• Thcod. Hist. Ecclcs. Jib. iv. cap. xvii. p. 126; Socrat. lib. iv. cap. xxi. xxii, ; Sozom. lib. vi. cap. xv.-xvii.
' Theod. Hist. lib. ii. cap. xvii'.; Sozom. li'i. iv. cap. xiii. ; Niccpli. lib. ix. cap. xxxix.
70 THE PREFACE OF MR BIDDLE
the things themselves signified by them that are the abominations decried? Now, thougli most of the things here pointed unto will fall under our en- suing considerations, yet because Mr B. hath here cast into one heap many of the doctrines which in the Christian religion he opposeth and would have renounced, it may not be amiss to take a short view of the most con- siderable instances in our passage.
His first is of Grod's being infinite and incomprehensible. Tlais he con- demns, name and thing, — that is, he says " he is finite, limited, of us to be comprehended;" for those who say he is infinite and incomprehensible do say only that he is not finite nor of us to be comprehended. What advance is made towards the farther reformation of the church-^ by this new notion of Mr B.'s is fully discovered in the consideration of the second chapter of his Catechism; and in this, as in sundry other things, Mr B. excels his masters.^ The Scripture tells us expressly that "he filleth heaven and earth;" that the "heaven and the heaven of heavens cannot contain him;" that his presence is in heaven and hell, and that "his understanding is infinite" (which how the understanding of one that is finite may be, an infinite understanding cannot comprehend); that he "dwelleth in that light which no man can approach unto, whom no man hath seen, nor can see" (which to us is the description of one incomprehensible) ; that lie is " eter- nal," which we cannot comprehend. The like expressions are used of him in great abundance. Besides, if God be not incomprehensible, we may search out his power, wisdom, and understanding to the utmost ; for if we cannot, if it be not possible so to do, he is incomprehensible. But " canst thou by searching find out God? canst thou find out the Almighty to perfec- tion?" " There is no searching of his understanding." If by our lines we suppose we can fathom the depth of the essence, omnipotency, wisdom, and understanding of God, I doubt not but we shall find ourselves mis- taken. Were ever any, since the world began, before quarrelled withal for asserting the essence and being of God to be incomprehensible? The heathen who affirmed that the more he inquired, the more he admired and the less he iinderstood,* had a more noble reverence of the eternal Being* which in his mind he conceived, than Mr B. will allow us to enter- tain of God. Farther; if God be not infinite, he is circumscribed in some certain place; if he be, is he there fixed to that place, or doth he move from it? If he be fixed there, how can he work at a distance, especially such things as necessarily require divine power to their production ? If he move up and down, and journey as his occasions require, what a blessed enjoyment of himself in his own glory hath he! But that tliis blasphe- mous figment of God's being limited and confined to a certain place is really destructive to all the divine perfections of the nature and being of God is afterward demonstrated. And this is the first instance given by Mr B. of the corruption of our doctrine, which he rejects name and thing, namely, " that God is infinite and incomprehensible." And now, whether this man be a " mere Christian" or a mere Lucian, let the reader judge.
That God is a simple act is the next thing excepted against and de-
' " Solent quidam miriones sedificari in ruinatn." — Tertul. de Prtesc. ad Hreres.
•"Est autem haec magnitude (ut ex lis intelligi potest, qusBde potentia et potestate Dei, itenique dc sapientia ejus dicta sunt), infinita ct incomprehensibilis."— Crell. de Deo, seu de Vera Rcl. prsefix. op. Volkel. lib. i. cap. xxxvii. p. 273.
* Simonides apud Ciceronem, lib. i. de Nat. Deoruni, lib. i. 22.
♦ Vide passim qufe de Deo dicuntur, apud Aratum, Orpheum, Homcrum, Asclepium, Platonem, Plotinum, Proclum, Psellum, Porphyrium, Jamblichum, Plinium, Tullium, Senecam, Plutarchum, et quse ex iis omnibus cxcerpsit. Eugub. de Prim. Pliilos.
TO HIS CATECHISM EXAMINED, 71
cried, name and thing; in the room whereof, that he is compoinided of matter and form," or the like, must be asserted. Those who affirm God to be a simple act do only deny him to be compounded of divers prin- ciples, and assert him to be always actually in beinff, existence, and intent operation.^ God says of himself that his name is Ehejeh, and he is I am, — that is, a simple being, existing in and of itself; and this is that which is intended by the simplicity of the nature of God, and liis being a simple act. Tlie Scripture tells us he is eternal, I am, always the same, and so never what he was not ever. This is decried, and in opposition to it his being compounded, and so obnoxious to dissolution, and his being in potentia, in a disposition and passive capacity to be what he is not, is asserted; for it is only to deny these things that the term "simple" is used, which he condemns and rejects. And this is the second instance that Mr B. gives in the description of his God, by his rejecting the re- ceived expressions concerning him who is so : " He is limited, and of us to be comprehended ; his essence and being consisting of several princiitles, whereby he is in a capacity of being what he is not." Mr B., soltts habeto; I will not be your rival in the favour of this God.