Secondly, You may consider it as corrupted and obscured by sin:⁵ And in this sense it’s no help, but a desperate enemy to what is good: and the more reason this way, the more opposition to God: and thus it fell out with all the great naturall Luminists; they became vain in their reasonings, the more they enquired and searched, the further off they were from what is true, 1 Cor. 2. 14. The naturall man perceiveth not the things of God: […], is not a man carnall and grosse in sinne, but a souly man, one that doth excolere animam, such as Tully and Aristotle. Now the wiser these men were, the vainer they were. Chrysostome’s comparison doth well agree with them: As if (saith he) a king should give much money to a servant that by it he should make his family more glorious, and he goeth presently and spends all his money upon whores and bawds. Thus did the Heathens: As Austin wrote to a man of great parts, Ornari abs te Diabolus quaerit, The Divell seeks to be adorned by thee.

Hence Egypt, that is accounted the mother of Sciences, and Moses in regard of knowledge is preferred before the Egyptians; yet that was the seat also of Idolaters: and so the Astronomers, who lifted up themselves above others in their knowledge of heavenly things, brought in those monsters into heaven, and attributed worship to them, and in their worship of their gods they added many feasts and sports. Thus they invented an happinesse, which Austin calleth Scyllaeum bonum, consisting of humane and brutish parts. If you aske how this naturall light⁶ cometh to be thus obscured; I answer, three waies: 1. By ill education. This is like the first concoction, or the first settling of the limbs of a man. Secondly, By long custome and degeneration. Hence some Nations have by their publike lawes allowed grosse sins lawfull; as some Nations have allowed robberies, some incest, some that all old men should be thrown down headlong a steep hill. Thirdly, By the just judgement of God; therefore three times in Rom. 1. God is said to give them up to sin.

Thirdly, You may speak of Nature as informed, and enlightened⁷ by Gods Word: and while it’s thus, you need not cast this Hagar out of doores. Let Scripture and the Word of God lay the foundation stone, and then Reason may build upon it. It is Stella his comparison: It is with Faith and Reason, as with the mould that is at the root of the barren and fruitlesse tree; take the mould out, and throw in muck or other compost, and then put the mould in, it will much help the tree, which hindered it before. Thus, lay aside Reason at first, and then receive truths by Faith; and afterwards improve them by Reason, and it will excellently help. Divine truths are not founded upon Reason, but Scripture; yet Reason may bear them up: as you see the elme or wall bear up the vine, but the elme or wall doth not bring forth the fruit; onely the vine doth that. As long therefore as the light of Nature is not the rule, but ruled and squared by Gods Word, so long it cannot deceive us.

The second grand consideration is, That the light of Nature is⁸ necessary in religious and morall things, though it be not sufficient. We speak of the light of Nature in the first consideration, as it is the residue of the glorious image of God put into us (for of the later, as it is informed by Scripture, it is no question.) Now this is absolutely necessary two wayes: 1. As a passive qualification of the subject for faith; for, there cannot be faith in a stone, or in a beast, no more then there can be sin in them: Therefore Reason, or the light of Nature, makes man in a passive capacity fit for grace; although he hath no active ability for it: And, when he is compared to a stone, it is not in the former sense, but the later. And secondly, it’s necessary by way of an instrument; for we cannot beleeve, unlesse we understand whether knowledge be an act ingredient into the essence of faith, or whether it be prerequisite: all hold there must be an act of the understanding, one way or other, going to beleeve. Hence knowledge is put for faith, and Hebr. 11. By faith we understand. Thus it is necessary as an instrument.

3. There is nothing true in Divinity that doth crosse the truth of Nature, as it’s the remnant of Gods image. This indeed is hard to⁹ cleere in many points of Divinity; as in the doctrine of the Trinity, and the doctrine of Christs Incarnation, which seemeth paradoxall to Reason; of whom Tertullian, lib. 5. de carne Christi, cap. 5. thus, Natus est Dei Filius, non pudet, quia pudendum est; Mortuus est Dei Filius, prorsus credibile est, quia ineptum; Sepultus resurrexit, certum est, quia impossibile. Yet, seeing the Apostle calls the naturall knowledge of a man Truth, and all truth is from God, which wayes soever it come, there can therefore be no contradiction between it. And hereupon our Divines doe, when they have confuted the Popish doctrine of Transubstantiation by Scripture, shew also, that for a body to be in two places, is against the principles of Nature. They indeed call for faith in this point: and Lapide, upon these words, Hoc est corpus meum, saith, If Christ should aske me at the day of judgement, Why did you beleeve the bread to be the body of Christ? I will answer, This text, if I be deceived, These words have deceived me. But we must compare place with place, and Scripture with Scripture. As for the doctrine of the Trinity, though it be above Reason, and we cannot look into that mysterie, no more then an Owle can into the Sun beames, yet it is not against it.

4. The same object may be known by the light of Nature, and by¹⁰ the light of Faith. This may easily be understood: I may know there is a God by the light of Nature; and I may beleeve it, because the Scripture saith so: so Hebr. 11. I may by faith understand the Word was made, and by arguments know it was made; and this is called faith, by James. The divels beleeve, that is, they have an evident intuitive knowledge of God, and feel it by experience; not that they have faith, for that is a supernaturall gift wrought by God, and hath accompanying it pia affectio, to him that speaketh, as the first truth. Faith therefore, and the light of Nature go to the knowledge of the same thing different waies: faith doth, because of the testimony and divine revelation of God; the light of Nature doth, because of arguments in the thing it self by discourse. And faith is not a dianoeticall or discursive act of the understanding, but it’s simple and apprehensive.

5. Though Reason and the light of Nature be necessary, yet it is not¹¹ a Judge in matters of faith. The Lutheran seemeth to depresse Reason too much, and the Socinian exalteth it too high: They make it not onely an instrument, but a Judge; and thereupon they reject the greatest mysteries of Religion. I know some have endeavoured to shew, that Religio est summa ratio; and there are excellent men that have proved the truth of the Christian Religion by Reason: and certainly, if we can by Reason prove there is any Religion at all, we may by the same Reason prove that the Christian Religion is the true one. But who doth not see how uncertaine Reason is in comparison of Faith? I doe not therefore like that assertion of one, who affects to be a great Rationalist (it is Chillingworth) that saith, We therefore receive the Scriptures to be the Word of God, because we have the greatest Reason that this is the Word of God. But we must not confound the instrument and the Judge: holy truths, they are Scripture truths, though hammered out by Reason. As the Smith that takes golden plate, and beates it into what shape he pleaseth, his hammer doth not make it gold, but only gold of such a shape: And thus also Reason doth not make a truth divine, onely holds it forth, and declareth it in such a way.

6. It’s altogether insufficient to prescribe or set down any worship of¹² God. Hence God doth so often forbid us to walk after our own imaginations, and to doe that which we shall choose. The Apostle calleth it Will-worship, when a mans Will is the meere cause of it. Now, it’s true, men are more apt to admire this, as we see in the Pharisees and Papists; they dote upon their Traditions more then Gods Institutions. Hence Raymundus, a Papist, speaking of the Masse, It is (saith he) as full of mysteries, as the sea is full of drops of water, as the heaven hath Angels, as the firmament hath starres, and the earth little crummes of sand. But what saith our Saviour, Luk. 18. that which is highly esteemed before men, is abomination before God? That word, […], is applyed to idols and false-worship. It’s true indeed, even in worship, light of Nature and prudence is instrumentally required to order the Institutions of God; but as Reason may not make a new Article of Faith, so neither a new part of worship. Now Natures insufficiency is described in these three reasonings:

7. To have all the worship of God sensible and pleasing to the eye. It¹³ was well called by Parisiensis, a madnesse in some, who doubted not to say, The Church was better ruled by the inventions of men then by the Scriptures. The people of Israel would have sensible gods, that they might see them: and certainly men doe as much delight in sensible pompous worship, as children do in gay babies; therefore the Prophet speaketh of their goodly images. But all this ariseth, because they are ignorant of spirituall worship, and cannot tell how to make spirituall advantage from God. It was well said by one, that A superstitious man is Gods flutterer, and not his friend; he is more officious then needs: and where a man is busie ubi non oportet, (said Tertullian) he is negligent ubi oportet. Such carnall sensible worshippers are well compared to those that, because they have no children, delight in birds and dogs; so because they have no true graces of the Spirit of God, they delight in these imitations.

8. To appoint mediatours between us and God. This was the¹⁴ great Argument of the Heathens; they thought themselves unworthy, and therefore appointed others to mediate between them and God; which Argument of the Heathens, some of the Fathers wrote against. But, doe not the Papists the same thing? Doe not they tell us, Petitioners at the Court doe not addresse themselves immediately to the Prince, but get Favourites to speak for them; so must we to God? And therefore Salmeron doth give some reasons why it’s more piety and religion to pray to God and Saints together, then to God alone. But is not this to forget Christ our head, who is made neerer to us then Angels are? And, indeed, Angels are reconciled to us by Christ. If therefore we follow the light of Nature thus, we shall fall into the ditch at last; and superstition is never more dangerous, then when it’s coloured over with the specious colours of Arguments.

9. To doe all by way of compensation, and satisfaction to God.¹⁵ Upon this ground were all the sacrifices of the Heathens. And is not all this with Popery? Doe they not make all penall things compensative? If they pray, that is meritorious; if they fast, that is satisfactory. Hence ariseth that seeming not to spare the flesh, Col. 3. ult. and the Apostle saith, it hath a shew of wisdome. But the more like any actions are to worship and wisdome, and are not so, the more loathsome they are: as in an Ape, that which makes an Ape so much deformed and loathsome, is because it is so like a man, and is not a man.

Use. Of Instruction. What hath made the idolatry of the Church of Rome so like Paganish and Ethnicall idolatry? Even because they followed their light, the light of Nature and Reason. Look over all their Paganish gods, and they have answerable saints. As the Heathens had their Ceres, and Bacchus, and Aesculapius; insomuch that Varro said, Discendum fuisset quâ de causâ quisque deorum avocandus esset, nè à Libero aqua, à Lympho vinum optaretur: so here, they have their St. Martin for the vineyard, Christopher for suddaine death, Nicholas for mariners, &c. And this was done at first, they say, to gain the Heathens; but the contrary fell out. Let us then follow the light of Nature no further then we ought; let her be an hand-maid, not a mistresse. And then we must take heed of going against her where she doth truly direct. Are there not many, not only unchristian, but also unnaturall actions? let us remember that.

Footnotes

1. The light of Nature is a remnant of Gods image. ↩

2. 1. The light of Nature usefull and necessary for the making of wholsome lawes in Common-wealths.
   ↩
3. 2. It instigateth to good duties towards God and man.
   ↩
4. 3. It makes men inexcusable.
   ↩

5. The light of Nature, as corrupted by sin, is an enemy to God and goodnes. ↩

6. The light of Nature obscured three wayes. ↩

7. The light of Nature inform’d by Gods Word an excellent help. ↩

8. The light of Nature, as it is a relict of Gods image is necessary in religious and morall things, and that two wayes. ↩

9. Though some divine truths may transcend the reach of Nature, none do crosse the truth thereof, as it is the remnant of Gods image. ↩

10. Faith and the light of Nature go to the knowledge of the same thing different wayes. ↩

11. The light of Nature a necessary instrument, but no Judge in matters of Faith. ↩

12. Nature insufficient to prescribe divine Worship. ↩

13. 1. Because it would have all the worship of God sensible and pleasing to the eyes
    ↩
14. 2. Because it’s prone to appoint mediatours between God and us.
    ↩
15. 3. Because it performes all duties by way of compensation & merit.
    ↩