The last proofe is from John 1. He is the true light, which enlightneth every man coming into the world: for so we think […] doth referre to man, not light; though Socinus and Grotius plead much for it. Some indeed understand this of the light of Grace; but it will be more universally and necessarily true of the light of Reason, which is in infants radically, though not actually. I shall not here relate what unsound Positions an Antinomian Authour hath in a manuscript Sermon upon this place, because it is not pertinent. So then there is an implanted sense and feeling of a deity; which made Tertullian say, O anima naturaliter Christiana! and Cyprian, Summaest delicti nolle agnoscere, quem ignorare non potes. If you object, that the Scripture speaks of the Gentiles as […], that is to be understood of a distinct and obedient knowledge of him. And as for some Atheists spoken of, that have expressedly professed it; what they did was partly in derision of the many gods, as Socrates, and another, who needing a fire, threw a statue of Hercules into the fire, saying, Age Hercules, XIII. laborem subiturus adesto, obsonium nobis cocturus. Besides, they did this with their tongue more then their heart, as appeareth by Diagoras, who when he had made a famous oration against a deity, the people came applauding him, and said, he had almost perswaded them, but only they thought, that if any were God, he was, for his eloquence sake: and then this wretch, like Herod, was content to be thought a god. We read Act. 17. 23. of an altar to the unknown god; But that is in this sense, Among the Heathens, it was uncertaine, which of their gods were appropriated to such or such offices: Hence when a plague was once at Athens, Epimenides brought sheepe, some whereof were black, others white, to Areopagus, and letting them goe from thence, whither they would, directed them to sacrifice (where they should lye down) […], to the proper God, and hence came their altars to an unknown God, because they knew not, which God to sacrifice to, for the removing of their calamities.

The second Question is, Whether the mystery of the Trinity, and² of the Incarnation of Christ, can be found out as a truth by the light of Nature? And here, certainly, we must answer negatively; for the Apostle, 2 Cor. 2. speaking of the mysteries of the Gospel, saith, It hath not entered into the heart of a man to conceive of them: which is to be understood, not onely of the blessed joy and peace of those truths, but also as they are truths; so that all these things are of meere supernaturall revelation. Hence we reade, that when, by reason of the Arrians, there was an hot dispute about these mysteries, there was a voice heard from heaven, […], The fall of the wise men. I doe acknowledge, that Austin and others have sought the foot-steps or representations of the Trinity in the creatures; yea, Nierembergius a Jesuit, De origine sacrae Scripturae, lib. 1. cap. 3. doth hold, that God did intend by the works of Creation, to declare the mysteries of graces; as by those artificiall things of the Ark, Tabernacle, and Temple, he intended spirituall mysteries: but this is false. But then they did first know and beleeve this doctrine by Scripture, and then afterwards goe to represent it. Yet it must be confessed, that all these Similies have scarce one foot, much lesse foure, to run on. The School-men speak of the three things in every creature, Esse, posse, & Operari. But especially that is taken up about the soule, when it understandeth or knoweth, and when it loveth: and the Son of God is represented by that Verbum mentis, and the holy Ghost by Amor. Now here is a mistake, for Christ is called […], Joh. 1. by John, imitating, the Chaldee, not in respect of any such scholasticall sense, but because he doth reveale and make knowne the will of God to us: so the union of the humane nature and the divine in one person, though learned men give many Examples, yet none come up to the full resemblance: And indeed, if you could give the like instance, it were not wonderfull or singular. We conclude then, that the Scriptures are the onely ladder, whereby we climb up to these things, and our understandings are of such a little stature, that we must climb up into the tree of life (the Scriptures) to see Jesus.

The third Question concerning this naturall light is, Whether it be sufficient for salvation? For, there are some that hold, If³ any man, of whatsoever Nation he be, worship God according to the light of Nature, and so serve him, he may be saved. Hence they have coined a distinction of a three-fold piety: Judaica, Christiana, and Ethnica. Therefore say they, What Moses was to the Jewes, and Christ to the Christians; the same is Philosophy, or the knowledge of God by nature, to Heathens. But this opinion is derogatory to the Lord Christ; for onely by faith in his Name can we be saved, as the Scripture speaketh. And, certainly, if the Apostle argued that Christ died in vain, if workes were joyned to him; how much more if he be totally excluded? It is true, it seemeth a very hard thing to mans reason, that the greater part of the world, being Pagans and Heathens, with all their infants, should be excluded from heaven. Hence, because Vedelius, a learned man, did make it an aggravation of Gods grace to him, to chuse and call him, when so many thousand thousands of pagan-infants are damned: this speech, as being full of horridnesse, a scoffing Remonstrant takes, and sets it forth odiously in the Frontispice of his Book. But, though our Reason is offended, yet we must judge according to the way of the Scripture; which makes Christ the onely way for salvation. If so be it could be proved, as Zwinglius held, that Christ did communicate himself to some Heathens, then it were another matter. I will not bring all the places they stand upon, that which is mainely urged is Act. 10. of Cornelius; his prayers were accepted, and, saith Peter, Now I perceive, &c. But this proceedeth from a meere mistake; for Cornelius had the implicite knowledge and faith of Christ, and had received the doctrine of the Messias, though he was ignorant of Christ, that individuall Person. And as for that worshipping of him in every Nation, that is not to be understood of men abiding so, but whereas before it was limited to the Jewes, now God would receive all that should come to him, of what Nation soever.

There is a two-fold Unbelief: one Negative, and for this no Heathen is damned: He is not condemned because he doth not beleeve in Christ, but for his originall and actuall sinnes. Secondly, there is Positive Unbelief, which they only are guilty of, who live under the meanes of the Gospel.

The fourth Question is, Whether that be true of the Papists,⁴ which hold, that the sacrifices the Patriarchs offered to God, were by the meere light of Nature: For so saith Lessius, Lex Naturae & obstringit & suadet, &c. the Law of Nature both bindeth and dictateth all to offer sacrifices to God; therefore they make it necessary that there should be a sacrifice now under the New Testament offered unto God: And upon this ground Lessius saith it is lawfull for the Indians to offer up sacrifices unto God, according to their way and custome. And, making this doubt to himself, How shall they doe for a Priest? He answereth, that as a common-wealth may appoint a Governour to rule over them, and to whom they will submit in all things; so may it appoint a Priest to officiate in all things for them. This is strange for a Papist to say, who doteth so much upon succession, as if where that is not, there could be no ministery. Now in this case he gives the people a power to make a Priest. But, howsoever it may be, by the light of Nature, that God is religiously to be worshipped; yet it must be onely instituted worship that can please him: And thus much Socrates an Heathen said, That God must onely be worshipped in that way wherein he hath declared his will to be so. Seeing therefore Abel, and so others, offered in faith, and faith doth alwayes relate to some testimony and word, it is necessary to hold, that God did reveale to Adam his will, to be worshipped by those externall sacrifices, and the oblations of them. It is true, almost all the Heathens offered sacrifices unto their gods, but this they did, as having it at first by hear-say from the people of God; and also Satan is alwayes imitating of God in his institutions: And howsoever the destructive mutation or change of the thing (which is alwayes necessary to a sacrifice) doth argue, and is a signe of subjection and deepest humiliation; yet how should Nature prescribe, that the demonstration of our submission must be in such a kind or way?

The fifth Question is, Whether originall sin can be found out by⁵ the meere light of Nature? Or, Whether it is onely a meere matter of faith that we are thus polluted? It is true, the learned Mornay labours to prove by naturall reason our pollution, and sheweth how many of the ancient Platonists doe agree in this, That the soule is now vassalled to sense and affections, and that her wings are cut whereby she should soare up into heaven. And so Tully he saith, Cum primùm nascimur, in omni continuò pravitate versamur; much like that of the Scripture, The Imagination of the thoughts of a mans heart is onely evil, and that continually: But Aristotle (of whom one said wickedly and falsly, that he was the same in Naturals, which Christ was in Supernaturals) he makes a man to be obrasa tabula, without sin or vertue; though indeed it doth incline ad meliora. Tully affirmeth also, that there are semina innata virtutum in us, onely we overcome them presently: Thus also Seneca, Erras, si tecum nasci vitia putas, supervenerunt, ingesta sunt, as I said before. Here we see the wisest of the Philosophers speaking against it. Hence Julian, the Pelagian, heaped many sentences out of the chiefest Philosophers against any such corruption of nature. But Austine answered, It was not much matter what they said, seeing they were ignorant of these things. The truth is, by nature we may discover a great languishment and infirmity come upon us; but the true nature of this, and how it came about, can only be known by Scripture-light: Therefore the Apostle, Rom. 7. saith, he had not known lust to be sin, had not the Law said, Thou shalt not last.

The sixth Question is, What is the meaning of that grand rule of⁶ Nature, which our Saviour also repeateth, That which you would not have other men doe to you, doe not you to them? Matth. 7. 12. It is reported of Alexander Severus, that he did much delight in this saying, which he had from the Jewes or Christians: and our Saviour addeth this, that, This is the Law, and the Prophets; so that it is a great thing even for Christians to keep to this principle. Men may pray, and exercise religious duties, and yet not doe this; therefore the Apostle addeth this to prayer, so that we may live as we pray, according to that good rule of the Platonist, […]. How would this subdue all those proud, envious, censorious, and inimicitious carriages to one another? But now when we speake of doing that to another, which we would have done to our selves, it is to be understood of a right and well-regulated will, not corrupted or depraved.

The seventh Question is, Whether the practice of the Apostles,⁷ making all their goods common, was according to the precept of Nature, and so binding all to such a practice? For there have been, and still are those that hold this. But now, that communion of all things is not jure Naturae, appeareth, in that theft is a sin against the Morall Law; which could not be, if division of goods were not according to the law of Nature. Indeed, by Nature all things were common, but then it was Natures dictate to divide them; as Aristotle sheweth in many reasons against Plato. What would have been in innocency, if Adam had stood, whether a common right to all things, or a divided propriety, (I speak of goods) is hard to say. But as for the practice of the Church of Jerusalem, that was occasionall, and necessary, therefore not to be a ground for perpetuall command; for other Churches did it not, as appeareth by the almes that were gathered, nor was it laid necessarily upon all to sell what they had, as appeareth by Paul’s speech to Ananias.

Use 1. If God be so angry with those that abuse naturall light,⁸ how much rather then with such, who also abuse Gospel light? These doe not put light under a bushell, but under a dung-hill. There are many that are Solifugae, as Bats and Owles are. In one Chapter God is said three times to deliver them up, because they did not glorifie God according to Natures light; how much more then according to the Gospels light? Gravis est lux conscientiae, said Seneca, but gravior est lux Evangelii: The light of the Ministery and Word must needs be more troublesome to thy sinfull wayes.

Use 2. Of Examination, whether, even among Christians, may not be found men no better then Heathens. Now such are, 1. Ignorant people: how few have any knowledge of God? 2. Violent⁹ adherers to former Idololatricall courses, taken up by fore-fathers. There is this difference between an Idolater and a true Beleever: The Beleever is like those creatures, that you can make nothing lye on their backs, unlesse it be fastened by some Scripture or reason; but the Heathen is like the Camell, that had a back for burdens on purpose: so that any idolatry he would bear, though it were not tyed on by arguments. 3. Such as are inordinately distracted about the things of this world, Matth. 6. After these things doe the Heathens seek. Hast thou not much of an Heathen in thee? 4. Such as rage at Christ, and his reformation, Psal. 2. Why doe the Heathens rage?

Footnotes

1. That there is a God, may be known by the light of Nature. ↩

2. The mysterie of the Trinitie, and the Incarnation of Christ cannot be found out by the light of Nature. ↩

3. The light of Nature insufficient for salvation. ↩

4. The Patriarchs did not offer sacrifices by the light of Nature, but God revealed his will to Adam to be so worshipped. ↩

5. Originall sin can onely be truly knowne by Scripture-light. ↩

6. Matth. 17. 12. expounded. ↩

7. Communion of all things no precept of Nature, and the Apostles practise of it was only occasionall, not binding to posterity. ↩

8. God is more off ended with those that abuse Gospel light, then those that abuse the light of Nature. ↩

9. Three sorts of Christians little better then Heathens. ↩