coalescere Unio Gentilium Iudaeorum insimul habitantium Iudaeis enim propter antiquam consuetudinem suffocatum sanguis erant abominabilia Comesti autem immolatorum simulachris poterat in Iudaeis suspicionem ingenerare circa Gentiles quod scilicet redituri erant ad Idololatriam ideo ista fuerunt prohibita pro tempore illo in quo de novo oportebat convenire in unum Gentiles Iudaeos procedente autem tempore cessante causâ cessat effectus manifestâ doctrinae Evangelicae veritate in quâ Dominu◠docet quòd nihil quod per os intrat coinquinat hominem Mat. 15. nihil est rejiciendum quod cum gratiarum actione percipitur 1 Tim. 4. Fornicatio autem prohibetur specialiter quia Gentiles non reputabant eam esse peccatum The Apostles forbad things strangled and bloud and meats offered to Idols not to oblige the Gentiles to the observation of the Ceremonial Law but to bring the Jews and Gentiles now living together into one peaceable Communion that the Gentile might not offend the Jew by eating bloud and things strangled which had been forbidden by their Law nor the Jew suspect the Gentile as relapsing to his former Idolatry if he should eat things offered unto Idols therefore those three things were forbidden for that time onely till there might be a right understanding and a firm agreement betwixt the Jew and the Gentile but in process of time when the Gospel came to be fully published the cause ceasing the effect likewise ceased with it for then both Jew and Gentile were taught that nothing that entreth into the mouth defileth the man S. Mat. 15. 11. and that every creature of God is good and nothing to be refused if it be received with thanks-giving 1 Tim. 4. 4. But as concerning fornication that was especially forbidden meerly in relation to the Gentiles because though it were a sin in it self yet was it not so in their opinion Thus the Angelical Doctor determines concerning this decree of the Apostles and to shew it was the undoubted judgement of his Church which in some things clearly sways him against the strength of his own reasons he again in effect renews the same determination Fornicatio illic connumeratur non quia habeat eandem rationem culpae cum aliis sed quia poter at esse similiter causa dissidii quia apud Gentiles Fornicatio simplex non reputabatur illicita propter corruptionem naturalis rationis Iudaei autem ex Lege divinâ instructi eam illicitam reputabant Alia verò quae ibi ponuntur Iudaei abominabantur propter consuetudinem legalis conservationis unde Apostolica Gentilibus interdixerunt non quasi secundum se illicita sed quasi Iudaeis abominabilia 22. qu. 154. art 2. resp ad 1. Fornication is there reckoned up with those other things not that it had as little sin as they but because it might have produced as great a cause of contention for the Gentiles through the corruption of their natural reason accounted fornication as no sin which the Jews knew to be a sin having their reasons enlightned and rectified by the Law of God and as for the other things they were forbidden not as unlawful or abominable in themselves but only as abominable to the Iews And indeed we cannot put fornication into the same bed-role of indifferency with the rest if we do but consider that the Apostles intent was not to give to those new beleevers a rule of life but a rule of peace not directions for their conversation but for their communion not to set down what was fit for their action but what was fit for their Union not what was conducible in it self but what was conducible to their present agreement in the first respect their Decree had been a very imperfect catalogue of things unlawfull a very imperfect rule of abstinence but in the second respect we have great reason to suppose that neither as a catalogue nor as a rule it needed any greater perfection And this was the judgement of the Latine Church concerning this matter though the Greek Church in the Trullane Council can 67. seem to be of another opinion and forbid all manner of eating of bloud but the reason is evident those of that council looked upon this decree as a command of the text and not as a condescention of the Apostles which doubtless was a mistake the like to which had been in the Asiatick Church before concerning Easter whence in process of time sprang up the heresie of the Quartadecimans for whereas S. Iohn the Apostle and some other Apostolical men had out of compliance with the Iews in Asia whose Church was mainly fixed in those parts kept the fourteenth day of the first moneth according to the law of Moses for their Pass-over Polycrates afterwards and the Clergy of his Churches taking that for an example or president which was onely a compliance or condescention would have perswaded the whole Christian Church to keep 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Scaliger cals it to keep a Pass-over rather in remembrance of Christs Passion which was upon a week day then in Remembrance of his Resurrection which was upon a Sunday the Reason was the Churches of Asia had mistaken S. Iohns condescention to the Iews for an approbation to themselves as if what he allowed onely to the Iews he had also approved and by consequent established for the Christians The like mistake seems here to have been amongst the Fathers in Trullo concerning eating of bloud whereas the Greek Church had otherwise a right judgement concerning Apostolical condescention which is not to look upon it as a dogmatical sanction for so Theodoret in his argument upon the Epistle to the Galatians tels us that some Iews had perswaded the Galatians to stick to the Iewish ceremonies of Sabbaths new moons and circumcision saying they should not follow S. Paul who was of yesterday but rather S. Peter and S. Iames and S. Iohn which had been with Christ and did not forbid Circumcision nor those other Ceremonies whereupon Theodoret thus declares his judgement or rather the judgement of his Church for he was neither heretical nor schismatical 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And true it was that those Apostles did not then forbid Circumcision because they thought it requisite for that time to condescend unto the Iews but these men concealing the cause laid hold of the practise and endeavoured by that means to turn the Condescention into a Constitution The like was also the judgement of Oecumenius on Act. 3. 1. where he tels us that S. Peter and S. Iohn went up to the Temple at the hour of Prayer 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. not that they did care to Iudaïze but that they might condescend to gain the Iews so that we may safely conclude notwithstanding the Canon of Trullo as well as the practice of the Asiatick Churches that the judgement of the Catholick Church
drunkard or unclean or profane person doth in effect deny the Forgiveness of sins and the Resurrection of the body Wherefore when Almighty God requireth every Christian to be true or faithfull unto the death that he may receive a crown of life Revel 2. 10. he requires of him a double truth or faithfulness not onely that he be true and faithfull in his Belief but also and much rather that he be true and faithfull in his life First God requires a faithfulness in our Belief by a right apprehension of Gods word not adding thereto nor diminishing therefrom for that is forbidden from the beginning of the Law as Deut. 4. 2. to the end of the Gospel as Revel 22. 18 19. not adding thereto by Superstition nor diminishing therefrom by Faction for as the superstitious seeks to flatter his God Religiosi sunt Deorum amici Superstitiosi Deorum adulatores so the factious seeks to flatter himself do thou thy duty and let alone thy flattery for it is not safe for thee to flatter thy God and much less to flatter thy self Secondly God requires faithfulness in our affection life and conversation that we may be saithfull professours of his truth and as faithfull witnesses to it for a man may be Gods witness by speaking by living by dying and he that is commanded to be faithfull unto the death that is to be faithfull in dying if God call him to it is already supposed to be faithfull in speaking and in living for he that bids thee be fathfull unto thy death doth surely suppose thee already faithfull in thy life and commands thee to continue so and this faithfulness is shewed by thy words in confessing and that 's veracity by thy deed in professing or practising and that 's fidelity and by thy perseverance unto the death both in words and deeds and that 's constancie This is the truth of Religion both formally and efficiently formally in regard of it self and efficiently in regard of us that as it is true in it self so it also makes us true and faithfull at all times and in all respects and if you further desire to know how far any Christian Church hath followed or doth follow this truth you may try it by this touch-stone which being infallible in reason cannot be erroneous in Religion 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith Aristotle lib. 4. Eth. cap. 13. Greece is not so happy as to afford us a name for this moral truth and may justly own to be Graecia mendax upon that account but he that hath that vertue is called by Aristotle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 A true man both in life and word and is to be known by these three properties that he is full of equity will do no man wrong is full of authoriey will ask no mans leave whereas the hypocrite is not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 himself for all others but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 all others for himself and lastly is full of modesty will ask no mans praise and therefore will set forth himself though in true colours yet with the least varnish so also is the true Religion first it is full of justice and equity for it looks onely after Gods glory not after this worlds advantages and therefore declares things as they are not as they conduce to mens interests secondly it is full of authority in all words and deeds still like it self neither dissembling what is nor pretending what is not that it may please men rather then God but saith with S. Paul For if I yet pleased men I should not be the servant of Christ Gal. 1. 10. thirdly 't is full of modesty rather delighting in extenuations of its own worth then in amplifications of it for though hypocrisie be a great talker a greater boaster yet Religion doth very much abhor all vain babbling and much more all vain boasting Not walking in crastiness nor handling the word of God deceitfully but by manifestation of the truth commending it self in every mans conscience in the sight of God 2 Cor. 4. 2. and therefore any Christian Church whatsoever that either turns Religion into State policy making Christs interest subservient to its own or that changes its Doctrine to please its new lords and masters or that boasts too much of its own Purity and Perfection as if none could be Christians but in outward communion with it none good Christians in comparison of it must in these respects be said not to be 〈◊〉 true Church for though it be Metaphysically a true Church yet is not so morally not according to moral truth for that it wants either equity or authority or modestie or all three that is to say it wants some necessary attendant of moral truth And here I had rather bewail then examine rather deplore then detect the present condition of many Christian Churches It is enough that the now so much despised and persecuted Church of England cannot have it justly laid to her charge that either she laboured to inter-weave her own with Christs interest much less to advance her own interest above his for want of equity or did not deal plainly with those Churches that did so for want of authorite or did revile other Reformed Churches which surely had not been infallible could not be impeccable for want of modesty and my hope is that a Church so full of Moral truth no less then of Metaphysical as it hath the God of Truth to own it so it will in due time finde the God of Power to vindicate to restore and to defend it however I doubt not but many good Christians had rather suffer in her afflicted communion then reign in the prosperity and glory of those who either do cause or do not regard her affliction In the mean time I cannot but pass this for a general animadversion That since onely the true Catholick is the true Christian and he hath two oposites the pseudo-catholick who is peccant in excess and the anti-catholick who is peccant in defect it fares with these two opposites as it fares with those two extreams that oppose the moral truth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The proud boaster loves to make shew of more then is so doth the pseudo-catholick who obtrudes more for Religion then can be proved Religion 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but the dissembler is quite contrary for he denies things that are and dimininishes what he doth not deny so doth the anti-catholick who denies that to be Religion which God hath made so and diminisheth what he cannot deny 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith the same Authour the boaster and the dissembler both are to be blamed because neither is so true a man as he ought to be yet more the boaster then the dissembler So also in Religion the pseudo-catholick seems farther from the truth for his superadditions then the anti-catholick for his diminutions for he that avoweth uncertainties for certainties brings a suspicion upon his faith even in most undoubted truths whereas he
courage in regard of Gods goodness who hath promised salvation to those that sanctifie him in their hearts by good resolutions and in their mouthes by good professions and in their lives by a good conversation and it fills them with constancy in regard of Gods truth and faithfulness who cannot but perform his promise This is the Tenure of a true Catholick he holds both his Religion and Salvation upon certainty not upon conjecture his Religion he holds upon the certainty of Gods most holy word for nothing else can furnish his mouth with a satisfactory answer to silence much less with a sufficient reason to convince his adversary and his Salvation he holds upon the certainty of Gods most faithfull promise for nothing else can furnish his heart with comfort or establish it with courage to satisfie and content himself and agreeable to this as far as concerns the certainty of Religion upon which alone is founded the certainty of salvation is Vincentius Lirinensis his description of a true Catholick Ille verus germanus Catholicus est qui divinae Religioni Catholicae sidei nihil praeponit non hominis cujusquam Autoritatem non Amorem non Ingenium non Philosophiam non Eloquentiam sed haec cuncta despiciens in fide stans permanens amplectitur quicquid universaliter Antiquitas Ecclesiam Catholicam tenuisse cognoverit He is a true and genuine Catholick who prefers nothing above divine Religion and the Catholick faith not the Authority of any man not Love not Wit not Philosophy not Eloquence but despising all these and standing fast in the faith doth embrace whatever he knows was universally and anciently held by the Catholick Church From this description it is easie to gather who are the true Catholicks viz. those Christians First Who in their Religion prefer causes above persons who pretend not to infallible Doctours but make sure of an infallible doctrine who look after Gods not mans Authority as the foundation of their faith for else they cannot stand so fast in it as to despise the Authority Love Wit Philosophy Eloquence of man in comparison of the Oracles of God Secondly Who in their communion prefer persons above themselves that is Gods Trustees above their own humours regard not any novelty or singularity but make much of antiquity and universality or in a word those who are immoveable in the Catholick Truth that they may persist in the true Christian Religion and who are obedient to the Catholick Church that they may persist in the true Christian communion Accordingly my business in this Treatise shall be to shew First The certainty of Religion in its substance that notwithstanding all our present impieties on all hands men may know when they have the true Christian Religion Secondly The certainty of Religion in its exercise that notwithstanding all our present inconstancies men may know when they have the true Christian Communion and when this Certainty of Religion both in its substance and exercise is compassed and atchieved which is the work then the certainty of salvation will be an undeniable consequent which is the reward of good Christians But till I come to my preaching I think it needfull to give my self to praying for though we may get the knowledge of Religion by preaching yet we cannot get the certainty much less the comfort of that knowledge but by praying so ill a course have those Divines taken of late to make this people gain the certainty of their Religion who have turned all praying into preaching for he that prays what the congregation knows not doth rather preach then pray as â—o his congregation for they can onely hear â—s judges they cannot joyn as Communicants in his prayer well he may teach them to pray after him but he cannot cause them to pray with him for though they may wish yet they cannot pray but in the assurance of faith and they cannot have the assurance of faith upon uncertainty and there is nothing but uncertainty in ignorance the ignorance of intention disposition and an erring direction of him that prays and the ignorance not onely of the substance and nature but also of the scope and drifts of his prayer If any faith can be exercised here it must needs be wholly implicite such a faith as we justly blame in the Papists and therefore most unjustly force upon Protestants a faith that hath no particular evidence of what it is to do and therefore can have no particular assurance of what it doth But whilest I have fallen upon others prayers I have almost forgot mine own God of his infinite mercy look upon us once more shew us the light of his countenance that we seeing our new building is upon the sand which is never the surer for being cemented with bloud may return again unto the Rock our Saviour Christ the onely foundation of our souls that is the onely way to make atonement for our impieties and finding the want of the Master builders or most artificial workmen may return also to his Church which also is built on that foundation for that is the best if not the onely way to get a remedy for our uncertainties that so coming to the infallible certainty of our Religion both in its substance and in its exercise we may also come to the most comfortable certainty of our salvation and from the certainty pass to the enjoyment from the assurance pass to the inheritance thereof through the Authour and Finisher both of our Religion and of our salvation our blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. This being the main scope of this small treatise ought to be the fervent prayer of its Authour who knoweth this lesson is not to be learned by recommending his book to you but by recommending your souls to God for 't is not all the preaching in the world though the whole world should turn preachers not onely with swords in their hands but also with Authority in their mouthes and with grace in their hearts I say it is not all the preaching in the world can bring you to this saving knowledge of Christ and of your self but onely praying and since you will not abide your Church to pray you may be the better contented to let his reviled Ministers continue and increase their prayers for you because you have the greater need though the lesser ability and power to pray truly and heartily for your self as either praying without Christs intercession or praying against his word but sure praying without Christs Communion because praying without if not against his Church 'T is hard to be a wilfull Separarist from your Church and not to be thus peccant in your prayers but you are all for preaching Christ whilest I am rather for praying him that is for such sound and set prayers as by their matter assure me of his intercession and by their form assure me of his communion and I am sure that with Mary I have chosen the better part though
offend many of those that manifestly oppose the truth and immortally injure their brethren by turning them out of the road of salvation to look after some new by-paths no less doubtfull then perilous for if St. Paul did wish himself accursed from Christ for his brethren his kinsmen according to the flesh Rom. 9. 3. then none that takes upon him St. Pauls calling but is bound to have so much of St. Pauls zeal as to think the salvation of souls his greatest blessing and to make it his chiefest aim and he that doth the one will certainly do the other and consequently not regard the causless displeasure of many if he may take the right course to save but one and without doubt this doctrine doth immediately tend to the salvation of all which adviseth men to take heed of hypocrisie in professing Religion and of apostacy in renouncing it or of schisme in receding from it for schisme is a particular apostacy even as a apostacy is a general schisme For the onely way to be assured of our future communion with God in happiness is to be assured of our present communion with God in holiness and we cannot be assured of communion with the Father of lights unless we walk as children of the light It is in effect St. Iohns argumentation 1 Epist. c. 1. v. 5 6 7. He that saith he hath communion with God must walk in the light But all we that profess our selves Christians do say we have communion with God in and by our Saviour Christ Therefore we must all walk in the light We that do profess our selves Christians as we do say that we have communion or fellowship one with another so we do much more say that we have communion with God not inviting men to our civil but to our Christian communion and unless we make good that saying we cannot make good our own Christian profession for he that hath communion with Christ hath communion with the Son of God and he that hath the Son hath the Father also 1 Joh. 2. 23. Whosoever denieth the Son the same hath not the Father therefore Turks and Infidels and Antitrinitarians do not worship the same God with us Orthodox Christians but he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also therefore Orthodox Christians in having Christ are sure they have communion with God For although these latter words He that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also be not in the Greek originals either of Greek or Latine Church for which cause they are by our Interpreters inserted in different characters from the text who did not desire to follow Beza where Beza did not follow the Church yet they are in the Vulgar Latine and are owned by Clemens of Alexandria in his comment upon this Epistle as it is recorded in Bibliothecâ Patrum and also by the Syrus Interpres and indeed are in effect owned by the Spirit of God himself for that they are virtually included in the former words by the rule of Contrariety or Opposition for by the same reason that whosoever denieth the Son hath not the Father it is most undoubtedly true that whosoever confesseth the Son hath the Father therefore all our labour must be that we may have the Son for in having him we are sure to have the Father And this is the grand doctrine of all the New Testament this is the main Gospel-truth that the Apostles maintained against all sorts of gainsayers in their time and they have left us their writings that we should also maintain it unto the worlds end That the Christian Religion is the only way to eternal salvation This their doctrine was strongly opposed in their days by four sorts of men 1. By the Gentiles not yet converted for they still maintained their heathenisme 2. By the Jews not yet converted for they still maintained their Judaisme 3. By the Jews not fully converted for they still maintained a mixture of Judaisme with Christianity they mingled together the Jewish and the Christian Religion 4. By the Christians converted but withal partly perverted for they brought in untrue professions and ungodly practises into their Christianity they corrupted and depraved the Christian Religion and the Apostles were accordingly very carefull as to confute these heresies so also to confirm and establish the contrary truth whence it is that all their writings are wholly taken up either in those confutations or in this confirmation For though the truth it felf is but one yet the controversies concerning it were no less then four and the Apostles thought it necessary not only to establish the truth in it self that it might appear truth but also to establish it in our hearts that it might appear truth to us that is truth without controversie not only a mystery of Godliness but also a manifest and confessed mystery 1. Tim. 3. 16. Wherefore it will not be amiss for us to see the state of the several Controversies that so we may the more clearly see the more firmly embrace the more constantly profess the truth The state of the first Controversie which the Apostles had with the Gentiles consisted of these two questions First whether there were a life everlasting to be looked for after this life Secondly whether that life everlasting were to be obtained by continuing in the idolatry of the heathen or by turning to the Religion of the Christians And in both these questions the truth of the Christian Religion is declared or rather demonstrated against the heathenish superstition out of the principles of natural reason and that truth summ'd up by St. Paul 1 Thes. 1. 9 10. How ye turned to God from idols to serve the living and true God and to wait for his Son from heaven whom he raised from the dead even Jesus which delivered us from the wrath to come There is a resurrection from the dead therefore the soul dies not with the body but lives eternally and this eternal life is not to be gotten by serving Idols but by serving the living and true God and there is no serving him but by waiting for his Son from heaven Thus was the Christian Religion justified against Heathenisme which afforded the first Controversie The state of the second Controversie which the Apostles had with the Jews not converted consisted but of this one Question Whether eternal life and salvation was to be obtained by the Jewish or by the Christian Religion And we finde the Apostles still proving out of the Old Testament the Ground of the Jews Religion and so acknowledged by themselves without the least doubt or contradiction that salvation was not to be had by Moses but by Christ so S. Peter in his several Sermons Acts 2. and 3. and 4. Christus Messias that Christ was the Messias the Saviour of the world is the subject of them all This he proves Acts 2. for that he had given the holy Ghost and was risen from the dead and both his proofs are out of the Old
Isaac and of Jacob onely we trust in him not by Moses nor according to the law but by Christ and according to the gospel for the law which was given in Horeb is now antiquated for it was given onely to you Jews but the law which we serve God by is a law given to all nations of the world and is to abide to the worlds end for Christ is given unto us as the law and as an everlasting law his Testament as a faithfull Testament to remain for ever after which no law no commandment is to be expected or may be received Thus far Justin Martyr to the Jew because thus far the Apostle had stated the question to the Martyr and indeed to all Christians in the epistle to the Hebrews the sum whereof is briefly this that Jesus Christ the eternal Son of God coequal and coessential with the Father and the holy Ghost is perfect God and perfect man in the unity of the same person and is that onely eternal King Priest and Prophet which God in the fulness of time gave unto his Church to govern instruct and sanctifie it for ever and this he proves by the promises before the law by the types and figures under the law and by the general consent of all the prophets And therefore in this same Christ the Christian Church hath already a perfect knowledge of God in this world and shall have a perfect enjoyment of him in the world to come and therefore may expect no other Doctrine either for sanctification here or for salvation hereafter Now in that the old Testament is alledged to prove and confirm the New it is evident that the substance of Religion is one and the same in both Testaments unless we will suppose the Spirit of God to have made use of unfit and unproper proofs a thing not agreeable with the spirit of a prudent man who gains his knowledge by succession of time and much less agreeable with the Spirit of the omniscient and onely wise God who seeth all things at once in the looking-glass of eternity and if the Spirit of God confirm the new Testament by the old and hath left both the old and the new Testament to confirm us then it is evident that no Christian can seek to weaken or diminish the authority of either Testament but he must be an enemy to his own confirmation in the Christian faith Wherefore among all the contestations contentions that have been in the Church of Christ that controversie doth least become Christians and doth most shake the foundation of Christianity which doth seek to undervalue the authority of the word of Christ for if there be no infallible certainty in the word of Chrst it is impossible there should be any infallible certainty in the Christian Religion therefore they are the greatest enemies to the certainty of the Christian Religion who seek to add to the Church by detracting from the Scripture for if the Scripture hath not a most undoubted authority the Church can have none at all for sure we are the Scripture was delivered to the Church without any faults or corruptions and therefore we are bound not onely in common charity but also in common prudence and justice to beleeve that the Church hath so kept it because all the faults of the Text are to be layed upon the Church to whose care and trust God did commit the keeping of the text for God requireth two things of his Church first to be a faithfull keeper then to be a faithfull interpreter of his word and if we will needs say she hath not been faithfull in the keeping how can we choose but say she may be as unfaithfull in the interpreting of the word of God So that they are the greatest schismaticks that ever were who under pretence of extolling the authoritie of the Church do question nay debase the authoritie of the Scriptures for these men have begun an everlasting schisme which must needs last as long in the Church as there shall be any Christians so well perswaded of Gods truth as to think it was worth the registring and of the books wherein it was registred as to think them worth the keeping And Cassander himself seems to be of this opinion in his consultation of Religion in the chapter of the Church I cannot deny but the chiefest cause of this calamitie and distraction of the Church is to be ascribed to them who being puffed up with an empty kinde of pride of ecclesiastical power did contemn and repel those who rightly and modestly admonished them wherefore I think there is no firm peace to be hoped for unless they begin the reconciliation who began the distraction that is unless they who are set over the ecclesiastical government do remit somewhat of their excessive rigour and do yield somewhat to the peace of the Church and hearkening to the instruction and advice of many pious men do correct some manifest abuses according to the rule of Gods word and of the ancient Church from whence they have lately swerved I will set down the words in Latine for their sakes who do understand the Authour as well as I have the sense of them in English for their sakes who do desire to understand their Religion Non negarim praecipuam causam hujus calamitatis distractionis Ecclesiae illis assignandam qui inani quodam fastu ecclesiasticae potestatis inflati rectè modestè admonentes superbè fastidiosè contempserunt ac repulerunt Quare nullam firmam pacem sperandam puto nisi ab iis initium fiat qui distractionis causam dederunt hoc est nisi ii qui ecclesiasticae gubernationi praesunt de nimio illo rigore aliquid remittant Ecclesiae paci aliquid concedant multorum piorum votis monitis obsequentes manifestos abusus ad regulam divinarum literarum veteris Ecclesiae à quâ deflexerunt corrigant Cassander in consult de Rel. ad Ferdin 1. Max. 2. Imp. cap. de Ecclesiâ His judgment is plainly this that the Scripture is to rule and govern the Church and that to advance the authority of the Church against the authority of the Scripture much more above it is to give the occasion of a calamitous if not of a remediless schisme and distraction a distraction not possibly to be remedied till this irreligious tenent which is the cause of it be renounced and it is high time though the tenent it self be yet scarce one hundred years old for all good Christians that wish better to Christs interest then their own to renounce it and leave raising objections against the holy Scripture thinking to set up the Church by pulling down the word of God for besides that both Scripture and Church by their joynt authorities can never make us too sure of our Religion it is not possible for the Church to stand if the Scripture fall but they must needs both fall together Whereas let the Church not be
dominion Both these grand factions from several principles inferring one and the same conclusion because both by their additions deprave the truth of the Text so that if we will needs allow that our glosses may be additions to the rule we must of necessity overthrow the rule and by not allowing Religion to be all-together at once we shall come to make it none at all It is not to be denied but Religion hath had and may have additions in regard of men but not in regard of it self Si de prophetia loquamur in quantum ordinaturadfidem Deitatis sic quidem crevit secundùm tres temporum distinctiones scil ante Legem sub Lege sub Gratia non autem quatenus per eam humanum genus in suis operibus dirigitur saith Aquinas 22 ae qu. 174. art 6. Prophesie may be said to have received increase as to Articles of Faith towards God for he hath revealed himself more fully under the Gospel then under the Law and more fully under the Law then before it but not as to duties of life either towards God or towards man The Christian knows and beleevs more then the Jew because Christ is more fully revealed unto him then to the Jew but yet Christ is still the same to both The same yesterday and to day and for ever Heb. 13. 8. The same before the Law yesterday Under the Law to day and under the Gospel for ever One Christian may know and beleeve more then another nay more then himself for as he increaseth in years so also in knowledge and faith yet the truth of the Christian Religion is but one and the same at all times onely more fully understood at one time then at another for which reason God requires a preparation of minde in every true beleever to be ready to beleeve more when it shall be revealed to him to be Gods truth and to do more when it shall appear to him to be for Gods glory The first part of this position concludes it impossible that there should be any certain catalogue of the fundamentals of Faith not onely for all men but also for one and the same man at all times because that may be revealed to one which is not to another nay to one man at this time which was not at that time The second part of this position concludes it necessary that the Evangelical Counsels should sometimes become a piece of the Law namely If the case be put that a man can in any of those particulars of Voluntary poverty Obedience or Chastity shew or exercise more fully and sincerely his love of God and therefore saith S. Hieroms gloss upon S. Matth. 19. 20. All these things have I kept from my youth up Mentitur adolescens The young man lies for if he had indeed kept this Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thy self he would not have been grieved for being commanded to sell all and give it to the poor no more then he was grieved for keeping all unto himself And Origen tells us it was written in some other Gospel that he had met withall in Hebrew but sure not of sufficient authority to discountenance the Greek for Aquinas that tells us this storie saith Si placeat alicui suscipere illud If any man please to receive it That when the young man began to scratch his head at this saying the Lord replied unto him How doest thou say thou hast kept the Law which requireth to love thy neighbour as thy self and behold many of thy brethren the children of Abraham are ready to die for hunger upon the dung-hill whiles not onely thy bodie but also thy house is full even to superfluitie Aquin. 22 ae qu. 189. art 1. resp ad 1. We must therefore say with Gulielmus de sancto Amore in libro de periculis Ecclesiae Paupertatem praecipit non actualem sed habitualem scil si gloria Christi id postulârit ut cùm ait Luc. 14. 26. Si quis venit ad me non odit patrem non potest esse meus discipulus non praecipit parentes contemnere sed tantùm si Christo se opponant That this is not a counsel but a command whereby our blessed Saviour commandeth though not actual yet habitual povertie though not a real yet a ready forsaking of all if the glory of Christ should so require as when he saith S. Luk. 14. 26. If any man come to me and hateth not his father he cannot be my disciple the command is but conditional to wit If his father oppose his Saviour there he must go from the one to come and cleave to the other And so Aquinas himself states this question saying Nullus est actus perfectionis sub consilio cadens qui in aliquo eventu non cadat sub praecepto quasi de necessitate salutis existens 22â—e qu. 124. art 3. ad 1. There is no act of perfection under an Evangelical Counsel but may in some case fall under a precept as being necessary to that mans salvation And in this particular case of voluntary poverty he saith thus Abrenunciatio propriarum facultatum in actu est quoddam perfectionis instrumentum sed secundùm praeparationem animi pertinet directè ad perfectionem 22 ae qu. 185. ad 2. For a man to renounce his property actually that he may betake himself wholly to meditation and prayer doth conduce instrumentally to perfection but for him to renounce it potentially in the preparation of his minde doth appertain directly to perfection that is to the perfection of Christianitie and so in effect he saith thus much He that will not part with his estate when Christ calls for it is far from shewing himself a good Christian. How little this precept is now observed by those who see their poor brethren readie to starve for Christ both at home and in forein countreys and yet neither lay their miseries to heart nor lay their hands to their relief Christ doth now see and will hereafter judge when he will not onely say Depart ye cursed to those that made them hungry thirsty and naked but also to those that let them continue so St. Mat. 25. 41 42. and good reason for such men forget their brother Ioseph in the pit sitting down to eat and drink while he is ready to perish they forget themselves and renounce their own bowels they forget their God and renounce his commandments not onely as enforced by right of dominion for being Lord of all he might call for all without shewing any other cause for it but also as being enforced by the light of reason for it is observable that Saint Paul useth more arguments to stir up the Corinthians to a liberal contribution for the poor Saints at Jerusalem then he useth to the stirring them up to any other Christian duty whatsoever for he hath concerning this duty almost two whole chapters together 2 Cor. 8 and 9 chap. and almost as many arguments as verses in those
and in the hand as Truth is opposed to Dissimulation or Hypocrisie Thirdly in its certainty or perseverance And of thy great mercy keep us in the same as Truth is opposed to uncertainty or to levity and inconstancy Religion then hath and must have a two-fold truth the first consists in a right apprehension whereby we believe the thing as it is the second in a right affection profession and action whereby we love and profess and do the thing as we beleeve and there cannot be a more religious prayer invented by the wit of Piety nor a more affectionate prayer practised by the zeal of Charity then that which is so remarkable both for its Piety and for its Charity in our own Church Collect 3. Sunday after Easter Almlghty God which shewest to all men that be in errour the light of thy Truth to the intent that they may return into the way of Righteousness there 's its piety towards God rightly descanting upon Gods intent in shewing the light of his truth to make men righteous not to make them inexcusable These things I say that ye might be saved S. Joh. 5. 34. not onely convinced saith our blessed Saviour and yet he spake to those who had not the love of God v. 42. Grant unto all them that be admitted into the fellowship of Christ Religion that they may eschew those things that be contrary to their profession and follow all such things as be agreeable to the same there 's its charity towards men affectionately desiring that as they have a Christian Communion so they may also have a Christian conversation lest their unchristian conversation destroy and disanull their Christian Communion which without doubt it hath done already in many ages of the Church and will do still to the worlds end unless God in his mercy fill our hearts more and more with this true piety towards himself and with this true charity one towards another And for this cause the Commandments are in the judgement of some Divines accounted practical Articles of the Christian Faith because if these be left out in our conversation what is true in it self of our Creed is as it were false to us since either our profession gives the lye to our apprehension and affection or our action to our profession for this is the difference betwixt speculative and practical truths speculativè practicè credibilia those things that we must believe speculatively and those that we must believe practically the first which are summed up in the Creed are truly believed if there be a conformity of the thing with the Understanding but the second which are summed up in the Decalogue are then onely truly believed when there is a conformity of the affection and of the profession and of the action with the belief thus they that worship Images do expunge the second and they that resist Magistrates do expunge the fifth Commandment if not out of their books yet at least out of their Faith in their Books they may be true believers but in their Lives they are in these particulars little less then Infidels Now see in what a miserable condition is the irreligious miscreant who so beleeves as to make void his own faith and so receives the truth as to make the truth it self a lie to him either for want of a sanctified affection in not loving it or for want of a sanctified action in not practising it and hence we may likewise see and must confess that not he who knows most of the doctrine of Faith is the best Beleever but he that most loves what he knows in speculatives and he that most practises what he knows in practicks so that a great Scholar may fully know the truth and yet to him it may be as a lye because he loves it not for to him it is what he desires it should be contrariwise an ignorant peasant may not fully know the truth and yet to him it may be the saving truth because he loves it for what is wanting in his head is made up by his heart O my soul glory not in the knowledge of Christ but in the love of that knowledge glory not in thy learning if thou art Mistress of any but in thy Religion to which thou oughtest to be a servant learning may make a man wise to ostentation but 't is onely Religion can make him wise to salvation Do not then with Pilate ask thy Saviour what is truth and then go away without his answer much less mayest thou turn to those Jews that help to crucifie him for if thou know these things happy art thou not because thou knowest them but if thou do them thy happiness consists not in knowing Christ but in practising him nor is it possible for a man to be long defective in his practise and not to be defective also in his knowledge since what is sinfull in the deliberate action is sinfull in the will and what is sinfull in the will is erroneous in the judgement or understanding and this is the reason that a man may be a heretick not onely in credendis but also in agendis not onely in Articles of Faith but also in Duties of Life nay indeed he cannot easily be a heretick in the Duties of Life and still remain truly Orthodox in the Articles of Faith as for example he that prays to a Saint or Angel in stead of God directly overthrows the first Commandment but indirectly also the first Article of his Creed I believe in one God for Prayer is a Sacrifice that may be offered onely unto God again he that wilfully dishonours his Governours whom God hath set over him directly overthrows the fifth Commandment but indirectly also the ninth Article of his Creed I beleeve the Holy Catholick Church the Communion of Saints for being a Lover of division he is not a true beleever of that Communion and this we may take for a general doctrine fitter to be received then opposed First that any practical errour which is against our duty towards God doth tend to a speculative errour against some part of the Creed which concerneth God as he that doth not honour God as God doth in effect deny him to be maker of heaven and earth therefore saith the Psalmist O come let us worship and fall down and kneel before the Lord our maker as if we could not truly beleeve him to be our maker if we will not worship him with all possible reverence and fear Secondly that any practical errour which is against our duty towards our neighbour doth tend against some Article of the Creed that hath relation to men as he that will not be subject to the authority of his lawfull governours Civil or Ecclesiastical doth in effect deny The Catholick Church and the Communion of Saints Thirdly and lastly that any practical errour against the duty which a man oweth unto himself doth tend against some Article of Faith that concerns himself as he that is a common
keep his Oath in slaying those who brought him the head of Ishbosheth so carefull was God of David and David of himself that though he were made King yet he made not his own way to the possession of the kingdom nay yet more after another persecution he is still the same man 1 Sam 26. 8 9 10 11. and will rather flie for the safety of his own life then seek to destroy his Sovereign he was afraid to go a King-catching for fear that might teach him to go a King-killing therefore he saith There is nothing better for me then that I should speedily escape into the land of the Philistines 1 Sam. 27. 1. and at last when the Amalekite had done this horrid act of killing King Saul for no Israelite would do it the Armour-bearer that was not afraid to kill himself was afraid to kill his King 1 Sam. 3. 4 5. you see how David punished him for doing it caused him to be put to death and said unto him Thy bloud be upon thy head for thy mouth hath testified against thee saying I have slain the Lords Anointed 2 Sam. 1. 14 15 16. and moreover cursed the place where it was done v. 21 The mountains of Gilboa must have no more dew nor rain because upon them had been spilt the Kings bloud and He bids not tell it in Gath nor publish it in the streets of Askelon lest the daughters of the Philistines rejoyce lest the daughters of the uncircumcised triumph v. 20. He looks upon this act as the reproach of Israel though it were done by an Amalekite how much more if the Israelites themselves had done it and in truth they were very much guilty of it for it was their not destroying Amalek within that made God leave Amalek without to destroy them for as this Amalekite had not been left to kill King Saul if Saul had obeyed Gods commandment of utterly destroying Amalek 1 Sam. 15. 3. so questionless If Israel had destroyed the spiritual Amalek for warring against them which is the reason why Amalek was to be destroyed 1 Sam. 15. 2. That is the sinfull lusts of the flesh which warred against the Spirit and made them in their hearts return into Egypt God had not suffered Saul to spare the temporal Amalek without them 't was once in their power to have destroyed Amalek but now 't is in Amaleks power to destroy them and they may pronounce that as a sentence which their brethren afterwards pronounced onely as a wish or imprecation His bloud be upon us and upon our children 't is our not destroying the spiritual Amalek hath given the temporal Amalek power to destroy both our King and us and our childrens children In all these particulars of Samuels mourning of Davids relenting lamenting and weeping of Sauls perishing not by an Israelite but by an Amalekite of the Amalekites being put to death and mount Gilboas being put out of heavens blessing the Word of God doth as it were make Proclamation in the name of the King of heaven That it is it can be no other then a fire from hell that cannot be quenched but by a Kings bloud But what should the Preacher talk of hell to Amalekites that look not after another world so they may enjoy this Let us therefore see what success of disloyaltie he bids them expect even in this world and sure 't is like to be none of the best for there is upon earth a Power if not a Person left to punish it even the very same power which such men abuse and therefore will not be tardie may not be sparing 1. their punishment as it follows in the next words For he doeth whatsoever pleaseth him Be not hasty to go out of his sight much more Be not hasty to put him out of thy sight stand not in this evil thing For he doeth whatsoever pleaseth him This doctrine of Allegiance is inforced by reasons that concern both the inward and the outward both the spiritual and the carnal man that if it work not upon us as called to the inheritance of another world yet it may as loving the inheritance of this The Preacher sets down both reasons The first concerns the spiritual man who looks after his conscience to him he pleads the Oath of God The second concerns the carnal man that looks after his interest to him he alledgeth the power of Kings For he doeth whatsoever pleaseth him And this is S. Pauls method after him who writes the most demonstratively of all the Apostles in all the doctrines of Christianitie yet in this doctrine doth he after a sort strive to go beyond himself for in this he doth not onely use demonstrative or convincing arguments taken from the nature of the cause but also prevailing or perswading arguments taken from the condition of the Person this great Doctour in other doctrines thinketh it enough to use those prooofs which we call argumenta ad rem but in this he is moreover industrious to apply those proofs which we call argumenta ad hominem not onely fit to prove the thing but also fit to reprove and charm the man that gainsays it In other documents of Christianity he preacheth by the demonstration of the spirit 1 Cor. 2. 4. But in this he useth another kinde of demonstration which we may call A demonstration of the flesh for so he argues Rom. 13. 4. He is the minister of God to thee for good as if he had said If not for Gods sake yet for thine own sake thou must be subject if not for thy Conscience yet for thy convenience if not for the good of thy soul yet for the good of thy body if not for thy everlasting salvation yet for thy temporal preservation Thus after the confounding arguments of resisting Gods Ordinance and receiving damnation to work upon the Conscience he brings his perswading argument He is for thine own good to work upon the man He is the minister of God to thee for good and the same method that he useth in his preaching he useth also in his praying 1 Tim. 2. 1 2 I exhort therefore that first of all supplications prayers intercessions and giving of thanks be made for all men For Kings and for all that are in authoritie that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty Nor are these very words In all godliness and honesty an argument to work onely upon the conscience but also upon the condition or the person of the man who though he may cast away the practice yet is loth to cast away the repute of godliness for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is honestie properly Honesta quaedam morum gravitas quae reverentiam conciliat saith Beza so then he that will be godly or will be thought godly must zealously pray for Kings he that will have the power of godliness in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or the form of godliness in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the reason will extend to
and gives this reason why he requires it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We were ordained and appointed of God to preserve the faith holy and incorrupt as we received it the Pope will now tell the Emperour so sed non fuit sic ab initio from the beginning it was not thus no nor in many hundreds of years after and in the sixteenth Action of this Council the acclamations of the Bishops to the Emperour at first calling him Another Constantine another Martian another Theodosius another Justinian are a proof beyond exception for no History is so irrefragable as the Acts of a Council that those Emperours had called the forementioned Councils and the petitions at last of the same Bishops praying for him as the Defender of the Orthodox Religion as the bulwark of the Church and as the Defender of the Faith cannot but assure us that they thought it the Emperours duty to call those Councils because they thought them bound to defend the Faith and to protect the Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 You see the title of Defender of the Faith to a King is of much greater antiquity then our Henry the eight as well as the reason of it and so many several laws in the Code and in the Novels of the Catholick Faith of the Sacraments of Churches of Bishops of Synods of Hereticks will be an evidence to the worlds end of the Supremacy of Kings in causes Ecclesiastical no less then those other titles in the institutes and digests that concern liberty and property and the affairs of this world will be an invincible evidence of their Supremacy in civil causes But I may not insist longer upon this Argument such kinde of quotations being fitter for the school then for the pulpit I will onely add this one more from Pope Adrian's own mouth to Charles the Great of France whom he calls Spiritualem Compatrem that is either his Spiritual Godfather for his patronage and care over his Person or his Fellow-Father in spirituals for his jurisdiction and government over the Church and he labours to give him such punctual satisfaction in all particulars concerning the second Nicene Council as if he feared that of Franckford called by Charles would as indeed it did over ballance that of Nice procured by himself no less in truth then it did in authority but we think his Compater to his Lord and Master a little too high though his Successours will not stoop so low for as we allow the Supreme no superiour so we must allow him no equal which is my second conclusion No person but is inferiour to him in power as no power but is inferiour to his in causes whether Ecclesiastical or Civil so no person or persons whether Ecclesiastical or Civil but is and are inferiour to him in power we understand not that Singulis major Universis minor or if we understand it think that Omnis anima speaks as well Universis as Singulis and therefore not onely one and one by himself but also one and all Subjects together all are inferiour to their Sovereign because they are all bound to submit unto him Let every soul be subject to the higher powers Rom. 13. 1. Their convening together doth as much take off their souls as it doth their subjection 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 can never agree but the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is joyned with the universis in the text 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 therefore of them also no less then of single persons must the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the next verse be necessarily understood Whosoever resisteth or How many soever resist both alike are comprehended in They that resist and they shall receive to themselves damnation The word here used 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 subordinetur let every soul be subordinate a word that more particularly points at the Ordines regni in the very signification of it because they can never want power to make resistance and seldom want chaplains that encourage them to make it but Ordines sunt ordinandi and subordinandi or else Ordines will be Confusiones Orders must be ordered and subordinate or though called States yet will be Ruines though called Orders will turn Confusions both of the text and of the kingdom and certainly the reasons alledged by S. Paul as equally concern Ordines regni as other Subjects and those as well all as some Universos as well as Singulos First Gods ordinance which may no more be rejected by all then by some by all together then by single persons in particular Secondly Damnation which may be incurred by all as well as by some by a Parliament as well as by Private Gentlemen 'T is true the King may not be so great a terrour to all as to some because all joyning together may not be afraid of his power What then yet I hope all have consciences as well as some and though happily it may not be said of the all of the whole kingdom Ye must needs be subject for wrath because all subjects holding together need not fear their Kings wrath yet it may and must be said of them all Ye must needs be subject for Conscience sake as 't is in the first verse For be they never so many that combine together that will give no satisfaction to the Conscience in regard of it self nor release in regard of God and yet even this very objection is sufficiently answered in the verse before in that he is said To bear the sword as the Minister of God and therefore Not to bear the sword in vain For though happily or rather unhappily in regard of his Person he may bear the sword in vain and perish under it yet in regard of his office he cannot for so he is the Minister of God and consequently a revenger of wrath that cannot fail of his revenge 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith Epiph. Haer. 40. adversus Archontichos He hath from God the right of the sword not from any other and he hath it for revenge Would to God those men who follow these Hereticks in multiplying powers and principalities though not in heaven yet in earth and in some other things too for these Archontici did abhor baptism and slight the Communion 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Epiph. ibid. I say would those men who follow these Hereticks in this gross opinion would likewise seriously go along with this learned Father in his solid confutation there would never again be any cavilling disputes upon the 13 to the Romans His confutation in brief is this You Archontici think by multiplying powers in heaven to overthrow the dominion and power of one God but indeed you rather establish it For if in earth there may be so many principalities and powers in one kingdom all subject not repugnant to one King then much more so in heaven 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In every kingdom upon earth there are many principalities but they are all under one King Nothing