CHAP. I. That according to the Doctrine of the Epi­cureans there can be no assurance of the Existence of a Deity.

ALthough the name of Epicurus was de­testable to Antiquity, in regard that placing the supreme attainment of human felicity in Delight, he seemed to deprave and adulterate whatso­ever is sublime and Generous in Philosophy; and [Page 2] moreover, though succeeding Ages▪ have had it in as much or g [...]ter abhorrence, [...] reason Time confirmed them in this opinion, that [...] End he aim [...]d at, was to ex [...]uish by his Maximes all the seeds of Honor, P [...]y, and Vertue; yet it is not my design, in terming those Epicureans, against whom this Dissertation is enterprized, to fasten that appellation upon them, as a piece of infa [...]y, but onely [...]o [...]note and specificate them by the Conformity [...]y have with that Person in his most capital Opinions. My purpose is not to repre­sent them in any other odious dress then that of the enormous and ill-beseeming appearance of their Perswasions in matter of Religion; and the sequel of this discourse shall manifestly enough discover, whether or no it hath been with Rea­son and Justice, that this Sect hath in all times been regarded with a sort of execration, not by popular judgement only, but also amongst the other Philosophers. Now whereas there is no Nation so projectedly Savage, as to be aliens to the belief of existence of some Deity, which man­kind ought to adore; no people, who do not es­say by some kind of performances to express the sentiments of Devotion and Honor they bear to­wards him; it is difficult to imagine there should be any persons found of minds so immensely di­stant from the common conceptions of reason, as to be able resolvedly to deny it. And the reason of the difficulty is this. That Notices which are so Universal, having a necessary foundation and firm root in Nature, it must needs be that such as stifle the same in themselves, have in the first place [Page 3] violated and defaced That. Hence it is that I would not formally accuse them who maintain that the Deity does not intermeddle in the affairs of this lower World, and conceive we ought to venerate the same only upon the account of its excellence, although there is not to be attended from it either Punishment for Wickedness or Compensation for Virtue; to have absolutely ba­nisht the knowledge of it from amongst them, and to make profession of believing there is a God onely to escape the infamous title of Atheist. Ci­cero indeed reproaches Epicurus with this artifice, and raises the suspicion upon his Followers; which nevertheless shall not ingage me to believe that the corruption of our Age could possibly af­ford birth to such monsters. But howsoever that particular be, certain it is beyond contradiction, that the Opinions of this Philosopher lead direct­ly to Impiety; and that if they who have em­braced them believe the existence of God, tis Na­ture which prevails in them, and which is never conquerable by all the attempts and outrages they imploy to conquer and suppress her.

Three things alone inform us there is a God; his Word, the World, and Man; and they teach us in truth, so evidently, and represent him so live­ty, that such eyes must be lostly obtenebrated, which do not perceive him therein. In his Word we meet with wonderful Revelations, and Pre­dictions ratified by Events after divers Ages, and with such Histories as no man knew, or could know; which notwithstanding, after they came to be discovered, the World it self hath consent­ed [Page 4] to, the mind of man acquiesces in them, and the shadows which have remained of them in the Fables of the Pagans do serve for even indu­bitable evidence and testimony unto them. On the other side it contains a doctrine of that excellen­cy, that no men of howsoever transcendent ac­complishments, could ever have invented the same; which is so conformable to our Reason, that although it be admirably sublime, there is nothing in it which subverts or incounters the soberness of our judgements; in a word, all the parts of it have such excellent proportion amongst themselves, that so many different spirits which have left it us in writing in several Ages, could not have carried on so unitedly and with such uniformity a design of like grandeur, without a guidance other then humane. Above all, there is remarkable in it a marveilous efficacy to comfort a man in his mise­ry, after it hath first given him to understand it, and unvailed his mind from the ignorance of him­self and his own calamity; which without doubt are effects, whereof our conscience instructs us we [...]annot be the cause. Lastly, this Divinity, wh [...] men have sought after, as it were, grop­ing [...]y in all Ages, is manifested to us therein with such clearness, that after so long experience which we have made of our natural blindness, it can be nothing but enormous stupidity not to see that God reveals himself therein, and that no o­ther could have spoken so suitably of his nature and of his perfections. In the mean while the Epicureans do not receive this Revelation as pro­ceeded from God, nor attribute so much to it by [Page 5] far as to the Writings of Plato, Cicero, and Aristotle. If they may be believed, all the Prophets were men of alienated understandings, and the Apostles vaga­bond circulators, who went about abusing the greatest part of the World. So that it is not from these men that they have learnt this truth, That there is a God; for if they gave credit to them in this particular, and avouched to hold it from them, why should they disbelieve them in the rest? Or how is it credible that so great & frontless Impost­ers as they imagine the Prophets and Apostles were, should be the first discoverers of so excellent a truth? Or if they did not first discover it so as to merit the title of its Inventors, and that notwith­standing we hold it from them, whence can it be conjectured they should have drawn it? It re­mains of necessity, that if they had it not from Di­vine Revelation, they attained it by study and contemplation, either of the World or of them­selves.

As to the World, it is easie that it could not be made by it self, and consequently must have an Author. The construction of so vast a fabrick speaks the power of its Architect; and its [...]dmi­rable motions, which have remained so re [...]lar and constant after so many Ages, offer to our wonder his incomprehensible Wisdom. In the Harmony of such variety of things, and contra­ry qualities, linked one with another, and in the convenient disposure of all the creatures to a sub­serviency in mutual offices, without which the World could not subsist, his Goodness is presented visible, as it were to our eye, and palpable by our [Page 6] hand. In the shaping of every thing and the apt Symmetry of its parts, appears an Art not only in­imitable by us, but even such as we are not capable perfectly to comprehend. The conservation of the Universe, and administration of all it con­taines, clearly evidences a Providence conduct­ing natural causes to their effects, and animating them with powers to produce them, which dis­poses of all evenements of things agreeably to his will, wisely ordering the most casual and contin­gent. And although there are not wanting some to complain of his regiment, and to reproach to him oftentimes the prosperity of the Bad, and calamitous estate of the Good; yet it does visibly enough defend and recompence Virtue, and on the contrary avenges Wickedness frequently, sometimes even to the displaying of dreadful judgements upon eminent impieties. Insomuch that there is not a Star in the Heavens, nor a Flower upon the Earth, whether considered in the gross or in parcel; but declares aloud that there is a God, Crea [...], Cons [...]rvator, and Gover­nor of all things. Nevertheless the Epicureans do not acknowledge that the World ever had a Be­ginning▪ or if it had according to their opinion, yet they will not confess that it was framed o­therwise then by the fortuitous concourse of in­finite pete [...]t Atomes; And for what concerns the regiment and conservation of it, they will not have the Deity imployed in the Government of Nature and things here below; and do not behold, as they profess, in all the Universe any footstep of his Providence. For tis their general Apo­phthegm, [Page 7] that God hath no affairs of his own, and takes no part in those of another, least he should interrupt his repose and the serene tranquillity of his eternal beatitude. So that if we believe them, all things come to pass in the World by a fatal ne­cessity, or as it pleases Fortune, who being blind and wonderfully temerarious, hath neither coun­sel nor aim in her actions. There remains the con­sideration of Man.

In our selves we may in the first place observe the structure of our Bodies, which are composed after so fair a Symmetrie, that the most excellent entendments are ravished and confounded in the speculation; and even the illterate and they which regard it more superficially, cannot but express their astonishment at the same. In effect, were there in them onely the Masterpiece of our Eyes, and that Activity of our Hands which ren­ders us so expedite to all sorts of services, there would be enough to raise amazement in us, and direct us to the knowledge of that infinite Wis­dom whereunto we ow our Originals. More­over, besides this Life which is the Energy of our Soul, and that imperceptible dispensation of spi­rits, which she manages with so much diligence for the motions of our Members, and the functi­ons of our Senses; The light of our Intellect, its agitations so vivid, regular conduct, and great capacity to comprehend all things, The faculty which inables us to reason concerning the Deity and dispute of it one against another, sufficiently evidences that there is some Principle of Under­standing without us, from which this ray we [Page 8] posses is derived into our Nature. For it must needs be that we have drawn it from without us; since by it we so far surpass our selves that our Fathers confes themselves unable to have communicated it to their chr [...]ten; as also, for their own particular, that they did not receive it from their fathers or Ancesters. More signally, the Fear which men na­turally have, when they apprehend the Deity will revenge their misdoings; and the Hope to find support from it, with which they comfort themselves as often as straits and necessity afflicts them; two Passions which are almost the sole mo­tives that ordinarily induce men to Religion; these discover indubitably that there is some Power, which makes it self universally percep­tible to all, aswell in punishments as in benefits and recompences. For how could it come to pass that all men should so conspire with an equal consentment in the knowledge of one and the same object, so remote as they are one from ano­ther, and separated by so many Mountains and Seas, but especially so divided and different in every thing else, in all manners, sentiments, rules of Life, garbes and customes; u [...]ess Nature the common [...]other had imbued them with the same instinct? Whence it comes to pass that as they vary even to admiration in the establishment of their Policies, either the diversity of the Climats of their habitation and the difference of their Temper and affairs obliging them thereunto, or being carried by the levity of their minds; and nevertheless all accord in this, That some form of Policy is necessary, since the society of men could [Page 9] not otherwise subsist: So we may remark an in­credible variety in the Mysteries and Religious Ceremonies of divers Nations, accordingly as they have received them from the tradition of their Ancestors, or respectively followed the guidance of their own humors and imaginations in the in­vention and continuance of the same; but yet they are unanimous in this, That there ought ne­cessarily to be some form of Religion, because the piety of man towards God could not other­wise subsist. Now as it is the evidence of the thing it self which obliges the Reason of men to judge that they ought to maintain some Societies amongst themselves; so that whoever acknow­ledges not the same, but denies to follow these natural inclinations, seems to have put off hu­manity; in like manner it is the evidence of the thing which constrains them to acknowledge it requisite to have some sort of Piety towards God; insomuch that he that rejects these suggestions of Reason, does no less then renounce the nature of man. But according to the Doctrine of Epi­curus, we do not hold our Being from God, and have nothing either to hope or sear from his Providence. On the contrary, if their suffrage be creditable, that Philosopher, in having deliver­ed men from the frights which conscience gives them in reflecting on impious actions, deserves incomparable glory, and such as might in some sort equal him and his disciples to God. The life of mortals (saith La [...]retius, Lib. 1.) lying before as it were oppressed and groaning under Religi­on, which appeared from the Heavens against it [Page 10] with a dreadful aspect, Epicurus was the first a­mongst men who dar'd to advance against it and encounter it.

Whereas therefore all these things have not been effectual to perswade them that God created the world, and that he preserves and rules it; whence have they taken those reasons which have any appearance of sufficiency to prove to them that there is such a Being? It were a strange thing, that they should not see a whit amongst so many marveils which are resplendent on all sides, and have ravished all Nations, however naturally enemies of the Deity, with beholding them, and enforced them to submit themselves to do homage to him [...]d render him some kind of veneration; [...]d y [...] be so quick-sighted in other reasons which no other persons besides them­selves could ever comprehend.

It is true, Epic [...]us sometimes affirmed that this truth, There is a God; Also, It is meet that all men honor him ▪ was of the number of those which are called Common Conceptions, or Proleptical Opinions, because without instruction of others, ev [...] one is teacher of the same to himself. And peradventure these men will also aver that they have drawn the knowledge thereof from this fountain. But this will in no wise warrant them; For whence come those Common notions, and from what source have we anticipated them? [Page 11] Indeed we do not deny but there are certain Ve­rities which are so evident that the Faculty whose office it is to contemplate them and discern the true from the false, cannot mistake in the judgement it makes of them; and we know also that the humane Intellect has a natural disposition to such acting; whence it proceeds that all Na­tions have consented thereunto, and always passed a uniform judgement of them. Upon this consideration, they have been termed Common Conceptions by the Ancient Philosophers, because they were not peculiar to the Athenians or Spar­tans, Peripateticks or Stoicks; but were received by all that have the use of Reason. Such is for example, this Proposition, The whole is greater then its part: But others of deeper intelligence have believed that we do not bring them with us every man out of his mothers womb, but that they are produced from objects which have offer­ed to us occasions of reasoning and collecting those general Maximes from several particular experiences. So that the first person that divided a thing into two parts, repeating the bi­partition over and over, and always observing that the parts of it were less then the whole in its intireness; and then coming from these particu­lar observations to consider the nature of the thing in it self, the discursive Faculty sum'd up that universal Theoreme. The original knowledge of which is consequently deduced from the pre­sence of objects, which furnished the matter to the ratiocination, from whence such conclusions do emerge. Now the Epirureans cannot aver that [Page 12] they attained the knowledge of the Deity by this means; since they maintain that nothing hath presented them with any shadow or footstep to raise their discourse to the Nature of God. For if the knowledge of him be deducible from the contemplation of sensible things, it must be in the way of mounting to knowledge of the cause by the mean of its effects: but according to the Epi­cureans, there is no such relation of affinity be­tween God and the objects of our senses. How then? Would they assert a like correspondence between the understanding of man and this pro­position, There is a God, to cause us acquiesce in it forth with without further ratiocination, as there is between the Eye and Corporeal Light, to ac­knowledge it assoon as it is seen? I conceive this is not their opinion, or at least it ought not. For Light carries it's credential in it's natural splen­dor, as all other sensible qualities of bodies have something in them to make themselves perceived, and which Characterises them; so that to know them there is no need of [...] thing more then to apply them [...] to the Organ of sense; Where­as this proposition of the existence of the Deity do's not demonstrate it self, nor immediately prove its verity to the Understanding. Reasons must be fetcht from elsewhere to demonstrate it, & other principles imploy'd, which are naturally more known to us, and have greater proportion with our Faculties. Wherefore, he that receives not any of those proofs which are brought from with [...] to support it, can be no more assured of it; then he that is not yet come forth of his [Page 13] Mothers Womb can be certain of the truth o [...] this Enunciation, There is light in the Sun, were he capable of understanding the words in which it is conceived.

I know not but some of these Worthies may op­pose, that we hold this verity from tradition of the Ancients, seeing they have left us very ma­ny others, of which we are not at all in doubt: For prudent persons have always ascrib'd much to the opinions of their Ancestors, especially if they were such as atchieved any thing towards the establishment and conservation of Common­wealths, or made provision for containing men in the respect due to Religion. The reason of which is a perswasion that they were more illumi­nated then their Posterity, either because the world was not so invaded with corrupt maners in their time, or for that they were not yet much re­moved from the Beginning of things. But in case this should be urged by them, yet it will be perpetually necessary that those Ancients receiv­ed this truth from without themselves, since they could not have it from themselves any more then we. Shall it therefore be likewise from tra­dition of their predecessors? If so, we shall run back to infinity; and whereas all other traditions have necessarily had some beginning, this will be found to be eternal. Now this is a thing which ha's not so much as the appearance of reason, es­pecially in the mouths of them who are oblig'd to confess that the World it self had a beginning, being fabricated by the casual coalition of Atoms. For if the World began to be, there is no ascend­ing [Page 14] by divers generations of men to eternity; but we must at length subsist in the first of all, who cannot have had this important truth from himself any more then we, but from the revelation of God, who must have discovered the same to him, to the end he might ascertain his Descendants thereof, and leave it to them in deposito to the end of the world. Now in what place was it that God made this revelation, if, as these people con­tend, there is not, nor ever was, either in man, the world, or any Oracle whatsoever, any trace or token of the existence of his Being and of his Divine Virtues? And if God had so much care at the beginning to reveal this Truth to the first of men, to the end they might not lead a life altoge­ther semblable to that of Brutes; why do they deny his Providence, of which this is an effect supremely important? Again, If God was plea­sed his Providence should appear in this occasion, why should he instantly after arrest the actions of it; as if after having let scape either constrain­edly or by inadvertency a beam of his Divinity he retir'd himself incontinently from before our eyes, and became envelopp'd in darkness eter­nally impenetrable? Lastly, what will be the certainty or incertainty of this tradition, I will use no other proof to shew, then such as I shall draw from the confession of the Epicureans them­selves. It is a tradition as ancient and as constant amongst men in general, That God takes care of the concernments of mankind, as is in the School of Epicurius the tradition That there is a God. Moreover, the world, and the occurrences that [Page 15] arrive in it every day, present the humane un­derstanding with proofs incomparably more evi­dent that there is a Providence which governs us, then this proposition, There is a God, furnishes us alone with assurances of its proper verity. For on what side soever it be regarded, wholly naked, as I have laid it open, it affords not any means to the mind to close with it for true, and settle it self upon it; whereas on all hands we meet with the materials of our reasonings upon which we ground the belief of a Providence. Neverthe­less Epicurus and his Disciples have dar'd to reject flatly the conduct of Providence, without weigh­ing either the tradition of their predecessors, or the evidences which support the same with such apparent firmness. What will hinder all the re­mainder of men from being as inclinable to deny the existence of God, if we have no other assu­rance of it then so wild and vagous a tradition?

Let us allow Epicurus a little more, and suppose the case that Nature alone hath imbued us with this truth from our birth, without any need of re­ceiving the impression of it by the contemplation of objects we have before our eyes; Yet it is in­comprehensible how certain Idea's of truths, pure­ly intellectual, could be ingraved▪ & preserve their lineaments in the materialls of which we are framed; besides that experience teaches all our fathers, that when they gave being to their chil­dren, it was at such time as they least of all thought of these Common Conceptions. But grant it possible; yet what is it which they understand by Nature? For if by that word they pretend to [Page 16] denote the concourse of those indivisible Parti­cles, of which their fancy will have the the world compos'd; or rather that Order which is be­tween causes purely natural and their effects (however other Philosophers describe it) seeing this kind of nature hath not it self any apprehen­sion of these verities, how hath it communicated that to man which it hath not, and whereof it is incapable to receive the least lineaments or seeds? It must needs be therefore, that it was God who writ them in the Understanding of man, either in him that had them first, to trans­mit the same to his Descendants, which is absolute­ly unimaginable; or in every individual person, from the instant of their conception, which would be highly necessary. Now if God hath had so great care of mankind as not to suffer one single person to come into the world, in whose breast he hath not first imprinted this divine Con­ception, how irrational is it to esteem him negli­gent both of us and of that which concerns us? And seeing he hath taken this care of us at a time wherein we could not render him any ho­nor; why should we not hope to obtain new be­nefits from his hand by our gratitude and by our prayers? I conclude therefore, that notwith­standing the pertinacious gainsaying of these peo­ple, and with whatever artifice they endeavor either to maintain or disguise their sentiments, they believe not at all the existence of a God; or if they do believe it, they have such perswasion from arguments which induce to the acknow­ledgment of his Especial Providence.

CHAP. II. Wherein the Service of God consists; And what that is the Epicureans can render him according to their Principles.

ALthough the precedent Discourse should not yield us this result, That the Epicureans being constant to their own Principles, cannot be as­sured of the existence of a Deity; and albeit we should have received this Common Notion from the faint impress of that which is called Nature in our Soul, without owing it to God: Yet this knowledge being so loose and incertain, it is im­possible it should lead us in a due manner to ren­der that honor and worship to God which our duty obliges us to; because it is natural to us to be but little solicitous of such things, of whose Being we are not indubitably assured, and espe­cially if they be such as utterly inconcern us. We reverence our Kings out of regard to the emi­nence of their Dignity, but they govern and pro­tect us, and the peace of the Commonwealth and safety of every particular person depends on the homage and obedience which is rendred to them. But how few are there, that in the whole course of their lives have so much as one reverential thought for Princes and Potentates, who are se­parated from them with onely an arm of the Sea or a Mountain? and how much less do we inter­tain [Page 18] any thoughts of alliegiance and awfulness to­wards the Mogal, or Prester John, or the great Cham of the Tartares? Yet if there should be any one so sensibly respectful of Royal Dignity, as not to think of the Kings of Persia or China, but with some veneration; in such case neverthe­less it is requisit [...] that he be absolutely perswaded, that there are Kings in Persia and China, and give an intire belief to the relations that affirm it. But I imagine there is no man so unboundedly superstitious in this particular, as to bear honor in his breast towards those that rule in the South­ern Continent, onely upon inducement of ha­ving seen such a Part of Earth drawn in the foot of a Map, and that there is some likelihood they are inhabited. In like manner who can doubt that the worship which the Epicureans render to God is extreamly cold and languid, and that they would not bear it patiently if the remembrance of him were exterminated out of the world? Nevertheless, being they seem desirous men should believe otherwise of them, let us under­take the inquiry, into the measure and rate of that honor they pretend to express towards him according to their Principles. For in regard Epicurus once writ a Tract concerning Piety to­wards the Gods (as Diogenes, Laertius and Cicero have recorded) he seems to have been willing it should be conceived that his intention was not to banish Religion from amongst mankind.

To pass by at present the particular of outward Ceremonies, which occur in all Religions, where­of we shall treat hereafter; and to confine my [Page 19] self to that onely which is most essential to, and as it were the soul of, Religion, I assert that all the service mortals are able to render to the su­pream Being is reducible to these four principal Heads; First, Adoration of his excellent nature above all other Beings in the Universe; Next, Affiance in his goodness, with expectation of assistance from him in exigencies. Thirdly, The expressing of Thankfulness for benefits already received. And lastly, The embracing and practice of Virtue, in the conduct of life, out of regard and obedience to him. As to the trust and de­pendance upon his goodness, the most devout Nations have always with good Reason esteemed it a principal part of his honor and of his service. For if there be any thing that can challenge vene­ration in the World, it is the power to do good; if any thing love and commendation, it is the will to put that power in use. Wherefore, for that whatever is venerable and praise-worthy in the inclinations of men, must be in a degree infinite­ly more eminent in the Deity, as well because of the infinite perfection of his being, as in that he is the source from whence all other things derive the perfections they own; of necessity these two properties are to be found in him; One, that he takes pleasure to expand himself in acts of good­ness towards his creatures, and particularly to­ward mankind, in whom his image is resplen­dent; The other, that his power to do Good is incapable of circumscription. Hence it was that the most Religious people, as I said above, have accounted that God became offended if men had [Page 20] less confidence in him then was sutable to the me­rit of that infinite power and eminent goodness; and in the Books we receive for sacred, such per­sons are expresly praised and commended, whose minds were reposed with greatest assurance upon his care, and which remained unshaken by the assault of great distresses and perplexities.

Now as to performance of this sort of service towards God, it is absolutely renounced by the Epicureans, in as much as they recount it amongst the principal requisites of the Divine Beatitude, that as he is without all participation of our ne­cessities, so he does not give himself the trouble of having any resentment or solicitousness con­cerning them. Whereby, under pretext of ad­vancing the glory of his felicity, they blemish the splendour of his Goodness, in which consists the principal perfection of his Being. It is, most certainly, a happy condition to injoy such an af­fluence of all sorts of good things, as not to stand in need of others, and to be sufficient to ones self. But it is also beyond denial incomparably more honorable to afford to another some parti­cipation of this happiness, especially when it is incapable of any diminution, saving by a perpe­tually reserved and solitary injoyment, without communicating to any other person. They ought to have ascribed to so perfect a nature at least as much commendation of benignity as Ennius gives him that shews the way to deviating travellers, or bestows fire upon his neighbor, or lights his Candle. For so are his words recited by Cicero;

For the next particular, Prayer, they are so far from allowing it a part of the service of God, that on the contrary they look upon it as a thing ra­ther meriting scorn or laughter, being either an evidence of poorness of spirit in the adverse ac­cidents of fortune, or a token of abject slothful­ness in such as refusing to take the pains for pro­viding by industry and vigilance to their needs, recurre to God for support of their worthlesse­ness.

Certainly if there be any good consolation to be had in the sufferance of calamities, it will as soon be found among those that follow a Religi­on, whatever it be, as among those by whom all sorts are universally rejected; and if examples of magnanimity are to be met with, they must not be sought for amongst such as place the supream Good of mankind in corporeal Pleasure. This opinion is too soft and effeminate of it self, to in­spire men with vigorous and masculine senti­ments in the midst of adversities. This is not from the School that gave us Cato's and Regulus's; but a more likely Seminary of such as Aristippus and Heliogabalus. Whereas on the other side, the Doctrine that instructs men to address to the Dei­ty in time of their afflictions, do's not prescribe them to abandon the ship to the incertainty of the tempest, and to lay aside the practice of pru­dence, [Page 22] under colour that all is within the care of divine Providence. Not the Christians onely, but likewise the Philosophers themselves have constantly believ'd, that the Providence of God and Prudence of man do very well consist toge­ther. But the Epicureans manifest that they are not at all indebted to themselves in point of good opinion, in that being no more then the dream of a shadow (as Pindar expresseth it, [...]) they nevertheless esteem themselves sufficiently foresighted and intelligent to pourvey and take order for all their necessities, without the assist­ance of a soveraign power. Is it in them to pre­vent the Hail from frustrating the hopes of Har­vest in the destruction of their Corn, or to hinder the Inundations of Rivers from ravaging their fields? Can they forecast against Pestilences and Mortalities, or secure themselves from the Gout and Stone? So far short is their ability in these particulars, that they know not how to warrant themselves from being strangled by the seed of a grape or a [...]ly, if such a contingency should be­tide them. But this is not the onely Vertue they vaunt of; for another part of their glory is in the invincible firmeness of their courage. What strength soever Vertue may have attain'd to a­mongst them, by serving as a handmaid to the pleasure of the Body, and pourveying all ways and means to foster the same, which it seems is the main imployment they assign it; yet it can be hardly imagined, that an Epicurean should fall in­to the calamities of Priamus, or feel the pains of poor Philoctetes, without a sigh or exclamation. [Page 23] And that magnificent boast, that the Sage of Epi­curus would cry out, even in the Bull of Phalaris, that he was at ease, was never accounted in the censure of the truely judicious but for a vain and extravagant Rodomontade. Religion, on the contrary, is purposed to shew men their vanity, of which experience convinces them; it teaches them to depend absolutely on Heaven, and there­by frames them to humility, the Virtue best becom­ing mortality; affording them in the mean time a support in God incomparably more firm, and a refuge of greater assurance, then all they are ever able to fancy or invent of themselves.

Of grateful acknowledgement for the benefits which we injoy as Tenants from the divine Li­berality, there is no mention at all among those who esteem themselves not obliged to it for the least hair of their heads. For whereas they af­firm that the Universe was modell'd in the excel­lent order we behold it, by the accidentary coag­mentation of infinite little bodies; it must needs be consequent to their opinion, that the first men were framed by the tumultuous and turbulent concourse of those small particles, and that the Architecture of all our members, and the admir­able vivacity of our Understandings, do also ow their Original unto the same. Verily, these men are much to be wondred at, whose gross belief determines the world and man, in the fabrick of whom appears so great Art and Wisdom, to have been made by chance; notwithstanding they are convinced that of a million of letters huddled to­gether and scattered upon the ground, they can [Page 24] never with a thousand experiments by the same chance compose the two first verses of the Aeneis. What reason therefore can they pretend to justi­fie their perversity, in choosing rather to ow the wonderful Machine of their Eyes, and the Un­derstanding which is the Eye of the Soul, to For­tune, which ha's none at all, then to God, whom themselves make profession to acknowledge for a wise and intelligent Nature.

It remains then, to inquire, whether from the exercise of Virtue, which is practiced amongst men, there may, according to the opinion of this Sect, any honor accrue to the Divine nature. We dispute not at present whether they can be vir­tuous, or not; although it be difficult to conceive they should hold Virtue in any esteem, who have none at all of Piety; and what charity they can have towards men, who are void of gratitude for the benefits they receive from God; and lastly, what discrimination they can make between Vice and Virtue, who believe not God ever distin­guisht them one from another by Laws, or that Justice and equity have any thing more to recom­mend them besides the authority of Legislators, and advantages of State. Our search onely is, whether from the Virtue of the Epicureans, admit­ting them not destitute of all, there redounds any glory to the Divine Nature. If there do, it con­sists either in this that they devote themselves to render obedience to him; for it is glorious to great persons to have their inferiors obey them; or in regard it is he that produces whatsoever is good in them; as the commendation of the effect [Page 25] reflects upward to the cause; or because, in imi­tating him, they represent the image of his Vir­tue in their own; being we cannot praise a pourtraict for the excellency of its air and Beau­ty, without intimating as great applause of the fair countenance, it represents. Now in the first place, whereas God hath not manifested his will to men in this point, how can they obey it? For where there is neither law nor commande­ment, it is an easie truth there is no place either for transgression or obedience. And here it is fruit­less to fly to the umbrage of those Proleptical Opi­nions, which are naturally imprinted in our spi­rits. For if Nature hath ingraved in the soul at their first conception, that God commands them to be Virtuous, how is this consistent with their denying that the Supream Being is interessed in that which concerns us, seeing he hath taken or­der in the most important particular of our life, which is to give us rules for the conduct of the same agreeably to reason? And how could Na­ture, of her self destitute of all knowledge of Vice and Virtue, endue us with these Idea's and common Notices, without the instinct of the Deity? Moreover, how is it come to pass that Nature hath principled them to discriminate be­tween Honest and Nesarious actions, without instructing them at the same time, that to these latter belongeth Vengeance, and to the other Recompense and Praise; and that there can be no other then God, from whose hands both the one and the other is to be expected. For true it is, the Difference between Vice and Virtue is not [Page 26] more naturally known, then it is naturally known that Virtue challengeth some Commendation, and that Vice ought to be attended with Blame for its retribution; Commendation and Blame, I say, which are but sleight matters, and of small consideration, if they be hoped or feared onely from the mouths of Men. Are the Censure or Estimate we make one of another of equivalency to what Nero and Sardanapalus have merited by their Villanies and Abominable turpitudes? How are they hurt now, in that their Memories are in­famous and execrable? And the Applause which we give in these days to the Virtue of Regulus, is it a recompense proportionate to the miseries which he endured for love of his Country? But these Opinionists manifest that 'tis not in obedi­ence to God that they live honestly and upright­ly, if at least there be discernable any Tract of Honesty and Justice in their Lives.

Nor do they more liberally ascribe to God the glory of their Virtue, as being the Author of the same; otherwise, they should of consequence ac­knowledge that they received some benefit from him, yea the greatest of all benefits, and with­out which all the rest together deserve not to be called such; a confession which they would not make even upon the Rack. So that it remaines onely, that the Image of God himself is relucent in their Virtue. But how will that hold good? Since according to the principles of this singular Discipline, the Nature of God, how luminous soever it be in it self, is so abstruse from mortals knowledge, that we cannot comprehend the [Page 27] least resemblance of the lineaments of Virtue with its Prototype. We may sooner come to understand what are the properties of the Load­stone, or the causes of the Reciprocation of the Sea, or the most unknown influences of the Stars: because it is possible at least to discover something of them in their effects, and the assiduous con­templation we spent upon them would perhaps clear up a little portion of the obscurities which enwrap them. But God being not revealed to us in any effect, on what rocks shall we climbe up into the Heavens to behold him there, or with what instrument shall we sound his Abysses? Now there is no way to comprehend the resem­blance which is between the Model and its Image, but by having either both before the eyes, or at least a lively Idea of both in the minde. Adde hereunto, that whosoever should imitate the Deity according to the Maximes of these Teach­ers, should never do good to any man: he should never afford succour to the Miserable, be­cause God do's not suffer himself to be moved at their cryes, and cannot admit his Beatitude to be disquieted by resentments of compassion in such cases: he should take no care of the Socie­ties of men, since God leaves them at random: he should punish no malefactors, being God con­nives at their crimes and is not at all offended with their enormities; good men should never find relief and support from his hands, seeing God ha's no regard to the oppression that afflicts them; or if he behold the same 'tis with neglect and in­flexibility: he should enjoy all his pleasures by [Page 28] himself, because God do's not communicate his felicity to any other person. But in as much as God is eternally happy, and injoys ineffable contentments, it is absolutely impossible they should resemble him. For who is he in the World that can boast himself to be happy? and in this brevity of our Life, who is there so foolish as not to despaire of immortality. But in that where­in they can imitate him, if they undertake to do it, they render themselves the most unprofitable men of the Earth, and cannot so much as exempt themselves from the reproof of being vitious and wicked. The nearer they approach to that God whom they describe with such qualifications, the greater infamy will they draw upon their con­versation; on the other side, the further they recede from him, the more recommendation will be due unto them. But I do not conceive, but such persons in whom is remaining any spark; I will not say of conscience and respect towards God, but of judgement and common sense, will account this Doctrine yet far more abominable then it is false, extravagant and inconsistent. Now all the Piety of the Epicureans amounts to this, that they adore the Deity out of respect to his Virtues, and the excellence of his Nature; which in what manner they can perform, is our next inquiry.

CHAP. III. With what kind of Adoration the Epicure­ans, according to their Principles can ve­nerate the Deity.

WE do not gainsay to Epicurus, or those which follow his steps in our times, but that the Deity in respect of the excellency of his Nature is to be adored, although neither the punishment for wickedness, or the reward of Virtue lay in his hands: so far are we from pretending that, that by attributing to him perfections incomparably more excellent then they do, we represent him, in himself worthy of much greater veneration. Notwithstanding, we judge, that this considerati­on alone, if his care and government of humane affairs be renounced, is insufficient to induce men to render him such honor as is proportionable in any measure to what we ow him; for, as to the performance of such as correspendent to this natural excellence, 'tis a point too high for the utmost vigor of our Understanding to attain to, however exalted by culture and industry. There are three motives which use to be most prevalent with us, to conceive any esteem of things; namely, The profit we receive by them, The plea­sure we find in them, and Their natural beauty. Now there is no person whom experience hath not taught, that this last consideration is the least [Page 30] powerful of all, and that there is rarely found any affected with it, where at least one of the other two, or both do not accompany it. Hence it comes to pass, that the number of those is small who devote themselves to the searches of things of no great use to humane Life; few that study those Sciences which lye in Contemplation in comparison of them which apply themselves to the Arts which afford some fruit or benefit; and even the greatest part of those speculative Inquir­ers make their Theories subservient to the exer­cise of the Sciences, wherewith they support themselves; as Natural Philosophy to Medicine, Geometry to Architecture and Peinture, Astro­logy to Agriculture and Navigation, and in like manner of the rest. The Metaphysicians them­selves, do not willingly spend their pains in that Science, which is the chief and most eminent of all, and hath for its object the things which most deserve our knowledge, but to the end to teach the same, and that onely for the further end of profit which accrues to them by it. Wherefore if it should once come to be imprinted in the san­cies of men, that there is nothing to be expected from the Deity, all thoughts of him would soon be worn out of their minds; and there would not be found so much as the thousandth part of man­kind, that would concern themselves with any greater care of him, then they do of the valour of Hector, or the exploits atchieved by Hercules and Theseus. Concerning the second attractive, Pleasure which hath a very powerful influence over our affections, it is difficult to imagine that [Page 31] there is ever so little in the knowledge of God, such as Epicurus represents to us. For all the de­lectation which the knowledge of things affords, when there ariseth no other benefit from them, is in a manner derived from one of these two foun­tains; either in that they are worthy to be known because of their natural beauty, as the Heavens with their motions, and the constant courses and revolutions of the Planets; or for that we be­hold Truth most lively and clearly displayed in them, which in what subject soever it be found, is supreamly agreeable to the Mind of man. As for example, One esteemed it so amiable in this proposition, That in a right angled Triangle, the side which subtends the right angle, makes a square equal to the squares made of the two sides containing the same, that in great ravishment, having been the first that found out the demonstration thereof, al­though he could hope no profit from it, it is re­corded that he went home and sacrificed a whole Hecatomb. Now besides, that to be in a capacity of receiving Delectation from the knowledge of such things as these, it is requisite to be gifted with a quick, piercing, and comprehensive Wit, and that the number is not great, which Nature hath favourably framed hereunto, and of conse­quence onely a few persons will be affected and drawn to the knowledge of Epicurus's Deity by that motive; the contentment even of them that imploy themselves in the same cannot be consider­able. For, as to the certainty, and assuredness of such knowledge, I would demand wherein it must consist; seeing according to their assertion, [Page 32] all that can be known of God is drawn from I know not what natural vagous and indetermin'd notion, which hath not been of force enough to restrain all Nations from ascribing an innumerable variety of shapes to the Deity, this of one sort, and that of another, not seldom repugnant and contradictory. And whereon is the confidence of Epicurus grounded, when he boasts in particu­lar of the clearness of his knowledge in this re­gard, whilst the God which he sometimes fancied to himself is rather a Chimera, or the extrava­gance of a man in a Phrenzy, then a conception suteable to a Philosopher or deducted from sober inference of reason. ‘The Deity (saith he in Cicero) hath not a body, but as it were a body: nor blood; but something of neer equivalence to blood.’ Notwithstanding, he teaches that this nature, consisting neither of body nor spirit, and consequently whereof it is impossible for him to frame any rational Idea in his imagination, is shaped after the resemblance of a humane body, because that is of all figures the most agreeable and commodious. But if all the Conceptions wherewith Epicurus and the other Philosophers have offered to represent the Deity be thus confu­sed a [...]d incertain, it is incredible they should yield any solid▪ pleasure▪ and so the Adoration which will result from thence, cannot be but ve­ry sleight, flitting and defective.

In effect, the first consideration which ought to be made of the nature of God, is to know whe­ther he be finite or infinite in his essence; foras­much as infinity of essence implyes infinity of all [Page 33] properties and Vertues; and on the other side, if the essence be limited, it is necessary that all facul­ties or Virtues which are in God be reduced and proportioned to the measure of his extention. And this is absolutely important to be known, for the rendring unto God the honor which apper­tains to him. For if his essence be limited, & conse­quently, if the attributes which are in him wor­thy of adoration be likewise limited; although they should far surpass what ever can be vener­able in our nature, yet it follows, there will be always a proportion between him and us. So that the Adoration of the Deity will be an honor but of the same species with that which we ren­der to some Worthy Person, and there will be no difference between the one and the other saving of Greater and Lesser, that is, in regard of de­grees onely; suteably to what we observe in lights which proceed from luminous bodies, in which there is this difference, that some are more dusky, and others more glittering; which because they agree in this that they are emanations of principles of one and the same nature, such as the bodies are, we love them with the same sort of affection, and measure that affection by the de­grees of clarity or obscurity we perceive in them. Did I say, there would be a proportion between God and us? There would undoubted­ly; but we should scarce contain our selves from believing the advantage to be on our part. For as we esteem the Light by the knowledge which we have of it, and the benefit which arrives to us by it; so that a man, to whom the Sun should be [Page 34] eternally absconded, would make more account of the Moon, or even of a candle that inlighten's him then of that: So they that love Virtue would have greater esteem for Socrates and Aristides, or some other grand personage, such as they were, upon the account of knowing them, and being able to advantage themselves in the imitation of them, by taking from them some prudent rule or custom for conduct of their Lives, then they would do of the God of Epicurus, who reserves himself in­velop'd in obscure Clouds, and do's not afford us so much as a glimpse of the least splendor of his Nature.

On the contrary, If God be infinite in his essence, and, which necessarily follows, in all his Properties, he deserves an Honor, altogether of another kind from that which is competent to Men. For there being no proportion between a Being Finite and Infinite, there likewise can be none between whatever results from them. Cer­tainly whosoever should value a man onely so far as he is a Living Creature, without any regard to the Reason that infinitely differences him from Brutes, he would do him a greater affront and outrage then could admit of any reparation: and on the other side he that should esteem a beast al­most at the same rate that we repute a man in as much as he is indued with reason, would attri­bute a worth to it, to which it is by no right in­titl'd, and would brangle the rules of the Nature of things. Therefore he that shall ascribe honor to God after the same sort with that which is per­form'd towards Men, unquestionably sins against [Page 35] him in case he be infinite, and abases him infinite­ly below the condition of his Being: whereas, contrarily, if he be of a nature finite and circum­scribed with certain bounds, to adore him as an essence immense in himself and in his properties, would not be to adore the Deity but a fantasm of a mans own brain and a Chimaera. And in the imagination of the thing it self, besides the vitio­sity attending the Adoration which is framed ac­cordingly, there would be an error too gross and insupportable, whereby that which is finite should become transfigured into that which is not so, contrary to the Laws of nature her self, which knows not to allow any thing for Infinite, if God be not.

Now forasmuch as the motions of the Body fol­low those of the soul, and represent the same; if there be, as is evident, a difference so great be­tween those two sorts of adoration in reference to the inferiour acts of the Understanding; of necessary consequence the Corporeal Gestures which proceed from the same, must be extreamly different one from another. So that as the Ado­ration of an infinite thing is an ingulphing of the cogitation in ravishment and admiration of it's object, conjoyned with as profound humility as the soul of man is capable of, without limitation, restriction, or reserve; so the exterior comport­ments appendant to the same ought to be such as may most express the acknowledgement of our selves to be nothing, and our deference of all honor and glory to that which we venerate. But since the honor which is render'd to a finite thing [Page 36] is exactly confined and determined by our mind, onely to so much as it is judged worthy of the same, that is, according to the measure of its Virtues: humility also bounding it self where it deemes the extent of those Virtues to be so; it must needs be that the Gestures of the Body like­wise in representing our submission, will repre­sent that we do not offer it without some limitati­on, and that we esteem not the thing beyond the value of its being. Hence it is evident that in so great an incertainty of the Nature of God, which we see according to the Doctrine of the Epicure­ans, a man cannot boast to know assuredly, it will be consequent that his Disciples be brought to render him such honor as is no more competent to him, then that which one should assign to a beast in respect to the excellence of its Understan­ding, and so mock him with impertinent service: Or rather, in stead of adoring him as God, we shall honor him as a man; like as if one should make the same account of a Grand Personage, and a Handsome Horse: which would be no Worship rendred to God, but an outrage done to him and a Sacriledge. Or lastly, in case a man should happen to be in the right, it would onely be by hazard; And with what zeal can that service be accompanied, or how can it be acceptable to God, which is rendred inconsiderately and at a venture?

The second consideration requisite to be per­pended concerning the Nature of God, is, whe­ther he be corporeal, or not; of which they can in no wise be assured, if they will hold themselves [Page 37] to their Principles. For if there be nothing in the world that declares him clearly to them, how come they to have so raised and sublime a spirit, as to be able to divine of what his substance is com­posed? But, because heretofore their predeces­sors in disputing this Point against the other Phi­losophers, found themselves wonderfully impli­cated, what side soever they took, they answer­ed in a kind of illusion of the World, that it was not a corporeal, but in a manner a corporeal es­sence. And although they assever that to injoy the Pleasures in which the Felicity of the Deity consists, it is necessary the same should be instru­cted with some kind of Organes correspondent to the senses of our Bodies; from whence it seems to result that they hold it to be really corporeal; yet when they are press'd to speak affirmatively, they have not the presumption to determine it so, but recur to those illusions of words, which place it between Bodies and Spirits, as it were in an Im­aginary Predicament. Now this is of greater consequence, then they deem it to be. For if God be a substance that partakes nothing of the nature of Bodies, to possess our imaginations with an Idea of him of corporeal shape, how ex­cellent soever it be, is, in stead of honouring him, to defame his glorious Majesty; in as much as a Nature absolutely simple and spiritual, far sur­passing in dignity the condition of Bodies, who­ever conceives the same under the Idea of a body, debases it many degrees beneath the worth of its being. Wherefore, if besides the image they so frame of it in their thought, they proceed further [Page 38] to represent the same in Marble or Copper by ar­tifice of the hand, what is this less then doing the same wrong, which should be done to an Excel­lent Understanding in saying it resembled a Gourd. And if he be corporeal, and they do not conceive him so, they will fall into the same in­convenience I mentioned above, of worship­ing, not the truth of the thing to which they pretend to render honor, but the dreams of their own fancy.

To what I have already evinced I shall further adjoyn, that it is natural to men, when they think upon any thing, to transmit their Minds to the place in which they imagine such thing to be; which is the reason, why, although we never were among the Mores and Toupinemboults, yet we cannot restrain our selvs, when we sometimes call them to remembrance, srom sending our thoughts to the places of the Geographical Charts, in which the Regions of their habitations are de­signed. And if a Peasant happily hear mention of those remote people, he presently fancies be­fore his Fys the Sea that lyes nearest his habitation, because he ha's understood it is necessary to pass over that to arrive at the place of the world where those Savages abide. It is, indeed, no­thing at all Incongruous or strange, that Nature should have given us such inclinations, because they serve in some measure to recreate and arrest ou [...] [...]inds, whose thoughts being otherwise ro­ving and without guidance would be lost and va­nish of themselves; as the irradiations of our eyes are dissipated in the wide Acr, when there [Page 39] is nothing before us to arrest our view. And not­withstanding we are conscious it is thus in all oc­casions, yet it is more particularly remarkable when ever we find our selves agitated with some vehement passion of Love and Desire, Fear or Hope. Now if the Epicureans represent to them­selves a Deity of a finite Nature, whether Corpo­real or Incorporeal it matters not; I would de­mand of them to what side of him is it that their thoughts guide them? Have they credible intel­ligence where God is? in the Heaven, or in the Air? in the Sea, or in the Center of the Earth? For as for other men, they indeed are perswaded that he is in the Heavens, because they believe he hath there display'd at the beginning, and doth likewise still display more Effects of his eter­nal Power, and inexpressible Goodness. But the Epicureans are persons that acknowledge no tract or appearance of these Attributes, imagining that admirable and glorious Machine of the Ce­lestial Fabrick to have been composed of so many Spheres in the fair order we behold, onely by the accidental meeting of Atomes. But if the Splendor of that Radiant Arche seems to them a more sutable residence for the Deity, then ha­bitation on the earth or in the recesses of the o­ther Elements, who hath informed them in which Hemisphere he is, whether in ours, or in that of the Antipodes. Then if by that chance, to which they ascribe all things, they should hit so luckily, or determine their sancies to think him on the side of our Hemisphere, will not the Epicureans that are on the other side of the world be very [Page 40] much mistaken, if they should likewise have this imagination on their part that God resides in that moiety of Heaven which covers them, and which they behold? Add hereunto that neither the one nor the other can have assurance that God sees them, or that he understands their hearts, and esteems their motions and thoughts acceptable un­to himself. Now is it possible that a man that doubts whether God hears and sees him, should have any rational devotion towards him? In what fashion can that person serve God in the se­cret of his Thought, that is not assured whether God hath Eyes piercing enough to know the in­clinations of his Heart? If they conceive God to be of an infinite nature, as in truth he is, so that he is present to all things, even to their most se­cret and profound meditation, (which without question they never learnt from the discipline of their Master) there will su [...]ely remain no trouble to them to what part they should direct the thoughts of their minds; besides that I understand not how it is more unworthy of the Majesty of God, or more interruptive of his eternal quiet, to govern all things in the Universe, then to know them so nearly, and penetrate into them with his essence. As the infinite comprehension of his Wisdom gives him the understanding of all things exempt from solicitude and perplexi­ty; and as the inviolable purity of his essence renders him their presence, and (if I may so say) their contact exempt from the contagion of their immundicity; so the infiniteness of his power frees the government and administration of them from [Page 41] being troublesome, and the invariable firmitude of his being secures him from receiving any alte­ration in his Eternal Felicity.

CHAP. IV. A more particular consideration of the Ho­nor which the Epicureans pretend to ren­der to God in respect of his Power, Good­ness, Justice, and Wisdom.

BUt after these General reasons, let us proceed to Survey those which may be drawn from a more particular consideration of the Properties of the Divine Essence, and in the first place in­quire what Honor the Epicurean Doctrine ascribes to him in reference to his Power. They who ac­knowledge God to have created All things of Nothing (a position indeed which we owe to Re­velation from Heaven, yet such as the right ren­son of Man subscribes to) have a very powerful inducement to become absolutely ravish'd, and swallowed up in admiration of his Omnipotence. For whereas there is a chasme of infinite extent between Entity and Non-Entity, of necessity the Power that ha's produc'd some thing from Nothing to Being, must be likewise infinite. Wherefore in case they had no more before their Eyes but this one Proof that God hath given con­cerning what He is, they ought to be so far con­vinced [Page 42] as to separate him from Parity with all o­ther things, and render him an honor of Adora­tion wholly different from that which they exhi­bite to Creatures. For seeing the power where­with they are capable to be indued bears no pro­portion to that of the Creator, they cannot be in­titl'd to the same sort of Honor with him, not so much as in the lowest degree; if it were possible to admit degrees in the honor due to an Infinite Being. They which conceive the Matter of sen­sible things to be eternal, but that God composed the World of the same, as a Potter frames his ves­sel of his Clay (which seems to have been the o­pinion of Plato) do not consider the Divine Pow­er in so eminent a degree; albeit they do indeed attribute an effect to it, which to serious perpen­sion seems onely atchievable by an infinite cause. For any power below infinite could never have been capable to bestow so excellent a Form upon a Chaos devoid of all, nor to impart the like to all other things which the World contains, by di­stributing formes to them, so different as they are, according to the divers rank that each holds in the Universe, and the various functions to which they are designed. So that likewise those of this judgement have ample argument and oc­casion to proclaim the wonders of it. As for them, who assert the world, such at it presents it self to our eyes, had never any Beginning, but that it proceeded from God by emanation, as Light do's from the Sun, and by a necessary and natural production, they do in truth very much detract from the glory of this Virtue, notwith­standing [Page 43] they always imply an acknowledge­ment that the Universe owes its Original unto him, although that great Effect were not pro­duced by that Cause by the disposure of free Vo­lition, but by the necessity of an inevitable de­pendance. Yet this Order also, were there no­thing else but the Circumgyration of the Celestial Orbes, of which they repute God the first cause, hath cause to admire the force that is requi­site thereunto. For whether God move the Hea­vens immediately and by himself, without the intervening assistance of any other thing (as one applies his hand to a wheel to turn it) notwith­standing any aptitude they may have to circular motion by reason of their natural figure, yet there needs a mighty strength to stir all that great Machine, and to govern so many different revo­lutions, to preserve them in harmony, and to hin­der them from clashing or interferring for ever. Or whether he moves the same by the Mediation of Intelligences, according to the conceit of Aristotle who was father to this Opinion of the Worlds Eternity; nevertheless God will always be the first Efficient of their motion; and if the Intelligences, which are far inferior to him, can do that, He is without doubt able to do much more. Moreover we know that Philosopher speaks very advantageously of the dignity of the First Mover, & attributes to him the glory of being the primary Principle of all things. But in reference to the Epicureans, they want our charity to make up so much as a probability that they believe the Supream Being is indued with any power at all. [Page 44] For what evidence have they for such a perswasion from his effects, if He hath not created the least Mushrom, nor given impulsion to so much as one of those small Bodies, by whose concurrence they hold the World had its contex­ture. Certainly, if they measure this power by the knowledge they have of it, and their know­ledge by the effects they behold of it (and it is clear they cannot know it otherwise) it must needs be extreamly inconsiderable, or rather none at all, in case they keep themselves to their Maximes.

But peradventure some among them will an­swer, that being there is a God, it is necessary he should possess all Perfection required to the con­stitution of so excellent a nature, and that among those perfections there ought to be a power also proportionate to the excellence of that nature. We will not scruple to concede this to them, although we shall afterwards shew where they learnt to reason in this manner: for the discipline of their ancient Master is of a different strain. However, all this will not secure them from falling foul upon the difficulties above-mentioned, of determining the extent of estimation which ought to be had of this Attribute: because it will follow that there is some measure between It and the Essence of God. Now it remains absolutely unknown to us whe­ther the essence of God be infinite or not, whence consequently the measure of Veneration which we ow him in regard of that Perfection is to us equally unknown. Besides, whereas the Facul­ties of all things are destinated to certain functi­ons, [Page 45] it will be difficult to be resolv'd what porti­on of power is necessary to render the Divine nature accomplisht, since it cannot be understood that God either hath, or ever will employ the same to the production of any effect. And though it were frankly granted them that right Reason informs us, either that there is no Deity, or that it owns a power without circumscription; Yet I dare maintain, Men would make but small account of that Perfection, which they knew no otherwise then by a simple ratiocination without having any actual testimony or proof of the same. Who is he amongst us that cares never so little for the Great Mogul, of whom it is related, that he keeps thirty thousand Elephants? or for any o­ther mighty Potentate like him in those Oriental Countries, because perhaps he is able to bring two or three hundred thousand armed men into the field when he pleases? Do's not every one more value the authority of the meanest Gentle­man in the Country where he lives, if he be Lord of his village; because he sees it and feels it; and for that in case he offend him, it serves to punish him; and if he obey it, he finds support by it? These people assuredly have strange Imaginations, and are made of principles wonderfully discor­dant. Observe, I beseech you, the discourses of Epicurus, when he is treating the question of the Supream Good; They are universally drawn from the sentiments of the Body, and from Plea­sure, to which our appetites naturally encline us. He affirms that Nature do's not onely aspire but pine and groan after her Ease; such is the [Page 46] violence of her inclination towards it: He pre­scribes his Sage to refer all to his own utility, and the contentment of his Senses; as if he consist­ed onely of Body, and were born for none but himself. Doth he speak of the Deity, and of the Honor which ought to be rendred to him? He abstracts the thoughts of men so far from their proper Good; he allows himself so little to be touched with the natural affection we bear to­wards our selves; he alembicks his wits in such manner in the speculation of things purely intel­lectual & phantastical, without having any regard to his particular profit, and his own satisfaction, that you would judge he were all Spirit, and had forgotten the care of himself and his Nature. But to Character him compleately in one word; he perfectly resembles that God whom he describes so negligent of humane affairs, and such a lover of his own felicity. For as according to his dictates, God contents himself with the solitary injoyment of his eternal repose in delectation, and profound vacancy from action, without con­cerning himself with any care either of us, or of our interests; so Epicurus gives himself no other trouble then to seek out means how to pass his days in delights, without anxious perplexing himself concerning God or things pertaining to him, and so allows himself the same kindness. Yet there is this difference; that Epicurus do's not be­lieve that he offends God in proclaiming openly that he takes no cognisance of things here below; but dare not plainly aver that he is unco [...]cern'd with the care of those in Heaven. And neverthe­less [Page 47] it really turns as much to the reproach of the Deity, to leave all to go at random, as it is hor­rible to make open profession of Impiety towards him. But let us now proceed to the other Divine Proprieties.

Although the greatest part of Mankind hath always been lead to serve God by Fear of Ven­geance, which he inflicts on the contemners of his Majesty; yet there was never any Nation but did acknowledge some remarkable Appearances of his Goodness in the Government of the Universe. The whole world hath ever placed amongst his most resplendent Perfections this propensity which he hath naturally to do good, to succour the Distressed, to relieve the Oppressed, to defend such as are injuriously outraged, and even where no necessity impells or otherwise obliges him, to expand himself in Liberality, the Quality pecu­liar to benigne and generous Natures. Hence have those glorious Titles been attributed to him by men upon this consideration, as particularly by Homer, who ordinarily stiles his Jupiter, The Fa­ther of the Gods and Men; not onely in as much as he is the Author of their Being (as another Poet expresly, [...].) but also for the care that he hath of them, and the paternal af­fections he beareth towards them. In effect, the lustre of his Majesty dazles them when they list up their eyes towards the Heavens, to contem­plate there the umbrage or reverse part of him that appears in their splendor. His Power astonishes them, when they feel the Earth trem­ble under their feet, or hear the tumultuous [Page 48] murmurs of Thunder in the clouds. The admi­ration of his Wisdom confounds them, when they come to consider that he beholds all things with one glance of his eyes, and one simple in­divisible apprehension, the Heavens, the Ele­ments, the Bodies that are composed of them, the innumerable variety of their faculties and opera­tions, the cogitations of our minds, and of all Intellectual Beings, all things which are onely in possibility, the Idea's of which are multipliable to infinity, their accordances and relations, their opposttions and Antipathies. His Justice strikes them with dread, when they Survey the strokes and examples of it in mankind by Pestilences and Wars, by Famines and Tempests, by over-flowes of Rivers and Inundations of the Sea, by light­nings discharged from Heaven, and other like de­monstrations of his Vengeance. In a word, all his other Virtues excite either Fear or Wonder in the Spirits of men; but the reflection upon his Goodness, and the experience they have of it, is that which rejoyces them, and makes their Lives sweet and desirable. As for Christians, they not only admire and venerate the other At­tributes of God, more then ever any other peo­ple did, but likewise set a higher estimate on this then other Nations ever have done, and make it the prime basis on which their whole profession is supported. On the other side the Epicureans, if they have any knowledge of it, it can be onely in an imaginary speculation, in the same manner as we above convinced their conjectures concern­ing the Power of the Deity to be; and if it fall out [Page 49] that they at any time praise and magnifie it, it can­not be otherwise inferred but that their Devotion must be very cold and languid. For they will not allow any acknowledgments to God for giving them a body, or for that he hath gratified them with sense and corporeal appetites, in the satia­ting of which they place their Supreme Good; since according to their doctrine, they are not the work of his Hands, either in their Matter or Form, of which the one owes its being to the eternal seed of Atomes, the other to the con­tingency of the coalition that so fabricated them. Nor will they more extol the same Goodness for that soul that animates them; being they look not upon it as a present of his Liberality; they recei­v'd it (they conceive) from their Fathers, as Colts do theirs from the Stallions that ingender them.

Then for the particular of Conservation of Life, which consists in the supply of Aliment, and Deliverance from such an innumerable variety of Accidents, which the tender Providence of God averts from our heads, they arrogate it partly to their own Circumspection, and partly impute it to Chance, deriding those that either return thanks, or make complaints to Heaven about it. In so much, that if we subscribe to them, we owe all the obligation of our Being and of our Happi­ness to our selves and to Fortune; and in the Mi­series, wherewith this Life is plentifully encum­bred, all the consolation left us is to vent our re­proaches and exclamations against Her. Question­less, we shall be amply revenged when we have reviled her with the appellations of Turbulent and Furious, Blind and Inconsiderate, unreason­able [Page 50] & extravagant in al her actions. For as for that invincible Magnanimity, which causes the Epi­cureans to triumph gloriously in the most deplor­able calamities and exquisite pains, 'tis a com­mendation to which they alone can attain, who are not onely initiated in the mysteries of the Wisdom of Epicurus, but have been admitted to contemplate the most venerable of his Secrets, and have there beheld Pleasure in so high a de­gree of grandeur and generosity, that Virtue her self do's homage to her, and reputes it honour to be received in the quality of her servant.

Concerning Justice, to whom it pertains to in­flict punishment for offences perpetrated against the laws of Nature and Reason, the Doctrine we meet with in this School is so far from ascrib­ing due Veneration to God in respect of the same, that their main design hath been to eradicate and extinguish out of the minds of Men such scruples as they are possess'd with concerning it, and to implant in their room most impious impressions re­flecting to his dishonor. I am not so severe as to account them of so horrid prophaneness as to de­ny that God detests Vice and Loves Virtue; and that being an excellent Intelligence and a perfect Nature, he cannot be destitute of the knowledge of the former's demerit, and the latter's worth, by reason and proportion whereof the love and aversion which he beareth to the one and the o­ther of these objects is enhanced. Now if God be powerful, which they dare not deny, and if he hath an abhorrence and hatred of Vice, as is ne­cessarily requisite to the sanctity of his Nature, what is it should hinder him from exercising Ven­geance [Page 51] against it? Is it because mankind is not under his Jurisdiction, and so he hath nothing to do to superintend over their Lives? That ve­ry same eminent worthiness of his Nature, which obliges men to adore it, gives him a right over them, if he please to use it, at least as much as they take one over another. And indeed the eminence of the Nature of a Thing, and it's perfection above the condition of other Beings, is one of the grounds of the authority that it chal­lengeth over them. For this cause the Philoso­phers teach that according to the Laws of Nature such persons as are indued in a degree extraordi­narily eminent both with Intellectual and Moral Virtues, and particularly with Prudence and Fortitude, which are the Qualities necessary for Government, ought to be the Princes of the World. Now Authority is a Right to rule as Superior, by administring the rewards of Virtue and penalties of Vice. So that if God be of a Nature so transcendently accomplish'd, that in re­gard thereunto men ow him honor and venera­tion, Obligation to honor and veneration being an indubitable testimony of the eminence of that which is honored, it is also a firm argument of his Right and of his Authority. And truly, if men be exempted from subjection to the Deity, it will be no impiety to affirm that they are Gods themselves. For it is one of the Conditions pe­culiar to the Deity alone, to be independent of any other thing, and to be soveraign to it self, that is, to acknowledge none. Wherefore if God do's not punish the crimes of Men, it must be because he will not. But not to will that a fact [Page 52] be punish'd which deserves it, especially in a per­son that is in authority and power to do it, is in some sort to consent unto it, or surely at least to connive at it; which is unworthy & incongruous to a nature perfectly eminent in Virtues, and al­most it self deserving correction and vengeance. Moreover, what justice can there be in this, that all men serve God, some more, others less, and the Epicureans themselves confess that all univer­sally ought to do it; and nevertheless he takes no consideration or cognisance of it, but loves those that blaspheme him as much as those that magnifie and praise him, and ordinarily suffers the Good to be oppressed by the Wicked, and equally shuts his ear to the sutes and cries of the one, and the blasphemies of the other? and this for the only respect of not troubling the serenity of his quiet, and that profound peace in which he continues after so many Ages? I am not ignorant that it is one of the ancient complaints of men, and one of the objections of Epicurus against Divine Pro­vidence, that the Good are here below insulted over by the Wicked, and that it is not at all seen how Heaven provides against such Inconveni­ence. But the other Philosophers have indeav­ored to refute it, and some of them have even gone so far as to ass [...]rt that if God do's not punish the Wicked in this World, he will assuredly do it in the other. Nor could any thing of fairer reason be expressed by the mouth of a Pagan or that more nearly approacheth to the sound judg­ments of Christians concerning this truth then that which Plutarch (Lib. de Sora Numinis vindicta.) hath delivered upon this subject. But the True [Page 53] Religion is that which alone discovers these My­steries to the bottom, and represents them to our contemplation wholly naked, with unspeakable satisfaction to those which consider them. One­ly Epicurus cannot exempt God from this blame which is unworthy of his Goodness and Justice, if he hath any, of suffering, that which he hath power to redress, the Wicked here to devour and tyrannize over the Good, and the virtuous and religious to become in recompense of their piety, most frequently miserable. He might have ascribed to him at least as much care of Mankind in this particular, as every Magistrate hath of his Commonwealth, and every inferior Judge of his Precinct or Village. But under pretext that there happen divers things, whose causes and ends they are not able to comprehend; and that many crimes are committed, whose punishment is not inflicted before their eyes; and that sundry upright men are in miseries, whose deliverance they behold not when they esteem it timely to appear, they infer that therefore God sees no­thing of all this, or that he regards it not. As if a King had abandon'd the government of his State, because such a one is not taken out of prison so soon as in their opinion he ought, or that another escapes the Whip in the place where he deserved it, who perhaps two days after is broken on the Wheel for another crime in the neighboring Province. So likewise it may be reasonably said that in these cases they imitate the rash and precipitous judgement of an ignorant and impatient spectator, that do's not expect till the last act of the Tragedy.

It may be further inquired whether the Epicu­reans do not yet in a greater measure blemish and obscure the Wisdom of God then they do his o­ther Perfections. For when they deny that there is a Providence in God, seeing Providence is nothing but a foresighted and rational conduct of things to their end, and of every particular thing to the purpose consentaneous to it, it seems they consequently deny that there is a Wisdom in God. For it is the part of Wisdom to propose to it self such a convenient end in the administra­tion of things, as it is of Providence to conduct them to that which they are designed: whence as Providence cannot be without wisdom, so is it likewise scarcely imaginable that Wisdom can consist without Providence. Unless perhaps they here turn about to their abstracted specula­tions, and attribute to God that Intellectual Vir­tue of which Aristotle speaks, and composes of Knowledge and Understanding joyned together, and makes to consist in the perfect cognition of all things and their principles. But yet, I know not how according to the doctrine of Epicurus, this sort of Wisdom can find place in God. For considering that there is an infinite number of things which depend on the Will of Man, and that the inclinations of his will depend on the reasons and objects which perswade and move him; how shall God see those things, if himself hath nought to do to look into the Understanding of man to a [...]fect him with those reasons, if he ha's no regard to the objects presented to us to move us, if he do's not manage them to such effect as to perswade and attract, if he neither incite nor [Page 55] restrain, neither bend nor correct the motions of the Will? If they say, that he beholds events, and by the events may divine of the causes from which they proceeded, we reply that that is no more then the atchievment of conjecture and hu­mane divination, not of the Wisdom of a God who ought to behold effects in the womb of their causes, and not the causes in the aspect of the ef­fects. In brief, according to them, God may perhaps know the things which exist, but he cannot know the things which are to come any more then We, and the next morning is to him in as much darkness as it is to us, who are natu­rally very ignorant Creatures. Lastly, to speak openly, he is a very wretched God, if he be not as wise as the Sage of the Philosophers, whose wisdom consists in governing himself reasonably, and the things which are in his disposure accor­ding to the same rule. I am not ignorant that Epicurius prohibits his Sage to intermeddle in the government of the World, and the administra­tion of the Commonwealth; An Opinion so strange and pernicious to Humane Society, that verily in this appears a signal effect of the Pro­vidence of God, that he hath not permitted all o­ther men to become as absolute fools as his pre­tended Sage. For what would the World be, in case wise men should forbear to meddle in it, but a most horrid and tumultuous confusion, without Laws, order, and Society, and no better then a crue of cut-throats and robbers. Plato without question had more Reason, when he wished that either those who seriously imploy themselves in [Page 56] the study of Philosophy were Governors of States, or they which govern States would seri­ously imploy themselves in the Study of Philoso­phy; and affirmed that in such times Empires would be happy. But (to proceed) I will admit the Sage to leave the Commonwealth to go at ran­dom; yet certainly he will take care of his Wife and Children, unless Epicurus represents us a Sage worse and more unnatural then Beasts. Shall not God therefore take care but onely to provide himself new pleasures perpetually, and imploy all his wisdom to effect that they never fail and be spent, unmindful of those in the mean time that ought in some sort to be to him in the quality of children, if not for being made by him, at least for the affection they have to imitate his Virtues, and become conformable unto him. To conclude, what kinde of admiration can any one have of such Divine Wisdom? What other characters can be given of God then that he is a person won­derfully dextrous and industrious to invent means to produce his own contentment, and render his felicity abundant and permanent; that imploys all the powers of his understanding, and directs all the sufficiencies of his Wisdom to that end: but for any thing else, he knows none of the transactions here below, or if he do, onely slights and derides them? Are not these very fit­ting reasons to inducement to venerate the Deity in regard of his Wisdom? Is it not very sutable to Epicurus to have been the inventor of such no­ble Philosophy, to insult arrogantly over them that ascribe glory to God for having framed the World in the fair order wherein we behold it, [Page 57] and poised the Earth in the middle, extended the Sea about it, and given air for respiration to ani­mals, for having modell'd all the Sphears of Hea­ven, and infused into the Stars the Virtues of their influences, for presiding every day over the mixture of the Elements in the composition of bodies, and uniting Nations one to another by commerce; for maintaining States amidst the contrariety of so many different humors, and conducting the Universe like an Artificial Machine according to the genius of each of the parts that compose the same? Certainly it is very easie to judge which of these two Opinions best deserves that exclamation of Lucretius (Lib. 1.)

CHAP. V. The Continuation of the Arguments evincing that the Epicureans cannot adore the De­ity in a due manner; with the solution of some Objections.

SInce the Epicureans cannot render any sutable honor to the Deity, either in consideration of his Power and Goodness, or of his Justice and Wisdom, which they wholly exclude out of the World and our knowledge; it remains that they worship him onely, either because he is Happy, or because he is Eternal, or because we behold him not, or meerly because he exists, without having the least regard to the Perfections of his Nature. And it seems the Poet Lucretius refers all his excellence to these two points, that he is supreamly Happy, and is of an Immortal Nature. For to this purpose he speaketh in these following verses ( Lib. 1.)

But concerning that profound Quiet, and im­mortal felicity, it is difficult to comprehend of [Page 59] what nature it is. For to make up a Happiness, t is requisite not onely to be exempt from the Evils of which we complain, otherwise Trunks of Trees and Rocks would be capable of the great­est; there must also be an injoyment of such con­tentments as are consentaneous to nature. What therefore shall we apprehend those of the Deity to be? Are they such as consist in corporeal plea­sures? Certainly to fancy to our selves a God e­ternally rejoycing himself with drinking delici­ous Wines, and eating exquisite Viands, and sleeping as often as he becomes weary with do­ing so, must needs make us conclude him more brutish then Brutes themselves. What appear­ance is there that the supream happiness of the Deity should consist in such things, in which a good man would account it shame to take any? If the disciples of this Divine Philosopher speak as they are taught, wherein are the conceptions wherewith he describes the beatitude of his God superior to the extravagancies of the ancient Poets, who seem expresly to have written of the Deities which they celebrated out of design to as­perse them with infamy. If God place his con­tentments in the contemplation and admiration of his own Virtues, being he knows none in him­self, or if he does, they must be such as are very smal & inconsiderable, that beatitude consequently cannot be in any great degree, nor consequently the honor which the Epicureans perform towards him in regard of the same. In effect, if there be no more Virtues in God nor fairer perfections then those which their Maximes assign to him, so improbable is it that men should become ravished [Page 60] with admiration of his beatitude, that without doubt he cannot but turn away his eyes from be­holding them, out of shame and regret to find them so defective; Like those persons that are im­bued with some seeds of Virtue, who reflecting to consider a little attentively their defects, be­come displeased and blush at the same. Besides all this, admitting God to be indeed most happy; yet if so be we partake nothing at all of his feli­city, it will rather be an incitement of our envy and hatred against him, then of our love and re­verence. First, of envy; for who is there that does not resent some kind of maligning passion when he considers the happiness of another, and finds himself extreamly miserable? Then like, wise of hatred; for what can he be accounted but a great Miser and hold-fast, and unworthy the love of any one whatsoever, that is able to make others very happy without making himself less, and notwithstanding do's it not; who refuses to di­rect wanderers into their way, and will not per­mit his neighbor to draw water out of his foun­tain? And although there were amongst men so much moderation of spirit, that the supreme feli­city of God should not induce them either to en­vy or hatred against him, yet is it credible there should be so much piety in them as to be drawn to adore him because of it? If he be rich (we say pro­verbially of one from whom we expect no good) let him dine twice; and in such cases we do not apprehend we commit any offence, when we proceed so far as to contemn the person and his wealth.

Now in truth, inasmuch as the God of Epicurus [Page 61] is immortal, and never suffers alteration in his nature, he far surpasses our condition: Never­theless the Duration of things, if they have no qualities to recommend them besides, is below being the true object of honor and veneration. The World and the Elements have been esteemed eternal by many among the Philosophers, yet none ever ador'd them: and they which account the Matter of which all things consist, to exist from all eternity, do not yield us one example of any person into whose thought it ever came to prostrate himself and render Religious venerati­on to it. And yet there is no question but he hath greater obligation to the World then to the Deity of Epicurus; as being indebted to it for his body, which was framed out of it; Whereas Epicurus's God hath contributed nothing either to the constitution or subsistance of his being. Ought we therefore to adore him because we see him not? I beseech the Readers indulgence to me to bestow a few words in laying open to these peo­ple the vanity and impertinence of their imagina­tions. Certainly, if we do not at all behold him, it is either because he is of a nature spiritual and imperceptible by the senses of our bodies, or be­cause though he hath a body, he withdraws it from our eyes, and hides himself far from our presence. Now whereas some Philosophical Sages have believ'd God to be of a nature not mingled with a body, they were induc'd to that perswasion by observing such admirable effects of his Wisdom and Power that they positively con­cluded a corporeal Being could not be a capable subject of so many transcendent Proprieties. [Page 62] And indeed being they judged by the producti­ons of their Understanding, that it was necessary for the soul, in which the same is seated, to be of a nature infinitely elevated above that of the bo­dy, it was but reasonable they should have no less good opinion of the Diety, whose producti­ons are infinitely more worthy admiration then those of the humane Intellect. But Epicurus not owning such Perfection and Virtues in God by their effects, he also cannot reason in the same sort. And if he could, though immaterial things have a great advantage above those which are corporeal here below, yet it principally consists in this that they are thereby exempted from cor­ruption and mortality. Now besides that there are certain bodies accounted not less incorrupti­ble then spirits, as the Heavens, and which might therefore deserve as much veneration as the Dei­ty, we have already shewn that the perpetual duration of things, without other qualities to re­commend them, do's not render them subjects re­quiring our adoration. On the contrary, if God hath a body, and never discover the same to our eyes, we should make but small account of it, al­though it were more luminous then the Sun. For whereas several Nations have adored the Sun, it hath been onely in consideration of his light so radiant, quickning, beneficial and necessary to the World, and which makes it self known to us in so many manners, which he distributes into all the parts of the World, and is therefore named the Eye and Heart of the Universe. Had he ne­ver ascended above our Horizon, no Nation had ever made an Idol of him in our Hemisphere, for [Page 63] all the descriptions that could have been made of him. To conclude in a word, so far would men be from being drawn to the service of the Deity, because they do not see him, that there is even a natural propensity in our minds to contemn that which we do not see, and rather to form Gods of Wood and Stone to our selves, then to have such as fall not under our sense: A vitious inclination indeed, and condemned by the Wise among the Pagans; but we are under the influence of an Institution that is powerful enough to correct this defect, and root this vitiosity out of our na­ture; Which the Epicurean can never attain to. For that which hath caused great and discerning per­sons, to penetrate so far into the knowledge of God, that they have been as it were enforced thereby to conclude that he ought to be honored with the exactest purity of the Understanding (without framing any material Idea of him in the phancy, much less to carve him in gold or repre­sent him in silver) ha's been onely, as I said above, the contemplation of the mighty effects of his Virtues, of which Epicurus hath no apprehension. Moreover concerning his meer existence, foras­much as that is common to him with all other things, good and bad, honorable and contempti­ble, high and low, corruptible and secure from mutation, reasonable & unreasonable, indued and destitute of sense, the Heavens (I say) the Ele­ments, Brutes, Insects, and Plants, he can chal­lenge no degree of eminence above us in that re­spect, nor by consequence can we own an obli­gation from thence, to render him our submissi­ons and reverence. As for the expression of [Page 64] Plato, that the Being of God is the onely true Be­ing, and that ours is no other then a shadow of that, infinitely inferior to it in dignity, he did not consider it simply as a Being, but as an eter­nal Being, that wasts not away with duration, nor is obnoxious to any kind of change, that in­cludes in its eternity all the several successions and revolutions of times, and all whose Proprie­ties and Virtues are as invariable as its essence. But this is not the subject of our present consider­ation, no more then it is the meaning of Epicurus. Hereafter, I shall no longer doubt that the piety of the Epicureans is worn onely on the outside, and lies wholly in shews and countenances.

Of which we can scarce have a more preg­nant or evident argument then experience. In the Christian Religion all the inducements are found, that ever led men to the service of God among the Pagans, and an infinite number of o­thers besides. For it presents us to contemplate in him an immense Power, an ineffable Wisdom, an exquisite Providence, an inexorable Justice, an incomprehensible Mercy; and in the conduct of all things agreeably to the design of his eternal constitutions there appears an administration transcendently admirable. One Religion pro­poses not so great recompenses for piety and Vir­tue, and another denounces less horrid punish­ments against Vice and irreligion. So that all that which the most devout Nations have ever believ­ed of God, as we shall see in its due place, hath comparatively been nothing but darkness; and all the devotion which their measure of know­ledge enkindled in their breasts, hath only been a [Page 65] dream of piety, and a very languid and faint zeal. And notwithstanding all this the num­ber of people is very small whom Christianity hath incited seriously to fear that Great God who hath revealed himself unto us. What affection therefore can men have for the doctrine of Epi­curus? If the fire it self cannot inflame piety in us, is it possible we should be warmed by his Ice? Certainly if the representation of those rich com­passions, in that God hath sent his Son into the World to redeem us from our offences by an ig­nominious death, are not effective to incite men to his Love, there remains no hope any other thing should have power to do it. Wherefore how can we expect the same from this imagina­tion, that God beholds from Heaven the calami­ties of men here below, without being at all af­fected therewith, unless it be with resentments of joy because they do not reach him: like as one should enwrap himself under the coverings of a warm and close-curtain'd bed, while others are half dead with cold, or should stand on the Sea­shore beholding a Ship in inevitable danger of being wrack'd. Furthermore if Religion be not powerful enough to induce us to the love of God by sentiments of gratitude which we ought to have for his benefits, at least the fear of his justice impressed on our minds, serves as a boundary to check the over-flowing of our Passions, and to retain them in some outward shew of esteem of Virtue: should this Fear once be removed out of their breasts (although it is impossible wholly to root it out thence; what pains soever be taken to do it) there would be such disorder in the Lives [Page 66] of men, and so dreadful an irregularity in all our passions, that there would not be left so much as a shadow of Virtue and probity upon the face of the earth. For seeing there are in our Souls, as the Philosophers themselves have observed, such appetites as naturally war against reason, sub­jecting and captivating the same upon all occasi­ons, as experience also demonstrates; and the Pleasure of the body meeting with so many baits and incentives, there is no vice to which we should not without all regret abandon our selves upon hope of impunity. They which are sub­ject to Laws, peradventure might abstain from those wickednesses which are punish'd by them, yet would permit themselves to act such as fall not within their cognizance; and if they us'd any kind of Prayer, it is likely it would be no other then that of some in Juvenal;

Besides that there are yet several persons, whose madness, being above the checks which the representation of punishments used amongst men suggests, is notwithstanding awed with the apprehension of Everlasting Pains. And then for such as do fear the punishments inflicted by the stroke of Magistracy, or even by the hand of na­ture, who recompenses debaucheries with the Gout and Stone and other such afflictions, at least they would not restrain themselves from being wicked in thought and will. Now what accept­able service can that person render to God whose [Page 67] mind is possess'd with evil desires? Or how can any thought of the Deity find admittance in that soul in which reason is dethroned to yield the rule to heady and precipitous passions. Where­fore it appears, that whereas we are in search of a doctrine capable to subordinate the appetites of men to Reason, and Reason it self to true Piety, which is the onely source of Virtue, that of these people perverts the right use of Reason in stifling and effacing Piety, and by that means gives up the reins to the insolence of our lusts and affections.

It may perhaps be demanded by some, how it follows, that because the ancient doctrine of Epi­curus is incapable of exciting men to piety, and repressing those violent inclinations which natu­rally hurry us to vice; that therefore in the pre­sent times, in which men have sublimer appre­hensions of the Deity then he had, not to mention that they are more fully assured of this Truth, That there is a God, the doctrine of the modern Epicureans should be no more effectual thereunto? Is it reasonable to bound the effects of the know­ledge men have now adays according to the mea­sure of what they had in the Ages of old? Should any advocate of that sect make us this objection, we are not unprovided of many things to return him in answer. And first in reference to that truth which is the foundation of all others, That there is a God, supposing the Epicureans of our time to retain the discipline of their predecessors, That the world was not created by him, that he do's not govern the same, nor ever revealed himself particularly to us by any oracle, how is it come to pass that we have a more certain [Page 68] knowledge of his Being? seeing we have no o­ther reasons nor testimonies thereof, then those which men had heretofore. And for that Com­mon notion to which they recur, how comes it to be more lively and deeply impress'd in our minds at this day, then it was in the minds of those that liv'd a thousand years ago? Are not they always the same race of men? and is it not always the same Nature that brings them into the World? But concerning the knowledge of the nature it self of the Deity, I shall readily admit, that a man whose brain is better made then that of Epicurus was, would not be guilty of so many ab­surdities as he is. Aristotle or Plato would never have described God after that fashion which he hath imagin'd him. But so it is, that this know­ledge hath never been so well display'd by those who have had no other guide besides the light of reason, as to yield a possibility of founding a more distinct belief thereof upon their imagina­tions at this day. For I am of opinion, they have gone as far as the mind of man, in the condition it is since the first Lapse, is capable to attain, with­out being extraordinarily assisted by God himself. And notwithstanding how great variety ha's there been among them in this particular? What absurdities and impertinences have they not as­serted? The beginning of Cicero's Books De na­tura Deorum, supply us with abundant evidence hereof, where the opinions of the Philosophers concerning this matter are recited. Good God! What dotages and extravagances do we meet with! Anaximander makes the Gods equally lyable to being born & to death with us; and determine [Page 69] to them their intervals for the duration of their being. Pythagoras affirms that God is a spirit dif­fused through the Universe, from which our souls are clipt off like pieces sever'd from the whole, and so divides him into a thousand mil­lions of fragments. Parmenides fancies him to be a crown of luminous fire wherewith the Hea­vens are inviron'd. Empedocles distinguishes not the nature of the Gods from that of the Ele­ments, which he conceives to be divine and im­mortal, although they undergo an infinite va­riety of Forms. Antisthenes will have an infinite number of popular Deities, and one natural. Xe­nocrates is contented to assign us eight, of which he saith the Sun, Moon, and other Planets make seven, and the eighth is distributed amongst the fixed Stars. Chrysippus holds that there is an in­numerable multitude of Gods, though he seems to establish one Principal, consisting in a certain power of Reason expanded through all the parts of Nature. Perseus acknowledges no other Dei­ties then those which men have consecrated ac­cordingly as they conceiv'd some considerable benefit bestowed on them by any one. Cleanthes esteems the whole world to be God, which also was afterwards the opinion of Pliny. Diogenes Apolloniates imagined that God was made of Air. Protagoras knew not what he is, nor whether there were any at all. Democritus jumbles him and hurries him like his indivisible bodies, framing an infinite variety of images of him. In a word, 'tis deplorable to consider how ignorant, for­lorne, and extravagant the mind of men is in its imaginations: and although Aristotle and Plato [Page 70] have had something more rational conceptions in this particular, yet there is discernible in them always abundance of weakness and inconstance. Nevertheless, those Philosophers, whose Fancies are rehearsed in that Treatise with so much deri­sion, were men of as good entendments and suf­ficiencies as the Epicureans of our days; and the greatest part of them had moreover to assist them in this Meditation the belief of a Providence, which was a light to conduct them to a clearer knowledge of what they were in search after. Therefore what are they able to do at this day, who besides being not more intelligent then those of old, do renounce the assistance of that aide. For in so difficult a chase, the former have undoub­tedly more advantages in traversing the thickets, by being acquainted with the footsteps of that they are in pursuit of, although but obscure, light­ly impress'd and pass'd over by bad searchers, then they who take no notice of any at all, and who if any presents themselves to their sight, shut their eyes that they might not see them, or on set purpose expunge and confound them. The knowledge of arts is indeed growing by degrees to greater politeness, accordingly as men improve them by other inventions and experiences. As it is probable Physick is more skillfully practis'd at this day then it ha's been heretofore, by reason of new observations made in Anatomy, and new tryals of the Virtues of Drugs, Plants and Mine­rals. But in case no dissections had been made of humane bodies for this two thousand years, or no new proofs experienc'd of medicaments, it would be necessary to remain contented with the mea­sure [Page 71] of knowledg which the Ancients had attain'd to in that art. Now being in the opinion of these people, God is not in any thing more particularly revealed to us then to our Predecessors, If the Epicureans will keep themselves to the Maximes of their Sect, they must either content themselves with what they have received from them; or if they will establish any thing of their own de­vices, they must frame out new models of the Dei­ty, which will not be less exorbitant: and the In­stance of Cicero will be found such as cannot at all be discredited. In his time the study of the Sciences flourished extraordinarily, and the wits of men were polish'd to as high a degree, as ever they were in any other Age. Besides their own In­ventions, they had the benefit of their labors, who liv'd in the World before them at such time as Learning was in the greatest honor in Greece; and indeed it appears by their writings, they made use of them very happily. Cicero himself was, among those great personages, of most e­minent and rare accomplishments; to whom as none was worthy to be rival for the Garland of Eloquence, so that there was scarce any that sur­pass'd or so much as equall'd him in all kinds of Literature. And notwithstanding all this, at what rate do's he speak of the Deity? Having introduc'd three Philosophers of divers Sects discoursing of Providence, he concluds his Book with this determination, That he judged the Dis­course of Balbus the Stoick who maintained it, more probable then that of Velleius the Epicurean, who oppos'd it with the greatest violence. Wherein it is observable, that Cicero keeping [Page 72] himself in this matter to that doubting manner of answering which was practis'd by the Academicks who dar'd not be confident of the truth of any thing whatsoever, and had for their Device that saying of Pliny, That the only certain thing is, that there is nothing certain; nevertheless when he disputes concerning the nature of the Supreme Good of man against the Tenets of Epicurus, he speaks so determinately to the disparagement of Pleasure, that he seems to have forgotten the stile of the Academy.

But let us a while consider how the truth of the matter stands. The Christian Religion teach­eth two sorts of doctrines. Of the former of which men have some notions, but confused and dark, beforehand. Of the other they never had any apprehension or intelligence, nor was it possible they should. Now although the latter sort contain nothing that is absurd or repugnant to reason, but on the contrary corresponds and conspires admirably with the other, composing therewith a Body of doctrine of most rare and absolute harmony, yet notwithstanding they are rejected by the people against whom we dispute upon such grounds and pretenses as shall be here­after declared. Of the other, which being il­lustrated by Religion, seems so much the more consentaneous to reason for that there were be­fore some seeds of them scatter'd in the humane Understanding, they admit those onely that please them best, and then reproach the sacred discipline from which they learnt them. And this is the reason by which it is come to pass that even a­mongst them that do not receive the Word of [Page 73] God, they speak in these days with more certain­ty and evidence concerning the Nature of God, his Infinite essence, Invisibility, Eternitie, Om­nipotence, highest Goodness and Wisdom; hence it is that they discourse more positively of the spi­ritual and immaterial being of the humane Soul, and of its immortality; and that they understand more exactly the natures of Vice and Virtue, and the natural difference that is between them. Ne­vertheless after all this they do not scruple to ac­cuse them of Lying and Imposture, to whom they are engaged for the illustration of these impor­tant truths: whereas they ought rather to have collected two things from thence; First, that see­ing the Writers of the Old and New Testament have clearly taught those truths whereof men spoke before so doubtfully afterall the indeavors that the acutest Wits of the World had us'd for their discovery, it must necessarily be that they received illumination from some other person; considering that they profess every one of himself and of one another, that as to the natural viva­city of their Understandings there was nothing extraordinary in them, and openly confess that there is no praise at all due to them for the same. For if we have regard to the good opinion which men naturally have of themselves, and how glo­riously they vaunt of their inventions, what praise might not those Persons challenge to them­selves for having taught us what God is; seeing we meet with One in the records of Story, that exalts himself to the skies for explaining a passage of Demosthenes, better then they had done who attempted it before his days, and for having ex­plained [Page 74] an intricate verse of Pindar? Had they had the least part of the vanity which Epicurus had for himself, when in the midst of his Fits of the Stone, he found such cordial and soveraign con­solation in the memory of his excellent inventi­ons in Philosophy; or of the vanity which his Disciples had in his behalf, when for the same reason they plac'd him in the rank of the Gods, they might on better grounds have fill'd the Uni­verse with their boastings. A second thing is, that since they were so happy in the bringing to light things of such excellence, and to which the Reason of man subscribes, we ought not to dis­parage their veracity in that which we are not able to comprehend; in regard they make proses­sion themselves that they do not absolutely com­prehend the same, and acknowledge their weak­ness thereunto. For it is hereby most apparent, that they have not sought the commendation of having a mind able to soar above the common flight of others, nor affected obscurity to the end to render their doctrine more venerable, or to reserv the understanding thereof for some of their familiar disciples, as we find related concerning some of the writings of Aristotle.

It would therefore be an honest modesty to yield them as much at least as Socrates did to Hera­clitus, when judging that which he understood of his Book excellent and admirable, he adven­tur'd to promise himself that what he did not un­derstand was so also. There appears to be no doubt but that there is a proportion between the Circle & the Square, since none would have imployed so much pains in the search of it, unless they had [Page 75] esteemed those two Figures to be commensurable. Nevertheless all the great Geometricians of our own and precedent Ages, have labor'd unsucces­fully in finding it out; and by how much they have been more accurately learned, and their wits more subtle in this speculation, so much the more have their imaginations concerning it been attended with impertinence. Wherefore, if per­adventure any person should be found at this day that were able to teach us the Quadrature of the Circle with such clearness, that the minds of all men should become enforc'd to acquiesce in the evidence of his Demonstrations (although it be but a thing of the nature of those that seem pro­portionall to the strength of our minds) it were scarce reasonable to question, but that he was sa­vored by some Understanding more then hu­mane. And the inducement to believe that he was so, would be so much the greater, in case he were known to be otherwise one of mean capa­city, little vers'd in the subtilty of such high spe­culations, and that he should disown the glory of having discover'd that truth by his own en­deavors. I add moreover, that if such person should offer to our approbation some other Geo­metrical Propositions, which we should not be able to understand, yet it would be unmeet to re­ject and condemn them, after having had such a singular proof of him in a matter so desperate. It would be necessary to wait till some other should rise up either in the present times or the future, to explicate them, as he had resolved a difficulty un­profitably attempted, and at last abandoned by all the great Mathematicians in all Ages. Certainly, [Page 76] therefore, it is greater justice to practise that mo­desty towards those, who in a matter of most di­vine sublimeness have revealed secrets to us which are incomparably more difficult to be found out by the mind of Man, then any Problems whatsoever of Geometry, & which since they have been discover'd, give more abundant content­ment then the most evident Mathematical Demon­strations. But these people manage the matter like those Plagiaries that pilfer the Manuscripts of learned men, of which they retain what they please, and publish the same under their own Names, to have the reputation thereof, and then in other things which they cannot relish, they indeavor to cast affronts upon them, whose glory they have fraudulently intitl'd to them­selves.

Lastly, what I beseech you, are the particulars of their accusation, whereby they arraign the Holy Writers of Ignorance, or Impertinence? First, that they avouch the Deity to be the Creator of all things; and next, that they attribute to him an especial care of humane affairs: two points which they cannot digest, because prejudicial to his Quiet, and inconsistent with the profound calme of his Beatitude. What bars (they de­mand) and Iron-crows did God make use of, to raise and adjust the pieces of this great Fabrick? What anxiety and solicitude would continually possess him, if he should concern himself in the innumerable affairs of mankind? What regrets & perurbations would be caused to him by all the provocations of injuries and indignities that are committed amongst us? How greatly troublesom it [Page 77] would be to him, like criminal judges, to have al­ways his hands in blood? How it would excite him to tenderness and compassion to behold the piteous condition of so many miserable wretches as are in the world? Poor people! that fancy such a God as resembles themselves, and that can do nothing but with labor, because themselves know not how to place a beam in an edifice with­out Levers and Cranes? If he be a God, he is in­finite; and if he be infinite, his power is not at all confined. Now to an infinite power, what needs there more then a twinkle of the eye, one single motion of his will, to build not onely one, but a thousand worlds? For why is it that men imploy so many engines, but onely to aid them­selves with the same where there own power is too short? why do they make use of Pulleys, but to supply the weakness of their arms? and why of their armes and hands, but because things are not obedient to their wills, unless, they ap­ply them thereunto? But to him that is infinitely powerful, there needs neither hands nor En­gines, because his will is alone sufficient to pro­duce the effect. And there is the same facility in government of the World, as in his Creation. Things require our industry and pains to know them, because we are not able to penetrate far in­to them, and remain ordinarily arrested on their surface, like the Dog that licks the outside of the glass wherein the Pulse is inclosed. Moreover, it is necessary for the Ideas of the things we com­prehend to enter into our minds successively, be­cause they are too narrow to admit the same all to­gether; agreeably to what we observe in Look­ing-glasses, [Page 78] which receive but one image at a time; so that he that attempts to represent more, confounds all. In like manner we move about to dispose things in order; because we are but in one place, and thence it is requisite for us in refer­ring several things to one and the same end to re­move our selves often from place to place; as also in case they be difficult to manage, we are necessitated to imploy the hands of another, and so frequently create substitutes to our prejudice and loss. But he that beholds all things with one glance, that is present every where, that pene­trates all things in the abstrusities of their nature and essence, and manages them all according to his Will, without any reluctation or resistence, what pains can we imagine it to be to him to go­vern the World? The Events of things fill us with anxiousness and perplexity, because they are not in our hands, and for the most part their issues are contrary to our hopes. But as for him that decrees them, and by consequence foresees them infallibly, what solicitous suspense can they create in him? They fear least he should suffer in­terruption of his Rest, by being continually in­cens'd against some, and affected with compassion towards others, Will they therefore have him to know the things that are done here below, or to be ignorant of them? If he be ignorant of them, it will follow that the God which they a­dore is scarce so knowing as we. For not be­holding the transactions of the World, and there being nothing done out of it, he will have no­thing for the object of that his supreme Under­standing, except his own nature: his nature, I [Page 79] say, which we have demonstrated above cannot be but wholly contemptible according to their doctrines. And if he knows nothing of the ho­nor we bear towards him, it is lost labor to ren­der him any. But if the worlds affairs be known to him, they do not give him less trouble by not reducing them to due order, then if he should stretch forth his hand to provide for the wellfare of the World. There is no appearance of reason why his Passions should be more mov'd by being provident concerning it, then by leaving all to go in confusion. But these people are as Saint Paul saith, become fools by their pretended wis­dom. For all these objections have no other grounds, but our cloathing of God with our passions, and framing of him according to the model of our own Being. If he be made in the same manner we are, if he resents our perturba­tions in himself, he is not God, he is Man. Which is as if a Pismire should apprehend of a great King, that it were not competible to him to trou­ble himself with the care of any thing, because she toyls with drawing a grain of wheat to her little cave, or is forc'd to encounter with a worm that devours it from her. Verily God in­flicts punishment on the wicked for their wicked­ness, without being thereby obnoxious to any emotion interruptive of his quiet, because his vengeance is not executed in choler as ours is, being carried thereunto by no other motive then for that he is Just. But Justice is a Virtue ex­empt from all passion and turbulent agitation. He hath a tender care over the Good, without feel­ing the agitations and heats in his bowels which [Page 80] we do. For he is not subject to our Evils. Wherefore having no communion of nature with us, he doth not behold or acknowledge the image of his natural condition in our calamities, and fears not least the like should befall himself; which is the principal and usual cause of our compassions. He hath regard to them because he is Good. Now Goodness is a propensity to do Good, and not a perturbation excited in our af­fections and accompanied with regret or anguish. But these frivolus objections are professedly an­swered in whole Treatises, to which I refer the Readers, to avoid detaining them with fruitless repetitions. Let us therefore proceed to some other considerations which are more important to the matter in hand.

CHAP. VI. Of the Natural difference which is between Vice and Virtue; and of the Terrors of Conscience: Whether it can be deduc'd from them that there is a Providence.

IT is not my intention to be prolixe in deducti­on of the reasons which are imploy'd against the Epicureans in behalf of Providence. It hath been done so often, and by so many excel­lent personages, aswell Pagans as Christians, an­cient and modern, Poets and Orators, Divines and Philosophers, that to begin the same over again, [Page 81] would be a work unprofitably undertaken, And I cannot but wonder that especially in our times there should be people that yet call it into questi­on, and who have not been able to learn neither from Earth, nor Heaven, nor Men, nor Angels, nor from the mouth of God, a thing that publish­eth it self so loudly and clearly. I shall onely make some reflections concerning the natural motions of our Hearts, which may afford us some understanding thereof. I would therefore will­ingly demand of these people, whether they judge that there is any natural difference be­tween Vice and Virtue, so that Vice is naturally blamable and evil, Virtue, on the contrary, honest and commendable in it self: or, whether they conceive this distinction to have been introduc'd onely to keep men in order, and to discipline Commonwealths, although otherwise they are things in their own nature indifferent. For if they be of the Opinion that Archelaus was of (from whom Epicurus, Aristippus, Carneades, and many o­thers learnt it) that there is nothing in the naked essence of things that discriminates them, and that the difference we find in them is proceeded onely from custome, and as they speak, from Positive Law; whence comes that desire we are all possess'd with, of being, if not really, at least seemingly honest persons; in so much that the most wicked are offended when they are taken for such as they are, and endeavor as much as possi­ble they can to cloath their wickednesses with the appearances of uprightness and probity. Certainly, that desire could never be so universal, were it not also natural; and it could not be na­tural, [Page 82] unless there be an essential difference be­tween that from which we are desirous to attain honor, and that for which we fear to meet with blame. For why should Nature have inspir'd and principled us to prize the one more then the other, or rather to love and affect the one, and have a kind of abhorrence of the other, if she her self had not placed more value and esteem on the one, and blasted the other with some marks of her improbation and hatred? And seeing there is oftentimes difficulty in the exercise of Virtue, by reason of the conflict of our sensual appetites, which resist the influences of that up­on our minds; and that on the other side, it seems there are so many delights and pleasures in Vice which give it an easie victory and dominion over our appetites, how comes it to pass that that which we call Virtue hath notwithstanding so much power over our minds, as to oblige us to render it this advantageous testimony? Indeed, as there is, perhaps, no vice of so universal ex­tent as that of hypocrisie, so neither is there any that more clearly attests the excellence of Up­rightness and Honesty. For if Justice and Hone­sty is not able to obtain the rule of our affections, which are in subjection to its enemy, it appears at least that its Idea cannot be driven out of the understanding, and that it enforces the Vitious to give sentence of condemnation against them­selves. Epicurus instructs his Sage to be careful of his reputation so far, as not to suffer himself to be contemn'd; because, say his followers, Con­tempt brings along with it very many inconve­niences, which cannot consist with Pleasure, but [Page 83] are destructive to it; so that if he owns no other motive to maintain a good esteem of himself but that, then provided he be able to secure himself from contempt by any other means, he will not be solicitous of having a good reputation. Now he that sets no value at all upon a good repute, is as careless of the actions that produce it. For Renown stands in relation to the actions and ha­bits of Virtue, as the images that are emanent from the qualities of sensible things are to them and the bodies cloathed with them. And the minds of men that judge of us and our actions are as the Mirrors that receive those images. Therefore, as, if it were indifferent to Epicurus in what manner a Looking-glass did represent him, and what images proceeded from his body, fair or foul, of a pleasant or horrid colour, well pro­portion'd in their parts and lineaments or de­form'd and extravagant, he would give us to to judge that he did not trouble himself about the qualifications and structure of his Body; so like­wise the contempt that he should make of his re­putation would sufficiently discover the little care he had of the constitution of his Soul. But to be thus qualified a man must be both wicked and impudent in the highest degree; which would be a wonderful quality for the perfection of a Wise man. However, as it is extremely sutable for an honest person to Love Virtue for it self, and to indeavor to imitate him of whom the Athenians gave this Character, He desires not to seem Just, but to be so; So that the perverse judgement that is made of him and his actions, do not drive him to desert it and discourage him from continuing [Page 84] such: so it is natural to men, and principally to the most Virtuous, to desire that their Virtue be acknowledged, and esteemed according to its due value; because, as Aristotle saith, this is its natur­al recompense.

But to come neerer to the matter in hand, If it be indifferent of it self to be Vitious or Virtu­ous, I demand, whether it be also an indiffe­rent thing to render honor to the Deity, or not. For if it be indifferent, the Epicureans are in the wrong when they enjoyn it as meet to venerate the Deity, in regard of the eminence of his Be­ing and his natural perfection. Because that excellence of his Being is not from Positive Law, but natural; otherwise men might make and un­make Gods at their pleasures, as they do their Statues. Either, therefore, the Epicureans are absolutly without Religion, and as much aliens to it as Beasts; or the honor which they make profession of rendring to the Deity, they do not ascribe to him out of obedience to the Laws of Commonwealths, every one in his own Coun­try, but because they find themselves naturally oblig'd thereunto. For in case it befell them to be in some place, where it were forbidden to serve God, would they comply with such prohi­bition? And if it were also commanded there to blaspheme him, or preach that there is none at all, could they obey those Laws without doing vio­lence to their consciences? Wherefore if there be of necessity some natural difference be­tween piety and impiety towards God, there must in like manner be some between Vice and Virtue in comportments amongst men. [Page 85] For as the excellence of the Nature of God obli­ges us to certain duties towards him, so also con­sanguinity conciliates and contracts certain obli­gations amongst us one towards another. And when I mention consanguinity, I do not onely understand that of Brethren and neer kindred a­mongst themselves, but also that of Fellow-Citi­zens and Countrimen, and even of men in gene­ral; because there is an universal consanguinity between them all, which hath its root in the com­munion of one and the same nature, and in the dependance and derivation from one common stock. And as the eminence of the Divine na­ture is the foundation of the honor which we render to it, so the equality of ours should be the foundation of the justice which we use one to­wards another.

This the Pagans themselves well observed, when they affirmed the World was a great City, and the several Nation as divers Quarters of the same Town; so that though there be certain du­ties that oblige us more strictly to our next neigh­bors, yet there cease not to be other general ones, which are incumbent upon us towards all men. Add hereunto, that if piety towards God be a natural and immutable obligation, & yet Vice and Virtue indifferent in themselves, and onely good or evil by the authority of a Constitution which is subject to alteration; If the law which sets a value upon Virtue happen to suffer a change, and the Vice which is contrary to it become recom­mended by a new constitution, there will result a consequence absolutely insupportable. For so it may come to pass that a man may be at the same [Page 86] time desperately vitious, a thief, adulterer, false-witness, murderer & parricide, and notwithstan­ding very Religious toward the Deity, who will love and favor him in consideration of his piety, if he hath any knowledge of the same. Which is a prodigious conceipt, and such as without further debate the common sense of men abhors. More­over there is no person so devoid of eyes and un­derstanding, who acknowledges not some natu­ral difference between the Beauty and Deformity of our Bodies, and that the advantage of the one above the other doth not consist meerly in the opinion of men and custom, as the comliness or ill-beseemingness of the greatest part of habits and fashions does, I am not ignorant that Opi­nion bears a great stroke in some singularities, and that we may account that for Beauty at this day, of which in Ages past they did not make the same esteem: as black eyes, such as those of Venus were, are more pleasing to some, to others, those that have something of blew, as those of Miner­va are described. But that is in things, wherein the natural difference is not so evident, and where every one may have his particular senti­ment, without digressing very much from reason. For otherwise, I do not think any man would deny that Achilles or Nereus was handsomer then Thersites, as Homer paints him out to us; and that a strait man, and of a proportionable stature is better made then a crooked Dwarfe, whose arms reach down to his heels, and his legs are distor­ted. Is it then likely, that there should be ac­cording to Nature, a Beauty and an Ugliness of Bodies, and none of the Soul? so that to estimate [Page 87] things agreeably to reason and not after common opinion, the chastity of Lucretia should not be more to be prised then the lightness of Lais, nor the Virtue of Cato then the dissoluteness of Sarda­napalus? If it be so, imagine a Commonwealth a­mong the Antipodes, in which it were as indiffe­rent for a man to kill his Father as his neighbors Dog, to rob in the corners of Woods as to hunt Hares or Deer, to lye with his Sister as with a Wise espoused out of the degrees of consangui­nity which circumscribe Marriages, and to be as honest a thing to Lye and perjure, as we account it here to be sincere in words and proceedings; it will follow that that Republike is regulated with as good constitutions and laws as the best polici'd that is in Europe. For such is the nature of things indifferent, that they take their tincture from the most received opinions, and weigh on­ly according to the standard of policy and Posi­tive Law. But these are not barely extravagan­ces, they are distempers and frensies, which the consent of all people gives the Lye to, and that relick of shame, which Nature hath left amongst the most corrupted Nations, utterly disowns and flyes from. In sincerity, is there something in Truth that advantages it naturally above a Lye? or is it preferred meerly by reason of custome? As much, without doubt, as there is of difference between Being and not Being, so is there of di­stance between Truth that results from the Being of things and is the representation of them; and Falsity, which is as the image of not-Being. Hence it is, that the perfection of the Under­standing of Man consisting in the knowledge of [Page 88] things which Are, conformably to their Being, and consequently in Truth: there must of ne­cessity be an inviolable relation between the Ve­rity of things and our Understandings, which are improved and perfectionated thereby; where­as they reject a Lye by a natural aversion, as soon as they know it to be such. And this Love of Truth hath ever appear'd uniformly in all gene­rous souls. Even little children do not readily take pleasure in stories that are told them, unless so far as they fancy them to be true.

Now is there a Thing naturally determin'd to ennoble our Understandings, which cannot be changed by Customes or Laws, Opinions or Fan­cies, and which remains always equal to it self and unvariable, and is there not also something naturally determin'd to render our other facul­ties perfect? I mean our Appetites and our Wills over which our Understandings preside. Certain­ly, it would be a very extravagant thing, if Rea­son, whereby a Man is a Man, should find its perfection in the sole knowledge of Truth, and that in this we excell the condition of Beasts who are not capable of comprehending it; and in the mean time, for our Affections, which ought to follow reason, there should be no difference be­tween us and Creatures that are destitute of it, by reason of which their appetites are wil'd and undetermined, without subjection to any Laws of Vice or Virtue. But it would be a thing yet more absurd and extravagant, if Living Crea­tures unfurnished of Reason, having every one their proper and natural goodness, which con­sists in a certain perfection of their actions (as [Page 89] we give the Title of Good to a Horse & a Dog, for the strength of their Limbes, agility of their mo­tions, vivacity of their sent and swiftness) and yet a man should not be styled Good, in regard of a constant and immutable perfection of his opera­tions, measuring them by the eternal rules of Truth and Reason. Hesiod understood this bet­ter then these pretended Philosophers. For he delivers this excellent Lesson ( Operum & Dierum, Lib. 1.)

But if there have been sound Nations heretofore, or be any such this day, amongst whom that bru­tish Custome of devouring one another is in use; or if some other such brutality, of the number of those that the right Reason of Man abhors, be practis'd any where without scruple or punish­ment; yet it cannot be inferred from thence, that their custome of doing so changes the nature of the thing in it self; or that the thing being indiffe­rent in its essence is diversly authoris'd according to the various fancies of Men. For there are People in whom Barbarisme hath subjected Na­ture, and imbued them with such monstrous sen­timents, which ought no more to be drawn in­to [Page 90] consequence against the consentment of all o­ther Nations, then the Prodigies which emerge besides the course of Nature, and violate the Laws which she ordinarily observes in the production of her Works. To these people may be applyed that sentence of Petrarch;

Whereas the Epicureans desire to pass for Philoso­phers they ought to have remarked that Nature hath distinguish'd our faculties, to the end they might never be confounded; that she hath assign­ed them their operations in such manner, that one cannot produce those of another; and that to those operations she hath determin'd certain rules, in the observation or Violation whereof, consists the Good and Evil, which invests them with the reputation of Goodness or Improbity, The Faculty of vision which we have in our Eyes, is clean another thing from that of Hear­ing, which is in our Ears; and the difference which distinguishes them, is so essential to their Nature, that it cannot be separated from the same without their intire destruction. The action of seeing is so proper to the Eye, and that of Hear­ing to the Ear, that whoso should employ the for­mer to receive and discern Sounds, and the lat­ter to distinguish the Colours and Figures of sen­sible things, would demonstrate that himself had his Understanding perverted, in going about so [Page 91] to pervert the establisht order of Nature. That action of seeing, to which the Eye is destinated, is performed in such manner, that he that should attempt to see with his eyes shut, or applying the thing to be seen immediately upon the Organ of the eye opened, or removing it from the eye to too great a distance, or lastly putting some bo­dy not diaphanous nor illuminated between the eye and it, should find it were to no purpose, be­cause Nature hath so ordered that to the act of seeing all the conditions opposite to these should be exactly observed. Now what she hath done in the faculties of our Bodies, the same she hath also practis'd in those of our Minds. There is in us one faculty of the Intellect, and another of our Appetites. And as our Understandings are designed for the knowledge of objects, so are our Appetites conferred on us in order to our desiring or eschewing them. The operation of the Understanding is neither good nor rational, unless it be accommodated to the condition of the object, to judge of the truth or falsity thereof ac­cording as the nature of the thing requires; Nei­ther is that of the Appetite good or commend­able, further then it is conformed to the conditi­on of the subject towards which it is carried forth, to desire or avoid the same, according as it is naturally desireable or worthy our aversion. And lastly, as the rules of which we make use to frame our Understandings to legitimate ratioci­nation, and by that means to acquire the habitude of Sciences, are drawn from the nature of the things themselves, so that even Epicurus, although he were no excellent Logician, composed a cer­tain [Page 92] number of Canons by which to regulate his reasonings; So the Maximes wherof we serve our selves to steer our Appetites, to desire or reject the objects presented to us as is fitting and requi­site, and to contract the habitude of Virtues, are in like manner drawn from the natures of the things, whence we have a certain systeem of Mo­rality by which to conduct our actions.

And this is of so much greater necessity, in re­lation to the things which concern Virtue, in as much as the operations of our other faculties are competible to us as we are Living creatures; which state is not the principal of our condition: whereas moral actions belong to us as we are Men; which is, as I may say the apex or highest atchievment of our being, and makes the most excellent piece of our Definition. For it would be an excessive irregularity in Nature, if the most excellent Being amongst all corporeal things, should be able to attain a certain term of his per­fection in the operations which are common to him with Animals destitute of Reason, and yet he should have no certain and determinate per­fection in reference to those faculties which ad­vance him so far above Brutes, that he thereby approaches in some sort to the image of the Dei­ty. In which consideration Plato affirmed that the Supreme Good of Man consisted in his con­formity with God; which was excellently well declared, and is supremely advantageous, if whereas God is of invariable Holiness, Man would give himself to imitate him by the constant exercise of an eminent Virtue. But if there be nothing fixed and certain in the Nature of our [Page 93] Moral operations, so that it is indifferent to be Vitious or Virtuous, what advantage can there be in our conformity with God? For it will be conse­quent, that the Nature of God is likewise indif­ferent to Vice and Virtue, and that he is as an Un­written Tablet, or Wax, susceptible of all impres­sions whatsoever, without being either more or less worthy of Veneration or contempt, disho­nor or Praise, for being either pure or polluted with Crimes, just or Tyrannicall, Good or Evil.

If the Epicureans acknowledge, what all sorts of arguments constrain them to do, that there are certain Laws establisht by Nature, according to which things are accounted Good or Bad, and actions likewise Vitious or Virtuous, in as much as they disagree from or correspond to the same, they must also of necessity confess that there ought to be a Providence, which after the last Act is concluded will repay the rewards of Good­ness to them that have merited them, and heap Vengeance upon such as have stored up the same for themselves by their evil actions. Semblably, as he that offends his Father or Mother, deserves cha­stisement; so in sinning against Nature, in whose Laws is comprehended that of Fathers over their Children, and who is the common Mother to us all, without doubt we shall be obnoxious to cor­rection. For every deviation from the right way requires a correction or reducement: where­fore the correction of a Person that departs from the precepts of Nature is his amendment; but the correction of a vitious action is the punish­ment of him that committed the same. Truely, [Page 94] the Political Laws by which penalties are appoin­ted for Crimes, are not onely just in as much as they are necessary for the conservation of Com­monwealths which their violation would ruin; they are also so, because that wickednesses, though they brought no dammage to the State, are of themselves punishable, and that Nature teaches us that aswell in moral matters as in others, Mon­stres, which so far transgress its rules, ought to be exterminated, to the end their enormity do not turn to her dishonor. But whereas Political Laws establish penalties onely to corrupt actions, and do not punish intentions and thoughts; 'tis not for that bad thoughts and intentions are not as deserving of punishment as actions; but be­cause the will and intention is not apparent either to the Magistrates or Witnesses; besides, if all evil aims and purposes, and such crimes as are committed in the mind onely, were liable to penal animadversion, the number of criminals would be so great, that the frequency of executions would beget too much horror, and the world would soon become depopulated and desart. Now it is not reasonable to punish any offences but such as are proved by good evidence; and it were better the world should be peopled with tolerable inhabitants, then to be reduc'd to so gastly a desolation by punishments and deaths. Yet there are a sort of intentions, which coming to the knowledge of Judges are capitally punish­ed; as those which lead to attempts against per­sons in Soverainty. In which there is not onely a bare regard so far, as if such fore-thought de­sign had grown to effect, the Commonwealth, [Page 95] which is under the Magistrates care, might have suffered considerable prejudice: but it is conside­red in as much as, the prejudice set aside, the de­sign it of it self is too abominable to be pass'd o­ver with impunity; such horridnesses requiring to be expiated with proportional punishments. Therefore seeing the counsels of which wicked actions are produced, are naturally as vicious as the actions themselves; & which is more, the acti­ons are not vicious, unless as far as they proceed from bad counsels; Whereas actions are punish­ed because of their enormity, there would be too notorious a Defect, and too great a Disorder in the nature of Things, if there were not some power superior to that of Soveraign Magistrates, which may give laws to thoughts and deliberati­ons. Now if there be any such Power, it is ne­cessary that the same have a clear cognisance of thoughts and deliberations, that it call those to account that are culpable therein, making their Conscience intervene as a witness against which there lies no exception, and at length begin to punish them by such remorse as the apprehension of judgement begets in their breasts, till afterwards it take a severer vengeance on them. Now this is that which we call the Providence of God, which punishes a part of those things which are done in this Life, to take away all misapprehen­sion that he endures others without exemplary punishment out of connivence; and to give every one grounds of belief that he refers them to ano­ther time, in which the Vengeance he will exe­cute on them shall compensate its deferring by a greater measure of severity.

Of what I have now represented, every man hath ten thousand witnesses in himself. For the terrors which all men experience, when they have committed some wickedness, and whereof they do not cease to feel the effects though they be assured of exemption from penalties constituted by publike laws, do sufficiently declare that there is some thing that frightens us within, with the denunciation it there makes of another sort of vengeance. Certainly, if there were nothing to be dreaded besides the punishment which every Magistrate inflicts in his Territory; what reason is there that soveraign Magistrates themselvs should be terrified with the same? It is true, these people object to us in this particular that those terrors are not natural, but are bred of the false opinion which hath possessed the minds of all men that the Deity is incensed by reason of our offences; to which they add, that the profound ignorance of people hath augmented those affrightments to them, as little children sear bug-bears in the Dark; so that if we had not been prepossessed with such a perverse opinion by our Ancestors, we should have always lived free from that fear in a perfect security. They adjoin moreover, that if there be any such natural Apprehensions wherewith men are discruciated, they are those of the Accidents of Fortune, which may arrive to all, the dispensa­tion of which is erroneously ascrib'd to Provi­dence Divine. For so speaks their Poet;

But in case this were no better grounded then on a false opinion men have been continued in, whence comes it to pass that the same should have so universally possessed the minds of all Nations? For who is he amongst all the people of the World that can avouch himself an exemption from these Fears? In every Nation what person ha's not at some time or other had more or less experience of them? Certainly that which is universal, hath some foundation in Nature; and that which per­sists constantly, and maintains it self alwayes in the same sort, cannot but be very deeply rooted therein; on the other side, vain and panick fears are incontinently dissipated, and are of very short duration. Time (saith Cicero) wears out the Errors of Opinion; but it confirms the judge­ments and sentiments of Nature. But there is something more in the matter; which is that al­though some have more apprehensions of them, and others less, yet all are desirous to be deliver­ed from them, and to finde out some reme­dy against them. For there is nothing that so harrasses the mind or gives it such anguish as Fear does; and there is no man finds any pleasure in being tormented in that manner. How therefore is it come about that men have been so susceptible of these vain terrors, seeing we naturally repell those things that are enemies unto us? And is it not so much the more considerable, that there have been always found some people, although [Page 98] they have been very rare among others, that have endeavored, as Epicurus, to deliver men from such affrightments, by openly preaching Impiety either by words or example. For David com­plaines that there were some even amongst the Jews, that were so devoid of sense as to deny that there is a God; or if there be, that he takes any consideration of humane actions by his Pro­vidence. A strange thing, that they which would imprint such vain Fears in the mind of Men, should have succeeded so happily and so universally therein, notwithstanding all the na­tural repugnances in us against them; and they which would deliver us from them could never effect their purpose, although they had the assist­ance of natural profaneness to favour them there­unto? Do's not this surpass all astonishment, that the Fear of Divine Justice naturally disquiets the souls of men, and causes such painful agitations therein; and yet notwithstanding, if Epicurus should have mounted upon the Theater at Athens, and the Poet Lucretius gone into the Pulpit for Orations, and there preached to the people the contempt of God and his Thunders, that instead of recompensing them for attempting to free men from such a tyrannical opinion, the greatest wret­ches would have been ready to beat out their brains with stones? And that those Nations be­ing so inflamed with love of their Liberty, and an ardent hatred against Tyrants which affected the Domination over their Goods and Persons, that they erected statues in their streets in honor of them that kill'd them, should have so great an ab­horrence against those which went about to dis­abuse [Page 99] them from a fancy which oppress'd and ty­ranniz'd over their souls? Surely it must rather be acknowledged that Nature prevail'd, and the wrath of God, which is in a high degree reveal­ed to men from Heaven, and ‘Quae caput a coeli regionibus ostendebat.’ And it helps not to alledge that it hath not been possible for us to be delivered from these Terrors, because we have not been instructed in the Do­ctrine of Epicurus. For whosoever looks nar­rowly thereinto will, not without admiration, remark two things. First, that there are very few men, but have a propensity to Prophaneness; and consequently every one is an Instructer to himself in the Epicurean discipline. Yet never­theless the number is so small that ha's delivered themselves from the inquietudes of conscience, that perhaps there never was so much as one per­son that became absolutely freed from them, not even Lucretius or Epicurus himself. In some men, the more resistance they employ against those assaults, the greater is their importunateness; and they are re-enforced by the endeavors that are us'd to repell them; so that from Impiety, to which they would resign up themselves to sin more at ease, without being molested by such alarms in the midst of their pleasures, they fall into Superstiti­on; like a fugitive slave, that is drawn back by the throat into his Masters house, where he is in­forced to obey whether he will or no, for fear of the Scourge and the Torture. Others, indeed, go so far, that the pleasures wherein they swim, [Page 100] and wherewith they almost totally subvert their reason, remove in a manner such sentiments out of their minds, so as sometimes to make a mock­ery thereof. But 'tis as when Criminals give themselves to debaucheries in the Prison. For when the fumes of wine are a little exhal'd, and they begin to think of their crimes with a setled consideration, they fret and are excruciated with the horror of Gibbets and Wheels which are preparing for them. But if it happen to them to be always drunk (which yet is rarely so) yet they are in their sleep tormented with horrible visions and affrighting dreams. The second thing observable is, that the honester part of mankind are they which feel those Terrors least; by rea­son that a good conscience which hath know­ledge of the Goodness of God and his inclination to Mercy, assures and reposes it self in the same: and notwithstanding such good men abhor that doctrine from the bottom of their hearts, that removes all fear of the Deity out of the Mind of Man. In so much that they which are least dis­quieted with these Troubles, are the men that esteem them to have their foundations in Nature, and to be grounded upon Truth. On the con­trary they which believe them vain and ground­less, are the most severely assaulted with them, without being able to be released from them. In which on the one side shines the Goodness of God towards them that love him sincerely, and fear him awfully; and on the other side, his Justice upon them that disesteem him. What man was ever more outragious against God then Caligula, or who ever so audaciously contemned his [Page 101] Vengeance? And for all that, when so ever it thundred, as if the Deity had spoke to him from Heaven, he hid himself under his Bed, as if he intended to make a Buckler of it against the Tem­pest. Whereas in the midst of the Darkness in which the Pagans liv'd, Socrates maintained his mind in that same tranquillity at his Death, wherein he had pass'd the whole course of his days.

But there is one thing highly worthy conside­ration, which is, that the stings of Conscience are never so sensible and so quick as when men approach near Death, or behold themselves in some eminent danger that menaces them. And whence should it be so, but onely that by the in­stinct of Nature they presage and anticipate with their fear the misery that attends the Wicked af­ter this Life; Misery, I say, which is so much the more horrible in the apprehensions they have of it, by reason that they know not what it is, and because all men have a perswasion that their souls are immortal. For if Death did extinguish the Soul with the Body, and so rescued both the one and the other from the Divine Vengeance and the jurisdiction of Fortune at the same time, there would be nothing at all to justifie those fears in reason. In case, I say, those terrors were not na­tural in us, there would be no person but would free himself from them with this consideration, There was a time when we were not in Being, and one day we shall exist no more: which was the consolation of Epicurus. But on the contra­ry, then is the time that those Alarms are redoub­led, and the tempests increase their violence. [Page 102] Insomuch that where there is lest one sparkle of piety and hope of pardon, men would not have this opinion true, That God hath no care of men, and that he prepares neither Good nor Evil for them in the other world. And where there is not so much as the least seed of piety, although they are very desirous that Opinion were true, yet they are not able to perswade themselves that it is so. And hereof the Epicureans themselves sup­ply us with an evident Instance: For what else intends their Poet in these lines?

What is it, I beseech you that he denotes by that hidden Power? Is it Nature? No surely: for Na­ture takes pleasure in the production and conser­vation of things, not in their ruine: besides that these Accidents which he mentions are not de­pendant on the ordinary laws of Nature. Is it Fortune then? No, much less: For wherefore should he say that she takes pleasure to shatter the grandeurs of the World disdainfully at her Feet, seeing she hath no knowledge either of little or great, nor whether those be the bagdes of Pow­er or not, which she tears in pieces, and dashes to powder? It remains therefore, that it is that which we call the Providence of God, which in­deed sometimes takes pleasure in convincing men of their vanity, and overturning the highnesses and excellencies of the Earth. And this is that which extorts from Horace (a disciple of the same [Page 103] School) that handsome confession, that having been formerly a contemner of the Gods, the dreadful violences of thunder made him re­nounce that foolish wisdom wherewith he had been imbued, and pronounce this memorable sentence;

So great is the power of truth, that even from the mouth of its adversaries it draws testimonies to its advantage.

CHAP. VII. Of the Epicurean Opinion concerning the Immortality of the Humane Soul, and the Supreme Good; and what may redound from it.

HItherto I have touch'd but transiently up­on the Questions of the Immortality of the Soul, and of the Supreme Good of Man; and I now come to examine what they judge of the one, and wherein they place the other. Which, though they both require to be treated of distin­ctly, I shall dispatch with brevity, according to the universal design of this Work. And foras­much as they of former times thought that the Soul survives not the Body, and the opinion of [Page 104] the modern Sectators is doubtful thereof, some affirming, others denying the same; it is neces­sary for me to shew, that if they grant that the Humane Soul is immortal, they are also obliged to confess that there is a Providence. I shall not scruple in the first place to alledge here for proof of the incorruptibility of our minds, The con­sent of all Nations, although I have already made use of that Argument in another matter. For it seems such to me, as ought in no wise to be re­jected, unless by contentious spirits, who when they have contradicted a truth, of how great evi­dence soever, think they have atchieved an ex­ploit of great applause. For I beseech you, if the soul of man be not immortal, if there be no firm reasons to induce us to believe that it is so, how hath such a fancy been able to become so rooted in our Minds, that there is not any opini­on that ha's a greater vogue in the World? Not onely the Greeks and the Romanes, who seem to have been better refined then other Nations, have been imbued with it; but the Barbarians, and least civilised people have equally had this per­swasion of the perpetual duration of their Minds; although the quality of their estate after death was almost equally unknown to them all. What therefore are those reasons that perswaded them of it, and rendred that perswasion so firm and unalterable? Should I say, that all Nations have received it from hand to hand from their An­cesters, perhaps it would stir the Epicureans spleen to mockery; yet I should not affirm either an absurdity or an impertinence. For all Man­kind being derived from one single person, and [Page 105] he having been indued with a more clean and particular understanding of his Being then others have had since; (because the race of men ha's been gradually depraved and degenerate accor­ding to the distance at which they have been re­moved from their originals;) he imparted the prin­ciples and knowledge to his descendants, which are ingrasted in them and intertained from Age to Age. And although it were no more then a tradition from hand to hand, which ha's been altered in divers manners by Lapse of time, yet the principal part thereof, which consists in the belief it self of the Immortality of the Soul, hath such a foundation in Truth and in Nature, that it hath been impossible, even for many Ages of time, which ordinarily decays all things, to prevail against it, or at least to deface it out of the minds of Men. Now no Relation ought to be discredited, which is accompained with these evidences. First, that no solid and indubitable reasons can be brought against the same to con­vince it of falsitie; as I am well assured there is none to be found against this of any reasonable probability: And Secondly, which is equally spread through out the whole Universe, and hath been with extreme forwardness received by all Nations; and Lastly, which hath born up a­gainst the encounters of time, and constantly maintained it self in the midst of so [...]any revolu­tions of humane affairs; so that it hath pass'd in­to the remotest Islands, and the territories sepa­rated from us by so great seas, that they have lain undiscover'd to us till within these last two hun­dred years. Is it not a thing worthy our marveil [Page 106] that in such places where men had lost all know­ledge of their Original, and of the streights over which the people pass'd from whom they are de­scended, and where they have in a manner for­gotten humanity it self; they should notwithstan­ding have preserv'd this belief, that there is some other thing in them besides the Body, of greater excellence, and which subsists beyond their fate and ashes. But if there be people sound in some other part of the New World, which are fallen to so low a degree beneath themselves and to such a measure of brutality, as not to have retain'd a­mongst them any shadow of this Sentiment (though I much doubt, whether there be any such) their testimony ought not to be of any con­sideration, not onely because they are very few in number in comparison of the rest of the World, but also because that it would not be strange if they whom barbarisme ha's unman'd in all other things, even so far as to have no inclination to society, should likewise have extinguish'd in their Minds that impression of Nature and the tradition of their Ancestors. But, praised be God, there are other reasons, which induce an intire belief of this important verity, and which hinder that this tradition is not worn out, as so many others have been, which had less firm rooting in our Minds.

All men have been alike perswaded that there is a God; and very few have doubted that he is a Rewarder of Virtue, and Punisher of Vice. Now neither the compensation of the one, nor the Penalty of the other, is always fully admini­stred in this World, even in the judgement of [Page 107] those who have had no great knowledge of the Nature of Sin, nor what punishment is compe­tent thereunto. And this is the observation from whence they inferr'd that there must be some other time then that of our sojourning in the Body, in which that retributive justice should be executed.

Whence the Opinion of the Souls immortallity ingrafted on the stock of the perswasion of such a Deity, hath fix'd its roots so deep, that it hath been impossible ever to be eradicated. And we have above demonstrated, that it must either be acknowledged that those two Propertys, must be in God, or that he is necessarily ignorant that they are in him. But there is hardly sound any one yet, that has suppress'd Nature in himself to such a degree. Wherefore there must be an other time then that of our abiding in the Body, which is appointed to render recompenses and punish­ments to Souls, since they are here dispensed so disproportionately to Vice and Virtue. I know well that Pomponatius, who under the pretense of defending the Immortality of the Soul, hath fought against it, and making profession to be a Peripatetick, hath embraced the sentiments of Epicurus in this particular, answers, that although the soul of man should be mortal, yet it would have recompense enough for the exercise of Vir­tue, in the possession of Virtue it self. Since it is a thing so excellent in its own Nature, that it is contented with it self (as the Stoicks speak) and that all remuneration which it receives besides, is either superfluous or not necessary unto it. But supposing this to be true of Virtue, that they [Page 108] which practice it, are sufficiently recompensed by injoying it; yet it would not be equally true of Vice, that they which addict themselves there­unto, are punished enough by doing so. For the Impious possessing very frequently so great con­tentments of Life, that the most part of Good men which have lived in all Ages, have been scandaliz'd thereat, can it reasonably be thought that there is satisfaction enough in this Philoso­phical speculation, that in as much as Vice is the greatest of all Evils, it is therefore a sufficient pe­nalty to their Crimes? Nature teaches us, and the practice of all Nations confirms it, that Vice being a Moral Evil, that is, such as consists in a thing which is of it self dishonest and meriting blame, the punishment thereof ought to be in suf­fering a Physical Evil, that is, such as consists in the feeling of something which is contrary to nature, and painful to it. And there was never yet such a Law-giver heard of, that established a constitu­tion to punish a man for Robbery by causing him to commit adultery. It is so natural to men to e­steem not onely that the Punition of Vice consists in Pain, but that it is congruous to the natural order of things, that whosoever commits Evil in the First manner should be repaid Evil in the Se­cond, that they number Nemesis amongst the Vir­tues, which denotes the indignation that we are inflamed with in beholding Good arrive to those that are Evil, and on the other side Evil betide them that have otherwise deserved. Whence, because they believed it proper to the Deity to maintain the orders of nature, and to correct the irregularities and deviations that happen therein, [Page 109] they have sometimes been carried so far as to doubt that there was a God, in as much as they observed according to their apprehension the Just and Pious evilly entreated, and the Wicked passing their days in ease and delectation as ample as their wishes. Every one knows the verses of Claudian in reference hereunto touching the life and death of Ruffinus; and Antiquitie furnishes us with store of other the like testimonies. Yea it hath befallen even the Prophets themselves to ex­claim upon this occasion;

Either, therefore, there is a strange Irregularity in Nature; or, being crimes escape with impunity in this world, contrary to what they deserve, there must of necessity be vengeance reserved for them in that which is to come.

Now concerning Virtue, although it be native­ly embellish'd with many beauties incentive of our Love, yet so it is that it cannot be it self the price and recompence which appertains to it. For what is Virtue, but the fair habits of our minds, and particularly the good actions which proceed from them? And what is a recompense, but that which is given in consideration of such good actions, and which consequently ought to come other where then from themselves? In truth, there is not less natural correspondence between Virtue (in which Moral Goodness consists) and [Page 110] Physical Goodness, which is placed in the injoy­ment and preception of what we naturally de­sire, then there is between there contraries. And the discontentment which we conceive in be­holding them which take pleasure in Virtue, to suffer remarkable calamities in their Lives, do's not appear less reasonable to us, then the dis­pleasure which we apprehend at the Prosperity of the wicked. Which disorder, when it happens in the nature of things that good men become mi­serable, do's not less perplex the belief we have of Providence, nor less incite us then the other, to doubt of the existence of the Deity. Witness that complaint of Ovid upon the death of Tibullus;

And although the Inclinations which induce Providence to compensate Virtue, are not of the same nature with those that oblige it to the pu­nishment of Vice, because the inducements to this Latter are sounded on his Justice, the recti­tude of which ought to be exact and rigorous; whereas the former arise from pure Good­ness or Mercy; yet the notions which we have of the Deity not permitting us to have a less good opinion of his goodness and Mercy then of his Justice, the scandal is equal to us in both the one and the other defect. Thus, you see, the same Prophet, after his hesitancy at the belief of Pro­vidence by reason of the Prosperity of the Wick­ed, immediately after complains that his integri­ty and his innocence were unprofitable unto him, seeing they did not repreive him from the Evils [Page 111] which he continually endured. And he professes, that this thought gave him so much inquietude and trouble, and the inequality of things seemed to him so preposterous and scandalous, that he could not well reassure himselfe till he was enter'd into the Sanctuary of the Lord of Hosts, and had consider'd the End that is reserved for such peo­ple. And Claudian likewise declared his dissatis­faction, till afterwards.

But seeing Death arrives equal to all, and that that of the Wicked (as the Prophet saith) is very fre­quently without regrets; and although it should be accompanied with some thing particularly terrible or painful, yet that punishment do's not by much equal the atrocity of the crimes which they have committed; if there be not some other chastisement reserved for the Wicked to come, and some other recompense prepared for good men, the Conduct of the Deity does not remain fully enough justified therein.

This consideration ought to suffice rational men, to evince that our Souls subsist after our Bodies: but we have other evidences besides of such firmeness that they could never be defaced by Barbarism it self. For he that pleases to con­sider never so little attentively the capacity our Understandings have to comprehend so many and so different things, their agitations so sud­dain as to fly from East to West, and from North to South in a moment; their inconceiveable [Page 112] swiftness in climing up in an instant even to the highest Heavens, there contemplating their mo­tions, and the Earth which they environ as a point; the power which they have to remember past things, to connect them with the present, and thence to frame conjectures of the future, which are sometimes so certain that they seem to be Prophecies; to embrace when they please in one gross all the mass of the Uni­verse, and also when they please to single out of it the most minute parts only; the facul­ty which they employ to discover the beginning of the World, and its annihilation; to keep a register of times past not by Ages and years one­ly, but by Moneths and Weeks, and Days and Hours and Minutes, to almost an infinite division; the exactness they attain to in calculating so per­fectly the courses of the Heavens, that they di­vine and point out the Eclipses even for several Ages to come; and their dexterous vivacity in inventing so many excellent Arts and industrious Mysteries; in polishing, illustrating and piercing into so many, occult Sciences, and difficult and intricate questions: what can be said upon con­sideration of all these perfections, but that there is something in us of greater excellence then our Bodies, yea a spirit issued from the breath of God himself? And herein I dare appeal to the testi­mony of the Epicureans themselves. They do not stick to publish that their Philosopher is worthy of immortality, and even to be acknowledged for a God, in respect of his rare inventions in Philo­sophy; although the rest hold him for a person absolutely ignorant of the things which he un­dertook [Page 113] to meddle with, and impertinent in those which he treated of and imagined he under­stood. Do they think then that that Divine per­sonage (as they call him) who first dared to dis­play the mighty power of his ardent spirit, to break and wrest open the gates of Nature, to dive into secrets formerly unknown, to pass be­yond the flaming Walls of the World, and post over that immense space of things with his un­derstanding to bring from thence the victorious knowledge of the Causes of the universe; that he I say, had no other Soul but a little Breath of Air that is dissipated in dying, and I know not what kind of vital heat, which is extinguished with this corporeal Mass? And were it not a strange disorder in the Nature of things, that Epi­curus should have merited the immortality of the Gods, and nevertheless could not arrive to the third part of the Age of a Raven? For what advantage is it to him now, while he is mingled with the dust of so many men dead before and after him, that others speak of his singular devices in Philosophy? And if the cause of his Life differ'd in nothing from that of a Horse, whence came those facul­ties, for which they pretend men are obliged to consecrate Temples and Statues to him? Truely, as an immortal faculty is requisite to serve and ho­nor the Deity, so for certain, in case he had had no other principle of his Life but a pitiful mor­tal puffe of Air, he would not have dared so au­daciously to encounter the sentiments of other men, and taught Irreligion with so mad an im­pudence [Page 114] as could not be repress'd by any terrors or respects whatsoever.

For there needs almost an equal strength of wit to do so well and so ill.

Moreover if our Souls be corruptible, they re­sult undoubtedly from the temperature of the Elements in our Bodies, and by that means are (howsoever subtle they be) corporeal themselves. If so, how can they have any conception of spi­ritual substances, which are absolutely separated from matter? For there is required some propor­tion berween the thing understood and that which understands; for which reason Philoso­phers affirm that by means of the conception of things the Understanding becomes in a manner of the same nature with them. How then, if we be nothing but Bodies, do we comprehend that there are things which are not such? and how do we enter into discourse of the Deity it self? Must not he be a very Brute, that imagines that the Fa­cultie whereby we comprehend that there is a Deity, and dispute of a spiritual and eternal Es­sence, and its Properties, differs not but in a de­gree of heat and refining of our humors, from the Faculties of Beasts? Aristotle taught that an Un­derstanding was either an act of the Fancy, or at least was not performed without the interven­tion of those Images which are form'd in the Fan­cy [Page 115] upon occasion of objects that strike our Senses. And like a cautious person as he was, made use of that Dis-junction, to the end he might not shake the doctrine of the immateriality of the In­tellect, of which in truth he seems sometimes to speak dubiously, but in other places renders such advantageous testimonies thereunto, that there appears no ground of doubting but that he had very rational sentiments concerning it. Pompa­natius, as great a Peritatetick as he is, hath liked better to determine that the act of Understanding is nothing but the formation of such Images. What picture then do's the Fancy delineate in it self, whereby to represent the Deity, and principally in them who are so clearly perswaded of the spi­rituality of his Nature, that if it ever happens to them to conceive any Idea of him according to the similitude of Bodies, they presently condemn their conceptions, and indeavor as much as pos­sible to abstract their Mjnds and raise them above all corporeal Beings, to the end they may have no other thoughts thereof, but such as are purely intellectual? It is true, they are sensible objects which furnish us either the matter or the occasi­on of all our speculations. But there is no man but knows that from those sensible things of which our Fancie receives the forms and repre­sentations, our minds elevate themselves to con­siderations infinitely more purifi'd, and which retaining nothing of the Nature and condition of Bodies, sufficiently confirm, that there are facul­ties in us, which, though they make use of cor­poreal organs for some few of their operations, are nevertheless immaterial themselves.

To proceed yet further; There is no person in the World, but is desirous of Immortality, and every one is convinced in his conscience of such an inclination. Whence therefore comes that desire to be so Universal amongst us, if there be nothing that is able to satisfie it? For the same Aristotle hath written, that the natural appetites are not given us to no purpose, but that there are certain things naturally designed for their satisfa­ction; and that Philosopher is provided with ir­refragable reasons to justifie his opinion. There­fore, where is that Immortality which we all seek after? Not in our bodies; Since all men yield to the stroke of fate. Nor yet in Statues or Books, nor in the Memory of men, nor in triumphal Ar­ches, nor the Inscriptions of Monuments. For the number of those is very inconsiderable who have provided themselves Memorials, that they have been; and of those which have been erect­ed to this day, there are not above two or three in a manner whose durable materials have secur'd them from the silent depredation of con­suming Time. At the utmost, although the an­cient Monuments should have still survived, as the Arches of triumph, Pyramids, and Mausolae­um's, yet they could not give the Immortality we seek; they are no more but testimonies that we are not to expect the same in this world; as they which want issue, take pleasure to keep little Dogs, and to behold their Breed. It remains then, that we have a complaint to make against nature, who hath given us a desire, without hope of be­ing able to content it; which is unworthy and disagreeable to the care which she hath had of us [Page 117] in so many other things. For as for what some may possibly alledge that Brutes have almost alike inclinations, and that even insensible things are lead by a natural instinct to their own conserva­tion; 'tis a frivolous objection: Shall we say, that because a Stone naturally tends downwards, it desires to be there perpetually? being ignorant of the impulsive cause that moves it, or the place whence it comes and whether it goes, and even of its own being, it cannot, to speak properly desire its own conversation. The cause is, for that every thing which is heavy, falls naturally downward; if a Stone should not do so, it would have no gra­vity, & were not a Stone. In a word, heavy things have as little desire to descend down, and light to mount upwards, either from the regions of Heaven or the centure of the Earth, as the num­ber of Two being doubled ha's to make Four. 'Tis the nature and order of things, which knows not it self who would have it to be so. As for Animals destitute of Reason, all the care they have of their Preservation lyes in that which we term the estimation of things present, which ac­cordingly as they are hurtful or profitable are de­sired or avoided by them, without all knowledge of the future, or any thought that reaches so far: much less are they able to do as men, who anti­cipate not onely intire Ages, but thousands and millions of Years to come. And who so compares that blind instinct of Pismires, which seem to provide in Summer against the necessities of Winter, with the thought of immortality, must either be an Idiot or a mad man. For, can any man of common sense imagine that those little [Page 118] Animals have an apprehension that the Sun being returned to the Tropic of Capricorn, will have no more power to make the Earth produce what is necessary to their subsistence? Surely no: But that small insect being naturally theevish, as long as she finds food in the fields, steals it from thence, and carries it to her little Cell, without dreaming that there will be a Morrow, and far from foreseeing the Rain and Frosts of Winter; being notwith­standing all Elogies of her, ‘—Ignara atque incauta Futuri.’ But that Providence which governs all things and takes care of their conservation, because it created them, gives these creatures those blind instincts and inclinations to theft, to cause them to lay up a store of necessary sustenance; as a Fal­coner makes use of the swiftness and rapacious­ness of Hawkes, to cover the table of their Ma­sters with excellent fowl, without their under­standing of the design. But for us, our desires are ardent, and our thoughts extend themselves wonderfully forward to the Future: and foras­much as the inquietude of ardent desires, when we see no hopes of contenting them, is extremely importunate; in case we have no part in Im­mortality, Nature will not onely have put the de­sire of it in us to no purpose (which she hath done in nothing besides) but also to deject and torment us, which were a cruelty beyond the spleen of Stepdames.

Moreover, experience it self teaches us that there is such a difference between the Body and Mind, that they seem oftentimes to have no com­munion one with another; so different are their [Page 119] functions, and so little mutation doth a great and universal change in the one work in the other. You may see a man blasted or lamed in all his Members by some accident, who yet hath the motions of his mind as strong, plyant and nimble as when he was in perfect health. You may see another upon the borders of the grave, ema­ciated like a skeleton, without vigor and pulse; whose understanding nevertheless is more sub­lime then before, and his thoughts more refined, who will judiciously discourse of every thing that is propounded to him, and that which is the greatest wonder will do it with so little asto­nishment at death, as if to devest himself of his body were of no more value to him then to stripoff his cloathes; although he apprehend full well on the one side what death is, and do not contemn it out of stupidity, and is on the other absolutely perswaded of the immortality of the Soul. But it's true, this is not universal; and great mutati­ons of the body sometimes produce remarkable changes in the Mind. Nor do I deny but that the Body is so constituted in its particular temper, and so neerly ligued with the Mind, that the disposi­tion of the one contributes very much to the fun­ctions and operations of the other. As when a Lute is untuned, how skillful soever the Musici­an be, he can never make any tolerable harmony; so in the total dyscrasie of the Body and its prin­cipal instruments, the Soul sometimes remains stu­pified and astonish'd. But seeing this happens not equally in all men, and that there are as many experiences of people who amidst aches and mutilations and losses of their limbs have preser­ved [Page 120] the whole strength of their Minds intire, till death, it must needs be that this Tabernacle lodg­eth something else that is of a more durable tem­per. Whence it is easie to conclude, that since it is not a Body, it must be an immaterial substance, and consequently incorruptible. For being of a spiritual nature it cannot be assailed by external things which offend us, nor suffer from any acci­dent that befalls it from without; and holding nothing of the matter of the Elements, or their contrary qualities, which naturally encounter one another to their mutual destruction, it involves not in it self any seed of corruption which seems to attend every thing that is composed of them.

I shall add moreover, what ha's been above demonstrated, that there is so great a difference between Vice and Virtue, that he that do's not acknowledge the same, is unworthy the name of a man. Which how is it possible for us to ac­knowledge, if the Faculties of our Minds be not different from those of Brutes, since they have no understanding at all of it? For it is certain, that we argue from the disproportion of effects to the difference of causes, and from the diversity of actions to that of the Faculties which produce them; and lastly from the difference of Faculties to that of the essence it self of the things in which those faculties reside. If therefore Brutes have no knowledge of Good and Evil, as every one sees they have not; and if we perceive an infi­nite distance between them, as reason informs us, and our conscience acquiesces therein, and the consentment of Nations hath declared in all the World; it follows that there is an infinite dis­proportion [Page 121] between our Faculties and theirs, and consequently that the like distance is found be­tween the essence of their Souls and that of ours. And I appeal to reason whether, being the per­fection of a Man consists in the knowledge of the most excellent objects, and in the exercise of Vir­tue, and the perfection of a good Horse lyes in the strength of his Limbs, and in the agility of his motions; whether, I say, it be not abundant­ly evident that the excellence of the one lyes in his Body, and the excellence of the other in some thing, wherewith the body hath scarce any com­munication or commerce. Whence it necessarily follows, that their natures differ wholly and abso­lutely in regard of reason, which alone is cap­able of conferring that perfection on man; as weighty things differ from light by the massive solidity of their matter, in which gravity is seat­ed; and as the circular Figure is discriminated from the rest by the roundness of its circumfe­rence equally distant from the centre. Of which the luctation and combate of reason against the corporeal appetites (which even Aristotle and o­ther Philosophers have plainly acknowledged) affords a testimony satisfactorily manifest. For since there is no shadow of such reluctance in Brutes, who follow their sensuality without any rule, or check, and that the same is sound in the most dissolute men, in whom conscience cannot be absolutely extinguish'd; it follows that it must have its original from something which is natu­rally destitute of that sensuality, and consequent­ly which is also not corporeal. Because it is ma­nifest, that those appetites which are called sensi­tive, [Page 122] and are common to us with Brutes, have their seat and root in the Body, and depend on that Soul by which we have resemblance with them, in asmuch as we are Animals. Wherefore, whether there be in man two distinct Souls, one Sensitive (as it is called) by which we are Animals, and the other Reasonable, by which we are men; or whether there be but one onely, which is in­dued with different faculties, whereby we are provided to perform all the Functions appertain­ing to those two respects; it is clear that that sen­sitive faculty is not displayed but in the Body, be­ing so linked to it as never to be separable from it; and that on the contrary the other is not seated in the body, since it is designed to check our appe­tites, which it performs oftentimes with very great violence and power. And this is so true, and so universally received, saving by the Epi­cureans (who think they have won the Palme for noble inventions in Philosophy, because they have degraded themselves to the rank of Brutes) that the most excellent persons have been so far from believing the Soul to perish with the Body, that on the contrary (not being able to conjecture how after the dissipation of the Body, they could ever be reunited and render the whole man im­mortal) they have affirmed that the Soul in which the Understanding resides is really the man, and that the Body is not, but as the receptacle and prison. But by the grace of God we shall see hereafter that man was created for immortality as well in reference to his body as to his Soul; and that being fallen from this prerogative by sin, he hath been restored thereunto by the Divine cle­mency and mercy.

Seeing it is so therefore, that the Soul of man subsists after separation from the Body, and con­sequently is of an incorruptible substance, it fol­lows of necessity that there is somthing to be ho­ped and feared from the Deity; and that though his Providence were not so cleerly intelligible in the world here, yet at least his justice is to be dreaded in that which is to come. For what will become of the soul after Death? Will she act, or will she be buried in eternal sleep? Certainly she is of a nature so active, vigilant and averse from idleness, that it is with regret that she allows the body its necessary intervals of refreshment. Even as plung'd and immur'd as she is in it, when that is at rest, she is not surpris'd with sleep, but is ever imploy'd on some kind of speculations how unprofitable and extravagant soever they be. Like as a Musitian, that is affected to the exer­cise of his Art, chooses rather to play on his Lute, though half untuned, and at the inconve­nience of making false Musick and committing dissonances, then to suffer his fingers to become torpid by continued disuse. And the more ex­cellent she is, that is, the more exercis'd in gene­rous contemplations, the more she hates repose, even to the abandoning all care of her habitation, though she otherwise loves and is a good compa­nion unto it. So that she would be clean diver­ted from the end to which Nature ha's designed her, if she were condemned to a perpetuall sleep in eternal night. What then will her occupati­ons be at that time? Will she frequent in Towns, or will she resort to unhabited placs? Neither of which is worthy of her, nor sutable to her in­clinations. [Page 124] Whilst she is here by reason of the body confined to sensible things, yet she quits her self from them oftentimes, to busie her viva­city in the contemplation of those which are in­tellectual. For whatsoever beauty the World hath, it all referres to the body, and so it feeds and satisfies the corporeal eyes onely. If there be any contentment for the Mind, it is in the con­sideration of that Wisdom, from which all the excellent order we behold, proceeds: Which is an object destinated to the Understanding and not to the corporeal sight. Much more there­fore, when she is no longer in this lodging of Earth, will she contemn sensible things, to give her self to such as are conformable unto her. And indeed the most excellent faculty of the Soul is the Understanding, and the perfection of that consists in contemplation of noble and excellent objects. Now there is in the perfection of eve­ry thing its supreme end and contentment; by reason of which, either the Soul must be extin­guished, which we have shewn is impossible; or she must be imployed in the contemplation of things worthy so sublime an intelligence. And what can there be, even in the opinion of the Epicureans, more worthy to be considered, lov'd, and ador'd then God, or consequently which so much perfectionates the soul of man and his un­derstanding, or which gives him so much satis­faction and joy? Therefore his supreme Pleasure will be to approach unto God, to behold and know him, to dive into his wonderful nature, as much as is possible to be founded in so great an Abysse. And this cannot be done, unless God [Page 125] communicate himself to the Soul, and suffer him­self to be (as I may so speak) touched and tasted by it. But what? If that be the perfection of the Soul, and consequently its aim, is it consen­taneous to Reason, that those which are polluted with all sorts of wickedness should likewise have free access to the Deity, and receive as high con­tentment from his communication, as he will ad­mit the Good unto? Or shall Fortune have then also a Soveraign power over spirits, to bring some of them fortuitously to their supreme Good, and as rashly debar others from it? Certainly altoge­ther otherwise. As they which have most re­ver'd the Deity and his image (which resplends in Virtue, and not in sensible things) or who (to speak better) have not esteemed sensible things further then as they are necessary to the body to render their Minds more free to its functions, and dextrous to the exercise of Virtue, shall in re­ward of their affections, obtain the injoyment of that which they loved here below (which is a thing agreeable to the Goodness of God:) so those shall by his justice be deprived of the same, who have slighted it in comparison of things visible and transitory. Now to be deprived of the con­templation of the Deity and of that delectation which it affords in communicating it self to the creature, is that which we account the punish­ment of sin committed in the body; which also cannot be without transcendent sorrow, and unspeakable distress. We refer these things as much as we can, to the experience of all men.

It is not questioned by any, but that we are de­signed to a supreme Good, and that such su­preme Good is of it self so great, that all our desires ought to concenter in tendency thereunto. The debates of Philosophers concerning its Nature, are infinite, and their dissenting opinions about it can never be composed by the help of Philoso­phy. Not to amuse my self in rehearsing the Fan­cies of others, which are almost without number, in the first place the Epicureans place it in the Plea­sure of the Body. The Stoicks determine it in Virtue. And the Peripateticks define it in the exercise of Virtue; yet account it not complete, unless it be attended with the Pleasure that ac­crues from injoyment of corporeal and external things; such as Beauty, Health, Riches, Peace, the love of ones Fellow-Citizens, and Prosperity in Enterprises. As for Bodily Pleasure, the Phi­losophers have long since driven that out of the School, as too soft and effeminate, wherein to place the soveraign happiness of good men. For is it equitable to attribute the same to Lais with Cornelia the Mother of the Gracchi? or to Marcus Brutus with Heliogabalus? And what a strange supreme Good is that which renders men of neer resemblance with beasts? Yet supposing it were so, experience shows that 'tis impossible to be ob­tain'd. For who ever tasted a Pleasure in the world, so pure, that had not in it a touch of bit­terness? If any one ha's tasted such, yet who ha's been able to continue and rellish it for a long time? Whether soever Pleasure be plac'd in a sensi­ble jollity for the injoyment of some desired thing; or establish'd in the Absence of all Evils, [Page 127] which they call Indolence; those Pleasures which tickle us are but of a moments duration, and no man ever yet pass'd an intire day, without com­plaining of something. Now the supream Good is a thing firm and constant, and which not only ought to be difficultly shaken (as Aristotle observed) but absolutely immutable. They who have con­fin'd it to Virtue, were without doubt more ge­nerous and worthy the prerogative of men. But there never yet liv'd any person, that attain'd to such a degree of Virtue, as it ought to be had in, to make up a happiness: for it is requisite that it be accomplished in all its degrees and parts. The Stoicks indeed were arrogant enough, to imagine themselves to have attained thereunto; but we have too much experience both of their im­becillity and our own, to believe them. And al­though some one should have reached to that high pitch of Virtue, yet cannot he be called a happy man, who is subject to fall into the mis­fortunes of Priamus, and who really falls into them. If there have been any Sages amongst the Stoicks, Cato Ʋticensis and Brutus were the men. And notwithstanding Cato in despair of ever be­holding the affairs of the Commonwealth re­stor'd, disputes in the first place against the Pro­vidence of God, and accuses its conduct of a strange instability and prevarication, as if it had favour'd the tyrannical attempts of Caesar; and then kills himself, to go seek his happiness in ano­ther place, since his Virtue could not give him it in this world. And for the other, being trans­ported with the same dispair, he slew himself with his own hand, after he had reviled Virtue, call­ing [Page 128] her weak and wretched, as if she were no more then a meer name or shadow. Which de­portments of theirs sufficiently detect and con­vince the vanity of those magnificent words of the Masters of their School; That a Wise man is invulnerable by all the Accidents of Fortune, and that he can never lose the support of Virtue, so unmoveable is she in him, and always like to her self. Aristotle ordered the matter better, when to the injoyment and practise of Virtue he adjoyn­ed the felicity which accrues from things exter­nal. Which opinion is no doubt more conform­able to our desires and natural inclinations. But though he had a capacity quick enough to discern that where one of those two things is wanting, the supreme happiness is defective, yet had he no more power then other men to conjoyn them actually and really together. In which impossibi­lity of amassing a supreme Good in the World of so many pieces, and consolidating them so well together, that their Union be never discompos'd, who sees not the necessary despair there is of all humane power to obtain the same? Which de­spair of obtaining cannot of consequence, but cause the pursuit to be abandon'd. So that as Na­ture hath given us the Desire to be happy, Necessity will have bound us down to a per­petual despair of being so. And the most ex­cellent of all things in the world, and for which all the rest seem to have been made, shall never arrive to its end, but shall appear as if it were purposely framed to be tormented continually with the dispair of never being able to reach it's injoyment. In which respect that of Ho­race [Page 129] to a Miser, will be as applicable to every man;

I shall proceed yet something further. The desires which men have are of two sorts; Of which the first are conformable to Nature, and do nothing at all encounter reason. The second are extravagant and repugnant thereunto; As if a man should desire to be all spirit, and to have no Body at all: this were an extravagance, to which right reason cannot assent. For tis to de­sire not onely a thing which will not, but like­wise which cannot be, being involved in a mani­fest contradiction, in as much as a man cannot be a man without having a body, nor have a body and be all spirit together. And if he should desire to be metamorphis'd into the nature of those sim­ple Intelligences, which we commonly called An­gels and are not destinated to be conjoyned to Bodies, his wish would not be less absurd. Because in case he should become such a simple and imma­terial Intelligence, he were no longer the same person, but should in effect desire the aboli­tion of his own being: for that in transmutations wherein the form it self of the thing (as they speak) perishes, the thing perishes also: Whence it would concern him as little to be an Angel as to be a Dog, and to desire one as the other. It is not from such desires as these that we are to de­duce arguments to shew what is the nature of [Page 130] man and of his Soul; because they which make them, deviate from the rules of Nature. The other sort of wishes, which are suggested by her, and are not thwarted or checked by reason, which, I say, do not destroy the form of our be­ing, but ennoble and advance it, are they which ought to be taken for manifest indices either of what we naturally are, or at least of what we ought to be. For whence should those desires happen to us, if they be not inspir'd by Nature? And to what end should they have been placed in us, if that of which we received of them, ne­ver intended to give us the satisfaction and injoy­ment they aim at. Admitting it were possible for us to compass all those things which are ne­cessary to make up the supream Good of Aristotle; and that we were in full possession thereof; be­sides that natural desire of the supreme Good which might seem to be contented in the injoy­ment, there would be left another not less vehe­ment or less inrooted in us, which is that of the perpetuity of such felicity without any alterati­on or interruption whatsoever. Now when we should with all imaginable care have cemented the parts together that compose it, when we should have nailed, linked and invested them so that there would be nothing but death able to dissolve the junctures, yet it would last but for our Life, & our Life could not last to the end of an Age. And then what would become of those desires of injoy­ing the same for millions of years even to perpe­tuity?

But some may here arrest my course, and de­mand whether experience shows not that it is im­possible [Page 131] to obtain a beatitude durable for ever? For who is he that is exempted from Death? Wherefore since wise persons do not onely not consult about things absolutely impossible, but do not so much as desire them; or if they happen to let a wish escape from them by some suddain impetus of nature, they presently bring the dis­course of reason to repress it; it follows neces­sarily, that such desire of a perpetual felicity is out of the limits of reason, and by consequence ought to be check'd by it, rather then cherish'd and encouraged. For death which happens universally, without priviledge to any, renders not the injoyment of a perpetual Good more im­possible to all men, then the weaknes of our minds, the inclination which we have naturally to vice, and the infinite multitude of inevitable miseries attending humane condition, renders impossible the possession of the Happiness which Aristotle de­scribes and terminates within the duration of our Lives. And nevertheless none ever condemned that desire in man of his felicity, none ever ac­counted it but both natural and reasonable. More­over, it is manifest that all the World desires Im­mortality, and the things which we have already deduced, demonstrate the same. Yet there ne­ver was any person that attain'd it. Must it there­fore be concluded that the desire of it is absurd, and besides the rules of reason and Nature? Epi­curus himself did not account it so, who a­midst the gripings of the Stone, and upon the very confines of death, comforts himself with the immortal glory which his Philosophical con­templations had acquired and should preserve for [Page 132] him to perpetuity. Cicero professeth Death is ter­rible to them who leave nothing of themselves af­ter departure out of this life, but not to those whose praises cannot dye. Alexander esteemed Achilles happy in that he had Homer to celebrate his Virtues and high atchievments of Armes, be­ing his memory would remain consecrated to e­ternity in the Poem of the Iliads. And himself made profession, that he did not at all fear death, be­cause he beliv'd his victories would render him immortal. And not so much but Ennius the Poet, presag'd he should live for ever in the mouthes and memories of men by means of his Verses. Ovid and Horace promise themselves nothing less from their Works, then that they shall continue their names throughout all successions of time, speaking of them as trophies erected to exempt them from the Power of the Fatal Sisters. Such as cannot hope the same from their works or great ex­ploits, expect at least to survive in their children; and would be very effectually comforted against death, if they could be assured that by help of their Pictures or Front of their Houses, their posteri­ty should retain the remembrance of their coun­tenances from age to age. Therefore as the im­possibility of obtaining from this Life, the su­preme Good described by Aristotle, do's not hin­der but that man was framed by nature to possess it; and as the impossibility of obtaining immor­tality do's as little evince that man was not desti­nated by nature her self to an incorruptible con­dition; so this impossibility of obtaining, as we desire, the perpetuity of the Supreme Good, does not argue that we were not made to injoy [Page 133] it, by him to whose power and goodness we are indebted for our Original. It must follow then, that either those natural desires which are not at all thwarted by reason, were given us to no pur­pose at all (which is a conclusion that true Philoso­phy disdaines to own) or that there is a supreme Felicity which is of perpetual duration. Now the injoyment of that immutable Happiness is the compensation allotted to Virtue by the Divine Goodness; as the privation thereof is the retri­bution and penaltie constituted by Divine Justice to Vice. The cause of the whole mistake, is the ignorance of what we were in beginning, and what we are become since by our own fault: for at our first creation we were constituted in full in­joyment of that Felicity, of which Aristotle fan­cied some kind of Idea; but Sin hath dispossess'd us of it. The Soul and the Body were both created to Immortality; but the Body is become mortal by our revolt; Both of them were desti­nated to durable Happiness without diminution or interruption throughout all Ages; but diso­bedience hath separated both the one and the other from it. The Privation of that blisseful E­state is an effect of the Justice of God; but the Hope that God hath by his Truth given us to re­cover it, is an effect of his Mercy; and both in­dubitable testimonies of his Providence, in as much as they are the most remarable instances and parts of it. For although God takes upon himself the care of Governing the motions of the Heavens, though he orders all the mutations of the Elements, and their mixtures for production of all things in Nature; and though he afford [Page 134] daily supply of sustenance necessary to the Fish of the Sea, the Beasts of the Field and ths Fowles of the Air; and all this most manifestly bespeaks his Wisdom, Power and Goodness; yet there is not in all this conduct any thing so worthy of himself as the exercise of his Justice in punishing, and the works of his clemency in rescuing those from condemnation which deserve it. In as much as in the former instance he uses goodness towards creatures which have not offended him, he fol­lows his natural inclinations, and the inviolable relation which is between Him and Them. But in punishing, he is inforced to commit a kind of vio­lence (as I may so speak) to retain the effects of his Benignity, and to inflict those of his indig­nation out of the onely consideration of his Justice. And when he comes to pardon, his Goodness, as it were overflows of it self to swallow up his Justice in Mercy. Now although I have been somewhat more prolixe in this dispute, and principally in the deduction of these last particulars, being lead to it by regard of their importance; yet I conceive I have not been te­dious to the Reader, who understands how fruitful and thriving that Doctrine of Epicurus is, and with how much obstinacy and opiniastry his successors of the present time labor to defend it. I omit to meddle with those sentiments of theirs that purely relate to Natural Philosophy: wherein the Glory of God, and Piety, and Vir­ture are not so neerly and particularly concern'd. Though I must not dissemble, that it is to be fear'd that some of those which so much recom­mend the Physicks of that Sect, do it chiefly to [Page 135] prepare some good impression for their Theology and Morality. I shall onely add in reference to such as openly declare themselves for Epicurus in that which belongs to Religion, that they have a very high opinion of the strength and subtilty of their wits, and bring a great obstinacy to the defence of their Tenets. For which reasons it was necessary to discuss their subterfuges exactly, either to reduce them to a better mind, which I confess cannot be done but by the sole grace of God, or to make them hold their peace, if they have not altogether with piety abandon'd all shame. And this I believe, I have performed in such a manner, that no man ought hereafter to be scandalis'd if they esteem the profession of all Religions indifferent. For since, to speak plain­ly they have no Religion at all in their Heart, it is no great matter to them what it is which they carry in their Lips. I shall therefore orderly pass over to examination of the Opinion designed to the second Part of my Work.

CHAP. I. Of the Ʋniversal Consentment of all Nations in this Point, That there ought to be One Certain Religion; And that it is Neces­sary that God himself prescribe the Model of the same.

AS all the World consents in this funda­mental Truth, That there is a God (which the Epicureans themselves dare not deny) and likewise that God governs all the transactions up­on Earth; (since the number of those that de­ny [Page 138] it is inconsiderable in comparison of its asser­tors; and they which profess to indubitate the same, are constrained, as we have formerly shown, to confess that they have no other know­ledge of God but by the traces and instances of his Providence) So we may observe an universal In­stinct of Nature in this that all Nations have ac­counted it necessary to the rendring to God the honor belonging to him, that there be one certain determinate form of Constitution called Religion, containing the rules according to which men ought to guide and comport themselves therein. For never was there any Nation that thought it enough to serve God in thought onely, without making demonstration of their devotion by ge­stures, & external actions, and observation of cer­tain ceremonies; unless, perhaps, some one a­mong those where Barbarism rules all, and which in that respect we usually term Savages. But the actions of such people are not to be drawn in­to consequence, except we account it also an indif­ferent matter to live on humane flesh as they do, and to be ignorant of all things that are honest and worthy recommendation. And yet there will be sound very few people but have at least some shadow of Religion, even amongst the Can­nibals. Now that such Instinct of Nature is not brutish, but is either accompanied with or pro­ceded from reason, is no hard matter to make appear with irrefragable evidence. Man is natu­rally a Lover of Society, and was not created to live in solitude: they which so affections to re­nounce converse with other men, must be (as One said long since) either some thing more or [Page 139] some thing less then Men. Now we have for the principal objects of our affections, God, and Men like our selves; which are also the two chief, and perhaps onely things to which we owe any Du­ties. Concerning those duties, in which we stand obliged one towards another, it hath been requisite to establish certain Societies upon good constitutions as upon firm bases, to the end there might be certain Laws to regulate those du­ties, to correct our excesses, amend our defaults, restrain the licentiousness of some, and excite the supinity and negligence of others; that by such means all things might be preserved in good or­der. And nature her self first gave the model thereof in families, where Parents and Children are held in reciprocal obligations, and so bre­thren one towards another, and likewise servants themselves. For from that Pattern were Cities first formed, which are as great Families, and Kingdomes which are as great Cities; in like man­ner as a Family is like a small City, or a narrow Kingdom. And he that sequesters himself from humane Society to live by himself, is look'd up­on as an Enemy of Mankind, as Timon the Atheni­an was; a sort of Monster wonderfully rare in the World. As for the Duties incumbent upon us towards the Deity, men have likewise appeared sociable therein, and have not chosen to serve God a part by themselves; but have constituted an other kind of Society, in which they might serve him all in common, and in some sort par­take in the devotions one of another; and this according to certain sacred constitutions, serving to regulate the mind of man, and to bind every [Page 140] one in conscience. So that in this Society, yet much more then in the other, whosoever sepa­rated himself from it, ha's been by common judg­ment of all the rest held for an enemy of the Deity, and as a beast unworthy to live upon the face of the Earth. And that this is so, experience and evi­dence of Truth attests beyond all contradiction.

But behold the pretension to justifie their dis­sent; Namely, that men are so obliged to follow one determined and setled constitution, that it is not free for them to discede to others, when oc­casions are presented to do so. For there are some that grant it natural to men to have some communion in Religion; but they judge that such communion depends on the Pleasure of each respective Nation, being an indifferent thing in it self. They conceive likewise that the inven­tion of Religions hath for the most part been a contrivance of cunning persons, whose diffi­dence of power to keep m [...]n in sufficient subjecti­on by the consideration of civil Society, occasi­on'd them to invent another of Religion, by means of which because of the opinion of the Deity, to which men ascribe a soveraign autho­rity and without reservation, they might hold the minds of their fellow-Citizens in greater awe, and govern them better according to their fancy. Thus you see why they are not so pervicacious as to separate themselves wholly from such a So­ciety, but communicate willingly in the Religi­ous ceremonies of their own Country, for fear of imbroiling the World, and to avoid singula­rity, which hath been always declined by rati­onall and intelligent persons: but otherwise they [Page 141] account it lawful for a man to comply with the places where he happens to be, according to the Adage, ‘Si fueris Roms, Romano vivito more.’ Which they back with this reason, that Nature indeed inclines men to such a Society, but that God himself having not determin'd the form thereof, hath left the same to the will of them which govern Commonwealths. Now were not this Opinion profess'd and owned by men which are otherwise very intelligent, it needed not to be lookt upon but with contempt. For the slight esteem which might be had of its au­thors, together with the invincible opposition all Nations bring against it, would secure it from ma­king impression on the mind of any one, and so it would dy and bury it self. But being that for many years there have been persons esteemed highly for their profound knowledge, or their great prudence in management of the affairs of the world, or some other commendable qualities of the mind, who have maintain'd or favour'd it; and that in these days in which Profaneness is overflown, there are many lead by the autho­rity of men of great reputation; I find my self oblig'd to incounter it vigorously, as far as the design of this work will permit me.

In the first place, it seems to me exceeding strange, that these men should be more indiffe­rent in that which concerns the Laws of Religi­ous Society, in which we perform our duties to the Deity, then they are in Civil Life, where [Page 142] they make no question concerning the offices which men owe mutually to one another. For put­ting the case that God hath made no particular de­claration of his will thereupon (although we shall see in the sequel of this discourse that it is not so) yet as in Civil Society there are certain natural Laws which are equally and perpetually inviol­able, so there are likewise some in Religion. For example; Whosoever should come into a Com­monwealth fram'd according to the Idea of that of Plato, that is, wherein a community of women were enacted; or in which thest were publickly established, as in the Island De los Ladrones; it would not be fitting for that man to frequent the beds of all sorts of women, and abandon his own wife upon his first coming; the Laws of reason and natural honesty being repugnant thereunto; nor to robbe his neighbor of his purse when he found him abroad from his house. It would be­come him to say to the Magistrate as Antigonus did to Creon in Sophocles;

No more lawful would it be for a person pious towards the Deity to participate in a Religion wherein there were impious and blasphemous ceremonies, although they which established them did not think them such. If a man should happen to come into a place where they pour­tray'd the Deity with the belly of a Swine and eyes of a Dog, were it meet to adore him under [Page 143] that figure? Or is it free for those which travel to the East Indies to mingle themselves in the im­pieties of the Pagans towards their Pagods, and to bear a part in the adorations and services which they render to Devils? Certainly, I do not conceive an honest man can consent so much as with one twinkle of his eye to such abomin­able customes. And truly it was with good rea­son that Tacitus held the Jews in that detestation which he discovers in his writings, being per­swaded that they worship'd the Head of an Ass. But in this he was very much blamable, that be­ing otherwise a grand personage, and who by his profession of being an Historian was oblig'd to impart to others the knowledge of the truth of things, he was so ill inform'd in this particu­lar, that he ought not to have grounded so im­portant a censure upon so slight a rumor. But that there have been Religions in former times, wherein such abominations were committed, is too manifest from History: and the Relations brought us from the East and West parts of the World, give us present testimonies of the like. Wherefore they against whom I now dispute ought at least to allow as much strictness in refe­rence to the service of God, as to the Duties which they render to men. That is, they should readily conform themselves to such ceremonies as are consentaneous to right reason, or at least not manifestly dissonant and repugnant to it; but where they violate the Laws of Nature so rude­ly, it is not free for any one whatsoever to con­descend to them.

But the matter is something further consider­able. For it also seems not to be more natural to men to conspire together uniformly in matter of Religion, then it is natural to them to think that it is the part of God to found and give the model of such a Society. All Nations have referred the invention of things to the Deity, which al­though they concern not God at all, yet seem hard and admirable; so as to esteem the first au­thors of them not onely inspired by God, but worthy to be Gods themselves. The Art of wa­ging War, those of Physick, and Poetry, and even of Embroidery had their inventors and patrons amongst the Gods. And as for things necessary to Life, the tilling of the Earth for the advantage of Corn, and the means of pruning the super­fluities of vines to procure wine from them, were not found by men without the same help. It is true that if onely the meaner and ignorant sort of people had been imbued with this belief, it might have been said that their ignorance occasion'd the admiration which they had of all excellent inventions; because perceiving that they sur­pass'd the power of their own wits, and mea­suring others by themselves, they might have im­agin'd that men could not have invented them of themselves. And hence it also came to pass that the Epicureans have within a small degree placed their Master amongst the Gods; because being for the most part but little instructed in commendable Sciences, when they beheld him far above them, they conceited that he had some­what of Divinity in him; although, without regard to the truth or falsity of his sentiments, he seems [Page 145] to have been but meanly qualified with gifts of the mind or acquisitions of knowledge. But whereas we observe the wise and learned to have likewise held that opinion, that the first Inven­tors were illuminated by some ray of Divinity, it must be confessed that it is a natural propensity in all men, and I know not what kind of con­straint by the evidence of truth. Socrates being condemned to dy, professeth that it was God that raised him up to teach Philosophy, and to reform the manners of his fellow Citizens by his precepts; and pronounces resolutely, that though they should open the Prison doors to him with injuncti­on never to Philosophise more, he would not go forth, but would rather obey God then men. And Pythagoras when he had found out an excellent demonstration in Geometry, went and sacrific'd a hundred Oxen: for what reason, saving that he acknowledg'd that God had favour'd him with his assistance therein? And truely they had rea­son on their side. I would not so much derogate from the dignity of the humane Mind, as to take from it all power of inventing excellent things, and of profound disquisition. But there appear­ed such a Providence of God in what I have al­ledged, that he that bears not a great measure of obstinacy in his breast will suffer himself to be per­swaded that God presided therein. Sometimes one Nation bears away the glory of Sciences and Arts, sometimes another; and divers Ages give birth to divers Inventions.

Archimedes performed such wonders in the Me­chanicks, as none in the world ever effected since. And of late days the singular Inventions of Typography, and that terrifying one of Ar­tillery, declare that God did not exhaust all his treasures in the Ages of old, but reserves some or other particularity to every Generation. It is true, when things are once found out, there's no body almost but observes a great obvious­ness and facility in their discovery; which yet is not so much, even in such things as are now [...] days accounted the most easie, but that th [...] would never have come into any man's thoug [...] without the influence of Heaven; or if they had, yet the atchievment and execution of the design would have seem'd impossible without assistance from thence. Who observes not such an orderly concatenation in the Propositions of Euclide one with another, that they correspond together, and propagate in a continual series with infalli­ble truth; and that consequently the power of humane wit may seem capable to have found out such a contexture of it self; since the onely thing considerable is to perceive what follows indubi­tably from certain principles by the means of ra­tiocination? And nevertheless I cannot per­swade my self (upon estimate of the great difficul­ty there was in the first discovery of those things, [Page 147] and of the admirable vivacity of imagination and vigor of judgement, requisite to the concinnati­on of their first compages) that that Person could possibly have drawn so many subtle and solid con­sequences from the first Principles laid down by him, and erect so firm a structure of a noble Sci­ence upon the same, without some especial favor of the Deity, who was pleas'd to provide by such means for the advantage of humane affairs, and for the adorning of our Minds with the Un­derstanding of Sciences. What a marvellous thing was it to find out the Polar inclination of the Loadstone, and to make that discovery the foundation of the great Art of Navigation, by help of which these latter Ages have discover'd so many unknown Lands and brought so many eminent advantages to our times above those of [...]ld? But moreover Homer, who perhaps was the most clear sighted among the Pagans, notwith­standing his decryed blindness, not onely ascribes to God the invention of abstruse matters; but referrs even our ordinary cogitations to him in these verses;

And his Poem is throughout beset with advertis­ments directed to men from the Gods, as so many pourtraicts of the Divine Providence, sutably as the obscurity of the times and the ignorance of [Page 148] the true God could permit him. And here­unto likewise all intelligent men agree, es­pecially the Poets, who seem to have been the Divines of the Pagans, and the Priests of their Mysteries. Now whereas they be­liev'd that humane Arts and Sciences, could not be invented without God, what would they have said of the Sciences of knowing and serving God himself? But although there may have been some dissonance of opinion among the Ancients concerning this Production or Birth of things; yet the foundation of these two kinds of Socie­ties, Civil and Religious, ha's been consider'd by them as a thing altogether divine. Whence it is, that there never was any celebrated Legislator, but made mention of the Deity in the beginning of his Laws, as having received them in some sort by his inspiration, and so conciliated reve­rence to them from that suprem authority. And we find that all of them were generally believed by their subjects therein; although Political Laws are drawn from principles of Honesty and Equity derived from those wherwith nature hath imbued the minds of men: So universal and deep ha's the perswasion been, that such things as are commendable onely for speculation or are bene­ficially practis'd, or difficultly found out and digested in beseeming order, are deriv'd from Heaven, as their primary source. And concern­ing Religion, it is likely never any Nation would have reverenced each their own respective ce­remonies of Religion, unless they had esteem'd them to have proceeded from Divine Revelation. For not to mention the Jewish people at present, [Page 149] who boasted thereof heretofore, nor the Christi­ans who glory therein now with a just title, and prove it by irrefutable demonstrations; can it be imagin'd Mahomet would ever have found so ma­ny Followers, unless he had pretended to a Pro­phetical Commission from God, and that the Dei­ty had given him instructions of such things as he ought to do by the information of a Pigeon? Are not we told that to that purpose he publish'd his Alcoran which he perswaded his Disciples was deli­ver'd to him from Heaven? It is not credible that so ridiculous a Law should be harbor'd in the minds of men so obstinately against all the attempts to suppress it by the Truth, were it not fixed by these kind of roots. As for the Pagans, Nums Pompilius, who establish'd the ceremonies of the Romanes, pretended to have been taught them by the Goddess Aegeria; and in general, all Na­tions have respectively attributed the origine of their Mysteries to their Gods. They were in truth, all of them mistaken; but yet their belief was founded on this reason, that none can either speak or think aright of God, much less serve him as is meet, unless he be taught by God himself; as it is impossible for creatures destitute of Rea­son to pay him what is due to him, and contrive the ways of honoring him, like men. But as al­though Horses are incapable of inventing the rules of their management, and yet are reduc'd to a regular observance of them by exercise; so Men not being able to attain so high as to find out the means of forming their souls to Piety, never­theless they can comprehend the same when they are revealed to them. But here I meet with [Page 150] an objection laid in our way; Does it not appear, say they against whom we dispute, that Religions have been invented by subtle and politick per­sons, to obtain a more absolute empire over the minds of others? For who can believe that Ma­homet was really inspir'd by God, unless he be as great an Ignorant as that Impostor was? or that Numa had communication with a Goddess? And truely I do not gainsay, but there have been ma­ny Rulers that have made advantage of this pre­text to abuse the credulity of their people. Nor will I say that all those which boasted of revelati­on have had correspondence with God, & instru­ctions from him in reference to the ordaining and establishing matters pertaining to his service. On­ly I avouch men have been lead to believe it by the natural instinct of judging that Religion could not be given saving by the hand of God himself. And it is not difficult to render the rea­son on which it is grounded. Every Religion, whether good or bad, consists of two parts; In one of which are contained the laws of the Ho­nor which is due to God; In the other, the means whereby the needs of mens souls are provided for, and how to infuse consolation and hope into them. But if one ceremony include both these par­ticulars together, so that both the Deity is honored and consolation procured to the soul of man; such ceremony, although it be but one, yet it ceaseth not to comprehend both those respects, and appears (as I may so speak) with both those two countenances. Now in reference to that which concerns the Deity, it hath been already declared that we live beset with too thick dark­ness [Page 151] to be able to know him of our selves; and we shall make it more amply manifest hereafter. Touching the Wants of man, being every one's heart dictates to him that he hath deserved punish­ment for his offences, his consolation can consist onely in the assurance of remission: but we are as much or more ignorant of the true means to ob­tain it, then we are in the knowledge of God him­self. Whence it hath proceeded that all Nations have been so obnoxious to the frauds of Deceiv­ers, who could never have found any credit a­mongst them, had they not been favor'd by those inclinations and sentiments which naturally pos­sess us. For there is in all souls not absolutely de­generated unto brutishness an extreme avidity of knowing the Deity, and especially a natural con­sciousness of their sins, with a lively apprehensi­on of punishment and vengeance, and a despair of ever being able of themselves either to find out the means of comforting the conscience or of sounding the bottom of that infinite abysse. Whence the first of those that declared any thing concerning the Deity, and the means of making propitiation for sins, if men had never so little an opinion that those teachers were excited there­unto by God, and they were able to stamp the least impression thereof in their minds, they soon gather'd a great stock of credit in the world. As they who are sick of some desperate disease, and which is inexpugnable by ordinary remedies, ea­sily yield themselves up to the cozenage of Empi­ricks, who make boast of great secrets unknown to all men besides. Or as they who are possess'd with a violent passion for the Philosophers Stone [Page 152] although otherwise perhaps intelligent enough, leave themselves open to the first impostor that promises them kingdomes and worlds.

Hereunto our Adversaries usually object two things: First they say, if men cannot of themselves found a good Religion without particular reve­lation from Heaven, it is impossible for them to serve God aright, if he have not made such a de­claration of his will: which if he hath done, 'tis a wonder how there come to be so few people that inquire after it or receive it. Secondly, wheras nature hath provided a supply of all things that are necessary to other creatures, it is not pro­bable that she hath neglected man, and left him in utter privation of the principal thing he ha's need of, and without the knowledge and use of which he cannot but be miserable; in which regard she would have been a mother one­ly to other Animals, and to man, the most excel­lent of all, a cruel malevolent Stepdame. But it is no great business to satisfie these complaints, and we shall begin with the last. Did we in the other things of Nature behold such order as is competent to their perfection, there would be a just occasion of complaint that she had strangely forgot her self in the particular we have in hand. For she would have produc'd man indued with an excellent faculty of understanding, without giving him any knowledge of the End or of the means destinated to lead him thereunto; and con­sequently, whereas all other things seem prudent­ly designed to a certain end, man alone should have been brought into the world inconsiderate­ly to discharge all his actions at randome, and [Page 153] permit his natural appetites to run unguidedly at a venture. Which were unworthy of that Wis­dom which we all acknowledge extremely admi­rable in divers things in the world of much less importance. But who is there that do's not observe a lamentable irregularity in Nature? Sometimes the seasons fall out preposterously and intricately: Sometimes vermin devours the buds of the Trees of the field: sometimes the air is vitiated in such manner that it begets fatal pestilences; sometimes the Sea breaks in upon a Country and swallows it up with its inhabitants; and sometimes in ano­ther place the inundation of a River drowns great and flourishing Cities. What wonder is it therefore, that disorder, being diffus'd through­out the whole world, should also be found in the condition of one of its principal pieces. 'Tis true, will some of them reply, but have not these things their natural causes? Surely, yes; but 'tis as diseases have theirs. For a Fever is not with­out inflammation of the spirits and humors, and the humors are not inflam'd except they have had some propensity to be so, either by reason of their corruption, or their abundance, or from the im­pression of some violent external cause. Now these causes which are here called natural, had never been, if there had not been a disorder in the nature of the bodies themselves. But those irregularities in particular things are proceeded from the disorder of their nature in general. As therefore, if the nature of humane bodies had continued in its integrity, a perfect and immuta­ble healthfulness would have had its natural cause in an exquisite temperature of pure humors; so [Page 154] in the disorder which hath befaln it, diseases have their natural cause in the abundance or deficiency, corruption or distemperature of the humors also. Now all the world is like one Body, of which all the parts, had no change be­fallen it, would have been disposed in so excel­lent an harmony, that the accidents we mention­ed could never have happened, which are like diseases surprising one or other of its members. And therefore as in Nature well regulated, ferti­lity, an uniform succession of the seasons, and a good constitution of the aer would have had their natural causes in the perfect harmony of the Whole; So the disturbances which have suceed­ed, have theirs also in its discord and discompo­sure. But above all things whatsoever, that disorder is apparent in man, not only in the cala­mities which befall him more frequent and great then to any of the rest of the Creatures; from which it may seem Providence ought to have se­cur'd him: but chiefly in himself, in his affecti­ons, in the perturbations of his mind, in the re­luctancy and contest of his Appetites against his Understanding, and in the darkness and perver­sity of his Understanding it self. And this ha's been the subject of high complaints in all Genera­tions. Insomuch, that whoso beholds the Na­ture of things in the estate she is in at pre­sent, perceives her like a broken or unorderly Watch, of which the springs are some too stiffe, and others too laxe, and all its Wheels displac'd; Or like a Great City, formerly full of magnificent dalaces and stately buildings dispos'd in a per­fectly handsome order, which time or the fury of [Page 155] some provoked Prince [...]ha's by fire and sword turn'd into rubbage and desolation.

Therfore to expect that Nature should now pro­duce the same effects in man, which she would have done in her integrity, is as if one should re­quire of a blind man to walk as directly as when he had good eyes; or of a mad man to have set­led thoughts and agreeable to reason. Indeed, that which we affirm, that a particular revelation for ordaining the means of serving God, and for providing for the needs of man's soul, is abso­lutely necessary, is not to be referr'd to nature in its integrity, who perhaps would have furnish'd us sufficiently wherewith to have per­formed our duty and comforted our selves. Like as a man that is both healthful, discreet and intel­ligent, is capable enough to preserve himself from things which may be hurtful to him; but when he is surpris'd with a disease, and the va­pors of a Fever perturbe his Fancy, he wants the assistance of another to prescribe him Physick, and rules for his recovery.

And the second difficulty is resolv'd with the same facility. The greatest part of men imagine that the Religion of which they make profession is true; and are so far from taking pains to seek out any other, that on the contrary, when no­velties are presented to them, they reject the same without further examination; being pos­sess'd with this prejudice against them, that since [Page 156] they have for a long while been owners of the truth, any other novelty cannot be but an Im­posture. And this is usually strengthened by the natural affection which we have towards the fa­shions and uses of our own country, and the constitutions under which we have been educa­ted from our infancy. For not onely the moun­tains & rivers & fields of our own Country have a kind of pleasingness & attraction which allures our minds, but also the manners of the inhabitants and the customes practis'd amongst them. And it is no great wonder if we easily deceive our selves in such things. For the same imbecillity of our Understandings which hinders us from finding out the true Religion of our selves, does likewise hinder us from judging so sincerely and distinct­ly as we ought, of such things as are propoun­ded to us. Besides that the opinions wherewith We are already imbued, are a greater hindrance to us in this matter, then if we were ignorant of all Religions; because it is requisite that we first unlearn what we conceive we already know for certain; which is a very difficult thing: as Wool which ha's received some tincture beforehand, is less fit to be dy'd into pure and native colours, then that which is altogether crude. As for those whose happier Understandings have enabled them to perceive the vanity of false Religions, and yet have not been instituted in the true, 'twas the dispair of being able to discover it, which made them give over the inquiry; as if a man that had experienc'd the weakness and im­profitableness of the Balm of Empiricks, should utterly despair of Physick, and abandon the care [Page 157] of dressing his ulcer together with the hope of healing it. And if Diagoras & Euemerus, two persons branded by the Ancients with the title of Atheists suffer'd themselves to be carried to a total & abso­lute contempt of the Deity, there is great proba­bility, that it was occasion'd by the ill opinion which they had of their false Gods, and there being at a loss in finding out the means to substi­tute the true one in their room. But certainly I do not conceive that any other reason induc'd Socrates to reclaim men from the contemplation of divine and celestial things, which had been the principal imployment of the Philosophers which liv'd before him, to the study of a Civil Life, and of the Laws of Policy and Virtue, after the vain attempts of his predecessors and his own. Whence it came to pass that he was condemned as a des­piser of the Religion of his Country, because he saw that all their doctrine of the Gods was erro­neous, and their ceremonies, superstition and vanity; and so finding no other Religion which satisfied him, he addicted himself to things in which the mind of man sees somewhat more clear­ly, such as is the doctrine of Virtue, and of the Laws upon which Governments are founded. As it is natural to us to take pleasure in things which are easie, and which we understand, and to disesteem those which are high and which we perceive are too remote for us to attain. But all this is not sufficient, unless we shew by evident reasons that the particular declaration of the will of God in this point is absolutely necessary. Which shall be my undertaking in the ensuing Chapters.

CHAP. II. How greatly it imports true piety, That e­very man be throughly assured that his Religion is Good; And, that that cannot be, unless it be of Divine Revelation.

ALthough there be certain verities in Religion so evident, that the greatest part of mankind assents to them unanimously; as, that there is a God; &, That he ought to be honored; That men are ob­lig'd to live agreeably to Reason and Nature; and, That the Deity which commands it so, rewards the observation of that commandment, and punishes those severely which transgress it: yet as to the manner of serving God aright, and also of living consentaneously to Nature and Reason, there ha's been alwayes a thousand differences a­mongst those who of their own motion have gone about to teach it to others. For scarce can there be found any Commonwealth among those which have been esteemed the best polici'd, in which some grand and signal vice ha's not been excused or permitted, or even sometimes recom­mended by publike Laws. But though they had accorded much better in the description of the duties incumbent on men one towards another; as it cannot be denied but that they have less dis­agreed therein then in that which pertains to Re­ligion; there is no person so meanly versed in the [Page 159] history of the Pagans ceremonies in matter of Religion, but observes a wonderful strange dis­sension about them. For under the name of Pa­gans, I comprehend not onely the Greeks and Romans, although there was a great medley in their mysteries; but I also understand all other Nations, which either have been heretofore or are still destitute of the knowledgè of the true God, in several parts of the World. And this is not to be marvell'd at. For since they have differ'd so much concerning the Nature of the Elements, and the principles of the composition of things; and have disputed so hotly touching fire, air, and water, things which fall under the notice of Sense; how was it possible they should agree in that, which with common consent surpasses all the power and acuteness of the mind of man? And in so great and almost unimaginable confusion of opinions, what wit had been capable to discover and sift out the truth, if there had been any in them, and to assure himself certainly that he had found it? In which regard the most prudent and moderate amongst them affirmed, that it was the safest way not to penetrate too far into things, and that God is a Being improportionably trans­cending humane comprehension. And the story of Simónides is too well known to need relating. How then could they know the means of serving God as they ought, seeing the reverence which we bear towards any thing is naturally measur'd according to the knowledge which we have of its nature? So that in the incertainty in which the mind of man fluctuates perpetually without any stay or guide, what could the devotion of [Page 160] those be, who could not be solidly instructed in that knowledge; or what could the zeal of those be towards any Religion who hold all to be of humane institution and indifferent? For there are but two guides in us, under whose conduct we are able to compass any thing; namely, Reason, and Appetite. Reason is moved by knowledge of the becommingness and profitableness of that which is offer'd to it, when it apprehends them in one object conjointly: for right reason will never account that profitable which is not honest too: but where it perceives honesty conjoyn'd with apparent utility, it is carried forth towards the same without scruple. Passion is excited to moti­on by an infinite variety of incentives, of which none can be commendable when they are repug­nant to reason, as hath been very well observed by the Philosophers themselves. If therefore a man be uncertain whether the Religion he professeth be good and profitable, that is, commendable in it self and congruous to reason, and that it teach­eth the means of obtaining the favour of the Dei­ty; which is the aime all Religions drive at: one of these two things will necessarily happen; either he will be very coldly affected towards it, or in case he be carried to it with zeal, it will be but a vehemence of Passion in his mind destitute of the guidance of reason, without which a man can do nothing worthy of commendation. For if Pas­sion principally move him to it, the incertainty of the Nature of his Religion being considered with reason will keep his affection in suspense: and if he be lead on onely by the bent of Passion, it will neither be a legitimate affection, nor a just and ra­tional [Page 161] zeal. Now on the one side, I do not con­ceive these people make any account of a Devo­tion which is not but onely in appearance, with­out the heart being affected therewith; since they would scarce allow their slaves to owe them such a kind of service; and on the other, that there is no appearance that they think the Deity accepts the worship which is performed by a blind passion and destitute of all rule and know­ledge.

It is indeed true that I meet with some, even among them which we are the name of Christians, who are of opinion that God look't with a favor­able eye upon the devotion in which all Nations pretended heretofore to serve him in so many dif­ferent forms; and that even their piety, although blind and dark, in that profound ignorance wherein they liv'd, was oftentimes followed with the benedictions of Heaven. But herein they do not concur with the principal Ministers of the Author of Christian Religion, who tell us that all devotion of the Pagans was a service per­formed to Divels. And as for the number of be­nefits which the Pagans received from Heaven, they were not conferr'd on them upon the ac­count of their ceremonies, which were rather impieties and detestable abominations then Devo­tions; but proceeded meerly from the conside­ration of God's being God, namely as he is good, and do's not cease, notwithstanding any ingrati­tude of men towards him, to do good to them, as being naturally inclinable so to do, and a lover of the race of mankind. But whereas his purpose was to invite them to him by his benedictions, as [Page 162] soon as they had received them, they went to re­turn thanks to Devils or certain Chimera's of Deities which themselves had invested with Divi­nity. But if he seems to have gratified some few more particularly, among whom there appear'd a greater measure of devotion, as he favoured the Romans with numerous victories and other great advantages, which rais'd their Empire to so re­nown'd a grandeur; they were ordinarily rather judgements executed upon other Nations, then testimonies of the favour of God towards the Re­publick of Rome. For it is certain, and the Pro­phets themselves foretold the same, that God ex­presly purposed to render that State potent and terrible, as if he would give a fierce and voraci­ous beast teeth of Iron to destroy all that came in its way, to the end that by devouring other Nations as it did, it might execute the divine ven­geance upon them, yet without understanding the secret end such actions tended to. And true­ly I know not how the Roman Armes could be acceptable to him by reason of their devoti­ons, which were all abominations, since there is no appearance they could be so for their justice; For as the Pirate of old said to Alexander the Great, that himself was called a Pirate because he rob'd on the sea with a Shallop, but Alexander was styled a Great King, though he practis'd the same trade, because he had a Fleet of five hund­red sail; the same reproach may with good rea­son be applyed to the Romans. What difference was there between them and Theeves or Ravish­ers, saving that these cannot pillage but some few persons they meet with travelling in Woods, or [Page 163] some remote houses in Forrests, and they plun­dred Kings and Kingdoms? Who sold that vaga­bond Romulus the jurisdictions of the Potentates of all the world, to transmit the same to his Des­cendants? There is then less reason to think that God took pleasure in their superstitions, which were inept and ridiculous, though they had had no reference to Devils. Can it be believed (for example) that God punish'd a Roman Consul with an overthrow of his Army, because he had des­pised the Augury they us'd to take from young chickens, who did not devour the food cast to them greedily enough? Or that Marcus Crassus was defeated and slain by the Parthians, because he had made light account of I know not what imprecations or cursings, which had been made for him by Caius Atteius? Certainly there was never in the world a greater contemner of Au­guries and Presages, and other such fopperies, then Julius Caesar; nor yet any Warrier that ever succeeded so fortunately and gloriously in so many Battels? For he seem'd to have took up a re­solution of trampling upon those superstitions, and braving his own Gods; and nevertheless all this hindred him not from atchieving his Enter­prises. It were to have an ill opinion of the Wisdome of God, to imagine he was plea­sed with the devotions and ceremonies, which the Roman Priests themselves despised in so high a degree, that One saith in Cicero, they had much ado to contain from smiling when they met one another in the streets. But if God sometimes heaped some particular favors upon Nations, whose Justice and Virtue were more [Page 164] commendable then their devotions, it was to shew how grateful true Virtue is to him, since he re­garded so graciously that which was no more then a shadow of it. Which tended to the incite­ment of other people, to the imitation of those whom he favoured so, because, as I said above, he loves the Society of mankind, and such Socie­ty cannot subsist without men bear at least some kind of affection to that which hath the appear­ance of Virtue and Justice. But as for their pre­tended Religions, he was ever so far from hav­ing any esteem of them, that he always had an implacable aversion against them. It is not my intention here to judge of the favour which he may have shewn towards some in his great mer­cies. For it is in truth most certain, that upon judgement of things not according to appear­ance onely, but by the Rules we have in the Word of God and by the Oeconomy he hath follow'd toward all Nations, besides the people of Israel, all the Gentiles were subject to a dreadful Curse. But it suffices that it is not my design at present to insist further upon this point; besides that it would be a great temerity to limit God in the dispensation either of his Wisdom or his other Perfections, or to pronounce determi­nately of things which are not revealed to us. I shall onely say, that it is a thing directly repug­nant to truth, reason, and Nature, that the Reli­gions of the Ethnicks should have been grateful to him. For it cannot be concluded that for that many amongst them were lead with a good zeal to such devotions (by a good zeal I mean the de­sire of being well-pleasing to the Deity therein) [Page 165] they therefore performed an acceptable or so much as excusable service to him. The aim and design of an action does not render the same good or praise-worthy, unless it be so in effect of it self, otherwise all things considered apart by themselves would be in a manner of the same value, and it would be onely the End that made the difference between them. And because that opinion, That the intention alone is capable to de­nominate and put a price upon actions, is a Rock on which I observe many fall foul upon, I esteem it not impertinent to spend a few pages in expli­cation of the matter.

There are generally two sorts of things in which men are deficient either toward God or towards one another. The first are those in which men offend when they are transported by the vio­lence of their Passions, although reason either by its own natural instinct, or advertisement by some express command of God, makes them hold out for a while. For where Vice ha's not whol­ly clouded and subverted reason (which happens onely to such as God abandons in an extraordi­nary manner) men do not commit many conside­rable crimes without reluctancy of conscience; but at length, after some contest and encounter, Reason becomes captiv'd by the violence of Pas­sion. Now no person can on any grounds ac­count these kind of actions excusable. For since the private conscience of those which perpetrate the same, do's not acquit them, how can they be excus'd thereof by others? No question, every one is the most favourable judge of his own acti­ons. But where we are condemned in our own [Page 166] censure of any fault, it would be great folly to expect our absolution from that of others. And nothing is more absolutely conformable to the Principles of Nature and Light of Reason, then Saint Paul's justifying the righteous­ness of the judgement which God will pro­nounce upon the Gentiles at the last day, by the condemnation which their own thoughts pro­nounce against them in their breasts. I am not ig­norant that Passion is sometimes so vehement, and obscures the Understanding so far, that after the commission of an evil action, attempts are made to defend it, and reasons sought out to co­lour it with the dress & appearance of Good and Fit. But this proceeds from the affection which we bear toward our selves, and from the obstina­cy of our passions; which yet are of no moment to justifie the deed. Otherwise the more wicked any one were, the more excusable would his wickedness be; for they are the most wicked, who have most given themselves up to the preci­pitous swing of their unreasonable appetites. Be­sides it often falls out that an action is notwith­standing condemned in the heart, though it be in shew defended and excused; but men are un­willing to appear to others what they know themselves to be. If Passion troubles the judge­ment of reason in any one so, as to take from him the knowledge of the vitiousness of his action, there needs onely to give him leasure till the same be somewhat appeased and to bring him if possible to consult his thoughts with composedness and serenity of mind. For when once the Passion hath remited its violence, and gives room for rea­son, [Page 167] there is scarce any man in whom conscience do's not perform the office of a judge which can­not be corrupted. If this be not effectual, but particular interests keep reason absolutely in sub­jection, it is requisite to separate the man and his fact, and represent to him the same action which he hath committed, under the name of strange persons disguising the story a little with some slight circumstances, which do not at all concern the ground-work. Thus the Prophet Nathan made use of an Apologue to David, after his adultery with Barsheba, and the murder of her Husband, to the end he might draw the King wholly from his own interests and prejudices which he might have in favor of himself. The consequence of which was, that he brought him to pronounce without hesitation a most equitable judgement, which immediately after he observed was appli­cable to his own crime. In effect, if a man does not in such case pronounce his own condemna­tion, it must be confidently affirmed that Vice is so much rooted and incorporated into his mind, that it hath extinguish'd all the seeds of Honesty which Nature had sown in it, and triumphs com­pletely over his conscience and his reason.

The second sort is of those things in which we fail by some error of judgement, without being transported by our Passions, and consequently without any repugnance of conscience. In faults of this nature we are sometimes excusable, and sometimes not. As for instance; If a man thinking to ridde himself of his enemy kills his Father in the darkness of the night; the fact consi­dered strictly is Parricide; but the ignorance [Page 168] of him that committed the same renders it a de­gree less, and excusable. Yea it may so fall out that his intention may make it commendable; as in case he understood himself to be with an ene­my of his Prince or Country in an alarm, and that he could not possibly distinguish by any token, or suspect by any occasion or conjecture, that it were his Father. The true character which can manifest his purpose in the action, is, as Aristotle saith, if upon beholding his Father dead, he is displeased with his misfortune, and affected with a sensible regret and sorrow, and plead nothing in his own favour beside his total ignorance of the thing, and the false appearances which temp­ted him to the mistake. So it may be judged that Oedipus was extremely unfortunate, but neither a parricide nor incestuous: and that Thyestes eat the flesh and dranke the blood of his children, and yet it ought not to be concluded that he was therefore any thing the more unnatural or barba­rous. The pitious lamentations wherewith they both deplor'd their unhappiness, sufficiently be­speak their innocence of those crimes, and that the same were befallen them by a pardonable ig­norance. One of them cryes out to Jupiter, in Seneca,

And the other, as soon as he came to know whence he was, brake forth into these words, in So­phocles,

And thereupon in a furious despair tore his eyes out of his Head. But all ignorances are not alike, For there are some things we are ignorant of, be­cause though we do know them, yet we take pleasure to delude our selves by vain reasons on purpose to obliterate their knowledge out of our minds; like bad servants who construe their Ma­sters orders to a contrary sense, because they are not according to their humor, and indevor to perswade their misinterpretation to others, till at length they are drawn to believe for true what they so strongly desire should be so. Thus some man that in the commencement of a Law-suit, un­derstood at first that he had the wrong side, is by the eagerness, slights and subtleness of Barretry so perverted from the knowledge of justice, that at last he takes up an assurance that his cause is Good. Now is the injustice which he commits afterwards in pursuit of such a perswasion, any wise excusable by his ignorance? If it be, there is no command but may be securely infringed, when it is free for servants to gloss upon the words of their Masters: no sort of in justice, which does not become right and equitable; nor fraud but may be converted into sincere and commend­able proceeding, if it be lawful for a man to blind himself with his passion, and to perplex the knowledg he hath of Truth in affected difficul­ties. [Page 170] Where there is an absolute commandment and which proceeds from a soveraign authority, such as God's is, we ought to be so humble and obedient, as though we should not comprehend all the reason of such command, yet the authori­ty of the person that gives it supplies what is de­fective in the understanding of the same. And Verity and Justice ought to be of such esteem as where they appear clearly to us, though it be not easie to unty all the difficulties which may arise, we ought to hold them always notwithstanding for sacred and venerable. As on the contrary, that perversion of Reason which is effected by the subtilty of cavillations and Sophistry inven­ted to abuse men, ought to be esteemed an intoxi­cation of the Understanding. But do we hold him excusable who being disturbed with excess of wine commits a wrong or an indignity? No, certainly; for since he is the cause of his own error, his ignorance ought to be imputed to him together with the rest of the mischiefs consequent to it, what intention soever he had during the per­turbation of his debauchery.

Lastly, There are some things which we are ignorant of, because we have been too supine in searching to know them. But if through such ignorance a man commit something against Na­ture and Reason, is there any just cause to acquit him of the fact? No more surely then in the o­ther. For the documents of Nature and Reason are sufficiently clear, if diligence be imployed to comprehend them; and in such cases the negli­gence it self is a crime, every man being oblig'd to be attentive and circumspect in that which is [Page 171] duty. Now it is not at all reasonable to excuse one fault with another, or to judge the duty not incumbent on a man, because he is ignorant of it at such times as he might have known it. So the Pagans were ignorant that the Statues which they erected to the Deity, were a disparagement to his glory, and thought they well discharged the duties of Piety, when they burnt incense to him before those Images. It is not doubted but they had a good zeal therein, that is to say, a de­sire of performing somewhat well-pleasing to the Deity. But yet their Worship was no other then detestable Idolatry, seeing it was possible for them to have learn't by contemplation of the U­niverse and the Providence which governs it, that God is of an infinite and spiritual nature, and which hath no resemblance with ours. For to speak plainly, they did him as little honor as they would have done to Augustus, if after they had heard wonders related of his Wisdom, Valor, and other rare qualities, they should have represented that great Emperor under the figure of a Beast. For if their good intent justified them, the Egyp­tians might have as much to plead for themselves when they adored God under the likeness of irra­tional, yea even of dead and insensible creatures. Because the duty of the Conscience toward the Deity is like that of a Wife towards her Husband, namely, as precise and incommunicable to any o­ther; and to defend the Idolatry of the Pagans with the pretext of a good meaning is as if a man should go about to excuse a Wife who had amo­rously entertain'd some other person in her Hus­bands absence, under colour that she fancied [Page 172] some resemblance between them, and should not dissallow that being she could not injoy her Hus­band, she was for his sake much affected towards his image. In a word, in the ignorances of which we are not our selves the cause, the Action takes it's tincture from the good intention, and is judg­ed accordingly: but in ignorances proceeding either from a manifest affectation, or apparent neg­ligence to obtain the truths which offer themselves to the Understanding, the intention, how good soever it he, follows the nature of the Action; so that if the Action be bad, the intention cannot possibly be good.

But to return to our purpose; Certainly God is not onely the principal, but the onely object of Religion; so that the knowledge of Him is the foundation of all Piety: which if it be solid, the structure built upon it will be firm; if bad and faulty, all that is raised upon it will fall to ruin. He that pleases may read in Cicero, the relation which Velleius there makes of the opinions of the Philosophers concerning this matter. I have re­cited some of them already, but there are more remaining; for we may find there about four or five and twenty, ready counted; besides several which he forgot. Diogenes Laertius also affords better store; but they all agree in this particular, that they are in a manner equally false, extrava­gant and unworthy the name of their Authors, who were generally commendable persons and of great reputation; Otherwise, they are strangly discordant in all circumstances. Yet every one of them conceived he had reason on his side, and that his fancy was dress'd up with rational and [Page 173] handsome probabilities and appearances. In which horrible jarring what means is there to di­stinguish the voice of truth, if it were amongst them? Who is he of mankind whose intellectu­als are subtle and vers'd enough in this matter, to be able to discern her in the midst of such confusi­on, and to assure himself that he hath observ'd her by her peculiar characters? But surely there is none that bethinks himself to find truth in that medly of sentiments and opinions although his Understanding were quicker-sighted in these mat­ters then naturally it is: for most certainly it is not to be found there; and I dare readily give those against whom I dispute their choice to maintain without blushing the most tolerable of them all: Except perhaps that of Anaxagoras, who (accor­ding to the relation of Cicero) affirms that the or­der and excellent disposition of all things owes its original to an infinite Understanding, but Diogenes Laertius do's not express that he deter­min'd whether that Understanding were of a fi­nite or infinite essence. And Anaximenes, whose disciple he had been, contented himself with say­ing that the Principle and Element of all things is infinite; leaving it to be conjectur'd whether he meant the Matter thereby, as the Air, or Water (which was the opinion of Thales) or some other like thing; or rather that which indued the same with Form and Order, which Anaxagoras termed [...]. But if the opinions of these two be put together, it may be Anaximenes attributed infinity to the Matter, and Anaxagoras added to the sa [...]e an infinite Understanding, not onely to frame and dispose it, but also to serve for its Form. From [Page 74] whence it results that the World is an infinite God and yet composed too, such as Pliny fancyes it in the beginning of his Natural History, and Virgil describes in the verses which I here sub­joyn;

Now this conceit is implicated with a thousaud absurdities & impertinences. And yet Philosophers of the present Age have no cause to boast that they are naturally more knowing in this particular then their predecessors were. All that the strength of the mind of man is able to reach to in reference to the knowledge of the Deity, was attempted in that interval of time which interceded between that wherein Philosophy began to flourish in Greece and the declination of the Roman Empire. It was in that period that we experienc'd all our power, and found at the upshot of our know­ledge that we understood nothing at all of it.

How then (will some say) Are there not instances enough in Heaven and Earth & the Government of the world, from whence to extract at least some good and solid knowledge of God? If there be not, why then are arguments drawn from thence against the Epicureans, to prove providence to them, and to refute their opinions concerning the nature of God? If there be, why cannot a man make use of them, to guide him at least in some measure to the knowledge of those secrets? [Page 175] God forbid that we should so much forget our selves, as to forget how clearly God ha's revealed himself in the World. The manifestation which he hath made therein of his Perfections is one thing, and the faculty which we naturally have to un­derstand them, an other. Reason indeed, but that which is right and in its integrity, not such as we now possess, might have thence collected the means of serving God in a due manner. But as it is deprav'd, blind, and maim'd in its powers and apprehensions, it is utterly incapable of dis­cerning the truth therein, or forming certain rules of piety from thence. There is light enough in the Sun to make it be seen; but it is by those who have eyes: to these who never had any, or have lost them, it is as dark as the Earth on which they tread. In like manner an infinite number of bright and excellent truths are held forth in the World and its Government, to him that ha's the eye of his Understanding sufficiently clear and serene. But the Eye of the Under­standing, which we call Reason, in the conditi­tion we injoy it at present, is so distemper'd, clouded and perturb'd, that it beholds the truths which are there, notwithstanding all their clear­ness, but very obscurely; and though they are most certain and stedfast in themselves, yet when it contemplates them, it perceives them onely as if they were inconstant and wavering. Nor are men in this Age more free from these natural im­pediments then they were two thousand years ago, and consequently can be no better assured of their knowledge. For to say that 'tis a Science which may aswell have been improved as o­thers, [Page 176] they which liv'd since having taken from the Opinions of the Ancients what was pure and rejected the unsound and bad, is a thing of no moment to our discourse, because it is untrue. Perhaps Aristotle built his Philosophy up with the opinions of Elder Philosophers, by refining them from that which he found faulty, and serving himself with the truths before discover'd by them, aswell to employ the same as materials to his structure, as to find out others which were yet abstruse aad unknown. And indeed it hath been observed that Hippocrates furnish'd him with the grounds of his Physiology, so that he had no more to do but to build upon them; and some have moreover believ'd that in divers places of his Writings and particularly in his Epistles he supplyed him with many singular advantages to the composing of his Ethicks. And although he refutes Plato in several of his Opinions, yet it is certain that he took many excellent instructi­ons both from the discourses which he heard him make in his Academy, and from the reading of his Works. But, I pray, observe how this came to pass. Aristotle was indued with an understand­ing capable to discern distinctly enough in mat­ters of Philosophy, the truths which his prede­cessors had brought to light, and distinguish the same from falsities; he was able to cull out and to place some apart from others, and so to compose out of his own inventions and those of others, a Body of Science better contriv'd then any had been before, and whose parts were more corre­spondent amongst themselves. But here the Question is concerning truths, which the mind [Page 177] of man, in its present estate, is not capable to perceive clearly; so that if he were put to make his choice of those different Opinions, it would betide him, that instead of hapning right, he would rather choose the worst; and thus it hath fallen out to all them which took imperfect hu­mane reason for their guide therein; If this rea­son be not satisfactory to my Adversaries, let them pay themselves with experience. Why did not Cicero garble all those different Opinions of Philosophers touching the Nature of the Gods, to frame a good one if possible, and leave posterity a rational doctrine in so important a matter? But in stead of doing so, the consciousness of his weakness makes him content himself with reciting them: and after all his stories, he knows as little of it as he did at first; as if they had been no­thing but clouds and darkness cast before his eyes. Or why do not they show us the writings of some Philosopher either ancient or modern, who be­ing no otherwise assisted then by the meer light Reason, ha's had more sound and sober opinions concerning it then his predecessors? On the o­ther side, it will be found that some Philosophers, who heretofore impugned Christian Religion, and the Books of the Old and New Testament, and who ought to have purifi'd that doctrine from the old absurdities it abounds with, to the end their adversaries might have less advantage a­gainst it, have been guilty of as many imperti­nences as they of preceding times, and afforded as much cause to be insulted over in regard of the stupidity and ridiculousness of their conceits. The unhappiness is, that being naturally blind in [Page 178] these things, we nevertheless conceive we see clearly; and are so possess'd with a good opini­on of our selves, that we will not admit any one to teach us; or if we have been taught by some bodyelse, we are so ungrateful that we will not acknowledge it, but reproach and execrate those persons from whom we have received all the purest of our knowledge. For 'tis the same case with these people and the Epicureans: who ha­ving been enlightned by Christian Religion in ma­ny truths, in the ignorance or incertitude of which they had otherwise eternally stagger'd or fluctuated, they arrogate the glory of having of themselves drawn them out of the bottom of De­mocritus's Well, or establish'd the belief of the same amongst men by the strength of their reason. For, why are they not (say they) as capable to in­vent them, as they are to apprehend and receive them since they are revealed? A wonderful Question truly, and worthy of such subtle per­sons! As if there were not a capacity in child­ren of a dozen years old to apprehend the most difficult Geometrical Demonstrations, when they are taught the same by some skillful Master; who notwithstanding could never of themselves have invented the least Theorem in that Science; Or as if we did not see them every day learn the A­rabick Tongue readily by help of a knowing In­structor, although they were as well able to pull the Stars out of Heaven (as we say) as to have disentangled the confusion of that Language and reduc'd it into Grammatical Rules. It is indeed by the same faculty of Understanding that dis­cover'd truths are comprehended, and those [Page 179] found out which are unknown; but there is re­quired a far greater strength and vivacity of In­tellect to make new discoveries then to compre­hend things which are offered ready framed to our hand. Semblably as the difference is which uses to be put between the Intellectus agens and pa­tiens; of which the latter is capable only to receive the Ideas of things arriving to it by the repre­sentation of objects; whereas the former refines and illuminates them, and purifies them from what they have of terrestrial or material, that so they may become absolutely worthy of our contem­plation. Since therefore it is demonstrated that without a supernatural revelation, the mind of man can have no certain understanding of the nature of God, it is necessarily consequent that without such revelation he is not able to render any acceptable service to him. For if he frame Ideas of God which are unsutable to him, he will not adore God when he designs to do so accord­ing to those Ideas, but onely a vain Phantasme of his Imagination. And it cannot be thought, but that in the natural darkness of our minds we are unable to frame other conceptions of him then what are infinitely below his excellence, and which attribute nothing to him but such as dispa­rage his dignity. But upon a stricter inquiry, we shall find yet something further. For suppo­sing a man were so happy as casually to light up­on the knowledge of the true God, yet the in­certainty which accompanies such a knowledge of chance, hinders all good and lawful exercise of the Religion which he so found out of him­self. For either the probabilities which adjudge [Page 180] it good, and the appearances which on the other side indubitate it, will be equal in our judgement; or we shall esteem those which induce to believe it bad of greatest moment; or those most rational which incline us to judge favourably thereof. Whence if in the first place the mind of man re­main in suspence, when any religious action is to be performed, whether he ought to do it or not, he will become poised between contrary proba­bilities, and indetermin'd (as they speak) not knowing on which side to propend. If he makes any resolution, it will be wholly to abstain from the same, upon this consideration, that as in a doubtful case whether Wine would be hurtful to a sick person or not, it is better to give him none at all, since it cannot be so profitable but it may be as noxious; so it is better to abstain from a dubious action in matter of Religion, because being done at a venture, it cannot so much please God in case it should be good in it self, but it may equally offend him if it should be bad. And his conscience will readily flatter him with this thought, that God will take it better from him that he ha's abstain'd from doing a thing well-pleasing to him, out of fear to offend him, then if he should offend him by putting it to the chance of performing a thing well-pleasing to him. For the omission of that which is good, is criminal in­deed; but the perpetration of evil is a double guilt, first in the commission it self, and next in abstaining from doing the contrary good. But if he judge the reasons which disswade the thing as bad, to be preponderant, then he will either abstain from doing it, according as reason injoyns [Page 181] him; or if he commit it, yet, how excellent o­therwise soever it be, it will not be a good action in regard of him, but a crime. For he will have committed a thing with deliberate purpose which he judged offensive to the Deity; which would be no less then to trample on all respect which we ought to have towards God. And this Cicero hath well observed in things simply moral. For he teaches expresly, that a good man ought to do nothing contrary to the dictate of his conscience or judgement, and accounts that to offend Jupiter and to go against the motion of a man's own con­science in any thing whatsoever is one and the same thing. Lastly, when the appearances which induce to believe the thing good, seem somewhat more plausible and reasonable then the others, if he be not a profane person (whose religious acti­ons the Deity cannot behold with a favorable ey) he will scarce be able to guide himself therein without being driven by the natural timerousness of his conscience into irremediable perplexities. For like as when a man hath eaten something which he suspected was poisonous, if afterwards he happen to feell the least alteration in his body, he is troubled for so doing, because the danger wherein he conceives himself disturbs his Un­derstanding, and augments his suspicions, quite dispelling those reasons which overweighed the same at first: so our conscience being of it self ve­ry easily terrified with apprehension of the judg­ments of God, at the least cross accident which be­fals it, repents of its action with incredible anguish & regret. In which condition a man is very prone to take up a perswasion that the most safe Reli­gion [Page 182] is to have none at all, and so follow the maxime of those who account it better to miss of gain then to put themselves in so great a hazard of loss. Now if any one should demand how then it came to pass that all Pagan Nations have each of them had their particular Religion, & that these considerations have not been available to divert them from embracing some or other; the reason is not difficultly given thereof. Amongst the Pa­gans some were contemners of the Gods; and if they did addict themselves to Religion, it was but by a maner of caution, least they should incur the universal hatred of the world; and so never en­tred at all into so profound a disquisition concern­ing these matters. Others had not indeed a Reli­gion revealed from Heaven; but yet they thought so at least: and this false opinion oblig'd them to the exercise of their devotions, almost as strongly as if they had assuredly known them to be true and good. For whether the reasons that per­swade us any thing be good or bad, yet the same motions in a manner are excited by such an opi­nion which the clear and solid knowledge of the truth would raise in us. There is no considerable difference, saving in the vehemence, and princi­pally in the constancy of those motions, no more then there is between the joy of one that ha's [...]ound a true Diamond, and another that ha's found a false one, so long as he believes it to be a pretious Stone. But it is time to pass on to other more particular considerations.

CHAP. III. Of the Immortality of the Soul, and of the Creation of the World: How greatly it imports true Piety to be fully assured of both; And that a man cannot be so without a particular Revelation.

IN this contention against the Epicureans, I ought to have question'd whether they be­lieved the Humane Soul to be Immortal, be­cause they which anciently were of this sect ac­counted it mortal as that of Brutes is; so that if they of the present Generation will follow the traces of their predecessors, they must also con­sent with them in this opinion. And neverthe­less I can scarce be perswaded that our Times could bring forth men so unnatural against them­selves; unless perhaps some wild dissolute young persons, whose minds are wholly taken up with Wine and Women. But being now to dispute a­gainst those that acknowledge a Providence in God by which he governs the Universe, I must pre­suppose that they esteem their Souls survive their bodies, and that death hath no power over them. So we find that all such as believed a Providence, have likewise taught the Immortality of our Souls, as things inseparably conjoyn'd; excep­ting the Saduces, who having the Books of Moses to instruct them, ought to be judg'd the blindest [Page 184] people of the World, that could not discern this truth therein. For all Religion being founded on this Hypothesis that our Souls are incorrupti­ble, seeing they acknowledge God to have been the Author of the Religion taught and command­ed in those Books, why should they not likewise acknowledge that God did by the same means e­stablish and confirm this Common Hypothesis. Truely all Religion aims at a double End, The il­lustrating the glory of God's Providence and Per­fections, and The comforting good men in their afflictions. Now whereas good men fall into so many calamities in the World, but Wicked often­times prosper, and that even the Good are op­pressed by the wicked, what glory would re­dound to that Providence from a Religion, which should constitute no time at all after this Life, in which the Good might receive comfort for their sufferings, & the Bad vengeance for their crimes. What great commendation were it to preside o­ver the mixture of Elements in the composition of Things, and to cause every one to follow its nature regularly, and in the mean time to take no care of those which reverence the Deity, but connive at the lewdnesses of such as contemn him? Not to conduct the course of Nature in a due manner, might speak some defect of Wis­dom; But not to compensate the Virtue of the Good, nor punish the crimes of the Vitious, be­sides the defect of Wisdom in not adjusting things aright sutably to their qualifications, and crossely coupling prosperity with Vice, and Mi­sery with Virtue, there would be a too notorious defect of goodness and justice. And perhaps it [Page 185] would not be less expedient to follow the do­ctrine of Epicurus (which notwithstanding we have convinced of infinite absurdities and impie­ties) then to ascribe a Providence to the Deity, and not to believe the immortality of the Soul: it being less unworthy the Divine Nature to neg­lect the Universe altogether, then to administer humane affairs with so much negligence, injustice and irregularity. But if there redounds little glory to the wise, good and just Providence of God from such a Religion, there accrues no more consolation to men; there being so small grounds to expect the remuneration of Virtue in this Life, that the greatest admirers of it, perceiving them­selves fall short of their attempt, at the end of their account, term her a meer vain shadow; and most deserving persons complain, that all things fall out preposterously to their hopes, while they observe unjust men flourishing in the midst of Pompe and Pleasure, and themselves insulted o­ver and oppress'd by arrogant and haughty Wickedness. For as for what is alledged, that all the Blessings which God promises in the Books of Moses to those whom he prescribes a Religion to upon his Covenant, are of Temporal things, which have no further relation then onely to the du­rance of this Life, and therefore there can be no certain proof of the Souls immortality drawn from thence; if it were so, the Covenant would be frustraneous and to no purpose. For I dare boldly affirm that of all those which are therein recorded with praise for religiously observing it, not one did attain, I do not say a perfect felicity of the present life so long as it lasted, for recom­pense [Page 186] of his Piety, but not so much as might coun­tervale the afflictions which he suffered. In so much that God himself in attesting their constant observance of his Covenant, should accuse and condemn himself of being deficient towards them; since they liv'd miserably for the greatest part of their Days. And those words of Jacob, My days have been few and evil, would be an e­ternal reproach to his promises and his Provi­dence. Wherefore it must either be denyed that there was any Religion constituted by the com­mand of God in the Books of Moses, or the Sa­ducees must confess that the immortality of the Soul is presupposed therein and confirmed by the testimony of God himself; since the belief of the corruptibility of our minds subverts the founda­tion of all Religion in the World.

Nevertheless, although the Doctrines of Pro­vidence and the Souls immortality are insepara­bly allied, and the latter is also demonstrated by invincible reasons which we deduc'd briefly a lit­tle above, yet it ha's hapned to it, as to divers other fundamental verities in Religion, name­ly that men remaind in suspence concerning the same, till they were acertain'd of it by a di­vine revelation. So that the most knowing Gre­cians (from whom Learning descended to the Ro­manes) spake so doubtfully of it, that it is not plainly known what they conceived about it: and they which most inclined to believe their Minds immortal, never declar'd themselves very positively that they thought so. Some have re­lated that Thales was the first among the Philoso­phers that believ'd the Immortality of our Souls, [Page 187] and indeed he is the first of whom Greece boasted for Philosophy. Before he and the rest which were termed Wisemen in his time set themselves to refine and regulate it, all that had attempted any thing, left it but in a rude dress and unseem­ly equipage. And it is a great evidence of the truth of this Doctrine, and a fair instance of the Providence of God in favour of it, that that Schole of Wisdom among the Pagans began to be polish'd and perfected by it, and was as it were built upon this foundation. But into how many sects did Philosophy soon after degenerate, of which there were some that expresly denied it, and others which made a doubt of it as of all o­ther things? With what ambiguity and incertain­ty have even they spoke of it, who seem'd de­sirous to teach it? Aristotle is extremely intricate about it, and seems sometimes to affirm one thing and sometimes another. Nor can it be conjectur'd why he so dubiously explicated himself in this point, being otherwise wonderfully eloquent and happy in his expressions, unless either be­cause he knew not well what to hold, as he de­clares freely in one place, That it is not yet evident what the Ʋnderstanding of men may be; or because he believed that the Soul is extinguisht with the Body, and yet would not pronounce it openly, for fear of giving scandal; as there are found ma­ny brave spirits, who living amongst men of con­dition are content to dissemble their opinions in matters of this nature. So likewise he seems to have dissembled what he thought of the best Form of Government, for fear of offending Aristotle. I am willing to ascribe my self into the number of them [Page 188] who believe that there is greater apparance that Aristotle was of the Opinion that affirms the Souls immortality, and I know many excellent passages may be produc'd out of his Writings which fa­vor it. But yet so it is, that in other places he seems to lay down principles which are incompa­tible with the same, and some of his most famous disciples have believ'd that he held the contrary. Socrates, as we find in Plato, knows not how to be confident of it, and perswades himself by rea­sons which for the most part are but of slender moment; and always speaks of it, as of other things, with doubting, and not determining any thing: although through the desire he had that his Soul were immortal, he inclined more willingly to this opinion, and accounted it of most probability: which is Cicero's judgement in his Tusculan Questions. And, truly, I conceive that in all things of this Nature the vulgar had better ap­prehensions then the Philosophers; yea, that the Philosophers corrupted the sentiments of Na­ture, which remain'd more lively and genuine in the breasts of the people. For they had wit and knowledge enough, to frame objections against the common conceptions of men, but yet they had not sufficient to resolve them; whence their minds became unsetled and wavering. Whereas the people, who understood not so much subtilty, held themselves more firmely to that which was taught them by nature it self, and they had re­ceived from her, though doubtingly, in regard of the weakness and ignorance of humane rea­son. As it often falls out, that a man that knows nothing in Civil Law, and yet hath some natural [Page 189] faculty of understanding, better discerns the right of a certain Case, then knowing Professors who have their heads full of Statutes and Para­graphs; great skill rather perplexing and con­founding then resolving them in the knowledge of things. But Philosophical disputes being spread from the Scholes into Towns among the people have obscured and disorder'd such natural notions, much more then the people by their own ignorance and negligence could have de­praved and embroiled the same of themselves. However, were they much better assured then they are that their Souls do not perish with their bodies, yet they must necessarily be extremely ignorant of the estate of them after their separa­tion. For how blind so ever the reason of man be in that which concerns the Deity, his Nature, Perfections and Providence, yet the arguments which satisfie us of them are so clear and resplen­dent in the World that in spight of all the dark­ness of the humane Intellect, there is always some beam that breaks through, affording that dubious and confused knowledge we mentioned was found amongst the Nations of the World. And how intangled soever the disputes of Philo­sophers were, the rational soul of Man gives al­ways so many proofs of its incorruptibility, that the knowledge thereof cannot be totally extin­guish'd. But as to its estate after this Life, it is not onely impossible for men to divine of them­selves what it will be, by reason of the corrup­tion and irregularity which is befallen their fa­culties, but though the eye of their reason were as clear and luminous as could be desir'd, yet [Page 190] they were hardly able to make the least probable conjecture concerning it, because God hath written nothing of it in the book of Nature, from which we draw all our knowledge. But they which are instructed by Religion in the History of the Worlds Original, can very easily give ac­count thereof. For God having produc'd Man in the Nature of things, in such an estate that if he had persisted in it, he should not have feared death, the revelation of that estate which must follow this Life would have been unprofitable to him, who was made, in case that the design of his creation had been pursued, to live perpetually in the World, and never to undergo the separation of his Soul from his Body. For that Truth teaches us (and likewise reason being informed in this particular either consents to, or is convinced of it) that it was the Offence which the First Man committed, which introduced death into the World. To what purpose therefore should God have imprinted in Nature any evidence or token of the estate of man after death, since in that first integrity of nature, there was no suspition nor shadow of Death it self? It is true, indeed, that God denounced to man, that if he degenerated from his integrity, he should dye; which might have occasion'd some thought in him of the pains which follow death, being he knew that his Soul was immortal. But the apprehension of punish­ment after sin, and also of that which follows death, do's not infer any other of remuneration, unless God reveal mercy and hope of pardon af­ter the transgression. Which God had not as yet done in the integrity of Nature. So that man [Page 191] having from God neither hope of pardon in case he should sin, nor any cause to think of death in case he should not sin, he had no occasion to raise his mind higher towards a better life. But if any one conceives some scruple touching the perpe­tuity of the life of man upon the Earth, if he had not fallen into sin, and imagines rather that God, after he had lest him for some Ages in the World to practice obedience and virtue, would have at last taken him to himself, and given a greater re­compense then that which he could have injoy'd in a terrestrial felicity, he must also confess that to instate man in the injoyment of such remunerati­on, there would have been no need of Death, and so that it was not necessarily for him to know what the estate of his Soul after separation from his body should be. Moreover, whatsoever that compensation would have been which man should have received for his Obedience and Vir­tue, insomuch as it would have been a condition and a glory supernatural, some revelation of it must necessarily have been made by another way, then nature; namely, then by the evidences which may be had from consideration of the Works of God, and the Government of the World. And in truth, to hear the Poets and Phi­losophers speak of it, sufficiently evinces that such as have had no other light to guid them in search of these things, but that of Nature and Reason, have onely groped in the dark. For how ridiculous is the description which they make of the Infernal Regions and Elysian Fields? Is it not pleasant to behold the Landskip which Virgil hath drawn of them in the sixth Book of [Page 192] his Aeneids? where he speaks of Rhadamanthus, and the severity of his sentences; and forgets not to paint out Tysiphone with her scourges and serpents, together with the Furies. He also pla­ces there hideous Hydra's, and I know not what kind of other vile beasts at the gates of Hell; and in that horrible prison which he represents twice as deep as heaven is high above us, he lodges the Titans, the Aliodes, and Salmoneus. There is also Tityus, who covers nine Acres of Ground with his body, and whose growing entrals are perpe­tually devoured by a Vulture. And not far from him the Lapith [...] with Ixion and Pirithous, over whose heads hang great rocks ready to fall upon them. He assigns there to some for their punish­ment, to roul a great stone eternally; and fastens others to the Spokes of a Wheel that turns about incessantly, and tortures as it turns. He fixes the poor Theseus upon his seat, and condemns him never to stir from it, being a torment fitted to a man that loved to travel; and at last concludes that if he had a hundred tongues and as many mouths, he could not recount all the sorts of pu­nishments wherewith sinners are tortured in that place. As for good men, he allots them more li­berty of air, and a more spatious habitation, where the skie is display'd with a fair purple light, and they behold their Sun and their Stars as we do ours: there some exercise themselves in various sorts of combats, as leaping, running on the grass, and wrastling on the Sand: others dance to the Musick of Orpheus's Violin; and so others divert themselves with other sports and re­creations. Are not these whimsies very capable of [Page 193] giving satisfaction to those which read them? Nor can it be said these extravagances are pecu­liar onely to the Poets, but that other men and especially Philosophers held more rational opini­ons. For, as I formerly said, the Poets were the Divines of the Pagans, chiefly in these matters, so that the Philosophers themselves admitted their fancies into their doctrines. Indeed Plu­tarch in the Treatise which he writ upon this Motto [...], seems to offer at some more reasonable interpretation of those follies, then what they present to the understanding at the first view: but nevertheless all the explication which he gives of them, amounts onely to this that the wicked Souls are plunged and over­whelm'd in the perpetual oblivion of all things. And in his Consolation directed to Apollonius, he adheres to the opinion of Pindar concerning the place and state of the Happy, which Pindar in the place which he alledges, describes almost after the same manner that Virgil doth, who seems to have imitated him. If an Author so grave and judicious as Plutarch was, suffer'd himself to be deluded with these fine imaginations, what shall we think of all other people, who were of mean­er capacities then he, not of the vulgar pitch on­ly, but even among Philosophers? But truely, their blindness in this matter must be favourably censur'd; since in other things they could dis­course and argue against Fables, and observe per­haps that the combates of the Gods one against another, their Loves, Hatreds and Jealousies, their imployments of the Forge and Spinstry, their Nectar and Ambrosia, were but pleasant ficti­ons, [Page 194] or Romantick fancies of Homer and his po­sterity of Poets. The light of Reason ennabled them wherewith to encounter these stories, so that they were not onely convinced of their va­nity, but invented somewhat of greater solidi­ty: but in this particular, if they beheld absur­dities which they were not able to maintain, they were not able to substitute any truths in their place. So that it was necessary for them either to admit such Trifles, as some did, or to live in a most profound ignorance of the estate of their Souls after the dissolution of the body, which was in­deed most ordinary. And Epicurus knew no better way to interpret the Allegory of those [...]ables, then to bring Hell up into the Earth, and to affirm that all which the Poets relate of the things below, as of the rock which hangs over the head of Tantalus, and the Rowling-stone of Sisyphus, and Tityus's Liver which is continually devoured by birds of prey, and the Tun of the Danaides, which could not be fil'd wtth all their pains in lading water into it, is felt onely in this life by covetous, ambitious and fearful minds ex­agitated with their own exorbitant passions. In a word, the soul of man being extinguisht when the body dyes, all that is reported of Hell and things done there is frivolous; and Cerberus and the Furies,

are nothing at all in his opinion; but

Now it cannot be exprest of how great impor­tance this ignorance is to the life of men. For as the hope of recompense is a quick spur to Virtue, so is the fear of punishment a most efficacious bridle to restrain from Vice; so that the study of that and the hatred of this increases or diminishes according to the proportion of knowledge which we have of the reward prepared for us. And the more men are corrupt, as experience shows they are infinitely, the less do they prize Virtue for it self, and on the contrary their inclinations are more violently carried forth to vice. Which is an argument, that 'tis only the fear of punishment and the hope of compensation which moves them, not the native beauty of Virtue or defor­mity of Vice. Whence in so gross an ignorance of their condition after this life, it was impossi­ble that they should be effectually reclaimed from the one or duely excited to the other. So that the conclusion clearly results that God must re­veal himself from Heaven to be the rewarder of Virtue, and the severe avenger of Vice, not one­ly in this Life, but also in that which is to come, by giving a sufficient information of the quality of the reward. And because so long as we are cloathed with this body and accustomed [Page 196] to sensible and corporeal things, we can scarce comprehend any thing but by the Ministery of the Senses or under the image of sensible things; if such revelation be express'd in Allegoricall speeches, taken from what is most ardently desired or feared in the world, it is requisite First that such description be grave, and savouring nothing of the weakness of the mind of man, which is evi­dent in those of the Poets. In the next place, there must be in such a revelation in which the penalties and recompenses to come are veiled un­der the shadow of corporeal and sensible things, other simple descriptions, to explain such as are typified, and give us to understand that both what it promises, and what it threatens shall be in a manner proportionable to the nature of hu­mane Souls, and not extravagant or incompati­ble therewith.

And lastly, it is necessary that such revelation be accompani'd with so clear evidence of its ce­lestial and divine original, that the assurance which it gives that those promises and threat­nings come from God himself, as if he had pro­nounced them with his own mouth, may beget an immutable certainty that although the expressions be Allegorical, yet the reality equals or surpasses them; which unquestionably produces wonder­ful effects. Whereas the opinion, that other de­scriptions found in the Books of Poets are hu­mane inventions, disparages their authority, and so renders them wholly ineffectual. Let us pro­ceed now to the other point of this Chap­ter.

Because, as it hath been shewn, all knowledge which we have of God comes either from a par­ticular revelation, or from contemplation of his Works; and that all our piety is deriv'd from, and regulated according to the measure of such knowledge: it is of high importance especially to those who acknowledge no particular revelati­on, to the end they may become truely pious to­wards God, to have an exact knowledge of his Works; namely of the World, and the things contained therein. I demand therefore whe­ther they believe that God is the author of the World. For if they do not, but deny that he created the matter out of nothing of which it is compos'd, or introduc'd the form into the mat­ter which we behold in it, they are as much at a loss, as Epicurus, to make out whence they learn't that God is powerful, or what is the measure of his power; so far are they from being able to as­sure themselves that it is infinite. There is indeed a great Virtue requisite for the administring of Providence, and which being duely considered by right reason, is found to be infinite. But if there hath ever been one person among the Phi­losophers that reason'd in this manner, God go­verns the world, Therefore his power is unlimi­ted (which I do not meet with any that ha's done) there are found a thousand who conceived that God employ'd his utmost skill and ability in the government of the World, and that his object was proportionable to his power; so that being but sufficient to all the World, he was not able to remove so much as one straw besides, unless he should during that little space surcease his action [Page 198] by which he moves all this great mass of the Uni­verse. Whereas they which believe that God created the World, and that he created it of no­thing, do necessarily imply in that belief this o­ther, that his power is immense, since there is an infinite distance between Being and Not-being, and those two terms (as they speak) cannot be conjoyn'd, nor the one be pass'd from to the o­ther, but by a power of infinite extent. Where­fore these people cannot adore God with assur­ance in reference to the infiniteness of his power. For that right reason which is necessary to frame reasonings from the conduct of Providence which may infer the immensity of the power of God is not to be found in any of mankind since the corruption which befell it. Moreover they deprive themselves of the fairest inducement to praise and thanksgiving which can be imagin'd. For if God did not create the World, he ha's not manifested any proof of his goodness in giving Being to the Creatures, which is infinitely bet­ter then Not-being, and consequently deserves an infinite gratitude, if man were capable of performing it. If particularly he did not create the World for man, nor gave him that dominion which he challenges over all things by imagining himself the King of the Universe, he does not ow him one word of thanks, and ha's no reason to say as a great King once did;

Which is reasonably a hymne more agreeable and well-pleasing to the Deity then the sume of all the Incense of Arabia. But in the next place, what duty will man think he owes to God even for his Being, if he believes not that he receiv'd it from him? And will he not rather be ready to place himself equal with him, being not dependant of him for his Being, since there is nothing more renders things equal one to another then Inde­pendance.

It is true, it may perhaps be said, that men are oblig'd to the Deity in as much as they depend of his Providence, because if that did not preside over natural causes and cause them to produce things necessary to the support of Life, we could not subsist, and therefore he which gives the con­servation of a being obliges as much or more then he which gives the being it self, and he that feeds and defends then he that begets.

But this is a gross mistake of theirs, and their pretended reason deludes them. For if God be [Page 200] not the Author of the World, how is he the Pre­server of it? Do's it not belong to him that made the Work to take the care of it? Whence hath he authority to intermeddle in the Works of a­nother; or the World the necessity of being guided and preserved by the hand of God, if it was not framed by the same? And indeed God must either be the author of the World; or Chance, as Epicurus affirmed; or as others, Na­ture; or it had never any beginning, but hath existed from all eternity. If it was Chance that made the world, then consequently it is also preserved and governed by the same hazard. And truely Epicurus was consistent with his own Prin­ciples when he denied Providence. For if the World was thus framed by the fortuitous con­course of Atomes, there is no need for Provi­dence to put its hand to support it; since it might be preserv'd in its Being by the same means by which it was produc'd; the conservation of things being not more difficult then their first pro­duction. If it was made by Nature, I demand, what that is? For if by Nature they mean the order which is in the things of the World, accor­ding to which causes produce effects sutable to themselves, certainly and determinately, namely, both universal causes, as the Heavens, and parti­cular, as Animals and Plants; they are not great­ly mistaken. We desire to know who is the Au­thor of that order; seeing order cannot be the author of it self. For besides that nothing is able to produce it self into Being, order is an effect of a Cause indowed with Understanding, but hath no understanding it self; in as much as Order is a [Page 201] disposition and relation according to which things are both conveniently marshall'd among themselves and rationally subordinated to some certain end. Now who will say that this relation and disposition of things among themselves is it self indued with understanding. And if the or­der of things did not produce, neither is it able to preserve it self. It belongs to the same faculty to preserve and make it. If by the Word Nature, they understand the world it self, composed and contrived with all the things in the order we be­hold it, or as the Author of the Book De Mundo speaks, the well ordered compages of all the parts of the Universe, How could that make it self? For the thing which makes, exists already, and that which is making is not yet existent. The Carver is before the Statue, and the Watch-maker be­fore his Springs that point out the hour, yea even before he begins to make them. But the Statue or the Watch, though begun, are neither of them such; nor yet when they are in making; till the whole work be compleated, and all the parts ad­justed and united in due order. In like manner, if the world made it self, it was before its own being, namely the world producing before the world produced, though but one and the same World. Which is a like folly as if a man should say that he begat himself, without a father. Whence also it follows, that it is not able to go­vern or support and maintain it self; no more then a Watch is if there be no body to fit and guide its Wheels and Springs, and to winde it up, and duely order it. If they say that the World is eternal, is it so without dependance on [Page 202] God, or is it eternal by emanation from him; as the Light of the Sun is of as great duration as the Sun it self? If it be eternal with dependance on the Deity, then God having produc'd the World as naturally as the fire burns or the Sun shines, must also preserve it in the same manner: and be­cause it will be a natural action, there will be no obligation to him for it, in as much as he can do no otherwise, as the Sun cannot restrain its beams nor withhold its light from illuminating the Universe.

And moreover such conservation of the World will be no longer an act of Providence. For that can never be termed Providence, which is an in­evitable necessity of things depending on their indissoluble natural connexion. So that I won­der with what reason the Stoicks called their Fa­tal destiny Providence, or thought those two things compatible together. For whereas Pro­vidence administers things with a freedom of Wil, what Liberty can there be in the conduct of that which depends on a fatal and Determinate neces­sity; which is precedent to any act of Provi­dence? If it be eternal without dependance on the Deity, it is it self God, as some heretofore ac­counted it. And because that which is eternal is also immutable, and maintains it self always uni­formly, neither shall God have any right to med­dle in the government of the World, which does not depend on him, nor the World any necessity of being governed or preserved by him; since there would be no change to be feared in it, its own eternity exempting it from all subjection to alteration. Wherefore it must either be confess'd [Page 203] that the World had God for its Author, or denied that God is any thing at all concern'd in the go­vernment and preservation of the World.

Now there is one thing considerable above o­thers. Which is, that though these reasons be so evident that nothing can be brought against them to refell them, yet there was never any man that perceiv'd them clearly, unless he were first in­structed of the creation of the World in the Books of Moses. Aristotle believed it eternal; Plato at­tributed eternity onely to the Matter; and in his Dialogue of the Creation he commits so many im­pertinences unworthy so great a Philosopher, that he that ha's the patience to read, will partly laugh at his conceipts and partly pity his extra­vagances; and esteem it as easie to combine the Atomes of Democritus together, as to conjoyn the minute subtleties of those Platonical speculati­ons. Besides, I am not satisfi'd (and the opinion of those which affirm it hath very great probabi­lity of truth) but Plato might have learn't all he knew of this matter from tradition of the Egyp­tians and Syrians, who had receiv'd it from Moses; for he had travell'd into those Countries, and was there imbued with truths formerly unknown in Greece; but afterwards endevour'd to cloath the same in the dress of Philosophy, to the end they might be more readily entertain'd by his Country­men. And being passionately devoted to Geome­try, & observing, what is most true, that all things were fram'd with a wonderful wisdom, as it were by weight, rule and measure, he interweav'd his Discourse with splendid conceptions of Lines, Proportions & Numbers. Whence it came to pass, [Page 204] that Aristotle, who did not attribute much to the tradition of others, but examined all things by his own reason, and otherwise observed an in­sufferable confusion in all these Numbers of Plato, and moreover, perhaps took too much pleasure in opposing his Opinions, designing to get all the re­putation to himself, which he detracted from his Master (as Plato himself complains in Diog. Laer­tius, that he had us'd him as rudely as young Colts that kick their Dams) and so disceded from his opi­nion, and introduc'd that of the eternity of the World, with dependance on the Deity, although such a dependance as infers a necessary and natu­ral production. And upon this consideration, as God willing we shall shew more amply hereafter, he seems to have had so cold a respect for the Deity.

Nor is there any ground to imagine that the Philosophers of latter times are more intelligent in these matters then those of old were; since the World furnishes them with no new arguments, nor Nature with new faculties or otherwise dis­posed to comprehend the same. They know, in­deed, that the World was created, and have a clearer understanding of the truth of arguments which confirm it, then the ancients, and even then right reason it self could supply them with: but it is since the thing was acertained by revela­tion. And if they would be ingenuous to confess it, they learn't it from the Books of Moses. But, what (will some say) could not Moses perhaps have a greater reach of wit then Plato or Aristotle, and so invent arguments of himself, and sound the truth to the bottom, and then communicate [Page 205] it to others; and that without any especial reve­lation, although he boasted thereof, to gain grea­ter authority amongst his people? Truely a very vain objection, and a pitiful subterfuge. For what should have hindred him from declaring his reasons, as well as Aristotle hath done his? And nevertheless he makes a very plain Narration of it, as Galen reproaches to him. And if his design were to enhance his authority, and so render those o­ver whom he commanded more plyable and flexi­ble out of respect to the Deity, why did he refuse that charge of exercising authority over that people and to conduct them? And how does he boast of so many miracles, which might have been contradicted by men then living, if the relation of them had not been true? Why did he refer all to the glory of God and nothing to his own? Or if his project were to credit himself onely by misprising and debasing his own worth, why did he not at least leave that authority to his children, rather then to his domestick servant? But he was so far from that, that contrarily to what naturall affections dictate to men, he made one of his at­tendants heir of his grandeur, and left his own issue to fall into a low and contemptible condition in comparison of his own. Certainly, it must ei­ther be said that Moses was an impostor in forging both the history of the creation and others which he relates; or, if any credit be given to him in the narration of that History so remote from his own times, then much rather ought he to be believ­ed in his recital of things which befell himself, of which there were so many witnesses either to confirm, or convince them of falsity. And surely [Page 206] they are abundantly confirmed in that they were never so much as accused or suspected. Besides that their Posterity ha's received them from hand to hand as divine irrefragable truths, and religi­ously maintained them for the space of many Ages. Which they would never have done, if the tradition of those ancient miracles had not from time to time been rendred authentique and worthy of perfect belief, by extraordinary acti­ons, predictions, judgements and deliverances in which appeared the singer of God. I shall say something more, since the matter leads me to it: Namely; that if the Philosophers, against whom I dispute at present, have vivacity and quicknes enough of understanding, to be certainly per­perswaded of the Creation of the World by rea­sons which their Wit is able to suggest to them, and the Ancients did not observe, I dare aver that would they take pains in reading the Books ot Moses with as much attention as they use in their own ratiocinations, they would there more certainly remark that they are proceeded from divine inspiration, then they could know of themselves that God ha's created and governs the World. For there are not more lively and evident arguments in the World, that God is the Author of it, then there are in the Books of Moses alone, to induce a belief that they are not of hu­mane invention. As I conceive, if a man should have from the hand of Archimedes himself the de­scription of those admirable Engines which he made, and that he had replenish'd the same with as many tokens of his incomparable skill in the Mathematicks, as there are traces of the Deity in the [Page 207] five books of Moses, he would find therein as much or more cause to admire the extraordinary grandeur of that Personages Wit, as in atten­tively considering his Machines and his En­gines.

CHAP. IV. How much true Godliness is concern'd in the certain knowledge, That the whole World is governed by a special Providence; and That the same is no otherwise attainable but by Revelation.

HItherto we have discours'd largely of the Providence which governs the World, and treated with the Philosophers of our Times as with persons that acknowledge it; and yet we are not fully assured what their judgement is re­ally concerning it, although it be a thing highly important to our dispute. For the Opinions of the Ancients have been very different about it, and the Moderns hide themselves, and do not willingly appear in publick, in regard that the Christian Religion being universally receiv'd in Europe, such as do not believe the same, are look'd upon as Monsters; so that it is very difficult to know distinctly what opinion they have of it. If therefore they be of that perswasion which is attributed to Aristotle (though some undertake to [Page 208] excuse him from it) their piety towards the Deity must consequently be wholly cold and languid. For Aristotle is accounted to have believ'd that the world being from eternity by emanation from God, as the light proceeds from the Sun, things are so necessarily disposed, that God being the first Mover of the Heavens, whether immediately or by the intervention of what he calls Intelli­gences, he is also by consequence the Author of all things. Because the other less universal mo­tions depend on the Heavens, and from those o­ther less universal motions proceed all things which are produced in the World; every cause acting sutable to its own Nature; as the Water moves the wheel of a Mill, and the wheel the Axeltree, and that another less wheel, and this also another, till at length the motion arrives at the stone which bruises the corn and reduces the same into flower. So that God is indeed authour of all things, but as a universal cause, which hath under it an infinite number of other subal­ternate and subordinate, which are the proxi­mate causes of effects which come into Being, and which receive their power of acting from the in­fluence of the first and most universal of all by the means of motion. And forasmuch as things which are termed fortuitous and contingent, do not depend on certain determined causes which are ligned by a sort of train to that superior & u­niversal one, and consequently if they be admini­stred by God they are administred by an Especial Providence; they which discourse at that rate take no notice at all of them, no more then of a thing which does not agree with their Principles. Nor [Page 209] can it be denyed but that grand Philosopher seems very frequently to lay down the grounds of this Divinity, although sometimes excellent sentences escape from him to the honor of a Par­ticular Providence, which is extended even to casual things or such as depend not on the con­catenation of natural causes. But it is to be fear'd that they are words spoken out of design to avoid the reproach which would have lain upon him of being too little religious, or at most the e­ruptions and flashes of Nature, which oftentimes surmounts the most deeply imprinted perverse o­pinions, and causes a man to forget his own Max­imes when they are contrary unto it, how con­stant and resolved soever he be to maintain the same. The Author of the Book De Mundo, dedi­cated to Alexander, seems to go a little higher, and speaks of God and his Providence in more magnificent terms. But in the first place the stile evidently shews, that Aristotle never writ it, and I should readily incline to their opinion who father it on Philo Judaeus, whom the Books of Mo­ses had imbued with many better and sounder o­pinions in relation to piety, then all that ever was met with in Greece: but he disguised himself on purpose, and accommodated that elegant Treatise after the Greek mode. Secondly, in case it had proceeded from the hand of Aristotle, yet it always terminates in this, that God keeps himself in the Heavens onely, and that it is not sutable to his glorious nature to be amongst frail and visible things, and that he governs the World by means of subordinate causes in nature, as the great King of Persia do's his Providences [Page 210] by his Lieutenants and Satrapae. Lastly, so little do's he think that a special Providence takes care of all particular events of things which are called contingent, that he excludes God as much as he can from their administration, and from all little inconsiderable accidents, as esteeming them un­worthy of his excellence: so far is he from ad­mitting God to preside absolutely over the Un­derstandings and Wills of men, and that he go­verns all their most inward and abstruse thoughts. All the Rhetorick which he imploys to deduce this most elegantly, and adorn it with the choisest flowers of Oratory and Poetry, amounts onely to this, without carrying it further. Now this doctrine can by no means be judged capable of begetting true piety in the hearts of men. For since they describe that action of God in the go­vernment of the World, as a natural thing, and by consequence necessarily determin'd, so that nothing can be attributed to the Goodness or free will of God, what obligation can men think they have to him, any more then they have to the Primum mobile which hurrieth all the Celestial Spheres along with it with a natural violence, which they are not able to resist. For though he be the supreme cause of all, and involves all o­thers; yet if a man be once perswaded that God is bound to that action by a natural necessity, he will not conceive himself more beholden to him for it, then to the Fire because it burns, or to the Air in regard it fills all the extent of Nature. Yea, it is questionable whether in stead of being incited to venerate him, men would not rather e­steem his condition miserable, to be perpetually con­fin'd [Page 211] to the Heavens to move them, without being able to slacken one moment, any more then Ixion to stay his wheel. But putting the case that men notwithstanding account that action to proceed from the free will of God (which yet is not con­sistent with their principles) and let us see on what inducements they will render praise and thanksgiving to God. Namely, for that he moves the Heavens, and the Heavens transmit their in­fluences to the Earth, and impart their virtues to the Elements, that so herbs may grow and fruits ripen, for the supply of nourishment to its in­habitants, and lastly for that by the same ways he gives animals the power to bring forth young ones, for the propagation and perpetuity of eve­ry Species. Now in an unexpected danger of which there are so many and various sorts which threaten men continually, and oftentimes over­take them, how will they turn their eyes and minds towards the Heavens to implore the assist­ance of God, seeing he ha's no care but of what he does naturally, and abandons contingent things to fortune? And when a man shall be de­liver'd from the danger of the fall of a house, or the assault of an Assassin, or the enterprise of a Poisoner, with what zeal will he thank the Deity, who ha's no regard thereof? Now our whole Life is full of such misfortunes; and that which befalls us according to the ordinary ways of Na­ture, is that which is most rare in all her course. Moreover experience is to every man the mistress of this truth, that things, which are common to us with all other men, how excellent soever they be, yet they do not much affect us: onely [Page 212] particular accidents make a lively impression in our minds. So that a man will look upon himself as more oblig'd to a Physitian, that secur'd him from loss of one of his Eys, which a defluction threatned him with, then to God that gave him both, with the injoyment of the light of the Sun at his birth. But above all the rest, the ignorance of that Singular Providence which presides in the minds of men themselves, and over their thoughts, will cause a signal prejudice to true piety therein. For Wisdom and Virtue being the most excellent of all Presents that can come from the hand of God to humane creatures, if we do not conceive that we hold them from him, we shall never return him the praise of them; we shall pride up our selves and become presumpti­ous, even so far as to rank our selves equal with him, yea above him, accordingly as we find in Cicero and Seneca such brave sentences as these; That a Wiseman owes his Being indeed to the Deity; but as for his Well-being, which consists in Wisdom, he ows the same absolutely to him­self. And moreover, that in this the Sage does in some manner go beyond Jupiter; in as much as Jupiter is good by the necessity of his Nature, and cannot be otherwise; but the other acquired his own Virtue by combating with discourse of rea­son against his corporeal appetites. A Soul tain­ted with this Philosophy, and pust up with so rank an arrogance, how can it ever perform any thing considerable in relation to piety? And yet thither it is that ignorance of this Providenc [...] carries us. But if they have a better opinion of Divine Providence, and subject not onely na­tural, [Page 213] but also contingent things, and our very thoughts to his conduct, we shall always return to demand of them, how they know it so through­ly: the World and the administration of it pre­sents us with arguments enough, if we were ca­pable to comprehend them; But how do they know it? Indeed the Philosophers and Poets sometimes utter in their writings excellent elo­giums of God: as among others, Plutark in his in­comparable Discourse De Sera Numinis Vindicta; and Socrates in an ancient Dialogue, attributed to Plato (whether it be his or not) says that Virtue is a thing that is not learnt as Arts and Sciences, but is given by Inspiration, as some divine and cele­stial beneficence. And Homer, as we have inti­mated elsewhere, ascribes to the Deity the great­est part of the extraordinary Motions of the Heart, especially such as are Heroical, as like­wise do's Virgil following his example.

And in another place he introduces Alethes, a per­sonage of high merit, thus speaking upon oc­casion of the generosity of Euryalus and Nisus;

And Juvenal shewing that the best and perhaps [Page 214] onely wish which men ought to make, is that the Deity would give them ‘Mentem sanam in corpore sano,’ seems to acknowledge that we hold both the one and the other from his liberality; which is a very authentique advowing of Providence. And it were easie to produce plenty of the like instances. But how little firm were all those people in this belief? And of what inconsiderable efficacy were those excellent sentences amongst the vulgar, yea amongst Philosophers and the Authors them­selves? Plutark one of the most religious of all, relates very exactly how Timoleon was miracu­lously delivered from the conspiracy of two mur­derers, by the meeting of a certain person who to revenge the death of his father kill'd one of them as they were upon the point to give him the fatal blow, though he knew nothing of the busi­ness. But in stead of acknowledging the Provi­dence of God therein, he contents himself with saying that the spectators wondred greatly at the artifice and contrivance which fortune uses, how she carries on one design by help of another, and unites things so remote by liguing and chaining the same together, how different soever they be, for producing the effect she resolves on. And without inserting any judgement of his own concerning God or his Providence, he onely says, that the Corinthians, understanding the deed, con­ceived good hopes thereby of success in the war of Sicily, because the General that manag'd it, was a sacred person and favour'd of the Gods. [Page 215] Leaving his Reader to divine what his own sen­timent was of the matter. So in like manner when he speaks of the different apprehensions which the Fall of Dionysius caus'd in the minds of them that liv'd in those dayes, he declares that some were glad of his misfortunes, as if they would have trampled him under their feet whom Fortune had cast down; others beheld him with some compassion, considering the great power secret and divine causes have over the weakness of Men, which appeared so remarkably in this Masterpiece of Fortune. What other words do's he use to represent the wise Providence of God, then that by which blind and temerarious chance is signified? And lastly that no man may think that by the term of Fortune he understood the provident Wisdom of God, I shal here rehearse his own words in his first book of the Opinions of Philosophers, which I believe will cause astonish­ment in them who have any knowledge of that person. After having said that Anaxagoras held that before God put his hand to the fabrick of the World, the bodies which we behold in motion were at rest, but the Mind of God contriv'd and order'd the same; and that Plato on the other side, maintained that the particles of matter had a con­fus'd motion, till God ranked and marshall'd them, knowing that order is much better then confusion, he adds, That, Herein they are both guilty of the same mistake in esteeming that God concerns himself with humane affairs, and that he made the World on purpose to govern it. For a nature so happy and incorruptible, and replenish'd with all sorts of goods without any partici­pation of evil, wholly addicted to preserve its own [Page 216] beatitude and immortality, cannot be engaged in the care of things belonging to men; otherwise it would be unhappy, by being employ'd like a Labourer to carry great burdens, and to take pains in fabricating and go­verning the world. You would think he had forsaken the Academy, and pass'd into the School of Epi­curus. How could a man that is susceptible of these rare opinions, have any thing certain in the knowledge of Providence, however some excel­lent passages sometimes fall from him in its com­mendation? Moreover, let us call to minde what Cato himself said and we touched above. This person, whom Nature had endued with incredi­ble gravity, as Cicero reports, which was aug­mented and confirmed by the doctrine of the Sto­icks, the most severe of all others, and who extoll'd Providence to the highest, when he perceiv'd the affairs of the Commonwealth to de­cline under the conduct of Pompey, and those of Caesar, who aspir'd to Tyranny, to thrive and gather strength, he complains that he beheld as he said, a fallacious instability in the government of the Gods, in that Pompey was always prospe­rous while he did no good, and all things were unsuccesseful when he took up arms for the con­servation of his Country and defence of the pub­like liberty. If therefore that great personage could be so scandalised at the Providence of God, what must we judge of them to whom nature had not given so great a capacity, nor so high a cour­age, or deep knowledge in Philosophy & even of that sect which would be accounted the most re­ligious? Could it otherwise be, but that the least accident of Fortune (as they spoke) falling out [Page 217] contrary to what humane Understanding judg'd fit and reasonable, should unsettle and transport their minds with amazement? And indeed, what were the opinions of the Philosophers in those dayes? Some maintain'd a fatal Necessity, such as it were impossible to avoid; inferior causes being so connected by Destiny with the superior, that not onely men could not resist it, but the Gods themselves were ty'd up by it: in like manner as Sarpedon dy'd in the War at Troy by the decree of Destiny, though his Father Jupiter had a vehement and ardent desire of the contrary. And this be­cause they had sometimes indevoured to prevent certain accidents by their industry and prudence, which Divine Providence that penetrates all ob­stacles, did not suffer them to bring to their de­sired end. Whence it came to pass that the weak­ness and ignorance of man, and the invincible power of the Deity in executing its purposes, brought a contempt upon Providence. For no­thing can be imagin'd that renders the Deity more subject to be contemn'd, or that more deadens the hopes of men upon all occasions, then this fatal destiny, nor yet that renders them more im­pudent in excusing their enormities; witness that Varlet in the Comedian, who after a sly trick which he had done, said, It was the will of the Gods; and had they not decreed it, I could never have done it. Others observing that there fell out an infinite number of things in the world, of which no account could be given, nor the causes assign­ed of such effects, esteemed that all went at ran­dom, and that God took no care of any thing. Yea sometimes they expostulated the cause of [Page 218] their calamities with the Deity, and complain'd that he took pleasure in beating them down and bandying them to and fro. And the Wri­tings of the Ancients are frequently strewed with such complaints, as so many blasphemies and to­kens of impiety, which their ignorance of Pro­vidence caus'd them to utter. Besides what I have recited above out of Claudian, Ovid, and o­thers, Jason in Seneca the Tragedian beholding Medea fly away in the Air after she had murder'd his children, saies to her, ‘Testare nullos esse, qua veheris, Deos.’ In Virgil, a mother that had lost her Son by an im­mature death, reviles the Deity, ‘Atque Deos atque astra vocat crudelia mater.’ And of this enough of other examples may be found, which have been collected by learned men. But if there have been some among the Pagans, who in these scandals have contained from blaspheming (which were very rare in com­parison of others) at least it cannot be denyed but that in that ignorance of the cause that go­verns the Universe, they were depriv'd of a great consolation, being dubious and wavering in a perpetual perplexity, whether God took care or not of their Life and affairs. Now as much as the opinion of God's good will and vigilant care for the good and conservation of men is rebated, so much without question is defaulked from their piety towards him. And, whereas (as we shall [Page 219] see in its due place) man is by nature alienated from God, and extremely averse and reluct­ant to be reduc'd to him how clear knowledge soever he ha's by his word of this wise Pro­vidence, how could those doubts and darke­ness ever introduce him to an ingenious and free devotion? I conclude therefore that all the Religion of the Ancients, who liv'd without a particular Revelation, had there been no other particulars to make it so but this, was either lan­guid or forc'd; and that consequently to beget in the hearts of men a true and since respect to­wards God it is needful that himself instruct us in the knowledge of his Providence. But that which follows shall shew the same more evi­dently.

CHAP. V. Of what great moment it is to know whether Death be a Natural Accident, or Not; And that such knowledge cannot be at­tain'd without special Revelation.

DEath is the most ordinary thing in the World; For all that are born must neces­sarily dye. Yet there is nothing of whose Cause and End Philosophers have been more ig­norant. All of them look't upon it as a thing purely Natural, which befalls us as inevitably as naturally; because our bodies being composed of the Elements which include discordant qualities, hot and cold, dry and moist, so long as these con­tinue in good harmony, and are mixed in a per­fect temperature, they are maintained in vigor; but when one comes to prevail against another, or one of them fails through absumption of the moi­sture in which it consists, or any other way, there necessarily follows a dissipation of the compages. Which happens in like manner to all other bodies which have the same principles of their generati­on; the union after a certain time being dissolved and the bodies corrupted. Indeed if the Soul of Man were mortal as his body is, they would have reason for this opinion, and Death would be na­tural to us as it is to other creatures: but it befits onely Epicurus, who believes the humane Soul [Page 221] corruptible, to hold Death for a thing simply na­tural, if every one will speak agreeably to his principles, and not run into absurdities and ex­travagances. For Man is not the Soul onely, he is the body to; that is to say, the body is not on­ly the case of his Soul wherein she is included for a time, but a part of man, which enters into his composition, and without which he cannot be called man. Now what a disorder is it in the Nature of man, that half of his essence should be extinguish'd at the end of fourty or fifty years, and the other half, his Soul, remain for ever after despoiled of it? Unless the wild Metempsychosis of Pythagoras be admitted, and that our Souls do not cease to go out of some bodies, and re-enter into others, sometimes into a horse, and some­times a bird, and sometimes a man; or if it be confin'd onely to humane bodies, that he who was a great Philosopher two thousand years ago, is now a Cow-heard, and that great Prince who discomfited Darius neer the City of Arbela, at this present a Porter in the Market. An Opinion, I conceive, they against whom I dispute will not own. Shall the Soul then, remain eternally a Widow? She, that cherishes the body so much, that she forgets her own interest to be compla­cent to it? She that is not separated from it but with so great regret, that the best marriage in the world is not dissolved with so much reluctancy and tears? In which respect, since these people acknowledge a Providence, how come they not to observe that if death be a thing purely natural, a good part of that Providence is lost, death ta­king the body from its jurisdiction, so that it can­not [Page 222] repay it the rewards of Virtue, nor make it feel any penalty for its Vices? Or if it be a punish­ment to the Body to exist no more, why do those dy who in consideration of their Virtue and Pie­ty ought to obtain some recompense for their bo­dies? For the course of the World is such, as we noted above, that in this life neither the greatest part of crimes are sutably punisht, nor the least part of compensations distributed; and the Colicks, Megrims, Catarrhs, Palsies, Goutes, and Stone hinder us from boasting of having found our corporeal beatitude here. Yea if death be a thing natural, as they conceive, it cannot be a punishment to the body for the Vices to which it is addicted. For that which is natural may in­deed be an infirmity or misery, but not a punish­ment; which ha's no place but in retribution for sin; and because things which are purely natural arrive to us, whether we sin or not. And besides the Vicious would be no otherwise treated then he which is not so, and he that is not Vitious would have no better a condition then he that is culpable. Which perverts all order of Justice and all Wisdom of Providence.

But there daily falls out a certain accident in Life, of which, in case death be natural, noman can give a pertinent reason nor acquit the Providence which governs the world of blame. Namely that Infants dye at their birth, and even some are ex­tinguish'd in the Womb. To what purpose were it to have lodg'd a Soul so little a time in a body, that it had not so much leasure as to know its ha­bitation? And since, as they teach, 'tis the Soul it self that fashions and disposes and contrives its [Page 223] mansion, why is it ruin'd before she can enjoy it, without hope of ever seeing it re-edified. And as to the poor wretched body which is not yet sensible of its condition, what is it the better for having been so little a while, or what hath it com­mitted that it must be no longer? I know well that it is taught that it is better to Be then Not to be, and I do not gainsay it: but yet a Being of so little duration is of no great comfort: and he would seem not to satisfie right reason, who be­ing ask'd why he breaks an excellent piece of workmanship incontinently after he had made it, without having reap'd any use of it either to him­self or any other, should answer that it was suf­ficient that he had given it a being of half an hour. For it was not to experiment his art that God framed little Infants; there are Proofs enough of that in so many millions of men; he knows it without tryal; and is so expert therein, that eve­ry work of his being perfect, he ha's no cause to repent of or be displeased with it. If it be an­swered that 'tis for the exercise of Parents to train them to patience; were there no more in it but this, the action indeed would have for its end to frame men to Virtue, in which their re­semblance with the Deity consists; but the means that God used to bring them to it, would seem to carry something of inhumanity, of which it is in­congruous that he should propose himself an ex­ample. God, who is so good, & hath so many other means in his hand to lead men to Virtue, would never willingly employ any thereunto, for which he might be accus'd of barbarousness and cruelty; especially seeing it is an accident so frequent, that [Page 224] in a Town of a thousand families, there do's not pass one day in the year in which it do's not happen. 'Tis true, for certain great and important considerations Kings are excused if they some­times commit some act of injustice or violence. But this must be very rarely done, and onely when the safety of the State is concern'd. Yet Lucretia could not contain from crying out, upon the death of Iphigenia, who was sacrific'd for the safety of all Greece, ‘Tantum Religio potuit suadere malorum!’ But that there should dye five or six times as ma­ny Children in the Cradle, as attain to mans e­state, seems an irregularity which not onely an Epicurean, but the most devout and pious amongst the Philosophers cannot but judge unsupportable.

Above all other considerations, the Fear which the thought of death begets naturally in all men deserves our animadversion. For how couragi­ous so ever any may endevour to appear, 'tis as Aristotle calls it, the most terrible of all terrors. And as one hath observed, if Julius C [...]sar, who was magnanimity it self, said that the most unex­pected death was the sweetest and most desirable, which testifies that he resented some dread when he thought of it, what may we think of the hor­rors, which other men have of it. And this Fear does not arise onely from the apprehension, that a man shall exist no more, but it hath something of I know not what other violence and bitter­ness. For otherwise, nature and reason being two things which accord very well together, if [Page 225] death were purely natural, reason would finde something in that consideration wherewith to be comforted, and gently drink off that Cup. But experience shews that the consolations taken from the necessity of Nature, and the example of so many other deaths, are too weak, and of too little efficacy, when the business is to strengthen a soul that trembles at the presence of death. Which if there have been some that were gene­rously resolv'd to undergo, they have been very few in number, and almost none in comparison of so many men, yea Nations, to whom the al­arms of death have been terrible and hideous. For I do not put in the rank of such as resolve gene­rously against it those Caitifs that tye the rope to their own necks, and drink to their companions upon the Ladder. For this is so far from true ge­nerosity conjoyn'd with the discourse of reason, that it is meer stupidness and more then bestial brutality. And it is diligently to be observed, that they who believe not that their Soul is im­mortal, comfort themselves more easily then o­thers do with the consideration of the necessity of death, and say that as the Generations which preceeded their Birth belonged nothing at all to them, because they were not yet in being, so they ought not to care for those which follow af­ter their death, in regard they shall be no longer; and that Agamemnon is dead, and Romulus, and Patroclus, and the Scipio's.

And I believe the greatest part of those that have [Page 226] shewn so high a courage in contemning death a­mong the Pagans, had not much consideration of their future condition. As it is clear by Socrates, who says, in Plato, that he knew not which was best to live or to dye, and that it were a folly to redoubt a thing of which there is no certain knowledge whether it be desirable or to be fear­ed. Whereas they that think seriously of im­mortality, find nothing in nature that encour­ages or comforts them. A sure evidance that death hath something of terror in it which does not proceed from nature, but from something else: for they would at least have more ground of consolation then the others, in the subsistence of the better part of their essence. Now whence can that horror be, but onely that death is the forerunner of divine vengeance, and makes up a part of it already?

If hereupon they agree that it is a punishment for sin; certainly, since all other Philosophers have held it to be simply natural, they cannot know it to be so by any other way then that di­vine revelation, that hath inform'd us by what gate it entred into the World. For none of the Ancients ever found out or could so much as di­vine in a dream what was the cause of it. And so far were they from having it come into their minds, that on the contrary some have believed that Death was rather a gift and gratification to us from the Deity, then a punishment inflicted by his Justice. Which opinion the innumerable mi­series of humane life greatly concurr'd to render authentick: the undergoing whereof being look'd upon as so dolorous, that sometime the de­liverance [Page 227] from them ha's been accounted the greatest good that could arrive. Or if some few have not dared to affirm absolutely that death was a Good, yet they maintain'd at least that it was no Evil, since it rescues men from all calamities which they suffer. To fear death, said Socrates to his Judges, is nothing else but to seem to be wise, and not to be so. For it is to pretend to know that which we do not know; because none knows what death is, nor whether it be not the greatest good that can befall a man. To which Plutark refers that exhortation of an ancient Greek Poet,

So also the greatest part of the reflections of Cicero upon this matter in the first of the Tusculane Questions fall into the Dilemma of Socrates; To wit, that if the soul be extinguish'd with the bo­dy, and so the sense of all things be absolutely a­bolish'd, death cannot really be an Evil; because a man being thereby wholly depriv'd of exist­ence, and exempted from among the nature of things, that which is not, is equally incapable both of Evil and Good. But if the soul survive the Body, death is so far from being an evil, that it ought rather to be accounted in the number of the greatest goods; seeing it delivers from the e­vils of this present life, and puts a man in possessi­on of the contentments of a better: upon which he does not omit to mention the converse with the Heroes, wherein Socrates placed the greatest part of the hopes of his joy. But the business is of higher importancy. For though the Light of Na­ture [Page 228] should have taught men that death is an ef­fect of the justice of God, yet is it impossible (as we shall see in due place) for the same to discover to them the remedy thereof. And I conceive, that though the reason of man should have been able certainly to conjecture what the cause of death is, God himself would have purposely hid it from them, least, not being able to discover the remedy of it, despair should sink and ruine all the World. All other ignorances have been prejudicial, and very often pernicious to men; to this alone we owe the conservation of humane Society. So that we may pertinently apply to this in particu­lar, that which Horace speaks generally of the ignorance in which it hath pleased God we should live, touching events to come;

The sole Word of God (which is the special reve­lation we are in quest of) is that which accords all these differences, and clears up all the diffi­culties and confusions. We shall not dispute at present, whether in his first creation the body of man was naturally so well constituted, that through prudence whereby he was able to avoid all hurtful things, and the use of aliments (which the blessing of God rendred as efficacious for the conservation of life by the good and pure qua­lities which he at first indued them with, as now they are often full of noxious juices, since the curse of God blasted them for our offence) he might without other assistance from the Deity, avoid all alteration and corruption either by dis­ease [Page 229] or Age. God hath in the composure of Gold and Diamonds and other like things, given suf­ficient proof of his power; and hath so exactly temper'd the contrary qualities of the Ele­ments in the constitution of certain bodies, that they seem not subject to any corrupti­on whatsoever. And the long life which the first Men liv'd, even after sin, and the examples of the like we meet with in several profane Histo­ries, and some also, though few, which may be found in the Histories of these latter times, give us enough to judge how firm and durable the life of man would be, were he as exactly and per­fectly fram'd, and the aliments that support him as good, as the estate of Nature in its integrity could have promised. We onely affirm, that though, as the Philosophers thought, the body of man being composed of the Elements, and consequently including contrary and repugnant qualities, would have carried in its self the seeds of death; yet this revelation teaches us that the Wisdom of God would have so provided therein, that if no disorder had hap­ened in the World through sin, the propensity which our bodies have to their own dissipation, would have been restrain'd and hindred by his Providence. For he would have repell'd all sorts of eternal accidents; he would have hin­dred the intemperature of the humors, both by preserving them in right harmony, and supply­ing man with aliments indued with excellent fa­culties and void of all noxiousness; and by in­fusing new vigor of life in time of necessity, to hinder the approach of Old-age, would have [Page 230] maintained man in a vigorous and flourishing consistence, and so given him the immortality, of which we have now nothing left but the desire. Whence likewise the union of the Soul and Body would have continued to eternity, not subject to any important change or evil accident. So that ad­mitting death to be an accident that sutes with the natural principles of the composition of their bo­dies, yet the cause that they do dye is, because it having been covenanted that the conse­quences of a mortal condition should be hin­dred upon condition that man continued in obedience, sin supervening hath changed the dispensation of all that, and effected that death is become in quality of a punishment and ven­geance. And this ought nor to be deemed strange; For there are things which considered in themselves have nothing so shameful in them, but that they may well endure either the presence of another, or the publike day-light, which yet through the disorder befallen in nature are be­come ignominious. Nakedness, which of it self is not dishonest, is become unseemly through sin, which hath caused rebellion in the corporeal ap­petites against reason. So that they who affirm it indifferent to go naked or clothed, shew that extreme profaness hath worn out of their fore­heads that shame which causes others to express their consciousness of sin and the unseemliness of the irregularity of our sensual faculties, so as to be asham'd of their impudence who are not so themselves. Wherefore though death were a natural accident, which yet it is not, the horror of it is too great, to acknowledge no more in it [Page 231] but pure nature and its motions. For why then do Infants dye? We learn from the same revela­tion that that so sudden separation of the soul from the Body is not for ever: but that the being which is given them, though at first it seem's to have been allotted for a moment onely, and by consequence little better then not-being, shall endure eternally, when the considerations shall cease for which it suffer'd the Eclipse of the time that it was to appear in this Life. For the being of man, when it hath once had a beginning, is of perpetual duration; and the time of Death is but as an Eclipse of his course. But this is not the place for this discourse, and therefore we shall add but a word more and pass forward. Whe­ther we consider the justice or the goodness of God, this revelation amply furnishes us what to answer in defence of both. He takes away lit­tle children at their birth, and notwithstanding does not incur thereby any blame of cruelty; be­cause before they were born they deserved that punishment by reason of the natural infection of sin which they drew from those that begat them. And indeed as we crush the Eggs of Scorpions before they are hatcht, not because they have as yet deserved to be destroy'd for any wound which we have received by them, but because in growing up, the seeds of venome which that brood hath by nature will infallibly be exerted to our mischief; so is it sometimes expedient for God to stifle from the wombe such children as have so many seeds of vice in them, that coming to years would do much more mischief then any Scorpion in the World. This the Philosophers [Page 232] never understood, and therefore could not re­turn in answer: But if there opinion were ad­mitted, it would be requisite to defer judging of the merit of Infants till they come to the age that ennables them to manifest and display their Vice. Moreover God resumes some of them back to him­self, whom he pleases to render happy by his goodness. Nor is it necessary that he should per­mit them a longer abode in this life, that so they might be capable of happiness for their practises of Virtue: because he do's not give it as a Salary deserved from his justice by our Virtues, but as a beneficence purely out of his liberality: which likewise the Philosophers never thought of; for according to them, if there remains any beati­tude to be hoped after this Life, it cannot be as­pir'd unto but by Virtue. How then can Infants obtain the same which dye in the cradle, and so are prevented of ever exercising themselves in Virtue? So great are the advantages of them which have this particular revelation above those which reject it; to wit, that we know for what reason we dread death so much, and why it is in­deed to be feared; what the sources are from whence we are to draw our consolations against its agonies; and lastly what is the way to ascribe glory always to the Deity, whatsoever accident happens in the World.

CHAP. VI. Of the Corruption of Mankind; How much it imports true piety to know the Original of it: which we cannot do without a par­ticular Revelation.

THe excellence of the Nature of man is such, that he cannot be considered either in his body or his mind, or in the dominion which he claims over all things, but there are presented very eminent testimonies and tokens of it. The Stature of his body is comely and graceful; not despicable for its smallness, nor unsightly and in­commodious by too great bulk: the Symmetry of his members, his delicate skin, and tender flesh, have an air so transcendently pleasing that all o­ther Animals may seem coursely composed, and made for laborious services, but man alone for­med and designed for empire. Especially in his countenance shines a majesty, that speaks him made to contemplate the heavens, no less then to command on earth. And whereas Brutes have their heads inclined downwards,

As for his Mind, the Sciences and Arts of which he is Author, the capacity to govern Societies [Page 234] and conduct Armies; the Dexterity of forming a design with understanding, and carrying on the same with prudence; of contriving the means industriously to their end, and guiding them thereunto by courses that seem oftentimes con­trary; the faculty of conceiving the Ideas of things which are not as if they were, although compounded of parts absolutely discrepant; the sagacity of knowing how to make use of expe­dients for long Navigations, and tracing wayes in the Sea by direction of the Stars, are sufficient proofs and evidences to evince its excellence. So that they are without comparison more to be ex­cused, who conceiv'd that the Spirit of Man was a small particle deriv'd from the Deity, then they which reduc'd it to the condition of Beasts. Pho­cylides had indeed some reason when he said, ‘ [...].’ As if God in creating man, and indowing him with so divine an understanding, had lent him a little portion of his essence. In like manner, the Empire which he hath over all other creatures shews sufficiently, that it is not for nothing that his mind and body have been indued with so ma­ny eminent qualifications above all other things. The Earth produces for him the necessities and pleasures of life to his contentment, and like a soveraign he employs its stones, marbles & metals to build his palaces, and guild the roofs which he makes of its Cedars. He covers himself with the wool of animals, and insects spin silk for his ser­vice. Notwithstanding his own weakness he [Page 235] ranks Elephants in battel, and makes them sub­servient to his passions without their knowing that they are so. He hath put the bridle in the mouth of Horses, and tamed that proud and fierce ani­mal for his convenience. Even the life of poor beasts is nothing to him for his sustenance; and how terrible soever the Sea be, yet he hath found out means to fail upon it securely, and to con­joyn nations by commerce, whom vast distances of Oceans have divided.

But notwithstanding all this, his corruption appears so manifestly, that there is none but ha's observ'd it. For one comely and perfectly well composed person, there will ever be found a hundred that have somewhat of difformity. There are always some impotent and less-favoured by nature, some one-ey'd and lame, and even some persons born to Kingdomes, whose structure and conformation of members is pitiful or ridiculous. We are subject to so many diseases, that some­times one single person suffers more of them in his life then all other animals together of a whole province.

The corruption of his Mind is extremely great. Not to speak at present of that ignorance which is common to all, and the most knowing complain of with good reason; although it may seem that man having been made to serve himself with all things, he ought at least to know them: The Evil which he commits both against others and himself, hath given occasion to One hereto­fore to say, That as it were better to give no wine to sick persons, because if it profits one, it hurts more; so it would have been better not to [Page 236] have allow'd man the use of reason, since for one good that it does, it causes ten thousand e­vils in the World. There are nothing but Wars of Nation against Nation, yea of the same Nati­on in its own bowels. In Cities there are sediti­ous, in families tumults; The Husband and Wise do not accord in the same bed, whose souls notwithstanding ought to be cemented together. And that which is more strange: every one is not at agreement with himself, our natural instabili­ty disquiets us, our passions turmoile us, our de­sires and jealousies fret and devour us; and which is a lively token of our corruption, in what condition soever we be, I do not say tole­rable onely, but even honorable and desirable by others, we are never contented with it. That which a while since we ardently desired, we soon after despise; and what we made no account of when we injoy'd, we resent its loss with sor­row; thus condemning our own judgement of error, frequently with remorse for suffering our selves to be transported with passion and appetite. Witnes that excellent Satyre of Horace, in which he introduces old soldiers complaining that they are not Merchants, and Merchants envying the hap­piness of the military life. The Lawyer there extolls the tranquillity and peace of the Husband­man, who also esteems himself miserable in com­parison of those that dwell in Cities. So that whether it be chance, or the wish and choice of reason, that puts men upon their course of life, yet there is not one but finds something to dislike in his own, and repines that he is not well at ease, nor so favourably treated as his Neigh­bor. [Page 237] And notwithstanding, were a proffer ten­der'd to exchange conditions: and the Merchant sent to the Campe, and the Soldier to traffick at Sea; as also were the Husbandman become a Law­yer, and engaged in the toilesome affairs of Law-Courts, and the Lawyer oblig'd to drive the Waine, there is none of them but would asmuch disapprove the change. Lastly we need not much exalt our selves for the Dominion which we have over other things; for the Earth produces no­thing but with the labor of our armes and sweat of our brows, and besides recompenses us oft­times with bryars and thistles. The Frost and Mill-dew blast our Vines and Corn, the Cater­piller and Locust devour our hopes; and the re­bellion of animals against us is such, that we are put to defend our selves even against vermine, not onely against Serpents, Dragons, Lyons and Tygers. Whence it is come to pass that the An­cients were so inconstant in the judgement which they made of man and his nature. For after ha­ving spoken so much to his advantage that the ti­tle of King and God sometimes was not sufficient for him, who can but wonder at Jupiters repen­ting in Homer for having given Peleus horses to become partakers of humane misery, where he says that man is subject to more miseries then any other animal upon the face of the Earth.

So some wept upon the birth of their children through compassion that they come into this Scene of troubles, and laught upon the death of their Parents, out of joy that they go out of it; and Euripides says that we ought to do so. In a word, the most usual comfort which they took in death, [Page 238] is that it puts an end to our miseries; and their histories, or fables, affirm that it was sent as a pre­sent from the Gods to the greatest and most excel­lent persons in recompense of their Virtues: as to Cleobis and Biton, for their piety towards Juno; to Agamedes and Trophonius, for their pains in buil­ding the Temple of Apollo at Delphos; and like­wise to Pindar. What therefore can we say that man is? In truth, considering mankind in gene­ral, it cannot be better resembled then to the pre­sent estate of Rome, which is but as the carkass of what it was of old. There are remaining indeed some ruins, and some old inscriptions not-intel­ligible, some fragements of ancient Statues, and defaced monuments and ponderous tombes since the time she was Emperess of the World. But in the whole all this is of so little proportion, that had we no other knowledge of her grandeur by histories, it were as impossible to conjecture thereby what she was fifteen hundred years ago; as it is to guess at the integrity that flourish'd in the first ages by the manners of the present times.

Now of the cause and origine this so deplorable ruine all the ancients both Poets and Philosophers have been ignorant; all their conjectures thereof are dubious and unresolved, and all their asser­tors false. Nor is it difficult to judge how much this ignorance hath hindred them from rendring to God what belongs to him upon this account, and tasting any true and solid consolations in their miseries. For how could they acknowledg his justice in the punishment of mankind, whilst they knew not that this disorder hapned by their [Page 239] own fault? How could they admire his goodness in conservation of the Universe, when they were ignorant that man deserv'd to be reduced to nothing from his birth? How could they have recourse to God for obtaining of him a remedy against such misery, seeing they knew him not; or how could they beseech him to repair their ruins? How could they learn not to murmure against him, if they knew not that the evils they suf­fered were worthily inflicted on them, and as due to their crimes? Lastly, how could they re­strain themselves from suspecting the wisdom or power of him that governs the World, while they were ignorant of any pertinent reason of all this disorder. For as when we observe in a Com­monwealth good and bad laws, and commend­able and unseemly customes mixed together, we conclude that either the first Legislators failed in some particular things, though they hapned right in others, or that later Magistrates degenerated from the Wisdom and Virtue of their Ancestors: so beholding order and confusion jumbled toge­ther in the World, it remains onely to con­jecture that either the wisdom of him that con­trived it at the beginning was defective, or that he could not support and maintain his ancient laws through want of power. I mention not at present the natural avidity of knowledge in us, which can be little satisfied without a particular revelation, as in other abstruse things, so in this which is of such moment, and continually pre­sented to our minds, namely, what should be the cause of so many evils that reign in the World.

In the next place the consolations which they employ against them are very strange. Some comfort themselves with the consideration of necessity; against which it is unprofitable to struggle. And indeed I deny not, but it is good counsel to give to such as are miserable, that when there is no means of deliverance from calamity, to indevor at least to support it with the least im­patience that may be, because necessity is invin­cible. It is good, I say, if it could be put in pra­ctise. But as he that should exhort a man that is in the paroxysm of a violent Colick, to be cheer­ful, would shew himself ridiculous and void of understanding; so he that should counsel a man fallen into some great and irrecoverable distress, to comfort himself because it cannot be otherwise, would deservedly be accounted troublesome and almost barbarous. Can any imagine that it would have been any great heartning to the poor Philo­ctetes, when he made the Sea and rocks resound his lamentable ejulations, and wish'd that some body would cast him down from the precipice of a rock into the waves beneath, for one to have said to him, Friend, there is no remedy, Destiny will have it so; and to wrastle against her decree is to swim against the stream? For this is the cause of his despair, that there is no remedy: were there any hope of it, he would not cry out so loud, but sustain himself with those excellent words of Epicurus, If pain be great, it will be but of short durance. And it would be to no pur­pose in such a case for a man to boast of the in­vincible strength of his courage. Hercules him­self groan'd [...]nd cry'd out in the midst of the [Page 241] flames. In effect, there is no constancy, which the assiduous perseverance of pain do's not at length overcome. Nature ha's not made us of Iron or Steel; but hath given us a tender and delicate flesh, and quick and lively sentiments. In a word, the consideration of Necessity may indeed cause a man to resolve to travel through a bad and dirty way, or to swallow a bitter potion that is soon down; but there is no constancy which is not undermined and worn out by a con­tinual suffering. Others have solac'd themselves with the commonness & generality of the misery conceiving it both injustice and folly, for any particular person to complain of his own case, where all are equally involv'd: As the Proverb hath it, 'Tis the comfort of sufferers to have compani­ons. Thus the Poet Antimachus compos'd an Elegy, wherein he reckon'd up all the disasters befallen to any people that ever he knew, to comfort him­self upon the loss of his wife. But as the Sun, though he shines in common to all that have eyes, yet his light ought not to be accounted less grate­ful and sweet; and as the use of respiration is not less necessary, because all animals equally breath the air: So the condition of unhappy persons is not less painful and grievous, by being common to all, nor the sentiment of great calamities more light by seeing others groan under the same misfortunes. Besides, this kind of consolation seems to me to have something of barbarism and inhumanity in it. If it happen to any one to be condemned to the Gibbet, either justly or unjustly, is it meet for him to desire to behold other of his compatriots executed with him for the diminish­ing [Page 242] of his unhappiness? It was a thing which dis­comforted Phocion at his condemnation to death, that he had fellow-sufferers; his great humanity inducing him to wish, that if possible that heavy sentence might have fallen onely upon his own person.

But they may seem to have had more reason who comforted themselves with the hope of death, that would put an end to all things. Yet who sees not that this was but the consolation of desperate people? For what difference is there be­tween a man that desires death through impatience of his pain, and him that kills himself; saving that one ha's more courage, or is transported with greater despair then the other? Death is naturally accounted an Evil, and even by most men the greatest of all Evils; nor is there any shame or pain but they will undergo for preserving their Lives, even so far as to suffer the mutilation of their arms and legs. Cut off my feet, and after that my leggs (said Mecoenas) and my thighs also, if you please. Provided I do but live, tis enough. What kind of consolation then can that be which is na­turally so much abhorr'd? And how great must their misery be, who place all their comfort in that which is naturally abhorr'd? Must not na­ture have reduc'd us to a deplorable extremity, when there remains no other comfort for us, but such as theirs is, who being stretcht forth on the Wheel on a Scaffold, are told that their sentence is mitigated onely to be hanged? But yet they which think of the immortality of their Souls, cannot comfort themselves by all these means, un­less they be well perswaded of the pardon of their [Page 243] sins which have drawn all these miseries upon them. For if they indure so great evils in this life for their offenses, what can they expect in the other? Certainly we see for the most part, such a person that desired death through impati­ence of his pain, timerously slinks from it when he sees it approaching, and would bargain with any body that could make his Gouts last for fifty years.

Lastly, there have been some that would draw matter of glory from humane miseries, and who held that they were the tryals of Virtue, e­steeming it best for a man to indure evil, because otherwise he can have no knowledg of Patience, which is the most excellent virtue of all. One suffered himself to be brayed in pieces without groaning, and another in the violent fits of the Stone, said, Do thy worst, Pain, yet I shall never confess that thou art evil. But in truth this is a foo­lish wisdom; this Indolence, as Plutark says, is not bought but at the price of brutality. To be a Philosopher of this fashion, a man must put off all humane passions, and be converted into a Stone. As if it were not natural to man to sigh and com­plain, and when he is wrastling with an extreme pain, to wish his deliverance. But yet those are greater fools, who find cause of pride and vani­ty in their suffering. Is it such a cordial chearing to a man who ha's the Colick, Gout, Megrim, or Tooth-ache; who is afflicted with poverty, shame and contempt of the World; who hath lewd children that threaten the Gallows; that is oppress'd and tyrannis'd by great adversaries; hated, tormented, persecuted and reviled by in­feriors; [Page 244] for one to come and tell him that his patient suffering of all this will acquire great glory to him in the world? Certainly if the glory and the sorrow were weigh'd one against another, I conceive there is no man of sense and that is sub­ject to all these evils, but would give all the glory which Caesar and Alexander had both together, to be delivered from them.

The most ordinary consolation (as we touched above) hath been to reproach and accuse God and Nature, which they affirmed was a good mother to other Creatures, but to man an incompassio­nate Stepdame; thus adding impietie to misery. And they have been even so foolish, as to conceit that the greatest part of our mischiefs proceed from I know not what malevolence in the Deity, as if he bare a hatred or envy either to the con­dition or to the prosperity of men. One faith, ‘ [...].’ Another,

And a third,

And indeed I see not, how in the natural impa­tience of our minds, men in so many miseries as they are beset with in the world, could contain [Page 245] from accusing the goodness of God, unless they had been instructed by the Word of God, of the source whence they flow upon us. 'Tis that alone teaches us, that 'tis a beginning of vengeance upon the Wicked, and a fatherly exercising of chastisement upon the Good; Who therefore re­ceive the same with humility in reverence to the will of God, bear it with patience as a thing which they have deserved and far worse, and rejoyce themselves in hope that his wise Providence will so proportion their afflictions and their strength, that they be not overwhelmed with the burden. And that which surpasses all humane imagination, It reveals such a glory to them, for the injoyment of which they are prepared by these sufferings, that in comparison of its weight and its eternity, all that they indure here is light and scarce of a moments duration. There it is that this encour­aging exhortation becomes effectual, ‘Tu ne cede malis, sed contra audentiorito.’

CHAP. VII. Of the Remission of Sins; What knowledge men naturally have thereof; And how much it is the interest of true Piety to he assured of the same. Also, Of the Resurrection of the Body.

WE have proved above against the Epicureans, that there is such a difference between Vice and Virtue, that it is not Places, or Times, or Laws of Magistrates, or Customes of Nations that renders the one commendable, and the other worthy of blame; but their proper nature and essence, which abides eternally equal and uni­form. We also shewed consequently, that as the recompense of goodness is congruous to virtue, so vice ha's a due right to punishment. For o­therwise, what is the meaning of all those ter­rors of conscience, which we shew'd above to be natural to men? And to what end were the Providence of God himself? Who should have taken the rewards of Virtue out of one of his hands, and the arms of vengeance against Vice out of the other? Wherefore I take it now for granted; besides that though I had not proved it, yet they with whom I treat at present, do with­out longer dispute yield it. So that I shall pass directly to speak of the Remission of Offenses which merit that punishment, and of what great [Page 247] concernment it is in order to being truely Religi­ous towards God, to know by what meanes to obtain it, and get full assurance there­of.

Now there are onely four motives which in­duce men to piety and Virtue. The first is that of which alone the Epicureans boast they make any account, namely, the knowledge of the excel­lence of the Deity; to which must be conjoyned (though it agrees not with the principles of Epi­curus, who places the Supreme Good of man in Pleasure) the knowledge of the natural honesty which is in things, and which is lovely and wor­thy to be followed for its own sake. The second is the sense of benefit we receive and profit that ac­crues from both the one and the other. For when we are favour'd by the Deity with some great beneficence, we ought earnestly to be incited to honor him in acknowledging the same. The third is the hope of obtaining some compensation for being Virtuous and exercising piety. And the fourth is the fear of incurring his indignation, by failing in the respective duties of Piety and Vir­tue. As for the first of these motives, we have already shewn, that unless God reveal himself in an especial manner, men live in a profound igno­rance of his nature and his excellence; in which respect it cannot be of much force to excite men to piety. And the case of the second is the same. For although the goodness of God be in infinite maners extended towards men, in their creation, and the conservation of their being, and in such an admirable variety of things which he hath created for their use; yet so it is that none of man­kind [Page 248] ha's ever acknowledged the same as is meet, nor indeed could they, as shall more amply ap­pear. Concerning the hope of recompense (not in this life surely, unless very scantly and after a fashion that does not correspond to the infinite goodness which is in God, but in another) all that men can have of it by the light of nature is un­questionably drawn from the consideration of the benefits which good men receive in this Life, from whence to argue, that he will enlarge his bounty in that which is to come. But divers things hinder a man from being able of himself to take from thence a certain argument for the fu­ture. For besides that those benefits consist on­ly in temporal and frail things, and that it is hard for a carnal man to conjecture by them of eternal and spiritual benedictions, they are blended with so many calamities, with which our Life is con­tinually persecuted, that a man can scarce clearly behold the goodness of God through the instan­ces of his justice, unless he bring a very great at­tention thereunto; and we on the contrary con­sider them very negligently. As therefore when a Prince checks and strikes as much or oft­ner then he caresses, it is hard to be assured of his good will, or to hope great favors from him, un­less one hath a most intimate knowledge of his nature and his counsels, and diligently weigh his actions and their circumstances, his words and gestures, thereby to see to the bottom of his thoughts: so man being naturally so negligent in considering the ways of the Deity, in the medly of effects of his justice and his goodness which appears in the whole conduct of the Universe, [Page 249] cannot without doubt but have all his cogitations and reflections thereupon confused & unsteddy. Is there so much as one to be found in an Age, that sets himself to contemplate the benefits which God hath conferr'd on him, from thence to conceive an assurance for the future, and behold the light of his favour through the darkness and death. His Understanding is naturally too weak-sighted; there are too many things in the world which di­vert it, too many affections in it that fasten it to the Earth. But principally because there is nothing so suspicious as a bad conscience, man well knowing his own great inclination to things displeasing to the Deity, and even to the slighting of his honor and service; his conscience hinders him from hoping any thing from the goodness of God, and objects to it self only his vengeance. So that the knowledge of Gods benefits towards men being so obscure and dubious in them, and on the other side the sense of their own demerit so quick and lively, they cannot but be possess'd with a great measure of fear, without almost any hope at all. Now if the hope of obtaining recompense by ser­ving God be none at all, or as good as none at all, the piety also will be none which uses to be pro­duced by such hope. But there remains fear e­nough; which is that alone which, to speak clearly, ha's induc'd men that have had no other guide in his service but reason, to address to him devotion after their own fashion (as Statius inti­mated in this sentence, ‘ [Page 250]Primus in orbe Deos fecit timor)’ which we will undertake to examine. By fear in the present discourse, I do not understand a re­verence arising from consideration of the Maje­sty of him before whom a man presents himself, which when he does not find himself guilty of any o [...]fence committed against him, may be conjoyned with a cordial love. For a thing that is excellent, great, and adorable of it self, naturally causes fear, & fa tremar altrui di Maraviglia, as the Poet Petrark speaks, makes the spectators tremble with astonishment. But this is no impediment to a violent love and a calme assurance in the consci­ence. But I understand that sort of fear which springs from the sense of a mans own vitiousness, and from the knowledge of a vengeance which he foresees will follow. Now the Nature of this fear is such, to speak generally, that the greater it is, the less there is of hope to escape punish­ment, and likewise less love then ought to be had for him whose indignation and choler we dread. For as the old Poet saies in Cicero, Quem odimus, periisse cupimus. And this is peculiarly verified when things stand in such termes as they do be­tween God and mankind; namely when he that fears, takes supreme pleasure in the things by which he deserved the punishments he is afraid of: So that instead of renouncing his vice by re­pentance, he would not have so much as the least desire of amendment enter into his soul, so trouble­some is it to him to be deprived of the content­ment which he receives in the satlating of his [Page 251] lusts. As a dissolute youth hates his Master to the death that scourges him for his debaucheries; or as a Thief that hates the Magistrate far more, for causing a Gibet to be prepared for him to punish his robberies. Wherefore man being corrupt and a sinner, as every one is convinc'd in his own conscience, and not doubting (however other­wise ignorant) but that God is severe and just; it must necessarily be (things being judged accord­ing to the motions of Nature) that instead of be­ing attracted to piety by Fear, he will rather be induc'd thereby to disclaim it wholly; and in­stead of being inflamed with the love of God, his fear will give him strong aversions against him, and possess him with hatred. But which is more, the less hope there is of obtaining his pardon, the less also is the care to reform his wickednesses. For Vice being full of baits and pleasure, who is he that will deprive himself of a present good and that is in his hand, without hoping that his so do­ing will turn to some benefit or advantage to him? Every one without question chooses rather to so­lace the fear of evil to come, by present plea­sures; which lessen the bitterness of fear accor­ding to the rate that they produce delight. So that if a man hopes to drown his fear absolutely in the pleasures of sin, he takes no care but to in­dulge his lust, and take his swinge without all re­straint. And on this manner are formed the most part of those Atheists so disorderly in all their comportments; who having felt the terror of Gods wrath, have on purpose plung'd themselves into drunkennese, uncleanness, and all other sorts of horrible dissoluteness, to divert the same [Page 252] out of their minds. So that by the custome of sin­ing they have so worn out the sentiment of the Deity in them, and are by degrees become so hardened, that they have scarce lest the least sparke of fear in their conscience. It is true that sometimes (as a drunkard will start up out of his sleep at the sounding of an alarm) when God re­veals his justice in an extraordinary maner, these monsters of men apprehend some sentiment of terror. But as when the Cry is over the drunk­ard falls down again on his pillow, and betakes himself to his former snoring; so the perill is no sooner pass'd in which these people found them­selves, but they return to their accustomed in­sensibility.

Wherefore the means to withdraw men from sin, when they are once awaked with the fear of vengeance, is the hope of pardon; which be­ginning to appear, excites repentance, and with that the love of him from whom favour is hoped. But what can that hope be in this calamitous estate of our nature, if God himself do not pre­sent the occasion of it? Can a man finde it in the Heaven, or in the Earth, or in himself? What argument is there to be had of any from all these things on which he may build a certain assurance? Perhaps it will be objected, that by the same ways whereby we know the Justice of God, to wit, by the consideration of his judgements, we may come to the knowledge of his goodness, namely, by the experience he affords of his benefits which he powres down so liberally upon men. Which I readily concede, and shall add this further, that since men have sinn'd from the beginning and be­yond [Page 253] the memory of all time, and notwithstan­ding their continual offenses God does not cease to do good to them, there may an argument be drawn from thence, that God invites men to re­pentance; Now he would not invite them to re­pentance, unless there were hope of pardon for them; for he does not mock or illude us: but all his actions are serious. Therefore God pre­sents us in the government of the World with grounds to believe that he is just, in exercising judgement upon the wicked; and good also, in extending his beneficencies towards the good; and merciful, in doing good even to such as are wicked: and right reason is able to discern him such in following him by these traces. But there are motions in the corrupt nature of man which frustrate the effect, if God did not provide for it after another manner. For man flyes from the presence of God through fear of punishment, and cannot hinder the prevalence thereof in his Soul; so that as a man affrighted beholds nothing stedfast­ly, but always imagines new occasions of terror, and represents hideous phantasmes to himself; so we are not able to allow our selves leasure to consider attentively this dispensation of the good­ness of God towards the Wicked, nor thereby to assure our selves of obtaining mercy and pardon. As a lewd wretch, whose conscience bears him witness of many hainous crimes, though he should perceive some connivence in the Magi­strate for a time, and his judge shew him some good countenance, cannot but be distrustful of him, and suspect that he dos but differr his punish­ment till another time, and assuredly reserve it [Page 254] for him; Especially, if he hath an opinion that the Magistrate is not such a one as himself, but abhors the wickednesses committed by him. Now we are universally thus principled, that as we hate those whom we feat, so we never bear good will towards them of whom we have some diffi­dence. And the distrusting the goodwil of anyone being a step to fear, is likewise by the same reason a degree to hatred; unless the distrust proceed to such a measure as to be an absolute fear, for then the coldnesse of affection is turned into perfect hatred. Wherefore Man thus distrusting the good will of God towards him, consequently can have but a very slight affection to him; yea he will even become his enemy, inasmuch as the di­strust in this case cannot but be extremely great.

But perhaps it will here be demanded, Whence then came it to pass that all Nations have each of them had its Religion? And why are not all men dissociated instead of liguing together in a religi­ous Society? To which I answer, that the mind of man is not ever agitated with the same emoti­ons, nor constant in the same thoughts; the same passion not always possessing him, nor the same vice. They take their turns, and succede or min­gle one with another. Two things therefore have hindred that men though possess'd with fear, have not abandon'd all service of the Deity; Profaness, and Pride: God permitting the pro­faness of some and the presumption of others to temper the terror of conscience. First profaness; because not weighing sufficiently how much God abominates Vice, and how inexorable his justice is, they often have flatter'd themselves with this [Page 255] thought, that he scarce takes any notice of small offenses, and such as are in the intention and pur­pose onely, that is, in the affections of the will and not in actions really executed. More­over they thought that he was not much incensed but with crimes that turn to some notable detri­ment to the Commonwealth, or carry some blot of infamous improbity; although masculine lust was either justified, or excused or tolerated by the most civilis'd people of Greece. And they were sometimes so besotted in their devotions, that they thought not but crimes of the greatest turpitude might with no great difficulty be expia­ted by their sacrifices, lustrations, religious pro­cessions, mysteries, and Bacchanal solemnities. On the other side Presumption; because not suf­ficiently acknowledging how much they ought to the Deity, they imagin'd that their good works, their offerings, and the exercise of that shadow of Virtue which they pursued, might countervale the offenses they committed: so that if they were balanc'd together, there might be hope not onely to avoid punishment, but more­over to obtain recompense. Upon which ground it was that Socrates being near his end, and dis­coursing of the immortality of the Soul, speaks largely of his hope (in case the Soul be not ex­tinguisht with the body) to go and live with Her­cules and Palamedes and the other persons of high account. But as to asking God pardon of the offenses, he had committed, he makes no menti­on at all of it; because though he spoke always dissemblingly of himself, he had in the bottom of his Soul a great opinion of his own Virtue, and made [Page 256] no great reckoning of his vices, from which notwithstanding he was no more exempt then others. And had his life been of such purity, that the eyes of men could not discern a blot in it (although some have written infamous matters of him) yet when the account is to be made up with God, there needs an other perfection of Virtue then that of his, to satisfie so exact a justice. But yet further. Oftentimes these two Vices of Pro­faness and Presumption have met together in the same subject, and lull'd men with vain hopes into absolute supinity. Whence the excess of Fear hath been retrenched, which would otherwise have at last turn'd into despair, and consequent­ly not only dissipated all communion in Religion, but likewise ruined all humane Society. For Fear restraining man on the one side from absolute contemning the Deity by profaness, on the other side profaness and presumption hinder'd it from precipitating men into that furious despaire which would have overthrown all, and caus'd more horrible agitations in the mind of man, then ever the most outragious Bacchides were sensible of. So that by the mixture, vicissitude & variation of these divers humors ha's Religion been main­tained in the World. But it is easie to judge how sincere that devotion was, which was bred of Fear (a passion that is naturally terminated in ha­tred) Self-presumption, and Misapprehension of the justice of God. Whereas the certain know­ledge of the remission of Sins, of which the es­pecial revelation from Heaven can onely give us assured hope, is a marveillous powerful attra­ctive to piety, out of gratitude towards so ine­stimable a goodness.

But if the Ancients, both Poets and Philoso­phers were so much at a loss concerning the pre­ceding particulars, that they extremely needed some other light then that of nature, to direct them to a firm knowledge of them, they have been much more uncertain in the point of the Resur­rection of the dead; of which they have been so far from determining any thing, that scarce so much as a slight shadow of it ha's been discerned by some few in so many Ages. The Stoicks, in­deed, were of opinion that there would come a day that should turn the Universe into flames, which should be incontinently follow'd with a restauration of all things into their ancient estate. And others thought, that after a certain re­volution of time, the Stars being returned pre­cisely to the point in which they were when all things began to be, all should be renewed, every thing returning again in its order, time, and na­ture. And one Theopompus, according to the re­lation of Diog. Laertius, affirmed that by the do­ctrine of the Magi, who were Philosophers a­mongst the Caldeans, all men must revive again one day, and become immortal. That Passage of Pho­cylides, an ancient Poet and Philosopher is singu­larly excellent;

[Page 258] And I deny not but this is sufficient to shew those that accuse the Christian Religion of teaching ab­surd and impossible things, that those famous per­sons amongst the Pagans would not have accoun­ted them such, if they had understood them; since having onely a dubious and obscure tradition of this transmitted from the hands of their ancestors, yet they publisht and maintain'd it with some confidence. For if they attribute that power to the Stars, how would they have im­paired the credit of Religion which refers the Re­surrection to the power of him that made the Stars themselves? But notwithstanding, these glimpses of light have been so rare, and so sud­denly disappear'd, that scarce any perceived them, not even they from whose mind and hand they proceeded; for I do not conceive Phocylides distinctly understood himself. Besides that there was a great deal of extravagancy in their opini­on. For did Seneca think that after that great com­bustion he should come again into the world and write anew to his friend Lucilius, and once more be under the Tyranny of that monster Nero? Or Lucan, that C [...]sar and Pompey should act over their wars again, and himself compose the Pharsalia again in verse? After which first there must also be another burning of the world, and another Palingenesie or renovation of things. And so to all eternity, the world should after certain revo­lutions be consumed by fire, and like the Phaenix arise again out of its own ashes. But if this must be done perpetually for the future, I see not why it should not have been done from all eternity hertofore; so that there have been already infinite [Page 259] worlds, and infinite more are yet to come: which beside the contradictions that a knowing Philo­sopher finds in so many infinite things existing actually and so successively some after others, is strangely extravagant and absurd to be con­ceiv'd. Moreover, what piety is that which this opinion begat in the minds of them that held it, that thought it thus determined by an in­evitable necessity of Destiny? For according to them God shall have no hand in the matter; but the same destiny that shall carry all things to their period when they are consumed by that univer­sal conflagration, shall likewise give new being to all things. Now there is no obligation to re­turn thanks to God nor to acknowledge his good­ness for being restored into being by the might of destiny, over which God hath no power. Never­theless men are so wedded to their own opinions (howsoever extravagant) that there being Sto­icks at Athens at the time of Saint Paul's preaching there (for as for the Epicureans, it was no won­der if they called him a Babler) and the Stoicks being a Sect to whom the doctrine of the resur­rection and universal judgement ought to be a­greeable, as bringing much light to their own Tenets, yet there were few or none that receiv'd it. Some (saith the Historian) derided it and others desired more satisfactory information of the thing. And yet of how great importance is it to true piety to be fully assured of this truth? For other­wise how shall the goodness of God, which we have abundantly shewn is the liberal rewarder of Virtue, render to the body the free recompense of the service it hath done the Soul in the practise [Page 260] thereof, and of the obedience which its natural appetites have yielded to reason, unless it be rai­sed again from the dust? Certainly, as we said a­bove, man is not onely the Soul, he is the body also; both which contribute respectively to Vir­tue, of which man is capable. Wherefore they ought both to be interested in the reward. And that justice, which is the avenger of sin, and without which the Providence of God would be too narrow and defective, how will that acquit its charge unless it equally punish the body with the soul? Seing they are usually the affections of the body that debauch the mind, and 'tis the plea­sure of the senses that prevents and misguids our reason. But the punishment would not be equally proportioned and distributed to the Soul and Bo­dy, if the soul were miserable to eternity, and the body wholly exempted from it to exist no more. And the condition of the body would be happy in comparison of that of the mind, although the defect of both were equal. Moreover the penalty encreasing proportionably to the dignity of him against whom the offense is committed (for an outrage done to an inferior person is punisht otherwise then that which is committed against a Soverain Magistrate) the justice of God being an infinite power, an immense and unlimited dig­nity and authority, how could the punishment of the body, by being no more, be proportional to the justice of God? Or if the justice of God can be satisfied for the offense committed against it, with the extinguishment of the body without re­vival to perpetuity, why is not the soul also ex­tinguisht with the body without remaining ex­posed [Page 261] to a continual and perpetual punishment? Certainly it must either be that the body suffers with the soul eternally for satisfaction of the justice of God sutably to his infinite dignity, or the soul must be extinguish'd together with the body. But neither the justice of the God, nor the nature of the soul suffers the same to perish or be abolish'd, and therefore the body must be raised from death to partake of the same compensation with it. Moreover of how great importance is it for consolation of our minds against the fear of death? For death being naturally terrible to all men, and the separation of the soul from the bo­dy full of bitterness and anguish, what more ef­fectual comfort can be received, then to expect after a peaceable repose in the grave to be raised by the hand of God from it, not to restore us the injoyment of this life, that so we might dye over again, but to live an eternal life in unexpressible contentment? Besides, what sweeter consolation in the loss of our friends, which is oftentimes more grievous to us then death it self, then the hope that they and we shall one day arise from the earth to dwell together in celestial glory? Cer­tainly, he that represents to himself what joy friends receive here, upon an unexpected meet­ing after divers years absence, may in a manner conjecture with what gladness we shall resent the day of that happy resurrection. Whence I conceive that, excepting the assurance of pardon of sins, which delivers the soul it self from the apprehensions of death eternal, there is nothing so capable of inflaming the mind of man with love towards God, as the hope of resurrection. For [Page 262] next to deliverance from the death of the soul, which consists in the sense of a remorse and eter­nal distress, what can be more sweet then the deliverance from the death of the body, which is to have no more sense, nor motion, nor life, nor being? And from the doctrine of the Resur­rection (however profane men gainsay it) results an admiration of the Wisdom of God, in reuniting things which nature had so straitly conjoin'd to­gether. For since death (as we have shewn) is not a natural thing but an accident superven'd contrary to the purpose of nature, and the de­sign of the first formation of man, who in regard of the excellence of his soul ought to be an im­mortal creature, though in reference to his body he was composed of the matter of the Elements; what is there more sutable to Divine Wisdom, then to reunite without injury either to his justice or his goodness, what death had separated by a kind of violence? For, to repeat those words of of Phocylides, it is not meet to dissolve the fair harmony of man. And lastly, though the power of God may be well understood other ways, yet herein is one of the greatest and most admirable testimonies of it; to wit, that from the earth, and the Sea, and the entrals of birds and beasts shall be required the bodies of men; and that their ashes which are dispers'd and confus'd amongst the Elements, shall be recover'd and recollected with so much art that every one shall resume his own body without confusion or mixture. Whence is it therefore, that this doctrine gives offense and scandal to some? Is it repugnant to the Wisdom of God? We have prov'd it agreeable thereun­to. [Page 263] And it would argue defect of wisdom in God, if he knew not to distinguish in this confu­sion of the Elements the places from whence to retake one day the reliques of our members. Is it impossible to his power? Surely no, if we ac­count the same infinite; and it is verily infinite, if it be divine. To conclude, doth it encounter rea­son? There is none of us but would naturally de­sire the resurrection of his body, if he esteemed it a thing possible. Wherefore seeing God re­veals to us both that he will and can do it, what is to be doubted more, but that reason consents in this desire with nature.

CHAP. VIII. What understanding can be had of true Virtue without a particular Revelation,

HItherto we have shewn that in the things which relate directly to God and his service, and the motives of true and sincere piety, men have either been without a particular revelation, or absolutely blind, or so unresolv'd and waver­ing in what they knew thereof, that they could not from thence render any true devotion to God, nor receive any solid consolation to them­selves. Our next task should be to shew that they likewise needed a particular revelation for the knowledge of true Virtue, which ought to be followed amongst men: but my design will not permit me to deduce that point at length; onely I am to desire the Reader to take notice of two things. Indeed I will not question but that they have had far more knowledge of true vertue by the light of nature alone, then they had of the requisites and concernments of true piety. The excellent instructions of Philosophers, commend­able Laws of Republicks, virtuous deeds of great personages, and the universal consent of all Na­tions any thing civilis'd, shew by the account they made of Virtue and its excellence, that they were clearer sighted therein then in other parti­culars. Yea there have been found men amongst them, who being considered onely on the out­side and by their actions of valour, justice, hone­sty, [Page 265] moderation, reverence towards parents and love to their country, might seem in a manner worthy to be parallel'd with those that have been illuminated by a clearer light of truth; I mean comparatively, as to things of that nature. And the reason of this is not difficult to be rendred. For besides that the knowledge of the duties of men one towards another is somewhat more proportionate to their understanding, then of those which regard the Deity (whence it is, that Cicero is much more certain and positive in the description of our mutual obligations in his Books de Officiis, then he is in the doctrine of the Nature of the Gods) there ha's been herein an in­fluence of the divine Providence. For God having purposed that the world should subsist till a certain time which he ha's prefixed to exercise judge­ment, and that amongst all sorts of Nations the seed of them should be preserved whom he would elect for his people, for which cause he yet main­tains the earth in its secundity; ha's presided in an especial manner over the minds of Legislators and Philosophers, to guide them to teach things sutable for the conservation of humane society, and over the minds of the people in general to cause them to comprehend and conform to the same. For if men had been as ignorant of right and honesty, as of God and what directly relates to him, instead of assemblies of men, Cities and Commonwealths, there would not have been seen in the world but troops of savage beasts and great parties of robbers; whence all had been re­duc'd into an horrible chaos. Nevertheless as well in this as in other things the particular revelati­on [Page 266] of the will of God, would have been not onely profitable for the better civilising of them, but also of absolute necessity in order to giving them a saving knowledge of him.

For in the first place, since God is the author and Lord of all the world, and its soveraign Le­gislator and governour, was not man made to glorifie him and to direct all his actions and cogi­tations to that end? And as his supreme good lyes in his communion & conjunction with God, ought not also his glory be his highest aim? And notwithstanding, where is there any amongst the Pagans, even of those who were the greatest admirers of Virtue, that proposed as the end of his actions the glory of the Creator of the World? that so much as thought that was the end to which they ought to tend? Some have aimed at their own glory, and to gain a reputa­tion among their fellow-Citizens, and to draw them to admire their Virtues, in stead of ascribing them to God. Others have made Virtute subser­vient to avarice and pleasure (as Epicurus) and be­lieved her lovely onely in that regard. And o­thers, though extreme few, held virtue in esteem indeed because of its natural dignity; but virtue being as it were the image and resplendency of God, it was not half reflected by being esteemed, since it was not thereby referr'd to the honor of its model, and the source from whence it was de­riv'd into the world. Further, what miserable va­luers were they of its dignity? The greatest part condemned onely Vices that appear in exterior actions: as if virtue ought not to be aswel the rule of purposes and intentions, as of the works of the [Page 267] hand or corporeal deportment; or as if external actions were not good or had onely so far as they represent the internal disposition of the heart, and take their tincture from it. But if some have not onely regulated the actions of men by vir­tue, but also their wills and counsels; yet all have generally err'd in this point, that they have not retrenched the corruption of vice near enough to the quick, but have excused the first motions that swerve from reason, as not being in our own power; and could not understand that there ought to be in man such a harmony of all his faculties amongst themselves, that not the least rebellion might arise in his appetites against right reason. Of which too if some have spo­ken; it ha's been one of a thousand, and as it were by chance. Besides, how shameful are the enormities which the greatest personages a­mongst them have committed in that which na­ture teaches most clearly? What was in Plato's mind to introduce a community of women into his Republick? who can but blush at the reading what Plutark hath written concerning love? yea who is not rather astonished then asham­ed at it? What were the Lupercalia of the Romanes, and the Bacchanalia of the Greeks? How laud­able was the custome amongst both those people of lending forth their Wives, if not receiv'd and practis'd commonly, yet at least not con­demned, but authoris'd by the example of Cato himself? Was it not needful therefore for God to reveal himself from heaven, for the reducing marriage to its primitive honesty, and teaching men by his own voice what they could not learn [Page 268] from nature, how loud soever she speaks therein. And I do not now mean the vulgar people, whose virtue was very scarce, and onely a lit­tle in shew, but the most eminent, and who by the opinion of their virtue drew the eyes and ad­miration of others.

It is not impertinent here to insist upon what we touched briefly and transiently above, to wit, that they knew not what true patience was. For it consists not, as they conceived, in the not feel­ing of evil, no more then a stock or stone, nor in the yielding to necessity because it were to no purpose to resist it; but it consists in a most hum­ble acquiescence in the will of God, who dispo­ses of all by his Providence; and in bearing such a reverence to his Majesty, as not onely not to murmur against him because it would not pro­fit any thing to do so, but not to be at all impati­ent, because it is not fitting or lawful. The Creature being bound to obey his Creator even to that point, that if God should purpose to acquire glory to himself from undeserved afflictions laid upon it (though he never does so) yet the crea­ture ought not to repine, but rather venerate his wisdom, so as not to inquire why he does it, and to have such an humble sense of it self in comparison of his Majesty, that God might with­out doing any wrong, even make use of its ruin for the illustration of his glory. For who does not find this true upon a due perpension? who comparing the nothingness (as I may so speak) of man with the infinite Majesty of God, can think we ought to complain of him in case it should please him to treat us so? Us, I say, who use so [Page 269] absolute a right over other animals, who have neither made nor supported them, and have none but a borrowed authority to do it. Although there is this proportion between them and us, that we are equally creatures; whereas between God and us there is no commensurability in any thing whatsoever. Even Kings and Monarks claim such a right over their subjects, and very many generous Nations concede the same to them with­out reservation.

But besides all this there are two most excellent virtues taught by divine revelation, which the Pagans were so far from ever reckoning such that they accounted the vices contrary to them for laudable virtues. The first is Humility, of whose recommendation there is no footstep nor shadow to be found in their writings. For it ha's been as an epidemical disease of their minds, to consider themselves in their own plumes & to esteem not less gloriously of them and of our na­ture then if we were as little Gods upon earth; in which respect they sometimes dar'd (as we have seen) to compare, yea to prefer themselves be­fore the Gods themselves. Whereunto the igno­rance of the true God ha's contributed more then can be imagin'd, and likewise the fictions of the Poets concerning all those Romantick Divinities which were adored by the vulgar. And in truth I see not why any honest woman ought not pre­fer her self before Venus, according as she is des­crib'd to us; since Immortality by which alone she surpass'd humane condition, gave her no other advantage saving to practise her infamous dulteries to eternity: as Aristides and Phocion had [Page 270] grounds to prise themselves much above a thee­vish Mercury, or a cruel and bloody Mars, whose Deity had no other excellence but to be a shelter of impunity from their crimes. It was fit there­fore to make men know in the first place, that though they should have continued in the state of perfection in which they were placed at their first creation, yet in comparison of God they are but inconsiderable worms upon the earth. Next, that they are fallen so far below themselves, that there is no proportion between them and their first being; and so to teach them to despise themselves in comparison of God, yea to think low of themselves in comparison of themselves; and, which is an infallible sequel of the little esteem we make of our selves, not to contemn any person whatsoever; but to prevent and go beyond all the world in respect, and to reverence all such in whom God hath put any mark of his eminence, whether in rare qualities of the mind, or in authority and power.

The other Virtue consists in the obedience which we render to Kings and Magistrates and all superior Powers. For because the Pagans did not perceive any particular Providence of God in the establishment of politique or civil order in the world, but thought that it was an institution either purely humane, every people having transfer'd into the hands of one or more of their fellow-Citizens the administration of their com­mon laws, and the avengement of their violati­on; or at most but natural; in as much as those to whom nature had been more bountiful in re­spect [Page 271] of understanding or prudence, to conduct others, undertook the management of Republicks as the best experienced pilots take upon them the steering of the ship; whence they made no scruple where they conceiv'd the persons entrusted with power abused the same, or that the case were ir­regular and preposterous in nature, the less wor­thy possessing themselves of the government, to rebel against their authority, and even to lay violent hands upon those whom they called ty­rants, and unjust invaders of the liberty of the people. And there is scarce any thing found more ordinary among their writings then Elogiums of Assassins that had slain Tyrants, nothing more honored in the publick places of their Cities then their Statues, nothing that they proclaim so loud as the defense of their liberty, nor any thing that ha's been more advantageously men­tioned then the killing of the Tyrants of Thebes, and the murder of Julius Caesar for the deliver­ance of the Commonwealth of Rome. But di­vine Revelation ha's carried our knowledges much higher, and corrected the deficiency of their sentiments who were not guided by its light. It hath taught us first, that there ought to be two kinds of societies in the world; The one Religious, which respects the service of God; The other onely Civil, in reference to the affairs of this life; and that God hath so dispensed things that he ha's impower'd each with its authority, and esta­blish'd over each its governors and rulers. So that as the Civil Power hath nothing to do to superintend in the Religious Society, to give laws to the consciences of men; but ought to [Page 272] submit it self to those which God hath establish'd therein: So the Spiritual Power hath no right to partake with the Secular, which is ordained for the conduct of the world; but ought likewise to be subject thereunto, without pretending to any prerogative over Kings and Magistrates. Moreover, it hath taught us, that although it be not forbidden to people truely free, that is, which have no soverain power above them, but have themselves the authority of their affairs in their hands, to defend their liberty against such as would oppress it; yet when once they have been subjected, and themselves own'd those that subdued them for their soverains, they are ob­liged to render faithful obedience to them. And in reference to the other Society, which con­cerns Religion, when once it hath gain'd some reasonable form in a place, and order is esta­blish'd therein, it is the duty of particular per­sons to obey willingly the constitutions which are made therein by those who have the power so to do. So that neither the one of these Socie­ties may attempt any thing against the other, be­cause their rights are separate, and their admini­stration distinct; nor any one whatsoever in ei­ther of them disturb the publick order by rebel­lion, because every man in his station is oblig'd to own it for superior to which he owes obedi­ence. And this obligation ought to be esteemed in­violable, not onely in reference to conservati­on of order thereby in either of these two Socie­ties, of which every good man should be desir­ous; but moreover because they have God for their Author, and therefore they ought to be [Page 273] honoured with reverence, by reason of the au­thority of him from whom they derive their O­riginal. So that as piety towards God is as it were the Pillar of the Religious Society, and Justice of the Civil, so there are onely these two cases in which it is lawful for particular persons to disobey these two Powers: First, when in the Religious Society something is commanded con­trary to piety: for at such times as the superior abuses his authority directly against God, and im­poses upon the conscience impious, idolatrous and superstitious laws, the inviolable command­ments of God ought without contradiction to overweigh the decrees of men. Secondly, when Magistrates ordain something contrary to Justice and Virtue; for in such cases using their authori­ty directly contrary to the end for which it was given them (to wit, to induce men to things ho­nest and commendable, and to contain them in the observation of the same) none are bound to yield obedience to them. Thus in the One the will of God is the rule, and in the Other that ho­nesty and equity which nature it self teacheth. In other things, wherein piety do's not suffer, nor honesty and the natural right of things is vi­olated, there is nothing so well-pleasing to God as a ready and willing subjection, though it were even painful and laborious: So far is God from permitting attempts against the one or the other, of those whom he ha's constituted in the government, either to diminish their authority or deprive them of Life. In effect, though Brutus and his companions thought they had done an heroick action in the as­sassinate [Page 274] of C [...]esar, and Cicero extoll'd it as high­ly as if it had been commanded by some Oracle of God himself; yet it is certain that it was an evil and culpable attempt, with which their me­mories will for ever be stained. I shall not here speak of the ingratitude of which they that ex­ecuted it may be justly impeached, there being none of them but had received some remarkable benefit from Caesar, or had their lives preserved by him. Nor shall I insist upon the success that came of it, that instead of freeing the people of Rome, they were the cause that they fell under the hands of three or four masters more rigorous then Caesar was, and who raign'd after a more absolute and bloody manner. I shall also omit to press what was so carefully observed by the an­cients, that there was not one of the Murderers of that Prince but perish'd by a violent death, and some by their own hands, and with the same sword wherewith they had slain him: al­though the vengeance of God be manifest enough therein. I shall onely say, that when Caesar was after his victory created perpetual Dictator, the people themselves all together had no power in them to take his authority from him; much less had fourteen or fifteen particular persons any just cause to conspire against his life. For the perpetual Dictatorship being a Soverain Dignity and independant on any other but God, the peo­ple of Rome had indeed a power to confer the same, by voluntarily surrendring up their liberty to him; but after they had conferr'd it, it was not in their power to revoke or annull it, so long as the person they had invested with it was [Page 275] living. Wherefore it ought not to be doubted but that the death of Caesar was a horrible parri­cide.

Hereunto ought to be conjoyned the precept we have not to exercise our own revenge our selves. For since Revenge, if good and lawful, is an administration of justice, and not a satia­ting of our passions; there being none but God that administers justice in the World, as being the sole governor of it, either immediately and by himself, or by the intervention of Magistrates (whom he hath appointed guardians of Laws and conservators of humane Society) he that receives an injury, ought not to do himself reason for it, in as much as thereby he would indulge and con­tent his own passion, and not execute a just and lawful vengeance; but it is fit that reparation be done him for it by their means to whom the care of right and preservation of laws is committed. And if these fail him, he must attend that God himself do it for him, having a perswasion that he is the preserver of the rights of all, and that when men sail in their duty he does not forget to correct their faults.

For a man to attempt satisfaction of his wrong himself, would be to invade the government of God; and to slight or implead the Magistrates, would be an express overturning of things esta­blish'd by God himself. To him it belongs to re­venge the injuries of private, and the injustices committed by publick persons. Nevertheless it is evident that if they have little understood the moderation which ought to be held in point of revenge, and the means of pursuing satisfaction [Page 276] of an injury; they have been yet more ignorant of that precept which Wisdom it self gives us (and right reason too, if we would hearken to it) Of loving our very enemies, and procuring good to those that offend us. And yet if the ex­cellence of Mans nature consists in resemblance with God; since God is so good and so patient towards the Wicked, and notwithstanding their offenses, their crimes and blasphemies, awaits their amendment with so great indulgence, and invites them thereunto with perpetual clemency and goodness, how can man ever attain his per­fection, if he do not imitate God in this exam­ple? Moreover since the publick good is with­out scruple to be preferr'd before that of any sin­gle person, and that if there be any good in the hatred which we bear to our enemies, it lies on­ly in some particular contentment, which we re­ceive by following the motions of our nature (if the pleasure of letting loose the bridle to one's passions may be called good, which ought rather to be restrained by right reason) and since on the contrary the good of the Commonwealth and humane society receives advancement by the virtue and prosperity of our enemies; how much more prevalent reason is there to love then to hate them, that is, to desire that they may become good and happy for themselves and ornaments of the Commonwealth in general, ra­ther then to wish their shame and calamity for the gratifying a particular passion? Lastly, since Hatred is a desire of seeing evil befal the person we hate, and no man ought to undergo evil but he that deserves the same by his wickedness; [Page 277] how can we be virtuous our selves, if we desire that others should become vicious; seeing a good man should wish that if possible all the world might become like himself, and virtue is a good that naturally desires to be communicated and expanded? Or how can we desire that they were virtuous and yet calamitous together? Nevertheless the Philosophers have scarce seen so much as a shadow of this doctrine? Where­fore we conclude in brief, that even in the knowledge of true virtue as well as in what concerns the nature of God and his legitimate service, humane reason is so defective, that without the aid of a supernatural light, it can neither constitute nor practise any thing conside­able and of worth.

CHAP. IX. What the principal tokens and evidences are by which this particular Revelation may be known and distinguish'd.

BUt admitting (will some say) That the reasons above alledged induce to confess that a par­ticular and celestial revelation is either highly important, or absolutely necessary; yet where shall we find it? For all sorts of Nations have boasted of the same; and the mind of man is so incertain in its judgments, that in this variety and confusion of voices, wherewith every one pretends to it, it is difficult if not impossible to be resolved. We are sufficiently sensible of our need, but we are at a loss in finding wherewith to satisfie it; and in case we should have found it, yet we can scarce be assured that that were the true remedy of our evil. For as some per­son may swallow poison while he conceives he uses a good medicament, so another when he uses a safe remedy, may yet think that he takes some noxious poison. To this difficulty we must give an answer before we pass further to the ex­amination of their opinion, who acknowledg­ing an especial declaration of the will of God in reference to his service, do nevertheless esteem the external professions of all Religions indiffe­rent.

It is most certain that if it were so, that some person had the true revelation of the will of God in all these things and in the declaration of all these truths, and yet did not believe that it was proceeded from God, it would be in no wise profitable unto him. No, not if he were but in suspence concerning it. For it is not with this as it is with drugs. A good medicine may be gi­ven to a man of distemper'd fancy, which will not fail to do him good, though he believe it an invenom'd potion. Because the Physick needs not the intervention of opinion or understand­ing to produce its effect, but directly acts upon the humors of the body and the parts affected. But here the medicine is taken and digested onely in the mind, and works not but by the mediation of belief, and that a certain, clear, and setled one, which excites the passions and affections; for this is the property of all perswasions that are impressed of a thing that must be reduc'd to pra­ctice, such as the doctrine of piety and virtue is. But if on the other side, we receive and em­brace with a firm belief that doctrine of truth re­vealed from Heaven, it is absolutely impossible for it not to display its power, and make us feel its efficacy. So that all the difficulty lies in being perswaded, and finding certain tokens or evi­dences which may make it be indubitably own'd. All Nations indeed boast of having it; neither ought it seem strange that they do so. For though the Understanding be to the soul as the Eye is to the Body; yet there is this difference in the re­semblance, that when a man is born blind, though by the many slips and stumbles that befall him at [Page 802] every step, he observes well that there is some­thing necessary for his guidance wanting to him, yet cannot one impose so far upon him, how de­sirous so ever he be of sight, as to make him be­lieve that he does really see: His own sentiment & experience invalidating the credit of those that should go about to abuse him with such an ima­gination. And if there wasever found a blind person that imagin'd that he saw, he had not onely darkness in the eyes of his body, but also distemper and disorder in his mind. In the un­derstanding the case is not the same; Because it is not become extinguish'd by sin in us, but we discourse and reason upon the appearances of things, and indeavor to discern the true from the false; and there being many things absolutely false, which are partly colour'd with false shews, and partly find a faculty in us easily to be deceiv'd; hence, I say, it happens to us, that re­ceiving the false for the true, we nevertheless imagine we have embraced the pure verity it self. And there are principally two things which here render us lyable to imposture: The first is, that not being able of our selves to invent or dis­cover the truth in the point of the knowledge of God and of his service, and having not in our corrupted and obscured minds any certain rules to examine what is propos'd to us concerning the same, all that seems to surpass our capacity, and ha's any thing of strange and extraordinary, if it be presented to us as divine, is readily ad­mitted, and our ignorance conciliates authority and reverence to it; as Lucretius saies,

As a man that should have never seen true Di­amonds, but onely heard some body perhaps as ignorant in Jewels as himself, speak of them, might be easily gull'd by the first counterfeits that were presented to him, and would take that to be brought from the bottom of the Indian Seas which was but gather'd from the rocks of his own country. The second thing is the sense of our necessity, which causes that as famish'd peo­ple eat and make good cheer with Garlick and Huskes, so men receive all sorts of Religions as divine, by reason of the sense that the consci­ence hath of its natural want, though they scarce ought to be counted amongst Sciences purely humane. Which though it be so, yet the truth of God is but one, uniform, and like to it self, and is not found but in one certain place. For would God who is one and immutable, reveal the man­ner of serving him in one place, after one fashi­on, and after another in another? It is not in this case, as it is with Princes who have divers Kingdomes, whereby it is perhaps neces­sary for them to comply with the customes of Nations, their laws and languages, be­cause it would be incommodious and difficult to rank them under the same constitutions, every people having their peculiar inclinations, and every climat its manners of acting, which is im­possible to be alter'd without danger of invol­ving all in great disorder. And though the gene­ral [Page 282] maximes of Policy, and the foundations it ha's in the natural justice and honesty of things be ever immutable and uniform, yet this do's not hinder but that several Commonwealths may be constituted after different formes, and the par­ticular laws upon which they are founded be accommodated and varied sometimes in one case and sometimes in another according to the diver­sity of circumstances. But the nature of God being always like to it self in all Ages, and the nature of man always one in all Nations, there must be always one and the same service to God, and to men one and the same rule of piety and virtue. If there be a difference found therein at any time, it is (as we shall see God willing in due place) in things which are not essential to Religion, but in some external shew of things of a midde quality and indifferent in themselves. So that either God ha's declared this his will but to one Nation alone, or if he ha's declared it to more, it ha's been by an equal and uniform revelation. And whereas Religions are extremely confus'd, this must have some tokens to distinguish it from all others, whereby it may be infallibly known: which are now the business of our enqui­ry.

Without question the best knowledge that can be had of the nature of a medicament is from the good, ready and certain relief received by it in a disease; After which experience there is no need of searching further into its qualities, un­less to gather occasions of admiring it more. In like manner, the best knowledge that can be had of the revelation of heavenly truth in this point, [Page 283] is by proof of the comfort that it affords to the souls of men, and by its efficacy of cleansing them from the corruption of sin; of which if we do not complain, we are more then stupid and insensible. But on the one side they that know the truth by this evidence, scarce require any o­ther; and on the other side we have now to do with them that cannot know this truth by the experience of its virtue, till they have first had some tast of it by an other way. Wherefore it is necessary for us to speak of it in another sort, and to shew briefly, that provided a man brings the like docility to attain it that he does to the study of humane Sciences, that is to say, a mind clear of all prejudice, affected to truth, and free from importunate and contentious quarrelling, the search is not laborious, nor the attainment difficult; so far are the pains imploy'd there­in likely to be unprofitable.

Indeed, I conceive, there is none will deny but that if there be a Religion in which all the truths we have above considered, are found, either wholly revealed, or illustrated sufficiently to de­termine the irresolution of the mind of man, and to fix his agitations, by contenting the insatiable desire of knowledge which is in us, that this Re­ligion is divine. For since there never was not onely any Nation, but not so much as one single person in any Nation that comprehended all these truths together; What God is in his own nature, How he hath created the World, In what manner he governs it, What is the cause and origine of Death, Whence all the disorder we behold in man and in the world came to pass, [Page 284] where we are to seek the knowledge of the means to obtain remission of our sins, What hope there is of the Resurrection of the body, yea What certainty there is of the doctrine of the immortality of our souls; nor any of them solid­ly and distinctly: do's it not follow that the do­ctrine which ha's so clear'd up all these truths, that for the future there remains nothing to be doubted concerning them, or known, for the satisfaction of our minds therewith, must neces­sarily proceede from some other then the mind of man? For there is no more to be expected af­ter tryal of the utmost power of our understand­ing in the discovery of these points. New Coun­tries have in our times been found in the East and West Indies, which were unknown to the Anci­ents. But the Sea and the Wind carried the dis­coverers thither; there needed but a little more daring, to sail forth from the coasts of one's country into the main Sea, and a something ex­acter observation of the Needle and the Stars to direct the course: and the arrival upon, and be­holding of those regions was an indubitable ma­nifestation of their existence. But should the World be turned about from East to West, and from North to South, there would be seen but one and the same Sun and the same Heavens, Lands, Seas, Rivers and Men, and the same order in the nature of things, which the Philo­sophers contemplated in Greece and Italy, the Druyds in Gallia, the Brachmans and Gymnosophists in India, the Magi and Astrologers in Chaldea, and Priests and mysterious divines in Aegypt. The ve­ry Scythians had their Sages who addicted them­selves [Page 285] to the search of things humane and divine. Therefore there must either spring up an other new kind of men, or it must not be hoped that any should see clear in this wherein all others have been blind. Now if this revelation be not proceeded from the mind of man, it must be come from God; no other could have given it us. For Demons cannot here reasonably be brought into the Scene. If they be, I demand whether they were good or bad. If good, they did it by the instinct and command of God; and so we have what we drive at. If bad, how could they which are the authors and lovers of lying teach us truths which oppose and condemn them, and ruine the dominion which they bear over the minds of men by means of ignorance? And since all such truth tends to the glory of God, and the wellfare of mankind, these especially, how could wicked Demons be induc'd to communi­cate the knowledg of them to men, being equal­ly enemies to Heaven and Earth? And in as much as every Religion professes either to teach things or to contain mysteries surpassing the apprehensi­on of humane understanding (for there never was any but pretended to deep secrets not to be sounded by the Reason of man, that so it might be more venerable) if there be sound one in which there are certain doctrines raised above our reach, so interwoven with truths which we comprehend, and whereof it ha's given us an absolute certainty, that they illustrate and con­firm one another; so that what we understand assures us of the truth of that which we do not fully comprehend, and what we do not perfect­ly [Page 286] comprehend connects truths together already understood, as a necessary cement to hinder the dissipation of the whole work: who can doubt but that it is God that connected those truths to­gether by an indissoluble concatenation? For without doubt they are truths, though we do not comprehend them; seeing they support others, of whose evidence reason is convinc'd, which would otherwise be ungrounded and infirm; their verity, I say, appears from this considerati­on; and it must needs be some other then the mind of man that ha's imploy'd them to this pur­pose, since that is not capable to comprehend their nature.

Furthermore, whereas it was well said by One, That things of greatest antiquity are best, and the Philosophers themselves, when they treat concerning God and Religion, extremely cry up Antiquity, and attribute much to the di­ctates of their Ancestors; as if nature it self had suggested to them, that there was a source of all these things, from which they that were nearest it drew the purest and sincerest waters, whereas accordingly as they are derived through several minds as so many several conduit-pipes, they become corrupted and tincted with extra­neous qualities and contract impurity; If there be found a doctrine that ha's all the marks of An­tiquity, and there appears nothing in the world that equals it, it ought not to be doubted but that the same is proceeded from him that is more ancient then all, as being author of all things. If the language in which it was reveal­ed be as the mother and stock from which others, [Page 287] though very ancient, are sprung; if it describes the history of the world and of men, and their propagation upon the earth; if it affords the de­monstration of times, and that without it the knowledge of Chronology would be more in­tricate then a Labyrinth; if it deduces its history from point to point with an exact correspon­dence, if it clearly and certainly relates histories that are as the body of the fabulous shadows that we see in the writings of the most ancient authors in the World, who will doubt but all which they have is taken from thence, and that we ought to refer what is therein deprav'd and corrupted thereunto as to its principle, and have recourse thither to learn what we are ignorant of?

Moreover, as the minds of men are so various, that we scarce see a son follow the design of his fathers building, when the foundations of it are laid, and the walls already erected; much less do they willingly conform throughout to their predecessors in Sciences and disciplines, every one being ambitious of the glory of having aug­mented, corrected or invented some thing (which occasion'd so many sects of Philosophers and Lawyers) If there be found a Religion, all whose parts accord together with an excellent harmo­ny (although it ha's been propounded at several times and by several persons in several places) and are so far from difformity, that they consist & unite together with a perfect proportion, though several workmen have labor'd therein; can it be denyed but that it was one and the same Archi­tect that always presided over the work, seeing it [Page 288] is manag'd with so equal and uniform a conduct? Whereas even the Palaces of Kings are composed of parts oftimes so disagreeing that they dispa­parage the edifice, according as successors have had different fancies from their ancestors: yea even such as have been built by one alone, al­ways represent something in their contrivance which argues the inconstance and imbecillity of man. But especially if there be found a Doctrine, whose revelations or supernatural truths having been very little and obscure at the beginning, so that it was impossible for the mind of man to ex­plain them, have yet many hundred years after been multiplyed in so sutable a manner, that it is dubious which to admire most, either the consentaneousness between the principles and their sequels, or the faculty that was requisite to deduce the same from them and to unfold them after a manner perfectly admirable; There is no question but he was the same that cast the seed into the earth and made it grow, that first pre­sented those invelop'd sparkles of light and af­terwards illustrated and unveiled them. More­over, inasmuch as God is the author of all things, his glory ought to be their natural end; but as none of the most knowing Philosophers ever propos'd the same to himself, or indevour'd to shew the tendency of things thereunto, yea on the contrary the most part speak nor of God, or if they do 'tis with some notorious disadvantage to his glory; If there be a Doctrine that aims wholly and all whose parts conspire unanimously thereunto, must it not be said that God intended the same as a means to redress the distraction and [Page 289] wandering of humane minds, and to reduce them into the right way? For how could it be that men should so prodigiously neglect the glo­ry of God, unless they were estrayed from their end, since they were made for it? And how were they able, when once lost in a strange Country, so well to recover the direct path again of themselves? Every Religion ought to contain the testimonies of Gods good will to mankind, and the duties of men towards him. If therefore, there be a discipline, a do­ctrine, a book, a society in which God himself speaks to men in a style and manner agreeable to the eminence of his Majesty, displays his justice to them most terrible in its appearance, discovers his power in its highest magnificence, and gives them to sound the bredth and length, depth and heigth of his infinite mercies, after a manner which cannot but ravish the thought of man with admiration, who can imagine that ever any man durst speak so? And lastly if examples of an in­comparable virtue be found therein, with inci­tations and instructions to piety, such as are not to be parallell'd any other where in the world, 'tis an indubitable argument that they are proceded from some other then the hu­mane mind or the School of man.

It is natural to men to aspire after a supreme good; it is inseparably rooted and fixed in our minds. Yet never any man attain'd it, or could so much as certainly tell wherein it consists: and 'tis lamentable to observe how different, incon­stant and incongruous the opinions of Philoso­phers have been in a matter of so great impor­tance. [Page 290] Therefore if there be any Doctrine that discovers the variety and solly of those that so grosly deceived themselves about it, and which brings to light and exposes to the eyes of all the earth a Beatitude that comprehends all the ex­cellencies the Philosophers were able to express in this point, and infinitely more, who can doubt but that it was God himself that hath ligh­ted this torch to dissipate all the darknesses of our minds? Lastly, Man being fallen from so high a degree of perfection into so great a corruption, of which Heaven and Earth and his own consci­ence bears him witness, and there being by that means so large an abysse between God and him, a war so irreconcilable between his justice and our offenses; If there be a Doctrine that teaches an expedient to fill up this gulf, and, as I may so speak, to build a bridge over it, to renew the commerce and correspondence between God and us, procuring satisfaction to his justice, and raising us up from our ruines, is it not necessari­ly consequent that it was God himself that re­veal'd it? For what edifice ever erected it self when it was fallen, and emerg'd anew out of its rubbidge? To him that is fallen from the favour of God into his indignation, who can shew the hope and means of his reconciliation but God himself? And I shall not fear confidently to assert that such a Religion ought besides the preceding evidences be authorised from Hea­ven, maintained against its enemies, and be effectuall to be perswaded after an extraor­dinary [Page 291] manner. Wherefore if there be one to which God hath born witness by great and signal miracles, which surpass both the pow­er of humane nature and the illusions of Ma­gick, and even the faculties of any malig­nant spirit and the highest intelligences, see­ing they could not be performed but by the power of God, and that it professes to be proceeded from him, who can be so bold as to gain-say it? For without dispute God could never have afforded his power to the confirmation of a lye, or revealed himself from Heaven expressely in such miraculous works to favour an imposture, that pretends to his name with a false title. Moreover, if being conversant in the world as a stranger, con­tradicted by all Nations, ardently persecuted by malignant spirits, and by such as they had seduced by their illusions, and drawn to their service, it ha's been as it were visibly defen­ded by dreadful judgements discharged both upon the persons and Nations that opposed it, by pestilence and mortalities, by famines and wars, by subversions of Cities and dissipati­ons of Kingdomes; it must needs be particu­larly loved by the Deity, since he so terribly revenges the injuries that are done to it. Lastly, being wholly designed for reclaiming men off from Idolatry and superstition to the service of the true God, and conforming their irregular appetities to reason; a thing impos­sible to be done, because men naturally love Idols as debauched men do courtisans, and [Page 292] are yet addicted to their own concupiscences as much or more then they are to idols: nevertheless if it ha's surmounted all resistance, overcome the most obstinate hearts, and tri­umphed gloriously over the humane understan­ding, leading their thoughts as prisoners by the force and clearness of its truth, so that it ha's subjugated even the greatest Empires, and all other Religions, doctrines, and sects have fallen and been scatter'd before it; Who can doubt for the future but that it is a divine truth and accompanied with divine assistance? Especially since for the propagating of it into all quarters of the world there was employed neither arms nor factions and conspiracies, nor the favour of great men, nor commoti­ons of people nor the subtlety of Philoso­phers, nor the eloquence of Orators, nor any thing else that bears a splendor and lustre in the eyes of men, but onely the naked pro­posall of a simple truth, and a firm and in­vincible resolution to indure all things for it. Certainly, where the means which men ordi­narily serve themselves of are rejected, and such as are contrary to them used, the design cannot but be some other then humane. And if it prosper in spight of the world's and mens opposition it must needs be through a divine and celestial virtue. Now we shall see (by the help of God's grace) in the sequell that there is a Religion in the world to which all these to­kens or evidences do sute and agree, and that they cannot be found but in that alone: [Page 293] and this in order to evince (as my first pur­pose obliges me) that they who acknow­ledge a particular or special revelation from Heaven in matter of Religion ought not to account all kinds indifferent as to external pro­fession: which must be the subject of the third part of my Work.

CHAP. I. That such as acknowledge a Particular Re­velation cannot allow indifference in Pro­fession of Religion.

HAving shewn by manifest and neces­sary reasons that in order to per­forming a service agreeable to God, and beneficial to the salvation of men, there needs an other light then that of Nature, and that they ought to be inlightened by a special revelation; and having [Page 296] declared the most evident tokens by which the same may be known, it should be our next busi­ness to enquire where they are found, in as much as Religion will infallibly be there found also. And this ought without longer dispute to be sufficient against those, who acknowledging the necessity of this particular revelation, & likewise confessing that there is such in the world, do not­withstanding account the external profession of all Religions indifferent. For where God hath re­vealed his truth, and declared his will in things that concern him and his service, what humane imaginations are to be preferr'd before him, or what excuses can be pleaded for disobedience unto him? But the obstinacy of men, and the importance of the matter requires further dis­cussing and illustration.

In man there are three distinct faculties, of which each ha's its respective influence in the profession and exercise of Religion: The under­standing, wherewith we apprehend the truth of things: The Will, in which are the motions of piety and habits of virtue: And the Senses, which are subservient to both. For it is by the Senses that objects arrive to the Understanding, and by the Understanding they excite sutable motions in the Will. Upon which account there must be three sorts of things in Religion that cor­respond thereunto. First, such as are propound­ed as truths to be believ'd, that so man, who is otherwise buried in ignorance, may attain a wis­dom worthy the excellence of his nature. For how can Religion subsist without a true under­standing of the nature of God and his Attributes, and [Page 297] other truths dependent thereon, so far at least as humane understanding is capable of the same? And since the supreme perfection of man con­sists in the legitimate practise of the true Religi­on, how can man be render'd perfect, if his in­tellect remain notwithstanding clouded with darkness and ignorant of the most excellent of all natures, and from which alone all other things derive their perfection? The second sort of things include such as are proposed not onely to be believed but to be done, and which lye in pra­ctise; as the precepts of piety towards God and charity amongst men, the duties of which are diffus'd through all the parts of humane life. Lastly, the third comprehends all external things, as the actions and ceremonies designed to give instruction of that which must be believ'd, and to beget affection towards that which is to be done, with that regularity according to which the Re­ligious Society is administred. Now all these par­ticulars ought to have such an accord among them, that the truths proposed to be believ'd be of a nature proper to beget piety and virtue in the minds of men; n as much as there is so strait an alliance between the Understanding and the Will, that the Will follows the steerage & government of reason, which is the guide and conductor of it: Whence that the motions of piety may be sincere, and worthy of the person in whom they are and to whom they are directed, it is requisite that the wisdom of the understanding be very pure, and its light very serene & clear. In like maner it is requ [...] ­site that the precepts which contain the duties of piety and virtue have no repugnance with the [Page 298] truths in knowledge of which consists the wis­dom of the understanding, but as they mutually depend on one another, so there may be a perf [...]ct correspondence between them. And lastly, it is meet that the ceremonies and external govern­ment of this society have such a congruity with all other things of Religion that first they be in nothing repugnant to the truths in which wis­dom consists, and next that they be peculiarly instrumental to the begetting and exciting of pie­ty and virtue. For as the internal part of man is much more excellent then his external, and Re­ligion is destinated to perfectionate his soul; so is it fit that the exterior and sensible things im­ployed as instruments thereunto be proper to the end to which they are adressed. And it would be a great absurdity to imploy means to attain to such an end which were not onely uncongruous therewith but opposite and contrary.

These things being thus premised, I demand whether they that believe a celestial revelation necessary and think there is one in the world, and nevertheless account the external profession of all Religions indifferent, place this indifference in the belief of truths proposed to the understan­ding, to give credit thereunto more or less as seems good to us; or whether they place it in the practise of that piety and virtue which is principally seated in the Will, to perform which of those precepts we please and no more; or lastly, whether it be in external communion of those ceremonies, and visible government by which the Religious Society is administred, to dispose of the same according to our humor, to [Page 299] omit such as are injoyned by this revelation, and embrace such as are opposite to them when we think sit, retaining in the mean while both the belief of those truths inviolable and the internal practise of piety, honesty, and virtue in our de­portments amongst men. Certainly, it is not probable that they account the belief of those truths indifferent which are offer'd to the under­standing to be believ'd by a divine revelation. For even in things not relating to Religion, and in themselves of little importance, the know­ledge of truth is without comparison better then the belief of falshood. And I do not conceive there is any person so brutish and unworthy the name of man, as to think it indifferent what sort of Philosophy to embrace, in case it were abso­lutely known in which sect the truth and certain intelligence of things were to be had. Truth is so beautiful and admirable that she ravishes the minds of men into her love; and the more puri­fyed and sublime they are the more violent is the love they be [...]r naturally to her. What did not those persons of old do, whose names are so ce­lebrated in the world, to find her out where they believed the discovery possible? What trans­ports of joy did they resent when they hapned on any footstep or trace of her? What vows and wishes did they make to find her? And what an expression was that of Plato, when he protested that if he could have found a man that knew how to Define aright, he would have cast himself at his feet to adore him? And neve [...]the­less the business was perhaps onely concerning the knowledge of a Goat or Caterpiller. But if [Page 300] God himself had declared in which sect of Philosophy the truth were, who would after­wards have esteemed the profession thereof in­different? And who would have had so little regard not onely to the dignity of truth, but to the authority of God and to his testimony? If, I say, he had commanded that the Tenets of Aristotle should be believed rather then those of Plato, as being of more truth, who would after­wards be a Platonist, with an absolute contempt of truth, whose value is inestimable, and the te­stimony that God had given it, the weight where­of is of soveraign authority, and his express commandment whose majesty is inviolable? Now if this be true, in reference to Philosophy, with which humane life might easily dispence, how much more do's it hold good in Religion, whose truths revealed from God are so important not onely to the present time but to all eternity? Truths, I say, to which he hath render'd such testimonies? Whereof he hath given such ex­press commandment, with terrible threatnings against incredulity, and abundant and gracious promises to those that embrace the same with a stedfast belief? But much less will they place their indifference in the practice of internal pie­ty, which is seated in the affections of the heart. For as for piety it self, Epicurus durst not question whether it ought to be exercised towards the Deity, or no; how therefore do they that acknow­ledge both a Providence of God in the govern­ment of the world, and a particular revelation of his will in matter of his service, presume to dispute it, or place it in indifference? And as [Page 301] for the manner of performing it, if God himself ha's declar'd what fiducary recumbence we ought to have on his goodness, what reverence of his glorious majesty, what dread of his justice, what gratitude for his benefits, or what ardour and assurance in calling upon him in necessity, and what obedience to his commandments, who will be so bold or stupid as to vse or oppose humane imaginations against the declaration that it hath pleas'd him to make thereof. 'Tis a thing we would not tolerate in our children or servants, to comment upon or dispute our commandments even in small matters when we have once signifi­ed our intentions; much less can we endure that they slight the same to follow their own fan­cies.

It remaines therefore that they place this liber­ty in the communion of external ceremonies; which yet they have no better grounds for then in the two preceding particulars. For first, the communion in external ceremonies in matter of Religion hath always been esteemed an open de­claration of the consent that is yielded by the heart to things proposed therein to be believed as truths, and to be practis'd as good and honest. And as naturally, in point of conscience, the mind refuses to communicate in the ceremonies of a Religion, whose maximes are contrary to its sentiments, and the precepts which refer to manners contrary to what he esteems just and honest; so it ha's ever been a universal sanction in all societies that have born the name of Reli­gion, not to admit any to the ceremonies rela­ting to it, but onely such as profess to receive [Page 302] both the precepts and doctrines of the same. What a strange opinion therefore is this? That it is lawful for a man to abstain from things to which God hath injoyned testimonies to be ex­pressed of the internal consent that is yielded to the truths revealed by him and to the command­ments which he hath given, and contrarily to communicate in such which are the types or se­quels of lyes and errors abhorred in the inward sense of the soul? It is the custome, when the external profession of a Religion, which consists in the practise and communion of its exercises, is deserted, and a different taken up, to renounce solemnly such things as were believ'd before, and to protest ingagement into new beliefs. Dare they say it is lawful for a man to do so against his conscience? That is to attest both his conscience and God that sees it, that he condemns that for a Lye which he believes in his heart to be truth, and to embrace as a truth that which he knows in the sense of his soul to be a Lye? If they think thus, I do not dispute against them. For I de­clared from the beginning that I would take my reasons from the motions of nature and consci­ence; which these people have quite extingui­shed, with all remains of natural generosity and ingenuity. I refer them to him that will deserved­ly revenge perjury, and before whom that plea will do them no service, ‘Juravi lingua, mentem injuratam gero.’ But supposing this were not so exactly observed, yet the participation alone in the ceremonies of a [Page 303] Religion is a declaration of approving its max­imes. Therefore perhaps they account it law­ful to allow by external profession the doctrines which we condemn in our minds, and on the contrary to condemn by outward behaviour that which we tacitly and inwardly approve. If it be so, sincerity and candor, the qualifications so worthy all honest persons, are perisht from the earth. For if this be lawful in that which belongs to the truth of God and things that concern him, why is it not as lawful in the conduct of humane life? It must be lawful to wear the liver of an enemy to one's King, to lye at every turn, to be­tray and deceive; and instead of the counte­nances of men free and fair in their conversation we shall see nothing but visards and disguises. Moreover, since the ceremonies of Religion ought to be of a nature apt to excite piety and virtue in the minds of men, to which the do­ctrines and precepts of Religion tend, how can it be lawful to abstain from partaking in those which God ha's appointed for that end, to com­municate with such as are remote and averse from it? Is it not to disclaim the exercise of vir­tue and piety it self, and to be addicted to vice and Idolatry or irreligion whereunto the contra­ry lead? For the ceremonies of a false Religion as well as of the true correspond with that which is taught for truth, and conspire to the same end. Those which are conjoyn'd with the truth revealed by God aim at sincere piety, and the perfection of the mind of man. On the contrary, those which accompany false­hood, lead to the corruption and perversion of [Page 304] the soul: And 'tis like as if a man should purpose to sail from the South with a Northen Wind, or ridde much ground forward by drawing his feet backward. Furthermore, the communion in ceremonies is a part of service performed to God in a Religion; for man as composed of body and soul, owes homage to God with both. But he can render no religious homage with the body but by participating in some sacred ceremonies. Wherefore if God ha's not approved by his com­mand nor any other manner whatsoever, the ceremonies to which we conform, who ha's se­cur'd us that they will be acceptable devotions unto him? And if we abstain from such as he hath commanded, who gave us this authority of dispensing with his commandments and to order the rules of his service at our pleasure both with­out him and against him? And lastly, since Reli­gion is a society which ought to be the more strict, sacred, and inviolable, in as much as it confederates men with God and between them­selves, whereas civil governments are contriv'd onely for the society of men together; and be­ing the tyes that ligue us to God do equally concern the soul and the body (the soul by the belief of truths and communion of pious and mo­ral precepts, the body by external ceremonies) whereas civil polities binde men onely in relati­on to the body and bodily concernments: what reason can there be thus to separate the things which God ha's conjoyn'd, and to dissipate that society which he would have be permanent?

But behold their main reason, with which they think themselves impregnable; namely, That all external things are neither good nor evil of their own nature; and therefore being indetermined in themselves as to those respects, it depends of our intention, and the end to which we design them, to give them, in a man­ner, their specifical being: So that they which make them subservient to Superstition and Idola­try, corrupt them; but such as destinate them to another end, use them well, and render them good. Now it is the part of the minde to desti­nate them to certain ends, and therefore they ought to be judged of by the thoughts of the heart: As when a thing is equally counterpoised on both sides, it depends on him that manages it, to incline it either this way or the other, and to determine the dubious propendency he observes in it. But this is easie to be refell'd by any that considers well the nature of indifferent things; for there are some things, in which whether con­sidered in themselves, or as they have respect to a certain end, there is nothing that can warrant them the title of good or evil, according to that kinde of goodness or badness from whence men are denominated vicious or vertuous. I demand therefore, Whether in the revelation which God hath made concerning his service, he hath commanded or prohibited any things of this nature? or whether he hath mentioned none such? If he hath commanded any, then the usage thereof is not free for the future; his Law ought to be obeyed, not disputed or dispensed with; nor is the exception allowable, that the [Page 306] thing of its own nature obliges neither to per­formance nor abstinence; for the Command­ment of God hath changed its nature, and though it obliges not considered in it self, yet it does so upon account of his Authority that commanded it: If there be any forbidden, the case is the same, the doing thereof is no longer indifferent; Indeed the nature of the thing, setting aside the prohibition, allows us liberty to use it, but that liberty is annull'd by the prohi­bition: And it is an equal sin not to do the in­different things which God hath commanded, and to do the indifferent which he hath forbid­den; namely, the violation of his Command; Otherwise there would be left no preheminence to God above man, not so much as men claim over one another. But if God hath made no men­cion of such things in this Declaration of his will, the exercise thereof is partly free, and partly not; It is free, if the same be not referr'd to Religion, but ranked amongst things purely humane: For then every mans prudence is a Law to him to use them or not; if he does not trust his own judgement, the prudence of those whose advice he may consult, ought to serve him for a rule in such a case; For it is the will of God and Nature, that they which are not able to conduct their lives in a due manner, should suffer themselves to be directed by others. And hence arose the Institution of Magistrates, to whom the Government of humane life is com­mitted; so that where the Magistrate interposes his injunction concerning such things, his Law ought to be obeyed, as the counsel of a publique & [Page 307] superiour Prudence, whom God and Nature have entrusted with the dispensation of such things with suitable Authority: But the practice of them is no longer indifferent, when they are referr'd to Religion, and made a part of the service of God; because it belongs to God alone to make Laws in reference to his service, and therefore to place his service in things which he hath left as indifferent, would be to usurp his place, and to invade his Authority. But this requires a more particular consideration.

Things wherein the service of God consists have a double respect; one, as they are accepta­ble to God to whom they are performed, and obtain his favour; the other, as they oblige the Consciences of men, upon the account of be­ing Divine and Religious: Wherefore whosoe­ver takes upon him the Authority of enjoyning such things for Religious, and requisite to the service of God, which are in their own nature free, and lest by God in their indifference, he commits several high crimes in one single at­tempt: For he offers to make a thing, not at all ordained by God, a means to obtain his favour, and to be well-pleasing to him. Now God is not delighted with things according to the fan­cy of man, but according to his own will. In the next place, he arrogates a dominion over the Conscience, and encroaches upon the Au­thority of God; for he places himself between him and that, though between God and the Conscience of man there is no intermedium, no more then there is between husband and wife; and God communicates to men the power of dis­posing [Page 308] that which concerns this life onely, whereby some are bound to yield obedience to others: But as for what relates to the Consci­ence, he hath reserv'd the Empire over it wholly to himself. In fine, he usurps what is proper to none but the Deity, by claiming the right of giving the Nature and Essence to things, and making them of free and indifferent, as they were, to become good or bad: For it may be truly affirm­ed, that it is as much in the power of men to create things of nothing, as it is to render such good or evil which were not so before. In the one there is requisite an infinite power, in the other an infinite authority; and consequently, as it is not permitted to any to usurp this right, so it is not lawful for any to obey him that usurps it; that is, to account those things for good by vertue of his Prescription, which were before indiffe­rent: Because this would be to allow and favour a tyrannie in prejudice of the glory of God; to inthral his Conscience, which God would have free in this regard; to pretend such things are acceptable to him, which he hath not command­ed, and to measure him according to our own will: In a word, to own for Divine and Reli­gious by humane command such things as the wisdom of God would have be esteemed purely humane and indifferent.

What then (will some say) is it not lawful for the Religious Society to establish certain Laws and Ceremonies, which private persons are bound to observe, when they are constituted by publique suffrage of the Society? or if God hath appointed certain persons to be Governours of [Page 309] this Society, as he hath placed the conduct of Justice in the hands of the Magistate, hath he not given them Authority to make Constitutions, concerning things in their own nature indiffe­rent, which oblige those that are subject to their rule? Yes certainly, and we have touch'd a­bove upon the manner how; but it will be here convenient to explain the same somewhat fur­ther. Magistrates in a Civil Society make two sorts of Laws; in some they expound the very Laws of Nature onely, and do not constitute; as when they forbid Theft, Adultery, Murder, and Blasphemy; for they are not the Authors of these Laws, they are onely the Proclaimers and Interpreters: So that when we obey them in this case, we do not so much obey them as Na­ture it self. Others are such as they judge profi­table for consetvation of that Society, over which they superintend, although they be not expresly grounded upon the Dictates of Nature; such are the Edicts concerning Commerce, Tri­butes, Taxes and Gabels; which when they ordain, they onely advance, and have respect to the publique good, and do not pretend the same to be the Law of God or Nature: Whence when we obey them in this case, we have regard to them, and not to the nature it self of the things; we do the same out of consi­deration of their Authority, and the benefit a­rising thereby, namely, the conservation of Society, and not as if these things were of them­selves sufficient to be authentick and inviolable grounds of Laws. In like manner, they that are intrusted with the Government of the other [Page 310] Society, have the care of two sorts of Consti­tutions committed to them. In the first of which, they onely expound the Laws of God, where­of they are not Legislators, but meer Guardians and Depositaries; and when they promulgate the same, they do not pretend that they are their own Decrees, but the Ordinances of God him­self: So that when we yield obedience there­unto, it is not properly in respect to them, but because of the express command of God, and the very essence of the thing. The second sort is, of those which they esteem profitable onely in reference to order and seemliness, or the con­servation of the Society which they govern, and do not recommend the same but under that title, and not as founded on the command of God; So that in submitting to them, we have regard to the Authority which God hath given them concerning the ordering these affairs, and to the benefit arising thereby, as peace and con­cord, by which the Society is preserved: And so far ought they to be obeyed, when they at­tribute nothing more to themselves. But when in either of these Societies, their Superinten­dents go about either to command and forbid, that which God and Nature have forbidden and commanded, or to change the very nature of things, or to impose their own Laws as Divine and Natural, we are not onely not bound to submit unto, but commanded to resist them, in­asmuch as they set themselves in the place of God, and instead of preserving the Society, ru­ine and overthrow it. And from all this it evi­dently follows, that it is not lawful in these kinde [Page 311] of things, to have Communion in a Religion which thus tramples on the bounds wherewith God and Nature have circumscrib'd it.

Moreover, there are some things, which con­sidered in themselves, are free, and of a middle nature, which yet are not so, as they are re­ferred to a certain end, but are determined by the very nature of the thing to which they are design'd. For example, the knowledge of those truths in which consists the Wisdom of Religion, is without doubt a thing good in it self, and which God commands by the same Revelation whereby he hath declared them: To attain there­unto, certain means must be employ'd, and there is no other then to expound them in com­mon, in the most fitting and convenient manner that may be, as to be present in some places to hear such as discourse of them, to communicate thereof with them, in order to be resolved of any difficulties that arise. Whence, though to resort to a certain place at a time prefixed, be a thing purely free and indifferent, if considered precisely and separately in it self, yet in case God had not expresly commanded the same, the commandment of that which is ordained, as the scope and end, encludes also tacitely and ne­cessarily that of the means which conduce there­unto. By the same reason therefore things, which though free in themselves, yet naturally refer to a bad end, and which is forbidden by God or Nature, ought to be accounted bad: For which cause, all Ceremonies which are in a false Religion, being destinated to an end bad of its own nature, and expresly forbidden by God; [Page 312] whosoever esteems them indifferent, overthrows all the order and natural relation, which is be­tween the end, and the means that lead unto it. For example, they with whom I treat at present, will not deny, but that amongst all those Nations which have been destitute of the particuler Re­velation which they confess necessary, there were divers that adored false gods, and so com­mitted Idolatry; but their Sacrifices, Mysteries, and Solemn Processions, were things destinated to that service rendred to false gods, as the means are destinated to their end; Therefore although the murdring of Beasts, and the various grimaces and external gestures of the body, and marching to Temples in great crouds, are indifferent, con­sidered in themselves; yet regard being had to the devotions to which they appertain'd; they were as severely forbidden as Idolatry it self; for it is the same case with this spiritual unclean­ness, and that of the body, the accesses & approa­ches of Stews, visits, & wanton aspects, because they are the inveglements to incontinence, are forbidden by the same Laws of honesty which forbid impudicity it self. But though this general discourse might perhaps be sufficient, yet I shall not decline to bring into the lists more particular reasons that encounter this irreligious Indifference, examining one after another, all Religions that are at present, or ever were in the world.

CHAP. II. Which have been the principal Religions That Profession of any sort is not indiffe­rent, even by the verdict of the Pagan: In which the Divine Revelation is not found.

ALthough the different Sects of Religion have been almost infinite, every Nation by practicing some particular Ceremo­nies, distinguishing their own from that of o­thers; yea, the same Nation sometimes dividing into factions upon this occasion; Yet generally all that ever bore any vogue in the world, may be reduced to four principal (each of which was respectively the stem from which all the rest sprung) namely, the Pagan, the Mahometan, the Jewish, and the Christian: For under the Pagan, I comprize all the Religions of the ancient Egypti­ans, Greeks, and Romans, of the Druyds, Brach­mans, Gymnosophists, and the rest, that had nei­ther Moses, nor Mahomet, nor Christ, for Au­thor of their Religious Ceremonies: For, though as the mindes of men are different, they have varyed in this respect by some light circum­stances, yet they all agree in what is essential, and make no scruple of communicating together in their mysteries. Under the Mahometan must [Page 314] be comprehended not onely that which is the National Religion of the Turkish Empire, but al­so that which is professed by the Persians, whom the Turks account Hereticks of their Law, and what other Sects soever there be of the same, As for the Jewish, we must make distinction of it rather according to times then Sects, inasmuch as though there was some times among the Jews some diversity of profession, between certain per­sons addicted to devotion after a special man­ner, as the Esseans, the Pharisees, and Saduc [...]es, yet this did not happen, till toward the decli­nation of their Religion, which for many ages after its first institution, had continued uniform throughout the whole Nation. Moreover, their differences were not in the fundamental and princ [...]pal points of Religion (excepting the Sad [...]cees, who denied the Resurrection of the body, and the immortality of the Soul) but in certain inconsiderable matters, which chiefly concerned their rule of ordinary life; as Monks among the Christians differ not in Religion from the people, but onely in a more austere and restrained manner of life. And though there were the Saducees that differed in principal points of Religion, nevertheless, as to external politie or government, they were all of one ac­cord, and had neither Temples nor Synagogues apart by themselves. But indeed there hath been a great diversity amongst them, if we have re­gard to several times; for the Christians not onely confess, that the ancient Jewish Religion was of Divine Institution, and that God reveal­ed his Laws to that Nation alone, but prove the [Page 315] same against the Pagans by irrefragable Ar­guments. Nevertheless they say, that this Religion, in reference to what concerns the external service of God, and the Law upon which it was founded, was but for a time, in expectation till the Christian were fully reveal­ed, whereof the Jewish contained onely the types and shadows; And that the Christian having been established by the Messias really and de facto manifested in the fulness of time, from thenceforth all that ancient Worship is abolish'd, and hath given place to that which was to come in its room. The Jews on the contrary maintain, that that Jesus whom the Christians adore, is not the Messias, but expect him still to come, re­taining and preserving as much as they are able in their dispersion, that ancient Law, although they have very much altered the Doctrine of their Ancestors: Therefore I call that the Jew­ish Religion, which the Jews profess at this day. Lastly, by the Christian, though it also be divided into several parties (from which it hath been as little able to warrant it self as the rest, nor to a­void the rent of Sectaries) I understand here onely these two, under which all others may be ranked; namely, Those who acknowledge no other Revelation of the will of God, but that which is found written in the Book called the Bible; and those, who besides that Book, re­ceive as Divine Revelation, certain Doctrines which they affirm to have been left by tradition from the first birth of Christianity, and continued along unto the present times; which they call, The unwritten Word. For as for certain He­reticks [Page 316] equally detested by both parties, who de­ny the Divinity of Christ, the Author of Reli­gion, they are justly accounted undeserving of the name of Christians, because they take away the Basis upon which all the Christian Doctrine is founded. Let us now examine, whether the Doctrine of Indifference, be competible with any of these Religions, and to which of them the commendation of being Divine of right belongs.

As for the Pagan, it is true indeed, the Greeks might well partake in the mysteries of the Egypti­ans, and the Romans in those of the Greeks, be­cause they all served almost the same gods, how­ever they gave them different names, and some­times followed distinct forms of Ceremonies. And in truth, we see not that they made any scruple of conscience in so doing: For though the Philosophers should have been more scru­pulous herein then the vulgar, inasmuch as they ought to have had more knowledge of the na­ture of the Deity; yet we do not read that Plato in his travels into Egypt and Sicile, separated from the Communion which the Inhabitants of the places had in the Ceremonies of the Country, how different soever they were from those of Greece. And in all those great Peregrinations which Philestratus relates Apollonius Thyanaus to have made, both into India, Ethiopia, Italy, Spain, Egypt, and Africa, we do not finde that he re­fuses the honour to the gods of every Nation which they performed to them, but generally conforms thereunto, reforming and amending after his own fancy the defects which he found in some slight circumstances onely, changing [Page 317] none throughtout either in Doctrine, or the body of their Mysteries. And if he abstains from communicating in the Sacrifices of beasts and living things, it was onely by reason of the whimsey of the Metempsychosis, which he had closely embraced from the Sect of Pythagoras, to whom it was peculiar. For the rest, he lest to Jupiter, Venus, Bacchus, and the other gods, their Temples, Statues, and Altars, and all their Mysteries, and would have us account him a more Religious Observer of them then any other person in the world. But however, none of them all would ever believe it lawful for them to com­municate in the Jewish Religion, or have any participation in the Ceremonies of the Christians, since they all accuse them of Idolatry, and their gods of vanity, and this with strange reproaches, calling them people without God, and those whom they adored, gods of dung and filth. For either the Jews and Christian say true in this point, or not: If they do not say true, but the Pagan Religion is of Divine Institution, then the Christians themselves are Idolaters. Now there is no likelihood, that a Religion of Divine Insti­tution, should permit communion in the service of false gods; for, as I said above, Religion is as the marriage of God with the soul, If there­fore God himself permits commerce with false gods, it is as if a man should permit his wise to prostitute her felf to others; whereby he would shew himself both too gross and stupid a contem­ner of his own right, a too sordid prizer of the honesty of marriage, and too unworthy of the faith of a true and loyal Spouse. If they say [Page 318] true, the testimony of the Pagan Religion ought not to be valued, whatever it be. But besides, it would not be reason for the Pagans, who do not believe it, to condescend the least in the world to the Christian Religion, since it does so much mischief and outrage to the gods they adore. For what man is there that hath never so little natural affection, or if natu­ral affections be possibly dryed up in him, so lit­tle shame lest in his face, as to dare pronounce it lawful for him to entertain a friendship either true or feigned, with such persons as have a sworn irreconcileable enmity against his father: yea, who would not resent it in point of honour, to hear his friend defamed in his presence? Ima­gine then what good devotion a Gentile could have, at the prayers which we make to God for the destruction and confusion of all those false Deities whom the Gentiles worship: For if he believes neither in our God, nor his own, he is no longer a Gentile, but an Atheist; if he believe in his own, can he have the heart to bow his knee and pronounce Amen to such Prayers of ours?

Indeed we finde it in some place or other, where Socrates counsels every man to serve God according to the mode of his own Country. But this counsel proceeded partly from ignorance of the true God, and despair of ever being able to comprehend his nature; because it being na­turally imprinted in the minde of man, that he ought to honour him, and the manner of doing it agreeably being unknown to Socrates, he had no further to advise, then to serve him at a ven­ture of hapning right or not: Like as a man that [Page 319] had cast his net a hundred and a hundred times in places noted for fishing without catching any thing, should at length in choler and despair, cast it into the next place he came to, though it were upon the sand or rocks. So the Painter in rage threw his spung against his Picture, because he could not please himself in representing to the life the foam of a horses mouth that he was paint­ing. Partly also, because all the Devotions of the Greeks had such a resemblance between them, that as the Dialects of their Language, and the fashions of their attire, how various so­ever, always retained the Greek aire and mode; so likewise, though in the manner of serving God they varied in some things of less impor­tance, yet in the judgement of this Person it was at the bottom indifferent to which of them to conform. And whereas he had never travelled, he conceived the opinion concerning the Deity and his service was alike almost in all Nations. But had he heard the Jews speak, without questi­on he would have either despised the gods of the Pagans, or abhorr'd the Jews, who utterr'd such hainous reproaches against them. Truly, the constancy which this Person shew'd at his death, and that admirable protestation he made, (That he would not cease to teach Philosophy a­mong the Athenians, not even for the hope of life, inasmuch as he conceiv'd himself raised up by God to reform the manners of his fellow-citi­zens by Philosophy) clearly evinces, that if he had had any certainty in Religion, and particular revelation of the will of God con­cerning his service, he would not have deviated [Page 320] from it in the least, much less would he have mingled himself indifferently in all sorts of cere­monies. Wherefore in that he advised every man to comply with the Religion of his Coun­try, it appears that he did not believe the form of Religion received amongst the Greeks to have been of Divine Institution; but being otherwise a man of peace, and politick, he would not have received customs infringed, for fears of commo­tions in the Commonwealth. Certainly, if the Pagans had believ'd the profession of all Religi­ons indifferent, the Romans would never have persecuted the Christians and Jews with such extremity, nor endeavour'd to constrain them by such rigorous torments, to sacrifice to their gods, and communicate in their mysteries; they would not have shewn themselves so violent for the extinguishment of Christianity in their Em­pire, nor made such diligent inquisition after the Books which we hold for sacred, to abolish the memory thereof. And if Julian sirnamed the Apostate, famous amongst the Pagans for his knowledge in Philosophy, had been of this opi­nion, he would not have renounced the name of Christian, for the service of Jupiter and other Pagan Deities; nor after he had revolted, would he have shewn himself so irreconcileable an ene­my thereunto: And the same may be likewise said of the other Philosophers, who in his time and before, oppugned the Religion of the Chri­stians with so great asperity and violence. They would without question have been more gentle and tractable, had they had any intelligence of this complacential Indifference.

Now whether the Pagan Religion favored this Indifference, or not (which yet experience and reason decides in the negative) it was so vain and false, that no account ought to be made of its suffrage. And I cannot imagine that there is any at this day, that bears the name of Chri­stian, who esteems it to have been of Divine re­velation. Wherefore the little I shall say to prove it, is not so much for necessity of the thing in it self, as because the design of this work does not permit me to pass it over absolutely in si­lence. To judge therefore what it was, we must not conceive it such as it is amongst barba­rous and savage Nations, such as the Toupinam­boults are at present, and the people of Suevia and Sarmatia were of old. For who will believe that any extraordinary Celestial light in matter of Religion ever illuminated those Nations, a­mongst whom there is scarce seen any traces of so much as humanity? It is true, there have been some people in our times, that have written so highly in commendation of the contentment there is in their opinion, in living under the simple Laws of nature, as they speak, that they seem inclinable to favour the manners and condi­ons of Savages, and prefer it before ours; so as to have no shame at all of their nakedness, and to boast that they do not cover it, but onely in re­spect to custom. But as for these persons, it is not my present purpose to dispute against them. If they would speak the genuine sentiments of their hearts, they would not onely not acknow­ledge any particular revelation of the will of God in Religion, but would moreover make pro­fession [Page 322] of not believing the immortality of their souls, nor any Religion in the world; and after having rendred themselves like to those misera­ble Savages in all brutalities, they would surpass them in this point, that they would cast under their feet all remembrance of God, of whom in their Desarts and forlorn Barbarism, the Marga­jats and Patagons have yet some fear and reve­rence. I speak now to such as make some e­steem of the improving elegancy of Learning, and who have some portion of honesty lest in their conversation amongst men. The Greeks and Romans therefore have without question carried the preheminence in all kindes of polite­ness and excellence amongst the Pagan Nations. So that it is amongst them that we must seek for this particular revelation, whether it may be found in the Religion of either of those people. It is true, the Egyptians were much celebrated for their mysteries and rare wisdom, and divers have thought that all the wisdom of Greece was tran­sported from the treasuries of Egypt, by those that travell'd thither for it. But if there were any thing of good among them, they had it from communication with the Jews, who besides that they sojourned a long time in Egypt before the Greek name arose in the world, they were their neer neighbours in Palestine, and had fre­quent and free commerce with them: yet have they so viciated, corrupted and obscured in their superstitions and idolatries, what they had learn­ed from them, that there is none of it to be known and distinguish'd, & almost all the books in which they had expounded their mysteries are [Page 323] lost. But he that is desirous to know what excellent opinions they had, what divine wisdom it was that made them so cryed up, he may please one­ly to read the Treatise written by Plutark of Isis and Osiris, and he will see in the first place that the veiles and allegories under which he sayes they hid their knowledge, are shameful and pu­tid fables, such idle and dull extravagancies and impertinences in themselves, that it is impossible they could serve for a coverture to any concep­tions, I do not say heavenly and divine, but worthy of men and ordinary sober sense. In the next place he will finde, that all that Plutark with singular acuteness of wit could uncypher of them, is so dubious, and the text on which he comments so plyable to all sorts of fancies, that he that would set himself about it, might invent several other interpretations as probable as his. They are as the divers impressions of clouds, to which the fancy of every man ascribes what image or lineaments seems best to him. And lastly, he will discover, that though the expo­sitions which that Philosopher presents us there, were as certain as if they had been delivered by an Oracle, yet they all terminate in two caitive and dismal Demons, unknown even to them that ador'd them; in uncouch speculations concerning the motions of the Moon and the Inundations of Nilus; in Platonick Idea's, and the Riddles of Pythagoras, and in that ancient foppery of Oromasdes and Arimanius, two opposite principles of all things, with some cold mystical interpretations of reasons why the Egyptians re­ligiously worshipped the Ox, the Sheep, the [Page 324] Ichneumon, Larks, Storks, Serpents, Dogs, Bee­tles and Weesels. Is not here great cause to boast of having drawn from the fountain of Divine Wisdom it self? So little ground is there to think so, that on the contrary, there is no person of indifferent understanding, but in the reading of that Treatise would pity Plutark, that bestowed so much knowledge and labour in commenting upon such absurdities, and could not discover them to be such. What shall we then say of the Greeks, who held from the Egyptians whatever they had not altogether bad? and what shall we think of the Romans, who had nothing but from imitation of the Greeks, both in humane Sci­ences and Religious Politie?

But put the case they had borrowed nothing from the Egyptians, but that this Divine Revela­tion had been peculiarly imparted to them, I would be told from what books that were in re­putation amongst them, we ought now to take it. For we have heard say indeed, that they had Sibyls, by whose means they were made acquainted with divine secrets, and who also writ books of the same, but the wind and time have carried them away. If there be any thing lest of their Oracles (as there are divers excellent Greek verses that bear their name at this day, yet are with very just reason suspected by the learned) the Christian Religion is clearly described in them, and the Pagan so strongly and directly confuted, that the Christians could scarce finde more express proofs for themselves, then in those books of theirs. And there is no likelihood that these were the same whom the Roman Priests [Page 325] went to consult, as oft as there was occasion to avert some raging mortality. For they taught not to render to Apollo, Latona, Diana, Hercules, Mercury or Neptune, those honours which they us'd to perform to them, to make them propiti­ous in such occurrences. If therefore this reve­lation was contained in the Books of the Sibyls, it is perish'd long since, and we have no more knowledge of them, then of those of Numa Pom­pilius, which were burned at Rome by authori­ty of the Senate, because they tended to the sub­version and annulling of all their Religious Ce­remonies. They had moreover memorials of the rights of the Pontifices, Augurs, and Aruspices. Of all which there is nothing left but the name. Miserable are we, if the truth was there; of which we are in despair ever to have any intel­ligence. Shall we then have recourse to find it in the books of the Poets? Truely it would be an excellent design to go about to build a Religi­on upon the model afforded us in the Theology of Hesiod, the Hymmes of Orpheus, the Poems of Homer, the Odes of Pindar, the Metamorphoses of Ovid, and the divine Theology of the great Virgil, who is so hard put to it to save the gods of the poor Aeneas from the sack of Troy, and who trusses them up in the same fardel with the little Ascanius as companions of the same fortune. It were more rationally credible that the beasts and trees held that rare converse together which Aesop reports of them in his Fables, then to give belief to the adventures and exploits which those Poets ascribe to their Deities. For in the first there would be nothing but childishness or at [Page 326] most but brutishness, in the latter impiety and blasphemy. And if, as some would have it be­liev'd of them (though perhaps themselves never thought of any such matter) their intent was to cover under the veil of those fables several true mysteries pertaining to the knowledge of the Deity and understanding of the secrets of nature, so far was the teaching the same after such a man­ner from being a divine intention, that on the contrary the honor of the Deity hath thereby been unworthily impaired and the truth smoth­er'd under most horrible lies. It follows there­fore that we go to the writings of Philosophers, to which we cannot without great injury to truth ascribe the commendation of being pro­ceeded from celestial inspiration, since the au­thors themselves, though sufficiently presumtu­ous, do not pretend they were so. And indeed we have shewn above that they were either wholly ignorant of the requisites to a true piety towards God, or if they had knowledge of some few it was wonderfully obscure and dubious. But how could the revelation of God have suf­fered them to groap and wander in that igno­rance! To conclude, is it then to those Oracles of Delphos, Dodona, Jupiter Ammon, and others the like, that we owe the glory of this divine knowledge? Truly, it moves both shame and pity, to hear themselves speak both of the origi­nal, and faculty of divination, and cessation of Oracles. It was a heard of Goats that first brought that of Delphos, which was the most famous and venerable of all, into reputation. But the vir­gins that were placed there to give answers to [Page 327] inquirers, which they receiv'd by their obscene parts, were not long there, but there arise most notorious scandals of them. All their predicti­ons were ambiguous and doubtful, like our Al­manack-makers, who prophesie by hap-hazard; and themselves gave this account of it; that the Daemons which spoke there not knowing things to come but by inspection of the Stars, and so being able to gather from thence but incertain conjectures, they shrouded their ignorance un­der the ambiguity of words capable of different interpretations, to the end they might make good their credit whatsoever the event of things might be. In a word, af [...]er Plutark had bestirr'd himself on all sides to finde out the causes of these Oracles and their ceasing, and sometimes con­ceiv'd them perishable and mortal Daemons, sometimes immortal, but that they chang'd place, he seems to resolve upon this worthy Philosophy. That the earth was in some places indued with certain prophetick Virtues, which come by ex­halations to be mingled and insinuated into souls fitting to receive those inspirations, and so cause in them those Enthusiasmes and predictions of fu­ture things: Afterwards, when all the virtue is spent, and the whole mass that was made there­of in the subterranean caverns, evaporated, then the prediction that was made by the Ora­cles of things to come, ceases and is extinguish'd. Without question those divinations could not but be very clear, which proceeded onely from the fumes of the earth, and the religious devotions very good that were paid to these divining exhalations and the persons who received [Page 328] the impressions of them in their souls.

But perhaps though the evidences of this di­vine revelation be lost, I mean the books in which it was recorded, yet it ha's remained in the memory of man, and is preserved by practise as by a living transcript. Be it so. Let us there­fore now examine the Pagan Religion in it self. Which certainly if it was divine, ought to have afforded a great knowledge of those supreme truths, in the understanding of which consists the perfection of our souls. And yet it ha's been pitifully defective herein. For setting a part at present those principles of Christian Religion, which seem most incredible, and by reason of which profane men reject or suspect it, there is no person that ha's a dram of common sense but will freely confess that we have beyond compa­rison more knowledge of the nature of the Deity and true virtue, then the ancient Greeks or Ro­manes ever had, which notwithstanding we have drawn from books more ancient then them by many ages, and which condemn the Gods of all other Nations. Whence therefore came it to pass, that if they had that particular revelati­on we enquire after, they were so ignorant of those indubitable truths, of which we are so knowing, who have learnt the same from those that are profess'd enemies to the Pagan Deities? If what they believ'd in matter of Religion was truth, whence do those truths which we perceive now so clearly and comprehend so certainly, convince them of falshood? And if the Gods which the Pagans ador'd were true Gods, why do the books which have taught us so many ex­cellent [Page 329] things whereunto humane reason cannot repugne, call them Gods of clay?

And indeed they were marveillous Gods; for even those that ador'd them knew their parents, and could shew their tombes, and tell a thousand debaucheries of them; which confirm that they were so far from being worthy to reign in the heavens, that on the contrary they deserved publick punishment upon earth. Their thefts, their rapes and adulteries, their attempts against parents, their whoredoms, whereby, if we be­lieve their authors, they filled the heavens with bastards, their Sodomies and incests would not have been suffered unpunish'd by those that built Temples and Altars to them, if they had ap­prehended them in the jurisdiction of their re­spective Republicks. And the supreme Jupiter himself must not be excepted, of whom Mene­laus exclaimed with more reason then he im­agin'd,

What a kind of Religion is that whose Gods have had a beginning, and that a long time after men, of whose history we have certain knowledge? For Jupiter and Saturne and Ʋranus are none of them so ancient as Abraham. On the other side what Gods had the Nations before these came in­to the world? Whosoever (saith Plutark) would search into the histories of the times that preceed­ed Theseus and Hercules, shall find therein nothing [Page 330] but vast and unknown solitudes, deserts, la­byrinths and abysses; where nothing occurs to fix and arrest his wandring thoughts. And the reason is because the most ancient people having for a good time retained some memory of their original and of the true God, it diminish't and vanish't by little and little till there remain'd no more of it in the World but the bare name; and so those that came after not knowing to whom they ought to ascribe it, they imputed it to them who had most endeared themselves to their love by their benefits or rendred themselves most re­doubtable by arms. Whence it was that Scipio Africanus in Ennius utters this brave language,

But had not the lateness of their original and the debauchedness of their manners been so well known, yet their multitude renders them con­temptible. For they had some high, some low, and some of middle ranke; some kept their quar­ters in the Heavens, others in the Earth, and in the Sea, and Rivers; and some under the barks of Trees and in Chimney-corners. They had of one sort for their corn, and another for their cattel, others for tuition of their houses, for arts, swords, and diseases. Honor, Virtue, the Fever, Fear and Victory, were consecrated and deified by them promiscuously; and even the in­fernal [Page 331] regions had their Deities, to the end there might be no corner in the world either above or below destitute of them.

Peradventure some will here take occasion to interpose two things: First that the wiser sort amongst them did not believe this multiplicity of Gods; and Secondly, that they that did believe it, acknowledged one supreme over the rest, and to whom they were as subalternate Deities. But this makes nothing against us. For, as to the first objection, we speak here of the form of Re­ligion establish'd amongst the Greeks and Romanes and not of the opinions of such or such Philoso­phers. If some have had peculiar conceptions dif­ferent from those of the people, this was not by reason of any special revelation, but through the natural strength of their minds which could not approve all that rabble of Divinityes which were in reverence with the vulgar. Besides, we have shewn that all those particular con­ceipts were of extreme little worth, and that what they contained of truth was intricat­ed and confused in a Chaos of lyes. In the next place, no Religions authorised by the consent of those Nations were founded upon those truths. If one person produc'd any thing of that kind into the publike, the people became immediately his enemies, as if he purposed the overthrow and destruction of Religion. Their opinion is probable who think the sole cause of Luhemerus's being branded with the name of A­theist, was his writing the history of those false Gods and discovering their shame to all the world; not that he peremptorily and flatly de­nied [Page 332] the Deity. Even the persons to whom those better sentiments were peculiar, never had, to speak strictly, any design of reforming the world, or reclaiming it from Idolatry and Superstitions. Themselves conformed thereunto, and com­mended the same as others did; because the lit­tle they perceived of truth was so dubicus, that it could not give them courage to oppose boldly the common received apprehensions; which ap­pears by Plato's books De Republica, and the Apo­logy for Socrates contained therein. For do's not he well prove that he believ'd there were more Gods, since he believ'd the Gods had children; the name of son presupposing the existence of a father? Is not this a rare ratiocination for so great a Philosopher? And how does he defend himself against the accusation of attempting to alter the Religion of his Country? No otherwise then by a flat denyal; though he was a person whom the fear of death could not have induc'd to dissemble a truth which he certainly knew, as appears sufficiently by the issue of his case. For the second; In truth I doubt not but those a­mongst the Pagans which had the least measure of understanding, asserted some supreme Deity a­bove all those diminutive ones, of which some reckon five and twenty or thirty thousand. Thus Homer makes his Jupiter utter this rodomontado, that should all the Gods together draw at one end of a chain, and he himself at the other, he could hoise them all up in spight of their reluct­ancy. Whereby it appears he had a higher opi­nion of him then of the rest; though he saies in another place, that had it not been for Briareus [Page 333] who came to his succor upon the request of Thetis, Jupiter had been bound by the other Gods, who had complotted to that purpose together against him. But what is the guess or hariola­tion of two or three to the constant opinions of a whole multitude? Or what is it considerable, if several persons have had these particular opi­nions, seeing they generally followed a contrary practise in Religion? And this is attested by ex­perience. What defect do they charge upon the other Gods, which they do not likewise at­tribute to Jupiter? What honour do they afford him, which they do not also allow to the rest? Do they erect more Statues or burn oftner and larger portions of incense to him? Do they con­secrate more Altars to him or build him a greater number of Temples? Do they give less credit to the Oracles of Apollo then to his, or make less account of his ceremonies? Are the rest ad­dress'd to by them with less reverence, or are they more sparing in giving them the title of Gods? Have they rather recourse to him in their afflictions? Do they render less praise to the others for victories which they obtain in battel? Whoso reads their histories, will find the other Gods as much praised, magnifi'd, sacrific'd to, adored, thanked and venerated as Jupiter; and if they allow him some priority in speaking, as we do to the President of a Council, yet in effect they equal all the others to him. But let them, if they please, place him in the highest throne in the heavens: what celestial revelation is that which multiplies Deities to millions? Certainly, if there be a Deity, it is infinite both in effence [Page 334] and power; if it be infinite, it is one, and suffers no companion or equal: If God be sufficient alone for the government of the whole Uni­verse, for what end were all these little pygmy-Gods, but onely to distract the minds of men from the true and supream Deity to them? And if he be not sufficient, how is he himself God who is so defective in his power? If the others be not Gods, but onely Daemons, either good or evil, creatures of the soverain God and mini­sters of his commands, then are those mortals idolaters that ascribe to them that title and glory; and by consequence their Religion is either hu­mane or rather diabolical, certainly far from be­ing divine, as they pretend.

But, alas, this is an Augean Stable. Though there should be some small Deities inferior to the supreme (which yet right reason abhors) yet He ought to be of a majesty so glorious, and of an essence and power so immense, as we have shewn above, that no corporeal image either by the hand in brass, or marble, or even by the mind in the fancy, can be framed of him. In as much as all corporeal figure not onely determines and limits the subject which it represents, but always refers it to the proportion of the thing it self under the figure whereof it is represented. Now how abominable was the idolatry of the Pagans in this respect? The Egyptians represen­ted the Deity under the figure of beasts, and A­pollonius in Philostratus blames their Gymnoso­phists for it. The Greeks and Romanes thought they did more sutably to represent him under a humane figure. How came this to pass, but only [Page 335] because they imagin'd that God resembled them­selves, and that there was a proportion as it were of greater and less between them and him? And was it not upon this apprehension that they were so forward to attribute the name of God to men, as to Kings, Emperors, and Phi­losophers, and that they dedicated Temples and Altars to them, and burnt incense to their Sta­tues? Wretched worms of the earth, that con­ceived they could comprehend what God is, and measure him by their fadom! To make Gods at their pleasure, and to become Gods themselves! But that which was most of all pernitious to them was the consecration of their Idols, into which by means of certain invocations they conceiv'd they could attract some portion of the essence of the Deity, or cause some extraordinary vir­tue to descend from him into their images; after which they look'd not upon them as meer Im­ages, but as things partaking of the divine na­ture it self. For under this pretext Daemons en­ter'd into them, making them sometimes speak intelligibly sometimes weep, sweat, bleed, re­move from their places, clatter their weapons, and practis'd divers other kinds of illusions in them, whereby the poor people were enchar­med, and conceiv'd the same opinion of them, as if they had had the Deity it self lodged in their Temples. Thus the evil Spirit exercis'd an ab­solute dominion amongst them. In short, it is an abuse of time to spend many words in shewing that all their opinions in this matter were false, their mysteries wicked, their observations fri­volous, and the service which they rendred to [Page 336] their Gods full of Idolatry. Their sacrifices were oftentimes barbarous and inhumane, for not onely the Massagetes, the Phoenicians, Cartha­ginians, Persians, and some other less civilis'd na­tions, but the Greeks, and Latines, and Gaules, whose Druydes were in great esteem, offer'd victimes of living men, yea some their own chil­dren, to their false Gods, as if they had con­ceiv'd God delighted to feed on their entrails. And who sees not that it was the devil, who is a murderer from the beginning, that incited them to those so lamentable bloody devotions. Their mysteries rendred men furious and frantick: for with what a spirit were those enraged women agitated after their devotions in the Bacchanal festivals? Their auguries by the flight of birds, their presages by the smoke of incense and the fat of their sacrifices, and by inspection of the intrals of immolated beasts were so absurd, that they seem to have been invented in derision of those that applyed themselves to them, and ar­gue that the learned Greeks and prudent Ro­manes, how great personages soever they thought themselves, had not much wisdom in the heart, as One of themselves sometimes said, since they sought it in the liver of beasts. Then for their ceremonies, there is nothing more inept and ridiculous. Was it not excellent to hear the Curetes and Corybantes when they were in pro­cession, some of them drumming upon Kettles, some upon Bucklers, and Helmets, and others gingling chains and Cymbals? Their manners of celebration were dishonest and unbecoming. For how could they but be asham'd both of those [Page 337] dances of naked men about tombes and of the races of naked men in the publick places of the Cities, yea at the meeting of women in the Lu­percalia? Their propitiations, purifications and oblations were unprofitable and inefficacious. For what could the death of poor beasts do in or­der to appeasing the anger of God? It was not they which had offended, nor did it belong to them to bear the punishment. If their blood had had the virtue of making propitiation for sins, the rich however otherwise wicked, were hap­py, that were able to offer hecatombs. And what efficacy was there in the aspersion of cold water to cleanse the conscience of man from his crimes? Certainly with good reason did One amongst them write,

Their miracles were for the most part illusions of Daemons; as the Serpent adored for AEsculapius in the City of Epidaurus, and afterwards carried to Rome to asswage the pestilence; and the ap­paritions of Castor and Pollux relating the tidings of the defeat of Perseus King of Macedonia, and all the speakings and sweatings of Images in their Temples. Or else they were tricks of Magick: as that of Appius Navius, who to gain credit to his Auguries, cut a Whetstone in two with a Ra­zor in the presence of Romulus; and also that [Page 338] manner of appeasing a raging plague in the City of Ephesus practis'd by Apollonius of knocking down a Daemon with stones, and his vanishing before Domitian, and all those jugling sleights that were done before him when he was at a feast with the Brachmans of India. Or they were simple gulleries; as that of the inundation of the Lake of Alba. The inventors of their de­votions were crafty men, who abused the cre­dulity of the people to render them plyable to their laws, and more respectful to their persons, as themselves confess of Numa Pompilius at Rome, and Minos at Crete, and some others. The most seemingly devout sectators of their Religions were very frequently contemners of them in the bottom of their hearts, though outwardly they put on a grave countenance to retain the affection of the vulgar; as Cotta, who in the books written by Cicero de Natura Deorum, sayes that Religions must be preserved in the state they were at first instituted for the conservation of Commonwealths, but that otherwise wise peo­ple laugh privately at all those mysteries; which was very religiously spoken by a Pontifex Maxi­mus. Or they were shamefully superstitious. For was it not gravely done of Fab. Maximus and C. Flaminius, one to depose himself from the Dictatorship and the other from the Mastership of the Horse, because a Mouse made a noise in the time of their installation; and of the Senate of Rome to call home Figulus out of Gallia and Scipio Nasica out of the Island of Corsica to abdi­cate the Consulship, because Tiberus Gracchus had observed in the books of Augurs that they [Page 339] were created contrary to the custome, and that the pavillions were not rightly placed in the pub­like Assemblies. Lastly, the means us'd to pro­mote and propagate this Religion were meerly humane, as wars, conspiracies, encroachments, invasions, sieges of places and battels. For how did the Romanes impose other Gods upon other Nations but by force of Arms? And how did they possess the Gods of their people but as spoiles of their enemies and trophies of their vi­ctories? Whereas, as we shall see hereafter, it was overthrown and ruin'd without a blow strucken, after a most wonderful manner.

CHAP. III. Whether the Profession of all Religions be Indifferent according to the Religion of Mahomet. And that this Religion is not of Divine Institution.

IT is of some difficulty to know certainly what was the opinion of Mahomet, the Author of the Turkish Religion, concerning this Questi­on, Whether the Profession of all Religions be Indifferent? For he seems sometimes to affirm it: as when he says in the Chapter of the Fable, That Jews, Samaritans, Christians, all that shall have trusted in God and believed the Resurrection of the Dead, and done good Works, shall be ex­empt from affliction, and they shall have nothing to fear at the day of Judgement. Sometimes a­gain he denies it: as when in the same Chapter and Page he saies, Certainly they which say that Jesus the son of Mary, is God, are impious; and the entrance into Paradise is forbidden to him that says God hath a companion equal to himself, but hell shall be his habitation. Which Assertions are manifestly contradictory. And he is other­wise alike unconstant and fluctuating. For some­times he promises the grace of God to all those that do good works, provided they believe the unity of the Deity; a thing which he is very in­stant [Page 341] in recommending. And sometimes he sayes that his Law is the onely way of truth and salvation, and almost every where he teaches to promote it by force of Arms; which does not well consist with his former maxime. For if all Religions equally endear to God and his fa­vour, what necessity is there of so many bloody wars for the propagation of Mahometisme? In truth it would be a strange thing if a good Musulman should think his salvation secur'd in the profession of the Christian Religion, which censures Mahomet for the greatest and most abo­minable Deceiver, that ever liv'd upon the Earth, and his Alcoran for a piece of unpa­rallell'd imposture and execrable impiety; or if he should partake in a communion where they pray continually for the destruction of the Em­pire of the Turke, and the extirpation of the Mahometan Religion. It is possible he might dex­trously explicate his meaning by this distinction, whereof there are some shadows frequently in his book; That if a person who once embraced the faith, afterwards happen to relapse from or renounce the same by constraint, yet he shall not be condemned, provided he retain the same in his heart: but if he do it voluntarily and with­out any violence, he shall never be redressed or restored into the right way by God, but shall be adjudged unto eternal pains. And it is well known, that whatever the Alcoran saies to the contrary, The Turkes hold the Persians for eter­nally damn'd, as hereticks of their Law, though they consent in the principal points of the same, and both unanimously hold that impostor for a [Page 342] supreme Prophet. But as to matter of life and ordinary practise, there is no people under the Sun more scrupulous in observation of things which they account as making part of their Re­ligion, or come neer it within a hundred leagues; as not to imploy any paper to unclean uses, be­cause the Alcoran is written in it, and other such niceties, which speak them indeed sufficiently foolish, but otherwise exact observers of their most minute ceremonies. Their publike prayers are constantly frequented, & their private never neglected. Their Fasts are strict and inviolable; and seeing they condemn the use of Wine as a­bominable, how can they be indifferent in other things more essential and important to Religion? Certainly though Christians have without com­parison better grounds for this pretension, that the truth is on their side, yet they are nothing neer so passionate for the promoting of Christia­nity, as the Turks are for the propagation of the Law of Mahomet. For they invite Christians to them by great rewards; they favour and ad­vance renegadoes: and when a war is under­taken, they are wonderfully zealous and ardent therein, if there be hope of extending their Be­lief, further thereby, and planting it amongst the Nations which they invade. Which also them­selves are so obstinate in retaining, that it is very ordinary to find amongst them great numbers of persons that have abandoned the name of Christ; but to see converted Turks in Christendom, is a thing then which nothing is more rare: Yea there have been some who have rather chosen to suffer an ignominious death, then to accept of a pardon [Page 343] for notorious crimes committed by them, on con­dition of being baptised.

But admit that Mahomet and the doctrine of his Law made for our, adversaries; yet I can scarce imagine that in this great light both of ho­ly and profane learning any man in these parts of the world would put any stress upon the testimo­ny of those people, who have not onely a pro­fest enmity to all liberal Sciences and such as are sutable to the excellence of humane understand­ing, but whose sottish and abominable superstiti­on equals and in some things surpasses that of the Pagans themselves. 'Tis true, he teaches not onely one supreme, but one single and solitary Deity, infinite in essence and power; and con­demns all those trifling Deities, which rendred the Pagan Religion so contemptible. He ac­knowledges that this Deity governs the World by his Providence, and that all is subject to his Empire, even things natural, fortuitous and contingent, and the motions of the mind of man. He preaches in general that God is a re­warder of virtue, and that he will repay wick­edness with sutable punishments. He extolls the mercy of God, and declares that he invites men to repentance. He exhorts to good works, and asserts the resurrection with a final judgement of all men at the consummation of the World. But all these things which are so specious and plausi­ble in themselves, are but as Sugar blended with his poisonous doctrines to make them be swal­low'd more pleasingly and unadvertedly; nor needs there any long discourse to discover his imposture.

I shall not at present insist on the qualifications of his person, how he was a wretched and vile Arabian, and raised himself to a reputation on­ly by robberies. Nor shall I mention his adulte­ries, and impure concubinage, nor his fraudes and violences. I shall pass over with silence, that it was onely the ambition of establishing an Em­pire amongst theeves that induc'd him to invent and hatch that Religion; which he suted to the genius of those he was to rule over, who had been accustomed to lead dissolute lives with wo­men, to enrich themselves by depredations and robberies, and to live by violence and rapine. Perhaps such as favour him, may be offended at these reproaches, though they contain nothing but what is true. Let the doctrine be considered alone in it self. The first thing which be pro­pounds is that he is a great Prophet of God, and a messenger by whose ministry he makes known his will to men. In the mean while, he acknow­ledges the Old and New Testament as divine Books; for he affirms that God imparted the Law to Moses, and the Psalms to David, and the Gospel to Jesus Christ, and in the general speaks very advantageously of them all, pretend­ing that as the Gospel succeeded the law, so like­wise the Alcoran succeeds the Gospel. But how is it possible that so great a change should arrive in the Church of God, that the Gospel should be as it were devoured by the Alcoran, without any prediction of so remarkable a matter either in the Old or New Testament? Certainly God hath followed a quite other method in all times as to what regards the various dispensation of his [Page 345] knowledge. In contracting alliance with Abraham, he in a manner laid the foundations of the Law and the Gospel, and declares things that did foreshew both the one and the other. The Law which came into the world four hundred years after, made express and direct mention of Jesus, and Mahomet himself does not deny but that Jesus was promised by the Prophets. How comes it to pass therefore that the Gospel hath intimated no­thing of Mahomet to advertise the Christians of so marveillous a mutation, to the end they might prepare themselves thereunto? It is true, that his advocates do here alledge two things: One, that Moses designed him by those words, God shall raise up unto you a Prophet like to me among your bre­thren; Hear ye him: The other, that his name was expresly written in the Old Testament, but that the Jews and Christians have expung'd it out of all places where it was in their books. But both these exceptions are vain. For, as for the first, The Gospel applyes those words of Moses to Je­sus Christ. Which if they do with just reason, how are they competent to Mahomet? If they be perverted to a contrary sense, whence is it that Mahomet confesses that the Gospel is of divine institution and revelation? Either Mahomet is an Impostor, that arrogates that to himself, which agrees to Jesus Christ; or the Gospel is false, to which notwithstanding Mahomet allows the dig­nity of being proceeded from the hand of God himself. For the second; it is without all colour of reason. For who first rased the name of Ma­homet out of our Books? Was it done, before he was born, and his doctrine had gain'd any re­pute [Page 346] in the world? No, surely: for neither the Jews nor the Christians had at that time any in­terest to move them to commit such a sacriledge. If he were named therein, yet they pretend it was with a promise to the Church of God, to raise up a great and soverain Prophet to it at a certain time; and who would have gone about to efface such promises out of the holy books? Certainly, as the Jews did not imbezle out of their Scriptures those which promised Christ be­fore he was revealed, so neither would the Christians have blotted out of theirs those of this supreme Prophet, before he came into the world, And if they have so carefully preserved the pre­dictions of Antichrist, who was to commit such horrible outrages, how much more dearly would they have kept the promises of this great and in­comparable personage? Was it then, after the times of Mahomet? Certainly, no: for there are copies of the Old and New Testament in their primitive language, and Greek and Latine Tran­slations made many ages before the birth of Ma­homet, which are inserted in the Writings of those that preceded him by a long time, and which are found wholly congruous with ours. The Chaldaick, Syriack, and Ethiopick Versions and Paraphrases which were performed long be­fore these was any mention of Mahomet in the world, have continued in their integrity to the present, without any trace of this prophecy. In a word, of all the ancient Christian and Jewish Commentators and Authors that have labored with an incredible diligence in the Old and New Testament for a thousand years past, none hath [Page 347] lest the least conjecture or shadow in his writings of ever having any knowledge of it. Could it possibly be, that this prophecy should be so to­tally rooted out of all the Writings in the World, in which it ought to have been implanted, as not one slip or sprig to be left of it, neither in Europe, nor Asia, nor Africa? And why were not the Turks carefull to preserve some Authentick Co­py wherein it might be found, thereby to con­vince the fraud of the Christians, and support the honor of their Prophet by the Scriptures? Certainly, we cannot have a greater animosity against Mahomet, then the Jews have against Christ: and we are not less jealous of the con­servation of our Gospel, then they were of their Law. Wherefore since they have not erased out of their Law the testimonies which authorise the person of Christ and his do­ctrine, there is no reason to suspect that we should have expunged out of the Gospel those that had favour'd Mahomet and Mahome­tisme.

But further, put case the Holy Spirit forgot to make mention of Mahomet as a great Prophet, in the Old and New Testament; yet if so be the Law, the Prophets, and the Gospel are proceed­ed from God, and the Alcoran also be, as its au­thors pretends, descended from Heaven, it is requisite that their doctrines agree together. For God cannot be repugnant to himself. Now the Jews observe an excellent correspondence be­tween the Prophets and the Law; and the Chri­stians between the Gospel, the Law, and the Pro­phets: but there is such a disagreement between [Page 348] these Books and the Alcoran, as neither the Mahometans, nor the Jews, nor the Christians, nor God himself can reconcile them together. I shall not now mention that the Old and New Te­staments teach that the Messias is both God and Man, and that there are three Persons subsisting in the Blessed Trinity, and that Christ dyed for the redemption of mankind: because they are points, which perhaps may be disputed: al­though, to receive the New Testament for the Word of God, and to reject the Doctrine of the Trinity, and that of Redemption by the Merit of Christ, is as if a man should take back with one hand that which he casts away with the other. I shall onely speak of those things which are clearer then the light it self. In the Alcoran, the History of the Creation of the World, of the Terestrial Paradise, of the Fall of man, of the Death of Abel, of the Deluge and the Arke of Noah, of the Angels which appear­ed to Abraham, of the Selling and Imprisonment of Joseph, of the Plagues of Egypt and Pharaoh, of the Calling of Moses and his Miracles, are so villanously corrupted and contaminated with Fables, both contrary to the truth, and ridicu­lous in themselves, that whatsoever is excellent, elegant, genuine, pathetical and divine in the books of the Jews, becomes cold and imperti­nent, absurd and devested of all verisimilitude, when this busie sciolist ha's the management of it. If Moses and Mahomet were guided by the same spirit, whence comes it to pass that they do not agree together? How do the Writings of the Former ravish attentive and sober minds [Page 349] with admiration, while the confused trash of the latter deters ingenuous spirits from the be­lief of those histories? In like manner, there is in the Evangelists a clear and coherent narration of the Annuntiation of the Angel to the Virgin, of the miraculous Conception of Christ, of the Birth of John the Baptist, and the history of Za­charias his father, of the Crucifying of our Savi­our and his Ascension into Heaven, and other like matters with their circumstances and depen­dances. All which is so perversly related in the Alcoran, debased with so many falsities and fa­bles, mangled and disguised with so many addi­tions, contradictions and intolerable mutilati­ons, that were it not for the proper names that he uses therein, and some slight marks by which the reader may judge that he intended the rehearsing of those histories, it would be difficult to imagine that he had ever heard of or understood any thing of them. Wherefore, if the Alcoran be proceeded from the Spirit of God, and yet it bears testimony to the divinity of the Gospel, how is it that the same spirit blows both cold and hot? Why does it report at one time after one manner, and differently at another? Had it lost the memory of that which pass'd in Judaea five or six hundred years before, and therefore recoun­ted the same afterwards after such a disagreeing manner? Or why did it not make use of the Memorials which the Evangelists and Apostles, who were ocular witnesses of those transactions, had recorded concerning the same? But its pos­sible, our Books have been altered. Which is a most frivolous exception. For if they were [Page 350] changed before the Sarazin name was heard in the World, by what prophetick spirit could it have been divined that Mahomet was to come, and so to new mold all the Old and the New Te­stament, out of despight to him? And if it was afterwards, how come our Books to accord from word to word and poynt to poynt, both in this and all other matters, with the Commen­taries of all them that writ in the first Ages of Christianity? How would the Jews have per­mitted the Christians so to alter the Old Testa­ment from the beginning to the end, and the Christians the Jews likewise the New, seeing they are so irreconcileable enemies amongst themselves? Is it not rather to be believed, that the ignorance of Mahomet, who had never pro­fest Christianity, and the bad memory of those that help'd him to compile his Alcoran, who sug­gested to him by roat, that little of it they had learnt by hear-say, caused him to committ all those hideous absurdities? And certainly he extremely mistrusted that people would believe so. For there is nothing he ha's so strictly for­bidden, as to dispute concerning his Law with the Jews, because his cheats and foists are so o­pen to discovery and conviction. Two things alone keep up in credit amongst his fellows the falsities which he vented with so outragious an impudence; Force of Arms, the terror of which he diffused wheresoever he came, and the Profound Ignorance of the people that fol­low him, to whom it is forbidden to enter into any examination of the verity of things.

But if he be fouly inconsistent and discordant in the relation of histories, he is no less in the do­ctrines which he teaches. For the Gospel ex­horts universally to patience, and would not have any maintain or advance it otherwise then by sufferings; and though in other things it con­demns not wars justly engaged in by Princes for conservation of their rights and the peace of their dominions, yet in matter of Religion it re­commends onely constancy in suffering of the Cross, and would have us be contented with that promise, that all shall be so well ordered by the Providence of God, that none shall have cause to complain that he leaves his own in oblivion. But what does Mahomet in this cast? There is not a chapter in all his book, wherein he do's not preach fire and sword, wars and massacres for the advancement of his Law. He promises re­wards in Paradise to those that shall acquit them­selves valiantly therein, and denounces eternal pains to cowards. And although (as He contra­dicts himself very frequently) he says sometimes that no person ought to be constrained by force to receive his Law, yet himself was the first that began so to make it be believed, and gave special commandments for it, which also ha's hitherto been practis'd by his successors upon all occasi­ons. In the Gospel Christ reduces Marriage to its ancient and natural purity, prohibiting Poly­gamy and Divorce, saving in case of adultery onely. By the Alcoran it is lawful to have four or five wives, if a man be able to keep them, and to add to them moreover if he pleases a number of concubines. How then is it, that Christ having [Page 352] taught that the permission of Divorce was an in­duligence to the people of Israel because of the hardness of their hearts, that at the beginning it was not so, and so having by degrees abolish'd polygamies which had been in custom amongst them; How is it, I say, that this Prophet, whose revelations are, if you will believe himself, the accomplishment of the Gospel and the Law, esta­blishes the same again with so boundless licenti­ousness? Certainly Christ did in this correct the defects of the polity of Moses, and put things into an estate convenient to the excellence of times under the Gospel. To urge the same fur­ther; Had there been any thing in the causes of the Gospel to be amended, Mahomet ought to have caused as much purity of holy marriage to have shin'd in his Law above that of Christ, as Christ had made to appear in his above that of Moses. And notwithstanding, clean contrary, he dishonors and pollutes it more then it ever was in the time of the Law of the Jews, or even amongst idolatrous nations that have had any knowledge of natural honesty. Add hereunto, that the Gospel being a Doctrine of holy liberty, and which hath favoured us with the grant of well-using such things as are neither good nor evil in themselves, hath abrogated the constitu­tion which obliged to abstain from them, and likewise recommended the use of them in time of necessity: which appears expresly in wine, which the Apostle advises Timothy to use for the weak­ness of his stomach. And so far was Christ from intending that his disciples and believers should abhor that sort of liquor, that he hath made it a [Page 353] part of the celebration of his most sacred my­steries. What new inspiration therefore had this pretended Prophet to forbid wine as an abomi­nable thing, and the game of Chess as a diabo­lical and cursed invention? As for the prohibi­tion of Games of Chance, such as Cards and Dice, he is most readily commended for it: but I know not what evil sports of industry had done him, that he should attribute the invention of them to wicked spirits, and excommunicate unpardonably out of his Paradise all those that divert themselves therewith. Above all things the contrariety of manners and fashions of be­haviour is remarkable between the authors of these two Religions, the Christian and the Maho­metan. For Christ shewed himself an unimita­ble example of all sorts of virtues, and Mahomet acknowledges him such, and his most bitter ene­mies could never find any thing in him that was to be blamed. Whereas Mahomet, like a mon­ster of uncleanness, places amongst the priviled­ges allowed him above others of his sect, that it was not lawful for them to have more then four or five wives beside some concubines, but he had liberty from God to espouse as many as he pleas'd. And that which is horrible to hear, he makes God speake as if he had endowed him with extraordinary vigor at his birth for that purpose. Yet I am the most mistaken man in the world if he were not jealous; so strictly doth he injoyn his wives not to go forth of the house, to make no flaunting of their beauty, and never to appear but with a veil over their faces: and so severely do's he forbid the Mahometanes to approach [Page 345] and caress them, yea to enter into his house, sa­ving at certain houres prefixed and determined by him. And for the height of continence in a Prophet of God, his sectators do not deny, that becoming enamour'd of the wife of Zeid his slave, he caus'd him to divorce her, that he might espouse her himself because of her excel­lent beauty; and afterwards this beast introdu­ces God speaking, and owning that it was he that married them together. Who can doubt, as to the rest, of the genius of this person?

But indeed the Paradise which he promises to his True-believers is an indubitable argument that the mind of this man was absolutely ingulf­ed in the dissoluteness of the flesh, and subverted with the love of women, and that his intention was to inveagle the minds of others by the same baits of lasciviousness. For with what beati­tude in the heavens above do's he feed their hopes? They shall be, saies he, in a Paradise wa­tered with fair and delightful fountains, which shall flow as gently as if they were of liquid cry­stal. They shall lye and repose in the shadow, under the cool of thick-leav'd and stately trees, which by their own motion shall intwine into pleasing bowers. There shall they eat all sorts of delicious fruits in all seasons, and shall be re­created with the melody of ten thousand little birds warbling amongst their branches; where­with shall be mingled the consort of most harmo­nious instruments and melodious voices. Their attire shall be magnificent and triumphant, as of silk purfled with gold, and bedecked with jewels and pearls. They shall sleep in beds imbroider'd [Page 355] with gold; their pillows shall have great pearles hanging at the corners, and their curtaines shall be beset with jewels beyond value and number. And that which tickles his fancy most, they shall each have their wives transcendently beautiful, with breasts delicately protuberant, and eyes like Jet enchased in Sylver, whiter then snow, and as great as large Eggs; which is a bigness some­thing exorbitant, unles he will give them an enor­mous stature at the Resurrection. And because sine Cerere & Baccho friget Venus, they shall ban­quet with them every day, and shall be diverted with all sorts of sports and recreations that can be imagined; and they shall be served at their feasts in fair large goblets of gold and crystal, beset with most precious jewels, and that by beautiful young Lads more smooth then pearls themselves, and perfumed with odors beyond that of Am­ber-gris and the most fragrant of Arabia. What can be concluded from this description of his rare Paradise, but that Mahomet was wholly of flesh, and there was nothing spiritual lest in his soul? Then, as for Hell, he describes it almost after the same rate. For he saies that the Wicked shall be cruelly tormented there in flames, and shall beg for a little water to refresh them; upon which shall be given a little drop of I know not what liquor, but so poisonous and corroding that it shall eat out their bowels, and yet they shall not dye; then they shall be fed against their wills with a fruit resembling the Devils testicles, which shall boil like fire in their stomacks; and they shall be cloathed with shirts of flaming pitch, and wear great collors of burning fire about their [Page 356] necks. Is not this an excellent prospect of the infernal pains? I know there are some of so perverted fancies as to seek out mysterious do­ctrines hidden under them. Yea they go so far as to make comparison thereof with that which is contained under the veil of some typical and figurative words in the books of the Old and New Testament. But were not these wild­brain'd persons sufficiently punisht in this life by their own folly, they should be answered with stripes and scourges instead of the reasons of Di­vines and Philosophers. For what is mysterious in the Bible is such, that were it, not under­stood, yet it offers nothing either absurd or ridi­culous. And that which is understood of it (as there is scarce any thing which is not, saving some prophecies not yet accomplished, in regard they are veiled under enigmatical expressions) ha's been manifested by events, which are the best Commentaries on prophecies, or illustrated by doctrines explicitely and cleerly delivered in o­ther places of it; So that the whole book does give light unto it self by its own beams. But in those prophecies of Mahomet, the obscure mat­ters are irrational and ridiculous in their obscuri­ty; and he that goes about to seek some doctrine worthy of esteem under the bark of his words, there is in the first place such a perpetual disson­ance in the text of the Alcoran, that he will soon perceive those words were not made for those things; and liken a noble and excellent doctrine cloathed with the seemingly mysterious style of that person to the story of Hercules's putting on the attire of a young maid; for what could be [Page 357] easier then to discern that those feminine habili­ments were unsutable to the robust and nervous members of him that overcame so many mon­sters? In the next place he will be forc'd to bor­row that doctrine some where else, either from the Holy Scripture, or from Philosophy, and transplant the same into the Alcoran as into a strange soil. For of it self it neither furnishes matter wherewith to supply its deficiency and emptiness, nor light to clear up its obscurities. And indeed, what a furious love of the Alcoran is it, that causes a man to observe such things in it, of which its author would not have us be­lieve he ever thought, and such as his interpre­ters reject, and his followers detest and abomi­nate? For why are they so affected to the Law of Mahomet, unless because it promises them all sorts of corporeal contentments? And should any expound those things to them in a mystical way, who doubts but that they would think his endeavor was to cause all the hope of their beati­tude to vanish into smoke?

Moreover, though for the Words and the Rime, that book was written in an Arabick style good enough, yet it is composed of parts so loose and incoherent amongst themselves, that 'tis a wonder how they that read it with so much ad­miration, do not advert its impertinence. For it is a hotchpot of several confused matters huddled together without any other connection then they have by chance; and it is sufficiently ap­parent that it was built at several times and by di­vers hands, and not followed according to one uniform and continued designe. For he mingles [Page 358] therein the Histories before the Law with those after it, those of the New Testament with the Wars of his own time, and sometimes divides one into two or three pieces, and contrarily sometimes ineptly molds two or three into one. Prayers, promises, exhortations, admonitions, commandments and laws, priviledges and histo­ries, descriptions of Paradise and Hell, Philoso­phy and Divinity after his manner, fables of times past and future, the number of the Celestial Orbs, and the death of a Cow are to be found jumbled together in one and the same Chapter. And you would say sometimes that they are verily the ravings of a man in a fever, or the enthusiasmes of a drunkard.

And if the order thereof be so perverted, the matter is little better. He saies that the Mind of man is a portion of the soul of God, which he breath'd into him at his first creation, and that under the shadow which the trees make they a­dore the Deity. He swears by the Alcoran in one place, and in another by his pen, that that book was sent to him from Heaven. That the Hea­vens would fall, were it not for the Angels that pray for us. That Jesus Christ had the soul of God. That many deserted Christ, because he was too eloquent. And disputing against the Christians he proves that Jesus is not the Son of God, and that God can have no Son, in as much as he hath no need of any thing whatsoever. [Page 359] He saies, Men were created of shadow, and Di­vels of flames of fire. And as for the creation of the rest of the Universe, he relates it in this manner: God created the Earth in two days, and fastned it, to the mountains as it were by anchors and cables. In the two next dayes he caused all sorts of herbs to spring up for the nutriment of animals. After which the earth being thus framed began to emit exhalations and steams, of which he formed the Heavens in two other days, in which he placed the Stars, and gave them principally in charge to chase away the Devils by the splendor of their light when they go to spy what is doing in Heaven. Did he rea­son or rage, when he writ all these excellent pieces of Divinity? But then he interweaves the same here and there with I know not what putid fables. He repeates a hundred and a hun­dred times, so distrustful is he it will not be be­liev'd, that God is the author of that rare book, & professes that all mankind together could not have made the least syllable of it. He sprinkles the doctrine of the resurrection with shamefull and unprofitable fables. Sometimes he goes a­bout to discourse of matters treated on by the Writers of the New Testament, and presently discovers that he understands nothing at all of them; as where he makes a comparison of Christ with Adam. Then in another place he trifles in­congruously about the Table of the Lord and the Sacraments of the Gospel. He boasts of having cemented the Moon together again which him­self had cut in sunder. He speaks of Predestina­tion and the Providence of God, as a Fatal De­stiny; [Page 360] and some say, 'tis by this means that he rendred his followers so adventurous in war, be­cause being perswaded that the decrees of that Destiny are inevitable, they cast themselves without heed into the mouth of danger, pre­suming they shall not dye, in case it be not pre­destinated, though their hearts were pierced with a hundred Javelins. Lastly, he contradicts himself at every turn. But the thing for which he most frequently defends himself, is his not doing of miracles, and he will not allow anyone to require them from him; though indeed he did all thing [...] which no man ought to undertake unless he can prove his vocation by authentick miracles. For he abolisht the constitutions which himself acknow­ledged were authoris'd by God, as those of the Law and the Gospel. He introduc'd a new form of Religion, and invaded the dignity of sove­raign Magistrates, levying armes against Princes, though he was but a private person, giving liber­ty to slaves in spight of their masters with an ab­solute authority, and maikng invasions and wars the most violent and bloody that ever were seen in the world, But ought not he to have autho­ris'd himself by miracles, to shew the right he had to do all this? Who ever attempted any of those things, as Moses, or Elias, or Christ, or his Apostles, but at sometime or other gave testi­mony of their celestial calling by miracles? Certainly when I consider on the one side the absurdity and grosseness of almost every thing he saies, I cannot but think he had great need of miracles to perswade the same to people of un­derstanding, and I should reckon it a miracle if [Page 361] any honest man could believe him. And on the other side when I consider the nature of his doctrine, and those to whom he perswaded it, I conceive it no great miracle to have allur'd and drawn carnal minds by the gaudy baits of a car­nal Paradise. In a word, it needs not to be much versed in that work to observe that it is a medly of all impertinent and bad things, amongst which there is sometimes found some little good, as there is in the Drugs of Egypt.

But what good there is there, is overwhelmed in an abysse of falsities, impieties, fables and im­pertinences; and it is not difficult to shew from what fountains he deriv'd it all. The good do­ctrines and sentences which are sometimes met with by the way, are taken from the Old and New Testament; The hatred which be perpe­tually testifies against the doctrine of the Trinity and the Deity of Christ, he receiv'd by contagion from the Arians and other hereticks that were in high repute in his time; That vile pollution of Marriage by the licentious multiplicity of wives and concubines, came from the Schole of the Nicolaitans; The rare carnal Paradise was the invention of Cerin [...]hus and the ancient Chili­asts; and that other foist, That Christ did not suffer really, but onely some Fantasme in his place, was forged by the Cerdonians, and others of that stamp. The greatest part of his Fables are borrowed from the Jews and some Apocry­phal Authors that were current, like false mo­ney, in those times: and his gross follies where­with [Page 362] he hath larded and strewed it throughout, came from his own ignorance, and for that hav­ing himself no knowledge at all neither of the Old nor New Testament nor of the writings of the Jews nor profane histories nor the Poets, he trusted to the memory of a lewd Monk, and some false Christians or false Jews, who ne­ver understood very much of them; whence all that he relates out of them is delivered rashly and at random. But on the other side, though there were nothing but truth in the whole Alco­ran, nothing but what were rational in it self and consentaneous to the Holy Scriptures, both for histories and doctrines, yet the author of it ought nevertheless to be held for no other then an Impostor, for that he dares to vaunt himself for a great Prophet. For such a Prophet as he pretends to be, ought not onely to declare things agreeing with those that were before him, but either to reveal doctrines unknown till then, or to expound those which were delivered enig­matically, and to unveil them out of their ob­scurities, and withall to make faith of his calling either by miracles or prophesies of things to come ratified by the events, the prediction of which does not import the vivacity of humane wit by penetrating by conjectures into some things undiscern'd by vulgar eyes, but the wis­dom of God to whom the bottom of the most im­penetrable secrets is conspicuous. Otherwise all Divines that ever writ concerning Religion either Jewish or Christian congruously to the books of the Old and New Testament, should be either Prophets or Apostles. Besides, were there [Page 363] no errors in the Alcoran, yet how many books have we that treat the best things contained therein in a manner incomparably more excel­lent. Wherefore he ought to be accounted a Deceiver, and the father of Deceivers, who be­ing so ignorant, so impertinent, so absurd, so discordant from truth, so fabulous and pollute, he yet glories that he is the greatest of all the Pro­phets, by whose ministry God revealed himself to men.

Now if Mahomet himself was so gross and mad a fool, his principal Doctors and interpreters had yet more need of manacles and chaines then he; which I shall shew onely by the sample of two books which they have in esteem. In one of which is described the journey of Maho­met into Paradise by the conduct of the Angel Gabriel. He entred (say they) into the first hea­ven, being mounted upon Alborach, an animal something bigger then an Asse, and having a hu­mane face; where he observ'd that that first sphere was of fine silver, and so thick as would require the space of five hundred years to be travell'd over by a foot-man. There they found an Angel so high as it would be a thousand years journey from his head to his foot, with seventy thousand other Angels, each of which had se­venty thousand heads, every head seventy thou­sand hornes, every horn seventy thousand knots, and the distance of fourty years journey between one knot and another. Also, every head had seventy thousand faces, in every of which there were seventy thousand mouths, in every mouth seventy thousand tongues, and every [Page 364] tongue spoke a thousand languages, in which they praised God seventy thousand times a day: you may imagine what a rare melodious noise they made. In the second heaven, which is made all of burnished gold, they found a great multitude of Angels greater then the former, a­mongst whom there was one whose seet touch'd the earth and his head the eighth Heaven. 'Tis strange no body ever saw him at least in one of the hemispheres. But all these were but pygmies in comparison of another, whom they met in the third Heaven, who was so prodigiously great that if he should hold all the world in the palm of his hand, he could nevertheless shut it. Yet be­twixt him and those which were in the fourth heaven, it is hard to say whether there were any proportion, unless some new Geometry be f und out to express it. For every one of them had seventy pair of wings, in each of which were seventy thousand pinions, and every pini­on was seventy thousand cubits long. But as for him that they saw in the fifth sphere, the Poets with their Briareus never understood any thing of him; for what was he with his hundred armes to the Angel that opened the gate to them, who had seven thousand arms, at the end of each of which he moved seventy thousand hands? In the other spheres they scarce found Angels of so enormous a stature: but in the eighth sphere they beheld I cannot tell what huge Gyant, so dread­ful, that he could have swollowed the Globe of the Earth & Sea as easily as a little Pill. Is the true History of Lucian and the Chronicles of Garagan­tua to be compared to this? In the other Book is [Page 365] recited the discourse between a Musulman and a Jew who puts questions to him about the princi­pal points of his doctrine; and here it is that the spirit of error and lying displayes its full sails. He saies God created a large Carton or Paper-vo­lume and a pen of so rare a shape, that it was five hundred days journey in length and four and twenty in breadth; and that with this pen, which ha's four and twenty points, he writes continually in that Paper all that ever was, is, or shall be in the world. That the light of the Sun and the Moon were equal in the beginning, so that the day could not be well distinguish'd from the night, but the Angel Gabriel as he flew by, struck the Moon with the end of his wing and made it loose half its light. Mention is made there of an Ox, of so immense a greatness, that between each of his horns (whereof he hath fourty) there is the distance of a thousand years journey. And yet he says this Ox is under the Earth, which the Hollanders sail round about in less then a year. And least the Sea should com­plain of being destitute of Mahometical Mon­sters, he assignes a fish to it, whose head is in the East, and tail in the West, which carries on his back the whole earth, seas, and mountains; a hea­vy load indeed; but the air and darkness which he casts into his burden do not much increase his weight. He makes Rats to have been produc'd in the Ark of the sneesing of a Hog, and Cats of the sneesing of a Lyon, perhaps by reason of the resemblance of their snout and muzzle. And he saies that Seraphiel (whosoever he be, is not worth much enquiry) on the day of resurrecti­on, [Page 369] shall by sounding a trumpet of five hundred years journey long, puffe out all the souls of the deceased, which being so dispersed about the world shall fly about, every one seeking its own body. They that find allegorical senses in these rare texts, I think no reasonable man will judge but a portion of Hellebore were more fit for them then argumentative discourses. Wherefore let him be perpetually concluded and accounted a most stupid and senselesse person, who will not subscribe to this Result, that the doctrine of Ma­homet is so far from being of divine revelation, that it is not so much as of humane institution. Or if man had any share in it, the evil spirit, when he contriv'd it, was lodged in his hypochon­dres.

CHAP. IV. Of the Religion of the Jews; Whether it allows Indifference: And how it ought to be held of Divine Revela­tion.

I Intimated above that the Jewish Religion is not to be distinguished according to the Sects of those that profess it, but accord­ing to the times in which they liv'd. Neverthe­less in this contest against those that maintain Indifference in the external profession of all Re­ligions, it is not material, if they betake them­selves to the Jewish, in what time they consider it, before or after the birth of Christ. For if they plead it as it was establish'd by Moses and conti­nued down to the birth of Christ, there never was any that so severely forbad its professors to participate in strange ceremonies. The first Com­mandment of their Law is, Thou shalt have no o­ther Gods before me. And next, Thou shalt not make to thy self the likeness of any that is in Heaven above, or in the Earth beneath, or in the Waters under the earth; Thou shalt not bow down before it. Comprehen­ding in one and the same prohibition both devo­tion towards other Gods, and the expression of it towards their Images. And all the books of Moses are in a manner but a commentary in con­firmation [Page 368] of these two Commandments, repeated and inculcated from page to page. As likewise all the ceremonies enjoyned by the same Law, differing from those of all the Gentiles, were as a separation between those Nations, which withheld the Gentiles from approaching to the Jews, whose God they did not know, and the Jews ftom communicating with the Gen­tiles, whom they looked upon as profane and idolatrous. Marriages with the Daughters of strangers were forbidden them, least they should become snares to them and cause them to turn a­side to other Gods: and the total extirpation of the inhabitants of Canaan was commanded, to the end there might remain no memory of them or their idols, which might be an occasion of perversion and scandal to them. And it ap­pears by many experiences that God and men construed this Law after this manner. For there is no where else to be found examples of greater resolution and constancy in maintaing of Reli­gion. They have chosen rather to be cast into burning furnaces, and amongst the paws of Li­ons, then to conform to the idolatries of Baby­lon. They have endured cruel deaths rather then they would taste of swins flesh, which was forbidden to them, and in short, have cheer­fully suffered all kinds of oppressions and vio­lences for the desense of their Law. On the o­ther side we do not finde more dreadful judge­ments inflicted on any nation for associating with other people in their religious Ceremo­nies. For they have been inslaved by their ad­versaries, their Country turn'd into desolation, [Page 369] and their whole Nation carried away by their vi­ctorious enemies into a strange Land. And indeed the case is too notorious of it self to be doubted. If the Jewish Religion be considered as it is pro­fessed by them at this day, being themselves pre­tend it to be of a permanent durance, and not subject to any variation, it follows that they must accord in this point with the doctrine of their ancestors. For wherefore should it be changed in this particular, being in all others in­variable? And truly their practise is not diffe­rent from that of old. They bear still about them a token imprinted in their flesh, which se­perates them from the rest of mankind. They abhor and despise other nations as ignorant of the true God: and abominate Images and Statues more in these days then ever, as reminding them of the idolatry heretofore so expresly forbidden to their fathers. So that they choose rather to be the scorn and hatred of all Nations, and de­prived of all hopes of honors, pre-eminences, great possessions, and offices, which are so pow­erful attractives to the rest of mankind, then to conform onely in outward profession to our devotions, and set foot in our Churches. But if they were of the Opinion of our Indifferents, were it not an easie thing for them to be baptis'd, and thereby redeem themselves from so many mischiefs, and partake in the honours of the Countries in which they dwell? It is true, some Marchands amongst them dissemble in such places where they are not permitted to sojourn; but they do it with great regret and against their consciences. Yet they cannot be brought to do [Page 370] any thing on the Saturday for fear of violating the Sabbath, or to eat the flesh of swine, the prohibition whereof they account perpetually valid.

But should the present Jews have degenerat­ed in this particular, as they have done in many others, from the faith and practise of their ancest­ors, yet there ought not any account to be made of their testimony as to the matter in question. For whatever advantages they have above the Pagans and Mahometans, they are nevertheless deviated from the way of salvation as well as they, and cannot pretend hereafter to have that Divine Revelation which ought to be the sole Rule to men of piety and devotion. Indeed their race is the noblest of all others; and there is no King or people that can boast to be descend­ed from so ancient a stock, nor prove their pe­digree by so authentick evidences. For they are not guilty of the ridiculous vanity of the Aegyptians, who by their own account are many thousand years elder then the World; nor of that of the Athenians, who thought themselves sprung out of their own soil. They do not pre­tend to have been formed of the Stones of Pyrrha, nor go about to rake the badges of their nobility out of the rubbidge of Troy. They shew by a great series of time, and an exact & clear display of divers periods the world of, that their first father was the common father of all, and that no nation can have any manifestation of its original but from their Records. As for the Antiquity of their Religion, it preceded all others by many Ages. It ha's been ratified by an infinite num­ber [Page 371] of great and excellent miracles, which made that Nation sometimes formidable to their neigh­bors, and which being frequently exploited, did without question advance it above the pa­rallel of all other people of the Earth. It ha's preserved amongst them the knowledge of the true God, and delivered the same to us, disin­tricated from the confusion of so many false Dei­ties, to whom our Ancestors were devoted. It gave them to know after what manner the World was at first formed, and ha's preserved fresh amongst them the memory of the most re­markable matters that arrived in that primitive Age of Men, of which other nations have had onely some kind of obscure and faint glimpses in fabulous stories, which afford onely enough e­vidence to convince the books of the Pagans of vanity, and to confirm the truth of what is found in the Jewish histories. And that which advantages them yet more, is, that their Law contains such an excellent model of all piety and virtue, that more wisdom ha's been revealed to them in ten words onely, then can be collected out of the Books of all the Philosophers, were the quintessence extracted out of them. In a Word, the Books of their Law and the Revela­tions of their Prophets are proceeded from Hea­ven; and as it shall more amply appear, they bear with them most undeniable testimonies of it. But the polity of their Religion, how divine so­ever, was to be changed; and its time being expired, we must otherwhere seek the rules of that which we ought to follow.

Wherefore to shew that their Law was to be changed, and that it was establisht but for a time, it must be consider'd in each of its princi­pal parts; As in the Political Laws, upon which their Republick was founded; In their Ceremo­nial Ordinances, in observation whereof con­sisted all their external divine service; And in the Ten Commandments of the Two Tables, which contain the General Precepts of piety to­wards God, and virtue which ought to be pra­ctis'd amongst men. As for their Political Laws, they were excellent indeed for the government of that Nation, and establish'd with singular Wisdom. But I conceive there is no Jew so opinative, as to account them proper for the go­vernment of all sorts of Nations in all Ages. For every country, every people, and time must have its respective laws, and there is necessity of altering the same according to the variety of circumstances. And as Divorce was permitted in the Commonwealth of Israel in its political go­vernment, for some necessity particular to that Nation, so there may be some other Nations, in which likewise for some political necessity it must be absolutely forbidden. It would seem unrea­sonable in a country where the houses are built with plain ridges, for the publick authority to demolish all sort of edifices of that fashion, & en­join to build only with battlements and ballisters. Now it is as little comprehensible, how in such a Country as France is, the Laws given by Moses concerning the determination of Law-suits could be practis'd. It would be requisite not on­ly to change the order of Magistrates and pra­ctise [Page 373] of Courts, but to new mold the manners of the intire Nation. And how could the divers forms of Governments of Kingdoms and Empires be conformed to the political Law of Israel, as Monarchy in France, Aristocracy in Venice, and Democracy in Athens? Must they that should be­come Jews in these parts of Europe, renounce all soverain powers that are so well establish'd therein according to the genius of every Nati­on, to reform them all according to the model of the Jewish policy? And if the great Cham of the Tartars with all his subjects, should cause them­selves to be circumcised, to what purpose would the Laws of Tenths for the Levites, & the like, be in his Country? Indeed all the policy of Israel was regulated either according to the nature of that people, different from most others, or according to the division of their Tribes, wherewith other Na­tions had no resemblance, or else according to the quality of the Country, which was unlike to others in many respects. But on the other side, their great Legislator, the most pious a­mongst their Kings, and the divinest amongst their Prophets have expresly promis'd the Call­ing of the Nations to the communion of one and the same Law with the Jews, so that they shall make up but one people. Rejoyce O ye Nations, his people, saith Moses, Deut. 32.43. And David in the 117. Psalm, O praise the Lord, all ye Nations; praise him all ye people. Why? but for being called to his knowledge. And in Psal 69.1. O sing unto the Lord a new song: All the Earth sing unto the Lord, vers. 3. Declare his glory among the heathen, and his Wonders among all people. But Isaiah more ex­presly [Page 374] when he promises in the 55. chap. of his Revelations, that the Messias shall be equally a Legislator of the Jews and others, vers. 4. Behold, I have given him for a witness to the Nations, to be a leader and commander of the people. Behold, thou shalt call a Nation that thou knewest not; and the Nations which knew not thee shall run unto thee, be­cause of the Lord thy God. And 'tis for the same reason that he speaks thus to the Church of God in the foregoing Chapter, Sing, O barren, thou that didst not bear; break forth into singing and cry aloud, thou that knowest not what it is to travel with child, &c. Enlarge the place of thy tent, and let them stretch forth the curtaines of thy Pavillions; spare not, lengthen thy cord and strengthen thy stakes. For thou shalt spread forth on the right hand and on the left; and thy posterity shall inherit the Nations, and make the desolate Cities to be inhabited. And the Jews themselves await the accomplishment of these promises. Wherefore it follows necessarily that their Law, as to the policy of the Commonwealth, was to alter; and that whereas before, it oblig'd all those who had any interest and title in the Alliance which God had contracted with them, the use thereof in this respect is now become free, and not necessarily obligatory. The truth is, though political Laws of Republicks be nothing but the natural laws of justice and honesty, which being general are applyed to particular matters according to the diversity of circumstances, which are infinite and infinitely variable; provided that in the go­vernment of every Nation the image of that na­tural justice be always resplendent in their Laws, it is not important whether there be difference [Page 375] in things of lesser concernment. And it would be too rigorous a yoak, to subject all Nations to the same form of Laws, without regard whe­ther the humors of men and conditions of times permit it. Now whereas the Law of Moses is composed of three parts equally, the change of one necessarily infers with it the alteration of the rest. And it must needs fall out here as it do's in the building of Palaces. For he that should go a­bout to change one part of a great uniform edifice it would be needful for him to change it all, and ruine it all from top to bottom; otherwise the dis­parity of its parts would render it unproporti­onal and deformed.

But this is more manifest in the Ceremonial Law, in which consisted all external service performed to God. For it would be more diffi­cult for all Nations to obey that, then the Po­litical. What likelihood is there, I beseech you, that God would tye all Nations, so remote and dispers'd upon the face of the Earth, to repair and sacrifice at Jerusalem, and assemble there at solemn Feasts? That from the North, South, East and West, they should all be there at a time appointed to perform that service, notwithstand­ing the interval so many Seas & mountains: And if when Jerusalem was besieged by Titus, the mul­titude of men grievously pestred the place, al­though there was onely the Nation of the Jews assembled there at that time, what Jerusalem would be capable of containing all other Nati­ons besides, which ought to come to the know­ledge of the true God? Could the Tribe of Levi have furnished Sacrificers enough, or Judea [Page 376] beasts for victimes? Could the Temple, had it been twenty times as big as that which Herod built, have received the twentieth part of those that were to perform their devotions in it? And what a horrible slaughter would there be, or how could they escape the deluge of blood which would fill the streets if every one were to offer his beast? But indeed he that shall duely consider the whole structure of the Religious Policy which was sometimes amongst them, shall find that it ha's not the appearance of a thing that was to indure to perpetuity, but was onely the platform and delineation of some other to come in its place. For to what end serv'd the massacre of so many beasts? Was it, because God took pleasure in the flesh of bulls, or in the blood of Goats? Himself denies it in their Pro­phets. In the 50. Psalm vers. 8. I will not reprove thee for thy Sacrifices, or for the burnt-offerings which should be continually before me. I will take no bul­lock out of thy house, nor he-goats out of thy folds, &c. Vers. 13. Will I eat the flesh of bulls, or drink the blood of goats? Offer unto God thanksgiving, &c. Also, Thou takest no pleasure in sacrifices, else would I give them; the burnt-offering is not accep­table to thee. The sacrifices of God are a contrite spirit, &c. And Isaiah in a severer strain, chap. 66. He that killeth an Ox is as if he slew a man; he that sacrificeth a sheep, as if he cut off a dogs neck; he that offereth an oblation, as if he offered the blood of a swine; he that burneth incense, as if he blessed an Idol. And certainly he should have too low an opinion of God, that should imagine he deligh­ted in beholding the spilling of the blood, or [Page 377] the smoking of the fat of sacrifices. He takes pleasure in the piety of the heart and in virtue, and not in the odor of incense or the death of beasts. Was it to make propitiation for their sins, and secure them from the curse denounced by their Law? Much less. For 'tis possible some man might fancy God so good towards his crea­tures, as to be pleas'd with such offerings pro­ceeding from a good heart, as testimonies of its devotion; But he is too just for any to imagine, that when he is incensed he maybe satisfied with trifles. Lastly, was it to exercise the people of Israel, and keep them in discipline, as curbes and pasternes are us'd to unruly horses, and di­vers rules of discipline are prescribed to youth inclinable to deboshery? This indeed was one of the uses of the Law, but the Jews will not acknowledge it, and which they cannot have learnt but from the Doctors and Founders of the Christian Church. Moreover, these exercises are not to be continued for ever: We take away the shackels from horses when they are become tractable, and leave children to their own con­duct when they come to age. Can it be thought then, that the Church of God should be alwaies in infancy, and never come to perfect age to have no more need of so exact and so rigorous a discipline? Let them consult their Books well, and they will find that in process of time God gave them to understand that all those things were but shadows, which were to vanish when the truth should be manifested, and that propor­tionably as that time approacht, the contempt that he had of those things in themselves was [Page 378] discover'd. For in the books of Moses they are most severely enjoyned as if the service of God really consisted therein. In the Psalms of David God begins to decry the use of them. And Isaiah in the first and the sixty sixt Chapter of his Pro­phecies, speaks so disadvantageously of them, that he almost as good as saies that they were even already abolisht. I know well, that he speaks of them after a comparative manner with internal vertues, which the Jews wholly forgot, confining themselves strictly and trusting in the observation of these externals. But I conceive that Moses in reproving the contempt of internal piety, would never have spoken with such dis­dain of those corporeal sacrifices, and there is nothing in all his books but gives assurance of the contrary. Whence then should this diffe­rence between them arise, since they were all guided by the same spirit, but that Moses was yet too remote from the body in which those shadows were to terminate? To what end were their Arks, Propitiatories, or Mercy-seats, Tables of Shew-bread, candlesticks, dishes, ba­sins, courtains, covertures, veiles, altars, sives, gridirons, censers, and lamps, in a word all the accoutrements and deckings of the Tabernacle, which if they represented nothing but what they barely seem, would be frivolous and tedi­ous? Especially, why should God so particular­ly give the whole scheme of it, and injoyn Mo­ses so strictly not to transgress in any thing from the pattern shewn to him in the mountain? Certainly if all this had no further reference then to the Tabernacle, no body can give a per­tinent [Page 379] reason why God should make so scrupu­lous a description of it, or why he should im­part extraordinary graces of his spirit to the chief managers of the whole work, unless we will say that God takes pleasure, like us, in im­brodery and painting. But when he saies ex­presly that it was onely a representation of what he had shewn to Moses, he apparently intimates that he aimed further, and that the Tabernacle was but the image of that which God reserved to himself till another time, and the Israelites were to expect. For seeing our minds are ne­ver contented with the images of things, when-they consider that they are meerly images, be; cause they cannot perfectly represent the life and the more exquisitely the images seem to be made, the more desirous are we to see the reali­ty; God admonishing them that the Ark and the Tabernacle were but representations of that which he kept hid with him, would by degrees excite them in the desire to behold the thing it self. But he would never have excited the appe­tites of men for nothing: if he inflame our hearts with any desires, he alwayes supplies where­with to satiate them, and never deludes men with vain expectations. Wherefore it must needs be that he ha's exhibited the same in it's due time, and the figure ha's given place to the substance. For at the appearance of the body it would be a folly afterwards to stick to the consi­deration of shadows. God therfore ha's done like an excellent Architect who intending to build a great and magnificent Palace, before he cuts out the porphyry, prepares the pillars, forms the [Page 380] arches, carves and squares the pieces of Cedar for the feeling or the Wainscot, designes out his whole work with a Crayon on paper, and takes pleasure in beholding the proportions of it in such an Idea. For before building up his Church of all Nations, and revealing his spiritual se­crets to it, he was pleased first to behold the de­sign of it in the structure of the Tabernacle, and in the whole Legal Polity of the Jewish Church. Not to make an assay, or take his proportions, for fear of failing when he should come to the effect; for all his works are present before him from eternity, but because the time did not yet require that he should put his hand to the true building, he would as it were please himself in the Idea which he had pourtraied of it in the Na­tion of the Jews, and give those that should one day see the real extribition of the thing it self, singular incitements to admire his wisdom in the wonderful correspondence of the building with the shadow.

Now in my judgement the present Jews ought to reflect more seriously upon the state of their affairs, and the change which is really and evi­dently befallen them; which if they did, they must be very obstinate not to be convinced by such experience. God caused the tabernacle to be built in the desart, and placed his Ark in it, giving them to know thereby that he dwelt with them under tents, during their attending the ac­complishment of his promises. Afterwards he permitted a Temple to be built to him in Jerusa­lem, wherein the Ark was at length setled, which till then had been ambulatory. As if he [Page 381] would signifie that his abode was fixed among them, and their Nation absolutely confirm'd in the promised land. And who would not have said at that time, that the Temple would con­tinue as firme as the mountain it self on which it stood, David having utterly defeated his ene­mies and filled all the neighbouring countries about him with the terror of his armes, and Solo­mon injoying so profound a peace? Nevertheless, about four hundred & fifty years after, Jerusalem is ruin'd, the Temple ras'd to the ground, and all the sacred vessels carried away to Babylon; and as for the Ark, it was never seen after in the World. Behold a notable change befallen both to their Civil and Religious Polity. For they had no longer a King, which was the head of the Republick, nor the Ark, which was incompara­bly the most venerable part of all their Religious Mysteries. Yet this was but the fore-runner of a more universal change. The distinction of their Tribes remained still, and the Royal race was owned in that of Judah, and that of Levi was preserved for the restoring of their sacri­fices. 'Tis likewise true, that at the end of se­venty years they return'd from their captivity, and rebuilt the Temple, but much less then that before, inferior to it in all prerogatives, and es­pecially in being destitute of that particular testi­mony of the presence of God which was before in the Mercy-seat. Why was it thus, but one­ly because the time was drawing nigh, in which they should seek their God no more upon the Earth, and that consequently their Religious polity should be ended, seeing it had this ex­press [Page 382] promise, I will dwell in the midst of them, and abide there; which is not to be understood but of the Tabernacle and the Ark, At length, after many profanations, the second Temple is de­stroyed from the foundations, the City of Jeru­salem burnt to ashes, the Nation dispers'd, with­out Levites, without sacrificers, without sacrifi­ces, without offerings, without solemn Feasts Sabbaths, Altars, Incense and Lampes, and this for the space of fifteen or sixteen hundred years, without any hopes of ever being recollected from so dreadful a dissipation. And which is more, all their Tribes so confounded by their long wandrings and by the search that ha's been made for all the evidences of their Genealogies to abolish them, that they know no longer to distinguish which is Judah, or which is Levi, or Benjamine, or any other Line. Certainly if that dispensation was to have been perpetual, God would never have permitted so long an inter­ruption of it, much less such as it should be im­possible to be redress'd. For should they rebuild Jerusalem, yet the Function of Sacrificing hav­ing been restrain'd to the Family of Levi with exclusion of the rest, they could not have any lawful Sacrificers, by reason of the confusion of their Tribes.

Let us now proceed to the Law of ten Words (or Decalogue) contained in the two Tables. In which two things are considerable. First, that it is, as was said above, a perfect model of piety and virtue, and in a manner the image of God himself. Secondly, that God propounded the hopes of life to the Jews upon observation of [Page 383] this Law together with the Judicial and Cere­monial; and forbad the transgression of it with threatnings of an unevitable curse. For these are the termes, Do this and thou shalt live; and, Cursed is he that continueth not in all the words of this Law to do them. Now, as for the first of these things, no person can deny to the Jews, but it is of perpe­tual duration, and ought to be uniformely ob­serv'd amongst all Nations. For since God is im­mutable in his own nature, his image also must of necessity be alike invariable; and I have al­ready asserted that his image consists in the holi­ness and justice of this Law. But as for the other, there must necessarily betide a change in that as well as in the other Laws. For though God ha's instituted Religion to save men and not to be as a snare to make them obnoxious to eternal dam­nation, how could this law be the means of at­taining salvation, which no man (except one onley) ever perfectly observed in all ages, yea which no man can observe in any age? Not that his Commandments are impossible to be performed in themselves, if we were not fallen from our ancient and primitive Integrity. For what is there more proportionate to our na­tural faculties, if they were in their integrity, then to love God with all our heart, and our neighbor as our selves? But for that sin ha's caus'd such a disorder in us, and imbued us with so profound habits of vices, it is always impossi­ble for our affections to be duely conformed to that obedience. Since therefore, according to the Religion of the Jews the hope of salvation is solely in the absolute observation of this Law, [Page 384] and on the other side the violation of it is accom­panied with an evitable curse, conscience, which checks all men for sin, suggests to them, that either there must be some change in Religion as to this regard to become capable of salvation, or that Religion was instituted not out of a designe to save but to curse and destroy. They will say per­haps, that there are promises of mercy mingled here and there in this Law, for those that shall repent of their sins, whereof their conscience convinces them. And I grant it. Miserable had they been, if it had not been so. For how could they have appeased the disquiets of their conscience? But I say the promises of mercy to penitents do not belong to the Contract establi­sh'd between God and them, according to which he promised life to those that kept it, and denoun­ced a curse to those that should transgress it in the least clause. For how can one and the same Covenant be capable of two such contrary clauses, Cursed is whosoever shall not observe this Law in all points; and, Mercy it promised to those that repent of the transgressions which they commit. What is repenting but returning to be a good man? And what is to be a good man, but to observe this Law? Therefore Re­pentance is an observing the Law after a trans­gression, I say an observing it, inasmuch as the Repentance be good and durable. Whence these two propositions will be found contradi­ctory in one and the same Contract, Cursed is whosoever abideth not in all the things of this Law to do them; and, Whosoever does not abide in all things of this Law, is not therefore ac­cursed, [Page 385] provided he does not alwayes persevere in his transgression, but at length repent of it. Now it is not consentaneous to the Wisdom of God to contract an alliance of so repugnant parts. But further, There will not be onely a contradiction in the denouncing of the Curse but also in the promise of reward. For observe how the Law speaks; Do these things and thou shalt live, that is, Observe this Law in all points, and thou shalt have life for thy salary of observing it. So that he that obtains Life by the Law, ob­tains it by virtue of his observation thereof, as a recompense. Now Life and the Curse are so op­pos'd that he that ha's not life falls into the curse, and on the contrary he that is delivered from the curse is instated in the injoyment of life. As he that is in health or in the light, is thereby exempt from diseases and darkness, and con­trarily he that is sick or in darkness is necessarily depriv'd of health and light; The injoyment or sense of the one consisting in the privation of the other. If therefore the same Law says, Repent and thou shalt obtain mercy, seeing mercy im­plyes deliverance from the Curse deserved, and deliverance from the curse is nothing but the in­joyment of life, it will follow that by the same contract life will be obtain'd as a recompense of the observation of the Law, and nevertheless be a favour too in regard of mercy. Which are things directly repugnant, and cannot be reconcil'd to­gether. These promises therefore belong to a­nother Covenant different from that which saies, Do these things, and Cursed is he, &c. and they were the seeds of that other Law which was to [Page 386] succeed in the place of the ancient one, and suf­ficient to bring penitents to salvation in that time and intitle them to Life (not by virtue of obser­vation of the Law, but through pure mercy) yet such as were to be more clearly and abundantly revealed. And let them but remark a little what their own Prophet David saies in the 32 Psalme; Blessed is he whose transgression is forgiven, and whose sin is covered. Blessed is the man unto whom the Lord imputeth not iniquity, and in whose spirit there is no guilt. When I kept silence, my bones wax­ed old, through my roaring all the day long. Because day and night thy hand was heavy upon me, my moi­sture is turned into the drought of Summer. I have acknowledged my sin unto thee, and mine iniquity have I not hid. I said, I will confess my transgressions unto the Lord, and thou forgavest the punishment of my sin. I appeal to themselves whether this be the lan­guage of a man that seeks the quiet of his consci­ence in those words of the Law, Do these things and thou shalt live? For the peace of conscience ariseth from the hope of life. But when he looks towards the Law, he is desperate, and hath no peace in his soul. His satisfaction is in the forgiveness of his sins, and therefore in the assurance of mercy. And yet this was David, a man according to God's own heart, that spoke thus. If therefore such a man as he did not obtain life by virtue of this contract, Do these things, what other dares claim a right upon such terms? If no man obtaines the same upon that account, is it not necessary that some other Covenant succeed, namely that of mercy and grace, in the room of that which was ineffectual? But we prosecute this [Page 387] too far; Let them hear God himself in the 31. Chapter of Jeremy, vers. 31. Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new Covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah, Not according to the Covenant that I made with their Fa­thers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, which my Covenant they brake, although I was an husband to them, saith the Lord. But this shall be the Covenant which I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the Lord, I will put my Law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts, and will be their God, and they shall be my people. And they shall teach no more every man his neighbor and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord; for they shall all know me, from the least of them, unto the greatest of them, saith the Lord: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will re­member their sin no more. Who sees not that he distinguishes the Covenants by these two things? First, that he will give them the grace to violate the New no more; which he did not under the Old. And secondly, that he will pardon under the New the transgressions of the Old, which under it he did not nor could, the denunciati­on of the curse annexed thereunto being irre­vocable. And what can be said more? Does not God in promising a New Law foretell the abroga­tion of the first? And why should he term this Old, if it ought to be perpetual, since perpetual things never wax old, age being a tendency to an end, till the thing growing old comes to be to tally extinguish'd. But whereunto then ser­v'd this Law, if none could obtain salvation by it? Truely, as Ceremony was a preparation [Page 388] to that which was to succeed and to give the Is­raelites some taste and knowledge of it, as in a shadow, so the old Law was a preparing of the minds of men to receive that which was to be enlarged and communicated under the other. For the more they have attempted to fullfill the Law of the ten Commandments the more have they found by experience of their vain indevours, that they had need of that grace which ingraves the Laws of the Lord upon our minds. The greater knowledge they have had of their trans­gressions and the curse which they had incurr'd, the greater necessity have they discern'd of that Pardon and propitiation which was to be exhi­bited to them under the New Covenant, and breathed more ardently after it. Which shall be shewn more clearly in the ensuing Chapters.

CHAP. V. That the time of the duration of Moses's Law is expired; and consequently that some other must be come in its place.

I Will not examine at present the solidity of that distinction of the Ages of the World made by some Jews, That two thousand years pass'd before the Law, two thousand under the Law, and two thousand more shall run out under the reign of the Messias, ac­cording to which computation the world is to last six thousand years. In the first period there will be found a mis-reckoning, unless the two thousand years of the Law be extended to the first Covenant entr'd into with Abraham, which indeed contained the principles of it. Concern­ing the last I will not determine; For not onely the disposing of times and seasons is in the hand of God, but to him alone belongs the knowledge of things to come. But as for that in the middle, it is a long time since those two thousand years were expired, not onely counting from the days of Abraham, but likewise from the publica­tion of the Law upon the mountain. And never­theless, as they think, they do not yet behold the Messias come; which might be another error in their account. I shall only say it was very consen­taneously done to make the Messias succeed after the Law, as he that was to bring the abrogation of it. For since it was to be changed, to whom [Page 390] could it belong to make that alteration, but to him of whom Moses said, The Lord thy God shall raise up unto thee a Prophet from the midst of thee, of thy brethren like unto me; unto him shall ye hearken; And David, The Lord hath sworn, and it shall not repent him, Thou art a Priest for ever after the or­der of Melchisedeck; And all the Prophets, That he was to be a King sitting upon the throne of David and commanding over the Kings and Ru­lers of the Earth. For since he ought to be a Pro­phet like Moses, he must also be a Legislator and continual Mediator of a Covenant, because it was this which render'd the office of Moses emi­nent above that of all other Prophets. Now he would be neither Legislator nor Mediator of a Covenant, if that of Moses were in force during his reign. Next, In as much as he ought to be a Priest after the order of Melchisedech, the Leviti­cal Priesthood must be changed. Lastly, if he ought to be the King of Kings, he must establish other ordinances then those enacted by Moses which were onely to rule the people of Israel, and not to command over Kings themselves. But further; All the Law, by acknowledgement of the Jews themselves, tends to the Messias as to its end, and all the parts of it concentre and ter­minate in him. Wherefore if the time prefixed for the coming of the Messias be pass'd, of neces­sity also the term of that Law must be expir'd. But that it is pass'd, divers reasons constrain us to be­lieve; which I shall deduce briefly, because others have done it with very exact diligence. And first, the Patriark Jacob, as we read in the 49 chap. of Genesis, spoke thus by a prophetick spirit, The [Page 391] Scepter shall not depart from Judah nor a Lawgiver from between his feet, untill that Shiloh be come, or till Shiloh come. That the Scepter and Lawgiver denote the power of political government, both the words shew evidently, and the consent of the Jews themselves attests. And that the Messias is denoted by Shiloh, both the titles of the Prince of Peace and Saviour given him in other places, and the ancient Jewish Interpreters and Para­phrasts do confirm, though there be difficulties made by some concerning the signification of the word, and the modern Jews quarrel about it. For [...] comes from [...], which bears both these significations, To love peace, and To save; and the circumstances of the place dispa­rage all interpretation that refers it to any other then the Messias. Wherefore the meaning of this Prophecy is, That the power of the Political Government should not be taken away from that Nation, in which the Tribe of Judah had un­questionably the preheminence, till he that was to bring eternal Peace came into the World. Now concerning the precise time when the Political Soveraignty was taken away from Is­rael, I shall not at present dispute; it is all one to me whether at such time, when Herod having extinguish'd the race of the Asmoneans, invaded the Soverainty, or whether the entire ruine of their Government must be referr'd to the desola­tion of their City and Temple, and to the dis­persion of their Nation by the Romanes. The rea­sons wherewith both these opinions are main­tain'd being diligently discussed by Learned men, are of no necessity to the matter in hand. It's suffi­ciently [Page 392] apparent that there ha's been no form of Regiment amongst the Jews for fifteen or sixteen hundred years. And they of the Tribe of Ju­dah, if this promise have a particular regard to them, are so far from holding the Scepter of that Nation, that all the Jews are universally subjected to strangers Laws, and their Tribes so mingled, as I said above, that there remains no longer any mark of distinction of their families. Moreover, there were two Temples at Jerusalem; the First built by King Solomon, with such magnificence that no structure in the World was comparable to it; the Second, erected by the Jews upon their return from the Babylonish Captivity, so mean and des­picable in respect of the other, that the Old men who had seen the former, poured forth tears when they beheld it; so that the Prophet Haggai, who was present at the re-edification, speaks of it in these terms, in the 2 chap. of his Prophesie, vers. 3. Who is left among you that saw this house in her first glory? And how do you see it now? Is it not in your eyes in comparison of it as nothing? But be­sides the smallness and contemptible form of the building in comparison of the former, the anci­ent Jews observe that there wanted five things in it; The presence of God in the Mercy-Seat; The spirit of Prophecy; The celestial fire which consum'd the burnt-offerings; The Ʋrim and Thumim; and the Ark: which added such lustre and glory one to another. Yet be­hold, how the same Haggai prophesies of it imme­diately after, vers. 6. Thus saith the Lord of Hosts, Yet once, it is a little while, and I will shake the Hea­vens and the Earth and the Sea and the dry land. [Page 393] Vers. 7. And I will shake all Nations; and the desire of all Nations shall come, and I will fill this house with glory, saith the Lord of Hosts. Vers. 9. The glory of this latter house shall be greater then of the former, saith the Lord of Hosts, and in this place will I give peace. Now of whom can this be understood but of the Messias, who was to enter into it, and effectively fill this house with glory? What else could advance it so, as not onely to equal but transcend the magnificence of the other? And indeed Malachy who liv'd and prophesied at the same time, speaks it plainly in the 3. chap. vers. 1. Behold I will send my Messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me; and the Lord, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to his Temple, even the Messenger of the Covenant, whom ye delight in; Behold, he com­eth, saith the Lord of Hosts. They will say, per­haps, that Haggai foresaw that Herod would en­large and enrich it so magnificently, that it should equal or surpass even that of Solomon. And 'tis true as Histories inform us, that he ad­vanc'd the same to a far greater splendor then rhat which the poor returned exiles had given it. But seeing all the pompous state that he be­stowed on it was but the effect of his vast and boundless ambition, which he express'd almost every where by proud structures, as amongst o­thers in the City and Haven of Caesarea, to the end his power and greatness might be admir'd, and not the divine glory promoted, how could it be agreeable to God to attribute to him the va­nity of a man? and even of such a man? who was a stranger, if not absolutely in profession, at least in heart and affection, from his Covenants, [Page 394] and a cruel bloody usurper of the government of his people? And if it was not well-pleasing to God that David should build him a Temple, because his hands had been bloodied in so many wars, which he had manag'd, though very just and undertaken out of necessity, for the delive­rance of Israel, and for the Glory of God him­self, how could he take pleasure in the vanity of this Monster, who was formed and elemented of wind and blood and dirt? Besides, though it had been built all of Saphires and Diamonds, could that glory have rendred it comparable to the least of the five mentioned particulars? or would it have been worth the pains that God should pro­mise to shake the Sea and the dry land, the Hea­vens and the Earth for it? to cause, I say, by his infinite power a universal change in the face of the World? and to what purpose were it to mention the shaking of all Nations, to bring the choice of them into that Temple, if there were no more signifi'd by it then the proud magnificence of the Pile, and vast greatness of the Stones? And what Nation ever changed their seat to go to see it, or to send offerings thither by their Ambassa­dors? We see therefore the Temple demolish'd, and all the attempts made to re-edifie it defeated by a special demonstration of the anger of God against them that endevour'd it, so that there re­mains onely the dust of its ruines after neer six­teen hundred years, without ever having been filled with the glory promised to it, if the Messi­as be not yet come, as the Jews pretend. In the third place, Daniel in the 9. chap. determi­nately foretold the time; since the expiration of [Page 395] which are past a dozen Ages. Seventy weeks (saith the Angel) are determined upon thy people, and upon thy holy City, to finish the transgression and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for ini­quity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy. Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem, unto the Messiah the Prince, shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks. That this place ought to be understood of the Messias, nothing but obstinate blindness can dissent; and 'tis very strange that Passion should so feel up the eyes of some of them, that in hatred of our Lord they should interpret it of some other. For to whom belongs it but to the Messias, either to be styled the Anointed by way of excellence, or to put an end to Prophecies, or to bring in and ma­nifest eternal righteousness, or to make propiti­ation for offenses? Now what is meant by those seventy weeks? Septenaries of daies, or weeks, or months, or years, or ages? Of weeks of days, and weeks of years there is frequent mention in the Old Testament; of the rest there occur no examples. And surely they cannot understand it of Ages, for so they would refer the coming of the Messias to too remote a distance of time; and of fifty thousand years which Daniel should have foretold, there would he pass'd little more then two thousand. And when would they see the accomplishment of their hopes? Therefore they must be septenaries of years, or moneths, or weeks, or dayes; and indeed they ought to be understood of years.

But observe what their subterfuge is, and to what they constantly retreat, to defend their opiniastry; That indeed the time prefixed by the Prophets for the sending of the Messias is ex­pired, but 'tis their sins which hinder them from seeing the accomplishment of those promises. By reason of them God ha's delay'd the time of their visitation and deferr'd the exhibition of the Me­ssias, and consequently prolong'd the term appointed for the duration of the Law: That when they shall have perform'd a sutable repen­tance, they shall see the effect of that which God hath promis'd; at which time, they do not gain­say, but the Law of Moses shall cease. But this Evasion is vain. For supposing that God defer'd the sending of his Anointed, yet at least the Temple ought to have been kept undestroy'd, and the Jewish Religion maintained in its inte­grity, and not so dreadful a dispersion of that Nation to have been suffer'd, and so total an a­bolition of all his service. For where are his sacrifices and his Altars? Why did not He leave some use of them at least, during the expectance of the accomplishment of that promise, Mal. 1.11. From the rising of the Sun even unto the going down of the same, my Name shall be great among the Gentiles, & in every place incense shall be offered unto my Name, and a pure offering? Let them consult their own Books. God denounced that he would cause the Deluge to come upon the Earth; and he exe­cuted it at the set time. He promised Posterity to Abraham, and gave it him contrary to all proba­bility. He foretold the Captivity of his Posteri­ty in Aegypt, and it came to pass, and continued [Page 397] neither more nor less then the four hundred years which he had limited. He promised the Deliverance of them from it, and perform'd the same faithfully with a thousand miracles. He foretold the Babylonish Captivity, and it did not fail; and he gave in charge to his Prophets to promise deliverance from it by means of Cyrus, naming him a hundred years before he was born: and with exact fidelity at the end of seventy years after their transportation into Babylon, he brought them back into their own Country by the Edict of that Prince. In a word, all their History from the beginning to the End is inter­woven with predictions and prophesies, which have had their accomplishment, without the least defect or miscarriage. Whence therefore should it be, that in this prediction, which is the foundation of their comfort, and on which all others depend, God should have changed his purpose, and by so long delays deluded the ex­pectation of the people of the Jews, which him­self excited in them by his promises? Why did not their sins hinder their deliverance from the hand of Pharaoh, and the accomplishment of that Word, that he would give the Land of Ca­naan in heritage to the seed of Abraham? For they were sinners at that time as well as now, and besides inclin'd to Idolatry, a sin hated by God most of all, and which themselves have at this day in so great abhorrence. And ought not the same obstacle to have impeded their return from the Captivity of Babylon? They were sin­ners then too, and have always been of the same genius, both they and their Ancestors. And if [Page 398] by reason of some more obstinate perversness in them then in their predecessors, God pleas'd to await their repentance for a time, why is that time lengthned out to fifteen or sixteen hundred years? that is, to three or four times as much time beyond the day prefixed as between the promise and the prefixed day it self? Who ever heard tell of such a tedious over-delay, where the Promises of God were engaged? And how long doth he attend their repentance? Hath he resolv'd to give it them, or to expect till they be converted of themselves, and of their proper motion? For if he expects the same from their voluntary and proper motion, all hope of ever seeing the Messias is lost. Since the horrid deso­lation of the City of Jerusalem, the burning of the Temple, the slaughter of their Nation, the dispersion of the remainder to the four winds of Heaven, the long servitude in which they are, the reproach and ignominy which they endure, the hatred of great and small; and in sum, all the curses they could imprecate upon their ene­mies, being befallen them, have not been suf­ficient to mollifie their hearts and convert them, what hope is there that hereafter any thing should move them to repentance? Fifteen or six­teen Ages suffice to give us a proof by them and their predecessors, what their posterity will do in this case after them. If God himself will give it them, and touch their hearts, what is the rea­son that he expects that so long time from ano­ther, which he ha's resolv'd to execute himself, and thus to expose his fidelity and constancy to the tacite suspitions of some, and to the close [Page 399] murmurings or even open blasphemies of others? Now I wish they would consider this attentive­ly; Namely, that in their Books God makes two sorts of Promises to them; Some are founded up­on a Condition, and others are (as they speak) Simple and Absolute. As for those which are sounded upon a condition, should God have pre­fixed a certain time for performance, yet ought not he be accus'd of inconstance, though he should defer it beyond the term, when the con­dition ha's not as yet been accomplish'd. For where the obligation is reciprocal, and some thing is to be done first on the part of men, why should any think God oblig'd to perform that which he promised not but under some previous condition? Are we wont to act thus one to­wards another? And of this Nature are the Legal promises, that is, the Promises of Life and Blessing upon a firm continuance in his Cove­nant. For by saying, If thou continue in the ob­servation of my Commandments, I will give thee all sorts of blessings, he do's perpetually imply, that in case of deviating from them the expecta­tion of all those Benedictions is frustrated. For the other, which are absolute, and not depen­dant on any condition, to fail to effect them is to be wanting to his own constancy. And why should God have been so forward as to promise absolutely, and yet retract it afterwards upon so groundless a pretence? This is the practise of vain men, who promise rashly; and afterwards repenting of the matter, seek out excuses and pretexts to put off the effect, and veil their levi­ty. Now let any man read the Old Testament [Page 400] from end to end, and he will find that the Pro­mises concerning the Messias are so far from being founded on any precedaneous condition on the part of men, that they are not so much Promises as setled and determined Predictions. Or if they ought to be called Promises (as indeed they are, since they are predictions of a Good to come, which must afford incomparable benefit and con­tentment) they are promises in which the Good­ness and Mercy of the infinite God seems to wrastle against the obstinacy of men. As soon as Adam was fallen, God, without being invited thereunto by his repentance, even without speaking to him, saies to the Serpent, I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel. Can it be suspected here, that without the foregoing penitence of men, these words shall never be accomplisht? On the con­trary, it is to excite our repentance, which o­therwise would have remained dead; for they are the promises of Grace, which alone (as we have said elsewhere) can awaken the minds of men to true repentance. In like manner, when the Patriarch Iacob saies, The Scepter shall not depart from Judah, &c. Does he understand that Shiloh shall come, onely provided Judah and Israel re­pent? Certainly he had no regard to that; but puts this among the absolute pure predictions, which the Spirit ennabled him to make concerning his Posterity, and the things which were to happen to every Tribe, were it repentant, or not. And thus it is also in all the rest, Deut. 18.18. I will raise them up a Prophet among their brethren, like unto [Page 401] thee, and will put my words in his mouth and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him. Vers. 19. And it shall come to pass that whosoever will not hearken unto my words, which he shall speak in my Name, I will require it of him. Psal. 2. I have set my King upon Sion the mountain of my holiness. And 7. The Lord hath said to me, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee. 8. Ask of me, and I shall give thee the Nations for thy inheritance, and the utter­most parts of the Earth for thy possession. 9. Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron, thou shall dash them in pieces like a potters vessel, &c. And Isaiah, 7.14. Behold, A virgin shall conceive and bear a Son, and shall call his name Immanuel. Also chap. 11.1. And there shall come forth a rod out of the stemne of Iesse, and a Branch shall grow out of his Roots. 2. And the Spirit of the Lord shall rest upon him, &c. Also chap. 32.1. Behold, a King shall reign in righ­teousness, &c. And likewise in that celebrated 53. chapter. And Malachi having ended the second chapter with a complaint of the murmurings of the Jews against the Providence of God, and likewise of their blasphemies, he continues his discourse thus, chap. 3.1. Behold, I will send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me; and the Lord, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to his Temple, &c. As if he would either break the heart of those Rebels by this admirable effect of an incredible goodness, or warrant his Provi­dence from blame by the execution of his immu­table decrees. But above all things, the Pro­phecy of Daniel above alledged is remarkable. For after having so clearly set down the time of the birth of Christ, he adds ( vers. 26.) And after [Page 402] score and two weeks shall Messias be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the [...]rince that shall come, shall destroy the City and the Sanctuary, and the end thereof shall be with a stood, and unto the end of the wa [...] desolations are determin'd. Now I beseech you, had not this its event in Titus and the Romanes, who ut­terly destroyed the City of Ierusalem, and burnt the Temple to ashes? How then could the pre­diction of the Desolation have been accomplish't which was not to happen till after the accom­plishment of the Promise, if the Promise were not executed before, seeing they are both con­tained in the same Prophecy?

It remains therefore, that since as it is not allow­ed for men to exempt themselves from subjecti­no to Divine Institutions so long as they are in force, so neither is it lawful to extend them longer then the term appointed to them by God himself admits; the Law of Moses having pass'd its time, either there is now no longer any form of Religion of divine institution in the World, or that some other hath been establish'd by God in its place. For as to what they alledge, that in several places of their Books, it is said that their Law ought to endure to perpetuity, [...], it hath been answered a thousand times that the word [...] taken simply, do's not necessarily signifie the perpetuity of a thing, or eternity of time, but oftentimes a long dura­tion onely, which began or is terminated at some certain and remarkable period, as of the Deluge, of the descent into Egypt, of a Jubilee, and the like; Examples of which are very or­dinary. [Page 403] Now it would be a thing too unsutable to that great goodness which God hath always testified to men, and to that special care he hath had to bring them to the knowledge of himself and by that to salvation, to have abolish'd and suppress'd the true Religion without substituting another in its stead. He hath always shewn that he loves the Political or Civil Societies of men, which onely have relation to the conservation of their rights and civil comportments among themselves: how much dearer then is the main­taining of a Religious Society to him, in which the importance is concerning the preservation of his rights over us, actions of piety and virtue, and the eternal salvation of our souls? Certain­ly, it would be a too strange inequality in the proceedings of a Nature so wise and uniform as the Divine, to have employ'd so great exact di­ligence in prescribing and delineating the Religi­on of the Jews and in all the order of it, and af­terwards to destroy the same totally without rai­sing another upon its ruines. And it would be too great a lightness in so constant a nature to have promised his Church in so many places of the Old Testament to cause her to subsist eternal­ly (and what is the Church, but a Society re­gulated according to the Laws of the true Reli­gion) and yet to subvert it utterly beyond all apparent possibility of restoration. Wherefore there ha's succeeded some other Religion in place of the Jewish. But it can be neither the Pagan, nor the Mahometane; and therefore it must necessarily be the Christian. And this is the [Page 404] business to be deduc'd more at large in the fol­lowing Chapter.

CHAP. VI. That the Christian Religion, being more excellent, hath succeeded the Jewish.

SO numerous is the store of things that offer themselves for the proof of what the title of this Chapter promiseth, that I beseech the Read­ers indulgence if I omit some. Should I do o­therwise, it would be impossible to proportion this piece to the rest of the work. I shall not al­ledge that the author of the Christian Religion and his principal Ministers were Jews, and so interessed and engaged, according to the natu­ral instinct of all Nations, to the maintenance of their own Religion, if it ought to have been perpetually durable; Nor that it was first of all to their own Nation that they adressed to per­swade the same to them, and did not turn to the Gentiles, but onely after they had been re­jected and persecuted by the Jews. Nor that the Pagans converted by their preaching pro­fess'd to be only gathered to the Jewish Nation, and inserted like a wild grasse into a natural stock. I shall onely compare the two Religions together, so to manifest the excellence of the [Page 405] Christian above the Jewish, and that not onely in things wherein they differ, but also in such as they agree together in: for ours will be found to have in either respect inestimable advantages a­bove it. And this will be sufficient for the proof of my proposition. For since the Jewish was of divine institution, if the Christian be more excellent, it must have been drawn from the same treasures of his celestial Wisdome, who enlargeth and augmenteth his favours as he plea­seth.

First, as for the things they agree in, seeing the Christian Religion acknowledges that the Books of the Jews are not onely true but divine, and consequently accords with them as to all the an­cient histories recorded therein, of the Creati­on of the World, the formation of man, the propagation of mankind, the destruction of the same by the Flood, the restoring of it by the fami­ly of Noah, the conflagration of Sodom, the se­lection of Abraham, the calling of Moses, the mi­racles in Egypt and the Wilderness, the deli­verances by the Judges, the establishment of Kings, the Captivity of Babylon, and the like; And that the Christian Religion ha's retained the doctrines revealed therein as inviolable, being of eternal and immutable truth; As, that there is but one God infinite in essence and perfecti­ons, and that all the petty Deities of the Pagans are trifles; that he is the punisher of Vice and the rewarder of Piety and Virtue, by sutable penalties and recompenses both for the body and the soul; that all creatures ow him honour and obedience, both because they hold their being [Page 406] from him, and in regard of his infinite majesty; that their beatitude consists in their communion with him, and their ruine and extream misery in their elongation from him; that he is the author of all the good that is in them, and therefore to him onely is praise and thanksgiving to be rend­red; And also that it professes to embrace the promises of the Messias, in the exhibition of whom the Jews place all the hope of their felici­ty and glory: It might seem that in these parti­culars and the like, the Christians ought not so much to be held to have succeeded the Jews as to be Jews themselves; or indeed rather the an­cient Jews to have been Christians, in as much as these are the foundation of Christianity laid by the Prophets, and upon which, to speak strictly, all the faith and piety of their ancestors was built. Nevertheless, the Christian Law is not without greater advantages herein, as having diffused these doctrines without comparison more universally then the Jewish ever did. For God being not onely the God of Jews, but of all people in the world equally, in as much as he framed all of the same blood, it is more sutable to the goodness of his nature to communicate the knowledge of his Name to all Nations, to East, West, North, and South, then to hold him­self as it were included within the bounds of Iudaea: and it cannot be denyed but that he pre­sents us with a more glorious example of his love to mankind, by uniting them together in a Society more strait then that of humanity it self, then he did sometimes by the Law of the Jews, who ha­ving their God, their Laws, their Ceremonies, and [Page 407] their hopes apart, look't upon all other Nations as profane, and entertain'd no communion with them. And certainly were not the Jews blinded by their passions, they would acknowledge in this not only the excellence of the Christian Reli­gion above their own, but also that the Author of it was the true Messias promised by the Prophets. For there is nothing so clear in all their Scriptures as the prediction of the calling of the Gentiles at the appearing of the Messias, as was shewn above; and the day is not so clear, as it is evident that this Promise hath been accomplisht by the preach­ing of the Gospel. For did not the preaching of the Apostles aim at the reducing of the Gentiles from the service of Idols to the knowledge of the God of Abraham? Did not they wage a mor­tal and irreconcileable War against false Deities? Did they not overthrow their Temples, and de­molish their Altars, with the sound of their voices? Are not the very names of the Idols of the Pagans obliterated out of the memory of men in the greatest part of the world? Certain­ly the Romans and the Greeks, whom the Iews held for aliens from the true God, and the Na­tions which both of them accounted Barbarians in Asia, Europe, Africa; even the Savages of the Indies, which were unknown to them, have done homage to the God of Israel, acknowledge the Jews for those that heretofore alone serv'd him, venerate their Scriptures, ascribe to their Law the prerogative of being the onely rule of piety and virtue, reverence their Prophets as heralds of the Divine Will, have cast off and a­bandon'd all their images. What do they re­quire [Page 408] further? Such a universal mutation in the whole face of the Universe, such a marvellous conversion of the hearts of so many Nations, in all parts of the World, can they judge possible to have been made without a special divine assist­ance? Certainly either this Prophesie, The Earth shall be filled with the knowledge of the Lord, as the bottom of the Sea with waters that cover it, ha's been accomplish'd in the preaching of the Gospel, or it will never be accomplish'd at all. Where­fore the Christian Religion hath this advantage in this respect above the Jewish, that God shews himself in it more affectionate and good towards men, and 'tis his property to be good; that men have more powerful inducements by this consi­deration to be good one towards another, in which consists their perfection; and lastly that it ha's this indubitable evidence of the manifestati­on of the Messias.

Then in reference to things in which they dif­fer; they are of many sorts. And as we above distinguish'd the Law of Moses into three parts; the Political, the Ceremonial, and the Moral, we will now consider each of them distinctly by it self in brief. And first for the Political, it needs not much to insist upon that, because it do's not so directly regard Religion; and yet it must not be wholly pas [...]over in silence. How exact therefore so ever it was, and congruous to the Nature of that people, yet it cannot be denyed but the Christian Religion which hath left to all Nations the free use of their own Laws, provid­ed that honesty and equity be resplendent in their policy, wherewith all the actions of men [Page 409] ought to be temper'd, is in this point preferable before it many degrees. For seeing the sub­stance and ground-work of Political Laws is proportionate to and do's not exceed humane reason, and therefore the constitution and ad­ministration of those Laws depends on Pru­dence, it is a very evident testimony that God greatly distrusted the prudence of the people of the Jews, when he took care to prescribe to them even in the least matter, and to give them, as their Prophet speaks, Precept after precept, Pre­cept after precept, line after line, line after line. But having diffus'd over all Nations a spirit of pru­dence and wisdom, by the publication of the Gospel, to administer their affairs with sage and good conduct, it was consentaneous that the e­stablishing of their respective Laws should be permitted to themselves. And this turns both to the great adorning of the Universe and to the singular praise of the divine Wisdom. For as the Wisdom of God is more illustrous in the seve­ral motions of the Heavens, of which some are slow, others more rapid, some tend towards the East, & others to the West, & yet from all of them at last results that excellent harmony on which the conservation of the World and the produ­ction of all things in the Universe depends, then if were no variety at all in their courses; And as in the Earth the different streams of Rivers, of which some glide so gently that their motion is scarce preceptible, others rush with violence like torrents, each according to the manner of the places through which they pass, some flow­ing towards the North, others towards the [Page 410] South, and all in the mean while come from the Sea and return thither again; do much more grace and adorn the face of the World, then if they all kept the same equal and uniform tract; So without doubt there appears a greater Provi­dence in the conduct of so many Nations so di­versified by various sorts of Laws and Govern­ments, Monarchical, Aristocratical, Democrati­cal, and mixt, each according to its peculiar ge­nius, all which nevertheless conspire to the glo­ry of one and the same God, and aspire to the atchievment of one and the same hope, then if they were all modell'd and policyed according to the same constitutions. Besides, that God being willing that Christians should be people of free courage, and erected to that honest liberty which is worthy of generous and noble souls, it ha's pleased him that men should exercise the actions of Justice and virtue no otherwise then by following the suggestions of a nature, almost restored by so excellent a Religion to its primi­tive integrity; so that every one should be a Law unto himself. It is true, that a good part of the Nations which in these dayes make pro­fession of the Christian Name, do not shew that a doctrine so heavenly ha's been efficacious to cleanse the vitiosity of nature, and repress the disorder of their passions; so that there may seem need of more Laws to prevent frauds and inju­ries. But this is the corruption of these dregs of Ages. And he that would know what Christi­an charity and the uprightness of those that have embrac'd this Law, is, must not consider it such as [Page 411] it is at the present time, but in the first Ages of the Church.

As for the Ceremonial Law, 'tis the Christian Religion alone that teaches us to understand the use of it, by manifesting the en [...] to which it aim­ed. For by that we are instructed that the whole structure of the Tabernacle, and all the Oecono­my of the service which was performed therein by external and sensible things did refer to spiri­tual verities and virtues. So that as much as the knowledge of divine mysteries and admirable doctrines, transcends things obvious to sense, by so much is the Christian Doctrine and the fruits produced by it more excellent then the Mosaical Worship. It would be too long to alle­gorise all that pertains to it; the matter will be evident by two or three examples. There were two eminent Sacraments; Circumcision, and the Paschal Lambe. To take them according to the construction of the Jews what other signification had they but onely to separate the people of the Jews, and to discriminate them from other Na­tions, and be a commemoration of their deliver­ance out of Egypt, and the death of the First-born? The one was a token imprinted in the flesh of a Covenant that seem'd to regard onely the body, and the other a memorial of a delive­rance meerly temporal. Now we have learnt from the Christian Religion that the First was in­stituted to represent the need we stood in that this corrupt nature of ours which we derive from our fathers by ordinary generation, should be retrenched, if we would have part in the spiritual Covenant with God; and the Second [Page 412] to be a type of him, of whom it was said, He was lead like a Lamb to the slaughter, and whose blood and death secured our souls from the dreadful and universal destruction, to which otherwise they were obnoxious. And in this we do no more but follow the traces which themselves have hereof in the Prophets, but could not dis­cern. To this purpose is their speaking of and exhorting to the circumcision of the heart, as in contempt of that which was made in the flesh; and also that of Moses's diligent injunction to sprinkle the blood of the Paschal Lambe upon the posts and tressell of the house, and that it should be a perpetual institution in their genera­tions. For what virtue had the blood of a Lamb to divert the sword of an Angel, and to war­rant the houses of the Israelites from the calamity of others?

There was moreover prescrib'd by it several washings and purifications for the vessels and utensils of the Tabernacle, houses and garments infected with any pollution, for men and wo­men seised on by some natural infirmity; things which were accounted unclean, if all these my­steries were not solicitously observed. The Gospel hath taught us that all this represents true sanctification, which cleanses the corrupt appe­tites of man, and purifies his conscience. And truly, otherwise to what end or benefit served all these washings, if they did not design some­thing else? Or why should corporeal and natu­rally inevitable infirmities, such as the Lunar flux of women, debarre them from communion with God and his Tabernacle, but onely as figu­ring [Page 413] those voluntary ones of the conscience? In this also we have the authority of their Pro­phets; It is said in Ezekiel, chap. 36.25. I will sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean: from all your filthiness, and from all your Idols will I cleanse you. But how? A new heart will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you; and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh. And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, &c. Now by how much piety and the internal virtue of the soul is better then the cleanness of the body, so much is the recommendation and doctrine of the one more excellent then the observation of the other. But this appears remarkably in the prin­cipal part of the Ceremonial Law, namely in the Sacrifices. For the death of beasts being, as we intimated formerly, incapable to make pro­pitiation for sins, and yet it being a thousand times expressed in the Law, that those victimes were appointed for propitiation, what remains but that they were destinated as types for the re­presentation of a Sacrifice, which in truth made real and sufficient propitiation for offenses? And indeed what else could the Prophet Isaiah have referr'd to, when he said, chap. 53.6. All we like sheep have gone astray, we have turned every one to his own way, and the Lord hath laid on him the ini­quity of us all. He was brought as a Lambe to the slaughter; and as a sheep before the Shearers is dumbe, so he opened not his mouth. Especially, since the blood of Bulls and Goats had no virtue for the purification of souls, and yet the High Priest en­tred every year into the Holy of Holies with [Page 414] blood in the presence of the Arke of the Lord, as if he had gone to offer satisfaction for the sins committed by the People, what had this been but a vain and empty ceremony, in case it did not typifie One, who in the quality of great and So­verain Priest entred into the presence of God in the Heavens, with real satisfaction for the sins of men? Truly the resemblance is admirable, Onely once a year (a period of time in which the world seems to exist a new, grow up, wax old, and terminate its duration, by the revolution and succession of the four seasons) the High Priest slew in the Tabernacle, but in a place separated with a veil from the Ark, a sacrifice for the offen­ses of the whole people: and once in the whole duration of the World, a Man devoted thereun­to offers himself in sacrifice, and suffers death up­on the Earth, a place remote from the presence of God, and sever'd from his especial mansion by the extent of the Heavens as with a veil, to the end to o [...]tain remission to all them that seek it. This being done, the High Priest took the blood of the Victime, and presum'd to enter in­to the Most-holy place within the veil, and to appear before the Mercy-Seat: And the same Man, Holy and without spot, after having suf­fer'd in the World, taking confidence from his sufferings, as having satisfy'd the justice of God, dares attempt to ascend into the Heavens, and pass beyond the veil to present himself before the Lord in the habitation of his glory. For he no longer dreaded his presence, having undergone all his wrath. Lastly, the High Priest, dipping his finger in the blood sprinkled it seven times be­fore [Page 415] the Mercy-seat; Now the Septenary is a number of perfection, as the Jews themselves acknowledge: And the same Man, who suffer'd death for the remission of sins, being entred in­to the Holy of Holies in the Heavens, abides there untill the consummation of Ages, to repre­sent his sacrifice continually before God, and by this his intercession to render him eternally pro­pitious unto us. Let them therefore consider a little without passion or prejudice the correspon­dence, and resemblance distinctly. For where­as in all that external service, God had regard to something to come, what better interpretati­on can be made of this mystery, then that the sacrifice of a beast prefigures that of a man; the expiation of a corporeal defilement, a spiritual purification; the place where the victime was slain, the World; the veil, the Heavens; the Most holy place, where the Ark was, the habi­tation of Gods's glorious residence; and the sprinkling made by the High Priest, the perpetual intercession of him that offered up himself by the Eternal Spirit? Wherefore let them either ad­mit this explication thereof made by the Christi­an Religion, or study to give more congruous and sutable. Which I assure my self, their at­tempts to effect will be so vain, and all their in­ventions so extravagant, that in respect of ours they will be but as darkness in comparison of light. But that all these typical representations have been really acted and accomplish'd, shall by the help of God, appear hereafter with abun­dant evidence.

Now if our Christian Religion be thus excel­lent above that of the Jews in the understanding and application of their own Ceremonies, it is also far superior to it in those which Christianity it self practises; of which indeed it ought not to be destitute. And first, it is highly advantageous to us, that they are few in number, and conse­quently less painful and laborious. Next, that they are less carnal and material, as not being ap­pendances of a Religion which seem'd to consist wholly in out-side, in the mean while till the spiritual things which it promised were really exhibited. And lastly, that they are eucharisti­cal and commemorative of that truely propitia­tory sacrifice, which ha's been already offered, and by consequence more proper to beget piety in our mindes, because they represent and apply things past to us, of which we have a perfect and cleare knowledge; whereas the Jewish figur'd the same as future, obscure, and in a riddle. Moreover, he that shall duly consider the ex­ternal face of the true Church, its exercises of devotion, its pompous simplicity and modest magnificence, singing, publick and solemn pray­ers; due celebration of its mysteries without I­dolatry or Superstition, and on the other side without contempt of a Being so worthy of pro­found admiration and reverence, and that ex­cellent custom of instructing the people by Preaching, and dispensing the Christian Doctrine to edification and comfort by exhortations and convenient reprehensions; will find that there is a more pleasing and comely spectacle in the order of its divine ministry, then in that butchery [Page 417] of sacrifices which was made in the Tabernacle, where it was necessary to be always imployed in washing and cleansing away the blood and scouring all the utensiles of the service from the soile and fat of sacrifices. And it may be also observed, that whereas the Jewish Religion ar­rested the mind to sensible things, affording them but very little taste of spiritual and intel­lectual; as 'tis the custome to retain children and instruct them in gross and sensual things for that their reason is yet but weak, and they live prin­cipally according to the guidance of their sen­ses; On the contrary, in the Christian Religion men are reclaimed from sense to understanding, so that what is sensible in it is not capable to arrest our minds on it, although it be profitable to lead us to the use of spiritual things, where with our souls are abundantly fed and satisfied; and this because that the Church under this Religion is come to perfect Age, being indued with far greater strength of reason and understanding to comprehend them. This the Prophets first taught us, who have spoken so disdainfully of all those external ceremonies of the Mosaical Law, as we have seen above, in comparison of the internal virtues of the Soul. And indeed nature it self would teach us the same; though they had been wholly silent of it. For since man, be­ing compos'd of body and soul, is principally man by the faculties of reason and understand­ing, the Religion which consists rather in cor­poreal exercises, then in the instruction and per­fectionating of the mind, must be judged infi­nitely inferior to that which is concerned [Page 418] principally and almost solely about the Soul.

As for the Decalogue, it ha's not been less illu­strated by the preaching of the Gospel then the other: Not that there ha's been any thing rela­ting to piety and good manners taught by the Gospel which was not compris'd in the Moral Law; Since this Rule of Justice and Perfection ha's been alwayes like to it self in all Ages. But the understanding of it having been corrupted partly by the hypocrisie and partly by the pro­faneness of men, the Christian Religion ha's re­duc'd it to its primitive purity and restor'd it to the highest pitch of its natural perfection. The Jewish Doctors upon this Commandment, Thou shalt not kill, thought that it was enough to ab­stain from the effusion of blood, and otherwise either justified or excused wrath, desires of re­venge, and words of spight and scorn. The Christian Excellency teaches us, that 'tis not the external act of murder only that is forbidden, but even the least motions of the mind that carry to revenge, the most loose thoughts of mischief, and the slightest words uttered in offense to our neighbor, either by derision or outrage. Then which what is more agreeable both to the nature of God who is so good, and who is not the judge onely of actions, but likewise of cogitations; and to the nature of man, whose outward acti­ons are neither good nor evil, but onely so far as they proceed from the good or evil source of the internal affections? Upon this Command­ment, Thou shalt not commit adultery, they con­demned the act indeed which defiles the bed of ones neighbor; wanton thoughts and lascivious [Page 419] glances they made no great reckning of. The Christian Religion teaches that he that looks up­on the wife of his neighbor with desire after her, hath committed adultery in his heart. Then which what is more sutable to the holiness of God and more reasonable in reference to that which ought to be in men? For what great ad­vantage were it to have kept the body unpollu­ted with filthy actions, if yet the soul should be full of impure cogitations? Moses in his Politi­cal Laws, the administring and superintendency of which belong'd to the Magistrate alone, con­stituted the retribution of Eye for Eye and Tooth for Tooth, that so the violence of outrages might be repress'd by the fear of a penalty semblable and adequate to each sort of crime. The Jewish Do­ctors extended this to private revenges, as if they had been permitted by this sanction. But the Christian Purity reforms this error by teach­ing, that a man ought to be so far from doing him­self reason for an injury, that it is more commen­dable to be so dispos'd as to receive and dispense with reiterated wrongs and insolences. Then which what is more befitting them that believe there is a God in Heaven, who preserves the rights of every one, who watches over all by his Providence, and who hath declar'd that vengeance belongs to himself? And thus also it is in the Law of Divorce and Polygamy, abroga­ted by the Gospel, which reduces marriage to the estate of its primitive institution, an estate so worthy and becoming in regard of its natural honesty, and so recommended even by their own Prophets. And truely, what likelihood is [Page 420] there, the Jews should be lest to eternity in that ancient hardness of heart for which it had been indulg'd to them, or that the example of the Jewish incon inence should be made authentick in other Nations? So also concerning light and unprofitable Swearing, which the Doctors of the Jews tolerated, provided exact care were us'd to perform what was incumbent by virtue of the oath; Christian Religion ha's abolisht the same as a profanation of the holy and sacred Name of God, which must not be pronounced but with great reverence. And is not this to reduce men from the shell to the marrow of the Law, from the outside to the inside, from the body to the soul, and even to the most spiritual part of the soul? And that these and such like have been the cor­ruptions which the Doctors of the Jews have introduc'd in their Law, the testimonies are but too frequent in their Books.

But there is yet something further conside­rable. For there are two things in every good Law; First the Righteousness of the command which it contains; and Secondly, the Right of punishment due to the transgression of it: both which arise from the natural difference which is between Vice and Virtue, and their necessary appendances, Punishment and Reward. Now Christianity hath not onely reduc'd the Law to its integrity in relation to the first, but hath also wonderfully illustrated it in the second; in which the Ignorance of men had debas'd it two ways. For first, if there were some among the Jews that had a little deeper knowledge in the Nature of the Law, and esteem'd it the rule not [Page 421] onely of actions or intentions accomplisht but also [...]f thoughts, yet they accounted sins com­mitted in thought or word onely so light, that they scarce believ'd God ought to inflict any punishment for them, and judged them very ve­nial in themselves. Secondly, though in sins per­petrated by scandalous actions they beheld a tur­pitude, which deserv'd severe chastisement, yet they had all this opinion that God would readi­ly forgive them without other satisfaction then by pitiful sacrifices. Perhaps, not that they thought sacrifices could impretate remission by their own value, as being equivalent to the de­served penalty (for to believe so, they must have been too like the victimes which they jugulated) But because God remitting the same freely, was contented with the acknowledgement made of the demerit by killing the sacrifice. For every man that slayeth a beast in his own stead, con­fesseth that he hath deserved death. But the Gospel hath restored it in this point to its pristine Majesty, and reinstated it in the prerogative of a severe avenger of the sins of men; for as we shall see hereafter, the belief of its inexorable se­verity in this point conduces highly to conciliate honor and reverence to it. First then, the Gos­pel hath taught men that those which they lookt upon as piccadillo sins according to the custome of the world, are of a henious nature when weighed in the balance of God's justice, so that men are to give account even of their idle words; and that the most inward thoughts of their minds, the least ticklings of their appetites, if they be dissonant from the rules of the Law, [Page 422] which require a perfection in which nothing can be impeached, render men obnoxious to the curse that is annexed to it. And truely should not the Gospel affirm it, the Law it self holds forth as much. For I demand whether the Deca­logue does not contain the rule of the most ex­quisite and consummated perfection that can and ought to be in humane nature? If it does not, then seeing all things which can concern the Moral perfection of man that are neither com­manded nor prohibited in this Law, are reputed as mean, that is, neither good nor evil, but in­different in themselves, it will follow that there may be some defect of moral perfection in man, which nevertheless shall not be at all reprovable: for mean and indifferent things, whether they be done or not, bring neither praise nor blame. So that a man that ha's all the moral perfection which the Law requires, but yet sailes of that which it does not, shall notwithstanding merit as much praise as he which ha's that which it commands not, and that which it does command together. Which is as absurd, as if one should say that an Angle made with a right Line and ano­ther that cuts the same decussatim, deserv's as well the title of a right Angle, as that which is com­posed of two right Lines, one of which falls perpendicularly upon the other. For it is not more necessary to an angle that it be compos'd of two right lines, whereof one falls perpendicu­larly upon the other, to be approv'd for a right angle; then it is necessary to a man to have all moral perfections possible, in order to being per­fect with humane perfection. Moreover, the [Page 423] Decalogue being nothing but the renewing of the Natural Law, which was for a rule of Life to the first man in the Garden of Eden, and of which he with his posterity lost the know­ledge by Sin, it would be requisite, sutable to that opinion, to presuppose that Adam in his first creation was not indued with all moral perfecti­on required in humane nature. Which indeed would be an affront to him that formed him. But I beseech you, do not the praises wherewith Da­vid extolls the Law of God, constrain us to have a more advantageous esteem of it. The Law of the Lord is perfect (saith he in the 19. Psalm) con­verting the soul: the Testimony of the Lord is sure, making wise the simple. The Statutes of the Lord are right, rejoycing the heart; the Commandment of the Lord is pure, enlightning the eyes. And in the 119. Psalm, he prayes for nothing else but that God [...]ould illuminate him in the knowledge of the Law, that he might walk in his Command­ments, as being the rule of all perfection desire­able; which is also extreme frequent through­out the whole book of his sacre [...] Hymnes. But if the Law contains the measure of the most exqui­site and accomplisht perfection that can be in hu­mane nature; then since the denunciation is ex­press, that Cursed is he who abideth not stedfast in all the things of this Law to do them, he is undoubt­edly subject to the malediction that deviates from this Law, and omits or commits the least thing forbidden or commanded by it. But a curse denounced by the mouth of God himself, cannot but be unconceivably dreadful and hide­ous.

In the next place, the Gospel teaches that the Law is so inflexible in its rights, that 'tis impossi­ble, after having transgress'd it, whether in a small or great matter, to be acquitted from pu­nishment, so as not to suffer the same either in proper person, or in that of some other. Which to an intelligent considerer even the Law it self sufficiently testifies. For it denounces on the one side an inevitable curse to them that transgress it, God himself pronouncing the same from the mountain of Sinai, with lightnings and thund­ers, smoke and flashes of Fire, and earthquakes. On the other side gratuitous remission of offenses is promised to them that have violated it. Now what expedient is there to fill up the abysse which is between these extremes? Shall that pardon be granted without preceding punishment? If so, what need was there of such terror at the pro­mulgation of this Law, and after to suff [...] all those horrible menaces of malediction vanish a­way thus in smoke? Perhaps, God powers all the Curse upon the victimes instituted upon him­self to be sacrifices of propitiation: and 'tis true they are termed expiatory a hundred and a hun­dred times. But what a kind of Comedy would it be, if God after himself had publish'd his Law with such dreadful majesty, should be contented, for satisfaction of the transgressing of it, with the death of a poor beast? Might not that Ad­age be here applyed, ‘Parturiunt montes, &c.’ It remaines therefore that those terrible threat­nings [Page 425] must either fall upon them that violate the Law, or upon some other capable to bear the same, substitute in their room, that so they may be secur'd from them. And the glory of the Law remains hereby more full and intire. For Reward being a sequel not more natural to Virtue, then Punishment is to Vice, the Law which denoun­ces a Curse for transgression, and yet does not really inflict the same, is as imperfect as that which should promise a reward to its observers, and af­terwards when it came to the effect, frustrate all their expectations. As he that should have fulfilled the Law in every point, would have cause to complain of it, if in case he reaped not the recompense of his piety and virtue, so would the Law have cause of complaint if he that viola­ted it, did not undergo the penalty of his offence: the natural order of things alike requiring both the one and the other. And from hence results a thing which turns marvellously to the advan­tage of the Christian Religion above the Jewish; Namely, that it represents to us the principal At­tributes of God, in which his usual wayes consist, as his Justice, Mercy, and Wisdome, in a much more eminent degree of excellence. For as for his Justice, it is nothing but a natural repugnanee that is between him and sin; by reason his Na­ture is good and holy, and the essence of sin (as they speak) consists in iniquity and pollution; a repugnance, I say, which necessarily inclines him to the hatred and abhorrence of sin. For he were not God, unless he hated Evill. Now all Hatred is a vehement desire of revenge; and hence it is that in their books this Justice is term­ed [Page 426] Wrath and Fury, and even an ardent Fury. Whence we infer, that accordingly as God is perfect in himself, so he abhors Evil; and as he perfectly abhors it, so he is equally inclin'd to execute vengeance upon it. Wherfore the Christi­an Religion which teaches that God ha's not sa­ved the World without being revenged, I say, not without taking satisfaction convenient to his Justice, exhibits the same to be consider'd in a more eminent degree, then that which holds forth remission without inflicting deserved ven­geance. For since the hatred of sin is a virtue in God, the more implacable this hatred is the greater is the virtue. There are indeed three sorts of satisfactions: First, such as is made to re­paire a dammage received; as if one should give a Statuary money for having broken an Image in his shop. Secondly, such as is in order to con­tenting an incensed Passion; as when we strike one by whom we have been offended. For though no good accrue to us by his harm, yet the passion is contented by being revenged. Thirdly, a satisfaction of Justice, when with­out regard either to dammage or indignation, a crime is expiated by punishment for the sole love of righteousness and the natural order which ought to be in things. Now the first hath no place in God; for what dammage can arise to him from our offenses? Nor the second: For he is not subject to our Passions; choler, and ani­mosity do not discompose his serenity, nor agi­tate him in any manner. And if these Passions are oftimes attributed to him in the books of the Prophets, 'tis by way of similitude with the hu­mane [Page 427] mind, as well as repentance; or rather ac­cording to the similitude which seems to be be­tween the actions us which men do out of choler, and those which God does out of justice; inas­much as both the one and th [...] [...]ther cause grief or pain to those on whom they are exercised. 'Tis therefore the third sort of satisfaction or re­venge, which is competent to God after so pe­culiar a manner, that the more perfect his na­ture is, it must of necessity be equally inexorable. And no man can imagine a justice in God capable of leaving the sins of men unpunish'd, but he must with all fancy him little abhorring sin, and too negligent of the natural order of things. Which would be a very unbefitting reflexion up­on him. But of this more at lage here­after.

But in the next place there is discover'd in the Gospel an incomparably greater depth of Mercy. For it is evident, he obliges less by pardoning that conceives himself less offended, and he con­ceives himself less offended that apprehends he may pardon without doing himself any injury, or diminishing the reputation of his virtue or his courage. On the contrary, he obliges more, that forgives an offense so sensible and atrocious, that to make expiation of it there needs a great preceding satisfaction. Since therefore the Chri­stian Religion represents the justice of God in­exorable, and nevertheless tenders absolute re­mission to men by his mercy; of necessity this mercy must be of a more transcendent benignity, that swallows up an implacable fury. And last­ly, his Wisdom is admirably resplendent in the [Page 428] Christian Religion; whereas in the Jewish, as the Jews understand it, there is scarce a glimpse of it in all that mystery. For if he punish according to the curse d [...]nounced in the Law, 'tis an act of pure Justice not of Wisdom. If he pardon with­out other satisfacti [...] [...] then the death of beasts, 'tis a work of pure Mercy, and not at all of Wisdom. But to finde an exped [...]ent to punish and pardon both together, to display his Mercy without de­rogation from his Justice, this is it which the [...] of man was unable to penetrate into, and wherein now it is revealed, appears an admir­able design of Wisdom.

And now what more natural conclusion can there be, then that the Christian-Religion is in­comparably more proper to induce men to Piety and Virtue, then the Jewish. For, as we have intimated elsewhere, there are three motives a­lone that incite us thereunto; Fear of Punish­ment, Hope of Reward, and the Admiration of the excellence of the Nature of God in it self, and of the beauty of piety and virtue in which his image is resplendent. Now as for the Fear of punishment, it is always so much the greater as [...]ustice is vigorous and inflexible. And there­fore the more implacable Religion represents the Justice of God, the more powerful is it to reclaim and keep men from vice by the terror of punish­ment. In like maner, the Hope of reward ought to be greater, where Mercy is greater too. For our Conscience bears us witness, that 'tis on this score we are to expect it. And if Admiration of the Perfections which are in God can be to us an ef­ficacious attractive to goodness (as indeed there [Page 429] is no true and sincere Piety which is not princi­pally rooted and fixed on this foundation) be­sides the great and incomprehensible Wisdom that is eminent in him, the immense depths of his Mer­cy ought to ingulf all our thoughts and inflame all the affections of our souls with a holy devoti­on. For ever since the time of the first sin, all our piety is nothing but a gratitude towards his mercy. And lastly, for that Contraries mutual­ly illustrate one another, the Beauty of Piety and Virtue will be more resplendant by the op­position of Sin, the horror of which appears so much the greater, as the punishment that attend­ed it is more terrible. Now how much this consideration, that God hath discharged the vengeance due to the sins of men on the person of his own Son, exalts the lustre of all the pre­cedent doctrine, we shall not now insist upon (for we have not yet consider'd the qualifications of his Person, who hath made this satisfaction for our offenses) But truely every one may of himself readily judge.

Lastly, The Christian Religion infinitely excels the Jewish, in the understanding of the Promi­ses which concern the Messias. For what Messi­as is that which the Jews expect? A Trium­phant King, who by force of arms may subdue the Nations, and bring Emperors under his yoak, and break Empires in pieces, may extend his conquests from East to West, and from North to South, and fill the whole Earth with the terror of his Legions, and advance the Jewish Nation as high as it is now miserably abased. For as for many more impertinences which they are other­wise [Page 430] guilty of in this matter, I shall forbear to mention them; as less intending their shame then their conviction; And I cannot but pity them when I observe the race of Israel, the Posterity of Abraham, and the people once beloved of the Lord, to equal and surpass in this all the extra­vagances of the Mahometans, and the Pagan fopperies. In that which I have propos'd which is the most tolerable of all their imaginations they sufficiently manifest that they are of the flesh and the world, since they apprehend nothing but carnal and mundane things. For if their re­main'd in them any spark of spiritual Light, they would acknowledge that they are compos'd of two Parts, Body and Soul; and that the body being earthly and material, and endued with or­gans and faculties like to those of beasts, do's not come neer the dignity of the nature of the soul, which is spiritual, inmaterial, intelli­gent, next the Nature of Angels, and as it were a beam of the very Deity. If therefore they expect glory and advantage from the ap­pearance of their Messias, it ought to be chiefly in reference to the soul, and not for the body saving so far as it is the servant and dependant of the mind. Now, as we have shewn above, in what can the glory of the soul consist, but in Wisdom and Virtue? And wherein do's wisdom lye, but in the knowledge of him, who is the Author and Fountain of all Virtue, Prudence and Understanding? Should he have turned the rocks into Diamonds, and the flints trampled on at each step into Gold and Jewels, the Snow of the Alpes into Butter, and the rivers into milk, [Page 431] the Wine of Judah into Nectar, and the bread of Asher into Ambrosia, and driven all the Kings of the earth fetter'd before his triumphant Chariot into Jerusalem, yet all this terrene pompe and magnificence had not been comparable to his lively illumination of minds by the knowledge of the Most-high, and to his victory over hearts, their passions and appetites. For there is so little proportion between the mind and the body, that the greatest and most triumphant Emperor of the Earth, if vicious and ignorant of things worthy the excellence of man, is to be contemn'd in com­parison of the most miserable slave that in the servile condition of his body, excells him as to the understanding in Virtue and Prudence. And I think there is not any so unworthy the being of man, that would not choose rather to loose all the Kingdoms of the Earth, if he possess'd them, and after that even the limbes of his body, then the use of Reason which advances him above the equality of beasts. Moreover, let them speak in conscience, whether it be not the sense of their present calamitie and the miserable estate they are reduc'd into by their dispersion throughout the whole world, that makes them breath after a Deliverer powerful in arms. Now what is the cause of this misery but their Sins, both such as are common to all men in general, and particular to their own Nation? For certainly God who lov'd them so tenderly, and chose them out from all others to communicate his Covenants to them, would not treat them so rigorously, were there not some lawful cause in their extraordinary offenses. [Page 432] And what a strange blindness and stupidity of mind is it, to have so quick a resentment of e­vils, relating to the body, and not to acknow­ledge the cause of them? What a depravity and perversity of understanding, to groan under the strokes of the hand of God, & never to groan un­der the load of their own iniquity? To pant inces­santly after a Deliverer of the Body, and never to think of the redemption of the soul? They are driven out of Judaea, and Heaven and Earth re­sound with their lamentations: They are by their sins debar'd the hope of Heaven, and make no matter of it; They are inthralled to their corporeal enemies, and murmure against God for it; They themselves are sold to Satan and to Sin, and do not understand the horror of this servitude: They are impatient in a waiting the coming of some Person, that may reassemble them from their dispersion, and deliver them in reference to the body: The Redeemer and De­liverer of their fouls is offer'd and preach'd to them, and they reject him. They flatter them­selves with hope of a profound and plenteous tranquillity in all sorts of pleasures and delights of the Flesh, and cheer up themselves with it: They are invited to taste how good the Lord is in his compassions, and they refute it. Their thoughts are day and night upon gold, silver, silk, scarlet, fine linnen, and jewels; and their hearts leap with the fancy; The Gospel tells them of riches and ornaments relating to the minde, and they blaspheme it. Is this the Posterity of that onely wife and intelligent people with whom God e­stablisht his Covenants? But above all the rest, [Page 433] they do injury to the glory of that Messias, who was promised to them, to fancy him an earthly Prince. For since themselves call his Kingdom the Kingdom of Heaven, what other ought they to hope for but one spiritual and heavenly; which beginning to be exercis'd here below in the souls of men which are of a spiritual nature, is accomplish'd above in glory unspeakable. And truly 'tis to this that all the Prophets lead us from the first to the last. What does that promise refer to (The seed of the woman shall break the Serpents head) but to the consolation of man by the hope of being deliver'd from the Curse of e­ternal Death, into which he is fallen by the de­ceit of the Evil One? For as he sin'd principally with his soul, which is the source and principle of the actions of the body, and alone capable of understanding the laws of piety and obedience; so it was consentaneous that the condemnation of death should be directed to the soul in case of rebellion. And that other promise (In thy seed shall all the families of the Earth be blessed) and (I will give this Land to thee and to thy Posterity after thee) wherein did it profit Abraham, if it aim'd no further then that Canaan, which himself never possess'd, and was not given to his Posterity till above 400. years after? Was it either a suffici­cent consolation to him in all the Crosses that he underwent, or a Promise worthy of God who establisht his Covenant with him? For which of us cares what will be done a hundred years after his death? As for those words of Jacob (untill Shiloh come) they promise a Prince of peace, a­bout whom neither fire nor sword shall glitter, [Page 434] but he shall be the author of peace between God and men. It shall come to pass (saith Isaiah) that the Mountain of the Lord shall be established in the top of the mountaines, and shall be exalted above the Hills, and all Nations shall flow unto it. But what to do? Come, shall they say, and let us go up to the Mountain of the Lord, and he will teach us his ways, and we will walk in his paths. Therefore 'tis to be en­rich'd in the knowledge of the Name of the Lord, and not in Jewels or Pearls; to learn to moderate and subdue their Passions, and not to conquer Kingdomes. Also in the 25. chap. 6. vers. In this mountain shall the Lord of hosts make un­to all people a feast of fat things, a feast of Wines on the lees, of fat things full of marrow, of wines on the lees well refined. Can they take this according to the Letter? It is certain, there are some so stu­pifi'd with the wine of ignorance, that they take it so, and expect to be satiated with that horrible Leviathan, which is powder'd up I know not where against the manifestation of the Messias. Poor people! who think the Prince of the Kingdom of Heaven will come to fill their bellies. But behold what follows, vers. 7. And he will destroy in this mountain the face of the cover­ing cast over all people, and the veil that is spread over all Nations. What is the meaning of this, but that all Nations being involv'd in ignorance as in the black veil of night, he will dispell all that darkness to the end they may behold the light of his knowledge; that they may rejoyce (I say) in the light of that Sun of Righteousness who carries healing in his wings? And thus through out all the Prophets; which would be [Page 435] too long to recite: there needs no more but to read them. For it will be found that he is a Prince of peace, upon whom the Spirit of the Lord shall rest, the Spirit of Wisdom and Ʋnderstanding, the Spirit of counsel and might, the Spirit of knowledge and of the fear of the Lord. That under his reign, The Wolfe shall dwell with the Lamb, and the Leopard lye down with the Kid; and the Calfe and the young Lyon and the fatling together, and a little child shall lead them, &c. That is, He will unite the most hostile Nations together in the same society of Religion, and cicurate and mollifie the fiercest people by the knowledge of the true God, and render the most untractable natures gentle and sweet. Which the Prophet himself expounds immedi­ately after; They shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain: For the earth shall be full of the know­ledge of the Lord, as the waters cover the Sea. He shall not cry, nor lift up, nor cause his voice to be heard in the street. A bruised reed shall be not break, and the smoaking flaw shall he not quench. So far is it that he shall batter all to pieces with Canon-shot, or hew all down with the sword. And as for his Glory, it must needs be other then ter­restrial and corporeal, Since he was to be despised and rejected of men, a man of sorrows and ac­quainted with grief: Since (I say) he was to be lowly, riding upon an Ass & a Colt the fole of an Ass. And indeed the frail dusty ornaments of the Earth would have been too vile and wretched for him that is the Sun of righteousness of souls. Wherefore forasmuch as the Christian Religion refers all the promises of the Messias to the good [Page 436] of the Minde, making him to be the Redeemer of souls, and attributing to him a spiritual Em­pire and glory; it directs them to their right end, from which the carnal imaginations of the Jews had perverted them, and hath conse­quently as great pre-eminence above the Jewish in this point, as the soul hath above the body, and the Heavens above the Earth.

CHAP. VII. That according to Right Reason and the Old Testament, the means of obtaining Salvation ought to be such as the Christi­an Religion holds forth.

I Affirmed in the precedent Chapter that the Law of God, and the nature of his justice require that either all men perish universally, or that some person in their stead endure the punishment which they have merited. But be­cause this is the Foundation of the Christian Re­ligion, and the most usual stumbling-stone on which the Jews and divers other people fall foul, it is requisite for us to discover it something more clearly in this Chapter. Certainly, if they will confess the truth, the natural terrors of their Consciences, when they consider the justice of God seriously, will make them acknowledge that nature it self directs them in order to the ob­taining of solid comfort, to seek out a satisfacti­on of merit proportionate to the Majesty of him to whom it is due, and to the demerit of their offenses. For not onely the Jews, to whom God revealed his vindictive justice more manifestly, but others who never heard speak of the Law, have been invaded by them. Which how could it be, did not punishment accompany sin as the shadow a body; and that for a man to be quit [Page 438] from the penalty, it must either be suffer'd by another, or he must be exempt from sin himself? And the Natural Instinct which lead them to of­fer sacrifices in the beginning, and which was approv'd and authoris'd by the Law of God un­der the Old Testament, is an evident argument of it. For whence was it that soon after sin committed, Abel offers the first-lings of his stock in sacrifice, and that this example became so pow­erful to all the posterity of Adam, that there ha's been no Nation by whom the death of beasts immolated in sacrifice was not practis'd; but onely that nature it self taught him to acknow­ledge what he had deserved, and all others have in like manner follow'd his sentiments? So that though they could easily judge that the satisfacti­on was not proportionate to the dignity of him with whom they thus transacted; yet being un­able otherwise to satisfie, they offer'd that which they could, and withal referr'd it to the Wis­dom of God to supply the rest? Moreover it is apparent by several Nations mention'd above, and whose names and customes are recorded both in Holy & Profane Histories, as the Cananae­ans, Tyrians, Carthaginians, Egyptians, Cyprians, A­rabians, Persians, Scythians, Cretans, the ancient Grecians, ancient Romans, Gauls, and others, who sacrifis'd living men, that the opinion which Caesar attributes to the Druydes, That it is not pos­sible for the Wrath of the Gods to be appeas'd but by offering the blood of men to them, was naturally imprinted in their souls; Otherwise man, being sufficiently prone to elevate the opi­nion of his faults and flatter himself, partly [Page 439] through an immoderate self-love, & partly by rea­son of the little knowledge he hath of the nature of God, would never be so inhumanely animated against his own species, and even against his own children; which some of those Nations were wont to make victimes of. And for testimony to this, I appeal to mens peculiar thoughts in the administration of humane justice. How do they detest murderers and robbers, and those that give themselves up to perpetrate heinous crimes? And when they observe a Magistrate suffering such persons to go on in impunity, do not they judge that he is either like them, one of their complices and partakers in their prey, or that he connives at their facinorous actions through want of power? Certainly, when any enormous misdeed is committed, there ought no dammage to arrive to the Commonwealth either by the Fact or the example; But there is a kind of detestableness in the deed that of it self cryes out for vengeance, the impunity of which blots the reputation of him who hath the authority and power of punishing in his hand, and brings him into an evil suspition and esteem. And he that shall more attentively consider the emanations of his own minde, will finde that Nature ha's not onely indued us with the Passion of Anger to be inservient towards defending us from particular injuries which are offered to us, but also ha's imprinted in our Minds a Hatred against Wick­ednesses which do not particularly reach us, which causes us not to be satisfied till we have seen vengeance inflicted upon the same. But assoon as we have beheld them [Page 440] expiated by sutable punishment, our minds ac­quiesce in the justice done with a kind of satis­faction, and our indignation ceases. For cor­rupt qualities and horrid vices in the soul, when they come to be discover'd by actions, they are like Ulcers and Cancers which hideously deform the visage; we divert our thoughts from the for­mer with indignation, and our eyes from the latter with nauseousness. Now the Virtues which are but little in us, are in God in a degree transcendently eminent; he possesses (as we may speak) the body of them, whereas we have no more then the shadow. As therefore a good Magistrate do's not onely detest Crimes, because they are detrimental to the Commonwealth, but also by reason of the natural turpitude which renders Vice odious, were it not pernitious; so that he thinks he do's not satisfie the natural e­quity of things nor his own Conscience unless he punish it; and the more upright a person the Judge is, the more hatred do's he bear against Vice for its own sake: So God do's not onely punish Sin, being the Universal Judge and Ma­gistrate of the World, because it produces pre­judice to Humane Society, and is an enemy to its preservation; but also by reason of that inter­nal and essential deformity in it which is so re­pugnant to the Divine Nature and the natural order of things; so that he cannot possibly pre­vail with himself not to revenge it. And the more perfect his Nature is, the greater is this na­tural detestation he hath against sin.

But to proceed further; The Jews consent that men are naturally corrupted by sin, and that they have in them from their conception an evil seminary of Vice, [...] which (they say) is like a mountain to the Good, and a straw to the Wicked; That is, they which are immer­ged in it are not sensible of it, no more then a dead man would be of his burden, if he were buried under a mountain. But they in whom God hath put some sparkle of spiritual life, feel what a great hinderance it is to their spiritual motions, and are discruciated and oppressed with it in their Consciences. And we have e­vinc'd above that this Corruption is manifest in all, against those which do not acknowledge the Holy Scriptures. Now, could the Divine Ju­stice (in their opinion) allow that men should ar­rive to Eternal Felicity, without satisfaction beforehand and repentance of that natural corruption? No, surely. And they which ac­knowledge no Satisfaction, do yet con­fess it absolutely necessary to the obtaining for­giveness of sins, and beatitude by that forgive­ness, that the sinner repent of his Offenses. I ask therefore, whence they have this repen­tance? Whether God begets it in them, or whe­ther they have it from themselves? Certainly, the books of the Jews teach expresly, that 'tis God who circumcises the Heart. And the usual prayers of David, That God would teach him to walk in the ways of his Commandments, sufficiently shew, that if He, that was already conver­ted, and a man according to God's heart, stood in need of the Working of God in him [Page 442] that he might follow his ways aright, it follows that with greater reason it is necessary for God to work the conversion of sinners, who are grown obdurate in their Wickedness. This, though it were not so plainly held forth in the Holy Books, is so evident, that even reason and experience make it good. For if Aristotle (who acknowledg'd not the vitiosity of mans Nature, but attributed all his depravedness to custome) teaches that when a man ha's once contracted a habit of vice by custome, it is not in his power afterwards to quit it, by reason that vice ha's possess'd his faculties, whose strength and per­formance is necessary to rescue him from it, and hinders them from executing their natural abili­ties; much more is it impossible for a man to dis­implicate himself from sin, the habit of which is in him, not by custome onely, but also by na­ture. Custome (it's said) is another Nature; yet Nature is always stronger then custome. How will it be then, when inveterate custome and na­ture are found together in the same vice? Cer­tainly, in such case another force then humane is requisite to reform it. Moreover, is not true repentance the Love of Holiness and Righteous­ness? And is not that Love also the chief part of Beatitude, of which other things are but as De­pendances? Surely, he that denies this, must pass into the School of the Epicureans, who plac'd the Supreme Good of Man in Pleasure, and made no reckoning of Virtue, but onely so far as it is requisite to a cheerful and Pleasant Life. Which was condemned by most part of the Pagans, and would be shameful for the Jews [Page 443] and those who acknowledge their Books to be Divine, not to condemn. It will follow there­fore that without a foregoing satisfaction to his Justice, God may give the Wicked the principal part of Beatitude without Repentance. For since 'tis he that gives them to be penitent, and that the principal part of Felicity lyes in Repentance, that is, in the love of righte­ousness and holiness, God shall give them the principal part of beatitude before he sees any preceding repentance in them. Now if there be nothing in the Nature of God which hinders him from giving the most excellent part of the Supreme Good to the Wicked without any re­gard to repentance, why should there be ought in it to hinder him that he should not even with­out that give them the other part of it, which consists only in appendances, to wit, Immortality and Glory? Which yet themselves account a thing absurd and impossible. Nor would it be material here to say, that it is not possible that God should give this Second and less principal part of Bea­titude, unles man have the former before, because Happiness is a natural consequent of Virtue; be­sides, that there is such a correspondence be­tween them, that virtue is incompatible with Misery, and Happiness with Vice; and that they are things of so repugnant an essence, that there is no possibility of coupling them, but there will appear a remarkable dissonance in the con­junction. And lastly, that God may draw neer to a sinful Creature to amend it, inasmuch as he loves virtue in which the amendment of it consists for its own sake; but cannot have any communion [Page 444] with a wicked creature to render it happy, by reason the Happiness of a creature is not so pre­cious with God, that to confer it, he should do injury to his justice and his Wisdom, which ab­hors vice and wickedness. For in the first place, if Happiness accompanies Virtue by a natural and inseparable dependance, misery does not less necessarily attend vice and wickedness. So that if it be not possible for Virtue not to be remu­nerated with a sutable Happiness, it is not less im­possible for Vice not to be punisht with due chastisement, there being an equal necessity and dependance between these things. And truely, he that considers the matter attentively, will finde that the bond which conjoyns Beatitude and Virtue together, is less indissoluble then that which connects Vice and Punishment. For the condition of the Creature being such, that it ought to be holy and virtuous, though God had not commanded it; and that God having so com­manded, it is bound to obey his command, though he had not proposed the hope of Re­ward, inasmuch as it owes all to God, both in regard of the infinite eminence of his Majesty, and because it holds its being from him; the pro­mise which God makes of remuneration, and the actual retribution which he performs of the same, ought to be imputed onely to his goodness and gratuitous liberality. We cannot pretend any other right towards him, from whom we hold all, yea our very Being. Now that which proceeds from Goodness, seems not to be of so strait an obligation, but that he which does it is at his liberty not to do it, and especially when [Page 445] the transaction is between two persons, the dig­nity and authority of one of which is infinitely above the condition of the other. Hence it is evident how, regard being had to the soverain Majesty of God, which advances him infinitely above all his creatures, and exempts him from all obligation towards them, he might have en­joyned Holiness & Virtue to his creatures with­out promising Recompense for it. But the rela­tion which is between Punishment and Sin, as to the consequence and dependance one of ano­ther, is a relation of Justice, from the exercise of which it is so impossible for the Supreme and Infinite Dignity to be exempt, that the greater it is, the more is it oblig'd thereunto; for that, as I said, the Love of Justice, on which the ex­ercise depends, and the Hatred of Evil is a Perfection in God, inasmuch as he is supreme governor and magistrate of the Universe; whence the greater his dignity is in this respect, the more is he oblig'd to the exercise of Justice, in which if he should fail, it could not be but he must suffer diminution of his glory. Again, if there be such a correspondence between Virtue and Beatitude, that they cannot be dissever'd, without appearance of deformity and irregula­rity, so that the Wisdom of God, who does all according to weight, number and measure, can­not permit the dis-junction of two things so closely united together; there is not less be­tween sin and punishment. Of which the mo­tions of our minds, which are as obscure sha­dows of the Properties which are in God, may be testimonies to our selves. For if we have [Page 446] compassion of a miserable man, whom we esteem not deserving his misery, we are also mov'd with indignation against one that is highly for­tunate, but unworthy the felicity he injoyes. And if we observe an excellent harmony be­tween these two things conjoin'd together, Vir­tue and Felicity; so likewise we esteem these two extremely well adapted where we finde them together, Vice and Misery. So it is in­congruous to the same Wisdom of God who committs no dissonance in any of his administra­tions, to permit a separation of these most Natu­ral Relatives. To conclude, I readily concede that God loves the virtue and holiness of his creatures by reason of its own excellence; for how can he but love his own image? and also that it is more precious to him then the Felicity, consequent to it; that is, to speak more clearly, that it is more well-pleasing to him that his crea­ture be holy and virtuous, then that it be happy. But at the same rate that goodness and piety are affected by him, he detests the creature that despises them. And if God be naturally inclin'd to provide for the happiness of man, because he is his Creator, he is likewise natural inclin'd to execute vengeance upon his Sin, inasmuch as he is his Judge. And truely I wonder how any can so much cry up the Mercy of God in the impunity of sins, to the prejudice of his Justice, whereas Historians do so highly extoll the memory of Zaleucus, for an act of justice done, as it may seem very much to the injury of the virtues of clemency and Mercy. This man (saith Valerius Maximus) having constituted very [Page 447] wholsome Laws in the City of the Locrians, one of which condemn'd adulterers to have their eyes pull'd out, it hapned that his own son was found guilty of the prohibited Crime, and conse­quently obnoxious to the severity of the punish­ment attending it. But the whole City interce­ding in the favour of the young man that he might be exempted from the rigor of the Law, were a long time denyed, till at length Zaleucus being overcome by the Petitions of his Citizens, that he might preserve the sight of his Son and the authority of his Laws, caus'd one of his own eyes to be pull'd out and one of his Sons; thus by an admirable temperament of equity shewing himself both a just Legislator and a mer­ciful Father. Why did not he suffer his Law to ly dormant for one day, to save both the eyes of his Son for the good of the Commonwealth? Or if he would not that his Law should be wholly in­fringed, why did he punish himself, when he was no partaker in the fault? But his reason was, that having establisht Laws, he accounted them inviolable; and this Act is recorded a­mongst the most memorable examples of Justice. How then can any esteem the eternal laws of God possible to be violated with impunity? Therefore either it is impossible for men to attain to the injoyment of Felicity without satisfying the Justice of God; or else it is possible for them to attain to it without Repentance. Which the common sense of man abhors.

Object. But possibly some may object and ask us, Whether the same absurdity will not follow from the Christian Doctrine which teaches necessity of a [Page 448] satisfaction precedaneous to Beatitude? For it informs us that men have not made satisfaction in their own persons but in the person of another, who was constitu­ted a Pledge in their room; and 'tis God himself that gave them this Pledge. Now the bestowing one to make satisfaction for sins, is an effect of infinite mercy and inestimable bounty; and yet it was not prevented by the repentance of men, but on the contrary preven­ted their repentance; For the gift of sanctification, to which repentance pertains, is an effect of the satis­faction and a fruit of the merit of Christ. How then could God be mov'd to communicate so great a good to men without preceding repentance, or without something else equivalent to a satisfaction? And if he could love his creatures so much, notwithstanding his justice, as to give them one to make satisfaction for them, to the end they might be capable of repentance and beatitude, why could he not give them both re­pentance and beatitude too without that satisfacti­on?

Answ. This deserves to be further display'd, that so the harmony which is between the parts of Christian Religion may become more conspi­cuous. Satisfaction is to be consider'd in two respects; First, as it is a punishment of sin, and so 'tis an act of justice; Secondly, as it is a means to obtain remission and impunity to those for whom satisfaction is made; and in this respect, 'tis an act of Mercy. As for the first, seeing it was an exercising of the justice of God upon the sins of men, there needed no other previous condition. The case stands thus. The Creature sin'd, and the justice of the Creator takes Ven­geance upon it. For the second, distinction [Page 449] must be made between the Mercy by which God is inclin'd to render his creatures good and hap­py, if nothing withhold him from it, and that whereby he really and de facto renders them good and happy. Not that these are two Mercies; for they are but one; but being considered in the first respect, the effect which it would produce is intercepted by some obstacle; and considered in the second, it is follow'd with the effect, be­cause an expedient is found out to remove the impediment which strain'd its efficacy. If there­fore some image of the former sort of Mercy can be found in men, it resembles the natural affecti­ons which Zaleucus had for his son, whose sight without question (had he had no other conside­rations) he ardently wish'd might remain safe and perfect. His paternal compassions would lead him to this, but the sacred authority of his Law obstructed his desires, and restrain'd his na­tural inclinations, that he should not do injury to justice. Now in reference to the first sort of Mercy, we grant that it may be in God towards his sinful creatures without any previous satis­faction or condition of repentance. But yet withal it does no injury to justice, because it brings nothing to effect. The consideration of the Law transgressed by the Creature intercepts it, so that man remains in his condemnation. For the other, which really and effectually confers repentance and consequently beatitude, satis­faction ought of necessity to precede it, because otherwise it would derogate from Justice, as the pity with Zaleucus us'd in sparing one of his sons eyes would have prejudic'd the authority of his [Page 450] Law, if he had not at the same time decreed to pull out one of his own. But Gods giving of his son to make satisfaction for us, arising from the former sort of mercy, was not founded up­on any preceding condition or satisfaction; o­therwise it would be requisite to proceed to in­finity, or recur to repentance. But the real con­ferring of sanctity and blessedness which attends it, was grounded on foregoing satisfaction. Whence it appears that though God might give us a Pledge without being otherwise prevented by us, yet he could not remit our sins and bring us to salvation without the intervention of that Pledge. And herein it is that on the one side his mercy is resplendant in willing it, on the o­ther his Justice in hindring him, and his Wisdom in satisfying the latter by such an expedient, and giving free passage to the former.

Now this without doubt ought to be sufficient to men of not contentious spirits: And never­theless here it is that the Boasters of Humane Reason lift up themselves. What shew of rea­son (say they) is there to punish sin in any other then the person delinquent? What justice to ex­ecute vengeance upon the just instead of the un­just? And what proportion between the punish­ing of one Man and the Sins of all the world? To the two former of these exceptions we in­tend to give satisfaction in the remainder of this Chapter; The third shall be remitted to another. First then, that several persons may be involv'd in the penalty and yet not in the guilt of a crime, appears in the practise of Life and ordinary ex­ercise of humane Justice. For Children are [Page 451] punisht for the sins of their Parents; and the tainte of the crimes of the Children redounds back upon the Fathers. This is seen every day in Offenses of Treason, where the design is more atrocious in it self and pernicious to the Common wealth. God himself, as Magistrate ha's given us a Precedent of this acting. For the Thest of Akan, who purloin'd forbidden goods, was fa­tal to his whole Family, and the Posterity of Saul was hang'd for their Father's fault. And the sin of David, who in a vanity and presump­tion of his strength, caus'd the Tribes of Israel to be numbred, was expiated with the death of seventy thousand men. Which also seem'd not irrational in the judgement of the Pagans, who very frequently attribute the defeats of great battailes and the loss of flourishing Armies either cut in pieces or destroy'd by mortality, to the fault of one single man. For, the overthrow of Cannae, if we will receive their account, was occasion'd by I know not what sin of Ter. Varro against Juno; and Apollo sent the Pestilence into the Army of the Greeks for Agamemnons despising his Priest. Thus also the Goddess Dice in Hesiod requires of Jupiter,

Now if it be not absurd for them which have no share in the saul [...] to partake of the punish­ment, [Page 452] it cannot seem more inconvenient that a translation of punishment be made from one person to another. And indeed that com­munication of punishment is in some sort a tran­slating part of it. As if the Criminal not being capable of all the punishment, others should be associated with him to bear a part of it. Now if a part may be transfer'd, and he discharg'd from so much, why may not the whole be de­volv'd over to another and so he obtain absolute exemption and impunity? Certainly, if it be not (as they speak) of the essence of punishment for sin to be all undergone by him that commit­ted it, it will be no more essential to it, to be un­dergone by him in part; provided at least there be some sufficient reason to oblige him that suffers the punishment to substitute himself in the place of him that deserv'd it. And this reason ought not to be fetcht elsewhere then from the strait and indissoluble conjunction that those two per­sons, the Criminal and the Sufferer have toge­ther. Now there are divers sorts of Tyes, which conjoyn persons closely. First, Natural Consan­guinity; as of Fathers towards their Children and Children towards their Fathers, of Bre­thren amongst themselves, and of all those who have some neer communion in the same blood. Secondly, Political Union; as of Subjects with their Kings, & vicissim, and of fellow-Citizens one towards another. And thirdly, Friendship voluntarily contracted, but ratify'd by invio­lable promises of running (as they speak) the same fortune, and laying down the life couragiously one for another. For it w [...] never lookt upon [Page 453] as unjust or strange, for those who are obstring'd one to another by these bonds to partake in the punishment of their Relatives, or substituted themselves in the room of one another to bear it all. There is nothing so celebrated in the Poets and Historians as the death which Alcestis suffer'd in her husbands stead, and the story of Damon and Pythias Pythagorean Philosophers of which one generously offer'd himself to bear the sen­tence of death given against his Friend by Diony­sius the Tyrant of Syracuse. And many other like examples have been diligently collected by learned Men. What can be said then, where there is found One that hath not onely one or two of these relations with mankind, but all to­gether and much more? What injustice or ab­surdity will there be for him to derive the punish­ment of mens sins upon his own Person? But such is He whom the Christians venerate for their Redeemer. For he is man, and conse­quently of the same blood with them, one with them in communion of the same nature. He loves them ardently, hath contracted an indis­soluble society with them, and hath offered himself of his own free and immutable will to be surety for their debts. He is King of all those whom he hath redeemed, and their head, and their brother. But he was innocent, and they unrighteous. What equity can there be in this, that he who did nothing should be beaten, and he that committed the fault have never a stripe? This is the Second Exception, to which there are three Answers. The First of which is, that by demonstrating above that Punishment may be [Page 454] communicated, and likewise all of it trans­fer'd to the person of him that had no hand in the Crime, it was by the same means demon­strated that the Just may be punish'd for the Un­just: for he that was unconcern'd in the fault, of which notwithstanding he suffers the penalty, is innocent in this respect, whether he be culpable or no in some other matters; and therefore he suffers in such case, not for other matters of which he may be guilty, but in consideration of this in respect of which he is absolutely just. So that all his other actions what ever they be are set aside, and of this, he is punish'd for, he is as innocent as the most virtuous man in the world. The Second is, that the Punishment of the Innocent and Impunity of the Guilty are so far from giving us ground to judge the Doctrine of satisfaction to the Divine Justice extravagant, that on the contrary 'tis that alone which ren­ders it receivable by right Reason. For had the substitute himself been culpable, he had been un­fit to be a substitute, for that the Divine Law obliges the Creature to all it is able to perform, and therefore the Transgression of it obliges to all the punishment of which the Creature is ca­pable. If therefore the substitute should be of himself obnoxious to punishment, how could he be able to satisfie for another? Certainly, he could not pay for an other, if he were bound to pay all he had of value in the world for himself. For he that h [...]th but a hundred Crowns and can have no more, and owes them all, he can by no Arithmetic [...] [...]tisfie for himself and his friend that owes a hundred more. Moreover, if they [Page 455] in whose stead the substitute suffered were still ly­able to punishment, there would be no satisfacti­on; which was purposely made to exempt them from it; Unprofitable were the payment made by the Surety, should the Creditor have yet a right to redemand his debt. The Third Answer is, That if the Substitute had continued for ever under the condemnation of those whose vicarius he became, such an excessive charity might have been thought strange, to destroy himself eter­nally for the salvation of others; But if he free himself from that condemnation, and bearing in his hand the discharge for an other, so wrastle against the Curse as to surmount it; if he indures the wrath of God even so far as to exhaust it, if he fight so successfully against Death as to tri­umph over it; if his very sufferings are to him but a passage to inestimable glories; if he obtain for the prise of his Fightings, beside the salva­tion of mankind, an immortal Crown of honor and a transcendent Soverainty in Heaven and Earth, who can afterwards be scandalis'd at his sufferings? And who will not acknowledge in his being willing to undergo the punishment deserv'd by men, an immense charity; in his remaining victorious, a wonderful power; in his being so highly recompensed, an immaculate justice; and in all this dispensation, an incom­parable Wisdom? But such is the Redeemer whom the Christians have embraced, and whom they perswade the Jews to acknowledge, even by inducements out of their own Scriptures. For besides that, as was shewn above, all their sacrifices were inept and unprofitable, if they [Page 456] had no figurative relation to some other really propitiatory sacrifice, where the punishment of men's sins were actually laid upon the victime offered, as it was typically plac'd upon the Beast which was immolated in the Tabernacle, so to rescue really from eternal condemnation, as the other deliver'd typically from the legal maledi­ction. The 53. chap. of the Prophesies Isaiah is so express to this purpose, that there must be abundance of perversity to call it into doubt. For in the beginning he describes the external ap­pearance of the Messias (for 'tis of him he speaks, as the most solid and learned among themselves consess) when he prepares himself for this satis­faction so full of sorrows and griefs. He is (saith he) grown up as a tender plant before him, and as a root out of a dry ground; that is, withered, and not like young plants which abound with sap: He hath no form nor comliness, and when we shall see him, there is no beauty that we should desire him. Be­cause it was not meet for him who prepared him­self for an ignominious death to lead before a de­lightful and pompous Life. Being to descend so low, it was expedient to go by degrees, and not to fall down suddenly, as from a precipice. He is the despised and rejected amongst men, a man of sorrows and acquainted with grief: and we hid as it were our faces from him; he was so despised, and we esteemed him not. Such scandal indeed, it behov'd him to suffer who was exposed to all, that even his own should abandon him, and be asham'd of his ignominy: otherwise how could he have sa­ved us from the eternal reproach which we had deserv'd, if himself had not been cover'd with [Page 457] reproach? But surely (saith he) he hath born our griefs, and carried our sorrows; his being so con­temptible before our eyes was not for any thing he was culpable of himself. He was covered with our misery and our shame, though we for our parts esteemed him stricken, smitten of God and afflicted; that is, They that beheld him did not consider it was for their offenses that he was stricken. And yet he was wounded for our transgressions and bruised for our iniquities: they were our sins and not his own that brought him into this condition. The chastisement of our peace was upon him; the satisfaction, by which we are reconciled and obtain peace with God. And with his stripes we are healed: by his sorrows and pains comes salvation both to our bodies and souls. All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way. Every particu­lar person of us have erred from the right way, and consequently by our perversity deserv'd to be destroy'd. But the Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all. Every one question'd him, and he was afflicted by it. Both the Divel, and the World, and they themselves for wh [...]se sakes he came, tormented him both by importunate troublesome questions, and outragious actions. He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth; he i [...] brought as a lambe to the slaugh­ter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumbe, so he opened not his mouth. Such it behov'd his obedi­ence to be towards him who laid the same upon him. Now is it possible to be more plainly de­clar'd, that the world was to be redeem'd by a satisfaction? Or have the Christians need of [Page 458] more clear and emphatical terms to preach it? But as for the Victory he was to obtain over his enemies, the rest he was to have after his labors, and the glory arising from his sufferings, they are not less apparently held forth in the follow­ing expressions. It pleased the Lord to bruise him, he hath put him to grief. But when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days. Which, being he laid down his soul, can be onely by a victorious resurrection. And the good pleasure of the Lord shall prosper in his hand. Whence, God shall commit to him the execution of his decrees, and strengthen him with power for the conduct of his purposes. He shall see the travel of his soul, and shall be satisfied: for there is nothing of so delectable a gust as the fruit of one's victories. By the knowledge of him shall my righteous servant justifie many; for he shall bear their iniquities. Therefore will I di­vide him a portion with the great, and he shall di­vide the spoil with the strong, because he hath powred out his soul unto death; and he was num­bred with Transgressors, and bare the sins of many, and made intercession for the transgressors. In con­science now, is this to be a Prophet, or to preach our Gospel? Is this to foretell things to come, or to point with the finger to things pre­sent, or to relate pass'd. Certainly, let any man choose the clearest passage of the New Te­stament concerning this matter, and compare it with these recited, and it will be hard to di­stinguish which is that of the Apostle and which of the Prophet. We conclude therefore, that the Holy Scriptures of the Jews agree with the [Page 459] Doctrine of satisfaction and have foretold it; and that Right Reason induces yea inforces to believe it.

CHAP. VIII. That the Promised Messias ought to be both God and Man; whence it follows that there are several persons in one simple Divine Essence: Also, Of the Divini­ty of the Old Testament.

THe third Objection against Satisfaction re­mains to be dissolv'd; Namely, that the punishment of one alone is not sufficient to obtain impunity for all men. Indeed, there is either no satisfaction, or it ought to be propor­tionate both to the ossenses of men for whom it was made, and the Justice of God that was in­censed, and consequently must be of an infinite worth and value. For to fancy to our selves a satisfaction admitted by God, infinitely below the demerit of the offense by way of Acceptance (as they speak) that is, that he should be con­tented as fully paid for all, though he receives but a small part, is a thing not consistent either with the Wisdom or Goodness of God, or the nature of his Justice, as we declar'd it above. Not with his Justice; For since it is impossible for that to leave the sins of men unpunisht, by rea­son [Page 460] it is the Hatred and Detestation of Evil, a Per­fection which is not divine if it be not infinite & extreme, nor extreme & infinite if it be not who­ly inexorable; how could it be contented with the punishment of one alone, for a satisfaction be­longing to all mankind? seeing it should thereby take vengance only for the offense of one, & remit the sin of all others freely without punishment? For, to speak properly, there is no real satisfacti­on in an Acceptance, but onely for so much as is receiv'd; all the remainder of the debt exceed­ing what is receiv'd is freely forgiven, and there is none but a fictitious and imaginary satisfaction for it. Now it is not competent to an implaca­ble justice to be pay'd with empty formalities and fictions. Secondly, not with his Goodness. For it there be nothing in his Nature that hinders him from remitting gratuitously and without sa­tisfaction the offenses of all men, saving one, what can there be in it to hinder him from forgi­ving that one also? If, I say, there be nothing to hinder him from being contented with the death of one single man onely (which of it self is of value onely to be satisfactory for one) for pay­ment for the infinite offenses of an almost infinite number of men, why did he not likewise exer­cise this his infinite goodness towards this per­son, that so it might be complete, and no ven­geance eclipse its lustre? Since also, be it by Acceptance or no, it is perpetually necessary that the person who is to make the satisfaction be perfectly innocent and exempt from sin. For God would not accept a polluted victime; and he were uncapable of appeasing the wrath of [Page 461] God for another who had provoked him by his own offense. Whence it should seem, he could scarce justifie his Goodness, if freely par­doning sinners, he should without any need at all revenge himself upon an innocent person. Lastly, 'tis not consistent with his Wisdom. For to what end were it to, make such an ambages and intricacy, where the way is so plain and short? What could be more easie then to par­don plainly without digressing to a satisfaction wholly defective in it self, and complete onely because he that receives it will absolutely have his justice contented with it? The reason al­ledged, is, that he might shew that his justice is terrible when he pleases, and ingenerate in the minds of mortals so much greater horror of their offenses. Certainly, if the design be to render Divine Justice sormidable, it appear'd so incomparably more in Noah's Flood, the confla­gration of Sodome, and many other dreadful judg­ments then in the Death of one single man. And if men must be made to know how worthy their Sin is of detestation and Hatred, the Destruction of the City of Jerusalem with the unparallel'd mortality and slaughter that was seen there is a much more authentick Document to that pur­pose, and an Instance that speaks lowder and farther beyond comparison. But I believe men are not possess'd with much dread of the wrath of God, when they are preach'd to, that it is ap­peased with so small a matter. It remains there­fore necessarily that the Satisfaction be of an in­finite weight and value, to the end it may be proportionate to the sin of men and to the infi­nite [Page 462] Majesty of God himself. But who can make it such? No man surely, who is nothing more then man. For the condition of his Nature is too low, and the b [...]unds of his dignity and ex­cellence too narrow, to correspond to so great an effect. It would be very much if One could pay for one; besides that the surety must abide in eternal destruction and having sav'd an other perish himself for ever. Then, all men in gene­neral cannot make it. For since Sin committed against an infinite Majesty deserves an infinite punishment, the Offense increasing, as Philoso­phers and Jurists teach, according to the pro­portion of his dignity against whom it is com­mitted; and since the punishment of men can­not be infinite unless it be eternal; should all men in general present themselves to undergo the wrath of God, they would become over­whelm'd by it to all eternity, far from redeeming themselves by a sufficient satisfaction. Thirdly, the Angels are equally unable. For besides that there is not communion and affinity enough between men and them, to be conveniently substituted as Pledges for them in suffering those pains, what­soever dignity the Angelical Nature possesses, whatsoever excellence it may have above the humane, yet it could never arise to equal the Majesty of God, in order to satisfying his Ju­stice after a proportional manner. For at most they are but Creatures, and there is an immense disproportion between the Creature and the Creator. And he had good reason, who said, Behold, He putteth no trust in his servants, and his Angels he chargeth with folly. Because, though [Page 463] upon comparison of Angels with men, they are of more transcendent purity and excellence; yet if they be compar'd with God, all their ex­cellence is despicable; and were it not that God upholds them they would fall; did not he infuse Light into them they would become darkness, as well as we. There remains therefore but one Expedient; which is, for God who alone is in­finite, to satisfie himself. And here it is that humane Reason is confounded. Let us, never­theless, experience how far we are able to com­prehend this abysse.

By the words above recited out of the Pro­phet Isaiah, it appears that he that underwent the chastisement of our peace, was to be man. A man of sorrows (saith he) and acquainted with grief, who must lay down his soul an offering for sin: and this cannot be meant of any other Creature. But had he had not express'd the same so manifestly, the nature of the punishment which it behov'd him to suffer, necessarily requires it. For this is the wages of sin, In the day thou eatest of the fruit of this Tree, thou shalt dye the death, that is, thou shalt be under the subjection and condemnation of death both as to body and soul. For as the Re­ward of Piety ha's respect to the whole com­plete man, compos'd of body and soul, so also ha's the retribution of sin, which ha's corrupt­ed both the one and the other. And indeed, he that was to break the Serpents head, according to the word of God, was to be the seed of the Wo­man. If therefore the satisfaction which he was to render to God, ought to be of an infinite va­lue, what person is able to render it, though a [Page 464] man, unless himself be of an infinite dignity? And if such man be of an infinite dignity, what remains but that he is also God; since infinite­ness of dignity cannot reside but in the divine Essence and Nature? Certainly, infiniteness of Dignity is as much incommunicable as infinite­ness of Essence; for it ha's its root and founda­tion in infiniteness of Essence, and the one is as the natural reflexion or irradiation of the other. So that, as it is impossible to separate the light and strength of the Sun from the Sun it self, or to imagine that something should possess that ad­mirable splendor and vivificant virtue which is in the Sun, and not fancy it to be the Sun it self; So, yea, much more, impossible is it, to attribute a dignity beyond all limits to any whatsoever, and not withall attribute to him an uncircumscrib'd and infinite essence. And to this, how seeming­ly repugnant soever to their reason, do the Di­vine Scriptures manifestly astipulate, out of which, I shall for brevity's sake, produce but some few irrefragable passages. Thus speaks the Prophet Malachi in the 3. chap. of his Pro­phecy. Behold, I will send my messenger, and he shall prepare the may before me: and the Lord whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to his Temple; even the messenger of the Covenant whom ye delight in. Words which we have shewn above, and the Jews grant, are intended of the Messias alone; the Messias, who alone was promis'd to be a Re­deemer to his Church. Now, I beseech you, to whom was the Temple of Jerusalem dedicated but to the true God? and can it then be meant of any simply a Creature that it was his Temple? Cer­tainly, [Page 465] neither the Jealousie of the Lord could endure it, nor the ancient piety of the Jews have permitted it; the erection of Temples, and de­dication of Altars being not due but to the Deity alone, as testimonies of the soverain honor we owe to his supreme nature and Majesty. But David apertly terms him God in the 45. Psalm, and will not have us put to the necessity of gathering it by consequence. Thy throne (O GOD) is for ever and ever; The scepter of thy kingdom is a right scepter. Thou lovest righteousness and hatest wick­edness; therefore, O God, thy God hath annointed thee with the oyl of gladness above thy fellows. For I challenge any man, to make out to whom else these words can sute, but to the Messias? Whose throne is this that must abide for ever and to eter­nity? For that the words he uses, [...], signifie a duration without end, they know who understand any thing in this language. Now there is no appearance, that the Holy Spirit would give the name of God to a simple creature on this manner, together with a Kingdom of everlasting duration. So likewise in the 110. Psalm, where David calls the Messias his Lord, ther's no question but he would have him understood to be something more besides a meer man. For David was a King and depended of no other but God; so that between the Divine Power and that which is truely Regal, such as that of Da­vid was, there can be no other intermediate. And yet he stiles him with the same appellation subjects use to their soverain Prince. In the 110. Psalm; The Lord said unto my Lord, sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool. [Page 466] But least any further cavill at this word [...], which sometimes in Scripture is gi­ven both to men and to Angels, by reason of the greatness of their strength and eminence of pow­er (though it cannot be found attributed to one alone in particular either of Angels, or men that are in power in the world) Isaiah makes the com­mentary of it. For unto us a child is born, unto us a Son is given, and the government shall be up­on his shoulder, and his name shall be called, Wonderfull, Counsellor, The mighty God, The Father of Eternity, [...], The Prince of Peace. Are these titles competent to a crea­ture? I know well that they assay to turn this passage to Hezekiah, and refer all these titles to God, except that of the Prince of Peace, which they say is given by him to Hezekiah; but it behoveth to have lost both shame and the use of common sense to believe them. For in what other place of the Scripture, where the Prophets mean to speak of God, and some action pur­posed by him to be done, do they accumulate so many titles? Besides, that to them that under­stand it, the genius of the language contradicts them very evidently: and their best Paraphrasts, being overcome with the clearness of the truth, refer it to the Messias. But the Prophet Jeremy speaks with the greatest clearness possible, in the 23. chap. of his Prophecy, Behold the days come, saith the Lord, that I will raise unto David a righte­ous Branch, and he shall raign as King, and shall exe­cute judgement and justice in the Earth. In his days Judah shall be saved, and Israel shall dwell safely; and this is his Name whereby he shall be called, THE [Page 467] LORD OƲR RIGHTEOƲSNESSE, [...]. For here the Ineffable name of God is us'd, which is as much incommunicable, according to the opinion of the Jews themselves, as his very essence. And indeed the greatest part of his other Names seem to hold forth his Properties; but this denotes his eternally permanent essence. This is it by which he delights to call himself, and glorifies himself in it. 'Tis true, they have two exceptions against this. One, that it ought to be translated thus; And the Name of him that shall call him, is the Lord our Righteousness. The other, that the City of Jerusalem is also termed by this Name, and therefore that the Messias cannot take so great advantage by it. But these are ca­vils unworthy of people in whom there is left the least measure of Understanding and Ingenuity. For as for the first; to what end here serves the mentioning the name of him that must call the Messias, without expressing the name of the Messias himself, seeing the drift is to set him forth, and to encourage the Church with the hope of those benefits which should accompany his coming into the World? And in the next place what a defective manner of speaking is this, And the name of him that shall call him, with­out adding how or wherefore? What example can be produc'd of the like? And when the Prophet speaks thus; In those days I will raise unto David a righteous branch, &c. In his dayes Judah shall be saved, and Jerusalem shall dwell safely, and then shall she be called The Lord our Righteousness, where the name of the City of Jerusalem is re­markably declar'd, and not of him that calls [Page 468] her, is the phrase and placing of the words whol­ly alike? For the second, Indeed it is more then evident, that this Name cannot have been at­tributed to a Person and to a City after the same manner. To a Cit [...] it cannot be sutable, but only as a memorial of Favour done to it by him to whom the Name is properly competent. And to a Person it cannot be appropriated, but to denote somthing that resides in such person. There can be no danger in communicating so glorious a Name to a City, none being so brutish or stupid as to take occasion to suspect any Divinity either in the whole people of a City, or its stones. To a man simply as man it cannot be given without an inevitable scandal of Idolatry, especially to such a personage as he that is describ'd there was to be, not onely a King, but the first-born among Kings, and the King of the whole world. And truely, if the Messias be not God, it would be injustice to condemne those that should adore him, as culpable of Idolatry, seeing him honored with so magnificent Names. For what ought we not to render to him, to whom both divine names and honors are communicated in the Scri­pture, the names of the highest Majesty, as that of [...], the most sublime honors, as de­dication of a Temple, and that so holy and sa­cred a Temple? Besides, that in describing his admirable atchievements, there is excuse more then enough for error; if error may be com­mitted herein. He ought to break the serpents head with his heel. Is it within the power of a meer man to foil so strong an enemy with so much dis­dain and glory? In him all the families of the earth [Page 469] ought to be blessed. A benediction so firm and vi­gorous, that it reaches through so many Ages, and is diffus'd so abundantly over all Nations, whence could it flow but from an infinite foun­tain? He ought to have the Heathen for his inheri­tance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for pos­session. Can so great an Empire be maintain'd and governed, yea even eternally, without an infinite power and wisdom? He ought to sit at the right hand of God. But how should he be ca­pable of so great an honor except he be God himself? For seeing Kings did not readily admit any to sit at their right hands, but onely those which were of their own blood, as Solomon did Bathshebah, or whom they establish'd Lieute­nants and Governors of their Dominions, as being the second place of the Kingdom, most honorable next the throne: Whether it be out of the first consideration that the Messias is seat­ed at the right hand of God, he can have no consanguinity with him but by communion of Nature; Or the Second, he cannot be capable of so eminent a dignity, nor provided of wis­dom and power enough to maintain the same, it being necessary to possess both in an infinite manner, if the person himself be not infinite. He ought to redeem the Church both by suffering an infinite punishment, as we have shewn, and by the victory which he was to obtain over death and him that was chief in the Empire of death. Who could undertake and accomplish so great a design, unless one that is very God? Now if this Messias our Surety, ought to be God, as must be acknowledg'd, or else all the Holy Scriptures [Page 470] denyed; forasmuch as his Person is of an infi­nite dignity, his Satisfaction was not only suf­ficient for all mankind (which how numerous soever, cannot be actually infinite) but also cor­respondent to the immensity of the Nature of God, and proportionate to his Justice. For as the Professors of the Civil Laws teach that crimes become more henious proportionably to the dignity of the person against whom they are committed, and Reason also adds its suffrage hereunto, so in like manner they attest that pe­nalties and Satisfactions are rated according to the dignity of those who undergo and perform them. And it is not material, that the punish­ment deserved by men was to be eternal in case they suffer'd it in their own persons, whereas the Passion of their Substitute ought to have had a certain termination of time; otherwise (that which is impossible to imagine) a person of such excellence should have continued under perpe­tual condemnation. For according to the na­tural right and order of things, sin deserv'd an infinite punishment, inasmuch as it was commit­ted against an infinite majesty. But because the nature of man is bounded, and infinity can­not otherwise be competent to him but onely by perpetual duration; had men themselves been to suffer it, it could not have been infinite o­therwise but onely by being eternal. But the satisfaction performed by our Substitute, did not need to be immense in respect of perpetual dura­tion because his person was of an infinite digni­ty. For it was made according to the absolute Right of Gods Justice, and the Natural order of [Page 471] things, and not according to the compensation which should have been made in the persons of men by the eternal duration of their paines, by reason of the narrow limitation of their Na­ture.

From this discourse it very clearly results that there are distinctly in the Divine Essence, which with the Jews we acknowledge to be one and simple, at least two Persons, or Hypostases, or Subsistences; (for we stand not greatly upon it, by which of these names they are termed) Name­ly, that which is most usually represented to us in the Old Testament by the Name of God Crea­tor of all things; and that, which in order to be­ing Mediator between God and Men was to as­sume humane Nature; who is sometimes repre­sented to us under the names of SON and Branch. As in the 2 Psalm, vers. 7. I will de­clare the decree; The Lord hath said unto me, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee. And vers. 12. Kiss the Son, lest he be angry. For what­ever clouds they endeavor to obscure this place with, it is as clear as the Noon-Sun, that it can­not be applyed to David or any other besides the Messias; No other can inherit so glorious a name as to be called, The Son of God, nor have the uttermost parts of the Earth for his possession and the Heathen for his inheritance. So likewise that that promise made unto David [When thy days be fulfilled, and thou shalt sleep with thy Fathers, I will set up thy seed after thee, which shall proceed out of thy bowels, and I will establish his Kingdom. He shall build an house for my Name, and I will establish the throne of his Kingdom for ever. I will be his Fa­ther, [Page 472] and he shall be my Son] is applicable to So­lomon (though that which follows agrees to him [But if he commit iniquity, &c.)] the too great magnificence of the words and the event of things cannot allow: the Kingdom of Solomon having been first of all rent in two in the time of Rehoboam, and afterwards his Throne for so many Ages so shatter'd to pieces that there are not the least reliques of it to be found in the world. And in another place, Ʋnto us a Child is born, unto us a Son is given, &c. Of whom with­out question Solomon is to be understood, where he introduces wisdom speaking thus; By me Kings reign, and Princes decree Justice. By me Princes rule, and Nobles, even all the Judges of the Earth. The Lord possessed me in the be­ginning of his way, before his works of old. I was set up from everlasting, from the beginning or ever the earth was made. When there were no depths, I was brought forth; when there was no fountaines abounding with water. Be­fore the mountaines were setled, before the hills was I brought forth. When he prepared the Heavens, I was there; when he set a compass upon the face of the depth. Then was I by him, as one brought up with him: and I was daily his de­light, rejoycing always before him. For what a strange manner of speaking would this be if the intent were onely to express that God is wise? To what purpose were it to give us notice so di­ligently, that he was wise from the beginning, if there be no other mystery in it, seeing it is as impossible that he should ever be without Wis­dom [Page 473] as his own Divine Nature? What maner of expression is it of Gods being wise from all time, for wisdom her self to cry out the Lord begat her? Can any Poetical Fury excuse such extra­ordinary and uncouth fetches, and especially in a Book whose style otherwise throughout, though it seems writ in verse, is as remote from enthusiasmes as the Heavens are from the Earth? Now the Son is without question a Person di­stinct from the Father; The Wisdom begotten, from him which begets it; The Branch shouted forth from him that emits it; He that causes to sit, from Him that sits at the right hand. And reason consequently proves the same evidently. For since it was requisite satisfaction should be made to that eternal and immutable Justice, and it behoved him to be God that should make it, to whom could he satisfie unless there be an o­ther person likewise God in whom this Justice is considered? For we have asserted and re­peated many times, that this Justice is a Perfecti­on in God, which consists in the hatred of evil; and that God by punishing exercises the office of universall Magistrate and Judge of the World. Wherfore it was necessary for the person who ex­ercis'd this inexorable Justice to be distinct from him upon whom it was exercis'd, the punisher from the sufferer. For in one and the same matter and the same respect none can be Ma­gistrate and Criminal both together.

Well (will some say) let Christian Religion stop there. The Scripture and Reason hold forth these two distinct Persons. But Christianity conjoines also a Third. What necessity is there [Page 474] of multiplying thus the Persons of the Deity? In­deed, that which makes the Christian Doctrine seem strange in this point, is, that Humane Rea­son is not easily able to comprehend how divers persons really and distinctly subsistent can reside in one single and simple essence: the union of essence being according to the judgement of Rea­son, repugnant thereunto. But if it be granted upon inducement of the Holy Scriptures and the necessary dependance of these truths so ex­cellently coherent together, that there are two distinct Persons in one single essence of God, the Doctrine of a Third ought not to be scrupul'd. For the Unity of the Divine Essence will be as little repugnant to the distinct subsistence of Three Persons as of Two. It behoves us there­fore to inquire in brief whether the Jews may finde this Third Person in their Books. Now mention is so frequently made of the Spirit of God in the Books of the Prophets, that it is some trouble to make choise in so great a multitude. These are apparent amongst others; I have not spoken in secret from the beginning (saith Isaiah chap. 48.) and now the Lord God and his Spirit hath sent me. Are not the Lord and his Spirit distinct? And yet to whom appertains it to send Prophets but to the Lord himself? If the Spirit had not been God, would Isaiah have call'd himself his Pro­phet? And that it might not seem to be the Se­cond Person who is call'd The Spirit, he else­where puts all three distinctly in one and the same passage; And the Spirit of the Lord shall rest upon him, the Spirit of Wisdom and Ʋnderstanding, the Spirit of Counsel and Might, &c. For it is clearer [Page 475] then the day, That the Branch growing out of the roots of Jesse is the Messias; upon whom seeing the Spirit of the Lord ought to rest, and that He also, as we have shewn, is the Lord, behold here is one only Lord distinguish'd into three Persons. And in another place in the same terms; The Spirit of the Lord is upon me. What me? The Prophet? No. For it follows, Because the Lord hath anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek; he hath sent me to binde up the broken hearted, to pro­claim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound: To proclaim the ac­ceptable yeer of the Lord. Effects which transcend both the capacity and the condition of the Pro­phets times. And to the same effect in another place; Behold my servant (to wit, the Messias, so styled in respect of his humane nature, and be­cause as he is Mediator he is employed by his Fa­ther for Redemption of the Church) whom I will uphold, mine Elect, in whom my Soul de­lighteth; I have put my Spirit upon him. And that passage in the 1 chap. of Genesis is very re­markable, though they except against it; And the Earth was without form, and void; and the Spi­rit of God moved upon the face of the waters. For what is that Spirit of the Lord? A great Wind (say they) which agitated that confused Mass of the Elements; for great things are said to be God's; as the Mountains of God. But in the first place, what verisimilitude is there that Moses should in the beginning of his History make use of a rare phrase and which is not found but in the Books of the other Prophets, and perhaps no where [Page 476] else in his own; which is enough to evince that it was not yet extant in his time? In the next place, whence came this great Wind, and to what end serv'd it? Was it to hinder that great confus'd mass from putrifying? God was well able to hinder that; and there being as yet no order establisht in Nature, it was not needful for God to create a wind supernaturally, to pre­vent the putrifying of the Matter by its agitati­on. And Then, the Matter of the Chaos being to continue so little a space in that estate, the putrifaction of it was not to be feared: Besides, the word moved, [...], does not signifie such a motion as the blast of a great winde, but onely a gentle tremulous concussion, in which regard it is attributed to the Eagle's shaking the wings in incubation over its brood; as if Moses would have said, The Spirit of God gently incubated on the World to cause it to be excluded or brought forth out of that confused matter. But many others have handled this Doctrine at large, and therefore I shall produce no more testimo­nies. Certainly, if regard be had to the Order which Christian Religion observes, not so much in reference to these distinct persons considered in themselves (for they are abysses, which it looks upon as inscrutable) as to the effects which are attributed to them in the work of Redemp­tion of Mankind, it will be found highly admirable. For to the Father, as to the first Principal Author of all things, it at­tributes the care and administration of the Ju­stice which takes vengance on the Sins of [Page 477] men; So that 'tis properly to his Person as Su­perintendant of the Common right of the Three in what relates to the unity of their Essence, that satisfaction ha's been rendred; And the first source of that Mercy whereby he was moved to determine to raise man from the misery into which he was fallen; And the Invention (if I may so speak) of that Expedient in order to it by his incomprehensible Wisdom. To the Son, as to him who assum'd humane Nature and con­join'd it with the Divine in the unity of his Per­son, and who suffer'd in one of his Natures a Passion of infinite value by reason of the infinite dignity of his other, it attributes the work of Redemption both in regard of the satisfaction which he made and the exercise and accomplish­ing of the other things belonging to his office. So all things having been created, as the Wise man speaks, by that eternal Wisdom, it could not be competent but to the same to raise them out of their ruins. To the Holy Spirit, as to him who, being common to the Father and the Son, is the Virtue by which both one and the o­ther produces things, and bring their purposes into being, it attributes the Action which ren­ders both the mercies of the Father and the Per­formances of the Son beneficial and efficacious to us. For what would the Dilection of the Fa­ther advantage us if we do not experience it, and the satisfaction of the Son if we do not embrace and receive it, to the peace and joy of our con­sciences? Which how can we do, if the facul­ties of our Understandings and Wills which are [Page 478] so blind and perverted, be not inlightned from above, and rectify'd by a supernatural power? So the Father, who prevented the existence of all things by his goodness, hath also prevented them by his mercy in restoring them to a happy being. The Son, by whom all things were at first created, as by the Eternal Wisdom and Word, hath re-establish'd and repair'd them. And the Holy Spirit, by virtue of whom both the Father and the Son accomplish'd the Decree of the Creation of the World, hath also been the Virtue of both to perfect actually the restau­ration of the World.

Nor ought the Jews here to be exasperated, or humane reason demur. For as for the Jews, since their own Scriptures teach this, what can they oppose in contradiction? Are they wont to control the words of the Lord, or to measure the Doctrine he reveals to them by their own judgements? Have they not learnt, That his thoughts are not as their thoughts; nor his wayes as their wayes, but as distant as the Heaven is high above the Earth? Have they not learn'd of their Prophet, that not onely none hath directed the Spirit of the Lord, or being his Counsellor hath taught him, but also that there is no possibility of fadoming his understanding? Yet their Ance­stors, who liv'd before the Hatred of Christian Religion had so blinded their Nation, perceiv'd some shadows of these truths in the Scripture, and have left divers footsteps of them in their Commentaries and Paraphrases, speaking so fre­quently both of the Word and the Wisdom of God and of his spirit, as of things distinct, that [Page 479] there is but too much to convince the obstinacy of their descendants. As for humane Reason, it ought not much to be scandalis'd if there be in the nature of God a depth beyond comprehen­sion, there being in all other things which seem commensurate to its capacity, so many difficul­ties which check it. None ha's yet been found that could give account of that Motion in the Heavens called The Motion of Trepidation; yea 'tis not yet fully determin'd, if we follow the Phaenomena of Astronomers, whether the earth circulates about the Sun, or the Sun about the Earth. The formation of Meteors ha's not hi­therto been clearly and certainly explicated, nor is there any that pretends confidently to have discover'd their causes throughly. The Flux and Reflux of the sea is to Philosophers a secret more deep then any of its abysses; and there is no mention of any that ever rightly un­derstood it. Then, in terrestrial things, who is he that can declare to us the nature of the Load­stone, what that attractive virtue is which draws Iron to it, and that other of it's verticity towards the Poles of the World? How nume­rous mysteries are there in the most easie Sci­ences, which cannot be discover'd to the bot­tome; and how many things seem facil, against which the acies of our minds is blunted? Who ever understood the reasons of the almost infi­nite variations, which are observ'd in the mix­ture of the Elements in the production of all things, as to colour, figure, quality, quantity, medicinal and venemous faculties? All the world knows what a Circle is, and Children are [Page 480] not ignorant of the shape a Square, a Peasant is capable of comprehending that there is accord­ing to all appearance some proportion between these two figures; and yet after so many thou­sand years to the present time, it is not found out nor determin'd what it may be. Where is the person amongst us, that is able to make our handsomely what is meant by the Agent and Pa­tient Intellect, as they speak, and wherein their difference consists? And 1. evertheless they bick­er in the Scholes to maintain that they are really distinct. Certainly, nothing ought to be so well known to us as our selves, nothing so evident to our minds as their own motions. Now we understand and will different things a thousand times in one day; and yet 'tis disputed whether the Will necessarily follows the dictates of the Understanding, or have some liberty of resistance for all dominion it ha's over it. 'Tis scarce known whether they be two distinct Faculties, and there are some which confound them. Books are compil'd of the Miracles of Nature; so term'd, because the effects indeed are visible, but the causes undiscern'd. The Occult Sympathies and Antipathies of things fill complete Volumes; and after the most exact and curious Enquiries, Obscurity and Incomprehension is pleaded in Fa­vor of Ignorance. Physitians examine our Pul­ses every day, and the most learned amongst them, if ingenuous, confess they understand not what that wonderful facultie is which sets the Heart in motion, whether it began to move first by contracting or dilating it self, and whe­ther the Arteries are contracted at the same in­stant [Page 481] of the Hearts extension. What ground of scandal therefore is in this assertion, that there is something in the Nature of God which we are not able to comprehend? But which is more; should it be granted that there is but one single person in the Divine Essence, yet none can boast of being able to solve the difficulties which may arrive from thence. For what humane mind is capable of distinctly understanding how all the Perfections of God are his very Essence, and not Accidents or Qualities like those faculties of ours, really distinct from the subject in which they reside? Since there are some of them not onely extremely different; as Wisdom and Power, but directly opposite, as Justice and Mer­cy? And yet reason induces yea compells to be­lieve it; otherwise, Accidents must be imagin'd in God, and consequently a composition, un­worthy the simplicity of his being. Who is he of us that is able to imagine an infinite essence, as the Divine is, diffus'd infinitely in the mane space, beyond the world, expanded throughout the whole Universe, so as to be totally present in all things, not divided or separated by the occurse and interposition of bodies, not mingled and confounded with the spiritual and immaterial substance of our Souls? Where is the man that is able to conceive after what manner our souls are extended through all the members of our bodies? For if it be all in every part of the Body, as is commonly taught, what difference is there between it's manner of being in the whole body and in each of its members? and if it be not to­tally present in each part, why is it not compos'd [Page 482] of parts, after the manner of bodies, and by consequence divisible and corruptible? I am not ignorant that many subtle distinctions are us'd in this matter, more proper to cast a mist before the eyes, then to afford a clear and certain knowledge of it: but I am confident, they are most times not understood even by those which alledge them. Now let us bestow our inquiries in such things as yield solid satisfaction to the mind, and not in such in which those that propose them have only design'd to shew the vivacity of their Understandings and their abilities. Otherwise, if we betake our selves to subtleties, forsaking manifest deductions, and conclude that for true which we are not able to make out, the Specu­lations of our Scholasticks in this kind will over-cloud our Religion, and supply matter enough for contradiction. But there are certain verities resembling too radiant lights, which dazle if be­held in themselves, and in their fountain, by rea­son of the weakness of our eyes, but content and delight if look'd upon in the correspon­dence they have with others more preceptible by our minds. And this in question is of this Nature.

Now there are two ways of being assured of the verity of this Doctrine. The first is that which we have touch'd upon formerly; That every man have so high an estimation of the ju­stice of God, as to believe it absolutely impla­cable towards us without a preceeding satisfa­ction for our offences; and know so well to weigh the horror of Sin, that he never dare think of approaching God without confessing [Page 483] ingenuously that he ha's deserv'd both the tem­poral death of the body and the eternal of the Soul, and that it is impossible for him ever to ob­tain pardon unless some other satisfie for him, and that with a price equivalent to the greatness of his crimes and the Dignity of Divine Justice. For he that is thus dispos'd in his soul (and we have shewn above that the right consideration of the nature of God requires man to be so) as­soon as the means of so idoneous a satisfaction is propounded to him, he will eagerly embrace it, unless he ascribe too much to Reason, and pre­sume too much on his own capacity to compre­hend things which are above his reach. But the good opinion we have of our selves in being able to dive into abstruse matters causes us of­tentimes to commit most pernicious errors. The Second is, for a man to consider attentively what the Book is, and the Doctrine in general, and in the body of which this makes but a part. For there will appear in the First so many evi­dences of its Divinity, and in the Second such an indissoluble connection of this point with many other verities of an indubitable certitude and evidence, that it will be impossible for the mind of man, if it be not totally obstinate and hardned, not to acquiesce therein. And in truth, let him begin with the books of Moses. Their Antiquity in the first place renders them venerable above all other writings of the world. For there are lest no monuments in all Antiqui­quity that come near them by many Ages: The War of Thebes, and the Sacking of Troy, to which Lucretius limits the knowledge [Page 484] men have of ancient matters, in these ver­ses;

And the times of Theseus and Hercules, beyond which Plutarch is able to discover no certainty in Histories, followed a long while after the birth of this great Prophet. The language in which it was written is the mother of all others; of which the several words which they have re­tain'd from it, and which are as slips of that an­cient stock, and the names of their very letters bear sufficient testimony. The style of it is plain indeed, but full of such native decency and graces; its narrations so equal, and accompa­nied with so curious a facility, that the truth of what it relates is resplendent throughout, and seems to justifie it self with a confidence that none would call it in question; an undubitable evidence of its generosity. The discourses it assigns those it introduces are wonderfully pa­thetical and agreeable to the condition of the persons. The things which it relates both of the creation of the World and the propagation of Mankinde, upon examination of reason alone hold forth a higher evidence then that of verisi­militude. And it is dubious whether the histo­ries of the deluge, of the conflagration of So­dom, of the building of the Tower of Babel, and the like, more clearly convince the Fables [Page 485] we meet with in the books of Poets, as a well-proportioned body discovers the deformity of the prodigious shadows it casts, or whether those vain worn-out traces of these ancient ve­rities bear a more irrefragable testimony to the same. The Prophetical eruptions, speak a spi­rit other then humane. The Predictions found therein have been so ratifi'd by events, that 'tis too great obstinacy to disparage their credit by contradiction. And if some things be related to have come to pass beyond the ordinary ways of nature, as mysterious shadows of what was to appear afterwards, and which really appear'd in due time, there results a light truely admir­able from the comparison of the Verity with the Figure. And the miracles which he performed for confirmation of his doctrine and for accom­plishing the enterprise which himself declar'd was committed to him, which might have been refuted by a hundred and a hundred thousand persons, if they had been counterfeit, and for defence of which so many millions of men would at present lay down their lives, clear him from all suspicion of fraud and imposture. Pro­ceed then to the books of Josuah, the Judges, Sa­muel, and the rest which writ the histories of the Kings of Juda, and Israel; and there will appear in them such an excellent continuation both of matters and times, such an exact description of Genealogies, a narration of various occurrences arrived both in the Church and State, in the per­sons of Kings and Prophets, great and small, Princes and Vulgar, war and peace, and all sorts of accidents, which carry with them a thousand [Page 486] marks of verity by the correspondence they have with humane passions and affections, and the re­semblances we observe of them in the various adventures of ordinary life, that a man must ei­ther bely his own faculties or give belief to such illustrious truths. And remarkably here and there occur such excellent instances of the Di­vine Providence both in justice and mercy, such illustrious examples of eminent piety and virtue in rare personages, such grave admonitions and efficacious exhortations by the mouths of the Prophets, that he must exceed rocks in stupidi­ty, that does not resent some lively emotions in his soul by reading them. Then go forwards and read the book of the Patience of Job, the Psalms of David, and the Proverbs of Solomon; Good God, how fraught with wonders! Some­times you will meet with sentences so full of Wisdom both in reference to knowledge and moral virtue, that the most excellent piece the Philosophers ever compos'd in that kind is dross and darkness in comparison; sometimes with a complaint so lamentable that it may melt the most rigid hearts with compassion; sometimes with the voice of God speaking and revealing himself from Heaven in a most august Majesty surround­ed with lightnings, and with a terrible voice re­sembling thunder. In one place an ardent prayer, in another testimonies of a fervent piety: here a zeal for the glory of God, and so inflam'd a virtue, or else so violent a hate against vice, that when you come to pass from reading of these books to those of the Philosophers, or of any other whatsoever that ha's assai'd to write of [Page 487] such matters, you will seem to be transpor­ted from Vesurius to Carcasus. In the whole series of them are interspers'd predictions of future things so remote, that no other but the Spirit of God durst have offered at them; apostro­phes to the Nations which were to be converted to the knowledg of the God of Israel, exultations for the manifestation of the Messias, so different from the ordinary thoughts and sentiments of men, that we must forget who we are, if we at­tribute the same to humane invention. And throughout the whole body composed of mem­bers so well adjusted and disposed in so excellent a harmony together, are universally diffus'd (like blood replete with spirits) vigor, life, con­solation so lively, efficacious and sensible to the soul into what perplexing inquietudes soever it falls, that there is none so sweet a refreshment in any ardor, nor soverain balm to whatsoever wound. And lastly, he that shall proceed from thence to the reading of the other Prophets, un­less he do it with much supinity and negligence, will observe in each page sparklings and beams of a light and inspiration truely Divine. Do they expound what the aim and use of the Law is? they do it with most profound Wisdom. Do they reprove and threaten in the name of God? the gravity of their admonitions is inimitable, and the denunciations of his judgements, ter­rible; so that no humane voice is able to stretch to so high a strain without breaking, no affecta­tion can be set out in a dress so stately, con­stant and uniform. Do they promise? If tem­poral deliverances, 'tis with demonstration of [Page 488] so redoubtable a power, that the very name of the Lord of Hosts, which is so often repeat­ed in them, sounds a kinde of grandeur I know not how to express, and which cannot arise from humane imagination: If spiritual re­demption by the Messias, 'tis in termes which re­present an inexhaustible sea of benedictions and riches. Do they foretell things to come? if it be in obscure termes, the very obscurity of the Prophecy is venerable; and there is always something of greatness discernable cross the veil, though not very distinctly; if it be in plain words, the names of persons designed intire Ages before their birth, times predetermin'd, and circumstances of matters most exactly taken notice of, sufficiently argue that they are nei­ther divinations of Daemons, nor humane con­jectures; neither nature being capable of so re­mote a foresight. Then, their transports are so sublime and their flights so bold, that no man durst attempt to soar so high; the doctrine held forth is so directly intended to the glory of God and the salvation of man, that 'tis not possible any evil spirit should have been the author of it; and the mixture of the Law with the Gospel is dispensed therein so wisely according to the condition of times, and the oeconomy of Pro­phecies opening themselves by degrees main­tained after such a rate, that should men and Angels conspire together, they would fall infi­nitely short of such an admirable wisdom. And I entreat such Readers as have any familiarity with the language in which they writ, to ob­serve the same attentively. For I am confident, [Page 489] whatever some say, there is not to be found in any Author, Greek or Latin, so magnificent and pompous an eloquence. And if they under­stand them not in their natural language, let them read them considerately in some version performed with care and diligence, especially in those which are commonly call'd Living Tongues. For though the Greek and Latine languages are in their own authors more rich and copious; yet those which live, if well man­ag'd, are more plyable to these Translations and take off better the impression and graces of the language of the Prophets; and this, because they are capable of new words and phrases. It will without question appear that all the reproaches profane men cast upon the Holy Books, and dis­paragements of its style and eloquence, are fri­volous. If therefore these Books teach the doctrine of the Trinity, as we have shewn they do, and are delivered to us by divine Inspiration, as is clearer then the Noon-Sun, what a folly would it be to go about to examine by reason the mysteries of the Divine Wisdom, which it self ha's revealed?

Now concerning the correspondence these verities have with others unquestionable in the Doctrine which holds them forth, it may seem suffi­ciently declar'd in the preceding discourse. Man is fallen into a depth of misery, and so is become an object of pity. Now in whom can he excite it, unless in him that is the Father of Mercy? But it was by his sin, and so he is an object of justice. And from whom is he to expect punish­ment but from the supreme Judge of the World? [Page 490] Will this Mercy display it self in pardon with­out punishing? No, that would be to the pre­judice of justice. Will this justice be executed upon man himself; Nor so; this would be to exclude all Mercy, in which the Almighty takes delight. What remains therefore but for God to substitute a pledge in the room of men? Now it is requisite that this substitute suffer death, and by consequence that he be man. And it is requi­site that his passion be of an infinite value; and for this, he must be God; for no other is cap­able of making such a satisfaction. And if he who is God be stricken by the hand of God by way of punishment, do's it not necessarily follow that there are two distinct persons in God? This redemption is unprofitable, if it be not efficaci­ously applyed to man. Who shall apply it to him? Not himself. A blind man might as well open his own eyes, or a Carcase raise it self out of the grave. And since this work of our salva­tion is common both to the Father and the Son, what is more consentaneous then for them to consummate and apply it by a Virtue which is common to them both? Now if it be common to both, it is distinct from both. How therefore is there not a Third? This is that which men chiefly stumble at in the Christian Religion. In all other things it is so consistent with reason, that its greatest enemies dare not gain-say it. In this indeed it is in no wise incongruous with reason, provided it be attended to in a due maner, & we let not loose the bridle to its presumptuous curi­osity. These principles are likewise common to both the parties, into which we have distin­guisht [Page 491] all those which profess the Christian Name in Europe at this day. If there be some things embrac'd by either, which seem absurd to reason, or contrary to piety, yet it behoveth not forthwith to accuse Christian Religion for it. It is meet to try the same by those Books which both equally own, and explore them by the com­mon Principles upon which their Religion is built. For if they be conformable thereunto, they will be found in no wise repugnant to right reason; if not, they must be held for humane in­ventions, and Religion discharged of the blame.

CHAP. IX. That Jesus is the Messias promised by the Old Testament. Also, Of the Divinity of the New.

WHereas we have evinc'd in the preceed­ing Discourse that the Christian Religion far surpasses in excellence of Doctrine that which the Jews of old profess'd, how divine soever it was; and consequently that it was sub­stituted in its place; it is now sufficiently clear, since Jesus is the sole author of it, and profess'd himself to be the Messias promised by the Pro­phets, that he is really the person. For how could an Impostor have been the interpreter and revealer of so celestial a Doctrine? And this is chiefly the means by which he verily ought to be judg'd; For 'tis a man's Doctrine which mani­fests what he is. Nevertheless, our design would not be complete, unless we also observ'd here briefly (because others have most diligently and amply acquitted themselves in this matter) the principal circumstances of his birth, his Life, and his Death. For there ha's not been the least defect therein, in relation to all that was here­tofore either required or presignified by the Pro­phets. Malachi had writ in these express terms ( chap. 4.) Behold, I will send you Eliah the Prophet, before the comming of the great and dreadful day of the [Page 493] Lord. And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their Fa­thers. From this place the Jews still expect the comming of Elias. But what appearance is there that Elias himself should be fetcht back from Heaven to converse again here below on Earth? That after so long an enjoyment of the felicities above he should return once more into the miseries of life? Certainly, as it was neces­sary for him at his reception into Heaven to be devested of the terrestrial qualities of his body, and clothed with sutable ones to the place of his new abode; so, if he should redescende amongst us, it would be requisite for him to resume quali­ties agreeable with a terrene condition, and to despoil himself of his celestial glories. Now he might well pass from worse to better, from an earthly to a heavenly life; but to return from bet­ter to worse would be a mutation of too much disadvantage. Elias therefore was to come, just as David was to come: for the Prophets promi­sed him also. Not that the Son of Jesse and fa­ther of Solomon ought to arise from among the dead, to repossess the Kingdom of Israel; but the Messias, of whom David was a type, ought to be the conducter and Chieftain of spiritual armies, and passing through many dangers and fights obtain peace to his people by his glorious victo­ries. Thus ought one to be born, who being cloath'd with the spirit of Elias, and leading the same manner of life, might prepare the hearts of men to receive the Messias by preaching the do­ctrine of repentance with an extraordinary au­thority & gravity. And such was John the Baptist, [Page 494] as our Evangelists describe him to us. Isaiah had said in the seventh Chapter of his Prophecies, Behold, a Virgin shall conceive and bear a Son, and shall call his name Immanuel. And though this might have had its accomplishment after the time of the Prophets, by the extraordinary birth of some in­fant, for a sign of the deliverance which is pro­mis'd here, yet in the second place it ha's regard to the Messias; as many things in the Prophets a­gree to the type in one respect, which are refer­r'd to the thing signified by the type in another. And in truth, besides that all temporal deliver­ances have, as shadows, prefigur'd the great and spiritual one, and this being very signal ought to prefigure the same in a more signal man­ner; what kind of sign was here chosen to assure Achaz and his people of Deliverance? For if the child of which he spoke, was to be born after an ordinary manner, certainly the sign was not great, nor capable of suggesting much assurance. If there ought to be something extraordinary in his birth, the election of this sign among so ma­ny others is strange, if it had no remoter aim. Add hereunto, that were all which the Jews alledge concerning the word Virgin true, and that it should sometimes signifie a young woman, because there is but little distance of time between these two conditions; yet being its proper and most common signification de­notes a Maid, 'tis a manner of expression mar­vellously strange, to intimate that a young woman shall bear a child, by saying, A Virgin shall conceive and bear a Son. So that according to this meaning, should the Prophet have shewn with [Page 495] his finger the young woman he spoke of, he had left Achaz and his people at as great a loss by this uncouth speech; and the condition of the times was sutable to such biassed Prophecies. Now Iesus was born of a Virgin, in a miraculous man­ner. Which the Jews now cannot handsomely deny; whose Ancesters that condemn'd him ne­ver did him this outrage, though they had rigo­rous laws against adulterers, and means enough to prove that he was not born in marriage, to which they might have had the acknowledge­ment of Ioseph and his Mother. Micai had ex­presly designed the place of his birth ( chap. 5.) But thou Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Iudah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel, whose goings forth have been from of old from everlasting. And all the Prophets promised him of the seed of David, in their Revelations, Histories, and Psalms. As for the place, the Evangelists declare it expres­ly: and as for his blood, they rehearse the race of Christ from father to son and from time to time up to David, Iudah, and even Adam himself. And the Jews never called in question his being of the royal line. Iacob prefixed the time of his com­ing at the subversion of all government and po­litical power in Iudah; and Malachi, before the ruine of the second Temple; Daniel, after se­venty weeks of years, to be reckoned from the time of his Prophecy. And the revelation of it was so clear and the tradition founded on it so constant, that all the Jews waited for this time; and several impostors rose up about this time to abuse their expectation. Now Christ was born [Page 496] at the predetermin'd time, when Herod possess'd himself of the Kingdom, and extinguisht all that was left of the race of David in any political Power or probability of attempting to gain it; a little before the destruction of the Temple, and the total desolation of the Nation, and the ruine of the Soverainty of Herod himself, and at the time when the seventy weeks of the Prophet were expired. It was foretold that he should be both a contemptible man in his external ap­pearance, and of a Life unblamable in his con­versation. For God calls him his just servant; and Isaiah, The despised and rejected of men. And Ie­sus spent the space of about thirty years un­known of all, not acknowledg'd even by his kindred, with parents of abject condition, al­though of royal descent: The calamities of the house of David having reduc'd some of his po­sterity to these termes: and his enemies re­proacht to him, as if he had been the Son of a Carpenter, and a Carpenter himself. As for the integrity of his Life, his most capital Adversa­ries, and calumny it self found nothing to re­prehend in it. Isaiah uttered these remarkable words in the 35. Chapter of his prophecy; Be­hold, your God shall come with vengeance, even God with a recompence, he will come and save you. Then the eyes of the blind shall be opened, and the ears of the deaf shall be unstopped. Then shall the lame man leap us an hart, and the tongue of the dumbe shall sing. A promise too magnificent to receive accom­plishment under any other then the Messias, both in reference to healing the imperfections of the body, and also in relation to the vices of the soul [Page 497] of which those are in a manner resemblances. As for the first, the Miracles which Jesus per­formed, were so great in themselves, so noto­rious in the sight of his enemies, so consonant to this Prophecy, that none can with any shadow of verity question that this Prophecy was ac­complish'd in him. For he gave sight to the blind, he healed such as were impotent from the wombe, he raised the dead, opened the ears of the deafe, loosned the tongue of the dumbe, commanded the winds and the Sea and they o­bey'd him, and surpassed as well in number as magnificence of his miracles all the Prophets that came before him. 'Tis true, there are some Jews who accuse him of having done the same by Magick. But then their Ancestors who con­demn'd him, would have bethought themselves to make this a part of his Indictment, and in­sert it into the sentence of his condemnation. For what law is more severe then theirs in con­stituting terrible penalties for Sorcerers, and all such as addict themselves to Magick? And ne­vertheless he did these wonders before their Eyes, under the view and cognisance of all the world; in the City and the Country, in the house and the street, and for the most part in the pre­sence of the greatest multitudes. Yet they ne­ver accus'd him of Sorcery. Some Pharisees in­deed, whose eyes were perstring'd by the lustre of his deeds, accus'd him of effecting them by Beelzebub the Prince of Devils. But their own followers did not believe them, and the An­swer he gave them was perfectly convincing; That his Doctrine wholly tending to the subver­sion [Page 498] of the Empire of Satan, the Devil would ne­ver have confederated with and assisted him that went about thus to undermine the foundations of his Kingdom. And truely what diabolical art or what sleight of Magick could be imploy'd in restoring life to the deceas'd, and sight to those which never had any, to heal persons des­perately sick at a great distance from him and by his Word alone, and to stop a continued flux of blood of twelve years onely by the touching of his garments, to reinfuse decayed strength in a moment, and rectifie cripled members after long impotence? For what are the works of Magici­ans usually but illusions, and feats of jugling, rather then actions surpassing the power of Na­ture? Others of the Jews ascribe his admir­able Works to the Cabala, pretending that he stole the name of God out of the Temple, and that to that ineffable Name [...] was annexed the power of doing miracles. But besides that this is a shameless fable, and unworthy to be ta­ken notice of, what colour is there that four Hebrew Letters should have the power of resus­citating the dead? And if the Name of God en­nabled him to work Wonders, was it with the permission of God himself, or against his con­sent? If against his allowance, surely it would be a pitiful case should a man by subtlety steal the name of God and do miracles by it, in spight of him to whom it belongs: That God, I say, should have devested himself of his infinite power to transfer it to four small Hebrew Characters by a irrevocable donation. If with his permission and consent, then hereby he confirm'd the calling [Page 499] of Jesus and ratified the open and clear decla­ration he made of being the Messias. Which he would never have done in patronage of an im­posture. God also foreshew'd that the Messias should suffer, and David apparently specifi'd the manner of his Death: otherwise, to what end did he say, They pierced my hands and my Feet? since in those times of his there was not among the Jews, any custome of a punishment in which they pierc'd the hands and feet, from whence David might borrow this phrase? For as for what they cavil upon the word, they pierced me, [...], as if it ought to be translated, as a Lion, [...], the sence of the sentence, which would by that means become imperfect and in suspence, refutes it. For what can this signifie, As a Lyon my hands and my feet, there being no connexion to that which precedes? Now our Lord Jesus hath suffer'd death, even the death of the Cross; by which on the one side the words of David have been accomplisht, and on the other that ha's been really brought to pass which was figu­ratively represented by the Lifting up of the Serpent: besides, that the Curse denounced a­gainst those which hang'd upon the tree, is be­come expiated thereby. David had said in the 16. Psalm, Thou wilt not leave my soul in Hell, neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see Corruption. To what purpose spoke he thus if he meant it of himself, seeing he is dead and in his dust with his fathers? And yet he spoke it not extravagant­ly; for the Holy Spirit which guided him did not suffer these words to escape him at randome. To whom then ought they rather to be referr'd [Page 500] then to him, of whom David was so express a type that he is styled by his Name? Therefore since he was to dye, and yet ought not undergo putrefaction in the grave, it follows that he ought to rise again from the dead; and this our Scriptures teach us of Christ, and is of most e­vident verity, though the Jews pretend dissa­tisfaction of it. For why shall we not give cre­dit to his Disciples who were eye-witesses of it, since they gain'd nothing but persecutions and capital hatreds by maintaining it? Who can imagine that men, who naturally love Life, should spontaneously abandon themselves to death, to defend the delusion of a Death from which they could expect nothing? Moreover, David in the 68 Psalm, saith, Thou hast ascended on high, thou hast lead captivity captive, thou hast re­ceived gifts for men. I beseech you, who do's he speak of? Is it of God as a person distinct from the Messias? It cannot be. Throughout all the whole space of Ages which pass'd before Pen­ning of this Psalm, never any deliverance was wrought for the people of Israel, nor extraor­dinary favour shewn them, whose greatness or manner may correspond to this passage; and the strain of the whole Hymne testifies the contrary. To whom can it sute but to him in whose time was to be seen the effect of the words which follow in the same place? Princes shall come out of Egypt; Ethiopia shall soon stretch out her hands unto God. By reason of which the King­domes of the Earth shall sing praises unto God, and Psalms unto the Lord; that is, to the Messias. Now our Lord is ascended into Heaven after his [Page 501] glorious resurrection, whence he hath sent those admirable gifts of the spirit, which have imbued the people of the Earth with the know­ledge of the Lord; whereof there need no o­ther proofs, then that the Nations, heretofore the most ignorant and barbarous, have now so much knowledge of the Nature of God, and the truths of Religion, that they exceed the Jews therein as far at least as they were exceeded by the Jews before the preaching of the Gospel. Daniel had foretold that after that Christ should be cut off▪ that is, after he should have suffer'd death, but not for himself, The People of the Prince that shall come shall destroy the City and the Sanctuary: and Christ confirmed this Prophecy by foretelling that of Jerusalem and the Temple there should not be left one stone upon another. Now who can doubt but that the event hath ra­tifi'd the Prophecy? Lastly, it was predicted, that he should destroy the Kingdom of Satan and the worship of false Gods: and since his times, they have been no longer in repute, even the most famous oracles have lost their very being. Of which there needs no other testimonies then those of Pagan Authors, who inquire after the cause of their cessation, and of experience after so many Ages that their memory is quite abo­lisht.

Very good (will some say) but of all this we have no authors besides the Evanglists and the Apostles, who are therefore justly suspected and lyable to exception, as speaking in their own cause. And moreover, who will warrant to us (say they) that there were Apostles hereto­fore; [Page 502] or if there were, that those Writings were of their composing? How frequent are cheats committed in such matters.

Here 'tis difficult to dispute: for what argu­ment and how clear soever be brought the thing it self is of greater evidence. And the Jews are very unjust and unreasonable, if having no o­ther warranty to give us of their Religion but the books of their Prophets, whereunto not­withstanding they require we should yield an absolute belief, and plye under those magnifi­cent names of Moses, David, Jeremy, Isaiah and the like; they demand of us other evidence of ours, then the writings of our Apostles. For what reason is there to ascribe more to the former then the latter? Yet let us comply in this with the obstinacy of men. It is demanded whether there were Apostles heretofore. But he that should demand whether there was a Caesar at Rome and an Alexander in Greece, might with good reason be judg'd troublesome and imper­tinent for indubitating a thing of so constant cre­dit. And nevertheless what remaines of the Empire of Alexander that may give us assurance of its quondam existence? are there any traces of it either in Asia or Europe? Certainly, no statues which were erected to him, no medals, no pillars erected for his monument, no memorial engraven in a rock or mountain, no person of his lineage, nor shadow of his Empire can give us any certainty of him. There's nothing but the Books of the Ancients for it, of which it may be in like manner demanded whether they be not supposititious, and whether the Authors [Page 503] whose names they bear, were ever in the world. Onely it ha's continued constantly in the me­mory of men, that there was sometimes an Alexander surnamed the Great by reason of his virtues and grandeur. And what have we of Caesar? His Commentaries; which may with as much reason be call'd in doubt as the Epistles of Saint Paul? For what more lively character do those bear of that great Emperor then these do of this great Apostle? More then this, what e­vidence can be produc'd but I know not what vain pretended inscriptions, some mutilous mo­numents and the foundation of some old castle, without any other title of its author then the ancient tradition that the Romanes waged great wars with our Gaules under his conduct? The most eminent token remaining of him is a vain shadow of his Empire transfer'd from Rome to Germany, and his name which is perpetuated from one to another by those Princes. Now is there any thing in all this to be compar'd with the immarcessible evidences which the Apostles have left of themselves in the whole earth? And if the name of Caesar retain'd by the German Em­perors, and that carkass of his Empire are suffi­cient proof that there was a great Prince of that name, is not the name of Saint Peter preserved by the Bishops of that place, and their authori­ty to which those Caesars have subjected them­selves, an authentick testimony that there was a Saint Peter? The Romane Name is indeed perisht and the Nations have shook off the yoak of its obedience, and out of the shivers of that great body are risen up divers Kingdoms, who own [Page 504] it no longer, how ever renown'd Emperors and formidable armies it had heretofore. But the Christian Name is Living, and the memory of those who founded it, though we be now far re­mov'd from their Generation, so fresh and deep in the minds of men, that a self-oblivion will sooner arrive to all mankind then they will for­get them. They are continually spoken of in life, they are sought to for consolation in death; the knowledge of them is instil'd into the souls of little children with their milk, who do not so soon understand that they are men, as they do that they are Christians and disciples of the Apo­stles. If therefore a much less certain tradition be not question'd, why shall that which is so con­stant be call'd into doubt? If belief is given to some fragments of statues, and some old trium­phant arches defac'd by time, shall we not give credit to so many Temples and infinite other au­thentick monuments? Wherefore it remains that there are certain things which though no other­wise known then by tradition and common re­port, nevertheless cannot be contradicted but by contentious spirits and such as are insuppor­table in their impudence. For when a thing containes nothing incredible in it self, and is moreover universally receiv'd; when all memo­rials that can be requir'd of it are found both in books & monuments; when the multitude of those which affirm it is innumerable in comparison of those which deny it; when it is embraced by all sorts of spirits and of all conditions, high and low, learned and ignorant, rich and poor; when it ha's got footing in several Nations, pass'd o­ver [Page 505] seas and mountains, and penetrated into the most remote regions; when it ha's taken such root in the minds of men that millions might be found all absolutely dispos'd to suffer death in defence of it; it behoveth to have lost common sense, or to be immensely brainsick, to be cap­able still to distrust it. The Question, whether the Books attributed to them be theirs or not, perhaps may seem of somewhat more difficulty to be resolv'd. And yet, if we be minded to use the same argument, the Christians have had so constant an opinion from all time that they are so, and all Nations and Languages so unani­mously acknowledg'd it, and render'd them so uniform a testimony, that if we doubt not but the Books bearing the names of Aristotle and Ci­cero are truely theirs, much more ought we to be assured of these, to which such a cloud of witnesses of all qualities and in all times have gi­ven most peremptory and convincing evi­dence. But let us close with them a little nearer.

The first thing which ought to be consider'd in a writing is the matter, whether it be both excellent of it self, and consentaneous to the condition of the person who propounds it. For I am perswaded the Marshal de Strossy who was an assiduous reader of Caesar's Commentaries, was not so much assured by the title of the Book that they had that incomparable Captain for Au­thor, as by the traces of an extraordinary mili­tary sufficiency he discern'd in them, which could not have been made or written but onely by a man that was a perfect master in the art of [Page 506] war. Now who did the Apostles pretend them­selves to be? Ministers sent to proclaim the name of Jesus Christ, and dispensers of his heavenly my­steries. Let it examin'd what consonance there is between their writings and this profession, and a most perfect correspondence will be found be­tween them. For in that which they have writ­ten of his history, they paint him out to us so much to the life, and with so natural a pencil, that he that reads them attentively cannot but seem to himself, to see, understand and converse with him amongst his disciples in Judea. More­over all their doctrines and narrations have that aim, without ever intermixing any thing of hu­mane sciences or affairs, and extraneous matters little conducing to their purpose; and yet even in that which they teach they discover such a profound wisdom, so unknown to all those that ever profess'd learning, and nevertheless so conformable to the humane Understanding when once it ha's comprehended the same, that it is abundantly manifest, that they in truth de­riv'd from the fountain of those mysteries what they dispenc'd to us, and that they pourtray'd Jesus so lively by having a perfect Idea of him deeply imprinted in their souls. Since there­fore the matter of those writings is such that they could not have been made but by those who were either Apostles or alike qualifi'd, what is more rational then to attribute the same to them, seeing they bear their names inscrib'd in the front, and the aire (as I may so speak) and genius of them in their aspect?

In the next place the style is to be consider'd; which ought to be agreeable both to the conditi­on of the Writer, and the capacity of those for whose use the writing is intended. Now the Apostles were indeed exalted to a most emi­nent dignity, but withall teachers of humility, and writ not to refined wits accomplisht by the acquist of Sciences, but to the most simple vulgar. What then behoved them to do but choose a plain manner of writing and phrases to which their Disciples were accustomed, to the end not to obscure mysteries of themselves above the ordinary reach of men by an elaborate and sublime style? And this they have done by wri­ting in Greek indeed, because that language was most generally in use among all sorts of Nations which were to be brought to the knowledge of Christ: but they have so accommodated it to the mode of the Hebrew Tongue, that rendring themselves understood by the Greeks, they have not relinquisht the idiomes to which those were accustomed who by reading the books of the Prophets were already somewhat lightly imbu'd & prepossess'd with those mysteries. As likewise it would have been inconvenient for that Divine Wisdom, unknown to all the Nations and which had convers'd with the Jewish alone, though veil­ed in a sort with ceremonies and legal doctrines, to have all at once quitted its simple and modest attire, to put on the pompe of the Greek or Ro­man eloquence. For besides that it would have been disguis'd thereby as in a strange garbe, the love it had excited in our minds might have been attributed to that quaint attire, whereas we [Page 508] ought to be invited to it onely by the attractive­ness of its simple and natural beauty. Never­theless there shine so many beams of celestiall light, and such a venerable Majesty through this humility and modest outside, I mean the plain­ness of its language, that whoso observes it at­tentively will judge it never to have been of hu­mane extraction. But in this it is in some measure different from the manner in which it was re­vealed by the Prophets, because it was then something terrible, for that designing to awe the minds of men rather by the respect of its Maje­sty then by very much knowledge, and unveil­ing it self but seldom, it was requisite it should use a high tone and full of authority. And thus we see why the Prophets seem to use more lof­ty strains and a more magnificent procedure. But now that it offers it self to perfect knowledge, taking away the band from before the eyes of men and the veil from its own face, it shews it self more obliging and gracious. Hence it is that the Apostles do not thunder and lighten, but discourse and reason, and perswade the humane mind by the consequence of their arguments; whereas the former amaz'd it.

Moreover, because 'tis proper to God to be constant, and on the contrary to man to be vari­able; so that the Works of God, as proceed­ing from an infallible wisdom, are correspondent to themselves in all their parts; whereas those of man, both through his ignorance which he can­not avoid, and his natural inconstancy, usually vary and interfere; since the Apostles being de­sign'd for Teachers to the whole world, ought [Page 509] to have been taught by God, it behoveth neces­sarily that every one be both consistent with himself and concordant with the rest. Let the New Testament therefore, the writings of which bear the names of eight or ten authors, be dili­gently consider'd, for discovering what harmo­ny they make together: certainly the histories will be sound so consonant, the opinions so u­niform, the style so like, and the ratiocinations prosecuted so equally, that though according to the diversity of each mans genius there be some kind of air which distinguishes them, so that it may be well observ'd that they are not the work of one alone, yet in this consort of several voi­ces of which each bears its measure and part, there cannot be found any real discord or disso­nance.

And because the Christian Religion ought to be built upon the foundations of the Jewish, so that what was begun by the Prophets, ought like an edifice to be continued by the Apostles, and finish'd according to the same design; let the Old Testament be compared with the New, that it may be seen whether there be any part of the structure not correspondent to the foundation, vitiating the proportion, disordering the work, or making a breach. On the contrary it will be found that there is no other difference between the Old Testament and the New in reference to the doctrine of salvation propounded by both, but that it was in the former as it were in its in­fancy, and in the latter as in its perfect age; there the foundations were laid of it, which scarce ascend above the ground, here 'tis ad­vanc'd [Page 510] into a complete structure as high as the clouds. 'Tis there like seed shouting out its verdure amidst the ceremonies of the Law, as amongst strange plants; here it is like a florish­ing and plentiful crop which ha's overtop'd them all. And lastly God speaks there indeed to the Israelites as a Saviour and Redeemer, but 'tis from the middle of acloud, whence sometimes issue forth lightnings and the noise of thunder; here he dispells all obscurity and shews a calme and serene aspect with a mild and charming strain.

[Hence also it comes to pass that they who betake themselves seriously to the reading of these books, being enamor'd on the excellency of the things they teach, perswaded by the evidence of truth, deeply affected with the knowledge of the nature of Sin which they hold forth, comforted effectually with the reme­dy which they exhibite against the same, and raised by the gracious promises they meet with therein, to a lively hope of a glorious immorta­lity, are transported with such ardor to embrace them, that all other things afterwards, how commendable soever, seem to them in compari­son, jejune, languide and disgustful, imperti­nent to the right end of humane life, and un­profitable towards what is alone of importance and necessity in it, to wit, The knowledge of God, for whose glory we were created; and The knowledge of the Chief good, whereunto we have a natural tendency; and the means to obtain the same, without which we are destitute of all hope. For admit you were imbued with all the Philosophy of the Greeks, understood all the excellent Learning of the Romane Civil Laws, possess'd all the skill in Physick which Hippocrates and Galen have left the world; had turned over all the writings of the ancients, and treasur'd up a magazine of all histories, observ'd all the motions of the Heavens, acquir'd the knowledge of all Arts and perfection in all lan­guages, and discover'd the most abstruse secrets in the Mathematicks or in Nature, indeed ye might find something of contentment to your mind by noble speculations, and avoid many dis­turbances [Page] of life, and be ennabled to provide for your security and the recovery of your health for a while, and perhaps gain a high re­pute amongst men: But when a man is at the point of death, and conscience summons him before the Tribunal of God, and he reflects se­riously on the immortal state of his soul, the me­mory of all this vanishes, and ther's nothing to animate and comfort us but only the knowledge of the things which are reveal'd to us in these divine writings; which moreover, both the multitude and the constancy of such as have maintained with their blood to be of Divine ori­ginal, do justly challenge admiration. For since it ha's not been through ferocity of courage that they underwent death with such alacrity, being simple men for the most part and humble and quiet-minded in their whole lives; nor through ambition of vain glory, from affecting which they were very remote in all their conversation; nor through a blind and obstinate headiness and opiniastry, having always shewn themselves submissive to all good reasons, and respectful to­wards all persons and especially towards supe­rior Powers; nor through brutish stupidity, since in all other matters they appear'd men of sober judgements, capable of reason and prudence; nor through ignorance of the nature of Death, see­ing they preach't to others that 'tis an effect of the vengeance of God upon the Sin of men, and were fully perswaded of the immortality of their souls; but the onely hope of glory promised in those books raised them beyond all fear; & they must needs have had a high perswasion of their [Page] verity, since it was capable to ingenerate so powerful and impregnable a confidence in their minds.

And whereas there were many things which might have reclaim'd and deterr'd them from embracing these Books; as the continual afflicti­ons which they promise in this life (for such is the gratification they hold forth here to those which receive them) the love of their estates, honors, and children, which naturally possesses the mindes of men; the reproach of an ignomi­ous death, which is so intolerable to minds that own any thing of generosity; the severity and reiteration of torments, sufficient to shake the most firm resolution; it follows that there must have been some more then humane inducements which fix'd their minds so unmoveably on an object expos'd to so numerous incomfortable perplexities and violences. Then, consider es­pecially the almost infinite multitude of Martyrs, and their long perseverance through so many Ages. For had there been but two or three, it might have been deem'd Nature had intended some extraordinary exploit in them, or that they were transported by some foolish fancy; and every Religion might produce some like ex­ample. But what charm could have been po­tent enough to induce so many millions of men, women and children, of all ages, conditions, sexes, and in so many most bloody persecutions renewed from time to time and age to age, to despise death so magnanimously, in maintain­ing a doctrine, which had no other trouble at­tended it, may seem ought to have been disgust­full [Page] to them both because it oppos'd their passi­ons, which we follow so willingly, and de­priv'd them of all the sweetnesses and delights of life? Nevertheless those Violences have been the means to propagate it throughout the whole Earth; and resolution and patience, the arms wherwith it ha's destroy'd the empire of the false Gods, and expelled the Demons from govern­ment of the World: Other kind of Armies it never depended on to extend its conquests even to the ends of the World and subdue the greatest and most flourishing Empires. All other Religions are confounded; or if any are still upheld, 'tis on­ly by the favor of Princes & force of arms. This, though all the powers of the world were enemys to it at it's birth, though it never attempted any thing but by the Voice onely, never us'd other rampart for defence but an invincible patience, ha's born up through 1600 years, and over­come the hearts of Princes themselves. But of this subject there are express Treatises, to which we refer the Reader, and proceed to examine in the next Chapter a certain Opinion excogi­tated of old by some giddy spirits, and reviv'd in our dayes, against the Divinity of Christ; which though destitute of all apparence of rea­son, do's not cease to take root and grow a­mongst many persons, and therefore requires our consideration.]

CHAP. X. That those who affirme Christ took upon him the appellation of God, though he was not so, onely that he might thereby render his D [...]ctrine more authentique, are ap­parently destitute of all reason.

THere are some people in these dayes who conceive they render the Christian Reli­gion very acceptable, when they give this account of matters pertaining to it; That true Religion consists in the internal piety of the soul towards God and in the sincere and con­stant exercise of true virtue towards men; That of all Religions, the Christian is that which holds forth most knowledge of the nature of God and true virtue, reducing the humane mind to the principles of nature it self and rectifying it from all the perverse opinions which the cor­ruption of depraved Ages had induc'd into it: But because the naked and plain proposing of these matters would have been very little ef­fectual with men, their own affections in­clining them more powerfully to vice then vir­tue; and for that the exhortations of a man merely man would not have been very preva­lent; Christ, who was the chief and most excel­lent promoter of it, that he might render his [Page 512] preaching more authentick, assum'd the glorious appellation of the Son of God and pretended to be God too; to the end that, it being natural to us to receive with reverence what proceeds from the Deity, his Doctrine might be more rea­dily and firmely embrac'd, his pretended di­vine dignity and the danger of rejecting what God is author of, conciliating a sacred and ve­nerable authority unto him. Whence it was, that like as when some great structure is to be built, scaffolds are erected round about it, which of themselves make no part of the Work, but are serviceable for conveying materials upwards and for the standing of workmen; so in the structure of Christian Religion some positions were employ'd, which of themselves are but mere fictions, but yet conduce to the establish­ing of profitable and excellent truths: Such are the doctrine of the Trinity, that of the Incar­nation of the Eternal Word, of Justification by means of Christ's death, and others which de­pend on these; which are in their judgement Pious Frauds (as they speak) useful to very ad­vantageous effects, and might be imploy'd with a safe conscience, because 'tis a good thing to de­ceive when the delusion renders men better, more happy and more wise.

Now this Opinion is so strange and swarmes with so many absurd impieties, that not the scarcity but the abundance of Arguments which arise all at once in the mind of whosoever con­siders it, renders me anxious where I should begin. For in the first place, it is requisite that they take away all correspondence between the [Page 513] Old Testament and the New, and deny that our Lord Jesus was the Messias. Because the preach­ing of Christ was grounded on this point, That God had heretofore by his Prophets promis'd a Messias to the people of Israel, who should be the Redeemer of the Nation; and he was sent accordingly by God for that end in the fullness of time t in which regard he invited all the world to receive him as the Supreme Prophet. Let them speak it out therefore confidently whe­ther Christ be the Messias promised by the Old Testament, or not. For if he be not, it behov­eth to become Jews, and to account him as they do for the greatest Deceiver that ever was upon the earth, and hence forward turn our Churches into Synagogues, reducing all Chri­stian order to the ancient manner of the Taber­nacle. If he be the Messias promised by the Old Testament, he is God; for that describes him to be such, as we have shewn by irrefrag­able proofs. And that those Books of Moses, Da­vid, and the Prophets, are divine, what we have spoken above in the matter leaves it no longer doubtful. Nevertheless, admit (for the present) they be writings purely humane; surely these excellent Theologers will not deny (least the reading shame them) but that they agree all in this particular, That from the Nation of the Jews ought one day to arise a great and rare personage who should be King in Israel, and should be called the Son and the Branch of the Lord himself. And this hath been the expecta­tion of that people in all times, with which they comfort themselves still in their deplorable [Page 514] desolation. But what moved them to speak in this manner, if they had no other instinct but from their own mind? Who incited Moses to set this fraud first on foot? Why did the others many Ages after so carefully cherish, ratifie and augment it in several circumstances with other false prophecies? What profit did they reap by deluding the world with such a hope? They must have had intelligence so many ages before with a man who was not yet in being, to foretell that he should exist; and this man born by chance at the just time which they presum'd to determine, must have taken occasion from these fortuitous predictions and the expectation rais'd by them in the minds of men, to declare himself the per­son whom so many prophets in so many different times had unanimously presag'd was to exist. Now it would be a strange case, that Moses should first of all, without any necessity of so doing or advantage by it in reference to his de­sign of governing the people of Israel and the establishment of his power, take up a fancy of the future arising of some great Prophet; and then another should come two or three hundred years after, and revive this prediction made at randome and enlarge and clear it up with other new (for this opinion was successively more and more confirm'd and rooted in the minds of men) and that at length, at the time prefixt and the set period, there should be found one both confident enough to draw all those presages to his advantage, and so favor'd by fortune that all the circumstances of his birth, his life, and his death should meet together in his person. Surely [Page 515] ther's as much likelihood in this as in the Imagi­nation of Epicurus concerning the framing of the world by the casual lighting together of Atomes. But there's something yet more strange. If they were predictions purely humane and also fortu­itous, like the Ephemerides of Nostradamus; be­ing they were cloath'd in magnificent terms, and there was nothing promis'd less then a King sitting upon the throne of David, who was to re­store the Commonwealth of Israel, faln into so mi­serable an estate under the power of the Romans; If Jesus were merely man and intended to ad­vantage himself by the foolish hopes of that peo­ple, what a preposterous madness was it to take the course he did? In stead of exciting the people to sedition against the Romanes, he commands to pay tribute, and pays it himself to give example: In stead of insinuating into the affections of daring adventurous men and such as he might use for Captains, he makes choise of a dozen poor Fishermen, and people of such con­dition, to have them continually in his train: In­stead of erecting his Nation to magnanimity, he betakes himself to preach humility and obedi­ence: In stead of imploying the virtue of doing miracles he was so mighty in, to astonish Herod or Pilate in some surprise or battail, he heals the lame and the blind and the dumb and the paraly­tick: And that which is, if these Opinionists be credited, the height of folly, instead of raising men into hope of his victories, he foretells to them which followed him that he was to dy up­on the Cross, and sharpely reproves one of them who went about to disswade him from that pur­pose [Page 516] of his. Was this the way, if it was a hu­mane Design, to be get in the world already pos­ses'd with hope of a Messias for a great Earthly King, a belief that he was the person which was promised by their Prophets? Surely Mahomet us'd not this course, who takes arms in hand, gives freedom to slaves, and because he knew his doctrine could not support it self by the prop of truth, plants it in all places, where he can by wars and battles. Wherfore to conceive a person should endevor to serve himself, after this manner, of the presumptions and expectations of men, is not to fancy a man but a lunatick. In the next place, I ask, whether Jesus Christ, when he called some persons with him to serve him in the work he undertook (as nothing is more apparent then that he had twelve peculiar Apostles) he discover'd this secret of his pre­tended Divinity to them, or whether he abus'd them aswell as other men? For if he discover'd the same to them, 'twas a wonderful com­plot, that he should style himself the Son of God, deport himself for very God, and they pro­fess themselves his messengers, sent immediately from him to promulgate his doctrine, and at last for their reward, he should be ignominiously crucifi'd, and each of them respectively after divers dangers both by Sea and Land, after im­prisonments, stonings, tortures and racks, should conclude their miserable and painful lives by cruel and shameful deaths. Truely, though he chose Fishers and men of low condition, yet I believe there was none among them so stupid as to be capable of being perswaded to partake in [Page 517] this enterprise upon these conditions. For as for his having induc'd them to it by this onely consideration, that great good should come thereby to the World, and that the Nations should be converted by their word from Idols to the true God, there was so little colour in the thing, that he would never have been believ'd; so little of that generosity in them which leads men to promote the universal good of the world without appearance of other recompense then misery and death, that none of them would have forsook his boat or his cottage. If he abus'd them also and impos'd upon them by his fair lan­guage, 'tis yet a thing surpassing all admiration, that this deceit should have rendred them of idi­ots and rusticks, the most excellent persons of the world, and incited them (who knew no­thing beyond mending nets) to undertake the reformation of Religion and manners of all the people of the habitable world. For even a re­jecter of the Gospel cannot but judge it requisite for them to have been endow'd with extraordi­nary graces, not adequate to Fishers and toll­gatherers, that they might perswade men to em­brace things of such a surprising nature, and bring it so to pass, that whereas Mahomet with all his Armies, and they which have succeeded him, have not been able to establish a firm Em­pire, but in the space of some hundreds of years, twelve mean and despicable men, in half an Age drew the greatest part of the World to them, and establisht an Empire over the consciences of men which continues unshaken after so many gene­rations; and furthermore, which is observable [Page 518] above the rest, they effected this by teaching men things repugnant to their natural inclina­tions, and exhorting them to dye courageously for one that was crucifi'd; whereas Mahomet publish'd a Law which flatters the body with carnal pleasures and likewise the mind by indul­ging it in its most violent passions? But will they venture to give credit to what the Apostle Saint Paul writes concerning himself? We have shewn above that it would be too great impudence to deny the Epistles which bear his name to be his, too great perver­sity not to believe it. I demand therefore, whe­ther, when he relates the means by which he was converted to Christ, he do's it according to truth, or to promote the Illusion? For if it were onely to play his part in the Comedy, what advantage was it to him to abandon the honors and priviledges he enjoy'd in his own Nation, and expose himself to hunger and thirst, the ha­tred of his Countrymen and the sury of cruel beasts, onely to deceive the world in favor of another Deceiver, and he one that was crucifi'd, for which he had no other reward to hope, but at length to perish by the same sort of punish­ment? If it was according to truth, what pow­er had a dead man to cause him to see such visi­ons, to speak to him from heaven and captivate all his thoughts (as he speaks) to his obedi­ence?

Yet perhaps both the one and the others, Christ and his Embassadors, intended the glory of God, and did all this in favour of true vir­tue, by an honest zeal which clos'd their eyes [Page 519] against all dangers, and was also seconded with some especial strength from God ennabling them to contemn all things in comparison of the ad­vancing of their enterprise. Let us therefore in­quire what their piety and virtue may have been if the opinion of these people be admitted. And first, did they use this proceeding by the com­mand of God? No, surely; For God, who is the God of truth, would not have commanded them to teach a Lye, or to make use of one to perswade some other thing that were true. He is powerful to cause the truth to be embrac'd by other means; and a greater injury cannot be done to him then to go about to gratifie him with what he hates. Much less would God have commanded a mere man to call himself his eter­nal Son and God equal to him, so to add blas­phemy and sacriledge to a lye. Indeed what ap­pearance is there, that whereas men ought to honor and venerate him as God alone, he should not onely have favour'd by his connivance but enjoynd by his expres commandment that a mor­tal man should take upon him to be eternal God, and draw the hearts and veneration of men to himself? But if they had no such command, what prodigious boldness would it have been for a man, whose conscience was convinc'd he was no more, to dare to call himself God? And what a hideous impiety in those who seconded him in this design to preach him for such through­out the whole world? These people make shew of commending Christ because he brought the minds of men to the knowledge of the purity of virtue, and taught a more refin'd and exquisite [Page 520] holiness then any that ever was besides; and yet they represent him to us the most notorious lyar and most impious blasphemer of men. The wise men of old exclaimed against the folie of Alexander the great, who suffer'd himself to be almost flatter'd into a belief that he was the Son of Jupiter, though he liv'd in a dark Age and Country, in which the stories of the lewdness of the Gods made it no incredible thing; Bacchus and some others worse being in the number, whose atchievements were short of his. But these subtle people we deal with, represent him to us for a modest person and worthy of imitati­on for his virtue, whom they judge to have a­bused the world by so notorious an imposture. Moreover, what piety could Christ have had to­wards God? For what an insolence was this to believe himself God if he was not so? And if he did not believe it, why did he not, having no command to profess himself such, tremble with horror as oft as he reflected on God and his own blasphemy? Certainly, if he had been such as these people describe him, he had deserved far worse then the cross which he suffer'd. But behold something yet more strange. They say that among the great and glorious things which Christ did, this excels the rest, That he abolisht Idolatry and the rable of Gods which were a­dor'd by the Pagans, and restor'd the know­ledge and true worship of the Deity: And yet, if what they say be true, he ha's establish'd the highest and most universal Idolatry that ever was seen in the world. For almost all Nations have embrac'd the doctrine of Christ: And [Page 521] amongst those Nations very few persons can be found but acknowledge him for God blessed for ever. Nor is it material here to alledge that his intention was not to be acknowledg'd for such. For why did he call himself God, unless that men might believe it? Wherefore does he complain of the incredulity of the Jews when they will not acknowledge him for such, but accuse him of blasphemy? And how would he have men be­lieve him God without adoring him, since it is as much sin not to adore him whom we believe to be God, as to adore him whom we esteem not to be so? Besides, he never repell'd any that a­dress'd to him under that notion, and his Apo­stles universally own it. Was it not therefore by his commandment? Or, if it were not by his express commandment, ought not he to have re­dress'd so dangerous a mistake?

One thing there is which I would understand certainly, whether they against whom I dis­pute, give any credit to the Books which we call the Gospel. For what ever good outside they wear, I doubt they believe them not at all, and withall think no Jesus Christ was ever in the world; and consequently all this Discourse is absolutely unprofitable: they must be referr'd to the preceeding dispute, in which I prov'd their Divinity against the Jews and others like them. If they afford any belief to those Books, certainly they will never accuse them of having forg'd the testimonies render'd of Christ from heaven, the authors of which might not only have contradicted one another, but might have been convinc'd of fal shood by fifty thousand persons. [Page 522] What then was the meaning of God in these words, This is my Son in whom I am well pleased? As for the miracles which he wrought, as raising the dead, giving sight to such as were born blind, healing inveterate lamenesses of many years, and the like, they could not pro­ceed from any but a special assistance of a power truely divine. And what appearance is there that God should have afforded his infinite power to such an impostor to cause men to believe in him, and consequently to found such a prodigi­ous and universal Idolatry? We know, said one, God hears not the wicked. But who ever was more wicked then Christ if he was so impi­ous and such a blasphemer as this Opinion repre­sents him. Then, in reference to the certain predictions which Christ made of things to come into which no humane conjecture could dive, there needs no other proofs of them then by comparing the correspondence which the Evan­gelists observe of them with the events them­selves. He foretold that he should dy, and it came to pass accordingly. But which is more, he foretold that he should rise again, and he was not deceived in his assurance. He fore­told the ruine of Jerusalem; and the Romanes, as if they had been hired by him for that purpose, fullfill'd his Prophecy. He declar'd that when he was once lifted up on high, he would draw all men to him; and experience attests the veri­ty of this oracle. For his Cross is like a stand­ard lifted up before the Eyes of all Nations to summon and invite them to his knowledge. Now many others indeed have foretold things to [Page 523] come; but I judge it impossible for such a per­son, as Christ would have been had he been such as these people describe him, to have obtain'd the spirit of Prophecy from God. Balaam sometimes prophesied of things to come; but it was for the good of the people. But this of Christs would have been to gain credit to the word of an impostor, to lead men into many snares, and especially, as was said, for God to lend his hand to the seting up of Idolatry. As for what these good the people say, that it was lawful to abuse men in some points in order to leading them to embrace certain excellent virtues; although it be a strange and absurd method of teaching truth by the favor of prodigious falsities, and a wiliness uncommendable by prudent judgements, yet should it be admitted, it ought not to be practis'd unless in matters which draw no pernicious con­sequences after them; as when the simplicity of childhood is beguil'd by smearing honey or su­gar on the brim of the cup which contains a me­dicinal potion,

But the using impious and blasphemous falsities, and which are infallibly effective of such idola­try, had Christ and his Apostles practis'd it, they had not followed that incomparable precept which they give us for a rule of our actions, Not to do evil, that good may come of it. As for the o­ther opinions, being they are consequent of this, and by reason of their dependency impli­citly [Page 524] prov'd in the proof of their primitive prin­ciple, I shall not insist upon demonstrating the truth of them. Only I shall intimate, that Saint Paul had been a person of a stranglye distemper'd mind, to labor so much in disputing against the Gentiles from the maximes of Nature, and a­gainst the Jews from the constitutions of the Law, to draw arguments from the books of the Old Testament, to expound allegories, to rea­son, raise and resolve objections, in maintain­ing the doctrine of justification by faith, and of predestination or eternal election, and other like doctrines, if they were nothing but ficti­ons. His writings discover a wisdom too pro­found to leave place for an accusation of so inept and ridiculous deceit. But the cause these peo­ple speak after this rate, is, that they never read or never understood the Holy Scriptures and the oeconomy of Christian Religion. For did they attentively consider them, they would easily ob­serve that the point of Christs incarnation in this doctrine, is like the image of Phidias in the Sta­tue of Minerva; which if taken away, the whole work is dissolv'd; if let alone, all the parts of the statue are terminated in the same with such art and wisdom, that an observing mind is ravish'd with admiration at the whole contrivance. But let us now return to our De­sign and bring it to conclusion.

CHAP. XI. That Indifference in the professing all Reli­gions is not justifiable according to the Christian Religion, which Party soever be embraced. And for Conclusion, The Refutation of the Pretext propounded in the Preface.

WE have by the Divine assistance shewn by reasons in which all endu'd with any sense of piety, and even in whom nature and reason are not absolutely perverted, ought to acquiesce, That the Jewish Religion having been heretofore alone of divine institution, the Christian hath by the authority of the Messias so succeded it, as that it hath wholly abrogated its use; and That this latter bears infinite evi­dences of its heavenly original, both in the ex­cellence of its doctrine, and the correspon­dence of it with the ancient Prophecies. We also intimated at the beginning, that there are two principal Parties of Christians, under which all are ranked that wear this name, differ­ing in two principal Points, on which all their other controversies depend. One of these Parties holds that that particular Revelation by which God hath ordain'd Religion and matters pertaining to his service, ha's been left to men [Page 526] by two ways; namely by the Scripture, and by verbal Tradition; the Scripture to serve for a foundation to Tradition, and Tradition to be a supplement in the deficiency of the Scripture, for that it contains not all things necessary to sal­vation; and even in what it do's contain, is of dubious understanding, and hath need of the interpretation of Tradition. Moreover, that the dispensing of Tradition ha's been committed to the hands of the Bishop of Rome, to use it with a Soverain and Apostolical authority, and a promise from God to be absolutely infallible in it. The other Party acknowledge no other re­velation of the Divine Wisdom, then that which is contained in the Books of the Old and New Testament, rejecting all verbal Tradition in re­ference to things necessary to salvation. And as for the authority of the Pope concerning the infallible interpretation of the Word of God, they not onely do not acknowledge it, but dare to condemne it as tyrannical and Antichristian. It remains therefore to inquire briefly, whether this flexible and soft Indifference be approvable by either Party.

Now how sharply soever they contend in o­ther points, they both accord in this, That it is in no wise lawful for Christians either to partake in the Idolatries of the Pagans, which their Re­ligion condemns as abominable; or to desert the Christian Religion, and embrace the Law of Mahomet, which they account a damnable im­piety, with which no communion ought to be had even so much as in appearance; or to joyn themselves to the Jews, though anciently the [Page 527] people of God, or partake in any manner what­ever in their worship, for that it would be an abjuration of the name of Christ the sole Saviour & Redeemer of our Souls. And this their judge­ment is grounded on texts of their Gospel so fre­quently occurring almost in each page, that 'tis scarce needful to alledge any example. Certainly, those words of St. Paul writing to the Corinth. are singularly emphatical, I say, that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to Devils and not to God; & I would not that ye should have fellowship with Devils. And they are so much the more to be consider'd in that he speaks not to those which were of Pagan belief, for he would not have termed such, Brethren; nor to those which had a desire to revolt from the Gospel of Christ to Paganisme; for otherwise those words, You cannot drink the Cup of the Lord and the Cup of De­vils, and you cannot partake of the Table of the Lord and of the Table of Devils, had been wholly be­side the purpose and impertinent; and if he had had to do with such people, he would have written in another style. But he speaks to such, as either through fear of persecution or com­placency, were willing to hold in with both sides, and to retain the Gospel of Christ in se­cret, but otherwise to conform, as to outward profession only, to the ceremonies of Idolaters. And the same Apostle was so jealous of the pu­rity of the doctrine which he held forth, and e­steem'd it so necessary to salvation for the form of it to be retain'd sincere and complete with­out any mixture of strange doctrines, that when certain Teachers went about, not openly to [Page 528] withdraw his disciples of Christ, but onely to introduce the doctrine of the Old Law in the matter of justification into the Covenant of Grace, because these are things absolutely in­compatible, he says, Although we or an Angel from Heaven preach any other Gospel unto you, then that which we have preached unto you, let him be accurs­ed. As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other Gospel unto you then that ye have received, let him be accursed. And can it now be conceived he had any favour for this Indif­ference? On the contrary, the Cross was ever the cognisance of him and others like him, and in general of all true Christians in all Ages; Not onely to denote that they believe in him who was crucifi'd for them by the Jews and the Ro­mans, but that they are resolv'd, if need re­quires, to undergo the like or more grievous punishment for the confession of his Name, as not being worthy to have part in his glory, un­less they generously incurre all sorts of dangers and sufferings for his sake. Thus likewise he said, Whosoever will be his Disciple, must take up his Cross and follow him. And the Martyrs of the Primitive Church, who in the infancy of Christianity, seal'd his truth with so much blood as they couragiously lost, so many horrible tor­ments which they underwent, so many shame­ful and exquisite deaths which they endur'd, have more then authentically confirm'd this be­lief, which was so universal and immutable in them, That he who confesses not the Name of Christ in the very face of danger, who abstains for love of him from all religious ceremonies [Page 529] different from his own, who do's not condemne th m publikely and even in the presence of Flames and Axes, is faln from the hope of their chief Good and for his unworthiness adjudged to eternal punishment and ignominy; according to that saying of their Master, Whosoever shall de­ny me before men, I will deny him before my Father which is in Heaven.

Then, for communicating in the Religion of one another, both Parties alike condemne it, and look upon this Indifference as a Profane and ir­religious humor. For they which hold Religion to be constituted aswel by Tradition as by Scri­pture, and that the Church of Rome alone is in­trusted with the custody of it, and the Pope the supreme mannager and dispenser of it, thunder out Anathema's against those which are not of their opinion, have persecuted them with flames and torments, and at this day in Italy and Spain exercise a cruel Inquisition against them of different judgments, though they declare not the same; and moreover when occasion is offer'd they make bloody wars upon those whom they account hereticks. And they believe themselves bound hereunto by zeal to the Christian Religion and the salvation of the souls of men, which when they cannot be reduc'd by reason, ought to be reclaim'd from error by the terror of perse­cutions and arms. And as they hold this for a necessary course towards those who are turn'd aside from the faith, so they wonderfully extoll the courage not onely of the ancient Martyrs, but also of those who resolutely undergo any thing for defense of the Roman Religion. And [Page 530] if there be any Country in Europe, wherein the contrary Party prevails, they enjoyn their ad­herents to submit rather to all sorts of evil u­sages, then to comply with anheretical profession; proclaiming openly that there is no salvation out of the communion of their own Church, the head and mother of all others, by communicati­on, participation and dependence on which a­lone, all other Christian Assemblies have right to the titles of Christian and Catholick; so that whoso is not gather'd unto it, is out of the way and lost. On the contrary, should the other Party, who restrain all Divine wisdom revealed for the instruction and bringing of men to salva­tion within the bounds of the Holy Scripture, approve this pretended lawful Indifference, they would be the most stupid and inconsiderate branglers in the World: For they alledge this cause of their separation from the Romane Church, for that they could not with safe conscience partake in its ceremonies; which ha's occasion'd many great wars, which within this last hundred years, have fill'd all Europe with deplorable slaughters and calamities. Themselves also undergo all sorts of inconveniences and mischiefs for their professions sake, rather then condescend in this point to the command of Kings and the bent of whole Nations; they extol the patience of their Martyrs (for with this title they honor the memory of such as have been put to death for defence of the Religion they profess) they exhort one another to the like magnanimity, and denounce eternal perdition in [...]ase they be deficient of courage herein.

I will not at present determine on which side the right is. May the Father of Mercy please to reconcile their minds, and close up this great wound of his Church! But in the mean time, it is beyond all doubt that according to their con­trary doctrines they ought to condemn one the other, and hold that whoso embraces the faith of the One cannot secure his salvation in the exter­nal profession of the Other. For example (for I wil will not engage far in this matter) The Reform­ed charge the Roman Church with three accusa­tions; Of heresie in its doctrine, in many par­ticulars; of Idolatry in its religious service; and of Tyranny in relation to government, in sun­dry instances; So as to call the head of it, Anti-Christ, and apply to him, as the person intended by Prophecies, whatsoever is found con­cerning Anti-christ in the Epistles of Saint Paul and the Revelation. If these accusations be grounded on truth, how can they comply with that Church, unless they will violate this Com­mandment, A man that is an heretick, after the first and second admonition, reject; Knowing that he that is such, is subverted and sinneth, being condemn­ed of himself, &c. And how can they but hold the teachers of it for accursed, according to this o­ther commandment, Little Children, Keepe your selves from Idolatry? And I cannot imagine that Saint Paul would permit external communion in the same Religion which those whom in regard of their Religion he excludes from hope of the Kingdom of Heaven. Be not deceived (saith he) Idolaters shall not inherit the Kingdome of God. And if he forbids to eat with them, that is, to converse [Page 532] familiarly with them in the way of civil and or­dinary life, much more would he prohibit to entertain society with them in the same Religi­on. But those words are most highly remark­able; If any man worship the beast and his image, and receive his mark in his forehead or in his hand, The same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation, and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy Angels and in the presence of the Lambe. For if the Beast menti­on'd there be Anti-Christ, as 'tis manifest; and the Bishop of Rome be this Anti-christ as the Re­formed pretend; and that to receive the mark of the Beast in ones forehead or hand, be, as is evident, to adhere to it in external profession, what does he but pronounce sentence of con­demnation against himself, who believes the Pope to be Anti-christ, and nevertheless esteems the outward profession of adhering to him in­different? For 'tis all one, as if he should affirm it lawful for a good and loyal Subject to fol­low the standard of the enemy of his King, some unjust and violent usurper of his Kingdom. And indeed it cannot be thought but that the Pope himself and his Cardinals, if they believed themselves such as the adversary party publishes them, would condemn themselves and all those which follow them.

On the other side, the Catholicks accuse their Adversaries of a temerarious separation from the true Church, and of having added Heresie to Schism, amassing their Religion up of all those heresies which have been condemned by the [Page 533] ancient Councils; and moreover of having to heresie added Rebellion against the Pastors, whose vocation is onely true and legitimate. Also, of having abolisht the most sacred Myste­ries which our Saviour instituted, subverted all order of Discipline from top to bottom; in a word, of having revolted from the faith and obedience of the Supreme Monarch of the Church, the Vicarius of our Lord Jesus, the sole and infallible dispenser of his mysteries. Now if this accusation contain as much truth, as up­on seeing it explicated and maintain'd in the writings of those great and even incomparable personages which have undertaken the quarrel in favour of the Roman Church in our times, it seems to have verisimilitude, what man so per­swaded can with a good conscience associate himself to people culpable of so many heinous crimes; as of Schisme, heresie, rebellion, teme­rity and sacriledge against God, impudence to­wards men, and above all of disobedience to him that represents Jesus Christ and God his Fa­ther upon earth? Surely he that should in the least connive at or bear with the reproaches cast upon him might be thought even capable of at­tempting on the person of the Redeemer of the World.

From all this it is easily colligible, That this opinion of Indifference of all Religions in out­ward profession, is false and pernicious; rend­ers all the exhortations of God himself in his Gospel to suffer for the truth, insignificant; dis­parages the sober judgement of the Apostles, who were the first that propos'd themselves ex­amples [Page 534] of inflexible resolution; and conse­quently leads to the contempt of God and of all Religion in the World. For like as one that should profess it indifferent to him what man he ownes for his Father, or what Prince's badge he wears instead of his King's, would tacitely in­timate himself to be of some spurious or degene­rate off-spring, and that he ha's a venal and un­natural soul; So he that cares not of what God he bears the cognisance here below, declares suf­ficiently that he acknowledges none for his own part, and that his following of any Religion is onely out of interest and complacency; and those Pretexts we mentioned in the beginning, how specious soever, are onely a coverture to this profane humor. Truth, say they, is hard to be disentangled from the confusion of the ma­ny Religions which have the vogue in the world: And God is of his own Nature so mer­ciful, that he is not strictly inquisitive con­cerning it, but is better pleas'd with the love of peace and society, then with the adherence to certain particular opinions which occasions such disturbances and miseries. Strange people! who complain of the difficulty of a thing they never enquir'd after, who limit the prerogatives of God and his affections, without understand­ing them, and who under colour of tenderness for peace with men make no conscience to wage war against God, who for the preservation of Civil Society which onely regulates and con­tains the duties of men among themselves, sub­vert and confound the Laws of Religion, in which are contained our duties towards him [Page 535] who created the World and Men. Certainly, had these Opinionists imploy'd in the search of God's truth, half the time they bestow on un­profitable occupations of this life, they would not judge Religion a thing full of spinous que­stions and irresolvable difficulties. The sole reading of the Old and New Testaments, which would not take up so much of their time as a quarter of Amadis or the Romance of Astrea, would clear up all those perplexities, and cause them to pronounce resolutely, provided they come to it with attentive minds and free from evil prejudices, for the preeminence of the Faith of Christ against all the superstitions of the world. And though some knot may be met with here or there by the way, yet what man is there who addicting himself to the study of a science, is deterr'd from it by one or two difficulties he finds in it? How often ha's such a one vex'd his brains for the understanding of Aristotle, and how many days and nights ha's he spent in the reading of his writings, dispairing of being ever able perfectly to understand them, who having scarce once in his life cast his Eyes upon the Epistles of Saint Paul complains of the con­texture of his ratiocination and the obscurity of his doctrines? And yet the affair with the Phi­losopher, was perhaps no more then to know whether Demonstration from the Effect deserves the title of Demonstration as well as that which is made from the Cause; or whether according to the Peripatetick doctrine Universals have a sub­sistence out of our Intellect; or what reasons justifie the opinion of ranking Privation among [Page 536] Principles of things; empty questions and of no importance in reference to Life: whereas in the writings of the Apostle, the argument is con­cerning the glory of God and the salvation of our souls. But the truth is, where the business is to render to God the service which we owe him, the most even ways seem rugged to us; but where 'tis to follow our fancies, all precipices become easily superable, and we level moun­tains. Had these people once understood Religi­on and well conceived the idea of it, they would exalt the mercy of God without comparison more then they do, and withal have a greater dread of his justice; and where he ha's reveal'd his celestial truths, they would not dare to bring a Lye into competition; where he ha's manifested his will, they would not presume to prefer their own before it; where he ha's de­scribed the form of Religion he would have us to follow with his own hand, they would not offer to equal with it either humane imaginati­ons or inventions of Devils; where he hath sworn, that As he lives, he will not give his glory to another, and that he will bring ven­geance upon his enemies, by drenching his ar­rows in their blood, they would not abuse his mercy to impiety, nor sleep in so profound a supinity, but would learn from those who have most of all extoll'd his compassions, that 'tis a ter­rible thing to fall into his hands. The great judgements wherewith he hath chastis'd all Nations by reason of their Idolatries, the dreadful calamities which he brought on his be­loved People for having imitated the same, the [Page 537] unparallel'd desolation of the City of Jerusalem, and the visible Curse which pursues that miser­able Nation every where for having rejected the Gospel, the breaking to pieces of the Roman Empire for having persecuted it, and the judge­ments which lie pours down from time to time upon all those who provoke him, would be sufficient documents to them that though his pa­tience be marvellous, yet he is terrible in reven­ging contempt towards himself and the truth revealed by him. As for what is alledged con­cerning the peace and union of minds inflam'd with so great passion through the occasion of Re­ligion some against others, and of the tranquil­lity of States put in combustion by differences in sacred matters; did we see no other means to obtain the same but those of impiety, it were more eligible to be at perpetual jars and enmities. Did Christ, who knew well that he came to bring fire and sword into the world by the preaching the Gospel, desist therefore from preaching it, or command his Apostles to conform themselves to all professions according to occasion, for fear of exciting seditions and tumults? No, surely. Should the world perish by combustions, his truth must be maintained. But by the grace of God we are not reduc'd to those terms. To turbulent and inconsiderate minds Religion is often a pre­text of commotions: to violent and bloody souls the same Religion is sometimes an incitement to murders and massacres. But wise and politick Princes, who give not themselves up to their own passion or to the furious zeal of others, have well understood, how, notwithstanding the di­versity [Page 538] of professions, to contain their people within the compass of duty towards them and concord together; and experience hath attested that when they will employ their prudence and authority therein as they ought they are equally well served by opposite Parties. So that the zeal of Religion being moderated by the laws of reason and humanity does not so transport mens minds but that they may live peaceable together under one Government although in contrary profession of Religion. Besides, the two Socie­ties (Civil and Religious) have their rights and their laws distinct, and the knowledge of the true God do's not lead to the troubling or subver­ting of humane Commonwealths, no more then ardency we ought to have for his glory ought to render men murderers and barbarians. But what tends all this discourse to? For certainly, these people who speak so much of the publick peace, have no great care for it; tis their own peace they are solicitous of. And because their God is the grandeur, pleasure and contentment of the world, they hate the profession which crosses th [...]ir designs, and lays obstacles before them, & which hinders them from mounting whether they aspire. And being 'tis an infamous thing to be accounted a despiser of the Deity, and they which declare freely that Religion is not wor­thy to be prefer'd before the things of the world, are ordinarily lookt upon as monsters by others, they shelter themselvs under the fair appearence of the desire of peace, and seek masks to disguise so uncomely an aspect. But he that should be­hold the bottom of their hearts (and they cannot [Page 539] so well hide themselves but they may be discern­ed cross their veil) would find there the con­tempt of God and of his service, which shame hinders them from laying open to the world. In Christendom whoever is neither a Catholick nor Reformed, he must of necessity be an Atheist (since he cannot be either Pagan or Jew or Ma­hometan, unless he have lost common sense toge­ther with all gust of piety) And indeed for the most part either their lives or discourses con­vince them to be such. For if there be any such person that lives in a measure honestly in the sight of the world, yet he speaks disdainfully of Religion, and looks upon all those as besotted who are lovers of the same. Others swim in all sorts of pleasure, and are so abandon'd to disso­luteness, that they cause shame to mankind and horror to any that considers them. These, Truth accounts it a glory to have her enemies. The former she cares for so much the less as they are much more rare. I pray God restore them to a better mind. And to him who hath afforded us the grace to bring this small work to its conclu­sion, be honor and glory to all eternity. Amen.