A vvoorke concerning the trewnesse of the Christian religion, written in French: against atheists, Epicures, Paynims, Iewes, Mahumetists, and other infidels. By Philip of Mornay Lord of Plessie Marlie. Begunne to be translated into English by Sir Philip Sidney Knight, and at his request finished by Arthur Golding

OF THE TREWNES OF THE CHRISTIAN RELIGION.

The first Chapter.

That there is a God, and that all men agree in the God∣head.

SUch as make profession to teach vs, doo say they neuer finde lesse what too say, then when the thing which they treate of is more manifest and more knowne of 〈◊〉〈◊〉 selfe, then all that can bee alledged for the setting foorth thereof. And such are the principles of all the Sciences, and specially of the certeynest, as which consist in Demonstration. The whole (will Euclyde say) is greater then his part. And if from equall things ye take equall things, the Remaynder shall be equall. This is rather perceiued of euery man by commō sence, then proo∣ued by sharpnesse of Reason. And like as they that would goe a∣bout too proue it, doo shewe themselues worthie to bee laughed at, as which should take vpon them to inlighten the Sunne with a Candle: so they that deny it, doe shewe themselues to bee wrang∣lers and vnworthie of all conference, as contenders against their owne mother wit, yea and against their owne confession; according to this common saying of the Schooles, That there is no reazo∣ning against those which deny the Principles. Now, if there bée a∣ny matter wherein this Rule is found trew; it is most peculiarly in this, that there is a God. For it is so many waies and so liuely paynted foorth in all things, and so peculiarly ingrauen in mans hart; that all that euer can bée deuized, sayd, and written thereof, is much lesse then that which is séene thereof euery where, and which men feele thereof in themselues. If yée looke vpward, yée see there infinite bodies and infinite mouings; diuers, and yet not trubling one another. If yée looke downeward, yée see the Sea continuasly threatening the Earth, and yet not passing his bounds: and like∣wise

the Earth altoogither heauie and massie, and yetnotwithstan∣ding settled or rather hanged in y^e Ayre, so as it stirreth not awh••. These bodies dire•• vs incontinently too a Spirit, and this orderli∣nes too a certeine Gouerner; forsomuch as it is certeine in nature, that bodies haue of themselues no mouing, and that euen those bo∣dies which are quickened, could not agrée stedfastly either with o∣ther bodies or with themselues, but by the ordering and gouerning of a Superiour. But when wée enter afterward intoo our selues, and finde there an abridgement of the whole vniuersall; a bodie fit for all sorts of mouings, a Soule which (without remouing) ma∣keth the bodies too mooue which way it listeth; a Reazon therein which guydeth them euerychone in their dooings; and yetnothwith∣standing, this Soule too bée such as wée can neither see it nor con∣ceiue it: It ought in all reazon too make vs all too vnderstand, that in this great vniuersall masse, there is a soueraine Spirite which maketh, mooueth, and gouern•••••• all that wée see there; by whom wée liue, moue, and bée; who in our bodies hath framed a Counter∣fet of the whole world, and in our Soules hath ingrauen an image of himself.* 1.1 This is it that caused one auncient Philosopher too say, that whereas our eyes cannot pearce vnto God; he suffereth him∣selfe too bée felt with our hands: And another too say, that the very first vse of Reazon, is imployed in conceiuing the Godhead; not properly by knowing it, but as it were by feeling it, which is more certeine: yea, and that the béeing of our Soule is nothing els, but the knowing of God vpon whom it dependeth. And Auicen spea∣keth yet more boldly, saying that he which acknowledgeth not the Godhead, is voyd, not of Reason, but euen of Sence. Now, if these Sences from whence our first knowledge proceedeth, doo witnesse the thing vnto vs; and wée do firmly beléeue a thing when we feele it, and that (as they teach vs) wée may féele GOD as well in the world as in our selues: Surely vnto him that treateth of Religiō, it ought too bée graunted as an vnuiolable Principle, That there is a God; and all men ought too bée forbidden too call it into que∣stion, vpon paine of ••ot being men any more. For if euery Science haue his Principles, which it is not lawfull to remoue, bée it neuer so little: much more reason is it that it should be so, with that thing which hath the ground of all Principles for his Principle. Neuer∣thelesse, let vs with the leaue of all good men, bestowe this Chap∣ter vpon the wickednesse of this our age: and if there bée any which by forgetting God, haue in very déede forgotten their owne shape,

and mistaken their owne nature: let them learne heereby too re∣knowledge themselues againe.

It is a straunge cace,* 1.2 that these men which ordinarily speake of nothing but the world, will not see in the world, the thing which the world sheweth and teacheth in all parts. For, let vs begin at the lowest, & mount vp too the highest; and let vs consider it whole together or in his parts; and wée shall not finde any thing therein, either so great or so small, which leadeth vs not step by step vntoo a Godhead. In this world (too consider it first in the whole,) we haue fower degrées of things: to wit, which haue Béeing, which haue Life, which haue Sence, and which haue Reason: Some are inde∣wed with all these giftes, and some but with some of them. The Ayre, the Sea, and the Earth are great, and haue a great scope. They beare vp and susteyne all things that haue Life, all things that haue Sence, and all things that haue Reason. And yet not∣withstanding, they themselues haue not any more then onely bare Béeing, without Life, without Sence, without Reason: that is too say, the néerest too not being. The Plants, besides being, haue also life, and they draw their nourishment from the Earth, and their re∣fresshing from the Ayre. The Beastes haue both Béeing, Life, and Sence, and take their foode both from the Elements and from the Plants. Man hath Béeing, and Life, and Sence, and Reason; and he inioyeth the Elements, liueth of the Plants, commaundeth the Beastes, and discourseth of all things both aboue him and beneath him. Lo heere an order, such from degrée too degrée, that whosoe∣uer conceiueth not by and by some Author thereof, hath neither Reason nor Sence, no nor is worthie too haue either life or béeing. I pray you from whence commeth this goodly proportion, and this orderly procéeding of things by degrées? Whence commeth the difference in their partitions? Whence commeth it that the hugest and widest things are vnderlings to the least and weakest things? Whereof commeth it that some things haue but a dead being, and next vnto notbeing; and that othersome haue a beeing that is moo∣uing, sensible, and reasonable, howbeit some more, and some lesse? Commeth it of the things themselues? How can that bée? For sée∣ing that nothing doth willingly become an vnderling vnto others: why bée not the heauiest masses allotted to the best shares? Wher∣of commeth it that the liuing things which in respect of the whole Sea are but as a drop, and in respect of the whole Earth are but as a grayne of dust, are in degrée of preheminence aboue them?

And whereof commeth it, that man being the fraylest of all liuing wightes, is serued by the Elements, by the Plants, and by the Beastes, yea euen by the wildest of them? Then is there a deuider or distributer of these things, who hauing imparted thē too others, had them first himselfe, and that most aboundantly; and who more∣ouer is of necessitie, almightie, seeing that in so vnequall partition, he holdeth them neuerthelesse in concorde. I say further, that all things are comprized vnder these fower: that is too wit, vnder Bee∣ing, Life, Sence, and Reason, according too his diuers imparting of them vnto all things.

Now I demaund, whether was first, of Beeing or Notbeing; of Liuing or Notliuing; of Sensible, or Notsensible; of Reasona∣ble or Notreasonable? Surely it was neither Reasonable, nor Sensible, nor liuing; for the time hath bin that wée were not. But wee knowe that wee had fathers, and that our fathers had forefa∣thers: and the ende of them maketh vs too beléeue that they had a beginning. In like cace is it with beasts and plants; for wée know the bréeding, growing, decaying and fading of them. Much more then may wée say the same of Being. For the things héere beneath which haue but onely bare beeing, are farre inferiour too the other things; and therefore cannot bring foorth themselues, and conse∣quently much lesse bring foorth the other things. It remaineth then that Notbeeing, Notliuing, Notsensible, and Notreasonable, were afore Beeing, Liuing, Sensible, and Reasonable. And yet notwithstanding wée haue both Béeing, Life, Sence, and Reason. It followeth therefore that it is a power from without vs, which hath brought vs out of Notbéeing into béeing, and hath parted the said gifts among vs diuerlly according too his good pleasure. For otherwise, from out of that nothing which wée were (If I may so terme it,) we should neuer haue come too be any thing at all. Now betweene nothing and something, (how little so euer that some∣thing can bee) there is an infinite space. Néedes therefore must it be that the cause thereof was infinite (at leastwise if it may bée called a cause,) and that is the very same which we call God.

Let vs come to the nature of the Elements whereof the whole is compated. The Fyre is contrarie too the Water, and the dry to the moyst; and of these contraries are infinite other things produ∣ced vnder them. Now the nature of contraries is too destroy one a∣nother; and no twoo things, euen of the least, can bee coupled togi∣ther, but by the working of a higher power that is able too compell

them. But wée see that these things doo not incroche or vsurpe one vppon another, but contrariwise that they match toogither in the composing of many things: and yet notwithstanding that not so much as two strings beeing of one selfesame nature, can agree in one tune, without the wit of a man that can skill too streine them and too slake them as he seeth it good. It followeth therefore that the heauenly harmonie wherein so many contraries are made too accord both vniuersally and particularly, are set toogither and guy∣ded by a spirit. Insomuch that if we will say, that according too the comon opinion, the aire is spread foorth as a stickler betweene the Fyre and the Water, and is ioyned too the one by his moysture, and too the other by his heate: Yée must needes say also, that there is a great and souerein Iudge aboue them, which hath made them too abyde that stickler.

Let vs mount vp higher. Wee see the Heauen how it mowweth round with a continuall mouing. Also wee see there the Planets one vnder another, which (notwithstanding the violence of the first moueable) haue euery one his seuerall course and mouing by him∣selfe. And shall wee say that these mouings happen by aduenture? But the same aduenture which made them to moue, should also make them to stand still. Agein, as for aduenture or chaunce, it is nothing els but disorder and confusion: but in all these diuersities, there is one vniformitie of mouing, which is neuer interrupted. How then? Doo they moue of them selues? Nay; for nothing moueth it selfe, and where things moue one another, there is no possibilitie of infinite holding on; but in the end men must be faine to mount vpto a first beginning, and that is a rest. As for example, from the hammer of a Clocke wée come too a whéele, and from that whéele too another, and finally too the wit of the Clockmaker, who by his cunning hath so ordered them, that notwithstanding that he maketh them all too moue, yet he himselfe remoueth not. It remay∣neth then that of all these mouings, wée must imagine one [Mo∣uer] vnmouable: and of all these so constant diuersities, one [vnua∣riable] alwaies like it selfe: and of all these bodies, one spirite. And like as from the Earth wée haue styed vp too the Ayre, from the Ayre too the Skye, from the Skye too the Heauen of Heauens, still mounting vp from greater too greater, from light too light, and from subtile to subtile: so let vs aduaunce our selues yet one degrée higher, namely too the infinite, too the light which is not too bée con∣ceiued but in vnderstanding, and too the quickening spirit; in respect

whereof, the thing that wée woonder at héere beneath, is lesse then a poynt, our light is but a shadowe, and our spirit is but a vapour. And yet notwithstanding he hath so paynted out his glorie and in∣stuitenesse, euen in the things which wée most despise; as that euen the grossest wits may easely comprehend it.

Let vs come downe againe too doo the like heere belowe. Wée shall see the Earth replenished with Herbes, Trees, and Fruites: both Sea and Land furnished with Beastes, Fisshes, Woormes, and Birds of al sorts; euery of them so perfect in his kind, as mans vnderstanding cannot spye any want or superstuitie in thē. Whence is all this? Is it of the Elements? Nay, how shall the thing which hath neither life nor sence, giue life and sence too other things? Or commeth it of the Sunne? Nay, when did wée euer see him bring foorth any such like thing: Whence then is this varietie, but of a mast fruitfull & vncōsumable might? Whence commeth this per∣fection, but of a singular wisedome? Of Plants, some are hot, and some cold; some swéete, and some bitter; some nourishing, and some healing. And of the most daungerous, the remedie is found either in themselues or in the next vnto them. Also as touching Beastes, the wildest and such as liue by pray, kéepe by themselues alone, be∣cause the flocking of them together would bee noysome. But the tame & such as are most for our profite, doo naturally liue in flockes and heardes, because the great numbers of them are for our com∣moditie. Is this also a worke of fortune? Nay, I say further: The Sunne heateth the Earth, the Starres doo limit her seazons, the Ayre moysteneth her drought; the Earth serueth the Grasse, the Grasse serueth the Beasts, and the Beasts serue Man. Each thing serueth other, and all serue one alone. Whence may this bonde come? If things bée euerlastingly, and of themselues; how haue they thus put themselues in subiection? By what meanes or when began they first too do so? Also how can one of them be for another, seeing that the ende wherefore things are, is euer afore the things themselues, either in nature, or els in consideration; and that the e∣ternitie hath not any thing either afore or after it? So that if they haue had their beginning of themselues; did they bring foorth them selues in seed, in flower, or in kernell? in Egge, or in full life? small or great, and so foorth? Againe, seeing that the one cannot bée with∣out the other, neither Beastes without Grasse, nor Grasse without the Earth, nor the Earth bring foorth any thing without the Hea∣uen: which of them came afore, and which of them came after? Or

if they were all bred together: whence commeth this agréement a∣mong so many diuers things; but of the same mynd which made and still gouerneth all things? Seeing then that these things are so linked together, and that they tend all to one: let vs conclude al∣so that that cannot come to passe but through one, who brought them foorth altogether at one instaunt and one burthen, when hee thought good. But now let vs see whence commeth this other one wherunto they tend, that is to wit Man; and whether he also bée not for and by that one which hath made them, that is to wit, for and by God.

He that seeth but onely the portrayture of a man,* 1.3 falleth by and by to thinke vpon a Paynter; and the first speech that he vttereth, is to aske who made it. Now, if a dead worke doe make vs to con∣ceiue a liuing worker: much more reason is it, that a liuing worke as man is, should make vs to bethinke vs of a quickening worke∣maister: yea euen of such a one as may bée (at least wise) as farre a∣boue man, as man is aboue the portrayture of his owne making, (forsomuch as there is an infinite distaunce betwixt being and not being, liuing and not liuing;) and the same againe is God. The proportion in mans bodie, which is so well obserued, that all our Artes doe borrow from thence, doth witnesse vnto vs a singuler Cunning: and the parts also in that they all serue each others vse, and euery of them serue the whole; betoken a great wisedome. Now, where Cunning and wisedome bee, there chaunce hath no place. For when a man loseth an eye, an arme, or a legge; wée follo∣wing the common error do commonly say, it is a mischaunce. But when a member that was out of ioynt is set in againe, or a mem∣ber that was lost is supplyed, though it be but with a botched one: none of vs will say it was chaunce; because that in the iudgement euen of the grossest sort, the propertie of chaunce is to vndo and to marre things, and not to make or mend any thing at all. Againe, by our Sences which conceiue al Colours, Sounds, Sents, Sa∣uors, and Féelings; wée may see, heare, smell, tast, and feele, that one selfsame workman made both the Sences, and the things that are subiect to the Sences. For to what purpose were the Sences without the sensible things? or the sensible things, without the Sences? And seeing that they relye one vpon another; which of them was bred first in the world? If man made them for his Sen∣ces; why maketh he not the like still? If he made himselfe to bée borne for them; why suffereth he himselfe to bée bereft of his Sen∣ces

one after another? Then is it to be sought for elswhere then in man. But when in the same man we yet further consider Spéech: must wee not needes say that he was made to communicate him∣selfe to many? And how are they borne one for another? Againe, when wee come to his Mynd, which in discoursing reacheth farre beyond all sensible things; shall wee not say that there are things merely to bee comprehended by vnderstanding, for the which the Mynd was made? And on the other side, if wee finde a Mynde in our selues which are but a little grayne of the whole world; dare wee say that there is no Mynd elswhere then in our selues? More∣ouer, seeing that by this Mynd of ours wee vnderstand all other things; which Mynd yet for all that vnderstandeth not ne knoweth not it selfe, neither perceiue wee what or whence this Mynde is which so vnderstandeth in vs: ought wee not to acknowledge that there is a Mynd aboue vs, whereby wee haue vnderstanding of o∣ther things, and which vnderstandeth & knoweth in vs the things which wee our selues knowe not there?

Now then, seeing we vnderstand not ne knowe not our selues, (my meaning is that we bee ignorant what we bee, and what it is from whence our noblest actions procéede:) can we bee the authors of our selues? And from whence then ought wée too acknowledge our selues too haue our originall? O man, it may bee that thou loo∣kest but too thy father. But from father too father, we shall come at length too a beginning. And soothly thou art very dulheaded too thinke thy selfe too bee the author of a man, considering that nei∣ther thou in begetting him, nor his Mother in bréeding him, did once thinke vppon the fashioning of him in hir wombe: No more (say I) than the Nuttree doth when a Nutte falleth from it to the ground, which neuerthelesse without the Nuttrées thinking there∣of, groweth into Roote, Sprig, Barke, and boughes; and in y^e end shootefoorth intoo Leaues, Flowers and fruite: And yet notwith∣standing, in peinting of an Image thou lookest vpon it a hundred times, and diuers dayes; thou amendest it, and thou busiest all thy wits about it. If thou be the dooer of this woorke in the making of man, tell mee why thou hast not children when thou wouldest, and why thou hast them sometime when thou wouldest not? Why hast thou a Daughter, when thou wouldest haue a Sonne, or a Sonne when thou wouldest haue a Daughter? In peinting thy Pictures thou doest not so disapoint thy felfe. Also, if thou beest this good workemaister in making of thy child; tell me how thou hast fashio∣ned

it? Whence is the hardnesse of his bones? the liquor of his veynes, the spirite of his Heartstrings, and the beating of his Pul∣ses? Seest thou this, which is also as smally in thy power, as if it were none of thine? Tell mée what is hidden in his breast, and the whole workemanship that is couched within him. If thou hast not seene it in the opening of thy like, thou knowest nothing there∣of. Tell mée yet further the imaginations of his brayne, and the thoughts of his heart: nay, tell mee thine owne, which oftentimes thou wouldest fame alter or stay, and canst not. It is a bottem∣lesse Pit, the which thou canst not gage: and therefore it followeth that thou madest it not. Knowe thou therefore O man, that all this commeth too thee from some cause that is aboue thy selfe. And sée∣ing that thou hast vnderstanding, needes must that cause haue vn∣derstanding too; and seeing that thou vnderstandest not thy selfe, needes must that vnderstand thee: and seeing that thou after a sort art infinite in nomber, but much more infinite in thy thoughts and deedes: needes must that bee infinite too. And that is it which we call God. What shal I say more? or rather or what remaineth not for mee too say? I say with the auncient Trismegist, Lord, shall I looke vpon thee in the things that are here beneath, or o•• the things that are aboue? Thou madest all things, and whol•• ••ature is no∣thing els but an image of thée. And I will conclude with Dauid, Blesse ye the Lord all ye workes of his; yée Heauens, yée waters, yée Winds, yee Lightenings, yee Showers, yee Seas, yee Ri∣uers, and all that euer is, blesse yee the Lorde: yea and thou my soule also blesse thou the Lord for euer. For, to lay forth the proofes which are both in the great world and in the little world; it would stand me in hand to ransacke the whole world; as the which (with all that euer is therein,) is a plaine booke laide open to all men, yea euen vnto Children to reade, and (as yee would say) euen to spell God therein.

Nowe like as all men may reade in this booke as well of the world as of themselues;* 1.4 so was there neuer yet any Nation vnder heauen, which hath not thereby learned and perceiued a certeine Godhead, notwithstanding that they haue conceiued it diuersly, ac∣cording to the diuersitie of their owne imaginations. Let a man ronne from East to West, and from South to North: let him ransacke all ages one after another: and wheresoeuer he findeth a∣ny men, there shall he find also a kind of Religion and Seruing of God, with Prayers and Sacrifices. The diuersitie whereof is ve∣ry

great; but yet they haue alwayes consented all in this poynt, That there is a GOD. And as touching the diuersitie which is in that behalf, it beareth witnesse that it is a doctrine not deliuered al∣only from people to people; but also bred and brought vp with e∣uery of them in their owne Clymate, yea and euen in their owne selues. Within these hundred yeres many Nations haue bene dis∣couered, and many are daily discouered still, which were vnknowen in former ages. Among them, some haue bene found to liue with∣out Lawe, without King, without House, going starke naked, and wandring abroad in the fields: but yet none without some know∣ledge of God, none without some spice of Religion: to shewe vn∣to vs, that it is not so natural a thing in man to loue company, and to clad himselfe against hurts of the wether, (which things wee e∣steeme to be verie kindly:) as it is naturall vnto him to knowe the author of his life, that is to say, God. Or if wee yeeld more to the iudgement of those which were counted wise among the Heathen nations, (whome afterward by a more modest name men called Philosophers:) The Brachmanes among the Indians, and the Magies among the Persians, neuer began any thing without pray∣ing vnto God. The lessons of Pythagoras and Plato, and of their Disciples, began with prayer and ended with prayer. The aunci∣ent Poets (who were all Philosophers,) as Orphey, Homer, He∣siodus, Pherecides, and Theognis, speake of none other thing. The Schooles of the Stoikes, Academikes, and Peripatetikes, and all other schooles that florished in old time, roong of that. The very Epicures thēselues who were shamelesse in all other things, were ashamed to denie God. To be short, the men of old time (as witnesseth Plato) ••hose their Priestes (which were to haue regard of the seruice that was to be yéelded vnto God,) from among the Philosophers, as from among those which by their consideration of nature, had atteined to knowe God. And so (which sildome hap∣peneth but in an apparant trueth) the opinion of the comon people and the opinion of the wise, haue met both iump togither in this point.

Well may there bee found in all ages some wretched kaytifes, which haue not acknowledged God, as there be some euen at this day. But if we looke into thē, either they were some yong fooles gi∣uen ouer to their pleasures, which neuer had leysure to bethinke them of the matter, and yet when yeeres came vppon them, came backe againe to the knowing of themselues, and consequently of

God: or els they were some persons growen quite out of kind, sa∣ped in wickednesse, and such as had defaced their own nature in thē selues; who to the intent they might practise all maner of wicked∣nes with the lesse remorse, haue striued to perswade themselues by soothing their owne sinnes, that they haue no Soule at all, and that there is no Iudge to make inquirie of their sinnes. And yet not∣withstanding, if these fall into neuer so little daunger, or be but ta∣ken vpon the hip, they fall to quaking, they crye out vnto heauen, they call vpon God. And if they approch, but a farre of, vnto death, they fall to fretting and gnashing of their téeth. And when they be well beaten; there is not any shadowe of the Godhead so soone of∣fered vnto them, but they imbrace it: so ready are nature and con∣science (which they would haue restreined and imprisoned) to put them in mind thereof at all howres.* 1.5 They be loth to confesse God, for feare to stand in awe of him; and yet the feare of the least things maketh them to confesse him. Nay, because they feare not him that made all things, therefore they stand in awe of all things; as wee see in the Emperour Caligula, who threatened the Ayre if it ray∣ned vpon his Gameplayers; and yet notwithstanding he wrapped his Cape about his head, or hid himselfe vnder his Bed, at euery flash of lightening. I beléeue (saith Seneca* 1.6 concerning the same matter) that this threatening of his did greatly hasten his death, for so much as folke sawe that they were too beare such a one, as could not beare, euen with the Goddes.

Among the learned,* 1.7 although the libertie of Sects was law∣lesse: yet the chiefe that men counted for Atheists, were one Dia∣goras a Melian Poet, one Theodore a Cyrenian, one Ewhemere a Tegean, and a very fewe others. But to say truely, these rather skorned the Idolles and false Goddes of their tymes, then denyed the true God. Accordingly as we sée many of them yet still among vs, which hold themselues cōtented with the knowing of vntrueth, without seeking after the trueth; and with mocking of Supersti∣tions, without seeking the pure and true Religion. Of the sayd Diagoras it is reported, that as hee was burning an Image of Hercules in his fire; he sayd, Thou must now doe me seruice in this thirteenth incounter, as well as thou hast done to Eurist∣heus in the other twelue. This was but a skorning of Idolles. For notwithstanding this: his Uerses began thus, that all things are gouerned by a Godhead. Also it is reported of the other, that he should say to the Egiptians; If they be Gods, why bewayle ye

them? and if they be dead folkes, why worship ye them? This also was a disprouing of the false Gods. And as for Ewhemere of Tegea, men are of accorde that the cause why he was called an A∣theist, was for that he wrate the true Historie and Genealogie of the Heathen Gods; shewing that they were Kings, Princes, and great Personages, whose Images being kept for a remembrance of them were turned into Idolles, their woorthie doings into yere∣ly Gamings, and their honorings into worshippings. And which of vs at this day beleeueth not as much? There were in deede a kinde of Philosophers called Scepticks (that is to say Dowters) which did rather suspend their Iudgement concerning the God∣head, then call it in question. But yet it ought to suffize vs, that they be the selfsame which deny al Sciences, yea euen those which consist in Demonstration; and which professe themselues to doubt of the things which they see and feele; in so much that they doubt whether they themselues haue any beeing or no. But yet for all that, let vs see after what maner these kind of people doe reason. Against the thing which the world preacheth, which Nations wor∣ship, and which wise men wonder at; these folke say at a worde for all, how shall wee beleeue that there is a God, sith we see him not? O foole, and (which worse is) O foole by being wise in thyne owne conceyt: Thou beléeuest that there is a Sunne, euen when thou art in a Dongeon or in the bottome of a Prison, because his beames are shed in at thy windowes: and doubtest thou yet still whether there be a God or no, when he sheweth himself to thee through the Sunne, the Moone, and the Starres; in the Ayre, the Earth, the Sea; in all things that they conteyne, yea and euen in they selfe? If thou haddest neuer seene Tree afore, thy wit at the very first sight of it, would leade thée to the roote which is vnder the Tree: and the sight of a Riuer would leade thee to the welspring thereof, which may peraduenture be two hundred Leagues of. And whosoeuer should tell thee the contrarie, thou wouldest stand at defiaunce a∣gainst him. O man, like as the Tree leadeth thee to the roote by his braunches; doth not the roote leade thee likewise to the kernell, and the kernell to him that made it? And as the Riuer leadeth thée to his head; shal not the head leade thée to the originall spring ther∣of, seeing thou canst not doubt but it hath a beginning, sith thou seest that it runneth with a streame? If thou shouldest arriue a∣mong the Indians, and finde but some sislie Cottage in the deso∣latest Countrey thereof; Thou wouldest by and by conclude, this

Ile is inhabited, some man hath passed heere. And why? Because thou seest there some tokens of mans wit, and knowest well that the Goates which thou hast seene raunging or skipping vpon the Rockes, can build no such thing. Now, when thou beeing borne beneath, seest here a hundred and a hundred thousand things which are not possible to be made by man: nay (which more is,) which it is not possible for him to knowe nor to vnderstand: oughtest thou not to say immediatly, Gods spirite hath passed this way, needes must here haue bene some higher thing then man?

Mention is made of certeyne precize persons,* 1.8 which beléeued nothing but that which they sawe, and the Wizards made them to see Deuilles: Wherevpon they came to beleeue also that there is a God. It was a mad kinde of conuersion, to beleeue in God by the ministerie of the Deuill. But what a number of other things beleeuest thou which thou seest not? Thou beleeuest that y^e Plants haue a kinde of Soule, that is to say, a certeyne inward power or vertue which maketh them to shoote foorth in their season. Thou seest them, but thou seest not it; neither knowest thou whence it commeth, or where it lyeth. Thou beleeuest that the Beastes also haue one other kinde of Soule, which maketh them to mooue: and yet thou seest it as little as the other. Also thou beleeuest that thou thy self (besides these) hast an abilitie of reasoning both vpon them, and vpon thy selfe, and vpon such as are like thy selfe. And yet as touching the bodie, thou seest not any thing altered in the partes thereof after death; neither within nor without. Where is that Soule then, or where hast thou euer seene it? If thou beleeue ther∣of because of the effects which thou seest, which cannot come from any thing els: I assure thée euen by the same effects, that if thou be∣léeue nothing thereof but that which thou seest with thyne eyes; thyne eyes see not but by thy Soule, and thyne eyes themselues see not thy Soule. To be short, thou beléeuest that thou hast a face, which without a looking Glasse thou seest not: And wilt thou not beléeue there is a God, whose face shineth foorth in all things?

Othersome to shewe themselues more fineheaded, haue arge∣wed thus. If there bee a GOD, he must needes be a bodily liuing wight, or els he should be sencelesse. And if he haue sences, then is he chaungeable; and if he be chaungeable, then may be perish: that is to say, he is no longer God. Beasts are they in very deed, which can conceiue no better then that which is common to Beasts.

Others haue sayd thus: If he be without bodie, he is also with∣out

Soule, and consequently without action. Or if he be a bodie, he is subiect to the chaunges therof. Alas that they should not be abls to conceiue a Spirite without a bodie, nor to see that euen in our selues it is the onely Soule that worketh, and that the bodie stir∣reth not but as it is moued by the Soule.

Others againe do reason, that if there be a God, he must needes be perfectly happie: and if he be perfectly happie, he is vertuous: if vertuous, he ouermaistereth his affections: and if he ouermaister his affections, he is tempted of his lustes; a thing altogether vnbe∣seeming the Godhead. And by these incouneniences they conclude, that there is no God at all: not perceiuing, or rather wilfully refu∣sing to perceiue that which Plutarke* 1.9 sayth very well: namely, that the person which ouermaistereth his affections, is but halfe vertu∣ous, but the stayed person is wholly vertuous, because the one doth but bridle his passions by force of reason, whereas the other hath them alreadie settled according to reason, But there is yet more in God: for he is reason it selfe, and there is nothing in him but rea∣sou. Soothly this kind of reasoning of theirs agréeth in effect with this saying of Xenophanes,* 1.10 that if Beastes were able to paynt, they would portray God like to themselues, because they could not naturally conceiue any further. Such and other like are the argu∣ments of these goodly Philosophers, which euen little babes might laugh to skorne: but els they could not haue bene against so mani∣fest and euident a trueth. And yet dare I also well assure you, that they themselues knewe the falsenesse of those arguments, but that they were as it were sworne to doubt of all things, and to gainsay all things.

Let vs then conclude with the learned and the ignoraunt, the Greekes and the Barbarians, Men and Beastes, things sensible and sencelesse, the whole and euery part thereof: That there is a God. And if there bee yet any folke that caste doubts thereof, in∣deuouring to race out not onely God but also man himselfe out of their hearts: let vs boldly appeale euen vnto themselues; not doub∣ting at all, but that their owne Conscience which cannot be defea∣ted, will one day make them to vnderstand it.

The second Chapter.

That there is but onely one God.

LEt vs studie further in the booke of nature,* 1.11 and see whether that as it hath taught vs a God∣head, it teach vs not also that the same consis∣teth in onely one God. I haue tould you alrea∣dy, that of things, some haue being, some haue being and life, some haue being, lyfe and sence; and other some haue being, lyfe, fence, and rea∣son. These fower sortes fall into three, from three into two, and from two into one, and that one is Beeing; afore the which (as I haue proued already) there went a Notbeeing. The residue there∣fore how diuers so euer they be, are all conueied in the one Beeing, and this one Beeing must needes rest in the power of one first Be∣ing, whereof the being which we sée, is but a shadowe. Againe, in all y^e things which we sée; we reduce the particulars too an vnder∣kind, the vnderkinds to an vpperkind, and the vpperkind to a most generall. As for example, we reduce all particular humane persons vnder the terme of man; All men vnder the terme of Wight; all wights vnder the terme of liuing things; and all liuing things vn∣der the terme of things that are or be; alwayes referring euery di∣uersitie to some vnitie, and the same vnitie to another vnitie which is more vniuersall. It remaineth then that when we can mount no higher, we must distinguish y^e things that are, into the thing which is of it selfe, and the thing which is not of it selfe. That which is not of it selfe, is the World and all that euer is therein, as I haue proued afore. That which is of it selfe, is the thing which we cal God, beyond whom nothing can bee imagined, and by whome all things both are and haue bene, as which could haue no beeing of themselues. Now to produce from Notheeing into beeing, requi∣reth an infinite power. For betweene nothing and something is an infinite distance; and two infinites cannot be abidden, no nor ima∣gined together. For the infinitenesse of the one doth incloase and bynd the power of the other, and looke whatsoeuer is giuen too the one, is taken away from all others. Therefore like as there must

néedes be one Infinite, so must there be but only one, yea and most simply one: from whose vnitie neuerthelesse flowe all the diuersi∣ties which we sée in the whole world, like as from a Pricke, pro∣céedeth a Lyne, an outside, and all substantiall bodies. And of vnitie or one in nombering, proceedeth euen and odde, round and square, and all the multiplicities, proportions, and harmonies which wee sée: sauing that the Pricke and the vnitie of nomber are interming∣led and interlaced with all things, whereas the foresayd most sin∣gle and alonly One, abyding still one in it selfe, bringeth foorth all the other vnities, and conteineth them all.

Let vs examine euery sort of things seuerally by them selues, and we shall learne the like still in them. In the Elements wee see contrarie qualities & operations. And where contraries are, there néede but two heads to set them at warre. For they cannot dwell together, neither can they match together, and much lesse can they reigne together. The further that any of them extendeth his po∣wer, the lesse can hee away with any fellowe. Now then if one rei∣gned ouer the Heate, and another ouer the Colde; one ouer the Dryth, and another ouer the Moysture; so as there were diuers makers or gouerners of the worlde: wee should also see diuer∣sities of factions, Element against Element in the whole worlde and in euery thing that is compounded, and continual warre in the middes of their Bowels. But now see we no such thing; but euery of them imbraceth other, both in the whole and in euery seuerall thing, notwithstanding that naturally they displace and destroy one another.

Furthermore they stand not at defyance alone by them selues, but the Sea becleapeth the Earth, the Sea and Earth togither are lapped vp in the Ayre, the Ayre is compast about with the Skye, and euery of them stoopeth vnder other; insomuch that of their con∣trarieties ye see there procéedeth a goodly vniformitie. Séeing then that there are not two factions, there is but one maker, and seeing they yeeld all into one, it cannot be but also by one. In the Earth wee see Riuers, which runne a very long race, but yet from one head: and againe many streames, which yeeld themselues all into one, which one is the Sea; and the Sea also being vndiuidable passeth through the whole inferiour world. Like as they come out of one vnitie, so doe they yeeld themselues vp into one other vni∣tie. In the Heauen wee obserue infinite diuers mouings, but yet all obeying vnto one. There is one light which sheadeth it selfe

throughout all places, but yet it procéedeth from one onely; which seemeth to multiply it selfe infinitely, & yet cannot by any meanes be parted: I meane one Sunne, whose beames spreading out on all sides, doe reach from the Skye vnto the Earth, and yet neuer∣thelesse continue still fast knit together in one bond by one vnitie. Now all these parts, which procéede from one and tend to one, doe make vs to beléeue that all procéede from one most single one.

Againe, in the things that haue life, as in Hearbes and Trées; wee see a barke, a stalke or trunke, many boughes or braunches, and an infinite number of leaues. The bodie hath no likenesse to the leaues, nor the leaues to the fruite, nor the fruite to the blos∣somes. And yet doe all these come from one roote, which hath his force vnited to it selfe; and the roote springing of a kernell or of a grayne, (which cannot be the work of any mo then one workman) conteyueth all the sayd diuersities in his vniformitie, and of it selfe alone yéeldeth foorth infinite of the same kinde; and of one begin∣ning of life which is not multiplyed in it selfe, maketh it selfe a be∣ginning of life (as well within it selfe as without it selfe) vnto ma∣ny things that haue life.

Likewise as touching wights, wee see in euery of them a thou∣sand diuers parts. Outwardly, Head, Eyes, Nose, Eares, Téeth, Tongue, Féete, Tayle, and so foorth: and inwardly the Heart, the Lungs, the Stomacke, the Liuer, the Bowelles, the Kidneys, the Bones, the Sinewes, the Heartstrings, the Ueynes, and such o∣ther things. The beginning of this whole Masse and of all those so manifold parts, is next cousen vnto nothing; a very small drop, of one shape, but onely one. Yet notwithstanding, it hath the begin∣ning of life and sence vnited in it selfe; which multiplyeth it self in∣to many abilities, sences, actions, and mouings: and that not in∣wardly onely, but also outwardly in infinite numbers of the same kinde, which in processe of tyme doe fill whole Countries. So cer∣teyne is this principle in nature, that all multitudes come from an vnitie or One, and that there cannot bee any multitude, vnlesse the same haue first bin no multitude. But wee take no héede of it, be∣cause wee see it euery day: and yet is it giuen vs to looke vpon, to the end we should haue regard of it. Howbeit, forasmuch as man is both the image of God, and the Counterpane of the world toge∣ther: wee cannot sée this vnitie so apparantly in any thing, as in man himselfe.* 1.12 If we looke vpon his bodie, all the parts thereof are made one for another, and minister one to another with mutuall

dueties: and without so doing, he could not continue nor liue. The Eyes guyde the Féete; the Féete beare the Eyes; by one part the things that are néedful are taken in; and by another the things that are superfluous are voyded out: and all and euery of them referre their doings to the benefite of the whole bodie. This vnion of di∣uers operations tending al to one poynt, shewes that the framing of man was made by one onely workemanship. And as the worke∣manship is but one, so must the workemaister also néedes bée but one. For, like as by a building that is made by péeces and of diuers proportions, we deeme the diuersitie of the maysterbuilders; so by the vniformitie thereof we iudge it to be the deuise and wo••kman∣ship of one alone. The Ueynes are spred foorth throughout the whole bodie, howbeit from one welhead, that is to say from the Liuer: so be the Sinewes, howbeit from the Brayne; So likewise are the Heartstrings, howbeit from the Heart. By these thrée sorts of Cunditpypes, are life, sence, and breath shead foorth euen to the least and vttermost parts, and the braunches thereof are without number, but the originall of all is onely one. But yet doth this shine foorth more cleerely in the Soule of man. It hath life, sence, and mouing. All these are dealt foorth, maynteyned, and guyded by the onely one Soule. Here ye see alreadie one vnitie. The Soule which hath his powers so diuers and so farre spred, is whole tho∣rowout all the whole bodie, and whole in euery part thereof, as much in the least as in the greatest, and as much in the least as in the whole. There ye see yet a streighter vnitie. Againe, the Soule is yet more streightly shut vp into Mynde, which is the Soule of the Soule, as the Apple of the Eye is the Eye of the Eye; and yet notwithstanding, this Mynd (as entierly one as it is,) conceiueth and doth infinite things, entereth into a thousand places without remouing, passeth ouer the Seas, mounteth vp to the Heauens, and reacheth downe to the deapth of the Earth. Lo here an vnitie most streight in it selfe, and yet extended to the vtmost parts of the world.

Hermes saith that the Sunnebeames of God are his Actions, the Sunnebeames of the World are the Natures of things, and the Sunnebeames of Man are Artes and Sciences. There∣fore let vs see whether the Artes and Sciences will guyde vs to the same vnitie, whereunto those Actions and the natures of things haue led vs alreadie, beginning at the lower, and mounting vp to the higher. Grammer teacheth vs to bring the diuers parts of

spéech into oue congruetie, and the end thereof is to speake; and the end of speaking is societie. Rhetorike teacheth to drawe mennes minds to one selfsame opinion. Logike teacheth to sift out y^e trueth from a nōber of falshods, which treuth can be but one. Their ends then are congruetie, societie, vnitie of mind and trueth, which are but sundrie sortes of vnitie. Arithmetick proceedeth from vnitie, Geometrie from a pricke; and Musick from agréement of sounds; and the end of them is to reduce things to one comon reason, to one proportion, and to one harmonie, all which are kinds of vnitie, and their braunches are braunches of the same. For Perspecttiue dra∣weth all his lynes to one poynt: Masourie and Carpentrie tende to vniformitie. The handicraft indeuereth to bring many powers and many mouings vnder one, to ouerrule them all: All which a∣gain are but sundry sorts of vnitie. Phisick tendeth to the preser∣uation or restitution of health; and health is nothing els but a wel∣proportioned vnion of diuers humors togither. The skill of Lawe tendeth to Right, and there is but one Right, though there be infi∣nite wrongs. Then serues it but to mainteyne, restore, and bring men backe ageine vnto vnitie. Let vs proceede further; Morall Philosophie subdeweth many diuers passions and affections vnto one reason, in one man. How shold gouernment bringeth ma∣ny men to the obeying of one householder: Ciuillgouernment re∣duceth many households into one Commonweale, which is no∣thing but an vnitie of many people, whether it be vnder one Lawe or vnder one magistrate; insomuch that euē the most popular Co∣monweales haue (in their extremities) taken a Dictator, and in their ordinarie course of gouernment a Consull, the one after the other. Now then all that euer man conceiueth, inuenteth and dis∣poseth, doth leade vs alwayes to an vnitie. Where vnitie is lost, there things goe to wrecke, Artes are confounded, and Common∣weales are dissolued. Then like as in vnvnited diuersitie wee finde waste and subuersion; so must we looke in vnity for the increase and preseruation of all things. Now if man, and all that is within man and without him doe leade vs to one alone: shall he suffer himselfe to raunge out vnto many? And if all the Sonnebeames of man, I meane his Arts and Sciences, tend too one vnitie: shall only di∣uinitie turne vs aside to a pluralitie of Goddes? Nay rather, by so many vnities, she will make vs stye vp to the true and perfect vni∣tie, and that vnitie is the onely one God.

But let vs sée now how all things being so diuers in the whole

worlde, are referred one to another. The Water moysteneth the Earth,* 1.13 the Ayre maketh it fatte with his showers, the Sunne in∣lighteneth it and heateth it according to his seasons. The Earth nourisheth the Plants, the Plants ••eede the Beastes, & the Beasts serue man. Againe, nothing is séene here to be made for itselfe. The Sunne shineth and heateth; but not for it selfe: the Earth heareth and yet hath no benefite thereby: the Winds blowe, and yet they sayle not: but all these things redound to the glory of the maker, to the accomplishment of the whole, and to the benefite of man. To be short, the noblest creatures haue néede of the bacest, and the bacest are serued by the noblest; and all are so linked together from the highest to the lowest, that the ring thereof cannot bée broken without confusion. The Sunne cannot be Eclipsed, the Plantes withered, or the Raine want; but all things féele the hurt thereof. Now then, can we imagine that this woorke which consisteth of so many & so diuers péeces, tending all to one end, so cuppled one to another, making one body, & ful of so apparant consents of affecti∣ons; procéedeth from elsewhere than from the power of one alone? When in a féeld we sée many Battels, diuers Standerds, sundry Liueries, and yet all turning head with one swaye; wee conceiue that there is one Generall of the field, who commandeth them all. Also when in a Citie or a Realme wee sée an equalitie of good be∣hauior in an vnequality of degrees of people, infinite trades which serue one another, the smaller reuerensing the greater, the greater seruing to the benefite of the smaller, both of them made equall in Iustice, and all tending in this diuersitie to the common seruice of their Countrie: we doubt not but there is one Lawe, and a Magi∣strate which by that Lawe holdeth the said diuersitie in vnion. And if any man tell of many Magistrates; we will by and by inquire for the soueraine. Yet notwithstanding, all this is but an order set a∣mong diuers men, who ought euen naturally to be vnited, by the communitie of their kind. But when things as wel light as heauy, whot as cold, moyst as dry, liuing as vnliuing, endewed with sence as sencelesse, and eche of infinite sortes, doe so close in one compo∣sition, as one of them cannot forbeare another; nay rather to our séeming, the worthiest doe seruice to the bacest, the greatest to the smallest, the strongest to the weakest, and all of them together are disposed to the accomplishment of the worlde, and to the content∣ment of man who alonly is able to consider it: ought we not forth∣with to perceiue, that the whole worlde and all things conteyned

therein, doe by their tending vnto vs, teach vs to tend vnto one a∣lone? And séeing that so many things tende vnto man; shall man scatter his doings vnto diuers ends? Or shall hee bee so wretched as to serue many maysters? Nay further, to knit vp this poynt withall, séeing that all things the nobler they bee, the more they doe close into one vnitie, (as for example, wee sée that the things which haue but mere being are of infinite kynds, the things that haue life are of infinite sortes, the things that haue sence are of ma∣ny sortes, howbeit not of so many; and the things that haue reason are many, onely in particulars): doth it not followe also that the Godhead from whence they haue their reason (as nobler thā they) is also much more one than they, that is to say, only one as well in particularitie and nomber, as also in kynd?

Howbeit, notwithstanding all these considerations,* 1.14 forasmuch as there is diuersitie, yea and contraritie in worldly things; some haue gathered vpon this diuersitie, that there be diuers Gods, ac∣knowledging neuerthelesse one Almightie aboue them all. And o∣thersome, in respect of the contrarietie, haue set downe but twoo Gods onely.* 1.15 The first say, If onely one God had made all things, there should haue bene no difference in things: but there is diffe∣rence; and therefore it must néedes bee that there are many Gods. Surely had these men wel considered the things afore alledged by mée; they should haue séene that nature is wholly and altogether against this Consequence. There is great diuersitie in one Plant, in one Wight, in one Man: and yet notwithstanding the ground thereof is vniforme. Yea and it is so true that onely vnitie is fruit∣full, that we sée how the diuersitie it selfe and that which commeth thereof, is vtterly barrein, both in Wights, (as in Mules) and in Plants, as in the Stergon,* 1.16 and also in all other like things. If they consider the Sunne, hee maketh Plants to growe all at one tyme, diuers one from another, and as diuers in themselues. Hee maketh some of them too shootefoorth, some to rypen, and some to wither. At one instant he both worketh drought in the Earth, and draweth vp Clowdes out of it to moysten it: he giueth Sommer, Daylight, & fayre weather to some, and Winter, night, and fowle wether vnto othersome: Hee maketh some folkes whyte, some blacke, some read, and some Tawny; and yet is hee but one selfe∣same Sunne, and one selfesame Creature, which at one selfesame instant, by one selfesame course, and with one selfesame qualitie of heate, doth all the sayd things, not onely diuers, but also contrarie.

And hee that should say that it is any other than one selfesame Sunne that maketh the Ethyopian blacke, and the Scotte yello∣wi••h, were not worthy to be answered. Now if a Creature doth by heate (which is but a qualitie) bréede so diuers effectes; what shall we say of the Creator, I meane the infinite Being of GOD, who imparteth himselfe to all things?

Again, if man consider himselfe, he féeleth, he séeth, he speaketh, he vnderstandeth a thousand diuers things, without any alteration in himselfe. Nay which more is, he conceiueth, he inuenteth, and he performeth so diuers workes, that Nations doe wonder one at a∣nother. One man portrayeth out the whole worlde in a little péece of Paper, peinting out all the Images of the Heauens, and all the Climates of the Earth. Some one other counterfeiteth all liuing wights, which Créepe, which Goe, which Flye, which Swimme. And all this commeth but of one mynd which conceiueth and brée∣deth all these formes, because it hath no forme of it owne; for had it any of it owne, it could not breede them, because it owne would occupie it to the full. What haue we then to thinke of him, whose willings are powers, and whose thoughts are déedes? Who is an infinite mynd; in comparison of the brightnesse wherof our mynds are but a shadowe? If we, who (to speake properly) are but in out∣ward showe, doe things in outward showe so diuers: do we doubt that he which is in very trueth, cannot do them also in very trueth? Moreouer, if the diuersitie make vs to imagine diuers Gods, how∣beit all procéeding of one alone: shall we say that he which in his v∣nitie, bred the rest of the Gods with their so diuers powers, had not the same powers in his vnitie? Againe, seeing the sayd diuersi∣tie was once included within the sayd vnitie; is it to be sayd that he was fayne to hatch vp diuers Gods, for the bringing of that diuer∣sitie to light? Nay, like as nature doth all things the shortest way: so also God made all things immediatly. And if they say it was his pleasure to make the high things himselfe, and to leaue the lowe things to be done by the pettie Gods: we must consider that High and Lowe, Noble and Unnoble, are but considerations of man. For to make the one or the other, is all one vnto God; who of his infinite goodnesse and power, hath drawne both twayne of them out of nothing, which was no more the one than the other, as wée shall see hereafter.

Let vs come to such as haue vphilde two beginnings,* 1.17 the one good whom they call Oromases; and the other euill whom they

call Arimanius;* 1.18 which opinion men say procéeded first from Zoro∣astres, and afterward from the Persians and Manichies; but wee shall finde no foundation thereof in nature. Their meaning is, that the Elements, the Plants, Beastes, Men, yea and Spirites, were as yee would say parted betwixt these twoo Gods, so as the one should bee the Creator of the one, and the other of other; the good God, of the good; and the euill of the euill. If it be so, then is there a Ciuill warre fully furnished, of forces set in battelray on both sides: so as there remayneth nothing but fighting, and yet after so long tyme we see no such fight at all. And therfore let vs conclude, that this cōtrarietie of beginnings is not. Unto the one, they alot∣ted Light: and vnto the other, Darknesse: vnto the one, Sommer: and vnto the other Winter: vnto the one, Heate: and vnto the o∣ther, Cold. In very déede these are Contraries, but yet is one self∣same Sunne the doer of them all, after as he goeth further from vs or commeth neerer to vs. And his going from vs is not to for∣goe his light, but to shine therewith the neerlyer vnto others; nor to coole himselfe, but to heate other folkes. Then if these contra∣ries come of one selfsame one, that is to wit of the Sunne: Much more likely is it in reason, that the Sunne himself should not come of two. Againe, why should the one of these contraries be good, and the other bad? Whosoeuer shall haue tryed the extremitie both of the Heate and of the Cold, shall not be able to discerne which is the worser. Likewise he that shall haue obserued the benefite that com∣meth of either of them in their seasons, shall not be able to discerne which of them to take for the better. The Heate ripeneth fruites; but it also seareth and parcheth them. The Colde starueth them; but it also maketh them to bud. Take away either of them both, and you take away all fruites. And like as both of them are need∣full to one selfsame thing, that is to wit, to the bringing foorth of fruites: so be they also procured by y^e course of one selfsame might, which is the Sunne. The same Sunne is the lightner of our eyes to our behoofe; and he is also the blinder of them if wee gaze vpon him at the heyhth of the day. Yet notwithstanding, both in the Sunne and in our eyes is the selffame light which they call good, and which by his reckoning should bee to them both good and bad: and if it be so, on which side shall they turne themselues?

They adde further: Among Plants there are so many poysons, and among liuing wights, so many noysome Beastes: that how should a good God bee author of them? Sillie man that thou art!

The Poysons thou occupyest in Tryacles for thy health, euen a∣gainst the Plague. And of those Beastes thou canst skill to vse the skinnes to clothe thee against the Colde. And if thou hast an euill opinion of some of them, because thou canst not serue thy turne with them; as much wouldest thou haue sayd sometime of y^e Horse, which as now doth thee seruice so many waies: & as much might the Satyre haue said of Fire when it burned him, notwithstanding that as now it be so many waies necessarie. Now then they might benefite thee, if thou wistest how to vse them: and whereas they a∣noy thee, it is not of their nature, but through thyne owne weake∣nesse or rather ignorance. But if they be good so farre forth as thou hast skill of them: shall they not bee good to him which knoweth them throughly? In the Closet of a Surgion who is but a man as thou art, thou shalt finde a thousand tooles; and thou wilt per∣chaunce esteeme him so wise, that thou wilt not thinke there is any one of them, which serueth not to some purpose. Yea, and if any of them doe cut thée or race thée; thou wilt not blame the toole nor the maister thereof, but thy selfe which tookest it by the blade, whereas thou shouldest haue taken it by the handle. And as little canst thou say, that the toole which did cut thee, as that the toole wherewith thou diddest cut what thou wouldest, had another maister or ma∣ker. Now then, wilt thou bring lesse regard with thée in this great shop of the Creator? It is his will that some things shall serue o∣ther liuing wights which serue thée, and othersome shall serue thee alone. Yea, and he will haue euen the harmes which thou receiuest by them, to serue thée to some purpose: and he serueth his owne turne better by thée, then thou canst serue thyne owne. And if thou which art nothing, hast yet so much wit as to drawe some peculiar good to thy self, out of another bodies workes, yea euen out of such as thou accountest euill; as out of Poyson, health; from the Wolfe, his skinne to couer thée; from the night, rest; and so foorth: Shall not the almightie and infinitie Spirit much better dispose them for the benefite of all men, yea and of all the whole world which com∣prehendeth so many things together?

They say yet againe; But why should a good God take pleasure in so many néedlesse things? For to what purpose serueth the Fly, and such other things? Tell me, wouldest thou like well that thine owne Children should speake such reproach of thy workes? Nay rather wherein doth the Flye anoye thée? And wherfore serued the Flye that Zeuxis paynted in his Table? It serued to make his

greatest disdeyners, (euen those which would haue had that rather then all the rest wyped out of the Table) to confesse his arte and excellent skill. And this serueth to conuict thée of blockishnes, thée (I say) which haddest rather to finde fault with God and with the Flye, then to wonder at the excellencie of him, who hath inclosed so liuely a life, so quicke a moouing, and so great an excellencie in so little a thing. So then, it is not for vs to chace her out of the table; but rather to confesse our owne ignoraunce, or els to chace it away. Hereby therefore we perceiue, that of all the things which they can alledge, there is none which is not good and behofefull in it self; and that the euilnesse thereof commeth onely through vs, and therfore that the thing hath but onely one Beginner thereof, who is good.

But behold, they vrge the matter yet more strongly. Howsoe∣uer the case stād (say they) it cannot be denyed but there is euilnesse in things, seeing that they corrupt themselues, and the sinne that is in our selues is vtterly euill: and sith it is so, from whence may that bee? For if God be good, he cannot bee the author of euill; and therefore there must néedes bee another author thereof. This que∣stion shall bee handled more lightsomely when I come to treate of Mans fall, which is the bringer in of the two euilles, namely both of payne and fault; but yet may we assoyle it if we take heede. Wée say that making and creating are referred to natures or substan∣ces, and that all natures and substances are good; and therefore that God who is good, is the author and Creator of them. On the con∣trary part, we say that euill is neither a nature nor a substance, but an income or accident which is falne into natures and substances; It is (say I) a bereuing or diminishing of the good qualities which things ought naturally to haue. This euill hath not any being in it selfe; neither can haue any being but in the thing that is good. It is not an effect, but a default; nor a production, but a corruption. And therefore to speake properly, we must not seeke whence com∣meth the doing of euill, but whence commeth the vndoing of good. As for example, Wine is of Gods creating, and it is good. Now this good substance falling to decay, that is to say, to abate or dimi∣nish of his vertue, becommeth Uineger. Wherevpon no man as∣keth who made the substaunce that is become sharpe, for it is the selfsame that it was afore; but they aske whence cōmeth the sharp∣nes or eagernesse, that is to say, the alteration that is befalne to the substance. If thou say that it commeth of the foresayd euill Begin∣ner the author of all euill, as the good Beginner is the author of all

goodnesse: forasmuch as euill is nothing els but a default, want or fayling of good; it is the souereine or chiefe default or fayling, as the good is the souereine or chiefe being. And if it be the chiefe default, then is it not any more. For the default or fayling of a thing, is a tending of the thing to notbeing any more the same that it was: and the fayling of all, is a tending to the vtter vnbeing or notbeing of the whole.

Moreouer, the sayd euill Beginner, which worketh not but in the substance that is made or created by another, could do nothing if the good Beginner wrought not first; and so should he haue the Commencement of his power depending vpon another than him∣selfe, which is a thing repugnant to a Godhead. And if you aske what is then the cause thereof:* 1.19 I tell you it is the very nothing it selfe; that is to wit, that God almightie, to shewe vs that he made all of nothing, hath left a certeyne inclination in his Creatures, whereby they tend naturally to nothing, that is to say, to chaunge and corruption, vnlesse they bee vphild by his power, who hauing all in himselfe, abideth alonly vnchaungeable and free from all pas∣sions. As in respect then that things be, they be of God; but as in respect that they corrupt & tend to notbeing that which they were afore; that commeth of the sayd notbeing, whereof they were crea∣ted. And so they be good, as in respect of their bare being; and euill as in respect that they forgo their formal being, that is to say, their goodnesse: Good on the behalfe of the [souereine] Good, the father of all substances; Euill as on the behalfe of the Nothing: And soothly neither by nature nor by iustice ought they to be made equall with the vnchaungeable Being of their Creator. And this is to be seene alike in all things. An Apple rotteth, and a man dyeth. The Apple and the man, that is to say, the natures of them are Gods Crea∣tures. As for the rottennesse and the sicknesse, they bee but abate∣ments and defaults of the good nature that was in either of them from the good Creator. Man againe becommeth a Sinner, and hereunto he néedeth no newe creation. It is a vanishing away of the good nature, which loseth her taste. And therefore S. Austine sayth, that the Latins terme an euill man Nequam, and an euill∣nesse Nequitiam, that is to say, Naughtie and Naughtinesse. Now, like as of rightnought there néedeth no beginner; so also is there none to bee sought of naughtinesse or euill. And by y^t meanes there remayneth vnto vs but onely one God the beginner and au∣thor of all things, as wee haue defined him alreadie afore. Plato,

Plotin,* 1.20 and other great Philosophers of all Sexts, are of opinion that Euill is not a thing of itselfe, nor can bee imagined but in the absence of all goodnes, as a depriuation of the good which ought to be naturally in euery thing:* 1.21 That euill is a kynd of notbeing, and hath no abyding but in the good, whereof it is a default or dimini∣shing. That the cause thereof is in the very matter whereof God created things, which matter they termed the very vnbeing, that is to say, in very trothe no being atall, whereof the Creatures re∣teyne still a certeine inclination, whereby they may fall away from their goodnesse: And that in the very Soule of man, the euil that is there is a kind of darknesse, for want of looking vp to y^e light of the souereyne mynde which should inlighten it; and through suffering it selfe too bee caried too much away to the materiall things which are nothing. But now that we haue doone with nature, it is good tyme to sée what the wysest men will teach vs concerning the one∣ly one God.

The third Chapter.

That the Wisdome of the world hath acknowledged one onely God.

SOme man will say vnto mée, if in the worlde, if in the things conteyned in the worlde, if in man himselfe, it bee so liuely painted out that there is but only one God; whereof then com∣meth the multitude of Gods among men, yea and among those whome the worlde counted wysest? I will not proue héere that all those Gods were either dead men or Diuels: for that shalbe handled more materially in another place. But it shall suffice for this pre∣sent, to shewe the vniuersalitie of consent in this point, and that e∣uen those which through custome did celebrate the pluralitie of Gods, did yet notwithstanding beléeue that there is but onely one true God: Which thing I will first maynteyne by the wyse men which liued from age to age. Mercurius Trismegistus, who (if the bookes which are fathered vppon him bee his in déede, as in trueth

they bee very auncient) is the founder of them all, teacheth euery∣where, That there is but one GOD: That one is the roote of all things, and that without that one, nothing hath bene of all things that are: That the same one is called the onely good and the good∣nesse it selfe, which hath vniuersall power of creating all things: That it is vnpossible that there should bee many makers: That in Heauen he hath planted immortalitie, in earth, interchaunge, and vniuersally, lyfe and mouing: That vnto him alone belongeth the name of Father and of Good; and that without blasphemie those titles cannot be attributed either to Angels, to Féends, or to men, or to any of al those whom men do cal Gods as in respect of honor and not of nature. He calleth him father of the world, the Creator, the Beginning, the Glorie, the Nature, the Ende, the Necessitie, the Renewer of all things, the worker of all powers, and the po∣wer of all works, the onely holy, the onely vnbegotten, the onely e∣uerlasting, the Lord of euerlastingnesse, and the euerlastingnesse it selfe; the onely one, and by whome there is but onely one worlde; alone, and himselfe alonly all; namelesse, and more excellent than al names. Unto him alone will he haue vs to offer vp our prayers, our Prayses, and our Sacrifices, and neuer to call vpon any other than him.

I would faine knowe whether it bee possible for vs to say any thing, either more, or better for the setting forth of the sayd vnitie? In déede in some places hee speaketh of Gods in the plurall nom∣ber, as when he calleth the world a God, and the Heauen with the Planets which rule the Heauen, Gods: but that is after the same maner which he sometymes calleth man himselfe a God, notwith∣standing that noman can doubt of his birth and death, which are things cleane contrarie to the true Godhead.* 1.22 The Starres (saith he, speaking of the Creation) were nombred according to the Gods that dwell in them. And in an other place he saith, There are two sorts of Gods, the one wandring, and the other fixed. But in the tymes going before, he had sayd that God is the begin∣ner of them, That he made them, That he is the Father and onely good, vnto whom nothing is to bee compared, either of the things beneath, or the things aboue. Also he saith further, That the world is a second God, and a sensible God: and that Man is a third God, by reason of the immortall Soule which is in him: but yet he cal∣leth them Children, Impes and Creatures of the onely one God, and most commonly Shadowes and Images of him; neither is it

his meaning to attribute so much vnto them, as only one sparke of goodnes, or power to make the least thing that is. To be short, hée setteth downe some Gods as principall, some as meane, and other some as vndergouernours: But the conclusion of his matter is, that the souereine dominion belongeth to God the souereine Lord of them all, vpon whom alonly they depend, and from whom they proceede, who alonly is called Father and Lorde, and whatsoeuer holyer name can be giuen, who made both men and Gods, yea and men (sayth he) much better and more excellent then all the Gods. And as at the beginning of his worke he had prayed vnto him a∣lone; so thanketh and praiseth he him alone in the ende: which thing I thought good to set out at length, because many Philosophers haue drawne their skill and knowledge out of his fountayne.

Pythagoras speaketh of God in these termes:* 1.23 God is but one; not as some thinke, without gouernment of the world, but all in all. He is the orderer of all Ages, the light of all powres, the Originall of al things, the Cresset of Heauē, the Father, Mynd, Quickener, and Mouer of all. Moreouer, he calleth him The in∣finite power from whence al other powers flowe; which cannot be verified but of him alone. Philolaus* 1.24 a disciple of his sayth, That there is but onely one God, the Prince and Guyder of all things, who is alwaies singular, vnmouable, like himselfe, and vnlike all other things. Also Architas sayth, that he estéemeth no man wife, but him which reduceth all things vnto one selfsame Originall, that is to wit, vnto God, who is the beginning, end, and middle of all things. And Hierocles* 1.25 one of the same Sect, sayth, that the same is he whom they call by the name of Zena and Dia, the Fa¦ther and maker of all things, because all things haue their life and being of him. Uerely (by the report of Eudorus as he is alledged by Simplicius* 1.26) they called him the founder of matter. And had we the hookes of Numenius,* 1.27 we perceiue well by the things which we reade & hére there, that we should finde them manifest and plaine. Now, all these had this doctrine both from Nature and from the Schoole of Pherecydes the Syrian the Maister of Pythagoras, vnto whom Aristotle* 1.28 attributeth it in his Metaphisicks. Empe∣docles the successor of Pythagoras, celebrated none other but this onely one, as appeareth by these Uerses of his.* 1.29

All things that are, or euer were, or shall hereafter bee, Both man & woman, Beast and Bird, Fish, Worme, Herb, Grasse, & Tree, And euery other thing, yea euen the auncient Gods each one Whom wee so highly honor heere, come all of one alone.

Parmenides and Melissus taught the same;* 1.30 and so did their Schoolemaister Xenophanes the Colophonian, as we bee credi∣bly informed by the Uerses of Parmenides rehearsed by Simpli∣cius; in the which Uerses hee calleth him the Vnbegotten, the whole, the only one, not which hath bin or shalbe, but which euerlastingly is all together and all of himselfe. To be short, of the like opinion were Thales, Anaxagoras, Timeus of Locres, Acmon, Euclide, Archoeuetus, and others of the auncientest Phi∣losopher. And Aristotle witnesseth in many places, that it was the common Doctrine of the men of olde tyme; The which Zeno hild so streightly, that to deny the Unitie of God, and to deny the Godhead it selfe, he thought to bée all one. And the cause of so say∣ing among the auncient Philosophers, was not their only reading therof in the writings of some that went afore them, (as we might doe now); but also their reading thereof both in the World and in themselues. But let vs come to the chiefe Sects of the Philoso∣phers.

Socrates the Schoolemaister of Plato,* 1.31 confessed only one God, and (as Aulus Gellius and Apuleius report) was condemned to drinke Poyson, for teaching that the Gods which were worship∣ped in his tyme were but vanitie: And for that in scorne of them he was wont to sweare by an Oke, by a Goate, and by a Dogge; as who would say there was no more Godhead in the one than in the other. Yet notwithstanding, he was the man whom Apollo by his Oracle déemed to bee the wisest of all Greece; thereby confessing that he himselfe was no God. His Disciple Plato deliuereth a rule in fewe words,* 1.32 whereby to discerne his meaning. When I write in good earnest (sayth he) you shall knowe it hereby, that I be∣gin my letters with onely one God: and when I write other∣wise, I begin them with many Gods. Uerely his ordinarie ma∣ner of spéeches were not, If it please the Gods, with the helpe of the Gods, and such like: but if it please God, by the helpe and guy∣ding of God, God knoweth it, Such a man is the cause thereof next vnto God, and such other like. Whereas he affirmeth al other things not to bee in very déede: He calleth God, the Father of the whole World, the Béer, that is to say, he who only is or hath bée∣ing; the selfbred, who also made y^e Heauen, the Earth, the Sunne, the Moone, the tymes and seasons, and all other things both hea∣uenly and earthly, high and lowe, and whatsoeuer els is. In other places he calleth him the Beginning, the Middle, and the End; by

whom, for whom, and about whom all things are;* 1.33 the Gouerner of all that euer is and shall be; the very Goodnesse, and the Paterne of all goodnesse; the King of all wighte indewed with reason and mynd; of whom all things haue their Béeing, and which is of more excellencie then the word Béeing. And the names and titles which he giueth vnto the true God, are commonly giuen him vnder the name of Iupiter, and he thinketh that they be not to be communi∣cated vnto any other. In déede sometymes he suffereth himselfe to be caried away to the cōmon maner of speaking, perhaps for feare of the like end that his Schoolemaister had, & he doth it expressely in his booke of Lawes,* 1.34 which was to bee published to the people. For there and in diuers other places, he calleth the heauenly* 1.35 Spi∣rites by the name of Gods: but yet he maketh God speaking to them as to his Creatures; naming them Gods begotten and made by him; and him on the contrary part the Father & God of Gods. Also he honoreth Heauen with the same name, because of the sub∣stantialnes thereof: and likewise the Starres, by reason of the per∣petuitie of their course: And it may be y^t in that respect the Greekes called them* 1.36 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Gods. Howheit, he addeth that they bee visible Gods, and that the Heauen was made by [the only one inuisible] God, That it hath none other immortalitie, than such as he hath giuen vnto it, and that he hath placed the Starres in the Skye for the measuring of tymes, seasons and howres, appoynting vnto e∣uery of them his Circuit.* 1.37 As touching mē, he sheweth wel enough what he beléeued of them, by his declaring of their Genealogie: that is to say, their mortalitie; to wit, that he acknowledged in thē some shadow of the Godhead, but that the very essence or substance thereof was in the onely true God.

All the Platomists haue followed the sayd doctrine, bringing it so much the more to light, as they themselues haue drawne néerer to our tyme. Damascius sayth;* 1.38 The one bringeth foorth all things; The one ought to be honored by silence: The one (like the Sunne) is seene dimly a farre of, and the neerer the more dimly, and hard at hand taketh away the sight of all things. Iamblichus surnamed the Diuine,* 1.39 acknowledged euery where a diuine cause, which is the beginning, end, and middle of all things: That there is one God the maister of all, at whose hand welfare is to be sought: That the end of all Contemplation is to ame at one, and to withdrawe from multitude vnto vnitie: And that the same one or vnitie is God, the Ground and of all trueth, happinesse, and

substaunce, yea and of all other Grounds themselues. He sayth in déede, (and his bookes are so full of it) That there are both Goddes and Fée••des; and of them he maketh diuers degrées, as, good and bad,* 1.40 high and lowe, and so foorth. But yet for all that, he alwaies acknowledgeth one chiefe, whom he calleth the onely one God, which hath vin afore all that is, and is the Fountaine and Roote of all that first vnderstandeth or is first vnderstoode, that is to say of all formes, shapes or Patternes [conceiued or conceiuable in mynd or imagination,] Suffizing to himselfe and Father of himselfe; the begetter of the Soules of the other Gods, according to the Pat∣ternes conceiued in his owne mynd; who is not only the chiefe Be∣ing, but also the superessentiall Beeing, [that is to say, a Béeing which farre surmounteth,* 1.41 passeth, and excelleth all Béeings:] nor simply Good, but the very Good and Goodnesse it selfe: Insomuch that he calleth all the other Goddes Seuered essences,* 1.42 Goodnesses deriued, and Myndes sparkling foorth from the Godhead of the Supersubstantial God, [that is to say, of the God whose substance surpasseth and excelleth all maner of substances:] which Gods vn∣derstand not any thing but by beholding the sayd One, nor are any better than dealers foorth of certaine giftes which they haue from him. And Theodore the Platomist addeth, that all of them pray carnestly ot the first, and drawe from him which is of himselfe; and that otherwise they should goe to nought.

Proclus,* 1.43 (after the maner of the Platomists, which was for the most part to be very Superstitious) turneth himselfe ofttymes a∣side to many Gods: but yet his resolutiō is this in expresse words. Who is he (sayth he) that is King of all, the onely God separa∣ted from all, and the producer of all things out of himselfe, which turneth all ends vnto himselfe, and is the end of ends, the first cause of operatiōs,* 1.44 the author of all that euer is good and beautifull, the inlightener of all things with his light? If thou beleeue Plato, he can neither be vttered nor vnderstood. And anon after, Then is it this first simplicitie which is the King;* 1.45 the Souereintie and Superexcellencie of all things, vn∣comprehensible, not to bee matched with any other thing, v∣niforme, going beyond al causes, the Creator of the substance of the Gods which hath some forme of goodnesse. All things goe after him and sticke vnto him: for he produceth and per∣fecteth al things that are subiect to vnderstanding, like as the Sunne doth to al things that are subiect to sence. To be short,

it is the vnutterable cause which Plato teacheth vs vnder two names in his Commonweale, calling it the very Goodnesse it selfe, and the fountayne of trueth, which vniteth the vnder∣standing to the things that are vnderstood.* 1.46 And in his Parme∣nides, The One or Vnitie wherevpon all the diuine Vnities are grounded, and which is the Originall of all that is, and of all that as yet is not. In his booke of the Soule and of the Spirit,* 1.47 he teacheth vs the way to atteyne from many multitudes to this supersubstantiall Unitie, which hee calleth the Nature grounded in eteruitie, the life that liueth and quickeneth, the waking vn∣derstanding, the welspring of all welfare, the infinite both in con∣tinewance and in power, and yet notwithstanding without quan∣titie, and so foorth. Neuerthelesse, he attributeth much to Angelles and Féendes according to Art Magicke, which the Platomists did greatly affect in those daies: howbeit in such sort, as he continually followeth this rule of his so oft repeated in his bookes, That all things are from the true God who is hidden;* 1.48 and that the second degrée of Gods, that is to say the Angelles and Féendes, are from the very selfsame: and (to bee short) that to beléeue any mo Gods than one, and to beléeue none at all, are both one thing.

Simplicius sayth:* 1.49 Whatsoeuer is beautifull, commeth of the first and chiefe beautie: All trueth commeth of Gods trueth: And all beginnings must needes bee reduced to one begin∣ning; which must not bee a particular beginning as the rest are, but a beginning surpassing al other beginnings, & moun∣ting farre aboue them, and gathering them all into himselfe, yea, and giuing the dignitie of beginning to all beginnings, accordingly as is conuenient for euery of their natures. Also, The Good (sayth he) is the Welspring & Originall of al things.* 1.50 It produceth all things of it selfe, both the first, the middle∣most, and the last. The one Goodnesse, bringeth foorth many Goodnesses; The one Vnitie, many Vnities; The one Begin∣ning, many Beginnings. Now, as for Vnitie, Beginning, Good, and God; they be all but one thing. For God is the first cause of all, & all particular Beginnings or Grounds, are fast settled and grounded in him. He is the Cause of Causes, the God of Gods, and the Goodnesse of Goodnesses.

Porphyrius* 1.51 acknowledged the one GOD, who alone is euery where, and yet in no one place; who filleth al places, and yet is con∣teyned in no place; by whom all things are, both which are and

which are not. This God doth he call the Father, which reigneth in all: & he teacheth vs to sacrifize our Soules vnto him in silence, and with chast thoughts. On the other side, he acknowledgeth the other Gods as his Creatures and Seruants, some visible, & some vnuisible: vnto whom he alloweth a materiall seruice, farre diffe∣ring from the seruice of the true God.

As touching Plotin* 1.52 his Schoolemaister, surnamed the Diuine, whom the Oracle of Apollo (as is reported by Porphyrius him∣selfe) didregister in the number of the wise men of this world, and in the number of the Gods in the other world:* 1.53 He that would al∣ledge the things which he hath spoken diuinely concerning the v∣nitie of the one God, should be fayne to set downe his whole trea∣tises vndiminished. The Summe is, That there is one Beginner of all things, who hath all thiugs and is all things and is all things, whose hauing of thē is as though he had them not, because his possessing of them is not as of things that were another mans; and his being them is as though he were them not, because he is neither all things, nor any thing among things, but the power of all things. That this Beginner dwelleth in himself, is sufficient of himself, & of himselfe bringeth foorth all maner of Essences, Soules, and siues, as being more than Essence, and all life. That by his Unitie he produceth multitude, which could be no multitude, vnlesse he abode One. As touching the vndergods, he sayth that they neither bée nor can bée happie of themselues, but onely by the same meane that men can become happie; namely, by beholding the light of vnderstanding, which is GOD, through their parttaking whereof they abide in blessednesse. Yea, he affirmeth that the Soule of the whole world surmized by the Platomists, is not happie but by that meanes: namely, by beholding the light which created it, like as the Moone shineth not, but by the ouershining of the Sunne vpon her. That was the very opinion of the Platonists as well old as newe co••∣cerning the onely one God,* 1.54 notwithstanding that of all Philoso∣phers they were most giuen to the seruing and seeking out of the bodilesse Spirites, whom we call Angels and Deuils, and whom they called Gods and Fée••ds.

Now let vs come to the Peripatetickes,* 1.55 and begin at Aristotle Platoes Disciple, who notwithstanding was vnreligious in many places, in not yéelding vnto God his due glorie, after the maner of these supersticious folke, who are ouerliberal in bestowing it vpon others: aud yet euen in him shall we finde this selfsame trueth. A∣ristotle

leadeth vs by many mouings,* 1.56 vnto oue first mouer, whom he declareth to bee infinite, without beginning and without ende. From thence a man may step further: for that which is infinite can be but one, because (as I haue sayd afore) the infinitenesse of one restreyneth the power of all others. Afterward he defineth him to be Liuing, Inunortall, and Euerlasting. And againe. [he nameth him] he onely possessor of wisedome, the Beginner of all Causes, and such like: None of all which things can bee attributed to any mo than onely one.* 1.57 Yet notwithstanding, he setteth certeyne God∣heads in the Heauen, in the Starres, and in the Sunne & Moone; vnto which Godheads he alsotteth the gouermnēt of those things, and termeth them heauenly Mynds, First substances, vnchaunge∣able and vnpassible, which (in his opinion) cannot wexe old, because they be aboue the first Mouable, & consequently aboue tyme. Yea, and Common custome, with the force of Loue caried him so farre, as to set vp Images vnto Iuno and Iupiter, vnder the name of Sauiours, for the life of Nicanor, and to doe Sacrifize to a wo∣man whom he loued, as the Athenians did vnto Ceres. But yet in his Abridgement of Philosophie, which he dedicated in his olde age vnto Alexander, his finall doctrine is this.* 1.58 This world (sayth he) wherein all things are orderly disposed, is mainteyned by God; & the highest thing that is in it, is that it is Gods dwel∣ling place. No nature is sufficient of it selfe to indure, if it bee not assisted by his tuition. He is the Father of Gods & Men, the breeder and Mainteyner of all the things whereof this world is composed; and yet for all that, he entreth not into them, but his power and prouidence ouersitting them from aboue, atteyne vnto all things, moue the Heauen the Sunne and the Moone, Preserue the things on earth, and make all and euery thing to doe according to their nature. He likeneth him to the great King of Persia, who from out of his priuy Cham∣ber gouerned his whole Empyre by his power and officers; sauing (sayth he) that the one is God infinite in power, and the other a ve∣ry bace and féeble wight. He sayth moreouer, that all the names which are attributed to the Gods, are but deuices to experesse the powers of the onely one God the Prince and Father of all. And therefore it is more behofefull to sende the Readers to the reading of that whole treatise of his throughout, than to set in any more thereof here, because they shall there see a woonderfull eloquence matched with this goodly diuinitie.

That which the first and most diuine (saith his disciple Theo∣phrastus* 1.59) will haue all things to bee exceeding good; and it may be also, that he is aboue the reache of all knowledge and vnserachable, Againe, There is (saith he) One diuine beginner of all things, whereby they haue their beeing and continu∣ance. But in his booke of Sauors he passeth further, and saith that God created all things of nothing.* 1.60 But to create of nothing, pre∣supposeth an infinite power; and againe, that power presupposeth an vnitie.

Alexander of Aphrodise* 1.61 in his booke of Arouidence written to the Emperour Antonine, attributeth Prouidence ouer all things vnto one only God, which can doe whatsoeuer he listeth, as appée∣reth by all his whole discourse. And he was of such renowne amōg all the Aristotelians, that they called themselues Alexandrians after his name. To be short, the most part of the Interpreters and Disiciples of Aristotle, found it so néedefull to acknowledge one onely Beginner, ond so absurd to maintaine any mo than one; that to the intent they might not confesse any such absurditie in their Mayster, they doe by all meanes possible excuse whatsoeuer might in his workes be construed to the contrarie.

As touching the Stoiks* 1.62 of auncientest tyme, wee haue no more than is gathered into the writings of their aduersaries; who do all attribute vnto them [the maintenance of] the vnitie & infinitenesse of GOD, according to this which Aristotle reporteth of Zeno; namely that there must néedes be but one God, for els there should be no God at all, because it behoueth him to be singularly good and also almightie, which were vtterly vnpossible if there were any mo than one.

Also Simplicius reporteth of Cleanthes, that in his Iambick verses he praied God to voutsafe to guyde him by his cause, which guideth all things in order, the which cause hée calleth destinie and the cause of cause. But the two chief among them whose doctrine we haue in writing, will easely make vs to credit all the residue.

Epictetus* 1.63 the Stoik (whose words Proclus, Simplicius, and e∣uen Lucian himselfe held for Oracles;) speaketh of only one God. The first thing (saith he) that is to be learned, is, that there is but one God, and that hee prouideth for all things, and that from him neither deede nor thought can be hidden. He tea∣cheth vs to resort vnto him in our distresses, to acknowled him for our Master and Father, to lift vp our eyes vnto him alone if wee

will get out of the Quamyre of our sinnes, to séeke our felicitie there, and to call vpon him in all things both great and small. Of all the Goddes that were in time past, he speaketh not a word: but surely he saith that if we call vpon the onely one God, hee will in∣forme vs of all things by his Angels.

As for Seneca,* 1.64 he neuer speaketh otherwise. What doth God (saith he) to such as behold him? Hee causeth his workes not to be without witnesse. And againe, To serue God (saith he) is to Reigne. God exerciseth vs with afflictions to trie mans na∣ture: and he requireth no more but that wee should pray to him. These ordinary spéeches of his, shewe that he thought there was but one God.* 1.65 But he procéedeth yet f••rther. From things discouered (sayth he) wee must proceede to things vndiscoue∣red, and seeke out him that is auncienter than the world, of whom the Starres proceede. And in the end he concludeth, that the World and all that is conteyned therein, is the worke of God. Also he casseth him the Foūder, Maker, & Creator of the World, and the Spirit which is shed foorth vpon all things both great and small.* 1.66 And in his Questions: It is he (sayth he) whom the He∣truscanes or Tuscans meane by the names of Iupiter, Gar∣dian, Gouernor, & Lord of the whole world. If thou call him Destinie, thou shalt not deceiue thyselfe; for al things depend vpon him, & from him comes the causes of all causes. If thou call him Prouidence, thou sayest wel; for by his direction doth the World holde on his course without swaruing, and vtter foorth his Actions. If thou call him Nature, thou doest not a∣misse: for he it is of whom all things are bred, and by whose Spirite we liue. To be short, wilt thou call him the World? In very deede he is the whole which thou seest, and he is in all the parts thereof, bearing vp both the whole World and all that is thereof. By this sentence we may also shewe, that by the terme Nature the Philosophers ment none other than God him∣selfe, accordingly as Seneca sayth in another place, that God and Nature are both one, like as Annoeus & Seneca be both one man. And whereas he sayth that God may be called the World;* 1.67 it is all one with that which he sayth in another place: namely, GOD is whatsoeuer thou seest, and whatsoeuer thou seest not: That is to say, whereas thou canst not see him in his proper béeing, thou seest him in his works. For in other places also he defineth him to a Mynd and Wisedome without bodie, which cannot be seene but

in vnderstanding. Now, of all the former things by him repeated in many places, none can bee verified of any mo than one. For he that maketh all, gouerneth all, and is all, leaueth nothing for any other to make, gouerne, or be, otherwise than from himself. But he speaketh yet more expressely, saying;* 1.68 Thou considrest not the au∣thoritie & maiestie of thy Iudge, the Gouernor of the World, the God of Heauen and of all Gods. All the Godheads which we worship euery man by himselfe, depend wholly vpon him. And againe; When he had layd the foundations of this good∣ly Masse, although he had spred out his power throughout the bodie thereof: yet notwithstanding he made Gods to be officers of his kingdome, to the end that euery thing should haue his guyde. Now, this is after the same maner that the holy Scripture speaketh of the Angelles. So then, he is not onely God the excellentest of all Gods; but also their very Father, Author, and Maker.

Let vs yet further adde Cicero and Plutarch, who haue of e∣uery Sect taken what they thought good. Both of them speake or∣dinarily but of one God, the author and gouerner of all things, vn∣to whome they attribute all things, and in that ordinary style is their word Nature, which surmounteth the custome of their tyme; but yet doth their doctrine expresse much more héere. Cicero trea∣ting of this matter in his booke intytuled Of the nature of the Gods, acknowledgeth one souereine GOD, whom he calleth the God of Gods, & that is the difference which he maketh. The Na∣ture of the Gods* 1.69 (sayth he) is neither mightie nor excellent; for it is subiect to the selfesame (beit Nature or Necessitie) which ruleth the Heauen, the Earth, and the Sea. But there is not any thing so excellent as God, who ruleth the World, and is not subiect to Nature, but commaundeth Nature it selfe. And he is full of the like sentences.

As for Plutarke,* 1.70 he suffereth himselfe to raunge oueroften into fables; but yet in good earnest he speaketh thus. Let vs not woor∣ship the Elements, the Heauen, the Sunne, the Moone, and so foorth: for they be but Lookingglasses for vs, wherein to con∣sider the cunning of him that ordeyned all things; and all the World is but his Temple. Againe: Wherefore doth Plato call God, the Father and Maker of all? He calleth him the Father of the begotten Gods, and of men, like as Homere also doth: but he calleth him the Creator of the things that haue no

life nor Reason.* 1.71 And therefore (sayth he in another place) he made the World as a Common house both to Men & Gods. Yea, (sayth he further) Although there were many moe such Worldes as this is; yet notwithstanding the one onely God should gouerne them all. Now this true God, whom he calleth the great God, the great Workemayster, the Sea of Beautie, the Ground of all good things, and the true Béeing, of whom alone it can be said: Thou art, and not thou hast bin or shalt be; is he whom he meaneth by the name of Iupiter, saying: That of the Gods, one is called Liberall, another Gentle, and a third the Dryuer away of euill; but the great Iupiter is in Heauen, who hath care vniuersally of all things. Thus ye see then how all the Philoso∣phers of all tymes, of all Sects, and of all Nations haue agréed in one God: which is the thing that y^e learned Varro* 1.72 noted very well; namely, that although the Teachers of the Heathen named many Gods and Goddesses: yet notwithstanding they comprehended them all vnder one, which was Iupiter, of whom the residue were but powers and functions: And this Iupiter, is he whom such folk worshipped vnder another name, as worshipped the only one God without Images; and he sayth that so God ought to bee worship∣ped. And to that purpose alledgeth he these verses of the right lear∣ned Poet Valerius Soranus.

The loue almightie is the King of Kings and God of Gods, One God, and all, the Father both and Moother of the Gods.

But now it is tyme to come to the auncient Poets,* 1.73 which were also Philosophers, and who by their feynings opened the gap to the pluralitie of Gods. Among these the first that wee méete with is Orpheus, whom Iustine* 1.74 calleth the first Author of them, the first giuer of names vnto them, and the first blazer of their Pede∣grées. But yet there is a Recantation of his in his Hymne vnto Musaeus, which is called his Testament, that is to say, his last doc∣trine, whereunto he would haue men to sticke. Lift vp thyne eyes (sayth he) to only maker of the World; He is but one, bred of himselfe: and of that one are all things. He is all in all, he seeth all and is seene of none. He onely giueth both welfare and wofull teares and warre. He sitteth in Heauen gouerning all things; with his feete he toucheth the Earth, and with his right hād the vtmost shores of the Sea He maketh the Moun∣taynes, Riuers and deepe Sea to quake, and so foorth. And in another place he calleth him the Firstborne, the Great, the Appa∣rant,

who hath created an incorruptible house for them that are im∣mortall.* 1.75 Also vnder the name of Zeus or Iupiter, he sayth of him as followeth.

Looke vp to that same only King, which did the world create. Who being only one, selfbred, all other things begate. And being with them all, vnseene of any mortall wight, Beholdeth all things; giuing Man now wealth and harts delight, Now wofull warre: For sure there is none other King but hee. I see him not, because the Clowdes a couert to him bee. And in the eye of mortall man there is but mortall sight, Too weake too see the lightfull Ioue that ruleth all with right. For sitting in the brazen Heauen aloft in Throne of gold, He makes the earth his footstoole, and with either hand doth hold The vtmost of the Ocean waues: and at his presens quake Both Mountaynes huge, & hideous Seas, and eke the Siygian Lake.

And anon after againe.

The endlesse Skye and stately Heauens, and all things els besyde, Did once within the Thundring Ioue close hoorded vp abyde. The blessed Gods and Goddesses whose beeing is for ay, And all things past or yet to come within Ioues bow••lles lay. From Ioues wyde womb did all things come; Ioue is both first & last; Beginning, Middes, and End is Ioue; From Ioue are all things past. Ioue layd foundation of the Earth, and of the starry Sky. Ioue reigneth King; The selfesame Ioue of all things farre and ny The Father and the Author is. One power, one God is hee; Alonly Great, one Lord of all. This royall Masse which wee Behold, and all the things that are conteyned in the same, As Fyre and Water, Earth and Ayre, and Titans golden flame That shines by Day, and droopy Night, and euery other thing Are placed in the goodly House of Ioue the heauenly King.

Phocilides* 1.76 followeth him in these wordes. There is but one∣ly one God, mightie, wise and happie. And againe, Honor the onely God. Also, All of them are mortall men, God reigneth ouer their soules. And Theognis (who is of the same tyme) spea∣keth not any otherwise. Homere* 1.77 (whom Pythagoras reporteth to be punished in Hell for making Fables of the Gods) cannot make a notabler difference betwéene the true GOD and al the rest of the Gods whome men worshipped in this time; than when hee saith, That if they were all hanged at a Cheyne beneath; he would pull them vp spight of their téeth: and also that he maketh them all too

quake vnder him: and that whensoeuer there is any greater déede talked of, he speaketh alwaies but of one God in the singular nom∣ber. Also Hesiodus* 1.78 who described y^e pedegrees of the Gods, shew∣eth his heléef sufficiently in this onely one verse written to his bro∣ther.

Both Goddes and Mortall Men, from one selfe race descend.

That is to say, All the Goddes are created by the onely one God.

Likewise Sophocles* 1.79 saith thus.

Certesse of Goddes there is no mo but one, Who made the Heauens, and eeke the earth so round, The dreadfull Sea which cleaps the same about, And blustring Winds which rayze the Waues aloft. But we fond men through folly gone astray, Euen to the hurt and damning of our soules, Haue set vp Idols made of Wood and Stone, Thinking lyke fooles, by meanes of honoring them To•• giue full well too God his honor due.

Euripides* 1.80 goeth yet further, saying.

Thou Neptune, and thou Iupiter, and all You other Goddes, so wicked are you all, That if due Iustice vnto you were doone, Both Heauen and Temples should be emptie soone.

And yet in defacing the false Goddes, hée ceasseth not to commend the onely true God in many places.

Aratus* 1.81 in the same place which is alledged by S. Paule, attri∣buteth all to one Iupiter, whome hee would haue to bee honored without ceassing.

As touching the Latins, Ouid* 1.82 in his Metamorphosis attribu∣teth the Creation of the World and of all things therein, vnto the onely one God. And Virgill* 1.83 doth ordinarily call him the King of Goddes and Men; and hee describeth hym sheading foorth his po∣wer to the vttermost coastes of Heauen and Earth, and with his vertue quickening the World, and all that is therein.

But forasmuch as Scoeuola* 1.84 the Highpréest of the Romaines distinguished the Gods of old tyme into thrée sortes, that is to wit, Philosophicall, Poeticall, and Ciuill; and wee haue séene how the Philosophers and Poets, (notwithstanding their owne Wynd∣lases and fables, and the infinite superstitions of their tymes,) doe méete one another in the onely one GOD: let vs sée consequently what the Ciuill sort will say vnto vs, that is to say, what hath bin

beléeued, not onely by the learned sort of all Nations, but also by the very Nations themselues.* 1.85 Soothly so incredible hath the vani∣tie of men bin since their turning aside from the true way, that all Nations haue let them selues ronne looce after such absurdities as wee would not beléeue, if wee sawe not the like still at this day. Some worshipped the Heauen, the Plantes, and the Starres like silly soules which at their first comming into a Kings Court, doe thinke that the first gay apparelled man whome they méete with is the King. Some made Gods of the Goodes which God gaue them. Some worshipped the Beastes which were for their benefite. And finally they made Goddes, not only of themselues, but also of their Speares, Shéelds and Swoordes, and buylded Temples to their owne Passions, as vnto Fearefulnes, Hardi∣nes and such others; yea and euen vnto things so filthy and loth∣some, as a man may bee ashamed and abashed to heare spoken of. Neuerthelesse, the costomable vse of such things made folke too haue no regard of them, and the most spirituall sort of them were so possessed with Ambition, that it filled all their myndes to the full. Yet notwithstanding, when they were once awaked, and fell a little to the bethinking themselues as of a thing in very déede against Nature, they were ashamed of their doings, yea and euen of themselues.* 1.86 Why Sir, (answered they to Sainct Austin? Thinke you that our Forefathers were so foolish and blinde, as to beleeue that Bacchus, Ceres, Pan, and such others were Goddes? It is not possible. Nay, they beleeued but in the onely one GOD, whose giftes and functions they hono∣red vnder diuers names; and whatsoeuer is more, is but Su∣perstition. Truely the AEgyptians (as wee reade) did honour Diuels, Men, Beastes, Serpents, and Plants: and to bee short, euery thing was to them a GOD. But as touching the true GOD, they described him in their holy Carects as a Pilot alone gouerning a Ship. And all their diuinitie (as is to be seene in Iamblichus,* 1.87) was referred vnto onely one God. Insomuch that the people of I hebais in AEgipt, reiected all the said absurdities of many Goddes, saying that there was none other God but only he whom they called C••ef, which was neuer borne, nor could euer dye,* 1.88 that is to say the Euerlasting. Also in Say a Citie of AEgipt, the Image of Pallas, that is to say of Wisdome, had his Inscrip∣tion: I am all that hath bin, is, or euer shalbe, and there was neuer yet any mortall man that vncouered my face. And Pro∣clus

addeth thereto, And the Fruites that I haue brought forth is the Sonne, as who would say, It is the Wisdome whereby God worketh, which is the Goddesseworker. Now if euen among the AEgiptians the opinion of the one onely God was not quen∣ched: much more reason haue we to deeme, that it was not quen∣ched among other nations.

In the Lawes of the twelue Tables were written these words:* 1.89 Let Men come to the Goddes chastly. Let Pompe bee re∣moued away: If they doe otherwise, God himselfe (that is to say, Iupiter whom onely they called the most gracious and most mightie) will reuenge it. Yet notwithstanding, it is certeyne that afterward Rome became the very Sinckpan of all the Idolatries of the world: for in winning of Nations, they wan also their Su∣perstitions. But could all this wype out in them the print of Na∣ture? Nay, contrarywise, Tertullian speaking of the Heathen of his tyme, sayth thus: As wholly as their Soules are brought in bondage to false Goddes, yet when they awake as a dronken man out of his sleepe, they name but one God, and the speech of euery man is, as it pleaseth GOD. They call vpon him as their Iudge, saying; God seeth it, I referre my self to God, God requite it me. O record of a Soule by nature Christian! To be short, in vttering those wordes, they looke vp to Heauen, and not to the Capitoll: for they knowe that Heauen is the Seate of the liuing God. Lactantius* 1.90 who came a good while after, saith the like. When they sweare, (sayth he) when they wish, whē they giue thanks; they name neither Iupiter, nor Gods in the plu∣rall number, but the onely one God: so greatly doth Nature constreyne them to acknowledge the truth. If there come an Alarum, or if they be threatened with warre; they do after the same maner: But as soone as the daunger is past, by and by they runne to the Temples of many Gods, whereas notwith∣standing they called but the one God to their succour. And in very trueth, if we consider the naturall motions which we haue in our afflictions; they part not our harts into diuers prayers at once, but doe put vs in mynd of onely one God, and to offer our prayers vp vnto him.

Now, forasmuch as Nature, Mans wisedome, and the voyce of all people, doe in all Languages commend, woorship, and con∣fesse one onely God: It remayneth for vs to see whether wée may not gather the like, euen by the very confession of the false Goddes

thēselues,* 1.91 which haue gone about to deface his name by al meanes. It is a case disputed among the learned, by what Spirite the Sy∣billes spake, because it is not vnconuenient that God should com∣pell the very Deuels to set soorth his prayses. Howsoeuer the case stand, they speake but of onely one God, saying.

There is but onely one true God, right great, and euerlasting, Almightie, and inuisible, which seeth euery thing, But cannot bee beheld himselfe of any fleshly man.

Also they crye out against the false Goddes, and exhort men to beate downe their Altars, accounting them happie which giue themselues to the glorifying of the only one God. But let vs héere Apollo himselfe. Being asked at Colophon by one Theophilus whether there was a God or no, and what he is: He answered in 21. Gréeke verses rehearsed by Lactantius,* 1.92 whereof I will holde me contented with the latter thrée, which are to be englished thus.

The selfebred, bred without the helpe of Moother, Wise of himselfe, whose name no wight can tell, Doth dwell in fyre beyond all reach of thought: Of whom we Angelles are the smallest part.

The rest of these Uerses commend and set foorth the Maiestie of the great God, but these suffize for this matter. Héere the Féend doth what he can to magnifie himselfe, saying that he is an Angell and a little portion of God, but yet hée acknowledgeth him as his Souereine. Porphyrius* 1.93 the great enemie of Christians, rehear∣seth many other like. The same Apollo being asked how GOD was to be worshipped, answered in 22. Uerses, calling him the e∣uerlasting Father, the Walker vpon the Heauen of Heauens, the Fashioner or framer of substances, the father of all things, the fa∣ther of all wights both mortall and immortall. And on the other side he calleth all others his Children, his Seruants, his Messen∣gers, and the Heraults or blazers abroad of his prayses. In ano∣ther answere comprised in ten Uerses, he calleth him the burning Flame, the Welspring and Originall of all things, the author of life, and so foorth; and afterward he concludeth,

I am but Phoebus; more of mee ye get not at my hand; It is as little in my mynd as I can vnderstand.

Being asked at another tyme by the* 1.94 Founder of Constanti∣nople, whether he should resist an enemie of his or no; he answe∣red thus:

Apollo is not of that mynd; beware How thou doest deale; he is too strong for thee. For God it is that makes him vndertake This enterprise, and doth the same maynteyne, Euen God I tell thee vnder whom both Heauen And Earth and Sea and euery thing therein, And Phoebus eke and Hell it selfe doth quake.

Proclus* 1.95 sayth, that the Oracles acknowledged the great God the Welspring of the fountayne of all things. And for an example he alledgeth this Oracle of fower Uerses; From God springeth the generation of all matter; from the same ground riseth the finenesse of the fyre, and the Globes of the World, and what∣soeuer els is bred, and so foorth. That is the answer of Apollo the God so greatly renowmed among the Heathen, when he was asked what God was. And being vrged to tell what he himselfe was, and how he would be called, he sayd:

Call me the Feend that knoweth all and is right sage and wise.

And at another tyme he sayth thus.

Wee Feends which haunt both Sea and Land through all the world so wide, Do trēble at the whip of God which all the world doth guide.

These foresayd Oracles are reported by Porphyrius, Proclus, and other Heathen men, wherof some be rehearsed also by Lactan∣tius: which may suffize to shewe how the very Deuils doe beléeue one God, and quake at him. But I hope I shall bee pardoned for handling this matter a little at the largest, because the consent of all men in that behalfe which I haue alreadie proued, is contrary to the opinion of many men. And therefore ye see heere how the World, Men, and the Deuilles themselues crye out with the holy Scripture, Hearken O Israell,* 1.96 the Lord thy God is but one God, the God of Gods, who onely worketh wonders, & hath not his like among the Gods. And that is the thing which I haue gone about to proue in these last two Chapters.

The fourth Chapter.

What it is that we can comprehend concerning God.

NOW, albeit that the least things which are in Nature and in our selues, doe sufficiently shewe vs that there is but one GOD: Yet notwithstanding all Nature is not able to teach vs what that God is, neither is man,

in nature able to comprehend any thing of him: and the reason ther∣of is euident in both twayne. In Man, because the greater can ne∣uer be comprehended by the lesser,* 1.97 neither can Man haue any thing in vnderstanding, which hath not first bene in his sences, as from whence procéedeth vnto him the beginning of all naturall know∣ledge: And he neither seeth nor perceiueth God in himself, but only by his effects. In Nature, because it is a thing wrought by God, and no work or effect how great so euer it be, can perfectly expresse the cause or worker thereof. Man is able to discourse after a sort, of the things that are lesse than himselfe, as of Beastes, Plants, and Stones. And yet if hee will enter into their substaunces; he must néedes stop short, and is constreyued to stay vpon the histories of them, confessing his knowledge to be but ignoraunce. If he come to himself, to knowe his owne Soule by the power of his Soule: by and by he is at his wits ende: For the maner of his discourse is but to procéede from kynd to kynd, and to passe from one reason to another. But on the contrary part, his mynd seeth not it selfe, but onely turneth into it selfe, leauing not any thing empty without it self whereunto to extend, no more than a Circle doth. And yet not∣withstanding, euery thing is equall to it selfe, and measurable by it selfe. What shall we then thinke that Man can doe, if he aduaunce himselfe to the considering of Goddes nature; seeing that the least Creatures that are doe put him to his trumpe? That is the very thing which hath made the ignorant sort to ouershoote themselues so farre, as to counterfect God by a shape like themselues: which thing the very Beastes (sayth Xenophanes) would haue done, if they had bin Paynters, as which cannot ordinarily conceiue any greater thing than themselues. Ye see then how Man is of himself too farre vnable to conceiue such a Greatnesse. Againe, if we consi∣der the effects, a man planteth, buyldeth, paynteth, and weaueth a thousande diuers workes: and wee thinke it not straunge that the bruite Beastes conceiue not thereby what Man is, howbeit that there is alwaies some proportion of vnderstanding betwene Crea∣ture and Creature; but betwéene the Creature and the Creator there is none at all. Nay, there is yet this more, that a man shall see and feele the workes of another man, and he shall knowe from whence he taketh his stuffe, after what maner he matcheth things together, and what Arte he hath obserued: But shall he for all that, knowe what the Soule or Mynd of that man is? No; nor yet his owne Soule. For his doings come nothing néere to that which he

is, no not so néere as the heate which the Sunne sheadeth into vs from aboue, approcheth néere to the naturall power that is in the Sunne; the which notwithstanding wee durst not take vpon vs to describe, if we had neuer felt it otherwise than in a Prison. But if thou couldest haue entered into the mynde of that man at the ma∣king of his worke,* 1.98 thou shouldest haue seene it farre more beauti∣full there: and all that euer he could do or thou say, is alwaies farre lesse than his Conceyt; and yet the same Conceyt of his is but as a sparke of the Mynd, whereof the same worke is a part.* 1.99 Now then, if thou being a man, canst not conceiue the mynde of a man by his doings, though thou beare the like mynd about thée thy selfe; and if his doings (of what sorte so euer they be) come farre short of that which he himselfe is: darest thou be so bold as to describe God by his works what he is, and to dispute of his substaunce? And if thou canst not conceiue him by his workes; how wilt thou then conceiue him, seeing thou canst not behold him otherwise? To this purpose we haue the common Historie of Simonides, who being asked by Hiero King of Syracuse what God is; demaunded one daies re∣spit to giue answere, and afterward two, and then fower, and in the end confessed that the more he thought thereon, the lesse he vn∣derstood thereof; and yet he was the man which taught very well, that God was the very wisedome it selfe. Xenophon, Plato, Plo∣tin and others say that he is a thing which cannot bee found, nor ought to be sought. To bee short, all the Philosophers crye in one voyce with Dauid,* 1.100 Lord, thou hast made darknesse thy Co∣uert, Lord I am wearied euen in thyne outter Courtes. Yet notwithstanding, whereas men are not able to atteyne to Gods substaunce; they haue gone about to betoken it by the excellentest names that they could deuise, as we haue séene in the last Chapter. They considered y^t forasmuch as all things haue their beeing from him, he himselfe was the souereine Béeing; and that to be so, it be∣houed him to bee euer, and therefore they called him the Euerla∣sting. And that to haue béeing without life; is nothing: and that he which giueth life to all, must needes bee all life: and therefore they call him the liuing God. And againe, that life without vnderstan∣ding is dead, and vnderstanding without power is vnperfect; and that he which giueth both of them to all, must néedes haue thē in himselfe for all: and therefore they call him Mynd and Myght, attributing vnto him the perfect knowledge and infinite power of all things. Finally, forasmuch as to Bée, to Liue, to Understand,

and to be mightie, the higher that they be, are so much the lesse to be estéemed, if good also abound not on all partes: because men on the other side receiue so many good turnes at his hand, they call him Good, excéeding good, and the goodnesse it selfe; assuring them∣selues that no other name doth so peculiarly fit him as that. Yet notwithstanding neither that, nor any thing els that we can ima∣gine more, can come néere him by infinite distance. Let vs attri∣bute vnto him the highest degrée of all perfections that can be, (as in very déede he must néedes haue them at the highest pitch, seeing that there is not any that hath measured them vnto him:) yet doe we attribute vnto him but imperfection. For if any of them be fi∣nite, then is he not infinite, as we ought to conceiue him to be: and infinite it cannot be, because the one of them should by the infinite∣nesse thereof shut vp the other within bounds.* 1.101 Therefore it beho∣ueth vs to conceiue a most single singlenesse, which neuerthelesse in one perfection comprehendeth al perfectiōs, as the roote of them; which séemeth a thing contrarie to mans vnderstanding: that is to wit, that his Prouidence is no more Prouidence than Iustice, nor his Iustice more Iustice than mercie, nor his knowledge more knowledge then life, nor his life more life than single béeing: To be short, that his being is such a being as is wholly aud alonly all, I meane altogether déede,* 1.102 altogether forme, altogether perfection and so foorth. And that is the thing which God himselfe teacheth vs, in that being asked his name by Moyses, hee answered him, I am that I am:* 1.103 which name the Iewes had in such reuerence, that the very Priestes themselues (as they say) named it not but at the great Feastes. And yet in the iudgement of Plotine, that name is not sufficient for him.* 1.104 Also we call him the good, and yet is that too little for him; for Good is the good of goodnes, as heate is the heate of hotnes. But God is the goodnes it selfe; and whatsoeuer is good, is of him. Yet notwithstanding, the very word Goodnes is not suf∣ficient; for goodnes hath his being in some substance. But in God there cannot any thing be conceiued, which is not substantially, yea and more than substantially substance. Againe, when we say, he seeth, he knoweth, he vnderstandeth; these things haue relation to tyme; and hee that made time is without the reache of time. Also when wee say, hee is héere, or hee is there, it is all one; for hee that made all places is not conteined in any place. And therefore Tiis∣megistus saith very well,* 1.105 That he is better and mightier then any name can expresse. And Salamon cryeth out with admiration,

what is his name? As who would say, man is not able to vtter or conceiue any word y^t doth properly fit him, neither in Nownes nor in Uerbes nor in complet spéech, because man is an essence subiect to time, place and accidents, which cannot passe beyond it selfe. Now then, what is the vttermost poynt that all our sine conceites can reache vnto?* 1.106 Uerily the most in effect that we can knowe con∣cerning his being, is that we can vnderstand nothing at al thereof. Insomuch that whatsoeuer we say thereof affirmatiuely, whether we terme it Scothnesse or Wisdome, or Kingdome, or Unitie, or Godhead, or any thing els which we meane thereby, it can not fit him. Finally, we can no more name him than comprehend him, how high so euer we thincke we mount vp. And therfore we must with Trismegistus call vpon him in silence; and say vnto him with Dauid, Lord, the best prayse that I can giue vnto thée is silence.

Now séeing we cannot knowe what God is, but by not know∣ing it, it standeth vs on hand to knowe what he is not, which is no small helpe for vs to know him after a sort. Wherein we must fol∣lowe a cleane contrarie rule.* 1.107 For as we haue said, that of all the things that are spoken and affirmed of Gods essence or substance, none fitteth him, being taken strictly: so whatsoeuer is spoken ther∣of negatiuely, shalbe found true, being taken after the same maner: Insomuch that that man may bee sayd to bee most skilfull in that behalfe, which knoweth most Negatiues or Remotions (as they terme them.) To make this poynt yet clearer, nature hath taught vs by the diuers mouings which we sée héere beneath, that there is a GOD which is the first mouer of the whole world. And by the same reason, we say that he himselfe is vnmouable,* 1.108 that is to say, remoueth not at all. For we see that the nature of him which ma∣ueth, insomuch as he moueth, is to be and to be setled in rest. Euen our Soule (as in respect of the body) is vnmouable, notwithstan∣ding that it cause and procure all the mouings of the body: and the mo things that a man intendeth to moue, the more it behoueth him to haue his mind settled. Forasmuch as God is euermore dooing, he is euer at rest, and he hath not his resting in another but in hym selfe, or rather is his owne rest himself. And therefore the auncient Philosophers called him 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉,* 1.109 that is to say, the vnmouable and stedfast, to put a difference betwéene him and the heauen, the Planets, and the Starres, which are subiect to mo∣uing, and whom the ignorance of folke hath called Gods. Herevp∣pon we say also that he is vnchangeable: for the change of a thing

in it self, as a kind of mouing which tēdeth out of it self.* 1.110 As for exā∣ple, He that desireth or coueteth, desireth or coueteth y^e thing which hehath not. But God is one, & al togither; neither is it possible for him to receiue being from any other: for nothing is changed but by some other thing, which in some respect is more mightier thā it, as Wood is changed by Fyre. But al things haue their power & force frō God alone. Therfore by this terme Vnchaungeable, we deny him to be lyke the immortall soules, which admit such passions as we perceiue, or also to the very bodilesse Spirites, whome we call Angels, & the Philosophers call Gods; who be not vnchangeable, sauing so farre foorth as they rest in y^e beholding of him which cānot be changed. And it maketh nothing against the matter, that we sée so diuers changes in all things. For it is one thing to change ones selfe, & another thing to will y^t there should be a chaunge; like as it is one thing to moue ones selfe, & another thing to will y^t there be a mouing. The Sunne maketh many diuers changes in the things which we see héere beneath, he maketh things gréene, hee maketh things yellow, he rypeneth things, he withereth things & so forth, and yet notwithstanding he changeth no whit of his heate; and had he also a mynd (as some suppose him to haue,) he might also wil al these chaunges without changing himself. So also may God, and much better. He without altering his own being, willeth & maketh al the changes in the beings of things: & yet it is as certeine y^t he is vnchangeable, & that if he were not so y^e whole chaungeable nature should perish; as it is certaine that if he were not vnmoueable, all mouing should vtterly ceasse. Now out of these two negatiues we drawe a third, namely y^t he hath neither beginning nor end, which thing we call Euerlastingnes.* 1.111 For the beginning and ending of all things, procéedeth of mouing and chaunge: and therefore he that is not subiect to thē, can haue neither beginning nor end. Moreouer, Time is but a measure of mouing, wherin there is both a forenesse & an afternesse. He therefore which is not subiect to mouing, is not subiect to time, and he which is not subiect to time, hath not his be∣ing by continuance of succession from one mouing to another. And so Gods being is altogether at once, which is the peculiar proper∣tie of euerlastingnes. And whereas we say, he hath bin, and he shall be; it is as much to say as there was neuer any tyme when he was not, neither shall it euer come to passe that he shall ceasse to be.

Againe,* 1.112 being euerlasting he is not subiect to any passiue possi∣bilitie; that is to say, looke whatsoeuer he is, he is the same actually and in very déede, and he cannot become any other thing than he is

alreadie. For, were there any passiue possibilitie in him as from himselfe, then should there be a chaunge in him; and if it were from elswhere, then should there be a mouing from possibilitie to déede, or to dooing; & he is not subiect to any of them both.* 1.113 Furthermore, Euerlastingnesse cannot be in way of possibilitie, but only actually and in very déede. For euery maner of déede being simply taken is afore the possibilitie thereof, as the cause is afore his effect, foras∣much as the possibilitie is (as ye would say) quickened by the déede. As for example, from a graine to an Herbe,* 1.114 and from a kernell to a Trée by the power of the Sunne. But as for Euerlastingnesse, it can abyde neither forenesse nor afternesse; and therefore looke what∣soeuer it can bee, it is the same all at once, and actually or in very déede, and euer. Whervpō it followeth also immediately, that God is neither matter nor materiall: for the propertie of matter is to be merely passiue; that is to say, capable of diuers formes or shapes, and such as may in possibilitie receiue, being it selfe altogether na∣ked and such as the Philosophers describe it to bee. By these con∣clusions we come to another, which is, that God* 1.115 is not compoun∣ded. For whatsoeuer is so, we say is of later tyme than the things whereof it is compounded. But God is euerlasting, and vnto him nothing can be new. Againe, Compounding is a knitting of many things into one; & ere those things could bee vnited in very déede, it behoued thē to be first in possibilitie; that is to say, to bée capable thereof. Now, as for God, he is not a thing in possibilitie (which is an vnperfect beeing) but altogether actually and in very déede.

Moreouer, wee say that God made all things, and knoweth all things. Now, if he had in him the nature of any of them, the same would trouble the natures of the rest, as wee see that the tongue of a sicke man that is sicke of an Agewe, is vnable to iudge of the tast of things, because it is furred by a cholerick humor; and the eye which hath any matter therein, can see nothing. It followeth then that too make and too knowe all things, God must néedes bee very single, and not holding any thing at al in him. And the more single hee is, the more is hee capable of the innumerable multitudes of things; like as the eye is then most capable of all colours and the eare of all voyces; when [in themselues] the one is least troubled with noyzes and the other with colours. Wherevpon it followeth that seeing he is not compounded, he cannot be a bodie:* 1.116 for all bo∣dies are conteyned within boundes, and haue partes, which thing most people haue knowne well enough as Numenius the Pytha∣gorian

reporteth.* 1.117 And not being a bodie, he cannot be in place, nei∣ther wholly nor partly. By reason whereof, wee may say in strict spéech, that he is no where, that is to say, that no part of him is li∣mited within any place to be poynted at. Notwithstanding, like as he made all things by the power of his béeing; so doth the same po∣wer enter into all things, fill all things and conteyne all things. And forasmuch as the same is vndiuidable, it is whole in all, and whole in euery part: and so likewise is he himselfe; that is to say, he is euerywhere, whole throughout, in whom all things haue their béeing, howbeit that hee is not determinatly or definitely in any thing. Wee haue an image hereof in our owne mynd, which yet notwithstanding is but a vayne shadowe. For, in as much as all the things which we conceiue are lesse than we; they be in the mynd without intermingling of the mynd with them, and the mynd after a certeyne fashion toucheth them all, although it bée not compre∣hended in any of them. Now, if all these things be in our mynd, because they be entered into it by our sences: how much more shall all essences be in God and he in all of them, seeing that all of them procéede from him, and that his onely conceyuing of them hath brought them foorth? Now then, let vs not imagine any intermin∣gling in this behalfe. The light of the Sunne continueth entierly throughout; it cannot bee deuided intoo partes, nor shet vp in any place, nor seuered from the welspring thereof: it sheadeth it selfe in∣to all places, it filleth all places, and it is present with all things which we see, (I speake after the maner of the Diuines) in essence, in power, and in presence. The Ayre is lightened with the presence thereof, and darkened with the absence, and wee perceyue both twayne of them; and yet for al that, it intermingleth not it self with the Ayre, ne leaueth any whit of it selfe into it. And shall wee pre∣sume to thinke lesse of the light which is not to bee conceyued but in vnderstanding; considering that wee see the like with our eyes? Or shall wee thinke it straunge that GOD should bee both euery where and nowhere, considering how wee see that from a bodie there isseweth such a bodilesse thing, as without touching any of them, lighteneth them all? And if a light shine in all things that shine; shall not the souereine essence bee in all things that are? And seeing that things could not haue bin made vnlesse Gods power (which is his very essence) had bin present with all things & with euery of them; shall any thing let him from being present with all things still? Now, like as the light of the Sunne hath diuers ef∣fects

through the disposition of mens eyes, and of the shéerenesse of things, and the diuersities of the substances whereon it lighteth: so is Gods presence diuers too diuers things, and yet is it without any diuersitie in it selfe. He is (sayth S. Austin* 1.118) in himself, as the beginning and the end: to the World, as the Author and go∣uernor thereof: to his Church, as a father in his House: to our Soules, as a Bridegroome in his Chamber: to the Rightuous, as a Helper and defender: to the Reprobates, as a trembling and terror. No man fleeth from him but to him, from his ri∣gor to his goodnesse, and so foorth. For what place shall he meete with (sayth he) where he shall not finde they presence? The selfesame presence which was present at the making of all things,* 1.119 is present with euery thing to preserue them all: and yet is it neuerthelesse absent from all things and from euery thing, as it was at the tyme that there were no things at all; because none of them conteyneth it or any part of it, but it conteyneth all things.

But we must passe yet one step further. God (say we) is present euerywhere. Then is he infinite,* 1.120 and yet is he not conteyned in a∣ny place, for he is not a bodie. It followeth therefore that he is not infinite in bodie,* 1.121 but in Spirit; nor in quantitie, but in goodnes and power, and better if better may be sayd. Wherfore, let vs not ima∣gine him to bee a huge or massie lumpe, as the ignorant sorte doe. The massinesse of things is that (as wee see) which maketh them vnable to doe things. Contrariwise, the more spirituall a thing is, the more actiue it is. He then which is the action of al powers, must néedes bee a Spirit of infinite power, and yet notwithstanding ex∣empted from all quantitie, (which properly is but a weakenesse or want of power) yea, and yet in such sort infinite, as all the infinite∣nesse thereof bee comprehended within bounds as to himselfe, that is to say, so as he finish or bound himselfe, because he neither is nor hath any thing without himself. Thus haue we by reason (and we may also haue it by the Deuilles in the forealledged Oracles, and likewise by all the Philosophers) that GOD is vnmoouable, vn∣chaungeable, beginninglesse, endlesse, single, bodylesse, and infi∣nite; all which are termes whereby wee declare, not what he is, but onely what he is not; not to make vs to conceyue him, but to kéepe vs from deceyuing our selues by our owne vayne conceytes. And of all these Negatiues we conceyue but one affirmatiue, as we did at the first; namely, that God is his owne being, as he himself faith vnto Moyses; insomuch that he is of himselfe, and all things are of

him, and he cannot be aught els than he is; insomuch also that it is all one with him to be great and mightie, as méerely and simply to bée; which is as much to say as that we must (as much as wee can) conceyue him to be good without qualitie, great without quantitie, euerlasting without tyme, euerywhere present without place, and so foorth. And to conclude this Chapter, whereas wee cannot com∣prehend God in his very being, wee will indeuer to come néere to the knowledge of him thrée waies by considering his effects; how∣beit in such sort as that we must thinke infinitely of him, aboue and beyond the things which seeme greatest vnto vs in the perfections which we perceyue to be in all things; as, goodnesse, trueth, wise∣dome, Iustice, life, vnitie, and such like; and yet conceyuing him (if we can) to be but one only perfection comprehēding all perfections in one, and yet euery of them infinitely aboue the highest degrée of perfection that we can imagine. And finally as in respect of the im∣perfections which are in all things, (as chaungeablenesse, weake∣nesse, materialnesse, and such like,) by conceyuing them to be more infinitely farre of from his nature, than wee can set them of in our vnderstanding. But when wee haue or shall haue taken neuer so much paynes in that behalfe, yet the vttermost that wee shall haue learned, is but only not to be ignorant of our owne want of know∣ledge. And therefore, to the intent we lose not our selues in seeking him, the surest way for vs is to p••ssesse him by louing seruing and woorshipping him; the which thing hee of his loue towards vs graunt vs to doe.

Amen.

The fifth Chapter.

That in the onely one Essence or Substance of God there are three persons which we call the Trinitie.

LET vs presume yet a little further, not by rash in∣quisitiuenes of man, but by the mercifull guyding of God, who hath voutsafed to vtter himselfe vnto vs in his Scriptures: and let vs sée whether reason will helpe vs to mainteyne and prooue the things which she of her selfe could neuer haue found out. For, reason is after a

sort in like case towards God, as our eye is towards the Sunne. Neither the Sunne nor any thing vnder the Sunne, can well bee seene without the Sunne: likewise neither God nor any thing be∣longing to God can bee seene without God, how good eyesight or myndsight so euer wee haue. But when the Sunne shineth, then our eye seeth the things which it sawe not afore, & iudgeth of them at his ease, notwithstanding that the eye bée but the same it was a∣fore, and haue but the same power of sight which it had afore, with∣out receyuing any newe increase thereof. Likewise, when GOD voutsafeth to vtter any doctrine vnto vs, the selfsame reason which otherwise could neuer haue perceyued it, doth then see it, and dis∣course it, and allowe of it, without receyuing any newe power abi∣litie or chaunge in it selfe. We haue concluded by reason, that God is a most single essence: And we beléeue by discouery from heauen, that in the same most single essence are thrée persons or Inbeings. Reason of it selfe could neuer haue atteyned to the finding thereof: for we cannot distinguish things vnlesse we conceyue them; and yet neuerthelesse, reason will serue vs to proue it.

First of all,* 1.122 we haue alreadie acknowledged by Gods effects or doings, that there is in him a working nature or power, (I must be faine to speake in the speech of man seeing that the diuine spéech is vnknowne to vs) which is the beginner and mouer of al things. And in euery of his workes, wee see a singular cunning; and in the knitting of all, both great and small together, wée see a wonderfull order, as I haue discoursed heretofore; and wee see there is neither order nor cunning where there is no vnderstanding. It followeth therefore that the souereine vnderstanding is in God from whom this great order and cunning procéede. Againe, albeit that of the things which are in this world, some vnderstand, and some vnder∣stand not; yet notwithstanding, all of them are appoynted to some certeyne end and marke, as the Sunne to make the day & to heate; the Moone to lighten the night, and all the Planets and Starres to marke out the Seasons; and so foorth of all other things. N••ne of them stumbleth in his way, none steppeth aside from his end••: and yet notwithstanding, the most part of them could not prescribe it to themselues. For the beginner of all ends is vnderstanding, and in the most of these there is no vnderstanding. Néedes must it bee therefore, that God the maker of them did also appoynt them their ends, and consequently that he had vnderstanding for them. Now, the innumerable multitude of things, and the linking of their ends

one to another as they now be, do shewe that al of them haue their beginning from one selfsame vnderstanding. Then must it néedes be, that this common author of their being, that is to say, the soue∣reine being, must also be the souereine vnderstanding, séeing he im∣parteth the effects of vnderstanding to so many things which haue it not. Moreouer, the things which haue vnderstanding are the dis∣posers and orderers of the other things, and not contrarywise. Man buyldeth, planteth, reareth vp Cattell, and maketh his com∣moditie of all of them together. Of men themselues, the skilfullest make Lawes, and take vpon them to rule others. To be short, the things which haue no vnderstanding doe naturally serue as instru∣ments to those which haue it; and the thing which hath the lesse of it, serueth that which hath the more of it; and no part in nature dea∣leth to the contrary. And (as wée haue proued by all the Philoso∣phers themselues) it is God that created all things that haue vn∣derstanding, as well those which are not tyed to bodies, as those which haue bodies; allotting to them their offices and ends, and so consequently he is the very beginner and end of them himself.

Then once againe, so farre foorth as we can describe this vnder∣standing by the outward effects thereof, it must néedes be in God a most excellent abilitie (if it may bee so named) by direction whereof he executeth most wisely the actiue or inworking vertue power and nature which we marke in all things in this world, howbeit, so as the chiefe working of them doth abide and rest still in him. I haue proued heretofore that God is infinite: which being so; nothing can be imagined in him, which is not infinite likewise: for otherwise he should bee as well finite as infinite both together. And infinite he were not, if he could vnderstand or knowe that to day which he vn∣derstood not afore. Néedes then must it be, that he from al eternitie vnderstandeth and knoweth the things which haue bin, which are, and which shall be; the whole, and the parts; the generalles, the spe∣cialles, and the particulars; the originalles, the procéedings, and the aftercommings; the doings, sayings, and thoughts of men; and so foorth, ••o as this vnderstanding in God is euerlastingly infinite.

Againe, vnderstanding is an inworking which abideth and re∣mayneth in the partie which hath it, and passeth not into any out∣ward thing. For, when we vnderstand the course of the Sunne, we become the more skilful therof in our selues; but as for the Sunne, he is nothing altered thereby. Also I haue told you alreadie, that God is most single, and that there is not any thing in him which

is not his very essence or being. Whervpon it followeth, that God not onely hath vnderstanding, but also that his vnderstanding is his very essence [that is to say, he is the very vnderstanding it self.] Now then, let vs see what it is that this vnderstanding begetteth. I haue told you that God is a mere doing, and that whatsoeuer he doth, he doth it from euerlasting; and that on the other side being most single, there is nothing in him which is not a dooer. Where∣vpon it followeth that this vnderstāding is euerlastingly occupyed in doing. And wherein then is it occupyed? What is the thing that it worketh vppon? Surely it can méete with nothing but it selfe. God then conceyued and vnderstood himselfe; and it must néedes be that he vnderstood himselfe, seeing that the chiefest wisedome is to knowe ones selfe, whereof he could not fayle. Therefore it was of necessitie, that this vnderstanding of God, should yéeld a reflexion backe againe to it self, as a face doth in a Lookingglasse, and as our mynd doth when it setteth it self to the considering of it owne pro∣per nature; and that it should conceyue and beget in it selfe a perfect image of it owne selfe, which image is the same thing which in the Trinitie we call the Sonne, the Word, or the Spéech; namely, the liuely and perfect image and wisedome of the Father. Now, this vnderstanding is actually euerlasting, [that is to say, euerlasting in ••éede] and euerlastingly actuall, [that is to say, euerlastingly do∣ing,] and therefore wee say that the second person which it beget∣teth is also euerlasting: and God in his vnderstanding had not con∣ceyued any thing that is lesse than himself; for it is equal with him. And whereas wee comprehend not our selues; that commeth of the darknesse and lumpishnesse of our flesh, which maketh vs vnlike our selues. We say then that the Sonne is equall to the Father, and the image of the Father. But yet moreouer, the being of the Father and his vnderstanding are both one: & his being or essence (being vnderstoode of it selfe) is none other thing than the being of the Sonne, who is bred and begotten by the Fathers vnderstan∣ding or mynding of himself. Wherevpon we conclude againe, that the essence of the Father is the essence of the Sonne, [that is to say, that looke whatsoeuer the Father is, the Sonne is the same;] so as they differ not but by way of relation: and consequently that they be Coeternall, Coequall, and Coessentiall, [that is to say, of one selfessame euerlasting continuance, of one selfesame state condi∣tion and degree, and of one selfesame substance or being;] which is the thing that we be taught in the Church. This second person for

diuers respects is betokened, by diuers names. He is ordinarily called the Sonne, because he is a Conception of the vnderstanding which is in God, and a perfect resemblance of him. And here wée haue to consider, that according to the diuersities of natures; the maner of bréedings or begettings doe varie also. For euery life (if I may so speake) begetteth or bréedeth a Sonne, issue or ofspring in it selfe afore it send it out; and the excellenter that the life is, the more inward to it is that which procéedeth or is bred thereof. Here∣vpon some haue supposed the Fire to be a liuing wight, because it bréedeth or begetteth another fire like it selfe. But howsoeuer the case stand, like as the Elements are naturally the bacest things in degrée, so hath Fire the bacest maner of bréeding or begetting; as which is not able to doe it but out of it self, and by the applying of some outward matter to him. The Plant conceyueth moysture in it selfe, which springeth foorth into bud, from bud into flower, and from flower into fruite; which fruite being ripe falleth to y^e ground, and there bringeth foorth another Plant. Now, this second Plant liued in the first Plant ere it liued in it selfe; and all liuing wights doe liue, moue and feele in their Dammes bellies, afore they come foorth; which is yet a more inward maner of bréeding and beget∣ting than the other. The sensitiue life conceyueth an imagination which hoordeth vp it selfe in the memorie: but as it procéedeth from the Sences and sensible things; so doth it depart out of it self. The reasonable life hath his conceptions and bréedings yet more in∣ward than all the rest. For it hath his reflexion backe to it selfe; and wée commonly terme the doings or actions thereof by the name of Conceptions or Conceyts, after which maner the lear••ed sort doe call their bookes their Children. But yet there is this more in this matter; namely, that in men this conceyuing procéedeth of imagi∣nation, which is an outward thing vnto it, because nothing can en∣ter into the vnderstanding of man but by the Sences; and moreo∣uer, for that the thing which is mynded or vnderstood, and y^e mynd or vnderstanding it selfe, are not both one in vs. But forasmuch as onely God is altogeter life, and his life is altogether vnderstan∣ding, which is the highest degrée of life; he hath his maner of con∣ceyuing and begetting most inward of all.* 1.123 For, he conceyueth in himself and of himself, and his conceyuing is a begetting, and this begetting abideth still in himselfe, because his vnderstanding can neuer any where méete with any thing but that which he himselfe is. And that is the second person whom wee call the Sonne, and

vnto whom that name doth so much the more properly agrée, be∣cause his resembling of him is more perfect, and his begetting or Sonneship (if I may so terme it) is more inward, than all the brée∣dings and begettings which we commonly see, or than any other that we can imagine. Also we cal him Logos, which some translate Word or Speech, and othersome Reason. Eyther of those signifi∣ca••ious is ordinary to the word Logos, and agréeable to that which is ntended to be signified thereby, so farre foorth as diuine things can be expressed by the spéech of man.* 1.124 When we call him Spéech or Word, it is according to the doctrine of the Philosophers, who haue marked that there is in man a dubble Spéech; the one in the mynd, which they call the inward Spéech, which wee conceyue a∣fore we vtter it; and the other the sounding image thereof, which is vttered by our mouth and is termed the Spéech of the Uoyce; ey∣ther of both the which we perceyue at euery word that wee intend to pronounce: which thing those folke might yet much better ob∣serue, which had neuer learned any Language, because they should not cease to haue those inward Conceyts in themselues [though they could not speake] For the witte or vnderstanding doth by and by conceyue an inwarde Spéech vppon the thing which is offered vnto it,* 1.125 and begetteth or bréedeth that conceyt in our mynde as it were by a suddein flash of Lightning, and afterward our mynd vt∣tereth it more at leysure by the voyce, the which voyce (notwith∣standing) is vnable to represent or expresse y^e inward Spéech per∣fectly: insomuch that wee see many men haue a great number of goodly conceyts in their mynds, which they be not able to expresse; and that in expressing them eyther by worde or by writing, they mislike their owne doings, because they bee farre inferiour to the things which they had conceyued in their mynds. Now, the spéech of the mynd is very Reason it self:* 1.126 and looke what the spéech of the mynd reasoneth and debateth, that doth the voyce vtter, and eyther of them is the image of the next that went afore. For looke what proportion is betwéene the voyce or Spéech of the mouth, and the Spéech of the mynd; the like proportion is betwéene the Spéech of the mynd, and the Spéech of the vnderstāding. The voyce hath néede of ayre, and is diuided into parts, and requireth ••eysure: The Mynd in déede is vndiuidable, but yet hath it néed of tyme to passe frō one cōclusion or reason to another. But as for y^e vnderstāding, it accomplisheth his action or working in lesse than a moment, and with one onely act doth so fill the Reason and mynd, that it is con∣streyned

to make many acts of one. And this diuersitie may euery man marke in himself, notwithstanding that all these acts seeme to be done together like Thunder and Lightning. Now then, the said Conception or Conceyt which Gods vnderstanding hath concey∣ued euerlastingly in himselfe, wee call Speech or Word; which is the perfect image of his vnderstanding, and Gods vnderstanding, is God himself. Also wee call it Reason, because Reason is as ye would say the Daughter, Spéech or worde of the vnderstanding, and we say that by the same Spéech or word, God made al things. For, as the Craftsman maketh his worke by the patterne which he had erst conceyued in his mynde, which patterne is his inward word: so God made the World and all that is therein, by that sayd Spéech of his as by his inward skill or arte. For he being but one, conceyueth all things by conceyuing himselfe. To be short, we call him also the Wisedome of the Father, yea, and euen meerely and simply wisedome. For, Wisedome (euen in man) is nothing els but a hauiour procéeding of diuers Conceyts or inward spéeches, whereby our mynde is perfected in the knowledge of high things. Now, God is the heyghth of all heyghthes, and by the conceyuing of himself he knoweth himself. But yet we must take this withall, that the thing which is a hauiour in vs, is essence in him, [that is to say, that he is the very things themselues which wee obtey••e to haue by meanes,] and that he himselfe is the ground of his owne wisedome, whereas the true wisedome of men, hath not any other ground than God. Now then, can there bee any greater wisedome in God, than to knowe himselfe? And is not that knowledge bred of vnderstanding?

Let vs come to the third person.* 1.127 We haue acknowledged here∣tofore, that in the most single essence of God, there is a workfull power, abilitie, or nature, matched with an vnderstanding, accor∣ding whereuto the sayde vertue or power executeth his actions. Now, in the selfesame essence, should there not also be a Will be∣sides the sayd vnderstanding? If wee consider all the things in the world, we shall finde in them a kynd of Will, tending to the seue∣rall welfare of euery of them: & the more vnderstanding they haue, the more wil also haue they; becasue that the more their welfare is knowne vnto them, the more also is it desired; & the more it is desi∣red, the more also is their will vniforme, and the lesse parted. I o∣mit the sencelesse things, as Plants, Herbes, and Stones, which haue certeine naturall inclinations, sufficiently marked by the fear∣••hing

out of their natures. But yet it cannot bee denyed, but that the Beastes haue a sensitiue appetite to followe the thing which their Sence taketh hold of to be good for them. Men also doe runne with all their harts after the thing which they suppose to bee good for them, whether it bee honor, riches or pleasure. And the more they knowe it or thinke themselues to knowe it, the more doe they yéeld their will vnto it: and the more they hold and possesse therof, the more is their hart settled therevpon. Only their vnderstanding being bewitched by vanitie, is deceytfully driuen to choose the euill for the good; by meanes wherof, the will which ought to be discréete and full of wit and vnderstanding, is forced of necessitie to degene∣rate into fleshly and beastly lust. The Angelles likewise (as say the Philosophers) haue also a will, and much more simply one & more liuely than ours. And as by their vnderstanding they know the ve∣ry good it self, that is to wit God; so haue they their will euer settled on him alone, without turning it aside to any of all the great mul∣titude of obiects wheron we be wont to set our mynds. Now, shall not he himself haue a will, who hath giuen will to al liuing things and imprinted it in them? And he that hath imparted so many be∣nefites to all things, to some mo and to some lesse; hath not he (say I) bestowed those benefites vppon them willingly? And he with the beholding of whom y^e blesseddest Spirits do féede their willes, hath not he the pleasure of contenting himself throughly with him selfe, seeing he knoweth himselfe perfectly? And what els is this pleasure, than will fulfilled, yea euen filled to the full with the true Good which sufficeth to himselfe, which is the onely peculiar thing whereon the very will resteth in déede? Againe, the nature of will is to applye all abilities to their actions. To no purpose haue wée hearing, if wee lift not to heare; to no purpose haue we sight, if wee list not to see; to no purpose haue wee abilitie to doe things, if wee li••t not to doe them. And this appeareth dayly in all our doings, which neuer come to effect, till they be quickened and put foorth by the will. But we see that God hath applyed his power to the do∣ing of many things, yea of things infinite and infinitely diuers. Therefore it followeth that he listed to doe them, and that he listed to make one thing to one ende and another to another, and one of them for another, and finally all for himselfe, and so consequently that he hath a will. And this will (so farre as we be able to discerne it by the effects) is a certeyn abilitie wherby he applyeth his work∣full power, when, where, and how he thinketh good; guyding and

performing it according to his owne mynd, howbeit that the chiefe act thereof is performed within it selfe. Neuerthelesse, this is spo∣ken alwaies after the manner of men. For if we haue much a doe to discerne the difference betwéene the abilities of Will and Under∣standing in our owne Soules, by reason of the linking of them to∣gether: much more reason is it that in this essence of God which is most single, and infinitely more one than ours, we should déeme all these things to be but one in him, notwithstanding that they differ in certeyne respects. God vnderstandeth, but I haue told you, that to be and to vnderstand is all one in him. Also God willeth or li∣steth; but too will and too vnderstand are likewise both one in him: and so all three come into one essence [that is, bee all one thing.] The reason hereof is very euident: namely, that willing or listing of is no more an action that passeth into the outward thing, than Un∣derstanding is; but abideth still in the Willer. For by our listing of a thing, we may perceiue some alteration in our selues; but y^e thing it self that is listed or willed feeleth nothing thereof. Now, I haue proued heretofore, that whatsoeuer is or resteth in God, is his very being; and moreouer, God willeth not any thing but as in respect that he vnderstandeth it; for the knowne good is the ground of his will, and he vnderstandeth not but by his essence, [that is to say, for that he is the very vnderstanding it selfe.] It followeth then, that in God, his Will is his very essence as well as his vnderstan∣ding; insomuch that he is both Power, Understanding, and Will all in one.

But let vs see now what procéedeth of GOD by his Will. I haue sayd afore, that God is mere Action, and moreouer, that he is most single: therfore he is still doing from all eternitie, and so like∣wise is whatsoeuer els we consider in his essence. Now, there we haue found an Understanding, by the Inworking whereof he kno∣weth himself; and also a Will, whereby he cannot but will himself, seeing he knoweth himselfe. And this Understanding, by a certeine Reflexion of it selfe vpon it selfe, hath begotten vs a second person, whom we call the Sonne and the Wisedome of the father. This will then which worketh euerlastingly, hauing likewise none other thing to worke vppon but it selfe, doth also by his working strike backe vpon himselfe, and delight it selfe in the infinite good which it knoweth there, and so sheadeth out it selfe wholly to the louing thereof; and by this action it bringeth vs foorth a third person (if I may so terme it) whom we call Gods Spirit and the holy Ghost,

that is to wit, the mutuall kindnesse and louingnesse of the Father and of the Sonne; of the Father the vnderstander, towards the Sonne conceyued and begotten by his vnderstanding: and of the Sonne backe againe towards the Father, acknowledging all that he hath and all that he is to be of the Father. And this sayd Will is the essence of God himselfe, and consequently eternally actiue, and actiuely eternall. For, in the euerlasting all things are euerla∣sting; and in a mere act, all things are act; and of such can nothing procéede which shall not be like them. Néedes therefore must this Spirit, this Louingnesse, or this goodwill, bee also actually euerla∣sting. Moreouer, the will extendeth as farre as the vnderstanding: for (as I haue sayd afore) will and vnderstanding are both one in God; and vnderstanding doth perfectly comprehend the thing that is vnderstood, namely the thing that is beloued, that is to wit God himselfe. The will then doth by his action (which is loue & liking) extend it selfe as farre as God himselfe; and so the third Person is equall to the second and the first. And yet doth this third Person procéede of the will, and the will is Gods essence, & of that essence can nothing procéede which is not his essence. Therefore he is not onely coeternall and coequall, but also coessentiall. Againe, wee see that in vs, there goeth alwaies some act of the vnderstanding afore the act of our will; for y^e cause why we will things, is that we think wee vnderstand them; and wee desire them for the good which wee perceyue in them; & the loue of a thing cannot be in the louer there∣of, but vppon his knowing of the thing loued; neither is will any thing els than appetite, bred of vnderstanding. The third Person therefore procéedeth from the first, not only by the will, but also by the vnderstanding, and by the knowledge which the vnderstanding bréedeth. And because it procéedeth of two, and not by way of re∣semblance, but by act of Will; we terme him Proceeding and not Begotten; which is in effect the reason of all that is taught vs in the Church concerning that matter. Notwithstanding, whereas wee say that the action of Understanding goeth afore the action of Will; our meaning is not to imagine any going afore or comming after in these persons; but onely to lay foorth this procéeding by the order of Nature, which wee could not haue done so well by the trueth of the matter: as if wee should say, that the Sonne is consi∣dered afore the holy Ghost, in like maner as y^e knowing of a thing goeth afore the desire of it, because that if they could haue had any beginning, the Sonne had bin formost in that case.

As touching names, we call him most cōmonly the holy Ghost. Holy, because there is nothing in God which is not pure and holy; * 1.128 whereby he is discerned from al other Spirits: and Ghost or Spi∣rit, because we commonly call those things Spirits, the beginning of whose mouing is vnknowne to vs;* 1.129 as the Wyndes, whose be∣ginning is vnknowne vnto vs: the breathing of the Heartstrings, which procéedeth from an inward beginning that is hidden from vs; and such other things: and to be short, because that in all things which haue life, the inwarde force procéedeth from some kynde of will by a certeyne Spirit. Now, as for loue, it is nothing els but a certeyne couert forewardnesse or foorthgoing of the will towards the thing that is loued; insomuch that the very benefite which we receyue by his loue, is a secrete and insensible through breathing, which worketh in vs, & yet we cannot well perceyue from whence it commeth. Againe, wee call him also Loue and Charitie, because all the actions of will are in loue and wellyking as in their roote, in like maner as all the doings of Gods Understanding, mée••e alto∣gether in his wisedome. For, whereas wee desire the thing which we want, or be glad of the thing which wee haue; the cause thereof is that we loue it or like well of it. Likewise also, whereas we feare a thing, or lothe it; that commeth of a hatred, which can haue no place in God, whose will nothing is able to withstand. Therefore as we haue God of God (that is to wit, the Sonne of the Father) by the euerlasting inworking of his Understanding; so also haue wee God of God againe (that is to wit, the holy Ghost or loue of them both) by the ioyntworking of the Understanding and Will together. Wherevpon we conclude thrée distinct persons or Inbe∣ings in one essence; not to exclude the singlenesse thereof which it behoueth vs to hold still; but to expresse the diuersitie thereof after a sort, which ought not to bee vnknowne; namely the power of the Father, the wisedome of the Sonne, & the goodnesse of their loue; for whom, by whom, and in whom,* 1.130 it hath pleased the sayd onely one vnspeakable essence to create and to loue all things.

But there is yet more, namely, that as there are thrée Inbeings or Persons* 1.131 in this essence; so also there can bee no mo but thrée: which thing may be made euident by the same reason. Whoso de∣nyeth that there is Understanding and Will in God as wee haue seene afore, must also denye that he hath made any thing, or that he doth any thing: for all the things which wee see here belowe, are marked both with the one and with the other. Likewise, he that

confesseth that all things are in him, (according to their preaching vnto vs) must néedes also confesse the Sonne and the holy Ghost, to bee the wisedome and the loue; for they bee but actions of those two, which cannot be without their action; neither can action bee e∣uerlastingly any where els than in God himself. Now, as we can not imagine God without his actions; so can wee not consider any other than those to abyde in him, nor consequently any other Un∣derbeings that procéede from thence; wherevpon we say also, that a fourth person cannot be admitted. As for example, we say he is the Creator, and we say true; and in so saying wee finde also a relation to the Creatures. But this power of Creating procéedeth from the power which is in the Father, and is not an action that abideth still within him, but passeth directly into the thing created, which in respect of the Creator, is as nothing in comparison of infinite∣nesse, whereof it cannot haue the preheminence. Also we say he is a Sauiour: and that is all one with the other. For his being a Sa∣uiour, is by his Sonne, as we shall see hereafter; and moreouer, it is an action that passeth into the thing saued, and abydeth not in God alone. Therefore it maketh not to the stablishing of a fourth person or inbeing; for then it ought to be Coessentiall. To be short, all Gods operations doe eyther procéede from within him, and a∣byde still in the worker and in their first ground; or els they procéed from without, and passe into the outward effect. That worke or action which procéedeth from within, can bee of none other essence than the thiug from whence it commeth: for in GOD there is no∣thing but essence, and in that esseuce can nothing abyde but the es∣sence it selfe. That which procéedeth from without, is alwaies of a sundrie essence, as are the Creatures and workes of God, which come nothing nere the essence of the Creator. The thing which doth the worke without, is Gods power, howbeit accompanyed with his vnderstanding and will. And the thing that doth the work within, is his vnderstanding and will and nothing els, as wee may discerne in our selues, who are but a very slender image thereof. And like as in beholding a paynted Table, or in reading the verses of a Poet, we imagine not therefore that there was a peculiar and immediate abilitie of paynting or versifying in the mynd or soue∣reyne part of their Soule; but we referre those skilles and al other like, vnto Wit and Will: euen so and much more according to rea∣son, of all the workes and doings which we see done by Gods po∣wer, we cannot gather any other persons or inbeings in him, than

those which procéede immediatly of his Understanding and Will; and alonly those and none other can be Coessentiall in him. Now, Understanding and Will in GOD, are essence; and his essence is merely one and most single. And moreouer, the Word or Spéech conceyueth not another Spéech, but turneth wholly vnto the Fa∣ther; neither doth the Spirit conceyue another loue than the loue of those two; but resteth and reposeth it selfe altogether in them. So then, there can but one onely word or spéech procéede by the vnder∣standing, nor but only one Loue procéede by the Will; neither can any other procéede of that Word and that Loue. And so there re∣mayne vnto vs the onely thrée persons of the Father, the Sonne, and the holy Ghost; by the which two, the Father gouerneth and loueth all things, because he himself alone is all things.

Now, as we haue read in nature that there is but one God, as a thing which we finde written euen in the least creatures:* 1.132 so may we now perceyue the euident footsteps of the chrée inbeings or per∣sons in one e••sence, as a marke of the worker that made them, in some more and in some lesse, according to their dignitie; which yet notwithstanding are such, as we could not well perceine them, vn∣till the doctrine thereof was reuealed vnto vs, no more than we can vnderstand the letters of Cyphering, which wee can neither reade nor decypher, vnlesse we haue some knowledge of y^e matter which they import, from other folkes hands, or by coniecture, or by some other way. Wee finde an Unitie in all things, yea euen in those which haue but only being. For all things are inasmuch as they be one: and whensoeuer they ceasse to bee that one, they consequently ceasse also to be. Againe, we see in them a forme or shape, and that is the marke of that witfull action (that is to say, of the euerlasting Word or Conceyt whereby God made them) which hath bred vs the essentiall forme or shape, and all other maner of formes and shapes. Also we see an inclination or disposition, in some more ap∣parant than in othersome; in some to mount aloft, as in fire; in some to sincke downe towards the Center, as in a Stone; and in all, to hold themselues vnited in their matter & forme. This is the marke of the workfull Will, wherein God hath voutsafed to stoope vnto them; and of the vnion which procéedeth therof, wherein he loueth, vpholdeth, & preserueth all things. But euen in some of the things of this bacest sort, there appeareth not onely a trace, but almost an image thereof. For, the Sunne breedeth or begetteth his owne beames, which the Poets doe call the very sonne of the Sunne:

and from them two proceedeth the light, which imparteth it selfe to all things here beneath; and yet is not the one of them afore the other; for neither is the Sunne afore his beames, nor the Sunne or his beames afore the light, otherwise than in consideration of order and relation, that is to wit, as in respect that the beames are begotten and the light is proceeding; which is an apparant image of the Coeternitie. Likewise in Waters, we haue the head of them in the earth, & the Spring boyling out of it,* 1.133 & the streame which is made of them both and sheadeth it self out farre of from thence. It is but one selfesame continuall and vnseparable essence, which hath neither forenesse nor afternesse, saue only in order and not in tyme, that is to say, according to our considering of it, hauing re∣spect to causes, and not according to trueth. For, the Welhead is not a head, but in respect of the Spring; nor the Spring a Spring, but in respect of the Welhead; nor the Streame a Streame, but in respect of them both; and so all three be but one Water, and cannot almost be considered one without another, howbeit that the one is not the other. It is an expresse mark of the originall relations and perso••s Coessentiall in the only one essence of God. The like is to bee sayd of Fire, which ingendreth fire, and hath in it both heate and brightnesse vnseparable. Also there are other examples to bee found of such as list to seeke them out. In Hearbes and Plants there is a roote, which yeeldeth a slippe, stocke or ympe, and the same ympe groweth afterward into a Tree. It cannot well be na∣med or deemed to be a roote, but that therewith it hath also ingen∣dred an ympe or stocke; for in that respect is it called a roote, and so is the one as soone as the other. Also there is a sappe which passeth from the one to the other, ioyning, knitting, and vniting them to∣gether by one common life, without the which life, neither the roote should bee a roote, nor the slip a slip, and so in effect they bee altoge∣ther, the one as soone as the other. Moreouer, among all liuing wights, euery of them ingendreth after his owne kind and forme; of whom one is an ingendrer and another is ingendred; among men, a father and a sonne; and by and by through knowledge, there procéedeth a naturall loue and affection from the one to the other, which knitteth and linketh them together. All these are traces, foot∣steps, and images, (howbeit with the grossest) of that high miste∣rie; and also I haue told you afore, that no effect doth fully resemble his cause, and much lesse that cause which in all respects is most in∣finite.

Notwithstanding, in mans Soule, (when I say Soule, I meane there the highest power thereof) the image and likenesse of the Trinitie is yet much more lyuely and more expresse. For first there is in it a Nature & abilitie of working, and as it were a mere act, whereby it liueth and giueth lyfe, and is it selfe in continuall working. The Latins call it Mens [that is to say Mynd] & we call it also the reasonable Soule, the which wee may liken to the Fa∣ther. This Mynd bréedeth an vnderstanding or Wit, by the which we vnderstand and discerne, not onely other things, but also our selues; and againe by vnderstanding we come to will, through the which we loue other things, and most of them for our owne sakes. These thrée powers are very distinct in vs: for wee worke not al∣wayes by Wit, not alwayes by Will, and yet our mynd worketh continually. Moreouer, oftentymes wee will the thing which wee vnderstand not, and wee vnderstand the thing which wee will not. And therefore to will and to vnderstand are not both one. Neuer∣thelesse this Working, Understanding and Willing, are not thrée lyues or thrée Soules in vs, but one lyfe and Soule, and that so streitly vnited in once essence, that euen in the selfsame instant that our mind doth a thing, it also vnderstaudeth the reason why it wil∣leth it or willeth it not, in which worke both our inworking power and also our wit and our will doe concurre all together. Yet not∣withstanding, this image is farre from the thing it selfe. For these thrée powers are seuerall in the essence of our Soule; and howe néerly so euer they be vnited together, yet is not the one the other; But in God who is most singly one, Being is Understanding, and vnderstanding is will, as I haue said afore. And againe, by Gods vnderstanding and by his will there procéede from hym two Inbe∣ings, by reasons whereof hee myndeth and loueth himselfe, and in himselfe all things. As for our Soule there can no such thing pro∣céede from it by the wit or the will, because although they be both in it, yet they take their grounds from without themselues, inso∣much that it can neither vnderstand nor loue, vnlesse the abilities thereof be set aworking by some outward thing. And which more is, the more it vnderstandeth it selfe, the more doth it streine it selfe to vnderstand and knowe another than it selfe: and the more it lo∣ueth it selfe through true knowledge of it selfe, the more dooth it séeke contentment by louing another, which other it cannot loue but by hating it selfe; that is to wit, it streyneth it selfe too behold and loue God, and to knowe and loue it selfe but only for his sake,

to whome alonly it belongeth to vnderstand all things in himselfe, and to loue all things of himselfe. But now it is high time hence∣foorth to sée what antiquitie will say to vs concerning this matter, the which it wilbe better for vs to reserue to the next Chapter fol∣lowing. And as touching the questions that may bee made by the curious sort vppon this poynt, we answere them at one word; Let them tell vs how they themselues are bred and begotten, and then let them aske vs of the begetting of the Sonne of God: Let them tell vs the nature of the spirit that beateth in their Pulses; and thē let them bee inquisitiue at our hands for the procéeding of the holy Ghost. And if they must be fayne to kéepe silence in so comon mat∣ters, which they dayly sée and féele in themselues; let them giue vs leaue to be ignorant in many things, which are such (as sayth Em∣pedocles) as no eye hath séene, nor eare heard, nor wit of man can conceyue.

The vj. Chapter.

That the Philosophie of old tyme consenteth to this doc∣trine of the Trinitie.

SUrely (as I haue sayd afore) this doctrine is not bred of mans braine, though it be paynted there after some sort; but was verely inspyred into our forefathers from aboue, who (as saith Plato* 1.134) were better than we, and nerer also vn∣to God. And in good sooth we see an infallible argument thereof, in that the elder the world groweth, the more do mens doctrines grow to perfection & know∣ledge. But contrarywise, the further that this hath gone from the former ages, the more hath it bin found darkened,* 1.135 & hath nowhere bin so lightsome as at the welspring thereof; vntill that by the birth of the true daysonne in deede, it receyued greater light than euer it had afore. And therefore when Plato, yea and Aristotle* 1.136 himselfe speake of the Godhead, of the Creation of the World, and of other like Misteries; they be fayne to alledge the auncient report, and the record of antiquitie descended from hand to hand, as y^e surest staffe to stand by in matters that excéede the capacitie of man. Which

thing they expresse ordinarily by these spéeches, According to the old Sawe,* 1.137 as the auncientest reports goe, As our forefathers and Elde••s say, and such like. Among these men of the auncientest sort, the first that wee méete with is Zoroastres, whom Plutarke reporteth to haue liued certeyne thousands of yeres afore y^e warres of Troy. Neuerthelesse, by report of the best Authors, he descended of Cham, and was vanquished by Nynus King of the Assyrians. Of him came the Magies, that is to say the Wisemen of Chaldey, and from them sprung vp the like in Persia, who had in their custo∣die the Registers of the Kings of those daies, & wrate their déeds, and had the ordering of matters perteining to Religion. And now marke what we find in their sayings gathered by men of old time, which are commonly called Logia, that is to say Oracles. The fa∣ther (sayth Zoroaftres) did perfect all things, and gaue them to a second Mynd whom all mankind taketh for the first. And Pletho Gemistus* 1.138 a Platonist sayth, that by this second Mynd, he meaneth a second God which succéedeth the Father, and hath his begetting of the Father; and that men haue taken him for the first, because God created the World by him, howbeit that the Fa∣ther created the myndly shapes, and gaue the gouernment of them to this second Mynd.* 1.139 Ye see then here is a second person begotten of the Father. Proclus rehearseth the same, saying; This Mynd hauing alone taken the flower of Vnderstāding from the po∣wer of the Father, possesseth the vnderstanding and power to deale foorth his Fathers vnderstanding or mynd to all Ori∣ginalles and all Beginnings of things. Then hath he his being and his vnderstanding from the Father, and all other things haue them from him. But the things which are found in his Commen∣tarie vpon the Parmenides of Plato are wonderfull.

For the better yéelding of the sence whereof,* 1.140 I will translate it into Prose, notwithstanding y^t it be written in verse in the Gréeke. The Mynd of the Father (sayth he) being settled by determi∣nate purpose, did shed foorth shapes of all sorts; which issued all from one selfesame fountayne, because the deuise and end were both of the Father. But yet were they diuided by a Fyre of vnderstanding, and (as it were by destinie) distributed into other vnderstandings. For afore the making of this sundry-shaped world, God had conceyued an incorruptible patterne thereof, as a world subiect only to mynd and vnderstanding: In the mould whereof this present World being stamped, be∣came

full of al those shapes, of the which there is but one on∣ly gracious Fountaine.

And againe in another place he sayth as followeth.

That is to say, The loue of God being a fyrie bond, issued first from his vnderstanding, and clothed it selfe with fire to temper the conueyances of the watersprings, by spreading his heate vpon the same. These are their accustomed obscurities; wherein (notwithstanding) it is clerely enough vttered, that there is a Father, a Sonne, and a Loue that linketh them together: and moreouer, that the sayd begotten Mynd or Understanding is he by whom God framed the World, and that from him procéedeth the diuine Loue, as I haue sayd heretofore. In another place they say that the sayd Fatherly Mynd hath sowed and planted in our Soules, a certeyne resemblance of the sayd begotten vnderstan∣ding, and that our willes be not acceptable vnto him, vntill wée a∣wake out of forgetfulnesse, and bethinke our selues againe of the ‖ 1.141 pure fatherly marke which is in vs. And againe, that the same Understanding, being of* 1.142 power to beget or bréede of it selfe, did (by considering) cast a fyrie bond of Loue vpon all things, wherby they be continued for euer. But it is enough for vs that in the say∣ings afore alleadged, wee haue a briefe Summe of the diuinitie of the Magies, who held thrée beginnings, whom (as wee reade in o∣ther places) they called Oromases, Mitris, and Ariminis, [that is to say] God, Mynd, and Soule. And surely wee should wonder at them much more, if we had their whole bookes, as we haue but pée∣ces of them remayning. Now, the Magies were first in Chaldye, and we reade in Moyses how highly Balaam was estéemed, in that he was thought able to blesse Nations and Armies. And these Chaldies are the same of whom the Oracle of Apollo answered, That only they and the Hebrewes had wisedome parted betwixt them.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. All wisedome certesse parted is betweene The Chaldies and the Hebrewes as is seene.

Mercurius Trismegistus* 1.143 (as we haue seene in the third Chap∣ter) acknowledged but only one God, who cannot well bee named but by two names, to wit, Good, and Father. And because the same God is indewed with vnderstanding, sometymes he calleth him 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, howbeit that most commonly he makes a differece be∣twéene the Father and the Understanding which he calleth Mynd

likewise. Which thing appeareth in this saying of his, I am Poe∣mander,* 1.144 the Feeder of Men, & the vnderstanding of the Beer which is of himself. But behold here records as cléere as can bée. God (sayth he) who is also Mynd, and Life, and Light, & Male-f••male; begate or bred Logon the Speech or Word, which is another Mynd, and the workmayster of all things; & with that Speech, another which is the fyrie God and the Spirite of the Godhead.* 1.145 Lo here a Mynd begottē of a Mynd, Understanding of Understanding, and Light of Light; and besides that, moreouer a Spirit. And againe, This Speech that proceedeth from GOD being altogether perfect, and fruitfull, and Workmistresse of all things, lighteth vpon the water and maketh it fruitfull. It is the same thing that is spoken of in Moyses, where God sayth, And the waters immediatly brought foorth. To be short, vnto this holy spéech (as he termeth it) he attributeth the begetting, in∣gendring & spreading foorth of al things from ofspring to ofspring, as is to be seene.* 1.146 But here is yet more: I thy God (sayth God) am Light and Mynd, of more antiquitie than the nature of moy∣sture that is issued frō the shadow. And this lightsome Speech which proceedeth from the mynd, is the Sonne of God. That which heareth and seeth in thee, is the word of the Lord; and the Mynd is God the Father;* 1.147 these differ not one from ano∣ther; and as for their vnion, it is the vnion of life, &c. And a∣gaine: This Speech being the workman of God the Lord of the whole World, hath chiefe power next him, and is vncrea∣ted, infinite, proceeding from him, the Commaunder of all things which he made, the perfect & naturall firstborne Sonne of the most perfect. To be short, he calleth him y^e myndly spéech, euerlasting, vnchaungeable, vncorruptible, vnincreasing, vndecrea∣sing, alonly like him, and firstbeknowne after God; and moreouer his onely Sonne, his welbeloued Sonne, the Sonne of the most holy, whose name 〈◊〉〈◊〉 be named by mouth of man. And is not this as much as to call him Coessentiall, Coeternal, and the Crea∣tor of all things?* 1.148 And what more can we say thereof?

Of the third parson he speaketh more dackly. Al kind of things in this World (saith he) are quickened by a Spirit; One Spirit filleth all things; the World nourisheth the bodies, and the Spirit the Soules; and this Spirit as a toole or instrument, is subiect to the will of God. But here is yet somewhat more. All things (saith he) haue neede of this Spirit; it beareth them vp,

it nourisheth them, it quickeneth them, according to euery of their capacities: it proceedeth from a holy fountaine, and is the mainteyner of all liuing things and of all Spirits. Here yee sée the reason why we call him the holy Ghoste, namely, because he procéedeth from the fountayne which is the very holynesse it selfe. And least we should thinke him to be a Creature,* 1.149 There was (saith he) an infinite shadowe in the Deepe, whereon was the water, and a fine vnderstanding Spirit was in that confuzed masse through the power of God. From thēce there florished a cer∣teine holy brightnesse, which out of the Sand and the moyst nature brought foorth the Elements and all things els. Also the Gods themselues which dwell in the Starres, tooke their place by the direction & appoyntment of this Spirit of God. Thus then hee was present at the creation of things; and it is the same spirit whereof it is sayd in the Byble,* 1.150 That the spirit of the Lord houered vpon the outside of the déepe. But in some places he matcheth all thrée persons togither. O lyfe (sayth he) saue that life which is in mee.* 1.151 O light and God the Spirit inlighten mee wholy. O worker which bearest thy Spirit about, let thy word gouerne mee. Lord, thou art the only one God. Againe,* 1.152 there was (sayth he) a light of vnderstanding, afore the light of vn∣derstanding, and there was euer a mind of the lightfull Mind, and besides those, there was not any thing els than the vnion of them by one Spirit vpholding all things: without which there is neither God nor Angel, nor other Substance: For hee is Lord, Father, and God of all, and in him and vnder him are al things. And hauing said so (sayth Suydas* 1.153) he addeth this praier. I adiure thee ô Heauen the wise woorke of the great God; I adiure thee ô voyce which God vttered first when he founded the world; I adiure thee by the onely begotten Speeche, and by the Father who conteyneth all things, &c. There is no man but he would woonder to sée in this author the very woords of S. Iohn: and yet notwithstanding his bookes were translated by the Platonists long tyme afore the cōming of our Lord Iesus Christ. And it is no maruayle though we find sayings of his in diuers pla∣ces which are not written in his Poemander, considering that hee wrote sixe and thirtie thousand, fiue hundred, and fiue and twentie Uolumes, that is to say Rolles of Paper, as Iamblichus* 1.154 repor∣teth. And it is said that this Trismegistus otherwise called Theut, is the same that taught the AEgiptians to reade, and which inuen∣ted

them Geometrie and Astronomie, which deuided AEgipt into partes, which left his forewarning against ouerflowings written in two Pillers,* 1.155 (which Proclus reporteth to haue beene standing still in his tyme;) and to be short, which had bene reputed and ho∣nored as a God among them. And it may be, that the treble outcry which the AEgiptians made in calling vppon the first Beginner, whome they tearmed the darkenesse beyond all knowledge, like too the Ensoph of the Hebrewes,* 1.156 and the Night of the Orpheus, was still remayning vnto them, of his diuinitie. Thus haue you séene how Zoroastres and Mercurie haue aunswered vnto vs, the one for the Persians and Chaldeans, and the other for the AEgiptians. For in matters of Wisdome, the wise ought to be beléeued for the whole Nation.

Now let vs come to the Greekes.* 1.157 Orpheus* 1.158 which is the aun∣cientest of them all, as soone as he beginneth to speake of these mi∣steries, doth first and formost shut all Heathenish folke out of the doores, and then sayth thus:* 1.159 Let thine eye be vpon the word of God, and start not away from it, for that is it that made the world, and is immortall, and (according to the old saying) is perfect of it selfe, and the perfecter of all things, and it cannot be seene but with the mynd. And afterward, I adiure thee Ô Heauen (sayth he) the wyse woorke of the great God, I adiure thee thou voyce of the father which he spake first, and so forth. For this (as appeareth afore) was a praier which he had learned of Mercurie; from whom also procéeded the common misterie of the Poets, That Pallas was bred of Iupiters brayne. The same man sayth that the first Moother of things was wisdome, and afterward delightfull loue.* 1.160 And in his Argonawte hee calleth this loue, most auncient, most perfect in it selfe, and the bringer foorth and disposer of all things.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.

Wherevpon Pherecydes* 1.161 also sayth, That God intending too make the worlde, chaunged himselfe into loue. And Iamblichus sayth that Pythagoras had the Philosophie of Orpheus alwayes before his eyes;* 1.162 and therefore it is not for vs to woonder, though he attributed the creation of al things to Wisdome, & (as Proclus reporteth) commended three Gods togither in one, as Plato doth. Howsoeuer the case stand, Aristotle* 1.163 sayeth, that they fathered all their perfection vpon thrée. And Parmenides did set downe Loue

as a first beginner; insomuch that in disputing in Plato,* 1.164 he leaueth vs there an euident marke of the thrée Inbeeings or Persones as Plotine noteth; but we shall see it layd foorth more playnly hereaf∣ter by Numenius the Pythagorist. Zeno the father of the Stolks,* 1.165 acknowledged the word to be God, and also the Spirit of Iupiter. And Alcinous reporteth that Socrates and Plato taught that God is a mynde, and that in the sauie there is a certaine 〈◊〉〈◊〉, which Inshape as in respect of God, is the knowledge which God hath of himselfe; and in respect of the worlde, is the Patterne or Mauld thereof; and in respect of it selfe, is very essence.* 1.166 This in fewe words centeyneth much matter, that is to wit, the one essence which God begetteth by the con••idering or knowing of himselfe, according to the patterne whereof he hath buylded the world. But yet Plato himselfe speaketh more playnly in his Epinomis. Euery Starre (sayth he) keepeth his course according to the order which (ho logos) the Word hath set, which word he calleth Most diuine.* 1.167 In his booke of Commonweale hee calleth him the begot∣ten Sonne of the Good, most lyke vnto him 〈◊〉〈◊〉 all things,* 1.168 y^e Good (sayth he) being as the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 that shineth in the skye; and the begotten Sonne beeing as the power of the Sunne whereby we see [that is to say, as y^e light.] Also in his Epistle to Hermius, Erastus, and Coriscus, hee chargeth them with an othe to reade it often,* 1.169 and at the least, two of them togither, saying: Call vppon God the Prince of al things, that are and shalbe, and the Lord the Father of that Prince and of that Cause, of whome if wee seeke the knowledge aright,* 1.170 we haue as much s••ill as can bee giuen to blessed men. Then is there a Lorde and Cause of all things, and moreouer a father of the same Lorde. But anto King Dennis who had asked of him the nature of God, he setteth down al the thrée parsons. The nature of the first (saith he) is to be spo∣ken of in Riddlewise, to the intent that if any mischaunce be∣fall the Letter by Sea or by Land, the reading thereof may be as good as no reading at all. Thus then stands the case. All things are at commaundement of the King of the whole world, and all things are for his sake, and he is the cause of the beautie that is in them; And about the second are the secōd things, and about the third are the third, and so foorth. Now these (as he himselfe sayth) are Riddies to Dennis the Tyrant vn∣to whome he wrote, and my e••pounding of them of the three I••∣béeings or Persones in the Godhead, is by the consent of all the

Platonists, who haue made long Commentaries vppon those woords, agréeing all in this poynt, that by these three Kings hee meaneth the Good, the vnderstanding, and the Soule of the World. And Origene* 1.171 against Celsus alledgeth certayne other places of Plato to the same purpose; the which I leaue, for auoy∣ding of tediousnes. But this doctrine which beeing reuealed from aboue, came from hand to hand vnto Aristotle, (who liued about thrée hundred yeres afore the comming of Christ (séemeth to haue decayed in him; who intending to ouerthrowe al the Philosophers that went afore him, corrupted their doctrine diuers wayes. And therewithall he gaue him self more to the seeking and searching of Naturall things, than to the mynding of the Author of them. Yet notwithstanding,* 1.172 he fathereth the cause of all things vppon a cer∣tayne Understanding,* 1.173 which he calleth Noun, y^t is to say Mynde,* 1.174 acknowledging the same to bee infinite in God; and also vppon a Frée will whereby he disposeth all things; wherevppon in the last Chapter I coucluded a second and a third persone. Insomuch that in a certayne place he sayeth playnly, that God is to be honored ac∣cording to the nomber of thrée, and that the same is after a sort the Lawe of Nature.

Now, for asmuch as this doctrine is not bred of mans brayne; if it bee demaunded whence all the Philosophers tooke it; wee shall finde that the Greekes had it from out of AEgipt. Orpheus wit∣nesseth in his Argonawts, that to seeke the Misteries (that is to say the Religion) of the AEgiptians, he went as farre as Mem∣phis, visiting all the Cities vpon the Riuer Nyle.

Through out the land of AEgipt I haue gone* 1.175 To Memphis and the Cities euerychone That worship Apis or be seated by The Riuer Nyle whose streame doth swell so hy.

Also Pythagoras visited the AEgiptians, Arabians and Chal∣deans, yea, and went into Iewry also, and dwelt a long tyme at Mount Carmel (as Strabo sayth:* 1.176) insomuch that the Priestes of that Countrey shewed Strabo still the iourneyes and walkes of him there.* 1.177 Now, in AEgipt he was the Disciple of one Sonchedie the chiefe Prophet of the AEgiptians, and of one Nazarie an Assy∣rian (as Alexander reporteth in his booke of Pythagorasis dis∣courses) whom some (miscounting the tyme) thought to bee Eze∣chiel. And Hermippus* 1.178 a Pythagorist writeth that Pythagoras learned many things out of the lawe of Moyses. Also the sayd AE∣giptian

Priest vpbrayded Solon, that the Greekes were Babes, and knewe nothing of Antiquitie.* 1.179 And Solon (as sayth Proclus* 1.180) was Disciple in Says a Citie of AEgipt, to one Patanit, or (as Plu∣tarke* 1.181 sayth) to one Sonchis; in Heliople, to one Oeclapie; and in Sebenitie, to one Etimon. Plato was the Disciple of one Sechnu∣phis of Heliople in AEgipt; and Eudoxus the Guidian was the Disciple of one Conuphis; all which Maysterteachers issewed out of the Schoole of the great Trismegistus aforenamed.* 1.182 To be short, Plato confesseth in many places, that knowledge came to the Greekes by those whom they commonly called the barbarus peo∣ple. As touching Zoroastres and Trismegistus,* 1.183 the one was an Hebrewe, and the other, an AEgiptian. And at the same tyme the Hebrewes were conuersant with the AEgiptians, as is to be séene euen in the Heathen Authors. Whereby it appeareth that the ori∣ginall fountayne of this doctrine was to bee found among them; which is the thing that wee haue to proue as now. I meane not to gather hether a great sort of Texts of the Byble, wherein mention is made as well of the second person as of the third, of which sort are these,* 1.184 Thou art my Sonne,* 1.185 this day haue I begotten thee.* 1.186 The Lord (sayth Wisedome) possessed me in the beginning of his wayes; afore the depths was I conceyued. &c. Also concer∣ning the holy Ghost,* 1.187 The Spirit of the Lord walked vpon the waters. The Spirit of Wisedome is gentle: And it is an ordinary spéech among the Prophetes to say,* 1.188 The Spirit of the Lord was vpon me. And in this next saying are two of them together, or ra∣ther all three.* 1.189 The Heauens were spred out by the word of the Lord, and all the power of them by the Spirit of his mouth. For they be so alledged and expounded in infinite bookes, howbeit that the Iewes at this day do labour as much as they can, to turne them to another sence.

But let vs sée what their owne Doctors haue left vs in expresse words,* 1.190 (for y^e most part) culled by themselues out of writtē bookes, afore that y^e cōming of our Lord Iesus Christ had made y^t docttrine suspected. In their Zohar which is one of their Bookes of greatest authoritie, Rabbi Simeon, the sonne of Iohai, citeth Rabbi Ibba expoūding this text of Deuteronomie, Hearken ô Israel, The E∣uerlasting our God is one God. The Hebrewe standeth thus, Iehouah Echad Iehouah Eloh enu. By y^e first Iehouah which is y^e pe∣culiar name of God not to bée communicated to any other, Rabbi Ibba saith he meaneth the Father the Prince of al. By Eloh enu

that is to say our God, he meaneth the Sonne the Fountaine of all knowledge. And by the second Iehouah he meaneth the holy Ghost proceeding from them both, who is the measurer of the voyce. And he calleth him One, because he is vndiuidable; and this Secret (saith he) shall not be reuealed afore the com∣ming of the Messias. The same Rabbi Simeon* 1.191 expoūding these words of Esay, Holy, Holy, Holy Lord God of Hostes; sayth, Holy is the Father, Holy is the Sonne, & Holy also is the holy Ghost. In so much that this Author who is so misticall among them, doth in other places call them the Three Mirrours, Lights, and Souerein fathers, which haue neither beginning nor end, and are the name and substaunce to the Roote of all Rootes. And Rabbi Ionathas in many Copies of his Chaldey Para∣phrase, sayth the same. And therefore no maruell though the Thal∣mudists of olde tyme commaunded men to say that Uerse twise a day, and that some obserue it still at this day. Upon these words of the 50. Psalme,* 1.192 El elohim Iehouah dibber, that is to say, The Lord of Lords the Euerlasting hath spoken: The ordinary Commen∣tarie sayth also, that by the sayd repetition the Prophet meaneth the thrée Middoth Properties wherby God created the world. Ac∣cording whereunto Rabbi Moyses Hadarsan* 1.193 sayeth that hee created by his word; And Rabbi Simeon sayeth he created by the breath of his mouth. And this saying of y^e Preacher, That a thrée∣fold Corde is not so soone broken, is expounded by the same glose, (I examine not whether filthy or no) that the inisterie of the Tri∣nitie in the one God is not easie to bee expressed. Nowe these thrée Properties, (which the Hebrewes call Panim, the Greekes 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and we & the Latins call Persons) are betokened by di∣uers names among the men of old tyme, but yet they iumpe all in one, according as they vnderstoode them, some more clearely than other some.* 1.194 Some name them the Beginning, the Wisdome, & the Feare of Loue of God: and they say that this Wisedome is Meensoph, as the Cabalists tearme it, that is to saye, of the infinite and most inward vnderstanding of God, who beholdeth hymselfe in himself, for so doe they expound it. Which is the selfesame thing that I spake of in the former Chapter, namely that God beget∣teth his Sonne or Wisdome by his mynding of himselfe. Other∣some call him Spirit, Word, and Voyce: as Rabbi Azariell* 1.195 doth in these words following. The Spirit bringeth foorth the Word and the Voyce, but not by opening the Lippes, or by speeche

of the tongue, or by breathing after the maner of man; And these three be one Spirit, to wit one God, as we reade (sayeth he) in the booke of the creating of man in these termes:* 1.196 One Spirit rightly liuing, blessed bee hee and his name, who liueth for euer and euer, Spirit, Word, and Voyce, that is to say, One holy Ghost and two Spirits of that Spirit. Now this booke of the Creation which he alledgeth, is one Rabbi Abrahams a very auncient Cabalist; Neuerthelesse it is of so great authoritie amōg them, that they father it euen vpon the Patriarke Abraham him∣selfe. And that which he sayth agreeth wholy to that which we say; for the mynd conceyueth the inward spéech, and of the mynd and of breath procéedeth the voyce. These three (sayth Rabbi Hamay* 1.197) beeing one, haue such a proportionable respect one towards another, as that the one, the Vniter, and the thing Vnited are but one poynt, to wit, the Lord of the whole world. Rabbi Isaac* 1.198 vppon the booke of the Creation maketh three nomberings, (which he termeth the Loftie one) in the Ensoph, that is to say, in the Infinite, that is to wit Garlond, Wisdom, and vnderstan∣ding. And to betoken them, Rabby Assee* 1.199 sayth that the custome was to marke them in all ages after this maner with three Iods Iehouah: which is as much to say as the Beeër, or He that is. To be short, what diuersitie soeuer there is in y^e names, they al agree in the thrée Inbéeings or Persons. And it is no maruell though they could not so well expresse them as we can now. Rabbi Ioseph* 1.200 the Castilian, hauing learned it out of the auncientest writers, sayeth thus: The light of the Soule of the Messias, is the liuing God; and the liuing God is the fountaine of the liuing waters; and the Soule of the Messias is the Riuer or Streame of lyse. Aud in another place, None but the Messias (sayth he) knoweth God fully, because he is the light of God and the light of the Gen∣tiles, and therefore he knoweth God, and God is knowen by him. Now when as they say that he knoweth GOD fully, they graunt him to be God; for who can comprehend God but GOD himselfe? And it is the selfesame thing which I spake of when I sayd light of light, and when in comparing the Sonne to the Fa∣ther, I lykened him as a streame to the fountaine, and the Sunne beames to the Sunne. Also we shall see in place conuenient, that by the Soule of the Messias, they meant The Word: and it is a wonderfull thing that all the names of God in Hebrewe (sauing onely the name of his Essence or single béeing) haue the plurall ter∣mination,

notwithstanding that they be ioyned with a verbe of the singular nomber, (whereof the auncient Iewes doe yéeld the same reason that we doe:) and that a great sort of the Texts of the olde Testament which we alledge for the proofe of the Trinitie, are ex∣pounded by them in the selfesame sence, howbeit that the Talum∣dists since the comming of our Lorde Iesus Christ, haue taken great payne to wrest them to another meaning.

Rabbi Iudas Nagid whom they commonly called the Sainct and Prophet, speaketh most plainly of all. Wherevpon it is to bée vnderstood,* 1.201 that men were forbidden to vtter the vncommunicable name of God, (that is to wit Iehoua,) saue only in the daies of at∣tonementmaking; and in sted thereof they were commaunded to vse the name of Twelue letters, for the other afore mētioned hath but fower. And beeing asked what the name of Twelue letters was, he answered that it was Father, Sonne, and holy Ghost. Also being demaunded what the name of Two and fortie letters was; he answered, The Father is God, the Sonne is God, and the holy Ghost is God, three in one, and one in three.* 1.202 Now then, it was a doctrine receiued from hand to hand in the Schooles of the Iewes, as wee see by the long continuance thereof in the suc∣cession of their Cabale. And therefore the contention of the Iewes and of the Rabbynes was not (to speake properly) in withstan∣ding the doctrine of the thrée Persons in the Essence of God; but in the applying thereof, namely to the incarnation of the Word, which in their eye was very farre vnbeseeming the Maiestie of God.

Let vs goe to Philo the Iew who wrate in Greeke, and we shall finde him like in all poynts from leafe to leafe. God (sayth he) is the souereine begetter, and next to him, is the Word of God. Also,* 1.203 There are two Firsts; the one is Gods word, & the other is God who is afore the Word; and the same Word is the be∣ginning and the ende 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 of his good pleasure, in∣tent, or will. And in another place, Like as a Citie (saith he) wher∣of the platforme is yet but set doune in the mynd of the Buil∣der, hath no place elswhere than in the Builder: So this world had not any being elswhere than in the Word of God which ordeyned all things. For what other place could conteyne the operations of God, yea or euen the simplest of his concei∣ued patternes? Therefore to speake plainly, The World in vnderstanding, is the Word or Conceyt of God that made it.

And this is not the opinion of me onely, but also of Moyses himselfe. And to conclude, he calleth him the Patterne of all Pat∣ternes, and the Mould wherein all things were cast. And in an other place, This World (sayth he) is Gods yonger Sonne; but as for the elder Sonne, he cannot bee comprehended but in vn∣derstanding. For he it is who by prerogatiue of eldership a∣bydeth with the Father. Now, this is word for word the same thing that S. Iohn sayth, And the Word was with God. And againe, The Word is the place, the Temple, and the dwelling house of God, because the Word is the onely thing that can conteyne him. And that is the thing which I sayd, namely, that GOD comprehending himselfe by his vnderstanding, begate the Sonne or the Word equall to himselfe, because he conceyueth not any thing lesse than himselfe. And to shewe the greatnesse of this Word, he could scarce tell what names to giue it.* 1.204 He calleth it the Booke wherein the essences of all things that are in y^e whole world are written and printed; the perfect Patterne of the World; the Daysonne, that is to be seene but only of the Mynd; the Prince of the Angelles; the Firstborne of God; the Shepheard of his flocke; the chiefe Hyghpriest of the World; the Manna of mens Soules; the Wisedome of God; the perfect Image of the Hyghest; and the Organe or Iustrument whereby God (being moued thereto of his owne goodnesse) created the World. And to be short, he calleth him the Firstbeginner, Lightfulnesse, or altogether light, God, and the Béeer that is of himself. All these are such things as more cannot be attributed to God himselfe:* 1.205 and he could not haue sayd more ex∣pressely, that the Word is Coeternall and Coessentiall with the Father, that is to say, of one selfesame substaunce and of one selfe∣same euerlastingnesse with the Father. Neuerthelesse, he addeth yet further, That this Worde hath in it the se••des of all things; That he hath distributed to euery of them their seuerall natures; and that he is the inuincible bond of the whole world & of al things therein. So then, he is (if I may so terme him) the materiall, effi∣cient, and formall cause of all things.* 1.206 And vnto whom can that bée attributed but vnto God? Againe, There are (saith he) Two Spee∣ches or words; the one being as an Originall deede, is aboue vs; and the other being as an Exemplification or Copy ther∣of, is within vs. And Moyses (sayth he) calleth the same the I∣mage of God; and this other which is our vnderstanding, he calleth a later Copy thereof. And the sayd first Speech (sayeth

he in his booke of the World) is the expresse print or stampe of God,* 1.207 and euerlasting as God him selfe is. And what more sayth S. Iohn, or the Apostle to the Hebrewes? And in all those pla∣ces, (which are worthie to be read throughout,) he vseth S. Iohns own terme (namely Logos) to signifie the sayd Spéech, or Word.

Of the holy Ghost hee speaketh more darkly, because the He∣brewes (as we shal see hereafter) amed chiefly at the Word or se∣cond Person. But it is enough for vs to haue séene, that this foun∣tayne abode sufficiently cléere among the Hebrewes, till the com∣ming of Christ (for Philo liued vnder the Emperours Tiberius and Caligula) though the streames thereof were as good as dryed vp among the Gentiles; verely because the Messias was to bee borne among the Hebrewes, of the beléefe in whom, this doctrine was to be the groundworke. For as soone as Christ was come into the World, it tooke light of him againe, as at the day sunne which inlighteneth not onely the halfe compasse where on he shineth, but also euen a part of that which seeth him not. For this doctrine was not only receyued in the Church, but also imbraced of all the great Philosophers that came after, notwithstanding that in all other things, they were deadly enemies to the Christians.

Numenius, the excellentest of all the Pythagorians,* 1.208 (of whom Porphyrie reporteth Plotinus to haue made so great account, that he wrate a hundred bookes of Commentaries vpon him) saith these wordes. He that will knowe the first and second GOD, must well distinguish, and aboue all things he must well settle his mynd; and then hauing called vpon GOD, he may open the treasure of his thoughts. And therfore let vs begin thus. God (I meane the first who is in himself,) is single, throughout cō∣pacted, and one in himself, and in no part diuidable. Also the second and third God is one: but yet you must consider, that the First is the father of him that is the worker of all things. [Now ye must vnderstand,* 1.209 that] whereas wee say, the Frst, Se∣cond, & Third Person; it is their maner to say, the First, Second, and Third God, which thing you must marke here at once for all the residue following. And whereas he sayth that the first of them is the Father, and that he is single, and that they bee but one; it is not to bee doubted but that he maketh them all one Essence, so as the second holdeth of the first, as the Light holdeth of the Sunne. Againe, The first God (sayth he) is free from all worke, but the second is the maker which commaundeth Heauen: and ther∣fore

are there two lyues, the one from the first, and the other from the second; the one occupyed about things subiect to vnderstanding, and the other about things subiect both to vnderstanding & sence. And moreouer, by reason of the mo∣uing which goeth afore in the second, there is also a sending which goeth afore in the first; and so there is a certeyne ioynt-mouing from whence the healthfull order of the World is spred foorth vniuersally.* 1.210 Now, whereas he speaketh of mouing, it is after the maner of the Platonists, who (metaphorically) doe meane, that to be vnderstood or knowne is to moue, and to vnder∣stand or knowe is to bee moued, because they wanted words to ex∣presse these déepe matters. And in the same sence doe wee reade in the Scripture, that the Sonne is sent of the Father. And againe, God the worker or maker (sayth he) is the beginner of Beget∣ting;* 1.211 and God the Good is the beginner of Beeing: and the Second is the liuely exppresser of the First, as Begetting is an Image of Beeing. And in another place he sayth, That this Wor∣ker beeing the Sonne, is knowne to all men by reason of the creating of the World; but as for the first Spirite, which is the Father, he is vnknowne vnto them. And surely (cōsidering their maner of speaking) he could not haue sayd more plainly, That the Sonne is the Image of the Father, that he hath his being in him, that he is one with him, & that by him the Father made all things. And it is agréeable to that which Proclus witnesseth of him, who reporteth of this Numenius, that he woorshipped thrée Goddes; of whom he calleth the first the Father, the second the Maker, and the third the Worke procéeding from them both. Wherein wée ought not so much to seeke into the default, as to commend the good that is therein. Besides this, it is good to marke here once for all, that these men which speake vnto vs here of thrée Gods, are the same which confessed vnto vs hertofore, that there is but only one God. Wherevpon it followeth that those thrée be but thrée Inbeings or Persons,* 1.212 in one Essence.

Plotinus, who was very well studyed in the bookes of Nume∣nius, steppeth yet further into the matter. And first of all, he hath made a Booke expressely & purposely of the thrée chiefe Inbeings, whereof I will set downe here a certeyne briefe Summe. There are (sayth he) three chiefe Inbeings, the One or the Good, the Vnderstanding or Witte,* 1.213 and the Soule of the World. And of these three it is not for any man to speake, without praying

vnto God,* 1.214 & without settling his mynd afore vnto quietnes. And if it be demaunded how one of them begetteth another; it is to bee considered that wee speake of euerlasting things, and therfore we must not imagine any temporall begetting. For this begetting which wee speake of heere, importeth and betokeneth but onely cause and order. How commeth it to passe (sayth he) that this Vnderstnding is begottē of the One? Surely it obteyneth not his beeing by meanes of any assent, commaundment, or mouing of the One; but it is a light shed foorth euerywhere, streaming from the One as brightnesse from the Sunne, and begotten of the One, howbeit without any mouing of the One. For all things, as in respect of their continuing of their nature, doe necessarily yeeld out of their owne essence and present power, a cetteyne nature that de∣pendeth vpon them, which is a very Image and countershape of the power from whence it proceedeth. As for example, Fyre yeeldeth heate, & Snowe cold: and Herbes yeeld chiefly sents or sauors. And al things whē they be in their perfection, ingender somewhat. That then which is euerlastingly perfect, doth euerlastingly beget, yea and it begetteth a perfect and euerlasting thing, howbeit that the thing begotten is lesse than the begetter. And what shall wee say then of the most perfect? That nothing proceedeth from him? Nay rather, that the greatest next him proceedeth of him? Now, the greatest and chiefest next vnto the One, is the Vnderstanding; the which hath neede alonly of the One, but the One hath no neede of it. Needes then must it bee, that that thing which is begotten of that which is better than Vnderstanding, must be the Vnderstanding it selfe. And this Vnderstanding, being the very Word of GOD and the Image of GOD, beholdeth God, and is vnseparably ioyned with God, and cannot be se∣parated from him otherwise than respectiuely, for that the one of them is not the other. Uerely after the same maner that wée affirme the Father to bee one person and the Sonne another,* 1.215 and yet neither of them both to be any other essence than the other. But let vs see how God begetteth this Vnderstanding, this Wit, or this Word. It is (sayth he) by the super abundance of him∣self. And therfore this begotten Vnderstanding must needes reteyne much of the begetter in him, and haue almost like re∣semblance vnto him, as the light hath vnto the Sunne, howbe∣it

so as the begetter is not the very vnderstanding it self:* 1.216 that is to say, they must differ respectiuely and not essentially; which ex∣presseth his former spéech where hee sayd 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 after another maner. And how then shall he (sayth he) beget him? Euen by a certeyne turning backe of the begotten to behold the beget∣ter, and this beholding is nothing els but the mynding or vn∣derstanding, of the good. And like as the One is but One, so the vnderstanding thereof is all things. For by being bred of the First Beginner, it knoweth all things, and bringeth foorth all things that are: namely, all Beautie of shapes, yea and al the Goddes that are to bee discerned by insight of Mynd. These words of his are repeated infinite tymes, and therefore I will for∣beare to rehearse them here any more.

As touching the third Inbeing,* 1.217 whom he calleth the Soule of the World, thus sayth he thereof. Like as the Vnderstanding, is the begotten issew, Word and Image of God or of the one; so is the Soule of the World the issew, Word and Image of the Vnderstanding, and is as a certeyne Reason ingendred of the Vnderstanding,* 1.218 the substance whereof consisteth in contem∣plation; and the same Reason is as the light of the Vnderstan∣ding and dependeth thereupon. And as there is no meane be∣tweene the One, and the Vnderstanding; so is there no meane betweene the Vnderstanding & this Soule of the World: but the difference is only this, that the one of them is as the very heate which is in fyre it self, & the other is as the heate which Fyre communicateth or imparteth vnto other things [by hea∣ting them with his heate.] And that is the same thing which wee affirme when we say, That the holy Ghost procéedeth from the fa∣ther by the Sonne, calling him the Gift of God, because that by him (who is his Loue) he voutsafeth to impart himselfe to vs here beneath. But we shal discerne his meaning yet better by the effects which he attributeth vnto him. This Soule (sayth he) hath brea∣thed life into all liuing things in the Ayre, in the Sea, and on the Land. It ruleth the Sunne, the Starres and the Heauen; It hath quickened the Matter which erst was nothing and vtter∣ly full of darknesse; and all this hath it done by the onely will of it selfe. It is all throughout all, like to the Father, as well in that it is but one, as in that it extendeth it self into all places. And he concludeth thus: And thus farre extendeth the God∣head. In déede he speaketh not so distinctly thereof, as Gregorie

Nazianzene; but yet forasmuch as he sayth that they be all thrée e∣ternall, of one selfesame substance, and differing onely in this, that the one of them is not the other, the same may well bee gathered of his sayings. In the residue of his booke he proueth that the same was the opinion of Plato, Parmenides, and Anaxagoras. And because the inward man (as he termeth it,) is the Image of God; he taketh proofe of the thrée Inbeings, from the cōsideration of our Soule, wherein there is a Mynd, a Reason and a Life; which thrée be (notwithstanding) all but one Soule. Neuerthelesse, he expres∣seth the maner of the sayd begetting in diuers other places. The One (sayth he) begetteth the vnderstanding, of the abundance of himself.* 1.219 And the vnderstāding is the Beeër, yea and the ve∣ry being of the Beeër (marke those words for all that followeth) and turneth backe againe to him, and is filled with him. And his cōclusion is, that the Mynder, the Mynding and the Mynded, are in the Godhead all one thing; and that this Mynding, which is the first and most excellent act of the Godhead, is essentiall, that is to say, the very substance or béeing of the Godhead, because that all the actions of the Godhead are the very Godhead or God himselfe. Now, by the Mynder, he meaneth the One or the First person; and by the Mynded or Beeër he meaneth the Second; and conse∣quently that they be Coessentiall, [that is to say, both one selfsame thing, which is GOD.] Againe,* There is (fayth he) a dubble kynd of Mynding: For a man myndeth, eyther another, or himselfe. Now, he that myndeth himself, hath not a seuerall beeing from that thing which he myndeth, but being both in one, he beholdeth himself in himself, and so becommeth two parties, which yet notwithstāding be both but one thing still. Now therefore there remayneth no more but to conclude, that the Begetter and the Begotten,* 1.220 the Mynder and the Mynded are both together, and also both one selfsame thing; and that if they bee both one selfesame thing, the one of them is not better than the other. Whervpon it followeth, that whereas he said heretofore that The One is better than the Vnderstanding (which he calleth heere the Mynded,) he ment it but in way of relation, and not in way of béeing. For in another place he sayth againe,‖ He that is the ve∣ry Liuing himself, is not the Mynded, but we cal him the Myn∣der. And although they differ one from another, yet notwith∣standing it is not possible for them to bee disseuered. Onely they may be discerned in vnderstanding, the one from the o∣ther,

because the one of them is not the other; which maner of discerning is no impediment but that they remayne both one thing still. For only God is both the partie that is con∣ceyued in Mynd or Vnderstanding, and also the partie that conceyueth him. Insomuch that when wee say, that the Myn∣der beholdeth the formes or Patternes of things;* 1.221 wee meane not that he looketh at them in another, but that he possesseth them in himselfe, by hauing in himself the partie that is myn∣ded. Or rather were it amisse to say, that the same which is mynded is the very Mynder himselfe in his vnitie and settled state; and that the nature of the Mynded which is behild, is an act that isseweth from him that Myndeth, which act con∣sisteth in beholding or mynding him, and in beholding him becometh one selfesame thing with him? Againe he sayth in a•• other place; To bee and to vnderstand, are both one thing [in God:] and if any thing proceede therof inwardly, yet is it no whit diminished therby, because the Mynder and the Myn∣ded are both one same thing. For the beholding of ones selfe in his selfe, is nothing but himselfe: But yet must there needes be alwaies both a selfesamenesse and also an othernesse. Now then, let vs conclude thus; that these two Inbeings or Persons, namely, The Mynded and the Mynder, are both one thing; and therefore that they differ not but only in way of relation: And that forasmuch as there must néedes bee euer both a selfesamenesse and also an othernesse,* 1.222 (If I may so terme them) the selfesamenesse is in the Essence or beeing,* 1.223 because that from God there procéedeth nothing but God; and the othernesse is in the Inbeings or Per∣sons, as in respect that the one is the begetter and the other is the begotten.

Moreouer, this Plotinus calleth the begetter the Father, and the begotten the Sonne, after the same maner that we doe. Cer∣tesse (sayth he) the vnderstanding is beautifull, and the most beautifull of all, (and therefore in diuers other places he termeth him the Beautifull, (as he termed the First the Good) and sitteth in cleere light and brightnesse,* 1.224 and conteyneth in him the nature of all things that are. As for this Worlde of ours, al∣though it be beautifull, yet it is scarce an image or shadowe of him; but the world that is aboue, is set in the very light itself, where there is nothing that is voyd of vnderstanding, nor no∣thing darke, but euery where is led a most blessed lyfe. Now,

lyke as he that beholdeth the Skye and the Starres, falleth by and by to seeking the author of this World: So he that con∣sidereth aud commendeth the World that is not to be discer∣ned but in vnderstanding, doth lykewise seeke the author thereof, namely who he is that begate that World, and where and how he begate that Sonne, that vnderstanding, that Child so bright and beautifull, euen that Sonne full of the Father. As for the souerein father hee is neither the vnderstanding, nor the Sonne, nor the Child, but a Mynd higher thā Vnder∣standing and Child. And next vnto him is the Vnderstanding or Child, who needeth both vnderstanding and nourishment, and is next to him that hath neede of nothing. And yet for al this,* 1.225 the Sonne hath the very fulnesse of vnderstanding, be∣cause hee hath it immediatly and at the first hand. But as for him that is the higher (that is to wit the Father;) he hath no neede of him: for then should the Sonne be the very good it selfe. So say we also that the Sonne hath all fulnesse, howbeit of the Father, and that the Father hath all fulnesse, but of himselfe: and that the Father is not the Sonne or the Worde, but that the Sonne or the Worde is of the Father. And in another place hee sayth, What shall a man haue gayned by seeing or beholding God? That hee shall haue seene God begetting a Sonne, and in that Sonne al things, and yet holding him still in him with∣out payne after his conceyuing of him, of whom this World (as beautifull as we see it to be) is but an Image: In which sort a painted Table is after a maner a portreyture of the mynd of him that made it. I sayd moreouer that this Sonne is the Wisedome of the Father;* 1.226 the like whereof Plotinus also sayth vnto vs. All things (sayth he) that are done eyther by Art or by Nature, are done by Wisedome. If they bee done by Arte, from Arte we come to Nature, and of Nature againe we demaund from whence she hath it:* 1.227 whereby wee finally come to a Mynd, and then are we to seeke whether the Mynd haue begotten Wise∣dome: And if that bee graunted, wee will inquire yet further, whereof? And if they say it begetteth it of it self: That cannot be, vnlesse the Mynd be the very Wisedome it selfe. Wisedome therfore shalbe the Essence, and the very Essence shalbe Wise∣dome, and the worthinesse of the Essence shalbe Wisedome. And therefore euery Essence that wanteth Wisedome, is in deede an Essence as in respect that Wisedome made it: but

forasmuch as it hath no Wisedome in it selfe, it is no true Es∣sence in deede. Now, the ordinary teaching of Plotine is,* 1.228 to call the Understanding or second Person the very Béeer in déed, or the very true Essence; and the first person a thing higher than Under∣standing or Essence. Wherevpon it should followe, that with him, Wisedome and true Essence are both one: that is to say, that the second person is Wisedome. To the same purpose also he sayth,* 1.229 that the sayd Mynd possesseth all things in his homebred Wise∣dome:* 1.230 That all shapes are but beames and effects thereof: and that the same is the trueth, yea and King of trueth; which is a name that the Scripture also attributeth to the second person.

As touching the third person, whom he calleth the Soule of the World,* 1.231 he seemeth in his other bookes to lay vs a foundation of a better opinion. For, God (saith he) hath wrought, & he wrought not vnwillingly: and therefore there is a will in GOD. Now surely he whose power is answerable to his will, should by and by become the better. God then who is the good it self [than the which nothing can be better,] filleth his owne will to the full, so as he is the thing that he listeth to be, and lifteth to be that which he is, and his will is his very Essence. This will a∣gaine, is his act or operatiō, and that act is his very substance. And so God setteth downe himself in this act of Beeing. And this is in a maner all one with the things which I spake in the for∣mer Chapter: namely, that God by his will produceth a third per∣son, that is to say, the loue of himself by delighting in himself. And in another place, This same GOD (sayth he) is both the lonely and loue: and this Loue is the loue of himselfe: for of himselfe and in himselfe is he altogether beautifull. And whereas he is sayd to be altogether with himselfe; it could not be so, vnlesse that both the thing which is and also the person which is to∣gether therewith, were both one selfesame thing.* 1.232 Now, if the together beer, (for I must be fayne to vse that word) & the thing together wherewith he is, be both one; and likewise the desi∣rer and the thing desired be one also; Surely the desire and the Essence must also needes be one selfesame thing. And this de∣sire of the Mynd is the Loue it self, whom we call the holy Ghost, which procéedeth by the Will, and so by the foresayd reasons is proued to bee Coessentiall.* 1.233 And this desire (sayth he in another place) is in the Mynd, which alwaies desireth and alwaies pos∣seth the first. This Loue then procéedeth not alonly from the first

person, but also from the second, according to his former teaching concerning the Soule of the World, which is, that it procéedeth from the first person by the second. Aud thus haue wee the three Persons or Iubeings acknowledged and layd foorth by Plotinus, whom I haue alledged somewhat the more at length, because he auowweth it to be a very auncient doctrine, and that he had learned it of his predecessors Numenius, Seuerus, Cronius, Gaius, Atti∣cus, Longinus, and Philarchaeus,* 1.234 and did afterward teach it to his Discipies, (who estéemed him as a God,) as we shall see hereafter in their writings.

Iamblichus* 1.235 sayth plainly that God made the World by his di∣uine Word, but he playeth the Philosopher more profoundly in this behalfe. The first God (sayth he) being afore the Beeër, and alone; is the father of a first God whom he begetteth, and yet neuerthelesse abydeth still in the solenesse of his vnitie: which thing farre exceedeth all abilitie of vnderstanding. This is the Originall patterne of him that is called both Father to him selfe and Sonne to himself, and is the Father of one alone, and God verely good in deede. Now, when he sayth that he is fa∣ther to himselfe, and father to a second; therein he distinguisheth the persons. And whereas he sayth that notwithstanding this beget∣ting, yet he abydeth one still: he sheweth that there is no separating of the essences. And he speaketh there after the opinion receyued a∣mong the Diuines of AEgipt.

But let vs heare Porphirie,* 1.236 (to whom Plotinus committed the ouerlooking of his bookes,) the best learned of all the Philosophers as sayth Saint Austin,* 1.237 and yet neuerthelesse the sworne enemie of Christenfolke. In his Historie of the Philosophers, these are his words: Plato taught (sayth he) that of the Good, (that is to say of the first person) is begotten an vnderstāding, by a maner vn∣knowne to men;* 1.238 and that the same vnderstanding is all whole next vnto himselfe. In this vnderstanding are all things that truely are, and all the Essences of all things that haue beeing. It is the first beautifull, and beautifull of it selfe, and hath the grace of beautie of himselfe, and before all worlds proceeded from God as from his cause, selfeborne and father of himself. And this proceeding of his, was not as ye would say by Gods mouing of himselfe to the begetting of him; but by his owne proceeding of himselfe from God, and by his issewing of him selfe. I say by proceeding, howbeit not at any beginning of

tyme: (for there was not yet any tyme,) and tyme is nothing in comparison of him; But this Mynd is without time and on∣ly euerlasting. Yet notwithstanding, as the first God is alwaies one, and alone although he haue made all things, because no∣thing can match or compare with him: so also is this Vnder∣standing or Mynd euerlasting, alone, without tyme, the tyme of things that are in tyme, and yet alwaies abyding in the vni∣tie of his own substance. Of a trueth he could not haue sayd more plainly, that the Sonne is the Sonne eternally, and of the fathers ow••e substance.

Againe, expounding that foresaid so greatly renowmed place of Platoes Episte,* 1.239 The Essence of God (sayth he) extendeth euen vnto three Inbeeings; For there is the highest GOD or the good; and next him, the Second, who is the workmayster of all things; and lastly the third, who is Soule of the World: for the Godhead extendeth euen vnto the Soule. And that is the thing that Plato mēt in speaking of three Kings: for although all things depend vppon these three: yet is their depending, first vpon the first God, secondly vpon the God that isseweth of him, and thirdly vpon the third that proceedeth from him. Now, in that he raungeth them in order thus one vnder another; he seemeth to play the Arrian. And yet is that very much in a Hea∣then man. But whereas he acknowledgeth one selfsame essence; he sheweth that the diuersitie is only in the functions, and in the order of causes, which is one steppe beyond the Arrians. Also S. Austin saith that he did put the third person as a meane betwene the other two, after which maner we also doe call him the band and vnion of them two, notwithstanding that Plotine doe put him vnder the Understanding. But in his booke of the chiefe Fathers or first Au∣thors of things, Proclus* 1.240 setteth doune his opinion yet more plain∣ly: saying, that there is an euerlasting or eternall Mynd, and yet notwithstanding, that afore the same there is a Foreëternall or former euerlasting, vnto whom the euerlasting sticketh, because the Foreeuerlasting is beyond all: and that in the euerlasting beeing, there is a second and a third: and that betwne the Foreeuerlasting and the Euerlasting, Eternitie resteth in the middest.* 1.241 Now, foras∣much 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Eternities are alike equall, this forenesse and afternesse which are attributed to the persons, is not in respect of tyme, but (as Plotine sayth) in respect of Nature, and (as ye would say) in∣consideration of cause.

Proclus the Disciple of Iamblichus sayeth that the aun••••ent Platonists did set downe three Beginners (whome wee call Per∣sons.) Of the which, the first, they called the One, The second (namely the sayd Understanding) they called the one many, and [the third, that is to wit] the Soule [of the world,] they called the One and many. But it is best for vs to heare what he himself saith. The Essence or vnderstanding (sayeth he) for among the Plato∣nists both are one) is sayd first of all,* 1.242 to haue his being, of the Good, and to be about the same Good, and to be filled with the light of trueth which proceedeth from it, and to be par∣taker thereof by the vnion which it hath therewith, and is most diuine, because it dependeth originally vpon the Good. Here ye see now a second persone, Light of Light, hauing his ful∣nesse from the first, And whereas hee saieth of the first light that it is most diuine; it is because he knoweth not by what words to ex∣presse the prehem••nence of the Father. In another place hee sayeth that this vnderstanding, (that is to say the Soule) is become One with the Good,* 1.243 that is to say, with the Father. And also that by his inyndly Inworking he is the very eternitie it selfe, sauing that hee dependeth vpon the Unitie;* 1.244 and that he is like vnto the One: and that the Soule or third persone is like to the mynde, from whence it procéedeth. But here is yet a more euident thing. The most part (saith he) doe set downe three Beginnings, the Good, the Vn∣derstanding or the Beeër, & the Soule. The first principall and vncommunicable, is the One, who is before and beyond all things. Next vnto him is the one Vnitie, which hath his be∣ing about the sayd first substance, and aboundeth by partici∣pation of him that is the One first of all. And this Inbeing is more then Substantiall,* 1.245 and the first of all the Inbeeings in the Trinitie that is to be conceyued in vnderstanding. And seeing that these two namely the One and the Vnderstan∣ding bee in the first rancke of the Trinitie, the first as the Begetter, the second as the Begotten, the first as the Perfec∣ter, the secōd as the Perfected: there must needes be a meane power betwixt them, whereby and wherewith the one may yeeld being and perfection to the vnderstāding or Beeër. For this proceeding of the Beeër from the One, and likewise the turning back of the Beeër vnto the One,* 1.246 is done by a certeyn power or might, and so there is a Trinitie; which is the full number of things belonging to a Mynd, so as this Trinitie is

Vnitie or Onenesse, Power or Might, and Vnderstanding of Mynd.* 1.247 The One is the Producer or yeelderforth, the Vnder∣standing is the thing produced or yeeldedfoorth, and the Po∣wer or Might depending vppon the One, is also linked to the Vnderstanding or Beeër And this Trinitie is the Vnitie or Onenesse, the Beeër or Vnderstanding, and the Behauiour of them both, wherby the Vnitie is the Vnitie of the Vnderstan∣ding, and the Vnderstanding is the vnderstanding of the Vni∣tie or One. Whereby Plato sheweth that the Father is the Fa∣ther of the Vnderstanding, & the Vnderstanding is the Sonne of the Father, and that the Might or Power is couertly com∣prised betweene them both. Now soothly, considering that he was a professed enemie to vs Christians, and therefore eschewed to vse our termes; he could not haue spoken better, nor haue sayd more plainly that the thrée Inbeings or Persones differ onely by way of relation, so as there is a Father, a Sonne, and a Behaui∣our of thē both, which we would haue called the Loue, the Union, or the kindnesse of them, that is to wit the holy Ghost.

Amelius the Disciple of Plotine,* 1.248 (as Proclus reporteth) ma∣keth also thrée kings or thrée Understandings: namely, the Beeër, the Hauer, and the Seeër: the first, the reall Understanding, the se∣cond the Understanding from the first, and the third the Under∣stāding in the second. Whom Theodorus imitating, hath termed them, the substantiall Vnderstanding, the Vnderstandable sub∣stance, and the Fountayne of Soules. Neuerthelesse, as great an enemie as Amelius was to the Christians, yet notwithstanding after many florishes and fetches about, in the ende speaking of the second Person he yéeldeth to that which S. Iohn speaketh of him in his Gospell.* 1.249 Surely (sayth he) this is the Word that was from euerlasting, by whom all things that are, were made, as Hera∣clitus supposed. And before God (sayth he) it is the very same Word which that barbarus fellow (for so did he terme S. Iohn) auowcheth to haue bin with God at the beginning in the or∣dering and disposing of things when they were confused, and to be God, by whom all things were absolutely made, and in whom they bee liuing and of whom they haue their life and beeing; and that the same Word clothing it selfe with Mans flesh,* 1.250 appeared a Man, and yet left not to shewe the Maiestie of his natu••e. Insomuch that after he had bin put to death, he tooke his Godhead to him againe, and was very GOD as he

had bin afore ere he came downe into Bodie, Flesh, and Man. Another Platonist speaking to the same effect, sayd that the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of S. Iohns Gospell was worthie to be graued euery where in letters of Gold. Thus ye see that the Gréeke Philosophie as wel afore as after the comming of our Lord Iesus Christ, agréeth with our Diuinitie.

As touching the Latins,* 1.251 they fell to Philosophie somewhat late•• but yet as little as we haue of their doings, they digresse not from the others. Chalcidius who wrate vppon Platoes limaeus, hath these words: The Souereyne and 〈◊〉〈◊〉 God, is the Ori∣ginall of all things; next vnto whom is his Prouidence as a se∣cond God, who giueth the law aswell for the temporall as for the eternall life. And furthermore, there is a third substance as a second Vnderstanding, which is the keeper of the sayd e∣ternall Lawe. The highest God commaundeth, the second or∣dereth, and the third vttereth or publisheth. Now the Soules doe the Lawe, and the Lawe is the very Destinie it selfe. And a little afore he sayth, that the sayd Prouidence, which he setteth in the second place, is the euerlasting Understanding of God, which is an euerlasting act, and a resembler of his goodnesse, because he is alwaies turned towards him that is the very Good it self. Also Ma∣crobius* 1.252 sayth, that Platoes opinion concerning the one chief God and the one Understanding bred and borne of him, is no falile at all, but a thing certeyne, howbeit that he could not otherwise ex∣presse it than by examples of the Daysonne and such other things. And surely if we had the bookes of Varro, and other great Clerks, it is possible that we should find much more to this purpose. Thus then ye see how the Platonists are all of one opinion and mynd in the doctrine of the Trinitie, wherein some of them sawe more and some lesse; some affirme the premisses whereof our conclusions en∣sewe, and othersome conclude the same expressely with vs.

The Aristotelians haue no voyce here, because they stand all in commenting vpon Aristotle, who gaue himselfe more to the libe∣rall Artes and the searching of Nature, than to looking vp to God the maker of all things. Yet notwithstanding, Auicen* 1.253 reiected it not: insomuch that he sayth that the first Mynd yéeldeth foorth a se∣cond Mynd, and the second a third; but he waded no déeper into the matter.

Let vs adde here the confessions of the very Deuilles,* 1.254 who ey∣ther by meanes of the reuelations therof which haue bin made vn∣to

vs, or by reason of their falling frō aboue, haue had some know∣ledge thereof••* 1.255 Soothly it is alwaies a pleasure to heare them yéeld record to the trueth euen spight of their harts. Wee reade that one Thulis reigned in old tyme in AEgipt, who wexing proude, asked Serapis the chiefe Idoll of the AEgiptians, (adiuring him strongly that he should not deceiue him) who he was that had reigned afors him and who should reigne after him, and also who was mightier or greater than hee. To whom Serapis answered in these fower, Uerses.

First God, and next the Word, and then their Spright; Which three be one and ioyne in one all three. Their force is endlesse; get thee hence fraile wight,* 1.256 The man of life vnknowne excelleth thee.

Also Apollo being demaunded concerning the true Religion, answered in ten Uerses thus.

Vnhappie Priest, demaund not me the last And meanest Feend, concerning that diuine Degetter, and the deere and only Sonne Of that ren••wmed King, nor of his Spirit Conteyning all things plenteously throughout, Hilles, Brookes, Sea, Land, Hell, Ayre, and lightsome Fyre. Now wo is me, for from this house of myne That Spirit will me driue within a while, So as this Temple where mens destynies Are now foretold, shall stand all desolate.

Being asked another tyme (as sayth Porphirius,)* 1.257 whether was the better of the Word or the Lawe; he answered likewise in verse, That men ought to beléeue in God the begetter, and in the King that was afore all things, vnder whom quaketh both Heauen and Earth, Sea and Hell, yea and the very Gods themselues, whose Lawe is the Father that is honored by the Hebrewes. And these Oracles were wont to be sung in Uerse, to the intent that all men should remember them the better as Plutarch reporteth. Now I haue bin the longer in this Chapter, because most men thinke this doctrine so repugnant to mans Reason, that Philosophie could ne∣uer allowe of it; not considering that it is another matter to con∣ceyue a thing, than to prooue or allow it when it is conceyued. And therefore aswell for this Chapter as for that which went afore, let vs conclude, both by reason added to Gods reuealing, and by the traces thereof in the World, and by the Image thereof shining

foorth in our selues, and by the Confession of all the auncient Di∣uines, and by the very depositious of the Deuilles themselues; that in the onely one Essence or substance of God, there is a Father, a Sonne, and a holy Ghost; the Father euerlastingly begetting the Sonne, and the Spirit euerlastingly procéeding from them both•• the Sonne begotten by the Mynd, and the Spirit procéeding by the Will: which is the thing that we had here to declare. And let this handling of that matter concerning Gods essence bee taken as done by way of preuention, howbeit that it depend most properly vppon the reuelation of our Scriptures, which being proued will consequently yéeld proofe to this poynt also. There may bee some perchaunce which will desire yet more apparant proofes: but let them consider that wee speake of things which surmount both the arguments of Logike and also Demonstration. For, inasmuch as Demonstrations are made by the Causes, the Cause of all Cau∣ses can haue no Demonstration. But if any be so wilful as to stand in their owne opinion against the trueth which all the World proo∣ueth & al Ages acknowledge: let them take the payne to set doune their Reasons in writing; and men shall see how they be but eyther bare Denyalles, or Gesses, or simple distrusts or misbeleefs of the things which they vnderstand not, and that they be vnable to wey against so graue and large Reasons and Recordes, as I haue set downe heretofore. And therefore, the glorie thereof be vnto God.

Amen.

The vij. Chapter.

That the World had a beginning.

LEt vs now retyre backe againe from this bot∣tomlesse gulfe; for the thing that is vnpossible to be sounded is vnpossible to be knowen. And séeing that our eysight cānot abyde the bright∣nesse of so great a light; let it content vs to be∣holde it in the shadowe. Now, this sensible world wherein we dwell, is (as the Platonists terme it) the shadow of the world that is subiect to vnderstanding: for certesse it cannot be called an Image thereof, no more than the

buylding of a Maystermason is the Image of his mynd. And yet for all the greatnesse, beautie, and light which wee see therein, I cannot tell whether the woord shadowe doe throughly fit it or no, considering that shadowes haue some measure in respect of their bodies, but betwéene finite and infinite is no proportionable re∣semblance at all. We that are héere in the world, doe woonder at it, and we would thinke wee did amisse if we should beléeue that any thing is better or more beautifull than that. For our flesh and com∣plexions are proportioned after the Elements thereof, and to the things which it bringeth foorth, as our eyes vnto the light thereof, and all our sences too the sensible nature thereof: and those which are of the world seeke but onely to content the sensualitie that is in them. But as we haue a Mynd, so also let vs beléeue that the same is not without his obiect or matter to rest vpon. And as the sence∣lesse things serue the things that haue sence; so let vs make the sensible things to serue the Mynd, and the Mynd it selfe to serue him by whom it is and vnderstandeth. My meaning is, that wee should not wonder at the world for the worlds sake it selfe, but ra∣ther at the woorkemaister and author of the world. For it were too manifest a childishnes to woonder at a portraiture made by a Pein∣ter, and not to woonder much more at the Peynter himselfe.

Now the first consideration that offereth it selfe to the beholder of this woorke, is whether it hath had a beginning or no: a question which were perchaunce vnnecessarie in this behalfe, if euery man would consult with his owne Reason, whereunto nothing is more repuguant, than to thinke an eternitie to bee in things which wee not onely perceiue with our sences, but also doe sée to perish. How∣beit forasmuch as the world speaketh (sayth the Psalmist) both in all Languages and to all Nations: let vs examine it, both whole together, and according to the seuerall parts thereof.* 1.258 For it may be that the worldlings (if they distrust their owne record) will at least∣wise admit that which the world it selfe shall depose thereof. Let vs then examine the Elements all together: they passe from one into another; the Earth into Water, the Water into Ayre, and Ayre into Water againe, and so foorth. Now this intercourse can∣not be made but in tyme, and tyme is a measuring of mouing, and where measure is, there can be no eternitie. Let vs examine thē se∣uerally: The Earth hath his seasons, after Springtime commeth Sommer, after Sommer succeedeth Haruest, and after Haruest followeth Winter. The Sea hath his continuall ebbing and flow∣ing,

which goeth increasing and decreasing by certeyne measures. Diuers Riuers, and especially Nyle, haue their increasings at cer∣teyne seasons, and to a certeyne measure of Cubits. The Ayre also hath his Windes, which doe one while cléere it and another while trubble it: and the same Windes doe reigne by turnes, blowing sometime from the East, and sometime from the West; sometime from the North and sometime from the South. And vppon them dependeth Rayne and faire wether, Stormes and Calmes. These interchaunges which are wrought by turnes cannot bee without beginning. For where order is, there is a formernesse and an after∣nesse, and all chaunge is a kind of mouing, insomuch that the alte∣rations which are made successiuely one after another, must of ne∣cessitie haue had a beginning at some poynt or other; on the Land, by some one of the Seasons; on the Sea, by ebbing and flowing; and in the Ayre, by North or by South; and so foorth. For if they began not at any one poynt, then could they not hold out vnto an other poynt. The Land then by his Seasons, the Ayre by his chaunges, and the Sea by his Tydes, ceasse not to crye out and to preach vnto all that haue eares to heare, that there is no euerla∣stingnesse in them, but that they haue had a beginning all of them. Againe, when we consider that the Earth receyueth his Seasons from the Sunne, the Sea his Tydes from the Moone, & the Ayre his Windes from an outward power that is vnseene: ought wée not to seeke the beginning thereof aboue and not beneath, without them and not within them, seeing that nothing héere belowe hath mouing of it selfe? And if the Elements which are accounted for the very grounds and beginnings of things, acknowledge a begin∣ning of their mouings; ought we not to acknowledge y^e same in all other things? Again, if we consider how this Moone which maketh the Tydes in the Sea, hath no light but from the Sunne which maketh the Seasons on the Earth; doe we not conclude by and by, that the Seasons of the Earth, and the Tydes of the Sea, and the continnall chaunges, mouings, and (as ye would say) backebrea∣things of the Elements, haue one commō beginning? But it may bee that these mouings haue place but onely vnder the Moone, and not in that fifth Quintessence of the Heauen, the substantialnesse and eternitie whereof Aristotle doth so highly commend. Nay, what if the higher wee mount vp, they proclayme their beginning still the lowder? What if the thing which we most chiefly wonder at in the Heauen, be most repugnant to eternitie? The Sunne ma∣keth

there his naturall course in the Zodiacke betwéene the two Tropicks or Turnepoynts, so as the Zodiacke is as it were his race, and the Tropicks are his vtmost listes, both the which are so distinguished by degrées and minutes, that hee cannot passe one hearebredth beyond them. The poynts of his two stops are his vt∣most bounds, the which so soone as he commeth at, by and by he turneth head back againe. Must he not thē néedes haue had a place to set out from, seeing he hath a place whereat to stop? Euery fo∣wer and twentie howers hee is caryed from East to West by the mouing of the Skye: and like as by his natural mouing he maketh the Sommer and the Winter; so by this violent moouing he ma∣keth Day and Night. Can such succession of tymes and Seasons be made otherwise than in tyme, or rather be any other thing than tyme? The Moone likewise finisheth her course euery Moneth: we see how she chaungeth, groweth, becommeth full, and waneth. E∣uery Planet hath his prefixed tyme and his ordinary course. To be short, men see the rising and the going downe of the Starres, and likewise their appearing and their tarying out of sight: and the ve∣ry Heauen it selfe which with himselfe caryeth all the rest about, doth it not but by moouing. Now whatsoeuer is moued, is moued in tyme; and all goings or whéelings about, must néeds begin at some one poynt; like as in the drawing of a Circle, the one shanke. of the Compasses is set fast in some place, and the other shanke is caryed round about. What followeth the••, but that the mouing of the Heauen and of al the things which the Heauen beareth and ca∣ryeth about, hath had a beginning? Then let vs not wonder at the brightnesse and light thereof as Aristotle did; for that bewrayeth the matter so much the more apparantly, in that it hath not that light but by distribution of mouing; nor at his perpetuall mouing, for that sheweth the more his streyt seruice whereto he is subiect; nor at his Constancie, for that is necessitie; nor at his huge great∣nesse, for he is so much the more hugely bowed downe. Surely the Skye is as the great whéele of a Clocke, which sheweth the Pla∣nets, the Signes, the howers, and the Tydes, euery one in their tyme, and that which seemeth to be his chiefe wonder, proueth him to bee subiect to tyme, yea and to bee the very instrument of tyme. Now, seeing he is an instrument, there is a Worker that putteth him to vse, a Clockkéeper that ruleth him, a Mynd that was the first procurer of his mouing. For euery instrument, how mouable so euer it be, is but a dead thing so farre foorth as it is but an instru∣ment,

if it haue not life and mouing from some other thing than it it selfe.* 1.259 Yea, but (will some man say) the Heauen goeth about con∣tinually; and in so many worlds and ages as haue bin, we perceiue no alteration at all. Wretched man that thou art! Thy Hart and thy Lights also haue a continuall mouing, and neuer lye still; and thou, with all the witte thou hast, canst neither increase it nor re∣streine it. The Phisitions themselues feele it, but can find no cause of it. The Philosophers ouertyre themselues in seeking it, and yet canst thou not tell the ende and the beginning thereof. Doest not thou things thy selfe which men as thou art doe déeme to be with∣out end, as straunge Milles and Trindles, and such other kind of selfmouings, of whose beginnings not euen Children are igno∣rant? And yet vnder colour that the great whéele of Heauen hath now of long tyme turned about without ceasing, wilt thou be so childish or so bli••d, as to beléeue that it hath turned so from euerla∣sting? O man, the same workmayster which hath set vp the Clock of thy hart for halfe a score yeares, hath also set vp this huge en∣gine of the Skyes for certeyne thousands of yeares. Great are his Circuits and small are thyne; and yet when thou hast accounted them throughly, they come both to one.

Let vs come to the things that haue lyfe and fe••ce. The Plāts shoote foorth into branches, and beare both bud and fruite: but yet either the plant springeth of the kernell, or the kernell of the plant, and both of thē procéede of a maker. Of liuing wights, some bring foorth their yong ones alyue, and some lay Egges, and we knowe which is ingendred of which: but whether the Egge come of the Hen, or the Hen of the Egge; it must néedes bée confessed that the one of them had a beginning. But I will leaue this vayne dispu∣ting whether of them was the first; which question the holy scrip∣ture will discusse in one word. Yea and nature it selfe also will dis∣cusse it, which requireth to haue the first things brought foorth in their perfect being. For it is enough for our purpose, that they may find themselues conuicted of a beginning throughout all things. And I pray you, if they cannot tell whether the mouing of their Heart or of their Loongs, began first with shutting or with ope∣ning, at the thrusting of the breth foorth, or at the drawing of it in; (whereof notwithstanding they cannot but knowe that there was a beginning:) ought they to be admitted to deny that things had a beginning, because it might be douted at which poynt they began?

Now if the Dumb and spéechelesse things ••ry out so lowd, and

the things that are voyd of reason conclude so reasonably; shall on∣ly man whom God hath indued both with spéech and reason,* 1.260 be ei∣ther so vnhonest as to hold his peace, or so shamelesse as to resist? Soothly as touching our bodyes, we know the beginning of them; and our so curious searching out of Pedegrees, maketh vs too confesse it whether wée will or no. And if any thing in the worlde might haue any true pretence or lykelyhod to boast of an eternitie; our Soules might doe it, which without mouing themselues doe doe cause a thousand things to remoue. They moūt vp vnto Hea∣uen, and go downe to the déepe, without shifting their place. They hoord vp the whole world in the storehouse of their memorie, with∣out combering of any roome there. They packe vp all tymes past present and to come together, without passing from one too a∣nother. To be short, they conceyue and conteyne all things, and af∣ter a sort euen themselues also. And yet shall we be so bold as too say they be eternal without beginning? Nay, how can that be, sith we sée that they profit and learne, yea and oftentimes also appayre and forget, from age to age, and from day to day? How (I say) can that be, sith we sée that they passe frō ignorance to knowledge, from darkenesse to light, from gladnesse to sadnesse, and from hope to despayre; and that not by yeeres, but euen in minutes and mo∣ments? And (which more is) wee sée them receyue great trouble and alteration by and for the things that are mutable and transito∣rie, which florish in the morning, and are withered and parched as in an Ouen at night. Now, to be altered and chaunged, importeth a mouing, and he that graunteth a mouing, graunteth also a begin∣ning; and to be moued by things mutable, sheweth an ouer great inconstancie of nature, which is a thing tootoo contrarie vnto eterni∣tie. To be short, how can y^t thing be eternall or euerlasting, which cannot so much as by any imagination resemble aught that this word eternitie betokeneth? And yet this soule of ours is the thing which in man ioyneth Heauen and Earth togither, marketh the chaunges in things aboue, and for the most part worketh them in the things beneath, carying vp a handfull of dust aboue the skyes, and after a sort bringing downe Heauen vnto the Earth. Much more reason then is it that neither in the Heauen, nor in the Earth, nor in all the Harmonie of the whole world which wee so greatly wonder at, there should not be any approching at al vnto eternitie.

Some man perchaunce will say vnto mee,* 1.261 that in the partes of the World there is no eternitie, but yet there may be in the whole.

Nay, how can a Whole bee eternall, which is composed of brittle and temporall parts? And what call they the Whole, but the huge frame of Heauen, whose mouing proueth that it had a beginning? Againe, some other will perhaps say, there is a beginning of moo∣uing in the world, as well in the whole as in the parts thereof; but yet it doth not therefore followe, that it had beginning of béeing. Nay, if the being thereof was euerlastingly afore the mouing ther∣of; how could it be called in Latine Mundus & in Gréeke Cosmos, that is to say, A goodly or beautifull order, seeing that for the most part, Order dependeth vppon moouing? For, take from the Heauens their turning about, and from the Sunne his course, and set them fast in some place where you list; and you shall make the one halfe of the Earth blynd, and the whole Earth eyther scorched with his continuall presence, or desert and vninhabitable by his ab∣sence: and ye shall make the Sea for the most part vnsayleable, and the Ayre vnfruitfull or vntemperate. Therefore it will followe at the least, that the World hath not bin inhabited euerlastingly, nor the Plants thereof bin eternall, nor the liuing Creatures (no not euen Mankynd) bin without beginning. Surely I wote not what eyes these Philosophers had, who had leuer to eternise y^e Stones, Rocks, and Mountaines, than themselues for whom those things were made. And againe, to what purpose serued the Sunne and the Moone at that tyme? Wherefore serued Ayre, wherefore serued Sea, when nothing did yet liue, see, and breathe? It remayneth then that afore mouing, it was but a confused heape, masse or lump of things without shape, and that in processe of tyme (as some say) a certeyne Soule wound it selfe into it, and gaue shape to that bo∣die, and afterward life, mouing and fence to the partes thereof, ac∣cording as he had made euery of them capable to receiue: insomuch that the world is nothing els but that confused heape now orderly disposed, indewed with soule and life, so as of that soule and confu∣sed lumpe together, there is now made one perfect liuing wight. A proper imagination surely, and méete for a very Beast, to father his so orderly essence vppon the shapelessenesse of a Chaos, that is to say, of confusednesse remoued away; rather than vpon the wise∣dome & power of a quickning Spirit. But seeing that this Chaos could not receyue eyther shape or order, but by the sayd Soule; if they be both eternall, how met they together in one poynt, being of so contrary natures, the one to shape and the other to be shaped? If it were by aduenture, how did y^t Soule by aduenture so set things

in order, and how happeneth it that it hath not since that tyme put them out of order againe? Or if it were by aduise; of whom should that aduise be but of a Superiour? And who is that Superiour, but God? Againe, eyther this Soule was tyed really and in very déede to this bodie of the world from all eternitie; or els it did but onely pearce through it by his power, as seemed best of the owne freewill. If it were tyed, specially to such a confused masse; by whō but by force of a higher power? And then what els could that con∣fused Chaos be to him, but an euerlasting graue? And what els al∣so were that to say, than that the sayd Chaos was as a shapelesse Child yet newly begotten and scarce set together in the moothers wombe, which within a few daies after, by the infusion of a Soule beginneth to haue shape, mouing, and sence; and afterward in his due tyme is borne, and being growne vp decayeth agayne, and so endeth, as our bodies doe? Or if a Soule pearced into it and went through it by a freewil and power; (let vs not striue about termes; for a Soule is so named in respect of a bodie whereto it is tyed) the same is the liuing GOD, who at his pleasure gaue it both shape, life, and mouing. But I will shew hereafter, that he not only gaue the Worlde his shape, but also created the very matter stuffe and substance thereof. But it suffiseth mée at this tyme to wrest from them, that he is the maker and shaper thereof.

Let vs yet more clearely set forth the originall of the World. I aske what the world is of it selfe? If it moue not, it forgoeth both his order and his beautie, as I sayd afore. And if it moue, it shew∣eth it selfe vncapable of eternitie.* 1.262 But there is yet more. These lo∣wer spaces of the world are the harbrough of liuing creatures, and specially of man, who knoweth how to take benefite thereof. The temperatenesse of the aire serueth for him; and yet the aire can not bee tempered nor the Earth lighted, without the Sonne and the Moone: Neither can the Sunne and the Moone giue light and tem∣peratnesse without mouing. The Moone hath no light but of the Sunne; neither can the Sunne yéeld it either to the Moone or too the Earth, but by the mouing of the Heauen: and the great Com∣passe of the Heauen going about, is the very thing which wée call the World, not estéeming these lower parts (as in respect of their matter) otherwise than as the dregges of the whole. And whereas the Elements serue man, and the Planets serue the Elements, yea and the Planets them selues serue one another: doe they not shew that they be one for another? And if they be one for another; is not

one of them in consideration afore another; as the ende afore the things that tend vnto the end, according to this common rule, that the Mynd* 1.263 beginneth his work at the end thereof? Now then, if the turning about of the Heauen serue to shewe the Planets, and they to yéeld light to the Earth and to all things thereon: doth it not serue for the Earth? And if it serue the Earth; I pray you is that done by appoyntment of the Earth, or rather by appoyntment of some one that commaundeth both Heauen and Earth? Againe, seeing that the ende is in consideration afore the things that tend thereto: shall this consideration be in the things themselues, or ra∣ther in some Spirite that ordereth them? Soothly, in the things themselues it cannot be: for if they haue vnderstanding, they haue also will; and the will intendeth rather to commaund than to obey, and vnto fréedome rather than bondage: and if they haue no vnder∣standing, then knowe they neither end nor beginning. Moreouer, forasmuch as they bee diuers, and of contrary natures; they should ame at diuers ends, whereas now they ame all at one end. Nay, which more is, how should the Sunne and the Moone, the Heauen and the Earth haue met euerlastingly in matching their dealings so iumpe together, the one in giuing light, and the other in taking it? In what poynt, by what couenant, and vnder what date was this done, seeing it dependeth altogether vppon mouing, which is not to be done but in tyme? It remayneth then, that the sayd consi∣deration was done by a Spirit that commaundeth al things alike, and that he putteth them in subiection one to another as seemeth best to himselfe, forsomuch as he is mightie to kéepe them in obe∣dience, and wise to guyde them to their peculiar ends, and all their ends vnto his owne ende; and he that thinketh otherwise thinketh that a Lute is in tune of it owne accord. Or if he say that this Spi∣rit is a Soule inclosed in the whole, he doth fondly incorporate the Spirit of the Luteplayer in the Lute it selfe, and likewise the buyl∣der in the buylding. In effect it is all one as if a Child that is borne and brought vp in a house, should thinke the house to be eternall or els made of it selfe, because he had not seene it made: or as if a man that had bin cast out newly borne in a desert Iland, and there nur∣sed vp by a Wolfe as Romulus was; should imagine himself to be bred out of the Earth in one night like a Mushrom. For, to beléeue that the World is eternall, and that the race of Mankinde is bred of it selfe without a maker, is all one thing, and spring both of one error. Doe not the two Sexes of Male and Female in all liuing

things ouerthrowe the sayd eternitie? For how should they bee e∣uerlastingly the one for the other, seeing they be so diuers? Againe, haue they bin euerlastingly but two, or euerlastingly mo than two? If but two, where are those two become, seeing that eternitie im∣porteth immortalitie, and a beginninglesse forebeing from euerla∣sting inferreth an endlesse afterbeing or cōtinuance to euerlasting? And if they were many: see ye not still the selfesame absurdities? And if ye say they be made euerlasting by succession of tyme; what (I pray you is death) but a token that they were borne? What is life (I speake of this our life) but a continuance of death? and what is succession, but a prolonging of time? Thus then ye see how that aswell by the parts of the World, and by the whole World it self, as also by the agréement of the whole with his parts, and of the parts among themselues; we be euidently taught that the fraine of the World had both a workmayster and a beginning. But now some man wil aske vs when it began? And that is the poynt which we haue to treate of next.

The viij. Chapter.

When the World had his beginning.

SOothly, it is not for mée to stand here disproo∣uing the doubtes of the Accounters of tymes; for y^e ods of some yeres, yea or of some whole hundreds of yeres, is not to bee accounted of betwéene eternitie and a beginning. But if we haue an eye to the procéeding of this lower World: we shall euidently percèyue, that like a Childe it hath had his ages, his chaunges, and his full poynts, restes or stoppes; so as it hath by little and little growne, bin peo∣pled, and replenished; and that (to be short) whereas the world sup∣poseth that it shall indure for euer, it doth but resemble an old Do∣tarde, which (bee hee neuer so forworne and drooping for age,) yet thinkes himselfe still to haue one yere more to liue. But I haue al∣readie sufficiently proued, that both Heauen and Earth haue had a beginning; and also that séeing the one of them is for the other, they

had the same at one selfe same tyme, and both of them from one self same ground. And therfore looke what shalbe declared of the earth, shall also be declared of the heauen: and forasmuch as the earth ser∣ueth for the vse of liuing creatures, and specially of man; looke what beginning we shall proue of man, the like shall wee haue proued of the disposition of the earth. For to what purpose were the Heauen being imbowed about these lower parts like a Uault; or to what purpose were the earth being as a flowre or plancher to goe vpon; if there were no inhabiter at all vpon earth? Surely if the World were without beginning,* 1.264 it should also haue bin inhabited from without beginning, and no people should be of more antiquitie thā other: Or at leastwise how auncient so euer it were, yet should no new thing be found therein. But if euen the oldest and auncientest things of all, be but newe; ought it not to bee a sure argument vnto vs, of the newnesse thereof? What thing I pray you can we picke out in this world, for an example of antiquitie?

Let vs begin at the Liberall Sciences; and we shall reade of the first commings vp of them all. Philosophie, which consisteth in the searching out of naturall things, is of so late continuance, that a∣fore the tyme of Pythagoras, the very name thereof was not kno∣wen. The Romanes counted it for folly long tyme after that. And Lucrece the Epicure singeth in his tyme, that the nature of things was found out but late afore. Also Seneca who came long after him, sayth that from the first comming vp of Philosophie to his tyme, there were not full a thousand yéeres. Socrates is sayd to haue bin the first that brought it from studie to practise, drawing it (as they sayd) from Heauen to Earth, and from Cities to houses and persons:* 1.265 that is to say, by teaching men to knowe themselues and to gouerne both themselues and others. And that is not aboue two thousand yéeres agoe at the most: For he was since the tyme of Esdras, who is y^t last Historiographer of the Byble. And what∣soeuer knowledge they had thereof, they had it (as I sayd afore) from the AEgiptians,* 1.266 & the AEgiptians had it from the Hebrewes and Chaldeans. For Pythagoras learned his skill of Sonchedie, and of the Iewes;* 1.267 Plato, of Sechnuphis; Eudoxus, of Conuphis; and all they, of the Disciples of Trismegistus; and Trismegistus, (as appeareth by his books) learned of (Moyses.) To bee short, Clearchus the Peripatetick sayth, he sawe the Iew of whom Ari∣stotle himselfe learned his Philosophie. Also Iamblichus maketh mention of Mercuries Pillars, wherein Pythagoras and Plato

had read his Doctrine:* 1.268 And Porphyrius witnesseth that all the Philosophie of the Greekes which they boast of with so many woords, came vp at the least a thousand yeres after Moyses. Now if the studie of Wisdome be so late in the world; how late is Wis∣dome it self? And if Greece were so lateward therein; where shal the antiquitie thereof be found among the Gentiles?

Some man will say that in asmuch as Socrates drewe men frō Heauen to Earth; Astrologie ought to be of more antiquitie: and I willingly agree thereto: for when a man looketh vp to Heauen, he setteth his first thoughts vpon that place. But how many yeres shall we gaine by that? If Thales* 1.269 were the first that taught it to the Greekes, (as they themselues say:) we know both by the very Greeke authors & by Thales* 1.270 himself, y^t he had it of the AEgiptians, & the AEgiptians of the Chaldeans, who are in very deede the Au∣thors thereof, insomuch y^t the word Chaldean is ordinarily put for an Astrologer. And if we say with Plinie, y^t Iupiter Belus was the Author thereof; if the same Belus was the first of that name, then was it about the time of Abraham. And if the Phenicians were the founders thereof, as it is sayd in another place: what were they els but the Hebrewes? Againe, I pray you what was the Astro∣logie of those folke? By the report of Plinie,* 1.271 Thales was the first among the Greekes, and Sulpitius Gallus among the Romanes that obserued the Eclipses of the Sunne and Moone. Insomuch that their Armyes (as Plutarche and Quintilian report) were dis∣mayed at the sight of them; so as the one of them did let passe the next three daies, & the other did let passe all the rest of that Moone, ere they durst enterprise or go in hād with any thing. Nay: it was counted high Treason towards God to alledge any naturall cause thereof. Anaxagoras was put in Prison for it, and Pericles had much adoe to get him released. Protagoras was banished Athens for it; and the Mathematicals were vtterly condemned for it. And what more doe the sauagest people of the world our poore Ameri∣cans? It was attributed vnto Thales, that hee was the first that obserued the North Starre; and to Pythagoras, that the morning starre and the euening starre be both one, and that the Zodiacke goes a Skiew, and girdeth the World about like a Girdle: and vnto Solon (as sayth Proclus) that the Moone finisheth her course in thirtie dayes. Afterward came Archimedes, who gathered the obseruations of many things, and thereof made the Sphere. Yet notwithstanding, all these are but litle entraunces; for the greate

Speculation of the Planets came long time after. What shall we say to this, that the very account of the yeere was vncerteine and confuzed in the countrie of Europe, vntill the time of Iulius Cae∣sar, and so remaineth still vnto this day in the greater halfe of the world? Insomuch that vntill a three hundred yeres afore the birth of our Lord Iesus Christ,* 1.272 the Greekes and Romanes had not yet any Quadrant, nor any Clocke, Dyall, or distinction of howres.

As touching Arithmetike and Geometrie,* 1.273 which were taught so precysely vnto children in Platoes tyme, it is well knowen that the authors of the notablest grounds of those artes, are Pythago∣ras, Eudoxus, and Euclides (who gathered them out of the wri∣ters of olde tyme) and certeyne others. And they which father the finding of them vpon Trismegistus, could not haue led vs more di∣rectly vnto Moyses.

But forasmuch as man is naturally more carefull of his health and commoditie,* 1.274 than curious of the Starres, it may bee that his Trades, Craftes and Artes, are of more antiquitie than his Sci∣ences. Surely as touching handicrafts, Varro a greate searcher of antiquities witnesseth, that all the Handicraftes were inuented within the space of a thousand yeres reckened backe frō his tyme. And let not the Gréekes brag any more, For euen in their Histo∣ries we find the first inuention or finding out of Fyre, which is the ground and beginning (if I may so terme it) of the most part of Handicrafts. And forasmuch as there are which haue written par∣ticularly of the fynding out of euery of them: I send the Reader vnto them.

But let vs speake of Leachecraft which conteineth Phisik and Surgerie,* 1.275 the Arte which is so necessarie for all mankinde. Doe wee not sée how it bréedeth, and from day to day groweth and in∣creaseth of sicknesses and Wounds, yea and euen of the death of men? Diodorus attributeth it too the AEgyptians, and Moy∣ses in Genesis maketh some mention of Pharaos Phisitions. O∣thers doe father it vppon Esculapius, and some vpon Arabus the sonne of Apollo: but what maner of Phisicke was that? If wee followe the woords of Moyses, they were rather Imbalmers of Dead bodyes, than Phisitions of sicke person. And Esculapius (as sayth Cicero* 1.276) was estéemed as a God for teaching to pull out Téeth, and to loozen the Belly. Also Podalirius and Machaon his successors, medled not but with outward Cures. To be short, He∣rodotus* 1.277 saith, that one was a Leache for the Eye, another for the

Head, and a third for the Féete; and that when they were at their wits end, they layd the diseased person in a place of resorte, to trye there vpon him the receyt, of whosoeuer came first: and that was a kind of Lechecraft, which as yet had neither Head nor Tayle. Al∣so the brute beasts taught men diuers Herbes and remedies by lit∣tle and litle, and some men did put them in proofe vpon others, vn∣to the which Herbes they left their names; insomuch that in the end one Hippocrates and certeine others made a collection of all those things, and so of many mens experiences was made an arte, and that Arte hath bene inriched from time to time, and more per∣aduenture in our age than euer it was before. Howsoeuer the case stand, it is certeyne that the first Phisition that was séene in Rome was one Archagatus, who about a sixscore yeeres afore the com∣ming of Christ, in the Consu••ship of Lucius AEmilius Paulus, and Marcus Liuius, was made free of the Citie; after whom diuers o∣ther Greeke Phisitions came thi••her by heapes, but they were by and by driuen away againe by Cato the Censor, as Hangmen or Tormenters sent by the Greekes to murther the Barbarians (for so did the Greekes call all other Nations besides themselues) ra∣ther than Phisitions to heale the diseazed: and that was, bicause that in all cases without discretion, they vsed launcing and searing to all Sores. Now sith we see the Sciences and Artes growe af∣ter that maner from Obseruation to Obseruation, and from Prin∣ciple to Principle, and to bee so newly come vp among the Nati∣ons of greatest renowne and learning; shall we doubt to conclude that it was so among the ruder nations likewise?

Let vs come to Lawes;* 1.278 for euen the barbarousest people had of them: and it may bee that seeing man is borne too societie and fel∣lowship, thei had greater care to set an order among themselues by good Lawes, than to marke the order of the Skyes or the disposi∣tion of their owne bodyes. But doth not the Lawe written, leade vs foorthwith to the Lawe vnwritten? And doe not the greate vo∣lumes of Lawes which we turne ouer now adayes, leade vs to the peeces of Trebonian; and Trebonian, to the Sceuolaes and Af∣fricanes; and these againe to the Lawes of the Twelue Tables? And I pray you what els be the twelue Tables, but the infancy of the Romane Lawes, which being very simple rudiments of Ciuill gouernment, like those which are to bee found at this day among the most barborests Nations, wee through a foolish zeale of anti∣quitie doe wonder at in the auncient Romanes, and despyse them

in the auntient Almanes, Thuringians, Burgonions, Salians, and Ripuaries, who notwithstanding had them farre better than the Romanes?* 1.279 But what antiquitie can be sayd to be in them, see∣ing their continuance hath not bin past a fower hundred yeeres a∣fore the comming of Christ, as the Romane Histories themselues informe vs?* 1.280 Againe, doe not the twelue Tables send vs backe to the Grecians? And of whom had the Greekes them, but of Dra∣co and Solon as in respect of the Athenians, who liued in the time of Cyrus King of Persia; and of Lycurgus as in respect of the La∣cedemonians, who liued about the end of the Empyre of Assiria? And what els is all this houge Depth of Antiquitie whereof the Greekes make so great boast, but late newnesse among y^e Iewes? Moreouer Plutarke sayth that Solon and Lycurgus* 1.281 had beene in AEgypt to seeke Lawes, and that there for all their bragging of an∣tiquitie, they were skorned as yong Children. The AEgiptians al∣so had their Lawes of Mercury, & Mercury doubtlesse had them from the Paterne of Moyses, whom Diodorus witnesseth to haue bin the first Lawe maker of all.* 1.282 To be short, what shall we say, see∣ing that (as Iosephus noceth against Appion) the very name of Law was vnknowen amōg the Greekes in the time of Homere?

But it may be that there haue bene Kings tyme without mind: for they were as a liuing Law,* 1.283 and their determinations were tur∣ned into Lawes. Let vs marke then, that from the great Monarks we come to the Kings of seuerall Nations, and from them to vn∣derkings of Prouinces and of Shyres, and afterwards to Kings of Townes, Cities, and Uillages, and finally to Kings of House∣holds which were the Fathers and Maisters of houses, and were the ••ldest erauncient est of them; and these doe sende vs to the one comon stocke (that is to say, the one comon beginning) of them all. And whē was that? Surely Iustine the History writer witnesseth, * 1.284 that the Kings which were afore Ninus King of the Assyrians, were but particular Iudges of controuersies which rose betweene folke of any one Towne, or Citie, or household, and that the sayd Ninus was the first King of whome any Historiographers haue, written.* 1.285 And Herodotus sayth that the AEgyptians had the first Kings. And he that will mount vp any higher, must doe it by the holy Scripture, which teacheth vs that Nembrod was the first that brake the sayd fatherly order of Houshold gouernment, where∣in euery father reigned ouer chose that descended of him, without any other prerogatiue than of age, which sort of Gouerners Ma∣netho

calleth Shepherdkings,* 1.286 saying that they had beene a thou∣sand yeres afore the warres of Troy. For as for the Greekes and Romanes, either they were not as yet at all, or els surely they li∣ued with Acornes lyke the People whome wee at this day call Sauages.

But let vs see if at leastwise the Gods of the Heathen haue a∣ny antiquitie:* 1.287 for in asmuch as the essentiall shape of man is to ac∣knowledge a certeine Godhead, it is lykely y^t nothing should be of grerter antiquitie than that. And in very deede Nations haue bene found both without Lawes and without Kings: but without Gods and without some sort of Religion, there was neuer any found. But what shall we say if men haue bene borne afore Gods, yea and also doe liue still after them? Let vs not buzie our braynes about the first comming vp of the petigods as well of the Romanes as of the Greekes, who had moe of them than they had of Shyres, Cit∣ties, Townes, and Houses; nor yet about their Pedegrees which are sufficiently described by their owne seruers and worshippers the Idolaters themselues: but let vs go to the very roote of them. What is to be sayd of the first Saturne, who is called the father of them all? Of what tyme is he? Soothly if wee beleeue the nota∣blest Storywriters amōg the Greekes, & the Epitaphe of Osyris reported by Diodorus the Sicilian Saturne, (I meane not the Sa∣turne of the Greekes, but y^e auncientest of all y^t Saturnes) is none other thā Cham the sonne of Noe, neither is Osyris any other thā Misraim the youngest sonne of Cham, And those which woulde make Saturne auncientest, say hee was but Noe himselfe. I for∣beare to say what Berosus and others of the lyke stampe report of him, bicause I hold them for fabling and forged authors. As tou∣ching Iupiter, if ye meane him that was surnamed Belus, that is to say Ball or Mayster; hee was the Sonne of Nembrod, which Memrod was also called Saturne, which was a common name to the auncientest persons of great Houses. And if he were that Iupi∣ter which was surnamed Chammon or Hammon; hee was the same Cham or Chamases the Sonne of Noe, which was worship∣ped in Lybya: for it is certeine that hee tooke his ioyrney thither. For as for Iupiter of Crete or Candy, and Saturne his Father, which were worshipped among the Greekes after the example of the other Iupiter and Saturne which were of farre more antiqui∣tie: they were but a little whyle afore the warres of Troy, and long after the tyme of Moyses. What maner of antiquitie then is that,

which passeth not the space of three thousand yeeres? And should the Greekes haue come by the knowledge thereof, if it had not bin written by others than themselues? But this poynt shall be hand∣led more at large in another place.

What shall we say of Trafficke betwéene Nations, and of bar∣gayning betwéene man and man,* 1.288 seeing that from Coyne of gold wee must come to Coyne of siluer, from Coyne of siluer to Coyne of brasse, and from Coyne of brasse to Coyne of yron, yea euen a∣mong the Romanes themselues? And againe, from Money stam∣ped and coyned, to Money by weight and measure without stamp, from weight to exchaunge of wares and of one thing for another, and from exchaunge to that blessed comonnesse of al things which was in the first ages of the world? Nay, the greater halfe of the world continueth still the sayd exchaunge, euen vnto this day; and some Nations had neuer had any skill thereof as yet, if the Naui∣gations of our tyme had not taught it them. And as for Nauiga∣tion it selfe,* 1.289 which is as the sinewes of Trafficke and Merchaun∣dise; if we beléeue Plinie, the first Shippe that euer was set a flote, was vppon the red Sea; and the first Shippe that euer came into Greece, came from the Coast of AEgipt. And if we credit Strabo, * 1.290 the Tyrians were the first that excelled in Nauigation, insomuch that some men make them the first authors thereof.* 1.291 For, as tou∣ching the Nauigations of Vlysses, they passed not out of the Mid∣land Sea. And what els was it (if it were a true Storie) but a flo∣ting of a Uessell at the pleasure of the winde, without kéeping of any certeyne course or direction? For it is certeyne that the voyage which he had to make, is ordinarily done nowadayes in lesse than sixe or seuen daies. And doth all this leade vs any further than to that little Countrey which on y^e one side is* 1.292 bounded with AEgipt, and on the other side with the redd Sea? And doe not the Stories of that Countrie direct vs to the Arke of Noe? For what els was that Arke but a Shippe, as the true Berosi••s doth in déede call it: And wheras Moyses telleth vs that anon after the Flud, such and such of Noes ofspring inhabited the Iles; is it not asmuch to say, as that the example of the Arke had imboldened them to venture vpon the Sea?

But forasmuch as Trafficke seemeth to serue for liuing weal∣thily,* 1.293 and simple liuing went afore liuing wealthily: I pray you how long is it agoe (may we thinke) since men liued by Acornes? From the delicates of Apitius, wee come to honest howshold fare;

and from such howshold fare, to poore labouringmans fare: that is to say, from deyntinesse to thriftinesse, & so foorth from thriftinesse to brutishnesse, at such tyme as men wayted for the falling of A∣cornes and Mast from the Trees like Swine. To bee short, from Cities and Townes, we come to houses dispersed; from houses, to Sheds; from Sheds to Tents; and from Tents to the life of the people called the Nomads or Grazyers. I meane not here the A∣mericanes, nor yet the barbarous people of old tyme; but euen the very Greekes and Romanes themselues? Wee knowe the first finding out of Corne, of Meale, and of Ploughes.* 1.294 If it were Trip∣tolemus, who taught it to the Greekes; he was the sonne of Ce∣res: Or if it were Ceres; it was the Goddesse of AEgipt the wife of Osyris. And what was this Osyris (to speake of his most antiqui∣tie,) but Misraim the graundchild of Noe? Plinie sayth that afore the Persian warres, there was no common Baker in Rome. The first Cherries that came in Rome, were brought thither by Lucul∣lus. When the Galles came into Italy, there were no Uynes in all Gallia: insomuch that the worde which signifieth Wine aswell in Greeke as in Latin, is straunge to them both, and is borowed of the Hebrewe woord Iaijn. The Earth hath bin manured by little and little, & euen yet it is scarsly halfe inhabited. And at one word, our deifying of the first founders of Corne, of Wine, of Tillage, of Fewel, and of Baking, as of personages of great account aboue vs all; doth well conuince vs of our former rudenesse. And yet wée mocke at the sillie barbarous people [of the Newfound Lands,] for terming vs folke falne from Heauen, when they see our great Shippes: whereas notwithstanding it is not yet ful two thousand yeares agoe, since we were worse than they.

But wée should not haue knowne those things (will some man say) vnlesse they had bin put in writing; and therefore Histories* 1.295 are of more antiquitie than all the things that we haue spoken of. Bée it so. But yet let vs repayre from the Histories of the Romanes to the yéerely Registers of their Hyghpriests, and we shall finde that the Romane Writers are of much later tyme than the Greekes, and the Greekes of much later tyme than the Babylonians. For their greatest antiquitie is but from y^e reigne of the Persians. And Phericydes the Assyrian, whom they report to haue bin the first that wrate in prose, was welnere eight hundred yéeres after Moy∣ses.* 1.296 The Romane Historie florished not, vntill such tyme as their Commonweale began to droope: and the beginning thereof is no∣thing

thing els but a Musterbooke of names, and a recoūting of Shéelds falne from Heauen, and of Launces trimmed with flowers. The Greeke Histories began at the Empyre of the Persians: And Plu∣tarke* 1.297 (who was a diligent searcher thereof,) sayth expressely that beyond Thebes, the Countrie was nothing but Sand, and a wast Wildernesse vnapprochable, a frozen Seacoast, or scorched Coun∣tries, such as men paynt in the vttermost parts of Mappes, that is to say, eyther vayne fables or darke ignorance. And yet for all this, what els is the life of Theseus than a heape of fond fables, or what euidentnesse or certeyntie is there in the Greeke Histories, afore the fowerscorthe Olympiade, that is to say, afore the reigne of Darius,* 1.298 seeing there was not yet any skill vsed in marking out the tyme eyther of the warres of the Medes, or of the warres of Pelo∣ponnesus? Varro the best learned of the Latins, intending to make an Historie of the Worlde, could well skill to diuide it into three parts. The first, concerning that age which was from the begin∣ning of the world vnto the Flud; the second, from the Flud vnto the first Olimpiad, which falleth out about the tyme of the buil∣ding of Rome; and the third, from the first Olimpiad, vnto his owne tyme. But as he calleth this later age Historicall; so calleth he the second age fabulous, because he found not any certeyntie thereof, neither in the Originall Registers and Recordes of the Romanes, nor in the Histories of the Greekes. To be short, to be∣gin his Historie at the furthest end, he maketh his enteraunce at the reigne of the Scyonians, which was the very selfesame tyme that Ninus began his reigne, euen the same Ninus which made warre against Zoroastres, which was about y^t tyme of Abraham. The same Varro* 1.299 accounteth Thebes for the auncientest Cittie of all Greece, as builded by Ogyges, wherevppon the Greekes cal∣led all auncient things Ogygians; and by his reckoning it was not past two thousand and one hundred yéeres afore his owne tyme. Trogus Pompeius beginneth his Historie at the bottome of al an∣tiquitie that remained in remembraunce; and that is but at Ninus, who (by report of Diodorus* 1.300) was the first that found any Histo∣riographer to write of his doings. The same Diodorus saith that the greatest antiquitie of Greece is but from the time of Iuachus, who liued in the tyme of Amoses King of AEgipt, that is to say (as Appion confesseth) in the very tyme of Moyses.* 1.301 And intending to haue begun his Storie at the beginning of the world, he beginneth at the warres of Troy: and he saith in his Preface, that his Storie

conteyneth not aboue a thousande one hundred thirtie and eight yéeres, which fell out (sayth he) in the reigne of Iulius Caesar, in the tyme that he was making warre against the Galles; that is to say, lesse than twelue hundred yéeres afore the comming of our Lord Iesus Christ. Also the goodly Historie of Atticus, whereof Cicero commendeth the diligence so greatly, conteineth but seuen hundred yéeres. Which thing Macrobius obseruing, commeth to conclude with vs. Who doubteth (saith he) whether the World had a be∣ginning or no, yea euen a fewe yeeres since, seeing that the ve∣ry Histories of the Greekes do scarsly conteyne the doings of two thousand yeeres? For afore the reigne of Ninus, who is reported to haue bin the father of Semiramis, there is not a∣ny thing to be found in writing. Yea and Lucrece himselfe (as great an Epicure and despiser of God as he was) is constreined to yéeld thereunto, when he seeth that the vttermost bound which all Histories (bee they neuer so auncient) doe atteynt vnto, is but the destruction of Troy. For thus sayth he.

Now if that no beginning was of Heauen and Earth at all,* 1.302 But that they euerlasting were, and so continue shall: How ••aps i•• that of former things no Poets had delight Afore the wofull warres of Troy and Thebes for to wright?

Yea, but the Registers of the Chaldees (will some man say) are of more antiquitie. For (as Cicero reporteth) they make their vaunt that they haue the natiuities of Childred noted & set downe in writing (from natiuitie to natiuitie) for aboue the space of thrée and fortie thousand yeres afore the reigne of the great Alexander. And that is true. But (as it hath bin very well marked) when they speake after their Schoolemaner, they meane alwaies (as witnes∣seth Diodorus* 1.303) the moneth yéere, that is to say, euery moneth to be a yéere: which account being reckoned backe from the tyme of Ale∣xander, hitteth iust vppon the creation of the World, according to the account of the yéeres set downe by Moyses. Likewise when the Iberians say they haue had the vse of Letters and of writing by the space of sixe thousand yéeres agoe; they speake after the maner of their owne accounting of the yéere, which was but fower mo∣neths to a yéere. And in good sooth Porphirius himselfe will serue for a good witnesse in that behalfe, who sayth that the obseruations of the Chaldees which Callisthenes sent frō Babylō into Greece in the tyme of Alexander, passed not aboue a thousand and nyne hundred yéeres. As for the obseruations of Hipparchus, (which

Ptolomie vseth) they drawe much néerer vnto our tymes; for they reach not beyond the time of Nabugodo••ozer. To be short, from our Indictions we mount vp to the Stories of the Romanes, and from them to the yéerely Registers of their Priestes, and so to the Calenders of their Feastes & Holidaies, and finally to the time of their driuing of the nayle into the wall of the Temple of Minerua, which was done alwaies yéerely in the Moneth of September, to the intent that the number of the yéeres should not bee forgotten. From thence we procéede to the Greeke Olimpiads, the one halfe of which tyme is altogether fabulous;* 1.304 and beyond the first Olim∣piade, there is nothing but a thicke Cloude of ignorance, euen in the lightsomest places of all Greece.* 1.305 In which darknesse we haue nothing to direct vs, if we followe not Moyses, who citeth the booke of the Lords warres, and leadeth vs safely euen to our first origi∣nall beginning. And how should the Histories of the Gentiles be of any antiquitie, when there was not yet any reading or writing: From Printing, we step vp vnto bookes of written hand; from the Paper which we haue now, we come to Parchment; from Parch∣ment, to the Paper of AEgipt, which was inuented in the tyme of Alexander; from that, vnto Tables of Lead and Waxe; and final∣ly to the Leaues and Barkes of diuers Trées. From writing we goe consequently to reading, and so to the inuention of Letters: which Letters the Greekes taught vnto the Latines, and the Phe∣nicians to the Greekes, (who had not any skill of them at the tyme of the warres at Troy, as the very names of them doe well bewray) and the Iewes taught them to the Phenicians. For in very déede what are the Phenicians, in account of all Cosmogra∣phers, but inhabiters of the Seacoast of Palestine or Iewrie? And so the saying of Ewpolemus a very auncient writer of Histories, is found true: namely, that Moyses was the first teacher of Gr••••••∣mer, that is to say, of the Arte of Reading; (notwithstanding ••••at Philo doe father it vpon Abraham;) and that the Phenician ••ad it of the Iewes, and the Greekes of the Phenicians; in r••spect whereof Letters were in old tyme called Phenicians.

Phenicians were the first (if trust bée giuen to Fame) That durst expresse the voyce in shapes that might preserue the 〈◊〉〈◊〉.

Here I cannot forbeare to giue Plinie a little nippe. Let•••••• (sayth he) haue bin from euerlasting. And why so? For (sayth h•• the Letters of the AEgiptians had their first comming vp about a fiftéeue yéeres afore the reigne of Ninus. But Epigenes a graue

Author sayth, that in Babylone certeine obseruations of Starres were written in Tyles or Brickes a Seuenhundred and twentie yeeres afore: And Berosus and Critodemus (which speake with the least) doe say fowerhundred and fowerscore yeres. O extreame blockishnes! he concludeth the eternitie of letters, vpon that wher∣by they be proued to be but late come vp. Now then, seeing wee find the originall comming vp of Artes, of Lawes and Gouerne∣ment, of Traffick and Merchaundise, of soode and of very Letters; that is to say, both of ••iuing wel, and of liuing after any sort; should we rather graunt an euerlasting ignorance in man, than a kynd of youthfulnesse which hath learned things according to the growths thereof in ages? And seeing that the Sciences, Artes, Honors, and Deinties of the lyfe it selfe doe proue vs a beginning thereof: is there any man either skilfull or vnskilfull, greate or little, Phi∣losopher or Handicrafts man, Laborer or Follower of the worldly vanities; that w•• any more bee so bolde as to stand in contention that the world is without beginning? What shall we then as now conclude of all this discourse? First that the inuention of all things is of so late tyme, that it is of sufficient force too make all men be∣léeue, (of what trade or profession so euer they bee) that it is but a whyle ago since the worlde began. And secondly that the sayd in∣uentions gathering together into one tyme, doe leade vs to some one certeine Countrie as to a Centre, where mankind hath first sprong vp, and afterward spred it selfe abroade as to the outermost partes of all the Circle. This time is the same space that was be∣twixt Moyses and the vniuersall Flud: And the Countrie is the same where mankind did first multiplie after their comming out of the Arke: that is to wit, all the Coast from Mount Taurus along by Mesopotamia, Syria and Phenice, vnto AEgypt; wherein wee comprehend the land of Palestine or Iewrie as the middle thereof, which by the auncient Greeke and Latin Historiographers, (who were vnskifull in Geographie) is diuersly accounted and allotted to the greater Countries that lye round about it, accordingly as it bordereth vpon them; one while to Syria, another while to AEgipt; some time to Phenicia, and some time to Araby the desert. And therefore as touching tyme and antiquitie, it is good reason that wee should beléeue the Histories of those Nations, and not of the Greekes or of the Latins, who are but yong babes in respect of the others; especially seeing that wee would thinke it a thing woorthy to be laughed at, if a man should stand to the iudgement of the sto∣ries

of Iewrie in the matters of the Greekes. But nowe let vs heare their contradictions.

If the world be fo new (say they) where of commeth it that it is so well replenished and full of people?* 1.306 Nay rather, if it bee with∣out beginning, or of so greate antiquitie as thou surmizest; how happeneth it that it hath not alway bene knowen? whereof com∣meth it that it is euen yet so slenderly peopled? how comes it too passe that it is not throughly inhabited in all places, or at leastwise in the best places of the worlde, where euen in our tyme are found both Iles and mayne Lands well habitable, and yet vninhabited? It is not past a hundred yeres ago,* 1.307 since we knewe nothing at all of more then the better halfe of the world. Wee were but at the en∣terance of the earth, and wee thought our selues to haue bin come to the full knowledge of Geographie. We thought our selues to haue knowen the vttermost Coastes of the world, when as we had not yet passed the Southcircle which diuideth y^e world in twayne. * 1.308 And yet notwitstanding, he that had spoken otherwise, should haue bene counted of most men for a foole. Yea and euen yet still at this day, we know nothing of y^t mayne Land of the South, & but very little of the North. It is not past two hundred yeres ago, since the Swedians sent the first inhabiters into the country of Groneland: and both Scotland and Ireland (being in our part of the world) are yet still halfe barbarus. Ye shall reade in Caesars Commentaries, that in his tyme Germanie was a continuall Forrest, wherein a mā might haue gone 50. daies iourney ere he could see any end of it, and that the people thereof were sauage and beastly, sacrifysing their owne Children to their Goddes. He seemeth heere to speake of the Cannibals or the people of Brasilie. It was long time after ere the Romanes durst aduenture ouer farre in that Countrie. Whereby it appeareth that all the auncient Townes and Citties which stand vppon the Riuers of Rhyne and Danowe, towardes Fraunce and Italy, did serue rather for a Banke or a Iettie against the ouerflowing of the Germanes, than for Fortresses to assayle them withall. Euen in the tyme of Tacitus, what were the people on the Sea coast of Germanie? What were the Saxons in the time of Charles the greate? And a feawe hundred yeeres agoe, what were the Lowe Countryes of Germanie, which at this day be the florishingest people of all Ewrope? The same is to be sayd of Ingland in Caesars time; and likewise of Fraunce, Italy, and Spaine, if we mount a little higher. For seeing that Roome is the

oldest citie of the Latines; how happeneth it that Alexander (who sought newe worlds to conquer) knewe it not by the statelynesse thereof? how happeneth it y^t he knewe as litle also of the French∣men and Spaniards, of whom all the auncient Histories speake ei∣ther nothing at all, or els with wonderfull ignorance? And what shall we say of Ephorus, whom men account the diligentest Histo∣riographer of them all? As great a Countrie as Spayne or Iberia is; he writeth thereof in such sort, as if it were but only one towne. Also what was Greece afore the tyme of Orpheus and Amphi∣on, who (as Thucidides* 1.309 reporteth) drewe the Greekes out o•• their Forrests and Fennes, about the tyme of the warres at Troy? And where learned Orpheus* 1.310 to lay away his owne sauagenesse, but in AEgypt? The holy Bible it selfe when it speaketh of the Greekes and of the lesser Asia, speaketh of them as of Ilands, that is to say, as of Countries that were furthest of from the knowledge of that time. Thus doe yee see the latenesse of the Westerne Nations; whom I call so, as in respect of the rest of the whole world, and of the Centre and middle poynt thereof, which I haue taken too bee from Mount Taurus vnto Syria.

Now let vs see the Easterne Nations also. The Countrie of India beyond the Riuer Ganges, was vnknowen in the tyme of Alexander, who notwithstanding had cast the platforme of his Conquest, on that side of the world. And his Pylots which went to seeke new Worlds, passed not beyond the Iland of Sumatra then called Taprobane, which is vnder the Equinoctiall and Easterly a great way of from the Molucques.* 1.311 And when it was tolde the Romanes that a Ship was found which by the commaundement of Necho King of AEgypt had sayled about all the Coast of Af∣frike, they tooke it for a fable: and therefore much lesse did they e∣uer come at Iaua the lesse or Iaua the more, or at the firme Land which is next vnto them. To be short, they did not ordinarily passe the Streytes of Gibraltar; by reason whereof their greatest Phi∣losophers could lesse skill of the nature and course of the Tydes, than the meanest Seamen or Sailer of our time. Now then what is to be said of Plinie with his Dogheaded men, his Oneeyed men, his Longeares, his Centaures, his Pygmees, and his Cyclopes, seeing that in all the Countrie where he planteth them, wee finde Men, Cities, and Kingdomes, no lesse whit florishing than the same wherein hee himselfe was; and as for any lykelyhod of that which he writeth of those things, we find none at all? As touching

the Southcountryes and the Northcountryes, that is to wit, be∣yond the Circles of the two Poles: The fower Empyres which haue bene so renowmed, neuer heard speaking of them but at ran∣don, and much lesse extended them selues so farre; in so much that euen we our selues know but a little of them, which Tempest and Shipwrecke hath taught vnto vs.

What win wee then by this discourse? Uerely that the World was not knowne of all those great Empyres, and much lesse of them that liued vnder their subiection. And that it was not peopled all at once, but that as folke ouerswarmed in a place, and chaunced to hit vpon a man that was aduentrus, they spred themselues fur∣ther and further vnder his guyding, into the Countries next vnto them. And (to be short) that the néerer any Countries were to our foresayd Centre, the sooner were they inhabited, made ciuill, and manured: which thing appeareth more plainly euen by the very ge∣nealogie of the World.* 1.312 Therefore let vs take our Centre to be ey∣ther the toppe of Mount Taurus where it is called Caucasus, and where Stories report the Arke of Noe to haue rested; or els the playne of Sennaar, where Moyses sayth that the Languages were confounded, and folke dispersed abroade; or els some place of Meso∣potamia, (for it skilleth little in respect of the world) and by consi∣dering the auncientest Estates, we shall finde the States of Assy∣ria, of Syria, of AEgipt, and of Persia to haue bin nerest to our Cen∣tre, and that the State of Assyria was the greatest of them all, and yet in very trueth but small in comparison of the States that suc∣céeded it. From y^t Assyrians, the Monarchie came to the Persians; from the Persians, to the Greekes; frō the Greekes, to the Latins; from the Latins, to the Frenchmen; and from the Frenchmen to the Almanes, accordingly as Countries multiplyed their habita∣tions, and that their people growing in Ciuilitie, matched their force with wisedome? And Spayne which heretofore was counted the vttermost part of y^e World, is now become y^e first discouerer of the newe World. But let vs goe on with the East parts: from the Persians wee goe to the Indians, and from the Eastindians to the Westindians, so long vntill wee come to their vttermost Coast, which is the selfesame place where the Spanyards found their first landing. And surely if two folke should kéepe on their way conti∣nually, the one on the one side and the other on the other (that is to say, the one Eastward and the other Westward:) in the ende they should méete both together, if there were firme land all the way for

them to go vpon. And in very déed, like as Ireland, a part of Scot∣land, Laplond, and Groneland, being the vttermost parts of our side of the World, are as good as sauage: so also be the vttermost inhabiters of the Westindies; namely Canada, Baccalea, Brasilie, and Petagon, which are descended of the Eastindies. And contra∣rywise like as in our Countries, the more they tend towards the Centre which I haue taken, the mo tokens haue they of their an∣tiquitie; as, Fraunce mo than Germanie; Italy mo than Fraunce; Greece mo than Italy; AEgipt mo than Greece; and so forth of the rest: So the Spanyards, who in their first Conquests found but Cotages and Bogges; did at their entering further into the Land, finde goodly Cities wel inhabited, orderly distinction of Commons and Nobilitie, Ministers of Iustice and men of Warre, Trades and Handycraftes well gouerned, Histories of their doings, won∣derfull antiquities, Towers passing the Pyramyds of AEgipt, and whatsoeuer els the world hath counted wonderfull. And out of doubt the néerer they come to the Centre of that part, the more shall they find still. For there is no man ignorant nowadayes what goodly great Cities and florishing Kingdomes,* 1.313 haue within these fewe yéeres bin discouered in the Westindies: And where it com∣meth to face the Eastindia with the Sea betwixt them both; there we see the great Empyre of China, so beautifull, so florishing, and so well gouerned in al respects; that the ciuilest tyme of all the Ro∣mane Empyre, may well séeme vnto vs to haue bene barbarous in comparison of that. It is in effect all one as though the Westerne Indians making Conquests vpon vs as we haue done vpō them, should haue arriued at the first in Ireland, Scotland, or Grone∣land; for as little could they haue sayd of vs, as wee of them. And whereas it may be replyed, that although the people there be rude, yet notwithstanding it hath euermore bin peopled: Let it be added thereunto, that in following the Coastes, men haue found many Countries euen yet vnpeopled. And also that euen in the best peo∣pled places of all their Conquestes, they haue not found the tenth part of so much people as the Countrie being manured were able to beare; whereas on the contrary part, in our Countries the Na∣ti••ns doe pester one another. And wheras our very vttermost bor∣ders are more frequented then theirs; the cause therof is, that ours be much néerer the Centre which I set downe, then theirs bee; as the Cosmographers doe easly perceyue. Wherevpon it hath come to passe, that the people which haue bene spred abroade from our

Centre vnto the vttermost Coasts of the frosen Sea, finding them selues more multiplyed than their Lands were able to mainteyne, and being not able to go any further for the Sea that hemmed thē in; haue rebounded backe agayne vppon the next Countries, as namely the Cymbrians vppon the Almanes and Romanes, and afterward the Gothes vpon Italy and Fraunce, the Humes vpon Pannoye, the Vandales vpon Spayne, and lastly the Turkes and Tartarians vpon all Europe. Which thing hath not happened vp∣pon the other part of the World, because of the large scope of their Countrey, which eniptyeth the Easterne Indya nito y^e Westerne; The Westerne into newe Spayne; newe Spayne into Brasilie; and Brasilie into the Southerne land, wherof not so much as the Sea∣coast is yet knowne. Neither befell it so vnto vs in the first ages, because our part of the World was not yet sufficiently peopled to ebbe backe agayne: but it befell chiefly a little afore or a little after the comming of Iesus Christ, that is to wit, towards the perfect age of the World. To bee short, were there neuer so much people, yet were it no woonder to him that would take the peynes to ac∣count what onely one ofspring might amount vnto in one hundred yéeres, and how many one man might see to come of himselfe in his owne lifetyme; which in another hundred yéere might increase into an infinite multitude. The Empyres haue alwaies extended their largenesse towards the North and the South, but yet more Northerly than Southerly, because the Centre which I take, is still afore towards the North, and in the temperatest Clymate of our halfe Globe, that is to wit, towards the 35. and 40. degréees (or thereabouts) of the Equinoctiall lyne, which diuideth y^t World euen in the middest; which thing I desire the Readers to mark ad∣uisedly. And truely Iseland (which in old tyme was called Thule,) was knowne in the tyme of great Alexander, notwithstanding that it be situate about 68. degrées North; whereas yet for al that, the greatest part of Affrick was vnknowne to them, and the vtter∣most reach of their knowledge was the Ile of Taprobane, which neuerthelesse are but vnder the Equinoctiall: so farre of were they from atteyning to y^e Southpole. To be short, the Coast of Affrick or Barbarie & of Spayne, was peopled by the Phenecians, whom we reade to haue bin long tyme Lords of the Sea. And the Com∣monweale of Carthage, which was so highly renowmed and rea∣ched so farre of, was an ympe of Tyrus the chiefe Citie of Phene∣cia, which bordered vpon Iewrie. For Tyrus sent thether the one

halfe of their people; wherevpon it was called Carthago, that is to say, the halfe towne. And the first people that dwelled there,* 1.314 went into that Countrey by a narrowe péece of drye land called Cata∣bathmos, which is a falling ground that ioyneth Palestine vnto AEgipt, as remayned yet still to bee read in the tyme of the Hysto∣riographer Procopius, vpon a Piller in Tingie a Citie of Affrick, set there by the inhabitants of Chanaan which had fled away from the sight of Iosua. And in good sooth, as appeareth by many senten∣ces of S. Austins, the Punicke tongue was but a kinde of seuerall proprietie of the Hebrew.

Some persist yet still in demaunding,* 1.315 from whence the South∣land, the Countrie of Brasilie, the Land of Perow and such others could be peopled? And whence I pray you was Affricke peopled, for the replenishing whereof thou canst not but knowe that inha∣bitants were sent thether both by Sea and by Land? Affrick was peopled first by the foresayd narrow péece of drye Land cassed Ca∣tabathmos, and afterward refreshed agayne by the streyghts of Gibraltar. And the Southland was peopled on the one side by the Ile of Taprobane, & on the other side by the streyghts of Ma∣gellan which do butt there vpō Brasilie. And Perow likewise was peopled by the narrowe poynt of land called Darien, by the which way Brasilie also was peopled. At such tyme as the Spanyards entered first into that great Nesse which conteyneth both Brasilie and Perow, they thought it to haue bin an Iland. In like manner, if the Perouians had landed in Affrick by the Athlantick Sea, and had fennd so long a side as the side of Affrick is that stretcheth vn∣to the red Sea, so as they being wearied with following it as the Romanes were, had made the like question: we would then haue mocked at them because we knowe the passage whereby men came thether: and they haue like occasion to mock vs, because they know theirs. But yet agayne, from whence came the people which are spred abroade from the Land that is called newe Spayne by the streyght of Daryen? Proc••ede on yet a little further, and thou shalt finde Cathay and Indya ioyning to that Land; and Groneland facing it on the Northside; and the streyght of Anian on the West side, which is almost as néere within the viewe of it as Spayne is vnto Affrick by y^e streyghts of Gibraltare. And I pray you what more maruell is it that they should haue passed by that streyght, than that the Latins passed into Sicilie by the Fare of Messana, or that the Vandales passed into Affrick and y^e Sarzins into Spayne

by the sayd streygh••s of Gibraltare? But the mischiefe is, that no∣thing can suffize vs for proofe of the trueth; but for witnesse against it, we admit both Ignorance, Heresay, and Doubts, and the very least suspitions or surmizes that cā come in our mynd. For I pray you what can bee more childish, (or rather as Varro sayth in his Eumenides) more worthie of Hell; than to say that men sprung vp in a Countrey as Béetes and Rapes doe? After that maner were the Athenians called Aborigenes, that is to say, Homebred or bred in that place: and in token thereof they wore a Grassehopper in their Cappe or Bonet:* 1.316 insomuch that Aristides to flatter them withal, told them that their Territorie was the first that euer bore men; and yet for all that, there had bin whole Realmes of men in Syria, afore there were any mē in Greece. The Latins also would vaunt themselues of the same: but Dennis of Halycarnassus and Porcius Cato acknowledge them to haue come out of Achaia. Aske the Sauages, and they will say the very same that these Sa∣ges say: for they knowe neither one thing nor other, further than their owne remembrance can reach.

But goe to Moyses, and he will tell you the Originalles of the first Nations, and the Genealogie of the whole World. And the names of them remayning from thence vnto vs, will put the mat∣ter out of all doubt to a man of vnderstanding. For of Noe by his eldest Sonne Iaphet, issewed the Gomerians or Cymbryans, the Medes, the Ionians who were the first inhabiters of Greece, the Twiscons Duchmen or Almanes, the Italians, and the Do∣doneans: namely of Gomer, Maday, Iauan, Aschenes, Elisa, and Dodanim. By Cham there issewed the Chananites, the AEgip∣tians, the Libyans, the Sabeans, and so forth; who reteyned the names of his Children, that is to wit, of Chanaan, Misraim, Lud, Saba, and so foorth: For Misraim in Hebrewe betokeneth AEgipt. By Sem there descended the Elamites & Persians, the Assyrians, the Chasdeans or Chaldees, y^t Lydians, the Aramites or Syrians, the people of Ophir & others; that is to wit, of Elam, Arphaxad, Lud, Aram, Ophir, and others. And these names were written and recorded by Moyses, afore those Nations were of any reputa∣tion, and they remayne yet still among the Hebrewes at this day. Now looke in what measure these fathers of houses increased their Children, so did euery of them spred out his braunches a farre of, insomuch that the ofspring of that stock did couer and ouershadow the whole earth, and the Arke of Noe did after a maner sayle ouer

the whole world.

But here is an Obiection which seemeth stronger.* 1.317 These rea∣sons (say they) do bring vs vp to the Flood; but as y^e Flud brought mankynd to that small number, whereby the World was by little and little renewed agayne: So may it be that there were other for∣mer Fluds, that had done the like afore; so as this latter Flud was rather a renewing of the World, than a first beginning therof. And to this purpose they will alledge this saying of Plato in his Ti∣maeus, that the ouerflowings of waters and the burnings by fire, doe from tyme to tyme refresh the World, and destroy the remem∣berance of the former ages, and also of all Artes, Sciences, and o∣ther Inuentions. This is worthie of some examination. Surely of Burnings eyther vniuersall or any thing great in respect of the whole world, there is no mention found in any Storie. Also of any other generall Flud, than that which wee take to bee the first, and last, there is as little to be found, vnlesse they will apply that name to the ouerflowings of Riuers in some final quarter, or to the win∣ning of the Sea by force of his breaking into some Countrey a League or twayne, which can nothing serue to this purpose. And if their alledging of it in that behalfe be vnfeinedly and in good ear∣nest as I beléeue it is; well mought they fare for their confession. For then will I aske them whether this Flud were vniuersall, or particular but to some one Countrey. If it were particular; how commeth it to passe that all Nations confesse it to bee vniuersall? And how commeth it to passe also that the Countries which had no part thereof, haue no incling thereof eyther in memorie or in writing? Or if it were vniuersall; did any men escape from it, or no? If none escaped, how then come wee to the knowledge of it? And whence are we also, but of a new Creation? And he that was able to create vs agayne, why was he not able to create vs also afore? If some escaped, as all of vs do consent that there did: why beléeue we them not as well in the things that went afore the Flud, as we beléeue them concerning the Flud it selfe? And who bee those that escaped but Noe and his issew, who leade vs to the first beginning both of the World and of men? For in al the Histories of the Hea∣then, what finde wee thereof woorth the alledging? Againe, I de∣maund whether this sayd Flud and others which they pretend to haue abolished the rememberance of the former tymes, befell by chaunce or by prouidence? If by chaunce; was it not possible, that of so many which may perchaūce haue bin eyther from euerlasting

or of very old tyme, perchaūce not so much as any one should haue escaped? Or if by Prouidence; by whose prouidence should it be but by Gods? or who could haue power to vndoe and confound this worke, but only he that made it? And what warrant hast thou that he destroyed it more than once, seeing thou art inforced to graunt that he made it but once? Nay, it may be that it befel through some Coniunction of the Starres. And who told them so? And if they knowe so much thereof, let them tell vs what Starres. I omit to tell them that such Coniunctions (as they themselues teach) threa∣ten not the whole World, but some small part thereof. After this maner did the Astrologers say, that in the yéere 1524. there should méete the like Coniunction as was at the generall Flud, by rea∣son whereof the whole earth should be couered with water: and yet as (Viues sayth) a fayrer yéere was neuer seene. To bee short, all things will goe for payment with these folke, sauing the trueth.

But sée here their last Ankerhold. How happeneth it (sayth A∣uerrhois* 1.318) that God forbore so long, and where had hee that newe deuice of making the world? Silly soule that thou art! which glo∣riest in asking Questions whereas skill consisteth in answering. Thou wilt néedes prooue the world by thy reasons to bee without beginning: and yet in thrée woords which thou hast spoken, thou shewest y^t thou knowest not what eternitie or euerlastingnes is. In eternitie (fréend myne) there is neither length nor shortnes of time: the euerlasting prouidence is not tyed to new casualtie. Consider that thou art a man. The Plants cannot iudge of Sence; the Beastes cannot iudge of the drift of Reason; neither canst thou which art s••biect to tyme, iudge of eternitie which is without time. For if euen thy litle Babe which is in time, cannot conceiue what tyme is: how shall hee that is but in tyme, vnderstand the euerla∣stingnes of the euerlasting? After that maner the brute beasts (if they had speech) would decipher the reache of thy wit according to their owne imagination. And thou wouldest mocke at them if they should goe about to describe what thy memorie is, which ioyneth past, present, and to come all in one. And how thinkest thou thy self able to iudge of eternitie, which alterest with the Winds, with the Moones, and with the seasons of the yere; euery day, euery howre, and euery minute? Askest thou why God forbore so long tyme? Nay rather, aske why God listed to make the tyme it selfe; for in one vndeuidable moment is eternitie ioyned both too y^e beginning and to the ende of tyme. Learne this also, that where there is any

bound orend, there is no long tyme. The long time of a Worme, is a mooneth; of an Ant, a yere; of a Horse, thirtie yeres; of a man, a hundred yeeres; of all mankind, certeine thousands of yeres; of tyme it selfe, a certeine space of tyme; and the terming of any of all their times long, is in respect of the long continuance of their life in time; but vnto him that made tyme, nothing indureth lesse whyle than time. Put the cace that the world haue lasted a hundred thou∣sand yeres, or (if ye will) tenhundred thousand, what shall ye gaine by that? That the world shall haue bene of the greater antiquitie. But in respect of whom? of God, or of thy selfe? of a Woorme, or of a Spirit? of eternitie, or of tyme? And what is all that in com∣parison of infinitenesse? Is not y^t Question all one still? Whence is this deuice? whence is this chaunce? as well in a hundred; as in a thousand, and as well in a thousand as a thousand thousand? Yet was the deuice and purpose eternall, notwithstanding that the execution thereof be in tyme, insomuch that he hath brought forth tyme, and tyme is measure of mouing, and mouing proueth a be∣ginning, and the beginning which it taketh is euer newe. Thou then which by a mouing hast a beginning proued vnto thée, giue o∣uer thy surmised eternitie and confesse a newnesse of tyme, for no∣thing is newer than tyme. With like reason myst thou demaund why God made the World rather here than elswhere. For these distinctions of time and place were created and brought forth toge∣ther at one instant with the World, so as they be neither without it nor afore it. He that is without tyme and without place, made both tyme and place; and if he had bin subiect to tyme and place, as thou imaginest; he could not haue made eyther place or tyme. Yea, but what did hee then (sayest thou) afore the worlde and out of the world? Once agayne amend thy plea. For in God there is neyther afore nor after, within nor without. But surely it is a goodly que∣stion, and welbeseeming a great wit. Afore thy Clocke or thy buil∣ding was made, thou diddest not ceasse to liue and to delight thy selfe in the perfectnesse of thyne Arte; and afterward thy building added nothing vnto thée, but thou vnto thy building. Thou woul∣dest haue bin ashamed to haue asked of Scipio what he did at home in his house in the Countrie, after he had giuen ouer the affayres of the Commonweale and the warre••: and he would haue answe∣red thée y^t he was neuer lesse ydle than when he was ydle, nor lesse alone than when he was alone. And yet thou thinkest that it stoode God greatly on hād to make this goodly place of y^t world for thée,

and to harber such blasphemers as thou art therein, as if he could not haue forborne thée, or liued without thy companie. God did the same thing without the world, which he doth still with the world: that is to wit, he is happie in himselfe. The world hath nothing at all augmented his felicitie or happinesse. But to the intent (as y•• would say) to shed foorth his happinesse out of himselfe; it liked him to create the world. Yea, but why did he it no sooner? What a num∣ber of faults are heere in one spéech? Thou wilt néedes be priuie to the cause of Gods will in al things, and yet is Gods will the cause of the causes of all things. By eternitie thou haddest not bin able to haue knowne his power; for the Maiestie therof would haue made the darke; and it is so bright that thou couldest haue séene lesse, than thou couldest see now if thou wert lodged in y^e body of the Sunne. Now he maketh thee to perceyue his power, by the creation of the world; his eternitie, by comparison of tyme; & his glorious bright∣nesse, by the shadowe thereof. By eternitie, thou couldest not haue knowne his wisedome; for thou wouldest haue déemed all things as wise as he, seeing they had bin as euerlasting as he. And what wisedome had remayned in him, if all things had bin of necessitie, and nothing at his owne choyce and libertie? But now thou seest his wisedome in the Stones, in the Herbs, in the dumb creatures, yea and euen in the workmanship of thy selfe. Thou seest it in the order, in the succession, and in the bréeding of all things. Thou ga∣sest at it in the greatest things, and thou wonderest at it in the smal∣lest; as much in the Flye and the Ant, as in the whole Cope of hea∣uen: wheras the eternitie of things would haue caused thée to haue attributed Godhead to the Skyes, the Starres, the Earth, the Rockes, the Mountaynes, and in effect to all things rather than thy selfe, as they did which were taught so to do. Also by this eter∣nitie thou couldest not haue conceyued his goodnesse, because thou wouldest haue thought that GOD had had as much néede of the World, as the World had of him. Thou shouldest not haue kno∣wen thy selfe to bee any more beholden to him, than to the fire for heating thée or to the Sunne for giuing thée light, because they should no more bee eyther fire or Sunne, if they forwent that na∣ture. But he sheweth thée by the creation, both that he himselfe is euer, and that thou hast had thy being since the tyme that it pleased him to create thée: that he without thée is eternall; and that thou without his goodnesse haddest neuer bin that little which thou art: and to bee short, that he is not tyed to any néede or necessitie as A∣ristotles

God is, (which could not refuse to driue y^t Mill, but was tyed to it whether he would or no:) but that his doing of things is altogether of his owne infinite goodnesse, wherethrough he vout∣safeth to impart himselfe vnto others, by making the thing to bée which was not; yea and by making the thing happie, which of it selfe could not so much as be. Now, had man any will or skill to acknowledge the power, wisedome, and goodnessē of his God? [I thinke not.] Then was it for thy benefite and not for his owne, that he made not the World eyther of greater antiquitie, or eter∣nall. For had he made it eternall; (let vs so speake seeing ye will haue it so,) thou wouldest haue made a God of it, and thou canst not euen now forbeare the doing thereof. And had he made it of more antiquitie; thou wouldest haue made it an occasion to forget thy God; and for all the newnesse thereof, yet wilt thou not beare it in thy mynd. Then seeke not the cause thereof in his power. The cause thereof is in thy••e owne infirmitie: Nay, the cause thereof is in his goodnesse, in that he intendeth to succour thyne ignorance. And so, notwithstāding al their obiections, we shall by this meanes hold still our conclusion, to wit, That the World is but of late con∣tinuance; That it had a beginning; and that concerning the tyme of the first beginning thereof; and concerning the continuance thereof vnto our daies, we ought to beléeue y^e bookes of Moyses aboue all.

The ix. Chapter.

That the wisedome of the World hath acknowledged the Creation of the World.

SIth we haue seene with what consent y^t whole harmonie of the World chaunteth the Crea∣tion therof and the praise of the Creator; now it followeth that we see what the wisedome of the world hath beléeued in that behalf: where∣in we haue to cōsider the selfsame thing which we considered in the doctrine of the thrée Per∣sons; that is to wit, that the néerer we come to the welhead thereof, the more clerer we finde it: yea and it is also a schoolepoynt of Pla∣toes teaching, That in these high matters of the Godhead, of the

Creation of the world, and of such other like, we must giue credite (as vnto a kynd of Demonstration,) to the sayings of men of most antiquitie, as folke that were better and néerer to God than wée. Here I should begin at Moyses, as the auncientest of all writers, and whom all the Heathen Authors doe honor and woonder at in their writings•• And the very first worde of his booke simply set downe in these termes, In the beginning God created Heauen and Earth; ought to bee vnto vs as a maximée of Euclyde, which in those daies men were ashamed to call in question.* 1.319 But to the in∣tent we confound not the word of God with the word of man, for∣asmuch as the folke with whom wee haue to deale, are such as re∣fuse those whom they cannot accuse: let vs ouercome them rather by their owne Doctors. Certeynly whosoeuer will take the payne to cōferre Mercurius* 1.320 Trismegistus with Moyses, shall reape ther∣by most singular contentation. In Genesis Moyses describeth the Creation of the World; and so doth Mercurie likewise in his Poe∣mander. Moyses espyeth darknesse vpon the Waters: And Mer∣curie seeth a dreadfull shadowe houering on the moyst nature, and the same moyst nature as it were brooded by y^e word of God, Moy∣ses sayth that GOD spake, and foorthwith things were made: and Mercurie acknowledgeth and bringeth in Gods worde shining, whereby he created the light and made the World and all that is therein. Moyses parteth the nature of moysture into twayne, the one mounting aloft which he calleth Heauen, and the other remay∣ning beneath which he calleth Sea: And Mercurie seeth a light fire which he calleth AEther mounting vp as it were out of the bo∣welles of the moyst nature, and likewise an ayre casting it selfe be∣twéene the water and the elementarie fire, which is nothing els but a more cléere and suttle ayre. The Sea and Land (sayth Moyses) were mingled together vntill God had spoken; and then by and by eyther of them tooke his place by himselfe. After the same maner Mercurie sayth that those two Elements lying erst mingled toge∣ther, seuered themselues asunder at the speaking of the spirituall word which inuyroned them about. What more? God (say both of them) created the Starres and the Planets.* 1.321 At the voyce of his word, the Earth, the Ayre, and the Water, brought foorth Beasts, Birdes, and Fishes. Last of all, God created man after his owne Image, and deliuered all his workes into his hand to vse them. Is not this a setting downe nor only of one selfsame sence, but also of the selfesame termes and words? But when as Mercurie addeth

afterward, that God cryeth out vnto his works by his holy word, saying, Bring ye foorth fruite, grow, and increase: may it not séeme vnto vs that we heare Moyses himselfe speaking?* 1.322 And as for the small differences which are in him concerning the seuen Circles, the Zones, and such other things; they serue greatly to the manife∣station of the trueth; namely, that this maner of Mercuries wri∣ting, is not a bare borrowing or translating out of Moyses; but ra∣ther a tradition conueyed to the AEgiptians from the Father to the Sonne. In another place he sayth that God by his holy, spirituall and mightie working word, commaunded the day sonne to bee, and it was done: that the Sea and Land should bee seuered asunder; that the Starres should be created; and that Herbes should growe vp euery one with his seede, by force of the same worde. Also that the World is but an alteration, a mouing, a generating and a cor∣rupting of things, and that it cannot be called good. These are con∣clusions cleane contrary to eternitie or euerlastingnesse. But foras∣much as [if I should set downe all his sayings which he hath to that purpose,] I should be fayne to copie him almost whole out: it is better for me to desire the Readers to go to the very place it self.

Orpheus the auncientest of the Greekes,* 1.323 had bin in AEgipt as he himselfe skyth, and there he learned, That there is but one God, and that

The Ayre, the Heauen, the Sea, the Earth, and Hell With all the t••••••gs that in them all doe dwell,

were harberd in his ••reast from all eternitie. And also that

The running streames, the Ocean, Gods and Men, Things present, things to come lay all at ease In that wide lap of his: and that within His belly large the bond lay lapped vp Which holdeth all this great huge worke together.

And afterward he addeth further,

These things which yet lay hidden all Within the treasure of his brest, He into open light did call, Creating as he deemed best This stately stage, whereon to showe His noble doings on a rowe.

And what els is this; than that God did euerlastingly hold the world hiddeny, (as the Apostle sayth) in the Treasurie of his infi∣nite

wisedome: Or (as Dennis sayth) in the Closet of his purpose and will; and afterward brought it foorth in tyme when it pleased him? And in another place, I sing (sayth he) of the darke confu∣sion,* 1.324 I meane the confusion that was in the beginning, how it was disfigured in diuers natures, and how the Heauen, the Sea and the Land were made. And what more? I sing (sayth he) of Loue, euen of the Loue that is perfect of it selfe, of more anti∣quitie than all these things; and of all things which the same hath brought foorth, and set in order, yea of tyme it selfe. I haue alreadie heretofore declared what he meaneth by this Loue: namely, the goodwill of GOD; and that also doe euen some of the Hebrewes meane by the Spirit which Moyses speaketh of.* 1.325 To be short, he sayth that he himselfe made a booke of the Creation of the world, which was a common argument among the Poets of that tyme, as Empedocles, Hesiodus, Parmenides, and such o∣thers, which were all Philosophers. And in many places he redu∣ceth all things to Water and to a certeyne Mud as to their origi∣nal, which thing agréeth well enough to the déepe of Moyses. The like is done by Homer and Hesiodus, which came after him. For, Hesiodus* 1.326 maketh description, not only of the Creating of •• world and of the parts thereof; but also of the Chaos or confusion and of the Gods themselues. And whē Homer intendeth to curse a man, I would (sayth he) that thou mightest returne to Water and Earth: that is to say, I would thou wert not any more, as the time hath bene that thou wast not. To be short, Sophocles, AEschylus, and the very Comedywriters speake after the same maner: and for proofe of them all, Ewripides shall suffize, who was the least reli∣gious of them all. The tyme hath bene (sayth he) that Heauen and Earth were but a lumpe: but after that they were separa∣ted, they ingendred all things, & brought to light the Trees, the Birds, the Beastes of the field, the Fishes, and Men them selues. For as for others, they speake more to the purpose, as Ara∣tus, who sayth that God hath set the Starres in the Skye to di∣stinguish the Seasons of the yeare: that he created all things: that men are his ofspring: that by the signes of Heauen he ment to giue them warning of the chaunges of the Aire, and of Tempests. And the voyce of these Poets is to bee considered as the opinion of the people to whom they sung their uerses.* 1.327

Now let vs go on with the auncient Philosophers. Pythago∣ras (by the report of Plutarke) saith y^t the World was begotten of

God, of it owne nature corruptible, because it was sensible and bo∣dily; but yet that it is not corrupted, because it is vphild and main∣teyned by his prouidence. The same thing doth also Diogenes Laertius witnesse. And whereas Varro* 1.328 sayth that Pythagoras ac∣knowledged not any beginning of liuing Wights: Architas his Disciple shall mainteyne the contrary for his Maister: For his wordes are these:* 1.329 Of all liuing Wights man is bred most wise of capacitie to consider things, and to atteyne to knowledge, and to iudge of them all. For GOD hath printed in him the fulnesse of all Reason. And like as God hath made him the in∣strument of all Voyces, Sounds, Names and vtterances; so also hath he made him the instrument of all vnderstandings and conceyts, which is the workmanship of wisedome: And euen for that cause (saith he) doe I thinke that man is of Gods crea∣ting, and hath receyued his instruments and abilities at his hand. Thales* 1.330 one of the seuen Sages hild opinion, that all things had their beginning of Water, and that GOD created all things therof, who is alonly vnbegotten, and hath not any end or any be∣ginning. * 1.331 And againe, The World (sayth he) is most excellently beautiful, for it is the worke of God. Also being asked whether was first of the Day or the Night; he answered that the Night was sooner by one day: as if he had ment to say, that afore God had created the light, it must néedes bee confessed that out of him there was nothing but darknesse. Now this Philosopher also as well as the rest had gone to Schoole in AEgipt.

Timeus of Locres termeth Tyme the Image of eternitie, and sayth that it tooke his beginning from the creating of Heauen and Earth, and that God created the very Soule of the World afore the World it selfe, both in possibilitie and in tyme. To bee short, Plutarke affirmeth that all the naturall Philosophers of old time, hild opinion that the begetting or creating of the World began at the Earth as at the Centre thereof: and that E••pedocles sayth that the finest kynd of AEr which they cal AEther, was the first part thereof that was drawne vp on high. And Anaxagoras is repor∣ted by Simplicius, to affirme that God (whom he calleth Mynd or Vnderstanding) created the Heauen, the Earth, the Sunne and the Starres; and scarsly is there any one to bee found, which tea∣cheth that tyme is without beginning.

Some of Platoes latter Disciples, (as namely Proclus wri∣ting against the Christians) would néedes beare their Mayster

downe, that he beléeued the world to haue had no beginning. But if wee may beléeue Aristotle,* 1.332 who was a scholler of his a two and twentie yéeres; he taught that the world was created; and it is one of the chief Principles wherein they most disagrée. Philo who was as another Plato, saith that Plato had learned it of Hesiodus. And Plutarch* 1.333 who sheweth himselfe to haue perused him throughly leafe by leafe, speaketh of him in these words. There are (sayth he) some studyers of Plato, which by racking his wordes, indeuer by all meanes to make him deny the creation of the World and of the Soule, and to confesse the euerlastingnesse of time, notwithstanding that in so doing they bereeue him of that most excellent treatise of his concerning the Goddes, against the despysers and skorners of whom in his tyme he wrate. And what needeth any thing to be alledged for proofe there∣of, seeing that his whole booke of Timeus is nothing els but an expresse treatise of the Creation of the World? The same thing also doth Aphrodisius* 1.334 witnesse concerning Plato. In his booke intytled Athlantick, he termeth the world a thing Longago created. In his matters of State he sayth that the world was set∣led and founded by God, and that it cōteyneth store of good things, and that the trouble somenesse which it hath, is but a Remnant or Remaynder of the former confusion. Also Socrates in his booke of Commonweale, termeth it 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉* 1.335 A Godhead begot∣ten or created. And which of the auncient writers did euer doubt, that Plato taught not the Creation of the World, considering that he hath made descriptions, both of all the parts thereof, and of the Gods themselues? And also that he sayth that the world was crea∣ted corruptible of it selfe, but yet abode immortall and vncorrupti∣ble through the grace of God which vpholdeth it? But let vs exa∣min the racking which Proclus offereth vnto him. Plato (saith he) affirmeth in his Commonweale, that whatsoeuer hath a be∣ginning hath also an ende: Now the World, as he sayth in his Timeus, shall haue no end: Therefore it followeth that it had no beginning. If another man should reason after that maner a∣gainst Proclus, Proclus would laugh him to skorne: for he shifteth the termes: and yet our Soules which he concludeth to be without end, faile not to haue had a beginning. But though we were neuer so wel contented to let him passe: yet doth Plato assoyle him in one word. The world (saith he) is corruptible of it selfe, for euery thing that is compounded, may also be dissolued: but it is not Gods will

that it should be corrupted. And myne ordinance (sayth the e∣uerlasting) is of more power to make thee to continue, than thine owne Nature is to make thee to perish.* 1.336 The which thing he speaketh yet more shortly in another place, saying that the world hath receyued an Immortalitie at the hand of the workmayster which made it.* 1.337 Now then, seeing that by Nature it may perish; surely by Nature it had a beginning: and the power that hath pre∣serued it from perishing, is the very same that made it to bee. Pro∣clus addeth: Plato propoundeth a Question (sayth he) whether the World was created after the patterne of a thing forecrea∣ted, or of a thing without beginning. Therefore he dowted whether it were eternall or no. What a conclusion was this for a great Philosopher? I aske whether men bee bred of themselues or created of another; therefore I vphold that they be bred of them∣selues: as who would lay that in disputing, it were not an ordinary matter to set down both the Contraries, for the affirming of y^e one and the denying of the other. Agayne, if it were begotten or crea∣ted after y^e example of a thing aforecreated, could it be beginning∣lesse, seeing that the patterne thereof had a beginning? And if it were created after the example of a thing vncreated, can it come to passe that it should be euerlasting, séeing that it is not the very pat∣terne it selfe? No: but as I haue sayd afore, wee admit horned ar∣guments against the trueth, whereas in defence of the trueth the perfectest demonstrations suffize vs not. Also in another booke in∣tytled of a String he sayth thus: Plato in his booke of Lawes sayth that Commonweales and Artes haue infinite tymes bin vtterly destroyed by Waterfluds and Burnings, and therefore that men cannot certeinly say from what time men haue first growne into Commonweales: Ergo, he beleeued that the World had no beginning. Nay, he sayth these things in his Ti∣meus, which is the booke whereof thou canst not dowt, but that he treateth there expressely of the Creation of the World. And he re∣peateth the same agayne in his booke of Commonwealematters, hauing sayd afore, that God created Heauen & Earth, the Starres and Gods. Now then, seeing it is one selfsame Author that spea∣keth these things, and in one selfesame place, and one immediatly after another: is it not certeyne that he ment not to match cleane contrary doctrines together? What is to be sayd then, but that he spake there after the maner of the common multitude, who (as A∣ristotle sayth) doe call the things infinite, which they be not able to

number? Or as Moyses himselfe speaketh, who calleth the things eternall, euerlasting or endlesse, which are of very long cōtinuance, notwithstanding that he make a booke expressely of the Creation of all things? But in déede it was a surmize of the auncientnesse of the World, which Plato (as it should seeme) had brought home out of AEgipt, accordingly as the report of Solon sufficiently decla∣reth, who telleth him that the AEgiptians had Registers of nyne thousand yeres, that is to say (as Plutarke interprets it) nine thou∣sand Moones.

But let vs come to Aristotle,* 1.338 to whom this opinion doth pro∣perly belong. For although some of his Schollers being ashamed on his behalfe, would fayne beare him on hand that he was of ano∣ther opinion, or at leastwise that he hild it as a doubtfull poynt; yet notwithstanding his sentences in that case are too certeine, too clere, and too manifest,* 1.339 for them to goe about to cloke his opinion. But seeing he was so bold as to remoue the former bound fettled by the authoritie and beléefe of all that went afore him: néedes must it bée that he had very expresse termes, and very certeyne Demonstra∣tiōs. And I pray you let vs see what maner a ones they be? From the mouings that are here beneath, he leadeth vs to the mouings that are aboue, and from them to a first mouer. Hetherto he is wel. But afterward he will haue this first mouer to moue euerlasting∣ly, and therefore that tyme should be euerlasting also. Neyther the ground nor y^e consequence of this argument are aughtworth. How will ye proue that the first mouer moueth eternally? Nay contrari∣wise, mouing argeweth a beginning. For in mouing there is a cer∣teyne poynt from whence the mouing is made, vnto another poynt wherto it tendeth: and euen according to Aristotles owne doctrine, forenesse, afternesse, and continuance of tyme do followe forenesse, afternesse, and continuance of mouing: and that implyeth a mani∣fest contrarietie to the definition of mouing from place to place. And that tyme should be beginninglesse, what els is it to say, than that tyme is not tyme, and (as ye would say) an implying of con∣tradiction in the very word it self? For what els is tyme according to Aristotle himselfe, than the number of mouing by forenesse and afternesse, by past and to come. And if it be a number, where is the infinitenesse thereof become? And if there be afore and after, where is the eternitie thereof? In another place he sayth, that mouing is eternall because tyme is eternall; and that the cause why time is so, is that it is alwaies ioyned to that which is past. I pray you what

a childishnesse is this? By the same reason I may say that the mo∣uing of a Mill, or the stirring of any liuing wight is eternall: for in those cases euery instant followeth immediatly in the necke of that which is past, no lesse than in the mouing of tyme; and yet wee bee not ignorant that they haue a beginning. But like as there is a certeyne first forthsetting in those, so is there also in the mouing of the Heauen, who is the bréeder of tyme. And Algazel* 1.340 answereth Auerrhois very well vpon this poynt; That looke what a poynt or pricke is in things that hold on whole vnbroken of; the same is an instant or moment in things that immediatly or continually suc∣céede one after another: and that as a poynt or pricke is the begin∣ning of a lyne, so an instant is the beginning of tyme: & Auerrhois could not disproue this reason, otherwise than by flowring him for it. He replyeth yet agayne, and sayth; Yea but if the World had a beginning, how shall the maker thereof be voyd of alteration? To such a question as this is, me thinkes he himselfe should answere thus: That the alledging of an incōuenience assoyleth not the que∣stion. But good Sir Philosopher! By your seeking to bring vs to this inconuenience, you graunt at leastwise that God created Na∣ture. And is it not a straunge ouersight in you, that you will néedes tye him to the lawes of Nature, which is the maker of Nature? and measure the power and libertie of the Clockmaker, by the sub∣iection of the Clocke vnto him? Art thou not ashamed to yéeld lesse preheminence to GOD, than thy King whom thou exemptest from subiection to his lawes, because he is the maker of the lawes? I pray thée what a thing were it, if thou shouldest vndertake but only to measure Nature by thyne owne wit? What a number of tymes hast thou found thy wit to stumble at the least things? How often hast thou found it against thy selfe? Now, if Nature goe be∣yond the reach of thy wit, how farre shall the very maker of nature outgoe it? Thou canst not shift thy place without remouing; and therefore thou déemest the like of God. But consider at leastwise that they Soule or Mynd not being limited within any place, is the place of a thousand things, & that a thousand things are the place thereof. Againe, thy Soule cannot conceiue any thing, without passing from contemplation to action: no nor abyde in contempla∣tion, without chaunge. Now thy desire is to haue GOD like thy self in this behalf. But if thou wilt not yéeld thy self to other mens reasons; at leastwise yéeld thy selfe to thyne owne reasons. For wheras thou sayst, that beyond the Heauen* 1.341 there is neither empti∣nesse

nor tyme; but that whatsoeuer is there, is exempted from all maner of tyme, mouing, chaunge, and passibilitie; and that in that vniuersall eteruitie all things doe leade a most happie and welcon∣tented life: darest thou say lesse of God, whom thou thy selfe doest place farre aboue all those things? The very brute Beastes would bable after that maner of the nature of thy Soule, yea and more to the purpose too. For wheras there is no comparison betwéene God and thée; they yet haue a thing that doth somewhat resemble thée▪ For thou chaungest in doing, because thy doing is another thing than thy being; and the thing that thou amost at is out of thy selfe; which thing cannot chaunge for thée, and therefore thou art fayne to chaunge for it. Also thou chaungest in beholding; for the thing which thou beholdest, and thou which beholdest it, are two: and to bee short, in beholding, thou doest after a sort suffer at the thing which thou beholdest, & in doing, thou sufferest at the thing which thou doest: but vnto him which is the maker of al things, to be and to behold, to behold and to doe, to doe and to will are all one thing. For euen in willing a thing he hath done it, and his willing there∣of is after a certeyne & determinate maner, (I vse humane wordes for the vttering of my meaning). To bee short, vnto him that be∣holdeth all things in himselfe, nothing can spring vp that shall bée new. Let vs now put the case, that the forealledged inconuenience be most to purpose; and let vs see at leastwise if thou canst skill to auoyde it in thyne owne opinion. If God (sayst thou) do make any thing new, he must néedes chaunge his mynd. And yet thou sayest therewithall, that in all things which are done here beneath by na∣turall causes,* 1.342 there is a certeyne influence of God, at leastwise of the vniuersall influence vnder the which thou puttest all things. So speakest thou, so speaketh Auerrhois, so speaketh Proclus and the rest of you thereof. Now, seeing that GOD doth euery day a thousand newe things here beneath; I demaund of thée whether he doth them vpon new deuise, or vppon euerlasting forepurpose? If he doe them vppon newe deuise, thou stumblest at that which thou wouldest eschewe: for (by thy reckoning) God doth that which he did not afore, namely, in sheading foorth his influence anewe, and in producing (by that influence) the thing that was not afore. Or if he do them vpon euerlasting forepurpose; then confessest thou that which thou meanest to denye; to wit, that God determined euerla∣stingly to make or doe things by his power, and that according to that determination, he giueth to euery thing in their tymes, what∣soeuer

hée had foreallotted them of his goodnesse. For what diffe∣rence makest thou in the cace betwéene one Plant, and all Plants? betwéene the Plant that is newe sprong vp to day, and the Plant that was withered a thousand yeeres agoe? betwéene the whole World, and the least thing conteyned therein; if thou be fayne too admit a new deuice, as well for the least thing as for the greatest? Nay thou hast deuised thée a God that is turned about vppon his Whéele, a God that hath but a little more wit than thy selfe, and a little more strength than thy selfe: and yet such are thy spéeches of him sometime, that I cannot tell whither thou wouldest be conten∣ted to be likened to him or no.

Let vs sée his other Reasons. All the auncient Philosophers (sayth he) sauing Plato, beleeued that tyme is without begin∣ning. A strange case, that he which taketh so great pleasure in con∣trolling all men that went afore him, will now néedes shéeld him∣selfe vnder them! But I haue alreadie prooued that that saying of his is false. And againe what greater contraries can there be, than tyme and eternitie? Also, The Heauen (sayth he) is a diuine bo∣dy, vncorruptible, the dwelling place of the Goddes, wherein there hath not any corruption bin seene that can be remem∣bred: Ergo it is eternall. But how will he proue this Diuinitie, and this Quintessence of his? Whence will hée prooue this vncor∣ruptible nature? What wil he answere to this saying of his owne, that the Goddes and Godheads dwell aboue Heauen, and vtterly without the compasse or reache of tyme? Is not this a setting downe of that thing for a ground, which is the thing that resteth to be proued, and (to speake after his owne maner) a crauing of the principle? But if we beléeue Plutarke, who affirmeth that Aristo∣tle helde opinion that the Heauen is a mingled nature of heate and moysture together; shall it not bee corruptible of it selfe as well as the grounds are whereof it is composed? hee addeth that the aun∣cient Greekes called it AEther [as ye would say Ayrun] because it ronneth about continually.* 1.343 And what will hee answere to Plato, who saith that the Heauen or Skye is called AEther, of his bright∣nesse, in which respect also he calleth the Starre of Mars, Aithon. Also what will he answere to al the former Philosophers, who are of opinion that the Skye is as Cristall composed of Water? And finally what is this Running about: but a departing frō one place to another? Soothly great reasons to maynteine eternitie; for if a man doe but breathe vpon them they vanish into smoke. And ther∣fore

Plotin in his booke of the World,* 1.344 and Damascius in expoun∣ding Aristotles booke of the Skye,* 1.345 and Proclus in his second booke vpon Platoes Iimeus, haue very well noted, that for the prouing of the eternitie, Aristotle hath set downe many things which néede none other disproofe than bare denyall, and which would be as hard for him to proue, as to proue the eternitie it selfe. What is to bée thought then, if euen by the propositions of Aristotle* 1.346 himselfe and of his Schollers, wee proue against him and his Schollers, that the World had a beginning? The World (say they) is eternall, and yet as eternall as it is, it dependeth vpon God. In that poynt they all agráe. The disagréement among them is in this, that some of them make the depending thereof vpon God to bee as vpon an efficient cause, and some as vpon a finall cause, and euery of them draweth Aristotle to his side as much as he can. Now, if it depend vpon GOD, as an effect dependeth vpon his efficient cause; who séeth not that an effect is after his cause, and that there went a wor∣king power afore the effect distinguished essentially from the cause therof. And where is thē this goodly ground of theirs become, that the World is eternall because no foreworking power went afore it?* 1.347 Or if it depend vppon God as the finall cause thereof, that is to say, if it were for him and not from him; so as it was not a thing of his making, but a thing that he could not conueniently forbeare: wheresoeuer an ende is intended, is there not also a forecast? And where forecast is, can chaunce and necessitie beare there any sway? And if God had no néede of the World, was it not at his choyce whether it should be or no? And being at his choyce, can it bee be∣ginninglesse, seeing that the being therof dependeth vpon another than it selfe? Againe, if the World depend vpon God as vpon the end thereof; the working power which they themselues require in the creation of all things, shall eyther haue gone afore it or not. If it must néedes haue gone afore it; then was it not from euerlasting; for this word forego being a betokener of tyme, excludeth y^e world from eternitie or euerlastingnesse. Or if there néeded not any fore∣working power to haue gone afore the world, but that it be simply an issewe procéeding from the force of the cause; why should it not procéede as well in tyme as from euerlasting, seeing that the sayd force or power is directed by Reason and by Will? And why then hold they this principle, That the World cannot be of creation, be∣cause that if it were so, some cause must néedes haue gone afore it? Again, whence hath the Skye his beginning of mouing, but from

an Instant? And whatsoeuer could be neuer so little a while with∣out mouing, why might it not be without mouing a longer while, seeing that the respect is all one, both of eternitie vnto all tymes, and of infinitenesse vnto all places? Therefore whereas Aristotle sayth that the World (notwithstanding that it is eternall) depen∣deth vpon God; he graunteth consequently that it is not eternall. Secondly, contrary to the teaching of all that went afore him, he deliuereth vs thrée first grounds; namely, Matter, Substance, or Stuffe, forme, shape, or fashion, and Priuation, Want, or berea∣••ing; and his Schooles are so greatly delighted therwith, that there is nothing els to bee heard spoken of in them. But if these be the first beginnings or grounds of things; where is then their eterni∣tie? And if they kéepe a circuit in going round about; how can it bee that they had not a beginning? Also how can a substance be imagi∣ned to be without forme, shape, or fashion; or forme, shape, or fashiō to be without a substance; seeing that euen mishapennesse it selfe is a kynd of shape, and also that a shape is nothing els than the forme or fashion of a substance? Moreouer, what greater absurditie can there be, than to make that a beginning of being, which hath by it selfe no being at all, nor can haue any being but in another thing, as if a man would make blindnesse to bee the beginner of sight, or darknesse the beginner of light? Agayne, seeing that neither sub∣stance nor shape haue of themselues any being at all: how can they cause other things to bee? Or how comes it to passe y^t two things which haue had no being at all, doe méete together in one essence or being; but by vertue of the souereine Béeer, who hath willed and determined that it should be so? And if his willing or determining be the cause of the being of them; who is he that did set or appoynt him the terme wherein to doe them? But to excuse one vntrueth, a man telles a thousand; and to shift of one error, he falleth into ten thousand: and yet it cannot bee eschewed, but that the trueth will sparkle out of the Contrarietie of vntrueths, as fire sparkles out of the knocking of one Flints••••one against another.* 1.348 In his booke of Problemes (which seeme notwithstanding to bee of many mens gathering,) he sayth concerning the ingendring of liuing things, that the small things, as Woormes, Cutfoules, and such other, are ingendred by the ordinarie alterations of the tyme, the greater by the greater alterations as things that haue néede of greate ••••••gin∣nings or grounds; and that there hath in tyme past bin such an al∣teration, as of it selfe hath ingendred them, yea euen the notablest

liuing things and man himselfe,* 1.349 supplying therein both the roome of the efficient cause, and also of the materiall, both at once. And it may bee that that is the cause why Va••ro sayth that Aristotle be∣léeued that there was no beginning of liuing things, or that liuing things haue bene from euer without beginning. Also in another place he sayth, that there was such an alteration at the same tyme that liuing things were first brought foorth; and that if it behoue Nature to bring foorth any mo of them, there must be such another alteration going afore, namely, by a rare Coniunction of some Starres.* 1.350 And in another place he sayth further, that if Man and o∣ther liuing wights had a beginning; it was eyther in egge, in séede, or in woorme, and so foorth. What a number of Monsters are héere for the stablishing of one Monstar, and yet he hath not alledged a∣ny thing which is not against himselfe. The lesser Coniunctions (sayth he) doe bréede the smaller liuing things, the meane bréede the meane, and the great ones bréede the great. Well, be it so. Yet these Coniunctions méet not but by the course of the Starres; and that course is a mouing, and euery mouing hath a beginning: and therefore it followeth that wights had a beginning. Againe, if the mouing of the Skye and of the Starres be euerlastingly; the Cō∣iunctions thereof are euerlastingly also, as Aristotle himselfe con∣cludeth;* 1.351 and so on the contrary. For if it haue turned about from e∣uerlasting, the Coniunctions haue likewise incountred from euer∣lasting. But euerlastingly they could not incounter: for the small ones, the meane ones, and the great ones are not all at once toge∣ther, but they come seuerally one after another with the space of certeyne hundred yéeres, & with diuers reuolutions betwixt them: whereas if they were eternall, none of them could goe or come a∣fore another. Therefore it followeth that there is a beginner of li∣uing wights, and a beginner of the goings about of the Skye and of all the whole order which we see: And that is euen God himself.

How much better had Aristotle done,* 1.352 if he had hild himselfe to that which he sayth well in other places; namely, that forasmuch as most things cannot haue a perpetuall continuance in the particu∣lar, that is to say in themselues, by reason of being too farre distant from their beginning: therefore God hath continued them by the spreading foorth of their kind; and to that end hath made them male and female and ordeyned copulation betwixt them. For if we make the liuing things without beginning, doe we not make them to be euerlasting? And if we ground their beginnings vpon some reuo∣lutions

of the Skyes; can those Reuolutions be euerlasting? Also, how shall they haue bene brought foorth, in full growth, or young, seeing that at the bringing foorth of al things, the things are tender and vnperfect? And if the things be not euerlasting, where then is the euerlasting mouing of the Heauen: that is to say, where is A∣ristotles eternitie become? The same followeth also of that which he sayth in another place; namely that he which did first gather men together, was y^e author of very great good. For in acknowledging that there was a tyme wherein folke liued like the men of Brasilie, or like the wandering Nomades; he acknowledgeth also an infan∣cie of the World. For els what should let that men haue not bene either euerlastingly dispersed, or els euerlastingly vnited together? And how comes it to passe O Aristotle, that there haue not bene Aristotles from euerlasting? Agayne, who shall choose out the very instant in eternitie for the bréeding and bringing foorth of any thing perticularly, but he that is the Lord of eternitie it selfe?

Aristotle in his Moralles commendeth godlinesse, and be high∣teth blessednesse to them that followe it; teaching vs that it consi∣steth in Contemplation. Now, seeing that this Contemplation or beholding is the meane to make vs blessed; it must néedes bee the beholding of a thing that is right blesfull: but blesfull it cannot bée, if it consist in these inferiour things which are base and subiect to so many miseries and turmoyles: Therefore he meaneth the Con∣templation which is the beholding of the only one God. Also in o∣ther places he sayth that our Soules are of a diuine nature, that they be immortal, that they come into vs from without, & that they be (after a sort) a kin to the Gods: and his Disciples would be of∣fended at him that should say, that their Mayster dowted of the im∣mortalitie of the Soule. And whereto is all this, if the World bée eternall? If it be eternall; eyther our Soules also be eternall, that is to say without beginning, or els they be not eternall. If they be; how happeneth it that they haue imprisoned themselues in these our bodies? Or if they bee so imprisoned at the appoyntment of an other: who shall that other be but God? And if God appoynt or al∣lot them to this newe state in tyme certeyne; who hath made one e∣ternitie subiect to another? And what is then become of this Maxi∣mée of theirs, that the World is eternall because God maketh not any thing there a newe? Moreouer, if they be euerlasting; who hath made them proportionable to their bodies; that is to wit, infinite Soules to infinite Bodies? And thē what becomes againe of this

other Rule of theirs, that Nature cannot abyde any infinitenesse? Or if they bee euerlasting and yet of some certeyne number, going and comming into newe bodies by course: is not that the opinion of Pythagoras, which Aristotle doth so greatly mislike? And if our Soules at their departing out of our bodies, doe goe to the enioy∣ing of the blessed immortalitie; doth it not followe, that from after the passingouer of that reuolutiō, men must moue without Soule, dispute without reason, and iudge without mynd; yea and that euen Aristotle himselfe speaketh and reasoneth without wit? To bee short, what hooteth it to bee godly or religious, if our Soules ac∣knowledge no better thing than themselues? What auayleth it to looke for the blessed Contemplation, if they bee perfectly blessed of themselues? But perfectly blessed they be, if they be eternall. And whereto then serueth the rewarding of them with immortall life; if they haue the eternitie or immortalitie alreadie? What els then is his vpholding of the world to be eternal, than a turning of y^e whole world vpside downe? But there are (sayth Aristotle) Godlinesse, Blessednesse, & Immortalitie: then doth it follow that our Soules are not eternall. And if they be not eternall; then haue they a begin∣ning; and that beginning haue they, either of God, or of the world. Of the world they haue it not: for (as I haue sayd) were the world eternall, the Conuersions or turnings about thereof should bee e∣ternal too, and consequently so should our Soules be also, as which should be bred of their power. But now are all things mortall that are ingendred by those Conuersions, as Aristotle himself graun∣teth. But we put the case that they haue an originall notwithstan∣ding that they be immortall. Therfore it remayneth that the same is from God. Now, they could not procéede from God as beames of his substance: for all of y^e Philosophers vphold that he is a single and vndiuided substance, vnited in it selfe and most perfectly one: but we be subiect to alteration, to ignorance, to euill affections and such other things. It remayneth therefore (and otherwise it cannot bée) that our Soules are the worke of Gods power. Now, if our Soules (which after a sort doe comprehend the Worlde and all things therein) bee the effects of Gods power, which through his goodnesse vttereth it selfe when he listeth: shall not the world it selfe and the senslesse and transitorie things which serue vs, yea and our bodies also which are but the Cotes or Instruments of our soules be so in likewise? Now then, let Aristotles Disciples choose whe∣ther they will giue ouer the eternitie of the world, or the immorta∣litie

of their Soules: the euerlasting turning about of a whéele, or the immortal settlednesse of blessed state: for both of them together cannot stand.

But surely his Disciple Theophrastus* 1.353 seemeth to haue percei∣ued these inconueniences and contradictions well, when he procée∣deth so farre as to say that God created the world, yea euen of no∣thing. And so doth Algazel the Saracen against Auerrhois, vnto whom he sayth, that God for the creating of the world néeded nei∣ther stuffe nor newe aduisement, but that like a most perfect work∣man, hauing all things in a readinesse, he tooke his owne leisure for the performance of his worke when it pleased him. And yet it see∣meth that Aristotle towards the ende of his life repented him of that doctrine: insomuch that in his booke of the world, he sayth that GOD is the bréeder and preseruer of all things in the world after what maner soeuer it be. And euen in his Metaphisicks, hauing re∣iected the opinions of many men concerning these things; he sayth thus.* 1.354 He that sayth that GOD or the souereyne Mynd is the Cause & Author not only of liuing things, but also of Nature it selfe and of the World, and of all the order therein; seemeth to speake discreetly and wel aduisedly; and they that speake o∣therwise, speake vnaduisedly. And they that are of the former opinion, haue very well set downe that Cause for the ground of all things that are, as the which is such a beginning as gi∣ueth mouing to all things. And in his booke of Wonders, (if it be his) he speaketh yet more euidently: saying, that naturally the Sea should couer the Earth as higher than it; but that God hath caused the Sea to withdraw it self, that the Earth might be vnco∣uered for the vse of man and of other liuing wights. And this is in effect a commingbacke to the opinion of his predecessors, from the which he would so fayne haue departed afore. Howsoeuer the case stand, all the auncient Philosophers doe eyther conclude the Creation of the world with vs, or els yéeld vs arguments into our hands wherewith to conclude it against themselues. To bee short, whē Aristotle who was the first that stepped out of the high way, sayth that the world is without beginning, he seemeth to bee Ari∣stotle no more; he doth so often gainsay himself and offend against his owne rules. And where he chaunceth to say that the world was created, he seemeth to be minded to yéeld himself to vs. And where the case concerneth not (at leastwise expressely) the one nor the o∣ther: he leaueth vs many Conclusions, which doe quite ouerthrow

and destroye the sayd opinion of his, and make him whether he wil or no, to conclude on our side.

The Latins* 1.355 fel to Philosophie somewhat later than y^e Greekes; by reason wherof they had the more cause to ouershoote themselues in the case of Eternitie: but yet wee see that the most part of them followed the opinion of Plato. That man (sayth Cicero* 1.356) that first gathered together men afore dispersed, was surely a great Per∣sonage. And ( as sayth Pythagoras) so was he which did first giue names to things, and which first comprised within a cer∣teyne number of letters, the sounds of mans voyce which see∣med to bee infinite, and which marked the Courses and pro∣ceedings of the wandring Planets, and which first found out Corne, Cloth, building, defences against wilde Beasts, and the rest of the things that make our liues the more ciuill. What els is this than an acknowledging of a beginning? For if mē were from euerlasting, did they not from euerlasting speake? Did they not from euerlasting giue names to things? Could they not inuent euery thing from euerlasting. Yes: and therfore he concludeth, We be not created by haphazard; but surely there was a certeyne Might or Power which had a care of Mankynde, and which would not haue begotten him to fall into the mischiefe of endlesse death, after hee hath outworne the great and innu∣merable aduersities and toyles of this world. Now, if we were created, and that there bee a souereyne power which hath had care of Mankynd; surely then hath there bene a beginning, seeing that the sayd power had a care of vs, eyther when as yet wee were not at al,* 1.357 or after the tyme that we were. And in another place he saith, That God created and furnished man, and that it was his wil that he should haue the souereyntie of all other things. That the world, the Sea, the Land, and all other things obey Gods tokens. And if a•• any tyme he bring in an Epicure alledging such worshipfull rea∣sons as this, With what engines & edgetooles did your God buyld the World,* 1.358 and such other; eyther he sendeth him away with such answere as he deserueth; or els by holding his peace, she∣weth sufficiently that he deserueth no answere at all.

Varro* 1.359 the best learned of the Latins, maketh an vniuersall Hi∣storie deuided into thrée tymes. The first (as I haue ••ayd alreadie) is from the Creation of the world, vnto the first Olimpiade. This man being a man of great reading, found the Creation of y^e world to haue bene but late afore, yea and so late, that he ioyned it imme∣diatly

to the tyme of the first Olimpiade. Likewise Seneca* 1.360 found all things to be new, and acknowledgeth in many places that God created the whole world, and man peculyarly to serue him. And e∣uer since the beginning of the World (sayth he) vnto this day wee be guyded by the intercourses of daies and nights, and so foorth. Macrobius passeth yet further, and sayth that the world cannot be of any long antiquitie, cōsidering that the furthest knowledge that is to be had thereof, reacheth not beyond two thousand yéeres. As touching the Poets, whose spéeches do for the most part represent vnto vs the opinion that was admitted among the common peo∣ple: Virgill is full of excellent sentences to that purpose; and Ouid hath made a booke expressely of that matter. And euen Lucrece al∣so who professeth vngodlinesse, sayth that beyond the Warres of Troy and Thebes, there was not any iote remayning to remem∣berance; than by the which, he could not better haue declared the World to be but young, howbeit that (after the maner of his own sect,) he fathereth that thing vpon chaunce, which all the wise men ascribe to the euerlasting prouidence. Plinie* 1.361 is the only▪ man whom I wonder at, that being so curious a searcher of Nature, he could not conceyue that which is printed in euery part of it, and which e∣uery man might of himself learne by his owne reading therein. He maketh a long Calendar of the first inuenters of things, as of Let∣ters, of Houses, of Apparell, and of very Bread.* 1.362 He reckoneth vp the Companies that haue fléeted from place to place for the peo∣pling and replenishing of Countries. And can there bee a greater proofe of newnesse than that?* 1.363 Sometymes he sayth that the Earth is become weary, and sometymes that it is wexed barreine in yéel∣ding of fruite and Mettalles, because it groweth olde. But in one place he sayth expressely, that mens bodies by little & little become of smaller stature by reason of the witherednesse of y^e world which wexeth olde. And is not this a reporting of the Skye to bee like a whéele, which gathereth heate and chafeth with rowling and whir∣ling about? And what improteth this wexing old, but that it had also (as ye would say) a birthtyme? What meaneth the wearing thereof away, but that it had erst bene newe? What is ment by the chafing of it, but that the temperature thereof is altered? For if the World be eternall; why is not the whéele thereof eternally in one heate, and men eternally of small stature? Or if at leastwise it be of very auncient continuance; why were not men become Pygmées long ago? And if the contrary bee to bee seene in Nature; what re∣mayneth

but to confesse that the World is but of late beginning? * 1.364 To bee short, the Stoikes (as Varro witnesseth of Zeno) taught that the world was created of God, and that it should perish. The Platonists* 1.365 affirme that it is created and mortall, but yet is sustey∣ned from perishing, by God. The Epicures* 1.366 graunt that it had a beginning, howbeit by haphazard and not by prouidence. The Pe∣ripateticks* 1.367 say in their conclusions, that it is without beginning; and in their premisses they vtterly deny it. The greatest despisers of God, as Plinie* 1.368 and such other like, doe write in their Prefaces, That the world is an euerlasting God; and throughout the whole treatises of their bookes, they vnsay it agayne. Now then, after so many graue witnesses, and after the cōfessions of the parties them selues, is there yet any of these pretensed naturalistes to be found, which dareth thinke the contrarie still?

But now since the comming of our Lord Iesus Christ into the earth,* 1.369 this doctrine hath bene receyued throughout the world, so as the thing which had aforetymes bene disputable among the Hea∣then, is now admitted as an article of faith, welnere among all na∣tions and sects on the earth. It may bee that the myracles which were seene then in Heauen, in Earth, in the Sea, vppon men, and vpon the very Féends, made the world to perceyue that there was a Creator of the world. For who could doubt that the creating of a newe Starre, the restoring of a deadman to life, or onely the ma∣king of a blindman▪ to see, was not the worke of an infinite power, yea euen as well as the buylding of the world; considering that be∣twéene béeing and not béeing, betwéene life and death, betwéene the hauing of a thing and the nothauing, the distance is infinite? And it may be that the signes which we haue seene from Heauen in our tyme, doe serue to make the blasphemers vpon earth vnexcusable. But wherof soeuer it came, the very Philosophers themselues be∣gan to make a groūded principle therof: insomuch that y^e Greekes, Persians and Arabians, and likewise afterward the Turkes and Mahometists, did put it into their beléefe as a thing out of all con∣trouersie. To be short, there is not at this day any ciuill or well or∣dered▪ people, which haue not their Chronicles and Histories of tymes, begun alwaies at the Creation of the world, wherein they doe all hold of Moyses, and agrée all with vs Christians, sauing in the controuersie of some fewe yéeres.

Of all the Philosophers, only the Platonists continued in esti∣mation: and all men reiected the newfound opinions of Aristotle,

and they stood at defiance, rather with the Gnosticks than with the Christians. Sainct Austin sayth concerning the Philosophers of his tyme, that their opinion was, that God was afore the World, howbeit not in time, but in order and by way of vndersetting only: like as if a foote (sayth he) were euer in one place, the print thereof should also be euer there. Unto whom it may be answe∣red in one word, that like as abilitie and intent of going went afore the going it self, both in the man and in the foote; so in God also, the power and intent of creating, went afore the Creation. But it is best to heare their owne words. Plotin in his booke of the World, findeth himself not a little graueled in this case, and he maketh ve∣ry little account of all Aristotles supposalles.* 1.370 If we say (sayth he) that the Skye is euerlasting as in respect of the whole bodie therof: how can that be, seeing that the liuing Creatures dye, and the Elements passe from one into another, and that (as Plato affirmeth) the Skye it selfe is in continuall wheeling? If we say that the Elements and the liuing wights cōtinue their perpetuities in their kynds: why doth the Heauen continue his perpetuitie rather in number and particularitie? If the cause thereof bee, that nothing can slippe out of it because it cōteyneth all things: how can that reason agree to the Starres and Planets, which doe not conteyne al things as the Heauen or Skye doth, and yet we affirme them to be euerlasting? And if nothing impeach it without; what should let that some∣thing may not impeach it within, seeing that all liuing wights doe naturally perish through the distemperāce of their parts, notwithstanding that they liue euen while they bee a dissol∣uing? And what inseweth hereof, but that both sortes of bo∣dies, as well Coelestiall as terrestriall, doe perish? yea and both Heauen and Earth likewise, sauing that the Coelestiall indure a longer tyme, and perish more slowly than the Earthly? Cer∣teynly (sayth he) if we tooke this word eternitie (as well in the whole world as in the parts thereof,) not to betoken an euer∣lastingnesse [that is to say, a perpetuitie or continuance with∣out beginning or end,] but only a difference of continuance; there would be the lesse doubtfulnesse in the matter. But all shall be out of doubt, if we father the same eternitie vpon the will of GOD, which of it selfe is able enough to vphold the World; for so shall things haue their continuance according to his pleasure, some in their kyndes, and some particularly in

themselues. Now, if the World were eternall; were it not impos∣sible that it should be otherwise than it is? But if it haue this being from the will of GOD; is it not discharged of that necessitie? And what shal then become of this saying of his, which he setteth doune in diuers other places, namely that the World is of necessitie, be∣cause it would behoue a second Nature to accompanie the first; vn∣lesse we vnderstand it to be spoken of the necessitie that is conditio∣nall, and not of the necessitie that is absolute as they terme it. A∣gaine, the same will which made the World to bée, and hath giuen continuance to the parts thereof, some after one sort and some af∣ter another, and hath disposed of them as it listed it selfe; shal it not also haue made them when it listed it selfe? Whosoeuer then ••aith, that the béeing of the world, as well in the whole as in the partes, dependeth vpon the will of God, taketh from the world all necessi∣tie of béeing. And hee that sayeth that there is no necessitie that it should haue bin from euerlasting, (let vs vse those words for want of other,) sayth therewithall that it is not euerlasting.

In his booke of Eternitie and of Tyme,* 1.371 he sayth that eternitie and tyme differ in this respect, that eternitie is verifyed but of the euerlasting nature, and tyme is to be verified of the things that are created: So as eternitie, is and abideth in God alone, whom he cal∣leth the World that is to bee conceyued but in mynd or vnderstan∣ding; and tyme abydeth in the worlde that is subiect to the sences: adding neuerthelesse, that the world (to speake properly) was not made in tyme; after which maner wee also doe say that it was not made in tyme but together with the tyme. But when he hath deli∣beratly scanned all the definitions of time made by the former Phi∣losophers, and hath searched all the corners of his wit too find out the best; in the ende he•• concludeth thus. Wee must needes come backe (sayth hee) too the sayd first nature, which I affirmed heretofore to be in eternitie, I meane the vnmouable nature, which is wholly all at once the infinite and endlesse lyfe, and which consisteth whole in one, and tendeth vnto one. But as yet there was no tyme at all,* 1.372 or at leastwise it was not among the Natures that consist in vnderstāding, but was to come af∣terward, by a certeine maner and kynd of posterioritie. Now then if a man will vnderstand, how tyme proceeded first from the hygher Natures which rested in themselues; good cause shall he haue to call the Muses too his helpe, for the vttering therof: For it may be that the Muses also were as then. There∣fore

let vs say thus; Afore such time as Forenesse issued foorth and had neede of afternesse; Tyme, (which as then was not,) rested in God with the residew of all things that now are. But a certein nature bent to many doings, that is to wit the Soule of the world, beeing desirous to haue more than the present, began to moue it self, and so from thence immediatly issewed tyme, which passeth on continualy and is neuer the selfsame. And we beholding the length therof, haue imagined tyme to be the image of eternitie. And what is ment by all this contem∣plation, but that a certeine Soule or mynd proceeding from God, that is to wit the Spirit of God, did mooue and cary the worlde a∣bout. That with that mouing and of that mouing, tyme was bred and brought foorth? That afore that moouing, there was a settled state or rest, as eternitie afore time? And that (as he himselfe saieth there) Tyme and Heauen were made both at once, and eternitie was afore them both.

As touching that it is demaunded what God did afore the World: doth not Plotinus himselfe furnish vs with sufficient an∣swere, in that he sayth that God not woorking at all but resting in himself, doth and performeth very greate things? And is not the lyke concluded by the godly doctrine of Gods prouidence, where∣of he treateth in bookes expresly bearing that tytle? for if it be pos∣sible for the World to be eternall as well as God: where then can there bee any prouidence? For what else is Prouidence, than the will of God vttered foorth with Reazon, and orderly dispozed by vnderstanding? And if Gods will bee required: where is then the necessitie of béeing, which in other places hee attributeth too the world? Also where is this saying of his become, that our Soules are immortall? and that some of them are eternall and afore all tyme? And lykewise this;* 1.373 that afore God had created the world and breathed a soule into it; it was but a dead corse, a mingle-man∣gle of earth and water, a darke matter; a thing of nothing, and (at a woorde) such a thing as euen the Goddes themselues were aba∣shed at it: and that after that God had shed this Soule into the world, both lyfe & mouing were therby breathed into the Starres, Planets, and Liuing wyghts. For seeing that from notbeing, not∣liuing, and notmouing, there is an infinite distance to being liuing and mouing: Doth it not follow also that there is infinite odds be∣tweene him that is, liueth, and moueth, that is to say God; and the thing that wayteth to haue being lyfe and mouing at his hand, that

is to wit the forementioned Chaos. And what is it that hath boū∣ded or filled vp this distance, but only the will of him who only is? And if will were the dooer thereof; then was it not of necessitie: And if it was not of necessitie; then where is the eternitie thereof?

Porphyrius disputing of the Mind or Understanding, the which hee termeth the beginning, ground, or welspring of the World; sayeth that it was bred of God from euerlasting, by a certeine eter∣nall or beginninglesse breeding, euen such a one as was afore all eternitie. It was not bred in tyme (sayth he) for as yet there was no tyme at all: and after that tyme was made, the world can scar••ly bee sayd in very dede to be, if it be compared with the foresayd Vnderstanding or Mynd. This is all one with the say∣ing of Trismegistus in a certeine place, where he calleth this mind, the trew, euerlasting, and first borne Sonne of God; and this world Gods yonger Sonne: the one begotten of his verie nature, and the other of his will.

Proclus* 1.374 and Simplicius keepe a greate coyle in mayntenance of the eternitie of the world, and haue made bookes therof ageinst Philoponus: but all their reasons are sufficiently refuted, by the things which I haue discoursed against Aristotle. But seing they maynteyne Gods Prouidence and the immortalitie of the Soule, doo they not reiect eternitie whither they will or no? And whereas Proclus wryting against such as vpheld that there bee infinite worlds without nomber, sayth that such infinitenes is ageinst rea∣son and knowledge; and that the admitting therof excludeth God, and abandoneth all things to fortune: why should he rather admi•• infinitenesse of time in this one world than infinitenesse of nomber in many, specially seeing hee alloweth Gods prouidence? And wheras Simplicius condemneth those to hell which beleeue no•• the Prouidence vppon the Reasons of Epictetus: dooth hee not consequently condemne the defenders of the eternitie of the world too the same punishment? And when Auerrhoes himselfe sayth that it is our dewtie to magnifie God by prayer and sacrifize, and that it is planted euen in nature to offer sacrifize; is he not contra∣rie to himself? for to what end reuerence we God, if we be nothing beholden to him? neuerthelesse my alledging of these things is not as though I knew not well that the Platonists, yea and euen these aformentioned philosophers also, do call the world euerlasting and vnbegotten: but to shew that the very surest of them haue wauered in this opinion: insomuch that they haue left vs principles con∣trarie

to their conclusions: and after all their long skirmishes, they find no rest but in our Camp. And soothly the most part of them be driuen to acknowledge certeine Degrees of eternitie. Wherof the first should be, that which is measured by the continewance of that which is euermore of it selfe, and becometh neither the longer for aught that is to come, nor yet the shorter for aught that is past; and that is it which is to be ascribed alonly vnto God. The second as the measure of such things as haue a fixed and béeing stable, and yet haue also a certeine succession in their operations, of which sort are the vnderstanding spirits or Angells; and this is properly cal∣led Aynesse. The third as the measuring of durablenesse continu∣ed by forenesse and afternesse, hauing a beginning but not an end, and this they call Tyme, attributing it properly to the World. And what else is this than to speake that thing by circumstance, which we vtter in one word? For to what purpose cal they a thing eternall or euerlasting, if by the termes Eternall and Euerlasting, they meane temporall? After which maner the Emperour Iusti∣nian* 1.375 speaking vnproperly of his owne Lawes, sayd he hoped that they should be eternall and euerlasting.

As tou••hing the opinion of Epictetus the Stoik & of Plutarke, no man can doubt except he quite and cleane disanull their bookes. GOD (sayth Epictetus) hath ordeined that there should bee Wiinter and Sommer, good seasons and bad: he hath giuen to the Earth both fruitfulnes and barrennes; and his dispo∣sing of things so by contraries, is to mainteyne the harmony of the whole. He hath brought vs into the world, giuen vs bo∣dies and members, and assigned vs heritages & fellowheires. It is hee that hath made both the sight and the colours, and neither sight nor colours were aught worth, if it were not for the light; and therefore hath he also made the light. Thus from poynt to poynt he leadeth vs to this conclusion, that GOD made the World and all that is therein. Plurarke sayth thus:* 1.376 If God were not the maker of all things, then should he bee re∣streyned in some things, and so were he not Lord of all: But he is to be acknowledged for Lord of all, and therefore of cō∣sequence he is the maker of them all.* 1.377 And here might a great nomber of the forealledged sentences of the selfesame Authors be alledged againe.

But what shall we say if Galien (who in comon account is the most heathenish of al writers,) after he hath throughly ript vp both

man and the world it selfe, be in the end constreyned too come backe to the same poynt? I make here (sayth he in his booke of the vse of parts) a true Hymne in the honour of our Maker. Whose ser∣uice I beleeue verily consisteth not in the sacrifising of hun∣dreds of Oxen vnto him, or in burning great heapes of Fran∣kincense before him; but in acknowledging the greatnesse of his wisdome, Powre, and goodnes, and in making the same knowen vnto others. For whereas of his owne free will hee hath voutsafed to garnish and beawtifie all things in the best maner that could be, and hath not enuied so great a benefite to any thing; I hould it for a proofe of perfect goodnes: and so farre praysed be his goodnes. Again, to haue found out the meanes how to adorne things so richly, sheweth a souereigne Wisdome, and to haue brought to passe and perfected al that euer he had forepurposed, betokeneth an incōparable might and power.* 1.378 And in his seauentéenth booke, who so considereth (sayth he) the composing & knitting togither of euery liuing thing, shall find that it caryeth in it a proofe of the Creators wisdom. And seeing that in the middes of that Puddle of hu∣mors eche liuing wight hath a Soule dwelling, indued with so great force and vertue: he ought of reason the more to won∣der at the greatnes and excellencie of the Mind that dwelleth in heauen.* 1.379 And who is he (had he sayd afore) which looking but onely vpon the Skinne of a thing, woondereth not at the cun∣ning of the Creator? Yet notwithstanding hee dissembleth not that he had tryed by all meanes to find some reason of the compo∣sing of liuing wights, and that hee would rather haue fathered the doing thereof vpon nature, then vppon the very author of nature. But yet for all that,* 1.380 in the end he concludeth thus. I confesse (saith he) that I knowe not what the Soule is, nothwithstanding that I haue sought very narrowly for it, neither can I yeeld a rea∣son how the Babe is formed in the Mothers Wombe. Well doe I see that in that case there is very greate Wisdome; and therefore I am of that opinion that it is not for any man too meddle with the searching out of it, but that it ought to suf∣fice vs that our Creator hath willed it to be after that fashion. For shall wee presume to seeke a reason of the dooing of that thing, which (without making of an Anatomie) we should ne∣uer knowe to haue bene done? It is all one as if he should say, that Nature whereat wee woonder so much, is nothing els but

whatsoeuer it pleaseth God to commaund.

And now what remaineth more but to heare Apollo (that is to say, the very Diuell himselfe) who being prayed to say an Hymne to the great God, beginneth it with this verse.

Which made the first Man and called him Adam: which verse Iustine the Martyre affirmeth to haue be••e commonly soong in his tyme.

After the confession of wickednesse it self, if we list also to heare the confession of Ignorance, there is not at this day so brutish a Nation, which either by reading it in the great letters of the Hea∣uens, or by tradition from their predecessors, reteine not the opini∣on that the worlde was created, howbéeit that the case doth stand with them as it dooth with the diuersitie of Portratures drawen out, the first from the lynely patterne it selfe, the second from that first, a third from the second, and so foorthon vntill the last counter∣fet reteyne scarse any feature at all of the first originall paterne. Of the Nations which we call Sauage or Wyld, some affirme them∣selues to keepe and reuerence the places where they furmyse too haue bin the originall of the Sea, of the Sonne, of the Moone, of the first man and of the first woman, &c. Othersome holde opinion that there came one frō the North into their country which heigh∣thened the Ualleyes and leueled the Hilles, and replenished their Country with Men and Women whom he had created, and that the same partie giueth them fruites of all sortes abundantly. Who (whensoeuer they prouoke him too wrath,) will chaunge their good soyle into barrein land, and take from them the fatnesse of the hea∣uen. May ye not sée clearly here the creation of the world, the sinne of man, and the curse which God hath giuen to the earth for mans sake? And as for the partie whom they speake of, it is a mingling of the storie of the Creation, with the story of some partie that first brought people from the North into those Countries too inhabite them euen long tyme after, ioyning the creation of the world with the peopling of Countries, as things not farre diuers, accordingly as is doone in diuers Histories. And I pray you how many euen of our Neighbournations that inhabite the vttermost borders of the world, could euen at this day answere more fitly too that question?

Now séeing that the World and all the partes thereof doo sing out the creation; séeing the wisdom of the world teacheth it, vngod∣lines (euen whither it will or no) a••oweth it, Ignorance séeth it, and all togither in all ages both taught, auowed, and perceiued it:

may not wee with the allowance euen of the blockishest and of the wickeddest, pronounce this definitiue sentence, That the World had a beginning, and that it had it at such tyme as it pleased God the Creator thereof? But there remayneth yet one poynt to be dis∣cussed; namely, wherof God created the World: and that is matter enough for another Chapter.

The x. Chapter.

That GOD created the World of nothing; that is to say, without any matter or stuffe whereof to make it.

I Cannot tell whether I may woonder more at the good insight of the auncient Philosophers in the knowledge of many naturall things, or at their blindnesse in the knowledge of the au∣thor of them, in that they set it downe for a de∣finitiue sentence, That nothing in al the world is made of nought, and therfore that the great workmayster himself could not make any thing without matter or stuffe whereof. For in effect it is a measuring of the builder and his building both by one rule or skantling, and an aba••ing of the po∣wer which they themselues confesse to be infinite, vnto the state of our infirmitie. God (say they) cannot make any thing without mat∣ter whereof. And why? Because a Mason cannot make any buyl∣ding without stuffe whereof. As who would say there were a more absurd kynd of reasoning in Logicke, than to conclude from the fi∣nite to the infinite, from the mightlesse to the almightie, from the transitorie to the euerlasting. Nay rather thou shouldest reason thus. Man, who is lesse than a Worme in comparison of y^e highest, draweth gold out of the Rocke, or out of the dust of the earth: Of the same earth or stone he maketh such cloath, wyre, and leaues of gold foyle, as no mā would déeme to haue come of so grosse a mat∣ter. Of the gréene Hearbe he draweth out white flower for his su∣stenance: of the stalkes of Flaxe and Hempe, he draweth out thréed to make cloath of: of ragges he maketh Paper to write on: and of the excrements of the little Silkworme he draweth out a great ••eale of Silkcloath. Agayne, he turkyneth some one rude & rough

kynd of stuffe into a hundred thousand fashions: of the least things he maketh very great things, and by the excellencie of his wit dra∣weth most excellent things out of that where the most part of men (notwithstanding that they be men as wel as he) found not ne per∣ceyued not any thing at all: as for example, out of the F••••••t, fire to warme him: out of the barreyne Ferne and vyle Seawéede, gliste∣ring Glasse: out of a Shelfish that the Sea casteth vp, Purple to make Ornaments of. To bee short, after a certeyne maner, he ma∣keth somewhat of nothing. Now, seeing that the weakenesse of mortall men can doe so much, shall not the mightie power of the e∣uerlasting, bee able to doe much more? And seeing that a thing of nought is able to doe so much, shall any thing be vnpossible to the maker of all things? But although this which I haue sayd might suffize the discréete, yet notwithstanding let vs discusse more large∣ly this matter concerning matter or stuffe.

Soothly if God néeded matter or stuffe to worke vpon; either he himselfe made it, or els it was eternally of it selfe as well as he. If he made it, he made it of nothing: for in seeking the matter of mat∣ter, ye shall procéede to infinite; and so haue I the thing I would haue. If it were from euerlasting, then were there two eternalles together; which is a thing repugnant to all reason and contrary to it selfe. For nothing can bee more contrary to eternitie, than to say that there is a matter or stuffe which attendeth or wayteth to haue his shape forme or fashion at some workmaster hand; or that there is an eternal thing which hath not any other life or being, than such as another eternall thing hath voutsafed to giue vnto it. For let vs see I pray you what maner of thing they imagine this matter to bée?* 1.381 They will haue it ot be a thing without shape, but yet a re∣ceiuer of all shapes: and they will haue shape to be without matter wherein to bee, but yet as a mould wherein to fashion all matters; so as the matter should haue no beeing at all, but by reason of the shape or forme, as of the giuer of being thereto. But how can mat∣ter be without forme, seeing that euen deformitie it selfe is a kynd of forme? Or how can matter be alone by it selfe, seeing that forme is the thing that giueth being vnto it? Now then, to say that mat∣ter is without forme, is all one as to say that it is and is not; which were the saying of a madman.

Yea (say they); but how is it possible for somewhat to be made of nothing, sith there is an infinite distance betwixt somewhat and nothing? Nay, I say rather, what is it which is not finite, in re∣spect

of him that is infinite? I meane in respect of him whom thou thy self aff••rmest to haue bounded the selfesame matter which thou doest take and teach to be infinite? But if thou listest to consider it, thou shalt perceyue that thou confessest a thing no lesse vncredible to thyne owne sence, than is the same which thou reiectest by thy sence. For when thou imaginest a matter without forme, and a forme without matter, thou speakest things that destroy one ano∣ther. But whereas I say that God created the World of nothing, that is to say without hauing any thing wherof to make it: in déede I say a thing that is wonderfull, howbeit which hath not any re∣p••gnancie in it selfe. Now, there is great difference betwéene spea∣king aboue reason, and against reason. For trueth and mans rea∣son are not inclosed within the like and selfesame bounds. But for∣asmuch as thou hast graunted that God is the author and worker of Nature, I would fayne knowe how thou canst be so bold to de∣nye, that he hath put life and mouing where none were afore, and that he hath made both sight and light, hearing and sounds, spéech and vnderstanding, where erst was more than death, more than blindnesse, more than dumbnesse, and more than dulnesse; that is to say, more than the bare priuation or bereuing of those things ••on∣sidering that neither to bee nor euer to haue bene, are much more wāts than simply not to be. Now, betwéene liuing and not liuing, seeing and not seeing, and so foorth, there is an infinite distance as well as there is betwéene being and not being, which distance can not be filled vp but by an infinite power: and looke where an infinite power is, it is alike mightie towards all things. Therefore it fol∣loweth that sith thou attributest vnto him the making of thy sight, of thy life, and of thyne vnderstanding; thou canst not deny him the creation of the things that haue light, life, and vnderstanding in them. Which if thou graunt in one thing, néedes must thou graunt it alike in all. For to giue life, and to giue béeing; to giue forme or shape, and to giue matter; and to giue them to one thing, and to giue them to all things; are all workes of one selfsame power, how diuers soeuer of degrées of them seeme vnto thée at the first sight. He therfore that confesseth God to be the former or giuer of shape, doth also confesse him to bee the creator of all things. Nay, I say more, that when thou termest God the souereine or highest being, (as Aristotle* 1.382 doth) or him that essentially and in very déede is, (as Plato doth): thou sayst (though vnwittingly) that he is the Crea∣tor, that is to say, the author of the being of all things.

If we looke into nature, the thing that holdeth the first place in things of order, is commonly the cause of al the things that fall vn∣der it. Among hot things, some bee hotter than some; but yet fire, which holdeth the highest degrée in heate, is the cause of heate in all things, and sheadeth it selfe into all without diminishing of it selfe, and by imparting it selfe to them is still increased: insomuch that the striking of a Flint inforceth the castingforth of a thousand sparkes, whereof euery one were enough to set the whole World on fire. In light some things, one light lighteth another, and by im∣parting maketh it selfe after a sort infinite: and the Sunne which is as the fountayne of light, extendeth and spreadeth it selfe out in∣finitely without disseuering, & after a maner createth light where was nothing but darknesse. Also in humaine affayres, Kings im∣part their dignities to Princes, Princes to their Uassalles, & Uas∣salles to their Subiects: and when they giue any man a qualitie which he had not afore, they terme him their Creature, as hauing made him somewhat of nothing, in respect of the qualitie where∣with he was indewed afore. To bee short, sents or sauors are shed foorth, and Sciences are taught from one to another, and from one to infinite: yea and euen diseases, which are nothing els but cor∣ruptions, ingēder one of another without diminishing themselues. Now, as for Heate, Light, Sauour, Science, and Dignitie; they be but qualities, termed by the degrées of first, second, and third qualities; yea and moreouer dead, senslesse, and liuelesse: and yet notwithstāding, looke which of these qualities holdeth y^e first place, the same doth naturally bring forth al the rest, without diminishing it selfe. And shall we then thinke it straunge that God, (who is the Béeing, which euen by their owne confession holdeth the chiefe and first place of all Béeings, or rather alonly can in very déede be sayd to be) should by his being bring fooith all other beings?

Yea say they; for wee see not any thing brought againe to no∣thing, and therefore néedes must they haue bene created of some∣thing. Nay, if worldly things should returne to nothing, conside∣ring how transitorie and fléeting they be alreadie, how short a time could the world indure; or rather how long agoe had it come to an end? But it was Gods will that it should continue. And therefore thou shouldest rather say thus: I see that the Trées, and the grea∣test Beastes, yea and men themselues doe spring as it were of no∣thing, and are resolued agayne into as good as nothing. I see them multiplye, liue, and do wonders. Of one selfsame seede I sée spring

both flowers, leaues, and fruite, and of another, the wonderfulnesse of eyes, the substantialnesse of bones, and the finesse of vitall spi∣rites. Agayne, I see all these things vanish away I wote not how, so as there remayneth nothing of them but a handfull of dust. And shall I now be so blockish as to say, that he which of so little and in so little hath made so many wondrous things that were not afore, could not make the little it selfe? Or that he which created the life the sence and the mouing, could not create a drop of water, a blast of ayre, and a handfull of earth? Nay, I will reason thus rather: That if God were not able to create the very matter of matter it selfe, surely he could neither giue forme or shape to the matter, nor create such things of the matter. Yes will they say: for it appeareth that all things returne as it were into one commō matter, whether wee followe the auncient Philosophers which reduce them to the Elements, or that wee followe the late writers which reduce them into Oyle, Salt, Water, &c. Bee it so: and then oughtest thou to conclude therevpon, that seeing there is but one matter, there is al∣so but one God; vnto whose power thou oughtest not to déeme any thing vnpossible, seeing that of that one thing he maketh so many things, not only diuers, but also contrary. For he that of one selfe∣same thing maketh both fire and water, doth he lesse than he which maketh that one thing it selfe?

What wilt thou say then if I make thée to see that there is not that thing which hath not in it self a peculiar creation, or a proper∣tie created,* 1.383 which cannot be attributed to the matter wherof it con∣sisteth, but is a greater thing than the matter it selfe, without the which, neither the matter, nor the elements, nor all the things that thou drawest out of them were any thing at all? And sith thou wilt néedes play the Philosopher afore thou doest beléeue; I demaund of thée whether things in their nature haue their béeing from mat∣ter or from forme? If from matter: why is a Plant rather a Plant than a mettall, seeing that (by thyne own saying) matter being but one, is no more one thing than another, ne inclyned to one thing more than to another, nor bounded within any one particular sub∣stance otherwise than by forme or fashion? And forasmuch as thou hast taken so great paynes in resoluing or bringing things backe agayne into their first matter; whence commeth it that thy extrac∣tions or the things which thou drawest out of it, haue so diuers or contrary operations, if besides the matter it selfe there be not ano∣ther substance which giueth them theirs?

If things haue their being from forme; I demaund againe whe∣ther forme bee a substance or no. If it bee not a substance, how can that which is not a substaunce make a substaunce, and how may an accident or income make an essentiall difference, & cause life, sence, and mouing to be where they were not afore? And if it bee a sub∣stance (as most Philosophers teach in expresse wordes) yea and a very perfect substance, as which perfecteth the matter and maketh it to be that which it is named to be: must it not néedes follow, that he which gaue this forme shape or fashion to the matter, created a substance which was not afore, yea aud a much more excellent sub∣stance than the matter which thou surmisest to haue bene afore it? Now, why should not he that was able to create the better, be also able to create the lesser good? Rightly therefore doth Aphrodiseus* 1.384 in his booke of the Soule say, that the forme shape or fashiō which the Craftsman giueth to his work, is no more a substance than the arte, craft, or cunning whereby he giueth it: but that y^e forme which Nature giueth, is no lesse a substance than Nature it selfe is. Let vs procéede further. Of the Mettalles, thou estéemest Gold & Sil∣uer: of the Hearbs, thou estéemest some for foode, and some for Phi∣sicke: of the Beastes, thou estéemest some to eate, and some to serue thée: of men, (which yet notwithstanding make all but one kynde) thou admittest and acceptest some for one purpose and some for an other. Now, if thy estéeming of them bee for the matter whereof they consist; how is that matter but one? Or if it bee for the forme, as in respect wherof Gold is not the same that Leade is; is not that forme a substance? And if it be a substance; shall it not followe that he which gaue that shape forme or fashion to the matter, is also the Creator of the matter it selfe? And seeing there is such difference of Mettalles, Hearbes, Beastes, and Men; doth it not followe that there are as many diuersities of Creation? And whereas he hath created all these diuersities of substances, wouldest thou make him to fayle in that one the bacest of all? What shall I say to it, that some one thing shall haue diuers powers, vertues and operations in diuers parts thereof; so as it shalbe cold without and hot within, white in the outside and red in the substance, colde in the leafe and hot in the roote, laxatiue in the pith and costiffe in the barke? As for example, the rynde of the Orrendge is hot, and the meate within it is cold; the leaues of flowers of the wyld Vine doe coole, and the in∣ner part of them doth burne. Phisitions report that the Lungs of a Hare healeth folke that are shortwinded; that the bloud of him

breaketh the Stone, and that the heare of him stauncheth bloud. Haue not these diuers parts diuers formes, besides the vniuersall forme of the thing whereof they bee the parts? And are not these diuers formes as many diuers substaunces, and consequently as many Creations? The Adamant or Lodestone draweth yron to him, and sheweth cōtinually the Northpole, and yet is disappoyn∣ted of his force by Garlicke. The Amber also draweth all light things vnto it; Hors••yes layed to a mans héele make blisters in his bladder; Agaricke purgeth Fleagme, Rhubarb Choler, and Elle∣borus Melancholie. If these operations come of the matter alone, tell me how that may bee. And why bee not the same operations common to all things? Or if (as thou sayst) they come of a secrete propertie; doth it not then come of the substantial forme, séeing that nothing can bée sayd to bee that which it is, or to haue any peculiar propertie, but by reason of the substantiall forme? Thou wilt per∣chaunce say, that it is the mingling of the Elements together that giueth forme or shape. Nay: for if it bee that mingling, where is then the foresayd common matter become? and what mingling to∣gether or what m••dley or mixture can bee made of one selfesame thing? And if thy meaning bee that the foresayd matter is a diuers composiding of the Elements together; then is thy matter a▪ forme compounded of diuers formes. For wherein do the Elements (be∣ing so contrary) differ one from another, but in their essentiall formes? And if it bee a mixture or Composition, where is then the eternitie thereof? Moreouer, wee see that in Plants, Beastes, and Men, the Compositiō that is made of the mixture of the elements, abydeth euen when they be cut downe or killed. For put a blocke into the fire, and the moysture that was in it when it grewe a Trée boyleth out with the heate, the aire therof steameth vp into smoke, the firie matter thereof burneth out in an oylie substaunce, and the earthly parts thereof falleth downe into as••hes. And in all liuing wights aswell as in man, the outward lump (which thou wilt haue to be composed of the mixture of the Elements,) remayneth whole after they be dead. But as for the Soule whereby the things haue their life, sence, and reason; which Soule is the peculiar forme both of Trées, Beastes and Men each after their kynd: that appeares no more when the thing is once dead. And therefore it followeth, that besides the matter (which is liuelesse) and the mixture of the Elements, there is also a substantial forme, which maketh y^e thing to be a Trée, a Beast, or a Man; and without the which it is not a

Trée but a blocke, nor a Beast or a Man, but a dead Carkesse or Carrion. Furthermore, when a Trée is dead, there remayne still certeine vertues both in the bark, and in the wood, and in the leaues thereof; which vertues are not only diuers, but also sometyme con∣traries, and those vertues procéed not of the matter, but of the sub∣stantiall forme. Whereof it followeth, that besides the forme of the Plant which fadeth by the death of the Plant it selfe, there are also other formes peculiar to euery part thereof, which abyde after that the forme of the whole Plant is perished. Now, if the mixture of the Elements cannot make the forme whereby the vpperkyndes differ one from another, as the sencelesse things from the things that haue sence; and the things that haue but only sence, from the things that haue reason too; can it make the difference that is be∣twéene the vnderkynds that are comprehended vnder euery of the vpperkynds; or betwéene the particulars that belong to euery vn∣derking; or betwéene the seueral parts that are in euery particular? If the mixture of the Elements (say I) make not a Trée to liue, that is to say to bee a Trée; shall it make it to heale, both some cer∣teyne diseases, and also some certeyne parts of it, some certeyne parts of man? And if it make not a Beast to haue sence, that is to say to bee a Beast: can it make it to bee a Lyon, an Elephant, or a Stagge? And if it make not a man to haue life, sence, and mouing; can it make him to speake, and to reason, one of one thing and ano∣ther of another, each man according to his seuerall inclynation? But how should the Elements giue life, which they themselues haue not? or free mouing, they themselues being caried vp & doune whether they will or no? or also sence, being themselues but the ob∣iects of our sences? Then must wee conclude that the difference of the vpperkynds from the vnderkynds, of the vnderkynds from the Particulars, and of their parts one from another, consisteth not in the matter whereof they bee made, but in their forme; and that the same forme is the peculiar substance of euery thing; and that looke how many sundrie sorts of formes there are, so many sundrie sorts of creations there haue bene, all procéeding from the power of the Former or giuer of them. And so, he that attributeth vnto God the forming or fashioning of the World, must whether hee will or no attribute vnto him the power of creating it also. For without crea∣ting of a new substance (what matter soeuer ye presuppose to haue bene afore) he had not created the World in such sort as it is. And he that was able to create any one of thē, was able to create them

all. For like might and power is requisite to the creating of an E∣met as of an Elephant, of a Ponde as of the Sea, of a péece of the world as of the whole world.

They procéede on still with their Chimere.* 1.385 God (say they) dra∣weth the forme out of the Abilitie of the matter. Let vs examine this doterie yet further. Abilitie (sayth Aristotle) is the beginning of mouing and of chaunge. Also there are (say his Disciples) two sorts of Abilitie: the one which worketh the sayd beginning in the other, and that is God; and the other which suffereth the mouing and chaunge at the others hand, and that is matter or stuffe, which by the mouing wrought into it by the other, receyueth his perfec∣tion which is termed Forme. Now, I demaund whether this pas∣siue Abilitie of the matter, bee a qualitie or a substance. They dare not say it is a substance; for were it a substance, then euen by their owne doctrine it were a forme also: and wheresoeuer is a forme, there is also an act, and that is more than an abilitie: but matter (as they say) is a mere abilitie. And if they say it is a Qualitie, (as A∣ristotle himselfe affirmeth): then followeth it that God draweth a substance out of the qualitie of an accident. Now, he that draweth the very Essence or béeing of things out of the passiue abilitie of an other, can much more drawe it out of his owne actiue abilitie or workfull power. For shal he be barraine of himselfe, which maketh a qualitie (yea and lesse than a simple qualitie) fruitfull in bringing foorth so many things? And seeing that Qualitie and Substaunce and all the highest kynds of Contraries bee (as they teach) further differing one from another than fire from water; and also that qua∣litie and accident are nothing of themselues: shall it not follow that God is able to create substances of nothing? Surely it is the say∣ing of Trismegistus in many places, that God created the World and all that is therein; and man with al his parts by his most fruit∣full word: and also that the will of God was the bréeder of the Ele∣ments. Pythagoras and all the old Diuines affirme, that God or the only One is the beginner of al things, yea euen of the first mat∣ter, as Simplicius* 1.386 reporteth in alledging the record of Eudorus. And Syrian the Maister of Simplicius sayth, that in that behalfe Plato followed Archenetus and Brotinus,* 1.387 which agréeed with Pythagoras. And in very déede he telleth vs, that to speake proper∣ly, Matter is no Essence at al, nor can be conceiued otherwise than by a bastard reason, that is to wit by imagining it voyd of al shape, and consequently also voyd of all being.

As touching Aristotle, he maketh matter to be the first begin∣ning of all things. But if he beléeued the world to haue bin begin∣ninglesse according to his owne teaching; where is this beginning become? Also he disprooueth the Chaos with very lyuely reasons; and to scape that, he holdeth himself to the eternitie, which is quite and cleane ageinst him. But howsoeuer the case stand, it is fully a∣gréed vpon among his most approued interpreters, y^t these names of Matter, Forme, and Priuation, serue not too bet••ken things truely béeing the same whereof they pretend the names; but onely are inuented to teache their scho••lers, after what maner things are bred & corrupted, by putting of one shape and putting on another? And wheras he saith that the power of all life séemeth to be parta∣ker of some diuine thing, & better than the Elements; and that the Soule of man hath his beeing from without,* 1.388 and not from the elements or from matter as the bodye hath: And that all Soules are formes, and all formes are substances: Dooth hee not make God to bee the creater of substances, yea and of better substances than the elements? Ageine, when he sayth that the knitting parts that is to wit the bones, the skin, the Sinewes and such lyke may be made of the mixing togither of the elements, and that the vn∣knitting parts as the Head,* 1.389 the Leg, the Arme, and so foorth can∣not be so made, but are made by nature and heauenly skil; insomuch that the proper essence and forme of the knitters, procéedeth neither of heate nor of cold, of moysture nor of drythe: Dooth hee not ac∣knowledge in euery seuerall part a seuerall forme and substaunce which commeth from some other where, than of the matter or of the mixture of the elements?* 1.390 And sith hee sayth in another place, that it were possible to haue such a coniunction of the heauenly bo∣dyes, as myght produce not only an efficient cause, but also euen matter it self for the creating and bringing foorth of liuing things, yea and of mankind also: why should he haue thought it vncredible, that GOD who dwelleth verye farre aboue such Coniunctions, should be able to doo y^e like?* 1.391 Also we see that Theophrast the grea∣test Clark of all his Disciples, findeth himself so graueled in his booke of Sauors or Sents, by reason of the particular natures of things, that hee bursteth out into expresse woords, and sayeth that God created all things of nothing.* 1.392 And Algazel the Arabian dis∣puting ageinst Auerrhoes, sayeth that the cause of all things, did also make matter it selfe. Also Aphrodiseus declareth in his pro∣blemes, that the philosophers were fayne to referre the effects and

vertues of many things, to some other thing than to y^e Elements. And if they coulde not father them vppon the Elementes, howe could they father them vppon matter or stuffe, séeing that the Ele∣ments haue power and force to do, wheras matter hath abilitie but only to suffer or to be wrought vppon. And if they could not father them vppon matter; vppon what else should they father them than vppon God, who hath created both the propertie and the substance of them togither?

The Platonists* 1.393 that wrate since the comming of Christ, haue giuen libertie too their owne braynes, to gad out into a thousand imaginations. But whereas Plotin* 1.394 telleth vs that Gods actions and effects, are contemplations which imprint in nature the séedes of all things: hee teacheth vs too thrust farre from vs such brutish questions as these; namely, Of what kind of stuffe did God frame the world? And with what tooles did hee it? which are further of from the nature of the Godhead, than our dooings are from mere contemplations. For what else is contemplation (ac∣cording to their owne docttine) than to be wholy seuered from mat∣ter? He speaketh often of the first matter, but how doth he descrybe it? He sayeth that the very matter it selfe which is ioyned too the forme hath not any true béeing, and he termeth it The beeing of a Notbeeing, that is to say, a thing, that in deede is not; and that dooth hee too distinguish theis transitorie natures from the verye Beeing of God, which he termeth The Supersubstantiall Beeing. But as for the first matter, he calleth it The very Notbeeing that is too say an imaginatiue thing which hath not any béeing at all in déede; as if yée would say (as hée himself addeth) a certeine vnsha∣pednesse, which is the cause of all mishapennesse, the chéef default or want; which is the cause of all the defaults or wants that are in partic••lar things; the very euill, which is the originall of all euils; and to be short, a thing that can neither bée knowen nor imagined, otherwise than we imagine what Darknesse is by the knowledge of light; namely an vtter absence of all light.

Yea, but (will some man say) Although it be not an Essence, yet ought it at the least to bee a Qualitie; and by his terming of it an Euill he séemeth after a sort to make it a qualitie.* 1.395 Nay; like as (saith he) when we call the first of all Beeings by the name of Good∣nesse, we meane not that that Goodnesse is in him a Qualitie, but a very substance, yea and more than a substance: So when wee call Matter by the name of Euill, our meaning is not that

it is a Qualitie or hath any Qualitie in it; But that it is no Qualitie ne hath Qualitie in it: For had it any Qualitie in it, then should it bee a Substance, and consequently a shape or forme too; but it is not any forme at all.* 1.396 That in effect is the summe of his booke concerning euill and the originall thereof. In his booke of Matter, he declareth that there was a matter, (for he would not els haue made bookes thereof in vayne;) but yet he sayth that the same was neither essence, qualitie, nor quantitie, nor had a∣ny essence, qualitie or quantitie in it; ne differed any whit from pri∣uation, sauing in this respect, that priuation is verifyed as in re∣spect of some subiect or substaunce that is bereft of some thing that is peculiar or incident vnto it, wheras Matter is an vniuersall and vtter want of all things, that is to say a thing farre worse than pri∣uation. And yet for all this, he will not haue it to be vtterly nothing at all, but as a wast or emptie space, a thing without bounds, a be∣ing without being. And what or where thē shall that be? At length he findeth it in the world that is to be conceyued but only in vnder∣standing, that is to say in God, in whom he will haue it to abide as a forme or patterne of the vniuersall masse of all things. What a raunging is here abroade to fall alwaies into one selfesame path a∣gaine? Might he not with more ease haue confessed plainly, that God is both the formall and the materiall cause of all things, that is to say, the Creator former and shaper of all things by his wise∣dome and power?* 1.397 Agayne, whereas in other places he telleth vs, that Matter being it self no essence at all, cannot be the cause of the particular beings of so many sundrie things; nor hauing no life, bée the cause of life, but that both life and béeing are breathed into all things from without, euen from the souereyne mynd: doth he not iumpe with vs, which say that GOD created all substances of no∣thing? And if he could create that which was, and giue vnto it both being and life: could he not also forbeare the thing that was not, that is to say matter? Atticus and his adherents would néedes beare Plato downe by reason of certeyne sentences of his Timeus and of his Commonwealematters misunderstood, that matter was eternall as well as God, howbeit that the same being voyd of rea∣son, was brought vnto reason by him that is the very reason it self. With these fellowes wee our selues shall not néede to deale, but only heare Porphyrius* 1.398 disprouing them after this maner. If nei∣ther God (sayth he) be of Matter, nor Matter of God, but both of them be Beginnings alike; whereof then commeth it that

there is so great ods betwixt them, sith we hold opinion that God is Good and the very worker or Doer, and contrarywise that Matter is Euill, and but only a Sufferer? The cause of this difference cannot proceed from the one to the other, at least∣wise if our saying be true: namely, that the one of them is not of the other. And much lesse proceedeth it of any third, con∣sidering that wee acknowledge not any higher cause: which beeing admitted, it followeth that these two so disagreeable Beginnings met and matched together by chaunce, and con∣sequently that all things are tossed and tumbled together by Fortune. Agayne, If God (sayth he) bee apt to the beautifying and orderly disposing of Matter; and Matter be apt to receiue beautie and orderlines at Gods hand; I demaund frō whence this mutuall aptnesse and disposition commeth? For conside∣ring that they bee so disagreeing and so full contrary one to another; surely they could neuer haue agreed of themselues, but must of necessitie haue had a Third to make the attone∣mēt betwixt them. Now I am sure you will not say that there was any third to commaund them: Neither wil I beleeue, that they fell to greement by aduenture. To bee short, seeing that Matter is not sufficient of it self to be in happie state, but nee∣deth Gods helpe thereunto; but God is of himself abundant∣ly sufficient, both to be, and to be happie: who seeth not that GOD is of more excellencie than Matter, and that Matter is not of it selfe so much as able to be? For were it able to bee, it were also able to be happie. And therefore it is not to be de∣nyed, but that he whom wee confesse to haue perfected Mat∣ter, was also the very first maker and Creator of Matter. But how could he make it of nothing? Let vs heare once agayne what the sayd Porphyrie sayth vnto this poynt. Handycrafts (saith he) haue need of instruments or tooles. For their working is out∣wa••••••, and they haue not their matter or stuffe at commaund∣ment. But the naturall Powers as more perfect, & being with∣in things, doo performe all their doings by their only being. After that sorte the Soule by his essentiall life, doth nourish, growe, ingender, breathe, feele, and so foorth. So likewise the Imagination, by the only one Inworking of it selfe, giueth di∣uers qualities and mouings to the bodie, all at one instant. So also the bodilesse Spirites themselues, (as the Diuines report) doe worke wonderous things by their imaginations, without

instrument or action. Much rather therefore shall the worke∣mayster of the whole world who is a Mynd, giue substance to the whole by his owne only being, that is to wit, to this diui∣dable world, himselfe being vndiuidable. For why should it be thought straūge, that a thing which is without a bodie, should produce things that haue bodies, considering that of a very smal seede there groweth so great a Beast, composed of so ma∣ny, so great, and so differing parts? For though the seede bee little, the reason of the seede cannot bee small, seeing it wor∣keth so great things: neither on the other side can it be great, forasmuch as it vttereth and sheweth it selfe euen in the smal∣lest percelles. Now, this reason of the seede needeth matter to worke vppon, but so doth not the Reason of God; for he nee∣deth not any thing, but maketh and frameth all things; and notwithstanding that he bring foorth and moueth all things, yet abydeth he still in his owne proper nature. Now, when as the sorest and learneddest enemie that euer Christiās had, acknow∣ledgeth this doctrine in good faith and in so expresse wordes who dareth open his lippes any more against it? Dare the Epicures with their motes doo it? How can they alledge any reason for them selues, being by their owne opinion made by haphazard at aduen∣ture without reason? Or shal the naturall Philosophers do it, with their temperings and mixtures? First let them examine their Mai∣ster Galene, concerning the things which I haue alledged out of him in the former Chapter: and if that will not suffize them, they shall heare him yet agayne in this Chapter. Certesse as it cannot bee denyed, but that as he laboureth by all meanes possible, to fa∣ther the causes of all things vppon the Elements, and vppon the mixture of them together: so is he driuen at euery turne, to acknow¦ledge somewhat in them which he is ashamed to father vpō them. In discoursing how the babe is formed in the moothers wombe, he findeth himselfe turmoyled with many opinions.* 1.399 But yet in the end, Soothly (concludeth he) I see so great a wisedome, and so mightie a Power, that I cannot thinke that the Soule which is in the child that is begotten, maketh the shape thereof, con∣sidering that it is altogether voyde of reason; but rather that it is formed by that which we call Nature. In his booke of the tempering of things, a place that serued best for the exalting of the powers of the Elements to the vttermost;* 1.400 he very sharply repro∣ueth those which father the cause of the forming of the parts of the

bodies of liuing things, vpon the qualities of the Elements. Not∣withstanding (saith he) that these Qualities be but instrumēts, and that there bee another that is the framer or fashioner of things. In his booke of the opinions of Plato and Hippocrates, he maketh the vitall spirite to bee the excellentest of all things that haue a bodie: and yet for all that, he will not haue it to be eyther the substance or the dwelling place, but only the instrument of the Soule. And in his booke of Flesshes he procéedeth further, & sayth that in treating of Leachcraft he spake often according to the com∣mon opinion: but that if it came to the poynt of vttering the opiniō that he himslfe hild, he declared that both man and Beast haue their beginning from aboue, and that their Soules are from Hea∣uen, and finally that the Soule procéedeth neither from the quali∣ties of the Elements, nor from any of all the things that wee see here beneath. Now, if the Soule of man, or of the very Beastes, procéede not of the Elements: how should it possibly procéede of the Matter? And if it procéede not of the Matter, must it not néedes procéed of the forme, or rather must it not néedes be the very forme it selfe? And what els is so excellent a forme, than an excellent sub∣stance? And from whence is that (by his owne saying) but from a former fashioner or shaper? And what els shal that former be, than a Creator, seeing that euen shaping, is a creating of a substance?

Now therefore, let vs conclude for this Chapter, both by vnso∣luble reasons, and by the testimonies aswell of our enemies as of our friends; that God both was able to create and also did in déede create the World of nothing, that is to say, by his owne onely po∣wer, without the helpe of any thing whereof to make it. And (to comprehend in fewe wordes whatsoeuer I haue treated of hereto∣fore) that GOD of his owne goodnesse wisedome and power, did make, shape, and create the World: that is to say, That (if a man may so say) he is the efficient formall and materiall cause thereof, without that he néeded eyther helpe, patterne, or stuffe to make it withall. And now let vs consequently see the finall cause: that is to wit, how and to what ende he guydeth it: which shall serue for the next Chapter following.

The xj. Chapter.

That God gouerneth the World and all things therein by his Prouidence.

ARistotle was woont to say, that the diuersitie of Questions ought also to haue diuersitie of Answers. Some (sayth he) doe aske whether Fire bee hot: & these must be made to perceiue it by touching it; for their sence is sufficient to shape thē an answer. Some demaund whether their father & moother be to be honored; & such are not worthie to be disputed with, but rather to be rebuked right sharply. And others desire to haue it proued to them by apparant reasons, that there is a Prouidence which ruleth the world. Such kynd of folke (sayth he) should be answered by a whippe or a hang∣man, and not by a Philosopher. His meaning was in fewe words, that there is not any thing so sensible and naturall, nor any thing whereof the feeling is so fresh in our sences, or so déepely printed in our nature, as Gods prouidence ouer the world: and that wee ought to thinke it more sure, than the things which wee feele with our hands, or than the things whereof our owne Conscience con∣uicteth vs. For in that he ordeyneth a greater punishment for him that doubteth of Gods prouidence, than for him that resisteth sence and nature; he doth vs to vnderstand, that the fault is vntolerable, as y^e which is eyther a manifest guyle, or at leastwise an ouergrosse ignorance,* 1.401 which the Lawyers affirme to be next ••owsen to guyle. And in very déede, if the denying that there is any God, bee a bely∣ing of a mans owne sences, and of his owne nature, and of all the whole world it self, as I haue sayd afore: I cannot say but that the graunting that there is a God, and yet notwithstanding to denye him the gouernment of things, is more vntolerable than the other; considering how great iniurie is offered vnto him in cōfessing him after such a sort, as to attribute vnto him eyes without sight, eares without hearing, might without mynd, mynd without reason, will without goodnesse, yea and a Godhead without properties peculiar to a Godhead: In respect whereof the auncient Philosophers cal∣led

the Godhead it self 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that is to ••ay God or Pro∣uidence, becaue the one cannot bee imagined without the other. And therefore in their iudgement, as much an Atheist was he that denyed Gods prouidence, as he that denyed the Godhead it self. I demaund of any man which confesseth that there is GOD, I say euen of the sauagest of them all, whereby he knoweth it? Hée will answere, by the orderly conueyance of things which he seeth both aboue and beneath; by the order which they kéepe without fayling, and by the tending of so innumerable contrarieties to one marke; the Heauen heating the Earth, the Ayre moystening it, the Earth bringing foorth Hearbes, the Beastes feeding vppon the same, and all seruing for the vse of man. It is all one therefore as if he should say, that he knoweth him by his Prouidence, and by the interlin∣king of all things together which he hath marked in them all. A∣gaine, he will say he hath perceyued, in Mettalles, (as ye would say) certeyne wombes which nourish them and bring them foorth; in Plants, a certeyne vertue which draweth their nourishment frō the earth, and with very good proportion distributeth the same a∣broade from braunch to braunch, and from leafe to leafe; and which (as though it had a kynd of vnderstanding of the owne mortalitie) bringeth foorth a seede at such tyme as the decay therof approcheth: and in Beastes also, that one member doth for another, and euery of them for the whole; a desire to increase their kynd; Doogges to giue sucke; and a skilfull care to nourish and preserue their young ones: And he hath considered that none of all this could bee so layd for aforehand by it selfe, and therefore that there was some other thing aboue them. Thus must it néedes be, that he is led againe by the consideration of the prouidence, to the knowing of God. Now, if the prouidence which wee haue marked, doe make vs to say that there is a GOD by mounting vp from the effects to the causes of them; doth it not followe that Prouidence is the peculiar effect of God, and that he which denyeth that, denyeth the Godhead it selfe, forasmuch as the Godhead is not to be knowne but by the Proui∣dence?

If God haue no care of the world, I aske of thée whether it bée for that he cannot, or for that he will not? If he cannot, how canst thou say he is almightie? Or how canst thou say he is infinite, see∣ing thou knowest the bounds of his power? Agayne, how canst thou call him wise, sith it is the propertie of wisedome to guyde things to some certeyne ende, and not to leaue any thing subiect to

fortune? And seeing that his power and wisdome haue extended to all things for the creating of them, who shall keepe them from extending to al things for the ordering and mainteyning of them? Besides this, the Plant hath no reason to guyde it selfe, nor to pre∣serue it selfe against that which is to come, and yet notwithstan∣ding thou seest there a mynd which furnisheth out all the partes thereof, and a wisdome which watcheth ouer it against that which is to come. The Beast also hath no more reason than the Plant, though it both feele and mooue. Yet is there an Inwit in it which the Beast knoweth not of, which Inwit concocteth, digesteth, and distributeth that which the beast hath eaten, and disperseth it foorth into his parts by iust proportion, watching for it when it sleepeth, and thinking vppon it when it thinketh not thereon. It perceiueth (I wo••e not how) that it hath need of Earth, of Ayre, or of Nest to lay the yong ones in: it prouideth aforehand for the tyme to come, and shiftety countries according to the seasons of the yeere, cho••∣sing them out naturally, without fayling at any time. In all these things there shineth foorth a certeyne prouidence, which yet for all that, the beast neither knoweth nor conceiueth. Thou thy selfe which art indewed with reason, hast a forecast, and by that forecast doest the things which other wights doe by nature, or rather which nature (that is to say the foreordinance of the Creator dooth for them,) the more whereof thou hast, the more also doest thou pro∣uide aforehand. For as little a worme as thou art, thou inuentest a thousand trades and artes, which are euerichone of them so many poynts of wisdome, and consequently as many prouidences. As much as thou canst, thou makest all things to stoope to thy lur••, thou applyest the rayne and the drought, the heate and the cold, to thyne owne commoditie: thou turnest the doings of thy neighbors, of the Cittie and of thy Commonweale to thine owne profite and honor: yea and if it were possible, thou wouldest apply the heauen, the earth, the sea, and oftentymes euen God himselfe to thine own benifite. Now then who prouideth for the Plants and for the brute beastes in whom thou seest so great prouidence though they them∣selues haue none at all, but onely he which made them? Or who di∣recteth the Arrowe to the marke, the Arrowe (I say) which seeth not the marke, but the Archer who hath eyes for it? And cannot he prouide for all, which giueth prouidence to all? And he that giueth it thee in such sort as thou the•• by makest al things to stoope to thy Lure, whereas yet notwithstanding thou madest them not, and of

whom thou scarsly knowest the names, is not he able to gouerne euery one of them according to their nature, and too direct them, yea and thee too, vnto the end that he hath purposed, seeing he hath made them? Againe, if God be not able to prouide for things, and to direct them to their end, how say we that he surmounteth all that euer we can imagine, sith we cannot deny, but that hee which pro∣uides aforehand is of more abilitie than he that cannot. And if wee can imagine any thing to be greater then hee, why should not wee our selues be that thing? And if euen in man, the abilitie of proui∣ding be better then the vnabilitie, seeing we vphold that whatsoe∣uer is excellent in our selues, (which yet notwithstanding is but in measure and by perticipation,) the same is infinitely and original∣ly in God: Why doe we not graunt that God by his infinite wis∣dome can direct all things to his ende, as well as euery thing can by their particular wisdom which he hath printed therein, prouide for the things which the nature thereof requireth? Too bee short, seeing that Prouidēce* 1.402 is nothing els but a wise guyding of things to their end, and that euery reasonable mynd that woorketh, begin∣neth his worke for some end, and that God (as I haue said afore) the workemaister of all things, hath (or to say more truely) is the souereine mynd,* 1.403 equall to his owne power: doth it not follow that God in creating the worlde, did purpose an end? And what other could that end bee, than himselfe and his owne glory, considering that the end wherevnto a thing tendeth, cannot be lesse good than that which tendeth vnto it? and againe that as farre as his power extendeth in abilitie to create the world at the beginning, so farre doth his wisdome extend in abilitie to guyde aud direct it to that end? And seeing that the beginner and the end of things (the Ar∣cher (I meane) and the marke that he shootes at) are both one, that is to wit God himselfe: can any thing crosse him or incounter him by the way, to hinder his atteyning therevnto? Well then thou seest now, that thou canst not deny GOD the gouernment of the world, vnder pretence that he is vnable.

But you will say, that he will not voutsafe to haue a care there∣of. How come you I pray you to be so priuie to his will? Hath na∣ture taught you? Nay, thou seest, in the Plants a certeine inclina∣tion to nourish all their parts; in beastes, a charishnesse to bring vp their yong; in men, a desire to prouide for their children and house∣hold; and in all folkes a regard to the mayntenaunce of the things which they haue either made or manured. And him that doth o∣therwise

thou estéemest to bee, not a barbarous persone or a wylde beast, but a very block or a stone. Now then shall not he which hath giuen such inclination to all things, yea euen to the very sencelesse creatures by his touching of them, shall not he himself (I say) haue it for them all? Darest thou beréeue him of that which thou takest to bee a prayse to thy selfe? or darest thou father that vppon him, which thou takest to bee an iniurie to thy selfe? Nay, like as this care is a sparke of goodnes, so he that is the goodnes it selfe and the welspring of all that euer is good in all things, sheadeth foorth this care into all things by his goodnes. He say I which hath voutsafed to create vs, will not disdeyne to preserue vs. But forasmuch as it was his will to create vs to some purpose, (for if nature doe not a∣ny thing in vayne, how much lesse doth he that created nature?) he will also guyde vs to that purposed end, by his wisdome.

Let vs sée what things wickednes can alledge against so mani∣fest a doctrine. First of all steppes me foorth Epicurus, and denyeth that he sees any prouidence at all in the world, but thinks to marke many things to the contrarie in the whole world;* 1.404 whereby he will néedes gather that there is no prouidence, no nor (if he durst say it) any God at al. For if there were a prouidence (saith he) why should Mountaynes occupie any part of the Earth? why should there bée any wyld beastes? why should there be any Sea? And of that lit∣tle dry ground that is, why should two parts be vninhabitable, the one for ouer great heate, and the other for ouer great cold; and the third part be in daunger to be vnhabited also, were it not that men plucked vp the Bryers and Thornes that woulde ouergrowe it? Why falleth the Snowe vpon the Corne, and the Frost vpon the Uines? Why blowe the winds both on Sea and Land? To bee short, why happen sicknesses and diseases according to the seasons of the yere, and finally death? And at a word, why is man borne in worse case than the least thing that creepeth on the earth, and hath néede of many things which all other wights may well forbeare?

Nay, he should rather haue sayd, I sée a thousand mouings in the Heauen, whereof euery one hath his peculier end, and yet tend all neuerthelesse to one selfsame generall end. I see them all caryed by one vniuersall moouing, notwithstanding that euery of them in∣force themselues to the contrarie by their owne proper courses; and that this vniuersal motion is moued by one Moouer, which moouer so ouerruling them, must néedes be of sufficient power to rule them all, considering that euen with one twinckling of an eye, hee ruleth

euen the same Heauen that caryeth all the rest about. It followeth then that there is one principall moouer, which gouerneth the Hea∣uen and all the diuersitie conteined therein. Agayne, I see that the Globe of the Earth and of Sea togither, is in respect of the Hea∣uen but a litle point, or (as Pythagoras said) but as one of the least Starres: that the Moone ruleth the Tydes of the Sea, and the Sunne the seasons of the Earth, and they both are disposed by the course of the heauen. Wherevpon I conclude, that he which ruleth the Heauen, ruleth both the Sunne and the Moone, and that hee which ruleth them, doth also rule both the Sea and the Earth. For how is it possible that he which ruleth the whole, should come short in ruling any part of the whole? Or howe should the force of hym be impeached by the Earth, which gouerneth those by whome the earth hath her force? Insomuch that if (to my séeming) his pro∣uidence appere more lightsomly in the Heauen than in the Earth, (which yet notwithstanding is not so,) and I cannot yéelde a rea∣son of all the things which I sée: I will consider with my selfe that I haue séene many instruments made by men as I my selfe am, whereof I sée plainly the effectes, but I conceiue not the causes of them: Also that in other some I perceyue well the vse of some partes of them, namely of the greatest and notablest parts, but as for the smaller parts, as the Uices, Nailes, Pinnes, Riuers, But∣tons and such like, I haue thought them to be but bywoorks, and yet without them the residue could not hold togither, nor performe that which they were made for: and although they were taken all a sunder, and shewed mée seuerally one by one; yet could I hardly conceiue them. Yea and moreouer that I my selfe haue made some, whereof my Seruants and Children haue not perceiued the reason at all, but would haue burned them in the fire as seruing to no vse. And therefore I will prayse GOD in the things which I knowe, woonder at him in the things which I conceiue not, and ra∣ther thinke my selfe (who am as nothing) to want wit and vnder∣standing, than misdéeme him that is the maker of all things too bée faultie in his prouidence. But sith fooles must be answered to their follies, least they should thinke themselues wise; and that the wis∣dome of these folke consisteth all togither in putting foorth questi∣ons, and in answering to nothing: let vs examine these goodly de∣maunds ouer from poynt to poynt.* 1.405 If there be a Prouidence (say they) whereto serue the Mountaines? Nay, say rather, if all were of one sort, where were then Prouidence? For what els is Proui∣dence,

but a disposing of many sundrie things to some one ende? And how cā any such disposing be, where there is but one selfsame thing euerywhere throughout? Bruite beast that thou art! So would an Ant speake of thée. It would aske whereto serued the ri∣sing of thy nose aboue thy face, or of thy browes aboue thyne eyes, or of thy ribbes aboue the rest of thy bodie; all which are higher a∣boue thy bodie, than the Mountaines are aboue the Plaines of the earth. Thou estéemest greatly of the beautie that is in thy face, and of the proportion that is in thy bodie; insomuch that thou fallest e∣uen in loue with them in another; and yet thou wilt finde fault with it in the whole world, as a deformitie and want of order. But thou Lucrece, durst thou (I pray thée) bee so bolde as to speake so of a Painter? Or would it not offend thée if another man should speake so grossely of thy bookes? If a man should finde fault with the sha∣dowing of a picture in a table; it would be answered that the Shoo∣maker ought not to presume aboue the Pantople. For without the blacke, the white could haue no grace; neither could the bright bée set out, without a dimming; nor difference and proportion of parts appeare, without a medley of contrary resemblance; nor finally the ••unning of the Painter be perceiued, without diuersitie of colours. Also he that should finde fault with the art of thy booke, hauing red but some péeces of it here and there; should by and by bee answered by the Lawyer, That a man cannot iudge of the Lawe, without reading it wholly throughout. And if there happen any absurditie; by and by there starts me vp a whole world of Grāmarians, which inforce their wittes to the vttermost to excuse it, and to finde some elegancie in thyne vncongruities. Alledging that that which is vn∣seemly in the part, beautifieth the whole worke, and the shadowe more than the perfect colour, and the dimme more than the bright, when they be fitly placed. All the commendation of these paynted things, consisteth in their diuersities. Insomuch that if thou see a Playne ouerhanged with a shadie Rocke, or a dankish denne at the head of a Riuer springing out of it; thou likest the better of the ta∣ble for it, and praysest the Paynter the more for his skill. Surely it is not possible that the Playne should please thée more than the Hilles, or the Riuer more than the Rockes, but that neither with∣out other could please thée at all. Now, if thou diddest consider the World as the worke of God, and the Mountaines and other parts which thou mislikest, not in themselues but as they be small péeces of that worke; doubtlesse thou wouldest say as much thereof. And

therefore sith thou canst not at one view behold all the whole world together, to iudge of the proportion of the whole masse and of the seuerall parts thereof at one instant; learne to commend the cun∣ning of the workmaister in the things which thou thinkest thy selfe to vnderstande, rather than to call it into question, for the things which thou vnderstandest not.

But let vs sée further what reason thou hast to complaine. Thou wouldest shunne both Rayne, Hayle, & Frost. Behold, the Moun∣taynes furnish thée with wood and Timber to house thée, to shelter thée, and to make thée warme. Thou followest the commoditie of Traffick; and behold, they serue thy turne with Riuers from East, West, North, and South, making way from the middest of the Land to the Sea, and ioyning the Coastes of Sea and Land to∣gether. The ambition of thy neighbours is suspected of thée, and thyne perchaunce is noysome vnto them: the high Mountaines are as bounds to separate Nations asunder, and to kéepe them from incroching one vpon another. I omit the Wines and fruits which they yéeld foorth, the clere waters which they shed out, the flockes and heards of Cattel which they feede, and the pleasant dwellings which they conuey in them. If thou couldest finde as many things in thy bare Playne alone, I would giue thée leaue to complayne of the Mountaynes. Nay, on the contrary parte, if thou haddest felt the discommodities of the Playnes of Lybie; or but onely of the Playnes of Beawsse, or of the Desert of Champayne, thou woul∣dest by and by wish that all were Mountaynes; and yet notwith∣standing, if all were playne, or al were hilground, thou couldest not tell how to commend or discommend eyther of them both. Now then, let this stand for an answere to all those Philosophers which take vppon them to controll the parts of a worke which they con∣ceyue not whole. For, to blame the whole World for the Moun∣taynes sake, or the Mountayne for the Woods that grow thereon, is all one as if ye should finde fault with the whole man for lesse than a wert or a heare; when as yet notwithstanding, in an old man thou honorest the same heare which the Barber cutteth off and ca∣steth into the fire, yea and thou honorest the olde man for the very same.

But let vs procéede with the rest of their arguments. Thou complaynest of the wilde Beastes;* 1.406 And who hath made them wild but thy selfe? Nay rather, thou shouldest wonder at the prouidence of God, who (as Apollonius hath well marked) hath printed such

an awe of man in them, that they hurt him not vnlesse they bée as∣saulted or pinched with extreme hunger. And therein what do they more than man would do in like extremitie? But thou hast yet fur∣ther cause to wonder at his prouidence, in that the Beastes which might hurt thée, go single alone by themselues, and haunt the Co∣uerts and Caues of the earth, and make but small increase; where∣as the Beasts which are for thy benefite, how huge and strong soe∣uer they be, come home familiarly to thée, submitting themselues in whole flockes and heards to a Childe, and increasing into thou∣sands within small tyme. Tell me in good earnest, is it a worke of fortune, that the Beastes which may anoy thy life doe shunne thée, and that those with whose life thou maynteynest thyne owne life, should come and offer themselues vnto thée?

But the Sea displeaseth thée for occupying so much of y^e Earth. Wart thou a dweller in the Sea as thou art on y^e Land, the Earth would displease thée for occupying so much of the Sea.* 1.407 And yet what a deale thereof is still emptie, which were sit to be inhabited? Know thou, that thou art beholden to it for the great number of li∣uing wights which it fostereth for thée, for the great number of Townes and Cities which it inricheth for thée; for the Nauiga∣tions whereby it shorteneth thy way and yéeldeth thée Trafficke; and for his vapors wherwith he mainteyneth the ayre and maketh the earth fat. For put the case that the Sea were dryed vp at an in∣stant: what a number of Cities thinkest thou should be seene deso∣late and Nations desert, when men should bee in case with the drought, as Fishes are that be left on drye ground at the going a∣way of the tyde? Why shouldest thou not rather commend the be∣neficialnes thereof the more, in that not thinking it enough to lend it selfe to thée to doe thee seruice otherwise: it also teacheth thée the mightie prouidence and prouident might of him that made it, whē thou seest it ouerdreepe the earth, and threaten it with drowning euery minute of an hower, and yet is not able to passe his bounds: or when thou seest it seeke to inuyron a great Countrey round a∣bout as though it were to imbrace it; and yet to stay at a very nar∣rowe balke, or els to winde it selfe into the bowelles of the Land at a narrowe chanell; whereas notwithstanding an infinite sort of little Iles are settled in the middest of the déepe, like a sort of small motes in a Pond. For, seeing that thou seekest thy commoditie and profite thereby, thinkest thou not that he also seeketh his glo∣rie? And though thou haddest none other profite by it, were it not

very much for thée to haue had it as a ground and matter wherfore to magnifie him?

The Windes* 1.408 perchaunce do make thée to hate it: for thou must néedes haue a saying to them too; and yet on the other side, if it hold calme, thou art weary of it. But couldest thou without them haue knowne the tenth part of the Earth? How couldest thou haue dis∣couered the Land of Perow and the Iles of Moluckes? Nay, how couldest thou haue come to the nerest Iles vnto thée, without thē? Now, if thou like of the Wind when it is fauourable to thée; why should not another man that hath to doe in a contrary Coast, like well of it when it is contrary to thée? And if both of you finde fault with the storminesse thereof; knowe ye that he which made it wilbe glorifyed thereby, in that he doth thée to vnderstand, that he is able to méete with thée both on Sea and Land, and thou art taught to call vpon him, when the selfesame winde which hath caryed thée at thy pleasure, is readie to dash thée against the Land.

But of that little of the drye ground which remaineth, two parts (sayst thou) be vnhabitable.* 1.409 Who tolde thee so? Nay rather, why doest thou not couclude therevpon, that there is a Creator; seeing that euen in thy tyme those parts were not inhabited? Surely the Winds whom thou blamest so much, haue taught vs that in those Clymates are goodly Countries, people of better health and grea∣ter strength than wee, more beautifull Cities, and more delicate fruites; and wee finde them so temperate, that we forsake the tem∣peratest Countries here, to goe thether. The daies and yéeres are measured otherwise in one Countrie than in another: but yet in this varietie there is a constancie: and the one selfesame Sunne which maketh so many diuersities, doth thée to vnderstand, that he which made the Sunne could well make the other things. To bee short, there is so great eunning in all these things, that thou hast bene inforced to make an Arte for the learning of them. And what els is an Arte, but the setting of diuers Rules in order together? And if Arte bee so néedfull for the knowing of them; who will not say that there is much more Arte in the thing it selfe?

Thou blamest the Thornes Bryers and Bushes for couering the earth: but thou considerest not into how many mischiefes ydle∣nesse plungeth thée. Thou blamest the Frost and Snowe for hin∣dering thy Husbandrie, whereas in déede they twitch thée by the eare, to put thée in mynd that the foyzon of the earth commeth of God. Thou blamest the Rayne for wetting thée; whereas yet not∣withstanding

it moysteneth thy grounds and makes them fat. At a worde, thou playest the babe, who thinkes his Nurce does him wrong when she kembes his head or puts on his cloathes, or ra∣ther when sometymes she plucks a firesticke from him, or takes a knife out of his hand: that is to say, thou misconstrewest al the good which the bountifull prouidence of God doth vnto thée.

But in the end (sayst thou) why be we not able to help our selues assoone as we be borne?* 1.410 Why bee wee subiect to so many diseases, and in the end to death? I will not now presse thée with that which I will speake of hereafter: namely, that for all these things none is to blame but thy selfe: for euen in the same things which thou fin∣dest fault with, I will shewe thée still to thy face, the prouidence of God. The babe is borne without abilitie to helpe himself, and hath none other skill at all but to crye. Contrarywise the bruite Beast is no sooner come from his Damme, but he is able to goe. Be it so. Yet notwithstanding, of all these babes (which to thy seeming are but as forlorne things) none dyeth for want of nurce or nourish∣ment, though there be nothing but payn and care in bringing them vp. Therfore it must néedes follow, that euen from the beginning, a certeyne prouidence hath watched ouer them, which hath ingra∣uen this kindly affection and carefulnesse in the mothers breast; and the lesse that babes can do for themselues, the more manifestly doth Gods power shine foorth in prouyding for them. As for the bruite Beasts, it was not requisite for them to be brought into the world in that sort, forasmuch as being vnable to conceiue reason, they had no interest at all in the knowledge of those things.

As touching diseases,* 1.411 if thou blame the seasons of the yeere for them; thou mayst as well blame the fire for burning thée, which yet notwithstanding thou canst not forbeare: For the fault is in thyne owne vndiscréetnesse, and not in their nature; and in thyne own vn∣rulinesse, and not in their distemperance. The selfsame heate wher∣with thou findest fault, ripeneth the Corne, Wine, and Fruites wherewith the most part of the world are fed. And if thou thinke that any man be therby cast into an Agew; he might haue forborne the to haue gone into the Sunne, but he could not haue forborne the shining of the Sunne vpon the earth. But if fathers of housholds haue roddes at hand to correct their children withal, and that a part of their gouernment consist therein: thinkest thou it straunge 〈◊〉〈◊〉 he which hath set vs in the World, should haue meanes to 〈◊〉〈◊〉 vs in awe, & to bring vs home to him? What wilt thou say 〈◊〉〈◊〉 a num∣ber

of diseases, which are as certeine fruits of some vices & sinnes? as one of Drunkennesse; and another of Lecherie, and so forth? Or what wilt thou say to Hippocrates himselfe, who speaking of or∣dinarie sores and diseases, inioyneth the Phisition in any wise to consider well, whether there be any peculiar stroke of God in them or no? that is to say, whether the sicknesse or disease bee extraordi∣narie, so as the proper and nerest cause thereof, be the hand of God vpon the party? Now furthermore, if there be nothing but disorder and wretchednesse in this World; why blamest thou death, which maketh thée to depart out of it? If it bee because thou hast goodes which thou art loth to forgo: thou must consider that if thy parents had not giuen place to thée by order of Nature, those goodes had now bene none of thyne. If it be because Death maketh cleane rid∣dance of most things; thinke also that in so doing it maketh place for other moe that are to spring vp in their place. But yet if thou wouldest consider how often men goe to seeke Death where it see∣meth to be doluen most déepe, and yet finde it not; how many méete with it at Bankets, at Feastes, at Mariages, at Triumphes, and where they would most faynest forget it; how many there be which dye yoong and in good health; and how many liue fore diseased euen to the depth of olde age; how many returne safe from most cruell Battels, to dye in their beddes; and how many dye in battell or in some fray, which haue shunned strife and tumult all their life long: thou shalt easely perceyue that our life and our death are not in our owne hand, ne yet depend vpon fortune, forasmuch as we scape so many places where fortune seemeth to reigne; and that much lesse doth our life and death depend vpon Nature, seeing it is not with vs as it is with Trées and other liuing things to whom there is set a certeyne terme, which for the most part they fulfill and ouer∣passe it not: but that our life and death depend vpon a higher cause, whose onely will disposeth and boundeth them, accordingly as is expedient for his owne glorie, for the order of the whole, yea and for our selues too.

Had it not bene better then (sayst thou) that man had bene made immortall rather than mortall? And had it not bene much better also (I say) that the earth had rather bin fire than earth, or that the eare had rather bene eye than eare, seeing that the one is more ex∣cellent than the other, and in the opinion of the Philosophers it is better to haue qualities actiue than passiue? Had the earth bin fire, where couldest thou haue rested? And if thyne eares had bene eyes,

what had become of thy spéech, yea & of thy reason too? Now there∣fore my friend, giue this world leaue to be a world, that is to wit a disposing of diuers things, and an order of many degrées. Euery kinde of thing hath his bounds and buttelles, accordingly as God hath listed to appoynt thereto. The Plant is a Plant because it doth but liue and grow; if it had sence also, thē should it be a Beast. A Beast is a Beast, because it liueth and hath sence: if it procéeded so farre as to haue reason also, then were it a Man. Man reasoneth and discourseth because he is Man; and were he therto vnchaunge∣able, he were a God. He therefore that demaundeth why the Plant hath no sence, and why Man is not immortall in this World; de∣maundeth why the Plant is a Plant, and why Man is Man. To be short, the cause why it is so, is that it hath pleased God to set as it were the diuers strings of the World in tune to make one har∣monie, insomuch that whosoeuer taketh away the diuersitie of things, taketh away the World it selfe.

But this is a poynt whereon they greatly stand. Well say they, Admit that the diuine Prouidence haue stablished the World, yea and that it haue an vniuersall care thereof: Yet to toyle it self in the carke and care of so many particular things,* 1.412 specially in this sinke here beneath, I meane in this elementall world which is subiect to so many chaunges; seemeth rather woorthie of dispraise than of praise. Nay say I, but if it be a praise vnto God to haue created all things as well beneath as aboue; what discommendation can it bee vnto him to preserue them all? And seeing he made them all of no∣thing, whence procéedeth their woorthinesse or vnwoorthinesse but of his will? Why should the cloth of Gold be of more account than the cloth of Hempe, or the Silke of more account than the Linnen, to the Paynter that paynted them both? If God gouerne the Hea∣uen, why should he not also gouerne the Earth, whereon doe go so infinite sorts of liuing things, in euery of the which, yea euen in the Flye and the Ant, the greatnesse of the Creator shineth forth more than in the very Heauen: as namely in their so liuely life, so readie vse of sences, so nimble and free mouing, yea and in the very little∣nesse of them, which in so small roome conteyneth so many great things together? For wee wonder more at the Clockmakers cun∣ning in making a Clock which a Flye may couer with her wings, than in making a Clocke of great compasse, where the very great∣nesse if selfe diminisheth the estimation thereof. If thou bee afrayd least y^e spirit of God should soyle it selfe in these corruptible things;

remember that looke with what mynd Cincinnatus commaunded his men of Warre and ruled the Commonweale, with the very same mynd did he both till and dung his ground, and yet thou coū∣test him neuer the more defiled or imbaced thereby. The selfesame Sunne which giueth light in the Skye, pearceth through y^e darke Cloudes and foggie Mistes, dryeth vp drawghts and Sinks, and sheadeth foorth his beames euen into the things which seeme most filthie and lothly; and yet he himselfe is not blemished or defiled therewith. Now then, art thou afrayd least God who careth for all things without care, moueth them without touching them, and at∣teyneth to them without putting himself foorth, is not able to wéeld these lower things without defyling himself by them? But it were more conuenient (sayth Aristotle) that God should deale with the great things himself, as the King of Persia doth in his priuie Chā∣ber, and that he should leaue the care of the smaller things to his Princes. As who would say, that the Gardyner which hath sowed both the great Cabbage and the little Turnippe, both the Gourd and the Melone, should make more account of the one for y^e great∣nesse therof, than of the other for the smalnes therof. Or as though thou wouldest not also the more woonder at the King, if without stirring out of his priuie Chamber, he could appoynt all things to be done, or rather doe all the things himselfe which other men doe. What is the thing (I pray thée) which thou commendest in Mi∣thridates, but that he could call all his Souldiers euery one by his owne name? Or in Phillip King of Macedonie, but that he him selfe made the prouision for all his whole Hoste, euen for their cari∣ages and for fodder for their Beastes? Or in the great Captaynes of our tyme; but that they can skill, not onely to make Warre and to order their Battelles, but also to set downe what the dayly ex∣pences of their Armies will come vnto, euen to euery loafe of bread and euery bottle of Hay? and welnere within one or two shot, how many shot of the Cannon will make a breach in such a wall or such a Bulwarke, and so foorth? Or finally in this Captayne or that, sa∣uing that this Captaine could skill to set the Sunne vpon the face of his enemies; and another to cast the winde, the dust or the smoke in their eyes; and another to serue his owne turne by a Marris; and some other to drawe his enemie into a myrie and dirtie Countrie? And what viler or baser things can there be than these aforerehear∣sed? Finally what is it that ye commend in the skilfullest Warri∣ours of them al, but that they could skill to serue their own turne?

Or in the most glorious Conquerours, but that they gat the victo∣rie in the ende? And so thou must néedes graunt that whereas the Counterparties fayled to doe the like, it was not for want of cou∣rage or goodwill, but for want of power or skill. Now, whatsoeuer is in the whole World, is the Armie or Hoste of God, an Armie or Hoste (I say) not which he hath gathered of his neighbours, but which he hath created with his owne hands? He knoweth all the Starres by name; for he made them. He hath prouided foode for all liuing things, and one of them is no greater to him than another: for they haue no being at all any longer than he listeth. If he make warre here beneath, all his Armies are readie to do him seruice and to wage battell vnder his Banner, yea euen the ambitiousnesse of Princes to punish themselues one by another. If Nations wexe proud; he armeth against them the Grashoppers, and the Locusts, the Horefrostes and the Blastings, the Windes and the Uapors of the Earth. In euery of vs he hath his inlookers to chastize vs; in our flesh, our corruptions; in our mynde, our passions; and in our Soules, our sinnes and disorders. There is not so small a thing, which serueth not him to very great purpose; nor thing so vyle, which serueth not his glorie; nor thing so enemylike, which figh∣teth not to get him the victorie; nor thing so wrongfull, which exe∣cuteth not his Iustice; nor thing so much against him, which hitteth not the marke that he ameth at. Therfore pleade not in this behalf vnaduisedly for Gods glorie. For, the more stirring, the more chaunge, the more disorder there is here beneath; the more doth he shewe the vnmouable decree of his euerlasting Prouidence, which (will they or nill they) directeth all the vncoustancies of this world to one certeyne end. And if perchaunce thou be afrayd least GOD should bee tyred with the payne and trauell: (for he hath néede of thyne vngodlines to reléeue him) consider how thyne own Soule, without any toyle to it selfe, and without thy priuitie, doth at one selfesame instant both prouide for the susteyning of thée, and make all thy parts to grow, euery of them according to his peculiar por∣tion and proportion, giuing sence euen to thy nailes and the heares of thy head, which are but outgrowings and not parts of thy bo∣die. And if thou wilt know how this Prouidence is occupied with∣out toyle; consider how that thy Soule (notwithstanding all the businesse which thy Soule doth without thy thinking theron) for∣beareth not also in the meane while to mount vp euen vnto heauen, and by the discourses thereof to turmoyle the whole Earth; to lay

for the maintenance and defence of innumerable howsholds, & like∣wise for the decay and ouerthrow of as many others; and to search into the dealings of the enemie, to make them to serue his owne turne; to treate both of Warre and Peace together at one tyme, and with the selfesame persons both at once. And darest thou now thinke that God is toyled in the things which thou thy selfe doest without toyle? Or that he is tyred with the gouernments wherein thou wouldest take pleasure? Or that he being a free and infinite Spirite, doth not that in a limited bodie, which thy Soule being finite in it selfe, doth in thy bodie where it is as in a prison? To bee short, seeing thou presumest to doe thy will with the things wher∣of thou canst not make one heare; shall GOD be vnable to doe his will with the things which he of his owne only wil hath made and created? The vertue that is in a kernell or a Plant, sheadeth it selfe from the roote to the vttermost braunches, yéelding nourishment seuerally to the stocke or stalke, to the pith, to the barke, to the flo∣wers, to the leaues, and to the fruite, to euery of them according to the proportion and nature thereof. The Sunne it selfe in kéeping his course, and without mynding any such thing, yéeldeth heate to innumerable Plants, and to innumerable people; and yet heateth not himself one whit the more. Now, if a creature doe so: what shal we say of the Creator? What shall we say of him which is not the Soule of the Plant, or of the Beast, or of Man; but the maker of al things, yea which made thē of nothing, who is not (as some Phi∣losophers haue vphild) the Soule of the World; but rather (if he may be so termed) the very life and Soule of all life and Soule in the World? But as we see dayly, if the Counsell of a Realme can not ceasse one wéeke, without confusion of the Commonweale; nor the Soule of a man or a Beast, forbeare woorking bee it neuer so little, without the death of the partie; nor the life that is in Plants stay without withering of the Plant; nor the Sunne goe downe without procuring darknesse, or suffer Eclips without some nota∣ble chaūge: much more reason haue we to beléeue, that if the world and al that is therein were not guyded, vphild, and cared for by the same power wisedome and goodnesse that created it and set in such order as it is: it would in one moment fall from order into confu∣sion, and from confusion to nothing. For, to haue no care of it, is to mislike of it: and to mislike of it, is in God to vndoe it, forasmuch as Gods willing of it, was the very doing of it. Now, if Gods Prouidence extend it selfe throughout to all things, aswell in Hea∣uen

as in Earth: wee cannot doubt but that it extendeth also vnto man. For what thing is there of so greate excellencie, either on Earth as mans body, or in Heauen as mans Soule? And in ex∣tending it selfe to man, it must needes extend it selfe equally to all men. For who is either greate or small, poore or riche, in respect of him which made both of nothing? Or what oddes is there betwixt them, sauing that whereas both of them bee but slaues to him that setteth foorth the tragedie, he appareleth the one in Cloth of Gold to play the King, and the other in a course Pilche to play the Beg∣ger, making them to chaunge their apparell when he listeth?

But hehold, here commeth almost an vniuersall grudge. For if there be (say they) a Prouidence; how commeth it too passe that ill men haue so much prosperitie, and good men so much aduersitie? that some be so long vnpunished, and othersome so long vnrewar∣ded? And to be short, that one for his wickednes commeth to the Gallowes, and another for the same cause obteineth a Diademe or Crowne?* 1.413 This question hath combred not onely the most vertu∣ous among the Heathen, but also euen the most Religious of all ages. But it were best to take héere a little breth, and to put it ouer among diuers other things which remayne to bee treated of in the next Chapter following.

The xij. Chapter.

That all the euill which is doone, or seemeth to be doone, in the world, is subiect to the prouidence of God.

I Sayd héeretofore concerning GOD, that all things teache vs that there is but one, and yet notwithstanding that all things togither can∣not sufficiently teache vs what hee is. Also let vs say concerning Prouidence, That in all things wee see a manifest Prouidence; but yet to séeke out the cause thereof in euery thing, is as much as to sound a bottomlesse pit, if it be not much worse, sée∣ing that the will of God is the cause of all causes. Surely if a man will blame Gods prouidence, because it agreeth not with his owne

opinion; he is a thousandfold too bee more mislyked, than hee that should find fault with the maister of an household for the order of his house, where hee hath not lodged aboue one night; or controll the Lawes & Counsell of a straunge countrie, wherof he hath had no further experience than by resorting too the Tauernes and com∣mon Innes: Or than the Babe that should take vpon him to giue sentence of his fathers doings, or than the Uarlet that should pre∣sume to iudge of the determination of a Court of Parliament, vn∣der pretence that he had hild some mans Male at the Palace gate: or (I will say more) than the brute beast that should vndertake too déeme of the dooings of men. For what are wee to be admitted to the Counsell of God, which cannot so much as abyde the bright∣nesse of his face? And what vnderstand we further of him, than he voutsafeth too reueale vnto vs? What Princis Counseler is so wyse, that he can giue his Lord good aduice, vnlesse his Lorde doe first make him priuie to his purpose as well present as past, and to all the other circumstances perteyning thereunto? Or what Hus∣bandman comming from a farre, will presume to vnderstand bet∣ter what tilth, what séede, what compost, and what time of rest such or such a péece of ground requireth; than he that hath bin acquain∣ted with it all the dayes of his lyfe? And how farre greater thing is it to create, than to till? But forasmuch as God is reason it self, and we through his grace haue some sparke thereof: let vs sée whe∣ther it bee not so euident in all his dooings, that in this poynt it in∣lighteneth euen the darknesse of our reason. And if wee perceiue it not so cleerly in all things, let vs acknowledge our selues to be but men, betwéene whom and God there is no comparison, whereas in very déede there were no difference betwixt him and vs, if we could throughly conceiue all his deuices.

Now then whereas it is sayd, that if there be a prouidence, why haue good men so much euill, and euill men so much good, afore wée deale with the matter, let vs agree vpon the words. I aske of thee which men thou callest good, and which thou callest euill; and like∣wise what things thou meanest to bee properly good or euill. If I should aske thée why healthy men haue so many diseases, and dis∣eased men so much health, thou mightest with good reason laugh mée to skorue: for health maketh healthy, and sicknesse maketh sicke. But whereas thou askest mée why good men haue so much e∣uill, and euill men so much good, pardon me though I cause thée to expound thy meaning: for naturally I cannot conceiue, that either

good men haue euill, or euill men haue good. For if by good men you meane rich men, men of honour, and men that are healthy; and that ye take riches, honour, and health to bee the good things: then is your question absurd. For it is al one as if ye should demaund, why hearded men haue heare on their chinnes, and beardlesse men haue none. But if (as I heare thée say) thou estéemest Solons pouertie to be better than the gold of Crassus; and Platoes honestie better than Dennysis tyrannie; and the Collick and the Stone of a wise∣man with his wisedom, to be better than the health and soundnesse of bodie of the foole with his follie: then art thou deceyued with the fayre name of Good: for it is another thing than these goodes, which causeth thée to preferre them and to estéeme them the better. Ther∣fore let vs say that the good are those which séeke after the true good things, and that the true good things are Godlinesse and Uertue: and contrarywise that the euill folkes are those which are wedded to the things that are euill in déede, that is to say, to sinne and vn∣godlinesse; and let vs not confound things together, the good with the bad and the bad with the good. For what goodes soeuer a man can haue, or (to speake after thyne owne maner) whatsoeuer euilles he can méete with; he cannot bee good though he haue all the goodes in the world, so long as he himselfe is not good; neither can he be in euill case, as long as he himself is not euill. As for the goods which goe about to beguyle vs vnder that attyre; let vs say they bee out∣ward things, common to the one sort as wel as to the other, for the which a man can no more bee termed good or bad, blesfull or wret∣ched; than he can bee called wise or learned for wearing a rich gar∣ment: And contrarywise that as all these false goodes are instru∣ments to the wicked to make them woorse, (as riches to corrupt both themselues and other men; authoritie, to doe vyolence; health to make them the lustier and stouter to doe mischief, and so foorth:) so the euilles which thou termest euilles, are helpes to good men to doe good, and furtherers of them in the exercise of vertue, as pouer∣tie to bridle their lustes, bacenesse to humble them, sicknesse to mée∣ken them, and all maner of comberances to driue them to flee vnto GOD, and to teach them to succour their neighbours in the like, when God shal haue drawne them out of them: euen after the same maner that a sickly bodie turneth all things that are ministred vn∣to it, into the vnsound humor which getteth the vpper hand; wher∣as on the other side, the sound & healthy bodie turneth to his nou∣rishment, euen the meates that are worst of digestion.

Now then, let vs come to the poynt. Wilt thou knowe why ri∣ches and honour are common both to good and bad?* 1.414 It is because that God (euen in spight of the wicked) cannot but bee good; inso∣much that he maketh the showers to rayne and the light to shine vpon the one as well as on the other, notwithstanding that the one sort doe curse him for wetting them or for making them to sweate, and the other sort doe blesse him for moystening and ripening the fruites of their labours. It is because God déemeth it not agréea∣ble eyther to his owne honor, or to the greefes and trauelles of his seruants, to reward them with trifling things, least they should set their myndes vpon them; like as a father that kéepeth his heritage for his sonne, thinketh it not to bee for his behoofe, to apparell him in the liuerie of his seruants and slaues. To bee short, it is because he dealeth like a Prince, who maketh his pay common to all his Souldiers: but as for the Garlond of Oke, he giueth it only to such as are the first that in scaling doe enter the breach, or get vp vpon the wall of a Towne that is assaulted. Likewise Kings doe cast their largesse at aduenture among the people; but as for their ho∣nors and dignities, they bestow them vpon those whom they espe∣cially fauour. It misliketh thée that this man tilleth his ground with moe Ploughes than thou: but aduise thy selfe well, whether thou couldest find in thy hart to exchaunge y^t inward gifts of grace which GOD hath bestowed vppon thée, with his Oxen and his Ploughes. Another is in greater reputation and authoritie with the Prince than thou art. But consider thou therewithall the hart∣bytings, the enuie, the hartburnings, and such other things which he indureth; and see whether the meanest degrée in Gods house where thou seruest, being free and exempted from all those things, be not much better than the best roome about any King. The King for his seruice done by him, rewardeth him with Lands, fees, and offices: but if thou be so bacemynded and wrongfull to thy selfe, as to foster thy body with the seruices and charges of thy Soule; con∣sider that God being liberall and iust, intendeth to reward spiritu∣all incounters with spiritual Garlonds, and to recompence thée ac∣cording to his own honor, and not according to the bacenesse of thy heart; and that so much the more, because that in very déede, he re∣wardeth not thy workes, but his owne workes in thée. Moreouer, the reward is giuen, not according to thy desart, but according to the worthinesse of him that bestoweth it. The recompence of one selfsame seruice, is farre other at y^e hand of a King, than of a meane

Lorde. If thou say thou couldest bee contented with a thousande French Crownes, Alexander would answere thée, that it might perchaunce be enough for thée to receyue, but not enough for Ale∣xander to giue. And if thou wouldest haue GOD to giue thée no greater reward than plentie of Wine and Corne, if thou knewest him well, thou wouldest bee ashamed of thy selfe: for it is the foode that is common to all men, and not peculiar to those that are his. Neuerthelesse, if thou step not so farre, but art desirous to knowe what be the goodes which good men haue in this world, (I speake of them that seeme not to haue them) Seneca telles thée, that they make their life allowable to God who knoweth them; in him they repose themselues, they haue peace in their Consciences; if he in∣crease not their present state, they also doe abate their desires; their enemies cōmend their vertue, all the world bemoaneth their want, and those that haue the distributing of goodes and honors, are bla∣med for leauing them vnconsidered. To bee short, the very asking of that Question (be thou a Christian or an Heathen man) is vnto them an inestimable reward; namely, that whereas concerning the most part of other men, it is wont to be demaunded wherfore they be aduaunced to riches, honor, and authoritie, and they themselues are oftentymes ashamed to tell how they came by them; euery man asketh how it happeneth that the good men are not rich, honorable, and in authoritie. Now, if thou haue the courage of a man, woul∣dest thou not choose as Cato did, that men should rather aske why thou haddest not an Image of thyne set vp in the open place, and why thou wast not admitted to that honour, than otherwise? Yes sayst thou: But if God listed not to giue mee them; why haue I at leastwise forgone those which I had? Why hath hee taken them from mée? It may be (sayth Seneca) that if thou haddest not for∣gone them, they would haue fordone thée. I tell thée that if hée had not taken them from thée; they would haue taken thée from him. I pray thée how often hast thou taken from thy Childe a puppet or some other toye that he played withall, to see whether he would be stubborne or no? How oft haste thou plucked the knife out of his hand, euen when he cryed to haue it still? And what euill meanest thou towardes him, when thou weanest him from his Dugge? Now then, thinkest thou it straunge that GOD should cast thy goodes into the Sea, which els would haue helped to drowne thée in destruction? O how greatly did Platoes Shipwracke aduaun∣tage him, to make him wise? Or that he should plucke the Sword

of authoritie out of thy hand wherof thou art so desirous, which els (peraduenture) had slayne thyne owne Soule? Or that to prepare thée to another life better than this, he should serue thee with such fit meanes, as might make thée to bee in loue with it? Thou wilt say that thou wouldest haue vsed them well: but what a number of men haue bin seene, which vnder the chastisement of pouertie were good men, whom riches and honor did afterward marre & corrupt? Thou sufferest the Phisition to take frō thée some kynds of meates which thou louest well, and to abridge thée both of thy fare and of thyne exercises, and of thy pleasures, because he hath seene thy wa∣ter or felt sometymes thy pulse: and wilt thou not suffer God (who hauing created thee and shaped thee, feeleth euerlastingly the pulse of thy Soule) wilt thou not suffer him I say, to bereue thée of some outward thing which he himselfe made, and which would worke thy destruction? Thou commendest the Captayne, who to make his iourney the speedier against his enemie, dispatcheth away all bag and baggage from his Armie, that his Souldiers may go the lighter, and that the breaking of a Chariot may not stay him by the way: and canst thou not finde in thyne heart that he which made thee and gouerneth thée, should dispose of thy baggages: that is to wit, of thy purchases or inheritances which thou hast gotten heere belowe, to make thée the nimbler against vice, and against the con∣tinuall temptations of this world?

But Enuie pricketh thee. Why taketh he them not (sayst thou) aswell from this man and that man, as from mée? And why loueth he thée perchaunce better than them? Tell mée why the Phisition appoynteth thee a greater portion of Rhewharbe, than him? Be∣cause such a one is more moued with one dramme, than another is with three. One is better purged with a single Clister, than ano∣ther is with a very strong Purgation. One man is sooner warned of God by the losse of his cropp of Grapes or Corne, than another is by the burning of his house, the losse of all his goodes, and the ta∣king of his Children prisoners. So Iob sawe the losse of his Cat∣tell, the burning of his houses, and the death of all his Children, and yet for all that, he praysed God still. That which was constan∣cie in him, might haue seemed blockishnesse in another. But when God came once to the touching of his person, he could not then for∣beare to dispute with him. Now then, séeing that the things which thou termest euilles and mischiefes, are in very déede both Medi∣cines and Salues; wilt thou not haue them ministred according to

the complexion of the patient? And thinkest thou thy selfe wiser in discerning the disposition of thy Soule, thā he that created it, thou I say which darest not trust to thyne own knowledge in the curing of thy bodie? The same is to bee sayd of diuers Nations, whereof some one may happen to be afflicted a longer tyme & more sharply with the Plague or with Warre, than another, and oftentymes al∣so euen for the selfesame causes. For God knoweth both the com∣mon nature of whole Nations, and the peculiar natures of euery seueral person. Some nature, if it should not sée the scurge alwaies at hand, would become too too proude and presumptuous: Another, if it should see it continually, would be quite out of hart and fall in∣to dispayre. If some were not kept occupyed with their owne ad∣uersities, they could not refrayne from working mischief to others. Another agayne beeing more giuen to quietnesse, is contented to sweate in tilling his grounds, & in trimming his Gardynes, with∣out coueting other mens goodes so he may keepe his owne. In like case is it with Plants: some require dunging, some rubbing to make them cleane, some proyning, some new graffing againe with the same to take away the harshnesse of their fruite, and some to haue their head cropped quite and cleane off. One selfesame Gar∣dyner doth all these things, and a Childe of his that stands by and sees it, woonders at it: but he that knoweth the natures of things, will count him the skilfuller in his arte.

Yea sayst thou, but though these euilles may be Medicines and Salues, how may death be so? For what a number of Innocents* 1.415 doe wee see slayne in the world? What a number of good folke doe we see put to the slaughter, not onely good in the iudgement of vs, but also euen in the iudgement of those that put them to death? Nay rather, what is death but the common passage which it beho∣ueth vs al to passe? And what great matter makes it, whether thou passe it by Sea or by Land? by the corruption of thyne owne hu∣mors, or by the corruptnesse of thy Commonweale? Agayne, how often haue Iudges condemmed some man for a cryme, whereof he hath bene giltlesse, and in the denyall whereof he hath stoode euen vpon the Scaffold, and yet hath there confessed himselfe faultie in some other cryme, vnknowne both to the Iudges and to the stan∣ders by? a manifest reproofe either of the ignorance or of the vniu∣stice of the Iudges, but a playne acknowledgement of the wise∣dome and iustice of the eternall God? And if God hring them to that poynt for one fault, and the Iudge for another; what vniustice

is in God for suffering them to bee condemned wrongfully by the Iudge, yea and to be punished with death or otherwise, for a cryme whereof their owne conscience cleareth them as giltlesse, when as God and their owne conscience doo iustly condemne them for some other? As for example, The Iudge condemneth them for conspi∣racie against the commonweale, whereas God condemneth them (perchaunce) for behauing themselues loosely in defending the commonweale. The Iudge vnder colour of offence giuen to the Church, and God for not rebuking the Churchmen freely inough. For I speake as well concerning Heathenfolke, as Christians in this behalfe. And what a nomber doe wee see, which confesse of themselues, and witnesse of their familiar freends, that by thy pu∣nishing of them, wherewith thou being the Iudge mentest to haue put them in feare and too haue restrained them, they haue taken warning to amend, and bin the more quickened vp and incoraged? And what els is this, but that as in one selfesame deede, God had one intent and thou another, so also he guyded it to the end that he himselfe amed at, yea and to a contrarie end to that which thou did∣dest purpose? But what a thing were it if thou sawest the fruite that GOD draweth out of it? The Childe that beholde his Fa∣ther treading of goodly Grapes, could find in his heart too blame him for so doing, for he thinketh that they should bee kept still, and cannot conceiue to what vse the treading of them should serue: but the Father knowing the goodnes of the Fruite better then the Child, (for he planted them, tended them, and proyned them) con∣sidereth also that within two moonethes or little more, they would wither and dry away, and therefore to preserue the vertue of them, he maketh no account of the eating of them, but treadeth them in a Fatte to make Wyne of them. And when the Child comes after∣ward to discretion, he museth at his owne folly, and acknowled∣geth that at that tyme he played the very Child, notwithstanding that as then he thought himselfe wyser than his Father. And after the same maner doth he when he sees him make conserue of Roses, of Uiolets, or of other flowers. He is sory to see them mard (as hee thinketh) and is ready to weepe for it, and he cannot be quieted, be∣cause he would make Nosegayes of them, which anon-after would wither, and he himself would cast them away by the next morrow. Now consider I pray thee, whither without any further induce∣ment, thou find not thy selfe too resemble this Child. GOD who made the good men that which they be, hath no lesse consideration

and loue toward them, than those which bewayle them. Hee know∣eth to what ende their lyfe serueth in this worlde, also hee knoweth when it is time to gather them, and to put to his Hooke or Sickle, to cut them downe, that they rotte not vppon the tree or vppon the ground, and how long they may be preserued in their kinde. And thinkest thou it straunge that hee should take some when they bee fresh and greene, too preserue them all the yeere long, or that hee should make Conserues of their flowers to bee kept a long time, or that hee should of their grapes make Wyns? Thinkest thou it straunge say I, that he should after a sort make their sauour, their sweete sent, and their strength, that is to say their godlines, their vprightnes, and their vertue too liue after them, which otherwise should bee buried with them? And that they which for themselues could not haue liued past three or fower yeres, should liue to the be∣nefite of the Church and the commonweale, not yeres but worlds of yeeres? If thou bee a Christian take for mee example the Apo∣stles and a great nomber of the Martyrs which haue suffered per∣secution: doest thou not euen yet still drink of that liquor of theirs? doth not their constant confession make thee also to confesse Christ, and their death helpe thee too the endlesse lyfe? Could Ignatius and Policarpus haue liued aboue fiue or sixe yeres more than they did? And yet what part of all their ages hath lasted so long or done so much good, as the last halfe howre wherein they dyed? Or if thou be a Heathen man, consider mee the death of Socrates or of Papinian? If Socrates had not droonke the iewce of Hemlocke without gilt, haddest thou had those goodly discourses of his con∣cerning the immortalitie of the Soule? Or wouldest thou haue beleeued it so easely? and therevpon haue bene contented to forgo thy lyfe so freely for the defence of thy Countrie, or for the maynte∣nance of the trueth? And if Papinian had not shewed how hono∣rable a thing it is to dye for doing right, and how farre the soue∣reine magistrate is to be obeyed, should we not bee bereft of a sin∣gular goodly example of stoutnesse and rightfull dealing? What thing did they in all their whole lyfe, either so much to their owne honour, or so beneficiall to them that were to come after them, as their dying in such sort? Now therefore, let vs say we be but babes. And forasmuch as we perceiue the wisdome of our Father t••o bee so great, whereas wee condemne him of want of skill, and foras∣much as our owne ignorance is so grosse, whereas wee boasted of wisedome, let vs rather confesse our weakenesse in all cases, than

presume to doubt of his sage prouidence in any thing.

But Cato* 1.416 of Vtica would needes that God should yéeld him a reason, why Caesar ouercame Pompey: as who would say, that the veriest rascall in the Realme, should commaund the high Court of Parliament to yéeld him account, why his case was ouerthrowen. For all our great Quarels and Complaints are lesse before God, than the least case of a poore Uillaine is afore the greatest Monark of the world. Nay, hee should rather haue considered that priuate States are punished by order of Lawe, and Commonweales and publik States by ciuill warres: And that the Commonweale of Rome was (euen by his owne confession) so corrupted in maners, in gouernment, and in the very Lawes themselues; that he might haue had much iuster cause to haue doubted of Gods prouidence, if after her punishing of others for the lyke things, she her selfe had scaped vnpunished: That the Greate men, what part so euer they mainteyned, were the members most infected, in so much that the wisest men of that age said, We see what part we ought to shun, but not what part wee ought to take: And that as Caesar made warre openly against his Countrie, so Pompey couertly and vn∣der hand made his partakers too fight for the mayntenaunce of his owne ambition, which was paraduenture discountenanced too the common people, but could not be counterfetted before God, who seeth the very bottom of our hearts. Now then shall wee thinke it straunge, that to the intent to shewe the common people how great∣ly they bée subiect to be deceyued vnder pretence of good fayth; and to teache great men how fore he mistiketh that they should shrowd their leawde lustes vnder the Cloke of Iustice; God should suffer Pompey to fall into the hands of his enemies? And that to punish the pryde of the Senate and the whole state; hée should cause their Army to bee vanquished, and let them fall into the hands of their owne Countryman their naturall Subiect? Nay how could God haue shewed his prouidence more manifestly, than by ouerthrow∣ing that State by her owne force, which thought there was not a∣ny Power in the worlde able too punish her? and by making her a bondslaue to her owne Seruant, which had brought so many Cit∣ties, Commonweales & Kings in bondage vnto her? But it may be that Caesar himselfe scapeth vnpunished. Nay: To shewe vnto Tyrannes that the highest step of their greatnesse is tyed to a hal∣ter, and that they be but Gods scourges which he will cast into the fyre when he hath done with them; within a whyle after, hée was

slayne miserably in the Senate when it was full.* 1.417 And by whome? Euen by those in whome hee trusted, which had fought vnder his Standard against the Commonweale, and which presuming them selues to haue deserued more at his hand than they had in deede,* 1.418 meant to deserue also of the Commonweale in murthering hym. Were wee now as diligent in marking the procéedings of things done in Histories, as we be in noting the maner of spéeches, the or∣der of indyting, or the antiquities which the wryter reporteth: We should find the lyke prouidence of God* 1.419 in the chaunge of all Sta∣tes. But I content my selfe with this one afore mentioned, as the which is best knowen too all men, except I were mynded to take some example of our present age to inlighten the matter withall. Now then, whereas Cato slewe himselfe through impatiencie, thinke ye not that if he had liued still, he would haue ceassed to con∣tend with God, and haue commended his Iustice, and haue writ∣ten bookes of his singular prouidence? Yes: But the mischief is, that whereas we would not iudge of a Song by one note, nor of a Comedie by one Scene, nor of an Oration by one full Sentence, we will presume to iudge of the Harmony and orderly direction of the whole world, and of all that is therein, by some one action a∣lone. Againe, in Musik we beare with changes and breathes, with pauses and discordes; In Comedies, with the vnmeasurable bar∣barous cruelties of an Atreus, the wicked presumptions of an Ixîon, and the lamentable outcryes of a Philoctetes: and all this is (if we will say the trueth) because we haue so good opinion of the Musician, that we think he will make al to fall into a good concord: and of the Comediemaker, that all his disagréements shall end in some mariage: and of the Tragediewryter, that ere hee leaue the Stage, he will tye the wicked Ixîon to the Whéele, or make the féends of Hell to torment the Atreus, or contrariwise cause GOD to heare the wofull voyce and pitifull cry of the poore Philoctetes. And if God seeme erewhyles to hold his peace, and to suffer men to play their partes; ought wee not too haue so good opinion of his wisdome, as to thinke that he can tell when it is tyme to pay them their hyre? And that although he let the wicked walk at large vp∣pon the stage, and the godly to lye in prison: he can also prouide to end the braueries of the one sort with iust punishment, and the wo∣full complaintes of the other sort with ioyfull triumph? When a Tragedie is playd afore thée, thou art not offended at any thing which thou hearest. Why so? Because that in two howres space:

thou hast shewed vnto thee the dooings of a ten or twelue yeres, as the rauishing of Helen, and the punishment of Paris, or the misera∣ble end of Herod vpon his murdering of Iohn Baptist. Insomuch that although thou bee not acquainted with the storie, yet the arte which thou perceiuest, and the end which thou expectest, make thee both to beare with the matter, and to commend the thing which o∣therwise thou wouldest thinke to be both vniust, and also cruell in the gouerner of the Stage. How much more oughtest thou to re∣freine thy mislyking, if thou considerest that the world is a kind of Stageplay, ••••nueied to a certeine end by a most excellent maker? And what an excellent order wouldest thou see there, if thou migh∣test behold all the ages and alterations thereof as in a Com••••••e, all in one day? yea or but the successe of some one onely Nation for an hundred yeres, which were lesse than the interuiewe of two Seruaunts in a Comedie? Thou hast seene Pompey ouercome. Loe here a discord that offendeth thine eares. Thou hast seene Cae∣sar to bring home his Sword bathed in the bloud of the Senate. If thou be a Child, thou weepest at it: but if thou beest a man, thou pacifyest the Child and attendest for the knitting vp of the matter, and for the iudgement of the Poët: Herevpon the Chorus singeth, and then maketh a pawse. All this whyle the Poet seemeth to haue forgotten Iustice, and if thou depart out of the company at that poynt, thou canst not tell what to make of it. But tarry a whyle and hearken to the note that followeth. Caesar is put to death by his owne men. See here how the discord is turned into a good con∣cord. Thy Childe seeth that this prowd Peacocke which vaunted himselfe aboue all the world, is in one day stabbed in with infinite wounds. Whereby, how little a one soeuer thy Child be, he hath some perceiuerance of the forecast of the Poet. Doest thou not see then againe, that wee bee like Children, which would controll the Song of all ages by one Note, or a long Oration by one Letter, wheras notwithstanding, our life as in respect of the whole world, is lesse then a short Minim in comparison of a whole song? If thou be a Christian, thou readest the History of Ioseph. When thou rea∣dest how he was sould into AEgipt, thou canst not be angry inough with his brothers, nor sufficiently bewayle his poore olde Father. Againe, when he is cast into the deepe Dungeon in recompence of his chastitie, thou couldest find in thy heart to blame, not only Pha∣rao, but euen God himself. But when thou seest him taken out of Prison to reade the Kings Dreames, and (within a fewe dayes af∣ter)

as a King in AEgipt; a succour to his father in his old age; and the rayser vp agayne of his whole house at their néede: then thou perswadest thy selfe that he which made him to reigne in AEgipt, did suffer him to be sold to the AEgiptians; that he which made him the deliuerer of his house, did also make him to bee solde into bon∣dage afore by his brethren: and to bee short, that the discord which offended thée and the harmonie which delighteth thee agayne, pro∣ceede both from one selfesame Musition. Howbeit, afore wee con∣clude this matter, see once agayne how much more vpright thou art towards thy Prince, than towards God. Thou seest a great number of his Armie come home wounded: if thou bee a man, it must needes greeue thee. Anon one brings thee home thyne owne Sonne dead: if thou bee a Father, thou canst not forbeare teares. A neighbour of thyne assureth thee that he was slayne in doing his duetie, in getting victorie to his Countrie. Though thou take not comfort in it at the first brunt, yet at leastwise thou wilt not bee so mad as to lay the blame in thy Prince. Within a while after, when thou fallest to considering the fruite of the victorie; then as it hath greeued thee to forgoe thy sonne, so wilt thou thanke God that he dyed in defence of his Countrie, and that he did his part in so noble a seruice. Shall not God then haue as great preheminence in set∣ting foorth his glorie, as Kings for the obteining of their victories? God ouer his Creatures, as Kings ouer their Subiects? Or shall not we haue as much patiēce in the death of those whom we bring vp, when they dye for his seruice, as when they dye for the honour of our Prince? Or shall wee haue lesse trust in him as touching his imploying of them to good purpose, than wee haue in Kings Prin∣ces and Captaines, which knowe not the issue of their owne enter∣prises, or at leastwise for the most parte knowe it not, ne haue any care of the life or death of them that serue them? Let this suffize for answer to such as vexe themselues either for their owne afflictions, or for the sodayne death of those whom they loue and estéeme. And let vs now consequently see, if we can satisfie those which are grée∣ued, at the prosperitie and slowe punishment* 1.420 of the wicked.

Thou sayst that the wicked haue welfare at will. King Cyrus was not of that opinion, when for a punishment to the people of the Citie of Sardis, he commaunded them to spend their tyme in gaming & feasting. Nay, thou shouldest rather say, that they haue miserie; for all the good things which thou termest good, and which wee count neither good nor euill, doe in the hands of the wicked

turne into euill, Well (sayst thou) howsoeuer they be termed, they haue great commodities in this world. What wilt thou say then, if their owne wicked disposition, and their owne sinne, do work them more mischiefe than all the harmes and euilles which thou beway∣lest in the good men? Sith there is not a greater mischiefe than to be wicked, and that all the commodities which thou enuyest them, haue as little force against the euil which they harber within them, as Ueluet Pantoples haue against the Gowte, or Dyademes a∣gainst the Headach, or Purple Robes against the Collicke; Gesse (if thou canst) what feare, and what Agewfits they susteyne in fol∣lowing their wicked lusts; as namely, this mā in haunting of Har∣lots, that man in ryding to commit a Robberie; one in poysoning his owne brother, that he may succeede him in the Kingdome; ano∣ther in ridding good Commonwealemen o••t of the way, that he may mainteyne himselfe still in his tyrannie. Consider what mise∣rie they indure, afore they can come to the performance of their e∣uill; what they abyde in the very doing therof; and what a turmoyle their owne Conscience maketh of it, after they haue performed it: and thou shalt see that it is a continuall Feuer, a straunge vnquiet∣nesse, and a sharpe sorrowe; so much alway the more daungerous, because the shamelessest of them all, dareth not bewray his disease to the Phisition. Alexander y^e Tyrant of Pherey, was wont euen in the chiefe of his prosperitie, to get himselfe within a Mote and to drawe vp the Bridge after him, when he went to lye with his Concubine. Dennis of Sicilie being afrayd to put any Barber in trust with the trimming of his Beard, made his owne Daughters to supplye that office: and growing afterward in ielozie of them, he findged it off himselfe with a burning firebrand. Another, as oft as he went to bed with his wife, searched her whether she had not a knife hidden in her bosome or about her. Thinke you not that the happiest of all these Tyrants, was more miserable than the person that was most oppressed vnder his tyrannie? With what saw••e thinke you did Dennis eate his deynties, when he imagined him∣selfe to haue a naked Sword hanging continually by a heare with the poynt ouer his head, as he sate at his Table? And yet what a number were there at that tyme, which enuyed the Purple Robes the Dyademes and the deyntie fare of those Tyrants, and which found fault with God for the ease and prosperitie which he gaue them? Babes that we be! We would chaunge our state with a kai∣••ife, that in playing the King in a Tragedie sweepeth the scaffold

with a long gowne of cloath of Gold, which within a fewe howers after, hee must bee fayne to deliuer home againe to the Upholster with payment for the hyre of it: and in the meane tyme we consider not what ragged clowtes, what seabbes, what vermin, and what itch and skurffe lyes hid vnderneath it, nor how that oftentymes in counterfetting the Maiestie of the King, he was fayne to s••ruh, and in manacing others, to grinde his teeth in his head. But were we clothed but one hower with y^t which he beareth about him, and whereof he cannot rid himselfe; we would rather go naked than be so clothed. And whereas it spyteth thee to see Tyrants reigne,* 1.421 and to stout it out, and to triumph, yea and that some of them come to their Crownes by doing the same things for which othersome come to the Gallowes: doth it not greatly skill (thinke you) whe∣ther a man be tormented in a coate of Ueluet or in a coate of Can∣nas? whether he be manacled and fettered in gyues of gold or of y∣ron? or whether in so short a showe, he play the great Lord or the poore Begger? How often hast thou seene the Cutpurse hanged with the purse about his necke, and the theefe hanged in the same apparell that he had stolne? Be thou of high or low degree, be thou rich or poore, be thou Prince or Peazant; assoone as thou hast giuen ouer thy selfe to vyce and wickednesse, by and by thou art become their prisoner and slaue. And if it be so, what skilles it who thou be, if thou bee not thyne owne man? Or whereto serues thee all that thou art, but to be the more wicked, which is in déed to be the more wretched? But although vyce bee a punishment to it selfe, and that (as sayth Hesiodus) it spring vp with the very misdeede it self: yet notwithstāding, many men cannot content themselues with Gods Iustice, vnlesse they see the offender led by and by to the Gibbet: that is to say, vnlesse the punishment be speedie, an open example and visible, as who would say, y^t the Gibbet were but y^e beginning of punishment and not rather the ende of it; or that they which are cast in prison for stealing, had not the halter about their neckes al∣readie, from the very instant that they bee taken, notwithstanding that sometymes forgetting their owne miserie, they play together at Cardes and Dyce.

Nay contrarywise, whereas Epicurus doth ground his grea∣test argument thereupon; let vs learne thereby to haue Gods pro∣uidence in the greater admiration. I demaund therefore what is the ende of all Iudges in punishing, whether it bee not the amend∣ment of the transgresser, if hee bee not put to death; or els that hee

should be an example and warning to others by his death? If it be the amendment of the partie, why findest thou fault with it, for that he is not put to death? God is a Phisition and not an Execu∣tioner. He knoweth better than thou, what hope of recouerie there is in the disease. The partie (sayst thou) was vnruly in his youth. The Wine that is now milde and good, was a two moneths agoe both hard and sharpe, and it will growe riper yet in tyme. Moreo∣uer, let the offender flee as farre as he list, yet is he in safe prison and vnder sure garde. God stands in no such doubt as thou doest: The offender can neuer scape his hands. No: but thou wouldest that God should at leastwise brond him with the broade arrowe. Where? In the forehead. Why, art thou afrayd that God could not knowe him agayne, if he had once shifted his apparell in some other priuie place? And doubtest thou that his bronding yron can not pearce euen to the heart, which thou seest not? Nay rather, the selfesame Land which for want of tillage and husbanding brought foorth Bryers and Thistles, that is to say, vyces and enormities, may by good husbanding beare good Wine and good Corne, that is to say, Godlinesse and Urtue. And haddest thou once shamed him by y^e Pillorie or by Carting; might it not gréeue thee to haue made him past grace? If the Athenians (sayth Plutarke) had killed or dissamed Themistocles for the outrage of his youth; or Miltiades for his rebelling in Chersonesus; where had the goodly Uictories become, which they obteyned in the Playnes of Marathon, on the Coast of Artemisia, and at the Riuer Eurymedon? Or had Con∣stantine also bene rigorously punished, for the crueltie wherewith his former yéeres were disteyned, and that thou haddest then kno∣wen aforehand, what things he was to doe afterward for the ad∣uauncement of Christianitie; thou wouldest haue bewayled him. And why sauest thou some from punishment for great crymes, in respect that one is a good buylder, another an excellent Musition, and a third a man of learning; whereas thou knowest not what they will proue afterward; & yet thinkest not that in so doing thou doest any hurt, but rather good seruice to thy Commonweale? But as for God, he knoweth which ground is euill of it selfe, and which it is that beareth Brambles and Thistles for want of husbanding. He knoweth what is in euery of our mynds afore wee our selues knowe it. The things which we are to doe in tyme to come, bee as present in his sight, as the things that we haue done alreadie. Nei∣ther Nero with his fiue yéeres good behauiour, nor Constentine,

with the wicked disorder of his yoonger tyme, could beguyle God, though thou which seest but the outwarde man, callest the one the Father of his Countrie, and the other an vnkindly Murtherer. He knoweth when the tamed Woolfe will turne agayne to his kynd, and when the churlish Dogge will put off his churlishnes. He fore∣knoweth mens natures in the very seede, whereas we scarce know them in the flower. Whereas wee play the blinde Barbers of the Countrie, in hauing recourse at euery instant to searing, cutting, launcing, and sawing for euery fore; he hath a thousand receyts to heale vyces withall, and a thousand kynds of scurges to correct of∣fenders withall, according to euery of their complexions. And thin∣kest thou then that he neglecteth his cure, because thou seest not the fearing yron in his hand? Or that his potentials (as the Surgions terme them) are not stronger than thyne actuals? And when thou seest the sinfull person cured after that maner without launcing, yea and without scarce; oughtest thou not to commend the curing thereof so much the more?

But there are which amend not a whit the more for the delay of their punishment. Admit it be so: Yet what a number also are there which doe amend? Nay, consider yet further, whether they bée not suffered to liue to punish thée; thée I say which hast bene scurged by them alreadie, and yet art neuer a whit amended. Thou woul∣dest haue thy father to throwe his rodde into the fire, and thou hast still a curst heart that cannot yéeld and aske forgiuenesse. Blame thyne owne stubbornnesse that he burneth not the rodde. Consider also whether it bee not a greater punishment to them to liue after they haue done amisse, than to haue dyed in the déede doing, forso∣much as they see that their slaughters haue not successe according to their willes, but that all the mischiefe which they haue wrought is in vayne, so as they haue but prouoked God & the whole world against themselues to no purpose, and haue gotten nothing therby but shame and reproach and torment of mynd; And whether God doe not by that meane compell them to crye out, Wee haue wea∣ryed our selues in the way of wickednesse, vntill wee can no more? If God (say I) by his seeming to be flowe, doe both amend thee and punish the other both at once; doest thou not perceyue a woonderfull worke of Prouidence? Moreouer, what is the whole continuance of all a mans life in respect of God, but one moment? shorter than the tyme betwéene the drinking of the Hemlocke, and the death of him that drinkes it? and much shorter than betwéene

the killing of a man in the morning, and the being hanged for it in the afternoone? if thou haue an eye to the chiefe end of punishmēts, namely the example of thē that liue still, to the benefite of the com∣monweale. I ask of thée whether thou thinkest not, that they were better warned by Neros killing of hymselfe a good whyle after his committing of so many slaughters & his setting of Rome on fyre, hauing neither Fréend that could saue him, nor foe that would slea him; than if he had bene burned in the foresayd fire which hee cau∣sed to be kindled? Nay, consider whether it ought not to bée yet a better warning to thée, when thou seest that the wicked man is e∣u••n then hild fastest by the necke, when he thinketh himselfe to haue escaped the hand of God; séeing there cannot bee a playner proofe, That no man can prescribe time for his wickednesse ageinst Gods Iustice? Agein, when Maximian after the committing of so ma∣ny cruelties, languisheth and pyneth away by péecepeale in infinite miseries; I referre it to thine owne iudgement, whether he do not more apparantly preache Gods Iustice ageinst Tyrans and wic∣ked Courtiers, than if he had bene slayne when hee was yoong, as Domitian and Commodus were? And whether he séeme not too thée, to haue bin as a cryer hyred for the nonce, to make this Pro∣clamation publikly with lamentable and languishing voyce all his life long, Take warning by mee to doe Iustice, and not too de∣spize God? Or whether, when Dennis the Tyran of Sicilie be∣came a Schoolemayster at Corinth, and fell too beating of Chil∣drens Buttocks; it was not a better beating too him, than if the people had caused his shoulders to haue bin rent from him vpon a Scaffold? and whether all the youth in the Citie were not better taught what the ende of Tyrannie is, by beholding him with his Roddes in his hand in the Schoole; than they should haue bene by séeing him put to death incontinently in the place?

And if thou think it not ynough that Lyciscus doe rotte aboue the ground, yea and that he crye out that he rotteth for his treazon; vnlesse the same Orchomenians whom he betrayed, doe come to the beholding of it: or if thou think it not enough that Nero make a mizerable end; except Agrippina whom hee vnnaturally mur∣thered, do feede her eyes with the sight of it: or that Herod become a forlorne creature, vnlesse the Innocents whom he flew, be called to looke vpon him: besides that thou requirest a thing ageinst rea∣son, thou must also vnderstand, that God punisheth not after the maner of worldly Iudges, namely to content them y^t haue suffered

wrong, or to satisfie thy mynd desirous of reuenge, or too purchace himself the report and estimation of a good Iudge at thy hand: but bycause he hateth the euill, which he intendeth to correct, and will also drawe good out thereof. And lyke as a discreete father, when his Chyld complayneth to him of some wrong doone vnto him by one of his Seruants, doth not by and by ronne vpon his Seruant with a cudgell, (for so should he make his Chyld cockish, and cause him not onely to doo the lyke for euery tryfle, but also to take the staffe in his owne hand & to lay about him, whereas he would haue him to bridle his passions, and to referre the redresse of his wrongs to him being his father;) but rather taketh his seruant aside, and chastyzeth him eyther before his fellowes, or before others of his children which beare him not so much grudge or ill mynd: euen so it is not to be thought straunge, if God do oftentimes chastyze the wicked farre from the view of the woorld, yea and sometymes also euen after the deceasse of them that made complaynt ageinst them. His intent is to punish their passions, but not to gratifie thine. He will teache me his Iustice, but he will not haue thee too think that thou shalt haue him at thy commaundement, to strike whensoeuer thou wouldest haue him. If he should stryke at thy appoyntment, then should he bee but thy Executioner, and thou shouldest bee the Iudge. But knowe thou that he executeth his owne Iustice and not thyne.

Yea (sayest thou) but what Iustice is it, that Children should be punished for their fathers? And (say I) what vniustice is it, if the Children be not considered for the good seruice of their fathers? A Prince giueth priuiledges too some Citie, for the faythfull seruice which it hath done vnto him: and who will not blame his Succes∣sor which shall take them away ageine a hundred yeeres after? A∣nother Prince bereueth a Citie of their Liberties and fraunchizes, for rebelling ageinst him: who will think it any rigor, that their Children which come after them should be in the same state? The Prince dooth it for feare least the Children hauing the same terri∣tory, should rebell as their fathers did. God standeth not in feare of men, but he seeth what they bee: and his knowing of them is not as we knowe the Aspworme by his stinging of vs, or the Uiper by his byting of vs; but he knoweth them afore they bee eyther Asp∣woorme or Uiper; and may he not then by that reason sometymes punish the Children, in the same respect that hee punished their fa∣thers? As for example, by taking away their authority if they com∣mitted

tyranny, least they myght abuse their authoritie still? Or by taking away their goods which they spent in ryot and excesse, least they should set their mynds vpon these vices still? and so forth of other things? But why doo I terme it punishing? I should ra∣ther terme it curing. For what more is all this, than wee see dayly done by Phisitions, who in caces where the fathers were diseased with the Stone, the Gout, or the Dropsie, doe forbid the Children the same things which they forbade their fathers, although the Children be not yet trubbled with the same diseases? And what els are sinnes and vices, but diseases and siknesses of the Soule? And what straungenesse is there in Gods dooing, sith that thou thy self dooest the very same? Thou Disinheritest the Children of them that haue attempted treason ageinst the Prince: and if the Prince may do it for the defence of his state; how much more cōmendable is the doing therof, for the preseruation of the parties themselues? But yet in this appeareth the mercifulnes of God, that if the Child of the wickeddest man in the world, refuse to be heire of his fathers sinne, and wickednes, and follow godlynes and vertue; God doth not only release him the debte due to such succession, that is to wit, the peyne and penaltie which is an vnseparable appurtenance of sinne; but also adopt him into the nomber of his owne Children, to make him partaker of his heauenly heritage. Nowthen, wh••t cause haue we to complayne, eyther of the prosperitie of the wicked, or of the aduersitie of those whom wee account to be good men, seeing that all these things tend, not onely to Gods glorie and the bene∣fite of the Comonweale, but also to the welfare and soulehealth of those whom we bewayle? And if we did consider yet further, how many there be whose miseries we bewayle, which foster a festered sore in their bosom; how many there be whose prosperitie we enuy, which haue much cleaner hearts than the other, and doe spit out all their venome outwardly; how many there bee which haue their nayles whole, and yet doo but little harme with scratching; how many there be which wold teare al things in peeces, if their nayles were not pared verye short; who for want of powre (I meane) or for want of corage to execute their naughtynes, seeme for the pre∣sent time good men, and a thousand other such circumstances which are to be marked in euery particular persone: surely they which do so lightly charge Gods prouidence, would chaunge their opinion; and where it seemeth to them most worthy of blame, there would they the more woonder thereat and commend it.

But this is yet the greatest poynt of all: That although God punish euill neuer so much; yet it can not bee denyed, but that hee l••au••th euill still in the World,* 1.422 séeing wee agree all in this, that sinne or vyce is euill. Now if hee be altogither good, how can he forbeare to hate it? And if hee bee Almightie, how can hee suffer it? And if hee order and dispose all things, how dooth hee permit it? This Question shall bee the clearelyer discussed, where wee prooue how euill came first into the World; namely by the fall of man. And then shall wee haue wherefore too woonder at Gods Prouidence, who hauing punished vs by our owne naughtynes, coulde skill too turne the same both to his owne glorie, and too the welfare of mankynde. To glaunce at it in feawe woords; by the way, It was requisite (and otherwyse it could not bee) that there should bee some difference beetweene the Creatour and the Creature, to the intent that the Creature should acknowledge it selfe to be a Creature, and yeeld honor to his Creator who had made him of nothing. Now the Creator is the good that is infinite and vnchaungeable: and therefore the goodnesse that is in any Creature, could not but be finite and chaungeable, sauing so farre foorth as it consented to depend vppon him alone. God therefore created man good, howbeit chaungeably good; free from euill, howbeit so as he myght choose the euill; and he created him right∣ly mynded, howbeit in such sort as he myght also go a stray. And this man by turning away from the Welspryng of goodnesse, did thereby fall away from his owne goodnes; and by following his owne will in sted of Gods Will, he left his freedome and became a bondseruant vnto euill. All they that are borne of this corrupted seede, reteyne the faultynes of that first fault, and cannot wyt it vp∣pon any other than the first man. Therfore if it be demaunded why God created man free, and not vnfree, seeing his freedome made him bond, it is all one as if it were demaunded, why hee created fyre to be light and suttle, that is to say Fyre, or why hee created water moyst and colde, that is to say, Water, or the World full of so many varieties, that is to say, a World, and to bee short, euery kind of thing, to be of this or that nature. For to haue free mouing and capable of Reason, is to be a man, and if we had not had it so, we would haue complayned. Again, to haue free moouing and such as cannot be but reasonable, is to be reason it selfe, that is to say, to be God. Now God ment not to create a God, but a man to serue him, lyke as when he intended to create Beastes for the seruice of

man, he created them Beasts and not men. But wherein wilt thou more woonder at the prouidence of the euerlasting GOD, than in that he not only ordereth & disposeth the things that he hath crea∣ted, but also the thing which he created not; insomuch that he dra∣weth good out of the euill, yea and compelleth the euill (contrary to the nature thereof) to serue vnto Good? If a Captayne were of such skill as to order al things in such wise in his Armie, that eue∣ry thing should serue to the atteynement of his victorie; thou woul∣dest commend him highly, & it were in déede one of the rarest feates of Warre. But if he could moreouer gayne some part of his ene∣mies Hoste, and make them to take his owne parte; thou couldest not woonder sufficiently at his pollicie. What wilt thou say then of him, which could make them to fight on his side vnwitting to them selues, and that euen his enemies Hargwebusses should helpe to giue themselues the foyle? Soothly euen after that sort is it that God can skill to make both sinners and their sinnes to serue him. Cyrus (as appeareth by the Histories) was an ambitious Prince; and ambition (as ye knowe) cannot be welliked of God. Now, to satisfie his ambition, Cyrus Ieuyes a great Hoste against the Assy∣rians. If a man should haue told him it had bin to deliuer the Isra∣elites, and to buyld vp Gods Temple agayne, as Esay had fore∣told; what think you he would haue sayd vnto it? Yet notwithstan∣ding the end of his Warres and of his warfare, fell out to be so in déede. Thus ye see how an ambitious person and his ambition ser∣ued God, without meaning any such thing. The Emperour Titus ment to bring Iewry to due obedience: and it had bin foretolde, that of Hierusalem one stone should not be left standing vpon another. No doubt but that Titussis owne passion caried him; but yet see how God ouerruleth it. The same man which persecuted y^e Chri∣stians at Rome, goeth to reuenge Christes death at Hierusalem, and (as sayth Iosephus) in that fact he tooke not himselfe as Empe∣rour of the World, but as the executer of Gods Iustice against the Iewes. Iudas through Couetousnesse betrayed the blud of y^e righ∣tuouse to death. But God by the sheading of that blud (if thou be a Christian) redéemed thée; and yet the holy Scripture saith, that the Deuill being in Iudas, did put that purpose into his heart. Ye see then that not the Couetousnesse of Iudas only, but also the Deuill himselfe serued GOD. Besides that, the Stories of the Byble be full of such matter, wee might marke the like examples ordinarily in the bookes of the Heathen, if wee were as diligent in obseruing

them, as we bee in obseruing the arte of Rhetoricke or Logicke in the author's which we reade. For by reason of the great corruption which reigned at those daies in Rome, all men cryed out that there was not any Commonweale there, appealing to God for defence against the vniustice of the Senate, at the same tyme that GOD executed iust vengeance vpon them for it, by the vniust couetous∣nesse of Caesar. Likewise when Attila entered euen into the bo∣welles of Europe, all the Preachers of Christendome did nothing els but bewayle the wretchednesse of that tyme.* 1.423 Ye must thinke that when this great Robber cast lots in his Countrie of Scythia, whether he should leade the third part of that Land, he had another meaning than to reforme the world. Yet notwithstanding, all men acknowledged him to be a necessarie scurge of GOD, and to haue come in due season. Yea, and he himselfe considering that he had conquered much more of the Countrie, than euer he hoped at the first to haue séene, insomuch that he had ouercome euen those which were counted the strength of the World: as barbarous as he was, he fell to thinke of himselfe, that he was the Scurge wherby God chastised the World. Not that God is not able to chastise vs him∣selfe whensoeuer he listeth; (for his Storehouse is neuer vnfurni∣shed of roddes to scurge vs withall, as of Plagues, Diseases, Fa∣mine, and such other things,) but that as a Maister of a howshold holdeth skorne to whippe his Slaues himselfe, causing eyther his thiefe Seruant or some other of their fellowes to doe it: yea and when his owne Children offend him grieuously, he voutsafeth not to beate them with his owne hands, (for so should he doe them too great an honour) but causeth (peraduenture) the groome of his sta∣ble to doe it, to the intent to shewe them the iustnesse of his displea∣sure: Euen so doth God punish the wicked one by another, whom he could consume all at once in one hower; yea and his Children al∣so by the wicked, when not counting of them as of his Children, but being readie as it were to disherite them, he disoeyneth to pu∣nish them with his owne hands. Thus therefore ye see, how God serueth his owne turne by the wicked and their wickednesse, to his owne glorie and to the welfare of those that are his.

And as touching the offences whereinto he suffereth good* 1.424 folks now and then to fall: what greater poynt of prouidence can there bee, than to turne them into instruments and furtherances of ver∣tue? If God should hold vs alway by the hand, it is certeyne that we could neuer trippe. And it is not to be doubted also, but that we

would think at the length, that it was of our owne steadynesse, and not of Gods vpholding of vs, not only that we tripped not, but al∣so that wee tumbled not downe. For what made vs fall but pride? and what maner of pride, but that we thought we would be Gods without God, yea euen of our selues? Now, to make vs to knowe our infirmitie, wherin it is his pleasure to shew his strength: some∣tymes he letteth vs goe alone by our selues for a while, and then stumble we at the next iob that we meete with. Neuerthelesse, this tripping and stumbling saueth vs from a greater fall: for it maketh vs to call for his hand to hold vs vp. After the same maner dealeth the Nurce with her Nurcechild that maketh haste to goe alone too soone: She suffereth him to stagger and to réele till he crye; but yet in letting him goe with the one hand, she holdeth him vp with the other; and sometymes he thinkes he goes a••alone, when as she gui∣deth him both with her eye and with her hand. Sometymes also when wee bee ouerlustie, God suffereth vs to fall into some sinne, both wittingly and willingly, & afterward maketh vs to féele such grypes and hartbytings for it, that euen the vyce it selfe serueth vs for a Schoolemaister, to driue vs to eschewe it. So the father suffe∣reth his Child to burne his finger in a Candle, onely of purpose to make him afrayd of fire, that the little findging of his finger, may kéepe him from the burning of his face. There are examples hereof in S. Peter, in Dauid and in others, which receyued good by their trippes and falles. And I haue no doubt but that a great sorte euen of the Heathen, haue felt in thēselues how greatly their experience of vyce in themselues hath profited them to the more earnest loue of vertue.* 1.425 So then, let vs not grudge at the prosperitie of the wic∣ked; for vnto them it is a bane: neither let vs complaine of the mise∣ries of the godly; for they be to their welfare. Let vs not reuerence the vizor of vertue in the wicked, for it is but an instrument of vice; neither let vs disdeyne the falles of the vertuous, for they bee but quicknings vp vnto vertue. But rather let vs glorifie God, which maketh the euill good whether it will or no, which causeth vyce to doe seruice vnto vertue, and which guydeth euen the most sinfull déedes, to his glorie; the most vniust, to the executing of his iustice; and the most vncerteyne, to the hitting of his marke. And notwith∣standing that he doe all this, yet can he not be blamed to haue wre∣sted any thing in the World, nor to haue mainteyned euill in any maner a wise, no more surely than the Soule or abilitie of mouing* 1.426 that is matched with a lame legge, is too blame for that the lame

man halteth, though it yéeld forth mouing into the legge, and guide the legge whether soeuer it will for all the lamenesse of the legge. What shall I say more? If any doe yet still doubt of the things a∣fore rehearsed, I will put him but to one proofe; for his answere whereto vpon leysure, I will beleeue him vpon his oth. If he bée a despiser of God, let him call to mynd if he can, how much euill he hath susteyned in the hauing of his goodes, and how much euill he hath endured to doe euill. Let him remember how greatly he hath tyred himselfe with his owne wishes, tormented himselfe with his good successes, set himselfe on fire when he thought but to warme him, and wandered quite away, when he ment to haue brought o∣thers to the bent of his owne bowe. Or if he be one that seareth God, let him cōsider how much euill he hath left vndone, in forbea∣ring to haue so great store of those false goodes: how many things he hath wished which he would haue eschewed, if he had forekno∣wen the issewe of them which he sawe afterward: how greatly he had bene dreaded and misliked of others, though he could not de∣uise to haue done better: how often his falles and slidings haue ser∣ued to make him to take sure footing against sinne: how oft his wā∣derings out of the way haue made him to escape the lyings in wayt and the théeueries of the world: how oft his owne wyles haue ser∣ued to turne him from the right: & how often his owne ouersights haue serued to bring him to his intended ende: and I doubt not but the héedfull marking of these things, both in others and in himself, will make him to perceyue that a certeyne euerlasting prouidence watcheth ouer our liues and all our doings. At leastwise vnlesse we will denye, that to leade the forecastes of others to another end than they purposed; to bring the vnaduised ouersights of others to better passe than they themselues could wish; and to make the wis∣dome of the wisest to doe seruice, not only to his owne diuine wis∣dome, (if a man may so terme it) but also oftentymes euen to the vndiscréetnesse of the meanest, is the worke of Prouidence.

The xiij. Chapter.

That mans wisedome hath acknowledged Gods Proui∣dence, and how the same wadeth betwene Destinie and Fortune.

NOW, like as men of olde tyme* 1.427 haue ac∣knowledged y^e maker of the world, some in expresse termes, and othersome by cō∣sequence: so haue they also easely percei∣ued the Prouidence, which thei haue dée∣med to depend vpon the same as an ap∣purtenance thereunto. Insomuch that euen they which haue flatly denyed the Creation, haue neuerthelater graunted the Prouidence, by reason that they found it so cleere and manifest a matter; howbeit that to denye the Prouidence and to denye the Creation is all one. Hermes espyes it out euerywhere, as well in the Creation of the whole and of the parts thereof, as in the order and maintenance of al things. And if it be demaunded of him, what prouidēce it is, to haue brought foorth so many things which seeme néedlesse and vnprofitable; his answer is readie shapen, That God created all things to his owne glorie: and that it is a glorie, both to him to haue created all things, and vnto all things to haue bin crea∣ted by his hand.* 1.428 And if it bee asked againe, whence the euill com∣meth that is in things: He answereth, That GOD created them good, howbeit that (to speake properly) there is nothing purely good but only God. As for the euill, it is come in vpon the good, like as all generation is accompanyed with corruption. The yron rusteth; thou wilt not wyte it vpon the Smith. The Wine sowreth; thou wilt not wyte it vpon the Uintener. The things that are created doe corrupt; as little also oughtest thou to wyte it vpon the Crea∣tor. Why? Because that only he is vnchaungeable, and it is méete that there should alway bée some difference betwéene the Creator, and the things created; betwéene all, and nothing. Plato in that he teacheth the Creation, doth also sufficiently teach the Prouidence. For if Gods power, wisedome, and goodnesse bee equall, or rather

all one thing; looke where his power is, there is his wisedome, and thither also extendeth his goodnesse. But his power extendeth euen to the least things, for els they could haue no being at all: therefore his wisedome also extendeth vnto them to guyde and gouerne thē, and likewise his goodnesse without the which nothing could be pre∣serued. And so, Gods prouident goodnesse and gracious wisedome doe watch ouer all things. Againe, when as Plato setteth downe God to bee the end of man, and man to bee the end of all things in the world and of the world it selfe: hee sheweth sufficiently that as man tendeth to God, so doth the world also; but vnto that ende it should not tend, vnlesse it were directed thether, and who directeth it thether, but he that first made it? To bee short, the perticular formes of all things present and to come in respect of vs, but eter∣nally present with GOD, can haue no abyding without a perfect knowledge and a steadie direction of all things.

But if any dowt hereof remaine yet still; let vs heare what the Platonistes say to that matter. Surely Plotin hath made two or thrée bookes thereof, wherein he teacheth prouidence by all things from the greatest to the smallest, comming downe euen to the little flowers which wee see vnblowen in the morning and withered at night, as though he had ment to say the same thing that wee reade in the Gospell: namely, Consider me the Lillies of the field; and so foorth. Unto the ordinarie complaynt concerning the prosperitie of the wicked, and the aduersitie of the vertuous; he answereth that the prosperitie of the wicked is but as a Stageplay, and the aduer∣sitie of the godly is as a gaming of exercise, wherein they bee tyed to a streight dyet, that they may win the prize for which they con∣tend. Unto the Question concerning euill, he answereth; that it is nothing els but a fayling of goodnesse,* 1.429 which goeth on still dimini∣shing it from degrée to degrée euē to the vttermost; and that it pro∣céedeth not from GOD, but from the imperfection of the matter, which he termeth nothing: and that the euill, (which consisteth al∣together in degrées and in fayling of good,) is so farre of from di∣minishing Gods Prouidence, that it is rather the thing wherein Gods Prouidence sheweth it selfe the more, as without the which there were no Prouidence at all to be séene: and yet that therewith∣all, God is the author of all abilities, and the disposer or ouerruler of all willes. Which things (to auoyde long discourse) are more conueniently to be seene in his owne workes.

His Disciple Porphyrius departed not from the same opinion,

howbeit that he was combered with the like perplexities, that they be which dispute ageinst it. Seeing that God (sayth he) doth by his skill ouerrule all things, and order them by incomparable proprietie of vertue; and that on the contrary part, mannes Reason being very small, is ignorant of most things how skil∣ful and curiouse so euer it seeme to be of the trueth: Surely we may then call it wyse, when it is not curiouse in serching such doutfull and hard matters, as are matched with daunger of blaspheming; but rather graunteth that the things which are done, are very well as they bee. For what can our small Rea∣son finde fault with or reprooue in the doings of that greate Reason, to esteeme them eyther lawfull or vnlawfull, seeing wee vnderstande them not?* 1.430 And in another place, If wee suffer a King (saieth he) to dispose of his owne affayres as he listeth; shall wee deny vnto GOD the ordering and disposing of the things heere beneath,* 1.431 which hee himselfe created? And a∣gainst such as founde fault with the gouerment of the world which they vnderstand not, these are his very words. Soothly (sayth he) there is not a more vniust speech, than that which presumeth to teache God Iustice, nor a more holy speech than that which yeeldeth to the trueth; and to think otherwise is a disease of mynd & a great cryme. For God not only directeth all things at all tymes, too the behoofe and full harmony of the whole vniuersally; but also is the cherisher preseruer and repayrer of euery seuerall thing in particular. I pray you hathe hee not shewed too Phisicians, (who haue so much prouidence as hee hathe giuen them skil,) the things that are too befall too the whole body of man, how that some members are to be cut of, some to be seared, and othersome to be eaten away with Cor∣rasiues, for the health of the whole body? And yet when the Nurces or Mothers see the Surgiō about to do it, do they not weepe and cry out ryght strangely, notwithstanding that they knowe it to be for the welfare of the childes body? But what doth the Father then who is wiser than they, but comfort the patient, and hold the playster ready to lay to the wound? God lykewyse for the curing of the whole, hath ordeyned that men should dye, (That is the thing that Epicurus findeth fault with) & that they should be separated asunder, as a Toe is sumtime cut of for the sauing of the whole body. And could we enter into the mynd of God, we should vndoutedly knowe why and

to what good end hee hath from the beginning barred some things from being because he foresaw they should be to hurt∣full, and vnto other some hath giuen death in recompence of their godlynes. The summe of all is, that nothing is done but by the prouidence of God, howbeit that many things seeme repugnāt to his wisdome and goodnes, as the cutting off of a Leg, or the sea∣ring of a member séeme repugnant both to the healing of the whole body, and to the purpose of the Surgion.

Also as touching the aduersities of good men,* 1.432 Sée héere what Synesius y^e Platonist answereth. The aduersities (sayth he) which wee thinke wee indure without our deserts, doe helpe vs too weede out our affections out of our ground; which is to much inclyned too them; and by that meanes the inconueniences which make fooles to doubt of Gods Prouidence, doe con∣firme wise folke the more therein. For what man would bee contented to part hence, if he found no aduersitie here? And therefore it is to be thought, that the Rulers of the lower Re∣gions (he meaneth the Féends) were the first founders of these prosperities which the comon sort maketh so great account of, of purpose to bewitch men with them, and to lull them a sleepe here. Hierocles also hauing made a long discourse,* 1.433 conclu∣deth that if we fall into any aduersitie whereof wee cannot coniec∣ture the cause, it behoueth to consider that wee bee ignorant in all things, and yet we must not procéede, so farre, as to say that God is the author of euill, or that he hath not a care of vs; for those (sayth he) were ouergreate blasphemies.

Aristotle* 1.434 speaketh not any otherwyse eyther in his greate Mo∣ralls or in his little Moralls, howbeit that hee be more graueled in his Metaphysiks. Howsoeuer the case stand, in his booke concer∣ning the world he graunteth vnto God the care of al greate things. And thinke you it beséemeth man too set bounds too the wisdome of God who hath limited the natures of all things; and to appoynt what God shall estéeme greate or small, before whom nothing can be greate or small? Neuerthelesse whereas he sayth that the world dependeth vpon God as the end thereof; the best of his Desciples do by infallible consequence gather thereof the prouidence of God. For seeing that the World dependeth vpon hym and tendeth vnto him; the beginning of that direction cannot procéede of any other, than of him to whom it tendeth. Agein, seeing that (as he sayth in other places) all kynd of things tend too some one perticular ende

euery one peculiar to it selfe, and all méete togither in one vniuer∣sall end, and yet all of them haue not reason or vnderstanding to ap∣poynt that ende too themselues, or to hold themselues within that bound. It followeth then that there is a certeine prouidence which hath that reason for all and euery of them, and that the same reason resteth in God vpon whō al of them depend, as Aristotles best ler∣ned interpreters are constrained to confesse. To be short, the quick sentence which is attributed vnto him, which is, That such as re∣quire a proofe of Gods prouidence are to be answered with the las∣shes of a Whippe: doth giue vs sufficient credit of his opinion.

Of the opinion of Theophrastus we cannot doubt. For he that graunteth the creation of a thing, cannot doubt of prouidence, con∣sidering that power and goodnes are alike equall in both of them. But behold héere y^e expresse words of Alexander of Aphrodise in his booke of Prouidence.* 1.435 That God should haue no wil (sayth he) to care for the things heere beneath, is too farre disagreeing with his nature; for it is the propertie of an enuious person. And that he should be vnable, were to vnseemely for him, for he is able to doe more than he hath yet done. Therefore let vs not dout of him, either the one or the other, but let vs rather conclude, that hee both can and will haue care of all things that are done heere belowe. And in another place hée gathereth this very conclusion, That all our welfare lyeth in the seruing of God, and that the feare of him is a gift of his, in that he voutsafeth to extend his prouidence vnto vs.

Of the opinions of Plutarke and Seneca, their owne bookes doo expresly testifie: namely Plutarks treatise concerning the slowe pu∣nishment of euill doers, for him; and Senecaes bookes concerning benefites,* 1.436 and a treatise of his concerning Prouidence; for him. So lykewise doth the wise Philosopher Epictetus vpon whome Sim∣plicius hath written. For after many forespéeches concerning the greatnes and maiestie of God, and the weakenes of man, they as∣sayed to yéelde a reason of all things that offended the weaker sort in this case, yea euen to the very accidents and to the thunderclaps. And I desire my readers to take the peynes to reade them whole, that they may sée how conformable the things whiche Christians teache, are to the wisedome of the best sort among the Heathen. Wherevnto they may for an income, adde this Oracle of Apollo himselfe reported by Porphyrius.

No man too hyde himself from God by cunning can deuize; No man by slyghts or suttle shifts can blind or dim his eyes. All places he fulfilleth,* 1.437 He is present euerywhere, And giueth lyfe to euery thing that mooues and lyfe doth beare.

And as concerning all other people of the Earth, in whose be∣halfe the Poets (which are full of such sayings euery where) may answere, as Orpheus, Homere, Hesiodus, Aratus, Sophocles, Phocylides and such others: surely in as much as wée sée that all Nations haue some Religion, it is a visible president, that Gods prouidence is beléeued and receiued of all with one accord. For in vayne doe meu serue God, if he sée it not; in vayne doo men pray to him if he regard them not, in vayne complaine they to him, if hee iudge them not; and to be short, in vayne doe wee call vppon him both on Sea and Land, (where counsell and casualtie seeme most to take place) for the mainteyning of our welfare, and the preser∣uing of vs from harme; vnlesse wée bée throughly perswaded that he heareth vs, and that he ruleth Heauen and Earth and all things in them from aboue, yea and euen the verye hazard of warre as Caesar termeth it, wherein fortune séemeth to beare greatest sway. But afore wee giue our determinate Iudgment, wee haue yet two Aduocates to heare, namely the Aduocate of Fortune, and the Ad∣uocate of Destinie. For (sayth the one) if all things passe vnder the guyding of prouidence, what becommeth of Fortune which we sée in so manye things? And (sayeth the other) what fréedome then hath man? must it not néedes be confessed, that a certeine destinie compelleth euery man to doe whatsoeuer he doth?

If ye meane fortune as she is peynted by the Poets,* 1.438 blynd, stan∣ding on a bowle, and turning with euery wynd: it is as easie to wype her away as to paynt her. For who seeth not that there is an vniforme order, both in the whole world, and in all the parts ther∣of, and how then can one that is blynd be the guyder therof? Also who vnderstandeth not, that to moue things belongeth to stedfast∣nesse and not vnto vnstedfastnesse? for how can that thing rule and wéeld others, which is caryed away it self? Or how can he hold the sterne who floteth himself vpon the water? Séeing then that there is so certein order in all things: it followeth that fortune beareth no sway in any thing, and therefore that there is no fortune at all. But if by the word fortune they meane as Proclus doth,* 1.439 a certein diuine power that gathereth causes farre distant one from another, all to one end: surely in that case we be more fréends to fortune than

they be. For we admit it, not only in things vncerteine wandering and wauering, but also euen in the things that are moste certein, yea and in all things whatsoeuer; as the which is but God himself disguysed vnder another name.

Nowthen to speake properly, what is Fortune? Is it a Sub∣stance? Euen by their owne confession, it hath no being but in the disorder of other things. Shall wee terme it an Accident? How should an accident worke so diuers accidents?* 1.440 What is it then, if it be any thing at all? Surely it is a word that signifieth nothing but respectiuely, that is to say, as hauing respect of some things or per∣sons that are spoken of, and it hath no ground or being but of and in our owne ignorance. That which is fortune to the Childe, is no fortune to the father: that which is fortune to the Seruant, is none to the Maister: that which is fortune to the foole, is none to the wise man: that which is fortune to the wise man, is none vnto God. Ac∣cording to the measure of our knowledge or ignorance, so doth for∣tune increase or abate.* 1.441 Take away ignorance frō men, and fortune is banished from all their dealings. The father letteth a thing fall in his Garden, to see whether his child wil bring it to him or steale it away. The childe thinkes it to be falne by chaunce; and his father who knowes to what ende he did let it fall, smyles at him. And so the thing that was chaunce or fortune to the childe, was of set pur∣pose in the father. A Mayster sendeth foorth diuers Seruants di∣uers waies, all to one place, to the intent that of many, some one at the least may escape and come home againe. They méete there all together. At the first sight the thing which was forecast by good or∣der, seemeth to them to happen by aduenture. A Captayne hauing deuised to take the Gate of some Citie, causeth a Cart or a Cha∣ryot to bee broken vpon the Drawbridge as it were by some mis∣chaunce, that his ambush may in the meane while breake foorth and enter the Towne. The Warders fall to beating of the Wagoner for it, and othersome excuse him as ouertaken by misfortune. And so the thing which was a pollicie of Warre in the Captayne that deuised it, is a chaunce or fortune to the Towne that wist not the ground of it. A wise man to giue a glyke to another wise man, or a Captayne to beguyle a Captayne, or an enemie to delude his ene∣mie, cyphereth a letter grossely for the nonce, and sendeth it such a way as he imagineth that it shalbe surprized. He that lighteth vpō it is glad of so good aduenture, and thinking that he readeth the se∣cretes of his aduersaries hart, buildeth all his affayres in good ear∣nest

vpon things contriued to deceyue him. And so the thing which was a rare deuise in the one, is a rare aduenture to the other. Now if among men, which are all of one kynde, and haue welneere like portion of reason, there bee such oddes betwéene age and age, be∣twéene qualitie and qualitie, and betwéene wit and wit; that the same which in one is prouidence, is fortune in another: shall wee thinke it straunge, that the thing which seemeth fortune to vs that are but blindnesse and ignorance, should be singular prouidence as in respect of God? Or that he which is the only cause of all causes, should haue the skill to assemble them together to some one cer∣teyne effect, how farre distant soeuer they be? As for example, if he make thee to finde a Treasor in digging of a pit, or to scape a fall from a plancher in going to walke vppon it; wouldest thou steale that benefite from the goodnesse of GOD, who brought thée to the one place, or saued thée from the other? I say from God who is thy maker, to father it vpon blynd Fortune which knoweth thée not? And why should it be harder for him to match two causes together that are farre asunder, than to haue made them so farre at oddes one from another? Or than it is for thy selfe to put wood to fire, and fire to water, & thy meate into the water, which are causes so farre distant, and yetnotwithstanding thou ioynest them together to one certeyne ende, which is the nourishment of thy bodie? And what things are further distant in thy mynd, than a Charyot, a Draw∣bridge, and an Hoste of men; which things notwithstanding thou couldest skill to bring fitly together for y^e taking of a Citie? Thus looke wherein thou doest chiefly place fortune, there doth the rarest and most wonderfull poynt of Prouidence most euidently shewe it selfe.

But now comes me the other Aduocate;* 1.442 who to bring vs vnto Destinie, and to a certeyne necessitie of all things and of al doings, maketh his hand of all the things which we haue alledged against Fortune. Therefore let vs see how we may walke betwéene For∣tune and Destinie, so as wee may shunne chaunce without failing into necessitie, and perceiue whether the same be Prouidence or no. If all things (say they) be guyded by GOD to some one certeyne end, yea euen those also which seeme casuall; then can they not bee turned any other way. I willingly graunt them that. And if they cannot bee turned; then are not mens doings free, but of necessitie. Nay, this cōsequent is vtterly false; because the things which haue free will to endeuer themselues contrary to Gods will, haue not

free power to restreyne his will from ouerruling them. But let vs lay foorth this matter more at large, that it may bee the better vn∣derstood. We see in the Skye a great number of Starres that are fixed, and many also (as the Planets) which haue euery of them their peculiar mouings turnes & courses seuerally to themselues. Now, the highest Heauen, by his vniuersall mouing carieth all the Starres about, as well the mouable as the vnmouable, without any stopping or interrupting of their perticular mouings, whereby bee made innumerable figures aspects and respects, which I leaue to the Astrologers to declare. The Sunne maketh the day and the yéere; the Moone maketh the moneths & the quarters; the Pleyads and Hyads make the Seasons; the D••gstarre maketh the heate of the Sommer, and so foorth. Let vs put the case that the highest Heauen stood still, and that the lower Heauens kept on their pecu∣liar mouings: or let vs put the case that he went on, and that all the rest stood still; and then should there bee none of the sayd figurings and aspects to bee seene. But let them all alone as they bee: let the highest Heauen by his mouing carie all the Starres about, and let euery of them continue the hauing and executing of his owne pe∣culiar nature, the mouable as mouable, and the vnmouable as vn∣mouable, and euery of them indeuer accordingly against the Uni∣uersall; and then shall wee see the woonderfulnesse of the Heauen, which by an vniforme kynd of mouing y^t leaueth to euery Starre his proper and peculiar mouing, yéeldeth euery day diuers formes in the Skye, which cause alterations in the ayre; which thing ney∣ther his owne sole mouing could doe if the residue of the Starres stoode still, neyther could the courses and mouings of the Starres bring it to passe, if they were not carried about by the mouing of him. Now let vs see how this example agréeth with our matter. God by his will and power hath created all powers, and disposed all willes. That his power ouerruleth all powers, al men confesse. For who is he that maketh a Clocke and cannot rule it? But that his will should direct all willes to such ende as he listeth, without forcing them frō their nature which is to be free; there is the dow••. God forbid that he which created nature to doe him seruice, should be vnable to vse the seruice thereof without marring it. God then (say I) guydeth all things to the performance of his will, the mo∣uable by their mouings, and the vnmouable by their stedfastnesse; the things indewed with sence, by their appetites, and the reasona∣ble things, by their willes; the naturall things, by their thraldome,

and the things that haue will, by their freedome: And the freer that they be, the greater is his glorie, as in déede it is a more commen∣dable thing to cause libertie to yéeld freely to obedience by gentle handling, than to hale it by for••e and compultion as it were tyed in a chayne. If the willes of all men were caried by Gods will with∣out hauing their awne peculiar mouings: the power of God could not shine foorth in them so much as it doth now, when all willes in∣force themselues seuerally against his will, and yet neuerthelesse euen in following their owne sway, doe finde themselues led (they wote not how) whether soeuer it pleaseth him. Neither should wée see the said diuersities of figures in the Heauen, which bréede so di∣uers effects, of Warres, of Peace, of decayes, of prosperitie, of ad∣uersitie, and such other; which serue all to the Prouidence of the e∣uer••asting God; but wee should see euerywhere one vniforme will holding all other willes fast fettered, and carrying them whether soeuer it listed; and the more streightly that they were tyed vp, the lesse should we estéeme of his power, as who would say he stoode in feare to let them loose. Agayne, if wee imagine all those willes to haue free scope, to followe their own lykings without any gouern∣ment of higher power to ouerrule them, and restreyne their wh••n they intend to breake out: wee should undoubtedly see diuers ends in things, where as now they tend all to one: And libertie would turne into loosenesse, loosenesse into disorder, and disorder into de∣struction; whereas the world doth necessarily require ord••r, and or∣der requireth all things to bee referred to some one certeyne ende. God therefore to shew his power in our fréedome and libertie; hath left our willes to vs; and to restreyne them from ••••senesse, he hath so ordered them by his wisedome, that he wor••••th his owne will no lesse by them, than if wee had no will at all. Let vs enforce our¦selues as much as wee list against his will, and yet euen our diso∣bedience shall turne to the fulfilling of his will. Let vs goe East∣ward when his will goes Westward, and yet doth his mouing cō∣duct vs still. But alveit that God do leade foorth and guyde the one will as well as the other; yet notwithstanding right happie as that will which indeuereth to followe, and vnhappie is that which must bee haled and dragged. Likewise in a keness of Hounds, euery of them runneth according to his naturall inclination, and yet all of them serue the purpose of the Hunter. Also in an Hoste of men, one fighteth for honour, another for spight, a third for gayne, and al for victorie to the Prince that sent them into the field. Take from the

Hounds their naturall inclinations, and from the Souldierr•• the•• perticular willes and dispositions; and ye doe away Hunting, and the Armie must néedes disperse.

Yea (say they)* 1.443 but God sawe al things and all the courses of the world from euerlasting al at one instant, and things cannot fal out otherwise than he hath forséene them. It séemeth therfore that no∣thing is casual nothing at the choyce of our wil, nor any thing that is not of necessitie. Yes: for as God beholdeth all things with one view,* 1.444 so doth he also behold euery of them woorking according too their seuerall properties. He séeth the motting of the Heauen, and the particular mouings of the Sunne and the Moone to bring forth the Eclipses of necessitie: he seeth men cōsulting of warre, of peace, of alyance and other things, willingly; and hee séeth the Plants sp••ing vp and growe naturally. He himself hath set downe the se∣cond, third, yea, and fourth causes, and hath linked them one to an other, to do what he will haue done: but the thing that deceiueth vs in this case, is that we consider not that our wills are among these causes and that according to their fréenesse such as it is, they work fréely in the doings of this world, lyke as all other causes woork euery of them according to their peculiar moouings, inclinations, abilities, natures or kynds. After the same maner the man that is acquaynted with•• his howseholdmatters, will deeme aforehand which of three parts his eldest sonne will choose, and which his se∣cond will choose, though he be farre of frō them, bicause he knoweth their natures and inclinations; and yet for all that, hee inclyneth them not to the dooing of the one or of the other. Ageine, another foreséeth that a Prince will kéepe peace or make warre, bycause he knoweth him two be eyther of a quiet or of an vnquiet disposition. Euen so is it with God: sauing that he being néere and innermore to al things than the things themselues are, doth knowe them most perfectly, wheras we haue nothing but by coniectures, and those verye weake. To be short, as in respect of God the things are of necessitie, which as in respect of themselues are things of casualtie; the cause wherof is, that the matter which in the things themselues is to come, is present to his sight euerlastingly; and his foreséeing of things to come, is not in the causes of them as it is vnto wyse men, but in himself who is the cause of all causes; and therfore he séeeth not that thou shalt do this or shalt not do that [as of a thing to come] but whatsoeuer thou art to doo, he séeth thée doing it from euerlasting; naturally if it be to be done naturally, and willingly if

it be to be 〈◊〉〈◊〉 willingly: and yet thy will is no lesse subiect to his will, than thy nature is subiect to the power that created it: neither is the fréedom of thy will (such as it is now after thy fall) any more compelled in taking deliberation, than thy nature is compelled in growing or shuming. When I speake heere of fréewill, I meane not to deale with this Question whether it lye in vs to choose the way of Sa••••ation or no. For as it is a thing that surmounteth the whole nature of mankind, and excéedeth y^e proportion of our 〈◊〉〈◊〉 vnderstandings: so must it necessitie ensue that wee must bee drawen by some hygher cause from aboue, as in a case that con∣cerneth the forsaking of our selues and of our owne desires, and not the following of them. Ageine, I intend not to take away the extraordinarie motions which God worketh in vs, when he vseth vs sometymes beyond the inclination of our nature; ••y bréeding that in vs by a secret operation, which was not in vs of our selues, But I speake peculiarly of these inferiour doings, which are pro∣portionable to our wit and to the capacitie of our reason; in which things our Fréewill (as may••od as it is) hath abilitie to exercyse itself, notwithstanding that is be vtterly lam••aud vnable to mount vp any higher. After that maner therefore may we 〈◊〉〈◊〉 betwéene the Fortune of Epicurus and the de••mie of Chrysippus, by Pro∣uidence; and betwéene casualtie and necessitie by the will of Got; and betwéene Loocenesse and Bondage by leauing their mouings frée which yet neuerthelesse shall come to the end which God hath listed to appoint vnto them, whatsoeuer windings and wreathings they séeme to themselues to make in the meane tyme. And as tou∣ching the destinie of the Astrologers, who make all things subiect to the whéelings about of the Skye, and make all things to be as much of necessitie as the mouings thereof: we will leaue them to pleade their case ageinst that greate Learned man the Countie of Mirandula, praying them to consider at least wyse, whether the greate studye and peynes which those greate Clerks haue tak••n to disprooue this destinie, can by any meanes bee fathered vppon destinie.

Now then, for a small conclusion of this whole discourse, let vs say that God is a souereine Beeing, and a souerein mynd, and that Beeing and Mynding are all one in him; and therefore that as in creating things the might and power of his Beeing extended euen to the least things or els they had not bin at all: so the Prouidence, forecast and direction of his mynd extend to all things, or else they

could not continue. Let not the confusion of things which we see ••eere belowe trubble vs; for the greater the same is, the great•••• doth Gods prouidence shewe it self therein, as the skill of a Phisi∣tion doth in the intricatenesse of a disease. But who is he that can limit the sight of the Euerlasting God? Surely not the prosperi∣ties of the wicked; for they be but visors: nor the aduersities of the godly, for they be but exercises; nor the Deathes of the giltlesse, for it is but a poudering of their vertewes to preserue them to the vse of posteritie. Nay, let not euen sinne it selfe, which is the very euill in deede, cause any grudge of mynd in vs; for God Created Nature good, but euill is sproong thereof. He Created freedome, and it is degenerated into Loocenesse. But let vs prayse God for giuing vs powers, and let vs condemne our selues for abusing them. Let vs glorifie him for chastising vs by our owne Loocenesse, for executing his Iustice by our vniust Dealings, and for perfor∣ming the ordinaunce of his rightfull will by our inordinate pas∣sions. It we see a thing whereof we knowe not the cause; let vs acknowledge our ignorance, and not name it fortune. The causes that are furthest a sunder, are neere at hand vnto him, to performe whatsoeuer he listeth. If we do any vnreasonable thing; let vs not alledge necessitie. He can skill to vse all things without marring them; the moouable, according to their moouings; the things in∣dewed with will, according to their passions; and the things in∣dewed with reason, according to their reasonings. In thinking to do our owne will, we bring his to passe. We be free to followe out owne Nature; and our Nature is becomme euill through sinne. O wretched fréedome, which bringeth vs vnder such bondage! And a••fore this nature of ours, we can neither shun it nor driue it from vs: for we be bon••••laues to it, and it to sinne, and there behoueth a stronger than our selues to rid vs thereof. Therefore let vs pray God to bring the fréedome of our wills in bondage to his will, and to frée our soules from this hard and damnable kind of fréedome, and to graunt vs by his grace, not as to the wicked, to doe his will in béeing vnwilling to do it; but as to his Children, at least wise to be willing to doe it euen in not doing it.

The xiiij Chapter.

That the Soule of Man is immortall, or dyeth not.

HIthertoo I haue treated of the world that is to be conceiued in vnderstanding, and of the sen∣sible World (as the Platonists tearme them) that is to say, of God and of this World. Now followeth the examining of the Little World (as they terme it) that is to say, of man. Con∣cerning God, we haue acknowledged him to be a Spirit: and as touching the World, we haue found it to be a body. In man wee haue an abridgment of both,* 1.445 namely of God in respect of Spirit, and of the World in composition of body, as though the Creator of purpose to set forth a mirror of his woorks, intended to bring into one little compasse both the infinitenesse of his owne nature, and also the hougenesse of the whole world toge∣ther. Wee see in mans body a Woonderfull mixture of the fower Elements, the veynes spreading forth like Riuers to the vttermost members; as many instruments of sence, as theere be sensible na∣tures in the world; a greate nomber of sinewes, Fleshstrings, and knitters; a Head by speciall priuiledge Directed vp too Heauen∣ward; & Hands seruing to all maner of seruices. Whatsoeuer he is that shall consider no more, but onely this instrument, without life, without sence, and without mouing; cannot but think verily that it is made to verie greate purpose; and he must needes krie out as Hermes or as the Sarzin Abdala doth, that man is a miracle which farre surmounteth, not only these Lower Elements, but also the verie Heauen and all the ornaments thereof. But if he could (as it were out of himself) behold this body receiuing life, and entering into the vse of all his motions with such forewardnesse, hands be∣stirring themselues so nimbly and after so sundrie fashions, and the Senses vttering their force so farre of, without stirring out of their place: think you not that he would be woonderfully rauished, and so much more woonder at the sayd life mouing and sence, than at the body, as he woondered afore at the body, to behold the excel∣lencie of the proportion thereof aboue the masse of some stone? For

what comparison is there betweene a Lute and a Luteplayer, or betweene a dumb instrument and him that maketh it to sound? What would he say then if he could afterward see how the same man being now quickned atteyneth in one moment from the one side of the earth to the other without shifting of place; descending downe to the centre of the world, and mounting vp aboue the out∣termost circle of it both at once; present in a thousand places at one instant, imbracing the whole without touching it; kreeping vpon the earth, and yet conteyning it; beholding the Heauens from be∣neath, and beeing aboue the Heauens of Heauens both at once? Should hee not be compelled to say, that in this sillie body there dwelleth a greater thing than the body, greater than the earth, yea greater than the whole world togither? Then let vs say with Plato, that man is dubble; outward, and inward. The outward man is that which we see with our eyes, which forgoeth not his shape whē it is dead, no more than a Lute forgoeth his, shape when the Lute∣plaier ceasseth from making it to sound, howbeit that both life, mo∣uing, sence, and reason be out of it. The inward man is the Soule, and that is properly the very man; which vseth the body as an in∣strument; whereunto though it be vnited by the power of God, yet doth it not remoue when the body ronneth. It seeth when the eyes be shut, and sometymes seeth not when the eyes be wyde open: It traueleth while the body resteth, and resteth when the body traue∣leth; that is to say, it is able of it self to parforme his owne actions, without the help of the outward man, wheras on the contrarie part the outward without the help of the inward that is to wit, the body without the presence of the Soule, hath neither sence, mouing, life, no nor continewance of beeing. In the outward man we haue a Counterfet of the whole world, and if ye rip them both vp by per∣celmeale, ye shal find a woonderfull agreement betwixt them. But my purpose in this booke is not to treate of the things that per∣teyne peculiarly to the body.

In the inward man wee haue a summe of whatsoeuer life sence and mouing is in all creatures, and moreouer an Image or rather a shadowe (for the Image is defaced by our sinne) of the Godhead it selfe. And that is the thing which wee haue to examine in this Chapter. In Plants, we perceyue that besides their bodies which wee see, there is also an inward vertue which wee see not, whereby they liue, growe, bud, and beare fruite: which vertue wee call the quickening Soule, and it maketh them to differ from Stones and

Mettalles, which haue it not. In sensitiue liuing things, we finde the selfesame vertue, which worketh while they sléepe & are after a sort as the Plants; and therewithall we finde another certeine ver∣tue or power which seeth, heareth, smelleth, tasteth, and feeleth; which also in many of them doth hoord vp the things brought in by the sences; which maner of power the Plants are voyd of. This do we terme the sensitiue Soule, because the effects thereof are discer∣ned and executed by the Sences.* 1.446 In man we haue both the quick∣ning and the Sensitiue, the former vttering it selfe in the nourish∣ing and increasing of him, and the later in the subtilitie of sence and imagination, wherethrough he is both Plant and Beast together. But yet moreouer wee see also a Mynd which considereth and be∣holdeth, which reapeth profite of the things that are brought in by the Sences, which by his séeing conceiueth that which it seeth not; which of that which is not, gathereth that which is; & finally which pulleth a man away both from the earth & from al sensible things, yea and (after a sorte) from himself too. This doe we call the reaso∣nable Soule, and it is the thing that maketh man to bée man, (and not a Plant or a brute Beast as the other two doe,) and also to bee the Image or rather a shadowe of the Godhead, in that (as we shal say hereafter) it is a Spirit that may haue continuance of being a∣lone by it selfe without the bodie. And by the way, whereas I say that the inward man hath a quickening power as a Plant hath, a sensitiue power as a Beast hath, and a power of vnderstanding wherby he is a man: my meaning is not that he hath thrée Soules but onely one Soule; that is to wit, that like as in the brute Beast the sensitiue Soule comprehendeth the quickening Soule; so in man the reasonable Soule comprehendeth both the sensitiue and the quickening, and executeth the offices of them all thrée, so as it both liueth, feeleth, and reasoneth euen as well and after the same maner, as the mynd of a man may intend to his owne household∣matters, to the affayres of the Commonweale, and to heauenly things all at once. Or to speake more fitly, these three degrees of Soules are thrée degrées of life, whereof the second excéedeth and conteyneth the first, and the third excéedeth and conteyneth both the other two. The one, without the which the bodie cannot liue, is the Soule or life of the Plant, and is so tyed to the bodie, that it sheweth not it selfe in any wise out of it. The second, which cannot liue without the bodie, is the Soule or life of the Beast; which doth well vtter foorth his power and force abroad, but yet not otherwise

than by the members and instruments of the bodie whereunto it is tyed. The third, which can of it selfe liue and continue without the bodie, but not the bodie without it, is the Soule of man, which giueth life inwardly to all his parts, sheweth foorth his life abroad in the perceyuing of all things subiect to Sence, and reteyneth still his force (as shalbe sayd hereafter) yea and increaseth it, euen when the strength of the bodie and the very liuelinesse of the sences fayle. And in very déede, ye shall see a man forgoe all his sences one after another as the instruments of them decay, and yet haue still both life and reason vnappayred. The cause whereof is, that some of the instruments of life and sence doe fayle, but the life it selfe which quickeneth them fayleth not. And therefore the Beast forgoeth not life in losing sence, but he vtterly forgoeth sence in forgoing life. And that is because life is the ground of the abilities of sence, and the sensitiue life is a more excellent life than the quickening life, as wherein those powers and abilities are as in their roote. To bee short, he that bereaueth man or beast of the vse of Sences, or man of the right vse of reason, doth not thereby bereaue him of life; but he that bereaueth the beast or the outward man of their life, doth therewithall bereaue them of sence and reason. Therefore it is a most sure argument, that the Soule which causeth a beast to liue, and the Soule that causeth it to haue sence, are both one, that is to wit, one certeyne kynd of life more liuely and more excellent than the life that is in Plants. And likewise that the Soule which cau∣seth man to liue, to haue sence, and to reason, is but one, that is to wit, one certeyne kynde of life more excellent, more liuely, and of further reach, than the life of the Beast. But like as sence is as it were the forme or Selfebeing (if I may so terme it) of the life of a beast; so is reason or vnderstanding the very forme and Selfebeing of the Soule of man; and (to speak properly) it is the Soule or life of the Soule, like as the apple of our eye is the very eye of our eye. And in very déede, when the mynd is earnestly occupied, the sences are at a stay; and when the sences are ouerbusied, the nourishment and digestion is hindered; and contrary wise: which thing could not come to passe if the Soule were any mo than one substance, which by reason that it is but one, cannot vtter his force alike in all places at once, but yéeldeth the lesse care one where so long as it is ear∣nestly occupyed anotherwhere. In this Soule of man (which yet notwithstanding is but one) the diuersitie of the powers and abili∣ties is very apparant. The quickning power doth nourish, increase

and mainteyne vs; and Reason and Sence meddle not therewith, neyther haue they power to impeach the working thereof. The trueth whereof appeareth in this, that those things are best done when our mynd is at rest, and our sences are asléepe; insomuch that oftentymes we forgo the sence and mouing of some parts by some Rhewme or some Palsey, and yet the same parts ceasse not to bee nourished still. Also, the sensitiue life seeth and perceiueth a farre of, yea oftentimes without setting of the mynd therevpon, or without considering what the Sence conceyueth. Some men which haue but weake Sences, haue very quicke vnderstanding; and likewise on the contrary part. Agayne, some fall into a consumption, which ••ant not the perfect vse of their Sences. Sometyme the reasona∣ble part is so earnestly bent and occupyed about the things that i•• liketh of, that by the increasing of it self, it hurteth and diminisheth the part that quickeneth. Also it standeth in argument against the Sences, and reproueth them of falshoode, and concludeth contrary to their information. And it may bee that the man which hath his digestion perfect and his Sences sound, hath not his wit or reason sound in like case. Now, were the Soule but onely one abilitie, it could not be so. But now is the same diuided manifestly into wit or vnderstanding, and will; the one seruing to deuise, and the other to execute. For we vnderstand diuers things which we will not, and wee will diuers things which wee vnderstand not: which contrary operations cannot be attributed both to one power. Neuerthelesse, the vniting of all these powers together is with such distinctnesse, and the distinguishing of them is with such vnion, that ordinarily they méete all together in one selfesame action, the one of them as readily (by all likelyhood) as the other, howbeit that euery of them doth his owne worke seuerally by himselfe, and one afore another as in respect of their obiects.

Thus haue we thrée sorts of men, according to the thrée powers or abilities of the inwarde man. Namely the earthly man, which like the Plant myndeth nothing but sléeping and féeding, making al his sences and al his reason to serue to that purpose, as in whom the eare of this present life onely, hath deuoured and swallowed vp his sences and vnderstanding. The Sensuall man (as S. Paule himself termeth him,) who is giuen wholly to these sensible things imbacing and casting downe his reason so farre, as to make it a bondslaue to his sences and the pleasures and delights therof: And the reasonable man, who liueth properly in spirite and mynd, who

entereth into himselfe to knowe himselfe, and goeth out of himselfe to behold God; making this life to serue to the atteynment of a bet∣ter, and vsing his Sences but as instruments and seruants of his reason. After as any of these thrée powers doe reigne and beare sway in man, that is to wit, after as a man yéeldeth himselfe more to one thā to another of them; so becommeth he like vnto the Spi∣rites, the brute Beastes, or Plants, yea and the very Blockes and Stones. But it is our disposition euen by leynd, to be caryed away by our corrupt nature, and by the obiects which hemme vs in on all sides; but as for against our nature yea or beyond our nature, our nature is not able to doe any thing at all.

Now, it is not enough for vs to knowe that wee haue a Soule whereby wee liue, feele, and vnderstand, and which beeing but one hath in it selfe alone so many sundrie powers or abilities: for it will be demaunded of vs by and by what this Soule properly is. And soothly if I should say, I cannot tell what it is, I should not belye my selfe a whit; for I should but confesse myne owne ignorance, as many great learned men haue done afore me. And I should doe no wrong at all to the Soule it selfe; for sith wee cannot deny•• the ef∣fects thereof, the lesse that we be able to declare the nature and bée∣ing therof, the more doth the excellencie therof shine forth. Againe, it is a playne case, that no thing can comprehend the thing that is greater than it selfe. Now, our Soule is after a sort lesse than it selfe, inasmuch as it is wrapped vp in this body, in like wise as the man that hath gyues and fetters on his féete, is after a sort wea∣ker than himselfe. Neuerthelesse, let vs assay to satiffye such de∣maunds as well as wee can. And forasmuch as it is the Image of God, not only in respect of the gouernment and maintenance of the whole world, but also euen in the very nature thereof: as wee sayd heretofore when we spake of the nature of GOD, if we cannot ex∣presse or conceyue what it is, let vs at leastwise be certified what it is not. First of all, that the Soule and the Body be not both one thing,* 1.447 but two very farre differing things, and also that the Soule is no part of the body, it appeareth of it self without further profe. For if the Soule were y^e body or a part of the body, it should grow with the body as the other parts of the body doe, and the greater that the body were, the greater also should the Soule be. Nay, con∣trarywise, the body increaseth to a certeyne age and then stayeth; after which age is commonly the tyme tha the Soule doth most grow, and those that are strongest of mynd are commonly weakest

of body, and the Soule is seene to be full of liuelinesse in a languis∣shi••g body, and to growe the more in force, by the decay of the bo∣die. The Soule then groweth not with the body, and therefore it is not the body, nor any part of the body. And whereas I speake of growing in the Soule, by growing I meane the profiting ther∣of in power and vertue, as the body groweth in greatnesse by fur∣ther inlarging. Againe, if the Soule were the body, it should lose her strength and soundnesse with the body, so as the maimed in bo∣die should therewith feele also a mayme in his vnderstanding as well as in his members: whosoeuer were sick of any disease, should also bee sicke in his reason: he that ••impeth or halteth, should there∣with ha•••• in Soule also: the blynd mans Soule should bee blynd, and the lame mans Soule should be lame. But we see cōtrariwise, that the maymed and the sicke, the Cripples and the blynd, haue their Soule whole and sound, and their vnderstanding perfect and cléeresighted in it selfe. To be short, many a man dyeth whose body is sound, and differeth not a whit in any part from that it was whē it was aliue, and yet notwithstanding, both life, mouing, sence, and vnderstanding are out of it. Let vs say then that in the body there was a thing which was not of the body, but was a farre other thing than the body.

Some wilfull person will obiect here, that the force and strength of the Soule groweth with the body, as appeare••h in this that a man growen wil remoue that which a child cannot, and that a child of two yéeres old will goe, which thing a babe of two moneths old cannot doe. But he should consider also, that if the selfesame man or the selfesame child should haue a mischaunce in his legge or in his arme, he should thereby forgoe the strength and mouing thereof, whereas yet notwithstanding his Soule should haue her former force and power still to moue the other as she did afore. Therefore it is to be sayd, not that y^e childs Soule is growen or strengthened by tyme; but rather that his sine wes are dried and hardened which the soule vseth as strings and instruments too moue withall and therefore when age hath loosened and weakened them, a man hath neede of a staffe to help them with, although he haue as good a wil to runne as he had when he was yoong. The soule then which mo∣ueth thē all at one becke, hath the selfsame power in infancie which it hath in age, and the same in age which it hath in the prime of Youth: and the fault is only in the instrument, which is vnable to execute the operations thereof: like as the cunning of a Luteplaier

is not diminished by y^e moystnesse or slacknesse of his Lute strings, nor increased by the ouer high streyning and tytght standing of them; but in deede in the one hee cannot shewe his cunning at all, and in the other he may shewe it more or lesse. Likewise the spéech of Children commeth with their teeth, howbeit that the speech doe manifestly v••ter it self first, in that they prattle many things which they cannot pronounce: and in old men it goeth away agein with their teeth, and yet their cloquence is not abated thereby. Asfor Demosthenes, although hee surmounted all the Orators of his tyme, yet were there some letters which he could not pronounce. Giue vnto old age or vnto infancie the same sinewes and teeth, and as able and lustye Limmes and members as youth hath; and the actions which the soule doeth with the body and by the body, I meane so farre foorth as concerne the abilities of sence and lyue∣lynes, shalbe performed as well in one age as in another. But had∣dest thou as greate indifferencie in iudging of the force and power of thyne owne soule, as of the cunning of a Luteplayer, (I say not by the nimblenes of his fingars which are perchaunce knotted with the gout, but by the playne and sweete Harmonie of his Ta∣bulatorie as they terme it, which maketh thée to déeme him to haue cunning in his head, although hee can no more vtter it with his hanos,) so as thou wouldest consider how thou hast in thy selfe a desire to go, though they féete be not able to beare the; a discretion to iudge of things that are spoken; though thyne eyes cannot con∣uey it vnto thee; a sound eloquence, though for want of thy teeth thou cannot well expresse it; and which is aboue all the rest, a sub∣stantiall quicke and heauenly reason, euen when thy body is most earthly and drooping. Thou wouldest soone conclude that the force and power of quickening, moouing, and perceyuing, is whole and sound in thy Soule, and that the default is altogether in thy body. Insomuch that if she had a newe body and new instruments giuen vnto her, she would bee as ••ustie and chéerely as euer she was, and that the more she perceyueth the body to decay, the more she labo∣reth to retyre into her self, which is a playne proofe of that she is not the body nor any part of the body, but the very life and inworker of the body.

And sith it is so,* 1.448 there néedeth no long skanning whether the Soule be a substance or a qualitie. For, seeing that qualities haue no being but in another thing than themselues; the life which cau∣seth another thing to be, cannot be a qualitie. Forasmuch then as

the Soule maketh a man to be a man, who otherwise should be but a Carkesse or Caryon: doubtlesse (vnlesse we will say that the only difference which is betwixt a man and a dead Carkesse, is but in accidents) we must néedes graunt that the Soule is a forming sub∣stance and a substantiall forme, yea and a most excellent substance infinitly passing the outward man; as which by the power and ver∣tue thereof causeth another thing to haue being, and perfecteth the bodily substance which séemeth outwardly to haue so many perfec∣tions.

But herevpon inseweth another controuersie, whether this sub∣stance bee a bodily or an vnbodily substance: which case requireth somewhat longer examination. Soothly, if we consider the nature of a body, it hath certeine measurings, and comprehendeth not any thing which is not proportioned according to the greatnesse and capacitie thereof. For, like as it selfe must bee fayne to haue a place in another thing; so must other things occupye some certeyne place in it; by reason whereof it commeth to passe, that things can haue no place therein if they be greater than it, without anoying the one the other. To be short, if the thing bee lesse than the body that con∣teyneth it, the whole body shall not conteyne it, but only some part thereof: And if it be greater, then must some part thereof néedes be out of it: for there is no measuring of bodies but by quātitie. Now we see how our Soule comprehendeth heauen and earth,* 1.449 without anoying eyther other; and likewise tyme past present and to come, without troubling one another; and finally innumerable places, persons, and Townes, without combering of our vnderstanding. The great things are there in their full greatnesse, and the small things in their vttermost smalnesse; both of them whole and sound, in the Soule whole and sound, and not by parcelmeale or only but in part of it. Moreouer, the fuller it is, the more it is able to receiue; the moe things that are touched in it, the moe it still coueteth; and the greater the things bee, the fitter is shee to receyue them euen when they be at the greatest. It followeth therfore that the Soule (which after a sort is infinite) cannot be body. And so much y^e lesse can it so bee, for that whereas it harboreth so many and so great things in it, it selfe is lodged in so small a body. Agayne, as a thou∣sand diuers places are in the Soule or Mynde without occupying any place; so is the Mynd in a thousand places without chaunging of place; & that erewhiles not by succession of tyme, nor by turnes, but oftentymes altogether at one instant. Bid thy Soule or Mynd

goe to Constantinople, and foorthwith to turne backe agayne to Rome, and straight way to be at Paris or Lyons: Bid it passe tho∣rowe America, or to go about Affricke; and it dispatcheth all these iourneys at a trice: looke whether soeuer thou directest it, there it is; and or euer thou callest it backe, it is at home agayn. Now, is there a body that can bee in diuers places at once, or that can passe with∣out remouing, or that can moue otherwise than in tyme, yea and in such tyme as (within a little vnder or ouer) is proportioned both to his pace, and to the length of the way which it hath to goe? Then is it certeine that our Soule is not a bodily substance; which thing appeareth so much the more plainly, in that being lodged in this body which is so mouable, it remoueth not with the body. Also it is a sure ground, that two bodies cannot mutually enter eyther in∣to other, nor conteyne eyther other: but the greater must alway néedes conteyne, and the lesser must néedes bee conteyned. But by our Soules, we enter, not only eyther into others bodies, but also eyther into others mynds, so as wee comprehend eyther other by mutual vnderstanding, and imbrace either other by mutual louing. It followeth then that this substance which is able to receiue a bo∣dilesse thing, can bee no body; and that so much the rather, for that the body which seemeth to hold it, conteyneth it not. Nay verely, this Soule of ours is so farre of from being a bodily substance, and is so manifestly a Spirit; that to lodge all things in it selfe, it ma∣keth them all after a sort spirituall, and bereueth them of their bo∣dies; and if there were any bodylinesse in it, it were vnable to enter into the knowledge of a bodie. So in a Glasse a thousand shapes are seene: but if the cléere of the Glasse had any peculiar shape of it owne, the Glasse could yéeld none of those shapes at all. Also all vi∣sible things are imprinted in the eye; but if the sight of the eye had any peculiar colour of it owne, it would be a blemish to the sight, so as it should eyther not see at all, or els all things should seeme like to that blemish. Likewise, whereas the Tongue is the discerner of all tastes; if it be not cléere but combered with humours, all things are of tast like to the humour, so as if it be bitter, they also be bitter; and if it be watrish, they be watrish too; yea and if it bee bitter, it can not iudge of bitternesse it self. That a thing may receyue al shapes, all colours, and all tastes; it behoueth the same to be cléere from all shapes, from all colour, and from all sauour of it owne. And that a thing may in vnderstanding knowe and conceiue all bodies, as our Soule doth, it behoueth the same to bée altogether bodylesse it self;

for had it any bodylinesse at all, it could not receiue any body into it. If wée looke yet more néerely into the nature of a body, wée shall finde that no body receiueth into it the substantial forme of another body, without losing or altering his owne, ne passeth frō one forme into another, without the marring of the first; as is to bee seene in wood when it receyueth fire, in seedes when they spring foorth into bud, and so in other things. What is to be said then of mans soule, which receiueth and conceyueth the formes and shapes of al things without corrupting his owne, and moreouer becommeth the per∣fecter by the more receyuing? For the more it receyueth, the more it vnderstandeth; and the more it vnderstandeth, the more perfect is it.

If it bee a bodily substance, from whence is it and of what mix∣ture? If it be of the fower Elements, how can thei giue life, hauing no life of themselues? Or how can thei giue vnderstanding, hauing no sence? If it bee of the mixture of them, how may it bee sayd that of diuers things which haue no beeing of themselues, should bee made a thing that hath being? Or that of diuers outsides should bee made one body? or of diuers bodies, one Soule? or of diuers deaths, one life? or of diuers darknesses, one light? Nay rather, why say wee not that he which beyond nature hath made the mix∣ture of these bodies, hath for the perfecting of our body, breathed a Soule also into the body? To be short, the propertie of a body is to suffer, and the propertie of our Soule is to doe. And if the body bée not put foorth by some other thing than it selfe, it is a very blocke; wheras the mynd that is in our Soule ceasseth not to stirre vp and downe in it selfe, though it haue nothing to moue it from without. Therefore it is to bee concluded by these reasons and by the like, that our Soule is a bodylesse substance, notwithstanding that it is vnited to our body.

And herevpon it followeth also,* 1.450 that our Soule is not any ma∣terial thing, forasmuch as matter receyueth not any forme or shape but according to his owne quantitie, and but onely one forme at once, whereas our Soule receyueth all formes without quantitie, come there neuer so many at once or so great. Agayne, no matter admitteth two contrary formes at once; but our Soule contrary∣wise comprehendeth and receyueth them together, as fire and wa∣ter, heate and cold, white and blacke; and not only together, but al∣so the better by the matching and laying of them together. To bée short, seeing that the more wee depart from matter, the more wée

vnderstand; surely nothing is more contrary to the substance of ou•• Soule, than is the nature of matter. Furthermore, if this reasona∣ble Soule of ours is neither a bodily nor a materiall thing, nor de∣pending vpon matter in the best actions therof: then must it néedes be of it self, and not procéede eyther from body or from matter. For what doth a body bring foorth but a body; and matter but matter; and materiall but materialles? And therefore it is an vnmateriall substance, which hath being of it selfe.

But let vs see whether the same bee corruptible and mortall or no.* 1.451 Soothly, if Plutarke bee to beléeued, it is in vayne to dispute thereof. For he teacheth, that the doctrine of Gods prouidence, and the immortalitie of our Soules are so linked together, that the one is as an appendant to the other. And in very déed, to what purpose were the World created, if there were no body to behold it? Or to what ende behold wee the Creator in the world, but to serue him? And why should wee serue him vppon no hope? And to what pur∣pose hath he indewed vs with these rare giftes of his, which for the most part doe but put vs to payne and trouble in this life: if we pe∣rish like the brute Beast or the Hearbes, which knowe him not? Howbeit, for the better satisfying of the sillie Soules which go on still like witlesse Beastes, without taking so much leysure in all their life, as once to enter into themselues; let vs indeuer héere by liuely reasons to paynt out vnto thē againe their true shape, which they labour to deface with so much filthinesse. The Soule of man (as I haue sayd afore) is not a body, neyther doth it increase or de∣crease with the body: but contrarywise the more the body decaieth, the more doth the vnderstanding increase; and the néerer that the body draweth vnto death, the more fréely doth y^e mynd vnderstand; and the more that the body abateth in flesh, the more woorkfull is the mynd. And why then should we think, that the thing which be∣commeth the stronger by the weakenesse of the body, and which is aduaunced by the decay of the body, should returne to dust with the body? A mans Sences fayle because his eyes fayle, and his eyes fayle because the Spirits of them fayle: but the blynd mans vnder∣standing increaseth, because his eyes are not busied: and the olde mans reason becommeth the more perfect by the losse of his sight. Therfore why say we not that the body fayleth the Soule, and not the Soule the body; and that the Glasses are out of the Spectacles but the eysight is still good? Why should we déeme the Soule to be forgone with the Sences? If the eye be the thing that séeth, and

the eare the thing that heareth; why doe wee not see things dubble, and heare sounds dubble, seeing we haue two eyes and two eares? It is the Soule then that seeth and heareth; and these which wee take to be our sences, are but the instruments of our sences. And if when our eyes bee shut or pickt out, wee then beholde a thousand things in our mynd; yea and that our vnderstanding is then most quicksighted, when the quickest of our eysight is as good as quen∣ched or starke dead: how is it possible that the reasonable Soule should bee tyed and bound to the sences? What a reason is it to say that the Soule dyeth with the sences, séeing that the true sences do then growe and increase, when the instruments of sence doe dye? And what a thing were it, to say that a Beast is dead, because he hath lost his eyes, when we our selues see that it liueth after it hath forgone the eyes? Also I haue prooued that the Soule is neither the body, nor an appertnance of the body. Sith it is so, why mea∣sure we that thing by the body, which measureth al bodies; or make that to dye with the body, whereby the bodies that dyed yea many hundred yéeres agoe, doe after a certeine maner liue still? Or what can hurt that thing, whom nothing hurteth or hindereth in the bo∣die? Though a man lose an arme, yet doth his Soule abide whole still. Let him forgoe the one halfe of his body, yet is his Soule as sound as afore: for it is whole in it selfe and whole in euery part of it selfe, vnited in it felfe and in the owne substance, and by the force and power thereof it sheadeth it selfe into all parts of the body. Though the body rot away by péecemeale, yet abideth the Soule all one and vndiminished. Let the blud dreyne out, the mouing wex weake, the sences fayle, and the strength perish; and yet abideth the mynd neuerthelesse sound and liuely euen to the ende. Her house must bee pearced through on all sides, ere she bee discouraged; her walles must be battered doune ere she fall to fléeting; and she neuer forsaketh her lodging, till no roome be left her to lodge in. True it is that the brute Beastes forgo both life and action with their blud. But as for our Soule (if wee consider the matter well) it is then gathered home into it self; and when our sences are quenched, then doth it most of all labour to surmount it selfe: woorking as goodly actions at the tyme that the body is at a poynt to fayle it, yea and oftentymes farre goodlyer also, than euer it did during the whole lifetyme thereof. As for example, it taketh order for it selfe, for our houshold, for the Commonweale, and for a whole Kingdome; and that with more vprightnesse, godlynesse, wisedome, and modera∣tion,

than euer it did afore, yea and perchance in a body so forspe••••••, so bare, so consumed, so withered without and so putrified within, that whosoeuer lookes vpon him sees nothing but earth, and yet to heare him speake would rauish a man vp to heauen, yea and aboue heauen. Now, when a man sees so liuely a Soule in so weake and wretched a body, may he not say as is said of the hatching of Chic∣kens, that the shell is broken, but there commeth forth a Chicken?

Also let vs sée what is the ordinary cause that things perish. Fire doth eyether goe out for want of nourishment, or is quenched by his contrary which is water. Water is resolued into aire by fire, which is his contrary. The cause why the Plant dyeth, is extremitie of colde or drought, or vnseasonable cutting, or vyolent plucking vp. Also the liuing wight dyeth through contrarietie of humours, or for want of foode, or by feeding vpon some thing that is against the nature of it, or by outward vyolence. Of all these causes, which can we choose to haue any power against our Soule? I say against the Soule of man, which (notwithstanding that it be vnited to matter and to a bodie) is it selfe a substance vnbodily, vnmateriall, and on∣ly conceiuable in vnderstanding? The contrarietie of things? Nay, what can be contrarie to that which lodgeth the contraries alike e∣qually in himselfe? which vnderstandeth the one of them by the o∣ther? which coucheth them all vnder one skill? and (to bee short) in whom the contrarieties themselues abandon their contrarietie, so as they doe not any more pursewe but insewe one another? Fire is hote, and water cold. Our bodies mislike these contraries, and are gréeued by them; but our mynd linketh them together without ey∣ther burning or cooling it selfe; and it setteth the one of them against the other to knowe them the better. The things which destroy one another through the whole world, do mainteine one another in our mynds. Againe, nothing is more contrary to peace then warre is; and yet mans mynd can skill to make or mainteyne peace in prepa∣ring for warre, and to lay earnestly for warre in seeking or inioying of peace. Euen death it selfe (which dispatcheth our life) cannot bée contrary to the life of our Soule: for it seeketh life by death, and death by life. And what can that thing méete withall in the whole world, that may bee able to ouerthrowe it, which can inioyne obe∣dience to things most contrary? What then? Want of foode? How can that want foode in the world, which can skill to feede on the whole world? Or how should that forsake foode, which the fuller it is, so much the hungryer it is; and the more it hath digested, the bet∣ter

able it is to digest? The bodily wight feedeth vppon some cer∣teyne things, but our mynd feedeth vpon all things. Take from it the sensible things, and the things of vnderstanding abyde with it still: bereaue it of earthly things, and the heauenly remayne abun∣dantly. To be short, abridge it of all worldly things, yea and of the world it selfe, and euen then doth it feede at greatest ease, & maketh best chéere agréeable to his owne nature. Also the bodily wight fil∣leth it selfe to a certeyne measure, and delighteth in some certeyne things. But what can fill our mynd? Fill it as full as ye can with the knowledge of things, and it is still eager and sharpe set to re∣ceyue more. The more it taketh in, the more it still craueth: and yet for al that, it neuer feeleth any rawnesse or lack of digestion. What shall I say more? discharge our vnderstanding from the mynding of it self, and then doth it liue in him and of him in whom all things doe liue. Againe, fill it with the knowledge of it selfe, and then doth it feele it self most emptie, and sharpest set vpon desire of the other. Now then, can that dye or decay for want of foode, which cannot be glutted with any thing, which is nourished and mainteyned with all things, and which liueth in very déede vppon him by whom all the things which we wonder at here beneath are vphild?

And what els is vyolence, but a iustling of two bodies together? and how can there be any such betwéene a bodie and a spiritual sub∣stance? yea or of two spirits one against another, seeing that often∣tymes when they would destroye one another, they vphold one an other? And if the Soule cannot be pushed at, neither inwardly nor outwardly: is there any thing in nature that can naturally hurt it? No: but it may perchaunce bee weakened by the very force of his encounter, as wee see it doth befall to our sences. For the more ex∣cellent and the more sensible the thing is in his kynd which y^e sence receiueth, so much the more also is the sence it self offended or grée∣ued therwith. As for example, the féeling, by fire; the taste, by harsh∣nesse; the smelling, by sauours; the hearing, by the hideousnesse of noyse, whether it be of Thunderclappe or of the falling of a Riuer; and the sight, by looking vpon the Sunne, vpon Fyre, and vpon all things that haue a glistering brightnesse. I omit, that in the most of these things, it is not properly the sence it selfe, but the outward instrument of sence only that is offended or hurt. But let vs see if there be the like in our reasonable Soule. Nay, contrarywise the more of vnderstanding and excellencie that the thing is, the more doth it refresh and comfort our mynd. If it bee darke so as wee vn∣derstand

it but by halues, it hurteth vs not; but yet doth it not de∣light vs. Nay, as we increase in vnderstanding it, so doth it like vs the better; and the higher it is, the more doth it stirre vp the power of our vnderstanding, and (as ye would say) reache vs the hande to drawe vs to the atteynement thereof. As for them that are dim∣sighted, wee forbid them to behold the things that are ouerbright. But as for them that are of rawest capacitie, wee offer them the things that are most vnderstandable. When the sence beginneth to perceyue most sharply, then is it fayne to giue ouer, as if it felt the very death of it selfe. Contrarywise, when the mynd beginneth to vnderstand, then is it most desirous to hold on still. And whereof commeth that, but that our sences work by bodily instruments, but our mynd worketh by a bodilesse substance which néedeth not the helpe of the body. And seeing that the nature, the nourishment, and the actions of our Soule are so farre differing, both from the na∣ture, nourishment, and actions of the body, and from al that euer is done or wrought by the bodie: can there be any thing more childish than to déeme our Soule to be mortal by the abating and decaying of our sences, or by the mortalitie of our bodies? Nay contrariwise it may be most soundly and substantially concluded therevpon, that mans Soule is of it owne nature immortall, seeing that all death as well vyolent as naturall commeth of the bodie and by the bodie.

Let vs see further what death or corruption is.* 1.452 It is (say they) a separating of the matter from his forme. And forasmuch as in man the Soule is considered to be the forme, and the bodie to be as the matter: the separation of the Soule from the bodie is cōmonly called Death. Now then, what death can there bee of the Soule, sith it is vnmaterial as I haue sayd afore, and a forme that abideth of it selfe? For (as one sayth) a man may take away the roundnesse or squarenesse from a table of Copper, because they haue no aby∣ding but in y^e matter: but had thei such a round or square forme, as might haue an abyding without matter or stuffe wherein to be, out of doubt such forme or shape should continue for euer. Nay (which more is) how can that be the corrupter of a thing, which is the per∣fection thereof? The lesse corsinesse a man hath, the more hath he of reason and vnderstanding. The lesse our mynds be tyed to these bodily things, the more liuely and chéerefull be they. At a word, the full and perfect life thereof, is the full and vtter withdrawing there∣of from the bodie and whatsoeuer the bodie is made of. All these things are so cléere as they néede no proofe. Now, we knowe that

euery thing worketh according to the proper being therof, and that the same which perfecteth the operations of a thing, perfecteth the being thereof also. It followeth therefore, that sith the separation of the body from the Soule, and of the forme from the matter, per∣fecteth the operation or working of the Soule (as I haue sayd a∣fore) it doth also make perfect and strengthen the very being there∣of, and therefore cannot in any wise corrupt it. And what els is dy∣ing but to be corrupted? And what els is corrupting, but suffering? And what els is suffering, but receyuing? And how can that which receyueth all things without suffering, receyue corruption by any thing? Fyre corrupteth or marreth our bodies, and we suffer in re∣ceyuing it. So doth also extreme colde: but if wee suffered nothing by it, it could not fréese vs. Our sences likewise are marred by the excessiue force of the things which they light vpon. And that is be∣cause they receyue and perceyue the thing that gréeueth them, and for that the maner of their behauing of themselues towards their obiects, is subiect to suffering. But as for the reasonable Soule, which receiueth al things after one maner, that is to wit, by way of vnderstāding, wherethrough it alway worketh & is neuer wrought into; how is it possible for it to corrupt or marre it selfe?

For what is the thing whereat our Soule suffereth aught in the substance thereof, I meane whereby the substance of our Soule is any whit impayred or hurt by mynding or conceyuing the same in vnderstanding? As little doth the fire hurt it as the ayre, and the ayre as the fire. As little hurt receiueth it by the frozen yce of Nor∣wey, as by the scorching sands of Affricke. As little also doth vyce anoye it as vertue. For vyce and vertue are so farre of from incom∣bering the substance of the Soule, that our mynd doth neuer con∣ceiue or vnderstand them better, than by setting them together one against another. That thing therfore which doth no whit appayre it selfe, but taketh the ground of perfecting it self by all things, can not be marred or hurt by any thing.

Agein, what is death? The vttermost poynt of mouing, and the vttermost bound of this life. For euen in liuing we dye, and in dy∣ing we liue, and there is not that step which we set downe in this life, which dooth not continewally step foreward vnto death, after the maner of a Dyall or a Clocke, which mounting vp by certeine degrées forgoeth his mouing in mouing from Minute to Minute. Take away mouing from a body, and it doth no more liue. Now let vs sée if the soule also be caryed with the same mouing. If it be

caryed with the same mouing, then doth it vndoutedly moue there∣withall. Nay, contrariwise, whether the mynd rest, or whether it be buzyed about the proper operations thereof, it is not perceiued eyther by any panting of hart, or by any beating of pulses, or by any breathing of Lungs. It is then as a Shippe that carieth vs away with it, whether we walke or sit still; the stickingfast whereof or the tying thereof to a poste, hindereth not our going vp and downe in it still. Ageine, if the Soule be subiect to the finall corruption of the body, then is it subiect to the alterations thereof also; and if it be subiect to the alterations, it is subiect to tyme also. For altera∣tions or chaunges, are spices, or rather consequents of mouing, and moouings are not made but in tyme. Now man in respect of the body hath certeine full poynts or stoppes, at the which he receiueth manifest chaunges, and thereafter groweth or decayeth. But com∣monly where the decay of the body beginneth, there beginneth the cheef strength of the mynd! Houbeit that in some men, not only their chinnes are couered with downe, but also their beards become gray, whose minds for want of exercise, shewe no signe at all either of rypenesse or growing. Moreouer, time (as in respect of the body) cannot be called ageyne, but in respect of the mynd it is alwayes present. Yea and tyme perfecteth, accomplisheth, and increaseth our mynd, and after a sort reneweth and refressheth it from day to day, whereas contrarywise it forweareth, wassheth away and quight consumeth, both it self, and the body with the life thereof. It follo∣weth then that the reasonable Soule is not subiect to time, nor con∣sequently to any of the chaunges and corruptions that accompa∣nye tyme. Nay we may say thus much more; That nothing in the whole World is nurrished with things better than itself; neither dooth any of them conteyne greater things than itself; But the things that are corruptible do liue of corruptible things, and can∣not liue without corrupting them: as for example, beasts liue by herbes, men by beasts, and sofoorth. And therefore things which liue by vncorruptible things, and can so receiue and digest them, as to turne them into the nurrishment of their nature, and yet not cor∣rupt them; are vncorruptible them selues to. Now the Soule of man, I meane the reasonable soule or mynd, conceiueth reason and trueth, and is fed and strengthened with them. And reason & trueth are things vnchaungeable, not subiect to tyme, place or alteration, but stedye, vnchaungeable, and euerlasting. For that twice two be fower, and that there is the same reason in the proportion of eight

vnto six that is of fower vnto three, or that in a Tryangle, the three inner angles are equall with the too ryght angles; and such like; are truethes which neither yeeres nor thousands of yeeres can change; as true at this day, as they were when Euclyde first spake them. And so foorth of other things. It followeth then y^t the Soule comprehending reason and trueth, which are things free from cor∣ruption, cannot in any wyse be subiect to corruption.

Agein, who is he of all men that desireth not to be immortall? And how could any man desire it, if he vnderstoode not what it is? Or how could he be able to vnderstand it, vnlesse it were possible for him to atteyne vnto it? Surely none of vs coueteth to be begin∣ninglesse, for none of vs is so; neither can any of vs be so. And as we cannot so be, so also can we not comprehend what it is. For who is he that is not at his witts end, but only to think vppon eternitie without beginning? On the contrarie part there is not so bace a mynd which coueteth not to liue for euer; insomuch that wheras we looke not for it by nature, we seeke to obteyne it by skill and pollicie, some by bookes, some by Images, and some by other de∣uices; and euen the grossest sort can well imagine in themselues what immortalitie is, and are able both to conceyue it and to be∣leeue it. Whence comes this, but that our soules beeing created cannot conceiue an euerlastingnesse without beginning, and yet neuerthelesse, that forasmuch as they be created immortal, they doe wel conceiue an immortalitie or euerlastingnes without end? And whereto serues this vniuersall desire, if it be not naturall? or how is it naturall if it be in vaine? and not onely in vayne, but also too bring vs to Hell and to Torment? Let vs wade yet déeper. Who can dispute or once so much as doubt whether the Soule bee im∣mortall or no, but he that is capable of immortalitie? And who can vnderstand what difference is betwixt mortall and immortall, but hee that is immortall? Man is able to discerne the difference be∣twéene that which is reason, and that which is not, and therevpon wee terme him reasonable. Whosoeuer would hold opinion that a man is not reafonable, should neede none other disproofe than his owne disputing thereof; for he would go about to proue it by rea∣son. Man can skill to discerne the mortall natures from the im∣mortall; And therefore we may well say he is immortall. For hee that should dispute to the contrarie, shalbe driuen to bring such rea∣sons, as shall of themselues make him to prooue himselfe immor∣tall. Thou sayest the Soule can not be immortall: and why? Be∣cause

(sayest thou (that to be so, it would behoue it to woorke seue∣rally by it selfe frō the body, When thou thinkest that in thy mynd; consider what thy body dooth at the same tyme. Nay yet further, who hath taught thee so much of the immortall nature, if thou thy selfe be nor immortall? Or what worldly wight can say what the inwoorking of a reasonable wight is, but the wight which in it selfe hath the vse of reason?

Yet sayest thou still, if the Soule be immortall, it is frée from such and such passions. How enterest thou so farre into the Nature that is so farre aboue thée, if thou thy selfe beest mortall? All the reasons which thou alledgest against the immortalitie of the soule, doe feight directly to the proofe of it. For if thy reason mounted no higher than to the things that are mortall, thou shouldest knowe neither mortall nor immortall. Now it is not some one couetous man aboue all other, that desireth immortalitie, nor some one man excelling all others in wisdome, that comprehendeth it, but al man∣kind without exception. It is not then some one seuerall skill or some one naturall propertie, that maketh such difference betwéene man and man as we sée to be betwéene many, but rather one selfe∣same nature common to all men, whereby they be all ma•••• to dif∣fer from other liuing wights, which by no deede doe shewe any de∣sire too ouerliue themselues, ne know how to liue, & therefore their Lyues doe vanish away with their bloud, and is extinguished with their bodies. If euer thou hast looked to dye, consider what discourse thou madest then in thy mynd: thou couldest neuer perswade thy conscience nor make thy reason to conceiue, that thy Soule should dye with the Body; but euen in the selfesame tyme when it dispu∣teth ageinst it selfe, it shifteth it self I wote not how from all thy conclusions, and falleth too consider in what state it shall bee, and where it shal become when it is out of the body. The Epicure that hath disputed of it all his lyfe long, when he commeth to death, be∣queatheth a yerely pension for the keeping of a yéerely feast on the day of his birth. I pray you to what purpose serue feastings for the birth of a Swyne, séeing he estéemeth himselfe to be no better than so? Nay what els is this, than a crying out of his Nature against him, which with one word confuteth all his vaine arguments? A∣nother laboureth by all meanes possible, to blot out in himselfe the opinion of immortalitie; and bicause he hath liued wickedly in this world, he will néedes beare himselfe on hand, that there is no Iu∣stice in the world tocome. But then is the tyme that his owne na∣ture

waketh, and starteth vp as it were out of the bottome of a wa∣ter, and at that instant painteth againe before his eyes, the selfsame thing which he tooke so much paynes to deface. And in good sooth, what a number haue wee seene, which hauing bene despisers of all Religiō, haue at the hower of death bin glad to vow their Soules to any Sainct for releefe; so cléere was then the presence of the life to come before their eyes. I had leuer (sayd Zeno) to see an Indian burne himselfe chéerefully,* 1.453 than to heare al the Philosophers of the world discoursing of the immortalitie of the Soule; and in very déede it is a much stronger and better concluded argument. Nay then, let vs rather say, I had leuer see an Atheist or an Epicure witnessing the immortalitie of the Soule, and willingly taking an honorable farewell of nature vpon a Scaffold, than to heare all the Doctors of the world discoursing of it in their Pulpits. For what∣soeuer the Epicures say there, they speake it aduisedly and (as ye would say) fresh and fasting; wheras all that euer they haue spoken all their life afore, is to bee accounted but as the wordes of Drun∣kards, that is to wit, of men besotted and falne asléepe in the de∣lights and pleasures of this world, where the Wine and the excesse of meate, and the vapors that fumed vp of them did speake, and not the men themselues. What shall I say more?* 1.454 I haue tolde you al∣readie that in y^e inward man there are (as ye would say) thrée men; the liuing, the sensitiue, and the reasonable. Let vs say therefore that in the same person there are thrée liues continued from one to another: namely, the life of the Plant, the life of the Beast, and the life of the Man or of the Soule. So long as a man is in his moo∣thers wombe, he doth but only liue and growe; his Spirit seemeth to sléepe, and his sences seeme to bee in a slumber, so as he seemeth to bee no thing els than a Plant. Neuerthelesse, if ye consider his eyes, his eares, his tongue, his sences, and his mouings, you will easely iudge that he is not made to be for euer in that prison where he neither seeth nor heareth, nor hath any roome to walke in, but ra∣ther that he is made to come forth into an opener place, where he may haue what to see and behold, and wherewith to occupye al the powers which wee see to bee in him. As soone as he is come out, he beginneth to see, to féele, and to moue, and by little and little falleth to the perfect vsing of his limbes, and findeth in this world a pecu∣liar obiect for euery of them, as visible things for the eye, sounds for his hearing, bodily things for his feeling, and so forth. But be∣sides all this, we finde there a mynd; which by the eyes as by win∣dowes

beholdeth the world, and yet in al the world finding not any one thing woorthy to rest wholly vppon, mounteth vp to him that made it; which mynd like an Empresse lodgeth in the whole world, and not alonly in this body; which by the sences (and oftentymes also without the sences) mounteth aboue the sences, and streyneth it self to goe out of it selfe, as a child doth to get out of his mothers wombe. And therefore wee ought surely to say, that this Mynd or Reason ought not to bee euer in prison. That one day it shall see cléerely, and not by these dimme and clowdie spectacles: That it shall come in place where it shall haue the true obiect of vnderstan∣ding: and that he shall haue his life free from these fetters and from all the affections of the body. To be short, that as man is prepared in his moothers wombe to be brought foorth into the world; ••o is he also after a sort prepared in this body and in this world, to liue in another world. We then vnderstand it, when by nature it behoueth vs to depart out of the world. And what child is there which (if na∣ture did not by her cunning driue him out,) would of himself come out of his Couert, or that commeth not out as good as forlorne and halfe dead; or that if he had at that tyme knowledge & spéech, would not call that death, which we call birth; and that a departure out of life, which we call the enterance into it? As long as we be there, we see nothing though our eyes be open. Many also doe not so much as stirre, except it bee at some sodaine scaring or some other like chaunce; and as for those that stirre, they knowe not that they haue eyther sence or mouing. Why then should wee thinke it straunge, that in this life our vnderstanding seeth so little, that many men do neuer mynd the immortall nature, vntill they be at the last cast, yea and some thinke not themselues to haue any such thing, howbeit that euen by so thinking they shew themselues to haue part there∣of? And imagine wee that the vnborne babe hath not as much adoe by nature to leaue the poore skinne that he is wrapt in, as we haue hinderance in our sences and in our imprisoned reason, when we be at the poynt to leaue the goods and pleasures of this world, and the very flesh it selfe which holdeth vs as in a graue? Or had the babe some little knowledge; would he not say that no life were compara∣ble to the life where he then is, as we say there is no life to the life of this world wherein we be? Or would he not account the stage of our sences for a fable, as a great sort of vs account the stage that is prepared for our Soules? Yes surely: and therfore let vs conclude where wee began, namely that man is both inward and outward.

In the outward man, which is the bodie, he resembleth the béeing and the proportion of all the parts of the world. And in the inner man he resembleth whatsoeuer ky••nd of life is in all things or in a∣ny thing that beareth life in the world. In his moothers wombe he liueth the life of a Plant, howbeit with this further, that he hath a certeyne commencement of sence and moouing which excéede the Plant, and doe put him in a readynesse to be indewed with Sences as a Beast is. In this life he hath sence and mouing in their perfec∣tion, which is y^t propertie of a sensitiue wight; but yet besides these, he hath also a beginning to reason and vnderstand, which are a be∣ginning of another life such as the sensitiue wight hath not, & this life is to be perfected in another place. In the life to come he hath his actions free and full perfected, a large ground to worke vppon able to suffise him to the full, and a light to his vnderstanding in stead of a light to the eye. And like as in comming into this world, he came as it were out of another world; so in going yet into ano∣ther world he must also goe out of this world. He commeth out of the first world into the second, as it were fayling in nourishment, but growing in strength vnto mouing and sence: and he goeth out of the second into the third, fayling in sences and mouing, but gro∣wing in reason and vnderstāding. Now, seeing we call the passage out of the first world into the second a birth, what reason is it that we should call the passage out of the second into the third, a death? To be short, he that considereth how all the actions of mans mynd tend to the tyme to come, without possibilitie of staying vppon the present time, how pleasant and delightful soeuer it be: we may well discerne by them all, that his being (which in euery thing (as sayth Aristotle) followeth the working thereof) is also wholly bent to∣wards the tyme to come; as who would say this present life were vnto it but as a narrowe grindle, on the further side whereof (as it were on the banke of some streame or running water,) he were to finde his true dwelling place and very home in déede.

But now is it tyme to sée what is sayd to the contrarie:* 1.455 where∣in we haue to consider eftsoones that which we spake of afore; name∣ly that if all that euer is in vs were transitorie and mortall, wee should not be so witty to examine the Immortalitie as we be: for of Contraries the skill is all one. If a man were not mortall, that is to say, if he had no lyfe, he could not dispute of the mortall lyfe; neither could he speake of the Immortal, if he himself also were not Immortall. Therefore let vs goe backe retryue. Some man will

say, that the Soule dyeth with the body, bycause the Soule and the body are but one thing, and he beléeueth that they be both but one, bycause he seeth no more but the body. This argument is all one with theirs, which denyed that there is any God, bycause they sawe him not. But yet by his dooings thou mayst perceyue that there is a God: discerne lykewise by the dooings of thy soule, that thou haste a Soule. For in a dead body thou seest the same partes remayne, but thou séest not the same dooings that were in it afore. When a man is dead, his eye seeth nothing at all, and yet is there nothing chaunged of his eye: but whyle hee is aliue it séeth infinite things that are dyuers. The power then which séeth is not of the body. Yet notwithstanding how lyuely and quickesighted so euer the eye be; it séeth not it self. Woonder not therefore though thou haue a soule, and that the same soule sée not it self. For if thyne ey∣sight sawe itself; it were not a power or abilitie of séeing, but a vi∣sible thing: lykewise if thy Soule sawe itself, it were no more a Soule that is to say the woorker and quickener of the body, but a verie body, vnable to do any thing of it self, and a massie substance subiect to suffering. For we sée nothing but the body and bodily substances. But in this thou perceiuest somewhat els than a body, (as I haue sayd afore) that if thyne eye had any peculiar colour of it owne, it could not discerne any other colour than that. Seeing then that thou conceyuest so many dyuers bodies at once in imagi∣nation: néeds must thou haue a power in thee which is not a body. Be it (say they) that we haue a power of sence; yet haue we not a power of reason; for that which we call the power of reason or vn∣derstanding, is nothing but an excellencie or rather a consequence of sence, insomuch that when sence dyeth, the residew dyeth there∣with also. Soothely in this which thou haste sayd, thou haste sur∣mounted sence; which thing thou haddest not done, if thou haddest nothing in thee beyond sence. For whereas thou sayest, if the sence dye, the rest dyeth also; it is a reason that proceedeth from one terme to another, and it is a gathering of reasons which conclude one thing by another. Now the sences do in deede perceyue their obiects, but yet how lyuely so euer they be, they reason not. We sée a Smoake; so farre extendeth the sence. But if we inferre, therefore there must needes be fire, and thereupon seeke who was the kind∣ler thereof: that surmounteth the abilitie of sence. We here a péece of Musicke; that may any beast do as well as we. But his hearing of it is but as of a bare sound; whereas our hearing therof is as of

an harmony, and we discerne the cause of the concords and discords, which either delight or offend our sence. The thing y^t heareth the sound is the sence; but the thing that iudgeth of that which the sence conceyueth, is another thing than the sence. The lyke is to be sayd of smelling, tasting, and feeling. Our smelling of sents, our tasting of sauours, and our feeling of substances, is in déede the woorke of our Sences. But as for our iudging of y^e inward vertue of y^e thing by the outward sent thereof, or of the wholsomnes or vnwholsom∣nes of foode by the taste thereof, or of the whotnesse or vehemencie of a feuer by feeling the pulse; yea and our procéeding euen into the very bowels of a man, whether the eye beeing the quickest of all sences is not able to atteyne; surely it is the woorke of a more migh∣tie power than the sence is. And in verie déede there are beasts which do here, see, smell, taste, and feele much better and quicklyer than man doth. Yet notwithstanding none of them conferreth the contraries of colors, sounds, sents and sauours; none sorteth them out to the seruing one of another, or to the seruing of themselues. Whereby it appeareth, that man excelleth the Beasts by another power than the Sences; and that whereas a man is a Peynter, a Musician, or a Phisition; he hath it from elswhere than from his sences. Nay, I say further, that oftentymes we conclude cleane contrarie to the report of our sences. Our eye perchauce telleth vs that a Tower which we see afarre of is round, whereas our reason deemeth it to be square: or that a thing is small, which our reason telleth vs is greate: or that the ends of lyues in a long walke do meete in a poynt, whereas our reason certifieth vs that they runne ryghtfoorth with equall distance one from another. For want of this discretion, certeine Elephants (sayth Vitellio) which were passing ouer a long bridge, turned backe beeing deceyued; and yet they wanted not sight no more than we do. But they that led them were not deceyued. Their Leaders then besides their eysight, had in them another vertue or power which corrected their sight, and therefore ought to be of hygher estimation. In lyke ••ase is it with the rest of y^e other sences. For our hearing telleth vs that the thun∣derclappe is after the lyghtening; but skill assureth vs that they be both togither. For there is a certeine power in vs, which can skil to discerne what proportion is betweene hearing and seeing. Also the tong of him that hath an Agew, beareth him on hand that euen sugre is bi••••er, which thing he knoweth by his reason to be vntrew. To be short, those which haue their sences most quicke and ly••ely,

be not of the greatest wisdum and vnderstanding. A man therefore differeth from a beast, and excelleth men by some other power than sence. For whereas it is comonly sayd, that such as haue séene most are comonly of greatest skill: we see that many haue traueled farre both by sea and land, which haue come home as wise as they went∣foorth. A horse hath as good eyes as he that rydes vpon him, and yet for all his traueling, neither he nor paraduenture his Ryder whom he beareth become any whit the wyser by that which they haue seene: whereby it appereth that it is not enough to see things vnlesse a man do also mynd them to his benefite.

Now there is great difference betweene the lyuelynes of the Sence, and the power that gouerneth the Sence; lyke as the re∣port of a Spye is one thing, and the Spye himself is another, and the wisdum of the Capteine that receyueth the report of the Spye is a third. Nay, who can deny, that Sence and Reason are dyuers things; or rather who wilnot graunt, that in many things they be cleane contrarie? Sence biddeth vs shun and eschew greef; where∣as Reason willeth vs to profer our leg sometyme to the Surgion to be cut of. Sence plucketh our hand out of the fire, and yet we our selues put fire to our bare skin. He that should sée a Sceuola burne of his owne hand, without so much as once gnashing his téeth at it, would thinke he were vtterly senslesse: so mightily dooth Reason ouerrule sence. To be short, Sence hath his peculiar inclination, which is appetite; and Reason lykewyse hath his, which is will. And lyke as reason doth oftentymes ouerrule sence and is contra∣rie to it; so will correcteth the sensuall appetyte or lust that is in vs, and warreth ageinst it. For in an Agew we couet to drink, and in an Apoplexie we couet to sleepe, and in hungre we couet to eate: and yet from all those things doth our will restreyne vs. The more a man followeth his lust, the lesse is he led by will: and the more he standeth vpon the pleasing of his Sences, the lesse reason vseth he ordinarily.

Againe, let vs consider the brute Beastes which haue this sen∣sitiue part as well as we. If we haue no more than that, how com∣meth it to passe that a little child driueth whole flockes and heards of them whether he listeth, and sometymes whether they would not? Whereof commeth it that euery of them in their kynd, doe all liue, nestle, and sing after one sorte; whereas men haue their lawes. Commonweales, maners of buylding, and formes of reasoning, not only diuers, but also commonly contrary? Now, what can har∣ber

these contrarieties together, but onely that which hath not any thing contrary vnto it, and wherein all contrary things doe lay a∣way their contrarietie? Surely it is not the Sence that can doe it, whose proper or peculiar obiect is most contrary to the sence. Be∣sides this (as I haue sayd afore) whereas we conceyue wisedome, skill, vertue, and such other things which are all bodilesse, our sen∣ces haue none other thing to worke vpon, than the qualities of bo∣dily substances: And whereas we make vniuersall rules of particu∣lar things; the Sences atteyne no further than to the particular things themselues: And wheras we conclude of the causes by their effects; our Sences perceyue no more but the bare effects: And whereas concerning the things that belong to vnderstanding, the more vnderstandable they bee, the more they refresh vs; Contrary∣wise, the stronger that the sensible things are, the more do they of∣fend the Sence: To be short, the selfesame thing which wee speake in behalfe of the Sences, procéedeth from elswhere than from the Sences. And we will easely discerne, that he which denyeth that besides the common Sence there is in man a reason or vnderstan∣ding, distinct and seuered from the Sence, is voyd both of vnder∣standing and of Sence.

But see here a grosse reason of theirs. This reason or power of vnderstanding (say they) which is in man, is corruptible as well as the power of perceyuing by the Sences. I thinke I haue prooued the contrary alreadie; neuerthelesse, let vs examine their reasons yet further. The forme or shape of euery thing (say they) doth pe∣rish with the matter. Now, the Soule is as ye would say y^e forme or shape of the body: therfore it corrupteth with the body. This ar∣gument were rightly concluded, if it were ment of the materiall forme. But I haue proued that the Soule is vnmateriall, and hath a continuance of it selfe. And in déede the more it is discharged of matter, the more it reteyneth his owne peculiar forme. Therefore the corrupting of the matter toucheth not the Soule at all. Again, if mens Soules liue (say they) after their bodies, then are they in∣finite; for the world is without beginning and without ending, and (as wee knowe) nature can away with no infinite thing: therefore they liue not after their bodies. Yes say I; for I haue proued that the world had a beginning, and that with so substantiall reasons, as thou art not able to disproue. Therefore it followeth that the in∣conuenience which thou alledgest can haue no place. Another saith, If dead mens Soules liue still, why come they not to tell vs so?

And he thinketh he hath stumbled vpon a woonderful suttle deuise. But how doth this followe in reason? There hath not come any man vnto vs from the Indies of a long tyme: ergo there be no In∣dies. May not the same argument serue as well to proue that wee our selues are not, because wee neuer went thether? Againe, what intercourse is there betwéene things that haue bodies, and things that haue no bodies; or betwene heauen and earth, considering that there is so small intercourse euen betwéene men, which liue all vn∣der one selfsame Sunne? He that is made a Magistrate in his own Countrey, doth not willingly returne to the place of his banish∣ment. Likewise the Soule that is lodged in the lappe of his God, and come home into his natiue soyle, forgoeth the desire of these lo∣wer things, which to his sight beholding them frō aboue, are lesse than the point of a Néedle. On the other side, he that is put in close prison, (how desirous soeuer he bee) cannot goe out; so the Soule which is in the Iayle of his souereine Lord God, hath no respit or sportingtyme to come tell vs what is done there. Unto the one, the beholding of the Euerlasting God is as a Paradize wherein he is wiling to remayne; and vnto the other, his owne condemnation is an imprisonment of his will. But we would haue God to sende both the one and the other vnto vs to make vs to beléeue. As who would say, it stoode him greatly on hand to haue vs to beléeue, and not rather vs y^t we should beléeue. And in effect what els is al this, but a desiring y^t some man might returne into his mothers wombe againe, to incourage young babes against the pinches and paines which they abide in the birth, whereof they would be as shye as we bee of death, if they had the like knowledge of them? But let vs let such vanities passe, and come to the ground.

Yee beare vs on hand (say they) that the Soule of man is but one, though it haue dyuers powers. Whereof we see the sensitiue and the growing powers to be corrupted and to perish: therefore it should seeme that the vnderstanding or reasonable power also should do the lyke. At a woord, this is al one as if a man should say, you tell mee that this man is both a good man, a good Swoord∣player, aud a good Luteplayer altogither; & that bycause his swoord falls out of his hand, or his hand itself becommeth Lame, therefor he cannot be a good or honest man still as you reported him to bee. Nay though he lose those instruments, yet ceasseth he not therefor to bee an honest man, yea and both a Swoordplayer and a Lute∣player to, as in respect of skill. Lykewyse when our Soules haue

forgone these exercises, yet ceasse they not to be the same they were afore. To inlyghten this poynt yet more; of the powers of our Soule, some are exercysed by the instruments of the bodie, and o∣thersome without any help or furtherance of the bodie atall. Those which are exercysed by the bodie, are the sences and the powers of the Sences and the powers of the growing, which may carye the same likenesse that is betweene a Luter and a Lute. Breake the Luters Lute, and his cunning remayneth still, but his putting of it in practise faileth. Giue him another Lute, and he falles to play∣ing newe againe. Put out a mans eyes, and yet the abilitie of see∣ing abydeth still with him, though the very act of seeing bée disap∣poynted. But giue vnto the oldest Hag that is the same eyes that he had when he was young, and he shall see as well as euer he did. After the same maner is it with the growing or thriuing power. Restore vnto it a good•• stomacke, a sound Liuer, and a perfect heate; and it shall execute his functions as well as euer it did afore. The power that worketh of it selfe and without the body, is the power of reason or vnderstanding, which if we wil we may call the mynd. And if thou yet still doubt thereof, consider when thou myndest a thing earnestly what thy body furthereth thy mynd therein; & thou shalt perceyue that the more fixedly thou thinkest vpon it, the lesse thou seest the things before thée; and the more thy mynd wandreth, the more thy body resteth: as who would say that the workings of the body, are the greatest hinderance and impediment that can bée to the peculiar doings of the mynd. And this abilitie of vnderstan∣ding may bee lik••ned to a man, which though he haue lost both his hand and his Lute, ceasseth not therefore to bee a man still, and to doe the true déedes of a man, that is to wit, to discourse of things, to mynd them, to vse reason and such like; yea and to be both a Lu∣ter and a man as he was afore, notwithstanding that he cannot put his Luteplaying in exercise for want of instruments. Nay, (which more is) this vnderstanding part groweth so much the stronger and greater, as it is lesse occupyed and busied about these bace and corruptible things, & is altogether drawen home wholly to it selfe; as is to be seene in those which want their eyes, whose mynds are commonly most apt to vnderstand, and most firme to remember. Doe we debate of a thing in our selues? Neither our body nor our Sences are busied about it. Doe wee will the same? As little doe they stirre for that too. To vnderstand and to will (which are the o∣perations of the mynd,) the Soule hath no néede of the bodie; and

as for working and being, they accompany one another sayth Ari∣stotle. Therefore to continue still in being, the Soule hath not to doe with the body, nor any néede of the body: but rather, to woorke well and to be well, the Soule ought eyther to be without the bo∣die, or at leastwise to be vtterly vnsubiect to the bodie.

Yea (say they) but yet we see men forgoe their reason, as fooles and mealancholike persons: and seeing it is forgone, it may also bée corrupted; and if corrupted, it may also dye: for what is death but an vtter and full corruptnesse? Nay, thou shouldest say rather, I haue seene diuers which hauing seemed to haue lost their right wittes, haue recouered them againe by good dyet and medicinable drinkes. But had they bene vtterly lost and forgone, no Phisicke could haue restored them agayne: and had they bene vtterly peri∣shed, the parties themselues should haue had neither sence nor life remayning. Therefore of necessitie the sould of them was as sound as afore. But our Soules wee see not otherwise than by the bodie and by the instruments of the bodie as it were by Spectacles; and our mynd which beholdeth and seeth through his imaginations as it were through a Clowde, is after a sort trubbled by the dimining of the Spectacles and by the smoakinesse of the imaginations. Af∣ter that maner the Sunne seemeth to be dimmed and eclipsed; and that is but by the comming of the Moone or of some Clowdes be∣twéene him and vs; for in his light there is no abatement at all. Likewise our eysight conceyueth things according to the Specta∣cles wherethrough it looketh, or according to the colour that ouer∣thwarteth the things which it looketh vpon. Ta•••• away the impe∣diments, and our eyes shall see cléere: purge away the humours, and our imagination shall bee pure: and so our vnderstanding shall see as bright as it did afore, euen as the Sunne shineth after the putting away of the Clowdes. And it fareth not with our Soules as it doth with our bodies, which after a long sicknesse reteyne still eyther a hardnesse of the Splene, or a shortnesse of breath, or a fal∣ling of the Rhewme vppon the Lungs, or a skarre of some great wound that cannot bee worne out because of the breake that was made in the whole. For neither in their vnderstanding, neither in their willes do our Soules feele any abatement, sauing that there abydeth some mayme or blemish in the instruments; to wit (as I will declare hereafter) so farre foorth as it pleaseth GOD for a iust punishment, to put the Soule in subiection to the bodie whose so∣uereyne it was created to haue bene, because it hath neglected the

will of the Creator, to followe the lustes and lykings of the bodie. This appeareth in Lunaticke folkes and such others, which haue their wittes troubled at tymes and by fittes. For they be not vexed but at the stirring of their humours, beeing at other tymes sober and well enough stayed in their wittes. The like is seene in them that haue the falling sicknesse. For their vnderstanding seemeth to be eclipsed, and as it were striken with a Thunderclap, during the tyme of their fittes; but afterward they bée as discréete as though they ayled nothing. To bee short, the body is subiect to a thousand diseases, wherewith wée see the vnderstanding to bee no whit alte∣red, because they touch not the instruments of the Sences and of the Imaginations, which moue the vnderstanding. Troubled it is in déede by those fewe things only, which infect the Sence and the Imagination, which by that meanes report the things vnfaithful∣ly whereon the mynd debateth. Therfore ye shall neuer see any bo∣die out of his wittes or out of his right mynd, in whom the Phisi∣tions may not manifestly perceyue, eyther some default of the in∣struments, as a mishapen and misproportioned head; or els an o∣uerabounding of some melancholike humour, that troubled and marred his bodie afore it troubled or impayred his mynd. And like as the wisest men being deceyued by false Spyes, do make worng deliberations, howbeit yet grounded vpō good reason, which thing they could not doe vnlesse they were wise in déede: So the reason that is in our mynd maketh false discourses, and gathereth wrong conclusions, vppon the false reports of the imaginations; which it could not doe, if it were eyther diminished or impayred, or done a∣way. Whereunto accordeth this auncient saying, That there bee certeyne follyes which none but wise men can commit, and certeyne Errors which none but learned men can fall into: because that in some cases, discretion and wisedome are requi∣site in the partie that is to be deceyued, euen to the intent he may bee deceyued; and learning is required in a man that he may conceyue and hold a wrong opinion. As for example, to be beguyled by a dubbledealing Spy or by the surprising of a cose∣ning letter, belongeth to none but to a wise man. For a grosheaded foole neuer breaketh his brayne about such matters as might bring him to the making of false conclusions by mistaking likelyhoods in stead of truth. Likewise to fall into Heresie by misconceyuing some high and déepe poynt, befalleth not to an ignorant person; for he is not of capacitie, neyther doth his vnderstanding mount so high.

To be short, whosoeuer sayth that mans Soule perisheth with the bodie, because it is troubled by the distemperature or mispropor∣tionatenesse of the bodie; may as well vphold that the Child in the moothers wombe dyeth with his moother, because he moueth with her, and is partaker with her of her harmes and throwes, by reason of the streyt coniunction that is betwéene them; howbeit that many children haue liued safe and sound, notwithstanding that their moo∣thers haue dyed; yea and some haue come into the world euen by the death of their moothers.

And whereas some say, that because our mynd conceyueth not any thing here, but by helpe of Imagination; therfore when the I∣magination is gone with the instruments whereunto it is tyed, the Soule cannot worke alone by it self, nor cōsequently be alone by it selfe: surely it is al one as if they should say, that because the Child being in his moothers wombe taketh nourishment of her blud by his nauill; therfore he cannot liue whē he is come out of her womb, if his nauillstrings be cut off. Nay contrarywise, then is the tyme that the mouth, the tongue, and the other parts of the Childe doe their duetie, which serued erst to no purpose, sauing that they were prepared for the tyme to come. After the same maner also doe wee cherish our mynd by Imagination in this second life; which in the third life being (as ye would say) scaped out of prison, shall begin to vtter his operations by himselfe, and that so much the more cer∣teynly, for that it shall not be subiect to false reports, nor to the sen∣ces eyther inward or outward, but to the very things themselues which it shall haue seene and learned. To bee short, it shall liue, but not in prison; it shall see, but not through Spectacles; it shall vnder∣stand, but not by reports; it shall list, but not by way of lusting: the infirmitie which the bodie casteth vpon it as now, shall then bee a∣way: the force which it bringeth now to the body, shal then be more fresh and liuely than afore. Now then, notwithstanding these vayn reasons of theirs, let vs conclude, That our soule is an vnderstan∣ding or reasonable power, ouer the which neither death nor cor∣ruption haue naturally any power, although it be fitted to the body to gouerne it. And if any man doubt hereof, let him but examine himselfe; for euen his owne doubts will proue it vnto him. Or if he will stand in contention stil, let him fall to reasoning with himselfe: for by concluding his arguments to proue his Soule mortall, he shall giue iudgement himselfe that it is immortall. And if I haue left any thing vnalledged which might make to this purpose, (for

why may I not, séeing that euen the selfsame things which I haue bin able to alledge on the behalf of myne aduersaries, do driue them thereunto?) let vs thinke also that he which feeleth himself conuic∣ted in himselfe, and for whose behoofe and benefite it were greatly, both to beléeue it and to confesse it, néedeth no more diligent proofe than hath bene made alreadie. But if any man will yet of spyght stand wilfully still against himselfe, let him trye how he can make answer to my foresayd arguments: and in the meane while let vs see what the sayd opinion of the wisest men, yea and of the whole world hath bene vpon this mater.

The xv. Chapter.

That the immortalitie of the Soule hath bene taught by the Philosophers of old tyme, and beleeued by all peo∣ple and Nations.

SOothly it had bene a very harde case, if this mynd of ours which searcheth so many things in nature, had not taken some leysure to search it selfe and the nature therof, and by searching atteyned to some poynt in that behalfe. And therefore as there haue at al tymes bene men, so shall we see also that men haue at all tymes beléeued & admitted the immortalitie of the Soule; I say not some one man or some one Nation, but the whole world with generall consent, because all men vniuersally and perticularly haue learned it in one Schoole, and at the mouth of one Teacher, namely euen their owne knowledge in themselues. The holy Scripture which teacheth vs our saluation, vseth no schoole arguments to make vs beléeue that there is a God: and that is because we cannot step out of our selues neuer so little, but wee must néedes finde him present to all our Sences. And it seemeth to speake vnto vs the lesse ex∣presly of the immortalitie of our soules, specially in the first bookes therof, because we cannot enter into our selues be it neuer so little, but we must néedes perceiue it. But inasmuch as from the one end thereof to the other, it declareth vnto vs the will of God: in so do∣ing

it doth vs to vnderstand, that it is a thing wherof it is not law∣full for vs to doubt.* 1.456 And whereas it setteth foorth so precisely from age to age, the great and manifold troubles and paines which good and godly men haue susteyned in indeuering to followe that will; it sheweth infallibly that their so doing was in another respect than for this present wretched life. For who is he that would depart with any péece of his owne lyking in this life, but in hope of better things? and what were it for him to lose his life, if there were not another life after this? This serueth to answer in one word to such as demaund expresse texts of Scripture, and are loth to finde that thing in the Byble, which is cōteyned there, not only in euery leafe but almost in euery sine. For whereas God created man after the world was fully finished and perfected: it was as much as if he had brought him into a Theatre prepared for him, howbeit after ano∣ther sort than all the other liuing things which were to do him ser∣uice. As for Beastes, Birds, Plants, and such other things, the E∣lements brought them foorth: but Man receyued his Soule by in∣spiration from God. Also the brute Beasts are put in subiection to man, but man is in subiection onely vnto God. And the conueying of that good man Henocke out of this life for his godlinesse, was to none other end, but to set him in another life voyd of all euill and full of all good.* 1.457 But when we reade the persecutions of Noe, the o∣uerthwartings of Abraham, the banishment and wayfarings of Iacob, and the distresses of Ioseph, Moyses, and all the residewe of the Fathers; they be all of them demonstrations that they did cer∣teynly trust and beléeue that the Soule is immortall, that there is another life after this, and that there is a iudgement to come. For had they bene of opinion that there is none other life after this; the flesh would haue perswaded them to haue hild themselues in quiet here, and they would haue liked nothing better than to haue follo∣wed swéetly the cōmon trade of the world, Noe among his frends, Abraham among the Chaldees, Moyses in Pharaos Court, and so foorth. So then, although the Scripture seeme to conceale it; yet doth it speake very loude thereof in déede, considering that all the cryes of the good and godly, and all the despayres of the wicked which it describeth vnto vs, doe sound none other thing vnto vs, if we haue eares to heare it. And it may bee, that in the same respect, this article of the Immortalitie of the Soule was not put into the auncient Créede of the Iewes, nor also peculiarly into the Créede of vs Christians, because wee beléeue beyond reason, and this is

within the bounds of reason; and whosoeuer treateth of Religion must néedes presuppose God eternall and man immortall, without the which two, all Religion were in vayne. Also, when we see that Godlinesse, Iustice, and vertue were commended among the Hea∣then of all ages: it is all one as if wee should heare them preach in expresse words the Immortalitie of the Soule. For their so doing is buylded euery whit vppon that, as vppon a foundation without the which those things could not stand. I will spend my goodes or my life for the maintenance of Iustice. What is this Iustice but a vayne name, or to what end haue I so many respects, if I looke for nothing out of this present world here? I will (sayd a man of olde tyme) rather lose euen the reputation of an honest man, thā behaue my selfe otherwise than honestly. But why should I doe so, if I looke for no good in another world, seeing I haue nothing but euill here?* 1.458 Surely if there be none other thing than this life, then is ver∣tue to be vsed no further, than profite and commoditie may growe vpon it; and so should it become a Chaffer and Merchandise, & not vertue in déede. Yet notwithstanding, those are the ordinary spée∣ches, euen of such as speake doubtfully of the Immortalitie of the Soule. Therefore they doe but denye the ground and yet graune the cōsequence; which is all one as if a man bauing first bin burned, should fall to disputing whether fire be hot or no. But now (which is better for vs) I will here gather together their owne spéeches one after another.

Hermes declareth in his Poemander,* 1.459 how at the voyce of the e∣uerlasting, the Elements yéelded forth al reasonlesse liuing wights as it had bin out of their bosomes.* 1.460 But when he commeth to man, he sayth, He made him like vnto himselfe, he linked himself to him as to his Sonne, (for he was beautiful and made after his owne Image) and gaue him al his works to vse at his pleasure. Againe, he exhorteth him to forsake his bodie, (notwithstanding that he woonder greatly at the cunning workmanship thereof) as the very cause of his death, and to manure his Soule which is ca∣pable of immortalitie, & to consider the originall roote from whence it sprang, which is not earthly but heauenly, and to withdraw him∣self euen from his Sences and from their traiterous allurements, to gather himself wholly into that mynd of his which he hath from God, and by the which he following Gods word, may become as GOD. Discharge thy selfe (sayth he) of this body which thou bearest about thee, for it is but a cloke of ignorance, a foun∣dation

of infection, a place of corruptiō, a liuing death, a sen∣sible carryon, a portable graue, and a household theefe. It flat∣tereth thee because it hareth thee, and it hateth thee because it enuieth thee. As long as that liueth, it bereueth thee of life, and thou hast not a greater enemie than that. Now, to what purpose were it for him to forsake this light, this dwellingplace and this life, if he were not sure of a better in another world (as he himselfe sayth more largely afterward?) On the other side, what is the Soule?* 1.461 The Soule (sayth he) is the garment of the mynd, and the garment of the Soule is a certeyne Spirit whereby it is vnited to the bodie. And this Mynd is the thing which wee call properly the Man, that is to say a heauenly wight which is not to bee compared with Beastes, but rather with the Gods of Heauen, if he be not yet more than they. The Heauenly can not come downe to the earth without leauing the Heauen, but Man measureth the Heauen without remouing from the earth.* 1.462 The earthly man then is as a mortall God, and the hea∣uenly God is as an immortall man. To bee short, his conlusion is, That man is dubble, mortall as touching his body, and immor∣tall as touching his Soule, which Soule is the substantiall man and the very man created immediatly of God (fayth he) as y^e light is bred immediatly of the Sunne.* 1.463 And Chalcidius sayth that at his death he spake these wordes. I goe home againe into myne owne Countrie, where my better forefathers and kinsfolk be.

Of Zoroastres who is yet of more antiquitie than Hermes, we haue nothing but fragments. Neuerthelesse, many report this ar∣ticle to be one of his,* 1.464 That mens Soules are immortall, and that one day there shall be a generall rysing againe of their bodies; and the answers of the Wise men of Chaldye (who are the heires of his Doctrine) doe answer sufficiently for him. There is one that exhorteth men to returne with spéede to their heauenly father, who hath sent them from aboue a Soule indewed with much vnder∣standing; and another that exhorteth them to seeke Paradise as the peculiar dwelling place of the Soule. A third sayth that the Soule of man hath God as it were shut vp in it, and that it hath not any mortalitie therein. For (sayth he) the Soule is as it were dronken with God, and sheweth foorth his ••••••uders in the harmonie of this mortall body. And agayne another sayth, It is a cléere fire procée∣ding from the power of the heauenly father, an vncorruptible sub∣stance, and the mainteyner of life, conteyning almost all the whole

world with the full plentie thereof in his bosome. But one of them procéedeth yet further, affirming that he which setteth his mynde vppon Godlinesse, shall saue his body, frayle though it bee. And by those words he acknowledgeth the very glorifying of the bodie.

Now,* 1.465 all these sayings are reported by the Platonists, & name∣ly by Psellus; and they refuse not to be acknowne that Pythagoras and Plato learned thē of the Chaldees; insomuch that some think, that the foresayd Hermes and Zoroastres and the residewe afore∣mentioned, are the same of whom Plato speaketh in his second E∣pistle, and in his eleuenth booke of Lawes, when he sayth that the auncient and holy Oracles are to be beléeued, which affirme mens Soules to bee immortall, and that in another life they must come before a Iudge that will require an account of al their doings. The effect whereof commeth to this, That the Soule of man procéedeth immediatly from God, that is to say, that the father of the bodie is one, and the father of the Soule is another: That the Soule is not a bodily substance, but a Spirit and a light: That at the departure thereof from hence, it is to goe into a Paradise, and therfore ought to make haste vnto death: And that it is so farre from mortalitie, that it maketh euen the body immortall. What can wee say more at this day, euen in the tyme of light wherein we be? Pherecydes* 1.466 the Syrian, the first that was knowne among the Greekes to haue written in prose, taught the same. And that which Virgill sayth in his second Eglog concerning the Drug or Spice of Assyria,* 1.467 and the growing thereof euerywhere, is interpreted of some men to bée ment of the Immortalitie of the Soule, the doctrine whereof Phe∣recydes brought from thence into Greece; namely, that it should be vnderstood euerywhere throughout the whole world. Also Pho∣cylides who was at the same time, speaketh therof in these words.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.

That is to say:* 1.468

The Soule of man immortall is, and neuer weares away With any age or length of tyme, but liueth fresh for ay.

And againe,

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. The Remnants which remaine of men vnburied in the graue, Become as Gods, and in the Heauens a life most blessed haue. For though their bodies turne to dust, as dayly we doe see, Their Soules liue still for euermore from all corruption free.

And in another place he sayes agayne:

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. We hope that we shall come agayne Out of the earth to light more playne.

And if ye aske him the cause of all this: he will answer you in ano∣ther verse thus.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Because the Soule, Gods instrument and Image also is.

Which saying he seemeth to haue taken out of this verse of Sibils.* 1.469

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. In very reason Man should bee The Image and the shape of mee.

Of the same opinion also are Orpheus, Theognis, Homer, He∣siodus, Pindar,* 1.470 and all the Poets of old tyme; which may answer both for themselues and their owne Countries, and for the residue of their ages. Likewise Pythagoras a disciple of Pherecides, held opinion that the Soule is a bodylesse and immortall substance, put into this body as into a Prison for sinning. And whereas the flée∣ting of soules out of one body into another, is fathered vpon him; although the opinion be not directly against the immortalitie of the Soule, yet doe many men thinke that hee hath wrong doone vnto him. And his Disciple Timoeus of Locres reporteth otherwyse of him. For what punishment were it to a voluptuous man, to haue his Soule put into a beast, that he might become the more volup∣tuous without remorse of sinne? Soothly it is all one as if in pu∣nishment of Murder or theft, yée would make the Murderer to cut the throtes of his owne Father and Mother, or the Théef to com∣mit trecherie ageinst God. Howsoeuer the case stand, he teacheth in his verses, that man is of heauenly race, and that (as Iamblichus reporteth) he is set in this world to behold God. And his Disciple Architas sayth,* 1.471 that God breathed reason and vnderstanding into him. Likewise Philolaus affirmeth that the Diuines and Pro∣phets of old time bare record, that the Soule was cuppled with the body for hir sinnes, and buryed in the same as in a Graue. Of Epi∣charmus we haue this saying. If thou beest a good man in thy heart, Death can doe thee no harme, for thy Soule shall liue happyly in heauen, &c. Also of Heraclides we haue this saying, We liue the Death of them (that is to say of the blessed) his mea∣ning is,* 1.472 that we be not buried with our bodyes; and we dye their Lyfe, that is to say, wee bee still after this body of ours is dead. Of the like opinion are Thales, Anaxagoras, and Diogenes concer∣ning

this poynt; yea and so is Zeno too, howbeit that he thought the Soule to bee begotten of Man, wherein hee was contrarie too himselfe. To bée short, scarsly were there any to be found among the men of old time, saue onely Democritus and Epicurus,* 1.473 that held the contrary way; whome the Poete Lucre immitated after∣ward in his verses. Yet notwithstanding when Epicurus should dye, hée commaunded an Anniuersarie or Yéermynd to bee kept in remembrance of hym by his Disciples: so greatly delighted hée in a vayne shadowe of Immortalite, hauing shaken off the very thing it self. And Lucrece* 1.474 (as it is written of him) made his booke béeing mad, at such times as the fittes of his madnesse were off him, sure∣ly more mad when he thought himselfe wysest, than when the fits of his phrensie were strongest vppon him. Whosoeuer readeth the goodly discourses of Socrates vpon his drinking of poyson, as they bee reported by Plato and Xenophon* 1.475 hymselfe; can not doubt of his opiniō in this case. For he not only beléeued it himself, but also perswaded many men to it with liuely reasons, yea and by his own death much more then by all his lyfe. And so ye see we be come vn∣to Plato and Aristotle, with consent of all the wyse men of olde tyme, vngeinsayd of any, sauing of a two or thrée malapert wret∣ches, whom the vngraciousest of our dayes would esteeme but as dronken sottes and dizards. Certesse Plato* 1.476 (who might paraduen∣ture haue heard speake of the bookes of Moyses) doeth in his Ti∣maeus bring in God giuing commaundement to the vndergoddes whom he created, that they should make man both of mortall and of immortall substances. Wherein it may be that he alluded to this saying in Genesis, Let vs make man after our owne Image and lykenesse. In which case the Iewes say that GOD directed his spéeche to his Angels; but our Diuines say hee spake to himselfe. But anon after, both in the same booke and in many other places, Plato* 1.477 (as it were comming to him himselfe ageine,) teacheth that GOD created Man by himselfe, yea and euen his Lyuer and his Brayne and all his Sences; that is to say, the Soule of him, not onely indewed with reason and vnderstanding, but also with sence and abilitie of growing and increasing; and also the instruments whereby the same doe woorke. Moreouer hee maketh such a mani∣fest difference betwéene the Soule and the body; as that hee mat∣cheth them not toogither as matter and forme, as Aristottle doth: but as a Pilot and a Ship, a Commonweale and a Magistrate, an Image and him that beareth it vpon him. What greater thing can

there be than to be like God? Now (sayth Plato in his Phoedon)* 1.478 The Soule of Man is very like the Godhead; Immortall, Rea∣sonable, Vniforme, Vndissoluble, and euermore of one sorte, which are conditions (saith he) in his matters of State) that can not agree but to things most diuine. And therefore at his de∣parting out of the world, he willed his Soule to returne home too her kinred and to her first originall, that is to wit, (as hée himselfe sayth there) to the wyse and immortall Godhead the Fountaine of all goodnes, as called home from banishment into her owne natiue countrie.* 1.479 He termeth it ordinarily 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that is to say, of kin vnto God, and consequently 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that is to say, Euerlasting, and of one selfesame name with the immortall ones, a Heauenly Plant and not a Earthly, rooted in Heauen and not in Earth, begotten from aboue and not héere be∣neath, and finally such as cannot dye heere, forasmuch as it liueth still in another place. To be short, séeing (sayeth he) that it compre∣hendeth the things that are Diuine and immortall, that is to wit, the Godhead, and the things that are vnchaungeable and vncor∣ruptible, as trueth is: it cannot be accounted to be of any other na∣ture than they. The same opinion doth Plutarche also attribute vnto him, which appeareth almost in euery leafe of his writings. As touching the auncienter sort of Platonists, they agree all with one accord in the immortalitie of y^e soule, sauing that some of them deriue it from God, and some from the Soule of the World, some make but the Reason or mynd onely to be immortall, and some the whole Soule: which disagreement may well be salued, if we say that the Soule all whole together is immortall in power or abili∣tie, though the execution and performance of the actions which are to be doone by the body, be forgone with the instruments or mem∣bers of the body.

The disagréement concerning this poynt among such as a man may voutsafe to call by the name of Philosophers, séemeth to haue begonne at Aristotle, howbeit that his Disciples count it a com∣mendation to him, that he hath giuen occasion to doubt of his opi∣nion in that behalfe. For it is certeine that his newfound doctrine of the Eternitie or euerlastingnesse of the World, hath distroubled his brayne in many other things, as commonly it falleth out, that one error bréedeth many other.* 1.480 Because nature (sayth he) could not make euery man particularly to continue for euer by himself, therefore she continueth him in the kind by matching

Male and Female together. This is spoken either grossely or doubtfully. But whereas he sayth that if the Mynd haue any in∣working of it owne without any helpe of the Sences or of the bo∣dy, it may also continue of it selfe, concluding thereuppon that then it may also be separated from the body, as an immortal thing from a thing that is transitorie and mortall: It followeth consequently also, that the Soule may haue continuance of it selfe,* 1.481 as whereof he vttereth these words, namely, That the Soule commeth from without, and not of the seede of Man as the body doth, and that the Soule is the onely part in vs that is Diuine. Now, to be Diuine and to be Humane, to be of séede and to be from without, that is to say, from GOD; are things flat contratrie, whereof the one sort is subiect to corruption, and the other not.* 1.482 In the tenth booke of his Moralls he acknowledgeth two sorts of lyfe in man; the one as in respect that he is composed of Body and Soule, the other as in re∣spect of Mynd onely; the one occupied in the powres which are cal∣led humane and bodily, which is also accompanyed with a felicitie in this lyfe; and the other occupied iu the vertues of the mynd, which is accompanied also with a felictie in another lyfe. This which consisteth in contemplation, is better than the other; and the felicitie thereto belonging, is peculiarly described by him in his bookes of Heauen aboue Tyme, as which consisteth in the franke and frée working of the Mynd, & in beholding the souereine God. And in good sooth,* 1.483 full well doeth Michael of Ephesus vppon this saying of his conclude, that the Soule is immortall; and so must al his morals also néedes do, considering that too liue wel, whether it be to a mans selfe or towards other men, were els a vaine thing and to no purpose but to vexe our minds in this lyfe.* 1.484 In his bookes of the Soule, hee not onely separateth the Body from the Soule, but also putteth a difference betwixt the Soule it selfe & the Mind, terming the Soule the inworking of the body and of the bodily in∣struments; and the mynd that reasonable substance which is in vs, whereof the doings haue no fellowship with the doings of the bo∣dy, and whereof the Soule is (as Plato saieth) but the Garment. This Mynd (sayth he) may be seuered from the body, it is not in any wyse mingled with it, it is of such substaunce as cannot be hurt or wrought vpon, it hath being and continuance ac∣tually and of it selfe;* 1.485 and euen when it is separated from the body, then is it immortall and euerlasting. To be short, it hath not any thing like vnto the body. For it is not any of al those

things which haue being afore it vnderstād them. And there∣fore which of all bodily things can it be? And in another place he sayeth thus: As concerning the Mynd, and the contempla∣tiue powre, it is not yet sufficiently apparant what it is. Ne∣uerthelesse it seemeth to bee another kind of Soule, and it is that onely which can bee separated from the corruptible, as the which is Ayeuerlasting. To be short, when as he putteth this question, whether a Naturall Philosopher is to dispute of all ma∣ner of Soules, or but onely of that Soule which is immateriall: it followeth that he graunteth that there is such a one. And againe, when as he maketh this Argument; Looke what God is euerla∣stingly, that are wee in possibilitie according to our measure: but hee is euerlastingly separated from bodily things, there∣fore the time will come that wee shall bee so too. He taketh it that there is an Image of God in vs, yea euen of the Diuine na∣ture which hath continuance of itselfe. Uery well and rightly ther∣fore doth Simplicius gather therof, the immortalitie of the Soule. For it dependeth vpon this separation,* 1.486 & vpō continuance of being of it self. Besides this he sayth also, that hunting of beasts is graū∣ted to man by the lawe of Nature, because that thereby man cha∣lengeth nothing but that which naturally is his owne. By what right I pray you, if there be no more in himself than in them? And what is there more in him than in them, if they haue a soule equall vnto his?* 1.487 Herevnto make all his commendations of Godlines, of Religion, of blessednes, and of contemplation. For too what ende serue all these, which doe but cumber vs here belowe? Therefore surely it is to be cōcluded, that as he spake doubtfully in some one place, so he both termed and also taught to speake better in many other places, as appeareth by his Disciple Theophrastus, who speaketh yet more euidently thereof than he.

The Latins* 1.488 (as I haue sayd before) fell to Philosophie some∣what later then the Gréekes. And as touching their common opi∣nion, the exercises of superstition that were among them, the ma∣ner of speeches which we marke in their Histories, their contempt of death, and their hope of another life; can giue vs sufficient war∣rant thereof. Cicero* 1.489 speaketh vnto vs in these words. The origi∣nall of our Soules and Myndes cannot bee found in this lowe earth: for there is not any mixture in them, or any compoun∣ding that may seeme to bee bred or made of the earth. Nei∣ther is there any moysture, any wyndinesse, or any firy matter

in them. For no such thing could haue in it the powre of me∣morie, Vnderstanding, and conceit, to beate in mynd things past, to foresee things to come, and to consider things pre∣sent, which are matters altogither Diuine. And his conclusion is, that therefore they bee deriued from the Mynd of GOD, that is to say, not bred or begotten of Man, but created of God: not bo∣dily, but vnbodily; wherevpon it followeth that the Soule cannot be corrupted by these transitorie things. The same Cicero* 1.490 in ano∣ther place sayeth that betwéene God and Man there is a kinred of reason, as there is betwéene man & man a kinred of blud. That the fellowship betwéene man and man commeth of the mortall body, but the fellowship betwéene God and man commeth of God him∣selfe who created the Soule in vs. By reason whereof (sayth hée) we may say we haue Alyance with the heauenly sort, as folke that are descended of the same race and roote; whereof that we may euermore be myndfull, we must looke vp to heauen as to the place of our birth, whether we must one day returne. And therfore yet once againe he concludeth thus of himself. Think not (sayth he) that thou thy selfe art mortall,* 1.491 it is but thy body that is so. For thou art not that which this outward shape pretendeth to be, the Mynd of Man is the man in deede, and not this lumpe which may bee poynted at with ones Fingar. Assure thy selfe therefore that thou art a GOD; For needes must that be a God, which liueth, perceyueth, remembereth, foreseeth, and finally reigneth in thy body as the Great God the maker of all things doth in the vniuersall world. For as the eternall God ruleth and moueth this transitory world, so doth the immortall Spirit of our soule moue & rule our fraile body. Hereuntoo consent all the writers of his tyme, as Ouid, Virgill and others, whose verses are in euery mans remembrance.

There wanted yet the wight that should all other wights exceede* 1.492 In loftie reach of stately Mynd, who like a Lord in deede Should ouer all the resdewe reigne; Then shortly came forth Man, Whom eyther he that made the world and all things els began, Created out of seede diuine, or els the earth yet yoong And lately parted from the Skie, the seede thereof vncloong Reteyned still in frutefull wombe: which Iapets sonne did take, And tempering it with water pure, a wight thereof did make, Which should resemble euen the Gods which souereine state doe hold. And where all other things the ground with groueling eye behold;

He gaue to man a stately looke and full of Maiestie Commaunding him with stedfast looke to face the starry Skie.

Here a man might bring in almost all Senecaes wrytings;* 1.493 but I will content my selfe with a fewe sayings of his. Our Soules (sayth he) are a part of Gods Spirit, and sparkes of holy things shining vpon the earth. They come from another place than this lowe one. Whereas they seeme to bee conuersant in the bodie, yet is the better part of them in Heauen, alway neere vnto him which sent them hither. And how is it possible that they should be from beneath, or from anywhere els thā from aboue, seeing thei ouerpasse al these lower things as nothing, and hold skorne of all that euer we can hope or feare? Thus ye sée how he teacheth that our Soules come into our bodies from aboue. But whether go they agayne, when they depart hence? Let vs here him what he sayes of the Lady Martiaes Sonne that was dead. He is now euerlasting (sayth he) and in the best state,* 1.494 be∣rest of this earthly baggage which was none of his, & set free to himselfe. For these bones, these sinewes, this coate of skin, this face, and these seruiceable hands, are but fetters and pri∣sons of the Soule. By them the Soule is ouerwhelmed, beaten downe, and chased away. It hath not a greater batterll, than with that masse of flesh. For feare of being torne in peeces, it laboureth to returne from whence it came, where it hath rea∣die for it an happie and euerlasting rest. And agayn: This Soule cannot be made an Outlaw: for it is a kin to the Gods, equall to the whole world, and to all tyme; and the thought or con∣ceyt thereof goeth about the whole Heauen, extending it self from the beginning of al tyme to the vttermost poynt of that which is to come. The wretched coarse being the Iayle & set∣ters of the Soule, is tossed to and fro. Vpon that are tormēts, murthers, and diseases executed. As for the Soule, it is holy and euerlasting, and cannot bee layd hand on. When it is out of this body, it is at libertie and set free from all bondage, and is cōuersant in that beautifull place (wheresoeuer it be) which receyueth mens Soules into the blessed rest thereof as soone as they bee deliuered from hence. To bee short, he seemeth to pricke very nere to the rysing againe of the dead. For in a certeyne Epistle to Lucilius, his words are these. Death, wherof we be so much afrayd, doth not bereue vs of life, but only discontinew it for a tyme; and a day will come that shall bring vs to light

agayne. This may suffise to giue vs knowledge of the opinion of that great personage, in whom wee see that the more he grewe in age, the nerer he came still to the true birth. For in his latest bookes he treateth alwaies both more assuredly and more euidētly therof.

Also the saying of Phauorinus is notable.* 1.495 There is nothing great on earth, (sayth he) but Man; and nothing great in Man, but his Soule. If thou mount vp thether, thou moūtest aboue Heauen. And if thou stoope downe agayne to the bodie, and compare it with the Heauen; it is lesse than a Flye, or rather a thing of nothing. At one word, this is as much to say, as that in this clod of clay, there dwelleth a diuine and vncoruptible nature: for how could it els be greater than the whole world?

As touching the Nations of old tyme,* 1.496 we reade of them all, that they had certeyne Religions and diuine Seruices, so as they belée∣ued that there is a Hell, and certeyne fieldes which they call the E∣lysian fields, as we see in the Poets Pindarus, Diphilus, Sopho∣cles, Euripides & others.* 1.497 The more supersticious that they were, the more sufficiently doe they witnesse vnto vs what was in their Conscience. For true Religion and Superstition haue both one ground, namely the Soule of man; and there could be no Religion at all,* 1.498 if the Soule liued not when it is gone hence. Wee reade of the Indians, that they burned themselues afore they came to ex∣treme oldage, terming it the letting of men loose, and the fréeing of the Soule from the bodie: and the sooner that a man did it, the wi∣ser was he estéemed. Which custome is obserued still at this day among the people that dwell by the Riuer Niger otherwise called the people of Senega in Affricke, who offer themselues willingly to be buryed quicke with their Maisters. All the demonstrations of Logicke and Mathematicke (sayth Zeno) haue not so much force to proue the immortalitie of the soule, as this only doing of theirs hath. Also great Alexander hauing taken prisoners ten of their Philosophers, (whom they call Gimnosophists) asked of one of them to trye their wisedome, whether there were mo••men aliue or dead. The Philosopher answered, that there were moe aliue: Be∣cause (sayd he) there are none dead. Ye may wel think they gaue a drye mocke to all the arguments of Aristotle and Callisthenes, which with all their Philosophie had taught their scholer Alexan∣der so euill. Of the Thracians, we reade that they sorrowed at the birth of men and reioyced at the death of them, yea euen of their owne chidren. And that was because they thought that which wee

call death, not to be a death in déede, but rather a very happie birth. And these be the people whom Herodotus reporteth to haue bene called the Neuerdying Getes, and whom the Greekes called the Neuerdying Getes or Thracians. Who were of opinion that at their departing out of this world, they went to Zamolxis or Ge∣beleizie,* 1.499 that is to say (after y^e interpretation of the Getish or Go∣tish tongue) to him that gaue them health, saluation or welfare, and gathered them together. The like is sayd of the Galles, chiefly of the inhabiters about Marsilles and of their Druydes; of the He∣truscians and their Bishops; and of the Scythians and their Sa∣ges; of whom all the learning and wisedome was grounded vpon this poynt. For looke how men did spread abroad, so also did this doctrine, which is so déeply printed in man, that he cannot but carie it continually with him. Which thing is to bee seene yet more in that which wee reade concerning the hearers of Hegesias the Cy∣renian, who dyed willingly after they had heard him discourse of the state of mens Soules after this life; and likewise concerning Cleombrotus the Ambraciote, who slewe himselfe when he had read a certeyne treatise of the immortalitie of the Soule. For had it not bene a doctrine most euident to mans wit, they would neuer haue bin caried so farre by it, as to the hurting of their bodies. And if among so many people, there be perchaunce some fewe wretched caytifes, that haue borne themselues on hand the contrarie; which thing neuerthelesse they could neuer yet fully perswade themselues to be out of all doubt or question: surely wee may beléeue that they had very much adoe and were vtterly besotted like Drunkards, a∣fore they could come to that poynt: so as wee may well say of them as Hierocle* 1.500 the Pythagorist sayde: namely, That the wicked would not haue their Soules to bee immortall, to the intent they might not be punished for their faults: But yet that they preuent the sentence of their Iudge, by condemning them∣selues vnto death afore hand. But if they wil neither heare God, nor the whole world, nor themselues: let them at leastwise hearken to the Deuill as well as they doe in other things; who (as sayth Plutark* 1.501) made this answer to Corax of Naxus and others in these verses.

It were a great wickednesse for thee to say The Soule to be mortall or for to decay.

And vnto Polytes he answered thus.

As long as the Soule to the body is tyde, Though loth, yet all sorowes it needes must abyde. But when fro the body Death doth it remoue, To heauen by and by then it styes vp aboue. And there euer youthfull in blisse it doth rest, As God by his wisedome hath set for the best.

Not that any saying of the Deuilles owne is to bee alledged in witnesse of the trueth; furtherfoorth than to shewe that he speakes it by compulsion of Gods mightie power, as wicked men diuers tymes doe when they be vpon the Racke. Now we bée come to the time or nere to the time that the heauenly doctrine of Iesus Christ was spred ouer y^e whole world, vnto which tyme I haue proued y^e continuall succession of that doctrine, which could not but bee vnse∣parably ioyned with the succession of men.* 1.502 But frō this tyme foorth it came so to light among all Nations and all persons; that Sainct Austin after a sort tryumphing ouer vngodlinesse, cryeth out in di∣uers places, saying: Who is now so very a foole or so wicked, as to doubt still of the immortalitie of the Soule? Epictetus a Stoikphilosopher, who was had in very great reputation among all the men of his tyme, is full of goodly sayings to the same pur∣pose. May wee not bee ashamed (sayth he) to leade an vnhonest life,* 1.503. and to suffer our selues to be vanquished by aduersitie? we be alyed vnto God, we came from thence, and wee haue leaue to returne thether from whence we came. One while, as in re∣spect of the Soule, he termeth man the ofspring of GOD, or as it were a braunch of the Godhead; and another while he calleth him adiuine ympe or a spark of God: by all which words (howbeit that they be somewhat vnproper) (for what wordes can a man finde to fit that matter?) he sheweth the vncorruptiblenesse of the substance of mans Soule. And whereas the Philosopher Simplicius* 1.504 hath so diligently commented vppon his bookes, it doth sufficiently an∣swer for his opiniō in that case, without expressing his words here. Plotinus* 1.505 the excellentest of al the Platonists, hath made nine trea∣tises expressely concerning the nature of the Soule, besides the things which he hath written dispersedly heere and there in other places. His chiefe conlusions are these. That mens Soules pro∣céede not of their bodies, nor of the seede of the Parents, but come from aboue, and are as ye would say graffed into our bodies by the hand of God: That the Soule is partly tyed to the body and to the instruments thereof; and partly franke, frée, workfull, & continuing

of it selfe; and yet notwithstanding that it is neither a body nor the harmonie of the body, but (if wee consider the life and operation which it giueth to the body) it is after a sort the perfection [or rather the perfector] of the body; and if wee haue an eye to the vnderstan∣ding whereby it guydeth the mouings and doings of the body; it is as a Gouernour of the body: That the further it is withdrawne from the Sences, the better it discourseth of things; insomuch that when it is vtterly separated from them, it vnderstandeth things without discoursing, reasoning or debating, yea euen in a moment; because this debating is but a certeyne lightening or brightnesse of the mynde, which now taketh aduisement in matters whereof it doubteth, and it doubteth wheresoeuer the body yéeldeth any impe∣diments vnto it; but it shall neither doubt nor séeke aduisement any more when it is once out of the body, but shall conceyue the trueth without wauering: That the Soule in the body is not properly there as in a place, or as in a ground, because it is not conteyned or comprehended therein, and may also bee separated from it; but ra∣ther if a man had eyes to see it withall, he should see that the bodie is in the Soule, as an accessary is in a principall, or as a thing con∣teyned in a conteyner, or a sheading or liquid thing in a thing that is not liquid, because the Soule imbraceth the body, and quickneth it, and moueth it equally and alike in all parts. That euery abilitie thereof is in euery part of the bodie, as much in one part as in ano∣ther, as a whole Soule in euery parte; notwithstanding that euery seuerall abilitie thereof seeme to bee seuerally in some particuler member or part, because the instruments thereof are there; as the sensitiue abilitie seemeth to rest in the head, the yrefull in the heart, and the quickning in the Liuer, because the Sinewes, Hartstrings and Uaynes come from those parts: Whereas the reasonable po∣wer is not in any part, sauing so farre foorth as it worketh and hath his operation there, neither hath it any néede of place or instrument for the executing of it selfe. And to be short, that the Soule is a life by it selfe, a life all in one, vnpartable; which causeth to growe, and groweth not it selfe; which goeth throughout the bodie, and yet is not conteyned of the bodie; which vniteth the Sences, and is not deuided by the Sences; and therfore that it is a bodilesse substance, which cannot bee touched neither from within nor from without, hauing no néede of the bodie eyther outwardly or inwardly, & con∣sequently is immortall, diuine, yea and almost a very God: Which things he proueth by many reasons, which were too long to bee re∣hearsed

here.* 1.506 Yea he procéedeth so farre as to say, y^t they which are passed into another world, haue their memorie still, notwithstan∣ding that to some mens seeming it goe away with the Sences as the treasury of the Sences. Howbeit he affirmeth it to be the more excellent kynd of memorie; not that which calleth things agayne to mynd as alreadie past, but that which holdeth and beholdeth them still as alwaies present. Of which two sorts, this latter he calleth Myndfulnes, and the other he calleth Rememberance. I will add but onely one sentence more of his for a full president of his Doc∣trine. The Soule (sayth he) hath had companie with the Gods, and is immortal; and so would we say of it (as Plato affirmeth) if we sawe it fayre and cleere. But forasmuch as we see it com∣monly troubled, we thinke it not to bee eyther diuine or im∣mortall, howbeit that he which will discerne the nature of a thing perfectly, must consider it in the very owne substance or being, vtterly vnmingled with any other thing. For whatsoe∣uer els is added vnto it, doth hinder the perfect discerning of the same. Therfore let euery man behold himself naked with∣out any thing saue himselfe, so as he looke vppon nothing els than his bare Soule: and surely when he hath vewed himselfe in his owne nature merely as in respect of his Mynd, he shall beleeue himselfe to bee immortall. For he shall see that his Mynd, ameth not properly at the sensible and mortall things, but that by a certeine euerlasting power, it taketh hold of the things that are euerlasting, and of whatsoeuer is possible to be conceiued in vnderstanding: insomuch that euen it self be∣commeth after a sort a very World of vnderstanding & light. This is against those which pretend a weakenesse of the Soule, by reason of the inconueniences which it indureth very often in the bodie.

Of the same opinion are Numenius, Iamblichus, Porphirius, and Proclus, notwithstanding that now and then they passe their bounds, suffering their wits to runne royet. For in their Philoso∣phie they had none other rule, than only the drift of their owne rea∣son. It was commonly thought that Alexander of Aphrodise be∣léeued not the immortalitie of the Soule,* 1.507 because he defined it to be the forme of the body proceeding of the mixture & temperature of the Elements. Surely these words of his doe vs to vnderstand, either that he ment to define but the sensitiue lyfe onely (as many others doe) and not the reasonable soule; or els that he varieth from

himselfe in other places. And in very déede hee sayeth immediatly afterward, that he speaketh of the things which are subiect to ge∣neration and corruption. But speaking of the Soule he sayeth it is separable, vnmateriall, vnmixed, and voyd of passions, vnlesse per∣chaunce we may thinke as some doe, that by this Soule he meane but onely God, and not also the Soule that is in vs; for the which thing he is sharply rebuked by Themistius, who notwithstanding speaketh neuer a whit better thereof himselfe. Howsoeuer he deale elsewhere, these words of his following are without any doubtful∣nes at all. The Soule (sayth he) which is in vs, commeth from without and is vncorruptible.* 1.508 I say vncorruptible because the nature thereof is such, and it is the very same that Aristotle affirmeth to come from without. And in his second booke of Problemes, searching the cause why the abilities of the Soule are oftentimes impeached: If a mans brayne be hurt (sayth he) the reasonable soule dooth not well execute the actions that de∣pend thereon. But yet for all that, it abydeth still in itselfe, vn∣chaungeable of nature, abilitie and power, through the im∣mortalitie thereof. And if it recouer a sound instrument, it putteth her abilities in execution as well as it did afore. But I wil reason more at large hereafter against the opinion that is fa∣thered vpon him.

What shall we say of Galene, (who fathereth the causes of all things as much as he can, vpon the Elements and the mixture and agréeble concord of them) if after his disputing against his owne Soule,* 1.509 he be constreyned to yéeld that it is immortall? Surely in his booke concerning the manners of the Soule he doeth the worst that he can against Plato: and in another place hee doubteth whe∣ther it be immortall, and whether it haue continuance of it selfe or no. Yet notwithstanding, in his booke of the doctrine of Hippocra∣tes and Plato,* 1.510 It must needes be graunted (sayeth hee) that the Soule is either a sheere body and of the nature of the Skye, (as the Stoiks & Aristotle himself are inforced to confesse) or els a bodilesse substance, whereof the body is as it were the Cha∣riot, and whereby it hath fellowship with other bodyes. And it appeareth that hee inclyneth to this latter part: For hee maketh the vitall spirit to be the excellentest of all bodily things,* 1.511 and yet he graūteth the Soule to bee a farre more excellent thing than that. What shall we then doe? Let vs wey his words set downe in his booke of the conception of a Child in the Moothers Wombe. The

Soule of Man (sayeth he) is an influence of the vniuersall Soule that descendeth from the heauenly Region, a substance that is capable of knowledge, which aspyreth alwayes to one sub∣stance lyke vnto it selfe, which leaueth all these lower things to seeke the things that are aboue, which is partaker of the heauenly Godhead, and which by mounting vp to the behol∣ding of things that are aboue the heauens, putteth it selfe in∣to the presence of him that ruleth all things. Were it reason then that such a substance comming from elsewhere than of the bo∣dy, and mounting so farre aboue the body, should in the ende dye with the body, because it vseth the seruice of the body?

Now hereuntoo I could adde infinite other sayings of the aun∣cient* 1.512 authors both Greeke and Latin Philosophers, Poets, and Orators from age to age, wherein they treate of the iudgement to come, of the reward of good men, of the punishment of euill men, of Paradise and of Hell, which are appendants to the immortalitie of the Soule: but as now I will but put the reader in mynd of them by the way, reseruing them to their peculiar places. To bée short, let vs runne at this day from East to West, and from North to South, I say not among the Turkes, Arabians, or Persians, (for their Alcoran teacheth them that mans Soule was breathed into him of God,* 1.513 and consequently that it is vncorruptible) but euen a∣mong the most barbarous, ignorant & beastly people of the Wold, I meane the very Caribies and Cannibals;* 1.514 and we shall find this beléefe receiued and imbraced of them all. Which giueth vs to vn∣derstand, that it is not a doctrine inuented by speculations of some Philosophers, conueyed from Countrie to Countrie by their disci∣ples, perswaded by likelyhods of reasons, or (too be short) entered into mans wit by his eares: but a natiue knowledge, which euery man findeth and readeth in himself, which he carieth euerywhere a∣bout with himselfe, and which is as easie to bée perswaded vnto all such as viewe themselues in themselues, as it is easie to perswade a man that neuer sawe his owne face, to beléeue that he hath a face, by causing him to behold himselfe in a glasse.

There remayne yet two opinions, to be confuted. The one is the opinion of Auerrhoes,* 1.515 and the other is the opinion of Alexan∣der of Aphrodise, who affirme themselues to hold both of Aristo∣tle; namely in that they vpholde that there is but one vniuersall reasonable Soule or mynd, which worketh al our discourses in vs, howbeit diuersly in euery seuerall person. And this thing (if wee

beléeue Auerrhoes) is done according to the diuersitie of y^e Phan∣tasies or Imaginations wherewith the mynd is serued as with in∣struments. But if we beléeue Alexander,* 1.516 it is done according too the diuersities of the capable mind as they terme it, that is to say, of the abilitie or capabilitie that is in men to vnderstand things, by receyuing the impression of the vniuersall mynd that worketh into euery of them which in respect thereof is called of them the woor∣ker. Soothly these opinions are such as may bee disprooued in one worde. For this onely one Mynd, whether in possibilitie or in ac∣tion, could not haue receiued or imprimted in euery man one selfe∣same common beléef and conceit of the immortalitie of the Soule, in so great diuersitie of imaginations, and in so many Nations, as we sée doe beléeue it, considering that the very same conceit is di∣rectly repugnant against it. Nay, it may well bée sayde that Auer∣rhoes and Alexander had very diuers conceits and imaginations one from another, and very contrary to all other mens, seeing they had so diuers and cōtrarie opinions imprinted either in their mind or in their imagination. Howbeit forasmuch as there may be some, y^e will make a doubt of it; Let vs examine them seuerally yet more aduisedly.* 1.517 First Auerrhoes will néedes beare Aristotle on hand, that Aristotle is of that opinion. Let vs see how this surmize of his can agrée with the propositions which Aristotle hath left vs. Aristotle telleth vs that the Soule is knit to the body as y^e forme or shape too the matter; that the Soule hath thrée chiefe powers, namely of lyfe, of sence, and of vnderstanding; and that the vnder∣standing part conteineth in his power both the other two powers, as a Fiuesquare conteineth both a Fowersquare and a Triangle.* 1.518 Whereupon it followeth that if any one of the three powers of the Soule be ioyned to the body as a forme to the matter; all the thrée be ioyned so to, as which are all in one soule as in their roote. Now Auerrhoes neither can nor will deny that the powers of growing and of perceiuing by the sences are ioyned after that maner too the body; and therfore it followeth that the vnderstanding power is to ioyned also, and consequently that according to Aristotle, as euery body hath his forme, so euery body hath his Soule.* 1.519 The same A∣ristotle findeth fault with the former Philosophers for holding o∣pinion that a Soule might passe out of one man into another: be∣cause (sayeth he) that euery certeyne Soule must needes be appor∣tioned and appoynted to some one certeine body. Now looke by what Soule a man liueth, by the same Soule doth he vnderstand:

for it is but one Soule indued with three diuers abilities, as hee himselfe teacheth opently. One vnderstauding or Mynd therefore, must (according to Aristotle) worke but in one seuerall body, and not in many bodyes. Also according to Aristotle, a Man & a Beast agree in this, that both of them haue one sensitiue power and one selfsame imagination of things perceiued by the Seuces, & that they differ in this, that man hath yet further a mynd and reason a∣boue the beast, which thing the beast hath not. Now if this Under∣standing or Mynd be without the man, as the Sonne is without the Chamber that it shineth into and inlighteneth; then cannot he be called reasonable or indewed with vnderstanding, neither doth he consequently differ from a beast. For the difference must bee in nature, and not in accident. And so should it insue that Aristotles foresaid definition of a man is false, as if he should define a Chāber by the shyning of the Sunne into it: Or say that a Dog differeth not from a man in kind; yea and that Beasts are eapable of vnder∣standing, forasmuch as they haue Imagination ready aforehand to receiue the influence thereof as well as wee. But Aristotle is al∣waies one in his defining both of beast & of man; and Auerrhoes also holdeth himself to it, without doubting thereof at all. This conclusion therfore cannot in anywise be vpheld by such grounds.

Againe, if there bee not in euery seuerall man a seuerall mynd, but onely one vniuersall mynd common to all men, which becom∣meth diuers by the onely diuersitie of our imaginations: Then in respect that we haue sundrie imaginations, wee shall bee sundrie li∣uing wights; and in respect that we haue al but one mynd, we shall bee all but one man. For man is not man in respect of the sensitiue power, but in respect of the reasonable part which is the mind. But Aristotle graunteth that we be not only diuers liuing wights, but also diuers men. And therefore he must néedes meane also, that we haue not only diuers imaginations, but also diuers mynds. Now besides many other Reasons that might be alledged, ye might add this also, That otherwise Aristotles Moralles and his discourses concerning Iustice, Fréewill, the Immortalitie of the Soule, the happie blisse, the reward of the good, and the paynes of the wicked, were vtterly frutelesse and to no purpose: For as our fancies or y∣maginations did come and goe, so would al those things come and go likewise; and so should they haue no continuance of themselues, but only be as a shadowe and vayne fantasie. But let Aristotle a∣lone, (for he hath wrong) and let vs come to the matter it self. The

Philosophers doe ordinarily make a dubble mynd; the one which they call possible or in possibilitie, which is capable and of abilitie to vnderstand things; and this they liken to a smooth table; the o∣ther they call working or workfull, which bringeth the abilitie into act, whereas notwithstanding they be not two mynds, but two se∣uerall abilities of only one mynd. Now, as for this abilitie or pos∣sibilitie of vnderstanding, we affirme it to be in the Soule of euery man. Contrarywise, Auerrhoes affirmed onely one vniuersall ca∣pable mynd to be shed abroad euery where throughout all men; and that the same is diuersly perfected and brought into act in euery se∣uerall man, according to the diuersitie of the imaginations which the man tonceyueth, euen by the helpe or influence of the sayd vni∣uerall workfull mynd, which he sayth is also a substaunce seuered from man, and (in respect of the vnderstanding in possibilitie) is as the Sunne is to the sight of our eyes; and the vnderstāding in pos∣sibilitie is to the imaginations, as the sight is vnto colours. Now, I demaund first of all, whether these vniuersall Mynds of his, bee substances created or vncreated. If they bee created, where becom∣meth then his conclusion, That the world is without beginning, and without ending, seeing that he will haue them to be continued euerlastingly in all men that haue bene, are, or shall be? If they bee vncreated, how can so excellent substances bee made subiect to our fond imaginations, to yéeld influence into them at their pleasures? Or rather how happeneth it that they correct them not? How hap∣peneth it that thei leaue them in such errors, yea euen in the know∣ledge of themselues, seeing that by the erring of the imaginations, the very vnderstanding and reason themselues must also néedes be so often beguyled? Againe, as concerning these substances, which extend into so many places; are they Bodies or Spirits? How can they be Bodies, seeing they be in infinite places at one instant, and do infinite things, yea and flat contraries? And if they be Spirits, doth it notfollow thervpō, that they be wholly in al men, & wholly in euery man; that is to say, that euery man hath them whole to himselfe? And therefore that if they bee deceyued by the fantasie of any one man, they be consequently deceyued in all men? And wher∣of comes it then, that one man ouercommeth his imaginations, and another man not? Or that one man resisteth them, and another suffereth himselfe to be caryed away by them? Moreouer, who can denye that a man willeth things, whereof he hath vnderstanding; and likewise that he willeth some things which he vnderstandeth

not; and that he vnderstandeth some things which he willeth not? And also that he willeth things euen contrary to his appetites, and concludeth oftentymes contrary to his imaginations, as commeth to passe in Dreames and in Lookingglasses; which thing the brute Beastes doe not? When a man willeth contrary to his appetites, willeth he not contrary to his sences, yea and contrary to his ima∣gination too? for what els is fantasie or imagination, than the re∣bounding backe of the sences? And if this workfull vnderstanding be the only worker in his possible vnderstanding by meane of ima∣gination; how commeth it to passe that a man willeth contrary to his imagination? Againe, when either in dreaming or in debating, reason concludeth cleane contrary to that which fancie or imagina∣tion offereth; wherof commeth it that a man is contrary to himself, or that the déede is contrary both to that which imprinted it, and to that wherein it is imprinted? Also what els is imagination (accor∣ding to the opinion of Auerrhoes,) than a certeyne operation an∣nexed to the bodie, steaming vp from the Hart to the Brayne? And on the contrary part who can say nay, but that the Will and Un∣derstanding are able to performe their operations without the in∣struments of the body, seeing that a man doth both will and debate things that are most repugnant to the body?* 1.520 Yea and that (as A∣ristotle sayth) those bee not actions which passe into the outward man, but those which abyde within and make perfect the inner mā? And who can make Will and Understanding to be things depen∣ding vpon imagination, seeing that both waking and sléeping and all maner of waies els, they dayly vtter infinite iudgements and determinations against it? Now, if we haue nothing in vs aboue Imagination: then considering that wee doe both will and vnder∣stand, it must needes bee that this power or abilitie to will and vn∣derstand is shed into vs from without. And if it be but only one v∣niuersally in all men; then seeing that the actions thereof are execu∣ted without the imagination, without the sences, and without the instruments of the bodie, yea and against them: it followeth that it willeth and vnderstandeth in vs whatsoeuer it liketh and listeth, euen in despite of all impediments and lets of the bodie; and that as it is but one, so it shall will but one selfsame thing, and likewise al∣so vnderstand but one selfesame thing in all men. For if (as Ari∣stotle confesseth) our imaginations make not our will and reason subiect vnto them; much lesse doe they make the foresayd vniuersall mynd subiect to them as Auerrhoes pretendeth. But now contra∣riwise

wee see there bee as many Willes as men, yea euen in one matter; and that the vnderstandings of men are not onely diuers, but also contrarie. It followeth then that euery particular person hath in that behalfe a particular substaunce, which willeth and vn∣derstandeth, franke and free from all imaginations whensoeuer it listeth to retyre into it selfe; and not that there is but one vniuersall mynd which willeth and vnderstandeth all things in all men. Be∣sides this, by the iudgement of Aristotle as I sayd afore, this vni∣uersall mynd could not worke will and vnderstanding in vs: for to will and vnderstand (sayth he) are operations that passe not into the matter nor into the outward thing, but abide stil in the worker, that is to say in the mynd, as actions and perfections thereof.

Let vs yet agayne take of that which hath bin sayd afore. If the sayd vniuersall only one working mynd, haue wrought from euer∣lasting in the sayd vniuersall only one capable mynd, by the Ima∣ginations of men: then hath the knowledge of all things bin euer∣more imprinted in the sayd capable mynd; for it shal euermore haue brought the abilitie into act: And therwithal, the working and per∣fection of the thing that is euerlasting, shall haue depended vpon a thing that is temporall; which is vnpossible. And although Auer∣rhoes supposed not the World to be euerlasting: yet notwithstan∣ding, the sayd capable mynd which hath bene set a worke so many hundred yéeres, by so many imaginations of men, and in so many sundry Nations, could not now méete with any newe thing wher∣of it had not the knowledge afore. For this capable mynd (saith A∣uerrhoes) is a certeine spirituall substance, which spreadeth it self foorth into all men and into all ages, and the nature of such sort of substaunces is to be all in the whole, and all in euery part thereof. For they bee not tyed to any one place, but are wheresoeuer they worke, and their working is in respect of the whole and not in re∣spect of any one part, forasmuch as they be vndiuidable. Therefore it should followe by his opinion (as I haue sayd afore) that the one vniuersall capable mind is & worketh whole and vnparted in euery man. And if it be so; then is y^e being of it there, not in way of méere abilitie or possibilitie onely, but in way of operation and perfect in∣working, as a wicked spirit is in a Witch, in a Pythonesse or in a possessed person: which spirit, (were he possessed of the man as he himselfe posseseth the man, (after which maner Auerrhoes affir∣meth vs to possesse the vnderstanding in possibilitie, by our imagi∣natious;) would make the man capable of all that euer the Spirit

himselfe knoweth or is. Whereupon it will followe, that this vn∣derstanding in possibilitie shall euerlastingly in all men from their very birth, actually vnderstand and knowe all things that all men vnderstand, as well in the old as the yoong, and in the ignorant as the skilfull; so as wee shall haue no more neede of sences, nor of imagination to vnderstand withall. Too be short, although Auer∣rhoes admitteth not the World to bee without beginning: yet at leastwise he will not deny, but that [by his reckening] they which come into the world at this day, should come farre more skilfull than all their predecessors, and the children of them more skilfull than their fathers, and the ofspring of those children more skilfull than those children themselues, and so forthon, because they should succeede in the knowledge continued throughout all ages. Wher∣vpon it will also insue, that all Sciences shalbe equally in all men that make profession of them. As for example, we will speake heere but of some one speciall Science, as Grammer and Arithmetike. Now if there bee any diuersitie in the skill thereof, that diuersitie cannot come but of the diuersitie of the subiect or ground wherein the skill is. Now the ground of the skill is the capacitie of the mynd or vnderstanding, (which Auerrhoes supposeth to be but on∣ly one, common to all men) and not the Imagination, which is but a reflexion or rebounding backe of the Sence. And so forasmuch as there is (by his saying) but one ground in al men; it followeth that the knowledge or skill of this or that Science must needes bee e∣quall & alike in all men: or els that if it be not equall, but doe vary, as wee see it dooth in diuers degrees; then the same varying or diuersitie happeneth through the diuersitie of the ground where∣in the skill is, and consequently that there is one particular vnder∣standing or one peculiar mynd in euery man, and not one vniuersal mynd comon to all men. Also it is a generall rule, that the recei∣uer of a thing hath not the thing afore he receiue it. For (as Ari∣stotle* 1.521 saith (that which is to receiue a thing, must needes be first vt∣terly voyde of the thing which it receiueth. Now afore that our Sence and Imagination had any beeing at all, this vniuersall co∣mon mynd had receiued & possessed all things aforehand; and not only receiued them, but also kept them together. For as Aristotle himself saith, that maner of mynd is the place of all vnderkinds & sortes of things, and thereto hath no lesse power than the Imagi∣nation, to reteine whatsoeuer the Sences receiue. In vaine there∣fore should that vniuersall mynd vnderstand by our Imaginations,

considering that it vnderstandeth by it selfe: in vaine likewise should the Imaginations imprint those things in it, which were imprinted in it so long afore: and in vaine is Aristotles setting∣downe of a workfull vnderstanding, which should bring our vnder∣standing in abilitie, from possibilitie into action; if the sayd onely one vniuersall mynd or vnderstanding be perfect of it selfe from e∣uerlasting, as it followeth to be vppon the opinion of Auerrhoes. Neither is it to be sayd, that although the conceyuable vnderkinds of things haue bene imprinted euerlastingly in the sayd vniuersall mynd; yet notwithstanding there needed an Imagination for the vnderstanding of them, as there needeth now whensoeuer we will vse the things that we haue seene or learned afore. For by that rec∣kening, to learne all maner of Sciences, wee needed no more but to bethinke vs by imagination, of the things that were already a∣forehand in the said only vniuersal one mynd, as we doe the things that haue bene printed sometime in our memories, and are some∣what slipped out of our remembrance; and so might we our selues learne all sciences without a teacher, because that in the sayd vni∣uersall mynde of ours, wee should haue all the skill that euer any man had atteyned to, in like maner as the persone that hath once had the skill of Arithmetik or Cosmographie throughly settled in his mynd, needeth no teacher to teache it him ageine, but onely to ouerturne his owne imagination, and to search his memorie for the finding againe of that which he had layd vp there. Now we knowe that whosoeuer learneth nothing▪ knoweth nothing, and that ordi∣narily he which most studyeth, most learneth: and that all the tos∣sing and turmoyling of a mans owne imagination that can bee all his life long, will neuer make him to attaine of himself to so much as the very principles of the least science that is. By reason wher∣of it followeth, That we haue not the skill of any science in vs, vn∣till wee either be taught it or find it out by beating our wits about it: and that our imagination serueth not to reuiue the Sciences in vs, but to bring them into vs, and to plant them in vs. And for∣asmuch as all the Sciences should bee in all men from the begin∣ning, if there were but one vniuersall mynd in all men, [which is not so] it followeth that there is in euery particular persone a par∣ticular and peculiar mynd, and not any one vniuersall mynd com∣mon to all men. Moreouer, our mynd atteyneth after a sort to the vnderstanding of itself: which thing it could not doe in very deede, if there were but one vniuersall mynd common to all men. For too

vnderstand it selfe, it must needes worke vpon it selfe. But if wee beleeue Auerrhoes, our mynd shall but onely be wrought vppon and receiue into it from the Imagination, as a Windowe recey∣ueth light from the Sunne. Ageine, the capacitie of the vniuersall vnderstanding in possibilitie, could not doe that. For it behoued it to haue some other thing besides itself, to bring it selfe into action. And surely Imagination could not helpe it, for it doth but offer vp the sensible things vnto it, & atteineth not so farre as to the things that are to be discerned by drift of reason. Yet notwithstanding we vnderstand that wee vnderstand, and we reason and iudge both of our Imagination, and also of our reasoning and vnderstanding it∣selfe. The thing then which doth so enter and pearce into itselfe, is another maner of power than an Imagination, or than an vniuer∣sall vnderstanding in possibilitie. What is to be said to this, that of one selfesame Imagination, one selfsame persone concludeth now after one sort, and byandby after in another sort; and thereoutof draweth both contrarie argumēts and contrarie determinations: or that diuers persons by diuers imaginations doe close togither in one will and one mynd? Is it possible that this should proceed of an euerlasting substance in one selfesame persone, seeing that ener∣lastingnesse is not subiect to any change of tyme or place? Or that it should proceede of any one selfesame substance in many men, see∣ing that the imaginations of them be so diuers one from another? at leastwise if the said substance worke not but by such instrumēts?

As touching the opinion of Alexander of Aphrodise,* 1.522 who vp∣holdeth a certeine vniuer sal working mind that imprinteth things in the vnderstanding in possibilitie, that is to say in euery mans se∣uerall capacitie, and bringeth it foorth into action: the most part of the Reasons alledged afore against Auerrhoes, will also serue against him. Howbeit forasmuch as by this workfull mynd, hee seemeth to meane God himself, there is thus much more to be ad∣ded vnto it; That God who is altogither good and altogither wise would not imprint in our mynde the fond and wicked conceites, which we find there, nor leaue so great ignoraunce and darkenesse as wee feele there, but would in all men ouercomme the infection which the body bringeth: and although hee inspired not all men a∣like with his gracious giftes, according to the diuersitie of their capacities after the mauer of a planed Table; yet would he not at leastwise peint the Worlde with so many false Portraytures and Traynes, as euery one of vs may perceiue to bee in our selues.

Agayne, were there any such inspiration or influence, it should bee eyther continuall or but by tymes. If continuall or euerlasting, we should without labour and without cunning vnderstand all that e∣uer our imagination offereth vnto vs. And if it bee but at tymes, then should it not lye in vs to list or to vnderstand any thing at all, though we would neuer so fayne. For contrarywise, we haue much a doe to vnderstand some things, so as we must bee fayne to winne them from our ignorance by péecemeale: and there bee some other things, which we vnderstand by and by as soone as they be put vn∣to vs, and when we list our selues. There is then in vs a power of Understanding, though very feeble; but yet neuerthelater obedient to our will: which thing cannot be fathered vpon God. Also if there be but onely one Mynd working in all men, there shall bee but one selfesame vnderstanding in all men, I meane naturally, notwith∣standing that it differ in degrees. For into what place soeuer the Sunne doe shed his beames, he doth both inlighten it and heate it, howbeit diuersly according to the nature and condition of the pla∣ces and things that receyue him, some more and some lesse, some brightlyer and some dimlyer. But howsoeuer the case stande, his light yéeldeth no darknesse, nor his heate any cold. So then, if the diuersities of mens imaginations doe cause diuersities of effects in the inspiration or influence that floweth into the capacitie of our vnderstanding; surely it must néedes bee after this maner, namely that one man shall vnderstand one selfesame thing more, and ano∣ther man lesse; but not in that any man shall take vntruth for truth, vnright for right, or one thing for another. Now, we see vnto how many errors wee bee subiect, I meane not in such things as this, namely, that one man seeth better a farre of, and another better at hand; but that one man seeth white and another seeth blacke (which are things contrary) in one selfesame ground and at one selfesame tyme. It followeth therefore that diuers and sundries mynds doe worke in diuers persons, and not one selfsame mynd in al persons. By force of which reasons and of such others, I say that euery mā shall finde in himselfe and of himselfe, That euery man hath a par∣ticular Soule by himself, that is to say a spirituall substance vnited to his body, which in respect of giuing life to the body is as the forme therof, and in respect of giuing reason, is as the guyde of our actions: That in euery man there is a certeyne Sunbeame of Rea∣son, whereby they conceyue things and debate vpon them; where∣through it commeth to passe, that oftentymes they agrée both in

the Reason it selfe which is one, and in the manifest grounds ther∣of, and in whatsoeuer dependeth euidently vpon the same: That e∣uery man hath also a peculiar body by himselfe, and likewise pecu∣liar complexion, humours, imaginations, education, custome and trade of life: whereof it commeth that euery man takes a diuers way, yea and that one selfsame person swarueth diuersly from the vnitie of Reason wherof the path is but one, and the waies to stray from it are infinite: That this Sunbeame of reason which shineth and sheadeth it self from our mynd, is properly that vnderstanding which is termed The vnderstanding in abilitie or possibilitie, which is increased and augmented by all the things which it seeth, heareth, or lighteth vppon, like fire, which gathereth increase of strength by the abundance of the fewell that is put vnto it, and be∣commeth after a sort infinite by spreading it selfe abroad: Also it is the same which otherwise we call the Memorie of vnderstāding, or myndfull Memorie: and it is nothing els but an abundance of Reason, and as it were a hoorder vp of the continuall influences of the Mynd: That the Mynd from whence this floweth as from his spring, is properly that which they the sayd Auerrhoes and Alex∣ander doe terme the working or workfull Mynd, which is a cer∣teyne power or force that can skill to extend reason from one thing to another, and to procéede from things sensible to things vnsen∣sible, from things mouable to things vnmouable, from bodily to spirituall, from effects to causes, and from beginnings to ends by the meane causes. This Mynd is in respect of Reason, as cunning is in respect of an Instrument or toole; and Reason, as in respect of imagination and of the things that are sensible, is as an Instru∣ment or toole in respect of the matter or stuffe that it workes vpon: Or to speake more fitly, this Mynd is vnto Reason, as the mouer of a thing is to the thing that is mouable, and Reason is to her ob∣iects, as the mouable thing is to the thing whereunto it is moued. For to reason or debate, is nothing els but to procéed from a thing that is vnderstoode, to a thing that is not vnderstoode, of purpose to vnderstand it: and the vnderstanding thereof is a resting that inse∣weth vppon it, as a staying or resting after mouing: That both of them as well the one as the other, are but onely one selfesame sub∣stance; and like as a man both when he moueth and whē he resteth, is all one and the same man, or as the power that moueth the Si∣newes is one selfesame still, both when it stirreth them, and when it holdeth them still; so the reasonable or vnderstanding Soule that

is in euery man, is but onely one selfesame substance bodylesse and immateriall, executing his powers partly of it selfe and partly by our bodies. And seeing that Auerrhoes and Alexander make so great estimation and account of the effects which are wrought in vs, that they bée inforced to attribute them to some vncorruptible and euerlasting Mynd; let vs take of them, that in very trueth the thing which worketh so great woonders in the body, can be neither sence, nor body, nor imagination; but a diuine, vncorruptible and immortall mynd, as they themselues say.

But let vs learne the thing of mo than them, which al wise men teach vs, and which euery of vs can learne of himself; namely, that this Understanding or Mynde is not one vniuersall thing as the Sunne is that shineth into all the windowes of a Citie, but rather a particular substance in euery seuerall man, as a light to leade him in the darknesse of this life; for surely it was no more difficultie to the euerlasting GOD, to create many sundrie Soules, that euery man might haue one seuerally alone by himselfe, than to haue crea∣ted but onely one Soule for all men together. But it was farre more for his glorie, to bee knowne, praysed, and exalted of many Soules, yea and more for our welfare to prayse, exalt and knowe him, yea and to liue of our selues both in this life and in the life to come: than if any other vniuersall Spirit, Soule or Mynd what∣soeuer, should haue liued and vnderstoode eyther in vs or after vs. Now then, for this matter let vs conclude, both by reason, and by antiquitie, and by the knowledge that euery of vs hath of himselfe; That the Soule and the Body be things diuers: That the Soule is a Spirit and not a Body: That this Spirit hath in man three abilities or powers, whereof two bee exercised by the body, and the third worketh of it selfe without the body: That these three abili∣ties are in the one onely Soule as in their roote: whereof two doe ceasse whensoeuer the body fayleth them, and yet notwithstanding the Soule abideth whole without abatemēt of any of her powers, as a Craftsman continueth a Craftsman though he want tooles to worke withal: And finally, that this Soule is a substance that con∣tinueth of it selfe, and is vnmateriall and spirituall, ouer the which neither death nor corruption can naturally haue any power.

And for a conclusion of all that euer I haue treated of hetherto in this booke, let vs mainteyne, That there is but only one God, who by his owne goodnesse and wisedome is the Creator and go∣uerner of the world and of all that is therein: That in the world he

created Man, after his owne Image as in respect of mynd, and af∣ter the Image of his other creatures as in respect of life, sence, and mouing; mortall so farre foorth as he holdeth the likenesse of a crea∣ture; and immortall so farre foorth as he beareth the Image of the Creator: that is to wit, in his Soule: That he which goeth out of himself to see the world, doth forthwith see that there is a God, for his workes declare him euerywhere: That he which will yet still doubt thereof, néedeth but to enter into himselfe, and he shall meete him there; for he shall finde there a power which he seeth not: That he which beléeueth there is one God, beléeueth himselfe to bee im∣mortall; for such consideration could not light into a mortal nature: and that he which beléeueth himselfe to be immortal, beléeueth that there is a God: for without the vnutterable power of the one God, the mortall and immortall could neuer ioyne together: That he which seeth the order of the world, the proportion of man, and the harmonie that is in eyther of them compounded of so many con∣traries, cannot doubt y^t there is a Prouidence; for the nature which hath furnished them therewith, cannot bee vnfurnished thereof it selfe; but as it once had a care of them, so can it not shake of the same care from them. Thus haue we thrée Articles which followe inter∣chaungeably one another. Insomuch that he which proueth any one of them, doth proue them all thrée, notwithstāding that I haue treated of euery of them seuerally by it selfe. Now, let vs pray the euerlasting God, that wee may glorifie him in his workes in this world, and he voutsafe of his mercie to glorifie vs one day in the world to come.

Amen.

The xvj. Chapter.

That mans nature is corrupted, & man falne from his first originall: and how.

YET for all this, let not man bee proude of the excel∣lencie or immortalitie of his Soule: for the more he hath receyued of his maker, the more is he indebted to him; and the more excellent that his nature is, the more lothsome and daungerous is the corruption

therof. The Peacocke is sayd to be proud of his gay fethers, when he sets vp his tayle round about him: but when he hath once stret∣ched out his wings, he falles into a dump, and as soone as he lookes vpon his féete, he casts mée downe his tayle and is ashamed. Euen so, as long as we thinke vpon the liuelinesse of our Spirit, and the excellencie of our Soule as in respect of the nature thereof; surely wee haue whereof to glorifie God that gaue it vnto vs, and of his gracious goodnesse hath voutsafed to honor vs aboue al other crea∣tures. On the other side, if wee consider how this nature of ours is straungely defiled and corrupted, and how farre it is digressed from the first originall thereof: surely there is no remedie but we must be ashamed of our selues, and woonder to see from how great a heigth we be now falne and sunke downe. Euen so the best Wine becom∣meth the sharpest and eagrest Uineger, and of Egges (which were in old tyme the delicats of Kings) is made the rankest poyson. For looke what degrée of goodnesse a thing holdeth while it abydeth in his nature, the same degrée of euill doth it come vnto, when it fal∣leth into corruption. Now then, looke how much our originall ge∣neration was the better; so much shall the corruption that lighteth into it be the woorser: which thing according to the order which I haue vsed hetherto, wee may examine towards God, towards the world, towards men, and towards our selues.

Greatly in good sooth is man bound vnto God,* 1.523 if he would con∣sider it; and very blynd is hée if he haue not the skill to perceiue it. Of the great multitude of Creatures which God had created, hee hath giuen to some but onely bare béeing; to some, both béeing and lyfe; and to other some both béeing, lyfe, and sence; But vnto man he hath giuen all these, and moreouer a reasonable mynd, whereby he (and onely he héere beneath) knoweth in all things what they haue and what they bee, which thing they themselues knowe not. Which is an euident proof, that whatsoeuer they haue or whatso∣euer they be, they haue it and are it for man, & not for themselues. For to what purpose are all their vertues and excellent properties, if they themselues knowe them not? The Sonne excellent among the celestiall bodyes, and the Rose among flowers. The beast is a degree aboue the Trees, and among the Beastes, one hath some one poynt which another hath not. But what skilles it what thou art or what thou hast, if thou knowe it not? What booteth thee the light, if thou see it not? what art thou the better for swéete sents, if thou smell them not? Or what auayleth it thee to excell in any

thing if thou discerne it not? Of a trueth, only man of al the things in this inferior World, can skill of these things and how to inioy them; and therfore it must néedes be that they were made for none but him; that is to wit, that to speake properly, GOD hath giuen vnto him whatsoeuer all other creatures either haue or be; and he hath not dealt with him simply as with a Creature, but rather as with a Child of his, for whom he hath expresly created this worlde and giuen it him to possesse. Now if the thing that is possessed bee infinitely lesse than the possessor thereof; and the world is giuen to man to possesse: how farre then doth man excell the world? And how greatly is man bound vnto God, who created him of nothing that is to say, not only hath giuen the world vnto man, but also gi∣uen euen man to man himselfe? Wherefore if he acknowledge not him to whom he is beholden, not only for this inheritance but also euen for his owne being: what shall we say but that he is an vnna∣turall and bastardly Childe, euen such a one as hath lost not onely his right mynd, but also euen his sences? But of so many men, of whom all and singuler persons stand bound, both ioyntly and seue∣rally in the whole and for the whole of that great bond for perfor∣mance of the Condition thereof, how fewe be there which doe once thinke of it, and how much fewer be there which thinke well of it? Nay, how fewe bee there which knowe that there is such a bond, and how much fewer doe dispose themselues to acknowledge it? And if perchaunce some one or two among many doe dispose them selues thereunto, yet notwithstanding who is he that euer was a∣ble to atteyne vnto it, considering that it importeth a yéelding vnto God of that which is his due: that is to wit, the imploying of our selues and of all that he hath giuen vnto vs, euen our whole being and life, our Sences, our Reason, our doings, and finally all that euer we haue both within and without vs, in his seruice? and that wee contrarywise turne all things to our selues as to their proper ende, yea and euen our selues to our selues which are nothing? If we kept a reckoning of our life, how small a part thereof do we be∣stowe vpon God? How fewe of our steppes doe wee walke in his seruice? How fewe of our thoughts are directed vnto him? And if wée looke vppon our very prayers, what are they but continuall of∣fences, seeing that euen in the middest of our greatest vehemencie, we vanish away by and by into vayne imaginations, and are caried as farre away from our prayers into wandering conceyts, as hea∣uen is distant from earth, and further? What Sonne will not fall

out with him that speakes euill of his Father? or els all that stand by will count him a coward if he passe it ouer with silence? Contra∣rywise, which of vs is moued when he heareth Gods name blas∣phemed? or if he be moued, that setteth himselfe in defence of him: or if he set himselfe in defence, doth not by and by forget it? What then doth this argewe, but that in very trueth, our Soule liueth not, but our Body; and that our Soule hath not her mouings and actions free and liuely, seeing it is not moued at the iniuries that are done to the Soule and to the father that made the Soule, but at the wrongs that are done to the body and to the father of the bo∣die? If a man breake the Scutchions of our Armes, wee take it to bee a great disgrace to vs, and a touching of our credite; and if hée breake our Images or Pictures, we fall out with him and will ne∣uer be reconciled: And if it be done to a Prince, he makes it a poynt of high Treason; and that we doe not the like, it is not for want of pride, but for want of power to reuenge it. On the contrary parte, which of vs is greeued at the wrong that is done to his neyghbor, or rather which wrongeth not his neyghbor euery day? Or which is much moued when he seeth a man slayne before his face, vnlesse he be his brother or néere friend? Nay, which of vs our selues doth not daylie kill his brother, eyther in very déede, or in heart, eyther with the Sword I meane, or by hatred, euen for the least offence that can be pretended, and so teareth or breaketh not the Image of God which he hath paynted and ingraued in man, euen euery ho∣wer without any regard? Now what els is this, but that we know not this Image of God to bee in our selues? For otherwise how durst wee bee so presumptuous, as to offer any hurt or harme vnto it, but because the secret consent of all mankinde in such outrage, confesseth it to be quite and cleane forgone, or at leastwise to bee so disfigured and defaced, and so straungely berayed, that it can scarsly bee discerned any more? And because the kindred that is betwéene all men, deriued from the father of their Soules, moueth vs very little, but the vyle kindred of the flesh moueth vs very much, which is as farre inferiour to the other, as there is oddes betwixt y^e soule and a lump of earth, or betwéene the fathers of eyther of them; that is to wit, betwéene GOD and Man: Yet notwithstanding, seeing that the wickeddest man in the world, and such a one as seemeth to bee touched with nothing, hauing once slayne him whom he hated most of all men, doth by and by after the deede done, feele a hart•• byting in his mynd, and a torment in his Conscience; which thing

he feeleth not for the killing of a thousand beastes euery day; what can we say to be the cause thereof, but only the remaynder of Gods Image common to all men, which putteth him in mynd of the wic∣kednesse that he hath done, and is highly offended at his owne of∣fence, and which (according to this saying The good blud lyeth not) maketh our indytement of it self, and would fayne euen it self be reuenged of vs within vs? Therfore let vs say (which thing we cannot denye vnlesse wee denye our selues) that God created man to be to him as a Child, and that man is growne out of kynd, yea straungely growne out of kynd, not regarding (as wee see in most men) to bee knowne eyther of his father or of his brethren, (which thing notwithstanding the bastards of this world do seeke to their vttermost to doe) but by his will going about to abolish his pede∣grée and al his titles of kindred, that he might be called the Sonne of the earth,* 1.524 (which was the name of Bastards in old tyme) rather than the some of him that begate him, and created so many things for him to inioye. For proofe whereof to be true, what ame we at in all our studies and indeuers, but the earth and earthly things? Had we continued still in our originall creation, wee should according to the spirituall substaunce of our Soules, haue naturally pursewed spirituall things, yea and haue mounted vp aboue the very heauen∣ly things. But where seeke wee now our inheritance, our welfare, and our felicitie, but in these transitorie things? And whereof are al our suites and quarrels in this world, but of Cattell, of Corne and of Land? Wherefore we must néedes confesse, that it is a witnesse of the dishereting of Mankynd from the heritage of his father, and that he is in his fathers displeasure and dissauour, and that he doth but runne after Peasecoddes as the prodigall Childe did, when he had wasted his inheritance licentiously.

But now to come to those which make most profession of god∣linesse; whence (thinke we) commeth the distrust that all of vs haue naturally of Gods goodnesse and assistance; but of the feeling of our iust disherison, which our conscience is greeued at within vs? The sonne of a good and rich father behighteth himselfe as much reléefe as his father is able to yéeld, and as he himselfe hath néede of. If not; but that the Child doubt thereof: we presume so farre of the fa∣thers goodnesse, that we conclude that his sonne hath offended him, and made himself vnworthy of his goodnesse by some great cryme. Now then, seeing that God is the very goodnesse and riches them∣selues, wherof commeth it that no man can assure himself of them?

that no man can rest himself boldly enough vpon him? that no man can trust vnto him so assuredly as his goodnesse requireth? and fi∣nally that our requestes are so full of distrust, and our hearts so full of vnbeléefe? Surely, séeing the fault cannot be in Gods goodnesse, which is a fountayne that cannot be dreyned drye: it must néedes be that the fault remayneth alonly in the naughtinesse and frayltie of our selues, which dare not hope for good at the hand of him which is most excellently good, because our whole nature telleth vs that we bee vnworthie of his grace, by reason we haue offended him too gréeuously.

If we consider the gouernment and order of the World,* 1.525 wee may euen there also find apparantly, that man holdeth not himself in his state, but is falne from the seate of honour wherein God had placed him. God had set him aloft, aboue the Stones, aboue the Plantes, aboue the Brute beastes, yea and aboue the world it selfe. If he abyde still in his degree, whence commeth it that so many men make themselues bondflaues to Gold and other mettals? and that so many men doe leade the life of Plants and brute beastes in the bodyes of men? some giuing themselues to nought els than to eating, drinking and sléeping, and neuer lifting themselues vp any higher; and othersome consuming and wasting themselues in most beastly delights & pleasures? For what beast is there that would be a Plant, or Plant that shooteth not vp to get out of the ground? To be short, what thing is there in the whole world sauing onely man, which doth not very precisely kéepe the owne state and de∣gree? I pray you if a man should see one with a princely Crowne al myry on his head, tilling the ground and following the Plough; what would he thinke but that he were deposed from his Throne, and that some mischief were befalne him? And what then is to be sayd of that man, which toyleth in Doonghils and skulketh into corners to wallowe himselfe in a thousand sorts of filthines, and imployeth all his wit vpon such things: but that he is falne from the toppe of his mynde, and that by the greeuonsnes of that fall, he hath so lamed and maymed all his abilities, that it lyeth not in him to returne againe from whence he is falne? For who can deny but he is borne to greater things than hee doeth? Or who can thinke that GOD hath giuen him an immortall Soule, to the intent he should imploy himselfe altogether about things which are not so much as worthy to be mortall? Or a countenance which he calleth continually to the mynding of Heauen, to looke groueling on the

myre? Or a Scepter, to play the dizard with it in a Playe? Or a triple Mace to rake Dounghilles withall, or too digge the ground withall?

Againe, how is the Lawe and order of gouernement which shi∣neth forth in the whole world and in all the partes thereof, turned vpside downe in man who is the Litle World, by the disobedience of the Body to the Soule? In Plantes, in Trees, and in brute beastes, the soule distributeth nurrishmēt by proportion. Their bo∣dyes obeye the direction of their Soules without geynsaying, and euery abilitie performeth his duetie accordingly. The nurrishing abilitie followeth his appetites, and goeth not beyond them. The sensitiue followeth his naturall delights, but it violateth them not. But as for man, what shall wee say of him? Surely that his body commaundeth his Soule, as if the Plough should drawe the Hor∣ses, as they say; that his will suffereth it selfe to be ruled by his ap∣petites; that his reason is an vnderling to his sences, and that his very whole nature is most commonly quite out of order. So must we needes confesse an ouerthrowe of nature, in him for whom ne∣uerthelesse nature it selfe was made, and that man was swarued a∣side from his right way, seeing that all other partes of the World doe followe their Nature, and that Nature itselfe teacheth vs it. What is to be sayd then, but that man is not onely falne from the state wherein he was, to be set in lower degree than he was afore; but also that he is falne in himselfe and from himselfe, in and from his owne peculiar nature? Moreouer it is manifest that the world was created for mans vse; for the world knoweth not it selfe, nor the creatures that are therein. And ageine, as for the Angels, they needed it not; and as for the brute beastes, they haue no skill to vse it. Onely man hath vnderstanding to vse the seruice thereof, and a body that hath neede of their seruice. Sith it is so, who can doubt that God created man with a knowledge of his creatures, and al∣so gaue him power ouer them? Whereof commeth it then that the beastes doe naturally knowe their seasons, the remedies of their diseases, and the Herbes that haue a proprietie of nature to heale them; and that only man among all other liuing things, knoweth them not, insomuch as he is fayne to goe to Schoole to the brute beastes to learne them? Also whereof commeth it that these crea∣tures (which surely GOD made not to be snares to man, for that had bene repugnant to the goodnes of the Creator, but for mans benefite and seruice) doe now kicke and spurne ageinst man, yea

euen those which haue no power or strēgth at all to withstand him? Let vs omit Woolues, Leopards, and Lyons, which seeme to haue some force to ouermatch the weakenes of man. What meaneth it that wormes make vs warre within our Bowels, y^t vermin deuou∣reth our Corne, and that the earth yeeldeth vs not any kind of fruit which hath not a peculiar enemie in it, to marre it ere it come to our hand: but to driue vs to confesse, that man must needes haue offended his maker right greeuously, and that whereas Gods put∣ting of his creatures in subiection to man, was to the end that man should haue continued in obedience vnto GOD, now because man hath rebelled against Gods Maiestie, God also suffereth those to rebell against man, whom he had put in subiection to man, yea euen to the very off kourings of the earth? For what els is this contra∣rietie of the earth to him that tilleth it, of the Sea to him that say∣leth it, and of the aire to the successe of all our labours and trauels, but a protestation of whole nature, that it disdeineth to serue a crea∣ture that was so presumptuous as to disobey his Creator; a crea∣ture I say, which by doing seruice to the creatures, hath forgone the authoritie which he had receiued of this Maker?

Now consequently let vs consider man towards man.* 1.526 What is there more disordered or more cōtrarie to nature, than is the nature of man himselfe? If beastes of one kind doe kill or eate one ano∣ther; wee take it for an ougly thing. What an ouglynesse then ought it to be vnto vs, when wee see how men (who alonly be in∣dued with reason,) doe euery howre kill one another, and roote out one another? Nay rather is it not a great wonder to see good a∣greement and frendship, not among Nations, not betwéene Coū∣tries, not among Companies; but euen in households, yea and be∣tweene Chamberfellowes? Wolues are cruell: but yet in what race of Wolues shall wee find Caribies and Cannibals? Lyons also are cruell: but yet where were they euer seene in Battell one against another? Now what is warre, but a gathering and pac∣king vp together of all the sorts of beastlines that are in the world? And yet what is more common among men than that? A Beast (say some) will barke or grunt ere he byte; a house will cracke ere it fall downe; and the Wind whistleth ere it breake things. But contrariwise what is man towards man? who euen in laughing, threatneth, in saluting sleaeth, & vnder faire countenance of cour∣teous interteynement, cloketh a thousand Serpents, a thousand Lyons, a thousand Quickesands, and a thousand Rockes at once?

Well: let vs leaue the wicked which discouer themselues too much. What doe wee in all our bargayning, buying and selling, but beguyle one another? or what doe we in our dalying, but de∣lude one another? And what els is the whole societte of man which we so highly commend, but a selfgaine, and a very incroching one vppon another, the greater sort as tyrants vppon the meaner, the meaner vpon the inferiour sort, and the inferiour sort one vppon a∣nother too take him in some trippe? To bee short, if wee doe any good, it is but to the end to bee seene; asfor in secret, wee will doe none at all. Ageine, if wee forbeare to doe euill, it is but for feare least the World should knowe it; and were that feare away, wee would stick at nothing. Wherto then serueth vs our reason which should further vs vnto all goodnes, but to couer our naughtinesse, that is to say, to make vs woorse and more vnreasonable? yet not∣withstanding how vnreasonable so euer wee bee in all our doings, we cannot but knowe that there is a reason; and were it not in vs, we could not conceiue it; and were it not corrupted, we should not swarue from it; and yet if we examine oure selues, we shalnot bee able to deny, but that we digresse very farre from it. Therefore we may well deeme of our reason, as of an eysight that is either im∣payred or inchaunted. It hath the ground of sight still; but yet it standeth the partie in no stead, but onely to beguyle him by false images and illusions.

Let vs come to man in himselfe,* 1.527 and see whether at leastwise he loue himselfe better than other men: and the more wee stirre him, the more shall we feele the stinche of his corruption. When a disea∣sed man feeles peine, wee say there is corruption in his body; and furthermore that there is a default in Nature, or that the partie hath taken some great surfet, which hath brought him to that case. Nowthen what shal we say of the great nomber of diseases wher∣with mankind is peyned, and wherewith he is so wholy ouerwhel∣med, that there is not any age of his life, any part of his body, or a∣ny small string in any part of his flesh, which hath not some peculi∣ar disease? Nay I say further, that man alone is subiect too mo di∣seases, than all other liuing things in this World togither. The Philosophers sawe it, and haue made bookes expresly thereof, and are vtterly amased and graueled in seeking out the cause thereof; and they could neuer yet yéelde any Reason thereof which might satisfie others or themselues. Neuerthelesse the most parte of them come to this point, that man is the most vnhappiest of all li∣uing

wights; and they find fault with God and nature for it, whom notwithstanding they confesse to haue doone nothing but iustly in that behalfe. One sayes, that onely Man fleaeth himselfe through impatience of greef. Another sayes, That the lyfe of man is such, as that death is rather to bee desired of him than lyfe. And of such speeches doe all their Schooles ring. There is another which with great woonderment, reckeneth vp certeine hundreds of diseases whereunto the eye alone is subiect. Now which of all the beastes hath so much as the thirtith part of them in his body? Is it likely that God, which hath giuen to Man so great preheminence aboue all his creatures, created him of purpose to torment him aboue all other creatures? Or rather is it not to be sayd, that man in his ori∣ginall was created farre after another sort than he now is, whether it be in respect of the Creator himselfe, or of the ende for which hee created him? Surely then, let vs say as we haue sayde afore, that the very cause why Man alone hath mo diseases in his body, than all other Creatures toogither; is for that hee hauing abused Gods gracious gifts, hath doone more euill than all they could skill too doe: and that the very euill and vntowardnes that is in them, is but to punish man withall: as for example, the Hayle and Snowe serue not to hurt the earth or the fruites of the earth, but to punish him that should take the benefite of them.

Againe, when we come to consider the Soule and the body knit together; what a number of affections doe we méete withall there, (which as saith Plutark) are so much more sorowfull and gréeuous than the bodily diseases, as the Soule is more sinfull and blame∣worthie than the bodie? To bring these passions to some reasona∣ble order, the Philosophers haue made bookes expresly of Morall vertue, and giuen precepts (say they) to bring them to obedience: wherein they confesse the rebelliousnesse that is naturally in vs a∣gainst reason. But who feeleth not in himselfe, that their remedies serue not so much to take away the mischief, as to cloke it? Which is a playne declaration, that it is not a spot which may bee washed away, but a déepe impression bronded in nature as it were with a fearing yron, which in very déede is not to bee wyped out agayne, but couered; nor to be subdewed and ouercome, but with much a do to be restreyned and hild short. Furthermore, seeing that reason is so much more excellent than passion or affection, as the forme shape or fashion (say they) is more excellent than y^e matter or stuffe wher∣in it is: whence commeth this infection in vs, that maketh the mat∣ter

to ouermayster the forme, and causeth the forme (as ye would say) to receyue shape and fashion of the matter; that is to say, which putteth reason in subiection to affection, & to the impressions which affection yéeldeth, contrary to the order which is obserued in all the whole world beside? For what els is this Intemperance of ours, but reason (such as it now remayneth) imprinted with lust and con∣cupiscence? And what els is anger, but reason atteynted with cho∣ler, and so foorth of the rest? And if a man will say, that these things are naturall in vs; whereof commeth it that of these affections, wee conceyue inwardly remorse, and outwardly shame; yea and that so naturally, as wee must of necessitie néedes feele them whether wee will or no, and can no more let them than we can restreyne the bea∣ting of our Pulses or the panting of our Hearts: but because that shame and remorse for sinne are naturall in vs, but the sinne it selfe is against nature? As for example, there be things the doing wher∣of is in vs vyce; and in brute Beasts, nature: for they be angry, they aduenge themselues, and they company together indifferently and in open sight: and of so doing they bee not ashamed, because it is their nature. Now, were these affections and fleshly pleasures as naturall in vs as in the Beastes; as little should we bee ashamed of them, as they. But contrarywise, if an honest man come in while wee bee angrie, by and by our rage is repressed, as who would say our vyce did hyde it selfe from him: and if a man come vpon vs vn∣awares in taking our pleasure (yea though it bee well lawfull) wee blush, as if our blud were desirous to hide and to couer our doings. Yea and how secretly soeuer we be alone by our selues in executiō of our vyces; wee incounter continually with a companyon in our selues, which not only beareth witnesse of them, but also condem∣neth and punisheth them in vs. Soothly then, the motions of an∣ger and lust against reason in man, are not naturall nor originall, that is to say,* 1.528 they procéede not of his first creation; but are come in afterward by corruption.* 1.529 And therefore the remorse which happe∣neth vnto vs in those passions, is nothing but a secrete (howbeit ve∣ry liuely) warning of nature, which is ashamed to play the brute beast; which thing she would not be, if those things were originally of mans nature. And in very déede, the vniuersall consent of man∣kynd in being ashamed to goe naked,* 1.530 insomuch that they had leuer to see the skinne of a Beast, or the excrement of a Woorme vppon themselues, than to sée their owne flesh: and the thing which Saint Austin noteth in all men; namely, that they will rather doe open

wrong in all mens sight, than haue to doe with their lawful wines openly; doe euidently shewe that the beastlinesse (that is to say the concupiscence or lust) that is in carnall copulation, is not an origi∣nall nature, but a mere corruption thereof. Which thing our pre∣sent age (but surely nothing to her prayse) may better proue vnto vs, than al the reasons in the world. For certeynly, considering the excessiue ouerflowing of vices which is to be seene, & y^e customable vse of them, yea euen of such as are against nature, turned almost into nature; if euer voluptuousnesse could haue transformed it selfe into nature, and preuayled against nature, it must néedes haue bene in this our age; wherein notwithstanding, as strongly armed, au∣thorised, and reigning as vyce seemeth to be, yet is she inforced to hyde herselfe euen in the middest of her tryumphs, vndoubtedly as acknowledging that she reigneth not ouer her owne, but ouer ano∣ther mans.

Agayne, if ye haue an eye to friendship, to charitie, to the bring∣ing vp of Children, to societie in Mariage; who will not say that for all our trayning vp to leade vs thereto, and for all our reading to instruct vs therein, yet we had néede to resort to the brute beastes to learne of them, and to take example of them, which is a token (as I sayd afore) that their nature is lesse corrupt than ours? If the case concerne the turning away from the vyces of Intemperance; Lecherie, Drunkennesse, Incest, & such others: who would thinke that our nature being so excellent, and (besides the discourse of rea∣son (hauing so many Lawes, Statutes, Penalties, & Magistrates to helpe it; and being brydled with so many daungers, sorowes and paynes insewing the same; should yet notwithstanding not bee re∣streyned: whereas on the contrary part, the brute beastes doe natu∣rally forbeare both foode and pleasure, sauing onely so farre foorth as nature requireth, that is to wit, for the maintenance and preser∣uation of them selues and of their kind? And séeing their nature doth so vphold it selfe, and that our nature beeing stayed so many wayes, and closed in with so many barres, cannot bee vpheld nor kept within compasse: who can say that our nature (in case as it is nowe,) is not in worse plyght than theirs is? And yet who wil say that the Nature of the excellentest of all other Creatures, hath al∣wayes bene such from the first originall beginning thereof? All the sayd things are comon both to Man and Beast: but yet moreouer, Man glorieth of an excellencie of mynd inriched by God with infi∣nite goodly gifts. What is to be said then, if in the thing whereby

he surmounteth them, he be found inferiour to them? Or if in that which of it self is vncorruptible, corruption be most open and eui∣dent? Of so many men indewed with Reason, I pray you how many be there that vse it? That is to say, Of so many men, how many be not brute beastes? Or what rarer thing is there among men, than a very man in deede? And of such as vse Reason, how many be there that vse it well; that is to say, how many bee there which be not Diuels? Now take mee out of mankind the beastes and the diuels, and who will thinke it straunge that a Philosopher tooke a Torch at high nooneday, to seeke for a Man in the middes of a multitude? One sort all their life long doe set their mynd vp∣pon nothing but this lyfe; they spare not so much tyme as to con∣sider what that power is which woorketh that thought in them. What booteth it these more to haue a mynd, than it booteth a man to haue eyes that doth nothing but sléepe? Others imploy it about the defyling of some mans wife, or the deflowring of some maiden, or the glosing of some wrong, or the eluding of some right, or the sowing of discord in some household, or the setting of fyre on the fower corners of some Realme. To what purpose ageine is it for these men to haue a mynd, which is bent and intended to nothing but mischief? Or what els is such a mynd, than y^e eye of the* 1.531 beast of AEgipt, which killeth those whom it looketh vpon, and it self also by y^e rebounding back of his owne sight? Some in deede doo lift vp y^e eye of their mynd aloft; but how farre or what see they? Surely (as saith Aristotle) euen as much as an Owle in the bright sunne. The Edge of vnderstanding rebateth at the outside of the least things that are: and how then shall it be able to enter into them? Our mynd is dazeled with vapors; and what will it be then at the vnaprochable light for which it was created? GOD created the World for man; therefore his intent was that man should haue the seruice thereof: and that he might haue the seruice of things, it behoued him to knowe them. Contrariwise, what thing doe wee knowe-sufficiently? What knowe wee in comparison of that wee knowe not? And how can wée vse the seruice of them, seeing euen the least things commannd vs; not the Beastes, the Herbes, and the Stones only, but also euen the Earth and the very drosse there∣of? God hath created man for his owne glory; and as man is the end of the World, so is GOD the end of Man. And it is not to be doubted, but that as God gaue man knowledge of the worlde, that hee might vse it too his behoofe; so hee gaue him knowledge of his

Godhead, that he might serue him. But how many be there which ame at this marke? and how shall wee hit it if wee ame not at it? and how shall we ame at it, if we see it not? and how shall wee ••ee it, if we thinke not on it nor passe not for it? Againe, let vs bend our wittes to it as stoutly as we can; who is he that féeleth not him selfe to quayle, when he is to think vpon God? Who is he that bur∣steth not, if hee streyne himselfe to farre? And whereof commeth this, but that the string of this Bowe hath falne into the Watter, and is made so wet that it wil serue to no purpose any more? This mynd bringeth foorth deedes; and because they be somewhat slow, they be done with the more aduisement. But what are the best of those deedes but sinne? If wée commit any cryme, all our whole mynd goeth with it, and our doing of the euill is for the euils sake. But if we doe any good; which of vs doth it not as a bywoorke for some other things sake, rather than for the loue of the good itselfe; as one for honour, another for gaine, and a third for feare? And what elles is this, but a seruing of vanitie, and not an obeying of vertue? And whereas euill is nought els than a bereuing or wan∣ting of good: who is hée on the contrarie part, which thinketh not himself a man goodynough, if he doe no euill? As who would say y^t good also were nothing els but the bereuing or absence of euil. And in very deede whome doe we call good and honest men, but such as absteyne from dooing men wrong, from stealing, from extorting, and from lending vppon Usurie, albeit that it behoue them to pro∣céede further, and to be liberall in giuing, forward in helping, and diligent in seruing, forasmuch as goodnes is not a defect or a not∣dooing of things, but an effect or dooing of things, and consisteth not in onely refreyning or ceassing, but in woorking and performing. And in effect, what els is it to define an honest man to be such a one as doth nothing atal; than to define a good Archer to be such a one as neuer shooteth at all? This mind of ours doth also yéeldfoorth words: and they passe out more swiftly than déedes, yea euen from the wisest. If a man would keepe a reckening of his words but for one day; what should hee find at night but a heape of vanities, as backebytings, slaunders, leasings, raylings, besides a thousand sortes of slipperdeuices and idle words, which euen by their onely idlenesse doe well bewray our vanitie? And sith i•• is euident that whereas speech was giuen vs to procure and mainteyne societie, we see it is commonly applyed to the breaking thereof, by sowing of discord and debate: who can deny but that there is a notable cor∣ruption

in the mynd, which vttereth forth that speeche? Ageine, séeing it is an vniuersal vyce, ageinst which the better sort do striue with all their force and cannot ouercome it: who can say it is a vice that is incident but to some peculiar persones, and not to the whole kynd of man? What is to be sayd then of our thoughts and witts, whereof whole thousands passe through our mynd in an hower, which our mynds can neither represse nor expresse? O how many doe we esteeme to be good men, whome we should sée to be wicked men if their thoughts lay open, or if we had eyes to see into them? O what a sort of wilde beastes should wee see harbered in a mans heart as in a Forest? And what is then our skil, but ignorance; our wizdome, but vanitie; and our holines, but hipocrisie? Wherein consisteth our vertue, but in concealing our vyces, whenas in truth (as sayth Aristotle) it were both more for our behoof and more ap∣proching to rightuousnes, if we layd them open? Moreouer, what is all our inforcing of our selues to vanquish our vices, but a labo∣ring to outronne our owne shadowe, which (doe we what we can) will alwayes accompany vs whether wee will or no? And surely we ought to be ashamed, not so much for that wee bee such, as for that either we knowe not our selues to be such, or be not sufficient∣ly ashamed that we be such. Neither is there a stronger proof of our corruption, than that: in like maner as we déeme them to be filthie and stinking, which are raking in Priuies and féele not the stinche of them: and those to be more sick which féele not themselues sick, than those which are most peyned with their disease: and those too be more frantick which find not them selues to be braynsicke, than those whiche seeke to the Phisition for the curing of their frenzie. For had we the wit to consider our chaunges, to féele the vnéeuen∣nesse of our Pulses, and to obserue the steamingvp of our humors with the impressions which they make in our brayne: wée should by such discerning of our diseases, become halfe sikfolke and halfe Phisitions. But surely considering the state wherein wée now bée, how we liue as it were by a borrowed Soule; I wote not where∣vnto I should compare vs, except it be to certeine diseased persons, of whom Hippocrates maketh this expresse Aphorisme,* 1.532 saying: When such as are very sore sicke, do feele no payne, but fall to playing with their Couerlet, pulling out the heares, and pic∣king out the motes; the case goeth very hard with them, and there is small hope or lykelihod that they shall liue. And what els is this life of ours, but euen such? We lay sticke to sticke, stone 〈1 page duplicate〉〈1 page duplicate〉

〈1 page duplicate〉〈1 page duplicate〉

to Stone, and Penny to Penny, no more minding the life of our Soule, than if wee had no Soule at all. If any man doe yet still doubt hereof, I offer him a condition, which if he will put in tryall, I dare assure him hee will doubt thereof no more. Let hym but set downe in writing, all the thoughts and imaginations that come in his head by the space of one day, and at night let hym reuiew them and take the account of them; And I dare vndertake he shall fynd in them so many vanities, so many crymes, so many Hobgoblins, and so many Monsters; so straunge, so fond, so foule, and so oug∣ly; that he shalbe afraid of himselfe like the beast that starkleth at the sodeine sight of himself in a lookingglasse; and that he shal not stand gasing, enamored at his owne beautie as Narcissus did; but ronne away ashamed of his foule deformitie, to séeke where to wash away the myre that he hath wallowed in. What a thing then were it, if he considered it thus all the weeke long without putting it in writing. And how much more were it, if hee should doe it a whole yere; and finally all his whole life? To be short, to set man in fewe words before our eyes, we reade comonly that there are fower po∣wres or abilities in mans Soule, namely, Wit, Will, the abilitie of béeing angrie, and the abilitie of lusting, and in these fower wée lodge fower vertues, that is to say, in Wit, Wizdome; in Will, Rightfulnesse; in the abilitie of being angrie, Hardinesse; and in the abilitie of Lusting, Stayednesse. Now, Wit is maymed with ignorance; Will, with wrongfulnes; Hardinesse, with Coward∣lines, and Stayednesse, with Licentiousnes; so as in this worlde they can neither be cured without skarre, nor be brought to a skar. Also we perceiue there are in man the outward sences, Imagina∣tion, and Appetite, which thrée the brute beasts haue as well as he, ouer and besides the which, hee hath also wit and will as peculiar giftes giuen him of God. And if we be men, we estéeme our selues better than beastes, and looke to haue them to be our vnderlings. Contrariwise, whereas Imagination ought to rule the Sences, and Reason to rule Imagination, and will to rule Appetite: now the outward sence carieth away Imagination, Imagination Rea∣son, and Appetite will, insomuch that the onely sence being bewit∣ched or beguyled, carieth a man headlong into all euill after the maner of Phaeton whom the Poets speakeof. It is a playne case therefore, that man hath made himselfe an vnderling to the beast, and consequently that mankind is turned strangely vpsidedowne, and doubtlesse farre more monstruously, than if we sawe him goe

vpon his head with his heeles vpward. Nowthen, seeing that man is so ouerturned, whereof can he brag, but of offending God vnces∣santly in this life, and of infinite punishment in another lyfe, ac∣cording to the infinitenesse of him whom he hath offended? And to what purpose therefore shall his immortalitie serue him, but to dye euerlastingly and neuer to be dead?

But let vs leaue this matter to another place.* 1.533 And forasmuch as by considering man what he is to Godward, to the worldward, to Manward, and to himselfe, I haue euidently proued his corrup∣tion & frowardnesse; namely, that he is vtterly contrary to the ende to which he was created of God, to the order of the whole World, to the welfare of all Mankinde, and to his owne benefite: Let vs henceforth cōsider from whence and from what tyme this mischief may haue befalne him, and what may haue bene the cause thereof. Certesse, if we say it came of God and that he had it of his creatiō; we blaspheme God too too grossely. For God is good, and the very goodnesse it selfe: and therfore he cannot haue made any thing euill. Also it appeareth throughout the whole gouernmēt of the world, that he is the mayster and mainteyner of order. And therefore how is it possible that he should make the little world (namely man) to be a mould of confusion and disorder? Agayne, no other thing than his owne glorie and the welfare of man, moued him to create man; and yet man beeing in case as hee is, forbeareth not to blaspheme Gods name, and to purchase his owne destruction. Néedes then must it be that Man was made a farre other creature at the begin∣ning, than he is now: as in very déede the Husbandman createth not the wiuell in the Corne, nor the Uintener the sowernesse in the Wine, nor the Smith the rust in the yron; but they come in from elswhere. Neuerthelesse, the man that neuer dranke other drinke than Uineger, would think it to be the naturall sap and taste of the Grape. And wee likewise who neuer felt other in ourselues than corruption, and are bred and brought vp in darknesse like the Cim∣merians, would beare ourselues on hand, that GOD is the cause and author thereof. Now, let vs which haue tasted both the Wine and the Uineger, iudge what maner of creatures we may haue bin in our first creation: in doing whereof there is yet notwithstanding this great difference, that the pa••at of our bodily mouth is able to discerne the swéete frō the sower; but the palat or tas•••• of our soule, is vnable to do eyther of them both the one, because corruption can not iudge of cleannesse; and the other, because it cannot iudge well

of it selfe. In Wine and Uineger we discerne a liquid nature com∣mon to them both: but as concerning their qualities, the Wine is swéete, warme, and friendly to nature; whereas the Uineger is sharpe, cold, and corrosiue: yea and the very colours of them are vn∣like one another. Lo here two things vtterly contrary; and yet not∣withstanding, the Uineger is nothing els but Wine altered from his nature. And because we haue seene the one as wel as the other; we will neuer bee made to beléeue, that the Uineger was Uineger from the very Grape. Let vs iudge of our Soules with like discre∣tion. We finde there a spirituall nature, immateriall and immor∣tall; and that is the onely remaynder of her first originall. But yet this Spirit of ours is foreward to nothing but euill, nor inclyned to any other thau bace and transitorie things. It clingeth to the earth, and is a bondslaue to the body. To be short, in stead of stying vp, it crauleth I wote not how, contrary to the nature of a Spirit, which mounteth vp on high, and cannot bee shut vp in these vyle and drossie things. Therefore it must néedes bee sayd, that this na∣ture of ours was not so of nature; it departed not such as it now is from the hand of the workmayster: but contrarywise, good, frée, pure, and indewed with farre other qualities than it hath now: for now it is steyned with naughtinesse, bondage of sinne, and corrup∣tion. Nay will some man say, seeing it was created cléere from all corruptiō, who was able to corrupt it as we see it to be now? Sure wee be that it is a spirituall nature: and therefore neyther the Ele∣ments nor any other bodie, could naturally do any hurt vnto it; and as little also could tyme doe any thing thereto: for tyme is nothing but the mouing of bodies. Moreouer it was free of it selfe, and La∣die of the bodie, and therefore could not receyue her first corruption from the bodie. And yet notwithstanding wee see, that as now it is subiect to be corrupted, both of her owne flesh and of the vanities of the world, which by nature had no power ouer it. Néeds then must the maker of nature himselfe, haue giuen a power to these things aboue their nature, whereby they might preuayle agaynst the na∣ture of the Soule; the doing whereof surely could not but haue bin rightfull in him, considering that he is the very rightuousnesse it selfe. For Iustice layeth not any punishment, but where some fault or offence hath gone afore. Therefore it must néedes bee sayd, that man had committed some hey••••••s crime against his maker, wher∣vpon such penaltie and bondage were appoynted iustly vnto him. And therefore let vs say, that the Soule of man being the first cor∣rupter

of it self, did of it owne accord vanish away as Wine turneth in it selfe and of it self into Uineger: whereas if the Soule had hild her selfe in awe and vnder couerture, and had rested on her Lées as is sayd of Wine; that is to say, if she had abidden stedfast in behol∣ding her maker, without seeking her welfare in her selfe: she might haue continued vtterly vncorrupted still. And agayne, that by tur∣ning so away from GOD to her selfe, she offended her maker, and forwent the gracious giftes which she had receyued of him; where∣vpon followed the curse of the Creator, and the sentence of his iust wrath vppon his creature; wherethrough it came to passe, that the same was not onely bereft of all the grace wherewith it was reple∣nished by beholding it selfe in him, but also was made an vnderling to the selfesame things which were made to haue done it seruice. Now what this sinne was, wee cannot better vnderstand, than by the punishment thereof. For punishment and sinne haue a mutuall respect one to another, as a sore and a salue, and may after a sort be knowne the one by the other. Order would that our wit should o∣bey GOD, and that all our sences and appetites should obey our reason: but wee see that as now our sences and appetites hold rea∣son vnder foote. This punishment ought to set our fault before our eyes, when as wee see our selues falne downe and thrust vnder our selues; namely, that man intended to haue mounted vp aboue God. The same order would also that all the whole world and worldly things should haue serued man, and man haue serued GOD; that God might haue bene the marke of man, as man should haue bene the marke for all other things to haue amed at. But wee see that at this day man is an vnderling to the least things that are: insomuch that euen those which haue neither sence nor life doe resist him, and he pitcheth the ende of all his desires in earthly things, as if they were of more valewe than himselfe, accordingly as all of vs know, that the end is alwaies better thā the things that tend to the same. Séeing then that nature is reuolted from man, it is certeyne that man is reuolted from God: for it is the ordinary punishment of re∣bellious Subiects, that their owne seruaunts and vnderlings also do kicke and spurne agaynst them. And moreouer, seeing that man not only findeth all maner of mischiefe and misfortune in himselfe, but is also so blynd as to seeke his felicitie in the myre, and in the durtie dunghils of this world; it is a token that he sought his hap∣pinesse in himself, and elswhere than in God? To bee short, wée bée striken in our Soules with ignorance of the things that are most

néedfull for vs; and in our bodies with continuall infirmities, and finally with death: and that is because we haue bene curious in see∣king trifeling things, as not contented with the lesson that GOD had giuen vs; and would néedes haue made our selues immortall, howbeit not by the euerlasting power of Gods quickening spirit, but by the forbidden vse of transitorie things, yea euen which had no life in them. Thus see we now whereof the corruption of man∣kynd is come, namely euen of our owne transgression, and of the punishment that followed vpon the same.

But it is demaunded of vs yet further,* 1.534 how long it is ago since this befell. If wee had espyed this corruption in vs but from some certeyne hundred yéeres hence; it were not for vs to seeke any fur∣ther for it. But let vs hold on our course vp the streame of Man∣kynd euen to the Riuers head, and wee shall finde it still alwaies foule and muddy; and we shal from age to age heare these outcryes euen among the best, I loue well the good, but I cannot doe it; and (to bee short) that man is inclyned to doe euill, and subiect to receyue euill; which are in one word both the fault and the pu∣nishment. Agayne, were it but in some households, or but in some Nations only, men would not sticke to father the fault vppon the Clymate and the Soyle, or vppon the misteaching or misexample of the Parents. But when we see that in that respect all men are in one selfesame taking, aswell the men of old tyme as the men of our daies, sauing that sinne increaseth continually, as well vnder the Equinoctiall lyne as betwéene both the Tropicks, and as well on the further side as on the hether side of them, sauing that some take more payne to keepe it from sight thā others, and that those which haue most wit are woorst; forasmuch as I haue alreadie sufficiently proued the creation of the world and of the first man: wee be driuen to mount vp agayne to the same man, and to say that as he is the roote of our ofspring, so is he also the welspring of this corruption which reigneth in vs, as in whom our whole race was both attein∣ted with sinne, and attached with punishment. In this behalfe it is not for vs to pleade against GOD, but to submit our shoulders to his Iustice, and to lift vp our eyes to his mercie. For necessarily from poynt to poynt doth this consequence ensewe: The Soule is corrupted in all mankynd: Who is so corrupted that he feeleth it not? This corruption cannot procéed from the Creator. For when did euer purenesse yéeld forth corruptiō? The other creatures could not haue defiled it. For what maketh a thing vncleane, but the ta∣king

of vncleannesse vnto it? and what causeth the taking of vn∣cleannesse vnto it, but the touching thereof? and what touching one of another can there be betwéene a Spirit and a Bodie? It remay∣neth therefore that our Soule corrupted it self by forsaking her due∣tie, eyther of her owne accord, or by the admitting vnto it of some wicked Spirit, that is to say by perswasion of that Spirit, which perswasion is vnto Spirits, as touching is vnto bodies. And a∣gayne, this coruption is from all tyme: then comes it not of tray∣ning. And in all Nations: then comes it not of Constellation. And in all ages, both old young and middle sort: then comes it not of i∣mitation or exampletaking. Therefore it must néedes procéed both from one only man, and from the firstcreated man, who turned a∣way from God through pride, whervpon God also did iustly turne away from him, as wee reade of our first father Adam in the holy Scripture. Now then, what remayneth more for vs, but to con∣clude that thing by nature, which wee beléeue through Scripture? namely, That God created man good: That he told him his will: That man chose to liue after his owne lyking, and would néedes become equall with God: That therevpon he was banished from Gods presence and fauour: That the Earth became rebellious a∣gainst man, and man against himselfe: and to bee short, that man was wrapped in the wretchednesse of this world, intangled with sinne in himself, driuen to liue euer dying in this life, and (were not Gods wrath appeased towards him) sure to dye euerlastingly in the life to come.

The xvij. Chapter.

That the men of old time agreed with vs concerning mans corruption and the cause thereof.

IT followeth that wee gather the voyces and iudgements of the wisest sort, yea & of all men in generall; the which in myne opinion ought to beare the more sway with vs, because it is a kindly thing with vs, both to loue our selues, and also to thinke ouerwell of our selues. For what cause hath a man to complayne, if being

made Iudge in his owne case, he frame his owne indytement, and willingly beare witnesse against himselfe, by his owne voluntarie confession? Surely, that man is straungly infected with vyce; it is witnessed sufficiently by the Histories of all ages, which in effect are nothing els but registers of the continuall Manslaughters, Whoredomes, Guyles, Rauishments, and Warres? And when I say Warres, I thinke that in that worde I comprehend all the mischief that can be imagined.* 1.535 And that these vyces were not crea∣ted in mans nature, but are crept into it; it appeareth sufficiently by the bookes of the Ceremonies of al Nations; all whose Church∣seruices are nothing but Sacrifices, that is to say, open protesta∣tions both euening and morning, that we haue offended God, and ought to bee sacrifized and slayne for our offences according to our desarts, in stead of the sillie Beastes that are offered vnto him for vs. Had man bene created with vyce in him, he should haue had no conscience of sinne nor repentance for it. For repentance presuppo∣seth a fault, and conscience misgiueth the insewing of punishment for the same. And there can be neither fault nor punishment in that which is done according to creation, but onely in and for our tur∣ning away from creation. Now, the Churchseruice and Ceremo∣nies of all Nations, doe witnesse vnto vs a certeyne forthinking and remorce of sinne against God. And so they witnesse altogether a forefeeling of his wrath, which cannot bee kindled against nature which he himselfe created, but against the faultinesse and vnkindly∣nesse that are in nature.

Also what els are the great number of Lawes among vs, but authenticall Registers of our corruption? And what are the mani∣fold Commentaries written vppon them, but a very corruption of the Lawes themselues? And what doe they witnesse vnto vs, but as the multitude of Phisitions doth in a Citie; namely, the multi∣tudes of our diseases; that is to wit, the sores and botches whereto our Soules are subiect, euen to the marring and poysoning of the very playsters themselues? Againe, what doe the punishments be∣wray which we haue ordeyned for our selues, but that wee chastise in vs, not that which GOD hath made or wrought in vs, but that which wee our selues haue vndone or vnwrought: nor the nature it selfe, but the disfiguring of nature? But yet when we consider that among all Nations, that Lawmaker is beléeued and followed by and by, which sayth, Thou shalt not kill, thou shalt not steale, thou shalt not beare false witnesse; whereas great perswasion is required

in all other lawes which are not so naturall: It must néedes be con∣cluded, that the Consciences of all men are perswaded of them∣selues, that the same is sinne, and that sinne deserueth punishment; that is to wit, that sinne is in nature, but not nature it selfe. But to omit the holy Scripture, which is nothing els but a Lookingglasse to shewe vs our spots and blemishes; what are all the Schooles of the Philosophers,* 1.536 but instructions of the Soule? And what els is Philosophie it selfe, but an arte of healing the Soule, whereof the first precept is this so greatly renowmed one, know thy selfe? A∣ristotle* 1.537 in his Moralles, sheweth that the affections must be ruled by reason, and our mynd bee brought from the extremes into the meanes, and from iarring into right tune. Which is a token that our mynd is out of tune euen of it owne accord, seeing that it née∣deth so many precepts to set it in tune agayne. And yet is not Ari∣stotle so presumptuous as to say, that euer he brought it to passe in his owne mynd.* 1.538 Theophrast his Disciple was woont to say, that the Soule payd wel for her dwelling in the bodie, considering how much it suffered at the bodies hand. And what els was this, but an acknowledgement of the debate betwéene the bodie and the mynd? But (as sayth Plutarke) he should rather haue sayd, that the bodie hath good cause to complayne, of the turmoyles, which so irksome and troublesome a guest procureth vnto him.* 1.539 Plato who went a∣fore them, sawe more cléerly than both of them. He condemneth e∣uerywhere the companie and fellowship of the body with the soule, and yet he condemneth not the workmanship of God. But he tea∣cheth vs that the Soule is now in this bodie as in a prison, or ra∣ther as in a Caue or a graue. And that is because he perceiued eui∣dently, that contrarie to the order of nature, the Soule is subiect to the bodie, notwithstanding that naturally it should and can com∣maund it. The same Plato sayth further, that the Soule créepeth bacely vpon these lower things, and that it is tyed to the matter of the bodie: the cause whereof he affirmeth to be, that she hath broken her wings which she had afore. His meaning then is, that the soule of her owne nature is winged and flyeth vpward, that is to say, is of a heauēly & diuine nature, which wings she hath lost by meanes of some fall. But to get out of these bonds, and to recouer her wings, the remedie that Plato giueth her, is to aduaunce her selfe towards God, and to the things that concerne the mynd. By the remedie we may coniecture what he tooke the disease to be namely, that our Soule hauing bin aduaunced by God to a notable digni∣tie,

the which it might haue kept still by sticking vnto God; fell to gazing at her gay feathers, till she fell headlong into these transito∣rie things, among the which she créepeth now like a sillie woorme, reteyning nothing as now of her birdlike nature, saue onely a row∣sing of her feathers and a vayne flapping of her wings. Now he sayth that he learned all this of a secret Oracle, the which he had in great reuerence. And of ••••••cueth, in this doctrine of the originall of our corruption, wee haue to marke the same poynt which wee haue noted in some other things afore; namely, that the néerer wee come to the first world, the more cléere and manifest we finde the matter. * 1.540 Empedocles and Pythagoras taught that the Soules which had offended God, w•••• condemned and banished into bodies here be∣lowe. And Phil••••••aus* 1.541 the Pythagorian addeth, that they receyued that opinion from the Diuines and Prophets of old tyme. Their meaning is, that the body, which ought to be the house of the soule, is by Gods iust iudgemēt turned into a prison to it; and that which was giuen it for an instrument, is become Manicles and Stocks. So then, there is both a fault and the punishment: and the fault must néedes procéede from one first man, euen in the iudgement of those men of olde tyme, which acknowledged the Creation of the world. Also those auncient fathers seeme to haue heard what pro∣uoked the first man to sinne. For Homer speaketh of a Goddesse whom he calleth Até, (that is to say Waste, Losse, or Destruction) which troubled heauen, and therefore was cast downe to the earth, where she hath euer since troubled Mankynd. And herevpon Euri∣pides calleth the Féendes 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that is to say, Falne from Heauen. And the AEgiptians, who bee of most antiquitie, hild and taught the same in their Misteries. It is a méetly cléere shadowe of that which we reade in the Scripture concerning the fall of the de∣uill, wherevnto he drewe mankynd afterward by his temptations. * 1.542 But when as Pherecydes the Syrian agréeing therein with Sibil, telleth vs expresly that this Deuill which hath marred and destro∣yed the whole earth was a Serpent, (whom he calleth 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that is to say, Snakebread or Adderbread,) which ar∣meth men by whole troopes against God: we by gathering al these testimonies together, shall haue the whole storie of the fall of man. Hermes* 1.543 being auncienter than all these, doth plainly acknowledge the corruption of man, yea and that so farre, as to say that there is nothing but euill in vs, & that there is no way for vs to loue God, but by hating our selues. And to kéepe vs from accusing the Crea∣tor,

The workmaister (sayth he to cut off all quarelling) is not the procurer of the rust, neyther is the Creator the author of the filth and vncleannesse that is in vs. On whom then shall wee fa∣ther the cause therof? God (sayth he) created man after his owne likenesse, and gaue him all things to vse. But man in stead of staying vppon the beholding of his father, would needes bee medling and doing somewhat of himselfe, and so fel from the heauenly contemplation into the Sphere of Elements or of Generation. And because he had power ouer al things, he be∣gan to fall in loue with himselfe, and in gazing vpon himself, to wonder at himself; whereby he so intangled himselfe, that he became a bondslaue to his bodie, whereas he was free and at libertie afore. Now he intangleth this trueth with his accusto∣med speculations. But yet what is this in effect, but that the first man being proud of the grace which he had receyued, drowned him selfe in the loue of himselfe, whereas he might haue liued euerla∣stingly by drinking still of the loue of GOD? And if we mount vp yet higher to Zoroastres,* 1.544 who (as is written of him) was Noes graundchild: wee shall finde that in his Oracles, he bewayleth the race of Mankynd in these words. Alas alas, the Earth mourneth euen vnto Children! which words cannot be otherwise interpre∣ted than of originall sinne, which hath passed from the first man in∣to all his ofspring; after which maner the Cabalistes and namely Osias the Chaldian interpret it; wherevnto Gemistus* 1.545 the Plato∣nist is not repugnant. And as touching the originall of this mis∣chief, he denyeth in these words that it came of creation; The thing that is vnperfect (sayth he) cannot proceede of the Creator.

Now that we be come as it were vp the streame to the first man Adam by whom sinne entered into the world, and by sinne, death: let vs see hēceforth what the opinion of the Philosophers hath bin, since the comming of the second man Iesus Christ. We haue a little booke of one Hierocles a Stoick,* 1.546 vppon the golden sayings of Pythagoras, which shall answer both for the Pythagorists and for the Stoiks. Man (sayeth he) is of his owne motion inclyned to follow the euill and to leaue the good. There is a certein stryfe bred in his affections, which stepping vp ageinst the will of Nature, hath made it to tumble from Heauen to Hell, by vndertaking to fight ageinst God. He hath a free will which he abuseth, bending himself wholy to incounter the Lawes of God: and this freedum itself is nothing else but a willingnesse

to admit that which is not good, rather than otherwise. What els is this, but as the holy scripture saieth, that al the imaginations of manes hart are altogither continewally bent to euill? and which wee dayly dispute of, namely that our freedome is fresh and fore∣ward vnto euill, but lame and lasie vnto dooing well? If yee aske him the cause thereof, Let vs not blaspheme for all that, (sayeth he) nor say that God is the author of our sinnes: but rather that man is of his owne accord become vntoward; and that whensoeuer we fall into sinne, we do that which is in vs, but not which was in vs from God. How then shall we make these propositions of his to agree; namely that God created man; that man is froward and corrupted; and yet that God created not man such a one: vnlesse we say that God created man good, and that afterward man degenerated from his nature? But it is the very thing whereunto he commeth of himself. Ambition (sayth he) is our bane; and this mischeefe haue wee of ourselues, bycause we be gone away from God, and do giue ourselues to earthly things, which make vs to forget God. And that this mischeef is comon to all mankynd, he confesseth sufficiently in that he giueth vs an vniuersall remedie that is to wit Religion: the which alon∣ly is able (sayeth he) to rid vs from earthly ignorance, without the riddance whereof, we can neuer come agein to our former shape, and to the lykenes of our kynd, which was to be lyke vnto God. Now if all the whole kynd be defiled as he sayeth it is; surely we must resort backe to one first father, frō whom it is spred out into the rest by naturall generation.* 1.547 Plutarke wryting of Mo∣rall vertue, findeth it a very hard matter to make our affection sub∣iect to reason, and the body obedient to the spirit. And he is driuen to maruell greatly, That our féete should be so ready to goe or too stand still whensoeuer Reason loozeneth or pulleth backe the Bry∣dle; and that on the contrarie part, our affections should carry vs away so headlong for all the restreint that wee can make. Also hee thinketh it strange, that in our discourses of the greatest matters, as of Loue, of the bringing vp of our Children, and of such like, we be driuen to take the brute beastes for our Iudges, as who woulde say that nature had stamped no Print of them in our selues; And he findeth himself so sore graueled in his consideration, that he pre∣ferreth the brute beastes before vs in all things, sauing in the capa∣citie which wee haue to knowe God; vndoubtedly as perceiuing a continuall following of their kind in all of them, wheras in vs on∣ly

there is contrariwise such an vnkindly and Bastardly Nature, that not euen the best of vs haue any whit of our former nature re∣mayning in vs, sauing onely shame that we haue it no more. And this very gift of knowing God which remayneth to man, graue∣leth Plutarke more than all the rest. Man (saieth he) is a reasona∣ble Creature; God hath set him in the world to be serued & honored of him, and he hath made him to be borne to com∣mon ciuill Societie. Whereof commeth it then that in his do∣ings he is more vnreasonable, more contrarie to Gods will, and more against the Lawe of Nature, then the very brute beastes? In this perplexitie, one whyle he saith that man had re∣ceiued fayre and sound Seede, but that he corrupted it afterward: Anotherwhile hee sayth that he delt with reason as perfumers doe with Oyles, which neuer ceasse medling and mingling of them, till there remayne no sent of Oyle at all: And in one place, per∣ceiuing (by all likelihod) this corruption to be so vniuersal: he saith further, that at the very beginning and from their first comming into the Worlde, men intangled and confounded themselues with sinne. Whereby we may perceiue, that had the thing bin declared vnto him in such sort as wée beléeue it; surely hee would willingly haue imbraced and receiued it, as the only solution of so many per∣plexities wherein he was intangled.

Let vs come to the Platonists. All of them agrée in these points; That the Soule of Man is a spirit; and that a spirit cannot natu∣rally receiue any affection from a body, neither which may cause it to perish, nor which may doe so much as once trouble it. Yet not∣withstanding, on which side so euer they turne themselues, they cannot deny but that our mynds are trubbled with infinite affecti∣ons and passions in this body, and that they be subiect one while to starting besides themselues through pryde, anger or enuie; an ano∣ther while to be cast downe with Riottousnes, Gluttonie, and I∣dlenes; yea and to receiue diuers impressions not only from the bo∣dy, but also from the aire, the water, and from Mistes, and finally from euery little thing in the world. Now how can this contrarie∣tie be reconciled, except their meaning be as ours is, that natural∣ly our Soules are not subiect to any of these things, but that they bee put in subiection to them beyond the course of nature? If it bee beyond the course of nature; by whome is it doone, but by him that commaundeth nature, to whome it is as easie to put a spirit in Pri∣son, as to lodge a man in a house? If it be done by him who is the

rightuousnes it selfe; doth it not followe that it was for some fault committed by the Soule? If for some fault; then seeing that the punishment thereof is in all men, in whome should that first fault be, but in that man which was the originall of all men, as in whom all of vs (say I) were materially? Now againe, this fault cannot bee imputed to the body, for it is in the will, and the body of it selfe hath no will: neither can it be imputed to any ••••fection receiued first from the body; for the Soule could not be wrought into by the body. In the Soule therefore must the fault of mankind néedes be, and for the soules offence doth the Soule itself suffer punishment, and make the body also to suffer with her.

Howbeit, that we may the better iudge of their opinions, let vs heare them in the chief of them one after another. Plotine hauing considered that the Soule is of nature diuine, heauenly, and spiri∣tuall; concludeth that of itselfe it is not wrought into by the body. But afterward perceiuing how it is defiled, ouermaistred by sinne,* 1.548 and by force of necessitie linked vnto lust; he commeth backe to this solution, That hir béeing here beneath is but a banishment too her,* 1.549 which he termeth expresly a fall, and otherwise (as Pato doth) a lo∣sing of hir wings: That the vertue which she hath, is but a Rem∣nant of hir former nature; That the vyce which she hath, is taken by dealing by these bace and transitorie things: and too bee short, that al the vertue which is learned, is but a purging of the Soule, which must be fayne to be as it were newfurbished, to scoure of the greate Rust that hath ouergrowen it. In these Contradictions therefore hee maketh this question to himselfe:* 1.550 What should bee the cause (sayth hee) that our Soules being of a diuine nature, should so forget both God their father, and their kinred, and themselues? Surely (answereth he) the beginning of this mis∣cheef, was a certeine rashnes & ouerboldnesse, wherethrough they would needes plucke their neckes out of the collar, and be at their owne commaundement; by which abuse turning their libertie into licentiousnes, they went cleane backe, and are so farre gone away from GOD, that (like Children which being newly weaned, are byanby conueyed away from their Fathers and Moothers, they knowe neither whose, nor what they be, nor from whence they came. Now in these words he a∣greeth with our Diuines, not only in this, y^t corruption came in by sin,* 1.551 but also in y^e kind of sinne, namely Pryde, wherby we be turned away frō our Maker. In another place, The Soule (saith he) which

was bred for heauenly things, hath plundged itselfe in these materiall things, and matter of itselfe is so euill, that not onely all that is of matter or matched with matter, but also euen that which hath respect vnto matter, is filled with euill, as the eye that beholdeth darknes is filled with darknes. Here ye sée, not onely from whence we be turned away, but also too what: that is too wit, from God, to vanitie, from the Creator to the creature, from good to euill. But of this inclyning to the materiall things, he sometymes maketh the body to be the author,* 1.552 as though the bo∣dy had caried the Soule away by force of his imaginations; and he acquitteth the mynde thereof as much as he can, insomuch as hee sticketh not to affirme, that notwithstanding all this marrednesse, yet the Soule liueth and abideth pure and cleane in God,* 1.553 yea euen whyle the Soule (whereof the Mynd is as yee would say the very eisight or apple of the eye) dwelleth in this body. Howbeit, besides that he is reproued for it by Porphyrius, Proclus and others; his owne reasons whereby he proueth that the Soule is not naturally subiect to the body, be so strong; that it were vnpossible for him too shift himself from them. In this the great Philosopher is ouershot, that he will needes seeke out the cause of sinne in Man as Man is now. Where finding Reason caried away by Imagination, and I∣magination deceiued by the Sences; he thought the fault to haue procéeded of that; wheras in deede he should haue sought the cause in Man as he was first created, when he had his Sences and Ap∣petites absolutely at commaundement, whose wilfull offending hath brought vppon vs the necessitie of punishment which we in∣dure. And in good sooth, this saying of his in another place cannot be interpreted otherwise; namely that the cause why the Soule indureth so many trubbles and passions in this body, is to be taken of the life which is led afore out of the body: that is to say, that the subiection of the Soule to the Body is not the originall cause of the sinne therof, but rather a condemnation thereof to punishment.* 1.554 Neither also can he scape frō these conclusions of his owne, name∣ly that the Soule beeing separated from the body, hath her wings sound and perfect: and that the Body being ioyned to the Soule, hath no power to breake her wings, and yet that she findeth herself there to be weake and without wings: except he hold with vs, that the Soule hath by her fall forgone her strength, and that the body by the feeblenes of the Soule and the sentence of the Creator, is strengthened in his weakenesse: that is to wit, in so much as the

body (as I haue sayde afore) is of a House become a Prison to the Soule. To be short, graunting Gods Iustice, as he doth; hee can neuer wind himselfe out of this question which he himself maketh; namely why the sinnes are imputed to the Soule, seeing it doth them not but by infection of the body; vnlesse he make this infecti∣on to be a punishment of the fault which the Soule had committed afore in the body.

But Porphyrius, who perceyued these inconueniences, hath spoken more distinctly of the matter than his Mayster did, agrée∣ing with him neuerthelesse in the corruption of man,* 1.555 and in the cleansing of the Soule; Which cleansing of the Soule (sayth he) is so needfull a thing, as that it cannot possibly bee but that God hath prouided some vniuersal meane of cleansing man∣kynd. How is it possible then (sayth he) that the fall of the Soule, should come of Imagination which knitteth the Soule to the bodie, seeing that the higher things are not drawne downe by the lower, but contrarywise the lower are drawne vp by the higher? Nay rather (sayth he) the higher substances come downe in themselues from vnderstanding into imagi∣nation, from spirituall things to bodily things, from high things to lowe things, frō perfect things to vnperfect things. And wheras by sticking fast vnto God they might haue abid∣den firme, not so much by their owne strength as by his, and might haue liued and wrought as vnder his forme; they bee come to a fall of themselues by stooping to matter. And ther∣fore* 1.556 (sayth he) in the substaunces which are inclinable to such things, there is befalne (as men say) a sinne, and a certeyne vn∣beleef which is condemned, because they fell in loue with the Creatures, and turned away to them from the Creator. To be short, he commeth to this poynt, that the fall of mens Soules, is like the fall of the Féendes that is taught by the Iewes, and that through the fault of the wit and the will, which he termeth vnbe∣leefe or vnfaithfulnesse, man is falne into the folly of concupiscence, that is to say,* 1.557 from the fault into the punishment thereof, from the rebellion of the Soule, into the bondage thereof to the bodie. And ye must not thinke wee speake contraries when wee say, one while that man sinned by aduauncing himself too high, and by presuming to become as it were equall with God; and another while that he sinned by stooping downe to these bace and lowe things. For in ve∣ry déede, the lifting vp of a mans selfe to Godward, is the true a∣bacing

and humbling of himselfe: for who is hée that can rightly looke vp to God, and make account of himselfe, or rather not bee a∣baced in himselfe? And to inclyne to a mans selfe, is in very trueth a presuming to make himselfe equall to God. For it is a seeking of that thing in our selues, which is not to bee found but in GOD, namely of welfare and felicitie; and what els is pride, but a selfesti∣mation or an ouerwéening of a mans selfe?

Proclus* 1.558 doth ordinarily call the inclyning of our nature vnto e∣uill, a descending or comming downe; and the corruption thereof, a fall, because the highest that our Soule can atteyne vnto, is the be∣holding of God; and the descending, stooping, or comming downe thereof, is to fall into estimation of our selues; and the fall is to bee thrust downe [in subiectiō] vnder our selues, like a body that falleth from some high place. But as touching the cause of the corruption, he fathereth it vppon our Mynd, that is to wit, the highest part of our Soule; saying that if the same had continued sound, and sticked fast vnto God, (as sayth Plotin) it had also hild reason sound still, which is the Sunbeame thereof, and consequently all our actions should haue bene found, so as wee should not haue bene subiect to sinne. Séeing then that the punishment is come euen to the highest part of vs, which we sée combered with so many passions, dimmed with so much darknesse, and defiled with so many vyces: surely the fault procéeded onely from thence. Herevnto we might ad many o∣ther sayings; but wee will content our selues as now with onely Simplicius* 1.559 the famous interpreter of Aristotle. As long as mans Soule (sayth he) cleaueth fast vnto God the author thereof, it abydeth sound, and holdeth her perfection wherwith she was created of God: but fall she once to shrinking away from him, by and by she withereth as hauing lost her roote, and comes to nothing; neyther can she recouer her former liuelynesse, except she be reunited agayne to her former cause. Now per∣ceyue we euerychone of vs, that our nature is withered; and there∣fore let vs say that we be slipped from our roote. And the roote lea∣ueth not the braunches, but contrarywise the braunches leaue the roote. Let vs say then that we haue bereft ourselues of the gracious goodnesse of God, who would haue mainteyned vs still: for to nou∣rish and quicken, is the propertie and nature of the roote. In one only thing doe the Philosophers differ from vs in this behalfe: namely, that they vphold all mens Soules to haue sinned euery one in himselfe; and wee say, That the onely first man sinned, and

thereby hath bound all his whole ofspring to the punishment. But yet doe both come backe agayne to one poynt, seeing that euen by their owne reasons I proued the creation of the world, which of necessitie leadeth vs to one man the father of vs all, whereas the Philosophers hang wauering still vnresolued in that poynt.

Among all people wee see there were prayers to craue pardon for sinne,* 1.560 Sacrifices to appease Gods wrath, Misticall washings, and Satisfactories or Uotaries that were 〈…〉〈…〉 ••he sinnes of some whole Realme, Citie, or 〈…〉〈…〉 (as I haue sayd afore) are publick protestations of a publick 〈◊〉〈◊〉. The Phi∣losophers were sore combered in finding a meane 〈…〉〈…〉 Man∣kynd from his filthinesse; some would haue done it by the Morals; some by the Mathematicals; and some by Religious Ceremonies: but in the end they confesse that all these ••••••ngs can doe nothing in that behalf. They be fooles in their remedies, but wise in discerning the disease. Wee reade of the people of Affricke at this day, (who bee giuen enough to contemplation,) that they fall into great con∣ceyts of mynd, and are not able to perswade themselues that all their Churchseruices are sufficient to make them cleane. And that is a proofe that they féele a mischief within them, whereinto neither the eye of the Phisition can see, nor the medicine that he ministreth can atteyne.* 1.561 Also the Persians were woont to hold a holyday euery yéere, which they called The Death of vyces: In the which Feast, for a token of deuotion, they killed of all sorts of Serpents & wyld Beastes. And doubtlesse that was because they had learned, that man doth couertly carie in his breast all maner of Beasts, y^e which it behoueth him to kill in himselfe, according to this saying of the Platonists, That the readiest way to returne vnto God, and con∣sequently to a mans first nature,* 1.562 is to kill his owne affections. But what shall we say to that which we haue learned in these our daies among the barbarous Nations of the West Indies? There came a man into their Countrey (say they) which called himself the Sonne of the Sonne, who by his word and power replenished the Land with men and women whom hee created, and gaue them great abundance of fruits. Who doth not herevppon call by and by to remembrance the creation of man and woman in the Scripture, where God sayth vnto them, Increase and multiply and fill the earth; I haue giuen you al hearb bearing seede, and all trees bearing fruite, and so foorth? But (sayth the booke of their Diuinitie) because some men prouoked his displeasure, he af∣terward

chaunged the good soyle which he had giuen them, into drye and barreyne sands, and bereft them of Rayne, and left them nothing but a few riuers to helpe themselues with∣all by their great labour and trauell. Who espyeth not here a∣gayne the sinne of man, Gods curse vppon the earth, and namely these words, In the sweate of thy browes shalt thou eate thy bread all the daies of thy life? And who should bee ignorant of God, when as euen those knowe him, whom wee estéeme to bee almost of another kynd than we be?

But here the wicked perceyuing themselues to want matter to replye,* 1.563 do fail to rayling against God. Séeing that man (say they) sinned through the fréewill which GOD gaue vnto him; how can God be called good, hauing giuen man wherewith to sinne? By the same reason I say at once for all, if God be good; why hath he made Man, or any thing for Man? If he should take from thée all that thou abusest, I pray thee what should bee left thée? Thy Reason? What is there in thée that maketh thée more vnreasonable? Thy Sences? To what other seruice doest thou put them, than to the marring of thy Sences? Thy Tongue? How much more eloquēt is it in speaking euill, than in speaking good? To bee short, where shal the good things become which he hath giuen thée for the main∣tenance of thy health and life? Nay, on the contrary part, which of them is it that thou turnest not to thy death and to thy bane? Now is the founder of them to blame, if thou kill thy self with the things without the which thou couldest not liue? Or if thou become euill by the things without the which thou couldest not be good? GOD hath giuen thée a will; and without will thou couldest not bee good. Unto will hee hath added a good wit to guyde it: and without wit thou couldest not be wise. If thou be loth to be eyther good or wise, it is but because thou art loth to bee a man. Thy will was giuen thée to loue God withall. Now, loue delighteth to bee fréeharted; neither would God bee loued of vs as inchaunted to it, but freely and vtterly vnconstreined. Therfore it behoued this will to be frée. Likewise thy wit was giuen thée to behold God withall. And had∣dest thou but onely thy Sences, what haddest thou more than the brute Beastes? And if thou haddest no more than they; why were they and all the whole world made for thee? Now then, which of these two canst thou finde fault with, seeing that without them both, thou couldest be neither good, nor wise, no nor a man? Thou wouldest haue bin created vnchaungeable; howbeit, not as a Rock

or a Mountayne, but as a Man. Surely the vnchaungeablenesse of Spirits, was created to depend vppon their linking in with their maker. Thou wouldest peraduenture haue bin an Angel: but there are euen of the Angels that are falne; and as thei were farre higher than thou, so was their fall more daungerous than thyne. O man, acknowledge the goodnes of the Creator in creating thée good; and acknowledge the vanitie of the creature, which cannot stand in his owne goodnesse, but in the goodnesse of the Creator. But especially aboue all things commend thou his goodnesse and mercie, in that he hath not onely reléeued thée in thy fall, but also as it were vphild thée that thou mightest fall the softer.

Another taketh exception to Gods Iustice. What Iustice is it (sayth he) to punish a man so rigorously for so small a fault? Nay, what is more iust than nature? What is more naturall than to runne into darknesse, when a man turneth away from the Sunne? Or (as Plotin sayth) to impayre and wex naught, when a man de∣parteth from the souereyne good? But O thou man which thinkest thy self iuster than God, what punishment wouldest thou appoynt to thy Sonne, not being a babe or a yoong childe, but being come to yéeres of discretion, and a mangrowen; not pinched and pyned, but flowing in all wealth: if vpon a brauerie and lustinesse of courage, he would disobey thée for a thing of nothing? Thē set thou Adam also before thyne eyes newly come into the world by the goodnesse of the Creator, not starke naked, but furnished with y^e whole world to serue him; not witlesse, but with a pure sound and skilfull mynd; not subiect to his lustes, but able to holde them in awe to his will, and hauing his will obedient to reason. Now, whether thou consi∣der his sinne, his rebellion, his vnfaithfulnes, and his pride; or whe∣ther thou haue an eye to the easines of absteyning from sinne: what punishment wilt thou not déeme him worthie to haue?

Yea (sayest thou) but why vseth he this rigour against his chil∣dren? Nay rather, say, why is he so mercifull, why is he so graci∣ous, as to kéepe them low in their fathers fall, least they should fall [more gréeuously] through the same rashnesse? Thou buildest a Citie, and the custome is to beautifie it with Priuiledges. After∣ward this Citie rebelleth; thou take•••• away their priuiledges, their Belles, their Armour, and their weapons; and this punishment of their Insurrection extendeth to all their posteritie, albeit they were but fewe at the beginning, and grewe to bee mightily multiplyed afterward. The graunting of the Priuiledges to the first, was a

poynt of goodnesse; for otherwise they might haue had occasion to complayne of thée. Likewise it is Iustice to take them so from thē, and mercie to withhold them from their posteritie who haue the same rebellious mynd in them, and had els runne headlong into extreme punishments. God gaue thée the priuiledge of freedome, and inriched thée with singular gifts both of body and mynd: praise thou his goodnesse. Now, because thou hast abused them, he eyther taketh them cleane away, or els diminisheth them: acknowledge thou his Iustice. And because thy children might doe as thou hast done, and would not be amended by thine example, he taketh them from them also and diminisheth them in thée: commend thou still his mercie in his Iustice, but specially honor thou his Iustice in his mercie, in that of this rebellious race hée causeth the partie to bee borne, which can appease his Iustice.

Yet for all this, they giue not ouer. If by the sinne of the first man (say they) nature be corrupted in all men: why be not the chil∣dren more corrupted than their Fathers, by meanes of so many sinnes committed by their Fathers? In this behalfe they mislyke of Gods clemencie, and yet could not Gods Iustice haue conten∣ted them. Now the Lords intent in punishing the rebellious Citi∣zens, was to make them submit themselues againe vnder his go∣uernement, and not to destroy them vtterly. And it was Gods in∣tent to humble mankind by making hym to feele the smart of his fall; and not to breake him in peeces in his wrath, but to reclayme him by his mercie. We bee falne into a Pit, we be falne from our highnes: now what would a second fall be? We haue broken our Wings already against the Earth; whether would wee fall at the next fall, being vnable to make a second flight? Wée be falne (say I) from the goodnes of our nature into naughtines, from Gods fa∣uour into his wrath: how can wee fall any lower? Nay rather by creeping halfebroken vpon the Earth, we knowe that we be falne; and féeling the losse which we haue susteyned, wee crye vnto God for relief, and like little Nurcechildren we beséech him to stay and vphold vs with his mightie hand.

Now therefore let vs conclude for these twoo last Chapters, That mans nature is corrupted; and that it was not so created of God; but that man abusing Gods grace, did cast himselfe downe from goodnesse into naughtines, and from Gods freefauour intoo his iust displeasure; and that the man in whome the sayd Nature was first corrupted, was the first man: from whom we haue recei∣ued

our corruption, as well as our nature. But let vs not so much muse to take an account how we be falne into this pit of infection, as earnestly bethinke vs by what meanes we may get out againe, which is the thing that we haue to treate of next.

The xviij. Chapter.

That God is mans souerein welfare, and therefore that the cheef marke which man should ame at, is to returne a∣gaine vnto God.

WE say that the chéefe poynt wherein fooles dif∣fer from wisemen, is that fooles shoote out their dooings at allauenture into the aire, and that wise men direct all their dooings to some cer∣teine end. And againe, that the poynt wherein good men differ from euill men, is that good men determine with themselnes vpon the good things, and euill men vpon the euill things, the good vppon that which is good in deede, and the euill vppon that which is good in showe. Therfore it standeth vs greatly on hand, both to haue some one certeine marke, and the same to be good: & to haue but one, be∣cause God hath giuen vs but one wit, and the perfection of wit is wizdome: and to haue the same good, because he hath giuen vs but one will, and the perfection of the will is goodnes. Surely God be∣ing the very goodnes and wizdome it selfe, was not without this one marke and the same very good, when he first created al things. For Nature (say the Philosophers) doth nothing otherwise than well and to a good ende. If they spake so of the Handmayd, what shall we say of the Mayster of the house? But forasmuch as he him self is the beginner, the holder on, and the ender of all things: he in all his doings did not set downe any other end than himselfe.* 1.564 We his creatures, who take our beginning and continuance from him, can haue none other end than him. Yet notwithstanding, the reaso∣•••••••• creature wisheth well to it selfe, and doth alwaies purpose a certeyne end with it selfe, which it thinketh to be behooffull. For the end of euery thing, is the peculiar good, benefite, or welfare therof:

and this desire being in vs by kynd, cannot be in vayne. Therefore it must néedes be that the true welfare of man consisteth in his true ende or in his true amingpoynt: and that the true amingpoynt of man, and the ende which the Creator intended, must méete iumpe together:* 1.565 That is to wit, he must imploye himselfe to the glorie of God, whose creating of all things was for his owne glorie, and by tending thitherward atteyne to his owne welfare, which is y^e thing that all things doe naturally seeke. And therefore if we finde either mans chiefe amingpoynt, or his souereyne welfare; we finde them both: for they be both but one selfesame thing; which in respect that his witte looketh thereat, is called his amingpoynt, and in respect that his will resteth thereon, is called his welfare, both of them to∣gether being the restingpoint of the whole man. And vnto this end is he to applye himselfe and all his motions, all his indeuers and all his desires, as to his highest felicitie benefite and welfare.

Now,* 1.566 had we continued in our originall nature, we should haue had no payne at all to séeke them: for our wit was inlightened with the sight of our marke, and our will was drawen by our welfare, that is to say, by GOD by whom and for whom we were created; whereas now through our pride our eyes are gazing at all things, sauing our right way and our chief welfare. Yet notwithstanding, wee may trace it out by certeyne markes, specially if wee beare in mynd that we be falne: for then wee will not stand groping for it in the filth of the things that are here beneath, as folke amazed at our fall; but wee will seeke for it in the grace and in the face of our ma∣ker from whence we be falne. For like as when we seeke to knowe the vse and goodnesse of a toole (as for example, of a Sawe,) wee consider it not by the rustinesse thereof that hath eaten away the téeth, or by the breakes that it hath taken by some falles; but by the téeth thereof which are sound, sharpe, and smooth, such as they were when they came newe out of the Sythemakers shop: euen so must we doe with man; we must not iudge of his end by the blyndnesse, ignorance, naughtinesse, and corruptnesse that is come vpon him, but by the excellencie, goodnesse, and light that was in him at the first when GOD created him. Also wee iudge not of the vse of the Sawe by the mettall thereof in that it is Stéele, or in that it hath a handle, or in that it hath an edge to cut withall: for a knife hath all things, which yet notwithstanding is neuer the more a Sawe for all that: but we déeme thereof by some peculiar shape, and by some propertie of the téeth therof, which make it to differ, not only from

a Knife, the which hath no téeth, but also from a Fyle which hath téeth, howbeit of another sort. Then let vs doe the like still in man. If wee déeme of the vse whereto God hath appoynted him, by that he liueth, or by that he hath sences; what néedeth man to be made, seeing that the Plants are indewed with life, and the brute Beasts both with life and sence? But now hath he made Man, and he hath not made him in vayne. The vse of him therefore is to be taken, of that part which GOD hath giuen him specially and peculiarly to make him a man; of that (I say) which maketh him to differ from the things which haue but onely being, life, and sence: I meane the very highest part of his Soule. Againe, the fayd perticular shape which giueth a perticular vse to the Sawe, is common to all tooles which beare the name of a Sawe: and therefore the special proper∣tie of Man which giueth him a peculiar vse which no other Crea∣ture hath, must néedes bee after such a sort peculiar vnto him, as it may neuerthelesse bee common to all of the same kynd: that is to say, as al men are created with that propertie, so all men must tend to that end. And forasmuch as that end is the souereyne welfare of Man; it hath consequently certeyne markes or tokens whereby it is to bee knowne. Man feareth nothing more than his end, neither desireth he any thing so much as to continue for euer: and yet not∣withstanding the souereine welfare is the end of Man: and there∣fore it must néedes bee an end without end; and end which doth not consume or waste, so as the thing which tendeth to it should therby be fordone: but which perfecteth & fulfilleth it, so as beyond it there is not aught that can bee desired or be. If there were any other be∣yond it, it were neither an end, nor souereine or chief. But for such a one doe we seeke. And if it could eyther waste or perish, we might be afrayd to lose it: and the greater that the pleasure were, the grea∣ter also should the greefe thereof bee. But the propertie of felicitie or happinesse is, to content the desire & to exclude feare. Now then, as touching the thing which we seeke; in respect that we seeke it as our end, it behoueth it to bee agreeable to the very nature of Man, peculiar to the whole kynd, and common to all that be of the kynd: and in respect that it is our souereine welfare, it behoueth it to bee vniuersall, perfect, and continuall. And now let vs see what that may be.

Surely if we consider man and the world;* 1.567 in man the Sences, and in the World the sensible things: man as the beholder, and the world as a Theatre: man as the guest, in the world the Feast pre∣pared

of all things conuenient for him: we will say by and by, not only that they be made the one for the other, but also that in very deede the World was made for man, and not man for the World or for any thing therein. And ageine, if we consider how that in the World there is wherewith to content the eye the eare and all the sences; but nothing that can sufficiently content the mynd, the which (as earthly as it is) passeth from the things visible to the in∣uisible, from the bodily to the gostly, and from the creatures to the maker: shall we not easily conclude (which thing I will treate of more at large hereafter) that as the worlde cannot be mans ende, so can it not also be his contentation? And yet notwithstanding man is not created for nought; neither is the desire of his owne welfare planted in him to no purpose. For as say the Philosophers, nature hath made nothing in vayn, neither is she maymed in things need∣full. Therefore it must needs be, and otherwyse it cannot be, but that the creator is the end and contentment of man, whose mynd cannot be satisfyed nor his will contented to the full, if any part of him do rest vppon these vyle and transitorie things. By the way whereas we comonly affirme that God is both the end and the wel∣fare of all things for that then he guyded and led whither soeuer be listeth by his prouidence, and also be made partakers of his good∣nes: we must vnderstand that this is verified of man after a ••ore high and excellent maner. Of the Creatures here beneathe, some haue but sence and appetite, and other some but only a bare inclina∣tion of nature: only man hath witte aud will, which make him a man. Now all these are vnfall••••••y directed whether soeuer it plea∣seth God, as the arrowe is leueled at some marke by the Archer, who shooteth the Arrow streyght though it haue no eye to see with. But man by a peculiar pruiledge hath an vnderstanding wit which was giuen vnto him cleere sighted and cleane, that he might see the marke whereat he is leueled, and will, which he receyued frank and free, that he myght repose all his delyght therein: the one to knowe and discerne it, the other to loue aud imbrace it; the one to see, and behold it, the other to obteyne and enioy it. Nowthen, as the hither end of all Creatures here beneathe is man, and the furthest end of them is God: so the neerest and immediate end of man is to knowe God, and his only welfare is to sticke wholy vnto him.

Let vs imagin man as much as we list,* 1.568 to be stil as sound as euer he was: yet what end, or what contentment could he haue but only God? We make greate account of riches; what could he be the bet∣ter

which had gotten all, or which had all riches gotten for him all ready to his hand? For what els is the getting of this world, but a proofe of want and pouertie? we esteeme hyghly of honor, of vaine tytles, and of dignities: And what els are all these but a bayne ga∣sing and wonderment of people, which can be none at all where no people are? Surely then was not man set in the world, to the intent that that should be his mark to ame at; and much lesse could he seeke his contentment there. Yet notwithstanding he had receyued more wit than we haue, and not to no end. And therefore we must needes say it was to direct him to some further thing than vanitie, which at that tyme could haue no place at all. Some will say, his fouereine welfare consisted in his health. What was his health; but his very being, and what maketh he••th to be esteemed, but siknesse•• and who longeth for it, but he that is diseased? But whereto serueth so excel∣lent a wit, if it be to haue nothing more than y^e brute beast? Another 〈◊〉〈◊〉 it cōsisted in vertue. How in vertue, seeing y^t vertue is nothing els but the subduing and conquering as affection by reason; whereof he was in possession already by nature, and had 〈◊〉〈◊〉 it still without cōtradiction she had not of his owne 〈…〉〈…〉 himself 〈…〉〈…〉

who sees not that many brute beastes doe passe man in lyuely force both of life and sence? But in this alone he (as Plutark saith) doth passe them all. Secondly, it must neuerthelesse bee comon to all men. Now (as vtterly blinded and corrupted as we be) what is more common among vs all, than the knowledge of God? If Ri∣ches and Honor bee the marke we shoote at; how feawe of so many men which leuell at it with Heart, Eye, Hand, and Sinewes, doe hit it? If our welfare consist in hauing our health, in béeing vertu∣ous, in dealing vprightly, or in calmenesse of mynd; how feawe doo inioy it? On the contrarie part, who is so blynd, that he feeth not God, as soone as hee doth but looke out with his Eyes? or which findeth him not within him selfe? or which atteyneth not to him, if he looke aboue himselfe? And who seeth not this marke, so cleere that the world is but a shadowe to it? so great that the whole world is nothing to it; and so néere, as that we be not néerer to our selues? Or who can be afrayd to bee shut out from it, whose greatnes hath roome inough for all, and whose sufficiencie is such, as the former shotte can be no impediment to the latter to haue a lighting place? Surely therefore we may wel say, that if we had continued sound, we could haue had none other marke or end but him; for all things els had bin nothing. And now also for all that we be corrupted; we ought not to tend or intend to any other than him; for he alone can be all to all, and this poynt can be nowhere but in him. To be short, like as the Soule is the shape of man, so is the knowledge of God the true shape of al vnderstanding of man. Neuerthelesse, although the shape of man was disfigured in the first man, yet there remay∣neth a certeine comon conceiuing of God, howbeit so defaced and beslubbered, that either wee discerne him no more to bee our ende, though hee put vs in mynd thereof on all sides; or els imagining our selues to leuell at that marke, we swarue aside one while to vn∣godlynes, and another whyle to superstition; or at leastwise we had leuer for the most part, to roue at euery thing that our sences méete withall, and too wallowe in these bace things like Beastes which haue no more but their sences.

Thirdly in our souereine welfare, I required that it should bee vniuersall. Now where shall it be found to be so but in God, who is in deede the very good of all goodnes, and the very welfare of all welfare that is in the world? Also that it should be perfect and full. And what desire wee but the things that are? And what can hee want, which possesseth him in whome all things are? Againe, I

added that the same must be euerlasting and vnchaungeable. Now who can bee so, but the maker of order and chaunge it selfe? and what thing see we heer•• in this word, yea euen in our selues, which a ••deth in one state by the space of two moments? To be short, if wee desire to content our sences, hee hath made sensible things for the ••once; and if we desire to content our mynd, he himselfe is the things that are to be mynded. Where then is the thing to be reco∣uered which we couet, but onely in him? Now as touching this vniuersall souereine good, true it is that all of vs are able too desire it, but for the most part of vs, vnable to discerne it, and none of vs able to atteine vnto it. There remaineth nothing to vs at all, I meane euen to the best of vs since our fall, but a gréef that we haue it not any more, and that we be not able of ourselues to recouer it ageine héere belowe. Then let vs say, that as it had bin a happy case for vs, to haue continued still in our first state: so is it now for vs to returne thither againe; that is to say, to be set againe in Gods fa∣uour, that we may oneday see his face yet againe. And because this blessednes cānot be brought to perfection in this life so full of wret∣chednes: we must dispose our lyfe in this world, not to liue still in the world, but to dye in respect of these dead things, and to liue vn∣to God; at leastwise if wee intend to liue the true lyfe, and to liue euerlastingly in him.

Now then wee see that wee haue found our true restingpoynt and our true welfare,* 1.569 that is to wit the turning ageine vnto God, from whose fauour and fellowship we be departed. For proof ther∣of, we neede but to examine from point to point the other ends and welfares which worldly men doe set downe to themselues, by the tokens & proofes which I haue made of the other already. Wher∣by as we shall find a common desirousenes in all men to seeke the welfare; so will we doubtlesse wonder at such diuersitie of tastes, which like to the lustings of them that haue the gréene Sicknesse, (who be greedy of Dust, Coales, Ashes and such other baggage) cannot but bewray vnto vs a straunge distemperature and corrup∣tion of our whole nature. Most men haue in all ages spent their whole life, either in raking togither of riches, or in Ambition, or in purchasing of Lands, or in puffing vp themselues with the wind of Pryde. And what can bee more contrarie to the lyking of our vn∣derstanding, than those things? The end whereto things tend, is better than the things themselues. What is it then for a man too ••end himselfe to these outward things; but too shewe that wee be

worse then Earth and Doong? And who would not beléeue that the Soule of man were infinitely lesse made for such things, than cloth of Gold to wrap vp myre and dirt in?

Also wee seeke the vttermost end of man.* 1.570 Now who is he that desireth not Riches for some other end, than for the Riches them∣selues? namely that hée might spend them either wantonly or ho∣norably, or necessarily? Nay who would passe for them at all, if he might haue the other things without them? Were it not so; what were more wretched than man in whose end consisteth his welfare; seeing that either the Wind, or Fyre, or robbing may bereue vs of that felicitie; that is to wit, ouerwhelme vs with miseries in one moment? Againe, how can Riches be the common marke for all men to shoote at, seeing that the inriching of one man is the impo∣uerishing of another? Yea and that the very béeing of them consi∣steth but in the opinion of men, some counting Gold, some stones, some Shelles, and some Nuttes to be Riches; and all resembling yoong children, which set al their felicite in Checkstones & pinnes? And what is it for men to set their felicitie in things which are nei∣ther Man nor of Man, as if they should set the goodnes of a Knyfe in the Sheath, or of a Horse in his Footecloth or Saddle? To bée short, how can that bee the souerein Good, which is no good at all? which is common as wel to the bad as to the good, and doth rather impaire men than amend them? Or howe can that bee our chéefe marke to shoote at, which of all things turneth vs most frō the true marke, that is to wit, from God; as in trueth there is not a readier way to driue vs quite and cleane from God, than to drawe vs née∣rer and néerer to worldly riches?

And what is Ambition?* 1.571 We might discourse of that tyme with∣out end: for in very déede it hath no end. Some atteyne to some cer∣teyne poynt: othersome be quite excluded. Which of them in our o∣pinion are the happiest? Soothly they that are excluded are disap∣poynted of their pretensed felicitie. That is al the harme they haue by it. They that atteyne to honor, are in continual torment, spight∣full or spighted, doing mischiefe or receyuing mischiefe, ouermated or ouermating. What is this but many euilles for one, and a mul∣tiplying of miseries without number, for the obteynement of one sillie shadowe of felicitie? We will leaue the residue to declamers: what are the fruites of these hellish torments, what are they? For∣sooth Honour, Reputation, and Power or Authoritie. What is all this but wynd, which cannot fill vs, nor scarsly puffe vs vp? I shall

be saluted as I goe abroade, I shall sit highest at méetings. In ha∣uing these things, what haue I, which a wicked man may not ra∣ther haue than I: And if it be a good thing, how is it giuen to euill men? I shall haue reputation. If it bee among euill men, O how shal I be blamed among good men! Perhaps I shal haue it among good men. If for vertue: who seeth not that reputation is but a sha∣dowe, made to followe vertue? And who will runne after the sha∣dowe, to forgoe the body? If freely for nothing, (as men say) vpon Credite: who knoweth not that thing to be nothing worth, which is giuen for nought, and by such as are noughtworth? And who will beléeue that we be borne to such an end as that? Nay rather, how many be the slaunders wherewith good men be charged: inso∣much that diuers tymes they bee fayne to forgoe their reputation, for the preseruation of their Conscience?

Finally,* 1.572 I shall haue obteyned power and authoritie. If that be the end of Man; how happeneth it that for one mans hauing of it, so many millions are fayne to goe without it? And if it be his so∣uereine good; whereof commeth it, that not only it is turned to euil, but also commonly turneth the possessors thereof to euill? But let vs put the case that all this is good. To whom? For euery one that is honored as a Prince, ten thousand are fayne to knéele: For one that tryumpheth, a hundred thousand are led in captiuitie: For one that reigneth, ten hundred thousand serue as Slaues. By this rec∣koning, some only one man should be the end of many men: and the felicitie of thrée or fower should bee the infelicitie of a whole world. Now our séeking is for the end and felicitie, not of some one or two men, but of all the whole kynd. What willye say then if euen those fewe haue it not? I take to witnesse the happiest Courtiers that are, whether one wrye looke of their Prince do not sting them more at the heart, than a thousand flatterers and as many crouchers and cappers can delight their eares and eyes? Nay, I report me euen to the greatest Princes themselues, whether one Rebellion of their Subiects against them, doe not vex them more than all their hono∣rable tryumphs doe reioyce them? And were it not a shame to say, that mans souereine good should stand in awe or depend vppon a grim looke? What els then are all these things, but resemblances of the Apples that grow about Sodome, which being pleasant to the eye, and prouoking to the appetite, doe vanish into smoake or into soote as soone as a man puts his téeth to them?

Besides this, the felicitie of man ought to abyde in the thing it

selfe. But the contentment of the ambicious person, dependeth vp∣pon another. Also it ought to be euerlasting: But ambition endeth with the body, and is buryed with it in the same graue. Againe, the things that ambition craueth, are fought sometymes for some o∣ther things sake: but wee demaund an end wherevpon to rest, and not a meane to an ende. To bee short, so farre of is ambition from being a way to bring vs to souereine good or felicitie; that in very trueth (as I haue sayd afore) it casseth vs miserably downe, and maketh vs to fall quite and cleane from it.

Now,* 1.573 seeing we cannot finde the thing we seeke for, neyther a∣mong men, nor in these worldly things; doth it not follow that we must seeke it in our selues? Surely the world is not of it selfe, nor for it selfe, but was made by another, and for another; neyther hath man his owne beginning of himself: and therefore he cannot be the end of himselfe. The maker of a thing maketh it not for the things sake, but for his owne sake: and therefore he himselfe is the ende of his worke. Againe, the thing that is made is not good in respect of it self, but for the ••fe or end whereto the maker maketh it: and ther∣fore the maker himself is the souereine good thereof. But let vs dis∣couer the matter ••et more largely. Man is composed of Bodie and Soule; the Bodie mortall, the Soule immortall. Now, if wee set mans felicitie in his bodie only; we doe too great wrong, both to the Soule, and to the whole man. For if it consist in the bodie, it peri∣sheth and ••adeth away with the bodie. And then what remayneth to the Soule which ouer liueth, but wretchednesse? But wee looke for 〈◊〉〈◊〉 which belongeth to the whole Man, and to his whole life both together.* 1.574 Againe, what should be this felicitie of the body, vnlesse perhaps it bee Beautie; which gladdeth more the beholder than the hauer thereof, and yet within a while after, is lost by some wound, soone sore, some pimples, or some Sunburning? In the Soule ioyned with the bodie wee haue thrée abilities, namely of life, of 〈◊〉〈◊〉 and of vnderstanding. Let vs sée in which of these three mans souer••ine welfare and end may be harbered. The Soule gi∣ueth life to mans bodie,* 1.575 and the perfection of life is health. If our life serue to none other end than that; what had the first man to doe with it, who was created healthfull? If it must bee the end of vs now after our corruption; what is more vnhappie than man? Nay, what is more vncapable of happinesse than man? A bodie subiect to a thousand diseases, a thousand harmes, a thousand daungers; weake, frayle, fraught with miseries within, wrapped in them

without; alwaies vncerteyne of life, alwaies sure of death; whom a Worme, an Hearb, a grayne of dust may kill: who if he looked for none other happinesse than that, were much better to bee a Plant than a Man. Againe, who is so sound and healthie of bodie, or so diseased in mynd, which (if he were put to the choyce) had not leuer to haue a sound mynd in a sicke bodie, than to bee out of his wittes hauing perfect health of bodie? Soothly then it is a very cléere ar∣gument, that our chiefe happinesse resteth in our mynd, seeing wee can finde in our harts to redéeme it with the miseries of our bodie.

Let vs come too the sensitiue parte.* 1.576 The happines thereof see∣meth to consist in Uoluptuousenes or Sensualitie. If that make vs happy; then happy be brute beastes, as who doe vse it both more freely and with more delyght than wee: and vnhappy is man, who cannot wholy becone a beast, do what he can. The beast taketh his pleasure, without regard who sees him, without remorse of consci∣ence, and without any argewing ageinst himselfe. Contrary∣wise, what man is hee which féeleth not a Lawe in himselfe that goes about to brydle him; which feeleth not a hartbyting in the m••••ds of his pleasure; or whose greatest delyghts leaue him not a sting of repentance behind them? And what happynes can that be whereof we be ashamed, and which compelleth vs to seeke couert for the dooing thereof? Also what a fond woorkman was he, that framed vs so farre vnfit for such a purpose•• insomuch that wheras al our body is lyable too aches & stiches both within & without and on all sides; we scarsly haue aboue two or three parts vpō vs capable of pleasure, and euen those also subiect to greef and peyue. Let there be a man (sayeth Plutarke) that hath led his whole lyfe in pleasure and sensualitie; and about a two or three howers afore he drawe to∣wards death, let him be put to his choyce whether he had leuer too delight his sences by lying with his Lais, or delyght his mind with deliuering his Country from some greate peril. wil be (think you) be so very a beast, as to dout which of them he shal choose? who séeth not then that the pleasure of the mind, is both greater than the plea∣sure of the body, and more peculiar to man, and more agreeable too his end? We seeke a souereine good; if it be good, it will amend vs. But what doth marre vs and impayre vs more both in bodie and soule, than fleshly pleasure? Also we meane it should be perfect. If it be so, it will make vs perfect too. But what consumeth vs, what decayeth vs more than sensualitie? Agein, we seeke an end; but yet an endlesse end, not which maketh an end of our pleasures, but

which doth still feede our desires. Contrarywise, what is there which is sooner at an end in it selfe, which sooner maketh an end of vs, or which sooner wearieth vs and lesse contenteth vs, than the bodily pleasures; considering that (as the Poet sayth) the pleasure and payne goe both together? Moreouer, how may that be the so∣uereine good, which is not so much as a meane good? For who can denye, but that abstinence is taken for a vertue, euen among the vi∣cious sort? And what maner of good is that, which may become e∣uill by increasing, if it were not euill of it selfe afore? Finally, al bo∣dily pleasures consist in the Sences, and are executed by the sensi∣tiue parts. Now, the Sences are oftentymes forstalled in vs, ey∣ther by diseases or by old age: and the sensitiue parts are dispatched at the least by death.

Now albeit that a man haue a dubble life, the one in this world, the other in another, the one dying, the other immortall; the first which is here tending to the second as the woorse to y^e better; yet is not our seeking for such an end or such a felicitie as dyeth with vs, but for such a one as maketh vs happye, quickeneth vs, 〈…〉〈…〉 sheth vs euerlastingly; the which surely is not to be found in mor∣tall things. Now followeth therefore the Understanding part, which is occupied one whyle in itself, another while in the gouern∣ment of the world, and another while in contemplation of heauen∣ly things: and of theis three operations spring three perfections; namely Uertue, Policie, and Wisedome. Let vs see yet in which of these 〈◊〉〈◊〉 consisteth our souereine felicitie and contentation. Soothly it is not to bee doubted, but that our end will bee found to consist in that part: for whether can the mynd of man reach, beyond the world and man and him that made them both? But let vs see if we come néere it in this world.* 1.577 I pray you what is Uertue? The cal••edesse of our affections. What are these affections of ours? The waues and stormes of our Soules, raysed with euery little ••last of winde, which doe so ••osse and turmoyle it vpside downe, that euen the best Pylots are fayne to strike Sayle, and reason it selfe is driuen welnere to forsake the Helue. If M••n were created to this end, why was he created with calmenesse of mynd? Or if his souereine good consist now in ouermaystering his affections; what more contrarietie can there bée, than to bée ••oyd of affections and to be a man? Let vs put the case that some man atteyne there∣vnto: shall he also stay there? No: for valiantnesse hath an eye to warre, warre to peace, peace to the prosperitie of the Common∣weale,

weale, and so soorth of others. Now, that which tendeth vnto ano¦ther, cannot be the vtmost end. But wil man at leastwi••e be conten∣ted therewith? Nay, let vs commend Uertue as much as wee list, and let vs busie our selues in making bookes of it; yet if it extend no further than to the things on earth, I dare well say there is not a∣ny thing, I say not so happie, but so wretched & miserable as man. Folke will say he is an honest man; but yet as honest as he is, they will let him starue for hunger. The Prince will say he is a faith∣full, a sound, and an vpright dealer, neyther led by couetousnesse nor caryed away with ambition: but yet he will not put him in trust with the managing of his affayres in this world. The foulest vyce in the world shall finde a mate: but if Uertue runne through the whole world, she shal scarce find a husband. Now then, if we séeke our felicitie in this life; what is Uertue but very miserie? And if we séeke it in the other lyfe; what shal become of this vertue where we shall haue no affections to encounter with? Surely then is not Uertue our end: for the end that we seeke, hath not an eye to a fur∣ther thing; neither dooth the souereine good thereof which goes ioyntly with it come to any end.

What then?* 1.578 Is Policie that end? We call Pollicie the right vse of reason in the gouerning of worldly affaires. Besides that, it may also properly be defined, to be an art or skill of guyding mens doings to a certeine end. Now the skill and the end that it ameth at, cannot be both one thing. But (to be short) what is this world? Strife, Warre, Discord, Enuy, Rancor, Burning, Sacking, wa∣sting, Spoyling, and destroying; a miserable ground for man too buid his felicitie vpon. What is the gouerning and disposing of al these things, but a dealing with By••es, Botches, and Cankers, whereof if we haue no feeling, they can (to go the best way) doe vs no good; and if wee haue feeling, they woorke vs nothing but sor∣rowe, grife, stinch, and lothsomnesse •• Yea, but the happines or fe∣licitie is in healing them. Happy then is that comonweale which receiueth good by thy peyne; but not thy peyne happy which thou hast taken to heale it. For when a Phisicion healeth a man, who receiues the benefite, the Phisicion, or the Patient? And if the Phi∣cion did his Cure for gaine, and the Magistrate his duety•• for ho∣nour; who sees not that the skill of curing was not the end of the one, nor the skill of gouerning the end of the other; séeing that they tended either of them to a further end, and that so ••••lie aone? Not∣withstanding all this, in the end Man dyeth and the World peri∣sheth;

but the Soule liueth still, and yet giueth ouer the dealings of the world. Therefore néedes must some other thing then Policy be our souerein good, seeing that this Policy is limited within the bounds of this world.

Now then,* 1.579 let vs examine Wisdome. It is the beholding of God and of things belonging to GOD. This requireth a man to lift vp himselfe aboue the world, and aboue himselfe; I meane that a man should retyre from all outward things into his owne soule, the Soule vnto her Mynd, and the Mynd vnto God. Surely there is great lykelyhod that our dooings ought to bee referred to this wisdome, and that our end and welfare should consist therein. For the perfecting of such a contemplation, wee say there are required Wealth, Health, Uertue, and Policie. For want and pouertie, bée as Fetters of Yron to a weldisposed mynd: a sickely and diseased body, is as a torture to it; vnruly affections dazle it and make it sée one thing for another; Policie is the stablisher of Comonweales, & whosoeuer giueth himself to contemplation, it behoueth him to be settled in a quiet place, that he may hold the Plommet of his mind steddy without shaking or stirring. Thus doe all things séeme to serue to that vse. But when they come all to the forenamed poynt, to helpe vs; yet I pray you how farre doe they further vs? It is naturally bred in man to beléeue that there is a GOD: and his woorkes doe put vs in mynd of it euery howre. But shall we enter into our woorkemayster, séeing that the very outside of the least of all his workes doth stoppe vs? Again, who knoweth not, that if there be not a God, there can bee no happines atall? And sith wee knowe it, euen (as ye would say) from our birth; why take we so much peine in seeking that which wee haue alreadie? Reason tel∣leth vs further, that God is good and iust; that is to say, that he lo∣ueth that which is good, & hateth that which is euill. And our owne conscience telleth vs, that we doe little good or none, but much euil. And if the little good which we doo be doone amisse, what happines is there, or rather what vnhappines is there not in that knowledge which maketh vs to feele a continuall torment in our selues? But the partie that is giuen too contemplation, mounteth vp yet higher, and considereth that God is immortall, vnchangeable, and not to be wrought into; which is as much to say, as that he is not as we men are, who doe dye, moue, and chaunge: and when hee comes to that poynt, he is at the highest that his wit can reach vn∣to. And what is all this stying vp, but a creeping still vppon the

earth? For, to say that of a thing which it is not, or to say it is not this or it is not that; what els is it but a protesting that we knowe not what it is? as if a man should boast that hee knowes an Ele∣phant, vndr pretence that hee knowes it is not a Snayle? What then is our highest contemplation but déepe ignorance? And who would make ignorance his highest felicitie & furthest end or shoote∣anker? Yet notwithstanding how feawe be there which atteine so farre? And if any through rashnes aduenture any further: 〈◊〉〈◊〉 what error and blyndnesse doe they fall, no lesse than they which forgo their fight by looking against the Sunne?

It remaineth then in the end,* 1.580 that wee must atteine to that by Fayth, which wee cannot atteyne vnto by Reason; that wée must mount vp by liuely beléef aboue our vnderstāding, vnto the things whereunto the eye of our mynd is not able to reach.* 1.581 And Algazell the Arabian procéeded so farre, as to say that the roote▪ wherby the felicitie to come is atteind vnto, is faith. And what is this fayth in God, but a beléeuing that our welfare lyeth in him? What is the beléeuing, but the hoping for it? What is hope, but the desiring of it? What is the desire of it, but the not hauing of it? And to bee short, what is the continuall beléef of it héere, but a bewraying that héere we can neither haue it nor see it? If we haue not faith; what haue we but ignorance? And if we haue faith; what haue wee but onely a desire and longing; considering that the greater our fayth is, the more wee despise these bace things; and the greater our de∣sire is, the more we hate our selues, and the more earnestly doe we loue God. To be short, What is fayth? Welfare behighted. But we would sée it. Again, what is faith? The way vnto felicitie. But we would possesse and inioy it. Looke then what proportion is be∣twéene that which is present, and that which is to come; such pro∣portion is there betwixt the hope which we haue heere (yea euen a∣boue the world and aboue our selues,) and the perfect and full frui∣tion of the good which we seeke to atteine vnto. But let vs in feaw words gather togither what wee haue said heretofore. Whereas wee seeke for an ende or restingpoint, the world is made for man, man for the Soule, the Soule for the mynd, the mynd for a much higher thing than it self, and what els can that be but God? As for that which we vnderstand here as concerning▪ God by our naturall wisdome; it is but ignorance; and that which we conceiue by our supernaturall power, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 but beléefe; and beleefe maketh not things perfect, but only moueth the vnderstanding. It followeth then that

our doings can haue no end to rest vpon here, but only in the life to come, which is the beholding and knowing of God. Againe, if wee seeke the souereine good; our appetites owe obedience to our will, our will to our reason, and the perfection of our reason is the kno∣wing of God. And so the contentment of our will is our possessing of God. Now we possesse not God, but so farre foorth as wee loue him: we loue him not, but so farre foorth as we knowe him: and nei∣ther can ignorance ingender earnest loue, nor beleefe ingender full and perfect fruition, but onely a certeyne hope, which hope is mat∣ched with impatience euen in the best of vs. It followeth therefore that we cannot inioye our souereine welfare, vntill we bee come to our vtmost end; nor haue our full contentation, vntill wee haue full knowledge: that is to wit, wee cannot haue it in this world, nor in man, which two cannot content the mynd or satisfie the will of mā, forsomuch as eyther of them both is a world of wretchednesse: but though wee haue a dubble life, yet can we haue our vtmost resting∣poynt and our onely souereine welfare, nowwhere els but onely in God and in the euerlasting life.

Here I should declare what that felicitie of man shalbe, when he is come to his vtmost restingpoynt. But who wilbee so rash as to open his mouth in y^t behalf, after him that hath told vs that nei∣ther eye hath seene it nor hart can conceyue it? And how should we knowe it here, being vnable eyther to see it or to haue it here? Now therefore at one word, let vs be contented with this, that all our de∣sires shalbe satisfied at that day, seeing they extend not but too the things that are; and that in God we shall at that day see, haue, and knowe all things. But yet for a more larger confirmation of this former poynt, it is now tyme to here what the Philosophers say thereof.

The xix. Chapter.

That the wysest of all ages agree that God is the vtmost end and souereine good, felicitie, or welfare of man.

SUrely man dooth naturally desire, for the con∣tentment of his will, to be well; and for the ex∣ercyse of his wit, to haue some certeine end. And therefore there is not a ryfer nor a larger place in Philosophie, than the serching out of the cheef end and souereine good of man; inso∣much that Cicero saieth that the whole autho∣ritie

of Philosophie, consisteth in that poynt alone. Notwithstan∣ding, forasmuch as by reafon of our fall, we find our selues astoni∣shed here by loue lyke folke falne out of the Clouds, and moreouer benighted with very déepe darknesse in a place that leadeth many sondrie waies cleane contrarie one from another; wee knowe not in this perplexitie which way to take, and yet euery of vs thinks him∣selfe wise enough to direct his companion. One calles to the right hand, and another to the left: One poynts ye vp the hill, and ano∣ther sets ye through the playnes: and yet all of them can as little skill of the right way one as another: and at the last the most part of them perceiue in the end of their trauell, that the more haste they made, the further they wandered from their way. But what woon∣der is it if blynd folkes, or such as are guyded by blynd folkes, or such as haue no guyde at all, doe goe astray? Nay rather, were it not to bée estéemed for a myracle, if any of them all, howbeit being guided from aboue, should happen to hit vpon the right way? Na∣tural desire causeth men to seeke their welfare. And all Philosophie lyeth in that poynt of seeking out the welfare of man. Sinne hath put vs from it, and maketh vs to lose it. And therefore the wiser sort haue laboured to recouer it by eschewing sinne. But most men knowing not that this sinne is come vppon vs by a high fall, and therefore imagining themselues to bee nestled still in their former place: doe busie their heads about the seeking of it there, not per∣ceyuing that they be throwne downe very low, farre from GOD, and vnderneath themselues.* 1.582 That is the cause why wee to no pur∣pose doe seeke by groping round about vs, for that which is not to be had there, nor is to be found there. Varro sayth that in his tyme there were twohundred fowerscore and eight opinions, concerning this poynt in the bookes of the Philosophers: that is to wit, two hundred fowerscore and eight Sects: for that was the badge or Cognisance that made the difference betwixt them. It was a won∣der to see so many diuersities, and a more woonder that of so many, so fewe could hit vppon the trueth. Yet notwithstanding they try∣umphed one ouer another, and were curious in confuting one ano∣ther; as in déede it is alwaies more easie to reproue a fault, than to amend it; and to conuince a lye, than to finde out the trueth. But yet at leastwise we haue wonne thus much at the hands of them al, That there is one chiefe ende and one souereine good, whereat all men ought to ame: and wee finde euen by the contrarietie of their own reasons one against another, that it is none of all those things

wherein they haue sought it: wherevpon wee may easely conclude, that it cannot bee anywhere els, than where wee seeke it. Had they well considered, that Man is falne from his former dignitie, and compared the glorie of his former state with the wretchednesse of his present state; they would haue sought none other happinesse or felicitie than to returne thether, that is to say, than to bee linked a∣gaine vnto GOD: and they would neuer haue followed so many fond fancies, more worthie to be pityed than to be laughed at. Ne∣uerthelesse there are some fewe to be found in all ages, which haue leueled at this marke, like as among all the rest, wee see that some haue had a certeyne knowledge of our first originall nature.

The Epicures sought this souereine good in the pleasures and delights of the bodie:* 1.583 and the Stoikes mocked them for their labor, perceyuing well, that there is not here so fayre and swéete a Rose∣bush, which hath not very sharpe prickes, and that it was the next way to make a man a beast. To be short, the Epicures themselues were so much ashamed of the matter, that to make Lady Pleasure to goe for an honest woman, they were fayne to disguyse her as much as they could, and to say that by Pleasure they ment the de∣lights of the mynde, and not the feuerous pleasures of the bodie, which passe away in the turning of a hand. But in the ende, what were their pleasures? Forsooth (say they) to bethinke a mans selfe how oft he hath made good chere, or how oft he hath séene his trull. O straunge beastlinesse. As who would say (sayth Plutarke) that the pleasures of this world were to be kept in Conserues, or to bee layd vp as Restoratiues in the closet of mans memorie: or rather (say I) as though the rememberance of troubles past, yea or of some gréeuous sicknesse recouered, were not more delightfull than the greatest ioyes that are possible to be had.

The Stoikes* 1.584 therefore doe giue vs another kynd of happinesse or welfare; namely Morall vertue, which cōsisteth in the quiet reig∣ning of reason in vs. But what is this els than a mere imagina∣tion? How will they answere to the Peripateticks, which say that man is not made for himselfe alone, but for common societie: That his vertue must ame at a further ende: That vertue neither in re∣spect of that whereat it ameth, nor of that whereon it worketh can make men happie? To bee short, what will they say to their owne companions, who for the vpholding of this their surmised felicitie, do vnderprop it with wealth, health, courage, and measurable plea∣sure, as vnsufficient to stand alone without ayde? But I haue rip∣ped

vp this poynt sufficiently in the Chapter going last before

What then do the Peripateticks* 1.585 set vs downe? As the Stoiks left the Bodie to mount vp to the Soule, so these mount vp from the Soule to the Mynd. There are (sayth Aristotle* 1.586) two sorts of Blessednesse. The one ciuill and publike, called Policie; which con∣sisteth in action: and the other priuate & of household, called Wise∣dome, which consisteth in Contemplation. He thinkes verely that he hath sayd somewhat. But how can Policie be this blessednesse, considering that according to his own saying, Policie is but a cun∣ning or skill to leade things to a certeyne end, and is not the end it self? Or how can Wisedome be it, seeing that (as he himself saith) our vnderstanding seeth as little in matters concerning God, as the eye of an Owle doth when she commeth nere the Sunne? Our vnderstanding is dull, our iudgement vncerteyne, and our memo∣rie deceytfull. The déepest of our knowledge (sayth Socrates) is ignorance; and all Philosophie (as Porphyrius* 1.587 vpholdeth) is but mere coniecture, easie to bee ouerthrowne with euery little push. Now then, how may this bee a happinesse, vnlesse we will graunt that the Owle is happie in comming neere the Sunne; or a blynd man happie in beholding colours?

His Disciples Alexander and Auerrhoes, perceiuing that all our contemplation is but vexation of mynd, most commonly to no purpose; haue found vs out another deuyce. Which is, that all our happinesse consisteth in ioyning the capacitie of our mynde, or ra∣ther of our imagination, vnto certeyne separated substances, to be informed by them in all maner of knowledge: for the which deuyce they bee reproued of most Philosophers, and as I beléeue, in the end they laughed themselues to skorne for it. But as I haue sayd alreadie, what are these separated substances of theirs? Or rather why did they not set our felicitie in being knit vnto GOD, whom they confesse to be better than all these things? Againe, who is he, were he neuer so fantasticall, euen though it were Auerrhoes him∣selfe, that could vaunt himselfe to haue euer atteyned to that ima∣gined Coniunction of theirs in this life?* 1.588 And seeing that (as they beare vs on hande) the knowledged of the nature of all sensible things, is required to the atteynment of that felicitie of theirs; how shall we atteyne to the full heyghth thereof, if wee stop at the very beginning?

The Academikes therfore, who take vpon them to weare Pla∣toes liuery, mounted vp one step higeher, and considered very well

that all our contemplation is but a continuall wrestling, one whyle against the darknesse of the things,* 1.589 and another whyle against the darknesse of our owne mynd. And as they acknowledged our hurt to proceede of a fall, whereby we brake our wings, which (as Pla∣to interpreteth them) were Morall vertue and contemplation: so conceiued they therevpon, that it were a great good turne for vs to recouer them againe. But whether to bee caried by them? Let vs heare that of Plato. All the things in this world (sayth he) which we cal goods, as Beautie, Riches, Strength, Nobilitie, and such other; are so farre of from being goods in deede, that they be rather corrupters and hinderers of good. Then are they very farre of from beeing the Souerein good of man, or consequently the End whereat he out to stay. Againe, It is vnpossible (sayeth Plato) that men should be happy in this lyfe, doe what they can: that is to be had in another lyfe, where the vertuous shal receiue felicitie for a reward. In vayne then doe wee seeke that here beneath, by our deedes and contemplations, which is not here to be found: and in vayne doe we set our vtmost end heere, where is not the furthest end of our lyfe. But in the end, what is this feli∣citie? It is (sayth Plato) to be ioyned vnto GOD, and to be∣come lyke vnto him, who is himselfe the highest top, the fur∣thest end, and the vtmost bound of all felicitie. Thus yee see that (by Platoes iudgement) the two things which we seeke, doe meete both togither alonly in God. The end of our life is to be ioy∣ned vnto God. And our Blessednes or felicitie which ought to con∣tent vs, which consisteth in the full fruition of all good things, is the possessing of God, who is the very felicitie itselfe. Yet neuer∣thelesse, Aristotle seemeth to haue come at length to y^e same point, in that he sayth,* 1.590 That God is the beginning, the middle, and the end of all things: and againe, that mans felicitie consisteth in the same thing wherein the felicitie of the Gods consisteth, that is to wit, in perfect contemplation of that which is aboue all mooueable things.

Pythagoras sayde that the ende of this lyfe is Contemplation;* 1.591 that the end of all Contemplation, is God; and that the felicitie of man is to be lifted vp vnto God. Also he taught vs that we be but as Pilgrims in this world,* 1.592 and as folke banished from Gods pre∣sence: and what doth the banished man desire more, than to be re∣stored home into his owne Country? And Mercurie sayeth, that our end is to liue in Soule, which in this world is as good as bu∣ryed;

That in this world there is not any thing that is woorthy to be sayd to bee well or good. It is in another place therefore that man must liue and inioy his welfare, namely (as he sayth) in being become one againe with God. And Zoroastres* 1.593 saith, that we must trauel with al our power towards the brightnes of the father, who is the giuer of our Soule. Also he hath told vs that we be falne a∣way from this brightnesse of light into thicke darknesse, and haue lost Gods fauour by going about to set our selues free from his seruice. But as the world hath taught vs more and more that there is no good in the world: so the later Philosophers haue discoursed yet more largely thereof, than those that went afore. Here therefore wee might rehearse a good part of Seneca and Cicero and others, whose opinion forasmuch as I haue alledged already in the Chap∣ter of the Immortalitie of mans Soule, where it may be knowen wellynough: I will content my selfe for this tyme with a fower or f••ue of them.

Surely Plutarke* 1.594 is wonderfull in confuting the beastlynes of the Epicures and the awk opinions of the Stoicks; setting against the Epicures, the pleasure that a good man receyueth in seeing God well serued here on earth, and in hauing hym for his Leader from aboue: and against the Stoiks, the stryfe which man hath a∣geinst hymself, which all their Philosophy is not able to appease, and therefore he resolueth hymselfe in the end, that as in the miste∣ries of the men of olde tyme,* 1.595 the looking vpon them was the ende why they tooke the orders of them vppon them; so the end of true Philosophie is the Contemplation and beholding of the myndly and immortall nature, that is to say of God the Creator.

Iamblichus was surnamed the Diuine:* 1.596 and it is sayd that he was so called, because he spake so Diuinely of this matter. Thus therfore doth he say: Shal we say that to be healthy, to be faire, to be riche, to be honored, to be of a good wit, and such lyke are mans happines? No surely. The strength of man is but a iest, and his honour a mockery. Yea, Man himself and all that he maketh account of, are but a fleeting shadowe. Neuerthe∣lesse, vnto good men, they be good possessions; but vnto wic∣ked men, they be euill and daungerous. What then? shoulde not the possessing of them for euer, and not as in a Dreame that vanisheth away, be the true happines? No: the possessing of them for euer, if it were without vertue, were a very greate mischiefe, and the sooner they were taken from vs, the lesse

harme it should be. Nay, the very true meane to atteine to the heauenly felicitie, is praying and calling vpon the Goddes, & cheely vpon the great God which reigneth ouer them all. And therefore he sayth in another place, Whatsoeuer a man doeth or leaueth vndone, ought to be referred to the Godhead▪ and all this lyfe is ordeyned for nothing els but to followe God; the knowledge of whom is perfect vertue, Wisdome and Blesful∣nes, which maketh vs lyke the Goddes, that is to say (after his maner of speaking, like the Angels. Let vs heare yet more of him. The time hath bene (saith he) that man was fast tyed to the be∣holding of God: but afterward he was made subiect to the bo∣dy, and tyed to the necessitie of Destinie; & therfore it beho∣ueth him to be well aduised, by what meane he may be rid of it. Now, other knowledge there is none that can deliuer him, but onely the knowledge of God. For the paterne of felicitie, is to knowe the good, and the knowing of good, is the holy gate whereby to come to the maker of all things. Now (sayth hee againe afterward) the care of these inferiour things which maketh vs to forget God, cānot be separated from this tran∣sitory lyfe wherein we be: for this body will neuer suffer vs to play the right Philosophers in deed. It followeth then that this knowledge of God vnder the which he comprehendeth all vertue, all wisedome, and all studie of Philosophie, cannot be atteind vnto nor become perfect in this lyfe, but onely in the life to come.

The finall end of Man (sayth Plotin) is the pure Good,* 1.597 that is to wit God; and all other things are but appurtenances to that end, and not the end, itself. Whosoeuer possesseth this good,* 1.598 can haue no good taken from him, nor any good put vnto him. For it is not only an vniting vnto God, but almost a being of God himselfe. Now who is he that can take such posses∣sion of it in this lyfe? And therefore he addeth. There our mynd beholdeth the fountayne of life, of vnderstanding, of being, the cause of good, and the roote of the Soule. There lyeth our welfare after such a sort, that to be farre from it, is as good as not to be atall. There is the beginning and end of lyfe. The beginning; for from thence doth it proceede; and the end; for there is the welfare whereon it resteth. The welfare, say I; for in atteyning thether, it becommeth agein that which it had bin afore. For as for the being which it hath here, what is it but a downfall, whereby it hath lost hir wings? Here reigneth

a bace and vile Venus; but there reigneth a heauenly one. Here a loue of the World; there the loue of God. And what a greefe ought it to be vnto vs, to be wedded to the earth? And on the contrary part, how desirous ought we to bee to feele God in all parts aboue? Yea and to be so ioyned vnto him, as one centre is within another, so as both of them may be but as one? Now he is full of such and larger sayings; and alwayes he concludeth blesednes & euerlastingnes follow one another, wherby he excludeth them, both out of this world and out of this lyfe.

But for the more spéede, let vs come to others. What is the end of Man (saieth Porphyrius)?* 1.599 It is vndoutedly to liue in Mynd. And how is that? By contemplation in this lyfe? No (sayeth he in another place). All Philosophy is but gessing, a lyght be∣leefe receyued from hand to hand, and which hath nothing therein which may not be called in question. What maner of Contemplation then shal the true one be?* 1.600 Not a heape of words (sayth he) nor a patching together of precepts; but a true vni∣on of the beholder and the thing that is behild, that is to say of our Mynd and of God.

Simplicius the Peripatetik, whether he learned it of Epictetus or some where els, speaketh of it thus. The greatest good that is in the knowledge of Nature, is that it is a fayre path to leade men to the knowing of the Soule, of the seperated substāces, and of Gods beeing. Moreouer it inflameth vs to the seruing of God, leading vs by the effectes to the Maiestie of the Crea∣tor; wherevpon followeth an onement with God, with assu∣red fayth and hope, which are the things for which philoso∣phy is cheefly to be vsed. And in another place; The beginning (sayth he) and the end of happy lyfe, and the perfection of our Soule, consisteth in being bent and turned vnto God, as well by acknowledging that he gouerneth all things with Iustice, as by consenting to all that he doth, as proceeding from a rightfull iudgement. For so long as our Soule abydeth in him as in the roote, it abydeth in the perfection wherein GOD created it. But if it fall to starting out of him, it becometh wi∣thered and droopeth, vntill it turne backe and bee vnited a∣gaine vnto him. The cause then of our vnhappines, is our sepera∣ting of our selues from God; and the cause of our happinesse is our linking in againe with him; and man seeketh a happinesse agréea∣ble

to his kynd, as all other things doe. The end of man therefore is to turne againe vnto God, that he may become one with him.

Syrian the Schoolemayster of Simplicius wryting vppon* 1.601 Ari∣stotle, hath comprehended the matter in one word; we deale with Philosophie (sayth he) for our owne benefite; that is to say, for our owne welfare; which welfare is to be vnyted vnto God.

And Alexander* 1.602 of Aphrodise commeth not farre behind when he sayth, that our souereine felicitie consisteth in deuotion towards God, beyond whom there is not any further reward to be desired. For seeing (sayth he) that the worthiest operation of the Soule is contemplation; & contemplation properly is the knowing of the best things; & none are so good as the things that con∣cerne God: our end and felicitie ought to be the contempla∣tion of things belonging to God. To be short, the bestestéemed interpreters of Aristotle, do make him to yéeld to this poynt whe∣ther he will or nill, as mē ashamed in his behalf, that hauing sought so much for the true end of man, he hath not set it downe more cer∣tenly.

Now, the Philosophers of old tyme knew in all tymes,* 1.603 not on∣ly that those which atteyne to the sayde ende for which Man was created, are happie; but also that those which despise it doe fall into extreme wretchednesse: the one sort receyuing euerlasting felicitie, the other sort being by Gods Iustice condemned to endlesse paine. Also it is an article expresly set downe in the Créedes of al people, as a poynt that is probable to all men at the very first sight, That God is rightuous and good; and that euill is accompanied with pu∣nishment, and good is accompanyed with reward.* 1.604 As for the Ca∣balistes of the Iewes, it is no wonder though they haue handled this matter well: for they haue drawne matter out of the foūtaines of the holy Scripture. And therefore let vs heare but the Heathen.

Those (sayth Hermes)* 1.605 which haue obteyned the fauour of God, are of mortall become immortall, and conceyue the on∣ly Good, which maketh them to fall into a misliking of these inferiour things, that they may indeuer with al their power to returne to him the more speedily.

Orpheus speaking yet more cléerely,* 1.606 bringeth good men into Gods presence, to the seate of felicitie, and to the feast of the righ∣tuous, where he maketh them dronken with the perfect and euerla∣sting contemplation: but as for the wicked he buryeth them in a quamyre, tormenting them with vayne thoughts, & making them

to drawe water into a Siue:* 1.607 that is to say, he assureth the one sort of perfect contentation, and putteth the other sort in extreme dis∣payre.

Of Pythagoras we haue these verses.* 1.608

If reason here thou followe for thy guyde, Then at thy parting hence thou shalt be sure, In Heauen a God immortall to abyde, No death thensforth for euer to indure.

And these verses were followed by all Poets, who commonly represented the receiued opinion: among whom Pindarus and Di∣philus procéede so farre, as to describe an excellent Garden reple∣nished with all things, & appoynted to be a reward for good men, as if they had heard speaking of the Paradise of the Iewes; or els had read Sibilles verses concerning a certeyne greene Garden which she also calleth Paradise, affirming it to be assighed for an heritage to such as followe the way of God: that is to wit, which take him for their shootanker, with whom they shall haue euerlasting life and light: whereas on the contrary part, the wicked (sayth she) shall lye burning like firebrands and Torches in endlesse paynes.

Also Timeus of Locres hath not forgotten this poynt in his little booke, where he sayth thus. There is a certeyne vengeance both according to the Lawes and according to the Oracles, which maketh vs to feare both heauen and earth. For strange and vnintreatable punishments are prepared for the wicked in hell.

Asfor Plato, he taketh so greate pleasure in this matter, that he cannot be drawen from it: and he scarsly passeth any one dialog, wherein he hath not some speeche thereof; meaning doutlesse to do vs to vnderstand, that without that, all Philosophie and all Diui∣nitie be maymed; and it should seeme that the constancie of Socra∣tes his teacher,* 1.609 had confirmed him not a little therein; in whose defence of himself, which was as it were his last wil, we reade these woords. Death would be greeuous to me, if I were not sure, first that when I am departed hence I shal go to the wise Gods (so did they terme the Angells or Created mynds) and secondly to the men that are deliuered out of this life, who out of dout are in better case than those that are here. And vnto Cratylus ageine he sayeth, when the good man departeth this world, he commeth to great honor and to a greate inheritance; for he becommeth a Demon according to the true signification of

the word, that is to say, skilfull and wyse.* 1.610 That then is the per∣fection of a Philosopher,* 1.611 whose end and profession is to haue know∣ledge and skill. And in his Theetetus hee sayeth, that with the Gods there is no euill, but euill walketh heere beneath among these transitorie things, and therefore that we must hye vs thither and flee from hence, that is to say, we must become ryghtuous and wyse. For (sayth he) such as shall haue followed the way of fol∣ly and wickednes, shalnot be admitted into the restingplace of the blessed sort which are exempted from all euill; but ac∣cording to their leawd lyfe, they shall be condemned to dwell for euer with the euill. In his Gorgias* 1.612 he maketh mention of an auncient Lawe vnder Saturne, which he affirmeth to haue bin then still in vse, namely that when good men depart out of this lyfe, they be sent into the fortunate Iles (which Iles Pindarus also de∣scrybeth verie curiously) and the wicked into the Iayle of Uen∣geance, which he calleth Tartar; vndoutedly betokening these vn∣knowen places, by places knowen vnto them, which they toke co∣monly to be eyther most pleasant or most horrible; lyke as the Iewes betokened the Restingplace of the blessed sort by a goodly Gardyne, and Hell by the valley of Onam or Ghehinom, which was an irksome place nere Ierusalem.* 1.613 In his Phedon he bringeth in a certeyne Prophet raysed from the dead, which reporteth that those which are iustified, go on the right hand, pure, and cleane, and are sent vp to Heauen; and that the damned sort go on the left hand, besmeared with filth and mire, wéeping and gnasshing their téethe, and in the end are sent into lowe deepe places. Yea and he descry∣beth there the blessed Countrey in such termes, that some men haue taken the peynes to conferre it, with that which is written there of in the Apocalips.* 1.614 To be short, in his Axiochus he calleth y^e place of Iudgment the féeld of truth; from whence (saieth he) they which haue followed the inspiration of the good spirit, shalbee sent into a Paradyse or pleasant Gardyn, which he descrybeth there in the de∣lyghtfullest maner that he can deuise, to represent the things which he cannot conceyue, by the things which we see here on earth:* 1.615 and that they which haue bin led by wicked feends, that is to say by the instinct of the deuill, shalbe condemned to darknes and confusion, where he describeth a greate nomber of endlesse torments. Neuer∣thelesse he sheweth that these things are not to be takē according to y^e letter, when he saith in his Comonweale,* 1.616 that neither the punish∣ments nor the rewards of this world are any thing atall eyther for

nomber or for greatnesse, in respect of those which are prepared for eyther sort in the lyfe to come.

Cicero who would néedes be as a Plato in Latin, followeth him as it were step by step;* 1.617 and so doth Plutarke also, who counterfet∣ting Plato, bringeth in one Thespesius raysed from the dead, and maketh him to discourse of the lyfe to come. And without calling in Plotine, Porphyrius, Proclus, Hierocles & such others, whome it would be ouerlong to heare, only Iamblichus shall suffice, whose words are these: The good Soule shall dwell with GOD, and walke vp and downe in Heauen, where it shall haue a dwel∣ling place. But the Soule that is defiled with cursed deedes, shalbe sent vnder the Earth, to the iudgements which are there executed vpon Soules. Now what can we demaund more of the Philosophers, than that which they confesse? Namely that the happines and the ende of man, are not in this lyfe but in the o∣ther, and that the marke which man should shoote at, is to imploy this in the knowing of GOD, that in the other lyfe he may euer∣lastingly enioy all good things in him.

So then, let vs conclude both by mans reason and by the autho∣ritie of all Philosophie. That as the body of man relyeth vpon his Soule; so his mortall lyfe relyeth vpon the immortall lyfe that is to come: That the end wheretoo man was created in this world, is to know and serue God, and to possesse him wholy aboue. How∣beit for asmuch as by our fall wee bee falne from knowledge into ignorance, and therfore although we haue some little glimmering sight of our end which wee ame at, yet wee wote not how to shape our selues to it; And again, by the same fall we be falne from our souereine welfare into a bottomlesse pit of misery, where we créepe so lame as it is not possible for vs to returne ageine to our former state: Let vs see whether God of his mercie, haue not left vs some remnants whereby to get vp ageine, and to bee directed into our right way; and whether hee himselfe also doe not reache vs out his fatherly hand, through the cloudes of darknes wherewith we bee ouerwhelmed, to pull vs backe and to call vs home ageine to him, as very Bastards, Rebelles, and vnworthy Caytifes as we he.

The xx. Chapter.

That the true Religion is the way to atteyne to the sayd end, and souereine welfare; and what are the markes of that Religion.

I Haue proued alreadie, That there is but one God the father of Mankynd: That he created the world for mans vse: and that he gouerneth both the World and Man by his prouidence. Herevppon the lea••t man among all will con∣clude by and by, That ••ith he is our father, we owe him obedience; sith wee hold all things of him in fee, wee owe him fealtie and homage; sith he prouideth all things for vs, we ought to call vpon him in all our doings and in all our necessities. Also I haue shewed, that Man is of nature im∣mortall: and therefore he must applye himself withall his heart to immortall things. That by sinne he is falne from God and from himselfe: and therefore he must craue forgiuenesse of him, that his wrath may bee appeased: That this offence was a certeyne pride and ouerwéening of himselfe; and therefore he must acknowledge his frayltie and wretchednesse, and humble himself before GOD. Now in one word, what is all this to say, but that as there is but•• one God and one Mankynd; so there ought to be but one Religiō, that is to say, one ordinarie duetie & seruice of man towards God? For what els are all the exercises of Religion, but appertenances of the Articles which we haue proued; that is to wit, of the creation of the world, and of Gods Prouidence; of the Immortalitie of the Soule, and of Mans fall; and of Mans souereine welfare? In Re∣ligion men 〈◊〉〈◊〉, men knéele, men haue ordinances to obserue: this is done in token of obedience. Againe; they giue thankes 〈◊〉〈◊〉 praise vnto GOD, and they giue him the firstfruites both of their Cattell and of their Corne: that is a signe of acknowledgement that they be but as his Tennants: They call vpon him in their ad∣uersitie, and they aske prosperitie of him in all their doings, be they neuer sosmall▪ It is properly a commending of themselues to his prouidence. Also in Religion there is wéeping, forrowing, fasting,

putting on of sackcloth, and besprinkling of themselues with du••t. This is in token that wee ought to humble our selues beneath the very earth. Againe, there be Sacrifices both generall and particu∣lar; and what are those but protestations that all of vs and euery of vs haue deserued death? In the end of all this, there commeth a promise and a pretence of euerlasting life, to such as discharge their duetie towards God: which is as much to say, as y^t those Ceremo∣nies and obseruations are not the things that wee must rest vpon, but are meanes to leade vs to our right end, which is to lift vs vp on high. But betwéene these two last Articles, namely betwéene the death which wee protest our selues to haue deserued, and the e∣uerlasting life that is behighted vs to inherit, there is a maruelous waste distance to bee filled vp: and yet notwithstanding eyther it must néedes bee that man is set in the world in vayne, or els that there is a way or a bridge ordeyned for the passing thereof. There∣fore Religion, which hath brought vs to the pits brim, must also shewe vs this bridge; that she may vnyte and linke vs againe vnto God, from whom we be gone so farre and so strangely by our fall; and that she may reconcyle vs as bastardly children to our father, and as rebellious Subiects to our Prince: without which reconci∣liation or (according to the Latin deriuation) Religion, God ceas∣seth to be our father, and wee to bee his children; and all Religion, how gay and glorious show soeuer it haue, is vtterly vnprofitable and vayne. Now, the end that man should ame at in this life, is to returne vnto God, and it cannot be in vayne: but in vayne it should be, if there be no way to leade man vnto GOD, or rather to bring God vnto man. To the intent therefore that neither GOD be de∣frauded of his glorie, nor man of his end and felicitie, there must according to my former profes) néedes bee a way, that is to say a meane to reconcyle man vnto God, and to vnite him againe vnto him, that he may bee saued; which way wee will (according to the common spéech) call Religion.

Now,* 1.618 all the auncient men agree fully, that there ought to be a Religion among all men; as in déede there is not a thing that doth more necessarily followe, than a GOD, a Man, and a Religion; a Father, a Sonne, and an Obedience; a Mayster, a Seruant, and a seruice: a Giuer, a Receyuer, and a reward: or rather a Lender, a Detter,* 1.619 and a Bond. And therfore full well doth one say, The Phi∣losophers ought to haue bin the first Diuines. For, inasmuch as we make towards GOD with two wings, that is to say, with

Wit and Will: Wit can no sooner conceyue that God is our fa∣ther, but by and by Will inferreth therevpon, Ergo wee ought to obey him and to serue him: yea and it procéedeth yet further, that sith he is our father and we his children, it is for our most behoof to returne vnto him.* 1.620 O Lord (saith Hermes) What thankes shal we yeeld thee? And byandby he answereth, Lord, there is but only one thanke, and that is the acknowledging of thy Maiestie. And agein: The only way to come vnto God, is godlines mat∣ched with knowledge, that is to say, to knowe how he wilbe ser∣ued, and therevpon to serue him. And Pythagoras was woont to say to the same purpose, forasmuch as wee be nothing without God, it becommeth vs to liue vnto God.* 1.621 Plato commendeth Religion in a thousand places, whereof I will not take past two or three sayings here. It is mans felicitie (saith he) to be like vn∣to God. As how? By being rightuous and holy. How may that be? By Religion towards GOD, which is the greatest vertue that can be among men. Aristotle (by many mens report) was Religious, and as for Auerrhoes his interpreter, he was vtterly irreligious. Neuerthelesse see how nature swimmeth ouer vngod∣lines. * 1.622Aristotle sayth it is graffed in nature to doo sacrifice. And * 1.623A∣uerrhoes sayth that we be bound by nature to magnifie God with Prayers and Sacrifices. What is this to say, but that it is natu∣rall to man, yea euen in respect of his shape and substance, to haue a Religion? And why?* 1.624 Alexander professeth himselfe to be the in∣terpreter of Aristotle, and therefore hee shall interprete him for vs here. It is (sayth he) because our whole felicitie consisteth in de∣uotion towards God. For wee looke for none other reward but God himselfe, and him being the very souerein good, we obteyne by seruing him. Now when we heare these words, wee may thinke it was a strong torment of conscience that wroong this trueth out of them. For all men knowe, that chéesly Auerrhoes vrgeth the eternitie of the world, and the vniuersalitie of one onely Mynd, which yet notwithstanding cannot match with godlynes.

Epictetus maketh not the like florishes of Philosophie, but yet he playeth the Philosopher much better in deede. If wee had wit (sayth he) what should we doe but prayse God continually, and sing Psalmes of thankesgiuing vnto him, euen in digging and tilling the ground, and both in iourneying and in resting? As how? Euen saying thus: Great is God which hath giuen vs these tooles to till the earth withall; Great which hath giuen

vs hands to woorke withall; Greate which hath giuen vs too growe euen not woting it, and to breath euen being a sleepe, for these are things that cannot be imputed to our owne cun∣ning. Such (sayth he) ought to be the Songs of euery of vs. And againe: If I were a Nightingale, I should doe as Nightingales doe: but being a reasonable Creature, what shall I doe now? I will euermore prayse God (saith he) without ceasing; and I will exhort you all to do the lyke.* 1.625 And Simplice his interpreter hauing first made many goodly discourses, addeth that hee which is negligent and slothfull in seruing and honoring God, can∣not be diligent in any other thing, how needfull so euer the same be.* 1.626 Of all vertues (saith Hierocles) Religion is the guyde, for it concerneth the matters of God, and therfore Pythago∣ras beginneth his precepts thereat. And the woord which he v∣seth there for a guyde signifieth a Queene, which one word impor∣teth very much, namely that al the vertues which we make account of, as Hardines, Wisdome, Iustice, and Temperance, are nothing if they be not referred vnto God, and vsed in respect of him, that is to say, if Religion do not direct and leade them to God the princi∣pall end whereto all our doings ought to tend.* 1.627 But what is Reli∣gion? It is (sayeth he) the obeying of God, the moother of all vertewes, and the disobeying of all vyces. And our obeying of God must be of such a sorte, that we must rather disobey our parents, yea and lose our lyues to than disobey him. For our obeying of our parents must be for the loue of God; and it is of his goodnesse that we possesse our lyues.* 1.628 Iamblichus sayeth thus. Let vs begin at the best and most precious; namely the obseruing of Religion, which is the seruing of God. And in another place. Thou surmisest (saith he) that there is some other way than Godlynes to atteyne to felicitie, and thou askest of me what that way may be. But surely (say I) if the very sub∣stance and original power of al goodnes and welfare be in the Gods: onely those are happy which consecrate and vnyte themselues to God after our example. For in that state are both contemplation and knowledge accomplished; and be∣sides the knowledge of the Goddes, there is also the know∣ledge of ourselues, which is gotten by casting backe our vn∣derstanding towards ourselues.* 1.629 To be short, Proclus as wel vp∣pon his owne iudgment as vppon the opinions of Plato, Iambli∣chus, Porphyrius, Plotin and others, saieth that Religion and the

calling vpon God are proper and peculiar to man after the fourth maner as Aristotle termeth it; that is to say, a naturall propertie which agreeth fitly to the whole kind of man, and only to man, and without the which he cannot bee a man. Now I am not ignorant that they speake sometimes of the seruing of the Gods in the pul∣rall number, as though there were mo Gods then one; inso∣much that some of the Philosophers turned aside to arte magike, and all of them yeelded to the I dolatries & Superstitions of their tymes. For in deede, to knowe that God ought to bee serued, and to knowe after what sort he wilbe serued, and to serue him thereaf∣ter, are things farre differing. But it is inough for this tyme that we win thus much at their hands, that of necessitie there is a Reli∣gion; which thing euen the Nauigations of our tyme doe shewe to be imprinted in all the Clymates of the world, and in all kinds of men; as which haue discouered Nations that wander in Woods, without Law, without Magistrate, without King, but none with∣out some kynd of seruing of God, none without some shadowe of Religion.

Héerby then we know that there is a Religion,* 1.630 that is to say, a way to Saluation, or a way whereby to come home againe vnto God. But are there many wayes, or but onely one? It is a high question, but yet easie to be decyded, if we consider what Religion requireth of vs, and what it is to get for vs. Religion (as the men of olde time themselues haue taught vs) requireth of vs in effect, that we should yéeld full obedience vnto God: ful obediēce say I, so as we should dedicate our selues to his glorie, both our thoughts, words and deedes, in such sort that our selues and all that euer is in vs should bee referred to his honour. If Religion require this, how can it be any other then one? Or what diuersitie can it admit? And if any require lesse of vs, cōtented peraduenture with the out∣ward man, (which is all one as if they would rob God of one halfe of a Man;) what is their dooing but Hipocrisie or high treason a∣gainst God? But now ageine, séeing that Religion byndeth vs in so great a bond, euen by nature, that there is not any man which is not inforced to confesse the dette so witnessed by the whole worlde: surely there is no man that féeleth himselfe able to pay it, or which doth not willingly pleade giltie, yea and which is not inforced to say, that the most part of his thoughts, words and déedes, are not only farre of from God, but also tending directly to offend GOD. Now then, if Religion offer vs not as well a meane whereby to

discharge and cancell the bond, as it offereth vs the bond it selfe: It is so farre of from being the way to welfare which it ought to bee, that it is rather a definitiue sentence of death, and an expresse con∣demning of vs. Therfore let vs see whether there be many wayes of satisfaction, or but onely one.

What shall the deuoutest man in the world offer vnto God for his owne discharge? Shall hee offer his first fruites? God gaue him both the séede and the whole crop. Sacrifices? The Wood, the Fyre, and the Cattell, are all of Gods gift. The whole world, if a man had it? Hee hath lost the inheritance and the right thereof in séeking to infranchise himself from the seruice of God. Nay (which more is) God not onely gaue the world vnto man, but also man to man himself. The world then and all that euer is therein, cannot discharge man against God. What may man himself doe? Sure∣ly an acceptable Sacrifice should man be to GOD (as Hierocles saith) if he were such a one as he ought to be. But what should the best of all men offer vp in sacrifising himself? Soothly nothing but enuy, hatred, rayling, backebyting, vaine thoughts, vntrue words, wrongfull dealing, and (to go yet further) faynt thanks, with cold and counterfet praiers. Now these are so farre of from amounting to a discharge, that they turne to a huge heape of worse and more vndischargeable bonds, according to the infinitenesse of the Maie∣stie of the Creator that is offended by them. Now then, if neither y^t world nor man can dischardge man against God; what remayneth to doe it, but God himselfe, whom Religion must offer to man for his discharge; euen God mercifull, to God iust; God a paymay∣ster, to God the creator: Uerily, that hauing shewed vs how déep∣ly wée be indetted to GOD; it may also teach vs the woonderfull meane ordeyned by God and in God, wherby he and his souereine Iustice may be satisfied, and our extreme iniquitie be therewith re∣léeued? Now the dette of vs all is all of one sort and nature; name∣ly that we owe our selues all wholy vnto God; and our vnabilitie to discharge it is also all alyke; namely that all that euer commeth of our selues can deserue nothing but death vpon death. Our com∣mon bond (say I) entred into of vs all by Gods benefites towards the first man, is by his disobedience become forfeted, both in re∣spect of himselfe and of all mankind. Besides this, the creditor and the payer are both one, and cannot be but both one. For it is onely God that both doth and can satisfie himself. It followeth then, that the true Religion can be but one; namely euen that only one which

sheweth vs the onely one meane of saluation: and that all other Religions, if they abate any whit of mans debt vnto God, are trai∣terous to his maiestie; and if they set not downe a sufficient meane of discharge, they be but vayne and vnauaylable ceremonies: and so as well the one sort as the other, vtterly vnworthy of the name of Religion. Furthermore, if there be diuers true Religions, I meane diuers, as in respect of the substance of them, whereof ri∣seth that diuersitie? Of the thing which they poynt at? Nay, in God (whom Religion looketh at) there is such vnitie, that all other maner of vnitie is diuersitie in respect of that. And then if it bee so that one Religion relye vpon one God, and another vpon another, we be sure that there is but one God, and that all other Gods are either Creatures or Uanities, insomuch that (as Proclus himselfe saith) mo Gods and no God differ nothing atall. And so what shal those other Religions be, but either Idolatrie or Atheisme, that is to say, vtter Godlesnes? Whereof then? Of their ground? Nay, Man which is the ground whereon Religion worketh, is but one kind of thing. Also as the disease being in all men commeth of one roote, so is it of one selfsame nature. Likewise the remedie thereof (as I haue sayd already) is but only one. Now where the ground is all one, the disease all one, and the remedie all one too: who will euer say that there should bee diuersitie of Artes in the handling or ministring of them? If a man bee too humble himselfe, I would fayne haue them to tell me, what other way there is than to know himselfe: what other way to knowe himselfe, than to behold him∣selfe: what other way to behold himselfe, then to looke into a faire cleare glasse? And what clearer glasse is there, than the Lawe of God, and the perfect obedience which GOD requireth at mans hand? And seeing that this lawe, and the perfect obedience requi∣red by the same, can be but one, How may Religion be diuided in∣to mo than one? Ageine, if man be to be lifted vp vnto God, what other way is there than to make him knowe God as his Creator, that he may honor him; as his gouernour, that he may call vppon him; as his father, that he may obey him; and altogither iust, that hee may seeke to appease his wrath? Which thing sith hee cannot doe of himselfe, what shift hath he but to haue recourse to the reme∣die? And séeing that the remedie can bée but onely one; doth it not follow that saluation lyeth in that onely Religion which sheweth it vnto vs, and that to haue any mo Religions, is but confusion and vanitie? And to speake properly, what is Religion? An arte or

skil (if I may so terme it) how to saue men. And wherein consisteth this arte? First in shewing men their disease; secondly in shewing them that it is deadly; and finally in teaching the fit and conueni∣ent remedie. In déede the very Law of Nature leadeth vs well too the first poynt. For who is hee which euen of Nature accuseth not himselfe, and whose conscience nippeth him not when hee hath sin∣ned? Reason also leadeth vs to the second poynt. For who is hee that concludeth not with himselfe, that the Creature which offen∣deth his creator deserueth to be rooted out, that is to say, that sinne ingendreth death? And thus farre may all Religions come, and all Ceremonies ordeyned by man, as Praiers, Sacrifices, Was∣shins, Cleansings, & such others. Bnt what is all this but a bring∣ging of vs to Hellgate, or rather a shewing of Paradise vnto vs a farre of, howbeit with such a horrible and infinite gulfe betwixt vs and it, as man and all the whole world can neither fill vp nor passe ouer? Yet must there néedes be a passage; For the end of Man is to be vnited vnto God, and this end is not in vaine; the meane to be vnited aboue, is to be reconcyled here beneath; and the meane to be reconcyled here beneath, is (as I haue sayd alreadie) but one∣ly one, which is, that God himselfe acquit vs without our dischar∣ging of the debt which wee owe vnto him. Onely that Religion then (and none other) which leadeth vs streight to the said passage, and by the following whereof we find it, is the true Religion, as that which allonly atteineth to the ende of Religion, which is the sauing of man. May not men (wil some say) worship God diuersly, some lifting vp their eyes to heauen, and othersome casting their faces downe to the ground? Yes, for the worshipping is but one, and the humbling of mens selues is but one still, though there bee difference in the signes. But our disputing here is not of the Cere∣monies, but of the substance of them. Also may not men offer Sa∣crifice diuersly? Yes. But if thy Sacrifices haue no further ende then the sheading of the blud of a beast; then (as sayth Hierocles) they be to the Fyre but a feeding thereof with fewell and vapors; and to the Préestes, a superfluous maintenance of butcherie. It is requisite therefore that sacrifices should bee referred to somewhat; namely that by them thou shouldest protest, that whereas the sillie innocent beastes doo suffer death, it is thou thy selfe that hast deser∣ued it both in body and Soule. Againe, if thou haue nothing els in thy Religion, but Sacrifices and prayers; how goodly a showe so∣euer they make, thou hast nothing but a confession of thy fault, and

a sentence of death against thee for the same. For if those Ceremo∣nies aime not at a certein marke, they be trifling toyes; and if that be the end whereat they aime; then come they short, as which doe but leade thee vnto death, and there leaue thee.

There are some that would beare vs on hand,* 1.631 that Religion is but an obseruation of certeyne Ceremonies in euery Countrie; by which reason, that which is holy here, should be vnholy in another place; and that which is godly in one Land, should be vngodly in another. To be short, they make it lyke the Lawes that depend vp∣pon Custome, which passe no further than the bounds of the place where they be vsed. If Religion be nothing else but so; what sci∣ence, art, or trade is more vayne than that? Or rather what is to be sayd of it, but that in deede it is no Religion at all? Leachecraft is vncerteine in many respects, as of aire, of water, of age, and of cly∣mate: but yet, y^e which is Leachecraft in one Countrie, is not man∣quelling in another. Lawecraft hath almost as many sundry Lawes as caces, and the caces that are in the world are infinite. Yet not∣withstanding who séeth not that all these diuersities of caces are brought vnder one vpryghtnes and reason? and that they which yéeld not thereunto, are not reputed for men, but rather, for enemies of mankynd and wyld beasts? Also vertue hath the affections to woorke vpon, a ground more mouable than the Sea and the wind. And yet who wil say, that that which is hardines betweene the too Tropiks is Cowardlines in all other Countryes; or that y^t which is stayednesse in one half of the world, is vnstayednesse in the other half? To be short, what thing is more subiect to rising and falling, or to be cryed downe or inhaunced, than coyne of siluer and gold, as which séemeth to followe the willes of princes? And yet notwith∣standing, for all their ordinances and proclamations, both gold and siluer do alwayes kéepe a certeine rate and valew. What shall we say then to Religion, which hath a firmer and substantialler ground than all these; I meane not mennes bodies, goods, affections, or fantasies; but the very soule and mynd of man, who also hath such a rest to stay vppon, as is settled, vnmouable, and the Lord of all Chaunges, that is to wit, God? How much more wysely doth our Pythagorist Hierocles teache vs, that Religion is the gouernesse of all vertewes, and that all vertewes tend to her as to their cer∣teine end, as who would say, they be no vertewes if they swarue from her; insomuch that hardynesse being referred to any other than godlynesse, becommeth rashnesse; wisedome becommeth wy∣lynes;

lynes; and Iustice becommeth Iuggling; and at a woord, all ver∣tue is but masking and hipocrisie? If Religion be the end of all vertewes, must it not needs be fixed and vnmouable? Or if it be mouable, what is there then that is iust, good, or vertuous? And if the case stand so; what thing in the world is more vnauaylable than man, or to speake more ryghtly, what thing is to lesse purpose in man, than his mynd? But there is vertue, and the wickeddest man that is, will auow it. Therefore there is also a certeine Religion, which maketh it to be vertue, and whereunto vertue referreth it∣self; and the vngodlyest man that is cannot scape from it.

Let vs looke yet further into the absurdities of this opinion. Who can denie but that among the diuersities of Religions, there were many sorts of wickednes and vngodlynes openly executed; some woorshipping the creatures in Heauen yea and on earth, as the Egiptians did in old time, and as the Tartarians do at this day; some offering vp men in Sacrifice, as the Carthaginenses did in old tyme and as the Westerne Iles do yet at this day: and other∣some permitting things not only contrarie to all Lawes, but also euen horrible and lothsome to nature? If all this be good; I pray you what good is there, or rather what euill is there in the world? But if it be euill in itself; who can deny but that there were wicked and vngodly Religions in the world, (I vse the woord Religion af∣ter the comon maner) and that a man had neede of a Rule where∣by to discerne the good Religion from the bad? And in verie deede it is so rooted in nature to beléeue that there is but one Religion to be had, as well as to beleeue that there is but one God; that (as we may daily see) a man will rather indure the change of a temperate aire into an extreme whot or into an extreme cold; of freedom into bondage; and of Iustice into Tyrannye, than any alteration atall (though neuer so little) in the case of Religion: verily as who would say, it were not so naturall for a man too loue his natiue Countrie, to be frée, and to be at his easie; as to haue some one cer∣teine Religion to gwyde him to saluation.

Now my meaning hath bin to lay foorth this trueth after the mo sorts, of purpose to take away the doubts, and to auoyde the krinks inuented anew by certeine Libertines. But forasmuch as there are many Ceremonies which disguise them selues in the attire of Re∣ligion to deceyue vs:* 1.632 it is more needfull for vs to haue sure and in∣fallible marks, whereby to discerne the true Religion. First of all therefore let vs lay this foundation which I haue layd and settled

alreadie heretofore, namely that Religion is the ryght Rule of ser∣uing God, and of reconcyling and reuniting man agein vnto God, that he may be saued. Now mans Saluation is nothing els but his felicitie, happynes, souereyne good, or welfare: and his welfare (as I haue declared afore) is to be knit vnto God. For neither the world, nor any creature in the World can make man happye, but only he that made man. And it is a cleare case that wee ought to serue him heere beneath, who is to make vs happie aboue, and nòne other but him. All Religion therefore, (how goodly a showe so euer it haue to the eye,) which turneth away from seruing God to ser∣uing the Creature, is but Idolatrie and vngodlynes vnto vs. Also all Religion which causeth vs to séeke our welfare anywhere els, than only in him that is the maker of all welfare; wilbe vnto vs not only vanitie and a thrusting of vs out of the way; but also a mur∣thering of ourselues, and a casting of vs headlong into all wret∣chednes. They may well haue in them an offering of first fruits, of thanksgiuings, and of other seruices: but all these are but iniuries and blasphemies ageinst God, if wee think ourselues beholden too any creature for the things which we neither haue nor can haue of any but the Creator. Also they may well haue prayers, and sacrifi∣ces, but those prayers shalbe both vayne and vngodly, being made to him that cannot here them, and which impute the gouernment of the world vnto Creatures, or to such as sée them not, or can scarsly sée the things that are afore them. And asfor their Sacrifices, they shalbe but smokie sauours, yea ful of trayterous trecherie to God, in that they confesse their lyues before dead things and make a∣mends to Creatures for the offences which they haue committed ageinst the Creator. Now therefore let the first marke of the true Religion which we séeke, be this; that it direct vs & all our Church∣seruices vnto the true God the maker of Heauen and earth, the on∣ly searcher of mens hearts, which are the things wherewith he wil cheefely be serued; that it may distinguish it from all Idolatries, which seeke vnto wood, to stone, to the Sunne, to the Moone, to Men, to Angells, and to all the Creatures that are in Heauen and in earth. And it is not needfull to heape vp here greate nombers of proofs, or to repeate agein the things that haue bin discoursed in the second and third chapters of this woorke. For sith there is but one God, and but one Religion; there is not also any thing more agréeable to nature, than to referre the same wholly to the creator. And in verie deede Plotin, Porphyrius, Proclus, Iamblichus and

such others; which worshipped the Angels or good spirits as they thought; sayd that their so doing (wherein neuerthelesse they were more vnexcusable) was to atteyne by degrees to the highest God.

But will this sayd marke alone fuffice vs?* 1.633 No: wee must not only serue GOD, but we must also serue him aright. Now then, what is the Rule of this seruice, or who is he that can set it downe in writing? That we may serue him aright, it behoueth vs to know him aright: and which of vs can vaunt of that? How many bee there which after long studie, can but so much as tell vs what it is not? And what followeth then, but that lyke as the wizdome of the world, cannot without the ouerthrowe of it selfe, atteyne any further concerning God, than to say what hee is not: so the same wizdome may well atteine so farre as to discerne what seruing of God is false; but it can no more set downe and poynt out the true seruice, than it can atteyne to the knowledge of the Godhead. The Country cloyne shalbe skorned for his labour, if he take vpon him to appoynt how his Prince is to be serued; and yet is he a man as well as the Prince, differing from the Prince in state and calling, but not atall in nature and kind. What is to be sayd then of Man, who is but a woorme, yea and lesse than a woorme in respect of the euerlasting God; if hée will needes shape him & serue him after his owne fancie? The Philosopher will say that GOD ought to bee serued. And if he be a Diuine, he will passe somewhat further, and say, that he is not serued with vapors and smoakes, nor with the sheading of blud. But which of them hath euer sayd, God is spi∣rit and serued in spirit? And if any of them haue come any thing neere it; how wyde hath he wandered away ageine when he came to the particular poynting out of that seruice? Of a trueth, what are all the worshippings of God which man hath ordeyned of his owne head, but childish imaginations, not onely vnbeseeming the Maiestie of God, but also inferiour to the discretion of a man? as Gamings, Showes, Stageplayes, Ronnings of Horses, Iusts, a thousand sorts of Combats, Swordplayings, Wrestlings, Buf∣fetings and such other? And what doth all this betoken, but that man mounteth not aboue man; and that when he thinketh himself to flye his lightest pitch, he scarce heaueth himselfe vpright vppon his feete, but neuer riseth aboue the earth? For what man is hee which calling his witts about him, and looking aduisedly vnto him selfe, could find in his heart to bee honored and serued after that maner? Surely then let vs say, that looke how farre God voutsa∣feth

to stoope vnto vs, so farre be we able to mount vp vnto him: for his comming downe, is our mounting vp. For if we cannot see the Sonne but by helpe of the Sonne, how welsighted so euer we be: much lesse can God be séene or knowen of vs, without the help and light of God himself. To be short, we cannot serue God except we knowe him nor knowe him except he voutsafe to discouer himselfe to vs, and therefore wee can not knowe how to serue and worship him, furtherfoorth then he listeth to shewe it vnto vs by his word. And yet for the discouering of himself vnto vs, he néedeth neither to drawe vs vp to his brightnes, nor to come downe to vs in his maiestie. For our mynds could no more abyde it than our eyes can away with the beholding of the Sonne: but hee must be fayne too stoope to our small abilitie, by telling vs what seruice he requireth at our hands, not according to his spirituall nature which we can∣not possibly comprehend, but as it were through a glasse or a scarf, according to y^e fleshly nature which we beare about with vs. Thus haue we found our second marke of Religion; namely that the ser∣uice of God which Religion is to teach vs, must be grounded vp∣pon his word, and reuealed vnto vs by his ownselfe.

Let vs heare what the heathen say in this case, who knewe very well that all the Ladders of their Philosophie were too short to reache thereunto, and that it behoued men to be inlightened and in∣structed from aboue. Diuinitie (saith Plato* 1.634) cannot be laydforth after the maner of other kinds of seruing, but hath neede of continuall mynding. And then our wit is foorthwith kindled as with a fyre, which afterward gathereth light more & more, and maynteineth it selfe. Finally (sayth he) we know nothing of Gods matters by our owne skill. If he which of all the aun∣cient Philosophers saw most cléere, confesse here that his sight fai∣leth very much if it be not ayded from aboue: what may we déeme of others? And in good sooth, in matters of Religion he sendeth vs euermore to the auncient Oracles, that is to say (according to his meaning) to Gods word.* 1.635 Aristotle in his Supernaturals rehear∣seth and commendeth a certeyne answere of Simonides too Hie∣ron Kyng of Sicilie; which is, that it belongeth to none but onely God, to haue skill of the things that are aboue nature; and howe much lesse then to be skilfull in Diuinitie, and to dispose of Reli∣gion, that is to say to shewe the meane how to ouercome and sur∣mount nature? And whereas Cicero in his Lawes sayeth,* 1.636 that there is not any lawe among men wherto men are bound to obey,

vnlesse it be ordeined by GOD, and deliuered as it were with his owne mouth: if he had bene well examined, he would haue sayde no lesse concerning Religion. It is certaine (saith Iamblicus* 1.637) that we be bound to do the things that please God. But which are those? Surely (sayth he) they be not possible to be knowen of any man, but of him that hath heard God himselfe speake, or which haue learned them by some heauenly instruction. And Alpharabius the Arabian agreeth thereunto in these words.* 1.638 The things that concerne GOD, and are to be beleeued through holy fayth, are of a higher degree than all other things, be∣cause they proceede from diuine inspiration, and mans wit is too weake, and his reason too short too attayne to them. And therefore we reade that as they which haue ordeined and stablished any Religion in any Nation, haue giuen it foorth as proceeding from God; verily because nature taught them, that it belongeth to none but to God alone, to appoynt how hee shalbe serued; neither would the ordinance therof otherwise be obserued, because the par∣ties that were to obey it, would make as great account of thēselues as of the partie that should inioyne it. Thus by the definitiue sen∣tence of the Philosophers, our second marke standeth firme, which will serue vs to discerne the true Religion from the inuenti∣ons of men, so as we may well refuse for vntrueth, whatsoeuer is not grounded vpon Gods word. But in following our former pur∣pose, let vs consider yet further whether this will suffice or no.* 1.639

We haue néede of a Lawe that procéedeth from Gods mouth: and what may that I pray you be, but the same which proceedeth from holynesse it self, namely that we should be holy as he is holy? And if we cannot of our selues know God, nor how he ought to be serued; alas how shall we performe it when he hath declared it vn∣to vs? The ende of Religion (sayeth Plato) is to knit man vnto God. The way to bring this to passe, is to become rightuous and holy, or (as saith Iamblichus) to offer vnto GOD a cleane mynd voyd of all naughtines and cléere from all spot. What man (as e∣uen they themselues confesse) could euer vaunt therof? And what els then is Religion to all of vs, but a booke wherein we reade the sentence of our death, that is to wit our very death in deede, vnlesse that in the ende wee find some grace or forgiuenesse of our sinnes? Yet notwithstanding Religion is the Pathway to life, yea euen to eternall life; a Pathway that hath a certeyne ende, and which be∣guyleth vs not. Therefore it must by some meanes or other fill vs

vp the great gulfe that is betwéene endlesse death, and endlesse life, and betwéene the dwellingplace of blessednes, and the horriblenes of Hell. And therefore let our third marke be, That Religion must put into our hands, a meane to satisfie Gods Iustice, without the which, not onely all other Religions, but also euen that which con∣teineth the true seruing of the true GOD were vtterly vayne and vnprofitable. Now, mans reason hath well perceiued that some such meane was néedefull in Religion: but to knowe what that meane is, was to high a thing for mans reason to atteyne vntoo. In respect whereof the Platonists busied themselues very much in finding out some meane to cleanse men from their sinnes, and too knit them vnto God beeing reconciled to his fauour, and they set downe certeine degrées wherby to atteine therunto. But yet in the end they confesse all their washings and clensings to be vtterly vn∣sufficient. There are which say it is to bee done by abstinence, by vertuous behauiour, by skill, or by Iupiters mysteries; and some say it is to be done by al of them successiuely one after another. But yet when they haue bestirred themselues on all sides, Porphyrius conclusion is, That they be Ceremonies without effect, and yet notwithstanding that there must of necessitie néedes be a meane to purge and iustifie men, and that the same must bee vniuersall, and that it is not possible (admitting Gods prouidence as we ought to doe) that God should leaue mankind destitute of that meane. And that this remedie ought to be conteyne din Religion, hee sheweth sufficiently in that hee seeketh it in taking the Orders, and in the Consecrations, hallowings and other misteries of his owne Re∣ligion, which in the end he letteth go againe. But yet more appa∣rantly doth Hierocles shewe it,* 1.640 who sayth that Religion is a stu∣die of Wisedome that consisteth in clensing and perfecting the life, that men may be at one with God, and become like vnto him: and that to atteyne to that cleanesse, the meane is to enter into a mans owne conscience, and to consider of his sinne, and to confesse it vnto God. Thus farre he is very well. Neuerthelesse, here they stoppe ouershort euerychone of them: for vppon confession inseweth but death, vnlesse God (who is the very Iustice it selfe, and more infi∣nitely contrary to euill than we can imagine,) be appeased and sa∣tisfied for our offences, whereas in Religion we séeke for very life. To bee short, of the great nomber of Religions which are in the Worlde, some haue no certeine restingpoint atall; as we reade of some people of Affrik, which worship that thing which they méete 〈1 page duplicate〉〈1 page duplicate〉

〈1 page duplicate〉〈1 page duplicate〉

first in the morning; and that is but a vaine Ceremonie: Some haue a restingpoynt, howbeit an euill one; as for example, all they that direct vs to the creatures; and those are nothing els but Ido∣latries. Some doe set vnto themselues a good end, in that they aime at the Creator; but they will néedes worship him after their owne fancie; and that is a swaruing aside to superstition, or rather (which worse is) a seruing of their owne fancie, and not of GOD. And a∣mong the residue, there is one which hath an eye to the Creator and honoureth his Lawe, and that is the Religion of the Iewes. This againe is a way that leaueth vs in the middes of our way, leading vs into the wood, but not leading vs out againe. But the true Religion in déede and which deserueth the name of Religion, is only that which hath God for hir shooteanker, his woord for war∣rant of hir worshipping, and a meane appoynted by him to pacifie hym withal; and in that onely and in none other resteth any Sal∣uation.

Some tell vs that Religion is nothing els but charitie;* 1.641 that is to say, the performing of a mannes duetie towards his neighbour: and those men would tell vs if they durst, that Religion is but an instrument of ciuil gouernment. But when they haue inlarged the commendations of charitie as farre as they can, what can they (at a woord) say more than we say thereof; namely, that Charitie is of such force and weight, that Religion can by no meanes stand with∣out it? Neuerthelesse, to speake properly thereof, Charitie is not the marke whereby to discrene the true Religion, but rather to di∣scerne who is ryghtly Religious. Too the intent a man may bée happye, he must returne vnto God; therefore he must needs serue him. That is the badge of Religion. But the godly or Religious man vttereth his Religion, (that is to say, that God hath touched him truely in his hart,) in that he performeth all the dewties of vn∣feyned freendship and godly affection towards his neybor who is the Image of God. Charitie therefore is nothing els but a reboun∣ding of godlynes or of the loue of God, backe vnto our neybour, or a reflexion or sigh vpon this Image. Also that a man may be hap∣pye, he must be linked vnto God; and that he may be linked vnto God, he must be reconciled into his fauor. Now this charitie which they speake of, is but a linking of Man vnto Man. It is not that which maketh a man happie, neither doth the fault which hath de∣stroyed vs all, consist in want of charitie, (I meane that Charitie which they pretend); but in rebelling ageinst God. Therefore it

booteth vs not to be at one with our neybour, except we be at one with God. Neuerthelesse it is a good signe that our hart is seruent in the loue of God, as the child is in y^e loue of his father, when being vnable as yet to vnite our selues vnto him, we link our selues in one body and one mind to al those which beare his Image. To be short, the true marke of fire is not heate; for there are other things which are whot as well as fire: but it is a vertew that is so linked vnto it, that as soone as ye heare of fire, it followeth immediatly that there is heate also, but not contrarywise. Lykewise Charitie is not the true religion itself, but a vertue which accompanieth it so of neces∣sitie, that a man can no sooner say there is Religion in this man or that man; but that it must needs followe incontinently, that there is charitie in him also. And what maner of charitie? Soothly not such as they take it to be which refreyne from misdealing for feare of mannes Lawe; for that is but hipocrisie: nor a desire of credit that we may haue the better spéede in our affayres; for that is but a chaffaring. Nor a desire of honor whereby wee be spurred to do∣wel; for that is but a self loue. But it is a certeine feare and loue of God, which maketh vs to cherish and loue all those for Gods sake, which are of him and hold of him. Now what man is he that dareth vaunt of this perfect charitie, y^t he loueth his neyghbor as he ought, and in such respect as he ought, that is to say as himself, and for the loue of God? For how can we haue this charitie, if Religion go not afore? And if our loue towards God be so short and feeble (as I sayd afore); what rebounding backe thereof will there be vppon our neyghbour.

Now therefore let vs conclude, That as man hath but one end, namely of returning vnto God; so there is but one ryght path to leade him thether, and that is Religion. And that as there is but one God; so there can be but one true Religion, that is to say, one way that leadeth to saluation; which Religion hath these thrée vnfallible marks whereby to discerne it; namely that it woorship the true GOD; that it worship him according to his word; and that it re∣concyle to God the man that followeth it. And now let vs conse∣quently sée which of al the Religions in the world it is, that alonly is to be discrned by these marks.

The xxi. Chapter.

That the true God was worshipped in Israell: which is the first marke of the true Religion.

THe first marke of y^e true Religion, without the which it cannot rightly beare the name of Re∣ligion, is the seruing of the true God. And the true God (as I haue said before) is the same y^t created heauen & earth and all things in them; which gouerneth them by his wisedom; which mainteineth them by his goodnes; which wéel∣deth them according to his wil, and directeth them according to his glorie. By this so notable a marke wee cannot fayle to decipher the true God from the false Gods, and by the selfesame meane to dis∣cerne the true Religion which beareth our first marke, from all o∣ther Religions how peinted and disguysed so euer it is possible for them to be. This God which hath doone those things can bee but one. For séeing he created all things, all the things which wee sée heere beneath are but creatures. Now then, whatsoeuer Religion pointeth vs to any mo Gods then one, we ought to abhorre it euen at the very first approche. Again, the same God is also infinite and incomprehensible. For the woorke cannot conceyue the woorkmay∣ster, but contrariwise the woorkemayster conceyueth the woorke. Whatsoeuer woorke therefore is made to counterfet him or too re∣semble him, or to shewe him vnto vs, can be nothing els but Idola∣trie and Superstition, inuented by the Diuell or by man.

Now let vs come néerer to the rabble of Religions; and wee shall sée there throngs of hundred thousand Gods distinguished by straunge fantasticall deuyces of men, of women, of beastes and of monsters. Yet shall wee not sée there any whit of that which wee séeke for. But there is one Religion to be séene among all the rest, which for all the rest, beareth this marke graued in her forehead, In the beginning GOD created the Heauen and Earth: and soundeth out this spéech alowd euerywhere, The Lord our God is but one God; and in the middes of all the rout that barketh and byteth at her on all sides, cryeth out coragiously, All your Godds

are but error and vanitie. Therefore without staying vppon the others, which are not worthie so much as to be looked on, wee will procéede to that onely one Religion which alonly in trueth profes∣seth the true way, and the knowledge of the place whereunto wee would come. Now, to shewe the way, the end whereto it leadeth must be knowen: and the end which all of vs tend vnto, is a happy lyfe. And to leade a happy lyfe, is to liue in God who is the very happinesse it self. And the same God (as I haue made the heathen∣men themselues to confesse) is but one. The Religions therefore which were not the liuery of that, but of many, cannot bring vs too the happynes which we séeke: for it is but one, and to be had at the hand of that one. Which then is the one Religion that shall leade vs to the one God? Shall we séeke for it among the Assyrians? They worshipped as many Gods as they had Townes. Among the Persians? They had as many Gods, as there be Starres in the Skye and Fyres on Earth. Among the Greekes? They had as many Gods as they had fancies: Among the AEgiptians? They had as many Goddes as they sowed or planted Fruites, or as the Earth brought foorth fruites of it selfe. To be short, the Romanes in conquering the worlde, got to themselues all the vanities in the Worlde, and they wanted no wit to deuyse others of their owne brayne. What shall it auayle vs to aske the way of these blynd Soules, which go groping by the Walles sydes, and haue not so much as a Child or a Dog to leade them as some blynd folk haue, but catch hold vnaduisedly of euery thing that comes in their way? But yet among these great Nations, we spye a little Nation cal∣led the people of Israel, which worshippeth the maker of al things, acknowledging him for their Father, calling vpon him alone in all their néedes, as (for al the small account that others made of them) abhorring all the glistering gloriousnes of the greate kingdomes that were out of the way. It is in the Religion of this people and not elsewhere, that that we shall find our sayd former marke. And therefore we must séeke it onely there, and leaue the damnable foot∣steppes of the rest, as being assured that wee may more safely fol∣lowe one man that is cléeresighted, than a thousand that are blind. For what greater blindnes of mynd can be, than to take the Crea∣ture for the Creator, a thing of nothing for y^e thing that is infinite?

Now, that the people of Israell worshipped the true GOD in such sort as I haue described him; the continuance of their whole Historie sheweth well ynough. All men knowe in what reuerence

the Byble hath bin had in all times among the Hebrewes. And if any man doubt whether it be Gods word or no; that is a question to be decyded otherwise. But yet for all that, it is out of all doubt, that the Hebrewes themselues tooke it to be so, and that wee can∣not better iudge of their Beléef and Religion, than by the Scrip∣tures, for the which they haue willingly suffered death. And what els doe those Scriptures preach from the first word of them to the last, than the onely one God the maker of Heauen and of Earth? As soone as you doe but open the Byble, byandby ye sée there, In the beginning God created the Heauen and the Earth. At the very first step in at the gate of that booke, it excludeth al the Godds made or deuised by man frō that people, to the intent to kéepe them wholy to the true God that created man. Open the booke further∣foorth at all aduenture whersoeuer you list, and frō lyne to lyne you shall méete with nothing but the prayses of that God, or protesta∣tions and thunderings against the strange Gods. God made man excellent, who for his disobedience is become subiect to corruption. Who could punish and imprison such a substance, but he that made it? He founded the world and peopled it, which afterward was o∣uerwhelmed by the flud, and who could let the waters loose, but he that held them at commaundement? The people of Israell found drye passage through the Red Sea; and who prepared them that way, but hee that founded the Earth vppon the déepes? Also the Sunne stoode still and went backe at the speaking of a woorde; and of whose word? but of his whose woord is a deede? I dispute not heere as yet, whether these things bee true or no; but I say onely that the Hebrewes beléeued them, yea and that they beléeued them in all ages; and that they worshipped him whom they beléeued to be the doer of those things; who certesse cannot be any other, than the same of whom the first lyne of the booke sayeth, That he made the Heauen and the Earth.* 1.642 Aske of Iob who it is whome he wor∣shippeth; and hee will not say it is hee whome the inuention of the Craftesman, or of the Imbroyderer, or of the proyner of Uynes hath deuised; nor that is sponne, weaued, or hamered; nor that hath a Tayle cut with a Razor; nor an Image turned arsyuersie, nor some iuggling tricke to dazle childrens eyes withall; for such (as we shall see more plainly hereafter) are the Goddes of the heathen: (but he will say) it is the same GOD that founded the earth, and stretched out his Metlyne ouer it, which hath shet vp the Sea within doores, and bounded the rage of his waues; which made the

light and the darknes; which holdeth backe the Pleyads and vn∣byndeth Orion; which hath created the world, and giuen vnder∣standing to man.* 1.643 It is he (sayth Dauid) which spreadeth out the Heauens as a Curtaine, and maketh him Chambers among the the Waters; which hath setled the Earth vppon hir Pillers, and chaced away the Sea at one only threatning of his; which maketh the Windes his messengers, and the Elements his seruants. It is hee (sayeth Esay) which is the first and the last;* 1.644 His hand hath grounded the Earth, and his right hand hath measured the Hea∣uens. As soone as hee called them, they appéered together before him: Heauen is his Seate, and the Earth is his Footestoole. Yea and besides all this, Moyses will tell vs, that streine we our selues to say what we can of him, we can say no more of him but that it is he whose name is I am that I am; euen he that alonly is, of whom all things that are haue their being, and in comparison of whom al things are nothing, whom neither words nor workes can expresse, onely in effect, and yet infinite therewithall.

Some man will say, it may be that this so greate a God, vout∣safeth not to stoope downe vnto vs, but hath left the charge both of the world and of men to some Seruants of his whom it behoueth vs to woorship. Nay, as he is hygh and great in power, so is he deepe also in wisdome and goodnes. Art thou sicke? It is he that both maketh helth and sendeth sicknesse; thou séest how he was E∣zechias Phisition. Wouldest thou haue Children? It is hee that openeth and shetteth the bearingplace. Insomuch that he made the old age of Sara fruteful, and the barrein Anne a moother and a Nurce. Doth thyne enemi•• vexe thee? He is the God of Hosts, whom Gedeon findeth as strōg with a smal army as with a great. Wouldest thou haue a prosperous wind?* 1.645 It is he (saieth Iob) that sheadeth foorth the Easterne wynd vpon the earth, and at whose call the northwynd commeth. Doth thy Husbandrye drye away with drought? It is he that dealeth foorth both the morning and the eue∣ning rayne; which beget the droppes of the deawe; and which ma∣keth it to rayne vppon the ground, yea euen where nobody dwells. To be short, art thou afrayd of famine? He prepareth foode for the Rauens to pray vpon,* 1.646 and their yong birds crye vnto none but him. The Lyons whelpes rore vnto him for foode, and all things that liue in the aire, on the Land, and in the water, do wayt vppon him for the supplying of their needs. And what is all this in effect, but that the God whom Israell woorshipeth, is the Creator and Gouer∣ner

of all things? The verie true God which maynteyneth all things by his goodnes, as well as he made them by his power. As carefull for all things yea euen to the least, as he is myghtfull and of abilitie to maynteyne them. Al the whole scripture from the one end to the other, that is to say the people of Israell from age to age, sing nothing else but that. Now if we reade ouer the old ceremo∣nies of the Egiptians, Persians, and Thuscanes leafe by leaf; where shall we find in them one woord of the true God, but onely in re∣nowncing, and blaspheming him? And what are all their Godes but caryers of Receyts, like these dogleaches which professe but the curing of some one disease only, or lyke these comon craftsmen, which professe but the skill of some one craft or misterie? But this true God (as I haue said) is the onely one God. What other people haue bin forbidden to call vppon many Godds? Nay rather, what other people haue not bin comaunded to haue infinite Gods, as a token of Religion? He is a quickening Spirit which cannot bee counterfetted nor conceyued. What other God hath sayd, Where∣unto will ye lyken me, which do hold the Earth betweene my Fingers? What house will yee build for me which make the Earth my footstoole and the Heauen my feate? And to what other people hath it bin sayd,* 1.647 Thou shalt not make any grauen Image? And what other people hath chosen rather to dye a thou∣sand tymes, than to breake that commaundement? Insomuch that they would not admitte eyther peynter or karuer into any of their Cities. Contrarywyse, which of all the Gods of the Heathen haue not requyred Images? Yea and (as we reade in Porphirius) taught how they should bee peynted? Much more vayne in good sooth than the mē that woorshipped them. To be short, the true God which gouerneth the whole world, must also (as I haue said afore) gouerne both men and their witts to his glorie. And to gouerne them so, it behoueth him to knowe them; and to knowe them, it be∣houeth him to see them; and to see into their harts, it behoueth him to haue made them. For the father which thinketh himself to be the begetter of a Chyld, seeth not into the hart thereof; nother doth the schoolemayster see into his scholers wit, whereof he thinketh him∣self to be the framer. And much lesse can an Imaginatiue God do any of those things, hauing not made the one nor the other. What other God shall ye reade to haue sayd, Thou shalt not couet: or to haue required the sacrifice of the hart, or the fasting of the spirit, or a hartbroken and lowly mynd? Who els can forbid Couetousenes

and hypocrisie, but he which is able to punish it? And who can pu∣nish it, but he that sees it? And who can see it in man, but he that made man? On the contrarie part, who séeth not that the Lawes which are reported to haue bin inspired by the Godds at Rome, in Athens, and in Lacedemon, extend no further than to the outward man?* 1.648 Insomuch that none of them (as sayeth Cato) is found to haue sayd He y^t is mynded to steale, but only He that stealeth, shalbe giltie. Which is as much to say, as that they be but Lawes of men, who see not into folks harts; Lawes of Creatures which pearce no further then the Cote or the Skinue. The people of Israel therefore are the people that serued the onely true God that made man, and all other people serued Gods made by men.

Now this silly people (as we reade in Histories) was strange∣ly despysed and trampled vnder foote,* 1.649 as though all the diuels had conspired and banded themselues against that people, which alon∣ly worshipped the true God. But what are the Heathen compelled in the end to confesse? Varro the best learned of the Romanes, who made a beadroll of all the Gods, for feare (as hee sayth) least they should stray away: concludeth in the end, that those doe worship the true God, which worship the onely one, without Images, and which beléeue him to be the gouernor of the whole world. Yea and (which more is) he saith that the Iewes (by what other name soe∣uer they call him) doo worship the same God truely:* 1.650 and that if after their example all Images had bin forbidden, (as they were a long time in Rome) men had not fallen into so many superstitions & er∣rors. It is not to be doubted but that he which spake so of y^t whole rabble of false Gods that were in Rome, would haue spoken much more of them, if he had not feared men more than his Gods. And whereas some of the heathen to excuse their owne sacriledge, haue borne the world on hand y^t the Iewes worshipped y^e head of a wild Asse, because a beast of that kind had shewed thē a fountaine in the wildernesse, at a time y^t they were distressed with thirst: Polybius, Strabo,* 1.651 and Tacitus himself the maker of y^t goodly report, doo wit∣nesse, y^t in the Temple of the Iewes there was neuer yet found any Penon, Pensil, Relik, or Image, neither at the tyme y^t Antiochus through couetousnes sacked it, nor whē Pompey for reuerēce spa∣red it.* 1.652 And truely the sayd Assish report of the Asses head, is scarce worth the disproof. But more rather because the Iewes rested vp∣on the Sabboth day, which the Gentiles dedicated afterward vnto Saturne, many men haue thought that they worshipped Saturne,

whereas if the heathen had asken but some Babe of the Iewes con∣cerning that matter, he would haue taught them that the GOD of Israel neuer fled away for feare of a man as Saturne did, but that he abydeth in Heauen, and that the whole Earth quaketh at his pre∣sence. Notwithstāding, the chiefe Monarckeies of the world armed themselues in all ages against this small people: but yet the smal∣ler that they were, the greater appeared the mightines of their GOD. Sennacharib King of the Assyrians had subdewed all his neighbours, and intended to fill vp the Dyches of Ierusalem as he had doone by the ouerthrowe of other Citties. For performance whereof he sent Rabsaces the Generall of his Hoste to subdue Eze∣chias King of Iuda. In the opinion of men Senacharibs argumēt was good and well concluded. If I should send thee two thousand Horses (saith hee) ready furnished to Battell,* 1.653 thou couldest hardly furnish as many men to ryde them. And canst thou thinke then that thou art able to resist my whole armie? I haue conquered Aram, and Arphad, and Ana, and Aua, and Sepharnam, and what shall then become of Ierusalem, if it stand wilfully against mee? But when as he said, Consider what became of the Goddes of those Nations, supposing the GOD of Israel to haue bene of the same stampe: therein his argument fayled, not for that (as the Logici∣ans say) he concluded from the particular to the generall, or from that which is true simply to that which is true but in some certeine respect, but for argewing from that which is nothing at all to that which is all, namely from the vanitie of Idols, to the almightines of the Creator. But what became of this victorious Monarke, and of his men, and of their Idols? Although the holy Scripture had sayd nothing thereof, Herodotus can tell vs it sufficiently. The Host of Sennacharib (saith he) was miserably discomfited, his state came to decay, his owne sonnes murthered him in the Temple of his Idols, the Babilonians gathered vp y^e scatterings of his Em∣pire, (which more is) in a certeine Temple of AEgipt, an Image of his was set vp with this Inscription,* 1.654 Learne at the sight of me to feare God. What more almost sayth the holy Scripture vnto vs thereof? And who can say that this was not a very arche of vic∣torie and triumph to the true God, against the Goddes of the Hea∣then, in the persone of that Prince which had destroyed so many of them? From henfoorth the Monarchie of the Assyrians did neuer prosper, but the Medes and Persians came to be Lords of it, who at the first seemed to take warning by the example thereof. For

they restored the Iewes home agein into their Countrie, according to the Prophesies, and gaue them leaue to buyld vp their Temple ageine, furthering them by all meanes therein, and giuing them certeine allowances for the maintenance of their Sacrifices, ac∣knowledging in their Letters to their Lieuetenants, that the God of the Iewes was the true God, and none other.

But what shall we say of the Gods of Greece, who in conque∣ring the Persians, came to take a foyle in Iewrie? For Alexander hauing subdewed y^e Persians, made men to worship him as a God; and hearing that in the Mountaines of Palestine, there was a peo∣ple whom neither the Assyrians nor the Persians could subdue to their Gods, for all the rigour and crueltie they could shewe; inso∣much that at his owne being in Babylon, certeyne Iewes that had bin conueyed thether, did flatly disobey him, when he ment to haue buylded there a Temple to Iupiter Bele,* 1.655 as Hecateus reporteth, who accompanyed Alexander in that voyage: he turned head to∣wards Ierusalem, with a venemous rancour to that poore people. But when Iaddus the Highpriest of the Iewes came before him in his Priestly attyre, accompanyed with his Leuites about him; A∣lexander cast downe himselfe at his féete & worshipped him. This * 1.656 God I say whom y^t greatest personages worshipped thensforth, did there worship a man that came to make supplication vnto him. Parmenio thinking this to be a very strange sight, asked Alexan∣der the cause why he did so. It is not the man (quoth Alexander) whom I worship, but the God whose Priest he is: for I sawe him (sayd he) in the same attyre, when I was yet in Macedony;* 1.657 and when I doubted whether I might meddle with Asia or no, he gaue me courage to proceed, assuring me that by his guyding I should ouercome the Persians. Herevpon he went vp into the Temple, and offered Sacrifize vnto GOD, in such maner as the Highpriest instructed him; who shewed him the booke of Daniell, wherein it was prophesied certeyne hundred yéeres afore, that a certeyne Greeke should come & conquer the Persians, which now fell out to bee he. Wherevpon he suffered the Iewes to liue after their owne lawes, and from seuen yéeres to seuen yéeres released them of all tributes, which thing he denyed to the Samaritanes. Now, of all the great number of Nations, of whom he conquered many moe than he saw, where reade we that euer he did the like to any of them? And whervnto shal we attribute this déede of his, but to his bethinking him of the thing which hehad learned in secret of

the great Priest of the AEgiptians called Leon, namely, that all the Gods whom the Gentiles worshipped, were Kings of old tyme, of whom the memoriall had bin consecrated by their posteritie: and therefore he is a greater King than any of them all, thought also that he might well be the greatest God of them all. But in the God of Israell he acknowledged another maner of thing: namely, that he was God of Gods and King of Kings, the chaunger of Em∣pyres at his pleasure, which vpholdeth Kings with his hand, not to performe their vayne attempts, but to bring to passe his owne euerlasting decrées. By the death of Alexander the Monarchie of the Greekes came to be dispersed, so as the Ptolomies gate the so∣uereintie in AEgipt. And what greater proofe would wee haue of their acknowledging the only one God, than to see Ptolomie Phi∣ladelph cause the Byble of the Hebrewes to be so solemnely tran∣slated at his owne charges? For what do Conquerours desire, but to giue lawes to those whom they haue vanquished: and therefore what els was this, than a receiuing of lawes at the hands of the Iewes? And seeing that the men of Israell were weaker than the men of AEgipt: what can wee say, but that the God of Israell had subdewed the Gods of AEgipt? And soothly, afterward when Pto∣lomie surnamed the bountifull had gotten y^e souereintie of Syria, he offered not Sacrifize for his victories vnto the Gods of AEgipt (which notwithstanding were very many in number, and seemed to haue giuen law to the Nations round about them): but he went to Ierusalem, and there acknowledging himselfe to haue receyued his prosperitie of the God of Israell, did consecrate the Monumēts of his victories vnto him. And yet was this in the tyme of the grea∣test aduersitie of the Iewes, euen when their Countrey was forra∣yed, and their Temple vnhallowed by their enemies and by their owne Priestes themselues; that is to say, at such a tyme as all out∣ward things should haue disswaded him from woorshipping of the God of that people, had not the most manifest trueth driuen him to the contrarie.

As touching the Romaines, what tyme they extended their warres into Iewrie, we reade that they reuerenced the Temple of Ierusalem: insomuch that Augustus ordeined certeyne Sacrifizes to be offered there both yéerely and dayly, and that diuers Heathen princes, being prouoked by his sending of offerings thither so care∣fully, followed his example in doing the like. But seeing the Ro∣maines brought all the Gods of all the Nations whom they had

conquered into Rome: how happeneth it that only this God could finde no place there?* 1.658 Cicero answereth, that it beseemed not the Maiestie of the Empire. But if I should appose him vpon his con∣science, did Bacchus, Anubis, Pryapus, and their shamefull night∣wakes and misteries celebrated in the darke, yéeld renowme to the state of the Empyre? Nay, if he will say the trueth, they knew that the God of Israell (and none other) was the true God, and that for the harbouring of him, it behoued them to driue away all the rest: but they had so long tyme foaded folke with Idolatrie, that they were afrayd (as many Princes are at this day) least they might be deposed by their Subiects in receyuing their rightfull Lord.

Yet notwithstanding (will some saye) this sillie people of the Iewes were caryed away from their own Countrey into the fower quarters of the world, scattered among other people, and parted a∣mōg all Nations of the earth, at the pleasure of their enemies that had gotten the vpper hand of them. Surely Gods wonderful pro∣uidence is to be noted in this case, farre more without comparison, than if that people had conquered y^e whole world by force of armes. For by the things which the Poets haue written of them, wee see in what contempt they were had of all men. But yet let vs heare the wonderment that was made thereat, not by a common person, but by the great Philosopher Seneca.* 1.659 Yet notwithstanding (saith he) the custome of that Nation hath so preuailed, that it is the rather receyued of the whole world, and they beeing vanqui∣shed, haue (I wote not by what meanes) giuen lawes to their Conquerours. Who seeth not here a great motion of mynd in this Philosopher? And what man hauing common reason, is not rauished thereat as well as he? Is it possible for Kings to haue subdewed a people whom they could neuer inforce to chaunge their owne lawes? The example thereof is Iewrie, which hath bin trod∣den vnder foote by the Assyrians, Persians, Greekes & Romaines; and yet for all their chaunging of their Maysters, they could neuer bee brought to alter their lawe. There may perchaunce some like constancie bee found among other Nations, as in respect of their lawes: but that a people being conquered, caryed away, brought into bondage, vnaccounted of, led in triumph by diuers Empyres, as the Iewes were, should not only subdue the harts of their Con∣querours to their GOD, so as the Conquerours could not fasten their lawes vppon the vanquished sort, but contrarywise the van∣quished sort haue fastened their lawes vpon their vanquishers, the

Subiects vppon their Prince, the Captiues vpon their Mayster, and the condemned vpon their Iudge: who (I pray you) would be∣léeue it vnlesse he sawe it?* 1.660 And if a man see it, how can he say that any other can possibly doe it but God? But if Seneca will voutsafe to heare Seneca quietly, it may be that he himselfe shall finde a re∣solution to his owne wonderment. Namely, that the Gods (as he sayth) which were called inuiolable & immortall, whom the Iewes left to other Nations, were dumbe and sencelesse Images, dis∣guysed in the shapes of Men, Beastes, and Fishes; and some in vgly and ilfauoured monsters; and that the Feends which pos∣sessed those Images, required woorse things of men for their seruice, thā the horriblest Tyrants that euer were; as that men should gash themselues, mayme and lame themselues, geld themselues, and offer men women and children in Sacrifize to them. But when folke heard speaking of the true God the ma∣ker of Heauen and Earth, and that he wilbe serued with the hearts and mynds of men: that word issewing out of the mouth of a poore prisoner, caught men prisoners and ouercame their Gods. And in very déede (as wee shall see hereafter) if we reade the good authors of that tyme; eyther they speak but of the one God, or if they speak of mo Gods, it is but for customes sake and in way of condemning them. What els then were the manifold fléetings of the Iewes, but as many conueyings abroad of companies of Preachers, to shewe forth the true God; and as many Armies to destroy the Idols and to roote them out?* 1.661 Wee reade that the Coniurers which were in old tyme amōg the Gentiles, did vse y^e name of the God of Israell, the God of the Hebrewes, and the God that drowned the AEgip∣tians, in coniuring such as were possessed of Deuilles, and that the Deuilles trembled at that name. This serueth not to proue that they worshipped not other Gods, but that they knewe those Gods to be of no force.* 1.662 Iulian the Apostata did vnderset his shoulder, to shore vp the seruice of the false Gods as much as he could. But yet durst he not deny, but that the God of Abraham Isaac and Iacob is a great and mightie God; and he sware by all his Gods that he was one of them that were conuerted to his seruice, and that hee knewe him to be very gracious to such as serue him as Abraham had done. Who now could euer make an Israelite confesse that a∣ny other God was good, than the same whom he worshipped? And if he be the very God, how can it be (euen by Iulians owne saying) that all the residue should not bee euill, seeing that this good God

condemneth them, and declareth them to bee all wicked Spirites and enemies of mankynde? But if Iulian himselfe would tell vs what befell him at Antioche, when he asked counsell of his De∣uilles who made all his Philosophers to quake, and all his great Sorcerers to runne away for feare: wee should see well enough what stuffe they be:* 1.663 insomuch that euen his owne Historiographer Zosimus, is ashamed to make report of it.

Now, I would fayne that the Heathen or their Aduocats should but shewe me one of these two things; eyther where any Author of the Iewes yéeldeth record to any God of the Heathen: or where any graue Heathen author hath condemned the God that is worship∣ped by the Iewes. Forasmuch then as in a Chapter appropried to the same purpose, I haue alreadie proued by all the auncient Au∣thors, and by consent of all people, that there is but only one God; and by Varro euen now, that the Iewes do worship the same God: what followeth therof, but that al of them be Iewes in that poynt, and that as many as are not so, are al ydolaters and deceiued? And for that cause when Orpheus had praysed God in these and such like verses alledged in the third Chapter.

There is but one perfect God the maker of all things, Who cherisheth and fostereth all things. &c.

He addeth immediatly,

Neuer man yet knew his incomprehensible being, sauing one of the blud of the Chaldees.

Which saying of his some referre vnto Abraham, othersome to Moyses; and some of the Platonists to Zoroastres the graund∣child of Noe. And Apollo himselfe being demaunded by the Gen∣tiles, what people was rightly religious from of old tyme; answe∣red him thus.

The Chaldees and the Hebrewes haue all wisdome twixt thē twaine, And of the true God only they the worship doe maynteine.

Wherevnto agréeth this verse of Sibilles:

The Iewes are sure a heauenly race, diuine, and full of blisse.

But it will bee yet much more, if wee can by their owne best Au∣thors, proue their Gods to be nothing but vanitie & leazing: which is as much to say, as that they haue not onely allowed the God of Israell, but also condemned all their owne Gods.

The xxij. Chapter.

That the Gods worshipped by the heathen, were men con∣secrated or canonyzed to posteritie.

I Haue sufficiently shewed heretofore in the se∣cond and third Chapters, that there is but one God; That both Angels and Féendes are but Creatures, the one seruāts, & the other slaues; That Nature and Philosophie consent toge∣ther therein, notwithstanding that ouerrooted custome haue like a waterstreame caryed folke away, and that the wise of the world haue loued better to followe the course of the streame, than to rowe against it. Yet for all that, it shall not be superfluous to see what they themselues haue written of their owne Gods, both generally of them all, and particulerly of euery of them.* 1.664 Therefore to begin with Hermes, whome we haue heard so highly commending the onely one GOD; He writeth of them in these words Lyke as the Lord God (sayth he) is the ma∣ker of the Gods in Heauen, so is man the maker of the Gods that are content to dwell in Temples, that they might be neer vnto men.* 1.665 Man then maketh Images after his owne likenes, whereunto hee calleth Spirites by Arte Magick, or els they come into them of their owne accord, and foretell vnto men things to come. But the tyme wil come, that all this kynd of Religion of the AEgiptians shalbe abolished, and that all their worshippings shall vanish away. And in very deede (sayth he) Esculapius the Graundfather of Asclepius, and Mercurie myne owne Graundfather, which are worshipped at Hermo∣polis in AEgipt, were Men, whose worldly men, that is to say their bodyes) lye the one in Lybia and the other in Hermopi∣lis, and vnder their names are worshipped certeine Diuels, whome I allured and drue into their Images. What more sub∣stantiall witnesse now could we produce against the Gods of AE∣gipt, than the very partie himselfe that made them?* 1.666 And what els were they then, than either men, or Diuels shrowded in the Ima∣ges or in the dead Carkeses of men? But I procéede with these

two partes the one after the other.

The great Highpriest of AEgipt called Leon, beeing asked se∣cretly by Alexander, concerning the originall of their Gods, and fearing more his power than their wrath; bewrayed vnto him, that all the greate Gods, yea euen those whome the Romanes termed The Gods of the greater Nations, were al of them men. But he prayed Alexander that he would not tell it to any body, sa∣uing his Moother Olimpias, and that she should burne his Letter as soone as she had read it.* 1.667 For as for the Beasts which the AEgip∣tians worshipped, Plutark sayth that some of them were worship∣ped as Planets and signes celestiall; and othersome because that when Osyris led his people to Battell, hee had diuers Antesignes according to the diuersities of the Countries, as in one a Dog, in another an Oxe, and so foorth: which afterward through emulati∣on were turned into Superstition. As touching the Phenicians,* 1.668 their next neighbours, Sanchoniation their owne Chronacler wryteth, that they honored such men for Gods as had bene greate among thē,* 1.669 or had inuēted any thing profitable for the life of man: and that as they were long time Lords of the Sea, and conueyed many companyes of their owne countrifolke into Libya & Spaine to inhabit there:* 1.670 so they peopled them with their Gods also. Con∣cerning the Gods of the Greekes, wee reade that Orphey, Ho∣mer, and Hesiodus were the first bringers of them in, and did set downe their Pedegrees in writing, giuing them names and Sur∣names, and appoynting them honours at their pleasures.* 1.671 Of whō Pythagoras sayth, that their Soules were hanged vpon a Trée in Hell, & there pinched with Serpents on all sides for their so dam∣nable deuices.* 1.672 And what hée himselfe déemed of those Gods, wee may sée in his lyfe written by Porphirius. For he wrote verses vp∣pon the Tumb of Apollo at Delphos, declaring him to haue bin the Sonne of Silenus that was slayne by Pithon, and buryed in a place called Tripos, because the three daughters of Triopus came thither to moorne. Afterward again, comming into a Caue of Ida, where he found a Throne set vp vnto Iupiter, hee wrote this in∣scription vpon it:* 1.673 Pythagoras to Iupiter. Heere lyeth the great Zeus whom men call Iupiter. Socrates in despite of those Gods did sweare by an Oke, by a Gote, and by a Dogge; and was con∣demned to drinke poyson, because he taught that there was but on∣ly one God. Which is as much to say, as that he déemed lesse god∣head to be in those Gods, than in the least creatures. Yet notwith∣standing,

he was the onely man whom Apollo auowed to bee the wysest man of all Greece: wherein he had shewed himself to haue had lesse wit than those beastes, if he had deemed such a one to bee wisest as had condemned the Godhead. But it is the propertie of the Deuill, both to abuse men and also to mocke them for their la∣bour. They cryed out against Socrates that he was a blasphemer, and made him to drinke his owne death. But within a while after, the Athenians did set vp an Image of him in one of their Tem∣ples, and in a rage did put his accusers to death: [which deede of theirs made notably against themselues:] for surely they could not better haue condemned their Gods, than by their iustifying and honoring of the partie that condemned them. As for his Disciple Plato, this saying of his shall suffice. When I write vnto you in good earnest, I speake but of one God; and when I meane o∣therwise, I speake of many. He imployed his Gods about vani∣tie, because the estéemed them to be but vayn. To be short, one saies, If they be Gods, why mourne ye for them? and if they be liuelesse, why worship ye them? Another sayes, be of good chéere my Coun∣treymen, men liued afore the Gods, and the Gods dye afore men. And the Poets themselues, who made the Gods to be such as they be, take as great pleasure in the vnmaking of them, as little Chil∣dren doe in playing with their Puppets: insomuch that there is no Tragedie good, which doth not baffle some one of the Gods, as Euripides (among the rest) doth in these verses.

Thou Neptune and thou Iupiter, and all you other Gods, So wicked are you euerychone, so fell, so farre at oddes, That if due iustice for your deedes were iustly on you doone, Ye should be banisht out of Heauen and from all Temples soone.

* 1.674 You will say perchaunce that the Romanes may possibly haue some better stuffe. By the originall of them which they themselues describe, we may iudge what they were. And let vs note that the writers of these things were no Greekes, which might haue bred some suspicion; but they were Romanes, euen y^e Idolaters them∣selues. The first that ordeyned Religion among them, was King Numa; who to authorize it the more, feyned himselfe to haue had conference with a Goddesse called Egeria which was a witch: and vnder that gay pretence,* 1.675 he bewitched the ignorant people with a thousand superstitions. A long tyme after, in the Consulship of Cornelius and Bebius,* 1.676 it happened that in the ground of a certein Scriuener named Petilius, néere to the place called Ianiculum,

there were found two Coffins, in one of the which was the body of Numa,* 1.677 and in the other were seuen bookes in Latin concerning the Lawes of their Priesthod, that is to say, their Ceremonies and Churchseruices;* 1.678 and other seauen Bookes in Greeke concerning the studie of Wisedome;* 1.679 whereby hee ouerthrewe, not onely the Gods of other Nations, but also the very selfe same whome hee himselfe had instituted. The Senate hearing thereof, caused the Bookes to be burnt openly before the people; which was as much to say as that they condemned all the Gods and all their Serui∣ces to the Fyre. Among many other Stories, Varro reporteth the same too: and hee concealeth not that Numa vsed Waterspel∣ling, and had communication with Diuels. And as touching the Gods whom the Latins worshipped before the time of this Nu∣ma Pompilius; Varro and Caius Bassus say, that Faunus ordei∣ned Sacrifices to his Graundfather Saturne, to his father Picus, and to his Suffer and Wife Fauna, whom the good huzwiues call Fatua of Fate, that is to say Destinie, because she was woont to reade their Fortunes; and afterward the people worshipped her by the name of Good Dame or Goddesse. And surely of no better value were those whome AEneas brought thither, whome Virgill termeth vanquished Gods, and after a sort putteth them and little Babes both togither in one Basket. Sceuola the Highpriest of the Romanes (as I haue sayd afore) made thrée sortes of Gods: Poe∣tical, worse than the worst men, Philosophical, whom they taught to haue bin men, howbeit y^t it was not good for the people to know it; and Ciuill, made by Princes to hold their people in awe with; for the which purpose also Varro addeth, that it is good for Cap∣teynes and Gouerners to be perswaded that they bee descended of Gods, that they may the more boldly vndertake and the more hap∣pely performe their enterprizes. But who could answere better to the matter, than the Highpriest himselfe? And which are these bet∣ter Gods, which are no Gods at all furtherforth than it pleaseth men? Varro sayth likewise, that his writing of humane things a∣fore diuine things, is because there were Cities afore there were Gods made by them, as the Paynter is afore his Picture. How much more reasonable had it bene that the Gods should haue com∣mitted themselues to the custodie of the Cities, than that the Ci∣ties should haue committed themselues to y^e custodie of the Gods?* 1.680 Also he deuideth his Gods into certeynes and vncerteynes. The certeyne (sayth he in his second booke) are as much or more subiect

to vncerteyntie than the vncerteyne. What certeyntie will he re∣port of the Gods, if they themselues be vncerteyn? But behold the godlinesse of the man. Hée sayth he will make a Register and an Inuentorie of them: and wherefore? for feare (sayth he) least they should be lost, not so much by some sacking of the Citie, as by the negligence of the Citizens, which began sore at that time to make no account of them. Soothly the Romanes had bene the more ex∣cusable, if they had deified this Varro that had such a care to saue and preserue their Gods. But y^e wise Senate thought themselues to haue prouided well for the matter, by making this ordinance, That no GOD should be admitted into Rome without their ad∣uice. As who would say, that to bee a God it was méete that a bill of petition should first bee exhibited vnto them, and men were to be sewed vnto for the obteynement of their voyces. By which one ar∣gument of theirs they declared themselues to bee more diuine than their Gods. And therevpon it came to passe, that they receyued in∣to their Citie all the Deuilles, all the Tyrants, and all the filthie Rakehelles of the world for Gods. As for the onely one true God the Creator of men, the founder of Cities, & the remouer of Em∣pyres; he had no name at al among them.* 1.681 Concerning the nature of the Gods, Cicero hath written thrée bookes; which to speake pro∣perly, are made to ouerthrowe all the Gods of the Romanes. For he reckoneth vp their ages, their garments, their deckings, their ofsprings, their auncetors, and their alliances. He sayth that their Temples are their Tombes; their Sacrifizes and Ceremonies, representations of their liues; and that from the least of them to the greatest, they were all men, and all their Religious Superstitions and olde wiues tales. As touching the true God, he speaketh farre otherwise. For he sayth that he made al things, that he made man, that he made the very Gods themselues, and to bee short, that it is much easier for him to woonder at God, than to vtter what he is; and to declare what he is not, than what he is. And whereas some∣tymes after the maner of the Stoikes, he goeth about to drawe na∣turall things out of the fables of the Gods; he doth it but onely to kéepe the people in ignorance, and according to his owne saying in the selfesame bookes, where hauing condemned his owne Gods, he sayth that yet for all that, those things are not to bee vttered to the people; and his allegories are so cold, that it is to bee thought that euen he himselfe laughed at them. As touching the Birdgazers he himselfe being a Birdgazer doth flatly skorne them, that is to say

euen his owne profession, yea and all such as sought counsell at Crowes and Rauens, that is to wit, the whole Senate of Rome. Likewise wee reade that Caesar held still the Prouince of Affricke against the forwarnings of the Birdgazers; and that Cato won∣dered how two Birdgazers could méete one another or looke one vpon another without laughing.* 1.682 And Seneca sayth in his booke of Questions, that the Bowelgazers were inuented for nothing els but to hold the people in awe. So little did the Wisemen beléeue the things which they themselues did to be wondered at and woor∣shipped of the common people. And thus much concerning their Gods in generall.

But if wee come to the particulars, the matter will bee yet more cléere, wherein I will bee as briefe as I can, because it is a matter that is treated of expressely by others. Among the innume∣rable rable of Gods,* 1.683 they haue twelue of principall renowme, whose names are comprehended in these two verses of Ennius.

Iuno, Vesta, Minerua, Ceres, Diana, Venus, Mars, Mercurius, Iupiter, Neptune, Vulcanus, Apollo.

And vnto these some added Bacchus and Saturne;* 1.684 this latter, because he might seeme to haue wrong, if he should not be counted a God as well as his sonne: and the other, because it might come to passe, that (being a firie fellowe) he would els make some fray, seeing that Ceres is a Goddesse. To dispatch the chiefe of them quite and cleane of that doubt, Euhemere of Messene will alone suffice; who gathering the historie of Iupiter and the rest, setteth downe their tytles, Epitaphs & Inscriptions which were in their Temples, & namely in the Temple of Iupiter Triphillian, where was a piller set vp by Iupiter himself, whereon the notablest of his doings were ingrauen. And this historie being called holy, was translated by Ennius, the words whereof are these.* 1.685 Saturne (sayth he) tooke Ops to his wife, and Tytan being his elder brother claymed the kingdome; but Vesta their mother, & Ceres and Ops their Sisters, counseled Saturne to keepe his possession. Which thing when Tytan perceyued; finding himselfe to bee the weaker, he compounded with Saturne, vpon conditiō that if Saturne had any Sonnes, he should not suffer them to liue, that the kingdom might reuert again vnto his Children. Ac∣cording to which composition, the first child that was borne to Saturne was killed. Afterward were borne Iupiter & Iuno twinnes both at one birth: of whome they shewed but Iuno,

and deliuered Iupiter to Vesta to be brought vp in secret. Af∣ter them came Neptune, who was serued likewise. And last of all came Pluto and Glauca; of whom only Glauca (who dyed within a while) was shewed, and Pluto was nurced secretly as Iupiter was. Now this came to Tytans hearing, who assem∣bling his Sonnes to him, took Saturne and Ops and put them in prison. But assoone as Iupiter came to age, he gaue battell to the Tytans; and getting the vpper hand of them, deliuered his father & mother out of prison. At length perceyuing that his father, whom he had set vp againe, was iealous ouer him and sought his life; he deposed him from his estate and droue him into Italy. In this only one historie we sée what Saturne, Iu∣piter, Iuno, Vesta, Ops, Neptune and Ceres were, that is to wit, men and women; yea surely euen men, and among men, but onely mere men. And yet were they the fathers and mothers of the rest of the Gods, and reigned in the Iles of the chiefe Midland Sea; and in Candy, a litle afore the warres of Thebes and of Troy. And by that meanes wee see also, from whence the Poets haue fetched their fables; which are not (as some thinke) mere fancies or imagi∣nations without ground, but disguising of the trueth, and of the Historie: True in that they report déedes rightly beseeming men; vntrue in that they attribute them as to Gods, and not as to men. Saturne is taken for the father of them al. And looke what is found of the father, is to bee verified of his ofspring. The Historiogra∣phers therefore haue sayd, that his wife did hide his children from him: and the Poets haue sayd that hee did eate them vp, because a Soothsayer had told him that one of them should depose him. To auoyde the absurditie of the word Krouos which is Saturne, the Stoikes haue turned it to Chronos, (that is to say tyme,) which deuoureth all things. But how will they applye all the rest of the Allegorie vnto the Historie? Who shall bee the daies lost, and who the daies saued? What shall Ops be, and Iupiter, and Pluto? who shall be this sonne of tyme, that perisheth not with the tyme nor a∣fore it?* 1.686 But Hermes (whatsoeuer he be) who knewe this pedegree well enough, holdeth himselfe to the letter, accounting Vranus, Saturne, and Mercurie among the rare men that were in tyme past. And Ennius sayth that this Varnus was the father of Sa∣turne and reigned afore him. Now, because Vranus in Greeke signifieth Heauen; the Stoikes more fabulous (as sayth Plutarke) than the Poets, haue called his sonne, Time; and his graundsonne

Iupiter, the Welkin or highest region of the ayre; whom Euhe∣mere reporteth to haue ordeyned Sacrifices vnto Vranus. And Ennius his translator reporteth, that he ordeyned them vnto his Graundfather Heauen, who dyed in the Ocean, and lyes buryed in Aulatie. To be short, of all these writers of antiquities, such as Theodore the Gréeke, Thallus, Cassius, Seuerus, Cornelius Ne∣pos and others were; none describeth him otherwise than a man: insomuch that euen Orpheus himselfe who canonized him for a God, speaketh of him after the same maner. What reade we of Iu∣piter? Iupiter (sayth the Historie) deposed his owne father, held his assemblies in Mount Olympus, stole away Europa in a ship named the Bull, and caryed away Ganymed in another ship cal∣led the Eagle: but he forbare Thetis, because an Achilles (which should be a man of greater might than his father) was to be borne of her. Finally, after he had made certeyne Lawes, and parted the offices of his estate among his friends, he dyed and was buryed in the Towne of Gnosus. What a life is this, but the life of a man? yea and of a most wicked man, vnworthie, not to reigne in heauen, but euen to goe vpon the earth? Neuerthelesse, because his succes∣sors inforced men to worship him as well as his Graundfather, yea and he himselfe in his life tyme had caused his Subiects, Uas∣salles and Confederates to dedicate Temples vnto him; by reason whereof wee see he was called by the names of Labradie, Atabu∣rie, Tryphill, and diuers other: all things were fayne to be applied and referred vnto him: insomuch that of a man, the Poets made him a God; of the Mountayne Olympus, they made Heauen; of a Shippe, and Eagle; and of Thetis, a Goddesse. Yet for all this, his buryall place putteth al out of doubt, and so doth the Epitaph that Pythagoras wrate thereon. For, to haue a Temple in one place, and a Tombe in another; and to be worshipped with prayer in the one, and to be eaten with wormes in the other, are things farre dif∣fering. Callimachus will needes taunt the Cretanes for shewing his Tombe with this inscription, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 that is to say, Iupiter the sonne of Saturne: and yet hee considereth not, that in saying that Rhea was deliuered of him among the Parrhasians, he himselfe maketh him to dye. For what is birth but a beginning of death? And therefore Sibill speaketh of the Gods in these words.

The fond vaynglory which the Cretanes vse About their Goddes doth many a man abuse.

They be but gastly Ghostes and feendes of hel, Or graues of men in whom no soule doth dwell.

To be short, Amalthea, and hir Goate that nurced Iupiter, which were honored in the Capitoll, and all his other misteries, represen∣ted nothing els but the trauells of his Childhod and of his lyfe; as, how he was stolen away, how he was hidden, and how he was nur∣ced: all which things are a manifest derogation of his Godhead. * 1.687 And Seneca taketh it to be a matter so woorthie to be laughed at, that he forgetteth his owne grauitie to giue a mock••vnto it. Seeing (sayth he) that this Iupiter was so lecherous, why begetteth he not Children still, if he be yet aliue? Is it bycause he is three∣score yeeres old? Or hath the Lawe of Papie restreyned him? Or hath he obteyned the priuiledge of three Children?* 1.688 Or fi∣nally, is it come into his mynd to looke for the same measure at other folks hands, which he hath measured vnto others, so as he is afrayd least some Sonne of his should deale with him, as he himself delt with Saturne? After that manner did this greate Philosopher mocke at his great God; wherein he was so much the lesse to be excused, bycause he woorshipped him, knowing so much as he did.

As touching Iuno, I wilnot stand so much vppon the Poets. Varro himself saieth that she was brought vp in Samos, and there maryed to hir brother Iupiter, by whom shee could not concey••e, in respect whereof, that Iland was called Parthenie, that is to say Maydenland. There also was hir famousest Temple, where shee stoode in wedding attyre; and hir yeerly feastes are in verie deede but playes ordeyned after the fashion of old tyme, to represent hir lyfe, that is to wit, hir mariage, hir iealosie, and hir incest.

And as concerning Minerua Iupiters daughter, wee reade that shee was deffowred by consent of hir father, who had made a promise to Vulcane, not to deny him whatsoeuer he should aske: so monstruouse and Lawlesse was the whole race of them. For as for Venus, whose aduoutries are mo than hir Children; Euhemere reporteth her too haue bin the first bringer vp of Stewes in the world, and that hir woorshippers to honor her withall, did call her 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and such other, which names euen a womā that were very farre past shame would take in greate disdeyne. To be short, in the Temple where Cina∣ras King of Ciprus was buried, who was the first that interteyned her; surely I am ashamed that the Heathen were not ashamed of

such shamefulnes; but yet much more, that such as beare the name of Christians, are not ashamed too make songs thereof in their books.

Let vs procéede to the rest. Neptune (as their holy Historie re∣porteth) had the Seacoast for his share, or (as othersome affirme) he was Iupiters Admiral, in respect wher of the Poets of our time call Admiralls, Neptunes. Pluto had the gouernement of lowe Countries, which they disguysing turned into Hell. Mars had the Leading of Souldiers in the warres, and should haue bin hanged at Athens for a murther. What maner of Godds (I pray you) be these, which stand at mens courtesie for their grace? And what is the Lawe of that Heauen, which receyueth those for Godds, whom men would haue hanged on the galowes vpon earth? Also Apollo became a Shepeherd for loue, and of a Shepeherd, hee became Laomedons Mason. He playd a feawe Iuggling tricks to deceiue folk withall; but in the end (as Porphyrius telleth vs) hee was killed by Python, mourned for by the daughters of Triopus, and buryed at Delphos. Who euer sawe a thing more ageinst reason, than the transforming of him into the Sonne, which is as much as to shet vp the Sonne into the earth? But yet such are the Godds of the Greeks and Romanes; that is to wit deadfolks, euen kings and Quéenes whom loue or feare hath made to be taken for Gods. And in good sooth, they did not any thing to their Godds, which men do not at this day to their dead & to such as are of reputation. They make them Temples, Chappells, and altars; they apparell them after their age; they set them vp Pensils and Penons accor∣ding to their degree or trade of liuing; they make them a funerall feast; they celebrate Anniuersaries or Yeermynds all of one sort. Insomuch that (as Tertullian saieth) the Obitfeast differeth not frō Iupiters feast, nor the wodden Canne from his Drinking∣cup, nor the Cearer of deadfolks from the Birdgasers; for the Birdgasers also had to deale with the dead. And therefore wee must not think it straunge, that Alexander would néeds be a God, sith he knew that men woorshipped such:* 1.689 or that Scipio Affricane thought that the greate gate of Heauen ought to bee set open for him: for his argument concluded the lyke; saying.

If men for slaughters made, to heauen admitted be; Then should the greatest gate of Heauen be opened vnto me.

Or that the gentle Ladies Larentia and Flora were Canonized at Roome, for they deemed themselues to haue deserued as much

by their professiō, as Venus had deserued at the hands of y^e Cypri∣ans: Or that Caligula tooke vpon him to haue Altars erected and sacrifise offered vnto him; for he was both more myghtie and also more mischeuous than those whome he worshipped. Let this suf∣fice for the Greate ones. And for the Little ones, we will content ourselues with Esculapius alone,* 1.690 whom the Emperour Iulian, that greate enemies of Christians, commendeth as his sauior aboue all the rest. He is (sayeth he) the Sonne of Iupiter. Then (say I) he is a man: for men begot not Goddes. But he came downe in∣too the World by the Sonne, and from the Sonne vnto the Earth, for the health and welfare of men. What Author, eyther in earnest or in iest, did euer say so? No, but he was (sayeth the Historie) the sonne of the fayre Coronis renowmed in these verses;

A goodlyer Lady was not to be found, In all Emonia going on the ground.

This Coronis being with Chyld by Apollos preest, gaue it forth, for the sauing of hir honor, that she was gotten with Chyld by A∣pollo himself; whereby it appeareth that hir sonne Esculapius, was not the Chyld of Heauen as Iulian reporteth, but (as men sayd in old tyme) a Chyld of the Earth, that is to say a bastard. And Tar∣quilius a Roman wryteth, that he was a Chyld found in Messine, and learned the vertues of some herbes at the hand of Chyron the Centaure, and playd the Pedlar a whyle at Epidaure; and that afterward being striken to death (as Cicero saith) with Thunder, he was buried at Cyuosures. To be short, what miracle reade wee to haue bin done by him, more than that he shewed men the herbs called Scordion and Asclepiodotes? By which reason we may as well Deifie the bird Ibis for the Clisters, or the Stag for the herb Ditanie. But to conclude, what a beastlynes were it to leaue the Creator of all things, and to worship a man for his knowing of some two or three of them?

Among other Nations of the world, the AEgiptians haue vpon the lyke reasons Deified their King Apis; forbidding all men vp∣pon peyne of death, to say he was a man: and I am euen ready to shudder at the remembrance of his misteries. Likewise the Baby∣lonians deified their Bele; the Mawres their Iuda; the Macedo∣nians their Cabyrus; the Latines their Faunus; the Sabines their Sa••cus; and the Romanes their Quirinus; that is to wit the first founders of their Townes and Citties, or the leaders of them to inhabite in forrein Countries; and the eldest of these their Gods,

that is to say their auncientest Princes, they called Saturnes, their Sonnes, Iupiters, their Graundsonnes,* 1.691 Herculeses; and so foorth; wherevpon it came to passe, that in diuers Nations there were di∣uers Saturnes, Iupiters, and Herculeses. Afterward the Empe∣rours deified themselues, and their fréends, and some, their Myni∣ons, as Alexander did Ephestion, and as Arian did Antinous, and some their Children, and some their wiues. Cicero béeing but a Citizen of Arpie; was so prwd that he would néedes Deifie his daughter Tullia, & he sticked not to say to Atticus, that he would make her to be worshipped as another Iuno or Minerua, conside∣ring that she was not inferiour to them in any thing. But he came in too rough a time to make Gods. What more? Euen in one man were a thousand Gods to be found. For they made Gods of faith∣fulnes, of constancie, of wisedome, and of all the other vertues; and likewise of Loue, of Pleasure, of the instruments of pleasure, and of all other vices; Also of feare, palenesse, gastfulnes, and all passi∣ons; Lykewise of Agewes, of the Hemerodes, of the Falling sik∣nesse, and of maladies and diseases; Also of Dounghils, of Snow, of Blastings, and of the very Winds, insomuch that the greate Emperour Augustus did sacrifice to the winde Circius, which tro∣bled him in Gall. The cause of these absurdities is in two things, the one is Gods iust striking of men with blindnes for their tur∣ning away from him vnto man, insomuch that whereas they will néedes become equall with God, they fall by degrees from poynt to poynt, euen to the casting of themselues downe vnto Beastes and Wormes, that is to say, they become inferiour to beastes. The other is, that Princes vnlightened by GOD are so desirous of vainglorie, and their Seruants are such flatterers, that the Prin∣ces perceiuing themselues to haue men at their commaundement, thinke themselues to be more than men, and their seruants, to bée made Idols themselues, doe willingly make Idols of their Prin∣ces. Hereof wee reade in the very Lawes of the Christian Empe∣rours, that their answers are called Oracles, their persons God∣heads; and their countenances diuine brightnesse. Who reading this can doubt, but that if such Lawiers had come in the first ages, they would haue made vs good store of Gods? Nay, would God we sawe not still among vs, greate nombers of lyuely and plaine∣speaking examples, of mans inclined disposition to the worship∣ping of creatures, notwithstanding that our Lawe in euery lyne thereof doe reproue vs for it, and after a sort twich vs euery howre

by the Cote, to pull vs from it. Now therefore, let the premisses be a president vnto vs, both of the vanitie of the Godds, and of the blockishnes of men, which haue both worshipped them and made them.* 1.692 And so let vs commit the knitting vp of this matter to Ci∣cero himself, who saith thus. The conuersation and custome of men (sayth he) hath allowed the aduanuncing of those men in∣to heauen, both in reputation & in good will, by whom they had receiued any greate benefite. Of that sort are Hercules, Castor, Pollux, Esculapius Liber, and such other; so as Heauen is peopled with mankind. And if I listed to search & ransacke the Antiquities and Registers of the Greekes, I should find that the same Gods whom we take for the greatest, haue had their originall from among vs. And for the verifying thereof, Inquire whose the Tumbes are that are shewed in Greece, and consider with thy selfe what their mysteries and Ceremonies are, and thou hauing accesse thither, shalt vnderstand without doubt, that my saying reacheth very farre.

The xxiij. Chapter.

That the spirites which made themselues to be worshipped vnder the names of those men, were feends, that is to say, Diuels or wicked Spirites.

NOw séeing that the sayd Gods were but men, yea and not Men, but Stocks and Images of men, & that the same slocks, if they had bene any more than Stocks, should rather haue worshipped men: we must néedes say with Seneca, that the men which worshipped them were be∣come worse than stocks. But herevnto it wil be answered, that they gaue answers of things to come, and that they wrought effects beyond the reache of man; which shewed that there was a lyfe and power in them, or els they had not seduced folke so long time. This is the second part which I haue taken in hand to prooue: namely that although all the auncient Philosophers agrée, that there are both good Spirits

and bad, the one sort (whom we call Angels) Seruants and Mes∣sengers of God; and the other sort Diuels, enemies to Gods glo∣rie and our welfare: yet notwithstanding, the Spirits which were serued in Stocks and Images as Hermes hath told vs, were vn∣cleane and mischeuous Spirites. These Féends therefore (to pur∣chase themselues authoritie) did borrowe the names of men, and most commonly of the wickeddest men. Yea and when they were asked what they were, they sayd in their owne Oracles that they were so: as for exāple, he that was worshipped at Delphos, said he was the sonne of Latona, Esculapius,* 1.693 the sonne of Apollo, Mer∣curie the sonne of Iupiter and Maia; and so foorth, as we reade in Oracles rehearsed by Porphyrius. But what honest man will not refuse for neuer so greate gayne, to take vppon him the name of a wicked man? or rather abhorre both the name and the very remem∣berance of him? And who then will not conclude that those Deuils which [to winne themselues credite] clothed themselues after that sort with the cases of so wicked men, were worse than the men? Al∣so they were drawne (sayth Hermes) into Images by Arte Ma∣gicke; yea and (by the reporte of Porphyrius* 1.694 and Proclus) they taught men receyts wherewith to drawe them thether and to bind them there, as wee reade of Proserpyne, Hecate, and Apollo. Of whom, one commaunded to beset her Image with Wormewood, to paynt a certeyne number of Rattes about it, and to offer vnto her Blud, Myrrhe, and Storax, to draw her thither. Another com∣maunded to wype out the lines and figures, to remoue the tuzzi∣muzzies of flowers from his féete, and to take the braunch of Olife out of his hand, that is to say, from his images hand, that he might withdrawe himselfe. Who sees not that they made themselues to bee drawne in and driuen out by things that haue no force at all, specially ouer Spirites?* 1.695 That it say, that (as Iamblichus also perceyued full well) their whole seeking was to deceiue vs by their comming, and to go away againe when they wist not what to say; more desirous to lye, than wee blockish to beléeue? And when they obeyed vs or pretended to obeye vs, let vs see what seruice they re∣quired at our hands: verely that their Images should be wel pain∣ted and well coted, and that they might be worshipped, prayed vn∣to, and senced. Now, if they were the Images of Spirites; what greater vntrueth can there be, than for a Spirit to be resembled by an Image? And if they were the Images of men; what greater beastlines (sayth Seneca) can there bee, than to offer Sacrifize to a

stocke, and to make the Caruer which made it, to eate at the second table, and to knéele downe before a counterfet of his own making, or to make the Paynter thereof to stand bareheaded vnto it? Now then, what els were they but teachers of vntrueth, whose intent was to turne men not onely from God to his workes, but also to themselues, and finally into very stockes?

Apollo being asked what seruice was to be yéelded to y^e Gods, declared that Sacrifize is to bee offered to them all, as well them that dwell in the Ayre and the Fire, as them that dwell in the Sea and in the Earth; to some, with white Beastes, and to some with blacke; to some vppon Altars, and to othersome vppon bankes of earth: to some the foreparts of Beastes, and to othersome the hin∣derparts, and such other like stuffe. And because they would néedes play the Apes with God in al things: they required this seruice af∣ter the example of the old Testament. For (as sayth Porphyrius) nothing delighteth them more,* 1.696 than to be estéemed as Gods: inso∣much that the greatest of them all (whom they call Serapis and we Beelzebub) will néedes be worshipped as the souereine God. But what resemblance is there betwixt them and the true God? God requireth of vs the firstlings of our fruites and of our Cattell. And forasmuch as he hath created them for vs; is it not reason that wee should acknowledge our selues beholdē to him for our Corne, and for our increase of Cattell? On the contrary part, these Gods re∣quire the acknowledgement of those things to bee done to them∣selues & to their Images. Gods inioyning of vs to sacrifize brute Beastes, is to witnesse the death that we deserue by our sinne: but they beare vs on hand, that by the death of a Beast wee be dischar∣ged from all sinnes. God sayth vnto vs, your Sacrifizes are no∣thing worth, I will haue obedience and not Sacrifize: your Obla∣tions loath me, and your Incence stinketh: the thing that I looke for is a broken and a lowly heart. The false Gods speake of no∣thing but of the sheading of blud, without telling or knowing why or wherefore, without end, without ground, without signification, and without comming any whit néere the heart. Now then, what are they els than slauish Roges and Rebelles, indeuouring to filch away the praise of our Creator?* 1.697 And yet for all their disguysing of themselues for a tyme, they bee not able to conceale their owne* 1.698 leaudnesse any long while. For they commaund vs to Sacrifize Men, Maydes, and Children vnto them. Had they ordeyned such things at their first comming in, who would not haue abhorred

them?* 1.699 But when they had once wound themselues into credite by some answers delightfull to our curious eares, and by some Iug∣glingtricks which seemed wōderfull to the weaknesse of our eyes: we suffered them to go by little and little whithersoeuer they them selues listed, as though it had bin vnpossible that they should haue sayd otherwise than well, or that wee should haue done otherwise than well in obeying them. According whereunto wee reade, that Children were Sacrifized to Saturne,* 1.700 in Candy after the maner of the Curets; In Rhodomene, the sixth day of the moneth Geit∣nion; In Phenice, in tymes of Plague, Warre, and Famine: and likewise in Affrick they Sacrifized men, vntill the Uiceconsulship of Tyberius, who caused the Priestes themselues to be crucified in the same Woodes where they were wont to doe their Sacrifizes. Also they offered the like kind of Sacrifize in Cyprus to y^e Nimph Agrawlis, and to Diomedes; and in the Ile of Tenedos vnto Bacchus; and in Lacedaemon to Mars. And all these abhomina∣tions are reported by Porphyrius, who therevpon concludeth, that all such Gods were of the wickeddest sort of Deuilles. Moreouer, wee reade that Aristomenes of Messene Sacrifized thrée hundred men at once to Iupiter Ithometes, of whom Theopomp King of the Lacedemonians was one: And that the Latins Sacrifized the tenth of their owne Children to Iupiter; and that because they had discontinewed the doing thereof, they thought themselues to bee plagued with dearth and diseases. That those false Gods them∣selues answered the Carthaginenses, that the misfortunes which lighted vpon them, happened for that whereas they had vsed to sa∣crifize the choycest of their Children, they Sacrifized none but the Rascalles, Chaungelings, Bastardes, and Bondlings. The like was done by the Druides in Gaullond,* 1.701 by the Almanes, by the Scandinauians, by the Tawricanes and others; insomuch that Chyron the Centaure had such Sacrifizes offered yéerely vnto him. So farre and with so passing supersticious crueltie was the Deuils kingdome extended, that the Deuill & none other could be the foūder therof. Who can now doubt after al this, but that those Gods were deuils, which were workers of such things as not on∣ly goodmen mislike, but also euen wicked men cannot but abhorre? In déede wee reade that one Diphilus King of Cyprus, made the Idoll of Cyprus to bee contented with an Oxe in stead of a Man; and that Amosis King of AEgipt appoynted that in stead of the thrée youg men which were woont to bee sacrificed to Iuno in He∣liople,

there should bée offered thrée Calues: and that afterward Pallas of Laodicea was contented with a Hynd: and that Hercu∣les in traueling through Italy, gaue thē men of Hay to be throwen into Tyber, but surely it had bene more to his commendation, if he had punished those Gods, thā to haue ouercome the great mon∣sters for which he is so renowmed. Yet was that custome obserued still:* 1.702 Insomuch that euen in Rome, euery yere the same day that men had bene wont to be sacrificed, the Altars were washed with mans blud, howbeit, about a fowerscore yeres afore comming of Christ, the Senate had condemned such sacrifices at Rome. Now séeing that (as Seneca sayth) they required such a seruice as Busy∣ris or Phalaris durst neuer to haue demaunded:* 1.703 who will not con∣clude with Porphirius, (as greate an enemy to Christians as hee was) that they were al diuels and wicked féends? Or with Quin∣tilian, that such Gods could not bee but witlesse and starke mad? And whereas the Senate which worshipped them, did neuerthe∣lesse condemne and abolish their Sacrifices, was not their so doo∣ing a condemning of the founders of them also? I meane of the wicked Féends themselues, which required those kinds of Sacri∣fices so instātly,* 1.704 and were so sore offended at the discontinewing of them? Labeo whom men tooke for a great maister of those Miste∣ries, sayd that the good spirits were to be discerned from the wic∣ked by this, that this latter sort became not fauorable but by man∣slaughters and deadly supplications, (which was a flat condem∣ning almost of them all: and that the other sort were pacified with Playes, Gamings, Feastes and Banquetings, Momeries and Maskings, and such other things. But if these good ones (as they terme them,) delight in such things as wyse men shunne and fooles are ashamed of, what followeth but that euen those good ones are worse than the worst men? Let vs examine their Playes and sho∣wes, for it is the difference that Labeo setteth downe.* 1.705 The Gods being sought vnto in an extréeme plague, commaunded for asswa∣ging thereof, that they should ordeine certeine Stageplaies. Con∣trariwise, Scipio Nasica the Highpriest of those Féends, to the in∣tent (as hee sayd) to eschewe the Plague, forbade the setting vp of the Scaffolds. Now of this Scipio or of the Gods, which I pray you shalbe found the wiser? The Stageplayes y^t were ment, were tales of loue, of aduoutrie, and of lecherie, interlarded with a thou∣sand filthy spéeches, insomuch that the Housebands forbade their wiues, and the Parents their Daughters to come at them. Fooles

laughed at them, and wyse men blushed at them, and all men at their going away from them, did with one common consent banish the Players of those Enterludes out of all good company, and de∣clared them to bee infamous persons by excluding them from all Offices, and by reiecting them from bearing any witnesse. Now séeing that the seruing of God is so commendable a thing; if these were Gods, why was it an infamie and reproach to serue them? The requirers of those playes, are honored; and why then are the plaiers of them reproched?* 1.706 The Greekes step vp to reason against the Romanes, and say that such Gods are worthy to be worship∣ped, their Stageplayers deserue to be reuerenced too. This propo∣sition of theirs is well grounded, and apparant of it selfe. But the Romanes taking another ground as sure as that, affirme it to be vnpossible for the Comedyplayers to deserue reputation, consi∣dering what they doe and say. Whervpon we are to conclude, that those Gods ought not to haue béen worshipped at all. And so hath Nasica gotten the better hand ageinst his owne Gods and their Playes. And yet are they the selfesame Gods that were confirmed by so many Oracles,* 1.707 whom Zosimus that great enemy of Christi∣ans so much bewayleth, that hee affirmeth the welfare of the Ro∣mane Empire to haue ended with the abolishing of them by Con∣stātine. And what els are the misteries which he highly commen∣deth, but remenbrances of the whoredomes, incests, murders, and deceites committed by the men whose names those Diuelles did beare? And what man is so brazenfaced, as that he will not bee a∣shamed of his sinne, and blush to heare it told vnto him? Nay who doubteth that if those men were aliue againe, they would be both ashamed and astonished at those things before the stāders by? And who then can doubt that those Gods were of the worst sort of Di∣uels, which not onely take pleasure in ill dooing themselues, but al∣so doe bedaube themselues with the euill which they did not? As for example, who would thinke that the goodly Gossip whom they call the Moother of the Gods, but whom the veriest kaytife in the world would bee loth to haue to be his Moother, could haue heard the vilanous spéeches wherewith hir feast was solemnised, and not haue hidden her selfe away for shame? And if Dame Flora could haue read the Floralles of Auleius, who doubteth that she would not haue done the lyke, and much more bene abashed to sée so great a Clerke and so graue a Senator as Cicero, caried with deuotion to y^e celebrating of them? For what els, at a word, are all those mi∣steries,

but Schooles of Lecherie, Sodomie, and Incest? And if the end of Religion be (as Plotin sayth) to become like the partie that is worshipped, what els could bee the marke that those Ceremo∣nies amed at, than to make men rype in all sortes of wickednes? and what readyer way could there bee to become Diuils in deede, than to resemble them? For whereas they say that after their spe∣wing out of al those filthy things openly, they giue some precepts of vprightnes and modestie to their Schollers in secret: thereby their naughtinesse appéereth the more plainly to bee altogither di∣uelish, in that they first corrupt the maners of a whole people, both by their Religious Seruices and by their example, and afterward preach of modestie and temperance to two or thrée, making as it were publick Sermons of all naughtines, to lay the Brydle in e∣uery mans necke, and then (too kéepe credit with a fewe that are of more conscience then the rest) rowning them secretly in the Eare with some little talke of vertue. For who hath euer read that any of them did euer giue one good precept, or one good example to the people, whither it were for the withdrawing of them from vice, or for the drawing of them to true vertue? And yet notwithstanding to what end desire wee to haue God or his blessed Angels conuer∣sant with vs frayle and weake men, but that they of singular good will, should induce, leade, and guyde vs into the way of saluation?

But their defenders reply, saying: Yet notwithstanding,* 1.708 they prophesied and wrought great and straunge miracles. Let vs omit that is more naturall to beléeue the partie which preacheth good things, without diuinations and miracles, than to beléeue the par∣tie that kéepeth a Schoole of euils, though he prophesie and worke miracles. But in the ende what were the Oracles and Miracles which they so highly commend? The Oracle of Delphos was one of the greatest in reputation. The beginning therof may be an ar∣gument for the rest. A heard of Goates (sayth Diodorus) was the first meane to bring it in credit. And afterward a yoong wench was set there, to vtter foorth the Oracles which she receyued, (as they say) by her priuie partes. And for the slaunders that grewe thereof, it was ordeyned that the Wench should be a Mayd of fif∣tie yeres old. By these circumstances a man may gather what ma∣ner a God that could be. To Cresus therefore beeing desirous to knowe what should bee the issewe of his warres against the Persi∣ans, the Oracle answered.

King Craesus passing ouer Haty streame, Shall ouerthrowe the proud and stately Reame.

Cresus gathered hereof that he should ouerthrowe the Empire of the Persians, but in déede he ouerthrew his owne; which thing the Oracle had prouided for aforehand, by making the answer so dout∣full that it might be taken both wayes yet was there greate reason that Apollo should haue preserued Cresus: for of singular deuotion he had greatly inryched his Temple at Delphos. And vnto Pyr∣rhus (as Ennius sayth) he answered thus.

I say the sonne of AEacus The Romanes sure shall ouercome.

Presuming hereuppon that he should ouercome the Romanes, hée himself was ouercome of them. Also he counseled the Athenians to flée before Xerxes: and he foretold the Salaminians that they should be ouercome by the Persians either in Winter or in Som∣mer. Who perceyueth not by these doutfull spéeches, that Apollo knew nothing certeinly, and therefore that he euer left himself a backedoore to scapeout, at all assayes? And as for the comming of these foresayings to passe; who douteth that Themistocles percei∣uing so puissant an armie to approche, déemed not as much thereof himself, specially seeing y^t afore he had heard the answer of Apollo, he counseled his Countrymen to wayt for their enemyes vppon the sea? And what a number of wise Senatours and good Capteynes were there (think wee) in those frée Cities and kindomes, which would haue giuen their aduice more to the purpose in that cace?

Zosimus reporteth that when the Palmirenes asked couns••ll, whither they should obteyne the Empyre of the East or us; an Oracle answered them in this wyse:

Go get ye hence lyke guylfull folke and Couseners as yee be; The things yee now do take in hand displease the Goddes I see.

And some such other dooth Zosimus report, whereof he maketh greate reckening. But what els are such wandering and generall answers, but deceytfull douts, and (as ye would say) shooes that will fitte both féete, as agréeable to folk that are furthest of, as to the parties that aske the Counsell? Therefore Oenomaus a Phi∣losopher and Orator of Greece, hauing oftentymes (as he himself confesseth) bin beguyled by the Oracle of Delphos, gathered a Register of the lyes thereof and did set foorth a booke ag••inst it, in∣tytled the falsehood of Oracles. And Porphyrius who lykewyse made a collection of them, euen without adding diminishing or

chaunging so much as one woord; sayeth that vppon examining of them, he found them ordinarily false: and he addeth the cause there∣of to be,* 1.709 That their foretelling, of things is not by foreknow∣ledge, but by coniectures taken of naturall causes, and of the mouings and meetings of the Starres, as hath appered in ma∣ny Oracles. For Apollo being asked by one whither he should haue a Sonne or a Daughter, answered, a Daughter; bycause ({quod} Apollo himself) that at the tyme of the conception, Venus ouershadowed Arares. And being asked another time whither that yeere should bee vnhealthfull or no; hee anwered yea, bycause the constellation thereof was daungerous for the Loongs: and so of other things. How many wyse women and lerned Phisicions would haue answered that matter better, and yet for so dooing men would not haue offered sacrifice vnto them? Nay, which more is, Porphyrius sayeth that vpon a tyme, Apollo of Delphos being vnable to coniecture by the Starres, desired folk to let him alone, telling them flatly that if they were importunate vppon him, he would answer them with lyes. And that at another tyme he answered flatly, that at y^t instant the course of the Starres could shewe him nothing. Now I pray you what maner of Gods are these, which learne their wisdome of the Starres? Nay, which worse is, how can they be sayd to bee good Spirits, which threaten to lye, if they be vrged too farre? And in good sooth such are the an∣swers which the coniured Deuilles doe yéeld yet still at this day by these Sorcerers and Witches; for the doing whereof, these ser∣uants of theirs are by all lawes condemned to be burnt, as he was that deceiued Manfred when he was to fight with Charles Duke of Aniow in the Realme of Naples, by this doubtfull construction of Grammer, Non, non Gallus superabit Appulum: which may bee Englished as doubtfully thus; No, the French man the Ita∣lian shall not ouercome. For Manfred considered not that in La∣tin two Negatiues may counteruayle an Affirmatiue. Many such other like trickes there are, which we may with lesse trouble reade in Histories. And if they knowe not the certeyntie of the things that are demaunded of them; why doe wee eyther woorship them or woonder at them? And if they speake that which they know not, are they not deceyuers? And if they speake against their owne know∣ledge, are they not lyers? And if it belong vnto Gods to deceyue and to lye; wherefore doe wee blame our neighbours and beate our children for so doing? Nay (which more is) to lye and to deceyue in

matters of such importance, where the case concerneth the blud of so many sillie Soules, and the sacking of so many poore houses; who can denye it to be the propertie of the Deuill, who euen from his first beginning hath bene found to bee doth a Murtherer and a lyer? As for Birdgazers, I haue touched them in a word or twaine afore. The AEgiptians obserued them after one sort, and the Affri∣canes after another; the Greekes on the right side, the Romanes on the left: and Aristotle skorned them because they determined not the tyme; and Plinie mocked them, because that euen by their owne doctrine, they touched not them at all which had no regarde of them. Yea and euen the greatest Birdgazers themselues, as Ca∣to, Caesar, and Cicero made a mocke of it. And if at any tyme they happened to hit right vppon a thing; it was but after the maner of our Almanackes, the flat contrary whereof who so followeth, shall commonly come néerest the trueth. Neuerthelesse, if their Gods foresawe any Plague by naturall Coniectures, as Philosophers, Phisitions, Hunters, and Shepheards also doe; they feyned them∣selues to be angrie at some State or Commōweale. And for what cause? Forsooth for omitting of common Playes and Enterludes; that is to say, for shutting vp the Schooles of Lecherie and Ribau∣drie: Or for that they had not made their wonted showes of Fen∣sers and Swordplayers; that is to say, of men that slewe one ano∣ther openly to please them withall, and to make a whole state giltie of manslaughter and murder. And if they iudged by the season of the yere that the Plague should ceasse; Then it was the goodly Sa∣crifices that had appeased them, and that made men the carefuller to continue them. Insomuch that when the Romanes had lost the bluddie battell at Cannas; it was sayd to be, because their Consul Varro had put a fayre yoong boye to the Galley. And when things went amisse in the Citie, it was eyther because some Dauncer or Gambolder had displeased them at the Gamings and Showes in the Kirke, or because some Malefactor had bin conueyed that way to the Gallowes. What a Godhead is that I beseech you, which is prouoked to anger by Modestie, and appeased by mischiefe? In the fauour whereof a man cannot stand, but by dealing wickedly; but is so straungely offended by the doing of Iustice?

But let vs see further whether they be any better Diuines than Prophetes. The Oracle of Delphos sayth thus:

A God in sooth is Cleomede, and not a mortall wight; The last begot of heauenly race; an Altar to him dight.

This Cleomede was one of those that pleasured these Gods, by beating one another with strokes of hand and foote; of whom we reade that he slewe his aduersarie at one blowe. But of such a one as Socrates, Plato, or Pythagoras, he would neuer haue sayd so much.

Againe he sayth thus.

Archilochus is a very Saint and seruant of the Gods: Yea verely of such Gods in déede; for he chose the wickeddest and leaudest sub∣iect of whom to make his verse. But of Theognis, or of a Phocyli∣des which had exhorted folk to good life, he would neuer haue sayd so much.

Of Cypselus he sayd thus.

A happie man is Cypselus and loued of the Gods. If it bee so: then what are Busyris, Phalaris, and al other Tyrants? for there neuer was a greater Tyrant than he. But the sayd Oracle sayd also, that Iupiter and Apollo had prolonged the life of Phalaris, for his wel handling of Cariton and Menalippus. Now, what fitter meane can there be to make Tyrants, (that is to say, enemies of mankind in the world) than to beare men on hande that such are beloued of the Goddes? Zosimus their great Patron, rehearseth an Oracle which answered, That for the appeasing of an Earthquake at A∣thens, it behoued them to honor Achilles as a God. This was a playne turning away of man from God to the creature. The same answered likewise to the mē of Methymnus, that it behoued them to worship a woodden head of Bacchus that was found by fishing in the Sea. And this was a making of them more blynd than the stocke it self. And when they were demaunded concerning the ma∣ner of woorshipping and seruing these Gods; they answered:

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉

That is to say:

Send you the heads to Iupiter, the lights vnto his Syre.

The dubble signification of the Greeke word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Fos, which signifieth a man, and may also signifie a Torch or a Light, did cut off the liues of many folkes. Which doubtfulnesse of spéech the I∣doll coueted, not of any intent to spare them, but to haue matter of excuse against such as made conscience to doe it. For being asked by the Athenians how they might make amends for their killing of Androgeus; hee willed them to sende yéerely to King Minos, seuen bodies of eyther sex chosen from among them all, to appease the wrath of God; and that kynd of Sacrifize continued still in A∣thens

in the tyme of Socrates. Now then, what els is all their doctrine than a seruing of the Deuill and of Creatures, yea euen with a seruice which in very déede is deuilish and horrible? Al these Oracles are reported by Oenomaus a Heathen man, who sought them out: by Porphyrie our enemie, who by them would induce vs to make great account of thē; who in the beginning of his booke, appealeth vnto GOD that he setteth not any thing downe of his own head: by Chrysippus the Stoike in his booke of Destinie, who by those Oracles goeth about to proue it: and by Zosimus himself, who maketh so great moane to see their mouthes stopped and their Temples shut vp. And surely it is not to be marueled, though the Peripateticks putting thē to tryall, did vtter great griefes against those Oracles: and that the Platonists (which went to worke more faithfully) were driuen to cōclude, that not only the vncleane Spi∣rites, but also euen their Goddes whom they thought to bee pure, were subiect to lying.

Let vs come to their Myracles.* 1.710 In the Temple of Venus there was a Lamp that neuer went out; and the Image of Serapis hung vnfastened in the ayre. Diuers deceyts may be wrought in the like case; and it is well knowne that the like wonders are seene euen in naturall things, as a Fountaine to light a Torch, and a Stone to hang by yron in the ayre. And they which haue the skill to vse such things, and to gather together the vertues of many into one, may wonderfully bleare the eyes, euen of the wisest. As for example, it hath bene seene that some haue found out a deuise how to burne vp one water with another; and to breake open a strong Locke, almost without touching it. And that the Féends (which know more than wee) doe better serue their owne turnes with the wonders of Na∣ture than we doe, it is not to be doubted: Insomuch that the Phi∣sition which knoweth the vertues of Hearbes, maketh things of them which the Gardyner that sowed them and cherished them vp would wonder at and cannot doe. But loe here a strange case. Ac∣cius Nauius the greate Birdgazer of Rome, did cut asunder a Whetstone with a Razor in the presence of King Tarquine. What a number of Witches are dayly burned which doe much more by their familiaritie with the Deuill? For they stop a Tunne that is pearced full of holes; they hold fast a Waterspout from run∣ning; and they bynd the naturall abilities: and yet notwithstanding they confesse that their so doing is by the wicked Spirites, and the wicked Spirites discouer not themselues otherwise than so vnto

them. And in very trueth, the Angelles and the Féends differ not properly in strength and power, but in will and practise: like as a∣mong men, the good men differ not from the wicked men eyther in strength of bodie or in stoutnesse of courage, but in the applying of their bodies and mynds. Also it may bee that the Image of Femi∣nine Fortune hath spoken, and likewise the Image of Iuno Mo∣neta, and such others: And that Castor and Pollux haue wyped a∣way the sweat from the Horses of the Romanes as they traueled: And that the Ladie Claudia drewe the Shippe wherein the Idoll of the Goddesse Bona was, which so many yoong men could not once stirre. Let vs admit all these things to bee true, notwithstan∣ding that Titus Liuius say that hee becommeth olde in reckoning them vp. Wee stand not to dispute whither Spirites can speake by Images or no: for wee doubt not thereof. But I say that the Spirites which speake in them be wicked Spirites, and turne vs away to the Creature, to make vs offend the Creator. Neither do I hold opinion that Spirites cannot take bodies vpon them; nor that they bee vnable to doe feates farre passing the power of men: for thereof examples are to bee seene, yea moe than were requisite. But the thing that I vphold is this, that the Spirites which seeke to haue the praise of a victorie obteyned, or of the asswaging of a Plague, which is due but to the only one God; or which will haue them ascribed to Fortune, which is but an imagination; or to a Iu∣no, which is but a Blocke; or to a good Goddesse the mother of the Gods, a mother whom the veryest wretches in the worlde (as I sayd afore) would disclayme to be their mother, are very Deuilles. And in good sooth, whereas the Deuill which tooke vppon him the name of that Goddesse, suffered himself to be drawne by Claudia, who had so ill reporte among all men: It agréed very well to the life which the Goddesse her selfe had led, and to the miracles of the Féends, & to the marke that they shot at: namely, to giue the more boldnesse to Claudia to continue her leaud life, and occasion vnto others to followe her.

Also one was counted a God because he draue away Grashop∣pers; another because he killed Frogges, Crickets, and Flyes. And hereof it came that the Chananites called their Belzebub, and the Greekes their Iupiter,* 1.711 by the name of Scareflye. Another (sayth Zosimus) sent Birds to deuoure the Grashoppers. Admit that all these effects haue not their particuler causes: yet what mi∣racles are they to make Gods withal? For by that reckoning, why

should not those also which by certeyne receyts doe kill Serpents, Rats, and Féeldmyce, or which doe moreouer driue away vermin out of mens bodies, bee counted Gods? Nay, if wee will see mira∣cles, let vs looke vppon the doings of the onely one God, which are vtterly vnpossible, wonderfull, and vncommunicalle to any crea∣ture. He made the world, and he destroyed it. He made the Sea, and he dryeth it vp. He made the Sunne, and he causeth it to stand still. Yea and (which is yet much more) he made all these things by his word, and with a blast of his mouth he chaungeth them as he listeth. These are the miracles of the God of Israell, which haue not their like among the other Gods. And if they will deale vp∣rightly in disputing, they must as well beléeue our bookes for these miracles, as we beléeue their bookes for theirs.

Also if wee looke vpon the miracles of the good Spirites, and of the seruants of that one God; they be not castes of Legierdemame to dazle mens eyes withall; nor nimble tricks & sleyghts, nor won∣ders to no end, to no reason, to no instruction: but when they strike, it is to chastize men; and when they heale, it is to glorifie God. If they speake, it is to teach; and if they appeare to vs, it is to leade vs to welfare. If they foretell, they doe it as messengers from God; and if they worke miracles, they doe it as executers of his power. And they bee so farre of from being angrie at a Song mistuned, or at a Gambauld misbegun in the honor of them after the maner of the Heathen Gods; that (as wee reade in our Scriptures) they bée offended with nothing more,* 1.712 than when men thank them or honor them for the things which they ought to thank and to worship the Creator.

By the tokens which the Platonists giue vs thereof, wee shall percieue yet better whether those Gods were good Spirits or bad,* 1.713 Angels or Diuelles; notwithstanding that that Sect was tootoo much ouertaken in the seruing of them. The Diuelles or wicked Spirits (saith Porphirius) delight in bludshed, in filthy and ry∣bawdly speeche, in giuing Poyson, in furnishing folke with charmes of loue, and in prouoking them to lechery, and to all vyces. Yea, and they beare men on hand, that all the Gods and the very Souereyne GOD himselfe, taketh pleasure in such things; either feyning themselues to bee the Sowles of some deadfolkes, or taking vppon them to be Gods. Which of all these tokens haue I not noted already in their Gods? Agein (saith Porphirius) They turkining themselues as much as they can

into Gods, that is to say, into Angels of light, to beguile our sence and imagination with straunge vanities: Insomuch that he that is the cheefe of them, will needes bee estemed to bee the souerein God. And yet notwithstanding, their foretelling of things is but by gesse, and all of them generally bee subiect to lying and deceyuing. They be angry at euery small tryfle; & are pacified againe with fond and vaine things. Neuerthelesse they haue beguyled some vayne Poets and Philosophers, and consequently by them haue drawen the silly people to the worshipping of them as Gods. What is all this but a descripti∣on of the very same Gods whom hee himselfe worshipped? Like∣wise Iamblichus who maketh an Anatomie of them,* 1.714 saith thus. They transforme themselues (saith he) into good Spirits; but in deed it is but a brag, wherby they pretend more than they be in deede. They make a galant showe, and daunt men with their words. They play the Gods, and yet are troubled with light passions.* 1.715 But the greate Witch Apuleius sayth yet more. They be pacified with gifts (saith he) and wroth with wrongs. They be pleased with Ceremonies, and angred with the want of them be it neuer so little. They take vpon them the ruling of Birdgazers and Bowelgazers, and of the Oracles and Mi∣racles of Witches and Wizards. To be short, they be vnkindly wights, passionate of Spirit, reasonable of vnderstanding, ay∣ry of body, and endlesse of time. To whom can these things a∣gree but to his owne Gods? And what remayneth then, but that they were Diuels; so much the more miserable, as they bee more vehement in their passions, and immortall in their nature.

Now is there nothing behind but their owne Confession, and thereof we shall not yet fayle. Apollo therefore as one vppon the Racke, doth in many of his Oracles acknowledge the Souereine God, and to make the most of himselfe, he termeth himselfe one of his Angels, as appéereth by this Oracle of his alledged afore.

We Angels are a parcell of the Souereine God of all.

And beeing asked vppon a tyme by what name he would be called and prayd vnto, he answered,

Call mee the feend that knowes all things to whom belongs all skil.

And in another;

The witty Feend, the Harmony and Cresset of the World.

And ageine.

Wee Feendes which runne through Sea and Land,* 1.716 do tremble shrink and shake, To see the Whip of that great God which makes the World to quake.

And yet notwithstanding, the Greeke word Demon (which is the word whereby they termed their Gods, and which in this place I english Feend) was so odious euen among the learned men them∣selues who knewe the originall thereof, that they would haue bene loth to call a Slaue so. But when as wee reade further that these Gods do quake at the naming of the Stigian marris, that is to say of Hell, insomuch that euen Iupiter himselfe sweareth thereby, and is afrayd to be forsworne: what els is to bee thought thereof, but that these Gods which feine themselues to reigne in heauen, are tormented in hell? Besides this, the miracles and Oracles of these Gods are come to an end, and their Seruices and Sacrifices are come to nought, and at length folke haue acknowledged the only one GOD the maker of Heauen and Earth, and ruler of the whole world, to be the same whome the Iewes haue worshipped. And in that respect it is that Seneca cryed out, That the Slauish Iewes had giuen lawe to the whole Earth. But who can maruell that hee which made both the worlde and man, should in the end make men to acknowledge him to be as he is? So then, let vs con∣clude for these last three Chapters, That there is but onely one God; That the same was worshipped, serued and called vpon by the people of Israell: That the Gods of the Heathen were men; That vnder the names of those men, diuels were worshipped; and finally that our first marke whereby to knowe the true God, is not to be found elsewhere then in the Iewish Religion; wherevpon it followeth that all other Religions were Idolatrie and Uanitie. For whereas some alledge in excuse, that the seruing of many Gods may well match with the seruing of the onely one; If they be Gods in deede, that is to say Angelles; they take themselues to haue wrong, for they seeke nothing but the honoring of God. And if they be Deuils, then are they Gods enemies; and then the woor∣shipping of them is a rebelling against God. To bee short, as little agréement is betwéene the seruice of the true God, & the seruice of the Heathen Gods, as is betwéene light & darknesse; the true good∣nesse and vtter naughtinesse; most extreme holinesse of will, (which is in him) & extreme teaudnesse of wil (which is in thē); welfare and soulehealth, whereof we be desirous, and destruction and wretched nesse, which they haue purchased to themselues by their rebellion.

The xxiiij. Chapter.

That in Israell Godds woord was the Rule of his Seruice; which is the second marke of true Religion.

NOw haue we séen by the former Chap∣ters, how blind man is in matters con∣cerning God, and his owne welfare; séeing that in sted of the true God his maker and Sauyour, he hath woorship∣ped not only the vilest and basest crea∣tures, but also the verie enemyes of Gods glorie and of his owne welfare. And that ought to warne vs the more, how néedfull this second marke that I haue giuenfoorth, is in reli∣gion; namely that Gods woord is the Rule of his seruice. For sure∣ly he that ouershooteth himself so farre as to take, not a Starre but the very darknesse itself for the Sonne: cannot but ouershoote him∣self much more in discoursing of his owne nature, course, and ver∣tue. And lyke as hee that hath missed his way at his first setting∣foorth, the more he hasteth him the more he goeth astray: so doubt∣lesse he that is ouerséene in the obiect of Religion, that is to say, the true God; the more he talketh of Religion and diuine seruis, the more shal he blaspheme the name of the euerlasting, and the further shall he wander away from his welfare. The heathen (as we haue séene) did woorship the diuell in stead of the true God; & what seruice insued thereof? Playes, Fables, Combates; which were Schooles of whoredome, of Incests and of murder; bluddie Sacrifices, and ordinarie manslaughters. If their godlynesse, were such, what might their vngoblynes bee? These extreme mischeeues made some to suspect that there was an abuse. But what did that auayle them? One sort sayd, séeing that Religion consisteth in such things, it were méete to bee banished quite out of the World: and thereof sprang the Schoole of Epicurus: and that is a falling from one breakenecke too another. A••othersort sacrificed as the common people did; and hil•• opinion in their harts with y^t wysest sort. Such were Aristotle, Cicero and others; of whom the former be••uea∣thed

a Sacrifice to Ceres by his last will; and the other celebrated the shameful feasts of the Goddesse Flora. What els is this, than a mocking of God, a deceyuing of folke of set purpose, and a betray∣ing of their owne saluation? There haue bin some feaw who in their wrytings haue let slippe some woords ageinst such vngodly∣nes, and haue taught that there is but only one God, and that hée was not serued with such Ceremonies. But when they come too giue a rule of Religion, at what poynt are they? One speaks one thing and another another, euery man after his owne fancie. They dispute and crie out one ageinst another too ouerthrowe one ano∣ther. But if ye take the whottest of them aside, & let them coole thei∣heate a little; they will tel you that they be scarce sure of that which they assure you; and that they be but the opinions of men, and there∣fore are disputable on both sides; only they think they find more like∣lihod of truth in their owne, than in the opinion of their aduersaries. To be short, among all the things which the wisemen of the world haue written here and there of the seruice of GOD, ye may hap to finde some one good saying in a hundred yeres, and fome one other in another hundred: but when ye haue gathered them all together as diligently as ye can, yet shall ye not bee able to make of them neither Rules, nor Grounds, nor scarcely good Problemes. So greatly is man by his corruption, both blinded in things concer∣ning God, and rechelesse in things that concerne his own welfare. Yet is it sooth (and so haue we proued,) that God hath set man in this world to serue GOD his Creator; and that Seruice we call Religion. Wherevpon it followeth, that euen since the first tyme that there was any man in the world, there hath also bin Religion. For the duetie which man oweth vnto GOD, is of the same date that man himselfe is; and the duetie which he oweth vnto God, is true godlinesse and Religion. Againe, Religion could not bee the inuention of Man: for the inuention of men tending to their owne pleasure or profite, procéed from ground to ground, from principle to principle, and from experience to experience, and at the first are rude, and afterward are polished, not by the same man that found them out, but most commonly a hundred yéere or twaine after: whereas Religion (that is to say, mans duetie towards God) was not so much instituted as bred with man, for his owne welfare and for the glorie of God. The thing (say I) without the which, God should not haue made man, and man might haue bene sorie that he had bene made; ought (euen at the first beginning) to be perfect and

fully accomplished to his end: which thing Religion could not be, if it were deuised by mans brayne, considering that after his fall he was striken with ignorance in his wit, and with frowardnesse and leaudnesse in his will. Néedes therefore must it be, that the rule of Gods seruice was giuen to man by God himselfe, who alonly is a∣ble to vtter his owne will,* 1.717 to make rules of his seruice, and to tell vs what things doe please him. Now, true Religion is the true seruice of the true God: and the true God (as I haue proued al∣readie) was not knowne in old tyme elsewhere than in Israell. As for the Gods of the Gentiles, they were Deuils, and consequent∣ly their Oracles were the worde of Deuils. Wherevpon it follo∣weth that there is no seeking for the true seruice of GOD and for the true word of God, but onely among the people of Israell; yea and that it must of necessitie also be found there. For seeing that of necessitie there must néedes bee a Religion; and that in Religion there must néedes bee a rule procéeding from GOD, according to which rule God will be serued; and that God was serued in Israell and no where els: The Rule which we seeke must néedes be found in Israell too. For as it is vnpossible that it should be elsewhere, be∣cause the true God was not anywhere els: so is it not possible that it should not bee there, forasmuch as there was one there, and that the true God also was there. Now therefore, the people of Israell had alwaies certeine bookes which we call the Byble or old Testa∣ment, which bookes they reuerenced and followed as the very word of GOD, whereby he hath shewed vnto men after what maner he will bee serued and worshipped. And those bookes haue bene kept continually from tyme to tyme, euen since y^e creation of the world: and they haue bene of such authoritie among the true Israelites, that they beléeued not any other bookes, and for the maintenauce of them haue indured warres, oppressions, banishments, remo∣uings, deaths, and slaughters; which are such things as are not to bee found among other Nations, notwithstanding that the Law∣makers of other Nations, in giuing them their lawes, made them beléeue that they procéeded from the Gods, because it was a thing as good as graunted among al men, that the setting doune of rules for Religion and for mans Soulehealth, belōged only vnto God. And therefore wee might well gather this conclusion, whereof the premises are proued heretofore; That there is but one true God, one true Religion, one true Rule of seruing God, reuealed by and from the true God. And that this true God was not knowne and

worshipped elswhere than among the people of Israell. Unto Isra∣ell then was the sayd word reuealed, and that word must néedes be the Byble or olde Testament, whereby the Israelites were taught the seruice of God. But forasmuch as wee haue to doe with folke that will sooner be driuen to silence by arguments, than perswaded by reason to beléeue, as though it stoode God on hand to perswade them for his honor, and not them to beléeue for their own welfare: I will by the Readers leaue, set forth this matter at large.

First of all,* 1.718 forasmuch as there is a Seruice of God to bée had; and that seruice should rather bée a misseruice than a Seruice, if it were not according to his will; and his will cannot be conceiued of vs by coniectures, but must be manifested vnto vs by his word; I aske them vpon their conscience, if they were to discerne that word from all others, by what markes they would knowe it, that they might not be deceiued! This word (say I) is the rule of Gods ser∣uice and the way of welfare. Unto this seruice is man bound from his very creation, and it is the marke whereat hee ought to shoote from his very birth. Will it not then bee one good marke of this word, if it be auncienter than all other Lawes and Rules, than all other words, than all inuentions of man? And will it not be ano∣ther good marke, if it tend to none other end, than the glorifying of God and the sauing of mankind? If (say I) it withdrawe man from all other things to leade him to God, and to turne him out of all bypathes? how great pleasure so euer there be in them, to leade him to saluation? Nay I say yet more, If we find things in the Scripture which no Creature could euer haue foretold or spoken; things which could neuer haue come into any mans mind; things not onely aboue but also against our nature; Will any man bee so wilfull and so very an enemy to his owne welfare, as not to yéeld and agrée, when he seeth both the hand, the signe, and the Seale of God? In déede I vndertake a matter beyond my abilitie; but yet the higher it is, the more will GOD ayde mee with his grace. And first of all,* 1.719 forasmuch as the worlde was made for man, and man for God; and man could neuer be without true Religion, nor true Religion without the word of God: I demaund of the great Nations and florishing kingdomes that haue giuen Lawes to all the world, and among whom the liberall sciences, artes, and lear∣ning haue bene most renowmed; whither any one of them is to be found that hath had a Lawe set downe in writing, concerning the true Seruice of the true God? Yea or one worde either right or

wrong that hath bin beléeued to procéede from him, I meane from the only one euerlasting GOD the maker of Heauen and Earth? Also I demaund of them whither among the Assyrians, Persians, Greekes, and Romanes, a man shall find an Historie of Religion deduced from the first beginning of the world, and continued so on from tyme to tyme, and from age to age? And on the contrarie part, whether there be any Heathen man which is not driuen to confesse, that the very latest writer of our Byble, is of more anti∣quitie than the auncientest authors that are renoumed among the Gentiles? And whether that little which the Gentiles haue lear∣ned concerning God be not borowed from other men; and finally whether in matters of religion, they haue not walked by groping, without light and without any direction? This matter is handled at large by diuers auncient writers. Neuerthelesse, for the ease of them which cannot reade them all, I will gather them here toge∣ther in feawe words.

The Byble beginning at the creation of the world & of man, lea∣deth vs from tyme to tyme, and from Father to Sonne, euen vnto Christ. It deliuereth vs a diuision of men into Gentiles and Is∣raelites, into Idolaters and true worshippers of the Souereine God; and their comming togither ageine into one after a certeine time, and by a meane appoynted euerlastingly to that end by God. And the writers thereof are Moyses, Iosua, the Chronicles of the Iudges and Kings, the Prophetes euery of them in his time, Da∣niell, Nehemias, and Esdras; of whome euen these latest were a∣bout thrée thousand and sixehundred yéeres after the creation, and yet were they afore any Chronicles of the worlde were in the resi∣due of the world. I desire all the Antiquaries of this time, which make so greate account of the antiquitie of the Greekes and Ro∣manes, or of an old Coyne, or of a whetherbeaten Piller, or of a halfeaten Epitaphe, what find they like vnto that? Esdras is the latest in the Canon of the Hebrewe writers, and yet liued he afore the tyme that Socrates taught in Athens. And what rule of Reli∣gion was there among the Greekes of his tyme, who condem∣ned him for speaking of the onely one GOD? At the same tyme were Pythagoras, Thales, Xenophanes, and the seuen Sages which haue borne so great fame in Greece, who in their whole life tyme haue sayd some good words concerning maners, and conuer∣sation among men, but as for God, they haue spoken nothing of him but dreamingly, nor deemed of him, but ouerthwartly, nor

knowen aught of him but that little which they learned of the AE∣giptians. Thither went Orpheus, Homere, Lycurgus, Solon, Pythagoras, Plato, Heraclitus, Democrates, Thales, Oenopis, and the residue of them to schole, as they them selues doe highly boast in their Bookes. And what learned they there but Supersti∣tion, as I haue shewed afore? And what els then could they bring into Greece? And what might their ignorance be, séeing they were counted wise so good cheape? Of the same date are the lawes of So∣lon in Athens, and (anon after) of the twelue Tables at Rome, which the Romaines sent to seeke in Greece by the aduyce of one Hermotimus an Ephesian.* 1.720 As touching GOD and his seruice, which should be the ground of all good lawes, scarce was there one word of very Iustice in déede, further than peculiar interest requi∣red, which was very little. But shall we seeke the lawe of godlines at the hand of the Greekes and Romaines,* 1.721 who a thrée thousand and sixe hundred yéeres after the Creation of the world, knew not whither there were many Gods or but only one?* 1.722 Ne knewe any further of Religion, than they had learned by their Trafficke into AEgipt?* 1.723 Who in respect of others are of so late tyme in the world, and (which worse is) had reigned thrée or fower hundred yéeres without inquiring after godlinesse and rightuousnesse?* 1.724 Surely we must hold vs to this poynt, that since the very first bréeding of man in the world, there hath alwaies bene Religion in the world. For he was not bred in vayne: neither could there be any Religiō with∣out reuealing from God. For (as the Philosophers say of nature) God fayleth not in things néedfull. And therefore where men haue bene so lateward, and GOD so smally knowne; there we shall not finde them. For as for the Oracles, that is to say the sayings of the Deuils that abused them; if they were of elder tyme than the peo∣ple, they spake not to them: and if they were bred after them, then were they newe. And in very trueth, euen by their owne Histories, the first original of the false Gods of Greece and of their miracles, tooke beginning about the warres of Troy, which befell about the tyme of the Iudges, towards the two thousand and eight hundred yéere after the Creation of the world. The great Kings of Assyria be of more antiquitie than the Greekes; for they fell into the tymes of the Kings and Prophets of Israell, whereas there was not any notable thing in the Storie of the Greekes afore the Captiuitie of Babylon. But how will they shewe vs any law concerning the seruice of God, yea or how could they haue any, séeing they forsooke

the true God and worshipped false Gods? Nay, as touching those false Gods, what memoriall almost haue wee of them, but in the Byble, and that is of the victories which the true God had against them, and of his Conquestes ouer them, which are spoken of from leafe to leafe, to their ouerthrowe and vtter confusion? Contrary∣wise, what be the Kings of Israell, but mainteyners; and the Pro∣phets but expounders of the lawe of Moyses? These as publishers thereof from tyme to tyme, to the intent that folke should not for∣get it, which thing wee see not in any other Nation; and the other as compellers of men to obserue it, as wherunto euen Kings them selues are bound. But if we goe backe from the tyme of the setting foorth of the lawe of Moyses; what haue the Heathen of that tyme to set against it? I say not only in respect of Godlinesse, but also for Iustice, and welnere for the common societie of men? The Athe∣nians will alledge Cecrops the founder of their Citie; & the The∣banes their King Ogyges. And of them they terme all things of antiquitie, Cecropian and Ogygian: And peraduenture they will tell vs, that at that tyme folk bred out of the earth in the Countrie about Athens; as though they spake of Mussheromes and Gras∣hoppers. And when they say so, what shall wee looke for at their hands concerning the seruice of God and heauenly things, sith they thinke them to haue bene bred of the earth? But yet they will not denye that this Cecrops was an AEgiptian, who brought them certeyne lawes for the ordering of Mariage; which is a sure proofe that they were vtterly ignorant of the law of God and Man. Long tyme after him came their Gods and Oracles; insomuch that al the Greekish Historie is (as ye would say) tungtyde for many hundred yéeres after, like a brooke that loseth himself within thirtie paces of his first spring. Among the AEgiptians & Syrians there was more forme of gouernement; but as for Religion, they worshipped the Heauens, the Planets, and the Starres, which are (in very déede) made for man, and for mans vse are put vnder certeyne lawes by God, and therefore much lesse are those Gods able to make men subiect vnto them. And if there were any among them that knewe more than others, it was the Birdgazers and the Bowelgazers, which are a kynd of Witches that turned men away from God to the Creatures, and therefore in no wise directed them to Salua∣tion. But what shall wee finde among the people of Israell at that tyme? A Moyses that preacheth but the onely one God, and tea∣cheth from him how he will be serued; and a Lawe that setteth the

bounds both of Religion and Policie; and the duetie of man both towards God and his neighbour; which euery seuenth day is read openly to all the people; which the Kings haue before their eyes, the Priestes beare about them, the Fathers teach to their Chil∣dren, and the Maysters to their Seruants, and which the very walles and forefronts of their houses doe shewe both to strangers and to their household folke. At the happiest tyme that ye can choose in Rome or Athens, (for I am willing to omit their barbarous∣nesse) what haue wee, (I say not of Religion, but of Order in Iu∣stice and state of Gouernment) that commeth any thing néere to that? Contrarywise, what lawe was there euer set foorth among them, which was not abolished againe ere it was knowne to the people? Or who made account of it but the Lawyers? Or who brake not the lawe afore he knewe it? To be short, where haue wee read that any whole Nation were all Lawyers, and all skilfull in the Lawes of God and men, but the people of Israell? And why was that, but because the same Law conteined the rule of welfare, the which it was méet that all folk without exception should know and vnderstand, because that naturally all men ought to tend vnto their saluation? And as touching the antiquitie of Moyses the set∣ter foorth of that Lawe among that people; I will not haue ye to beléeue me, but the Gentyles themselues. The very ground of the antiquitie of Greece (say Diodorus & Denis of Halycarnassus,* 1.725) was Inachus, who liued twentie Generations (that is to say, a∣bout fower hundred yéeres) afore the warres of Troy. And Ptolo∣mie of Mendese a Priest of AEgipt, (who gathered his Historie out of the holy Registers of y^e AEgiptians) sayd that Amosis King of AEgipt reigned the same tyme that Inachus reigned in Greece;* 1.726 and that in the tyme of the same Amosis, Moyses went out of AE∣gipt with the people of Israell. The same thing is affirmed by Appion the Grammarian the great enemie of the Iewes; and also confirmed by Berosus the Babylonian,* 1.727 Polemon, Theodotus, Ipsicrates, and Moschus, writers of the Stories of the Phenici∣ans, cyted by Eusebius and Affricanus. Eupolemus in his booke of the Kings of Iewrie sayth, that Moyses taught letters to the Iewes; the Iewes to the Phenicians; and the Phenicians to the Greekes by Cadmus. And so by that reckoning, Moyses should be, not onely of most antiquitie in their Histories, but also of more antiquitie than all Histories. Numenius sayth that Plato and Py∣thagoras had nothing but from the AEgiptians and Syrians, and

namely from Moyses; insomuch that he recyteth his historie almost word for word as we haue it in the Bible; saying that Moyses was a great Diuine, Lawmaker, and Prophet. Also Diodorus of Si∣cilie sayth, that he vnderstoode by the AEgiptians, (who notwith∣standing were enemies to Moyses and to all his race) that he was the first Lawgiuer of all, and moreouer a man of great courage, and of very commendable life; and that the Iewes estéemed him as a GOD, as well for the knowledge that he had of GOD, as for his authoritie and preheminence. And he (sayth Diodorus) gaue a Lawe vnto the people of Israell, which hee sayd hee had recey∣ued of Iah, for so doe they call the GOD whom they worship. And who is this GGD Strabo* 1.728 sheweth vs sufficiently where he saith, That Moyses hauing rebuked the AEgiptians for their vani∣ties and follies, and for resembling God (who is to be worshipped and serued otherwise) by the Images of Beastes and Men; with∣drew himselfe from among them that he might serue God.* 1.729 To be short, Porphirius in his fourth booke ageinst Christians, beareth this record of Moyses, that he had written the historie of the Iewes truely, which thing he had perceyued by conferring it with Sacho∣niathon the Berutian, who rehearseth the very same circumstan∣ces; the which hee had learned out of the Registers of one Hiero∣baal a Priest of the God of Leuy, that is to say, of the God of Isra∣ell, and out of the Chronicles of the cities, & out of the holy bookes which were woont to be dedicated to temples. And this Sachonia∣thon (saith he) was somewhat after the time of Moyses, about the tyme of Semiramis. Now, Porphirius giueth vs here more than we aske. For we set Abraham in the tyme of Semiramis, & Moy∣ses came certeine hundred yeeres after: Now then, the bookes of Moyses dooe leade vs vp from Sonne to Father vnto Abraham, from Abraham to Noe; from Noe, to the first Man, and from the first man to God the Creator, beyond whome it is not possible to passe any further, as I haue proued alreadie: and in treating of the Creation we must alwaies néedes come backe agein. And through out all this discourse Moyses telleth vs of the things that GOD hath discouered vnto men, and the lawes which he hath giuen after maner of a couenant, to the intent they should be his people, and he should be their God: The which Couenant it had surely bene both a shame & folly for him to haue deuised for that hardhearted & stub∣borne people, whom hee burdeneth not with any other thing, but that which was notoriously knowen vnto them, and thereby they

were certified of their originall natiuitie. Neither is it to be suspec∣ted that he wrote these things (as some list to say) to get authoritie to himselfe and his; for hee brondeth his Graundfather Leuy with an open marke of reproch expressed in these words of Iacobs Te∣stament; Simeon and Leuy are cruel instruments,* 1.730 in their van∣quishings, &c. Cursed bee their wrath, for it was shamefull; I will diuide them in Iacob, and scatter them in Israell. &c. As who should say, hee ment to disgrade Leuy and all his race; to the saying wherof nothing compelled him. Also he reprooueth Aarons idolatrie and Maries murmuriug, notwithstanding that hee was his Brother and she his Suster: and he repeateth oftentymes, that for his owne fault, God had told him that he should see the land of Canaan, but not enter into it. To be short, hee ordeineth and lea∣ueth Iosua to be his Successor, whereas by reason of the authori∣tie which he had among that people, he might by al likelyhod haue set vp his owne sonnes. And yet we sée that naturally we conceale the faults of our Parents, and corrupt their Pedegrees to make them the more vertuous, and our selues the more commendable 〈…〉〈…〉, and we be loth to acknowledge our owne faults. 〈…〉〈…〉 the homeliest men of vs all) except it be among our 〈…〉〈…〉 fréeds, and as late as we can. Much lesse can we find in our heartes to publish them to the knowledge of posteritie. To bée short, we be so desirous to leaue honour and estimation to our chil∣dren, that such as would not haue bene ambitious for themselues, cannot refreyne from beeing ambitious for their posteritie. Now then, what may we conclude thereof, but that he yéelded the honor of his auncetors, and his owne too, vnto Gods glorie & the trueth? And although wee procéede not so farre as to conclude absolutely, that he wrote at that time as from God, and not as from man: yet notwithstanding, forasmuch as in his writings he strippeth mans nature naked, ought we not at leastwise to conclude, that he which made lesse account of himself and his than of the trueth, would not haue preferred vntrueth before it for any respect?* 1.731 Some miserable kaytife that is quarelous against his owne welfare, will say heere, Admit that Moyses, Iosua, Dauid, Esay and others were as aun∣cient as ye list: yet how shall I be sure that those bookes also were as auncient, and of their writing? It were inough to answere him, How beléeuest thou that such bookes or such were Platoes, Aristo∣tles and Ciceroes. Marry (saiest thou) because they haue bene con∣ueyed vnto vs from them from hand to hand? Use thou the like

equitie towards the others, which as great a nomber of men doe assure thee to haue come from them. But if that will not perswade them, yet want we not wherewith to inforce them. First and for∣most I appeale to the conscience and iudgement of all persons, which knowe what it is to indite, whether the style of the Scrip∣tures bee not such and so peculiar, as it cannot by any meanes bee counterfetted or disguised. And if there bee any that will néedes doubt thereof, I pray him to make a triall thereof but in some one side of a leafe, bee it in plainnesse of setting things downe as they were done, or in feruentnesse of praying, or in pitthinesse of Pro∣phesying: and he shall foorthwith perceiue, that as well in the mat∣ter it selfe as in the maner of indyting, there is a certeine new taste in sted of the old, which is peculiar to all tymes, so as no man can atteine to the same naturall veyne, the same zeale, and the same ef∣ficacie, vnlesse he be led by the same hand, moued by the same spi∣rit, and pricked with the same spurre that Moyses, Dauid, and the Prophetes were. To be short, if it be hard to father a booke vppon Plato, Herodotus, and Hipocrates, but that hee which shall haue read them aduisedly, will by and by espie it euen a farre of; So is it as vnpossible to father the other bookes vppon those which haue a stile sofarre differing from other writings, vnlesse a man wil beare himselfe on hand, that such bastardbookes were made in the same ages or néere about the same tymes that those Authors liued in. Let vs sée how it may be possible to haue bene doone in the same a∣ges. Moyses published the Lawe before all the people, and he cur∣seth the partie with death both of body and soule, which shall adde, diminish or alter any thing. Hee bindeth the people household by household, to take fast hold thereof. His bookes are deliuered to e∣uery Trybe, they be read openly euery Saboth day, they be kept carefully in the Arke, and the Arke is kept as carefully by all the Trybes. And that this was doone, it appeareth not onely by his booke, but also by the effects that insewed therof from time to time, and by the footesteps therof which are euident euen yet among the Iewes. If it be possible for a booke to bee preserued from falsifying and foysting, what booke shall that be but the Byble? which was garded by ten hundred thousand men, and copyed out, not by some Scriueners onely, but also by all the people? Afterward came Io∣sua, who renewed the same Couenant, proclaymed the Lawe, and yéelded record vnto Moyses. Lykewise the Iudges succéeded Io∣sua, Samuell succéeded the Iudges, the Kings and the Chronicles

succéeded Samuell, and the Prophets succéeded them all. These bookes followed one another immediatly and without interp••••••••∣tion: and euery one that followed, presupposed the things to be an infallible trueth which had bene written by them that went afore; neither was there any that did cast any douts or reproue any of the former histories, as is found to be doone in other Histories; (as for example, Hellanicus reproueth Ephorus, Ephorus finds fault with Timeus, and consequently Timeus reprehendeth them that wrote afore him:) But Iosua gathereth a certeine and vnfallible consequence of Moyses, the Iudges of Iosua, Samuell of the Iud∣ges, Dauid of them all, and so all the rest. And to speake of the Prophets, they bee not lyke the bookes of our Astrologers, which reforme one anothers Calculations, and controll one anothers Prognostications: But as they shoote all at one marke: so they a∣grée in one thing, notwithstanding that they wrote in sundrie times and sundry places. Nay (which more is) wée see that the people were so sure of that Lawe, that from age to age they chose rather to abyde all extremities, than to giue it ouer; insomuch that they defended it ageinst the Chananites, the Philistines, the Assyrians, the Babilonians, the Persians, the Greekes, and the Romanes. Who then durst be so prowd and bold as to voilate or imbace the thing that was hild to be so holy, defended with so ma∣ny lyues, and confirmed with so many deathes? If yee say, the Heathen; Their intents was not to marre it, but to make it quyte away. For what profite could haue redounded vnto them of that payne? to what ende should they haue done it? or how could they haue corrupted it in the sight & in the knowledge of so many folke? Moreouer, who knoweth not that the Scriptures were caryed by the banished Iewes, into diuers countryes of the world afore they came into the hands of the Gentiles, as of the Greekes or Roma∣nes? As for the Iewes; their shooteanker and felicitie consisted in the kéeping of them, & the reward of corrupting them was death: and what could it thē haue benefited them to haue corrupted them? Nay, yet further, which of them would haue dyed afterward for a Lawe, which they knewe to bee corrupted or counterfetted? And soothly we see throughout their Histories, that there passed not so much as any one halfe hundred yeeres without persecutions and warres for that Lawe.

And whereas it myght be sayd, that some suttleheaded fellow among the Iewes had done it to abuse the rest: how could that be a∣geine,

séeing it was not in the hands of fower or fiue Prestes only, as the Ceremonies of the Hetrurians and Latins were; but in the hands of the whole people, so as one sillable could not be chaun∣ged, but it was to be espyed euen by yoong Children. Considering also that we reade not of any king how wise so euer he were, that euer durst presume to ad, diminish or alter any whit thereof; where∣as notwithstanding, all other Lawes of the world were made by péecemeale, and Kings and Senats haue alwaies reserued to thē∣selues a prerogatiue to correct them and alter them at their plea∣sure, specially when they limited their authoritie, and serued not for the mayntenance of their possession. And if any man to beréeue vs of this argument, will stepfoorth and say, that our Scriptures are as an Historie gathered out of the Registers of many ages, by some one author; as we sée Berosus hath done for the Chaldees, Duis for the Phenicians, Manetho for the Egiptians, and such o∣thers; let him tell vs then (I hartily pray him,) in what age of the world that Author is lykely to liued. If in the tyme of Moy∣ses, of Iosua, or of the Iudges; how commeth it to passe that he wryteth of the reignes of the kings? If in the tyme of the first Kings; how wryteth he of the last Kings? If in the tyme of the last Kings; how is it possible that the Iewes being afore that time caryed away into diuers places of the world, and scattered abroade euerywhere lyke the members of Pentheus, should carie & keepe with them the books of Moyses, which (by these mens reckoning) were not yet made, according to which booke both themselues did notwithstāding then liue, and also taught other Nations? I meane the ten Trybes by name, which by three former remouings were scattered ouer the whole Earth, whereof the marks are to appar∣ant to be denyed. The first in the the tyme of Achaz King of Iuda, and of Placea King of Israell, by Thiglath Phalassar King of the Assirians, who caryed away Ruben, Gad, and the halfe trybe of Manasses: the second in the tyme of Ose by Salmanasar, who ca∣ryed away Isachar, Zabulon and Nepthaly into Assiria: and the third anon after by the same Salmanasar, who conueyed away Ephraim and the other half of Manasses; as is witnessed both by the auncient Records of many Countryes, and also by the Chro∣nicles of the Hebrewes. And at that tyme whyle Printing was notyet in vse, what meane was there to disperse those books so soone and so farre of? Nay, which more is, what will they say when they shall find the bookes of Moyses to haue bin kept frō father to sonne,

euen, in the vtmost Coasts of Ethyopia, whither the Empires ne∣uer came, which bookes they say they haue had there euer since the tyme of Salomon, that they were brought thither by the Queene of the Prouince of Saba? Thus haue I spoken inough of this mat∣ter, both for them that are contented to be satisfied with reason, (for if they do but reade our scriptures, they haue whereon to rest,) and also for those which are otherwise: for it is hard to shewe him aught, which by his will will see naught. But there are yet further which tell vs that in the tyme of the Machabees, Antiochus a∣bolished the lawe of Israell, and al the bookes of the Byble: and they think themselues to haue made a greate speake, and hard to be re∣solued. I leaue it to the consideration of all men of iudgment, whi∣ther it be easie for a Prince though he vse neuer so great diligece, vt∣terly to abolish any maner of booke whatsoeuer, seeing the nature of man is such, that the more that things are sought to be plucked from him, the more he streyneth himself to keepe them. But when a booke is once beleeued and reuerenced of a whole nation, not for delight of things done by men, therein conteyned, but for the sal∣uation of man therein reuealed; for the trueth whereof men are not afrayd to indure both death and torments, as was witnessed by ma∣ny in the time of the same Antiochus: what diligence of man can suffise to abolish it? But let vs put the cace that it was abolished in Iewrie: yea and that it was abolished throughout his whole Em∣pire: what can yet insue thereof, séeing that the ten trybes (ouer whom Antiochus could haue no authoritie) had caryed them and disperced them abroade to the vttermost bounds of the world? And séeing that the remouing of the other two trybes, had made them rife among the Persians and Babylonians? And that the Ptolo∣myes c••••rished the Iewes ryght tenderly in Egipt, giuing them open S••••agogs with franchyses & libertie? And also that Ptolo∣mie Ph••ladelph had caused all the Byble to be translated into the Gréeke toong by the thrée score and ten interpreters, and had layd it vp in his librarie as a Iewell? And to be short, that the Iewes were at that verie tyme so dispersed among the Greeks themselues, as there was scarcely any Citie which had not receyued them with their Sinagogs?

But although none of all these reasons were to be had; then, if the Byble was lost and abolished, how was it found ageine so so∣deinly in one instant? Who could (as ye would say) cas•• it vp whole out of his stomacke at once? Or who hath euer red that the Iewes

made any mone for the losse of it, or tooke any peyne for the séeking of it out ageine? And to cut off superfluitie of spéeche, whereof then commeth it, that of so manie Gramarians beeing of opinion that they should become wyse men in one day, if they had Ciceroes bookes of Comonweale to reade; none of them all being more sut∣tleheaded than the rest, hath vndertaken to counterfet them in his name? No no: let vs rather say the Scriptures are of more anti∣quitie than all other wryting; and the more they be so, the more aduersitie haue they indured: the rage of Tyrans hath ouerflowed them; and yet they could nother drowne them nor deface them: they haue bin condemned to the fire, and yet could not bee consumed. Contrarywise, the bookes of the greatest men, how greate authori∣tie so euer they had, haue bin lost, and for all the peyne that hath bin taken to preserue them, yet haue they often come to naught. The Chronicles of Emperours (say I) bee perished, when the Chro∣nicles of the smal Kings of Iewrie, and of that poore outcast people, and I wote not what a sort of vanished Shepeherds despised of the world and despysers of the world, haue continewed to posteritie in despyght of the World. Therefore it must néeds be say, that the Scriptures haue bin preserued by Gods singular prouidence, both so long time and ageinst so many iniuries of time. And séeing they be the only wrytings which only he hath preserued from the creati∣on of the world vnto our dayes; surely they were for our behoof. And séeing they haue bin reiected of the world, and yetnotwithstan∣ding doo liue and reigne in despyght of the world; surely they be from somewhere els than of man or of the world; that is to wéet Reuelations from God to man, continewed from tyme to time for his glorie and our welfare. And so by this discourse we gayne this poynt, that our Scriptures which are left vs by Moyses, Iosua, and the Prophets, are the auncientest of all wrytings, and vtterly voyd of all lykelyhod of mingling or counterfetting: and that sith that euen from the beginning there hath bin a Religion reuealed from God, and we find none other than this to haue continewed fromthe verie Creation vnto vs; we may inferre, that the Scrip∣tures wherein we reade it, are of God, bycause that from lyne to lyne they conteyne his Reuelations made vnto mankynd. But let vs passe from this antiquitie which is but the barke of the Scrip∣tures, and let vs come to the substance of them, which will giue vs assurance of the place from whens they come.

Now then, let vs reade the bookes of men as well of olde tyme

as of our owne tyme, and what is the scope,* 1.732 the ground, the forme, and discourse of them, furtherfoorth than they eyther expounde or followe our Scriptures? Some write to celebrate the Kings and great Capteynes of their tyme: these be but vauntings of men, ru∣mors of people, consultations to destroye one another, and suttle deuyces to disappoynt or vndoe one another. Good men by reading them become malicious, and euill men become worse. And by the way there must bee some pretie spéech of Fortune, which swayeth the Battels. As for God who maketh Kings and vnmaketh them againe, who holdeth both the enterances and issewes of all things in his hand, there is not so much as one word in al a great volume. Who doubteth that these be bookes of men, which cōteyne nothing but the passions, the subtelties, and the indeuers of men? Another sort write (as they themselues say) to make themselues immortall. They write goodly discourses, to make themselues to be had in ad∣miration. If they chaunce to stumble vppon some good saying for maners or for the life of man; they turkin it a thousand waies to make it seeme good for their purpose. They deliuer their words by weight, they driue their clauses to fall alike, they eschew nycely the méeting together of vowelles: and what greater childishnesse can there bee in graue matters, than that? Yet notwithstanding, they make bookes of the despising of vaynglorie, and their bookes them∣selues are full of ambition: of the brydling of affections; and their arguments are ranke poyson and contention. If they happen to speake of the seruing of God; it is by Sacrifieing to Deuilles, and to their owne Louers, and friends, as we reade that Socrates, Pla∣to, and Aristotle did. Who is he then which euen by the first lyne or by the opening of the booke, maye not perceiue that they which speake bee men, yea and but very men in déede; considering that in all their bookes they speake but of man? Men (say I) that seeke the glorie of men and not of GOD; Preachers of vanitie, and not of mans welfare?

On the contrarie side, wee heare how the Scripture sayth, In the beginning God made Heauen and Earth. What is ment by this enterance, but that the Reader should not in the rest of the discourse looke for the follies of men, but for the wonderous works of the Creator? And what other author did euer begin his worke so? Herodotus beginneth his Historie after this maner: Herodo∣tus of Halycarnassus hath spoken these things. Though he had neuer sayd so, it would neuer haue bene surmised that he had spo∣ken

any thing but of man. For what is his whole booke but vani∣tie? Or what hath he which is not inferiour to man? After the same maner doth Hippocrates begin his bookes concerning the nature of man; and likewise Timaeus of Locres his treatise of Nature and of the Creation of the world: which Authors I alledge as auncien∣test of all others. But if we go through the whole Scripture from the one end to the other, we shal finde nothing there but that which is promised at the first word; that is to wit liuely letters, and vn∣possible to be falsified, of a booke that procéedeth from God, namely his own glorie and the welfare of man. As for the glorie of the E∣uerlasting, it leadeth vs to the creation of the world, and of man; to the sinne of Adam, and the corruption of Mankynde; the Flud of Noe that followed therevpon, and the confusion of Tongues; the calling of Abraham and his seede, the plagues of Pharao, and the wonders of AEgipt. What is there in all these things, that sauo∣reth of man, or of the vanitie that possesseth him? What hath he there which maketh him not eyther to stoope vnto God or to sinke vnto Hell? Againe, on the other side, what els doth that whole dis∣course shewe vs, but the highnesse of the Euerlasting, his merciful∣nesse towards the lowly, and his iustice and iudgements towards the proude, when wee see all loftinesse of the world cast downe be∣fore him, and all the puissance of Empyres giuen ouer to Catter∣pillers and to the wormes of the earth? Afterwarde Moyses com∣meth to the rehearsing of the lawe that God gaue to that people. Whence came that extraordinarie wisedome, and why rather in Israell than elsewhere, in the tyme when all other Nations were so rude? And what maner of lawe was it? Soothly a lawe compre∣hended in ten Sentences, and yet those ten Sentences conteyne whatsoeuer can belong to Godlinesse, Uprightnesse and Iustice, whither it bee of seruice towards GOD, or of duetie towards our neighbour: Insomuch that all the great volumes of lawes where∣of the world is full, without ground, without end, notwithstanding that they treate but onely of Iustice, are referred all to that marke, and haue not any thing more than is there. Again, all these ten say∣ings are vnfolded in two words: namely, to loue God with the whole heart, and a mans neighbour as himselfe. Let the Athe∣nians shew me the Lawes of their Draco, and the Romaines the Lawes of their twelue Tables; if there be one word of true Godli∣nesse and Iustice in them? Let the Greekes and Romaines shewe all that euer they wrate by the space of a thousand yéeres; and see if

ye shal finde so much thereof, as is conteyned in those two sayings only. And as for our Philosophers, which make so great bragges of the ten Predicaments of their Aristotle, which are but the seede of Sophistrie and vayne babling; I aske them (at leastwise if they haue any eyes) what account they ought to make of this Lawe, which hath conueyed in so fewe wordes, both the matters of the world which are infinite, and the matters of GOD, which are vn∣comprehensible to man, together. The Israelites come to take their iourney into Chanaan vnder Moyses; they bee brought in thether by Iosua; and they be ruled and gouerned there by the Iudges and Kings: And in this discourse there fall out many humane things, many enterprises, surprises, Sieges, Battels, Uictories, & Con∣questes. Héere it behoueth vs to enter into our selues, and by our selues into the naturall disposition of all men. When wee goe to giue the onset, I meane the better sort of vs; what say wee? Lord, we set our Battels in aray, but thou giuest the victorie? After that maner speake the Christians at this day. Nay: but if God prosper vs, what will we say at our returne? Mary, I wonne such a Hill, I brake the Uauntgard, the Enemie was discomfited by my coun∣sell: and herevppon rise quarrelles who shall haue the honor of the victorie. But as for God, we shall heare no more speaking of him, than if there were no GOD at all. The History writers which de∣scribe their Uictories, are curious in naming euen the meanest Capteynes, for offending any man; and moreouer in describing of the aduauntages of the places, of the Sunne, of the Winde, of the Dust, of him that led the Soldiours to handblowes, & of the con∣sultations of the Capteynes: so as he balanceth the Battels after his owne scoales; and as for mens sinnes which are the procurers thereof, he neuer once thinkes of them. Séeing then that the Au∣thors of our Byble are the auncientest of all others, whereof com∣meth this newe kynd of indyting, or w••••••ce haue they learned it, that in all their Histories they giue the glorie of the Battels and of all feates of Armes alonly vnto God, both afore and after? Or whence come these ordinary words, God giueth them into our hands, God is our victorie, God is as strong in a small num∣ber as in a great? Whence also come the goodly Songs, which we shall not finde in any of the Heathen Writers; but of this, that they wrate the warres of GOD and the victories of the Lord, yea and euen in his behalfe which was the doer of them? If they wrate on mans behalfe, why wrate they not in mans vsuall order of in∣dyting?

dyting? Why wrate not Moyses and Iosua, (say I) as Polybius and Caesar wrate? Or who letted them to take to themselues the glorie of their high enterprises? Or if they wrate for Kings and by commaundement of Kings; why finde wee no commendations of Iosua, Dauid, Iosaphat, and Ezechias; as well as of Themisto∣cles, Miltiades, Alexander, and Traiane? For what other com∣mendation finde wee of them, than that they walked in the way of the Lord, that they destroyed the high places, that they ouerthrew the Idols, and such like, howbeit that we reade of heroicall & Mar∣tiall déedes done in their tymes? And what ought we then to con∣clude, but that, as all other bookes which tend to the glorie of men, and concerne but themselues or some others, are the workes of men: so these bookes, which tend alonly to the glorie of God, yea euen by the contempt of men, are the works of God, that is to say, inspired by GOD? As much is to be sayd of the Prophets, who when they speake of any succour that was to come to the people of Israell, or of any enemie that was to come sodeynly vppon them: they sayd not, your friends shall succour you, or your enemies shall runne in vpon you; but, the Lord will send Cyrus to deliuer you, the Lord will arme the Babylonians to scourge you. Uayne are all your dealings if your trust be not in him: Uayne are the threat∣nings of your enemies, if you turne vnto him: and all this is to as∣sure you, that all things are subiect vnto him; insomuch that euen they which thinke themselues to make warre against him, do fight for him and by him. To be short, if we inquire of them concerning the state of the earthly Kingdomes; they answer vs of the heauēly. If a man be combered with this present life; they teach vs the life to come. And oftentymes a man would thinke that they spake no∣thing materiall to our demaunds, because they answer not directly to our demaund, but to that which wee ought to demaund. Let vs consider somewhat nerely of what mynd the Soothsayers are, both by the Oracles of the Deuilles, and by such as make profession of Soothsaying. The Deuilles require Sacrifices for their answe∣ring to curious questions. The Astrologians are fayne to seeke out Princes. The foreteller of things to come by Palmistrie, or by Phisiognomie, or by the inwards of Beastes, or by y^e signes of the Skye, doe the like. And ordinarily who bee more vayne and more puffed vp with pride, than those kynd of men? What iarring is there among them, what disagréement in their foresayings? Nay, which of them haue wee sée••••••; which is not a mony man? or that

would rather dye than not declare Gods wrath to a Prince? Or that hath not soothed a Prince in his sinnes, to sucke gayne out of him? Or that hath giuen the glorie vnto God and not to his owne cunning & skill? Or refused the honor that was offered vnto him, as a notable iniurie? Witnesses hereof may Apollonius, Apu∣leius, Maximus, and such others be; who by their foretellings ne∣uer sought other thing than Images of themselues to be set vp in Halles of Cities, and Pensions in the Courts of the most vicious and detestable Princes. And what is to be sayd then of these folke, who goe willingly to declare the ouerthrowe of States, and the deaths of Princes? Which for sake their apparant ease, to goe and shew foorth Gods wrath? Who of all their wonderfull knowledge yéeld none other reason but this, The Lord hath sayd it vnto vs, nor seeke any other reward than the glorie of GOD, yea matched oftentymes with their owne death?

Let vs come to the Poetries of our Scriptures, and let the hea∣then set theirs ageinst them, and who wil doubt but that they shall blush for shame? To omit the arte, the measure, and the antiquitie of them, which are but the outsides of them, but yet more beautifull in ours than in the Poetries of the Greekes or Romanes. For what are theirs but the vauntings of men, counterfetted prayses, and discourses of Loue Songs, not manly, but vnméete for men? One singeth mée the rage of Achilles; another; the wandrings of AEnaeas, and a third the loue of Paris and Helen: And so farre hath this kind of dealing passed into custome, that it seemes vnpossible for man to be a Poet, a Diuine, and an Historiographer all togi∣ther. So farre are our mirth and songs estraunged naturally from God and from trueth. What shall wee say then to the Poetries, specially of Dauid, considering that he was afore all the Poetries of the Heathen; but that those Poetries are not an imitation, but a simple affection? If we seeke there for songs of victorie, we haue of them; but they concerne the God of Hostes, If for Brydesongs, they bee not wanting; but if they be of God and of them that feare him; If for hurning loues; there be songs of the very Loue itself, howbeit kindled of God himselfe: If for Shepeherds songs, it is full of them, but they concerne the Euerlasting for the Shepherd, and Israell for the flocke. The arte of them is so excellent, that it is an excellencie euen to translate them. The affections so liuely, that they quench & choke all others. If he had written in mans behalfe, had he not as good a ground as Homere had? what were his com∣bate

with Golias, his victories ouer the Philistines, his loue of Bersabee, and such others? Or thinke we that he was not subiect to the same passions, or made of the same mould that wee be? Or that he which wakeneth vs so much, was drowzie himself? Or that he which speaketh of nothing but Loue and Honor, was without them hymselfe? No; but in very deede it was another maner of Pulse that did beate in his Ueynes, than beateth in ours, and ano∣ther maner of fire that burned in his marow. Which thing no man can deny that readeth his Psalmes, so lyuely, so feruent, and so full of affections: howbeit that he directeth his loue and his vehement desires to another marke, as one that behild a farre other beautie, coueted a farre other honor, and tasted a farre other pleasure than of the worlde. For all those bookes aime at none other marke than the honor of God, contrarie to mans nature, which robbeth God of his honor as much as can be, to cloth itselfe therewith, and coue∣teth nothing so much as glorie.

But let vs come to the other marke which followeth this suc∣cessiuely,* 1.733 namely the welfare of man. Forasmuch as I haue sayde, that the marke whereat man shooteth in this life, is his owne wel∣fare: If God haue left him any word, or giuen him any reuelation, to what end ought wee to aknowledge the same to be done, but to light him in the way of welfare, and to turne him from all crosse∣pathes and bywayes which might leade him from the ende that he aimeth at. Now let vs hardely reade all the Bookes of the Hea∣then, and there is none of them which buzieth not our braynes a∣bout Mooneshine in the water, making vs to spend night and day therein, as though wee had none other resting place to seeke? whereas none other booke than the Byble doth put vs in minde of our way? Our welfare is our shooteanker, and the welfare as well of one of vs as of another, is to liue immortally vnited vnto God. How shall Aristotle put vs in mynde thereof, who leaueth vs in doubt whether there be any immortalitie or no, and which fetteth our shooteanker in I wote not what muzings, peraduenture vpon Logicke and naturall Philosophie, as his own? Or how shall Pla∣to doe it, who suffereth himselfe to be caried away with the comon error? Or Seneca* 1.734 (how high soeuer he sore with his Wings,) who will haue the wyseman to play the foole, the harebraind, and the Lechor, and to giue ouer himselfe to all maner of vices, for the bringing of his affayres to passe, yea euen to his owne harme, and to the blaspheming of God himselfe? But if we hearken to the ho∣ly

Scriptures, we shall perceiue from tyme to tyme, that they bee no vntrustie guides of our waies, neyther such as stand douting at y^t first fower wayléete, whither a man should take on the right hand or on the left, but they be sure guydes, such as are able to drawe vs out of the myre, and to conuey vs through the wyld Forests of the world, not onely by leading vs by the hand, but also by seruing our turnes both for a guyde, and for a Cresset, and for a path all togi∣ther. Therfore at the very first enterance they tell vs that God ha∣uing created the world, made man of the dust of the earth, and that hee made him after his owne Image and likenesse, and gaue him power ouer al the things that he had made héere below. And what els is this, but a teaching of man at the first word, that he is indet∣ted to God for all things, that his felicitie cōsisteth in seruing God, & that he is made to another end than other liuing wights; namely for God him selfe? From hence it leadeth vs to our disobedience, & to the punishment that insewed therevpon; to wit, that by seeking our welfare elsewhere than in God, wee fell into all mischiefe. As touching the immortalitie of our Soules, and the Prouidence of God, forasmuch as they be Schoolepoints to brawle vpon, but vn∣doubted•••• grounds to as many as conceiue that there is a GOD, (which thing all men doe) and such as men ought not to doubt of or to be taught, but to practise and exercise all their lyfe long, we sée no disputing there as is among the Philosophers. Henoch there∣fore indured many hard things in that froward generation, for ser∣uing God; and by speciall priuiledge was soone taken out of this lyfe. And to what intent, but to haue a better. Abraham, Isaac, and Iacob wayfared from place to place vpō the earth. And did they so in y^t hope of the land of Chanaan? Nay, who would haue indured so much hardnesse for his Posterities sake? Or for a promise that should not bee performed till fower hundred yeeres after? Then was it because they grounded themselues vppon a better inheri∣tance: and that is the selfesame which God meant when he sayd to Abraham, I am thy great reward. Moyses came somewhat née∣rer this promesse; for he sawe the Land, howbeit but from the top of a high mountayne. And wherefore languished he fortie yeres in the wildernesse among a thousand grudgings, at the poynt to bee stoned euery howre by his own countrimen, & yet was faine to dye at the instant of obteining his hope? Soothly he had séene another countrie néerer him, whervnto he aspired; & farre better (which he was to possesse in the lyfe to come) then he forewent in this present

life. The like is to be said of Iosua, of y^e Iudges, of Samuell, of Da∣uid, & of the Prophets; whose whole life was not a schoolediuinitie like vnto the Philosophers, but a continuall practise of this faith: namely, that mans shootanker is not in this world, nor our welfare to be sought héere: but that it behoueth vs to seeke it in God, and to turne againe to him that we may inioye it. To that end tend these precepts which are giuen to men in the Lawe, Thou shalt loue God with all thyne heart, with all thy Soule, and with all thy strength. To what end? To bee oppressed by Pharao, turmoyled vp and downe in y^e Desert, beaten by the Philistines, ouerthrowne by the Assyrians, caryed away by the Babylonians, and troden vn∣der foote by all Nations? If the loue of God bring vs no better re∣ward than so, what gayne wee by being his people? Nay, it is to shewe vs, that our welfare dwelleth not heere belowe; that these Hosts which welcome vs into our Inne with smyling countenāce, doe cut our throtes in our beddes; that the reward of such as serue God, is not the world nor any worldly thing, but the very maker both of man and of the world. Then followeth there another pre∣cept; namely, Thou shalt loue thy neighbour as thy selfe. What would Carneades haue sayd, or rather what would hee not haue sayd, if he had examined this Commaundement? This Philoso∣pher being sent Ambassadour on a tyme from Athens to Rome, made an Oration of Iustice before Cato the Censor, whereof he spake wonders. The next day he made another, wherein he proued that it was but folly and fondnesse; or that the Romaines should be fayne to come backe againe to their Cotages, and that all traf∣ficke and whatsoeuer els it be whereby Cities are made to florish, would come to nought. What is to be sayd then of this law, which extendeth so farre as to say, not only, doe not that to others which you would not haue done to your selues; but also, doe that for o∣thers which you would haue done for your selues? And surely if our welfare consist in this world, what goodlier lawe can there bée, than for a man to loue himselfe and his owne, and to wrest all his neighbours affayres to his owne profite? And contrarywise what greater fondnesse, than to be another mans Baylie, that is to say, to procure oftentymes a mans owne losse? But the Philosopher was ignorant that godlinesse is the roote of Iustice, and that Cha∣ritie is nothing els but a rebounding backe of the loue which wee owe vnto God, vpon Mankind which is his Image. And the ay∣ming poynt of this Commaundement, which beeing restreyned

within one worde spreadeth it selfe throughout the whole lawe of Israell, is none other than to shewe vs that our chiefe dwelling place is elsewhere than heere, and that whereas we loue all things here for our own sakes, we ought to loue other men as our selues, and our selues for Gods sake, who is our sole and onely welfare. Hereunto doe all the Scriptures guyde vs, bee it by authoritie of the lawe, or by example of holy persons, or by the exhortations of the Prophetes: and there is not that lyne which twitcheth vs not by the eare, to waken vs out of the sléepe of this world; and which plucketh vs not from the stoole and the table, and from the glewing vanities that sticke so fast to vs; to bring vs backe to glorie and to the inioying of God who is our welfare. Seeing then that natu∣rally we thinke so little vppon this glorie of God; what a booke is that, which speaketh of nothing els? Séeing we be plūged so déepe in the world, and the world in vs; what a booke is that, which with∣draweth vs from it euery hower? And what would become of man if he had not another spirit than the spirit of man and of the world, which biddeth battell both to man and to the world? Soothly wee may well say therefore, that the Scriptures are verily of Gods in∣spiring, which haue so expresse resemblances of him, and so contra∣rie to the hand, stampe, print and writing of the whole world.

The xxv. Chapter.

That through out the whole processe of the Byble, or old Testament, there are things which cannot proceede but from God.

WE haue lerned heretofore by perusing the vni∣uersall world, that all things tend too Godds glorie; by the examining of man, that his onely and whole welfare is to cleaue vnto GOD. Now therefore fith we sée that the Scriptures preache vnto vs the same thing that wee haue read both in the world and in ourselues; ought it not to be a good proofe to vs, that he which made both the World and man, hath also made the Scriptures to rule them by? And that

he which hath spoken to all Nations by his Creatures, hath also voutsafed too shewe himselfe more nerely too them by his Scrip∣tures? Agein, séeing that the Scriptures commaund vs to loue God with all our hart, and that the Creatures haue heretofore de∣clared vs to be bound thereto; so as the Creatures teache the self∣same thing which the Scriptures commaund: what can we say but that both those bookes haue one selfesame author? Howbeit foras∣much as our eyes be so daseled by our fall, that the Creatures were vnto vs as a clasped booke, or as a thing written in Cyphers; God to apply himself to the weaknesse of our sight, hath giuen vs his Scriptures: and that forasmuch as our wills are wholly turned from him, it behoued vs to be comaunded our owne welfare, which (were we according to our first creation) we should couet and fol∣lowe earnestly at the only sight of the first booke. But forasmuch as it may still be sayd, that these bookes are rather the woorks of good men and of such as feared God, than of God himself: let vs sée if they haue not in them some proper and peculiar markes of Gods spirit. I meane such as no creature can be partaker of, but by inspiration from God. For like as in his dooings there are certeine miracles, wherein euen the wickeddest acknowledge the finger of God: So in his words or Scriptures, there may vndoubtedly bee some such thing, as cannot procéede but from God himselfe. Let vs begin at the Style.* 1.735 In mens affayres we haue two sorts of writing. The inferiour sort and men of equalitie, indeuer to perswade folke by apparant reasons; for they knowe they haue no authoritie to giue them credite. But Princes will of their mere authoritie looke to bée beléeued whatsoeuer they say: for they thinke they haue the world at their commaundement, and that they may speak what they list: and they suppose it to bee some derogation to them to alledge any reason. Also in humane Sciences the case is all one. For the Phi∣sition is beléeued of his Patient without alledging why: but of an other Phisition he is not so. Likewise the Schoolemaister is belée∣ued of the Scholer, yea euen in things which were disputable for him with one of his fellowes. So much more therefore shall this rule take place in matters diuine, which surmount both the vnder∣standing of the learner, and the skill of the Teacher himselfe. A∣gaine, we see how the Philosophers doe mount vp from things e∣uidently knowne to things lesse knowne, and from Grounds and Principles, to Conclusions. And therefore Aristotle intending to proue that there is a God, made a whole score of bookes of it: and

Plato speaking of things diuine, will haue the auncient Oracles to be beleeued, and not his owne sayings: which argeweth that euen by nature men knowe well, that they deserue not to bee beléeued, further foorth than they make proof, no not euen in the least things; and therefore that they bee worthie to be laughed at, if they thinke their sayings to be authoritie in matters diuine. Now then, sith it is so that the Style is such both of all men in their common dis∣courses, and of all the Philosophers in high matters: what shal the Author of our Byble bee, whose will and meaning is to bee belée∣ued vppon his bare worde, euen in the things which excéede both the naturall beléefe of such as heare them, and the vnderstanding of all men which take vpon them to speake of them? GOD crea∣ted Heauen and Earth: Man is falne from his originall state by sinne. If thou beest a man that sayest it, who will beléeue thee vnlesse thou prooue it? And yet notwithstanding it appeareth that hee wrate it to bee beléeued: for hee commaundeth it to bee belée∣ued. Therefore his speaking is of authoritie, and not by perswasi∣on. Yet notwithstanding no body is beléeued vpon his bare word, sauing in things which lye in his own power and his owne know∣ledge. Whosoeuer then in things surmounting man, (I meane in matters concerning GOD and mans saluation) will looke to bee beléeued of authoritie, only because he sayes it; yea and to be more beléeued without proofe, than others vpon proof; must néedes be the Prince and Father of man and not a man. Now, who sees not this course kept throughout all the Scriptures; and yet where is there any one Syllogisme or Demonstration in them? sauing such as these which soothly be more firme than any Syllogisme, and more néedefull than any Demonstration; namely, The Lord hath sayde it, and it is doone; the Lord hath spoken it, and he will be beléeues. And what other booke find we which proceedeth after that maner, howbeit that some deceiuers haue long time since presumed to im∣mitate the same?

Also we haue many bookes of maners written by the Heathen. How procéede they against Uice? or how deale they with Uertue? They define, they distinguish, they dispute of the generall and of the vnderkind, of the meane and of the extremes. It is spoken (say they) from one Countermatch to another. And if they offend the Lawes of Logicke, they be afrayd of reproof.* 1.736 The Lawes of God speake a little more plainly: He that stealeth shall pay fowerfold: He that killeth shalbe punished with death, Which is as much to

say, as that the authoritie of the one dependeth vpon their power, & the authority of y^e other dependeth vpon their proof. To be short, euen our spéeche extendeth ordinarily no further than our power: and therefore the Teacher speaketh after another maner then the Learner, the Prince than the Subiect, and the Senatour than the Orator. What maner a booke then I pray you is this, which spea∣keth to all men alike, to Kings as to Subiectes, to Greate as to small, to old as to yong, to learned as to vnlearned; sauing that it surmounteth the capacitie of the one as well as of the other? ney∣ther intreating nor perswading any man, but absolutely bidding or forbidding al men. Nother (which more is) doth it say to any man, Thou shalt liue as a recluce within y^e precinct of thyne owne house all thy life long, or thou shalt lye in continual prison; but thou shalt liue or dye for euer without ende. In what other booke reade wee such commaundements? Ye in what booke reade we such punish∣ments & such rewards? And if euery bodies speaking be according to the abilitie of his power; from whom is this spéech which dareth pronounce or threaten euerlasting things, but from the partie him selfe that is euerlasing? If it be a creature that speaketh it, either it is a good creature or an euill. If it be an euill creature, why for∣biddeth he euill so rigorously? and commaundeth good so expres∣ly? or (to say better) how commeth it to passe, that the mark which hee aimeth at is Gods glorie and our welfare? Or if it bee a good Creature, how happeneth it that hee chalendgeth to himselfe that which belongeth to GOD, and which cannot be imparted to any Creature, which is the very sinne that ouerthrewe both the Diuell into Hell, and man into destruction? And if it be no Creature nei∣ther good nor bad; what remayneth then, but that it must needes be the Creator? Now what leafe is there in the whole Scripture, where wee meete not with such matter? And herewithall wee see that thing in the obseruers of that Lawe, which is not read of any others: namely that they haue yeelded their lyues, and incurred the hatred & disdeine of the whole worlde, rather than they would breake or despise it. Uerily euen in this respect and none other, that they were sure that they serued such a Lawegiuer, as not only had power ouer the barke of man and ouer this present wretched lyfe as other common Lawgiuers haue; but also was of power to giue either euerlasting lyfe or endlesse death. The same appeareth yet more, in that the lawes which are giuen to men in the Scriptures, are not inioyned alonely to the outward man; but doe pearce euen

to the heart of man. In deede they require Sacrifices; but yet they preferre obedience. They inioyne fasting; but that is from sinne. They inioyne Circumcision, but it is the Circumcision of the hart. To be short, for a Summary of al Sinnes, they forbid lusting and couering; which thing (as I haue sayd afore) is not to bee found in any law of the Heathen. Who I pray you knoweth the very ana∣tomie and secret conceyts of our hearts, but he that made them? Or who can looke into Man, but the maker of Man? And who is he ei∣ther Man or Deuill, that euer durst presume to inioyne a lawe to mens thoughts? But all these things come still to this poynt, that the partie which speaketh so vpon authoritie, threatening things that excéede mans abilitie, and making a law for the things where∣vnto we cannot come; must of necessitie be of more power than we.

Agein, what a number of things haue wee taught vs in the Scriptures,* 1.737 which cannot bréede of mannes brayne, nor come from elswhere than from about? And if they cannot bréede in his mind, how can they come from his hand or from his mouth? We can wel say there is one God; for if wee enter into our selues wee find him there; and if we goe neuer so little out of ourselues, we meete him euery where. But that in one Essence there should be thrée persons, the Father, the woord, and the Spirit; how can it bréede in the ima∣gination of man? Or who could euer haue thought of it? Also, from the Creatures wee come to the Creator; from mouing to a rest; from nouelties to a beginning: and there mannes reasoning stayes. But although the first man myght knowe when hee was created; yet how could he haue knowen when the world was crea∣ted? And although that by the new things therein, we déeme it too be newe: who euer durst to haue limited the first day and the first houre thereof? Or how could that Chymera haue come in any mannes mynd? And yet in verie déede we haue dyuers Chymeras among the auncient writers, concerning the Creation of the world according to the diuersities of opinions that were among the Phi∣losophers, and the diuersities of imaginations among the comon people. But was there euer any afore this booke of the Byble, that began his account of tymes or his historie, at the first day of the world, thought he were of opinion that the world was created? And séeing that the intent of al wryters of stories is to be beléeued; what els had this beginning of an historie at that poynt bin, but a crac∣king of his credit at his first enterance in, if the maiestie of the Au∣thor had not serued for a warrant? Lykewise, that man, to attayne

to his appoynted end, néeded the handywoorke of God himself; It ap••eareth vnto vs by the weaknesse of our nature. But that for the appeasing of Gods Iustice, God himself should be fayne too come downe and to take mans flesh vnto him; who would say it but only God? and who could bee beléeued in that case but only he? So is it also concerning the conception of the Uirgin, concerning the pro∣mises that were not to come to passe vntill fower hundred yéeres after, cōcerning the comming of the Messias, and such like things; which would neuer haue come in a mans head to haue written: so farre of are they from mans wit, I meane as of it self and without imitation. And I dare boldly say, that whosoeuer readeth y^e Scrip∣tures aduisedly and with intent to marke them; shall in euery booke finde many matters, which euen by his owne iudgement had neuer come in mans mynd, notwithstanding that they be spoken by wise men, who both beléeued them firmely, and ment to bee beléeued in speaking them.

What shal we say then to the Prophesyings* 1.738 or true foretellings which are sowen euerywhere in the Scriptures, that is to wit of Gods spirit which is shed foorth from the one ende to the other; I say not in scattered leaues as the Prophesies of Sybil were, but ai∣ming al at one poynt, notwithstanding that they were vttered both at diuers tymes, by diuers persons, and in diuers places? I omit the first Prophesie concerning the womans seede that should crush the Serpents head, and such like perteyning to the redemption of man by the Messias, because that that doctrine shall haue his pro∣per place hereafter; and I will alledge none other things than such as are alreadie proued and out of controuersie. Unto Abraham was giuen this promise:* 1.739 They seede shall doe seruice in a strange Land, and bee hardly intreated there fower hundred yeeres; and then will I iudge the Nation whom they shall haue ser∣ued; and in the fourth generation shall they come hether a∣gaine. What Oracle did euer foretell a thing so precisely, so mani∣festly, and so long aforehand? And yet was that Prophesie fulfilled at the appoynted tyme: and it cannot be sayd to be a counterfet; for Moyses in leading the people of Israell through so many turna∣gaines, grounded himselfe vpon none other thing. And it stood him on hand to speake of a Prophesie that was common among them, and deliuered from hand to hand, considering that he taketh it for his theam and ankerhold, both to speake vpon and to worke vpon. And soothly, as it was receiued by Abraham, so was it receyued by

Moyses, and put in execution by Iosua. Iacob made his Testa∣ment in AEgipt; wherein there are as many Prophesies as words: not for his owne Childrē only, but also for the Trybes that should come of them. Neuerthelesse I will stand but vppon one of them. Thou Iuda (sayth he) thy brothers shall commend thee,* 1.740 & thy fathers Children shall yeeld thee reuerence. And the Scepter shall not be taken from Iuda, nor the Law maker frō betweene his feete, vntill Silo come. The effect hereof is, that the Scepter shall remayne with Iuda, and that he shall haue souereine iurisdic∣tion, vntill the tyme of Messias: and so do the Hebrewes interpret it. Yet were Ruben, Simeon, and Leuie the eldest brethren of Ia∣cobs house; and therefore his doing was against the order of na∣ture. And Moyses who led the people of Israell out of AEgipt, was of the Trybe of Leuie. Iosua who brought them into the Land of Canaan, was of Ephraim: The Iudges were raysed vp one while out of one Trybe and auother while out of another: and Saule the first King chosen by the people, was of the Trybe of Beniamin, which was the yoongest of all. These things therefore were a curst shaking to the Prophesie. In the meane while the Scepter passed from Saule to Dauid, from a King to a yoong Shepheard of Iuda, and there was settled for euer, notwithstanding the murmurings of the ten Trybes against it, and the falling away of Israell, & the Captiuitie of Babylon. And whereas he sayth, vntill Silo come, it sufficed vntill another tyme, that by the sapce of two thousande yéeres, the house of Iuda reigned still in Israell, and had the elder∣ship, together with a direct obserued pedegree: which thing wee reade not of any other stocke in the world. Here they will say, who shall assure vs that Iacob spake those things? If I should aske them as much concerning their Histories, what knowe they more of them? And what should Moyses haue gayned by the deuising thereof, being himselfe of the Trybe of Leuie, and giuing ouer his charge to one of the Trybe of Ephraim, which had rather bene an occasion to make Iuda (which was the strongest of al the Trybes) to grudge against him, seeing that that Trybe had bene authorised both by Iacobs last will and by answer from God? Or if he did it to greatefie Iuda, why was he not afrayd to displease Ruben, Si∣meon, and Leuie: or rather why made he not the Prophesie to fall vpon Leuie to authorise himselfe? Nay, what gratefying of Iuda could it yet be, considering that Iuda was excluded from it at that tyme, and came not to it a thousand yéeres after? Surely (the fore∣sayd

circumstances being well weyed) eyther there was neuer any Prophesie vncorruptly reported, or if euer any were, this must néedes be it. And as touching these good Philosophers, which will haue prophesying to procéed of a coniunction of the vnderstanding which they call Possible, with an vnderstanding which they terme Separated, by meane of imagination: & that old men cannot Pro∣phesie by reason of y^e weakenesse of their imaginatiue power: what wil they say here to Iacob, who was an older man thā any of their tyme,* 1.741 & yet notwithstāding saw so cléerly & so farre of? For if their doctrine be commonly true, and yet notwithstanding, olde Iacob prophesied; doeth it not followe that his prophesie is extraordina∣rie, and commeth from a higher power than the sayd pretensed vn∣derstanding; that is to wit from God? And if his prophesying was according to their rule; doth it not followe that their doctrine is false, that is to wit, that prophesying commeth not of the force of our imagination, nor of our selues, considering that it weakeneth not with vs, but that it cometh by inspiration from God? In the blessings that Iacob gaue to his posteritie, the matter ought not to be passed ouer so lightly, where hee speaketh of the partes that should be allotted to euery of his Children in the Land of Canaan, as if he had made them himselfe, assigning to one the Seacoast, to another the Cornecountrie, and to another the vynegrounds, euen after the same sort that they were diuided vnto them certeine hun∣dred yeeres after by lot. For how could he come to the knowledge thereof, but by him that ouerruleth all Lots? And seeing that the foretellings of Astrologie are a meane betwéene necessitie and ca∣suall as Ptolomie teacheth; and nothing is more casual than lots, what maner of Astrologie is this, which iudgeth of lottes both so long aforehand and also so certeinly? But when as in the chapter going next afore, wee reade that Iacob in blessing the Children of Ioseph, preferred Ephraim the yonger Sonne before Manasses who was the elder, and being warned thereof by their Father, an∣swered ageine that he was not deceiued, but that the yonger bro∣ther should bee the greater, and that his Seede should growe to a multitude of people: what arte moued Iacob to say it, or what pro∣fit moued Moyses to contriue it? If ye say Phiznomie or Iudicia∣rie, the good old man was blind. But what lineamēts can foreshew for a whole race, or what Constellations can shewe what shall be∣fall to whole Nations that are yet vnborne? If it bee sayde that Moyses loued the one better than the other: The two of whom he

speaketh were already dead at that time, and the people that were to come of them, were but then in comming. And yet was that prophesie fulfilled; for the Trybe of Ephraim was alwayes migh∣tier than the Trybe of Manasses, as appeareth throughout the whole processe of their Histories, and in the end the kingdom of the Tenne Trybes was grounded chiefly vpon that. And in confir∣mation of this word, as oft as Moyses, Iosua, the bookes of Kings, or the Chronicles speake of those two Children, the yongest is e∣uer named afore the eldest: which thing vndoubtedly the Trybe of Manasses would neuer haue indured without taking exceptio to it, if they had not thought themselues to haue rested vpon the will of GOD, and not vpon the fancie of man. What shall we say of Moyses? Hee speaketh to the people continually of the Conquest of Chanaan, according to that promise, and therfore it must néedes he that it was a prophesie very commonly knowen among them. And in déede Ioseph picked out a long time for it afore his buriall. Nay, moreouer Moyses deuideth the Land vnto them in mynd; appointeth them arbitrators to make their partitions; giueth them Lawes to settle themselues vpon; appointeth them what orders they should kéepe there, setteth them doune the platformes of their Cities, Suburbes, and houses; inioyneth them the tilling of their grounds, the resting of the se••••••th yere, their Feastes and Solem∣nities, and appointest them their Cities of refuge for casuall man∣slaughters. A man might say that his speaking of these things was as if a Father should dispose of his goods that he had gotten, and which hee had already in his hand. What lykelyhod hereof was there, at such tyme as they burned Bricke in AEgipt? or when they lingered in the wildernes? yea or at the returne of the men that were sent to spye out the Land, when they reported nothing but hardnesse to the people? I pray you, if a man should at this day part Italy or Greece among vs in his imagination, to euery of vs share and share lyke; would we not say accxsording to the prouerbe, that he parted his Uenison before he had caught it? And yet what a nomber of men haue passed the Alpes vnder the Standard? And sith it is so that Moyses entered into that Land, and those which wayted for it dyed in the way, and yet that at the tyme appointed, the Chananites gaue place to that people: who seeth not that of necessitie the same people were driuen by some other than man to followe Moyses, yea Moyses himself to take vpon him the leading of them through so many distresses; both of them being grounded

(say I) not vppon mans fancie, but vppon expresse promise which they by vnfallible records beléeued to be of God? But hée procee∣deth yet further. For as he foresawe them in Chanaan afore they came there: so foresawe hee them there to offend God by seruing Baal after they came there. I say he saw them forget GOD, and God myndfull of them in his wrath: hee sawe them dispersed and scattered ouer the fower quarters of the World, and troden vnder the féete of Straungers: To be short, he sawe the Gentiles called of God into his Church in their place; yea and he sawe it so cléerly, that he foretold it to them all in his Song,* 1.742 which hée willed them to preserue from hand to hand, as a witnesse against them & a dis∣charge to himself. Though from the top of Mount Nebo he could behold the land of Chanaan to speake so fitly thereof: from what mountaine could hee see the things that were yet in the reynes and heartes of men as then to come, yea which lay hidden yet many hundred yeres after; or in what booke could he haue seen them and read them; but in the booke of lyfe, that is to say in God himselfe? The word that was spoken by Moyses was performed word for word by Iosua, without adding or diminishing any whit, contrarie to the ambitious mynd of man which lyketh not to follow another mans lure; which thing was no small signe that Iosua did not so much obey Moyses, as God speaking by Moyses. And this curse that Iosua* 1.743 pronounceth in his booke, ageinst the man that should build Iericho ageine, is not to be forgotten: He shal lay the foun∣dation thereof vpon his firstborne (sayth he) & set vp the gates thereof vpon his yongest sonne. That is to say, he shalbe puni∣shed with the suddein death of all his Children.* 1.744 For about fiuehun∣dred yeres after, in the time of Achab, Hiel of Bethel builded vp Iericho, the which he founded vpon Abiram his first Sonne, and hung vp the gates of it with the death of Segus his yongest sonne, and the booke of Kings sayth there, it was according as the Lord had spoken by the mouth of Iosua the Sonne of Nun, to shewe that Gods word is euerlasting, and that it neuer ouerslippeth the tyme. And in very déede it lyeth ouerthrowen at this day, and was neuer repayred since that tyme, howbeit that the beautifull situati∣on thereof might haue allured euery man, as we reade in the aun∣cient Geographers. In the bookes of Iosua and of the Iudges wee sée the things performed which were foretolde by Moyses, and the comming to passe both of the promises & of the threates that were made by him. For accordingly as the people of Israell did either

turne away from God or returne vnto him; God raysed vp Ty∣rants in Chanaan to punish them, or deliuerers in Israell to de∣liuer them. And as for the bookes of Samuel, of the Kings, and of the Prophetes; either they be prophesies of effectes to come, or ef∣fectes of prophesies forepast. To be short, in all the discourse of the Byble, there is not any season to bee found without both Prophet and Prophesie, as well in prosperitie as in aduersitie: Whereby we might sée both the heauenlines and the trueth of them the more clearly, if we could set the places, persones, and state of that time before our eyes. But out of this continuall prophesying, wee will drawe some peculiar poyntes, so euident as cannot bée gaynesaid, which will vndoubtedly be of credit among all indifferent persons.* 1.745 At such time as Ieroboam the sonnne of Nebath made the tenne Trybes to fall away from Roboam the Sonne of Salomon; to the intent they should haue no occasion to returne againe to their former state by resorting to Hierusalem to woorshippe there: hee réered an Alter in Bethell contrarie to the Lawe of God. Then came a man of God (sayeth the historie) to Bethel by the com∣maundement of the Lord, and sayd to Ieroboam; Behold, a Sonne shalbe born of the house of Dauid, whose name shalbe Iosias. He shall sacrifise vppon thee the Preestes of the Hillal∣ters which offer incense vpon thee: And this shalbe the signe thereof,* 1.746 Thyne altar shall ryue asunder, and the asshes that are thereon shalbe powred downe. This Prophesie was fulfilled in all poynts by Iosias thrée hundred yéeres after. And when Iosias (sayeth the historie) had so done, he sawe a certeine tumbe, and as∣ked whose it was, intending to haue burnt the bones of him that lay there, as he had done of the other préests in Bethel. But it was told him that it was the tumb of the man of God, which had foretold those things so long agoe: whereuppon hee forbade any man to touche it. Now they that knowe how those bookes of the Kinges were disposed, wilnot call the historie in question. For the histories of the Kings were written by the priests and Prophets, according to the measure of the time that they reigned, and were holden so ho∣ly, that it was felonie to touche them. Furthermore, séeing if this Prophesie was written afore the comming of Iosias, it could not be falsified: for who could haue hit vppon his proper name? And if it were written after, and deuised vppon the euent: how came the sayd Tumb to bee made at the same instant? Or was there none other deuise wherewith to haue disguised it, without taking any

further peyne? Myght it not haue suffised to haue sayd, One Iosi∣as shall come &c. without speaking eyther of the death of the man of God, or of his méeting with the Lyon, or of the talk which he had with the Prophet of Samaria; but that he must take peyne to be found a Lyer by the Samaritans which knew the originall of y^e Tumb, or could at leastwise haue inquired it? But in verie déede this Prophesie which dooth so set downe the name, the place, and the circumstances in the doing; is such as cannot bee fathered but vpon God, as vnto whome alone things absent or to come are pre∣sent. And to shewe the vncorruptnesse of the Scripture the more cléerly, it cōcealeth not that the same man of God by whose mouth God had vttered the sayd Prophesie, was slaine by a Lyon for go∣ing back ageine to eate with the Prophet of Samaria contrarie to the word of the Lord: which doth vs to vnderstand, that men are nothing of themselues, but onely so farforth as they be Gods tooles and instruments. Now then by what coniecture can we deeme that man to haue bin the deuiser of a lye, who to tell the trueth, sticked not to dishonor the remembrance of so great a Prophet, whose sin∣ceritie appéered by so many circumstances?

Wonderfull is Esay in the things that hee foretelleth concer∣ning the kingdome of the Messias and the calling of the Gentiles for he seemeth rather an Euangelist than a Prophet. Also when he threateneth Hierusalem with the captiuitie of Babylone, or chée∣reth them ageine with hope of their deliuerance: his maner of indi∣ting sheweth, that he speaketh as one that sawe them both; and in that respect also were y^e Prophets called Seërs. And in very trueth, he saith not, the Lord will doe, the Lord will call, the Lorde will destroy, and so foorth: but, he doth, he calleth, he destroyeth: Yea and oftentimes, he hath done, he hath called, he hath de∣stroyed, and so foorth; as though he spake not of things that were but onely néere the execution or performance; but of things alrea∣dy come to passe. After that maner did he foretel things, in the time that the people prospered and trusted in the allyance of the Chal∣dees, and that all likelihods were to the contrarie. But I aske of such as doubt of our Prophesies,* 1.747 by what spirite could Esay say; I am the Lord that doeth things in deede, which doe say vnto Cyrus, Thou art my Shepherd, thou shalt fulfill al my will: and which sayeth vnto Hierusalem, Thou shalt be builded ageine; & vnto the Temple, Thou shalt be founded agein. And ageine: Thus sayth the Lord to Cyrus his anoynted, whom I haue ta∣taken

by the right hand to subdue the Nations before him, & to weaken the reynes of Kings. I will goe before thee, and le∣uell the croked wayes. I will breake open the Brazen gates, & wring asunder the yron barres, and so foorth, that thou mayst knowe how that I am the Lord the God of Israell which cal∣leth thee by the name. For loue of my seruant Iacob, and for Israels sake haue I named thee by thy name, and called thee though thou knewest me not, &c. How many wonders shall we find in these fewe words, if wee list to examine them? At the same tyme that the people of Israel triumphed vnder their allyance with the Chaldees, Esay threatened them with destruction by the selfe∣same people. This is somewhat.

But some will say that mans wisedome may reache as farre as that. Yea, but he foretelleth, not onely the captiuitie of that people, the sacking of the Cittie, and the ouerthrowe of the Temple: but also the destruction of the Chaldees by the Persians, and the buil∣ding vp of Hierusalem and the Temple by them again. Well may mans skill wade into Wéekes and monethes; but considering the vncerteintie of worldly matters, it can neuer wade into yéeres, and much lesse into hundreds of yeres, and into the whole continuance of a mightie and long lasting Monarchie, as Esay doth there. In so much that hee nameth Cyrus a hundred yeeres afore hee was borne. And afore his Graundfathers were named in the world, hée calleth him by name to deliuer Israel. And in another place he sum∣moneth the people of Cethim (that is to say of Macedonie) to the destroying of the Persians. And in his eight Chapter he taketh V∣rias and Zacharias the sonnes of Iebarachias by name to be wit∣nesses of his Prophesie, who were vnborne a hundred yeres after. Let the greatest enemies of the trueth enter into their owne con∣sciences, and tell me what humane skill or cunning there could be in those things. They cannot say here, that these Prophesies were forged by some man vpon the euent. For by the remouing of the Iewes vnto Babylon, the Lawes, Prophesies and Scriptures of Israell which were cōmon among that people, were conueied into diuers places of the world; amōg the which they had this Prophe∣sie afore Cyrus was borne: and beeing in diuers mens hands, it was vnpossible to be falsified. And in good sooth, sith we see that the Kings of Persia being conquerours, caused the Temple to be buil∣ded ageine, it ought to bee a marke vnto vs, that in the Idolatrie out of which they came, they had séene wonders of the God of Is∣raell,

and that according to Esaies saying, they perceiued them∣selues to be called by him. The same is to bee considered of vs in Icremie and Ezechiell, who beeing in places farre one from ano∣ther, the one in Ierusalem and the other in captiuitie at Babylon, foretell the selfesame things, as sure Registers of one Court. But Ieremie* 1.748 is the more wonderfull in this behalfe, in that he prophe∣sieth expresly that the people which were caryed away prisoners, should bee brought home againe at the ende of thréescore and ten yeeres, contrary to all likelyhood, and yet with such assurednesse, as a man would verely haue sayd, that he had led them home againe by the hand into Hierusalem. And in very déede, at the thréescore and tenth yeeres end, the people were conueyed home againe at the forenamed instant, as though Cyrus had bene bent of set purpose to verifie the Prophesie, or as though hee had bene waged by the Prophet. And it appeareth by the nineth Chapter of Danyell, (where this prophesie is alledged,) that it was common among al the people. As for Danyell* 1.749 himselfe, who being borne vnder the first Monarchie, seemeth rather an Historiographer than a Pro∣phet, as in respect of the Monarchies and things that insewed; (for he speaketh of the Persians, Greekes and Romaines, of the tyran∣nie of Antiochus, of the vnhallowing of the Temple, and of other things that were done sixe hundred yeeres after his tyme, as of things alreadie come to passe): like as he closeth vp the Prophesie from the creation of the world to the comming of Christ; so ought he to stop all mens mouthes that will speake against him. For if a man wil not beleue the Iewish Chronicles, in that they report that the Prophesie of Danyell was read vnto Great Alexander at his comming to Hierusalem, to shewe him what was foretold of him: yet is it euident and cannot bee denyed, but that when Prolomie caused the Scriptures to be translated, the Prophesie of Danyell was then extant, and was translated with the residue; which was long tyme afore the Tyrannie of Antiochus, the which he descri∣beth to the eye. And therefore if it could not bee falsified in that be∣halfe, as little could it be falsified in all the rest, considering that all of it doth equally and infinitely exceede the reach of all creatures, and cannot proceede from any moe than one Spirit. Now then, let vs looke vpon the things that are in this Prophet; and whence could hee haue them,* 1.750 but from him that maketh and vnmaketh Kings at his pleasure? He forewarned Balsasar the sonne of Na∣bugodonozor, that he should haue a fall, because he had not taken

example at the chastisement of his father, but had aduaunced him∣selfe against God. It will perhaps bee sayd, that it is the saying of wise men, that when pride goes afore, shame commeth after. But when as Balsasar was slayne that same night in the middest of his iolitie; it was a marking of the thing more precisely, which had bin foretold by the former Prophets also.* 1.751 But in that which followeth there is no shift at all. Behold, Darius was but newly entered into the Monarchie, when euen in the first yeere of his reigne Danyell sayd vnto him, Three Kings shall stand vp yet in Persia, and the fourth shall be inriched with great riches aboue them all; and when hee is so increased,* 1.752 hee shall stirre vp euery man against Greece. These fower or fiue words conteyne the historie of seuen or eight score yéeres. We haue great learned men, which by reason of their long experience, haue made (as it were) an Anatomy of our state: but which of them I pray you durst euer take vpon him to tell how many Kings should come after, and much lesse to foretell what should be done by the fourth King that was to come as Da∣nyell doth here, who maketh expresse mention of Darius voyage against the Greekes? Let vs heare him yet further. But a mightie King shall rise vp (sayth hee) and reigne with great authoritie, and do whatsoeuer he will. Who seeth not here how Alexander commeth out of Greece against Darius, and subdueth the Per∣sians? And when he is in al his royaltie (sayth he) his kingdome shall be broken and diuided to the fower windes of the ayre, how beit not to his own race, but vnto strangers; for his king∣dome shalbe plucked vp by the roote. He could not haue payn∣ted out Alexanders Monarchie more liuely, which was but as a flash of lightening that passeth from the West into the East, and tooke ende in it selfe, and was deuided into many Kingdomes, as Macedonie, Thrace, Syria, and AEgipt, among Princes that were not of his race. Whosoeuer would haue made an Abridgement of the whole Historie of the Monarchie of Greece in fewe words; he could not lightly haue done it in other than these. Neuerthelesse, it is a glauncing ouerthwart through two Monarchies & two whole hundred yeeres, whereas all the wisedome of the world put toge∣ther, could not ouersee so much as two yeeres, no not euen in the commonest affayres of a household. Now, the storie of the Mace∣dones was not the thing that he aimed at: but the chiefe thing that hee sought into, was the state of the Church to come among the Iewes; and therefore he letteth the rest of the braunches alone, and

goeth on but only with the Kings of Syria and AEgipt. Therefore let vs reade the residue of the Chapter. There he paynteth out the warres of Antiochus King of Syria against the Iewes, the resi∣stance of the Machabees, the oppression of the righteous, and the defyling of all holy things, so liuely and manifestly, that he which were not told of it afore he reades it, should not be able to say whe∣ther it were a Prophesie or an Historie.* 1.753 In his eight Chapter he describeth a battell betweene a Ram and a Goate. The Ram (saith he) that had two hornes, is the King of Medes and Persians, because those two states went ioyntly together. The Goate is the King of Greece; & the great horne that he had betweene his eyes, is the greatest King, that is to wit the great Alexander: and yet none of them both liued sixe score yeeres after.* 1.754 In the se∣uenth Chapter he describeth al the fower Monarchies, but special∣ly the Romaine; which had (sayth he) teeth of yron, wherewith it brake and deuoured all the rest. And he purseweth it so farre, that he declareth himselfe to haue had a sight in his mynd, both of the breeding, of the proceeding, and of the decaying therof. If we con∣sider what Rome was at that time, it was then scarce hatched: and a great while afterwarde, Alexander hauing but a small cut ouer the Sea that is betwixt that and Greece,* 1.755 knewe it not. To bee short, in the nineth Chapter he foretelleth that at the end of three-score and ten wéekes, (accounting from the day that the word was vttered by Ieremie for the buylding vp of the Temple agayne,) Hierusalem should be destroyed by a prince of the people that was to come, that is to say, by an Emperour issewing from the Com∣monweale of Rome, which at that tyme was not in being: which thing I could shew here to haue come to passe at the instaut afore∣named, according to the Prophesie. But forasmuch as this poynt perteyneth properly to the comming of the Messias, wherunto we reserue many things that may confirme vs more and more in the holy Scriptures, it shall bee treated of in his peculiar place. Now then, we haue here a continuance of wonderfull Prophesies, from the creation of the world euen vnto Christ, vttered and set foorth a long while afore hand, and come to passe iust in their tymes; not generall, but marked with their circumstances; not doubtfull, but such as expresse the things and persons by their names. And ther∣fore to knit vp this matter withall, I demaund vnto what we may attribute them, but to the inspiration of GOD•• Some in stead of holding themselues within their bounds, will néedes ouerleape

them, by denying al. But besides the reasons afore alledged, séeing that at the same tyme that the Israelites worshipped their God, the Nations about them had Oracles which answered vnto all questions; and that man is so inquisitiue of things to come, that if he cannot bee certified at home, he seeketh euerywhere abroade: I would haue them to answer me, whether this people were of ano∣ther nature than all other Nations, whom we knowe to be yet still at this day more giuen to prophesyings than any other Nation? And how being so giuen thereunto and not hauing aught at home wherewith to satisfie their curiositie, they could in the middest of so many miseries, hold themselues to the seruing of the one GOD, who alone of all others did not speake, but alonly had kept silence to all their requestes? For if it seeme straunge and myraculous vn∣to vs to haue had Prophesies: much more straunge and myraculous ought it to bee, to haue made more account of a God that gaue no answers at all, specially in so many distresses and oppressions; than of the Gods of the Heathen which did nothing els.

But forasmuch as none of the men of olde tyme was so impu∣dent as to deny them,* 1.756 but all were inforced either to woonder at them, or to alledge causes to diminish the estimation of them, Let vs examine the reasons which they giue them. One saies that they were tyed to the Starres, and yet they mocked at the diuinations of the Chaldees euery where. Now then, of so many Astrologers as were among the Gentiles, and haue made bookes thereof, name me any one that hath foretold the doings, not of an Empire, but of some one man: not a hundred yeeres aforehand, but a yeere afore∣hand, sauing that the diuell now and then by Gods sufferance, hath executed the same euill which hee himselfe foretold vpon the partie that asked counsell of him. But Ptolomie wil say, the foretellings of the Astrologers are a meane betwéene necessitie and chaunce: for they foresée not the euentes or fallings out, but ouely the inclinati∣ons or dispositions of things, & as many as promise any further, doe but abuse men. What thinke wee then that this Ptolomie would haue sayd, if he had read these prophesies, so particular,* 1.757 that they séeme rather stories of things past, than foretellings of things to come. Surely he would haue sayd that they could not haue pro∣ceeded but onely from God, as he setteth downe and deemeth very wel in letter things: And that they which foretell particular things must needes be inspired of God: And agein, that the iudgements of such as gaze vpon the Starres, are doubtfull, howbeit that they

which foretell the good part, approch neerer the trueth, by reason of a certeine power that beareth sway in their Soule, although that otherwile they haue no skill at all in the arte. And in very deede, the best Astronomers haue reiected Iudiciall Astrologie, as in vain and without foundation, yea euen after they haue well tyred them∣selues in it. But in Israel we reade of a Neateheard called Amos, whose Prophesies were no lesse euident for the matters they trea∣ted of, than were the Prophesies of Daniell and Esay. Auerrhoes and his followers haue a peculiar opinion of mans Soule, name∣ly that we haue a certaine capacitie of vnderstanding, which they terme an vnderstanding in possibility, the which informeth and tea∣cheth by the working of an vniuersall mynd, which by the particu∣lar imaginations of euery man, commeth to be ioyned to the vn∣derstanding in possibilitie that is common to all.* 1.758 And therefore they say that Prophesying proceedeth properly of that Coniuncti∣on in men that haue a strong and liuely imagination. If it be so, I would haue the disciples of Auerrhoes (who had so goodly an ima∣gination,) to imagine this, to shewe mee some Prophesie of their Maisters or of their owne. Also let them answere mée how it hap∣peneth that our Prophetes for the most part haue commonly bent old men, seeing that (after their doctrine,) old men cannot Prophe∣sie by reason of the féeblenes of their imagination? But forasmuch as these men doe preache vnto vs that the worlde is eternall; how happeneth it that Prophesying hath not bene instilled into men by the sayde coniunction, euerlastingly concerning tyme, and in all tymes, séeing that to become a Prophet, there néedeth no more but to haue a very strong imagination? forasmuch as the separated vn∣derstandings are euermore readie and disposed to the said Coniun∣tion? How happeneth it also that a man being come to that point, Prophesieth not of all things that he can imagine? But hereby we see manifestly that this Prophesying of theirs is not an habit, but a passion that fadeth a way like the sound of a Lute, when the play∣er ceasseth to strike. Or if they say that a man must first get him both the actiue and the contemplatiue habits,* 1.759 and then the said vn∣derstanding matcheth it selfe with our imagination, as the forme of a thing matcheth with the substance thereof, whereof commeth it that Dauid being a Shepheard and Amos a Neteheard, did pro∣phesie so wonderfully? Some will haue it, that Prophesying is deriued into man by the Starres, conditionally that he be disposed to receiue it. Herevpon they prescribe him a certeine diet; where∣by

he must make his body equall and euenly counterpeysed by Al∣chimie; and afterward he must gather togither the Beames of the Skie into a mirrour, which they call Alchemusie, made according to the Rules of Catoptrik: and finally he must stellifie by Astrolo∣gie as well the man himselfe, as the foode that he vseth. And they say that Apollonius of Thianey prophesied after y^t maner. These are Toyes to bee laughed at, rather then worthie to bee answered. And let euery man consider, whether our Prophetes being She∣pherds, Neateheards and vnlearned, were framed with such curi∣ousnes, to Prophesie according to diet. Nay when his wittes bee somewhat well wakened, he shall perceiue that they were inspired with things which the Starres could neither doe, nor betoken, nor knowe, forasmuch as they bee still in the hand of the first cause, and are not come downe so lowe as to bee subiect to the second causes.

The Platonists therfore come somewhat nearer the truth, speci∣ally Iamblychus and Porphyrius by name. For they say that the foretelling of things farre of aforehand, cannot be done nother by art nor by nature, but only by inspiration from God. Howbeit for∣asmuch as they speake of many Gods, and tooke the diuels for An∣gells it may be obiected ageinst vs, that our Prophesies proceeded eyther from diuells or from Angells. But if we call to mynd the Oracles of diuells, and compare them with our Prophesies, there will appeare as much difference betwixt them, as is betweene the discretion of a wise man, and the tittlecattle of a foole. Therefore let vs heare what they say. The Gods (sayeth Porphyrius) foretel naturall things by the order of naturall causes which they marke; and they foretell things that depend vpon our owne wil, by coniectures takē of our doings. But forasmuch as they be swifter than we, they preuent vs and outrunne vs, and that in such sort, that as naturall things are deceyuable, and mens cases are variable & vncerteyne; so they both, as welthe good as the bad, bee subiect to lying. What els is this to say but that they can foretell nothing of vs furtherfoorth than they learne by our doings; nor of naturall things furtherforth than they reade them in nature, that is to say than they reade them as in a booke, howbeit with a sharper and swifter eysight than we? But nother diuell nor Angell can reade that in the Starres which is not there: nor in men, that which men themselues knowe not, specially considering that the greatest learned men doe hold opinion that they enter not

so farre. In the Starres they could not reade the names of Iosias, Vrias, or Cyrus: niether in the hearts of Iosias, Vrias; and Cyrus themselues, (who were not at that tyme in the world) could they reade the déedes which they were to do certeine hundred yéeres af∣ter. For only vnto God are those tymes present which are to come; but as for to Angells and vs there is no more of the roll of tyme knowen, than it pleaseth God of his gracious goodnes to vnfold vnto vs. It followeth then by the doctrine of these Philosophers, that our Prophesies being so cléere, so particular, and so neare to things a farre of; could not be in spyred from many Gods.

Yet notwithstanding, all Prophesying (say they) procéeds either of art, or of nature, or of some Spirit, or of God himselfe. Of arte, as by Astrologie; of nature, as when mannes nature is ready to receiue the influences of the vniuersall; and of some Spirit, as by some league or couenant made with him. But of none of all these three could the Prophesies of the Hebrewes procéede, as I haue shewed euidently afore. It remayneth therefore that those Prophe∣sies are of God; and consequently that their Scriptures are Gods woord; which is nothing els but eyther those Prophesies them∣selues, or the effects of those Prophesies. And to shut vp this Chap∣ter, it will not be amisse to rehearse this record of Porphyrins, that the Religious sect of the Essens among the Iewes, by reason of their occupying of themselues in those Prophesies, made a profes∣sion of Prophesying, and seldom tymes missed. For in deede there is greate lykelyhod, that if we vnderstoode all the Prophesies of the Byble (which thing is vnpossible for vs bycause we cannot lay the states of all tymes togither;) wee should find there manie things which are darke to vs at this day, and yet were cléere, well vnder∣stoode, and easie, euen to the verie comon people, euery one in his tyme.

The xxvj. Chapter.

That the things which seeme most woonderfull in our Scriptures, are confirmed by the Heathen themselues: and a solution of their cheefe Obiections to the same.

NOw that wee knowe that it is God that speaketh in the Scriptures; there should remayne no more for vs to doe, but to hearken vnto him with silence. For see∣ing he hath made al things by his word; his worde cannot haue sayde any thing which he hath not bene able to doe. And if we crouch, and lay our hand vpon our mouth at the sight of a Kings Seale: surely it were more reason that wee should dispose our mynds to beléeue, and our willes to obeye without scanning, wrangling or gaynsaying, when wee see the expresse signing and seale of God in his Scriptures. Howbeit, to the intent wee may leaue no cause of doubt to the Reader: forasmuch as some haue presumed to obiect, I desire that I also may haue leaue to assoyle their demaunds. Now therefore, let vs see what is obiected against vs, as well by the Infidels of old tyme as of our daies.* 1.760 First of all, As great ac∣count (say they) as you make of your Scriptures; there is no re∣cord yéelded vnto them by any of our auncient Authors Gréeke or Latin, as Plato, Aristotle, Theophrast, and the rest of so many Philosophers,* 1.761 Historiographers, & Poets. This is euen as much as if a man should aske witnesse of the men of Perow, concerning the Histories of Fraunce or Spayne. For in the times whereof our Scriptures speake, what were the Greekes and Romaines in re∣spect of the Iewes, but sillie sauage people that fed vpon Mast? Or soothly it is all one, as if a man should aske a childe of the things that were done afore he was borne; considering that the latest Hi∣stories in our Byble, are of more antiquitie than the Schooles of Greece, or the vse of reading was in Rome. Nay moreouer, from the tyme that the Greekes knewe there was an AEgipt, they went thether to Schoole, and there had communication with the Iewes,

(as I haue proued alreadie) at whose hands they reaped that little knowledge which they had concerning the true God, the creation of the world, and the fall of Man. Insomuch that Plato alledgeth our Authors vnder these words; As the authors of old tyme re∣port, or as it is reported in the auncient Oracles. And Nume∣nius hauing espyed that Plato could not get that skill frō elswhere than out of Moyses, termeth him Moyses speaking in y^e language of Athens, that is to say, translated into Greeke. The Histories of Greece begin about the tyme of Cyrus. But (sayth Aristobu∣lus* 1.762) the lawe of Moyses and the departing of the Israelites out of AEgipt, were translated into Greeke afore y^e reigne of Alexander, yea or of the Persians themselues. Which is as much to say, as that the Greekes euen from their first vpspring, or at leastwise from the first tyme that they began to knowe themselues, heard speaking of our Scriptures and were desirous to haue them. And Hecataeus* 1.763 the Abderite who attended vppon Alexander in his Conquests, made a booke purposely of the Iewes, which thing he did not of any of all the florishing Nations which he had seene in his voyage. Also Herennius Philo* 1.764 hauing read the sayd Philoso∣pher, sawe him so wonderfull in the things that he had learned of the Iewes, that he beléeued him to haue bene become a Iew, and to haue bene conuerted to their lawe. Anon after, when the tyme of the calling of the Gentiles approched, that it behoued the Prophe∣sies to bee made knowne to the whole world; to rid away all suspi∣tion of contryuing them vppon the euents; God did put into the heart of Ptolomie Philadelph King of AEgipt, to make a Librarie, in the which (by the counsell of Demetrius Phalareus a Disciple of Theophrastus) it was his will to haue the Byble of the He∣brewes, and therefore at his great charges caused it to be transla∣ted into Greeke. The Historie of this translating is set out by one Aristaeas a Chamberlaine of King Ptolomies; who with another named Andrew, was sent to Eleazar the Highpriest of the Iewes to fetch the Byble and sixe men of euery Trybe that were learned in both the Languages, to translate it. And he sayth that Deme∣trius Phalareus made report vnto the king, that these Scriptures were the onely writings that were diuine in déede;* 1.765 and that there∣vpon the King asked him in his presence, how it happened that he had not those bookes sooner, seeing hee spared not for any cost, and that Iewrie was so nere hand? Wherevnto Demetrius answered, that they were written in a peculiar language, and therefore that it

behoued him to write to the Highpriest to haue Interpreters: ac∣cording to which aduice, the King sent Ambassadours with letters and presents to Eleazar, (of which Ambassadours he himselfe was one): And that by the consent of all the people,* 1.766 the threescore and twelue Interpreters were sent into into AEgipt. Yea and in this Historie (which is extant still at this day) ye may see the Copies of the letters that were written from Demetrius to Ptolomie, from Ptolomie to Eleazar, and from Eleazar to Ptolomie. And the said Aristaeas addeth, that when the Byble was once translated & peru∣sed in the presence of the chiefe Péeres of his Realme, the King caused a solemne curse to be proclaymed with loude voyce, against all such as should ad any thing to it, take aught from it, or alter aught in it. And afterward (sayth hee) when the King vppon fur∣ther reading therof, did maruel that of so many things and so wor∣thie of remembrance, there was no mention made by the History∣writers and Poets of Greece: Demetrius Phalareus answered him, that it was a diuine lawe, giuen of God, which ought not to be touched but with cleane hands, (as Hecataeus himself writeth) affirming moreouer that Theopompus a Disciple of Aristotles had done him to vnderstand, that whereas some had gone about to disguise the Scriptures of the Iewes with Gréeke eloquence, they were striken with amazednesse for their labour, and vppon prayer made vnto God were warned in a Dreame, that they should for∣beare to vnhallow or defile those heauenly matters, with the glosse of their owne inuentions. Yea and that Theodotus a Tragicall Poet had told him, that because he intended to haue intermingled some matters of the Scriptures with his Tragedies, that is to wéet, by drawing grounds of his Poetries out of the Byble, as o∣ther Poets had done with the warres of Thebes and Troy: he had suddeinly forgone his sight, which was afterward restored agayne vnto him vppon continuall prayer and long repentaunce.* 1.767 And this befell iust in the same tyme that the Greekes and Romaines did but begin to deale with Philosophie. Also Numenius the Pytha∣gorist, whom many preferre before Plato, made so great account of the Scriptures, that his booke of Welfare, of Number, and of Place, and his booke intytled The Lapwing, were full of texts al∣ledged out of Moyses and the Prophets with great reuerence: And he is the same Philosopher whom Plotin had in such estimation, that he voutsafed to write a Cōmentarie vpon him. But I would that the Greekes should but shew me the like record of their owne

writings and of their owne lawes, not in our bookes, but euen in their owne bookes; and I beléeue that no indifferent person would refuse that offer.

Here followeth another obiection:* 1.768 Namely that the Scrip∣tures haue a simple, bare, and grosse style: but if they were of God, they would speake farre otherwise.* 1.769 I demaund of them, whither mens styles ought not to be according to the persones that speake, and whither the grace of eloquence cōsist not in obseruing séemely∣nesse; as namely whither the eloquence of a Subiect, ought not to differ from the eloquence of a King; the eloquence of a child, from the eloquence of a father; and the eloquence of an Aduocate, from the eloquence of a Iudge; or whether by the Rules of Rhetorick, that which is eloquence in the one, shall not bee foolishnes in the o∣ther? Therefore if the Lawyer or Aduocate will pleade eloquent∣ly, he must moue affections: to the intent he may moue other men, hee must first mooue himselfe. The Iudge must vtter his wordes grauely, and he must also be vnflexible and vnintreatable, without moouing and without affection. The King must simply and abso∣lutely commaund; for hee is both the voyce of the Lawe, and the rule of the Iudge. But if either the King come to perswade, or the Iudge to debate cases; then must the one put on the state of an Ad∣uocate, and the other the state of a subiect, and lay aside the state of a King and Iudge. What then I pray you shal become of the law of God the King of kings, who is infinitely further aboue y^e grea∣test Monarkes, than the greatest Monarkes are aboue their mea∣nest Subiects; and who excéedeth alyke both the Iudges and the parties that are to be iudged? We would haue him to vse Induc∣tions as Plato doth, or Syllogismes as Aristotle doth, or pretie sleightes as Carneades doth, or outcryes as Cicero doth, or fyne conceites as Seneca doth. We would haue him to vtter his words by weight, that they might fall in iust measure and sound; and to interlace some farre sought words, some allegoricall matters, and some strange deuises wherwith comon vse is vnacquainted. If we should sée a Kings Proclamations set foorth in such a style, which of vs would not by and by note it as smelling to much of the Ink∣horne; and which of our Eares woulde not rather glowe at it; than lyke of it? Surely then, the simpler that Gods Lawe is, the better doth it beséeme the Euerlasting; considering that the sim∣pler it is, the more it resembleth the voyce of him that can doe all things; yea and (which more is) the simpler it is, the better doth it

fitte all people. For the Lawe that is ordeined for all men without exception, ought to be as an ordinarie foode, or rather as a common kynd of bread applyed to the taste and relishe of all men. But what will you say if the Scriptures haue in their lowlynes more state∣lynes, in their simplicitie more profoundnes, in their homelines more allurance, and in their grossenesse more lyuely force & sharp∣nes, than are to bee found any where els? Wee reade in the first chapter of Genesis, God created heauen and earth; God spake, and the waters were seuered from the earth; Hee commaun∣ded, and the earth brought foorth herbes. There is not so very an idyot or so simple a man, but he can vnderstand these things, I meane so farre as is requisite to his Saluation, yea and consent at the very hearing of them, that the things must néedes bee as it is sayd there. But if a man will wade déeper into the matter, as how God hath in all eternitie chosen (as ye would say) one instāt where∣at to begin this worke, without stuffe or matter to woorke vppon; and how he made it by his onely bare word: they be such bottom∣lesse déepes, as will make euen the stoutest afrayed, and enforce the wysest to stoupe to the skill of the lowly and little ones, so excel∣lent is the simplicitie of the Scripture, both to instruct the low∣ly, and to confound the prowd both at once. In our Bible we haue Histories, and in Histories what desire wee? A trueth: for that is the very substance of them. Now what greater proofe of trueth can there be, than simplicitie? A style or maner of indyting that setteth downe things past before our eyes, as if they were presently in doing? What greater token would we haue thereof, than (in our reading) to féele the very same affections which those felt of whom we reade: Let the hardest hearted men, and the most vntoward in the world go reade the Histories of our Byble, as how Isaac was led to be sacrifized, how Ioseph became knowen agein to his bre∣thren, how Iephthe was vexed with the méeting of his daughter, or how Dauid was gréeued at the death of Absalon: and (if they will say the trueth) they shal féele a certeine shuddering in their bo∣dyes, a certeine yirning in their heartes, and a certeine tender affe∣ction all at one instant, farre greater than if all y^e Oracles of Rome or Athens, should preach the same matters whole daies togither. Let them reade the same stories ageine in Iosephus, to whom the Emperour Titus caused an Image to be set vp for the elegancie of his historie, and they shal find that after his inriching of them with all the ornaments of Rhetoricke, he shal leaue them more cold and

lesse moued, then he found them. And that is because that in very deede, true beautie desireth no peynting; but the more naked it is, the more it allureth; and (as Iewellers and Lapidaries say) the fayrer that any Precidus Stone is, the lesse doth it néede both of Gold and of woorkmanship. And soothly to set vp our Scriptures vpon high words, is nothing els but to set vp a well proportioned tall man vpon a Scaffold, which diminisheth somewhat of his na∣turall proportion, and yet addeth not any whit to his stature.

Also in our Scriptures we haue Prophesies, and in those Pro∣phesies we haue threatenings, exhortations, and vehement spée∣ches. And it is in such matters, that the Orators are woont to thun∣der and to mount vp into their loftie spéeches, In this kynd, the Latins make greate account of Cicero. But I report me to al such as haue read both of them with lyke iudgment, what comparison there is betweene him and Esay? betweene his flattering insinua∣tions with chyldish excuses of ignorance, and the enterances of E∣say, lyuely, graue, and ful of maiestie? Betweene his long Periods too the which hee herkeneth so deuoutly; and the others cutting woords which are as thounderstroks dubbled, to daunt the stowtest stomacke that is? But among all the Greeks, Cicero* 1.770 himself wondereth at AEschines ageinst Demosthenes in acerteine place, where he layeth open his iniuries, and passions ageinst him, in déede more lyke a bedlem than a man in his right witts. And what eloquence, what force, or what percing hath that place (I beséech the Readers with all my hart to reade bothe the one and the other) in comparison of this beginning of Esayes? Herken ye Heauens (sayeth he) and giue eare thou Earth; for the Euerlasting hath sayd, I haue norrished Children and brought them vp, and they haue rebelled ageinst me. The Oxe knoweth his owner, and the Asse his maysters cribbe: but Israell hath not knowen me, my people haue no vnderstanding; Ah sinfull people, people loden with iniquitie, too what purpose should yee bee chastysed any more, sith ye heape sinne vpon sinne? The whole head is sicke, and all the body is ful of sores. From the sole of the foote to the crowne of the head▪ there is not any sound part. What abundance of kindnes, and eloquence, of humilitie and haultines, of reasons and affections, is there in these feawe woords? And how much greater should wee find them in their owne Lan∣guage and in their owne accents?* 1.771 Truly some great learned men of our tyme (which thing I think not to be any abatement of their

commendation) haue vndertaken to make Paraphrases vpon this Prophet and others, ful of goodly sentences, and humane eloquēce, which haue serued fitly to giue him the greater grace. And if our Rhethoritians fin•• fault with those similitudes as ouer homely: I would haue them to tell me to what vse Similitudes serue, but to make things cléere; and what is the meane to make matters cléere, but by taking Similitudes from things best knowen? And what manner of ones were the Metaphors of the Romanes, but at the first rude and homely, and afterward taken from warres, and in processe of tyme taken from pleading and oratorie, according as they grew to be more corrupted? And what els are y^e Similitudes of Cicero himself in his treatyse of old age, but lykenings taken from husbandrie and Uynes, bycause he himself delyghted in those things? To be short, when it commeth to the pursewing of a Si∣militude euidently, to the setting downe of a Desolation lyuely, too the reprouing of vyces sharply, or to the promising of deliuerance brauely: our Prophets do setfoorth euery thing so naturally, so pre∣sently, so forcibly, and so lyuely; as that it appeareth manifestly that they had the persones, the places, the tymes, and the things them∣selues whereof they spake, al present before their eyes: yea and that maner of indyting is comon to all our Prophets vniuersally. Of all these things I requyre none other witneses, than our verrie de∣spysers of God themselues, whose contempt of our Scriptures, which they neuer had leysure to reade, entereth for the most part vnder this colour, that some mayster of arte which neuer red any more than his Cicero, ne can skill to discerne what beséemeth ey∣ther others or himself, hath skorned the things which he hath not the skill eyther to peyse or to prayse. From such people (say I) sprin∣geth the contempt of our Scriptures, specially in Italy; who being out of their Schooles are not able to say one woord to the purpose, no nor scarcely so much as simply to talke. Politian (sayth Viues) did altogither despyse the reading of the Scriptures. Therefore let vs sée what he commended. He spent his whole lyfe in scanning whether a man should pronoūce Vergilius or Virgilius; Carthagi∣nenses, or Carthaginienses; Primus, or Preimus: and if he had any further leysure, he spent it in making some gréeke Epigram in the commendation of Lechery and Sodomy. A graue iudgment soothly for vs to set our mynds vppon. Another called Domitius Calderinus, turned yong men from the reading of the Scrip∣tures: but what goodly matter tooke he to occupye himself withall?

Forsoothe he passed his lyfe in making a Comment vpon Virgills Priapus, a booke which all men that haue any péece of manhod in them are ashamed euen too speake of. But what greater proofe of the prayse of our Scriptures would wee haue, than that such per∣sones doe despyse them? Contrarywise, Marsilius Ficinus, and Iohn Erle of Mirandula the honour of Italy and of his age for skill in all sciences, hauing read all the good authors in the world, came at length to rest themselues in our Scriptures, and were in the end out of lyking with al others; but as for these they could ne∣uer haue their fill of them. If there were no more but y^e affirmation of the one, & the deniall of the other; vnto which of them I pray you ought we rather to yéeld? Nay, I dare say, and I will mainteine it among all such as knowe what it is to speake to the purpose, & ac∣cordingly as may best beséeme euery man; that our scriptures are written in such wise, as may most fitly beséeme both God the author of them, and the matters that they treate of, and the partyes to whom they be spoken; and that a more séemely style than that can∣not be imagined, eyther for God; (for he is our Prince; and it be∣seemeth not Princes to perswade): or for the matters; for they be holy and graue, and graue matters (as sayeth Aristotle) should not be peynted: or for the partyes to whom they be spoken; for they were folk of all sorts without exception; and lyke as all of them were bound to beléeue and obserue them, so was it behooffull that al should vnderstand them.

But now enter they into the matter of them. The Scriptures * 1.772(say they) doe tell vs things vnpossible and vncredible, more lyke the fond fables of Poets, than the reportes of sound Histories. I would haue them tell mée to whom they be vnpossible, & to whom they bée vncredible? séeing they father them not but vpon God the maker of Heauen and Earth, to whom all things are alike easie? The Poets say that Iupiter thundreth aboue, and that Neptune turmoyleth the Seas, and rowleth vp the Earth: and wee knowe that both Iupiter and Neptune were men as we be: and therefore we say iustly that they report Fables; for they father things vpon men which are aboue the abilitie of man to doe, and which sur∣mount the power of all Creatures. But when things that are vn∣possible to Creatures, are reported of GOD, whose power is infinite: although men doubt whether they were doone or noe; yet can they not deny but that hee was able to doe them. And if their suspecting of them bee because they reade the lyke things in their

owne Fables; I haue proued already, that these things were writ∣ten long tyme afore they had either wryters of Histories, Poets, yea or any writing at all. And therefore they ought to thinke that their Fables were deuised vpon our Histories, and their Leasings vpon our truethes. For lyke as a man hath bene afore his portrai∣ture, good Coyne afore counterfet Coyne, a true Seale afore a for∣ged Seale, and a true Copy afore a forgerie: so also was the true declaration of things afore Fables: according to this rule of the Philosophers, That euill hath not any being of it selfe, but in ano∣ther thing, ne is properly a substance, but a corruption of a sub∣stance. Therefore we beléeue not the Fables of Homere, nor the Inuentions of Euripides and Sophocles, made vpon the battell of Troy; and yet wee deny not but there was a Warre of Troy. As little also doo wee beléeue the Romanes which vaunt of the twelue Péeres of Charles the greate the King of Fraunce; and yet wee doubt not but there was a greate Charles that did greate things in his tyme, and had greate store of Noble Parsonages in his seruice. To be short, had there neuer bene any Dogge, Horse, Beare, or Lyon in the world; neither Poets had feined, nor Pein∣ters had peinted vs any Cerberus, Pegasus, or Chymere. Lyke∣wise, had there not bene a trueth of the things whereon the Poets made their Fables, we should not haue had at this day any Fables in the Worlde.* 1.773 Let vs come to particularities. In all the whole Scripture there is not a more woonderfull thing, than the Creati∣on of the world and of man: And if we admit those two poyntes, nothing ought to séeme straunge vnto vs in the residew of the By∣ble. For all the miracles which wee wonder at, are but sparkes of the infinite power which vttered it selfe at that tyme in the crea∣ting of all things. Now I haue proued alreadie both by liuely rea∣sons, and by witnesse of the auncient writers, that the world and al things therein were created, and that they were created by the on∣ly will of God, at such tyme as pleased him; and that it cannot bée otherwise imagined. Uppon this trueth haue the Phenicians and AEgiptians fashioned their Fables; saying that in the beginning there was a darknesse, and a spirituall Ayre, and in an infinite Chaos; that this spirit couered the Chaos: and that of the con∣iunction of them twayne, was bred a certeine Moth, that is to say, a certeyne slyme, whereof all liuing things were ingendred. It can not be denyed but that this was a mistaken Copy of the holy and natiue Copie written by Moyes.

Concerning the creation of Man, the AEgiptians say hee was created both Male and female. Herevpon Plato gathereth that he was a Manwoman or Herkinalson: and the Scripture had sayd that God had created them Male and female. So befalleth it pro∣perly to a Portrayture that is drawen by another. That which is taken at the lyuely image, loseth a little of his nature. That which is taken at the Patterne, loseth somewhat more; And so from one to another, they varry in the ende so farre from the very originall, that a man can scarsly find any resemblance thereof.* 1.774 The fall of man hath bene proued of mée by many reasons, and approued by all the Philosophers, and euen by the very feeling of our corrupti∣on. All men are inforced to confesse it. But Moyses is the only man that setteth vs downe both the Historie and the cause therof. Here∣vpon the Emperour Iulian quareleth, thinking it straunge that a Serpent should speake, which is no more but that the diuell spake by the Serpent. And what is there herein, which befell not dayly among the Gentyles? diuels, to deceiue men, spake to them from out of Images. The Féend of Dodon spake out of an Oke. Phy∣lostratus sayth that an Elme spake to Apollonius of Thyaney: A Riuer (sayeth Porphirius) saluted Pythagoras. Euen Iulian himself & his Philosopher Maximus, heard the diuell speake in di∣uers voyces & in diuers maners: & in al this geare there is thought to be no straungenes at all. For séeing that the diuell of himselfe is not visible to our eyes; must hee not bee faine to put on a borowed shape? And if he borowe one, why should he rather take some other shape than the shape of a Serpent? And if he speake; why should he not speake as well by the mouth of a Serpent, as of another li∣uing wight? and as well of a liuing wight, as of a thing that hath no lyfe? Nay further, this creature hath a manifest figure, in that it trayleth vpon the ground, and liueth of the dust: and in that wée by our winding away from God to the base and Earthly things, are brought to the same poynt at this day.

We reade of the men of the first age,* 1.775 that they liued seuen, eight, or nine hundred yeres: which thing some thinking to be incredible, haue imagined that those yéeres were but moneths, notwithstan∣ding that in the historie of the vniuersall Flud which insewed, the moneth is set downe to be of eight and twentie daies, and the yéere to be twelue moneths, and that otherwise wee must be faine to ad∣mit, that they begate Children at lesse than ten yéeres of the sonne. And yet is that one of the griefes which they conceiue against our

Scriptures; as who would say it were not as easie vnto GOD to extende our liues vnto ten thousand of yeeres, as to a hundred, to God I say who hath made both the life it selfe, and the yéeres, and the worlds of yeeres. Yet notwithstanding, Manethon the AEgip∣tian, Berosus the Chaldean, Moschus, Hestiaeus, and Hierom, who wrate the Stories of the Phenicians, doe confirme the saying of Moyses concerning the first men. Also Hesiodus, Hecataeus, Acusilaus, Hellanicus, and Ephorus agree thereunto: affirming that they were ordeyned to liue so long tyme, as well for to studie the Sciences, as to inuent the Handycrafts; and specially for the finding out of Astronomie, because (say they) if they had liued lesse than sixe hundred yéeres, their obseruations had bene in vayne, be∣cause the great yere cōtinueth so long. To be short, the matter was so cléere, & so common in all auncient Histories, that Varro passeth it not ouer as a light thing, but laboureth to yéeld a cause thereof.

For the punishment of Mankynd there flowed a generall Flud.* 1.776 What Nation hath not beléeued it, and what Author hath not spo∣ken of it? Among the AEgiptians, Phenicians, Greekes, and Ro∣maines nothing was more common. And because they had heard that it befell in the primetyme of the world, and were ignorant in the accounts of y^t tymes; euery writer of Histories did set it downe in the tyme which he thought to be of most antiquitie: as for exam∣ple, the Thebanes referred it to the tyme of Ogyges, the Thessa∣lyans to the time of Deucalion, and so forth of others. Moreouer, in Brasilie, in the new Spayne, and in the Florida, the beléef there∣of is common, and all of them impute it to mans sinne, and to the wrath of the highest powred out vpon mankynd. But let vs come yet to more particular poynts. God commanded Moyses to make an Arke for the sauing of himselfe and his household, and for the preseruing of the seede of the world there. And he reckoneth vp vn∣to vs all the whole length, breadth and depth thereof: which is a proofe that he had the trueth it selfe, wherof the residue had but the fame. Yetnotwithstanding, Alexander Polyhistor, and Abydene doe write,* 1.777 that Saturne foretolde vnto Xysuthrus the Flud ere it came; and that he made him an Arke, to saue all kynd of Cattell with him: That he preserued his holy writings by ingrauing them in certeyne pillers at Heliopolis in AEgipt, and sayled in his Arke towards Armenie: that after certeyne daies he sent foorth certeyne Birds, which found no drye ground: that at the end of certeyne o∣ther daies, he sent out certeine other Birds: and that in the end per¦ceiuing

drye land, hee came downe out of the Arke in Armenie, where (by their saying) the remnants of the Arke are diligently kept by the Inhabitants, who helpe themselues with it in many diseases. And their talking of Saturne is according to the maner of the Greekes, who surmised y^e Iewes to haue worshipped Saturne, because they kept holy the seuenth day. And it may bee that Xy∣suthrus may in the Assyrian tung betoken as much as Noe, who in diuers places had diuers names as wee reade. Neuerthelesse, this difference serueth vs for a profe, because we see it is not a sim∣ple supposall, but a firme tradition from the Father to the Sonne. The same thing is reported by Berosus,* 1.778 not the counterfet Bero∣sus, but the same Berosus whom the auncient writers alledge; and by Ierom the AEgiptian, Mnaseas the Phenician, and others. Yea and they ad further, that the place where Noe came downe out of the Arke was called Saleh Noah, in Gréeke 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that is to say Noes comming downe; and that it was at a certeine Moun∣taine called Baris or Paropanisus, which (according to their lan∣guage at that tyme) seemeth to come al to one.* 1.779 Also Plutarke spea∣keth expressely of the Doue that Deucalion sent out of the Arke to seeke drye land: and Phauorinus and Stephanus speake of the place where the Arke rested; which cannot be vnderstood of any par∣ticular flud of Thessalie, which doubtlesse was contriued out of the other vniuersall flud. Now therefore not knowing what to replye in this behalfe, they picke a quarrell at the measure of the Arke, i∣magyning it hard for God to doe that which they themselues can not doe. But besides that the Arke was a figure of the Church whereinto all Nations should one day be gathered and saued; O∣rigen sheweth to Celsus the Epicure by the Geometricall Cubit, that it was of a marueilous greatnesse and capacitie. And Buteon a Mathematick declareth expressely in a booke, what it conteyned foote by foote. To be short, sith we reade that the Flud was vniuer∣sall, considering that that could not be but by Gods appoyntment, who notwithstanding intended to saue those that were his: the sight of such a myracle ought to make all the residue credible, with∣out alledging of measures in a power which is without measure. For wheras some will néedes impute that Flud to a certeine great Coniunction of Planets which was at that tyme; I send them to the Earle of Mirandula,* 1.780 who not only proueth that there was not then any great Coniunction at al, but also that although there had bene one, yet they could not assigne it to the named poynt; but ra∣ther

that by their owne rules the Coniunction was such at that tyme, that it betokened rather an vniuersall burning than an vni∣uersall drowning of the world.

At the going away of this Flud, the Scripture telleth vs of a Ham or Cham* 1.781 which discouered y^e shame of Noe his father. The Chaldees say it was Zoroastres, who would with his Charmes haue made him barren. The Greekes after them feyned their Iu∣piter Hammon to haue gelded him. Thus turned they the Histo∣rie into a fable. Likewise Iaphet is none other than the Iapetus of the Poets, who tooke the renewing of the world after the Flud, for the very first creation thereof. Then followeth consequently the confusion of the tongues.* 1.782 It is a very cléere case that languages are to no vse, but in respect of the diuersitie of them; insomuch that if there were no moe but one in all the world, it were méere found∣nesse to knowe any moe than that. Therefore like as reason hath led vs to one first man, so ought it also to leade vs to one first lan∣guage; which was but one alone, like as there was but one man a∣lone with his wife. If the diuersitie of them consisted as now, but in proprietie of phrases and forme of wordes, it might be sayd that they had bene altered by processe of tyme. But it is well knowne that there are many Languages, whose very originall words are farre diuers and vtterly vnlike one another, sauing in some fewe words that haue bene brought out of other Countries by Trauel∣lers and trade of Marchandise, which haue euery where reteyned still the same names they had in the place from whence they came. Ye will say then that men inuented them when they conueyed In∣habiters abroade to people other Countries. But what a vanitie had that bin? What life of man could haue suffised to do it? What benefite could haue insewed of it, either to y^e inuenters themselues, or to their followers? Nay, who seeth not that it had bene a pub∣licke miserie? not a knowledge, but an ignorance; not a pleasure, but a hell to posteritie? Certesse, wee say therefore that reason lea∣deth vs to that which the Scripture sayth; namely, that at the be∣ginning there was but one language: That the diuiding of Lan∣guages came not of men, but that the diuiding of men came of the diuision of Languages: and that it was not a deuice of men (who at that tyme were sufficiently occupyed in the néedfull knowledge of nature, and in the finding out of profitable Arts and Sciences) but a punishment cast of God vpon mankynd. Let vs see how the auncient writers do further these reasons. The common opinion

is (say Abydenus and Alexander* 1.783) that men being bred of the earth, and trusting in their own strength, would needes in de∣spight of the Gods goe reare a Tower vp to the Sunne, in the same place where Babylon now is: and that when they had raised it very high, the Gods ouerthrewe it and cast it downe vpon their heads with a great wind: and that at that tyme be∣gan the diuersitie of Languages: wherevpon, the Hebrewes called that place Babel. Of these things speaketh Sibill also in her verses in the selfesame termes. And Hestiaeus and Eupolemus doe ad, that the Priests which scaped from thence, gate themselues with the misteries of their Iupiter (the same was eyther Nem∣brod or Iupiter Bele) into the Plaine of Sennaar, from the which place men departing by reason of the confusion of tongues, began to seuer themselues abroade to people the rest of the world. Here it pleaseth Iulian to fall to scoffing. For (sayth hee) a great sort of such globes as the whole earth is, being heaped one vpon an other, were not able to reach halfe way to the Sphere of the Moone.* 1.784 But the reason of this enterprise of theirs is euident; namely that their intent was to haue had a refuge ageinst the height of the waters, if any flud should come ageine, that is to say, to make a banke ageinst Gods wrath, which it had bene better for them to haue pacified by prayer. And this pryde of theirs is not to be thought so straunge a matter, considering how wee reade in the Histories of the Greekes, that one Xerxes sent letters of defyance to the Sea: and in the Histories of the Romaines, that one Cali∣gula vndertooke a quarrell against Iupiter. And Iulian himselfe was not a whit wiser, when he would néedes take vpon him to im∣peach the kingdom of God, by prohibiting the Christians to reade Poets. And whereas Celsus will néedes beare himselfe on hand, that the sayd Historie was taken out of the fable of the Aloides: all men know that Homer was the first Author of that fable, who came a long tyme after Moyses. And in good sooth, these particula∣rities of the confounding of Tongues, of the dispersing of men a∣broade, of the place where it befell, of the naming of Phaleg who was borne at the very tyme of the diuision, and such other circum∣stances; doe euidently shewe that Moyses speaketh not at rouers: whereof there is also this further profe, that the Originals of Na∣tions according to the diuiding of households at that tyme, are not read of in any other Author.

As vayne also is this saying of theirs, that the burning vp of So∣dom

is taken from the tale of Phaeton,* 1.785 which is in déede as farre from it as Heauen is from the earth. For euen at this day there are yet still to bee séene the remaynders of Gods wrath, noted by Strabo, Galen, Mela, and others: namely the bitter Lake where∣in nothing can liue; the banks thereof lyued with Bitumen; the Stones stiuking and filthie; the trées bearing fruites fayre to the eye, but falling to Cinder and smoke in the hand; which things we reade not of to haue bin séene any where els, and yet in a valley most beautifull to behold, where stoode at that tyme fiue Cities, or according to Strabo thirteene, which were all consumed with fire for sinne ageinst nature. And Iosephus sayeth that the Image or piller of salt whereinto Loths wyfe was turned, was to be séene there euen in his dayes. These are the greatest woonders of the booke of Genesis. The residew thereof consisteth in the historie of Abraham and of his Children. As for the Princes of those dayes, we haue nother Pedegrée nor historie of them among the Heathen wryters: and therefore it is the more to be woondered at, that they haue spoken of our Shepherds.* 1.786 For Berosus sayeth that about a ten generations or descents from the vniuersall Flud, there was a∣mōg the Chaldees a great man that excelled in Astronomie. And that by him Berosus ment to betoken Abraham, Eupolemon* 1.787 de∣clareth: for he sayth that in the sayd tenth generation, Abraham* 1.788 was brone in Camerine a Towne of Babylonie, otherwise called Vr or Caldeople; who inuēted Astronomie among the Chaldees, and was in the fauour of God, by whose commaundement hee re∣moued into Phenice, where hee taught the course of the Moone, of the Sunne, and of the Planets, whereby hee greatly pleased the King: notwithstanding that he saith hee had receiued it from hand to hand from Enoch, whome the Greekes (sayeth hee) called Atlas, vnto whome the Angelles had taught many thinges. Also he rehearseth the Battell that was made by Abraham for the recouery of Loth, the interteinment of Melchisedek, the ouerth∣warts that Abraham indured for Sara his wife in AEgipt, and the Plague thot God did cast vpon Pharao to make him to deliuer her to Abraham agein. And Artabanus* 1.789 in his storie of the Iewes re∣porteth almost the selfesame things; adding, that of Abraham the Iewes were called Hebrewes, wherin the néerenesse of the names deceiued him. Melon* 1.790 in his bookes ageinst the Iewes, wrate that Abraham had two wiues: and that by the one of them which was an AEgiptian, he had twelue children, among whom Araby was

parted, which euen in his tyme had twelue Kings still: (Those were the twelue Sonnes of Ismaell the Sonne of Abraham by Agar the AEgiptian, which are set downe by name in Genesis,) And that by the other (which was a woman of the Countrie of Sy∣ria,) he had but onely one Sonne named Isaac, who lykewise had twelue Sonnes, of whom the yongest was called Ioseph, of whom Moyses (sayth he) descended. Also Alexander setteth foorth Abra∣hams sacrifice at length, and the children that he had by Chetura. And in his historie he alledgeth one Cleodemus a Prophet, other∣wise called Malchas, whom he affirmeth to agrée with Moyses in the Historie of the Iewes. Ageine, Hecataeus the Abderite hauing bene in Iewry, did purposely make a booke of Abrahams lyfe, which thing he had not of his owne maister King Alexander. To bee short, that which Orpheus sayeth of a certeine Chaldee vnto whom onely God manifested himselfe, seemeth to be spoken of A∣braham. For he had bin conuersant in AEgipt, where the renowme of Abraham was so greate, that euen in their Coniurings they made expresse mention of the God whom Abraham had worship∣ped. The same Alexander writeth the fleeing of Iacob for feare of his brother Esawe; his abode in Mesopotamia; His seuen yeeres seruice; his marying with two Sisters; the nomber of his Chil∣dren; the rauishing of Dina; the slaughter of Sichem; and likewise the selling of Ioseph; his imprisonment, his deliuerance for ex∣pounding of Dreames; His authoritie in AEgipt; His marying with Askeneth the daughter of Pethefer the Highpriest; His two Sonnes by name which were borne of her; the comming of his brothers into AEgipt; the Feast that he made them; the fiue partes which he gaue to Beniamin (whereof this Historiographer inten∣deth to yéeld a reason) the comming of Iacob & of his whole house∣hold into AEgipt; of what age euery of them was; and how many Children euery of them had. And so hee bringeth vs downe from Noe to the Flud, from the Flud to Abraham, from Abraham to Leuie, and from Leuie to Moyses; howbeit euer among with faultes in reporting the things done, with differences in accoun∣ting the yeres, and with some additions of small importance here and there; which serue to shewe that he had not those Histories im∣mediatly out of the Byble, but out of some other bookes which he had séene elsewhere. The selfesame things did Theodotus con∣uey into his Poetrie: and likewise Philo Biblius, Nicholas of Damasco, Aristaeus, and others. Of whom this latter made a pe∣culiar

description of the storie of Iob, how he was tempted as well by the Diuell as by his neighbours; affirming him to haue bene the Sonne of Esawe dwelling in the marches betweene Idumea and Araby, which thing he could not haue red in the Scripture. To be short, the places which beare the name of Abraham both in Damasco, in Chaldee, and in the Land of Chanaan; and of Ioseph in Egipt, together with the well of woonderfull antiquitie neare to Ascalon, do giue vs assurance both of their abode in Palestine, and of their remouing into Egipt. And Manethon the Historiogha∣pher of Egipt setteth vs downe their originall, and their comming downe into Egipt, terming them in his language Shepehered∣kings, which was, because that as wee reade in the Scriptures, their wealth consisted in Cattell. But of all these auncient writers wee haue but fragments, such as wee could gather together out of auncient Authors.

Now let vs come to Moyses. Alexander sayth that he was the sonne of Amram the sonne of Elat, the sonne of Leuie, the sonne of Iacob, and so foorth: that is to say, a naturall Israelite and not an AEgiptian. But let vs heare Artabanus* 1.791 concerning his first com∣ming vp, and the discourse of his whole life. He sayth that Meris the sonne of Kenephris King of AEgipt, being vnable to haue chil∣dren, adopted a childe of the Iewes called Moyses, and instructed him in the lawes; who afterward gaue letters to the AEgiptians, and was reputed of them as a God and named Mercurie: That Kenephris beeing enuious of his reputation, sent him into the warres against the Ethyopians, with an armie of Iewes vntray∣ned, to the intent that both he and they might haue perished toge∣ther: And that Moyses demeaned himself so wisely, that the Ethy∣opians being ouercome, had him in such estimation, that they re∣ceiued Circumcision of him: That at his returne, great counte∣nance was made vnto him, howbeit that he perceiuing it to be done vpon an euill mynd, withdrew himselfe into Arabie, where he ma∣ried the daughter of Raguel a King of that Countrie: In y^e which meane time, the King of AEgipt that had oppressed the Iewes with so many toyles and (to the intent he might the more safely kill thē) had appoynted them a certeyne Liuerie; dyed very suddenly of a Leaprosie. These things are not reported by Moyses; for he wrate not any thing to the aduauncement of himselfe, but treated altoge∣ther of Gods victories, and not of his owne. But in the selfesame Author there followeth the calling of Moyses. This Moyses (saith

he) was occupyed in continuall prayer to God for the deliue∣rance of the people: And one day as he was earnest in pray∣ing, there issewed a fire out of the earth, where was not any fit matter to burne, and a voyce tolde him that he should deliuer the Iewes and bring them into their Countrie. Wherevpon without raising of any force, he by the counsell of his wiues father, declared the will of God to the King, who by and by committed him to prison. But the prisondoores were ope∣ned vnto him by myracle, and he went to the Kings bedside, and summoned him again to obey God. And when the King had asked him the name of the GOD, Moyses told it him in his eare, whereat he fell into a swound, but Moyses raised him vp againe by the hand, and the Priestes that made a scoffe at it dyed out of hand. He declareth afterward that the King requi∣red signes, and that Moyses turned his Staffe into a Serpent: That he smote the riuer of Nyle and made it to ouerflowe: That he strake it againe, and it returned within his bankes: That there∣vpon the Priestes of Memphis were commaunded to doe the like matter vppon paine of their life, and that they by Arte Magicke brought foorth a Dragon, and chaunged the colour of the riuer: by meanes whereof the King became so proude, that he hardened his heart against the Iewes: That then Moyses smote the earth with his Rod, and the earth brought foorth first venemous Flyes, next Frogges, then Grashoppers, and afterward other strange things: Wherevpon (sayth this Historiographer) there hath growen a custome of keeping and reuerencing a Rod in their Temples euer since, because they holde opinion that Isis is the Earth, which beeing striken with that Rod, brought foorth those things. In the end there was (sayth he) such an Earthquake o∣uer al AEgipt, that the King determined to let that people go. But in this poynt the Priests disagree. For the Priests of Mem∣phis say that Moyses marking the tyde passed the Sea at a low water. But the Priestes of Heliople say, that the Kings intent was to pursew the Israelites to recouer the Iewels which they caryed away with them out of AEgipt, and that Moyses being warned of God strake the Sea, which gaue place to him and al his people, and that the AEgiptians were partly destroyed with thunder and lightening, and partly drowned in the same wa∣ters. When they were passed the Sea, they liued thirtie yeeres in the wildernesse and were fed with a certeyne Snow, which

God did rayne downe vpon thē from heauen. And this Moy∣ses was a man of a tall stature, browne, with long heare on his head and a long beard, and a countenance full of maiestie; and when he did all this worke of his, he was fowerscore and nine yeeres old. We reade the same things written by Demetrius and Eupolemus Gréeke Historiographers, who doe ad many particu∣larities moe: and Manethon nameth the King Tethmosis vnder whom these things were done. Also Numenius the Pythagorist sayth, that he had read the life of Moyses in Histories worthie of credite: and he rehearseth how he was taken out of the water; how he was brought vp in the Court; that afore he was Circumcised, he was called Iehoiachim;* 1.792 howbeit that by report of such as pro∣fessed the knowledge of Misteries, he had a secret name in heauen, to wit Melchi; that he wrought great myracles before the King of AEgipt; and that certeyne Magicians called Iannes and Mambres would haue done the like: which are things that are not set downe in our Scriptures, but must néedes be had of them out of the holy Registers of AEgipt. And in very déede, in the Coniurations of the AEgiptians,* 1.793 they vsed these words to the Deuils, The God of Is∣raell, the God of the Hebrewes, the God that drowned the AEgiptians with their King in the red Sea: which sheweth eui∣dently that the matter was commōly knowen and out of al doubt. And I remember not any Author that denyeth Moyses to haue conueyed the people of Israell out of AEgipt with great myracles. For soothly it had bin a myracle of all myracles, to haue made them to suffer so many aduersities without myracles. But yet some Au∣thors haue attributed those myracles to Magicke, and othersome to naturall reasons. There is (sayth Plinie) a kynd of Magicke, which dependeth vpon Moyses* 1.794 and the Cabale; but yet had Ma∣gicke neuer so great scope (sayth he) as vnder Nero, neither was it euer found to be more feeble and vayne. And in trueth, what like∣nesse is there betwéene the Illusions of a Magician, which vanish away in the twinckling of an eye, and y^e leading of a mightie great Nation through the Sea, and (which more is) the mainteyning of them from hunger & thirst so long a time? But yet hath the Scrip∣ture prouided against this slaunder. For no lawe els in the world doth so expressely forbid Magick, as doth the lawe of Moyses: and the Cabale whereof Plinie had heard speake,* 1.795 is further of frō such doings, than eyther Arithmeticke or Grammar. And whereas o∣thers doe report, that Moyses marked the ebbing of the water that

he might passe the red Sea: surely they make the counsell of the AE∣giptians very grossewitted, in casting themselues away so rashly. Nay I say further, that if it had bene so, the waters that drowned the one people would not haue spared the other. But euery man knowes that the Gulfe of Arabie is not subiect to such tydes as those are: and though it were, yet cannot the like cauill take place in all the residue of the myracles that are attributed vnto him. As vnméete also to bee admitted, is the slaunder of Iustine the Histo∣riographer and others, That Moyses was driuen out of AEgipt be∣cause he was a Leaper, and that he caryed all the Leapers of the Realme away with him. For it is a cléere case by record of all aun∣cient writers, that the people whom he caryed away, was a straun∣ger in AEgipt: and when he himself rehearseth openly the benefites which that people had receiued at Gods hand, You knowe (sayth he) that there hath not bene any sicknesse or disease among you, since the tyme you came out of AEgipt. And on the contra∣rie part he menaseth them with the Plagues, Byles, and Botches of AEgipt, if they offended God. Insomuch that whereas in any o∣ther auncient lawes, there is no mention made of any order for them that are infected with the Leaprosie: in this Law (as though GOD had ment to preuent that slaunder) they be separated from the companie of men, their clothes are to bee layd away, their hou∣ses to be scraped, and certeyne other things are to be done; which is a sufficient proofe, that those which gouerned that people and had authoritie ouer them, were no Leapers.

This people then went out of Egipt:* 1.796 and the Scripture sayeth that they were Sixhundred thousand men on foote, besids women and Children.* 1.797 Heare ageyn they krye out: They were but three∣score and ten when they went into Egipt; and how then is it pos∣sible that they should be so manie at their going out? I wilnot al∣ledge any miraculousnes, though the Scripture declare that that people increased very greatly; insomuch that it termeth them by the woord Frye, as though it spake of Fisshes. But I beséeche them to make somewhat a nearer reckening, not with the largest, but after the ordinarie maner, what nomber myght rise of threescore and ten persones in fower hundred yeeres or thereabouts, which was the tyme that they were in Egipt; and they shall find their full nomber afore they come to Twohundred and fiftye yeeres. After the same maner do we sée that Thréescore households of Arabians, passing into Affrica in the tyme of the diuision vnder Calis, had

peopled it throughout in lesse than thréehundred yeeres: insomuch that euen at this day, the Prouinces beare the names of Beni Megher, Beni Guariten, Beni Fensecar and so foorth; that is too say the Children of Megher, of Guariten, and of Fensecar. And there was not that Familie which peopled not some one Shire or other. Also the West Indyes which haue not bin knowen vnto vs aboue one hundred yeeres, will within one hundred mo be peopled with Spanyards. To be short, Viues saith, he sawe an honest man in Spayne, which had peopled a village of a hundred houses with the issew of his owne body, so as the names of kinred fayled. And this present yeere there dyed a noble Ladie in Germanie, which had seene a hundred and threescore Children borne of hirself and hirs; and yet the one half of hir Children dyed afore they were maryed; and those that are maryed are of age to haue manie mo. Their saying therefore bewrayeth a manifest ignorance, lyke as theirs doth who being ignorāt of progression in Arithemetik, will easely bargayne for a horse or some other thing, to giue euery day doble for it during a whole mooneth, beginning with a pennye: who by that tyme that they come but too the midds of the mooneth, begin to perceiue that which no reason could haue beaten into their heads afore, namely that all the goods they haue are not able too serue the turne.

After Moyses succeded Iosua,* 1.798 who brought the people into the promised Land, so as y^e Chananytes did partly flée before him, and partly were made tributaries vnto him. He that shal reade the voy∣age of this people from iourney to iourney, and consider the bounds and coas••s of their porcio••s; will byandby iudge the trueth of the storie. But yet Procopius in his historie of the Vandales,* 1.799 leaueth vs a notable marke thereof in these words. Al the Country (saieth he) which lyeth from Sidon to Egipt, was in old tyme called Phenice; and they that wrate the History of the Phenicians, report that in old time it was all vnder one only King. In these costes dwelt the Gergesites, Iebusites & other nations, who at such tyme as they sawe the great army of Iosua comming to∣wards them, remoued into AEgipt. But within a while after, by∣cause that Country could not beare them, they passed into A∣frik, where they buylded many Cities and peopled the whole Country euen to the Pillers of Hercules, and their language is half Phenician. Also in Numidy (among other Cities) they builded Tingit, the seat whereof is very strong, where are two

Pillers of white stone to be seene nere vnto a greate Fountain, wherein are grauen these words in the Phenician tongue: we be those that fled from the Robber Iosua the sonne of Nun. Such (sayeth he) is the original of those Nations, whom we call at this day Maurusians. And Eupolemus sayeth that Iosua Pro∣phesied a hundred and ten yeeres, and placed the Tabernacle in Silo. From thence he leapeth to Samuel, & form Samuel to Saule, whom he affirmeth to haue bin anointed at Gods commandment; and so to Dauid, whom (taking the one for the other) he calleth the sonne of Cis.

But betwéene Iosua and Saul, we haue the time of the Iudges; in the storie of whom some haue marked, that the mightie deedes of Hercules are feyned out of y^e doings of Sampson, and the vow of Agamemnon out of the vow of Iephtha. Dauid* 1.800 (saith y^e same Author) subdewed the Ammonites, Moabites, Itureans, Naba∣theans and other nations that extend vnto the Riuer Euphrates, and made the King of Tyre and the Phenicians tributarie to him. Afterward and Angell called Nathan shewed him the place where the Temple should bee builded, for the which he prepared woorke∣men, and rigged foorth Shippes at the Cittie of Melan in Araby. and sent them to an Ile of the red sea called Vrphen, from whence he fetched great quantitie of Gold, Copper,* 1.801 Ceder wood and such other things. Notwithstanding (saieth hee) the Angell would not that he should buyld the Temple, because he had bene steined with blud in the Warres; and so that worke was reserued to Salomon his Sonne, who came to the Crowne at the age of twelue yeeres. And of how great riches Dauid was,* 1.802 it may appéere by his tumb, wherein after the custome of those tymes, he did lay vp great trea∣sures. For about an eighthundred yeres after, Hircanus béeing as∣sayled by Antiochus the godly, tooke thrée thousand Talents out of one vault to content him withall. And within a while after, He∣rod opened another vault and found as much there. What nota∣ble things reade we of Salomon?* 1.803 First his building of the Tem∣ple, which is described (saith Iosephus) as well in the Chronicles of the Tyrians, the Competitors of the Iewes, as in ours. And in their Treasorie are kept the Letters of Salomon to Hyram King of Tyre, and Hirams letters vnto him;* 1.804 which make mention of the great nomber of Carpenters that Hiram sent vnto him; of the or∣der that Salomon tooke for the finding of them by imposts, and of the Contribution that euery Prouince made to that ende; which

things are reported at length by Eupolemus also, and likewise by Alexander Polihistor, Hecataeus the Abderite, Dius a Phenici∣an, and diuers others, yea and that so particularly and with such care, as that there is not that measure, vessell, toole or instrument of the Temple, which they haue not noted, which thing we reade not that they haue done in the behalfe of any of their owne Temples. Yea and the Tyrians doe note the very yere and the day thereof in their Chronicles; to witte, that it was a hundred fortie and thrée yeres and eight moonethes afore their buylding of Carthage. Se∣condly the Scripture maketh great commendations of Salomons wisedome; insomuch that the Quéene of Saba came from a farre to see him. And we reade in Plutarke,* 1.805 that it was a custom among the Kings of old tyme, to put questions one to another, to trye the abilitie of their wittes, and that a certeine prayse was appoynted for him that wonne the victorie.* 1.806 And Dius an Historiographer of the Phenicians, rehearseth the Riddles and Questions that Salo∣mon sent to King Hiram, saying that it cost Hiram very much be∣cause he was not able to assoyle them, vntill at length he found a yong man of Tyrus named Abdemon, who decyphered vnto him the most part of them. And as touching the Quéene of Saba, who came from the Ile of Meroe to sée Salomon; the Chronicles of AEthiope report that her name was Makeda,* 1.807 and that she had a sonne by Salomon, which was named first Meilirh, & afterward Dauid, whom she made her Heire of that great Empire which we now adayes doe call Prester Iohns Land. Likewise it reporteth that she caried with her twelue thousand Iewes, of euery Trybe a thousand. And because the noblest men of that Countrie, do vaunt themselues to bee of the blud of Israell; although they haue recei∣ued the Gospell, yet doe they reteine Circumcision; not that they thinke it necessarie to saluation (say they;) but to kéepe still the pre∣rogatiue of their blud.

What remayneth yet further? The Sayling of Salomons Shippes; which lasted thrée yeeres; and that séemeth vnto them incredible. And so by that rule, let vs alwaies be at this poynt, ne∣uer by our good willes to beléeue that which wee vnderstand not. But who is he at this day whom the Spaniards and Portingales haue not perswaded that? Specially the Portingales, which are a yere and eight moonethes a making their voyage, notwithstanding that they haue both the vse of the Compasse, and better knowledge of the Seas, and more certeine Harboroughs, and a shorter cutte.

And surely it is not to bee passed ouer lightly,* 1.808 that the Gold that was brought home by the sayd Nauigations, is called in Hebrew in the duall nomber Paruaim, as if a man would say, brought from the Perous, or from the Indies as well the East Indies as the West Indies,* 1.809 as a certeine learned man of our tyme hath noted. So is the wood Brazill called by the name of the countrie of Bra∣sill from whence it is brought: and Machoachan the Drug, by the name of Machoachan the countrie, and so foorth of other things. For as touching the Nauigation to the Indies by the red Sea, it was ouer comon, both to imploy so much tyme about it, and also to make so great a matter of it.

In the Histories of the Kings following,* 1.810 the chiefe things that are to be marked, are the thrée remouings away of the tenne Tribes of Israell, the first vnder Phacea the Sonne of Romelia and Oseas Kings of Israell, by Tigbath Phalassar and Salmana∣sar Kings of the Assyrians. The maner whereof was that the Is∣raelites were caried away into farre Countries,* 1.811 (specially the best sort of them,) and other Nations were placed there in their stead. For the Israelites were conueyed thence into Media, and receiued the vninhabited Countryes to dwell in, and of them came partly the Cholchians who in the time of Herodotus* 1.812 caused themselues to be circumcised; and partly the Tartarians, who about the yere of our Lord a thousand and two hundred, ouerwhelmed the earth lyke a waterflud vnder the leading of Cingi, and afterward did set vp the Empire of the greate Cham. And in very deede they were Circumcised afore they euer heard of Mahomet; and they yéelded willingly to goe to his Lawe, so much the rather because it see∣med to hold of theirs. And the word Tartars or Totaras signifi∣eth Remnants or Leauings in the Syrian tongue. Uerily euen a∣mong the Hordes of the Tartars, in the furthest part northward, there are which haue reteined still the names of Dan, Zabulon & Nepthaly; and therefore it is not to be wondered at, that there be so many Iewes in Russie, Sarmatia, and Lituania, and so the née∣rer to the Tartarians still the mo. The same hath no lesse lykely∣hod of trueth concerning the Turkes. For the word Turk in He∣brewe, signifieth banished men, and is taken in way of reproche. And it is very lykely, that Mahomet to eschewe the offending of those so great Nations, which at that tyme began to awake, held still Circumcision, and the Cleansings, and the Ceremonies of Moyses Lawe.

As touching the remoouing away to Babylon, which was pe∣culiarly of the trybe of Iuda: Alexander Polihistor saith expresly, that in the time of Ioachim King of Iuda, Ieremy was sent vnto them from God, to foretell them of extreme calamitie, because they worshipped an Idoll called Baall; Ioachim commaunded him to be burned quicke; and that Ieremy sayd further, that the King of Assyria should make them labour to digge a Channell to sayle out of Euphrates into Tygris:* 1.813 and that vpon that hope Nabuchodo∣nozor putting himselfe in Armes with all his power, spoyled Sa∣maria, tooke Hierusalem, and led away Ioachim prisoner. The same thing is witnessed by Diocles, and likewise namely by Be∣rosus the Chaldean, who sayeth that the sayd captiuitie indured thrée score yéeres and ten. Alpheus addeth that Megasthenes an auncient Author writeth, that Nabuchodonozor at his returne home, was striken with madnesse, and dyed crying incessantly to the Babylonians, that a great mischief was neere them, which all the power of their Gods could not stay. For (quoth hee) a Hafe∣asse of Persia shal come and make vs his thralles. The man that he spake of was Cirus;* 1.814 who (as Alexander Polyhistor and He∣cateus the Abderite doo witnesse) builded vp the Temple of Hie∣rusalem ageine.

As concerning Sesakes voyage against Roboam, Herodotus speaketh euidently enough, albeit that he name him not, declaring that he crept vppon his belly to AEgipt, Syria, and Palestine. And the storie of Sennacherib is there vnder that selfesame name, and how hee was slayne at his comming home,* 1.815 and that an Image was set vp vnto him with this inscription, Learne by me to feare God, for a memorial of Gods iudgement against him. Moreouer, Menander an Ephesian made mention in his Tyrian Historie, of the great Drought that was in the tyme of Achab,* 1.816 and of the a∣bundance of rayne that was obteyned by the prayers of Helias: after y^e imitation whereof, the Greekes feyned the like of AEacus. And Iosephus witnesseth that hee had read the storie of Ionas in many Commentaries; the which is rife in rememberance yet still among the Arabians of Affrick. And as touching the greatnesse of Niniuie, it is described fully alike in Diodorus.* 1.817

The token that God gaue to Ezechias by making the Sunne to retyre backe certeyne degrées, was registred in the Chronicles of the Babylonians, and of the Wisemen of Persia;* 1.818 the which to∣ken (some say, and not without some ground) was giuen so vnto

him, because he delighted in Astronomy, and had reformed the He∣brewe Calender. But many auncient bookes are lost, which might tell vs much more of these matters. Neuerthelesse, I would fayne haue these controllers of our Scriptures, to tell me if they haue a∣ny Historie among the Heathen, that hath moe witnesses of the trewnesse thereof, than the Historie of the Iewes. And whether a∣ny, euen of the greatest Empyres of the world, be so confirmed by the Histories of frends, as the Historie of that little Nation is con∣firmed by his enemies.

And whereas they obiect, that wee see no such myracles in our daies: I will prooue vnto them in another place, that the like haue bene seene since, which haue proceeded from the same power. But it is enough for me at this tyme to put them in remembrance, that if true myracles had not bene wrought in the world, we should not haue had so many false myracles among the Heathen. Nay, I say more, wee should not haue so much as the very name of Myracle, which could not haue bene giuen at the first, but to things that ex∣céede the abilitie of man, yea and of all other Creatures, as things rightly worthie of that name.

Now remaine the Absurdities which they will néedes finde, be∣cause they vnderstand not the reason.* 1.819 That law of yours (say they) stands talking of Beastes, of Pastures, of Oxen that dosse with their hornes, and of such other things. These are too base things for the word that procéedeth from GOD. Why say they not like∣wise, that they were too base things for God to create? And where∣fore are Lawes made, but for the benefite of man? And although they might seeme vyle in respect of God; can they denye them to haue bene profitable in respect of men, at that tyme when men for the most part liued by grazing? But of these nice fellowes I would knowe what the Lawes of Plato were, and what the Lawes of the twelue Tables were, at such tyme as the Romanes were Tilmen and Grazyers? or what the Lawes of Venice were, when they were but Fishers? Yet do we reuerence those Lawes for their an∣tiquitie; insomuch that if wée find but some old fragment of them, we thinke we haue a Iewell: and the Emperours of Rome being in their chief glorie, raced not out of their Digests the Lawes that begin thus, If Cattell: nor the Venetians their Statutes of Fis∣shing: nor the Frenchmen their ordinances of Hunting and Haw∣king; which might in many Coūtries seeme matters to be laughed at in our daies, and yet there were euen then which caryed them

into other Countries, as necessarie to appease strifes in their due tyme and place. To bee short, as long as Rome was champyon∣ground, it made Lawes against the harmes of Cattell. But when it fell once to building, it made Lawes for Gutters, Chanels and Sinkes. When it began to seeke the ruine of other men, it made Lawes of Battell, of Warfare, and of the sacking of Cities. And when it listed to destroye it selfe, it made Lawes of Rebellions, prescriptions and banishments. All the which were alike behoofull and necessarie in their tymes: and the first Lawmakers were no lesse honored than the latter: howbeit that the state of the Com∣monweale was worse and more corrupted in the latter tyme than in the other, because that whereas in the former tymes it had to do but with the repressing of Beasts, in y^e latter tymes it had to deale with the brydling of men worse than wyld Beastes, or to speake more truely, men that were become wood beastes themselues.

They ad, God (say you) created all things: and yet notwith∣standing Moyses denounceth some beastes to bee cleane and some vncleane. Whereto may these bee good? They ought to consider, that oftentimes the things which of themselues are cleane, become vncleane by the abuse of them, like as the thing that is good and wholsome by nature, becommeth euill and vnwholsome by excesse or surfeting. And in that respect hath Wine bin prohibited among many people, and there are fewe which haue not abhorred some Beastes or others; after which maner wee see that at Rome, such as had murthered their fathers or their moothers, were put into a Sacke with an Ape, a Cock, and a Uiper, and cast into the water; a thing whereof it were vneasie to yéeld a reason. But the sayd law of Moyses, not being vnprofitable, ne tending any higher than this present life, did not without cause put a difference betwéene brute things.* 1.820 For if we looke well to it, it denoūceth al those brute things vncleane, whereby the AEgiptians made their diuinations or tooke their foretokens, as the Woolfe, the Foxe, the Dragon, the Hare, the Sparehauke, the Kyte, & so foorth. And that was to make the people of Israell to abhorre the vanities and abhominations of AE∣gipt; like as if a man would keepe his children from fire, he would prohibite them euen the Chimney. And because those abuses were knowen among them; the end and aimingpoynt of that Lawe, was the redresse of them. And therefore vppon this poynt, I desire our despisers to suspend their iudgement in the things they vnderstand not. For as in that tyme no fault was found with this difference

in the Lawe of Moyses; so should no fault be found with many o∣thers at this day, if wee could set before vs the same tyme againe. I omit concerning the things that liued vpon pray, that ouer and besides that men tooke foretokens at them, they had this doctrine in them without much stepping aside from the letter, that men should not take away one anothers goodes. And as touching the Swyne, it is well knowne that for the inuention of Tillage which hee shewed to the AEgiptians by wrooting vp the ground with his groyne; they worshipped him as a God; in consideration whereof he was declared to be abhominable: besides the which thing, there appeared this euident allegorie, that men should not bemyre them selues in the dirt and dung of this world.

As for the Sacrifices, I haue touched them heretofore, and will treat of them more at large hereafter, forasmuchas they did put men hourely in rememberance of death dew for sinne, and of the ne∣cessitie of a sacrifice to cleanse away the same, namely of y^e sacrifice of Iesus Christ then to come, which should serue for the clensing of all mankynd. But admit that God to bring vs to obedience, had listed to giue vs Lawes whereof we could not conceiue the reason? What is it more than many Princes and Lawemakers haue done, as Plutark sayeth? Or than we our selues do to our Children and Seruants? And yet who will think it méete that they should aske vs a reason why we do so? Surely I desire no more, but that they which come to our Scriptures, should yeeld at leastwise the like regarde that they yeeld to Homer or Virgill. If they find in them any dark sentences; they say they will mark them with crosses and leaue them too Grammarians too martyr themselues withall. Therefore let them not thinke it straunge, that God hath left such things in his Scriptures, to humble the mynds of diuines withal. If in the Poet they meete any Solecismes, that is too say, incon∣gruities of speeche; byandby they be elegancies or figures. Let them consider in the Scriptures also, that the thing which they think doth disagree at the first sight, wilbee found verie fit of him that vnderstandeth the figure. To be short if a Poet haue spoken a woord that seemeth needlesse or without reason; the Schoole∣mayster turneth it into al sences to find some sence in it: the Scol∣ler is out of patience if his Mayster find none: and the Scholler will rather find fault with his Mayster, and the Mayster with his owne ignorance, than confesse any imperfection ar ouersight in the Poet. Now then if in these bookes confirmed with so manie Mi∣racles

and proceeding from soo greate authoritie, we m•••• offe••th things which to our fleshly wit séeme vnprofitable or absurd; it ••ere good reason that wee should bee the more diligent and heedfull in serching them and in turning them into al sences. And if in the end of all this, we find not wherewith to satisfie vs; let the hearer con∣fesse his dulnesse of vnderstanding, and the teacher acknowledge his owne ignorance; and let vs pray God to voutsafe to inlighten vs with his Spirit.

Now I thinke I haue sufficiently shewed, by the antiquitie, the style and the matter, by the ende also and by the particularities of our Scriptures; that they be of God, and that they cannot procéede from any other than him. By antiquitie; for they bee the first of all writings, and God hath bin reuealed in them euer since there were any men. By their style: for they instruct the lowly, and pull downe the highmynded, speaking with like authoritie to all men. By their matter: for their onely treating is of Gods doings and of his com∣municating of himselfe to men. By the marke whereat they aime: for they tende not to any other thing than Gods glorie and mans welfare. And by their singularnesse: for there are things without number, which cannot bee bred in the mynd eyther of man or An∣gell. The absurdnesse which wee suppose to be there, is but a see∣ming so to our ignorance: and the impossibilitie which to our see∣ming is in them, is but in comparison of our disabilitie. The truth of them is witnessed vnto vs in Histories, at leastwise if the case so stand that Gods word haue neede of mans record. He that is the Child of God knoweth his fathers voyce: but yet it may be that for the better confirming of him, my writing hereof shall not bee in vayne. Who so refuseth that, no man can perswade him thereto: but yet shall this serue to conuict him; and (by Gods helpe) a great sort which as yet haue had their eares so dulled with the noyse of this world, that they haue hetherto but ouerheard it, shall hereafter incline both their eares and their hearts thereunto. Now I beséech the almightie who spake the worde and the world was made, to speake effectually in our daies, and that the world may beléeue him. And because the marke that beléef shootes at, is the welfare of man: let vs see what welfare wee finde in this word; which is our third marke of Religion, and shalbe the matter of the Chapter next fol∣lowing.

The xxvij. Chapter.

That the meane ordeyned of GOD for the welfare of mankind, hath bene reuealed alwayes to the people of Israel; which is the third marke of Religion.

••Ow remayneth the third marke of true Religion to be examined: which is, that it teache the true and only way ordeined of God for the saluation and recouery of mankind; without the which (as I haue shewed already) all Religion is vnauai∣lable and vayne. Howbeit forasmuch as this Doctrine importeth the welfare of the world, and I haue interlaced many things by the way, which may dim the remembrance thereof: Let vs here call ageine to mind how néedfull this marke is in religion. And soothly it will be one further marke of the heauenlynes of our Scriptures, if we find that they teache vs the necessitie of that on∣ly meane, and also direct vs to it from the beginning foorthon from tyme to tyme.* 1.821 We haue read in the booke of Nature, that Man is immortall: that his happinesse is not here beneath, but in the end∣lesse lyfe: that the blessednesse of that endlesse lyfe, is to inioy God aboue: and that the meane to atteyne thereto, is to serue and ho∣nour him here beneath with all our heart. But the same booke hath taught vs also, that by sinne we bée falne from our originall: that we be falne from Gods fauour into his wrath: that we be infinite∣ly departed away both from seruing him and from sticking to him: and cōsequently that we be gone a••tray from the happinesse which we should seeke & cannot find elsewhere thā in him. What remay∣neth then for vs, but vtter despayre? And whereto serueth the said endlesse lyfe, but to be turned into endlesse death? And the euerla∣sting happynesse wherevnto wee were created, but to our euerla∣sting grief? vnlesse some Boord be left vs at hand to saue vs from our shipwrecke: I meane vnlesse God doo make vs some way, both to appease his wrath, and to come ageine into his fauour. In this extremitie therefore wee méete with Religion, which directeth vs

to the true God. But what els is that, than a sending of an offen∣der to his Iudge? or a laying of Strawe to the fyre? considering y^t God is infinitely good, that is to say, infinitely contrarie to euill, and if contrarie to euill, then also vnto vs, whose thoughts, sayings and dooings are altogether euill. The same Religion hath set vs downe the Scriptures, wherein wee reade the will of our Crea∣tor: But what haue we yet found there? That mankind is corrupt from his roote, and as it were rotten at his Core: That all the ima∣ginations of mans heart are alwayes vtterly euill: and yet not∣withstanding, that God commaundeth vs to loue him with all our heart, and our neighbour as our selfe; behighting to them that doe it euerlasting lyfe, and to them that doe it not, euerlasting death. Which of vs feeleth not a stryuing in all his members ageinst the will of God? And consequently who is hée that ought not too feele a very Hell, when he entereth into himselfe and into the scrip∣tures, to reade his Arreignement and Condemnation? And so, what is Religion but vanitie, and what is the Scripture or Gods word but a harthyting, if wee find not there the Charters of grace and remission, which reconcyle vs to God, and knit vs ageine vnto him, and by that vnyting doe restore vs the happynesse where∣vnto we were created? So falleth it out, that God cannot be disap∣poynted of his purpose, and that the Religion which hee hath gra∣ued so déepely in mans heart, cannot be in vayn. Néedes then must it be, that in the true religion and in the Scriptures we must find our grace and the meane thereof, which is the third and chief mark that we séeke.

Let vs expresse this Doctrine yet playnlier, for it is the very knot and forme or inshape of all Religion. The happynesse of man is to be vnited vnto God, and the way to be vnited vnto him, is to sticke vnto his will. The first man being created free and capable of good, disobeyed GOD, and by his disobedience became a bond∣slaue to sinne. So was hee farre remoued from God and from his owne welfare, and (had not grace stepped in) he had bin in extreme miserie, which we call Hell. Of this Rebell are we all borne, and his flesh hath begotten vs both fleshly and bondslaues of sinne as he was. By Nature than we can looke for none other than the wa∣ges of sinne, which is death; neither can wee haue any other inhe∣ritance than our Fathers, who hath left vs nothing els to inherit but damnation. Now let vs see what we our selues haue brought to this decayed succession. In sted of discharging our Obligation,

we ronne on further in arrerages: and lyking well thereof, we da••∣lie increase our debt. For none of vs al dischargeth himself to God∣ward, of the things which he requireth of vs iustly in his Law, and therefore wee continue still behind hand. Nay, there is none of vs which offendeth not the Lord infinite waies daily in thought, word and deede, by meanes whereof we plundge our selues in euer dée∣per and déeper. Now then, though we found not our succession so decayed; yet doe wee our selues make it such by our excessiue debts and continuall offences; which in effect is all that wee can bring thereto. And against whom see wee these offences? Euen against God, against our father, against our maker; al which is a great ag∣grauating of our fault: namely, that the Child should rebell against his father, or that a thing of nothing should turne away from his creator; yea and (which worse is) take wages of the Deuill to fight against him. The crime is so out of al measure great, that it cannot nor ought not to bee inhaunced. But were there no further matter than this, that forasmuch as God is infinite, the offence is multi∣plyed according to the person against whom it is commited: our offence against GOD cannot but bee infinite, and consequently so must our punishment be too. Now therfore we poore wretches sub∣iect to infinite paynes without number, which by our continuall misdeedes doe daily multiply the infinitenesse of our punishments still euen to the vttermost; haue néede of a remedie. And what shall that remedie be? Gods mercie? Nay, mercie may not be contrarie to his Iustice. What then? Gods Iustice? No, wee haue neede of mercie. By what meane may GOD execute his Iustice without disanulling his mercie; or exercise mercie without preiudice of his Iustice; so as both of them may be verified, as well that God is in∣finitely gracious, as that he infinitely hateth all euill, both toge∣ther? If he shewe mercie absolutely to an infinite offence, where is his Iustice? Or where is his vniuersall gouernment, whereby he yéeldeth good to the good and euill to the euill? Yea, and where is our owne Iustice become, which is but a shadowe of Gods? A∣gaine, if he execute mere Iustice, what shall become of Mankynd after this life? Or rather, why hath he mainteyned him euer since his first fal, that his Iustice hath not deuowred vs of al this while, vs I say in whom is not any thing which burneth not before his wrath? It remayneth then, that to appease his wrath and to make way to mercie, which wrath of his is nothing els but a iust intent to punish, and which mercie of his is likewise but a iust intent to

forgiue: there must come some satisfaction betwene God and Man, without the which there would bee (as ye might terme it) an vtter Emptinesse in the world, whereunto nature it selfe cannot agree. But what a depth is here yet still, considering that the fault is in∣finite, and the punishment must be proportionable to the fault, and the satisfaction likewise to the punishment, that is to say, that satis∣faction infinitely infinite is required at our hands? Let man offer the whole world vnto God; and what offereth he but that which he hath receiued of GOD, and that which he hath lost by his disobe∣dience? And sith GOD hath created this world of nothing; how should a thing of nothing multiply so infinitely, as to satisfie for an infinite offence? Let Man offer himselfe; what offereth he but vn∣thankfulnesse and disobedience, blasphemie and froward déedes? That is to say, what shall he els do but prouoke Gods wrath more and more against him? Nay, let the very Angels step in, the Crea∣ture to pacifie the Creator; the thing that is finite in goodnesse to couer an infinite euill; the indebted in all respects, to discharge ano∣ther more indebted: and what els will this be, than a couering that (as the Prophet sayth) doth but halfe couer; and a plaister infinite∣ly too little for the sore?* 1.822 Surely, let vs say therefore that God him∣selfe must bée fayne to step in betwéene his Iustice and his mercie, and as he created vs at the first, so to create vs newe againe; and as he created vs then in his fauour, so to acquit vs now from his wrath; and as he vttered his wisedome then in creating vs, so to imploye the same now againe in repayring vs; and soothly so much the more (if more may bee) because that in our creation nothing re∣sisted the goodnesse of the Creator, whereas in our reparation our naughtinesse withstandeth him as much as is possible. Out of one bottomlesse deepe wee goe still into another: but God bee praysed, they bee the deepes of his grace. Who then (say you) shall bee this Mediatour, God vnto God, Infinite vnto Infinite, and able both to discharge the bond, and to asswage the infinite punishmēt? Here let vs bethinke vs againe what hath bene sayd afore in the fifth and sixth Chapters. I haue declared there, both by reason and by re∣cord of all antiquitie, that in God there are three persons or Inbe∣ings in vnitie of one essence, and that the same are coeternall and coequall in all respects: The Father as the ground and welspring; the Sonne, as the euerlasting word and wisedome of the Father; and the holy Ghost as the bond of kyndnesse and loue, whereby the Father and the Sonne are linked together: and I pray the Rea∣der

that for the refreshing of his memorie, he will voutsafe to reade ouer those Chapters againe vpon this poynt. Needes then I as∣sure you must one of those three persons step in betwixt Gods wrath and our infinit Fault. And sith it is so, which of them should rather doe it than the wisedome, considering that the case standeth vppon the new creating of vs againe, and that we were created by the same at the first? or than the Sonne, seeing wée bée to be adop∣ted, that is to say, to bee admitted to an inheritance? Nay moreo∣uer, it behoued this Mediatour to step in for euer. For inasmuch as the world was created for man, and man is falne away from God: neither the world nor man now after his fall, could haue a∣bidden before God one moment of an hower. Behold, in the maner of this mediation, there is againe another incomprehensible Miste∣rie, howbeit such a one, as when it is once reuealed vnto vs, wee deeme it vnpossible to haue bene otherwise. We haue God infinit∣ly iust, and Man infinitely sinfull. The infinite Iustice due to so in∣finite offence, could not bee satisfied, but eyther by infinite punish∣ment, or by an infinit reparation: and this infinite reparation could not proceede but from him that is infinite, that is to wit from God himselfe. It behoueth then that our Mediatour be God, and of his gracious goodnesse such a one haue we. But this infinite Godhead is not to recompence our disobedience otherwise than with obe∣dience; nor our vndesert, otherwise than with desert; not our stub∣bornnesse otherwise than with lowlynesse: neither againe is he to purchace vs grace, but by punishment; or life, but by death. And to the intent he may obey, he must abase himselfe; to deserue, he must serue; to become lowly, he must stoope downe beneath himselfe; to suffer, he must become weake; and to dye he must become mortall. Certesse we say therefore, that it is conuenient and behoofull, that our Mediatour should be both God and Man. Man, to bee borne vnder the Lawe; God, to performe the Lawe: Man, to serue; God, to set free: Man, to humble himselfe to the vttermost; God, to exalt himselfe aboue all things: Man, to suffer, God to ouercome: Man, to dye; and God to tryumph ouer death. Nay moreouer, forasmuch as he submitteth himselfe willingly to such things, for our sakes say I, and not for his owne: néedes must his obedience become a discharge for the disobedience; his desert a discharge of the vnde∣sert, and his lowlinesse a satisfaction for the stubbornnesse of them that beleeue in him; yea and moreouer, a purchace of obedience, de∣sert, and lowlynesse vnto them; so that looke what is due to his o∣bedience,

that is to wit, loue; to his desert, that is to wit, reward; to his humilitie, that is to wit, honor; to his sorowe, that is to wit, ioye; to his death, that is to wit, life; and to his victorie, that is to wit, Tryumph; the same is purchaced and giuen by him, and im∣puted and made due at Gods hand to all such as honor that great benefite, and call vpon the father in his name. From this poynt we may proceede afterward to other conditions and circumstances re∣quisite in the Mediatour God and Man, seeking him alwaies as may be most conuenient and agreeable, both to Gods Iustice, & to the office & dignitie of the Mediatour.* 1.823 It is necessarie for our wel∣fare say I, y^t the Mediator should be man to beare y^e punishmēts of men, & to recōcile Mankynd. And if he were not a mā; then like as we should haue no part in him nor he in vs: so should he not auayle vs any whitte, neither in way of satisfaction, nor in way of desert. Méete it is therfore that he should be borne of our race, and that he should be flesh of our flesh & bone of our bone, to the intēt that as in Adam we be al become bondseruāts to sinne; so in him we may be deliuered and set frée from the reward of sinne, which is death. A∣geine, forasmuch as he was to ouercome sinne, it behoued him to bee without sinne; and forasmuch as it was for him to make vs cleane, it behoued him to be without vncleannesse. For we knowe that all of vs are conceiued in iniquitie; and borne in vncleannesse and corruption; and therefore it behoueth him to be such a man, as is conceiued after an other maner than man is. And this after so many wonders ought not to be counted a wonder: for he that de∣riued woman out of man without helpe of woman, can also deriue man out of woman without helpe of man. To these particularities we shall come time enough hereafter, and if suffizeth at this tyme, that Gods Iustice and mans offence haue euen by humane reason directed vs to a verie necessitie of a Mediator God and Man, able to discharge mā of euerlasting death ageinst God, and to purchase him the souerein felicitie of lyfe. And this is it that I meant in the beginning of the chapter; namely that this marke is so of the ve∣ry substance and inshape of Religion, that Religion without that, should be vtterly vnauaylable and vayne. The Heathen séeme to haue perceyued this necessitie by many examples. They knewe that man was created to liue for euer,* 1.824 and that hee could not in∣ioy that benefite, but by turning again vnto God. But in this they fell short, that they considered not that from vs to God the way is vnpossible to man, if God himself be not our way whereby to come

thither. It may be that they haue heard, that it behoued a man to dye for the sinnes of the world. And therevpon the diuell did put in their heads to sacrifice men, and so to lay the sinnes of a whole Ci∣tie or countrie vpon the backe of some one poore wretch. And looke who was the greatest offender of all others, and whom they had vowed to the gallowes for the multitude of his misdéedes; him did they put to the pacifying of Gods wrath towards them. Such are the accustomed Apish toyes of the Diuell. But how shall he that is in Gods displeasure, appease his displeasure? And what shall the worst doo, if the best can doo nothing? The Emperour Iulian could not tell how to rid his hands of this necessitie in his disputations ageinst the Christians. By reason whereof, perceiuing that there must néedes bee a meane betwéene God and man for the cleansing of mens Soules, hee bare himselfe on hand, that Esculapius the Sonne of Iupiter was manifested to the world by the lyuely in∣gendring of the Sonne, and that hee shewed him selfe first in Epi∣daurus, and afterward in diuers other places, to heale mens Bo∣dies and to amend their Soules: Which is a proof, that the impos∣sibilitie of the Incarnation of the Sonne of God, which is preten∣ded by some, séemed not to him to be vnpossible, forasmuch as the Iucarnation of Esculapius the sonne of Iupiter, God (in the opi∣on of Iulian,) and the sonne of God, seemed to him not onely possi∣ble, but also come to passe. And in verie déede, why should it seeme strange that he which hath knit the Soule of man being a spiritu∣all substance, vnto his body being an earthly; should bee able to v∣nite himselfe vnto man? But I haue shewed afore, that this Escu∣lapius was a man; and that the spirit which abused his name, was a diuell, and that both of them were wicked creatures. And more∣ouer, who euer beléeued or setfoorth this Fable of Esculapius, but onely Iulian? Nay verily, Porphyrius hath outgone all antiqui∣tie in this behalfe.* 1.825 For hauing laid this foundation, That the soue∣reine welfare of the Soule is to sée God, That it cannot see hym vnlesse it be first cleansed from the silth thereof, and therefore that by Gods prouidence there must be some meane procured to cleanse mankind: whē he commeth to the seeking of it out, he saith, That the Artes and Sciences doo well cleare our wits in the knowledge of things, but they cannoth so cleanse vs, that wee may come vnto God. And wheras many men deceiued themselues in séeking this cleansing by Magik and Theurgie: he sayd that imagination and common sence might well bee helped thereby in the perceyuing of

bodily things; but they atteyned not to the purging of the vnder∣standing of the Soule, neyther could they make a man to see his GOD or the trueth it selfe. Againe, whereas some Philosophers sought this clensing in the Misteries of the Sonne, and of Iupi∣ter, that is to say, in communicating (as they surmised) not with Deuils, but with such as were estéemed to be good Gods, he decla∣reth that there was as small likelyhood thereof in their Misteries, as in the Misteries of the rest: and moreouer that those things ex∣tended but to very fewe men, whereas this clensing ought to be v∣niuersall to the benefite of all mankind. In the end, hauing reiected all other clensings; his conclusion is, that the Beginnings onely and none others, can worke and bee the meane to worke this vni∣uersall Clensing. What he meaneth by the Beginnings, the Pla∣tonists can tell well enough: and I haue declared it by many sen∣tences of his in my fifth and sixth Chapters; that is to wit, the per∣sons or proprieties that are in God, whom Porphyrius calleth ex∣pressely the Father, the vnderstanding of the Father, and the Soule of the World. He could not almost haue come any néerer vs, vnlesse he should haue met iumpe with vs: and surely he see∣meth to haue had this of the Chaldees, from whom he acknowled∣geth himselfe to haue receyued many diuine Oracles concerning this matter. But it is enough for vs that wee haue gayned these poynts of him, That there must of necessitie be some meane ordey∣ned of GOD for the clensing and sauing of mankynd: That none can worke that Cleannesse, except it bee some one of the Begin∣nings, that is to say, except it hee God himselfe; and that he neuer met yet with any Sect in all Philosophie that setteth foorth the meane thereof. Therefore it standeth vs on hand to seeke it; not in Philosophie, but in our Scriptures. For seeing they bee of God, and are reuealed for the welfare of Man, they ought to direct vs to the only meane of the Saluation which we long for. And like as Religion was bred and borne as soone as Man, as I haue sayd a∣fore; so must it needes be, that the meane of Saluation was reuea∣led as soone as Religion, and set foorth in the holy Scriptures from tyme to tyme. And if we finde it so; it will be an vnfallible testimo∣nie; both of our Religion, and of our Scriptures together.* 1.826

Let vs then begin with the Creation of man. The Scripture sayeth that as soone as he was created, God gaue him this Lawe: If thou eate of the tree of the skill of good and euill; thou shalt dye the Death. That is to say, If thou turne away neuer so

little from the obeying of me, thou shalt fall into my displeasure, and from my displeasure into endlesse death. Byandby after, man is seduced by the Serpent, that is to say by the diuel, and breaketh the Lawe of his Creator; by meane whereof he is in his displeasure, and by sinne is become subiect to endlesse damnation. Now seeing that this man was alone; and that the world was made for him; what should haue followed but the vtter destruction of the world out of hand, and the burning of man euerlastingly in Gods wrath? But see how Gods wisdome stepped in for the sauing of man, and for the preseruing of his owne woorke; and sinne was no sooner bred, but the scripture immediatly sheweth vs the remedie thereof. I will set emnitie (sayeth the Lord to the diuell) betweene thy seede and the womans seede.* 1.827 Hir seede shall crush thy head, and thou shalt byte it by the heele. That is to say, I will cause one to be borne of the womans seede, which shall subdew the diuell: and the diuell shal do his indeuer to trip vp his heeles by tempting him all maner of wayes; but he shall treade the diuell vnder his feete, and make him to yeeld vp his weapons, that is to wit, Sinne and death. Now, who seeth not that to ouercome the diuell, it be∣houeth him to be God; and that to be borne of a Woman, it beho∣ueth him to be man, that is to say both God and man, as I haue sayd afore?* 1.828 Here beginneth our controuersie ageinst the Iewes of these later tymes, who hold opinion that the Messias or Chryst, whom we vphold to be the Mediator betweene Gods Iustice and Mannes sinne; shalbe some greate Emperour that shall deliuer them from bodily oppression; whereunto I haue answered at large heretofore.* 1.829 Howbeit, they cannot denie, but that by the death which God threateneth to Adam for his transgression, Rabbi Moses Ben Maimon vnderstandeth a spirituall death, that is to wit, the death of the Soule wounded with sinne and forsaken of hir lyfe which is God: and that by the venoume of the Serpent, he meaneth sinne it self, which shall ceasse (sayeth he) vnder the Messias; and that the same is also the Interpretation of the auncient Cabalists: and lykewyse that the Sinagog of old time vnderstoode the sayd text to be ment of the Messias, as the Interpretation of the thréescore and ten Interpreters, and the auncient Translation of Hierusalem it∣self,* 1.830 do giue vs cause to beleeue. For (sayeth this Latter expresly) so long ô Serpent as the womans Children keepe the Lawe, they kill thee: and when they ceasse to doo so, thou stingest them in the Heele, and hast powre to hurt them much. But

whereas for their harm there is a sure remedy, to heale it, for thyne there is none. For in the last dayes, they shal crushe thee al to peeces with their Heeles, by meanes of Christ their King. Now if the death bee spirituall, and the enemy spirituall, and his weapons spiritnall: how can it be denyed that the battell betweene him and the Messias who is to vanquish him, is lykewise spiritual, his power spiritual, and his Kingdome spirituall? Moreouer, what were Adam, Henoch, Noe, and Abraham benefited by this pro∣mise; if it extend no further than to temporall things? Which of vs would indure here a thousand miseries, vnder pretence that cer∣teine thousands of yeres hence, we should haue an Emperour borne which should he redouted euerywhere? Now lyke as the scripture beginneth with the promise of the Messias, that is to say of the de∣liuerer of our Soules: so doth it shewe euidently, that it aimeth not at any other mark than that. For leauing the great States of the world, and the breeding of Kingdomes and Principalities, which are things whereon Histories stand so curiousely; it leadeth vs directly too the birth and ofspring of Abraham, whereof the Messias was to be borne. And vnto the same Abraham doth God repe〈…〉〈…〉 promise often times; that in his seede al nations should be blessed; 〈◊〉〈◊〉 is to say, that one should be borne of his seede, by whom Saluation should be profered to all nations of the Earth? And age in, that in Isaac the seede should be called vnto him: which thing surely is not spoken of the Posteritie of his Sonne Ismael, notwithstanding that GOD told him that his fleshly posteritie should be verie florishing. But this preface which the Lord maketh, shall I hide any thing from my seruant Abraham &c. Sheweth euidently how it is a misterie that passeth al vnderstanding of man, and whereunto Abraham had no lesse ryght than his seede. From Abraham this promise passed by hand to Isaac, from Isaac to Ia∣cob, and Iacob left it by his last will too his children with these woords; The Scepter shalnot be taken from Iuda, nor the law∣giuer from betweene his feete, vntil Silo come; and vnto him shall the Nations resort. Which woords were spoken to Iuda by name, bycause the sayd holy seede was to come of his stocke. And that the same saying was ment of the Messias; the Thargum of Hierusalem and the Onkelos which are bookes of chéef anthoritie among the Iewes, do assure vs. For they translate it thus, vntill Chryst or the Anoynted come; whereunto is added this; too whom the Kingdome belongeth. And the schoole of Rabbi Sila 〈1 page duplicate〉〈1 page duplicate〉

〈1 page duplicate〉〈1 page duplicate〉

being demaunded in the Talmud,* 1.831 what should bee the name of the Messias; answereth, Silo is his name: for (say they) it is sayd, vn∣till Silo come. Albeit now that the sayd kingdome be other than a temporall Dominion; yet is the text formall in that place. For the Iewes wayt that the Messias or Christ should come of the Trybe of Iuda, and that at the tyme of his comming the Scepter and the Lawgiuer should both be taken from Iuda. Surely the thing that Israell looked for as then, was not to subdue other Nations, seeing that Israell himselfe was not to reigne at that tyme. And wretched had the hope of other Nations bene, which looked for him also, ac∣cording to this text, if his comming should haue bene but to spoyle them and make hauocke of them. But he was to reigne, yea euen ouer all Nations, yea and to the benefite of all Nations. His reig∣ning then shalbe according to the first promise, namely ouer mens Soules, the which he shall deliuer from the bondage of Sinne and the tyrannie of the Deuill. In the Lawe of Moyses, the Sacrifices and Ceremonies doe represent vnto vs y^e satisfaction which Christ was to make for the sinnes of the people by the sacrificing of him∣selfe. But specially the Passouer Lambe, the Sacrifice of the red Cowe, the sending of the Scapegoate into the Wildernesse, and the raising vp of the brasen Serpent for the heali•••• of diseases, were all of them Memorialles for the people, to put them in mynd both of the comming of the Messias, and to what ende hee should come. For whereas wee reade that the doorepostes of the houses were besmeared with the blud of a Lamb, to the intent that the de∣stroying Angell should not touch them: that the Ashes of a Cowe without spot were kept for the sinnes of the Congregation: That the Highpriest laying his hand vppon a Goates head, acknowled∣ged the sinnes of the people ouer him, and the Goate went away with them into a place vninhabitable, to the intent (as ye would say) he might neuer be heard of any more: and that as many as be∣held the brasen Serpent, were healed incontineutly of the stinging of Serpents: seeing that the things which were imployed to those purposes, could not of their owne nature serue there vnto: we must néedes conclude, that they were signes; signes (say I) of spirituall and inward matters, like the Scripture it selfe, which is spirituall and serueth for the inward man: That is to wit, That the Deuill hath no power ouer those which are reconcyled to God by the Sa∣crifice of the Messias who is charged with their Sinnes: and that those which haue an eye vnto him, are by and by healed of the Ser∣pents

deadly sting. And whereas some thinke it straunge that so great a thing, should bee figured by so vyle and base things: the fi∣gure is the more profitable, and the lesse daūgerous in that it is so. For had so high things bene figured 〈◊〉〈◊〉 foretokened by things ap∣proching to their highnesse: men might haue bene deceyued by thē, and haue taken the figures for the things themselues, and so haue rested vpon the gaynesse of the sheath, without looking into it. As for example, if in stead of the Goate, they should haue Sacrificed the man of greatest reputation in the Congregation: Men, béeing giuen to yéeld too much vnto man, would haue mistaken him for the very Mediatour himselfe. But when the figure of our recon∣cilement vnto God, and of the forgiuenesse of our sinnes, is taken at a brute beast which hath nothing sutable thereto, sauing that he is giltlesse and capable of death: wee bee taught that it is but a fi∣gure, and that it behoueth vs to ••ade into the thing it selfe: & that so much the more, because those Sacrifices are so solemnely and so expressely commaunded to posteritie, as things which for the welfare of mankynd, ought to be alwaies in remembrance, or ra∣ther present before mens eyes.

But yet the Hebrewes held opinion that Asar,* 1.832 Elcana and A∣biasaph the three sonnes of Chore mentioned in the sixt Chapter of Exodus,* 1.833 were authors of diuers of the Psalmes that are gathe∣red into the second booke of Dauids Psalter, and so is Moyses also of some one or two in the third booke; whereby they comforted the Fathers in the wildernesse, assuring them of the cōming of Christ. Unto Dauid (who was of the Trybe of Iuda) God himselfe con∣st••••ieth the sayd promise,* 1.834 telling him that the blessed séed should come of him. I will rayse vp (saith he) thy seede after thee, which 〈◊〉〈◊〉 come one of thy loynes; his kingdome will I stablish for euer; I will be to him for a Father, and he shall be to mee for a sonne, And although this may séeme to be ment of Salomon Da∣uids sonne, who was in déede but a figure of Christ; yet notwith∣standing the often repeating of these words eternally, euerla∣stingly, and for euer, giueth vs to vnderstand, that it cannot bee 〈◊〉〈◊〉 but of the thing figured, that is to wit, of the eternall or e∣uerlasting King. And in very deede Dauid sheweth well in his Psalmes, that hee hath looked further with the eyes of his mynde, than to his sonne Salomon.* 1.835 For in the second Psalme, Thou art my sonne (saith the Euerlasting,) this day haue I begottē thee. I will giue thee the Gentyles for thyne inheritance, and the

vtmost coastes of the earth for thy possession. And in the fiue and fortieth Psalme, speaking of the mariage of this Sonne, with an extraordinary preface, Thy Throne ô God (sayth he) is from euerlasting; and the Scepter of thy kingdome is a Scepter of righteousnes. And in the seauen and fortith, The princes of the Nations are assembled togither (sayth he) to be the people of the God of Abraham. And in the thréescore and seauenth; Thou shalt iudge folk righteously, Thy sauing health shalbe knowen to al Nations, and thou sha••t direct the Nations of the earth. And this later clause is shet vp with this worde Selah, which the Hebrewes are not wont to vse, but in some profound misterie. To be short, in the thréescore and twelfth Psalme, after he hath sayde. All Kings shall worship him, and all Nations shall serue him: Hée addeth, for he shall deliuer the poore that cry vnto hym, and the distressed that hath no helpe. Yea and which more is, All Nations shall report themselues to be blessed in him, and they shall also blesse him. Dauid is full of such sentences, which shewe that he speaketh of a King, howbeit of another than Salo∣mon his owne sonne. For Salomons kingdom extended not much further than his fathers, neither did the Nations méete togither vnder him; and as for his kingdome, it ended wich his beath, and within day or twayne after was rent in peeces. And therefore the auncient Synagog did alwayes vnderstand those texts to be ment of Christ, who was to be borne of the séede of Dauid, as we may perceyue by the Chaldee translation, which interpreteth them to be spoken concerning the same partie. Howbeit sith it is not said in any of the Psalmes, Reioyce thou Israel, for thou shalt reigne ouer the Gentiles; but, Reioyceye Gentyles, be glad ye Na∣tions and Kings, for I will giue you a King: surely it is euident that the ioy which he reporteth to be so greate, is not for that they should haue a Iewe to be their king, for euery Nation had leuer to haue one of their owne countrie; or for that this King should haue a souereine Monarke aboue them all to controll them, for euery of them had leuer to reigne by himselfe alone: but rather because this King should bee of a farre other nature and qualitie than all other Kings, namely a King of soules, a deliuerer of men from the bon∣dage of sinne, and a spirituall Monarke. Also the Song of Songs is an expresse poetrie cōceruing the vnion of Christ & his Church, and hath bene so vnderstoode of the Iewes, as it appeereth by the Chaldee Paraphrase therof which we haue. As for the Prophets,

we find nothing els in them almost line by lyne, but foretellings of Christ to come, of y^e Nature of his Kingdome, of the calling of the Gentiles, of the stablithing agein of godlynes, and such other mat∣ters; as wel to put y^e people then present in remembrance of them, as to prepare the aftercommers to receiue them. Insomuch that if the Prophets speake of the returne from Babylon, of the stablish∣ing ageine of the kingdome, of the building ageine of the Temple, and such other things? by and by within two or thrée verses, yee shal see them caried away to the spirituall kingdome of Christ, and to the true Temple which is the Church: as though they had ment to say vnto vs, that we must not rest vpon these temporall things which are but shadowes; but remember that we be men, that is to say Soules; and that our welfare cōsisteth not in liuing, in gouer∣ning, and in reigning heere, but in seruing God that we may be v∣nited vnto him, & ruled by him, howbeit not so as we should reigne in the world, but that God should reigne in vs by the Scepter of his word, and by the power of his spirit, and be obeyed of vs. It shall come to passe (sayth Esay)* 1.836 that in the latter dayes the hill of the Lords house shalbe set vp vpon the toppe of the moun∣taynes, and that all Nations shal come flocking to it, and ma∣ny folke shall say, Come, let vs goe vp to the Lords hill, and to the GOD of Iacobs house. This text is spoken manifestly of Christ and of his reigne, and of the blessing that was to be shed out vpon all Nations by him. But let vs reade further. He will teach vs his wayes (sayth he) and we shall walke in his pathes. The Lawe shall come from out of Sion, and the world of the Lorde from Hierusalem. He shall iudge among the Heathen, and re∣proue the Nations. They shall turne their Swordes into Cul∣ters, & their Speares into Sythes. Here is no speaking of wars, of fighting or of force; but the Lawe of Gods worde, and of tea∣ching. And in the fourth Chapter, At that day (sayth he)* 1.837 shall the Lords braunch be m••ch made of, and glorious, and whosoe∣uer abydeth in Hierusalem shall be called holy. If this glorie were not expounded, some would thereby behight here a triumph. But at the same time (saith he) the Lord will wash away the fil∣thynes of the daughters of Syon, and clense away the blud of Hierusalem from the middes thereof, by the spirit of iudge∣ment and the spirit of burning. It is then a glory, yea and a true glorie, but yet a farre other glorie then the flesh vnderstandeth. Now the Iewes vnderstand this text of the Messias: for whereas

the Hebrewe hath Braunch; the Chaldee Interpreter hath tran∣slated it the Lords Anoynted or Christ.* 1.838 In his nineth Chapter he sayth that he shalbe called the Prince of peace; (and the Chaldee Paraphrast hath translated it the Christ or Anoynted of peace) and that his kingdome shalbe increased, and that there shall bee no end of his reigne, and that he shall execute Iustice vpon the throne of Dauid for euer. If he shalbe a Prince of peace, where shal warre become?* 1.839 And if there bee no warre, what shall this increase of his kingdome bee? That doth he shewe vs apparantly in his eleuenth Chapter.* 1.840 A blossome shall spring (sayth he) out of the stocke of Isay, and a braunch shall growe out of his roote. The spirite of the Lord shall rest vpon him, the spirite of wisedome and vn∣derstanding, the spirite of counsell and strength, the spirite of knowledge & of the feare of the Lord. He shal smite the earth with the rod of his mouth, & kill the wicked with the breath of his lippes. The Goate and the Lambe shall dwell together, and the Leopard with the Kid. The Earth shall bee full of the knowledge of the Lord as with an ouerflowing of the Sea, and the Gentiles shall inquire after the roote of Isay, which shal be set vp as a Standard for people to resort vnto. The Conquests then of this Emperour shalbe of mens Soules; his tributes, their worshippings; his armour and weapons, the spirit of the Lord; his peace, the vniting of all folke together into one Church in the fa∣uour of their Maker. Also in the fiue and twentie he 〈…〉〈…〉 shall destroy death for euer, and take away the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 at hy∣deth the face of all people.* 1.841 And in the fiue and thirtie, The eyes of the blynd shall bee opened, and the eares of the deaffe shall be vnstopped. And in the two and fortie and the nine and fortie: He shalbe no outcryer nor loude of speech; his voyce shall not be heard in the streates. He shall set iudgement on 〈…〉〈…〉 and the Iles shall wayt for him. He shal be a maker of leagues among people, and a light vnto the Gentiles. Some shall come from the North, and some from the South; so as the land shall be to narrowe for them. The Kings themselues shalbe foster•• fathers to my people, and Queenes shall bee their Nurces. Which of all these things can bee vnderstood otherwise than of a spirituall kingdome? On the contrary part, let vs see how the same Prophet speaketh of Cyrus the great Emperour, which was to deliuer Israell by the force of armes out of the hands of the Chal∣dees. I haue taken thee by the right hand (sayth the Lord) to

make Nations subiect vnto thee, and to weaken the reynes of Kings; to set open the doores vnto thee, and to vnlocke the gates against thee. I will breake open the gates of brasse, and burst asunder the barres of yron. I will giue thee the hoorded treasures, and the things that lye hid in secret places. What likenesse is there betweene this maner of speaking and the other, and consequently betwéene the deliuerances or the deliuerers them selues? But in the two and fiftie and three and fiftie,* 1.842 he taketh a∣way all doubt. Behold (saith he) my seruant shall behaue himself happely, and be exalted and aduanced very high. As how? He shall bee despised of men (sayth the Prophet) and thrust out of their companie. A man full of sorowe and heauinesse shall he bee, and euery bodie shall hide his face from him. He shall bee wounded for our misdeedes, and smitten for our sinnes. The chastisement of our peace shal lye vpon him, and by his stripes shall wee bee healed. And he sayth afterward, Although there was not any vnrightuosnesse in him, yet was it the Lords will to breake him with sorowe. And because he shall giue his life for sinne, the will of the Lord shall prosper in his hand, and he shall see the labour of his Soule, and inioy it. For by his know∣ledge he shall make many rightuous, and he shall take their i∣niquities vpon him. Now this text is interpreted expresly of the Messias by the Chaldee Paraphrast.* 1.843 And in the Talmud, Rabbi Iacob being asked the name of the Messias, sayth he shalbe called Leaprous; and there he bringeth in this text to proue it. By which reckoning his life should be but languishing and paine, sauing that he tryumphed ouer the Deuill and Death, and that we vnderstand it spiritually. To be short, in the fiue and fiftie he is called the Law giuer of the Gentiles:* 1.844 and in the nine and fiftie, The Redeemer: And in the thréescore and one, The Phisition of the helplesse, and the Proclaymer of the acceptable yere of the Lord: And in the thréescore and two, The Sauiour, & the League or Attonement which he bringeth to the people; not that he Lordeth it, but that he is holy; nor that he giueth lawes to other Nations of the earth, but that he hath the word of GOD in his owne mouth and in the mouthes of his seede; sauing that in the kingdome of his Christ, God will giue a better place to straungers then to them.

As for al the other Prophets, like as they shoote not at any other marke, so haue they not any other voyce. Neuerthelesse we will content ourselues with a feawe of their sayings, which shall giue

credit to all the rest; and so much the more, bycause their wryting was comonly both at sundry times, and in sundry places. We haue seene how the Messias was promised to the issew of Dauid and to Dauid himself.* 1.845 Thus therefore doth Ieremy speake thereof con∣formably to that which we haue sayd heretofore. I will rayse vp a braunch vnto Dauid (sayeth the Lord), and hee shall reigne as King, and prosper, and execute Iustice and Iudgment vppon Earth. And if ye aske the Prophet what maner of prosperitie this shalbe: It is (sayeth he) that in his dayes Iuda shalbe safe, and Israel shal dwell without feare, and the name whereby he shal∣be called, shalbe the Euerlasting, our Ryghtuousenes; that is to say the Iustifier of vs. For (sayeth he) the Lord hath sayd it. Dauid shall neuer want a Successor sitting vppon his Throne, neither shall there euer want a Priest of the Priests the Leuites to offer sacrifice before me: Neither is it any more possible for you to breake this couenant; than to breake the couenant that I haue made with day and nyght. Now, the Iewes cannot denie, but that euen by the record of their owne Paraphrast, this text is ment of Christ, and yet notwithstanding, that there hath not wanted a Successor both to Dauid and to Leuie; and that both the Kingdome and the Preesthod are come to an end; and therefore that he speaketh here of another Kingdome and of another Preesthod: Likewyse sayeth Ezechiell,* 1.846 I will set a shepherd ouer my flocke, which shall feede them, namely my Seruant Dauid. I will bee their God, and he shalbe their Prince among them. I wil enter into a Couenant of peace with them, and make noysom beasts to ceasse from the earth. I will rayse them shortly a plant of Renowne, and they shall no more bee the iestingstock of the Gentyles. And if we aske, how? They shall nomore be defiled (sayeth he) with their Idolles, nor with their abhominations, nor with their misdeedes: but I will saue them from all their sinnes, and make them cleane, and they shalbe my people, and I wil be their God. And that this text also is ment of the Messias, the Iewes cannot deny. For in their very Talmud* 1.847 they say that the Messias is called Dauid, bycause he was too be borne of Dauids race: and they alledge this present text and others for the same pur∣pose. Daniel in his second and seuenth Chapters expounding Na∣bugodonozors Dreame, treateth of the fower greate Monar∣chies, which should rise vp in the world euery one in his tyme: the which are betokened there, vnder these fower Metalls, Golde,

Siluer, Brasse, and yron. But when the Dreame representeth vs the stone heawen without hand, which stryketh the Images yron feete and breaketh them apeeces: it is as much as if it had told vs, that the Kingdom of the Messias shall seeme to be of small stuffe, without stay and without force of man; and yet that it shall indure for euer, bycause it is set vp by God. And therefore whereas he ad∣deth in another place, That all People, Nations and Toongs shal serue that Kingdome, it is to be vnderstoode of another kynd of ser∣uice than the ordinarie. But in his fifth Chapter he sheweth where∣in the same peculiarly consisteth. It is (sayeth he) in bringing di∣sobedience to an end, and in sealing vp sinne, to clense away iniquitie, and to bring ryghtuousnes into the world; to close vp prophesying and visions, and to anoynt the holy of Holyes. Yea and it is so little ment that Hierusalem should be the seate of that kingdome, that it was to be destroyed anon after by the Ro∣manes. The nomber of the Children of Israel (sayeth Ose* 1.848) shalbe as the sand. And where it hath bin sayd, you be not my People; there it shalbe sayd, ye be the people of the liuing God: which is as much to say as that many people should become Is∣raelytes. And this shalbe done (sayth the Lord) not by bowe, nor by swoord, nor by battel: but bycause I will shewe mercy, and saue them by their Lord God, and marry them to me of my compassion. Iewry (sayth Ioel) shalbe inhabited, euer∣lastingly, and Hierusalem from generation to generation. Yet had they greate ouerthrowes afterward, yea euen in the Prophets owne tyme. But yet he addeth, I will wype away the blud from those whom I haue not yet cleansed, that is to wit, the Gen∣tiles, and the Lord shall dwell in Syon. Then speaketh he of ano∣ther Iewrie and of another Syon, that is to wit, of the spirituall one, which is the Church. To the same end tendeth Amos* 1.849 when he sayth, I will set vp the Tabernacle of Dauid againe, and stop vp the breakes thereof, and amend the decayes, that he may possesse the remnant of Edom, and of all other nations. And Micheas* 1.850 sayth that many Nations shall come to the Lords Hill, and talke there one with another, saying as followeth; namely, that the name of the Lord shall bee called vpon ouer them, and that the Law shall come out of Syon and the word of the Lord out of Hie∣rusalem, which shall teach them his waies. And to the intent wee should not thinke, that whereas Micheas sayth that the name of the Messias shall shortly bee magnified to the vttermost parts of

the earth; Israell shall tryumph after the maner of the world: The Assyrians (sayth he) shall not ceasse to come into our Land, and to walke vp and downe in our Palaces. That is to say, the good and vertuous folke shall not ceasse to be persecuted for all that: but yet howsoeuer they fare, Idolatrie shalbe ouerthrowen, as he saith afterward, and the Anoynted shall reigne through the power of the Lord, and he shall be our peace. And Sophonie* 1.851 foretelleth to the same effect, That God will starue all the Gods of the earth, so as euery man shall worship in his owne place throughout all the Iles of the Gentiles: that is to say, That Hierusalem shall not bee the only place to worship in, but rather that God wil haue euery place to bee a Hierusalem. In Zacharie* 1.852 the Lorde hauing sayd I will make my seruant Braunch to come; addeth immediatly, and I will wipe away the wickednes of this land in one day. And ha∣uing sayd, He shall reigne vpon his seate: He addeth foorthwith, that the Highpriest also shal sit there with him, That is to say, that Christ shalbe both King and Priest. He sayth in deede, Bee glad thou daughter Sion and triumph; For thy King commeth: But see here with what furniture; A righteous Sauiour & a low∣ly, sitting vpon an Asse, euen vppon an Asses colt, which is the Chariot of Ephraim and the Horse of Hierusalem, & the bowe of warre. He shal speake myldly to all Nations, and yet shal he be obeyed from the oneside of the earth to the other. If there be no greater triumphe than this, what néedeth so great ioy? But he expoundeth himselfe in these words following. Thou shalt bee saued by the blud of thy couenant, and I haue let out thy pri∣soners from the waterlesse pit. Now, that this text is ment of Christ,* 1.853 it appeareth by Rabby Samuel and Rabby Ioseph in the Talmud. And Rabby Selmoh ben Iarchi (as great an enemy as he is to vs,) expoundeth it not otherwise. Agein, In that day (saith he) a Welspring shalbe opened to the house of Dauid, and to the Inhabiters of Hierusalem, to wash away their sinne and their filth; & I will roote out the names of the remembrance of ydols from the earth sayth the Lord of Hostes. All this is nothing els but the clearing of men from their sinnes, and the abo∣lishing of Sathans reigne. To bee short, Malachie telleth vs of Christ, That he shall bring vs an Attonement betwéene GOD and vs. And of the Ambassadour whom GOD ment to send afore him to prepare his wayes, He sayth that hee shall turne the heartes of the Children to their Fathers, and the heartes of

the Fathers to their children. By the preparation of the Ambassa∣dour, we iudge of the Office of his Maister: namely that his com∣ming is properly to reigne in our Soules, seeing his Ambassa∣dour prepareth them for him, exhorting vs to turne away from our sinnes. Now of this long but yet néedefull discourse, wee ga∣ther two things. The one against the Gentyles, which is, that the meane of cleansing mankind hath bin promised and preached euen from the fall of Adam, and that the same promise is from time to time brought to our remembrance by our scriptures: to wit that it is doone by Christ, who was to bée borne of the womans séede by Abraham, Iuda, Dauid and others. The other is against the Ie∣wes of our tyme, who looke still for a Christ to come: which is, that the deliuerāce promised by him, is not ment of the tyranny of some earthly Prince ouer vs; but of the Tyranny which the diuell exer∣ciseth in our Soules by the vnrighteousnes of sinne, the rewarde whereof is euerlasting death. The Gentiles of old tyme yéelded vnto these texts, when they had once imbraced the spirituall king∣dome of Christ: and it may be that if we had to doo with the Iewes of elder tyme, the matter should soone bee dispatched.* 1.854 For all the forealledged Texts haue bene vnderstood of the Messias and of his reigne, both by the auncient Rabbines and by the Chaldee Para∣phrasts. Moreouer it is very manifest, that y^e Cabalists who wrate long tyme afore the Talmudistes, and who (as they say) doo pearce into the very Marowe of the Scriptures, wheras the Talmudists doe but grate vppon the barke of them: haue vnderstoode that the cleansing away of sinne and the heating of the contagious venome which the Serpent did shed into Adam, and by him into the whole ofspring of man: was to bee wrought by the Messias. Yet for all this, notwithstāding al y^e forecasts of mans wit, we want not some euen of the newer sort of Writers, which haue vnderstoode it af∣ter the maner aforesaid.* 1.855 The exposition of Salomons Balett vpon these words, A Grape of Copher, makes this allusion; Eschcol Haccopher, That vnto the Church, Christ is a man of full attone∣ment, who shall be borne of the Children of Abraham, and shall make satisfaction for sinnes, in such sort as he may say to the mea∣sure of Iudgement, It is enough: that is to say, he may stay Gods wrath and punishment; and God (sayth he) will lay him to gage and deliuer him for those that are his. And vpon the fourth Chap∣ter where it is written thus, A thousand sheelds hang there, that is to say, in the Tower of Dauid, the sayde exposition hath

these words: Often haue I (saith the Lord) taken my people in in protection, for the dezert of one that was to come after a thousand generatiōs, And I haue made them to succeede one after another, to bring the Sheeld at the last vnto him, which is the onely desyre of my Children, and shal defend them bet∣ter then a thousand Sheelds. Also the Rabbines say, That the Creatures which are growen out of king by Adams fall, shall be set in their perfect state againe by the Sonne of Perets, and accor∣ding to their accustomed fondnesse, for proofe thereof they bring in a Text of Ruth and another of Genesis,* 1.856 where this worde Tole∣doth is written very plainly, that is to wit, with two Vaus. And as thouching the sayd Sonne of Perets, euery man knowes among them that it is the Messias, whom they looked for to come of Iu∣da by his sonne* 1.857 Perets. Concerning the calling of the Gentiles, the Talmud maketh this comparison, That the Horse shalbe set in the stall of the halting Oxe. Which wordes Rabbi Iacob and Rabbi Selomoh expound thus;* 1.858 namely that forasmuch as the Iewes shall haue forsaken the Lawe, God will put the Gentyles in their place, and yet not driue them away afterward, though the Iewes turne again vnto him: which is a thing very farre of from the Monarchie which they imagin as oft as there is any speaking of the calling of the Gentiles. To bee short, the notablest of their Rabbines are ashamed of the feastings & extraordinarie pastimes, which the Iewes behight themselues at the comming of the Mes∣sias; and conclude with Rabbi Moyses ben Maimon, (of whom they report that since Moyses hymselfe vntill this Moyses there was none so like vnto Moyses) that the felicities and pleasures of that tyme, ought to bee vnderstood according to this saying of E∣sayes,* 1.859 That the earth shalbe as it were ouerflowed with y^e know∣ledge of the Lord, and that euery man shalbe occupyed in seeking and in knowing GOD. But Rabbi Hechadoseh sayth yet more plainly, That the Messias shall by his death saue Adams race, and deliuer mens Soules from Hell;* 1.860 and therefore shall bee called Sauiour.

Let vs yet further by reason ouercome the wilfull sort, if it bée possible.* 1.861 They hold it for an Article of their faith, both by Scrip∣ture and by tradition, that there shalbe a Messias. He that denyes that (say they) denyes the Lawe & the Prophetes, and is condem∣ned to Helfyre. And therefore (say they) he that denyeth the com∣ming of the Messias, cannot be saued. If he which is to reigne in

Israell and to giue them prosperitie, bee a temporall King: what skilles it me greatly whether I knowe him and beleeue in him, or no? or what ioy can it bee to me, sith I cannot see him? Nay ra∣ther what a griefe is it to mee that I shal not see him, and what a peine is it to pyne away in wayting for him? Ageine, what good∣nesse is it in GOD to haue foretold vs it: if by beléeuing it we fare neuer the better, & yet must dye euerlastingly for not beléeuing it? In y^e Articles of their faith, they beléeue in y^e only one God. There is greate reward in beléeuing well. They beleeue a blessed lyfe. As it is the Soule that beleeueth; so doth the reward redound vn∣to her. And euen so is it with all other things which are no Arti∣cles of fayth, furtherfoorth than a man hath benefite by beleeuing them. But as for this Article of the Messias, what booted it Abra∣ham, Moyses, so many Kings, so many Prophetes, & such a nom∣ber of people; if there were no further secret in it? Why was it foretold so carefully by the Prophetes? Why was it so oft repea∣ted, no lesse in the prosperitie than in the aduersitie of that people, and no lesse vnder the good Kings than vnder the Tyrants? Nay, which more is; why was it more, yea farre more carefully repea∣ted to those which were not at the tyme when he should come, than to those which were to be borne in his time; if the Messias be not certeinly more than simply a good King, and the prosperitie a∣nother maner of prosperitie than any is on earth, and the ioy ano∣ther maner a ioy than is conceiued by the sences? And yet for all that, vnto a Iewe it is an Article of fayth, and of the necessitie of saluation. We say therfore, that the Messias is not a King of tem∣porall delightes, but the King of Saluation and welfare.

Agein, they beleeue that the Scriptures are of God, and that they teache them the way to Saluation. Now the ordinarie voyce of them is ageinst the Pompe, the brauery, and the vanitie of the world: saying that God will turne them into sorrowe, mourning and dung. Herewithall, the same Scriptures turne vs away from all other delights, to talke of that, and from all honor and reputa∣tion, to the atteynement of that kingdome. Who seeth not there∣fore, that this ioy which the Scriptures doe so much commend, is of another kind, than the ioy which they discommend, and that the kingdom which they make vs to couet, is to be possessed in heauen and not on earth? Be glad O Daughter Sion (say the Prophets) reioyce thou Hierusalem, sing ye nations a••d peoples. And wher∣fore? For certeine thousand yeres hence, there shall rise vp a great

King in Israell. What greater fondnesse can there bee than this? He shall make a good peace say they: what passe I for that, if I my selfe be in Warre? He shall open the Prisons: what is that to mee, if I in the meane whyle doe rotte there? He shall triumph o∣uer al the Nations in the word. What am I y^e better for that, if in the meane season other Nations trample me vnder their féete, and leade mee in triumphe ouer all the worlde with my hands bound behind mee? The father [say they] reioyceth for his Sonnes wel∣fare: yet is that but a light and flightfull ioy, and who is hee that wilbe moued for the afterspring of his children that are long hence to come? And who would not count him a foole for reioycing there∣at, and much more for beléeuing it? Surely, then doth this ioy ex∣tend farther, so as euen the foretellers thereof doe feele it them∣selues and are cheered therewith, and the hearers thereof doe taste of it and finde themselues comforted: and both of them in their Soules inioy the Fraunchises and Freedomes of that king∣dome aforehand, ere the sayde King whom they looke for he borne into this world. Let vs put the case farther, that they which shall attend vpon the Messias, shalbe rewarded abundantly with all the pleasures of this lyfe: what shall become of him in the ende? Hee shall dye (say they) and his generation with him, and therevppon they keepe a sore contention how many yeeres hee shall liue. How farre of is this geere from that which the Prophetes speake of, concerning a ioy that shall neuer haue end? What if they passe a hundred yeres in all ioy? what is it but a long feast, which as soone as a man sleepeth is quite and cleane forgotten? And if ye dye al∣together, what remayneth of it any more? And if ye liue out of the world, what remayneth thereof but greef? And what reason haue the Fathers to reioyce so much at that flash of Lightening, which passeth away in a momēt? Soothly much lesse thā for a Mariage∣feast, at leastwise which is accompanied with the birth of some children. In very deede these things are toyes to laugh at, but yet among the Iewes they bee earnest matters, and they rest vppon them at this day lyke silly soules as they be, as though there were none other lyfe for man than this, or as though they should euer be babes still in this life. But some to shunne this absurditie, haue falne into another, namely that all they which haue hoped for the Messias, shal come to lyfe agayne as they were afore, yea and euen the wicked sort too, that they may burst for spight and sorrowe. They that be in the glorie of God shall come backe again to see the

glorie of that man. They that are free from this Prison of sinne, shalbe shut vp againe in it to see this licentiousnes. They that liue euerlastingly in all felicitie aboue, shall come downe to eate of fat beastes. What is this but a tittletattle of Children, which in their conferences can go no higher than Tartes and Iunkets, nor conceiue any higher pleasures than those? And what els in ef∣fect is all this, than to ryse from Bed to Boord, and from Boorde to Bed ageine to sléepe? But if all this must be done in Palestine, so as all that are spoken of afore shall come thither: How will Pale∣stine or Iewrie suffice to receiue them, or what Leuiathan* 1.862 wil suf∣fice to féede them? And if the Gentiles also shabe admitted thither, as they say: what maner a Temple shall there be? And if all men shall bring their Sacrifices thither, what shall Hierusalem be, but a continuall slaughterhouse of beastes, and all Iewrie an vniuer∣sall streame of blud? Who seeth not then, that (as the Prophetes declare vnto vs) the Gentiles shall not in very deede bee gathered in Hierusalem, but Hierusalem shall be spred out among the Gen∣tyles? And that they shall not come ronning from a farre to the Temple, but that they themselues shalbe the Temple, I meane their heartes, where God shalbe serued and worshipped: And see∣ing that GOD so greatly refuseth our sheadings of blud, our fat Muttons, and our perfumes: who can thinke that those shalbe the feast which he will prepare to chere vs withall.

The xxviij. Chapter.

That the Mediatour or Messias is promised in the Scrip∣tures to be both God and Man, that is to wit, the euer∣lasting Sonne of God taking mans flesh vnto him.

••Ow then, let it stand for a poynt conclu∣ded, That the Christ our Messias pro∣mised in the holy Scriptures is a Re∣déemer from spiritual bondage. But for∣asmuch as I haue proued, that he ought not to fetch vs out of prison without Raunsome; nor could pay the Raunsome being infinite, vnlesse he were God and Man; Man to suffer, and God to ouer∣come:

it followeth that I must shew, that Gods word hath promi∣sed vs that he shalbe such a one: and that shall serue as well against the Gentyles, as against the Iewes. Now, if wee had none other proofe thereof than this, that Christes office is to vndoe sinne and death, and to appease Gods wrath against mankynd, as I haue sayd; seeing that these things are such as no creature can doe, nor ought to presume to doe: as oft as we reade that his office is such, wee must needes conclude that the Messias must needes then bee God. For (as the Gymnosophist of India sayd vnto Alexander) he is God in very déede, which doth that which no creature can do. But the Scripture* 1.863 intending to succour our infirmitie, the elder the world waxeth, speaketh euer the more manifestly thereof vnto vs; and surely after such a sort, that the skilfullest among the Iewes of late tyme become most vnskilfull when they goe about to dar∣ken it. First of all at the making of the promise in Genesis, it is sayd that this seede, that is to say this Christ, shall crush the Ser∣pents head: and this Serpent (as I haue said afore) is the Deuill; and his venome is sinne:* 1.864 and by meanes of sinne we be all become thralles to the Deuill, against whose power we know that no force of man can doe any thing. It followeth then that this Christ must haue another nature than mans, yea or than Angels: For the An∣gels and the Deuils differ not in power, that is to wit, diuine. Af∣terward where the promise is repeated to Abraham; of what man can it be verifyed, In thy seede shall all Nations be blessed?* 1.865 Or who can blesse so effectually but only God, who commaundeth his blessing (sayth he diuers tymes) and then doth it shead it selfe out vpon vs and our workes. But as the Prophetes doe preach the Messias vnto vs, so also doe they describe vs his natures and qua∣lities, so as we neede not any other Commentarie vpon that pro∣mise, than the Prophets themselues. Unto Dauid therfore it was renewed, and in his issew was it to be accomplished. See here how he speaketh of it in the 45. Psalme.* 1.866 My heart (sayth he) intendeth to vtter good matter, and my worke shalbe to speake of the King, (that is to wit of the Messias, and so doth the Chaldee Pa∣raphrast himselfe interpret it:) Thou art more perfect than the Children of men. This might be ment of a man: but let vs reade further: O God (sayth he) thy Throne is from euerlasting to e∣uerlasting, the Scepter of thy Kingdome is the Scepter of Rightuousnesse. Thou louest rightuousnesse and hatest wic∣kednesse: And therefore God thy God hath annoynted thee

with the oyle of gladnesse aboue thy fellowes. These so ex∣presse words cannot bee spoken, (specially among the Hebrewes who were not so lauish of Gods name as other people are) but of one that is very God and very man both together. In the hundred and tenth Psalme,* 1.867 The Lord sayd vnto my Lord (sayth Dauid) sit thou at my right hand, vntill I haue made thyne enemies thy footstoole. And a little after, Thou art a Priest for euer after the order of Melchisedeck. To sit at Gods right hand, and to be a Priest for euer, cannot be attributed to a man. Nay (which more is) Dauid who knewe well that there is but one Lord, calleth him his Lord. And wee reade that with this selfesame text Christ stop∣ped the mouthes of the Pharisies. Now, that the fathers of olde tyme vnderstood these things to be spoken of the Messias, it appea∣reth by the translation of Ionathas, cited in y^e booke of Collections; for he translateth it,* 1.868 The Lord sayd vnto his word: and it is alled∣ged to proue, that the Messias should sit on the right hand of God. Insomuch that the Iewes Commentarie vpon the second Psalm,* 1.869 sayth expressely that the Misteries of the Messias are rehearsed in the hundred and tenth Psalme. And Esay in his nineth Chapter sayth thus: A Babe is borne vnto vs and a Sonne is giuen vnto vs, and his kingdome shalbe vpon his shoulder. Ye see here the birth of a man. But he sayth further, His name shalbe called, the wonderfull, the Counseller, the mightie God, the euerlasting Father, the Prince of Peace. Néedes then must this selfsame man be also God. And whereas he is sayd to bee the Prince of Peace; Ionathas trāslateth it the Christ (or the anoynted) of Peace. And Rabbi Ioses the Galilaean, sayth vpon the Lamentations,* 1.870 that the Messias shalbe called the father of euerlastingnesse,* 1.871 the Prince of peace and so forth: and for confirmation thereof, he alledgeth this text, and so doth also the Commentarie vppon Genesis. And the holy Rabbi* 1.872 (as they terme him) sayth expressely, that the Mes∣sias in that he should bee both God and Man, should bee called E∣manuell; In that he was God, the wonderfull and the Coun∣seller: In that he was mightie, Gheuer, that is to say Strong: In that he was Euerlasting, the Father of euerlastingnesse; In re∣spect y^t peace should be increased vnder him, The Prince of peace: In that he should deliuer mens Soules from Hell, The deliuerer out of bondage: and in that he should saue men, Iesus that is to say, The Sauiour. For whereas Rabbi Selomon, to conueye these titles to Ezechias, interpreteth them after this maner: And God,

the wonderfull, the Counseller, & the euerlasting father, hath called Ezechias the Prince of peace &c. Besides that the He∣brewe Grammer and the phrase of that tongue are repugnant to that Construction: it is well enough seene that such things cannot be verified of King Ezechias, and that it is but a deuice of this late borne Iew against the opinion of al antiquitie to escape from this text which is so expresse. Esay* 1.873 in his seuenth Chapter sayth thus. Behold, a Virgin shall bee with child and bring forth a Sonne. Here ye see that Christ shall bee a man. And thou shalt call his name Emanuell, that is to say, God with vs. Then shall he bee both God and Man,* 1.874 that is to wit, God dwelling among men as a man. But vnto this and such like texts, they answer vs that the El, that is to say GOD, is imparted to Princes and Iudges: And therefore let vs heare further. In that day (sayth Esay* 1.875) the Lord of Hostes Iehouah tsebhoath, shalbe in sted of a crowne of glory and of a Diademe of honor to the residue of his people. The Chaldee Paraphrast interpreteth this concerning the Messias. And againe; In that day shall the people that were harryed a∣way and rent a peeces, be brought for a present to the Lord of Hosts.* 1.876 The Commentarie vpon Genesis vnderstandeth this also to be spoken of the same person. This is another: I will wayt for the Lord who hath hidden his face from the house of Iacob, and I will attend vpon him. The Disciples of Rabbi Hija ap∣plye this in the Talmud to the Messias. And yet in all these places wheresoeuer is the word Lord, the Hebrewe hath the word Ieho∣uah, that is to say the Bëeer or he that is, which is the vnspeaka∣ble or vnutterable name of the Creator, and in opinion of the He∣brewes is not to be imparted to any Creature.* 1.877 Wherevpon it en∣seweth, that the Messias, to whom it is imparted, should be the ve∣ry euerlasting God; and that the auncient writers who attributed those sayings to him, looked that he should bee such a one. In the thrée and twentie and in the thrée and thirtie of Ieremie wee reade thus: Behold, the daies shall come, that vnto Dauid I will raise vp a rightuous braunch, and he shall reigne as King. These words belong to Christes Manhood. But by and by after he sayth, And in his daies Iuda shall bee saued; and behold, the name whereby he shalbe called, shalbe Iehouah, the Euerlasting, our Rightuousnesse. Heere againe is the foresayd vncommunicable name of God, which the Iewes doe so greatly reuerence. Yet not∣withstanding, the thréescore and ten Interpreters, who were all

Iewes, vnderstood it so. And Ionathas interpreteth it of Christ in both respects. As touching the latter Rabbines, who will needes correct the text, and in stead of ijkreo, doe set downe ijkra, to the in∣tent that the sence might be, He that calleth him shall bee the E∣uerlasting: I report me to all their owne Grammarians, whether it be not both a corrupting and a racking of the text. And truely in the thrée and thirtie Chapter the Prophet sayth the same thing in diuers words: wherevnto this forgerie cannot be applyed.* 1.878 That is the cause why Rabbi Abba vppon the Lamentations of Ieremie demaundeth what shalbe the name of the Messias, and afterward answereth Iehouah schemo, the Euerlasting is his name. And to that purpose alledgeth he the selfesame texts of Ieremies. And the Commentarie vpon the Psalmes sayth,* 1.879 Seeing that none of the Subiects of a King of flesh and blud, that is to say of a tempo∣rall King, is called by his name (that is to say King): How hap∣peneth it that God imparteth his owne name to the Messias? and what name is that? Soothly Iehouah is his name according to this saying, The man of warre, Iehouah [that is to say the E∣uerlasting] is his name. And Rabbi Moyses Hadarsan* 1.880 expoun∣ding this saying of Sophonie, to call vppon the name of the E∣uerlasting; saith thus: Here Iehouah is nothing els but the King, the Messias, [or the anoynted King.] And the same thing is re∣peated in the selfesame words in the Thalmud. And wheras some, to disappoynt vs of the consequence of these texts, doe say that in Ezechiel, Hierusalem is called by that name, where it is sayd thus Iehouah schammah,* 1.881 [that is to say] the Euerlasting is there; that is to say, the Euerlasting hath chosen his dwelling place in Hieru∣salem: They by chaunging the Hebrew vowels doe make him to say Iehouah schemo, [that is to say] the Euerlasting is his name. But besides the consent of all Copies repugning to this vnshame∣fastnesse; Ionathas can assoyle the case, who translateth it expresly, God hath placed his Godhead there. Now, besides the sayd texts, which shewe that the Iewes of old tyme wayted for a Mes∣sias that should be both God and Man: we haue also great tokens thereof in those fewe writings of theirs which remayne dispersed here & there, notwithstanding y^t the Iewes hide thē from vs or els corrupt them as much as they can. The Commentarie vppon the Psalmes sayth,* 1.882 Because the Gentyles ceasse not to aske of vs where is our God; the time shal come y^t God wil sit among the Righteous, so as they shalbe able to point him out with their

fingar.* 1.883 And whereas it is so often sayd, I will walke among you, it is all one (say they) as if a King should go walke in his Gar∣dyne with his Gardiner, & his Gardiner should alwaies shrink behind him: and the King should say, shrinke not backe, for ••o, I am lyke thee: euen so will GOD walke among vs in his Gardyne of pleasure in tyme to come.* 1.884 And therefore another sayth that the Euerlasting shall one day bee as a brother of Iacob, that is to say in the tyme of the Messias, according to this saying of the Ballet, I would fayne that thou wast to me as a brother. And the Commentarie vppon the Ballet sayth in another place, That God himself who is the Husband of the Church, should come in his owne persone to marrie her.* 1.885 Uppon the xxv. of Leuiticus, where mention is made of one brother that redéemeth out another, in the yéere of Iubilee;* 1.886 many make an Allegorie, that that brother is Christ. And the Commentarie affirming the same, sayth that Is∣raell shalbe redeemed of God, who shall come in his owne beeing, and that Israell shall no more bee brought in bondage. And vppon Genesis,* 1.887 Rabbi Moyses Hadarsan alledging this saying of the Psalme,* 1.888 I will shew him the Saluation of God; sayth thus: This is one of the Texts of Scripture of greatest weight, that the Saluation of Israel is the Saluation of God. For God wilbe the pryce and payment of Israels Raunsom, lyke as if man hauing but a little Corne of the second Croppe,* 1.889 should redeeme the same. Hereof came this Tradition, that God left some portion vn∣perfect on the Northside, to the intent that if any reported himselfe to be God, hee should fill vp that want, and that thereby his God∣head should be knowen. And all men knowe that ordinarily by the North, they ment the Euill, which should be remedied by the Mes∣sias. But the Cabilists were farre more spirituall in this behalfe than the Thalmudists. And first of all Rabbi Simeon ben Iohai * 1.890 in his Commentaries vpon Genesis in the language of Hierusa∣lem, saith that the feare or mercie of the Lord should take a body in the Wombe of a Woman, and be Crowned King the auncient of dayes for euer. And that it was decreed that a holy body and a wo∣man should be incorporated togither,* 1.891 and (for proof whereof he al∣ledgeth an auncient booke whereof he tooke it) the same should bée accomplished in the third age, that is to say, in the third Period of the Church;* 1.892 and that then the higher world should by the said holy body be vnited to the inferiour world: so as God should bee sancti∣fied beneath as well as aboue, and the holy Ghost should come as

out of a sheathe, that is to say, should be shewed foorth openly; and that all this is but one, namely the Euerlasting himself. And to be short, that the Woman of whom the holy word should take his bo∣dy, and out of whom the sayd faythfull was to come; should be ho∣ly and blessed aboue all other women. Now it appeareth that here∣by he ment the Incarnation of the Messias.* 1.893 For in the Talmud, the Schoole of Rabbi Hamina being demaunded the name of the Messias, answered Hamina, that is to say, Mercy is his name. And in the Prophetes, they betoken the Messias by the name of mercie. Another Cabilist sayth,* 1.894 That sinne shalbe brought to ende by the Messias, who shalbe the power of God, euen by the spirit of wisedome wherewith he shalbe filled. And another sayth, that the misterie of Messias the King, is that his operation cōsisteth whol∣ly in he, vau, and iod, he,* 1.895 (which is the misterie of the seuenth day) that is to say in calmenesse of mynd, without force; and that his name whole together shalbe composed of these letters, to wit, Ieho∣uah, the Euerlasting. But the holy Rabbi vpon the 9. Chapter of Esay where Christ is called y^e euerlasting father,* 1.896 playeth the Phi∣losopher yet further vpō the letters of that name. Like as the let∣ter he (sayth he) is made of daleth and vau,* 1.897 (as appeareth by the shapes of those letters) so shall the Messias be of the nature of Man,* 1.898 and of the nature of God. And like as the double he cō∣sisteth of a double daleth and two vaus: so bee there two Son∣ships in the Messias, that is to say, two sorts of beeing Sonne, the one in respect that he is the Sonne of GOD, the other in respect that he is the Sonne of a Prophetisse, as it is sayd in E∣say 8. And as those shapes are distinct in one selfesame letter, and yet are both one letter: so shal the natures of Christ or the Messias be distinct, and yet shall make but one Christ. I stand not vppon the foundation which he taketh of the letters, which I make none account of: but the onely thing which I meane to ga∣ther, both by this text and by the former texts, and by all others that may bee gotten together, is that the expectation of the Iewes in old tyme, was of a Messias that should bee both God and Man: and that they haue not bin able to race it out of their bookes to this day, for all the diligence that they could vse in that behalfe.

And for asmuch as I haue sayd that in God there bee three per∣sones in one substance, the Father the Sunne and the holy Ghost: it followeth that wee must sée which of these thrée the Churche of Israell wayted that the Messias should be. And as we haue found

it méete that hee by whom God created vs (to wit the sonne or the woord) should be the meane to create vs now agein;* 1.899 so also shall we find by the Scripture, that the same second person is he that was promised. In Genesis the Messias is called Silo, and pro∣mised to be of the stocke of Iuda. Now the woord Silo (sayeth Kimhi)* 1.900 signifieth the Sonne of him, and is deryued of a woord which signifieth a womans Afterbirth as they terme it, which thing is not to be passed ouer lyghtly. And therefore Dauid repea∣teth and expoundeth the same promise in these woords; I wilbe his Father (sayeth the Lord) and he shalbe my Sonne. And in the lxxxix. Psalme* 1.901 he addeth, I will make him my firstbegotten, and souereine of al the Kings of the earth: which word Rabbi Nathan expoundeth concerning the Messias and thus doth Dauid himself expound it in the second Psalme:* 1.902 The Lord hath sayd vnto me, thou art my Sonne, this day haue I begotten thee. And ageine, Kisse the Sonne ô ye Kings & Rulers of the Earth and happy be they which put their trust in him. Surely it appeareth y^t in all that text he speaketh of the Sonne of God, and not of the sonne of a man. For otherwise he that hath sayd vnto vs, Cu••sed be hee that trusteth in man, and a foole is he that leaneth vppon the Princes of the earth, would not say vnto vs, Blessed are thei that put their trust in him. But yet further Rabbi Selomoh y^e sonne of Iarchi, and Aben Esra (as much enemyes as they be vnto vs) also do witnesse that the sayd Psalme was vnderstoode in old time to concerne the Messias; neither do they themselues expound it o∣therwise. Insomuch that Aben Esra sayeth expresly, that Bar sig∣nifieth a Sonne in that place as well as in the xxxj. Chapter of the Prouerbes. And the exposition of the Iewes vppon that Psalme,* 1.903 is that there God resembleth a King that would destroy a ••oune in his anger, if he were not pacified by his sonne. In the lxxij Psalme,* 1.904 where the reigning of the Messias is manifestly descrybed, His name (sayeth he) shall continew for euer, his name shalbe euer∣lasting as long as the Sonne indureth. Am the Hebrew woord Ijnnon which he vseth, commeth of the woord Nin. Which signi∣fieth a Sonne, as if a man would say Sonned or Sunnified. In the Commentarie vpon the fowerscore and thirtéenth Psalme,* 1.905 these woords Thy throne is from euerlasting to euerlasting, are ex∣pounded to concerne the Messias.* 1.906 And the paraphrast (which is re∣ported to be Rabbi Ioseph the blynd,) agreeth thereunto. And in the Talmud, the Schoole of Rabbi Ianai being asked the name

of the Messias, answereth, Innon is his name; for it is sayd in the Psalme, before the Sonne was in the sky, Innon is his name. Esay, Ieremie and Zacharie in the texts aforealledged, do call him Impe and in all those places the Caldee paraphrast translateth it the Lords Anoynted: and Iosua the sonne of Leuie sayeth that Impe is his name. But least wee should thinke that this Impe were but an Impe of Dauid;* 1.907 he is called there, the Lords Impe the Impe of the Euerlasting, and the Euerlasting himself. Now there is not a nearer nor a properer metaphor thā to terme a sonne an Impe, or an Impe a sonne. This sonne we call moreouer the woord; wherein the Iewes dissent not from vs. In the xlv. of Esay* 1.908 it is sayd, Israell shalbe saued by Iehouah (that is to say by the Euerlasting) with endlesse, saluation: which saying Ionathas translateth, by the woord of the Lorde. In Ose,* 1.909 I will saue the house of Israel (sayeth the Lord) by the Lord their God: which saying the sayd Ionathas translateth By the woord of the Lord their God, and so foorth ordinarily in all other lyke texts. And it is not to be douted but that by the sayd woord they ment the Messias. For in the Hundred and tenth Psalme,* 1.910 (which as they themselues affirme, conteyneth the misteries of the Messias) vpon these words, the Lord sayd vnto my Lord &c. Ionathas saieth, The Lord said vnto his woord, sit thou on my ryght hand. And Rabbi Isaac Arama vppon Genesis,* 1.911 expounding this text of the Hundred and seuen and fortith Psalme,* 1.912 The Lord sent foorth his woord, and they were settled, or as others translate it, were healed; sayeth e••mes•••• that this woord is the Messias. Yea and Rabbi Simeon the sonne of Iohai, the cheef of the Cabalists, wryting vppon Ge∣nesis * 1.913 and by the way expoūding there these words of Iob,* 1.914 yet not∣withstanding I shall see my God in my flesh: sayeth that the mercie which proceedeth from the highest wisdome of God, shalbe crowned by the woord, and take flesh of a woman. But let vs heare Philo* 1.915 the Iewe vpon this point; Hardly can I say (sayeth he) what tyme is appoynted for the returne of the banished Iewes For men hold opinion that it shalbe at the death of a hygh preest, which as some think is at hande, and as othersome thinke is farre hence ••••t my opinion is, that this high preest shalbe the word or spe••••h of God, cleere from sinne aswell willing as vn∣willing, who to his father hath GOD the father of all, and to his mother hath the wisedome wherby al things in the world were created. And therefore his head shall be anoynted with

Oyle, his Maiestie shall shead forth beames of light round a∣bout him, and he shalbe clothed with light as with a garment. For the auncient worde of him that is, is clothed with the world, &c. Also in Malachie* 1.916 where it is sayd, I will send myne Ambassadour before my face; Rabbi Moyses the sonne of Mai∣mon expoundeth it, Before Christ the Anoynted. And in Osee * 1.917 where it is written, Wee shall liue before his face: Rabbi Moy∣ses Hadarsan sayth it is Christ the King. And in the 17. Psalme * 1.918 where it is sayd, I shall behold thy countenance in rightuous∣nesse, and bee satisfied at the rysing vp of thy likenesse: Rabbi Nehemias sayth, I shall bee satisfied with the sight of thy Mes∣sias, who is thyne Image. And to the same purpose might a great many moe bee alledged. The thing which they say is all one in ef∣fect with that which wee say, namely that the Sonne or worde of God is the image of God, and the brightnesse of his countenance. To bee short, we say that the Sonne is light of light, and they say the same of the Messias.* 1.919 For vpon the Lamentations of Ieremie, Rabbi Biba being asked the name of the Messias, answereth in the ende, that it is Nehira, that is to say Light, according to this saying in the second of Daniel,* 1.920 Light is with him. And vppon the place of Genesis where it is written, Let there bee light Rabbi Moyses Hadarsan sayth that it is the Messias, according to Rab∣bi Abba, and Rabbi Iohanan vppon the 36. Psalme,* 1.921 where it is sayd, We shall see light in thy light. Oftentimes (say they) hath the light of Israell bene quenched and kindled againe, when they were one while subdewed and another while deliuered. But in the end he sayth, it is not to be required that flem and blud (that is to say a mortall man) shall inlighten vs, but God himselfe in his owne substance will doe it. According wherevn∣to it is sayd in the 18. Psalme,* 1.922 God hath bene our light. And likewise in Esay,* 1.923 Israell shall be saued by the Euerlasting. To bée short, like as we say that the Sonne as in respect of the Father, is as a Riuer in respect of the Spring, or as Reason is in respect of the Mynd: so say the Cabalists that the light of the Soule of the Messias,* 1.924 is in respect of the liuing God as Reason is in respect of the Mynd; and that the liuing God, as in respect of the Messias, is as a Fountaine or Welspring of liuing water, in respect of the streame or riuer of life that floweth out of it.

Now then, we haue in our Scriptures a Mediatour that is both God and Man. But reason hath led vs to two circumstances moe:

The one is that this Man must be of our race; and the other is that he must be borne after another maner than wee bee; the one for our behoofe,* 1.925 the other for his owne dignitie; and therfore let vs enquire yet further of the Rabbins concerning these poynts. As touching the first poynt, it is euident enough of it selfe, and néedeth no long proofe. For Christ is promised to come of the seede of Adam, A∣braham, Isaac, Iacob, Iuda, and Dauid; and the Iewes haue belée∣ued it so certeinly, that euen during the tyme of their Captiuitie at Babylon, they chose their Resch Caluta, that is to say, the chiefe Capteyne of their Banished folke, out of the house of Dauid, as from whence they looked for a deliuerer. And as touching the se∣cond poynt, Behold (saith Esay)* 1.926 a Virgin shall conceiue & beare a Sonne, and call his name Emanuell; which is as much to say, as that the Messias shalbe the sonne of a Uirgin, and that he shall bee begotten without fleshly copulation. The late writers of the Iewes say it is not written a Virgin or mayden, but a wench or yoong woman. I will not vrge them that the Hebrewe word Al∣ma is taken ordinarily for a yoong Mayden or Uirgin, as in the fo∣wer and twentie of Genesis where. Rebecka is so called; and in the second of Exodus where it is spoken of the Sifter of Moyses. And euen in this place, the thréescore & ten Interpreters translate it in Gréeke, idou he Parthenos, y^t is to say, Behold a Virgin &c. But I would haue them to tell me what the token is that is giuen here to the house of Dauid, and whether a token ought not to bee some speciall and notable thing, and whether it bee not a matter of earnest, sith it is God that giueth it, who sayth expresly, Aske me a token, whether it be from beneath or from aboue? I beséech them what straunge signe or token is there, in that a yoong woman beareth a Child? What thing is more ordinarie in the world, and consequently more fond to bee giuen or taken for a myracle? Nay, the auncient Rabbines haue well waded euen into the depth of this matter. And therefore Rabbi Moyses Hadarsan writing vp∣pon the 85. Psalme,* 1.927 vppon these words, Trueth shall bud out of the earth, sayth thus. Rabbi Ioden noteth here, how it is not sayd here, shalbe borne, but shall bud, because the begetting and birth of the Messias shall not be after the maner of other worldly creatures, but he shall bee bred without companie or copulatiō. And it is certeine that no man nameth his father, but he is concealed and kept secret, vntill he himselfe come and reueale him. And vpon Genesis,* 1.928 You haue sayd (sayth the

Lord) we be fatherlesse: and so shall the Redeemer be whom I will giue vnto you, according to that which is sayd in the 4. of Zachary,* 1.929 Loe, this is the man whose name is Braunch; and ac∣cording to this which is sayd in the 110. Psalme;* 1.930 Thou art a Priest for euer after the order of Melchisedech. Also he repor∣teth that Rabbi Berachia gathereth the like. But Rabbi Simeon ben Iohai sayth yet more expresly vpon Genesis,* 1.931 That the spirit hauing bin shut vp in a [womans] wombe, should come foorth with great force to bee the highest Prince, which is Messias the King. And the holy Rabbine procéedeth so farre,* 1.932 as to seeke out by the proportion of their Cabalie, what should be the name of the Israe∣litish Uirgin that should beare the Messias. There remayne many other things to bee treated of concerning the tyme, the place, the life and the death of the Messias, which are reserued for another place, peraduenture more conuenient for them. Let it suffice vs for this tyme, That in the Religion of the Israelites, there was pro∣mised from tyme to tyme euen from the beginning, the Mediatour betwéene Gods Iustice: and Mans Sinfulnesse, the Sauiour of mens Soules, and the Author of the selfesame clensing which the very Heathen themselues déemed to bee so néedfull; namely Iesus Christ, God and Man, the euerlasting Sonne of GOD, borne of woman in his due tyme, without sinne, frée from [desert of] Gods wrath as in respect of himselfe, and able to appease it towards o∣thers, cleane in his humane nature, and sufficient through his di∣uine nature to cleanse ours. And this is the third marke which I haue shewed to be so néedfull in Religion, and so peculiar thereun∣to, that wheresoeuer the same is found, there is Religion, that is to say, a way to Saluation; and wheresoeuer the same wanteth, there is no Religion at all.

Sothen, in the Religion of Israell we haue all the three marks of the true Religion,* 1.933 namely, the true God, the Lawe of God, and the Mediator of Saluation. And I beseeche all men to sooke well about them and to see whether they can find them elsewhere in any other of the Religions that haue bin of old time. Nay, asfor in them, in sted of the true God, we shall find diuells, men, and Stocks. In sted of Gods woord to inlyghten vs to Soulehealth, we shall find doutfull Oracles and answers of Idolls, vayne, fond, without ground, without end, which speake not a whit of Gods glorie nor of mans welfare. Insted of a sufficient Mediator, wee shall find a sort of wasshings that passe no further than the skin; we shall find man∣slaughters,

and sacrifising of wretched kaytifs condemned for their misdéedes. But how should there be any religion, where is no God? Or how should Religion be certeine, where God speaketh not? Or how should it be a healthful one, where he himself is not the meane of attonement? Certesse therefore let vs say, that only in Israell was the true Religion; and that Israell was as a Schoole or Uni∣versitie founded by God, wherein he himself voutsafed to teache, that men myght learne their owne Saluation.

But behold here is yet one obiection ageinst God.* 1.934 How hap∣peneth it (say they,) that this schoole was among this people only? why was it not in all Nations? Why was it not (at leastwise) in some other as well as in that? O man, it becommeth man to hold his peace when God speaketh, and to yeeld to whatsoeuer he will haue done. Thou art ryghtuous but so farre foorth as thou doest rightuous deedes: but as for God, it is farre otherwise with him: for with him, things are not rightuous furtherfoorth than hee doeth them. Neuerthelesse, I pray thee what canst thou say? That in Adam, God the Creator made all mankynd: and in Adam al man∣kynd is forlorne. But the wisdom of the Creator stepping in byand∣by, reuealeth his woord, and vttereth the promise of the mediator to all men. Here now thou seest no distinction of Nations or people. Of Adams Children, some imbraced the seruice of God and the promise; and some forsooke it, and regarded i•• not. Some (say I) tooke part with the Diuell; and othersome stacke to the gracious goodnesse of God. What haste thou too alledge here ageinst the Rightuousenes of the Creator? After this followeth a general cor∣ruption of mankynd; and God exhorteth them by Noe to repen∣tance, threatening them with his wrath if they did otherwise. Still they refuse Gods mercy, and for so doing are all drowned by his Iustice, sauing only Noe and his household, who were saued in the Arke. Now were not all men hitherto onely one people still? And so; were not Gods woord and the reuealing of himself directed still to al men? Ageine, ye see that in the Arke al mankind was gatherd ageine into one Howsehold. At that tyme there was no difference of circumcysed and vncircumcysed, of Iew or Gentyle. Anon they turned away vnto Idolls and forsooke the Couenant that God had made with them. Who hath not cause here to honour the patient∣nes of God in bearing with them, and to woonder, not that he suf∣fered men to take their owne wayes, but rather that he voutsafed to reserue any men aliue in the world? Yet notwithstanding, euen

at that tyme he chose Abraham out of the mids of Idolatrie, ma∣nifested himself new ageine vnto him, vttered his secrets vnto him, deliuered him his promises in pawne, and entered into couenant with him and his seede. All which things were not doone alonly for him and his seede, but to blesse all the Nations and kinreds of the earth in the partye that was to be borne of his seede, and to re∣nue his Couenant with them. Who then seeth not here, both that the couenant was offered to all Nations, howbeit that all of them had refused it; and that when God of his infinite mercy renewed it with Abraham, he renewed it in effect with all men? Thou desi∣rest that God should be iust; and yet wouldest thou also continew still. Were he iust after that maner which thou wouldest haue him iust, thou hadst bene vndone in Adam; thou hadst, bene swept away with the flud; thou hadst bene destroyed in y^e ouerflowing of vngod∣dlines & Idolatrie after y^e flud; thou hadst (say I) bene either vtterly fordone, or continued forlorne for euer. Thus desirest thou things both contrarie in themselues, & contrary to thine owne meaning. And therefore appeale not to Gods iustice, but cry vnto him for mer∣cy with both thy hands. And yet in thy desiring of this his mercy, or grace there is yet another error; in y^t thou wilt néedes appoint him the maner & measure thereof; and thou wilt haue him to do it at thy pleasure: whereas notwithstanding, if he should do it according to thy deuice, thou wouldest find fault with him for it; & if thou hadst liked well of it, another man would haue misliked it. But what ad∣uice couldest thou haue giuen him for the creating of thée, who as then wast not? Or what counsell wouldest thou giue him for the re∣creating of thée, who art but y^e worse for that which thou hast alrea∣dy? Thou wouldest that God should haue reuealed himself alyke to all men. He did that at the beginning. Well, such Reuelations tend to a Mediator, and the same Mediator must be God and man: and to be man it behoueth him to bee borne of some one stocke or o∣ther. And thou seest that that priuiledge must néedes befall to some one certeine stocke: for he that is to saue all men cannot be borne of all men. If thou be a Romane, the gloriousenes of thy Citie will seeme to deserue it: But yet will Babylon and Niniue stand in contention with thee for it, and Athens will thinke to be no lesse regarded for hir learnings sake. How much speedyer way were it for vs, to cut of this stryfe by yéelding vnto God who sayeth, The case here standeth not vpon merit, but vpon mercy: and to the intent al men may perceyue it to be so; I wil haue the welfare of al king∣domes

too come of a Hillocke that is hidden in the middest of the world, in the digging downe whereof they haue taken soo much peynes & pleasure. And lesse this same Hillok itself should growe proud, I wil make it to spring, not out of the top, but out of the foote thereof; nor out of the head Citie, but out of a little village that is vnregarded. Yea and moreouer, (as we shall see hereafter) where it springeth vp, there shall it be refused, and straungers shall set it on fire;* 1.935 insomuch that where the foundations of the Kingdome thereof are layd, one stone shalnot be left standing vppon another. Let all the wyse men of the world wey these Circumstances, yea euen ac∣cording to their owne wisdome; and seeing that Saluation is a re∣ward of free fauour, and not a recompence of desert; a thing that concerneth Gods glorie which is the finall ende of all things, and not mans vanitie: let them tell mee where the Mediator of mans Saluation could bee borne, or where the Mysteries of his com∣ming ought rather too be bestowed, than in Israell? Yet notwith∣standing if we consider still all circumstances; the world shall still be found vnexcusable. For the first Kingdomes were in Siria, As∣siria, Persia, Arabie and Egipt: vppon the borders of all which Kingdomes, Hierusalem stoode as a Watchtower, for them to looke at, or as a Lanterne to giue lyght to all those nations round about it. And as the Empires began to remoue further of, into the Lesser Asia, Greece, and Italy; we see how Gods prouidence did disperse the Iewes and their Sinagogues into them throughout the whole world as Preachers of the true God, Schooles of his seruice, and Heraults of the Mediator that was to come, to bring saluation to all mankynd. Now forasmuch as the ende of Religion is mans Saluation; and the end of our Scriptures is Christ the Mediator the bringer thereof: we must hencefoorth see how he hath bin promi∣sed from tyme to tyme since the first beginning, and whether hee haue bin exhibited to the world in the tyme aforelimited vnto him. And that is the thing which we haue to treate of in the Chapters next following.

The xxjx. Chapter.

That the time wherat the Mediator was promised to come is ouerpast, and that he must needes be come, as well ac∣cording to the Scriptures, as according to the traditions of the lewes.

WEE knowe already by our Scriptures, that there is a Mediator, we knowe his office, his Nature, and the intent of his comming: and we knowe these things, not onely by our scrip∣tures, but also by the Commentaries of the auncient Iewes. Now followeth that wee see whether he be come into the world or no, which is the poynt wherein lyeth the chiefe difference and disagreement betwéene the Iewes and the Christians.* 1.936 The Iewes looke for him still, and thinke long for his comming. The Christians beléeue he is come alreadie, & put their trust in him: and both of them ground themselues vpon the same presidents, yea and oftentymes vppon the same clauses.* 1.937 Let the Scriptures therefore bee iudges of this case, and let vs see what time they behighted for his comming, and what tokens they giue vs of his comming. First of all, The Scep∣ter (sayth Iacob) shall not be taken from Iuda, nor the Lawgi∣uer from betweene his feete, vntill Silo come. This text is ex∣pounded of the Messias, by the Zohar* 1.938 of the Cabalistes, and by the Talmudistes in diuers places, by the Chaldee Paraphrases, and by Rabbi Dauid Kimhi himselfe. And the Sence is cléere; namely that the souereintie and chéef authoritie of gouernement, should continue in the Trybe of Iuda vntill the cōming of Christ,* 1.939 as the Onkelos and the Commentarie vpon Genesis expound it. Wherevpon Rabbi Hama the sonne of Hauina sayth in the Tal∣mud, The sonne of Dauid shall not come, so long as any soue∣rein authoritie be it neuer so small remayneth in Israell:* 1.940 and to the confirmation thereof he alledgeth a text out of the eightéenth Chapter of Esay.* 1.941 Also Rabbi Mili alledging Rabbi Eliezer the sonne of Rabbi Simeon,* 1.942 sayth that Christ shall not come, vntill there be a cleane riddance of all Iudges and all Magistrates in

Israell. Which thing he will needes gather likewise vpon the first Chapter of Esay. Therefore when they once sawe that the soue∣reintie and all maner of Iurisdiction ceassed in Hierusalem; they should haue taken it for a sure token, that the Messias was at their doores. Now therefore let vs see if this alteration be come to passe, and the very peculiar tyme when it came to passe. Saule (say some of their newe Rabbines) was chosen King in Silo of the Trybe of Beniamin, and it may be that these things were spoken of hym. Nay: for it is sayd, The Scepter shall not depart from Iuda. And seeing that the Scepter had not as then bene in Iuda, nor was to come into that trybe, vntill Dauid was afterward anointed King: the Scripture should rather haue sayd, The Scepter shall not be in Iuda, vntill it haue bene taken from Silo. Whereby it appée∣reth that the sayd text cannot bee meant of Saule.* 1.943 Others say that Ieroboam the Sonne of Nabath remoued the state of Ephraim from the subiection of Iuda, by the Rebellion of the ten Trybes, and was crowned in Silo. Yea say we; but the Scepter remayned still in Iuda,* 1.944 and the chief Senate in Hierusalem; and the state of Ephraim was brought to ruine long tyme afore Iuda was caryed away vnto Babylon:* 1.945 yea & Ieroboam was crowned in Sichem, and not in Silo. Agein, what maner of interpretation is this, vntill Silo come,* 1.946 that is to say, vntill Ieroboā come who is crowned in Silo? Some therefore by the word Silo, will needes vnderstand Nabuchodonosor. For (say they) he tooke Ierusalem, caried Iuda away to Babylon, and destroyed the Temple; and by that meanes they thinke to shift of the sayd Prophesie. But euen in the time of the captiuitie, the Iewes had a Reschgaluta, that is to say a Chéef or head gouernour of their Captiuitie, whome they chose of the Tribe of Iuda, and peculiarly of the house of Dauid, as their own Histories do testifie, wherein they set downe the succession of their Princes very carefully from Zorobabell foorth.* 1.947 And therefore the Talmud saith, that by the Scepter, we must vnderstand the heads of the Captiuitie; and by the Lawgiuer, the Sonnes of Hillell, that is to say the disciples of Hillel; of whom y^e two cheefest were Ionathas the sonne of Vziel the author of the Chaldee paraphra∣sis vpon the Prophets, and Simeon the rightuous of whom men∣tion is made in S. Luke. To be short, the Machabies them selues who held both the Souereintie and the Priesthod in Israell, were (as they themselues report) of Iuda by the Moothers side,* 1.948 and of Leuy by the Fathers side (for those two Tribes were woont to go

togither by alyance) or rather (as othersome report) of Iuda by the Fathers side, and of Leuy by the Moothers side. And as for the Sanhedrins, that is to say, the thréescore and ten Iudges, (who in the opinion of Rabbi Moyses Hadarsan,* 1.949 were not to ceasse afore the comming of the Messias) they continued still euen vnder the captiuitie of Babylon, & vnder the Dominion of Machabies. Hi∣therto therefore the Messias could not be come: and besides that, it were an vtter wresting of the Text, to conuey it any other way then to the comming of the Messias, against the whole consent of all Israell. But (sayth Iosephus* 1.950 the Iewe) after the Warres be∣tweene Aristobulus and Hircanus the last of the Machabies, the Romanes being Lords of Iewrie, did set vp one Herod the sonne of Antipater an Edomite, that is to wit a mere Stranger) to bee King there. Which Herod for the easier stablishing of his state, maried the daughter of Hircanus then prisoner in Parthia. After∣ward when hee sawe that Hircanus (who onely remayned of the stocke of the Machabies, was returned home; fearing least the Iewes,* 1.951 who bare an affection to hym, should set him vp againe in the kingdome: he killed both him and his daughter whom he had taken to wife, and also the Children whom he had begotten of her. And not contented with that outrage, he rooted out as many of the house of Iuda, as liued in any countenance or credit, defaced their styles and tytles, and burned their Pedegrees. Also he made High Priestes whom it pleased him, but not according to the Lawe, nor according to their Trybes. Finally (as sayth Phylo* 1.952 the Iewe) hee slew all the Sanhedrin, that is to wit the Thréescore and twelue Senators of the house of Iuda, which were assistents to the king, and did put Proselites and Straungers in their place; insomuch that hauing by his crueltie abolished both the Priesthod and the Senate, & vttterly cōfounded the whole state; he brought to passe, that at length about the thirtieth yere of his reigne, he was accep∣ted of all men for King, and ruled all things as he listed himselfe. This is the time (say I) wherein the Souereintie and Iurisdicti∣on of Iuda did ceasse; and that not lyke an Eclipse for a fewe ho∣wers, dayes or yeeres, but for a continuall tyme. Insomuch that from that tyme foorth (which is now aboue fifteene hundred yeres ago) there hath not risen vp any one man in all the world, beeing a Iewe borne, that hath any where had any authoritie great or small among the Iewes. Nay further, Vespasian, Titus, Domitian, A∣drian, and diuers other Emperours of Rome, haue indeuered to

roote out the whole house of Iuda; and they of the Trybe of Iuda haue sought to cōceale themselues, and manifestly to corrupt their owne Pedegrees, to rid themselues from the rigorous inquisition that was made for them. Insomuch that at this day, there is not a Iewe (I report mee to themselues whether I say not true) which can vaunt that he hath his pedegree certein, yea or which can shew any lykely coniecture that hee is of the Trybe of Iuda, that is to say, of the blud Royall of the which Christ was promised. That which I haue sayd appeareth sufficiently by the present state of the Iewes, which haue so long tyme continued, and yet still be without King, without Gouernour, without Priest, without Iudge, with∣out Genealogie, and without certeyne succession. But forasmuch as they refuse the witnesse of the whole world; let vs heare their owne. In the 17. Chapter of Deuteronomie* 1.953 where mention is made of the King, it is sayd thus: Thou shalt set him ouer thee to be thy King, whom the Lord thy God shall giue thee from among thy brethren, and thou shalt not set a straunger ouer thee. And the custome was to deliuer the Lawe to the King to reade therein,* 1.954 as is expresly commaunded there. Now (sayth the Commentarie vpon that place) when Herods Agrippa who was a Iewe in Religion, came to the reading of that verse, he fell a wée∣ping. Neuerthelesse, all the people bad him be of good courage, and told him that he was their brother, notwithstanding that he came of the stocke of a bondwoman. And in another place it is reported, that at the tyme of this chaunge,* 1.955 there was heard a voyce from heauen saying, Now shall the seruant prosper without doubt, which steppeth vp in Israell against his maister: Whereby He∣rode the great, tooke courage to pretend tytle to the Kingdome: And that as touching the Sanhedrin, (that is to wit the Senate of Israell,) Herode the great slew them euerychone saue only one whose name was Bota,* 1.956 who could not create any moe Senators, because it could not bee done without the laying on of the hands of moe than one: And that a while afore, the Romaines had driuen them out of the Palace of Hierusalem, and that therevppon they tooke themselues to Sackcloth and Ashes, and cryed out with pas∣sing great sorowe,* 1.957 Wo vnto vs, for the Scepter is taken away from Iuda, and the Lawgiuer from betweene his feete; and yet for all that, the Sonne of Dauid is not yet come.* 1.958 Thus ye see that the tyme of Christes cōming fell out in the reigne of Herode, in whom the Kingdome was conueyed to Straungers,* 1.959 and the

Iewish Senate was vtterly rooted out, which thing had neuer happened at any tyme afore.

Here followeth another marke of his comming. Wee knowe there had bene in Hierusalem two Temples:* 1.960 the first builded by Salomon & destroyed by Nabugodonozor; the second builded by Zorobabel vnder the protection of Cyrus and Darius Kings of Persia, and destroyed afterward by the Emperour Tytus.* 1.961 Now, of the second Temple thus speaketh the Prophet Haggeus who was one of the builders therof; Who is left among you that saw this house in her first beautie? But what thinke you by it now? Is it not in your eyes as a thing of nothing? This doth vs to vnderstand that the second Temple was nothing comparable to the first in Maiestie and statelinesse. And in deede wee reade in Es∣dras, that the good old Fathers which had seene the first, could not forbeare wéeping when they behild the second. Also the Rabbines * 1.962 do report, that there wanted chiefly fiue things in the second which were in the first: namely, Fire from heauen that consumed y^e burnt∣offerings, the glorie of God among the Cherubins, the manifest breathing of the holy Ghost vppon the Prophetes, the presence of the Arke, and the Vrim and Thumim. And they affirme, that to the same end it is sayd in Salomons Ballet, Wee haue a little Si∣ster, &c.* 1.963 which they say is meant of the Church vnder the second Temple, which in outward showe should not match the Church that was vnder the first Temple. To bee short, the Chronicle of the Hebrewes beginning the Historie of the Church of Israell vn∣der the second Temple, sayth these wordes: Hitherto the Pro∣phets haue spoken by the holy Ghost: but henceforth bowe downe thyne eare, & hearken to the voyce of wise men: which is as much to say, as that in all the tyme of this second Temple, wee see not one Prophet rise vp. Yet notwithstanding, the same Prophet sayth thus also;* 1.964 The glorie of the latter house shall be greater than the glorie of the first. And therefore he exhorteth Zorobabel and Iosua the sonne of Iosedec and al the people to be of good cheere. It was méete then that vnder this second Temple, there should be some peculiar and extraordinary gift giuen of God, which should excel both the Arke, and the Vrim and Thumim, and the Prophesying, and whatsoeuer other glorious thing the former Temple had.

Some say that of the newe things the stuffe was much richer than of the former. Admit that the first was of Siluer and this lat∣ter

of Gold. What is there herein that can match the gift of Pro∣phesying? Another sayes, that the fashion and workmanship there∣of was more curious. What is that to the presence of God, who shewed himselfe so openly in the first? Some (because the text is flat against them) haue accounted that the second Temple conti∣nued longer than the first by ten yéeres, the second hauing stood fo∣wer hundred and twentie yéeres, whereas the first stood but fower hundred and ten yéers. What can be more vayne or more cold, or lesse beseeming, either for God to teach, or for a man that hath any wit, to heare? I say, for God before whom a thousand yéeres are but as one day; or for Man, whom one day of aduersitie in his life∣tyme doth more gréeue, than a thousand yéeres continuance of his buildings can pleasure him after his death? Moreouer, who kno∣weth not that this second Temple was oftentymes defiled, and spoyled by Antiochus, by Pompey, by Crassus, and by others? But the Prophet speaketh shirle enough to them that list to heare. As yet (sayth he) there remayneth a little tyme sayth the Lord, and then will I remoue both Heauen and Earth; I wil remoue all Nations; and they shall come; the desire of all Nations shall come, and then will I fill this house with glorie.* 1.965 What is this desire of all Nations? We knowe it is Christ, of whom it is sayd in another place, that he is the hope of the Gentiles, & that they shall bee blessed and happie in him. And the Chaldee Paraphrast hath transtated here, the Anoynted. Also in the Talmud, Rabbi Akiba vnderstandeth that text of Christs comming, howbeit that he mistake his person.* 1.966 And the Prophet Malachie who prophe∣sied at the same tyme, expoundeth it in these wordes. The Lord whom ye seeke, and the Ambassador of the league which you desire, shall come incontinently into his Temple. The very meaning hereof is, that vnder this second Temple, the Church of Israell shall haue the good fortune to see Christ the Lorde whom they looked for so long tyme. Now at the same tyme that the king∣dome of Israell fayled, that is to wit in the reigne of Herod, about a fortie yeres afore the destruction of the Temple,* 1.967 the little beautie that was in it did vtterly ceasse. For the spirit of the great Sina∣gogue (say y^t Iewes) which after a sort supplied the want of y^e Pro∣phetes, came to an ende in Simeon surnamed the Rightuous (of whom mention is made in the first Chapter of Saint Luke.) And then also ceassed all the speciall blessings of the second* 1.968 Temple reckoned vp in the Talmud. Yea and God shewed visibly that he

abhorred them, in that (say they) the ordinarie appearing of an An∣gell at the entering in of the Sanctuarie, was turned into an vgly and blacke Bugge. And whereas aforetymes thirtie men could scarce open the doore of the Temple; now it opened of it self, wher∣at Rabbi Iohanan Ben Zaccai one of Hillels Disciples was ve∣ry sore amazed. And in the end, the Temple was so destroyed, that one stone was not left standing vppon another. And notwithstan∣ding that the Iewes had leaue to buyld it again,* 1.969 specially vnder the Emperour Iulian the deadly enemie of Christians, who of his owne purse gaue greatly to the building thereof: yet could they ne∣uer bring it to passe; but (as the very Heathen writers of that tyme doe witnesse) fires issewed out of the earth, and thick Lightenings from the Skye, and burnt vp the workmen and beate downe the workes which they had begun with so extreme pride and so exces∣siue cost. Soothly wee may well say therefore, and hardly can the Iewes geynsay it, that the second Temple is destroyed long ago, without hope of recouerie; and that Christ was promised to come afore the destruction therof. Therfore it must néedes be that Christ is already come into the world. And that the hope of Israel was so, it appeareth yet further. For vpon the last chapter of Esay* 1.970 where it is sayd, Afore her pangs came vpon her, she brought forth a manchild: Rabbi Moyses Hadarsan saith, The Redeemer of Is∣rael shal be borne afore the birth of him that shal bring Israel in bondage.* 1.971 And Ionathas the great Disciple of Hillell saith vpō the same text, Israel shall be saued afore her extremitie come, & the Anoynted shalbe shewed openly afore the throwes of her Childbirth come. Also Rabbi Moyses of Tyroll, and Bioces, both according to this Text and by their owne reckoning vppon Daniell, doe looke for this thing towards the ende of the second Temple. Likewise the booke which they call Bereschith Rabba * 1.972 maketh this Parable, As a certeyne Iewe was at plough, an A∣rabian passing by heard one of his Oxen lowe: and herevpon willed him to vnyoke his Oxen, because the destruction of the Temple was at hand:* 1.973 and that byandby the other Oxe lowed likewise: wherevpon he bad him againe vnyoke out of hand; for the Messias was alreadie come. And Rabbi Abon hauing repeated the same in another place, saith thus: What neede we to learne it of the Arabians,* 1.974 seeing the text it selfe declareth it? Surely I passe not for their Parables, which haue no very good grace with them, and oftentymes bewray that they wanted wit in

very déede: but my intent is to gather of them, that it was a com∣mon opinion among them, that Christ or the Messias should come into the world a little afore the destruction of the Temple.

Let vs heare what the Angell Gabriell sayth to Daniell:* 1.975 for he goes néerest of all to the matter. Threescore and ten weekes (sayth he) are determined vpon thy people,* 1.976 and vpon thy holy Citie, to make an end of the disobedience, and to anoynt the Holy of Holies. Knowe thou therefore and vnderstand, that from the going foorth of the commaundement for the buil∣ding againe of Hierusalem, vnto Christ the Prince, there are seuen weekes, and threescore and two weekes; and then shall the streates and the broken walles be repayred again in short tyme. And after threescore & two weekes, Christ shalbe slaine and nothing shall remaine vnto him. And the people of a Prince that is to come, shal destroy the Citie and the Sanctua∣rie; and the end thereof shall be as with an ouerflowing, and it shall bee digged vp with desolations to the end of the warre. And he shall stablish his couenant with many in one weeke, and in the middes of the weeke shal he cause the Sacrifice and Oblation to ceasse, and for the spreading out of abhomina∣tion he shall lay it waste, &c. This only one Prophesie is enough to conuince the Iewes, and therefore it behoueth vs to examine it from poynt to poynt. First, that this text is ment of the Messias, it is so euident and absolute, that it is a starke shame to denye it. And so is it applyed by Rabbi Saadias vpon Daniell, by Rabbi Nah∣man of Geround, and by Rabbi Hadarsan, who be the notablest among them. For as for Rabbi Selomoh, who vnderstandeth it of Cyrus; or Aben Ezra, who applyed it to Nehemias; or Rabbi Leui the sonne of Gerson, who vnderstādeth it of Iosua the High∣priest: there is not that word in this text, which doth not disprooue them;* 1.977 besides that the Anoynting which is spoken of here, must needes be a spirituall anoynting, considering that there was not a∣ny more anoynting at all vnder the second Temple. There are (sayth he) threescore and ten weekes. Let vs see what maner of wéekes they be. The Scripture telleth vs of wéekes of daies, and of wéekes of yéeres; and examples of them both are in Leuiticus* 1.978 and in diuers other places. The wéekes of daies serue for ordinary matters; and the wéekes of yéeres for matters of great weight and of long continuance. But Daniell* 1.979 may bee his owne expounder. For in the next Chapter hee speaketh expresly of mourning three

weekes of daies; whereas here in a matter of estate, which passeth with slower steppes and requireth larger measure; he speaketh of weekes simply without addition. And in very deede Hierusalem could not bee builded agayne in seuen weekes of daies; but it was to be builded agayne in many weekes of yeeres. After that maner are they taken by Rabbi Saadias, Rabbi Moyses, and Rabbi Se∣lomoh also, vnto whom all the best of them consent: and there is not any one of them (to my knowledge) which taketh these wéekes to be wéekes of daies. But as for the yoonger Rabbines, whenso∣euer they bee pressed, they say these weekes conteyne eyther ten yéeres a péece, or fiftie yeres, yea or a whole hundred yeres a péece; a thing without reason in this text, and without example in all the whole Scripture.

It followeth, from the going forth of the Commaundment for the building again of Hierusalem to the anoynted Prince, are seuen weekes and threescore and two weekes. That is to say, (as the Prophet himselfe expoundeth it) for the building vp of the Citie of Hierusalem and the Temple, seuen weekes, which make nine and fortie yéeres. And from the building againe of Hie∣rusalem vnto Christ, threescore and two weekes, which make fower hundred thirtie and fower yéeres; all which together amount vnto fower hundred fowerscore and three yéeres. And in good sooth, if wee begin (as the Prophet teacheth vs) to account the wéekes frō the day wherein the word was spoken that Hierusalem should be builded againe, that is to wit from the thréescore and tenth yere of the Captiuitie,* 1.980 or from the first yéere of King Cyrus when Ie∣remie wrate to the prisoners at Babylon, assi••ring them of their deliuerance, at which tyme Cyrus gaue commaundement for the building againe of the Temple, vnto the tyme of Herode King of the Iewes, or of Tyberius the Emperour of Rome: we shall finde that in that very tyme were fulfilled the fower hundred fowerscore and thrée yeres, yea and the very thréescore and tenth weeke wher∣in Christ was to stablish the Couenant of God with men. And it seemeth that Daniell or rather the Angell ment in these thréescore and ten wéekes, to allude to the thréescore and ten yéeres spoken of by the Prophet Ieremie; as if he should haue sayd, At such tyme as ye were led away captiue to Babylon, Ieremie assured you that you should bee deliuered from that temporall Captiuitie within thréescore and ten yéeres, and ye see it is so come to passe. And now I tell you that within thréescore and ten weekes of yeeres, ye shall

be deliuered from the spiritual captiuitie, by Gods couenant made vnto you, whereof the Anoynted shalbe the Mediatour. I am not ignorant how some writers begin the account of these weekes at the first yéere of King Cyrus; and some at the second yéere of Arta∣xerxes; & othersome at the twentie yeere of the same Artaxerxes, because at that tyme there went out another Proclamation in fa∣uour of Nehemias, by reason that the building of the Temple had bene stayed. But which way soeuer they goe to worke,* 1.981 the ende of these weekes falleth still vpon the tyme of Herod and Tyberius, and méeteth iumpe with the prophesies that went afore. And it can not bee denyed but that they were accomplished according to the circumstaunces set downe here by the Prophet. For the Prince of the people that was to come, destroyed the Citie; that is to wit, the Emperour of Rome did ouerthrow Hierusalem and beate downe the Temple, and abolish their Sacrificings through the whole Land of Iewrie, and bring vpon them the extreme desolation that is spoken of here by the Prophet. And therefore some of the Rab∣bines being vnable to shift of this text, haue presumed to say that Daniell had sayd well in all the rest, but that he ouershot himselfe in this account.

The very traditions* 1.982 of the Iewes themselues doe bring vs to this tymer At leastwise there is not any whose date is not out long ago. In the Talmud* 1.983 is this saying of the schoole of Elias so great∣ly renowned among them. The world shall indure Sixthousand yeeres; Two thousand yeeres emptie, that is to say without Lawe; Two thousand yeeres vnder the Lawe; And two thou∣sand yeres vnder Christ. And Rabbi Iacob sayth herevpon, that the first two thousand yeeres ended in the tyme of Abraham; the second about the destruction of the Temple (which thing he pro∣ueth by an account of the tymes) at the ende of which latter twoo thousand he sayth that Christ should come and deliuer Israel from captiuitie.* 1.984 Thus farre he agreeth with vs. But he addeth, for our sinnes sakes his comming is deferred. This glosse marreth the text. For in other places it is sayd flatly, that the tyme of the com∣ming of the Messias is past now seauen hundred and fortie yeeres ago, which thing they lament in both their Talmuds. And vppon this verse of Esay, I will make hast to doe it in his tyme, which is spoken expresly of Christ and of his Kingdome:* 1.985 Rabbi Iosua the sonne of Leuy apposeth these words, I wil make haste, against these other words, in his tyme. I will make haste sayth the Lord,

at leastwise if they be worthy [addeth Rabbi Iosua] In his time, [sayth the text] that is to say, euen when they would not, [addeth Rabbi Iosua] which meaning of his he might haue expressed much more fitly in saying, That Gods grace geinstandeth our sinnes in such sort, as that all our iniquities cannot stop or stay the course thereof.

We haue another Tradition vpon the ninth Chapter of Esay.* 1.986 where he setteth downe this excellent Prophesie cōcerning Christ, A Childe is borne vnto vs, &c. In that place are written these words, lemarbeh hammisrah concerning the increasing of his king∣dome, with the Hebrewe Letter •• Mem closed in the mids of the word, notwithstanding that the sayd Letter which as our M,* 1.987 is not wont to be written so, but in the end of a word. Here therefore according to their custome, they fall to descating vpon the letters, and because the •• Mem is here closed vp, whereas it ought cōmon∣ly to be written open thus, ••: they say there must needes bée some great misterie hidden and shut vp there: and that as Rabbi Tan∣huma was séeking the reason thereof, a voyce from heauen answe∣red him, razi li razi li, that is to say, I haue a secret: which by the consent of them all, concerned the Messias. But some of them passe further, and say that this cyphred Letter importeth sixe hundred, that is to wit, sixe hundred yeeres, which are to be reckened from this Prophesie vnto the Messias. And in very deede, frō the fourth yeere of the reigne of Achas, at which time the Prophesie was vt∣tered, we shall find by account that they fall not out long after the time of Herod. Another is read in the Talmud in these wordes: Rabbi Elias sayth to Rabbi Iehudas brother of Rabbi Sala the Essene,* 1.988 The worlde cannot haue any mo than fowerscore and fiue Iubilees, that is to say, Fower thousand two hundred and Fiftie yeres, and in the last Iubilee, shall the sonne of Da∣uid come without doubt; but whether in the beginning ther∣of or in the end thereof I cannot tell. Rabbi Asse is of his opi∣nion in the same case. To be short, R. Moyses Ben Maimon sayth in his Epistle to the Iewes of Affricke,* 1.989 that there is an auncient Tradition that Christ should bee borne in the yeere of the Worlde fower thousand fower hundred seuentie and fower. The which ac∣cording to their owne account should be past, now more then nyne hundred yeres ago.* 1.990 And Rabbi Moyses of Geround and Leuy the sonne of Gerson speake of another, which behighted it in the yere of the world fiue thousand one hundred and eightéene: which

by their owne account is expired more than two hundred yeeres since. Finally after much alteration and vayne expectation to no purpose, the conclusion of the greatest Rabbines commeth to this poynt, That it is needeles to calculate any more for the comming of Christ, That all the tymes limited by the Prophetes are alrea∣dy past, and that there remayneth not any thing els than repen∣tance and good woorkes.

Ouer and besides the tyme, they doe also deliuer vs certeine to∣kens of Christs comming, in their traditions.* 1.991 When the Messias commeth (say they) there shal be fewe wise men in Israell, and many Seducers, Inchaunters and Wizards. The wisedome of the Scribes shall stinke, and the Schooles of Diuinitie shall be∣come Brothelhouses. Good men in Israell shall bee abhorred, and the countenances of the men of that age shalbe ful of vn∣shamefastnesse. Is not this a liuely description of the maners of the Iewes, yea euen of the Pharisies themselues, in the tyme of Herod and of y^e destruction of the Temple? Let vs hearken what Iosephus* 1.992 their owne History writer speaketh of them. Iewry was at that time (sathi he) a Den and Harbour of Theeues, of Mur∣derers, of Inchaunters, and of Seducers of the people. And doubtlesse God was offended at their extreme vngodlinesse; insomuch that he abhorred both Hierusalem & the Temple, and brought in the Romaines thither to purge thē as it were with fire. Yea, and I beleeue (sayth he) that if the Romanes had staied neuer so little to come to destroy them; either the earth would haue swallowed them vp, or some great waterflud must haue drowned them, or els they had bin burned vp as Sodom was. For that generation was much worse than euer Sodom was. Thus then aswell the writings as also the notablest Tradi∣tions of the auncient Iewes, doe poynt vs to the tyme of Herod. And truely, Tacitus, Suetonius,* 1.993 and Iosephus himselfe (witnesses voyd of suspitiō) report that in that age it was bruted euery where, that out of Iewrie should come a King that should reigne ouer all the whole world; and that this saying was grauen in a very open and renowmed place of y^e Castle at Hierusalem;* 1.994 which thing cau∣sed the Iewes to bee so readie to rebell, and so loth to serue the Ro∣maines.* 1.995 And it appeareth by the whole Historie of that age, that all the people, yea and Herod himselfe had their eyes and eares e∣uer open wayting and watching for the Messias, the one to im∣brace him and the other to destroye him. For as in all the former

tymes, wee reade not that any man tooke vpon him to be the Mes∣sias,* 1.996 & much lesse that any was receiued as he: so in this age there scarsly passed any one yéere, but some one or other stepped vp to be he, verely because that (to their seeming) they had the disposition of the people, and the very tyme it self answerable to their intent. He∣rod therefore who perceiued himselfe to haue bene but newly pro∣claymed King by the Romaines, fearing to bee dispossessed of his Crowne, did what he could to destroye the blud royall of Iuda, de∣facing their Genealogies, and not sparing euen his owne sonnes. Yea and there stepped vp certeine Courtyerrabbins, which would néedes make the world beléeue that Herod was y^e promised Mes∣sias, whereof some will haue the Herodians to procéede which are spoken of in the Gospell. And this sect was greatly furthered by the opinion of the fleshly sort, which by the Messias looked for a re∣stitution of their State; that is to wit, of Uineyards, of gorgeous buildings, of precious Stones, and of all things sauing of them∣selues. Also about the same tyme stepped vp one Iudas a Gawlo∣nite, who called the people to libertie, and mainteyned with some assistence of the Pharasies, that they ought not to pay tribute to the Emperour.* 1.997 So also did another Iudas the sonne of one Eze∣chias, a Capteyne of Cutthrotes, and a certeyne Shepheard na∣med Athrouges, whose pretence was no lesse than to bee Kings, and to deliuer their followers from the yoke of bondage. Likewise vnder the gouernement of Faelix, and in the reigne of Agrippa, a certeyne AEgiptian taking vpon him to be a Prophet, led certeyne people vp to Mount Oliuet, and made them beléeue that from thence they should see the walles of Hierusalem fall downe, and then they should goe in thither. Againe, vnder the President Cus∣pius Fadus, one Thewdas vndertooke the like enterprise. Al which are signes that they tooke aduauntage of the tyme, and abused the hope of the people to the maintenance of their owne ambition. But (which more is) we reade in y^e Talmud,* 1.998 that in the tyme of Agrip∣pa one Barcozba (which name signifieth the Sonne of Lying) stept vp among the people, and pretending to be Christ, was taken so to bee by the Rabbines themselues, and reigned thirtie yeeres and a halfe:* 1.999 yea and that as Ramban reporteth in his sentences of Kings, they required not any signe of him; insomuch that the great Rabbine Akiba the wisest of al the Talmudists, became his Har∣nesbearer, and applyed vnto him the second Chapter of the Pro∣phet Haggeus expounded heretofore; vntil at length after long and

pernicious abusing of them, when he could not deliuer them from the yoke of the Romaines, in the end they knockt him on the head. Yet notwithstanding, afterward againe, about a fortie yeres after the destruction of the Temple, another of the same name gathered into the Citie of Bitter all the Iewes* 1.1000 that were thereabouts; and of him they report wonders, as that he should haue a hūdred thou∣sand men about him, which vpon trust of their inuincible strength, did cut off one of their fingers; that going to battell he was wont to say, Helpe vs not thou Lord of the world seeing thou hast forsaken vs, &c. And that the Rabbines which had bene deceiued by the former,* 1.1001 (so greatly were they perswaded of the tyme) recei∣ued this man neuerthelesse, and made him also to be receiued of o∣thers, applying vnto him this text of the booke of Nombers, A Starre shall come out of Iacob, because the Hebrewe word Cocab signifieth a Starre; and saying that in stead of Cocab it ought to be written Cozab or Cozba, which was his name. And this is written by their owne Histories, and confirmed afterward by ours, and al∣so by the very Heathen writers which wrate the life of the Empe∣rour Adrian. Yet for all this, they were still the more wasted, and caryed away into Spayne, and Hierusalem was peopled with o∣ther Nations, and the whole Land of Iewrie made vtterly hea∣then. And as many as went about afterward to abuse the Iewes vnder that pretence, (as one did not long since in Italie) were by and by destroyed and welnere wyped cleane out of rememberance. Let vs adde yet further, that since that tyme (which is now aboue fiftéene hundred yéeres agoe) they neuer had any Prophetes, any comfort from GOD, any extraordinarie gifts, no nor any know∣ledge of their Tribes: which is a most euident token, that the Pro∣phesies which amed chiefly at Christ, are fulfilled, and that in him the Church is comforted and indewed with the giftes which it ho∣ped for; and to bee short, that he for whose sake the pedegrees were to be kept certeyne, is not now to be borne. And therefore wee see how some of them doe say with Rabbi Hillel, That the daies of Ezechias haue swallowed vp the Messias; that is to say, that he is not to bee looked for any more; and that folke haue made them∣selues vnworthie of him: and that some others through extremitie of despayre, do pronounce them accursed which determine any cer∣teyne tyme of the comming of the Messias.

Thus then we see now that the holy Scripture and the aunci∣ent interpretation thereof, doe méete together in the tyme of He∣rod,

to shewe vs the Messias there: and therevpon it is, that we sée the people in the Gosphell so ready to ronne after Iohn Bapthst and Christ; and to moue these ordinarie questions, Art thou hee that should come? When wilt thou restore the Kingdome of Israell? Shall we waite for another yet still? and such other. But But let vs see what startingholes stubbornes hath inuēted against the things aforesaid.* 1.1002 The Messias (say the new Rabbines) was borne at the very same time, and in the very same day that the se∣cond Temple was destroyed, that this Prophesie of Esay* 1.1003 might be fulfilled, Before hir throwes or pangs came, she was deliue∣red of a Manchylde:* 1.1004 but he is kept secret for a tyme. For so doe we reade vpon the xxx. Chapter of Genesis. And in the Talmud,* 1.1005 Rabbi Iosua the sonne of Leuy sayth, that it is a Reuelation that was made vnto Elias. I would faine then haue them to shewe me what one Text in all the Scripture giueth any incling thereof. They ad that he shalbe hidden sower hundred yeeres in the greate Sea, eight hundred yeres among the sonnes of Coree, and fower score yeres at the gate of Rome. And Rabbi Iosua the sonne of Leuy saith in the Talmud, that he himselfe sawe him there lapping vp his sores among the Lazermen. What are these things (euen by none other witnesse then them selues) but tales contriued vpon pleasure, of purpose to mock folke? Some say he shalbe set vp in great honour next vnto the Pope, and that in the end he shall say to the Pope as Moyses did to Pharao, Let my people goe that they may serue mee, and so foorth. If he be borne so long agoe, and keepe him selfe secret (as they say in their Talmud) but till he be called to deliuer them; what cause is there why he should kéepe himself away still, seeing they haue called him so much and so lowd and so many hundred yeres, seeing also that the time is expyred, yea and almost dubble expyred, and finally, seeing that euen accor∣ding to their owne exposition, it is sayd. I will hasten them in their tyme? They answere yet still, there remayneth but a good repentāce. Tooto•• miserable surely were we, if God should not pre∣uent our repentance with his grace. For the very repentance of the best men,* 1.1006 is but a sorynesse that they cannot be sory enough. But let vs heere a pretie Dialogue of two Rabbins disputing in their Talmud of this matter. It is written sayth Rabbi Eliezer, Turne againe yee stubborne Children,* 1.1007 and I will heale you of your stybbornesse.* 1.1008 Yea, but it is also written sayth R. Iosua, Ye haue bene sold for nothing, and ye shall be redeemed with mony:

that is to say, ye haue bene sold for your Idolatryes, which are nothing, and ye shalbe redeemed without your repentance & good workes. Yea but it is sayd sayth R. Eliezer, Turne yee to mee, and I will turne to you.* 1.1009 But let vs also reade sayth R. Io∣sua, I haue taken ye in mariage as a wyfe, and I will take you one of a Citie and twoo of a Household, and giue you ente∣rance into Sion. R. Eliezer replyeth thus: It is sayd, ye shalbe saued in calmnesse and in rest. Nay sayth R. Iosua, it is written in Esay,* 1.1010 thus saith the Lord the Redeemer of Israell to the de∣spised Soule, and to the people that is abhorred; that is to say, that your wickednes shal not stop the course of Gods decree.* 1.1011 In the end, Eliezer sayth, what meaneth Ieremy then to say, If thou turne thee ageine ô Israell: seeing it is a conditionall maner of speaking? Nay saith Rabbi Iosua, what ment Daniel then by this Text, I heard the man that was clothed in linnen and stood vppon the Water of the Riuer, and he lifted vp his right hand and his left hand vp to Heauen, and sware by him that liueth for euer, and it shalbe for a tyme and tymes, and halfe a tyme? And the Talmud sayth that at this tert R. Eliezer was blankt and held his peace, which was as much to say as that he condescended to that which R. Iosua had sayd, namely that the offences of Israell should not stay the comming of Christ, but that God would preuent Israell with his holy grace. Agein, if the want of a generall Conuersion do withhold the comming of the Messi∣as; then considering that the punishment which lyeth vppon that Nation is vniuersall, and their banishment of so long continuance and so farre from whome, In so much that their Temple, Cittie & Countrie be destroyed, and they may not so much as once sée them a farre of; what is the cryme that is so exceeding great, so vniuer∣sall, and so continuall among them? I meane what is the fault peculiar to that Nation, and not common to them with all other Nations of the world? The first Temple (say they) was destroyed for Idolatrie, for superfluitie, and for sheading of giltlesse blud, and specially the blud of Zacharie and Esay. Yet notwithstanding they wanted not Prophetes in the time of their Captiuitie; nay they neuer had mo than then; so mercifully did God measure his comfortes to them according to their afflictions. What is too bee sayd then, séeing ••••at now in so many hundred yeres they haue not bene comforted at all, no not euen at this day when they be both lesse giuen to Idolatrie, and (to all séeming) more constant in their

Lawe; and in effect lesse giuen to Royot and lesse bluddy than euer they were? Nay further, séeing that vnder the second Tem∣ple they shewed so great zeale against the Romaines, that they ad∣mitted not any Idolatrie among them, but chose rather to dye a thousand deathes, than onely to receiue either the Emperours I∣mage, or the Romayne Standard peinted with an Eagle; inso∣much that they left the breache of the wall of the Citie vngarded, rather than they would breake their Sabboth day: What might be the cause that God should withold the open manifestation of the Messias, whom they affirme to haue bene borne at that tyme, or multiply their miseries so extreemely? Some say it was for their worshipping of the Golden Calfe in the Wildernes, that is to say for a fault that was committed a two or thrée thousand yeres ago, when as (notwithstanding) the people were then presently puni∣shed for it out of hand, and many recoueries and ouerthrowes had ensewed since in the meane whyle. Others say it is for the selling of Ioseph by his brethren; and therevpon some of them bring vp againe the fleeting of Soules fathered vpon Pythagoras. Why doe they not rather acknowledge herein their owne colde absurdi∣ties?* 1.1012 nay (sayes one of their bookes) it is for a fault which they knowe not, and therefore it is not foretold them when they shalbe deliuered, as it was to the Captiues of Babylon. If they knowe not the fault, then can they not acknowledge it; and if they cannot acknowledge it, in vayne are all their Penances and Repentance. And yet in very deede they haue from tyme to tyme (and that not long ago) done publick and open penances, much more exactly to outward apparance, than euer they did; of purpose to hasten their Messias, who notwithstanding (by the report of their Talmud* 1.1013) is so néere and ready at hand, that (by their saying) he wilnot stay one day, if they turne vnto God according to this saying of the psalm.* 1.1014 Tooday if yee heare my voyce. But wee say, that forasmuch as their punishment is so vniuersall, so long, and so extreme; their fault must needes also be so too: And that séeing the former Ido∣latries and vnrightuousnes were pacified in the destruction of the first Temple, as they themselues say; It must néedes bee some greater matter, that continueth their punishment still after so ma∣ny desolations. And thervpon I conclude, both that Christ is come at his foreappoynted tyme, & also that they haue refused him; so as God hath sent them saluation in y^e selfesame m••••er y^e he promised it them by his Prophets, & they haue trampled it vnder their féete.

The xxx. Chapter.

That Iesus the Sonne of Mary came at the tyme promised by the Scriptures, and that the same is Christ.

NOw then, in the time of the first Herod, wherein both the Prophesies of the holy Scriptures and the auncient traditions of the Iewes doe méete, let vs examine who could haue bene the Messias. For at that tyme (as I haue declared afore) many pretended themselues to bee he, of whom both the liues, the doctrines and (almost) the names also are now worne out of mynd, notwithstanding that they were vphild by great mul∣titudes of people, and authorized by the chiefe Doctors among them. Neuerthelesse, in the same tyme, and euen in the selfesame yéere that Herod was accepted of the Iewes for their King,* 1.1015 Iesus the Sonne of Mary was borne, whose whole life was nothing els but a teaching of Saluation to that people; and whose end was to be crucified by the Synagog; and yet for all that, his doctrine and name continue still through the whole world. He it is whom wee call Christ, and whom wee affirme to be the Anoynted. And there∣fore let vs see first how al the prophesies are come to effect in him, and how he hath fully performed the office of the Messias.

Here let vs call to mynd the circumstances which we haue noted hertofore.* 1.1016 The Prophets haue told vs that he should be borne of a Uirgin.* 1.1017 The Gospell affirmeth Mary his mother to haue bin such a one; and yet the Iewes which haue come afterward,* 1.1018 haue written that she was taken in adulterie. Wel, seeing that in al their doings they shewe so greate rage ageinst hir Sonne; forasmuch as they had to deale but ageinst a sily womā that had no stay to stand vnto, and their Lawe is so expresse and peremptorie ageinst aduontryes: why did they not indyte her of it,* 1.1019 which would haue quasshed the reputation of hir sonne and of hirself both togither? Or why say they not rather that he was the sonne of Ioseph; but that Ioseph knew and sayd the contrarie? And seeing that Ioseph disclaymed

him for his sonne, had they not the more aduauntage to haue made him partie and playntif ageinst hir adulterie? But she liued safely by them, both after hir sonnes death, and without sifting in his lyfe∣tyme. And what greater profe of hir chastitie desire we, than to sée so many Pharisies, and so many Iudges inraged ageinst one sily woman,* 1.1020 and yet not daring to charge her with any cryme? But the talke of one Theodosius a Iew with a Christen Merchantman named Philip in the time of the Emperour Iustinian, is worthy to be noted in this behalf. In the Temple of Hierusalem ({quod} the Iew) there were two and twenty ordinary Preestes; and as soone as any of them dyed, the residew chose another in his place. Now it happened that Iesus for his singular Godlynes and doctrine was chosen by them. And to the intent they myght knowe the name of his father and moother, and inregister it according to their custome; they sent for them, & Mary came thither alone, bycause Ioseph was then dead. She being asked the name of the father of Iesus, answered vppon hir othe that she had conceyued him by the Holy Ghoste, and reported to them the woords of the Angell. Moreouer she told them the names of the women that came to hir labour vnlooked for; vppon dew inquisition whereof, when all things were found to fall out true, they registred his name in the Register of the Priestes in these words. IESVS THE SONNE OF THE LIVING GOD AND OF THE VIRGIN MARIE. And this Register ({quod} Theodosius) was saued at the sacking of Hierusalem, and afterward kept in the Citie Tiberias, where it is preserued in secret, and I haue seene it as one of the cheefe among the Iewes, and as one from whom in respect of my de∣gree, nothing was restreyned. And I beleeue therby that it is not ignorance that holdeth me in the Iewish Religion, but the honor which I haue among my Countrymen, the lyke where∣of I could not haue elswhere. Now there is greate lykelyhod that this should be true, considering that Iesus (as we see) did preache in the Temple, and went sometymes vp into the Pulpit, which thing the pryde of the Pharisies would hardly els haue in∣dured. And the holy Rabbine* 1.1021 also sayeth expresly that the moother of the Messias should be a virgin, and that hir name should be Ma∣rie; and he gathereth it after the arte of the Cabalists, out of these wordes in the nineth of Esay,* 1.1022 Lemarbeh hammisrah. And Rabbi Hacanas the Sonne of Nehumia sayeth that this Marie was of

Bethleem the Daughter of Iehoiakin Eli, of the lyne of Zoroba∣bel, of the trybe of Iuda, which was the trybe whereof the Messias should come. And of a trueth, we reade not in the Gospell, that Ie∣sus was vpbrayded by his comming of the trybe of Iuda, or of the house of Dauid; but rather that he was the sonne of a Carpenter; for the long continued aduersities of y^t house of Dauid, had brought some of his posteritie to lowe degree.* 1.1023 And Rabbi Vla sayth that Iesus of Nazareth by name, being of the blud royall (that is to say the sonne of Dauid) was crucified the day afore the Passouer. And seeing the Messias was so precisely promised to be of that race; let vs not doubt but that the Scribes would willingly haue verified the contrarie, if they had could, for then had the Goale bene wonne on their side. To be short, to come backe againe to the virginitie of Mary, she was not a woman of such kindred, alyance, and wealth, as might be bold to hope that her single word would bee beléeued without tryall: neither were the people to whom she spake, besot∣ted with y^e opinion of the Heathen, who forged tales of their Gods to make themselues to be the easelyer beléeued: but the thing was so true, that the very trueth thereof imboldened her. And in very déede, that is the very cause why Simon Magus (to the intent he might not seeme any whit inferiour to Iesus) denyed not the same poynt,* 1.1024 but rather graunting it to be true, was desirous to make his Disciples beleeue, that he himself also was the sonne of a Uirgin. The Prophet Micheas* 1.1025 sayeth, And thou Bethleem Ephrata which art but little to bee counted among the families of Iu∣da, out of thee shall come to me the partie that shall reigne o∣uer Israell, and his foorthcommings are from the beginning, and from the daies of eternitie. Here againe we haue two births of Christ; the one in tyme, the other euerlastingly afore all tyme. And therevppon rise these farre differing speeches of the people in the Gospell, saying one while; When Christ commeth, wee shall not knowe whence hee commeth;* 1.1026 and another while; Is it not written that Christ shall come of the seede of Dauid, and of the towne of Be••hleem where he dwelt? Now, that it was so vnderstoode by the Fathers of old tyme, the Chaldee Paraphrase giueth credit,* 1.1027 where it is translated thus: Out of thee shall Christ come which shall hold the souereintie ouer Israell. And Iona∣thas the author of the sayd Paraphrase, a principall Disciple of Hillels, was yet aliue at the same tyme that Iesus was borne: and the holy Rabbine and Rabbi Selomoh consent therevnto. And

that Iesus was borne in Bethleem, euen after such a fashion as was not looked for, I see not that any of them denyeth it. Moreo∣uer, there was to bee seene the Stable wherein Christ was borne, heawen out of a Rocke; which place Origen* 1.1028 reporteth to haue bin singularly reuerenced of the Infidels in his tyme.

The Gospell telleth vs that Iesus certeine daies after his birth, was caryed to Hierusalem to bee offered to the Lord according to the Lawe, and that there a man named Simoen,* 1.1029 a man that was rightuous and feared God, being certified by the holy Ghost that he should not dye vntil he had first seene Christ the Lords Anoyn∣ted; tooke him in his armes & praysed God, saying; This day haue I seene thy saluation, &c.* 1.1030 Here I charge the Iewes before God, to bethinke themselues well of the things which they both write and reade of this Simeon: namely, how that the Disciples of Hil∣lel should neuer fayle til Christ were come: That this Simeon sur∣named the Rightuous, and Ionathan the sonne of Vziel were two of the chiefe of those Disciples: That in this Simeon the spirit of the great Synagog did vtterly fayle and ceasse: That God himself did then shewe by all signes, that he abhorred that Synagog and the Sanctuarie, and that all should goe awry, and that all things were full of darknesse there.* 1.1031 Whereof comes this chaunge which they themselues doe marke so aduisedly, but of their contempt of Christ? And whereas they say further, that the Temple opened of it selfe, and that Rabbi Ionathan Ben Zaccai fellow disciple with Simeon being astonished thereat, bethought him of this saying of the Prophet Zacharie,* 1.1032 Open thy doores thou Libanus, and let the fire cōsume thy Cedars: what is it but the same that Simeon foretold vnto Mary, saying; Behold, this child is sent to bee the ouerthrow and the raising vp of many, and to be a signe that shalbe spoken against? This Child is named Iesus,* 1.1033 that is to say Sauiour: and the Gospell adding the cause thereof, sayth; For he shall saue his people from their sinnes. Who ruled and directed his birth, to bee of a Uirgin, in Bethleem, and vnthought of, to make it méete iust with the Prophesies going afore, and to make his name now to agree both with the Circumstances going afore, and with all the whole course of his life? For of so many men that had borne the name of Iesus afore, as well in the tyme of the first Temple as of the second; in which of them shall wee finde all these things to concurre as they do here? Neither is this naming of him so, in vayne. For like as neither Abraham nor Moyses did bring

the Israelites into the land of Canaan, but Iesus the sonne of Nun: so neither the lawe of Nature nor the lawe of Moyses, could bring vs into our true Canaan, that is to wit our spirituall inheritance, but only grace by the true Iesus. And therefore the Saint Rabbi sayth;* 1.1034 That because Christ shall saue folke, therefore he shall be called Iesus; and because he shall be both God and Man, ther∣fore he shall be called Emanuell,* 1.1035 [that is to say, God with vs.] And in another place, The Gentyles (sayth he) shall call him Ie∣sus.* 1.1036 And he draweth this name out of the nine and fortith Chapter of Genesis by a certeyne rule of the Cabale which they terme No∣tariak, by taking the first letters of the wordes Iabho schilo velo, which make the word Ieschu:* 1.1037 and likewise of these wordes in the 72. Psalme Ijnnur schemo veijthbarecu: and also of these in the 96. Psalme,* 1.1038 iagnaloz sadai vecol: all which are texts that are ment ex∣presly of the Messias. Although I force not of these their doings, yet haue I alledged them against them selues, because it is their custome to shewe the cunning of the arte of their Cabale. And af∣ter the same maner haue the Machabies also their name, that is to wit, of the first Letters of the words of this their deuice, Mi camo∣cha baelim Iehouah; that is to say, Which of the Gods is like thee ô Iehouah? That the name Iesus should bee reuealed vnto them, it is no strange matter, considering that in the third & fourth bookes of Esdras, Iesus Christ the sonne of God is named expres∣ly and diuers tymes, and the tyme of his comming precisely set downe according to Daniels wéekes. For although the Iewes ac∣count those bookes for Apocriphase, & the Primatiue Church hath not graunted the like authoritie to them, as to the other Canoni∣call bookes: yet is it a cléere case, that they were written afore the comming of Iesus Christ, of whome neuerthelesse they speake by name.

Now the Scripture promised also a Foreronner,* 1.1039 that should come afore the manifesting of the Messias to the world. For Ma∣lachie* 1.1040 sayth, Behold, I send my Ambassadour to make way be∣fore him, and by and by after shall the Lord whom you seeke, enter into his Temple. And in the next Chapter following, he is called Elias, by reason of the lykenesse of their offices; and this text (as I haue shewed afore) is vnderstood by them concerning the Messias.* 1.1041 And soothly we haue certeine footestepes thereof in these words of the Gospel, The Scrybes say that Elias must first come. And in another place, Art thou Christ, or Elias, or one of the

Prophets? A little afore that Christ disclosed himself, Iohn the Baptist stoode vp in Israell,* 1.1042 and was followed by such a multitude of people, that all the greate ones grudged at him: and he is the same man whō by way of prerogatiue, the Chronicle of the Iewes calleth Rabbi Iohanan the greate Preest. Concerning this Iohn the Baptist, forasmuch as they suspect our Gospel, let them beléeue their owne Storywriter.* 1.1043 There was (sayeth he) a very good Man that exhorted the Iewes to vertue, and specially to God∣lynes and vpryght dealing, inuiting them to a cleannesse both of body and mynd by baptim. But when Herod perceyued that great multitudes of people followed him, which (to his seeming) were at his commaundment; to auoyd insurrections he put him in prison, where anon after, he cut of his head. And therefore it was the common opinion, that when Herods ar∣my was afterward ouercome and vtterly put to the swoord, it was through Gods iustiudgement for putting of Iohn Baptist vniustly to death. By this witnesse of Iosephus, we sée what his office was, namely to preache repentance and to Baptize, or (as Malachie sayth) to turne the heartes of the Fathers to their Children, and the heartes of the Children to their Fathers. But the thing which we haue chiefly to note here, is that hauing the people at commaundement, yet when Iesus came, he gaue Ie∣sus place, and humbled himselfe to him, and yeelded him the glory: the which thing man beeing led by affection of man would neuer haue done. Insomuch that after that Iesus had once shewed him∣selfe, the Disciples of this greate maister shewed not themselues as his disciples any more; and that was because his trayning and teaching of them was not for himselfe, but for Iesus. And as tou∣ching the peculiar act of Baptizing, it seemeth that the Leuites wayted for some speciall thing vpon it, in that they asked of Iohn, How happeneth it that thou Baptizest, if thou bee neither Christ, nor Elias the Prophet?

But let vs come now to treate of the lyfe of Iesus, not according to our Gospells, but according to such Histories as the Iewes them∣selues cannot denie: and what els is it than the verie body of the shadowes of the old testament, and the very pith and substance of the words that were spoken afore concerning the Messias? Let vs call to rememberance to what end he came, namely to saue Mankind: and the nature of his Kingdome,* 1.1044 how it is holy and spirituall. Whereof are all his Preachings, but of the forgiuenesse of sinnes,

and of the Kingdome of Heauen? his Disciples were alwayes importunate vppon him in asking him, Lord when wilt thou set vp the Kingdom of Israel agein? In sted of contenting their fan∣cyes, he answereth them concerning the Kingdome of Heauen. They Imagined some Empyre of Cyrus or Alexander: that their Nation might haue bene honored of all other nations of the earth. One of them would néedes haue sit on his right hand and another on his left. What answereth he to this? Nay (saith he) whosoeuer will be greatest, let him be the leaft; and if I béeing your Maister be as a Seruant among you, what ought you to bee? Yee shalbe brought before Magistrates: that is farre from reigning. Ye shall be persecuted, imprisoned, tormented, and crucifyed: that is farre of from triumphing. I wil giue you to vnderstand how great things ye be to suffer for my names sake: y^t is very farre from parting of Countryes. Yet notwithstanding, happy shall you bee when you suffer these things, and he that holdeth out to the end shalbe saued. Who can imagine any temporall thing in this kingdome, where∣of the first and last Lesson is, that a man to saue his lyfe must lose it? and to become happy must wed himselfe to wretchednes? The people followe him for the miracles which hee woorketh: and the Iewes deny not but he did very greate ones. But let vs see wher∣to they tended. He fed a greate multitude of people in the wilder∣nes, with a feawe Loaues. This miracle was matter enough for him to haue hild them with long talke; but he preacheth vnto them of the heauenly bread which feedeth vnto euerlasting life. Also hee healeth all sicke and diseased folke that come vnto him: howbeit, to shewe that that was but an appendant or rather an income to that for the which he came; Thy sinnes (sayth he) be forgiuen thee. To be short, from Abrahams Well, hee directeth the Woman of Samaria to the Fountaine of lyfe. Béeing shewed the goodly buil∣dings of Hierusalem and of the Temple, he foretelleth the ouer∣throwe of them both. Beeing required a sittingplace at his right hand or at his left; he answereth of a Cuppe that such a petitioner is to drinke. When men go about to make him King, he steales a∣way from them. And whereas his Apostles looke for some greate triumphe; his accomplishing of it is after the maner that the Pro∣phet Zacharie speakes of, namely by ryding vpon a shée Asse, euen vpon the Colt of an Asse. And yet neuerthelesse Herod the King trembleth at him in his throne, the whole Counsell of the Realme are in a perplexitie, and all the people are astonished. And in his

doings he maketh it to appeare sufficiently, that he hath the hearts of all men in his hand, and that if he himselfe listed hee should be o∣beyed both of the greatest persons and in the greatest matters. Surely then wee may well say, that the marke which this Iesus and the marke which the Messias leueleth at, are both one; name∣ly to drawe men from the earth, and to make them to plant their whole hope by his meanes in heauen.

It followeth that to this office which he did euidently take vp∣pon him, he brought the qualities requisite to the executing there∣of, that is to wit, that he was both God and Man: I say, God as the Sonne of God, and Man* 1.1045 as borne of a woman, without sinne, and such in all poyntes as he was forepromised to be. Of this hope we haue some footesteppes in the Gospell. For some say, We haue heard say that Christ endureth for euer.* 1.1046 And Nathaneel him∣selfe sayth, Sir, Art thou the Sonne of GOD and the King of Israell? That is to say, art thou the Sonne of GOD whom we looke for to be the King of Israell? To the same purpose may wée set his two natures heere one against another. Hee himselfe was hungrie; and yet hee fed many thousands with a feawe Loaues. He suffered thirst; and yet he gaue other men liuing Waters that ouerflowed. He was wéerie, and yet he saide come vnto mée all yee that are weerie. He payd tribute, but he commaunded the Fish to pay the Tributemony for him. He was dumb as a Lamb, but yet was the very spéech itself. He yéelded vp his spirit and dyed, but he told them hee had power to take it to him againe. To be short, hee was condemned, but he iustifieth: He was slayne, but he saueth: He prayed; but his praying was for vs, and hee heareth our pray∣ers. For these countermatchings and the lyke doe wee reade of in our Euangelists, in whom wee haue the dooings of both natures distinguished, and yet notwithstanding ioyned togither in one per∣sone. But if they will vtterly deny our Gospels; then shall wee in that poynt be more vpright than they: for we will not deny al their writing. Now they agree with vs that hee was man; and for all their casting vp of their Foame against him in their bookes, yet are they not able to charge him with any vice euen in his priuate lyfe: and therefore the chiefe thing that wee haue to stand vppon, is the proofe of his Godhead.

Iesus (sayth our Gospell) wrought miracles.* 1.1047 Hee healed the sicke, restored Limmes to the lame, gaue sight to the blind, and rai∣sed the dead vnto lyfe: and that not in one or twoo places, but in

many: nor in a corner, but in the open sight of the world: and there are many thousands of men which will rather dye vpon the Racke than deny him, yea or not preach him. I aske them vpon their con∣sciences, if they will deny that he wrought any miracles. If they deny it: then what a mirac••e is this, that so many people doe fol∣lowe a poore abiect without miracles, and are contented to dye for his sake, euen when he himselfe is dead? And if these miracles of his (as namely the restoring both of sight and lyfe, & such others) were not very great and farre surmounting all nature of man; yet who would lose his lyfe, but for a better? and how could hee giue the better, which could not giue the other? And if it bee a miracle to woorke vppon a man by touching him, and much more without touching him, and most of all without seeing him: what a miracle is it to worke in the heartes of whole Nations farre of, without seeing them; and to touche them without comming at them; and to turne them to him without touching them? And if the bones of Elias bee commended for prophesying in his Tumbe; what shall this Iesus bee for ouercomming so many people, and for conque∣ring so many Nations after his death, yea and (which is a greater matter) euen by the death of his seruants, who preached nothing but his death? But the Rabbines saw welly nough that the mira∣cles of Iesus could not be denyed. And truely R. Iohanan sayth in the Talmud,* 1.1048 that a Neuew of R. Iosua the sonne of Leuy had taken poyson, and that beeing adiured by the name of Iesus, hee was healed out of hand: and this is a verifying of that which Ie∣sus himselfe sayth,* 1.1049 namely that if they drinke any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them: And Rabbi Ioses sayth, that when a Ser∣pent had bitten Eleazar the sonne of Duma,* 1.1050 Iames the Disciple of Iesus would haue healed him, and Rabbi Samuel would not suffer him.* 1.1051 And Iosephus their owne Storiwriter speaking of the miracles of Iesus, findeth them so wonderfull, that hee cannot tell whether he ought to call him Man or God. And they ought not to thinke it straunge that he should woorke miracles, considering that they beléeue the miracles of Moyses, of Elias, of Eliseus, and di∣uers others.* 1.1052 But some of them did attribute his miracles to Ma∣gicke, and some to the power of the name of God which they char∣ged him to haue vsurped: in the examining of both which poynts, I beseech them to ioyne with mee without affection.

As touching Magicke, they say that their thréescore and tenne Senators whom they call Sanhedrin, were very skilfull in it; and

so sayth R. Selomoh also, the better to conuince the Inchaunters. And we reade in Iosephus, that Magicke was neuer more fre∣quented in Iewrie then it was among the Doctors at this tyme. Now if their meaning was to conuict Iesus as an euill doer; why did they not put him to shame? why did they not vse the rigour of the Lawe against him? How happeneth it that in their accusing of him, they charge him not with any Magicke at all? Or if they meant to ouercome him by the arte; why did not some one of them woorke the like things or greater? Why did not their miracles swallowe vp his? Nay contrariwise, whereof commeth it that Io∣sephus calleth Iesus a worker of miracles, and the other sort Ma∣gicians and deceitfull Cowseners? And that his miracles worke still euen after his death, whereas theirs vanished away afore they were dead? But like as in the tyme of Moyses, God suffered great Magicians to be in AEgipt, that hee might make his owne power the more euident in Moyses: so at this tyme there was great store of them in Iewrie, to the intent it might appeare what difference is betwixt that which man can doe by the Diuels abusing of him, and that which the fingar of God himselfe can doe in man. And in good sooth I dare well say, there is not any arte in the worlde, that doth more clearely verifie the miracles of Iesus, than Magicke doth. For by Plinies report, there were neuer mo Magicians, than in the time of Nero, (which was the tyme that Christes Disciples did spread his doctrine abrode) neither was the vanitie of that Arte euer more apparantly knowen (as he witnesseth) than at that time. And euen among the Iewes of our time, that science is more com∣mon at this day, thā among al other people. For they make bookes thereof, specially in the Eastpartes of the world. But what are they els than casts of Legierdemayne or Iuggliugtrickes, and toyes for Babes to play withall? And as for the Magicians which the Princes of Christendome mainteine in their Courts, to the shame of vs all and to their owne confusion; what are the things which they doe, but (to speake fitly) mere illusions that vanishe away out of hand, as which consist in some nimble tricks in playing at Cards and Dyce, or in slipper deuises of slight and vayne things? Of which kind of folkes and dealings, I say not who would wil∣lingly dye for them, but who would not be ashamed to liue with them? As for Iesus, wee see it is farre otherwise with him. Hee wrought very great miracles in the world: and although hee was crucified, yet (sayth Iosephus) his Disciples forsooke him not:

and therefore euen after hee was gone from them, they wrought miracles still: and what maner of Miracles? Surely euen such as within the space of twentie yeres or thereaboutes, filled all the world full of Christians: and that miracle continueth still vnto this day. The Empires which had not heard any speaking of Christ, were conuerted to the Kingdome of Christe, and beléeued hym for his doings afore they heard of his name. The Emperours vnder whome hee had bene crucified, and his Disciples diuersly persecuted, are glad to doe him honour, and to build Temples vnto hym. Let the Iewes tell mée what Magician they euer heard of, that wrought such miracles after his death? If they say that Christes Apostles and Disciples also were Magicians; then séeing that no man which is well aduised, doeth any thing but to some end; let them tell mée what gayne the Apostles could get by exercising this Magike, which procured them nothing but hatred, sorrowe, imprisonment, torments, and cruell death? And seeing that Magicians doe hyde themselues and conceale their arte when they be pursued for it: what kind of Magicke is this, which will needes be knowen and exercised, euen in despite of Princes, and of the world, yea and of death; that is to say, euen in despite of the man himselfe (if I may so say) that doth practise it? If it be further replied that some extreme vainglorie led them: how happeneth it that euery of them did not cause himselfe to be worshipped alone? And that they did not their workes in their owne names, but refer∣red all to Iesus, yéelding vnto him the power, the honour, and the glory of all? If they say (as of force they néedes must) that the power of the crucified Man wrought still in them and by them: Let them say also that the same man liued still euen after his crucify∣ing, yea and a farre other lyfe than all other men (considering that after this lyfe he maketh men to be more than men) that is to wit, a lyfe not onely free from death, but also euerlasting and diuin•• in deede; and so is farre of from the punishment appointed by them to Magicians, that is to wit from béeing in Iayle and vnder tor∣ture, or (as they themselues terme it) in endlesse death. But as soone as they perceyue themselues stopped on that side, by and by they seeke to scape out another away.

Iesus (say they) wrought his miracles by vertue of the vnvtter∣able name of God, which he mynded. And therevpon they fall to an account, which sheweth (as many other in their Talmud doe) that in Gods matters they wanted not only the spirit of God, but

also euen the humane wit and reason: and God knoweth I would be ashamed to rehearse it, but for their owne welfare. Their saying then is, that in Salomons Temple there was a certeine stone of very rare vertue, wherein Salomon by his singular wisedome had ingrauen the very true name of God, which it was lawfull for eue∣ry man to reade, but not to cun by hart, nor to write out: And that at the Temple doore were two Lyons tide at two Cheynes, which rored terribly, that the feare of it made him to forget the name that had commited it to memorie, and him to burst asunder in the mids that had put it in writing. But Iesus the sonne of Mary (say they) regarding neither the curse annexed vnto the prohibition, nor the roring of the Lyons; wrate it out in a bill, and went his way with it with great gladnesse: And least he might be taken with the thing about him, he had a little opened the skinne of his Leg and put it in there, and afterward wrought his miracles by the vertue of that name. Now ye must thinke that if I was ashamed to repeate this géere, I am much more ashamed to stand confuting of it. Neuer∣thelater, séeing that the sumptuousnes of Salomons Temple is described so dilige••tly vnto vs, and yet no mention is made either of that rare stone, or of those Lyons that were so zealous of Gods name: whence I pray them haue they this so fayre tale? And how commeth it to passe that Iosephus was ignorant thereof, who had so diligently perused their matters of remembrance; or how come they to the first knowledge thereof, so many hundred yeres after? Ageine, where became those Lyons at such tymes as the AEgipti∣ans and Bahylonians spoyled Hierusalem and defyled the Tem∣ple? How found they them ageine in the second Temple? Or if they were immortall, where became they afterward? Nay further, how happeneth it that Salomon that great king who consecrated and ingraued the sayde Stone, wrought not the lyke miracles himselfe, specially sith wée reade not that he wrought any miracle at all? And what godlynes had it bene for him, to haue concealed and kept secret that name, which would haue cured so many dis∣eases of body and infirmities of mind? whereby folke might haue bene turned away from idolatrie, and the whole world might haue bene wonne vnto the lawe of God? But if I must néedes answere fooles further according to their folly; then if Iesus be the seruant of the liuing God, and vse his name to his glory, why doe they not beléeue him? Or if he serued not GOD, how was it possible that the name of God should bee waged by a mortall man, ageinst the

glorie of God? And what a blasphemie is it to•• vphold, that the power of God is so tyed to his name, that his enemyes may (whe∣ther he wil or no) serue their owne turnes, both with his name and with his power, to the ouerthrowe of his kingdome, and to the sta∣blishing of theirs? Nay rather, let vs say according to their owne teaching, that Iesus did great miracles,* 1.1053 both in the name of God and in the power of GOD, and that God gaue power vnto his name, and not the name vnto God. Iesus therefore was certeinly the seruant of God, and endewed with such power from God.

Now, whereas some deny that Christ should worke myracles, when as notwithstanding, the Scripture sayth the contrarie, and the Iewes in the Gospel do continually exact signes and myracles at his hand, & their Talmud reporteth that Christ should discerne good from euill by the onely sent or sauour, by the want of which propertie they say that Barcozba was bewrayed not to bee the Messias; and whereas they affirme that the wild beasts should lay away their woodnesse, and that Hierusalem should bée hoyssed vp three leagues into the ayre, and such other like: I confesse in déed•• that the chiefe end of Christes comming, was not to worke myra∣cles, accordingly also as we see that his doing of them was but as by workes and vppon occasion; and I esteeme more of those which do heare his word and kéepe it, than of those which remoue Moun∣taines. Neuerthelesse, Rabbi Hadarsan* 1.1054 sayth he had learned of Rabbi Natronai, that Christ should come with very great signes and myracles, and that the Pharisies should attribute them to Art Magicke, and to the names of vncleane Spirits, according wher∣vnto we reade in the Gospell, that they sayd thus, He casteth out Deuilles by the name of Beelzebub. And the Commentarie vp∣pon the booke of the Preacher sayth,* 1.1055 that all the myracles which went afore, are nothing to the myracles of the Messias. Also the Talmud in a certeine place sayth, That the myracles which shalbe wrought in the tyme of the Messias in the kingdomes of the Gen∣tyles, compared with the myracles that were wrought in AEgipt, shalbe as the substance to the accident.

Unto Myracles is ioyned Prophesying,* 1.1056 as a thing to be num∣bered among the chiefe myracles. That Christ should bee a Pro∣phet, they will not denye: for they take the text of Deuteronomie* 1.1057 where a Prophet is promised them, to be ment of Christ: & there∣vpon riseth this common demaund in the Gospell, Art thou the Prophet? And wheras they say in their Talmud, that the Messias

shall iudge of things by their only smell; it cannot bee soundly vn∣derstood of any thing els, than of an excellent gift of Prophesying. To let passe a thousand particular Prophesies, and a thousand texts whereby we perceyue that Iesus read things in the hypocri∣tish hearts of the Pharistes, and sawe things in the hearts of his Disciples, which they themselues neither sawe nor perceiued: who will not woonder at these which wee see so peremptorilie come to passe, namely, Ye shalbe brought before the Princes and Ma∣gistrates of the earth; men shall thinke they doe seruice vnto God, when they murder you for my names sake; that the glad tydings of his kingdome should bee preached through the whole world, notwithstanding all impediments; That Hieru∣salem should bee destroyed; That all things should bee wasted and vnhalowed there; That of the same Temple which they re∣uerenced so much, one stone should not be left standing vpon another; And that the tyme wherein these things should bee done was then so neere hand, that euen those which led him to death, had cause to bewayle themselues and their Childrē? For what I pray you could those poore Fishermen thinke, when he spake to them of being led before Kings; and (which more is) when he told them that they should driue Nations like flockes of Shéepe afore them at the hearing of the Gospell? What likelihood was there hereof in his owne person or in theirs, considering the lowlinesse of his life, and the reprochfulnesse of his death? And as touching the destruction of Hierusalem which befell about a fortie yéeres after; sith we reade expresly in their owne Histories, that the Emperour Tytus offered them peace, sought the preseruation of their Temple, graunted them the free vse of their Religion, and during his seege did seeke as it were by intreatance to them being beseeged, that he might saue and preserue them; and yet notwith∣standing (as Iosephus reporteth) they would needes perish whe∣ther he would or us, and wilfully cast themselues into the same ex∣tremities whereof Iesus had forewarned them: who can say that he was ignorant of the vnchaungeable determination of God, not∣withstanding that to the sight of Man, the matter was as likely to haue fal••e out otherwise as euer any was, specially considering that the enemies themselues, on whom the whole case seemed to depend, laboured by al meanes to turne the destruction away from the beseeged?

Now, albeit that as well Prophesying as Myracles, haue ey∣ther

of them their peculiar and vncommunicable markes of Gods spirit and finger,* 1.1058 whereby to discerne the one from the other: Yet certesse, doctrine is the touchstone of them both.* 1.1059 For, if there rise vp a Prophet (sayth the Law) and giue thee a signe or myracle, and therevppon he come and counsell thee to turne aside to straunge Gods: thou shalt not hearken vnto him. Therfore let vs see what doctrine Iesus matched with his signes and miracles. Let vs reade the Gospell from the one ende to the other, and wee shall see nothing there but to loue God with all our heart, and our neighbour as our selfe. Also he came not to abolish the Lawe, but to fulfill it; nor to destroye the Temple, but to purge it. The Pha∣risies had extended the Lawe but to the outward man; he condem∣neth their hypocrisie, and bringeth it backe againe to the inward man. They sayd, hate your enemies: but he sayd, if ye loue none but your friends, what are ye better than the Publicanes? They sayd, Thou shalt not commit adulterie; thou shalt not kill: But he sayd, If thou looke vpō a woman to lust after her, thou hast broken the Lawe: and if thou say to thy brother, Racha; thou hast alreadie killed him. To bee short, a neighbour by their interpretation, was but in Iericho or néere thereabouts: but he told them that a neigh∣bour was in Samaria, in idumea, & in all the corners of the world. Also if a case concerne God, he taught men to forsake Goods, Pre∣ferments, Father, Moother, Wife, Children, and all that euer is, for loue of his seruice. As for Saluation and Welfare, he taught men to hoord vp treasure in Heauen, and to shake off the world in this life, that they may be clothed with glorie in another. What is there in all this, I say not which turneth a man away, but which setteth him not in the right way, and which tendeth not in effect to the glorie of the true God, to the doing of our duetie towards our neighbours, and to euery mans owne saluation and welfare? By the way, this doctrine is not a declaiming, nor an exercise of Philo∣sophers, who (as Seneca affirmeth) pretended slaues by their ty∣tles, and conteyned poyson and venome in their boxes: but it is ex∣pressed in his life, and read in his Disciples, whom neither Iewe nor Gentyle haue euer blamed, but for their simplicitie and inno∣cencie: Insomuch that Philo* 1.1060 the Iewe made a booke expresly there∣of for a woonder. For whereas Celsus the Epicure obiecteth, that Iesus chose Publicanes and men of wicked conuersation to be his Disciples: euen therein peculiarly hath he shewed the effectualnes of his doctrine in the curing of mens soules, as a Phisition doth in

healing those that are sorest sicke and furthest past hope of recoue∣rie in a Citie. To be short, at his word the Nations that worship∣ped Deuilles, Men, Planets, Stockes and Stones, turned to the only true God. The Deuils that had abused them, hid themselues away, and their Oracles lost their voyces, as shalbe sayd hereafter. But as for the lawe of God and the holy Scriptures, (I meane euen those (ye Iewes) which you your selues beléeue & reuerence;) they come to be read, imbraced, and expounded through all y^e world and in all Languages. If this doctrine then bee of the Deuill; by what marke shall we know the doctrine of God? And if to giue au∣thoritie to the Byble ouer all the world, be the destruction thereof; what shal we call the stablishing thereof? And if Iesus haue by his doctrine stablished the seruice of the true God, authorised the Law of Moyses, and rooted vp the seruice of the Deuill by the bottome: how can it be sayd that the Deuill hath eyther inspyred him, or as∣sisted him in his myracles and Prophesyings, both for the king∣dome of God, and against the Deuils owne Tyrannie?

Yea (say you) but he professed himselfe to be the Sonne of God.* 1.1061 So much the rather (say I) ought you to imbrace him, seeing that by the record of your auncetors, the Messias ought so to be. And in reporting himselfe to be so, if you reade your owne Doctors well, ye shal finde that he turneth you not away to diuers Gods, nor yet to straunge Gods.* 1.1062 For according to your owne Scriptures and Traditions, these three, namely the Father, the Sonne, and the holy Ghost, are but one God. I would knowe but this one thing of you; whether you take him for a true Prophet, or for a false Pro∣phet; for the seruant of God, or for the seruant of the Deuill. You haue sayd heretofore that he vsed the power of the name of God in his myracles, whereby ye haue graunted me very much: and I al∣so haue proued vnto you, that such particuler and speciall Prophe∣sies as these, cannot procéede but from God himselfe. But what a seruant is he to the Deuill, which ouerthroweth his maister? How is hee not an ouerthrower of him, which saueth vs? How is he a false accuser of vs, which iustifieth vs? How is he a deadly enemie, which setteth vs againe in life? For what els hath the doctrine of Iesus done throughout the whole world, but destroyed the Altars of the Deuils, beaten downe their Temples, broken their Images in peeces, abolished their gamings, their feastes, their Sacrifices; and moreouer withdrawne the rest of men from Murder, Whore∣dome, Theft, & all other abhominations wherein they were plun∣ged,

and from the vaine seruices whereabouts they occupied them selues, and wherewith they deceyued their owne Consciences? If ye say he was the seruant of GOD; the very Turkes confesse as much. Therefore procéede yet further, and graunt that sith he is the Prophet and seruant of God, he is to be beléeued. For God the Creator being altogether good and wise, would not lende him his spirit to deceiue vs. And if we ought to beléeue him, we ought also to heare him: and if wee heare him, he telleth vs that he is Christ the Anoynted, that he is the trueth, that he is the way, that he came from God his father, and that the father and he are but one. And in déede, one while to shewe that he was sent of his father, he pra∣yeth vnto him: and anotherwhile to shewe that he is equall with him, he commaundeth absolutely and of himselfe. Surely therfore we may well say, that this Prophet Iesus being assisted by Gods spirit, both in his Prophesyings, and in his Myracles, and in his Doctrine; and beeing borne of a Uirgin, in Bethleem, and at the tyme appoynted afore hand by the Prophets; is Christ the Lords anoynted, GOD and Man, euen such as he was declared and be∣highted vs in the holy Scriptures, as I haue shewed alreadie.

But lo here the stumblingblock of the Pharisies and the Iewes.* 1.1063 What likelyhood is there (say they) that our Christ by whom wee looke that Israell should be so renowmed, should be so bace and ab∣iect a person? Nay moreouer, if he be both God and Man (as you Christians say he is) what can bee imagined more against all rea∣son, than that he should bee buffeted, whipped, crucified, accounted among théeues, and in the end reprochfully killed, as your Iesus was? Soothly, to folke that haue imagined and reckoned vppon a Monarchie of the whole world, and behighted themselues places among the chiefe in the same; it must néedes bee a great corsie and greefe to bee defeated of that hope. But had they well chewed and digested this text of Zacharie:* 1.1064 Behold, thy King commeth vnto thee, rightuous, Sauiourlike, and lowlie, ryding vpon an Asse, euen the Colt of an Asse: which text their Rabbines expound of the Messias, and wee reade it to haue bene fulfilled in Iesus at his comming into Hierusalem: they would not thinke it so straunge that in the same person also should be performed this saying of the same Prophet in another place, I will powre out the spirit of grace and mercie vpon the house of Dauid, and vpon the in∣habiters of Hierusalem; and they shall looke vppon me whom they haue pearced: which text likewise the Rabbines expound of

the Messias, as well as the other. Now I haue shewed heretofore, that the Messias should reconcile vs vnto God, by the satisfaction and amends which he should make vnto him for vs: and also how agreeable the sayd amends was both to Gods Iustice and mercie, which cannot bee contrarie one to another, and also to the order of dealing that is among men. For in asmuch as man would néedes through his pride become equal with God, and by his disobedience bee as God: it was méete that his Suretie should be abaced euen beneath man, and yéeld perfect obedience, euen to the most reproch∣full death that could bee. Againe, to turne man againe and to re∣streyne him from sinne, nothing could bee more effectuall, than to make him knowe the horriblenesse of his sinne, by the greatnesse of the penaltie and satisfaction thereof: neither could any thing bee more forcible to allure him to the loue of God and of his neighbor, than to see God redéeme him from wretched thraldome by y^e death of his owne Sonne God and Man; and the same his own Sonne crucified and dying for the raunsome, not of his brethren, but of his enemies whom he voutsafeth to admit to be his brethren. But forasmuch as the Iewes beléeue the Scriptures, they will not re∣fuse them in this poynt, and therefore let vs examine them here to∣gether.

As touching Christs Lowelynesse in abacing himself, I haue treated thereof heretofore, and all the whole scripture teacheth it vs sufficiently. At one word, in the place where it is sayd. The Scepter shalnot bee taken from Iuda; it is added byandby, Tying his Assecolt to the vyne, and the foale of his sheeasse to the hedge. Uppon which text Rabbi Hadarsan sayeth thus;* 1.1065 when Chryst commeth to Hierusalem,* 1.1066 he shal gird his Asse with a girt, and enter into the citie very poorely and lowelely, euen after the same maner that is spoken of in the nynth of Zachary. But to auoyd often repetitions, let vs beare in mynd what hath bin sayd afore, that it may leade vs the more gently to the passion of Christ, which is our only welfare and their vtter stumbling blocke. Wée haue in the Lawe a great nomber of Sacraments and Sacrifices,* 1.1067 as well solemne at set feasts as continewall and ordinarie, and a∣mong them, the Easterlambe, the Sacrifice of the red Hekfar, the sending of the Scapegote into the Wildernesse, and such other lyke: of all the which it is sayd, that their blud wassheth and clen∣seth away the sinne of the congregation, and that the sprinkling thereof turneth away the Angell of destruction from their houses.

Now forasmuch as this was done with so greate solemnitie, ex∣presly commaunded to be obserued, and conueyed ouer from age to age and from father to sonne: I aske them vpon their consciences, whether they bee signes and figures of a sacrifice too come which should clense away sinne; or whether those sacrifices themselues had that vertue. If they say the Sacrifices had that force in them∣selues: what vertue is there in the blud of a Lamb or of a Hekfar, ageinst Sinne? And wherefore sayeth God so often vnto vs, I wil none of your sacrifices, I will none of the blud of your Bulles and Goates, al such things are but smoke and lothlynes in my sight? And at such tyme as they were prisoners at Babylon, or scattered abroade in the world, where they might not by their lawe offer any Sacrifice; was there then no forgiuenesse of their sinnes? Yes surely: and therefore they were signes and figures of Christ as then to come, who was to dye sor our sinnes: which signes do now cease and haue ceassed now these many hundred yeres through the whole world, euersince the comming of him that was betokened by them, namely of the Lamb of whome it is said in Esay:* 1.1068 He was led to the slaughter as a Lamb and he hild his peace without opening his mouth, as a sheepe before the Shearer: which text the Rabbines also do interpret to be ment of the Messias. And as concerning the red Heckefar, the Cabalists do make a Cace of it, & aske why in the booke of Nombers,* 1.1069 the death of Marie is ioyned immediatly to the Lawe of the red Cow: and thereout of they will needs drawe the death of Christ to come. And in very deede Iesus the true Easterlambe was crucified on the very day of the Pas∣souer, as witnesseth Rabbi Vla in the Talmud.* 1.1070 Also as Esay had said of the Lamb Christ, He is slayne for the sinne of the People: so Iohn Baptist saieth of Iesus, Behold the Lamb of God which taketh away the Sinnes of the world. Agein, as they were for∣bidden to breake any boane of the Easterlambe; so were Christs leggs left vnbroken, when the leggs of the théeues that were cru∣sified with him were broken. To be short, as the red Cow accom∣panyed with all the people, was conueyed out of the Hoste and burne•• without the Campe; so also was Iesus led out of the Citie accompanyed by the people, and crucified without the Citie.* 1.1071 But let vs reade the Historie of the lyfe and death of Iesus whole togi∣ther out of Esay. There was neither fauor (sayth he) nor beawty in him, neither sawe we any fayrenesse in him that was to bee desired. He was despysed and thrust out from among men, a

man full of infirmities & inured to sorrow by reason whereof we accounted him so vile, that we hid our faces from him. Yet in very deede he bare our infirmities, and was loden with our sorrowes: but we thought him to be wounded and stryken of God, whereas he was wounded for our misdeedes, and smitten for our sinnes. The punishment of our peace was layd vppon him, and by his strypes are we healed. Al of vs went astray lyke sheepe, and turned aside euery man after his owne way: and the Lord hath cast vppon him the iniquities of vs all. Being misintreated and smitten, hee opened not his mouth. As a Lamb was he led to be slayne, & yet hild his peace as a Sheepe before the shearer. He was lifted vp from prison and iudge∣ment, and yet who is he that can recken vp his generation? He was plucked vp from the liuing vppon the earth, and couered with woundes for the sinne of my people. His graue was giuen him with the wicked, & with the Riche in his death, Although hee neuer committed vnryghtuousenes, nor any gwile was found in his mouth; yet was it the Lords will to breake him with sorrow; that when he had giuen his lyfe in sacrifice for sinne, he myght see a longlasting seede. Which deuyce of the Lord shall prosper in his hand, and with the labour and trauel of his Soule shall he get greate Riches. My ryghtuous seruant (sayeth the Lord) shall with the knowledge of him make ma∣ny men ryghtuous, and take their sinnes vppon himself. I will giue him a portion among the greate ones, and he shal deuide the spoyle with the mighty ones; bycause he yelded his Soule vnto death, and did muster himself among the transgressers, and tooke vppon him the sinnes of many, and prayed for the offenders. Who seeth not in this text, both the apprehension and the sorrowes and the wounds, and the death of Iesus? Yea and his meekenesse, Lowelynes, and innocencie? His apprehension, tur∣ning to our deliuerance; his sorrowes, to our ioye; his wounds, too our health; his death, to our lyfe; his ryghtuousenes to our inrigh∣tuousing; and his punishment, to our obteynement of grace? And when we reade, He was abhorred of men, and we made none account of him; do we not see men spitting in his face? Also when we reade these words, We tooke him to be woūded of God; do we not here the Iewes saying to him, If thou be Christ the cho∣sen of God, saue thy self? Ageine when he is outrageously delt withall and yet he openeth not his mouth; do we not note his inno∣cent

holding of his peace? Finally, whereas he was nombered a∣mong the transgressors, and yet prayed for them, notwithstanding that he bare the sinnes of other men: what is it els but the crucify∣ing of Iesus betwéene the two théeues, and the very spéech of the repentant théefe which sayd, As for vs, wee receiue worthely ac∣cording to our deedes; but as for this man, what euill hath he done? Yea & the very prayer which Iesus made vpon the Crosse, saying, Lord forgiue them, for they knowe not what they do? Now, that the sayd text was vnderstood of Christ by the old Rab∣bines; the Iewes cannot denye. For Ionathas the Chaldee Para∣phrast the Sonne of Vziel, who liued about that tyme,* 1.1072 expoundeth it of Christ by name.* 1.1073 And whereas it is sayd, In very deede hee bare our infirmities, Ionathas translateth it, He shalbe heard at Gods hand for our faults, and for the loue of him our sinnes shalbe forgiuen. And vppon these words, Wee hid our faces a∣way from him: He sayth thus; as though the countenance of the Godhead had bin withdrawen from him, because he see∣med so to our sight, and wee considered not what hee was in deede. Wherevppon Rabbi Vla sayth thus in the Talmud:* 1.1074 Let him come, but let not me see him: and his so saying was for the extreme paynes which hee knewe that Christ should indure.* 1.1075 And therefore they feyne that he sits bynding vp of his sores at Rome∣gate. * 1.1076 Also in a certeyne place where they inquire of the name of Christ, they say hee shall bee called Whight, as one couered with sores of Leprosie; and they ad, according to this saying of Esay: In very deede he bare our infirmities and tooke our sinnes vpon him.* 1.1077 And we tooke him as a Leaper, and as one wounded and cast downe of God. Neuerthelesse, that the Iewes (notwithstan∣ding the euidentnesse of this Prophesie) should not for all that be∣léeue; the Prophet himselfe doth prophesie in the same Chapter. For afore he enter into the matter of Christes passion and death, he maketh this preface, saying:* 1.1078 Who hath beleeued at the hea∣ring of vs? or to whom hath the Lords arme bene discouered? And on the contrary part hee sayth to the Gentyles: Many men shall woonder for the loue of him,* 1.1079 and Kings shall shut their mouthes before him, They that haue not bene tolde of him shall see him, and they that haue not heard of him shall thinke aduisedly on him. Uppon this so cléere a text, let vs heare the in∣uentions of persons that haue imbatteled themselues against their own Saluation. To turne this text from Iesus, Rabbi Selomoh

and Dauid Kimhi (afore whom the sayde wilfulnesse of opinion was not among the Iewes* 1.1080) haue turned away frō al the writers of former tyme, whom (notwithstanding) they confesse to haue vn∣derstood it of Christ; and they passe not what they say, so they may stand vpon denyall. This text (say they) is not meant of Christ, but of the Iewish people afflicted by the Chaldees & the Ro∣maines. And this serueth well to shewe what oddes is betwéene the iudgemēt of Reason and of Affection. For I presume so much vppon their vnderstanding, that if they had bene borne in the tyme of Ionathas the sonne of Vziel, or at leastwise at any tyme afore the comming of Iesus, they would haue bene vtterly of another mynd. Then if the Prophet speake of the afflicted children of Isra∣ell when he saith, He was despised of men, and we hid our faces from him: Of whom I beseech them is that sayd which followeth without change of person, namely; In very deede he bare our in∣firmities, and wee tooke him to haue bene wounded of God? That he was despised, is ment (say they) of the people of Israell. Then, that he bare our infirmities, must néedes (say I) be ment of the people of Israell too. And what can bee more fond, than to say that the people of Israell bare the infirmities of the people of Isra∣ell? specially sith it is sayd immediatly, And by his stripes are we healed: which saying putteth and apparant difference betwéene the Phisition and the Patient, betwéene the Sufferer and him that is eased by his suffering? Againe, what People or what Nation was euer benefited by the sufferings of the Israelites? To what pur∣pose serueth this out••ry of the Prophet, Who hath beleeued our word, if he haue no further meaning than that the Children of Is∣raell bare their owne paynes? All of vs (sayth the Prophet foorth∣with) haue gone astray like Sheepe. Who ••ee these Shéepe that haue gone astray, but the Israelites, and among them the Prophet himselfe? And vpon him (saith he) hath the Lord cast the sinnes of vs all. If hee cast them vppon Israell, what cause of woonder is there in not beléeuing it? For who doubteth but that euery man is woorthie to beare the blame of his owne fault? But will any man gaynsay the Prophet himself, who expoundeth his owne meaning so plainly afterward? He was plucked vp out of the land of the liuing (saith he) and couered with wounds for the sinnes of my people. For who seeth not here a manifest countermatching be∣twéene the people that are healed, and the partie that suffereth for the healing of them? betwéene Israell whose sores are brought to a

scarre, and the partie that beareth away his sores? The Prophet addeth, There was no vnrightuousnesse in him, neither was a∣ny guyle found in his mouth. Surely there is pride in men, yea and euen in these men; and yet I can hardly beléeue, but that they would be ashamed to chalenge the verifying of this text vpon them selues. And as for the people of Israell that were afflicted by the Chaldees; the Rabbines affirme that their first Temple was de∣stroyed for their Idolatrie, Superfluitie, and sheading of giltlesse blud. And concerning the second Temple which was destroyed by the Romaines, they say the cause thereof was the peoples coue∣tousnesse, their hating of their neighbours without cause, and their selling of the rightuous person. And whereas they reply, That the people of Israel suffered so much affliction at one season, as suffised to discharge their successors that liued afterward in another season: surely besides that it is contrary both to the Iustice and to y^e mer∣cie of God; that glose cannot be verified of any one lyne of the sayd text: but it appeareth by experience, that the afflictions which the people of Israell indured at the hands of the Chaldees, did not dis∣charge them of Antiochus; nor the afflictions layd vppon them by Antiochus•• defend the Iewish Church against the Romaines; nor the extreme outrages of the Romaines so satisfie for the sinnes of that people, but that they bee more scattered, and more brought in bondage, as well of moe sorts of maisters as of moe sorts of sla∣uerie at this day, than euer they were afore. Loe how one false and fond proposition procureth many fonder solutions.

But let vs here further, how this text is expounded by other of the Prophetes. Seuentie weekes (sayth Daniell* 1.1081) are set downe for the ending of disobedience, & for the Sealing vp of sinne, and for the cleansing away of iniquitie and the bringing of rightuousnes for euer. As how? For vnto the anoynted Prince (saith he) shalbe seauen weekes and threescore & two weekes; after which tyme the Anoynted shalbe slayne, and nothing shalbe left vnto him, and the Prince of a People to come shall destroy the Citie. &c. Here ye see how Christ must dye, & namely for sinne, according to this saying of Esay, He hath giuen his lyfe for sinne. And (as I haue shewed already) Iesus was put to death euen the very same tyme. As touching the Circumstances of his death,* 1.1082 They perced my feete and my hands (sayth Dauid) and parted my garments among them, and cast lots for my coate. We reade not that Dauid was serued so, but rather Iesus who

was crucified (howbeit that that king of punishment was not vsed among the Iewes, but among the Romaines) and lottes were cast for his Coate: and the Euangelistes alledged this Text to the same purpose, as who would say, it was so vnderstood in their tyme. And whereas in stead of Caru, that is to say, they pear∣ced, the Iewes will néedes reade Caari, that is to say, As a Ly∣on: their Mass••reths, (who haue made a Register of all the Let∣ters of the Scriptures) doe witnesse that in all good Copies it is written Caru they pearced. Also the therescore and twelue Inter∣preters haue translated into Greeke, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, &c. they pearced my handes, &c. And the old Chaldee translater, hath ioyned both those readings in one, thus They haue pearced and thruft throgh my feete and my hands as a Lyon. They that vnderstand the Traditions of the Indians & Etihopians, doo wit∣nesse the like: accordingly also as the Iewes themselues do know by their owne readings, and are warned by their Mazaroths, that that sence is vnperfect. For as for the Chaldee Paraphrase of R. Ioseph the blind, because he was about a three hundred and fortie yeres after Iesus, we admit him not for a Iudge: and besides that, he is dubble blinded with a blind moode which he bewrayeth euery¦where against vs.

Also the Prophet Zacharie* 1.1083 sayth, I will powre out the spirit of grace and mercy vpon the house of Dauid & vpon the In∣habiters of Hierusalem, and they shall looke vnto me whome they perced.* 1.1084 He that powreth out this spirit is God; Hee that is perced is man; and both the one and the other togither is Christ God and Man. And they themselues expound this text in the same sence concerning the Messias, that our Euangelists alledge it of Iesus that was striken into the side with a Speare; which surely had bene a fondnesse in them,* 1.1085 (considering how feawe texts they alledge (if they had not bene commonly vnderstoode to concerne the Messias.* 1.1086 And it is all one with this which some of the Rabbines do say in y^e Talmud, namely That Christ should be distressed as a woman that laboureth of Child, according as Ieremy* 1.1087 sayth, that hee had great anguishes to suffer, but that he should in∣dure them willingly too deliuer men from sinne. And Rabbi Hadarsan* 1.1088 saith that Satan should be an aduerfarie to him and his Disciples; and therefore he applyeth vnto him a part of the thirde chapter of the lamentations of Ieremie. Also in the booke of Ruth, where it is written, Eate thy bread and temper it with vineger:

This bread (sayth the Commentarie) is the bread of the Anoin∣ted King or Messias, who shalbe broken for mens sinnes, and indure great torments as it is written in Esay. And the Saint Rabbi saith, that Christ should deliuer mens Soules from hell by his death. Howbeit yet further, whereas it is sayd in Esay,* 1.1089 we bee healed by his death: the auncient Cabalistes* 1.1090 vnderstand it of Christ, and say that the Angels (who were the teachers of our forefathers, as Raziel of Adam, Metatron of Moyses & so forth) had taught them that the cleansing away of sinne should be doone vpon wood. And Rabbi Simeon Ben Iohai* 1.1091 the first among them, writeth thus; Wo woorth the Murtherers of Israell, for they shall kill Christ. God will send his sonne clothed in mans flesh to wash them, and they will kill him. Also Rabbi Iuda* 1.1092 sayth, That after a long breathing tyme, God will deliuer his name of twelue letters to Ieremie in writing after this maner, Iehouah ••lohim emeth, that is to say, The euerlasting God is trueth; and that hee will wype out the first Letter of the last worde, so as there shall remayne Iehouah elohim meth, that is to say, The euerla∣sting God is dead. And peraduenture it is therevpon, that Rab∣bi Iosua the sonne of Leuy sayde,* 1.1093 That Israell was not heard in the world, for want of knowing this name; that is to say, for want of praying vnto God by y^e Mediator Christ who died for vs. To be short, Philo the Iewe,* 1.1094 a very renowmed Author, hand∣ling this question, namely when the banished Israelites and Iewes should returne home; saith it should be at the death of a Highpriest. Howbeit finding himselfe graueled at this, that some liue longer than othersome; Surely I beleeue (sayth he) that this Highpriest shall not be a Man, but the Word (the which hee prayseth in infi∣nite places) exempt from al sinne both willing and vnwilling, who to his father hath God; and to his moother, the wisedom that is without beginning and without end. Whereby it ap∣péereth that he had heard of Christ a Highpréest, whom it behoued to be God the Sonne of God, that he might sanctifie, and likewise man that he might dye.

As touching the startinghole which the newe Rabbines séeke, in that (contrarie to the whole course,* 1.1095 both of their owne auncient writers and of the Scripture) in sted of one Christ God and Man, they make two Christes, the one the Sonne of Dauid, the other the Sonne of Ioseph, saying that this latter (to whome they apply all the foresayd Texts) shalbe slayne in battell, and afterward ray∣sed 〈1 page duplicate〉〈1 page duplicate〉

〈1 page duplicate〉〈1 page duplicate〉

againe by the Prayers of other: Surely let vs tell them as R. Moyses* 1.1096 doth, That none other than only the sonne of Dauid, shall come with authoritie of Christ; howbeit that there are two com∣mings of Christ, the one in lowlynes as Zacharie* 1.1097 sayth. Poore, Lowely, and Sauiourlyke; and the other in maiestie out of the Clowdes of the ayre, as is described in Daniel: the one to Re∣déeme, the other to iudge, as they thēselues say vpon these words of Ecclesiastes,* 1.1098 What it is that hath bene? The same that shalbe: wherevpon they inferre, The last Redeemer is reuealed, and he that is hidden shall come yet once againe. To be short, here yée sée, how in the end the stumbling blocke is turned into glorie. For as Christ dyed innocently,* 1.1099 so shall he also ryse agayne and reygne for euer. Yea he shall ryse againe: for it is written in the Psalme, * 1.1100 Thou wilt not suffer thy holy one to see corruption, which say∣ing cānot be ment of Dauid; for he is dead and rotten in his graue, yea and he shalbe raysed againe within the third day, for it is writ∣ten,* 1.1101 He will quicken vs after two dayes, and in the third day will he rayse vs vp ageine. Also he shall go vp into Heauen, to sit at the right hand of God;* 1.1102 for it is written, The Lord hath sayd to my Lord, sit thou on my right hand.* 1.1103 And all these Texts are so expounded by Rabbi Moyses Hadarsan,* 1.1104 by R. Hacadoseh, by R. Ionathan the Sonne of Vziell and others:* 1.1105 and they be all accom∣plished in Iesus. For their owne writer Iosephus* 1.1106 sayth, In the tyme of Tyberius there was one Iesus, a wise man (at leastwise if he was to be called a man) who was a worker of great mira∣cles, and a teacher of such as loue the trueth, and had a greate trayne as well of Iewes as of Gentyles.* 1.1107 Neuerthelesse, being accused vnto Pilate by the cheefe of the Iewes, he was cruci∣fied. But yet for all that, those which had loued him from the beginning, ceassed not to continue still. For he shewed himself alyue vnto thē a three dayes after his death, as the Prophetes had foretold of him both this and diuers other things. And euen vnto this day doe those continue still which after his name are called Christians. Certesse then let vs conclude as this Iewe doth in the selfesame place, and in his owne words, This Ie∣sus was in very deede the Christ. For as for the goodly tale, That Christes Disciples stole him out of his Graue, and that for feare they did cast hym downe in a Gardyne where he was found after∣ward: the fondnesse and fabulousenesse thereof appéereth in this, that whereas because hee had sayd in his lyfetyme. Destroy this

Temple, and in three dayes I will rayse it vp ageine; And also, There shall none other signe be giuen vnto you but the signe of the Prophet Ionas, and so foorth; therevpon the Iewes caused Pylate to set a sure gard about the Sepulchre: Yet notwithstan∣ding, Pylate writing afterward to the Emperour Claudius, ad∣uertised him of the resurrection of Iesus, so as the greater and surer the gard was that Pylate did set, the mo and the stronger were the witnesses to proue the Iewes lyars in that behalf. Also the high Priestes béeing so inraged against Iesus as they were, would not haue sticked to haue hanged vp the sayd found Carkesse openly in the Marketplace, whereby they might haue abolished all the repu∣tation of Iesus out of hand. Ageine on the other side, the Apostles were men so afrayd of death, so weakeharted, so féeble in faith, and so vtterly without credit; that there is not any lykelihod that they durst take the matter in hand. Nay (which more is) what benefite could they haue had by his dead Carkesse? what should it haue boo∣ted them to haue forgone their Children, their Wyues, yea and themselues too for such a one? Should they not rather haue had cause to haue bene offended at his cowsmage, and therevpon bene the readier to haue condemned the remembraunce of him them selues, and to haue turned all men away from him? Contrariwise, they preach nothing but his resurrection; for that are they conten∣ted to dye; for that doe they teache other men to dye; alonly by that doe they hope too liue and dye most blessedly; and of all the whole nōber of them, there was not so much as one that could be brought to say otherwise: nay rather which could bee made to conceale it, and not to speake of it, though they were let alone, yea or for any promise or threatning that the greatest personages in the worlde could make vnto them. Surely therefore, if euer any deede were true, we must needes say that this is it.

Finally Daniell* 1.1108 sayth; After that the Anoynted is slaine, The Prince of a people to come,* 1.1109 (that is to say, the Emperour of Rome) shall destroye the Citie and the Sanctuarie, and his end shalbe in destruction, and vnto the end of the warre be deso∣lations ordeyned.* 1.1110 But he shall stablish his couenant with ma∣ny in one weeke, and in halfe a weeke shall he cause the Sacri∣ficing and Offering to ceasse. And to the same effect Iesus him∣selfe sayth, Weepe for your selues and for your Children, and let them which are in Iewrie flee into the Mountaines. Abho∣mination shall abide in the holy place, and of the Temple one

stone shall not be left vpon another. And yet neuerthelesse, this Gospell (sayth he) shall be preached ouer all the world for a witnesse to al Nations. Who can say that this was not accom∣plished within a while after the death of Iesus? And who seeth not yet still the remnants of this desolation vpon Hierusalem, and vp∣pon all that people? Yea and moreouer, that this their vtter ruine and ouerthrowe, is not to bee fathered vpon any other thing, than vpon their putting of Iesus to death? Iesus was apprehended in Mount Oliuet;* 1.1111 and from Mount Oliuet was Hierusalem besee∣ged. He was crucified on the day of the Passouer; and on that day was the Citie entered into. Hee was whipped in the Romaine Emperours Pauilion by Pylat;* 1.1112 and in the Emperours Pauilion were the Iewes whipped by the Romaines for their pleasure. He was deliuered by them into the hands of the Gentyles; and they themselues were scattered abroade into the whole world, to bée a skorning stocke to all Nations. Of these things and many other like doe the Rabbines complaine in their Histories, and the more they speake of them, the more doe they confesse Gods Iudgement vpon themselues. For what els are all these things, but the execu∣tion of this their owne sentence giuen vpon themselues, his blud be vpon vs & vpon our Children?* 1.1113 Insomuch that (as Iosephus reporteth) when Tytus sawe the sayd extremities, he lifted vp his eyes to heauen and sayd,* 1.1114 Lord thou knowest that my hands are cleere from all this blud that is shed. And afterward when vpon the taking of the Citie, he had considered the force and strength of the place and the people; he sayd, In very deede God hath fought on our side in the taking of this Citie, for otherwise what po∣wer could euer haue wōne it? Also the Tēple was burnt doune, though he did what he could to haue saued it, because (sayth Iose∣phus) the vneschewable day of the destruction thereof was come. Likewise the Citie was rased, cast vp vppon heapes, and made leuell with the ground,* 1.1115 as if neuer man had dwelt there; and ten hundred thousand men were put to the sword within it; which thing wee reade not to haue bene done to any ot••er Citie taken by the Romaines. To bee short, the signes that went afore, and the voyce that gaue warning from heauen, & the opening of the Tem∣ple of it own accord, seemed to be forefeelings of Gods wrath that was to light vpon them. Again, the Fountayne of Silo which was dryed vp afore, swelled vp to giue water to the Romaine Hoste. Insomuch that their owne Historywriter, beholding so many re∣cords

of Gods wrath, was in maner cōstreyned to come somewhat nye the cause thereof, which he affirmeth to be, that the Highpriest Ananus had vniustly and hastily caused Iames the brother of Ie∣sus to be stoned to death, and certeine others with him, to the great griefe of good men, and of such as loned the Lawe. To the which purpose also may this saying of the notablest of their Rabbines be applyed, That the second Temple was destroyed for their sel∣ling of the Rightuous, and for hating him without cause;* 1.1116 ac∣cording to this saying of Iesus concerning them, They haue ha∣ted me without cause.

And whereas some Iewes at this day doe say, that they bee pu∣nished because some of them receiued this Iesus for the Christ: there is no likelyhood of trueth in it. For considering that Gods maner is, to saue a whole Citie for some ten good mens sakes, if they be found in it: he would much rather haue saued his own peo∣ple for so many mens sakes, being the chiefe and representing the state of the Realme of Iewrie, which did put their hands to the ac∣cusing of Iesus; and for so great a multitudes sake, which cryed out, Away with him, away with him, crucifie him. And if God confirmed the Priesthood vnto Phinees, for his zealousnesse in pu∣nishing a simple Israelite: what thinke you your selues to haue de∣serued, for crucifying (as you beare your selues on hand) an enemie of God, one that named himselfe Christ the Lords Anoynted, yea and which sayd he was very God himselfe? Yet notwithstanding in the middes of all these calamities, the Citie and Temple of this Iesus were builded vp, first in Iewrie it selfe, and afterward in the whole world; and according to Daniels Prophesie, the Couenant of Saluation was stablished among all Nations by the preaching of his Apostles; and the Sacrifices of the Iewes were then put downe, and neuer anywhere reuyued againe since that tyme. And within a while after, the very ydolatries of the Gentyles, which had possessed the whole world, were likewise dasshed also, as wée shall see hereafter. Whereof Rabbi Hadarsan* 1.1117 writing vpon Da∣niell seemeth to haue giuen some incling, in that he sayth, Halfe a weeke, that is to say, three yeeres and a half, shall make an end of Sacrificing. And so doth R. Iohanan in that he sayth, Three yeeres and a half hath the presence of the Lord cryed out vp∣pon Mount Oliuet, saying, seeke God while he may be found, and call vpō him while he is nere hand. And vpon the Psalmes it is sayd,* 1.1118 That by the space of three yeeres and a halfe, GOD

would teache his Church in his owne persone. Now it is ma∣nifestly knowen, that Iesus preached betwéene thrée and fower yeres about Hierusalem, and that his preaching was pursewed and continued afterward by his Apostles.

Sothen, we haue in the Prophets a Christ the sonne of God, which was to be borne of a Uirgin, in the end of the thréescore and and ten wéekes mention in Daniel, at Bethleem in Iewrie; whom being foregone by an Elias, it behoued to preache the kingdome of God, to dye a reprocheful death to mans Saluation, and to ryse a∣gayne with glorie; shortly wherevpon should follow the destructi∣on of Hierusalem and of the Temple. And at the very selfesame tyme, we haue in our Gospels & in the stories of the Iewes them∣selues, one Iesus the sonne of God, borne of the Uirgin Marie, at Bethleem in Iewrie, who beeing foregone by Iohn the Baptist, preached the kingdome of Heauen both in woord and déede, was crucified at Hierusalem, beléeued on by the Gentiles, and reuēged by the ouerthrowe and destruction of the Temple. And all these circumstances and markes are so peculiar vnto him, that they can by no meanes agrée to any other. Wherefore let vs conclude, that this Iesus is the very same Christ that was promised from time to time in the Scriptures, and exhibited in his dew time according to our Gospell. For that is the thing which wee had to proue in these last two Chapters.

The xxxj. Chapter.

An answere to the Obiections which the Iewes alledge a∣geinst Iesus, why they should not receiue him for the Christ or Messias.

NOw let vs examine the obiections* 1.1119 of the Iewes, and sée what they can say ageinst the Testimonie of all the Prophetes, which agreeth fitly to Iesus, and can a∣gree to none but him. First, If Iesus (say they) were the Christ; who should haue knowen and receiued him, rather than the great Sinagogue which was at that time? This obiection is very old;

for in the Gospell the Pharisies say,* 1.1120 Doe any of the Pharisies or chiefe Rulers beleeue in him, saue onely this rascall people which know not the Lawe, who be accursed? Here I might al∣ledge Simeon surnamed the rightuous, a Disciple of Hillels, who had serued fortie yeres in the Sanctuarie,* 1.1121 how hée acknowledged Iesus for the Sauiour of Israell and the light of the Gentiles; in the which Simeon the Iewes themselues confesse that Spirit of God to haue sayled, which was woont to inspire the greate Sina∣gogue, and inspired him still during all his lyfe. Also I could al∣ledge Iohn the Baptist, whom they called the great Rabbi Ioha∣nan, who acknowledging Iesus to be the sonne of God, sent his Disciples vnto him: And likwise Gamaliel, whom in the Acts* 1.1122 of the Apostles we reade to haue sayd, If this Doctrine be of God, it will continew; if not, it will perish; and in Clement, to haue bene a Disciple of the Apostles; and in their owne bookes, to haue bene the Disciple of the sayd Simeon:* 1.1123 And finally S. Paule him selfe, a disciple of the sayd Gamaliel, soothly a very great man, and of great fauour and authoritie among them, of whom they cannot in any wyse mistrust. To bee short, Iosephus reporteth that this Iesus was followed among y^t Iewes, of all such as loued y^e trueth, and that as many as loued the Lawe, did greatly blame Ananus the highpréest, for causing the disciples of Iesus to be put to death. Also R. Nehumia* 1.1124 the sonne of Hacana hauing recounted the mi∣racles of (Iesus, within a litle of whose tyme he was) sayth expres∣ly, I am one of those which haue beleeued in him, and haue bene baptized, and haue walked in the right way. Likewise the S. Rabbi seemeth to haue hild of Iesus; and if he did not, then is it yet more wonderfull than if he had knowen him,* 1.1125 considering y^t he séemeth to describe this Iesus by the selfsame circumstaunces y^t the very Christ is described by him. But without any stāding vpō that poynt, I say further to them, That whereas the Synagogue receiued not Iesus for the Messias, their so doing is a token that he was the very Messias in deede; and that their receiuing of Bar∣cozba for the Messias, was a sure proofe that Barcozba was not the Messias. For it is expresly sayd by the Prophetes, that when the Messias came vnto them, they should be so blynde as not too knowe him, and so vnthankeful as to despise him. The stone (sayth Dauid) which the builders refused,* 1.1126 is become the chiefe cor∣ner stone, and that is a maruelous thing in our eyes.* 1.1127 And this saying doth Iesus interpret concerning the kingdome of Heauen,* 1.1128

which should bee taken from the Iewes for their refusing thereof. Also this text is applyed to the Messias by R. Ionathan, yea and by R. Selomoh also (as great an enemy to Christ as he is) who writing vpon Micheas* 1.1129 sayth that Christ (by exprese name) should bee borne in Bethleem; and which way so euer they turne them∣selues, they can gather none other sence of that place. Herevppon commeth it that the yoong babes crye out in the Gospel, Hosanna which commeth in the name of the Lord; which is y^e verse that followeth next after this place of Esay,* 1.1130 Go tel this people, Heare and vnderstand not, Looke and see not. Harden the heart of this people, stop their eares, and close their eyes, least they see with their eyes, & heare with their eares, and vnderstand with their heartes, and turne agein, and I heale them. How long? Euen all their Citties be desolate without inhabitants (sayth the Lorde) and the houses without any man in them, and the land be a wildernesse. Yet shall a Tythe remayne and turne a∣gein, and be made bare as a Turpentine tree & an Oke, whose sap neuerthelesse shall continue in them. And if ye desire the in∣terpretatiō hereof, behold, it is readie at hand in the same Prophet. For going about to describe with what humilitie and simplicitie Christ should come to suffer for vs, (whom these great Rabbines looked for too haue come in triumph to content their pryde and am∣bition) Who hath beleeued our preaching (sayth he) or to whō is the Lords arme discouered? That is to say, of so great a nom∣ber of Iewes which looke for the Messias, how feawe shall there be that will beléeue him, when they see him come after such fashion as I am to describe him vnto them? But surely (sayth he) Those to whom he had neuer bene declared shall see him, and those that neuer heard of him shal cōsider him. This text (as I haue declared often heretofore) is expounded by the Iewes themselues concerning the Messias, Also Zacharie saith, I wil powre out the spirit of grace and mercie vpon the house of Dauid, aud vpon the inhabiters of Hierusalem, and they shall looke vnto mee whom they haue pearced. This Hierusalem (say I) and this house of Dauid wherevpon GOD will power out his grace and mercie, are the very same which shal pearce his Anoynted and cru∣ciste him after the same maner that they martyred Esay, Ieremie, and Zacharie, and tormented all the rest of the Prophetes, ac∣cording wherevnto our Lorde Iesus sayde vnto them, It is not meete that any Prophet should dye elswhere than at Hierusa∣lem.

Now they must néedes graunt, that if they were to kill hym, they were not to know him: for who durst bée so presumptuous as to lay his hande wittingly vpon the Lords Anoynted? And those words also doe they expound to concerne the Messias.* 1.1131 To be short, Moyses sayth; The straunger y^t is among thee shalbe thy head, and thou shalt be his tayle; he shalbe aduaunced aboue thee, and thou shalt be his vnderling. And Esay sayth, Because of the sinne of Iuda, I wil seeke out those which haue not sought for mee, and I wilbe found of them which haue not enquired for me. I wil giue a better place in my Temple to the Geldedmen & Strangers, than to the Sonnes and daughters of Israel. And it is an ordinary matter among the Prophets, to vse such speeches as this, Those which are my people,* 1.1132 shall no more be my peo∣ple: & thei which were not my people shalbe my people, & such other. And sildom doo they speake any word of y^e calling of y^e Gen∣tiles, but they match it immediatly w^t the casting off of y^e Iewes for their refusing of Christ, like as ye cānot well make mention of the graffing of a tree w^t a strāge Impe or sien, but ye must also speake of the eu••ting off of the boughes to make place for it.* 1.1133 To this same effect doo R. Samai and R. Selomoh say, It is sayd in Ieremy, I wil take one out of a Cittie, and two out of a Trybe, and make them to enter into Sion, because (adde they) that as of sixe∣hundred thousand Israelites, onely two (that is to wit, Iosua & Caleb) entered into Chanaan; so shall it be also in the dayes of the Messias. Aud the sonnes of Rabbi Hija affirme.* 1.1134 That the Messias shalbe a stone to stumble at vnto the two houses of Israel, and a Snare to the Inhabiters of Hierusalem, and they deliuer it for a great Secret. Also R. Iohanan and R. Iacob,* 1.1135 say that the Gentiles shalbe put in place of the Iewes that haue refused the Lord, as the Horse is put in the place of an Oxe that halteth. And whereas I haue said that Gods spirit should be withdrawen from the Syn••gogue for their Iniquities sake. Rabbi Iudas sayth, that when the Sonne of Dauid commeth, there shalbe feawe wyse men in Israel, and the wisdome of the Scribes shall stinke, and the Scholes of Diuinitie shalbe become Brothelhouses: which accordeth with this saying of our Lorde Iesus, Of a house of prayer ye haue made my house a den of theeues. And R. Ne∣horay sayth that mens countenances shal at that tyme be past shame. And R. Nehemias writeth, that wickednes shalbe multi∣plyed without measure,* 1.1136 and there shall be nothing but vnto∣wardnes

& Heresie;* 1.1137 insomuch that (as sayth R. Natronai.) They shall say that the miracles which the Mesias shall woorke, are done by Magicke and by vncleane Spirites. To be short, Iere∣my* 1.1138 saith, The Shepherds are become beastes, and haue not sought the Lord. And in another place, They haue made my sheepe to go astray, & turned them away to the mountaines. And the Rabbines to confirme the matter, say thus: If our pre∣decessors were the Children of men, we be the children of As∣ses; and surely (sayth R. Menahem,) the shee Asse of R. Pine∣has is wyser then we. But to come backe ageine to the Prophesie of Esay, The Oxe (sayth he) knoweth his owner, and the Asse knoweth his maisters Crib, but my people knowe not mee, they haue no vnderstanding. And in very déede whosoeuer doub∣teth yet still what spirit gouerned the Teachers of the Iewes from this time foorth; let hym reade but onely their Talmud, which is such a booke, that God (say they) studyeth in it euery first fower ho∣wers of the day: And when Hierusalem was destroyed, hee left himselfe thrée cubits space wheron to sit and reade in the Talmud, which yet notwithstanding was not then made. Besides this, they make God (in that booke) to bewayle the miseries of Israel, to bee angrie at the Comb of a Cooke, to lye, and to commit sinne and so foorth; so that if a man might haue looked into the consciences of those Rabbines, I beléeue hee should haue seene that they made not so good account of GOD as of themselues. As for the Scrip∣tures, they expound not one text of them among a hundred to the purpose, no nor scarsly without blasphemie, sauing where they fol∣lowe or alledge the Rabbines of old time. The residew are either toyes, or oldwiues tales, or horrible blasphemies, or things ei∣ther too fond for Children or to wicked for men, and such as euen the Diuell himself would be ashamed of. To be short, I can not tell how they that wrate that booke could bee Iewes; or howe the rea∣ding of it now should not make them all become Christians.

Yet they reply still and say:* 1.1139 What lykelyhod is there that this Iesus was the Messias,* 1.1140 comming so attyred as he did? Or were not we (at least wyse) woorthie to be excused for not knowing him, comming disguysed after that manner? Nay, I demaund of you, after what other sort he could or should come, considering that hee came to humble himself, and to be crucified for vs? You looked to haue had him princelyke, and he was forepromised poore: a War∣ryour, and it was told you he should be beaten and wounded: with

a greate trayne, and he is descrybed alone vppon an Asse: with a companie of wyues, and there was no mo spoken of but only one: with tryumphing and feasting, and yee were informed aforehand that his bread should be stéeped in vineger, and his Cup be full of gall and bitternesse. You imagin vnder him, eyther the Peace of Salomon, or the Conquests of greate Alexander: peace to ma∣nure Iewrie at your ease, and Warre to reape the riches of the Gentyles. But he came to appease Gods wrath, and to vanquish the Diuell; and thenceforth to make Iewes and Gentyles equall. Of these two commings, which is most meete, both for Gods glorie, and for his owne? Admit he had the Empyre of Cyrus and Alexan∣der; admit he had all the power and riches of all the Kingdomes that euer were in the world; what were all this but a witnesse of his want, and an abate 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of his glorie? As for example; Moyses led Sixhundred thousand feyghting men out of Egipt, and with the stroke of his rod he passed the red Sea and drouned the Egipti∣ans therein. Now in whether had Gods glorie more appeared, and the calling of Moyses bin better warranted •• by his winning of a battell ageinst the Egiptians with so greate a nomber of men, or by ouerthrowing them with one stroke of a rod? In reducing the King to reason by force of armes, or in making him to seeke mercy by an hoste of fleas and lyce? Let vs come now to Christ. He was to subdewe the world vnder his obedience. Whether was it more to his glorie and more correspondent to his Godhead, to haue done it by inuesting himself in an Empyre, or by ridding himself of all worldly meanes, by force of armes, or by his only word? By con∣quering men with shewe of pompe, or by winning them with suf∣fering reproche at their hand? By tryumphing ouer them, or by being crucified by them? By being alyue, or euen by being dead? By killing his enemyes, or by yéelding vnto them? By ouerthro∣wing his foes; or by sending his seruants to suffer whatsoeuer they would do vnto them? For who séeth not, that in the victories of Princes, their men bée partakers with them of their glorie? And that in battells betwéene men, the Horse and the speare haue their part? And that oftentimes the harnesse and the very shadowe of the Crests of their helmets (as yee would say) do step in for a share? Surely therefore, wee may well say, that Iesus could not haue shewed his Godhead better, than in comming like an abiect & mi∣serable man; nor his strength better, than in comming in feblenesse; nor his myght, than in infirmitie; nor his glory, than in despisednes;

nor his eternitie, than in dying; nor his rysing ageine, than in being buryed; nor his whole presence, than 〈◊〉〈◊〉 his way hence; nor finally his quickening life, than in conquering the world by the death of his Diciples. For had he come otherwise, man had had the glory thereof: the stronglyer he had come, the lesse had bin his vic∣torie; and the more pomp he had pretended outwardly, the lesse had he alwayes vttered his Godhead, and the more excusable had both the Iewes and Gentyles bin in not receyuing him. To be short, wil ye sée that he was the same sonne of God, which was present with God at the creating of the world? God created the world without matter or stuffe whereof, and without help, by his only word: And Iesus being destitute of all help and meane, hath conquered the world with his only word, euen by his 〈◊〉〈◊〉 death, which séemeth to haue bene a cleare dispatch of him? What greater maiestie or greatnesse can we imagine than this?

Yea but (say they) where bee the signes promised by the Pro∣phets?* 1.1141 and specially the euerlasting peace which Christ was to bring vnto the world, which should turne Swords into Mattocks and Speares into Coulters? To this we may answer, that Iesus was borne vnder the Emperour Augustus, at which tyme the Hi∣stories tell vs, that the Temple of Iauus at Rome was shut vp•• and all the world was at peace throughout, as who would saythat by that meane God meant to open a free way to the preaching of his Gospell. But let them first of all marke here their owne con∣trarietie of speech, in that they require of vs here a generall peace, and in other places speake of battelles against Gog and Magog, and of the bathing of themselues in the blud of the Gentyles, inso∣much as they say that their second Messias the Sonne of Ioseph, shalbe slayne in battell. Nay, as he is a spirituall King, so bee his warres and peace spirituall also. Esay* 1.1142 calleth him a man of warre: but of his warres he sayth, They shall turne their swordes into Coulters. On the contrary part he calleth him y^t Prince of peace: but of such peace wherof it is sayd;* 1.1143 The chastisemēt of our peace was layd vpon him, and by his stripes are we healed: that is to wit, he was wounded for our misdeedes and torne for our iniqui∣ties. To be short, Micheas* 1.1144 sayth, He himselfe shalbe the peace. Neuerthelesse, to the intent ye should not thinke he meaneth of your manuring of your grounds & of your dressing of your ••ine∣yards; yet shall not the Assyrian (sayth he) ceasse to come into our Land, and to march in our Palaces. And therefore doth Iere∣mie

well say, He shall breake the yoke from thy necke, & burst asunder thy bonds: howbeit (as he expoundeth himselfe in ano∣ther place,* 1.1145) in such sort as thou shalt not serue straunge Gods any more: that is to say, he will both winne vs victorie and be our victorie himself against the Deuil, and also both purchace vs peace and be our peace vnto God, according to this which he sayth ano∣ther where: The Euerlasting will be our rightuousnesse.* 1.1146 And in trueth, in the booke of Sabbath where these texts are examined, Rabbi Eliezer sayth plainly, That warres shall not ceasse at the first comming of the Messias, but only at his second comming, that is to wit, when he commeth in glorie to iudge the world.

Of the same stampe are the obiections that followe.* 1.1147 It is writ∣ten (say they) that Mount Oliuet shall bee split asunder in the middes, and the one halfe fall towards the East and the other half towards the West: which thing wee sée not yet come to passe. Well, they cannot denye but that this text speaketh plainly of the destruction of Hierusalem: and if they will néedes followe the let∣ter, they shall see in their owne Histories, that when the Romanes beseeged the Citie, they made their trenches on that side. Againe, it is sayd,* 1.1148 That the Lords hil shalbe aduaunced aboue al hilles; and therevppon they dreame that Hierusalem shalbe hoyssed vp thrée leagues into the ayre. But these people which otherwhiles delight so much in Allegories, ought to vnderstand these, euen by the text it selfe. For (sayth the Prophet) folke shall say let vs goe vp to Syon, and God will there teach vs his waies:* 1.1149 The Lawe shall come out of Syon, and the word of the Lord from Hieru∣salem. And I pray you when came they better out, than when the Apostles of Iesus did spread them abroade from Hierusalem tho∣rowe the whole world? And therefore Rabbi Selomoh* 1.1150 saith vpon those texts, that the Lord should at that tyme be magnified in Hie∣rusalem, by a greater signe•• than he was in Sinai, Carmel, & Tha∣bor, And Rabbi Abraham the sonne of Ezra sayth, that this Ad∣uaunced hill is the Messias, who shalbe highly aduaunced among the Gentyles. Also it is sayd in Esay;* 1.1151 The Woolfe shall feed with the Lambe: and in Malachie,* 1.1152 The Angell of the Lord shal make the waies playne:* 1.1153 which things (say they) wee see not yet perfor∣med, nor many other such like. But yet doth Rabbi Moyses Ben Maimon their great teacher of Rightuousnesse say; Let it neuer come in thy head, that in the tyme of Christ the course of the world shall any whit bee chaunged: but when thou readest in

Esay, that the Woolfe shal dwell with the Lamb, call to mynd how Ieremie* 1.1154 sayth, A Woolfe of the wildernesse hath wasted them, and a Leopard watcheth at their Cities, to snatch ••p them that come out. For the meaning thereof is, that both Iewes and Gentiles shalbe cōuerted to the true doctrine, and not hurt one another, but feede both together at one Crib, according to this saying of Esay in the very same place, The Woolfe shall eate Hay with the Oxe. And after that maner (sayth he) must we expound all such maner of speeches, which belong to the tyme of Christ: for they be parabolicall and fi∣guratiue. of the same sort also is the exposition of Rabbi Dauid Kimhi, howbeit that ordinarily he followed the letter, & the tran∣slation of Ionathan himselfe. And as touching the Angell or Am∣bassador that should leuell the waies mentioned in the text of Ma∣lachie: The meaning thereof (sayth Ramban) is that a great Prince shall bee sent afore the Messias come, to prepare the harts of the Israelites to the battell. But Malachie expoundeth himselfe more fitly in these wordes: He shall turne the hearts of the fathers to their Children: that is to say, he shall exhort Isra∣ell to repentance.

The Obiections* 1.1155 that insewe hereafter haue a little more weight in them. It is written, I will destroy all the Idolles of the earth. Also,* 1.1156 I will hungerstarue all the Gods of the Gentyles. And a∣gaine,* 1.1157 They shall all serue mee with one shoulder. Would God that the abuses which are crept into the Christians Church against Christes ordinance,* 1.1158 were not so great a Stumbling blocke to the Iewes. Neuerthelesse, let them consider the great nomber of Gods woorshipped by the Assyrians, Persians, Greekes and Romaines, at what tyme euery Countrey, euery Citie, euery Household, and euery person had his peculiar God and his Idols by himselfe: and they shall finde that within a little while after y^e Apostles had prea∣ched the doctrine of Iesus to the world, they were all gone, and not so much as any rememberance of them had now remayned, but that in publishing the glorie of God, wee had also declared their o∣uerthrowe. Let them reade the Histories of the Heathen and aske of them what is become of their Oracles, I meane the Deuilles which hild them in with their Lyes and Dreames, and would not bee pacified but with the Sacrificing of men, yea and euen of their owne Children: and of all those wickednesses, which had taken roote all the world throughout, can they now shew any print at all?

Euen in the tyme of Tyberius began men to aske these questions, namely what was the cause that Oracles spake not any more; that Deuils wrought not as they had done aforetymes; And that their Priestes wanted liuing? And the Heathen themselues were driuen to answer, that since the tyme that Iesus had dyed, and his Disci∣ples had preached abroade, Arte Magicke and the Deuils had lost their power. So sodeine, so vniuersall, and so wonderfull to our very enemies was the chaunge in that tyme; and of so great force was the onely name of Iesus in the mouth of those poore men, a∣gainst Kings and Emperours, against their Kingdomes and Em∣pyres, and against the vpholders and worshippers both of the De∣uilles and of their Idols.

For briefnesse sake I omit this Obiection* 1.1159 following and such o∣ther; as that all Nations haue not followed Iesus. For the Pro∣phets haue tolde vs, that but a remnant shall bee saued: and Iesus himselfe sayth that Many be called, and fewe chosen. And it suf∣fiseth that the voyce of the Gospell hath bene heard ouer all the world, and that the gate of the Church is set open to all Nations. Againe, to come to an issewe, they know•• that the word Col [that is to say All] betokeneth not that all men without exception shall followe him, but that all Nations without difference shall bee his people. Againe, the seede of Christ (say they) should be euerlasting: but we see not the seede of Iesus to bee so. They say very well, in that by the word Seede, they meane Christs Disciples; and in their owne language they terme them Sonnes or Children: & thankes be to the Lord, there are Disciples of his still, euerywhere through the whole world.

But the principall Obiection remayneth yet behind, and that is this: If Iesus be the Sonne of God, (say they) why chaungeth he the Lawe of God his father deliuered by Moyses, beeing (as hath bene sayd alreadie) both holy and inuiolable, which who so doth, how can) hee bee receiued for the Messias? Surely in this poynt where they charge Iesus with the changing and abolishing of the Law; we be flat contrarie to them; affirming that he did not change it or abolish it, but more plainly expounded it and fulfilled it. Nay say they, Circumcision was expressely commaunded by God vnto Abraham, and afterward to Moyses: and why th•••• hath Iesus a∣bolished it? In déede that is the thing which doth alwaies deceiue them; namely, that they take the signe for the thing signified, and the shadowe for the substance and trueth of the promises. But wée

say that Circumcision was a signe or seale of the Couenant, and not the Couenant it selfe, and the best of the Iewes denye it not themselues.* 1.1160 And yet Moyses sayth: When the Lord shall haue cast thee out to the vttermost partes of the earth, yet will he bring thee home againe into the land which thy fathers pos∣sessed, and hee will circumcise thy heart and the heart of thy Children, that thou mayst loue the Lord thy God; with all thy heart and with all thy Soule, and that thou mayst liue. And in another place he sayth: Circumcise the foreskin of your hearts, and harden not your neckes any more. And whē the Prophets rebuke vs, they call vs not simply vncircumcised, but vncircumci∣sed of heart or of lippes. The which ought to aduertise you that the signe is fleshly,* 1.1161 but the thing signified (that is to wit, the Co∣uenant) is spirituall;* 1.1162 and that it would behoue you to enter into the Marée of the Lawe, and not to byte about the barke of it. To bee short, the Cabale it selfe giueth vs to vnderstand, that Christ shall cure the venome of the Serpent, make a new Couenant, and take away the necessitie of Circumcision. As touching Sacrifices, I haue declared alreadie heretofore that they were signes. It is sayd that they shall cleanse away the sinnes of the Congregation. How may that be, if we go no further than to the blud of a Lamb, or to the sprinckling of the ashes of a Cowe? And therefore. Dauid sayth:* 1.1163 Thou desirest not Sacrifice for sinne, and therefore will I not giue thee any. And God himself sayth: I blame thee not for that thou hast giuen me no burntofferings. Also in Esay:* 1.1164 Who required these things of you? As for these Sacrifices, these new Moones, these Sabbats, and these solemne Feastes, they lothe me, they burden me, and I cannot wel away with them. More∣ouer Micheas sayth: If thou gauest thousands of thy Sheepe, and Riuers of Oyle,* 1.1165 yea & thyne eldest sonne, euen the sonne of thyne own bodie begotten for thy sinne: all this is nothing before the Lord. Nay, (sayth Esay) the offering of an Oxe is as the murthering of a man, and the offering vp of a Sheepe is as the snetching of a Dog, and the burning of Incense is as the blessing of an Idoll. All which sayings doe vs to vnderstand, that the Sacrifices were not the very things themselues, but onely signes of things, that is to wit, partly of the lustes and affections which wee feele in our hearts, and partly of the Saluation which wee looke for by the Messias; and that if wee passe no further than the bare Sacrifices, thei be vtterly vnprofitable. But Dauid saith;

The Sacrifice of the Lord, is a broken and lowly heart. And E∣say sayth, Wash your selues, scoure away the naughtinesse of your hearts, doe right to the fatherlesse and the widowe. Also Micheas sayth, Deale vprightly, & shewe mercie. These bée the Sacrifices which God requireth at euery of our hands, and which were betokened in the particuler Sacrifices, by the Bowels, Kid∣neyes, Liuer, and such other parts, which were wont to be burned vpon the Altar. And as touching the generall Sacrifices and such as were more solemne, they betokened that vniuersall Sacrifice for the sinne of Mankynd which God had ordeyned euerlastingly, that is to wit, the death of the Messias. For that those Sacrifices should haue an end, namely, the signe by the presence of the thing signified, the figure by the presence of the substance, and the sha∣dowe by the presence of the bodie, wee perceiue by these wordes of Daniell;* 1.1166 From the tyme that the continuall Sacrifice is taken away, there shall bee a thousand two hundred fowerscore and ten daies. And that it should be done by the death of Christ, it ap∣peareth by this which he had sayd afore,* 1.1167 After threescore & two weekes Christ shalbe killed, and in halfe a weeke he shall cause the Sacrifice and Offering to ceasse; and for the outreaching of abhominations, there shalbe desolation vnto the end. And whereas Malachie* 1.1168 hauing reproued Sacrifices very sharply, saith; From the Sunnerysing to the Sunnegoingdowne, my name shalbe great among the Gentyles, and Incense and pure Ob∣lations shall be offered euerywhere in my name: it cannot bee vnderstood of the Sacrifices ordeyned by the Iewish Law, but ra∣ther of the abolishing of them, and of all other signes, by the Mes∣sias. For if the Gentyles must Sacrifice vnto him according to the law; then must they come to Hierusalem to the Temple there. And if it be so: what Court will bee large enough to hold the Sa∣crifices? What shall al Hierusalem be but a very Slaughterhouse and Butcherie? Nay moreouer, the Prophet sayth that they shall offer euerywhere; which thing bewrayeth an euident chaunge: and a pure or cleane Oblation, which putteth a difference betwéene their Offerings, and the bloodie Sacrifices of the Lawe. And after that the Prophet hath sayd, My name shall bee great among the Gentyles: Hee addeth immediatly; But yee haue vnhalowed it. Which is as much to say, as that y^e Gentyles shalbe these Priests euery man in his owne place, and they shall not neede to co•••••• to you Iewes for the matter. To bee short, as touching the Sacri∣fices,

some of the Rabbines say,* 1.1169 They shall all ceasse, sauing the Sacrifice of praise and thanksgiuing. And as touching the Sab∣bath; He that bringeth the Commaundement from God, (say they) may also breake it: wherevnto our Lord Iesus agréeing, sayth, The Sonne of Man is Lord of the Sabboth. And as tou∣ching the difference betwéene Beastes cleane and vncleane, All Beastes (say they) which are counted vncleane in this age, shall bee counted cleane by the vertue of God in the age to come, that is to wit vnder the Messias, as they were to the Children of Noe.* 1.1170 And thereof they ad this reason, That Gods inioyning thereof for a tyme, was but to trye who they were that would obey his word. The same doth Rabbi Hadarsan affirme, saying; There is not a more expresse Lawe, than that which concerneth the monethly disease of women; and yet shall that ceasse in the reigne of him: [that is to say, of the Messias.] And it is not for them to alledge here, that concerning the Circumcision, the Sab∣both, the feast of Easter, and such others, it is sayd that thy shalbe legnolam:* 1.1171 that is to say by their interpretation, for euer. For wee haue learned of them, that the word legnolam, signifieth not for e∣uer,* 1.1172 but a long tyme; and a tyme of long continuance without in∣termission or breaking of, rather than a continuance of tyme with∣out end. And in that sence doe we reade it sayd of Samuel; He shall abide in the presence of the Lord legnolam for euer:* 1.1173 Vpō which place the Commentarie sayth, It is an age of the Leuites or a Le∣uiticall age, that is to say, the continuance of fiftie yeres. Like∣wise, of the Seruant whose eare his maister boared through, it is sayd; He shalbe thy Seruant legnolam for euer: in which place the Commentarie sayth,* 1.1174 Vntill the yeere of Iubil. And therfore their great Grammarian Rabbi Kimhi sayth, that legnolam signifieth a long tyme, according to this saying in the Prouerbes, The olde bound or buttel that hath continued of long tyme; where he vseth the word legnolam. The words whereby the Hebrewes vse commonly to betoken a tyme without end, are these, gnad netsach, and selah, and legnolam vagned.

But that God ment by the sending of his sonne Christ to make a new Couenant with his people, as farre differing from the first Couenanat as the thing figured differeth from the figure, let vs here Ieremy* 1.1175 in his one and thirtith Chapter. Behold, the day shal come (sayeth the Lord) that I will make a new Couenant with the House of Israel, and the House of Dauid; not according to

the Couenant that I made with their fathers, when I tooke them by the hand & led them out of the land of Egipt, which Couenant they haue disanulled though I was married vnto them: but the Couenant that I wil make with them after those dayes (sayth the Lord) is this; I will plant my Lawe within them and wryte it in their harts, and I wilbe their GOD and they shalbe my people. Euery man shalnot teache his neybour any more, nor euery man his brother, saying, Knowe the Lord; for they shall knowe me from the greatest to the least. And I will forgiue their vnryghtuousenes, and their Sinne will I remem∣ber no more. And that this was ment of the comming of the Messias, it appeareth playne. For he had sayd afore, The Lord wil create a new thing vppon the Earth; a woman shall compasse a man about. Also that by the House of Israel he ment all such as should bee graffed into that house by the comming of Christ, it ap∣peareth in this, that hauing spoken of the peopling of Israel, he said afore, I will sowe the house of Israel and the house of Iuda with the seede of Man; and after that maner do the Rabbines them∣selues alledge it. And therefore doth Ionathan say vppon Esay,* 1.1176 Ye shall drawe waters of gladnesse out of the welsprings of Salua∣tion, that is to say, you shall receyue new doctrine of gladnesse by the chosen ones of the Rightuouse, that is to wit, of Christ; of whom the Prophet had sayd in the Chapter going last afore, God is my safety, I wilbe bold and not be afrayd.* 1.1177 And the Co∣mentarie vppon the booke of the Preacher sayeth, The lawe that men learne in this age, is nothing in respect of the lawe of the Messias; nor the miracles that are past, in comparison of his miracles. And in the booke of Blessings it is sayd, the things that were done in Egipt are but tappilath that is to say,* 1.1178 an Accident or Bywoorke; but the things that shalbe done in the tyme of the Messias, shalbe gnikkar that is to say, the substance thereof. Yea and Rabbi Iohanan in the Talmud sayeth, Wherein soeuer a Prophet biddeth thee transgresse the Lawe, obey him, sa∣uing in Idolatry.* 1.1179 For al the rest are things that may be chaun∣ged by a Prophet according to occasion and tyme.

Yet they reply and say, is God then chaungeable, to giue a lawe that shalbe chaunged after that fasshion?* 1.1180 No, say we. For what chaungeablenesse is it to promise and performe, to say and to do, to represent and to bring to passe, to begin and to finish? Nay contra∣rywise, what greater constancie can there be, than to bring to passe

in their tymes, and according to their circumstances, the things which he had promised to his people? He had said, Circumcyse me all your male Children. This was a signe. And he sayd also, He shall Circumcyse your harts and the harts of your posteritie; and that is the verie true signification of the signe. Now Iesus himself was circumcysed, and that was bycause he was borne vnder the Lawe. But yet hath he circumcysed our harts by regenerating vs, which is as much to say as he performed the Lawe. And why should it bee thought straunge that Circumcision is not reteyned now that the Gentyles are called. Verely bycause there is not now any peculiar people, nor consequently any peculiar marke to bee coueted of any one People or Linage, as a seuerall marke of coue∣nant betwéene God and them. Also God hath sayd, Take a Cowe for a Sinne offering, And ageine, Take euery of you a Lambe. But he hath sayd lykewise, The sacrifice that I require is a bro∣ken and sorowfull hart. The sacrifice that I prepare for you is my Christ, who shalbe led as a Lambe to be slayne for you, and vpon him shall your sinnes be layd. Therefore the Moother of Iesus caried her Sacrifice to the Temple, for her purification; but she caried her Sonne with her also according to this scripture. Euery manchild that first openeth the womb, shalbe holy vn∣to the Lord; because he was borne vnder the Lawe. But he was crucified for our sinnes, wherein he accomplished the onely Sacri∣fice that had bene betokened by so many Sacrifices in the Lawe, and therefore he made an ende of all sacryficing and offering of ob∣lations, as one that came to fulfill the Ceremonies of the Lawe, and to set vs free and discharge vs of them.

On the contrarie part, how delt he with the Lawes which were no signes but matters of substance in deede? It is written. Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God. And Iesus hath sayd, Thou shalt loue God with all thy hart, and he hath giuen vs an exam∣ple thereof in himself. Thou shalt not make to thy selfe any gra∣uen Image sayth the Lawe: and Christ hath ouerthrowen all the Idols of the Heathen. The Lawe sayth, Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord in vaine: yea (saith Iesus) and thou shalt not sweare by any maner of thing, no not euen by thine owne head. The Lawe sayes, Thou shalt keepe holy y^e Sabboth day: Howbeit not to restreine thee from going aboue two myles that day, as the Pharisies taught; but to apply thy selfe all that day throughout, to the mynding of the Lawe of thy God, and to the

seruing of thy Neighbour in his neede. And to the Commaunde∣ments of the second table he saith, Thou shalt honour thy Father and thy Moother; howbeit from thy heart, and not for fashions sake, and thou shalt doo the lyke to all thy Superiours. Thou shalt uot kill: yea, and if thou hate, not thy neighbour onely, but also euen thyne enemy; thou art a manslear already. Thou shalt not steale: and if a man will haue thy Cote from thee, thou shalt let him haue thy Cloke too. Thou shalt not beare false witnesse: not only in word either false or hurtfull, but also ydle. Thou shalt not commit aduoutry: No, for if thou doe but looke vpon a woman with a lust vnto her, thou hast committed adultrie already. Moreo∣uer, so little leaue hast thou to couet any mans goods, that to succor him thou must dispossesse thy selfe, and sell all that euer thou hast. Finally, Thy God is only one God, and no mo: but thy neighbour is euery man whom thou meetest, of what Countrie, state, condici∣on, or calling soeuer he or thou be. To bee short, worshippest thou God? doe it with the knees of thy heart. Doest thou fast? When thou doest it, annoint thy face. Doest thou almes? Let not thy left hand knowe it; giue of thy néede, and not of thine abundance. I demaund now whether the exhibiting of the substance and body of the Lawe, in sted of the counterfet or Portrayture thereof, and the requiring of the mynd in sted of the flesh; be an abolishing or defa∣cing of the Lawe? whether the stablishing thereof, bee the disanul∣ling thereof? The clearing and inlightening thereof, be the quen∣ching thereof? or the fulfilling therof in himself, and the spreading thereof ouer all Nations of the Earth, bee the breaking thereof? Nay moreouer, the Lawe (say the Cabalistes) was giuen to man for the sinne of the Serpent; that is to say (accordi••g to our doc∣trine) not for vs to accomplish, for wee cannot atteine thereto; but to shew vnto vs how farre the infection of that venome hath caried vs away, from that duetie which God and nature it selfe require of vs. Which end of the Lawe is greatly inlightened vnto vs by the comming of our Lord Iesus, in that he teacheth vs that the Lawe is not satisfied with an outward and pharisaicall obedience, that is to wit, (to speake fitly) by hipocrisie; but by the vncorrupt obedi∣ence of the Heart, yea euen much more by an vnfeyned acknow∣ledgement of our disobedience, than by the greatest profession of obedience that a man can shewe?

If they vrge yet further, why then was not this lesson of yours giuen vs at the beginning? I answere, that euen from the begin∣ning

foorthon, Moyses and the Prophetes gaue it you, in willing you to circumcise your hearts, to offer vp the sacrifice of prayse and obedience,* 1.1181 to absteine from vnhalowing the Saboth day with vn∣rightuousnes, and such otherthings. And in speaking to you of the land of Canaan, they haue told you lowd inough by all their doo∣ings, that it behoued you to haue a further reache of mynd, namely to the things which (as Esay saith) neitheir eye hath séene, nor eare heard, nor heart of man conceiued. The seruice then which God re∣quired of you is spirituall, and the reward which we ought to looke for, is spirituall also. But you, lyke Children as ye be, thought not but (as the most part of you doo still at this day) vpon the body and the world; whereas GOD spake to you concerning your Soules and the welfare of them, which lyeth in him. Euen so the Schoole∣maister promiseth his yoong Scholer a Marchpaine or some other banketing stuffe to make him to learne; not that vertue shall not like the Child much bettter, and be a greater reward to him when he hath atteyned vnto it; but because that if he should talke to him of vertue or of honour at that tyme, he can no skill of any of them both; and he would bee the negligenter to his lesson, and the more vnable to conceiue a greater thing. And truely ye would haue sayd vnto Moyses; Let not God speake vnto vs, but to thee; and yet was he fayne to couer his face, because ye could not abide it. To the same purpose doth Esay say, that ye were fayne to haue line af∣ter line, and precept after precept, and lisping Prophets to dallie with you like newe weaned children, that they might make you to vnderstand. Also S. Paule sayth in the same sence, that ye were trained vp like babes vnder the discipline and tutorship of the law. To bee short, all Mankind (after the maner of one only man) hath his birth, his Childhood, and his youth, and his spirituall nourish∣ment proportionable to euery age, as well as euery of vs hath by himselfe. Nature ought to be a Lawe vnto vs. And verely GOD ment to make vs to feele how sore it is corrupted in vs; and because that in those first ages wee did transgresse it and breake it so many and so sundrie waies, like yoong Scholers, which (to speake right∣ly) cannot write one right letter without a sample: therefore God gaue vs the Law written; and there remayned at leastwise so much conscience in vs all, as that none of vs could say but it was most iust. Neuerthelesse, it was Gods will that wee should trye our strength for a tyme in the doing thereof; whereby we perceyued in the end, that wee could not atteyne thereto, like as the Child that

indeuereth to followe the Copie of a good Skriuener, and cannot atteyne to the fashioning of one letter aright, furtherfoorth than his maister guideth his hand. At length came Gods grace brought by Iesus Christ, when our accusation (I meane the accusation of all Mankynd and specially of the Church) was made and concluded both by Nature and by the Lawe the Interpreter of Nature, and that so apparantly, as none of vs can denye but that he deserueth very great punishment, nor any of vs say that he deserueth any re∣ward at the hand of the euerlasting God, whose reward being pro∣portionable (if I may so terme it) to the giuer, cannot be but euer∣lasting. So then, Nature hath made man readie to receiue y^e Law; the Lawe hath made him readie to imbrace grace: and God (as sée∣med conuenient to his wise prouidence) hath in this last age of the world, caused his grace to be brought and preached vnto vs by his Gospell, euen vnto vs which were as folke standing on the Scaf∣fold readie to bee executed: to the intent that such as perish should acknowledge his Iustice, & such as are saued should acknowledge his onely grace in Iesus God and Man, the onely Sauiour and Redéemer of Mankynd.

Amen.

The xxxij. Chapter.

That Iesus Christ was and is GOD, the Sonne of GOD, a∣gainst the Heathen.

NOw then, wee haue Iesus Christ such a one as hée was promised vnto vs in the Scriptures, namely God and Man, the Mediatour of mans saluation,* 1.1182 (as sayth S. Paule) manifested in the flesh, cruci∣fied by the Iewes, preached to the Gen∣tyles, beléeued on in the world, and ta∣ken vp into glorie. And forasmuch as I haue alreadie prooued the trewnesse and diuinenesse of the Scriptures, and that according to them the Me∣diatour was to be such a one as Iesus was: here I might make an end of this work: for the cōclusion followeth of it self. The Scrip∣tures

are of God; In them we haue found Iesus to be the Messi∣as, the Mediator, and the Redéemer of Mankynd; therefore it fol∣loweth that we ought to receiue him for such a one, and to imbrace his doctrine with all our heart. Howbeit to take all cause of doubt from the Heathen, let vs shewe them yet further, that Iesus is God the sonne of God, without the testimonie of the Scriptures. For it may be, that although they will not beleeue Iesus to be ve∣ry God by meanes of our Scriptures, yet they will beléeue our Scriptures to be of GOD in very deede, when they shall see that Iesus is God, whose comming hath bene declared so plainly and so long aforehand in our Scriptures. But to begin withall, let vs call to mynd this saying of Porphyrius, That Gods prouidence hath not left mankind without an vniuersall cleansing, and that the same cannot be done but by one of the beginnings, that is to wit, by one of the three Persones or Inbeeings of Gods essence. And likewise these poynts which I haue proued already, namely, That man is created to liue for euer: That by his corruption hée is falne from Gods fauour into his displeasure, and consequently excluded from that blessednes: That to bring him in fauour ageine, a Mediator must step in, who must be man, that he may susteine the death which mankind hath deserued; and God, that he may triumphe ouer death, and decke vs with his de∣sert. And such a one doe we say the same Iesus is which was cru∣cified by the Iewes, and beleeued on among the Gentyles of olde tyme: And God of his grace graunt in our tyme, to inlighten all those to whom he hath not as yet giuen grace to beléeue.

Surely as the Mediator came for the Gentyles* 1.1183 as well as for the Iewes, that is to say for all men: so it should seeme that the Gentiles had some incling thereof reuealed to them from GOD, that they might prepare themselues to receiue him.* 1.1184 In the Scrip∣ture we reade of a Prophet named Balaam, who prophesied plain∣ly enough of Christ. And some auncient writers say that his Pro∣phesie,* 1.1185 and the prophesie of one other named Seth, were kept in the East partes of the world. And Iob who was an Edomite, sayth, I am sure that my Redeemer liueth, and shall stand vp last vp∣pon the earth.* 1.1186 Also the Sibils, and specially Sibill of Erithra who is so famous aboue the rest,* 1.1187 (at leastwise if the bookes which wee haue vnder their names be theirs) doe tell vs that he should be the sonne of God,* 1.1188 be borne of a Uirgin, be named Iesus, woorke mi∣racles, be crucified by the Iewes, be raysed ageine to glory, come in

the ende to iudge both the quicke and the dead, and so foorth; and that, (which is a greater matter) in such termes, and with such par∣ticularities, as it seemeth to be y^e very Gospel turned into verse, as though God had meant to vtter his misteries more manifestly by them to the Gentiles, than he had done to the Iewes, bycause the Gentyles had not bene inured to y^e heauēly doctrine any long time aforehand, and namely to the hope of the Redéemer. And as for them which thinke those bookes to haue bene counterfetted in those Sibils names, surely they may more easely say it than proue it; but I passe not greatly for that. For (as Suetonius* 1.1189 Tranquillus re∣porteth) the Emperour Augustus made them to bee locked vp in two Cofers of gold, at the foote of the Image of Apollo on mount Palatine in Rome, where it was hard for men to haue falsifyed them. And in the tyme of Origen, of Clement of Alexandria, and of Iustine the Martir, which was not long after the preaching of the Apostles; those bookes were abrode in the world, as appeareth by the discourses of Celsus the Epicure, who sayth in deede that they were counterfet, but hee proueth it not. Also the Emperour Constantine in a certeine Oration of his, witnesseth that hee had séen and read them, and referred the Gentiles of his time to them. Well it cannot be denied but that there was at leastwise some such like thing. For Cicero in his bookes of Diuination* 1.1190 writeth these words, Let vs obserue the bookes of Sibyll. We must name vs some King, if we will liue in safetie. And yet all men knowe how hatefull a thing the name of King was, both to all the Romaines and to Cicero him selfe. Also he maketh mention of Sibils Acro∣sticke, that is to say, of certeyne verses of hirs whose first letters made the name of that King, of which sort wee haue some in the eighth booke of the Sibyls; wherevpon he concludeth, that they had a sound and wel setled mynd. Moreouer, the Emperour Constan∣tine affirmeth, that Cicero had translated the booke Sibyll of Eri∣thra, & that Antonie would haue had it abolished. In these bookes it was sayd, y^t as soone as the Romanes had set the King of AEgipt againe in his State, by and by should bee borne the King of the whole worlde. And therefore Cicero writing to Lentulus* 1.1191 who sewed to haue that charge; doth mention that Oracle vnto hym: and the Romaines made a dout whether they might restore the King of AEgipt or no, by reason of that matter, whereof the Sibyls doe make some spéeche in their second booke.* 1.1192 Neuerthelesse when the Romaines had well canuased the case, Gabinus conueyed

home Ptolomie King of AEgipt into his Kingdome, and at the same time was Iesus Christ borne. Virgill who by the fauour of Augustus had accesse to those bookes, made an Eglog* 1.1193 (which is but a translation of certeine of the Uerses of those Sibyls) concer∣ning the happie state which Sibyll behighted by Iesus Christ the sonne of God; sauing that Virgil not looking deepely into the mat∣ter, applyed it wholy to one Salonine, in fauour of Augustus whō he meant to flatter: After which manner the Romanes wrested this famous foresaying of Syria, to the Emperour Vespasian, That out of Iewrie should come the Souereine of the whole world. But wee reade that one Secundian a notable man in the tyme of the Emperor Decian,* 1.1194 and one Verian a Peinter, and one Marcelline an Orator, became Christians vpon the onely reading and confer∣ring of those Oracles. And therefore the first writers among the Christians, as Iustine, Origen, Clement,* 1.1195 & such others, doe som∣mon the Heathen to the bookes of the Sibyls, because they would not with their good willes haue beléeued ours; and also to a former prophesie of one Histaspes, which spake plainly of the comming of the sonne of God into the world, and of the conspiring of all king∣domes ageinst him and his. And therefore all those bookes were forbidden by the Heathen Emperours, vpon peyne of death. But God of his wonderfull prouidence had prouided for the Saluation of the Gentyles, by scattering the Iewish nations with their books and prophesies, into all the fower quarters of the World; howbe∣it that we reade not of any other Linage or Nation to haue bene so scattered without losing their tytles, their bookes, their name, and the very knowledge of their original; which prerogatiue the Iewes had, to the intent they should bee Preachers of the comming of the Mediator, and witnesses of the antiquitie, trueth, and vncorrupt∣nes of the Prophestes, ageinst the effect whereof neuerthelesse they set themselues with all their power. For what better witnesses I pray you could the Gentyles haue; than the Iewes themselues? namely in that they being the putters of Iesus and of his disciples to death, were ready notwithstanding to dye for the trueth & sound∣nesse of the bookes wherein he was foreshewed, foretold, and fore∣promised vnto them at all tymes? Furthermore, that this King promised by the Prophetes and the Sibyls, should deliuer the Law of good lyfe to the whole world, Cicero séemeth to haue had some vnderstanding (howsoeuer he came by it) or els I cānot tell wher∣to I should apply this goodly sentence of his in his third booke of

his Commonweale. Soothly the very Lawe in deede (sayth he) is right reason, shed into all men, constant, euerlasting, which calleth all men to their duetie by commaunding, and frayeth them from fraud by forbidding; which yet notwithstanding neither biddeth nor forbiddeth, in vayne to the good, nor by bidding or forbidding moueth the bad. From this lawe may nothing be taken, to it may nothing be put, neither may it be wholy abrogated. Neither Senate nor Pope can discharge vs of this Lawe,* 1.1196 neither needeth there any interpreter or ex∣pounder thereof to make it playne. There shall not bee one Lawe at Rome, and another at Athens; one tooday, and ano∣ther toomorrowe: But one selfesame Lawe being both euer∣lasting and vnchaungeable, shall conteyne all Nations and at all tymes; and there shall be but one common mayster and commaunder of all, euen God. He is the deuiser, the discusser, and the giuer of this Lawe; which who will not obey, shall flee from himselfe as if he disdeined to be a man; which dooing of his must needes be a sore punishment vnto him, though hee were sure to scape all other punishments. Who seeth not here, that this Heathen man espyed, that all Lawes of man are but va∣nitie, and that he looked that God himselfe should come openly in∣to the sight of the world, to giue a good lawe to Mankind? Now, Iesus hath manifestly giuen this Lawe, causing it to be published by his Apostles, and their voyce sounded to the vttermost bounds of the earth. And for proof hereof, what is more conuenient and meete for man in the iudgement of conscience, than to loue God with all his heart and all his Soule; and his neighbour as himself? which yet notwithstanding doth more surmount our abilitie to performe, and more bewray our corruption, and more condemne whatsoeuer is in vs of our owne, than doth the Lawe it selfe vniuersally in all mankind. On the contrarie part▪ what find we in all the writings of the Heathen, but a Hireling vertue, and a teaching to cloke vice, that is to say Hipocrisie? But as this Lawe is verily of God, so let vs see whether the bringer thereof bee God. And I beseech all worldly wise men, not to hearken vnto mee by halues, nor to looke vpon things at a glaunce, (for I come not to daly with them:) but to yeeld mée both their eares, and to looke wistly, & to bend all their wits aduisedly: for the néerer they looke vnto y^e matter, & the more deliberatly they consider of it; the sooner will they yeeld to our doctrine, as to the vndoubted trueth, yea & as to very nature it self.

Iesus therefore is borne in the little Countrie of Iewrie subde∣wed by the Romaines,* 1.1197 of poore parents, in a sorie Uillage, destitute of friends and of all worldly helpes, and yet was he to be Empe∣rour of the whole world, to giue the Law to the whole world. Let vs see the procéeding of this Emperour & of his Empyre. Amend (sayth he) and beleeue the Gospell: for the kingdome of Hea∣uen is at hand. If we consider the maiestie of the Romaine Em∣pyre, the eloquence and learning of the great Clerks, and the pride of the Sophists and Orators of that tyme; what greater fondnesse could there be to all seeming, than to talke after that maner? Who would not haue thought folly both in Christ and in his Apostles for their preaching so? But what addeth he? Whosoeuer wil come into this kingdome, let him forsake goodes, father, moother, wife, children, yea and himselfe too. And let him take vp his Crosse and followe me. Let him thinke himself happie that he may suffer a thousand miseries for me, and that in the end he may dye for my names sake. What maner of priuiledges are these I beseech you, to drawe people into that kingdome? What a hope is it for them that serue him? What are these promises of his, but threatnings? and his perswasiōs, but disswasions? What say we to a friend whom we turne from some other man, but thus; eschewe that mans companie, for ye shall haue nothing with him but trauell and trouble? And what worse could the veriest enemies of his doctrine say, than he himselfe sayd? Also what a saying of his was this to S. Paule a man of reputation among the Pharisies, and greatly imployed afore in following y^e world? I wil shew thee how great things thou hast to indure for my names sake? And yet notwithstanding, what a sodeyne chaunge insewed, from ap∣prehending and imprisoning, to bee apprehended and imprisoned? from being a Iudge, to be whipped and scourged? from stoning of others to death, to offer himselfe from Citie to Citie to bee stoned for the name of Iesus?

Let vs heare on the contrarie part the voyce of a worldly Con∣querour.* 1.1198 Whosoeuer will followe me (sayth Cyrus to the Lace∣demonians) if he be a footman, I will make him a Horseman: if he bee a Horseman, I will giue him a Charyot: if he haue a Manor, I will giue him a Towne: if he haue a Towne, I wil giue him a Citie: if he haue a Citie, I will giue him a Countrie: and as for Gold, he shall haue it by weight, and not by tale. What ••ddes is there betwéene the spéeches of these two Monarkes, and

much more betwéene their Conquests? And therefore what com∣parison can there bee betwixt the Conquerours themselues? This Cyrus as great an Emperour as he was, could not haue the Lace∣demonians to serue him for all his great offers. But Iesus being poore, abiect, and vnregarded, did by his rigorous threats, euen af∣ter his own suffering of reprochfull death and his manacing of the like to his followers, drawe all people and Nations vnto him, and not only Souldyers, but also Emperours; nor only Cities, but al∣so whole Empyres. Cyrus dyed in conquering; and Iesus conque∣red by dying. The death of Cyrus decayed his owne kingdome, as a bodie without a soule: But the death of Iesus inlarged his king∣dome euen ouer the Empyres. And how could that haue bene, but that the death of Iesus was the life of all Empyres and all King∣domes? Who seeth not then, in the mightinesse of the one, a hu∣maine weakenesse; and in the weakenesse of the other, a diuine mightinesse? Wee woonder at the Conquests of Alexander. And why? Because that beeing but a meane King of Macedonie, he passed into Asia, and conquered it with fortie thousand men and no moe. Had he caryed a hundred thousand with him, we would haue had the lesse estimation of his deedes. But how much greater ac∣count would we haue made of him, if he had done it with halfe his number? And had he done it with the tenth man, O how we would haue wondered! And if wee made a God of him for conquering so; what diuine honor would we think sufficiēt for him now? At least∣wise who would not haue thought him, if not a God, yet (at the least) assisted with the power and might of GOD? But had these Souldiers ouercome their enemies by being beatē at their hands; had they conquered by causing themselues to bee killed; had they brought Kingdomes in obedience by submitting themselues to their Gibbets: had it not bene a cryme to haue left them vnwoor∣shipped for Gods? For if betwéene the able man and the vnable man, the skilfull and the vnskilfull, the difference bee that the vn∣skilfull can doe nothing vnlesse he haue very well and abundantly wherewith: but the skilfull can worke much vpon little, and by his cunning ouercome the awknesse of his stuffe: What is the diffe∣rence betwéene the skilfullest man and God, but that the man can of a little make somewhat, whereas God can of nothing and with∣out helpe of any thing make great things, yea and euen one con∣trary of another and by another? Which is as much to say, as that he is of infinite power, able to fill vp the infinite distance that is be∣twéene

contraries, and specially betwéene nothing and something. Now, let vs see what Iesus hath done; and let vs bring with vs the same eyes and the same reason, which wee did to the iudging and discerning of the Historie of Alexander. First, our Lord Ie∣sus was borne destitute of al worldly helps. From ten to tenthou∣sand, and from tenthousand to ten millions, men doe atteyne: but who can atteyne from nothing, to so huge a thing? He was accom∣panyed by a fewe ignorant Fishermen of grosse wit. And yet is it no small matter y^t he could cause them to giue ouer their Trade to follow him. But what Instruments were they to make Preachers to the whole world, being rather cleane contrary to such a purpose? And to incourage them, he sayes vnto them: Blessed are ye when ye indure all maner of aduersities for my names sake. This had bene enough to haue driuen them away, and yet they followe him. At length, he sendeth them of Ambassage to al Nations; And what was their message? He that taketh not vp his Crosse and followeth me, is not worthie of me. What is he that would at this day take such a charge vpon him, no though he were well re∣warded for his labour? They shall whippe you in their Synagog sayth he. Who would vndertake to deale in such a case? Specially vppon such a perswasion as this, Hee that will saue his life shall lose it? In the ende, he dyeth. And how? Crucified betwéene two Théeues. Those fewe followers of his are at their wits end. He leaueth neither Children nor kinsfolke behinde him to vpholde his sillie kingdome. The kingdome of Heauen that he had talked of, seemeth to bee buryed in the earth. What worldly kingdome had not perished in this plight? How long did the throne of Alexander reigne, notwithstanding that it was vphild with the hope of some Children, with the policie of great Capteynes, with the force of victorious Armies, and with the very terrour of his name? In the meane while, those sillie Shéepe of Christ came together, and wēt and preached to Hierusalem, and afterward to all the world. And what preached they? That Iesus had bene crucified, and that it be∣houed them to beléeue in him. If he was a man; what was more vayne? If he was a God; what was more absurd? Yet notwith∣standing, if they may haue audience, they teach men to suffer for him: if they be shut out, they will rather dye than forbeare to speake of him: and if they bee accused for it, they preach their cryme before their Iudges. Malefactors are tormented to make them tell their fault, and these are tormented to make them to conceale it. Those

hold their peace, to saue themselues from death; and these dye for speaking. Their persecutors crye out, what a miserie is this, that we cannot ouercome an old man, or a woman? what a shame is it for vs, to be more wearie of tormenting them, than they bee of the torments? Yet notwithstanding, in lesse than fortie yéeres y^e world is filled full of this doctrine, and the Countries are conquered to Iesus Christ by those fewe Disciples preaching his bludshed and sheading their owne, from Hierusalem to Spayne, yea and from Hierusalem to the Indyes. And looke by what meanes this king∣dome is founded, by the same also is it stablished, and from tyme to tyme increased and mainteyned. What man (if he knowe how farre man can extend) can attribute these things vnto man? Hée is God (sayth a wise man) which doth that which no creature can do: And who euer did such things either afore Iesus or after him? Al∣so Aristotle sayth, that of nothing can nothing bee made: that in deede is a rule in nature. But what els are these doings of Christ, but a making not only of some thing, but also of y^t greatest things, of nothing? And who can vyolate or ouercome the lawe of nature, but only he that created nature? Now God spake the word, and it was done: this surpasseth nature. But when Iesus sayth, He that doth not take vp his Crosse and followe me, is not worthie of me: to our fleshly vnderstanding it is as much as if he should say, Flee from me; and yet men followe him, and seeke him. The word (say I) which were enough to driue vs away, draweth vs vnto him: by disswading, he perswadeth vs: in turning vs away, he tur∣neth vs to him: in throwing vs downe, he setteth vs vp: and in kil∣ling vs, he maketh vs euerlasting. Who can drawe one contrarie out of another, as, the effects of water out of fire, and the effects of fire out of water; but he that made both fire and water? And who can drawe perswasion out of disswading; and conuerting out of diuerting; but he that made both the heart of the man that hearke∣neth, and the speech of the partie that speaketh? And what is the conquering of the liuing by the dying of himselfe and his; but as ye would say a working of an effect by taking away the cause? What is this subduing of the world by disarming, tying, and deliuering of himselfe; but a taking of a way contrarie to his businesse, and a choosing of instruments most cōtrarie to his working? And he that doth a thing by instruments contrarie thereunto, nay rather by such instruments as are directly hurtfull to it and can no way fur∣ther it; doth he not shew that he could do it by his only word, with∣out

other helpe? But let vs see yet more. It is against nature to make something of nothing: Here the Philosophers must stoope. It is against nature to make a thing by speaking the contrarie: Here the Orators are put to silence. What wilt thou say then, if besides all this, there bée an extreame resistance in the thing it selfe: if thou be a Phisition, in the Complexion: if thou bee a Capteyne, in the Conquest: if thou be an Orator, in the willes of men? Alex∣ander did great things with fewe men. I graunt. But if men had made head against him as they might haue done, in what case had he bin. Let vs see contrarywise what resistance men made both ge∣nerally and particulerly to shut Iesus out of y^e doores. If ye speake of force; he could scarsly preach without perill of death. His Apo∣stles could not open their lippes, but thei were by and by whipped, stoned, racked, crucyfied or burned. The cruellest Emperours, as Caligula, Nero, Domitian, and such others, wrought vpon them the chiefe déedes of their cruelties. If any of those Emperours chaunced to bee more mield, O what Iustice vsed he! Forsooth, If they bee not sedicious, (say they) let them not be sought. But come they once in Question, wherefore soeuer it be, let them not escape. I would fayne learne what sect of Philosophers in all Greece, would not haue ceassed at the least commaundement of a Magistrate. And of what trueth doe we finde any monuments of Conquests ouer all the world; but of the trueth of Iesus Christ? If ye haue an eye to policie; those that followed him were excluded from all promotions and offices: And what a hell is that to a man of an ambicious nature? Their Children were prohibited to goe to Schoole: and what was that but a cutting vp of the tree by y^e roote, if it had not growen by grace from Heauen? Also certeyne coun∣terfet Dialogs, forged concerning Pylate and Christ, full of wic∣ked lyes and blasphemies, were inioyned to bee read in Schooles, and to be conned of Children by hart, to steyne the name of Iesus, and to make it odious and lothsome to all men for euer. And what more pernicious policie could the Deuill himselfe haue deuised?

The Iewes worse than all others, (to whom notwithstanding he was promised) were false Traytors to him; and whereas they should haue preached him, they did most eagerly accuse him; inso∣muche that there scarsly came any of his Disciples into any towne, but that they made Hew and crye vppon him to murder him. Nay (which more is) in euery seuerall persone there was an inward in∣counter, and an extreame resistance ageinst this word. Yea? [sayd

men within themselues] shall I beleeue in Iesus? An abiect man? A crucified God? Shal I beleeue his Disciples, the ofscourings of the World, and the outcasts of the Iewes? Shall I beleeue in him for a two or three dayes, to leaue behind me a wretched wyfe, a reprochefull rememberance of myself, and the report of a foole too my posteritie? If the Emperours made so cruell warre ageinst this doctrine both by swoord and by their Lawes; we may well con∣iecture what Warre euery man maynteyned ageinst it in himself. And if we haue knowen what persecution is, let vs here bethink vs of the battells betwéene the flesh and the spirit; and of the lyuely and sharpe arguments which a man in that cace maketh ageinst him∣self. Notwithstanding all this, in the end whole Nations yeelded themselues to the word of those men, and euen Empyres worship∣ped Iesus Christ crucified. If weakenesse wrought this; why did not force get the vpper hand? If foly; why did not wisdome try∣umph ouer them? If manhod; why did not multitude preuayle? No surely, it was Iesus the sonne of God, who repayred the world by his spirit as God had created it at the first by his word. Cicero could not woonder ynough at Romulus, for that (sayeth he) in a time which was not rude, he had compassed so much as to be called a God. And certesse I maruell at Cicero, that he shewed himself so grosse in that behalf. For if he were called a God, who euer belee∣ued him to be so? And what was Rome at that tyme, and a long tyme after, but a rout of ignorant and silly Shepherds? But there∣by wee may deeme, what iudgment hee would haue giuen vppon Iesus. Romulus was called a God; but the Senate beleeued it not. The Senate did put the people in feare, and by that meanes made them to say it. But all the whole Empyre of Rome could not scare one Disciple from professing of Iesus. What resemblance then is there betweene them two? The same may be sayd of Alex∣ander as greate an Emperour as he was, when he made men too woorship him as God. For euen then did his army fall to mutinies, he lost his estimation, he disteyned his victories, & his owne howse∣holdseruants were contented too be beaten rather than they would knéele downe to woorship him. And asfor Caligula, Domitian, He∣liogabalus, and others, they were Laughed to skorne as long as they liued; and they were not so soone dead, but their Godheads were dragged in the myre lyke doggs, and men voutsafed them not so much as a Tumb to be buryed in. But what say yee to Ie∣sus, who being despysed all his lyfetyme, was woorshipped as God

after his death? Whose Godhead 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Disciples preache euen vp∣pon the racke, and whom the very Emperours Tiberius, and An∣toninus, and Alexander honored in their harts and woorshipped as God in their priuichambers? And in what time? Surely in the Learn eddest tyme that euer was, and in the full florishing state of knowledge in all arts, skills, and sciences: when Rhetoryk, Lo∣gicke, and all Philosophie were at their pryde; and at such time as Magik and all maner of curious seiences had their full scope and were at their hyghest pitch. If he be woorshipped for his wisdome; what a nomber of graue Senators were there at that time? If for Learning and Doctrine; what a nomber of learned men? If for Riches and parentage; how would those greate men haue yeelded to such an ofcast? If for his giltlesse death, why not others also, of so many which preached him and followed him? And why was not Gabinius woorshipped so to, being a Citisen of Rome, a man of honour, and vniustly crucified, in whose behalf Cicero vttered all the goodly eloquence that he had? Nay surely, they sawe such a chaunge in the World, so sodeine, so greate, and so vniuersall; that they could not impute it to any other thing, than to the power and operation of him that ruleth the world, whose myghty power they perceyued in Iesus.

That this so suddein turning of Nations to woorship a man;* 1.1199 of Emperours to reuerence reproche, and of wise men to haue folly (as sayeth S. Paule) in admiration, is verie true: I will take none o∣ther witnesses than themselues. We reade in Suetonius and Taci∣tus, that the name of Christ was knowen in Rome, and through∣out all Italy: For they persecuted the Christians a fresh contrarie to the custome of the Romanes; insomuch that Nero* 1.1200 made them to be put to the slaughter,* 1.1201 as if they had bin the authors of the bur∣ning of Rome, which he himself had caused to be set on fire. And we reade that in the same time, the Senate made certeyne decrées, whereby many thousands of Christians, infected with the Iewish superstition, (for so did they terme them bycause they had their ori∣ginall from the Iewes) were banished into dyuers Iles. Which thing the Senate would not haue done, (considering their ordina∣ry maner of proceeding in caces of Religion) if the hastie increase of that spirituall kingdome had not put them in feare. And within a whyle after, we see how all the Emperours were amazed at this flocking of people togither vnto thē, for counsel how to extinguish that doctrine; and how fires were kindled ageinst them on all sides;

and yet how Nations neuerthelesse were shaken at the voice of the Apostles, and the verie Courts of Princes with their Legions of Souldyers, were made to inclyne vnto Christ. Sufficient witnes∣ses whereof be the Lawes of that age; wherein it was inacted that the Swoordgirdle of a Souldyer should not bee worne of any Christian: that they should not beare any office or haue any charge in the Court, and such other. And Vlpian the Lawyer did himself write fower bookes ageinst the christians. And truely we reade that a greate many gaue ouer their charges, rather than thei would for∣sake the Christen fayth. Moreouer in the tyme of Marcus Aureli∣us,* 1.1202 there was a Legion that was called the Legion of Malta, which was altogither of Christians; of which Legion hee witnesseth in a certeine Epistle of his,* 1.1203 that being vpon a time brought to vtter dis∣tresse by the Marcomanes, this Legion obtayned by prayer beth Thunder from Heauen ageinst the enemie, and Rayne wherewith to refresh the whole army, whereupon that Legion was afterward called the Thunderer. And therefore saieth Tertullian* 1.1204 in his Apo∣logie, If as many of vs as be Christians should get vs away into some corner of the world; ye would woonder to see how feaw people ye should haue remayning to you, & ye should be fayne to seeke other Cities to commaund; or rather you to flee away out of hand and too hyde yourselues; for yee should haue mo enemyes than Citizens left ye. We haue filled now whole Ci∣ties, Ilands and Castles; Counselles, Palaces, and Courtes; Trybes, Legions, and Armyes. What warre were we not able inough to vndertake, if we listed? And what is it that we might not bring to passe, dying so manfully and so willingly as wee do? Nay, the Lawe of our warre teacheth vs to dye, and not to kill. Now what kingdome euer had so greate increase, in so short tyme? But (which is a greater matter) what a thing is it to van∣quish by yeelding, to be furthered by retyring, and to conquer by dying? We reade of the Emperour Tiberius, that vppon a letter written to him from Pilate reporting the miracles of Iesus,* 1.1205 his giltlesse death, and his rysing agein from the dead; he preferred a bill to the Senate with his assent vnto it, to haue had them pro∣clayme Iesus to bee God; and that the Senate refused it, because they themselues were not the authors thereof; but that Tyberius abode still in his opinion. And therevpon Tertullian sayth, Goe looke vpon your Registers and the Acts of your Senate:* 1.1206 Also Vespasian the scourge of the Iewes, forbare the Christians: and

Traiane moderate the persecution, vpon the report of their inno∣cencie made vnto him by Plinie.* 1.1207 Marcus Aurelius hauing felt the helpe of their prayers did the like. Likewise did Antonine,* 1.1208 but to another end: namely, because that (as he himselfe writeth in an e∣pistle of his) persecution did stablish the Church of the Chri∣stians. To bee short, Alexander* 1.1209 the sonne of Mammea, did in his Chappell worship Iesus surnamed Christ, of whom also he tooke his* 1.1210 Poesie, and therefore the Antiochians called him the Arch∣priest of Syria. And it is reported that for Christs sake, the Empe∣rour Adrian builded many Temples without Images. Finally, the good Emperours of Rome, Vespasian, Adrian, Traiane, An∣tonine the méeke and such others, had Christ in estimation and al∣lowed of the Christians. But how farre? Surely as to acknow∣ledge in their hearts that they were good and honest men, and that Iesus had more in him than was of Man. But yet for all this, If they be accused, (say these good Emperours) let them bee pu∣nished; if not, let them not be sought. This is a good proofe and allowance of their innocencie: but surely it is but a slender reléefe for them. Contrarywise, the wicked Emperours Nero, Domi∣tian, Valerian, Commodus, Maximine, Decius, and such others, condemned them, and by their condemning of them did iustifie them. For what did they euer allowe, but euill? But what maner of condemning is this? Kill all, burne all, yea whole Cities, haue no respect of sex, of age, or of qualitie. Scarcely had the Christians any breathingtime, but a new counterbuffe came vpon thē againe▪ they were no sooner from the torture, but they must too it againe. And yet God did so rule all things by his prouidence, to the intent the whole glorie in this misterie should redound to himself, that the mield dealing of the good Emperours did in déede iustifie y^e trueth, but yet durst they not aduaunce or further it: whereas on the con∣trary part, the malice of the other sort condemned it and persecuted it to the vttermost, but yet could they not destroye it. To be short, in fewe yéeres there passed ten horrible persecutions vppon that poore Church; and yet in the end the Emperours themselues sub∣mitted themselues to the Crosse of Christ, and their Empyres sought their welfare there. Therefore we may alwaies come back to this poynt, That he, yea only he which first created the world of nothing, when there was not yet any thing to withstand him; is a∣ble to recouer the world from Sathan and to subdue it to himself, without the helpe of any thing, euen by instruments repugnant to

him, and in despight of the whole world bending itself ageinst him.

But what will ye say if he subdue, not onely men,* 1.1211 but also their Gods? not only the world, but also the Souereynes of the world; I meane the Diuels which at that time held the world vnder their tyrannie? Let vs reade the Histories of the Greekes & Romanes that were afore the comming of Christ; and what shall wee find in them, but the Myracles and Oracles of Diuels? What els haue Varro, Cicero, Titus Liuius and such others among the Ro∣manes; or Herodotus, Diodorus, Pausanias and the residewe a∣mong the Greekes? On the contrarie part we see, that euen euer since Christ was borne and preached (the world hath chaunged his hewe. Iesus was borne vnder the Emperour Augustus,* 1.1212 and see here what Apollo answereth vnto him.

An Hebrew Child which daunteth with his powre The blessed Gods,* 1.1213 doth straightly mee commaund To get mee hence to Hell this present howre; Therefore of mee no Counsell now demaund.

Wherevpon Augustus erected an Altar in the Capitoll, with this inscription vppon it; The Altar of the first begotten Sonne of God.

And Cicero sayth that the Oracles whose answers he had so di∣ligently registred in his bookes, did ceasse in his tyme: And Iuue∣nall* 1.1214 reporteth the same of the Oracle of Delphos by name, how∣beit that he beareth vs on hand, that Kings did put them to silence, who in deede were most inquisitiue to hane them speake. Likewise Strabo sayth that the Priestes of Delphos were brought to beg∣gerie by it. But Lucane giues this generall report of all the Gods of the Romanes.

The Gods by whom this Empyre stoode, abandon euerychone Their Temples, Shrynes, and Sacrifice, and leaue vs now alone.

Also Celsus the Epicure sayth, that the Oracles of Claros, Del∣phos, and Dodon were striken dumbe. And Iulian the Renegate writing ageinst the Christians, confesseth and witnesseth the same of the Oracles of AEgipt. Yea and Porphirius himselfe (for I alledge none heere but the deadly enemyes of Christ) rehearseth these verses of Apollo.

Alas ye Treuets, moorne with mee; Apollo now is gone, Gone quite & cleane; the heauenly light compelles me to be gone. Ioue was, Ioue is, and Ioue shalbe; O Ioue, now welaway; The light of all myne Oracles doth fayle mee now for ay.

And vnto y^e Priest y^t asked him the last Oracle, he answered thus.

Vnhappy Preest, inquire no more of mee The outtermost and last, concerning the Deuine Begetter, or the onely decre Beloued Sonne of that most mightie King. Nor of his Spirit which vpholdeth all Both Mountaines, Earth, Brookes, Seas, Hell, Aire, & Fyre Now wo is mee: For sore ageinst my will, That spirit driues mee from this house of myne; So that this Chappell where I prophesie, Shall out of hand be left quyte desolate.

Also being inforced by charmes and Coniurations, he sayd againe as it were for a solemne Farewell;* 1.1215

The Pythonesse shall neuer now her voyce hencefoorth recouer. Long tract of tyme hath withered her: The souereine power a∣boue her Hath lokt her vnder silence fast, so as she can no more Now vtter any prophesie; which greeueth her full sore. But you according to your woont, such sacrifices still To Phoebus offer, as are meete for men to God to kill.

To be short, Plutarke* 1.1216 hath made a booke of purpose, intytled why Oracles haue ceassed. But in the end he commeth to this poynt, That the spirites which had the managing of those Oracles, are mortall, and that by their deathes their Oracles ceassed, whereas notwithstanding he commonly vpholdeth that all spirites are im∣mortall; but in déede he should haue sayd that they were shut vp as in a Iayle. Herevpon he rehearseth at length a notable story of one Epitherses, who sayling néere the Vrchinyles, heard (and al those that were in the Ship with him) a certeine voyce comming from one of those Iles, which bade them declare that the great Pan was dead, And he telleth that after this voyce followed an vnspeakle sighing, and lamentations without nomber. Which storie (sayth he) was reported to Tiberius then Emperour; who beeing desi∣rous to knowe the trueth of the matter, enquired very earnestly the opinions of all the Philosophers, What that great Pan should be. Now let vs marke that this was done in y^e reigne of Tiberius, vnder whome Christ was crucified, and that this Pan was one of the chéef Idols of the Heathen, as appéereth by this his Oracle in the bookes of Borphiryus.

The Goldenhorned Pan which serues the grizly Bacchus, stalks Among the Moūtaines clad with woods, & keepes his wonted walks.

In déede Apollo andswered vnto Diocletian, that The Rightu∣ous made him dumb; and the Priest told Diocletian, that by the Rightuous he meant the Christians. Wherevpon Diocleti∣an fell to persecuting them. Also the same Apollo told Iulian (who would néedes waken him vp ageine by Coniurations) that hee could say nothing till he had first remoued the bones of Babylas a Martyr of Christs away, which were an impediment to him; which is as much to say, as he could not opē his mouth, but to pronounce the sentence of condemnation against himselfe. And therefore, It is no maruell (sayth Porphyrius* 1.1217) though our Cities bee smitten with the plague, seeing that Esculapius & the rest of the Gods are put so farre from them. For since the tyme that Iesus hath bene worshigped, we haue taken no benefite by any of all our Gods. Then let this great Philosopher tell me, whether Iesus be a Man, and they Gods or no? What maner of Gods are those, which shrinke away at the presence of a Man? and what a man is he, that maketh Goddes to hide their heads? Nay further, what a man is he whose Disciple commaundeth their Maisters, & whose seruant commaundeth their Gods? Will ye sée how it is the name of Iesus whereat they tremble, and which they shun? Loe herr the tryail whereto the Christians submit themselues before the Gen∣tyles. Let a man (saith Tertullian* 1.1218) that is possessed in deed with a Deuill, bee brought before your Iudgmentseate; and at the commaundement of the meanest Christian, the Spirit shall speake, and confesse himselfe to be an vncleane Spirit. Let one of those folke be brought whom you thinke to be inspyred of a God; be it the same God that promiseth you rayne, or beeit Esculapius that playeth the Phisition among you. If hee dare lye before a Christian, or if hee confesse not himselfe to bee a Deuill; take the Christian to bee presumptuous, and let him dye for it out of hand. Now, none will speake his owne shame, but rather that which may sound to his honour. Surely they will not tell ye that Iesus is a deceiuer, or of the cōmon stamp of men, or that he was stolne out of his graue, as hath bin re∣ported vnto you: but that he is the power, the wisedome, and the word of God; that he sitteth in heauen, and that he shall come to iudge vs; and on the contrary part, that themselues bee Deuilles damned for their naughtinesse, and wayting for his dreadfull doome; and that is because that being afrayd of Christ in God, and of God in Christ, they yeeld to God and

Christ, and to the seruants of God and Christ. If Tertullians saying be true, what els is this, but that Iesus commandeth them as slaues, yea euen by his seruants? Or if it be false, how easie had it bene for the Heathen to haue giuen him the foyle, by putting the matter in proof? And why did they not put y^e Christians to shame, in the open face of the world? Nay (sayth Lactantius) when they offered sacrifice to their Goddes, the presence of a Christian would haue dashed their misteries: and therevpon came vp this spéech which we reade in Lucian:* 1.1219 If there be any Christian here, let him get him hence. And whē they asked any question of their Gods, their spéech fayled them: and it was as easie for a Christian to driue Apollo out of his Priest or Pythonesse, as to driue a De∣uill out of one that was possessed. And Iulian himselfe (as Zosi∣mus dareth not denye) found by proofe in his Magical works, how weake his Gods were, and how strong Christ is. Moreouer, some curious Princes haue by their Magicians caused Iupiter, Nep∣tune, Vulcane, Mercurie, Apollo, and Saturne himself, that is to say, the Deuilles that decked themselues with their names) to ap∣peare: which thing they could neuer cause Christ to do, with all the Coniurations that they had: and that is because all those Gods of theirs were Deuilles, ouer whom good men haue power by com∣maunding them in the name of GOD, and euill men by pleasing them. But as for Iesus Christ the very sonne of God, he stoopeth not to any creature, but is serued by Angelles and good men as by his Seruants, and by Deuils and wicked men as by his Slaues.

Also at the same tyme that Iesus came, there was scarsly any Countrie in the world, where these Deuilles had not men offered ordinarily vnto them in Sacrifice, as we vnderstand by Porphy∣rius himselfe, and as I haue declared heretofore. But in the reigne of Tyberius, they were forbidden in Affricke, and the Priests that Sacrificed them were hanged vp in their hallowed Groues. And vnder the Emperour Adrian all Sacrifices and all Idolles were abolished almost euerywhere. And therfore sayth S. Austin to the people of Medaure; See how your Temples are partly decayed for want of reparation, and partly shut vp, and partly altered to another vse.* 1.1220 To worship your Idols, you haue put the Chri∣stians to death; & the Christians by their dying haue cast your Idols downe to the ground. And in another place he cryeth out; where be your Gods, where be your Prophets, where be your Oracles, your Bowelgazings and your Sacrifices? And we reade

not of any that reprooued him of vntrueth; notwithstanding that many (and among them one Zosimus) bewayleth y^e decay of them; and yet doth not any of them step foorth for him, to shewe any re∣maynder of them. And whereas Iulian sayth, As our Oracles are ceassed, so also be your Prophets: Let him first shewe vpon what cause his Oracles are ceassed, which many haue sought and none yet found. As for ours, they had an eye to Christ, and amed at him as their marke: and now that he is come, the office of the messen∣ger ceasseth in the presence of the maister, and the representing of saluation by Sacrifices ceasseth, because the Saluation it selfe is come.

Iesus therefore hath ouercome both the world and the Prince of the world,* 1.1221 by a force (in outward showe) cleane contrarie to all victorie, and by a way contrarie to the end that he intended; that is to wit by his word, which to the sight of the world is folly & féeble∣nesse. Let vs see now how in his workes he passeth all the abilitie of al Creatures, according to this saying of his, The works which I doe, doe beare witnesse of me. And soothly it is a myracle that so many people haue beléeued at the preaching of the Apostles: but a farre more wonder that so fewe folke in these our daies should re∣gard it, though Iesus Christ and his Apostles had neuer wrought other myracle than that, as I haue often sayd afore. But that they wrought very great myracles besides, I see fewe of the Heathen that dare denye it; and against the Iewes I haue sufficiently pro∣ued it alreadie. Wee haue a Letter of Pylats, wherein he witnes∣seth that Iesus gaue sight to the blynd, cleansed Leapers, healed them that were diseased with the Palsey, deliuered men from De∣uilles, ouerruled the waters, raysed the dead, and rose againe him∣selfe after he had bene dead thrée daies. Also our Diuines of olde tyme say vnto the Heathen, Reade your owne Commentaries, and search your Registers, & you shal finde there the myracles of Iesus. And the Emperour Iulian speaking of him in skorne, sayth thus; What hath this Iesus done worthie of memorie or of any account in all his life; sauing that he cured a fewe blynd and lame men, and deliuered some from Deuils that possessed them, in the Villages of Bethsaida and Bethania? To be short, as well the Turkes as the Iewes confesse and commend his my∣racles; and the Emperours would neuer haue estéemed of him, if it had not bin for his myracles. Apollo himself in his Oracles called him 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that is to say, The wise in won∣derfull

workes. But let vs take Iulian at his word, and his con∣fession will bee enough. Put the case that he had done no more but cured the blynd, and that he had cured no moe than one. Who is so blynd, that in this healing of the blynd, seeth not this singuler po∣wer of God? Is not the eyesight one of the excellentest substances in the world? And what is the restoring of sight, but the restoring of a substance? and what is the restoring thereof, but a newe crea∣ting therof, euen of nothing? And what can make a substance (how small soeuer it bee) of nothing, but an infinite power? The which who can haue, but the only one God? or who can be the instrument or disposer thereof, but only he that pleaseth God? To be briefe, is he not without the bounds of nature, which can create a substance? And whence hath he then that power, but from the maker of na∣ture, at leastwise if he be not the maker himself? But our Lord Ie∣sus wrought infinite myracles, as the Iewes that sawe them haue witnessed and doe witnesse still; and not only he, but also his Apo∣stles;* 1.1222 and not onely his Apostles, but also their Disciples. And in deede they haue contriued certeyne bookes vnder the name of Ie∣sus, as dedicated by him to Peter and Paule, conteyning an Arte of working Myracles; by likelihood because they had seene them pain∣ted together, howbeit that Paule (as is well knowen) kept not cō∣panie with Christ while hee liued in the flesh, but persecuted his Disciples a good while after. And S. Paule sayth expresly, that he himselfe came in signes and myracles: wherein if he lyed, it was an easie matter to disproue him. Againe, Christ wrought some such myracles, as Iulian being vnable to denye, falleth to rayling and reuyling him, calling him the greatest Magician that euer was in the world. And of Saint Peter, they report that by his Magick he made the Christian Religion durable for the space of thréehundred thréescore and fiue yeres, and that he did it without the priuitie and consent of Iesus. Whence rise these great slaunders, but of the greatnesse of the workes of Christ and his Disciples? And if they had not done both great and manifest myracles; had not the shortest way bene to haue denyed them? But let vs consider of what spirit these contrarieties procéede. Iesus (say they) did dedicate a booke to Peter and Paule: and Paule was a persecuter at that time and long time after. Likewise, Peter (say they) stablished Religion without the priuitie and consent of Iesus: and how then had he learned it of him? To be short, if there bee any such bookes, why doe they not shewe them? If they be good, why should they hyde them? If they

bee euill, why estéeme they him wise? Or if they bee effectuall, why doe they not put them in practise? As touching this poynt, I haue answered the Iewes alreadie. But let vs come to the matter a∣gaine. Magicke neuer florished more in Princes Courts, than in the tyme of the Apostles. Why did not some bodie step foorth to vanquish them or to conuict them? Denis and Origen were great Philosophers; and Origen was the Disciple of Ammonius, & fel∣lowdisciple to Plotin, that is so greatly allowed & so highly com∣mended amōg them. Were these men such as would suffer them∣selues to bee led with illusions; or attribute that to Gods speciall working, which depended vppon nature? Specially Origen who had bene trayned vp in Platoes Philosophie, and at that tyme pro∣fessed Magicke, as well the naturall by the consent of dispositions in things, as the deuilish which they call Theurgie by entering in∣to fellowship and compact with Spirits? Iulian also, (who to con∣found the myracles of Iesus, did what he could to reuiue Magicke by the help of Iamblichus and Maximus) did he euer cure a blind man, or make a lame man goe? Nay, what got he by it, but gastly feare, such as serued not to heale mens diseases, but to driue him∣selfe out of his wits? As for those which attribute the Myracles wrought by the Christians, to a strong and forcible imagination so vehemently fixed and fast set in the beléefe that Iesus is God, that it doth things wonderfull to our mortall nature: therein they followe the opinion of Auicen, who attributeth vnto fantasie or i∣magination, the operations that seeme to excéede nature.* 1.1223 If it bée so, I would fayne haue these good Philosophers tell mée, if of so many phantasticall Arabians as haue bent their whole force to i∣magination all their liues long, they can name me one that hath wrought any myracle? And of them all, who should rather haue done it, than the author of this imagination? Also say they, whe∣ther of these hath the greater force? an abilitie that is bred in vs, or a qualitie that doth but come into vs? fire as it is in it selfe, or as it is in a thing that it hath heated? Now, these Philosophers worke (as they thinke) by imagination applyed to naturall things, which imagination is an abilitie bred in man by nature: But the Chri∣stians (say they) worke by an imagination or perswasion that they haue concerning Christ, which imagination is not naturall, but commeth from without. Why then did not these Philosophers worke myracles in naturall things, yea and more euident than the myracles of the Christians.

As touching Prophesying,* 1.1224 which holdeth a verie hygh place a∣mong miracles; and is much lesse subiect to the wrangling of So∣phisters; Phlegon the Emperour Adrians Freedman, confesseth in the thirteenth and fourteenth bookes of his Chronicles, (con∣founding neuerthelesse S. Peter with Christ) that things to come were knowen to Iesus; and he witnesseth though with an ill will, that all the things which he had foretold were come to passe accor∣dingly in euery poynt. And this kynd of miracles of his cannot be denyed, specially at this day. For in our Gospells wee reade his foretellings, and in the Histories of the Heathen we reade the ful∣filling of them. What will ryse then of all this? Uerily that Iesus hath conuerted the World by the bare Preaching of his Apostles, and by his owne only word; and that is, of nothing to make greate things. This woord considered in itself, could not but turne men away from him: and that is a drawing of an effect out of his con∣trarie. The diuells hid themselues away at the voyce of his Ser∣uants: and that is a power surmounting the power of man and An∣gell. He not only made the Creatures obedient to his becke, but also created new substances of many sorts and at many tymes: And this could not be but by a power that was diuine in deede.

But now omitting that such things depend vppon God alone;* 1.1225 if the Lord Iesus had wrought by the Prince of the diuells, [as hee was slaunderously reported to haue done,] would he haue preached innocencie and holynesse of lyfe, reuerence towards God, charitie towards our neybour, yea and that both in word & déede? For who could euer find fault in his conuersation? And seeing that the Gods of the heathen were diuels (as I haue proued afore); would he haue ouerthrowen their Idolls, beaten downe their Altars, abolished their Sacrifises, shut vp their Temples, and stopped the mouthes of the diuells themselues? Or if they were Gods, as the heathen reported them to be; were they not goodly Gods, that would flee away for the diuell, and rank Traytors to the souereine God, that would forsake their places, and cast away their armour and weapon so cowardly? Or if (as the suttlest and cankeredest sort of them do say) the diuel thought himself more woorshipped in Iesus and more serued by his alone ageinst the glorie of God, than by all the serui∣ces that had gone afore; (wherein notwithstanding I appeale to their owne consciences whether thei speake as thei thinke): would God (think you) haue giuen his spirit, and committed his power to the diuell or to the diuells instrument, too procure obedience and

seruice to the diuell? Specially séeing that our Lord Iesus did such things as surmounted the nature power & reache of all creatures, and which could not bee done but by or from the Creator himself? Nay, séeing that God is altogither good; what a blasphemie were it? And séeing he is altogither wise, what an absurditie were it? And seeing he is our father, what a contrarietie were it? And séeing he doeth all things to his owne glorie, how should hee further his enemie, specially an enemy that laboreth by al meanes he can to be∣reue him of his glorie? Surely therefore the woorking of Iesus was from God and for Gods glorie; insomuch that neither he nor any of his Disciples, did euer speake vnto vs of any other thing; and therefore God himself reuenged his death, both vppon Herod that had persecuted him, and vppon the Iewes which had betrayed him (accordingly as hee had foretold them) and also vppon Pilate which had condemned him: and lykewise vppon the Neroes, do∣mitians, Valerians, Maximies, Diocletians and such others as had persecuted his Disciples; the end of all whom cryeth and pro∣claymeth with open and loud voyce, Take warning at vs to deale iustly and to feare God. Nay further, this Iesus woorking mani∣festly by the power of God, telleth vs playnly that he was the sonne of GOD, that the father was in him and he in the father, and that both of them were one. Also he did oftentymes of his owne authori∣tie commaund nature as Lord thereof, and cause men too woorship him as God, euen among the Iewes who abhorred nothing more than a straunge God. On the other side the Prophets of old tyme which Prophesied of him, wrought miracles also, howbeit by cal∣ling vppon the name of God; and lykewise the Apostles that prea∣ched him, howbeit in his name: and all they refused the honor that was offered them, and rent their garmenes when men honored them, acknowledging themselues alwayes to be but his seruants and instrumēts of his glorie. And had he not bin the sonne of God; surely in so saying he had not bin Gods seruant, but his enemie, and a rank rebell and Traytor and whatsoeuer woorse is if any can bee worse, and consequently vnder the extreme wrath of the creator, as a persone puffed vp with passing pryde, which is the cause both of mans falling from his state, and of the diuells condemnation at Gods hand. Therefore let vs say that Iesus is the Sonne of God as he himself hath told vs, and that we ought to here him, to yeld vn∣to him, to followe him, and to woorship him as God, I meane God and man, the only Mediator of mankynd, who dyed for our sinnes

and rose ageine to make vs ryghtuouse; to whom be glory for euer and euer.

Amen.

The xxxiij. Chapter.

A Solution of the Obiections of the Heathen ageinst Ie∣sus, the Sonne of God.

SUrely by those feawe things which the Hea∣then of old time eyther listed or durst speake of Iesus, euen at such tyme as it was an offence not only too speake well, but also euen not too speake euill of him; we sée well that he did put al the Philosophers to their Clergy; so as thei wist not which way to turne them. In his lyfe they could find no ••lanie;* 1.1226 of his doctrine thei knew not what to say; and asfor his power, they could not denie it for shame. All the shift they had, was but to say he was a greate man, full of godlynes and vertue, and woonderfull to all men: but that his Disciples did him wrong to call him God, séeing that neither he nor his Apostles had euer affirmed him so to be. But let those that dout hereof, reade S. Iohn, and they shall find in dyuers places, that no man hath told vs more playnly that Iesus was God, than Iesus himself; God (say I) the euerlasting sonne of God, sent downe from Heauen, equall with the father, and all one with the father. Their so saying was to auoyd the force of this argument of ours when we say, he could not do such things but from GOD; therefore he was not an enemy to God.* 1.1227 But he had euidently bin so, if he had conueyed Gods glorie to himself and called himself God not being so in déeed; Therefore it followeth that séeing he himself said he was God, he is so in déede; and that our worshipping of him, is a worshipping of the very true God. Herevpon it is that the Philosopher Longinian in an epistle of his to S. Austin sayeth, that he could not wel tel what to déeme of Iesus. And asfor Plotine, he impugneth not so much the Christi∣ans, as the Gnostiks and Manichies. And Porphyrius who fell away from Christ bycause hee had bin reproued by the Churche, sayeth thus; It is a greate matter that the Godds themselues

should witnesse with Iesus, that he was a man of singular god∣lgnes, and that for the same hee is rewarded with blessed im∣mortalitie: But in this the Christians ouershoore themselues, that they call him God. And Apollo being asked of one how hée myght with••rawe his wife from Christiani••te, answered; Thou mayst sooner fly in the ayre or wayte in water, than drawe her away from that. So strong was Christ in conuerting men too him, to haue nothing but aduersitie in this lyfe; and so far to weake were the Deuils to turne them away from him, though they pro∣mised them all maner of good. And here wee may not forget a sub∣tile tricke of the Deuill, worthie to bee noted in many of his Ora∣cles alledged by Porphyrius. For commonly in the wynding vp of them, he euer commended the Iewes, as worshippers of the on∣ly GOD, and for that they continued deadly enemies to Iesus Christ, against whose Godhead they made what resistance they could, howbeit altogether in vayne.

As touching the Turkes,* 1.1228 Mahomet sayth, That Gods spirit was a helpe and a witnesse to Iesus the Sonne of Marie: That the Soule of God was giuen vnto him: That he is the messenger, the Spirit, and the word of GOD: That his doctrine is perfect: That it inlighteneth the old Testament: and that he came to con∣firme the same. But that he should be God, and specially the sonne of God, that he denyeth: and yet it is not possible that he should be either the Spirit or the Word of God, but he must also bee God, considering that in God there cannot be any thing imagined to be which is not GOD himselfe: and that in the same doctrine which Mahomet himselfe doth so greatly allowe, our Lord Iesus affir∣meth himselfe to be God, and the Sonne of God. But let vs heare further of the Obiections which the Infidelles make, why they should not receiue Christ for God.

What so great thing (sayth Iulian* 1.1229) hath your Iesus done, that hee may bee compared with Socrates, Lycurgus, or Alexander? Nay surely may we say, and vpon better ground, what haue they all three done and put them together, that is comparable to the do∣ings of an Apostle of Iesus? Socrates (sayth Iulian) was an In∣nocent: but yet an ydolater.* 1.1230 A teacher and patterne of Morall ver∣tue: but yet (as his owne Porphyrie reporteth) leacherous and a louer of women; and so cholericke in his anger, that he spared not to say any thing were it neuer so wrong. Yet dyed he for the trueth of the onely God: but he had serued false Gods al his life long, and

euen at his death he made vowes still vnto them. And let not Iu∣lian boast here, that his doctrine continued after his death. For the Athenians acquitted him and honored him anon after: whereas open warre was mainteined against the Apostles & their doctrine, by the space of thrée hundred yéeres together. And yet in as great reputation as Socrates was after his death, his Disciple Plato durst scarce be so bold as to speake against the Gods. Such there∣fore were their examples of good behauiour, as these be. One Cy∣mon was an honest man, but yet giuen to Incest. Aristides was an vncorrupt man, but •• robber of the common treasure and am∣bicious. The Catoes were reformers of disorders in youths, but yet adulterers and murtherers themselues. But as for Iesus and his Apostles, what enemie of theirs was euer so past shame, as to carpe their conuersation? And if the forerehearsed men were so farre of from common honestie, euen by the record of them that had them in chiefe estimation: how much further of were they from be∣ing Gods, yea or from resembling them?

In Lycurgus* 1.1231 (to Iulians seeming) there was some singulari∣tie. The people were so rude and headstrong that they put out one of his eyes as he was proclayming his Lawes: and yet notwith∣standing those Lawes bare sway in Lacedemon many hundred yéeres after. But Iulian must remember also, that the Phrasians being next neighbours to Lycurgus, and his confederates & com∣panyons in armes, would not admit them; and that the Lacede∣monians themselues corrected them while he was yet aliue: vpon the report whereof he dyed out of hand for pride, greef, & disdeyne. But what comparison is there betweene Sparta and the whole world? betwéene dying for disdeyne to see his Lawes corrected, and dying willingly to correct the Lawes of all the world?

What will he tell vs now of Alexander?* 1.1232 He had a great Hoste and power of men: so much the more weaker was he of himselfe. Iesus was despised and full of infirmitie: so much the greater is his mightinesse and honor. Alexander vanquished the Persians in Battell: how much more commendable had it bene, if he had done it with a blast of his mouth? If he had liued, he would haue con∣quered the whole world: how much more honorable had it bene, if he had tryumphed ouer the world by dying? Alexander increased his kingdome by oppressing; and Iesus by yéelding. Alexander by killing, and Iesus by dying. But Alexanders Empyre decayed by his death; whereas the kingdome of Iesus was both founded

and stablished by the death of himself and his. The difference ther∣fore betwixt them is as great, as is betwixt him that dyeth and him that quickeneth; or betwéene him that of all maketh a thing of nothing, and him which of nothing maketh all things. To bee short, if ye looke for vertue; A man that excelled in vertue, was in old tyme a wonder. The Philosophers themselues (sayth Corne∣lius Nepos) condemned themselues in their owne teachings. But after the tyme that Iesus was once preached, what a number of men, women, and euen children, in Towne and Countrie, yea and in Wildernesses, taught vertue to the world by their example? If ye require rightuousnesse; what were the first Christians but tea∣chers of equitie, of vncorruptnesse, and of vprightnesse. Yea what enemie of theirs doe wee finde, that once openeth his mouth to ac∣cuse them? If ye seeke the despising of death; in déede they make a great a doe of one Zeno an Eleate, for spitting out his Tongue at a Tyrant, least he might confesse what the Tyrant demaunded: and likewise of one Leena a woman of Athens, that indured all maner of torments without vttering one word. If this be so great a matter; what a thing is it, that in one age, ye shal haue whole mil∣lions of all fexes, of all ages, of all states degrées and conditions, go willingly and ioyfully to death: insomuch that the Historiogra∣pher Arrianus, makes a generall rule of it, That all Christians made in effect no account of death? not to conceale any fault of theirs, as those others did, who had leuer to haue suffered tormēts than to haue dyed: but for professing the thing openly before all people, which they had learned of God, as folke that would haue thought themselues vnworthie to liue, if they had hild their peace. To bee short, what Disciples, what Subiects, what Souldyers had Socrates, Lycurgus, or Alexander in all their life, that came any thing nigh this? these (I say) which were taught, ruled, and trayned vp by Iesus euen after he was departed hence, and by his Apostles which were rude, ignorant, and weake as long as he was conuersant with them, yea and euen at the very tyme of his death?

Besides this notable alteration,* 1.1233 I sayd also that at that tyme the seruing of Idols ceassed in all places at once. Are they (thinke you) so voyd of wit as to say, that the ceassing thereof in so many places, in so notable maner, and in so great geynstriuings; happe∣ned by chaunce? And must it not be that those Gods were made in great haste, which had perished by so sodeine chance? No say they: it came to passe by a Constellation (that is to say, I wote not what

a méeting together) of the Starres in the Skye. Let vs examin•• this Astrologie a little. They suppose, (and it is a cōmon opinion) that according to the diuersitie of Images in the Skye, there are also diuers Religions and diuers Goddes in diuers Nations; and therefore they deuide the world into seauen Clymates, and vn to euery Clymate they allot a seuerall Planet to haue the rule of it. But how wil they answer to Bardesanes the Syrian, who (as they themselues cannot denye) was the wisest of all the Chaldees?* 1.1234 Ye part the world (sayth he) into seauen Clymates, euery Clymate to bee gouerned by a Planet, and what a number of Nations are vnder euery Clymate? In euery Nation, what a number of Shyres? In euery Shyre what a sort of Townes? All which doe differ both in Lawes, in Gods, and in Religions; and that, not only according to the number of the twelue Signes, or of the sixe and thirtie faces only, but in infinite sorts. In India vnder one selfesame Clymat some eate mans flesh, and some eate no flesh at all: some worship Idols, and othersome admit none at all. Againe, ths Magusians (carie them whether soeuer ye will) are giuen to Incest after the custome of their Moothercoūtry Persia from whence they descend: And the Iewes being dis∣persed ouer all the world, alter not their Religion nor their maner of life wheresoeuer ye bestow them. To be short, a Na∣tion departing out of one Clymate, carieth new Goddes and newe Lawes into another Clymate, and yet the Clymate nei∣ther troubleth nor hindereth the doing thereof. What vertue haue the Clymats or the Signes ouer Lawes and Religions: the differences whereof are made by Forrestes, Riuers and Moun∣taynes, which are the bounds of Iurisdictions; rather thā by them? And which they are brought into againe euen in despite of them, by men, by custome, and by conquest? And in good sooth, whereof commeth it that in the Countries where Venus, Mercurie, and Saturne were worshipped in old time; the Gods are now abolished quite and cleane, & yet the signes are still in the same places where they were afore? And whereof commeth it that the Iewish Lawe beeing banished and vtterly rooted out of their owne Countrie, continueth vnder all Clymates still? How happeneth it that the Religion of Mahomet is now, where the Christian Religion was in tyme past? and the Christian is now, where sometyme were the bluddy Altars of Saturne and Mars, and in some places many and contrarie Religions together?

For the saluing of this absurditie, they runne into another. Not the Clymates in very déede (say they) doe make the differences in Religion, but the great Cōiunctions of the Planets: and yet euen about this poynt they bee at great oddes among themselues. For some say that the great Coniunctions of Iupiter and Saturne and none other,* 1.1235 do dispose of Religion. Others say that properly Iupi∣ter betokeneth Religion, and that after as he is accompanied, so bringeth he foorth the diuersities of them; as for example, accom∣panyed with Saturne, the Iewish; with Mars, the Chaldee; with the Sunne, the AEgiptian; with Venus, the Mahometane; with Mercurie, the Christian; and with Luna, the Antichristian; and that there cannot be aboue sixe of them. If I should aske both of them a reason, or an experience of their saying, I doubt which of them would be most graueled. But because I will shewe my selfe more indifferent, I require first that they agree among themselues, to tell mee which is a great Coniunction, which is a meane one, and which is a small one: for as yet they varie vppon that poynt. And likewise whether the nineth house or the seuenth house is the house of Religion. Herewithall I would haue them to set me downe the beginnings of the great Coniunctions, that they might iump with the originall springings vp of Religious and with the chaunges of them: which thing they haue not hetherto done. Thirdly, if Re∣ligion depend vppon the Coniunction of the Planets; let them tell me whither vpō the ceassing of those Coniunctions, the Religions shall not ceasse also, or at leastwise anon after, as light fayleth by the going away of the Sunne: and wherevppon it commeth then that the Christian, the Iewish, and the Heathen Religions haue continued so many hundred yéeres, seeing there was neuer any A∣strologer that once dreamed that a Cōiunction should last so long? Fourthly, what greate Con••unction bred the doctrine of Iesus Christ, seeing there was neuer any chaunge in Religion, so great, so vniuersall, so speedie, nor so durable; and yet euen by their owne confession, there was not at that tyme nor neere about that tyme, any Coniunction either great or small that could be perceiued. To be short, if only Iupiter & Saturne be the authors of such chaunge; which of them maketh the difference in Religions? If Iupiter make the diuersities of them according as he is accompanyed, how happeneth it that there bee so many and so sundrie sorts of Reli∣gions, seeing it was sayd afore that there can bee no mo than sixe? Againe, what great Coniunction was there at the chaunge of Re∣ligion

made by Mahomet? Or at the change that was made after∣ward by the Arabians or Saracens in Affrick? And when of two Coūtries, yea and euen of two Cities y^t haue but a Riuer betwixt them, the one sticketh stoutly and wilfully to the old Religion, and the other imbraceth the newe: what Coniunction may be the cause of such disiunction?

But too come too particulars, I aske of them concerning the chaunge of Religion that was brought vp in the tyme of Iesus, whether they giue their iudgment thereof by the first vprysing and originall of Idolatrie, which was to fayle at that tyme as a Clew of yarne that is wound out too the end; or by the Orignall of the Christen Religion, which was to succéede and to smoulder the o∣ther, by the force and operation of some greate Coniunction then fresh and lusty to thrust it foorth? Ag••ine as touching the originall beginning or first vprysing, be it of that Religion which came vp, or of that which went downe; whence do they take it? from the first publishing thereof, as they iudge of a Citie by the laying of the first stone, or from the birth of the founder or inioyner thereof by lawe, as if a man should iudge of the prosperitie and luckynesse of a Citie or house by the natiuitie or birth of the Maistermason, or of the ow∣ner or founder that causeth it to be builded? But if Idolatrie was to decay at that tyme, by reason that the force of the Coniunction that caused it was then outworne; did all sorts of Idolatrie being so many in nomber, spring all of one selfsame Coniunction, and therefore must néedes al fayle not once? Who can tel when the force of a Coniunction shall vanish away, but he that knoweth the first instant of the beginning thereof? And where haue they euer mar∣ked or found out, eyther the very instant or any tyme neare the in∣stant wherein Idolatrie was first borne, which béeing so dyuersly shaped and of so sundry sorts, must néeds (by their owne opinion) depend vpon many great Coniunctions? Or where haue they cast the natiuitie of the first founder thereof▪ who certeinly 〈◊〉〈◊〉 néeds bee mo than one? Or if they iudge it by the first vprysing of the Christian Religion; if it depend vppon a greate Coniunction, let them shewe vs one that tyme: or if it proceede from the natiuitie of the setter vp thereof by Lawe; let them tell vs where they haue red it. For they wilnot denye•• but that the birthtyme of Iesus about the casting whereof so many. Astrologers haue bewrayed their owne folly, is vncerteine and without ground. To be short, eyther the springing vp of Religion is as vpon some greate Coniunction.

and at that tyme there was none such too be marked; or els at the springing vp thereof by the preaching of Iesus, some greate Con∣iunction matching there withall, did giue force vnto it; but none such was séene about that time neither: or finally both the vprysing and the force thereof depended vppon the birthtyme of Iesus; and that is more vncerteine and lesse knowen vnto vs than both the o∣ther. But that the birth of one man should ouerrule so many na∣tures and so manie Nations, what Astrologie will permit; séeing that some one or other of euery Nation, myght be borne in the self∣same instant as well as he? And that such a natiuitie should ouer∣rule, not only the Nations, but also the Gods or rather diuells of the Nations, what theologie or what Astrologie will graunt; sée∣ing that by the iudgment of the best Astrologers, the Starres in∣force not the mynd of man, and much lesse the separated mynds (as they terme them,) that is to say Spirits; and that euen by their owne diuinitie, men ought to honor and obey the Gods? Finally, what order is this, that the Starres should haue dominion ouer a man, and by the same man tryumph ouer all the Gods? But the ••anitie of these contemplations or rather gasings, is playnly be∣wrayed by the effect thereof. For by their supposed Coniunctions they gaue their iudgment that the Christen Religion should not continue aboue thrée hundred and thréescore yéeres or thereabouts: and then did it manifest itself more and more to the ouerthrowe of all maner of vngodlynes and superstition. Albumazar extended it afterward to the thousand fourehundred and Sixtith yere; and yet, GOD be thanked, it lifteth itself vp ageine and shineth foorth still more and more, On the otherside, Abraham a Iew Prophesied that in the yéere of our Lord a thousand fowerhundred thréescore and fower, the Iewish Religion should get the vpper hand; the which was neuer more oppressed than at that tyme. This serueth to shewe that their iudicial Astrologie is so vayne and fond that although ye graunted them all their suppositions, (whereof in very déede they can make no proofe) yet thei would cōfute themselues by the course of the tymes, and also by their owne consents. Neuerthelesse I would not haue any man think, that my speaking hereof is bycause I haue not matter where with to aduantage myself in their Astro∣logie: For I could alledge here, how they say that Iesus in his natiuitie, had for his ascendent, the signe of Virgo in hir first face, as they terme it, in which place of the Heauen, Albumazar the A∣rabian sayeth that the Indians and Egiptians haue marked a vir∣gin

bearing two eares of Corne in hir hand, and a Child sucking on her breast, whom a certeine Nation (sayth he) call Iesus; and that the Starre which the Greekes and Latines in their languages cal an Eare of Corne, is called by the Arabians The signe of the foode that susteyneth, as if ye would say, The substantiall bread or foode: And that vpon the Starre which the wise men sawe in the East in the tyme of the Emperour Augustus; the Astrologers deliuer matter enough: But in these earnest matters, I am loth to alledge any thing which is not substantiall, or which I take not to be so.

After Astrologie, Magik* 1.1236 biddeth vs battell. I sayd that Iesus in his miracles, surmounted the abilitie of all Creatures. Hereuppon they set ageinst vs Simon the Sorcerer, Apollonius of Thyanie, Apuleus of Medaure, and such others: And soothly all these doo yeld vs so much the greater record of the miracles of Iesus, in that for to diminish the estimation of them, they haue had recourse to false miracles, and giuen credit to such as were woorkers of them. Simon* 1.1237 therfore reported himself to be a GOD, to haue giuen the Lawe to Moyses vpon Mount Sinay, to haue appeared afterwärd in the persone of Christ, and finally too haue shed out the gifts of toongues vpon y^e Apostles in the persone of the holy Ghost: where∣in he confesseth aforehand the myghtynesse of Christes name, and that he would haue men beléeue that he was Christ, and beautifie himself with his woorks. To this end doth he apply the grounds of Magicke, whereby he maketh the people to woonder at him. Now, Iesus had bin crucified; but vnto this man the Romanes did set vp a standing Image vppon the Bridge of Tybris,* 1.1238 with this tytle, To Simon the holy God. The Disciples of Iesus suffered, and taught men to suffer, and were extreamely persecuted of all Iud∣ges. Contrariwise, he and his folowers were much made of among the greatest personages. But he did yet more: for he taught his Disciples that Idolatrie is an indifferent thing, and that men should not néede to suffer for his Doctrine; and what could be more delyghtfull and more entycing than this géere? Yet notwithstan∣ding, in the end both he and his Lady Selene were quyte shaken of at all mens hands, and all the cunning he had could not make him to take footing ageine in the world, neither hath the remembe∣rance of him had any continewance here, but to the glorie of the Lord Iesus, and to his owne shame. And what els doth this giue vs to vnderstand, but that it is in vaine for Princes to cherish a wic∣ked

w••ede, when Heauen is bent ageinst it, and that they labour in vayne to plucke vp the good herb, which God intendeth to prosper?

They make greate braggs of one Apollonius of Thyanie.* 1.1239 How feawe at leastwise among our learned men haue not heard of him? This man did call vp the Ghost of Achilles,* 1.1240 that is to say, a diuell. What a nomber of Sorcerers can do as much as that? He asketh him whether he had not a Tombe? Whether Polixena were kil∣led for his sake or no? Whether the things which the Poets re∣port of him be true? What good hap should come vnto the world; and what good fortune was to befall to the Necromancer himself? He tooke a Lucksigne at the sight of a Lyonesse; and what a Su∣perstition was that? He wore Rings made by the constellations of Planets; and what a vanitie was that? When a Plague was be∣gun, he gaue warning of it: and when it grewe strong, he floonke a∣way. He fetched a yoong wench to life againe; but yet his counter∣fet Euangelist Philostratus durst not auowe that she was starke dead. What is there in all these, that is eyther good or great? But now come wee to the poynt. Iesus dyed for the saluation of the world;* 1.1241 and Apollonius to driue a certeyne disease out of a Citie, caused a straunger to be stoned to death as he passed by in the open Marketsted. The Disciples of Iesus were slayne in all Cities: and Apollonius had Images set vp vnto him, and was worship∣ped in many Temples for a God. The sayd Disciples did in the end ouerthrow both the Temples, the Idols and his Images too: Contrarywise, Apollonius liued till he sawe himselfe bereft of all honor, and his Images consumed into smoke; neither did the fame of him ouerliue him thrée daies; insomuch that euen y^e booke which he had written of his consultations with the Deuils in the den of Trophonius, rotted and perished together with the Ceremonies of the same Caue. What are the Myracles of this Apollonius, but proofes of the Godhead of Iesus? For seeing that hauing at∣teyned to the vttermost that man and nature could come vnto, he vanished away so soone euen of himselfe; and Iesus euen in despite of man, and of the world, and of nature, went through and gate the vpper hand of him and of all others; how could this haue come to passe, if the working of Iesus had not bene by a higher power than the power of the world, of man, and of nature?

Apuleius* 1.1242 of Madaure hath shewed sufficiently in his bookes, that he knewe al the trickes of Magicke: but what was he the bet∣ter for them? He was of an honorable house; but did he euer atteine

to the least degrée of dignitie? Some will say perchaunce, that he made no reckoning of it: what shall we say then to his pleading a∣gainst the men of Choa (from whence neuerthelesse he had maried his wife) for that they would not receiue an Image of him? But the Emperour Vespasian* 1.1243 (sayst thou) cured a blynd man at Alex∣andria; and those (sayth Tacitus) doe beare witnesse of it, which had no gayne by saying it. And why then deléeuelye not the myra∣cles of Iesus, witnessed by so many men which are content to for∣goe all that euer they haue, yea and their liues also, for saying it? And had Vespasian done so; who knoweth not the vaingloriousnes of the Romaines? O how well would it haue matched with this Oracle applyed vnto him by his flatterers: namely, That the Mo∣narke of the whole world should come out of Iewrie: and also with this other, That to bee saued, it behoued them to haue a King? And as small a miracle as it was, what a coūtenance would it haue caried, being vphild by so many Legions, soothed by so ma∣ny learned flatterers, mainteyned by the state of the Empyre, and confirmed by so many hangers on? For as for Antinous* 1.1244 the Em∣perour Adrians Minion, whom the Emperour endowed with Temples and Sacrifices: to what purpose serued he, but to shewe that it was not in the power of the great Emperour of the world, to make folk beléeue a man to be a God, what payne or cost soeuer he put himselfe vnto?

Yea (say they) but to beléeue the myracles of Iesus,* 1.1245 we would see myracles still. The tyme hath bene that they were seene, the tyme hath bene that they were beléeued, and tyme hath altered the course of them: what a number of things doe we beléeue which we see not? And what reason or what benefite should leade vs to the beléeuing of any other rather than of them? But we should bée the more assured of them. As much might the former ages haue sayd, and as much may the ages say that are to come; and so should it be∣houe myracles to bee wrought to all men and at all tymes. And were it once so, then should myracles bee no myracles, forsomuch as in trueth they haue not that name, but of the rare and seeldome sight of them. The Sunne giueth light daylie to the world: he ma∣keth the day, the yéere, and the seasons of the yéere. Trées hauing borne flowers and fruite become bare, and afterward shoote out their buddes and florish agayne. The Uyne turneth the moysture of the Earth into Wine: the graine of Corne, turneth it into eares of Corne: and the Pipen or kernell of an Apple, into an Appletrée.

And infinite men receyue shape and birth euery hower. Al these are very greate miracles, and God and none other is the doer of them; nature teacheth it thée, and thou cāst not denie it. But forasmuch as thou séest them euery day, thou regardest them not; and yet the leasf of them would make thée to wonder, if it were rare. To succour thyne infirmitie, the Sunne forgoeth his lyght, a drye sticke flori∣sheth, water is turned into wyne, and the dead are raysed to lyfe: and all this is too shewe vnto thée, that the same power which wrought in creating things at the beginning, woorketh now still whēsoeuer it listeth; and that if the effects liue, the cause of them is not dead. And if thou shouldest sée euery day some miracle in the Sunne, in Plants, and in man; surely in lesse than a hundred yeres miracles would be chaunged into nature with thee, and the helpes of thyne infirmitie would turne thee to vnbeleef; and to make the world beleeue agein, God should be faine to create a new world for the world. An example whereof may bee the people of Israell, who hauing their meate, their drinke, their trayning vp, and their go∣uernement altogither of miracle, did in lesse than forty yeres turne them al into nature; and lyke folke accustomed continewally to phi∣sick, which turne their medicines into nourishment of their bodies; they abused the stayes of their fayth, by turning them into occasi∣ons of distrust and vnbeleef. Now, God created nature, and hath giuen it a Lawe, which Lawe he will haue it to followe. Neuer∣thelesse, sometymes for our infirmities sake he interrupteth it, to the intent to make vs to knowe that he is Lord of nature. But if he should do it at our appoyntment, then should we be the Lords both of nature and of him; and if he should do it in all caces, we would make a rule of it; and we would make bookes and calculations of it no lesse than of the Eclipses of the Sunne or of the Moone, or ra∣ther than of the motions of the eyghth Sphere; and we would im∣pute all those interruptions and chaunges, to the nature of nature itself. Therefore it is both more conuenient for his glorie and more behooffull to our saluation, that nature should still followe hir na∣ture, and that miracles should continue miracles still; that is to say, that they should be rare, as necessarie helpes to the infirmities of our nature, I meane not of one man, or of one age, but of all man∣kynd, or at leastwise of al the Church togither, which is but as one comonweale and one man.

Yet remayneth Mahomet,* 1.1246 and he séemeth to be a iolly fellowe: for he made a great part of the world to beléeue in him. He was an

Arabian and tooke wages of the Emperour Heraclius, to serue him in his warres anon after the declyning of the Empyre; and in a mutinie among the Arabian Souldyers, he was chosen by them to be their commaunder, as we sée dyuers tymes in the bands of the Spanyards. Whether he were a good man or no, let the people of Mecha (who woorshippe him at this day) iudge, which condem∣ned him to death for his Robberies and murthers. And he himself in his Alcoran confesseth himself to bee a sinner, an Idolater, an adulterer, giuen to Lecherie, and subiect to women; and that in such words as I am ashamed to repeate. But he hath inlarged his Em∣pyre by his successors, and layd his Lawe vppon many Nations. What maruell is that? For why? Auendge your selues (sayeth he) with all your harts; take as many wiues as ye be able to kéepe; Spare not euen nature itself. What is he (though he were the ran∣kest Uarlet in the world) that myght not leuie men of that pryce, considering the corruption that is in mankynd? Hee reigned as a Lord say they; but yet by worldly mean••••, yea and vtterly vnbesée∣ming a man. If ye enquyre of his Doctryne, (say they) it is holy, conformable to the old and new Testamēt, and admitted of God. But as good as yée make it, yet may yée not examin it nor dispute of it vpon peyne of death. And what man of iudgement would not haue some suspition of the persone (though he were very honest,) which should say, Behold ye be payed, and in good monny; but yée may not looke vpon it by daylyght? If yée looke for his miracles; In déede God sent Moyses and Christ with miracles; but Maho∣met comes with his naked swoord to make men beléeue, and asfor other miracle he woorks none.* 1.1247 And therefore al his Alcoran is no∣thing els but kill the Infidells, reuendge your selues, he that kills most shall haue greatest share in paradise, and he that feyghteth la∣sily shalbe damned in hell. How farre is this geare of from suffe∣ring, and both from conquering and continewing by sufferance? What wickednesse myght not bee stablished by that way of his? Notwithstanding, to allure the Iewes he exalteth Moyses, and re∣teyneth Circumcision: and to the intent he myght not estraunge the Christians, he sayeth that Christ is the Spirit, Woord and Po∣wer of God, and that Mahomet is Christes seruant, sent to serue him, and Prophesied of by him afore. Ageine to please the Here∣tiks called Nestorians, he affirmeth that yet for all this, Christ is not very God, nor the Sonne of God, but that he hath in déede the Soule of God. Thus doe ignorance and violence in him incounter

one another, the one to choke the trueth, and the other to inforce the falsehod. What practyses, what wyles, what countersayings, what inforcements, what armyes, what cruelties vseth he not too perswade men? And yet what hath he wonne by all this, but to be a Prophet without Prophesying, a Lawemaker without mira∣cles, and (euen among his owne Bisshops) a man without God or Religion? What man of discretion would reade his Alcoran twice, except it were for some greate gayne, or by manifest compul∣sion, considering the absurdities, toyes, contrarieties, dreames, and frantik deuyces that are in it, besides the wicked things, wherof I wilnot speake? Farre of therefore is he from furnishing foorth of a Martyr, that will dye eyther for the Preaching thereof, or for not recāting it. To be short, Mahomets miracle is, to waste and spoyle the world by warre; Christs is to bring the world in order by his suffring for it. Mahomet was assisted by a sort of Cutthrotes like himself; Christ was followed by infinite folk dying and suffering aduersitie for his sake. The woorkes of Mahomet were such as e∣uery man can do; and doeth dayly: the woorkes of Christ are such as neuer any man did, nor durst vndertake to doo but he himself. Surely therefore we may wel conclude, without wearying the rea∣der any longer about these vanities; That Mahomet was a man, and wrought but as man and by man, and therefore is to be exami∣ned as a man: and that Iesus Christ wrought by GOD and was (as he hath told vs) the sonne of God, and therefore let vs here him and beleeue him as God.

At this woord,* 1.1248 behold, they step vp ageine and say; a man to be God? What an absurditie is that? How is it possible? Nay ra∣ther séeing it is conuenient and agreeable both to Gods glorie and to mans saluation, as I haue proued afore: why should it be vnpos∣sible? God created mā by his wisdom, which wisdom is his sonne. Now, what is more meet than he should repayre man by him ageine? Also it was a man that sinned, and in that man and by that mā did al his ofspring sinne likewise. Now what is more rightfull, than to repayre him by man? Man rebelled ageinst his father: who could appease this offence but God himself? And who could better pacifie the father, than his owne welbeloued Sonne? Man (say I) rebelled through extreame pryde, vppon desire to be equall with God. Now what thing is there which ought too humble man soo much, as to see his Creator submit himselfe beneath man for the fault of man? Or which ought somuch to make him to consider his

sinne and to be sory for it, as to consider the infinite greatnesse of his Raunsum, the excéeding greatnesse of his sinne, and of his pu∣nishment due for the same? And if thou vrge me still, with how is it possible? I answer it is possible, bycause God lifteth it, and euen in mans vnderstanding it conteyneth no contrarietie to say it. Also it is possible; for we see it is so; and so many Profes cannot bee wy∣ped away by a bare question. It séemeth possible enough to thee O Iulian when thou listest: for thou sayest that Esculapius the sonne of Iupiter tooke humane flesh to come downe vnto the earth: and thyne owne Philosopher Amelius doth vnder hand approue, that Gods eternall word toke flesh and clothed himself with the nature of man, alledging the very words of S. Iohn for the matter. To be short, thou haste a spirit vnited to thy body; thou ca••st not deny it, and yet thou séest it not. And if thou wert lesse than man, thou wouldest also deny it to be in man: and yet for al that, what fellow∣ship is there betwéene a body and a spirit? And what may seeme more ageinst reason, than that a Spirit which occupyeth no place, should not only be lodged, but also imprisoned in a place? But hee which made both the one and the other of nothing, can do what he thinketh good with both of them. And seeing that to glorifie man, he voutsafed to take him vp into heauē and to ioyne him vnto him, (Plotin saies so, and therefore thou wilt willingly here it and allow of it:) why should he be lesse able too come downe if he list, and too vnite and ioyne himself to man vpon earth, if he list to humble him∣self?

But why did God send his deare Sonne into the world rather in that tyme than in any other?* 1.1249 Why sent hee him not soouer or la∣ter? These are questions for maysters to vse to their Seruants, and not for silly Creatures to vse vnto God, who by his only po∣wer made vs to be borne, and by his only grace hath begotten vs new ageine. But (as I haue sayd afore to the Iewes,) man liued for a tyme without the Lawe, too make him too learne that hée was not a lawe to himself: and a certeine tyme vnder the lawe, to make him find by proofe that he was not able to performe it, and after∣ward grace was offered vnto him, as vpon a scaffold where he sawe nothing but death: and so the knowing of nature corrupted made man the more able to receyue the Lawe; and the Lawe made him the more ready to imbrace Gods grace. Moreouer it is a woonder∣full confirmation to vs, when we consider that from the beginning of the World vnto his comming, we haue alwayes had Prophets

from tyme to tyme, agréeing in one mynd and one voyce, as He∣raulds and Trumpettors euerychone of them, to publish and pro∣clayme the maiestie of this King, which was to come into y^e world. For had he come anon after the Creation of the World, this con∣firmation of ours had bin greately 〈◊〉〈◊〉, bycause they that were the first had bin surprysed by his comming vnlookedfor, and those that haue come after should haue bin in daunger to forget it or to make the lesse account of it, as though his comming had not belon∣ged to them; whereas now all of vs are partakers both of ioye and of Gods admonitions; both afore the Lawe, for he was promised to them; and vnder the Lawe, for they lykewyse heard the Trum∣petts, and also in the tyme that he came, for hee himself spake to them; and finally in our tyme, for his returne draweth nygh. Ne∣uerthelesse, it was his will too come in the tyme when learning did moste florish, and when the greatest Empyre was in the cheefest pryde, to the end that all worldly wisdome should acknowledge it self to be foolishnes, and all strength and power acknowledge itself to be weaknesse before him.

Now, therefore let vs all conclude, as well Iewes as Gentyles, that Iesus Christ is the eternall sonne of God, the Redeemer, and the Mediator of mankynd. And let no question or obiection with∣hold vs from it. Iewes; for he is such a one as he was promised to them, borne in Bethelem of a virgin of the Trybe of Iuda, at such tyme as the kingdome was gone from the house of Iuda, humbled beneathe all, exalted aboue all, put to reproachefull death for our sinnes, and raised ageine with glorie to make vs rightuouse. Gen∣tyles; for he did woorks which could not proccede but from God; he created things of nothing, drue one contrarie out of another, sur∣mounted the nature of man, and ouercame the nature of Angells: his doing of which things (beeing not possible too bee done but by God,) declared him to be very God. And both togither; for all of vs desire eternal lyfe, al of vs knowe the corruption of our nature, all of vs perceyue what Gods Iustice requyreth, all of vs find that we haue néede of his mercy, and all of vs sée that betwéene his Iu∣stice and his mercy, none can (by reason) step in to be the Mediator but GOD, and to be the Satisfier, but man, euen Iesus Christ, borne of the virgin, and the sonne of God. And seeing it hath plea∣sed the father to giue vs his sonne, let vs imbrace him; and seeing he hath sent him too bring glad tydings too our Soules, let vs here him. Finally let vs hearken to the rule and doctrine which he hath

left vs, that we may indeuer to liue vnto him in all godlynes, con∣sidering that he hath voutsafed of his vnspeakable Loue, to suffer here beneath, and to dye for vs.

The xxxiiij. Chapter.

That the Gospell in very trueth conteyneth the doctrine of Iesus the Sonne of God.

NOw, as for our Lord Iesus Christ him∣self, (for I think I may now so call him without offence to the Iewes or scorne of the Gentyles) he hath not left vs any of his owne life or doctrine written by himself. For soothly had he writte it him selfe, men would haue conceiued some suspition thereof. Againe, had he set downe those high things in a high style; the common sort would not haue vnderstood them: and had he vt∣tered them in a simple stile, they would haue concluded (for so farre as they had vnderstood,) that it had bene but the worde of a Man, and not the word of God himselfe; as wee see it is a very common fondnesse in the world, to estéeme more of the bookes that are darke by reason of their ouerhigh style, than of those which stoope as low as they can to the capacitie of the readers, to instruct them. But his life and his doctrine be recorded by his Apostles and Disciples as∣sisted by his spirit,* 1.1250 from whom we haue the Gospels, the Acts, and the Epistles, all which together we call the newe Couenant or the newe Testament. And whether this Testament ought to be of au∣thoritie among vs or no; I reporte me to the iudgement of all the world. For the writers therof liued in the same tyme that y^e things were done, and sawe the doing of them. And although that at the tyme of their writing, they were farre asunder; yet agrée they both in the Historie and in the Doctrine; and looke what they wrate, the same did they preach and publish openly euerywhere, euen while those were aliue which could witnesse thereof, yea euen while their enemies liued which would haue bin very glad to haue taken them

with an vntrueth: and in the end they signed it with their blud, and sealed it with their death in all places of the earth: which thing we reade not to haue bene done for any other writing or Testament whatsoeuer, though it came from neuer so great a State or Mo∣narke, how authenticall soeuer men laboured to make it. If wee looke vpō the authors, their writing is not to flatter some Prince, as some doe. For had Iesus bene but a Man, what could haue bin gained by flattering him when he was crucified? Againe, they were none such as made their gayne of writing. And such would Cor∣nelius Tacitus haue men to beléeue. Nay rather, they gaue ouer the world, and gaue their owne liues for the things which they wrate. If ye haue an eye to the style, it is natiue, simple, playne; preaching Christes Godhead without concealing his infirmitie, and confessing his infirmitie without graunting away his God∣head. The weakenesse, the curiousnesse, and the ambitiousnesse of the Apostles, that is to wit of the writers themselues, are registred diligently there. Of bragging, of boasting, of vanitie, or of y^e praise of Iesus himselfe, there is not one word. Peter stept aside, and de∣nyed his Maister thrée tymes: and Mark his Disciple (who wrate the Gospell vnder him) hath set it downe in writing. Iohn and Iames the Sonnes of Zebedie desired to sit, the one on the right hand and the other on the left hand of Iesus in his Kingdome; and who vrged them to tell such tales out of Schoole, which might seeme to abate their owne credite and authoritie? Also Iesus him∣selfe was wearie, and thirstie, and wept: these are infirmities of man: yet doe they preach him to be God and dye vppon it. Might thei not haue concealed these things without preiudice of y^e trueth? yes to our seeming, and euen with aduauncement thereof; at least∣wise if they had not wirtten in the behalfe of the trueth it selfe, and that they had not bin sure that his mightinesse vttered it selfe in in∣firmitie. To bee short, they set downe the particularities of tyme, place, and person, day, Citie, and house. The more particularly that they declare things, the more easie was it to haue discouered their vntrueths, and to haue conuinced them. For they spake not in Iewrie of things done in the Indyes, but at the gates of Hieru∣salem, in Bethanie, in Bethsaida, and in Hierusalem it self, in such a streate, at such a gate, by such a poole and so foorth. The witnesses were then aliue, the blynd saw, and the dead walked vp and downe among them. Had the Apostles lyed, how easie had it bene to haue disproued them? What weapons gaue they to their enemies to

haue ouercome them selues withall? And yet for all this, how hap∣pened it that of so many Pharisies enraged ageinst them, which tooke exception so precisely to the healing of a man vpon the Sab∣both day, and to this saying of Christs misunderstoode, Destroy this Temple and in three dayes I wil rayse it vp agein; and of so many men which were ready both to do euill and to say euill; none of them all stoode vp to geynsay them? Where was the zeale of Gods house become at that time, than at the which there were ne∣uer mo zelouse persones to be seene? At leastwise how happeneth it that in that houge heape of nyne or ten volumes of the Talmud, they bring not foorth their exceptions and geynsayings, ne set vs downe some Countergospell? Seeing then that Hatred picketh out proofes and testimonies where none are; and yet notwithstan∣ding, the extreme hatred of the Pharisies findeth none, no not euen in the tyme and place where the things were done, and when their owne authoritie was strongest and at the hyghest pitch: what may we conclude thereon, but the infallible trueth of the Historie of the Gospell?

Neuerthelesse, let vs yet satisfy vnbeléeuers, by prouing y^e things vnto them which they esteeme to be most vncredible in the Historie of our Lord Iesus Christ. When Iesus was borne in Bethelem, a Starre* 1.1251 (sayth the Gospell) was marked by the wyse men in the East, the which they followed, and it gwyded them to the place where Iesus was. Some perhappes will flatly deny this Starre to haue bin. (Let any man iudge, how little credit to himself and authoritie to Christ, the Euangelist could haue purchaced by be∣ginning with a lye which all men could haue disproued, specially seeing he taketh the Scrybes, and Pharisies themselues to wit∣nesse therof.* 1.1252 But we reade that the very same time, (Augustus ha∣uing then the cheefe charge of the Games kept in the honor of his moother Venus) at Rome) there was seene a Blasingstarre or Comet (that is the name whiche they giue too all extraordinarie Starres) whereof the Preests of that Colledge gaue their iudge∣ment, that for the singular markes which it had, it betokened not warre, plague, or famin, as other ordinarie Comets do; but the sal∣uation of mankynd to be at hand. And vnto this Comet (bycause of the rarenesse thereof) there was an Image set vp in the Citie, And that onely Comet (sayeth Plinie) is woorshipped ouer all the World. Whereunto relyeth this verse of Virgill in his fourth Eglog, made to flatter Augustus by applying vnto him the appe∣ring

of that Starre; Behold how noble Caesars Starre steppes foorth with stately pace. After which maner hee wresteth vnto Augustus, all the happinesse with Sibyll promised by the birth of the Redeemer. Also Cheremon a Stoik Philosopher,* 1.1253 iudged the same Starre to betoken welfare and happynesse; and thereuppon perceyuing his Gods to be weakened, he traueled into Iewry with certeine Astrologers, to seeke the true God. And Chatcidins the Platonist sayth expresly, that the Chaldees had obserued that it be∣tokened the Honorable comming of God downe vnto vs, to bring grace to mortall men. Here the Astrologers had matter whereupon to excercyse their Contemplations. For this Starre appeared in December, when the Sunne was in Sagittarius,* 1.1254 in which signe (say they) both Iupiter, the Sunne, and Venus were met altoge∣ther; al which thrée (by their principles) betoken a most ryghtuouse, a most myghtie, and a most mercifull King, but yet poore, by rea∣son of the Sunne which was come in betwixt them. How should he be myghty, if poore? Frutefull also, bycause of Iupiter in the Angel of the ascendant; but yet baren and Chyldlesse by reason of the Moone which was in y^e first face of Virgo. Of these their Con∣trarieties we myght, according too their art, gather some profit. But I will let these curiosities alone too such as delyght in them. But in very deede, this Starre appearing in December without rayes, and being healthfull, was not an ordinarie Comet, but a ve∣ry Starre in deede. The lyke whereof we haue seene ourselues in the same season of the yere, in the yere of our Lord a thousand fiue∣hundred threescore and twelue, the signification whereof God will reueale vnto vs when he sees tyme. How had the former Starre bin one of the ordinarie Starres that are fixed in the firmament; what a miracle was it that it should leaue his place and charge, not to reigne ouer Iesus, but to serue him? And if it were newly then created; by whome could it be created, but by the Creator; and for whom, but for himself? And whereas Iulian the Renegate not be∣ing able to deny the trueth of the Historie, and the cunning of the Wise men by the gwyding thereof, would beare men on hand that it was the Starre named Asaph, which the Egiptians haue mar∣ked to be séene but once at euery fower hundred yeres: besides that we reade not of any lyke to haue bin séene in all the former ages; it hath not bin séene any more in these full fiftéene hundred yeeres which are passed since that tyme. Now by this inquirie of the wise men, Herod was moued to kill all the Children about Bethelem,

which were two yéeres old and vnder, meaning among them to haue killed the Child whom the Starre betokened: in doing wher∣of bycause a Sonne of his owne was killed with the rest; we reade in Macrobius,* 1.1255 that the Emperour Augustus héering thereof gaue him this taunt, I had leuer be Herods Swyne than his Sonne.

Agein, that Christ should be borne of a Uirgin, they thinke it ve∣ry straunge.* 1.1256 I haue discussed this poynt already ageinst the Iewes. GOD had foretold it; and what could then let him to bring it to passe? For who can dout of his power, when he is sure of his will? But this was so true, that Simon Magus to the intent he myght not seeme inferior to Christ in any thing, Preached to his owne Disciples, that he himself was the sonne of a Uirgin, which thing Iesus Christ neuer Preached of himself. And wee reade that the same day that Christ was borne, the Temple of Peace fell downe at Rome; at the laying of the foundation whereof, Apolo told the Romanes it should stand till a Uirgin did beare a Chyld; where∣vpon they thought it should haue continewed for euer. And as tou∣ching Simeon, who hauing Iesus in his armes acknowledged him to be the Sauiour of the world, I haue declared what the Iewes say of him.* 1.1257 And as for Iohn the Baptist our Lords foregoer, the Historie of his godly life and doctrine and of his death also, is set downe after the same maner in Iosephus, that it is in our Euan∣gelists. If we consider Christes works, all the whole course of his life was nothing but myracles, the which I haue proued true long ago. And this only poynt, namely that they be described & set forth with so many circumstances, whereunto neuer any man hath yet presumed to take exceptions, doth sufficiently giue credite to the matter; and therefore let vs passe vnto his death.

From the sixth hower (saith our Euangelist) vnto the nineth hower there was darknesse ouer all the Land:* 1.1258 that is to say, at high noone and euen in the chiefe of the day. If they doubt hereof, Phlegon Trallia the Emperour Adrians Fréedman, the diligen∣test of all Chronaclers,* 1.1259 noteth that in the fourth yéere of the two hundred and tenth Olympiade, there was the greatest Eclips of the Sunne that euer was seene, and therewithall a very straunge Earthquake. And that was the very 18. yéere of Tyberius, in the which yere Christ suffered his passion. And Eusebius sayth he had read the like in the Commentaries of the Gentyles. Also Lucian a Priest of Antioche cryed out to such as tormented him: Search your owne Chronicles, and you shall finde that in the tyme of

Pylate the light fayled in the chiefe of the day, and the Sunne was put to flight as long as Christ was a suffering. And Tertul∣lian* 1.1260 in his Apology doth summon them to the same bookes. Now, that it was no naturall Eclips, it appeareth playne: For y^e Sunne was then so farre of from Cōiunction with the Moone, that it was euen full against it, according to the Lawe of the Passouer, which was to bee kept the 14. day of the Moone. And if they take excep∣tions to the Epistles of Dennis of Areopagus, wherein he descri∣beth the spectacle of this wonder at lēgth; Esculus the Astrologian a man of small Religion sayth, that at that tyme the Sunne was in the first degree of Aries, and the Moone was newly entered into Libra. Others say, that the Moone was in Virgo and the Sunne in Pisces, which commeth al to one in effect: and therfore that there could bee no naturall Eclips by reason of this opposition. To bée short, some say it was vniuersall ouer all the world; and then was it a speciall worke of God, for the order of Nature can doe no such thing in the world. Othersome say it was peculiar to y^e only Land of Iewrie; and then is Gods speciall working yet more manifest: for it is (as yée would say) a poynting at the cause of the Eclips with his finger; namely, the suffering of the Sauiour of the world. And as little also could that Eclips be by the order of Nature, as the other. For who but onely God could dim the sight and light of the Sunne in such sorte without a Coniunction thereof with the Moone, that it should giue light to all places sauing onely Iewrie, as who would say, he sholed out Iewrie frō al the rest of the world? And as touching the Earthquake* 1.1261 that accompanyed it, the fore∣sayd Phlegon speaketh thereof, ioyning it to the Eclips as our E∣uangelistes doe. And these cases are so rare and vnseene, not in some one age, but in the whole course of the world, that seeing they be reported to haue bene in one selfesame yéere, and both together; they cannot be vnderstood of any other than those which our Euan∣gelists and Authors speake of. To be short, the Ueyle or Curteine of the Temple did rend asunder. For the beléeuing or discrediting of this poynt, there néeded no more but to goe to the place and see whether it were so or no. And Iosephus speaking of the foreto∣kens of the destruction of the Iewes, reporteth the like thing.

Behold, Iesus is now dead: but the third day he ryseth againe,* 1.1262 as he himselfe had told aforehand. If he had sayd as Mahomet sayd, about an eight hundred yéeres hence I will come see you a∣gaine; he had taken a good terme for tryall of his lye. But when he

sayd I will come againe within these three daies; his deceyt (if he had ment any) would soone haue bin discouered. Here they crye out and cannot admit the storie to bee true. And yet notwithstanding when they reade that one Erus an Armenian, that one Aristeus, or that one Thespesius rose againe to life; they thinke no euill of Plato, Herodotus, or Plutarke for reporting it. How vnindiffe∣rent are these people, which will néedes both beléeue and be belée∣ued of all men without witnesse and vnrequested; and yet no wit∣nesse can suffice to make them beléeue their owne saluation? Wo∣men sawe Christ, men touched him, the vnbeléeuers felt him with their fingars; he did eate and drinke and was conuersant among them, dyuers tymes and many daies: and yet all this they stoutly denye. But Pylate witnessed it; and the Apostles being earst asto∣nished at it, did afterward preach it, publish it, & signe it with their blud. He whom the Chambermayd had made amazed, and who had denyed him thrée tymes in one hower when he was aliue; doth preach & publish him euen in Hierusalem, before the Magistrates, and before the Priestes; and no threates can make him holde his peace. If Christ rotted in his graue: what hope of benefite was to be had of his dead carkesse? Nay if he liued not in Peter; who vrged Peter to preach him? And if he spake not in him; who would haue beléeued him? Who (say I) would haue beléeued it, at leastwise so farre as to preach and publish it, and to signe and seale it with their blud, vpon his report, and also after that he was gone? Uerely, the very slaunderers themselues giue light vnto this trueth. For ther∣vpon it is that the Iewes haue feyned, that his bodie was stolne a∣way: for they found it not there: but Pylate prooueth them lyers expresly. And therevppon also did some of the Gentyles surmise, that they had crucified a Ghoste or Sporne in stead of him: which thing the Iewes vphold to bee very false, who tooke offence at his death, as which thei knew to be a matter of trueth, in respect wher∣of they call him still the Crucified. But hee liued then, and liueth still for euer and euer. And therefore as he had promised his Disci∣ples afore his death,* 1.1263 Sainct Luke sayth that he sent them the holy Ghost in firie Tongues within a few daies after his rising againe: wherby they receiued the gift of Tongues or Languages, yea and that in such wise, that the same gift came doune vpon many others by their laying of their hands vpō them. This is one of the things which they will not beléeue, as who would say it were not as easte for God to giue one man the vnderstanding of many Tongues, as

it was to deuide one language into so many when he was displea∣sed. But if it be a bragge, as they surmise: to what end was it? and what might haue bin more easely disproued? The Magistrate had them in his hand: why did he not examine them before the people? Hierusalem was as the Musteringplace of all the East: and where then might they haue bene disproued and made to recant it? Nay, the effect that followed vpon it confirmed it. For the Apostles, bée∣ing but Fisshers, and Publicanes, and at the beginning ignorant persons, men which ordinarily knewe no more than their owne moother tongue, and that but grossely; did afterward write bookes, and trauell ouer the whole world, preaching in all places. Consi∣der what lyking either the Iewes or the Gentyles would haue had of such folke, to haue made them their spokesmen to the people. And yet the Disciples did it so effectually, that in lesse than fortie yéeres, the whole world that was inhabited, was replenished with the name and doctrine of Iesus. How could that haue bin done, if they had not had an extraordinarie skill of the Languages? Sooth∣ly the Historie thereof was so true and so commonly knowne, that Simon Magus to countenance himselfe withall, reported himselfe to bée the same that came downe vpon the Apostles in firie tungs, vnder pretence that by the helpe of the Deuill, he counterfetted af∣ter a sort the gift of tongues.

And as for some searchers and sisters of words, it is not for them to carpe at the Hebrewe phrases which they finde in our Euange∣listes; seeing that in Horace or in Virgill they count Gréeke phra∣ses for an elegancie. For to the intent they may perceiue that it is done to expresse Christes matters the more pithily, and to repre∣sent them the more néerely: let them reade S. Paule. and there they shall finde so fayre a Gréeke tongue, so full of pithie wordes, so full of excellent and chosen phrases, and so peculiar to the Gréeke tongue it selfe, that the best learned doe confesse he had the very ground of it, and alledge him for an example of eloquence. Let vs come to the historie of him. This S. Paule a Disciple of Gama∣lielles, was sent with Commission to persecute the Christians. In his way (sayth Luke) a light shone about him,* 1.1264 and being smitten to the ground, he heard this voyce, Saule, Saule, why persecutest thou me. To bee short, of a Iewe he became a Christian: and of a Persecuter, a Martir.* 1.1265 And if thou beléeuest not S. Luke; S. Paule himselfe toucheth his owne historie in diuers places. What hath vnbeléefe to bring against this, saue onely peraduenture a bare de∣nyall,

according to common custome? If Peter sawe it: he is but a Fissherman say they. If Paule heard it: he is an Orator. So then belike, if God offer thee his grace in an earthen vessell, thou misly∣kest of it: and if he offet it thee in a vessell of some valewe, thou sus∣pectest it: eyther the one is beguyled, or the other beguyleth thee, sayest thou. What wilt thou haue God to doe to make thee to be∣leeue him? Examine this case well. Paule in the way to growe great, he is in good reputation with the Magistrate & the Priestes, and sodeinly he chaungeth his Copie out of one extremitie into an other, to bee skorned, scourged, cudg••led, stoned, and put to death. Put the case that neither S. Luke nor S. Paule did tell thee the cause thereof. What mayst thou imagine, but that it was a very great and forcible cause, that was able to chaunge a mans heart so sodeynly and so straungely? Is it not daylie s••ene (wilt thou say) that men are soone changed and vpon light causes? Yes, fooles are. But he debateth the matter, he vrgeth his arguments, and he dri∣ueth his conclustons to an ende. The best learned of his enemies finde fault with his misapplying (as they terme it) of his skill, and yet commend his writings. Yea, and he knoweth that vnto thee his preaching will seeme folly, and yet that (as much folly as it is) it is the very wisedome of God; and that by following it he shall haue nothing but aduersitie, and yet for all that, he doth not giue it ouer. How shall he be wise, that counteth himselfe a foole? or rather which of the wiser sort is not rauished at his sayings and doings? But if he be wise, learned, and weladuised as thou seest he is; what followeth but that his chaunge proceedeth of some cause? And see∣ing the chaunge was great, the cause must néedes be great also: and seeing it was extreame and against 〈◊〉〈◊〉; surely it must needes proceede of a supernaturall and souereine cause. Uerely the reason that leadeth thee to this generall conclusion, ought to leade thee to the speciall also: that is to wit, that it was a very great and su∣pernaturall cause that moued him: namely, the same which Sainct Luke rehearseth, and which he himselfe confirmeth in many pla∣ces, for the which he estéemeth himselfe right happie to ••ndure the miserie which he caused and procured vnto others, and in the end after a thousand hurts and a thousand deaths, he willingly spent his life.

Also the death of Herod striken by the Angell for not giuing glorie vnto God,* 1.1266 is reported vnto vs much more amply by Iose∣phus, than by S. Luke.* 1.1267 Herod (sayth he) made showes in Caesa∣rea,

and the second day of the solemnitie,* 1.1268 he came into the Theatre being full, clad in robe or cloath of Siluer, which by the stryking of the Sunnebeames vppon it, made it the more stately. Then began certeyne Clawbacks to call him God, and to pray him to bee gracious vnto them. But forasmuch as he did not refuse that flatterie, he sawe an Owle sitting vpon his head, and by and by he was taken with so straunge torments, that within feawe daies after he dyed, acknowledging Gods iudgement vpon him, and preaching thereof to his flatterers. This Historie is set out more at large by Iosephus, which in effect is all one with that which is written by S. Luke, who sayeth that the people cryed out, It is the voyce of God, and not of a man: and that thervpon an Angell of God strake him, and he was eaten with wormes, and so dyed. These bee the things which they finde scarce credible in the historie of our Euangelistes: which yet not∣withstanding are cōfirmed by the histories of the Iewes and Gen∣tyles, who report the things with words full of admiration, which our Euangelistes set downe simply after their owne maner. And seeing that in these things, which exceede nature, they bee found true; what likelyhoode is there that they should not also deliuer vs Christes doctrine truely; specially being (as I haue shewed afore) miraculously assisted with the power of his spirit according to his promisses, and moreouer hauing witnessed the sinceritie of their writings, by suffering so many torments, and in the end death? Seeing then that the new Testament conteyneth the trueth of the doctrine of Iesus, and proceeded from the spirit of Iesus, whom I haue shewed to be the Sonne of God; what remayneth for vs, but to imbrace the Scriptures as the worde of life and Soulehealth, and as the will of the Father declared vnto vs by his Sonne, and to liue thereafter, and to dye for the same; considering that by the same wee shall be raysed one day to glorie, and reigne with him for euer?

But forasmuch as we make mention of rysing ageine from the dead;* 1.1269 that is yet one scruple more that remayneth. What lykely∣hod is there of that (say they,) séeing that our bodyes rotte, Woor∣mes deuour vs, yea our bodyes do turne into woormes, and a nom∣ber of other chaunges ••o passe ouer them? This is a continewall stumbling alwayes at one stone, namely to stand gasing at Gods power who can do all things, when ye should rather rest vpon his will. He will do it: for he hath knit the body and Soule togither, 〈1 page duplicate〉〈1 page duplicate〉

〈1 page duplicate〉〈1 page duplicate〉

〈1 page duplicate〉〈1 page duplicate〉

〈1 page duplicate〉〈1 page duplicate〉

〈1 page duplicate〉〈1 page duplicate〉

〈1 page duplicate〉〈1 page duplicate〉

to be parttakers of good and euill togither, and hee hath giuen one Lawe on them both togither, so as they must suffer togither and ioy togither, yea and suffer one for another and one by another in this lyfe: and what Iustice then were it to separate them in another lyfe? He will do it: for he made the whole man; who if he were but Soule alone, were no man atall. He will do it: for to the intent to•• saue man, his Sonne hath takē the flesh of man vnto him. Now to saue the Soule, it had bin inough for him too haue taken but a Soule: but he that made the whole man, will also saue the whole man. To be short; he will do it; for he hath sayd it: and he will doo it; for he hath done it already. He hath sayd it by his Sonne, and he hath also done it in his Sonne, and his sonne adorneth vs with his victorie; and he will surely adorne vs with his glorie. Looke vpon the grayne that is cast into the ground; if it rotte not, it springeth not vp; if it spring not vp, it yeldeth no foyson. Agein, of one graine, come many Eares of Corne; of a kernell, a goodly Tree; of a thing of nothing (as yée would say) a perfect liuing Creature. Which of all these things resembleth the thing that commeth thereof, eyther in substance, or in shape, or in quantitie, or in qualitie? To be short, what straungenesse is there in this? Of a handfull of Earth God made thée, and all the Earth of nothing, and of a handfull will he make thée new ageine? This body of thine which in time past was not, is of his making; this body which one day shall ceasse to be, he wil one day make new agein. Uerily this doctrine was common to all true Iewes, and among all the Teachers of the Lawe, who had gathered it out of the old Testament, (as we reade in Iosephus and in the Acts of the Apostles) for they agrée fully with S. Paule in that behalf. And in the Talmud* 1.1270 there are infinite places thereof. Also the Alcorane (which is borrowed of their Rabbines) is full of this Doctrine. And as concerning the Heathen of old tyme, Zo∣roastres sayd, that one day there shal be a generall rysing ageine of all the dead. Theopompus a Disciple of Aristotles doth the lyke; and noman in old tyme (sayeth AEnaeas of Gaza* 1.1271) did once geyn∣say them. The Stoiks hild opinion, that after a certeine tyme there should bée an vniuersall burning of the World, (which wée call Doomesday,) and that immediatly after, all things should be set in their perfect state ageine, as they were at the first: and it was the opinion of Crysippus in his booke of Prouidence translated by Lu∣cane the Stoik, which new state Varro calleth Palingenesian, that is to say, a Regeneration, Rebegetting, or New birth Platosaith

expresly that mens Soules shall returne into their bodyes. The Astrologers following Albumazar,* 1.1272 vphold that when y^e Starres come home ageine euery one into his first place, all things shal bée sette ageine in their first originall state, both men, Beastes, Trées and all other Creatures; which opinion euen Arethmetick alone sheweth to bee absurd in Astrologie, and the best learned men reiect it. Neuerthelesse it bewrayeth our beastlynes,* 1.1273 which do attribute such power to the Starres, to defeate the maker of them thereof.

As touching the iudgement which the Sonne of God shall giue after the sayd Resurection; although the same were not foretold by the Prophets of old time, and by so many verses of the Sibills, and finally by the mouth of Iesus and his Apostles: surely Gods gi∣uing of his Lawe, not to the outward man but to the inward,* 1.1274 nor to our déedes onely but also to our thoughts, sheweth sufficiently without other proofe, that there is another Iudge than the Magi∣strats of this world to iudge vs, and another Iudgment than their iudgement to be lookedfor, as whose iudgment here procéedeth but to the outward déede, and by proofes of witnesses, and therefore cannot in any wise pearce into the hart, to discerne what is within. Neither would our owne cōsciences sumon vs so often as they do, if we were not to appeare before other than men. For sith it is the Soule that cheefely receyueth the Commaundement and cheefely breaketh it: it is the Soule that must come to examination and tryall; which cannot be done in this world, wherein there is but a shadowe of Iustice, and whose Lawes and Iudges extend no fur∣ther than the outter side.* 1.1275 And therefore wee see that the auncient Rabines speake very often of this General Iudgment, and (which more is) do attribute it to the Messias, saying; Feare not God for your Iudge; For your Iudge is your owne fellow citizen, your owne kinsman, and your owne brother. All the auntient Gen∣tyles haue spoken so of this Iudgement, which they say shall bee giuen in another lyfe, in the féeld of truthe, whereuppon shall fol∣lowe eyther endlesse lyfe or endlesse death as I haue shewed afore. Yea and it séemeth that by the lending of their auncient Oracles (which were a kynd of Cabale) they passed yet further. For they called their greate and souereine God by the name of Iupiter, and gaue the iudging of mens Soules to his Sonne Minos, the King and Lawegiuer, and not vnto Apollo, Mercurie or any other: as who should say, they ment that the Iudge of the World should be the Sonne of God, and yet there withall a ryghtuouse man, that 〈1 page duplicate〉〈1 page duplicate〉

〈1 page duplicate〉〈1 page duplicate〉

is to say, the Mediator, God and man.

I hope I haue now shewed the truenesse and substantialnesse of the Christian Religion,* 1.1276 and the vanitie and wickednesse of all o∣ther Religions. Of the which Christian Religion, the Primitiue, Churche, for a Badge and comfort to the Christians, hath made a Sūme which we call the Créede of y^e Apostles. For we beleeue in God the Father Almyghty maker of Heauen and Earth, &c. To beléeue in him, is to trust in him; to trust in him, is to hope for all good things at his hand; but vayne were our hope, if it reached no further than to this present world. Now I haue declared here∣tofore that there is but only one God: that the same God created the world for man,* 1.1277 and man for his owne glorie, and both of them of nothing: That he guydeth them by his Prouidence, the one ac∣cording to nature, which is a steady and suresettled Lawe prescri∣bed by him to the World; and the other according to wit and will, which he hath giuen him, so that which way so euer man take, he frameth him alwayes to his holy will, to such end as he hath ap∣poynted: That man is immortall and created to leade an endlesse lyfe:* 1.1278 that in that lyfe is the souereine welfare or good, which alonly can content mans will, and satisfie, his wit;* 1.1279 and therefore that he must tend and indeuer thither with all his heart and bend all the powers of his wit to that end: And to be short, that the meane for man to atteine thereunto,* 1.1280 is to serue the true God with al his hart, with all his Soule, and with all his strength; that is to say, to vow all his thoughts wordes and déedes to the glorie of God. But I sayd also that man is falne from his Originall,* 1.1281 through the pryde and disobedience of the first man, whereuppon hath followed fro∣wardnes in his will, and ignorance in his wit: Ignorance making him vnable to discerne his owne welfare, and frowardnes turning him away from it, yea euen when it is shewed him, and making him vnwoorthy to atteyne to it, and finally causing him to abuse his abilities and powers to all euill, and so consequently plunging him in the gulf of al miserie, both according to his owne desert, and according to the Iustice of God; Whereuppon it insueth that man is forlorne in himself, vnlesse God recouer him by his mercy; blind, except God inlyghten him ageine; vtterly Lame to the doing of a∣ny good, and to the atteynement of any good, vntill Gods grace do releeue him.* 1.1282 And therefore I sayd, That he hath left vs a Religion for a guyde, A Religion that turneth vs from all Creatures, as which are but vanitie; and conuerteth vs to him the only Creator

of Heauen and Earth; and that the same is the Religion of the Is∣raelytes;* 1.1283 and that in al other places there was nothing but the ser∣uice of Diuells, and Idolatrie. That the Religion of Israell had the kéeping and custodie of his word, his reuelations, and his pro∣mises, giuing vs his Lawe for a Rule to liue by, whereby it con∣uicteth vs of our naughtynesse, and inuyteth vs to call to God for grace.* 1.1284 That the old Testament is the Lawe of Moyses and the Prophets, which I haue proued to haue proceeded from God, and to haue bin inspyred by him: that in the end hauing condemned vs he offereth vs his grace, and hauing giuen iudgement vpon vs, he sendeth vs pardon, and steadeth vs of a Surety that is able to pay our depts:* 1.1285 that this Surety is the Messias promised to the Iewes for the saluation of the whole world, the Mediator of mankynd, God and man, exhibited to the world in his due tyme, to bee the Sauyour of the Iewes and the lyght of the Gentyles, euen Iesus Christ the Sonne of God,* 1.1286 in whom we beleeue according to this percell of the Créede, And in Iesus Christ his Sonne our Lord, conceyued by the Holy Ghoste, borne of the Virgin Mary, crucified, Dead, and rizen agein, and so foorth. Al which poynts we haue proued ageinst both Iewes & Gentyles; ageinst the Iewes, by the Scriptures; and ageinst the Gentyles by reason, which they themselues say they take for their guyde; and by their owne Re∣cords. Our Créede addeth, I beleeue in the Holy Ghoste. And I also haue shewed how there bee thrée Inbeings in one Essence or Being,* 1.1287 acknowledged by the Iewes and 〈◊〉〈◊〉 by the Gentyles namely the Father, the Sonne, and the Holy Ghoste, which are termed by them, the One, the word, and the Loue, in the name of whom we be Baptysed. And finally we beleeue, that God by the dese•• of his sonne in the power of his holy Spirit,* 1.1288 maynteyneth his Church spred ouer the whole world, knitteth vs in one Com∣munion of fellowship togither, pardoneth our sinnes, and will one day rayse vs vp ageine, to make vs inioy euerlasting lyfe. To that end hath the Father created vs, the So••ne redeemed vs, & the ho∣ly Ghost inspired vs. And therefore let vs looke vp with sighes, and with sighes trauell vp towards the Kingdome whose King is the Trinitie, whose Lawe is Charitie, and whose measure is eterni∣tie. And vnto him, who hath graunted me both to begin and to end this woorke (whom I beséeche with all my heart to blesse it to his glorie, and to the saluation and welfare of those that are his) be ho∣nour, glorie and praise for euer and euer.

Amen.

FINIS.

Notes

• * 1.1

  T••imegistus in Poeriandro. Iamblichus, concerning Misteryes. Chapt. 8.
• * 1.2

  The World leadeth vs v••∣to God.
• * 1.3

  Man leaded•• vs to God.
• * 1.4

  Vniuersall Consent.
• * 1.5

  Suctonius in the life of Ca∣ligula.
• * 1.6

  Seneca in his first booke concerning Wrath.
• * 1.7

  Obiections concerning such as were counted A∣theists.
• * 1.8

  Plutarch in his treatise of the ceassing of O∣racles, repor∣teth that a Ru∣ler of Cilicia which was an Atheist, came to the beleef of a God, by an answere giuen from the Ora∣cle of Mopsus, to a demaund of his whiche was deliuered sealed.
• * 1.9

  Plutarke in his ••reatise of mo∣rall vertue.
• * 1.10

  Xenophanes as he is alled∣ged by Cle∣ment of Ale∣xandria in his Stromats.
• * 1.11

  The World leadeth to one onely God.
• * 1.12

  Man leadeth vs to one God.
• * 1.13

  The linking in of things toge∣ther.
• * 1.14

  The obiectiōs of such as mainteyne mo Gods thā one.
• * 1.15

  Iulian the A∣postata, in Cy∣rillus.
• * 1.16

  Stergon is an herbe which groweth of an Onyon stuffed with Linseede or seede of Flax.
• * 1.17

  Against two beginnings.
• * 1.18

  Plutark in the lyfe of Osyris and Isis.
• * 1.19

  Nothing be∣ing •• negatiue, canseth no∣thing which is the priuatiue.
• * 1.20

  Plato, in his Timaeus. Plotin, in Enn. 1. lib. 8.
• * 1.21

  Trisinegist in Asclepio. Simplicius vp∣pon Epictetus.
• * 1.22

  Mercurins Trismegistus, in his Poeman∣der. Chap. 3. 8. 10. 11. 12. And in his Ascle∣pius. Chap. 2. 6. 8. 9.
• * 1.23

  Alledged by Cicero, Plu∣tarke, Clemens of Alexandria, and Cyrillus.
• * 1.24

  Philo the Iew: and Iambli∣chus of the Sect of Pytha∣goras.
• * 1.25

  Hierocles a∣gainst the A∣theists.
• * 1.26

  Simplicius in his Phis.
• * 1.27

  Numenius concerning the Good.
• * 1.28

  Arist. 14. Me∣taph. Cap. 4.
• * 1.29

  Aristo le al∣ledgeth them in his first Phi∣losophy and in his booke of the World.
• * 1.30

  Aristo. 1. Phis: cap. 10. lib. 3. Simplie. lib. 1. Phis.
• * 1.31

  Academicks.
• * 1.32

  Plato in his 13. Epistle to King Denis.
• * 1.33

  Plato in Ti∣moeus, in his 10. booke of his Common∣weale, and in his Epistle to Dion, Her∣mias, and Co∣ricus. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• * 1.34

  Plato in his booke of Lawes, and in his booke in∣tyled Epino∣mis.
• * 1.35

  We call them Angelles.
• * 1.36

  Of the word Thein, which signifieth to Runne.
• * 1.37

  Plato in his Timoeus and Laertius in Platoes life.
• * 1.38

  Damascius. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• * 1.39

  Iamblichus in his booke of the Sect of Py∣thagoras.
• * 1.40

  Iamblichus in his booke of Mysteries. Chap 1. 3. 5. 12. 16. 17. 39.
• * 1.41

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• * 1.42

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• * 1.43

  Proclusin Pla∣tos Diuinitie.
• * 1.44

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• * 1.45

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• * 1.46

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉
• * 1.47

  Proclus in his booke of the Soule and the Spirit cap. 32. 42. 53.
• * 1.48

  Many Gods (sayth Proclus) is Godlesnesse.
• * 1.49

  Simplicins yp•• the Epictetus of Arrian.
• * 1.50

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉
• * 1.51

  Porphyrius in his z. booke of Abstinence, & in his booke of Occasions. chap. 21.
• * 1.52

  Porphyrius in the life of Plo∣tin.
• * 1.53

  Plotin in his first Enneade lib. 8. Chap. 2. Enneade 6. lib. 4. cap 1 2. 3. 4. & in the whole 6. booke, and in the 3. Enne: lib. 8.
• * 1.54

  Augustin: de Ciuitate Dei. lib. 10. cap. 2.
• * 1.55

  The Peripate∣ecks.
• * 1.56

  Aristotle in his Metaphisiks, and in the first booke of his Naturall Phi∣losophy.
• * 1.57

  Aristotle in his booke of Hea∣uen.
• * 1.58

  Aristotle in his booke of the world, which Iustine the Martir affir∣meth to haue bin named his Abridgemeut of Philosophy. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• * 1.59

  Theophrastus in his Meta∣phisiks. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• * 1.60

  Theophrastus in his booke of Sauours.
• * 1.61

  Alexander of Aphrodise in his booke of Prouidence, and Cyrill a∣gainst Iulian the Apostata.
• * 1.62

  The Stoiks.
• * 1.63

  Epictetus in Arrianus.
• * 1.64

  Seneca euery where.
• * 1.65

  Seneca in his Booke of the happylyfe, & in his Treatise of Comfort.
• * 1.66

  Seneca in his naturall Que∣stions, and in his bookes of Benefiting.
• * 1.67

  Aristotle cal∣leth him 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 that is to say, All the whole.
• * 1.68

  Seneca in his booke of so∣deine death, & in his exhorta∣tions alledged by Lactantius. lib. 1. cap. 5.
• * 1.69

  Cicero in his booke of the Nature of the Gods.
• * 1.70

  Plutarke in his treatise of Isis and Osyris of Oracles that are ceassed: Of calmenesse of Mynd: Against igno∣rant Princes:
• * 1.71

  Of Platonicall Questions: Against the Stoiks: Against Epi∣cures: What is ment by this Greeke word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. ei.
• * 1.72

  Varro, as he is alledged by S. Austin in the Citie of God. lib. 4. cap. 9. 11 & lib. 7. cap. 54. 9. 23.
• * 1.73

  Poetes.
• * 1.74

  Iustin in his booke of Mo∣narchie. Iustin to the Gentyles. Athenagoras in his Treatise concerning the Resurection. The Recanta∣tion of Or∣pheus who is called the Au∣thor of the pluralitie of Gods.
• * 1.75

  Clemens in his Protreptik to the Gentiles.
• * 1.76

  Phocylides,
• * 1.77

  Theognis. Homer.
• * 1.78

  Hesiodus.
• * 1.79

  Sophocles in Cyrillus a∣gainst Iulian the Apostaia.
• * 1.80

  Euripides Cle∣meus in his
• * 1.81

  Aratus. Iouis genus sumus
• * 1.82

  Ouid.
• * 1.83

  Virgil in his fourth booke of Husbandry & euerywhere else.
• * 1.84

  Scaeuola, as he is alledged by S. Austin in the Citie of God lib. 3. Cap. 27.
• * 1.85

  The consent of People.
• * 1.86

  In the Citie of God. lib. 4. cap. 24.
• * 1.87

  Iamblichus concerning the Mysteries of the Egiptians. cap. 37. 39.
• * 1.88

  Plutarke in his treatise of Isis and Osyris.
• * 1.89

  Cicero in his second booke of Lawes. Deos adeunto casté: opes a∣mouento: si secus faxint, Deus ipse vin∣dex erit: that i•• Goe to God chastly: re∣moue away riches: If any doe otherwise God himselfe will punish him. Tertullian in his Defence.
• * 1.90

  Lactantius. lib. 2. cap. 1.
• * 1.91

  Lactantius lib. 1 Chap. 6. Iustine in his Apologie. The Cracles of the Sibylles.
• * 1.92

  Lactan. lib. 1. cap. 6.
• * 1.93

  Porphyrius in his tenth book of the prayses of Philosophy.
• * 1.94

  Pausanias.
• * 1.95

  Proclus vpon Timaeus.
• * 1.96

  Deuter. 6. Psalm. 85.
• * 1.97

  Man cannot comprehend God.
• * 1.98

  Cicero in his booke of the Nature of the Gods.
• * 1.99

  Plotinus Enn. 6. lib. 8. cap 11 Galen in his 9. booke vpon the Decrees of Hippocrates. Although it appeare by cer∣teine demon∣stration, that it is a diuine workmayster that hath pro∣created vs: yet can we not by any wit or rea∣son conceyue, neither what his substance is, nor how he made vs. For we must con∣sider that it is a farre other thing, to shew that a certeyne Prouidence made vs: than to knowe the substance, ey∣ther of our owne Soule, or of him that made vs.
• * 1.100

  Pesuit tene∣bras latibulum suum, Defec•• in A••rijs tuis Domine.
• * 1.101

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• * 1.102

  Mercurius Trismegistus in his Poeman∣der. cap. 2. & 6.
• * 1.103

  Ehjch asher ehjeh.
• * 1.104

  Plotiri. Ennead. 7. lib. 7. cap. 38.
• * 1.105

  Mercurius in his Poemāder. Prouer. 30. v. 4.
• * 1.106

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 sayth Porph. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 sayth Porph. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. in praepositio∣nibus. Dennis in his booke of the names of God.
• * 1.107

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Tibi silentium laus. What God is not.
• * 1.108

  Vnmouable.
• * 1.109

  1. Phisik. 3. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• * 1.110

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Out of the ver∣ses of Parme∣nides reported by Simplicius. Vnchaunge∣able.
• * 1.111

  Euerlasting.
• * 1.112

  Mere Act.
• * 1.113

  Erom Possibi∣litie into deed.
• * 1.114

  A grayne may become an herbe, and a kernell a tree: which they be not so long as they continue a grayne and a kernell. Vnmateriall.
• * 1.115

  God is single and vncom∣pounded.
• * 1.116

  Bodylesse. Numenius 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• * 1.117

  Place is to be considered, ey∣ther as a thing created, or as a conteyner of a thing placed. This way God is nowhere: the other way he is euery where. So is he both euery where, and no where. No where by li∣mitation or poynting downe of place, & euery where by fil∣ling all places.
• * 1.118

  S. Austin vpon the Psalmes.
• * 1.119

  1. Phisic. 2. &c. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• * 1.120

  Infinite.
• * 1.121

  Infinite, not by stretching or streyning out, but by sheading in.
• * 1.122

  The begetting of the Sonne, or of the se∣cond Person
• * 1.123

  Why the se∣cond Person is called the Son, the Worde, Speech, Wise∣dome. &c.
• * 1.124

  Looke in the 12. Chapter of Mercurius tri∣megistus Poe∣mander.
• * 1.125

  Rapid•• qua∣dam Corusca∣••ione perfun∣dit animum. that is to say, it sheadeth through the mynd with a certeyne swift glistering.
• * 1.126

  Vox pr••f••rt, Animus ratio∣cinatur, Men∣tis 〈…〉〈…〉 is to say•• the voyce vttereth, the mynd rea∣soneth or de∣ba••eth, and so Reason is the very word or 〈…〉〈…〉 Mynd.
• * 1.127

  The procee∣ding of the holy Ghost, or third per∣son.
• * 1.128

  Why the holy Ghost is called Loue. &c.
• * 1.129

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• * 1.130

  Of whom, by whom, and in whom.
• * 1.131

  Three Persons and no mo.
• * 1.132

  Traces of the Trinitie in the World and in Man.
• * 1.133

  The welhead, the Spring, & the streame.
• * 1.134

  Plato in his Philebus.
• * 1.135

  Plato. lib. 3. of his Common∣weale: and lib. 10. & 12. of Lawes.
• * 1.136

  Aristo. lib. 1. of Heauen. & lib. 12. of his Me∣taphisiks. Plotin often. &c.
• * 1.137

  The Chaldies heard speake of the Trinite. Zoroast••es. Plutarke in his treatise of Isis and Osyris. Plinie and A∣ristotle beare witnesse that he wrote ma∣ny bookes.
• * 1.138

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Pletho Gemi∣stus.
• * 1.139

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• * 1.140

  Proclus lib. 2. & 3. vpon Pla∣toes Parmeni∣des.
• ‖ 1.141

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• * 1.142

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• * 1.143

  Mercurie. The Egiptians
• * 1.144

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Of the selfebe∣ing in his Poe∣mander. cap. 2.
• * 1.145

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, &c.
• * 1.146

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• * 1.147

  Mercury alled∣ged by Cyril∣lus. lib. 1. against Iulian. & in his Poe∣mander cap. 1. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• * 1.148

  Merc. 1. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Austin in the Prayer of Fiue Heresies. Mercurie in his Esculapius. Chap. 3. & 7.
• * 1.149

  Mercurie in his holy Sermon in his Poeman∣der. cap. 3.
• * 1.150

  Gen. 1.
• * 1.151

  Mercurie in his Poemander. cap. 13.
• * 1.152

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Cyrillus a∣gainst Tul∣gentius.
• * 1.153

  Suidas in his Mercurie. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• * 1.154

  Iamblichus in his 39. Chap. of Mysteries.
• * 1.155

  Plato in his Phedon and Philebus. Eusebius of Demonstra∣tion
• * 1.156

  Iamblichus Chapt. 1. Produs vpon Plato. Damascius the Platonist.
• * 1.157

  The auncient Greekes.
• * 1.158

  Orpheus.
• * 1.159

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. And agayne. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, &c.
• * 1.160

  Clemens lib. 5 Strom. Orph. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• * 1.161

  Pherecydes in Proclus.
• * 1.162

  Orph. in Ar∣gonaut.
• * 1.163

  Aristotle in his first booke of Heauen.
• * 1.164

  Parmenides in his Cosmogo∣ni•• ailedged by Plutarke.
• * 1.165

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• * 1.166

  Plotin. En∣nead. 4. lib. 1. Chap. 8. Zeno the stoik Aleinous con∣cerning the Doctrine of Plato.
• * 1.167

  Plato in his E∣pinomis.
• * 1.168

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• * 1.169

  Plato in his sixt booke of Common∣weale.
• * 1.170

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Plato in his E∣pistle to Her∣mias, Erastus, and Coriscus. Plato vnto Dennis the Tyrant. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉
• * 1.171

  Origen in his 6. booke a∣gainst C••lsus.
• * 1.172

  In his first booke of Phi∣losophy.
• * 1.173

  Also in his booke of the World.
• * 1.174

  In his first booke of Hea∣uen.
• * 1.175

  Orpheus in h•••• Argonawts.
• * 1.176

  Cicero. Iam∣blichus. Por∣phyrius.
• * 1.177

  Clemens in the first booke of his Stro∣mars.
• * 1.178

  Out of Alex∣ander & Her∣mippus.
• * 1.179

  Plato in his Timaeus.
• * 1.180

  Proclus vpon Timaeus.
• * 1.181

  Plutarke in his Treatise of Isis and Osyris.
• * 1.182

  Plato in his E∣pinomis, Cra∣tylus, and Phil.
• * 1.183

  Iustine & Ma∣nethon alled∣ged by Iose∣phus against Appion.
• * 1.184

  Psalm. 2.
• * 1.185

  Prouerb. 8.
• * 1.186

  Gen. 1.
• * 1.187

  Esay. 53.
• * 1.188

  Esay. 61.
• * 1.189

  Psalm. 33.
• * 1.190

  The Iewes themselues do proue the Tri∣nitie.
• * 1.191

  R. Simeon ben Iohai expoun∣ding the 6. of Esay.
• * 1.192

  Psalm. 50. and the Midra••ch vpō the same.
• * 1.193

  R. Moyses Ha∣darsan vpon the 42. of Gen. Midrasch Co∣beleth chap. 4.
• * 1.194

  Rabbi Isha•• ben Schola vp∣pon the last verses of the 111. and 112. Psalmes.
• * 1.195

  R. Azariel in his Commen∣tarie or treatise of Holinesse.
• * 1.196

  Iepher haije••∣sirab.
• * 1.197

  R. Hamay in his Treatise of Speculation. Hagnij ••n.
• * 1.198

  R. Ishaac vpon the booke of the Creation.
• * 1.199

  Cether choch∣nah binah. Rabbi Assee.
• * 1.200

  In his booke intytled, Scha∣guar orah. that is to say, The Gate of Light.
• * 1.201

  The Epistle of the Secretes of R Nehumia the Sonne of Hacana.
• * 1.202

  This is to bee seene euen in Sainct Math. chap. 1. ver. 20. where the An∣gell sayth to Ioseph, that Mary was with child by the holy Ghost: for otherwise it had bin to no purpose to haue spoken of the holy Ghost, of whō they had not heard any speaking a∣fore.
• * 1.203

  The same is also in the Preaching of Iohn the Bap∣tist, Chapter 3. verse 20. He shall baptise ye with the holy Ghost & with Fyre. And in diuers other places. And in very deede the name of the holy Ghost is rife among all the Rabbines. Philo in his Treatise vpon the sixe Daies. In his treatise, That Dreames are of God. In his booke of the World. In his booke of the remo∣uings of Abra∣ham.
• * 1.204

  Philo in the Allegories of the law, in his Bookes of of Dreames, of Tyllage, of the firy sword, of the Heire of Heauēly thīgs, of the euil that layeth snares for the good, &c.
• * 1.205

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• * 1.206

  Philo in his bookes con∣cerning the Heyre of Hea∣uenly things, of the mo••esty of Women, and of the word, &c.
• * 1.207

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that is to say, as a print prin∣ted in Waxe,
• * 1.208

  The later Py∣thagorians & Academiks. Numenius in his booke of the Good. Looke Euse∣bius and Cy∣rillus. lib. 8.
• * 1.209

  The Reader must vnder∣stand, that by three gods thei meane three Inbeeings, as they thēselues do declare it.
• * 1.210

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉,
• * 1.211

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• * 1.212

  This Plotinus liued vnder the Emperour Ga∣lien about the yere of on Lord 25 or. Plotin. Enn. 5, lib. 1.
• * 1.213

  Of the three souerein or cheefe persons or Inbeings.
• * 1.214

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. To the intent the Reader think not any obscuritie in this or other that follow, he must remem∣ber that to the first Inbeeing, (that is to say, Persone) the Philosophers giue the names of the One, The Mind, the Good, the Fa∣ther, and the Begetter: vnto the second per∣sone, the na∣mes of Beeër or he that is, wit or vnder∣standing, the Beautifull, and sometimes Speech, word, Reason, wis∣dom, Sonne, and the begot∣ten: and vnto the third per∣sone, the na∣mes of Loue, Will, Power, and the Soule of the World: & sometimes, the second world, &c.
• * 1.215

  In respect of this Third, thei call the First the Amiable, and in respect of the Second, they call him the Mynd, as shall be seene by examples.
• * 1.216

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Another per∣sone and not another thing.
• * 1.217

  Plotin Enn. 5. lib. 2. &. lib. 3. Chap. 85. & Ernead. 3. lib. 9. Cap. vlt.
• * 1.218

  The vnder∣standing of the Good.
• * 1.219

  Plotinus Enn. 5. lib. 2. & lib. 3 Chap. 5. 6. 7. 12. & lib 4. Chap. 2.
• * 1.220

  Plotin. Enn. 5. lib. 5. Ch. 3. & lib. 6. Ch. 1. & lib. 8. ch. 12. & Enn. 3. lib. 8. cap. 7. 8. 10.
• * 1.221

  Plotin. Enn. 5. lib. 9. Chap. 1.
• * 1.222

  Plotin. Enn. 6. lib. 7. ch. 39. & lib. 7.
• * 1.223

  The same in one respect, & another in a∣nother respect; or, all one in one respect, & diuers in ano∣ther respect.
• * 1.224

  Plotin. Enn. 5. lib. 5. cap. 12.
• * 1.225

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• * 1.226

  Plotin. Enn. 5. lib. 8. Chap. 5.
• * 1.227

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• * 1.228

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• * 1.229

  Plotin in his booke of In∣shapes.
• * 1.230

  Enn. 3. lib. 9. Chap. 2.
• * 1.231

  Plotin. Enn. 6. lib. 8. 8. Chap. 13. 15. 27.
• * 1.232

  Plotin Enn. 3. lib. 8. Chap. 10.
• * 1.233

  Plotin. Enn. 3. lib. 9. Chap. 1.
• * 1.234

  Cyril against Iulian lib 8. Porphyrius in the lyfe of Plo∣t••••us.
• * 1.235

  Plotinus agaīst the Gnostiks. Enn. 2. lib. 9. Chap. 1. Iamblicus of the sect of the Pythagorists, and in his booke of the Mysteries of the Egyptians. Chap. 37. and 39.
• * 1.236

  Porphirie in his 4. booke of 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Philoso∣phers.
• * 1.237

  Cyrill. against Iulian. lib. 1.
• * 1.238

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• * 1.239

  Cyrill against Iulian. lib. 1.
• * 1.240

  Porphyrius in his booke of the chiefe fa∣thers, alledged by Proclus.
• * 1.241

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉
• * 1.242

  Proclus in Pla∣toes Diuinitie.
• * 1.243

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• * 1.244

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• * 1.245

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉
• * 1.246

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• * 1.247

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• * 1.248

  Amelius a Pla∣tonist.
• * 1.249

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• * 1.250

  Cyril. against Iulian. lib. 8. Austin in the Citie of God. lib. 10.
• * 1.251

  The Latin Philosophers. Chalcidius vp∣pon Platoes Timeus.
• * 1.252

  Macrobius vppon the Dreame of Scipio. God & Mynd begotten of God.
• * 1.253

  Auicen.
• * 1.254

  The Oracles of Diuelles. Sybill.
• * 1.255

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• * 1.256

  Suidas in the lyfe of Thulis
• * 1.257

  Porphirius as he is alledged by S. Austin in his ninth book of the Citie of God. Cha. 23.
• * 1.258

  The world it selfe telleth vs that it had a beginning.
• * 1.259

  An obiection.
• * 1.260

  Man had a be∣ginning.
• * 1.261

  An obiection.
• * 1.262

  The linking of things togi∣ther.
• * 1.263

  The inwoor∣king of the Mynd begin∣neth at the end.
• * 1.264

  The Originall of Sciences. Lucr: Carus: This nature & reason of thīgs was lately fo••d out, and I m••y selfe was one of the first that did stumble vpon it, & am able to turne it into my na∣tiue language. ••••d Persius sayth, It came hither after the time that my Countrymen began to taste of Pepper and Dates.
• * 1.265

  Austin. lib. 18. of the Citie of God, Cha. 37. Cicero: Iam∣blicus: Por∣phyrius.
• * 1.266

  Orpheus in his Argonauts.
• * 1.267

  Proclus vpon Timeus. Plutark in his Isis and Osiris. Iamblicus in his booke of Mysteries. Chap. 1.
• * 1.268

  Clemens Ale∣xandrin. in his booke of Stro∣mats alledging Alexander, Hermippus, & Clearchus, Porphyrius al∣ledged by En∣sebius. lib. 11.
• * 1.269

  Laertius in the lyfe of Thales.
• * 1.270

  Thales in his Epistle to Phe∣recydes in Cle∣mens Alexād: Plinie. lib. 5. 6.
• * 1.271

  Plinie. lib. 2. Plutark in the lyfe of Niceas. Quintilian. lib. 1.
• * 1.272

  Censorius cō∣cerning Chri∣stes birthday. Cap. 9. Varro.
• * 1.273

  Arithmetik & Geometry. Plato in his Epinomis.
• * 1.274

  The Originall of Crafts, Tra∣des and Artes. Varro in his fifth booke & first Chapter of Husbandry.
• * 1.275

  Leachecraft which com∣prehendeth Phisik and Surgerie.
• * 1.276

  Cicero in his booke of the nature of the Gods.
• * 1.277

  He o lotus. lib. 1.
• * 1.278

  The originall or gouernmēt.
• * 1.279

  〈…〉〈…〉 Cap. 21.
• * 1.280

  Pomponius of of the first cō∣ming vp of the Lawe.
• * 1.281

  Plutark in the lyues of Solon and Lycurgus, and in his trea∣tise of his and Osyris.
• * 1.282

  Iustine the Martyr alled∣geth Diodorus in his exhorta∣tion.
• * 1.283

  Iosephus a∣gainst Appion
• * 1.284

  Iustine in his first booke.
• * 1.285

  Plini, lib. 7. Merodotus. lib. 2.
• * 1.286

  〈…〉〈…〉
• * 1.287

  The originall o•• the Heathē Goddes.
• * 1.288

  Traffik of Merchandyse, and bargay∣ning, buying and selling.
• * 1.289

  Nauigation. Plinie lib. 7.
• * 1.290

  Strabo. lib. 16.
• * 1.291

  Tibullus Ele∣••ia. 7.
• * 1.292

  That is to say the Land of Canaan. Berosus alled∣ged by Iose∣phus against Appion.
• * 1.293

  Feeding.
• * 1.294

  Plinie. lib. 7. & Diodorus. lib. 1. 2. 6.
• * 1.295

  The first com∣ming vp of Histories.
• * 1.296

  Plinie. lib. 7. Apuleius in his Florishes.
• * 1.297

  Plutark in the l••fe of The∣seus.
• * 1.298

  Censorinus.
• * 1.299

  Varro in his third booke of Husbandry vnto Pto:
• * 1.300

  Diodorus. lib. 3.
• * 1.301

  Clemens Ale∣xandr. in his first booke of S••om:
• * 1.302

  Lucretius the Romane Poet.
• * 1.303

  Diodorus. lib. 8. 1.
• * 1.304

  Plinie lib. 7. Herodotus. lib. 5.
• * 1.305

  Varro in his first booke of Analogie. Crates the Greeke Philo∣sopher demaū∣ding why the Greekes decli∣ned not the names of their letters saying 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 as wel as thei said 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 was answered by the Greekes themselues, that it was by∣cause those names of their letters are not Greeke but barbarus. Lucane. lib. 3. Eupolemus in his booke of the Kings of Iuda alledged by Clemens of Alexandria in his fowrth booke.
• * 1.306

  Obiections.
• * 1.307

  The World scarce knowen in old time.
• * 1.308

  Reade the Na∣uigations of the Portin∣gales and Spa∣niards.
• * 1.309

  Thucidides in his first booke.
• * 1.310

  Orpheus in his Argonauts.
• * 1.311

  Herodotus, lib. 4.
• * 1.312

  The proceedīg or growing foreward of the World.
• * 1.313

  An History of the Realme of China.
• * 1.314

  Strabo. lib. 3. Plutark in the lyfe of Scipio.
• * 1.315

  The Histories of Affricke.
• * 1.316

  Aristides in his Pautheuaik,
• * 1.317

  An Obiection of Fluddes taken out of Plato.
• * 1.318

  The obiection of Auerrhoes.
• * 1.319

  The men of most antiqui∣tie beleeued the Creation of the world.
• * 1.320

  Mercury in his Poemander.
• * 1.321

  Mercury in his Poemander, the. 1. & 3. cap.
• * 1.322

  Mercurie al∣ledged by Cy∣rillus in his se∣cond booke ageinst Iulian the Renegate. Mercurie in his holy Sermon.
• * 1.323

  Orpheus in his Argonawtes.
• * 1.324

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉
• * 1.325

  Orpheus in his Argonawtes.
• * 1.326

  Hesiodus in his booke of woorkes and Dayes, and in his Genealogie of the Goddes.
• * 1.327

  Plutark in his booke of the opiniōs of the Philosophers.
• * 1.328

  Varro in his second booke of Husban∣dry.
• * 1.329

  Iamblichus one of the sect of Pythagoras, cyting Archi∣tas.
• * 1.330

  Laertius in the lyfe of Thales.
• * 1.331

  Plutark in his banket.
• * 1.332

  Aristole in his eightth booke of naturall Philosophie. Epicurus in Cicero.
• * 1.333

  Plutark in the Opinions of the Philoso∣phers, and in the creation of the Soule.
• * 1.334

  Aphrodisius as he is alled∣ged by Simpli∣cius vpon the bookes of Heauen.
• * 1.335

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• * 1.336

  Plato in his common∣weale.
• * 1.337

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• * 1.338

  Agenist Ari∣stotles Eterniti.
• * 1.339

  Aristotle in his. 1. 3. & 8. bookes of na¦turall Philoso∣phie; In his first booke of the Heauens. and in his first booke of the breede of li∣uing things.
• * 1.340

  Algazel.
• * 1.341

  Aristotle in his first booke of Heauen▪ cap. 9.
• * 1.342

  Proclus con∣cerning the Influence of the first cause.
• * 1.343

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Plato in his Cratilus. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• * 1.344

  Plotin in his booke of the world.
• * 1.345

  Damascius vppon the bookes of the Skye
• * 1.346

  Proclus in his second booke vpon Timeus. Aristotle a∣geinst Aristo∣tle.
• * 1.347

  As in way of end.
• * 1.348

  Aristotle in his problemes Sect. 10. Probl: 64.
• * 1.349

  Sect. 10. Probl. 15.
• * 1.350

  Aristotle in his third booke of the breeding of liuing wyghts. Lucrece: The Wombes of the Earth grew fit for rootes.
• * 1.351

  Aristotle in his xjj. booke of Metaphisiks Chap. 7.
• * 1.352

  Aristotle in his second booke of Generation and Corrup∣tion. Cap. 10. and in his bookes of Comonweale.
• * 1.353

  Theophrast in his booke of Sents, Sauors, or Smelles.
• * 1.354

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• * 1.355

  The Latins.
• * 1.356

  Cicero in his first booke of Inuention, & in his first booke of the Orator.
• * 1.357

  Cicero in his second booke of the Nature of the Gods.
• * 1.358

  Cicero in his Lawes.
• * 1.359

  Varro.
• * 1.360

  Seneca in his first booke of the happy lyfe. Chap. 31 and 32. and in the first booke of his naturall Questions: and in his Epistles. Macrobius lib. 1. Saturna∣lium. Virgil. Ouid. Lucretius the Poet.
• * 1.361

  Pliny.
• * 1.362

  Plinie. lib. 7.
• * 1.363

  Plin. lib. 2.
• * 1.364

  The Stoiks.
• * 1.365

  The Platonists
• * 1.366

  The Epicures.
• * 1.367

  The Peripate∣tiks.
• * 1.368

  Pliny.
• * 1.369

  The opinions of the Plato∣nistes.
• * 1.370

  Plotin. En∣nead: 2. lib. 1. cap. 1. and. 2.
• * 1.371

  Plotinus En∣nead. 3. lib. 2. Chap. 2.
• * 1.372

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• * 1.373

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• * 1.374

  Porphyrius.
• * 1.375

  Iustinian in the preface to his Digests.
• * 1.376

  Plutark in his Psychogonie.
• * 1.377

  Galen in his third booke of the vse of the Partes of mens bodyes.
• * 1.378

  Gal. lib. 11. & 17.
• * 1.379

  Galen in his booke of the breeding of Children.
• * 1.380

  Galen in his fifteenth book of the vse of Partes.
• * 1.381

  He that graū∣teth God to be former, fashio∣ner, or giuer of shape; doth therewith con∣fesse him to be the Creator.
• * 1.382

  Aristotle in his second booke of things ••∣bo••e na••••••re.
• * 1.383

  The particular Creation of all things.
• * 1.384

  Aphrodisaeus in his first booke of the Soule.
• * 1.385

  The Peripate∣tiks.
• * 1.386

  Simplicius vp∣pon the natu∣rals.
• * 1.387

  Syrian vppon the Superna∣turals.
• * 1.388

  Aristotle in his second booke of the breede of liuing things. chap. 3.
• * 1.389

  Aristotle in his 4•• booke of Meteores, Chap. 10.
• * 1.390

  Aristotle in his second booke of the breede of liuing wights, to∣wards the end.
• * 1.391

  Arist. in his probl. sect. 10. probl. 64.
• * 1.392

  Aphr. probl. 1.
• * 1.393

  The Platonists
• * 1.394

  Plotin in his book of Con∣templation & of the One.
• * 1.395

  Plotin in his 1. book Enne. 2. Whence euill commeth.
• * 1.396

  Ennea. 2. lib. 4.
• * 1.397

  Plo••n in his booke of Pro∣uidence, & Enn••d. 6. lib. 1. Chapt. 17.
• * 1.398

  Porphyrie vp∣pon Timaeus.
• * 1.399

  Galen in his booke of the fashioning of infants in their moothers wombe.
• * 1.400

  In his second book of Tem∣perings.
• * 1.401

  Ignorance next cosin vn∣to Guyle.
• * 1.402

  What Proui∣dence is.
• * 1.403

  All working of an vnder∣standing mind is to some end.
• * 1.404

  Obiections a∣gainst Gods Prouidence. Alphonse the tenth King of Spayne sayd that if he had bin with God at the creation of the world, it should haue bin much bet∣ter ordered thā it is: and God punished him for so saying. Roderik of Toledo in the sixth chap. of his 4. booke.
• * 1.405

  The obiection of Moūtaines.
• * 1.406

  Wyld Beastes.
• * 1.407

  The Sea, Aristotle con∣cludeth that there is a Pro∣uidence, by∣cause the earth is vncouered, which the Sea as the hygher element wold else ouer∣whelme. In his booke of Woonders.
• * 1.408

  The wynd
• * 1.409

  The Earth vn∣habitable.
• * 1.410

  The birth of Man.
• * 1.411

  Siknesses and Diseases.
• * 1.412

  Obiection of base and vyle things.
• * 1.413

  This fellowe for his leawd∣nes gat a Gib∣bet, He a Crowne.
• * 1.414

  That the false goodes are comon both too good and bad.
• * 1.415

  The murthe∣ring of Inno∣cents and gilt∣lesse persons.
• * 1.416

  The Goddes allowed that case which had the vpper hand. But Cato with the vanqui∣shed, ageinst the Goddes did stand.
• * 1.417

  Seneca in his third booke of Anger.
• * 1.418

  Caesar sawe Cimbrus Tul∣lius, who had a litle afore bin very whote in his defence, & others of his owne confe∣derates in Ar∣mes, stād now with their Swords drawe about his Chaire of E∣state, and ta∣king part with the Pompeies after Pōpeyes decease.
• * 1.419

  The cause why men find fault with Gods Proui∣dence.
• * 1.420

  The slowe pu∣nishment of the wicked.
• * 1.421

  Wickednes is a punishment to it selfe. Seneca in his Thebais. Feare not: for he shalbe pu∣nished, & that right sore. He shall reigne: That is a pu∣nishment. And if thou dout thereof, beleeue his fa∣ther and his graundfather.
• * 1.422

  How God suf∣fereth euill in the World.
• * 1.423

  Saluian in his vii booke of Prouidence.
• * 1.424

  The very Sinnes of good men are re∣dressed to their benefite.
• * 1.425

  Euilles are in the world as things set one ageinst ano∣ther, after the maner as it is in the elo∣quence of wordes.
• * 1.426

  The actions and mouings are of God; but the disor∣ders of them and the hal∣tings are of ourselues.
• * 1.427

  The Men of old tyme.
• * 1.428

  Hermes in his Asclepius, and Cyrillus in his second booke.
• * 1.429

  If the man that suffereth be good; also. Plotin lib. 3. Ennead. 4.
• * 1.430

  Porphyrius to Nemertius.
• * 1.431

  Cyrillus in his second and Fifth bookes ageinst Iulian.
• * 1.432

  Syn••sius the Platonist.
• * 1.433

  Hierocles.
• * 1.434

  Aristotle in his Moralles to Nicomachus and Eudemus.
• * 1.435

  Alexander of Aphrodise in his booke of Prouidence.
• * 1.436

  Seneca concer∣ning Benefits, lib. 2. Cap. 4. 5. 6. 21. 31.
• * 1.437

  Porphyrius in his Collectiōs of Philosophy. Oppianus 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉
• * 1.438

  Ageinst For∣tune.
• * 1.439

  Proclus vppon Timeus.
• * 1.440

  Iunenall. I here wants no God at all, where wisdum doth aduyse: we ••ooles haue fortune deifide and plaste aboue the Skyes, Cicero.
• * 1.441

  Error, & Blind¦nes and the not knowing of things and causes, haue brought vp the names of Nature and Fortune.
• * 1.442

  Ageinst Destinie.
• * 1.443

  Godes fore∣sight or For∣knowledge.
• * 1.444

  If it be pre∣destined (saieth one) that thou shalt recouer thy sicknes, it is in vayn for thee to send for the Phisi∣sion. If it be thy destiny (answereth another) to haue Childrē; it is in vayn for thee to cōpany with thy wyfe.
• * 1.445

  Man is both Soule & body.
• * 1.446

  In Man are three Abilitie•• of Soule.
• * 1.447

  The Body and the Soule be not one self∣same thing.
• * 1.448

  That the Soule is a sub∣stance.
• * 1.449

  Bodilesse.
• * 1.450

  Vnmateriall.
• * 1.451

  The Soule hath beeing of it sel••. Plutark in his tre••y••e why God deferreth the punish∣ment of the wicked: Vncorruptible.
• * 1.452

  What is death
• * 1.453

  Cleu••. lib. 1.
• * 1.454

  Three lyues i•• Man.
• * 1.455

  Obiections.
• * 1.456

  The opinion of the Men of old tyme.
• * 1.457

  The beleefe of the Patriarkes. &c.
• * 1.458

  The wise Men of Egipt.
• * 1.459

  Hermes in his Poemander.
• * 1.460

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉
• * 1.461

  Hermes in his Poemander. cap. 10.
• * 1.462

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• * 1.463

  Hermes in his Esculapius. AEnaeas Gaz. concerning the immortalitie of the Soule.
• * 1.464

  Gha••deans.
• * 1.465

  The Greekes.
• * 1.466

  Pherecydes.
• * 1.467

  Assyrium vul∣go nascetur A∣monium.
• * 1.468

  Phocylides.
• * 1.469

  Sybill.
• * 1.470

  Pindar in the second song of his Olympiads Homer in the Funeralles of his Iliads.
• * 1.471

  Pythagoras. Hera••litus as he is reported by Philo. Epicharmus as he is reported by Clement of Ale••andria.
• * 1.472

  Thales, Ana∣xagoras, Dio∣genes and Ze∣••o.
• * 1.473

  Epicurus.
• * 1.474

  Lucretius.
• * 1.475

  Socrates, Plato and Xenophō.
• * 1.476

  Plato in his Timaeus.
• * 1.477

  Plato in his Timaeus, and in his third booke of a Comonweale.
• * 1.478

  Plato in his Phoedon, in his matter of state, in his Al∣••ibiades, and in the tenth booke of his Comonweale.
• * 1.479

  Plato in his fifth booke of Lawes.
• * 1.480

  Aristotle in his second booke of liuīg things.
• * 1.481

  Aristotle in the third book of the Soule.
• * 1.482

  Aristotle in his tenth booke of moralles.
• * 1.483

  Michael of E∣phesus vpon Aristotles Mo∣ralles.
• * 1.484

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• * 1.485

  In his second booke of the Soule.
• * 1.486

  In the last booke of the parts of beasts. In the tenth of his Supernatu∣ralles.
• * 1.487

  In his first booke of mat∣ters of state.
• * 1.488

  The opinion of the Latin writers.
• * 1.489

  Cicero in his first booke of his Tusculane Questions, & in his booke of Comfort.
• * 1.490

  Cicero in his second booke of the Nature of the Gods: and in his fust booke of Lawes.
• * 1.491

  In Scipioes dreame.
• * 1.492

  Ouid in his first booke of Metamorpho∣sis.
• * 1.493

  Seneca writing to Gallio and to Lucillus.
• * 1.494

  Seneca concer∣ning the Lady Martiaze Sōne and the short∣nesse of this life In his Que¦stions, and in his hooke of Comfort.
• * 1.495

  Fauorinus.
• * 1.496

  The common opinion of all nations.
• * 1.497

  Porphyrius in his 4. booke of Abstinence.
• * 1.498

  Which with their owne hands made the fire to burne their bodies in: and sawe aliue the kindled flame that should consume their Skinne.
• * 1.499

  Gebeleizie, that is to say, Register or Gi∣uer of caze & rest.
• * 1.500

  Gebeleizie, that is to say, Register or Gi∣uer of caze & rest.
• * 1.501

  Plutarke in his treatise of the flow punish∣ing of the wic∣ked.
• * 1.502

  The opinion of the later Philosophers.
• * 1.503

  Epictetus. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉
• * 1.504

  Simplicius.
• * 1.505

  Plotinus. Plotin. lib. 1. Ennead. 4. cō∣cerning the Beeing of the Soule, & lib. 2. cap. 1. & lib. 3. cap. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. lib. 4 cap. 11. & the seauenth book throughout.
• * 1.506

  Plotinus in his booke of the Sences, & of Memorie. En. 4. lib. 3. and in his booke of doubts concer∣ning the Soule chap. 26. 27.
• * 1.507

  Alexander of Aphrodise in his bookes of the Soule.
• * 1.508

  In his second booke of Pro∣blemes.
• * 1.509

  Galen in his booke of the Manners of the Soule.
• * 1.510

  In his booke of the doctrine of Hippocrates and Plato.
• * 1.511

  In his booke of Concepti∣on.
• * 1.512

  The vniuersall consent.
• * 1.513

  In the Alcorā, Azo: 25. and 42.
• * 1.514

  It appeareth by the storyes or the East and West Indyes.
• * 1.515

  Ageinst Auerr∣hoes.
• * 1.516

  Let the Reader beare these termes & their significations in Mynd, for al the discourse here ensewing.
• * 1.517

  Auerhoes, vp∣pon Aristotles third booke of the Soule.
• * 1.518

  Aristotle in his second booke of the Soule.
• * 1.519

  Aristotle in his first booke of the Soule.
• * 1.520

  Aristotle in his ••. booke of Su∣pernaturalls.
• * 1.521

  Aristotle in his third booke of of the Soule.
• * 1.522

  Against Ale∣xander of A∣phrodise.
• * 1.523

  Mans corrup∣tion appeereth in his respect to Godward.
• * 1.524

  The sonne of the earth.
• * 1.525

  In respect of the World.
• * 1.526

  In respect of Man.
• * 1.527

  Man in respect of himself.
• * 1.528

  Diodorus lib. 4.
• * 1.529

  Herodotus in his Clio.
• * 1.530

  Austin in his woork of the Citie of God, lib. 14. Chap. 17. and 18.
• * 1.531

  The Cato∣pleb and also the Cocka∣tryce.
• * 1.532

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• * 1.533

  Whence mans corruption cō∣meth.
• * 1.534

  How long ago corruption came into mā.
• * 1.535

  The Consci∣ence of Sinne.
• * 1.536

  The opinion of the Aunci∣ent Philoso∣phers.
• * 1.537

  Aristotle.
• * 1.538

  Theophrast.
• * 1.539

  Plato in his Phedrus.
• * 1.540

  Empedocles and Pythago∣ras.
• * 1.541

  Philolaus.
• * 1.542

  Pherecydes al∣ledged by Ori∣gen against Cellus.
• * 1.543

  Hermes in his Poemander.
• * 1.544

  Zoroastres
• * 1.545

  Gemistus.
• * 1.546

  Hierocles the Stoic against Ath••••••ts.
• * 1.547

  Plutarke in his booke of Mo∣rall vertue, and in his booke of the mutuall loue betweene Parents and their Children and That Beastes haue Reason.
• * 1.548

  Plotin: Enn. 3. lib. 2.
• * 1.549

  Also Enn. 1. lib. 6 Cap. 5. Also Enn. 1. lib. 8. Cap. 14. & Enn. 6. lib. 9 Cap. 9.
• * 1.550

  Plotin. lib. 1. Enn. 5. Cap. 1.
• * 1.551

  Plotin. Enn. 1. lib. 8. Cap. 4.
• * 1.552

  Plotin. Enn. 3, lib. 5. Cap. 5.
• * 1.553

  Enn. 3. lib. 3. Cap 4.
• * 1.554

  Plotin. Eun. 1. lib. 8. Cap. 14. & lid. 3. Cap. 4
• * 1.555

  S. Austin in the Citie of God, lib. 10. Cap. 23. and 32.
• * 1.556

  Porphyrius in his booke which she∣weth how to do the things that are to be conceyued al∣only by reason and vnderstan∣ding.
• * 1.557

  Also in his third booke of Abstinence.
• * 1.558

  Proclus con∣cerning the Soule and con∣cerning the Feend. cap. 4.
• * 1.559

  Simplicius vp∣pon Epictus.
• * 1.560

  Vniuersall consent,
• * 1.561

  Agathias in his secōd book of the Persian Warres.
• * 1.562

  The generall Historie of the Indyes ca. 122.
• * 1.563

  Obiections.
• * 1.564

  Things are said to be good, either by cause they come to good end, or were purposed to a good end.
• * 1.565

  Mannes end or amingpoynt and his welfare consist or rest both in one thing.
• * 1.566

  The Mark•••• whereby to knowe the amingpoynt and welfare of Man.
• * 1.567

  The world is not the end to which man was made.
• * 1.568

  God is the end or Marke that Man ameth a••.
• * 1.569

  The false ends and the false Welfares.
• * 1.570

  Riches.
• * 1.571

  Honor.
• * 1.572

  Powre Au∣thoritie and Soucreintie.
• * 1.573

  The vtmost end & ••••uerein good of Man are not in him∣self.
• * 1.574

  Beautie.
• * 1.575

  Helth
• * 1.576

  Bodily Plea∣sure, Volup∣tuousenes, or Sensualitie.
• * 1.577

  Vertue.
• * 1.578

  Polici••.
• * 1.579

  Wisdome or Religiousnes.
• * 1.580

  Faith or Be∣leef.
• * 1.581

  Agazel in the beginning of his Supernatu∣ralles.
• * 1.582

  Austin in his xix booke and first cap. of the Citie of God.
• * 1.583

  The Epicures. Antisthenes answered 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• * 1.584

  The Stoiks.
• * 1.585

  The Peripate∣tikes or wal∣kers.
• * 1.586

  Aristotle in his Moralles. lib. 5
• * 1.587

  Porphyr. in his first booke of the Soule to Byrithius and Anebon.
• * 1.588

  The Acade∣miks. Plato in his Common∣weale lib. 10. In his Epino∣mis. In his Theete∣••••s.
• * 1.589

  Laertius in the life of Plato-Plato in his Phoedon.
• * 1.590

  Aristotle in his booke of the World: And in his Morals; and in his first booke of the Heauens.
• * 1.591

  The Philoso∣phers of old tyme.
• * 1.592

  Pythagoras. Mercurius Trif megistus, o∣therwise called Hermes.
• * 1.593

  Zoroastres.
• * 1.594

  Plutarke.
• * 1.595

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• * 1.596

  Iamblichus.
• * 1.597

  Plotin. Enn. 1. lib. 4. cap. 15. 16.
• * 1.598

  Plotin. Enn. 6. lib. 9. Cap. 10.
• * 1.599

  Porphyrius in his worke of abstinence. lib. 1. cap. 2.
• * 1.600

  Porphyrius concerning the Soule, to Byrithius and Anebo the AEgiptian. Simplicius vp∣on the Natu∣ralles and vp∣pon Epictetus.
• * 1.601

  Vpon these words, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• * 1.602

  Alexander in his booke of Prouidence, cyted by Cy∣••illus.
• * 1.603

  The ends both of the good & of the bad.
• * 1.604

  In their booke of shame con∣cealed.
• * 1.605

  Hermes Tris∣megistus in his Poemander.
• * 1.606

  Orpheus.
• * 1.607

  Pythagoras. Pindarus Di∣philu•• Sibylla.
• * 1.608

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Tat is to say, they that wor∣ship the sooth∣fast and euer∣lasting God, shall inherit lyfe for euer time without end, dwelling in Paradyse a∣lyke euer flo∣rishing greene. But of the o∣ther sort she sayth thus.
• * 1.609

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. That is to say, rosted cōtinu∣ally with fyre∣brāds of peines Socrates in de∣fence of him∣self.
• * 1.610

  Plato in his Cratylus.
• * 1.611

  Plato in his Theetetus.
• * 1.612

  Plato in his Gorgias.
• * 1.613

  Plato in his Phoedon, and in his tenth booke of Lawes.
• * 1.614

  Plato in his A∣xiochus.
• * 1.615

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• * 1.616

  Plato in his Common∣weale.
• * 1.617

  Plutarke, con∣cerning the slowe punni∣shing of the wicked.
• * 1.618

  There is but one true Reli∣gion.
• * 1.619

  Marsilius fici∣nus cōcerning the Christian Religion.
• * 1.620

  In the last cap. of his Escula∣pius.
• * 1.621

  Plato in his Epinomis and in his Thoe••te∣tus.
• * 1.622

  Aristotle in his fifth booke of Moralles: and in his first of Heauen.
• * 1.623

  Auerrhoes vp∣pon that first booke of Hea∣uen.
• * 1.624

  Alexander of Aphrodyse, concerning the prouidence of God, cyted by Cyrillus.
• * 1.625

  Simplicius vp∣pon Epictetus.
• * 1.626

  Hierocles in his first chap∣ter against A∣theifts.
• * 1.627

  Hierocles. cap. 6. 19. 11.
• * 1.628

  Iamblichus in his 45. Chap∣ter of Myste∣ries,
• * 1.629

  Proclus in his booke of pray∣ing.
• * 1.630

  Tha•• there is but one true Religion.
• * 1.631

  An obiection.
• * 1.632

  The first mark of the true Re∣ligion.
• * 1.633

  The second marke of true Religion.
• * 1.634

  Plato in his se∣cond Epistle: and in his Par∣menides.
• * 1.635

  Aristotle in his Supernaturals.
• * 1.636

  Cicero in his first booke of Lawes.
• * 1.637

  Iamblichus.
• * 1.638

  Alpharabius in his booke of Sciences.
• * 1.639

  The third marke of true Religion.
• * 1.640

  Hierocles in his 14. and 24. Chapters, and in his preface.
• * 1.641

  An obiection.
• * 1.642

  Iob. 38.
• * 1.643

  P••alm. 104.
• * 1.644

  Esay. 48. & 61.
• * 1.645

  Iob. 38.
• * 1.646

  Psal. 104.
• * 1.647

  Origen ageinst Celsus. lib. 3.
• * 1.648

  Cato in his oration for the Rhodians.
• * 1.649

  The Heathen acknowledged the true God to be in Israell▪
• * 1.650

  Austin, in the Citi of God. lib. 8. chap. 31. Denis of Haly∣carnassus. lib. 1.
• * 1.651

  Tacitus, lib. 5. or (as some editions haue) lib. 2.
• * 1.652

  Appiō ageinst Iosephus.
• * 1.653

  2. Kings. 18. 19.
• * 1.654

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉
• * 1.655

  Hecataeus the Abderita.
• * 1.656

  Moenina, Alexander who vaunted himselfe as a God.
• * 1.657

  Iosephus in his Antiquities, lib. 11 cha. 8.
• * 1.658

  Cicero in his oration for Flaccus.
• * 1.659

  Seneca in his Booke of Su∣perstitions.
• * 1.660

  Seneca in his booke of Su∣perstition. Austin de Ci∣••itate Dei. lib. 6. cap. 10.
• * 1.661

  Origen a∣gainst Celsus. lib. 3.
• * 1.662

  Iulian ageinst the Galileans.
• * 1.663

  Zosimus. lib. 4. Socrates. lib. 3. cap. 11.
• * 1.664

  Hermes in his Esculapius, translated by Apulcius.
• * 1.665

  Austin de Ci∣uitate Dei. lib. 8. cap. 23. The Gods of the Egiptians.
• * 1.666

  Cyprian con∣cerning the vanity of Idols
• * 1.667

  Plutarke in his treatise of Isis and Osyris.
• * 1.668

  The Gods of the Phoenici∣ans.
• * 1.669

  Sanchoniati∣on traslated by Iosephus.
• * 1.670

  The Gods of the Greekes. Herodotus, lib. 2.
• * 1.671

  Aulus Gelliu•• lib. 3. cap. 11. & li. 17. ca. 21.
• * 1.672

  Pophirius in the lyfe of Py∣thagoras.
• * 1.673

  Apuleius and Aulus Gelins.
• * 1.674

  The Gods of the Romanes.
• * 1.675

  Titus Liuius, Decad: 4 libro ••kimo.
• * 1.676

  Valerius Ma∣••mus lib. 1.
• * 1.677

  Plinius lib. 13. cap 13.
• * 1.678

  Austin lib. 7. cap. 14.
• * 1.679

  Lactantius. lib. 1.
• * 1.680

  Austin de Ci∣uitate Dei, lib. 7. cap. 17.
• * 1.681

  Cicero concer∣ning the Na∣ture of the Goddes, the first of his Tusculane questions.
• * 1.682

  Seneca. lib. 2. cap. 4. and 42.
• * 1.683

  The Goddes of Greater Na∣tions.
• * 1.684

  Eusebius de prepar. euan∣gelica, lib. 4.
• * 1.685

  Euhemere as he is cited by Lactantius.
• * 1.686

  Hermes in his Aselepius.
• * 1.687

  Seneca in his Moralles.
• * 1.688

  The Lawe of three children.
• * 1.689

  Scipio Affri∣can in Ennius.
• * 1.690

  Esculapius. Iulian ageinst the Galilaeans.
• * 1.691

  Xenophon in his Equiuoca∣tions.
• * 1.692

  Cicero concer∣ning the Na∣ture of the Godds, in his booke of Lawes, and in his Tusculane Questions.
• * 1.693

  Porphyrius in his booke of the Answeres of the Gods. Eusebius de praeparat. euan∣gel: lib. 3. Cap. vltimo.
• * 1.694

  Porphyri••s in his sayd booke of the Answers of the Goddes. Euseb. de prae∣part: euang. lib. 5. Cap. 6. and. 7.
• * 1.695

  Iamblychut concerning Mysteries. cap. 27. and 31.
• * 1.696

  Porphyrius in his booke of answers &c. Euseb. lib. 4. Cap. 4.
• * 1.697

  The Sacrifi∣sing of Men. Enseb. lib. 4. Cap. 7.
• * 1.698

  Denis of Haly∣carnassus lib. 1.
• * 1.699

  Diodorus of Sicilie lib. 20. Porphyrius in his booke of Abstinence. Histrus and Manethon cited by Euse∣bius.
• * 1.700

  Tertullian in his booke of Apologie. Erichtho in Lucane. The godly AEnaeas in vir∣gill.
• * 1.701

  Caesar in his bookes of his Warres in Gaullond. Procopius. lib. 2. of the warres in Gothland.
• * 1.702

  Euseb. lib. 4. Cap. 7.
• * 1.703

  The yeere af∣ter the buil∣ding of Rome 657. Plinie, lib. 30. Cap. 1. Quintilian in his booke of Fanaticall things.
• * 1.704

  Shamefull Seruices. Austin in his second booke of the Citie of God. Cap. 11.
• * 1.705

  Austin in his first booke of the Citie of God. Cap. 32.
• * 1.706

  Austin. lib. 2. Cap. 4. 5. 6. 13. In infinite places in the Digests.
• * 1.707

  Zosimus. lib. 2.
• * 1.708

  The Oracles of the Gods were false, vn∣certeine, vayne and wicked.
• * 1.709

  Porphyrius in his bookes of the Answere of Oracles.
• * 1.710

  False Miracles.
• * 1.711

  Iupiter. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• * 1.712

  Markes wher∣by to knowe Diuels.
• * 1.713

  Porphirius in his secōd book of Abstinence. In his Epistle to Anebon al∣ledged by Eu∣sebius. lib. 4. cap. 11. Iamblichus in his booke of Mysteries in many places.
• * 1.714

  Iamblichus in his booke of Mysteries.
• * 1.715

  Apulcius.
• * 1.716

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Austin in his ninth booke of the Citie of God. chap. 19.
• * 1.717

  What and where the true Religion is.
• * 1.718

  Marks where∣by to discerne Gods word.
• * 1.719

  That the By∣is of more an∣tiquitie then all other wri∣tings.
• * 1.720

  Cicero in his second booke of the Ends of things.
• * 1.721

  Aulus Gellius in his 20. book Cap. 1.
• * 1.722

  Denis of Ha∣lycarnassus lib. 1. cap. 2.
• * 1.723

  Plinie lib. 34. cap. 5.
• * 1.724

  Pomponius ff. of the origi∣nall of Lawe.
• * 1.725

  Denis of Hal••∣carnassus.
• * 1.726

  Appion in the fourth booke of his Historie against the Ie∣wes.
• * 1.727

  Eusebius li. 10. Cap. 3.
• * 1.728

  Strabo. lib. 15.
• * 1.729

  Porphirius li. 4 Eusebius in his booke of pre∣paration to the Gospell.
• * 1.730

  Gene. 49. 5. 7.
• * 1.731

  Obiect. o••••.
• * 1.732

  The Bible ten∣deth altogither to the glorie of God.
• * 1.733

  Mans welfare.
• * 1.734

  Seneca in his exhortations.
• * 1.735

  The Style of the Scriptures.
• * 1.736

  The lawes and commaunde∣ments in the Scripture.
• * 1.737

  The doctrine of the Scriptu∣res exceedeth the reach of man.
• * 1.738

  Prophesies so∣wed through∣out all the By∣ble.
• * 1.739

  Gene. 15.
• * 1.740

  Gene. 49.
• * 1.741

  Rabbi Moyses vpō the booke Abubacher.
• * 1.742

  Deuter. 32.
• * 1.743

  Iosua. 7.
• * 1.744

  1. King. 16. verse 34.
• * 1.745

  1. King. 13.
• * 1.746

  2. King. 22. verse. 15. 19.
• * 1.747

  Esay. 44. & 45.
• * 1.748

  Jerem. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. &c.
• * 1.749

  Daniel. 9.
• * 1.750

  Daniel. 5.
• * 1.751

  Esay. 13. 2••. 47 Ieremy. 50.
• * 1.752

  Daniel. 15
• * 1.753

  Daniel. 7.
• * 1.754

  Daniel. 8.
• * 1.755

  Daniel. 9.
• * 1.756

  Obiections.
• * 1.757

  Ptolomie in booke of the fruite.
• * 1.758

  The same thing doth Moises of Nar∣bon say vppon the booke of Abubacher, & Auempare.
• * 1.759

  Roger Bacon in his booke of the Sixe sci∣ences of expe∣rience, and in his abridge∣ment of Diui∣ni••••e.
• * 1.760

  An obiection concerning the witnesse of the Greekes.
• * 1.761

  The Answere.
• * 1.762

  Aristobulus writing to Pto¦lomy Philo∣••netor. lib. 1.
• * 1.763

  Hecateus con∣cerning the Iewes.
• * 1.764

  Herennius Phi¦lo concerning the Iewes.
• * 1.765

  Aristaeas con∣cerning the translation of the Threescore and Ten In∣terpreters.
• * 1.766

  Eusebius in his eight booke of the prepa∣ration to the Gospell.
• * 1.767

  Origines in his fourth booke ageinst Celsus.
• * 1.768

  An Obiection concerning the style.
• * 1.769

  The Solution.
• * 1.770

  Ci••ero in his Tusculane Questions.
• * 1.771

  Osorius the Portingale.
• * 1.772

  Obiections concerning the vncredible∣nesse of things in the Scrip∣tures.
• * 1.773

  The Creation of the world and of Man.
• * 1.774

  The fall of Man.
• * 1.775

  The ege of the first men.
• * 1.776

  The generall Flud.
• * 1.777

  Alexander Po∣lyhistor. Abydemus al∣ledged by Cy∣rill in his first booke against Iulian.
• * 1.778

  Iosephus in his first booke of his antiqui∣ties. chap. 3.
• * 1.779

  In his treatise that beastes are capable of reason.
• * 1.780

  Iohn Picus Erle of Miran∣dula against Astrologers.
• * 1.781

  Cham.
• * 1.782

  The confusi∣on of tongues or languages.
• * 1.783

  Alexander Po∣lyhistor. Abydenus. Sibylla. Euseb. lib. 9. cap. 4. de pre∣par.
• * 1.784

  Genes. 11.
• * 1.785

  Sodom. Galen in his booke of simples. Pausanias in his Eliaks. Solinus in his Polyhistor. Tacitus in his last booke.
• * 1.786

  Eusebius. li. 9. de praepar. Cap. 4.
• * 1.787

  Eupolemus in his booke of the Iewes.
• * 1.788

  Abraham and his race.
• * 1.789

  Artabanus in his Historie of the Iewes.
• * 1.790

  Melon against the Iewes.
• * 1.791

  Artabanus concerning the Iewes.
• * 1.792

  Secundum Mystas.
• * 1.793

  Origines a∣gainst Celsus lib. 4.
• * 1.794

  Moysessis My∣racles.
• * 1.795

  In sted of Ca∣bala, Plinie hath Ioca∣bela.
• * 1.796

  Exod. 12.
• * 1.797

  The nomber of the children of Israel.
• * 1.798

  Iosua.
• * 1.799

  Procopius in his secōd book of the warres of the Vau∣dales.
• * 1.800

  Saul. Dauid.
• * 1.801

  The Scripture of the Prophet.
• * 1.802

  Iosephus libr. Antiquit: 15. Cap. 16. & lib. 16. cap. 11. & of the Iewish warres. lib. 5. cap. 2.
• * 1.803

  Salomon.
• * 1.804

  Iosephus in his antiquities. lib. 8. cap. 2. Euseb. lib. 9. cap. 4.
• * 1.805

  Plutarke in his feast of Seuen Sages.
• * 1.806

  Iosephus li•• cap. 2.
• * 1.807

  The History of Ethiop. Makeda.
• * 1.808

  ••. Chron. 3.
• * 1.809

  Gilbert Gene∣brand in his Chronologie.
• * 1.810

  The remo∣uings of the ten Trybes. 1. Kings. 15.
• * 1.811

  2. Kings. 17. 4. Esdras. 13.
• * 1.812

  Herodotus li. 2.
• * 1.813

  The Deliue∣rance by Cirus
• * 1.814

  Iosephus in his Antiquitie. lib. 8. cap. 4.
• * 1.815

  1. Kings. 14. Herodotus li. 2
• * 1.816

  1. Kings. 18.
• * 1.817

  Diodorus li. 3.
• * 1.818

  Esay 38. Denis in his Hierarchie.
• * 1.819

  Obiections concrneing Absurdities.
• * 1.820

  Origen ageinst Celsus lib. 4.
• * 1.821

  The needeful∣nesse of this third marke.
• * 1.822

  One Mediator God & Man.
• * 1.823

  Man borne without Cor∣ruption.
• * 1.824

  The opinion of the Heathē concerning the cleansing of Mankind.
• * 1.825

  Saint Austin concerning the Citie of God. lib. 20. Cap. 9. & 23. & 32.
• * 1.826

  The Mediator promised in the Scriptures, from the one end of them to the other.
• * 1.827

  Gen. 3.
• * 1.828

  Christ is a spi∣rituall King, contrary to the opinion of the Iewes of our tyme.
• * 1.829

  Let the reader beare in mynd once for all, that the word Messias in He∣brewe, & the word Christ in Greek, signi∣fie both one thing, namely the Lords A∣noynted.
• * 1.830

  The Thargūr of Hierusalem
• * 1.831

  The Talmud in the Treatise intytled San∣hedrim, in the Chapter Me∣lee.
• * 1.832

  Midrach The∣hilim.
• * 1.833

  A tradition of the Hebrewes.
• * 1.834

  2. Sammuel. 7. 1. King. 5. 6. 1. Chron. 2v, Plal. 89.
• * 1.835

  Psalm. ••. & 45 & 47. & 67. & 72.
• * 1.836

  Esay. 1. Micheas.
• * 1.837

  Esay. 4.
• * 1.838

  Esay. 9.
• * 1.839

  Esay. 11.
• * 1.840

  He had said a fore, that the high Cedars should be cast downe, that is to say the great Princes. And against those Cedars he set∣teth expresly this litle brāch of the roote of Iesse, or Isay. This Iesse or Isay was Da∣uids father.
• * 1.841

  Esay. 25. 35. 42 49.
• * 1.842

  Esay. 52. 53.
• * 1.843

  In the Tal∣mud in the treatise intitled Sanhedrin in the Chapter Helec.
• * 1.844

  Esay. 55. 59. 61. 62.
• * 1.845

  ••ere. 23. 30. 33.
• * 1.846

  Ezcehiel. 34. 17.
• * 1.847

  Talmud in the ••reatise in∣tytled, Sanhe∣drin, in the chapter Helec. Daniel. 2. 7. 9.
• * 1.848

  Osec. 1. 2. 3.
• * 1.849

  Amos. 9.
• * 1.850

  Micheas.
• * 1.851

  Sophonie. 2.
• * 1.852

  Zacharie. 3. 6. 9. 13.
• * 1.853

  In the treatise Sanhedrin: cap. Halec.
• * 1.854

  The Iewes of old tyme loo∣ked for a spiri∣tuall King. Misdrach Ha∣s••im.
• * 1.855

  Ballet. Cap. 1. vers. 14. & cap. 4. vers. 4.
• * 1.856

  Rabbi, Bara∣chias in his Bereschith. Rab ba Mis∣drach. Exod. 21.
• * 1.857

  We call him Phares.
• * 1.858

  Thalmud in the treatise Sā∣hedrin, cap Helec.
• * 1.859

  Esay. 11.
• * 1.860

  Reasons a∣gainst the Ie∣wes of our daies.
• * 1.861

  It is the 13. ar∣ticle of the be∣leef of the Iewes Rabbi Moyses ben Maimon.
• * 1.862

  The Iewes of our dayes say that this Le∣uiathan is a Whale pow∣dred for the feast of the Messias.
• * 1.863

  That by the Scriptures, Christ the Me∣diator is both God and Man
• * 1.864

  Gen. 3
• * 1.865

  Deut. 21. ver. 8
• * 1.866

  Psalm. 45.
• * 1.867

  Psalm. 110.
• * 1.868

  The Booke sepher kib∣butsim.
• * 1.869

  Midrasch The hilim vpon the second Psalm, verse. 7. Esay. 9.
• * 1.870

  Lament. 1. ver. 16.
• * 1.871

  Bereschith Rabba vpon Genes 55.
• * 1.872

  Rabbi He••a∣dosch.
• * 1.873

  Esay. 7.
• * 1.874

  Christ is called Iehouah, that is to say, the e∣uerlasting God.
• * 1.875

  Esay. 18. & 28. &. 1.
• * 1.876

  Bereshith Ke∣••ana.
• * 1.877

  In the treatise Sanhedrin. cap Dine Mam∣monoth.
• * 1.878

  Lament 1. vers. 16.
• * 1.879

  Midrasch Te∣hilim vpon the 23. Psal. vers. 1.
• * 1.880

  R. Moyses Ha∣darsan vpon Genesis ca. 4••.
• * 1.881

  Thalmudi•• the treatise Sā∣hedrin, Cap. Helec.
• * 1.882

  Midrasch Tehilint, vpon the fortith Psalm.
• * 1.883

  In the booke intytled Siph∣rei vpon the 26 of Leuiti∣cus.
• * 1.884

  The booke Mechilia vpon the 14. of Exo. The Ballet. 8. vers. 1.
• * 1.885

  Leuit. 25. vers. 25.
• * 1.886

  The booke Tan huma••. Midraseh vpō Leuiticus. Rabbi Moyses Hadarsan vpō
• * 1.887

  Gen. 49.
• * 1.888

  Psal. 49.
• * 1.889

  Midrasch sir Hasirim cap. 1 Rabbi Eleazar vnto Zohar.
• * 1.890

  The Cabilists. R. Simeon. B. Iohai vpon Gene. 1. ver. 17. & cap. 17. ver. ••.
• * 1.891

  In the booke of Shamefast∣nes.
• * 1.892

  The same vpō Genesis. ca. 10.
• * 1.893

  In the treatise Sanhedum. cap. Helec. Ieremy. 16.
• * 1.894

  The booke of Faith and Re∣conciliation.
• * 1.895

  In the booke Hecadma vau, He, Iod, He.
• * 1.896

  In his booke intytled the Gate of light.
• * 1.897

  Cap. 1.
• * 1.898

  Rabbi Heca∣dosch.
• * 1.899

  That the Se∣cond Persone tooke flesh.
• * 1.900

  Kimhi in his booke of Rootewordes.
• * 1.901

  Psalm. 89.
• * 1.902

  Psalm. 2.
• * 1.903

  Midrasch The∣hilim vppon the second Psalm.
• * 1.904

  Psalm. 72. vers. 17.
• * 1.905

  Psalm. 9. vers. 2.
• * 1.906

  In the treatyse Sanhedrin. Cap. Helec.
• * 1.907

  Rabbi Iosua ben Leui in his Echa Ra∣bethi, Cap. 1. vers. 16.
• * 1.908

  Esai. 45. ver. 17
• * 1.909

  Osee. 1. vers. 7.
• * 1.910

  Psalm. 110.
• * 1.911

  Gen. 47.
• * 1.912

  Psal. 147. vers. 18.
• * 1.913

  Gen. 10.
• * 1.914

  Iob. 19. vers. 26.
• * 1.915

  Philo the Iew in his booke of the bani∣shed.
• * 1.916

  Malachy. 5. vers. 8.
• * 1.917

  Osee. 6. ver. 2.
• * 1.918

  Psal. 17. ver. vit.
• * 1.919

  In Echa Ra∣bathi cap. 1. vers. 6.
• * 1.920

  Dan. 2. ver. 22. Gen. 1.
• * 1.921

  Psal. 36. ver, 9.
• * 1.922

  Psalm. 18.
• * 1.923

  Esay. 45.
• * 1.924

  In the booke intitled the Gate of light. cap. 2.
• * 1.925

  And of a vir∣gin.
• * 1.926

  Esay. 11. 14.
• * 1.927

  R. Moyses Ha∣darsan vpon the 85 psalme.
• * 1.928

  Vpon the 25. of Genesis.
• * 1.929

  Zach. 4. vers. 7.
• * 1.930

  Psal. 110.
• * 1.931

  Gen. 2.
• * 1.932

  Hacadosch.
• * 1.933

  The conclusi∣on of the three Markes of the true Religion in Israel.
• * 1.934

  Obiections▪
• * 1.935

  Obiections.
• * 1.936

  The marks and tokens of Christes com∣ming Gen. 49.
• * 1.937

  In the Tal∣mud. vnder the tytle San he∣drin, the Cha. Helec.
• * 1.938

  The booke called Zohar. Kimhi vppon Genesis, and in his booke of Rootes.
• * 1.939

  The King∣dome is cessed Bereschith. Rabba.
• * 1.940

  The Talmud in the Chapter Chelek.
• * 1.941

  Esay. 18. vers. 5 and 7.
• * 1.942

  Esay. 1. vers. 25. and 26.
• * 1.943

  1. Kings. 12.
• * 1.944

  Sedar Olam▪ Zura.
• * 1.945

  Origen in his 4. booke of Princes.
• * 1.946

  The Talmud in the treatyse Sanhedrin, Chapt. Dine Mammouoth. Rabbi Moyses the Egiptian in the preface of the Maie∣monims.
• * 1.947

  This Hillel was a great Doctor a∣mong them out of whose Schoole issewed many greate lerned men in the Lawe.
• * 1.948

  Rabbi Dauid Kimhi vppon Haggeus.
• * 1.949

  Rabbi Moyses Haddarsan vp∣on Genesis. chap. 49.
• * 1.950

  Iosephus in his first booke of the warres of the Iewes. cap. 5. & 25. lib. 15 cap. 9. & 10.
• * 1.951

  Sedar Olam.
• * 1.952

  Philo in his booke of Times.
• * 1.953

  Deut. 17.
• * 1.954

  Midrasch vpō Deuteronomy
• * 1.955

  In Bauaba∣thra cap. Ha∣sutaphim.
• * 1.956

  In the Tal∣mud of Hieru∣salem in the chap. Sanhe∣drin.
• * 1.957

  Rabbi Asse & Rabbi Raha∣mon.
• * 1.958

  In the foresayd place of the Talmud.
• * 1.959

  Seder Olam.
• * 1.960

  The ouer∣throwe of the∣second Tem∣ple.
• * 1.961

  Haggeus. Cap. 2. vers. 4.
• * 1.962

  Rabbi Samuel in the treatyse Sanhedrin. In the Tal∣mud of Hie∣rusalem. R. Aha in his booke of Dayes.
• * 1.963

  Midrasch on the Canticle. Cap. 8. vers. 8. Seder Olam.
• * 1.964

  Rab. Selomoh vpon the first of Haggaeus, in the word ••eiccabhedah where he wan∣teth
• * 1.965

  Gen. 59.
• * 1.966

  Malachie. 3. In the Tal∣mud, in the Treatyse San∣hedrin, Chapt. Helec.
• * 1.967

  The Talmud in the Treatise Pirkei auoth: and in the Treatyse Io∣mach.
• * 1.968

  Tereph Becal∣pi.
• * 1.969

  Ammianus Marcellinus, lib. 23.
• * 1.970

  Esay. 66. vers. 7.
• * 1.971

  Rabbi Moyses Hadarsan.
• * 1.972

  Bereschith Rabba.
• * 1.973

  In the treatyse Barachoth. In the Tal∣mud of Hie∣rusalem.
• * 1.974

  In Echa Rha∣bathi vpon the lamentation of leremie.
• * 1.975

  Daniels Wée∣kes.
• * 1.976

  Daniel. 9.
• * 1.977

  In the treatise Sanhedrin in the Talmud of Hierusalem,
• * 1.978

  Leuit. 23. & 2••.
• * 1.979

  Dan. 10.
• * 1.980

  Ieremy. 29. ••, Esdr. 1.
• * 1.981

  2. Esdr. 2.
• * 1.982

  The traditiōs. Moyses of Ge∣round.
• * 1.983

  The Talmud in the treatise Sanhedrin, Chap. Helec, & euerywhere els.
• * 1.984

  The Talmud in the treatise Auodazara.
• * 1.985

  Talmud in the treatise Sanhedrin. Chapt. Helee.
• * 1.986

  Talmud in the booke Sab∣bath, and in the treatise Sanhedrin.
• * 1.987

  For so M is cal∣led with the Hebrewes.
• * 1.988

  In the treatyse Sanhedrin. Cap. Halec. Rambam in his Epistle to the Iewes in Affricke.
• * 1.989

  R. Moyses of Geround vpon the fiue bookes of Moyses.
• * 1.990

  In the Capter Halec, of the treatise Sanhe∣drin.
• * 1.991

  R. Iohanan. R. Iuda, & R. Nehoray in the Chapter Halec.
• * 1.992

  Iosephus in his Antiquities. lib. 20. cap. 6. & 8. & in his warres. lib. 6. cap. 15. & lib. 7. cap. 9.
• * 1.993

  Tacitus and Suetonius in the lyfe of Ves∣pasian.
• * 1.994

  Ios••phus. lib. 7 Cap. 12.
• * 1.995

  Hegesippus. lib. 3.
• * 1.996

  False Christes in that age.
• * 1.997

  Iosephus in his Antiqui∣ties. lib. 18. cap. 1. & 2. &. lib. 17. cap. 8. lib. 20. chp. 2. & 6.
• * 1.998

  Talmud in the Treatise Sanhedrin Chapt. Halec.
• * 1.999

  R. Moyses ben Maimon in his Sentences.
• * 1.1000

  Beresc••••itl•• Raba. R. Iohanan.
• * 1.1001

  Talmud in the treatise Col. Israel.
• * 1.1002

  The vaine an∣swers of the Iewes.
• * 1.1003

  Esay. 66. ver. 8.
• * 1.1004

  Berecs••hith Rabba vppon Gen. cap. 30.
• * 1.1005

  The Talmud, treatise Sanhe∣drin. Ch. Helec The Children of Core were three brethrē, which were Prophetes at the same time that the Israe∣lites were in the wildernes.
• * 1.1006

  In the treatise Sanhed••in. ca. Helec.
• * 1.1007

  Ieremy 4.
• * 1.1008

  Esay. 24.
• * 1.1009

  Malachy. 4.
• * 1.1010

  Esay. 2••.
• * 1.1011

  Daniel. 1••.
• * 1.1012

  The booke Mechilta.
• * 1.1013

  Talmud in the treatise Sanhedrin. Ch. Helec.
• * 1.1014

  Psalm. 90.
• * 1.1015

  Philo in his book of times.
• * 1.1016

  Esap 9.
• * 1.1017

  Ieremy. 34.
• * 1.1018

  The Prophe∣sies fulfilled i•• Iesus.
• * 1.1019

  Borne of a vir∣gin.
• * 1.1020

  Suidas vpon the word Ie∣sus.
• * 1.1021

  R•• Haeadoch, in the third Question.
• * 1.1022

  Esay. 9.
• * 1.1023

  The Talmud, the treatise Sanhedrin: Chapt. Nig∣mar Hadin.
• * 1.1024

  Clemeus in his Recogniti∣ons.
• * 1.1025

  Micheas, 5. vers. 2.
• * 1.1026

  In Berhleem. Iohn. 7. ver. 42.
• * 1.1027

  Ionathan ben vxiel.
• * 1.1028

  Origen ageinst Celsus.
• * 1.1029

  Simeon,
• * 1.1030

  Luke. 1,
• * 1.1031

  Talmud. trea∣tyse Pirker a∣uouth. & in the treatise Io∣mach. Chapt. Tereph Be∣calpi.
• * 1.1032

  Zachary. 11.
• * 1.1033

  Iesus.
• * 1.1034

  R. Hacadoch.
• * 1.1035

  Esay. 9.
• * 1.1036

  Gen. 49.
• * 1.1037

  Psalm. 72.
• * 1.1038

  Psalm. 96.
• * 1.1039

  A Forerunner.
• * 1.1040

  Malachy. 3. vers. 1.
• * 1.1041

  R. Moyses Ben Maimon in his Sentences. Mark. 9. ver. 1••.
• * 1.1042

  The Ghroni∣cle of the Prin∣ces of Israell vnder the se∣cond Temple.
• * 1.1043

  Iosepus. lib. 18 Cap 7.
• * 1.1044

  The kingdom of Iesus is spi∣ritual.
• * 1.1045

  God and Man
• * 1.1046

  Iohn. 12. vers. 34.
• * 1.1047

  The Miracles of Iesus.
• * 1.1048

  The Talmud of Hierusalem in the treatise Auodazara.
• * 1.1049

  Marke. 16.
• * 1.1050

  Midrasch Co∣heleth.
• * 1.1051

  Ioseph in his Antiquities. lib. 18. Cap. 4.
• * 1.1052

  In the Tal∣mud, treatis•• Sanhedrin. chap. Dinei Mammonoth col: lib. 20. Iap. 6.
• * 1.1053

  In the treatyse Sanhedrin. ch. Helec.
• * 1.1054

  R. Hadarsan vppon the Psalme. 74.
• * 1.1055

  Midrasch Co∣heleth. Capt. 1. Talmud. trea∣tyse Baracoth. Chapt. Mema∣thai korin.
• * 1.1056

  The Prophe∣syings of Iesus,
• * 1.1057

  Deuter. 8. and 18.
• * 1.1058

  The Doctrine of Iesus.
• * 1.1059

  Deut••ron: ••••.
• * 1.1060

  Philo concer∣ning the Con∣templatiue life.
• * 1.1061

  An obiection.
• * 1.1062

  Looke the 6. Chapter here∣tofore.
• * 1.1063

  The stumb∣ling blocke of the Iewes.
• * 1.1064

  Zacharie. 9. & 12.
• * 1.1065

  Gen. 49.
• * 1.1066

  R. Moyses Ha∣darsan vppon the xl••x. of Ge∣nesis.
• * 1.1067

  The passion of Iesus foretold in the Scrip∣tures.
• * 1.1068

  Esay. 53.
• * 1.1069

  Nomb. 19.
• * 1.1070

  In the treatyse Sanhedrin, Chap. Nigma•• Hadin.
• * 1.1071

  Esay. 53.
• * 1.1072

  R. Moyses Ha∣darsan.
• * 1.1073

  Gen. 24.
• * 1.1074

  Treatise San∣hedrin. Chap. Helec.
• * 1.1075

  Midrasch. Ruth.
• * 1.1076

  Rabbi Ioses in the booke Si∣phrei.
• * 1.1077

  R. Iacob & R•• Hamina. Cha. Helec.
• * 1.1078

  Esay. 53.
• * 1.1079

  Esay. 52.
• * 1.1080

  The fond shiftes of the Iewes,
• * 1.1081

  Daniel. 9. vers. 14. and 16.
• * 1.1082

  Psalm. 22. vers. 17.
• * 1.1083

  Zachary. 12.
• * 1.1084

  Bereschith Rabba vpon. Gen. cap. 42. The booke Succa: chapt. Hahechil.
• * 1.1085

  Iohn. 19. vers. 37.
• * 1.1086

  The treat: Sanchedrin. Gap. Helec.
• * 1.1087

  Ieremy. 30.
• * 1.1088

  Rabbi Hadar∣san vpō Ge. 1. Echa rabeth. Chap. 3. Midrasch Ruth Cap. 2. vers. 14.
• * 1.1089

  Esay. 51.
• * 1.1090

  Cabalistes.
• * 1.1091

  R. Simeon ben Iohai Miran∣dulan in his Conclusions.
• * 1.1092

  R. Iuda in his book of Hope.
• * 1.1093

  Midrach T••hi∣lim.
• * 1.1094

  Philo the Iew in his booke of the banished. Looke afore in the 6. Chapt••••••
• * 1.1095

  Obiection.
• * 1.1096

  R. Moyses vpō the Iudges.
• * 1.1097

  Zachary. 9. ver. 4.
• * 1.1098

  Daniel. 7. Midrasch Co∣heleth Cap. 1. vers. 9.
• * 1.1099

  Talmud, trea∣tyse Sanhedrin Cap. Helec.
• * 1.1100

  Psal. 16.
• * 1.1101

  Ose the. 6.
• * 1.1102

  Psalm. 110.
• * 1.1103

  The booke Mechiltha.
• * 1.1104

  R. Moyses Ha∣darsan, vppon Genesis. Cap 22. and 40.
• * 1.1105

  R Isaac vppon Genesis.
• * 1.1106

  Iosephus in his Antiquitie Lib. 18. cap. 4.
• * 1.1107

  The booke of Collections.
• * 1.1108

  Daniel. 9.
• * 1.1109

  Math. 24. vers. 15.
• * 1.1110

  The destructi∣on of Hierusa∣lem.
• * 1.1111

  Iosephus in his Antiq lib. 20. Cap. 6. 8.
• * 1.1112

  In the Iewish Warres. lib. 5. Cap. 8. and lib. 6. Cap. 25. 27. 28. 47.
• * 1.1113

  Philo ageinst Flaccus.
• * 1.1114

  The Talmud concerning the destruction of Hierusalem.
• * 1.1115

  Iosephus, in the Warres of the Iewes lib. 7. cap 9. 12. 14. 16.
• * 1.1116

  Iohn. 16.
• * 1.1117

  R. Hadarsan vpon Daniel.
• * 1.1118

  Midrasch Thehilim.
• * 1.1119

  Obiection, that he must haue bin knowen.
• * 1.1120

  Iohn. 7. ver. 4••.
• * 1.1121

  Euke. ••••.
• * 1.1122

  Act. 5. 38.
• * 1.1123

  Talmud. trea∣tyse Pirke•••• auoth.
• * 1.1124

  R. Nchum••••.
• * 1.1125

  There were two Rabbies of the name of Hacadosch, both called Saincts: the one liuing vn∣der Antio∣chus, and the other vnder the Emperour Antonine.
• * 1.1126

  Psal. 11. ver. 22.
• * 1.1127

  Esay. 28. ver. 16
• * 1.1128

  Math. 21. vers. 42.
• * 1.1129

  Micheas. ••. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. 2.
• * 1.1130

  Esay. 6. vers. 53.
• * 1.1131

  Deut. 2••.
• * 1.1132

  Ieremy. 3. vers. 14.
• * 1.1133

  Talmud. Treatyse San∣hedrin. Cap. Helec.
• * 1.1134

  Talmud. Trea: Sanhe∣drin, Ch. Dines Mammoneth.
• * 1.1135

  R. Iohanan & P. Iacob. chap. Helec.
• * 1.1136

  Talmud. San∣hedrin. Helec.
• * 1.1137

  R. Moyses Ha∣darsan vppon the 74 Psalme.
• * 1.1138

  Ieremy. 10. ver. 11. and 30. ver. ••.
• * 1.1139

  Esay. 1.
• * 1.1140

  An obiection concerning the bacenesse of Iesus.
• * 1.1141

  An obiection that the signes promised by the Prophets are not come to passe.
• * 1.1142

  Esay. ••.
• * 1.1143

  Esay. 9. &. 35.
• * 1.1144

  Micheas. 3. vers. 3.
• * 1.1145

  Ieremy. 30. & 35.
• * 1.1146

  Talmud in the treatyse Sab. bath.
• * 1.1147

  Zachary. 14. vers. 4.
• * 1.1148

  R. Iohan••n in the treat: Baua Bath••a. Midrasch, Psalm. 86.
• * 1.1149

  Zachary. 4. Esay. 2. and Michens. 4.
• * 1.1150

  R. Selomoh & R. Abraham ben Ezra vpon Esay. 2. and Micheas. 4.
• * 1.1151

  Esay. 11.
• * 1.1152

  Malachy. 3.
• * 1.1153

  Rabbi Moyses Ben Maimon vppon Deut. in the Lawes concerning Kings and War••es.
• * 1.1154

  leremy. 5.
• * 1.1155

  An obiection that Idolatry should ceasse.
• * 1.1156

  Esay. 2.
• * 1.1157

  Zach. 13.
• * 1.1158

  So phony. 3••
• * 1.1159

  An Obiection ageinst the Al∣teration of Re∣ligion made by Christ.
• * 1.1160

  Deut. 30. and 10.
• * 1.1161

  Ieremy. 4.
• * 1.1162

  The Cabale by the report of Picus Earle of Mirandula.
• * 1.1163

  Psalm. 49. and 50.
• * 1.1164

  Esay. 1. and 58. and 66.
• * 1.1165

  Micheas. 6.
• * 1.1166

  Daniel. 12. verse. 11.
• * 1.1167

  Daniel 9.
• * 1.1168

  Malachy. ••
• * 1.1169

  Midrasch. Nombers. 13. Mark. 2.
• * 1.1170

  R Hadarsan vpon Gen. 42. and 49.
• * 1.1171

  Leuit. ••. and 15.
• * 1.1172

  Deut. 15.
• * 1.1173

  Midrasch.
• * 1.1174

  R. Dauid Kimhi in his booke of Rootes. Pro∣uerb. 22.
• * 1.1175

  Ierem. 31. vers. 31. 22. 27.
• * 1.1176

  Mechilta vpon Exod. 12. Esay. 12.
• * 1.1177

  Midrasch Co∣heleth Chap. 11. 1.
• * 1.1178

  In the treatyse Boracoth. Tal∣mud of Hieru∣salem Chapter Meemathai Korin.
• * 1.1179

  Talmud, trea. tyse Sanhe∣drin.
• * 1.1180

  A reply of the Iewes.
• * 1.1181

  Deu. 30. & 10. Esap. 56. and 5 ••.
• * 1.1182

  2. Tim. 3.
• * 1.1183

  Prophesies a∣mong the Gentyles. Nomb. 22. and 23.
• * 1.1184

  Origen in his 13. Homily vp∣pon Genesis.
• * 1.1185

  Chrisostom in his second Ho∣mily vpon the viii. of Ma∣thew.
• * 1.1186

  Iob. 19. 25.
• * 1.1187

  The Oracles of the Sibylls.
• * 1.1188

  Lactantius. lib. 4. Cap. 6.
• * 1.1189

  Suetonius in the lyfe of Augustus. cap. 31.
• * 1.1190

  Cicero in his first booke of Diuination.
• * 1.1191

  Cicero in his first Epistle to Lentulus lib. 1. epist.
• * 1.1192

  In the second booke of their Oracles.
• * 1.1193

  Virgil. Eglog 4
• * 1.1194

  Vincent. lib. 11. cap. 50.
• * 1.1195

  Iustine in his Apologie. Origen against Celsus. Clement in strom:
• * 1.1196

  Cicero in l•••• third booke of his Common∣weale. in Lactantius lib. 6. cap. 8.
• * 1.1197

  The procee∣ding of the Kingdom of Iesus beyond nature and a∣geinst Nature.
• * 1.1198

  Plutark in the sayings of the Kings of old tyme.
• * 1.1199

  Records of the wonderfull proceeding of Christes King∣dome.
• * 1.1200

  Sueton. in Ne∣ro.
• * 1.1201

  Tacitus lib. 5.
• * 1.1202

  Xiphilus in the lyfe of M: Au∣relius.
• * 1.1203

  The Epistie of M. Aurelius in the Apologie of Iustine.
• * 1.1204

  Tertulian in his Apologie.
• * 1.1205

  Egesippus in his Auacepha∣leosis.
• * 1.1206

  Euseb. Tertullian in his A••ologie.
• * 1.1207

  Plinie in his Epistles. Iulius Capito∣limus in Adri∣an and Alex∣ander.
• * 1.1208

  Antonine the Emperour in an Epistle of his to the cities of Asia.
• * 1.1209

  Dion in the life of the Em∣perour Alex∣ander.
• * 1.1210

  The deuice was this, Do not to another that which thou wouldest not haue done to thyself.
• * 1.1211

  The aboli∣shing of the False Gods & of their Ora∣cles.
• * 1.1212

  Suidas in the lyfe of Augu∣stus.
• * 1.1213

  Ni. ephorus. lib. 1. Cap. 17.
• * 1.1214

  Iuuenal. Sa∣tyr. 3.
• * 1.1215

  Eusebius in his booke of Pre∣paration to the Gospell.
• * 1.1216

  Plutark.
• * 1.1217

  Porphyrius a∣gainst the Christians.
• * 1.1218

  Tertullian in his Apologie.
• * 1.1219

  Lucian in his Alexander.
• * 1.1220

  S. Austin in an Epistle to the people of Me∣daure.
• * 1.1221

  Miracles which could not proceede but from God
• * 1.1222

  Austin concer∣ning the true Religion.
• * 1.1223

  In his sixth booke of the nature of things.
• * 1.1224

  The Prophe∣sies of Iesu••.
• * 1.1225

  Phlegon as he is alledged by Eusebius, Lac∣tantius, & O∣rigen.
• * 1.1226

  The witnesse of the Infidels
• * 1.1227

  S. Austin in his Epistles. Porphyrius in bookes of the prayses of Phi∣losophi••.
• * 1.1228

  Alcoran, Azo. ar, 1. 4. 11. 13.
• * 1.1229

  Iulians obiec∣tions.
• * 1.1230

  Porphyrius al∣ledging Ari∣stoxenus.
• * 1.1231

  Lycurgus.
• * 1.1232

  Alexander. ••
• * 1.1233

  The obiecti∣ons of the A∣strologie.
• * 1.1234

  Bardesanes the Syrian. Euseb. prepar. lib. 6. cap. 18.
• * 1.1235

  Albumazar. Roger Bacon.
• * 1.1236

  The Obiectiōs of the Magi∣tians.
• * 1.1237

  Simon Magus
• * 1.1238

  Iosephus in his 5. booke of the Iewish warres. cap. 1.
• * 1.1239

  Apollonius of Thyanie.
• * 1.1240

  Philostratus in the life of A∣pollonius.
• * 1.1241

  Dion in Au∣relian.
• * 1.1242

  Apuleius.
• * 1.1243

  Vespasian. Tacitus. lib. 20
• * 1.1244

  Antinous.
• * 1.1245

  Obiection.
• * 1.1246

  Mahomet.
• * 1.1247

  Alcoran, A∣zoar 2. 3. 6. &c
• * 1.1248

  An obiection against Chri∣stes Incarna∣tion.
• * 1.1249

  Why Iesus came at the same tyme that he did.
• * 1.1250

  The sinceritie of the writers of the Newe Testament.
• * 1.1251

  The Starre that led the Wise men.
• * 1.1252

  Plinie lib. 2. cap. 25.
• * 1.1253

  Origē against Celsus.
• * 1.1254

  Marsilius Fici∣nus in his trea∣tise of the Starre that led the Wise men.
• * 1.1255

  Macrobius in his Saturnals.
• * 1.1256

  Borne of a Virgin. Clement in his Recogni∣tions. Petrus Come∣stor.
• * 1.1257

  Iosephus lib. 18. cap. 7.
• * 1.1258

  The Eclips. Mark. 27. vers 45. Mark. 15. verse 33.
• * 1.1259

  Phlegon Tral∣lian in the 13. booke of his Chronicles. Origē against Celsus. Suidas.
• * 1.1260

  Tertullian in his Apologie.
• * 1.1261

  The Earth∣quake.
• * 1.1262

  The Rysing a∣gayne of Iesus from the dead.
• * 1.1263

  The cōming downe of the holy Ghost.
• * 1.1264

  Acts. 9. & 22.
• * 1.1265

  1. Cor. 15. 8. 2. Cor. 12. 2. The Conuer∣siō of S. Paule,
• * 1.1266

  The death of Herodes A∣grippa.
• * 1.1267

  Acts. 12.
• * 1.1268

  Iosephus in his antiquit•• lib. 19. cap ••.
• * 1.1269

  An obiection against the ry∣sing againe of the Dead.
• * 1.1270

  Talmud. cap. Helec. treatise. Sanhedrin.
• * 1.1271

  AEnaeas Gaza concerning Immortalitie. Seneca in his 75. Epistle, and in his bookes of Questions. lib. 3. cap. 26. 27. 28. &c. Ouid in his Metamorpho∣sis lib. 1.
• * 1.1272

  Lucane the Neuew of Se∣neca. lib. 1. Lucretius. li. 5. Lactātius out of Chrysippus lib. 7. cap. 22.
• * 1.1273

  Austin of the Citie of God. lib. 22. cap. 27. Haly vpon the first Apote∣tesme of Pro∣lomie.
• * 1.1274

  Nicolaus O∣resmus con∣cerning Pro∣portions. The Acrostiks of Sibill. Lactantius. lib. 7.
• * 1.1275

  Midrasch. Psalm. 118. Esay. 45. Psalm. 149. &c.
• * 1.1276

  The Conclu∣sion of the whole Booke.
• * 1.1277

  Chapt. 1. 2. 3. 4 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13.
• * 1.1278

  Chapt. 14. and 15.
• * 1.1279

  Chapt. 18. 19.
• * 1.1280

  Chapt. 20.
• * 1.1281

  Chapt. 16 17. 20.
• * 1.1282

  Chapt. 20.
• * 1.1283

  Chapt. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 23.
• * 1.1284

  Chapt. 24. 25. 26.
• * 1.1285

  Chapt. 27. 28.
• * 1.1286

  Chapt. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33.
• * 1.1287

  Chap••
• * 1.1288

  Chapt. 34.