindering the concurrence of it with his own, in regard of this circum­stance.

Three miraculous Sepulchres in the holy History.

The Scripture mentioneth three fa­mous Sepulchres, in the which God hath given life to the dead, to wit,

That of Elisha, whose corps served to raise another dead, though himself returned not to life.

That of Lazarus, which was raised from the dead, but not by himself.

That of Christ, who rose himself, and at the same time raised many o­thers, whose graves he had opened at his own death, Matth. 27.52, 53.

The two first were preparatories to the wonders of the third. The Son of God raised others, before he raised himself; and again, in coming out of the sepulchre, he carried his power in­to the graves of others, who were rai­sed after him.

Four men that raised the dead, before and after the coming of Christ.

The gift of Miracles was conferred upon divers, who notwithstanding re­ceived not the power to restore life to the dead; this kinde of Miracle being reserved to a small number of them. The Scripture nameth but four who exercised this power; two under the Old Testament, and two in the New. The two first are Elijah and his succes­sour Elisha: The one raised the son of the widow of Sarephta, the other the son of the Shunamite. The two other are Saint Peter and Saint Paul: The one raised Dorcas; the other, Eutychus. So God raised two instruments of the Resurrection, before the coming of his Son, and after he was gone out of the world. Christ appeared between the two first and the two last, as the Sun among the Planets, spreading his quickning power over the dead of the one and the other Testament.

Christ hath verified his Resurrection by all the proofs which could be given.

BEing come back from the dead, he hath made himself known to be li­ving, Not to one person alone, but to many, men and women, yea, to above five hundred together: Not at one onely time, but at many and divers times: Not for a little time, but for the space of fourty days: Not in one onely place, but in many and divers, in the city, in the fields, within the houses, and upon the mountains: Not afar off, but in the same chamber, in a close [Page 137]place: Not by one means, but by an infinite number of testimonies. By the Hearing, he causeth his voice to be known: By Sight, his lineaments and stature: By the Touch, the wounds of his hands, his feet, and his side: By his Actions, going, coming, and eating with his disciples, he shewed that he was truely alive: And beside all this, by all the Scriptures, beginning at Mo­ses, and going thorow all the Prophets, he proved the necessity and verity of his Resurrection.

Why God never raised any person of note, to converse among men, except the Messiah.

Of all the dead which have returned into the world to sojourn there some space of time, and frequent the com­pany of men, there hath not been, ex­cept our Lord, any Prophet, nor any person otherwise famous. Those whom God raised, either were chil­dren, (as he of Sarephta, and the son of the Shunamite) or young people, (as he of Naim, the daughter of Jairus, [Page 138]and Eutychus) or without any mark of eminent quality in the Church (as he that came living out of the grave of Elisha, Lazarus, and Tabitha.) For as for the Saints which appeared on the day of the Resurrection of Christ, they did no more then passe by, and having shewed themselves, stayed not at all a­mong mortals; neither are their names mentioned in the History. Where­upon it may be asked, Why being raised from the dead, they stayed no longer time in the world, that there might have been some time to con­verse with them? And in sum, Why none of the Patriarchs or of the Pro­phets have been called back from the dead, to sojourn a while among men, as Lazarus or Eutychus? But without speaking of the Fathers of the Old Testament, I will yet make this questi­on; Why did not our Lord raise John the Baptist, who had been his forerun­ner and his contemporary in the days of his flesh? Was it not to the purpose that that excellent Prophet, so great a [Page 139]light of the Church, and who had suf­fered death for the Truth, should be returned unto life, as well as the daugh­ter of Jairus, or the young man of Naim?

It is easie to conjecture why this was not done. If Abraham, or David, or any one of the Prophets, or any one of them who wrought Miracles in their life time, had returned to the world there to make their abode, there had never wanted those who would have honoured them excessively. If Super­stition made Idols of the dead bodies of Saints, how much more would it have ido [...]ized the very bodies them­selves living after their death? This is one of the causes for which God li­ked better to raise an ordinary man, who had touched the bones of Elisha, then to raise Elisha himself: For such a Prophet, that had been so famous in Miracles, had been adored by men, if he had returned from the grave to be among them.

There was also another particular [Page 140]reason concerning John the Paptist. It is known how high his reputation had been. After his death, that was ascri­bed unto him which was not: For when the Son of God caused himself to be known by his miraculous actions, divers notwithstanding took him for John the Baptist, whom they imagined to be rai­sed from the dead, and to be the au­thour of those marvels that then were wrought, Matth. 14.2. and 16.13, 14. This errour had passed further, if that Prophet had in effect been raised: But it was requisite that that light should give place to a greater Lumina­ry, since he came not but onely to bring men unto Christ. To conclude, Christ is the onely Prophet that made any stay after his death, to the end that he might be adored by them. All the rest that returned from the dead, either have been persons that had nothing extraordinary in their life, or have not stayed alive some few moments of time upon the earth; but Christ stay­ed fourty days, and conversed with [Page 141]many, at several times, in several pla­ces, and in several occurrences.

Of all those that have been raised from the dead, none is introduced in Scripture speaking, except Jesus Christ.

We need not demand whether we would be curious to see a man that had returned from the dead, or whether we would desire to speak with him. How many questions should we ask him? We should demand of him what remembrance he had, what be­ing his soul had out of the body, in what place it lodged, in what condition it found it self, what it saw or under­stood, and what it did. When Laza­rus was raised, great troops of the Jews ran to see him: Without doubt, they had as much curiosity as we have, to ask and to hear him discourse. And surely they whom God restored to life, recovered also their speech; yet the Scripture reporteth not any thing which hath been spoken by them: And [Page 142]even when Eutychus was raised, ( Acts 20.9.) which happened in the presence of many spectatours, he put himself a­gain into the assembly, to hear Saint Paul; nor did they forsake the preach­ing of the Apostle, to ask or hearken to one that was returned from the dead. We read indeed that Moses and Elias being returned to the world, spake with the Son of God in his Transfiguration; and the subject, of their discourse was of the decease which the Redeemer was to accom­plish in Jerusalem, Luke 9. But for the rest, all the dead which have been rai­sed, keep silence in the History; for it reciteth not any one word which they uttered, although it observeth other particularities which seem lesse consi­derable. And this is true of all those whose resurrection it hath described, there being not one of them who is re­presented unto us speaking. Hereup­on it is to be considered why the Scri­pture never rehearseth what they have said: For an omission so notable and [Page 143]universal cannot be without cause. We finde therefore that this is an honour reserved to Christ, to be the onely man, among them that were raised from the dead, whose words should be registred; the onely one which speaketh in the Scripture; the onely one from among the dead, whom we can hear. Wherefore the holy History expresseth very amply the words which the Son of God uttered after his Resurrection, to divers persons, & upon divers subjects: but for the rest which returned from the dead, it mentioneth not so much as one word of all that they have spo­ken.

Three several Fourties of Days, in the time that our Saviour stayed in this world. Observations upon this circum­stance.

Fourty days passed after the birth of Christ, till the first entry he made into the Temple, to be presented according to the Law, Levit. 12. Luke 2.22. Fourty [Page 144]days after his Baptism, till the day he began to enter upon the functions of his charge, having miraculously fasted all that time: And fourty days after his Resurrection, before he entred in­to heaven. In the first Fourty, he ap­peared as a common man, as all the rest of the first-born of Israel, which they carried to the Temple to consecrate them to God. In the se­cond, he appeared as a miraculous man, as Moses and Elijah, by an abstinence ex­traordinary. In the third, he appear­ed as the Son of God, being declared to be so by his Resurrection, Rom. 1.4.

Many memorable periods have be­gun and ended by Fourties of days or yeers. The Deluge began by a rain of Fourty days; and Noah opened the window of the Ark Fourty days after the waters were withdrawn from co­vering the tops of the highest moun­tains.

The slavery of the Hebrews in E­gypt, and the peregrinations of their Fathers, lasted ten times Fourty yeers, [Page 145]( Gen. 15.13.) to wit, till their going out of Egypt; and were followed by another Fourty yeers of their sojourn­ing in the desert. Moreover, after their going up out of Egypt, to the yeer in which Solomon laid the foundations of the Temple, which is a date of a great consideration in the sacred Histo­ry, there passed twelve times Fourty yeers, 1 King. 6.1.

Why the Son of God entered no more into the Temple, after his Resurrection. And the difference in this regard be­tween Him and those which were his principal types.

Hezekiah having been menaced with death, had a promise that on the third day he should ascend into the house of God, as a man newly raised from death. Jonah being brought back to the light of the living, would see the Temple of God; chap. 2.5. And Isaac, another figure of the Resurrection of Christ, was delivered from death in the same [Page 146]place where the Temple was afterward built. Now the Son of God being raised from the dead, entered indeed into the City of Jerusalem, and revisited divers places which he had frequented before his death, but he returned no more in­to the Temple, which at other times he had so often honoured with his pre­sence: For it was not convenient that this great and Eternal Priest ha­ving consummated the Sacrifice which disannulled all those of the Temple, of which he had rent the vail, and be­ing to make his entrance into the San­ctuary of heaven, should return into that which was none other then a fi­gure of the heavenly, Heb. 9.24.

Of those which have seen the Son of God being in heaven.

We know that he hath been seen in all the three degrees of his Exaltation. He was seen after his Resurrection, by more then five hundred persons at one time. He was seen ascending into [Page 147]heaven, by the eleven principal disci­ples. And finally, he hath been seen at the right hand of God, by Saint Ste­ven and by Saint Paul. These two wit­nesses sufficed for the publishing the third degree of his Exaltation, the first and the second being attested by so great a number of persons.

It is a thing considerable that the Wisdom of God hath chosen the first of the Martyrs and the last of the Apo­stles, to be eye-witnesses of the glory of his Son: The one being in the hands of the executioners, died in this confession, That he saw the heavens open, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God, Acts 7.55, 56. The other having been a sworn enemy of the Name of Christ and of those that be­lieved in him, hath confessed that he saw him in glory after his Ascension, 1 Cor. 9.1. and 15.8. The one is the first that sealed this truth with his blood: The other is the last who had charge to publish it as having seen it after he had persecuted it. All the other disciples [Page 148]saw Christ conversant on earth, but these two onely have seen him raigning in heaven.

All the miraculous prerogatives which have been severally in divers Saints are found united in one onely Christ i [...] a soveraign degree.

Among the Saints, divers have beet rendered famous, Either by their mi­raculous birth; as Isaac and John the Baptist: Or by the Miracles which themselves wrought; as Moses, Elijah, Elisha, &c. Or by the gift of Prophe­cie; as Samuel, Daniel, &c. Or by their Resurrection from the dead; as Laza­rus, &c. Or for having ascended into heaven; as Enoch and Elijah. But ne­ver had any man all these prerogatives together, except the Son of God. Some have had a miraculous birth, or else have been Prophets, which have not had the gift of Miracles. Others have wrought Miracles, so far as to raise the dead, but themselves have [Page 149]not been raised. Others have been rai­sed from the dead, but their bodies have not ascended into heaven, but were returned once more unto the grave. Others are ascended into hea­ven, but they have no power to work upon them that are on the earth. On the contrary, one alone and the same Christ was conceived miraculously, exercised the power of Miracles and that of a Prophet, came back from the dead, is ascended bodily into heaven; and, that which appertaineth to none other, from above governeth the whole Church. The same Christ surpasseth infinitely all the others in every one of those miraculous preeminencies which they have had. Some were born of mothers which had passed the age of childbearing; but Christ was born of a Virgin. Some have been Prophets; but Christ received not the Spirit by measure Some have had the gift of Mi­racles in certain occasions; but Christ at all times had that power. Some have been raised from death by some other; [Page 150]but Christ raised himself. Some have been lifted up into heaven; but Chri [...] was carried thither by his own power And finally, as he holdeth the fir [...] place in all things, he alone is set dow [...] at the Right Hand of God.

Why doth the holy History never say the God descended, but onely where the b [...] ­sinesse hath been to do justice, or to esta­blish it, and protect the innocent?

WHensoever God hath descend­ed, it hath been, Either to pub­lish Laws; as those which he gave [...] old to Israel, Exod. 19.18. and 34.5. Or to appoint Judges; as were read in Numb. 11.17. Or to proceed against the guilty; as the builders of Babel, and the Cities of Sodom and Gomorrah, Gen. 11.5, 6, 7. and 18.21. Or to give [Page 151]protection to Jacob going into Egypt, Gen. 46.4. Or to do justice to the Hebrews, which were oppressed by the Egypti­ans, Exod. 3.8.

Certainly the Scripture intended not to say that God descended locally; yet so it is that he will one day really de­scend, in the person of his Son. Now forasmuch as he will not descend but to execute judgement, all the other Descents which the Scripture attribu­teth to him, meet in the same scope: For it never representeth God coming from above, but either to do Justice, or to preserve it.

An observation upon the f [...]ur general Judgements mentioned in the Scri­ptures.

All the Judgements which God hath shewed or yet doth shew upon any parts of mankinde, are but particu­lars. There are four which have con­cerned or do concern all the genera­lity. The three first have already [Page 152]appeared, and the fourth is at the door.

The first Judgement is that which God pronounced against Adam and his wife, who represented all their poste­rity. The second is that which cau­sed all the inhabitants of the world, except eight, to perish by the waters of the Deluge. The third is that which divided the society of men, by the con­fusion of Tongues, in Babel. The fourth is that of the last Day.

The first Judgement deprived men of immortality, and declared them subject to death, which, by power of it, is come upon them successively. The second caused all mankinde to die at one time, reserving a very small num­ber of persons. The third brake off the communion which was among men, bereaving them of their universal language, and hindering them from un­derstanding one another.

Now there are divers resemblances and differences between these three first Judgements which are past alrea­dy, [Page 153]and the fourth, which is yet to come. But we have onely to consider, that in the first three, God hath judged the living; but at the last he shall judge both the living and the dead. Upon this subject, I am to propound the fol­lowing Observation.

A wonderful Mystery which is seen in the several goings out of the three first men which God took out of the world.

The life of man hath two different issues: Some going out of the world by a violent death, others by a natural. But those which shall be found alive when our Lord shall come to the last Judgement, shall passe neither by the one nor the other of these two ways, but by a third, which shall be a sudden transmutation of their bodies, by the which they shall become incorruptible, 1 Cor. 15.52. So then there are three several kindes of issues ordained to men, to dislodge out of this world, some by one, some by another; to wit, [Page 144]

• Violent death,
• Natural death,
• And the transmutation of them that shall be found a­live at the day of Judgement.

Of these three ways, the two first have been open to this day, and are the ordinary passage of mortals. The third is reserved for the last inhabitants of the world.

All these three several issues have been visibly marked out in the three first men that have parted out of this life: for the first that dislodged, was Abel; the second was Adam; the third was Enoch.

• The first went out of the world by a violent death,
• The second, by a natural death.
• The third, by a change superna­tural and miraculous.

These three went in this order, and the one followed the other immediate­ly, among them whose departure is mentioned in the Scripture. But they went by different ways, which repre­sented [Page 155]all those by which men were to passe after them: For all those which shall go out of the world after these three first, or who shall go out hereaf­ter, by which soever of these three ways, go but in the footsteps of some one of these three forerunners, who are (in this regard) an abridgement of all mankinde, divided as in three bands. And particularly, as those who ought to passe by that above-named change, to be translated from this life without seeing death, shall be the last that dislodge; so Enoch, who repre­sented them, parted from this world the last of the three; being preceded by Abel, who died a violent death; and by Adam, who departed by a natural death. We are here to admire the dispensation of this great God, and the Wisdom of his Spirit which dictated the Scriptures. These three men whom God first withdrew from the world, the diversity which is seen in their going out, and the order held in it, were a sample or epitome of that [Page 156]great piece which he would unfold all along the ages, and which was to be extended as far as the last men that shall be found living upon the earth.

Why God, who hath foretold and set down the measures of certain particular times, hath not revealed how long the world should endure, or when the day of Judgement should be.

God at other times foretold, How ma­ny veers space it should be before the Deluge, Gen. 6.3. How many yeers the slavery of the Hebrews should endure, Gen. 15.13. How many yeers there should be of plenty and famine, in the days of Joseph, Gen. 41.29.30. How many yeers the Jews should remain in the Captivity of Babylon, Jer. 25.12. and 29.10. Dan. 9.2. How many yeers should passe to the death of Christ, Dan. 9.24. We know that some of these predicti­ons have been given four hundred, yea four hundred and ninety yeers before their time expired. Now there might [Page 157]be all the way computed, from day to day, how many yeers yet remained to the end of the time limited by those oracles. Yea, God hath not onely gi­ven an account of yeers, but sometimes hath punctually set down the very day on which a deliverance or other event should come to passe, Dan. 12.11, 12.

But neither the Day of the last Judgement, nor the Yeer, nor yet the Age which is to make an end of all the rest, was ever set down in any Prophe­cie, whatsoever the curious can say against it. Now among the causes of this silence, we are to consider this. When God hath foretold that such or such a notable event, where the time could not be foreseen by any humane wisdom, should come to passe in such a Yeer or on such a Day, the principal scope of these predictions hath been to confirm the faith of them which should see them accomplished, ( Joh. 13.19.) For they that lived until that time, and saw the Prophecie effected precisely at the day named, even against all ap­pearance, [Page 158]had so much the more rea­son to believe in God for the time to come, in so manifest an experience of his infallible truth: and the same al­so was a means to convert unbelievers. But at the last Day it will not be the work to make provision any more for faith in regard of things to come; not will there be any more place for the conversion of miscreants. So that a revelation of that Day could not serve for those ends and uses for the which God had revealed divers other Days remarkable. The Wisdom of God doth not give us superfluous predicti­ons. It is necessary to know that there shall be a last Day, but not to know precisely when it shall be.

Four remarkable productions which the Scripture attributeth to the Spirit of God; to wit, two in the Creation, two in the Redemption.

AMong so many great and divers effects of the Spirit of God, the Scripture mentioneth particularly these four productions:

1. That of all the species which were enclosed in the masse of the ele­ments, in the beginning of the world: for, to cause them to bring forth, the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the wa­ters, Gen. 1.2.

2. That of the Soul: For the breath of God, which made man a living soul, was the Spirit of the Almighty, Gen. 2.7. Job 33.4.

3. That of the body of Christ, which [Page 160]alone among all men was conceived by the holy Ghost, Luke 1.35.

4. That of the new man: For, to become such, it behoveth to be born a­gain of the Spirit, Joh. 3.5, 6.

Why the Scripture representeth the holy Ghost, and his effects, under the names of Water, of Fire, of Anointing with Oil, and of Sprinkling of Blood. The true interpretation of these terms, contained in divers pas­sages.

The Scripture speaketh of Water and the Spirit, by which we are to be born again: Of the holy Ghost and of Fire, with which we are to be ba­ptized: Of the Unction which we have from the holy One, which is an effect of the same Spirit: Of the Sprinkling of the Blood of Jesus Christ, which is wrought also by the holy Ghost, Joh. 3.5. Matth. 3.11. 1 Joh. 2.20. 1 Pet. 1.2. So that the names of Water, of Fire, of Anointing with Oil, [Page 161]and of Sprinkling of Blood, are used to denote either the holy Ghost, or those acts which he worketh in us. Now it is very easie for one of the vulgar to speak to this, and to say they are simi­litudes. Many Commentatours and ordinary Preachers content them­selves to alleadge to us some resem­blances between Water and the holy Ghost; and likewise some conformi­ties and analogies between the Fire, which purifieth and consumeth, and the holy Ghost, which produceth the like effects. But there are other depths to sound.

It is requisite therefore to know that all the Purifications of the Law, which were figures of that Purification which we have by the holy Ghost, were wrought either by Water, or by Fire, or by Oil, or by Blood. All things which had need of cleansing, were pu­rified by one of these four means.

1. By Water: as it was practised in divers occasions: For we know that washings with Water were very fre­quent [Page 162]under the Law. It is not necessa­ry to produce examples.

2. By Fire: as when God comman­ded to purifie the spoil which they had taken from the Midianites, he ordain­ed that all that which could endure the Fire, (to wit, Gold, Silver, Brasse, Iron, Tinne, Lead) should be cleansed by Fire, Num. 31.22, 23.

3. By Oil: as it was observed in the Unction of the Priests, and that of the leprous, Lev. 14.16, 17, 18.

4. By Blood: as it is notorious, and we shall see by and by, that almost all things according to the Law are pur­ged by Blood, Heb. 9.22.

Now to shew that all that which is required to a true Purification, all that which the Law prescribed to those ends, is found universally in the power of the holy Ghost; the Scripture representeth it, with its effects, under the name of the matters and all the acts which ser­ved to the Legal Purifications. I might speak of other things concerning this subject; but they will come better to [Page 163]purpose in the doctrine of Baptism, for which I reserve them.

A catalogue of those actions which were celebrated with Aspersion of Blood in the time of the Law.

All the Law was written in Blood. The Priest, the people, went not but thorow blood. Now to comprehend these so many different actions in which Blood intervened, it will be to the purpose to distinguish them, and reduce them into ranks or categories. We finde therefore that there are se­ven kindes of actions solemnized by the Aspersion of Blood.

1. The first Passeover; In which the Israelites dipped a bunch of hysop in the blood of the lamb, and marked their doors, to serve for their safe­guard.

2. The Covenant treated between God and the people: For after that Moses had rehearsed the Articles, he took the blood of the Sacrifice offered [Page 164]to that effect, and sprinkled one half on the Altar, and the rest upon the peo­ple, saying unto them, This is the blood of the Covenant.

3. The Consecration of the Tabernacle and of the Priests. In this ceremony, Moses sprinkled with blood the Taber­nacle and all the vessels of the service: Besides, he took of the blood from off the Altar, and made an aspersion upon Aaron, upon his sons, and upon their garments.

4. The Sacrifices, as well Eucharistical as Expiatory: For in all Sacrifices the blood was poured all about the Altar of burnt-Offerings: In some of them it was also put upon the Altar of In­cense: In others there was made an aspersion before the Vail of the San­ctuary.

5. The general Expiation, which was celebrated once a yeer. In this So­lemnity, the High Priest made an a­spersion of blood, seven times, before the Mercy-seat, afterward within the Vail, afterward also upon the Altar of Incense.

6. The purification of the unclean. The High Priest took of the blood of an heifer slain for this purpose, and sprinkled it before the Tabernacle; af­terward, the Sacrifice being burned with its blood, and the ashes reserved, they were mingled with water, to sprinkle the tents, the vessels and the persons tainted with any uncleannesse. This mystery is opened by the Apostle, Heb. 9.13, 14.

7. The ceremonial cleansing of the le­prous, as well of houses as of persons. A sparrow was killed, and with his blood the man was sprinkled that was newly healed of the leprosie. Besides, they took the blood of a lamb, with which was marked the right ear of the leper, and his hand and his foot. Like­wise, if the leprosie had taken hold of the walls of an house, the Priest sprink­led them with the blood of a sparrow, after that the infection was gone.

Thus all this multitude of actions performed by sprinkling of blood, is reduced to the seven kindes here men­tioned. [Page 166]This distinction may serve not onely for the memory to retain them but also for the understanding, to know well their differences, and the myste­ries inclosed in this diversity. It shall suffice as for the present, to observe the power of the holy Ghost, repre­sented by the number of seven, which is a mark of perfection; to shew, tha [...] by it we have an entire application o [...] the blood of Christ.

Blood hath no propriety of making whil [...] Why then is it said (Apocal. 7.14.) tha [...] the Saints have made white then robes in the blood of the Lamb?

Many, according to the custom o [...] the vulgar, stay themselves at a simili­tude, taking whitenesse for an embleme [...] of cleannesse or of glory: But the si­militude faileth them then, when they should finde this whitenesse in blood, which naturally defileth in stead of cleansing, and taketh away whitenesse in stead of giving it.

Some learned Interpreters say very well, that this passage beareth an allusi­on to the habit of the Priests of the Law, who entered not into the Tem­ple but in white robes. The sense then is, that those that are here spoken of, which are come out of great tribulati­on, are made Priests unto God, whom they serve day and night in his Temple, vers. 15. For this Priesthood with which they are honoured, is expressed under the name of the vestment which the ancient Priests wore when they did the service.

But the question yet remaineth, How these robes are made white in blood. I think therefore that this ex­pression denoteth a resemblance be­tween the consecration of Levitical Priests, and that of Christians. When Aaron and his sons were called to this charge, there were given them Priestly gaaments, among the which was the linen robe: but it was not permitted them to approach to the Altar, or to exercise any Office in the Tabernacle, [Page 168]till they were first sprinkled with blood, both they and their garments, Exod. 29.21. Levit. 8.30. As therefore the ancient Priests were consecrated by blood, and made capable to wear the Priestly habit in the house of God; so in the vertue of the blood of Christ, we are reinvested of the quality of Priests, represented by the white gar­ment. And this is summarily what I had to say concerning this passage, which it behoveth to expound rather by a metonymie then by a single meta­phor.

Why Moses is more prolix and more ex­act in the description of the Taberna­cle, then in that of the whole world.

VVHosoever shall compare the two first Chapters of Genesis, with the sixteen last of Exodus, except the two and thirtieth and the two fol­lowing, shall finde a great difference between Moses describing the frame of the Universe, and Moses describing the fabrick of the Tabernacle. In the one, he is very general and succinct: in the other, he is very copious, and setteth down even to the smallest particulars. The description of this great building of the World seemed truely to require more words then that of a little pavil­lion, which was but an atome in com­parison [Page 170]of this vast extent of the hea­vens and of the earth: But quite con­trarily, the Spirit of God having shut up and reduced into a little table the whole masse of the world, displayeth unto us the structure of the Taberna­cle in a long and large picture. Now it is very certain that the style of the Scripture hath its measures compassed by the circles of a soveraign wisdom. Behold then that which we here consi­der, setting apart many other reasons which we might bring upon this sub­ject.

The world was not built but for the Church, to the end that in it God might be served. The Tabernacle was both a figure of the Church, and the ensigne under which it was assembled. God therefore willing to shew that his Church, in which his service is perfor­med, is more precious to him and more considerable then all the rest of the world, hath spoken of the Taber­nacle more amply and more parti­cularly then of all the Elements, [Page 171]yea, then of all the world toge­ther.

The number of persons that make up the bo­dy of the universal Church is not onely presixed and definite, but also regulated by measures and proportions.

God is not tied to Numbers, yet neverthelesse he doth and disposeth his works by number, weight, and mea­sure. It is observed that after the go­ing up out of Egypt, God caused to be numbred all the Israelites from the age of twenty yeers and upward ( Exod. 38.26.) and there were found six hun­dred three thousand five hundred and fifty men. The yeer following, God commanded to make a second review of the people ( Numb. 1.46.) but with­out comprising the Levites which had been numbred the first time with the other Tribes. Notwithstanding this substraction, and the casualties which might have changed the number of the people, since the yeer foregoing, it is [Page 172]found that their number was yet justly and precisely six hundred three thou­sand five hundred and fifty men. In which is seen a proportion which God held in the multiplication of that peo­ple. There is also observed a mystery in the exact number of the two and twenty thousand Levites which were then reckoned ( Numb. 3.39) For the rest, I contest not against the common opinion, touching the hundred fourty and four thousand of the seventh of the Revelation, that they ought to be taken for an indefinite number, as well as the seven thousand which had not bowed the knee to Baal: But it ought to be considered why the holy Ghost, who speaketh nothing superfluous, is not contented to have named the total sum of them that were sealed in Israel, but also divideth it in twelve times twelve thousand, distributed by equal portions among the twelve Tribes, e­very one of which is mentioned the one after the other, with the expressi­on of its particular number: For this [Page 173]sheweth that the number of the Elect and the multitude of Believers, are measured by certain proportions, which are known to him who is the Authour. Certainly, the resemblance of the seventy Disciples of Christ, to the seventy Judges which were substi­tuted to Moses, and to the seventy chil­dren which Jacob had when he went down into Egypt, is a line of this admi­rable symmetrie with the which God hath limited and proportioned the bo­dy of the Church.

Now this fortifieth that Maxime, That the number of the Elect cannot suffer addition nor diminution: And, That Election proceedeth not from the will of the Elect, but that of God which prevented them. For can it be said that all the Elect, from the begin­ning of the world to the end, have agreed together to make a company composed precisely of a number certain and regular?

Of the small number of believers, in the three several comings of the Son of God. Resemblances on this subject.

When the Son of God came in the Spirit, before the Deluge, to preach to the men of that time, the Church was found reduced into the sole family of Noah, 1 Pet. 3.18, 19, 20. When the Son of God came in the Flesh, being made man, there were but a few persons that were disposed to receive him. And when he shall come finally in Glory, shall he finde faith on the earth? Luk. 18.8.

As there were in the Ark seven crea­tures of every clean kinde, so also there were not above seven that were clean in heart: For of the eight which were preserved from the Deluge, there was one which was impure to wit, Cham. The number of the faithful was some­what greater, when Jesus Christ was born: Neverthelesse the Scripture nameth but seven, as the most notable, to wit, Joseph and the Virgin, Simeon [Page 175]and Anna the Prophetesse, Zacharias, and Elizabeth his wife, and John the Ba­ptist their son, who was born a little before.

Three several states of the Church in three several times, and three several titles of it.

Before the Law, the Church was to use this term, Oeconomical.

Under the Law, it was National.

And under the Gospel, it is become Catholike, or, Universal.

It is known that God extended it by degrees. At the beginning it consisted onely of families, which were those of the Patriarchs, and continued so till af­ter the death of Joseph and his bre­thren. Afterward, these families be­ing multiplied so far as to surpasse the number of the Egyptians, it began to make the Body of a Nation; and God imposed upon it Laws and Rules, after­ward gave it a Countrey where it might live apart. Finally, the Gospel being [Page 176]gone forth from thence, and published thorow all the earth, the Church hath been no more bounded within an en­closure of one people, but of National which it was, it is become Universal.

A difference between the Church of the Old Testament and that of the New, i [...] regard of the Communion of th [...]se things which were ordained to sanctity.

The Law, as it is sufficiently known, distinguisheth the things that were onely holy or sanctified, from those which were most holy, that is to say, which served also to sanctifie others. For example; the aromatical confecti­on which was used for the anointing of the Priests; Item, all Expiatory sacri­fices; certain kindes of Oblations; and the Altar, which sanctified the Sa­crifices; all these things were called thrice holy, Lev. 2.3. and 6.14. Num. 18.9. Exod. 28. Now it is to be observed that the Priests onely had the right of touching those things that were most [Page 177]holy: This was a priviledge of their Office. The people never touched the Altar, never might use an ointment like that of the Priests, nor might ever taste of any Sacrifice of Expiation, as we shall see when we come to treat of the Supper of the Lord. In sum, it is a Maxime, That every thing which had the quality of most holy, was interdicted to the people; which, in this regard, had no communion with the Priests. We go not about here to sound the depth of this mystery: It sufficeth us to observe that the New Testament hath taken away this difference. All Christians at this day are Priests, all have received the Priestly Unction, all have right to eat that which is most holy, and which hath the power to sanctifie, to wit, the Expiatory Sacrifice, that is, the Body of Christ. Thus the Com­munion of Saints is now more com­plete and more universal then it was under the Law.

Four several buildings of which God hath been the Archit [...]ct, representing seve­rally the estate of the Church.

We finde four buildings of which God himself hath set down and order­ed the structure.

The first is the Ark, in which he pre­served Noah during the Deluge.

The second is the Tabernacle, which was built in the Desert, about the which were encamped the Tribes.

The third is the Temple, built upon a mountain, where was held the gene­ral assembly of the people of God.

The fourth is the heavenly Jerusa­l [...]m, described Rev. 21.

But there is a great difference be­tween these four buildings.

The first, that is the Ark, had no o­other foundation then the waters upon which it floated.

The second, to wit, the Taberna [...]le, was truely placed upon the earth, but it was ambulatory, having no resting [Page 179]place, as being composed of pieces that were taken down and transported from one place to another.

The third, to wit, the Temple, was fixed, founded upon a rock, of strong matter, that promised a long continu­ance: But it was combustible, and subject to be demolished: As in effect, it was twice overthrown from the top to the bottom.

But the fourth, which is Jerusalem a­bove, builded by Gods own hand, with­out any workman, possesseth a firm­nesse without shaking, and a continu­ance without end.

This fourth building is the scope and perfection of the three foregoing, the which having successively represented the Church in several degrees of weak­nesse, determine in this estate unmove­able in which it shall be, being placed in heaven.

Why the most notable periods of the Church, and many famous mysteries, had their beginning in a Desert.

The first time that Angels spake to men, was in a Desert: For Hagar the first person to whom Angels spake, was in a Desert, when the voice of the Angel was directed to her, Gen. 16.7.

The first time that God spake to Moses, was in a Desert, in that famous vision of the burning bush, Exod. 3.

The Law was given in a Desert.

The Tabernacle was built in a De­sert.

The most illustrious figures of Christ, Manna, the Rock from whence issued water, the miracle of the Brazen Serpent, were brought forth in a De­sert.

The miraculous fast of Moses, that of Elijah, and of Christ, passed in a Desert.

The preaching of the Gospel began in a Desert, Matth. 2.1.

Baptism, the first Sacrament of the New Testament, began in a Desert, and Jesus Christ himself received it in a Desert.

The first and the last piece of Scri­pture, to wit, the Books of Moses, and that of the Revelation, were delivered in a Desert.

The Christian Church, gathered from among the Jews, after the Ascen­sion of the Son of God, withdrew it self into a Desert, before the destructi­on of Jerusalem, and sojourned there three yeers and six months, Rev. 12.14.

Many excellent considerations might be brought upon this subject: But principally the Wisdom of God would shew in the most notable beginnings, as well of the Israelitish as the Christian Church, that his Church is a Body di­stinguished from all other societies that are in the world, formed upon other principles, of an original quite diffe­rent; and that it was not founded upon any terrestrial Empire.

It is worth the noting, that as the [Page 182]Church of Israel remained fourty yeers in a Desert, before it was established in the land of Canaan; so the Christi­an Church remained after its begin­ning, to wit, after that the Son of God was ascended into heaven, seven times fourty yeers in a continual persecuti­on, which reduced it into solitudes and deserts: For after the Ascension of our Lord, till the three hundred and fifteenth of his Nativity, when Constan­tine called back the Christians, and cau­sed them to build Churches, there pas­sed two hundred and eighty yeers, se­ven times as many yeers as the Israe­lites had passed in the Desert.

All the Church was never gathered toge­ther in one place, except then wh [...] it was in the Ark.

After the family of Adam, in which for that time was included the Body of the Church, it is not found that the be­lieve [...]s, which make up the Church Mi­litant, have been all gathered together [Page 183]in one place, save when they were all enclosed in that Vessel which preserved them from the Deluge. The Israelites, when they went forth out of Egypt, and when they remained in the Desert, were all assembled in the same place: but yet it could not be said for certain that all the Church was there: for we know that God had children among other Nations, far distant from that of Israel; witnesse Job and his friends, who all acknowledged the true-God. It is a vanity most vain, when Decrees are represented under the name of the Universal Church, as if it had been as­sembled in one place; for even the Councels which are called General, are not such in effect, nor can it be said that they represent the Church Uni­versal: For never was there a Con­vocation made by the suffrages of all the Churches in the world.

A difference between the Remission which the Law presented of old to sinners, and that which is offered unto them by the Gospel.

BEhold a point remarkable against the Jews, who believe to finde their salvation in the Sacrifices and other Ceremonies of the Law, under pre­tence that it saith that it shall be par­doned unto him who bringeth such or such an Oblation for his sin. I passe by that which is notorious to all Christi­ans, that those Legal Expiations had none other quality then that of figures: But that which I observe beyond this, is, that the Law it self never present­eth an universal Remission to the sin­ner. This is a Maxime, That the Law had not any Sacrifice which did uni­versally [Page 185]expiate all the sins of a man. All the Expiations of which it speak­eth, were but of certain sins, not of all entirely; and therefore they promised a plentary Remission, but still left the sinner indebted to the Justice of God.

Against this may be objected the Expiation general which was perform­ed every yeer on the tenth day of the seventh month, according to the ordi­nance contained in Levit. 16. For that beareth expresly that this ceremony did expiate all the iniquities and tres­passes of the children of Israel. But we must consider that this Expiation was made but once every yeer, and onely on one day; and it was for sins precedent, that is to say, which had been committed till then. The offen­ces which were committed after that day, were not expiated till a yeer after, on the same day. So that by the space of a whole yeer, men remained bur­dened with an infinite number of crimes which came upon them after the precedent Expiation, and there needed [Page 186]another, which came not till the yeer was come about. Now how many persons died before the revolution of the yeer, without being able to attain to the day of Expiation? All those therefore which were prevented by death before that day fell, departed without having obtained an entire Re­mission, since there remained a number of sins which could not as yet be expi­ated according to the Law.

Surely the Law it self shewed the impotency of its Expiations, by which there never could be a coming to a to­tal Remission. But the Remission which we have by Christ, blotteth out universally all the sins of a man that accepteth this pardon. Neither yet is it restrained to any circumstance of place or time. Therefore whereas the Law presented Remission of sins but one onely time in a whole yeer, the Gospel presenteth it unto us every day.

Which is most injurious and repugnant to God, Either [...] Despair, or Presum­ption?

He that despaireth, offendeth the Mercy of God: But the presumptuous, that believeth himself to be capable of giving satisfaction to God, offendeth his Justice and his Mercy both toge­ther. His Justice, in requiring that it should approve a payment that is none. His Mercy, in presuming to content his Justice. For whosoever imagineth that he is able to satisfie the Justice of God, believeth not that he hath need of his Mercy.

A believer having commited some sin ve­ry enormous, is it credible, although he have repented and obtained pardon, that God will love him altogether as much as he loved him before the offence commited?

God loveth the righteous; but if [Page 188]the righteous happen to commit some great crime, it is impossible but God should resent it. Neverthelesse the gate of his Mercy is always open to the penitent. But is there any likelihood that God having been grievously offen­ded by a man whom he loved, will yet love him with so great an affection as he loved him before? For he may pardon him, and yet neverthelesse abate of his former good will. We pardon often­times such an one as hath rendred him­self unworthy of the friendship which we bare to him, and we may yet have abundance of affection towards him; but it is hard that our affection should return to the same degree in which it was before the offence came between, howsoever he testifieth his being dis­pleased for it.

Concerning this question, we may say, That there is more joy in heaven, and consequently more affection, in some regard, for one sinner coming to repentance, then for ninety and nine righteous, that have no need of par­ticular [Page 189]repentance: That the love of God toward his children is not measu­red according to the proportion of the good which they do, but proceedeth purely from his own goodnesse: That even there where sin hath abounded, God causeth that his grace super­aboundeth: That he to whom God hath pardoned the greater sins, is of­ten he that more loveth God, and con­sequently is the more beloved of God, Luke 7.47. That the father of the Pro­digal (whose Parable tendeth to our matter) testifieth that he had still as much of love for that his son, after all his debauchednesse, as he had before, Luke 15. That the Remission of sins is represented under the name of Am­nestie or Oblivion, when God promi­seth that he will have no remembrance of our transgressions, but account them as not having been; whence it fol­loweth, that their memory shall not diminish the love which God bare unto us from the beginning, Jer. 31.34. Heb. 8.12. and 10.17. And lastly, that many [Page 190]Saints have committed divers notable crimes, and being fallen from the rank which they had in the Church of God, have not onely obtained Remission but also have been reestablished in all their dignities and preeminences, as we shall see presently.

Examples of divers great sinners reesta­blished in their first estate.

We finde four famous among all o­thers, whom God hath fully restored, to wit, a High Priest, a Prophet, a King, and one of the first Apostles. These four are, Aaron, Jonah, Manasseh, and Saint Peter. Aaron, who being named of God to the Priesthood, after being become an instrument of the idolatry of the golden calf, was neverthelesse again exalted to the Priestly dignity. Jonah, who having deserted the office of a Prophet, was notwithstanding yet honoured with that charge the second time. Manasseh, who after having filled all the City of Jerusalem with in­nocent [Page 191]blood, and erected an Empire for the devil, for which crimes he was despoiled of his Royalty, found never­thelesse favour with God, who caused him to reascend his Throne. Saint Pe­ter, who had weakly denied his Master, was notwithstanding restored to his Apostolate; yea, by three clauses ex­pressed in his commission, to blot out the three denials which had issued from his mouth, Joh. 21.15, 16, 17.

There might be produced other ex­amples: but these are the most ex­presse. The goodnesse of God would reestablish those sinners represented in those four different conditions, the highest of all; to wit, the Priesthood, the office of a Prophet, the state of a King, and the Apostolate; to shew that there is no fall so foul from which a childe of God may not be lifted up, yea, so far as to return to a higher de­gree, to be neerer to God.

Why is Abraham so highly commended for having believed that God could raise the dead? Heb. 11.19.

IS this any marvel that so great a Pa­triarch had this belief, seeing so ma­ny Christians have it, and so many Is­raelites had it as well as he? Why is this faith honoured with a greater elo­gium in him then in them? We must consider that before the days of Abra­ham, and also a long time after, God had not as yet raised any dead. This kinde of Miracle was not seen till the end of many ages after the decease of Abraham: Neither he nor they that had gone before him had ever seen or heard, that one that was dead had been raised again. As therefore this Miracle was without example, so much the [Page 193]more of faith was needful to believe that God was able to effect it. But as for us, we have many examples of the Re­surrection of the dead, in divers per­sons to whom God restored life. Upon which I am to produce these observati­ons following.

An admirable gradation in those which have been raised from the dead.

The particular Resurrection of La­zarus, and of the others which we read in the History, is an image of the gene­ral Resurrection which is to come. In the estate of those dead bodies which God hath raised at several times, there are divers degrees.

Some have been raised incontinently after having given up the Ghost, there having not been above some few mi­nutes between their death and their re­surrection; as Acts 20.9, 10.

Others had been already fully cold, before they were raised; as the son of the Shunamite, as it appeareth by the [Page 194]circumstances related 2 King. 4.20, &c.

Others had been already washed and prepared to the burial; as Tabitha, Acts 9.37.

Others had been already on the way to the grave; as the son of the widow of Naim, which was carried out of the Town to be interred, Luke 7.12.

Others were already entred into the grave; as he which rose again by the touch of Elisha's bones, 2 King. 13.21.

Others had not onely been in the grave, but also had stayed there, yea, they had been putrified; as Lazarus, Joh. 11.39.

Others had been reduced to dust; as those that rose with Christ, Matth. 27.52.

Thus God sheweth unto us the Re­surrection in all the conditions of the dead, from them that went no further then expiration, even to them of which there remained no more then dust. His power which giveth life, hath gone thorow all the passages thorow which dead bodies do descend [Page 195]to the lowest degree of their annihi­lation.

The same shall come to passe in the general Resurrection: For when the Son of God shall call up the dead, there will be found those that have been deceased onely some few hours since, or but a few days; others, that shall be already putrified; o­thers, that shall have been five or six thousand yeers in the grave, of which there will remain no more but the ashes.

Why there have been more young people raised from the dead then old.

God hath raised from the dead those of both sexes, and of different ages; as, the daughter of Fairus, and Tabitha; but the greatest part have been of young people. The son of the wi­dow of Sarephta, and the son of the Shunamite, were as yet in their child­hood. The son of the widow of Naim, was but a youth. The daughter of [Page 196] Jairus was but twelve yeers old. Euty­chus was a young man: And it is pro­bable that Lazarus was so. The num­ber and age of the Saints which came out of their graves when Christ arose, is not mentioned in the History: So much is certain, that among all them whom it nameth, the number of young people raised from the dead is greater then that of aged persons, of whom we have none but Tobitha, and it may be him that was raised in the grave of Elisha.

Now this also is a short table or pa­tern of the great Resurrection which is to be at the last Day: For that shall raise far more young people then old. This needeth no demonstration. The number of them that die young, hath still surpassed the number of them that die old. How many human creatures die in their childhood, or in their growth, or in the flower of their age? Those that go beyond all those first seasons of their life, and arrive as far as the last, are very few in comparison of them whom [Page 197]death intercepteth in the way. As therefore the number of the younger sort is the greater among the dead, so also it shall be the greater in the Resur­rection of the dead. And to represent this to us, God would, by a mysterious Preludium, raise more of young peo­ple then of old.

The first and the last of all Miracles.

THe first Miracle that came to passe after the Creation, is, as I have al­ready said, the translation of Enoch. And the last Miracle which shall be wrought in the world, shall be the translation of the faithful, which at the last Day shall be carried up to hea­ven. All the Miracles, from the first to the last, tend to carry man to hea­ven. [Page 204]And by their beginning, God would shew what should be their conclusion.

Why Adam was not carried bodily to hea­ven as well as Enoch.

The translation of Enoch was a pre­ludium of ours, which we expect, and a testimony of eternal life, where we shall be gathered together in body and soul. But it is worth the enquiring, Why God wrought not this Miracle in the person of the first man, but de­ferred it until the seventh generation. Behold then what may be said concer­ning it.

If Adam, who represented all man­kinde, had been carried up to heaven as Enoch afterward was, there would not have wanted some that would con­clude that heaven appertained natural­ly unto men, as children and heirs of Adam. Now to prevent this errour, and to teach us that heavenly beati­tude is given by Grace, and not by Na­ture, [Page 205]the Wisdom of God found it not good that the common father of men should ascend corporally to heaven, but would that he should die, and that his body should remain in the earth. Besides, that which is most worthy of observation, God would not translate Enoch till such time as Adam was dead; and yet Enoch had already lived above three hundred yeers before the de­cease of Adam. But after that Adam was dead, Enoch was the first Patriarch that went out of the world. For great reasons, the going forth of Enoch was preceded by that of his grandfather. In that of Adam, who died, God did shew what it is that men hold of their Nature, to wit, death: In that of E­noch, who was carried up without dy­ing, God hath shewed what it is that the righteous ought to expect from Grace, to wit, immortality. In that of Adam, the father of all, is seen the condition of all men, to whom it is appointed once to die: In that of Enoch is seen the priviledge of Believers, who shall [Page 206]be carried to heaven. And as the death of Adam went before the rapture of Enoch, so it behoveth that we die i [...] Adam, before we can be carried up with Enoch.

Why God hath shewed the glory of heaven to some that were yet upon the earth, and yet never shewed hell to any person while he was in this world.

Saint Steven being as yet here be­lowe, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the glory of God. Saint Paul being as yet mortal, was in the third heaven, and heard unspeaka­ble words that there were uttered. But none, whether Elect, or Reprobate, ever saw hell, but after his death. Why hath not that place of torment been shewn unto mortals, as well as Para­dise?

The cause for which God hath cau­sed the joys of heaven to be seen, hath been to the end to comfort his chil­dren, and to encourage them to those [Page 207]sufferings which should be followed by such a glory. The sight of hell maketh not for this purpose: Nor is it enough to say that it might serve for the con­version of unbelievers: For if a wicked man had seen hell, he would no more amend then the brethren of the wicked rich man would have done up­on the word of one dead that had come back from the bosome of Abra­ham, Luke 16.31.

Why Saint Paul being come back from the third heaven, speaketh not of having Seen, but onely of having Heard, 2 Cor. 14.4.

It may be that in effect he was trans­ported thither rather to Hear then to See. And this, Either because being yet mortal, God revealed himself to him as to Moses; not by the sight of his face, of which every man living is un­capable, but by the words of his mouth, Exod. 33.18, &c. Or because being to descend yet from heaven hither below, [Page 208]to instruct others, he had need to re­ceive instructions, and by consequence, it was more necessary for him to Hear then to See, more profitable both to him and to those that were afterward taught by him. For howsoever the words which he had heard, were un­speakable, yet they furnished him with great lights, the which he forgot not, but brought them from above, to en­lighten both himself and others.

Two onely things at which Jesus Christ as man wondered.

THe one was the Unbelief of his country-men the Galileans, Mark 6.6. The other was the Faith of a stranger, to wit, the Centurion, Matth. 8.10. We read not that Jesus Christ, [Page 209]in the days of his humiliation, ever ad­mired any thing but these two. It is truely a thing to be admired, that many are unbelievers in a greater light, and that many have a great faith, being en­lightened but by a little spark.

Of a strange method by which God obligeth men to believe.

It were an impertinency and folly for one man to say to another, I com­mand thee to believe this: for Belief is not formed by Commandment, but by Perswasion. None is master of the Be­lief of another, no not of his own: For a man cannot Believe all that he would, yea, he is often constrained to believe that which he would not; as the devils believe, against their will, that there is a God. The object of Belief is not Imperative, but Indica­tive; nor is it proposed in form of a Commandment, but in that of a Nar­ration.

Neverthelesse, God doth not onely [Page 210]invite us to Believe, in presenting to us the Truths which are the objects of our Faith, but himself commandeth us: This is his Commandment, that we should Believe on the Name of his Son Jesus Christ, 1 Joh. 3.23. Upon which we ought to consider, that in commanding to believe, he can cause us to believe. His words, when it pleaseth him to animate them with his Spirit, plant Faith in the heart of man. Nor doth it import that they be narrative or pro­hibitive, or otherwise conceived: For their efficacy dependeth not upon the form of the expressions, but upon the secret vertue of their Author. It were a great impropriety every way, if a man should command me to believe; for with all his commandments he cannot cause me to believe, as long as my spi­rit perswadeth me to the contrary. But God, who is the Father and the Master of spirits, can speak in the terms of Commanding; because in command­ing to Believe, in effect he giveth the grace to Believe. So that language, [Page 211]which were absurd in the mouth of man, is admirable in the mouth of God.

Of those that promise to Believe, if the truth be shewn unto them.

There is nothing more ordinary a­mong them which dispute against the true Religion, then these words, Prove me that which ye say, and I will believe it. But these people speak as if Faith one­ly depended upon themselves. They promise that which is not in their power. This is as if a blinde man should promise to know colours, pro­vided they be shewed unto him. The Truth, what evidence soever it bring­eth with it, is not perceptible but to him that hath eyes capable of discern­ing it. Now this visive faculty is not given to all; although all presume that they have it.

I will not here speak of them who imagine that if they saw some Miracle, they should undoubtedly believe: Nor [Page 212]of them who think they have a great Faith, because they never doubted of any point of Religion: Nor of the learned, why they are more subject to doubts then the common sort of Chri­stians: Nor of other matters apper­taining to this subject, which I have touched in my Treatise of Popular Er­rours.

I will therefore passe to the second part, which is the doctrine of Works, contained in the Deca­logue.